surely hence it is that the building of our Sion riseth no faster Our Tongues the tongues of the builders are divided O how happy were it for us and for the Church of God did we all speak but one Language Whilest we thus differ saith one truly we can build nothing but Babel Difference of Tongues caused their Babel to cease but it builds ours A truth whereof we have lamentable experience at this day O what a Babel is this our Sion at this day turned to all thorow this confusion of Languages because all do not speak the same thing not Ministers Much lesse people Among them how many several Languages to he heard at this day More then ever there were at Babel At Babel some conceive that one Tongue was divided into seventy two Languages But our divisions far exceed that number At Babel others conjecture that there were as many tongues as several kinreds and families With us there are more Kinreds and Families being subdivided The husband speaking one thing the wife another the parent one thing and the childe another the master one thing and the servant another Thus it should not be Christians who have one Head should have but one Tongue all speaking the same thing for substance 2. And as much as may be for expression also However not affecting a difference A vain and dangerous affectation so it is to decline common and received expressions whether laid down in the Word or else being consonant to it upon good ground taken up by the Church The later of these many ancient Hereticks took great exceptions at and sought to make advantage of Some words they met with in common use in the Church but because they did not finde them syllabically and expresly in the Scriptures therefore they rejected them and with them the things signified by them Thus the Arrians because they found not the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Consubstantiality in the Text therefore they rejected it and with it the Orthodox doctrine of the Church touching the sons being of the same substance with the father And so the Sabellians because they found not the word Trinity in Scriptures therefore they denyed the Trinity of persons in the God-head Upon like ground the Photinians denyed the two natures in Christ and the Nestorians the Hypostatical the personal union of those two natures Thus it was of old And thus it is in many places of this Kingdom at this day where all these old rotten Errors are again revived and raised out of their graves and that upon the very same pretences A dangerous affectation which Christians should beware of Do we beleeve with the Church let us not without just ground refuse to speak with the Church in the Churches Language and Dialect Specially in the phrase of Scripture This is that which the Ministers of Christ should affect as much as may be to speak in that sacred Dialect Not setting the Minâ— of their Brains on work to coyn new and high and far-fetcht expressions purposely to amuse the hearer a practise much in use with Familists and Antinomians and some other Sects of the times Of such Pareus observes truely that giving themselves first to finde out new phrases and terms afterwards oft-times they come to broach new Doctrines new Opinions and so to make Sects and Schisms in the Church And therefore to prevent this the Apostle here desires his Corinthians that they would speak the same thing Therein saith the foresaid Author tacitely pointing at one of these heads from whence their Schisms and Factions were sprung viz. From their different Language in and about matters of Religion And let this his advice to them be as acceptable to us as it is seasonable That we may avoyd the like evils in speaking of the matters of God take heed of affecting an unwarrantable and wanton singularity Ministers hold we fast that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} that form of sound and wholesome words which we have received from Christ and his Apostles and from the Orthodox Churches of God speaking the same things in the same manner that they have done before us Not crossing not interfering with them nor yet willingly with our Brethren Pulpit against Pulpit is next to Altar against Altar As much as may be let such clashing be declined by the Ministers of Christ whose endeavor should be that they might all speak the same thing This do we And this do you Quest I but how shall both we and you attain to it How shall we come to this unity of Language Answ. Why labor we for unity of Hearts and Mindes Anatomists tell us of an Artery which goeth from the Heart to the Tongue If Hearts be agreed Tongues will soon be accorded And thus I am got upon the second step of the Apostles gradation which leadeth me to the third That ye be perfectly joyned together in the same minde and in the same judgement I shall not stand long upon either Onely the first word will stay me a little being a word full of Emphasis and significancy {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} That ye be perfectly joyned together So our Translation renders it by divers words not knowing how fully to expresse it in one The word properly signifieth Compagination when the parts of a thing are aptly joyned together so as they do fitly agree with the whole and amongst themselves Even as it is in the body of man wherein the Members are all fitly joyned and knit together in a due symmetry and proportion so as they are each serviceable to other and all to the whole This is properly {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} And this it is which Paul here begs for his Corinthians that they might be thus united and compacted together A blessing very desirable for every Church Thus in the Church invisible united The whole body is knit together by joynts and bands