A90287:130
A review of the true nature of schism, with a vindication of the Congregational…A review of the true nature of schisme, with a vindication of the Congregationall…
A review of the true nature of schism, with a vindication of the Congregational churches in England, from the imputation thereof unjustly charged on them by Mr D. Cawdrey, preacher of the Word at Billing in Northampton-shire. / By John Owen D.D.A review of the true nature of schisme, with a vindication of the Congregationall churches in England, from the imputation thereof unjustly charged on them by Mr D. Cawdrey, preacher of the Word at Billing in Northampton-shire. / By John Owen D.D.
Oxford: printed by Henry Hall printer to the University for Thomas Robinson, 1657
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.
The rest of the chapter I have passed through, once and again, and cannot fix on any thing worthy of farther debate: A difference is attempted to be found in my description of the union of a particular ⟨p. 144⟩Church, in this and another place: because in one place I require the consent of the members to walk together, in another mention only their so doing, when the mention of that only, was necessary in that place, not speaking of it absolutely, but as it is the difference of such a church from the church Catholic, some impropriety of expression is pretended to be discovered: (id populus curat scilicet:) which yet is a pure mistake of his, not considering unto what especial end and purpose the words are used: He repeats sundry things as in opposition to me, that are things laid down by my self and granted: Doth he attempt to prove that the union of a Church is not rightly stated: he confesseth the form of such a Church consists in the observance and performance of the same ordinances of worship numerically: I ask, is it the command of Christ that believers should so do? is not their obedience to that command, their consent so to do? are not particular churches instituted of Christ? is it not the duty of every believer to join himself to some one of them? was not this acknowledged above? ⟨p. 145⟩can any one do so without his consenting to do so? is this consent any thing but his voluntary submission to the ordinances of worship therein? As an express consent and subjection to Christ in general is required to constitute a man a member of the Church Catholic visible; so if the Lord Jesus hath appointed any particular church for the celebration of his ordinances; is not their consent who are to walk in them, necessary thereunto? But the Topic of an explicit covenant, presenting its self with an advantage, to take up some leaves, would not be waved, though nothing at all to the purpose in hand. After this, my confession made in as much condescension unto compliance as I could well imagine, of the use of greater assemblies, is examined, and excepted against, as being in my esteem, he saith, though it be not so indeed, a matter of prudence only: But I know full well, that he knows not what esteem or disesteem I have of sundry things of no less importance.
The rest of the chapter I have passed thorow, once and againe, and cannot fix on any thing worthy of farther debate: A difference is attempted to be found in my description of the union of a particular