member and yet both he and that particular Church too may be guilty of Schism So that his definition is too strait I will give him more advantage and let him take it I shall then give a description of Schism and open it Then I will lay down several Propositions tending to the clearing of the Question who are the true Schismaticks Schism is a renting or dissolving that Vnion which Christ our Head requireth in his visible body To open it I shall be short 1st That Christ hath a Body Natural and Mystical or a body in a mystery which is to him as his natural body is known to all Christians Ephes 1.22 speaking of Christ He is the head over all to the Church v. 23. which is his body This Head and this Body make up one Christ mystical 1 Cor. 12.12 so is Christ 2ly This Body of Christ is but one two Bodies joined to one Head much more thousands were monstrous All the believers in all the particular Churches of the world make up but this one Body of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ehes 4 4. one body So Rom. 12.4 5. 1 Cor. 12.12 so Revel 19. ch 21. one Bride one Wife 3ly This body hath its bands or ligaments whereby the body is tyed to the Head and the members one to another For those to the Head I omit the other concern me in this place how the members are tyed one to another Now these ligaments are first Internal secondly are External 1. Internal and they 1. The blessed Spirit of Christ Ephes 4.4 One body and one spirit so 1 Cor. 12.13 The second is love Col. 3.14 Eph. 5.16 2. The External bands are the Sacraments or Seals of the New Covenant whether Government be any thing I shall touch afterwards But for the Sacraments they are the bands of this visible body they belong only to the members of this body one Baptism Ephes 4.5 belong only to that one body v. 4. 1 Cor. 11.17 We being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of that one bread Hence Excommunication in which men are cut off the Body and rendered durante hoc statu as Heathens and Publicans not visible members of Christ is by casting them out of Communion with their Body in these Ordinances In these Ordinances the visible members of the body declare that unity and internal band of love one to another Panis igitur fractio est unitatis dilectionis symbolum Virtute hujus Sacramenti con a lescimus in unum corpus invicem cum Christo Par. in loc Paraeus in loc who quotes Chrysostom and the practise of the old Christian Churches how Christians in this Ordinance did manifest their unity and love A Christians love I speak to the business in hand is twofold 1. There is a Christian love common to all 2. There is a Christian Ecclesiastical love proper to some as for Christian love I am bound to manifest that to the bodies and souls of all though Heathens I will pray with Heathens a silly thing to turn Excommunicated persons from Prayer which is Natural Worship I will Preach to Heathens I will exhort reprove encourage Heathens privately to comfort a Heathen as a Christian I cannot else I call not to mind what effects of love I manifest to a Christian but I will to a Heathen But for Christian Ecclesiastical love manifested by Communion in these Symbols or signs I will not manifest that to one Heathen only to the members of this visible body being one with them As for Episcopal Government which Dr. Goodman and this late Commencer adds First I would thank either of them if they would give us a stout piece against Erastus and his followers 2ly If by Episcopal Government they mean such as now is among us let them first prove it is of Divine Institution which all the Commencers in Cambridg or Oxford shall never be able to do so long as there is a Bible and if they cannot do that then where is the schism It 's rather our duty to separate from what is not of Christs planting in his house 3ly But let the Government be of Christs Institution yet wherein doth that Government shew it self among other things in letting in or casting out of this body by admitting or casting out from these Ordinances of the Sacraments but that refusing or separation from such Episcopal-Government meerly as Episcopal should be Mortale schisma this is but the figment of the delirant-brain of a Prelatical Zealot 2ly This Schism is in the visible body of Christ I hear there are schisms among you 1 Cor. 11.8 the house of Cloe 1 Cor. 1.11 saw them who informed Paul Schism it seems comes under the senses then it must be in the visible body when this body visibly met together By the visible body of Christ I understand all that make profession of their Faith in the Lord Jesus and the Doctrine of the Gospel soundly and do in their conversation visibly walk according to his Rules in his Gospel so that their conversation do not openly beâ—ly and deny their profession Tit. 1.16 That the one body of Christ mentioned 1 Cor. 12.12 in which there ought to be no schism v. 25. is meant the visible body of Christ I think none will deny So Rom. 12. Ephes 4. 1. It is such a body in which the Lord had set Apostles Evangelists 1 Cor. 12.18 Ephes 4.11 such a body to which extraordinary gifts were given But these were Apostles not to one particular Church but the Catholick Church visible 2. One member is to suffer or rejoice with another 1 Cor. 12.26 Ay if it be a member and real member of our particular Church of Corinth but for other Churches and unless we are sure they are invisible members let them go Is this the meaning 3. Are we baptized into a particular or the Catholick Church 1 Cor. 12.13 and Baptism belongs to the visible Church Other things I might mention but I think it will not be denied 3ly When then that union our Lord and Head requireth in this his visible body is rent dissolved when Communion is denied among the members of it contrary to his appointment Now Schism appears when the internal band Love is broken there is something of the nature the root of the sin is in it but that is hid Men can hypocritically and vilely meet together and hold communion in that Ordinance which holds forth unity and love and have their hearts wretchedly divided one from another this may be hid as I said But Schism properly so called is when the external band is broken when communion in those symbols or signs is denied on one side or refused on the other side without warrant from Christ so that the members do not meet and hold their communion as they ought but split into several pieces opposite one to another as if they were not members of that one body Now Schism is apparent