having nourishment ministred to it from the Head as the Apostle speaketh All true Believers they are incorporated into one Mystical body knit together by the bands of Faith and Love By the one united to their Head Christ by the other one to another And such a union such a coagmentation is a thing very desirable for every visible Church This it is which maketh it a compleat and perfect Church So the vulgar Latin here renders the word in the Text Sitis autem perfecti Be ye perfect Then is a thing said to be perfect and compleat when it hath all the parts thus aptly and fitly put together And thence it is that the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is sometimes used in that sense So our Translation renders it 2 Cor. 13. Finally Brethren Fare ye well be perfect {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} That is perfectly united unto Christ and one to another as the Jesuit there fitly expounds
relation and though they will not own you yet do you own them still looking upon them as Brethren So did Ioseph upon his unkinde Brethren who had cast him into the pit and sold him into Egypt yet still he looketh upon them as Brethren his bowels yerned over them and as occasion was his hand was inlarged towards them in the supply of their wants thus stand you affected to your unkinde Brethren of the Separation Suppose by their uncharitable censures they should cast you into the pit excluding you from their communion and send you to Egypt to Rome as some of them have done by their rash and un-Christian censures past upon the Church of England and the Members of it yet still let your bowels yern over them and be ready upon all occasions to do all good offices to them Looking upon those of that way and dealing with them as Brethren Brethren of the Separation That was the stile of the last age which our fathers gave unâ—o theirs and let not us grutch it their children So call them so own them I mean such of them as in whom the Image of God appeareth Such still they are or may be to uâ— even as Iosephs Brethren were to him Brethren by the Fathers side though not by the Mothers though they will not acknowledge the same Church for their Mother yet they acknowledge the same God for their Father and in that respect let us yet look upon them as Brethren I beseech you Brethren By the Name of the Lord Iesus Christ There is the Apostles Adjuration so I may not amisse call it For what is an Adjuration but the requiring or commanding of a thing by interposing the Name and Authority of God or Christ And thus doth Paul here back his Obtestation or charge by the sacred Name of the Lord Jesus The name of Jesus Christ is the same with Christ himself I know some Romish Expositors would make more of it placing a great deal of weight in the very name it self In obtestationibus etiam nomina ponderantur saith the Iesuite Estius upon it In obtestations requests and charges of this nature names themselves have their weight Thus amongst the Iews saith he they had ever a special regard to that nomen Dei tetragrammaton that four-lettered name of God as they called it viz. Iehovah The name it self was sacred unto them and consequently they took it as the most solemn Obligation which was bouâ—d with it And of such account saith he should the name Iesus be unto Christians Nomen sacrosanctum super omnia venerabile a sacred name and a name above every name And therefore Paul in his Obtestation saith he here maketh use of that name as presuming it would carry a great deal of sway with them But this we decline as smelling too much of the Iesuit Who by advancing the name Jesus above all other names thinks also to advance 〈◊〉 is own Order above all other Orders Leaving them the shell seek we for the Kernel To beseech by the Name of Iesus Christ here is no more but to beseech for Christs sake or by Authority from Christ Take it either way we shall finde it a prevalent Argument 1. For Christs sake For the love of Iesus Christ so Calvin explains it Quantum ipsum amant As you love Jesus Christ as you bear any true respect unto him And can there be a more forcible perswasive to a Christian then this Paul himself having felt the working of this love in his own Brest he found a compulsory force in it The love of Christ saith he constraineth us And hereupon he maketh use of it as an Argument to others as conceiving that if this would not prevail with them nothing would And surely so it is Where the Name of Christ love to Christ respect unto Christ unto his Honor and Glory will not prevail with Christians there is little hope of prevailing The name of Christ it should be dear and precious to every Christian a thing alwayes in his eye Like the Pole-star to the Mariner which way soever he stears yet he hath an eye to that Thus in what ever a Christian undertaketh he should have a respect to this name So Paul presseth it upon his Colossians Col. 3. Whatsoever ye do in word or deed do all in the name of the Lord Jesus viz. With a respect unto him in reference to his Honor and Glory What ever may tend that way that do we What ever is dishonorable to Iesus Christ that avoid 2. Or secondly By the name of Iesus Christ that is by Authority from Iesus Christ Thus Officers speak and act not in their own but in their Masters name the Kings name by Authority from him And thus the Ministers of Christ being Church-Officers what they say or do to the Church it must not be in their own name but in the name of Iesus Christ In his name they must Preach as Ambassadors for Christ In his name dispense Sacraments and Censures In the name of our Lord Iesus Christ when ye are gathered together in the power of our Lord Iesus Christ to deliver such a one unto Satan So Paul would have his Corinthians