14. yet there was no Schism Ambo in unitate Catholica constituti saith St. Austin both remained in Catholick unity There were differences between Chrysostom and Epiphanius between Jerom and Austin yet it would be hard to charge them with Schism The Lutherans differ from the other Reformed Churches in some lesser Truths but because they agree in fundamental Articles there is not properly a Schism the difference non impedit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hinders not the unity of the Faith saith Dr. Ward But then Differences amount to Schism when they break the unity of Faith Determ fol. 3. or the unanimous Communion in Ordinances Such were the Differences above-mentioned in Corinth there was no separation from the Church there yet because those Differences broke the unity of Ordinances they are called Schism A Schism from the Church stands in a criminous separation from it The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when it relates to the Church doth as I take it only denote in Scripture Divisions in a Church But the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth seem to denote division from a Church Such a kind of dissention in which men separate one from another in body and place as well as mind Yet in that 1 Cor. 3.3 it seemeth to be no more than division in a Church However this be the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jud. 19. doth properly signify to separate or put ones self extra terminos Ecclesiae out of the bounds of the Church Now this Schism from a Church is either negative or positive Negative Schism is when men separate from a Church and go no further no new Church or Assembly is set up Positive Schism is when there is not only a simple Separation but a new Church or Assembly is instituted in which the Word and Sacraments are administred This is called struere Altare contra Altare A negative Secession may in some case be lawful as when one is unjustly ejected out of a Church he may recede from it Yet saith the Learned Camero a positive Secession in that case is not lawful De Eccles 325. he may not immediately set up a new Church at least not without some other Reasons or Circumstances Touching this Separating Schism it is first to be noted that there may be a Schism without a Separation and there may be a Separation without a Schism There may be a Schism without a Separation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Schism in the body 1 Cor. 12.25 when there is no schism from it There was not for ought I can see any Separation in the Church of Corinth Yet the Dissentions there making a breach upon the Communion in Ordinances did amount to Schism St. Cyprian saith De Unit. Eccl. That all believers are in one House The Church saith he is unanimit at is hospitium an House of amity and unanimity where they sweetly dwell together in the unanimous Worship and Service of God If a man do not go out of this House and leave the Unity of it yet if he make Dissentions there and disturb that Unity he is guilty of Schism Again There may be a Separation without a Schism In many Cases one part of a Congregation may depart from the other and become a Church of it self and yet there may be no Schism at all What if it be done in a Congregation too great to meet together for convenience and by common consent This will be no Schism at all 'T is but as when Abraham and Lot parted asunder because the Land was not able to bear them Or as when the Hive being too little for the Bees one part goes away and dwells by it self in a new Family What if there be a Law or Canon made to allow such a Separation It will hardly be called Schism and yet Church-unity doth not vary as Human Laws and Canons do for then it might be something or nothing as men please If in a Church the foundations of the holy Faith be destroyed what can the Righteous do Join they cannot separate they must When Eunomius the Arian was made a Bishop Theod. l. 4. c. 14. not one of his Flock rich or poor young or old man or woman would communicate with him in the Service of God but left him to officiate alone When Nestorius did first publish his Heresy in the Church the people made a noise Evagr. l. 3. cap. 5. and ran out of the Assembly When under the Emperor Basiliscus five hundred Bishops condemned the Council of Chalcedon it was hard for Christians to join with them The Church is where the Truth is and no where else What if the terms of Communion be sinful we are rather to break with all Churches than to commit one sin against God The breaking off from him is more than breaking off from all men Thus in some cases there may be a Separation without Schism Indeed Schism is not