THE QUESTIONS Between the CONFORMIST AND Nonconformist Truly stated and briefly discussed Dr. FALKNER the Friendly Debate c. Examined and Answered Together with a Discourse about Separation and some Animadversions upon Dr. STILLINGFLEET's Book ENTITULED The Vnreasonableness of Separation Observations upon Dr. Templers Sermon Preached at a Visitation in Cambridge A brief Vindication of Mr. Stephen Marshal Sed hoc nimis doleo quia multa quae in Divinis libris saluberrima praecepta sunt minus curantur tam multis presumptionibus sic plena sunt omnia ut gravius corripiatur qui per octavas suas terram nudo pede tetigerit quam qui mentem Vinolentia sepelierit August Epist 119. Cum Apostolus testetur mysterium hoc iniquitatis suo etiam tempore agi caepisse hinc intelligimus opiniones omnes Traditiones a Sacris Scripturis dissidentes quas Pontificis urgent tanquam a Patribus acceptas ad Apostasiam hanc quam praedixit Apostolus esse referendas Downham de Antichrist p. 151. LONDON Printed for Tho. Cockerill at the Three Legs in the Poultry over against the Stocks-Market 1681. THE Reader may please to take notice that this Discourse was drawn up long before now Doctor Falkner took his Degree else I had given him his Title And so something of Schism was spoke to before the Epistle to Dr. Stillingfleet could be written To the Reverend and my much Honoured Brother Dr. Edward Stillingfleet Dean of St. Pauls SIR I Hope it is no offence unto you though you be a Dean Unreas Separat p. 62. that I call you Brother since you have taught the Press how to speak soberly and amicably calling us Dissenting Brethren this is better language than Sots Rogues Fools Knaves Rebels Schismaticks which we read and hear from others As for Rebels if they be all Rebels that break the Kings Laws I believe the King will have but a few loyal subjects He hath Laws against Drunkenness Swearing Whoring Sabbath breaking and these are agreeable to the Law of God besides Laws about Hares Partridges Pheasants and against Papists c. we see men can live in opposition to these Laws yet these are not called Rebels But if the Laws of men concern the House and Worship of God concerning which God himself hath given us his own Laws to which all Princes and men are bound and unto which all their Laws ought to be conformable as we shall hear your self speak presently but that conformity we cannot see and therefore dare not assent and consent c. now we are called Rebels Schismaticks and what not Aug. Epis 119. Thus it was in pious Augustines time and this he complains of Sir speaking of your Church you tell us p. 302. Our Church is founded upon a Divine Rule viz. the Holy Scriptures which we own as the basis and foundation of our faith and according to which all other Rules of Order and Worship are to be agreeable 2ly Our Church requires a conformity to those Rules which are appointed by it agreeable to the Word of God Twice you tell us agreeable to the Word of God to which we agree also this being the affirmative part of the second Commandment that all things in our worshipping of him be agreeable to his will and word Now Sir had you proved that all the things imposed upon us had been agreeable to the word of God you had put an end to this Controversie But though I honour and love you for the great service you have done to the Church of Christ against the Papists yet in proving the things Imposed upon us to be conformable to the word of God I humbly conceive you fall very short therefore are we still Nonconformists Several things are imposed upon us but in your whole Book I find not one Scripture you produce to shew the agreement of them with it Till then our Separation is reasonable That Schism is a great sin I agree with you and wish Christians were more convinced of it than I see they are But the Questions are 1. What is schism 2. Who is the cause of schism For the first Sir I presume you will grant that the separation against which you preached and now printed do suppose there was a union with that body from which you tell us we are now separated For how can there be a separation from that to which we were not united Now Sir I think by what you have said to remove the mighty stumbling-block as you call it pag. 359. of the Cross there will be found many thousands in England who were never admitted into your Church and if not admitted into it then not united to it as such a Church no members of your body how then can you charge them with this sin of separation from it Thus then Sir you speak of the Cross in Baptism p. 351. when the Minister uses these words We receive this child into the congregation of Christs flock and sign him with the sign of the Cross c. the Minister now speaks in the name of the Church We receive c. then follows as the solemn rite of admission and do sign him with the sign of the Cross All publick and solemn admissions into societies having some peculiar ceremony belonging to them And so as Baptism besides its Sacramental efficacy is a rite of admission into Christs Catholick Church so the sign of the Cross is into our Church of England in which this Ceremony is used without any prescription to other Churches Thus you have interpreted the Cross Whether this will satisfie Mr. B. I leave it to him it doth not me the Imposers of that Ceremony in their Canons do not tell us that it is the Rite of admission into your Church but by this ceremony the Infant is dedicated to the service of him that died upon the Cross And that Book being of publick authority must carry it I had thought that in our Baptism we had been Dedicated to the Father Son and Spirit But it seems this is not enough you annex to his words Another sign to dedicate us to the service of Christ that died upon the Cross This Sir I hope you will prove to be agreeable to the word of God as you told us your Impositions are I am very ignorant of the Text that proves it and you have named none But this is not the thing I aim at it is your interpretation I mind and from it I gather that you and all others who charge us with separation from your Church must prove That we were received and that by this rite of admission the Cross into your Church which you call the Church of England This is clear from your own Interpretation and also from the page before 350 where you illustrate it from the Independent Churches Thus Suppose say you an adult person to be baptized and immediately after Baptism to be admitted a member of an Independent Church and the ceremony of this admission to
be holding up of the hand in token of his owning the Church-Covenant c. Now Sir let me suppose as you do suppose that the Pastors of the Independent Churches should baptize several persons but never admit them into their Churches by this ceremony of holding up the hand let them baptize many thousands and these thousands chuse other Pastors who are rightly qualified and ordained by Prayer Fasting and Imposition of hands of the Eldership The Independents cannot charge these Churches with schism and separation from their Churches for they never admitted them by that ceremony and rite of Admission of holding up the hand into their Churches Now Sir apply it for about twenty years there was publick Baptism administred but not by your Liturgy much less with the Cross How many thousands do you think in the space of so many years may be baptized none of these were ever admitted into your Church by those words VVe receive this child c. and sign him with the sign of the cross But of many such do our Congregations consist who were never your members why then do you call them separatists from you Besides Sir your Liturgy admits of private Baptism and then no such admission by the Cross and abundance have been thus baptized without it to my knowledg For my own particular I cannot tell whither I was so admitted my Parents never told me so and for my godly Father I am sure he hated humane inventions in the Worship of God I was born they told me in winter time extream for cold the house half a mile from Church and I being their only Son at that time it 's a question whether they would carry me forth in such an extream cold season so far As for the Church-Register that nor any other that ever I saw specifies nothing of my being admitted into your Church by the Cross but only of my being baptized but that say you and truly is into the Catholick Church No Registers then recording who were so admitted it will be hard matter for these who are ancient to prove their admission into your Church and if we were not I know not how we can now be admitted For this Rite of Admission is used only at Baptism unless we will yield to be Rebaptized and so to be admitted by the Cross this you