the other parts I did resolve to condescend to follow it at least so far till it might appear what was His mind to me therein and accordingly did follow it till it came to the period whatever it be that now it is at This is the true rise and occasion of this Treatise and of the several parts thereof and therefore I have continued its entry in the original mould thereof to wit in laying down some general doctrines from that place of Scripture and if there be afterward any more particular relation to the second and third chapters of the Revelation than to other Scriptures this simple narration of the rise thereof may satisfie any concerning the same whereof we shall say no more but first lay down the grounds of all from that text and then proceed in the Treatise which is divided in four parts upon the reasons formerly hinted at The Grounds of this Treatise AMongst other things that troubled the Church in the primitive times Scandal or offence was a chief one and the many directions that are given concerning it and the reproofs that are of it shew that it is a main piece of a Christians conversation to walk rightly in reference thereto and a great evidence of loosnesse where it is not heeded On ver 6. we shew that this was a foul fault of the Nicolaitans to be carelesse of offending or of giving of offence and not to regard Scandal and here the Lord holdeth it forth to be so by comparing it with Balaam's practice ver 14. which is aggreaged from this that he taught Balac to lay a stumbling-block before Israel From which these doctrines may be gathered 1. That there is such a fault incident to men in their carriage even to lay stumbling-blocks before others and to offend them 2. That men ought to walk so as not to offend others or so as to lay no stumbling-block before them So that it is not enough not to stumble themselves if this could be separated from the other but also they ought to be carefull not to stumble others 3. The Lord doth take special notice how men do walk in reference to others in this and is highly provoked where He seeth any guilty of it 4. The devil hath ever endeavoured to have offences abounding in the Church and to make some lay such stumbling-blocks before others 5. It is most hurtfull to the Church and destructive to souls where offences abound and men walk not tenderly in reference to these so that the Lord expresseth it with a twofold wo Matth. 18. as being a wo beyond sword or pestilence 6. We may gather that corrupt doctrine never wanteth offences joyned with it and that ordinarily those who spread that are untender in this 7. That offences often accompany the rise and beginning of any work of Christ's amongst a people these tares of offences are ordinarily then sown 8. That some offences are of a publick nature and that Church-officers should take notice of such and that it is offensive to Christ when they are over-seen and not taken heed unto 9. Church-officers even such as otherwayes are approved in their carriage and ministery may fall in this fault as by comparing the Epistles to Pergamos and Thyatira is clear 10. When Officers fall in this fault it is yet no reprovable thing in members that are pure in respect of their own personal carriage to continne in communion with such a Church the Ordinances otherwayes being pure PART I. The sum of it THese doctrins being in the words and Scandal being a great part of the challenge of the Nicolaitans or at least a great aggravation of their challenge and also being a most necessary thing for a Christian 's daily walk to be carefully taken heed unto there is ground here to speak to the same in a time especially wherein offences abound and that in respect of what is called-for both in private persons and in Church-judicatories or of private scandals and such as are publick We shall draw what we would say of the first to these five 1. To shew what an offence is 2. To shew how it is given 3. To shew some considerations that ought to deter from giving of it 4. To shew what weight it ought to have on a Christian in his walk 5. Point at some directions necessary to be adverted unto when offences are rise and multiply CHAP. I. Several Distinctions of Scandal FOr clearing of the first two we shall premit some distinctions and we would advert that by offence here is not understood that which doth actually displease or grieve another alway for there is a great difference betwixt displeasing and offending as also betwixt pleasing and edifying for one may be displeased and yet edified well satisfied and yet offended First then we are to distinguish betwixt displeasing and offending for here offence is taken in opposition not to a man's being pleased but to his edification and so offence or stumbling in short here is something that doth or may mar the spiritual edification of another whether he be pleased or displeased as by comparing Rom. 14. ver 13. with ver 20 and 21. is clear for what he first calleth a stumbling-block or an offence he expoundeth it afterward to be any thing that may be the occasion of a fall to another and make him stumble or weak or to halt in the course of holinesse as some block would hinder or put a man in hazard to fall in the running of a race And from this is the similitude drawn in this phrase 2. Scandal is either given only or taken only or both Given only is when one doth lay something before another which is apt of it self to cause him fall or sin although the other do not fall by occasion of it yet if it be inductive to sin of its own nature it is an offence or stumbling-block as Christ saith to Peter Matth. 16. Thou art an offence to me though there was nothing could stick to Him yet that was in its nature such which Peter had given Him in advice 2. It is taken only when no occasion is given but when a man doth what is not only lawfull but necessary and yet others from their own corruption do carp thereat and stumble thereon Thus did the Pharisees offend at Christ Matth. 15. 12. who did never give offence to any and this is common to wicked men that stumble where no stumbling-block is and as it is said they know not whereat they stumble Prov. 4. 19. This also is called passive offence as the other is called active 3. It is both given and taken when there is something active on the one side that is apt to draw another to sin and something that is yielded unto on the otherside and the bait is accepted This was it in that stumbling-block which Balaam laid before Israel and thus ordinarily it is amongst men who having corruption are soon inflamed in lesse or more
Discipline is more vigorous and concerning that there is no question it being done in due manner Yet I say that that can be no ground for withdrawing from the Ordinances of Christ as if they or their consciences were polluted by the presence of such others For 1. That there were such defects in the Church of the Jews cannot be denied and particularly doth appear in the instance of Elie's sons who made the Ordinances of the Lord contemptible with their miscarriages yet that either it was allowable to the people to withdraw or faulty to joyn in the Ordinances can no way be made out If it be said there was but one Church then Therefore none could separate from the Ordinances in it Answ. 1. This doth confirm what is said to wit that the joyning of scandalous persons in Ordinances doth not pollut them to others for if so the Lord had not laid such a necessity upon those that were tender that they behoved to partake of polluted Ordinances or to have none and if it did not pollute them then some reason would be given that doth evidence it now to do so 2. If there be an unity of the Church now as well as then then the conâ—…equence must be good because so where ever folks communicate those many that communicate any where are one bread and one body as the Apostle speaketh 1 Cor. 10. 17. compared with chap 12 13. And so by communicating any where we declare our selves to be of the same visible Church and politick body with those who communicat elswhere even as by Baptism we are baptized into one Church and into communion with all the members of the body any where And therefore if this be considered it will not be enough to eschew pollution if the objectioâ—… be true and well grounded to separate from one Society or one particular Congregation except there be a separation from the whole visible Church for so also Jews might have separated from particular Synagogues or have choosed times for their offerings and sacrifices distinct from others Famous Cotton of New England in his Holinesse of church-Church-members pag. 21. grants that there were many scandalous persons in the Church of the Jews 2. He saith that that was by the Priests defect for they ought not to have been retained And 3. though he say that that will not warrand the lawfulnesse of admitting scandalous persons to the Church yet he asserteth that it may argue the continuance of their Church-estate notwithstanding of such a toleration and if so then it approveth continuing therein and condemneth separation therefrom and consequently a Church may be a Church having the Ordinances in purity and to be communicate in notwithstanding of the formâ—…r fault 3. What hath been marked out of Learned Writers for paralleling the constitution of the Church under the Gospel with that under the Law in essentiall things doth overthrow this objection for now separation is as impossible as formerly 2. This defect is to be observed in severall of the Primitive Churches as we may particularly see in the second and third Chapters of the Revelation yet it is never found that any upon that account did withdraw or were reproved for not doing so even when the Officers were reproved for defect Yea on the contrary these who keeped themselves pure from these Scandals though continuing in that communion are commended and approven and exhorted to continue as formerly Now if coutinuing in communion in such a case be of it self sinfull and personall integrity be not sufficient to professours where the defect is sinfull to the Officers even though in other personall things and duties of their stations they were approveable How can it be thought that the faithfull and true Witnesse should so sharply reprove the one and so fully approve the other at the same time 3. The nature of Church-communion doth confirm this because such influence hath the scandalousnesse of one to make another guilty as the approven conversation of the other hath to make the Ordinances profitable to him that is scandalous for we can no otherwise partake of the evil than of the good of another in Church-communion But it is clear that the graciousnesse of one cannot sanctifie an Ordinance to one that is profane and therefore the profanity of one cannot pollute the Ordinance to one that is tender And as he that examineth himself partaketh worthily in respect of himself and his own condition but doth not sanctifie communicating to another So he that partaketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself and not to another and for that cause is both the precept and the threatning bounded Let a man examine himself c. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself for upon doing or omitting of duty in himself doth follow worthy or unworthy communicating to him And if in the most near conjugall fellowship the company of a profane Husband may be sanctified to a gracious Wife even when hers is unsanctified to him because that dependeth upon the persons own qualification and way of usemaking of Gods Ordinance of marriage much more may it be here this last might be a distinct argument of it self 4. If continuance in communion with such persons be sinfull Then it must either be because communion with such as are profane indeed whether we know or think them to be so or not is sinfull or it must be because we know them or think them to be such But neither of these can be said Not the first because so to keep communion with an hypocrite or a Believer in a carnall frame were sinfull although we thought them to be sincere which cannot be pleaded nor can it be said it is because we know them to be so Because 1. If we knew a man to be so and another knew not in that case the Ordinances were pollutted to one and not to another at the same time though possibly both were exercising the same faith and having examined themselves were in the same frame which were absurd Yea 2. If it depended on our knowledge of it Then our very supposing it to be so although it were not so would pollute the Ordinance and what confusion would be there may be afterward hinted Nor can it be said it is because we think so because supposing some to think otherwise it would be still an ordinance to them and a duty to continue in it and not to us which is the former absurdity and this doth not flow from the binding nature of an erroneous conscience which may be alleged in other cases but from the difference of persons light charity or other apprehensions of things whereby one is induced to esteem that scandalous which another doth not 5. If communion with profane persons that are such to our knowledge be sinfull and polluteth Ordinances Then these things may be enquired which will infâ—…r diverse absurdities 1. Ought persons to try all those that they keep communion with
whether they be profane or 〈◊〉 For if any profane person be in that communion which they might have known if they had tried then their ignorance cannot excuse 2. It may be enquired what degree of triall and search doth sufficiently exoner because possibly a further triall might have discovered some to be profane 3. It may be enquired what evidences may demonstrate persons to be scandalous and make them to be so accounted of If only something seen by themselves or if something reported by others and that whether it be judicially made out or only asserted and how manies report is to be taken for proof or if any that be so reported of be so to be accounted 4. What sort of scaâ—…dals are to be enquired-in to make a person such as polluteth the Ordinances If it be any kind of scandal or but scandals of such a nature If one scandal be sufficient or if theâ—…e must be many and how many are to be laid weight upon in this and some satisfying grounds how and where to fix the difference are to be laid down 5. It may be asked if one scandalous person alone doth pollute the Ordinances or if there must be moe and if so How many 6. Suppose such a scandal were known to us alone charity and Christs command do say it is not to be published conscience saith in that case the Ordinance is polluted time straits either to communicate doubtingly or with offence to abstain and hide the cause or contrary to charity to signifie the same These and many such like things are requisit to satisfie one upon this supposition that communion in such a case is sinfull Therefore it is not to be admitted 6. If the Ordinance be polluted to one that is clean Then it is either the deed of the Church-officers that doth pollute it or the deed of the scandalous person that doth communicate But neither of these can be said Not the first for that would suppose that all the Ordinances were polluted although no scandalous person were present actually because they were not actually excluded and though they were absent yet there being no impediment made to them by Church-officers as to their guilt it is the same Nor the second Because supposing a person not to be debarred it is his duty to communicate and can it be said that he in doing of his duty upon the matter should make that not to be a duty to us which lieth on by a joynt command which requireth eating from him and from us as it requireth praying 7. The Lords ordering it so in His providence that He admitteth unsanctified Officers to administrate His Ordinances and yet withall accounting them Officers and the Ordinances in their hands to be His Ordinances and that even when they are known to be unsound till in His own way they be removed doth demonstrate this that pollution in joynt worshippers doth not pollute the Ordinances to others For if any did pollute them Then most of all scandalous Officers But these do not Ergo c. We may see it first in the scandalousnesse of Priests under the Law for we must either say that there were no scandalous Priests or that the people did then offer no sacrifice and joyn in no worship or that sinfully they did it All which are absurd 2. We see in Christs time the Scribes and Pharisees were pointed out by Him as scandalous Mat. 23. v. 3. Yet even there doth He require continuance in the Ordinances administrate by them notwithstanding 3. Doth not Paul speak of some that preached out of envy Philip. 1. 15. which is a most grosse scandal and of others who sought their own things and not the things of Christ Phil. 2. 21 Both which are grosse and clearly evidenced by his testimony yet is he content that people continue yea he supposeth that they may profit in communion with them which he would not had the Ordinances been polluted by them to others And the same may be said of several Churches in these second and third Chapters of the Revelation where both grossnesse of Ministers and of many Professors is notified by Christ to the Church yet it cannot be supposed that that might have been made the ground of separation afterward from them more than not doing of it was reprovable before 8. If known evil in any that doth communicate pollute the Ordinances in themselves Then how can a Believer communicate with himself Because 1. he hath corruption 2. He hath as full knowledge of it as of any other mans yea that which may make him think it more than what he knoweth of any other man 3. That corruption is as near him as the corruption of any 4. The Law doth more particularly strike against corruption in him as to himself than that which is in any other Yea 5. this corruption doth certainly in so far pollute the Ordinance to him and make him guilty Now the same grounds that say he may communicate with a good conscience notwithstanding of his own corruptions will also say he may communicate notwithstanding of that which is in another much more because the sins that follow his corruption are his own sins which cannot be said of the sins of others And if repentance for his own sin resting upon Christ protesting against the body of death which yet are but the acts of the same person in so far as renued differing from himself as unrenued If I say such acts may quiet his conscience and give him confidence to partake notwithstanding of his own corruption and that even then when he as unrenued may be accounted guilty may they not much more give him confidence in reference to the sins of another which are not so much as his deeds 9. In that directory which Christ giveth Mat. 18. this is implied because he doth warrand an offended brother to bring obstinate offenders to the Church as the last step of their duty and as their â—…ull exoneration Tell the Church saith he and no more is required by him after that but conforming of his carriage to the Churches Sentence in case of obstinacie And none can think upon supposition that the Church did not their duty that then they were from that forth not to joyn in that Church but to separate from them as from heathens and publicans because so a particular person might Excommunicate a Church whom yet Christ will not have to withdraw from communion with a private member till obstinacie and the Churches censuring interveen Yea by so doing a private person might account another a heathen and publican without any publick Censure which is contrary to Christs scope which subjoyneth this withdrawing of communion from him to the Churches Censure This will bind the more if we consider that Christs words have an allusion as is commonly acknowledged to the Jewish Sanedrim which being but one could not admit of any separation from its communion though there had been defect in this What may be done in
