and subservient unto their Edification as is expresly affirmed Ephes. 4. 11 12 13 14. As it should seem an Opinion opposite unto this Notion of National Churches is examined and confuted Pag. 17. ibid it is a great Mistake to make the Notion of a Church barely to relate to Acts of Worship and consequently that the adequate Notion of a Church is an Assembly for Divine Worship by which means they appropriate the Name of Churches to particular Congregations Whereas if this hold true the Church must be dissolved as soon as the Congregation is broken up but if they retain the nature of a Church when they do not meet together for Worship then there is some other bond that unites them and whatever that is it constitutes the Church I am far from pretending to have read the Writings of all men upon this Subject nay I can say I have read very few of them though I never avoided the reading of any thing written against the way and order which I approve of Wherefore there may be some as far as I know who have maintained this Notion of a Church or that it is only an Assembly for Divine Worship but for my part I never read nor heard of any who was of this Judgment Assemblyes for Divine Worship we account indispensably necessary for the Edification of the Churches but that this is that which gives them their Constitution and formeth that which is the bond of their Union none of the Nonconformists as I know of do Judge For it will not only hence follow as the Reverend Author observes that the Church is dissolved when the Congregation is broken up on which account Churches at this time would be dissolved almost every Week whether they would or no but that any sort of Persons who have no Church-Relation unto one another meeting occasionally for Divine Worship do constitute a Church which it may be within an hour they cease to be It is not therefore on this account that we appropriate the Name of Churches unto particular Congregations There is quite another way and means another Bond of Union whereby particular Churches are constituted which hath been sufficiently declared But if the meaning of the appropriating the Name of Churches unto particular Congregations be that those Societies which have not or which cannot have Assemblies for divine Worship are not Churches properly so called it is a thing of another consideration that need not here be insisted on But when such Societies as whose bounds and limits are not of Divine Institution as were those of the National Church of the Jews no nor yet of the Prudence and wisdom of men as were the distribution of the ancient Church into Patriarchates and Diocesses but a meer natural and necessary consequent of that prevailing Sword which on the Dissolution of the Roman Empire erected distinct Kingdoms and Dominions as men were able such Societies as are not capable of any Religious Assemblies for Divine Worship and the ministration of Christian Discipline in them such as are forced to invent and maintaine an Union by ways and means and Officers and orders which the Scripture knows nothing of are proved to be Churches of Christs Institution I shall embrace them as such In the mean time let them pass at their own proper rate and value which the Stamp of Civil Authority hath put upon them What is further discoursed by the Author on this Subject proceeding no further but why may it not be so and so we are not concerned in 3. Pag. 23 24. There is a Distribution of all Dissenters into two Parties 1. Such as say That although they are in a state of Separation from our Church yet this separation is no sin 2. Such as say That a state of Separation would be sin but notwithstanding their meeting in different places yet they are not in a state of Separation The Difference of these two Parties seems to me to be only in the different ways of expressing themselves the one granting the use of the word Separation in this case which others will not admit For their Practice so far as I can observe is one and the same and therefore their Principles must be so also though they choose several ways of expressing them Both sorts intended do plead that in sundry things they have communion with the Church of England and in some things they have not nor can have it so Some knowing the word Separation to be of an indifferent signification and to be determined as unto its sence by what it is applyed unto do not contend but that if any will have it so the state wherein they are should be denominated from their dissent unto those things wherein they cannot hold communion with the Church of England and so are not offended if you call it a state of Separation how best this hinders not but that they continue their Communion with the Church of England as was before mentioned Others seem to take Separation in the same sence with Schisme which is alwayes evil Or at least they pretend it is their Right to have the Denomination of their state taken from what they agree in with the Church of England and not from their dissent in other things from it And therefore they continue in a Practice suitable unto that dissent Wherefore I judge that there is no need of this Distinction but both parties intended are equally concerned in the Charge that is laid against them for their dissent in some things from the Church These things being premised that we may not be diverted from the substance of the cause in hand as they would otherwise occurre unto us in our progress I shall proceed unto the consideration of the Charge it self laid against the Nonconformists and the arguings whereby it is endeavoured to be confirmed The Charge is That all the Nonconformists of one sort or another that is Presbyterians and Independents are guilty of sin of a sinful Separation from the Church of England and therefore as they live in a known sin so they are the Cause thereby of great evils confusions disturbances among our selves and of danger unto the whole Protestant Religion whence it is meet that they should c. The matter of Fact being thus far mutually acknowledged that there is such a stated Difference between the Church of England and the Nonconformists the next Enquiry naturally should be on these two Heads 1. Who or what is the cause of this Difference or Distance without which we cannot judge aright on whom the blame of it is to be charged For that all men are not presently to be condemned for the withdrawing from the Communion of any Church because they do so without a due Examination of the causes for which they do it will be acknowledged by all Protestants In plain terms our Enquiry is whether the cause hereof be on the one hand the Imposition of terms of Communion without any Obligation in Conscience to make that
