Books Published by Edward Polhill of Burwash in Sussex Esq And Sold by Thomas Cockerill at the Three Legs over-against the Stocks-Market PRecious Faith considered in its Nature Working and Growth In 8vo. Speculum Theologiae in Chricto Or a view of some Divine Truths which are either Practically exemplified in Jesus Christ set forth in the Gospel or may be reasonably deduced from thence In 4to. Christus in Corde Or the Mystical Union between Christ and Believers consider'd in its Resemblances Bonds Seals Privileges and Marks In 8vo. A Discourse of Schism A DISCOURSE OF SCHISM By that Learned Gentleman EDWARD POLHILL Esq Late of Burwash in Sussex LONDON Printed for Thomas Cockerill at the Three Legs over-against the Stocks-Market MDCXCIV TO THE READER 'T IS not the design of this Preface to commend the Author of the ensuing Treatise his own Works do that sufficiently He was a very Learned Gentleman and a Justice of the Peace of very great esteem among all men in his own Countrey where he lived in full and constant Communion with the Church of England And therefore being no Clergy-man either of one sort or t'other he is the more likely to write impartially about Schism and being no Frequenter of any of the Dissenters Meetings he cannot reasonably be supposed to be byass'd in their favour But yet on the other hand he was far enough from entertaining any of those Prejudices against their Persons or Assemblies which it hath been the great endeavour of some to infuse into the minds of all men but especially of the Magistracy and Gentry He was zealously concerned for Truth and Serious Religion not for a Party On all occasions he shew'd himself to be one of a truly Christian that is of a Catholick Temper and was a sincere lover of all good men of what Persuasion soever He was fully convinced and so wilt thou too if thou diligently perusest and readest the following Discourse that Bigotry is the dangerous Schism the guilt whereof a man is not necessarily involved in or secured from by the bare being of this or that Party among us CHAP. I. The Church-Catholick two-fold The very mystical Body of Christ or The totum integrale made up of all the Particular Churches The Vnity of the Church a Divine thing Doth not consist in Human Rites in a Liturgy Diocesan Episcopacy or the Civil Laws of Magistrates It s true Vnity in its internal Essence and external Communion A particular Church CHristians as high motives as they have to Unity are yet divided not only by the existence of Schism but about the notion of it The Papist charges it on the Protestant one Protestant charges it on another and the Reason is because they differ in their measures of Church-Vnity Some require more to it than others the Papist will have the Unity of a Visible Head some Protestants will have an Unity of Human Rites and Modes Hence there comes a Schism about Schism The very notion divides us In this case it is worth the while to enquire into the true nature of Schism in the doing of which two things must be premised Something must be spoken of the Church and something of the Vnity of it First Something must be spoken of the Church In the Old Testament we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a word derived from Congregating in the New we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a word derived from Evocating or calling out The Jewish Church being shut up in one Nation could meet all together in one place the Christian Church being spread over the World cannot indeed meet all together in one place but they are coetus evocatus a company called out of the World to the Worship of God The Church may be considered as Catholick or Particular The Catholick Church may be taken either as the very mystical Body of Christ or as a totum integrale to all the particular Churches on Earth As the mystical Body of Christ it is invisible made up only of real Saints all of them are internally united to Christ the Head all are animated by the Holy Spirit all have the Joints and Bands of Grace all have the effectual working in their hearts This is the Church-Catholick in the Creed this is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Assembly of the first-born Hebr. 12.23 This is in Clemens Alexandrinus called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Congregation of the Elect. Here are no damnata membra as St. Austin speaks As Christ's natural Body did consist all of pure Members so this mystical Body doth consist of true Believers As in every Member of the natural Body there is an Human Spirit so in every Member of the mystical Body there is the Spirit of Christ Such is the Catholick Church as it is the mystical Body of Christ But as it is a totum integrale made up of all the particular Churches on Earth so it is as its parts are visible and made up of good and bad Some are living Members Partakers of the Spirit of Christ some are dead ones Some are in internal conjunction with Christ some are in external only Some are in the Church really and before God some are in it only apparently and before men Thus the Church is a Field which hath Wheat and Tares a Net which hath good Fish and Bad a Floor which hath Corn and Chaff In Isaac's Family there was an Esau in the Colledge of Apostles a Judas in the visible Church there are foolish Virgins as well as wise some have only the Lamps of Profession whilst others have the Oyl of Grace This may serve for the Church-Catholick Now particular Churches are but partes similares Ecclesiae Catholicae similar parts of the Catholick Church visible The Catholick Church is as the whole Tree Particular Churches are but Branches That is the main Ocean these are but Arms and Creeks of it To that as Mr. Hudson observes the Promises and Privileges primarily belong to these they belong in a secondary way That is the first receptacle of Ordinances these derive them from that In every particular Church there is as St. Cyprian speaks Plebs Pastori adunata a People joined to a Pastor for the performance of Divine Worship Here the Word is preached the Sacraments are administred 2dly Something must be spoken of the Vnity of the Church The Unity of the Church is that whereby the Church is one There are many Members but one Body many Sheep but one Fold many Stones but one Building The Apostle reckons up many Unities appertaining to the Church There is one body and one spirit even as ye are called in one hope of your calling one Lord one faith one baptism one God and father of all Here is unit as principii one God that calls the Church Vnitas termini one Heaven that is hoped for by it Vnitas mediorum one Faith one Baptism to join men to Christ and the Church Vnitas Capitis one Lord Jesus who
Magd. Cent. 6. cap. 8. Evagr. l. 3. c. 30. Aulicâ Sapientiâ usus banished some of both Parties aequale praemium veritas mendacium tulêre Truth and Falsehood were alike rewarded Hence it appears that the Unity of the Church doth not stand in Humane Laws the true Unity is founded only in Scripture These things being so I come to lay down the true Unity The Church may be considered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in its internal Essence or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in its external Communion In the first consideration it hath invisible Bands to make it one in the second it hath visible ones The soul of the Church is as St. Austin speaks internal Grace the Body of it is external Profession and Communion Take the Church in its internal Essence so its Unity stands in the Holy Spirit and the Graces of it There is one body and one spirit Eph. 4.4 There are many Members in the Mystical Body of Christ but they are all but one Body and why so They are distant in place and time yet they are but one Body distinct Bodies have distinct Spirits but they have but one Holy Spirit which unites them not only to Christ the Head but one to another so they must be but one Body because they have but one Spirit to actuate them Hence St. Austin saith Non potest vivere Corpus Christi nisi de Spiritu Christi In Joh. Tract 26. The Body of Christ cannot live but by the Spirit of Christ It is the Holy Spirit that makes them one living Body Under the Spirit there are three Uniting Graces which make the Mystical Church but one they are Faith Hope Enarr in Psal 37. and Charity Hence that of St. Austin Si Fides nostra sincera sit Spes certa Charitas accensa sumus in Corpore Christi If our Faith be sincere our Hope certain our Charity kindled then are we in the Body of Christ Hence St. Bernard observes a triple Vertue in the Primitive Church De ascensi Domini Serm. 5. Magnanimity Longanimity and Vnanimity the first was from Faith the second from Hope the third from Charity Faith unites all the Members in the Mystical Body to Christ the Head and so they are one in Capite Love unites them not only to the Head but one to another and so they are one in Corpore Hope unites them to one center in Heaven and so they are one in Termino In these things stands the Unity of the Church in its internal Essence Take the Church in its External Communion so its Unity stands in the Holy Ordinances They continued stedfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of bread and in prayers Acts 2.42 These are the golden Bands that tie the Church together As the Church mystical is made one by Graces so the Church visible is made one by Ordinances As the same Graces are all over the one so the same Ordinances are all over the other The same pure word is preached Com. in Psal 133. The Church saith St. Jerome Non in parietibus sed in dogmatum veritate consistit It doth not stand in Walls but in True Doctrines