deal with that scandalous person And so himself here dealeth with them not in his own name but in the name of the Lord Iesus Christ I beseech you Brethren by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ Thus have I cast a glance upon the words severally and simply considered finding somewhat in each branch not unuseful Give me leave now before I part with them to reflect upon them again looking upon them as they stand in reference to the thing here so much desired by the Apostle from these his Corinthians Which is Unity Peace Church-Peace and agreement amongst themselves A thing certainly of very great consequence of high concernment to the Church Otherwise questionlesse Paul would never have laid so much weight upon it never have put so much strength to his râ—quâ—st and charge concerning it Wise men do not use to intreat for trifles Much lesse to beseech and that with such earnestnesse It is Aretius his note upon the Text and it is a good one Wise men saith he will not make use of such serious obtestations much lesse of Adjurations except it be in matters of great importance and weight Now if this be a truth as undoubtedly it is and I wish it may be so looked upon by those who are so ready upon every sleight and trivial occasion to break out into such deep and solemn protestations not sparing to make use of the name of God to binde them surely this cannot be the part of wise men much lesse of wise Christians then certainly there is scarce any one thing of greater concernment unto Christians then this Sure I am there is no one thing that Paul doth nor I think any man can more earnestly
properly so called Which again may be either from the Church or from a Church From the Church Catholike the whole Church That was properly Donatism the direct Error of the Seekers at this day Or from a particular Church and that is properly Separatism My eye is cheifly upon the latter of these Of which to advance yet one step further following the conduct of the learned Chameron there are two kindes or rather two degrees There is to use his terms a Negative and a Positive Separation The former is simplex secessio when one or more do quietly and peaceably withdraw themselves from communion with a Church onely enjoying themselves and their consciences in a private way not making a head against that Church from which they are departed The other when persons so withdrawing do consociate and draw themselves into a distinct and opposite body setting up a Church against a Church Exercising the Worship and Service of God Administring the Ordinances Word Sacraments Censures apart in a separated body and in a separated way This is that which Augustine and other Divines after him alluding to that act of King Ahaz's 2 Kings 16. in setting up an Altar of his own making after the fashion of that which he saw at Damascus besides the Lords Altar call the setting up of an Altar against an Altar And this it is saith that judicious Author which in a peculiar manner and by way of eminency is and deserves to be called by the name of Schism And thus you see both the name and thing in measure opened unto you What Schisms are viz. Church Divisions Which if they be in Doctrine are properly Heresies in Practise Schisms Which may be either without Separation or with it The former are Sects and Factions the latter more properly Schism Which consisteth in an unwarrantable separating and withdrawing from Church-communion Whether it be from the whole Church which is Donatism or from a particular Church which is Separatism Which may be carried either in a private way by a simple secession and withdrawing or in a publike and open-way by setting up a Church against a Church the former a Negative the latter a Positive Schism Now these are the things which the Apostle here with so much earnestnesse and importunacy diswades his Corinthians from And surely not without cause is it that he should be so zealous in this cause as will appear if we do but rightly consider the nature of such Divisions such Schisms which are Evils and great Evils Evils Take it as you will for the evil of punishment or sin We shall finde it true in both 1. Schism is an evil of Punishment a Judgement and that a great one It is one of the judgements which the Prophet Amos threatens against Israel Amos 6. Behold the Lord commandeth saith he and he will smite the great house with Breaches and the little house with Clests That place Joramo applieth and that not unfitly to Hereâ—â—â—s and Schisms which are as Brâ—aâ—hes and Clests in the Church A sad Judgement Such are Divisions in the State Heal the Breaches thereof for it shaketh saith David speaking of the Civil Commotions in his Kingdom A judgement which we all feel of and groan under at this day And such are Divisions in the Church a judgement a sad and sore judgement Such are the Ecclesiastical Breaches in this Kingdom at this day The Schisms and Divisions which are broken in and that amongst God own people for my own part I cannot but look upon them as one of the blackest Clouds one of the saddest judgements which hang over the head of this Kingdom at this day Of sad influence for the present and unlesse they be healed of dangerous consequence for the future A great Judgement 2. And in the second place a great sin Such are heart divisions amongst a people They are both a judgement and a sin Their heart is divided saith the Prophet Hosea now they shall be found faulty Their heart is divided or He hath divided their heart as the Margin reads it This had God done In as much as they had divided their hearts from God God in his just judgement divided them amongst themselves taking away his spirit of peace and communion from them giving them over to Seditions and Fractions