the bad from among the good in the Church but from among the good in the World Not that they should both grow together in the Church till Harvest but in the World And to strengthen this they alledge our Saviours interpretation of this Parable where he says that the Field where the Tares and the Wheat grow together is the World Mat. 13.38 And this indeed at first sight seems to be a very considerable Objection But if we consider the matter well I think it may appear otherwise The Field indeed in which the Seed was sown and the Gospel first preached was the World according to our Saviours Commission to his Apostles Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel Mar. 16.15 But then those that received this Seed of the Gospel so as to make profession of adhering to it were presently baptized and received into the Church Now it was among these that the Tares sprang up many of them proving bad Christians So that the Seed was first sown in the World as in a common field But yet the Tares sprang up in that part of the world which was now become the Visible Church and an enclosed Garden And therefore when the time of the Harvest shall come when these Tares must be separated from the Wheat our Saviour says They shall be gathered out of the Kingdom of the Son of Man Ver. 41. where they were permitted to grow till this Harvest And what is this Kingdom of the Son of Man but his Visible Church The History of the Event of the Apostles Preaching does plainly lay open the meaning of this Parable and that of the Draw-net and other like Parables in that the Visible Church which they gathered out of the world consisted of bad as well as good And this Parable in particular shews further that these Tares were not to be gathered out of the Church for this very reason Lest while ye gather up the Tares saith he ye root up also the Wheat with them So that it seems that the Tares growing with the Wheat is in some respect matter of security to the Wheat and that the Wheat would be in more danger by the Tares being gathered from among it than by their growing together with it in more danger of bein rooted up or rooted out And this seems fully to justifie and make good that reason I am now upon why all unregenerate Christians should not be denied a place and being in the Visible Church If it shall be hear said that the Church in the Primitive times when but few in number did yet subsist yea and abundantly increase too tho they had no humane or worldly Power to defend them and when almost the whole world both of Jews and Gentiles were against them And why may it not as well do so now tho none that are not of the Invisible Church should be any defence unto it I answer that there is no doubt but that they might subsist in the world continue and increase as well as they did provided they had but the same extraordinary means to back and abet them and to increase their numbers as those Primitive Christians had I mean those miraculous Powers which then procured the Christians great reputation among the People and which did still attract and draw in more to their Party than were diminished by the Persecution which was raised against them by the higher Powers which were then Infidel For by reason of those miraculous wonders which were done by the Apostles and others in those times the multitude of People were so astonished and affected that they favoured them so far as that the Rulers were put under some awe For we read that for the reason aforesaid great grace or favour was upon them all to wit all the Christians Acts 4.33 And Chap. 5.13 it s said that the people magnified them So that the Rulers when they had otherwise a mind to it found not how to punish them because of the people for all men glorified God for that which was done Chap. 4.21 And in Chap. 5.26 it s said of the Captain and Officers that were sent to bring the Apostles before the Council that they brought them without violence because they feared the people lest they should have been stoned And by reason of the credit they obtained among the people both to themselves and their way by the numerous Miracles they wrought believers were the more added to the Lord multitudes both of men and women notwithstanding all the opposition which was made against them by the Rulers Chap. 5.14 And that wonderful increase of Believers which was made from among the Heathen also was attributed by St. Paul unto those Signs and Wonders that were wrought for the proof and confirmation of the Christian Way I will not dare saith he to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me to make the Gentiles obedient by word and deed through mighty Signs and Wonders by the Spirit of God Rom. 15.18 19. But if the small number of sincere Christians that are in the world had no other means to preserve themselves and to increase their number but the goodness of their Cause and their own Innocency and were not countenanced and protected by Christian States and Governours and by a multitude more of the same Profession with themselves than are of like sincerity in that Profession they would be in great danger of being in a manner extirpated out of the world by the Insidel and Antichristian Parties in it When the Papal defection befel the Church within the Roman Empire the greatest part perhaps of the then Visible Church in that part of the world fell off from the Orthodox and sincere and became their Enemies in time The consequence of which was the exterminating and rooting out of that part of the world in a great measure the Orthodox and sincere Christians Which is a great instance to shew how it would fare with those of the Invisible Church if they were deserted by those Christians which are not of it or if those were rejected as no fellow-members of the Visible Church and thereby made their Enemies 4. Another reason is taken from the danger in another respect of reckoning none of the Church as Visible but upon the reputation of their being of the Church as Invisible For to admit men upon no other terms into the Visible Church nor to its Communion but upon the reputation and under the Notion of their being already of the Church as Invisible tends greatly to betray many Souls into a dangerous snare of self-deceiving For if this rule of admission should be observed many mistakes would be committed either through fallibility or partiality of judgment in them that admit them and so many would be received into the Visible Church or to the Communion of it as Members of the Invisible which yet are not of it And if so then all those which are thus received under the approbation of