The Hereticks as the same Father goes on may have the Walls but the Church is where the Truth is The Arians boasted of their Unity Contra Auxent but as St. Hilary tells them it was but Vnit as Impiet at is an Vnity of Impiety The Unity of Truth is in the Church only there all have one Law one Charter all are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concorporated and copartners of the promise Eph. 3.6 No body of men hath such a Law or Charter as the Church hath The same Sacraments are administred These are Seals of the Churches Charter and Symbols of that Communion which we have with Christ as Head and one with another as Fellow-members In Baptism we enter into the Holy Society in the Lord's Supper we are Fellow-commoners and eat together as Members of the same Family Contra Faust Manich l. 19. cap. 11. St. Austin saith That in every Religion men are joined together aliquo signaculorum consortio by a fellowship in some Seals No Society of men hath such Seals as the Church hath The same Prayers in substance are made tho in the Primitive times there was no Common Prayer or Liturgy in the Church Ignatius Epist ad Magn. yet there was ever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Common that is a Publick Prayer which in the mouth of the Minister is as it were breathed out by all the people that the Divine Blessing may come down upon the Word and Sacraments I shall here add nothing touching Ecclesiastical Discipline because the particular mode of it is not so essential to a Church as the other are To conclude Where there are lawful Pastors dispensing Holy Ordinances and a People meeting and unanimously joining in the use of them there is a True Church Hic est fons Veritatis hoc Templum Dei hoc domicilium Fidei as Lactantius speaks There is the Fountain of Truth the Temple of God the Dwelling-place of Faith These things being premised touching the Church and its Unity I come now to enquire into the Nature of Schism CHAP. II. Schism defined Seminal or Actual In the Church or from it There may be a Schism without Separation and a Separation without Schism The Characters of Schismatical Separation Voluntariness want of Charity Pride Error breach of Sacred Vnity for little or no Cause from the Catholick Church SChism is the Scissure of the Church visible a breach of the sacred Vnity of it without cause 'T is a Scissure of the Church De Unitat. Eccles a renting vestem Christi inconsutilem the seamless Coat of Christ as St. Cyprian speaks It was as St. Austin speaks signified by the breaking of the net Luke 5.6 The net at Sea brake Ibi Ecclesia in hocseculo hic in fine seculi figurata est Austin in Joh. Tract 122. propter significanda Schismata to note out the Schisms of the Church on Earth but the Net drawn to the Shore brake not John 21.11 to note out that the Saints in Heaven are in summâ pace in the highest unity No Schisms are in that blessed Region 'T is a Scissure of the Church Visible In the Church Mystical there are no Schisms It 's true the Flesh which in the Saints warreth against the Spirit is a Schismatick and makes such rents in their Souls that they are in a sort divided from themselves It is not I but sin that dwelleth in me saith Saint Paul Rom. 7.20 He distinguisheth his corrupt Self from his renewed Self But yet that Flesh cannot shall not totally finally rent them off from the Mystical Body They may fall into sins yet those Principles which tie them to the Mystical Body are not extinct the Spirit of Grace will not leave them but raise them up out of their Falls Hence St.
Schism was for just little or nothing and so is every Schism that is properly so called The Separation is as the cause is When the cause is weighty and just the Separation is innocent When the Cause is light and inconsiderable the Separation is Schism Schismaticks are but tanquam paleae as chaff◠and as St. Austin speaks Expos in Epist Joh. Occasione venti volant foras A little Wind drives them out of doors 7thly Schismatical Separation is not only from a particular Church but from the Catholick one As by a just Excommunication a Man is cast out from the Church Catholick so by an unjust Separation a man casts out himself from the same The Reverend Primate Bramhall in his Vindication of the Church of England lays down two things the one is this If one Part of the Vniversal Church separate it self from another not absolutely or in essentials but respectively in Abuses and Innovations not as it is a part of the Vniversal Church but only so far as it is corrupted and degenerated it doth still retain a Communion not only with the Catholick Church but even with that corrupted Church from which it is separated except only in Corruptions The other is this Whosoever separates himself from any part of the Catholick Church as it is a part of the Catholick Church doth separate himself from every part of the Catholick Church and consequently from the Vniversal Church which hath no Existence but in its Parts Thus that Learned Man It is one thing to separate from a Particular Church as it is corrupted and degenerated another thing to separate from a Particular Church as it is a part of the Catholick Church The Learned Dr. Prideaux saith De Visib Eccles Non habendus est Schismaticus qui Romam aut aliam quamvis deserit particularem Ecclesiam ob additamenta non serenda sed qui aversatur Communionem unitatem Ecclesiae Vniversalis Catholicae He is not to be esteemed a Schismatick who forsakes Rome or any other Particular Church because of some Additions not to be born but he that turns away from the Vnion and Communion of the Church Catholick and Vniversal Epist ad Cornel. l. 2. Ep. 11. St. Cypriam charges it upon the Novatians that they did Catholicae Ecclesiae corpus unum scindere Cut in pieces that one Body of the Church Catholick De Unit. Eccl. c. 17. St. Austin charges it upon the Donatists A Christianâ unitate quae toto orbe diffunditur sacrilego schismate separatos esse That they were by a Sacrilegious Schism separated from that Christian Vnity which is diffused over the whole world Separation is then Schism when it is from a particular Church as it is a part of the Church Catholick for then it is from every part of the Catholick Church and by consequence from the whole Church These Characters may suffice to shew what Separation amounts to Schism CHAP. III. The Separation of the N. C. is not Schism Not voluntary Not from want of Charity Not from Pride and Contempt Not attended with Error No breach of Sacred Vnity Not for little or no Cause The Rites and Ceremonies for which they separate no little things as considered in themselves Of the Sign of the Cross in Baptism The Ceremonies as terms of Communion intrench on Christ's Kingly Office Invert the Gospel are against Christian Charity Liberty and Vnity The Pleas for Ceremonies not satisfactory Of Order and Decency Whether the Ceremonies are parts of Worship N. C. do not separate from the Catholick Church I Now go on to consider the Separation of the Nonconformists Ministers and People whether that be Schism or not in the doing of which I shall review the former Characters with respect to them 1st Schismatical Separation is intentional and perfectly voluntary but quo animo do the Dissenters separate In our Law an entry shall not be called a disseisin partibus invitis against the will of the Agents Neither should a Separation in such a Case be in Theology called a Schism Is it imaginable that the intention or option of the Nonconformists should be to be out of the Church rather than in it It is easy to judge who they be that most intend and love Church-unity those who would have the terms of it easy plain and unquestionable or those who would have them clogg'd with Scruples The Nonconformists separate but their parting from the Church like the Merchant's parting with his Goods in a Storm is not purely voluntary but a mixt Action done with an unwilling will not out of love to Separation but to salve Conscience When the Papists charge Schism upon our Church what saith Bishop Bramhall Reply to the Bishop of Chalced. fol. 55. Schism is a voluntary Separation To be separated might be our Consequent will because we could not help it but it was far enough from our Antecedent will or that we did desire it And a little after If they did impose upon us a necessity of doing sinful things and offending God and wounding our Consciences then we did not leave them but they did drive us from them And what saith Dr. Prideaux Fugati potius quam fugientes non tam à Roma ut est secessimus quà m ad Roman ut erat regressi sumus We were rather driven away than voluntarily flying we are not so much departed from Rome as it is as we are returned to Rome as it was In like manner the Nonconformists being charged with Schism may say To separate is not their Antecedent will but Consequent they depart from the Church but it is by a kind of constraint they had much rather be in the Church they wish for it pray for it and salvâ conscientiâ would do any thing for it but there are some things which they cannot join in Such a departure should not be called Schism 2dly Schismatical Separation proceeds from hatred Schismatici discessionibus iniquis à fraternâ Charitate dissiliunt Aug. de Fide Symbol cap. 10. or at least from a want of Charity but do the Nonconformists thus separate What is done out of Conscience to God cannot be fairly interpreted hatred to our Brother It is love to God that causes men to walk according to Conscience but it is want of love to him that makes them hate their Brother These two cannot stand together If we call that hatred which indeed is Conscience we forfeit our own Charity by misconstruing the Charity of others It is the desire of the Nonconformists to live in charity with the Conforming Brethren In the Council of Carthage St. Cyprian and his Fellow-Bishops in the point of rebaptizing those that were baptized by Hereticks plainly erred and dissented from the rest of the Church yet they were never charged with Schism for it and why Because they did it neminem judicantes neo à jure communionis aliquem si diversum senserit amoventes Judging none removing none that
