The Way of CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHES CLEARED: In two TREATISES.  
In the former, 

From the Historical Aspersions of Mr. Robert Bailiff, in his Book, called [A Dissuasive from the Errors of the Time.]    
In the latter, 

From some Contradictions of VINDICAE CLAVIUM:    
And from, 

Some Misconstructions of Learned Mr. Rutherford in his Book entitled [The due Right of Presbyteries.]    
By Mr. JOHN COTTON, sometime Preacher at Boston in Lincolne-shire, and now Teacher of the Church at Boston, in New-England.  
LONDON, Printed by Matthew Simmons, for John Bellamy, at the sign of the three Golden-Lions, in Cornhill. 1648.   

An Epistle PACIFICATORY, To the Brethrens dissenting from this Way.  
HEre (Reverend Brethrens) is presented unto you in Print, that very Copy, which the worthy Author (Mr John Cotton, Teacher of the Church at Boston in New England) sent together with his letter under his own hand unto me. His honouring me therein (upon my real account) deserved his request, that I would assist the Press, which with the greatest diligence opportunity put into my hands I have performed. And the worth of the subject, and the Author's sweet and solid handling of it, hath richly rewarded my labour, legendo, perlegendoque, in the usal and perusal thereof. The Man, most patiented towards a sharp Antagonist, (you yourselves being judges.) The Manner of handling, gracious; meek words, playing the Champion for Verity and Innocency, with arguments of steel, unsheathed and shining with an amiable plainness of speech, and a free and sincere openness of heart. The Matter partly Apologetical, partly Controversal. In the former part you will meet with: 1. A true and terse History of the purer Churches in later pudled times: The blots aspersed upon them, clearly pummice● and spunged of; and divers precious Saints for learning and religion (through whose sides Christ's ways by opponents have been sorely wounded) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, evidently and unrepliablely vindicated. 2. A very good account of many singular Doctrinal points, not only of more speculative Theology, ventilating the chaff from the wheat, Error from Truth; but of most practical Soulsearching, Soulsaving, and Soul-solacing Divinity. I might give golden instances, glating gloriously upon my Spirit, but for falling under a leaden retarding of dispatch; fearing jest the press tarry for me; for it even treads on my heel. In the latter part of this Book, being Controversal, you have a fair Additional to the 
a 
1 Church government and Church Covenant.  
2 The way of the Churches. in N. England.  
3. The Apologet. Narrat.  
4. The Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven.  
5. The model of the Church way. by M. Bartlot.  
6. Answer to 32. Quest.   Models (afore printed) of the Church way (so much called for by you;) not Magisterially laid down, but friendly debated by Scripture, and argumentatively disputed out to the utmost inch of ground, and defended Cap a pie (as they speak) from the head to the heel, of every branch of Truth essential to the controversy.  
Now than (worthy Brethrens) consider and view over what ye gain to your design, whiles some among you endeavour by pen to blot the fair copy of Truth; (because you at present 
b 1. Pet. 1.12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Angels desire earnestly to stoop down to look into the things of the Gospel.  Stoop not down low enough to see it a Truth) and to cross out of the Book of men's memory and esteem the names of them whom God will honour, though you will not? Surely the copy is written out fairer and fuller; books are multiplied; more men read them; and by reason of the late mists hover over Truth, and cords of bondage straightening men's consciences; all men of conscience are more eager to search out, and having found, to stand to, and sit down by those Truths that clear their minds, and set free their spirits. Mists mantling and masking, the Sun ascending, are soon cast of, and dispelled by its beams, being near his Zenith. We grasp with men of rising parts, and high places, for free speaking, about Text proof Points, to our loss. By an Antiperistatical opposition, the zeal of godly learned Writers, (before concealedly clouded with more silence) is set on fire: the cloud breaks, the voice of their thunder (as the Historian speaks of that Greek Commander Pericles his Fulminating Oratory) awakens the World, and the flame burns up the hay and stubble. 
1. Cor. 3.12, 13. 14 etc.  Truth is like Camomile; the more it is trodden, the more it spreads. Like the Wal-nut tree, the more it is beaten for its fruit this year, the more it fructifies the next. Eclipses 'cause men more to stare after the Sun, and more joy in the enjoying of its light, when got free. The jews crying up Mosaical Ceremonies, and human traditions; Stephen, Peter, Paul, dispute, Preach, Apologise for the Spiritualty, and liberty of the Gospel. 
Act. 2. Act. 4.  What succeeds? thousands are converted, ten thousand are convinced, and the World is overrun with the knowledge of the truth, as the waters cover the Sea. The Gentiles likewise, (especially the Roman Empire) take the next turn to dedignify the christians, scandalise their religious practices, and to persecute both (witness the ten persecutions.) What was the income, the return of gain upon that adventure? Upstart those mighty Giants in Religion, awakened with an holy inflammation of zeal, Aristides, Justinus, Melito Apollinaris, Athenagoras, Apollonius, Tertulllanus, etc. And gloriously Apologise for the Truth: james, Thomas, Andrew, Matthew, Philip, Mark, and others of the Apostles; 
Sanguine fundata est Ecclesia, sanguine cre vit, sanguine succrevit, sanguine finis erit.  Simon and Parmenas' of the 7. Deacons; Simeon, Zenon, Polycarp, and millions more in ensuing ages by succession, die for Christ, and seal to the certainty of the Truth with their bloods, making glorious confessions of it, whereby many Martyrizers, become Martyrs. Sanguis Martyrum semen Ecclesiae. Whiles the Persecutors marred (as they thought) Martyrs, they made Martyrs: and by their opposition they increased shrill and conspicuous confessions and professions of the Truth of Jesus. In so much that Plyny a great State's man to the Emperor, writes to him a persuasive to stay the persecution. At last, an Emperor himself Constantine the Great, becomes a Christian, and than down went Barrabas, and Christ was exalted. The Sun of the Gospel shone out once again over the face of the whole earth.  
Therefore my humble request to you my Reverend Brethrens, is, that ye more study Peace, and stir up Love, among Brethrens, and less controversy in these unparelleld times of universal contention, totally polemical, both Scholastically, and civilly. And to this end let us be warned (by that good account this Book renders unto us) of facile credulity, either to reports, or letters, or Books, unless they be handed to us from the Authors themselves, with whom ye have to do. Otherwise (as this book bears notable witness) our eyes and ears shall be abused, and our judgements warped from the simplicity and straightness of Truth. Suppose any real difference should be between us: if we agreed in foundation doctrinals, yea, and in the main Principles of the constitution and jurisdiction, or power of a particular Congregational Church: as that it should consist of Saints in union, invested with Power to take in and cast out; I wonder it should amount to so high a contest, about degrees (which altar not the kind) of forming and reforming such a Church. You say SAINTS in outward profession is the Matter of such a Church; and an implicit uniting, viz. a walking and communicating with you is a sufficient evidencing of the form. We judge that real SAINTS uttering in discourse the breathe of the Holy Spirit, and experiences of conversion, witnessed in a stricter conversation, to be the Matter; and their solemn confession of their Faith, and express open covenanting with the Lord to walk with such a body of Saints in all the ways of Christ to their light and power for reciprocal edification, to be the Manifest Form. How is it now that only a going before one another in degrees of reformation, according to the National solemn League and Covenant, should breed in you as it were a specifical opposition against us? If you have a mind to ascend up higher to fetch down differences from above, about Appeals: Nor here hence is their just cause to build up such Bulworks of Hostility between Brethrens. If in the reign of Episcopacy, those Parishes were quiet where could not be found work for the Hierarchy to intermeddle; surely than the Classes may conveniently permit particular Congregations, (prostrated below them as it were at their feet) to rest in peace, whiles they meetly manage their own Church affairs, within their own Sphere. If we need advice, we shall willingly look on a company of Godly Elder and Brethrens of other Churches, called together for counsel by our, and other Churches (be the Assembly of them smaller, greater, or greatest) as upon an Ordinance of Christ, and as bound by the Truth of Christ as readily to receive, as they are to give counsel to us according to the Truth. Only we cannot be contented to look absolutely upon all their advice (without exception) as authoritative dictates, and Magisterial Canons, necessarily to be obeyed sub poena under a penalty, how much soever our consciences remain unsatisfied the mean while.  
The case standing here abouts (as near as I could rough-draw the state of it in this instantaneous haste) let us I beseech you be rather Irenaei, than Cassandris. 
Peacemakers, not Breach-makers.  As we do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Galat. 2.14.) walk even with the right foot in the Gospel; so let's in discipline (whiles the difference in the thing is no wider) give one another (as the Apostle speaks, Gal. 2.9.) the right hand of fellowship. 
Weems. Portrait p. 1.  A learned Scot well observeth, that there is a kind of justice among thiefs, else their society would soon be disbanded. And shall it not be among Brethrens, Saints, Ministers, lest we dissolve Churches, yea, ordinary communion of Saints? Let Idol-Dagon be half fish and half man, but let not Christ be divided, nor the profession of his Truth be set at odds. If our heart's grudge (and let that be our sorrow) yet let us not 
a Act. 7.54.  gnash the teeth and saw one another's repute a two, with the teeth of keen words. Let not anger 
b Ester. 1.18. The word signifies to be angry, and to foam.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 boil up into a foam, 
Chalde. job. 16.20.  to throw the scum upon one another. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Syriac. john 16. v. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In N.T. often Vet. Lat. Paraclitus, in N.T. often  Hereby else we slay both the souls of thousands, and the charity of 10000 to their sin, and our discomfort. O it is a sad thought on my spirit, that we should pretend to have the Paraclet (so called in many languages for its comprehensive signification of Friend, Comforter, Doctor, Advocate, Intercessor, etc.) that is, the Spirit to be our comforter, and yet it should appear so little in us, to teach us and convince us of vilipending, or to work in us love, friendship, and beseechings towards one another. Now that the Lord would by his Spirit, with a second conversion (as the Scripture calls the progress of mortification of some special corruption) trans-form our rugged hearts into love, charity, yea dilection, is the prayer of yours to serve you in the Lord, and for the Lord,  
NATHANAEL HOMES.   

The worthy name of the Reverend and Learned Author of this Treatise (which with delight I have perused) is a sufficient argument to persuade, not only to the reading of it, but also to a belief and expectation of something Excellent therein.  
Imprimatur  
Imprimatur John Bachiler. January 1. 1647.   

The CONTENTS of the Chapters and Sections of the first Part.  

Chapter 1.  
OF the Title inscribed to M. Bailiff his book; A diswasive from the errors of the time, Page 1   

Chap. 2.  
Sect. 1. 2. Of those whom the dissuader styleth Brownists. p. 2  
Sect. 3. Of M. Brown and M. Barrow. p. 5  
Sect. 4. Of M. Johnson and M. Ainsworth, p. 6  
Sect. 5. Of M. Smith and M. Robinson. p. 6  
Sect. 6. Of the contempt and contumely said to be put upon the old Brownists, by the Independents. p. 9   

Chap. 3.  
An answer to the diswaders 3d. Chapter touching the original and progress of the Independents in New-England. p, 10  
Sect. 1. Of the title put upon us, of 

A Sect,  
Independent.   p. 10  
Sect. 2. Of the number of the Congregational Regiment, and of the wisdom threapt upon them, in engaging of note to them. p. 12  
Sect. 3. Touching the line of the pedigree of the Independents in New-England. p. 12  
Sect. 4. Of Cottons pretended former dislik of the new English way, and after closing with it. p. 17  
Sect. 5. Of the pretended danger of the new English way unto the world, after Cotton and others closing with it. p. 21  
Sect. 6. Of Cottons pretended misleading 

M. Davenport.  
M, Goodwin.   p. 23  
Sect. 7. Of Cottons pretended sudden change to the passionate affecting of the new English way, and the conversion of Mr. Goodwin to it. p. 25  
Sect. 8. Of Cottons pretended rashness in change of his mind in latter and former times. p. 28  
Sect. 9 Of Cottons pretended known failings, and M. Baylies pretended just cause to discover them to the world. p. 30  
Sect. 10. Of Cottons prelatical tenants. p. 32  
Sect. 11. Of Cottons pretended Pelagianism, and Arminian Errors. p. 32  
Sect. 12. Of Cottons pretended Montanism. p. 35  
Sect. 13. Of Cottons pretended Antinomianism and Familisme. p. 38 

Quest. 1. Whether our Union with Christ be complete before, and without Faith? p. 41  
Quest. 2. Whether Faith be an instrumental cause in applying Christ's righteousness to our justification? p. ●2  
Quest. 3. Whether the Spirit of God in evidencing our justification, doth bear witness in an absolute promise of free Grace, without qualification or condition? p. 43  
Quest. 4. Whether some saving qualification may be a first evidence of justification? p. 45  
Qu. 5. Whether Christ and his benefits be dispensed in a Covenant of works? p. 46    
Sect. 14. Of Cottons humiliation upon his former fall, as is reported by M. Bailie. p. 62  
Sect. 15. Of the shameful absurdities said to be found in the way of Independency, notwithstanding the great helps, to prevent, or cover it and first of those helps. p. 66  
Sect. 16. Of the first absurdity said to be found in our way of Independency. p. 69  
Sect. 17. Of the second shameful absurdity, said to be found in the way of Independency. p. 73  
Sect. 18. Of the third shameful absurdity said to be found in our way of Independency. p. 82  
Sect. 19 Tending to rectify some mistakes of M. Bayly, in relating the former absurdities. p. 87  
Sect. 20. Tending to consider what better fruits might have been expected from Presbyterian Discipline for the removing of the like absurdities. p. 91   

Chap. 4.  
Sect. 1, 2, 3. Of the antiquity of Congregational discipline, compared with Classical. p. 93   

Chap. 5.  
Of the fruits of Congregational Discipline. p. 100  
Sect. 1. Of the fruits of it in the Primitive times. p. 100  
Sect. 2. Of fruits of Congregational Discipline in our Churches in new-England. p. 102  
Sect. 3. Of the fruits of Congregational Discipline in England. p. 102    

The CONTENTS of the second Part.  

THe second Part (being Doctrinal and Controversal) concerning Congregational Churches and their Government. p. 1  
Sect. 1. Of the Church to which Christ committed the power of the Keys. p. 5  
Sect. 2. What the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven be. p. 14  
Sect. 3. Of the Subject to whom the power of the Keys is given. page 19  
Sect. 4. Touching the power of the Keys in the Church of Believers without Officers. p. 21    

Reader, be pleased (where its Printed false) to read right; as in these instances.  

Part. 1. p. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, p. 8. For●es, p. 42. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 44. erga, p. 79. l. 6. Author. p. 83. l. 9 scelus.  
Part 2. page 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 31, l. 16. Constance.    

Treatise I 
PART. I.   