which afterward proved the ruine of their Kingdom And being thus divided now they were found faulty guilty of many and great evils Such is Sedition in the State and such is Schism in the Church each aâ— evil a Mother evil an inlet to an Ocean of Evils We have to deal with the latter Schism which is a sinful evil and that no small one Peccatum gravissimum So our judicious Casuist determines it concerning Schism properly so called It is a most grievous sin Musculus informs me of some who in point of sinfulnesse have compared it with Hâ—resie and others who have aggravated it beyond it as the greater evil of the two Himself concludes it a sin of a high nature And therein all Divines agree with him Augustine that famous Doctor of the Church disputing against the Donatists about their Schism which was a Separation from the whole Church he calleth it by the name of Sacriledge Sacrilegiâ—m Schismatis The Sacriledge of Schism Withall not sparing to tell them that that Schism of theirs was a greater sin then that which they took such high offence at and which was the ground of their Separation because it was not so severely proceeded against as they judged fitting but some that were guilty of it were still admitted to intermeddle in the affairs of the Church viz. The sin of the Traditores as they called them such as in time of persecution had through fear delivered up their Bibles to the Persecutors to be burnt This sin that judicious Father compares with their Schism And to try which was heaviest he brings both to the ballance of the Sanctuary Where he findes this out weighing that So much he collects from the grievousnesse of the punishment inflicted by God upon this sin above that I or any other Three sins he taketh notice of each of which was grievously punished The first was the Israelites Idolatry in worshipping the Golden Calf Exod. 22. The second was a sin not much unlike to that of the Traditores though for circumstance far more hainous viz. That foul act of King Jehoiakim in cutting and burning the prophetical Rowl Jere. 36. The third was that Schismatical and Seditious attempt of Corah and his company rising up against Moses and assaying to make a rent a breach amongst the people by dividing and separating themselves from the rest All three hainous sins and each grievously punished But none of them like the last The first the Israelites Idolatry was punished with the Sword The second Jehoiakims contempt was punished with Captivity But the third Corahs Schism with an unheard of judgement The earth
Secondly As for our Ordination wee acknowledg the same We had it not from the people and we blesse God wee had it not In asmuch as wee finde neither Precept nor President for it in Scripture neither untill this Last-last age was there ever any such custome in the Churches of God Thirdly As for our Election if a Popular Vote be in this case needfull some of us many of us can herein plead a Fore-consent most of us I presume an After-consent Now let me aske this question What was it that made Leah Jacobs wife Shee was not so the first night he bedded with her Why there came an After-conâ—ent a Ratihibition as the Lawyers call it which made the mariage valid And such a consent I presume must if not all the godly Ministers in this Kingdome have If not an Explicit yet an Implicit consent which is ejusdem valoris of the same weight So as if their first entrance were not so orderly yet this after-act maketh or rather acknowledgeth them to be true Ministers Object 2. But supposing our Ministery to be true yet wee want an Ordinance and that one of the three the first three viz. Discipline Answ. Suppose this defect yet cannot that destroy the essence of a Church It was not the want of the Golden-snuffers or some other like utensiles in the Temple that could make it to be no Temple Discipline maketh for the well being not for the being of a Church Secondly But in the second place however the Exercise of this Ordinance be in some particular acts for a time suspended yet is not the Ordinance it self alienated which being an Appendix to the word and Sacraments cannot in respect of the right of it be separated from the Church Object 3. But here is no right Constitution Our Churches were not Rightly gathered at the first neither are the Members of them combined in a Church-Covenant which is the forme of a Church Answ. Suppose this also that there were some Errours in the constitution of our Churches yet will not that make them no true Churches inasmuch as Constitution in that way is only an appendance of an externall form no part of the essence of a true Church 2. But neither must this be granted Master Cotton himselfe in this case pleads our cause remembring us not without warrant from Antiquitie that The first Churches in this Kingdome were gathered either by some of the Apostles themselves or by Apostolicall men which being so as himselfe inferres wee cannot but conceive that they were rightly gathered and planted according to the rule of the Gospel So that all the work now is saith hee not to make them Churches which were none before but to reduce and restore them which are to their primitive institution 3. As for combination by Church-covenant Doctor Ames truely states it That an implicite Covenant in this case is sufficient Now such a Covenant do all make who joyne themselves to a Church holding a constant communion with it in the Ordinances of Christ So much and no more can be extorted from that phrase of joyning to the Apostles of which we read Act. 5. 13. where it is said that after that exemplary judgement executed upon Ananias and Sapphyra for their hypocriticall profession Of the rest saith the Text no man durst joyne himself unto them And so it is said of Paul Act. 9. When he came to Jerusalem he assayed to joyn himself to the Disciples that is to have fellowship and communion with them The word is the same with that which we meet with Act. 8. 