the whole Earth profess Faith in Christ then we may consider its Unity in this Sense either Negatively wherein it did not consist or Positively wherein it did consist Negatively It consisted not in an Uniformity of Rites and Customs for every particular Church was at liberty to follow its own proper Usages One Church was not obliged to observe the Rites of another but every one followed its own peculiar Customs Thus with respect to their Fast before Easter there was a great Diversity in the Observation of it in some Churches they fasted one Day in others two in some more and in others forty Hours but yet still they retained Peace and Concord the diversity of their Customs commending the Vnity of their Faith So also the Feast of Easter its self was variously celebrated The Asiatick Churches kept it on a distinct Day from the Europeans but yet still they retained Peace and Love and for the diversity of such Customs none were ever cast out of the Communion of the Church So likewise writes Firmilian That in most Provinces their Rites were varied according to the Diversities of Names and Places and that for this no one ever departed from the Peace and Vnity of the Catholick Church So that the Unity of the Church Universal consisted not in an Uniformity of Rites and Usages Neither in the next Place did it consist in an Unanimity of Consent to the Non-essential Points of Christianity but every one was lest to believe in those lesser matters as God should inform him Therefore Justin Martyr speaking of those Jewish Converts who had adhered to the Mosaical Rites says that if they did this only through their Weakness and 〈◊〉 and did not perswade other Christians to the observance of the same Judaical Customs that he would receive them into Church-fellowship and Communion Whosoever imposed on particular Churches the observance of the former of these two things or on particular Persons the belief of the latter they were esteemed not as Preservers and Maintainers but as Violaters and Breakers of the Churches Unity and Concord An Instance of the former we have in that Controversie between the Churches of the East and West touching the time when Easter was to be celebrated For when Victor Bishop of Rome had Excommunicated the 〈◊〉 Churches because they continued to observe that Feast on a different time from the Churches of the West not only the Bishops of the adverse Party but even those of his own side condemned him as rash heady and turbulent and writ several Letters about this Affair wherein as the Historian writes they most sharply censured him As for the Latter we have an instance thereof in the Controversie that was between Stephen Bishop of Rome and Cyprian Bishop of Carthage touching the Validity of Hereticks Baptism For when Stephen Anathematized Cyprian because he held the Baptism of Hereticks to be null and void other Bishops condemned Stephen as a Breaker and Disturber of the Churches Peace And amongst others Firmilian a Cappadocian Bishop vehemently accuses him as such because that he would impose upon others the Belief of such a disputable Point which says he was never wonted to be done but every Church followed their own different ways and never therefore broke the Vnity and Peace of the Catholick Church which now saith he Stephen dares to do and breaks that Peace which the ancient Bishops always preserved in mutual Love and Honour And therefore we find in the Acts of that great Council of Carthage convened to determine this matter that when Cyprian summ'd up the Debates thereof he dehorts his Fellow-Bishops from the imposing Humour and Temper of Stephen It now remains saith he that every one of us declare our Judgments concerning this matter judging no Man or removing any one from our Communion if he think otherwise than we do for let none of us make himself a Bishop of Bishops or by a Tyrannical Terror compel his Colleagues to the necessity of obeying So that the forcing a Belief in these lesser matters was Cruelty and Tyranny in the Imposers thereof who for such unreasonable Practices were look'd upon as Enemies to and Violators of the Churches Concord being the true Schismaticks inasmuch as they were the Cause of Schism and Division unto whom therefore may be applyed that Saying of Irenaeus That at the last Day Christ shall judge those who cause Schisms who are inhumane not having the fear of God but prefering their own advantage before the Unity of the Church for trivial and slight Causes rent and divide the great and glorious Body of Christ and as much as in them lies destroy it who speak Peace but wage War truly straining at a Gnat and swallowing a Camel § 3. But Positively The Unity of the Church Universal consisted in an Harmonious Assent to the Essential Articles of Religion or in an Unanimous Agreement in the Fundamentals of Faith and Doctrine Thus 〈◊〉 having recited a Creed or a short Summary of the Christian Faith not much unlike to the Aposiles Creed immediately adds The Church having received this Faith and Doctrine although dispersed through the whole World diligently