The Unreasonableness of Separation, Part 2 · Section 8
Sect. 8. II. Suppose they should allow our Parochial Churches in their Constitution to be true Churches; yet the exceptions they make against the Ministers of our Churches are so many, that they scarce allow any, from whom they may not lawfully Separate.
1. If the People judge their Ministers unworthy, or incompetent, they allow them liberty to withdraw, and to Separate from them. This I shall prove from many passages in several Books of Mr. B. and others.
First, They … it in the Peoples Power, notwithstanding all Lega… …stablishments, to own or disown whom they judge sit Mr. B. speaks his Mind very freely against the Rights and …etronage,Answ. p 15, 50. and the Power of Magistrates in these cases, and pleads for the unalterable Rights of the People; as the old Separatists did. Plea for Peace, p. 55.God, saith Mr. B. in Nature and Scripture, hath given the People that consenting Power, antecedent to the Princes determination, which none can take from them.Brownis…s Apology, Sect. 23. Mr. A. saith, Every particular Church has an inherent right to choose its own Pastors. Dr. O. makes the depriving the People of this right one of his grounds of Separation.Mischief of Imposit. Preface. So that although our Ministers have been long in possession of their Places, yet if the People have not owned them,Dr. O's. Vindic. p. 36. they are at liberty to choose whom they please. How many hundred Congregations,Answ. p. 50. saith Mr. B. have Incumbents, whom the People never consented to; but take them for their hinderers and burden! So many hundred Congregations it seems are in readiness for Separation.
Secondly, The People are made Iudges of the worthiness and competency of their Ministers. This follows from the former. Plea for Peace, p. 83.In case incompetent Pastors be set over the People, saith Mr. B. though it be half the Parishes in a Kingdom, or only the tenth part, it is no Schism, saith he, but a Duty, for those that are destitute, to get the best supply they can, i.e. to choose those whom they judge more competent; and it is no Schism but a Duty, for faithful Ministers, though forbidden by Superiors, to perform their Office to such people that desire it. This is plain dealing. But suppose the Magistrate should cast out some, and put in others; In that case he saith, If they be Men of uniried and suspected parts of fidelity (of which the People are to be Judges) the Princes imposition doth not make such true Pastors of the Church before, or without the People consent; nor doth it always bind the People to consent, and to forsake their former Pastors, nor prove them Schismaticks, because they do it not.
Thirdly, They give particular directions to the People, what sort of Ministers they should own, and what not. Mr. B. bids the People not think that he is perswading them to make no difference:Cure of Divisions, Direct. 36. but after he hath set aside the utterly insufficient, and the heretical (of which the People are admirable Judges) he lays down this general Rule, Any one whose Ministry is such, as tendeth to destruction more than to edification, and to do more harm than good is not to be owned. And if not to be owned so, then he is to be separated from: and although he adviseth the People to lay aside partiality and passion; yet whether they will or not, they are left sole Iudges in this matter. And that we may not think all this to be only a Romantick Scheme, or Fiction, Sacrileg. desert. p. 10.he tells us elsewhere, That they are not able to confute the People in too many places, who tell them that their publick Priests are so defective in their necessary qualifications for their Office, as that they hold it unlawful to own such for true Ministers, and to encourage them by their presence, or commit the care of their Souls to such, i.e. in plain terms, they are encouraged to Separation on this account, which is directly contrary to the Principles of the old Non-conformists, as appears at large by Mr. Ball.Ball against Can, p. 1, 4, 5, &c. if, saith he, Can's meaning be, that it is not lawful to communicate in the Worship of God with Ministers not fitly qualified, disorderly called, or carelesly executing their Office and Function, then it is directly contrary to the word of Truth, sound Reason, and consent of all the Learned. With much more to that purpose. Pag. 15, 42, 56.and even Mr. B. himself, when he takes upon him as a Casuist to determine these things, Trial of New Church way, p. 11.doth then declare his Mind.
