be warranted by the Church and to make his words good he produceth great Credentials from the Pope and many other great Men. This great and learned Prelate in his Exposition of the Catholick Faith c. hath these words We acknowledge a Head established by God Sect. 21. p. 50. to conduct his whole Flock in his paths which Head is the Pope as Successour to St. Peter the Prince of the Apostles and that the Papal Chair is the common Centre of all Catholick Unity Sect. 1. p. 2. And in another place he promiseth not to meddle with any thing but the Decrees of the Council of Trent because in them the Church hath given her decision upon these matters now in Agitation Which Council was called by the Pope's Authority only and the true sense of all its Decrees by the Bull of Pope Pius IV. reserved to be explained by him alone So that the great noise of the Catholick Church is at last dwindled into the Roman Catholick which we of the Church of England take to be a contradiction in Terminis the same with a particular Universal for they may as well say that the City of Rome is all the World as that the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church Besides this notion of the Catholick Church virtual is altogether new having no foundation either in the Holy Scriptures or in any Primitive and Authentick Antiquity and therefore we can by no means admit of it This is that Church by which and towards which we are charged with the guilt of the horrible sin of Schism And God be thanked it is no worse for from any Criminal Schism in this case I hope we shall without any great difficulty be able to acquit our selves 2. If we consider a Christian Church as it is particular then are we to understand it of a number of Men professing Christianity formed into a Society under lawfull Governours and governed by such Laws and Rules as are not different from but agreeable to the Laws and Rules of the Catholick Church And if any Man or number of Men who are Members of that Society shall without just cause separate themselves from the Communion thereof he or they so doing are certainly guilty of Schism Nor is every occasion which a capricious humour or discontent may suggest to us to be taken as a sufficient ground of Separation Nay though there be something really amiss or at least we are persuaded that there is so in the Doctrine or Discipline of that Church whereof we are Members yet ought we rather to suspect our own Judgments and suppress our own Sentiments than break the unity and peace thereof In a word unless such a particular Church shall make the terms of her Communion such as cannot be complied with without sin I do not know any other just ground of Separation therefrom Thus have I considered the subject of Schism in its greatest latitude And now let us see how far any thing that may be gathered from hence can affect the Church of England 1. If the Church of England hath made no defection from the Catholick Church diffusive i. e. from the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church which compriseth all Men and all Societies of Men professing Christianity Nor from the Catholick Church representative i. e. the Prelates and Pastours of the Universal Church lawfully assembled in a Council that is truly free and general If she profess no other Doctrine nor exercise any other Discipline than what she hath received from Christ and his Apostles and was constantly profest and exercised by their Successours in the primitive Church If she be willing to submit all matters in difference between Her and any other Sister-Church to be tried by the Holy Scriptures the primitive Fathers and the Decisions of the four first General Councils Then can she not be justly charged with Schism upon that account And that she doth and is willing to doe all this that is here supposed we are ready to make good whenever our Adversaries shall give us the occasion so to doe 2. If their notion of a Church virtually Catholick be altogether new without any foundation either in the Holy Scriptures or in any primitive and authentick Antiquity then the power and privileges which the present Church of Rome challengeth upon that account are mere nullities and consequently the Schism which she chargeth of the Church England with upon that score a mere Chimera which vanisheth of it self If they think to avoid the force of this supposition they must produce some good and authentick Record which as yet hath not been discovered 3. If the Church of Rome be onely a particular Church and no otherwise Catholick than her Neighbours are who profess the same common Christianity If she can have no more power to censure us than we have to censure Her then can she not without great presumption and great injustice charge us with the sin of Schism 'T is true indeed we do not joyn in Communion with her and the reason why we do not I have given in the third Section But it is as true that we hold the Catholick Unity and for the sake of that they themselves will grant that we may lawfully depart from the Unity of any particular Church SECT V. III. Schism is a Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church AS the Act of Schism is Separation and the Subject thereof a Christian Church so the Object in and about which the Separation is made is the Communion of that Church Now there are three great Bonds of Communion viz. Faith Worship and Government and whosoever shall separate either from the Catholick or any particular Church whereof he is a Member in any of these I do not see how he or they so doing can be acquitted from the guilt of Schism unless the corruption in some one or more of these be so great as to render the Communion sinfull to him who knows it SECT VI. I. Of Faith as it is a Bond of Communion BY Faith here I understand the established Doctrine of the Church that common Christianity which we all profess to own and embrace For it is not every Doctrine that is received and taught in any particular Church that is properly the Bond of Communion but such Doctrine as is or ought to be received by all It is plain and our Adversaries themselves will acknowledge it that we may and ought to differ from particular Churches in some Doctrines Otherwise why do they differ from us from the Greek Church and indeed all other Churches besides their own in many things On this score is it that we cannot receive their new Articles of Faith those additions which are made unto and those alterations which are made in the old and common Christianity by their Council of Trent We believe all that is contained in the Holy Scriptures to be infallibly true all that was ever taught by Christ and his Apostles and their Successours
have been very dangerous For it is impossible Heb. 6.4 5 6. that they who were once enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost And have tasted of the good word of God and of the powers of the world to come If they fall away that they should be renewed again by repentance seeing they crucifie again to themselves the Son of God and put him to open shame These Instances do plainly discover to us that before conviction though men be in errour yea though it be a dangerous and fundamental errour and industriously propagated by them yet may their case be pityable But when they are better informed or at least have means sufficient for their better information if after this they still remain stubborn and contumacious in their errour and persist in the defence and propagation thereof this their obstinacy will alter the nature of their crime and render their condition very dangerous if not desperate 1 John 3.20 21. For if our heart condemn us God is greater than our heart and knoweth all things But if our heart condemn us not then have we boldness toward God saith the Apostle John. And Blessed is he who condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth Rom. 14.22 saith St. Paul. SECT X. The Church of England acquitted from the guilt of Heresie THIS notion of Heresie which hath been laid down and explained in the foregoing Sections being not only Ours but Theirs also being supported by so great and eminent Authorities as that of St. Aug. of their own Angelical Doctour and canonized Saint St. Tho. Aquinas of their great Martin Navarrus and of the most authentick Authority of their own Church at this day the Council of Trent in its Catechism ad Parochos Our Adversaries can have no colourable pretence to except against it And if it be admitted we are ready to joyn issue with them and contented to stand or fall by it The point in difference between us is briefly this Whether the guilt of Heresie according to this Notion be justly or unjustly charged upon the Church of England by the Church of Rome To acquit the Church of England is my task at present in order whereunto I shall take a review of what hath been said and as briefly as may be apply it to our present case 1. If it cannot be proved that the Church of England doth receive believe or teach any other Doctrine than what hath been received believed and taught by the Catholick Church nor broach any new Opinions thereby to divide the Church for any secular advantage to her self nor obstinately defend any false Opinions Then by St. Austin's rule before quoted she cannot be justly charged with Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be proved against her And therefore according to this Rule she is unjustly taxed with Heresie by the Church of Rome 2. If it cannot be made appear that the Church of England doth corrupt the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints nor teach any Doctrine contrary thereunto nor dissent from any known established Article thereof nor obstinately maintain any such dissent therefrom Then by the rule of their own Angelical Doctour she ought not to be charged with Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be made appear against her Therefore by this Rule she ought not to be charged with Heresie by the Church of Rome 3. If it cannot be made manifest by any publick Act or Record owned as Authentick by the Church of England that she hath renounced or forsaken that Faith into which she was baptized and of which she once made profession nor embraced any false and new Opinions which are contrary thereunto nor doth obstinately believe and maintain any such false and new Opinions Then by the Rule of their Navar. Doctour she cannot be justly charged with the guilt of Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be made manifest against her Therefore by this Rule she is unjustly charged with the guilt of Heresie by the Church of Rome 4. If it cannot be proved that the Church of England either doth or ever did neglect and despise the Authority of the holy Catholick Church or doth embrace and hold any wicked Opinions in despight and defiance of that Authority or with a wilfull and obstinate mind defend and maintain any such wicked Opinions Then by the judgment of the Council of Trent in their Catechism ad Parochos she ought not to be held guilty of Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be proved against her Therefore by the Judgment of that Council she ought not to be held guilty of Heresie 5. If there be not pregnant proof that the Church of England hath embraced some Opinions which are contrary to or at least not agreeable with that Faith and common Christianity which was taught by Christ and his Apostles or hath laid a new foundation i. e. made something to be Religion and an Article of Faith which really is not so being not built upon the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets or doth openly teach any Fundamental Errours in Religion thereby to seduce and withdraw people from fundamental Truth and Holiness or doth stubbornly maintain and defend a fundamental Errour in Religion against repeated Admonitions and clear Convictions Then can she not if this Notion of Heresie be true be justly burdened with the guilt thereof But there is not nor indeed can be any pregnant proof of any thing of all this against her Therefore according to this Notion of Heresie she cannot be justly charged with the guilt thereof I am well aware that the Minor Proposition in all these will stiffly be denied by our Adversaries they will with great boldness and confidence tell the world that all this and more hath been and still may be proved against the Church of England But God be thanked though this may soon be said it can never be proved That they frequently call us Hereticks and both do and have all along endeavoured to represent us as such to the world we very well know and if they were allowed to be Judges it would go very hard with us we should not be able to acquit our selves at their Bar. But this we think to be a very unreasonable thing that they being Parties should be Judges too and therefore we appeal from them And if they ask whither we do appeal I answer we appeal to the Holy Scriptures to the primitive Fathers and to the four first General Councils But because this may seem to be either too tedious or too troublesome a way of trial I have made choice of one more short and easie I have here laid down a Notion of Heresie which is agreed upon both by them and us and therefore unexceptionable by this we are willing to be tried and by this to stand or fall I do not say in any of these Propositions that
disturbed and their Communion rent and shattered if not dissolved by evil Members As for the former viz. the Civil State when by some factious and seditious Members Feuds and Animosities are somented and by that means the Unity is broken and the Body divided into several Parties then doth it labour under a dangerous Schism We have an eminent instance hereof in Holy Writ 1 Kings 12. v. 16. The Ten Tribes of Israel being violently rent and torn from the House of David in the days of Reboboam Nor are we without as great an instance in our own memories and in this Kingdom But this is not the Schism we are now to treat of As for the other viz. the Ecclesiastical State it is no less subject to it than the Civil And hath been so much pestered therewith that from the first foundation thereof untill this day we can hardly name a time I am sure no long time in which it did ever enjoy perfect Peace and Tranquillity How much the Church of God is broken and divided and crumbled into parties and factions at this day is but too apparent and who can look upon those wounds and bruises which she hath received thereby without melting into tears and being overwhelmed with grief and sorrow How great and crying their sin is who have been the occasion thereof they will one day find and severely suffer for it unless with the tears of true and unfeigned Repentance they do in time wash off the guilt of it and by that means find favour with God. I pray God give us all grace seriously to consider what share we have in the Church's Sufferings and in our several places to make it our great and only business to restore Peace and Unity thereunto SECT II. Of Schism in the Church THIS is the Crime which by our Adversaries is laid to our charge and this is that which I have undertaken to vindicate the Church of England from And it is high time to doe it for on that account they begin to look very scornfully upon us and esteem us no better than Heathens and Publicans And we are roundly told that whilst our Schism subsists uncleared it is to no purpose to enter into debate with us about any particular points of Doctrine nor are we to be hearkned to in any particular Controversie But if a bare accusation without proof be a sufficient Conviction they may doe well to look to themselves for there are those who will not stick to charge them with the same Crime and perhaps upon better grounds than they charge us and if so then their Argument may be retorted upon themselves But I do not think a bare Re-crimination sufficient either to clear us or burthen them and therefore I have chosen another method viz. by laying open the Nature of Schism and stating the Notion of it in so large plain and comprehensive terms that it may easily be applyed to those who are guilty of it And in pursuance of this method I shall now present you with a Definition of Schism Definition of Schism Schism is a voluntary and causeless Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church of which we are Members This I take to be as large and comprehensive a Definition of Schism as they can justly require By this we are willing to be tryed and if found guilty to submit to the Censure due to Schismaticks and would willingly hope though as yet we have no great reason for it that our Adversaries will be so ingenuous too To put the matter therefore upon trial I shall take this Definition in pieces and having laid the several parts before you proceed to discourse of them severally 1. Schism is a Separation i. e. a breach of Unity and dividing of some well compacted Body 2. It is a Separation from a Christian Church i. e. from such a Society between which and us there either is or ought to be a Religious Union and Conjunction for between Christians and Jews or Turks there can be no Schism because they are not joyned together in any Religious Society 3. It is a Separation from the Communion of that Church in Faith Worship and Government under that Notion as they are bonds of Communion 4. It is a voluntary and causeless Separation i. e. being neither forced thereunto nor having any sufficient cause or ground for so doing 5. It is a Separation from that Church of which we are Members i. e. which hath a jurisdiction over us and to which we owe subjection and obedience SECT III. I. Schism is a Separation THE word Schism naturally imports a Separation and the word Separation as naturally implies a breach of Unity in which consists a good part of the Nature of Schism Yet are they not terms convertible for though every Schism be a Separation yet every Separation is not a Schism in the strict notion of it unless it be attended with all those other requisites of a Schism There may be a good and lawfull as well as an evil and sinfull Separation if a Separation be grounded upon good reason and managed to good ends and purposes then is it not only good and lawfull nor only excusable but very well justifiable too But if there be no good ground for it nor any good end promoted by it then is it evil and unlawfull and by no means excusable much less justifiable The former of these seems to be warranted by the express Doctrine of St. Paul who tells us That there can be no fellowship between righteousness and unrighteousness 2 Cor. 6. v. 14 15 16 17. nor any Communion between light and darkness nor any concord between Christ and Belial nor any participation between a believer and an infidel nor any agreement between the Temple of God and Idols And thence concludes Wherefore come out from among them and be ye separate saith the Lord and touch not the unclean things and I will receive you And the other seems to be as plainly condemned by the same Apostle who commands us to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace Eph. 4.3 This may be farther illustrated by some familiar instances Suppose a Society of Thieves and Robbers or any other sort of wicked men united and linked together by some common ties rules and laws framed and devised by themselves for the support of their wicked Community if any one should separate himself from that Company and thereby not only break the Unity but do what in him lies to dissolve the Society it self would this be imputed to him as a Crime Or would it not rather be looked upon by all mankind as a good and generous and in a sober sense as a meritorious Act Or suppose any particular Society of Men though legally established yet making the terms of their Communion such as could not in honesty and justice be complied with if any one should separate himself from that Society would it be a Crime in him Or ought he
not rather to be commended for it But it is far otherwise in the Body Politique which is the aggregation of all particular Persons and all particular lawfull Societies If any one shall separate himself therefrom and thereby break the Unity and disturb the Peace thereof he will by all Men be judged guilty of Sedition and Treason And the reason is evident because in the two former Cases men have a greater liberty of judging and acting than they have in this For those at best are but the Ordinances of Men but Government is the Ordinance of God and therefore though upon just ground we may separate from them though it be to the hazard of their Peace and Unity yet can we have no just ground of Separation from this For though the Governours may sometimes happen to be wicked and ungodly Men yet the Government still is sacred and it is not for Subjects to call their Sovereigns to account It is our duty to study and pray for the peace and safety and to acquiesce in the rules and determinations thereof chusing rather to suffer under it than disturb the Peace of it And if either through the ignorance or inadvertency of those in Authority there happen any Male-administration in the Government it is not the governed but the Governours that stand accountable to God for it And thus it is in the Church Let us suppose a number of Schismaticks and Hereticks who have banded themselves together and formed themselves into a Society under the strictest Rules and Laws they could devise as the Donatists and Novatians of old did If any one should separate himself from their Communion and return into the bosome of the Church This certainly would never be imputed to him as a Crime Or suppose a particular Church though lawfully constituted and established under lawfull Governours should make the terms of her Communion such as that her Neighbour Churches could not without sin and danger hold Communion with her would a Separation in this case be adjudged a Schism Or would it not rather be look'd upon as their duty and interest to withdraw from her But it is far otherwise in the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church for though there may be some reasons to warrant a Separation from those yet can there be no reason why we should separate from Her. And the reason is evident because she being founded by God and having his promise for her preservation can never give any occasion thereof Whosoever therefore separateth from Her puts himself out of the ordinary ways and means of Salvation and becomes guilty of the greatest and most dangerous Schism By this time I hope 't is evident that though every Schism import a Separation yet every Separation doth not make a Schism Nor is it every Unity that we are to be so tender of but onely the Catholick Unity of God's Church And now let us apply this to our present Case We are charged with Schism by the Church of Rome because we have separated from her Communion Though this might safely be denied and it might perhaps upon better grounds be said that she hath separated from us not we from Her yet for the present we 'll admit of it and give her this reason for it We have separated from Her because she hath made the terms of her Communion such as till they are reformed we cannot without sin and danger