walk and behave themselves in this state and condition And unto those who have attained that measure whence in comparison of others they may be styled perfect that they press on unanimously towards the end proposed And as for those who in any things differed from others he encourageth them to wait on the teachings of God in that use of the means of Instruction which they enjoyed And having prescribed to each supposed Party their especial Duties as such he lays down the Duty of them both in common which is that in and with respect unto what they had attained they should walk by the same Rule namely which he had now laid down and mind the same things as he had before enjoyned them Wherefore these words of the Apostle are so far from being a foundation to charge them with Schisme who agreeing in the substance of the Doctrine of the Gospel do yet dissent from others probably the greater part of the Church are intended in some things that it enjoyns a mutual forbearance among those who are so differently minded 4. But our Author affirms that it cannot be a Rule of Charity and mutual forbearance that is intended because the Apostle had spoken of that just before But it is apparent that he speaks these words with reference unto what he had said just before and if this be that which those who are otherwise minded are not obliged unto then are they not obliged at all to walk by the Rule intended which is not the mind of the Apostle so himself declares out of Cajetan that the Apostle subjoins the last words to the former least the Persons he there speaks unto should think themselves excused from going as far as they can in the same Rule Pag. 37. But a Rule he says it is limiting and determining the Practice requiring Uniformity in observing the same standing Rule The Nonconformists hereon do say that if the Apostles or any one Apostle did appoint such a Rule as this intended let it be produced with any probability of proof to be theirs and they are all ready to subscribe and conform unto it On supposition that any Rule of this nature was appointed by the Apostles and declared unto the Churhes as the Reverend Author I suppose doth intimate that it was though I dare not affix a determinate sense unto his words in this place all that can be required of us is that we do conform and walk according unto that Rule so appointed and declared by them This we are alwayes ready to doe Sundry general Rules we find in the Scripture given unto us relating unto the constitution and Edification of Churces to their Order and Worship and Government sundry particular Rules for Ministers and others how they should behave themselves in Church Societies and Assemblies are also laid down therein all which we embrace and submit unto the Authority of Christ in them And if any other Government or particular Rule can be produced given by them which is not recorded in the Scripture so it can be proved to be theirs we will engage to conform unto it 5. If the Rule pretended to be given by the Apostle be of any use in this case or can give any force unto the Argument in hand it must be such an one as appointed and required things to be observed in the Worship of God that were never divinely appointed imposing the observation of them on the Consciences and practices of all members of the Church under Penalties spiritual and temporal a Rule constituting National Churches with a Government and Discipline suited unto that constitution with Modes and Ceremonies of Worship no where intimated in the Scripture nor any way necessary in the Light of Reason Such a Rule I say it must be since although I should grant which yet I do not that the consequent is good that because the Apostles made Rules for the practice of the Church that Believers were bound in conscience to submit unto therefore other ordinary Governours of the Church may do so also yet it will by no means follow that because the Apostles appointed a Rule of one sort present Church Governours may appoint those of another We know full well and it is on all hands agreed what is the Rule that our conformity is required unto If this be done from any Rule given by the Apostles it must be a Rule of the same nature or to the same purpose otherwise by a pretence of their pattern or example Rules may be made directly contrary unto and destructive of all the Rules they ever really gave as it is actually fallen out in the Church of Rome But 6. We deny that the Apostles made or gave any such Rules to the Churches present in their days or for the use of the Churches in future Ages as should appoint and determine outward modes of Worship with Ceremonies in their Observation stated Feasts and Fasts beyond what is of Divine Institution Liturgies or forms of Prayer or Discipline to be exercised in Law Courts subservient unto a National Ecclesiastical Government What use then they are or may be of what benefit or advantage may come to the Church by them what is the Authority of the Superior Magistrate about them we do not now enquire or determine Only we say that no Rule unto these ends was ever prescibed by the Apostles For 