Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
christian_n catholic_n church_n society_n 1,852 5 9.5659 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A25216 A reply to the Reverend Dean of St. Pauls's reflections on the Rector of Sutton, &c. wherein the principles and practices of the non-conformists are not only vindicated by Scripture, but by Dr. Stillingsfleet's Rational account, as well as his Irenicum : as also by the writings of the Lord Faulkland, Mr. Hales, Mr. Chillingworth, &c. / by the same hand ; to which is added, St. Paul's work promoted, or, Proper materials drawn from The true and only way of concord, and, Pleas for peace and other late writings of Mr. Richard Baxter ... Alsop, Vincent, 1629 or 30-1703.; Barret, John, 1631-1713. 1681 (1681) Wing A2919; ESTC R6809 123,967 128

There are 6 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Liberty of captivating their Vnderstanding to Scripture only and as Rivers when they have a free Passage run all to the Ocean so it may well be hoped by God's Blessing that universal Liberty thus moderated may quickly reduce Christendom to Truth and Vnity This Citation being to long I shall add but one more out of him and that a shorter p. 209. This is most certain and I believe you will easily grant it that to reduce Christians to Vnity of Communion there are but two ways that may be conceived probable The one by taking away diversity of Opinions touching Matters of Religion The other by shewing that the diversity of Opinions which is among the several Sects of Christians ought to be no hinderance to their Vnity in Communion Last of all I close with your Rational Account p. 291. And therefore those lesser Societies cannot in Justice make the necessary Conditions of Communion narrower than those which belong to the Catholick Church i. e. those things which declare Men Christians ought to capacitate them for Communion with Christians Even an acknowledgment of the Scriptures as the indispensible Rule of Faith and Manners Which be pleased to note is something different from your late establish'd Rule Now would you fix here that those things which declare Men Christians shall suffice to capacitate them for Communion with you how many Mens Scruples would be removed and what better way can you think of to put a stop to Separation 7. Are you Impartial in charging all Nonconformist's Meetings with Separation tho very many of them ordinarily join with the Parochial Congregations and do not deny them ●o be true Churches as the old Separatists did p. 56. It is true say you in that Opinion they differ but in Separation they agree As in your Sermon p. 33. For do they not do the very same things and in the same manner that the others do how comes it then to be Separation in some and not in others Which I answered Rector of Sutton p. 49. thus What they do is not done upon the Separatists Principles and therefore not done in the same manner Yet you neither retract that Saying of yours nor refute my Answer And have not others as much reason to object against you that when you receive the Sacrament k●eeling you do the same thing that the Papists and Lutherans do I do not think it manifestly appears from the Pope's manner of receiving either sitting or a little leaning upon his Throne as you say p. 15. that the Papists are allowed to follow him herein How then comes that to be an Act of Worship in them when with you it is no Act of Worship but a ●eer indifferent Ceremony 8. Are you not very Partial in loading those that do not absolutely separate from you but only secundum quid as you do p. 54 55 56. Making their Practice that own you to be true Churches to be the more unjustifiable more inexcusable more unreasonable Separation Is it not a greater Schism to separate from you as no true Church than to do it only because you are faulty in imposing such Conditions as they cannot lawfully submit to Are they the greatest Separatists who hold Communion with you so far as they can I should think they are the greatest Separatists whose Separation is the most unjustifiable inexcusable and unreasonable As I had thought there was not so much reason to deny the Being of the Church of England while she retaineth the true Faith and hath the true Worship of God for substance as there may be to doubt of the lawfulness of Ceremonies and Modes of Worship invented and imposed without any clear Scripture-Warrant And suppose one dares not receive the Communion with you because he holdeth kneeling in that Act a participating with Idolaters and another is kept off because he suspects there may be some Superstition in it will you say the latter is the more unreasonable And do you not own those Lutheran Churches that have Exorcism with Baptism yet to be true Churches And if you was placed there must you therefore own and use Exorcism tho against your Judgment or be guilty of a more inexcusable unreasonable Separation from them than the Papists who deny them to be true Churches 9. Are you Impartial in allowing a different way of Worship to the Members of Forreign Churches here in England as p. 147 148. while you are against allowing the like Liberty to Natives which you deny not to Strangers Bishop Davenant Ad pacem Eccl. Adhort p. 116. Rat. 3. argues That none ought to deal more hardly with their Christian Brethren of other Churches than with their own Rom. 12. 