Ministerii he hath ordained the perfect means of teaching the Church and all other means are as none at all The Cross not teaching under him teacheth not truly and being none of his means hath none of his blessing If the Cross might be a true Teacher then the standing Images of Christ might be so too which though called by the Papists Lay-mens Books do yet but make men forget God Again the Sign of the Cross looks very like a Sacrament Baptism is a Symbol of our Christian Profession so is the Cross Baptism hath a word annexed to it I baptize thee in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost So hath the Cross We sign this Child with the Sign of the Cross in token that he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified Baptism points out Christ crucified so doth the Cross Baptism enters the baptized into the Church so doth the Cross We receive this Child into the Congregation of Christ's flock and sign him with the sign of the Cross As Baptism admits into the Church Catholick so the Cross admits into a particular Church Baptism dedicates the Infant unto Christ so the Cross dedicates him to the service of him that died on the Cross Can. 30. And what now is wanting to make it a Sacrament It is not vehicalum gratiae It 's very true it is not Neither can any Human Invention be such It therefore looks as like a Sacrament as any Human thing can do no such thing being capable of conveying Grace unto men In the next place the Ceremonies of our Church may be considered as terms of Communion with it That is there must be a Surplice or no preaching a Cross or no baptizing a kneeling posture or no Lord's Supper These things though they are very light to the Conformists are not so to the Nonconformists I shall therefore consider them in some particulars 1st The Ceremonies thus taken do seem to intrench upon the Kingly Office of Christ He is the one Lord and Lawgiver of his Church 'T is his Royal Prerogative to institute Sacraments This is confessed by the Papists themselves Pars 3. Q. 72. Art 1. Aquinas relating that some held their Sacrament of Confirmation was instituted in some Council and that others held it was instituted by the Apostles saith this cannot be because to institute a new Sacrament pertinet ad potestatem excellentiae appertains to the power of excellency which is in Christ alone De Sac. l. 1. c. 23. Bellarmin proves that Christ is the only Author of Sacraments It is a flower of his Crown to institute Ordinances no man may take this glory from him The Apostles the highest Officers in the Church were not Lords of it but Ministers and Stewards under Christ 1 Cor. 4.1 to do his pleasure They taught only what he commanded them Matt. 28.20 St. Paul preached 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing without Scripture Act. 26.22 He would not go beyond his Commission Tom. 2. fol. 722. Non debent Episcopi saith the Excellent Whitaker suas traditiones aut leges aut contra aut extra aut praeter Evangelium obtrudere The Bishops ought not to obtrude their Traditions or Laws either against or without or besides the Gospel That Gospel which is the Law of Christ is the Canon that must rule all their Canons Christ hath the full Royal Power the Church hath only a limited Power from him Christ may make Laws of Institution the Church can only make Laws of Execution or Disposition such as tend to the right and orderly disposing of those Ordinances which were instituted by Christ In legibus Ecclesiasticis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tantum spectatur Whit. Tom. 2.721 The Apostles did not institute any thing of Worship or Ordinances But they did take care that the Ordinances should be used in a way suitable to their dignity These things being so the only Question is Whether the Church hath any Patent or Commission from Christ to institute or impose mystical Ceremonies as terms of Communion In answer to this I take it the Church hath no such Power or Commission The Pattern of Christ and the Apostles is more to me than all the Human Wisdom in the world It is the observation of St. Austin That Chrst's Yoke being easy Aust Epist 118. he did Sacramentis numero paucissimis observatione facillimis significatione praestantissimis societatem novi populi colligare Tie together the Society of a new People with Sacraments few in number easy in observation and excellent in signification And who would depart from this simplicity I am sure the Apostles did not They delivered only that which they received of the Lord 1 Cor 11.23 De Or. Err. lib. 2. c. 5. Hoc fidei illorum er at officii saith Bullinger This was their faith and duty They did believe saith the same Author that Christ was the wisdom of God ne in mentem ipsorum venit it came not into their minds to add Ceremonies to Christ's Institutions The Primitive Christians continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of bread and prayer Acts 2.42 There was nothing but the pure Institutions of Christ not an additional Ceremony to be seen among them Nay in Justin Martyr's time Apol. 2. we find the Lord's Supper used in pure simplicity and why should we make our additions to the Sacraments St. Cyprian contra Aquarios Epist 63. expresses himself notably touching the Lord's Supper Ab Evangelicis Praeceptis omnino recedendum non est We must not depart from the Evangelical Precepts And a little after Non nisi Christus sequendus est solus Christus audiendus est Christ only is to be followed Christ alone to be heard Again Human Ceremonies are not congruous to the pure light of the Gospel Tom. 7. fol. 727. Num Divinae Figurae sublatae sunt ut Humanae succederent saith Learned Whitaker Were the Divine Figures taken away that Human might succeed If the Divine Shadows under the Law did all vanish before the Sun the pure and Evangelical Light may Humane Vmbra's come and overcloud it Surely it cannot be It was the saying of a great Doctor once in the Church of England That in the morning of the Law the shadows were larger than the body and it will be a sign of the evening and sun-set of Religion if these shadows shall be stretcht out again and outreach the body If the Church may institute or impose two or three Ceremonies it may do more and more till men under the pressure cry out Epist 119. as St. Austin did Tolerabilior sit conditio Judaeorum The condition of the Jews would be more tolerable than that of Christians Moreover none but God alone can institute a Ceremony to signify a mystery in Religion he only hath authority over Religion he only can bind the Conscience he only can illustrate the mind he only can give a
Ceremonies are not made by our Church any parts of Worship and therefore there is no offence in them I answer The Ceremonies seem to be parts of Worship feveral ways They seem to be parts of Worship in themselves as being an honouring of God at least in some respect It 's true they are not parts of Worship ratione principii because they are not parts of Divine Institution But they seem to be parts of Worship ratione termini as being an honour done to God There may be a double honour done to God There is an honour done to him as the Supream Being by subjection and resignation And there is an honour done to him as the Fountain of Grace by dependance upon him for some Spiritual Gift Both these seem to be in the use of the Ceremonies In the use of the Cross the Infant is resigned to God dedicated to him that died on the Cross and this looks like Worship Again the Ceremonies are Mystical Teachers not Supream Teachers for that were to turn them into Idols but Vnder Teachers and therefore in the regular use of them we must depend upon the great Teacher for illumination and this also seems to be an act of Worship They seem to be parts of Worship relatively as they are in conjunction with the holy things of God The Cross is so interwoven with Baptism in the administration of it that it looks like a part of it Before Baptism the Minister prays for those that are dedicated to God and that dedication is as the Canon tells us by the Cross After Baptism thanks are given that the Child is received into the Congregation and this is done by the Cross also For upon making the Cross the Minister saith We receive this Child into the Congregation Parker Of the Cross fol. 115. Thus as Mr. Parker hath noted the Cross is incorporated into Baptism in the administration of it They are knit together à priori à posteriori by the precedent and subsequent Prayers Moreover they seem to be parts of Worship reputatively as they are highly valued Our Saviour charges the Pharisees that they preferred their Traditions above the Commands of God Matt. 15.3 6 9. Their Corban swallowed up their duty to Parents The Jews say that there is more in the words of the Scribes than in the words of the Law and that it were better to die than to violate a Tradition Our Divines charge the very same thing upon the Papists Whitaker tells Duraeus That it was a greater Offence Tom 1.206 Quadragesimam violare quam Dei verbum contemnere to break Lent than to despise the Word of God Gregorius Hemburgius Melch. Adam de vitis Jureconsultorum