Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n church_n just_a schism_n 2,608 5 10.7463 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A53999 Jerub-baal, or, The pleader impleaded being an answer to Mr. Croftons (lately published) plea for communion with the Church under her present corruptions, &c., entituled Reformation not separation by way of humble remonstrance thereunto : shewing, that non-communion with the Church of England in her liturgy and common-prayer, in those that (yet) joyn with her in the substantial ordinances and instituted worship of Christ, is no schism, and that such are unjustly called separatists : in a letter / written by T.P. for the private satisfaction of a friend, and by him published for common benefit. T. P. 1662 (1662) Wing P112; ESTC R7299 36,119 58

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

ground though not of Positive yet of Negative though not of Total yet of Partial Separation and Non-Communion in such a case can be no sin therefore no Schism How can Non-Communion be sin there where one cannot communicate without sin unless men will impose or suffer to be imposed upon themselves a Necessity of sinning that which true Piety abhorrs I am not alone here or without the suffrage of the sober-Learned a sufficient protection against the brand of Novelty who say that if a Church be either no true Church See Dr. Cawdrey in his Treatise Entituled Independency a great Schism or so extreamly corrupted that a good Christian cannot hold Communion with it without sin Separation in that case is no Schism but they are the Schismaticks that give the Cause of that Separation Then let the VVorld Judge who in England may most deservedly be branded for Schismaticks On the Contrary Culpable Faulty and sinful Separation from the Church the Schism in question is as I think it is generally described a Causeless Separation from Communion with and participation of Christs instituted Worship in a true Church Sir This premised we shall easily discover what Church-breach Schism or Separation it is that Mr. Crofton chargeth upon those in the Church of England and amongst those my self who under the present Providence though they joyn with her in the Instituted VVorship and Substantial Ordinances of Jesus Christ therein administred by as Prayer Hearing of che Word Preached Singing of Psalms c. yet do not cannot communicate with her in her Liturgy or Common-Prayer as being guilty of a sinful Practice c. 1. 'T is not a breach of the first Vnion viz. That wherein the Elect Gods Chosen Ones are by a true Faith or the Spirit of Faith un-interruptedly indwelling in them conjoyned one with another and all of them with their Publick Head Christ for this as is declared is an utter Impossibility which none but an Arminian Spirit will deny 2. 'T is not a Breach of Communion with the Catholick-Visible Church and her Common Head Christ by vertue of Outward Profession which is called a Catholick and Vniversal Separation for this were not only Schism but Apostacy as hath been said not only a Breach of Church-Vnity but a Voluntary forfeiture of a Church-State an Imputation which my Creed will acquit me from while I professedly own the true Catholick Doctrine of Christ and 〈◊〉 Apostles the Orthodox Fathers Councels Confessors Martyrs in all Ages and the Reformed Churches 3. 'T is not a Breach in the Church either 1. in poynt of Judgment and Opinion nor 2. in poynt of Charity and Affection 1. Not in poynt of Judgment and Opinion for as for Erroneous Principles according to that light God hath given me I abhor them Church-rending Divisions I shall not willingly or wittingly be accessory to never forgeting what Luther said of Caspar Schwenckfield that Church-Incendiaries may kindle a fire here which may burn themselves to all eternity hereafter But if a Dissent in Judgment about matters of Worship or Discipline yea and perchance in Doctrinal poynts too at least Non-Fundamentals from our present Church-Pilots be a Schism I shall not busie my self about either Vindication or Excuse under the Censure but sure I am either Mr. Crofton himself is in this sense a Schismatick or else justly may he be branded for an Apostate 2. Nor in poynt of Charity and Christian Affection Mr. Crofton is no competent Arbitrator in that case God himself is best able to judge who at this day walks charitably who not for my own part I have Charity for all Church-Members understand their Persons not their Corruptions The Law of Piety and the Law of Charity God himself hath married together and whom God hath joyned let no man separate 4. The Breach or Schism then charged must be a Separation from the Church of England not 1 Total since I communicate with her in those Parts of Christs instituted Worship and Ordinances Prayer Hearing c. Nor 2. Positive whilst I turn not Conventicler and embody not into a Party or Convention set up against her Altar against Altar Threshold against Threshold c. But 1. Partial and 2. Negative viz meer Non-Communion with her in her Liturgy or stinted and Set-Forms of Common-Prayer This is the Schism and Separation charged This is the Crime and great Article of Endictment What and is Mr. Crofton turned Accuser of the Brethren Sir Two Things I equally dislike Separation on the one hand and Superstition on the other and what sober Christian will not they being