preserves it as tho' she inhabited but one House and accordingly she believes these things as 〈◊〉 she had but one Soul and one Heart and consonantly preaches and teaches these things as tho' she had but one Mouth for altho' there are various Languages in the World yet the Doctrine is one and the same so that the Churches in Germany France Asia AEgypt or Lybia have not a different Faith but as the Sun is one and the same to all the Creatures of God in the whole World So the Preaching of the Word is a Light that enlightens every where and illuminates all Men that would come to the knowledge of the Truth Now this Bond of Unity was broken when there was a Recession from or a Corruption of the true Faith and Doctrine as Irenaeus speaks concerning Tatian the Father of the Encratites that as long as his Master Justin Martyr lived he held the found Faith but after his Death falling off from the Church he shaped that new Form of Doctrine This Unity of the Church in Doctrine according to Hegesippus continued till the Days of Simeon Cleopas Bishop of Jerusalem who was Martyred under Trajan but after that false Teachers prevailed such as the 〈◊〉 Marcionists 〈◊〉 and others from whom sprung false Christs false Apostles and false Prophets who by their corrupt Doctrines against God and his Christ divided the Unity of the Church So that the Unity of the Church Universal consisted in an agreement of Doctrine and the Corruption of that Doctrine was a Breach of that Unity and whoever so broke it are said to divide and separate the Unity of the Church or which is all one to be Schismaticks So Irenaeus writes that those that introduced new Doctrines did divide and separate the Unity
this Enquiry with an earnest Perswasion to Peace Vnity and Moderation § 1. HAving in the precedent Chapters enquired into the several Parts of Divine Worship and the Circumstances thereof I now come to close up all with a brief Appendix concerning Rites and Ceremonies by which I mean two different things By Rites I understand such Actions as have an 〈◊〉 Relation to the Circumstances or manner of Worship As for Instance The Sacrament was to be received in one manner or other but whether from the Bishop or Deacon that was the Rite Lent was to be observed a certain space of Time but whether One Day or Two Days or Three Days that was the Rite thereof So that Rites 〈◊〉 necessary Concomitants of the Circumstances of Divine Worship Appendages to them or if you rather please you may call them Circumstances themselves By Ceremonies I mean such Actions as have no regard either to the Manner or Circumstances of Divine Worship but the Acts thereof may be performed without them as for instance In some Churches they gave to Persons when they were baptized Milk and Hony And Before they prayed they washed their Hands Now both these Actions I call Ceremonies because they were not necessary to the Discharge of those Acts of Divine Worship unto which they were affixed but those Acts might be performed without them as Baptism might be entirely administred without the Ceremony of giving Milk and Hony and Prayers might be presented without washing of Hands Now having explained what I intend by those two Terms of Rites and Ceremonies let us in the next place consider the Practice of the Primitive Church with reference thereunto And first for Ceremonies § 2. It is apparent that there were many of that kind crept into the Church of whom we may say that from the beginning they were not so For when the Quire of the Apostles was dead till which time as Hegesippus writes the Church remained a pure and unspotted Virgin then the Church was gradually 〈◊〉 and corrupted as in her Doctrin so also in her Worship an Infinity of Ceremonies by degrees insensibly sliding in very many of which were introduced within my limited time as the eating of Milk Hony after Baptism the abstaining from Baths the Week after the washing of their Hands before Prayer their sitting after Prayer and many other such like which through various ways and means winded themselves into the Church as some came in through Custom and Tradition one eminent Man perhaps invented and practised a certain Action which he used himself as Judging it fit and proper to stir up his Devotion and Affection others being led by his Example performed the same and others again imitated them and so one followed another till at length the Action became a Tradition and Custom after which manner those Ceremonies were introduced of tasting Milk and Hony after Baptism of abstaining from the Baths the whole ensuing Week of not kneeling on the Lords Day and the space between Easter and Whitsuntide of the Signing of themselves with the Sign of the Cross in all their Actions and Conversations concerning which and the like Tertullian writes That there was no Law in Scripture for them but that Tradition was their Author and Custom their Confirmer Of which Custom we may say what Tertullian says of Custom in general that commonly Custom takes its rise from Ignorance and Simplicity which by Succession is corroborated into use