his Separation examined p. 42. once said of the Presbyterial is true of the Episcopal That there are many Ministers that have as few wicked at that Ordinance of the Lords Supper as ever were in the Church of Corinth I must confess that I was pleased with the ingenuous acknowledgment of the Author of The Cry of a Stone in 1642. who saith pag. 39. I freely acknowledge that there are many in the Parishes of England which are of a very godly Life and Conversation and some that go as far therein as ever I saw any in my life And if I should prefer any of the Separated before them in Conversation I should speak against my own Conscience but in the Church-state and Order I must prefer the other And I question not but that the State of the Church is still as good in that respect as it was then and might have been better had those kept in it that are run away from it and that by their Divisions in Religion make many to question whether there be any such thing in the World Certainly were our endeavours rightly placed and united there is scarcely any Church in the World whose Temper would promise more success than that of ours And if we would deal fairly as J. G. in his Cretensis pag. 5. once said in comparing them together and not set the Head of the one against the Tail of the other but measure Head with Head and Tail with Tail I will not say of our Church as he did of Independency That if that hath its Tens Presbytery hath its Thousands of the Sons of Belial in its Retinue but I will say That even the separated Churches as they now stand are not without them as well as we And if they would as well look out the Extortioner and Unjust and Covetous and Railer not to speak of others amongst themselves as they do pick out the Fornicator and Drunkard that are as they insinuate with us they would find their own Churches not so good and others not so bad as they imagine But supposing that such are in the Communion of our Church as it is not to be altogether denied yet is not the Church presently to be blamed Hear what Mr. Brinsley saith in his Arraignment of Schism pag. 39. Supposing such unwarrantable Mixtures have been and yet are to be found yet it cannot properly be put upon the Churches score What her Ordinance was touching the keeping back scandalous Persons from the Sacrament they which have read her ancient Rubrick cannot be ignorant And Mr. Vines of the Sacrament c. 19. p. 233. speaking about the Power which the Minister hath of keeping off unworthy Persons from the Lords Supper saith I as little doubt of the Intention of the Church of England in the Rule given to the Minister before the Communion in the case of some emergent Scandal at the present time The Church hath provided for the correcting of Offenders and perhaps there may be as good reason why the Censures of it are not now executed as there was in the late Times Mr. Crofton once told the Independents in his Bethshemesh clouded p. 110. The continuance of our disordered Discipline is the fruit of their disordered Separation from us I would fain be resolved in what Adam Steuart in his Zerubbabel to Sanballat pag. 70. puts to the Querie I would willingly know saith he whether it were not better for them that aim at Toleration and Separation to stay in the Church and to joyn all their endeavours with their Brethren to reform Abuses than by their separation to let the Church of God perish in Abuses Whether they do not better that stay in the Church to reform it when it may be reformed than to quit it for fear to be deformed in it If they had taken this course and had given us their help in stead of withdrawing from it doubtless the Censures of the Church would have signified more and the Members of it have been in a much better condition than now they are I shall conclude this with what is said by a well-experienced Person in his Address to the Nonconformists pag. 161. If in stead of this Separation each Christian of you had kept to Parochial Communion and each outed Minister had kept their Residence among them and Communion with them as private Members in the Parish-way and had also in a private capacity joyned with those Ministers which have succeeded them in doing all the good they could in the Parish I nothing doubt but that by so doing you would have taken an unspeakable far better course to promote the Power of Religion in the Nation than by what you have done It 's they that have in great measure weakned if not tied our Hands and then complain that we do not fight If all things therefore were considered I believe that they would have as little reason to condemn our Churches for Corruptions in this kind as I am sure if they will be constant to themselves that they have none to separate from us upon account of them 2. Separation is not to be allowed for slight and tolerable Errors which are not Fundamental and hinder Communion with Christ the Head as may be collected from pag. 28. 37. of this Sermon So also say the old Nonconformists in their Confutation of the Brownists published by Mr. Rathband pag. 4. We desire the Reader to consider that a People may be a true Church though they know not nor hold not every Truth contained in the Scriptures but contrarily hold many Errors repugnant to them This was the Primitive Opinion and Practice say the Provincial Assembly in their Vindication pag. 139. All such who professed Christianity held Communion together as one Church notwithstanding the difference of Judgments in lesser things and much corruption in Conversation And now that the Church of England doth hold no Fundamental Errors I appeal to themselves What it was before the Wars let the Author of Church-Levellers printed for Tho. Vnderhil 1644. speak When it was objected That the Presbyterians whilst persecuted by the Bishops did hold forth a full Liberty of Conscience he answers This is a Slander the difference between them and the Prelates being not in Doctrinals but Ceremonials And therefore after the Covenant was taken whilst the Lords had the Power of Admission to Benefices all Persons presented were to read the Articles publickly and profess their consent to them And that it is the same still is confessed So Mr. C. in his Discourse of the Religion of England pag. 43. The Doctrine of Faith and Sacraments by Law established is heartily received by the Nonconformists So Sacrilegious Desertion pag. 45. We differ not at all from the Doctrine of the Church of England till the new Doctrine about Infants was brought into the new Rubrick And certainly that is if an Error no dangerous or fundamental one So Dr. Owen in his Peace-offering 1667. p. 12. The Confession of the Church of
