yourselves: not only the not injuring, hurting, or grieving each other, either by word or deed: but also, the bearing one another's burdens; yea, and lessening them by every means in our power. It implies the sympathizing with them in their sorrows, afflictions, and infirmities: the bearing them up, when, without our help, they would be liable to sink under their burdens: the endeavouring to lift their sinking heads, and to strengthen their feeble knees. 27. Lastly: The true members of the Church of Christ, endeavour, with all possible diligence, with all care and pains, with unwearied patience, (and all will be little enough,) to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace to preserve inviolate the same spirit of lowliness and meekness, of long-suffering, mutual forbearance, and love and all these cemented and knit together by that sacred tie, the peace of God filling the heart. Thus only can we be and continue living members of that Church which is the Body of Christ. 28. Does it not clearly appear from this whole account, why in the ancient Creed, commonly called the Apostles', we term it the Universal or Catholic Church? The Holy Catholic Church? How many wonderful reasons have been found out, for giving it this appellation? One learned man informs us, "The Church is called Holy, because Christ the Head of it is holy." Another eminent author affirms, "It is so called, because all its ordinances are designed to promote holiness." And yet another, "Because our Lord intended, that all the members of the Church should be holy." Nay, the shortest and the plainest reason that can be given, and the only true one is, The Church is called holy, because it is holy because every member thereof is holy, though in different degrees, as he that hath called them is holy. How clear is this! If the Church, as to the very essence of it, is a body of believers, no man that is not a Christian believer can be a member of it. If this whole body be animated by one Spirit, and endued with one faith, and one hope of their calling; then he who has not that Spirit, and faith, and hope, is no member of this body. It follows, that not only no common swearer, no sabbath-breaker, no drunkard, no whoremonger, no thief, no liar, none that lives in any outward sin but none that is under the power of anger or pride, no lover of the world; in a word, none that is dead to God, can be a member of his Church. 29. Can any thing then be more absurd than for men to cry out, The Church! The Church! And to pretend to be very zealous for it, and violent defenders of it; while they themselves have neither part nor lot therein, nor indeed know, what the Church is! And yet the hand of God is in this very thing! Even in this his wonderful wisdom appears, directing their mistake to his own glory, and causing "the earth to help the Woman." Imagining that they are members of it themselves, the men of the world frequently defend the Church. Otherwise the wolves that surround the little flock on every side, would in a short time tear them in pieces. And for this very reason, it is not wise to provoke them more than is unavoidable. Even on this ground, let us, if it be possible, as much as lieth in us, "live peaceably with all men." Especially as we know not how soon God may call them too out of the kingdom of Satan, into the kingdom of his dear Son. 30. In the mean time let all those who are real members of the Church, see that they walk holily and unblamably in all things. "Ye are the light of the world!" Ye are "a city set upon a hill, and cannot be hid." "let your light shine before men!" Shew them your faith by your works. Let them see by the whole tenor of your conversation, that your hope is all laid up above! Let all your words and actions evidence the Spirit whereby you are animated! Above all things, let you love abound. Let it extend to every child of man: let it overflow to every child of God. By this let all men know whose disciples "love one another." ye are, because you SERMON LXXX. ON SCHISM. 1 CORINTHIANS Xii. 25. "That there might be no Schism in the Body." 1. IF there be any word in the English Tongue as ambiguous and indeterminate in its meaning as the word Church, it is one that is nearly allied to it, the word Schism. It has been the subject of innumerable disputes, for several hundreds of years: and almost innumerable books have been written concerning it in every part of the Christian world. A very large share of these have been published in our country; particularly during the last century, and the beginning of the present. And persons of the strongest understanding, and the most consummate learning, have exhausted all their strength upon the question, both in conversation and in writing. This has appeared to be more necessary than ever, since the grand separation of the Reformed from the Romish Church. This is a charge which the members of that Church never fail to bring against all that separate from her and which consequently has employed the thoughts and pens of the most able disputants on both sides. And those of each side have generally, when they entered into the field, been secure of victory supposing the strength of their arguments was so great, that it was impossible for reasonable men to resist them. 2. But it is observable that exceedingly little good has been done by all these controversies. Very few of the warmest and ablest disputants have been able to convince their opponents. After all that could be said, the Papists are Papists, and the Protestants are Protestants still. And the same success has attended those who have so vehemently disputed about separation from the Church of England. Those who separated from her were eagerly charged with Schism: they as eagerly denied the charge. And scarcely any were able to convince their opponents, either on one side or the other. 3. One great reason why this controversy has been so unprofitable, why so few of either side have been convinced, is this: they seldom agreed as to the meaning of the word concerning which they disputed: and if they did not fix the meaning of this, if they did not define the term, before they began disputing about it, they might continue the dispute to their lives end, without getting one step forward; without coming a jot nearer to each other than when they first set out. 4. Yet it must be a point of considerable importance, or St. Paul would not have spoken so seriously of it. It is, therefore, highly needful, that we should consider, 1. The Nature, and, II. The Evil of it. I. 1. It is the more needful to do this, because among the numberless books that have been written upon the subject, both by the Romanists and Protestants, it is difficult to find any that define it in a scriptural manner. The whole body of Roman Catholics define Schism, A separation from the Church of Rome: and almost all our own writers define it, A separation from the Church of England. Thus both the one and the other set out wrong, and stumble at the very threshold. This will easily appear to any that calmly consider the several texts wherein the word Schism, occurs. From the whole tenor of which it is manifest, that it is not a separation from any Church, (whether General or Particular, whether the Catholic, or any National, Church,) but a separation in a Church. 2. Let us begin with the first verse, wherein St. Paul makes use of the word. It is the tenth verse of the first chapter of his first epistle to the Corinthians. The words are, "I beseech you, brethren, by the name of the Lord Jesus, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no Schisms," (the original word is oxuata,) "among you." Can any thing be more plain than that the schisms here spoken of, were not separations from, but divisions in the Church of Corinth? Accordingly it follows, "But that ye be perfectly united together, in the same mind and in the same judgment." You see here, that an union in mind and judgment was the direct opposite to the Corinthian Schism. This consequently was not a separation from the Church or Christian Society at Corinth; but a separation in the Church: a disunión in mind and judgment, (perhaps also in affection,) among those who, notwithstanding this, continued outwardly united as before. 3. Of what nature this Schism at Corinth was, is still more clearly determined, (if any thing can be more clear,) by the words that immediately follow. "Now this I say,' This is the schism of which I speak, you are divided into separate parties: some of you speaking in favour of one, some of another Preacher," Every one of you saith," (ver. 12,) “I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas," (or Peter.) Who then does not see, that the schism for which the Apostle here reproves the Corinthians, is neither more nor less, than the splitting into several parties, as they gave the preference to one or another preacher ? And this species of schism there will be occasion to guard against in every religious community. 4. The second place where the Apostle uses this word, is in the eighteenth verse of the eleventh chapter of this epistle." When ye come together in the Church," the Christian congregation, "I hear that there are divisions,' (the original word here also is oxioμata, schisms among you.) The Apostle immediately tells you, (ver, 10,) “When you |