Episcopacy by Palladius a damning Schism by separating from the former or a Reformation is just Reformation Schism LXIII 13. When the Church first set up Patriarchs Metropolitans General Councils Monasteries Parish Churches distinct from Cathedrals Organs New Liturgies and multitudes of Ceremonies this was a departing or separating from the contrary Church way which was there before was it therefore Schism LXIV 14. When Socrates tells us of some Countreys that had Bishops in the Countrey Villages like our Parishes was it a damning Schism to separate from this custome by decreeing that even small Cities should have no Bishops Ne vilescat nomen Episcopi or when the Chorepiscopi were put down where they had been LXV 15. If a man separate not from any thing essential to the Church of England he separateth not from that Church though he refuse that which is its Accidents or some Integral parts We are charg'd with separating from the Church of England as if it were a matter of fact beyond dispute and scorn'd for denying it even by them that will not tell us what they mean by the Church of England or by Separation By the Church of England we mean the Christian Kingdom of England or all the Christians in England as living in one land under one Christian King who Governeth them by the Sword which includeth their Concord among themselves in true Christianity we are Christians we profess agreement in Christianity with all Christians we are under the same King as they are and profess subjection and take the same Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy yea we are not charged with differing in any thing called Doctrinal from their Thirty Nine Articles but we disown certain late Covenants and Oaths which are not Twenty three Years old and the Subscription to one Canon about the Innocency of all in their Liturgy now either these new Oaths Covenants and Canon Liturgy and Ceremonies are essential to the Church of England or not If yea then 1. It 's a poor humane Church made by them that made these Oaths Liturgy and Ceremonies 2. And then it 's a new upstart Church and no man can answer the Papists where it was before Luther or before Henry 8. yea if its essentials were made by this King and Parliament 1662. then the present Church is no older But if these things be indifferent or not essential to the Church then to separate only from these is not to separate from the Church If it be said That for the sake of these we separate from the Church it self and therefore from its essence we abhor the accusation and challenge them to prove it If we separate from the Church essentially it is either Locally or Mentally not Locally for we are yet in England nor is Local distance only a sin not Mentally for we own it for a true Christian Kingdom called a National Church bound to serve Christ in Love and Concord to their Power We deny not the King to be the Governour nor Christians to be Christians no nor the particular Churches and Ministers to be true thô culpable Churches and Ministers nor their Sacraments to be true Sacraments we profess to hold with them one Catholick Body one Spirit one God one Christ one Faith one Baptism in the essentials and one Hope and are ready to promise to live in Concord with them in all other things as far as will stand with our Obedience to God so that we separate not from the Church of England as such but from some of its Accidents which we dare not be guilty of LXVI 16. The same I say of a Parish Church he that locally removeth e. g. from a Church that hath Organs to one that hath none separateth from a pair of Organs but not Mentally from the Church unless the Organs be its essence LXVII 17. They that are for the true antient Episcopacy e. g. as much as Arch-Bishop Vsher's Reduction which we offer'd did contain but dislike the Lay Civilians power of the Keyes and Officials Surrogates Arch-deacons Government c. do not separate from the Church as Episcopal but from the humane Novelties which they disown LXVIII 18. If a Parishioner fall out with his Priest and they goe to Law about Tythes Glebes Words c. and the Suit be long and the man dare not Communicate with him believing that he hateth him thô the animosity should be culpable being but personal his going from him to another Church is not separating from Christ for I hope that even Mr. Dodwell himself will not say that every Priest is Christ. LXIX 19. Ex quovis ligno non fit Mercurius surely there is some qualification essential to the Ministry if a man want that qualification it is a Duty to separate from him as no Minister e. g. When I came to Kederminster after my subjection to six or seven worse I found the Vicar one reputed ignorant of the Fundamentals he was brought in by Sir Henry Blunt a Papist who Preacht but once a quarter which most thought he might better have forborn and his Curate Mr. Turner at Mitton Preacht once a day whom I found ignorant of the Catechism Principles by Conference and he confest he had but one Book Musculus common places in English and he said some of that to the People and they took it for a Sermon he lived by unlawful Marrying infamous for Drinking and Quarrelling he that had taken these for no Ministers and separated from them had not thereby separated from Christ or his Church Catholick LXX 20. If it prove as hard to know who is the true Pastor in a competition of Pretenders as it was to know which was the true Pope when there were two or three above twenty times or whether e. g. Optandus was true Bishop of Geneva that knew not Letters or whether Duke Heriberts Son consecrated in Infancy was Arch-Bishop of Rhemes or any other Infant consecrated be a Bishop officiating per alios Surrogates Chancellours Officials c. it is not here a Separation from Christ to separate from either of the Pretenders He that mistaketh not is not liable to the Charge he that mistakes doth not erre in an Article of Faith but in a difficult point of humane title and the qualification and right of a single man and my Opinion is that if such a title were tryed before our Judges or King and they should mistake and give Judgment against him that had right this were no separating from Christ nor proof that they are Infidels LXXI 21. If the Case of two contending Bishops or Presbyters come before a General or Provincial Council and they mistake and give it to the wrong and so separate from the right I do not think that thereby they separate from Christ or the Church Catholick e. g. The Constantinopolitan Council first gave the Church of Constantinople to Nazianzene and after judged him out as having no right if by this they separated from Christ they that take them for the
stairs to hatred and destroying it 's his way to cure Schism that is commonly painted with Horns and Cloven feet If a man come from a Countrey Village and be made by Covenant a Citizen of London how prove you that he renounceth King or Kingdom But he saith p. 9. Those who wilfully separate from the Corporation to which the Charter was granted forfeit their Interest in the Charter Ans. What Reader doth this man presume upon that will not ask him how he proveth 1. That Gods Law or Charter to his Church doth not require them to congregate in distinct single Churches as London Charter doth to erect several Companies and the Universities several Colledges 2. And that God hath not in his Word given order or command for such single Churches But that the Apostles and Titus by fixing Elders to their several Churches and Cities separated from the Universal Church 3. And that their subordinate Churches have not need of distinct subordinate consent and duty And that our Diocesan Churches all separate from the Universal Did he think these things need no proof at all It may be he will say that the Diocesan depend on the Vniversal but the Presbyterian or Independent do not I Answer Dependance is either that of Subjects on Soveraign or Magistrates for Government or that of a Community of Equals for Communion In the former respect they depend on none but Christ as Universal Soveraign Nor on any Foriegners for Governments In the latter they depend on all true Churches for Communion And Doctor Hammond and most Diocesans hitherto have said that Diocesan Churches are thus far Independent or National at most And if any be for a Forreign Iurisdiction in Charity before they perswade England to it they should procure them a Dispensation from all the Oaths that have sworn all this Kingdom against endeavouring any change of Government and against a Foreign Iurisdiction For some Fanaticks now Dream that PER is the Mark of the Beast and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the number of his Name is nominal as well as numeral and refers to CH-urch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and STate For as for them that find a mans name in them I abhorr their Exposition more § 11. P. 9. God saith he hath not made any Covenant in particular with the Church of Geneva France or England c. A. 1. God hath made one General Law for Christians congregating with their fixed Elders or Bishops in particular Churches all the World over And