trust the conduct of their Souls Nor did they think so that forbad men hearing fornicators Nor Cyprian that required the People to forsake Basilides and Martial Peccatorem Praepositum XXXV So full was the proof given in the Book called The first Plea for Peace that the Church from the beginning denyed Princes and Magistrates to be entrusted with the choice of Bishops or Pastors to whom the Churches were bound to trust the conduct of their Souls that he who denyeth it is not worthy to be therein disputed with And yet we doubt not but they may force Infidel Subjects and Catechumens to hear sound and setled Preachers and Catechists And may dispose of the Tythes Temples and many other Accidents of the Church and may drive on Pastors and People to their Duty XXXVI It is false Doctrine that two distinct Churches may not be in the same Precincts or City This being a meer Accident which abundance of Cases make unnecessary and unlawful Which I shall prove That which is no where commanded by God is no duty But that there shall be but one Church or Bishop in the same Precincts is not commanded of God Ergo c. Divine of Gods making They own the Major in the case of Indifferent thing If they deny the Minor let the affirmers prove any such command We grant a command of Love and Concord and a prohibition of all that is against them But in many instances to have several Churches in the same precincts is not against them If they fly to the Canons of foreign Councils the reason of them we shall weigh and duely regard But they were National and had their Legislative Power only from their own Princes and their Counselling Power only from Christ And we disown all foreign Jurisdiction XXXVII In all these Cases following and more two Churches may be in the same precincts yea and a City 1. In Case that several Bishops are called justly to dwell in the same City or Diocess and many of their Flock be with them e. g. Many Bishops of England dwell long yea mostly in London or in London Diocess e. g. The Bishop of Eli dwells in the Parish of St. Andrews Holbourn Qu. Whether there he be a Subject to Dr. Stillingfleet as his Pastor and bound to obey him or whether many out of his Diocess thousands may not as Lawfully dwell half the Year in London as he And whether when he preacheth to them he do it not as their Bishop in London Diocess And so of many other Bishops that here reside XXXVIII 2. Either our Parish Churches are true Churches or not If not the Separatists are so far in the right And separate not from true Churches eo nomine because they separate from them If yea then many Churches are in the same City and Diocess Of their agreement and dependance on the same Bishop I shall speak anon XXXIX 3. In case that in one City there be resident Stranges that are sent on Embassies or live for Merchandize or flee from Miseries and are the Subject of other Princes whose Laws and Customs they are under e. g. At Frankford Hamburgh Middleburgh Dantzick Constantinople there have been English distinct lawful Churches And in London there are Dutch and French Churches And if the King allowed a Swedish Church a Danish Church a Saxon Church c. with their several Bishops who is so weak as to need proof that this is lawful and they true Churches XL. 4. In case men of different Language are not capable of mutual converse by personal communion or help As Dutch French Italian Greeks Germans c. Grotius and Dr. Hammond oft in Dissert and Annot. do maintain that Peter at Rome had a Church of Iews and Paul a Church of Gentiles And that the like distribution of Churches of Iews and Gentiles there was at Antioch Alexandria and other places And by this they Salve the Contradictions in Church History about the Succession of Linus Cletus and Clemens And the Apostles setled not a sinful Church way XLI 5. Yea Grotius maintaineth that the Apostles setled the Churches at first not like the Jewish Priesthood but in the order of their Synagogues de Imper. sum Patest and in Annot. And that as there were divers Synagogues in a great City with their Archisynagogus and Elders so there were divers Churches in a City with Bishops and Presbyters XLII 6. When there are a greater number of Persons in one City or precinct than can have any just personal Knowledge and Communion and more than any one Bishop with his Presbytery can perform the needful Pastoral oversight to it is lawful and a duty to gather another Church in that City or Precinct But this is truly the Case of many great Cities though worldly Wisdom have at Rome and other places oft denyed notorious evidence and experience He that will gather up all the duties that Dr. Hammond saith were charged on the Bishops in his Annotations on all the Texts that name Elders and Bishops if he can believe that any Bishop can perform the tenth part of them to all in the Diocess of London York Lincoln Norwich c. I will not dispute against him if he maintain a Bishops Ubiquity or that at once he can be in twenty places But if they say that what then was commanded them to do personally they may do by others I say that if they may change the Work they may change the Power that specifieth the Office and so it is not the same Office in specie instituted in Scripture And then Lay-men may have Power to preach and administer Sacraments and do the Office of Priests and yet be no Priest as Civilians do of Bishops which is a Contradiction Certainly if there be more Scholars in the City than one Master can Teach and Rule it is no Schism to set up more Schools and Schoolmasters but a duty And if the Lord Mayor on pretence of City Government should put down but as great a part of Family Government as those Diocesans do of Parochial Church Government who allow none under them to be truly Episcopi Gregis and have the power of their Church Keyes I think that it were no Schism to restore Families so that the City might have more than one entirely XLIII 7. If the Soveraign Power upon Politick or Religious Reasons should determine that e. g. Dr. A and Dr. B and Dr. C. shall all be Bishops in London to such Volunteers of Clergy and Laity as shall choose each of them to be their Bishop and this without altering their dwellings no man can prove it sinful And of his reasons the King is judge XLIV 8. If the Bishop or Clergy of a City Diocess or Nation do agree by Law or Canon to admit none to the Ministry or Communion that will not commit a known sin deliberately as the Condition of his Communion it is a duty to congregate under other Pastors in those precincts This is confest If they