joyn with Her. The Church of Rome being only a particular Church and not the Catholick Church as some of her Parasites would fain persuade us hath no more security from Errour and Mistakes than the rest of Her Neighbours And therefore if this reason be true she cannot deny if she will be ingenuous but that we have a just ground of Separation and consequently are no Schismaticks And that it is true as it hath often been demonstrated so we are ready still to doe the same again whenever we shall be called to it But that being no part of my design at this time I shall proceed SECT IV. II. Schism is a Separation from a Christian Church AS Separation is the Act so a Christian Church is the Subject of Schism i. e. As it is a body compacted and united together by the Bands and Ligaments of our common Christianity For where there is no Union or Conjunction there can be no Schism And therefore between Christians and Jews or Mahometans there can be no Schism because they are not joyned together in any Religious Society Now the Christian Church may be considered either as it is Catholick or Universal or as it is Particular 1. If we consider it as Catholick and Universal there are three several Notions of it Sometimes it is taken for the Catholick Church diffusive i. e. for the whole body of Christians dispersed upon the face of the whole Earth and so it comprehends all Persons and all particular Churches professing Christianity And this I take to be the true and genuine notion of the one holy Catholick and Apostolick Church mentioned in our Creed And whosoever shall make a Defection or Separation from this Church will be found guilty of a manifest dangerous and most abominable Schism Sometimes it is taken for the Catholick Church Representative i. e. for the Prelates and Pastors of the Universal Church delegated by their several particular Churches and Assembled in a Counsel truly free and general And whereever we meet with such an one we pay all deference and regard that is due to the Decisions and Determinations of it And if any Man or any Society of Men shall set up his or their private Judgments against the publick Judgment of the Church declared in a Council truly free and general and shall be so tenacious of their own opinions as upon that account to break Communion with the Church I do not see how they can be excused from the sin of Schism Sometimes it is taken for the Catholick Church virtual and so it is generally understood by our Adversaries though they do not agree among themselves For some of them would confine the notion of the Church virtual to the Pope alone others to the Pope in Conclave some to the Pope in Council but these differ among themselves some telling us that the Pope is above the Council others that the Council is above the Pope others there are who to put a better Face upon the matter do by the Catholick Church virtual understand the Church of Rome and all those other Churches which are in Communion with Her. I shall not undertake to arbitrate this difference but leaving these several Parties to compromise the matter among themselves as well as they can I shall call in an unexceptionable Witness to testifie that this is the notion which the Church of Rome now hath of the Catholick Church and that is Monsieur de Meaux the late Bishop of Condom who in his exposition of the Catholick Faith c. tells us he will say nothing but what shall
the Primitive Pastours and Governours of the Church we readily comply with We believe all the Articles contained in those three ancient Creeds viz. that commonly called the Apostles the Nicene and the Athanasian We are willing to submit to all the Decisions and the Determinations of the four first General Councils and to any Council that is lawfully called and truly free and general We are ready to receive all Traditions that are truly Apostolical and we are willing to embrace any other truth as yet unknown to us whensoever or by whomsoever it shall be duly made out to be so And whilst we this doe we cannot truly be charged to have broken Communion with the Catholick Church nor justly reputed Schismaticks therefrom And as for the Church of Rome she being only a particular Church hath no jurisdiction at all over the Church of England and consequently no more power to censure us than we have to censure her for in this case the rule holds Par in parem non habet imperium Equals have no Authority over one another And therefore for her to impose her new Articles of Faith upon the Church of England and because she refuseth to receive them and joyn Communion with her upon those terms presently cry out Schism Schism is so idle so vain so unaccountable a Clamour as I am perswaded the Learned among them cannot but disapprove it For whilst we hold the Catholick Faith entire and maintain Communion with the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church therein though we differ from the Church of Rome or any other particular Church in some Doctrines Yet is it impossible that we should be guilty of a Schismatical Separation either from her or them SECT VII II. Of Worship as it is a Bond of Communion BY Worship here I mean Publick Worship and that considered only in its Substantials and Essentials not as it is clothed with particular Modes Rites and Ceremonies Otherwise it can be no Bond of Communion The substantial and essential Parts of Publick Worship I take to be these viz. Prayer reading the Holy Canon interpreting the same and the administration of the blessed Sacraments Now these in divers Churches may be performed in different Manners and with different Rites and Ceremonies and yet those Churches notwithstanding this may still hold Communion with the Catholick Church and consequently be guilty of no Schismatical Separation therefrom nor from one another But if we by Worship understand the established Publick Worship of a particular Church then are we to consider it not as abstracted from but clothed with such Modes Rites and Ceremonies as are thought convenient by that Church And if any one who is a Member of such a Church shall upon any pretended offence taken against any such Modes Rites and Ceremonies separate himself from the Publick Worship I do not see how he can be acquitted from the guilt of Schism And this I take to be the case not only of the Protestant Dissenters from the Church of England as they call themselves but of English Roman Catholicks too For that they did hold actual Communion with us many years together in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign and neither then nor ever since did pretend to take any offence at the Substantials of our Worship is very plain and evident And that it was not we that separated from them but they that separated from us is as manifest and therefore it will concern them more than us to clear themselves from the sin of Schism And for this I know no other Plea they can make use of than their obedience to the Universal Pastour of God's Church which Plea is to be considered under the next great Bond of Communion viz. Government SECT VIII III. Of Government as it is a Bond of Communion THat our great and Universal Pastour the Lord Jesus Christ did found and constitute a Church and that he did not leave it without Laws and Rules to be governed by nor without proper Governours invested with Power and Authority to exert and execute those Laws we stedfastly believe But that he ever did delegate all his Power to any One or substitute any One Person to be the Universal Pastour of the Church after him we cannot believe because we have no ground for it either in Scripture or in any primitive and authentick Antiquity And indeed how should we for till the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople began to envy one another's Greatness and to strive for Supremacy which was about 600 years after Christ the Church was never acquainted with any such name or thing as is now claimed And no sooner did it adventure to peep abroad but warning was given against it as Antichristian and that by one of their Popes And when afterwards it was publickly usurped it was condemned by a General Council and they are not yet agreed among themselves where to fix it And therefore they cannot in reason expect that we should build our Faith upon such an uncertain Foundation or make that a Bond of Communion in the Church which the Church from 600 years and upwards knew nothing of That Government is a Bond of Communion in the Christian Church we acknowledge and that it was never lodged in the hands of any one Person since our Saviour I think is very plain and evident But where then doth it reside This will best be known by considering how it is derived That it was united in the Person of our Blessed Saviour will be acknowledged on all hands and where he left it there we are to look for it Now that he left it with his Apostles and made them equal sharers therein I think is very plain notwithstanding that pretence which is made by our Adversaries that it was lodged in Peter alone a pretence which hath been so often and so miserably baffled and which if it were true would doe them no service that I wonder they are not ashamed to bring it upon the stage any more And that from the Apostles it was derived to their Successours the Bishops and Pastours of God's Church is the received opinion of all Antiquity Episcopatus unus est cujus à singulis in solidum pars tenetur Cypr. de Vnitate Ecclesiae Edit Oxon. p. 108. And that it now lies dispersed among all the Pastours and Bishops of particular Churches unless they be lawfully called and assembled in Synods or Councils under the Power Protection and Assistance of Civil Authority we verily believe This is the notion we have of the visible and external Government of the Catholick Church and as it hath been so if there were occasion for it may it still be made appear to have been the very notion that all the World except those who have submitted to the Usurpation of Rome ever had and still have of it to this day Now the Laws and Rules by which this Government is administred are to be found in the Holy Scriptures in the Usages and Customs of