his Command is not without Promise of being with them to the End of the World and that Promise becometh a Promise to every Church so congregate God hath not made distinct Laws or Promises to every Christian But the Promise to Justifie all Believers justifieth each single Person when he believeth If the King should make one common Law to command all his Subjects that are Freeholders to live in Corporations or Hundreds described with their priviledges those priviledges would be all theirs that are so incorporated As one Charter may Priviledge every London Company diversified by subordinate Agreements 2. And that God who will have them thus incorporated and distributed into several single Churches doth Covenant or Promise according to their demerits to each Do I need to recite the peculiar Promises and threats to the seven Asian Churches Rev. 2. and 3. which are Covenants to them § 12. Next Pag. 10. He will tell us what Communion is and in many words it is to tell us that Communion is nothing but Vnion I know that quoad notationem nominis Communion may signifie Vnion with others But they that write Politicks have hitherto distinguished Vnion and Communion taking Communion for Actual Communication or exercise of the duties of men in Union But to speak cross to other Writers on the same Subjects and give no reason for it and to confound Vnion and Communion is one part of this edifying Resolution § 13. Pag. 11. Our Communion with the Church consists in being members of the Church which we are made by Baptism saith he Then the Baptized are still in Communion with the Church till their baptism be nullified And hath he proved us Apostates § 14. Pag. 12. Should any man who is no member of the Church nor owns himself to be so intrude into the Church and Communicate in all Holy Offices it 's no Act of Communion c. A. I thought communicating ordinarily in Holy Offices had gone for an owning of Communion If it do not would you would tell us how to know who are of your Church § 15. P. 13. Saith he Church-Communion does not consist in particular Acts of Communion which can be performed among those who are present and Neighbours but in membership Now as a member is a member of the whole Body not meerly of any part of it c. All the Subjects of England who never saw nor converst with each other are members of the same Kingdom A. 1. That word meerly hath more Craft than Justice or Honesty Meerly signifieth Only I suppose and if he would make his Reader think that they that are for single Church peculiar membership and consent do take themselves to be meerly or only members of those single Churches and not of the Universal it is shameless injury 2. Will he ever draw men to conformity by making them believe that because they owe Common Communion to all Christians therefore we owe no special duty to the Bishops Priests Churches or Neighbours where we are setled Do the Men of one Colledge School Corporation owe no more duty to that than to all others Do the Free-holders of Bedford-shire choose Knights for Middlesex or the Citizens of Oxford choose Officers in London These seem strange Resolutions to us 3. But doth he remember that if Communion consist not in Acts of Communion to such but in membership even with the distant then he that is baptized and no Apostate and performeth no other Acts of Communion to the Bishops Parson or People where he liveth than he is bound to perform to them a hundred or thousand miles off is no Separatist Methinks this favours Separation too much § 16. Pag. 14. When he denyed any Divine Covenant to make us members of particular Churches distinguish't from the Vniversal as all National Diocesan and Parochial are as parts from the whole he presently confuteth all again saying The exercise of Church Communion as to most of the particular duties and Offices of it must be confined to a particular Church and Congregation for we cannot actually joyn in the Communion of Prayers and Sacraments c. but with some particular Church A. Oportuit fuisse memorem 1. Reader doth not this man here confess that there are particular Churches 2. If these be not distinct from the whole then each particular is the whole 3. If the Exercise must be in particular Churches must not men Consent to their Relations and Duties Is it a sin to Promise
Duty 4. Sure it is not meer Place but a mutual Relation of Pastors and People that distinguisheth these Churches The Presbyterians preach't once in the same Places that you do and yet you take them not for the same Church Pastors If one from York or Cornwall come into your Pulpit without consent do People stand as much related to him as to you Some men are of extraordinary sufficiency to resist and conquer the clearest evidence of Truth But he addes every Act of Communion thô performed to some particular Church is and must be an Act of Communion with the whole Catholick Church A. And who denyeth this No sober Independent or Presbyterian that ever I met with It 's a weighty Truth § 17. P. 14. Saith he Praying and Hearing and Receiving the Lords Supper together doth not make us more in Communion with the Church of England than with any other true and Orthodox part of the Church thô in the remotest part of the World A. I think that 's not true With the remotest parts you have only Catholick Communion with the Church Universal In England and London you have that and more even special subordinate Communion with your own King Bishop and Flock 2. And hath not the Church of England such Communion in obedience to its own Laws as the Act of Uniformity Convocation and Canons which you have not with all abroad Do your Bishops in Convocation make Canon Laws for all the World Do you Swear Canonical obedience as much to the Bishop of Paris or Haffnia c. as to your Ordinary Do the Canons of all Churches impose our Liturgy or ipso facto excommunicate all that affirm any thing in it or our Ceremonies or Church Government to be against Gods word Sure this is a peculiar kind of Communion 3. If not why are all the Nonconformists cast out that offer to officiate and Communicate on such terms as are common to all sound Churches Pag. 15. Saith he There is nothing in all these Acts of Communion which does more peculiarly unite us to such a particular Church than to the whole Christian Church A. What neither in these Acts nor any other Then we are no more bound to hear you or maintain you as our Pastor than to hear and maintain the whole Christian Church § 18. P. 20. Saith he There is no other Rule of Catholick Communion for private Christians but to communicate in all Religious Offices and all Acts of Government and Discipline with Christians those with whom they live A. 1. Elsewhere you added sound and Orthodox Else they that live with Arians Socinians Papists in Spain France Italy c. are bound to communicate with them in all Religious Offices and obey them 2. This concludeth that where Presbytery or Independency is the way of the place where we live all must thus communicate and obey The King and Custom then may make any way to become our Duty 3. If you tell us that it 's only with the Sound and Orthodox you were as good say nothing unless you tell us who must judge that whether the People themselves or who for them 4. But if this be the only rule for private Christians what shall they do e. g. in Aethiopa Egypt Syria and many other Countreys where the Churches are such as General Councils and other Churches judge Hereticks or Schismaticks And what shall they do when at Antioch Alexandria Constantinople c. one party is uppermost by the Judgment of Councils and Prince one Year and another contrary party the next And what shall they do where the Prince equally tolerateth both and it 's hard to know which is the more numerous as in Zeno's and Anastasius Reign c. And what shall they do when many Churches in one City are of divers Tongues as well as Customs Have the Greeks French and Dutch in London no rule of Catholick Communion but communicating in all Offices with the English and obeying all your Bishops Courts § 19. P. 21. Saith he Distinct and particular Churches which are in Communion with each other must have their distinct bounds and limits as every member has it's natural and proper place and Situation in the Body A. Why may not the Greeks Dutch and French live in Communion with the Churches London though they live dispersedly among them In Brandenburg Hassia and many free Cities and Belgia where Lutherans and Calvinists as called live together and own each other as Brethren why may not both be Churches of Christ § 20. P. 21 22. A great deal more he hath of the like making Schismaticks at his Pleasure This is plain in the Case of the Presbyterian and Independent Churches and those other Conventicles They are Churches in a Church Nothing can justifie the Distinction of Christians into several Churches but only such a distance of place as makes it necessary c. p. 22. Distinct Churches in the same place can never be under the same Communion A. These things are repeated so oft and the word separate so deceitfully rolled over and over that I will answer all together