Unity Ephes. 4. 3. Upon this Occasion he starts this Question Whether if there be Errors in the Church we may separate our selves His Judicious Resolution is this Errors are either practical in Manners or doctrinal in Tenets For vitious Manners we may not separate Lot did it not The Jews might not do it from the Scribes and Pharisees because they sate in Moses Chair Though we may not separate from such corrupt persons in the publick Assemblies yet we may in private conversation 1 Cor. 5. 11. If the Church err in Doctrine it is to be considered whether the error be in a point substantial fundamental or not if in a point substantial fundamental whether upon infirmity or obstinacy if of frailty we may not separate as in Corinth and Galatia If a Church err in the foundation openly obstinately a separation may be made 1 Tim. 4. 5. yet the error being in some not in all it remains a Church as Corinth did If the Error be in smaller points not fundamental we may not separate They which build upon the foundation of hay and stubble of erroneous opinon may be saved 1 Cor. 3. 25. Mr. Perkins concludeth that no man can separate from the Church of England with a good Conscience since it teacheth obeyeth believeth the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles In the most justifiable cause of Separation he requires examination conviction censure or condemnation To separate without examination is not Piety but Phrensie No man can judge aright of that saith the Philosopher whereof he is ignorant No man can well determine what he doth not well discuss Qui ad pauca respicit de facili pronunciat 2. To separate without conviction is levity to be like clouds hovering with every sudden gale of Doctrine Mr. Perkins condemns the want of Moderation in those that condemn the Church of England without sufficient conviction If any object admonition by Books take the same Authors resolute assertion his asseveration for a satisfactory reply I say again there are grosser faults in some of those Books than any of the faults that they reprove in the Church of England and that Books are not fit to convince especially a Church 3. To separate without a Juridical Censure an Authoritative a Synodical Doom is at least a hasty irregularity Otherwise Separation paves a Causey to Confusion Schisms will be endless Synods needless If two or three Members of your new Collected Church should separate from your Church branding it to be a corrupt Church not lawfully to be communicated with your selves would esteem those two or three to be very inconsiderable for number or power for to be ballanced with that Collected Church whereof they are or as you alledge ought to be Members I pray consider the disproportion is far greater betwixt your Collected Church and the National Church of England To wind up this bottom That you have been prudent in Examination shall be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pass for granted but it remains for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether your conviction of the Church of England hath been sufficient or your censure your condemnation Nay it is a Question put out of all Question negatively since that the Church of England hath not been disproved by any Demonstrative Arguments upon Scripture Principles to be no truly constituted Church nor yet condemned by any Synod Till then I pray forbear to separate from it I shall add by way of Prolepsis If you here object that in being thus scrupulous you may be irrecoverably involved in guilt for want of a Synodical Condemnation which is not in your power I answer In case of this defect there is allowable only a partial Separation in the Church not a total from the Church Or a Negative Separation by not asserting abetting countenancing owning erroneous Tenets or vitious enormous Practices not a positive separation by constituting a new visible Church by deserting the Old in its Religious Duties and Assemblies The best Christians in the Church of Corinth and Galatia nay St. Paul himself did separate no otherwise when there was conspicuous in the one a tincture of Paganism in the point of Resurrection in the other a spot of Judaism in point of Justification They severed doctrinally as to those particulars not personally as to the sacred publick Ordinances As to your Quotation of St. Jude I shall fortifie Mr. Perkins Judgement with Mr. Arthur Hildershams upon John 4. 