1. There is not the least intimation of any such Rule to be given by them in the Scripture There are in it as was before observed many express Rules both general and particular about Churches their Faith Worship and mens walking in them thoroughly sufficient to direct the Duty and Practice of all Believers in all cases and occurences relating to them But of any such Rule as that here pretended there is no mention which certainly if it had been given and of the importance which now it is pleaded to be of such as that without it neither Peace nor Unity nor Order can be preserved in Churches some intimation at least would have been made of it therein Especially we may judge it would have been so seeing sundry things every thing so far as we can understand wherein the Edification of the Church is any way concerned are recorded in it though of little or no use in comparison of what so great and general a Rule would be of Besides there is that Doctrine delivered and those Directions given by them in the Scripture concerning the Liberty of Believers and forbearance of Diffenters as is inconsistent with such a Rule and the Imposition of it 2. The first Churches after their times knew nothing of any such Rule given by them and therefore after they began to depart from the simplicity of the Gospel in any things as unto Worship Order and Rule or Discipline they fell into a great variety of outward Observances Orders and Ceremonies every Church almost differing in some thing or other from others in some such observations yet all keeping the Unity of
by the Courts of Bishops Chancellors Commissaries c. is unknown to the Scriptures and in its Administration is very remote from giving a True Representation of the Authority Wisdom Love and Care of Christ to his Church which is the Sole end of all Church Rules and Discipline The Yoke hereof many account themselves not obliged to submit unto 5. There is in such Churches a total Deprivation of the Liberty of the People secured unto them by the Rules and Practices of several Ages from the Beginning of choosing their own Pastors whereby they are also deprived of all use of their Light and Knowledge of the Gospel in providing for their own Edification 6. It cannot be denied but that there is want of due meanes of Edification in many of those Parochial Churches and yet provision is made by the Government that those Churches are under that none shall by any way provide themselves of better means for that great end of all Church Society It is on these and the like Reasons that the Non-conformists cannot joyn in total Communion such as the Rule pleaded for requireth with Parochial Churches In this state as was said the Lord Christ having Instituted particular Congregations requiring all Believers to walk in them it is the Duty of those who are necessiated to decline the Communion of Parochial Churches as they are stated at present to joyn themselves in and unto such Congregations as wherein their Edification and Liberty may be better provided for according unto Rule But hereon the Reverend Author proceeds to oppose such particular Congregations or Churches I think as unto their original and necessity for so he speaks page 25 to page 26. But I must needs say further I have never yet seen any tolerable proof that the Churches Planted by the Apostles were Limited to Congregations Howbeit this seems to be so clear and evident in matter of Fact and so necessary from the nature of the thing it self that many wise Men wholly unconcerned in our Controversies do take it for a thing to be granted by all without dispute So speaks Chief Justice Hobart page 149. In the Case of Colt and Glover cont Bishop Coventry and Litchfield And we know well that the Primitive Church in its greatest Purity was but Voluntary Congregations of Believers submitting themselves to the Apostles and after to other Pastors to whom they did Minister of their Temporals as God did move them Of the same Judgment are those who esteemed the first Government of the Church to be Democratical so speaks Paulus Sharpius In the beginning the Government of the Holy Church had altogether a Democratical Form all the faithful intervening in the chiefest Deliberations thus we see that all did intervene at the Election of Matthias unto the Apostleship and in the Election of the six Deacons and when St. Peter received Cornelius an Heathen Centurion unto the Faith he gave an account of it to all the Church Likewise in the Council celebrated in Jerusalem the Apostles the Priests and the other Faithful Brethren did intervene and the Letters were written in the name of all these three Orders In success of time when the Church increased in number the faithful retiring themselves to the Affairs of their Families and having left those of the Congregation the Government retained only in the Ministers and became Aristocratical saving the Election which was Popular And others also of the same Judgment may be added But let us hear the Reasoning of this Learned Author against this Apprehension this he enters upon page 26. It is possible at first there might be no more Christians in one City than could meet in one Assembly for worship but where doth it appear that when they multiplied into more Congregations they did make new and distinct Churches under new Officers with a seperate Power of Government Of this I am well assured there is no marks nor foot-steps in the New Testament or the whole History of the Primitive Church I do not think it will appear credible to any considerate man that the 5000 Christians in the Church of Jerusalem made one stated and fixed Congregation for Divine Worship not if we make all the allowances for Strangers which can be desired but if this were granted where are the unalterable Rules that assoon as the Company became too great for one particular Assembly they must become a new Church under peculiar Officers and