under his third Case at the End § 21. P. 27. See how openly he recanteth most aforesaid There is a sence indeed wherein we may be said to be members of one particular Church considered as distinct from all other particular Churches But that principally consists in Government and Discipline Every Christian is a member of the Whole Christian Church and in Communion with it but he is under the immediate instruction and Government of his own Bishop and Presbyters and is bound to personal Communion with them and this constitutes a particular Church in which all Acts of Worship and all Acts of Discipline and Government are under the Direction and conduct of a particular Bishop A. Omitting that he seemeth to make the Parochial Churches no Churches but parts of one here he saith all that he seemed to write against and that those that he reproacheth hold allowing the difference of the extent of Churches And is it Edifying to read such a discourse that saith and unsaith by self-contradiction And he adjoyns 28. p. how by agreement Patriarchal and National Churches are made And is not Agreement a humane Contract CHAP. II. Of his first Case § 1. PAge 31. His first Case Whether Communion with some Church or other be a necessary Duty incumbent on Christians And he thinks the Resolution of this is as plain as whether it be necessary for every man to be a Christian For every Christian is baptized into the Communion of the Church A. In this I know no Christian adversary to him But it being the Vniversal Church that he giveth his proof of necessary Communion with it 's odde to say We must have Communion with some Church or other As if there were more than one Universal Church 2. But we grant more that all that can well should be also members of some single Church § 2. P. 32. He saith External and Actual
Catholick Church representative must say that the Catholick Church separated from Christ and it self When another Council wrongfully deposed Chrysostome and separated from him and Cyril Alexandr perswaded the continuance of it did the universal Church separate from it self and Christ If a General Council which should be wisest be excusable from damning Schism whenever it misjudgeth and separateth from a rightful Bishop sure every Lay-man and woman that doth the same doth not separate from Christ. If it prove that a General Council deposed Nestorius as unjustly as David Derodon thought or Dioscorus as unjustly as others thought or Flavian as unjustly as the Orthodox think this proveth them Guilty of some Schism but not of separating from the universal Church When Menna of Constantinople and the Pope excommunicated each other when a Synod in Italy renounced Vigilius and all his Successors were an hundred years deposed from their Primacy and a Patriarch at Aquileia set up in his stead for a great part of Italy because Vigilius subscribed to a General Council de tribus Capitulis this was Schism somewhere but not separating from Christ. LXXII 22. If a man in England should think that all the old Councils were obligatory which decree that he shall be taken for no Bishop that comes in by the choice yea or Mediation of Courtiers Princes or great men or any that have not the true Consent of Clergy and People and thereupon should conclude that Bishops Deans Prebends c. so chosen and imposed are Lay-men and no true Bishops and Pastors this were a separating from those Persons but not from Christ and the Vniversal Church when as Mr. Thorndike saith that till the right of Electing Bishops by the Clergy and People be restored we need look no further for the reason of the Contempt of Episcopacy here So if a man think that God never trusted every Ignorant Wicked man that can but get Money and buy an Advowson to choose those Pastors to whose conduct all the People are bound to trust their Souls and the Bishop to admit them for fear of a Quare impedit if they have but a Certificate and can speak Latine This is not damning Separation LXXIII 23. If a Bishop set up a seeming Convert really a Papist e. g. Mr. Hutchinson alias Berry or one of them that lately Confessed themselves Papists the People that find by experience what the man is are not damned Schismaticks for not taking him for their Pastor or for going from him If Godfrey Goodman Bishop of Gloucester was a Papist did he separate from Christ that separated from the Diocesan Church of Gloucester while he was an Essential part Or that did not implicitely trust all the Priests that he ordained LXXIV 24. If in a Cathedral Church one withdraw from their Service because of their difference in singing Ceremonies c. from the Parish Churches thô it be the Bishops Church that he separateth from it is not as a Church nor from any thing essential to it e. g. Miles Smyth Bishop of Gloucester the famous Hebricâ—â—n and chief in our Bibles Translation declared and performed iâ— that he would never come more to his Cathedral because the Dean in Laud time kept up the Altar Qu. Whether he separated from himself or his Church Vbi Episcopus ibi Ecclesia Who were the Separatists They that followed the Bishop or they that separated from him and kept to the Cathedral The same I â—ay of Williams Bishop of Lincoln that wrote against Altars LXXV 25. If faithful Pastors and People are setled in concord and the higher Powers make a Law to depose and eject them without just cause as Multitudes were in many Emperours dayes and Multitudes by the Interim in Germany in Charles the fifths time and Multitudes in the Palatinate by Ludovicus and in too many other Countreys those that leave the Temples and Tythes to the Magistrate but cleave to their old Pastors in forbidden meetings called Conventicles supposing the Pastoral Relation not dissolved as the Ioannites clave to Chrysostom do not thereby separate from the Catholick Church Had the Power been lawful that set up another way when Dr. Gunning kept up his Meetings at Exeter House it had not been a Separation from Christ that he then made LXXVI 26. If the Law command all to take one man for his Pastor and a Parent command his Child or a Husband his Wife to take another and not that and the Child or Wife know not which should be obeyed and whether the choice belong more to the Domestick or the Publick Government it is not a separating from Christ which way ever such an one shall go LXXVII 27. Yea if I should think that self-Interest and self-Government bind me rather to choose a Pastor for my self than to stand to such a choice by Prince Patron or Prelate which I think intolerable as well as against their will I may choose a Wife or a Physician or a Tutor or a Book or my daily food this is not separating from the Universal Church LXXVIII 28. If owning the same Diocesan make them of one Church who differ more than Nonconformists and Conformists do then owning the same Christ Faith Scripture c. maketh them of one Catholick Church who differ less But c. Iesuites Dominicans Iansenists and all the Sects of Papists are taken for one Church because they own the Pope and Councils In England the Diocesan Conformists are taken for one Church thô some of them are as much for a Foreign Jurisdiction as Arch-bishop Laud Arch-bishop Bromhall Bishop Gunnings Chaplain Dr. Saywell Mr. Thorndike Dr. Heylin and many more have manifested in their words and writings And some that subscribe the Articles of General Councils erring in Faith and against Heathens Salvation and against free will and for Justification by Faith only c. do shew that they differ in the Doctrines of Religion unless the sound or syllables be its Religion while one and another take the words in contrary sences Some are for Diocesans being a distinct Order from Presbyters some as Vsher and many such deny it Some hold them to be of Divine Right and some but of humane some think the King must choose them some rather the Clergy and People some hold them Independent others rather subject to the Arch-bishops and Convocation some think all that bear Office in their Church Government are lawful others think Lay-Civilians Government by the Keyes unlawful and so are ipso facto excommunicate by their own Canons some that promise Canonical Obedience to their Ordinary take the Judges of the Ecclesiastical Courts for their Ordinaries and others only the Bishops some think they are sworn to obey their Ordinaries if they rule according to the Canons and so to pronounce all Excommunicate that the Canon excommunicates if commanded Others think otherwise that they are judges themselves whether the Canons command licita honesta some take the Pope to be Antichrist and the Church of