and so vindicated against the Truth But our Lord Christ hath called himself Truth and not Custom wherefore if Christ was always and before all then Truth was first and ancientest it is not so much Novelty as Verity that confutes Hereticks Whatsoever is against the Truth is Heresie although it be an old Custom Others again were introduced through a wrong Exposition or Misunderstanding of the Scripture so were their Exorcisms before Baptism and their Unctions after Baptism as in their proper places hath been already shewn Finally Others crept in through their Dwelling amongst the Pagans who in their ordinary Conversations used an Infinity of Superstitions and many of those Pagans when they were converted to the Saving Faith Christianiz'd some of their innocent former Ceremonies as they esteemed them to be either 〈◊〉 them deceut and proper to stir up their Devotion or likely to gain over more Heathens who were offended at the plainness and nakedness of the Christian Worship of which sort were their washing of Honds before Prayer their sitting after Prayer and such like Concerning which Tertullian affirms that they were practised by the Heathens So that by these and such like Methods it was that so many Ceremonies imperceptibly slid into the Ancient Church of some of which Tertullian gives this severe Censure That they are deservedly to be condemned as vain because they are done without the Authority of any Precept either of our Lord or of his Apostles that they are not Religious but Superstitius affected and constrained curious rather than reasonable and to be abstained from because Heathenish § 3. As for the Rites and Customs of the Primitive Church these were indifferent and arbitrary all Churches being left to their own Freedom and Liberty to follow their peculiar Customs and Usages or to embrace those of others if they pleased from whence it is that we find such a variety of Methods in their Divine Services many of which 〈◊〉 be observed in the precedent part of this Discourse as some received the Lords Supper at one time others at another Some Churches received the Elements from the Hands of the Bishop others from the Hands of the Deacons some made a Collection before the Sacrament others after some kept Lent one Day some two days and others exactly forty Hours some celebrated Easter on the same Day with the Jewish Passover others the Lords Day after and so in many other things one Church differed from another as Firmilian writes that at Rome they did not observe the same Day of Easter nor many other Customs which were practised at Jerusalem and so in most Provinces many Rites were varied according to the Diversities of Names and Places So that every Church followed its own particular Customs although different from those of its Neighbours it being nothing necessary to the Unity of the Church to have an Uniformity of Rites for according to Firmilian the Unity of the Church consisted in an unanimity of Faith and Truth not in an Uniformity of Modes and Customs for on the contrary the Diversity of them as Irenaeus speaks with reference to the Fast of Lent did commend and set forth the Vnity of the Faith Hence every Church peaceably followed her own Customs without obliging any other Churches to observe the same or being obliged by them to observe the Rites that they used yet still maintaining a loving Correspondence and mutual Concord each with other as Firmilian writes that in most Provinces
many Rites were varied according to the Diversities of Names and Places but yet saith he never any one for this broke the Peace and Vnity of the Church One Church or Bishop did not in those days Anathematize another for a disagreement in Rites and Customs except when Victor Bishop of Rome through his Pride and Turbulency excommunicated the Asiatick Bishops for their different Observation of Easter from the Church of Rome which Action of his was very ill resented by the other Bishops of the Christian Churches and condemned by them as alien from Peace and Unity and contrary to that Love and Charity which is the very Soul and Spirit of the Gospel even the Bishops of his own Party that celebrated Easter on the same Day that he did censured his 〈◊〉 and violence as unchristian and uncharitable and writ several Letters wherein they severely checkt him as Eusebius reports in whose time they were extant all which are now lost except the Fragment of an Epistle written by Irenaeus and other Bishops of France wherein they affirm that Victor was in the right with respect to the time of Easter that it ought to be celebrated as he said on the Lords Day but that yet he had done very 〈◊〉 to cut off from the Vnity of the Church those that observed it otherwise that it had never been known that any Churches were excommunicated for a disagreement in Rites 〈◊〉 of which there was not only in the time of Easter 〈◊〉 self but in the Fast that preceded it Some fasted one day others more some forty hours which variety of Observations began not first in our Age but long before us in the times of our Ancestors who yet preserved