CHAPT. I. Of the Title inscribed to Mr. Bailiff his Book, A Dissuasive from the Errors of the Time.  
NOah gave it for a blessing to his son Japhet (in a word both of Prophecy and Prayer) God persuade Japhet to devil in the Tents of Shem, Gen. 9.27. And if a Persuasive to devil in the Tents of Shem were a blessing; than a Dissuasive from the Errors of the Time (rightly so called) is a blessing also. But when Mr. Bailiff is pleased amongst the Errors of the time to reckon (that which he calleth) Independency; he may do well to consider, whether he bring not upon his credulous Reader a curse in stead of a blessing.  
The supposed Errors found in those who are called Independent Churches, are chief two, upon which all the rest do depend: and both of them such as may well be cleared by Noah's blessing.  
For, 1. they hold, that Cham and Chanaan, whilst they are such, (that is, graceless persons, and scorners at the falls and infirmities of the Saints) they are not to devil in the Tents of Shem. Noah did not pray for such a blessing to them; yea, i● had been a curse both to them and Shem (if he had so prayed) and not a blessing.  
2. They hold also, that Japhet himself should not be brought to devil in the Tents of Shem till God persuade him. They would not have Shem to enlarge his Tents, to compass or compel Japhet to live under his shadow. It is one thing for Japhet and Shem to devil together by voluntary consociation; another thing for Shem to rule over Japhet by undesired and unallowed jurisdiction. Let Cham and Chanaan be as servants unto Shem and to Japhet too, (for so Noah prophesied:) but let not Japhet be a servant to Shem, not more than Shem to Japhet. But though these be the principal Tenants of Independents (as they are called;) and indeed blessed truths in the blessing of Noah: yet Mr. Bailiff reckoneth these amongst the Errors of the Times; and the Independents themselves amongst the wanderers on the right hand, together with Brownists, (as he calleth them,) Anabaptists, Antinomians, Seekers: As on the left hand, he reckoneth Prelates, Papists, Arminians, Socinians, Erastians'. And it should seem, he taketh Independents to be one of the most dangerous Sects of them all, (at lest, as the state of the times now standeth:) or else he would not have addressed all the whole force of his Discourse against them: Only taking up Brownists (as he styleth them) by the way, to usher in the other with the greater prejudice. But for my part, I dislike not Mr. Baylie's zeal against Errors where it is rightly placed: Only let him allow the like liberty to us, which he taketh to himself, That as he publisheth a Dissuasive against Errors; so we may have leave to bear witness to the Truth.   

CHAP. II. Of those whom the Dissuader styleth Brownists.  

SECT. 1.  
MAster Bailiff rightly observeth, That in our departure & flight from Rome, some took up their stand too soon, before they had passed the lines (he meaneth all the lines) of communication with the Whore: and others ran on too long (or too far) beyond the bounds of truth and love. The former of these sorts he maketh the Lutherans, in respect of some defects in their Reformation. The latter, he maketh to be the Anabaptists in Germany. The successors of the former, he maketh to be Cranmer, Ridley, and those other Confessors and Martyrs who settled Episcopacy and Ceremonies in England. The successors of the latter sort, (the Anabaptists) he maketh to be those whom he styleth Brownists.  
But as there is a vast difference between the Episcopacy of England, and the Superintendency of Germany, (the one ruling by Monarchical Power, the other by the consent of the Aristocratical Presbytery:) so neither is there such correspondency between the German Anabaptism, and the English Brownism, as to make Brownism a native branch of Anabaptism.  
Yes, (saith the Dissuader) That Brownism is a native branch of Anabaptism, is evidenced, by the frequent transition of the one to the other. The dissolution of ice and snow into water, argueth strongly their original from that element; so the ordinary running over of the Separatists to the Anabaptists.  
Answ. The dissolution of ice and snow into water, doth indeed argue strongly their original from water, because they are easily resolved into it without putrefaction or corruption. But so i● not the Separatist resolved into a Germane Anabaptist, without a further degree of corruption and putrefaction. It is no argument a man is bred of worms, because he is next resolved into worms; for he is not so resolved without putrefaction. Say not, a man is resolved at last into dust from whence he was first taken; and yet the resolution is not made without putrefaction. For a man is not made of dust naturally, but by a transcendent creating power above Nature. But the Dissuader maketh the Separation a native branch of Anabaptism.  
Besides, I suppose, it is not an obvious thing to hear of an Anabaptist turn Separatist, though some Separatists have turned Anabaptists; which argueth there is not such a mutual frequent transition from the one to the other, as is yearly found of ice and snow into water, and of water into ice or snow again.   

SECT. II.  
The first Separatist, which the Dissuader saith he hath read of, was one Bolton, who was a Minister of an old separate Congregation, and afterwards felt the sense of his Errors so grievous to his soul, (by the finger of God's Justice stirring in his conscience) that he did not only publicly at Pauls-crosse recant them, but thereafter was so dogged with a desperate remorse, that he rested not till he had hanged himself.  
Answ. 1. Though Bolton may have been the first Separatist that the Dissuader hath read of; yet he might have read of others before him. For in the Book called The Register of memorable matters touching Reformation, there is recorded a story of an hundred persons, who refused the common Liturgy, and the Congregations attending thereunto, and used prayers and preach, and Sacraments amongst themselves: whereof 14 or 15 were sent to prison: Of whom the chiefest was Mr. Smith, with Mr. Nixon, James Ireland, Robert Hawkins, Thomas Boweland, and Richard Morecroft. And these pleaded their separation before the Lord Mayor, Bishop Sands, and other Commissioners on June 20. in the year 1567. which is about fourscore years ago; and this as it seemeth was many years before Bolton; for Mr. Bailiff reckoneth the wand'ring of the Separatists to be about 50 years standing, (page 59) but this Smith and his company was 30 years before.  
Answ. 2. Old Mr. Bruister (the reverend Elder of the Church of Plymouth, a man of long-approved piety, gravity, integrity) his testimony of this Bolton may take of the prejudice which the fearful fall of Bolton seemeth to Mr. Bailiff to cast upon the Separation: Which I will recite, not to justify that way of his separation, but to take of unjust scandals. This Bolton (saith he) partly by the terrors of Bishops, and partly by flattery, was brought indeed to recant. But afterwards they slighting him, the terrors of the Almighty fell upon him, and considering how he had sinned against his conscience, he (Judas-like) laid violent hands upon himself.  
But the Dissuader may be pleased to consider, that Apostasy from the way of Separation, and terror of conscience even to desperation, and self-murder following thereupon, are no just exceptions against Separation: no more than Judas his apostasy from Christ, and terror of conscience even to desperation and self-hanging following thereupon, were any just exceptions against Christianity.   

SECT. III. Of Mr. Brown, and Barrow.  
Of Mr. Brown and Mr. Barrow, it is fare from me to make any defence either of their persons, or of their way of rigid Separation: the hand of God upon their spirit, giving them up, one to a spirit of inconstancy and profaneness; the other to a spirit of bitterness and rashness. Though it is no just conviction of the errors of their way of Separation: yet it is a shrewd argument that either their way was not right, or their hearts not upright in it.  
But this let me say, be it so, that Brown did revolt from his way, and took a Parsonage from the Bishop, and that in a Town by name called A-church in Northamptonshire, (a real check to his error, who formerly counted every Church in England no Church:) yet this back sliding of Brown from that way of Separation, is a just reason why the Separatists may disclaim denomination from him, and refuse to be called after his name, Brownists. If Judas, or Julian, or Ecebolius do apostate from Christianity, no reason is there that all that profess the way of Christianity should be called Judaites, or Julianists, or Ecebolians. In the Ecclesiastical History, though Photinus was the disciple of Marcellus in an heretical opinion touching Christ: yet the followers of them both, when Marcellus had revoked his error, were not called Marcellini but Photiniani. To speak with reason, if any be justly to be called Brownists, it is only such as revolt from Separation to Formality, and from thence to profaneness. For Mr. Barrow, though I neither excuse the unsoundness of his judgement, nor the bitterness of his style: yet I doubt the Dissuader is deceived, when he saith, That Queen Elizabeth was so impatient of his contumelies, that she caused him in a morning to be hanged on the Tower-hill. For there be grave Professors (who lived nearer those occurrences) who speak of Queen Elizabeth as ignorant of Barrow's execution, and Greenwood's, and displeased at it, when she heard of it afterwards: neither was their execution on Tower-hill, but at Tyburn, long after the sentence of death passed against them.   

SECT. iv Of Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Ainsworth.  
The Dissuader is deceived when he saith, Mr. Ainsworth with his half, did excommunicate Mr. Johnson and his half. For, as I am informed by some judicious Professors who lived in those parts, Mr. Ainsworth and his company did not excommunicate Mr. Johnson and his, but only withdrew from them, when they could not longer live peaceably with them. Mr. Johnson his last Book, argueth he had learned more moderation of spirit, than he did put forth in his former times.  
Mr. Ainsworth, a man of a more modest and humble spirit, and diligently studious of the Hebrew Text, hath not been unuseful to the Church in his Exposition of the Pentateuch, especially of Moses his Rituals, notwithstanding some uncircumcised, and ungrounded rabbinical observations recited, but not refuted.  
But when the Dissawder saith, that M. Ainsworths' company after his death, remained long without all Officers;  
There be sundry living that know the contrary. For when he died he left two Elders over the Church, Mr. Delacluse, and Mr. May.  
And therefore I do not see any ground of that speech,  
That the weight and evidence of God's hand against Ainsworth had so fare disgraced that Sect, as the Dissuader expresseth. For though in simplicity of heart, in some things he went astray: yet the way he walked in, did not suffer disgrace by him, nor by the weight and evidence of God's hand upon him, for aught I have ever heard or read of him, save in Mr. Bailiff. The Lord knoweth how to be merciful to such as seek him in simplicity of heart, according to light revealed, though he do observe and chasten some Error in their way.   

SECT. V of Mr. Smith, and Mr. Robinson.  
The fall indeed of Mr. Smith, and the Spirit of errors and instability that fell upon him, was more observable: and a dreadful warning from heaven, against 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 selfe-fulnesse, and self-pleasing. For though the tyranny of the Ecclesiastical Courts was harsh towards him, and the yokes put upon him in his Ministry, too grievous to be borne: yet neither was he alone in suffering: Nor were those that suffered with him at that time, (Mr. Clifton, and Mr. Robinson) such inconsiderable Persons, that he should affect to go alone from them. It is true, he had found help by the conference (which himself had requested) with Mr. Dod, Mr. Hilderson, and Mr. Barbon, before he left England: yea and such help, that he thought he could have gained his Tutor johnson, from the Errors of his Rigid Separation. But he had promised them, not to go over to him, without their consents: and they utterly dissuaded him therefrom, as fearing his instability. And yet contrary to his Promise he went over to him, yea, and that contrary to his own pretence and offer of another conference with them before his going. Though the way of Rigid Separation had been less heterodoxal, than it is, yet to venture upon it in such breach of manifest Rules, no marvel, if it led him into manifest temptations and Abberations.  
The Dissuader is misinformed, when he saith (page 16) he moved a great company to follow him to Ley in Holland. For as I understand by such as lived in those parts at that time, he lived at Amsterdam, and there died, and at Ley in Holland he never came.  
Of Mr. Robinson, the Dissuader doth rightly observe, tha● he was a man of the most learned, polished, and modest spirit of that way, and withal he might have said, so piously studious, and conscientiously inquisitive after the Truth, that (as the Dissuader rightly observeth) it had been truly a marvel, if such a man as he, had gone on to the end a rigid Separatist.  
As a fruit of his studious inquisition after the Truth, he resorted (as I have understood) to many judicious Divines in England for the clearing of his Scruples, which inclined him to separation: and when he came into Holland, he addressed himself to Doctor Ames, and Mr. Parker: rather preventing them with seeking counsel and satisfaction, than waiting for their compassion. But as they excelled in learning and godliness, so in compassion and brotherly love also; and therefore as they discerned his weanedness from selfe-fulnesse, so did they more freely communicate light to him, and received also somethings from him. The fruit of which was (through the Grace of Christ) that the Dissuader himself confesseth, he came bacl indeed the one half of the way: Acknowledging the lawfulness of communicating with the Church of England, in the Word and Prayer: but not in the Sacraments and Discipline, which was (saith he) a fair Bridge, at lest a fair Arch of a Bridge for union. But when he saith, he came on to communicate with the Church of England in the Word and Prayer, it must not be understood of the Common-Prayer-Book, but of the Prayers conceived by the Preacher before and after Sermon: And yet in coming on so far as he did, he came more than half way of any just distance.  
For though he stuck at the Common Liturgy, Sacraments and Discipline: yet since than it hath appeared, there was no just ground of coming on to them. The Honourable Parliament, and Reverend Assembly of Divines have (by the grace of Christ) seen just cause to remove the Liturgy, to abolish the Hierarchy (which was the Discipline he chief stuck at) and to give order for restraint of ignorant and scandalous Persons from the Sacrament, which may well make up two or three Arches more (as Mr. Bailiff calleth it) of that fair bridge for union, fare more than the half way.  
It is true, Mr. Robinson did not acknowledge a Nationall Church governed by the Episcopacy to be a Church of Divine Institution. But though he acknowledged the stile and privileges of a Church in the New Testament to belong to a particular Congregation of visible Saints: yet such Nationall Churches, French or Dutch, as were governed by Presbyters, and separate from the world at the Lords Table, he did not disclaim Communion with them, I have been given to understand, that when a Reverend and godly Scottish Minister came that way, (it seemeth to have been Mr. john Tarbes) he offered him Communion at the Lords Table: though the other for fear of offence to the Scottish Churches at home, excused himself. Yea when some English men that offered themselves to become Members of his Church, would sometimes in their confessions profess their Separation from the Church of England, Mr. Robinson would bear witness against such profession: Avouching, they required no such professions of Separation from this or that, or any Church, but only from the world. All which do argue, that his coming on to Protestant Churches, was more than the half way. But (saith the Dissuader) this new Doctrine (or way) of Mr. Robinson, though it was destructive to his old Sect; yet it became an occasion of a new one, not very good. It was the womb and seed of that lamentable Independency in Old and New-England, which hath been the fountain of many evils already though no more should ensue, as anon shall be declared.  
Answ. When this cometh to be declared, I hope it will come to be declared also, that the way of Independency hath been bred in the womb of the New-Testament of the immortal seed of the Word of Truth, and received in the times of purest Primitive antiquity, many hundreths of years before M. Robinson was born: and that it hath not been the fountain of any evils at all, much less of such evils, as to deserve the style of lamentable Independency.   

SECT. VI Of the contempt and contumely said to be put upon the old Brownists by the Independents.  
TO shut up this Chapter, the Dissuader telleth us, That the way of the old Brownists is become contemptible not only to all the rest of the world, but to their own children also; even they begin to heap coals of contumelies upon their Parents heads; as may be seen in the Eulogies which both Mr. Cotton, and the five Apologists are pleased to give them in Print; yea, so much are these Children ashamed of their Fathers, that they usually take it for a contumely to be called after their name. Not Independent will take it well at any man's hand to be called a Brownist either in whole, or in the smallest part.  
Answ. 1. No marvel, if Independents take it ill to be called Brownists, in whole, or in part. For neither in whole, nor in part do we partake in his Schism. He separated from Churches and from Saints: we, only from the world, and that which is of the world. He turned apostate from the Separation which he had professed: and it is absurd to denominate either Sect or right way, from such as apostate from it. If he had stood constant in his way, and his way had been the same with ours, yet we were not baptised into his Name; and why should we than be called after his Name? If schism be a manifest fruit of the flesh, than they that give Nicknames tending to the reproach and division of Brethrens, they walk after the flesh; for they sow variance and schism amongst Brethrens.  
2. It is an unjust and unworthy calumny, to call either Cotton or the Apologers, the children of their Fathers, whom he styleth Brownists. They never begot us, either to God, or to the Church, or to their Schism: a Schism, which as we have lamented in them, (as a fruit of misguided ignorant zeal:) so we have ever born witness against it, since our first knowledge of it.  
3. Though we put not such Honour upon those he calleth Brownists, as to own them for our Fathers; yet neither do we put so much dishonour upon them, as to heap coals of contumely upon their heads. We look not at them with contempt, but compassion: Neither do we bear witness against their Schism in any words of contempt and reproach, (which are the characters of contumely) but in words of spiritual and just reproof; even in such terms, not which scornful wit, but which holy Scripture suggesteth.    