45. Lect. 35. Such as separate from our Churches upon pretence of the corruptions that are in them These are marked with a black coal by Jude 19. These be they who separate themselves being sensual having not the Spirit But herein Christians must learn wisely to distinguish such as are unjustly separated by others from the Church Assemblies and such as voluntarily separate themselves These deserve to be called Schismaticks and not the others Neither are they to be counted Schismaticks as though they dare not be Agents or Practisers of any corruption that remaineth in the Church yet can bear and tolerate them as burthens without forsaking the Church for them To this sort I will say no more but wish them well to weigh the Examples of Gods Servants that have been mentioned in this Doctrine which frequented so diligently the publick Worship of God in Jerusalem when there were far greater corruptions both in the Priests and People and Worship it self than can be found in ours What Mr. Hildersham here winds up is unravel'd in his thirty sixth Lecture Because the Author is not lyable to your exception and proceeds upon Scripture Principles your own appeal who hath been reputed by Dr. Willet Malleus Schismaticorum qui vulgo vocantur Brownistae I shall here insert what himself hath dilated in his own Language without contracting or altering it Upon John 4. 22. We know what we worship for salvation is of the Jews Hereupon Mr. Hildersham observeth that our Saviour in commending the Worship and Religion of the Jews makes himself one of their number acknowledgeth himself a Member of their Church professeth that himself did worship God as they did from whence this Doctrine ariseth for our Instruction That those Assemblies that enjoy the Word and Doctrine of Salvation though they have many corruptions remaining in them are to be acknowledged the true Churches of God and such as none of the faithful may make separation from We shall need no further proof of this Doctrine than the example of our Saviour himself If we consider of the one side how corrupt the state of the Jews Church was in his time and on the other how far our Saviour did communicate with them For the first what the state of the Church was in his time we may know if we consider First What the Priests and Teachers were themselves that had the ordering of God's Worship Secondly What the people were with whom he was to joyn in Gods Worship Thirdly What the Worship it self was wherein he was to communicate
the Saints as Fellow Members I desire to be resolved who those Saints are Not the reformed Protestants not the Primitive Christians you exclude both their Church being not separate if they be acknowledged Members of the Catholick Church they are interested in the Communion of Saints expressed in the Creed And then your separation from them amounts to a separation from the Church and the Communion specified in the Creed To ascend higher are the Apostles the Saints you own a Communion with Then prove they made such separations from Christian Congregations as you do But you admit them not the Title of Saints let me inoffensively ask for my own satisfaction if they be real Saints why not Titular If your selves as real assume the Title why may not the Apostles be indulged that privilege in regard you plead to be Saints of the same extraction especially since us to the judgment of others at least there is greater certainty infallibility of their Saintship than of yours As for your desire of company comfortably to partake the things of God those Assemblies you have quitted do afford those sacred Comforts you have deserted them for wherein sacred Ordinances are most comfortably because most charitably celebrated Being private Persons or Pastors of a Parochial Church we are principled to be Converts not Judges to exercise severity in repentance not censure to be inquisitors in our own Breasts to condemn none but our selves Religion is not tainted with Faction among us nor Zeal stained with Schism We bewail the practical prophaneness of any that the same tincture of Grace is not visible in Worship and in Life however our wickedness is not in Gilgal as to this charge God's pure Ordinances are not slurred not vitiated much less vacated rendred ineffectual by mens impure desailances unless to themselves only To the pure all things are pure The LETTER Therefore do humbly offer these ensuing grounds to your serious consideration desiring your judgement on them and thoughts of them The ANSWER I take no felicity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Nazianzens expression to mould Divinity into a Comedy I shall not by the Divine assistance fail of a serious Discussion of your Advertisements weighing them in the ballance of Reason and Religion I am not so improvident an Enemy to a numerous Family as to be peevishly wedded to clouded Tenets could I be rationally and conscienciously divorced from them I should not stick to pen my own Retractations according to the laudable Example of St. Austin The LETTER That there is a Church of God here on Earth all do agree in concerning the Matter and Form in general there is no great difference That it is coetus fidelium a company of people called out and segregated from the World by the Word to walk together in the Gospel of Jesus is granted The ANSWER The quod sit that there is a Church is uncontrolled undiscussed the quid sit what that Church is is the subject of Ancient and Modern Debates Here the Logick Rule is to be observed Ambiguous words are first