execution of discipline which I have in the former Section noted to be hindred in the effects thereof and not helped by divisions and separations is desireable and would be advantageous to the Church Yet here we must observe 1. That some mens rigour would make the rules of Communion overstrict and severe which was the ground of the Schism of the Novatians and Donatists and as some have anciently related of the Meletians also and it is not desireable that the Churches authority should be acted by such heats 2. That real defects in this particular though they are not to be approved of are no sufficient ground for separation since such blemishes were mixed with the beauty of the Apostolical Churches themselves as is manifest from almost all the Apostolical Epistles and particularly from the first Epistle to the Corinthians in which divers miscarriages were taxed and yet unity was strictly commanded and dividing severely rebuked Yea this very discourse at sometimes will not owne P. 126. that this thing solely of it self is sufficient to justifie a separation and the Congregational Churches in England in the Declaration of their Faith and order affirmed Of Institution and Order of Churches Sect. 21. the Church-members upon offences taken by them having performed their duty private admonition and relating it to the Church ought not to disturb any Church-order or absent themselves from the publick assemblies or the administration of any ordinances upon that pretence but to wait upon Christ in the further proceeding of the Church 19. Last Plea Another thing only touched in that discourse but which is the main ground of mis-apprehensin is that there is saith he no Evangelical obligation to local or external Comunion P. 256 257. with any particular or parochial Church of this Nation because every man may relinquish it by removing his habitation which plea floweth from want of a right sense of the Church Catholick For every Christians obligation to keep Communion with the Church is founded in his being visibly a member of Christs body which includeth his visible fellowship with the whole Church which he entreth upon by Baptism and from hence he standeth obliged to communicate with that regular fixed part of this Church where he resideth and from which he hath no warrantable or necessary cause of separation In this respect our Parochial Assemblies are of like nature with the Jewish Synagogal Assemblies unto which they were not obliged by any special Synagogal-Covenant but partly from Gods general command of their assembling themselves together and partly from their Religious profession and circumcision engaging them to Communion with the whole Church of the Jews and thereby to their Synagogal-Communion Hereupon under that dispensation it was the practice of our Blessed Saviour whose example should not be over-looked by us to attend upon these Synagogal Assemblies and the Religious worship of God celebrated therein as appears Luk. 4.16 At Nazareth where he had been brought up as his custom was he went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day 20. And can it enter into the heart of any Christian to imagine that the holy Apostles who in their travells could not be fixed in any particular Congregation did not stand bound by the duty of Christian Vnity to join themselves in Communion with the particular fixed Churches or Assemblies of Christians where they came as S. Peter at Antioch S. Paul at Jerusalem and divers other places though such Churches were founded by some of the other Apostles And upon this account of the Vnity of the body of Christ the Primitive Christians when they went abroad into other Regions and distant parts of the World did with a Religious care seek the Communion of the Churches where they came and not to make separate Assemblies Yea this is a thing so far acknowledged by our English Independants themselves though they can talk at another rate where it serves their interest that in their publick Confession of Faith at the Savoy they say Conf. Ch. 27. Sect. 2. All Saints are bound to maintain an holy fellowship and Communion in the worship of God which communion though especially to be exercised by them in the relations wherein they stand whether of Families or Churches yet as God affordeth opportunity it is to be extended to all those who in every place call upon the name of the Lord Jesus 21. But the conditions required in any particular fixed Christian Assembly embracing the Christian Faith and Worship in the place of our residence to make it our duty upon the account of the Christian Vnity to join therein are these two 1. That our communicating therein doth not oblige us to join in any action or profession which is sinful This is acknowledged on all hands and needeth no further proof because the Christians duty of keeping in Communion with Christ himself doth require it 2. That the Assembly we join in doth not maintain an unwarrantable separation from the Communion of the established Church for here to join in Communion is to join in separation and is like Barnabas and the other Jews joining with S. Peter