humane Covenant for Christ hath made but one Covenant with Mankind which is contained in the Vow of Baptism if it be then no man is a Christian but an Independent Ans. Alas for the Church that is taught at this rate 1. I never saw what Independents do in this case but I think none of them that are Sober own any other sort of Church but the universal and single Churches as members of it and therefore require no Contract but 1. To the Covenant of Baptism or Christianity 2. To the Duties of their particular Church-relation 2. And nothing is here of necessity but manifested Consent which is a real Contract but a clearer or a darker an explicite or implicite consent differ only ad meliús esse 3. Is not God the Author of Magistracy Marriage c. And is it any violation of Gods part if Rulers and People Husband and Wife be Covenanters by his command 4. Is it any renuntiation of Baptism to promise at Ordination to obey the Arch-Bishop and Bishop and to take the Oath of Canonical Obedience Is it not still exacted Are not the Takers of it obliged are not Covenants imposed on all that will be Ministers in the act of Uniformity are not multitudes kept out and cast out for not making these Covenants Quo teneam nodo c. How should one deal with such slippery men Good Mr. Zachary Cawdry that wrote to have all men to covenant Submission to Bishops and Parish Ministers did not dream that it was any violation of Baptism 5. Do not men owe duty to their Pastors which they owe to no others If not put them not on it Why are you angry with them for going from you Why doth the Canon suspend those that receive them to Communion from another Parish that hath no Preacher Why are we ruined for not covenanting as aforesaid if yea then is it against Baptism to promise to do our duty 6. But hath God commanded or instituted no Covenant but Baptism Yes sure the Matrimonial at least and I think Ordination is covenanting for the Ministry Did not the Apostle Acts 14.23 ordain Elders in every Church if you would have by Suffrage left out of the Translation no sober man can doubt but it was by the Peoples consent and was it without their consent that Titus was to ordain Elders in every City Could any then come otherwise in Did not all Churches hold and practise this after and was it none of Gods Institution If so God requireth us not to take any of you for our Bishops or Pastors Who then requireth it What meaneth Paul when he saith they gave up themselves to the Lord and to us by the Will of God 7. Can the wit of man imagine how it is possible without consent for a man to be made the Pastor of any Flock Who ever ordained a man against his will or for any man to have Title against his will to the proper over-sight and pastoral care of any one Pastor or the priviledges of any Church If any think they may be cramm'd and drencht with the Sacrament or that an unwilling man may have a sealed pardon and gift of Salvation delivered him he will make a new Gospel And how any particular Pastor is bound to give that man the Sacrament ordinarily that consents not ordinarily to receive it of him I know not No man is a member of any City or any Company of Free-men in the City but by mutual consent and the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy to the King maketh not the Oath of a Citizen as such or of a Member of a Company as such unlawful 8. Doth this Doctor think that he ever yet proved to sober men that the Covenant aforesaid of Godfathers and Godmothers to make Christians and members of the universal Church is more or so much of Gods Institution than the Contract or Consent between Bishops or Pastors and People to make a single Political Church 9. If it follow not that no man is the Kings Subject that sweareth not to the City It will not follow that none is a Christian but an Independent or Church-consenter 10. How are your Parish or Diocesan Church members known to your selves or any others Are all that dwell in the Parish or Diocess your Church members Then Atheists Sadducees Hobbists and all vicious men and thousands that never communicate are such Yea those that you call Separatists If it be every transient Communicant have you a proper Pastoral care of every Travellers Soul that so communicates with you You after plead that his very ordinary Communion maketh him not a member if he be unwilling to be one And is not his consent then necessary Or if ordinary Communion be the test how few then of great Parishes are of the Church yet that is because such Communion signifieth their Consent to your over-sight of them § 9. But it 's much to be approved which p. 5. and oft he saith that to be taken into Covenant with God and to be received into the Church is the very same thing as to the Universal Church By which all his gross Schismatical Accusations afterwards are confuted No man then is out of the Church that is not out of the Baptismal Covenant either by not taking it or by renouncing some Essential part of it And when will he prove that to take him rather than Dr. Bates that was cast out to