THE NECESSITY Of Keeping our Parish-Churches, ARGUED From the Sin and Danger of the Schisms in the Church of Corinth, and of the present Separations. IN A SERMON BEFORE THE HONOURABLE JUDGES, At the last Assizes, held at EXETER. By Francis Fullwood. D. D. Nunc quoque non sum scribere ausus vobis, de imminentibus Ecclesiae periculis, & gravi●● 〈◊〉 mate quod timemus, ac plurimis quae sustinemus incommodis. S. Bernard. in Ep. 118. Cùm ob rem levem Schisma fit, manifesta odij nota est. Cameron. de Schis. London, Printed by E. T. and R. H. for James Collins at the King's Arms in Ludgate-street, 1672. TO THE READER. NOtwithstanding the many Modern Epistolar Flouts at such kind of Apologies for Printing, give me leave to say, that many Considerable Persons have earnestly desired that this Sermon should be public. I was not much provoked to hear, that Some of my Auditors should say, there was not a word of Edification in it; for as, I hope, they were none of the wisest; so, I know, it intended to prevent destruction. We are called to labour under this odds: men may reject the means without God's grace, we may not expect the End without God's blessing. I fear some of my Friends question my prudence; and are troubled that I appear so earnest in the point. But I am not yet satisfied, that it is Prudence in the Pastor not to be in earnest, when the Flock is in Hazard. I believe I never had more plain Truth on my side, or greater Cause to deliver it: when we see the Nerves of our Church resolved, and the whole body and the very Foundations shake: when mischief is intended to our Fathers and Mother and all our Brethren round about us: When, not only our Neighbours, but even God's house is in flames, is this a time for a prudent man to keep silence? To what end are we placed upon the Tower as Watchmen, if we dare not say; What of the Night? I hope, upon serious deliberation, I have set my shoulder to the Parochial constitution of the Church of England: if that falls, I can but fall with it: and in earnest, I foresee not, where I can stand safe, without it; neither care I much to be informed in that point: duty only is true security. He that said follow me; hath this said of him, the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up. Farewell. 1 Cor. 11. 22. What! have you not houses to eat and to drink in? Or despise you the Church of God? IT was truly observed, that the late Conventicles Ebbed and Flowed, with their hopes of Mercy and fears of Justice; in the Execution, and Suspension of the Execution of the penal Laws; for, accordingly, upon the security of impunity, we are now overflown beyond all bounds of Sober Moderation and Just Liberty. And, who can any longer forbear? who, I say, that hath any sense of Religion can forbear, to cry out; What an Horrible thing is committed in the Land? unless other parts are wiser than ours. 'Tis confessed the observation is to our Reproach, and aught to be concealed: but that is impossible: and perhaps, the Cure too is beyond our power: yet, I hope, none can think they have cause to be offended, if we use our liberty, so far only, as to detect and bewail the Sin and Mischief of this most monstrous licentiousness. My Complaint is this. That, in a City of so excellent Government, and whose Governors are singular Examples in our public Worship, whereas, about thirty or forty persons did use to meet together, privately, before the late Declaration; now, as themselves do glory (though it's thought, they sometimes overlash a little) there are so many hundreds, that do it in the face of the Sun: and these, generally, such, as Communicated with us in our Parish-Churces, immediately before the Toleration. These are they that now separate themselves; defy our Communion; set up their Altar against ours; and hold their new Assembles, just at the same hour with our Parochial; as if they designed the ruin of our Churches by the directest opposition imaginable: and all this, under colour of his Majesty's gracious Declaration; though that as directly declareth the Fstablishment of the Church of England. But letit be well considered; is there one word in that Declaration to encourage Such to forsake us, as it found in Communion with us? It intends indeed to gratify persons of Tender Consciences; that is, those that could not, as themselves thought, join with us in our public worship without sin: but what part of it will they lay claim to that both Can and Did? If such do separate, and yet have any Consciences, they seem not to be very tender ones that can serve at opposite Altars: and in so short a time, upon the only single Temptation of Liberty, can so easily change their Guides, their Churches, their places of Assembling, and manner of worship. For thus, they do not only disturb, desert, and divide, but even despise the Church of God. An Argument, which the great Apostle (what ever we think) thought sufficient, not only to rebuke but suppress the Divisions and Schisms in the Church of Corinth; as appears by the Smart exprobration in the Text. What! have you not Houses to eat and to drink in? or despise you the Church of God? Let us weigh both the Indictment and the Evidence. The Indictment, in general, lieth in the Text: they despised the Church of God. The Evidence is found in the preceding verses 18, 19, 20, 21. and is twofold. For they did so, both by their Schism and profaneness. I hear, saith he, there are divisions among you; 'tis Schisms in the Margin, according to the Greek: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and by the word [Heresies] in the next verse, he intends nothing else, by the consent of all Expositors. And by their intemperance, which he calleth drunkeness, v. 21. he argueth their profaneness: and by both evinceth their despising the Church of God in the Text. Hence my Work is, 1. To lay before you the nature of Schism. 