by holding Communion with the particular Church wherein they live that Church not being Schismatical all the particular Churches through all the World being the Members that make up the Mystical Body of Christ the one Catholick Church Sir having shewed you as clearly as I can the true Notion of the Catholick Church and Communion of Saints Schism is so clearly unmasked that a man may though not from the same impulse yet with as much certainty pronounce and declare you a Schismatick as the Prophet Nathan did King David's Sin when he said Thou art the Man For it is most manifest that all who pretend Christianity and wilfully refuse Communion with the Catholick Church do cut themselves off from and cease to be Members of the Body of Christ for he hath but one Body that is his Church and this in the Language of the Scriptures and the Judgment of the Fathers in the Primitive Times is Schism And this agrees too with the Nature and Signification of the Word Sir though it be above my Education yet since I undertook your Enquiry I have made search and do give you this following account of these Fathers whose Judgments are against you St. Irenaeus Bishop of Lugdunum Lib. 4. adver Her cap. 43. who was Cotemporary with Policarpus a Disciple of St. John who must in Reason be allowed to know the Primitive Apostolick notion of Schism better than you or any who are of your Faction exhorts all Christians to harken to those Presbyters who were in the Communion of the Catholick Church and that they might not be deceived describes them Qua propter is qui in Ecclesia sunt Presbyteris obaudire oportet iis qui Successionem haâ—ent ab Apostolis c. Wherefore they are oblig'd to obey those Presbyters who are within the Pale of the Church who as we have shown are the Successors of the Apostles who have received the sure gift of Truth together with an Apostolical right of Succession according to the Deâ—ree of the Fatherâ— Reliquos vero qui absâ—stunt a principali Successione quocunque loco colliguntar c. As for those who renounce the Apostolical Succâ—ssion and Assemble themselves in any place whatsoever suspect and esteem them as Heretical and Damnable Opinions who flatter themselves with hope of Lucre and Vain Glory but as for them who rend and tear in pieces the Unity of the Church they shall receive punishment of God as Jeroboam did St. Ignatius the Second Bishâ—p of Antioch from St. Peter in his Ep. ad Tralianâ—s ad Smyrnenâ—es and in those to the Philâ—ippians c. frequently charges 'em to keep in the Unity of the Christian Church by a regular obedience to the Bishops and by Communicating with those Presbyters who were set over them by Authority of Episcopal Order that to disobey those Bishops and their Presbyters and to separate from them is in those Epistles charged with Schism St. Athanasius brands Ischyras for a Schismatick and gives this Reason for it that Ischyras did Usurp a Ministerial Authority without regular Ordination from the Bishops of the Catholick Church and gather'd to himself a Congregation separate from the Bishop of Alexandria in whose Province he liv'd St. Cyprian Ep. 4. ad populum Carthaginensem de quinque Presbyteris exhorts them to have no Communion with those who had divided themselves from their Bishops assuring them that to be sine Episcopis was to be extra Ecclesiam And in his Book De Vnitate he gives this Notion of Schism Contemptis Episcopis Derilictis Dei sacerdâ—tibus constituâ—re aliud Altare aut Conventicula diversa constituere That it was Schism to dispise and forsake the Bishops and Priests of God and to set up another Alter or to set up distinct Conventicles Sir though I pretend not to the Originals yet having found these Instances produced by men of unquestionable Sincerity and great Learning I presume to present you with them I have more of this kind before me but these Testimonies are sufficient to shew how different from and far short your discription of Schism is from the Notion of Schism the Fathers had in the Primitive times and that in their Judgment you are Guilty of Schism Sir you cannot by this time but see your Guilt and though you as Criminals usually before our Tribunals plead not Guilty 't is your own phrase yet I beseech you consider your Trial must be before that Tribunal which cannot be deceived or bassled you had better try and judge your self now that you be not judged To live in Schism you ingeniously acknowledge is a black and hanious Crime to promote and patronize it as you do must then be a great agravation of it it is to be out of the Catholick Church and Communion of Saints out of which there is no ordinary means nor any firm ground to fix any hope of Salvation its plain Acts 2.47 The Lord dayly added to the Church such as should be saved no being added to the Church no being saved there is no other way revealed by which you may be saved And it concerns you highly to consider how you can answer for all those many poor Souls that you seduce into Schism and so industriously keep out of Christs Fold I caution you in all Meekness and Christian Charity and out of a sincere desire of your eternal welfare and if you have that preparedness of mind that Meekness and Selâ—-denial which the Holy Jesus requires in the Gospel you will no longer contend with Flesh and Blood but immediately surrender your self into the Communion of that Church where if you will not be wanting to your self you will find all the satisfaction that a Christian can desire there being all things exhibited to you that appertain to Life and Salvation Having thus finished what I designed as sufficient to shew you the true Notion of Schism and your mistake in the Nature of it I proceed to make some Remarks upon your Brief Enquiry c. THe Scope of all you say till your Instance of Eldad and Medad amounts to no more but that Schism is an Arch-Rebel c. a deformed Brat c. a Crime so black no body will plead Guilty to the Indictment And then comes another Law term Hue and Cry c. 