Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	act_n	bishop_n	presbyter_n	3,131	5	10.0517	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A81501	The Discipline and order of particular churches, no novelty. Proved from Scripture, reason, autiquity, and the most eminent modern divines. Or, A discourse of the church, in a scripture notion, with her extent, power and practice, tending to moderate the minds of men, toward dissenters in matters ecclesiastical, and to acquit such from the charge of innovation, faction, separation, schism, and breach of union and peace in the church, who cannot conform in many things to the rules, canons, and practices of others. / By a Lover of truth, peace, unity, and order.	Lover of truth, peace, unity, and order.	1675 (1675)	Wing D1558A; ESTC R174652	61,995	98

Matter as to the particular Churches to which every Member must joyn himself to wit to the Parish wherein each Member resides for the time being and also as to the manner of joyning and being admitted that is by their being Parishioners To say nothing of the Irrationalness of this way 〈◊〉 the Apprehension of such who consider what it 〈◊〉 that makes a Society to be so and any one to ●ecome a Member thereof or of such who know ●hat it is to have Communion in Christian Societies ●s such We Answer First That there were no such Laws ●ade by the first Christian Emperors against Chri●tian Liberty in this case Secondly If any were made since it is reasona●le to enquire how such who made those Laws ●ad this Authority derived upon them from God in ●uch cases If it cannot be shewed as we think it ●annot be then the Freedom continues still to Chri●tians It is wonderful that Men yea Christians should ●hink it most just to preserve Mens Liberty of Liv●ng where they please and to remove from one place to another to choose what Society they please in Civil things And yet restrain Mens Liber●y in this case as if Soul-health Liberty Com●ort and Profit is not to be preserved above that of the Body Especially since the Law of Nature ●nd the Law of God hath left it free Thirdly That Law which makes all Persons in●efinitely Living or that shall Live in such a Pre●inct to be a Church and Members one of another ●n a particular Society and puts them under a ne●essity of joyning together as one Body in the Matters of God can very hardly be defended from oppugning the Laws of Christ which forbids Fel●owship in such things with such and such Persons many of which may be found in every Parish amongst us But to prove by some particulars now That the Power in Church-Affairs was for some Ages Exercised in and by these particular Churches and no● else-where without any Interruption or Controll considerable And without any additional or Superiour Authority Bish Nicholson Vindication of the Church of England p. 26. agrees this of Deacons after the Apostles days An● first as to the choosing of their Ministers Acts 6 2 3.5 6. The whole Church there the Multitude by the Apostles own Direction did choos● their Deacons and were Judges of their Qualifications The Apostles told them what the Deacon● should be the Multitude were Judges whether they were such For the same seven without Examination or Exception which they chose were by the Apostles set apart for the work The Apostles being then the only Officers of that Church which was then but one Society or Congregation Lorinus Salmeron Gasper Sanctus upon Act. 14.23 Deer Part 1. dist 62. See Assembly of Divines upon Act. 24.23 So for the Elders or Bishops Acts 14.22 23. Paul and Barnabas ordained or appointed them Elders in every Church but for the manner it was by suffrage i. e. by the Peoples choice or Vote thus the very Text is rendred in some Translations and so by Magdeburg Divines Translated They created Presbiters in every Church by suffrage Cent. 1. Lib. 2. Cap. 4. Col. 401 402. and this could not be but in particular Congregations who could meet together to this end The Apostles carried no Men with them but passing from Church to Church they appointed such of every Church whom they found there and who were more capable of Judging than the Church of which they were Members and who had experience of and acquaintance with them That this was so is yet more evident by this That afterwards for many hundred years together this way only was continued in the Churches for the Congregations or particular Churches to choose their own Bishops and other Ministers and they ●ccounted it as their Right without any controll as ●or instance in Euseb Eccl. Hist Lib. 3. Cap. ● 1. p. 44. It is said that after the death of James ●he Apostles and Disciples of our Lord gathered ●hemselves together to consult who should succeed ●nd they all with one voyce judged Simon worthy So Euseb Lib. 6. Cap. 28. p. 110. when all the Brethren of the Church of Rome had gathered themselves together for the Electing of a Bishop their Bishop being dead and many had thought upon Notable and Famous Men Fabianus being present the whole Multitude with one accord and the same Spirit of God agreed upon him and made him Bishop The People of a Church in Constantinople being by their Bishop before his Death desired to choose one of two Men he named because of their Vertues did after his Death meet and choose one of them Soc. Eccl. Hist Lib. 2. Cap. 4. p. 253. So did the People of a Church in Millan being met together with one voyce chose Ambrose to be their Bishop which the Emperour concludes there to be the work and will of God Socrat. Lib. 4. Cap. 25. p. 335. There are such Multitudes of Presidents and Instances of this Practice that it would be endless to mention them Only see some Instances in the same Histories of Socrates Lib. 2. Cap. 9. p. 256. Lib. 4. Cap. 13. p 324. Lib. 6. Cap. 2. p. 359. Lib. 7. cap. 7. p. 377 378. Lib. 7. cap. 12. p. 380. cap. 26. p. 390. Evagr. Eccl. Hist Lib. 4. cap. 6. p. 473. Lib. 2. cap. 11. p. 436. This continued unquestioned 500 Years at least And though attempts were sometimes made by Bishops and the Civil Powers they engaged t● Depose Ministers and thrust in others upon Churches yet still the Churches refused them and chos● others themselves when they wanted them a Soc. Lib. 2. cap. 6. p. 254 One Emiseus there refused at two several places by the People a Alexandria and Emisa So likewise Socrat. Lib 4. cap. 7. p. 318 319. when one Eunomius wa● sent to Cizicum by a Bishop of Constantinople an● commanded to be placed there by the Emperour yet was he refused and Eunomius went and Live with him that made him Bishop So again Socra● Lib. 7. cap. 12. p. 380. One Salvatus rejecte● by a Church in Constantinople So again at Cizicum where a Bishop at Constantinople appoint Proclus to be their Bishop The Church at Cizicum understanding what was done prevented it an● chose Dalmatius a Religious Man to Govern and Proclus being not admitted there spent hi● time at Constantinople Socrat. Lib. 7. cap. 28 p. 391. and many more Instances of this Nature might be given Yet we find no complaint made thereof as any irregular Act of the People which doubtless would have been had it not been their known right Cyprian agrees to this that if any were intruded upon the People he was taken for a false Bishop no● a true Pastor for which he is quoted by the Magdeburg Divines Cent. 3. cap. 7. col 175 176 Moreover the Emperour Constantine acknowledgeth this right to be Lodged in these particula● Churches See his Epistle to the Church in Antioch where

was nothing else but their Election c. And that all the Rites and Ceremonies now used are but Novelties And Martin Bucer for these conclusions in his afore-said Book and in his Scripta Anglicana of the Office of Pastor p. 154. 159. 