the Primitive Church and in the Canons and Constitutions of the four first General Councils But if by Government we understand the Government of particular Churches then is it lodged in the Pastours and Governours of those Churches and is to be administred by them according to such Laws and Rules as are agreeable to those of the Catholick Church And in this case it can have no influence from one National Church to another for as such they are equal and Equals have no power over one another But whosoever is a Member of any such Church and refuseth all due obedience to the Pastours and Governours thereof doth thereby contract the guilt of Schism Now whether the Church of England or the Church of Rome by the violation of all these Bonds of Communion have disturbed the Peace of the Christian Church broken the Unity of the Universal and of all particular Churches and thereby incurred the guilt of Schism you may take a prospect in this short parallel which I shall now lay before you 1. As for Faith considered as a Bond of Communion What the Church of England believes and what she is ready and willing to comply with I have told you in the 6th Sect. But the Church of Rome not contented therewith added to the sacred Canon some Apocryphal Books which were never before received either into the Jewish or Christian Canon And as if the revealed Will of God were an imperfect Rule she undertakes to supply the defects of it by groundless Traditions She makes new Creeds witness the Trent Creed and that both without the consent of the present and against the Doctrine and Practice of ancient Churches Now which of these hath violated this Bond of Communion Judge ye 2. As for Worship considered as a Bond of Communion I have given you our Sentiments of it and told you wherein it consists in the 7th Sect. Now how far the Church of Rome hath corrupted that pure Worship of God both by her subtractions and additions I shall briefly acquaint you As for Prayer it must be performed in publick in an unknown tongue which the People understand not So that they must not know what they pray for and consequently cannot with any true devotion say Amen It must be offered to Saints and Angels and not immediately to God who glories to be styled a God hearing Prayers and this we take to be an Act of Religious Worship due to the Creatour only but by them paid to Creatures As for the reading of Holy Scriptures if any portion of them be read in publick it must be in Latin a Language not understood by the People and therefore impossible for them to be instructed by it It is true indeed they sometimes interpret some portion of Scripture by preaching in the Vulgar language but then the People must take all they say upon trust they must not without special leave be allowed the Bible in their own Language no not in private lest with the Noble Bereans they should examine whether those things be so or no. As for the Sacraments they have added five that were never instituted by Christ and taken away half of one of those which they cannot but own was of his Institution i. e. they deprive the Laity of the Cup in the Lord's Supper besides those many Superstitions which they have intermix'd and therewith corrupted the pure and primitive Worship of God. Now let any indifferent Person judge whether they or we have violated this Bond of Communion and consequently which of us may be charged with Schism 3 As for Government considered as a Bond of Communion What our thoughts are of it you may see in the beginning of this Sect. Now how far the Church of Rome doth differ not only from us but from the Catholick Church both ancient and modern and from all other particular Churches in this point will appear if we consider That she usurps a Dominion condemned as Antichristian by one of their own Popes disowned by the whole Church at that time and which we at present cannot own without betraying the Liberty of the Church That by virtue of this Usurped Power she imposeth unreasonable and unlawfull conditions of Communion and for non-compliance therewith excommunicates not only the Church of England but as some will tell you three parts of the Christian World besides Now if the Church of Rome by setting up and exercising this Exorbitant Power hath broken this Bond of Communion then who is chargeable with the Schism judge ye SECT IX IV. Schism is a voluntary and causeless Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church THese are the two conditions of Schism it must be voluntary and causeless and from these two conditions it receives its greatest aggravation and becomes a sin of the deepest dye and greatest guilt 1. It must be a Voluntary Separation I call it Voluntary to distinguish sin from punishment Schism from excommunication for though by the latter a man be cast out of the Church and made no member thereof yet strictly speaking he is thereby separated from the Church and doth not separate himself 'T is true that every sin is a voluntary act in the sinner but doth that excuse him or rather doth it not aggravate his guilt If a man be separated from the communion of the Church by some pressing necessity this may be his misfortune and not his fault Or if a man be under a constraint and have a force put upon him if he be frighted with threats and menaces or wheadled with promises and allurements if his fears and hopes those two prevalent passions in man be raised to that height as to darken his understanding and overpower his will these circumstances may extenuate though they cannot altogether excuse his guilt But when a man doeth an evil action not by chance but of choice not by force but by inclination not rashly and inconsiderately but deliberately and advisedly this makes his sin to be exceeding sinfull For thereby the Schismatick puts himself out of the ordinary way and means of salvation divideth the body of Christ despiseth and condemneth the Church of God and breaketh the bond of peace which ought to be kept intire and inviolate And therefore do I make this a Condition of Schism because if we can suppose a Separation from the communion of the Church to be involuntary it will not deserve that name SECT X. II. It must be a Causeless Separation c. THAT Schism in it self is a great and grievous sin and in its consequences extremely mischievous to the Church of God and to the Schismatick himself is agreed on all hands But how much greater must the sin needs be when thereby all this guilt is contracted and all this mischief done without any cause i. e. without any sufficient cause Now a Separation may be considered either as it relates to the Catholick or Particular Churches And then a Separation from the Catholick Church taken in the most comprehensive
sense is not Schism but Apostasie and it will be impossible for any man to find a sufficient reason for that But if it be considered as a separation from the communion of some particular Church then it is implied that possibly there may be such cause given as may justifie the Separation and if so then the guilt of Schism will lie at the door of that Church which gives such cause and not at his or theirs who separate therefrom Now I have already told you that I know no cause which can justifie such a Separation save onely this when a Church makes the terms of her Communion such as cannot be complied withall without sin And in this case methinks it is very plain That it cannot be sin to separate when it is sin to communicate for no Laws of Men can abrogate or dissolve the obligation of the express Laws of God. But if there be no such cause then to break communion with any Christian Church upon any other account will amount to a Causeless Separation and consequently incur the guilt of Schism If therefore the Church of England ever did or now doth forsake the communion of the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church or if she ever did or now doth voluntarily and causelesly break communion with any particular Christian Church then may there be some colour to charge her with the sin of Schism but if none of all this can be made appear against her then ought she to be acquitted of that charge Now whether any such thing can be made out against her or whether the whole charge will not fall heavy upon the Church of Rome will appear in the sequel of this Discourse SECT XI V. Schism is a Separation from the Communion of that Church of which we are Members THis is the last part of our Definition and I add these words of which we are Members because Schism imports a Division of some united and well compacted Body or a making two of that which before was but one On this score is it that we cannot charge Turks Pagans and Jews with Schism because they never were of the Christian Church nor joyned with her in any Religious Society And here the Church will be at a great loss how to fix the guilt of Schism upon the Church of England for if we neither are nor ever of right ought to have been under the Government of that Church then hath she no Jurisdiction over us nor do we owe her any subjection and obedience and consequently cannot be guilty of Schism towards her nor hath she any power to censure us for it We own her to be a sister-Sister-Church and a true though unsound Member of the Catholick Church and so far as she holds the Catholick Faith and Worship we are ready and willing to hold Communion with her But we cannot submit to her Usurpations nor communicate with her in those Errours Abuses Superstitions Additions Subtractions and Alterations by which she hath so grosly corrupted the pure and primitive Faith and Worship of God's Church SECT XII The Church of England acquitted from the Scandal of Schism IF this Definition of Schism be allowed as I see no cause why they should disown it and not applicable to the Church of England then is she unjustly charged with the guilt of Schism by the Church of Rome Now whether it be applicable to the Church of England will appear by taking a review of the several parts of it 1. Schism is a Separation i. e. a breach of Unity or a dividing of some well compacted Body And here we are charged for breaking the Unity and dividing the Body of the Roman Catholick Church as they call it To which I answer if that Church were truly Catholick either in respect of place or Doctrine this charge would lie heavy upon us but being neither we shall be able with less difficulty to answer this Objection It must be acknowledged that the Church of Rome at the time of the Reformation and some long time before that had usurped a certain Power and Dominion over us and had exerted the same in such extravagant impositions as at last became too heavy for us to bear That Church had indeed by a long custome gained such an ascendent over our Fore fathers that she had enslaved their Judgments and obtruded what she pleased upon them she had unawares led them into many Errours in Doctrine many Superstitions in Worship and almost swallowed up their Liberty in Point of Government At length it pleased God to open the Eyes of our Fore-fathers to see the slavery and bondage they were in and how far they were gone from the Unity of the Catholick Church both in Faith in Worship and in Government To retrieve themselves many Efforts were made and great Endeavours used for a Reformation But none of those prevailing they at last bethought themselves of casting off the Roman yoke which by the assistance of the Civil Authority not in tumultuary but in a regular way was effected and when that was done then upon mature deliberation they reform those other abuses which were crept in among them Whether this broke Catholick Unity or no let the World judge If this be a Schism we must own our selves guilty of it but we see no reason to own it to be so yet for in all this we have done nothing but what we are able to justifie before all the World. For even our Adversaries themselves will not deny but that a National Church hath power in it self to reform abuses within it self But it may be they will tell us that we are not a Church but a faction or party made up of Schismaticks and Hereticks broke loose from the Church If this were true we should have little to say for our selves but a bare accusation is no proof They may do well therefore to recollect themselves and consider that before Austin the Monk set his Foot in England there was a Christian Church settled here under lawfull Governours which Church opposed the proceeding of that proud Monk and denyed obedience to the See of Rome for which they severely suffered If notwithstanding all this our Adversaries shall as they frequently do revive that old thred-bare question so often baffled Where was your Church before the Reformation Our answer is ready it was where it is the same for substance now that it was then It is indeed reformed and repaired but not made new There is not one stone of a new foundation laid by us the old Walls stand still only the overcasting of those ancient stones with the untempered Mortar of new inventions displeased us and that we washed off Durand Ration l. 1. What their own Durandus saith of material Churches is very applicable to the Spiritual If the wall be decayed not at once but successively it is judged still the same Church and upon reparation not to be reconsecrated but only reconciled If therefore our Church be the same for