defeat the end for which an external way and manner of performing Publick Worship should serve and is appointed If they would prove such Worship corrupt in the Essence or substance of it they must prove that it is so either in the object of Worship or in the subject matter of it for in those two the Essence or substance of Worship doth consist To prove it corrupt in reference to the object of Worship they must prove that the Worship is directed to some Creature as well as to the only true God or by some Mediator other than Christ Jesus But this they will not pretend to do If they would prove it corrupt in respect of the subject matter of it they must prove that the Prayers which are made or the matters for which Praise is given to Almighty God are not Prayer matter or Thanksgiving matter or that some other part of Worship is used as of Divine Institution which is not such But now none of these things can be proved against the Liturgy For no other things are therein prayed for or thanks given to God for but such as the Dissenters themselves do may or ought to pray for or praise God for nor any thing else observed as an Ordinance of God but what they themselves do own to be of Divine Institution such as Baptism and the Lords Supper So that the whole of the Worship is pure and uncorrupt in respect of the Essence of it 2. If then they will prove any thing to purpose they must prove that the faults and defects in the external manner of performing the said Worship are such as cause it to fall short of and do defeat the end and use for which an external administration of Publick Worship serves and is appointed Now the end and use of the best external Mode of Worship is edification that is it serves to convey the object and subject matter of Worship to the mind of the Worshippers to the end they may be sutably affected And this end of Worship is defeated when the Worship is performed in a Language which the People do not understand or in such words and phrases as are insignificant of or unsutable to the parts of Worship to which they are applied But neither of these things can be charged upon the Worship performed according to the Liturgy For the Worship is performed in a Language understood by all the People and in words and phrases competently significant and expressive of and sutable to the nature of the subject matter of the Worship in its several parts and so is agreeable to the general Rule for administration of Publick Worship which the Apostle terms to be uttering by the tongue words easie to be understood 1 Cor. 14. By it the minds of men may be guided and conducted from one part of Worship to another and be affected according to the different nature of the several parts of which the whole Worship doth consist which is the proper end and use of an external Form of administration of Publick Worship Object But perhaps it will be said that the Worship performed according to the Liturgy does not so adequately and fully agree with the rule and end of the external administration of Worship in some respects as it might have been made to do or as some other does To which I answer That the question is not whether the external manner of Worship according to the Liturgy be the best or no in all respects But suppose it should not and suppose that some external Circumstances ordered by it should be or make it to be less useful than it might have been or than some others are yet so long as they do but make it less useful to the end for which it serves but do not defeat it nor are destructive of it nor of the Worship it self but that it remains competently useful to its proper end tho comparatively but in an inferiour degree Suppose I say that all this should be granted for Argument sake and we should proceed with them upon their own terms yet this would be no sufficient cause of refusing Communion with the Church in the Ordinances of God thus administred 1. For first if it were it could scarcely be lawful to hold Communion with any particular Church in the whole world because it is not likely but that more or less of such Circumstances of Worship as are less useful are used in all Churches in the World For considering the fallibility of all men and their knowing but in part at best I think it would be no breach of Charity to suppose that there is no Church Constitution for Worship in all the world nor perhaps any one way of external administration of holy things humanely performed but what is accompanied with Circumstantial defects more or less such I mean as are less useful than others that might be made use of were it not for mens imperfection that have the making or managing of them So that the Notion or Opinion that Circumstantial defects in the external manner of Worship is a just ground of separation from it is destructive of Catholick Communion it self 2. None account themselves guilty of or defiled by the defects that are in the manner of a Ministers praying in the Pulpit so long as the matter is good and there is the same reason in reference to Circumstantial defects in Prayers made by the Liturgy We can hardly say that any publick Prayer is so free from all defects but either in respect of the Method or manner of expressing the matter it might possibly be better done than usually it is done even by good men And therefore it is a very unreasonable thing to make Circumstantial defects in the manner of praying a ground of separation from Communion in Prayer 3. If it were lawful to separate from Communion in Worship only because less usefully administred then tho there should be no Liturgy in the case yet where one Minister does but excel another in his Ministration it would be lawful to separate from that Congregation where the Worship or other Ministration is less usefully performed and in a manner inferiour to what is done by another in another place But no man will be so absurd as to say this may be practised for if it might there would be no end of separation but a door would be opened to all confusion and People must be separating as often as they conceive they have found one Minister of a Congregation to excel another in the manner of his Ministration And if Separation may not be practised upon this account then it cannot be duly practised for that reason that the manner of Worship performed according to the Liturgy is less useful and less edifying than that which is or may be done after another manner 4 It is not the external manner of Worship but the essential matter that is the Rule of Christians agreement in one Catholick Communion in Worship throughout the world In the
or of the ill effect of them and if it should be any occasion of them yet there is a vast difference between the being an accidental occasion of division and actually to divide and separate causlesly And look how much the one is worse than the other by so much must the Dissenters be more in fault by their actual division and separation than they can with any appearance of reason pretend the other to be for the severity of their imposition Now that the imposition of the Liturgy is no necessary cause of division and separation will appear in that the defects objected against it are no sufficient cause of separation from the Worship performed according to it and this I hope I have made out to the satisfaction of any Man whose prejudice is not greater than his reason in my inquiring into the nature of Schism among the following discourses In which discourses I have endeavoured to remove those bars and stumbling-blocks out of the Dissenters way which have kept them from Communion with our Parochial Congregations and this with a design of ease to them as well as service to the Church otherways But this their narrowing and lessening the extent of the visible Church and the terms of admission into it and of sharing in the External priviledges of it and likewise their confining the Administration of its Worship to one Circumstantial mode as only Lawful when Almighty God has not done so is of very pernicious consequence For it has we see divided the Protestants among themselves and cast them into Parties and then engaged them in contentious Disputes one against another which has begot a kind of strangeness and shiness in them towards each other yea and disaffection too and the opposition begot upon this account rises still higher and higher and more and more threatens ruine to both Parties