The Dying Mans Testament to the Church of Scotland, Part 4 · Chapter 1
CHAP. I. How heresie, schism and division differ, together with the several kinds of division.
HAving now come this length, there is one thing of nigh concernment to what is past, which possibly might be usefull to be enquired into, Concerning such scandals as cannot be called in the former sense doctrinall, not yet personall; because there may be purity in the one, and regularity and orderlinesse in the other respect, and yet actually there may be a scandal and an offence or occasion of stumbling lying in the way of many, and that is, by schisms and divisions in the Church, or amongst the people of God. This weThe introduction. confesse is no lesse difficult to speak to, than any of the former, because there is often more that can be said for both sides, and the side from whence the offence riseth, is not so easily discernable, which maketh, that we are the more unwilling and lesse confident to undertake to speak any thing in reference thereto; Yet seing we have in providence been led to the former purposes, without any previous design; and now, having this occuring to us, before we close, we shall endeavour shortly to speak a word in reference thereto, in a generall abstracted manner, without descending to any particulars, which may be dangerous to be touched upon; but shall give some generall hints concerning the same, which we are induced unto upon these considerations,
1. Because such divisions are as really scandalousThe scandal and hurtfulnesse of divisions. and hurtfull to the Church, as either scandals in practice or doctrine are. 2. Because the Word of God hath as fully discovered and abundantly condemned the offensivenesse of this, as of any of the former. 3. Because there is such a connexion amongst these sorts of scandals, that often one is not without the other. Hence we see, 1. that contention and offences and the wo that followeth them, are joyned together, Matth. 18. 1, 2, 3, &c. 2. Divisions and corrupt doctrine, or heresies, are knit together, 1 Cor. 11. 18, 19. so that seldome there is corrupt doctrine, but it hath division with it; and never is division, but it hath offence, As in the Epistles to these of Corinth and Galatia is clear: Hence dogs and evil workers, that is, the spreaders of corrupt doctrine, are also called the concision, Phil. 3. 1, 2, &c. and in experience we often find, that a spirit of division waiteth upon delusion, and oftentimes doth take up and prevail, even over those who have been preserved from the delusion; As in a great storm, some places have great and dreadfull blasts and drops, who yet may be keeped free from the violence of the tempest; Even so, this deluge of errour, hath showrs of divisions waiting upon it, which often may affect these who are preserved from the violence of delusion it self; which maketh, that the speaking something to this, doth not impertinently follow upon the former. 4. Because if this be wanting, what is said in the former cases, is palpably defective, especially at such a time, when there is no lesse cause to observe this evil, than any of the former. This being, as to them, in some respect a cause that bringeth them forth and fostereth them, and, in some respect, an effect which necessarily and naturally followeth upon them: for, divisions breed both scandals in practice and doctrine; And again, scandal in these, doth breed and entertain divisions.
2. What we would say, shall be drawn to theseThe heads of the ensuing part of the Treatise. four heads. 1. To consider what division is, or of what sort it is, which is properly to be spoken of here. 2. What are the causes which do breed and foster the same. 3. What are the evil effects which ordinarily flow from it. 4. What may be thought to be duty in reference to such a time, and what may be looked upon as suitable remedies of such a distemper.
For the first, We take it for granted, that there is such a thing as division in the Church; which is not to be looked upon as any new or strange thing; for, the Scripture maketh it clear, and the History of the Church putteth it out of question: Concerning which we may premit these few things,
1. That the division which is intended here, is not every contest, and alienation of mind, and difference of practice incident to men; but that which is proper to the Church concerning Church affairs, and so is to be distinguished from civil debates and contentions. We would advert also, that there may be Church differences that fall not under the charge of Scandal, as when in some things, men of conscience are of different judgements, yet carry it without any offence or breach of charity; Or, when in some practices there is diversity with forbearance, as was in Policarpus dayes, and the time of Iraeneus (about Easter matters) These we speak not unto. 2. Although sometimes titles and expressions may be used more generally and promiscuously; yet, in this discourse, we would distinguish between these three, Heresie, Schism and Division, without respect to what otherwayes useth to be done.