will not admit no more than we We read of the Apostles admitting of many believers God added to the Church Act. 2. ult but never that they used this rite of admission the sign of the Cross only this is our happiness we are more wife more holy greater lovers of Christ than ever the Apostles were though we profess we are built upon the foundation of Apostles and Prophets Ephes 2.20 that their examples are too low for us Besides Sir is it not meet that when children come to years of discretion they should then be called before the Church to declare whether they own their Baptismal Covenant and also their admission into the Church they are reputed members of as you say the Independents require their Children to own the Church-Covenant let them now be members of the Church by their own consent Truly Sir if it come to that since we read what your Canons say of the Cross and how it is abused in Popery and how strange this is to the Apostolical admission we should not like it But are not children members of the same Churches with their Parents though we think so yet this is nothing to the practise of your Church For as in your administration of Baptism the Parental Covenant Abraham and his seed which is the ground of the Administration is wholly omitted so the Parent he must stand by as if he were a Heathen the business is only with the God fathers and Godmothers an invention of Higinus Bishop of Rome about 144 years after Christ who first added these to Baptism a person of no great worth of whom it is said Nihil praclari de gubernatione factis ejus commemorari potest So much cause have I to beg pardon for my defects in the education of my own Children that I would not be Sponsor for the child of the best friend I have in England But however this is not it but the sign of the Cross with such words that makes the admission into your Church 2. Q. But if there be a Separation or Schism the question is who is the cause of it A. Schism must needs be theirs whose the cause of it is saith Bishop Land in which you justifie him Ration Account p. 324 325. I humbly conceive that whoever imposes other terms of Communion than Christ hath imposed he or they are the cause of the schism We do not say you necessarily separate from all Churches that have errors or corruptions in them supposing those errors and corruptions be not imposed on us as conditions of communion Ibid. p. 332. I pray do not think that we suppose you impose such gross things upon us as Rome imposed on you No Sir we bless God for that great advance which was made by our first Reformers But whereas you say you retain only such innocent Ceremonies which were in use before the Papal power grew to that height I pray first are you sure that All the Churches did use them 2. Did they use all that are imposed on us I know they used others but did they use to tye up their Ministers to such syllables in prayer or else must not pray Did they kneel at the Lords Supper we know the contrary c. 3. Did they impose these as conditions of Communion But grant there were such Ceremonies and other things as now imposed upon us I will say of them Downh de Antichristo p. 151 what Bishop Downham saith of the opinions and traditions differing from the holy Scriptures which the Pontificians say were received of the Fathers they are to be referred to that Apostasie the Apostle foretold 2 Thes 2.3 when he said the mystery of iniquity already worketh v. 7. And I pray Sir since the examples and practises of those Churches are made so much use of against us let me give you my thoughts in a similitude of your own In your Epistle to your Rational Account c. dedicated to the King you tell his Majesty that the Church of England in the late confusions suffered an Eclipse but since his Majesties Restauration she hath recovered her luster c. Sir we observe when the Sun riseth it doth not suddenly go into an Eclipse but gradually so that common people do not mind it until the light of it be sensibly obscured so nor doth it come out of its Eclipse suddenly at once but gradually but it will not cease its motion till it appears in its glory It is the same with the Gospel-Church it did not presently suddenly fall into that dark Eclipse which it suffered under the Antichristian Papal power but it got into it by degrees the Churches not
sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi How could a man write plainer for the peoples power of Election But our Protestants tell us that only from the time of Frederick the second who died Ann. 1250 or there about were the people excluded from the power of chusing Pastors and it was the deed of Gregory the ninth as Krantzius reporteth 7. That Church did believe and prove the Pope c. to be the Antichrist Rome-christian to be the Whore Apoc. 17. thus the Bishops and our Professors of Divinity c. but I can meet but with very few of this Church of that opinion Dr. Hammond the Oracle of this new Edition of the Clergy cannot find him in the 2 Thes 2. nor in Apoc. 17. the Pope is an honest man with him Bishop Bramhall tells us Our contest is not with the Church of Rome but the Court of Rome I find that you have declared 1. That the Church of Rome is a true Church 2. That they retain the fundamentals of Religion 3. That salsation is to be had in the Church of Rome Lay all together here is a fair Bridg laid to go over to Rome To say that God hath his people under the Jurisdiction of Rome is one thing Apoc. 18.4 but to say the Church of Rome is a true Church is another thing a Wife and a Whore differ 8. In that Church Re-ordination to the same office was never heard of but exploded as it is in all Churches else but in this Church it is imposed 9. There was no Oath taken nor Covenant made with the great God to reform the House of God in Doctrine Worship and Discipline according to the word of God this ought to be though the Covenant had not been made had the things imposed been according to the Word of God this Covenant had bound us to them that Covenant will not be beaten out of the hearts of them who know God and fear an Oath what ever other persons make of it the least then men can do is to abstain from those things which were once cast out as being unconformable to the word of God and shall those people have no Ordinances for fear of a separation 10. In that Church Quakers were not known but under this Church they swarm that raze the foundation and destroy all Gospel-ordinances And many people being offenced with your imposition and disgusted with your Clergy lay in great danger of being carried away with them and I doubt not abundance had gone but that by our Preaching and administring all Ordinances they have been kept close to Gospel truths Gospel-ordinances and Gospel-ministry The Quakers and Papists are not so hated by your Clergy as we are From all which I conclude the Cause is not the same and had Mr. Ball Mr. Hildersham c. been living in our days they would I doubt not have done as we do But then we are charged with bringing in of Popery and this takes up several leafs of your Preface Heylin one of yours tells us indeed I perswade my self Geograp in Quarto Edit pag 470. had the Reformed party abroad continued an allowable correspondence in some circumstances with the Romish Church as the Church of England doth now it had been far greater and less stomacked and this was the censure of Monsieur de Rhosny when he observed the Majesty and decency of our Church-service in our Cathedrals On the other side Harding Bristow and Carrier seducing Jesuits assured themselves that they might yet convert England to the Catholick