or negligent private Christians shall not be intangled in the guilt of their Sin if they be humbled and use all lawful means for remedy though they do Communicate 6. Let them search Whether there be any Scripture-warrant to break off Communion with any Church when there is no defect in the Ordinances themselves onely upon this ground because some are admitted to them who because of their personal miscarriages ought to be debarred The Jews of old though they separated when the Worship if self was corrupted 2 Chron. 11. 14 16. yet not because wicked men were suffered to be in outward Communion with them Jer. 7. 9 10. Nor do the Precepts or Patterns of the Christian Churches for casting out of Offenders give any liberty to separation in case of failing to cast them out and though the suffering of scandalous Persons be blamed yet not the Communicating with them The Command not to eat with a Brother who is a fornicator or covetous c. 1 Cor. 5. 11. concerns not Religious but Civil Communion by a voluntary familiar intimate Conversation either in being invited or inviting as is clear by these two Arguments 1. That Eating which is here forbidden with a Brother is allowed to be with an Heathen But it 's the Civil Eating which is onely allowed to be with an Heathen Therefore it 's the Civil Eating which is forbidden to be with a Brother 2. The Eating here forbidden is for the punishment of the nocent not for a punishment to the innocent Now though such Civil Eating was to be forborn yet it follows not at all much less much more that Religious Eating is forbidden 1. Because Civil Eating is arbitrary and unnecessary not so Religious which is enjoyned and a commanded Duty 2. 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 3. Civil Eating is done out of love to the Party inviting or invited but Religious is done out of love to Jesus Christ were it not for whom we would neither eat at Sacrament with wicked men nor at all To conclude this Separation from Churches from which Christ doth not separate is Schismatical Now it 's clear in the Scripture that Christ owneth Churches where Faith is found for the substance and their Worship Gospel-worship though there be many defects and sinful mixtures among them And what I have said concerning the Schismaticalness of separation because of the sinful mixtures of those who are wicked in practice is as true concerning separation from them who are erroneous in judgment if the Errours of those from whom the separation is made be not Fundamental and hinder Communion with Christ the Head And much more clear if clearer can be is the Schismaticalness of those who separate from and renounce all Communion with those Churches which are not of their own manner of constitution and modell'd according to the Platform of their own particular Church-order To refrain Fellowship and Communion with such Churches who profess Christ their Lord whose Faith is sound whose Worship is Gospel-worship whose Lives are holy because they come not into that particular way of Church-Order which we have pitch'd upon is a Schismatical rending of the Church of Christ to pieces Of this the Church of Rome are most guilty who do most plainly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and circumscribe and bound the Church of Christ within the Limits and Boundaries of the Roman Jurisdiction even so as that they cast off all Churches in the World yea and cut them off from all hópe of Salvation who subject not themselves to their way Herein likewise those Separatists among our selves are heinously faulty who censure and condemn all other Churches though their Faith Worship and Conversation be never so Scriptural meerly because they are not gathered into Church-order according to their own Patterns In Scripture Churches are commended and dignified according as their fundamental Faith was sound and their Lives holy not according to the regularity of their first manner of gathering And notwithstanding the exactest regularity of their first gathering when Churches have once apostatized from Faith and Manners Christ hath withdrawn Communion from them And this making of the first gathering of People into Church-fellowship to be the Rule to direct us with whom we may hold Communion will make us refuse some Churches upon whom are seen the Scripture-characters of true Churches and joyn with others onely upon an Humane testimony because Men onely tell us they were orderly gathered Obs ult It should be our care to shun Separation To this end 1. Labour to be progressive in the work of Mortification The less carnal we are the less contention and division will be among us Are ye not carnal saith the Apostle and he proves it from their divisions Separation is usually but very absurdly accounted a sign of an high-grown Christian We wrangle because we are Children and are men in malice because children in holiness Wars among our selves proceed from the lusts that war in our members James 4. 1. 2. Admire no Mans Person The excessive regarding of some makes us despise others in respect of them When one Man seems a Gyant another will seem a Dwarf in comparison of him This caused the Corinthian Schism Take heed of Man-worship as well as Image-worship Let not Idolatry be changed but abolish'd Of this largely before upon having mens persons in admiration 3. Labour for experimental benefit by the Ordinances Men separate to those Churches which they account better because they never found those where they were before to them good Call not Ministers good as the young man in the Gospel did Christ complementally onely for if so you will soon call them bad 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 nay be such for our constancy in abiding in them 4. Neither give nor receive Scandals Give them not to occasion others to separate nor receive them to occasion thy own separation Watch exactly 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 Turn separation from into lamentation for the Scandalous 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 6. Give not way to lesser differences A little division will soon rise up to greater Small Wedges make way for bigger Our Hearts are like to Tinder a little Spark will enflame them Be