first and last And the Papists themselves could never have contrived a more likely way to disgrace the Reformation to lay low the Protstant interest to enfeeble its strength and to break down its fence and make way for the return of Popery than we our selves have taken by dividing our selves by needless and unreasonable scruples and by making a Reformation of the Reformation as necessary as the first Reformation from Popery was and for want of it to make a second separation as necessary as the first For what would or could they do more than separate in case Popery were in place of Protestant Worship And however an emendation in some things of an Ecclesiastical concern may be very convenient and desirablee when it can be had in a Legal way yet to make this as necessary as the first Reformation from Popery was and a separation from Parochial Communion for want of it as necessary as our first separation from Popery was is so unreasonble that it is a marvelous thing that men of any reputation for Wisdom should not see it and be full of the sense of it And so it is likewise that they should run so desparate a hazzard as they do of losing all the benefit they have of the National Reformation from Popery rather than be denied or want that further Reformation as they esteem it which they desire And is it not marvelous also that they will not do what they can do toward preventing of it by complying with publick Order as far as they can For they themselves have given occasion to believe that very many especially of the more knowing of them can joyn in the Common Prayers made in our Parochial Assemblies yea and more than so however it comes to pass they refrain from doing so And one would think the Apostles injunction if it be dossible and as much as in you lies live peaceably with all men should weigh more with them than any politick consideration whatsoever especially when the Publick Peace and Safety is so much concerned in it as it is and as they know it is It is hardly to be believed that they can think that not to comply as far as they can should be a more likely way to come into their End fo far as it is fair and reasonable than to do so is God Almighty grant the things which belong to our Peace may not still be hid from our Eyes I have been informed and do perceive that many of the Dissenters can come to Church but cannot not kneel in receiving the Sacrament by reason whereof they are obnoxious to the Law tho' they should come to Church For whose help and satisfaction in this Case I shall here add a few words which were omitted in a more proper place One reason of this scruple of theirs is taken from our Saviour and his Apostles using another gesture at the first Institution of the Lords Supper But it must be considered 1. That if the circumstances attending the first Institution of this Supper should oblige us to an imitation of them as well as in what is Essential to the Ordinance it self then we may not receive it but in the Night and after another Supper is first eaten and in the Gesture and Posture of lying upon Couches or Beds for under those Circumstances it was first instituted and received But now the different Practice of Christians in after times does declare That they have not held themselves obliged to imitate them in these Circumstances Nor is there any reason they should because these things were but accidental to the Ordinance it self and were all occasioned by this Supper being instituted at the Paschal Supper and from the Jews Gesture used therein according to the Custome of their Countrey And the alteration of the Gesture does no more alter the Nature of the Ordinance than the alteration of the other Accidental Circumstances does 2. Scripture Examples are no farther binding to us than they were agreeable to some Precept or Rule of Duty otherwise But now there is no Precept enjoyning any one Gesture to be used in receiving the Sacrament as exclusive of any other and therefore any may be made use of when required by the Government over us for where there is no Law there is no Transgression But if there had been any one Gesture required by our Saviour as necessary and as exclusive of others no doubt but St. Paul would have made mention of it when he made known to the Church of Corinth what he had received from the Lord touching his Last Supper but we see no such thing was mentioned by him Chap. 11. 3. The Jewish Church having altered the Gesture in their eating the Passeover from what was used at the first institution of it our Saviour we see complyed there with and conformed to what was then become Customary in that Church And if we do the like for the like reason who can blame us for it without reproaching our Blessed Saviour Their other reason of their Scruple is taken from the Papists having abused this Gesture of kneeling to Idolatry in worshipping the Bread by
it for which cause they say we should not use it in receiving the Sacrament least we seem to sympolize with them therein In Answer to this several things are to be considered As 1. That tho' the Church of Rome doth strictly enjoyn kneeling at the Elevation of the Host yet in the Act of Receiving it is not required by any Cannon or Constitution of theirs Dr. John Burges of great Note in his time in his Treatise touching the Lawfulness of receiving the Sacrament kneeling or in his Defence of the three Innocent Ceremonies Chap. 21. pag. 67. and pag. 479. of his Rejoynder as he is recited for I have not his Book hath these words With us the Bishops or Ministers Communicate kneeling as well as the People But with the Papists the Pope when himself performeth the Office receiveth sitting as being a Type of Christ the Mass Priests receive standing by the Canon of the Mass For confirmation of all which he cites several Authors He denies not but that the People receive kneeling and says that the Priest did so too untill the Doctrine of Transubstantiation begot the Canon for his standing But he denies that kneeling in the very time of receiving was ever in the Church of Rome any Rite of or for Adoration of the Sacrament it self and says never any Pope enjon'd it nor is there any direction in the Mass for it The Reverend Dr. Stilliigfleet hath asserted much to the same effect in his Unreasonableness of Separation Pag. 15. 2. How or after what manner soever kneeling has been abused by the Papists to bad purposes yet the abuse of a thing otherwise lawful in it self does not make the Vse of it unlawful when separated from that abuse Kneeling is abused by the Papists in their Prayers to the Virgin Mary and other Saints but this does not make the Vse of kneeling unlawful in our Prayers to Almighty God 3. Our receiving the Sacrament kneeling in complyance with Publick Order and Authority can be no appearance or cause of Suspicion of bread-Bread-Worship because the same Authority which requires our kneeling therein has declared in the Rubrick at the end of the Office of Communion That no Adoration is thereby intended or ought to de done to the Bread and Wine or to any Corporal Presence of Christs Natural Flesh and Blood but is intended and meant for a signification and grateful Acknowledgement of the benesits of Christ therein given By this we see all appearance and suspicion of requiring kneeling in order to any Bread-Worship is quite taken away 4. Standing is a Gesture of Adoration as well as kneeling Mark xi 25. and yet the Dissenters do not think it Vnlawful for that reason to receive the Sacrament standing