it becometh as it were two and this is exclaimed against and regrated by the Fathers under the expression of erecting altare contra altare that is altar against altar whenas the Lord allowed but one even in reference to His own worship 2. Schism may be in worship that is when it may be both the same Doctrine and Government is acknowledged yet there is not communion keeped in Church-ordinances as in Prayer Word and Sacraments but a separate way of going about these is followed It seemeth that this was in part the schism of the Corinthians whatever was the rise thereof that they had a divided way of communicating and of going about other duties and other Ordinances as may be gathered from 1 Cor. 11. 18 19 20 21. with 33. This kind of schism hath been frequent in the Church and hath flowed not so much from dissatisfaction with the Doctrine and Government thereof as with the constitution of the Members or failings of the Governours Thus it was in the case of the Novatians Donatists Meletians Cathari and others of whom it is recorded that their fault did not consist in setting up any strange Doctrine or in rejecting of the truth at least at the first but in breaking the band of communion as Augustine hath it often for saith he Schismaticos facit non diversa fides sed communionis disrupta societas contra Faustum lib. 20. Again he saith of the Donatists Ad Bonifac. Epist. 50. Nec de ipsa fide vertitur quaestio sed de sola communione infaeliciter litigant contra unitatem Christi rebellâ—…s inimicitiâ—…s perversitate sui erroris exercent And this sort of schism doth often draw with it the former there being no way to maintain this without the other Of this schism there are many kinds according to its several rises and degrees and also according as it extendeth to the breaking of communion in whole from Ordinances or in part only from some or in some Ordinances as appeareth to have been in the Church of Corinth where there hath not been a totall schism though it hath been in that Ordinance of the Supper especially and it is like also that that schism hath been occasioned because of the corruption of some members with whom others have scared to communicate and therefore have not tarried for them for the Apostle doth particularly condemn this and exhort them to tarry one for another and to attain this he doth clear them of what was necessary for right partaking to wit the examining of themselves ver 28. and doth declare unto them that who so did eat unworthily and did not prepare himself did eat and drink damnation but to himself and not to others wherefore saith he ye need not be so anxiously solicitous how they be prepared or of what sort they be that are with you but examine your selves and tarry one for another that there be not a schism amongst you And this he speaketh even when he hath been reproving drunkennesse among the Communicants yet will he not admit that as an excuse why private persons should Communicate separatedly which was their practice This was spoken of in the first part This Schism however it be understood hath ever proven exceeding hurtfull to the Church and hath been an inlet and nursery to the greatest errours It is most pressingly condemned in the Scriptures even with as great weight as corrupt doctrine and heresie are and it is attributed to that same originall to wit the flesh with witchcraft idolatry heresie c. Gal. 5. 20. It hath ever been most weighting to faithfull Ministers most offensive to people of all sorts most advantageous to the enemies of the truth and hath made the Church most vile and contemptible before the world as we may see in the sad complaints and writings of the Fathers in reference to the Novatians Donatists and others of that kind It hath also proven most dangerous to these who have been engaged therein and often hath been a snare to bring on some spiritual desertion deadness of spirit security self-confidence or some other spirituall evils of that kind or to dispose for receiving a more grosse tentation as was formerly marked Also it may be observed that such schisms have spread very suddenly in some places of the world but have not been easily removed for these schisms of the Novatians and Donatists did trouble the Church for severall generations which might be enough to make men think the breach of unity in that respect to be no little evil and to make them fearfull to fall in the same But because every schism properly doth imply some errour in doctrine although it doth not arise from the same therefore we shall forbear to speak any thing particularly to this because what hath been said of errours in doctrine may in part be applyed here For we will find that schism doth imply one or all of those 1. That such apprehended corruptions do either make such a society to be no Church or communion with that Church in other Ordinances to be unlawfull because of such corruptions or of such corrupt members 2. That there may be a distinct erected Church beside a Church which yet may not be of communion with that other Church 3. These or such consequences that either the Church of Christ in the earth is not one which truth of the unity of the Catholick visible Church is the main ground of all Church-union and communion Or that that one Church may be of such heterogeneous or dissimilary parts as the one of them ought not to have communion with the other Or at least this that a person ought to seek his own satisfaction and consolation though to the prejudice and renting of the Church and to the generall offence and stumbling of all others The fairest schism and separation must imply one of these for it cannot be conceived that otherwayes men would act so directly according to these principles if they did not take them for granted It is to be adverted that as there is an unjust schism that is a separation without any cause at all so there is a rash and scandalous schism that is when it is beyond the ground given or when the ground given is not such as will warrant such a separation Which may be 1. when the separation or schism is upon some occasion which is indeed a defect in the Church but not such as doth make communion therein sinfull as that in Corinth Or 2. when it may be the schism is extended beyond the ground that is when suppose one could not communicate in the Lords Supper in such a Church because of some sinfull corruption in that Ordinance if upon that occasion one should separate from communion in all Ordinances that were to exceed the ground given Or 3. when no professed schism is owned yet when really and indeed it is practised so as men can neither justifie a schism or separation upon such a ground nor yet
The Dying man's TESTAMENT to the Church of Scotland OR A Treatise concerning Scandal Divided into Four Parts 1. Concerning Scandal in the general 2. Concerning Publick Scandals or Scandals as they are the object of Church-censures and more particularly as they are in practice 3. Concerning Doctrinal Scandals or scandalous errors 4. Concerning Scandalous Divisions In each of which there are not a few choice and useful Questions very shortly and satisfyingly discussed and cleared BY That singularly faithfull and wise Servant of Jesus Christ Mr. IAMES DURHAM late Minister of the Gospel in Glasgow Who being dead by this yet speaketh And published by Iohn Carstares one of the Ministers in GLASGOVV To which is prefixed an excellent PREFACE of famous Mr. Blair Minister of the Gospel at St Andrews wherein he also vigorously driveth the main design of the blessed Author in this last Piece of his Labours Together with a TABLE of the CONTENTS of the several Chapters of each Part. Matth. 18. 7. Wo unto the world because of Offences for it must needs be that Offences come but wo to that man by whom the Offence cometh 1 Cor. 10. 32. Give none Offence neither to the Iews nor to the Gentiles nor to the Church of God Psal. 119. 165. Great peace have all they which love thy Law and nothing shall offend them Edinburgh Printed by Christopher Higgins in Harts Close over against the Trone-Church 1659. The Preface THe rise of the subsequent Treatise the blessed Author in the very first words thereof declareth to be the occasion he had from Revel 2. on the Epistle to the Church of Pergamos to meditate on the nature and sorts of Scandal And before I say anything of this present work I shall hence take occasion to shew my thoughts of his Commentary on the Book of Revelation In my humble opinion that which was spoken of the vertuous woman Prov. 30. v. 29. may well be applied to the pains this Author hath taken on that Book Many Writers have done worthily but thou excellest them all The reason of my so high estimation thereof is taken from a threefold excellencie I find therein The first is a brief clear and accurate opening of the most difficult Text in the whole Bible applying with great sagacity and admirable dexterity dark Prophecies to their historical events and yet with judicious sobriety not restraining as it were to single stars of several persons that which rather relateth to conglobate constellations of agents or patients together with a modest yet a diligent search of those things which are not yet accomplished Whoever would compendiously have an experiment hereof let him read the first Lecture on Chap. 6. which parcel with some others were sent to me by the Author some moneths before the printing And as herein I did find great satisfaction by reason of the clearnesse and notable coherence of the Interpretation and convincing grounds and arguments proving the solidity thereof So may thou Christian Reader be sweetly refreshed and strongly confirmed thereby The second excellencie hereof is the great plenty of practical Divinity relating to all Christians but more especially to Ministers of the Gospel I cannot name any Authors work wherein I have perceived so many edifying overtures so many searching discourses and encouraging helps as this Commentary abounds with From the first Lecture on Chap. 3. both the carefull Christian and the well-gifted diligent Preacher may be first allarmed and then well strengthened by that searching discourse on these words Thou hast a name that thou livest but art dead The third excellency of this work lieth not only in clearing and answering many doubts very succinctly but also in discussing more largely by way of digression many weighty and important Truths even to the number of twenty five So that this Commentary besides profitable opening of such a Text and handling much practical Divinity cleareth with great modesty without any personal reflections and discusseth edifyingly as much darkened Truth as if the whole work had been written to dispute and determine pertinent and important questions But now to say no more of that Work which speaketh for it self being in the hands of many and I wish it be diligently perused with a blessing from Heaven I come to say something of this Treatise of Scandal And well was he fitted to write of this subject whose exercise it was to have alwayes a conscience void of offence toward God and toward men and very succesfull was he in walking this way for in a time wherein scandals of all sorts did abound exceedingly few there were if any at all who did stumble at his way or he at the way of others endeavouring still and by all means winning and edifying And whoever knew his way of walking they will read the same in this Treatise set forth to others In the first part thereof thou wilt find Christian Reader the nature of Scandal dexterously opened with the several sorts of it and the variety of wayes whereby it is both given and taken with considerable grounds to make Christians loth and wary both as to the giving of offence and taking And withall many intricate cases are cleared as namely what is to be done when the matter is lawfull and the offence doubtfull Also what ought to be our carriage when there is a real difference between parties upon the account of a civil interest Also what behaviour is requisit when the command of Superiours and the eschewing of offence are in opposition Also that very important case is accuratly debated and wisely determined what is to be done when offence is like to follow on either side And finally what course both private Christians and Pastors ought to hold when scandals and offences abound The answer to which alone holdeth forth a very excellent directory for christian walking toward others The second part treateth of Scandal as it is publick and falleth under Ecclesiastick censure wherein there are many excellent overtures for the wise and right exercise of Church-discipline Among many this is considerable That the saving grace of repentance is not to be enquired into as the alone ground upon which Church-officers are to rest for removing an offence but that a sober serious acknowledgment of the offence with the expression of an unfeigned-like purpose to walk inoffensively is sufficient This is very accurately debated and solidly and soundly determined There is also Chap. 12. a clear discussing of that tickle Question What ought to be done by privat persons when Church-officers spare such as are scandalous to wit upon supposition that there is a real defect in the truth wherof often there is a mistake yet private professors are to continue in the discharge of the duties of their stations and not to separate from the Communion of the Church but to count themselves exonered in holding fast their own integrity mourning for offences representing the same to Church-officers and if need be to superiour Judicatories All this is strongly
What if a profane confessing party refuse to give satisfaction p. 125. CHAP. 12. Concerning what ought to be done by private persons when Church-officers spare such as are scandalous p 126 127 128. They are to continue in the discharge of the duties of their stations and not to separate from the communion of the Church nor withdraw from the Ordinances but to count themselves exonered in holding fast their own integrity since their consciences are not defiled by the presence of scandalous persons as is cleared by several pregnant arguments p. 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135. For further confirming of this there is a particular consideration of 1 Cor. 11. v. 17 18 c. p. 136 137 138 139 140. CHAP. 13. Shewing more particularly what it is that private persons are called unto in such a case p. 141 142. Why it is necessary to acquiesce in the Churches determination as to practice p. 143 144 145. which is confirmed by those three New-England Divines Cotton Hooker and Norton p. 145 146 147. CHAP. 14. Clearing whether the Ordinances of Christ be any way polluted by corrupt fellow-worshippers p. 147 148 149 150 151. CHAP. 15. Shewing if any thing further in any imaginable case be allowed to privat Christians p. 151 152 153. PART III. Concerning Doctrinal Scandals or Scandalous Errors CHAP. 1. HOlding forth the expediency of handling this matter p. 154. Errour vented by those who are corrupted therewith is no lesse scandalous and no lesse to be accounted so than grosse practices p. 155 156. CHAP. 2. Concerning the spreading of errour Gods displeasure at the suffering thereof and the fainting even of good men in restraining the same p. 157. What height delusions of this kind may come unto p. 158 159. with what use may be made of the same p. 159 160. The tolerating of grosse errour is most displeasing to God and why p. 160 161. Sometimes those who want not affection are too condescending to erroneous Teachers and why p. 162 163. CHAP. 3. If any of the People of God may be carried away with grosse delusions p. 164. It is not simply impossible but some may in a great measure for a time be carried away ibid. yet not so easily as unto grosse practical evils p. 165 166. When any Believers fall in such evils usually the Lord singularly chastneth them for the same p. 166. Ordinarily corrupt Teachers set more upon Professors to withdraw them than upon others that want profession and why p. 167 168 169. CHAP. 4. How it is that grosse delusions may come to such an height as they often do p. 170. What hand the Lord may have in such a plague cleared p. 171 172 173 174 175 176 177. CHAP. 5. How errour may be known to be a judicial stroke and why the Lord smiteth with it p. 177 178 179. What causes do most ordinarily procure this plague of delusion p. 180 181. CHAP. 6. By what means and how Satan driveth on this plague amongst a people p. 182 183. What is Satans method of proceeding p. 183. How he prosecuteth it p. 184 185 186 187 188. The means and arguments that are used to carry on this design 189 190 191 192 193. The manner how this design is carried on by Satan through corrupt Teachers his emissaries p. 194. What accession a people may have to the bringing of this plague upon themselves cleared p. 195 196. CHAP. 7. What is called for as duty in such a case p. 196. What is not the proper duty or remedy in such a case Sure an absolute toleration of all errours and the promoters thereof is not p. 197 198. Extreams here are to be eschewed p. 198 199 200. CHAP. 8. When some errours are to be forborn p. 201. Some necessary and usefull distinctions hereanent p. 201 202 203 204 205 206 207. Some things not at all to be forborn p. 208. CHAP. 9. What is called-for from Church-officers in the case of spreading errour p. 209. What a Minister is called unto in reference to God and himself at such a time p. 210 211 212 213 214 Union amongst Ministers and their flocks is carefully to be studied in such a case p. 215. What is the Ministers duty in reference to the flock in general at such a time p. 216 217 218 219. What is spoken of the duty of Ministers doth by proportion agree to Ruling-Elders according to their station p. 220. What is a Ministers duty in reference to those that are seduced ibid. Tryal and discovery is to be made of what errours are maintained and by whom Then the party is to be convinced p. 222 223. CHAP. 10. Whether at all times a publick debate be necessary with such persons upon these points p. 223. In what cases it is called-for ibid. and p. 224. In what cases it is not called-for p. 225. What is to be accounted the sufficient conviction of a gainsayer where it is cleared that it is not only the putting of the adverse party to silence p 226 227 228. How a publick debate is to â—…e managed when necessary p. 229 230. CHAP. 11. Admonition is necessary and how to be performed p. 231. The several steps of admonition p. 232. Some things observable in the way of admonishing p. 233. That rejecting of an obstinate Heretick is to Church-officers a necessary duty and a mean to be made use of for the Churches edification ibid. and p. 234. What if the person seduced be judged to be truly gracious p. 234 What if he be no fixed Member of any particular Congregation p. 235. What if Civil Magistrates concur not to the backing of the Sentence ibid. and p. 236. Two limitations to be adverted to in the rejecting of Hereticks p. 236 237. CHAP. 12. What is to be accounted a satisfying and succesfull admonition p. 237. Some usefull distinctions of satisfaction are set down for the clearing of this ibid. and p. 238 239. Whether any thing be required of Ministers towards those that are rejected as Hereticks p. 239. CHAP. 13. What is required of Magistrates for restraining of seducing spirits p. 240. They are called according to their places to interpose p. 241. They are not meerly to look to outward order p. 242 243. That the grounds against Toleration concern Magistrates as well as Ministers p. 244 245. That total forbearance is not like the Gospel cleared p. 246 247. It 's Magistrates duty to prevent the infection of the people under them by corrupt doctrine p. 247. CHAP. 14. What may be justly acknowledged to be within the reach and power of the Magistrate in such a case and so what is his duty p. 248. Some Cautions premitted ibid. and p. 249. The Magistrates duty may be considered first with respect to God p. 249. Secondly with respect to themselves p. 250. Thirdly with respect to those that are yet free of infection p. 250 251 252 253. Fourthly with respect to the Deluders or those that are deluded p. 254 255 256. It