an Independent Authority It is very strange that those who contend so much for the Scriptures being a perfect Rule of all things pertaining to Worship and Discipline should be able to produce nothing in so necessary a point I Answer 1 It is possible that an impartial account may ere long be given of the state and ways of the first Churches after the Decease of the Apostles wherein it will be made appear how they did insensibly deviate in many things from the Rule of their first Institution so as that though their mistakes were of small moment and not prejudicial unto their Faith and Order yet occasion was administred to succeeding Ages to increase those Deviations until they issued in a fatal Apostasy An eminent instance hereof is given us in the Discourse of Paulus Sharpius about matters Benificiary lately made publick in our own Language 2 The matter of Fact herein seems to me evidently to be exemplified in the Scripture For although it may be there is not express mention made that these or those particular Churches did divide themselves into more Congregations with new Officers yet are there Instances of the Erection of new particular Congregations in the same Province as distinct Churches with a seperate Power of Government So the first Church in the Province of Judea was in Jerusalem But when that Church was compleat as to the number of them who might Communicate therein unto their Edification the Apostle did not add the Believers of the adjacent Towns and places unto that Church but Erected other particular Congregations all the Country over so there were different Churches in Judea Galile and Samaria that is many in each of them Act. 9. 31. So the Apostle mentions the Churches of God that were in Judea 1 Thes 2. 14. And no where speaks of them as of one Church for Worship Order and Government So he speaks again that is constantly Gal. 1. 22. I was unknown by face unto the Churches of Judea And that these Churches were neither National nor Diocessans but particular Congregations is as I suppose sufficiently evident So was it in the Province of Galatia there is no mention of any Church therein that should be comprehensive of all the Believers in that Province But many particular Churches there were as it is testified chap. 1. ver 2. So was it also in Macedonia the first Church planted in that Province was at Philipi as it is declared Act. 16. And it was quickly brought into compleat Order so as that when the Apostle wrote unto it there were
frequent them generally judge otherwise For it is not to be supposed that Faction among them should so commonly prevail beyond Interest and therefore if they thought it were lawful for them to comply with the Laws they would do it But why then is this kept up as such a mighty Secret in the breasts of their Teachers Why do they not Preach to them in their Congregations Is it for fear they should have none left to Preach to that is not to be imagined of mortified and conscientious men Is it lest they should seem to condemn themselves whil'st they Preach against Separation in a Separate Congregation This I confess looks oddly and the tenderness of a man's mind in such a case may out of meer shamefacedness keep him from declaring a Truth which flies in his face while he speaks it Is it that they fear the Reproaches of the People Which some few of the most Eminent Persons among them have found they must undergo if they touch upon this Subject for I know not how it comes to pass that the most godly People among them can the least endure to be told of their faults But is it not as plainly written by St. Paul If I yet serve men I should not be the servant of Christ as Wo be unto me if I Preach not the Gospel If they therefore would acquit themselves like honest and conscientious men let them tell the People plainly that they look on our Churches as true Churches and that they may lawfully communicate with us in Prayers and Sacraments and I do not question but in time if they find it lawful they will judge it to be their Duty For it is the Apostles command here Whereto we have already attained let us walk by the same Rule let us mind the same things A Crime this is which if true is not easily to be expiated Nor can men give greater evidence of their own Hypocrisie Insincerity and Government by corrupt Ends and Designs than by such abominable Arts and Contrivances So if it should prove not to be true it cannot but be looked on as animated by such an evil Surmise as is of no small provocation in the sight of God and men This Reverend Author makes a distinction about Communion with the Church Page 20. between what is required of Ministers and that which is called Lay-Communion which is the foundation of this Charge I do not confound bare suspending Communion in some particular Rites which Persons do modestly scruple and using it in what they judge to be lawful with either total or at least ordinary forbearance of Communion in what they judge to be lawful and proceeding to the forming of separate Congregations i. e. under other Teachers and by other Rules than what the established Religion allows And this is the present Case of Separation which I intend to consider and to make the sinfulness and mischief of it appear But he knows that by the Communion and uniting our selves unto the Church which is pressed either on Ministers or People a total submission unto the Rule as established in the Book of Canons and Rubrick of the Liturgy is required of them all When this is once engaged in there is no suspending of Communion in particular Rites to be allowed They who give up themselves hereunto must observe the whole Rule to a tittle Nor is it in the power of this Reverend Author who is of great dignity in the Church and as like as any Man I know to be inclined thereunto to give Indulgence unto them in their abstinence from the least Ceremony enjoined Wherefore the Question about