to be distinguish'd then defined The Church is either Universal or Particular Grand Differences being loudly prosecuted touching the Matter and Form of both The Romanists comprehend Miscreants Reprobates for material parts and Members of the Catholick Church the Reformed allow only Elect Persons to be true and real Members of this Church yet they avouch vitious Christians nay scandalous till excommunicated to be Members of a particular visible Church but the Separatists do quite expunge raze them out The Romanists exact not as a consecutive but a constitutive essential Note as a formal mark of every particular Church Subjection to the Pope The Separatists require a Church Covenant an evidence if not assurance of the grace of every Member The Reformed Protestants dissent from both But not to tread out of your track Your Latin definition of the Church coetus fidelium is accommodated to the inward Church invisible Though an Assembly if particular be an object of Sense Believers properly are not But your English illustration of it is the Character of the outward visible Church that walk in the profession of the Gospel of Jesus If they walk whether in the Notion of Nature or Scripture if they profess they must be visible This is to shuffle together Disparata The LETTER 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Saints by calling is Scripture Definition Rom. 1. 7. 1 Cor. 14. 33. but how far these terms may be understood how far extended and wherein restrained is the controversie The ANSWER I shall not except at the Etymologie nor the Scripture definition but the Restriction of it That 's the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the main hinge of the Question If you understand Saints by calling of an inward effectual vocation the Testimony is an impertinency as to our debate touching an outward visible Church If you understand it of an outward Vocation remember our Saviours uncontrolled Maxime many are called but few are chosen This suites with a mixt Communion with an outward profession take Aretius his rational descant on St. Pauls Character How are they called Saints since it is certain many Novices in belief yea notorious lewd wretches in life were among them whereto he frames a double answer They were Saints by calling because called to Sanctity and endowed with preparatory Graces Because the better part were Holy the rest were Saints in the judgement of Charity though not of Infallibility It is the Candor the Rhetorick of the Apostle that the Title might be a Lecture the name a charm to Holiness Zanchy under the name of Saints apprehends titular professing Christians but the faithful distinguish'd severed from these by the Apostle to be sincere Believers Thus your first Citation is a Nominal definition of Christians nominal professional not real habitual outwardly interested by Baptism though not inwardly regenerated Saints by destination by designation not in conversation not in the least perfection of parts much less of degrees Your second Citation 1 Cor. 14. 33. is less advantageous to advance your design God is not the Author of confusion not of dissention in the vulgar Latin not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of tumult but of peace as in all the Churches of the Saints That is in all Christian Churches that are called obliged to be Saints If you observe your separation to be the source of dissention of confusion admitting no dependance no subordination it will appear at a great distance from those Apostolical Churches of the Saints especially if you note the coherence in the Claromonte Edition approved by Beza and other Reformed Divines immediately adjoyning to the 33 verse the 36 37 38 39 40 th vers and annexing 34 35 vers to the 40 th What came the Word of God from you or to you only The ophylact thus illustrates it You are neither the prime nor the sole Believers It behooves you to entertain that with affection with submission which hath
the approbation of the Christian World St. Paul conjures the Corinthians by the Examples of all Churches The same Argument unsinews your separation not to run counter with all Christian Churches Produce one Christian undoubted Church of your separate strain not universally branded for Schismatical Phyllida solus habebis The true Church shall be yours You may derive your Pedigree from the Novatians and Donatists who boulted some of your Tenets for Separation and Constitution These will discover some lineaments of your Complexion not the intire proportion However if you are Saints upon their account they were not Hereticks and if they were Hereticks upon your account your selves are not Saints If you acknowledge them not Hereticks you reject the Judgement of all Christian Churches in all Ages since their Heresies were broached Sysinnius counsel to Theodosius was prudent to move Innovators to stand to the Judgement of the Church before Division I tender to you the determination of our Question by the