good of the Church that the leaven of profanity spread not and that others may thereby learn to fear This reason is given 1 Cor. 5. 6 7 c. and 1 Tim. 5. 20. Now when we speak of the end of publick trial and censure respect is to be had to all these but especially to the more publick and generall ends so as the persons particular edification be not neglected and therefore in procedor particular and speciall respect would be had to that manner whether by mâ—…eknesse or rigidity by forbearing or proceeding which may most attain these ends Hence 2. we say that the same offences upon the matter are not equally nor at all times nor in all persons and it may be in all places in the same manner to be pursued and followed and the reason is clear because according to circumstances that manner which is edifying at one time and in one case may be destructive in another and so is not to be followed because that power which God hath given is for edification and never for destruction 2 Corinth 13. 10. And accordingly we see Paul in some cases censuring corrupt men as Hymeneus and Phyletus 1 Tim. 1. 20. Sometimes again he threatneth and yet spareth although the scandal in it self deserved Censure as when he saith Gal. 5. I wish they were cut off that trouble you and yet doth it not because he found not the Churches edification so to require So also 2 Corinth 10. 4. and 6. Having in a readinesse to revenge all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled which yet he thought not meet for the time to do lest it should have irritated to more disobedience and have bred some greater rent or schism or have made the authority of the Ordinances lesse weighty and so have marred his end which was in all things and so in this forbearing their edification as he expresseth it chap. 12. 19. Brethren we do all things and so this also for your edifying When I speak of edifying I do not speak of pleasing the persons for that may be often destructive to them and others also But this is intended that it is to be weighed in Christian prudence whether considering the time and place we live in the nature of the person we have to do with and of those also among whom we live it be more fit to follow this way with such a person at such a time or another way and accordingly as it seemeth probable that this way will honour God most more fully vindicate His Ordinances gain the person from sin to holinesse at least to a regular walk and edifie others most So accordingly ought Church-judicatories to take the way that leadeth most probably to that end And therefore it ought not alwayes to be accounted partiality when such difference in Church-procedour is observed yet these things would by all means be guarded against 1. That nothing be done with respect to persons or appear to be done so that is for outward civil or naturall respects to be more gentle to one than to another than which nothing is more derogatory to ecclesiastick Authority and stumbling to people 2. This difference of proceeding would rather be in the manner and circumstances of proceeding in reference to some offences than in dispensing with what seemeth to be materiall or it would be in such offences where there is no settled rule and wherein Church-officers have more latitude as for instance some offences are of that publick nature that usually they are followed with a publick reproof such cannot be conveniently past-by in any ordinary conceivable case suppose it be fornication or some such thing yet in the manner of citing and dealing with the person or expressing or timeing of the reproof there may be condescending but to omit it altogether would hazard the casting loose of that Ordinance of publick reproof which would mar the edification of the Church more than advantage any particular party Other offences again are more occasional in reference to which there is no definit law or practice suppose it be speaking reproachfull words of some persons Officers or others in such there is more liberty to condescend which way may be most convincing to the party Lastly in trying what may be most edifying we are not to look to one end alone to wit the persons particular good only or the publick good only c. but to put all together and to try how joyntly they may be best attained 3. From this also it will appear that Church-officers ought with such tendernesse love and sympathie to walk in publick Censures as not only they may have a testimony in their own Consciences but also that those who have offended and others that observe their way may also be convinced of the same for if this be not what can their Censure gain and if it be needfull for a Minister in preaching to study that it is in some respect more necessary here because ordinarily men out of their corruption are more ready to mistake mens intentions in this and we conceive that in this a Church-judicatories procedour ought discernably to differ from a civil Court in that they are not only out of Justice censuring the party with a respect to the common body for whose good in some cases the most penitent member must be cut off and cannot be reprived but as endeavouring the Churches freedom from offences that the offending member may be thereby with all tendernesse restored and cured and in experience we see that often Church-censures have weight as they are constructed to proceed from love And we conceive that the following of these and such like directions may have much influence for attaining of this 1. That nothing be rashly and hastily brought to publick but that which is a convincing Scandal in it self clear in the matter of fact and also after privat dealing with the person and triall of his carriage afterward if the scandal be not very grosse and publick Hastie bringing to publick irritateth and if a private admonition of Minister and Elders might gain a Brother what needeth further And by so doing a person is convinced that that Minister or Elder desireth his amendment and on that condition to cover his offence 2. There would be no rigid insisting in what is personall in reference to any of the Judicatory as suppose they should sometimes get snarling answers or unbecoming words or be met with by irreverent carriage in that case there would be condescending and what is offensive beside would be insisted on and these personall things forborn It is true the authority of the Ordinances would ever be kept up yet that is not alwayes done by a rigid prosecuting of personal reflections but on the contrary it often looketh likest Christs Ordinance when meeknesse is most prevalent and so in the end it cometh to have greater weight for many cannot discern betwixt Officers seeking their own authority and the authority of the Ordinances
requireth it or to acknowledge their offence to an offended party or they may be willing to appear and willing to acknowledge their offence but differ as to the time place manner c. For the first Though a Church-judicatory may wait for a time yet can they not in some cases dispense with them because otherwayes they are not heard nor is the end obtained and therefore may processe proceed especially if that disobedience look contemptuous-like For the second sort of disobedience to wit in the manner or circumstances of giving satisfaction although in this also those that are serious to have offences removed will not readily stick yet if it be there is difference between this and the former if there be no discernable evidences of contempt in it and in this no question Church-judicatories have a greater latitude to do as may edifie wherein they are especially to take notice of these things 1. That by too much rigidity in circumstances they seem not unnecessarily to wrong them or to lay too much weight of satisfaction upon such formalities 2. That by too easie passing from such they do not strengthen any to follow that example for the time to come And 3. that even in circumstances there be an equality in reference to these same scandals in all persons And if there be hazard in reference to any of these by condescending to alter or forbear a circumstance in a publick rebuke we conceive it is safer to abstain from â—…hat forbearance and not to yeeld it and yet not simply upon that account to pursue a processe but to continue dealing with the person while either he be convinced and brought for the good of order and edification of the Church to yeeld or there be more clearnesse to do otherwise CHAP. XII Concerning what ought to be done by private persons when Church-officers spare such as are scandalous WE come now to the last Question proposed to wit supposing that Church-officers should be defective in trying and censuring scandalous persons what is the duty of private Christians in such a case and if notwithstanding they ought to continue in the communion of such a Church or to separate from her This Question hath troubled the Church and been the occasion of many 〈◊〉 in many ages the devil thereby under pretext of indignation at offences hath made them to abound in the Church as the Church-histories and Writings of the Fathers in what concerneth the Novatians Donatists and such like do fully evince And although we have great ground to acknowledge Gods mercy in the sobriety of His people amongst us so that we have unity with purity yet seing in order this doth follow we shall answer shortly in laying down these grounds 1. It cannot be denied but such a case may be and often de facto is that Church-officers are defective in the exercising of Discipline upon scandalous persons what from negligence what from unfaithfulnesse what from fainting or some other finfull infirmity at the best as may be gathered from the second and third Chapters of the Revelation 2. Though this be true yet possibly it is not alwayes their fault when it is charged on them as suppose 1. That no private person or possibly even the complainer hath admonished such persons as are counted scandalous nor have given-in sufficient proofs of their scandal to any Church-judicatory or it may be many are counted scandalous who cannot legally and judicially be found to be such for it is more easie to assert a scandal than to prove even often when it is true and it being rather a ground of irritation than edification when a processe is entred and not convincingly made-out Therefore often in duty some procesâ—…es are abstained Sometimes also Church-officers may be faithfully dealing with persons to recover them from scandals and yet not find it fit for edification to proceed to high Censures In such cases Church-officers cannot reasonably be blamed and those who complain would pose their own consciences if they have exonered themselves and done their duty and have put it to the Officers doors before they account it their fault And it is most unbecoming for persons to charge others and to be defective in their own duty which necessarily inferreth the other And if it were as difficult and weighty a task to calumniate and groundlesly to charge Church-officers with this as it is faithfully to follow private admonition there would not be so much of the one and so little of the other And if it be rightly looked to it will not be easie to charge them with grosse defects and if they be not grosse the matter is not so to be stumbled at they being in the exercise of Discipline as in other things for that must be upon one of these accounts either 1. Because such scandalouâ—… persons after refusing of private admonitions were complained of to them and that evidence of the fact was offâ—…red and Church-officers refused to put the same to trial Or it must be because when they did try they did determine such a thing to be no scandal or not to be pâ—…oven or that supposing it to be proven they did not câ—…nsure it or at least when scandals were open and obvious and palpable they did not take notice of them Now is it probable that such a Church-judicatory will frequently be found that will fail grosly either of these wayes And if they do then there is accesâ—…e to convince them by an appeal to a superiour Court which in that case is a duty If it be said that their failing and neglect is in some covered manner so carried-on as there is no accesse to such legal complaints Answ. 1. We suppose if the things be that grosse and the fact so clear and frequent as that there be just ground to complain then there will be also accesse to such a proof 2. If it be so carried and not owned then it may be their sin before God but it is not to be accounted a proper Church-offence in the sense before-mâ—…ntioned seing they could not be convinced judicially even before the most impartial Judge And as in such a case we cannot account a private brother ecclesiastically scandalous although the general strain of his way may be dissatisfying to us So ought we not to account this for there is a great difference betwixt that which may be offensive to a persons private discretion and put him possibly in a christian way to desire satisfaction and that which is to be noised as a publick Church-scandall Asser. 3. Upon supposition that the defect be true yet private professors are to continue in the discharge of the duties of their stations and not to separate from the Communion of the Church but to count themselves exonered in holding fast their own integrity It 's true it cannot but be heavie to those that are tender and if it become scandalously excessive may give occasion to them to depart and go where that Ordinance of
what that is which is called-for and by what rule we are to proceed in it If it be said that in such a case the duty is to separate from that Church where the plurality of Officers do admit such as are accounted to be scandalous Then we ask 1. What is next to be done it must either be to continue as no member of a Church which is both impossible and absurd It is impossible that there can be any particular visible baptized member and not belong to the visible body at least being considered as the Church maketh one integral visible body It 's absurd because it would say That either Christ had no visible Church or that He hath an ordinary way of edifying by external Ordinances without His visible Church or that a person might be regardlesse of and without His Church and Ordinances and be approven of Him and expect the benefit yea upon this supposition the unfaithfulnesse of Church-officers in not casting-out of scandalous men would infer the actual unchurching of those that were not scandalous and so the sin of the one should be the punishment of the other which is absurd If it be said that another Church of more pure members is to be gathered in which persons in such cases are to joyn for obtaining of pure Ordinances Then we ask further What if such a Congregation cannot be had Then what is duty in that case Is there a necessity of living without a visible Church-state wanting all Church-ordinances to our selves and Baptism to our children What can be the fruit of that Is it not a more uncontrovertible hazard to put our selves without all communion of Church-ordinances than to enjoy them where they are pure though some joynt partakers be offensive Is not the other the way to make our children heathens and for ever to be without Baptism seing warrantably they cannot be entered where we cannot a bide Doth not this also make way to make all the Ordinances contemptible and to be undervalued by the profane seing such persons do so contenâ—…edly live without them Further we ask What if other persons and we cannot agree upon joâ—…nt members for if it be left to mens particular discerning that rule is uncertain and various being involved in many difficulties as was formerly hinted in that case either there must be no separated Church or diverse separated Churches according to the latitude of diverse persons charity This being certain that one will think a person scandalous which another doth not esteem so and one will approve that which another will condemn Again we ask What if such persons that withdraw and seek to enter a more holy society should be refused Then how could they evidence their own holinesse and convince these refusers that they were graciously qualified and so to be admitted if that were stuck upon for whatever profession were made it behoved still to be tried by no other rule but by folks particular discerning and charity Again suppose this difficulty to be overcome and such a congregation to be settled Is it not possible that even some of those members should become scandalous Then supposing that by the plurality of that Church such persons were not accounted scandalous or not cast out what were to be done According to the former grounds these who suppose themselves only pure could not continue in communion but behoved again to separate and if so then upon the renuing of the former supposition there behoved still to be a separation in infinitum For there can no Church be expected on earth in which these cases are not supposable and possible And so now we may resume the conclusion Either a private person must acquiesce as being exonered when he hath followed the action before the Church or he shall have no ground of peace any where till he be out of the world or out of all visible Churches And so also there can be no other way of keeping publick order and ordinances and of eviting scandal and confusion This truth is fully made out by those three worthy and pious Divines of New England Cotton Hooker and Norton The last whereof by many reasons evinceth this in his answer to Appolonious his last question pag. 162 163. and doth from the Church of Corintâ—… in particular confirm this There saith he was impurity or corruption in worship for women taught in the Church There was corrupt Doctrine many denied the Resurrection in manners she was most corrupt there being so many fornications sects palpable love of the world c. Yet saith he the Apostle did not command those that were worthily prepared to abstain from the Supper but rectifying abuses he did command every one to try himself and so to eat c. And many other things hath he excellently to this purpose and laieth this for a ground that per alios indigne accedentes non polluitur communio licet minuitur consolatio that is the communion in worship is not polluted though the consolation be diminished by such joynt worshippers The second to wit Mr. Hooker doth confirm this Maxime fully part 1. chap. 9. pag. 119 120. and doth call it irrationall that the fewer should be judges of the deed of the plurality and elswhere that to admit separation in such a case were to lay a ground for separation in infinitum Only we may add these two observations thereon 1. May not this be allowed to the Presbyteriall Church where the plurality of Church-officers think fit nâ—…t to cast out 2. That the Presbyteriall government is upon this consideration unjustly loaded with an absurdity as if necessarily upon their grounds the minor and better party being overswayed suppose a particular Congregation were wronged by the plurality of a Presbyterie could have no redresse for according to his grounds the same would follow upon the congregationall way for suppose the plurality of the Congregation should wrong some officer contrary to the vote of the minor and better party there can be no other redresse there than for men to keep themselves free For it still recurreth if the minor part should claim to have their Sentence weighty because it is upon the matter right which the other is not he hath already determined in the place cited that that is contrary to all orderly proceeding and rules of reason and layeth open the gap to endlesse dissention and the annulling of all publick proceeding for men in such cases being their own judges are ever ready to think themselves in the right By the first to wit Mr. Cotton it is laid down as an unquestionable agreed ground with this note upon the back of it By hasty withdrawing Reformation is not procured but retarded Thus he pag. 2. of the bolinesse of Church-members And hath not experience confirmed this Might not Discipline have been more vigorous in many Congregations if this had not been And what can be expected of Reformation in the body of the Christian world if to the offence of the
