proof of the validity of the Ministers Calling any further than to put the accuser if he can to prove that any essential part is wanting whether in Qualification Ordination or Consent would be vain it being done so largely by the old Non-conformists 2. But is there a Power retained in such Churches to cast out offendors Answ Yes A Power divine or given by Christ Remember that as I have proved Disp of Ordinat men are not the Makers of the Office of the Sacred Ministry nor the Measurers or Givers of the Power but only the Choosers of the person that shall receive what Christ by Institution giveth and the Ministerial Investers of the person in that power Therefore Whoever receiveth the Office of a Pastor receiveth the power of the Keyes to take in and cast out Though not arbitrarily nor ungoverned by himself But the Parish Ministers or very many of them now in question do receive the Office of Pastors Therefore they receive the power of the Keyes to take in and cast out If you say that the Bishops intend it not in ordaining them I answer 1. It sufficeth that Christ intendeth it who is the only maker and giver of the power The Book of Ordination maketh them solemnly Covenant to give faithful diligence alwayes so to Minister the Doctrine and Sacraments and the Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath â—â—â—manded c. And to teach nothing as required of necessity to eternal salvation but that which they are perswaded may be concluded and proved by the Scripture as containing all such necessary doctrine And to be ready with all faithful diligence to banish and drive away all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to Gods word And to use both publick and private monitions and exhortations as well to the sick as the whole And to be diligent in prayers and reading the holy Scriptures and in such studies as help to the knowledge of the same laying aside the study of the world and the flesh And that they will be diligent to frame and fashion themselves and their families according to the doctrine of Christ and to make both themselves and them as much as they can wholesome examples to the flock c. And till lately the said Book recited Acts 20. 28. to the Presbyters at their Ordination And the Canon 26. saith No Minister shall in any wise admit to the receiving of the holy Communion any of his Cure or flock which be openly known to live in sin notorious without repentance Besides what the Rubrick saith to that purpose And now though I think this one of the greatest sores which you have touched yet judge whether even the Laws and Canons concede no Power to the Ministers 3. But if they did not the Power of Office is one thing and the Liberty of exercising it is another We have Power from Christ to preach and if we be silenced and our liberty restrained by men that proveth us not to be no true Ministers If you mean that no Church is to be communicated with where the Pastor is hindered by men from the full discharge of his Office you mistake and can never prove it 4. They that voluntarily neglect their Office without hinderance by the force of men are more to be blamed than those that are so forced But in the Primitive Churches Discipline was lamentably neglected voluntarily as appeareth in the Case of most of the seven Churches Rev. 2. 3. for which they are threatned by Christ and in the Corinthians case yea corrupted by such as Diotrophes And do you think that the Church that hath Power to do well and will not is therefore to be communicated with because it can that is because it sinneth not through disability but negligence or wilfulness 5. But the Core of your erroneous reasoning is behind you say they were without any Vniversal innovation or degenerating in those Essentials of Order as well as doctrine which they fell into in the ages after c. An Vniversal degenerating in the Essentials even of Doctrine and Order too is a big and a sad word And the time pointed at by you being so early if I can understand you you do as the Seekers unchurch the universal Church of Christ For if it Degenerated Vniversally in the Essentials of doctrine it Vniversally apostatized from Christianity For where any Essential part is lost the Essence and just Name is lost And I beseech you let not rashness or passion blind you to over-overlook the dreadfulness of this Doctrine 1. If Christ had then no Church as he had not if the Essential degeneration was Vniversal then he was no King of the Church on Earth no Lord no Teacher no Saviour of the Church no Intercessor for it in the Heavens And do you not then dethrone him and deny him indeed to be the Christ What a Head without a Body A King without a Kingdom 2. So you will make all Gods Promises of his Churches perpetuity as built on