Doctor of Law was wont to say That for many years men might speak more freely de potestate Dei quà m Papae of the Power of God than of the Pope And what is the value that is now upon Ceremonies among our selves Hath there not been too high a rate set upon them May we not complain in the words of St. Cyprian Epist 75. ad Pomp. Divina praecepta solvit praeterit humana traditio Human Tradition dissolves and passes over Divine Precepts It is apparent that if Learning and Piety could have outweighed a Ceremony many Worthy and Excellent Persons had been now in the Church who are at this time out of it I may add it is also clear that if that Heat and Zeal which hath run out against Non-conformity could have been turned against Impiety and Profaneness we had now been a much more excellent People than at this time we are It was often the complaint of Erasmus Whit. Tom. 2. fol. 726. Divina contemni Humana urgeri That Divine things were contemned and Human urged If this should be our case it would be no wonder at all for men to say that the Ceremonies are made parts of Worship Thus much touching the Ceremonies And if what hath been alledged against them be true the Separation of the Nonconformists can hardly be imagined to be without cause But because not only the Ceremonies but some other terms lay as blocks in their way I shall add one short word more They were by an Act of Vniformity deprived of their People and their People of them They could not come up to the terms of a publick Ministry neither would their People come to the publick Ordinances in this which I take it was their case it is extream hard to charge criminous Schism upon them When the Emperor put Chrysostom out of his Church Socrat. l. 6. c. 16. the Joannites separated from the Publick and those not only People but Bishops and Presbyters yet I do not know that they were charged with the crime of Schism for it Theod. l 1. cap. 21. When Eustathius Bishop of Antioch was banished many people and Ministers left the Publick Assemblies Yet I find not that these Separations were charged with the crime of Schism The Nonconformists being in the same or a very like case Charity would make the same construction of them Thus much touching the sixth Character Now I proceed to the last 7thly Schismatical Separation is not only from a particular Church but from the Catholick one It is a memorable Passage of the Reverend Vsher whose words I shall transcribe Neither particular Persons In a Sermon before the King 1624. nor particular Churches are to work as several divided Bodies by themselves which is the ground of all Schism but are to teach and to be taught and to do all other Christian Duties as parts conjoined to the whole and Members of the same Commonwealth or Corporation The Excellent Davenant Boroughs in his Irenicum fol. 67. in his Rules for Peace saith Proscindi nec debent nec possunt à communione particularium Ecclesiarum quae manent conjunctae cum Ecclesiâ Catholicâ Those may not be cut off from communion with particular Churches who remain joined to the Catholick Church I may add Those may not be esteemed Schismaticks by any particular Church who are in conjunction with the Universal Schismatical Separation is not only from a particular Church but from the Universal And is it thus with the Nonconformists Do they separate from the Church-Catholick I take it they do not and for this I shall lay down two or three things A Particular Church may be considered two ways either in that which it hath in common with other particular Churches now or heretofore in being or in that which it hath particular to it self A particular Church in the first respect acts as a part of the Church-Catholick but in the second respect it acts by it self A Separation from a particular Church considered in the first respect is a separation from the Church Catholick but a separation from it considered in the second respect is not so The Nonconformists differ from our Church not in that which it hath in common with other Churches but in
is the vital Head of the Church Vnitas Corporis one Body in which the Members do all adhere one to another and to the Head And unitas Spiritûs one Holy Spirit to animate and actuate the whole Body The Unity of the Church is not an Human thing but Divine The Unity is as the Church is built upon the foundations of the Apostles and Prophets Eph. 2.20 All the Joints and Bands which tie the Church together are from Christ the Head As under the Old Testament God ordained the Loops and the Taches that coupled the Curtains together to make one Tabernacle Exod. 26.6 So under the New Christ hath ordained the Bands and Ligatures that couple Believers together to make one Church Hence this Unity is stiled by St. Cyprian Epist ad Cornel. Vnitas à Domino per Apostolos tradita An Vnity delivered from the Lord Christ and by the Apostles and by St. Austin Vnitas Christi the Vnity of Christ Contra Cresc l. 2. c. 31. l. 4. c. 21. St. Jerom speaking of the Church of Christ as joined together in the unity of the Spirit hath this notable Passage Ecclesia habet urbes legis Com. in Mich. c. 1. Prophetarum Evangelii Apostoloram Non est egressa de finibus suis id est de Scripturis Sanctis The Church hath its Cities the Law the Prophets the Gospel the Apostles it goeth not out of its bounds the Holy Scriptures That only is Unity which is found there When the question was between the Catholicks and Donatists Vbi sit Ecclesia Where is the Church the Columba unica the Dove that is but one St. Austin tells them De Unit. Eccl. c. 2 3. that it was to be sought Non in verbis nostris sed in verbis Capitis Not in our words but in the words of the Head Jesus Christ the Head knew his own Body And again Sunt certe libri Dominici ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam There are the Lord's Books there let us seek the Church And again Nolo Humanis Documentis sed Divinis Oraculis Sanctam Ecclesiam demonstrari I will not have the Holy Church demonstrated by Human Documents but by Divine Oracles It was the notable Observation of Bessarion Fuit aliquando tempus quo immaculata Dei Spoasâ— Ecclesia summâ concordiâ tranquillissimâ pace intemeratâ veritate fruebatur cum simplicitatem puritatem Evangelicae Doctrinae maximi omnes faciebamus solis Sacris eloquiis contenti his inhaerentes his acquiescentes in unum ab his collecti ovile sub uno Pastore omnes agentes Crab. Conc. Florent Archbishop of Nice That then the Church had the highest concord peace and truth when it did adhere to the simplicity and purity of the Evangelical Doctrine contented with the Sacred Oracles inhereing and acquiescing in them only collected by them into one fold and living under one Pastor The only true Unity of the Church is that which is to be found in Scripture When men will have an Unity not of God's making but of their own it falls out as when a piece of new cloth is put to an old Garment there is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a rent made The Humane thing that did seem to fill up the Churches Unity doth make a breach in it Victor will have one Easter-day and this little thing rents off the Eastern Churches from the Western The Unity of a visible Head in the Church is very plausible yet this is but a piece of Donatism to have the Church only in parte Papae 'T is as Gregory said against John of Constantinople Titulus in discissionem Ecclesiae a Title to rent the Church in pieces Nay the very Roman Church where it was hatched is rent by it Part would have a Council above the Pope Part would have the Pope above a Council The Councils of Constance and Basil call the Popes Schismaticks and the Popes have cast off and reprobated those Councils Thus those Human things in the Church which are set up for Unity turn to Ataxie and like the Egyptian Reed pierce and rent that hand that leans on them These things being so it appears that the Unity of the Church doth not consist in any Human thing But to instance in some particulars 1st It doth not stand in Human Rites and Observations In the first Golden Age in which as Egesippus saith the Church continued a pure Virgin there was little or nothing of Ceremony but much of Unity Christians were then of one heart and of one soul Acts 4.32 In after Ages Human Observations creeping into the Church they were observed variè pro arbitrio Euseb l. 5. cap. 23. Christians varied in the observation of Easter some kept Easter on one day some on another They varied in their observation of Lent Some fasted one day some two some more some forty They varied not only in the number of the days but in their abstinence Some eat Fowl with their Fish Socrat. Hist l. 5. c. 21. some were contented with dry bread only They varied also in many other Human Observations as may be seen in Ecclesiastical Story In all these there was no unity Soz. Hist l. 7. c. 19. yet the true Vnity was not wanting They did not put unity in such things no the Rule was Differentia rituum commendat unitatem fidei The non-unity in Rites commended the Vnity of the Faith The Christians were wont to fast Tert. contra Psych ex arbitrio non ex imperio out of choice not out of command St. Austin Epist 118. speaking of the various Customs in the Church saith that in such kind of things there was libera observatio indifferent things remained indifferent one did not impose them upon another so there was no breach of Unity When the question was whether there should be in Baptism trina or simplex mersio St. Gregory answered Conc. Tolet 4. Can. 5. In unâ Fide nihil officit diversa consuetudo In one Faith a di verse Custom hurts not In the Council of Lateran under Pope Innocent the Third Can. 9. it is ordained That where in one City or Diocess Crab. Conc. Tom. 2. there were people of divers Tongues and Rites sub unâ Fide there the Divine Offices should be performed secundum diversitates Rituum Linguarum Luther speaking of the Popish Ceremonies saith truly Sub Papâ est pompa externae unitatis sed intus non â—n si confusissima Babylon Vnder the Pope is the pomp of external Vnity but within there is nothing but a most confused Babel It is certain Church-unity doth not consist in Rites let men fancy what they will there is but one healing Rule to be found In necessariis unitas in non-necessariis libertas in utrisque charitas 2dly It doth not stand in a Liturgy or prescribed Form of Prayer The Church for some Centuries was without a Liturgy but never without Unity The Liturgies ascribed