CHAP. III. An answer to the Disswaders 3 Chap. touching the original and progress of the Independents in New-England.  

SECT. I. Of the Title put upon us of 

A Sect,  
Independents.    
THe way of the Churches in New-England is neither justly called a Sect, nor fitly called Independency. Not a Sect; for we profess the Orthodox Doctrine of Faith, the same with all Protestant Churches; we celebrated the same Sacraments; and submit to the spiritual government of the same lawful Guides, so fare as Christ and our own choice hath set them over us. And though we do not subject ourselves to the Government of the Elders of other Churches, (as many great Churches do,) yet we acknowledge and reverence such Churches in the Lord, as true Churches of Christ, and are willing to make use of their Brotherly counsel and help as need shall require.  
And though we do not open the doors of our Churches so wide, as to receive all the Inhabitants of a Nation, or of every Town, into the fellowship of our Churches; yet we do not separate from such Protestant Churches as do take that liberty: but only we separate from the world, that is, from the worldly sort of them, who either live in open scandal, or at lest do not openly hold forth any spiritual discerning of the Lords Body, and are therefore u●●eet to communicate at the Lord Table.  
Nor is Independency a fit name of the way of our Churches. For in some respects it is too straight, and in others too large; it is too straight, in that it confineth us within ourselves, and holdeth us forth as Independent from all others: whereas indeed we do profess dependence upon Magistrates for civil Government and protection: Dependence upon Christ and his Word, for the sovereign government and rule of our administrations: Dependence upon the counsel of other Churches and Synods; when our own variance or ignorance may stand in need of such help from them. And therefore this title of Independency straitneth us, & restraineth us from our necessary duty, and due liberty.  
Again, in other respects, Independency stretcheth itself too largely, and more generally, than that it can single out us. For it is compatible to a Nationall Church, as well as to a congregational. The Nationall Church of Scotland is Independent from the Government of the Nationall Church of England; and so is England Independent from Scotland. Nor is there any Sect at this day extant, but shrowdeth themselves under the title of Independency. The Antipaedobaptists, Antinomians, Familists, yea, and the Seekers too, do all of them style themselves Independents. Nay, even the Pope himself, (who exalteth himself above all Civil and Church-power) yet even he also arrogateth the title of Independency; Prima s●des à nemine judicatur; that is, the Sea of Rome is Independent. Why than should Independency be appropriated to us, as a character of our way, which neither truly describeth us, nor faithfully distinguisheth us from many others? Wherhfore if there must needs be some note of difference to decipher our estate, and to distinguish our way from a Nationall Churchway, I know none fit, than to denominate theirs Classical, and ours congregational.   

SECT. II. Of the number of the congregational Regiment, and of the wisdom threaped upon them, in engaging Persons of note to them.  
The Dissuader acknowledgeth, We are not numerous, but the fewest in number of the noted Sects, and not to consist of above One thousand persons within the Lines of the City's Communication.  
Answ. 1. If we be the fewest of noted Sec●●, it was sometime the lot of God's Israel to be the fewest of all people, Deut. 7.7.  
Answ. 2. If there be a thousand of our way within the Lines of the City's Communication, I hope there want not divers more to be added to them in other parts of England, besides some thousands more in New-England. But it is not for us to follow David's sin in numbering the people of the Lord; only the Lord increase their number an hundreth fold, (yea, a thousand fold) and make them as the stars of heaven for multitude.  
But for the quality of the persons, the Dissuader telleth us, They have been so wise, as to engage to their party some of chief note in both Houses of Parliament, in the Assembly of Divines, in the Army, in the City, and Countrey-Committees.  
But in so saying, the Dissuader putteth a dishonour both upon God, and upon those persons of chief note. It is a dishonour to God, to attribute that to the wisdom of man, which is the mighty and gracious work of the wisdom of God. And it is a dishonour to such men, to hold them forth as engaged to this way by the wisdom and industry of men, who have been well known (and some of them for many years) not to have engaged themselves or others any further, than the grace of Christ, and the conscience of his Word hath engaged them to do and suffer, according to the will of God.   

SECT. III. Touching the Line of the Pedigree of the Independents in New-England.  
The Separatists (saith the Dissuader) were their Fathers. This is demonstrable not only by the consanguinity of their Tenants, (the one having borrowed all their chief Doctrines and practices from the other:) but also by deduction of their Pedigree in this clear Line. Mr Robinson did derive his way to his Separate Congregation at Leyden; a part of them did carry it over to Plymmouth in New-England: Here Mr. Cotton took it up, and did transmit it to Mr. Goodwin, who did help to propagate it to sundry others in Old-England first, and after to more in Holland; till now by many hands it is sown thick in divers parts of the Kingdom.  
Answ. That the Separatists were our Fathers, we have justly denied it above; seeing they neither begat us to God, nor to the Church, nor to their Schism. That we are (through grace) begotten to God, and to his Church, we received (many of us) from the blessing of Christ upon the Ministry of England. That we grew weary of the burden of Episcopacy and Conformity, we received from the Word of God by the help of the Non-conformists there. That we laid aside the Book of Common-prayer, we received from the serious meditation of the second Commandment, and not from the Writings of the Separatists, though they also had taken up the same Conclusion upon other premises. The particular visible Church of a Congregation to be the first subject of the power of the Keys, we received by the light of the Word from Mr. Parker, Mr. Baynes, and Dr. Ames: from whom also, (from two of them at lest) we received light out of the Word, for the matter of the visible Church to be visible Saints; and for th● Form of it, to be a mutual Covenant, whether an explicit or implicit Profession of Faith, and subjection to the Gospel of Christ in the society of the Church, or Presbytery thereof. And these be the chief Doctrines and practices of our way, so far as it differeth from other Reformed Churches. And having received these, not from the Separatists, but from the Lord Jesus, by gracious Saints, and faithful witnesses of Jesus; the consanguinity of our Tenants with any the like found amongst the Separatists, will not demonstrate the Separatists to be our Fathers.  
It is very likely (and by the fruits of some of them, it is very evident) that the Church of Plymmouth in New-England received very much light and life, by the blessing of Christ upon Mr. Robinson his Ministry, whilst he lived with them in Holland: nor need we to be ashamed, to learn any truth of God from him, or them, or from any other Saints of God, of fare meaner gifts, than he or they had received. But I must confess ingenuously, that his denial of the Parishional Congregations in England to be true Churches, (either by reason of their mixed and corrupt matter, or for defect in their Covenant, or for excess of their Episcopal Government) was never received into any heart, from thence to infer a nullity of their Church-estate. Neither was our departure from them even in those evil times, a Separation from them as no Churches, but rather a Secession from the corruptions found amongst them, unto which also we must have been forced to conform, even in our own Practice through the Rigour of the times, unless we had timely departed from them. In which case, Doctor Ames will excuse us (yea and the Holy Ghost also) from aspersion of schism or any other sin, in so doing, De Conscientia, lib. 4. cap. 24. Numero 16. in Responsione 7. add quaest. 3.  
The Dissuader is mistaken (when he saith Page 54.) That after the death of Ainsworth, there remained only a small handful of Separatists at Amsterdam, and another small company at Leyden, under Mr. Robinson's Ministry, and besides them, no other at that time were known in the world of that Religion.  
For Mr. jacob, whom Mr. Lothrop succeeded and after him Mr. Barbon being an Elder governed the same Separate Church in Leyden which held Communion with Mr. Robinson's Church, as appeareth by their Letters published in Print. And that Church as it began before Mr. Robinson, so it continued after him, and still doth. And it is not less a mistake, when the Dissuader maketh the Divisions in Mr. Robinson's Church, or his desertion of many of their Principles to be an occasion of well-neare bringing that Church to naught: till some of them went over to New-England, and persuaded their neighbours who sat down with them in New- Plymmouth to erect with them a Congregation after their Separate way.  
For the Church at Leyden was in peace, and free from any division, when they took up thoughts of transporting themselves into America with common consent. Themselves do declare it, That the proposition of Removal, was set on foot and prosecuted by the Elders upon just and weighty grounds. For (to use their own words)  though they did quietly and sweetly enjoy their Christian & Church-liberties under the States: yet they foresaw Holland would be no place for their Church, and their posterity to continued there comfortably: at lest in that measure, which they hoped to find abroad, and that for these reasons, which I shall recite, as I received them from themselves. 
1. Because themselves were of a different language from the Dutch where they lived, and the Dutch were settled in their way; in so much that in ten year's space, whilst their Church sojourned amongst them, they could not bring them to reform the neglect of the Lords D●y, or any other thing amiss amongst them.  
2. Because their Counttrey-men who came over to join with them, by reason of the hardness, and chargeableness of the Country, soon spent their estates, and than were forced either to return bacl for England, or to live very meanly.  
3. Because the Country was a place of so great liberty to children, that they could not educate their children, as their Parents had educated them: nor could they give them due correction, without reproof and reproach from their Neighbours.  
4. Because their posterity would in a few generations become Dutch, and so loose their interest in the English Nation, name and language.  
These being debated at first in private, and thought weighty, were afterwards propounded in public, and after Solemn Days of Humiliation both in public and private, it was agreed, that part of the Church should go before their Brethrens into America to prepare for the rest: And in case the mayor part of the Church did choose to go over with the first, than the Pastor to go along with them. But if the mayor part stayed, than he to stay with them: and to follow afterwards, when they should hear out of America of their safety and health, and possibility of subsistence: But the Lord translated him to himself, before the rest could prepare to go along to their Brethrens. Notwithstanding when the first company Embarked themselves for America, their Brethrens accompanied them to the Sea, and took their leaves with such abundant expressions of Brotherly Love, as drew the neighbour Dutch to much observation, yea and some Admiration of them, at Delph-Shoven in Holland.  
Their departure therefore was not in a way of division among themselves, but with mutual consent, and common intendment of peaceable cohabitation.  
Neither did that company which came over to Plymmouth, erect here a New-Church (as the Dissuader taketh it,) for by consent of the Church which they left, they came over in Church-estate, and only renewed their Covenant when they came hither.  
Neither did the Church of Plymmouth (as the Dissuader reporteth them) incontinently leaven all the vicinity.  
For (as themselves say) at the first coming there was no vicinity of Christian habitation. They came over in the year 1620. Mr. Endicot, (the Captain with his Company) came not over till the year 1628. and sat down at Salem, 8. years after Plymmouth. The year following, Mr. Skelton, and Mr. Higginson came over, and sitting down with Mr. Endicot at Salem, entered into a Church there. How far they of Salem took up any practice from them at Plymmouth, I do not know: sure I am, Mr. Skelton (their Pastor) was studious of that way, before he left Holland in Lincolnshire.  
Nor was there any other Church planted after Salem till Mr. Winthrop, and some other godly gentlemen, and many good Christians came over together with Mr. Wilson, and Mr. Philip's, (Ministers of the Word:) whereof the one gathered a Church at Boston, the other at Watertowne, in the year 1630. The next year followed Mr. Eliot, and the year after Mr. Weld, who gathered into a Church at Rocksbury, as old Mr. Naverisk, and Mr. Warham had done the same before at Dorchester.  
It was in the year 1633. when Mr. Hooker, Mr. Stone, with myself arrived in the same Ship together: and being come, we found several Churches gathered, and standing in the same Order, and way, wherein they now walk: at Salem, at Boston, at Watertowne, at Charle-Towne, (which issued out of Boston) at Dorchester and Rockesbury. So that the Dissuader is much mistaken, when he saith, the Congregagation of Plymouth did incontinently leaven all the vicinity: seeing for many years there was no vicinity to be leavened. And Salem itself that was gathered into Church-Order seven or eight years after them, was above 40. miles distant from them. And though it be very likely, that some of the first comers might help their Theory by hearing and discerning their practice at Plymmouth: yet therein the Scripture is fulfilled, The Kingdom of Heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of Meal, till all was leavened, Matth. 13.13.  
But yet if the Dissuader knew the spirit of those men who first came over hither, after Plymmoth, (though before us) he would easily discern, they were not such as would be leavened by vicinity of neighbours, but by the Divinity of the Truth of God shining forth from the Word. The body of the people at that time was not of such a carnal spirit, as so many of them to leave so fair accommodations, and dear relations in our native Country, to come over into a wilderness, to take up a Form of Government, upon any such ground as the Dissuader conceiteth, because it holdeth out so much liberty, and honour to the people.  
This were indeed not to seek out for Liberty of Conscience, but Elbow-roomth of lust; and not to attend the honour, but the humour of the people. To pass such a judgement upon strangers, had need to arise from Divine Revelation, or else it will fall under the note of human temerity.  
But (saith the Dissuader) howsoever it was in a few years, the most who settled their habitations in the Land, did agreed to model themselves after Robinson's pattern.  
Answ. I do not know, that they agreed upon it by any common consultation: But it is true, they did as if they had agreed (by the same Spirit of Truth and unity) set up (by the help of Christ) the same model of Churches, one like to another. But whether it was after Mr. Robinson's pattern, is spoken gratis: for I believe most of them knew not what it was, if any at all. And if any did know it, the men were such, as were not want to attend to the patterns of men in matters of Religion, (for against that many of them had suffered in our native Country) but to the pattern of the Scriptures.   

