Schism was for just little or nothing and so is every Schism that is properly so called The Separation is as the cause is When the cause is weighty and just the Separation is innocent When the Cause is light and inconsiderable the Separation is Schism Schismaticks are but tanquam paleae as chaff◠and as St. Austin speaks Expos in Epist Joh. Occasione venti volant foras A little Wind drives them out of doors 7thly Schismatical Separation is not only from a particular Church but from the Catholick one As by a just Excommunication a Man is cast out from the Church Catholick so by an unjust Separation a man casts out himself from the same The Reverend Primate Bramhall in his Vindication of the Church of England lays down two things the one is this If one Part of the Vniversal Church separate it self from another not absolutely or in essentials but respectively in Abuses and Innovations not as it is a part of the Vniversal Church but only so far as it is corrupted and degenerated it doth still retain a Communion not only with the Catholick Church but even with that corrupted Church from which it is separated except only in Corruptions The other is this Whosoever separates himself from any part of the Catholick Church as it is a part of the Catholick Church doth separate himself from every part of the Catholick Church and consequently from the Vniversal Church which hath no Existence but in its Parts Thus that Learned Man It is one thing to separate from a Particular Church as it is corrupted and degenerated another thing to separate from a Particular Church as it is a part of the Catholick Church The Learned Dr. Prideaux saith De Visib Eccles Non habendus est Schismaticus qui Romam aut aliam quamvis deserit particularem Ecclesiam ob additamenta non serenda sed qui aversatur Communionem unitatem Ecclesiae Vniversalis Catholicae He is not to be esteemed a Schismatick who forsakes Rome or any other Particular Church because of some Additions not to be born but he that turns away from the Vnion and Communion of the Church Catholick and Vniversal Epist ad Cornel. l. 2. Ep. 11. St. Cypriam charges it upon the Novatians that they did Catholicae Ecclesiae corpus unum scindere Cut in pieces that one Body of the Church Catholick De Unit. Eccl. c. 17. St. Austin charges it upon the Donatists A Christianâ unitate quae toto orbe diffunditur sacrilego schismate separatos esse That they were by a Sacrilegious Schism separated from that Christian Vnity which is diffused over the whole world Separation is then Schism when it is from a particular Church as it is a part of the Church Catholick for then it is from every part of the Catholick Church and by consequence from the whole Church These Characters may suffice to shew what Separation amounts to Schism CHAP. III. The Separation of the N. C. is not Schism Not voluntary Not from want of Charity Not from Pride and Contempt Not attended with Error No breach of Sacred Vnity Not for little or no Cause The Rites and Ceremonies for which they separate no little things as considered in themselves Of the Sign of the Cross in Baptism The Ceremonies as terms of Communion intrench on Christ's Kingly Office Invert the Gospel are against Christian Charity Liberty and Vnity The Pleas for Ceremonies not satisfactory Of Order and Decency Whether the Ceremonies are parts of Worship N. C. do not separate from the Catholick Church I Now go on to consider the Separation of the Nonconformists Ministers and People whether that be Schism or not in the doing of which I shall review the former Characters with respect to them 1st Schismatical Separation is intentional and perfectly voluntary but quo animo do the Dissenters separate In our Law an entry shall not be called a disseisin partibus invitis against the will of the Agents Neither should a Separation in such a Case be in Theology called a Schism Is it imaginable that the intention or option of the Nonconformists should be to be out of the Church rather than in it It is easy to judge who they be that most intend and love Church-unity those who would have the terms of it easy plain and unquestionable or those who would have them clogg'd with Scruples The Nonconformists separate but their parting from the Church like the Merchant's parting with his Goods in a Storm is not purely voluntary but a mixt Action done with an unwilling will not out of love to Separation but to salve Conscience When the Papists charge Schism upon our Church what saith Bishop Bramhall Reply to the Bishop of Chalced. fol. 55. Schism is a voluntary Separation To be separated might be our Consequent will because we could not help it but it was far enough from our Antecedent will or that we did desire it And a little after If they did impose upon us a necessity of doing sinful things and offending God and wounding our Consciences then we did not leave them but