Rome no true Church others think otherwise Many more Armmian and other such differences there are and yet all of one Church both Catholick National Diocesan and Parochial oft Much more are those Nonconformists that differ from the Church in nothing but what the Imposers call Indifferent LXXIX 29. If one that prayeth in the Litany against false Doctrine and Schism and readeth the Conformists telling him of the danger of it should verily think that Dr. S. printeth and preacheth false Doctrine and such as plainly tendeth to serve Satan against Christian Love and Peace and to the most Schismatical dividing and damning of Christâ—ans should hereupon separate from him for fear of Schism and false Doctrine and go to a safer Pastor I think it were not to separate from Christ. LXXX 30. If a Bishop in any Diocess in London should openly write or plead for a Foreign Jurisdiction and we are told that none are true Ministers that depend not obediently on the Bishop he that for fear of the Law or of Personal or common perjury should separate from that Bishop and his numerical Diocesan Church doth thereby neither separate from the Catholick Church nor from the Church of England As if the Kings Army should have a Colonel that declared himself an obliged Subject to the King of France and bound to obey him the Regiment may forsake that Colonel Yea if the General of the Kings Army should give up himself in subjection to the Enemy or a Foreign Power and say I will take a Commission from the Turk and my Officers shall only obey me and the Soldiers obey them were not this an Army of Traytors or Rebels though none but the General took a Commission from the Enemy So if the Bishops should all take Commissions from the Pope or declare themselves Subjects to a Forreign Jurisdiction it were no separating from Christ to separate from them all in Loyalty to Christ and to avoid National perjury and Schism LXXXI 31. If a man think that he is bound to use all Christs instituted means of Salvation and live in a Church that wilfully omitteth any one of them e. g. either Infant baptism or singing Psalms or Praying or Preaching or the Lords Supper or all Personal care and discipline to exclude the grosly intolerable to resolve the doubting c. He that in Obedience to Christ goeth to a Church and Pastor in the same Diocess or City that omitteth none of these is no damned Schismatick LXXXII 32. He that is unjustly cast out of the Church and by its very Laws excommunicated ipso facto is no damned or Sinful Schismatick for Worshipping God in a Church that will receive him Nor any one that is denyed Communion unless he will sin Much more if they should prove half as many and great Sins as the Nonconformists have said they fear in the first Plea for Peace c. LXXXIII 33. If a Foreigner that doth but half understand our language withdraw to a Church and Pastor whose tongue he understands obeying God and Nature is no damning Schism LXXXIV 34. If one that is erroneously conceited of the obligation of General Councils should think it a sin to kneel at the Sacrament on any Lords day in the year or any Week day between Easter and Whitsuntide because Tradition and the twentieth Canon of the first Council and that at Trull c. do forbid then to adore kneeling this separating on that account to another Congregation is not damning If it be said that Mr. Thorndike and others tell us that it is not necessary that we do the same things which the Supream Catholick Power commanded but that we subject our selves to the same Power which may change their own Laws I answer 1. The asserting of that Universal Soveraignty is the greatest Crime and Heresie of all 2. By this it seems that our Religion is very mutable and very uncertain and a man hath need to take heed of obeying any old Canons till he know the mind of the present Church and who those be and how to know it 3. But what if the same man read Dr. Heylin of Sab. telling him that this custome against Adoration-kneeling continued a thousand years and was never revok't by any true General Council but changed by little and little by mens practice And what if he question who those Changers were and whether their practice was Rebellion at first and whether they had power to repeal the Canons of the greatest Councils without a Council Sure they that are for such Councils universal soveraignty when they have cast men into these snares should scarce tell them that they are damnable Schismaticks for joyning with such Churches as obey these Councils rather than with those that ruine men for not disobeying them LXXXIV And now Reader if thou art one that thinkest of these things with Christian Sobriety and impartiality I appeal to thee whether if I should be of the mind of Mr. Dodwell and such self-conceited Resolvers I should not write my own Condemnation and be one of the grossest Schismaticks that any History hath mentioned unless ever there were any man so mad as to hold himself to be all the Church Yea when he no more distinguisheth of Separation and Schism but involves almost all Christians in his Condemnation and tells us that Schism will damn us as soon as Adultery and Murder is it not obvious for all men to infer that we are as odious as Adulterers and Murderers and doth he not Preach Christians into the hatred of each other and can any wonder if Rulers should think the Punishment of Murderers is not worse than we deserve It is not Newgate only but Tyburn that these healing men do seem to assign us it would be too tedious to look over all these again and shew you how great the number is that these men damn and how few on Earth in any Age they excuse from being so far like Murderers LXXXV 1. It seems to me that he virtually damneth all Christians on Earth as such Schismaticks for it is most certain that all men have sin and culpable imperfection in Knowledge Will and Practice and if any say That he hath no sin he is a Lyar saith St. Iohn and it is certain that all two persons on Earth have many errours and many differences from one another it is certain that the Love and Duty of Christians towards each other is culpably defective in all men It is certain that no man living is so perfect in knowledge as to know all the indifferent things in the world which may be imposed to be Indifferent And long and sad experience hath told the Church that both gross errours and sins and things called Truths or indifferent which few can be sure of may be imposed What follows from all this but that all men on Earth may easily fall under the imputation of disobedience to Prelates and so be Excommunicate and then they have their choice when no man is perfect and
all that obey the twentieth Canon of the Nicene Council And from all that obey the Councils that forbid communicating with a Fornicating Priest And from all that obey the Councils which nullifie the Episcopacy of such as are obtruded by Magistrates or not consented to by the Clergy and People And many more such Abundance more instances of their Separation and Damnation I might adde In a word I think their Principles are as I first said for damning and separating from all men living for all men living are gulity of some sort and degree of Schism that is of Errours Principles or Practices in which they culpably Violate that Union and Concord that should be among Christians and Churches Every defect of Christian Love and every sinful Errour is some degree of such a violation All Christians differ in as great matters as things indifferent And no man living knoweth all things Indifferent to be such And these men distinguish not of Schism nor will take notice of the necessary distinctions given in the third Part of the Treatise of Church Concord And solutio continui causeth pain nor do they at all make us understand what sort of Separation it is that they fasten on but talk of Separation in general as aforesaid LXXXVII They seem to be themselves deceived by the Papists in exposition of Cyprians words de Vnit. Eccles. Vnus est Episcopatus c. But they themselves seem to separate from Cyprian as a Schismatick and consequently from all the Church that hath profest Communion with him and with all the Councils and Churches that joyned with him For Cyprian and his Council erred by going too far from the Schism and Heresie of others nullifying all their Baptisms Ordinations and Communions And for this errour they declared against the Judgment of the Bishop of Rome and other Churches and they were for it condemned as Schismaticks by the said Bishop And here is a far wider Separation than we can be charged with 2. And Cyprians words came from the Mind that was possest with these opinions and are expressive of his Inclination 3. Yet they are true and good understood as he himself oft expounds them the Bishop of Oxford citeth some instances many more are obvious in which he opposeth the Bishop of Rome saying that none of them pretendeth to be a Bishop of Bishops and limiting every man to his own Province and saying that they were to give account to none but God with much the like But in what sence is Episcopacie one 1. Undoubtedly not as numerically in the personal Subjectum Relationis One Bishop is not another if you should say Paternity is One none believe that one mans Relation of Paternity is anothers The Relation is an accident of its own Subject as well as Quantity Quality c. 2. Nor doth any man believe that many Bishops go to make up one Bishop in Naturals 3. Nor did ever Cyprian hold or say that all Bishops go to make up one Politick Governing Aristocracie as many go to make one Senate or Parliament that hath a power of Legislation and Judgment by Vote as one Persona