5. Nam fra●●rnit●s Christiana quae Intercedit inter membra Christi non variatur pro locorum aut nationum varietate You would have your own more hardly dealt with than those of forreign Churches Now what Equity is here Either you have Communion with those of Forreign Churches not withstanding their different way of Worship or you have not If you have no Communion with them then are you not Schismaticks from those Churches If you have Communion with them why may you not as lawfully have Communion with Nonconformists in their way of Worship Can you assign any just and sufficient Cause ex Natura rei why such a way of Worship should not be allowed 10. Do you deal Impartially while you complain p. 112. that no bounds are set to the Peoples Fancies of purer Administrations concerning which I am quite mistaken if I did not wish the Rector of Sutton had cautioned what he said and you on the other hand set no Bounds but by your excepting against what Mr. B. hath written of it would have People own and commit the care of their Souls to such Ministers as are in place be they never so profane insufficient or unsound Tho Mr. Cheyney Full Answer c. Introduct p. 7. grants That where God doth make a difference Men may Now God doth make a difference says he between the Ministry of the best and the worst between the Ministry of a John Baptist and a Pharisee a living Man and an Image P. 177. Say you And doth this Kindness only belong to some of our Parochial Churches c. Where you suppose every Parochial Church in England to be a true Church and every Parochial Minister by consequence to be a true Minister unless you would argue fallaciously there Tho I had thought it possible to have found out some few at least whom you would have been ashamed to own I cannot but wonder at that you urge again and again p. 111. Were they not baptized in this Church and received into Communion with it as Members of it p. 148. Our Business is with those who being baptized in this Church c. May not all those that were baptized in Presbyterian or Independent Congregations as well plead their Baptism for their continuing in that way of Worship which was in the
that any will prove Separation from the Church of Rome lawful because she required unlawful Things as Conditions of her Communion it will be proved lawful not to conform to any suspected or unlawful Practice required by any Church-Governours upon the same Terms if the Thing so required be after serious and sober Enquiry judged unwarrantable by a Man 's own Conscience Which with more you have in that Page and the Page before it cuts off your third Particular Preface p. 75. Here now I have gained so much Ground of you Such are necessitated to withdraw from your Communion who must otherwise joyn in some unlawful or suspected Practice As Chillingworth p. 269. To do ill that you may do well is against the Will of God which to every good Man is a high Degree of Necessity And say you Rational Account p. 290. Can any one imagine it should be a Fault in any to keep off from Communion where they are so far from being obliged to it that they have an Obligation to the contrary from the Principles of their common Christianity Here I assume they are bound by the Principles of common Chrisianity to keep off from Communion with you that know they should certainly sin if they held Communion with you because they should then joyn in suspected ●ractices and things which after Enquiry their Consciences tell them are unlawful Ergo you must say it cannot be a Fault in such to keep off from Communion with you Though I would grant them faulty so far as any keep off through Prejudice Error Ignorance yet so far as these are involuntary they are more excusable than to go directly cross to their own Consciences here So therefore such are necessitated to withdraw Communion from you who would certainly sin if they held Communion with you judging such Communion to be sinful 2. If you say here What is this to a positive Separation which is the present Business You shall see it is something towards it You are come a fair Step on the Way Once grant that it is lawful for Men or that Men are necessitated to deny Communion with you in unlawful or but suspected Practices which are unlawful to them and you come presently to the Point Allowing them to withdraw from yours you must allow them to joyn in some other Christian Assembly unless you would have them utterly deprived of the Worship of God and to live like Heathens As you say well Irenic p. 109. Every Christian is under an Obligation to joyn in Church society with others because it is his Duty to profess himself a Christian and to own his Religion publickly and to partake of the Ordinances and Sacraments of the Gospel which cannot be without Society with some Church or other So then Christians that cannot enjoy Sacraments with you must joyn with some other Society where they may enjoy them And further take notice of that remarkable Assertion in your Rational Account p. 335. and apply it here as far as there is Cause Our Assertion therefore is that the Church and Court of Rome are guilty of this