SECT. 4. Of Cottons pretended former dislike of the New-English way, and after closing with it.  
In pursuing this pedigree and descent of New-English Discipline, the Dissuader is pleased to present me to the world, to be the first who appeared in displeasure against it, though afterwards to have fallen into a liking of it.  
But how doth he make it appear, that I did appear in displeasure against it? His proof is from a private Letter of mine to Mr. Skelton, where I call it an error, (whether in Mr. Skelton, or some of his people) to conceive, that our Congregations in England are none of them particular Reformed Churches. Surely, if that be all the proof, I willingly acknowledge, I did appear against that Error. But neither was I the first that did appear against it, (but divers godly English Ministers before me:) neither have I fallen to the liking of the contrary opinion since.  
But the Dissuader is much deceived, if he take that Error to be the judgement of the Churches of New-England, howsoever some particular persons may lean that way.  
Nor will it yield any better proof, that which he allegeth out of my Preface to Mr. Hildersons Sermon upon John. For that which I there wrote, concerneth the way of the Rigid Separation, which renounceth the Churches of England as Antichristian, and the godly members thereof, as no visible Saints. Neither is my judgement altered at all in this Point to this day: which also I have lately maintained in my Reply unto Mr. William's his Answer of my Letter, and in a Treatise concerning the Baptism of Children. And what I have written in this Point is suitable to the judgement of the Body of the Churches and Elders in New-England, and not at all repugnant to the way wherein we walk.  
But I marvel, what should move the Dissuader to report of me, That though in England I fell of from the practice of some Ceremonies, and but of some of them, and was distasted with Episcopal Government: yet so long as I abode in England, I minded no more than the Old Nonconformity: For in this one sentence he giveth a double misreport of me.  
First, that in England I fell of but from some of the Ceremonies. For (by the grace of Christ) I forbore all the Ceremonies alike at once, many years before I left England. The first grounds which prevailed with me to forbear one Ceremony, would not allow me to practise any. The grounds I well remember were two: 1 The significancy and efficacy put upon them in the Preface to the Book of Common-prayer: That they were neither dumb nor dark, but apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty to God, by some notable table and special signification, whereby he may be edified, or words to the like purpose.  
The second was the limitation of Church-power, (even of the highest Apostolical Commission) to the observation of the Commandments of Christ, Matth. 28.20. which made it appear to me utterly unlawful, for any Church-power to enjoin the observation of indifferent Ceremonies which Christ had not commanded. And all the Ceremonies were alike destitute of the commandment of Christ, though they had been indifferent otherwise, which indeed others have justly pleaded they were not.  
What favour I was offered not only for connivance, but for preferment, if I would have conformed to any one of the Ceremonies, I forbear to mention. Yea, when I was suspended upon special complaint made against me to the King that than was, and all hope of restitution denied to me, without yielding to some conformity, at lest in one Ceremony at lest once; yet the good hand of the Lord so kept me, that I durst not buy my Ministry so dear: And yet (I thank the Lord) my Ministry was dearer to me (to speak the lest) than any preferment.  
When the Bishop of Lincoln-Diocesse (Dr. Mountaigne) offered me liberty upon once kneeling at Sacrament with him the next Lordsday after: or else to give some reason, why (in conscience I could not) unto Dr. Davenant (than Bishop-elect of Salisbury, who was at that time present with him at Westminster) I durst not accept his offer of liberty upon once kneeling; but I gave them this reason for my excuse and defence, 
Cultus non institutus, non est acceptus:  
Genuflexio in perceptione Eucharistiae est cultus non institutus;  
Ergo, non est acceptus.   
The second misreport which the Dissuader maketh of me in his former sentence, is, That howsoever when I was in England, I was than distasted with Episcopal Government; yet so long as I abode in England, I minded no more than the Old Nonconformity.  
I pass by his unsavoury metaphor of my distaste of Episcopal Government. Conscientious judgement in matters of Religion is not led by taste or distaste: will he say, that both the Parliaments of England and Scotland have abolished Episcopal Government upon a distaste?  
But when he saith, I minded no more than the Old Nonconformity whilst I abode in England, he must be more privy to my mind than any mortal man is, and than myself too, to make it good. There were some scores of godly persons in Boston in Lincolnshire, (whereof some are there still, and some here, and some are fallen asleep) who can witness, that we entered into a Covenant with the Lord, and one with another, to follow after the Lord in the purity of his Worship; which though it was defective, yet it was more than the Old Nonconformity. Besides, I had than learned of Mr. Parker, and Mr. Baynes, (and soon after of Dr. Ames) that the Ministers of Christ, and the Keys of the Government of his Church are given to each particular congregational Church respectively: And therefore neither Ministers nor Congregations subject to the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction of Cathedral Churches, not, nor of Classical Assemblies neither, but by voluntary consociation, and that in some cases; and those falling short of that which is properly called subjection to their Jurisdiction. Which made me than to mind not only a neglect of the censures of Commissary Courts, (which bred not a little offence to them, and disturbance to myself) but also to breathe after greater liberty and purity not only of God's Worship, but of Church estate. But suppose that I had than minded no more than the Old way of Nonconformity: yet the experience of the Godly will easily acknowledge, that the way of the Lord is light and strength to the upright, and giveth more and more understanding and enlargement to them that walk in it.  
Nay, the Disswaders own words might convince him, that I minded more than the Old Nonconformity, whilst I abode in England. For if Mr. Cotton, and those Brethrens who went along with me, came over to New-England, to join ourselves with those American Churches, (as he saith) it argueth plainly we did not upon our coming hither, go contrary to our former judgement, and fall into a liking of this way. For than we would never have taken so long and hazardous a voyage to join to Churches, whose way was contrary to our judgements all the while of our abode in England. Rational charity would conceive, that Christian men, who chose rather to forfeit our Ministry, and maintenance, and all our dear relations in our native Country, than to submit to a course contrary to our judgements, would never transport ourselves to America, to run a contrary course to our judgements in a land of liberty. But thus in heat of pursuit of an adversary (whether cause or person) men will not stick to suffer their tongues and pens to run over, though for haste one word interfere with another.   

SECT. V Of the pretended danger of the New-English way unto the world, after Cotton and others closing with it.  
But to proceed, why should the Dissuader conceive, That our coming over into these parts, and joining with these American Churches, should 'cause this New-way (as he calleth it) to begin to grow dangerous to the rest of the world?  
To which world (I pray you) hath this way grown dangerous? to the Christian world? or to the Antichristian world? or to the Pagan world?  
The Pagan world of Indians here will acknowledge our sitting down by them, hath prevented the danger either of their dissolution or servitude. For the Indians in these parts being by the hand of God swept away (many multitudes of them) by the Plague, the manner of the Neighbor-Indians is either to destroy the weaker Countries, or to make them Tributary: which danger ready to fall upon their heads in these parts, the coming of the English hither prevented. And of late (through the grace of Christ) one of our fellow-Elders, Mr. Eliot, Teacher of Rocksbury, having gotten the knowledge of the Indian language preacheth to them every week one week to one Congregation on the fourth day, to the other on the sixth the week following. And to him they willingly give ear, and reform their vicious living according to his Doctrine; and some of them offer themselves to be trained up in English Families, and in our Schools: and there be of them that give good hope of coming on to the acknowledgement of the grace of Christ. To them therefore our way is not dangerous.  
To the Antichristian world, the more dangerous it is; I doubt not, it is the more acceptabl● to God, and I hope, it is not the less safe in Mr. Baylie's eye. Some of the Jesuits at Lisborn, and others in the Western Islands have professed to some of our Merchants and Mariners, they look at our Plantations, (and at some of us by name) as dangerous supplanters of the Catholic cause. If that be the greatest danger, I presume Mr. Bailiff will not ab hoc dicto secundum quid, pronounce us dangerous (simplicitèr) to the rest of the world.  
To the Christian world, what danger hath accrued by our means? many that knew both our Magistrates and Elders, and the chief sort of our people, and knew how little we affected to travel into foreign countries' to see fashions; they upon our departure grew more inquisitive into the cause of our voluntary exile; and thereupon, more jealous of corruptions at home in the Worship of God, and in Church-Discipline; more sensible of the burden and danger of Episcopal tyranny, and consequently more ready to follow the good example of the Churches and Commonwealth of Scotland, in rejecting and shaking of Episcopal usurpations and intrusions of Liturgies. And hath this been so dangerous to the rest of the world?  
Besides, if Books and Letters do not delude us with false intelligence, the great salvation, and glorious Victories which the Lord hath wrought for England these late years by any English power, his own right hand hath brought to pass chief by such despised instruments as are surnamed Independents. And are than the witnesses of that way so dangerous to the rest of the world?  
Wherein than lieth the danger of this way?  
It seemeth the Dissuader conceiveth (as some others have done) that this way hath been a double danger to those Churches: 1 In becoming a dangerous inlet to all kind of Sects, who shroud themselves under the name of Independents, and claim impunity under their shadow. 2 In retarding the establishment and free passage of the work of Reformation.  
But for the former, if the devil come and sow Tares, yea Briars and Thorns, where Christ hath sown Wheat, is therefore the wheat a dangerous grain? And if thereupon not only tares, but briers and thorns pled for freedom from eradication, must therefore the wheat be plucked up, to root out the rest? Surely the way which is practised in New-England cannot justly be taxed for too much connivance to all kind of Sects: we here do rather hear ill for too much rigour, which evidently argueth, our way is of itself no inlet at all to all kind of Sects, unless it be merely by accident: as Christianity hath been an inlet to all kinds of heresy; for where there is no Christianity, there is no heresy.  
As for the latter, the retarding of the work of Reformation, Surely we found it here the readiest way to a speedy Reformation. The common disorders obvious and ordinary in other Plantations are here either not found, or soon Reform. The Retarding of Reformation in England springeth rather, partly from such as would have no Reformation at all, but affect elbow-roomth to their own lusts: partly from such as will have no Reformation, but in their own way. But if it might please the Lord to bow the hearts, both of the Presbyterians, and of the Congregationalls, so fare as both of them are come, to walk by the same rule, and mind the same thing, (both of them to mind Reformation according to the rule of the Word, as they conceive it; both of them to redress abases, the Presbyterians, the abuses found in their Churches, and the Congregationalls in theirs,) doubtless, it need not to be feared the work of Reformation will speedily found (by the blessing of Christ) a free and mighty passage through out the three Kingdoms.   

SECT. 6. Of Cottons pretended misleading 

Mr. Davenport  
Mr. Goodwin.    
If it be true which the Dissuader relateth from Mr. Edward's, 
Page 56.  that before my departure from England, I had by conference in London brought of Mr. Davenport, and Mr. Goodwin, from some of the English Ceremonies.  
Why doth he note me in his margin to be a Misleader of Mr. Goodwin and others? Is it a misleading to lead men away from the English Ceremonies? Were they Misleaders, who led the Honourable Houses of Ptrliament to fall of from the Ceremonies? Or did the Parliament misled the people of England to the disuse of them?  
But Mr. Bailiff knoweth not Mr. Davenport, nor Mr. Goodwin, if he think the ablest Divines in Christendom, much less such a poor weak thing as myself could bring them of to forsake their public Ministry, wherein they were notable instruments of good service to God and man, unless they saw the light of the Word and Spirit of Grace to go before them in such ways. Virgin-soules are want to follow the Lamb, wheresoever he goeth (Rev. 14.4.) And the Sons of God are led by the Spirit of God, (Rom. 8.14.) And therefore let Mr. Bailiff be entreated not so much to undervalue his holy Brethrens, as to think they were rather misled by me, than led by the Spirit and Word of Grace in their own judgements and consciences. It is true, Mr. Davenport, Mr. Goodwin, with some other godly Brethrens had some conference with me at London, about the cause of my sufferings, and of my purpose to leave the Land; which they said, they desired the rather, because they did not look at me as a passionate man, though the Dissuader (who knoweth me not) be pleased so to represent me to the world in this Paragraph. And upon their motion two Points were chiefly debated: 1. Touching the limitation of Church-power, to matters of commandment, not of indifferency, (which I touched before.) The 2. touching the office of Bishops, whether the Scripture Bishops be appointed to rule a Diocese, or a particular Congregation. Now both these being agreed upon amongst us, Mr. Edward's is much mistaken, and Mr. Bailiff too, when they say, that neither Mr. Davenport, nor Mr. Goodwin, nor myself did mind any further than the leaving of some few ceremonies. For grant the former principle, of the limitation of Church-Power to matters of Commandment, and all the Ceremonies must be left of at once. And grant the latter, touching the limitation of Bishops to a particular Congregation; and it will necessarily infer an unavoidable Separation from under the shadow of Diocesan-Episcopall-Government.  
Besides, presently after, I received Letters from Mr. Goodwin, (and as I take it, before I left England) signifying, that as in our former conferences, we had debated much of the negative part of the 2. Commandment, so he had since meditated much, and seriously of the affirmative part of it, the positive institutions of Gods Divine Worship in opposition to human inventions. Whereby I plainly discerned, (England as the State of it stood than) could not hold him long. It is an usual thing with God, in times of Reformation to enlighten his Servants, though fare distant one from another, with the same beams of light of Divine Truth, which the world interpreteth, they have learned one from another: but indeed all from the same Spirit, who distributeth to every one, even as he william. But whether Mr. Davenport, and Mr. Goodwin received aught from me, I do not know, sure I am, I have received much from them. The members of the Body of Christ, are want to minister supply one to another, according to the effectual working of the Spirit of Grace in every part, to the mutual edifying of themselves, and of the whole Body in Love, Ephes. 4.16. And why should mutual edification be made a matter of exprobration?   