politica He never owned such a humane Soveraignty But Episcopatus unus est 1. In specie all Bishops have one Office 2. Objectivè As the Catholick Church is one whose welfare all Bishops ought to seek 3. And so finaliter as to the remote End and are bound to endeavour Concord 4. And as effects all are from one efficient institutor As it may be said that all official Magistracy in England is one 1. As from one King or summa potestas 2. As described by one Law and as Justices of one Species 3. As all their Cities and Counties and Hundreds are but part of one Kingdom whose welfare all are for 4. And as they are all bound to keep as much common Concord as they can if any mean more they should tell us what If any mean that all Bishops make one numerical Universal Government they are heinous Schismaticks and the Kingdom is Sworn against their Judgment And these Men damn them in damning Schismaticks The truth is Cyprian de Vnitate Ecclesiae leaving out the Papists additions is a good Book and worthy to be read of all and take Cyprian's Description of the Episcopacy of the Church which we must unite with and the nature of that Union and we would rejoyce in such But if Cyprian had lived to see either Arians or Donatists the greater number or any Sect after call themselves the Church because that Princes set them up and had seen them depose Chrysostome and such other doubtless he would never have pleaded the Unity of Episcopacy for this but have judged as he did in the Case of Martial and Basilides nor did he ever plead for an universal humane Soveraignty LXXXVIII If we are damned Schismaticks I can imagine no pretended manner of Separation in which our Schism consists but first either Local as such 2. Or Mental as such 3. Or Local caused by Mental If Local as such be it All Christians are Schismaticks for being locally separated from others and absent from all Churches and places save one If Mental Separation be it either all Mental Division is such or but some only if all then all mortal men are Schismaticks as differing in a multitude of things from others If it be not all what is it is it all difference in the Essentials of Christianity we grant it and we are charg'd with no such thing Is it all difference in the Integrals or Accidents so do all differ that are not perfect Is it all want of Love or all Vncharitableness to one another all on earth have some degree of it and those are likest to have most that do as the Bishops did against the Priscillianists bring godly people under reproach on pretence of opposing Heresie or that seek the Silencing Imprisonment Banishment or Ruine of men as faithful as themselves For our parts we profess it our great Duty to love all men as men all Christians as Christians all godly men as godly all Magistrates as Magistrates c. Is it for our separating in mind from any Principles in specie necessary to Communion in the Church Universal or single Churches let it be opened what those Principles be We own all Christianity and all Ministry of Gods Institution and all his Church Ordinances We own Bishops over their Flocks let them be never so large so they be capable of the Work and End and alter not the true species and we submit to any that shall by the Word admonish Pastors of many Churches of their Duty or Sin or seek their good Nor do we refuse Obedience to any humane Officers set up by Princes to do nothing against Christs Laws nor nothing but what is in Princes power in the Accidents circa Sacra Is it because we disown any Numerical Rulers we own the King and his Magistrates we own all that we can understand to be true
there being somewhat opposite in all men and Churches on Earth you damn your selves for Communicating with them 9. That a man may have more Communion with the Church which he Locally separateth from even for sin than with that which he is present with E. g. A Congregation or Nation of men of eminent Sanctity and Order â—ound Doctrine and Worship may by humane frailty take some one falsehood or uncertain thing to be necessary to Ministry or Communion as they say some Churches unhappily of late reject all that own not the Antiquity of the Hebrew Points I cannot have local Communion with that Church for they will not receive me unless I subscribe either a falshood or that which I judge false but yet I highly honour and love them and have mental Catholick Communion with them when perhaps necessity may make me Locally join with a Church of far worse men and Order that will impose no sin on me 10. And I would advise these men did they not despise my advice for the Church of Englands sake and their own to retract their Errours and not lay such a Snare before the People Should you say in the Pulpit If the Church be guilty of any Schism by her Impositions oft-named Excommunications and silencing of Christs Ministers and afflicting good people without just Cause then I and all that communicate with it and me communicate in the guilt of Schism and are all in as much danger of Damnation by it as Adulterers and Murderers tell not your hearers this for if you do some will think you bid them separate or be damned and only make a doubt whether most men have Noses or not XCII Qu. But is not the Inference true Ans. No it 's false There are twenty cases in which 1. One may be guilty of Schism and not be a Schismatick as denominated from what predominateth 2. And as many in which he is not at all guilty that communicateth with the guilty And let the world that is sober and awake judge now whether these men or we be the greater Schismaticks and which more condemneth or separateth from the Church of England We say that all Churches have some degree of Schism and so hath the Church of England as it hath imperfection Errour and Sin but that it is not therefore no Church nor is it unlawful to communicate with it All Christians and Churches must not be separated from that are guilty of some degree of Schism If any will turn these Serious matters into Jest and say as Dr. Sayâ—â—ll that they will receive Greeks Lutherans c. that come to their Communion his Serious Readers will tell him that so will most Sects receive those that approve of their Communion and come to them Joyning with you signifyeth that they are of your way therein But will you go to their Churches and Communicate with them You will receive the damned Schismaticks if they come to you when yet you make it damnable to joyn in their meetings with them This quibbling beseems not grave men in great matters To conclude Reader God having allowed more Legislative Power to men in things Secular than in Religion I may say this case is like ours in debate I. Some Judges and Lawyers say that the Oath of Allegiance makes a Subject in this Kingdom that the Renouncing or Violating it by Treason or Rebellion or deserting the Kingdom overthrows the Relation But that other particular faults or quarrels against Neighbours Justices Judges yea the King himself are punishable according to the Laws but are not all Rebellion nor dissolve Subjection nor oblige the Subjects to renounce civil converse with each other though some contempt and obstinacy may outlaw them Such is our Judgment of Church Relation and Communion which I need not rehearse II. Suppose a sect of Lawyers and Judges arise that say no men are the Kings Subjects but are Rebels that break any of his Laws that Shoot not in long Bows that Bury not their dead in Woollen that swear prophanely that eat flesh in Lent unlicensed that have any unjust Law-Suit that wrong any Neighbour that oppress any Poor man all these are Rebels yea all that plead opposite Causes at the Bar and all Judges that judge contrary to one another and all that misunderstand any point of Law and Practice accordingly and all that besides the Oath of Allegiance do constitute Marriages Families Schools Societyes by any other Covenants of their own and all that are of different Cities and Companies parts of the Kingdom or all whose Justices Mayors Sheriffs c. differ from one another in any point of Law and practice Or all that obey not every Constable and Justice or that go to divers Justices in the same Precincts or that go from one Justice to another to avoid unrighteous Judgment or that go from the Physician of the Place for Health and from the Schoolmaster of the Town for greater edification or that Travel beyond Sea for Knowledge yea all that understand not every word in the Law that may concern them If any say none of these are the Kings Subjects but Rebels opposite to him and one another and deserve to be all hang'd as Murderers and so are all that have Communion with them Quaere 1. Whether these men are for the Unity of England 2. And are Friends to the King that deprive him of all his Subjects as much as those that would have him have no Subjects that be not of the same Age Stature Complexion and Wit 3. And whether they are Friends to Mankind 4. And whether they condemn not themselves if they live not as Anchorets out of humane Society 5. And whether that Nation be not by infatuation prepared for Destruction that would believe them and would hate scorn and ruine them that are of the first mentioned opinion according to the saying Quos perdere vult Iupiter hos dementat As to the more dangerous Doctrine now threatning this Land that would subject England to a Foreign Jurisdiction on pretence of a Necessity of either an Universal Church Monarch or Church-Parliament Senate or Council or of all the Church on Earth represented by Patriarchs or Metropolitans or that plead for Subjection to them under the Name of Communion they require a distinct Answer But Dr. Is. Barrow and Mr. Beverley's Catholick Catechism have effectually done it FINIS THE SECOND PART AGAINST SCHISM BEING ANIMADVERSIONS On a Book famed to be Mr. Raphson's LONDON Printed for Tho. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside near Mercers-Chappel 1684. TO THE READER Reader WHEN I had Written the first of these Discourses I came after to know more of the Authors Iudgment by another Book against me which I also Answered but it lyeth by unprinted I also wrote for the use of some private Friends my Reasons for Communion with those Parish-Churches who have Capable Ministers which many Importuned me to Print but that also is yet undone But a Book famed to