they did drive us from them And what saith Dr. Prideaux Fugati potius quam fugientes non tam à Roma ut est secessimus quà m ad Roman ut erat regressi sumus We were rather driven away than voluntarily flying we are not so much departed from Rome as it is as we are returned to Rome as it was In like manner the Nonconformists being charged with Schism may say To separate is not their Antecedent will but Consequent they depart from the Church but it is by a kind of constraint they had much rather be in the Church they wish for it pray for it and salvâ conscientiâ would do any thing for it but there are some things which they cannot join in Such a departure should not be called Schism 2dly Schismatical Separation proceeds from hatred Schismatici discessionibus iniquis à fraternâ Charitate dissiliunt Aug. de Fide Symbol cap. 10. or at least from a want of Charity but do the Nonconformists thus separate What is done out of Conscience to God cannot be fairly interpreted hatred to our Brother It is love to God that causes men to walk according to Conscience but it is want of love to him that makes them hate their Brother These two cannot stand together If we call that hatred which indeed is Conscience we forfeit our own Charity by misconstruing the Charity of others It is the desire of the Nonconformists to live in charity with the Conforming Brethren In the Council of Carthage St. Cyprian and his Fellow-Bishops in the point of rebaptizing those that were baptized by Hereticks plainly erred and dissented from the rest of the Church yet they were never charged with Schism for it and why Because they did it neminem judicantes neo à jure communionis aliquem si diversum senserit amoventes Judging none removing none that
Austin saith In Psal 88. Si in aeternum caput in aeternum membra If Christ the head be for ever so are the Members Schism then is not in the Church Mystical but in the Church Visible 'T is a breach of the Sacred Vnity in the Church I mean of an Unity founded in Scripture every breach of that Unity is Schism but a breach of an Human Canon or Law is not Schism St. Cyprian shewing the madness of Schismaticks saith De Unit. Eccl. Quis audeat scindere Vnitatem Dei Who dares cut in pieces the Vnity of God So he calls the Churches Unity because it is not Humane Contra Cresc l. 5. c. 21. St. Austin saith It is a great evil to make a Schism ab Vnitate Christi not from man's Unity but from Christ's and the same Author calls Schism in divers places Contr. Lit. Pet. l. 2. c. 30 81. Sacrilegium Schismatis the Sacriledge of Schism because the Unity is not Human but Divine When the Papists charge Schism upon us as casting off the Pope the Head of Unity the Learned Dr. Hammond answers Tract of Schism 157. He was never appointed by Christ to be Head and the Answer is sound No such Unity was appointed in Scripture Again 'T is a breach of the Sacred Unity without Cause When the Orthodox Christians separated from Arian Bishops who subverted the Faith of Christ it was no Schism at all When the Protestants came out of Idolatrous Rome it was no Schism but a Duty Causa say the Canonists non secessio facit Schismaticum it is not the separation but the cause that makes the Schismatick Schism is either seminal or actual Seminal Schism stands in the carnal and corrupt Lusts of the Heart these are the bitter Roots and Springs of Division Whence come wars and fightings among you come they not of your lusts that war in your members James 4.1 Were there no warring Lusts within there would be no jarring Discords without The Apostle speaking of the Divisions in Corinth saith Are ye not carnal and walk as men 1 Cor. 3.3 Divisions come from the Carnal part in Christians not from the Spiritual St. Austin speaking of Abraham's dividing the Beasts but not the Birds saith by way of allusion De Civ lib. 16. cap. 24. Carnales inter se dividuntur Spirituales nullo modo Carnal men are divided one from another but not spiritual The Lusts of men are the great Make-bates But to instance in some particulars Pride is an horrible Schismatick by swelling it breaks into a rupture by lifting up a man above himself it divides him from his Brother The greatest instance of Pride in the World is the Bishop of Rome he sits as he pretends in the Infallible Chair he hath all Laws in scrinio pectoris he claims all Power Sacerdotal and Regal he stiles himself the Head of the whole Church he is called a God on Earth his Title is Dominus Deus noster Papa and after all this state he is no less an Instance of Schism than of Pride He rents himself off from the Church Universal he will not be a Member in it but an Head a Universal Lord over it The Church must be only in parte Papae and no-where else All the Protestant Churches in the World must be cast off as Schismaticks and this abominable Schism must be stiled Unity Again Self-love is a great