Church whose Service and Ceremonies she yet retained Nor do I see any such alteration made in this Edition but if Pope Pius the 4th and Gregory the 13th offered to confirm the former and the Council of Trent affirmed they might do it then the Pope may do this for ought I know But how do we bring in Popery Pref. p 7. you tell us out of Bishop Sanderson the first way is by pulling down Episcopacy c. But Sir Bishops are restored and you tell the King the Church of England is out of her Eclipse that she shines in a firmament above her Adversaries I pray Sir what is the matter that now Popery is coming in as a flood upon us cannot these Bishops the English Banks keep it out I say nothing how strongly they act in Parliament against it the Kingdom talk enough of it I pray Sir tell us what have you Conformists done more against Popery than the Dissenters have done 1. Have you prayed earnestly against it so have we 2. Have you Preached against it so have we 3. Have you Printed against it as you have done excellently and we thank you for it so have ours The first Book I saw was Fiat Lux. I saw a second Impression and wondered I heard of no answer from your Church Dr. Owen was the man that answered it Ann. 1662. so long ours have appeared 4. Have your Clergy kept their monthly Fasts four or five years foreseeing what now is coming upon us if God prevent it not so have several of our Ministers with the hazard of our Estates and Persons by Informers from whom you were free 5. Did you the last year at least for the chief part of the year beside your family-prayers set a part sometime between fix and seven in the morning one day in the week to pray purposely that God would deliver this Nation from these bloody Papists and their cursed Idolatry and Doctrines c. so have we in several Counties and layed the same charge on our people 6. Do you think you shall be put to defend our Legal right to the Protestant Religion by what I am loth to mention the sword since the Lollards-Tower the Bishops Cole-house c. are out of date they are too thirsty and must have larger draughts I believe there will be no distinction then between a true Protestant Conformist and us therefore we must join with you Why then do you charge us with bringing in of Popery I desire your Church would not put us upon temptation we wrong them not in their Tythes but charge our people to pay them exactly and do not grudg us the little that we have to bring us in bread I thank God I am not very lazy in my place but if you will give me twelve pound per Annum for my stipend you shall have it and thank you too But I bless God I may work for so good a Master A little more as to our Communion with your Church Sir some of us have lived in Gods House where we saw the Government hath been carried on by Officers of his own appointment according to his own Rule and what a majesty have we beheld in it Admonitions first privately then publickly by the Elders continuing in this course of admonishing to try if they could bring to repentance sometimes longer sometimes shorter as the sin hath been and they in prudence saw reasons I have known them waste half a year
in this course When nothing would do but they must come to Excommunication how wisely did they govern the Brethren to bring them to declare their consent * 2 Cor. 10.6 obedientially to their Elders for they deny the Government to be Democratical nor will I own the Fraternity to be the first subject of the Keys In the beginning it was not so as our Lord said in another case Mat. 19.8 and to the beginning we must go and your * Primit Government of Church p. 147. Thorndike speaks excellently to this why the Congregation ought to be concern'd in this Now when all were agreed how dreadful was the sentence what pale faces how many tears did it cause in the Congregation a solemn sight to behold the Church putting the person out of the Congregation Terrible as an army of banners Cant. 6 1◠I have often thought of the Text since After this how excellently did the Church walk towards an Excommunicate person to bring to Repentance And what rare effects have I known of this Ordinance without any Writs de Excommunicato capiendo alas these could never effect what I have known to the humbling of such a person And now Sir do you think that we who have seen these things can join with your Church where this Ordinance so majestical so terrible is so horribly profaned I pray Sir pardon me though I stand off from it But I pray Sir why do your Bishops excommunicate those who were never of your Church why do they not Excommunicate the French or Dutch True they live under your Laws but your Law is they must be admitted by the Cross and being Infants could not help it As to your Discourse about particular Congregations and Diocesan Churches it is not my purpose to meddle with it only I desire you to tell me why a Pastor of a single Congregation may not be as fit to govern that Congregation as your single Bishop to govern a thousand Congregations as it is with your Church where did the Apostles ordain but one single Pastor to a Church we have eight Churches recorded in the Epistles and the Acts but we read in them all several Elders to carry on Church-work As for Timothy and Titus being Bishops in our controverted sense enough hath been said about them Strange that we should have twelve Apostles beside Paul and Barnabas many Elders and several Evangelists and but two Bishops who were Evangelists too recorded in holy Writ to be the pattern for the succeeding Bishops when where and how those two were made Bishops we cannot find And for the large Diocesses so large that 't is impossible for a Bishop to perform the Duties the Lord requires of a Pastor to one quarter of the Diocess Pag. 203 The Petitioners for Reformation in King James's reign tell his Majesty That in Augustine's time there were in one Province under Carthage of the Catholick and Donatist Bishops above nine hundred Of the Catholicks part there were present 286 and absent 120 by reason of sickness and old age Episcopal Churches void 60 in all 466. Of the Donatists there were present 279 absent 120 Churches void 60 in all 459. These come near the matter make him but Episcopus praeses and as to Officers and Churches I may come to agree with you leaving my brethren to their judgments Several other things I took notice of in your Book that may easily be answered as the perplexing scruples you mention pag. 384 385. If we must baptize only by the Parents right that men must run into No none at all But Sir did you not forget your self very much p. 393. when you tell us the differences between the Popish Ceremonies and your Ceremonies viz. That yours are appointed only for decency and order Sir do not your Preface to your Ceremonies tell us another story viz. of a significacy in them to put us in mind of our duty 2. Of an aptness in them to stir up our dull minds to our duty Here is some efficacy in them to help to the performance of duty stirring up dull minds these do not much differ from the efficacy you say the Papists give to theirs for the purging away some sorts of sins I think both alike As for your French Letters who told le Moyne what he writes pag. 404. That we believe that a man cannot be saved in the Church of England I never heard such a word from any Dissenter nor ever had I such a thought Certainly none of our Bishops would write such a line to him So that this must be the figment of a French mans brain which we abhor for the story he writes p. 409. of a Nonconformist that he heard preach I could tell him a story of one of our late