191. and on Mat. 16. That imposition of hands on those chosen Ministers belong to the Presbiters but that this they have not Originally but only Instrumentally as Servants to the whole Congregation And that this ought to be done publickly in the Church where they are Elected before all the Congregation and that the imposition of hands is no essential part of Ordination Luther held this Concil Trident l. 7. p. 590. but that it may be omitted And that those who are Elected and Lawfully called to the Ministry by the Suffrage of the whole Church and People are Ministers Lawfully called and Ordained without this Ceremony And Mr. Prin there further proves this by David Blond Apol. Sect. 3. de Ordinatione plebis in Electionibus jure from p. 309. to 448. He also affirms p. 81. That Morney Amesius Morney Lord of Plessis in his Book de Eccesia cap. 11. and sundry others there quoted say That the People alone in case of Necessity where are no Bishops or Ministers or where Bishops refuse to ordain as they ought may Elect and Ordain Ministers The right of Ordination and Election being Originally in the whole Church and people c. and that imposition of hands is no Essential but Ceremonial part of Ordination as Angelus de Clavaso Peter Martyr Mr. Baxters body of Divinity of Ordination p. 79. and others both Papists and Protestants affirm Mr. Stillingfleet in his Irenicum p. 392. where he transcribes Bishop Cranmers answer to the Questions before mentioned hath set down these words amongst others as the Bishops own words The Bishop having affirmed that the people before Christian Princes did commonly Elect their Bishops and Priests saith further That in the New-Testament he that is appointed to be Priest or Bishop needed no Consecration for Election or appointment thereto saith he is sufficient Now having so great a cloud of witnesses beyond all exception and a concurrent sentence in this matter by Persons at so great a distance each from other in their Judgment in other things and living in several ages of the World It seemeth strange that there should be such wrestling against the common right of the Church of God and such a stir to make that Scripture Acts 14.23 to speak something else than that which so many Learned eminent Godly Men agree it doth and the practice of the Church so long and universally and fully affirm it to do Much more strange it is that men should be blamed for being of this Judgment and practising accordingly having so much ground to believe it to be the truth If any should pretend that there are other Officers in the Church of God besides Ordinary Bishops and Deacons Ho●ker in his Eccles Polity 4th Book p. 417 418 c. allows Presbyter and Deacons to be the Clergy and that no where in the New Test are they called Priests nor will he contend for that Name See more p. 123 of the same Book by Divine Right to continue Let such prove it if they can But it seems clear that after Prophets Apostles and Evangelists these extraordinary Officers of Christ were deceased who while they continued had extraordinary Furniture given them from Christ for their work These of Bishops or Elders and Deacons in the particular Churches were all one no superior and General Officers over many as Mr. Stillingfleet in his afore-said Irenicum p. 416. saith that the Episcopal Men will hardly find any evidence in Scripture or the Apostles practice for Churches consisting of many fixed Congregations for the Worship of God under the charge of one person First it is manifest that Bishops and Elders in those days were the same Officers and not one above the other Acts 20. where the Apostles ●nt for the Elders of the Church of Ephesus and ●●ving Discoursed with them he gave them ●harge that they the same Persons should take ●ed to the Flock over which the Holy Ghost had ●ade them Bishops or Overseers as our Tran●tion hath it So when Peter writes 1 Epist 5 ● 2 c. He there calls the Ruling Officers in ●eneral Elders whether Ruling only or Ruling ●●d Teaching Elders See 1 Tim. 5.17 Bishop Cranmer in the place before quoted by ●r Stillingfleet in his Irenicum p. 392. saith ●hat the Bishop and Priest were at one time and ●ot two things but both one Office in the begin●ng of Christs Religion Dr. Fulk against the Rhem. upon Titus 1.5 ●nd Jerome in his Comment upon Titus affirms ●is And the Magdeburg Divines quote Jerome Am●rose and Chrysostome for the proof of this and ●lso for shewing how in after Ages one Elder was ●xalted above the rest Doctor Whittaker in his Answer to Campian in his ten Reasons 10. Vol. and then called the Bishop ●y way of Eminence and that this was by Humane ●uthority Cent. 2. Cap. 7. col 126. Cent. 4. ●ap 6. col 491. Cent. 5. cap. 7. col 737. Nay ●regory Nazianzen wisheth this Episcopal decree ●bolished and saith it is Tyrannical Orat. 28. So ●ad it proved in his days as it seems Bishop Jewel in his Reply to Mr. Harding p. ●22 229. 250 251 252. alledgeth this out of Je●ome Cyprian c. That Bishops are greater than ●riests more of Custom than of Gods Ordinance That the Power of all Priests by the Authority of Gods Word is one and equal and that it was ●nly Policy that set one over many And in p. 257. ●oncludes against Papists in these words If Christ saith the Bishop appointed not one Priest ov● another how then is it likely he should appoint o● over all And so Mr. Stillingfleet in his afo●said Book See Smect p. 24. 26. Raynolds conference with Hart cap. 8. p. 461 462. affirms this Policy to be the ground of raising one E●de● ab●ve others and so step by step to the Pope See also p 540 541 p. 276 277. 310 311. proves this 〈◊〉 large That Bishops and Presbiters were the sa●● in Primitive times and that Arius was not c●demned for that Opinion but for his separat●● from such who set up Bishops above other Pries● and he quotes Aug. Epist 29. for this That 〈◊〉 difference between Episcopacy and Presbitery t● the one is greater than the other arise only by 〈◊〉 Custom of the Church attributing a Name of gre●er Honour to them Secondly That Bishops Elders and Deac● were all the Officers Christ intended to have c●tinued in the Church after the Apostles days see● clear in this That when the Apostle wrote to 〈◊〉 Church of the Philippians he mentioned these ●ly To the Bishops and Deacons Phil. 1.1 A●● when the Holy Ghost mentions the Qualificati● of Church-Officers he names none but these N● doth he

Church and if not then it may be believed that they will say be it far from us to determine in such cases for others or to desire our determinations should be imposed upon others And then we are confident the Magistrate will be farther from Challenging any right to determine of those things nor will he undertake to impose by Law upon the Churches but it hath been common amongst Church men to deal subtilly in these things first themselves determine and set down Rules in these cases and tender them to the Magistrate to confirm by Laws as those things which are necessary to the ends aforesaid And then when they are established by Law and they themselves cannot justifie many or any of them to be necessary or any way answering the ends proposed They presently lay the charge upon the Magistrates and say it s commanded and we must obey being by virtue of his Law bound in Conscience so to do Certainly let us not deceive our selves God is not mocked Christ hath pronounced a wo against them by whom offences come The excuse of the Magistrates commanding it will not serve their turn when our Lord comes to judge in Righteousness Yet there are some who are highly offended against such who walk after the Rules herein before set down as near as they can and fear to erre from it as that way of worship and managing of Church affairs which they judge according to Gods word to be Christ's mind they should walk by and as that in which the Churches in the Primitive and best ages walked and which also hath been by many learned and Godly men in all ages since held to be the true way And these offended ones generally conclude against such that they are Separatists from the Church Schismaticks Factious c. for so doing the old Callumnies cast upon the Apostles and other Saints in former ages and by Papists upon Protestants in latter ages and their way called Heresie and evil spoken of as Act. 24 c. 25. c. 28. Though in Truth these offended ones understand not in this case what they say or whereof they affirm either it is pure ignorance in such not understanding what a Church is from which properly a Separation may be said to be made or in which a man may be said to be guilty of making a Schisme or what Act it is that may properly be called a separation from or constitute a man a Schismatick in such a Church or else ignorance that is wilful arising from interest that blinds them These do just as the Presbyterian Ministers once said in Smect p. 58. 