( ;io ) 2. it muff be proved unto. the End propoled, that the Occa6öns and Reafons of their Separation of old, were the fame, or of the fame nature only, with thole which we plead, for our refraining Communion from 'Parochial 4fcmblies. Now though the Dr. here makes A flourifh with fome Expreffions about Zeal, Difcipline, Purity ofthe Church, Edification (which he will not find in any of their Pretences) yet in truth there is not one thingalledged, wherein there is a Coincidence be- tween theOccafions and Reafons pleaded by them, and ours. It is known that the principal thing in general which we infili upon, is the unwarrantable Impofition ofunfcrip- tural Termes and Conditions of Communion upon :As ; was there any fuck thing pleaded by them that made the Schifnies ofOld ? indeed they were all of them ìmpofers, and feparated from the Church becaufe they would not fubmit unto their Impofitions. Some Bfhops, or Tome that would have been `ßifbops but could not, entertaining force new Conceit oftheir own, which they would have impofed on all others, being not fubmitted unto therein, were the Caufes of all thofe Schifmes which were juftly efteemed Criminal. So was it with the Yovatians and .Donatßs in an efpecial manner. Even the great Ter- iullian (thoughno Bithop) left the Communion of the Church on this Ground. For becaufe they would not admit of the firmObfervance of Tome .fluflere Severi- ties in Falling, Abflinence from fundry Meates, and Watching, with the like, which he efteemed neceffary, though no way warranted by Scripture Rule or Exam- ple, he utterly renounced their Communion; and counte- nanced
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=