Lay-Communion is concerning that which is absolute and total according unto all that is enjoined by the Laws of the Land or by the Canons Constitutions and Orders of the Church Hereby are they obliged to bring their Children to be baptized with the use of the Aerial Sign of the Cross to kneel at the Communion to the Religious observation of Holy-days to the constant use of the Liturgie in all the Publick Offices of the Church unto the exclusion of the exercise of those Gifts which Christ continues to communicate for its Edification to forego all means of Publick Edification besides that in their Parish-Churches where to speak with modesty it is oft times scanty and wanting to renounce all other Assemblies wherein they have had great experience of spiritual advantage unto their souls to desert the observation of many useful Gospel-duties in their mutual watch that Believers of the same Church ought to have one over another to divest themselves of all interest of a voluntary consent in the Discipline of the Church and choice of their own Pastors and to submit unto an Ecclesiastical Rule and Discipline which not one in a thousand of them can apprehend to have any thing in it of the Authority of Christ or Rule of the Gospel and other things of the like nature may be added This being the true state of Lay-Communion which will admit of no Indulgence if the Rule be observed I must say that I do not believe that there are Six Nonconformist Ministers in England that do believe this Communion to be lawful for the People to embrace And on the other hand they cease not to instruct them wherein their true Communion with the Church of England doth consist namely in Faith and Love and all the fruits of them unto the glory of God I heartily wish these things had been omitted that they had not been spoken not to cover any guilt in the Nonconformists whose Consciences are unto them a thousand witnesses against such Imputations But whereas the ground of them is only Surmises and Suspicions and the Evil charged of the highest nature that any men can involve themselves in the guilt of it argues such a frame of spirit such an habit of mind as evidenceth men to be very remote from that Christian love and charity which on all hands we sometimes pretend unto Of the same nature is another Charge of the like want of sincerity pag 46. Those saith he who speak now most against the Magistrates Power in matters of Religion had ten substantial Reasons for it when they thought the Magistrates on their own side For which is quoted an Answer unto two Questions 1659. that is they change their Opinions according to their Interest I know not directly whom he intends Those who are commonly called Independents expressed their apprehension of the Magistrates Power in and about Religion in their Confession made 1659. That any of them have on what hath ensued changed their Opinion therein I know not And for my part I have on this occasion perused the Answer unto the two Questions directed unto and do profess my self at this day to be of the same judgment with the Author of them as it is expressed in that Paper There are things not easily to be numbred wherein we acknowledge the Magistrates Power and Duty in matters of Religion
in it the Saints whereof it was constituted with Bishops and Deacons Phil. 1. 1. But that Church being so compleat the Apostle appointed other particular Congregational Churches in the same Province who had Officers of their own with a Power of Government these he mentions and calls the Churches of Macedonia 2 Cor. 8. 1. 23. Wherefore we need no more Directions in this matter then what are given us by the Apostles Authority in the Name and Authority of Jesus Christ nor are concerned in the Practice of those who afterwards took another course of adding Believers from other places unto the Church first planted unless it were in case of a disability to enjoy Church-Communion among themselves elsewhere Whatever therefore is pretended unto the contrary we have plain Scripture evidence and practice for the errecting particular distinct Congregations with Power for their own Rule and Edification in the same Province be it as small as those that were of Samaria or Galile It cannot surely be said that these Churches were National wherof there were many in one small Province of a small Nation nor yet Metropolitical or Diocesan nor I suppose will it be denied but that they were intrusted with Power to Rule and Govern themselves in all ordinary cases especially when in every one of them Elders were ordained which the Apostles were careful to see done Act. 14. 22. This is the Substance of what we plead as unto particular Congregations 3. It is not probable that any of the first Churches did for a long time encrease in any City unto such a number as might exceed the bounds of a particular Church or Congregation For such they might continue to be notwithstanding a Multiplication of Bishops or Elders in them and occasional distinct Assemblies for some Acts of Divine Worship And it seems if they did begin to exceed in number beyond a just proportion for their Edification they did immediately erect other Churches among them or near them So whereas there was a mighty encrease of Believers at Corinth Act. 18. 10 there was quickly planted a distinct Church at Cenchrea which was the Port of the City Rom. 16. 1. And notwithstanding the great number of 5000 that were Converted at Hierusalem upon the first Preaching of the Gospel yet were they so disposed of or so dispersed that some years after this there was such a Church only there as did meet together in one place as occasion did require even the whole multitude of the Brethren who are called the Church in distinction from the Apostles and Elders who were their Governours Act. 15. 4 12. Chap. 21. 