have not met with them § 3. But though little Sects for this use some appearance of Scripture-reason as the Anabaptists that say The unbaptized are no Church-Members but you are all unbaptized c. yet there are few big Sects but worldly advantage and cheating Words and Names are the strength of their Cause by which they do more than by any sober shew of reason The assumed names of the Church and Catholicks and Ancient and the Names of Hereticks and Schismaâ—icks and Lutherans and Calvinists and Novelists falsly imposed on their Adversaries next to the Sword and Flames are the Engines of the Popish Sect by which they defend their Separation from all other Christians in the World And such use the gross Schismatical parts do make of the names of The Church of Enâ—land and Catholick Communion appropriated to themselves and the names of Seperatists and Schismaticks imposed arbitrarily on others Next to the Sword this is their chief proof That men are Separatists if they will not separate from all save them and such as they § 3. Among all the Casuists I found none abound with this sort of Logick so much as the Resolver of three Cases about Church-Communion which when I had read I am so much against Separation that I thought meet to joyn with the rest of the Casuists who unite against Schism so far as to disswade Men from this Man's and Mr. Dodwells extraordnary Schismatical Doctrine § 4. But when I had written a just Confutation of him hearing by fame who he is I thought it my duty before I publisht it to see the Book which he wrote against Mr. Humphrey and Me because he may perhaps be there more intelligible for I had never before seen it and would not seek it because I would not tempt my self to a work which I have so little pleasure in as is the confutation of such men But when I had read it I found the Author a great deal sounder in his opinions than in his words and than he was represented to me to be There is a great deal that 's good and worthy the reading in his Book when he doth but keep off from his Schismatical cause He handsomely openeth some Doctrinals and so fairly alloweth forbearance of others in Doctrinal differences that were he as Catholick and equal in his opinion about Government and that which he calleth Catholick Communion he would be against Schism a Catholick indeed He doth fairly disclaim even Archbishop Bramhall's concession to the Papists And he handsomely confuteth Mr. Dodwell and maintaineth the validity of Sacraments and the duty of our Communion with the foreign Churches that have no Bishops and justifieth the Church of England that hath still owned Communion with them He hath proved the no necessity of continued Successive ordination by Bishops He hath defended the Independency of Diocesan Churches in point of Government and that one Church hath not proper Governing Power over another but only an obligation to Communion of which more anon § 5. But I must say That though he hath a smooth and handsom Stile for an Orator either He or I which of us I am no fit Judge is so wofully defective in Logick and Politicks that of these Subjects one of us is utterly unfit for a strict dispute not knowing the usual Sense of ordinary terms nor explaining them aright nor seeming to know what a true Definition is nor proceeding in any Scholar-like method But that little explication of Terms which he giveth is usually near the end of the â—ook when a confused dispute before hath tended but to seduce which ever of us it is that is in the fault it 's a great wrong to the Reader And if it be he I find no likelihood that any should cure him but himself or some one that he hath a very high opinion of For when his mistakes are discovered the substance of his Answer is a haughty ignorant scorn at the discovery Had he happily learnt to Explain Define and Distinguish and Methodize when he was young enough to submit to his Tutor it had been well for him But it being now to be learnt when he is a Doctor and such a Doctor Scorning and ignorant Wrangling will take the place of necessary Learning § 6. This I must tell the Reader That the Man speaketh so much worse than he seemeth by after Contradictions to think and hath so little Skill in exact expressing the matter or his mind that I can scarce ever pretend with any confidence to know his meaning For when he hath said worst and is confuted he comes over it again and scorneth us for misunderstanding him and tells us that he meant as we do So that it is his Words that I only undertake to confute and not his meaning till I am better able to say that I know it Nor would I think it a work beseeming me to write a Book to tell the World how unskilful this man is in speaking intelligibly and aptly if I did not find that others are seduced by receiving his words in the usual sence of such not knowing that he meaneth not as he speaketh So far as he meaneth well I think I am his Friend in perswading people to be of his mind and to believe what he thinks and not what he saith And if he hold on his way and fall not out with the Truth for my sake I am in hope that the effect also of this Survey will be that in the next he will renounce all his Errors save the terms and will say that he meant as I did And then if he do rail and scorn at me only as misunderstanding him I can bear it § 7. Nor should I think it a Duty in my condition to save Readers from his real errors were it not that they notoriously tend to perswade the Land to think of Thousands of the faithfullest Christians that I know as damnable intollerable Schismaticks guilty of the sin that will damn them as soon as Adultery and Murder and consequently to call Men to hate them as such and to proceed in silencing ruining and imprisoning them which is to tell all them that do so that they do well which if it should prove otherwise who can express the greatness of his sin against the Souls of one party and the Lives Estate and Ministry of the other § 8. His scorn p. 11 12. for my purpose to have medled with such Men in the Cause of Conformity no more seems some invitation to me to prevent the like But the foresaid Motives are far greater P. 35 36. While he over and over repeated the confused words of One Communion which must excuse us from Schism as dangerous as Murder and we that live among Men that use to distinguish Union from Communion and know that Communion yea and Union too hath a Multitude of degrees and our desire was that he would but explain in what he fixt it that we might understand his accusation he tells
Pastors have to the Universal Church will enable any of them more or fewer confederate or not ex authoritate Ministri Nuncii to tell any other Bishops or Churches of heinous scandalous sin and admonish them and renounce Communion with the impenitent and exhort people to forsake Heretick Bishops c. But all this as Equals and not as the fixed Overseers of other Churches nor as Rulers of other Pastors And so one Martin may do by a Synod of Bishops IX Kings are as truly and I think as much obliged to do their work in Concord and Communion The contrary dreadful Doctrine of Dr. Parker for setting up an Vniversal Council of Princes to govern all the Kings on earth is to be confuted elsewhere as also his subjecting Christ to Kings which implieth that they may command reward and punish him as Bishops And Kingship is as truly One as Episcopacy That is 1. It is of the same species 2. Under the same Universal King 3. Governed by the same Universal Laws 4. Bound to regard the Good of all the Church and World above that of their own Kingdoms 5. And bound to contribute the utmost of their Wit Interest and Power for the said common good of Church and World And because all the Kings in Europe may do more to this common good of all than Bishops without them can do I may say That they are bound hereto rather more than less than the Bishops As a rich man is bound to liberality more than a poor man and one that hath the Tutorage of