The Unreasonableness of Separation, Part 2 · Section 18
Sect. 17. But whence comes it to pass, that any who think occasional Communion with us to be lawful, should not think themselves obliged to constant Communion? From what grounds come they to practise occasional Communion? Is it from the Love of Peace and Concord, as Mr. B. saith? That is a good ground so far, as it goes, But will it not carry a Man farther, if he pursue it, as he ought to do? What love of Concord is this to be occasionally present at our Churches, and at the same time to declare, That there is greater purity of Worship, and better means of Edification in Separate Congregations? The one can never draw Men so much to the love of Concord, as the other doth incourage them in the Principles of Separation. But, if there be an Obligation upon Men to Communicate with the Church they live in, notwithstanding the defects and corruptions of it, that Obligation can never be discharged by meer occasional Presence at some times, and in some Acts of Worship; Trial of Grounds of Separation. Chap. 10. p. 791.for, saith Mr. Ball, To use one Ordinance, and not another, is to make a Schism in the Church.
The only Example produced to justify such occasional Communion with defective Churches, is that our Blessed Saviour did communicate after that manner in the Iewish Synagogues and Temple. But this is so far from being true, that the old Separatists granted, That our Lord Communicated with the Iewish Church in Gods Ordinances,Robinson's Treatise, p. 11. living and dying a Member thereof; and from thence they prove, That the Iewish Church had a right Constitution in our Saviours time.
And did not he declare,Ainsworth's Consider. examin'd, p. 5. That he came not to dissolve the Law, but to fulfill it? And that he complyed with Iohn's Baptism, because he was to fulfill all righteousness? Did he not go up to the Feasts at Ierusalem, as a Member of the Iewish Church, and frequent the Synagogues? Even at the Feast of Dedication, though not instituted by the Law, he was present,John 10, 22, 23. as other Iews were. Yea, Did he not express more than ordinary zeal, for purifying the outward parts of the Temple, because it was to be a House of Prayer for all Nations? Was not this to shew Mens Obligation to come and Worship there, as well, as that the place was to be kept Sacred for that use? And, Doth not the Apostle expresly say, That he was made under the Law? Where is there the least ground in Scripture, to intimate, that Christ only kept occasional, and not constant communion with the Iewish Church? What part of Worship did he ever withdraw from? Did he not command his Disciples to go hear the Scribes and Pharisees, because they sate in Moses Chair? Matt. 23. 2.Where did he ever bid them go thither, when they could have no better; but when they could to be sure to prefer the Purer way of Worship, and better Means of Edification? Was not his own Doctrine incomparably beyond theirs? Is there any pretence for greater Edification now, to be mention'd with what the Disciples had, to forsake the Iewish Assemblies, for the love of Christ's own Teaching? Yet he would not have them to do that, out of the regard he had to the Publick Worship and Teaching. Our Saviour himself did only Teach his Disciples Occasionally, and at certain Seasons; but their constant Communion was with the Iewish Assemblies. And so it was after his Passion, Luk. 24, 53.till the Holy Ghost fe…l upon them, and they were then imploy'd to gather and form a new Church; which was not done before; and thence the Author of the Ordinary Glosse observes; That we never read of Christ's Praying together, with his Disciples (unless perhaps at his Transfiguration with three of his Disciples) although we often read of his Praying alone. So that no example can be mention'd, which is more directly contrary to the Practice of Separation upon the present grounds, than that of our Blessed Saviour's; which ought to be in stead of all others to us.