be a Teacher or Pastor at Dunstans or to take this man and not another to be the Lawful Bishop or Priest and to obey him in every Oath and Ceremony is an Essential part of the Baptismal Covenant or of Christianity But such a rope of Sand as Mr. Dodwell and this man tye together to bind men to their Sect will serve turn with some that know not who speaks Truth by any surer way than prejudice § 10. His Doctrine of Separation and gathering Churches out of Churches is anon to be considered But whereas he addes p. 7. These men convert Christians from common Christianity and the Communion of the Vniversal Church to Independency Ans. My acquaintance with them is small save by reading their Books And there are few Men of any Common Denomination Episcopal or other that are not in many things disagreed But I must in Charity to them say that as far as I can judge by their Writings or Speech he palpably slandereth them and that none that are grave and sober among them do separate their Churches from the common Christianity or the Universal Church any more than the Company of Stationers Ironmongers c. are separated from the City of London or London from England or Trinity Colledge from the University of Cambridge or Oxford I never met with man and I am confident never shall do that doth not take his Independent Church to be part of the Universal and Dependent as a part on the whole If belying others stopt at words the wrong were small But when it 's made but the
Duty 4. Sure it is not meer Place but a mutual Relation of Pastors and People that distinguisheth these Churches The Presbyterians preach't once in the same Places that you do and yet you take them not for the same Church Pastors If one from York or Cornwall come into your Pulpit without consent do People stand as much related to him as to you Some men are of extraordinary sufficiency to resist and conquer the clearest evidence of Truth But he addes every Act of Communion thô performed to some particular Church is and must be an Act of Communion with the whole Catholick Church A. And who denyeth this No sober Independent or Presbyterian that ever I met with It 's a weighty Truth § 17. P. 14. Saith he Praying and Hearing and Receiving the Lords Supper together doth not make us more in Communion with the Church of England than with any other true and Orthodox part of the Church thô in the remotest part of the World A. I think that 's not true With the remotest parts you have only Catholick Communion with the Church Universal In England and London you have that and more even special subordinate Communion with your own King Bishop and Flock 2. And hath not the Church of England such Communion in obedience to its own Laws as the Act of Uniformity Convocation and Canons which you have not with all abroad Do your Bishops in Convocation make Canon Laws for all the World Do you Swear Canonical obedience as much to the Bishop of Paris or Haffnia c. as to your Ordinary Do the Canons of all Churches impose our Liturgy or ipso facto excommunicate all that affirm any thing in it or our Ceremonies or Church Government to be against Gods word Sure this is a peculiar kind of Communion 3. If not why are all the Nonconformists cast out that offer to officiate and Communicate on such terms as are common to all sound Churches Pag. 15. Saith he There is nothing in all these Acts of Communion which does more peculiarly unite us to such a particular Church than to the whole Christian Church A. What neither in these Acts nor any other Then we are no more bound to hear you or maintain you as our Pastor than to hear and maintain the whole Christian Church § 18. P. 20. Saith he There is no other Rule of Catholick Communion for private Christians but to communicate in all Religious Offices and all Acts of Government and Discipline with Christians those with whom they live A. 1. Elsewhere you added sound and Orthodox Else they that live with Arians Socinians Papists in Spain France Italy c. are bound to communicate with them in all Religious Offices and obey them 2. This concludeth that where Presbytery or Independency is the way of the place where we live all must thus communicate and obey The King and Custom then may make any way to become our Duty 3. If you tell us that it 's only with the Sound and Orthodox you were as good say nothing unless you tell us who must judge that whether the People themselves or who for them 4. But if this be the only rule for private Christians what shall they do e. g. in Aethiopa Egypt Syria and many other Countreys where the Churches are such as General Councils and other Churches judge Hereticks or Schismaticks And what shall they do when at Antioch Alexandria Constantinople c. one party is uppermost by the Judgment of Councils and Prince one Year and another contrary party the next And what shall they do where the Prince equally tolerateth both and it 's hard to know which is the more numerous as in Zeno's and Anastasius Reign c. And what shall they do when many Churches in one City are of divers Tongues as well as Customs Have the Greeks French and Dutch in London no rule of Catholick Communion but communicating in all Offices with the English and obeying all your Bishops Courts § 19. P. 21. Saith he Distinct and particular Churches which are in Communion with each other must have their distinct bounds and limits as every member has it's natural and proper place and Situation in the Body A. Why may not the Greeks Dutch and French live in Communion with the Churches London though they live dispersedly among them In Brandenburg Hassia and many free Cities and Belgia where Lutherans and Calvinists as called live together and own each other as Brethren why may not both be Churches of Christ § 20. P. 21 22. A great deal more he hath of the like