Justification of Separation from the Church of England, Treatise · Section 75
The Prophets did not separate themselves though they cryed out against Mr B.wickednes, Isa. 1. 4. 5. 6. 9. 10. &c.
Both the Prophets, Preists, and people that were godly did separateAnsw. frō Apostate Israel in Ierboams tyme, which we take to be1 King. 11. 29. 30. 31. 32, 33. 2 Chro. 11. 14. 16. your estate in a great measure, cōsidering your worship, holy dayes, Preisthood, & government. But for Ierusalem & the Church there, the case is otherwise. Touching which I desire these two Rules may be born in minde.
First that ther was that one onelyonly visible Church vponupon the faceI. of the earth, tyed to one temple, altar, sacrifice, Preisthood, in one place, & that no man could absolutely separate from that Church, but he must separate from the visible presence, and from all the solemn publique worship of God.
Secondly that the Iewish Church had not that distinct ecclesiasticallII. ordinance of excommunication, which we now have, but that the obstinate or presumptuous offender was by bodily death to be cut of from the Lords people, the same persons namely the whole nation being both Church, and common wealth, according to that special dispensation of those times. Wherevpon it followeth, first, that since absolute separation from the Iewish Church was unlawfull, communion with it was lawfull: and 2. that since the Church had not the power to cast out an offender, it was no pollution vntounto them to suffer him amongst them, so they discharged, such other duetyes, as were inioyned them, by the Lord. But it is now otherwise: the times are altered and the dispensations of them. Every place where a companie of faithful people are gathered into Christs name, is mount Syon, & hath the promise of Gods presence: and separation from one Church remayning vncurable may be made into another. And as separation may be from a Church, so may excommunication be of person, obstinately wicked. And these two Rules, rightly applyed wil (as I am perswaded) satisfie the scriptures and reasons brought by Mr. B. here and both by him, and others els where, from the old testament, and the vnpolluted cōmunion of the servants of God in the Iewish Church. The other scriptures I will breifly passe over.
Tit. 1. 15. shewes, that all the creatures of God are pure to the pure. I graunt it, and his ordinances also. But ever provided, in their lawfull, and right vse, which in a prophane and vnsanctified communion they are not. By your exposition Mr Bernard, a godly man might eat the Lords supper with haeretiques, excōmunicates, yea Turks or Pagans, if they would, and yet all should be pure to him. Of the 2. and 3. chap. in the Revelation, I have spoken formerly, and there proved that the Churches were polluted by the tolleration of wicked persons amongst them, and therefore reproved, neyther is it materiall, if the scriptures do not expresly tax the whole Church for connivency every time they rebuked some persons in it. It is sufficient they do it in some places, and in some Churches: there is the same reason of all, neither hath one Church priviledge above an other, or for one sin, more then an other. And this also may serve for answer to the 2. & 3. of your twenty Reasons in your 2. book. OnelyOnly you must take knowledgpag. 1… 1. of your▪ grosse oversight in the latter reason, where the question being of the true matter of the Church, you bring in Noah in the old world, & L…t in Sodom vnpolluted, as though the world, and Sodom had been true matter of the Church, & Noah and Lot of the same religious communion with them. The like ignorance you shew in the 8. Reason, where you demaund why the fellowship in civil society should not be polluted, as well as religious communion. As though you had never read that †1 Cor. 7▪ 14.the vnbeleeving husband is sanctified to the beleeving wife for civil society, which is no way dissolved, no not though the one party be a Turk, Iew, or Atheist. And do you think Mr B. that religious communion may be held with such without pollution?
In the next scripture which is Gal. 5. 10. the Apostle no way acquites the Church of transgression, but speaks vnderunder hope of their repentance, which they were to manifest by avoyding & cutting off such as had troubled, and sedu…ed them, Gal. 1. 8. 9. and 5. 12.
In Mat. 5. 24. 25. Christ commaunds that before a man offer his gift he reconcile himself vntounto his brother. True, but where hatred is, there is no holy reconciliation: and where brotherly admonition is not, and that to the reformation of the brother offending, there is hatred, as is manifest▪ Lev. 19. 17. And if you would improve to the right vse this scripture, it would drive you and others from your Corban, till you had discharged the dutyes of mercy to your brethren, which the Lord accepts above sacrifice.