't is an hanious Crime but 't is very difficult and scarce possible to find it it cannot be described All I need say to this is the difficulty is removed I have plainly shew'd you how to describe it and so to make a true Judgment who are Guilty whether they plead Guilty or not Guilty The Instance of Eldad and Medad is nothing to the purpose of Schism for they were not if I mistake not to administer in Holy things not any thing of the Priest-hood but that Spirit of Prophecy which they received was to qualifie them for the ease of Moses in the Civil Government and a Crime in the State is Sedition not Schism Yet they did
Schismatick And consequently all Societies of Christians who withdraw themselves from the Government of their Bishops who are the Apostles Successors and from communicating with those Presbyters lawfully set over them by Episcopal Ordination and Institution and frame themselves into any other kind of Government are guilty of Schism This 〈◊〉 the true formal Notion of Schism in the sense of the Fathers in the â—tive Church Of which more anon This Church so constituted and established to continue to the end of the â—orld from its Universallity was by the Primitive Fathers called the Catholick Church and from its Unity the Communion of Saints Which is now to be considered What this Union and Communion of Saints is appears by Holy Scripture St. John 13. v. 35. By this shall all men know that ye are my Disciples if ye have love one for another Love is the Badge of a Disciple of Christ and Member of the Catholick Church but there must be more in the command to the Disciples to love one another than commonly the acceptation Love hath for the Christian Religion enjoyns Love and Charity to all men To Love our Enemies to pray for them that hate us and to do good to them that despitefully use us and persecute us is the command of our Blessed Saviour and Gal. 6. v. 10. As we have therefore opertunity let us do good unto all men So that this Love which one Disciple is to have for another must be such as distinguisheth Chrstians from all other men Now what can that be but to love one another as members of the same Body whereof Christ is the Head and what can that be but to live in Christian Communion and Fellowship one with another Iâ— cannot be the bare loving one another for there are some who are not Christians who are so bountiful and loving towards all men that if this were the only Charactâ—ristical mark of a Christian they would and must pass for Christians without believing in Christ And who seeth not that Pyrats and Robbers and the vilest of men love one another So that it is as before is said not the bare loving one another by which men are known to be Christians but the being admitted by Baptism into the Society of the Christian Church and loving one another in the Communion of that Church this is that which makes true Christian Charity Saint Paul commands 1 Cor. 12.25 26. that there be no Schism in the Body but the Members should have the same care one for another and whether one Member suffers all the Members suffer with it or one Member be honored all the Members rejoyce with it now ye are the Body of Christ and Members in particular Christians to love one another is to love like Members of the same Body to preserve the Body from all Rents and Schisms and to maintain Sympathy and Chriâ—â—â— Charity in the Communion of Christs Body whereof we are all Mâ—â—bers So that Christian Charity unites us to Christs Body and nothinâ—â— Christian Love and Charity that doth not unite us in one Body 〈◊〉 one Communion that is one external visible Communion of the Christian Church Thus you see that by the words Christian Love and Charity so much used in Scripture must be understood the Communion of Saints and that out of the Communion of Saints there can be no Christian Charity And so is the same thing meant expressed by other words namely Brotherly Love Rom. 10.12 and by the name Brethren Heb. 13. v. 1. Let brotherly Love continue This term Brother was given to none but those who liv'd in Communion with the Church not the Gnosticks who seperated from it under pretence of greater Knowledge nor any who separate upon any pretence whatsoever And aâ—ter the Apostles the Primitive Church did confine the Christian Brother-hood to the Communion of the Church all the Precepts relating to Brotherly Love either in the Evangelists or Apostles suppose Christians to be Members of the Mystical Body of Christ that is his Câ—urch and to be all United there in full Communion and this is what tâ—e â—postle means to have no Schism in the Body out of all which it appears Fiâ—thly to assent to and believe all the Articles of Faith contained in the Apoâ—â—les Nicene