When corruption and external communion be so involved that it is simply impossible to leave the corruptions unless we leave the external communion of the church, a necessity of separation from that external communion then lieth upon us:1 But though errors or corruptions of some kind be not only tolerated but established,2 maintained, and pressed, yet if we can hold communion without approbation of the said errors or corruptions, Separation in that case is unjust, rash and unadvised, because the ⟨p. 183⟩Lord therein doth not go before us. The sin of Separation, if unjust, is so great and heinous, the ill consequences and mischiefs, so many and fearful, that all Christians should be well advised neither to lay stumbling-blocks before the feet of others, which might occasion their turning aside, nor to seek or catch occasions of departure, but rather to wait and tarry till they be assured that the Lord goeth before them.3 For the first, when the Anabaptists in Helvetia opposed humane inventions as unlawful, they were by public authority and with common consent abolished. And that of Irenaeus is well known, Variety of ceremonies commend the unity of faith. For the other part, the faithful have ever tolerated weaknesses and infirmities in each other, and abuses in the church, so long as the foundation was held, and they agreed in the main. In the primitive church not only some persons but whole congregations have doubted of many books of scripture, and yet lost not their dignity of true churches of Christ. How long did the faithful wait and bear before they departed, or rather were driven by excommunication, sword, and sire out of Babylon? This hath been the judgement of the godly learned in all ages of the church.4 They that for trifling and small causes, saith Irenaeus, divide the body of Christ, &c. these can make no reformation of such importance as to countervail the danger of a division. 5When good men tolerate bad men, saith Augustine, which can do them no spiritual hurt, to the intent they may not be separated from those who are spiritually ⟨p. 184⟩good, then there is no necessity to divide unity. And in another place,6 These two things retained will keep such men pure and uncorrupted, that is, neither doing ill, nor approving it. Although faith be one funiculus colligantiae, 7yet variety of opinions without pertinacy standeth with unity:
When corruption and externall communion be so involved that it is simply impossible to leave the corruptions unlesse we leave the externall communion of the church, a necessity of separation from that externall communion then lyeth upon us:1 But though errours or corruptions of some kind be not onely tolerated but established,2 mainteined, and pressed, yet if we can hold communion without approbation of the said errours or corruptions, Separation in that case is unjust, rash and unadvised, because the ⟨p. 183⟩Lord therein doth not go before us. The sin of Separation, if unjust, is so great and heinous, the ill consequences and mischiefs, so many and fearfull, that all Christians should be well advised neither to lay stumbling-blocks before the feet of others, which might occasion their turning aside, nor to seek or catch occasions of departure, but rather to wait and tarry till they be assured that the Lord goeth before them.3 For the first, when the Anabaptists in Helvetia opposed humane inventions as unlawfull, they were by publick authority and with common consent abolished. And that of Irenaeus is well known, Variety of ceremonies commend the unitie of faith. For the other part, the faithfull have ever tolerated weaknesses and infirmities in each other, and abuses in the church, so long as the foundation was held, and they agreed in the main. In the primitive church not onely some persons but whole congregations have doubted of many books of scripture, and yet lost not their dignity of true churches of Christ. How long did the faithfull wait and bear before they departed, or rather were driven by excommunication, sword, and sire out of Babylon? This hath been the judgement of the godly learned in all ages of the church.4 They that for trifling and small causes, saith Irenaeus, divide the body of Christ, &c. these can make no reformation of such importance as to countervail the danger of a division. 5When good men tolerate bad men, saith Augustine, which can do them no spirituall hurt, to the intent they may not be separated from those who are spiritually ⟨p. 184⟩good, then there is no necessity to divide unity. And in another place,
- 1Rom. 3. 8.
- 2He who would have us receive the weak in faith, whom God hath received, would not have us refuse the fellowship of churches in that which is good, for weakness in them of one sort or other. And this we have so plainly and plentifully commended unto us, both by the prophets, yea by Christ himself in the Jewish church, and apostles and apostolical men in the first Christian churches (in which many errors and evils of all kinds were more then manifest, and the same oft-times both so far spread and deeply rooted as the reforming of them •as rather to be wished then hoped for) as that no place is left for doubting, &c. Robins. ubi suprà, pag. 15.He who would have us receive the weak in faith, whom God hath received, would not have us refuse the fellowship of churches in that which is good, for weaknesse in them of one sort or other. And this we have so plainly and plentifully commended unto us, both by the prophets, yea by Christ himself in the Jewish church, and apostles and apostolicall men in the first Christian churches (in which many errours and evils of all kinds were more then manifest, and the same oft-times both so farre spread and deeply rooted as the reforming of them •as rather to be wished then hoped for) as that no place is left for doubting, &c. Robins. ubi suprà, pag. 15.
- 3Zuingl. tom. 2. De Bapt. pag. 70.
- 4De haeres. lib. 4. cap. 62.
- 5Contr. Parm, l. 2. cap. 1•.
- 6Cap. 21.
- 7Cusan. Catholic. concord. l. 1. cap. 5.