substance now that it was before the Reformation then it is plain that by our Reformation we made no Separation from the Church we only laid aside the corruptions i. e. those unsound and unwholsome additions which the Church of Rome had made to the ancient Structure of Christ's Religion and when those were removed the Church which was by them obscured appeared again in her primitive Lustre and Beauty Now if the Church be the same still it will necessarily follow that we who are of that Church do now hold the same Communion in all the Substantials and Essentials of Religion with all other Christian Churches that we did before For as to all the Essentials of a Church we hold the same Faith the same Worship and the same Government now that we did before the Reformation and which now is and always hath been owned by the Catholick Church in all Ages And if so then can we not possibly be guilty of any Schismatical Separation 2. Schism is a Separation from a Christian Church i. e. from such a Society between which and us there is or ought to be a Religious Union and Conjunction That we cannot upon that score be justly charged with any Schismatical Separation either from the Catholick or any particular Christian Church I hope is sufficiently made out in the 4th Sect. of this Discourse to which I refer the Reader being unwilling either to give him or my self an unnecessary trouble 3. Schism is a Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church in Faith Worship and Government considered as Bonds of Communion And here we are roundly charged by the Church of Rome with a Schismatical Separation from her and a manifest breach of all these great Bonds of Communion But having in the beginning of this Sect. I hope sufficiently vindicated the Church of England from any Schismatical Separation from the Catholick or any other Christian Church in her Reformation and cleared her innocency as to the breach of any of these great Bonds of Communion in the 5th 6th 7th and 8th Sections I shall not need to say any more of it here There is only one thing which as yet I have taken no notice of and with which they often twit us viz. The Derivation of our Orders from them Mr. Harding in his answer to Bishop Jewel's Apology doth mightily triumph in this telling us That a Church cannot subsist without lawfull Pastours and Governours that there can be none such without lawfull Ordination by imposition of hands that we neither have nor ever had any such but from the Church of Rome that those who received that power from her becoming Schismaticks and Hereticks by their Separation from her forfeited that power and could not convey it to others that therefore we have now no such thing as lawfull Priests and Bishops among us without which we cannot be a Church that herein we have broken the great Bond of Communion viz. Government by departing from that Church from which ours had its Being and therefore cannot be excused from the sin of Schism To this B. Jewel hath given a long learned and full answer to which I shall refer the Reader He may find it in the second part of the defence of the Apology of the Church of England Chap. 5. Division 1. But to shew you in how empty and insignificant a show this mighty triumph ends I shall here offer some few things to consideration 1. That the conferring of Orders giveth no Power or Jurisdiction to him or them by whom they are conferred over him or them on whom they are conferred For do we not know that the Bishop of Rome is always consecrated by the Bishop of Hostia and yet I hope they will not say that the Bishop of Hostia is therefore above the Bishop of Rome 2. Let it be granted that we derive our Orders from the Church of Rome not as from the Fountain or Original of Orders but as from the conduct or means of conveyance I would ask this question do they believe their Orders to be good and valid or not If not why do they presume to exercise those high and holy Functions to which they are admitted thereby If they do then our Orders must be good and valid too and we have as good right as they have to that Succession which they so much boast of 3. That the Bishops and Pastours of the Church of England are true and rightfull Successours to those that have been before them being elected consecrated confirmed and admitted in as an effectual a manner as they were If their Predecessours were deceived in any thing they succeed them in Place but not in Errour For though they were indeed their Predecessours in Office yet were they not the Rulers and Standards of their Faith. And it cannot be denyed but that a Succession in Faith and Doctrine is far more considerable than a Succession of Persons and that God be thanked we are able to make good from the pure and uncorrupted Fountain In Doctrine therefore we succeed the Church of Rome as the Day succeedeth the Night as the Light succeedeth Darkness and as Truth succeedeth Errour 4. That those Bishops and Pastours who have once been duly elected consecrated confirmed and admitted in and to those sacred Functions do not by departing from the Errours and Superstitions of any other Church though it be that from which they received their Orders lose the power that was thereby committed to them but are still in a capacity to convey the same unto others 5. That the Bishops and Pastours of the Church of England being legally possessed of having duly exerted and constantly and regularly exercised this power the Orders conferred by them by virtue thereof are to all intents and purposes good and valid and consequently our Church cannot be said to want true and lawfull Pastours and Governours 6. That though the Church of England in her Reformation have cast off the Usurpations and laid aside the corruptions of the Church of Rome yet hath she not thereby broken any Bond of Communion with the Christian Church and therefore cannot justly be charged with the guilt of Schism For whilst she holds fast those three great Bonds of Communion viz. Faith Worship and Government in all the substantial and essential Parts thereof the guilt of that horrid Schism which hath so much bruised and wounded rent and torn the Church of God can never be laid at her door These things I thought good to offer to consideration and when they are seriously and deliberately weighed I do not doubt but that the ingenuous Reader will so well improve them as to satisfie himself and others that all this mighty triumph is no more than a vain and empty show 4. Schism is a voluntary and causeless Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church i. e. When men have full liberty to make their own choice having no force nor constraint put upon their inclinations nor any cause or
occasion given to justifie their Separation then may they be truly said to act voluntarily and without cause And if this be our case we must confess our selves guilty of Schism but if not then are we unjustly charged with it That our recession from the Church of Rome was not a voluntary act in us but a necessity upon us occasioned by force and violence constraint and compulsion is plain and evident We did not attempt a Separation but only desire a Reformation that so we might walk together in the House of God as friends If they would have hearkned to us and removed those errours and abuses those Superstitions and corruptions that tyranny and usurpation which they had introduced into the Faith Worship and Government of Christ's Church we had still peaceably continued in Communion with them But so far were they from hearkning to these our just desires that instead thereof we were menaced with fire and fagot with imprisonment with confiscation of our Estates with all kind of sufferings and even death it self if we refused to comply with their Corruptions and innovations And therefore we may truly say with the Learned Causaubon Causaub ad Peron Non fugimus sed fugamur We did not run away from them but were driven away by them But yet notwithstanding all this force and violence if we had not sufficient cause to justifie our recession we must still be criminal Eusch l. 6. c. 44. for we are of opinion with Dionysius Alex. in his Epistle to Novatus That any thing must rather be born than that we should rend asunder the Church of God. But alas we had too great cause for what we did The Church of Rome had corrupted the Faith of God's Church with her unwarrantable additions and alterations The primitive beauty and purity of God's Worship she had defaced with Superstitions That goodly and well compacted structure of Government which had been erected and established in the Church of God she had quite demolished and instead thereof had erected an unheard of tyrannical Government unknown to the Primitive Church and condemned by all other Churches ever since it appeared in the World. In a word she had made the terms of her Communion such as could not be complied with without sin and when it is sin to communicate it cannot be sin to separate Thus much I hope may suffice to satisfie any indifferent and unprejudic'd Reader that the recession of the Church of England from that of Rome in her Reformation was neither owing to a dividing humour nor without just cause And therefore she is unjustly charged with the guilt of Schism by the Church of Rome upon that account 5. Schism is a voluntary and causeless Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church of which we are Members i. e. which hath a Jurisdiction over us and to which we owe Subjection and Obedience Schism imports a breach of Unity a dividing of that Body which before was but one it implies the casting off of a lawfull Jurisdiction to which we were obliged to yield Subjection and Obedience Now if we neither are nor ever were of right Subjects of that Church if we neither are nor ever were such parts of that Body as are to depend upon the Head of it then can we not justly be charged with breaking the Unity of that Church or dividing of that Body because that Church or that Body doth still remain the same it was notwithstanding our recession therefrom And if it neither hath nor ever had any lawfull Jurisdiction over us then we neither do nor ever did owe any subjection or obedience thereunto and therefore cannot without great injustice be charged with a Schismatical Separation therefrom To prove this Negative would require a much longer Discourse than is now designed and therefore at present I shall only say that this we insist upon That the Church of England neither is nor ever was by any divine Authority bound to be in obedience to the Church of Rome And whenever they please to make their claim we are ready to defend our selves against it In the mean time till they make this good they have no reason to brand us as hitherto they have unjustly done with the odious Names of Schismaticks and Hereticks Thus have I taken a review of the several parts of the Definition which if it be allowed will fairly acquit the Church of England from the guilt of Schism And now let us see whether the Church of Rome can so well discharge her self of it SECT XIII The Church of Rome guilty of that Shism with which they charge the Church of England IT is a rule generally allowed that the Cause makes the Schism If the Church gives cause of Separation there is the Schism if not the cause of