And if its being a Gesture of Adoration be no just exception against the Vse of it in receiving the Sacrament then the Adoration supposed or implyed in the Gesture of kneeling can be no just exception against the Vse of that Gesture neither in the performance of the same Duty 5. Kneeling its being a Gesture of Adoration is so far from making the Vse of it unlawful in receiving the Sacrament as that it is the great reason why it is not unlawful but fit and convenient For no good Christian will deny but that it highly becomes us inwardly to Adore our Blessed Saviour in the Act of receiving the Bread and Wine for his wonderful love in dying for us and for giving his Flesh for the Life of the world and if so then it cannot be incongruous or unfit to express and signifie this internal Act of Adoration by another that is external for we are to Worship and Glorifie him both in our Bodies and our Spirits And now me thinks no man atho understands and considers these things should be able to think it Vnlawful to kneel in receiving the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of our Blessed Saviour THE CONTENTS OR THE Heads of Enquiry Query I. WHat is the true Notion of the Vniversal Church as visible Pag. 3 Query II. What is it which prepares or qualifies persons for that relation to God in Christ which makes them visible members of his Church 6. Query III. What may that be by which People are made visible Church-members 9 Query IV. How and when is the Covenant between God and men entred into by which people are externally united to Christ and visibly made members of his Church 13 Query V. How can Infants become visible Church-members by Covenanting with God since they seem naturally uncapable of doing such a thing 19 Query VI. Whether in the baptising of Children that method of proceeding be not most proper by which the Children are most directly made to enter into Covenant with God by their Parents 38 Query VII For what reason is Church-membership said to be invisible as well as visible in some and yet but only as visible in others and from whence doth this difference arise 41 Query VIII Whether men are no otherwise members of the Church as visible then as they are reputed members of the Church as invisible 53 Query IX Whether God hath granted any right to Church-priviledges to those who are only of the Church as visible but not as invisible 123 Query X. Why and for what reason may it be conceived does Almighty God own and and allow others to be of the Church as visible than only such as are of the Church as invisible 173 Query XI What is it that makes the difference between the Vniversal Church as visible and particular Churches And what makes the difference between one particular Church and another 207 Query XII Whether from the reason of the Extent and Latitude of visible Church-membership and Communion which has been discoursed of the great usefulness of a National Settlement or Constitution for the publick Emercise of the Worship of God in all parts of a Nation professing Christianity may not fairly be infer'd and concluded 225 Query XIII Wherein may Catholick-Church Communion consist And how and by what means is it best preserv'd 265 Query XIV What is the nature of Schism 300 Query XV. Supposing things touching visible Church-membership and Communion to be as they have been represented in our former Enquiries Yet how do they tend to lessen our Church-divisions 349 ERRATA THe Running Titles of the Book mistaken Pag. 22. l. 23. dele since p. 31. l. 1. after all add these p. 39. l. 27. for properly r. property p. 48. l. 5. f. whom r. when l. 25. dele also p. 54. l. 15. f. mans r. mens p. 57. l. 16. f. man r. men p. 61. l. 12. f. taken r. broken p. 62. l. 2. f. in r. on p. 118. l. 8. f. qualifies r. qaalified p. 195. l. 2. f. bein r. being p. 335. l. 19. f. Rule r. Cure CATHOLICISM OR Several Enquiries touching the Nature and Extent of Visible Church-Membership and Communion c. NOTIONS narrower than those which will hold Scripture-measure concerning the Church and what it
Pray while unregenerate as not come to the Sacrament while they are so For they are required to do both the one and the other in a right manner as well as to do them at all But yet no judicious Man will say that all unregenerate Men ought to restrain Prayer before God or to be restrained from it For it is possible and to be hoped that their Praying may have that good effect upon them as to make them better And the same may be said of such mens coming to the Sacrament 3. Though the Scripture directs that by Church-Censure Men should be debarr'd from the Sacrament for open Acts of Scandal yet I know not where it directs to keep them from it for want of saving Grace so long as not guilty of such Scandal 2. Obj. It is again Objected that this Ordinance is appointed for the Confirmation of the Converted but not for the Conversion of the unconverted Answer I grant indeed that this Sacrament is not appointed for mens first Conversion to Christianity or for unbaptized Persons But yet it may be very useful together with other means to carry on the work of Conversion from common Grace to special And yet such is the Conversion generally which is wrought in such as are Educated in the Christian Religion The use of this Sacrament in conjunction with Christian Doctrine may very well contribute its share in carrying on this progressive change in Men by improving common Grace into special The Preaching of the Cross is to us who are saved the Power of God to Salvation saith St. Paul 1 Cor. 1.18 And Christ as Crucified is by the Lords Supper Preached to the seeing of the Eye as well as by Word and Doctrine he is Preached to the hearing of the Ear And the Eye affecteth the Heart as the Prophet speaks as well as the Ear And therefore the one may help on the work of Conversion from common Grace to special as well as the other And in all likelyhood it often does so as we have reason to think when we see Men who as may be seared have no more than common Grace upon occasion of their going to the Sacrament to become more serious both before and after than usually they are at other times And if such would but frequent it often it might well be hoped that it would work a great alteration in them by making them often more serious and considerate about the things of their Souls And indeed what is more likely to beget a love to our Blessed Saviour than such a lively representation of his wonderful love in dying for us as is made in the Celebration of that Sacrament 3. Obj. The giving this Sacrament to such as by a saving Faith are not in Covenant with God is but like setting a Seal unto a blank To which it is answered First That this Sacrament is not a Seal of Mans Faith but of Gods Covenant and the Seal that is set to that is not set to a Blank The Lords Supper is not a Seal to assure such as receive it that they have Faith but to assure them of Gods Faithfulness in his Covenant and to work in them a confidence in that Circumcision which was a Seal of the Covenant was not set to a blank when applyed to Children before they had Faith Secondly though this Sacrament be indeed a Seal of Gods Covenant directly yet it must be acknowledged that the end and design of its being so is to help Mens Faith in Gods Faithfulness and Goodness in reference to what he has promised in his Covenant But then though this be so yet the giving this Sacrament to such who have but common Faith cannot be said to be like setting a Seal to a blank