a mere local defection but a moral one Non â—liscessies corporalibus motibus De Bap. cont Don. l. 1. c. 1. sed spirit alibus est metiendus saith St. Austin The departure is not to be measured by corporal motions but by spiritual but enough of this In the next place I shall endeavour to lay down some Characters whereby it may be known when Separation is Schismatical 1st Schismatical Separation is intentional and perfectly voluntary Thus the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that separate themselves Jud. 19. do by their own voluntary act put themselves out of the bounds of the Church Thus they that went out of the Apostolical Church 1 Joh. 2.19 did it intentionally and freely It is the observation of Aquinas That as in natural things 2 2ae quaest 39. Art 1. c. that which is by accident doth not constitute the Species So in moral not that which is besides the intention for that is accidental hence he infers Peccatum Schismatis proprie est speciale peccatum ex eo quod intendit se ab unitate separare quam charit as facit Proprie Schismatici dicuntur qui propria sponte intentione se ab unitate Ecclesiae separant The sin of Schism is a special sin in that it intends to separate from that unity which charity makes Schismaticks are properly those who of their own accord and intention do separate themselves from the unity of the Church It 's true every Schismatick doth not say as Marcion did Ego sindam Ecclesiam I will cleave the Church in two yet this is that which he means in his Separation As in our Common-Law when we would know whether an entry amount to a disseisin we enquire Cro. lib. 3. Blunden quo animo fecerit with what mind it was done So in Theology if we would know whether a Separation amount unto Schism we must enquire with what mind it was done Schism saith Dr. Hammond is a voluntary dividing The Schismatick is he that divides himself from the Church not he that is cut
is the vital Head of the Church Vnitas Corporis one Body in which the Members do all adhere one to another and to the Head And unitas Spiritûs one Holy Spirit to animate and actuate the whole Body The Unity of the Church is not an Human thing but Divine The Unity is as the Church is built upon the foundations of the Apostles and Prophets Eph. 2.20 All the Joints and Bands which tie the Church together are from Christ the Head As under the Old Testament God ordained the Loops and the Taches that coupled the Curtains together to make one Tabernacle Exod. 26.6 So under the New Christ hath ordained the Bands and Ligatures that couple Believers together to make one Church Hence this Unity is stiled by St. Cyprian Epist ad Cornel. Vnitas à Domino per Apostolos tradita An Vnity delivered from the Lord Christ and by the Apostles and by St. Austin Vnitas Christi the Vnity of Christ Contra Cresc l. 2. c. 31. l. 4. c. 21. St. Jerom speaking of the Church of Christ as joined together in the unity of the Spirit hath this notable Passage Ecclesia habet urbes legis Com. in Mich. c. 1. Prophetarum Evangelii Apostoloram Non est egressa de finibus suis id est de Scripturis Sanctis The Church hath its Cities the Law the Prophets the Gospel the Apostles it goeth not out of its bounds the Holy Scriptures That only is Unity which is found there When the question was between the Catholicks and Donatists Vbi sit Ecclesia Where is the Church the Columba unica the Dove that is but one St. Austin tells them De Unit. Eccl. c. 2 3. that it was to be sought Non in verbis nostris sed in verbis Capitis Not in our words but in the words of the Head Jesus Christ the Head knew his own Body And again Sunt certe libri Dominici ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam There are the Lord's Books there let us seek the Church And again Nolo Humanis Documentis sed Divinis Oraculis Sanctam Ecclesiam demonstrari I will not have the Holy Church demonstrated by Human Documents but by Divine Oracles It was the notable Observation of Bessarion Fuit aliquando tempus quo immaculata Dei Spoasâ— Ecclesia summâ concordiâ tranquillissimâ pace intemeratâ veritate fruebatur cum simplicitatem puritatem Evangelicae Doctrinae maximi omnes faciebamus solis Sacris eloquiis contenti his inhaerentes his acquiescentes in unum ab his collecti ovile sub uno Pastore omnes agentes Crab. Conc. Florent Archbishop of Nice That then the Church had the highest concord peace and truth when it did adhere to the simplicity and purity of the Evangelical Doctrine contented with the Sacred Oracles inhereing and acquiescing in them only collected by them into one fold and living under one Pastor The only true Unity of the Church is that which is to be found in Scripture