Gal. 2.14 who all walked contrary to the truth of the Gospel in withdrawing from the Communion of the Gentiles at Antioch and the communicating with such a separating Assembly would be a breach of that Apostolical command of avoiding them who cause divisions Rom. 16.17 And we may observe that the joining in needless separations being a sin against the commands of Christ which require Christian Unity and Communion can not be warranted by any authority upon earth because that authority can not dispense with the commands of Christ but ought to be subject to them and therefore as S. Peter's practice and countenance Theod. Hift. l. 4. c. 22. Aug. Ep. 166. did not excuse Barnablas and the other Jews so neither could the indulgence of Valons the Emperour or his Predecessor execuse the different Sects by them tolerated from being guilty of Schism and the breach of Christian duty in their divisions and separations 22. Another notion of Schism there is A fourth Notion of Schism which condemneth separation where ever Communion is lawful but assumeth that whereever any thing unlawful or strongly suspected Mr. H. Tract of Schism p. 2 5 8. is required in order to Communion there to hold Communion would be to join in conspiracy and separation is then both lawful and necessary Concerning which notion granting that separation is necessary where any thing unlawful is required in order to Communion I can not admit for truth that if any thing suspected be so required separation becometh lawful thereby For if by suspected be meant whatsoever the person who maketh the separation doth suspect as evil by this rule he who through carelessness of enquiry or prejudice and want of Charity is needlâ—sly suspicious about any form of service or way of Church-Administrations will be allowed to separate and to be therein free from
and affectionately recommended and hath naturally such other dangerous attendants as have been above observed to be the result of the breach or want of the Churches Peace This sin is to the Church what Sedition is to the State the most manifest and direct means to hinder its Government and to destroy that Society which is best preserved in true Vnity and of which as Christ himself hath so every Christian ought to have a tender regard It is to the body of Christ what disjointing is to the body of man it hindreth the actions of the body and the usefulness of the members to each other it weakneth the whole and causeth pain and anxious grief to those other members which are not senseless and is ordinarily accompanied with swelling tumours in the part ill-affected and out of order 12. And as it self is contrary to Gods Commandment so its influence promoteth all manner of sin and is called by Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an original of evils Ign. Ep. ad Smyrn For besides the evils above mentioned which accompany this sin as it includeth a breach of the Churches Peace it is apt to prevail with the Separatist to so much impiety as to place much of his Religion in that which is his sin viz. his unwarrantable separation and it is oft if not ordinarily attended with so great uncharitableness as to be pleased with respect to the interest of their party in hearing if not speaking evil concerning others who withstand them It promoteth prosaneness and disadvantageth Religion in others by rendring censures and admonitions of the Church when they are administred the less efficacious upon the offenders who are the more ready to conclude that it is no great shame or danger to be excluded from that Society of Christians from which many who profess Religion do exclude themselves And upon this and other easily discernable accounts it is a probable occasion of remisness in the exercising discipline which would be more enforced and enlivened by a more general Union whereby also divers obstacles and impediments would be removed Athan. Synops in 1. Ep. ad Cor. Thus Athanasius was of opinion that the Corinthian divisions were the cause why the incestious person was not rejected SECT IV. Some false Conceptions of Schism refuted 1. But because there are some notions or rather misrepresentations of this sin of Schism designed to excuse many from the guilt thereof whom the rules of Christianity do envolve under it I shall endeavour to discover the insufficiency of such Plaisters either to cover or cure so great and dangerous wounds as the deep rents made in the Church to which they are applyed 2. A first false Conception of Schism A first Notion is the natural result of the New-England Independant Principles of Church-Communion They assert expresly Ans to 32. Qu. quo 4. that Baptism neither maketh nor admitteth any to be members of the Church and call it the opinion of Papists and Anabaptists that we enter into the Church by Baptism But they assert the foundation of Church-Society to be laid in their Church-Covenant which is a particular contract among themselves binding themselves to God and one to another to live in Christian Society with that particular Congregation to which they join themselves by this contract Apol. for Chur. Coven