because a common Faith such as unregenerate Men may have is more than no Faith at all and yet it is the having no Faith at all which can only answer to the setting a Seal to a blank in this case For a common Faith may be improved until it become special as I have shewed and upon that account this Sacrament being a Sacrament for Mens improvement in Faith and Love may as well belong to them who have but common Faith as to those whose Faith is special and saving And indeed what is more likely to make a Faith which is but dull and unactive as a common Faith is to become lively and vigorous than that which with great Advantage is to this end represented to the Mind in this Sacrament as I said before Thirdly I might add that the Covenant made in Baptism is Recognized and renewed in the use of the Lords Supper and this doubtless may be done by such as have but common Faith as well as by those who have that which is special and saving 4. Obj. The saying of St. Paul in 1 Cor. 11.28 Let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that Bread and drink of that Cup is alledged against mens being admitted or presuming to come to the Lords Supper who have not saving Grace though otherwise free from Scandalous Offences They suppose Saving Grace Repentance Faith and Love to be the Matter about which the Apostle would have Men to examine themselves as necessary to qualifie them for Lawful Communion in that Sacrament Now that for Men to examine themselves whether they have saving Grace or no is very necessary for their Preparation for coming to the Sacrament is granted because thereby they will the better come to know the state of their own Souls and what it is that hinders their assurance of having such Grace and the necessity of removing it and their need of such a Saviour as he is whose Love they are to commemorate in that Sacrament And God forbid that I should in the least encourage any to neglect the best Preparation they can make for so concerning a business as the approaching to the Table of the Lord is And except by examination they can find in themselves some knowledge and belief that Christ Jesus is the Saviour of Sinners by dying for them and of the Nature and End of this Sacrament in general I do not understand how they should receive any benefit by coming to it But to conclude from this saying of the Apostle that Men are to forbear coming to the Table of the Lord until by self-examination they can satisfie themselves that they have saving Grace I think to be more than ever the Apostle intended in those words For such satisfaction and assurance is hardly attainable while Christians are but weak and unexperienced though known to God to be sincere And for this cause it seems to be more than is fit to be imposed upon Men as a condition of their coming to the Lords Supper But by the reason which St. Paul gives in verse 29. why he would have Men to examine themselves before they eat of that Bread and drink of that Cup it appears that the thing in special and in particular concerning
house is done by their Confederation and Covenant as the Cement by which the Christians were united and combined in one particular Church fitly framed together as the phrase is Ephes 2. But St. Peter is not here speaking to any one particular Church as such when he says ye are built up a spiritual house but to the strangers scattered abroad throughout Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and Bethynia as appears Chap. 1.1 And no one surely can think that these Christians thus scattered and at this distance could become one particular Church by such a mutual Confederation as these hold necessary for the forming a particular Church And if not it must be by vertue of somewhat else than such a particular Church Covenant as these dissenting Brethren thought to find here by which Christians in so many distant parts of the world as aforesaid were built up one spiritual house And that doubtless must be the same thing by which all Christians in the world become one spiritual house of God for so they are For when Christ is said to be High Priest over the house of God Heb. 10.21 And to be faithful as a Sen over his own house Heb. 3.6 House in these places cannot signifie less than the Universal Christian Church who are called the houshold of faith And how do all these Christians become the house of God but by being joyned and devoted to him by the Baptismal Covenant and thereby to one another among whom he dwells and is Worshipped as in his holy Temple For by this they all become one body which is but another Metaphor under which to express the same thing Ephes 2.21 22. 1 Cor. 12.13 It is the same thing which makes persons Members of the Church Universal that qualifies them for particular Church Membership and that is the Baptismal Covenant And to make any other Covenant besides this so necessary to qualifie men for particular Church Membership and Communion as to make this of Gods own appointment insufficient for that end is a great impeachment of it and contains in it such consequences as the Abetters of it would be ashamed to countenance if they were aware of it For so long as it is asserted to be of divine appointment the formal cause of a particular Church and essential to its being and is made the Condition of Communion when God has no where appointed or required it so long it may be charged with these evils 1. With a teaching for Doctrine the Commandments of men a piece of vain Worship condemned by our Saviour Mat. 15.9 which is the same thing with adding to Gods Word or a saying he saith when he hath not said it 2. It is in some sort and in part a making void the Command or Institution of God that men might establish their own Tradition For whereas the Baptismal Covenant qualifies men for particular Church Membership by bringing them into the Universal Church this Opinion denies the Baptismal Covenant to be sufficient to this end and sets up this other confederating in its room 3. It contains in it the Unchurching of all those Gospel Churches that are or ever have been in the world that have not been thus united by Church Covenanting For to say this is the Form of a particular Church or the formal cause of it is in effect to say that none are really Churches without it for Matter and Form are essential to the being of Churches as well as they are of other things Now to Unchurch all Churches that have not been thus confederate is a great thing indeed if we consider how few years it is since such Covenanting was heard of in any Christian Church in the world and by how inconsiderable a number of Congregations it has been used since it has been heard of These things considered it is matter of a very venturous and daring nature As for the other part of our Enquiry touching that which makes the difference between one particular Church and another we may conceive of it thus 1. It consists partly in that which does distinguish one Town from another or one great Neighbourhood from another and that is the bounds of Habitation And this distinction is as well convenient yea necessary for Ecclesiastical Order and peaceable Government as it is for Civil and does as well accommodate the ends of the one as of the other and without this a peaceable and orderly Government in the whole Church would be impracticable even as it would be in an Universal Empire And thus the Churches planted by the Apostles are differenced and distinguished one from another that at Rome from that at Corinth and that at Ephesus