the Rock against which Hell Gates should not prevail and of being with them to the end of the world c. to be false and fail And if the whole Church failed and the Promises made to it what particular soul can trust Gods Promises 3. If all the Church apostatized how shall we know that Apostates did not corrupt all the Copies of Scripture that are come down to us 4. And then the Article I believe the holy Catholick Church would have been a falshood or error 5. And then there could be no Baptism no Sacrament of the Lords Supper c. 6. And then there must be New Apostles with Miracles to make a new Church And thus we have Mr. Williams doctrine whose Story I recited in my last Book Sect. 52. E. B. p. 15. This necessity of separation which began then continueth still since our Churches though reformed from Popery that is from Antichristianism in some points yet are not restored to the primitive pattern and purity R. B. 1. Whether by our Churches you mean only the Parish Churches of godly Ministers or also All the Protestant Churches and all other Vniversally through the world I am not sure But as far as I can conjecture by your words you mean All. Because you speak of them as in a Continuance in part in the Vniversal degeneration in Essentials And you speak of them as avoiding Popery but in part and call them our Churches and mention no Church in the world here that you own as a true Church and whether any where in all your writings I remember not I confess I pretend not to know the mind of so careless a Writer by any words but very plain ones But if this be your mind as it seemeth to be you would do well being so bold a man to tell the world your mind more plainly And you that think that no Truth is to be sold as you call it for Peace let Independents Presbyterians Separatists Anabaptists c.
Worship of God which he hath not commanded without exception is a sin 2. That being present where they are used involveth us in the guilt Where note 1. That it is not Part of the Worship but things used in the Worship that he speaketh of 2. That I proved the contrary to both these at large and the man saith only that he hath my word for the contrary and giveth not a syllable of answer to my twenty instances and many undenyable reasons to the contrary Doth he not either highly esteem his own reason and authority that thinketh it should be received if he do but say the word without attempting to answer what 's said against him or else doth he not greatly despise his own Readers and followers in taking them for such credulous ductile souls as will take his bare word without expecting any reason from him to confute what is said on the other side Or is all this on presumption that his Reader will not know what I have said Sermon Notes Meeters Tunes printed Bibles as printed and divided into Chapters and Verses the words of a Sermon or Prayer the particular Method Cups Tables c. are used in the Worship of God without any particular command or any command for this rather than that in cases of indifferency And yet all these are not therefore unlawful And I proved that all Ministers and Families sin in Gods Worship and yet that it is not therefore lawful to separate from them all If you your self say that you say nothing in preaching or praying but what is commanded you and that your Worship hath no sin you deceive your self and the truth is not in you But if you think it a sin for any to hear you or have communion with you why do you not plainly tell your hearers so To keep far from a false matter as from writing falshoods by the dozens and not to partake of other mens sins is one thing and for Children to tell their Fathers or People their Pastors we must not worship God with you because in Forms Words Method you do something not commanded yea because through error you do somewhat sinful is another thing Sect. 45. E. B. Lastly Whatever pretences may be used for the keeping of Peace yet to speak strictly so as to satisfie Conscience Peace is but ill bought if we must purchase it at so dear a rate as the loss of truth And this Truth concerning the sole Soveraign Power of our Lord Christ in appointing all matters of his Worship is a point so necessary to be maintained and so utterly inconsistent with the supposing that any thing is to be obtruded which he hath not commanded that we dare not allow our selves in the practice of any thing which may prejudice that fundamental R. B. 1. How oft have I answered that saying about selling Truth for Peace and must hear it again in the old confusion without any notice of what hath been said See my Treatise of Infant Baptism on that point particularly Do I fell thirty three Truths when I read thirty three untruths in your Writings Do I sell Truth if I should hear