2. To show you, that the present separation is such. 3. That thus the Church of God is despised; especially when the consideration of profaneness is added thereunto. Now of these things, I beseech you of your Clemency, to hear me a few words: which I have rather chosen to deliver at such a time as this; when, it is presumed, there are many from several parts of the Country, equally concerned in the occasion, assembled to hear me. For the choice of this subject, with a little patience, you will perceive, the sin and danger of the present Schism is too plain a Reason. And for my encouragement, in labouring to stay this plague, and the farther eating of this sore Cancer, I am sure I follow very great Examples. What do the Apostles; what the most Eminent Fathers; what all our solid Modern Divines, oppose themselves against, upon all occasions, with more zeal and vehemence of spirit, than against Causers of division and Schism in the Church? Yea herein, not only our own Pastors of the Church of England, but the very Nonconformists, (which were easy to manifest by the writings of the Puritans against the Brownists heretofore, and more lately of the Presbyterians against the Independents, and other Sectaries,) have led me the way. So that, if I prove that thing to be Schism which I speak against; and that Schism such, as is of fearful consequence to the Church of God; I doubt not of your kindness to pardon me, if I shall use that boldness in my way of Arguing, that in other Cases might not so well become me, in so great, so grave, so Learned and so Honourable an Audience. And with this Confidence I shall now enter the lists. Of Schism in general, and the Application of it to the present separation. We are to lay our foundation in the right notion of Schism: to that end, we shall show you first the nature of schism in general; and then the nature of that schism of which the Corinthians were guilty: still making application. to the present Separation as we pass along. For the first, that we may understand what Schism in general is, we must know that it is agreed by all that have formerly written about it, that the nature of it lies in practice; and not in opinion, farther than the opinion concerns the practice. Indeed the words, Heresy and Schism, sound the same Accommodatum est ad signif. separation●m qua quis separat ab ecclesiâ. Isodor. 8. Etym. cap. 3. thing in the Text, and some other places of holy Scripture; but after ages found reason to distinguish them; by confining Heresy to error in Faith, and schism to error in practice: and that practice peculiarly such, as is a breach of unity in the Church (as S. Austin and S. Hierom teach) what ever our opinions otherwise be. Schisma, à Scissurâ vocatur, schism is a rent: therefore the Holy Scriptures express it, by causing divisions; separating ourselves; forsaking the Assemblies; heaping up teachers to ourselves; and drawing Disciples after us, and the like. Ignatius and S. Cyprian soon after define schism Cyprian Epist. ad Pupuen. Tertul. adv. Haer. lib. 1. c. 5. Irenae. lib. 4. c. 43. adv. Haer. Chrysost. in Ep. ad Eph. Hom. 2. by a renouncing, or not obeying or submitting to our lawful Guides, Bishops and Presbyters. And with Tertullian, S. Austin, S. Jerom, and the rest of the Fathers, schism is a breach of Unity, by a Separation from the Church, and errecting Altar against Altar. But when things of this nature had past a more through examination; it was at length concluded, that there might happen to be a just cause of separating from a true Church: and hence schism came to a more accurate and stated definition: and now it seems to be agreed on by all, at least Protestants, That Schism is an unlawful Definition of schism. and unwarrantable or causeless rending or dividing the Church of God. Schism is dividing the Church; therefore such as are said to be guilty of it, are supposed to be, or Ex communi sensu supponit, eum, qui separatur, fuisse unitum; ut Scissura, etc. Lud. d. lafoy cand. in Tertul. bound to be members of the Church thus divided. Again 'tis an unlawful, unwarrantable and causeless dividing; therefore it must be either without just ground; or, at least, without due counsel and advice, if the cause be just. According to Cameron and others; Schisma est secessio ab Ecclesia, vel injusta vel temeraria: schism is either an unjust or a rash separation from the Church. Once more; It is also generally agreed, That there can be no just cause of separation from a true Church, while we may lawfully Communicate with it; that is, while we may do so without sinning. So that schism is a refusing to communicate with such a Church. It is as weakly, as needlessly said of some, that