suffrage and practice of the Reformed Churches before your separation was raked out of the Embers it was enwrapped in or else to the Primitive Churches either before the flame of the Novatians and Donatists was kindled or after it was extinguish'd by the vigorous Confutations of the Fathers and the Pious Sanctions of Christian Emperors and Councils If in despight of these you will persist in contention in separation my Refuge is the Apostles Apology We have no such custome nor the Churches of God The LETTER Visible Saints must be but how far Saints must be discovered The Word I suppose carries in it a holy separation to God a people separated for his service for his glory and how wicked men having only a bare outward profession may be such is unknown to me whom the Scripture speaks otherwise of Tit. 1. Prov. 8. 9. The ANSWER There is not an exact necessity of that Visibility so far as to conclude no Sanctity if no Visibility no Church if no lustre There may be Gold in the Ore obscured not yet resplendent refined Bullion Where was the Visibility when the Primitive Christians during the brunt of Pagan persecution betook themselves for security to remote Deserts to obscure Caves when Prisons were the sole Oratories and Temples when the Churches were universally demolished the Sacred Scriptures burnt the Christians disrobed disfranchised stript of their Dignities immunities deprived of their liberties and lives by the fierce Edicts of Dioclesian Where was the Church visible when it was o'erspread with a cloud of Arrianism Athanasius against the whole World and the whole World against Athanasius Eliah discovered not one Saint but himself yet God vindicated seven thousand that had not bowed their knees to Baal We are not visible Saints to you nor you perhaps to us Veniam damus petimusque vicissim I pray God we may be all visible Saints to him I confess that to be a Saint imports a holy separation a people separated for the Divine Service and Glory Those you have abandoned are so servered dedicated by Baptism They who demonstrate only a bare outward profession may be Saints outwardly formally for profession though not inwardly really as touching affection touching sincere Religion Yet in this defect of entire genuine Purity the good are not to be eschewed for the evil but the evil are to be tolerated for the good I shall wave your first Quotation Tit. 1. no verse being specified I shall not contend in a roving conjecture in a dark conflict like the Andabates I presume you intended not the whole Chapter for a Proof this were a fondness of separation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like the vehement affection of the Platonists whose intellectuals being prepossest with numbers imagined number an Essential in every constitution Your second Appeal is to Prov. 15. 8 9. The sacrifice of the wicked is abomination to the Lord but the prayer of the righteous is acceptable to him The way of the wicked is abomination to the Lord but he loveth him that followeth righteousness If you can dispense with Charity to brand those you separate from to be wicked If you can dispense with Humility to repute your selves righteous yet this is no Argument for separation The Sacrifice of the wicked is abomination therefore The Sacrifice of the godly mingled with the wicked is abomination you conclude more than you premise Judas eating the Paschal Lamb as for his own personal action was an abomination but this had no reflection on his associates in that oblation the Apostles Their Piety did not sanctifie and acquit him nor did his iniquity defile and condemn them The LETTER The manner also of their coming into such a condition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Saints called not Saints compelled or Saints making their Saintships their Calling their Profession not enemies to Holiness This by the way The ANSWER It is true Religion ought to be perswaded not constrained Faith and Innocence are not the products of power and violence Piety is not savoury if not voluntary Yet tempers are to be distinguished mens dispositions being as different as their complexions Some are moulded like Wax for the impressions of the Sacred Spirit Others are to be hewen like stones to be squared and polished Materials for the Temples of the holy Ghost Of some take compassion making a difference or commiserate those that are staggering according to a famous Manuscript others save with fear Beza interprets it with terrour pulling them out of the fire Though compulsion is not allowable in the grafting the planting of Religion yet it is in the fencing and pruning of it It cannot be compelled secundum actum imperatum for the inward apprehension it may to outward profession secundum actum elicitum I grant that Saints ought to make Saintship their Calling or rather their Calling makes them Saints When their conversation contradicts their Vocation their Profession the crime is the greater when our works confound