SECT. 7. Of Cottons pretended sudden change to the passionate affecting of the New-English way, and the conversi n of Mr. Goodwin to it.  
It seemeth to me a strange speech of the Dissuader, and as far from Truth, as from ingenuity, that assoon as I had tasted of the New English air, I fell into a passionate affection with the Religion I found there.  
For I knew their Religion before I came into New-England, and himself said above, that I came with a purpose to join with their Churches: Which argueth, I did not fall into an affection to their Religion, by tasting of New-English Air. Nor hath his speech any reasonable construction, that with tasting the new English air, I soon fell into a passionate affection to their Religion, unless he take me for one of those children, who are tossed to and from, and carried about with every wind (or air) of doctrine, Ephes. 4.14. Nor do I yet understand why he should accounted the Religion of New-England another Religion, than that of England and Scotland and other Reformed Churches. Difference in some external form of Church administrations is not want in the writings of judicious Divines, to make up the note and name of a different Religion.  
Neither can I imagine what should move him to say, that I fell into a passionate affection with the Religion here. A passionate affection, is a strong, yea a violent, and inordinate affection. Did the Dissuader ever read, or hear me, to express any such violent or inordinate affection to the Religion here professed?  
How Mr. Goodwin cometh to be accounted, and called of the Dissuader, my Convert, I do not know. It is not good to take liberty to use Scripture Idioms, but in Scripture sense. The Scripture speaketh not of conversion, but in the sense of Regeneration begun, or renewed: neither doth it style one man, another man's Convert, but reserveth that solely and solidly to the Lord.  
But I marvel why the Dissuader should say, That M. Goodwin with little ado was brought by my Letters from New-England to follow in this step of my progress.  
For first, I do not remember that ever I wrote Letter to him from New-England about our way. And my Letter, which Mr. Bailiff quoteth amongst his Testimonies (in G) was not written to him, but to a brother of mine (by Marriage) in Boston. Men that have been bred and brought up under a form of Doctrine, or Worship, or Government, and never saw ground to scruple it, they may with little ado receive it, and embrace, and follow it: which, it may be, hath been the case of many thousands in England, and usually falleth out in settled Churches. But for M. Goodwin to take up a way not only contrary to that wherein he hath been bred and brought up, but also discrepant from the judgements of so many godly learned Brethrens, to the hazard of his Ministry, and to the smothering of himself in a cloud of calumny and obloquy, believe it who will, I cannot easily believe it, that he took up such a way with very little ado. I cannot but believe, it cost him many prayers, and sighs, and groans, much study, meditation, and conference, before he could satisfy himself in such a course; He being especially (as Mr. Bailiff reporteth him) a man of a fine and dainty Spirit, (and therefore loving and tender:) to which sort of men, it is most unwelcome to offend Reverend Brethrens by dissenting from them: and with whom it is most usual to suspect their own judgements and ways, when they go alone. Luther was not accounted a man of a fine and dainty spirit, but of a more resolute and stern temper; and yet it was no small temptation even to him. Nunquid tu solus sapis? Quoties mihi palpitavit tremulum Cor, & reprehendens objecit fortissimum illud argumentum, Tu solus sapis? tóine errand universi? etc. Luther. in Praefat. de Abrogandâ Missa privata, etc.  
Mr. Edward's his Antapology, I have not had the opportunity to come by, much less to read: and therefore I cannot tell what sense to make of those words which Mr. Bailiff quoteth out of him (in H:) and wherein he saith, Mr. Goodwin was bold to boast of me in terms beyond the bounds of moderation. Sure I am, Mr. Goodwin was not want to be accounted, either a bold man, or a boaster. I have many years known him and his modesty, and abhorrency both from boldness and boasting: and if Mr. Bailiff take up a report to the contrary from Mr. Edwards (who is but one witness, and it may be prejudiced) I dare not follow Mr. Bailiff herein, but must allow Mr. Goodwin the privilege of an Elder, against whom no accusation is to be received under two or three witnesses, 1 Tim. 5.19. By what rule therefore Mr. Bailiff receiveth this testimony against Mr. Goodwin, by one single witness, he may do well to consider. Sure I am, it agreeth not with the Rules either of congregational or Classical Church-government.  
But if Mr. Goodwin himself do acknowledge such a speech, he knoweth best in what sense he spoke it. For myself, I can own it only in the same sense wherein Agur spoke it of himself, Prov. 30.2, 3. Surely I am more brutish than man; I have not the understanding of a man: I have not learned wisdom, nor know the holy.  
The next testimony which Mr. Bailiff quoteth out of Mr. Edward's to the same purpose, speaketh not of Mr. Goodwin, but of some other whom Mr. Edward's nameth not. But such Apocrypha testimonies with judicious and equal minds, will never go for authentical evidences. For the matter of the testimony itself, I conceive, the form of Church-government wherein we walk doth not differ in substance from that which Mr. Cartwright pleaded for. For two things chief there be wherein such as are for a congregational way, do seem to differ from Presbyterians: 1 In the matter of their Churches; they would have none allowed but visible Saints. 2 In the exercise of Church-censure, they leave that power to the Elders and Brethrens of the same Church whereof the delinquent is a member. And in both these we found Mr. Cartwright's footsteps going plainly before us. For, 1. he taxeth in Bishop Whitgift, that speech of his; The Church is full of Drunkards and Whoremongers, etc. Whereas Mr. Cartwright would not have scandalous persons born withal in the Church. And for the 2. he speaketh fully, in 1 Cor. 5.4. Forasmuch (saith he) as the Apostle reproveth the Church of Corinth, for that they had no● (before his Letters) excommunicated the Incestuous; It is evident that the Ministers, and the rest of the Church there had power and authority thereunto.  
The next Testimony which Mr. Bailiff allegeth to prove Mr. Goodwin's boasting of this new light (as he calleth it) beyond the lines of moderation, is from the words of Mr. Williams in his examination of a letter of mine. His words be, That some of the most eminent amongst them have affirmed, That even the Apostles Churches were not so pure as the New-English Churches.  
But what is this to M. Goodwin? M. Williams speaketh of some of the most eminent in New-England, where Mr. Goodwin never came.  
Besides, Mr. Williams doth not ascribe these words to any definite persons in New-England. And, as I said before, Apocrypha testimonies will never go with equal minds for authentical evidences. It is no new thing for Mr. Williams to mistake both himself and others, as hath appeared in the Reply both to his examination of that Letter, and to his Bloody Tenent. I never heard of any man's speech in New-England so hyperbolical in the praise of New-English Churches, nor coming nearer to the words in hand, than the words reported of Mr. William's himself: That of all the Churches in the world, the Churches of New-England were the most pure; and of all New-English Churches, Salem (whereof himself was Teacher) was the purest. But such arrogant comparisons are as smoke in God's nostrils, Esay 65 5. the first born of vanity, and the first step to apostasy.   

SECT. VIII. Of Cottons pretended rashness in the change of his mind in latter and former times.  
Mr. Bailiff proceedeth, and telleth us, It had been happy for England, that Mr. Cotton had taken longer time for deliberation, before that change of his mind. He might have remembered his too precipitant rashness in former times, both to receive, and to sand abroad to the world such Tenants, whereof after he had cause to repent.  
I should think myself a most unhappy man, if England should be the less happy for my sake. Mr. Bailiff doth either undervalue England, or overvalue me; if he think the happiness or unhappiness of England doth stand or fall upon any deliberate or precipitate act of mine.  
But what think ye, was that rash and precipitate act of mine, which hath impeached the happiness of England? It was, saith he, that change of my mind. What change was that? That which I mention in a Letter to some friends in Boston, That if I were with them again, I durst not take that liberty which sometimes I had done: I durst not join in Book-prayers: I durst not now partake in the Sacrament with you: to wit, in respect of those scandalous persons who communicate with you, and will settle upon their Leeses with the more security by your fellowship with them.  
I do remember such a Letter I wrote; whether to one or more in Boston, I remember not: Some say it is printed, but I know not, nor have I seen it: But I take the contents as Mr. Bailiff reporteth them. And concerning them, I durst appeal even to Mr. Bailiff himself, (though a stranger to me, and professing opposition) yet let him speak in good earnest, whether if I had taken longer time of deliberation even to this ●ay, I should not have found just cause to have changed my mind, as I than did? Did I change my mind than to any other judgement or practice, than what the Reverend Assembly of Divines, and the Honourable Houses of Parliament have found (by the grace given to them) to be the Truth, and by Public consent approved, and by Public authority established? And doth he think, that it had been happy for England, if the Parliament and Assembly had neither of them changed their minds, but still retained Book-service, and admitted scandalous persons to the Lords Table? How shall a poor Christian do to satisfy his Brethrens, that are not satisfied with their own judgement and ways; if he be of the same judgement, or speak the same thing with them? verily, it is not good in God's sight (but even an abomination to him) to keep a weight and a weight, a measure and a measure: to judge the same act in themselves to be weighty, which in others they judge to be light and rash. But the comfort is, the righteous God judgeth righteously, not according to acceptance of persons, but according to Truth; and accepteth the work of his own Spirit of Truth and Grace wheresoever he findeth it.  
As for my too precipita●● rashness in former times, which he he is pleased to remember me of, let him be pleased to forbear his censure a while, till I may give account thereof to Reverend Doctor Twisse. In the mean time let him know, that those Tenants which he saith I sent abroad to the world, whereof I had cause after to repent, I neither sent them abroad to the world, (but wrote them privately for the satisfaction of a neighbour Minister) nor do I yet know, whether I have cause to repent of them or not, it being near thirty years ago since I wrote them, and many years ago since I read them.  
But in the mean time, let Mr. Bailiff be pleased to understand, that I came hither in September in the year 1633. and that letter of mine which I sent to Boston, was dated (as himself quoteth) in October, 1635. And surely to writ my Opinion of such a case, which I had considered of for the space of two whole years, doth not seem to be a rash and precipitate act: Nor can it be said with truth, That I did incontinent persuade to the New-English way, as soon as I had tasted of the New-English air. Two whole years and more, giveth a man more than a taste of New-English air; nor is that an act done incontinently, which is done upon two years' deliberation.   

SECT. IX. Of Cottons pretended known failings, and Mr. Baylies pretended just cause to discover them to the world.  
Mr. Bailiff proceedeth to discover my evident and known failings, (as he calleth them) and he conceiveth neither piety nor charity will hinder him to remark them. And why so? me thinks it should be some great and weighty cause, that himself, who is want (as he saith) to speak liberally to the praises of men, who in his thoughts are much inferior to Mr. Cotton; should now give up himself to speak liberally to the dispraise and disgrace of him, whom yet in his entrance thereinto he seemeth to reckon amongst such as he calleth the dear children of God. Surely there is not the lest child of God, but is ordained of God to be a vessel of honour; and to make any such a vessel of dishonour, what is it else but to endeavour to overthrew the eternal counsel of God? Nor is there the lest child of God, but is a member of the Body of Christ; and the natural members of the Body are want to cover the nakedness of such members as are most uncomely.  
But Mr. Bailiff is of opinion, as he saith, that when my gifts are turned into snares, and made inducements to others to follow me in my wander: than the discovery of my clear weakness may be a retractive to every Prudent man, & a caveat from God, to beware of my ways. Belike than it will follow, that though it be contrary both to the counsel and Commandment of God, and to the Communion of his Mystical Body, to cast reproaches and dishonour upon the lest of God's servants: yet for a good end, to keep others from idolising of them, it may be lawful to rans●ck all their former lives, and to hung them up in the sight of the Sun, in chains of public infamy, and obloquy. But I confess, I have not so learned Christ, as to allow myself to do evil that good may come of it. Nor do I believe it had been a way of God, when the men of Lystra so highly Idolised Paul and Barnabas, as to accounted one of them to be Jupiter, and the other Mercurius, and to present them with Divine Worship, that than some godly brother of Paul's company should have stepped in amongst them, and said, Sirs, why do you these things? Paul hath been a bloody persecutor of the Truths of God, a Blasphemer, a scornful oppressor: and Barnabas is a man subject to passion and dissimulation, and both of them mortal men, subject to all kind of sinful corruption. Such zeal for the glory of God, I know not by what rule of piety or charity, it could have been justified. God hath sanctified other means, to wean his servants from idolising their Brethrens. Cornelius idolised Peter even with Divine honour, Act. 10.25. But did Peter therefore, or any of the 6. Brethrens that went along with him, think it a just warrant, to proclaim to Cornel. Take heed what you do, this man whom you idolise hath been a liar, a perjured person, an horrible curser of himself, and renouncer of the Lord Jesus before many witnesses? God forbidden. Yea of latter times, when the pregnant strength and glorious lustre of many heroical and excellent gifts of Luther had been so idolised, that many and great Nations followed him in some notorious errors of his way: yet Calvin thought it no just ground, why Bullinger or other Divines should break forth against him, as he had done (atroci invectiva, to use Calvins word) against them, but sweetly professeth, Saepe dicere solitus sum, etiamsi me Diabolum vocaret, me tamen hoc illi honoris habiturum, ut insignem Die servum agnoscam: Calvin. Ep. 57 ad Bullingerum. The want of this spirit is Fundi Anglicani calamitas, the unhappiness of England at this day. But what if all these heresies or errors, which Mr. Bailiff chargeth upon me, be but so many errors of himself, or of his witnesses? Will he still make it an act of piety, or charity to remark them (as he calleth it) for my evident and known failings, and follies: which are either not failings, nor follies at all, or none of mine?  
Let us examine the particulars.   

SECT. X. Of Cottons Prelatical Tenants.  
1. He instanceth in the Errors of my education, and my long continuance in them: sundry of them (as he saith) I confess stuck by me all the time of my abode in England.  
And this he proveth from the testimony of mine own Letter (above mentioned) from New-England to my friends at Boston, October 5. 1635. As joining in Book-prayers and fellowship at the Lords Table with scandalous Communicants. It was but in the next foregoing Page, (pag. 56. of Mr. Baylie's Book) wherein he maketh it the unhappiness of England, that I changed my mind from those very Tenants, which he now calleth the Errors of my education, and Prelatical Tenants? But if they be Errors, why doth he tax me for changing from them? And why doth he say, It had been happy for England, if Mr. Cotton had taken longer time, before he had changed his mind from such Tenants? Let Mr. Bailiff choose which he will take; either these are no Errors nor Prelatical Tenants; or if they were, it was no Error in me, nor unhappiness to England that I changed from them. A considerate and equal mind should not be so far transported study partium; nor so soon forget itself, as to censure it in one Page for an unhappy change from such Tenants, which in the next Page he noteth for Erroneous and Prelatical Tenants.   

SECT. XI. Of Cottons pretended Pelagianism and Arminian Errors.  
2. My next Error, he calleth, My more dangerous fall into the gulf of Pelagianism, some of the Arminian Errors. I did expect, he would have named what those Pelagian or Arminian Errors had been. But for that, he referreth me to the Antapology, a Book which I do not know that ever I have seen. Sure I am, I have often assayed to get, but cannot yet procure it. The testimony which Mr Bailiff quoteth out of it, referreth me to the Preface of Dr. Twisse his Answer. I have read his Preface, wherein I find no particular Tenants of mine expressed as Erroneous. But this testimony he is pleased to give me, (which might somewhat alloy the harshness of the scandal of my fall into the gulf of Pelagianism and Arminianism:) Mr. Cotton (saith he) as I have heard, is very sound and orthodox in the Point of Election: and cometh to this work with a gracious intent to clear the Doctrine of Predestination, (and that, in the particular of Reprobation) from such harsh consequences as seemeth to be derived from thence.  
Dr. Twisse doth indeed truly express that which (through grace) was my true intent, to clear the Orthodox Doctrine of Predestination from such harsh consequences, as are wont to be derived from absolute Reprobation. For when I was first called to Boston in Lincolnshire, so it was, that Mr. Doctor Baron, son of Dr. Baron, (the Divinity Reader at Cambridge) who in his Lectures there, first broached that which was than called Lutheranism, since Arminianism:) this Dr. Baron, I say, had leavened many of the chief men of the Town with Arminianism; as being indeed himself learned, acute, plausible in discourse, and fit to insinuate into the hearts of his Neighbours. And though he was a Physician by profession, (and of good skill in that art:) yet he spent the greatest strength of his studies in clearing and promoting the Arminian Tenants. Whence it came to pass, that in all the great Feasts of the Town, the chiefest Discourse at Table did ordinarily fall upon Arminian Points, to the great offence of the Godly Ministers both in Boston, and Neighbor-Towns. I coming amongst them a young man, (as having gone to Cambridge in the beginning of the 13th year of my age, and tarrying there not above 14 years in all, before I was sent for to Boston:) I thought it a part both of modesty and prudence, not to speak much to the Points, at the first, amongst Strangers and Ancients: until afterwards, after hearing of many Discourses in Public meetings, and much private conference with the Doctor, I had learned at length where all the great strength of the Doctor lay. And than observing (by the help of Christ) how to avoid such expressions, as gave him any advantage in the expressions of others, I than began publicly to Preach, and in private Meetings to defend the Doctrine of God's eternal Election before all foresight of good or evil in the Creature: and the Redemption (ex gratiâ) only of the Ellict: the effectual vocation of a Sinner per irresistibilem gratiae vim, without all respect of the preparations of Free will: And finally, the impossibility of the fall of a sincere Believer either totally or finally from the estate of grace. Hereupon, when the Doctor had objected many things, and heard my answers to those scruples which he was want most plausibly to urge; presently after, our public Feasts and neighbourly meetings, were silent from all further debates about Predestination, or any of the Points which depend thereon, and all matters of Religion were carried on calmly and peaceably. Insomuch, that when God opened mine eyes to see the sin of conformity, (which was soon after:) my neglect of conformity was at first tolerated without disturbance, and at length embraced in practice by the chief and greatest part of the Town. But so it fell out, that a neighbour Minister dwelling about 16 miles of (and my very loving friend) hearing of some Answers of mine tending to clear the Doctrine of Reprobation against the exceptions of Dr. Baron, he seemed not to be satisfied therewith, but wrote to me seven or eight Questions about the same; whereto I willingly gave him such Answers as than came to hand, and that soon after the receipt of his Questions, which is now long since, about 30 years ago. Little did I think, that a private Letter of mine written to a very friend, should ever have been divulged abroad. But it seemeth some got Copies of it; and in process of time, one Copy multiplied another, till at length it came to Dr. Twisse his hand. None of his Writings against Arminius or his followers had been than published: but he was than (by the report which went of him) of such high esteem with me, as I wrote him a thankful Letter for the pains I heard he had taken in examining my Answer to Mr. Bells Queries: (for that was the neighbour Ministers name who sent them to me;) and desired from him leave to see the copy of his Answer. He lovingly granted it, only with desire after a time to return his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: yet after that having got himself another Copy, he sent me word, he was content I should keep his. Whereupon I took it with me to New-England; but since my coming hither have found such constant diversion from such Contemplative Controversies, to attend Practical, that I have not to this day been able to perpend the Doctor's Answer, which I see is now Printed: I hope, God will give me opportunity ere long (after two or three other Treatises perused) to consider of this his labour of Love. I bless the Lord, who hath taught me to be willing to be taught of a fare meaner Disciple than such a Doctor, whose Scholastical acuteness, pregnancy of wit, solidity of judgement, and dexterity of argument, all Orthodox Divines do highly honour, and whom all Arminians and Jesuits do fall down before with silence. God forbidden I should shut mine eyes against any light brought to me by him. Only I desire I may not be condemned as a Pelagian or Arminian, before I be heard, or be found more slow in retracting an Error, than in discerning it.   