a not having actual communion with a particular Church is not schism. Who ever dreamed it was? yet a refusing to Communicate, or, as Ames saith well, a Schisma in tantum separa● ab Ecclesia in quantum renuntiat Communioni. Am. renouncing Communion with any Church, especially our own, while we may continue it without sinning, this, I say, is schism; and indeed generally acknowledged to be so; in that all parties concerned in the controversy, put it to this sole issue; whether the conditions of Communion be lawful; that is, whether we may Communicate without sin. And indeed as nothing is better than unity but duty; so nothing is worse than division or breach of unity, especially in the Church of God, but sin. Schism then is such unlawful breach of unity; and only a breach of charity as an effect of it. And all causeless separation is such unlawful breach both of unity and Charity: and such separation is causeless, when we may Communicate without sin: and consequently, is schism beyond all exception. As there is little difference about the definition Distinctions of schism. of schism; so less about the distinctions or modes of it. We every where find it said to be Partial, when we causelessly refuse to Communicate with a true Church in some ordinances only: Total, when in all. It is negative, when we simply separate: positive and formal, when the separated gather new Churches, and set up Altar against Altar. And now we have the foundation laid, not on the narrow principles of a party, but in its full latitude, according to the Scriptures and the Church of God. And I dare even challenge you to show me one good Author of any persuasion, that hath written purposely of this point, that contradicts me in any one particular of the premises. I am sure, the worst of the separatists do not: for that they generally excuse their separation, by this plea; that our Churches are null: or they cannot join with us without sin. The Application. Give me leave then so far to apply this Doctrine of schism, to the present practice: and now judge righteously. Is not the present general separation from our Churches, in the language of the Scripture, a causing divisions; a separating themselves; a forsaking our Assemblies; a going out from us; a heaping up new Teachers; and a drawing Disciples after them? Do they not, in the words of the Fathers, renounce our Bishops and Presbyters; break the unity of the Church; separate from it; and set up Altar against Altar? Do they not do this, rashly without due advice; unjustly without sufficient ground? Do they not thus rashly and unjustly separate from a true Church, not only in part but wholly? not only negatively but positively, and run upon formal schism, in the Reformed and Presbyterian Dialect, by renouncing our Communion, and gathering new Churches, under new Ministers, government and manner of worship? Who can deny it? who dare defend it? Object. Keek close to the Argument, and there are but two things that can possibly be objected: either that they are not, and ought not to be members of our Churches: or, that they cannot continue so without sin. Answ. But neither of these can be bent to the present case: for we speak, especially, of such as were Baptised; and have, for many years together, worshipped God, in their own persons, in the Temples with us: and thus have done as much to the making themselves members of our Parishs-Churches, as the very Independents require. Besides, it ought to be considered seriously, that they stand obliged to worship God with us by the laws of Order and Cohabitation: by the civil and Ecclesiastical laws of the Church and Kingdom: which, do what they can, will reach and bind their Consciences, both by virtue of the natural laws of Government, and the positive laws of Scripture. Both which have Divine Authority sufficient to exact your obedience to your Rulers in all lawful things. And that, to worship God with us in the Temple, is a lawful thing; I appeal to your own present judgement, if it agree with your late practice. However, I am sure, I have the general consent of the Reformed Churches, and of the Old Nonconformists, Puritan, and Presbyterians, against both your judgement and practice, if they be indeed both changed. Object. I know it is said, they do not absolutely deny our Communion; but they think they may serve God better in their gathered Churches. This is the refuge of their cunning men. Answer. But can they be in earnest? Our Communion then must be either corrupt or defective. Defective, you cannot say; for we have all the same Ordinances that you have, and a great many good Prayers that you have not. Are we corrupt then? Show, wherein: there is nothing in our lay-Communion that you use to scruple, but Kneeling at the Sacrament. As for the Surplice and the Cross, these belong to the Pastor's Office: And shall not he have liberty to do his duty, as well as you to neglect yours? Besides, if you should imagine, that you are concerned about the Application of the Sign of the Cross to your Children; I need not tell you of ways to avoid it, without gathering Churches. If these things be so, answer me like Christians. You would Separate that you may have pure Ordinances, i. e. that you may receive the Communion, sitting. And is