making Schismaticks at his Pleasure This is plain in the Case of the Presbyterian and Independent Churches and those other Conventicles They are Churches in a Church Nothing can justifie the Distinction of Christians into several Churches but only such a distance of place as makes it necessary c. p. 22. Distinct Churches in the same place can never be under the same Communion A. These things are repeated so oft and the word separate so deceitfully rolled over and over that I will answer all together under his third Case at the End § 21. P. 27. See how openly he recanteth most aforesaid There is a sence indeed wherein we may be said to be members of one particular Church considered as distinct from all other particular Churches But that principally consists in Government and Discipline Every Christian is a member of the Whole Christian Church and in Communion with it but he is under the immediate instruction and Government of his own Bishop and Presbyters and is bound to personal Communion with them and this constitutes a particular Church in which all Acts of Worship and all Acts of Discipline and Government are under the Direction and conduct of a particular Bishop A. Omitting that he seemeth to make the Parochial Churches no Churches but parts of one here he saith all that he seemed to write against and that those that he reproacheth hold allowing the difference of the extent of Churches And is it Edifying to read such a discourse that saith and unsaith by self-contradiction And he adjoyns 28. p. how by agreement Patriarchal and National Churches are made And is not Agreement a humane Contract CHAP. II. Of his first Case § 1. PAge 31. His first Case Whether Communion with some Church or other be a necessary Duty incumbent on Christians And he thinks the Resolution of this is as plain as whether it be necessary for every man to be a Christian For every Christian is baptized into the Communion of the Church A. In this I know no Christian adversary to him But it being the Vniversal Church that he giveth his proof of necessary Communion with it 's odde to say We must have Communion with some Church or other As if there were more than one Universal Church 2. But we grant more that all that can well should be also members of some single Church § 2. P. 32. He saith External and Actual
Communion is an Essential duty of a Church-member meaning a Christian. A. 1. And yet before he denyed that Communion lay essentially in this Exercise but only in Vnion Yea and Nay is his Custom 2. Some few Christians as those that live where such Communion cannot be had without sin c. are not bound to it therefore it is not true that it is Essential to Universal Church-membership And I think sickness endeth not the essentials that disableth men 3. Note Reader that by this mans Doctrine we are all unchristened and damned if we do not gather into disallowed Churches if we be unjustly cast out of the allowed ones For all must be Church members that will be Christians and an unjust Excommunication cannot disoblige us from Christianity nor bind us to consent to be damned Now read the 5 th 6 th 7 th 8 th c. Canons of the Church of England which ipso facto Excommunicate all that affirm any thing in their Liturgy Articles Ceremonies or Government sinful and answer Spalatensis arguments against Excommunicating ipso facto and prove all this just and you may prove what you will just But you see where he layeth the Controversie If any be Excommunicated without sufficient cause or by Lay Civilians to whom God never gave that power or by such Bishops or Pastors as have no just Authority for want of a true call or Consent or if any unlawful thing be made necessary to Communion all such persons must by his own confessions hold Church-communion whether these imposers will or not for all Christians are bound to be of some Church § 3. p. 33 34. He saith that None but publick Prayers are the Prayers of the Church properly and acts of Communion that is such as are offered by the hands of men authorized and set apart for that purpose c. Ans. Who would have thought that we are more for the Liturgy than he I undertake to prove that all the Responsal Prayers and all the Litany Prayers in which the Minister names but the matter to them and the People make it a Prayer by speaking the petitioning parts are all the publick Prayers of the Church and so are all the petitioning Psalms spoke or sung by the People and not only that which is offered by the Priest I do not think that he believeth what he carelesly saith here himself But the Independents are stiffer for his first Thesis of the necessity of Church-communion than he is his unfit words I pass by CHAP. III. Of his second Case § 1. THE next question of Occasional Communion as distinct from fixed he turns out of doors as if there could be no such thing and it 's very true as to the Church universal but as to visible actual Communion with this or that particular Church it is not true 1. A Traveller of another Country who on his journey communicateth with every Church where he passeth is not a fixed Member of that Church for 1. The Pastor or Bishop hath not that peculiar Charge of him as of fixed members 2. He is not bound where he passeth to take such notice of the lives of Communicants or Pastors and to admonish the Offenders and tell the Church as fixed members are 3. He hath not the right in chooseing Pastors or Deacons as the fixed Members have 4. An itinerant Bishop in transitu is not their fixed Bishop ergo an Iterant Lay-man is not a fixed Member The same I may say of one that is a fixed member of another Church in the same City and cometh to that only to signifie universal Communion or neighbourly which though he deny to be lawful I shall further prove anon And the same I may say of those