errours in respect of their effects and other aggravating circumstances may become intolerable and to be proceeded against by this Sentence as was said of lesser Scandals in practice Yet we conceive that properly it is some grosser errour than what may be accounted to be of infirmity such as many godly sober unprejudged men may have that is to be the ground of such a Sentence Therefore we refer the decision of this to be gathered from the Distinctions formerly laid down 2. We find it qualified by this That this rejection is not to proceed hastily but to follow upon rejected and sleighted admonitions Therefore if an admonition be received before and the Church therein be heard there is no further proceeding to be in in reference to this Sentence Because 1. the limitation is expresse 2. The reason is clear for if the lesser do the turn and prevail to the recovery of the person and removing of the offence from the Church What needeth more CHAP. XII What is to be accounted a satisfying and successefull admonition IF it be asked What is to be accounted a satisfying and successefull admonition And how men are to judge of and walk in reference to the same Answ. We would distinguish satisfaction or successe as to an admonition which may be either full satisfaction or only partiall Full satisfaction is When the person is so fully convinced of his ill as not only to forbear the venting thereof and to give no offence for the time to come but also fully to abandon the same as being grieved therefore and willing to edifie others by a suitable acknowledgement Again we call that a partial satisfaction or successe when though there is not a fully satisfying length obtained yet can it not be said to be altogether fruitlesse As suppose 1. a person should not be brought wholly to disclaim his errours yet should professe a conviction of the ill of venting them and troubling the Church with them and afterward should engage to abstain from offending in that kind 2. Suppose one should be convinced of the more grosse errours and be content to disclaim these yet should stick at some others professing scruple in them We would also distinguish these that give partiall satisfaction 1. Either they are such as appear to be sincere in the length they come and in the professions they make as also to be docile and ready to be informed or they are such who discover the want of ingenuity in their proceeding and themselves but to be lying at the wait to return to their vomit Now to apply this We say 1. When this satisfaction is full there is no question for thereby not only all further processe is to be sisted but the person is to be admitted to have communion in Church-priviledges 2. Where this partiall successe is of the first sort We conceive it may be sufficient to sist processe for a time and to continue the persons under means within the Church so long as they contradict not their profession yet it is not sufficient to give them free accesse to all Church-priviledges as if the scandal were fully removed 3. Where that satisfaction is but of the last kind that is mocking and dissembled We say that though it may put a Church-judicatory to try the evidences of this dissimulation and during that time possibly to stop a little their proceeding yet ought it not to mar the drawing forth of the Sentence lest there be an accession to the hurt which is intended to the Church by that dissembler And here we are to apply both the reasons against and characters of dissimulation which were spoken to on practicall offences 4. If there be no seeming satisfaction at all then after admonitions given the person despising the same is to be rejected as one that is infectious and unfit to have communion in the Church or the benefit of any Church-priviledge and Ordinance And in a word to be for his scandal and obstinacy against Christs Ordinances declared to be Excommunicate and casten out of His visible Kingdom as an out-law to the same Which is to be done with such gravity weightinesse sympathy and authority as it may look like the Ordinance of Christ and have an impression of His dread and Majesty upon all that are witnesses thereof If it be asked Whether any further duty be required from a Minister towards such a person after the Sentence is past Answ. He is not then properly under pastorall charge since he is no member of Christs visible Church at least in that respect as members fall under common and ordinary actuall inspection Yet we conceive 1. That the Minister is to continue to deal with God for him at least in private if so be he may be recovered out of this snare because he is under the last cure which will either prove life or death Gods blessing therefore to it is to be sought and it becometh well the naturall care of a kindly Minister that is thirsting for the blessing to deal with God for it 2. Although there be not actuall accesse to any thing yet ought there to be a lying at the wait to observe any opportunity which may be for his good and when it offereth it would be carefully improven And therefore 3. for that end whatever indignation beshown against a mans wayes or errours to make these loathsome to others yet still there would be evidence of tender respect to the persons and if need be means used to supply them especially if they come to any strait although in all this they would keep such a distance as may keep up the weight of the Sentence both to them and others But by this way their suspicious mistakes of Ministers carnalnesse against their persons are best removed and accesse is thereby made to be edifying unto them Some examples whereof are recorded in the life of Musculus as to his tendernesse to most desperately deluded persons when they were in affliction and discountenanced exceedingly by Magistrates which God blessed in the end for their recovery this is suitable severity in Magistrates and tendernesse in Ministers And amongst other ills and snares that that cruell indulgencie which is indeed cruell to the poor souls to whom it becometh a snare hath following it this is one That the Magistrate is accounted mercifull and the zealous Minister cruell whereby they are put in an incapacity to be edified by the one and in a capacity as it were to miscarry as they will by the indulgence of the other CHAP. XIII What is required of Magistrates for restraining of seducing spirits THe second thing that we proposed to speak to in this remedy was as it relateth to Magistrates to wit Whether any thing be or what it is that is called-for by the Word of God from them to be performed in their stations for the drying up of such a floud and removing of such a plague It is not our mind to insist so much in this
altogether vindicate their practice from inferring the same in which respect the schism and rent floweth from affection or inclination and not from well grounded light or reason and so cannot be but rash and unwarrantable 4. It may be in the manner precipitant when either means have not been used to remove that ground if it be just or when men so heighten some lesser defect in a Church by aggreging it with such circumstances as may make it appear to themselves or others a ground sufficient to bear and warrant separation or in such a way to vent their dissatisfaction with things or persons as thereby to hurt the unity of the Church or to occasion a rent or division or schism in the same when it may be others beside their intention may thus conclude A Church so corrupted c. is not to be keeped communion with and it may be the proposition is sound and so qualified as it is acknowledged by all Divines But this or that particular Church is such This again is offered to be made out by the too vehement aggravation of some lesser defect which may seem to confirm that assumption and in practice it may be observed that as some will lay down premisses concerning a schism who yet dare not act according to the conclusion and actually separate So others will keep the conclusion and actually separate in practice who yet durst not in Thesi absolutely maintain schism to be lawfull upon such a ground It is to be adverted that schisms and divisions are so nigh in nature and names that we may use instances for illustration of either promiscuously The third word is Division which doth not at the first view differ from Schism yet we do take it here as different and to agree to such Divisions and Dissentions in the Church as are consistent with communion both in Government and Worship and have not a divided Government or Worship following them as in the former case Of such there are many instances in Scripture and Church-history as we may observe by considering these Distinctions thereof 1. There is a Doctrinal Division as when the matter is not fundamental nor yet is it pleaded-for as such to the breaking off of communion amongst these that differ yet possibly being a meer indifferent matter is followed with too much eagernesse vehemency bitternesse c. by these who owne the same respectively Thus contentions were hot in the primitive times for meats and such things which were neither of themselves destructive to the foundation of Faith on either side at least in that time and so were not heretical nor did they break off communion in Church-ordinances and so were not schismatical yet was the Church troubled therewith by division amongst her members Of this sort are the divisions that may be amongst godly and orthodox men in some points of Truth when they too vehemently presse their own opinion to be received with a kind of necessity or load the other with too many absurdities beyond what will follow from the nature thereof 2. There are some Divisions that may be called Practical and do indeed imply some difference of opinion but do also infer somewhat in practice Of this sort was the division about Easter in primitive times before it came to a schism some keeping one day some another And in after-times it abounded when some acknowledged the ordination of such a Bishop and others not when some acknowledged the authority of such a Council and others not and so had divided practices 3. Some Divisions are betwixt particular men some have influence upon Churches and are as it were one party against another The first is more properly a difference and may be betwixt eminently godly and zealous men such as was betwixt Paul and Barnabas Act. 15. 39. and is called a contention Such also we will find in Church-history betwixt Augustine and Ierome Chrysostom and Epiphaneus which indeed hath a contention with it and if the Lord prevent not is apt to make parties and to rent the Church but the other to wit the acting of one party against another as hath been seen in many Councils and appeareth to have been amongst the Corinthians when one adhered to one person and one to another This I say looketh like faction and is properly division 4. Division may be considered in all these respects as it is in judgment or in affection or in practice It is in judgment when they are not of the same mind but have diverse apprehensions concerning Truths 2. It is in affection when upon that difference of judgment alienation followeth whereby that love and affection and charity that one oweth to another is somewhat cooled or discomposed 3. It is in practice when they speak and act differently and oppositly as if it were an advantage to Truth for the one to crosse and undermine what the other doth This distinction is clearly insinuated 1 Cor. 1. 10. I beseech you brethren that there be no divisions amongst you Which is branched-out in union in these three to wit speaking the same thing that relareth to action Of being perfectly joyned together in the same mind that relateth to affection And of being one in the same judgment that relateth to opinion which supposeth that there were divisions opposit to all these which also often go together 5. There are some Divisions which to say so are negative and are in the manner and circumstances of doing some duties Thus men may differ and take diverse wayes yet both of them be endeavouring the thriving of the work of the Gospel and no way labouring to crosse each other or to make one another lesse weighty and succesful Thus Paul and Barnabas after their contention did indeed differ in their manner of prosecuting the work of the Gospel yet both of them did continue faithfull therein and neither of them did counter plot nor counteract to others Again some divisions are positive to say so when men do not only differ from each other but do oppose each other and do not set themselves singly to prosecute the work which possibly their opposit may be prosecuting with them but there is an endeavour to lessen the authority and mar the actings of the other and to engage men in the approbation of that particular wherein they do differ which savoureth of division and faction properly and is more hurtfull and intolerable when as the first is more tolerable amongst men who have their infirmities and it 's like that such were the divisions of Corinth when there was an endeavour to cry up one and down another 6. Some are in doctrine for difference of judgment some are in government for precedency as sometimes was amongst the Disciples a contest who should be greatest which is not so much for Government abstractly and considered in it self or about what should be done as it is for the persons who should be the governours and doers thereof as amongst the Disciples it is not
extraordinary manner was laid aside by the Lord did dispute that possibly there might be some more than an ordinary thing in his way and that he might through accesse to God do such things when as yet they were not infected with his errours This did breed a schism when others necessarily behoved to condemn the deeds and also the persons as not serving the Lord but their own bellies Rom. 16. ver 16 17. 4. It usually ariseth from secret grudges at being sleighted or heart-burnings at anothers credit and reputation beyond them and sometimes indeed not because of the fact done but because such persons were the doers thereof and one way or other springeth from the root of pride envy or emulation which hath many branches whereby it venteth its malignant distempering disposition in sundry shapes It is indeed sad that such things should be amongst the Disciples of Christ yet often we see that this Who should be the greatest was a bone of contention among them especially when some had evidenced their too great pronenesse and inclination to prefer themselves to others This also had influence upon that muteny which Aaron and Miriam did stir up against Moses Numb 12. and it is the Lords word by the wise mouth of Solomon Only by pride cometh contention 5. Too much insisting on and aggreging of the infirmities or opinions of others and loadening and aggreging them with many fearfull consequences hath much influence upon this especially where words are wrested beside the intention and sense of the speaker because such an humour sheweth little love and respect to the person and by the nature of the work doth tend to hold him forth as odious ignorant absurd or some way despicable which even good men being but men are not easily brought to digest We see this in Iob's friends who frequently carp at his expressions and study to aggrege them which indeed were not alway altogether excusable yet their scope at least in the work was to represent them and him much more absurd than indeed they were And this was in these debates between Augustine and Ierome and usually is where such differences are as too many reproachfull and bitter differences now in the Church almost every where do hold forth 6. They are occasioned by a carnal and factiouslike pleading for and vindicating even of Truth Often it is not the matter whereabout godly and learned men debate that maketh division for there may be difference where there is no division but it is a carnal manner of prosecuting either side of the difference even that side whereon the truth doth lye that doth engender the division and often we see men differing about greater points than others do and yet carrying so as it cannot be called Division It 's marked 1 Cor. 3. that some were for Paul some for Apollos some were for none but Christ and yet this is counted a side of the faction aswell as any of the other not because being for Christ is wrong but because that factiously they walked under that pretext Which we may take up in these respects 1. When a man too peremptorily presseth his light upon others or upon a Church in a matter that is not fundamental or necessary which is condemned Rom. 14. 