59. take it in their own words These do as the Papists dazle the Eyes and astonish the senses of poor People with the Glorious name of the Church c. This is the Gorgons-Head as Doctor White said which inchanted them they call say they for obedience to the Church c. no mention of God and Scripture If we say these Divines there question what is meant by the Church of England they storm as he that holdeth by an unjust Tytle will not suffer the Tytle to be questioned they say these men sometimes make the Convocation the Church excluding both Presbiters and people as not worthy to be reckoned of the Church sometimes the bounds of the Kingdome is the Church If so say they why not England Scotland and Ireland one Church being under one Monarch Thus they contend and know not upon what foundation but having heard of the name of the Church and found Ordinances and Formes of worship amongst them and Discipline used according to humane Laws and Constitutions here they go and never so much as enquire or put it to the question whether they are agreeable to Scripture or Rules prescribed by God And then they take it for granted presently that such who do not in these matters as they do are Separatists and Schismaticks and deserve punishment as rashly as the two Disciples did in another case Luke 9. who would have fire from heaven upon the Samaritanes but they knew not what Spirit they were of as Christ told them they never considered upon what ground they desired such a thing whether it were Christ mind or not that it should be so And as Augustine quoted by Mr. Stillingfleet in his aforesaid Book p. 61.62 complained of men in his dayes about Ceremonies who contended highly yet had no ground for it but this as his words are because it had been the custom of their Country or because they have found them in another Church c. they think that nothing is right and Lawful but what they do themselves And as Bishop Jewel in his Reply before cited said of many Hereticks That they had nothing to plead but that they were born lived in and received of their Fathers what they did practise upon some such poor grounds as these doth the ignorance of men work thus to abuse their brethren And that it may so appear Let such persons be perswaded to weigh the premises well in the fear of God and take these conclusions with him First that such who continue in the Faith of our Lord Jesus Christ and thus hold Union with the Head of the Church according to John 15.4 5. continue in and do not separate from the Catholick Church the body of our Lord Jesus Christ the first Church in this discourse described for there is no other Union between the members of this Church as such but this their being by one Faith united to one Head and from thence animated by one Spirit and such who so continue cannot be called Schismaticks in this Church To this Doctor Carleton agrees in his aforesaid Book p. 6 7 8 9 10. c. 2dly That such who continue to make a profession of the Faith of our Lord Jesus and do not openly deny him in their works do still abide in the visible body of Jesus Christ The Church 2dly above described and cannot be said to separate from this Church or be guilty of Schisme here for this profession is the only thing wherein the unity of the whole visible Church lyeth And thus Mr. Stillingfleet in his Book called a Rational Account c. p. 331. saith That there is no separation from the whole Church but in such things wherein the unity of the whole lyeth For separation saith he is a violation of some union 3dly That such who continue to walk in and with any visible Company Congregation or particular Church on earth holding the true faith in the orderly participation of Ordinances in man-as the Scripture directs and in subjection to Christs Lawes given to be executed therein as such a Church the Church 3dly above described he cannot be said to separate from or be guilty of schisme in this Church Now then if these offended ones will justifie their charge against such who do not in Church affaires as they do It is necessary they prove such whom they thus accuse guilty either of infidelity

THE DISCIPLINE AND ORDER Of Particular CHURCHES NO NOVELTY Proved from Scripture Reason Antiquity and the most Eminent Modern DIVINES OR A Discourse of the Church in a Scripture Notion with her Extent Power and Practice tending to Moderate the Minds of Men toward Dissenters in Matters Ecclesiastical and to acquit such from the Charge of Innovation Faction Separation Schism and Breach of Union and Peace in the Church who cannot conform in many things to the Rules Canons and Practices of others By a Lover of Truth Peace Unity and Order London Printed Anno Dom. M.DC.LXXV THE DISCIPLINE AND ORDER OF Particular CHURCHES no Novelty c. THE Church of God since the days of the Gospel was and is according to Scripture-expressions either first the whole Body of Christ consisting of all the Elect See the disputation against Campion at the Tower Sep. 18. 1581. in the Morn by Tulk. and Goad as Eph. 5.23 Christ the head of the Church the Saviour of the Body ver 27. That he might present to himself a Glorious Church ver 25. Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it So Heb. 12.22 23. To the General Assembly and Church of the First born written in Heaven c. Col. 1.18 He is the Head of the Body the Church c. Dr. Carleton sometime Bishop of Chichester in his little Piece Called A Direction to know the true Church p. 3. saith That the Saints before the Law under the Law and under Grace make up the Body of Christ or Members of the Church and that this is the Catholick Church Or Secondly the Universal Visible Church or whole Visible Body of Believers upon the whole Earth at the same time as Acts 2.42 The Lord added to the Church daily Mr. Baxter Cure of Church-Divisions p. 82. Ho●ke● Eccl. Polity third Book p. 88. c. So Eph. 3.21 Vnto him be Glory in the Church by Christ Jesus throughout all Ages Or Thirdly a particular Congregation Society or Company of Professors of the Faith of Jesus Christ usually meeting together in one place as one Body for the participation of the same Ordinances and Exercising the same Duty as a Church in Edifying one another Reynolds in his Conference with Hart Cap. 6. p. 218. saith That a Bishop in our sence is him to whom the Over-fight and charge of a particular Church is committed such as Ephesus Philippi and the seven Churches Prayer c. Such as was the Church in Jerusalem Acts 11.22 Tydings came to the Ears of the Church which was in Jerusalem and they sent forth Barnabas and others c. That this was but one Congregation is evident from Act. 15. where Paul and Barnabas and others coming from Antioch to this Church they were received by the Church first and then the Apostles and Elders The Apostles Elders and Brethren the whole Multitude were present at the Discourse of the Matter and the Epistle wrote in the name of the whole Apostles Elders and Brethren met together with one accord ver 25. Such was the Church of Antioch which was gathered together Acts 14.27 when Paul and Barnabas came and with whom they had Assembled before a whole year Acts 11.26 And were afterwards gathered together to receive and hear the Epistle Acts 15.30 Such were the Churches which the Apostles visited and ordained Elders in Acts 14.23 for they did it by suffrage Likewise the Church in Corinth 1 Cor. 1 2. Vnto the Church of God in Corinth These met in one place 1 Cor. 5. 1 Cor. 11.18.20.23 Cap. 14.23 So the Church at Cenchrea near Corinth See Smect p. 40 41. 47 58 59. Bishop Jewels Reply to Harding p. 230. And Mr. Stillingfleet quotes Pareus in Rom. 16. for this that the Church of Corinth did meet sometimes at Cenchrea because of the violence of their Enemies in Corinth Therefore also when the Apostles spake any where of the Assemblies or Societies of Believers in any one Country they call them not a Church in the singular Number or the Church of such a Country or Isle but Churches as of many in the same Country as in Judea Macedonia Galatia Asia 1 Thes 2.14 2 Cor. 8.1.18.23 24. Gal. 1.2.22 The Holy Ghost mentions seven Churches by name in Asia Rev. 1.4 Ch. 2. Ch. 3. And as to this the same Bishop Carleton in the same Book p. 2. saith That particular Churches are visible Assemblies c. and Governed by divers visible heads and proves it by Gregory Lib. 4. Epist 3. A fourth Church in Scripture Phrase cannot be found since the time that all in every Nation which fear God are accepted as the Apostle said Acts 10.34 35. Such as National Provincial Synodical c. We read not in Scripture nor in any Church History for many years after Christ of any Church distinct from these Descriptions before given Now it is to be presumed that there are none who will affirm that the first of these three Churches could possibly meet together or do any Act as a Church either in choosing Officers determining Controversies Ordering things indifferent to Edification giving Interpretations of Scriptures partaking of Ordinances and casting out of Offenders c. Or that ever any such Power was derived down from Christ upon them as a Church so to do or that he ever intended this Church when he directs any thing to be done by the Church as such because of the utter impossibility of their performance thereof as a Church part of which being already fallen asleep and part not yet born Also it may be concluded as to the second Church above described that it is utterly impossible they should at any time meet together as a Church in one Body to agree upon consent unto Act or Order any thing according to the power given to the Churches as above joyntly as such a Church or partake of Ordinances joyntly as such Nay it 's improbable if not impossible that in their Representative this Church should meet and put themselves into a capacity to Act as a Church in any of the things to be done by a Church as such Nay was there ever any such meeting of this Church None as can be found in Story Or if this were possible where have we Authority of Scripture or Primitive Practice to justifie such a Company of Representatives to call themselves a Church in this sence and to take to themselves the Power of the whole Church given to her by Jesus Christ and to call their Acts the Acts of the Church And it would be strange for any to affirm that Christ hath put the Power as to the Execution of it into the hands of a Body that can never possibly be able to Execute the Power derived upon If any number of Men would colourably make themselves the Churches Representative It is necessary they should be chosen by the whole and some one at least for every particular Church Body Society or Congregation throughout the World as the Messengers