Schism by forcing Men N. B. if they would not damn their Souls by sinning against their Consciences in approving the Errors and Corruptions of the Roman Church to joyn together N. B. for the solemn Worship of God according to the Rule of Scripture and Practice of the Primitive Church and suspending I suppose it should have been and to suspend Communion with that Church till those Abuses and Corruptions be redressed And I observe further Ibid. p. 291. you would not have Men bound to Communion with a particular Church but in Subordination to God's Honour and the Salvation of their Souls Yea you say Men are bound not to communicate in those lesser Societies where such things are imposed as are directly repugnant to these Ends. And where Men should be forced to damn their Souls by sinning against their Consciences would not this be directly repugnant And yet are not such bound to joyn together for the Solemn Worship of God c. You see now how far I have brought you even on your own Grounds how you will get off I know not Then might it not have been expected that you would have been more favourable and charitable towards the Assemblies of those Ministers and Christians that are kept off from you by unlawful Terms or at least such unnecessary Terms as are to them unlawful You speak more temperately Rational Account pag. 331. Here let me use some of your own Words there which something favour those Assemblies you now engage so zealously against By their declaring the Grounds of their Separation to be such Errors and Corruptions which are crept into the Communion of your Church and imposed on them in order to it they withal declare their readiness to joyn with you again if those Errors and Corruptions be left out ☞ And where there is this readiness of Communion there is no absolute Separation from the Church as such but only suspending Communion till such Abuses be reformed This they 'l say is very good But now in your new Impartial Account Preface pag. 46. you speak in another Dialect Would they have had me represented that as no Sin which I think to be so great a one or those as not guilty whom in my Conscience I thought to be guilty of it Would they have had me suffered this Sin to have lain upon them without reproving it c. What that which is as plain a Sin as Murder pag. 209. which is really as great and as dangerous a Sin as Murder and in some respects aggravated beyond it Preface p. 45. And yet on the other hand would you have them conform to you though against their Consciences Would that be no Sin Would God be wel-pleased with such Service as was done but to please Men while their Consciences in the mean while condemned them for it Can you say bonâ Fide that it is better more pleasing to God that Men conform to your Modes and Ceremonies though they have real Doubts of Conscience that they are unlawful or better they should live without God's publick Worship and Ordinances then to joyn with such as the Non-conformists That this is as the Sin of Murder Dare you go or send to all the Dissenters in your Parish supposing you take them to belong to your Charge and give 'm it under your hand that though they are still unsatisfied after all you have said and written though they believe they should offend God if they joyned with you upon such Terms yet I say durst you give it under your hand that they would do better to joyn in your way of Worship than in that of the Non-conformists though they have no more doubt of joyning with the latter than you had heretofore If you are clear in the Point have you done this Or why do you neglect your Duty towards them Why do you not endeavour to bring them in
limiting and inclosing the Catholick Church and if any disturb the Peace of this Church and here you do not 〈◊〉 the most peaceable Dissenters that only meet for the Worship of God and separate no farther from your Church than as it is not Catholick you go on The Civil Magistrate may justly inflict Civil Penalties upon them for it Is this your Mind that all that submit not t● those new federal Rites as they are supposed and teaching Signs and Symbols spoken of should be both debarred of Church-Priviledges and laid under Civil Penalties as disturbers of th● Churches P●ace Then I cannot but wish that Governours may have more Moderation and Clemency or poor Dissenters more Faith and Patience than you shew Christian Charity herein But if they are as near the Primitive Church and as much in Communion with the Catholick Church as you are yea and in Communion with you still so sar as you are Catholick what great reason can you have so severely to condemn them I hope the Doctrine of the Non-conformists generally is sound their Worship agreeable to the Word The only Question then remaining seems to be By what Authority they do these things And who gave them Authority Now it is true they cannot pretend Authority from the Bishops but if they can prove they have Authority from Christ is not that sufficient If he hath called them to the work of the Ministry and commandeth them to be diligent and faithful in it according to their Abilities and Opportunities me th●nks Men should not deny their Authority And whether may not such Societies as you call n●w Churches return what you cite p. 