our words our lives check with our names The title of a Saint is the impeachment of a Miscreant Your Proof if logically examined is fallacious Wicked men are enemies to holiness therefore not Saints Members of a Church It is ignoratio Elenchi In the same consideration they are not Saints and Enemies to Holiness Their Saintship is in appearance their enmity to Sanctity in substance Holy at least as Professors though unholy as Malefactors This by the way as you express it is indeed a by way out of the Orthodox road of the Jews and Christians It is with new Tenets saith St. Epiphanius as with new ways wherein when men are once engaged they will proceed on with hazard of safety rather than return with any fear of infamy The LETTER I shall briefly speak something concerning a separation from the Church of England in propounding these two Queries First whether ever the Church of England was as a Nation or National Church constituted according to the Word of God and
Primitive Institution The ANSWER Such unnecessary Queries have discarded necessary Duties which are become pastimes and triumphs to our Romish Adversaries Wounds and scandals to our Reformed Brethren I shall not cavil at the terms of the Question though justly lyable to exception as a Nation being a civil consideration as a Church a spiritual but I affirm the National Church of England to be constituted according to the Word of God and Primitive Institution I shall not act the Samaritan who would be reputed a Jew when Judaism was resplendent flourished but in its Umbrage and Captivity had no portion no interest in Israel Having owned and reverenced the Church of England as a chaste Matron as a venerable Mother in her lustre I shall not desert nor brand her as an impure Harlot in her Eclipse I imagine her pathetically expostulating with you in this Assault as Coriolanus's Mother in Livy did with her hostile Son The LETTER If it was whether it be not so degenerated and defaced from a true Gospel Institution that a man cannot safely walk therein and partake of the Holy Things of God without sin The ANSWER Your twisted Query is a Fallacy Fallacia plurium interrogationum a compound of variety of contrariety at least in consequence of ingredients A Church is not degenerated without a charge of the corruption the stain of depravation A Church may be defaced by the freckles of affliction by the scars of persecutions The Beauty of the Piety of the Church of England is clouded the Feature disfigur'd by the Obstructions of the times In this consideration of solemnity Seges est ubi Troja fuit But an afflicted eclipsed is not a degenerated depraved Church If your self be degenerated from her profession your question resembles the fond imaginations of Harpaste who being deprived of her sight would not be perswaded her self was blind but that the room was dark There may be in Tertullians Judgement a confidence of two sorts of blindness intellectual to discern a depravation which is not and not to see that perfection which is The Calamities of the Church of England are not to be imputed to her for crimes Is the less Christian because she owns Christs Badge and wears his Livery the Cross. The participation of her holy things is not unholy It is no sin to communicate with her in these but to separate from her To prevent an imaginary guilt of Pollution by others beware lest you incur a real guilt of Schism by separation in your self It is the wily artifice of Satan though probably you neither ken nor dread it Sic notus Ulysses In this nicety of severity you supererogate exceeding the Apostolical prescription Have no fellowship with the fruitless works of darkness The works not the workers unless you intend to quit universally all society with the World The Sacred Charge nay Charm of a Sacred Life is cast in the same mould Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from evil From the quality the action not the agent the sin not the sinner Unless as Constantinus reproved Acesius you will erect a ladder for your separation to mount Heaven alone The LETTER Touching the first Query I have this to say First Primitive Institution the first Apostolical Church Acts 2. 42. from the verses before I gather the matter of it to be Converts and no ordinary Work on their hearts neither 37 38 39 verses joyning all together it holds forth that they were and so all to whom the promise belongs which is a Church Legacy ought to be called Converts The ANSWER That first Apostolical Institution doth not justifie your separation your Argument may be retorted Some have hence proved the lawful constitution of those Churches you separate from By an outward profession which is the result of their Communication you alledge that they were Converts Were they reall Converts or Professional If real this ingrafts them in the invisible Church as professional they were interested in the visible Church This Profession claimed the Appellation to be called Converts But you argue