Princes and Nobles Sons or a Physician that hath an Hundred such Patients is bound to more care and more bound to care than another And all Kingdoms are as truly parts of God's Kingdom over men as all Churches are parts of the Universal Church If Justices or Mayors will of themselves make a New Body Politick by Confederacy and Association and say We claim no Superiority but an Authority in order to Communion to make Laws of Government for the Kingdom or many Counties and should say It is One Kingdom as Unified by this Communion and these Laws of ours and not by their Relation to one King I should doubt whether to call them Sots or Rebels or Traitors § 5â— P. 206 207. he boldly repeateth How oft have I told him what it is that makes the Catholick Church One Catholick Church which is the constitutive Form he enquires after viz. Not one superior power over the whole Church but one Communion and this Communion is in Humane Forms and Canons Ans. How oft doth he tell us that which if a Dissenter had asserted I should have thought the Name of an Heretick too gentle for him as coming so near the denying both of the Church and Christ. See here the Church is not made One and so not made the Church by its unitive Relation to Christ the Head He is not the constitutive Regent Form but a Voluntary Agreement to make Laws of Government c. is the constitutive Form And yet he saith before It is not made by Man but God § 51. But p. 220. he disgraceth the Dean by these words Mr. B. indeed says That the Universal Church is headed by Christ himself But as the Dean adds this doth not remove the difficulty For the question is about the Visible Church whereof the particular Churches are parts and they being visible parts do require a visible constitutive Regent Head as essential to them Therefore the whole Visible Church must likewise have a visible constitutive Regent Head Ans. Dangerously false and the Fundamental Principle of Popery When they know how frequently the Papists are answered to this by Protestants and I told them how fully I had answered it to Iohnson and oft why have we no Reply but say over and over the same things Viz. 1. No Kingdom nor thing is Visible simpliciter but secundum quid Our King is not visible in Ireland nor but to â—ew in England His soul is visible to none nor his body save the outward Accidents If he were seen by none but Courtiers it were a Visible Kingdom 2. In all these Respects the Church is Visible 1. The Bodies of the Subjests are Visible 2. Their Oath af Allegiance Baptism and Profession are Visible 3. Christ lived Visibly on Earth 4. He is Visible in Heaven to his Courtiers 5. He hath one Visible Law and Covenant to govern all his Church 6. He hath Visible Officers 7. He hath Visible administrations of Mercy and Justice by himself and his Officers 8. And he is coming to Judgment Visibly and all Eyes shall see him Now the Controversie is either de re or de nomine De re none but a false Teacher will deny any one of these that I say not a gross Heretick 2. De nomine either this much may warrant the Name of a Visible Church or not If not we must go the old way of some former Protestants and say That the Chatholick Church is not Visible And for ought I see we must say That the Kingdom of Ireland if not of England is Invisible because few see the King and no man ever saw the Soul of King or Subjects or their Bodies save the skin If all this warrant not the Name of Visible Church the Confederacy of an unknown Company of Bishops will not But remember that the Controversie is but de nomine and we say more by far to prove it Visible than you do while you deny Popery § 52. P. 2â—5 I Argued That if a Regent Supreme be the informing part of a Diocesan Metropolical c. Church so must it he of the Catholick if the word Church be used univocally Hence he inferreth that I thus argue If there be not a Supreme Head over the whole Church there is no such over any part So little doth he understand an Argument When as I argued only from the parity of Reason That if the summa potestas be not the Form of the Catholick Church then it is not of Diocesan Churches But it is of Diocesan Churches as is confest Ergo This supposeth that they confess Christ to be the summa potestas Therefore I say He must be the Constitutive Form The man blusht not here to say That I infer A Bishop cannot govern his own Church unless one Bishop or a Colledge govern the whole How little Belief is due to such a Man § 53. P. 844. He saith I think it as certain That those Churches cannot be Members of the Catholick Church whose Communion is unlawful Answ. Seeing it is plain That he meaneth not only mental Communion in Essentials of which it's true but local Communion in outward Acts I take him to be one of the grossest Schismaticks that ever I had to do with and one of the greatest Enemies to Christian Catholick Love If any could prove it unlawful to have Ministerial Communion in England where he cannot have it without declaring Assent and Consent to all thingt in their three Books that would not prove the Church of
England no part of the Catholick Church If a Lay-man could prove it unlawful to trust other men with his Child in Baptismal Covenanting as far as the Church here doth or sinful to joyn in avoiding the Communion of all such gâ—dly men as the Canons or a Lay-Civilian may Excommunicate This will not prove the Church of England no part of the Catholick Church If any Church will deny men Communion unless they subscribe to some one small Untruth as the Liturgies false Rule to find out Easter-day or a mis-translation or the denial that Christ died for all c. this doth not unchurch them all But men have made so many snares by their numerous invented sinful forms of Communion that by such schsmatical Censures as this one scarce knows what Church on Earth is â—ot unchurched § 54. He saith Where there is 〈◊〉 bâ—â—ach of Communion no declared 〈…〉 act of communiâ—n between 〈…〉 be in communion with each 〈…〉 You may say of them what you will But all these Negatives speak no positive Act And is Communion nothing but Negations All this I may say of those that never heard of each others being 2. There may be an express disowning of each as the Romans did the Asians about Easter and the Africans about rebaptizing and the Britains disowned Augustine and as some disown a Pair of Organs or neglect of Discipline c. And yet both be parts of the Catholick Church § 55. P. 326. He is so Catholick in Doctrinals as to say that We may safely communicate with any Church how different soever our Opinion in other Matters may be when we agree in all the Fundamentals of Christian Faith and Essentials of Worship Answ. What could one wish more Is this the same Man May you not then admit those that so far agree with you Are all your humane Associations and Confedearcies and all the Laws for Church-Discipline and Government made by men that have no Legislative Power Essentials of Worship or Fundamental Doctrines of Faith Are all that your foresaid Canons Excommunicate Men for such Essentials If this much be enough in the Church notwithstanding all other Sins and Errors why not in those that you should receive But it seems by this that Matters of Divine Faith and Worship besides bare Essentials are small things to him in comparison of Bishops Rules and Canons § 56. Pag. 395. He saith To separate causelesly from any true and sound part of the Catholick Church cuts such Separatists off from the Church If they will justifie their Separation they must prove that what is Enjoyned is Sinful Answ. 1. Have you answered what they have said and said again towards a Proof Remember that you call them to it and justifie their Separation if they prove it 2. But your Conclusion is false and odious leaving it doubtful what part of the Christian World you damn not If I could prove that you separate causelesly from the Nonconformists doth that certainly cut you from all the Church I doubt there are too few Christians on earth who do not in some degree separate causelesly from others Grotius joyned with no Church locally in Worship long before he died Most of the Church in East West South and North is damned falsly by this Rule He that doth but causelesly separate pro tempore from a Preacher by Passion or Mistake as Mr. Martin aforesaid from Mr. Lapthâ—rne separate causelesly from a true and sound part of the Christian Church His words make me think so sadly of the Case of the Church that must be tempted and distracted by such men as puts me far from a sporting frame But as Dr. Twisse and some of the Gravest Writers sometime divert their Readers with a sad Story that hath somewhat in it ridiculous why may I not put him another such Case At Bridgenoth before 1639. One Parson Crosse a thorough Conformist Preacht a Sermon In which inveighing against Marriage he said If you marry a Widow She will be like a Banbury Cheese when all the Paring is cut off there 's little left So when all Portions and Legacies are paid â— Whoever Maid or Widow if you will hope for a Wife and virtuâ—us Woman you must be like a Man that will find out one Ele in a Barrel of