Doctrine with their Bloods have sundry eminent Instruments of Christ endeavoured to reclaim the Popish from their Errours but in stead of being reclaimed they anathematized them with the dreadfulest Curses excommunicated yea murdered and destroyed multitudes of those who endeavoured their Reducement not permitting any to trade buy or sell to have either Religious or Civil Communion with them except they received the Beasts mark in their hands and foreheads All which considered we might safely forsake her nay could not safely do otherwise Since in stead of our healing of Babylon we could not be preserved from her destroying of us we did deservedly depart from her and every one go into his own Country and unless we had done so we could not have obeyed the clear Precept of the Word Apoc. 18. Come out of her my people c. Timothy is commanded to withdraw himself from perverse and unsound Teachers 1 Tim. 6. 3 5. Though Paul went into the Synagogue disputing and persuading the things concerning the Kingdom of God yet when divers were hardened and believed not but spake evil of that way he departed from them and separated the Disciples Acts 19. 9. And expresly is Communion with Idolaters forbidden 2 Cor. 6. 14 17. What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness what communion hath light with darkness what concord hath Christ with Belial what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols Come out from among them and be ye separate And Hos 4. 15. Though thou Israel play the harlot yet let not Judah offend and come ye not unto Gilgal neither go ye up to Bethaven Though in name that place was Bethel the House of God yet because Jeroboam's Calf was set up there it was indeed Bethaven the House of Vanity If Rome be a Bethaven for Idolatry and corrupting of Gods Worship our departure from it may be safely acknowledged and justified In vain therefore do the Romanists Stapleton Sanders c. brand our separation from them with the odious name of Donatism and Schism it being evident out of Augustine that the Donatists never objected any thing against nor could blame any thing in the Church from which they separated either for Faith or Worship whereas we have unanswerably proved the Pseudo-Catholick Roman Church to be notoriously guilty both of Heresie and Idolatry and our Adversaries themselves grant in whatever Church either of these depravations are found Communion with it is to be broken off I shall conclude this Discourse with that Passage out of Musculus concerning Schism There is saith he a double Schism the one bad the other good the bad is that whereby a good Vnion the good whereby a bad Vnion is broken asunder If ours be a Schism it is of the latter sort Obs 3. The voluntary and unnecessary dividing and separation from a true Church is Schismatical When we put bounds and partitions between it and our selves we sin say some as did these Seducers here taxed by Jude If the Church be not Heretical or Idolatrous or do not by Excommunication Persecution c. thrust us out of its Communion If it be such as Christ the Head hath Communion with we the Members ought not by separation to rend and divide the Body To separate from Congregations where the Word of Truth and Gospel of Salvation are held forth in an ordinary way as the Proclamations of Princes are held forth upon Pillars to which they are affixed where the Light of the Truth is set up as upon a Candlestick to guide Passengers to Heaven To separate from them to whom belong the Covenants and where the Sacraments the Seals of the Covenant are for substance rightly dispensed where Christ walketh in the midst of his golden candlesticks and discovers his Presence in his Ordinances whereby they are made effectual to the Conversion and Edification of Souls in an ordinary way where the Members are Saints by a professed subjection to Christ and his Gospel and haply have promised this explicitly and openly where there are sundry who in the judgment of Charity may be conceived to have the work of Grace really wrought in their Hearts by walking in some measure answerable to their Profession I say to separate from these as those with whom Church-communion is not to be held and maintained is unwarrantable and Schismatical Pretences for Separation I am not ignorant are alledged frequently and most plausibly that of Mixt Communion and of admitting into Church-fellowship the vile with the precious and those who are Chaff and therefore ought not to lodge with the Wheat Answ 1. Not to insist upon what some have urged viz. That this hath been the stone at which most Schismaticks have stumbled and the Pretence which they have of old alledged as having ever had a Spiritum Excommunicatorium a Spirit rather putting them upon dividing from those who they say are unholy than putting them upon any godly endeavours of making themselves holy as is evident in the Examples of the Audaeans Novatians Donatists Anabaptists Brownists c. 2. Let them consider Whether the want of the exact purging and reforming of these Abuses proceed not rather from some unhappy Obstructions and political Restrictions whether or no caused by those who make this Objection God knows in the exercise of Discipline than from the allowance or neglect of the Church it self Nay 3. Let them consider Whether when they separate from sinful mixtures the Church be not at that very time purging out those sinful mixtures And is that a time to make a separation from a Church by departing from it when the Servants of Christ are making a separation in that Church by reforming it But 4. Let it be seriously weighed That some sinful mixtures are not a sufficient cause of separation from a Church Hath not God his Church even where corruption of Manners hath crept into a Church if purity of Doctrine be maintained And is separation from that Church lawful from which God doth not separate Did the Apostle because of the sinful mixtures in the Church of Corinth direct the Faithful to separate Must not he who will forbear Communion with a Church till it be altogether freed from mixtures tarry till the day of Judgement till when we have no promise that Christ will gather out of his Church whatsoever doth offend 5. Let them consider Whether God hath made private Christians Stewards in his House to determine whether those with whom they Communicate are fit Members of the Church or not Or rather Whether it be not their duty when they discover Tares in the Church in stead of separating from it to labour that they may be found good Corn that so when God shall come to gather his Corn into his Garner they may not be thrown out Church-Officers are ministerially betrusted with the Ordering of the Church and for the opening and shutting of the doors of the Churches Communion by the Keys of Doctrine and Discipline And herein if they shall either be hindred