Schism is in the Separatist So that where the cause is found there the charge of Schism resteth If therefore the Church of Rome hath given just cause of Separation from her then is she causally guilty of that Schism and I am afraid will hardly be able to acquit her self from being so of almost all other Schisms in the Church Their ingenuous Cassander confesseth Cass de Offic. boni viri c. that the Roman Church is not a little changed from her ancient beauty and brightness and that she is deformed with many diseases and vicious distempers And being thus sick Bernh de vita solit St. Bernhard undertakes to be her Physician and prescribes her a Diet which he tells us must be profitable though unpleasing i. e. she ought to be reproved and a Reformation required And if thereupon an offence be taken Bernh ad Hug. de Sancto vict Epist 77. the same Saint Bernhard shall acquaint you where the scandal will rest When saults are taxed and scandal grows thereupon He is the cause of the scandal who did that which was worthy to be reproved not he that reproved the ill doer And that the Church of Rome hath given occasion both to the reproof and scandal let their own President in the Council of Trent inform you Who saith Orat. praes Concil Trident Sess 11. That the Depravation and Corruption of Discipline and Manners in the Church of Rome was in a great measure the Cause and Original of all those Schisms and Heresies which then troubled the Church But that it may appear that I have a desire to deal fairly and friendly with them I shall here present them with a Copy of their Charge and give them time to plead to it The Charge was long since drawn up by two great men of our Church viz. Bishop Hall and Bishop Bramhal and never yet pleaded to that I know much less cleared Bishop Hall in a little Book intituled The Old Religion dedicated to his Diocess of Exeter chap. 4. lays down their Charge in these five particulars 1. Nothing can be more plain than that the Roman is a particular Church as the Fathers of Basil
well distinguish it not the Universal though we take in the Churches of her subordination or correspondence This truth we might make good by authority if our very senses did not save us the labour 2. No particular Church to say nothing of the Universal since the Apostolick times can have power to make a fundamental point of Faith It may explain or declare it cannot create Articles 3. Onely an Errour against a point of Faith is Heresie 4. Those Points wherein we differ from Romanists are they which only the Church of Rome hath made fundamental and of Faith. 5. The Reformed therefore being by that Church illegally condemned for those Points are not Hereticks This I take to be a fair discharge for the Church of England from that foul aspersion which hath been cast upon her by the Church of Rome But Bishop Bramhal chargeth them more home and particularly in five Articles more and lays the sin at their door 1. The Church of Rome usurps an higher place and power in the Body Ecclesiastical than of right is due unto her 2. Se separateth both by her Doctrines and Censures three parts of the Christian World from her Communion and as much as in her lies from the Communion of Christ 3. She rebelleth against general Councils 4. She breaks or takes away all the lines of Apostolical Succession except her own and appropriates all Original Jurisdiction to her self 5. She challenges a temporal power over Princes either directly or indirectly which draws Sedition and Rebellion after it and is no small aggravation of their Schism These are the things we charge them with if they can truly plead not guilty thereunto then are we criminal But if they cannot if these things be really true then are they causally guilty of that Schism with which they would charge us and the whole weight with all the dreadfull consequences thereof will lie at their doors and be an heavy burthen upon them SECT XIV The Conclusion THat there is and for a long time hath been a great and grievous Schism in the Church and that those who have been guilty of it have miserably rent and torn and even eaten out the Bowels of their common Mother What considering Person can be ignorant and who can know it without tears of pity and prayers to God for the restoration of the Church's Peace and Unity This would much better become us than disputing about it and this I declare should have been my Province had not the daily and loud Clamours of the guilty Party so unjustly assaulted the Church of England and forced me from my Privacy to undertake this necessary and just Defence of my dear Mother It hath for a long time been matter of debate and a ball of contention where the cause of the Schism was to be sound The Church of Rome with great confidence and assurance hath laid it at the door of the Church of England and that Church upon better grounds hath charged the Church of Rome with it I pray God open both their and our Eyes that we may all see and know the things that belong unto our Peace that laying aside all rancour and animosity we may at last joyn hearts and hands to promote Truth and Holiness and study nothing more than to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace For my own part I have so great an abhorrence for the sin of Schism that I do seriously profess if I were convinced that the Church of England were guilty of the Schism I would rather chuse to suffer any thing elsewhere than continue in it but God be thanked I am otherwise perswaded and so well satisfied therein that as I have lived so I hope I shall die in the Communion of that Church But alas Perfect Peace and Unity are too great Blessings to be hoped for in this sinfull World they may be Objects of our Prayers but hardly of our Hopes However if we are what we pretend to be i. e. humble and obedient Christians it would well become us in our several Stations to observe the Apostle's Rule which bids us Follow Peace with all Men and Holiness without which no Man shall see the Lord Heb. 12. v. 14. Now the God of Peace who brought again from the Dead our Lord Jesus the great Shepherd of the Sheep through the Bloud of the Everlasting Covenant make us all perfect in all good Works to doe his Will working in us that which is pleasant in his sight through Jesus Christ to whom be praise for ever and ever Amen Heb. 13. v. 20 21. FINIS A VINDICATION OF THE Church of England From the foul Aspersions of Schism and Heresie Unjustly cast upon Her by The Church of Rome PART II. After the way which they call Heresie so worship I the God of my Fathers believing all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets Acts 24.14 LONDON Printed by J. H. for Luke Meredith at the King's Head at the West End of St. Paul's Church-Yard MDCLXXXVII A VINDICATION OF THE Church of England c. The INTRODUCTION HEresie is a crime of so crimson a dye so heinous in it self and of so dangerous and destructive consequence both to the Heretick himself and to others that without great plain and pregnant proof to charge any Christian or Society of Christians therewith doth evidently betray a rash censorious malicious and unchristian temper in them that doe it I cannot but wonder therefore that the Church of Rome upon so light and insufficient grounds should be so liberal in bestowing this Character upon the Church of England and those of her Communion De corrupt artib Ludovicus Vives one of their own Men did long since complain of this saying Haeresis nomen rebus levissimis impingitur c. The name of Heresie is laid upon every light matter so would the Scotists deal with the Thomists if the custome of the Schools had not made the name so familiar It is a good caution and worthy to be attended to which Alphonsus de Castro De Haeres l. 1. c. 7. p. 79. another of their own Doctors gives in this case Idcirco fit c. Therefore it happeneth that they who so rashly pronounce and call every thing Heresie not considering what or whereof they speak are often smitten with their own dart and fall into the same pit which they themselves had digged for others For this I should rather call Heresie to advance the Writings of Men unto the same degree of honour with the Word of God which they do who think it altogether as impious to dissent from them as from the Scriptures of God. We freely confess with St. Austin Errare possumus We may mistake and be in an errour but we as fully resolve with that holy Father Haeretici esse nolumus We will never be guilty of Heresie We have too great an abhorrence for it and are too well acquainted with the mischief of it to run our selves
17. but only the holy Scriptures These we are told are able to make us wise unto salvation and to make the man of God perfect And what can we desire more Heresie therefore must be such an Errour in Religion as is against the truth of God's word being neither contained therein nor to be proved thereby And whosoever is guilty of such an Errour and proceedeth openly to teach and obstinately to defend the same the whole guilt of Heresie and all the mischievous consequences thereof will lie at his door And now let us see how far this first part of the Definition doth affect the Church of England Doth she not embrace the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints Is it not that which she doth so earnestly contend for doth she not profess that common Christianity which she hath received from Christ and his Apostles doth she not own Jesus Christ to be the authour and finisher of her Faith and the holy Scripture to be the rule of her Religion Doth she teach any Doctrine that is not agreeable to the Word of God or profess any Errour that is contrary to the Truth thereof If she do let her Adversaries implead her and if she cannot defend her self she will be so far from being obstinate that she will readily own her fault and by God's assisting grace repent and reform But if they cannot justly charge her with any of these things let them for shame forbear their ungrounded clamour against her as an Heretical Church The Innocency of the Church of England in this point will manifestly appear if we consider what she doth publickly profess and teach her Children to believe in her Articles of Religion 1. She doth declare her Belief Art. 6. That the holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation 2. That whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation 3. That the three Creeds viz. The Nicene Art. 8. the Athanasian and that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed ought thoroughly to be received and believed because they may be proved by most certain warrants of holy Scripture And after such a Declaration as this with what face can the Church of Rome charge her with the guilt of Heresie The Church of England indeed is so modest as not to challenge to her self an Infallibility as that of Rome unwarrantably doth She is willing to acknowledge that she may err but she as firmly resolves that she will never be obstinate in an errour and therefore cannot be justly burdened with the guilt of Heresie SECT III. II. Heresie is an Errour in the Foundation of Religion THE Church of God is said to be built upon the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Eph. 2.20 Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone Where by the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets St. Lyr. in loc Paul means as their own Lyra informs us the Doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets the one foretelling and the other preaching Christ Jesus And the same Apostle tells us That 1 Cor. 3.10 As a wise Master Builder