that dwell where there is no fixed single Church at all for want of a Pastor but they congregate only when some strange Minister passeth through the Town CHAP. IV. His third Case § 1. PAge 48 49. He resolveth his third Case Whether it be lawful to Communicate with two distinct and separate Churches negatively and saith It is contrary to all the Principles of Church Communion as any thing can possibly be it is to be contrary to our selves it is Communicating with Schism That the Presbyterian and Independent Churches have made an actual separation from the Church of England he hath evidently proved and they are Schismaticks and to communicate with them is to partake in their Schism and if Schism be a great sin and that which will damn us as soon as Adultery and Murther then it must needs be a dangerous thing to communicate with Schismaticks And p. 42. There cannot be two distinct Churches in one place one for occasional and another for constant Communion without Schism Ans. To save those that are willing from the Poyson of these Schismatical Doctrines lapt up in confusion by men that abhor distinction or understand not what they say I will first lay down that truth that he fights against with convincing evidence and then shew you the mischief of his false Doctrine and Application § 2. The confusion of these words Church Communion Separation and Schism which every one signifie divers things is the chief means to blind and deceive his Reader whether it do so by himself I know not I. The Word Church signifieth sometime the universal Church sometime a single Organized Church as part of it and sometime humane combinations of such single Churches and that into Diocesan Classical Provincial Patriarchal National and Papal II. The Specification and Nomination of Churches is from the formal cause and the proper Government is that form And the Individuation is from matter and form but principally from the form III. The Union of Pastor and Flock in Relation makes that which is a form aptitudinal as the Soul to the Body to be the form in act as the Union of Soul and Body and Gods command and consent with the consent of the necessary relate and correlate cause that union IV. Union is in order to Communion which is primary by the exercise of the formal powers on the matter and secondary by the action of all the parts according to their several capacities and Offices V. The Union of the Church is of divers degrees 1. The formal Union of the Head and Body which maketh it essentially the Christian Church 2. The Vnion of the parts among themselves as Christian which maketh them a Body capable of Union with the Head 3. The Union of the parts as unequal Organized the Official with the rest which maketh it an Organized Body fit for its special use and welfare 4. Union in integrity of parts which maketh it an intire Body 5. Union in due temperament and Qualities which maketh it a healthful Body 6. Unity in Common Accidents which make it a Comely Beautiful Body joined with the rest But 7. Union in mutable Accidents is unnecessary and impossible VI. These several degrees of Union are found in Bodies natural and Politick 1. The
the same place their neighbourhood maketh them capable of Personal presential Communion as men that may know and admonish each other and meet by turns and in presence manage their concerns which differenceth single Churches of the lowest order from associated Churches of men that have Communion only by others at distance XV. As Logicians say of other Relations the matter must be capable of the end or it is not capable of the name and form so is it here e. g. It is no Ship that is made of meer Sponge or Paper or that is no bigger than a Spoon it is no Spoon that is as big as a Ship One House is not a Village nor one Village a City nor a City a meer House So twenty or an hundred or a thousand Parishes associate cannot be a single Church of the first or lowest Order being not capable of mutual Knowledge Converse or personal present Communion Nor are two or three Lay-men capable to be such a Church for want of due matter But supposing them capable thô a full and rich Church have advantage for Honour and Strength yet a small and poor one is ejusdem ordinis as truely a Church and so is their Pastor as Hierom saith of Rome and Eugubium so Alexandria and Majuma c. Gregory Neocaesar was equally Bishop of nineteen at first as after of all save nineteen in the City XVI If the Apostles have Successours in their care and Superiority over many Churches it will prove that there should yet be men of eminent worth to take care of many Churches and to instruct and admonish the younger Ministers But it will neither prove 1. That they succeed the Apostles in the extraordinary parts of their Office 2. Nor that they have any forcing power by the Sword 3. Nor that one Church hath power over others by Divine right for the Apostles fixed not their power to any particular Churches but were general Visitors or Overseers of many Yet if the same Man who is fixed in a particular Church have also the visiting admonishing oversight of many as far as was an Ordinary part of the Apostles Office and be called an Archbishop I know no Reason to be against him XVII There be essential and Integral Acts of the Sacred Ministry instituted by Christ These none may take the Power of from any Ministers nor alter the species or integrity of the Office by setting up any such Superious as shall deprive them of that which Christ hath instituted or arrogating the like uncalled But as in worship so in Order and Church Government there are undetermined accidents As to choose the time and place of Synods to preside and moderate and such like And these the Churches by agreement or the Magistrate may assign to some above the rest And if the Magistrate