and Saint Athanasius's Creed allow'd and receiv'd in the Primitive Church to pertake all of the same Table where we aâ— pertake of the same Body which was broken for us and of the same Blood which was shed for us and to joyn all in the same holy Prayers and Supplications Intercessions and giving of thanks made as the Aposâ—le expresâ—ly commands for all men to be Subject and Obedient to ouâ— Spiritual Rulers and Governors who have derived their Power and Authority â—rom the Apostles by a due succession to this present Age in all things pertaining to Godly Life Decency and Order as the Catholicks did in the Primitive times this is true Christian Charity in the Language of the Scriptures and this is the Communion of Saints To hold Communion in the Articles of Faith only or what you call Fundamentals without any visible Sign of being in Communion with some Church that is a true Member of the Catholick Church is not sufficient to make a Catholick or one in the Communion of Saints though without such a Communion of Faith it is imposible to be so Corah and his Company were of the same Creed with Moses and Aaron yet were Schismatical wretches and were punished with a Vengeance The Donâ—tiâ—â—s whom you acknowledge to be Scismaticks held the Fundamentals of Religion but their separate Communion from the Catholick Church upon pretence of greater purity excluding all other Churches as not Catâ—o ick this made 'em Schismaticks in the judgment of the Fathers in the Catholick Church at that time So that all particular Churches who agree with the Primitive Catholick Church in all the Articles of Faith and in the external visible Worship and Service of God are true Members of the Catholick Church and in the Communion of Saints and no other The Church of England then having from the first planting of the Gospel here retained the Apostolick power of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and Ordaining Priests by an unterrupted Succession of Arch Bishops and Bishops in the right line from the Apostles to this present time and agreeing with and no way repugnant to the Primitive Catholick Church in Doctrin Discipline and Worship is truly a Member of the Universal Catholick Church out of which there is no Communion of Saints The necessary consequence whereof is that they who live within the Jurisdiction of the Church of England and refuse Communion with her in the external visible Worship and Service of God do exclude themselves from being Members of the Catholick Church or in the Communion of Saints and are consequently guilty of Schism The reason is plain because there is no other way for any to hold Communion with the Universal Catholick Church but
hinc illae lacrymae It must rather be the setting up of your Seperate Communions that hath been so much the bane of this Christian Church I am sure it was the Puritanical Faction who in their Conventicles blew up the Trumpet of Sedition and Rebellion and overturned the Government of both Church and State and through pretended Sanctity and Gospel Zeal perpetrated the most hellish Actions that ever were since Adam Then was Violence under the colour of Zeal the Note and Badge of Sanctity Loyalty to a Prince of incomparable piety and faithfulness to the most pure Christian Church was damn'd for malignancy I am sure you are of the same Tribe these were the men by whom the Church was not only rent in Pieces but for a time which was as long as they were in Power rooted out here we may truly say hinc illae lacrymae Mr. H. I lived in the time when through Blood and Rebellion your Party gave Laws and Rules to all then all that were of our Church were not Censured for little things but Branded for Reprobates Excluded from Mercy all the Clergy not only Silenced but Sequestred and many Imprisoned and starved it was not much worse with Christians under Nero and Dioclesian and all this for not Conforming to your Novel Discipline yet the gentle Penalties of the Royal Laws which were made for Peace and Unity are cry'd up by you and your Party for such a Persecution as never was Alas Sir for all your pretended Meekness and Charity now you that retain the same principles would certainly repeat the same miseries had you the same power which God of his Infinite mercy for ever prevent Amen Now I return and try whether from your Instance in the Corinthians you could not have found a far more genuin conclusion and more agreeing with the Apostles meaning If but the having one Minister of Christ though rightly ordained in admiration above another to the begetting Contention incur the Guilt of Schism and is no way to be Tollerated in the Church of God How much more am I a Schismatick who am not only not rightly ordained but keep up a Communion seperate from the Church of God in the Kingdom where I live the Argument will hold a Minori ad Majus If contentions about admiring one Minister above another be Schism then sure to maintain a Separate Communion which makes Contention much hotter fiercer and more numerous must much more be Schism In Page 15. you say That 's Schism which breaks or slackens the bonâ— by which the Membeâ—s are knit together In this you are Orthodox but you keep not to it for you say Now that bond is not an Act of Vniformity in point of Communion in the same Modes and Ceremonies but true Love and Charity in point of Affection