SECT. XII. Of Cottons pretended Montanism.  
3. The next Error which Mr. Bailiff is pleased to threape upon me is my old Montanism, which he saith, he hath heard from some gracious Ministers; and wherein some think I remain to this day.  
Who those gracious Ministers are from whom he heard this, he doth not mention; nor what this old Montanism of mine should be, he doth not express. But thus I must stand guilty in Mr. Baylie's judgement, and by his relation, in the judgement of all men that give credit to his testimony, of an horrible Heresy, but I must not know what; and by the accusation of gracious Ministers, but I must not know whom.  
Augustine recordeth (in his Catalogue of Heresies) Chap. 26. the Heresies of Montanus to be: 1. That Montanus and his two harlot-Prophetesses, Prisca and Maximilla, had received the Holy-Ghost not in part, as the Apostles, but without measure. 2 Second-mariages they condemn as whoredom. 3 The Bread in the Lords-Supper, they mingle with the blood of a yearling Infant.  
Daneus in his Comment upon that Book of Augustine, addeth other Heresies, out of other Authors: as for a 4. That Montanus himself was the Comforter promised to the Apostles. 5 That incestuous copulations were not to be disallowed. 6 That Enthusiasms and Revelations were rather to be followed than the Word of God. 7 That they confounded the Persons in Trinity, as did the Sabellians and Patropassiani.  
Now amongst all these Montanistick Tenants, I would entreat Mr. Bailiff to tell me (in faithfulness) which of them it is he chargeth upon me, and which he calleth, my old Montanism, wherein some think I do remain to this day.  
Or if he say, (as he doth) that he hath heard of my old Montanism, by some gracious Ministers, let him be pleased to entreat them to declare to me those Points of Montanism, which they know by me, or suspect in me. Otherwise I shall conceive, though they may be gracious Ministers that so told him, yet it was no part of their graciousness so to speak; a speech that neither savored of Truth, nor love, nor wisdom, nor faithfulness.  
But in perusing the sequel of this Discourse, I find a passage, which maketh me suspect, what Tenent of Montanism it is which he aimeth at, in Page 61. speaking of the vileness of the errors of the members of our Churches; They did (saith he) avow openly, The personal inhabitation of the Spirit in all the godly; his immediate Revelations without the Word; and these as infallible as the Scripture itself. And this (saith he) is the vilest Montanism.  
These two latter Tenants, immediate Revelations without the Word, and them as infallible as the Scripture itself, I willingly confess they are vile Montanism; though I would not say (as he doth) the vilest. For the vilest is, to hold Montanus himself to be the Holy-Ghost, or to have received the Holy-Ghost in a more full measure than the Apostles themselves.  
But for the first of these Tenants, touching the Personal Inhabitation of the Holy-Ghost in the godly, it may further be considered before it be condemned. Personal Inhabitation may be taken in a double sense: For, 1 It may hold forth no more but this, the indwelling not only of the Gifts of the Holy-Ghost, but of his Person also in the Regenerate. Or 2. it may hold forth further, the indwelling of the Person of the Holy-Ghost in the Regenerate, so fare forth as to make us one Person with himself, or to communicate with us some Personal propriety of his own.  
In this latter sense Mr. Bailiff may well be allowed to call it, vile Montanism: for the Errors are vile, and also wrapped up in Montanus his Tenants: But for the former, the indwelling not only of the Gifts, but of the Person also of the Holy-Ghost in the Regenerate, I must profess, I neither believe the Tenent to be vile nor Montanism. Not Montanism, for amongst all the Errors of Montanus or his followers, I never read this imputed to them, by such as have been the most diligent Recorders and Refuters of ancient Heresies. Neither Augustine, nor Epiphanius before him, nor Daneus after him, did ever father this Tenent upon the Montanists. Nor is the Tenent vile or erroneous, but an holy Truth of God delivered to us from the Word of Truth. As may appear,  
1. From the testimony of the Lord Jesus, Joh. 14.16, 17, 26. with Joh. 15.26. The argument standeth thus, The Comforter which proceedeth from the Father and the Son; even the Spirit of Truth, he dwelleth in the Disciples of Christ Jesus.  
The Comforter which proceedeth from the Father & the Son, even the Spirit of Truth, is the Person of the Holy-Ghost himself.  
Therefore the Person of the Holy-Ghost himself dwelleth in the Disciples of Christ Jesus.  
2. From the testimony of the Apostle Paul, 2 Tim. 1.14. That Good thing (saith he) which is committed to thee, keep, by the Holy Ghost, which dwelleth in us. That Good thing is fitly understood by our best Interpreters, Calvin and Beza, to be, not only the sound Doctrine of ●he Gospel, and his Ministerial Office, but also the excellent gifts of the Spirit of Grace furnishing him for discharge of his Office, and dispensation of the Gospel. Whence the Argument holdeth thus;  
The Holy-Ghost that keepeth the good gifts of Grace in us, dwelleth in us.  
The Holy-Ghost that keepeth the good gifts of Grace in us, is not the gifts, but the person of the Holy-Ghost distinguished from them:  
Therefore it is the Person of the Holy-Ghost, and not his gifts only that dwelleth in us.  
3. From another testimony of Paul, Rom. 8.11. If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead, devil in you; he that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your mortal bodies, by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. Whence the Argument ariseth thus,  
The Spirit that dwelleth in us, is the Spirit that raised Christ from the dead, and shall also quicken our mortal bodies;  
But it is not the Gifts and Graces of the Spirit, but the Person of the Spirit himself that raised up Christ from the dead, and shall quicken our mortal bodies:  
Therefore it is the Person of the Spirit that dwelleth in us.  
It was not the Gifts and Graces of the Spirit of Christ himself, much less our Gifts and Graces that did raise up Christ from the dead. Not the Gifts and Graces of Christ himself; for they were but created. And it was an act fare above all created power, to raise up Christ from the dead. Much less were they our Gifts and Graces that raised him up; for ours, are not only created, but imperfect, and which is more, they were not than in Being, when God raised up Christ from the dead.  
To these three Divine Testimonies (which are the ground of my faith in this point) let me add one human Testimony of a learned Divine, who was never tainted, nor taxed with Montanisme, I mean Zanchius, de Tribus Elohim Parte altera, lib. 4. cap. 1. His testimony cometh in thus: Praeter alia argumenta, quibus confirmavimus Spiritum Sanctum verum esse Deum, illud etiam non fuit minimum, quod inde deduximus, quia Fideles vocantur Templum Spiritus Sancti, 1 Cor. 6.19. and 3.16.  
Against this argument from the proof of the Godhead of the Holy-Ghost, Ochinus gave this answer amongst others: Dona Dei nobis concessa, hoc eodem nomine notari: sed non tertium suppositum, hoc est personam, a Patre & Filio distinctam, etc.  
To this Zanchius replieth: Non potest Spiritus Ochinianus nisi impudenter inficiari, quin Spiritus Sanctus, hoc est, tertia haec persona (quae etiam Spiritus Dei, & virtus Dei appellatur) habitet in Sanctis hominibus, & quin illi sint hujus Templum, qui enim in iis habitat, judicio, & voluntate praeditus est, & loquitur; Spiritus Patris vestri (inquit Christus) loquitur in vobis, Matth. 10.20. Spiritus autem Sanctus appellatur ipse Spiritus Dei, & Spiritus Christi. Spiritus igitur Sanctus, hoc est tertia Persona, habitat in Sanctis. Quod vero ait Spiritus Ochinianus, Non posse tertiam Personam habitare in Sanctis, quin ibi etiam habitent reliquae, dictum est bene. Nam etiam Christus dixit, Ego & Pater ad eum veniemus, & mansionem apud eum faciemus, joh. 14.23. Hoc vero ideo fit, quoniam omnes sunt una & eadem essentia, etc.   

SECT. 13. Of Cottons pretended Antinomianism and Familisme.  
The Dissuader proceedeth to point at (as he calleth it) another more dangerous fall of mine, which in his Margin, he nameth Mr. Cottons Antinomianisme, and Familisme: and within a few lines, his wand'ring into the horrible Errors of the Antinomians, and Familists, with his dear friend Ms. Hutchinson, so far that he came to a resolution to side with her, and to Separate from all the Churches in New-England, as legal Synagogues.  
If all this charge were true (as indeed, in all parts of it, it is false:) yet the errors of Antinomianism, and Familisme, than stirring in the Country, and condemned in the Synod at Newtowne, were not more dangerous, than the old Montanisme. I confess, the Familisme afterwards broached by Mr. Garton, and his followers, the same which Calvin in his Opuscula refuteth (in his Instructio adversus Libertinos) as Calvin judgeth it more dangerous than Popery, so I conceive it to be as dangerous as Montanisme, though I cannot say more dangerous: for both of them overthrew all principles & foundations of Christian Religion. But for the making good of this charge upon me, let Mr. Bailiff be pleased to instance in those horrible errors either of Antinomianism or Familisme, whereunto I either wandered or fell: Or let him make it appear that I came to such a Resolution, to side with my dear friend Ms. Hutchinson, and to separate from all the Churches in New-England, ●s legal Synagogues.  
Let us examine his proofs and Testimonies.  
1. The first is from the parties themselves, the followers of Ms. Hutchinson, who (saith he) boast of Mr. Cotton for their Master and Patron.  
And it is true, they professed so: just as Wightman who was burnt at Lichfield for Montanisme, (avouching himself to be the Holy Ghost) professed he had received all his grounds from Mr. Hildersham. And I confess myself, being naturally (I thank God) not suspicious, hearing no more of their Tenants from them, than what seemed to me Orthodoxal, I believed, they had been far of from such gross errors, as were bruited of them. But when some of my fellow-brethrens (the Elders of Neighbour Churches) advertised me of the evil report that went abroad of their corrupt Tenants, I desired to know what the Tenants were, which were corrupt, and which they had vented here and there, in my name. They mentioned some to me, some of those which are published in the short story of that Subject: and named also to me the persons, who had uttered the same. I therefore dealt with Mrs. Hutchinson and others of them, declaring to them the erroneousness of those Tenants, and the injury done to myself in fathering them upon me. Both she, and they utterly denied, that they held such Tenants, or that they had fathered them upon me. I returned their Answer to the Elders, who had spoken to me of them: and I inquired, if any two of them, or of their Neighbours could bear witness in this case. They answered me, they had but one witness of any corrupt Tenent: and that one, loath to be known to be an accuser of them. I replied, what course would you than advice me to take? They answered, that I could not indeed bring the matter to the Church for want of witnesses: But the best way would be, publicly and privately to bear witness against such errors. I took their counsel, and bore witness against the errors complained of, as well publicly as privately. Which when some Elders and Brethrens heard, meeting soon after with some of these Opinionists: Lo, say they, now we have heard your Teacher bearing witness openly against those very points, which you falsely father on him. No matter (say the other) what you hear him say in public: we know what he saith to us in private. This answer bred in some of my Brethrens and friends, a jealousy, that myself was a secret fomenter of this spirit of Familisme, if not leavened myself that way. Whereupon sundry Elders and Brethrens perceiving these Errors to spread, secretly and closely, they consulted among themselves, and with me what I thought of a Synod, whether it might be of use in such a case for the clearing of these Points, and the allaying of the jealousies and differences in the Country? I answered, yea. Thereupon, with consent of the Magistrates, a time, and place was appointed for a Synodical meeting, and sundry Elders were sent for, from other jurisdictions, and messengers from all the Churches in the Country to assist in this work.  
Against which time three things principally were attended for preparation.  
1. A Solemn Fast kept in all the Churches: in which it fell out, that Mr. Whelewrights Sermon was apprehended to give too much encouragement to the Opinionists. And himself hath since confessed, that being but new come into the Country, having but little acquaintance but with his kindred, and their friends, (who were many of them levened this way) he spoke some things, which if he had before discerned their Familisme, he would not have expressed himself as he did.  
The 2. thing attended to, for preparation to the Synod, was, the gathering up of all the corrupt and offensive Opinions that were scattered up and down the Country, and to commend them to Public Disquisition in the Synod: that howsoever, the Authors of them were loath to own them publicly, yet at lest, they might see them publicly tried, confuted, and condemned. The which was accordingly done in the Synod: and the Opinions with their Confutations are since printed in the short story, whence Mr. Bailiff fetcheth many Testimonies.  
The 3. thing thought needful for preparation to the Synod, was, to gather out of my Sermons to the people, and my conferences (in word and writing) with the Elders, all such opinions of mine as were conceived by some, to be erroneous: and having gathered them together, to inquire in a brotherly conference with me, how far I would own them, or how I did understand them, that so the true state of the questions in difference might appear; and withal, if there were any aguish distemper, or disaffection grown in any of our spirits amongst ourselves, it might be healed in a private brotherly way, and mutual satisfaction given and taken on all hands. Accordingly we had such a meeting in private; wherein five questions were propounded unto me, with desire of my plain and explicit answer to the same: which also upon their demand, I gave suddenly.  
Quest. 1. Whether our Union with Christ be complete before and without Faith?  
Where I gave this answer, which was taken in writing: Not without, nor before the habit (or gift) of Faith, but before the act of Faith; that is, not before Christ hath wrought Faith in us (for in uniting himself to us, he worketh Faith in us:) yet in order of nature, before our faith doth put forth itself to lay hold on him.  
For indeed I looked at Union with Christ, as equipollent to Regeneration. And look as in Generation we are in a passive way united to Adam: so in Regeneration we are united to Christ. And as the soul habet se mere passive (in the judgement of our best Divines) in Regeneration, so also in union, and by the judgement of Christ himself, who saith, without Christ abiding in us (and so united to us) we can do nothing, not bring forth any spiritual fruit at all: much less can we before union with Christ, unite ourselves to Christ, which is the greatest and most spiritual fruit of all. I was not ignorant, that some of the Schoolmen (even some Dominicans) & out of them Ferius, and some others, (even of judicious Protestants) are of opinion, that Christ doth give the Soul by the Almighty power of the auxilium efficax of his Spirit, to put forth an act of Faith, to lay hold on Christ, before he give them a habit or gift of Faith. But I could not understand how this could stand with Christ's Word, That without Christ abiding in us, we can do nothing. Which argueth, no spiritual act can be done by us without Christ habitually permanent in us. And us acute and judicious Baynes saith, (in Ephes. 1.) This were to give a man to see, without an eye to see withal: which though God can do by his Almighty power, yet as the Philosopher said of Entia: so it may be much more said of Miracula (which are extraordinary Entia) Miracula sine necessitate non sunt multiplicanda.  