and his Followers first stumbled pag. 37 38 39. Mr. Jenkin 2. Let them consider whether the want of reforming abuses proceed not from some unhappy obstructions in the exercise of Discipline rather than from the allowance of the Church Mr. Brinsley What though there are some failings in the execution through some unhappy obstructions in the exercise of Discipline yet cannot the Church stand charged with them pag. 40. Mr. Jenkin 3. Let them consider whether when they separate from Sinful mixtures the Church be not at that very time purging out those Sinful mixtures pag. 33. Mr. Brinsley Consider the manner in separating at such a time in a time of Reformation What separate from a reforming Church pag. 51 52. Mr. Jenkin Hath not God his Churâ—h even wâ—â—re corruption of Manners hath crâ—pt into a Church iâ— purity of Doctrine be maintained And is sepâ—ration from that Church lawful from which God doth not separate pag. 34. Mr. Brinsley Suppose there may be some nay many just Scandals amongst us by reason of corruption of manners yet is not this a sufficient ground of separation from a Church wherein there is purity of Doctrine pag. 50. Mr. Brinsley How dare any forsake that Church which God hath not forsaken p. 59. Mr. Jenkin Let them consider whether God hath made private Christians Stewards in his House to determine whether those with whom they communicate are fit Members of the Church or not or rather whether it be not their duty when they discover Tares in the Church in stead of separating from it to labour that they may be found good Corn that so when God shall come to gather his Corn in to his Garner they may not be thrown out Church-Officers are Ministerially betrusted with the ordering of the Church and for the opening and shutting of the Doors of the Churches Communion by the Keys of Doctrine and Discipline and herein if they shall be either hindred or negligent private Christians shall not be intangled in the guilt of their Sin p. 34 35. Mr. Brinsley God hath not made all private Christians Stewards nor yet Surveyors in his House so as that every one should take an exact notice of the conditions of all those whom they hold Communion with who are fit to be members of the Church and who not It is Cyprian's counsel What though there be some Tares discovered in the Church yet let us for our parts labour that we may be found good Corn that so when God shall come to gather his Crop into his Garner we may not be cast out Ministerially the Church-Officers whom Christ hath betrusted with the ordering of the Church them he hath made the Porters in his House for the opening and shutting the doors of the Churches Communion by the keys of Doctrine and Discipline Now in this case if either their hands be tied by any humane restrictions or if through negligence they let loose the Rains how private Christians should be entangled in the guilt of that sin it cannot be conceived pag. 414. Mr. Jenkin The Command not to eat with a Brother c. 1 Cor. 5. 11. concerns not Religious but Civil Communion by a voluntary familiar intimate Conversation either in being invited or inviting pag. 35. Mr. Brinsley That which Paul prohibits there is not properly a Religious but a Civil Communion not to mingle themselves with such scandalous Livers by a voluntary familiar and intimate Conversation in an ordinary way repairing to their Tables or inviting them to yours Mr. Jenkin Now though such Civil eating was to be forborn yet it follows not at all much less much more that Religious eating is forbidden Because Civil eating is arbitrary and unnecessary not so Religious which is enjoyned and a commanded Duty pag. 36. Mr. Brinsley If we may not have Civil much less Religious Communion Ans Not so neither inasmuch as the one is arbitrary and voluntary the other a necessary Communion pag. 45. Mr. Jenkin It should be our care to prevent Separation To this end 1. Labour to be progressive in the work of Mortification pag. 38. Mr. Brinsley How shall this Vnity be attained 1. To this end labour after new hearts Mr. Jenkin 2. Admire no Mans Person This caused the Corinthian Schism Take heed of Man-worship Mr. Brinsley How may Schism be prevented 6. Take heed of having the Persons of Men in admiration This occasioned all those Divisions in the Church of Corinth Take we heed how we look too much at Men. p. 59. Mr. Jenkin 3. Labour for Experimental benefit by the Ordinances Find the setting up of Christ in your hearts by the Ministry and then you will not dare to account it Antichristian If with Jacob we could say of our Bethels God is here we would set up Pillars Mr. Brinsley 4. Labour to see and acknowledge God in our Congregations Now if he be here how dare any withdraw When Jacob apprehended God present with him at Bethel Surely the Lord is in this place he sets up his Pillar there Have we met with him why do we not set up our Pillar here pag. 58. Mr. Jenkin 4. Neither give nor receive Scandals Give them not to occasion others to separate nor receive them to occasion thy own Separation Construe doubtful matters charitably Look not upon Blemishes with Multiplying-glasses or old Mens Spectacles Hide them though not imitate them Sport not your selves with others nakedness Mr. Brinsley 3. Take heed of Scandals whether of giving or receiving Of giving to drive off others of receiving to set off our selves Doubtful matters still construe them on the better part So doth Charity not looking upon Blemishes with Multiplying or Magnifying-glasses So far as may be without sin hide them Cursed Cham espies the nakedness of his Father and makes sport with it pag. 56. Mr. Jenkin 5. Be not much taken with Novelties New-Lights have set this Church on fire For the most part they are taken out of the Dark-Lanthorns of old Hereticks They are false and Fools-fires to lead Men into the Precipice of Separation Love Truth in an old dress let not Antiquity be a prejudice against nor Novelty an inducement to the entertainment of Truth Mr. Brinsley 2. Be not over-affected with Novelties As for those New-Lights which have set this Kingdom on fire at this day for the most part they are no other than what have been taken out of the Dark-Lanthorns of former Hereticks no other but ignes fatui false fires useful onely to mislead Tr th is lovely and ought to be embraced in whatever dress she cometh whether new or old As not Antiquity so neither should Novelty be any prejudice to Verity Mr. Jenkin 6. Give not way to lesser differences A little division will soon rise up to a greater Small Wedges make way for bigger Our hearts are like to Tinder a little spark will enflame them Be jealous of your hearts Paul and Barnabas separated about a small matter the taking of an Associate pag. 40 c. Mr. Brinsley 1. Take heed of lesser divisions Small Wedges make way for great ones Small differences sometimes rise to Divisions pag. 57. Mr. Brinsley 4. Bâ— jealous over our own heâ—rts they being like unto Tinder ready to take fire by the least spark It was no great matter that Paul and Barnabas differed vpon onely about the taking of an Associate pag. 71 c. Now Sir by this you may perceive how some Men do