affix Baronies Honours Revenues or his own due Civil forcing Power and make the same Men Magistrates and Ministers whether we think it prudent and well done or not we must honour and obey them XVIII Some call these humane Accidental Orders forms of Church Government and affirm as Bishop Reignolds did and Dr. Stillingfleet in his Irenicon and many excellent men by him cited that no form of Church Government is of Divine Command Which is true of all this second sort of Government which is but Accidental and humane but not at all of the first sort which is Divine and Essential to Christ himself first and to Pastors as such by his appointment so that the essential Government of the Universal Church by Christ and of each particular Church by Pastors specified by him if not of Supervisors of many as succeeding Apostles and Evangelists in their Ordinary work are of unalterable Divine right But the humane forms are alterable Such I account 1. The Presidency and Moderatorship and accidental Government of one Bishop in a single Church over the other Presbyters Deacons c. 2. The accidental Government of a Diocesan as an Archbishop over these lowest Bishops and Churches 3. And the Superiority of Metropolitans and Patriarchs over them so it be but in such Accidentals and within the same Empire not imposing a forreign Jurisdiction These tota specie differ from the Divine Offices XIX All these single Church being parts of the Universal are less noble than the whole and are to do all that they do as members in Union with the Whole and to do all as Acts of Communion with them XX. The General precepts of doing all to Edification Concord Peace Order c. oblige all the Churches to hold such correspondencies as are needful to these Ends And Synods are one special means which should be used as far and oft as the Ends require And if National Metropolitans and Patriarchs order such Synods I am not one that will disobey them But if on these pretences any would make Synods more necessary than they are and use them as Governours by Legislation and Judgement over the Particular Bishops by the use of the Church Keyes and will affixe to them or Metropolitans besides an Agreeing Power and the said Government in Accidentals a proper Church Government by making and unmaking Ministers or Christians excommunicating and absolving as Rulers by the said Keyes it may be a duty to disown such usurpations As the King would disown an Assembly of Princes any where met that would claim a Proper Government of him and his Kingdom Thô it were much to be wisht that all Christian Princes would hold such Assemblies for the Concord and Peace of Christendom XXI The Essentials of Faith Hope and Loving Pracâ—â—ce essentiate the Church objectively And these are all summarily contained in the Baptismal Covenant explained in the Creed Lords Prayer and Decalouge and all with much more even Integrals and needful Accidentals in the Sacred Scriptures which taking in the Law of Nature are Gods Universal Law XXII There is no Church on Earth so sound and Orthodox as to want no Integral part of Christian Religion Proved There is no man on Earth much less any multitude so sound as to want no Integral part But all Churches consist only of Men And therefore if all the Men be so far defective all the Churches are so It is not their Objective Religion Generally and implicitely received that I mean but their Subjective Religion and their explicite reception of the Objective The Scripture is our perfect Objective Religion in it self and as an Object proposed and in general and implicitely we all receive it But as a man may say I believe all that 's in the Scripture and yet be ignorant of the very Essentials in it so a man may explicitely know and believe all the Essentials and more and yet be ignorant of many Integrals All things in Scripture proposed to our Faith Hope and Practice are the Integrals of our Religion But no Christian understandeth all these proposals or words of Scripture Therefore no Christian explicitely believeth them all or practiceth all To hold the contrary
Church on fire and they separated from the Preacher one Fryer stuck by the belly that was going out at the window the door being wedged with the crowd a Boy that saw it open above their heads got up on their shoulders and went on 'till he slipt into a Monks Cowl and there lay still 'till the Monk was got out and felt something on his back and thinking it was an heretical Devil began to conjure him in the Name of Father Son and Holy Ghost to tell him what he was and the Boy cryed O good Master I am the Bakers boy c. Quaere Whether this was Schismaticks separation At Walsall in Stafford-shire Mr. Lapthorne known to me in his lusty age who had been a Non-conformist but thought it an honour to be converted by a King and gloried that King Iames in conference changed him but being as rustick a thunderer as Father Latimer and more he was wont to let fly without much fear one Mr. Martin in the Parish accounted the greatest enemy to Puritans when he heard what he liked not would goe out of Church one day in a path way where Mr. Lane had rode a little before pelting Crabs with a pole the ground opened and swallowed him and his pole that they could never be found being a Cole-mine long on fire ever after that when any one would goe out of Church at a blustering passage Mr. Lapthorne would call to him Remember Martin Quere Whether all these were separating Schismaticks But this is too far off In Dunstans West where Dr. Sherlock Preacheth when I was licensed twenty years ago at Christmas as I was Preaching some Lime or Stone fell down in the Steeple with the crowd the Church being old and under suspicion they all thought it was falling and most ran out in tumult and some cast themselves headlong from the