destructive the one to the Vnity the other to the Purity of the Church and the latter not more than the former understand I pray you sinfull Separaiotn Schism in the Church is a Rent and Wound in Christs Body a Crucifying afresh of the Son of God The Schismatical Rendings of the Church by Anabaptists and such like Fanaticks in Germany cost Zealous Luther no little grief and lamentation God forgive those who are known to have been too too guilty of such Sectarian-Cruelty here at home 1 Cor. 1.13 Zech. 13.6 Is Christ divided was a sad Interrogatory What Christ wounded in the house of his friends that 's sad The Voluntary Rending of Christ-Mystical is a sin nothing inferiour in my mind to that of the Jews Crucifying of Christ Personal forasmuch as that it reacheth both Head and Members That then which inclineth me to this attempt is not Consciousnesse to my self of any Schism or sinfull Separation though I perceive you are ready to espouse mine Acculers quarrel in case of non-satisfaction to your enforced request but the prevalent sense as well of your importunity as of mine own innocency This Epistle possibly may seem to be with the City of Myndus lyable to upbraiding the Porch being too big but neither is the premised Introduction larger nor the subsequent discourse more brief than I judged expedient Mr. Croftons Grounds and Reasons urged for Communion with the Church of England in all Acts of worship and consequently in Common-Prayer therein administred by and against Separation or withdrawment from the same are all reduced to four Positions or Argumentative Propositions from which Premises he infers partly the Lawfulness partly the Expediency and partly the indispensable Necessity of the former as the sinfulnesse and unwarrantablenesse the Schism of the latter And those Positions he calls CONSIDERATIONS which come now to be considered CONSID. 1. Page 4. Communion with the Church-Visible in all the Acts I had rather say Parts of Solemn Publique Worship is an Essential part of the sanctification of the Sabbath or Lords day and positive indispensable duty of every particular soul called by the name of God to be onely superseded by a reall inevitable necessity with assurance to any that God will have mercy and not sacrifice This is the Major-Proposition of Mr. Croftons great Doom-Argument The Assumption must be this But Communion with the
thankfullnesse under the reception of an Extraordinary Blessing and not as an Act of Piety Necessity or Worship And though I shall not at this time at least go so far as some namely to assert that the Consecrated Bread purposely set before Superstitious Kneelers Protestants and the supposed Transubstantiated Bread purposely placed before Idolatrous Kneelers the Papists is the same In Esse Ad. rabili yet two things I shall say First A Papists Idolatrous Kneeling before the Bread supposed to be Transubstantiated is in some respect more Excusable than a Protestants Superstitious Kneeling before the Bread being onely Consecrated for his Creed doth though not Justifie yet in part excuse his gesture Did I beleeve that the Sacramental Bread is no sooner Consecrated than really Transubstantiated into the Body of Christ I should think I should greatly ●●n if I did not forthwith exhibit Worship thereunto since as the O thodox-Learned generally grant there is Adoration and Worship due to Christ even as Man viz by vertue of the Personal Vnion of his Humane with his Divine Nature Secondly The gesture of Kneeling at the Sacrament c. in the Church of England having Necessity placed in it else why is it imposed and not seft Arbitrary yea and holinesse and worship too as its * The Arch-Bishop of Spalato Dr. Burgesse Dr. Mortoun Paybody c. learned Patrons inform us and so becoming a dangerous piece of Superstition and Will-Worship I am warranted to withdraw and refuse Communion with her therein by a Supersedeas of Mr. Croftons own grant viz in case of Real-Inevitable Necessity with this assurance that God will have mercy and not sacrifice The Sacrament is a Priviledge but Superstition is Sin now I may often warrantably wave a Priviledge but never am I warranted to commit the least Sin and therefore for fear of Poyson I deny my self Food Alas Mr. Croftons Instances in Stinking Fish c. Pudled water c. An Vncleane Vessel c. yeeld not the least satisfaction to me what if there be poyson in the dish though never so well garnished My Dear Friend The case is very hard but what shall I do If I must dye let it be by famine as soon as by poyson If I must be fourty years without a Passeover even as long as the Israelites were in the Wildernesse without theirs The will of the Lord be done I had rather be in the Wildernesse without it than go back to Egypt for it while I know that I am in the way towards Canaan not so getting St. Bernards Maxim Non privatio sed contemptus damnat The want of a Sacrament is my Affliction but the Contempt of it onely under that want is my Sin only my prayer is that God would forgive them Who make the Lords offering to be abhorred Thus Sir I hope you are by this time satisfied in the case namely That Non-Communion with the Church of England in her Liturgy and Common-Prayer as also in the Lords Supper under the present method of Administration in those who yet joyn with her in Prayer Praise The Word Preached Parts of True Solemn Divine Worship