that they were real Converts because no ordinary work wrought on their hearts It is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They were pricked in their hearts They had some sting of conscience some gripings of remorse at St. Peters Sermon Reprobates are not always destitute of these corrosive Anxieties Compunction of heart doth not amount to conversion unless you will confound the critical differences of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 warranted by the Evangelists It is a preparative to it it is not an accomplishment of it In this instance it is expressed generally of all the Auditors without any limitation in 37 verse Now when they had heard this they were pricked in their hearts But it is qualified restrained They that gladly received his word were baptized in the 41. verse If both qualifications of a bitter compunction and a chearful attention be linked yet they will not compleat them to be true Converts Ananias and Saphira are computed Members of this Congregation you will not grant a true Conversion where there is a Recidivation Their first Profession is censured Dissimulation The LETTER 2. How they were gathered into order by withdrawing themselves yea and that from a Church not from Heathens but from a froward Generation such as many professing are as great enemies to Christ as ever they were though not in the same manner For those who will not have Christ to be their King to rule over them are as great enemies to Christ as those that will not have him their Jesus to save them Matth. 19. 14 27. Phil. 3. 18 19. The ANSWER I grant they were gathered into order though your Medium doth not infer it The Text sets it out Parainetically St. Peters admonition not Historically the execution the practice of it in the 40 verse However they withdrew themselves not from a Church if you intend by a Church a Christian Assembly but from a Synagogue If from a Church in this Notion you contradict your self this was not then the first Primitive Institution I suppose in your construction first Apostolical Before this numerous shole caught in the Fisher of Souls Net the Church after our Saviours Passion is summed up comprehending one hundred and twenty Members To collect three thousand out of a Church of an hundred and twenty were as prodigious Logick as Arithmetick I pray weigh the importance of the inference touching this Primitive Institution They withdrew from a Synagogue from Jews therefore Christians must withdraw from Christians They gathered to the Church therefore a Church must be gathered from a Church Such deductions are ropes of Sand arena sine calce as Domitian censured Senecas concise uncemented expressions an incoherence more laudable in sentences than proofs but not to digress That froward Generation mentioned were especially the Scribes and Pharisees our Saviours profest embittered
according to the Syriack and Vulgar Latin Translations This being compared with Prov. 10. 12. whence it is probably esteemed to be transcribed it must be understood of the offences of others Charity doth not light a Torch to blaze but spread a vail to conceal to enwrap them in obscurity and silence rather resembling Briareus with an hundred hands to relieve distresses then Argos with an hundred eyes to espie offences An humble merciful errour out of the Sphere of our own Chage is more reconcileable with a well guided Charity than an over severe censorious truth This Charity extenuates small lapses aggravates not great in doubtful cases is a candid interpreter in manifest crimes mourns but condemns not Take St. Bernards descant on your own note for the guidance of Charity In the failing of others excuse the intention if you cannot the action charge it on the score of ignorance surprizal casualty If an offence be heinous notorious not to be defended or concealed reflect upon your self with this Application The Temptation was over vehement if it had been in me thus prevalent how had I been foiled To conclude this point which alone may serve to unsting your separation In your rigorous sentencing of Parochial Churches your Zeal may be greater than your Charity and that Zeal perhaps more enflamed than enlightned Gerson requires to the temperature of Zeal Prudence Benevolence Perseverance The LETTER Parochial Churches as confessed by Mr. Hooker and others are not Jure Divino therefore of a humane constitution I speak not of conveniency but necessity that every one of a Parish must be of a Church The ANSWER Mr. Hooker was a sober stickler for Unity and Uniformity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But if my memory be not a fraudulent Record there is no such passage extant in his Ecclesiastical Policy though I confess it consonant to his weighty Judgement if rightly understood The inconvenience of your separate Churches is a consequence proved by your concession of the convenience of our Parochial Churches A convenience it is of great antiquity and importance I