179 180. out of Calvin Instit. l. 4. c. 1. n 9. as proving them to be true Churches They having the Word of God truly preached and Sacraments administred acc●rding to Christ's Institution Now he saith as you have him where ever th●se Marks are to be found in particular Societies those are true Churches howsoever they are distributed according to Humane Conveniences And therefore if you did not look only on one side you might probably see that you are no more allowed wilfully to separate from them than they are from you And as that Synod of the Reformed Churches in France at Charenton A. D. 1631. declared as you have it p. 186. That there was no Idolatry or Superstition in the Lutheran Churches and therefore the Members of their Churches might be received into Communion with them without renouncing their own Opinions or Practices So why might not the Non-conformists and their Hearers be taken into or acknowledged in Communion with the Church of England without renouncing their Opinions or Practices they being certainly as far from Idolatry or Superstition as any of the Lutheran Churches As the Helvetian Churches with you p. 187 declare That no Separation ought to be made for different Rites and Ceremonies where there is an Agreement in Doctrine and the true Concord of Churches lies in the Doctrine of Christ and the Sacraments delivered by him Even so because the Non-Conformists consent with you in Doctrine do not break them off from your Communion for their difference about Ceremonies May not several Churches differ in Modes and Forms of Worship and yet have Communion with one another Some Difference you cannot but grant betwixt your Cathedral Service and that in common Country Churches p. 146 147. You will not say the Churches in other Nations that have not the same Rule with you are Schismaticks No not though such came over into England and lived among you And what if the old Liturgy and that new one which you cannot but remember the compiling of and presenting to the Bishops at the Savoy 1661. had both passed and been allowed for Ministers to use as they judged most convenient might not several Ministers and Congregations in this case have used different Modes of Worship without Breach of the Churches Peace or counting each other Schismaticks Would you have called those new separate Churches that made use of the new reformed Liturgy And what if a Dutch Church was in your Parish Would you disclaim Communion with them because they had some Rules and Orders different from yours And what if divers of your Parish living near it should joyn with that Congregation would you thence conclude that they erected a new separate Church And as the Canon 1640. speaks of bowing towards the East or Altar That they which use this Rite should not despise them which use it not c. if now our King and Parliament like true Catholick Moderators should put forth an Henoticum make an healing Law enjoyning Conformists and Non-conformists that agree in the same Faith and Worship for Substance to attend peacably on their Ministery and serve God and his Church the best they can whether they use the Liturgy and Ceremonies or no without uncharitable Censures and bitter Reflections upon one another either in Word or Writing would you yet say that the Non-conformists Assemblies not following your Rules and Orders were no other than new separate Churches 5. I know no Laws nor Ecclesiastical Canons that the present Non-conformists have made And non-entis nulla sunt praedicata But if your meaning be that it is enough to prove them New Churches that they come not up to your Laws and Church-Rules and therefore are so 〈…〉 as they conform not to you I would argue thus Either Conformity in all things to your Church-Rules is necessary to Communion with the Church of England and to cut off the charge of being of a New ●hurch or not If Conformity in all things be not necessary here why may not sober Dissenters that own the Church of England for a true Church and profess the same Faith and worship God in no other manner than according to the Liturgy and Practice of the Church of England as you say p. 160. Mr. B. declared in writing and as I told you a good Lawyer pleadeth Rector of Sutton p. 26 50. I say why may not such be owned as in Communion with the Church of England Why do you charge them with erecting new separate Churches meerly because they differ from you in some alterable Circumstances and separable Accidents not necessary to Churches Concord and Communion I see you dare not say that those things wherein they differ from you are any parts of Worship So they are of the same Faith and agree with you in all parts of Worship And is not all this with their owning themselves to be be of the Church of England so far as it is Catholick a bidding fair for your Reception of them and acknowledging them still in Communion with you And then why have you so many words of such being no good Christians because Members of no Church as pag. 104 105 110. f. If Conformity in all things to your Church-Rules be not necessary pray tell us what is necessary and what not what things may be dispensed with and what not Rector of