England declared in the Articles of Religion and herein what is purely Doctrinal we fully embrace and constantly adhere unto Again pag. 17. We know full well that we differ in nothing from the whole Form of Religion established in England but onely in some few things in outward Worship Herein too we have the concurrence of Mr. W. himself in his Separation yet no Schism p. 60. If you take it the Church of England for such Christians onely who are of the Faith in Doctrinals with those that hold the Thirty nine Articles here the Nonconformists come in for a share also who are of your Faith therein excepting those which respect Discipline and Ceremonies And pag. 62. It is evident that some sort of Errors in a Church though but tolerated may be a just ground of withdrawing though I do not charge the Church of England with any such Errors This therefore being thus acknowledged one would have thought the Argument might be fairly dismissed and that here could be no reason found for Separation And yet when we are come thus near it is like the two Mountains spoken of in Wales upon whose tops you may exchange Discourse and almost come to shaking of Hands and notwithstanding all there is little less than a days Journey betwixt you We seem to have brought the Matter to a perfect reconciliation but when we least thought of it we are at open War again For the Author last-mentioned grants as much as we can ask but immediately thrusts in a Reason or two that he thinks will maintain their Ground and vindicate their Practice notwithstanding The Doctrine he hath nothing against but yet the Preachers are Sometimes he saith they are contrary one to another some are for the Doctrine of Predestination others against it c. and how shall he then judge of their Faith and Doctrinals pag. 60. Sometimes he saith It is conceived many of them preach contrary to the Articles ibid. Sometimes again It is conceived that several of them do not honestly believe those Articles that they have professed to believe p. 62. And to make all sure because it may be objected That the People have liberty in this case of complaining he answers To what purpose when such Errors are publickly professed in printed Books and no course taken for correcting or ejecting of the Authors pag. 61. Things as impertinently as slanderously suggested For what though the Ministers differ among themselves in some Points as he doth after his Predecessors the Brownists affirm as you may see in the Nonconformists Answer to them pag. 4. is that a reason to forsake our Communion and doth he that forsakes ours for theirs find the case much amended Do not the Nonconformists as much differ from each other as any amongst us If not from whence proceed all those Disputes about Communion and Non-communion with us about the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness the nature of justifying Faith lawfulness and unlawfulness of prescribed Forms of Prayer of God's Prescience c. And why are Mr. How and Mr. Baxter c. so much teazed by some of their Fellows and the latter called Slanderer Dictator Self-saver and accused of Profaneness Blasphemy and what not as you may see in the Antidote to his Cure 1670 Is it not because they will not swallow down the absurdest of their Principles or do go further toward an accommodation of our unhappy Differences than they will allow But what are those Points that our Ministers thus differ among themselves or from our Church in Is it about the mode in Imputation or about the Object of Predestination c. These things the Church of England is not so minute and positive in If he will not believe me I shall turn him over to Mr. Hickman who hath in several Tracts particularly concerned himself in this Argument and may be supposed to understand it He in his Latin Sermon De Haeresium origine 1659. pag. 37. undertaking to answer Tilenus about the Doctrine of our Church concerning the Object of Predestination whether massa corrupta or no saith Apage nugas Non solet Ecclesia Anglicana in mysteriis hujusmodi explicandis vagari in eas quaestiones quae nimia subtilitate popularem captum effugiunt Is it about the special Grace of God in the conversion of a Sinner or the influence of the Holy Spirit in it Then I will dare him to produce any that are herein Nonconformists to the Doctrine of the Church of England and that teach That there is no special Grace exerted in the conversion of a Sinner or That the Holy Ghost is of no further use in the conversion of Men than as he first inspired those that delivered the Doctrine of Christianity c. as he slanderously doth say He may force and scrue and wrest but he cannot do it honestly and fairly But supposing there were several that did thus teach and that such Books were Licensed where this is affirmed Doth this presently make the Church Heretical Notwithstanding this I believe that the Church of England is in it self as Orthodox as theirs was in 1646. when Shlichtingius his Comment on the Hebrews or what was little better came out thus attested by Mr. J. Downame I have perused this Comment and finding it to be learned and judicious plain and very profitable I allow it to be printed and published I doubt they would have taken it very ill to have been then charged with Socinianism because that Book came out with such an Imprimatur from him that was deputed in those Times to give it And yet I never heard that Mr. Downame was corrected or ejected for so doing And may they continue Orthodox notwithstanding and we for such an escape be counted Heretical But how far a Church is concerned in such Cases I think will appear from what is said in The Divine Right of the Presbyterial Government pag. 265. The Church of Rome setting aside those particular Persons among them that maintained damnable Errors which were not of the Church but a predominant Faction in the Church continued to be a true Church of Christ until Luther's time as the unanimous consent of the Orthodox Divines confess yea as some think till the cursed Council of Trent till when the Errors among them were not the Errors of the Church but of particular Men. Now I hope they will be as favourable to us and give our Church as much allowance in this case as that of Rome and not count it the Error of the Church till by some Decree Canon or Article it is owned so to be Sir You may by this time perceive how hard these Persons are put to it when it makes them so quick to espy and busie to rake all the dirt they can together to make our Church deformed and worthy of all that defamation they have branded it with and of that distance they observe and keep from it How do they torture Phrases hale along Expressions whithout due Process to the
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