to St. Peter St. James St. Mark are plainly spurious there are to be found the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which were not extant in the first Centuries There mention is made of Temples Altars Monasteries such things as the Primitive Church knew not Apol. 2. prope finem Tert. Ap. cap. 30. In Justin Martyr's time the Minister prayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to his ability In Tertullian's he prayed Sine monitore quia de pectore without any Prompter but their own heart Epist 34. de Celer In St. Cyprian's time the Ecclesiastical Lector was to read praecepta Evangelium Domini not a Liturgy Euseb de Vit. Constant l. 4. c. 20. In Constantin's time had there been a Liturgy he had not needed to have composed a Prayer for his Army Soc. Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 21. In the time of Socrates among all Forms of Religion there were not two that consented together in precandi more Set-forms of Prayer were not introduced into the Church till the Arian and Pelagian Heresies invaded it and then to prevent the diffusion of Heretical Poyson Set-forms came in In the Council of Laodicea holden about the Year 368. Can. 18. it was ordained that there should be caedem preces But this was a Form of the Minister's own composing as appears by the 23d Canon of the Third Council of Carthage holden about the Year 399. which appointed that none should use a Form unless he did first conferre cum fratribus instructioribus After which in the Milevitan Concil holden about the Year 416. Can. 12. it was ordained that the Form used should be approved of in a Synod Still this was a Form of the Minister's own making It was many years after this before a Liturgy was absolutely imposed on Ministers that they might not pray by their own Gifts only but by the prescribed Forms of others About the Year 800. Charles the Great being Emperor Pope Adrian moved him to establish a Liturgy by a Civil Edict and obtained it And this is said to be Gregory's Liturgy Thus the Church was much longer without a Liturgy than it can be imagined to have been without Unity Therefore Unity doth not consist in it 3dly It doth not stand as I take it in a Diocesan Episcopacy There are Bishops in Scripture but no Diocesan ones There are Presbyters ordained in every City but no Bishops ordained to be over them In Thessalonica there were not one but many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Thess 5.12 The Presidency there was in many not in one The Bishops at Philippi Phil. 1.1 being more than one in one city were no other than Presbyters The Presbyters at Ephesus are in express terms called Bishops Acts 20.17 28. St. Peter exhorts the Presbyters to feed the Flock of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acting as Bishops among them 1 Pet. 5.2 St. Paul would have Titus ordain Presbyters in every City for a Bishop must be so and so Tit. 1.5 7. If the Bishop and Presbyter were not here the same the reason which must not be imagined would be inconsequential There are the qualifying Characters of a Bishop set down in 1 Tim. 3. and in Titus 1.7 but there is not one of them but is requisite in a Presbyter not one of them peculiar to a Diocesan Bishop The Scripture Evidence is very clear that a Bishop and a Presbyter are all one When Aerius brought some of these Scriptures to prove it Epiphanius who calls him Heretick gives only this poor Answer That in many Churches there were no Presbyters but who can believe that at that time there were more Bishops than Presbyters that when there were more Bishops in one City there should be no Presbyters at all there It is a thing altogether incredible Clemens Salm. in App. ad Primat fol. 50 54. in his Epistle to the Corinthians makes Bishops and Presbyters all one Polycarp in his Epistle to the Philippians mentions only Presbyters and Deacons In the Epistle ascribed to Ignatius ad Magnesios a Bishop above a Presbyter is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Salm. in App. fol. 57. Com. in 1 Tim. 3. a novel Institution St. Ambrose saith Episcopi Presbyteri una ordinatio est there is but one ordination of a Bishop and a Presbyter St. Jerome saith Epist ad Ocean ad Evagr. Apud veteres iidem Episcopi Presbyteri fuerunt Anciently Bishops and Presbyters were the same Again Com. in Epist Tit. That the Bishop was greater than the Presbyter consuetudine magis quam Dominicae dispositionis veritate rather by custom than by any true dispensation from the Lord And again that before Communi Presbyterorum Consilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur The Churches were ruled by the Common Council of Presbyters St. Austin saith that Episcopacy is greater than Presbytery Secundum honorum vocabula Epist 19. quae jam Ecclesiae usus obtinuit according to the Titles of Honour which are now used in the Church Thus it appears that a Diocesan Episcopacy is but Humane and by consequence Church-unity doth not stand in it The Reformed Churches which are without Episcopacy are not without Unity I conclude this with the Judgment of the Learned Dr. Ward Determ 109. who speaking of the difference in Ecclesiastical Government which is between our Church and those beyond Sea saith that it may and ought to be tolerated absque fraternae unitatis laesione without any breach of Brotherly unity 4thly It doth not stand in the Civil Laws of Princes When Magistrates were Pagans there was yet a Church and an Unity in it When they became Christians the Unity was the same the Joints and the Bands were as before sacred not civil from Christ the Head not from the Magistrate It 's true the Church hath an external help and guard from good Laws but its Unity doth not consist in them Neque quia regna dividuntur De Unitate Eccles c. 12. ideo Christiana unitas dividitur cum in utraque parte inveniatur Catholica Ecclesia saith St. Austin Kingdoms may be divided but Christian Vnity is not in both parts the Catholick Church is found Should the Unity of the Church consist in the Laws of Magistrates then the Laws being dissolved there would be no Unity the Laws being altered the Unity must vary and turn about to every point as the Laws do That which now is Unity under a contrary Law must be Schism that which now is a Schism under a contrary Law may be Unity Under the Emperor Valentinian the Orthodox may be the Church under Valens the Arrians may be it Nay as the Magistrate may be you shall not know by him where the Church or the Truth is In that great Schism when the Bishops of the East and West fell out about the Council of Chalcedon some would not part with a syllable of it some utterly rejected it The Emperor Anastasius
Austin saith In Psal 88. Si in aeternum caput in aeternum membra If Christ the head be for ever so are the Members Schism then is not in the Church Mystical but in the Church Visible 'T is a breach of the Sacred Vnity in the Church I mean of an Unity founded in Scripture every breach of that Unity is Schism but a breach of an Human Canon or Law is not Schism St. Cyprian shewing the madness of Schismaticks saith De Unit. Eccl. Quis audeat scindere Vnitatem Dei Who dares cut in pieces the Vnity of God So he calls the Churches Unity because it is not Humane Contra Cresc l. 5. c. 21. St. Austin saith It is a great evil to make a Schism ab Vnitate Christi not from man's Unity but from Christ's and the same Author calls Schism in divers places Contr. Lit. Pet. l. 2. c. 30 81. Sacrilegium Schismatis the Sacriledge of Schism because the Unity is not Human but Divine When the Papists charge Schism upon us as casting off the Pope the Head of Unity the Learned Dr. Hammond answers Tract of Schism 157. He was never appointed by Christ to be Head and the Answer is sound No such Unity was appointed in Scripture Again 'T is a breach of the Sacred Unity without Cause When the Orthodox Christians separated from Arian Bishops who subverted the Faith of Christ it was no Schism at all When the Protestants came out of Idolatrous Rome it was no Schism but a Duty Causa say the Canonists non secessio facit Schismaticum it is not the separation but the cause that makes the Schismatick Schism is either seminal or actual Seminal Schism stands in the carnal and corrupt Lusts of the Heart these are the bitter Roots and Springs of Division Whence come wars and fightings among you come they not of your lusts that war in your members James 4.1 Were there no warring Lusts within there would be no jarring Discords without The Apostle speaking of the Divisions in Corinth saith Are ye not carnal and walk as men 1 Cor. 3.3 Divisions come from the Carnal part in Christians not from the Spiritual St. Austin speaking of Abraham's dividing the Beasts but not the Birds saith by way of allusion De Civ lib. 16. cap. 24. Carnales inter se dividuntur Spirituales nullo modo