he had laid the foundation i. e. saith Lyra the Faith of Christ and none other which Faith worketh by love And in another place he saith 2 Tim. 2.19 The foundation of God stands sure i.e. saith Lyra Fides Resurrectionis the Faith or Doctrine of the Resurrection These Scriptures will help us to explain what we mean by the foundation of Religion in this part of the Definition viz. some principal and fundamental point or points of Faith or as their own angelical Doctour styles them Th. Aq. 22. qu. 11. art 2. c. some Article or Articles of Faith or some Doctrines which necessarily follow therefrom And by an Errour in this Foundation I understand not only a dissenting therefrom but also a making of something to be Religion or an Article of Faith which really is not so And whether we be guilty of such an Errour I leave to the impartial Reader to judge when he hath carefully perused these Papers That the Church of England is not guilty of any such Errour methinks is very plain For she doth publickly declare Art. 6. That whatsoever is not read in the holy Scriptures which contain the Doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets and the Faith or common Christianity which was once delivered to the Saints nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation She also receiveth the three ancient Creeds Art. 8. and teacheth her Children to receive and believe every Article therein And whilst she doth this with what colour can the Church of Rome brand her with Heresie or charge her with an Errour in the foundation of Religion A general charge without any particular instances will not doe to such an one this general answer may suffice and when our Adversaries think fit to descend to particulars they may be further considered SECT IV. III. This fundamental Errour must be openly taught THE Church cannot and therefore doth not pretend to take cognizance of the thoughts of mens hearts that is the sole prerogative of Almighty God who is the searcher of hearts and trier of reins By the law of God a false Prophet or dreamer of dreams was to be slain but then he must be such an one as had endeavoured thereby to seduce the people from the worship of the true God Deut. 13.1 2 3 c. And our Saviour tells us of some who should be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven i. e. should have no place in the Church but be cast out of it as rotten and unsound members And that we may not be ignorant what sort of men these are he describes them to us telling us They are those who break his commandments and teach men so Matt. 5.19 And St. Peter tells us of some who should privily bring in Damnable Heresies and these he calls False Teachers 2 Pet. 2.1 And St. Pauls tells us of some who caused divisions and offences in the Church whom he warns us to avoid but how shall we shun them unless we know them He therefore gives us their character telling us they are such as by good words and fair speeches deceive the simple Rom. 16 17 18. These instances may sufficiently justifie this expression and shew you that it is not without cause that I have given it a place in the Desinition of Heresie For though a man have not only a kindness for some heretical opinions or fundamental errours but do heartily espouse and embrace them yet so long as he keeps all this lockt up in the cabinet of his own breast he is not censurable for it nor can any one without great rashness pronounce him an
Heretick for not to be and not to appear in foro Ecclesiae are the same Heresie then which is so great and heinous a crime an errour so mischievous to the Church of God and of so dangerous consequence to the Heretick himself ought certainly to be very well proved and made mighty clear and manifest before it be charged upon any man or any society of men who profess Christianity For though every Heresie be an Errour yet every Errour is not Heresie It must be an Errour in Religion and in the foundation of Religion too and that fundamental Errour must be divulg'd and openly taught i. e. there must be an endeavour to instill the poison of it into others thereby to seduce and withdraw them from fundamental Truth and Holiness and all this must be own'd stoutly and maintain'd obstinately before it can merit the name of Heresie Till therefore the Church of Rome by plain and undeniable Arguments hath proved all this particularly upon the Church of England she cannot without great rashness and presumption charge her with it A general imputation without particular proofs will amount to no more than a malicious scandal which will betray a great want of true Christian charity in them and the weight thereof will at last fall heavy upon their own heads Alphonsus de Castro de Haer. l. 1. c. 7. p. 79. For as one of their own Doctours saith Those that so rashly pronounce and call every thing Heresie not considering whereof they speak are often stricken with their own dart and fall into the same pit that they themselves had digged for others So far is the Church of England from openly teaching any fundamental errour in Religion that she neither is nor can be proved guilty of any such as is made appear in the preceding Section She teacheth nothing but the pure Word of God nor receiveth any thing as an Article of Faith or necessary to Salvation but what is contained in holy Scripture or may be proved thereby and therefore cannot be justly charged with the guilt of Heresie upon this account SECT V. IV. This fundamental Errour must be obstinately defended and maintained THIS is the last part of the Definition and that which gives spirit and life to all the rest for though we should be guilty of Errour and of Errour in Religion yea though that Errour should be a fundamental one and openly taught by us yet if we be not obstinate therein but upon fair and full conviction are willing to reform our Judgments and relinquish the same we cannot be justly burdened with the guilt of Heresie Such is the modesty of the Ch. of England that she doth not believe much less boast her self to be infallible as the Ch. of Rome unwarrantably doth As the Church of Jerusalem Alexandria and Antioch have erred so she or any other particular Church may err but such is her piety and humility that she is very desirous of and always ready to receive better information and thereupon to reform and amend her Errours She is and ever hath been willing to submit all her Doctrines to be tried by the touchstone of God's Word by the primitive Doctours and Pastours of Christ's Church and by the four first General Councils and therefore without great injustice cannot be thought to be obstinate or contumacious To make a Fundamental Errour become Heresie two things you see are required 1. That Fundamental Errour must be defended 2. It must be defended with obstinacy SECT VI. I. Of Defending a Fundamental Errour TO be guilty of a fundamental Errour in Religion is a great and dangerous crime but to persist in it and undertake the defence of it renders it yet greater and more dangerous for Religion is that upon the due observance of which depends all our happiness here and all our hopes of happiness hereafter and therefore to mistake therein is like an errour in War which is hard to be retrieved but to go on in so doing and set our wits upon the rack to invent arguments to maintain it is to form weapons against our selves with which to batter down all our hopes of future felicity Yet even this may admit of some alleviation for if those who embrace those errours be fully perswaded that they are that Faith which was once delivered to the Saints then are they obliged earnestly to contend for them or if in the defence thereof they do not contend so much for victory as for truth being ready upon better information to relinquish them or if by the misfortune of an ill education or otherwise they be prepossessed therewith and only hold them till they are better instructed not being averse to hearken thereto such an Errour or such a defence of it will not amount to Heresie But God be thanked the Church of England hath no need of any excuse in this case for she receiveth nothing as an Article of Faith but what is contained in holy Scripture nor defends any Doctrine but such as may be proved thereby and therefore it is a manifest injury and malicious scandal in those who charge her with the defence of any fundamental Errour in Religion 'T is true she contends earnestly but it is for the Faith that was once delivered to the Saints She strenuously defends the Religion which she professeth but it is because she hath received it from Christ and his Apostles and because it is well warranted by the Word of God. And if this be Heresie then is she guilty of it if not then is she unjustly charged with it by the Ch. of Rome SECT VII II. Of defending a fundamental Errour with Obstinacy HOW dangerous it is to espouse a fundamental Errour in Religion and how much more dangerous it is to engage in the defence and maintenance of such an errour I have already told you But if that defence be managed with stubbornness and obstinacy it renders the matter not only more dangerous but very desperate Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit Prov. 26.12 there is more hope of a fool than of him saith the wise Solomon If a fool offend it is usually out of ignorance but the sin of the other commonly proceeds from malice a fool sometimes will be counselled but he that is wise in his own conceit shutteth both his eyes and his ears against all advice and instruction And of such St. Hilary saith well They i. e. Hilar. de Trin. l 6. fools forasmuch as they know not the Truth may have their salvation in safety if afterward they believe but all hope of salvation is shut from thee i. e. who art wise in thy own conceit because thou deniest that thing which thou canst not chuse but know This is the case of him who obstinately defends a fundamental errour in Religion and it is this stubbornness and obstinacy that doth complete and perfect his Heresie and by reason whereof he is justly styled an Heretick But to make a man so obstinate