QUEST. II. Whether Faith be an instrumental cause in applying Christ's righteousness to our Justification.  
Whereto I answered,  
Faith is an instrument to receive the righteousness of Christ applied to us of God, for our Justification: but not properly an instrumental cause.  
Where I understood Instrument, as the Hebrews do, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they indifferently put for Instrument, or Vessel: For Faith emptying the soul of all confidence in its own righteousness, is a fit vessel or instrument to receive the righteousness of Christ offered and imputed; and so I took Faith rather as a fit disposition of the subject to be justified, than as a proper instrumental cause of our justification: like the empty vessels of the Prophet's widow, which whilst they were empty, the oil ran forth into them (the empty vessels being fit to receive it:) But yet the empty vessels were not properly instrumental causes of the running forth of the Oil, but only fit instruments to receive it.   

QUEST. 3. Whether the Spirit of God in evidencing our Justification doth bear witness in an absolute promise of free Grace, without Qualification, or condition.  
My answer was,  
The Spirit in evidencing our Justification doth bear witness either in an absolute promise, or in a conditional: in case, the condition be understood, or applied absolutely, not attending the condition as the ground or cause of the assurance, but as the effect and consequence of it: or (as I might have added, as before) as a fit disposition of the subject to receive it.  
For I conceived, though the Spirit may evidence to us our Justification in a Qualification or condition: yet sometime the condition is not there before the promise, but freely given with the promise, as Acts 10.43, 44. where though Cornelius and his household were believers, yet many of his kindred and friends were not: who yet upon hearing the promise of Remission (or Justification) unto Faith, they received both Faith and Justification, and the evidence of both, all together: as did also the Jailor in the like sort, Act. 16.31. Sometime, though the Qualification or condition be there before, and the Spirit do bear witness to our Justification in that condition: yet the condition is not the cause either of justification, or of the evidence of it, as in Luke 7.47. Christ beareth evident witness of the Remission or Justification of Mary Magdalen, in her love to him. Nevertheless her love was not the cause, neither of her Justification, nor of the assurance of it, but an effect of both. For she expressed those evidences of her love to Christ, because her sins were forgiven her, and because herself was assured of the forgiveness of them.  
Sometimes the Qualification or condition mentioned in the promise, though it be in the soul before, yet it is not evident there before. And than the evidence of Justification springeth not from the condition, but from the Grace of the promise, clearing and evidencing both the condition and the Justification. Thus Christ applieth himself by his Spirit, to bruised Reeds, o● broken hearts. Isa. 57.15.  
Lastly, if Faith itself be meant to be the saving qualification or condition, and be also found, and that evidently in the soul to whom the Promise of Justification is made; yet the Spirit may bear witness in the Promise of Grace to the Justification of such a soul, without either the word expressing the Condition in that place, or the soul attending the Condition at that time: As when Christ said to the Woman, Luk. 7.48. Thy sins are forgiven thee, He neither mentioneth her Faith in that word, nor doth it appear, that she did reflect upon her Faith in receiving that Promise at that time. Many an Israelite stung by the fiery Serpents in the wilderness, might look up to the brazen Serpent for healing, and yet at that time not look to their eye, nor think upon their eye by which they looked. And though afterwards Christ do make express mention of the woman's Faith, to which he attributeth her salvation, (Woman, saith he, thy Faith hath saved thee, ver. 50.) Nevertheless, that Faith, though it be an Evidence of Assurance in the subject Person of his Justification: yet it is also an Effect or Consequence of the Evidence and Assurance of the Object, that is, of the grace and mercy of God clearly revealed and applied to the soul in the Promise, even to the begetting of Faith itself, and the Assurance of it. As when Christ did promise' (by the Ministry of Paul) salvation to the Jailor in Believing; the Grace of Christ clearly revealed and applied in the Promise did beget Faith in the Jailor, and the Assurance of Faith. And so his Faith, and the Assurance of it was an Effect and Consequence of the Grace and Assurance of it offered to him in the Promise. Faith though it be an Evidence of things not seen (with bodily eye;) yet it is an effect of a former Evidence, even of the light of God's Countenance shining forth through Christ in the Promise of Grace upon the soul, to the begetting of Faith, and the assurance of it.  
But howsoever, Faith being always of a self humbling efficacy, it is a fit disposition of the subject to receive comfort and assurance, Isa. 57.15.  
Calvin defineth Faith to be Divinae ergo nos benevolentiae firmam certamque cognitionem, quae gratuitae in Christo Promissionis veritate fundata, per Spiritum Sanctum & revelatur mentibus nostris & cordibus obsignatur. Institut. l. 3. c. 2. Sect. 7. Now when he cometh to expound what he meaneth by the free promise of grace in Christ, upon which this knowledge (or assurance) of Faith is founded, he maketh it to be, not conditional. And he giveth this reason, Quoniam (saith he) Conditionalis Promissio quâ ad opera nostra remittimur, non aliter vitam promittit, quàm si perspiciamus esse in nobis sitam. Ergo, nisi Fidem tremere, ac vacillare volumus, illam Salutis Promissione su●ciamus oportet, quae à Domino ultrò ac liberaliter, potiusque miseriae nostrae quàm dignitatis respectis offeratur; ibidem Sect. 29.  
But what was the occasion of this Question from any speech or writing of mine, I cannot call to mind, unless it were concerning the First evidence of justification, which is the purport of the next Question. For otherwise, if Faith and Assurance be first founded and bottomed upon a Promise of Freegrace, I never doubted, but that Sanctification or Faith, (any saving qualification) may be, (and is by the help of the Spirit) a clear and certain Evidence of Justification. So that put the Question in terminis,  
Whether the Spirit of God in Evidencing our Justification doth bear witness in an absolute Promise of Freegrace, without qualification or condition?  
I should answer plainly and roundly, The Spirit doth Evidence our Justification both ways, sometime in an absolute Promise, sometime in a conditional.   

QUEST. 4. Whether some Saving Qualification may be a first Evidence of Justification?  
Hereto I answered,  
A man may have an argument from thence, (yea, I doubt not a firm and strong argument) but not a first Evidence.  
For I conceived, Faith itself, which is an evidence of things not seen, and the first saving Qualification that doth Evidence Justification, is itself founded upon a former evidence, even the Freegrace of God in Christ, revealed in the promise of Grace, and applied to the soul effectually by the Spirit of grace both in our effectual Calling (even to the begetting of Faith) and in our Justification. Accordingly, the Apostle reckoning the Evidences that bear witness of our life in Christ, giveth the first plac● to the Spirit, before any fruit of the Spirit; There are three (saith he) that bear witness on earth, the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood, 1 Joh. 5.8. First, the Spirit, to wit, of illumination and drawing, whereby he revealeth Christ to us, and worketh Faith in us, 2 Cor. 4.6. Ephes. 1.17, 18. Joh. 6.44.45. Secondly, the water of Sanctification. And thirdly, the Blood of atonement (or pacification) pacifying the conscience.  
Calvin also is of the same judgement in this Question, in 2 Pet. 1.10. & in 1 Joh. 3.14. & 19  
And Zanchy likewise doth at large dispute this Question, and conclude it against Dr. Marbachius in his Miscellanies, in that part of it entitled, Disceptatio inter duos Theologos, from pag. 598. to pag. 605. Editionis in quarto.   