you preach or pray erroneously and impose your confused prayers on the people or impose this or that Metre or Tune on them in singing of Psalms 2. Here you say Matters of Worship before it was in Worship And even the word Worship is taken so variously as calls for explication before we determine whether man may appoint matters of Worship For if you will call putting off the Hat and reverent gestures in particular and Metres and Tunes and the Method and words of the particular Prayer or Sermon by the name of Worship then man may appoint it 3. It is an untrue supposition and but a begging of the question that our presence with any thing obtruded unlawfully is a prejudice to that fundamental of the Soveraignty of Christ All men that sin do sin against his Soveraignty And all that obtrude any thing unlawfully sin against it by that obtrusion But if you obtrude a rash and passionate prayer on the people or an erroneous or disorderly prayer or an ill-composed Hymn or Psalm their presence is no approbation of your error nor denying of Christs Soveraignty Do you or can you believe and make all your followers believe that the Synagogue-Worship and the Temple-Worship were kept so pure by the Priests Levites and Pharisees in Christs dayes as that there was nothing of humane Tradition obtruded Or nothing but what God commanded Can you believe this Or can you believe that Christ was not usually or often present there See Luke 4. 16. At Nazareth where he had been brought up as his custom was he went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day And of Paul its said Acts 17. 2. As his manner was he went in to them and three Sabbath dayes reasoned Or do you believe that Christ was a sinner and that he contradicted his own Soveraignty What! and yet be a perfect Saviour Who is it now that prejudiceth fundamentalls Sect. 46. E. B. And we judge we have sufficient warrant from what the Apostles did in a like case Acts 15. 24. For if they reproved such as preached up Circumcision and other Legal Ceremonies at that day when as the Apostles had given them no such Commandment saying of them that they subverted or spoiled the souls of the Disciples then may we affirm the like of those men now who in things equally indispensible do act with every whit as little authority from whom on that very account we think it our duty to separate R. B. 1. The authority of the King and lawful Magistrates is more about the Circumstantials of Worship as whether Abiathar shall be High Priest c. than the false Teachers was about that doctrine 2. The Apostles do indeed declare that they sent them not to preach or not such doctrine But that 's not the thing on which they lay the great accusation but on the false and dividing doctrine which they preached Christ saith of one that cast out Devils in his Name and followed him not Let him alone he that is not against us is for us And Moses wisht all the Lords people were Prophets But these false Teachers would have made the keeping of Moses Law to be necessary to salvation And can you prove that the Minister doth so whom I use to hear Do all the Parish Ministers do so Can you see no difference between one that saith The Law or Cannons command me to use this Surplice or Form as an indifferent thing and one that saith Except you do this or that you break Gods Law and cannot be saved Except you separate from all Parish Churches you sin against God and prejudice a fundamental Sure it is one thing to say God saith this or binds you to this or forbids you this and it s another thing to say The King or the Bishop saith it 3. And what is it
that keepeth you from seeing how strongly you confute your self Is there a word in Acts 15. to forbid all Church communion with those that taught even this subverting false doctrine How many Texts be there that intimate that the Churches long without a prohibition held communion with the erronious judaizing Christians Till they grew obstinate and grew up to a Heresie and were the Separaters themselves and did subvert the Gospel and faith of Christ But yet prove that such doctrine is held by our Parish Churches and I will leave them Do not the Independents offer to subscribe the Doctrine of the Church of England Sure then they think its Doctrinals to be sound Sect. 47. E. B. By two Arguments you labour to defend your irregular way of Communion 1. That in the Primitive Churches there were many corruptions which the Apostle writes against but doth not advise any because of them to separate But I answer It is not corruption or error barely considered as such that we account to be a sufficient ground of separation But the Imposing of that error with on high hand and making a submission to it at least in our practice and outward observance