A41330:741
The questions between the conformist and nonconformist, truly stated, and briefly discussed Dr. Falkner,…
The questions between the conformist and nonconformist, truly stated, and briefly discussed Dr. Falkner, The friendly debate &c., examined and answered : together with a discourse about separation, and some animadversions upon Dr. Stillingfleet's book entitled, The unreasonableness of separation : observations upon Dr. Templars sermon preached at a visitation in Cambridge : a brief vindication of Mr. Stephen Marshal.The questions between the conformist and nonconformist, truly stated, and briefly discussed Dr. Falkner, The friendly debate &c., examined and answered : together with a discourse about separation, and some animadversions upon Dr. Stillingfleet's book entituled, The unreasonableness of separation : observations upon Dr. Templers sermon preached at a visitation in Cambridge : a brief vindication of Mr. Stephen Marshal.
London: printed for Tho. Cockerill, 1681
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
4ly. If any particular Church shall vary from that Pattern, and shall impose upon the members of this body, conditions of communion which our Head hath not imposed, and such as from the light of Scripture we cannot but apprehend as sinful, and yet will force them to subject to such conditions, or else no communion; that imposing Church is the schismatical Church, and the guilt of Schism lies at their door; Let this Imposition be in Faith, Worship, Discipline, or Manners. Let the Church be Papal (if that be a Church), Episcopal, Presbyterian, Independent, Anabaptistical, Lutheran, Calvinist, no matter what, the Imposing party is the Schismatic. Why do you, how dare you if you be members of that Head, impose that upon the members of his Body, which himself hath not? we will not, we must not admit any other wisdom or will in things which concern him, but his own; if we may admit three things which vary from his Rule, we may admit three ⟨p. 84⟩hundred, and turn him out from being Head. A great stir there is about the power of the Church in circumstances of worship: If you mean inseparable circumstances, ordering them according to the general Rule our Head hath given, for the edification of the Church, I know no Nonconformist such a block as to deny it; but that the things imposed upon us as conditions of Communion in the Church of England (as you call it) are such, the former discourse hath sufficiently proved the contrary. Hence the Church-men of England are the Schismatics.
4ly. If any particular Church shall vary from that Pattern, and shall impose upon the members of this body, conditions of communion which our Head hath not imposed, and such as from the light of Scripture we cannot but apprehend as sinful, and yet will force them to subject to such conditions, or else no communion; that imposing Church is the schimatical Church, and the guilt of Schism lyes at their door; Let this Imposition be in Faith, Worship, Discipline, or Manners. Let the Church be Papal (if that be a Church), Episcopal, Presbyterian, Independent, Anabaptistical, Lutheran, Calvinist, no matter what, the Imposing party is the Schismatick. Why do you, how dare you if you be members of that Head, impose that upon the members of his Body, which himself hath not? we will not, we must not admit any other wisdom or will in things which concern him, but his own; if we may admit three things which vary from his Rule, we may admit three ⟨p. 84⟩