from that at Philippi yea that at Cenchrea from that at Corinth which yet bordered upon Corinth and so of the rest And indeed that difference which is made between Church and Church by Vicinity of Neighbourhood and Cohabitation does best answer the ends of particular Church Association such as is assembling together for Publick Worship and mutual assistances in all Christian offices of Brotherly love and friendship But this alone does not constitute Christians dwelling together in the same place a particular Christian Church tho by their being of the Church Universal they are as fit matter qualified for it But 2. That which does constitute such to be a particular Church as that signifies a company of Christians in Local Communion in Divine Worship consisting in the participation of Gospel Ordinances is the placing over them one or more Church-Officers to minister to them therein By which Officers as well as by the place where they dwell and where they assemble for Worship they are distinguished from other like Churches under the Conduct of other Church-Officers of the same kind For by such their joynt Local Communion in the Worship administred by their spiritual Guide or Pastor they are united with him and among themselves as one Worshipping Congregation by which Union also they are distinguished from other particular Churches as other particular Churches in like manner are from them Those of the Independent Church-way do indeed hold particular Churches as such to be Antecedent to any Church-Officers over them Which is the reason which Dr. Owen in his Inquiry concerning Churches does alledge to prove the Power of the Keys to be given to the Church And to prove particular Churches to be Antecedent to Church Officers he quotes Acts 14.23 where it is said of Paul and Barnabas And when they had ordained them Elders in every Church c. As for this proof of his Assertion I shall consider it by and by but shall first examine and try what is in the Assertion it self which I am inclined to think will be found full of mistake and that the contrary will be found true viz. that the Evangelical Ministry is and always has been Antecedent to the existence of Christian Churches and indeed an instrumental cause of their being And this is true not only of particular Churches but also
or their doing more to accomplish it than the Law or Government under which they are allows them For otherwise it is not seditious I conceive for men to endeavour to get any thing amiss in the Government to be altered in a regular way that is in such a way as the Government or publick Constitution allows I need not say how much the two bonds the one of Peace the other of Charity is broken by this sort of Division which is accompanied either with Faction or Sedition nor how great the Schism is that is made thereby But this is certain that a Division of this kind cannot be without much envying and strife and where these are there is confusion and every evil work as St. James hath told us Chap. 3.16 4. Another sort of division in the Church is that which is made by an unjust Separation of one part of the Catholick Church from another in the business of their Communion in their solemn Worship And this is a division of a very high nature indeed especially when it is accompanied with the third sort of Division before insisted on For if such a Division be unjustly made it is point blank contrary to the Unity of the Spirit that is contrary to the Unity of Communion among Christians which was taught and practised by men inspired by the Spirit in reference both to solemn Worship and Christian Fellowship as has been formerly explained By such a Division the Churches peace is broken with a high hand great offence being thereby taken at others and cause of offence given to them and a wide gap opened for debate strife contention and confusion to enter in to a dreadful destruction of Charity the spirit and life of Christianity without which Faith it self is dead and all other religious performances little available It concerns us greatly therefore and some men more especially very diligently to inquire how far the Divisions and Separations that do abound in our days and in this Nation are unjustly or justly made To do which I do not know a more compendious way than to enquire into the nature of our National Constitution about Gods publick Worship and the power of giving being to it and how far we are obliged to observe it That such National Constitutions as have been made in several Nations for reformation from Popery and for the establishing of the Reformed Religion and Worship in the room of it since the beginning of the Reformation has been so far approved of by God as that he does reckon and esteem those Nations his Kingdoms upon that account I have found as I conceive in our twelfth Inquiry Which with what else is there produced and argued for the usefulness of such National Constitutions I take to be ground sufficient to authorize a National authority in such an undertaking Now when ever the forming of such National Constitution is undertaken by them to whom it does belong they must needs find that tho the Essentials and substance of all divine Worship is expresly and particularly set down in Scripture yet there are several Circumstances and Accidents of Worship which pertain to the external administration of the substance which are not otherwise determined in Scripture than by general Rules as that Edification Order and Decency be always observed in the choice of such things as are not particularly determined and set down in Scripture Such are those I instanced in in another of our Inquiries concerning Prayer tho all the substantial parts of it are determined in Scripture yet we are no where limited to pray with a set Form nor without one to use or not to use Book-prayer to kneel or to stand in Praying nor directed whether in the Publick Worship there shall be several distinct and short Prayers used for several things or whether all Prayer matter fit for a publick Assembly shall be comprised in one or more longer Prayers And the like may be said touching several external Circumstances that are to be used in all other parts of Publick Worship This being the case it will necessarily fall under the consideration of those who are imployed in the forming a publick Constitution for Worship which of these will tend most to the Peace Unity and Edisication of the Church and to Decency and Order whether to leave all aside termined Circumstances of Worship to every ones choice who are to administer the holy things or in these things to chuse for them and to determine by an Ecclesiastical Constitution what shall be observed Suppose we then that upon serious consideration and consultation they come to be fully persuaded in their own minds that to leave all both Ministers and People to their own choice in such undetermined Circumstances in Gods Publick Worship would tend to great Division Disorder and Confusion as it did in the late times of general Liberty and that then we should have one opposing another in their different ways and making of Parties one against another to endless branglements and to the eating out the heart and life of true Religion And suppose also that upon such considerations as these they come to a resolution to determine all undetermined Circumstances of Publick Worship by the use of a Liturgy except only what is to be performed in the Pulpit as that which tends most in their Judgment to Peace Unity