Selected quad for the lemma: world_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A52414
|
The charge of schism continued being a justification of the author of Christian blessedness for his charging the separatists with schism, not withstanding the toleration : in a letter to a city-friend.
|
Norris, John, 1657-1711.
|
1691
(1691)
|
Wing N1245; ESTC R40651
|
37,244
|
145
|
grounded that I need not insist upon this Plea From the whole course of this Argument which I believe has receiv'd no damage by the management it fully and clearly appears that the Sanction of the Law is not only a thing really distinct from it but also no way necessary to its Obligation and therefore that the removing of the Sanction does not imply or involve the removal of the Law and consequently that the Toleration by removing the Sanction does not remove no nor so much as interrupt the Obligation of the Law to which the Sanction has been shewn to be not at all necessary Which I think breaks the Neck of the Objection and he had need be a very skilful Artist that shall set it agen Well but suppose which you see is not the Case that the Law which enjoyns Conformity to the Religion and Church establisht were by the Toleration perfectly remov'd and the Preceptive part of it taken away as well as the Penal yet neither upon this Supposition which is indeed a very great Concession and Abatement would a Toleration excuse those from Schism who would be guilty of it without it For Sir these Men are to consider if they have not already consider'd it that we do not derive the Grounds of Obligation to Ecclesiastick Communion only from the Authority of the Civil Law though that must be allow'd to add a considerable weight to the Obligation but also and chiefly from that of the Divine Law which I conceive to be as Positive and as Express in requiring Unity and Conformity of Worship as in requiring any Religious Worship at all The necessity of this is by S. Paul press'd upon the Ephesians from the Unity of that Body whereof they were Members from the Unity of that Spirit which was to them the Common Principle of Life and Action from the Unity of that Hope to which they were call'd from the Unity of that Lord to whose Service they were all devoted from the Unity of that Faith which they all profess'd from the Unity of that Baptism whereby they were grafted into the Church of Christ and lastly from the Unity of that God who was the Father of them all who was above all and in them all Every one of which Heads of Argument might justly deserve the Consideration of a particular Discourse but that I am willing to suppose my Reader so apprehensive as not to want to have things laid out to him more at large Accordingly the Christian Church is always represented by Figures that express the greatest Unity not only between that and Christ but also between Fellow-Christians This is said to be that One Body into which we are all Baptized by One Spirit and which is said to be fitly joyn'd together and compacted This is that Spiritual House built upon the Foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Jesus Christ himself being the Chief Corner-stone in whom all the Building fitly framed together grows into an Holy Temple in the Lord. 'T is represented also as one Flock under one Shepherd Jesus Christ whose last and most Solemn Prayer was for the Unity of the Church which must therefore be supposed to be highly agreeable to the Mind and Will of God otherwise our Saviour would not have pray'd for it so earnestly and with such Solemnity Though I question very much whether this Solemn Prayer of Christ will be fully heard and answer'd till the Glorious State of his Millennial Reign upon Earth However in the mean time 't is most certain that 't is the Great Duty of us all to endeavour after that State of Unity which our Saviour pray'd might be among his Disciples Hence it is that Schism is Condemn'd as a Work of the Flesh and those that Separate are said to be Sensual not having the Spirit and Christians are admonish'd to mark and shun them that cause Divisions and are withall Commanded to mind or think one and the same thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to stand fast in one Spirit with one Mind to walk by the same Rule to be joyn'd together in the same Mind and in the same Judgment and with one Mind and Mouth to glorifie God the Father with a World of Precepts and Exhortations to the same purpose which every one may find that does but open the Bible Now what can all this signifie Nothing certainly less than this That the Unity of the Church is so Sacred a thing that it ought to be preserv'd by all Lawful means and that no Separation ought to be made in it without absolute and evident Necessity In one word that where 't is Lawful to Communicate there 't is Sinful to Separate Which is more expresly deliver'd in that Apostolical Canon taken notice of by the Author of Christian Blessedness If it be possible as much as lies in you live peaceably with all Men. This takes in the whole Latitude and Capacity of Society the State as well as the Church in both which by vertue of this Precept Peace and Unity is to be maintain'd as far as is Possible and therefore without question on as far as is Lawful And if the Peace of the State is to be preserv'd as far as is possible then certainly much more the Peace of the Church Since then the Scripture is both so frequent and so express I might say also so earnest and passionate in inculcating the Necessity of preserving the Unity of the Church and in Condemning all unnecessary disturbances of it it is most certain that the Divine Law without the Confirmation of the Civil is a sufficient Obligation to Church-Unity where-ever it may Lawfully be held Every Christian Church that proposes Lawful terms of Communication has by the Law of God though the Civil Law be silent in the case an undoubted Right to the Conformity of all that are within the Pale of her Establishment who cannot with-hold it from her without incurring the Guilt of Schism which according to the general sense of the Christian World is nothing else but an unnecessary Separation and then is Separation unnecessary when Communion is lawful The Argument in Form is Whoever separates unnecessarily is guilty of Schism But whoever separates where he may lawfully Communicate separates unnecessarily Therefore whoever separates where he may lawfully Communicate is guilty of Schism The Minor Proposition is plain by its omn Light since there can no Moral necessity be pretended for not doing what may Lawfully be done And the Major Proposition is clear by the Light of Scripture which presses and injoyns the Peace and Unity of the Church to the very utmost degree of strictness even as far as is possible Whence the Conclusion necessarily follows That whoever separates where he may lawfully Communicate is guilty of Schism This is so clear and evident that the most moderately affected in Point of Church-Unity and Conformity could never shut their Eyes against the Light of it though they endeavour'd to wink never so hard Particularly