When men will have an Unity not of God's making but of their own it falls out as when a piece of new cloth is put to an old Garment there is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a rent made The Humane thing that did seem to fill up the Churches Unity doth make a breach in it Victor will have one Easter-day and this little thing rents off the Eastern Churches from the Western The Unity of a visible Head in the Church is very plausible yet this is but a piece of Donatism to have the Church only in parte Papae 'T is as Gregory said against John of Constantinople Titulus in discissionem Ecclesiae a Title to rent the Church in pieces Nay the very Roman Church where it was hatched is rent by it Part would have a Council above the Pope Part would have the Pope above a Council The Councils of Constance and Basil call the Popes Schismaticks and the Popes have cast off and reprobated those Councils Thus those Human things in the Church which are set up for Unity turn to Ataxie and like the Egyptian Reed pierce and rent that hand that leans on them These things being so it appears that the Unity of the Church doth not consist in any Human thing But to instance in some particulars 1st It doth not stand in Human Rites and Observations In the first Golden Age in which as Egesippus saith the Church continued a pure Virgin there was little or nothing of Ceremony but much of Unity Christians were then of one heart and of one soul Acts 4.32 In after Ages Human Observations creeping into the Church they were observed variè pro arbitrio Euseb l. 5. cap. 23. Christians varied in the observation of Easter some kept Easter on one day some on another They varied in their observation of Lent Some fasted one day some two some more some forty They varied not only in the number of the days but in their abstinence Some eat Fowl with their Fish Socrat. Hist l. 5. c. 21. some were contented with dry bread only They varied also in many other Human Observations as may be seen in Ecclesiastical Story In all these there was no unity Soz. Hist l. 7. c. 19. yet the true Vnity was not wanting They did not put unity in such things no the Rule was Differentia rituum commendat unitatem fidei The non-unity in Rites commended the Vnity of the Faith The Christians were wont to fast Tert. contra Psych ex arbitrio non ex imperio out of choice not out of command St. Austin Epist 118. speaking of the various Customs in the Church saith that in such kind of things there was libera observatio indifferent things remained indifferent one did not impose them upon another so there was no breach of Unity When the question was whether there should be in Baptism trina or simplex mersio St. Gregory answered Conc. Tolet 4. Can. 5. In unâ Fide nihil officit diversa consuetudo In one Faith a di verse Custom hurts not In the Council of Lateran under Pope Innocent the Third Can. 9. it is ordained That where in one City or Diocess Crab. Conc. Tom. 2. there were people of divers Tongues and Rites sub unâ Fide there the Divine Offices should be performed secundum diversitates Rituum Linguarum Luther speaking of the Popish Ceremonies saith truly Sub Papâ est pompa externae unitatis sed intus non â—n si confusissima Babylon Vnder the Pope is the pomp of external Vnity but within there is nothing but a most confused Babel It is certain Church-unity doth not consist in Rites let men fancy what they will there is but one healing Rule to be found In necessariis unitas in non-necessariis libertas in utrisque charitas 2dly It doth not stand in a Liturgy or prescribed Form of Prayer The Church for some Centuries was without a Liturgy but never without Unity The Liturgies ascribed
to St. Peter St. James St. Mark are plainly spurious there are to be found the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which were not extant in the first Centuries There mention is made of Temples Altars Monasteries such things as the Primitive Church knew not Apol. 2. prope finem Tert. Ap. cap. 30. In Justin Martyr's time the Minister prayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to his ability In Tertullian's he prayed Sine monitore quia de pectore without any Prompter but their own heart Epist 34. de Celer In St. Cyprian's time the Ecclesiastical Lector was to read praecepta Evangelium Domini not a Liturgy Euseb de Vit. Constant l. 4. c. 20. In Constantin's time had there been a Liturgy he had not needed to have composed a Prayer for his Army Soc. Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 21. In the time of Socrates among all Forms of Religion there were not two that consented together in precandi more Set-forms of Prayer were not introduced into the Church till the Arian and Pelagian Heresies invaded it and then to prevent the diffusion of Heretical Poyson Set-forms came in In the Council of Laodicea holden about the Year 368. Can. 18. it was ordained that there should be caedem preces But this was a Form of the Minister's own composing as appears by the 23d Canon of the Third Council of Carthage holden about the Year 399. which appointed that none should use a Form unless he did first conferre cum fratribus instructioribus After which in the Milevitan Concil holden about the Year 416. Can. 12. it was ordained that the Form used should be approved of in a Synod Still this was a Form of the Minister's own making It was many years after this before a Liturgy was absolutely imposed on Ministers that they might not pray by their own Gifts only but by the prescribed Forms of others About the Year 800. Charles the Great being Emperor Pope Adrian moved him to establish a Liturgy by a Civil Edict and obtained it And this is said to be Gregory's Liturgy Thus the Church was much longer without a Liturgy than it can be imagined to have been without Unity Therefore Unity doth not consist in it 3dly It doth not stand as I take it in a Diocesan Episcopacy There are Bishops in Scripture but no Diocesan ones There are Presbyters ordained in every City but no Bishops ordained to be over them In Thessalonica there were not one but many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Thess 5.12 The Presidency there was in many not in one The Bishops at Philippi Phil. 1.1 being more than one in one city were no other than Presbyters The Presbyters at Ephesus are in express terms called Bishops Acts 20.17 28. St. Peter exhorts the Presbyters to feed the Flock of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acting as Bishops among them 1 Pet. 5.2 St. Paul would have Titus ordain Presbyters in every City for a Bishop must be so and so Tit. 1.5 7. If the Bishop and Presbyter were not here the same the reason which must not be imagined would be inconsequential There are the qualifying Characters of a Bishop set down in 1 Tim. 3. and in Titus 1.7 but there is not one of them but is requisite in a Presbyter not one of them peculiar to a Diocesan Bishop The Scripture Evidence is very clear that a Bishop and a Presbyter are all one When Aerius brought some of these Scriptures to prove it Epiphanius who calls him Heretick gives only this poor Answer That in many Churches there were no Presbyters but who can believe that at that time there were more Bishops than Presbyters that when there were more Bishops in one City there should be no Presbyters at all there It is a thing altogether incredible Clemens Salm. in App. ad Primat fol. 50 54. in his Epistle to the Corinthians makes Bishops and Presbyters all one Polycarp in his Epistle to the Philippians mentions only Presbyters and Deacons In the Epistle ascribed to Ignatius ad Magnesios a Bishop above a Presbyter is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Salm. in App. fol. 57. Com. in 1 Tim. 3. a novel Institution St. Ambrose saith Episcopi Presbyteri una ordinatio est there is but one ordination of a Bishop and a Presbyter St. Jerome saith Epist ad Ocean ad Evagr. Apud veteres iidem Episcopi Presbyteri fuerunt Anciently Bishops and Presbyters were the same Again Com. in Epist Tit. That the Bishop was greater than the Presbyter consuetudine magis quam Dominicae dispositionis veritate rather by custom than by any true dispensation from the Lord And again that before Communi Presbyterorum Consilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur The Churches were ruled by the Common Council of Presbyters St. Austin saith that Episcopacy is greater than Presbytery Secundum honorum vocabula Epist 19. quae jam Ecclesiae usus obtinuit according to the Titles of Honour which are now used in the Church Thus it appears that a Diocesan Episcopacy is but Humane and by consequence Church-unity doth not stand in it The Reformed Churches which are without Episcopacy are not without Unity I conclude this with the Judgment of the Learned Dr. Ward Determ 109. who speaking of the difference in Ecclesiastical Government which is between our Church and those beyond Sea saith that it may and ought to be tolerated absque fraternae unitatis laesione without any breach of Brotherly unity 4thly It doth not stand in the Civil Laws of Princes When Magistrates were Pagans there was yet a Church and an Unity in it When they became Christians the Unity was the same the Joints and the Bands were as before sacred not civil from Christ the Head not from the Magistrate It 's true the Church hath an external help and