22. when men in these debates keep not their faith or light to themselves but do trouble and distract others therewith 2. It is when men too vehemently presse such a thing as if the contrary thereof or those who maintain the same were intolerable and so in a fiery violent way seek to bear down that which is indeed an errour though of infirmity It is marked by some that write Church-history and Augustine is of that same mind That Stephanus Bishop of Rome did more hurt to the Church by his too vehement opposing of Cyprian's errour which was That those that were baptized by Hereticks or Schismaticks ought again to be baptized because he did therby hazard the dividing and renting of the Church by refusing communion with such as were against him than Cyprian did in his maintaining of his errour Because though it was still his opinion he did meekly and condescendingly carry in it with respect to the unity of the Church 3. This is also when things are followed with Sentences and Censures on the opposit opinion and the abbetters thereof as if it were a matter of Faith It 's known what influence those Sentences of Victor Bishop of Rome had upon renting of the Church and stating that divisive distinction betwixt the East and West Church and that for a matter of nothing to wit What day of the moneth precisely Easter was to be keeped and he was for that sharply reproved even by Iraeneus who was of that same judgment with him And many such instances are in History 4. It is when in the prosecution of such things men leave the matter and fall on personall reflections and become bitter in these respects as to cast-up pride and arrogancy hypocrisie ignorance heresie or erroneousnesse or some other personal fault if any be known or imputed to them or one way or other to sleight them and make them despicable So Aaron and Miriam murmur against Moses Numb 12. that he had married an Ethiopian woman that he seemed to sleight them as if God had only spoken by him and not by them also Epiphaneus also did upbraid Chrysostom with hypocrisie Ierome hugely revileth Vigilantius whose tenents seem to be as near truth as his are so it was between Demetrius and Theophilus when in the matter of fact each giveth to other the lie 5. It is when the manner of carrying on a thing is factious as endeavouring to make sides and parties under hand and indirect dealing to engage others in their differences and to stir up men by such means against others It is like it was so in Corinth even amongst the people who adhered not to false teachers It is marked also in that vehement bitter contention that was between Ierome and Ruffinus that he did endeavour by all means to waken hatred against Ieromes person and to defame his writings more than in any convincing way to make out his point and yet all this arose from Ierome his alleaging the other to be a favourer of Origens heresie because he had translated some books of Origens which was indeed condemned by others as being dangerous yet seing Ruffinus did disclaim these errours and deny that he approved them there was no such ground to presse him with iâ—… and this became the occasion of that irreconciliable hatred which was never removed in which also it is marked that Ierome doth object to the other obscurity and harshnesse of stile adding withall many other sleighting expressions 7 It may be by the imprudencie of such as have good affection As 1. expressing too much good liking of some corrupt men because they pretend fairly Thus the Church was divided in Phrygia for Montanus because some
ought to bestir themselves to quench this in the Church never did mariners use more speed to stop a leak in a ship lest all should be drowned than Ministers especially and all Christian men should hast to stop this beginning of the breaking in of these waters of strife lest thereby the whole Church be overwhelmed And if the many evils which follow thereupon the many commands whereby union is pressed yea the many entreaties and obtestations whereby the holy Ghost doth so frequently urge this upon all as a thing most acceptable to Him and profitable to us If I say these and many other such considerations have not weight to convince of the necessity of this duty to prevent or heal a breach We cannot tell what can prevail with men that professe reverence to the great and dreadfull Name of God conscience of duty and respect to the edification of the Church and to their own peace at the appearance of the Lord in the great Day wherein the peace-makers shall be blessed for they shall be called the children of God CHAP. VII General Grounds leading to Unity BUt now it may be of more difficulty to speak particularly to what indeed is duty at such a time when a Church lyeth under rents and divisions For though the general be granted yet often it is difficult to take up the particular cure and yet more difficult singly to follow the same It being still more easy to prescribe rules to others than to follow them our selves especially in such a case when spirits are in the heat and fervour of contention whereby they are some way drunken with affection to their own side and prejudice at the others and distracted as it were with a sort of madnesse in pursuing their adversaries as that great and meek Divine Melancthon did expresse it so that it is hard to get affections that are in such a temper captivated to the obedience of light And though we will not take on us to be particular and satisfying in this wishing and hoping that it may be more effectually done by some other yet having come this length we shall in an abstracted manner consider some things in reference thereunto and endeavour to hold forth what we conceive to be duty especially to the Ministers of the Gospel that have interest in such a Church As also what may be required of others that may possibly think themselves lesse concerned therein Wherein we shall keep this order 1. we shall lay down some general Grounds which we suppose as granted 2. We shall premit some preparatory endeavours agreeable to the same 3. We shall speak negatively to what ought not to be done or ought to be forborn 4. Positively to the healing means called-for in reference to several sorts of division with some questions incident thereupon And lastly We shall consider the grounds that do presse the serious and condescending application of these or other healing means in such a case The first generall ground which we take for granted is this That by way of precept there is an absolute necessity of uniting laid upon the Church so that it falleth not under debate Whether a Church should continue divided or united in the These more than it falleth under debate Whether there should be preaching praying keeping of the Sabbath or any other commanded duty seing that union is both commanded as a duty and commâ—…nded as eminently tending to the edification of the Church and therefore is so frequently joyned with edification Nor is it to be asked by a Church what is to be done for the Churches good in a divided way thereby supposing a dispensation as it were to be given to division and a forbearing of the use of means for the attaining thereof or rather supposing a stating or fixing of division and yet notwithstanding thereof thinking to carry on edification It is true where union cannot be attained amongst orthodox Ministers that agree in all main things for of such only we speak Ministers are to make the best use of the opportunities they have and during that to seek the edification of the Church Yet that men should by agreement state a division in the Church or dispense therewith and prefer the continuing of division as fitter for edification than union we suppose is altogether unwarrantable 1. Because that is not the Lord's Ordinance and therefore cannot be gone about in faith nor in it can the blessing be expected which the Lord doth command to those that are in unity Psal. 133. 2. Because Christ's Church is but one Body and this were deliberately to alter the nature thereof and although those who deny this Truth may admit of division yea they cannot have union that is proper Church-union which is union in Government Sacraments and other Ordinances because union or communion in these doth result from this principle yet it is impossible for those that maintain that principle of the unity of the Catholick visible-visible-Church to owne a divided way of administrating Government or other Ordinances but it will infer either that one party hath no interest in the Church or that one Church may be many and so that the unity thereof in its visible state is to no purpose This then we take for granted And though possibly it be not in all cases attainable because the fault may be upon one side who possibly will not act unitedly with others yet is this still to be endeavoured and every opportunity to be taken hold of for promoting of the same The second ground which we suppose is this That as union is ever a duty So we conceive if men interessed will do their duty there can be no division amongst Orthodox Divines or Ministers but it is possible also to compose it and union is a thing attainable For 1. We are not speaking of composing divisions that are stated upon the fundamentall things nor are we speaking of removing all differences as if all men were to be one in judgment in every point of Truth there may be difference where there is no division as hath been said Nor 3. when we speak of mens doing their duty do we mean a full up-coming of every thing in knowledge and practice and that in a sanctified manner though that ought to be endeavoured but it looketh principally to the doing of duty in reference to this particular if it may be called so of attaining union a great part whereof doth consist in outward obvious things which do neither require simply sanctification in the person though in it self most desirable nor perfection in the degree some whereof we may afterward mention so that the meaning is if we consider union in it self without respect to mens corruptions which will make the least thing impossible when they are in exercise it is a thing possible according to the acknowledged principles that sober orthodox men usually walk by as experience hath often proven and reason doth demonstrat in the particulars afterward
to be instanced And this consideration ought the more pressingly to stir up the endeavour of this duty although oftentimes through mens corruption it hath been frustrated Thirdly we premit That in endeavouring union and healing men would not straiten it to an universall union in every thing in judgement and practice but would resolve to have it with many things defective that need forbearance in persons that are united which me may take up in these particulars 1. There may be difference of judgement in many things I mean in such things that are consistent with the foundation and edification and such a forbearance would be resolved upon and to do otherwayes were to think that either men had no reason at all or that their understandings were perfect or at least of equal reach 2. There may be dissatisfaction with many persons whether Officers or Members and to expect a Church free of unworthy Officers or Members and to defer Church union thereupon is to expect the barn-floor shall be without chaff and to frustrate the many commands whereby this duty is pressed for so this command should be obligatory to no Church but that that is triumphant yet certainly our Lord Jesus gave this command to His Disciples when Iudas was amongst them and Paul gave it and practised it when some preached out of envy Philip. 1. and when almost all sought their own things and not the things of Christ And certainly if people ought to carry even to corrupt Ministers who yet destroy not the foundation as Ministers in the duties that becomes them to Ministers in communion with them while they continue such Then certainly Ministers ought to keep that communion with Ministers that becometh their relations seing they are still Ministers in that respect as well as in the other And if this corruption will not warrant separation in other Ordinances as was said in the close of the second part Then neither will it warrant division in the ordinance of government 3. It may also be consistent with many particular failings and defects in the exercise of government as possibly the sparing of some corrupt Oâ—…cers and Members yea the Censuring of some unjustly or the admission of some that are unfit for the Ministery and such like These indeed are faults but they are not such as make a Church to be no Church and though these have sometimes been pretended to be the causes of schisms and divisions in the Church in practice yet were they never defended to be just grounds of schisms and divisions but were ever condemned by all Councels and Fathers and cannot be in reason sustained For 1. there should be then no union expected here except we supposed that men that have corruption could not fall in these faults 2. It is not unlike but some of these were in the primitive Churches somewhat is infinuated thereof Rev. 2. in those Church-officers their tolerating of Iezebel and the Nicolaitans to seduce the people and to commit fornication yet neither is separation or division called-for or allowed either amongst Ministers or people Sure there were such corrupt acts of all kinds amongst the Jews Church-officers yet is it clear that Nicodemus and Ioseph of Arimathea did continue to govern joyntly notwithstanding thereof who yet cannot be counted accessory to any of their deeds Because which is a third reason men in such cases have accesse even when they are present to discountenance such corrupt acts by not consenting thereto and testifying against the same yea they may by so doing stand in the way of many wicked acts which by dividing they cannot do which is sufficient for their exoneration both before God and men As we may see in the instances of Ioseph and Nicodemus mentioned who continue united in the government keeped the meetings even when Sentences passe against those who will acknowledge Christ and orders for persecuting Him and them and yet they are declared free because they dissented from and testified against the same yea their freedom and exoneration by vertue of their dissent being present is more solemnly recorded to their honour in the Gospel than if they had divided And yet the unity of the Church now hath the same ground and no fewer motives to presse it than it had then 4. It may stand with some defects in Worship manner of Government and rules that are necessary for good government in a Church It is like that many things of that kind were defective in the Church of Corinth where the Sacrament was so disorderly administrated as hath been marked confusion in many things of Worship and some things still to be set in order yet doth the Apostle no where press union more than in these Epistles as formerly hath been marked neither can it be thought that perfection in all these is ever to be expected or that union untill such time is to be delayed And if there be defects of that kind it is union and not division that is to be looked upon as the commended mean for redressing of the same If it be asked then With what kind of defects or discontents may an union be made up or what Rules may be walked by therein For answer We offer these Considerations or Rules 1. What cannot warrant a breach where there is union that cannot warrantably be the ground to keep up a division Now there are many miscarriages or defects which are really grosse and yet will not warrant a schism as all that write thereon do clear and is obvious to all The reason of the consequence is Because making up of a breach is no lesse a duty than preventing thereof And further if it began upon such a ground Then the continuing thereof upon the same ground is but the continuing in the same sin and it cannot be thought that any party by dividing upon an unjust ground can afterward be justified upon the same ground It remaineth therefore that if the ground was not sufficient at first to warrant a separation or division it cannot be sufficient afterward to continue the same Rule 2. Such defects as do not make communion in a Church and in its Ordinances sinfull will not warrant a separation or division from the same for this followeth on the former It is acknowledged by all that there is no separation from a true Church in such Ordinances as men may without sin communicate into although others may be guilty therein as suppose men to have accesse to Government without such bonds and engagements and such like as may mar their freedom in following the light of the Word in deciding whatever shall come before them even though others should step over the same Rule 3. Men may keep communion with a Church when their calling leadeth them thereto upon the one side and they have accesse to the discharge of the same upon the other this also followeth upon the former for if some acts of a mans station lead him to an united way of acting