Carnal men are divided one from another but not spiritual The Lusts of men are the great Make-bates But to instance in some particulars Pride is an horrible Schismatick by swelling it breaks into a rupture by lifting up a man above himself it divides him from his Brother The greatest instance of Pride in the World is the Bishop of Rome he sits as he pretends in the Infallible Chair he hath all Laws in scrinio pectoris he claims all Power Sacerdotal and Regal he stiles himself the Head of the whole Church he is called a God on Earth his Title is Dominus Deus noster Papa and after all this state he is no less an Instance of Schism than of Pride He rents himself off from the Church Universal he will not be a Member in it but an Head a Universal Lord over it The Church must be only in parte Papae and no-where else All the Protestant Churches in the World must be cast off as Schismaticks and this abominable Schism must be stiled Unity Again Self-love is a great Schismatick it so appropriates all to it self that it leaves nothing in common it is such an inordinate uniting of a man to himself that he cannot be joined to others That little word Ego is a strange divider of all Society When Novatus fell off from the Church and became the Head of the Cathari there was somewhat of self in it Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 6. c. 42. The denial of an Episcopal Preferment made him set up a Church for himself and in that Church before he gave the Eucharist he made the Communicants swear by the Body and Blood of Christ not to forsake him To name but one thing more Hatred is also an inward Schismatick it dissolves what Love unites and sets a man against his Brother to whom he should be joined in amity De Bapt. l. 1. c. 11. Origo Schismatis est odium fraternum saith St. Austin The hatred of a Brother is the origin of Schism In the Council at Ephesus called Concilium praedatorium the Eutychian hatred broke out sadly against the Orthodox The Bishops that favoured that Heresy carried the matter by mere force and violence crying out Qui dicit duas Naturas in duo dividit He that confesseth two Natures in Christ divides him into two Such a desperate thing is Hatred that it prompts men to divide even unto blood Such Lusts as these are the roots of gall and wormwood which bear the bitter fruits of Schism and Division Actual Schism is either a Schism in the Church or a Schsm from it A Schism in the Church stands in the Differences and Dissentions of the Members in it We have in the Church of Corinth three instances of it They differed about the Excellencies of their Teachers Every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas 1 Cor. 1.12 They differed about the manner and time of the Holy Eucharist They did not wait one for another the rich contemned the poor 1 Cor. 11.21 22. They differed about the variety of Gifts among them the inferior in gifts envied the superior and the superior in gifts despised the inferior the feet envied the hand and the head undervalued the feet 1 Cor. 12.15 21. And every one of these differences is in these Texts called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Schism in the Church and the reason is because every one of them did break the Unity of the Church in Ordinances When they lookt more on the Teacher than on the Truth there could not be an intire communion in hearing the pure word they heard it but partially in the gifts of one rather than of another When at the Lord's Supper they did not wait for but contemn one another there could not be an unanimous conjunction in that Ordidance The Eucharist the Seal and Bond of Union was as it were rent and torn in pieces When the inferior in gifts envied and the superior despised they could not worship and serve God like those Acts 2.1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with one accord Those Differences did make a breach upon that Worship that should have been intire Now here it is to be noted that every difference among Christians doth not amount to Schism There was a Paroxism a hot fit between Paul and Barnabas yet no Schism Acts 15.39 In the Church of Corinth Brother went to law with Brother 1 Cor. 6.6 The Apostle blames the difference but calls it not Schism Stephen Bishop of Rome was against Rebaptization Cyprian Bishop of Carthage was for it De unico Bapt. c.
14. yet there was no Schism Ambo in unitate Catholica constituti saith St. Austin both remained in Catholick unity There were differences between Chrysostom and Epiphanius between Jerom and Austin yet it would be hard to charge them with Schism The Lutherans differ from the other Reformed Churches in some lesser Truths but because they agree in fundamental Articles there is not properly a Schism the difference non impedit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hinders not the unity of the Faith saith Dr. Ward But then Differences amount to Schism when they break the unity of Faith Determ fol. 3. or the unanimous Communion in Ordinances Such were the Differences above-mentioned in Corinth there was no separation from the Church there yet because those Differences broke the unity of Ordinances they are called Schism A Schism from the Church stands in a criminous separation from it The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when it relates to the Church doth as I take it only denote in Scripture Divisions in a Church But the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth seem to denote division from a Church Such a kind of dissention in which men separate one from another in body and place as well as mind Yet in that 1 Cor. 3.3 it seemeth to be no more than division in a Church However this be the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jud. 19. doth properly signify to separate or put ones self extra terminos Ecclesiae out of the bounds of the Church Now this Schism from a Church is either negative or positive Negative Schism is when men separate from a Church and go no further no new Church or Assembly is set up Positive Schism is when there is not only a simple Separation but a new Church or Assembly is instituted in which the Word and Sacraments are administred This is called struere Altare contra Altare A negative Secession may in some case be lawful as when one is unjustly ejected out of a Church he may recede from it Yet saith the Learned Camero a positive Secession in that case is not lawful De Eccles 325. he may not immediately set up a new Church at least not without some other Reasons or Circumstances Touching this Separating Schism it is first to be noted that there may be a Schism without a Separation and there may be a Separation without a Schism There may be a Schism without a Separation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Schism in the body 1 Cor. 12.25 when there is no schism from it There was not for ought I can see any Separation in the Church of Corinth Yet the Dissentions there making a breach upon the Communion in Ordinances did amount to Schism St. Cyprian saith De Unit. Eccl. That all believers are in one House The Church saith he is unanimit at is hospitium an House of amity and unanimity where they sweetly dwell together in the unanimous Worship and Service of God If a man do not go out of this House and leave the Unity of it yet if he make Dissentions there and disturb that Unity he is guilty of Schism Again There may be a Separation without a Schism In many Cases one part of a Congregation may depart from the other and become a Church of it self and yet there may be no Schism at all What if it be done in a Congregation too great to meet together for convenience and by common consent This will be no Schism at all 'T is but as when Abraham and Lot parted asunder because the Land was not able to bear them Or as when the Hive being too little for the Bees one part goes away and dwells by it self in a new Family What if there be a Law or Canon made to allow such a Separation It will hardly be called Schism and yet Church-unity doth not vary as Human Laws and Canons do for then it might be something or nothing as men please If in a Church the foundations of the holy Faith be destroyed what can the Righteous do Join they cannot separate they must When Eunomius the Arian was made a Bishop Theod. l. 4. c. 14. not one of his Flock rich or poor young or old man or woman would communicate with him in the Service of God but left him to officiate alone When Nestorius did first publish his Heresy in the Church the people made a noise Evagr. l. 3. cap. 5. and ran out of the Assembly When under the Emperor Basiliscus five hundred Bishops condemned the Council of Chalcedon it was hard for Christians to join with them The Church is where the Truth is and no where else What if the terms of Communion be sinful we are rather to break with all Churches than to commit one sin against God The breaking off from him is more than breaking off from all men Thus in some cases there may be a Separation without Schism Indeed Schism is not a mere local defection but a moral one Non â—liscessies corporalibus motibus De Bap. cont Don. l. 1. c. 1. sed spirit alibus est metiendus saith St. Austin The departure is not to be measured by corporal motions but by spiritual but enough of this In the next place I shall endeavour to lay down some Characters whereby it may be known when Separation is Schismatical 1st Schismatical Separation is intentional and perfectly voluntary Thus the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that separate themselves Jud. 19. do by their own voluntary act put themselves out of the bounds of the Church Thus they that went out of the Apostolical Church 1 Joh. 2.19 did it intentionally and freely It is the observation of Aquinas That as in natural things 2 2ae quaest 39. Art 1. c. that which is by accident doth not constitute the Species So in moral not that which is besides the intention for that is accidental hence he infers Peccatum Schismatis proprie est speciale peccatum ex eo quod intendit se ab unitate separare quam charit as facit Proprie Schismatici dicuntur qui propria sponte intentione se ab unitate Ecclesiae separant The sin of Schism is a special sin in that it intends to separate from that unity which charity makes Schismaticks are properly those who of their own accord and intention do separate themselves from the unity of the Church It 's true every Schismatick doth not say as Marcion did Ego sindam Ecclesiam I will cleave the Church in two yet this is that which he means in his Separation As in our Common-Law when we would know whether an entry amount to a disseisin we enquire Cro. lib. 3. Blunden quo animo fecerit with what mind it was done So in Theology if we would know whether a Separation amount unto Schism we must enquire with what mind it was done Schism saith Dr. Hammond is a voluntary dividing The Schismatick is he that divides himself from the Church not he that is cut