Edification Order and Decency And when they have gone thus far in general they will necessarily be led to proceed in the next place to the choice of particular Circumstances of administration of the several parts of Publick Worship In which it is to be presumed they govern themselves according to the best of their understanding by those general Rules which direct all things to be done for Edification Order and Decency And when they have done so and brought things to the best issue they could yet considering that all men and the best of men are fallible it is not unlikely but that they may be mistaken in some things and that such and such a Circumstance or Mode of administration of Worship would have better and more fully agreed with the general Rules than those they have made choice of But yet if their failings and and mistakes therein do not extend to the corrupting of Gods Worship in the Essence or substance of it but only to the ordering of some less useful Circumstances to be observed in the external manner of performance of that Worship there will be no just cause of separating from Communion in it upon that account For those who separate from Communion in the Worship which is every Lords day performed in our Parochial Assemblies according to our Liturgy are obliged to prove one of these two things against it if they would justifie their separation from it Either first that the Worship is corrupt in the Essence or substance of it or secondly that the faults or defects in the External manner of performance of it are such as do fall short of and
Publick Worship at least in part should be performed by a Liturgy appears by their having ordered that so it should be And this ought to weigh much with humble and modest men remembring what St. Paul hath said in another case to shew what esteem ought to be had of the Usages and Customs of the Churches of God If any man seem contentious we have no Such Custom neither the Churches of God 1 Cor. 11.16 2. To satisfie yea to convince such as are under a prejudice against worshipping God by the use of our English Liturgy that there is no such difference as they fancy between the worshipping God according to that in conjunction with Pulpit Worship and that way of Worship which they so much prefer before it I shall offer this to their consideration viz. That there have as worthy men for Piety and Learning both Conformists and Non-conformists as perhaps ever England bred lived and died in Communion in that Whorship which has been performed by our English Liturgy from the beginning of the Reformation downward And we may well conclude that their Souls would never have prospered and flourished so as no mens more if there had been any such difference as some men imagine between the way of their Communion and that of others Men do not gather Grapes of thorns nor Figs of thistles That the souls of many prosper no better under it proceeds not from the nature of the provision for them but from their own gross neglect both of it and of themselves who doubtless would be such as they are whatever the manner of Worship is in the places where they live 3. If we have in the place where the providence of God hath set us means of worshipping God publickly competently useful and sufficient to the ends of such Worship tho it should in some respects be inferiour to some other yet if we can have no better without breaking Order and running into confusion nor without breaking one Commandment to observe another nor without making our selves guilty of an unlawful separation and all the dreadful consequences of it we may be said to worship God in the best manner we can tho we content our selves with this provided we be not wanting to improve it the best we can to its end And the reason is because we then perform the best Worship we can that will consist with edification Publick Order and the peace of the Church and a Worship wherein all these concur does best answer to general Rules for the manner of Publick Worship taken together 4. For men to separate from Parochial Communion in the Worship performed according to the Liturgy to the end God may be worshipped by them after a better manner in separate Assemblies is to do evil that good may come of it unless they can prove a necessity so to separate or to sin For that to separate without such a necessity is to do evil is a Protestant Maxim assented to on all hands among them And that they are under no such necessity as to sin if they do not so separate I have shewed before by shewing that the said Worship is neither corrupt in the essence of it nor is the external manner of performance of it deficient as to its end and use one of which must be proved against it before separation from it can be justified 5. By such a separation as that we speak of men really do much more disservice to God and the great concerns of Religion and the Souls of men than they can with any colour of reason pretend that by worshipping God without the Liturgy they honour him or Religion or advantage the Souls of men The effects of such a Separation are very visible which do too naturally flow from it such as the destruction of Peace Charity and Humility the engendering of Envy Hatred Strife and Contention to the great reproach of Religion and dishonour of Almighty God and the hurt of mens Souls But how these great evils can be pretended to be counter-ballanced by their Worship being performed without the Liturgy I understand not but do take it to be a matter past doubt that the benefit which those that separate get by their Communion without a Liturgy over and above what they might have gained by Communion where that is used will never equal the hurt they draw upon themselves and others and the wrong they do to Religion by their separation And if not then when ever the account comes to be made up and their loss to be compared with their gain they will be found exceeding great losers by their separation notwithstanding all the advantages they promised themselves by it Thus far to shew that there is no just cause of separating from Communion in the Worship performed by the Liturgy every Lords day As for the gesture of kneeling in the act of receiving the Lords Supper so much hath been written to prove it no sin and so little that looks like an Argument to prove the contrary that if men of understanding would but lay aside prejudice and impartially compare and consider what hath been said on both sides I cannot think that after this any could be long without satisfaction touching the lawfulness of complying with publick Order in that matter especially considering how much is declared at the end of the Office for administration of the Lords Supper in the Liturgy to clear that gesture in that action from all suspicion of Bread-worship more than in the Liturgy in use in the old Non-conformists days when they scrupled it But if any after they have done thus shall not for all that be satisfied yet that can be no more an Argument to them than it was to the old Non-conformists why they should not hold Communion in the rest of the Lords-day Worship as they did and not only so but pressed it also on others as their duty to do so and zealously inveyed against separation from it as a great evil as their Writings do abundantly shew And that for such to hold Communion with their Brethren so far as they can is plain matter of duty I have shewed before And in case they should thus hold Communion in the other parts of Worship they need no more to live without the use of the Lords Supper than the old Non-conformists did since I doubt not but they know how to be therein accommodated as well as they did and as they were And so for Baptism in case they cannot be active in the use of the Cross after it yet they may be passive in as much as it is not used as any sign of Gods conveying grace as Sacraments are but only as a token of duty nor as any Rite in Baptism neither but only in receiving the Persons baptized into the Church after they are baptized and seems to be no more ground of scruple than laying the hand upon and kissing the Book in swearing is which is a piece of Divine Worship which none scruple
