The Dying Mans Testament to the Church of Scotland, Part 4 · Chapter 11
CHAP. XI. What is to be done in closing doctrinal differences.
1. FOr doctrinal differences of judgment, there are three wayes to close them; (it is to be adverted, that the difference is not supposed to be in any fundamental thing) First, By sober andThe first way of closing doctrinall differences. serious conference, one party may bring another to the same judgment with them; or, both parties may quit something of extremities, and joyn in a middle opinion. This is the most solid union, when men come to think and speak the same thing, and sometime hath been attained. Yet concerning this, we say, 1. That all union is not to depend on this, as hath been said. 2. It hath been very rarely attained, especially when difference hath spread and rooted it self by debating and contradiction, seing even good men have both infirmity and corruption. 3. We say, that publick dispute, either by word or writ, hath never proven very usefull, even amongst good men, to attain this end, But ordinarily such debates have heightned the controversie, and engaged men more; so that if any thing prevail towards this, it is friendly, familiar conferences opening truth, rather than formal stated disputations; because in such, men are (as it were) upon their guard, and fully do exercise their wit; in the other, there is more accesse to inform the judgment, by a loving, grave, serious manner of speaking of the truth, and that privatly to others, especially to such as are of reputation for parts and ability, and that it be not done in vain, as Paul hath it, Gal. 2. 2. And it's observable that he speaketh this in reference to his way, when he intended the evidencing of his agreement with the chief Apostles in the matter of doctrine. Also we find meeknesse and instructing put together, when there is any expectation to recover one from a difference, 2 Tim. 2. 15. and convincing or disputing is more especially applicable to these of whom there is little hope, out of respect to the edification of others. Hence we find the Apostles disputing with false teachers in some points of truth, but rather intreating and exhorting Believers to have peace amongst themselves, notwithstanding of lesser differences.
A second way of composure, is, when such agreementThe second way of composing such differences in judgment cannot be obtained, To endeavour a harmony and keep unity notwithstanding of that difference, by a mutual forbearance in things controverted: which we will find to be of two sorts. The first is, to say so total, that is, when neither side doth so much as doctrinally in word, writ, or Sentences of Judicatories, presse any thing that may confirm or propagate their own opinion, or condemn the contrary, But do altogether abstract from the same out of respect to the Churches peace, and for the preventing of scandal; and do in things wherein they agree according to the Apostle's direction, Philip. 3. 16. Walk by the same rule, and minde the same things mutually, as if there were no such differences, and waiting in these till the Lord shall reveal the same unto them. This way is safe, where the doctrine upon which the difference is, is such, as the forbearing the decision thereof, doth neither mat any duty that the Church in general is called to, nor endanger the salvation of souls through the want of clearness therein nor, in a word, infer such inconveniences to the hurt of the Church, as such unseasonable awakening and keeping up of differences and divisions may have with it; Because the scope of bringing forth every truth, or confirming the same by any authoritative sanction, &c. is the edification of the Church; and therefore when the bringing forth thereof doth destroy more than edifie, it is to be forborn. Neither can it be ground enough to plead for such decisions in preaching, that the thing they preach-for is truth, and the thing they condemn is errour. Because, 1. it is not the lawfulnesse of the thing simply that is in question, but the necessity and expediency thereof in such a case: Now, many things are lawfull that are not expedient, 1 Cor. 10. 23. 2. In these differences that were in the primitive times concerning meats, dayes, genealogies, &c. there was a truth or an errour upon one of the sides, as there is a right and a wrong in every contradiction of such a kind, yet the Apostle thinketh fitter, for the Churches peace, that such be altogether refrained, rather than any way (at least in publick) insisted upon or decided. 3. Because no Minister can bring forth every truth at all times, he must then make choice; And I suppose some Ministers may die, and all do so, who have not preached every truth, even which they knew, unto the people. Beside, there are (no question) many truths hid to the most learned. Neither can this be thought inconsistent with a Ministers fidelity, who is to reveal the whole counsel of God; because, that counsel is to be understood of things necessary to mens salvation, and is not to be extended to all things whatsoever; for, we find the great Apostle expounding this in that same Sermon, Act. 20. ver. 20. I have keeped back nothing that was profitable unto you; which evidenceth that the whole counsel of God, or the things which he shewed unto them, is the whole, and all that was profitable for them, and that for no by-respect or fear whatsoever he shunned to reveal that unto them. Also, it is clear, that there are many truths which are not decided by any judiciall act; and amongst other things, sparingnesse to decide truths that are not fundamentall judicially hath been ever thought no little mean of the Churches peace, as the contrary hath been of division.