thought otherwise from the right of Communion That Error of Rebaptization De Bapt. cont Don. l. 1. c. ult which in the Donatists was as St. Austin speaks Fuligo in tartareâ faeditate the smoak of their hellish filthiness was in St. Cyprian but naevus in candore sanctae Animae a freckle in the candor of an holy Soul and the reason was because St. Cyprian had what they had not Charitatis ubera the breasts of Charity to cover his Defects In respect of this Charity Bishop Davenant saith Sentent de Pace 112. Melius de Ecclesiâ meruit errans Cyprianus quam Stephanus Romanus recte sentiens Ecclesias quantum in se fuit Schismatico Spiritu dilacerans Cyprian erring deserved better of the Church than Stephen Bishop of Rome rightly thinking but by a Schismatical Spirit as much as he could renting the Churches Charity is a great thing and I hope it may be found among the Nonconformists they leave the Church neminem judicantes judging none of their Conforming Brethren the breasts of their Charity may cover some defects I hope therefore Schism in this respect cannot be charged upon them I am sure Charity is in all good men Conforming or Nonconforming but if we compare Parties together that Party which binds burthens on Conscience and leaves them there seems to me to have less of Charity than that which shrinks and withdraws the Shoulder from them 3dly Schismatical Separation issues out of pride and contempt The Donatists thought themselves the only men they boasted as if their Communion were the only Communion Si nostra communio est Ecclesia vestra non est Aug. de Bapt. cont Don. l. 1. c. 11. as if their Baptism were the only Baptism Vos dicitis in nobis Baptismum non esse Aust contr Cresc l. 4. cap. 62. But do the Nonconformists separate thus Do they say that they only are the Church or that they only have the Ordinances Do they despise their Conforming Brethren or lift up themselves above them No surely they desire to be but as Brethren and that one Brother might not Lord it over another When our Divines charge the Monasteries as Schismatical because they have separate Meetings and Ordinances Bellarmin answers thus De Not. Eccl. l. 4. c. 10. Soli Schismatici sunt qui ita erigunt altare proprium ut altare aliorum prophanum censeant They only are Schismaticks who so set up their own Altar that they esteem the Altar of others prophane It is indeed one thing to have distinct Meetings for Worship and another to have opposite ones The Nonconformists have Meetings of their own but without the contempt of others The Jews say he that contemns the Solemn Assemblies of the Church hath no part in Seculo futuro But where the distinct Meetings are without contempt there I suppose it is not to be called Schism Here that may take place he that is not against the Church is for it A candid Charity interprets all to the best 4thly Schismatical Separation is ordinarily if not always attended with some Error or other Schisma in Haeresim eructat The Novatians Donatists Luciferians had their propria Dogmata their proper Errors Their Separations were to set up their Errors their Errors under pretence of Truth were to justify their Separations Hence St. Cyprian saith that the Schismaticks are De Unit. Eccl. Pestes lues Fidei corrumpendae veritatis artifices the Pests and Plagues of the Faith the Artists in corrupting Truth But as for the Nonconformists what new Doctrine do they bring what Error do they propagate what deadly poison is under their Lips Do they not fully and firmly adhere to the Church as Optatus speaks in una Fide in one Faith Whit. de Not Eccl. cap. 8. are they not joined together ut in manu digiti as the fingers in the hand pointing out the same pure Doctrine Bishop Abbot in his Book De gratiâ perseverantiâ tells us of some Corrupters Prasat ad Lect. Qui veteres haereses denuo in Scenam producunt Pelagianâ lue correpti Gratiae Divinae vim nervosque succidunt Who bring up the old Heresies upon the stage and having caught the Pelagian Pestilence cut asunder the strength and nerves of Divine Grace Not only some of our men but Foreigners too have taken notice that the Plague of Socinianism hath been creeping in among us Upon the 8th Article Mr. Rogers upon the Articles of our Church tells us that he heard a great Learned man speaking of Zanchy's Book De tribus Elohim call him a Fool and an Ass Arnoldus in his Book against the Racovian Catechism Praef. ad Lect. takes notice of the Socinian Heresy creeping up among us But do the Nonconformists propagate these Errors Do they spread abroad the poison Do they not steddily stick to the true pure Doctrine of our Church And is not conformity in Doctrine much more than conformity in Ceremonies Surely it is It seems therefore hard to charge Schism upon them He indeed goes out of the Church who goes out not in Body but in Faith Hence it was the judgment of Gersom Ger. de Eccles cap. 6. sect 3. That in a simple Schism without any depraved Doctrine added to it when it is doubtful by whom the Schism is made till it be lawfully determined those that are Followers in it do belong to the Church 5thly Schismatical Separation is a breach of some Sacred Vnity The Schismatick adheres to the Church in part but withal he breaks in part He adheres in part De Bapt. cont Don. l. 1. c. 1. or else he would be an Apostate Thus St. Austin saith of the Donatists In quo nobiscum sentiunt in co nobiscum sunt In what they think with us in that they are with us Thus when the Donatists asked whether their Baptism did generate Sons to God If it did not generate why doth not the Catholick Church rebaptize them but if it do generate then ours say the Donatists is the Church St. Austin makes this answer De Bapt. cont Don. l. 1. c. 10. That the Church of the Donatists doth generate Vnde conjuncta est non unde Separata est Separata est à vinculo Charitatis sed adjuncta est in uno Baptismate It generates as it is joined to the Church Catholick not as it is separated from it It is separated from the bond of Charity but it is joined in one Baptism Thus the Donatists were â—oined to the Church in part Again The Schismatick though he adhere to the Church in part yet withal he breaks in part or else he could be no Schismatick Thus St. Austin saith of the Donatists De Bapt. contr Don. l. 1. c. 1. In eo à nobis recesserunt in quo à nobis dissentiunt In that they are departed from us in which they dissent from us When Cresconius urged for the Donatists that there was
una Religio eadem Sacramenta nihil in Christianâ observatione diversum Contra Cresc l. 2. cap. 3. That on both sides there was the same Religion the same Sacraments nothing in Christian observation diverse Which Plea by the way had it been true would have been good there being no Schism where there is no breach of Unity St. Austin utterly denies it and asks them Quare rebaptizatis Why do you rebaptize those that were baptized in the Catholick Church Indeed they thought themselves the only Church and so broke themselves off from the Church Catholick Thus the Schismatick is partly in conjunction with the Church and partly in separation from it he adheres in one thing and breaks off in another But is it thus with the Nonconformists Are not they joined to the Church in all that which is truly Vnity Have not they in their Meetings the unity of Ordinances the same pure Word preached the same holy Sacraments administred and this by true Ministers of Christ And what other Unity is there in Visible Churches Or what of true Unity is there between two Pararochial Churches which is not between their Meetings and Parochial Churches Abate but Humane things in which Church unity stands not and they are not partially but totally in conjunction with the Church of England and if so there is no breach of Unity and by consequence no Schism in them De Bapt. cont Don. l. 1. c. 1. St. Austin lays down a notable Rule That he that acts Sicut in unitate agitur as it is done in the unity in eo manet atque conjungitur in that he abides and is joined in all those things wherein Vnity stands The Nonconformists act as the Church doth therefore they are in conjunction with it St. Austin tells us Contra Cresc l. 2. c. 10. That the Church doth in the Donatists acknowledge Omnia quae sua sunt all things that are its own Let the Conforming Ministers acknowledge all that of true Unity which is in the Dissenters