he tells this Church in general that they did affect Eusebius and would have Elected him to be their Bishop and then he perswades them to choose another seeing all did not agree therefore saith he not Lawful because saith he he that is Elected to a Bishoprick by the general Suffrage of Wise men assembled to deliberate thereof ought by Gods Law to enjoy it This is Recorded in Eusebius of the Life of Constantine Lib. 3. cap. 58. p. 52. Yea the great Nicene Councel agree it in these words expressed in Socrat. Lib. 1. cap. 6. p. 225. Speaking about some who might be in a Capacity of being made Ministers they say if they be found worthy and the People choose them they may Succeed the Deceased c. Yet further it 's manifest by the same History That where any one Congregation did divide into two Bodies each apart chose their own Bishops for themselves as in the Case of the Church of Antioch Socrat. Lib. 5. Cap. 9. p. 343. Lib. 4. cap. 1. p. 316. So in many other Cases when those of the true Faith had Bishops imposed upon them by the Arrians they divided themselves from the Arrians and chose to themselves Bishops and Assembled alone And it is observable That all these Bishops thus chosen and appointed of the People of these particular Churches were still acknowledged as Lawful Bishops by all and in all the Councels mentioned in those Histories Nor do we find the least Objection any where Recorded in those days against such who came thus to this Office as being unlawfully called To this Practice of the particular Churches and their Right thereto the Fathers give in their Testimonies also a touch of them therefore Tertul. in his Apol. to the Gent. Cap. 39. p. 137. English Translation saith That in these Assemblies there are Bishops that preside they are approved of by the Suffrage of them whom they ought to conduct So saith many others Possidon in vita Aug. Cap. 4. Leo. 1. Epist 95. quoted by the Magdeburg Divines Cent. 2. cap. 7. col 134 135. Cent. 1. Lib. 1. cap. 4. col 179. Cent. 3. cap. 6. col 146 147. The Roman Presbiters in their Epistle to Cyrian affirm that every Church hath a like Power of Choosing Calling and Ordaining Ministers and for just cause again to depose them Cyprian Lib. 1. Epist 4. Aug. Epist 100. Cyprian Epist 68. And Cyprian himself saith That the right of choosing such as are fit and refusing the unworthy belong to the People and whole Church and that by Divine Authority And that the Officers and People did consult about it with common consent And for these things he is quoted by the Magdeburg Writers Cent. 3. cap. 7. col 153.173 174 175. Cap. 6. col 135 136.146 and also that the People did consider the Life and Manners of the Persons to be chosen and judge and much more to this purpose in those places before John Ferus a Fryer in his Comment upon Act. 11. and Magdeburg Cent. 5. cap. 6. col 178 179 180. Now we shall add a few Testimonies and Judgments of latter Ages and of Men otherwise differing The Papists themselves at the Councel of Trent acknowledged that this was the usual Practice of the Church of God for 800 Years together after Christ for the particular Churches to choose their own Ministers and they then affirmed that there were remaining at that day the Records thereof at Rome and they then and there desired that those Records might be destroyed lest Luther who maintained this Right to the People should make use of them to bring in the Custom into the Church again And they there also acknowledge that this was taken from the Church by the Authority of a Council only who made a Decree against it See the Conference of Rayno'ds Hart c. 6. p. 223. Hart saith out of Genebrard that Clemens took not the Bishoprick by the Councel of the Lord least the Example of taking it by nomi●ation of Peter should pass to posterity and derogate from the free providence of the Church in choosing of her own Bishop Geneb●ard Chronolg l. 3. in Lin. See more l. 4. Seculo 11. Cited in the same Confer Cap. 7. l ●76 Concil Trident. in English Lib 7. p. 590 591.598 See more of the same Council Lib. 8. p. 725. And he that wrote this History complains against Rome about this in these words The Church of Rome grant not the People the Election of their Ministers which certainly saith he was an Apostolical Institution continued more than 800 Years Concil Trident. Lib. 2. p. 163. Bishop Jewel in his Reply to Mr. Harding p. 230. Saith out of Cyprian Lib. 1. Epist 4. That the Bishoprick was bestowed upon Sabinus by the consent and voices of the whole Brother-hood of that Church to which he was to be Bishop He there saith that Honorius the Emperour Writing to Boneface doth agree him to be Bishop whom some of the Clergy and whole Brother-hood shall choose And the Bishop himself then there affirms from hence that every particular Church is called the whole Church And after in p. 282. The Bishop affirms that Cyprian in the same place saith That the People being Obedient to Gods Law have Power especially to choose worthy or refuse unworthy Priests Mr. Stillingfleet in his Irenicum p. 306. quotes Tertul. Exhort Castil c. 7. for these words That all the difference between the Ministers and People comes from the Churches Authority and again p. 416. himself saith That Episcopal men will hardly find any evidence in Scripture or the Practice of the Apostles for Churches consisting of many fixed Congregations for Worship under the Charge of one man nor in the Primitive Church for the Ordination of Bishops without the preceding Election of the Clergy and at least consent and approbation of the People so much he allows there and something more in p. 339. where he useth these words speaking of Elders now the voyce of the People which was used in the Primitive times is grown out of use c. by which he confesseth it to be the Primitive Practice But Mr. Stillingfleet having as he saith been at the pains to transcribe some of Bishop Cranmer's words they will serve well here and we shall again transcribe so much of them as speaks to this particular See them in the same Irenicum p. 391 392. They are these That in the Apostles time when there were no Christian Princes by whose Authority Ministers of Gods Word might be appointed nor sins be corrected by the Sword there was no Remedy then for correction of Vice or appointment of Ministers but only the consent of Christian Multitude amongst themselves by an uniform consent to follow the Advice and perswasion of such Persons whom God had most endued with the Spirit of Wisdom and Councel c. Sometimes the Apostles and others unto whom God had given abundance of his Spirit sent or appointed Ministers of Gods

Word sometimes the People did choose such as they thought meet thereunto and when any were sent by the Apostles or other the People of their own voluntary will with thanks did accept of them not for the Supremacy Imperial Dominion that the Apostles had over them to command as their Princes or Masters but as good People ready to Obey the good Councellors and to accept any thing necessary for their Edification and Benefit And again that the People before Christian Princes were commonly did Elect their Bishops and Priests thus far of Bishop Cranmer which words of his as Mr. Stillingfleet there affirms he put his own Hand to and gave it in in answer to certain Questions put to him in King Edward the Sixths Time and now remain upon Record Bishop Nicholson of Gloucester in his Vindication of the Church of England p. 27. grants the Truth of this That the People did choose their Pastors in the Primitive Ages of the Church in express terms and saith it was taken away from the People by Christian Princes when the Fathers disliked the use So far of him in this place Polanus in his Sintagma Lib. 7. Cap. 15. fully proves and affirms this Right to be Lodged in these Churches Under this Head De Electionibus seu vocationibu● Ecclesiasticis First he saith That the Liberty or Power of Election calling or sending of Ecclesiastical Persons is a Right which the whole Church hath in choosing and calling to themselves approved and fit Ministers and in placing them into Sacred Order p. 542. After in his next p. 543. under this Question a quibus Electio seu vocatio Ministrorum Ecclesiae fieri debeat By whom the Election or calling of Ministers of the Church ought to be made He saith That unto the Legitimate or