make their Books and Sermons and by what ways a Man may rise to the reputation of being a considerable Author he may cull and pick pilfer and steal and become Learned to a miracle an excellent Preacher and write even to a Folio and if he had but the Art of keeping men from poring into neglected Authors and prying into Books that are cast into corners might pass as such But as long as what is forgotten in one Age is revived in another and as long as it is become a Trade to collect Pamphlets I would advise your Friend to be more wary for the future and keep from writing a Folio and a Comment again And now Sir it is high time for me to conclude to whom it is no pleasure to deal in such a way and to converse with those kind of Books that you see my Design hath put me upon It is Charity to you and the World that hath led me along and I hope I have so managed it as shall be to the offence of none but those that are Enemies to Truth I am sure I have so much avoided all that might exasperate that I have for that reason cast aside Leaves of what some others might be tempted to have taken in If Mr. Jenkin hath been hardly dealt with he must thank himself who 〈◊〉 without provocation defamed others could not be suffered to run away with that out-cry which he hath made without a just Rebuke I am SIR Your Servant S. R. FINIS ADVERTISEMENT The RIGHT of TYTHES Asserted and Proved from Divine Institution Primitive Practice Voluntary Donations and Positive Laws With a Just Vindication of that Sacred Maintenance from the Cavils of Thomas Elwood in his Pretended Answer to the Friendly Conference Printed for E. Croft at the Seven Stars in Little Lumbard-street
his Anatomy upon the Heart pag. 160. But is not that now true which he there charges upon themselves We have gone against the Letter of it For do not many of them that have said all this set up Churches against Churches exercise the Worship of God administer Ordinances the Word Sacraments apart and in a separated Body Which in a peculiar manner and by way of eminency is called Schism saith Mr. Brinsley pag. 16. Is Schism all on a sudden grown so innocent a thing that Persons are to be indulged and tamely permitted to continue in it And is it not as sad now as it was then that many that pretend to Religion make no Conscience of Schism as Dr. Manton on Jude pag. 492. doth observe Certainly That still remains good which was said by Mr. Brinsley pag. 17. The Schisms and Divisions which are broken in and that amongst God's own People are what I cannot but look upon as one of the blackest Clouds one of the saddest Judgments which hang over the head of this Kingdom at this day of sad influence for the present and unless they be healed of dangerous consequence for the future Have we not Atheism and Infidelity and Profaneness enough to encounter but must we have more Work found us by those that have given us Arguments to oppose themselves with Are we in no danger of being over-run with a Foreign Power and that the Romans shall come and take away our Name and Church when we which are at difference amongst our selves shall without any opposition be swallowed up by them Are they yet to be taught that as nothing can so nothing will sooner make us a prey to them than mutual Hostilities amongst our selves And whence is it that they will run the adventure and care not what they expose us to Is it that Rome is nearer to them than they are to us That will not be supposed Is it that they expect better Quarter from that than they meet with from our Church That let Experience decide Is it that by bringing all to confusion and a common scramble they may hope to go away with the Supremacy That their Divisions amongst themselves doth confute For can they think because they agree against us that they will agree among themselves Or can they think if they do not that one alone can carry the Victory from the Common Enemy Let a sober Author of their own in his Discourse of the Religion of England be heard who saith pag. 39. That the common safety and advancement of true Religion cannot stand by a multiplicity of petty Forms but requires an ample and well-setled State to defend and propagate it against the amplitude and potency of the Romish Interest And are not these the thoughts of the wisest in this Nation and shall Men yet continue to keep up Feuds and Animosities and make no scruple of contradicting themselves to feed them It was once said by Mr. Brinsley pag. 62. That it 's a foul blemish to a Minister of Christ to speak one thing to day and another thing tomorrow to say and unsay And I will appeal to all the World whether this be not what our Brethren are guilty of Surely if they would but take the pains to review what they have written and weigh those Arguments against Schism and Separation that they formerly published they would return to themselves and to that Church which they have so unadvisedly broken off from they would then think it their Duty with the old Nonconformists to come as far as they can and their Happiness to live in the Communion of that Church where they may be as good as they will they would then see that Schism is a great Sin and that their present Separation is Schism I should now conclude but that I may fear that Mr. Jenkin will proclaim and others think me a Slanderer for saying pag. 44. That he hath borrowed the Substance of this Sermon from Mr. Brinsley's Arraignment of Schism if I do not make it good and therefore in my own vindication and also to shew you how far holiness and indignation may be pretended when indeed it is little better than hypocrisie and calumny that prompts Men on I shall draw the Comparison and leave you and all others to judge whether he be not one of those empty and unaccomplished Predicants spoken of in his Exodus pag. 56. that preach the Sermons of others and more than that dare before all the World publish them as his own the like to which is also done by him or one of his Brethren in the Vindication of the Presbyterial Government pag. 132. compared with Mr. Brinsley pag. 16. and pag. 134. with 52. and pag. 135. with 41. Nor hath he borrowed from Mr. Brinsley alone but hath rifled divers other Authors for the greatest part of his Book as might easily be proved were it either requisite or worth the while How far he is beholden to others for that kind of Wit and tawdry Eloquence that a gross and bribed Flatterer in his Patronus bonae Fidei gives him the Title of Seneca for the Author of the Vindication of the Conforming Clergie hath already shewed And how bold he hath made with others for Argument and Reason the following Instances will be a sufficient Specimen where he hath scarcely left any thing untouched that he then thought might serve his purpose A Sermon preached by W. Jenkin herewith Printed and also to be found in his Comment on Jude printed in Quarto 1652. The Arraignment of the present Schism by John Brinsley LONDON 1646. Mr. Jenkin THeir Heresies were perverse and damnable Opinions their Schism