29. where the Spirit speaking to Philip bids him go and joyn himself to the Eunuchs chariot {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} proximè adjungitor that is goe neer it so as he might have converse and conference with the Eunuch And so doe they who in a constant way come and sit down under such a Ministery holding communion with such a people in all the Ordinances of God they joyn themselves to the Church in that place which being an implicit covenant cannot be denyed to be sufficient to the constituting of true members of a Church But I shall waste no more time upon this subject in vindicating the truth of our Churches which hath already been done so strongly so convincingly by others that certainly it cannot but be either great wilfulnesse or great weaknesse not to acknowledge them so to be Taking this then for granted which is by our judicious Brethren acknowledged and I think will not be denied by any moderate spirit now proceed we to a second enquirie and that is Quest Whether here be a separation or no from these true Churches Answ. That there hath been so I presume it will not be denyed by any who ever heard of the Brownists errour of which rigid way I wish there were not yet too many to be found both in this and other places of the Kingdome such as professe Separation and glorie in it But I passe by them the persons I have here properly to deale with are such as would be thought to come neerer to us and yet are divided from us such as in word at least owne us for true Churches and yet withdraw communion with us and that not onely in a negative way as Peter and some other of the Jewes are said to have separated from the Gentiles Gal. 2. Before that certain that is certain Jewes came from James viz. from Jerusalem hee did eat with the Gentiles But when they were come hee withdrew and separated himselfe c. And other Jewes dissembled likewise with him The very case of some in this and other places of the Kingdome Before that certain of another way came from the other side they did eat with us they held communion with our Churches but upon their coming they have withdrawn and separated themselves but also in a positive way combining themselves into separated societies â—etting up of Churches some of them in Churches and against Churches exercising the worship of God in a separated way refusing communion with us whether for them to have communion with us or for us to have communion with them So is it in divers parts of the Kingdome and I wish I might not say that it were so in this place Repl. But doe wee not charge them wrongfully Separation is a thing which they professe against and they call in their practice to bear witnesse to their profession Occasionally they will joyn with us in some acts of publick worship viz. in hearing and preaching the word hearing our Ministers and preaching to our people Answ. True some of them haply will doe the former Some I say not all for wee must know that in this division as commonly it is in all divisions there are subdivisions Some of this way will hear us in this place a second sort will hear their owne Ministers here but not ours a third sort
will neither heare ours nor their own within these walls But some of them will And so they may by their owne principles and yet have no Church-communion with us Hear us as gifted men not as persons in offâ—â—â— Hear us as Teachers but not as Ministers a distinction without a difference Besides hearing say they is no act of Church-communion Eating one bread at the Lords Table that indeed is properly Communion say they but not hearing one word And as for occasionall hearing it is agreed at all hands it is not properly an act of Church-communion which is no more then Infidels and Heathens may doe who have no communion with the Churches of Christ And so for preaching to us this they may doe occasionally nay constantly and yet have no communion with us nor yet preaching to us as Churches of Christ which some of that way have openly and freely disclaimed in way of Preface to their Sermons no more then they may doe to Turks and Indians with whom yet they have no communion As for that Ordinance wherein Church-communion as they conceive it properly lyeth therein they totally decline us From my heart I wish there were not so much truth in this charge Repl. But this cannot properly be called a Separation a separation imports a praeunion a union by a Church-agreement Now where there never was such an agreement there cannot properly be a separation and consequently not a Schism Answ. To this I have laid the foundation of an answer already by distinguishing betwixt an explicite and an implicite Church-agreement or Covenant the former is verball and formall the later reall Now as for this later an implicite agreement I presume it will not be denyed to our Churches otherwise they were no Churches And if it be granted then to withdraw communion with them may stand chargeable with the guilt of separation and consequently of Schism as truely as really as if they had been gathered by an explicite formall Church-covenant As for such a Covenant expressed in words however some may conceive it to make for the bene esse the well being the orderly gathering of a Church which my self will not wholly deny yet for the esse the simple being of it I think few or none will affirme it And if there may be a Church where there is no such Covenant then there may be a separation from that Church and that separation a Schisme Otherwise the Brownists nay the Donatists separation had been no