Bishops ten times worse but the Press shall not know it but you shall Sir I have given you a few of my thoughts reading over your Book while my Papers were in the Press which have lain by me several years and must tell you I am not yet satisfied with the title of your Book viz. the Vnreasonableness of Separation c. To your Prayer in the end of your Preface I heartily say Amen Amen SIR I am your Servant to love and honour You G. F. THE QUESTIONS Between the CONFORMIST AND Nonconformist Truly stated and briefly discussed IT was not without the ordering of Divine Providence that the day which the Imitators of the Heathens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did consecrate to their St. Bartholomew should be the day on which the blood of so many thousand Protestants was poured out in France and the day also on which so many hundreds of Gospel-Ministers to whom Christ had given both will and skill for his work success in his work were turned out of his work in England The crime both there and here which they found was the same the Princes found against Daniel in the Law of his God A day of gladness it was to many but not to all upon the same ground One Conformist and a man of note tells a Captain under his Majesty since his Return that he was glad so many Ministers refused to conform the Captain would know his reason he gives it thus Had all Ministers conformed people would have thought there was nothing in Religion only a thing to talk of in the Pulpit and serve a State-design for these Ministers will turn any way the State turn But by their giving up their livings and exposing themselves and families to outward evils rather than they would conform to things imposed not agreeable as they apprehended to the Gospel they preached they have convinced men there is reality in Religion and given a check to Atheism This was the substance and to be sure he was not more glad than I was when the Captain told me his Discourse How zealous yet some have been to bring us over to Conformity the many Books published for it and against us have declared Some of
great question about the Ruling Elder but I am not to meddle with it now Our Brethren of the Presbyterian judgment I suppose yield the question they may and ought to unite to make up one Governing Church but I do not fully understand their meaning Suppose twenty Parishes and Congregations that meet together to worship God and twenty Ministers belonging to them are these twenty Parishes distinct Churches as to Word and Sacraments so that he that is Pastor in one Church hath nothing to do in another Parish as to feeding them with Word and Sacraments but as to Government and Jurisdiction one Minister with the rest of the Classis have power over them all if this be the meaning I am not satisfied in it Dr. Stilling fleet hath declared his judgment they may unite I wish he had pleased to have opened his mind fully about it If he will yield but this That constitution of a Church wherein a Pastor cannot possibly feed with Word and Sacraments watch over and govern his flock according to Christ be it Diocesan or Parochial that constitution is not according to Christ and consequently unlawful as Scripture-light and nature's light will prove it I should it may be come up to him to perform our duty by Substitutes this may please them who make their own brains not Gods word their rule and such we little regard God hath now brought me to old age in my Pilgrimage divers disputes about Church-work and Government I have read absurd unscriptural practices in Churches I have seen woful disorders and wretched effects I have heard and known great scandal but so circumstanced that a single Pastor could not proceed by Mat. 18.15 c. to remove it I have met with one of the ablest Divines in England and exercised in Government was of the same opinion with me all arising from this notion of a single Pastor with such a people making a Church and all which mischiefs might be avoided if the uniting of several particular Congregations into one particular Church were admitted which Scripture-examples and Scripture-reasons will sufficiently justifie CHAP. IV. Of SCHISM THere remains yet one thing to be spoken to viz. the great crime of Schism with which we are charged by the Fr. Deb. in his first and second Book very deeply thus also Dr. Goodman and this is the common language of them all both in Pulpit and Press To which I would take liberty to speak more largely That Schism in the Church is a great crime is readily yielded by understanding men of all parties and no party will own it though they be guilty enough of it At this day all but Conformists are Schismaticks but to the Prelatical party this sin is a stranger yea in the time of our troubles when they were in France and refused Communion with the French Protestant Churches yet a Prelatical person was not then nor can be guilty of Schism but they were Schismaticks in France What is Schism Dr. Goodman tells us p. 112 113. Schism is a voluntary separation of ones self without cause given from that Christian Church whereof once he was a member He opens his Definition p. 113 114. First It is a separation c. i. e. When a man shall refuse to join in the acts and exercises of Religion used by such a society and to submit to its authority So he that refuseth Baptism the Lords-Supper or to submit to the censures of the Church Thus he But what he means by non-submission to the censures of the Church I know not for I know but few Nonconformists that are under the Censures of their Church nor how it will agree with his second which is 2ly It must be voluntary separation So that Excommunicate persons are no Schismaticks 3ly It is separation from a particular Church 4ly Of which Church he was once a member because Schism imports division making two of that which was but one before But according to this opening of his definition I pray Sir tell us how you will prove us Schismaticks For take up your third head 1. I pray tell us what is that particular Church you mean National Diocesan Parochial As for the National I know not how you understand a National Church for as I understand it you cannot prove us Schismaticks For the Diocesan you cannot prove us Schismaticks unless the refusing to submit to Prelatical Government be Schism For the Sacraments belong not to a Diocesan Church quâ sic I suppose Dr. Goodman's judgment to be the same with the Doctor that kept the Act at the Commencement at Cambridg I heard so much of one question that I laboured much to get a view of it but could not in our parts A Conformist told me it was to this purpose Recessio a regimine Episcopali est mortale schisma he told me Damnabile schisma as it was told him I say only this to it As God gives up some men to monstrous lusts in practise so he doth others to as monstrous opinions in judgment in these days So that it must be meant the Parochial Church But 2ly I pray prove that we were members once of that particular Church you mean For the Diocesan we deny any such Church especially as your constitution is to be according to Christs Institution and therefore were not are not members of it For the Parochial Churches I pray how are we members of them 1. Not by our Baptism if that were your meaning I would soon give arguments to confute it 2. Not by my dwelling within such a Parish-bounds though I am for the Vicinity of Church-members yet I was not so simple when I was in my Place to think that all the people that dwelt within the bounds of the Parish where I was Minister must own me for their Minister as if a spot of ground measured out by a Civil constitution must make a man a member of a Church which as such is a spiritual and free society I wish Dr. Goodman could convince all the Papists that dwell within these Parishes that therefore they are members of the Church of England or Schismaticks 3. I know nothing but consent that constitutes any man a member of a Church but that we never gave either to the Priests imposed upon us by a Patron and a Prelate nor to the Parochial Church as you take Parochial Wherefore upon Dr. Goodman's definition I argue where there was no union there can be no Schism But between us and your Church there was no union Ergo no Schism why then doth he charge us with it 3ly Suppose we were members yet still you are to prove there was no cause given for our separation which though you attempt to do yet Sir you must bring other manner of arguments than Rhetorical flourishes and humane stories to convince us But one thing more Why doth he tye up his definition to a particular Church I think a man may hold Communion with that particular Church of which he is a