Gallery for hast when they were quieted and came in again the Boyes in the Chancel broke a Wainscot Skreen with climbing on it and the noise made them run out again one old woman going out cryed It 's just with God because I took not the first warning Lord forgive me and I 'le never come again Quere Whether these or at least this resolving Woman was a Schismatick and separated from the Catholick Church If not there is some separation that is not so bad as Murder and methinks the Doctor should forgive it for the success for the Parish hereupon resolved to pull down the Church and build it new a far better Fabrick where the Dr. now Preacheth and it drove me away that I preacht there no more Whether this new Church built where the old one had possession before be not a Schismatical Separatist I leave to him LII 2. Local Separation without Mental can make no culpable Schism for Nil nisi Voluntarium est morale if a man be imprisoned or be sick and cannot come to the Church it is innocent Separation I have been at no Church this half year much against my will O that God would heal me of this Separation LIII 3. If it must be mental Separation that must be culpable then it is diversified according to the mental degree and kind and no man separateth from the universal Church who separateth not from somewhat essential to it to separate from its Integrals or Accidents may be culpable but it 's no Separation from the Church no more than every breach of the Law is a Separation from the Kingdom LIV. 4. Some separate as to place locally and not mentally some mentally and not locally and some both He that daily observeth the outward Communion of the Church and yet taketh it for no Church or denyeth its Faith Hope or essential Duty separateth indeed All those men that live unbelievingly atheistically wickedly that in their converse prate against the Scripture and immortality of the Soul and that hate and persecute serious Godliness are damnably separated from Christ and therefore from the Catholick Church and are so to be esteemed so far as this is known thô when it is unknown the Church can take no notice of it LV. 5. It being only Humane Laws and Circumstantial Conveniences that make it unmeet to have divers Churches and Bishops living promiscuously in the same Parishes Cities Dioceses or Nations where Laws and circumstances allow it it is no unlawful separation LVI 6. He that liveth in forreign Lands Christian Mahometan or Heathen where various Churches live promiscuously Greeks Armenians Protestants Papists c. is no Schismatick if he choose which he thinks best and be absent locally from the rest condemning them no further than they deserve LVII 7. He that removeth into another Diocess or Parish for his worldly interest separateth without fault from the Church he was in LVIII 8. It is a lawful separation to remove ones dwelling because the Minister is ignorant unskilful or otherwise bad and this for the better edification of his Soul and the use and help of a more able faithful Minister even Law and Custome and reason do allow it LIX 9. Thô the Canon 57. and 28. forbid Ministers oft to give the Sacrament to Strangers that come out of other Parishes even where no Preaching is yet those many sober People that use this in London are not taken to be Schismaticks as bad as Murderers Many that are esteemed the most sober religious Conformists do ordinarily goe from their own Parish Churches some in Martins and St. Giles's Parish c. for want of room and some for more Edification to Dr. Tillotson Dr. Stillingfleet Dr. Burnet Dr. Fowler Mr. Gifford Mr. Durham Mr. Horneck and such others and communicate with them and thó these are called by the late Catholicks by the Name of Dangerous Trimmers I think even Dr. Sherlock will think it more pardonable than Murder if they come to him LX. 10. If the King and Law should restore the antient order that every City that is every great incorporate Town in England should have a Bishop yea or every great Parish and that the Diocesans should be their Arch-Bishops and our new Catholicks should tell the King and Parliament that they are hereby unchristened Schismaticks as dangerous as Adulterers or Murderers for gathering Churches within a Church I would not believe them LXI 11. If e. g. at Frankford Zurick Lubeck Hamburgh c. a Church is settled in the Lutheran way and another in the Bohemian way described by Lasitius and Commenius which is a conjunction of Episcopacy Presbytery and Independency or a Church that had no Liturgy or none but that which the French Protestants and Dutch have would it be damning Schism for such as Cox and Horne at Frankford to set up an Episcopal Church in the English mode and with their Liturgy and so far to separate from the rest LXII 12. If it be true that Iohn Maior Fordon and others say that Presbytery was the Government of the Church of Scotland before Episcopacy was brought in was the introduction of