the very condition of Communion This we say is a thing which necessitates us to make a separation R. B. Mark that you distinguish not of Corruption or Error nor except any but what is Imposed And when I had answered all this so fully why will you deign to confute a Book while you disdain to take notice what it saith 1. Who would have thought that you are so much looser in your communion than we are I will separate from that Church which in the essential matter Pastor or all the flock after admonition retaineth such Corruption and Error as is directly contrary to any essential point of Christianity though they impose it not on others But by these words it seems as scrupulous as you are you would not separate from Hereticks or Ungodly ones if they do not Impose their Heresie and Impiety 2. How oft have I urged you to prove that our publick Parish Ministers whom I advise men to hear do Impose any more than you your self do By choosing what Chapter to read you impose on the people to hear that Chapter then or none By choosing what Place Hour Method Words yeâ— Matter and Metre Tune c. you impose upon the people to joyn in all these or not to have communion with you therein And so our Teacher doth by reading Common-Prayer and wearing the Surplice impose on us to hear him so reading or to stay away But he maketh no Laws he commandeth us no Ceremony They are commanded by others and not by him And it is not in your own practice of any thing forbidden of God that I advise men to have communion with such but only in Gods true Worship though in the circumstances or manner the Minister himself say or do something that is forbidden as every Teacher in the world doth though not in the same degree It is one thing to submit to be present at the Worship which the Pastor performeth in some faulty manner And another thing wilfully to do evil your self or to approve of his failings or your own Sect. 48. E. B. To which I add only this that however the presenting our bodies at a Worship which we do not inwardly approve of may render us excusable and justiste us among men yet we are sure it will not in the sight of God who hates hypocrisie R. B. Though you confound I must distinguish the essentials of the Worship from the circumstances and outward imperfections in the manner I do inwardly approve of the matter or substance of the Worship which I joyn in in the main and labour to pray with my heart when I joyn in the Common-prayer though I consent not to the whole Method nor to the defects And when I hear a man in free prayer use confusion disorder unseemly words and when I hear one man drop the error of an Arminian or a Lutheran another of an Antinomian another of an Anabaptist another of a Separatist c. in his prayer I do not inwardly approve of that error or disorder any more than of the defects of forms And yet if it were hypocrisie to be present I would joyn with no man living Can all your hearers inwardly approve of all that you say if you preach and pray but as you write If they can its time to pitty them And are they Hypocrites else for joyning with you Sect. 49 E. B. p. 14. 1. This is clear in Scripture that our Lord Christ who was himself holy and separated from sinners did never call or design his Church to be an impure mixt body of holy and unholy without any distinction blended and hudled up together but to be an holy separate people and to depart from unrighteousness R. B. 1. Remember Reader for he will not remember that but even now he told us that it is not Corruption and Error barely as such that is a sufficient ground of separation without Imposition And now here is nothing but Mixture of Holy and Vnholy Reconcile these if you can 2. Christ that was perfectly separated from sinners had yet ordinary communion with sinners in a sinful or culpable manner of performance unless the Jews were all perfect Therefore our separation must be such as Christs was in our measure 3. Impurity and unholiness and sin is not the Matter of Gods Call or designment either in the Church or out but of his Permission But Communion with those Churches which by permission have sin and impurity in them is a commanded thing And they that must depart from iniquity must not alwayes depart from the worshipping Assembly where some unrighteous persons are Your argument if it be any must run this Christ did never call or design his Church to be an impure mixt body of holy and unholy The Parish Churches which you perswade us to communion with are impure mixt bodies Therefore the Parish Churches are such as Christ never called or designed them to be Suppose we grant you the Conclusion Whoever is a sinner is such as Christ never called or designed him to be But your Question intimateth that you would argue thus Whatever Church is such as Christ did not call it or design it to be is not to be communicated with But all the Parish Churches are such as Christ did not call or design them to be Ergo The Minor you prove Whatever Church is an impure mixt body of holy and unholy c. is such as Christ did not call or design them to be But the Parish Churches are such But I answer you 1. A Church is no Church that wants the Essentials required by Christ But he that will not communicate with Church or person that wants the Perfection which Christ calleth them to shall communicate with no Church or person on Earth 2.
