The Unreasonableness of Separation, Part 2 · Section 1
Sect. 1. HAving made it my business, in the foregoing Discourse, to shew, How far the present Dissenters are gone off from the Principles of the old Non-conformists; I come to consider, What those Principles are, which they now proceed upon;
And those are of Two sorts.
First, Of such as hold partial, and occasional Communion with our Churches to be lawful; but not total and constant, i. e. they judge it lawful at some times to be present in some part of our Worship, and upon particular occasions to partake of some acts of Communion with us; but yet, they apprehend greater purity and edification in separate Congregations, and when they are to choose, they think themselves bound to choose these, although at certain seasons they may think it lawful to submit to occasional Communion with our Church, as it is now established.
Secondly, Of such as hold any Communion with our Church to be unlawful, because they believe the Terms of its Communion unlawful; for which they instance, in the constant use of the Liturgy; the Aereal sign of the Cross; kneeling at the Communion; the observation of Holy-dayes; renouncing other Assemblies; want of Discipline in our Churches; and depriving the People of their Right in choosing their own Pastors.
To proceed with all possible clearness in this matter, we must consider these Three things, 1. What things are to be taken for granted by the several parties, with respect to our Church. 2. Wherein they differ among themselves about the nature and degrees of Separation from it. 3. What the true State of the present Controversie about Separation, is.
I. In General, they cannot deny these three things.
1. That there is no reason of Separation, because of the Doctrine of our Church.
2. That there is no other reason of Separation because of the Terms of our Communion, than what was from the beginning of the Reformation.
3. That Communion with our Church hath been still allowed by the Reformed Churches abroad.
1. That there is no Reason of Separation, because of the Doctrine of our Church. This was confessed by the Brownists, and most rigid Separatists; as is proved already; and our present Adversaries agree herein. Vindication of Non conformists, p. 8, 9.Dr. Owen saith, We agree with our Brethren in the Faith of the Gospel; and we are firmly united with the main Body of Protestants in this Nation, in Confession of the same Faith: And again, The Parties at difference do agree in all Substantial parts of Religion,Page 22. and in a Common Interest, as unto the preservation and defence of the Protestant Religion. Mr. Baxter saith, That they agree with us in the Doctrine of the 39 Articles,Answ. to Serm. p. 27. as distinct from the form of Government, and imposed abuses. And more fully elsewhere, Is not the Non conformists Doctrine the same with that of the Church of England, when they subscribe to it, and offer so to do?Defence of the Cure of Divisions, p. 64. The Independents as well as Presbyterians offer to subscribe to the Doctrine of the 39 Articles, as distinct from Prelacy and Ceremony. We agree with them in the Doctrine of Faith,Restor of Sutton, p. 15. and the Substance of God's Worship, saith the Author of the last Answer. And again, We are one with the Church of England in all the necessary points of Faith,Page 30. and Christian Practice, We are one with the Church of England as to the Substance, and all necessary parts of God's Worship And even Mr. A. after many trifling cavils, acknowledges, That the Dissenters generally agree with that Book which is commonly called the 39 Articles,Mischief of Imposition. Preface. which was compiled above a Hundred years ago; and this Book some Men call the Church of England. I know not who those Men are, nor by what Figure they speak, who call a Book a Church; but this we all say, That the Doctrine of the Church of England is contained therein; and whatever the opinions of private persons may be, this is the Standard by which the Sense of our Church is to be taken: And that no objection ought to be made, against Communion with our Church, upon account of the Doctrine of it; but what reaches to such Articles as are owned and received by this Church.
2. That there are in effect no new termes of Communion with this Church, but the same, which our first Reformers owned, and suffered Marty…dom for, in Q. Maries days. Not, but that some alterations have been made since, but not such as do, in the Judgment of our Brethren, make the terms of Communion harder than before. Mr. Baxter grants, that the terms of Lay Communion are rather made easier by such Alterations, even since the additional Conformity, with respect to the late Troubles. The same Reasons then, which would now make the terms of our Communion unlawful, must have held against Cranmer, Ridley, Iacob against Johnson, p. 21, 23, 29, 32, 33, 37, 40, 42, 47, 54, 68, 79, 82.&c. who laid down their Lives for the Reformation of this Church. And this the old Non-conformists thought a considerable Argument against Separating from the Communion of our Church; because it reflected much on the honor of our Martyrs; who not only lived and died in the Communion of this Church; Bradshaw's Answer to Johnson's Third Reason Sect. 2. Giffard against Brow: p. 97, 98, 10….and in the practice of those things, which some are now most offended at; but were themselves the great Instruments in setling the Terms of our Communion.
3. That Communion with our Church hath been still owned by the Protestant and Reformed Churches abroad. Which they have not only manifested, by receiving the Apology and Articles of our Church into the Harmony of Confessions; but by the Testimony and Approbation which hath been given to it, by the most Esteemed, and Learned Writers of those Churches, and by the discountenance which they have still given to Separation from the Communion of it. This Argument was often objected against the Separatists, by the Non-conformists; and Ainsworth attempts to Answer it no less than Four times in one Book; but the best Answer he gives,Counterpoyson, p. 9. 10, 27, 51, 92. is, That if it prove any thing, it proves more than they would have For, saith he, the Reformed Churches have discerned the National Church of England to be a true Church; they have discerned the Diocesan Bishops of England, as well as the Parish-Priests to be true Ministers; and rejoyce as well for their Sees, as for your Parishes, having joyned these all alike in the…r Harmony. As to the good opinion of the Reformed Church, and Protestant Divines abroad, concerning the Constitution and Orders of our Church, so much hath been proved already by Dr. Durel, and so little or nothing hath been said to disprove his Evidence, that this ought to be taken as a thing granted; but, if occasion be given, both he and o…hers are able to produce much more from the Testimony of foreign Divines, in Justification of the Communion of our Church against all pretences of Separation from it.