is plain that there is real need of more Ministers than are in place And I desired to know whether it was better that Men shoul● be untaught and so p●rish for lack of Knowledg● than taught by such as the Non-conformists Whether the Souls of Men are of no more value than our Ceremonies But as yet I have no Answer from you that may satisfy What you further say to me p. 137. I have fully answered before Again pag. 144. You cite a few Words of mine wich I know to be true of some and pitty them And though it is said we would certainly give but bad Quarter to others yet I hope if I had been all this time in plac● for me they should have had their Liberty to hear those they were 〈◊〉 ●●tisfied with and could profit more by Pag. 168 169. You contradict not what I said Rector of Sutton p. 15 16. Onl● 〈…〉 little use of it as seem'd to serve your purpose there while yet 〈◊〉 ●●ands good against you Pag. 196. You do not fully set down my meaning though it was plain enough Rector of S●tton p. 42. Neither do you take any notice of what you had said your self Irenic p. 65. though you there meet with it again Wherefore I wonder how you could overlook it If that Council at Gangrae had enjoyned the religious use of a peculiar habit appropriate to the Service of God and others had refused to submit to it I question then whether the Council would not have been the Schismaticks As whether any without being guilty of making a Schism can exclude and silence Ministers for wearing Beards or for not obeying such a trifling command as that was Mr. B Church-History p. 360 361. § 55. But upon that matter of the Council's condemning the followers of Eust. Sebastenus I still query whether you ought not to make a difference betwixt such as separated meerly upon pretence of Purity while they were indeed defiled with gross Errors both in Opinion and Practice as I there shewed and such as are necessitated to withdraw and cannot otherwise keep their Consciences pure This you should consider As Chillingworth says p. 282. § 71. A Murderer can cry Not Guilty as well as an innocent Person but not so truly nor so justly And P. Martyr Loc. Com. cl 4. l. 6. p. 894. Si quaedam partes ab eo toto se dividant quod ●itiari infici nolint discessio erit laudabilis The seventh and last place where you take notice of me is p. 307. And there I am brought in as concluding with and for you about your National Church But if we are agreed herein why then do you call that which I say of it Rector of Sutton p. 20 21. A weak Assault as you do implicitly p. 303. § 23. Assaulting tho never so weakly is not agreeing but quite different or rather contrary But there I say 1. That we will thank you if you can prove the National Church of England as it is now established to subsist by a Divine Law and positive Institution of Christ. 2. I put it to the question whether it be not Schismatical for any National Church to make such Terms of Agreement and Communoon as are ●ot agreeable to that same Rule by which all Christians ought to walk And that your Terms are such is easy to prove from your own Words there recited And whether they that so far separate from such a dividing National Church tho they comply not with its established Rule may not yet be found walking by the same Rule in the true sence of your Text Yet these things you thought fit to pass by and would notwithstanding persuade your Readers that had rather take your Word than be at any pains to compare things together that we are agreed and this point is thought fit to be given up And yet I do not deny but Christians of whatsoever Society whether a less or greater should be for uniting so far as they can to preserve and strengthen the Society and to promote true Religion and Christianity So I agree with you in what you say p. 292. The best way of the Churches Preservation is by an Union of the Members of it provided the Union be such as doth not overthrow the ends of it And doubtless this is a good and necessary Proviso for that which overthrows the ends of Vnion is a wicked Conspiracy against Christ and his Church rather than true Christian Vnity or Concord But then it should be considered if a National Church sets down such Terms of Union as have no tendency to promote the common cause of Religion and true Interest of Christianity such terms as are sure to cause Dissention as evidently tend to divide break and shatter the Society whether the Churches Preservation be therein truly consulted or any way likely to be thereby secured And whether as Mr. Corbet says Kingdom of God c. p. 155. The Constitution of the Church should not be set as much as may be for the incomp●ssing of all true Christians which indeed makes for its most fixed and ample state And whether the taking of a narrower compass be not a fundamental Error in its Policy and will not always hinder its stability and increase Thus I think I have spoken to all the Passages in your Book wherein I am properly concerned Yet am I not at an end of my Task In your Preface you direct me to three Letters you have subjoined to your Treatise Preface p. 76. You say There is one thing more which this Author takes notice of Rector of Sutton p. 6. If we are condemned by oothers abroad we may thank our Friends at home who have misrepresented us to the World while we have not been allowed to plead for our