was a perverse Separation from Church-communion The former was in Doctrinals the latter in Practicals the former was opposite to Faith this latter to Charity By Faith all the Members are united to the Head by Charity one to another and as the breaking of the former is Heresie so their breaking of the latter was Schism pag. 21. Mr. Brinsley HEresie saith Jerome is properly a perverse Opinion Schism is a perverse Separation The one a Doctrinal the other a practical Error The one opposite to Faith the other to Charity By the one Faith all the Members are united to the Head by the other Charity they are united to one another Now the breaking of the first of these Bands is Heresie the latter Schism pag. 14. Mr. Jenkin Schism is usually said to be twofold negative and positive 1. Negative is when there is onely simplex secessio when there is onely a bare secession a peaceable and quiet withdrawing from Communion with a Church without making any head against that Church from which the departure is 2. Positive is when persons so withdrawing do so consociate and draw themselves into a distinct and opposite Body setting up a Church against a Church or as Divines express it from Augustine an Altar against an Altar And this is it which in a peculiar manner and by way of eminency
what in another case he once said in his Sermon of the Saints Worth pag. 11. viz. If a man takes the Picture of another he will not take it of his Back-side Leg or Hand or the like but of his Face his beautifullest Part yet that you and others will observe it that the World be no more troubled with such Narratives as can serve to no good End but will effectually promote a bad which is to expose Religion and make it mean and contemptible For my part I could heartily wish that all Differences about little things were laid aside it being as he observes pag. 252. on Jude very unsuitable that a greater Fire should be employed in roasting of an Egg than an Ox and to be more contentious for Bubbles than Blessedness As for greater Differences I could as heartily wish they were composed that the Love of God did more encrease and that would be the encrease of Vnity For what he saith Vol. 2. on Jude pag. 630. is very true The preserving of our Love to God is an excellent preservative against Sectaries and false Teachers He who loves God will fear to break the Vnity and Peace of the Church I cannot conclude better As for the great Case I refer you to the Sermon it self by which methinks I could stand and fall as being confident that either that will justifie Mr. Jenkin or that he will be able to justifie that and so shall be impatient till you give your Opinion of it to SIR Your Servant H. N. THE SERMON JUDE ver 19. These be they who separate themselves sensual having not the Spirit IN the 17 verse Jude produceth the Testimony of the Apostles of Jesus Christ in confirmation of what he had before said In which Testimony I note five Particulars 1. To whom it is commended to his beloved 2. How it was to be improved by remembring it 3. From whom it proceeded the Apostles of our Lord Jesus 4. Wherein it consisted in a Prediction That there should be mockers walking after their ungodly lusts 5. To whom it is opposed viz. to these Seducers These are they who separate themselves In which Words the Apostle shews That these who separate themselves from the Church were Scorners and that these who were sensual and void of the Spirit did follow their ungodly lusts Or in the Words Jude expresseth 1. The Sin of these Seducers in separating themselves 2. The Cause thereof which was 1. Their being sensual And 2. Their not having the Spirit For the first their Separation Two things are here to be opened 1. What the Apostle here intends by separating themselves 2. Wherein the Sinfulness of it consists 1. For the first The Original word may signifie the unbounding of a thing and the removing of a thing from those Bounds and Limits wherein it was set and placed c. Or it imports the parting and separating of one thing from another by Bounds and Limits put between them and the putting of Bounds and Limits for distinction and separation between several things it being thus a Resemblance taken from Fields or Countries which are distinguished and parted from each other by certain Boundaries and Land-marks set up to that end and thus it 's commonly taken by Interpreters in this place wherein these Seducers may be said to separate themselves divide or bound themselves from others either first Doctrinally or secondly Practically 1. Doctrinally by false and Heretical Doctrines whereby they divided themselves from the Truth and Faithful who were guided by the Truth of Scripture and walked according to the Rule of the Word c. 2. Practically they might separate themselves as by Bounds and Limits 1. By Prophaneness and living in a different way from the Saints namely in all loosness and uncleanness 2. By Schismaticalness and making of separation from and divisions in the Church Because they proudly despised the Doctrines or Persons of the Christians as contemptible and unworthy or because they would not endure the holy severity of the Churches Discipline they saith Calvin departed from it They might make Rents and Divisions in the Church by Schismatical withdrawing themselves from Fellowship and Communion with it Their Heresies were perverse and damnable Opinions their Schism was a perverse separation from Church-communion The former was in Doctrinals the latter in Practicals The former was opposite to Faith this latter to Charity By Faith all the Members are united to the Head by Charity one to another And as the breaking of the former is Heresie so their breaking of the latter was Schism And this Schism stands in the dissolving the Spiritual Band of Love and Union among Christians and appears in the withdrawing from the performance of those Duties which are both the Signs of and Helps to Christian Vnity as Prayer Hearing Receiving of Sacraments c. For because the dissolving of Christian Vnion chiefly appears in the undue separation from church-Church-communion therefore this rending is rightly called Schism It is usually said to be twofold Negative and Positive 1. Negative is when there is onely simplex secessio when there is onely a bare secession a peaceable and quiet withdrawing from Communion with a Church without making any head against that Church from which the departure is 2. Positive is when Persons so withdrawing do so consociate and draw themselves into a distinct and opposite Body setting up a Church against a Church or as Divines express it from Augustine an Altar against an Altar And this it is which in a peculiar manner and by way of eminency is called by the name of Schism and becomes sinful either in respect first of the groundlesness or secondly the manner thereof 1. The groundlesness when there is no casting of Persons out of the Church by an unjust Censure of Excommunication no departure by unsufferable Persecution no Heresie