it, indeed, all come to this? And will this bear you out in a Total Separation, and tearing our Churches in pieces, as you do? You cannot think it. But, what ever is amiss with us, your late practice and this very Objection granteth, that you believe it lawful to join in our Worship; and if so, nothing can excuse your Separation from Schism, according to the Doctrine of Ames, and indeed in the Judgement of all men but yourselves; if not very lately, of yourselves too. Besides, to Separate, that you may serve God Inter nos quibus idem Christus, una Religio, eadem Sacramenta, nihil in Christiana observatione diversum. Donat. Aug. To. 7. p. 46. m. better, is too like the pretence of all former Schismatics, that stand condemned in the Histories of the Church. The Novatians, Audeans, Donatists; the Soberer part of our own Separatists and Independents, all these pretended for Reformation and purer Worship and Discipline; which, with you, is to serve God better. Lastly, pardon me, if I warn you of some danger in this Principle; if left or trusted in their hands that are Cunning, and know how to use it with Advantage. It lays the Reins of Government upon the People's Neck, and impels them to reform without their Rulers; and consequently, is plainly inconsistent with the Reason and order of all good Polity; and opens a Gap for Division and Confusion in the Church (how ever it fares with the State) while every one is hurried by his own Wild Fancy, set on fire by this Principle. Yea, it carries also in it the Ruin of the Separated Churches themselves: It hath been formerly observed to ferment and work strangely in them, and may do the like again. It hath not been content to pill off the first black or browner Skin of the Onion; but it would have it whiter and whiter; and still hath peeled and peeled, one after another, till nothing has been left (except tears in the eyes of the beholders) but Skin and Husks; thought fit only to be trodden under foot by Atheistical Swine; while the Reformers themselves are prepared to be torn in pieces by Dogs; as the Apostle styles some Ravenous Antichristian Doctors. 2. The Point hath yet force to defeat another great Argument for Separation; for if our people cannot leave us without Sin and Schism; how vainly it is said, We must preach; we may not preach in the Temples; we cannot preach otherwhere without Auditors; we can have no Auditors but out of the Parochial Congregations; therefore we must gather Churches out of them. One would think the Argument went better thus: had we a People of our own, there were a necessity of our preaching; but seeing we have none, there is no such necessity; where there is no opportunity, there is no duty, saith Mr. Baxter: The Argument as it is, is in plain English, no better than this; We must provide for our Families; we cannot do this except we steal from our Neighbour; therefore we must steal. It seems ridiculous to plead an interest in, or Pastoral Relation to the people you had ten years agone; founded in the Independent Notion of the people's Consent. Where do you find one word in Scripture, making the people's Consent necessary to a particular Pastors Call, or his relation to them? Besides, in a Christian Commonwealth, is there nothing required to give such relation but the people's Consent, if that be so? Is the Consent of the Magistrate expressed in his Laws respectively, nothing in this matter? Is the Consent of the Overseers in the Church, that give us Institution nothing? It seems, beyond all doubt, that the Laws of the Church where we live, must be the measure and standard of our spiritual Title, as well as the Laws of the Land, of our Temporal. And if the King and the Bishop have a hand in our Introduction and Ejection, we cannot be restored without them. Besides, the remedy is too too short, were it good: Have not the people generally consented to other Pastors? How few of the Ejected Ministers do indeed apply themselves to their Ancient Flocks, as they should do by this Rule? Yea, they put their Sickle, every where, into others men's Harvest, without all shadow of this poor pretence. Give me leave to be plain; This pretended necessity of preaching and drawing away our people from us, the real necessity of peace and order condemns; the necessity of obedience to the Laws condemns; necessity of obedience to God's word, requiring obedience to those Laws, condemns: Yea, the necessity of keeping your Promises and Oaths, if you were ordained by Bishops, flatly condemns. Lastly, that we must preach, though inhibited by Law, and Law executed, is a principle condemned by the reason and practice of all Churches; yea of all kind of Nonconformists; the late Presbyterians, the old Puritans, and the very Independents themselves in New-England; as might easily be made to appear. And if our Brethren concerned, examine their own late Principles, and the little reason they had to forsake them, I fear they will hardly escape Self-condemnation: But I desire it may be heeded, that I here speak not of the point of Liberty, but of Law and Conscience. Of the Schism charged upon the Corinthians; particularly, in their preferring some Pastors to the slighting of others. YOu have heard what Schism, in general, is; and how notoriously the present Separation is guilty of it. Let us now consider the particular Schisms in the Church of Corinth, and the agreeableness of ours with these. The Corinthians seem to be charged with a threefold Schism. 