And, first, Heresie, is some errour in doctrine, andWhat heresie is. that especially in fundamentall doctrine, followed with pertinacie, and endeavour to propagate the same. Again, Schism may be where no heresie in doctrine is, but is a breaking of the union of the Church, and that communion which ought to be amongst the Members thereof, and is either in Government or Worship. As, first, in Government, when the common Government, whereto all ought to be subject, is rent, and a Government distinct, set up. This may be, either when the Government is altered▪ as, suppose some should set up Episcopacy in oppositionWhat schism is, and the kinds thereof. to Presbytery, yet keeping still the fundamentall truths; Or it may be, where the same Government is acknowledged, but there be difference concerning the persons to whom the power doth belong; so, sometimes men have acknowledged Popery, yet followed diverse Popes; So often, Sectaries have not disclaimed Councils and Bishops, but have set up their own, and refused subjection to these to whom it belonged. The first kind implieth a doctrinall errour concerning Government; The second may consist with the same principles of Government, but differeth in the application of them, and becometh a schism, when men act accordingly in acknowledging diverse supream Independent Governments: Because so, when there ought to be but one Church, it becometh, as it were, two: and this is exclaimed against, and regrated by the Fathers, under the expression of erecting altare contra altare, that is, altar against altar, whenas the Lord allowed but one, even in reference to His own worship. 2. Schism may be in worship, that is, when, it may be, both the same Doctrine and Government is acknowledged, yet there is not communion keeped in Churchordinances, as in Prayer, Word and Sacraments; but a separate way of going about these is followed. It seemeth, that this was in part the schism of the Corinthians (whatever was the rise thereof) that they had a divided way of communicating, and of going about other duties, and other Ordinances, as may be gathered from 1 Cor. 11. 18, 19, 20, 21. with 33. This kind of schism hath been frequent in the Church, and hath flowed not so much from dissatisfaction with the Doctrine and Government thereof, as with the constitution of the Members, or failings of the Governours. Thus it was in the case of the Novatians, Donatists, Meletians, Cathari and others, of whom it is recorded, that their fault did not consist in setting up any strange Doctrine▪ or in rejecting of the truth (at least at the first) but in breaking the band of communion, as Augustine hath it often; for, saith he, Schismaticos facit non diversa fides sed communionis disrupta societas, contra Faustum, lib. 20. Again, he saith of the Donatists, Ad Bonifac. Epist. 50. Nec de ipsa fide vertitur quaestio, sed de sola communione infaeliciter litigant, & contra unitatem Christi rebell…s inimiciti…s, perversitate sui erroris, exercent. And this sort of schism doth often draw with it the former, there being no way to maintain this without the other. Of this schism there are many kinds, according to its several rises and degrees; and also, according as it extendeth to the breaking of communion in whole, from Ordinances, or in part only from some, or in some Ordinances, as appeareth to have been in the Church of Corinth, where there hath not been a totall schism, though it hath been in that Ordinance of the Supper especially; and it is like also, that that schism hath been occasioned, because of the corruption of some members, with whom others have scared to communicate; and therefore have not tarried for them: for, the Apostle doth particularly condemn this, and exhort them to tarry one for another; and to attain this, he doth clear them of what was necessary for right partaking, to wit, the examining of themselves, ver. 28. and doth declare unto them, that who so did eat unworthily, and did not prepare himself, did eat and drink damnation; but to himself, and not to others: wherefore, saith he, ye need not be so anxiously solicitous how they be prepared, or of what sort they be that are with you, but examine your selves, and tarry one for another, that there be not a schism amongst you. And this he speaketh, even when he hath been reproving drunkennesse among the Communicants, yet will he not admit that as an excuse, why private persons should Communicate separatedly, which was their practice. This was spoken of in the first part.
This Schism, however it be understood, hath ever proven exceeding hurtfull to the Church, and hath been an inlet and nursery to the greatest errours; It is most pressingly condemned in the Scriptures, even with as great weight as corrupt doctrine and heresie are, and it is attributed to that same originall, to wit, the flesh, with witchcraft, idolatry, heresie, &c. Gal. 5. 20. It hath ever been most weighting to faithfull Ministers, most offensive to people of all sorts, most advantageous to the enemies of the truth, and hath made the Church most vile and contemptible before the world, as we may see in the sad complaints and writings of the Fathers, in reference to the Novatians, Donatists and others of that kind: It hath also proven most dangerous to these who have been engaged therein, and often hath been a snare to bring on some spiritual desertion, deadness of spirit, security, selfconfidence, or some other spirituall evils of that kind, or to dispose for receiving a more grosse tentation, as was formerly marked. Also, it may be observed, that such schisms have spread very suddenly in some places of the world, but have not been easily removed; for, these schisms of the Novatians and Donatists did trouble the Church for severall generations, which might be enough to make men think the breach of unity, in that respect, to be no little evil, and to make them fearfull to fall in the same. But because every schism properly doth imply some errour in doctrine, although it doth not arise from the same, therefore we shall forbear to speak any thing particularly to this, because what hath been said of errours in doctrine, may in part be applyed here: For, we will find, that schism doth imply one, or all of those. 1. That such apprehended corruptions do either make such a society to be no Church, or communion with that Church in other Ordinances, to be unlawfull because of such corruptions, or of such corrupt members. 2. That there may be a distinct erected Church beside a Church, which yet may not be of communion with that other Church. 3. These or such consequences, that either the Church of Christ in the earth is not one, (which truth of the unity of the Catholick visible Church, is the main ground of all Church-union and communion) Or, that that one Church may be of such heterogeneous or dissimilary parts, as the one of them ought not to have communion with the other; Or, at least this, that a person ought to seek his own satisfaction and consolation, though to the prejudice and renting of the Church, and to the generall offence and stumbling of all others; The fairest schism and separation, must imply one of these: for, it cannot be conceived, that otherwayes men would act so directly, according to these principles, if they did not take them for granted.