p. 3 5 15. And this Church-Covenant is they say the Constitutive form of a Church and joining in it is that which maketh a particular person a member of a Church And from hence it may be easily infered that there can be no duty of holding and therefore no sin of Schism in withdrawing or neglecting Communion where they have not made this engagement by that particular Covenant 3. But this notion of the Vnion and Communion of the Church doth confine it to such strait limits as to exclude in a manner all Christians of all ages from Church Society but themselves and is thereby uncharitable and no stranger to Schism and can not consist with the full and due sense of the Churches Catholicism for the ancient Church did never account the obligation to Christian Communion to be so narrow a thing as only to respect a particular Congregation and therefore never framed any such particular Covenant This is also directly contrary to S. Paul who as an argument to Union and against Schism saith 1 Cor. 12 13. By one Spirit we are all baptized into one body and teacheth us that we are baptized into Christ Rom. 6.3 and thereby are planted together in the likeness of his death v. 5. and that they who are baptized into Christ do put on Christ Gal. 3.27 Which Scriptures do sufficiently express that by our Baptism as we undertake the Christian life so we thereby are admitted to be members of the Church or body of Christ and are engaged as members to Vnity therein and to continue in Communion therewith Whereas if this notion was admitted the grounds for the being and Vnion of the Church which the Scriptures lay down together with the Apostolical and Primitive practice must be accounted as insufficient and the necessary support of its being and Union must be derived from this late invention All which things are sufficient to manifest the errour of this opinion and to shew that there may be a sinful breach of the Vnity of the Church among them who never entred into that Church Covenant 4. A second Notion Dr. Owen of Love Church Peace c. 3. But one of that way of our own Nation treating of Schism and separation acknowledgeth Baptism to give Relation to or entrance into the Catholick Church visible but still owneth a particular contract or joint consent among themselves to be the only bond for external Ecclesiastical Communion in a particular Church or as he expresseth it to be that wherein the Vnion of such a Church doth consist which will be hereafter further considered N. 19 20. Dr. Owen's Review of Schism ch 8 9. And he giveth us this representation of Schism That the sin of Schism doth not consist in the want of or breach of external Vnity by separation but in the want of internal Vnity by needless divisions of judgment in a particular Congregation as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he saith is used 1 Cor. c. 1.11 Hence these assertions are laid down 1. That the departing of any man or men from any particular Church as to the Communion peculiar to such a Church is no where in Scripture called Schism nor is so in the nature of the thing it self 2. One Church refusing to hold that Communion with another which ought to be between them is not Schism properly so called 5. But if we here consider the matter or thing it self we must enquire whether Christian Religion doth allow needless separations in the Christian Church And surely he must have strange thoughts of the earnest commands and frequent arguments for Christian Unity who supposeth them to regard only an inward
Vnity and yet to allow of open breaking and dividing and visible falling into pieces Is this to think either honourably or reasonably of the designs of Christ to suppose that he should express his Church to be one body compacted and joined together Eph. 4.16 intending that its real members might be daily parting asunder by disclaiming the communion of each other or that the whole Church should be as one building fitly framed together Eph. 2.21 but with free allowance that its parts should be at such a manifest distance as never to come so near one another as to owne their communion And when our Saviour prayed for his Church which should believe through his Apostles Doctrine as a consequent upon their believing that they may be one in us that the world may believe that thou hast sent me Joh. 17 20 21. Cyp. de Ovat Dom. Christoph in Joh. 17. Hom. 81. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is manifest that that Union of the Church which should tend to convince the World of Christianity and engage them to the Faith of Christ must besides the inward Vnity of faith and love include an open and professed holding communion with each other which is the most visible testimony of their Unity and the want of which hath occasioned them who were strangers to Christianity to decry and loath the Christian Religion as appeareth from what is above-mentioned in the second Section Hier. in Eph. 4. And when S. Paul requireth to keep the Vnity of the Spirit in the bond of peace it hath been reasonably of old thence inferred that separation and breaking the Churches peace ought to be rejected because it opposeth and loseth that Vnity of the Spirit Cypr. Ep. 52. which Christians should maintain by renouncing fellowship with the Church of Christ 6. And it is manifest that needless withdrawing or not holding communion with that particular setled Church where we abide with appearance of causeless distast towards it or the way of its communion was vehemently and with a pathetick zeal condemned in S. Peter himself withdrawing and separating from the Gentiles which action included a blameable forbearance of manifesting his allowance and approbation of their way of Christian life and serving God Gal. 2.11.14 And the manifold cautions against divisions oft expressed in the Scriptures do especially condemn such separation which is the highest attempt and most open profession of dividing and as this separation is expresly condemned in the holy Scripture so this is that thing which is so greatly condemned by the ancient Canons above named and that even under the term and name of Schism And it is of no small moment to observe that the Primitive Church who received the holy Commandments of the Gospel from the Apostles did always understand the precepts of peace to extend mainly to the duties of external communion especially considering that whereas the Churches peace can only be broken by Church contests which are managed either by words writings or open actions of discord this latter way of expressing them by actions of separation and open rendezvous of parties is of all other the highest and most considerable 7. But if the use of the word Schism be here considered it includeth much of needless strife about words to deny 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Schism signifying division or renting asunder to be a fit expression for rents and separations in the Church when it hath been so used in the common Ecclesiastical custom of speech and is that which is according to the direct and proper import of the word And if S. Paul accounted the bandying into parties and factions at Corinth though without separation which some account to be their case to be Schisms because their Unity was thereby opposed and hindred much more must separation which is the highest appearance of parties and breach of Unity and was probably the true state at Corinth be so accounted of 8. Dr. Owen of Evang. Love and Church Peace c. 5. And whereas the same person hath of late purposely undertaken to espouse the interest of separation from the present Church of England and to defend it from the charge of Schism the pleas and pretences made in behalf thereof will now fall under our enquiry 9. A third Notion Its first Plea P. 167 171 172. One principal Plea is That where things or observances unscriptural are made the indispensible condition of Communion there to refuse submission to such things imposed and to with hold Communion from that Church is no Schism but a discharge of a duty And that we may understand what he meaneth by such expressions as Vnscriptural conditions of Communion he telleth us in one place P. 171. We do not dispute the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the things themselves P. 177. and in another place that it may be at present granted that the manner or modes of the performance of Gods worship with rites and ceremonies for order and decency may be lawfully appointed or as it pleased him to call it instituted by the rulers of the Church yet saith he this will not help in our present enquiry unless it be also granted that what may be lawfully practised in the worship of God may be also lawfully made a necessary condition of Communion And he saith in another places P. 205. It is required in this case not only to produce a warranty from the Scripture for the use of Liturgies but also for making the constant attendance on them a necessary condition of Communion Wherefore his sense is that with-holding Communion becometh lawful and a duty where any appointments for orderly ministration and the fit and decent performance of Gods service though lawful in themselves but not particularly expressed in Scripture as conditions of Communion are so determined that they must be submitted to and complyed with by them who embrace actual Communion with that particular Church 10. But this is both false in it self and would render all setled Church-Communion utterly Vnlawful and would make separation the Universal duty of all Christians in every Christian Assembly in the World not excepting them of the Congregational way For the Scriptures have not injoined the particular time for Sacramental and other administrations nor the place for publick Assemblies nor in what method Prayer Preaching Sacraments Psalms Chapters Hymns with other thanksgivings and services are to be performed nor hath it determined us either to or against any particular lawful form or external rite as making them either universally necessary or sinful but these with divers other things of like nature are left to the rules of Ecclesiastical Liberty and Prudence Now it concerneth him who made this exception to discover how there can possibly be any orderly Christian Assemblies and unconfused performances of Religious services where such things as these are not determined as where their Prayers and Services are neither performed with nor without a form c. And to the common