Lawful Election of the Ministers of the Church especially of the Pastors is requisite a free and ingenious consent and Suffrage of the whole Church whose business it is that is of the Elders and Flock The which consent must not be had by intreaty or sold for a price much less forced and extorted so that it is the part of the whole Church to choose Ministers for themselves And there he gives these following arguments to evince it First because even in the time of the Apostles the whole Church whose business it was did choose Ministers for themselves or to it self Neither did the Apostles themselves saith he Ordain any one for Ecclesiastical charges only by their own Authority but always by the Church consenting and approving Acts 6.2 c. and 14.23 Secondly because by this means the Churches own Liberty which Christ hath given to it is kept For a Pastor or Minister of the Word of God is not to be obtruded upon the Church of God against his will Can. Null invit distinc 61. Thirdly because it serves to this That even the Ministers may with a good Conscience Rule the Lords Flock by whom he is Elected and the Flock of the Lord may in like manner yield themselves the more easie to him to be Instructed and fed than to him who beside or against their will is thrust upon them and again he is not to be acknowledged for a Lawful Pastor of the Church who hath been intruded on the Church by the Authority and Command of the Prince Quod testatur Concil Parisiense primum Can. Octavo Tomo Secundo Concil And after he saith in the same p. That fit Persons are to be nominated and presented to the People before the Election and should be openly proposed in the Assemblies And again in p. 544. Under this Question Qualiter seu quomodo Ministri Ecclesiae Eligi vocari debeant How the Ministers of the Church ought to be chosen and called Acts 14.23 Those Persons are to be Nominated of whom the Election and Calling ought to be made to this end that the Church by the free Suffrage of the whole Congregation or such to whom she hath committed a Right and Power of choosing may approve and accept of one of them That the Suffrages are collected by some Pastor of the Church or of another to whom he shall commit it And they are given either in Order by every Elector Vivâ voce or joyntly of all or many by lifting up of hands or either way c. For if by giving their Suffrages Vivâ voce there were variance and they go into many Sentences of unprofitable and tedious prolixity Those who had any Votes for Ordination were again named and every one being named they who chose him were commanded to lift up their Hands At the Nomination of whom either all or many lifted up their Hands this Man was concluded to be Lawfully Elected After this manner saith he Paul and Barnabas did Create Elders Acts 14.23 And after under this Question By what Rite or Ceremony c. he saith He who was Elected by the Church with free Suffrages at length received Ordination of the Pastors of the Church 1 Tim. 4.14 5.22 the whole Multitude of the Church being present Then Polanus concludes with these words They do therefore grievously sin who do manifestly drive away the Ecclesiastical People or Flock from the Election of their Ministers which saith he the false or Counterfeit Popish Bishops do yea they do grievously sin who do impose Bishops and Pastors upon the Church against their will Thus far Polanus agrees in his own words From some of the former Authorities The African Synod Athanasius Cornelius and others The Presbyterian Divines in their Book called Smectimnius admits this power to reside in the People of particular Churches and that by Divine Authority They say First That the especial power of Judging of the Worthiness or Unworthiness lay in the People Secondly That the power of choosing or refusing them upon this Judgment resided in the People Thirdly That the power descended upon them by Divine Authority Athanasius say they in his Epist ad Orthodoxos blamed the Intrusion of Bishops as against the Apostolical Precepts against the Canon and compelled the Heathen to Blaspheme Mr. Prin in his Book of un-bishoping Timothy and Titus p. 69. affirms this out of Alcuvinus de Diviniis Officiis Cap. 37. That Ministers of all sorts were made to the Year 800 by this Election of Clergy and People and that they were all present at their Ordination and consented to it Also he affirms in p. 72 73. That Martin Bucer in his Book of recalling and bringing in again the use of Lawful Ordination saith That this power is in the People Much more might be produced to prove this particular See only Magdeb. Cent. 4. cap. 6. col 43. Concil Trident. in English Lib. 8. p. 725. Lib. 7. p. 591. 598. Lib. 6. p. 404 405. And as to imposition of Hands upon these thus chosen Mr. Prin in the same Book p. 72 73. quotes Jerome Epist to Evagr. and his Comment upon Titus for this That the Ancient Consecration of Bishops

doctrine And we find the seven Churches in As●● acting thus and not one blamed for the neglect 〈◊〉 another in this matter nor one commended for th● good in another but each Church for it self Perg●mus blamed for having such amongst them that he● the doctrine of Balaam Thyatira for suffering th● woman Jezebel to teach and seduce c. The Churc● of Ephesus commended for trying the false Ap●stles Magdib Cent 1. l. 2. cap 7. Col. 522. Rev. 2.2.14 15 20. which clearly shewe● that these Churches had no dependency one of an●ther but each had power both to try false teacher and to have cast them out not to have suffered the● amongst them and the not doing it or the d●ing of it accordingly is taken notice of by th● Lord Jesus Christ as a neglect or a work of ea●● Church as particularly and alone concerned and 〈◊〉 the whole body of each Church as is evident 〈◊〉 those places and these words there used in th● close of what was written to each Church He● what the Spirit saith to the Churches not to th● Officers or particular Persons offending or Bishop but the whole and they blamed for suffering su●● Persons amongst them That those Churches we● but particular Societies or single Congregation● and the things spoken are spoken to the whole bod● of each Church Ambrosius Ausbertius Perkin● and Brightman affirm And also Dr. Tulke Tydal and the Old Translators call them seven Co●gregations Ephesus one and that said to be b● one Flock Acts 20. For at this time were m●titudes of Jews and Heathens in this City Ye● ●en Polycarp their Bishop was called out to suffer ●●re were but few Christians in that City as Eu●ius History tells us The Presbyterian Divines ●ree this See Smect p. 40 41 43. Tertul. also tells us That in these Congregati●s these things were done In these Assemblies ●●ith he we make Exhortations and Threatnings 〈◊〉 Divine Censures that banisheth Sinners and ex●deth them from our Communion We Judge ●●m saith he with very great Circumspection ●cause we know that God is in the midst of us ●d knows what we do Apol. Cap. 39. p. 137. 〈◊〉 this the Magdeburg Century Writers fully ●ree And also sets forth the manner how the Con●egations did it Cent. 1. Lib. 1. Cap. 4. col 158. ●b 2. Cap. 4. Col. 358 359. Cap. 6. Col. 498. ●●d again they prove this from Augustine Cent. ● Cap. 4. Col. 380 381 382 383 384. And ●ain they say from Ambrose ad Valentinianum ●peratorem That those Churches had this Pow● and none else and this ought to be done openly the Congregation the People being present Cent. ● cap. 7. col 500 501. And that in the Epistle the Roman Presbyters to Cyprian it is affirmed at the Presbyters Deacons and Lay-People ●re wont to be together in Councel and to speak ●d confer their own sence and mind in these things those days Cent. 3. cap. 7. col 176.152 153. ●●d that Cyprian himself saith That as the Peo●e and whole Church hath Power to choose their ●●n Ministers So if the Bishops did fall into He●ie they were deposed by the Clergy and Peo●e and they appoint another And that it was ●t Lawful for the Bishop to do any thing herein ●thout the Peoples Councels Cent. 3. cap. 7. col 173 174 175 176. And again they say that Origen did rebuke the Pride of some Priests those days who did despise the Counsels of t● Inferior Priests and Lay-Men Cent. 3. cap. 7. c● 151 152 153. Many more Testimonies might 〈◊〉 offered for the proof hereof in those days no● denying it or practising otherwise for many Ag● And Mr. Stillingfleet Mr. Vines upon the Sacrament P. 129 173 194 195 196. agrees all this f●lly And also saith That God gave this great Charter to the Church not the Emperor and that God gave it to them as a Church in the same Irenicum p. 4● saith as to a Power arising from mutual compa● and consent of Parties he acknowledgeth a Pow● to bind all included under that Compact Not 〈◊〉 virtue of any supreme binding Power in them b● from the free consent of the Parties submitting sai● he which he saith there is most agreeable to th● Nature of Church-Power