as you and I do is no breach of duty but a duty the one being no True Divine Worship but Will-Worship the other being though a Substantial Part of Worship yet Adulterated and extreamly Corrupted Worship therefore no SCHISM which was the thing charged Now give me leave before I conclude this to produce my Warrant and Protection in the case from the Church of Englands own Canon and Constitution namely the 9th made in the year 1603. Entituled Authors of Schisms in the Church of England censured the words whereof are these viz Whosoever shall hereafter separate themselves from the Communion of Saints as it is approved by the Apostles Rules in the Church of England and combine themselves together in a new-Brotherhood accounting the Christians who are conformable to the Doctrine Government Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England Prophane and unmeet for them to joyn with in Christian Profession let them be excommunicated Ipso facto c. Now 1. I separate in case of Real-Inevitable Necessity only therefore not contrary to the Apostles Rules 2. Mine is not Positive Separation therefore no Combination in a New-Brotherhood 3. I am not only a Professor of the same Faith which is all the Canon seems to require but a Partaker in the same Ordinances though not in all with those who are Conformable c. and therefore that very Canon which censureth Schismaticks protecteth Me. Now Honoured Sir Though I perswade my self that your request is satisfied in the case touching Non-Communion c. Yet cannot I satisfie my self unless I give a brief touch upon Mr. Croftons other Considerations and before I come to them assoile what is objected from the High Places amongst the Israelites A Recocta crambe with him and an ordinary Allegation with all that are of his perswasion in the case in hand Do men complain saith he as they have cause Page 39. That some Roman Rites were retained when this Church was reformed let them consider many pious Kings of Judah have their reforming-Governments stained with a But the High Places were not taken away but the People went thither to worship yet I find not that any God-fearing Israelites who loathed those Reliques of Idolatry ever barred themselves because thereof from Gods Altar and Worship Ans 1. The Retention of Jewish Ceremonies in the Christian Church is God knows a just cause of Complaint since by reason of them the condition of the Christian Church is become more intollerable than was that of the Jewish Infant Church the Jews being subjected to Divine Impositions the Christians oh sad to Humane Presumptions the Arbitrary Lawes and Lusts of Men witnesse Sr. Augustine Ad Januar. Epist 119. c. 19. Item Epist 118. c. 2. 2. If the Retention of Jewish-Popish Ceremonies in the Church of England at first when Reformation was but Early was a just cause of Complaint how much more grievous must the Reduction of them after Sacred and Solemn Expulsion be the First compared to that of the last 20 years being as the Twilight to a clear Sunshine It St. Augustine complained of the intollerable burthensomness of Ceremonies in his dayes as in the places before mentioned what cause have we to complain c. in our dayes For if the first Introduction of them into the Roman Church was a Reduction of Judaisme how like does the Reduction of them into the English Church look to the Introduction of Romanisme what and not complain 3. Mr. Croftons alleadged case of the Israelites and their High Places c. is alass infinitely wide of Ours and therefore I marvel that a man of such Parts as he is should once plead the thing For 1. Though the High-Places of old were even under Reforming Governments both retained and frequented which I deny not yet what makes this against me who dispute not about the Retention
be Impregnable and Invincible The Gates of Hell shall not prevaile against her A promise ever made good to the Whole Body of the Catholick-Visible as it is to every Individual Member of the Catholick-Invisible-Church 2. That the Vnion which is between Christ and Particular Visible Professors and Churches parts of the Church Catholick-Visible may be broken and interrupted is a truth that hath been verified in many sad experiences forasmuch as all are not Israel that are called Israel Many Particular Churches and Councels however our Neighbours in the Church of Rome amongst the rest of their Romish strange-fire ascribe an Infallibility and unerring Quality to them yet are known to have so far degenerated as to become instead of Churches of Christ Synagogues of Satan witnesse the Churches of Asia which though once recorded for Golden Candlesticks Rev. 2. yet are at this day the Receptacles of Mahometan Idolatry Judea that degenerate Vine Rome that Adulterate See c. But this is not only Schism but Apostacy being a degeneracy from the true Catholick-Apostolick Faith and a Separation from or not holding of the head from which all the body by joynts and bands having nourishment ministred and knit together increaseth with the increase of God Col. 2.19 which is inconsistent not onely with the Vnity but with the Verity and very Being of a true Church whence those Churches are deservedly called Apostatical as well as Schismatical and Renegadoes or Fugitives from the Faith of Christ such as Parphyrie Julian miserable Spira and such like who have of Visible and Professed Members of the