and it may be easily inferred that if it be lawful to set days apart for humbling themselves before God with sasting and prayer without any particular divine Commandment it must needs also be lawful where there is sufficient occasion to appoint the like for the Service of God with Religious praise and thanksgiving with joy and gladness of heart 5. They had also the Feast of Purim established by the Letters of Mordecai Esth 9.21 when the Jews ordained and took upon themselves to do after this writing vers 27. after which Esther and Mordecai wrote with all authority to confirm these days of Purim vers 29.31 and it is expresly declared that the Decree of Esther confirmed these matters of Purim vers 32. The Feast of Dedication was appointed by Judas Maccabaeus and his Brethren and the Children of Israel 1 Mac. 4.59 to be observed annually for eight days in remembrance of the cleansing of the Temple from the profanations of Antiochus and the restoring the liberty of the performing the Service of God therein and at this Feast was our blessed Saviour himself present at the Temple Joh 10.22 23. And that the Feast of Dedication was that Feast appointed by Judas Maccabaeus though some ancient Christian Writers did otherwise interpret it is proved by Junius Buxtorf but especially and very largely and fully by Mr. Selden De Syned l. 3. c. 13. Sect. 7. c. Ibid. Sect. 12. Divers other Feasts are mentioned in the various Jewish Kalendars as may be seen in Scaliger and in that Kalendar exhibited by Mr. Selden which I shall not insist upon Yet it may be considered that Scasiger divideth the Jewish Feasts into the Legalia or Feasts appointed by Gods Law and Politica or such as were established by their own consent and that those of this last sort were some of them appointed before the time of Fsdras and some after of both which he undertaketh to give particular instances De Emend Temp. l. 7. and it is thought by Mr. Thorndike that the Feast of the Wood-offering expressed in the Jewish Kalendars Of Religious Assemblies c. 8. is referred unto in Neb. 10.34 and Chap. 13.31 both which places speak of the Wood-offering at the time appointed But the instances above mentioned are sufficient to manifest that it was lawful under the time of the Jewish Church to appoint days of Religious Solemnity to be annually observed though they were not enjoyned by any divine Institution Wherefore I forbear to insist upon the seven days feast which Solomon kept before the Lord immediately before the Feast of Tabernacles 1 King 8.65 2 Chron. 7.9 10. and of the seven days feast in the time of Hezekiah added to the seven days of unleavened bread 2 Chron. 30.23 Now it seemeth very reasonable that Christians whose mercies from God are greater than the Jewish Church enjoyed should also make use both of weekly and other set times for the Service of God it being prophesied of the Gentile Church under the Gospel Isa 66.23 That from one new Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another shall all flesh come to worship before the Lord. 6. After the Coming of Christ as the Disciples of John fasted oft so our Lord declared that his Disciples should fast after his departure This duty was asterwards practised by the Apostles and enjoyned to all Christians 1 Cor. 7.5 and was in part exercised in the stationary days of the ancient Christians two days in the week And besides other times Eus Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the time of our Lords passion which Eusebius calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is evidently asserted by him though he misunderstand some words of Philo to have been observed by the Christians in the days of Philo and that is from the time of our Saviours death and to the observation of the Passion time those words of Tertulli in do manifestly refer notwithstanding the divers conjecture of learned men where he declareth the Christians appointing jejuniis Parasceven Advers Psye c. 14. Cont. Cets l. 8. and what Origen writeth of their observing the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which probably includeth more than a single day 7. There is abundant testimony also of other solemn days of Religious joy besides the Lords days to have been observed Tert. de Idol c. 14. among which Tertullian mentioneth the whole fifty days from Easter to Whitsontide with which he saith no Religious Solemnity of the Gnetiles could compare and Origen undertaketh to justifie the Festivals of the Christian Church at Easter time and Whitsontide Orig. Ibid. and such like besides the Lords days not to be contained under the Apostles censure upon the Galatians for their observation of days and times And before their time the observation of some annieversary remembrance of eminent Martyrs is expressed in the Martyrium S. Ignatii published by Bishop Vsher from ancient Manuscripts which he