selves Therefore to give satisfaction as to the Judgment of some of the most eminent and learned Protestant Divines abroad now living I have subjoyned to the following Treatise some late Letters of theirs c. Now whether you have put these Letters in print with the consent of those that wrote them or by some Law or Priviledg peculiar to your self I know not nor shall I trouble my self to enquire And whether they were procured on purpose to grace and set off this Book of yours as by their Date they appear to have come lately as you say the first written in September 80. The second in October The third in November this however is not very material But it is likely some may think your Five Answerers confronted and confounded with the Authority of these three Letters of some of the most eminent and learned Protestant Divines abroad now living Yet to tell you my Thoughts I could not but think thus with my self That if we had no more cause to fear a French-Army confuting us by Club-Law than that any eminent French Protestant Divines would condemn us if they thorowly examined and knew our Cause we were so far safe enough Now as to these Letters
too p. 287. By that Rule whosoever regulates his Life and Doctrine or Belief I am confident that though he may mistake Error for Truth in the way he shall never mistake Hell for Heaven in the End And yet further should you not consider whether it be not more agreeable to the Revealed Will and Mind of Christ that you should suffer some Ta●es to grow rather than pluck up good Corn with them Reverend Sir It having so happened that poor I have been called out among others an hundred times fitter to shew my Opinion touching the Matter you have started I cannot but think as I here declare so far as my Judgment serves you might have employed your Time your Learning and Parts to much better purpose than you have done in this late Piece of Work Surely my Life would be but sad to me if I could not find more pleasing Work than this that you have been an Occasion of engaging me in And yet I hope to have more Comfort in it at the great day of Accounts than I can conceive you to have of yours in that Day If you lay the Vnity ●f Christians upon Conformity too or Vniformity in doubtful and suspected if not unlawful Practices a general Vnion can never be had or hoped for If you would make the way to Heaven narower than Christ has left it many will be forced to leave you here But now if you would henceforth propose and promote an Vnion amongst Christians u●on Catholick Ierms we are for you and would heartily joyn with you And as that most learned and pious Bishop Vsher Serm. of Vnivers of the Church and Vnity of Faith p. 43 44. If at this d●y we should take a Survey of the several Professions of Christianity that have any large Spread in any part of the World and should put by the Points wher in they did differ one from another and gather into one Body the rest of the Articles wherein they all did generally agree we should find that in th●se Propositions which without all Controversy are universally received in the whole Christian World so much truth is contained as being joyned with holy Obedience may be sufficient to bring a Man unto everlasting Salvation Neither have ●e cause to doubt but that as many as do walk according to this Rule Pe●●e shal● be upon them and Mercy and upon the Israel of God Now there●or● do as he says ibid. p. 18. We for our parts dare not abridg this Gra●t and limit this great Lordship as we conceive it may best fit our own turns but ●●ave it to his own Latitude and seek for the Catholick Church neither in this Part nor in that P●ece but among all that in every place call upon the N●m● of Jesus Christ our Lord both theirs and ours And if a Zeal for such a general Comprehension and happy Vnion of Christians will to use the Words of Mr. de L' Ang●e p. 424. bri●g down a thousand Blessings of Heaven and Earth upon those that shall contribute the most unto it resolve now and hence forward to put forth your self this ●ay Put in for your share of Blessings I remember I concluded my former writing with a Collect borrowed from you Here I would say Amen to that Prayer with which Dr. Potter shuts up his Answer to Charity mistaken That it would please the Father of Mercies to take away out of his Church all Dissention and Discord all Heresies and Schisms all Abuses and false Doctrines all Idolatry Superstition and Tyranny and to unite all Christians in one holy Bond of Truth and Peace Faith and Charity that so with one Mind and one Mouth we may all joyn in his Service I add no more but that the Father of Lights would so direct your Studies and Course that you may do nothing against the Truth but for the Truth which is the Prayer of Reverend Sir Your humble and faithful Servant Iohn Barrett I more wish than hope that of these sad Controversies here will be The END Proper Materials drawn from the true and only way of Concord c. QUERY 1. WHether the Apostle Paul hath not clearly and fully decided the case against censuring or despising one another for things Indifferent Rom. 14 15. And if Men wi●● not understand nor stand to that Decision whether it should be any wonder if they will not understand or be satisfied with our most