condescending to be upon one side levelled according to the length that another goeth but condescending would be levelled mutually according as expediencie calleth for with respect to the edification of the Church for which end even many infirmities of others are to be for born and things otherwayes unreasonable in respect of these men we have to do with yet respect to the Churches peace ought to make men cede in these for if there ought to be condescending for private peace much more ought it to be for Church-peace and publick edification and though we cannot nor will not now be particular in this yet concerning it we may lay down these considerations 1. In what may involve a man in sin or in the approbation thereof in others there is no condescending but what length may warrantably be gone even to the utmost border of duty men ought to go for this end so that nothing ought to be a stop or march in condescension but this I cannot do this and sin against God otherwayes one ought to be all things to others This consideration will be more clear by comparing it with the former Rules and what afterward may be said 2. This condescension would be mutuall upon both sides that is one party would not expect full submission from the other for that is not union but dominion Hence the Apostle in his pressing of union in such cases doth ordinarily pray and obtest both sides And seing affection is the main ground of union it is fit there should be condescension for mutuall testifying of respect each to other This is also confirmed by an Epistle of Calvines to Mr. Knox afterward cited wherein he presseth that condescension be mutuall for removing of a division that was in his Congregation at Frankford 3. Even that party that seemeth to be rightest in the matter or to have authority on its side or to have countenance from others ought yet to condescend yea in some things to be most condescending because such are in some sort parents and strong they ought therefore the more tenderly to bear and cover the infirmities of the weak and because they are more sober and at themselves they therefore ought to carry the more seriously toward others whom they suppose to be in a distemper and not to be equally groffe in handling the tender things of the Church whereof union is a main one And considering that authority is given for edification it is not unsuitable for it to condescend for attaining its end for which cause we find often Paul laying by his authority in such cases and intreating and wooing as it were even the meanest dissenters in this matter of union as we see him Phil. 4. beseeching Euodias and Syntiâ—…he who were it is like but very private persons to be of one mind And in ancient times we will find 1. sometimes the innocent party ceding and condescending as in the case betwixt Basilius and Eusebius at Cesarea Basilius though having the best side and of greatest account yet did first cede by withdrawing for the peace of the Church and afterward for the good thereof to wit the preventing of its being tainted by the Arian heresie he did return and condescend to be subject to him who was in competition with him which tended exceedingly to the good of that Church to the removing of that Schism and the great praise and commendation of his zeal and singlenesse 2. We find that oftentimes the most tender and sincere and these who were upon the right side have been most condescending and oftentimes these who did the wrong such as it was were most averse from condescension as in all the Schisms that have arisen upon frivolous grounds will appear 3. These who condescended most in such things have ever been thought the greatest friends to the Church even sometimes when they have been deepest in the rise of the Schism and when their side was not so justifiable as the other yet by condescending they have commended themselves more to the Churches friends than their opposites It is marked in that schism at Antioch betwixt Miletius and Paulinus who were both Orthodox yet had they divided governments and Congregations in the Church because of different Ordinations which had keeped them rent for some time and although Miletius his Ordination and entry was not so justifiable according to the Canons as the others was yet the parties tenacious upon either side being strong there was accesse to settle it by no authoritative decision wherefore it came to a treaty by means of these that were appointed Arbiters that so union and communion in the Ordinances might be made up in that Church at which conference Miletius overtured that they might joyn together as Bishops to take care of one Flock while they lived and after the death of either he who survived should be only Bishop of the united Flock unto whom one only should succeed to have charge of all for preventing of division for the time to come to which overture Paulinus would not acquiesce but stood to the formality of order without valuing the Churches peace or proposing any just ground of exception against Miletius person or Doctrine he to wit Paulinus was counted unworthy to govern such a Church and removed therefrom and the other as more worthy because of that his condescending was therefore alone invested in the government therof 4. We will find them sometimes yeeld in all particulars that do not involve any consent unto or approbation of what is wrong It is marked by Augustine in his Writings against the Donatists that sometimes Councels that have condemned men have for peace without any satisfaction again restored them upon after thoughts and he marketh it as a great condescension of the Bishops of Spain that they did so in the case of Osiuâ—… when he was found innocent by the French they did not saith he pertinaciously with animosity defend their former Sentences lest they should fall in the sacriledge of a Schism which doth exceed all wickednesse and with that humility peace was keeped because saith he they had rather be against their own Sentences than the unity of the Church And he doth upbraid that principle of the Donatists in the case of one Primianus who was refused to be restored by an after Councell of theirs because a former pretended Synod of their own had deposed him alleaging and abusing that word of the Apostles for that end Gal. 2. If I again build what I have destroyed then am I found a transgressour and he doth more commend the practice of Pretextatus and Felicianus who being condemned it is like unjustly by three hundreth and eighteen Bishops yet did saith he for concords sake return and joyn with these who did condemn them and by them were without all losse or diminution of their honour received into fellowship And wat ever may be in the justice or injustice of any of these former deeds upon the
will be hoter and carry things further than lesse engaged men of the same judgement will allow and such ought not to be silent in such a case Thus Ireneus though of Victors judgement in the matter of Easter yet did boldly expostulate with him for his vehemency in pressing of the same to the hurt of the Churches peace charging him to forbear and to follow union notwithstanding which act of his is still highly commended and as Eusebius observeth counted answerable to his name 6. Serious and single thoughts of union would be laid down and that would be purposly driven as the great duty so that endeavours would not principally tend to strengthen a side or exouer themselves or get advantage to others c. but to make one of both and therefore when one mean or occasion faileth another would be essayed neither would men weary or faint herein although it prove often a most fainting businesse 7. Men would endeavour all this with tendernesse and respect to mens persons actions and qualifications for oftentimes the rise of a division is in the alienation of affections between some persons which afterward disposeth to construct hardly both of their opinions and actions and indeed often the stick is here that mens affections are not satisfied one with another and that maketh them that they do not trust each other Hence we see that in the Scripture the commending of love and of honouring and prefering of others in honour to our selves is ordinarily subjoyned to the exhortations to union or reproofs of division as Philip. 2. Eph. 4. Matth. 18 c. And we see in the primitive times when no mean could cure schisms one party shewing respect to another or to some eminent head of the opposit party it may be even after their death did alley the same and engage these that formerly shunned communion to joyn with them It is particularly observed That when at Constantinople some had continued separated from the Bishops government and the Church thereof after Chrysostom's deposition for the space of thirty five years and were called Iohanits yet Proclus who by some interval succeeded in that See by recording Chrysostom's name amongst eminent persons and making honourable mention of him and bringing his body from the place where it was buried in his exile and burying it honourably at Constantinople in the great Church of the holy Apostles did so appease and engage those that had disclaimed all the interveening Bishops that instantly they did acknowledge him and joyn with the Church The like also is mentioned to have been the end of that Schism at Antioch because of Eustachius his removal from them when Callaudion the Bishop did return his body honourably to be buried and went out with his party to receive the same solemnly some miles from the Town those also who out of respect to him to wit Eustachius had continued separated from the succeeding Bishops for above an hundred years now seeing the adverse party put respect on him they also did from that time forth joyn with them Both these are recorded in the fifth Century and if respect to dead men be prevalent to engage affections certainly mutual respect and evidences of confidence amongst men living would be much more weighty This giving of respect would be manifested in these and the like 1. Respective mentioning in word or writ of the persons and what concerns those that differ especially such as are most eminent and leading amongst them 2. There would be good constructions put upon their end and intentions and sincerity even in such actions as are displeasing 3. Mens opinions and actions would not be loaded with grosse absurdities and high aggravations especially in publick because that tendeth but to make them odious and standeth in the way of a future good understanding when one hath proposed another as so absurd and hatefull a person 4. All personal reflections would be abstained as also sleighting answers disdainfull-like words and salutations and such like would be shunned But on the contrary there would be love familiarity tendernesse and if there have been any reflection or bitternesse to occasion mistake yea if it have been unjustly apprehended there would be condescending to remove the same I have heard of a worthy person who being led away in an hour of tentation was by many of his former friends afterwards discountenanced whereby he was as it were engaged in a kind of discontent to defend his deed and resent the disrespect of such persons which almost grew to a rent but having occasion to encounter one who was most opposit to his present way who yet notwithstanding of all did lovingly and familiarly as ever imbrace him without mentioning any such thing it is said That his heart melted instantly with the conviction of his former opposition and so any further procedure towards a rent was prevented when he saw there was yet again access to the affections of the most eminent of those he did differ from 5. There would be expressions of mutual confidence in one another which would appear not only in personall respects but with respect to the Ministery of such as they differ from endeavouring to strengthen and confirm that which was the thing that endeared Basilius to Eusebius that even while he differed he endeavoured to have his Ministery weighty amongst the people 6. Respect would be shewn to men of that judgment and side it being such a difference as is supposed they would be helped and furthered and counted notwithstanding thereof if otherwayes qualified fit for trust and charge for this is not only engaging of a particular person but of all the party and doth hold forth a confidence in them notwithstanding of that whereas the contrary is disobliging and irritating of all because it proposeth all of such an opinion or practice to be unworthy of charge or trust which no man can well digest and it some way necessitateth them in a divided way to endeavour some other way of entering and to increase their diffidence of them who so partially in their esteem at least manages matters and prefers the strengthening of a side to the edification of the Church as any different party cannot but expound it seing they seem to themselves to have some perswasion of their own integrity in the main work 7. There would even be mutual visits and fellowship civil and christian as hath been yea rather it would be increased for if men have some confidence that others love their persons respect them as Ministers and esteem of them as Christians they will be easily induced to trust the other as such also 8. If reflections and bitternesse be vented by some as even good men are too ready to indulge to themselves a liberty in debate to exceed in this yet there would be no such meeting given Luther is censured for exceeding in this even by such as loved him and it is a most excellent advertisement that Calvin giveth to
for parts and ability and that it be not done in vain as Paul hath it Gal. 2. 2. And it 's observable that he speaketh this in reference to his way when he intended the evidencing of his agreement with the chief Apostles in the matter of doctrine Also we find meeknesse and instructing put together when there is any expectation to recover one from a difference 2 Tim. 2. 15. and convincing or disputing is more especially applicable to these of whom there is little hope out of respect to the edification of others Hence we find the Apostles disputing with false teachers in some points of truth but rather intreating and exhorting Believers to have peace amongst themselves notwithstanding of lesser differences A second way of composure is when such agreement in judgment cannot be obtained To endeavour a harmony and keep unity notwithstanding of that difference by a mutual forbearance in things controverted which we will find to be of two sorts The first is to say so total that is when neither side doth so much as doctrinally in word writ or Sentences of Judicatories presse any thing that may confirm or propagate their own opinion or condemn the contrary But do altogether abstract from the same out of respect to the Churches peace and for the preventing of scandal and do in things wherein they agree according to the Apostle's direction Philip. 3. 16. Walk by the same rule and minde the same things mutually as if there were no such differences and waiting in these till the Lord shall reveal the same unto them This way is safe where the doctrine upon which the difference is is such as the forbearing the decision thereof doth neither mat any duty that the Church in general is called to nor endanger the salvation of souls through the want of clearness therein nor in a word infer such inconveniences to the hurt of the Church as such unseasonable awakening and keeping up of differences and divisions may have with it Because the scope of bringing forth every truth or confirming the same by any authoritative sanction c. is the edification of the Church and therefore when the bringing forth thereof doth destroy more than edifie it is to be forborn Neither can it be ground enough to plead for such decisions in preaching that the thing they preach-for is truth and the thing they condemn is errour Because 1. it is not the lawfulnesse of the thing simply that is in question but the necessity and expediency thereof in such a case Now many things are lawfull that are not expedient 1 Cor. 10. 23. 2. In these differences that were in the primitive times concerning meats dayes genealogies c. there was a truth or an errour upon one of the sides as there is a right and a wrong in every contradiction of such a kind yet the Apostle thinketh fitter for the Churches peace that such be altogether refrained rather than any way at least in publick insisted upon or decided 3. Because no Minister can bring forth every truth at all times he must then make choice And I suppose some Ministers may die and all do so who have not preached every truth even which they knew unto the people Beside there are no question many truths hid to the most learned Neither can this be thought inconsistent with a Ministers fidelity who is to reveal the whole counsel of God because that counsel is to be understood of things necessary to mens salvation and is not to be extended to all things whatsoever for we find the great Apostle expounding this in that same Sermon Act. 20. ver 20. I have keeped back nothing that was profitable unto you which evidenceth that the whole counsel of God or the things which he shewed unto them is the whole and all that was profitable for them and that for no by-respect or fear whatsoever he shunned to reveal that unto them Also it is clear that there are many truths which are not decided by any judiciall act and amongst other things sparingnesse to decide truths that are not fundamentall judicially hath been ever thought no little mean of the Churches peace as the contrary hath been of division The third way which is the second sort of the former of composure is mixed When there is some medling with such questions yet with such forbearance that though there be a seen difference yet there is no schism or division but that is seriously and tenderly prevented as upon the one side some may expresse their mind in preaching and writing on a particular question one way others may do it differently yet both with that meeknesse and respect to those they differ from that it doth beget no rent nor give just ground of offence nor mar union in any other thing Or it may possibly come to be decided in a Synod yet with such forbearance upon both sides that it may prove no prejudice to union those who have authority for them not pressing it to the prejudice of the opinion names consciences of the other or to their detriment in any respect but allowing to them a liberty to speak their minds and walk according to their own light in such particulars And on the contrary the other resting satisfied in the unity of the Church without condemning them or pressing them to condemn themselves because so indeed their liberty is no lesse than others who have the decision of a Synod for them And thus men may keep communion and union in a Church even where by the Judicatories thereof some lesser not fundamental errour which doth also infer unwarrantaable practices is authoritatively concluded We have a famous instance of this in the Church of Africa in the dayes of Cyprian which by the Ancients hath ever been so much esteemed of There was a difference in that Church concerning the Rebaptizing of Hereticks and Schismaticks after their conversion or of such as had once fallen in to them Cyprian and the greatest part thought their first Baptism null or by their fall made void others thought it not so who were the lesser part yet right as to this particular There was meetings on both sides for defence of their opinions Also in a Council of near three hundred Bishops it is judicially and authoritatively concluded yet that Synod carried so as they did not only not censure any that dissented nor presse them to conform in practice to their judgment but did also entertain most intimat respect to them and familiarity with them as may be gathered from what was formerly hinted And upon the other side we do not find any in that Church making a schism upon the account of that judicial erroneous decision though at least by three several Synods it was ratified but contenting themselves to have their consciences free by retaining their own judgement and following their own practice till time gave more light and more occasion to clear that truth And we will never find in the