judgeth to have been written by Philo Gaius and others who were present at this Martyrdom who write Manifestavimus vobis diem tempus ut secundum tempus martyrii congregati communicemus althletae glorificantes in ipsiusee merabili sancta memoria Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum To the same purpose are the words of Cyprian Cyp. Ep. 34. n Martyrum passiones dies anniversaria commemoratione celebramus and this is the sense also of Tertullian his oblationes pro defunctis pro natalitiis annua die facimus for both the Phrase and thing of these ancient oblations De Cor. Mil. c. 3. did particularly intend an honourable memorial and Communion with the person And when Eusebius giveth an account of the change of the Empire under Constantine from Heathenism to Christianity he saith they then had great respect to the Lords day De Vit Const l. 4. c. 23. and honoured the days of the Martyrs and celebrated the Festivals received in the Church And I suppose it needeth no proof that the Apostles and Evangelists had the chief place among the Christian Martyrs who were the principal Testisiers of Christ and the particular days wherein a pious remembrance of them was celebrated to the glory of God are frequently mentioned after the end of the third Century and are expressedin Constit Apost l. 8. c. 33. And though the particular Festivals of the Apostles were according to the practice of the Church in several parts of the World celebrated at very different times as may appear by comparing the practice of the Western Church with the Constitution of Alexius Comnemus which concerned the Eastern or Greek Church and with the several Arabick Kalendars two of which are exhibited by Mr. Selden de Syneder l. 3. c. 15. Yet in all these Churches as also in the Syriack as appeareth from the Rubricks for the Lessons on these days in the Syriack Testament and also in the Aethiopick and Egyptian Churches as appeareth from the Computus Aethiopicus De Emend Temp.
designed for these Religious actions 2. That though the Jewish Sabbath had a peculiar respect to their deliverance from Egypt Deut. 5.15 Yet for that mercy which was far inferiour to what Christians enjoy by Christ they observed also other yearly solemnities especially the great Feasts of the Passover and the Feast of Tabernacles Wherefore though the observation of the Lords day as it is one day in seven encludeth a testimony that we worship God the Creator who made the World in six days and rested the seventh and as it is the first day of the Week it containeth a a professed owning and honouring of Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour who accomplished his humiliation and began his exaltation on that day yet this doth by no means exclude the lawful use of any other time directed either by voluntary choice or Ecclesiastical or political laws for the advantage of piety in the worship of God and the more solemn observance of those great actions of our blessed Lord which ought evermore to be had in remembrance CHAP. V. Of the particular Offices in the Liturgy SECT I. Of the direction for Communicants receiveing the Lords Supper 1. THE first particular office according to the order of the Book is that for the Communion at the end of which the Rubrick requiring every Parishioner to communicate at least three times in the year is disliked because many persons may not be duly qualified to receive Presbyt Excep p. 21. and therefore this Rubrick was desired either to be left out or to be altered to this sense that the Communion should be thrice in the year administred if there be a convenient number to receive Now because this exception is thought considerable whereas indeed the Rubrick is herein not only justifiable but very commendable I shall endeavour to clear this whole matter by these considerations 2. Cons 1. To receive the holy Communion is a very great Christian duty and cannot be neglected without grievous sin and the displeasure of God This may appear by observing that God strictly required all his Sacramental Institutions to be received when he appointed Circumcision he declareth concerning the uncircumcised Manchild that that Soul should be cut of from his people he hath broken my Covenant Gen. 17.14 When he ordered the use of the Pass-over he said the man that is clean and not in a journey and forbeareth to keep the Passover the same soul shall be cut off from his people because he brought not the Offring of the Lord in his appointed season that man shall bear his sin Num. 9.13 and even this person who was unclean was bound to keep the Passover in the next following month Num. 9.10 11. Under the New Testament those words Joh. 3.5 Except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God are by the general testimony of Antiquity to be understood concerning Baptism and the Pharisees are condemned for rejecting the Counsel of God against themselves being not baptized of John Luk. 7.30 Now the reason why God was so greatly offended at the neglect of these Sacraments is expressed to be because he accounted this to be a disowning or dis-esteeming his Covenant of