nor Idolatry in the Church maintained no necessity if Communion be held with a Church of communicating in its Sins and Corruptions 2. The manner of Separation makes it unlawful when 't is made without due endeavour and waiting for Reformation of the Church from which the departure is and such a rash departure is against Charity which suffers both much and long all tolerable things It is not presently distasted when the justest occasion is given it first useth all possible means of remedy The Chyrurgeon reserves Dismembring as the last remedy It looks upon a sudden breaking off from Communion with a Church which is a Dismembring not as Chyrurgery but Butchery not as medicinal but cruel 2. The Sinfulness of this Schismatical separation appears several ways I shall not spend time to compare it with Heresie though some have said that Schism is the greater Sin of the two August cont Donat. lib. 2. cap. 6. tells the Donatists that Schism was a greater Sin than that of the Traditores who in time of Persecution through fear delivered up their Bibles to the Persecutors to be burnt A Sin at which the
from this Sermon in which Separation is unwarrantable and schismatical 1. It is not to be allowed when it is by reason of Mixt-Communion and admitting into Church-fellowship the vile with the precious This he handles at large from pag. 33. to pag. 37. and saith That it hath no Scripture-warrant And this hath been their constant Opinion So Mr. Firmin in his Separation examined pag. 40. Corrupt Members there were enough in the Jewish Church and so in the Christian Churches soon after and in the Apostles times but you have no example of separating from them So the Provincial Assembly of London in their Vindication of the Presbyterial Government pag. 134. Suppose there were some sinful mixtures at our Sacraments yet we conceive this is not a sufficient ground of a negative much less of a positive separation This they give the Reason of Because in what Church soever there is purity of Doctrine there God hath his Church though overwhelmed with scandals And therefore whosoever separates from such an Assembly separates from that place where God hath his Church which is rash and unwarrantable Mr. Vines in his Treatise of the Sacrament hath a whole Chapter viz. cap. 20. to shew the unlawfulness of it and saith pag 235. That to excommunicate our selves from Gods Ordinances if Men of wicked Life be not excommunicate for fear of pollution by them is Donatistical So Dr. Manton on Jude pag. 496. The Scandals of Professors are ground of mourning but not of separation And Mr. Baxter doth speak fully to it in his Cure of Church-Divisions pag 81. If you mark all the Texts of the Gospel you shall find that all the separation which is commanded in such cases besides the separation from Infidels and the Idolatrous World is but one of these two forts 1. That either the Church cast out impenitent Sinners by the Power of the Keys or 2. That private Men avoid all private familiarity with them But that the private Members should separate from the Church because such Persons are not cast out of it shew me one Text to Prove it if you can The consideration of this made the Author of the Book called Nonconformists no Schismaticks to quit this Argument concluding pag. 16. with good reason That if one Mans sin desileth another that Communicates with him who can assure himself of any Scriptural Communion on this Side Heaven All which I have produced and could indeed tire you with Quotations of this kind on purpose to let you see how much the Author of Separation yet no Schism doth run counter to his own Party and withal how little acquaintance with this Argument will serve to shew the weakness and inconsistency of that Tract He puts the case thus pag. 56. If Ministers or many of the Members are much corrupted or the Members onely commonly so but connived at it is a sufficient ground for the sound to withdraw And for this he gives two Reasons 1. Lest under the pretence of Peace they should be guilty of the greatest Uncharitableness and that is the hardning and encouraging them in their abominable Impieties 2. Because the sound ought by the Law of God and Nature to provide for their own safety for they cannot but be in apparent danger by Communicating with such Now granting the Case so to be yet separation will not be granted lawful by themselves upon the Reasons which he there gives I shall refer him for an Answer to the first of the Letters that passed betwixt the Ministers of Old and New England published by Mr. Ash and Mr. Rathband 1643. as thought by them at that time very seasonable When those of New England had said That by joyning with an insufficient and unworthy Ministry they did countenance them in their Place and Office pag. 8. it is answered pag. 11. The Scripture teacheth evidently not onely that the People by joyning do not countenance them in their Place and Office but that they must and ought to joyn with them in the Worship of God and in separating from the Ordinance they shall sin against God From whence you may observe That the countenancing of such whom the Word of Truth doth condemn as not approved Ministers of God as it 's there said is no reason to discharge us of our Duty and if Separation be not otherwise our Duty the fear of hardning others by our Communion with them will never make it to be so Surely this might have been very well thought to be the effect of the same Practice in the Church of Corinth where there was as the Provincial Assembly of London observeth in their Vindication pag. 134. such a profane mixture at their Sacrament as we believe few if any of our Congregations can be charged withal And yet the Apostle doth not persuade the godly Party to separate much less to gather a Church out of a Church Which yet had been very necessary if this Author's Reason had been of any force And his second Reason viz. Care of our own safety will also have no place here if Mr. Jenkin's Authority will signifie any thing with him who speaking in this Sermon p. 36. of that Text 1 Cor. 5. 11. of not eating with a Brother c. shews very well that it is to be understood of Civil and not Religious eating and gives this as one Reason for it viz. That there is danger of being infected by the wicked in civil familiar and arbitrary eatings not so in joyning with them in an holy and commanded Service and Ordinance If we follow the Apostles Precept of having no familiar and ordinary converse with Fornicators Covetous Idolaters Drunkards c. we may be assured that we shall be in no danger of Infection by their Company in Religious Offices and Duties where there is little or no converse opportunity and way for it The case I acknowledge is sad when such are to be found amongst Christians and that Discipline is not exercised upon them but I ought not to leave my Place and Duty because such do joyn with me in it or to separate from the Church of God because such continue in its Communion For this is to tear the Church in pieces and the Doctrine that drives to it is very pernicious Take the Character of it from the Provincial Assembly in their Vindication pag. 124. That Doctrine that crieth up Purity to the ruine of Vnity is contrary to the Doctrine of the Gospel But truly the case is not so bad with us as it is represented I know there are some that do object as J. Rogers did in 1653. The Parish-Churches are not rightly constituted for there is in them ranting revelling To whom I shall reply as Mr. Crofton did then to him in his Bethshemesh clouded pag. 103. O sharp sentence severe censure at one word pronounced on all Parishes indefinitely the Position whence it flows had need be well proved and the Inference well backed For I must needs say that what Mr. Firmin in