being not Coersive b● Directive and then he avers That such was t● Confederate Discipline of the Primitive Church b●fore they had any Christian Magistrate From whic● words of his may be gathered That there was 〈◊〉 Agreement amongst Christians of each Society 〈◊〉 Congregation to submit to the Laws of Christ f●● he saith none can be bound but those that consen● and it canno tbe supposed that such a confederatio● or Agreement can be well made amongst more tha● can conveniently meet in one place as a Churc● that all are bound who do thus Confederate or joy themselves together in a Society and that this Society and Church by virtue of this Confederatio● as a Church hath Power in this case to deal wi●● as many as do come amongst them and consen● Especially since he hath in the same Book p. 13● agreed that a real confederation ought to be b●tween those who joyn themselvas together in Go●pel-Ordinances in Order to their being a Church and saith that none will deny this who know what it is that makes a Society to be so which is ●●ch a real confederation with one another And ●●terwards p. 148 149. to the matters in hand more ●xpresly he saith these things That the Jews being ●●e Church of God secluded Men from their So●eties which saith he may be looked upon not 〈◊〉 a civil but a Sacred Action and that they had ●●is Power of Excommunication and for the Chri●●ian Church he saith the practice of Discipline ●pon Offenders was never questioned c. That ●ence saith he we gather in that it hath been the ●ractice of Societies constituted for the Worship ●f God to call Offenders to an account for their Of●ences and if upon Examination they are found ●uilty to exclude them their Societies and that it 〈◊〉 the dictate of the Law of Nature That every Offender against the Laws of a Societie must give ●n account of his actions to the Rulers of the So●iety and submit to the censures inflicted on him ●rom all which sayings of his this will follow That every particular Church or Society joyning ●ogether by a Confederation amongst themselves ●ave this Power within themselves to call Offenders ●o an account and to seclude them their Society if ●here be just cause found Yet take one place more ●f him and then we shall leave this as undenyable it is in p. 228 229. where he saith It must in rea●on be supposed that all Matters of the Nature of ●candal to the Church must be decided there Mat. ●8 And there he Argues the Lawfulness of Ex●ommunication in Christian Churches and adds ●his For if every Person saith he might with●raw from the Society of such a one as continued ●efractory in

themselves the name of the Church as invested with authority to make Laws to impose upon others in these Church matters For if a fourth Church on Earth distinct from the three descriptions above be not found and proved to be vested with this power and capable to execute it according to Christs mind none of these three did ever execute any such Power the two first never made Laws since they grew to big to meet in one place the third never made any to be binding or observed further than in and by the same Congregation or Society where they were made and by whom they were agreed to It is true we find That other Churches liking the Rules of some one Church did imitate them and agree of the same in their Churches also as Socrat. ●n his Eccles Hist lib. 5. cap. 21. p. 351. c. affirms That in those dayes there were diversities of Observations and Rites in several Churches without any forcing of any but every Church as it seemed good to them and that such as liked those Rites did commend them to their Posterity for Laws And Mr. Thorndike in his Book called the true way of composing differences pag. 26 27. saith That if a part of a Church speaking there of a National Church as men tearm it shall give Law to the whole such part that so doth for so doing are Schismatick If therefore any particular Church being but a part of the whole in his sence should make Rules for the whole or if it be said that the Convocation or Synod is such a Church who have this Power to make Laws for the whole these also are but a part of the Church in Mr. Thorndikes sence and but a little part too If these therefore shall give Laws to the whole then hear what Thorndike saith If yet they say This is the whole Church in their Representative Answer first cannot justly call themselves the Representative of the whole for they were neither chosen nor sent by the whole nor did the whole ever intrust them with any such Power Nor were they chosen sent and intrusted by the particular Churches of the whole without which in any rational way they cannot be supposed to be the whole Church in her Representative no nor the Church of England in her Representative if not so sent chosen and intrusted by the particular Churches thereof as above nor will they we presume challenge any authority from Christ immediately derived upon their persons to be the Churches Representative and to make Laws for them But Secondly If it should be granted though against all reason that they do indeed represent the Church of England yet then it must be proved by the Word of God or very good authority that any such Representative was called the Church and so accounted and hath such power to make Laws for many Churches or Congregations by Divine-right and to whose Laws those Churches were bound to give obedience for Conscience sake If that in Acts 15. be urged it seems to be altogether impertinent unlesse they will make the Apostles and whether all or some only we cannot determine the Elders of the Church in Jerusalem and all the brethren of that Church a Convocation or Synod And such another we can hardly find now adayes that this was so and no other is apparent from the very Text for all these met together about the matter and it is said verse 22. It pleased the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church to send chosen men of their own Company c. cheif men amongst the brethren and in the next verses we find That the Apostles Elders and Brethren wrote about the matter and say It seems good to us being assembled together with one accord to send c. here the brethren were as much the Convocation as the Elders But then also consider the causes why the Church at Antioch sent to this Church at Jerusalem about this matter and why they in Jerusalem write their mind again to them they are two The first may be Supposed that is because there were some of the Apostles the second is Expressed that is because those men who came to Antioch and preached the Circumcision there pretended that they came from Jerusalem from the Apostles and whole Church there with this Doctrine therefore was there great reason why they should apply themselves to them to be resolved of the truth in that matter for about the same question Paul and Barnabas had before disputed at Antioch and also mark the matter they write about it hath a suitableness to that which they had desired to be resolved in The epistle tells them that they who wrote the Epistle had given no such commands to those men to teach such things ver 24. And further That it seemed good to the Holy Ghost to lay no greater burthen upon them than such necessary things therein mentioned which things were necessary to be abstained from because the use of them would then have offended and fornication was sin in it self and by the way note here are no new things required to be done of those but somewhat they should forbear to do because by doing it they may offend such who could not judge it to be lawfully done and sin Here now is not the least footsteps for such a Synod as the Convocation our Council of Bishops or Ministers as a Church to make lawes which shall be binding to any more than themselves who agree to them For the Church at Jerusalem had such a thing fallen out with them as did at Antioch That some had come from Paul and Barnabas and that Church with false Doctrine unto them might as well have written to them at Antioch to have been resolved And Paul and Barnabas and the Elders and Brethren of that Church of Antioch might have written an Answer to them with equall authority Nay but is there ground to give like credit or subjection to a Rule of any Convocation or Synod now as there was to the Apostles in those days Surely No But if it be said that they are the Churches Representative and their Lawes are the Lawes of the Church by humane authority only then it will be necessary to prove That such who take upon them to make Churches and Convey power to them by their Lawes have such a power delegated to them from Jesus Christ so to do Otherwise their Lawes will not creat such a Church with authority in these cases and to whose Laws obedience is to be expected for Conscience sake The old Rule must be remembered None can give to another that he hath not in himself But if it be said that the Governours of the Churches of a Nation or Kingdome with the Magistrates authority have power to determine of matters indifferent in their owne nature about the worship of God and in Church Government and by Law to impose them upon the particular Churches of that Nation For Answer to this first we think it a