for leisure to refell FINIS ERRATA IN the Contents Page 2. Sect. 24. for meant r. recant Sect. 5. p. 5. after and adde into Epist p. 4. l. 27. for that r. and. p. 41. l. 2. r. writings shew p. 43. l. 22. for quod r. quid p. 86. l. 15. r. and by Mr. Eliot p. 93. l. 12. for confirmed r. confined p. 100. l. 1. r. have not p. 105. l. 21. for designe r. deigne p. 120. l. 9. for your r. their p. 146. blot out the two first lines repeated p. 181. l. 16. for occasions r. accusations less litteral errours are past by BUT I have one thing more to Advertise the Reader of that I was too blame to believe Mr. Bagshaw in his recitation of my own words in his pag. 5. where he saith that of Cromwell himself though he dyed in his sinful Usurpation without manifesting any repentance I give this Saint-like Character in my Pref. to the Army The late Protector did prudently piously c. exercise the Government Having noted that I spake against Oliver a few leaves distant I too rashly believed Mr. Bagshaw that this passage was spoken of him too But upon perusal I find it is most notorious that I spake it of his Son when the Army had brought him to a resignation which any man may see that will peruse the place Hereafter therefore I will not so hastily believe so common a in what he writeth of the most visible subject of my self or others 1st False Doctrine 1st Falsehood in fact Second false Doctrine Third false Doctrine Second Falshood 1. Crime A slander of many hundreds 3. Falshood 2. Crime Justifying or excusing sin under Judgements 3. Crime Taking a Call to Repentance for a heinous wrong 4th False Doctrine 5th False Doctrine 4th Visible Falshood 5th Visible Falshood 4th Crime Impudent Calumny 6th 7th falshoods 8th Falsehood 9th Falsehood 10th Notorious Falshood and a Calumny 11th and 12th Falsehood and Calumny 5th Crime Calumniating insinuation My word to the Army heretofore 13th 14th falshood 6th Rash Calumny 15th Falsehood 7th Self-condemning calumny 16th 17th 18th 19th and 20th visible falshoods 21st Falsehood implyed 22d Falsehood implyed 8 Self confutation Calumny 23d Falsehood 24th Self-dâ—clared falshood 24th Falsehood and a calumny repeated 25th and 26th Falsehoods 9th Crime rejecting and slandering readful warning 10th Crime Self-denying 11th Crime Excusing false prophecying to the dishonour of Gods Spirit 12th Crime Paralleling false Prophecies with the Prophets words in Scripture 13. Crime Scripâ—ures eluded 14 Crime Duty reproached and scandal made a duty Of Pride The Reasons of my publick Communicating 27 28. 29. Visible untruths 15. Crime Impudency in calumniating Of Justification 16 Crime Resisting and reproaching other mens labours for the service of God and the good of souls with confidence in notorious falsehood Of much writing The Case of separation Self-condemnation 30th and 31st visible Untruths 32d 33d Untruâ—hs Blind sophistry and palpable fallacy How a Parish Church is or is not part of a Diocesane Church The same fallacy with an untruth Whether a Parish Minister be but a servant to the Diocesane Whether all the Parish Ministers consent to persecution Slander Of reproving sharply the sins of others Narrow Communion Mr. Bagshaw obligeth me to reprove him sharply left I be guilty of his sin All sinners are not to be separated from 6th False doctrine 34th Falshood and slander 35th Falshood 7. False doctrines at lest implyed Q. 1. Whether it is an indispensible duty to maintain all our Christâ—an liberty or what Luke 14. 18. Isa 61. 1. 2 Pet. 2. 19 20 21. Act. 18. 26. 2 Tim. 2. 26. 2 Cor. 3. 17. Heb. 2. 14 15. Gal. 4 3 9. Romans 8. 15 2. Iohn 8 31 36. Romans 6. 