cogent Arguments Second Plea for Peace p. 169. § 75. Whether they that say the Apostle doth not forbid such Impositions there can see Day for Light 1. Doth he not forbid censuring despising and not receiving one another and command Dissenters to receive one another And then must he not forbid such Imposition as is inconsistent herewith 2. Doth he not direct this Command to all the Church of Rome even to the authorized Pastors and Rulers of the Church as well as to the People 3. Was he not a Pastor and Ruler of that Church as fully authorized as any that should succeed 4. Is not this Scripture as others written for a standing Rule and so obligatory to Rulers still ib. p. 170. § 77. Did not the Apostle speak here by Divine Authority Are not his Words recorded here part of Christ's Law indited by the Spirit And may we think that any that come after him or to whom he wrote should have power to contradict or obliterate the same Way of Concord p. 152. 5. Do not his Reasons touch the case of all Churches in all Ages and not only some particular Persons and Case As he argueth from the difference betwixt well-meaning Christians as weak and strong as doubting and as assured as mistaken and as in the right c. If such weak mistaken Christians in such matters ever have been and ever will be in the Church upon Earth doth not the reason from their case and necessity still hold 6. How many great and pressing moral Reasons that all Christians are bound by are heaped up here Does he not argue 1. From Christian love to Brethren 2. From human Compassion to the Weak 3. From God's own Example who receiveth such whom therefore we must not reject 4. From God's Prerogative to judg and our having no such judging power in such cases 5. From God's Propriety in his own Servants 6. From God's Love and Mercy that will uphold such 7. Because what Men do as to please God must not be condemned without necessity but an holy Intention cherished so it be not in forbidden things 8. Because Men must not go against Conscience in indifferent things 9. From Christ's dreadful Judgment which is near and which we our selves must undergo 10. From the Sin of laying Stumbling-blocks and occasions of Offence 11. From the danger of crossing the end of Christ's Death destroying Souls for whom he died 12. Because it will make our Good to be ill spoken of 13. Because the Kingdom of God or Constitution of Christianity and the Church lieth in
teach not Heresy nor preach down Holiness c. and deny us not their Communion unless we will sin or a Conformists that will hold Communion with none but his own Party but separates from all other Churches in the Land Ib. p. 41. Is he a greater Separatist that confesseth them to be a true Church and their Communion lawful but preferreth another as fitter for him or he that denieth Communion with true worshipping Assemblies as unlawful to be communicated with when it is not so If the former then will it not follow that condemning them as no Church is a Diminution or no Aggravation of Separation and the local presence of an Infidel or Scorner would be a less separate state than the absence of their Friends If the latter which is certain then will it not follow that if we can prove the Assemblies lawful which they condemn they are the true Separatists that condemn them and deny Communion with them declaring it unlawful Answ. to Dr. Stil Serm. p. 47 or 49. Q. 80. And whether is not the Separation of whole Churches much worse than of single Persons from one Church when it is upon unwarrantable Cause or Reasons Ib. p. 31. Now how many of the Dissenters frequently communicate with them while they generally refuse shun and condemn our Assemblies Are there no true Churches to be found in the World that have no Bishops of a superior order over Pastors And were there not true Churches in England in that long Interval of Episcopal Government And are not they as justly to be charged with Schism and Separation from those true Churches which were before the re-establishment of Episcopacy as they that are commonly charged by those Encroachers and Invaders of other Mens Rights Vid. Sacril Desert p. 60. Q. 81. Seeing the Universal Church is certainly the highest Species whether have any Authority on pretence of narrower Communion in lower Churches to change Christ's terms of Catholick Communion or to deprive Christians of the right of being loved and received by each other or to disoblige them from the duty of loving and receiving each other Whether can humane Power made by their own Contracts change Christ's Laws or the Priviledges or Forms of Christ's own Churches Way of Concord p. 111. § 14. Q. 82. Whether the greatest and commonest Schism be not by dividing Laws and Canons which causlessly silence Ministers scatter Flocks and decree the unjust Excommunication of Christians and deny Communion to those that yield not to sinful or unnecessary ill-made Terms of Communion ibid. third Part p. 13. § 43. And if any proud passionate or erroneous Person do as Diothrephes cast out the Brethren undeservedly by unjust Suspensions Silencings or Excommunications whether this be not tyrannical Schism First Plea c p. 41. And as we say of the Papists that they unjustly call those Men Schismaticks whom they