Therefore one Prelate but of ordinary mission commission and qualification that never converted one Church may be not one person in truth shall have power over many Elders and Congregations where he never Preached over so many that if he Preached every Lords-day he could not preach once in a year to them yea so many that if he Preached every day in the year he could not preach once in a year to them some Diocesses are so large This consequent from such an Antecedent my dull Intellect cannot reach I deny the Consequence What might be said I foresee and would have prevented it but I am in a Postscript and so can only touch things as I pass Arguments he fetches from three Topicks to prove the superiority of one single person over other Elders 1. From Reason p. 23. Though the Vniversal Church be built upon a Rock yet particular Churches are subject to Dilapidations c. Ergo. A. In matters belonging to the House of God I thought the will of him that built the House and is Lord over it should first have been consulted His will hath reason in it we are sure but for our reasons they will put no end to the debate for one thinks his reason is as good as another Quot capita tot sententiae It is Instituted worship we are upon depending upon the positive command of the Law giver But however I deny your consequence And that 1st Mr. Baxter Church-History gives sufficient proof From the woful experience the Church hath found of your Repairers these having been as great causes of the Dilapidations as any other That Bishops have been both great Schismaticks and Hereticks Bellarmine will tell you What woful work these have made in the Church of England in our time we do still remember but I will spare names let them alone in their graves Musculus not an English Nonconformist from the experience the Church had found of the mischiefs it suffered by these Repairers Musc loc Commun p. 195. sound out to prevent and heal Schism as Hierom tells us saith Had Hierom lived to these days to see how this counsel of setting up the Bishop above the Presbyter hath profited the Church he would have acknowledged it was not the counsel of the Holy Ghost to take away Schism as was pretended but the counsel of the Devil c. Thus he with much more he adds 2ly There are other means to repair without such Prelacy as experience hath proved in several Churches where Heresie and Schism have either been kept out or healed when crept in Profaneness suppressed better than ever it was in England by Prelacy 3ly That one Prelate is as subject to corruption in Doctrine and conversation as other Ministers and who shall repair him the Presbyters being inferior to him they must not be so sawcy that kind of Creature whom you call the Metropolitan is as subject to corruption as the other Prelate As to the proof you give p. 26 27. There is a greater probability of an union of judgments when all within a certain precinct lye under an obligation to be determined by the reason of one c. A. I thank you for this saith the now Pope Innocent this helps to strengthen my old worm-eaten Chair weak in the joints and ready to crack Heresie and Schism must be avoided in the Vniversal Church as well as in the Church in your Precinct but if the Bishops in your several Precincts differ in their Judgments about Heresie and Schism as they have done and will do now what more probable way for union of Judgments than to have them lye under an obligation to be determined by the reason of one and who should that one be but my self this is but the same reason that Bellarmine hath given for Pontifex Maximus 2ly In one Diocess are some hundreds of Elders all having the power of Jurisdiction ex aquo from Christ as the Learned Dr. Stillingfleet hath proved but however if this Doctor deny it among these there may be many as godly men of as solid reason and judgment as is this one Prelate yea it may be excel him in all and in years his Elder too yet all these must have their reasons and judgments subject to the determination of the reason of that one Prelate I shall not applaud him for a man of an accuminated Intellect that shall assert such an irrational Proposition 2. His second Topick is Gods Declaration for the perpetuity of Apostolical Government which was over other Elders and Congregations p. 28. Yea Sir this is of moment if you can carry it First Text Mat. 28.20 Teach baptize instruct all Nations to observe whatsoever was commanded them I pray add this And he commanded them to teach That one Prelate while the Church stands should have superior power over other Elders and Congregations then you do something Because you mention commands for Government name two or three Texts to stop the mouths of these Erastians But to the Text. It is not for nothing that our Lord while he mention Teaching Baptizing and under this the Lords Supper yet saith nothing of Government Surely he had a reason for it 2. I yield from the Apostles and other Elders Government recorded in the Scripture that Government belongs to the Eldership with the Erastians leave but from hence to infer that because the Apostles did exercise power over other Elders Ergo now one Prelate over other Elders I shall deny the Consequence For 1. you tell us p. 25. It 's true the Vnction whereby they were qualified for it was not of the vulgar composition But say I the Unction these Prelates have is but of the vulgar composition Hence to argue from extraordinary to ordinary is a kind of fallacy a kin to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They that exercise Government over other Governours as all Elders are had need be in Wisdom Learning Holiness and fitness for Government as Saul among his brethren higher by head and shoulders so were the Apostles and Evangelists above those Elders over whom they exercised Authority We find no such things amongst the men of the vulgar Vnction 2. Those Elders as well as the people were the Aposties Converts these being but newly brought home to the Faith well may their Fathers have power over them and cause enough to visit them the case is not so here 3ly When the Apostles come to deal with the ordinary Elders there is no intimation left of any such power of one Prelate over the rest You tell us p. 45. that Timothy was Ordained Bishop of Ephesus about the 13th year of Claudius I hope you will not force it from 1 Tim. 1.3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus He must have an illuminated Intellect indeed who can force the ordination of a Bishop out of these words Besides certainly had he been Bishop there Paul need not have besought him to be resident there but however sure I am he must be