guard from good Laws but its Unity doth not consist in them Neque quia regna dividuntur De Unitate Eccles c. 12. ideo Christiana unitas dividitur cum in utraque parte inveniatur Catholica Ecclesia saith St. Austin Kingdoms may be divided but Christian Vnity is not in both parts the Catholick Church is found Should the Unity of the Church consist in the Laws of Magistrates then the Laws being dissolved there would be no Unity the Laws being altered the Unity must vary and turn about to every point as the Laws do That which now is Unity under a contrary Law must be Schism that which now is a Schism under a contrary Law may be Unity Under the Emperor Valentinian the Orthodox may be the Church under Valens the Arrians may be it Nay as the Magistrate may be you shall not know by him where the Church or the Truth is In that great Schism when the Bishops of the East and West fell out about the Council of Chalcedon some would not part with a syllable of it some utterly rejected it The Emperor Anastasius
Magd. Cent. 6. cap. 8. Evagr. l. 3. c. 30. Aulicâ Sapientiâ usus banished some of both Parties aequale praemium veritas mendacium tulêre Truth and Falsehood were alike rewarded Hence it appears that the Unity of the Church doth not stand in Humane Laws the true Unity is founded only in Scripture These things being so I come to lay down the true Unity The Church may be considered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in its internal Essence or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in its external Communion In the first consideration it hath invisible Bands to make it one in the second it hath visible ones The soul of the Church is as St. Austin speaks internal Grace the Body of it is external Profession and Communion Take the Church in its internal Essence so its Unity stands in the Holy Spirit and the Graces of it There is one body and one spirit Eph. 4.4 There are many Members in the Mystical Body of Christ but they are all but one Body and why so They are distant in place and time yet they are but one Body distinct Bodies have distinct Spirits but they have but one Holy Spirit which unites them not only to Christ the Head but one to another so they must be but one Body because they have but one Spirit to actuate them Hence St. Austin saith Non potest vivere Corpus Christi nisi de Spiritu Christi In Joh. Tract 26. The Body of Christ cannot live but by the Spirit of Christ It is the Holy Spirit that makes them one living Body Under the Spirit there are three Uniting Graces which make the Mystical Church but one they are Faith Hope Enarr in Psal 37. and Charity Hence that of St. Austin Si Fides nostra sincera sit Spes certa Charitas accensa sumus in Corpore Christi If our Faith be sincere our Hope certain our Charity kindled then are we in the Body of Christ Hence St. Bernard observes a triple Vertue in the Primitive Church De ascensi Domini Serm. 5. Magnanimity Longanimity and Vnanimity the first was from Faith the second from Hope the third from Charity Faith unites all the Members in the Mystical Body to Christ the Head and so they are one in Capite Love unites them not only to the Head but one to another and so they are one in Corpore Hope unites them to one center in Heaven and so they are one in Termino In these things stands the Unity of the Church in its internal Essence Take the Church in its External Communion so its Unity stands in the Holy Ordinances They continued stedfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of bread and in prayers Acts 2.42 These are the golden Bands that tie the Church together As the Church mystical is made one by Graces so the Church visible is made one by Ordinances As the same Graces are all over the one so the same Ordinances are all over the other The same pure word is preached Com. in Psal 133. The Church saith St. Jerome Non in parietibus sed in dogmatum veritate consistit It doth not stand in Walls but in True Doctrines The Hereticks as the same Father goes on may have the Walls but the Church is where the Truth is The Arians boasted of their Unity Contra Auxent but as St. Hilary tells them it was but Vnit as Impiet at is an Vnity of Impiety The Unity of Truth is in the Church only there all have one Law one Charter all are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concorporated and copartners of the promise Eph. 3.6 No body of men hath such a Law or Charter as the Church hath The same Sacraments are administred These are Seals of the Churches Charter and Symbols of that Communion which we have with Christ as Head and one with another as Fellow-members In Baptism we enter into the Holy Society in the Lord's Supper