1. In preferring some Teachers to the slighting of others. 2. Refusing to observe the lawful Customs of their own Church. 3. Dividing in the Communion of it. The first we find, 1 Cor. 1. 10. Now I beseech you brethren, let there be no Divisions (or Schisms Gr.) among you; it hath been declared to me that there are contentions among you, vers. 11. Now, what were these Schisms and Contentions? Why, every one saith, I am of Paul, I of Apollo, I of Cephas, and I of Christ; one not liking to hear any but solid Paul; another, any, but zealous Peter; a third, any, but eloquent Apollo's; and a fourth would hear none, but wait for the Inspirations of Christ himself. Thus, we see we may be guilty of Schism, not only by refusing all Ministeries; but by having Itching ears, and heaping up Teachers to ourselves; and by a partial preferring some kind of Teachers to the slighting of others with pretences of Edifying better by them. This too palpably argues a renouncing and disobedience of our own Pastors, that notorious Donatist. In Causa Ceciliani Episcopi, cui crimina objecerunt,— s● ab Ecclesiâ Catholicâ diviserunt. Aug. To. 2. Ept. 50. Ecclesia propter quemlibet hominem relinquere non deb●mus, ibid. Epis. ad Pup●● anum: vid. etjam Epi. 1. ad Cornelium. Schism branded by the most eminent Fathers in the Primitive Ages of the Church, as before was noted; and Mr. Hales tells us, that the people's partial preference of some Bishops before others, hath been the general cause of Schism in most Ages; yea, he adds, that he that reads St. Cyprian, would imagine that that Father thought, there was no other Schism but this. Hear him in one place for the rest; unde enim Schismata, etc. whence do Schisms and Heresies arise? but when the Bishop who is one, and governs the Church, is contemned by the proud presumption of certain persons; and the Man that is honoured, Dignatione Dei, Indignis hominibus Judicatur, is judged by unworthy men. Now, are not our New Churches Schismatical enough for this Cause also? Is it not respect of Persons that draws our people from us, to hear their New or Old Teachers? The Preachers say, indeed, they must take care of their own old Flocks; and the people say, they must hear their old Ministers. But, besides what we have said to this already, we must say, the cheat is too manifest: For, how few of their old Ministers are left, that will preach unto them? Many are dead; many conform; and some are honest and modest, and like not to be Independents and gather Churches: And very few of these few, that are left, and do take this liberty, are to be found near their old places; except they are such, as were ejected out of the best of our Towns. But the Non-Conformists are godly, zealous and painful Preachers: And what is this but to intimate that we are not so, though, thanks be to God, you cannot say it; especially in the Parishes, where your Godly Preachers would gather their Churches. But, my brethren, is not this to say, I am of Paul, etc. Deceive not yourselves, this is not your virtue, or your strength, or spiritualness above others; but indeed your Sin and Schism, your weakness, and your flesh. The Apostle saw (though you cannot,) envying, strife and faction in these, and such like pretences. I writ unto you, saith he, not as unto spiritual, but as carnal and Babes; for ye are yet carnal: For whereas there is envying and strife and Divisions or Factions among you, are ye not carnal and walk as men? And all this he proves, after this manner; for while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollo; are ye not carnal? 1 Cor. 3. 1, 2, 3, 4. Yet you may not escape thus: Your practice hath a double Aggravation, beyond theirs. 1. The Preachers in Corinth were all of one kind of Ordination, and Pastors of the same Church; and did not at all countenance this partial respect of their own gifts, but rather reprove it; as you have heard the Apostle, who was one of them: So that there was no Schism or difference among the Pastors; and St. Hierom's great In. cap. 3. ad Titum. Cause of Schism was wanting; who tells us, that it Separates from the Church propter Episcopalem dissensionem. But you Separate from us, and adhere to such as are no allowed Pastors of our Church, either by Presentation, Institution, Induction, or, for the most part of them, Ordination itself; and we have cause to fear, that our Differences are made not only by the people, but chief by the Teachers. Secondly, Paul, Apollo and Cephas, as they were Ministers of the same Church, and at unity among themselves, so they had all the same Mode of Worship, the same Government and Discipline, as well as Doctrine. But now, as you forsake your true Pastors, so you make new Churches of another Ministry, Worship and Government, and quite of another Constitution; and where is your Sobriety to run thus upon a Total Separation from us? What think ye, are ye not carnal and walk as men in the Apostles Logic? Yea, I say, ye are children, and driven of the wind and tossed. The Second Sort of Schism, viz. slighting lawful Usages. THese Corinthians were further