Schisme in as much as they did not separate from Churches so gathered and combined by an explicite Church-covenant which whatever may be pleaded for the conveniencie of it yet certainly as it is distinct from the Covenant of grace it is but a prudentiall way no other then a humane and that a novell invention So then as yet the charge runs on Here are true Churches and here is a separation from these Churches Qu. A third inquirie followes Whether this separation be voluntary and spontaneous or no If so this will contribute much to the making up of the formalitie of this Schism Now whether so or no let it be enquired what coaction what necessity there hath been and is for such a departure 7. For the former Coaction and violent Expulsion what-ever the former times might have done yet I hope the present will not take up that plea if so be the violence and rigour of the one did drive some away yet mee thinks the lenity and indulgence of the other might invite them to return to communion again with that Church those Churches which are so willing so desirous to receive them into their bosomes Repl. But there was there is a necessitie of this departure Why so Why were there no more but this the unequall division of your Congregations in many places necessitates a division For instance In this and so in many other places of the Kingdome your Congregations are too great too numerous the people too many to joyn together in a convenient way in church-communion Now in this case a withdrawing of some is necessary as it is for bees to flight when the hive is too strait for them Answ. In answer to this I shall not spare again to acknowledge what I have formerly both preached and published That in this place and so I suppose it is in divers other in the Kingdome there is but too just a ground for this complaint and my desire still is as I then expressed it that this inconvenience might be remedied by an orderly division Far be it from me and from all the Ministers of Jesus Christ to cry out against divisions upon so base and unworthy a ground as this because wee would ingrosse a people wholly to our selves though too many for us to have the inspection over This it was which made the souldiers in the Gospel so unwilling to have the seamlesse coat of Christ divided because each of them hoped and desired to have it whole and entire to himself And this it was as Musculus aptly applies that Storie which made those foure Colonels the four Patriarchs of the Church the Patriarch of Jerusalem Alexandria Constantinople and Rome each to complain of the rending and tearing of the Church by divisions Why Because every one of them aspired to be Commander in chief Universall Bishop and so to have had the whole to himselfe And this it is which ever since hath made that grand Schismatick the Pope so hee is the greatest Schismatick in the world to cry out so much against Schism because by every such division his greatnesse suffers some diminution Now far be such base ends from the thought of any Minister of Christ for my self I professe I am so far from grutching an orderly division in this place that I shall not rest satisfied till I see it accomplished which I do not wholly despair to do if some of those who take up this complaint for their own advantage be not the hinderers of it 2. But yet in way of Reply I might in the second place minde them who take up this plea in this place that however this Congregation be great and too great yet can it not be imagined to be so great as that at Jerusalem must needs be which yet is so earnestly contended for by those of that way that it was but one Congregation one Church 3. However in the third place whether this be the true ground of this Separation or no let the emptie seates of diverse engaged in this division being constantly in my eye let them give evidence If so be they for their parts want no convenient accommodation for participating in publike Ordinances this plea in reference unto them must be acknowledged to be in a great measure if not wholy void and null Repl. But though here should be no Naturall yet there is a Morall necessity of separating And why so Why in one word we cannot hold Communion with you
communion with the Church with such the Church should not eat they ought not to be admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and being excluded from her Communion Christians ought not to entertaine unnecessary societie with them Otherwise civill communion with them may be had Peter Martyr putteth one case Suppose a travellour in his journey a case too ordinary cannot be commoded with diet or lodging but in a profane Inne or Alehouse may hee not therefore take in there And Calvin puts the like Suppose a man coming to an Ordinarie see an excommunicate person there may hee not sit downe and eate with him In these cases a man is not left to his owne libertie and free choice no more is a Christian in his religious communnion Whether hee will come to the Lords Table or no it is not left to his owne choice it is his dutie not his libertie And therefore suppose the company communicating with him be not every wayes such as hee could desire suppose some of them apparantly unworthy yet is hee not thereupon to abstaine from that Ordinance much lesse to separate from that Church whereof God hath made him a member To this I might add The one of these is an inward the other onely an outward communion the communion which a beleever hath with an unbeleever in eating of the Sacrament is no other but what the unbeleever there hath with Christ an outward and visible communion But in intimate societie there is an inward communion so as there is a broad difference betwixt the one and the other Here then is no warrant which can yet be found in Scripture to make this separation warrantable and just Repl. But is it not sufficiently warrantable in the ground and cause of it Answ. Not so neither in reference to our Churches I speak still for some not for all wherein what-ever blots may be found let me yet say There were as great if not greater in the Church of Corinth Have wee some some scandalous persons tolerated amongst us So had they Have we a mixture in our Communion So had they A strange mixture specially if that word be to be taken properly as some Expositours conceive it must be which the Apostle layeth in their Sacramentall dish 1 Cor. 11. 