16 18 22. Q. 2. Whether there be no way but separation to preserve our Christian liberty 8. False doctrine 9. False doctrine Whether not separating be prejudicial to a fundamental viz Christs Soveraignty The Case Acts 15. Acts 15. against the Sparatists Mr. Bagshaw's too loose communion with all Hereticks that impose not His own Imposing Of approving what we joyn in Whether he be an Hypocrite who joyneth with any manner of Worship which he approveth not Self-contradiction Whether no Church may be communicated with that is not such as Christ called and designed it to be When a Church is to be separated from for approving sin 10. F. doctrin 11. Dreadful false doctrine Read and fear the tendency of separation Mr. William's doctrine More of the Causes of separation Boasting Ignorance 12. False doctrine and pernicious 36th Untruth Whether the true Reading and uncorruptness of particular Texts be sufficiently known by the light of the Scripture alone A lame deceitful recital and 17. Crime Cruel judging millions unknown without a Call 18. Crime Justifying a falshood while you openly your self detect it 37. Untruth implyed 38. 39. Untruths implyed 40. Untruth implyed 41. Untruth notorious Wisdom and humility in the dark Phil. â—â— 26. 42. Untruth 43. Untruth 44 Untruth 1. Untruth of Mrs. 2. Untruth 3d Untruth 4th Untruth 5th Untruth 1st Untruth 2d Untruth 3d Untruth 4th Untruth See Jer. 28. 6. 5th Untruth 6th Untruth 7th Untruth 45th Untruth by E. B. A new sort of Honesty Envy and partiality Superstition * 46th Untruth * 47th Untruth * 48th Untruth The self-evidencing light of Scripture what it is
The word mixt is ambiguous and implyeth a double act one of the Impure part and that Christ designeth not but forbiddeth the other of the holy who joyn with some that are unholy and that in some Cases Christ commandeth and did practise himself 3. Without distinction indeed it should not be for Discipline is appointed to distinguish regularly 4. Take home the argument and try it on your self Whatever Church is such as Christ did not call and design it to be is not to be communicated with But a Church that hath an erroneous Preacher or an erroneous sinful people is such as Christ did not call or design it to be Ergo And will you then communicate with any in the world or any with you Sect. 50. E. B. p. 14. Though through the Corruption of men and negligence of Church-Officers many ungodly prophane Formalists and hypocrites did and daily do creep in yet there is a strict command given to put such out of the Church and turn aside from them If such are to be withdrawn from then if any Church which is admonished concerning them shall still maintain abett and countenance them that Church is defiled and unfit to be communicated with 1 Cor. 5. 7. Eccles 9. 18. Heb. 12. 15. R. B. 1. It is only gross sinners after just Admonition upon proof that are to be put out The Officers ought not to do it without proof 2. Have you or others rightly Admonished every Parish Minister that you call us to separate from and convicted them upon proof when you have heard them speak for themselves 3. And who gave you authority so to examine other Pastors being but a single person 4. We easily grant and earnestly desire that true Church-Justice should make a difference But in case the Officers do not their duty it is none of the peoples duty to separate therefore haveing done their own part except in these cases 1. That the Error or Crime be so great as to be inconsistent with Christianity or Church communion 2. That the Church do not only neglect it but deliberately Own that Error or Crime in its aggravated state as it is so inconsistent with Christianity or Communion Not only being consequentially guilty of it as the best man may be of the most heinous sin of another by some omission of his duty to cure it but making it their profession or Practice 3. That this be done not by some particular members only but by an essential part of the Church that is either by the Pastor or by the main body of the people 4. That this be fully proved or so notorious as to need no proof 5. That they be impenitent herein after due admonition When these five things concur it is a duty to separate from a Church as unfit for Christian Communion And in lower cases it is a duty to prefer a Better when we can have it But it s much higher or lower rather that you go You say A Church which after admonition and discovery of offenders will not use her authority to cast them out This may be by mis-information on the sinners side or by meer negligence as in Eli's case and may be a great sin and yet not the same in kind as that which should be censured nor such as will unchurch that Church nor make its communion unlawful to the innocent As to your proofs the Texts you cite are all written to the whole Churches as Churches who are bid put them away c. save that to Timothy and Rev. 2. which is to the Church-Rulers And it followeth not that if a Church or Church-Rulers who have the power of the Keyes are bid to reject or cast out or not suffer an Heretick or wicked person and to have no fellowship with them therefore every member is forbidden to have Communion with that Church in Gods Worship unless they cast such a one out I did by many Scripture instances Rev. 2. 3. 1 Cor. 11. 