Separationfrom the Church 4 fin. and fo not to eat with frsch o, ffenders. So is that in Thef. 3. and that in Tit. 3. to. eA man that is ,reVerecick after the ftrfi and fecond admonition a : tinlefs it be a Heretick that bath already fe'parated himfëlf from our communion ; And tilen'it can be but private familiarity which we are further to avoid. In brief, there is no other place of Scripture, that I know of, which corn- rnandeth any -more. I have before fhewed that abundanceófChurch corruptions , or of fcanda- lons members, were then among them, and yet the Apoflle never fpake a fyllable to any one Chriftian , to feparate from any one of all thofe Churches : Which we cannot imagine that the Moly Ghoft would have wholly omitted, if in- deed it hadbeen the will of God. Obj. But then why did Luther and the firft Pro- tejtants, feparate from the Church ofRome ; and how will you juftifte themfromSchifm/? Anf. Its pity that (loth andfottilhnefs, should keep any Protetiart (cr Papift either) in filch ignorance, as to need any help to anfwer fo eafie a g9ueflion at thisday t Let not equivocal names deceive us, and the cafe is eafie. By the word Church the Scripture ital. maneth; 'firft, either the Univerfal Church which is the body or King dome of Chtift alone : Secondly, or particular Congregations affociated for perfonal communion in Gods worfhip : But the Pope -bath feigned a. nother kindof thing , and called it The Church That is, The Vniverfality of Chriftians a headed by himself, as the sorftitartive and governing head. Whereas , firm , God never inflituted or al- lowed fach a Church, Secondly, nor did ever the Univer-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=