Peace and Vnity amongst themselves as we now do for the Diversity of 〈◊〉 commended the Vnity of Faith And as for this 〈◊〉 concerning the time of Easter the Bishops which governed the Church of Rome before Soter viz. Anicetus Pius Higynus Telesphorus and Xystus they never celebrated it the same time with the 〈◊〉 neither would they permit any of their People so to do but yet they 〈◊〉 kind and 〈◊〉 to those who came to them from those 〈◊〉 where they did otherwise observe it and never any for this Cause were thrown out of the Church even your Predecessors though they did not keep it yet they sent the Eucharist to those that did keep it and when in the times of Anicetus blessed Polycarp came to Rome and there were some Controversies between them they did not seperate from one another but still maintained Peace and Love And though Anicetus could never perswade Polycarp nor Polycarp Anicetus to be of each others mind yet they communicated one with another and Anicetus in Honour to Polycarpus permitted him to Consecrate the Sacrament in his Church and so they departed in mutual love and kindness and all the Churches whether observing or not observing the same Day retained Peace and Vnity amongst themselves § 4. But though one Church could not oblige another to a Conformity in Rites and Customs yet a particular Church or Parish could enforce its own Members to such a Conformity an instance whereof we meet with in that famous Controversie about the Time of Easter It was the Custom of the Asiaticks to celebrate that Feast at the Full Moon or at the same time with the Jewish Passover on whatsoever day of the Week it happened It was the manner at Rome to observe it the Lords Day after and both these Churches quietly followed their several Usages without imposing them on each other But yet the Churches of Asia permitted none of their Members to solemnize it after the Roman manner neither did the Churches of Rome or of the West license any of their Inhabitants to celebrate it after the Asiatick manner for if either of them had granted any such thing there must have ensued Confusion and Disorder to have seen Easter differently observed in one and the same Church whilst some Members of a Parish where Fasting to behold others Feasting would have been a perfect Ataxy and Irregularity Therefore though Anioetus Bishop of Rome retained Peace and Unity with Foreign Churches that differed from him as to the Time of Easter without obliging them to a Compliance with the Roman Custom yet he peremptorily required it of the Members of his own Church and would never permit them to Solemnize that Feast on the same time with the Asiaticks So that though every Church had the Liberty to use what Rites she pleased yet every particular Member had not but was obliged to observe the Manners and Customs of that Church where he lived or where he occasionally communicated A Church Collectively or the Majority 〈◊〉 a Church with their Bishop could change their old Customs and introduce new ones as was done in the Affair of Easter the Asiaticks at length submitting to the Roman Usage but till that was done every particular Member was required to follow the old Customs of that Church to which he belonged and not to bring in any Innovations or new Rites because as was said before that would beget Tumults and Disorders and the Persons so acting would be guilty of that Strife and Contention which is condemned by those Words of the Holy Apostle 1 Cor. 11. 16. But if any Man seem to be contentious we have no such custom neither the Churches of God Which is as if the Apostle had said If any Men either to shew their Wit or to head and strengthen a Party will contradict what we have said and affirm it to be decent and comely either for Men to pray covered or Women uncovered This should silence such Contentious Opposers that there is no such Rite or Custom in any of the Churches of God but their Practice is the very same with what we have directed unto and therefore to that they ought peaceably and quietly to submit and yield Thus now I have finished this Enquiry and have as far as I could search'd into what was first proposed If I have not illustrated any Point as clearly as might be expected the reason is because I found nothing farther pertinent thereunto in those Writings to which I am confined if I had I should freely have mentioned it Whether I have been mistaken in the Sense and Meaning of any Passage I must leave unto my Readers to judge all that I can say is that I am not conscious to my self of any wilful and designed Mistakes having throughout this whole Discourse endeavoured deavoured to find out the plain and naked Truth without being byass'd to any Party or Faction whatsoever and that if any one shall be so kind and favourable as to convince me of any Slips or Errors which I may have committed through Inconsideration or want of a due Understanding I shall thankfully acknowledge them and willingly renounce and leave them § 5. What hath been related concerning the Constitution Discipline Unity and Worship of the Primitive