22. Nor was that Church of any greater Number when they all departed afterwards and went out unto Pella a Village beyond Jordan before the Destruction of the People City and Temple And though many Alterations were before that time introduced into the Order and Rule of the Churches yet it appears that when Cyprian was Bishop of the Church at Carthage that the whole Community of the Members of that Church did meet together to determine of things that were for their Common Interest according unto what was judged to be their Right and Liberty in those days which they could not have done had they not all of them belonged unto the same particular Church and Congregation But these things may be pleaded elsewhere if occasion be given thereunto But yet 4. I must say that I cannot discern the least necessity of any positive Rule or Direction in this matter nor is any such thing required by us on the like occasion For this distribution of Believers into particular Congregations is that which the nature of the thing it self and the Duty of men with respect unto the end of such Churches doth indispensibly require For what is the end of all Churches for which they are instituted Is it not the Edification of them that do believe They will find themselves mistaken who suppose that they were designed to be subservient unto the secular Interest of any sort of men What are the means appointed of Christ in such Churches for that end Are they not Doctrines and Fellowship breaking Bread and Prayer that is the joynt Celebration of the Ordinances of Christ in the Gospel in Preaching the Word Administring the Sacraments Mutual Watchfulness over one another and the exercise of that Discipline which he hath appointed unto his Disciples I desire to know whether there be any need of a new Revelation to direct men who are obliged to preserve Churches in their use unto their proper End to take care of such things as would obstruct and hinder them in the use of means unto that end of their Edification Whereas therefore it is manifest that ordinarily these means cannot be used in a due manner but in such Churches as wherein all may be acquainted with what all are concerned in the very Institution it self is a plain Command to plant erect and keep all Churches in such a state as wherein this end may be attained And therefore if Believers in any place are so few or so destitute of Spiritual Gifts as not to be able of themselves jontly to observe these means for their Edification It is their Duty not to joyn by themselves in a Church-State but to add themselves as Members unto other Churches and so when they are so many as that they cannot orderly communicate together in all these Ordinances in the way of their Administration appointed in the Scripture unto the Edification of them it is their Duty by vertue of the Divine Institution of Churches to dispose of their Church-state and Relation into that way which will answer the Ends of it that is into more particular Churches or Congregations I speak not these things in opposition unto any other Church-state which men may erect or establish out of an opinion of its usefulness and conveniency much less against that Communion which ought to be among those particular Churches or their Associations for their common Rule and Government in and by their Officers but only to manifest that those of the Non-conformists which are supposed to adhere unto the Institution of particular Churches in a peculiar way do not thereby deserve the Imputation of so great and intolerable a Guilt as they are here charged withal And whereas I have hereby discharged all that I designed with respect unto the first sort of Non-conformists as they are here distinguished I might here give over the pursuit of this Argument But because I seek after Truth and satisfaction alone in these things I shall a little farther consider what is offered by this Reverend Author unto the same purpose with what we have passed through So therefore he proceeds pag. 26. to pag. 27. If that of which we read the clearest Instances in Scripture must be the standard of all future Ages much more might be said for limiting Churches to private Families then to particular Congregations For do we not read of the Church that
was in the House of Priscilla and Aquila at Rome of the Church that was of the House of Nymphas at Colosse and in the House of Philemon at Laodicea Why then should not Churches be reduced to particular Families when by that meanes they may fully enjoy the Liberty of their Consciences and avoid the Scandal of breaking the Laws But if notwithstanding such plain Examples Men will extend Churches to Congregations of many Families why may not others extend Churches to those Societies which consist of many Congregations I Answer 1 Possibly a Church may be in a Family or consist only of the Persons that belong to a Family But a Family as a Family neither is nor can be a Church For as such it is constituted by Natural and Civil Relations But a Church hath its Form and Being from the Voluntary Spiritual consent of those whereof it consists unto Church Order They gave saith the Apostle their own selves to the Lord and unto us by the Will of God 2 Cor. 8. 