It is to be adverted, that as there is an unjust schism, that is, a separation without any cause at all; so there is a rash and scandalous schism, that is, when it is beyond the ground given; or, when the ground given, is not such as will warrant such a separation: Which may be, 1. when the separation or schism is upon some occasion which is indeed a defect in the Church, but not such as doth make communion therein sinfull, as that in Corinth. Or, 2. when, it may be, the schism is extended beyond the ground, that is, when suppose one could not communicate in the Lords Supper in such a Church, because of some sinfull corruption in that Ordinance, if, upon that occasion, one should separate from communion in all Ordinances, that were to exceed the ground given. Or, 3. when no professed schism is owned; yet when really and indeed it is practised, so as men can neither justifie a schism, or separation upon such a ground, nor yet altogether vindicate their practice from inferring the same, in which respect, the schism and rent floweth from affection, or inclination, and not from well grounded light, or reason, and so cannot be but rash and unwarrantable. 4. It may be, in the manner, precipitant, when either means have not been used to remove that ground if it be just; or, when men so heighten some lesser defect in a Church by aggreging it with such circumstances, as may make it appear to themselves or others, a ground sufficient to bear and warrant separation; or, in such a way, to vent their dissatisfaction with things, or persons, as thereby to hurt the unity of the Church, or to occasion a rent, or division, or schism in the same, when▪ it may be, others beside their intention may thus conclude, A Church so corrupted, &c. is not to be keeped communion with, (and, it may be, the proposition is sound and so qualified, as it is acknowledged by all Divines) But this or that particular Church is such. This again, is offered to be made out by the too vehement aggravation of some lesser defect, which may seem to confirm that assumption: and in practice, it may be observed, that as some will lay down premisses concerning a schism, who yet dare not act according to the conclusion, and actually separate, So others will keep the conclusion, and actually separate in practice, who yet durst not in Thesi absolutely maintain schism to be lawfull upon such a ground. It is to be adverted, that schisms and divisions are so nigh in nature and names, that we may use instances for illustration of either promiscuously.
The third word, is Division, which doth not at the first view differ from Schism; yet we do take it here as different, and to agree to such Divisions and Dissentions in the Church as are consistent with communion both in Government and Worship, and have not a divided Government or Worship following them, as in the former case. Of such there are many instances in Scripture and Church-history, as we may observe by considering these Distinctions thereof. 1. There is a Doctrinal Division, as whenWhat is here meant by the word Division. the matter is not fundamental, nor yet is it pleadedfor as such, to the breaking off of communion amongst these that differ, yet possibly being a meer indifferent matter, is followed with too much eagernesse, vehemency bitternesse. &c. by these who owne theThe severall kinds thereof. same respectively. Thus contentions were hot in the primitive times for meats, and such things which were neither of themselves destructive to the foundation of Faith on either side, at least in that time, and so were not heretical; nor did they break off communion in Church-ordinances, and so were not schismatical; yet was the Church troubled therewith by division amongst her members. Of this sort are the divisions that may be amongst godly and orthodox men in some points of Truth, when they too vehemently presse their own opinion to be received with a kind of necessity, or load the other with too many absurdities beyond what will follow from the nature thereof.
2. There are some Divisions that may be called Practical and do indeed imply some difference of opinion, but do also infer somewhat in practice: Of this sort was the division about Easter in primitive times before it came to a schism, some keeping one day, some another. And in after-times it abounded, when some acknowledged the ordination of such a Bishop, and others not; when some acknowledged the authority of such a Council, and others not, and so had divided practices.
3. Some Divisions are betwixt particular men, some have influence upon Churches, and are, as it were, one party against another. The first is more properly a difference, and may be betwixt eminently godly and zealous men, such as was betwixt Paul and Barnabas, Act. 15. 39. and is called a contention. Such also we will find in Church-history betwixt Augustine and Ierome, Chrysostom and Epiphaneus, which indeed hath a contention with it, and, if the Lord prevent not, is apt to make parties, and to rent the Church; but the other, to wit, the acting of one party against another, as hath been seen in many Councils, and appeareth to have been amongst the Corinthians, when one adhered to one person, and one to another; This, I say, looketh like faction, and is properly division.