Schismatick it so appropriates all to it self that it leaves nothing in common it is such an inordinate uniting of a man to himself that he cannot be joined to others That little word Ego is a strange divider of all Society When Novatus fell off from the Church and became the Head of the Cathari there was somewhat of self in it Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 6. c. 42. The denial of an Episcopal Preferment made him set up a Church for himself and in that Church before he gave the Eucharist he made the Communicants swear by the Body and Blood of Christ not to forsake him To name but one thing more Hatred is also an inward Schismatick it dissolves what Love unites and sets a man against his Brother to whom he should be joined in amity De Bapt. l. 1. c. 11. Origo Schismatis est odium fraternum saith St. Austin The hatred of a Brother is the origin of Schism In the Council at Ephesus called Concilium praedatorium the Eutychian hatred broke out sadly against the Orthodox The Bishops that favoured that Heresy carried the matter by mere force and violence crying out Qui dicit duas Naturas in duo dividit He that confesseth two Natures in Christ divides him into two Such a desperate thing is Hatred that it prompts men to divide even unto blood Such Lusts as these are the roots of gall and wormwood which bear the bitter fruits of Schism and Division Actual Schism is either a Schism in the Church or a Schsm from it A Schism in the Church stands in the Differences and Dissentions of the Members in it We have in the Church of Corinth three instances of it They differed about the Excellencies of their Teachers Every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas 1 Cor. 1.12 They differed about the manner and time of the Holy Eucharist They did not wait one for another the rich contemned the poor 1 Cor. 11.21 22. They differed about the variety of Gifts among them the inferior in gifts envied the superior and the superior in gifts despised the inferior the feet envied the hand and the head undervalued the feet 1 Cor. 12.15 21. And every one of these differences is in these Texts called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Schism in the Church and the reason is because every one of them did break the Unity of the Church in Ordinances When they lookt more on the Teacher than on the Truth there could not be an intire communion in hearing the pure word they heard it but partially in the gifts of one rather than of another When at the Lord's Supper they did not wait for but contemn one another there could not be an unanimous conjunction in that Ordidance The Eucharist the Seal and Bond of Union was as it were rent and torn in pieces When the inferior in gifts envied and the superior despised they could not worship and serve God like those Acts 2.1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with one accord Those Differences did make a breach upon that Worship that should have been intire Now here it is to be noted that every difference among Christians doth not amount to Schism There was a Paroxism a hot fit between Paul and Barnabas yet no Schism Acts 15.39 In the Church of Corinth Brother went to law with Brother 1 Cor. 6.6 The Apostle blames the difference but calls it not Schism Stephen Bishop of Rome was against Rebaptization Cyprian Bishop of Carthage was for it De unico Bapt. c.
off from it but he that goes out and recedes of his own accord He condemns himself being out of the Church not by Censure but suo arbitrio by his own free Choice The Donatists were in their minds and wills so set upon their own way Aust Epist 162. that after a long series of Debates and Hearings they were still the same as before A right Schismatick makes it his business to divide Cypr. de Unit. Eccl. A Matre Filios segregat Oves à Pastores solicitat He severs the Sons from the Mother he entices the Sheep from the Pastor This is the first Character 2dly Schismatical Separation proceeds from Hatred or at least from a want of charity In Asc B. Mar. Serm. 5. Quisque saith St. Bernard sibi unus debet esse per integritatem virtutis unum cum proximis per vinculum dilectionis Every one ought to be one with himself by the integrity of Vertue and one with his Neighbour by the bond of Charity De Bapt. con Don. l. 1. c. 11. Love unites but hatred divides and breaks out into Schism Nulli saith St. Austin Schisma facerent si fraterno odio non excaecarentur None would make Schisms unless they were blinded with the hatred of their Brethren This Character was evident in the Donatists Contra Cresc l. 2. c. 10. hence the same Father tells them Sacramenta habetis charitatem non habet is Sacraments you have but Charity you have not And withal he tells them that though they had multa magna De Bapt. cont Don. l 1. c. 8 9. many and great things yet all was nothing si unum defuerit if that one thing Charity