1. That a Ministers personal faults do not allow People to Separate from the Worship of God.Christian Direct. Part. 3. p. 747.
2. Nor all Ministerial faults, but only those that prove him or his Ministration utterly intolerable.
But now,Answ. p. 50. if Mr. B. may be believed, the People need not be told, how great a number of Cases there are among us, where the Ministers are uncapable of the Ministerial Office, and therefore it is no sin in them to judge him no Minister, and consequently to Separate from him. Hath not Mr. B. fully set forth the Pride, Ignorance, Censoriousness, Headiness, Rashness of raw and injudicious Zealots? and after all this. Is it fit or reasonable, that the opinion of such persons be taken, concerning the qualifications of their Ministers? Hath not Mr. B. complained with more than ordinary resentment,Cure of Divis. p. 393. that they are ready to scorn, and vilifie the gravest wisest Pastors? And, Must such Mens Judgments be taken, concerning the Abilities and Competency of their Ministers? Either Mr. B. hath extremely wronged them in the Characters he hath given of such People; or he hath taken away all the reputation of their Judgment in such cases: When they scorn and contemn the greavest wisest Pastors, are they fit to Judge of Ministerial A…ilities? But there are graver and wiser among the People. Suppose that; But doth not Mr. B. say, That the rawest and rashest Professors are commonly the most violent and censorious? these are the bold and forward men, that will Judge in spite of the rest; these are the men that need not be told, what numbers of uncapable Ministers there are among us And it doth not become Mr. B's Gravity or Wisdom to hearken to all the censures and malicious reports of such ignorant and heady zealots (as he calls them) about the unworthiness or incapacity of their Ministers. Are they only the grave and wise Pastors among themselves, which are scorned by such men? It is possible, that those may be grave and wise among us too, whom they censure for incompetent men; Or must the same People which are raw and injudicious, ignorant and censorious, proud and self-conceited, when they make their Judgment of them, be of a sudden turned into grave and wise men, when they pass their Judgment upon the Abilities and Fitness of our Preachers? This doth not look like fair and equal dealing. I pray let our Ministers have a fair hearing, and let the matter be well examined, before the People be thus encouraged to Separate from their Ministers for their disabilities, or unworthiness. But suppose there be too great a number of young, raw, injudicious Preachers, as Mr. B. saith,Answ. p. 54. no Man can deny that knoweth England, and hath any modesty. Is there no way, but to your Tents O Israel? Will nothing but Separation serve your Turn? Is this the way to mend the matter, and to make them grave and wise? Doth not Mr. B. confess, That they have too many such among themselves? Must they Separate from them too? What endless confusions do such Principles tend to? But the bottom of all is, this Separation must be justified, one way or other; and such Principles found out, which may seem to do it. Yet after all, What is this to the present case of Separation in this City? for here the Charge was laid, and to this the Answer must be given, or it is to no purpose. Is it any reason, that near half of some Parishes in London, should Separate from their grave and wise Pastors, such as I know some to be, where this case is; because in Cornwall, or Yorkshire, or Northumberland, there are many raw and injudicious, besides scandalous Priests, as Mr. B. speaks? We urge you particularly with the London Separation, you tell us what the People say of the Insufficiency and Vnworthiness of the Clergy in other parts of England; suppose it true, What is all this to the business? If you persist in this way, we can name the Parishes to you in London, where the Ministers are Men of unexceptionable Learning and Piety; where the Churches are large enough to receive the People that Separate; as well as those that come; and yet they forsake the Churches Communion, and adhere to the Separate Congregations: Tell us plainly in this case, Is this Separation lawful or not? If it be lawful, to what purpose do you make use of so many shifts and evasions, as to great Prishes, and insufficient and scandalous Priests, in other parts of the Nation? Answer to the case proposed, and to the place where the Charge was laid; and think not to escape by such apparent evasions, and impertinencies as these. If you think such a Separation unlawful, then Why do you pretend to confute my Sermon, which was designed purposely against it?