15 c. prove the contrary to which you give no answer 5. Let all sober Readers note how few in the world we shall have communion with on your terms How certainly you will turn all Churches into strife and bitter envyings confusion and every evil work For Railers and Covetous among the rest are those that must be avoided And if any member of the Church shall think that one Railer or one Covetous person is kept in unjustly away they must go and condemn the Church as unworthy of Communion And who will not think that read your Book that you would be one of the first accused of Railing Yea how few even of the strictest separating Churches are they that neglect not Discipline upon some one person It may be it may be a rich or powerful man that will persecute or divide the Church if he be cast out Is there no Gathered Churches as they are called that have one Railing woman in or one Covetous person 6. But Sir our question is not only of the Communion of Members but also of strangers occasionally and rarely And what call hath a stranger to try the Discipline of another Church Or what opportunity hath he to know all their members crimes and to admonish them Why may not I in my travail communicate with a Church whose members and Discipline I know not At least all Parish Churches have not been thus admonished by you Sect. 51. E. B. p. 14. Lastly Which will fully answer the scruple It is to be considered that the Primitive Churches were setled by the Apostles and constituted according to the Divine pattern having all the Ordinances of Christ and true Officers rightly established among them so that though many scandalous sins did break out and were visible among some of the members yet a power was still retained in each Church for the keeping themselves pure by casting out offenders whereby they were kept to the institution and orders of Christ without any universal innovation or degenerating in those Essentials of Order as well as Doctrine which they fell into in the ages after and when Antichristianism which was then working did manifestly shew it self not only in rejecting truth 2 Thess 2. but in imposing error Rev. 13. 16 17. then was separation made necessary R. B. Reader this confused huddle of words it seems is the thing he trusteth to as a full answer to the scruple But 1. If such Churches are to be communicated with as yet retain all the Essentials of Office Order and Doctrine then those are to be communicated with that are now in question But the former seemeth here intimated by himself That our said Churches have all such essentials is thus proved Whereever there are true Pastors and a Christian flock related mutually as such receiving the holy Scriptures as such there are all things essential to a true Church for Office Order and Doctrine But it is so 〈◊〉 the Parish Churches in question To stay here to write a particular
know it if indeed you think that all their Churches are to be separated from as well as the Parish Churches If this be your mind I suppose you are but a Preacher to Auditors your self and not a Pastor to any Church He that thinks no Truth should be concealed for fear of suffering should not carry it in darkness and dissimulation to the Pastors and Churches about him if really he believe them to be no Pastors or Churches or not to be communicated with But I think that you better deserve to be disowned by them than they by you Certainly few or no Protestant Church that I have known will say that it is restored to the primitive pattern and Purity in degree If that therefore be your meaning you do separate from all the Churches in the world But if you mean not in Degree but in Essence I still challenge you to prove that the Churches in question want any thing Essential or need a Restoration to that which they never lost Sect. 52. E. B. p. 15. So that more may be said for separation now when whole Churches are out of order and corrupt than could be at that time when corruption had infected only particular members R. B. 1. Is it now come to that Is it the number corrupted that must decide the case Who can tell where to find this Proteus sometime it is the mixture of holy and unholy sometime it is not bare corruption without Imposition And now it is the numbers corrupted whole Churches And in the next sentence you shall see what 2. Is the whole Church any thing besides the particular members Is there any other matter or any form besides the Relation of the particular members 3. I challenge you if you can to prove any corruption in the Churches in question which is not consistent with the essence I know not so much errour or harm in the people of the Church that I now joyn with where I live as Paul chargeth on the Corinthians or Galathians Though I suppose the