The breach of Communion be it for want of Uniformity in the same Modes and Ceremonies or what you will that is not sinful does certainly to use your own words Break and Slacken the Bond by which the Members are knit together for to divide in point of Communion is to dis-unite and unknit the Members and consequently the Bond be it as you say Love and Charity or the Unity of the Spirit or what you please is broken and this you most truly say is Schism and yet you say that the Bond is not an Act of Vniformity c. in point of Communion which is a manifest contradiction Now all these erroneous and miserably mistaken Expositions of Scripture and inferences equally false are the Foundation upon which you erect your Description of Schism and which at present you apprehend is the true Scriptural Notion of Schism which that all who read these papers may judge of I here Insert Schism is an Uncharitable Distance Division or Alienation of Affection among those who are called Christians and agree in the Fundamentals of Religion occasioned by their different apprehensions about little things You agree with our Church in all that you call Fundamentals and your Distance and Division you acknowledge is for little things that it is an Uncharitable Distance and Division is undeniable for the breach of Christian Communion is certainly the breach of Christian Charity here you are Condemned out of your own mouth But how far different your Description is from the Primitive Catholick Notion of Schism sufficiently appears to you by what I have shewed before You mention not Seperating or withdrawing from the Communion of the Church which is most Infamous and Notorious Schism and confine it only to breach of Charity which though always a great fault yet in many cases amounts not to Schism I now take notice of your Fourth Inference page 23. If this be Schism then there may be Separation of Communion where there is no Schism say you for thus we all agree that there may be difference of apprehension and yet no Schism provided it do not eat out Christian Love but be managed amicably as betwixt the Arminians and the Calvinists in the Church of England What strange kind of Reasoning is this If breach of Charity be Schism then separate Communion may be without Schism and to prove this you instance in the difference between the Arminians and Calvinists in the Church of England who differed in Opinions the former Asserting the Freedom or Liberty of the Will the other Election and Reprobation here was no separation of the Communion or denial of any Article of the Church for both sign'd the Articles nor from Communion one with another both parties submitting to the Uniformity required so you bring an instance to justifie seperate Communion from Schism where there was no seperate Communion at all see how illogical your reasoning is If breach of Charity be Schism then there may be separate Communion without Schism Would any man of Sence but you have made such a Conclusion from such premisses would not the Argument have run truer thus If breach of Charity be Schism then separate Communion is much more Schism But breach of Charity is Schism Therefore c. I am forced here to say what I have said before that it is most manifest that a separate Communion unless from a Schismatical Church is in it self the agravation and extremity of Schism and is naturally and infallibly the cause of the highest breaches of Charity and of the hottest and fiercest contentions which you own to be Schism But suppose there were some thing in our Constitutions that needed amendment or alteration yet every defect and supposed Corruption in a Church is not a sufficient ground for Separation or warrant enough to tear it in pieces Hear Mr. Calvins Opinion he saith where ever the Word of God is duely Preached and Reverently attended to and the true use of the Sacraments kept up there is an appearance of a true Church whose Authority no man may dispise or reject its admonitions or resist its Councils or set at nought its Discipline much less separate from it and
the prime addit on of these gifts and graces that are among you is this that ye all teach the same Doctrine and nourish Charity and Vnity that there be no divisions in the Churches but that ye be compacted and Vnited as Members of the same Body in the same belief and affection Is not this quite different from your Exposition you take off the force and efficacy of the Apostle's Exhortation to Unity purposly to excuse your Schism is any thing more demonstrative in the World than that your practice is quite contrary to this Exhortation who have set up a Communion separate from the Church of God establish'd in this Kingdom both by Divine and Civil Sanction You are unlucky in your Exposition very wide from the mark and it can never fare otherwise with you while you live in Schism it being the Nature of Schism to hurry men into a thousand errors Again in the former Paragraph That ye all speak the same things viz. In the Fundamental Doctrines of Christianity for say you in little things it can never be made a duty to be of the same Opinion since it is morally impossible I must here say again what I have said that different Opinions in meer Notions and Speculations or any differing Opinions that break not Communion are not here meant for so men may differ and not be guilty of Schism