The third way (which is the second sort of the former) of composure, is mixed, When there is some medling with such questions, yet with such forbearance,The third way of composing such differences that though there be a seen difference, yet there is no schism or division, but that is seriously and tenderly prevented; as upon the one side, some may expresse their mind in preaching and writing on a particular question one way, others may do it differently; yet both with that meeknesse and respect to those they differ from, that it doth beget no rent, nor give just ground of offence, nor mar union in any other thing; Or, it may possibly come to be decided in a Synod, yet with such forbearance upon both sides, that it may prove no prejudice to union; those who have authority for them, not pressing it to the prejudice of the opinion, names, consciences of the other, or to their detriment in any respect; but allowing to them a liberty to speak their minds, and walk according to their own light in such particulars: And on the contrary, the other resting satisfied in the unity of the Church, without condemning them, or pressing them to condemn themselves; because so indeed their liberty is no lesse than others who have the decision of a Synod for them: And thus men may keep communion and union in a Church, even where by the Judicatories thereof, some lesser not fundamental errour, which doth also infer unwarrantaable practices, is authoritatively concluded. We have a famous instance of this in the Church of Africa in the dayes of Cyprian, which by the Ancients hath ever been so much esteemed of. There was a difference in that Church concerning the Rebaptizing of Hereticks and Schismaticks after their conversion, or, of such as had once fallen in to them; Cyprian and the greatest part thought their first Baptism null, or, by their fall, made void; others thought it not so, who were the lesser part, yet right as to this particular; There was meetings on both sides for defence of their opinions. Also in a Council of near three hundred Bishops, it is judicially and authoritatively concluded; yet that Synod carried so, as they did not only not censure any that dissented, nor presse them to conform in practice to their judgment; but did also entertain most intimat respect to them, and familiarity with them, as may be gathered from what was formerly hinted. And upon the other side, we do not find any in that Church making a schism upon the account of that judicial erroneous decision (though at least by three several Synods it was ratified) but contenting themselves to have their consciences free by retaining their own judgement, and following their own practice, till time gave more light and more occasion to clear that truth. And we will never find in the Writings of any time, more affection amongst brethren, and more respect to peace, than was in that Church at that time amongst those that differed; And there is not any practice more commended in all the Church-history and Writings of the Fathers, than this practice; as partly may be gathered from what was formerly touched out of Augustine. And if we will consider the case rationally, we will find that it is not impossible to have union in a Church where there is in such a difference an authoritative decision, even supposing that side, on which the errour lyes, to be approved. For, 1. There is no necessity for such as have authority for them, to presse others in their judgment or practice in such things; neither can it be thought that such a decision can of it self satisfie all scruples, neither yet that men doubtingly may follow; Nor, lastly, that such controversies can bear the weight of troubling the Church, by censuring such as otherwayes may be faithfull, seing sometimes even unfaithfull men have been spared with respect to the Churches good, as hath been said. And, secondly, upon the other side, such a constitution of a Church, doth not involve all that keep communion therein, in the guilt thereof, if personally they be free; as in the instance of the Jewish Church is clear: where, no question many corrupt acts have been established, yet did it neither make communion in Worship or Government to be unlawfull, where the matter and manner of carriage was lawfull. Beside, this would infer, that no Judicatory could keep union, where there were contrary votes, or a Sentence past without unanimity: because that is certainly wrong to them who think otherwayes, and if so, there could be no Judicatory expected either in Church or State; for, it cannot be expected, that they shall be still unanimous, or, that the greater part shall cede to the lesser, and rescind their own act. Also, suppose there should be such a division upon one difference, can it be expected that those who unite upon the divided sides respectively, shall again have no more difference amongst themselves? and if they have, shall there not be a new division? and where shall this end? And seing men must resolve to keep unity where there are faults of such a nature, or to have none at all, it is as good to keep it at first, as to be necessitated thereto afterward. The Orthodox urge this argument against the Donatists, who would not keep union with them, because of pretended corruptions in the proceedings of Judicatories and Ordinations; yet were constrained to bear with such amongst themselves, and particularly to receive, and unite with the Maximinianists, whose communion they had once rejected, though a branch of their own faction, because they saw no end of divisions if they did not resolve to dispense with such things amongst themselves. And Augustine often asserteth, that they were never able to answer this argument when it was propounded to them, to wit, Why they did not give them that same latitude, in keeping communion with them, which they had given to the Maximinianists, who were guilty of such things as they imputed to them? We conceive then, that even in such a case there may be union for prosecuting the main work of the Gospel, notwithstanding of such a circumstantial difference, if men otherwayes set themselves to it; and the generall grounds, formerly laid down, do confirm this.