i. e. Mr. Burroughs will by no means allow but condemns as the direct way to bring in all kind of disorder and confusion into the Church This both Presbyterians and Independents then are agreed in That Edification alone is no sufficient Reason to forsake one Church for another and that a Persons own Opinion of his Case in that matter will not make that lawful to him which will be the unavoidable means of bringing in confusion to the Churches which he either leaves or joyns himself to But the Author of Separation yet no Schism thinks he hath sufficient Reason for his Opinion who doth thus argue viz. You call it a Crime because you suppose it is a transgression the Law of visible Communion with some particular Church But I say That the Laws of visible Communion with this or that particular Church are but positive and therefore subordinate to Laws more natural and necessary such is that wherein we are commanded to take care of our Souls and Salvation So that if Christians do shift particular Churches for the obtaining of very apparent advantages to their Salvation above what they have had where they were I see therein no Crime at all committed I grant indeed that positive Laws must give way to natural but then there must be a plain necessity that must intervene to make them inconsistent for otherwise both remain in force as I conceive they do in the Instance here given If indeed Salvation was inconsistent with or what we run the apparent hazard of in Communion with a particular Church then there is sufficient reason for separation from it but if it be onely that I conceive the increase of Knowledge or the engaging of my Affections may be better attained by separation from than continuance in its Communion this is far from a necessity and so no sufficient Reason to break it As it is in a Family If the Master takes no care to provide for his Children and Servants who of old were esteemed the Goods of their Master but that they must starve if they continue with him or if what he provides is such as will rather poyson than nourish them or what is absolutely forbid as Swines flesh under the Law in such a case they may shift for themselves and refuse to live with him till he mends their Condition But if what he provides is lawful wholesom and sufficient though not of so good nourishment as might be wished they are to content themselves and to keep within the bounds of Duty and Observance So it is here If we were in a Church that either denied us what is necessary to Salvation or that would engage us to do what will bring it into imminent hazard we have an unquestionable Reason to forbear Communion with her But when the means of Salvation that we enjoy are sufficient to it and what we deliberate about is onely the Degree and Measure what is better and fitter we cannot quit a Church without sin and our departure is unnecessary And that will further appear if we consider 1. That no further Knowledge or Edification is necessary than what we can attain to in a lawful way and what is otherwise lawful in it self by taking an undue course for it is made unlawful As Hearing Reading and Christian Converse are very fit Means for my Improvement but if I for it do injure my Family and neglect my Calling it is so far from being my duty that it is my sin So to edifie my self and to acquire a greater measure of Knowledge and Christian Vertues is a noble and most excellent End but if I for it break off Communion with the Church whereof I am a Member I make my self a Transgressor All which if well considered the falacy of our Author's Argument will appear For suppose I reason thus The Laws of particular Families are but postive and therefore subordinate to Laws more necessary such is that wherein we are commanded to take care of our Souls and therefore if I neglect the former for the good of the latter I see no Crime therein committed Would not this appear very conceited and imaginary And if it 's false here it is so in the Case that he offers The grounds of his mistake herein seem to be 1. That he was so intent upon the positive Laws of particular Churches that he had no respect to Church-communion in it self which is highly necessary by which means he did not consider that this Principle of shifting Communion for the expectation of further Improvement is what tends so to the dissolution of a Church that he that holds it is capable of continuing in no Communion whatsoever and what cannot be put in practice but confusion in and breaking up of Churches will most certainly follow This was what they of New-England had experience of and therefore provided against in their Platform of Church-Discipline cap. 3. Church-Members say they may not depart from the Church and so one from another as they please nor without just and weighty cause Such departure tends to the dissolution of the Body Just Reasons for a Members removal of himself are 1. If a man cannot continue without sin 2. In case of Persecution But not a word of a more profitable Ministry and greater edification Now if this be the necessary and constant Effect of this Principle it cannot be true 2. Another ground of his mistake seems to be That the notion of a particular Church led him to think that their separation into Societies distinct from our Church was no more than to go from one Parish-Church to another which is also the conceit of the Author of Sacrilegious Desertion This he insinuates pag. 66. But this is apparently false as I have shewed in part before and which will be further evident if you observe that their Agreement with us in Thirty six of our Articles makes them to be no more of us whilst they differ in the others that refer to our Constitution and which they separate from us for as they profess than that of the Independents made them one with the Presbyterians who in all matters of Faith did freely and fully consent to the Confession published by the Assembly the things of Church-Government and Discipline onely excepted as they say in the Preface to the Platform of Church-Discipline in New-England And much to the same purpose is that of the Congregational Churches met at the Savoy 1658. But yet for all this they neither of them think themselves one with the other and the Independents for their separation were notwithstanding accused of Schism by the other 2. This Course is unnecessary and so unlawful because even in the way in which a Person is whilst a Member of a true Church in the sense all along spoken of he may attain to all due Improvement The Author of Prelatique Preachers none of Christs Teachers pag. 31. to encourage People rather to sit at home than hear the Publick Ministers tells them That