Meetings and they may perceive that their Brethren are in conjunction with them Where there is a total conjunction there is no breach of true Unity and where there is no such breach there is no Schism But you will say their departure from the Congregations in publick is a Schism I answer Every local Separation is not a Schism there is more in Schism than so Every departure is not Schism It is hardly to be called such when those that depart do yet remain in conjunction with them from whom they depart And this I think is the Case of those that are Nonconformists 6thly Schismatical Separation is a breach of sacred Unity for little or no cause at all Hence Irenaeus saith o◠the Schismaticks That propter modicas quaslibet causas magnum gloriosum Corpus Christi conscindunt for little and inconsiderable Causes they cu◠in pieces the great and glorious Body of Christ The Professors of Leyden say Synops pur Theol. Disp 40. That a Schismatical Church is that quae propter externos aliquos ritus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Communionem Christianam abrumpit which for some external indifferent Rites breaks Christian Communion This Character seems prima facie to press upon the Separation of the Nonconformists They separate for Rites and Ceremonies which seem to be but minute and inconsiderable things this therefore must be duly considered The Ceremonies of our Church may be considered under a double notion either as they are in themselves or else as they are terms of Communion The Ceremonies as considered in themselves however innocent they seem to be to the Conformists they are not so to the Nonconformists To instance but in one of them The Cross in Baptism is lookt upon as a thing unlawful or at least as a thing very ill-coloured and suspected to be unlawful To explain this I shall lay down some few things 1st The Sign of the Cross was indeed used among the Ancient Fathers but not without a mixture of Superstition De Cor. Mil. Tertullian will have Signaculum Crucis to be necessary in every part of our life Lib. 2. adv Judaeos St. Cyprian saith That in hoc Signo Crucis salus sit omnibus qui in frontibus notentur in this Sign of the Cross there is Salvation to all who have this mark in their Foreheads Origen saith In Exod. cap. 15. That fear and trembling falls upon the Devils cum Signum Crucis in nobis viderint when they see the Sign of the Cross in us St. Ambrose saith Ser. 43. That all prosperity is in uno Signo Christi in that one sign of Christ he that sows in it shall have a Crop of Eternal Life he that jour mes in it shall arrive at Heaven it self St. Athanasius saith That Signo◠racis omnia magica compescuntur De Incar verbi all Conjurations are repressed by the Sign of the Cross In Matt. Homil. 55. St. Chrysostom saith That all Sacraments are perfected Signo Crucis with the Sign of the Cross St. Austin saith In Joh. Tract 118. That unless the Sign of the Cross be applied to the Forehead of the Believers or to the Water of Regeneration or to the Oyl with which they are anointed or to the Sacrifice with which they are nourished nihil eorum rite perficitur none of these things are rightly performed Bellarm. de Imag. lib. 2. c. 29. Such a use of the Cross as this is Protestants cannot allow of Only the Papists who would have Humane Inventions do great things make use of such Sayings in the Fathers 2dly The Sign of the Cross is an abominable Idol in the Popish Church Bellarmine who doth distinguish the Cross into three parts the True Cross the Image of the Cross and the Sign of the Cross lays down this general Doctrine Omnes Cruces adoramus Bell. l. 2. c. 30. de Imag. We worship all Crosses And particularly of the Sign of the Cross he saith That it is Signum sacrum venerabile a sacred and venerable Sign Aquinas saith Pars 3. Q. 25. Art 4. That the Image of Christ is to be adored cultu latriae the Sign is to have the same adoration as the thing it self And how which way is it that such an horrible Idol should be retained in a Church Protestant and pure from Idolatry The Brazen Serpent was ordained by God himself and yet when it was abused to Idolatry Hezekiah broke it to pieces and called it Nehushtan a piece of brass 2 Kings 18.4 It was a singular Figure of Christ The lifting of it up upon a pole for corporal Cures did by Divine Ordination type out the lifting up of him upon the Cross for spiritual yet becoming an Idol it was no more to be endured And why should the Cross a mere Human Invention being once so abused ever be tolerated The Children of Israel Hos 2.16 17. were not to mention the
that which it hath in peculiar They differ from it in Episcopacy so do the Foreign Churches they differ from its Liturgy so do the Foreign Churches at least in part Their Congregations are distinct and distant from the Parochial Churches so is one Parochial Church from another If the Foreign Churches notwithstanding such differences are in unity with our Church so are the Nonconformists If the Nonconformists by reason of such differences are Schismaticks what are the Foreign Churches which have the same You will say the case is diferent Those of Foreign Churches never did as our Nonconformists do go out from our Parochial Churches Very true but every local separation doth not amount to Schism neither have others the same occasion of separation from our Churches as the Nonconformists have When a Law or Canon made by those who have particular jurisdiction in a Nation or Church will justify Separation and make it no Schism then the Separation is not from the Church-Catholick But such is the case of the Nonconformists Should there be such a Law or Canon made among us it would justify their Separation and make it no Schism therefore their Separation is not from the Church Catholick When men separate from a Church in pride and contempt as if they only were the Church then the Separation is from the Church Catholick Thus the Novatians thought that the pure Church was with them only Thus the Donatists said that the Church was only in parte Donati Thus the Papists say that the Church is only in parte Papae but the Nonconformists do not do so They acknowledge our Church to be a true Church they are joined to it in all that which is true unity They would further bear a part in it if some Stumbling blocks were out of the way By these things it may appear that they still remain in conjunction with the Church-Catholick Thus I have gone over the Characters of Schismatical Separation and in so doing have briefly examined the Case of the Nonconformists FINIS Books Printed for and Sold by Thomas Cockerill at the Three Legs in the Poultrey near Stocks-Market HIstorical Collections the 3d Part in 2 Volumes Never before Printed Containing the Principal Matters which happened from the meeting of the Parliament November the 3d. 1640. to the end of the Year 1644. wherein is a particular Account of the Rise and Progress of the Civil War to that Period Impartially related Setting forth only Matter of Fact in Order of Time without Observation or Reflection By John Rushworth Fol. A Demonstration of the first Applications of the Apocalypse together with the Consent of the Ancients concerning the Fourth Beast in the 7th of Daniel and the Beast in the Revelations By Drue Crescener D. D. 4to. A Seasonable Discourse wherein is examined what is lawful during the Confusions and Revolutions of Government Stitched 4to. The Evidence of Things not seen or divers Spiritual and Philosophical Discourses concerning the state of Holy Men after Death By that eminently Learned Divine Moses Amyraldus Translated out of the French Tongue by a Minister of the Church of England 8vo. A Succinct and Seasonable Discourse of the Occasions Causes Nature Rise Growth and Remedies of mental Errors To which is added 1. An Answer to Mr. Gary against Infant-Baptism 2 An Answer to some Antinomian Errors 3 A Sermon about Union By John Flavel 8vo. A Discourse concerning Liturgies by the late learned Divine Mr. David Clerkson 8vo. Geography Anatomized Or A Compleat Geographical Grammar being a short and exact Analysis of the whole body of Modern Geography after a new plain and easy method whereby any person may in a short time attain to the knowledge of that most noble and useful Science c. To which is subjoined the present state of the European Plantations in the East and West-Indies with a Reasonable Proposal for the propagation of the Blessed Gospel in all Pagan Countries Illustrated with divers Maps By Patrick Gordon M. A. 8vo. An Exposition of the Assemblies Shorter Catechism with Practical Inferences from each Question by John Flavell late Minister of the Gospel at Dartmouth in Devon 8vo. The Future State Or A Discourse attempting some display of the Soul's Happiness in regard to that eternally progressive Knowledge or eternal increase of Knowledge and the consequences of it which is among the Blessed in Heaven by a Countrey Gentleman a Worshipper of God in the way of the Church of England 12o. The Death of Ministers Improved Or An Exhortation to the Inhabitants of Hortley in Glocestershire and others on the much lamented death of that Faithful Minister Mr. Henry Stubbs To which is added a Sermon upon that occasion by Richard Baxter 12o. English Exercises for School-boys to translate into Latin comprizing all the Rules of Grammar and other necessary Observations afcending gradually from the meanest to the highest Capacities By John Garretson School master Fourth Edition 12o. A Short Introduction into Orthography Or. The method of True Spelling published for the common good but especially for the use of a private Grammer and Writing-School 12o.