observe the 11. and 13. ver going before we may well guess 3. If you refer it to his Office as you do and would thence infer the perpetuity of his Office to the Worlds end I deny that to be the meaning For when the Apostle charges him 2 Tim. 4.5 do the work of an Evangelist c. there the word Evangelist is taken in the same sense with Eph. 4 11. not only Calvin and Gerhard but Scultetus though an Episcopal man yieldeth and it were absurd to think otherwise But that Timothy in the 1. Epistle Chap. 1.3 should be ordained a Bishop as you say and long after this charged to do the work of an Evangelist they must have dull Intellects indeed that know nothing of an Evangelist and a Bishop who beelieve it The Evangelist being one fixed to no place and had the power of Miracles as Eusebius and the Scriptures testifie This was a Commandment so incumbent upon Timothy that his Salvation or miscarrying was concerned in it as he performed it and so it is true of all Ministers but for an Evangelist the French Church the Low Countries Scotland New-England where Mr. Eliot hath more right of Superiority over the Churches of the Indians than any Prelate in the World yet would detest your Doctrine nor any Churches that I know of own an Evangelist As yet then the proof fails Thus we find in Clemens Epistle to the Corinthians a Metropolitan Church forsooth there is no mention made of any such Prelate But pag. 2.62 69. and 73. especially he mentions only Elders without any distinction A Bishop being but Primus Presbyter Primi Presbyteri Episcopi appellabantur Ambros in 4 Eph. as Ambrose calls him it may stand with Episcopus Praeses Thus Polycarpus in his Epistle to the Church in Philippi another Metropolis saith Dr. Hammond there is no menion of any such Prelate but pag. 18. he exhorts them to be subject to the Elders and Deacons answering to Paul Phil. 1.1 For Timothy's being twice ordained and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentioned 1 Tim. 4.14 which you would have understood of Prophets c p. 45 46. What you aim at in Timothy's twice Ordination I know not whether that we may be twice ordained though first by Presbyters let it first be proved that Timothy was twice ordained to the same Office Timothy first ordained by the Apostle himself you say 2 Tim. 1.6 I pray Sir to what Office say and prove from Divine Writ If the second time ordained not to an inferiour Office I hope the first Ordination by an Apostle the second to a higher Office by Inferiour Officers I pray when was he ordained an Evangelist Nor does your notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 take to be meant of any other Prophets different from Paul for we know that Paul excelled in all gifts 1 Cor. 14.18 as of Tongues so no question of Prophesie Why therefore Paul might not be He to whom the Spirit revealed this concerning Timothy as yet so young and so to take him along for his Companion give us a Reason for it seems there was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 given 1 Tim. 4.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in 2 Tim. 1.6 he bids him stir up the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was in him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Apostles did convey gifts we know by their imposing of hands though the Presbitery joyned with the Apostle in his Ordination and so I know not above One Ordination that ever Timothy had and that to an Evangelist His third and last Topick to prove the Superiority of this Prelate is the practise of the universal Church pag. 42. To which add his saying pag. 53. As for Prelacy the Essence whereof lyes in a Superiority of an Ecclesiastical person over Elders in a certain precinct it was ever owned by the Church as agreeable to the Canon of Scripture Sir did you deliver this in the Pulpit for a Truth where be sure no man ought to speak any thing but Truth Have not you read Austins Epistle to Hierom Epistle 18. in which Austin writes thus to him Quanquam enim secundum honorum Vocabula quae jam Ecclesiae usus obtinuit Episcopatus Presbyterio major est c. Surely you have read Hieroms Comment upon Tit. 1. Episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine quam Dispositionis Dominicae veritate Presbyteris esse majores To which A. B. Anselm subscribes in his Comment on the same Chapter What Sir is Ecclesiae usus and Consuetudo the same with Canon of Scripture Have not you read Estius Sent. l. 4. d. 24. calling those Hereticks that are not of your Opinion and undertaking to prove the jus Divinum of Prelacy as you do he saith thus Quod autem jure Divino sint Episcopi Presbyteris Superiores si non ita clarum este sacris Scripturis aliunde tamen satis efficaciter probari potest Have you not read what Medina saith of the Fathers in this point and what our Bishop Jewel naming the same Fathers that Medina did adds Paul himself must be a Heretick if Bishop and Presbyter be not the same according to the Scriptures Much more I might add that I wonder you could write such a line And what Sir will you exclude all those Churches from being parts of the Catholick Church that have not nor do own your Prelacy or what Church do you mean when you say the Church hath owned That so many of the Church were of your Opinion this with your Metropolitan Arch-Bishop brought that Whore in Apoc. 17. to her Chair without which that Prophecy had not been fulfilled to this day so that though it is not true what you say yet if it had been true it had not much prevailed with me but God hath left Testimony against it both in his Word and in the Church As for your notion p. 51. The reason why the Apostles wrote to the Churches that were in the cities which were Metropoles was to shew that all the Churches which were in that Province did depend upon that Metropolis Government and this Bishop was an Archbishop p. 50. I pray Sir which of the Apostles told you this was their reason or where do you find this written The Apostle mentions but but one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 5.4 This notion I see you are so taken with that p. 51. you tell us this Hypothesis gives the most intelligible account why all the Churches in Asia are reduced to Seven An Intelligible account then we have of that which I had a desire to know but because the Lord had hidden it it became not me to inquire after his secrets but now we have a reason why all the Churches in Asia are reduced to Seven 1. I pray Sir give us since you are so acquainted with Christs secrets an Intelligible account why since there were so many Churches in Europe and those Churches in the Metropoles yet the Lord writes not to one of