may continue there without being guilty of the Sin of them How far the first of these is and ought to be acknowledged I have shewed above at pag. 62. And how far the latter you may see in Mr. Brinsley's Arraignment of Schism pag. 50. Though toleration of some unwarrantable mixtures in a Church be an evil yet it is not so great an evil as Separation upon that ground This was the Opinion of the Five dissenting Brethren in their Apologetical Narration pag. 6. We have always professed and that in those times when the Churches of England were the most either actually over-spread with defilements or in the greatest danger thereof That we both did and would hold a Communion with them as the Churches of Christ And this they agreed to upon this consideration that otherwise there hath been no Church yet nor will be to the day of Judgment which Persons otherwise perswaded could or can hold Communion with as you may find it in the old Nonconformists Letters to those of New-England pag. 12. Mr. Firmin's Separation examined pag. 25. and the Vindication of the Provincial Assembly pag. 135. 2. I add That the imposition of things unlawful or so thought to be in a Church makes a Person in this case no farther concerned than as they are imposed on him For if Corruptions tolerated are no bar to Communion then they are not when imposed meer Imposition not altering the Nature as Mr. Crofton saith in his Jerubbaal pag. 27. 3. Imposition in some things unlawful or supposed so to be will not justifie a separation from what is lawful The Author of Separation yet no Schism in his Epistle to the Reader thus pleads for the People The People are not always free from such Impositions which they extremely suspect as sinful as that they cannot enjoy Baptism for their Children without the Cross nor receive the Lords Supper without Kneeling to name no more as well he could not But suppose that these things are imposed and what they extremely suspect can this be a Reason for their separation in those things where nothing of this nature is Certainly in obedience to Magistrates and for Communion with a Church we ought to go as far as we can and what I cannot do is no excuse for the omission of what I can Thus did the old Nonconformists think and practice as I observed to you before from the Vindication of the Provincial Assembly pag. 135. That though some of them thought it unlawful to receive the Sacrament kneeling yet they held Communion with the Church in the rest And accordingly Mr. Firmin argues in his Separation examined pag. 29. Suppose there should be some Humane mixtures are all the Ordinances polluted Why do you not communicate with them in those Ordinances which are pure Now if this be true what shall we say to them that have nothing to object against the greatest part of what they are required to communicate with us in and yet keep up a total and positive Separation from us as if all Parts were alike infected and that from the Crown of the Head to the Sole of the Foot there was nothing but Wounds and putrifying Sores 4. The meer suspicion that a Person may have of the unlawfulness of what is imposed will not justifie his omission of or separation in that particular For he ought to come to some resolution in it and in case of Obedience Communion and Charity to go against such his Suspicion To this purpose speaks Mr. Geree in his Resolution of Ten Cases 1644. Things wherein doubts arise are of a double nature 1. Meerly arbitrary and at my own dispose 2. That are under command as coming to the Sacrament Obedience to the Higher Powers in things lawful If Scruples arise about these and a Man doubts he sins if he acts and he also doubts he sins if he forbears c. In this case he must weigh the Scales and where he apprehends most weight of Reason must incline that way though the other Scale be not altogether empty And this done after humble and diligent search with bewailing our infirmity that we are no more discerning will be accepted by God God puts not his People on necessity of sinning nor can our Scruples dispense with his Commands So Mr. Faldo in his Quakerism no Christianity pag. 93. In doubtful and difficult Cases wherein we cannot reach the knowledge of our Duty it 's our Duty to follow the Examples of the greatest number of the Saints c. And then surely what will serve in such a case to let us dispense with our Doubts will much more in Obedience to Governours and for Communion with a Church This I thought to have more largely handled as it 's thought a new and late Argument used by Bishop Sanderson c. but what I can prove to be of old the common Resolution of the Case and as the contrary is pleaded for from Mr. Hales But lighting happily upon a Book called Mr. Hales's Treatise of Schism examined wrote by a Learned Person I shall refer you to it where he particularly undertakes this Point pag. 110 c. Having thus made good the Three Propositions abovesaid and shewed That the Church of England is a True Church That there is a Separation from it and That this Separation is voluntary and unnecessary that which remains is not to be denied viz. That therefore the present Separation is Schismatical So that now you may see in what condition those of our dissenting Brethren are that withdraw from the Communion of our Church and how little able they will be to reconcile their present Proceedings to their former Principles and Professions It was once said by them in the Vindication of the Presbyterial Government pag. 133. We dare not make separation from a true Church by departing from it as you do speaking to the Independents Then Independency was what they proved to be Schism because 1. Independents do depart from our Churches being true Churches and so acknowledged by themselves 2. They draw and seduce Members from our Congregations 3. They erect separate Congregations 4. They refuse Communion with our Churches in the Sacraments Now we judge that no Schism is to be tolerated in the Church as say the London-Ministers in their Letter to the Assembly pag. 3. Then the inevitable Consequences of it could be discovered and represented as that by it Peoples minds would be troubled and in danger to be subverted bitter heart-burning would be fomented and perpetuated godly painful and orthodox Ministers be discouraged and despised the life and power of Godliness be eaten out by frivolous Disputes and the whole Course of Religion in private Families be interrupted and undermined as they there say pag. 4. Then Church-Division was as great a Sin as Adultery and Theft as Dr. Bryan maintains in the Publick Disputation at Kilingworth 1655. pag. 28. Then it was pleaded That they Covenanted not onely against Sin but Schism as saith Mr. Watson in