Body become Enemies to the Head some of them turning open Persecutors of that Faith whereof they were once Professors are not barely called Separatists but branded for cursed Apostates 3. The Communion wherein the Members of this great Corporation the Church Catholick-Visible are by vertue of their Common Profession of the true Religion and Faith of Christ united one with another is subject to a twofold Schism or breach viz 1. A breach in the Church and 2. A breach from the Church The first consists in Intestine Divisions and differences either 1. in point of Judgement and that principally about matters either of Discipline or Worship if the Errour be in a point fundamental or incorrigibly persisted in it is then Heresie which St. Augustine calls Schisma inveteratum or else 2. in point of Charity and Christian Love The second consists in a degeneracy from the true Religien and a voluntary relinquishing of a Church-state but this is as I have said above of not holding of the Head not Schisme onely but Apostacy a Cat holick and Vniversal Separation for one that thus relinquisheth Christs Body-Catholick separates from it Tanquam Membrum ab Integro as a Member from the Whole now as a Leg or Arm when lost ceaseth to be a member of the body Natural to which it was united even so a Professor thus degenerated ceaseth In statu quo without recovery by repentance to be a Member of this Body Mysticall Whereas many are most justly condemned for Separatists I shall not need to name any who yet while they hold the Head and professedly own the Catholick-Apostolick Faith of Christ cannot be disowned for Members of the Body Branches in the Vine Part of the Mystical Building the Church Catholick-Visible Church-Communion is distinguishable into 1. Real 2. Pesonal There is a Real Community and a Personal Society now though those Separatists refuse by way of Personal Association to communicate with that Church from which they separate yet they continue a Real Saint-Communion and Fellowship with her in the Enjoyment of the same Objective Ordinances Prayer Word and Sacraments and therefore notwithstanding their Separation from a Particular they cease not to be Members of the Catholick Church Real Community being maintained though Personal Society be unjustly denyed The Third Church-Vnion is that Social-Local-Joynt-Fellowship wherein the Members of a Particular Church are united one with another not only by the Profession of the same Faith and Religion all the Members of the Catholick and Vniversal Church are thus united but in the participation of the same Ordinances Administrations and instituted worship of Christ in a particular place where there is fitting opportunity of executing and yielding due observance to Rules of Joynt-Communion which is not a thing possible for the Vniversal Church now through numerosity and multitude though once it was viz when the whole Catholick-Christian Church consisted of about but 120. Members in all Act. 1.15 Now This Comunion may admit of a twofold breach viz. 1. Schism in the Church 2. Separation from the Church as the breach in the Church Catholick before The first is a breach either 1. in point of Judgement and Opinion or 2. in point of Charity and Christian Affection the too too frequent issue and result of the other 't is chiefely the former I presume that Sr. Augustine calls Dissidium Congregationis Church-dissention the latter he calls Odium Fraternum Brother-hatred and dis-affection both sad Church-Rents What when Lot and Abraham Brethren are at strife when Brethren fall out by the way Separation from the Church is either 1. Partial 2. Total 1. Negative 2. Positive 1. A Partial Separation when we decline Communion with the Church in some Ordinances but joyn with her in others as in Prayer but not in hearing of the Word or in both those but not in the Saerament 2. A Total Separation is an Vniversal declension of Communion with a Church in every Ordinance 1. Negative Separation when we withdraw from Communion with some Church not joyning with any other but continuing in hopes and expectation of the happy amendment of that Church from which we withdraw with a purpose of returning to her when reformed 2 Positive Separation when we do not only decline Communion with a Church but divide into several Parties Combinations and new Conventions as probably 't was amongst the Corinthians One saying I am of Paul another I am of Apollo a third I am of Cephas c. 1 Cor. 1.12 embodying in several Church-wayes setting up Altar against Altar and Threshold against Threshold Separation from the Church may be Culpable or Inculpable Lawful or Vnlawful and that more or lesse according to its Grounds and Causes Now the only lawfull Grounds or Causes of a Total-Positive Separation are usually reckoned three viz. 1. Intolerable Persecution from Persons 2. Damnable Heresie in poynt of Doctrine 3. Grosse Idolatry in poynt of Worship These are the Grounds of our just Departure from the Tyrannical Heretical Idololatrical Church of Rome O happy Divorce may the Lord perpetuate it that we may never say a Confederacy to her again Isa 8.12 but upon Gods own Terms of Accommodation Let them return unto thee but return not thou unto them Jer. 15.19 Again when the Corruptions of a Church are such as that one cannot communicate with her without sin unavoydably That seems to me to be a just