blamed with a slighting the Customs of the Church; for the Apostle, having in the beginning of this Chapter, minded them of the Decency of some particular Circumstances of Worship; he at length enforceth their observance by an Argument from Custom in the Churches of God, v. 17. But perhaps, though this be a fault, some may think it not always so great a fault, as to be called Schism; especially when men keep their Church. Yet it may not be amiss to observe that Beza placeth the nature of Schism in this very thing; a leaving the Church for the sake of some external Rites. And I see not how our new Churches can be excused in this point: For do they not take offence at our Rites and Ceremonies? Do they not plead this offence, and this only or chief, for their Separation? Though our Rites are not only Rites of Custom, but of positive Laws too: Though our Rites are such as the Communion of the people is little concerned in: Yea, though they are such also, as all former Non-Conformists stiffly contend, none ought to Separate from our Churches for; and much less to gather themselves into new Churches; as it is at this day, when, you know, you are indulged to omit them without penalty or Separation. The last Charge of Schism in Corinth, a dividing at the Communion, in the Text. LAstly, these Corinthians were guilty of Schism also by their Divisions in their Communions; reproved in the Text; explained in the Verse before it; In eating, every one taketh before other his own Supper; and one is Hungry and another is Drunken, i. e. saith Calvin, they drank too freely and merrily at their feasts joined with the Lords Supper; wherein, also, the Rich excluded the Poor, and Factiously denied them to Communicate with them; and after the Rich had done, the Poor were suffered to eat together, only of what the Rich had left: Thus, they Divided in their Love-feasts, as most consent; but Pareus thinks also, in the Lords-Supper itself. Thus Unity was broken; and that's Schism: Thus, saith Grotius, it happened in their Times, which is fallen out much more in ours, that the thing instituted for the incorporating and uniting of Christians, in vexillum Schismatis vertitur; is made the occasion of Division and Schism. This kind of Schism, is too easily applicable to our present Separation, which cannot escape alike, yea a far worse Accusation: For do not our brethren avoid Communion with us especially in the Eucharist? Hath not this Communion been the only matter of their Division, when they so long joined with us in all things else? None can deny it. But, their Schism is now commenced much higher, by the following Circumstances. 1. The Corinthians divided only in one Ordinance with partial Schism; our brethren, in all, with total Separation. 2. The Corinthians held their divided Communions in the same Public Place; our brethren Ver. 18. & 20. leave our Public Churches, and have Private Houses for Public Worship. 3. Their divided Communions were successive; and not at the same time; but some before, some after other, v. 21. but our brethren set their new Verse 21. Altars directly against ours in point of time; in plain opposition. 4. The Corinthians communicated with the same Pastors, in the same Modes of Worship and Government; yet for dividing among themselves were Schismatics; and who can excuse those that renounce their Pastors, and heap up new ones, of another Ordination, to serve another Altar, under another Mode of Worship, Government and Discipline? The Sum is; the Corinthians were Schismatics for dividing only in one point: But our brethren divide from us in all things; in our Pastors, Temples, Assemblies, Worship and Government: Yea, they have new Pastors, Places, Assemblies, and all things else, concurring both to Negative, and Positive, and Total Separation; and if this be not Schism, in the Rankest sense imaginable, say, what is. Of the Contempt which falls upon Church, as a Public Place of Worship, by Schism. YOu have heard the first Evidence, viz. Schism; but because your patience would fail me to speak of the Second, viz. Profaneness (though doubtless we have too much reason for that also) I shall employ the time remaining, in lamenting the Contempt, which necessarily falls upon the Church of God, by Schism and Separation; beseeching you, at last, for pity's sake, to have no hand in it. Despise ye the Church of God? Whether we understand the Locus or the Coetus, the Place or the Assembly, such as Separate show plainly, that they despise the Church of God. First, they despise the Public Place of our God's usual Worship; as the Synogogue is properly the Meeting of the People, and improperly the Place in which they meet; so the name Church, saith Grotius, hath both Significations; but here, as he conceives, and is plain enough in Vid. ver. 20. with 22. the Context, we are especially to understand the Place: For so early it seems the Church had Places peculiarly devoted to divine Service; and Eusebius observes, it was evidently so in Dioclesian's time. These Churches or Temples, were then distinguished from their Private Houses, by their proper uses; these were to eat and to drink in, [Have you not houses to eat and to drink in?] and for Civil Conversation; but the Church for divine things; Prayers, Doctrine, Sacraments, the