Writings of any time more affection amongst brethren and more respect to peace than was in that Church at that time amongst those that differed And there is not any practice more commended in all the Church-history and Writings of the Fathers than this practice as partly may be gathered from what was formerly touched out of Augustine And if we will consider the case rationally we will find that it is not impossible to have union in a Church where there is in such a difference an authoritative decision even supposing that side on which the errour lyes to be approved For 1. There is no necessity for such as have authority for them to presse others in their judgment or practice in such things neither can it be thought that such a decision can of it self satisfie all scruples neither yet that men doubtingly may follow Nor lastly that such controversies can bear the weight of troubling the Church by censuring such as otherwayes may be faithfull seing sometimes even unfaithfull men have been spared with respect to the Churches good as hath been said And secondly upon the other side such a constitution of a Church doth not involve all that keep communion therein in the guilt thereof if personally they be free as in the instance of the Jewish Church is clear where no question many corrupt acts have been established yet did it neither make communion in Worship or Government to be unlawfull where the matter and manner of carriage was lawfull Beside this would infer that no Judicatory could keep union where there were contrary votes or a Sentence past without unanimity because that is certainly wrong to them who think otherwayes and if so there could be no Judicatory expected either in Church or State for it cannot be expected that they shall be still unanimous or that the greater part shall cede to the lesser and rescind their own act Also suppose there should be such a division upon one difference can it be expected that those who unite upon the divided sides respectively shall again have no more difference amongst themselves and if they have shall there not be a new division and where shall this end And seing men must resolve to keep unity where there are faults of such a nature or to have none at all it is as good to keep it at first as to be necessitated thereto afterward The Orthodox urge this argument against the Donatists who would not keep union with them because of pretended corruptions in the proceedings of Judicatories and Ordinations yet were constrained to bear with such amongst themselves and particularly to receive and unite with the Maximinianists whose communion they had once rejected though a branch of their own faction because they saw no end of divisions if they did not resolve to dispense with such things amongst themselves And Augustine often asserteth that they were never able to answer this argument when it was propounded to them to wit Why they did not give them that same latitude in keeping communion with them which they had given to the Maximinianists who were guilty of such things as they imputed to them We conceive then that even in such a case there may be union for prosecuting the main work of the Gospel notwithstanding of such a circumstantial difference if men otherwayes set themselves to it and the generall grounds formerly laid down do confirm this CHAP. XII What to do for union in points not doctrinall but about matters of fact or personall faults IF the difference be not doctrinall in point of judgment at least only but being in matter of fact as personall faults and corruptions whereby the one is ready to object to the other some bypast failings and miscarriages whereupon by inconsiderat upbraidings pressing of Censures or condemnation of what hath been done the Churches peace is in hazard to be broken and men like to be rent and divided in their communion And oftentimes such things prove exceeding fashious where men wilfully or imprudently pursue such things without respect to the Churches peace This often waited upon a time of darknesse or persecution when men being in the dark and in a distemper were led away by tentation and overtaken with many faults and sometimes amongst others made to juffle with and trample one upon another as it were not knowing what they were doing and when this time was over some were ready to carp at what was past in the dark and to quarrell at others for such juffling when they were so through-other This indeed was ordinary but most unbecoming grave men to make that a ground of contending which inadvertently was done by others in the dark as the great Basilius saith In nocturno tempore densis tenebris Such contests are of four sorts First Sometimes in generall there is a dissatisfaction with the constitution of the Church in respect of the grossenesse of the Officers and Members thereof This cannot be removed upon the one side only because tares cannot but be in the Church and that discernably as Cyprian saith it is removed then by meeknesse and tendernesse upon the one side towards such as have withdrawn and by their yeelding to return who have withdrawn which when it came to passe hath been matter of gladnesse to all the Church Amongst Cyprians Epistles Epist. 50. edit Pameli mention is made of Urbanus Maximus and others of the Church of Rome who being Confessors and imprisoned in the time of persecution and after their delivery finding many grosse Members to be in the Church and meeting with the doctrine of Novatus that commended separation to the godly for their more comfortable communion together that they came to be tickled therewith and for a time to separate from the communion of Cornelius and others of the Clergy pretending there could be no communion in such an evil constituted Church but afterward finding the great hurt that came thereby to the Church they overcame their own affections and inclinations and out of respect to the good of the Church did unit which was exceedingly welcomed by all as their Epistle to Cyprian and his to them do manifest And as their fall sheweth that it is not impossible but that zealous Ministers who have keeped out against defection may be overtaken with such a fault So it giveth a sweet copie of Christian deniednesse and tendernesse by others to be followed in the like case Their words to Cyprian are worthy the observing Nos habito consilio utilitatibus Ecclesiae paci magis consulentes omnibus rebus praetermissâ—…s Iudicio Dei servatis cum Cornelio Episcopo nostro pariter cum universo Clero pacem fecisse cum gaudio etiam universae Ecclesiae prona etiam omnium charitate A second sort of such contests are When faults are alleaged which either are not true or cannot be proven although possibly they may be both grosse and true for both of these did the Novatians and Donatists trouble
the Church insisting long in charging many crimes upon men particularly upon Cecilianus and Osius which they could never be able to make out although they alleaged that such faults were cloaked by the Catholicks and that they were not to be communicated with In this case the Orthodox took three wayes to remove such a difference 1. By pleading forbearance of awakening such contests and exhorting rather to keep union than to hazard to break it upon such grounds and so as Augustine saith ut quaedam incerta crimina pro certa pace Deo dimitterentur Cont. Epist. Parm. lib. 1. cap. 3. 2. If that could not be acquiesced in they admitted the thing to proof over and over again that by lawfull triall it might be decided as we will find in the former instances the same case of Cecilianus was often tryed even after he was absolved It is true the Donatists did not acquiesce but did separate for which cause they were ever accounted most grosse Schismaticks yet is it of it self a way wherein men may satisfyingly acquiesce A third way sometimes used was That when divisions were like to be occasioned by dissatisfaction with a particular person against whom things could not be judicially made out so as to found a Sentence nor yet possibly was there so full satisfaction with him in every thing as by owning of him to hazard a rent where a people were stumbled by him they did without judiciall processing or Censuring interpose with the Bishop to cede and wrote to the people to choose another So in that Council of Carthage Canon 91. letters are written to Maximianus called Episcopus Bagiensis and the people that he might cede the Bishoprick and they might choose another yet there is no mention of any made-out accusation or Sentence but that for the good of the Church Synodo placuit c. There is mention made elswhere in history of a Bishop of that place of that name who had been a Donatist and did return to the communion of the Church but if this be he or what was the cause of this appointment is neither certain nor of great concernment in this A third sort of contests of this kind are When crimes are grosse and clear and men are either justly censurable or Censured some possibly honestly minded may be engaged to do for them by their insinuating upon them and giving misinformations and prejudices and so be brought to endeavour the preventing or removing of Sentences against or from such as justly deserve the same In this case we find a threefold way of composure 1. An endeavour used to clear to others the justice of such a Sentence when it hath been traduced Thus when Basilides and Martialis were justly deposed by a Synod of Spain they did by false pretexts engage the Clergie of Rome to owne them and write for their recovery which did exceedingly offend the Bishops of Spain whereupon they wrote to Cyprian and these in Africk for advice who being met in the Synod approved their deposition and advised them not to readmit them because none such who had any blemish and were not holy ought to minister in the holy things and that rather they should bear with Stephanus his mistake who out of ignorance and misinformation was led to side with such Thus Cyprian hath it in his Epistles to the Church of Spain Epist. 68. So that schism was stopped and the Churches continued to acknowledge the lawfully ordained Bishops that succeeded these And the readmission of such had neither been in it self lawfull nor yet had compassed the end of obtaining peace in these Churches where the people was stumbled by their carriages A second way was When the men were orthodox and profitable though failing in some grosse particular yet when they were owned by others in the Church Synods did not stand for concord to remove such Sentences as was formerly instanced in the case of Ostus Augustine also in a certain Epistle 164. doth approve the not-censuring of one Optatus lest thereby a schism should be occasioned because of manies adhering to him We will find also a third way That when men have been Sentenced and some have continued to owne them and others to oppose them such have been brought to submit themselves and so the division hath been removed It was so in that hot contest that continued long between the Bishops of Rome and the Church of Africk in the case of Apiratus Bishop of Sica c. who being deposed by the Synod of Carthage was pressed to be admitted by the Bishops of Rome whom by no means these of Africk would admit at last these that were Sentenced came to acknowledge the Sentence whereby the division was stopped A fourth sort of contests or divisions for matters of fact is When both sides have had their failings in a time of darknesse and tentation some one way and some another and after some breathing they fall by mutual upbraidings to hazard the Churches peace one casting up this fault to him and he again upbraiding him with another The way taken to prevent this is most satisfying when both acknowledging their own guilt to other did forgive one another and joyn cordially for the good of the work In the debates with the Donatists there is much mention made not without great commendation of the practice of a Synod which is called Concilium Cirtense wherein the members did mutually confesse their faults and saith he to wit Augustine in the conference formerly cited Sibi invicem ignoscebant ne schisma fieret And by the scope of the Catholicks in urging that example and by the vehemency used by the Donatists in denying the same it would seem that they looked upon this as a most excellent and satisfying way of removing differences amongst godly men when every one acknowledgeth their own fault and doth not upbraid but forgive one another endeavouring to have the rememberance of bypast miscarriages rather forgiven and buried in oblivion than mentioned Because good men being but men usually there are failings on both sides and the denying of it provoketh others to insist the more thereon as the acknowledging thereof doth stop the upbraiding of them with the same and usually it is to be seen that the best men had rather mention their own faults in their acknowledgements than hear the same done by any other Beza Epist. 23. also hath such an advice as this to a Church that had fallen into division Utinam utraque pars acquiescere malit quam si curiose nimium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quis sit in majori culpa inquiratur CHAP. XIII What to do toward uniting in divisions arising from diversity of circumstances in external administrations and especially arising from Church-government A Third matter that occasioneth divisions is a diversity in Worship Ceremonies or things that relate to externall administration of Ordinances when some follow one way in Preaching administrating of
Sacraments Catechising c. and others another This ordinarily breedeth janglings and oftentimes troubled the Church as we see in the businesse about Easter and Ceremonies It is not our purpose to insist in this because ordinarily such debates pretend some lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse in the thing contended for and are to be counted amongst the jangling debates that the men of God are to eschew And also because these things are often fully and clearly discussed We shall only say concerning them 1. That as there is a necessity of suffering some difference in Doctrine So is there also a necessity to bear with some differences in circumstances in the externall manner of Worship c. and men would not soon offend at every difference nor be displeased if it proceed not from affectation of singularity unfaithfulnesse or some other corrupt rise And we will find great condescendency in the greatest men both of old and late in things that are not sinfull in themselves for keeping of union in the Church And thus far the Apostles practice of becoming all things to all will warrand Zanchius in an Epistle to this purpose giveth both many examples of and reasons for this 2. We say that men especially in a time of divisions would by all means endeavour to keep the trodden and approven way that hath been used and is in use in a Church in such administrations because the lesse men be sticking in the manner of these things and the more simplicity they use and the lesse they differ from what is most ordinary and approven the lesse will the hazard of division be in these things which doth arise from the multiplying of them the changing of the old or bringing in of a new manner the condemning of the way and manner used by others as having some great absurdity in it and the pressing of their way even in circumstances upon others These and such things are to be eschewed and so indeed there is no way to peace in these things but to forbear for it is more easie to forbear some new thing than to make others alter what is old except there be some reason in the matter to move to this The great and usually the most bitter contentions of a Church as was said before are in things that belong to Government which are of many kinds and have their own proportionable cures when blessed of God We shall instance in these five kinds of contests in this matter The first is concerning the form of Government The second is concerning the formality of Church-judicatories The third concerning the matter enacted or decerned by them The fourth concerning particular miscarriages and abuses of power in Government And the fifth concerning the persons who ought to govern or to whom the Government is due and whose determinations are ultimatly to be obeyed For the first Debates about the nature and form of Government may be considered doctrinally and so it is a difference of judgement Some think one form of Government lawfull and others not that but another If this difference be fairly carried it needeth make no division in the Church as was in the foregoing part hinted 2. It may be considered practically that is when men not only think so differently in their judgement but accordingly they act driving opposit designs as if they were two parties seeking to get one Church subdued to them and neither of them doth acknowledge the other This cannot be without division for the ground of all union and communion in the visible Church in all the Ordinances of Christ is the unity of the visible Church as even in old time Augustine did presse So Ecclesiastick union must be made up and entertained in a Church by an unity in the Government thereof for though there may be a forbearance and a kind of peace where the unity of the visible Church is denied or where there are divided Governments that are not subaltern yet there can be no Church-union nor communion in Ordinances of Word Sacraments and Government which results from the former and doth necessarily presuppose the same We dare not nor cannot offer any directions for making up an union here save that men would unite in one form of Government that can extend to the whole body and that in such a Government as is allowed by Christ otherwayes it can be no union because so it were not a duty as union is If it were asked What kind of Government that may be most probably wherein men ought to unite Answ. We mind not to digresse to a doctrinall debate yet these characters may be given of it 1. It must be a Government that can extend unto and reach all the body for one main end of Government is union Eph. 4. 3 10 11 c. and the removing offences which make divisions Matth. 18. And this union is not to be in this or that particular part of the body but in the whole 1 Cor. 12. that there be no schism in the body therefore it must extend to all or be in a capacity to do so 2. It would be in a proportionable fitnesse to remove these causes that breed divisions for there cannot be union in a Government that is not fitted for that and therefore must be able to purge corrupt teachers and the leaven of corrupt doctrine out of the whole Church or any part thereof Hence both in the Scripture and primitive times and all alongs there hath been still a joynt authoritative concurrence for removing these causes of this evil in whatsoever place they did appear 3. It must be such a Government as hath an unity amongst the whole Governours for this end and so it must answer to the unity of the body Hence in the Epistle to the Galatians Paul commendeth the remeeding of that evill to them all in a joynt manner as being one lump without respect to their subdivision in particular Churches and if this Authority did not imply unity amongst the Governours wherever they lived and a capacity to act unitedly upon occasion there could be no accesse authoritatively to remove such evils from the Church nor such weight in the mean applied 4. It must be a Government wherein there is a coordinatenesse amongst the Governours because so not only the union of the Church is made up but her communion is represented and to place the Government in one as Papists do in the Pope doth not make an union in the Government which implieth a mutuall and kindly co-ordinatnesse and associating one with another but whatever they pretend of union in it it is really but tyrannie and such as the most arbitrary ruler may have when by violence he seemeth to keep down all divisions under him neither so can that body be said to be united in him And we see in the primitive times even after Bishops and Patriarchs were brought in into the Church that still the supream Government whereby union was entertained did
