A26924:458
The English nonconformity as under King Charles II and King James II truly stated…
The English nonconformity as under King Charles II and King James II truly stated and argued by Richard Baxter ; who earnestly beseecheth rulers and clergy not to divide and destroy the land and cast their own souls on the dreadful guilt and punishment of national perjury ...
London: printed for Tho. Parkhurst, 1689
Chapter 30: Point XXVII. Of refusing Communicants from other Parishes, Canon 28.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Chap. XXX Point XXVII. Of refusing Communicants from other Parishes, Canon 28.
L. WHY may not this be obeyed?
L. VVHY may not this be obeyed?
M. In some cases it may, when Persons straggle without cause: But there is frequent need that will justify it as a Duty: Parish Bounds are a humane Order for conveniency; but the benefit of an able faithful Minister, and the choice and use of such where they may be had, is of Divine Appointment, and a matter of far greater weight. The Canon supposeth Ministers that neither can nor may be suffered, to Preach or Expound any Doctrine: If a Neighbour Parish have an able Teacher, must he drive away poor hungry Souls that seek his Consolatory Communion and Help? If Parishes that are bound to maintain their own Poor, suffer any of them to be in danger of perishing ⟨p. 118⟩by cold or hunger, a Neighbour Parish tho' forbidden by men, is bound by God to relieve them in distress: Every Christian is related to all the Catholic Church, and as he hath need, hath right to the Communion of Saints, out of his Parish. In London, where some Churches have excellent men, if a Lord or Gentleman live in a Parish where a Patron hath set over them, one that Preacheth not sincerely but railingly in strife, contention, or gross Error, why may not such a man go to a Neighbour Church? And why must that Neighbour Minister repel him? When yet our Antagonists in this case, maintain that the Catholic Church, being but one, every Christian must Communicate in every place where he hath occasion: And that a Diocese is the lowest sort of Church, of which Parishes are but parcels: And consequently a man never separateth from his Church, that separateth not from the Diocesan.