Public Exercises of Piety and Religious Worship; therefore called, as in the Text, the Churches of God. Despise you the Church of God? Not that divine Worship is to be wholly shut out of our Private Houses: Yet it ought to be such as agrees with the Nature of them, viz. Family-Worship. Public Worship in Private Houses, when we may have Public, hath been ever a Solecism in Religion: So we must also eat and drink in the Church; yet, in such wise, as agrees with the Place; not after a common and carnal manner, as these Corinthians did; but in Christian Communion, after our Lord's Institution, as the Apostle commands. Now, by Schism, this Church or Public Place of God's Worship was despised among them; thereby, they made it as their own houses; they gave it nothing of its due Reverence; they despised the Worship of it, and the God of it, by turning it into a Den of Thiefs, stealing from God and the Poor; and a Sty of Swine, by their Sensuality and Luxury; a House of Pride and Faction, of Envy and Division; which ought to have been a House of Prayer and Piety, a House of Purity and Unity, in the Communion of Saints. Did they thus despise God's House, and do Applicat. not we, much more? P. Martyr complains of his Times; now the Temples lie open all the day long, for walking, news, and all sort of profane business; and minds us of our Saviour's whipping the Buyers and Sellers out of the Temple; and it cannot but seem strange to us, that such, especially, as despise the Temple in its holy uses, should yet thus profane it. But, this is not the Contempt, I chief bewail; for while men forsake this Public House, and build others for Divine Service; can they more shamefully despise it? While they forsake it, especially upon such Grounds, as they imagine should carry away all others, as well as themselves; can they take a more effectual course to render it contemptible? If after these cross Examples, others should be tempted to do so wickedly, what would become of our Temples? They may stand a while indeed as forlorn and neglected Monuments of our Irreligion and Atheism; but, at length, must fall, and the Magnificence of England fall with them, to the imparalleled reproach of our Church and Nation; they may serve a while, for meaner Offices than our own Houses, as some of them lately did, but too soon we may have cause to lament with the Prophet, Lift up thy feet to the perpetual desolations; even all that the Enemy hath done wickedly in the Sanctuary: they have defiled by casting down the Dwelling place of thy Name to the ground; they said in their hearts, let us destroy them together; they have burnt up all the Synagogues of God in the Land: O God, how long shall the Adversary reproach? Psal. 74. 2. to 11. Yea, it is not an Enemy that reproacheth us; then we could have born it. We took sweet counsel Psa. 55. 12. 14. together, and (lately) walked to the House of God in Company. I know you will say, that our brethren intent no such thing; but this is, plainly, the intention of their Actions, if not of their minds, which ought chief to be observed, and without which the intention of their minds is insignificant. The Contempt of the Assemblies by Separation. SEcondly, suppose by the Church of God we understand the Coetus or Assembly of Christians; how are these despised, while you treat them as unworthy of your Company? while you reject our Pastors, our Members, our Worship and Ordinances, as well as our Temples? What can be the Intention of your Separation, but to reflect upon us as too too corrupt; and to censure us as Assemblies of Sinners and Publicans, though you heed not who are the Pharisees; and plainly to expose our Bishops, Pastors, Government and Worship to Public Scorn and highest Contempt; and the Church of England, and our Parochial Congregations, to the certainest Method of Reproach and Ruin; should others be persuaded to deal so spitefully with us as yourselves? I say, this way of Separation, as it immediately plucks up our Ancient Landmarks, and dissolves our Parochial Constitution; so, it leads directly to the tearing our Prayer-book again; the trampling, first, upon our Government, next upon our Governors; and, if wiser men than I am, have any skill at guessing, a betraying our Church, and the Reformation of it to Foreign Invasion and Usurpation; the barbarous Captivity of spiritual Egypt and Sodom; which God avert. If not, than this must be for a Lamentation: How doth the City sit solitary that was full of people? I am. 1. How is she become as a Widow? All her Friends have dealt treacherously with her; they are become her Enemies. Judah is gone into Captivity. She dwelleth among the Heathen. The ways of Zion do mourn, because none come to her solemn feasts; all her Gates are desolate; her Priests sigh; her Virgins are afflicted, and she is in bitterness; her Adversaries are the chief; her Enemies prosper; and from the Daughter of Zion all her beauty is departed. The Application of the whole Discourse for Union and Parochial Worship. THus you have heard what Schism is, and the danger of it to the Church of God; and that breach of Union and Division of the Parts, threatens the dissolution of the whole: Now, what remains, but that if you would avoid the Mischief, you prevent it in the