the Church causing sad thoughts of heart pag. 67. Mr. Jenkin It 's opposite to the Edification of the Church Division of Tongues hindred the building of Babel and doubtless Division in Hearts Tongues Hands and Heads must needs hinder the building of Jerusalem While Parties are contending Churches and Common-wealths suffer In troublous times the Walls and Temple of Jerusalem went but slowly on pag. 27. Mr. Brinsley The Church is hereby hindred in the Edification of it We know what it was that hindred the building of Babel even a Schism in their Tongues division of Languages And surely there is no one thing that can more hinder the building of Jerusalem when Christians shall be divided in their Heads Hearts Tongues Hands As it is in Civil Wars whilst the Parties are contending the Commonwealth suffers The Wall and Temple of Jerusalem went slowly on in troublous Times pag. 21. Mr. Jenkin When Church-Members are put out of joynt they are made unserviceable and unfit to perform their several Offices They who were wont to joyn in Prayer Sacraments and Fasting and were ready to all mutual Offices of Love are now fallen off from all pag. 28. Mr. Brinsley Members of the Church being put out of joynt by Schism become unuseful to the Body unapt to those Duties and Services which before they performed How is it that those who were wont to joyn with the Churches in Hearing Prayer Sacraments and were so ready to all mutual Offices of Love are now fallen off from all pag. 67. Mr. Jenkin Our Separation from Rome was not before all means were used for the cure and reformation of the Romanists by the discovery of their Errours that possibly could be thought of notwithstanding all which though some have been enforced to an acknowledgement of them they still obstinately persist in them Our famous godly and learned Reformers would have healed Babylon but she is not healed Many skilful Physicians have had her in hand but she grew so much the worse In stead of being reclaimed they anathematized them with the dreadfullest Curses excommunicated yea murdered and destroyed multitudes of those who endeavoured their reducement not permitting any to trade buy or sell to have either Religious or Civil Communion with them except they received the Beasts Mark in their Hands and Foreheads All which considered we might safely forsake her Since in stead of healing Babylon we could not be preserved from her destroying of us we did deservedly depart from her and every one go into his own Country and unless we had done so we could not have obeyed the clear Precept Apoc. 18. Come out of her my people pag 29 30. Mr. Brinsley Our Separation was necessitated through their obstinacy in their Errors which notwithstanding the discovery of them and that so clear as that some of their own have been enforced to an acknowledgement of them and all ways and means used for their Reformation they still persist in What then remains but a cutting off We would have healed Babylon but she is not healed What then followeth Forsake her and let us go every one to his own Country How many Physicians have had her in hand Luther c. and the rest of our pious Reformers but all to no purpose We were enforced she not permitting any to trade buy or sell to have either Religious or Civil Communion with her except they receive her Mark in their Hands and Foreheads But on the other hand anathematizing them These things considered let God and the World be judge whether our Separation from them be voluntary Not unjust being warranted by Authority of Scripture commanding this separation Come out of her my People Rev. 18. 4. pag. 27 28. Mr. Jenkin To separate from Congregations where the Word of Truth and Gospel of Salvation are held out in an ordinary way as the Proclamations of Princes are held forth upon Pillars to which they are affixed where the Light of Truth is set up as it were upon a Candlestick to guide Passengers to Heaven to separate from them to whom belong the Covenants and where the Sacraments the Seals of the Covenant are for substance rightly dispensed where Christ walketh in the midst of his golden Candlesticks and discovereth his presence in his Ordinances whereby they are made effectual to the conversion and edification of Souls in an ordinary way where the Members are Saints by a professed subjection to Christ where there are sundry who in the judgement of Charity may be conceived to have the work of Grace really wrought in their hearts by walking in some measure answerable to their Profession I say to separate from these as those with whom Church Communion is not to be held is Schismatical pag. 31 32. Mr. Brinsley Are not our Congregations true Churches What are not here the Pillars of Truth Is not the Word of Truth the Gospel of Salvation here held forth and that in an ordinary and constant way even as the Edicts and Proclamations of Princes are wont to be held forth by Pillars to which they are affixed where the Light of Gods Truth is set up and held forth for the guiding of passengers in the way to Eternal Life Are not here the golden Candlesticks where the Seals of Gods Covenant the Sacraments of the New Testament are for substance rightly dispensed where there is the presence of Christ in the midst of his Ordinances so as in an ordinary way they are made effectual to the conversion and salvation of many where Christ sitteth walketh in the midst of his golden Candlesticks where there are Societies of visible Saints all such by outward profession and a considerable part of them walking in measure answerable to that profession can it be questioned where these are whether there be true Churches of Christ pag. 29 30. Mr. Jenkin The voluntary and unnecessary Separation from a true Church is Schismatical pag. 31. Mr. Brinsley Schism is a voluntary and unwarrantable Separation from a true Church pag. 23. Mr. Jenkin Pretences for Separation are alledged frequently and most plausibly Mixt Communion and of admitting into Church-fellowship the vile with the precious and those who are Chaff and therefore ought not to lodge with the Wheat Mr. Brinsley Sinful mixtures are tolerated among you There is not that due separation of the Wheat from the Chaff the precious from the vile but all sorts are admitted Mr. Jenkin Answ 1. Not to insist upon what some have urged viz. That this hath been the Stone at which most Schismaticks have stumbled and the pretence which they have of old alledged as is evident in the examples of the Audaeans Novatians Donatists Anabaptists Broâ—nists pag 33. Mr. Brinsley Answ 1. I might here mind them That this hath been the common Stock whereupâ—n Schism hath been usually grafted the common pretence taken up by all Schismaticks the Novatians Audaeans Donatists from the same Root sprung that later Schism of the Anabaptists It was the same Stone at which Brown