5. Neither is there any mention at all in the Scripture of the constitution of Churches in private Families so as that they should be limited thereunto 2 What is spoken of the Church in the House of Aquila Nymphas and Philemon doth not at all prove that there was a particular Church in each of their houses consisting only of their own Families as such but only that there was a Church which usually assembled in their respective houses Wherefore 3 Here is no such Example given of Churches in private Families in the whole Scripture as should restrain the extent of Churches from Congregations of many Families And the enquiry hereon that if men will extend Churches to Congregations of many Families why may not others extend Churches unto those Societies which consist of many Congregations hath not any force in it For they who extended Churches unto Congregations of many Families were the Apostles themselves acting in the Name and Authority of Jesus Christ. It cannot be proved that ever they Stated Erected or Planted any one Church but it was composed of Persons out of many Families nor that ever they confined a Church unto a Family or taught that Families though all of them Believers and baptized were Churches on the account of their being Families So others may extend Churches unto those Societies which consist of many congregations yet not so as that those who cannot comply or joyn with them should thereon be esteemed Schismaticks seeing such Societies were not appointed by Christ and his Apostles If such Societies be so constituted as that there is but a probable Plea that they are ordained by Christ there may be danger in a dissent from them meerly on this account that they consist of many congregations but this is not our case as hath been before declared The Remainder of this Section consists in an account of the Practice of the Churches in some things in following Ages This though of Importance in itself and deserving a full enquiry into yet belongeth not unto our present case and will it may be in due time be more fully spoken unto Those supposed of the first way and judgment who grant a separation from the established form of the Church of England are dismissed with one charge more on and Plea against their Practice not without a mixture of some severity in expression pag. 30. But suppose the first Churches were barely congregational by reason of the small number of Believers at that time yet what Obligation lies upon us to disturb the Peace of the Church we live in to reduce Churches to their Infant Stateâ— Which is pressed with sundry considerations in the two following Pages But we say 1 That the first Churches were not congregational by reason of the small number of Believers but because the Lord Christ had limited and determined that such a state of his Churches should be under the New Testament as best suited unto all the ends of their Institution 2 That which is called the infant state of Churches was in truth their sole perfect estate what they grew up unto afterwards most of them we know well enough For leaving as it is called their infant state by degrees they brought forth at last the Man of Sin 3 No Obligation lies upon us from hence to disturb the Peace of any Church nor do we do so let what will be pretended to the contrary If any such Disturbance do ensue upon the Differences that are between them and us as far as I know the blame will be found lying upon them who not being satisfied that they may leave the first state of the Churches under a Pretence of its Infancy and bring them into a greater Perfection then was given them by Christ and his Disciples but compel others also to foregoe their Primitive Constitution and comply with them in their Alteration thereof The Remainder of the Discourse of this Section so farre as I can understand proceeds on this Principle that the sole Reason and cause of our Non-conformity is this Perswasion of the Divine Institution of particular Churches But all men know that this is otherwise This of all things is least pleaded and commonly in the last place and but by some among the causes and Reasons of our withholding Communion so farre as we do so from the Church of England as unto the way and manner wherein it is required of us Those Reasons have been pleaded already and may yet be so farther in due time For the Rest of the Discourse we do not we cannot believe that the due and peaceable Observation of the Institutions of Christ doth of it self give any Disturbance unto any Churches or Persons whatever Nor that a peaceable endeavour to practise our selves according unto those Institutions without imposing that Practice on them can be justly blameable We do not we cannot believe that our Refusal of a total Compliance with a Rule for Order Discipline Worship and Ceremonies in the Church not given by Christ and his Apostles but requiring of us sundry things either in themselves or as required of us directly contrary unto or inconsistent with the Rules and Directions given us by them unto those ends as in our Judgment and Light of our Consciences is done in and by this Rule is either Schism or blameable Separation We do judge our selves obliged to preserve Peace and Unity among Christians by all the means that Christ hath appointed for that End by the exercise of all Grace the performance of all Duties the observation of all Rules and Directions given us for that end but we do not we cannot believe that to neglect the means of our own Edisication appointed unto us by Christ himself to cast away the Liberty wherewith he hath made us free and to destroy our own Souls for ever by acting against his Authority in his Word and our own Consciences guided thereby in a total complying with the Rule proposed unto us is a way or
Charity to believe all things to believe that each Party was accepted with God whilest they served him according unto the Light which they had received And as it is to be thought that upon the giving of this Rule and Direction they utterly laid aside all the animosities in Judging and despising one another which they had been guilty of so it is certain that they continued in their different Practice a long time after without any rebuke or reproof Yea some Learned men do Judge and that not on Grounds to be despised that the parties who differed were gathered into distinct Churches and so continued to walk even to the dayes of Adrian the Emperour when the last and final destruction of the whole Nation of the Jews did befall them after which those who were not hardened to the utmost gave off all expectation of any respect to be had with God of their old Institutions I do not know how tho present Case between the Church