21. where he chargeth them that when they came together to Celebrate the Lords Supper and to have Christian Communion in their Love-feasts which were annexed to the Sacrament immediatly either going before it or following after it * uncertain whether though most probably the latter some of them were Hungry and others Drunken however if they were but intemperate in the use of the Creatures at that time which Expositours generally conceive the word there to import If so here was such a Mixture as I hope our Congregations will not cannot be charged with Yet for all this and many other abuses tolerated in that Church we hear not a word from the Apostle by way of advice and counsell to his Corinthians that the godly party should withdraw themselves from Communion with such a Church Or that they should mould and incorporate themselves into a new body a new Church consisting of a select party taken out of the old one Which yet surely had it been so necessary or expedient as now it is conceived by some to be hee would not have neglected to put them upon Still then it must remain an unjust Separation notwithstanding what ever ground can be alledged to the contrary * To which I might yet add what is not altogether inconsiderable the Injustice of this practise in reference to those Ministers and those Churches from which this Separation is made Those Ministers are hereby deserted by those whom it may be God bath made them his Instruments to beget and bring home to himself or at lest to nourish and bring up for himself Strangers entring upon the fruit and comfort of their labours Themselves no more owned then as if there had never been any such relation betwixt them and their people Repl. Why but is this such an act of Injustice What may not people make choice of what Ministers they please putting themselves under such a Ministry as by which they may edifie most Answ Suppose it that a people have such a Power and Right to choose their own Ministers yet having once chosen them and God by giving a blessing to their Ministery having ratified and confirmed that choice evidencing that they are the Ministers of God to them whether may they now upon your pretext of greater Edification take a liberty to themselves to chose new ones toties quoties as oft as they please and to run from one to another This the moderate Authour of the late Irenicon will by no meanes allow but condemns as the direct way to bring in all kinde of disorder and confusion into the Church And I think none who are impartially judicious but will therein subscribe to him As Ministers are hereby injured so Churches The Churches from which this Separation is made though true Churches of Christ yet hereby they are Shamed Contemned Condemned Disquited Hindred Indangered And If this be not an Act of high Injustice let any but those who are interested in the guilt of it speak Sure I am it is not agreeable to that Breviate of the second Table the Rule of common equity and justice layed down by our Saviour Matt. 7. 12. Whatsoever yee would that men should doe unto you doe yee even so to them What Ministers what Churches would willingly have such measure meated to themselves And if not so let them see with what pretext of equity and justice they can offer it unto others I know there will be found some Figleaves to cover the nakednesse of this practice But they are such as will soon be blowen away 1. In the first place it is alledged that in this kingdom at present there is no way laid forth for the Churches to walk in And then why may not they take liberty to set up their Way as well as others theirs Answ. Now truly so it was in Israel when there was no King there every one did that which was good in his own eyes So they did but whether they should so have done or no there is the question and yet no question And so it hath been in this intermysticall season this unhappie Interregnum of the Church Multitudes have taken a licence to do what seemed them good broaching of new Doctrines and setting up of new wayes But quo jure by what right and with what warrant they have done it let them make answer for I cannot True it is this unhappie Anarchie no Church-Government must be acknowledged to have been the occasion of them all but a just ground or warrant for any of them it cannot be said to be not for Separation I am sure 1. In as much as the Churches frame and fabrick hath