were wanting and what Charity they could have who allowed no Church but their own I know not When there are no just Scruples no reasonable Causes of Separation surely the departure must be for want of Charity 3dly Schismatical Separation issues out of Pride and Contempt When they went out from the Apostolical Church 1 Joh. 2.19 there was somewhat of Antichristian Pride and Contempt in it for in the verse precedent Antichrists are said to be then in being Those that separated themselves Jud. 19. did it as a Learned man saith cum contemptu aliorum as if they had some peculiar Doctrine or Sanctity This Character may be seen in the Novatians and Donatists Novatus is said to be Superbiâ inflatus puft up with pride when he set up his Separate Church that he might be head of those who called themselves pure Euseb l 6. cap 42. The Roman Synod takes notice of this and decreed That he cum simul elatis with his proud companions should be esteemed as Aliens to that Church St. Austin saith of the Donatists that Superbi ruperunt rete fecere altare contra altare Proud men broke the net and set up Altar against Altar It was indeed horrible pride in them to say that the Church was only in parte Donati and it is no less in the Papists to say that it is only in parte Papae For any one Party to boast as if the Church were with them only and not elsewhere is Schismatical Pride or proud Schism Then is Separation a Schism when it is done in pride and contempt 4thly Schismatical Separation is ordinarily if not always attended with some error or other It is a very are thing to see a mere simple Schism sine ullâ depravatâ Doctrinâ without some mixture of depraved Doctrine Every Zimri hath its Cosby every Divider hath some lie or other to which he is joined Neque Schisma feri potest nisi diversum aliquid sequantur qui faciunt saith St. Austin Cont. Cres l 2. c. 7. Neither can there be a Schism made unless they that make it follow some different Doctrine Nullum Schisma non â—bi aliquam fingit Haeresin ut recte â—b Ecclesia recessisse videatur Com. in Tit. c. 3. saith â—t Jerome There is no Schism but it frames to it self some Heresy that it may seem to have rightly departed from the Church Novatus did not only separate from the Church but set up his own Error That the lapsed were not to be received in the Church no not upon their repentance no more than dead men Donatus did not merely separate but advanced his uncharitable Error That the Church was only in parte Donati De Unit. Eccl. c. 11. upon which account St. Austin tells him that he did aliud Evangelizare preach another Gospel Theod. Hist l. 3 5. Neither did the Luciferiani only separate but they had their propria Dogmata their proper Errors Thus the Learned Whitaker De Notis Eccl. Q. 5. Non est Schisma nisi cum Errore aliquo conjunctum fuerit There is no Schism but it is in conjunction with some Error The Schismatick ever hath some peculiar Opinion to promote in the world and upon that account he separates from the Church and sets up for himself 5thly Schismatical Separation is a breach of some Sacred Vnity The Schismatick doth indeed adhere to the Church in part but with all he breaks in part There is some breach of Unity He adheres to the Church in part but not in all St. Austin saith of the Donatists In multis erant mecum Enarr in Psal 54. in Schismate non mecum In many things they are with me but in their Schism they are not with me And in another place he saith That they were with the Church in Sacraments but not in vinculo pacis in the bond of peace Thus the Schismatick adheres in part but then he breaks in part There is some breach of sacred Vnity I mean of that Unity that is founded in Scripture Hence St. De Unit. Eccl. Cyprian expostulates with the Schismaticks Quis audeat scindere unitatem Dei vestem Domini Ecclesiam Christi Who dares break the Vnity of God the seamless Coat of the Lord the Church of Christ Contra. Parm. l. 2. c. 1 11. Hence St. Austin tells them Non est quicquam gravius Sacrilegio Schismatis There is nothing more grievous than the Sacriledge of Schism Were there no breach of Unity it would not be Schism were not the Unity sacred it would not be Sacriledge Then is Separation Schism when there is a breach of some sacred Vnity 6thly Schismatical Separation is a breach of Sacred Unity for little or no cause at all The memorable Mr. Tract of Schism Hale's speaking about the Schism touching the keeping of Easter saith This matter tho most unnecessary most vain yet caused as great a Combustion as ever was in the Church the West separating and refusing Communion with the East for many years together In this fantastical Hurry I cannot see but all the World were Schismaticks neither can any thing excuse them from that imputation excepting only this that we charitably suppose all Partie out of Conscience did what they did Thus he This great