Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n just_a schism_n separation_n 2,155 5 11.1655 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
A59859 A Protestant of the Church of England, no Donatist, or, Some short notes on Lucilla and Elizabeth Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707. 1686 (1686) Wing S3331; ESTC R15108 5,084 8

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

a good Argument in St. Austin's time when the whole Catholick Church was in one Communion without any Corruptions in Faith and Worship to justifie a Separation For in this Case whoever separated from any Society of Christians separated from the whole Christian Church and nothing else was necessary to prove them Schismaticks but only their Separation which was as visible a Schism as tearing an Arm or Leg from the Body For when the whole Church was one Communion without any Corruptions of Faith or Worship there could be no Dispute which was the True Catholick Church and to Separate from the Catholick Church is certainly Schism This was the Case of the Donatists against whom St. Austin wrote that Book de Vnitate They had nothing to object against the Faith or Worship of the Catholick Church but only pretended that they Communicated with Traditors or those who were Ordained by them that is With those who in the Times of Persecution delivered up their Bibles to the Persecutors which yet was not so great a Fault as taking away the Bible from the People which if they had not had in those Days they could not have delivered it and persecuting those who use it But when the Church is divided in Faith and Worship into a great many different and opposite Communions it is a ridiculous thing for any Part of the Church to call it self the Whole and then to charge others as St. Austin does the Donatists with Separating from the Whole especially when such a Separation is occasioned by such Corruptions as are dangerous to Mens Souls Which is vastly different from the state of the Church in St. Austin's time and therefore what he says cannot be immediately applied to us They must first prove that the Roman Church is the Catholick Church and a Pure and Uncorrupt Church and then we will grant that not to Communicate with them is Schism E. This Church is the Body of Christ as the Apostle saith Col. 1. 24. For his Body which is his Church Whence surely 't is manifest That he who is no Member of Christ cannot have Christian Salvation But the Members of Christ are joyn'd to each other by the Charity of Vnity and by the same Charity do they cohere to their Head Christ Jesus E. To separate from the Body of Christ is certainly Schism but St. Austin in the same place tells us that there is a Separation from the Head as well as from the Body that is from Christ who is the Head as well as from his Body which is his Church The first is a Schism occasioned by Heresy the second is a causless Schism without any corruption in Faith and Worship So that He never intended that for fear of Schism we should Communicate with a very Corrupt Church but only warns us not to Separate from the Church of Christ when such a Church does not Separate from Christ. But as far as any Church or Society of Christians Separates from Christ the Head so far we may and ought to Separate from them F. Whosoever therefore is Separated from this Catholick Church how laudably soever he thinks himself to live for this only Crime that he is disjoyn'd from the Vnity of Christ he shall not have life but the wrath of God abideth on him F. As for the evil and danger of Schism we perfectly agree with this Father and will say as Ill things of it as the Church of Rome her self can desire But we are not afraid of these Ill Consequences of Schism while we are no Schismaticks G. NOW St. Augustin places the Donatists Schism in their not joyning with Catholicks in Religious Offices In forsaking all Christian Assemblies In not partaking with them of the Eucharist In Prayers c. Whence he concludes them not to belong to the Catholic Church Not to be Members of Christ ' s Mystical Body Not to have Charity Not Sacraments to Benefit Not Piety with Hope nor Salvation G. THIS is all very true and this was the Character of the Donatist Schism They were charged with no Heresy for they were Guilty of none but only with Separating from the Communion of the Catholick Church in Prayers and Sacraments which is a Separation and if it be Causless as it was in the Donatists has the Guilt of Schism But is a very just Separation and no Schism if it have a just Cause H. Have Prelatical Protestants of Great Britain and Ireland any visible Communion in the Eucharist or other Divine Service with any Christian Church on Earth If they have not as is undeniable then according to St. Augustin they are not in the Catholic Church are not Members of Christ are without Charity beneficial Sacraments hopeful Holiness and eternal Salvation H. Do the Prelatical Protestants of Great Britain and Ireland refuse Communion with or deny Communion to any Church on Earth without a Cause If they do not they are Innocent if they say we do let them prove it We have nothing in our Worship that can hinder any Christian not Roman-Catholicks themselves from Communicating with us and then if they will not do it it is their own Faults We refuse Communion with no Church with whom we can Communicate without Sin and it is no Fault to refuse Communion when it cannot be had without Sin And therefore we are still in the Catholick Church and I believe the best Reformed part of the Catholick Church we are Members of Christ have true Christian Charity so much even for the Church of Rome that it is made by themselves an Argument against us and therefore doubt not to receive all the benefit of Sacraments and if we live holily to receive the Fruits of it in eternal Salvation I. And this Censure by so much the more justly belongs to them as their Schism is more consumacious their Calumnies against the Catholick Church more horrid and their Defection by Heresie as well as Schism wider than the Donatists I. Contumacy can never be in a good Cause and that we are sure ours is Though had he known any thing of the Story of the Donatists he would have known That no Man can be more constant and vertuously steddy in a good Cause than they were contumaciously Obstinate in a bad one We do not calumniate the Catholick Church God forbid nay not the Roman Church for though we say a great many Ill things of them they are True and that is no Calumny And are we the greater Schismaticks because we justifie our Separation by laying the Fault on the Corruptions and Innovations of the Church of Rome If the Donatists could have done so St. Austin would not have thought them so much the worse Schismaticks but no Schismaticks at all And as for Heresy when This Author can prove us guilty of that we will allow our selves to be worse Schismaticks than the Donatists were The End (a) LVcilla a Private though Rich and Powerfull Woman and therefore a fit Patroness for a Faction but no Legal Reformer (b) Elizabeth a Sovereign Princess who had Authority in Her own Kingdoms to Reform the Church which makes some difference between them (c) Papist had been here a more proper Parallel than a Protestant but that he is not so Orthodox as a Donatist though as great a Schismatick Epist. 48. Epist. 1 53. De Vnitate Ecclesiae c. 4. Cap. 2. Epist. 1 53.