Cause, which you see is Schism, Separation and gathering Churches. As you would preserve our Church, you must preserve its Union; the Case admits of no other Cure; the Case is otherwise desperate: Yet, this is a sure Remedy, carrying in it a continuity of Parts, which is our Health. Now, there is but one way of maintaining this Union; and that is necessary, viz. the preserving our Parochial Constitution and Worship; if this be once dissolved, we are lost. Parish-bounds were, at first, laid by the light of Nature, (for persons living together, should worship God together) and the general practice of Scripture; where we still find Cities and Churches are Commensurate: perhaps, among so many Instances, there may be some few just exceptions; but, generally, the bounds of our Parish-Churches are convenient enough, our very Adversaries being Judges. However, where they are inconvenient, the people cannot be thought fit Reformers; popular Experiments about Ancient Foundations will be ever hazardous if not Ruinous. What hand trembles not to touch a Constitution that hath been found so convenient, and stood so firm for so many Ages? Yea, a friend of their own, of no mean account, affirms, that the Protestant Interest in England depends very much upon the Piety, Honour and Integrity of our Parish-Churches. The Conclusion. COnclude then; there is no other visible remedy against the foresaid Mischiefs, but our ordinary attending upon the Worship of God in the Temples. If you regard the Common Safety and the Public Peace, or your Private Interest therein involved; if the Prosperity of Zion, your duty to and care of Religion; if the great concerns of God and men's Souls, and the Reformation, weigh any thing with you: Yea, as you abhor Schism and Heresy, Popery and Anarchy, Atheism, Confusion and perpetual desolations in the Church of God, take head of separating yourselves; break not our Parish-bounds; forsake not, slight not, our Public Worship and Assemblies. Take heed of giving Countenance to gathered Churches; so far, as to gratify a Wanton itch of hearing their Teachers: They are Schismatical in their Constitution; and plainly design opposition and destruction to the Church of England; and he that sees not this, sees Nothing. Let Houses retain their proper offices, and be content with them; but see, that you Reverence the Sanctuary. O contemn it not, by withdrawing yourselves, and God's Ark and Altar from it: What! Have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? Or despise ye the Church of God? Do not dare to do it; 'tis a great Sin, and of destructive Consequence; and you have had Warning; and, to say no more, you have no Assurance, that either God or Man will always indulge it, or let it go unpunished. FINIS. Some single Sermons and other Discourses touching the present differences in the Church, Printed for James Collins. 1. Catholic Charity recommended in a Sermon before the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor of London, in order to the abating the Animosities among Christians that have been occasioned by differences in Religion, by Jos. Glanvile Rector of Bath. Price 6 d. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: or a seasonable Recommendation and defence of Reason in the Affairs of Religion; against Infidelity, Scepticism, and Fanaticisms of all sorts, by Jos. Glanvile Rector of Bath. Price 6 d. 3. The Christians Victory over Death; A Sermon preached at the Funeral of the most Honourable George Duke of Albemarle, by Seth Lord Bishop of Sarum. Price 6 d. 4. A Mirror of Christianity, and a Miracle of Charity; or an exact Narrative of the Life and Death of the Lady Alice Duchess Dudley, by R. Boreman DD. Price 6 d. 5. The General Assembly, or the necessity of receiving the Communion in our public Congregations evinced from the Nature of the Church, the Word of God, and Presbyterian Principles; A Sermon by Francis Fulwood. DD. Price 6 d. 6. Miserere Cleri; A Sermon representing the Miseries of the Clergy, and Assigning their true Causes in order to Redress, by Edw. Westonhall B. D. Price 6 d. 7. Vrim & Thummim; or the Clergies Dignity and Duty recommended in a Visitation Sermon, by Mal. Couvant B. D. Price 6 d. A Discouse of Toleration, in answer to a late Book, entitled, A Discourse of the Religion of England. Price 6 d. Indulgence not justified, being a Continuation of the Discourse of Toleration, in answer to the Arguments of a late Book, entitled, A Peace Offering or Plea for Indulgence; and to another, called, The second Discourse of the Religion of England. Price 6 d. Toleration not to be abused; or a serious Question soberly debated and resolved upon Presbyterian Principles, viz. whether it be adviseable, especially for the Presbyterians, either in Conscience or Prudence, to take advantage from His Majesty's late Declaration, to deny or rebate their Communion with our Parochial Congregations, and to gather themselves into distinct and separate Churches. Price 6 d. The Judgement of the Learned and Pious St. Augustin, concerning Penal Laws against Conventicles, and for Unity in Religion, delivered in his 48 Epistle to Vincentius. Promiscuous Ordinations are destructive to the honour and safety of the Church of England, written in a Letter to a Person of Quality.