we are Fellow-commoners and eat together as Members of the same Family Contra Faust Manich l. 19. cap. 11. St. Austin saith That in every Religion men are joined together aliquo signaculorum consortio by a fellowship in some Seals No Society of men hath such Seals as the Church hath The same Prayers in substance are made tho in the Primitive times there was no Common Prayer or Liturgy in the Church Ignatius Epist ad Magn. yet there was ever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Common that is a Publick Prayer which in the mouth of the Minister is as it were breathed out by all the people that the Divine Blessing may come down upon the Word and Sacraments I shall here add nothing touching Ecclesiastical Discipline because the particular mode of it is not so essential to a Church as the other are To conclude Where there are lawful Pastors dispensing Holy Ordinances and a People meeting and unanimously joining in the use of them there is a True Church Hic est fons Veritatis hoc Templum Dei hoc domicilium Fidei as Lactantius speaks There is the Fountain of Truth the Temple of God the Dwelling-place of Faith These things being premised touching the Church and its Unity I come now to enquire into the Nature of Schism CHAP. II. Schism defined Seminal or Actual In the Church or from it There may be a Schism without Separation and a Separation without Schism The Characters of Schismatical Separation Voluntariness want of Charity Pride Error breach of Sacred Vnity for little or no Cause from the Catholick Church SChism is the Scissure of the Church visible a breach of the sacred Vnity of it without cause 'T is a Scissure of the Church De Unitat. Eccles a renting vestem Christi inconsutilem the seamless Coat of Christ as St. Cyprian speaks It was as St. Austin speaks signified by the breaking of the net Luke 5.6 The net at Sea brake Ibi Ecclesia in hocseculo hic in fine seculi figurata est Austin in Joh. Tract 122. propter significanda Schismata to note out the Schisms of the Church on Earth but the Net drawn to the Shore brake not John 21.11 to note out that the Saints in Heaven are in summâ pace in the highest unity No Schisms are in that blessed Region 'T is a Scissure of the Church Visible In the Church Mystical there are no Schisms It 's true the Flesh which in the Saints warreth against the Spirit is a Schismatick and makes such rents in their Souls that they are in a sort divided from themselves It is not I but sin that dwelleth in me saith Saint Paul Rom. 7.20 He distinguisheth his corrupt Self from his renewed Self But yet that Flesh cannot shall not totally finally rent them off from the Mystical Body They may fall into sins yet those Principles which tie them to the Mystical Body are not extinct the Spirit of Grace will not leave them but raise them up out of their Falls Hence St.
Austin saith In Psal 88. Si in aeternum caput in aeternum membra If Christ the head be for ever so are the Members Schism then is not in the Church Mystical but in the Church Visible 'T is a breach of the Sacred Vnity in the Church I mean of an Unity founded in Scripture every breach of that Unity is Schism but a breach of an Human Canon or Law is not Schism St. Cyprian shewing the madness of Schismaticks saith De Unit. Eccl. Quis audeat scindere Vnitatem Dei Who dares cut in pieces the Vnity of God So he calls the Churches Unity because it is not Humane Contra Cresc l. 5. c. 21. St. Austin saith It is a great evil to make a Schism ab Vnitate Christi not from man's Unity but from Christ's and the same Author calls Schism in divers places Contr. Lit. Pet. l. 2. c. 30 81. Sacrilegium Schismatis the Sacriledge of Schism because the Unity is not Human but Divine When the Papists charge Schism upon us as casting off the Pope the Head of Unity the Learned Dr. Hammond answers Tract of Schism 157. He was never appointed by Christ to be Head and the Answer is sound No such Unity was appointed in Scripture Again 'T is a breach of the Sacred Unity without Cause When the Orthodox Christians separated from Arian Bishops who subverted the Faith of Christ it was no Schism at all When the Protestants came out of Idolatrous Rome it was no Schism but a Duty Causa say the Canonists non secessio facit Schismaticum it is not the separation but the cause that makes the Schismatick Schism is either seminal or actual Seminal Schism stands in the carnal and corrupt Lusts of the Heart these are the bitter Roots and Springs of Division Whence come wars and fightings among you come they not of your lusts that war in your members James 4.1 Were there no warring Lusts within there would be no jarring Discords without The Apostle