but Quakers There are others who frame to themselves other reasons of separation from Parochial Communion in Worship besides its being performed by the Liturgy as namely because those Congregations are not as they pretend constituted of visible Saints nor by a Church Covenant Who these are is well known for whose sakes several of my former Inquiries are made in which there are such things produced from the holy Scriptures as may I suppose be sufficient to satisfie their reason if not their prejudice touching their mistake in these opinions As for their exceptions against the Government of the Church by Bishops as Diocesan how they would make Communion with the particular Congregations under their Jurisdiction unlawful upon that account I understand not unless they think the Ministers of those Congregations by whom the Ordinances are administred to be no true Ministers because Episcopally ordained and not by Presbyters And if this should be their scruple they may easily receive satisfaction by considering that Diocesan Bishops were Presbyters before they were Bishops and therefore must needs remain so after For they were not devested of any Ministerial power or authority by being made Bishops but only invested with a superaddition of authority and power they had not before So that they who are ordained by them are ordained by a Presbyterial authority and more And with this the old Nonconformists satisfied themselves touching the validity of their Ministerial authority received by Ordination from the Bishops that then were Some again dislike Parochial Communion because the Civil Power is so much concerned as it is in Ecclesiastical affairs relating to it one way or other and for that all such things are not left wholly to the ordering of Ecclesiastical Rulers as they were in the Apostles times and long after But there is not the same reason why they should be so left now as there was why they were so then The reason why they were wholly left then to the ordering of an Ecclesiastical Power was because there was no Civil Powers as Christian then in being so that they could not promote Christianity better any other way But it is not so now for it is shewed in our last former Inquiry but one that the affairs of the Gospel and the Salvation of men in a Christian Kingdom or State may better be provided for and promoted by a national Constitution than they can be without it And that therefore things of this nature are not to be ordered as if we were still in a Pagan Kingdom when we are not For where the reason of things is altered it is but reasonable and fit that there should be a sutable alteration in the things themselves Thus the gesture of standing with Loyns girt and a Staff in the hand appointed to be used in eating the Passover at the first Institution of it for that it was then to be eaten in haste was afterwards altered to another gesture by the Church when that Circumstance of eating in haste ceased and our Saviour himself did eat it in that posture to which the Church had changed it which is a consideration of very great weight in reference to this and some other cases And the Obligation of the Ceremonial Law ceased upon the same ground when the substance was come which had been prefigured by Ceremonial Rites And the like might be observed touching the discontinuance and disuse of anointing the sick washing Disciples feet and the kiss of Charity and some other things which were obliging until the reason of the Obligation ceased But altho the Civil Power doth concern it self by a National Constitution to order and direct in things appertaining to the Church for the promoting of Religion and the Salvation of men yet it does not this without the advice and assistance of those that are Officers and bear rule in the Church And when the Civil Powers have gone as far as they think fit in ordering and directing by Ecclesiastical advice and assistance yet they do not act any thing themselves peculiar to the Ministry of the Church but leave all such things wholly to them who are invested with Ministerial authority reserving only to themselves a power os restraining such men from an undue exercise of their Office tending to publick disturbance And thus I have endeavoured to satisfie the Dissenters that there is no sufficient reason or cause for them to separate from the Publick Worship of our Parochial Assembles and that their pretences for their doing so when narrowly looked into are found to have nothing of substance in them sufficient to bear them out in it And if I am not mistaken in my Allegations and reasonings I cannot discern how their separation can possibly be defended from being an unlawful Schism And if it be I am sure they have upon many accounts great reason to desist from engaging farther in it QUERY XV. SVpposing things touching visible Church-Membership and Communion to be as they have been represented in our former Inquiries yet how do they tend to lessen our Church Divisions The answer to which is That if the matters of our Inquiry be as they have been represented then they tend to lessen our Church-divisions by removing and taking away the very foundation on which they and our Church-separations are in great part at least built For I do not know any one of the different Parties among the Protestant Dissenters except those called Presbyterian who do not found their separation from our Parish Churches at least principally upon this supposition that they are not constituted according to the order of the Gospel And why not according to the Order of the Gospel but because as they say they are not constituted ol Gospel matter that is not of visible Saints but of such as for a great part of them at least were never duly reputed to be regenerate or to be of the Invisible Church and their meaning is as I collect both from their Writings and Converse That they were not at first nor since constituted of such particular members only as at the time of such their Constitution had a probable appearance of Regeneration but of all baptized persons however they proved good or bad and without any other probation or discrimination Now if those things be true which have been endeavoured to be proved to be so in the management of the former Enquiries Then this ground on which they build their separation is altogether unsound and such as has no firmness or substance in it but is only imaginary For our Parish Congregations are constituted of persons visibly in Covenant with God the Father Son and Holy Ghost by being baptized in their name and thereby engaged to be theirs to worship and serve the Father by the Son through the assistance of the Spirit And of such and no other were the Churches planted by the Apostles constituted And this Covenanting was then and so is now the visible formal difference between those of the Visible