absolute or of their denying their profession of Jesus Christ or of withdrawing from the Congregation or Society to which they were regularly joyned without just cause refusing to walk in such a Church of Christ in the orderly participation of ordinances and to submit to the laws of Christ exercised therein Or they must find a fourth Church described in Scripture or in the Apostles dayes and shew such a one now from which a man may be said in a proper sence to separate also prove what act it is that makes a separation from that Church And that these persons are guilty of separation thence by such an Act or else they cannot rationally conclude any of these to be separatists or scismaticks in any sence at all If they can do neither of these they will see cause to be angry no longer But it is possible they may alledge against some of these that they have separated from the particular Congregations whereto sometimes they were joyned therefore are they seperatists For Answ first Then it must be proved that they were regularly joyned to that Congregation that is by a voluntary Act of theirs in understanding which is proved by some expresse desire in him that joynes and an actuall admission by the Society to which he is joyned For a man may ignorantly sit down at a Sacrament in these Churches where no order is observed to prevent that confusion as in Most Parish Churches yet this makes not a regular joyning nor him a fixed member of that Church or Society a heathen may do this besides this is not consisting with the nature of a regular Society of rationall men much less of Christians where must be a consideration or compact between all the parties obliged yea further if a man be made of such a parish by the law of the land and bound by the Law joyn with the same Parish as a Church and be one of the members thereof This cannot be a regular joyning him to this Church neither without his own voluntary Act For by the Law of Nature and the law of God men are left free to joyn themselves to what Congregation or Society they pleased Amos 3.3 How can two walk together except they be agreed And it is against both these yea against the very nature and well being of such Societies to force men to be of this or that Society against their own minds and without the free consent of the Society it self yet this was the case of most we presume who withdrew from parish Churches and Societies either they did never by any act desire a regular admittance or did the Society ever in truth make any Actuall admission only sate down at a Sacrament or they were made of the Society by a Law neither of which can be made out to be such a regular joyning to that Society as to d●nominate any such person to be a Schismatick or Seperatist for leaving them and joyning himself to any other Besides should we grant that they were regularly joyned and so actuall members of this or that Church yet if they remove to another Church if the Church of England be but true to their own Principles and own their common practices See Mr. Vines upon the Sacrament p. 266. he saith as we may remove for health c. so for more fruitful Ordinances as regular the guilt of separation cannot lye in this neither for they allow a man to leave one parish and go to another for conveniency of Habitation Ayre Trade c. Bodily advantages and then joyn with the other Parish Church as a member there and leave the first yea and that without acquainting the first Church whereof he was a Member with his intentions and for this he shall be no Separatist so that from this it 's clear that separation lyes not barely in this that men leave one Congregation or Society and joyn themselves to another And wee think it may easily be granted that if outward concernments be enough to acquit a man from the guilt of separation on such an account and warrant his remove from one Church to another much more may Soul concernment justifie a leaving of one Church and adjoyning to another Yet further we hope none will deny but that there may be just cause for withdrawing from some Societies and whether this might not fall in for a sufficient plea for many to clear themselves by from any crime upon the account of withdrawing from the Society where once they were and joyning to another Mr. Stillingfleet in his said Irenicum p. 117. 118. 120. agrees thus much That where any Churches retaining purity of doctrine do require the owning of and conforming to any unlawful or suspected practice men may lawfully deny conformity to and communion with that Church in such things Hales of Schisme p. 8. without incurring the guilt of Scisme and gives this reason for it If our separation from the Church of Rome was therefore lawfull because she required unlawfull things as Conditions of her Communion Then wherever such things are required by any Church Non-communion with that Church in those things will be lawfull too And where saith he Non-communion is lawfull there can be no Schisme in it If that justified our withdrawing from the Church of Rome Mr. Raynolds conference with Hart p. 666. 667. will it not saith he justifie mens Non-conformity in things supposed by them to be unlawfull And again our best Writers against the Papists lay the imputation of Schisme not upon these who withdraw Communion but upon those who require such things whereby they did rather eject men out of their Communion than the others separate from them And he quotes Mr. Hales of Schisme to prove fully The refusal of Communion in case any unnecessary things suspected by some and held unlawfull by others be made Conditions of Communion to be Lawfull and Duty c. Now it may be this might be the case of every one who hath withdrawn Communion from parishes that many things are required there whithout a Conformity to which no communion can be had with them That these required things are in the judgment of those who thus withdraw unnecessary useless unlawfull or suspected at least And then this will upon the same grounds acquit every such one who have withdrawn from the Charge of Scisme And though Mr. Stillingfleet seems a little in the 117. p. of the said Book to mince it in these words I say not that men may proceed to erecting of new Churches Yet he in his Book called a Rational Account c. p 332. seems to own such a thing when he pleads against Rome and justifies Protestants separations These are his words Suppose all the particular men I converse with were Leprous my associating my self with them doth not imply any separation from the Communion of all mankind but that I am loth to be infected as they are Therefore I withdraw till I can meet with

healthfull persons withwhom I can associate again And if several other persons saith he be of the same mindwith me and we therefore joyn together do we therefore divide our selves from the whole world Thus he in this place clearly intimated a withdrawing from one Society upon good grounds and then for as many as be so withdrawn and of the same mind to joyn themselves together and associate by agreement and that is no separation And no doubt but that there is matter enough to be found sufficiently to warrant such persons in this also as well as in withdrawing Communion But if yet they shall say the Church of England is that from which these separate How pray If the Church of England be granted to be a Church in either or both of the two first Descriptions herein before given though in Truth she be but a little part of both yet there is no other Union with her as one Church nor can there be but the Union in Fa●th under one Head Jesus Christ and participation of the same Spirit and the profession of this Faith So that none can be said to separate from her as a Church or be guilty of Schism or breach of Union here but such who renounce the Faith and their Union with Christ the Head in Word or Deed and forsake their profession of it And this Church of England cannot be pretended to be a particular Church under the third Description for they never yet associated as such nor is it possible for them as a Church to meet in one intire body in one place to partake of the same Ordinances or do any other Act as a Church or Society but always met in their several Bodies or Churches for performing of all Acts of a Church as such In like manner also do these who are so blamed Therefore in this sence neither can they be by any Rule of Reason said to be guilty of Schism If these Offended ones shall yet say thus That such Men refuse to joyn with our Congregations and Ministers in our way For Answer to this besides what hath been said before to justifie their continuing by themselves