A53704:819
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.
(3.) By partaking in other mens sins, through a neglect of our own duty. Nor,
(4.) By foregoing the means of our own Edification which he Commands us to make use of. For these things have no Tendency to the Preservation of that Peace, and his third supposition, is, That nothing can discharge a Christian from the Obligation to Communion, with his fellow members, but what is allowed by Christ or his Apostles, as a sufficient Reason of it. It is fully agreed unto, where a man is a member of any Church of Divine Institution by his own Consent, and virtual consideration, nothing can discharge him, from Communion with that Church, ⟨p. 327⟩but what is allowed by Christ as a sufficient Reason for it.
But a little farther Enquiry may be made into these things; It was before asserted that all things lawful were to be done for the Preservation of the Peace of the Church. Here it is pleaded that there are many Obligations on us, to preserve its Peace and Unity. I desire to know, unto whom these Rules are Obligatory? who they are that ought to yield Obedience unto them? If it be said, that these Rules are not prescribed unto the Rulers and Guides of the Church, but unto them only who are under their Conduct, I desire a proof of it, for at the first view it is very absurd. For as the preservation of the Peace and Unity of the Church, is properly incumbent on them who are the Rulers of it, and it is continually pleaded by them that so it doth, so all the Rules given for that End, do or should principally and in the first place, affect them, and their Consciences. And these are the Rules of their Duty herein which are laid down by the Dr. I desire therefore to know, that since there are such obligations on us to preserve the Peace and Unity of the Church, that for that End we must do what we lawfully may; whether the same Rule doth not oblige us to forbear the doing of what we may lawfully forbear, with respect unto the same End. Nay this Obligation of forbearing what we may do, and yet may forbear to do without sin, for the Peace and Unity of the Church, especially when any would be offended with our doing that which we may lawfully forbear to do, is exemplified in the Scripture, confirmed by Commands and Instances, is more highly rational, and less exposed unto danger in Practise, than the other of doing what we can.