as to deserve this title two things are to be supposed viz. Admonition and Conviction 1. That he hath been admonished and that more than once of the evil of his way of the danger of it and of the necessity of leaving it 2. That he is convinced in his own mind of all this These two are expresly contained in that direction and advice which St. Paul gives to his Son Titus A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition reject Knowing that he that is such is subverted or perverted and sinneth being condemned of himself Tit. 3.10 11. Secing therefore these two are so necessary to complete the character of an Heretick it may not be amiss to take a view of them severally before we apply the Character SECT VIII Of Obstinacy in Errour against Admonition THAT men in Errour ought to be admonished will be own'd by all and that in case of Heresie the Admonition is to be repeated is plainly intimated by St. Paul in his advice to his Son Titus already quoted And in what manner and by whom this Admonition is to be given our Saviour's Rule in the case of trespasses and offences between brethren will very fully instruct us Matth. 18.15 16 17. which is this If thy brother trespass against thee go and tell him his fault between thee and him if he hear thee thou hast gained thy brother But if he hear thee not take with thee one or two that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be confirmed And if he refuse to hear them tell it unto the Church and if he refuse to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an Heathen and a Publican Where we may observe that our Saviour speaks of a twofold Admonition viz. one that is to be given in private and in a brotherly and friendly manner and another that is to be given in publick by those who had jurisdiction over the offending person and are vested with power and authority to censure him Now let us apply this to the case in hand If thy Brother offend by embracing and tenaciously holding some fundamental errour in Religion and this come to thy knowledge it will be a charitable work in thee if in a brotherly and friendly manner thou dost privately admonish him between thee and him alone if thou beest successfull therein thou hast done a good work thou hast gained thy brother But if this will not doe thou must not leave it so but take others with thee and admonish him before them Thus far may a private person interess himself in admonishing another who is faln into or in danger of falling into Heresie and if the person admonished continue obstinate against such admonition he doth by that stubbornness very much add to his crime and incur the guilt of Heresie yet properly speaking he cannot truly be called an Heretick in the eye of the Church because she hath not yet taken cognizance thereof And therefore it follows if he refuse to hear them tell it to the Church i. e. bring the cause before them who have a jurisdiction over him and sufficient power and authority to censure and punish him And being once and again admonished by the Church if he still remain contumacious then let him be rejected saith St. Paul or as our Saviour here let him be unto thee as an Heathen and Publican i. e. let him by Excommunication be cast out of the Church and counted unworthy the society of Christian men This is the method in which we ought to proceed against Hereticks they must be admonished and that Admonition must be repeated and they must be obstinate against that Admonition before we ought to censure them But it is not a private but publick not only a friendly but authoritative Admonition and stubbornness against that which will truly denominate a man or any Society of men to be Hereticks For Heresie is an Opinion contrary to that of the Catholick Church Aug. cont Faustum saith St. Aug. And whosoever doth obstinately believe that which is contrary to the holy Catholick Faith is an Heretick In Enchirid c. 11. p. 141. n. 2. if he be baptized saith their Navar. Doctor And whosoever despising the authority of the Church doth obstinately defend wicked opinions Part. 1. in expos art 9. Symbol p. 76. n. 2. he is to be called an Heretick saith their Trent Catechism Now if the Church of Rome can prove that the Church of England hath espoused and publickly taught any fundamental Errour in Religion and hath been thus regularly dealt withall and duely admonished by those who had authority so to doe and yet continued obstinate in her errour against such Admonition then is she guilty otherwise not But this I shall have Occasion to consider more particularly hereafter and therefore at present I shall proceed SECT IX Of Obstinacy in Errour against Conviction AN Heretick is one that is not only subverted or perverted Tit. 3.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but self-condemned saith St. Paul i. e. One who having once received and owned the true Faith doth now oppose and condemn it as false saith their own Lyra in loc or one who commendeth Errour and reproacheth truth saith the Ord. Gl. Who like those who accused the Woman taken in Adultery before our Saviour John 8.9 is convicted by his own Conscience i. e. who is conscious to himself of the evil of his own doings Self-condemnation always supposeth conviction an Heretick therefore being one that is self-condemned must also be convinc'd of the errour of his way and one who notwithstanding that conviction still remains stubborn and obstinate therein i. e. who resists the repeated admonition of the Church For if a man labour under an invincible ignorance and be thereby betrayed into some dangerous errour or by the misfortune of an ill education have his judgment perverted and prepossessed with wrong notions and sentiments of things his case is truly pityable and it would be very hard and injurious to burden him with the guilt of Heresie But if such an one being admonished of the evil of his way shall happen to be convinc'd of his errour and yet after such admonition and conviction contumaciously continue therein he will have no plea left to excuse him from the guilt thereof By the old Law Numb 15.24 25 26 27 c. if a man sinned through ignorance there was an atonement provided for him but if he sinned presumptuously there was no atonement for him but he was to be cut off from among the people This was St. Paul's case in the time of the Gospel for he himself tells us That he was a blasphemer and a persecutor and an oppressor 1 Tim. 1.13 but he obtained mercy because he did it ignorantly through unbelief But if after he was converted he had been guilty of these crimes his plea of ignorance and unbelief would then have been out of doors and his case would
they never charged us with any of these things for that I very well know they both do and have done but I do say that they neither have nor ever can prove any of these things against us And here now were a fit opportunity to examine the particulars of their charge and the validity of them but before I do that it will be requisite to make good our own ground and by giving you some account of these Propositions that either are or will be denied to make it appear that they are not the issue of a rash and inconsiderate zeal but the offspring of deliberate and well digested thoughts And though it be contrary to the Laws and Rules of Disputation to put one upon proving a Negative and therefore I need not doe it yet for once and to gratifie our Adversaries I will endeavour to doe a work of Supererogation To make it appear that none of all these things have been by our Adversaries proved against the Church of England though it would be no very difficult yet would it be a very tedious business For to doe it effectually I should be obliged to examine not only all the particulars of their charge but also the strength or weakness of every Argument which they have at any time brought to make it good which would take up so much time and paper as the designed brevity of this small Treatise cannot allow I shall therefore wave this and instead thereof take a more short and compendious but every way as effectual a course It is acknowledged by all that when an Adversary is pressed with an Absurdity which he cannot escape the Argument is conclusive against him If therefore I can make it appear that it is a thing impossible for our Adversaries according to their own Notion of Heresie to make good their charge against the Church of England I may safely conclude that they have never done it because they could not doe that which is impossible to be done A thing is then said to be impossible either when it is simply and absolutely so in it self or when it is so only upon supposition It is then said to be simply and absolutely impossible when it implies a contradiction or is altogether repugnant to the nature of the thing as for instance That one and the same Body may be in more places than one at one and the same time is a proposition so repugnant and contradictious to the nature of Bodies that he must be wilfully blind who doth not see an impossibility therein A thing may be also said to be impossible upon supposition of an incapacity or insufficiency either in the active or passive power in the Efficient or Matter that is to be wrought upon Though the thing be possible in it self yet if the Agent be not of sufficient power to produce the effect designed it is impossible upon that account As for instance if ten unarmed men should undertake to beat ten thousand well appointed and well disciplined Souldiers in open field it is possible indeed that those ten thousand may be beaten but not by those ten because they have not power sufficient to doe it Again a thing may be said to be impossible upon supposition of an incapacity in the passive power or matter that is to be wrought upon for if the subject matter be wholly incapable of receiving such an impression as the Agent would stamp upon it though there may be no defect in the active power yet in respect of the passive there is an impossibility Let us now apply this to the case in hand The Church of Rome chargeth the Church of England with the guilt of Heresie and the question is Whether they can make good this charge against her I do not question the power of our Adversaries to doe the thing if it were to be done but if it be not to be done then notwithstanding the sufficiency of their power there is an incapacity in the subject they are to work upon which renders their attempt impossible If therefore I do make it appear that it is impossible for them to prove this against us it will be a fair Justification of the Minor Proposition in all the foregoing Arguments and consequently a clear discharge of the Church of England from that foul aspersion so unjustly cast upon her by the Church of Rome Now this I shall endeavour to make good in this manner The Notion of Heresie here laid down I have made appear to be that which is allowed by them as well as us and therefore that must be the Standard we are to be tried by Their work therefore will be to make it manifest that there are some Doctrines received believed and taught by the Church of England which are Errours in the foundation of Religion and those obstinately defended and maintained by her Now the only way to know what Doctrines are received believed and taught by any Church or Society of Christians is to have recourse to the publick Acts and authentick Records of that Church or Society and that is no difficult task for ours are made publick and exposed to the view of all And if they know not what we own as authentick Records I shall here inform them 1. The Holy Scripture is the foundation of our Faith and the Rule of our Religion 2. The 39 Articles agreed upon by the Archbishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year 1562 which are partly Positive and partly Negative where they declare the Faith and Religion of the Church of England they are positive and where they reject the Additions Alterations and Innovations of the Church of Rome they may be termed Negative 3. The Book of Homilies wherein the Doctrines of our Church briefly declared in the Articles are more largely explained These are the publick Acts and authentick Records wherein the Doctrines of the Church of England are to be found Art. 6. for she publickly declares That all things necessary to Salvation are contained in the Holy Scripture and that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to Salvation She also declares Art. 8. That the three Creeds the Nicene Creed Athanasius's Creed and that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed ought thoroughly to be received and believed for they may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture Unless therefore our Adversaries can find Heresie in the Holy Scripture or in the Articles of Faith summarily contained in the three ancient Creeds it will be impossible for them to find it in the Church of England because she doth not receive believe or teach any other Doctrine but what is contained therein or may be proved thereby This is that Faith and common Christianity which we received from Christ and his Apostles and