Episcopacy by Palladius a damning Schism by separating from the former or a Reformation is just Reformation Schism LXIII 13. When the Church first set up Patriarchs Metropolitans General Councils Monasteries Parish Churches distinct from Cathedrals Organs New Liturgies and multitudes of Ceremonies this was a departing or separating from the contrary Church way which was there before was it therefore Schism LXIV 14. When Socrates tells us of some Countreys that had Bishops in the Countrey Villages like our Parishes was it a damning Schism to separate from this custome by decreeing that even small Cities should have no Bishops Ne vilescat nomen Episcopi or when the Chorepiscopi were put down where they had been LXV 15. If a man separate not from any thing essential to the Church of England he separateth not from that Church though he refuse that which is its Accidents or some Integral parts We are charg'd with separating from the Church of England as if it were a matter of fact beyond dispute and scorn'd for denying it even by them that will not tell us what they mean by the Church of England or by Separation By the Church of England we mean the Christian Kingdom of England or all the Christians in England as living in one land under one Christian King who Governeth them by the Sword which includeth their Concord among themselves in true Christianity we are Christians we profess agreement in Christianity with all Christians we are under the same King as they are and profess subjection and take the same Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy yea we are not charged with differing in any thing called Doctrinal from their Thirty Nine Articles but we disown certain late Covenants and Oaths which are not Twenty three Years old and the Subscription to one Canon about the Innocency of all in their Liturgy now either these new Oaths Covenants and Canon Liturgy and Ceremonies are essential to the Church of England or not If yea then 1. It 's a poor humane Church made by them that made these Oaths Liturgy and Ceremonies 2. And then it 's a new upstart Church and no man can answer the Papists where it was before Luther or before Henry 8. yea if its essentials were made by this King and Parliament 1662. then the present Church is no older But if these things be indifferent or not essential to the Church then to separate only from these is not to separate from the Church If it be said That for the sake of these we separate from the Church it self and therefore from its essence we abhor the accusation and challenge them to prove it If we separate from the Church essentially it is either Locally or Mentally not Locally for we are yet in England nor is Local distance only a sin not Mentally for we own it for a true Christian Kingdom called a National Church bound to serve Christ in Love and Concord to their Power We deny not the King to be the Governour nor Christians to be Christians no nor the particular Churches and Ministers to be true thô culpable Churches and Ministers nor their Sacraments to be true Sacraments we profess to hold with them one Catholick Body one Spirit one God one Christ one Faith one Baptism in the essentials and one Hope and are ready to promise to live in Concord with them in all other things as far as will stand with our Obedience to God so that we separate not from the Church of England as such but from some of its Accidents which we dare not be guilty of LXVI 16. The same I say of a Parish Church he that locally removeth e. g. from a Church that hath Organs to one that hath none separateth from a pair of Organs but not Mentally from the Church unless the Organs be its essence LXVII 17. They that are for the true antient Episcopacy e. g. as much as Arch-Bishop Vsher's Reduction which we offer'd did contain but dislike the Lay Civilians power of the Keyes and Officials Surrogates Arch-deacons Government c. do not separate from the Church as Episcopal but from the humane Novelties which they disown LXVIII 18. If a Parishioner fall out with his Priest and they goe to Law about Tythes Glebes Words c. and the Suit be long and the man dare not Communicate with him believing that he hateth him thô the animosity should be culpable being but personal his going from him to another Church is not separating from Christ for I hope that even Mr. Dodwell himself will not say that every Priest is Christ. LXIX 19. Ex quovis ligno non fit Mercurius surely there is some qualification essential to the Ministry if a man want that qualification it is a Duty to separate from him as no Minister e. g. When I came to Kederminster after my subjection to six or seven worse I found the Vicar one reputed ignorant of the Fundamentals he was brought in by Sir Henry Blunt a Papist who Preacht but once a quarter which most thought he might better have forborn and his Curate Mr. Turner at Mitton Preacht once a day whom I found ignorant of the Catechism Principles by Conference and he confest he had but one Book Musculus common places in English and he said some of that to the People and they took it for a Sermon he lived by unlawful Marrying infamous for Drinking and Quarrelling he that had taken these for no Ministers and separated from them had not thereby separated from Christ or his Church Catholick LXX 20. If it prove as hard to know who is the true Pastor in a competition of Pretenders as it was to know which was the true Pope when there were two or three above twenty times or whether e. g. Optandus was true Bishop of Geneva that knew not Letters or whether Duke Heriberts Son consecrated in Infancy was Arch-Bishop of Rhemes or any other Infant consecrated be a Bishop officiating per alios Surrogates Chancellours Officials c. it is not here a Separation from Christ to separate from either of the Pretenders He that mistaketh not is not liable to the Charge he that mistakes doth not erre in an Article of Faith but in a difficult point of humane title and the qualification and right of a single man and my Opinion is that if such a title were tryed before our Judges or King and they should mistake and give Judgment against him that had right this were no separating from Christ nor proof that they are Infidels LXXI 21. If the Case of two contending Bishops or Presbyters come before a General or Provincial Council and they mistake and give it to the wrong and so separate from the right I do not think that thereby they separate from Christ or the Church Catholick e. g. The Constantinopolitan Council first gave the Church of Constantinople to Nazianzene and after judged him out as having no right if by this they separated from Christ they that take them for the