Mr. Hales a very Free and for the most part Judicious Writer and one very remarkable for his Moderation especially as to all Church-matters and who writes of Schism with all the tenderness imaginable handling it as if he were feeling the Edge of a Razor And yet after all his Endeavours to reduce it into as narrow a compass as he could by making as few guilty of it as might be he could find nothing to justifie Separation but only Sinfulness of Communion As may appear from several Passages that occur in his Tract of Schism For says he Page 195. For the further opening the Nature of Schism something must be added by way of difference to distinguish it from necessary Separation and that is that the Causes upon which Division is attempted proceed not from Passion or Distemper or Ambition or Avarice or such other Ends as Human Folly is apt to pursue but from well-weigh'd and necessary Reasons and that when all other Means having been tried nothing will serve to save us from guilt of Conscience but open Separation So that Schism if we would define it is nothing else but an unnecessary Separation of Christians from that part of the visible Church of which they were once Members Again says he Page 198. Unadvisedly and upon Fancy to break the Knot of Union between Man and Man especially among Christians upon whom above all other kind of men the tye of Love and Communion does most especially rest is a Crime hardly pardonable and that nothing Absolves a man from the guilt of it but true and unpretended Conscience Again says he Page 209. What if those to whose care the execution of the Publick Service is committed do something unlawful c. yet for all this we may not separate except we be constrain'd personally to bear a part our selves The Priests under Eli had so ill demean'd themselves about the daily Sacrifice that the Scriptures tell us they made it stink yet the People refused not to come to the Tabernacle nor to bring their Sacrifice to the Priest For in these Schisms which concern Fact nothing can be a just Cause of refusal of Communion but only to require the execution of some unlawful or suspected Act. Again says he Page 215. Why may I not go if occasion require to an Arian Church so there be no Arianism exprest in their Liturgy And again Lastly Page 227. speaking of Conventicles says he It evidently appears that all Meetings upon unnecessary occasions of Separation are to be so stiled so that in this sense a Conventicle is nothing else but a Congregation of Schismaticks From these and other like Passages any one may be satisfy'd that Mr. Hales with all his Moderation could not but see that where Separation is not necessary there Communion is and that to depart from the Communion of a visible Establisht Church with whom you may lawfully Communicate is to be guilty of Schism And so much seems to be granted even by the Author of the Letter of Toleration who defines Schism to be an ill grounded Separation in Ecclesiastical Communion made about things not necessary 'T is true indeed by things not necessary this Author means as he afterwards explains himself things not expresly contain'd in the Rule making him a Schismatick that separates from a Church because that Church does not require what the Scripture does not But this will come to one and the same thing For why is he a Schismatick that makes a Separation from a Church for not requiring more than is expresly contain'd in Scripture but only because he might Communicate with that Church notwithstanding this her frugality and reservedness and consequently his Separation was unnecessary This is the thing into which the Schism of such a Separatist must be at last resolv'd And then for the same reason why is not he as much a Schismatick that separates from a Church that does require more than the Scripture expresly contains provided it be not contrary to the Rule of Scripture since with this Church he may also lawfully Communicate and therefore has no Necessity for his Separation 'T is the unnecessity of the Separation that in both Cases makes the Schism So that this Notion of our Author though at first sight it seems to offer somewhat New resolves it self at long run into the Old Common Notion of Schism which has all along obtain'd in the Christian World Where-ever therefore there is no necessity of separating there the Church has a Right to Communion which to with-hold from her is Schism or else there is no such thing as Schism in the World This Right the Church of Rome had before her falling into her gross Corruptions and this Right the Church of England and all other Churches have that are Reform'd from them And this Right every Lawfully Constituted Church has by vertue of the Divine Law which is her Original Charta and which of it self lays upon all Christians a sufficient Obligation to Church-Unity though there should be no Civil Authority to back and inforce it For indeed unless it were so how could there be such a thing as the Sign of Schism in the Apostles Times and in the more Primitive Ages of the Church There was then no Civil Law to Oblige Christians to Church-Communion so far from this that the Edge and Point of the Civil Sword was turn'd directly against it The State and the Church then not only moved in two Different but in two Opposite Spheres And yet we find that in those early times the Sin of Schism was as much condemn'd and Schismatical Persons as deeply branded as in any of the after Ages Nay more indeed because of the singularity and strangeness of the Crime Punish'd indeed they could not so well be for want of the Concurrence of the Civil Sword which was not then in a Christian hand but they were censured and condemn'd and according to the Apostle's Admonition those were mark'd and avoided that caused Divisions And therefore though we should allow the Present Toleration to Silence the Civil Law whereby Conformity is injoyn'd which yet from the Premises appears to be far otherwise yet since the Divine Law requiring all possible Unity stands uncancell'd for sure the Toleration won't be pretended to reach that those that make Caufeless and unnecessary Divisions will still be guilty of Schism notwithstanding the favour of the Toleration which I am afraid will prove but an indifferent Plea for Separation at the Last day to those that have no better What then you 'll say is the Effect of a Toleration Or what can be supposed to be the just and reasonable intent of it I answer As to the Effect it cannot release at all from any preceding Obligation It does not release so much as from the Obligation of the Civil Law whose Penalty it only suspends much less does it release from Obligation to the Divine Law with which it has nothing to do and upon which it has