converted Iew or Turk should not be baptized in the manner that others are baptized but some other way it may be there was some Iew or Turk to be baptized when that determination passed but that particular Act being by there is no probability that ever there may be accesse to put the same in practice again although it be not simply impossible Now there is great odds betwixt these two and in effect this last case doth look liker a doctrinall determation when the occasion thereof is past than any way to be practicall Further we may distinguish these also in such practices that are positively enacted to be practised by an authoritative Act ordaining in such possible cases that it be so done that is when such a case occurreth men should be astricted to follow the same and Ministers should accordingly act Or they are such cases as do not ordain any practice to be done but do declare such a thing to be lawfull As suppose they should declare a Minister might lawfully baptize a Iew so as is formerly said without any peremptory ordaining of the same which is still rather a doctrinall decision than a positive ordinance We may yet add one distinction more which is this determination is either to declare such a thing lawful to Church-men in some Ecclesiastick matter as suppose as was sometimes in the primitive persecutions upon some Querie from some Ministers it should be enacted that in such and such cases Ministers might flie sell the Church-goods or use such and such shifts and means for their escape and deliverance as others it may be would think unlawfull Or it is when the practising of the supposed case belongs to Magistrates or men in civil stations as suppose upon some Queries from Magistrates or others enquiring if it were lawfull to admit Iews to dwell in such and such places meerly for civil traffick or if they might eat and drink with an Ambassador of the Cham of Tartaria or help Chinas against the Tartars or such cases which possibly beside the occasion of the Querie might never occur now supposing the case to be decided affirmatively by a Church-judicatory and a rent to have followed thereupon and to continue after the case is not probably practicall because of the former decision and so in the rest of the former suppositions it is to be enquired If and How union may be win at in them respectively Now these distinctions being premitted we come to consider accordingly How union may be made up where division standeth upon such accounts In reference to all which in the general we say That peremptorinesse and self-willednesse being excluded which are expresly prohibited to be in a Minister it is not impossible to attain union amongst faithfull sober and orthodox men who will acknowledge that mutuall condescending and forbearance is necessary which by going through the particular steps will appear wherein we may relate to the former generall grounds laid down and be the shorter in instances and reasons because this draweth out in length beyond our purpose and also because Verbum sapienti satis est and these especially that are concerned in this need not by us either to be instructed or perswaded to their duty many of whom the Lord hath eminently made use of to teach convince and perswade others We shall only as in all the rest offer some things to their view which may occasion the remembering of what they know and the awakening of the zeal and affection that they have to act accordingly To come then to the first sort of determinations which are doctrinall it may appear from what is said that there can be no just ground of division upon that account for in such things a Church may forbear particular persons and again particular persons may forbear a Church It is not to be thought that all orthodox Divines are of the same mind in all things that are decreed in the Synod of Dort particularly in reference to the object of predestination yet the Synod hath not made any division by Censuring of such neither these who differ from that determination have broken off communion with the Church but have keeped communion and union in the Church hath not been thereby interrupted yet these who apprehend themselves to be right cannot but think the other is in an errour and if this forbearance be not allowed there can never be union in the Church except we should think that they behoved all to be in the same mind about such things and that there should never be a decision in a Church but when there is absolute harmony for supposing the plurality to decide right yet these whose judgement were condemned were obliged according to their light to divide seing they are in their own judgments right It is true I suppose that it is not simply unlawful or hurtful to truth for a Church-judicatory out of respect to peace in the Church to condescend abstractly to wave a ministeriall decision without wronging of the matter As suppose these in Africk for peace had waved their judiciall decision of the necessity of rebaptizing in such a case or these who determined the contrary might have waved theirs yet neither of them had hurt their own opinion Or suppose that in the decisions that were concerning Easter upon both sides of the controversie either had past from their decisions and left the matter in practice to mens arbitrement without any decision I suppose this had not been a wrong to truth supposing it to have been on either side And indeed considering what is written in the History something like this may be gathered For first It is clear that there were determinations on both sides and particularly That the West Church and these that joyned with them did determine the Lords Day necessarily to be keeped for distinguishing them from the Iews 2. It is also clear That Policrates with many Bishops in Asia did judicially condemn that deed appointing the fourteenth day of the month to be keeped So that necessarily both decisions could not stand And 3. this is clear also That the way that was taken to settle that difference so stated was That judiciall decisions should be waved and men left to their own arbitrement to observe what day they thought good whether in the East or West Church whereupon followed an union and Policarpus did communicate with Anicetus at Rome upon these tearms Ut neuter eorum sententiam suam urgeret aut defenderet as the Centariators have it out of Ireneus that is that neither of them should urge or defend their own opinion and upon this there followed peace notwithstanding of that difference It brake up again more strongly in the time of Victor and although Ireneus was of his judgment yet did he vehemently presse him not to trouble the Church by pursuing such a determination and did exceeding weightily expostulat with him for it He wrote also to the other party that both of them might
forbear the pressing of such decisions and that the thing might be left to mens arbitrement without prejudice to the Churches union as formerly it had been used this is clear from Church-history and that word of Sozomen lib. 7. cap. 19. is weighty Frivolum enim quidem merito judicarunt consuetudinis gratia à se mutuo segregari eos qui in praecipuis religionis capitibus consentirent that is They judged it and upon good ground most frivolous for men to be separated or divided one from another because of a custome who did agree together in the main points of Religion And though this matter be of it self no controversie decided in the Word at least as it was stated yet considering their thoughts of it and the grounds which they alleage for it it was not so to them and that peremptorines of Victors who afterward would not be reclaimed from that second determination is condemned by all as being the ground of that following schism And indeed in such cases where two parts of a Church are divided having independent authorities as to one another and there being contrary determinations in the same question it seemeth convenient and necessary for peace that either both should wave their decisions or that both should permit the decisions of each other to stand and be in force to such only as should acquiesce therein and willingly acknowledge the same Again where there is nothing like a party or equality but the division is in the same one Church betwixt a greater and smaller number and the greater will not be induced to remove their determination It is no way sinfull to the lesser to joyn with them notwithstanding thereof they having their own freedom and liberty cautioned as was formerly said Yea this seemeth not unexpedient that they should do for the good of the Church 1. Because it is not so readily to be expected that men who have such an advantage will cede to these who have it not 2. It may have inconveniencies if a smaller dissenting number should necessitat a Church to wave former determined truths though possibly not fundamental because of their dissatisfaction therewith who esteem them not to be truths and strengthen others in a schism as if they could not keep union and communion with a Church where any thing contrary their mind were determined Also 3. it seemeth most agreeable to reason that in sinlesse cedings the lesser number should cede to the greater And 4. because by so doing this accidental confirmation of an opinion by having the plurality of a Church or Synod for it is left open to the other side when they may be the plurality Hence we see generally that the minor part cedeth to the greater if the not pressing of the removal of such a decision be a ceding yea even when the plurality were wrong as in that case of Africk these who differed did not presse the rescinding of that determination having their own liberty Nor did these that had the plurality then for them impose any bond to keep the other from rescinding their determinations if they should come to be in such a capacity but both keeped peace for the time and afterwards in the dayes of Augustine we will find Councels of the Church of Africk determining the just contrary concerning that case of Baptizing and yet still entertaining peace and communion amongst themselves although the authoritative decision stood alwayes upon the side of the plurality CHAP. XV. What shall be done in order to union about such decisions as have practical consequents following thereon TO come to the second case to wit anent such decisions as have some practicall consequents following thereupon For the more short answering we shall lay down these Assertions Assert 1. In such practices as are opposit and infer division in the cases mentioned there can be no union or communion expected as we see in all the cases where such have been practised as of the Novatians Donatists and such like there may be more or lesse heat and bitternesse betwixt men that differ so but there cannot be union because such determinations and practices do draw a line and build a wall of separation betwixt the one and the other and so makes one side to be accounted as not of the same body Assert 2. Where the consequents only infer some difference or are not peremptorily pressed they do not infer necessarily a division as we see in the cases of Africk and others mentioned and Sozomen in the chapter cited giveth many instances of diversities of this kind in Churches without any breach of communion and saith it is necessary because Neque easdem traditiones per omnia similes in omnibus Ecclesus quamvis in omnibus consentiant reperire possis that is Ye will hardly find the same traditions alike in all things in all the Churches even though they agree in all things that are material And upon the matter such determinations are but indeed as if they were doctrinall to such as acknowledge them not and men are accordingly to walk in them Assert 3. In such practices as are daily practicable in respect of the occasions thereof union is more difficult though not impossible than in such cases where the occasion of practice is not probable because there being no present occasion to practise the same it looketh most unwise like to bring in or keep in a more certain and greater evil in the Church for eschewing of what folks may never be put to and suppose the case to be past that may probably never recurre it is more for the Churches good by abstaining the approbation of such an act and by not being involved in the apprehended guilt thereof to make up again the communion of the Church for the preventing of a greater hurt because that continueth to be a duty and is necessary to edification and the thing being past ought not to be the occasion of a present and following division as was formerly said If it be said How can there be union in such a case upon the principle supposed till as may be said by one side those who have decided and acted corruptly should repent and as may be said by the other till those who have divided unjustly from the Church and wronged the authority thereof should acknowledge their offence without which there cannot be union For answer to which we say 1. What if neither party shall ever be brought to repent or acknowledge an offence shall the Church in such a case never attain to union Repentance implyeth a conviction and this implyeth information and clearness in the judgment that such a thing is wrong Now it being often seen that it is impossible to get men of one judgment concerning such a thing Must therefore union be impossible till men be of one judgment This hath been formerly disproved 2. What if this had been the mind of the Churches and Servants of God from the
former instances of men most tender of union and yet most zealous in this yea these two go together because zeal for the Churches edification constraineth to union and doth also presse the removing of corrupt unfaithfull Ministers which next to division in a Church is the greatest plague of a Church Therefore these things would be adverted 1. That the purging of the Church of such and the work of union would be joyntly respected otherwayes if union be sleighted it will hazard the falling in too nearly with the schisms of the Novatians and Donatists which have been so hurtfull to the Church 2. Union when it is in competition with the deposing of some unfaithfull men and both cannot be obtained together it ought to be preferred as we see the Apostle doth 2 Cor. 10. 6. who will not censure in such a case lest he state a schism for the continuing of such in a Church is indeed a hurt seing they are uselesse and in a great part hurtfull yet so honest Ministers may have accesse to do good beside them but when schisms enter the hurt thereof is more comprehensive and they do render unusefull the Ministery both of good and bad 3. It would be considered also that the division being in the case supposed where men are orthodox and pious on both sides it is not so exceedingly to be feared that either men palpably corrupt in doctrine or conversation should be entertrained upon the one side or that men useful in the Church and blamelesse in their conversations should be crushed upon the other 4. It would follow also that union should be no prejudice to the ridding of the Church of corrupt Ministers but that it should be studied where there is need because it is a fruit of the same spirit to be zealous against corrupt men from which meeknesse and moderation toward these who are not such do proceed and therefore if there be any such object of zeal as an unfaithfull Minister as it is not like that ever the Church was or shall be free of such then ought men to bestir themselves faithfully in the removing of such It is marked and commended in the Angel of Ephesus Rev. 2. v. 2 3. That he was eminent in patience and enduring and yet so zealous in this that he could endure no unsent Minister but tryed such as called themselves Apostles c. which contemperature or mixture is exceedingly commended And in reference to the scope which we are upon zeal in this is not only a duty as at other times but a speciall mean having influence on the procuring of union because so one of the great stumblings that hath been in the Church to make the Ministery contemptible is removed and a practicall evidence of mens zeal is given which tendeth to lay a ground of confidence of them in the hearts of others so also men are keeped from falling under the tentation of luke-warmnesse and forgetting of every duty but the supporting of the side at least that which usually is imputed in such a case is removed and also by this men would find the necessity of bearing with many things in others who may in the main be supposed to be honest And however it is the way to be approven before God and to have a testimonie in the consciences of others All which conduce exceedingly to union whereas universall cessation from this as if there were no such matter to work upon and obstructing formally yea or materially or virtually any thing thereof doth exceedingly tend to the fixing of division and cooling of the affections of many that look on without which that is warmed affections there is little accesse to hearty union 6. We say that this duty of purging would not be so in its vehemency pressed either under a division or while union is not confirmed as when a Church is in a good condition because that were to give strong physick to an unsettled weak body that might rather stir the humours to the prejudice of the whole than remove them Therefore we conceive that sobriety and prudence would be used here in moderating of the exercise of this duty till the union be confirmed and as it were by preparations the body be disposed for the same Therefore if faults be not grosse evidences clear and a persons unfruitfulnesse or hurtfulnesse demonstrable in which cases no difference amongst such parties as are to be united is to be feared It is safer for the Church to abstain the same than to hazard the opening or ruffling of a wound scarcely cured by the unseasonable pressing of such a duty The Apostle doth in severall cases spare consures of unfaithfull men out of respect to the Churches good as hath been formerly hinted and as the judicious divine Mr. Gillespy who yet cannot be branded with luke-warmnesse in this duty in his Aarons rod maketh out and doth give instances of severall cases wherein this forbearance is called-for In sum we suppose that having to do in such a case with such persons it is more safe for men to do their own duty keeping the peace of the Church and to leave others to do according to the manifestnesse of things as they shall answer before God as to their seeking the good of His Church and if this prevail not with such men for ordering them in their duty will any think that the keeping up or threatening of division will prevail Lastly It would be considered if such ends as any side would propose either in keeping in or purging out of men who are thought fit or unfit respectively can be attained without union so as with it Therefore seing that is a thing which belongeth to Government and men are to be swayed in such Acts by what conduceth most to edification when they cannot attain the length they would as we suppose men shall never do in this matter of purging they then are to walk by this rule of choosing what comparatively is most edifying as was formerly said Sometimes also difference hath been about the excommunicating of persons or readmitting again to communion but what concerneth this may be somewhat understood from the former grounds wherein extremities would be shunned and the Churches peace and the Authority of the Ordinances studied Also we have otherwayes beyond our purpose become so long and possibly ad nauseam usque in other things we shall therefore forbear particular descending into this but proceed in the generals proposed CHAP. XVIII The fears of mis-government for the time to come and remedies thereof THe last thing in Government which was proposed as that whereabout differences and divisions do arise is in reference to Government for the time to come and resolves in this Who shall have chief hand in the decision of matters that after may fall out supposing the union to be made up This resulteth from the present diffidence and prejudice which each hath in reference to other and from that impression that men have that there