in admiration being taken with the gifts and parts of their Teachers some addicted themselves to one others to another making themselves their Disciples I am of Paul and I am of Apollo c. Take we heed of being taken in the same snare Let not our eyes be so dazeled with what ever eminency of parts or graces which we apprehend to be in others that we should set up their examples for our Rules This it was that drew many of the Jews and Barnabas amongst the rest into the Error of an unwarrantable Separation they saw Peter a leading man a prime and eminent Apostle going before them And surely this it is which hath misled many a well meaning soul in this Kingdom drawn them into the same error to separate from their Brethren because they have seen some prime leading men whose persons they honor and that it may be deservedly to go before them And this is the main Loadstone the principal attractive that inclines them to look that way No wonder in this case if they be subject to miscarry So hath many a ship done by following her Admiral which carried the Lanthorn in a dark night not heeding her own course as she should have done both have been bilged upon the same shelf A dangerous thing it is to shape our course by anothers compasse And therefore to draw to a conclusion take we heed how we look too much at man what ever he be It was Pauls resolution concerning those who seemed to be somewhat men of reputation such as the Apostles were for of some of them he there speaketh What ever they were saith he it maketh no matter to me God accepteth no mans person It is rule not example a divine Rule not a Humane example that we are to walk by Let this be our guide the Rule of the Word Being led thereby now are we in the way to peace and that both inward and outward with God our selves others As many as walk according to this Rule Peace shall be upon them and upon the Israel of God And thus I have at length dispatched the negative part of this Apostolical Obtestation or Charge Wherein if any conceive I have dwelt too long I shall make them amends in handling of the latter part of the Text the Positive part of this Charge which I shall passe over with as much brevity as possibly may be That ye all speak the same thing and that ye be perfectly joyned together in the same minde and in the same judgement We have here the Apostles Exhortation which in one word is to that which we so much at this day in this Kingdom want Vnity A threefold unity consisting in three particulars in Tongue in Heart in Head So Calvin and Beza distinguish the parts of this Gradation In Tongue That ye all speak the same thing In Heart That ye be perfectly joyned together in the same minde In Head And in the same judgement So the Apostle here placeth them in a retrograde Order Beginning first with that which in order of nature is last Tongue-unity floweth from Heart-unity and Heart-unity from Head-unity Men first agree in judgement think the same thing Then in Affection minding the same thing then in Language speaking the same thing The Apostle here goeth backwards ab imis ad summa from the bottom to the top from the stream to the fountain from the effect to the cause And in that method I shall follow him beginning with the first 1. Tongue-unity Such a unity should all Christians specially the Members of the same Church strive after and labour for A unity of tongues This is that which Paul wisheth for his Romans Rom. 15. where he prayeth that they might with one mouth glorifie God And this is one thing which here he so earnestly begs for from these his Corinthians {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} That ye all speak the same thing {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} The same thing both for Substance and Expression Christians should have an eye to both 1. For substance that they may speak the same thing though it be in different Language So did the Apostles at the day of Pentecost Acts 2. They spake divers Languages but the same thing A remarkable difference betwixt that division of Tongues at Babel and this at Jerusalem At Babel they spake different things as well as different words One speaks of Brick another answers him with Morter But at Jerusalem the Apostles however they spake different Languages yet they all spake the same thing all Preached the same Gospel delivered the same Truthes O that there were such an happy unity amongst us at this day in this Kingdom That there were but one Language to be heard in this Iland One Language amongst Ministers amongst people Ministers they are by their office speakers as it is said of Paul he was the cheif speaker Gods Mouth to his people Thou shalt be as my mouth O that this mouth might still speak the same thing having but one Tongue in it A mouth which should have more tongues then one in it we would look upon it as a strange monstrosity O let it not be said or thought that the Mouth of God should have so One Mouth So runs the phrase of Scripture As he spake by the mouth not mouths of all his holy Prophets And one Tongue One Tongue for one man It is one of Pauls qualifications which he requires in a Deacon he must not be {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Double-tongued speaking sometimes one thing and sometimes another A foul blemish to a Minister of Christ to be so to speak one thing to day another tomorrow to say and unsay to have more tongues then one If all should speak the same thing then much more the same man But that by the way One tongue for all That all the Ministers of Christ might speak the same thing the same Truths for substance so as though they deliver several points of Doctrine yet they may be such as are no way repugnâ—â— to another or to the Truth Truth we are sure is but one Error be various And the Word of Truth as Saint Iames calleth the Gospel Preached it is no more It is but one Word One Faith one Baptism saith the Apostle one Doctrine of Faith How is it then that amongst us there should be more then one How is it that not onely Parlors but Pulpits and Presses ring with such a contrariety of Doctrine And that not onely in some smaller differences as in the Interpretation of an obscure Text of Scripture or the like wherein men sometimes may safely disagree each abounding in his own sense but in points if not of yet neer the Foundation Surely a sad hearing presaging no good to the Church or cause of God in this Kingdom This it was as I have said which hindered the building of Babel And