which his Sacraments were a sign and seal Gen. 17.14 and because Gods appointment and institution therein was not obeyed Num. 9.13 Luk. 7.30 Wherefore because the Lords Supper doth exhibit the New Testament in the blood of Christ and the partaking thereof is particularly commanded by Christ it must upon the same reasons be as evil and dangerous to neglect this Sacrament as those other And if it be further considered that this is a special Ordinance of eminent Christian profession shewing forth the Lords 〈◊〉 till he come 1. Cor. 11.26 and exhibiting the Communion of the body and blood of Christ the right partaking of this Ordinance must needs be concluded to be a principal action and service of Christianity whether we consider the duty performed or the benefits which may be thereby received 3. If the practice of the Apostolical and Primitive Church be consulted the three thousand converted on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Ghost was given Act. 2.42 did all continue stedfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of Bread and Prayer And the receiving the Communion was esteemed so high a part of the Christian service in their publick Assemblies Act. 20.7 that their assembling was called their coming together to break bread Conc. Ant. c. 2. The Council of Antioch determined them to be cast out of the Church who were present at the reading of the Scriptures but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a disorderly manner went away and received not the Eucharist Can. Ap. 9. and the same was decreed in the Canons of the Apostles and much to the same purpose in other Councils which as that of Antioch were embraced as part of the Code of the Universal Church Agreeably hereunto it was Ignatius his desire for the Ephesians Ign. Ep. ad Ephes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they all of them jointly and every one of them particularly should meet together and partake of the same bread Among the Protestant Churches Syn. Petricor Sect. 5. 1587. the Polonian Synod consisting of members who owned three distinct confessions did unanimously declare that all Pastors ought to teach and accustom their auditors that as oft as the Lords Table is prepared in the publick Assemblies for the faithful they should not neglect every one of them to come unto it And the vehement expressions in the Geneva Catechism and in Bucers Censura against them who neglect to come to the Lords Supper might be here added with other testimonies of the same nature Only it must be here observed that Non-Conformity hath run its changes at such a variance as if both the extreams were to be preferred to the middle way The Author of the Admonition esteemed this direction for the Communicants receiveing to be too large T. C. Reply p. 117. and that too much was done in directing them to Communicate but both Mr. Cartwright the chief opposer of the Liturgy in Queen Elizabeths time Alt. Damasc c. 10. p. 727 728 and the Author of the Altare Damascenum who was the most violent censurer thereof in King James his time thought that too little was done herein for both of them would have all who are in the Churches Communion forced even by civil punishments saith the former and statis temporibus omnes adigendi sunt saith the latter to receive the Lords Supper and both of them condemn them who abstain from the Lords Table out of fear as guilty of superstition and that they ought not to be born with But now again the Chanel is altered and the stream is returned to the other side But by the invariable rule of the will of God which is an unerring guide it is the duty of all Christians to attend upon
Christ to the narrow limits of some parts of Africa saying Dost thou call thy self a Christian that thou mayst envy the glory of Christ cujus signum in fronte te portare asseris whose sign thou clarest thy self to bear in thy forehead he thereby sheweth that this sign was accounted to include an engagement or admonition to promote and advance the honour of Christ And that it might be a more plain Memorial of the Christian faith and duty when it was used to the Catechumens Confes l. 1. c. 11. De pec Mer. Remis l. 2. c. 26. Aug. de Symb. l. 2. c 1. some distant time before their Baptism of which S. Austin maketh frequent mention the abrenunciation and profession of faith were then joyned therewith as appeareth from S. Aug. de symbolo ad Catechum the like unto which appeareth in our office of private Baptism and when it was used at the time of the administration of Baptism it immediately followed upon the persons professing to undertake the Christian life Dionys de Hier. Eccl. c. 2. as is expressed by the Author De Hierarchia Ecclesiastica And some dark intimation of this Primitive use of this sign may be discerned remaining in the corruptions of the Papacy but the more clear expression thereof is exhibited in our reformation 7. This sign used in our Church upon any person in the office of Baptism is declared to be in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ Crucified and manfully to fight under his Banner against sin the World and