first cast out themselves by unjust Excommunication may we not say so of any others especially if either for that which is a Duty or for some small mistake which is not in the Persons power to rectify no greater than most good Christians are guilty of their Church-Law says he shall be excommunicate ipso facto ibid. p. 104. See also Answ. to Dr. Stil Serm. p. 47. or 49. § 8. Q. 83. Whether making sinful Terms of Communion imposing things forbidden by God on those that will have Communion with them and expelling those that will not so sin whether this be not heinous Schism First Plea c. p. 41 42. Q. 84. Whether all those would not be deeply guilty of such Schism who by talk writing or preaching justify and cry it up and draw others into the Guilt and reproach the Innocent as Schismaticks for not offending God Ib. Q. 85. If any will confine the Power or Exercise of the Church-Keys into so few Hands as shall make the Exercise of Christ's Discipline impossible or shall make Churches so great or Pastors so few as that the most of the People must needs be without Pastoral Oversight Teaching and publick Worship and then will forbid those People to commit the care of their Souls to any other that would be Pastors indeed and so would compel them to live without Christ's Ordinances true Church-Communion and Pastoral Help whether this would not be Schismatical and much worse Ib. p. 44. Q. 86. When able faithful Pastors are lawfully s●t over the Assemblies by just Election and Ordination if any will causlessly and without Right silence them and command the People to desert them and to take to others for their Pastors in their stead o● whom they have no such knowledg as may encourage them to such a change Whether this can be defended from the charge of Schism As Cyprian in the case of Novatian says that he could be no Bishop because another was rightful Bishop before ● Ib. p. 49 50. Q. 87. Whether the way to heal us be not 1. To approve the best 2. To tolerate the tolerable 3. To have Sacraments free and not forced 4. To restrain the Intolerable 5. This to be the Test of Toleration Whether such tolerated Worship do more good or hurt in true impartial Judgment 6. Magistrates keeping all in Peace Way of Concord third Part p. 144. Q. 88. Whether it be not a weakning of the King's Interest to divide his Subjects and build up unnecessary Walls of Partition between them and to keep them in such Divisions seeing a Kingdom divided against it self cannot stand And whether it be not unsafe and uncomfortable to a Prince to rule a divided mutinous People but sweet and safe to rule them that are united in mutual Love Whether they that would lay the Peoples Concord upon uncapable Terms would not bring the King's Interest in his Peoples Love and willing Obedience and ready Defence of him into too narrow a Bottom making him the King of some causlessly divided and espoused Party which must be set up to the Oppression of all the rest who are as wise and just and loyal as they Second Plea c. p. 76. § 24. Si in necessariis sit Vnitas In Non-necessariis Libertas In u●risque Charitas Optimo certe loco essent res nostrae To make a rounder number I may add from Mr. M. Godwyn his Negro's and Indians Advocate pleading for the Instructing of them and so admitting them into the Church a Book lately Printed and Dedicated to the Arch Bisho● of Canterbury Q. 89. Whether Is the wilful neglecting and opposing of it as he says in the Title-Page no less than a manifest Apostacy from the Christian Faith Can no Christian ever justify his omitting any possible lawful Means for the Advancement of his Religion as he says p. 91. Are all professed Christians absolutely boun● in their Places to endeavour the same by their Vow in Baptism and their very Profession Q. 90. Then are they not bound in their Places to endeavour the Advancement of Religion as well at home as abroad And do they not owe as much Service herein for Christ's sake towards their own Country-men as towards Strangers Should not English-men be as well concerned for English-men as for Indians And when the State of Religion is so visibly declining in England Atheism Ignorance Error Profaneness Popery and Superstition encreasing and getting up so fast amongst us is he for any great Advancement of Religion that would send away all Non-conformists if there be thousands of them to his Negro's and Indians for this wise Reason that There is no want of their Labours at home FINIS ADVERTISEMENT THe Readers is desired to take notice that these Papers were sent to London by the Author on the latter end of February or beginning of March last but by reason of the multitude of Pamphlets they could not get through the Press sooner The Ingenuous Reader is ●●so desired to pass by the Errata the Author being remote from the Press these few he hath observed in some of the Sheets he hath seen viz. ERRATA PAge 5. l. 6 r. above P. 20 l. 24. r. do you not P. 21. l. 12. r. Wages P. 22. l. 22. r. Contrarywise P. 23. l. 24. r. and. P. 24. l. 18. dele down P. 28. l. 1. r. Triarios P. 57. l. 6. r. single-soal'd P. 62. l. 29. r. excite greater P. 63. l. 24. r. Church P. 70. l. 30. r. Inobedientia P. 72. l. 19 20. r. betray P. 81. l. 35. r. for P. 83. l. 36 r. did he at all