primitive Ministry and gifts more excellent than any of ours Sect. 53. E. B. For it is not as I said before Corruption barely no nor Imposition barely that is a sufficient ground for any to separate For where some lesser errours are held but not Imposed or where only necessary things are imposed we shall not forbear Communion But when errour is once imposed and by a strong hand forcibly maintained notwithstanding all admonitions and endeavours of reformation here we must separate or consent to sin R. B. Better and better Here it is granted that neither Corruption barely nor Imposition barely will justifie separation But by Corruption and Imposition barely seemeth to be meant such formaliter quoad actum without including the degree of the matter For it is expounded of Lesser errours held and not Imposed or of necessary things Imposed So that if it be Imposed on us to Worship God it will not prove us no Christians we are beholden to you for this clemency And if we should mistake a point of Genealogie or Chronologie it will not un-church us This is something 2. Well but what is the crime that maketh our Communion unlawful when errour is once imposed c. so then if you can speak sense any errour Imposed will do it What if it be Imposed on the Church to use a Translation of the Bible that hath some errour in And is there any without Must that Church needs be separated from And yet the Church that used the same Voluntarily and therefore more sinfully is not to be separated from What if erroneously it be imposed on the Church to meet at an inconvenient time or place What if some flaw or errour in Chronologie on smaller-matters were in their imposed Confession which the Pastour erroneously subscribeth to It seems an Infallible Imposing Church may be communicated with and no other But do you not know that there is a Ministerial as well as a Magistratical forcing Imposition Every Pastour that speaketh as by Commission from Christ Imposeth somewhat on the people He Imposeth doctrine and Method and words in prayer and times places utensils orders metres tunes as aforesaid Must all these be separated from that is almost all the Pastors in the World And is there no remedie 3. But perhaps you lay all the stress on a strong hand and force If so prove that your Ministerial Imposition of errour in your Prayer or Conduct doth not make Communion unlawful and yet that forcible imposition doth As if Voluntary reception made less the sin Prove that the Church of the Jews was nullified whenever any errour was imposed by authority Or when the Pharisees then in power had corrupted it in Christs time by force If this were your meaning then separation could scarce be Lawful till there was a Constantine a Christian Emperour who being not infallible might force or impose something amiss whereas you before talk of an early universal failing necessitating separation It seems then that no Countries are so unhappy as those that have Christian Magistrates who being fallible impose some errour And that in all the Ages and Countries that have Heathen or Infidel Rulers notwithstanding Church Corruptions not forced Separation is a sin 4. But I would fain know whether it be the Imposition that nullifieth the Church or makes Communion unlawful or only the obeying that Imposition If it be the Imposition then a Heathen Prince may nullifie the Church at pleasure If it be only the obedience then 1. Must it be once obeying or continual What if Aurelian or Dioclesian forbid Church-assemblies will once obeying them nullifie all the Churches or make their Communion unlawful 2. Why will not obeying a Minister or deâ—â—ver make it as unlawful as obeying a King 3. Why doth not the doing it without constraint as is said make it as unlawful as obedience 5. Is it the King and Parliament or the Bishops whose Impositions have this sad effect If the former then as is said it was 300 years after Christ before separation was lawful If the latter then it is not force only that doth it And Independent or Anabaptist or Presbyterian Pastors may Impose as well as Bishops For the Bishops disclaim all coercive power in the Church as I have shewed to Dr. Moulin Sect. 54. E. B. The second Argument is the example of the former Non-conformists who you say were all against separation c. R. B. Here you cite a passage of Mr. Hildershams that the authority of man is not to be set against Gods and that we may know more than those that went before us c. And did not I tell you so my self who dissenteth from you in this Bring your proof from Scripture against them and us and we will hear you Or give us but good proof that you are a wiser and better man than they and are better taught of God and we will yield this by-reason from authority But to bring