Snakes It 's a hundred to one you miss her But if you light on her you have but a wet Snig by the Tail a slippery handful Now the Women were angry with the Preacher he was an Orthodox Licens'd Man They separate from him Quere Whether they separated from the Catholick Church Reader I am tired with following this Writer and Mr. Crosse's Sermon makes me think of his Book By that time all the wordy mistakes are pared off the good matter is like his pared Banbury Cheese And if you fish for them at a venture it 's great odds but you meet with some scurvy words or matter instead of them Or if you light of that which is better his Sence is so uncertain in undistinguisht words that you have but Mr. Crosse's wet Snig by the Tail But not to seem more incredulous and indifferent from him than I am I subscribe to his words to Mr. Humphrey pag. 226. Ignorance and Insensibility is as great a security to some Men against Shame as Impudence is to others And to his words to Mr. Lobb pag. 388. What a blessed thing is Ignorance which helps Men to confute Books without Fear or Wit And I do acknowledge That this â—r hath helpt me more sensibly to understand St. Paul 1 Tim. 3.6 Not a Novice lest being lifted up with Pride he fall into the condemnation of the Devil FINIS UNNECESSARY SEPARATING disowned in the Reasons of the Authors Censured Practice § 1. WHEN I see 1. How many suffer for refusing Communion with the Parish Churches 2. And how many are offended with Me and such others for Communicating with them censuring Us as mistaking compliers with Sin The Cause and some good Peoples request invite me to answer these following Questions I. Whether Men should be compelled to Communicate with any Church by Corporal Penalties II. Whether they who consent to Communicate with some Church may chuse their own Pastor and Company or may by force be confined to their Parish Priest and Church III. For what Reasons I and such others Hear in and Communicate with the Parish Churches And whether so to do be a Sin or a Duty or a thing Indifferent § 2. I. To the first case I answer 1. It were happy if the Sword could compel Unbelievers to Believe but it cannot nor is a way which Nature or Scripture ever allowed Man to use for such an end 2. To force an Unbeliever to Lie by saying he Believeth is a Sin 3. An Infidel must not be Baptized till he profess with seeming Seriousness and Willingness that he Believeth in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and will Vow
Church on fire and they separated from the Preacher one Fryer stuck by the belly that was going out at the window the door being wedged with the crowd a Boy that saw it open above their heads got up on their shoulders and went on 'till he slipt into a Monks Cowl and there lay still 'till the Monk was got out and felt something on his back and thinking it was an heretical Devil began to conjure him in the Name of Father Son and Holy Ghost to tell him what he was and the Boy cryed O good Master I am the Bakers boy c. Quaere Whether this was Schismaticks separation At Walsall in Stafford-shire Mr. Lapthorne known to me in his lusty age who had been a Non-conformist but thought it an honour to be converted by a King and gloried that King Iames in conference changed him but being as rustick a thunderer as Father Latimer and more he was wont to let fly without much fear one Mr. Martin in the Parish accounted the greatest enemy to Puritans when he heard what he liked not would goe out of Church one day in a path way where Mr. Lane had rode a little before pelting Crabs with a pole the ground opened and swallowed him and his pole that they could never be found being a Cole-mine long on fire ever after that when any one would goe out of Church at a blustering passage Mr. Lapthorne would call to him Remember Martin Quere Whether all these were separating Schismaticks But this is too far off In Dunstans West where Dr. Sherlock Preacheth when I was licensed twenty years ago at Christmas as I was Preaching some Lime or Stone fell down in the Steeple with the crowd the Church being old and under suspicion they all thought it was falling and most ran out in tumult and some cast themselves headlong from the Gallery for hast when they were quieted and came in again the Boyes in the Chancel broke a Wainscot Skreen with climbing on it and the noise made them run out again one old woman going out cryed It 's just with God because I took not the first warning Lord forgive me and I 'le never come again Quere Whether these or at least this resolving Woman was a Schismatick and separated from the Catholick Church If not there is some separation that is not so bad as Murder and methinks the Doctor should forgive it for the success for the Parish hereupon resolved to pull down the Church and build it new a far better Fabrick where the Dr. now Preacheth and it drove me away that I preacht there no more Whether this new Church built where the old one had possession before be not a Schismatical Separatist I leave to him LII 2. Local Separation without Mental can make no culpable Schism for Nil nisi Voluntarium est morale if a man be imprisoned or be sick and cannot come to the Church it is innocent Separation I have been at no Church this half year much against my will O that God would heal me of this Separation LIII 3. If it must be mental Separation that must be culpable then it is diversified according to the mental degree and kind and no man separateth from the universal Church who separateth not from somewhat essential to it to separate from its Integrals or Accidents may be culpable but it 's no Separation from the Church no more than every breach of the Law is a Separation from the Kingdom LIV. 4. Some separate as to place locally and not mentally some mentally and not locally and some both He that daily observeth the outward Communion of the Church and yet taketh it for no Church or denyeth its Faith Hope or essential Duty separateth indeed All those men that live unbelievingly atheistically wickedly that in their converse prate against the Scripture and immortality of the Soul and that hate and persecute serious Godliness are damnably separated from Christ and therefore from the Catholick Church and are so to be esteemed so far as this is known thô when it is unknown the Church can take no notice of it LV. 5. It being only Humane Laws and Circumstantial Conveniences that make it unmeet to have divers Churches and Bishops living promiscuously in the same Parishes Cities Dioceses or Nations where Laws and circumstances allow it it is no unlawful separation LVI 6. He that liveth in forreign Lands Christian Mahometan or Heathen where various Churches live promiscuously Greeks Armenians Protestants Papists c. is no Schismatick if he choose which he thinks best and be absent locally from the rest condemning them no further than they deserve LVII 7. He that removeth into another Diocess or Parish for his worldly interest separateth without fault from the Church he was in LVIII 8. It is a lawful separation to remove ones dwelling because the Minister is ignorant unskilful or otherwise bad and this for the better edification of his Soul and the use and help of a more able faithful Minister even Law and Custome and reason do allow it LIX 9. Thô the Canon 57. and 28. forbid Ministers oft to give the Sacrament to Strangers that come out of other Parishes even where no Preaching is yet those many sober People that use this in London are not taken to be Schismaticks as bad as Murderers Many that are esteemed the most sober religious Conformists do ordinarily goe from their own Parish Churches some in Martins and St. Giles's Parish c. for want of room and some for more Edification to Dr. Tillotson Dr. Stillingfleet Dr. Burnet Dr. Fowler Mr. Gifford Mr. Durham Mr. Horneck and such others and communicate with them and thó these are called by the late Catholicks by the Name of Dangerous Trimmers I think even Dr. Sherlock will think it more pardonable than Murder if they come to him LX. 10. If the King and Law should restore the antient order that every City that is every great incorporate Town in England should have a Bishop yea or every great Parish and that the Diocesans should be their Arch-Bishops and our new Catholicks should tell the King and Parliament that they are hereby unchristened Schismaticks as dangerous as Adulterers or Murderers for gathering Churches within a Church I would not believe them LXI 11. If e. g. at Frankford Zurick Lubeck Hamburgh c. a Church is settled in the Lutheran way and another in the Bohemian way described by Lasitius and Commenius which is a conjunction of Episcopacy Presbytery and Independency or a Church that had no Liturgy or none but that which the French Protestants and Dutch have would it be damning Schism for such as Cox and Horne at Frankford to set up an Episcopal Church in the English mode and with their Liturgy and so far to separate from the rest LXII 12. If it be true that Iohn Maior Fordon and others say that Presbytery was the Government of the Church of Scotland before Episcopacy was brought in was the introduction of