4. Division may be considered in all these respects as it is in judgment, or in affection, or in practice. It is in judgment, when they are not of the same mind, but have diverse apprehensions concerning Truths. 2. It is in affection, when upon that difference of judgment alienation followeth, whereby that love, and affection, and charity that one oweth to another, is somewhat cooled or discomposed. 3. It is in practice, when they speak and act differently and oppositly; as if it were an advantage to Truth for the one to crosse and undermine what the other doth: This distinction is clearly insinuated, 1 Cor. 1. 10. I beseech you, brethren, that there be no divisions amongst you; Which is branched-out in union in these three, to wit, speaking the same thing, that relareth to action; Of being perfectly joyned together in the same mind, that relateth to affection; And of being one in the same judgment, that relateth to opinion: which supposeth that there were divisions opposit to all these, which also often go together.
5. There are some Divisions, which (to say so) are negative, and are in the manner and circumstances of doing some duties. Thus men may differ and take diverse wayes, yet both of them be endeavouring the thriving of the work of the Gospel, and no way labouring to crosse each other, or to make one another lesse weighty and succesful. Thus Paul and Barnabas, after their contention, did indeed differ in their manner of prosecuting the work of the Gospel, yet both of them did continue faithfull therein, and neither of them did counter plot nor counteract to others. Again, some divisions are positive (to say so) when men do not only differ from each other, but do oppose each other, and do not set themselves singly to prosecute the work, which possibly their opposit may be prosecuting with them; but there is an endeavour to lessen the authority and mar the actings of the other, and to engage men in the approbation of that particular wherein they do differ, which savoureth of division and faction properly, and is more hurtfull and intolerable, when as the first is more tolerable amongst men who have their infirmities; and it's like, that such were the divisions of Corinth when there was an endeavour to cry up one, and down another.
6. Some are in doctrine, for difference of judgment; some are in government, for precedency; as sometimes was amongst the Disciples, a contest who should be greatest: which is not so much for Government abstractly, and considered in it self, or about what should be done, as it is for the persons, who should be the governours and doers thereof; as amongst the Disciples, it is not the question, What kind of government shall be? or, What should be the Governours duty? But, who should be chief and have the main hand in ruling?
7. Sometimes Divisions are more stated and deeply rooted, when some way mens designs are crosse, though not in the main, yet in the manner of carrying them on. Sometimes again, they are more occasional, and arise from some particular act or circumstance, wherein men may differ, and may be when neither side draweth-on a division; So that particular of taking or not taking Iohn Mark in the company, was the occasion of that contention and division betwixt Paul and Barnabas, Act. 15. when otherwayes there was an harmony in the series and strain of their whole way.
8. Sometimes Divisions are betwixt godly and orthodox men upon the one side, and corrupt men upon the other; as were the divisions of the Church with the Arian Hereticks, and others of that nature. Sometimes again, they are amongst godly and orthodox men on both sides, and this is a main ingredient in, and aggravation of, the scandal of Division, when it is amongst Christ's own Disciples; and this is that which we would especially speak to: Concerning which we say,
1. That there is such a thing incident to the ChurchDivision among the Godly. as division amongst godly, able, and orthodox men, as betwixt Paul and Barnabas, Act. 15. The Disciples of Christ and the disciples of Iohn; yea, oftentimes betwixt the Disciples of Christ amongst themselves. And afterward the instances of Augustine and Ierome, Chrysostom and Epiphaneus, with many others of later times, do demonstrat it. In the Old Testament we find Iob and his friends keeping up a long dispute right sharply. And, Numb. 12. something is recorded of a division between Moses, Aaron and Miriam.
2. This Division may continue long, and come toIt may continue long, and come to a great height. a great height, that is, it may be very sharp, although it may be the rise thereof be small; for, contentions are, as the letting out of waters, Prov. 17. 14. and they often grow, even amongst good men, so as to provoke much sharpnesse against each other, and that with much confidence, as the instances given do clear.
3. Though it be frequent to them to come to an height, yet they are not easily removed, even amongst the best; This being true, Prov. 18. 19. That a brother offended, is harder to be won than a strong city, and that their contentions are as the bars of a castle, they are so strongly rooted. Hence, we see, that there is no breaking off between Iob and his friends▪ till the Lord interpose; there is no composing of the matter between Paul and Barnabas, but their contention continueth so hot, that they must separate; Neither isAnd not easily removed there any thing expresly recorded of their meeting together again, although they had long been of most intimate fellowship as nearest colleagues in their journeying and travelling in the Lords work, and that appointed thereto, even by Himself extraordinarily, Acts 13. It is recorded, that Chrysostome and Epiphaneus did sunder so imbittered one at the other, that Epiphaneus did wish, That Chrysostome should not die a Bishop: He again did wish, That the other might not see his home, to wit, Cyprus, to which he was then making his voyage; both which accordingly fell out: which is a dreadfull instance of this evil, and looketh like the Lords making use of their passion, to signifie His displeasure against both their distempers.