First it 's thought in Charity to be presumed That these Men are convinced of the Truth of the premises That in truth all things about Church-Affairs were managed in and by particular Churches Congregations or Societies by Divine Authority and so Ordered as before Their Ministers chosen the Matter of their Worship without any addition alteration or diminishing according to Divine Rules Scandalous Persons cast out c. That these cannot judge it Lawful for them to do any thing in these matters contrary or not according to this Rule but think if they should they must sin against God And then this must needs be a sufficient plea for these in this case especially since other things to them doubtful unnecessary and sinful are made necessary Conditions of Communion with those Congregations So that none can communicate with them but of necessity he must submit to own and joyn with there things and neglect the other way Secondly Is any man bound to joyn with or partake in every Congregation in England or in more than one or must he be guilty of the breach of Union Surely no may not a Man abide in his own Parish all his Life and refuse to have any Minister but his own or Communicate with any Congregation but that whereof he is a Member Yet he shall not for this be accounted a Schismatick or Separatist It is presumed no Man will say he shall Wherein then lyes the difference These men thus accused do joyn themselves to some one Congregation or Church of God according to the Rules as was in the beginning and there they abide in the Orderly participation of Ordinances and Subjection to Christs Laws therein executed and disagree in nothing of the true Faith from other Churches So that it follows That barely upon this pretence neither can they fasten the Crime of Separation upon those who do not joyn with their Congregations and Ministers May not members of Parish-Churches be as properly said to be Separatists for refusing to joyn themselves to those Congregations Societies or Churches and Ministers in their Worshipping of God as these for not joyning with them Nor can it be said That these dis-agree with the Church of England in any thing wherein the whole Church of God is agreed or the whole Church of England but only in some things wherein the Church of God yea in England dis-agree amongst themselves as Mr. Stillingfleet in his said Book called A Rational Account p. 357 358. affirms against the Papists in these words We saith he have not separated from the whole Christian World in any thing wherein the whole Christian World is agreed But to dis-agree from the particular Churches of the Christian World in those things wherein those Churches differ amongst themselves is not to separate from the Christian World but to dis-agree in some things from these particular Churches The case is here the same These do not separate from the whole Church of England but only dis-agree in those things wherein the particular Churches differ amongst themselves And then walk with such who can and will agree with them in these things If they say the Parish-Churches are most Lawful and right and so their Ministers Ministration and Order Let this be first decided by Gods Word and their Lawfulness better proved than the Churches Ministry and Order and Management of Church-Affairs amongst these and before set forth as the Primitive Practice and then they say something But if they justifie all by the Law of the Land only it may soon be answered by this That it was not so from the beginning That the other way is proved by the Law of God and Practice of the Primitive Churches and approbation of Learned and good Men in all Ages yea and of Men of contrary Practices themselves Therefore surely the best plea against this For if Magistrates or Governors appoint any thing in these matters not agreeable to these Rules so that Men cannot be satisfied in their own minds but doubt it's Lawfulness such doubting ones may not be in the practice of it till they be satisfied of it's Lawfulness without sin Nor will it be a sufficient Excuse in the great Day of the Lord if they thus sin To say that the Magistrate commanded me to do it If they shall yet further alledge That these Persons agree not to Walk not in those Practices and Rules in the Church of England which are prescribed by the same Church and to which the generality of the same Church agree and submit and therefore they may be said to be Separatists and Schismaticks Though a full Answer to this may be gathered from the Answer to the last Objection And what hath been said in this before to acquit them from this Charge upon such an Account That is that the Church of England as such

never prescribed any such Rules because they never met in the whole or in their Representative to consult about or agree upon any such Rules for the whole Nor can any who have made such Rules pretend themselves upon any Divine or Rational grounds to be the Church of England and intrusted from above with any such Power to make such Rules for the Churches Practice nor are Men bound to use any thing in Gods Worship or about it not commanded by God himself so long as they suspect such things in themselves or as they are circumstanciated to be unlawful of which every Man must be his own Judge for his own Practice because it doth so highly concern him as he would please God Yet we shall add this further by way of Answer First It is no true Rule therefore to Practise those things which the generality of a Nation do barely because they do so For we think few will deny that the most go the broad way the wrong way love not follow not Christs Laws and Rules Secondly That the generality of the Church of England in truth do not agree to those Rules and Practices in the Church but would rather be glad that they were altered and Reformed if the Magistrate would please to permit it which we will make out thus First it may be taken for granted we judge That the greater number of People are not so studious as to inform themselves of the true way of Ordering of Church-Affairs and making of Ministers but take all upon trust in these matters with the greatest implicit faith that can be what ever their Governors do in these Cases they subscribe to and practise do herein as others do or as they are enjoyned to do or as their Worldly Interest leads them That there are others who come not near any Churches or Worship at all who care for none of these things are practical Atheists and of these not a few Some again and that a considerable Number too who are professedly against all our ways as Papists and others who pretend to be above all Ordinances and External Rules in these Matters So that when all these are set apart as being not fit to give Sentence in the matter nor their practice of any consideration in this case The number of Knowing Serious Consciencious and Judicious Christians whose Sentence only is worthy regard in this business in the Church of England will be but few Secondly Of these few the Major part consent not in heart at least it is not their Judgment that those prescribed Rules in the Church of England are so Decent Lawful Useful to Edification or tend to Peace as is pretended as many though they Actually submit to them have openly declared And there are no doubt many more might they speak freely and not be Offenders would testifie this A considerable number also of these demonstrate their dissent by their Sufferings for their Non-conformity to them and practising after another Rule in these things If then the Major part of the Knowing Sober Judicious and Consciencious Christians in England dissent How can they say The Church of England prescribes or Commands this or that Or have agreed on or determined of this or that Or that the generality of the Church agree to this or that for an Agreement must be a judicious Act of the mind to say That the Rabble of Ignorant Careless and notoriously scandalous Persons agree to it love it embrace it and contend highly for it will help little to commend the Judgment of the Church or make her Laws valid And if this be so Then Thirdly In what sence or by what Rule of Reason can one part of the Christians in England rather be called Schismaticks and Separatists for not agreeing with the other in these things than the other part for not agreeing with the first except at least it be in things apparently and undoubtedly Lawful and tending to Edification and so accounted by all that Offence cannot be given It can be no way resolved but thus That those who are uppermost in outward Power whether one party or other will have it so We shall therefore end with the words of Tertul. in his Apol. Chap. 39. p. 142 143. English Translation We Offend no body we Injure no body When any Vertuous or Godly People are associated when any Pious or Chast Persons Assemble together their Vnion should not be called a Faction but a Lawful Society FINIS