of England and the Non-conformists could have possibly been more plainly and distinctly stated and exemplified in any thing that the Churches were capable of or liable unto in those days then it is in this Case here stated and determined by the Apostle in whose Direction Rule and Determination we do fully acquiesce But 5 It is true also which this Reverend Author observes that when the False Apostles or any other Judaizing Teachers pretending to Authority did impose the Observation of the Rites and Ceremonies of the Levitical Law on any Churches unto their Disturbance and Division the Apostle looks hereon as that which so far altered the Case that he gives other Rules and Directions about it And if such Impositions might be yet forborn in the like Case especially as accompanied with the severe Supplement and Addition of all sorts of outward Penalties to be inflicted on them who cannot comply with them an open Door would appear into all that Agreement Peace and Quietness among us which are desired I have treated thus far of these things not to manage a Controversie with this Author or any other but only to shew that there is no ground to be taken from this Text or its Context to give countenance unto the severe Censure of Schisme and all the evil Consequents of it as maintained by ill Arts and Practices upon the Non-conformists The Procedure of our Author in the management of his Charge is in a way of proving from the Assertions and Concessions of the several Parties whereinto he hath distinguished Non-conformists that they have no just Cause to with-hold full Communion from the Church of England especially in its Parochial Assemblies And as unto the first Party whom he affirms to grant that they are in a State of Separation he quotes some Sayings out of a Discourse of a Nameless Authour Concerning Evangelical Love Church Peace and Unity And together with some Concessions of his he adds his Judgment that Communion in Ordinances must be only in such Churches as Christ himself instituted by unalterable Rules which were only particular and Congregational Churches As I remember that Author hath at large declared in his Discourse what Communion Believers ought to have with the Church or all Churches the Church in every sense wherein that Name is used in the Scripture But I shall not trouble my self to inquire into his Assertions or Concessions nor at present can I do so not having that Book with me where I now am My business is only to examine on this occasion what this Reverend Author excepteth against or opposeth unto his Assertion about Congregational Churches and the answering his Charge of Schisme notwithstanding this Plea of the Institution of particular Churches for the Celebration of Divine Ordinances This he doth pag. 25. Granting this to be true how doth it hence appear not to be a sin to separate from our Parochial Churches which according to their own Concessions have all the Essentials of true Churches And what ground can they have to separate and divide those Churches which for all that we can see are of the same nature with the Churches planted by the Apostles at Corinth Philippi or Thessalonica Ans. We will allow at present that the Parochial Churches at least some of them in this Nation are true Churches that is that they are not guilty of any such hainous Errors in Doctrine or Idolatrous Practice in Worship as should utterly deprive them of the Being and Nature of Churches Yet we suppose it will not be made a Rule That Communion may be with-held or withdrawn from any Church in any thing so long as it continues as unto the Essence of it to be so This Author knows that Testimonies may be produced out of very Learned Protestant Writers to the contrary 2. We do not say it is not pleaded that because Communion in Ordinances must be only in such Churches as Christ Himself hath Instituted c. that therefore it is Lawful and Necessary to Seperate from Parochial Churches but it may be pleaded thence That if it be on other Grounds necessary to so seperate or with-hold Communion from them it is the Duty of them who do so to joyn themselves in or unto some other particular Congregations The Reasons why the Non-conformists cannot joyn in that Communion with those Parochial Churches which were before described are quite of another Nature which are not here to be pleaded however some of them may be mentioned to deliver us from this Mistake that the Ground of Seperation from them is the Institution of particular Congregational Churches And they are such as these 1. There are many things in all Parochial Churches that openly stand in need of Reformation What these are both with respect unto Persons and things hath been before intimated and shall be further declared if occasion require But these Parochial Churches neither do nor indeed can nor have Power in themselves to reform the things that ought by the Rule of the Scripture to be reformed For none among us will plead that they are intrusted with power for their own Government and Reformation In this case we judg it lawful for any Man peacoably to with-draw Communion from such Churches to provide for his own Edification in others 2. That there are many things in the constant total Communion of Parochial Churches imposed on the Consciences and Practices of Men which are not according to the Mind of Christ. The things of this nature I shall not here mention in Particular 3. There is no Evangelical Church Discipline administred in such Parochial Churches which yet is a necessary means unto the Edification of the Churches appointed by Christ himself and sacredly attended unto by the Primitive Churches And we dare not renounce our Interest in so blessed an Ordinance of Christ in the Gospel 4. The Rule and Government which such Parochial Churches are absolutely under in the room of that Rule and Discipline which ought to be in and among themselves namely that