Schism Detected in Both Extremes, Part 1 · Chapter 2 – Chapter 3
CHAP. II.
Of his firſt Caſe.
§. 1. PAge 31. His firſt Caſe, Whether Communion with ſome Church or other be a neceſſary Duty incumbent on Chriſtians:] And he thinks the Reſolution of this is as plain, as whether it be neceſſary for every man to be a Chriſtian: For every Chriſtian is baptized into the Communion of the Church.
A. In this I know no Chriſtian adverſary to him: But it being the Vniverſal Church that he giveth his proof of neceſſary Communion with, it's odde to ſay, We muſt have Communion with ſome Church or other: As if there were more than one Univerſal Church. 2. But we grant more, that all that can well, ſhould be alſo members of ſome ſingle Church.
§. 2. P. 32. He ſaith [External and, Actual Communion is an Eſſential duty of a Church-member (meaning a Chriſtian.)]
A. 1. And yet before he denyed that Communion lay eſſentially in this Exerciſe, but only in Vnion; Yea and Nay is his Cuſtom. 2. Some few Chriſtians (as thoſe that live where ſuch Communion cannot be had without ſin, &c.) are not bound to it; therefore it is not true that it is Eſſential to Univerſal Church-memberſhip. And I think ſickneſs endeth not the eſſentials, that diſableth men.
3. Note Reader, that by this mans Doctrine we are all unchriſtened and damned if we do not gather into diſallowed Churches, if we be unjuſtly caſt out of the allowed ones: For all muſt be Church members that will be Chriſtians, and an unjuſt Excommunication cannot diſoblige us from Chriſtianity, nor bind us to conſent to be damned. Now read the 5th 6th 7th 8th, &c. Canons of the Church of England, which ipſo facto Excommunicate all that affirm any thing in their Liturgy, Articles, Ceremonies or Government ſinful, and anſwer Spala…enſis arguments againſt Excommunicating ipſo facto, and prove all this juſt, and you may prove what you will juſt. But you ſee where he layeth the Controverſie: If any be Excommunicated without ſufficient cauſe, or by Lay Civilians to whom God never gave that power, or by ſuch Biſhops or Paſtors as have no juſt Authority for want of a true call or Conſent; or if any unlawful thing be made neceſſary to Communion, all ſuch perſons muſt by his own confeſſions hold Church-communion whether theſe Impoſers will or not; for all Chriſtians are bound to be of ſome Church.
§. 3. P. 33, 34. He ſaith that [None but publick Prayers are the Prayers of the Church properly, and acts of Communion, that is, ſuch as are offered by the hands of men authorized and ſet apart for that purpoſe, &c.]
Anſ. Who would have thought that we are more for the Liturgy than he? I undertake to prove, that all the Reſponſal Prayers, and all the Litany Prayers, in which the Miniſter names but the matter to them, and the People make it a Prayer by ſpeaking the petitioning parts, are all the publick Prayers of the Church, and ſo are all the petitioning Pſalms ſpoke or ſung by the People, and not only that which is offered by the Prieſt: I do not think that he believeth what he careleſly ſaith here, himſelf.
But the Independents are ſtiffer for his firſt Theſis (of the neceſſity of Church-communion) than he is, his unfit words I paſs by.
CHAP. III.
Of his ſecond Caſe.
§. 1. THE next queſtion of Occaſional Communion as diſtinct from fixed, he turns out of doors, as if there could be no ſuch thing, and it's very true as to the Church univerſal; but as to viſible, actual Communion with this or that particular Church, it is not true.
1. A Traveller of another Country, who on his journey communicateth with every Church where he paſſeth, is not a fixed Member of that Church: for, 1. The Paſtor or Biſhop hath not that peculiar Charge of him as of fixed members. 2. He is not bound where he paſſeth to take ſuch notice of the lives of Communicants or Paſtors, and to admoniſh the Offenders, and tell the Church, as fixed members are. 3. He hath not the right in chooſeing Paſtors or Deacons as the fixed Members have. 4. An itinerant Biſhop in tranſitu is not their fixed Biſhop; ergo an Iterant Lay-man is not a fixed Member.
The ſame I may ſay of one that is a fixed member of another Church in the ſame City, and cometh to that only to ſignifie univerſal Communion, or neighbourly; which, though he deny to be lawful, I ſhall further prove anon.
And the ſame I may ſay of thoſe that dwell where there is no fixed ſingle Church at all, for want of a Paſtor, but they congregate only when ſome ſtrange Miniſter paſſeth through the Town.