shall take their rise in the Western Church from Evaristus in the beginning of the second Century They were afterward more disperst and regulated by Dionysius in the year 267 and by Marcellus in the year 305. From which date the Parochial Division was generally embraced in all Christian Territories Constantine the Great the first Christian Emperour did by a solemn Law suppress all separate Churches allowing no Religious Assemblies but in Cathedral or Parochial Churches for the prevention of clandestine Heresies and Schismes Simplicius was round with Victorinus a famous Orator converted from Paganism to Christianity but sequestring himself from Parochial Congregations I will not account you in the Sacred List of Christians unless I see you in the Church among them A penalty was enacted for absentors without necessary Diversions by the Elibertine Council the year 310. The Great Council of Chalcedon did debar any Ordination of Ministers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without a particular Title or interest without a Parochial Charge A provident course to restrain vagrant Levites seconded and reinforced by diverse succeeding Councils This was the wisdom of the Primitive Christians But you object this amounts only to a humane constitution A Parochial Church is of a mixt nature partly Divine partly Humane There is a threefold consideration of a Divine Institution First for the matter as well as the Power the Author of it This is Gods own Law simply and purely Moral its subject being absolutely good in it self if commanded in an Edict absolutely evil in its self if countermanded in an Interdict a Prohibition This Law is universally reducible to a natural dictate a principle imprinted in the Souls of men Of this stamp and mould are the Branches of the Moral Law the Precepts of both Tables Secondly There is a Divine Constitution not for the convincing equity of the Matter but the binding Authority of the Power the external imposition of God as a Lawgiver Such was Gods charge to our First Parents touching the prohibited Fruit in Paradise The eating whereof was not forbidden because evil but evil because forbidden 3. Thirdly a Constitution is Divine for the Matter and not the Power not immediately but mediately when the Precepts of men are grounded upon the Laws of God on the Rules of Divine Equity In the present Question touching Parochial Churches The constitution is not entirely humane or positive in the Schoolmens expression It is Divine in the third Consideration because of its foundation For though the circumstantial individual respect the present limits of Parishes as now sorted be humane yet the substantial respect that there be a regular limitation for bounds to Ministers and People is implicitely comprehended in these two grand Apostolical Canons Let all things be done to edification Let all things be done decently and in order The one being the spiritual Canon the other the Ecclesiastical or the one diverting us from a pompous superstitious gayness the other from a disordered unbeautified rudeness in Religion There is yet a more special Divine Foundation touching the substantial part That Pastors and Flocks should have their distinct Relations and Limits this being warranted by Apostolical Precept and Practice When Paul and Barnabas had ordained elders in every Church They committed the Churches they planted to several peculiar Pastors as Junius and Tremelius expound it Thus St. Paul left Titus in Creet which is titled by Homer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dignified with an hundred Cities to ordain Elders in every City That so none should be destitute of its own Presbyter it s constituted Pastor its local setled Minister Hereby the labour in the Ministerial Charge becomes lighter the care the exacter saith Theoph. The Apostle knits together the mutual special tye of Duty Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your souls as they that must give an account that they may do it with joy and not with grief for that is not profitable for you These Duties cannot commodiously conscienciously be discharged without distinction of charges designation restriction of places Vigilance for souls is obstructed by distance The account also must needs be hudled when the charge is confused The Apostles had a general Oecumenical commission qualified with unparallel'd endowments for Languages for Miracles suitable to such dispersed unbounded employments The Time Message and Messengers were extraordinary This universall Embassy is not exemplary Our bounded Parochial Churches are but Copies of the Jewish division by Synagogues which though they were not of Divine Right à priori by Injunction yet they were à posteriori by the approbation of Christ and the Apostles and of greater Antiquity than the Temple it self These Parochial Boundaries are singular Expedients for Piety and Regularity not only convenient but necessary as to order and obedience in this