speaking of the Divisions in Corinth saith Are ye not carnal and walk as men 1 Cor. 3.3 Divisions come from the Carnal part in Christians not from the Spiritual St. Austin speaking of Abraham's dividing the Beasts but not the Birds saith by way of allusion De Civ lib. 16. cap. 24. Carnales inter se dividuntur Spirituales nullo modo Carnal men are divided one from another but not spiritual The Lusts of men are the great Make-bates But to instance in some particulars Pride is an horrible Schismatick by swelling it breaks into a rupture by lifting up a man above himself it divides him from his Brother The greatest instance of Pride in the World is the Bishop of Rome he sits as he pretends in the Infallible Chair he hath all Laws in scrinio pectoris he claims all Power Sacerdotal and Regal he stiles himself the Head of the whole Church he is called a God on Earth his Title is Dominus Deus noster Papa and after all this state he is no less an Instance of Schism than of Pride He rents himself off from the Church Universal he will not be a Member in it but an Head a Universal Lord over it The Church must be only in parte Papae and no-where else All the Protestant Churches in the World must be cast off as Schismaticks and this abominable Schism must be stiled Unity Again Self-love is a great Schismatick it so appropriates all to it self that it leaves nothing in common it is such an inordinate uniting of a man to himself that he cannot be joined to others That little word Ego is a strange divider of all Society When Novatus fell off from the Church and became the Head of the Cathari there was somewhat of self in it Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 6. c. 42. The denial of an Episcopal Preferment made him set up a Church for himself and in that Church before he gave the Eucharist he made the Communicants swear by the Body and Blood of Christ not to forsake him To name but one thing more Hatred is also an inward Schismatick it dissolves what Love unites and sets a man against his Brother to whom he should be joined in amity De Bapt. l. 1. c. 11. Origo Schismatis est odium fraternum saith St. Austin The hatred of a Brother is the origin of Schism In the Council at Ephesus called Concilium praedatorium the Eutychian hatred broke out sadly against the Orthodox The Bishops that favoured that Heresy carried the matter by mere force and violence crying out Qui dicit duas Naturas in duo dividit He that confesseth two Natures in Christ divides him into two Such a desperate thing is Hatred that it prompts men to divide even unto blood Such Lusts as these are the roots of gall and wormwood which bear the bitter fruits of Schism and Division Actual Schism is either a Schism in the Church or a Schsm from it A Schism in the Church stands in the Differences and Dissentions of the Members in it We have in the Church of Corinth three instances of it They differed about the Excellencies of their Teachers Every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas 1 Cor. 1.12 They differed about the manner and time of the Holy Eucharist They did not wait one for another the rich contemned the poor 1 Cor. 11.21 22. They differed about the variety of Gifts among them the inferior in gifts envied the superior and the superior in gifts despised the inferior the feet envied the hand and the head undervalued the feet 1 Cor. 12.15 21. And every one of these differences is in these Texts called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Schism in the Church and the reason is because every one of them did break the Unity of the Church in Ordinances When they lookt more on the Teacher than on the Truth there could not be an intire communion in hearing the pure word they heard it but partially in the gifts of one rather than of another When at the Lord's Supper they did not wait for but contemn one another there could not be an unanimous conjunction in that Ordidance The Eucharist the Seal and Bond of Union was as it were rent and torn in pieces When the inferior in gifts envied and the superior despised they could not worship and serve God like those Acts 2.1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with one accord Those Differences did make a breach upon that Worship that should have been intire Now here it is to be noted that every difference among Christians doth not amount to Schism There was a Paroxism a hot fit between Paul and Barnabas yet no Schism Acts 15.39 In the Church of Corinth Brother went to law with Brother 1 Cor. 6.6 The Apostle blames the difference but calls it not Schism Stephen Bishop of Rome was against Rebaptization Cyprian Bishop of Carthage was for it De unico Bapt. c.