the Devil c. Which words speak this sign to be a token by way of remembrance of his duty to the person baptized and a testimony of engagement upon him and expectation concerning him from the Church Which sense of these words is made more manifest by the Canon Can. 30. which declareth that it is apparent in the Communion Book that the infant baptized is by vertue of Baptism before it be signed with the sign of the Cross received into the Congregation of Christs stock as a perfect member thereof and not by any power ascribed unto the sign of the Cross and it after addeth that this Church accounteth this sign a lawful outward Ceremony and honourable badg whereby the infant is dedicated to the service of him that died upon the Cross Now dedicating a person being an engaging or setting him apart unto God and it being evident from the Canon that this dedicating is wholly distinct from the baptismal dedication to be a Member of Christs Church we must hereby understand the Church to engage this Member upon her account to the service of Christ in like manner as when any Father shall give himself to the Lord as the Macedonians did 2 Cor. 8.5 and with diligent care shall warn and charge his Children to yield and devote themselves to God this is properly called his dedicating himself and his to the service of God And this sense is yet more evident from the office of Baptism where the Minister baptizing acting in the name of God saith in the singular number N. I baptize c. but saith in the plural number We receive this Child and do sign him c. acting herein in the name of the Rulers and other Members of the Catholick Church in Communion with us the whole body desiring and seeking the good of every member So that hereby there is as great an obligation laid upon this person baptized as the members of Christs body and the power of his Church can lay upon him by their relation to him interest in him and authority over him 8. Defence of three Cerem Par. Ch. 2. Sec. 7. With much agreeableness to this sense Bishop Morton declared that the Child is dedicated to God by consecration in Baptism which is a Sacrament of Grace but the dedication which is fignified by the sign of the Cross is not by any proper consecration to God or tender of grace received from God by such a sign made but is a declarative token of duty which afterwards the person baptized ought to perform concerning his constant and visible profession of the Christian Faith Bishop Fern saith Consider of Concernment Gh. 7. n. 7. Eccles Polit l. 5. Sec. 65. it signifieth the duty of the baptized and is to mind him of it and Mr. Hooker termeth it an admonition to glory in the service of Christ and a memorial of duty and a bar or prevention to keep from Apostacy 9. Now besides the Sacraments themselves it is very useful and needful to admit other means of memorial and solemn charge to engage men to the faithful service of God who are too prone to be negligent therein Though all Abrahams Family were circumcised God had a special favour for Abraham because he would command his Children and Houshold after him Gen. 18.18 19. and they would keep the way of the Lord. And though in Joshua's time the Israelites were circumcised Josh 24.22.27 and kept the Passover and had their Sacrifices and publick general Assemblies before the Tabernacle yet Joshua did further solemnly engage them to God and set up a stone as a witness thereof And when S. Paul mentioned the good profession which Timothy made before many witnesses 1 Tim. 6.12 13. he thought fit to add a solemn charge unto Timothy in the sight of God and Jesus Christ which requireth him to answer that profession Wherefore since such a charge is in it self very useful if as members we have that due value we ought to have for the body of Christs Church that engagement charge or expectation which hath a concurrent force and influence both from the Rulers and from multitudes of other members of that body must be thought the most solemn and weighty of all other 10. That in so considerable a Case some significant rite is very expedient to add to the solemnity thereof is sufficiently proved by the common wisdom of Mankind when they commit to others any great charge and by the prudence of the ancient Church in this very particular And this rite of the sign of the Cross is upon many accounts very proper for this purpose because it is apt to suggest to our minds the remembrance of the name of Christ which was anciently signified by chi the first letter of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the old form of which letter was this †as appeareth from an ancient Inscription proâ—â—ced by Scaliger and of the Passion of our blessed Saviour upon the Cross Scalig. Animad in Euseh p. 110 120. and of the nature of Christianity in taking up his Cross and also because it was a sign to this end honourably used by the Primitive Christians And our Church hath taken abundant care to prevent all superstitiousness in the use hereof both by appointing it after the person is baptized and received as both the Office of Baptism and the Canon expresseth and by the