A brief vindication of the non-conformists from the charge of schism as it was…A brief vindication of the non-conformists from the charge of schisme as it was…

The Procedure of our Author in the management of his Charge, is in a way of proving from the Assertions and Concessions of the several Parties whereinto he hath distinguished Non-conformists, that they have no just Cause to with-hold full Communion from the Church of England, especially in its Parochial Assemblies. And as unto the first Party whom he affirms to grant that ⟨p. 34⟩they are in a State of Separation, he quotes some Sayings out of a Discourse of a Nameless Author, Concerning Evangelical Love, Church Peace and Unity. And together with some Concessions of his, he adds his Judgment, that Communion in Ordinances must be only in such Churches as Christ himself instituted by unalterable Rules, which were only particular and Congregational Churches. As I remember that Author hath at large declared in his Discourse, what Communion Believers ought to have with the Church, or all Churches, the Church in every sense wherein that Name is used in the Scripture. But I shall not trouble my self to inquire into his Assertions or Concessions; nor at present can I do so, not having that Book with me where I now am. My business is only to examine on this occasion what this Reverend Author excepteth against or opposeth unto his Assertion about Congregational Churches and the answering his Charge of Schism, notwithstanding this Plea of the Institution of particular Churches for the Celebration of Divine Ordinances. This he doth pag. 25. Granting this to be true, how doth it hence appear not to be a sin to separate from our Parochial Churches; which according to their own Concessions have all the Essentials of true Churches. And what ground can they have to separate and divide those Churches, which for all that we can see, are of the same nature with the Churches planted by the Apostles at Corinth, Philippi, or Thessalonica?

The Procedure of our Author in the management of his Charge, is in a way of proving from the Assertions and Concessions of the several Parties whereinto he hath distinguished Non-conformists, that they have no just Cause to with-hold full Communion from the Church of England, especially in its Parochial Assemblies. And as unto the first Party whom he affirms to grant that ⟨p. 34⟩they are in a State of Separation, he quotes some Sayings out of a Discourse of a Nameless Authour, Concerning Evangelical Love, Church Peace and Unity. And together with some Concessions of his, he adds his Judgment, that Communion in Ordinances must be only in such Churches as Christ himself instituted by unalterable Rules, which were only particular and Congregational Churches. As I remember that Author hath at large declared in his Discourse, what Communion Believers ought to have with the Church, or all Churches, the Church in every sense wherein that Name is used in the Scripture. But I shall not trouble my self to inquire into his Assertions or Concessions; nor at present can I do so, not having that Book with me where I now am. My business is only to examine on this occasion what this Reverend Author excepteth against or opposeth unto his Assertion about Congregational Churches and the answering his Charge of Schisme, notwithstanding this Plea of the Institution of particular Churches for the Celebration of Divine Ordinances. This he doth pag. 25. Granting this to be true, how doth it hence appear not to be a sin to separate from our Parochial Churches; which according to their own Concessions have all the Essentials of true Churches. And what ground can they have to separate and divide those Churches, which for all that we can see, are of the same nature with the Churches planted by the Apostles at Corinth, Philippi, or Thessalonica?