A53704:748
An enquiry into the original, nature, institution, power, order and communion of evangelical churches.…
An enquiry into the original, nature, institution, power, order and communion of evangelical churches. The first part with an answer to the discourse of the unreasonableness of separation written by Dr. Edward Stillingfleet, Dean of Pauls, and in defence of the vindication of non-conformists from the guilt of schism / by John Owen.An enquiry into the original, nature, institution, power, order and communion of evangelical churches. The first part with an answer to the discourse of the unreasonableness of separation written by Dr. Edward Stillingfleet, Dean of Pauls, and in defence of the vindication of non-conformists from the guilt of schisme / by John Owen.
London: printed by J. Richardson for Nath. Ponder, 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.
However, let me not be misinterpreted as unto that expression of destroying our Faith, which the Communion required with the Church of England, as unto all the important Articles of it, doth not do, and I can subscribe unto the Words of Daily, as quoted by our Author out of his Apology: If, saith he, the Church of Rome hath not required any thing of us, which destroys our Faith, offends our Consciences, and overthrows the Service which we believe due to God; if the Differences have been small, and such as we might safely have yielded unto; then he will grant their Separation was rash and unjust, and they guilty of the Schism.
However, let me not be misinterpreted as unto that expression of destroying our Faith, which the Communion required with the Church of England, as unto all the important Articles of it, doth not do, and I can subscribe unto the Words of Daille, as quoted by our Author out of his Apology: If, saith he, the Church of Rome hath not required any thing of us, which destroys our Faith, offends our Consciences, and overthrows the Service which we believe due to God; if the Differences have been small, and such as we might safely have yeilded unto; then he will grant their Separation was rash and unjust, and they guilty of the Schisme.
He closeth his Transcription of the Words of sundry Learned Men, who have justified the Separation of the reformed Churches from the Church of Rome, wherein we are not in the least concerned with an Enquiry, What Triumph would the Church of Rome make over us had we no other reasons to justify our Separation from them, but only those which (as is pretended) we plead in our Cause. I say whereas we do plead, confirm and justify all the Reasons and Causes pleaded for the Separation of the Reformed Churches from them, not opposing, not weakening any of them, by any Principle or Practise of ours, but farther press the force of the same reasonings and causes in all Instances whereunto they will extend, I see neither what cause the Papists have of Triumph, no• any thing that weakens the Cause of the Reformation. He adds further, how should we be hissed a•d laughed at all over the Christian World, if we had nothing to allege for our Separation from the Roman Church, but such things as these? I answer, that as the Case stands, if we did allege no other Reasons but those which we insist on for our refraining Communion with our own Parochial Assemblies, we should deserve to be derided, for relinquishing the Plea of those other important Reasons which the Heresies and Idolatries and Tyranny of that Church do render just and equal. But if we had no other Causes of Separation from the Church of Rome, but what we have for our Separation from our Parochial Assemblies at home, as weak as our Allegations are pretended to be, we should not be afraid to defend them against all the Papists in the World; and let the World act like itself in hissing.