so nothing but Forms which is the sense of your Church I say may I be but as pleasing to God My reason is I observe it would very much please my corrupt lazy unbelieving heart I should not need then to beg of God the presence of his Spirit to help me as to the matter of prayer nor need I act my faith and dependance upon him as conscious of my own insufficiency 2 Cor. 3.5 for all my prayer is prepared to a syllable I should not then labour with my proud heart to submit quietly to Gods pleasure though he doth substract and not afford that presence sometimes which he doth at other times For here are the same words and syllables at all times his absence or presence hath no room here It may be the Friendly Debater that can jeer I see at Christian experiences will jeer at me too because I give this experience of my corrupt heart but I care not As for Dr. Falkner let but the Question be truly stated and I do not find one Scripture-argument he hath brought that concludes the Question for his own humane reasons I little regard them in divine Worship As for private Christians I know your Clergy look on them as the Pharisees did upon the vulgar Joh. 7.49 but Sir I know more of them than you or Dr. Falkner plain Mechanicks have I known well Catechised and humble Christians excellent in practical piety kept their station did not aspire to be Preachers but for gifts of prayer few Clergy-men must come near them I profess I fall short of them I have known some of them when they did keep their Fasts as they did often they divided the work of Prayer the first began with Confession the second went on with Petition for themselves the third Petition for Church and Kingdom c. the fourth Thanksgiving every one kept to his own part and did not meddle with anothers part Such excellent matter so compacted without Tautologies each of them for a good time about an hour if not more apiece to the wondering of those who joyned with them Such answers of prayer I have known to others that they have praised God for assurance that he had heard them before they rose off their knees and at that time it was done a thing of very great consequence but heard not of it till two days after Here was no reading of Liturgies these were old Jacobs sons could wrestle and prevail with God and yet must be punished if they came not to Church and set above an hour in the cold to hear a Minister read that which their boys could do at home and blessed be God that England in this dark day hath many thousands of such plain but praying Christians however despised and punished As for that Question Whether every particular Congregation makes a particular Church which you deny and oppose the Dissenters p. 234. c. I pray Sir why do you not answer Mr. Alsop's Text which he brings p. 45. from 1 Cor. 11.18 compared with 20. that Text deserves an answer and till that be done they are not confuted you have left out the strongest Argument Sir you must state the Question a little closer else you will not carry it I doubt not but there may be one particular Congregation which may be invested with the power and execute all the power of the keys and I think that is a Church For instance take your own Congregation and a few more in London where four or five thousand meet to worship God so large are your places with Galleries also I would suppose in such a Congregation there would be required four Teaching Elders four Ruling Elders Sir I must own that Officer though I think there hath been an error in assigning him that power which is not due to him and four Deacons Let all these Officers ply their work as hard as they will I doubt not but they will find their hands full and hearts full too unless the Four thousand be the better Christians But Sir will you deny this Congregation to be such a Church as we read of in the Gospel compleat as to exercise of all the power of the keys I am sure you will not As for your Reason for Episcopal Government another ground of difference between us which you give us in your Preface pag. 5. quoting Mr. Noyes of New-England in your Treatise pag. 234. agreeing with you viz. It is hard to perswade considering men that the Christian Church should degenerate so soon so unanimously so universally c. Mr. Noyes Would not Elders so many knowing men at least some of them have contended for Truth wherein their own Liberties were so much interessed Aerius his opposing of Bishops so long after their rise and standing is inconsiderable c. Sir much here might be said but I leave it to those with whom you have to deal as for Mr. Noyes I know him very well and know what may cause him to write for Episcopal Government That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bear with my words for I am sure it is contrary to Scripture and Reason of the Congregational men That the Fraternity or Plebs is the first subject of the power of the keys have made such work in Congregational Churches to my knowledg that their Elders have felt the need of that principle and made them to think again But good Brother what Episcopacy is it you mean if you mean only Episcopus Praeses I am of your opinion it was the government in the Apostles time when Elders in a particular Church were multiplied And if we would but exercise more meekness and patience one with another Consult the Scriptures more attentively we shall find that the true Government and Constitution of the Church takes in somthing of Episcopacy somthing of Presbytery something of Independency But Sir if you mean Episcopus Princeps which is our Case one that hath a Superiority of power above Presbyters with which these must not meddle and this Bishop such large Diocess as ours are and this Bishop also the Sole Pastor over the Diocess as Bishop Morley checking Mr. Baxter tells him that the Bishop of Worcester and not Mr. Baxter is Pastor of Kidderminster as well as of all other Parochial Churches in that Diocess pag. 2. Sir this Episcopacy you and Mr. Noyes have to prove that it was ever in the Apostles time or of Christs Institution for this we utterly deny The Presidential Episcopacy as I may term it lasted as it is conceived by Learned men till the middle of the second Century or towards the end of it your self does not deny it Iren. pag. 275 276. But for this Princely Episcopacy when that began to be set up then began the Degeneracy of the Apostolical Government Though Mr. Noyes makes little of Aerius yet Medina tells the world that Jerome Austin Ambrose Sedulius Primasius Chrysostom Theodore Theophilacct were all of Aerins his judgment and you say Medinas judgment will prove true Iren. 276. So say Bishop Jewel and Learned Whitaker Quam Epiphanius frigidissimis rationibus refellit saith Whitaker Tom. 1. pag. 149. As for their Diocesses beside what I have said before you tell us they were not very large since all the Parishes could communicate on the same day with what was sent from the Cathedral Church Iren. pag. 370. Sure I am what you plead for now does not agree with the last Paragraph of your Irenicum where you were nearer the Truth How they should come to degenerate so soon is easily understood if we believe the 2 Thes 2 3 4 and 7. ver and the 17. Chap. of the Revelation If positâ permissione infallibiliter sequitur quod permittitur which I am sure is true then it is as true if the Spirit foretels what shall come to pass that must come to pass good Austni good Cyprian and other good Bishops by their Superiority of power and large Diocesses did prepare the way for wicked Boniface the third and he made the Catholick Church his Diocess it was impossible for him else to come there had the Churches kept to the Apostolical Government That Counsel and prediction of God was secretly and severely brought about by men This was once your your Opinion Ire pag. 197 198. Though the Elders had equal power from Christ yet being it was to be exercised but in a co-ordinate way with others you tell us they might devolve the exercise of their power to others Iren. 276. and Dr. Templer tells us there is a greater probability of an Vnion of Judgment when all within a certain precinct lie under an obligation to be determined by the reason of One c. when there is only matter of Right and Liberty which require care pains watch but no profit or gain come into the Purse as here we can easily and readily listen to Reason that may take us off from Duty and part with that Right which hath no profit but only pains annexed to it FINIS