But if you mean by morally impossible that it is impossible for Christians to be perfectly joyned together in the same mind and in the same Judgment as the Apostles exhorts so as to maintain Unity and prevent Schism in the Church either the Apostles Exhortation is to no pâ—â—pose and effect or your insinuation very vain You go on that ye be perfectly joyned together with the same mind and in the same â—udgment which say you must be understood of a serious endeavour afâ—â—r it for otherwise a perfect conjunction must be reserved for a world of â—verlasting perfection Sir are you so self dignify'd to use your own words as to be a Teachâ—r of Saints and know not that a perfect Conjunction in the Catholick Church and Communion of Saints is required of all those who are to â—â—â—e to the world of everlasting perfection Your 11 12 and 13 pages are filled with an Enquiry of the Corinâ—hians miscariâ—ge you say that Clemens Romanâ—s in his famous Epistle to â—e â—â—rinthians stiâ—l calls Schisms contentions which I believe is true For â—chism is the Mother of Contention You find that the Corinthians were divided in their Opinions about â—heir Ministers one cries I am of Paâ—l as more Edifying another cries am of Apollos and another I am of Câ—phas this you say did not make â—he Schism for say you Why might not each go where he might be most ediâ—â—d but you say the Schism was in that they Sacrificed Christian Love and â—harity and after you say a great deal to little purpose For It s very plain the Corinthians were accused of that you call Schism â—areâ—y for preferring or admiring one Minister above another though â—dification was the pretence and not for breach of Communion for with â—hichsoever they Communicated it was one and the same Communion â—r Saint Paul and Christ were not divided nor were either of the other â—ivided from Christ their Communion was the same though their Cures â—ere several so that there was no reason as you impertinently say to siâ—ence any of them for in them there was no Schism nor any blame â—ut say you the wâ—y of Curing this Schism was not to silence Apollos and â—ephas that they might all be of Paul and here you make St. Paul some â—art of amends for your former Scandalous Exposition in saying that he â—refered Souls Sâ—lvation before his own Credit How impertinently do you say the way to Cure this Schism was not to â—lence Apollos c. As if to silence you that your followers may come â—o Church were as illegal as to have silenced them Sir there is a vast â—ifference between you and they who are Pastors and Ministers of Christ â—â—ey are the Stewards of the Mysteries of God and the Ministers of Reâ—onciliation and are made so by Apostolical Power of them our Blessed â—aviour saith St. John 10. v. 2 thus He that entreth in by the door is the Shepherd of the Sheep but such as you who climb up some other way our Saviour in the 1 v. calls a Thief and a Robber Had Apollos and Cephas been as disorderly and Schismatical as you St. Paul would in all probability have exercised his Apostolical Power and have silenced them as the Cure and it is more than probable that the Schism which you maintain would receive a Cure were you and all such silenced and supprest In your Recipe for the Cure of Schism one Ingredient is That they walk all the same way though they trace different paths your falacy and equivocation in this is very visible for here is nothing like a different path it is all one way and one path they were all United in the same Communion But you cunningly insinuate this merely to delude the ignorant and undiscerning by perswading them that your Conventicle is the same way with the Church only as you call it a different path which is no other than Schismatical meeting So your cure of Schism is to continue in Schism You are a rare Spiritual Phisitian And then to bring up the rear you have this rare Inference viz. It appears that narrow Spiritedness which is a very improper expression which confines Religion and the Church to our way and party whatever it is to thâ— condemning of others that differ from us in little things is the bain of thâ— Christian Church And to make this as true as the Gospel you set down a Latin Proverb hinc illae lachrymae Sir Religion is the bond of Unity did you ever know Religion with out Bounds and Rules for all of that Religion to be confined to even to a Punctilio and is it narrow Spiritedness to observe those Rules and tâ— be confin'd within the Bounds of Religion is it a Schismaticating Principle to make a true Judgement of Schism which you call an Arch-Rebeâ— in Christs Kingdom and censure them who are Guilty of it Have not all they of your Conventiling Communion Rules given them though of your own parties making by which they are confin'd to yours and distinguishable from all other different Communions If you or any other of the Presbyterian Communion come to London or any other parâ— of this Kingdom do not you hold exactly the same way of Worship aâ— you have here sure you cannot deny this and is not this to confinâ— your Sect to your own way and Communion Why then do you reproachfully call this narrow Spiritedness in others and practice it your selves You say condemning of others that differ in little things is the great Schismaticating principle which hath been so much the bane of the Christian Church