QUEST. 5. Whether Christ and his benefits be dispensed in a Covenant of Works?  
Whereunto my answer was,  
Christ is dispensed to the Elect in a Covenant of Grace: to others he may be dispensed in some sort, (to wit, in a taste of him) either in a Covenant of works, or in a Covenant of grace legally applied.  
To give an hint of the reason of mine answer. The Covenant on Mount Sinai, (wherein Christ was dispensed in sacrifices and ceremonies) though to the faithful seed of Abraham it was a Covenant of Grace, (wherein they saw Christ and his benefits graciously dispensed to them, Psal. 51, 7.) yet to the carnal seed, it seemed to me to be a Covenant of Works, to prepare them for the saving benefits of that Covenant of Grace which was formerly given to Abraham and his seed, (but neglected by them in Egypt) and afterwards renewed in the plains of Moab, Deut. chap. 29. & Chap. 30. And so Paul maketh that Covenant on Mount Sinai, to be expressly a different Covenant from that of grace, to wit, a Covenant gendering unto bondage, Gal. 4.24, 25. and the other Covenant (Deut. 30.) to be of Grace, Rom. 10.6, 7, 8. Moses also himself, having recited the Covenant on Mount Sinai (Deut. 5.) he maketh the observation of all the Commandments to be the righteousness of the people, Deut. 6.25. and their life, Levit. 18.4. And so Paul understandeth him, Rom. 10.5. Gal. 3.12. Now that Covenant which gendereth unto bondage, and holdeth forth righteousness and life upon obedience to all the Commandments, it is a Covenant of Works.  
And so have the chiefest German Divines, as well as Piscator, and Polanus, taken the Covenant on Mount Sinai to be a covenant of Works. See Piscaeor, Ezek. 16. Observat. ultima in vers. 60.62. & Polanus ibidem.   
How far there arose any consent or descent about these questions, between my Fellow-brethrens (the Elders of these churches) & myself, it is not material now to particuralrize; it is enough, that upon our clear understanding of one another's minds & judgements, and upon the due proceeding of our Church against convinced notorious errors and scandals, we have ever since (by the Grace of Christ) much amiable and comfortable Communion together in all brotherly kindness. But this short relation may suffice.  
To let Mr. Bailiff know, and all them that shall read his Book, to consider, what slender ground he had to speak of my wand'ring into the horrible Errors of the Antinomians, and Familists, and siding therein with Mistress Hutchinson, and therein to tell the world of a more dangerous fall of mine, than that of Montanisme: And withal to clear up to him, what little ground Mistress Hutchinson had, to pretend, that she was of Mr. Cottons judgement in all things: that so Mr. Bailiff may likewise observe what ground himself had to take up such a report against me, upon her testimony. Which yet will the more fully appear, if I proceed to relate a principal passage or two in the Synod, after it was assembled. It was the first act of the Synod (after Prayer and choice of Moderators) to propound the several offensive opinions, which had been dispersed up and down in the Country, and briefly to argue them, and bear witness against them. The opinions were about fourscore (more or less) which being orderly propounded and argued against, I perceived that some of the Members & Messengers of our Church, were ready to rise up, and pled in defence of sundry corrupt Opinions, which I verily thought had been far from them; especially such as concerned union with Christ before Faith, justification without Fiath, inherent righteousness, and evidencing a good estate by it at all, first or last. Whereupon assoon as I could get liberty of speech with them, Brethrens (said I) if you be of that judgement, which you pled for, all these Bastardly Opinions, which are justly offensive to the Churches, will be fathered upon Boston. They answered me again, Though they were not clear for those Opinions, which they spoke for, yet neither were they clear for condemning of them, considering the tenderness of some Consciences: I replied, if they were doubtful of the erroneousness and danger of such Opinions, they should have dealt openly with the Church at home, when they were chosen Messengers, and should have declared their judgements before the Church: as knowing such points amongst others were likely to come into agitation in the Synod: whereas now look what they speak, it is conceived by the whole Country to be the judgement of our Church.  
Hereupon some of the Messengers of our Church withdrew themselves, and appeared no more in the Synod, such as did appear, did much what forbear any prosecution of argument in such causes. But that (to my remembrance) was the first time of my discerning a real and broad difference, between the judgements of our Brethrens (who leaned to Mistress Hutchinson) and myself. And therefore to clear myself, and the sounder Members of our Church from partaking in those manifold errors there presented, I declared my judgement openly before all the assembly, That I esteemed some of the Opinions, to be blasphemous: some of them, heretical: many of them, Erroneous: and almost all of them, incommodiously expressed: as intending to except those chief, wherein I had declared mine own opinion, as before.  
But because I would deal openly and ingenuously with Mr. Bailiff, and hid nothing from him, that might fortify his accusation against me, there was some colour of my leaning to one Antinomian Tenent in one day of the Synod. For though in answer to the questions of the Elders before the Synod, I had affirmed Faith to be an instrument for the receiving the righteousness of Christ to our justification: yet for as much as some great Divines had let fall some expressions, that seemed to favour the Antinomian party in a contrary Tenent, I was desirous to hear that Point a little further ventilated, and to see the difficulties a little more fully cleared. Dr. Twisse (not suspected for an Antinomian, much less for a Familist) in his vindiciae gratiae, de electione, Parte 2. Section. 25. Numero 5. bringeth in Arminius, arguing against Mr. Perkins, thus: The righteousness of Christ wrought or performed, is not ours, as wrought or performed, but as by Faith imputed to us. Whereto the Dr. answereth,  Before Faith, this Righteousness of Christ was ours, and in the intention of God the Father, and of Christ our Mediator, was wrought for us. And because it is wrought for us, therefore God in his own time will give it us, and Grace of every kind, even Faith itself amongst the rest. But Faith coming, (which the Holy Ghost kindleth in our hearts) than at length this love of God to us in Christ, is acknowledged & perceived. Whence it is, that the Righteousness of Christ is said to be imputed to us, by Faith, because it is not discerned to be imputed to us, but by Faith: and than we are said to be justified with that kind of Justification, & absolution from sin, which breedeth peace in our Consciences. 
And this (saith he) I confirm by two arguments. 1. Because by the Righteousness of Christ, we obtain not only Remission of sins, but Faith itself, and Repentance, as it is written, God hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in Christ, Ephes. 1.3. Therefore even before Faith and Repentance, the Righteousness of Christ is applied to us, as for which we obtain Grace effectual to believe in Christ, and to repent. 2. Because Justification and absolution, as they signify an immanent act in God, are ab aeterno, etc.  
Whereto he subjoineth the Poet's ingenuous verse to the reader.  
Si quid novisti rectius istis,  
Candidus imperti; si non, bis utere mecum.  
Before Dr. Twisse, Chamier (a Divine, as free as the other from suspicion of Antinomianism) denyeth Faith to be a cause of Justification; For if it were (saith he) Justification should not be of Grace, but of us. But Faith is said to justify, not because it effecteth Justification, but because it is effected in the justified person, and requisite to be found in him. De Fide libr. 13. cap. 6. And to the same purpose, De Justificatione, libr. 22. cap. 12. he contendeth, that Faith as it doth not merit, nor bring Justification, so neither doth it (impetrare) obtain it. For if it were so, than tum ratione, tum tempore Fides praecederet Justificationem, Faith should go before Justification, both in nature and time: Which (saith he) in no sort may be granted. For Faith is itself a part of Sanctification; but there is no Sanctification, but after Justification, quae & re, & naturâ prior est, which both in the thing itself, and in nature is before it.  
To the like purpose doth Mr. Pemble deliver his judgement in his Book of the Nature and Properties of Grace and Faith, Page 24. 26. of his Edition in Folio.  
The Discrepance of all these Divines from the received expressions of the most, gave just occasion, why in such an Assembly, the judgement of sundry acute and judicious Elders, might be enquired. Accordingly, in one day of their dispute in the Synod (with Mr. Whelewright, if I forget not) I interposed such a word as this, God may be said to justify me before the habit, or act of Faith, and the habit is the effect of my Justification, intending the same sense, as hath been expressed out of those Divines: upon which, the next day was taken up in disputing and arguing that Point with me. And when I saw their apprehensions, that they were suitable to Scripture phrase, and the contrary difficulties might be removed sano sensu, I the next morning did of myself freely declare to them publicly, my consent with them in the point, which (as they professed) they gladly accepted.  
Now upon all this relation (which is the substance of the whole Truth in this cause) I desire Mr. Bailiff might consider what ground he had, either to report me to the World as sometimes dangerously fallen into the horrible Errors of Antinomianism, and Familisme: or to take Ms. Hutchinsons' report in this cause, That she was of Mr. Cottons judgement in all things. Let him please to read the short story of the Errors and heresies, for which she was admonished publicly in Boston Church, and compare them with the Tenants of mine now mentioned, and let him judge of himself, whether she was of Mr. Cottons judgement in all things.  
I would not have enlarged myself so much, either to clear her testimony, or to elevate it, were it not to take of some scruples and surmises in Mr. Bailiff of some dangerous guilt in me of Antinomian, and Familisticall errors, which he thinks cannot be avoided by what he collecteth from other testimonies, as well as hers which may fully be prevented and avoided by this relation of the true state of things.  
But before I leave speech of her, let me speak a word to Mr. Bailiff of the Epithet he is pleased to give her, when he styleth her, my dear friend, with whom I resolved to side and separate from all the Churches in New-England, as Legal Churches.  
At her first coming she was well respected and esteemed of me, not only because herself and her family were well beloved in England at Allford in Lincolnshire (not far beyond Boston:) nor only because she with her family came over hither (as was said) for conscience sake: but chief for that I heard, she did much good in our Town, in woman's meeting at Childbirth-Travells, wherein she was not only skilful and helpful, but readily fell into good discourse with the women about their spiritual estates: And therein cleared it unto them, That the soul lying under a Spirit of Bondage, might see and sensibly feel the heinous guilt, and deep desert of sin, and thereby not only undergo affliction of Spirit but also receive both restraining, and constraining Grace likewise, (in some measure:) restraining from all known evil (both courses, and companies) (at lest for a season) and constraining to all known duties, as secret Prayer, Family Exercises, Conscience of Sabbaths, Reverence of Ministers, Frequenting of Sermons, Diligence in calling, honesty in dealing and the like: yea and that the Soul might found some tastes and flashes of spiritual comfort in this estate, and yet never see or feel the need of Christ, much less attain any saving Union, or Communion with him, being no more but Legal work, even what the Law, and the Spirit of bondage (breathing in it) might reach unto. By which means many of the women (and by them their husbands) were convinced, that they had gone on in a Covenant of Works, and were much shaken and humbled thereby, and brought to inquire more seriously after the Lord Jesus Christ, without whom all their Gifts and Graces would prove but common, and their duties but legal, and in the end wizzen and vanish. All this was well (as is reported truly, page 31. of her Story) and suited with the public Ministry, which had gone along in the same way, so as these private conferences did well tend to water the seeds publicly sown. Whereupon all the faithful embraced her conference, and blessed God for her fruitful discourses. And many whose spiritual estates were not so safely laid, yet were hereby helped and awakened to discover their sandy foundations, and to seek for better establishment in Christ: which caused them also to bless the Lord for the good success, which appeared to them by this discovery.  
Hitherto therefore she wrought with God, and with the Ministers, the work of the Lord. No marvel therefore if at that time, she found loving and dear respect both from our Church-Elders and Brethrens, and so from myself also amongst the rest.  
Afterwards, it is true, she turned aside not only to corrupt opinions, but to  generally the Elders of the churches, (though of them she esteemed best of Mr. Shepheard:) and for myself, (in the repetitions of Sermons in her house) what she repeated and confirmed, was accounted sound, what she omitted, was accounted Apocrypha. This change of hers was long hid from me: and much longer the evidence of it, by any two clear witnesses. I sent some Sisters of the Church on purpose to her Repetitions, that I might know the truth: but when she discerned any such present, no speech fell from her, that could be much excepted against. But further discourse about her course is not pertinent to the present business. But by this Mr. Bailiff may discern, how fare Ms. Hutchinson was dear unto me, and if he speak of her as my dear friend, till she turned aside, I refuse it not.  
But yet thus much I must profess to him, That in the times of her best acceptance, she was not so dear unto me, but that (by the help of Christ) I dealt faithfully with her about her spiritual estate. There things I told her, made her spiritual estate unclear to me.  1. That her Faith was not begotten nor (by her relation) scarce at any time strengthened, by public Ministry, but by private Meditations, or Revelations only. 
2. That she clearly discerned her Justification (as she professed:) but little or nothing at all, her Sanctification: though (she said) she believed, such a thing there was by plain Scripture.  
3. That she was more sharply censorious of other men's spiritual estates and hearts, than the servants of God are want to be, who are more taken up with judging of themselves before the Lord, than of others.  Now a word of that other passage, in Mr. Baylies speech, touching my resolution to side with Ms. Hutchinson, and to separate from all the Churches of New-England, as legal Synagogues 
The truth is, I did intended to remove, but not to Separate; much less with Ms. Hutchinson, and lest of all from all the Churches of New-England: and yet less than the lest of all, to separate from them, as legal Synagogues.  
The occasion of my intent of removal was this. After the banishment of Ms. Hutchinson and sundry others by occasion of her, the general court made an order, that none should be received to abide as Inhabitants in this Jurisdiction, unless they were allowed under the hand of the Governor, or two Assistants. The Assistants are our Magistrates. When this Law came to be put in ure, I was informed that some godly passengers who hither arrived out of England, were refused to sit down amongst us, because (upon trial) they held forth such an union with Christ by the Spirit giving Faith, as did precede the acting of Faith upon Christ: and such an evidence of that union, by the favour of God shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, as did precede the seeing (though not the being) of Sanctification.  
This took the deeper impression upon me, because I saw by this means, we should receive no more Members into our Church, but such as must profess themselves of a contrary judgement to what I believed to be a Truth. Besides I was informed, that it was the judgement of some of place, in the Country, that such a Doctrine of Union, and evidencing of Union, as was held forth by me, was the Trojan Horse, out of which all the erroneous Opinions and differences of the Country did issue forth.  
Hereupon, fearing this might in time breed a renewal of Parozysmes, I called to mind the intent of my coming hither, which was, not to disturb, but to edify the Churches here: and therefore began to entertain thoughts rather of peaceable removal than of offensive continuance. At the same time there was brought to me a writing, subscribed with about threescore hands to encourage me to removal, and offering their readiness to remove with me into some other part of this Country.  
I considered, If we removed, it would be matter of much various construction amongst such as knew us, both in Old-England, and New; and I was loath to do any thing, (especially of importance) but what I might give account of before God, and his people; I took advice therefore of some friends here, especially Mr. Davenport, and resolved, first to clear the certainty of the grounds of the information given me of the rejections of those godly persons (of whom I had heard) for their judgement's sake in those points. 2. To see if my continuance here would certainly, or probably breed any further offensive agitation: And 3. If both those things were found clearly, than to take opportunity with common consent to remove to Quinipya●k whereto at that time a door was opened.  
But when I came to inquire the certainty of these informations, in conference with some of our chief Magistrates and others, I found, though there had speech been about such points between themselves, and some passengers: yet their refusal of such passengers was not upon those points, but (as I remember) upon denial of inherent righteousness in believers, and of any evidence of a good estate from thence, first or last. Withal, they declared to me their minds touching such points of Union, or evidencing of Union, which I had taught, that they did not look at them to be of such Fundamental concernment either to civil or Church-Peace, as needed to occasion any distance in heart, (much less in place) amongst godly brethrens. Which when I heard from them, and found upon search, the misinformations given me, were but misprisions, I than laid down all thoughts of removal, and sat down satisfied in my abode amongst them, and have so continued (by the help of God) to this day. By all this may appear the truth of what I said, that though I had thoughts of removal, yet not with Ms. Hutchinson, she being gone to Road Island, but I intending Quinipyack. Much less had I any thoughts of Separation from all the Churches of New-England: for the Churches in Quinipiack are in New-England. And those Churches at the Bay (amongst whom I lived) It was far from my thoughts to separate from them, whom I ever truly honoured as the holy Spouses of Jesus Christ. Nor did I ever look at such Points, as any just ground of Separation from any Church, (so much as in place, much less in Communion:) not nor any just ground of removal from them, unless a man were compelled to profess contrary to his judgement. And lest of all durst I turn my back upon such Churches as Legal Synagogues, who do all of us hold Union with Christ, and evidencing of Union by the same Spirit, and the same Faith and the same holiness: though some may conceive the Union wrought in giving the habit, and others rather refer it to the act: and some may give the second place to that, whereto others give the first.  
It was therefore too much credulity in Mr. Bailiff, either to take up the former testimony from Ms. Hutchinson, or this latter from Mr. Williams: though if both of them had joined in one and the same Testimony, (which they do not) yet the Testimony of two excommunicate Persons doth not make up idoneum Testimonium in Ecclesiastical causes.  
Not? Saith Mr. Bailiff, if I mistake not the humour of the man, (Mr. Williams he meaneth) he is very unwilling to report a lie of his greatest enemy.  
I look not at myself, as his greatest, or lest, or any enemy at all. I do not know, that I did ever walk towards him either in the affection, or action of an enemy, notwithstanding the provoking injuries, and indignities he hath put upon me.  
Nor would I call it any man's humour (as Mr. Bailiff calleth it, Mr. Williams his humour) to be very unwilling to report a lie of his greatest enemy.  
But this I say, Mr. Williams is too too credulous of surmises and reports brought to him, and too too confident in divulging of them. Which if Mr. Bailiff know not, he may (at his leisure, if he think it worth the while) peruse the Reply, I have made to his answer of my Letter, as also my answer to his bloody Tenent.  
But Mr. Bailiff giveth the more credit to Mr. William's his Testimony, because Mr. Williams saith in his examination of my ●etter, How could I possibly (saith he) be ignorant of their estate, when being from first to last in fellowship with them, a Officer amongst them, had private and public agitation concerning their Estate, with all, or most of their Ministers?  
The answer is very easy both to Mr. Williams, and Mr. Bailiff too, that Mr. Williams speaketh of the times before his banishment: than indeed he had some fellowship with us, and might have had more, but that he suspected all the Statos conventus of the Elders to be unwarrantable, and such as might in time make way to a Presbyterial government. But this Testimony, which he giveth about my nearness to Separation from these Churches, was many years after his banishment from us, when he was in no fellowship with us, sacred nor civil, nor came any whit near any private or public agitation amongst us, nor could have any intelligence of our affairs, but by report and fame, which is tam ficti pravique tenax, quam nuncia veri, and is indeed in this point, most false.  But yet (saith Mr. Bailiff) the truth of this horrible fall (of Mr. Cotton) if you will not take it, neither from the followers of Ms. Hutchinson, nor from the Testimony of Mr. Williams: yet we may not reject the witness of Mr. Winthrop, and of Mr. Wells in their printed relations of the Schisms there. 
Both these, albeit, with all care and study, they endeavour to save Mr. Cottons credit: yet they let the truth of Mr. Cottons Seduction fall from their Pens in so clear terms, as cannot be avoided: yea so clear, as no Art will get Mr. Cotton cleared.  
Notwithstanding all this confident charge of Mr. Bailiff, there will be no need at all of any Art to clear Mr. Cotton, from seduction into any such horrible fall, the naked truth (by the help of Christ) will clear both itself, and him. The Testimonies of Mr. Winthrop, and Mr. Wells, are all delivered (as it seemeth) in the short Story. There  
In the Preface, page 7. It is said, By this time, they had to patronise them, some of the Magistrates, and some men eminent for Religion, Parts and Wit.  
Answ. 1. This were something, if there were no more men eminent for Religion, Parts and Wit, in the Country but myself, who profess no eminency in any of these in respect of many of my Brethrens. But if I were eminent, the testimony concludeth not. Let not Art judge, whether the conclusion will follow from both the premises particular: but let common sense judge of such men, as than lived in the Country, whether there were not many eminent persons for Religion, Parts, and Wit, who did patronise them, though I had been out of the Country.  
2. I willingly confess, that I myself, though I did not patronise them, yet I did countenance them (in my measure) whilst they held forth (to my knowledge) no more than I have formerly delivered of my own Tenants: which yet I hope he will not again tax, as an horrible fall into Antinomianism and Familism. When their Errors were brought to me, I bore public witness against them, even before I was fully persuaded that those persons were guilty of them.  
His next Testimony (which he quoteth from page 25. of the short Story) the former part of it concerneth Mr. Whelewright, and not me: though I must confess I do not know how it can be collected from Mr. Whelewrights doctrine, unless it were by a forestalled misapprehension and mis-application of those hearers, who were leavened with corrupt Opinions. The latter part of the testimony, That the former Governor never stirred out, but attended by the Sergeants with Halberds or Carrabines, but the present Governor was neglected: I do not remember, that ceremony was any more than once neglected: and when I heard it, I bore witness against it. And they excused their former observance, by the eminency of the person. But sure I am, the present Governor (as he well deserveth all honour from this Peopole, so) he is seldom or never seen in public, but in like sort attended with Halberds or Carrabines.  
Next, he allegeth a testimony from the Court, which (it is likely) was delivered by Mr. Winthrop, being than Governor, page 35. of the short Story: They soon profited so well, as in a few months, they outwent their Teacher.  
Answ. This testimony is so far from taxing me of any horrible fall, that it clearly acquiteth me from the fellowship thereof. For if they outwent their Teacher, as the Court said (and said truly:) than I went not along with them in their Tenants. And Teacher I was called, and their Teacher, as being called to that Office in that Church, whereof many of them were Members.  
The next testimony (from page 33. of the story) expresseth, That upon the countenance it took from some eminent Persons, her Opinions began to hold up their heads in Courts of Justice.  
Answ. This might indeed argue, that some Magistrates leaned more or less to that way: but it reacheth not me, who am seldom present at any Courts, but when with other Elders I am sent for. And let it not be forgotten, what I related above, that many held with those Opinionists (as they were called) when they knew of no other opinions held forth by them, but what was publicly taught in our Church: but after they were discovered to overgo not so much their Teachers, as the truth, and that so evidently, as could clearly be convinced by the testimony of two or three witnesses, they were soon forsaken by those, who esteemed better of them before.  
His next testimony is from the story page 32.  It was a wonder, upon what a sudden, the whole Church of Boston (some few excepted) were become her new Converts, and infected with her Opinions. 
And Preface page 7. most of the Seducers lived in the Church of Boston.  
Answ. That most of the Church of Boston consented with Ms. Hutchinson, (whilst she openly held forth not more, than what was publicly taught) is true; but nothing to prove Mr. Cottons horrible fall, for after she fell into any horrible, or evident erors, it may clearly appear, the whole Church were not become her canverts, by this undeniable evidence, that the whole body of the Church (except her own son) consented with one accord, to the public censure of her, by admonition first, and excommunication after.  
But (saith Mr. Bailiff) None of these erroneous persons were ever called to accounted by the Presbytery of that Church, till after the Assembly, though the Pastor of the Church, Mr. Wilson was always exceeding zealous against them.  
Answ. 1. Mr. Bailiff is mistaken, when he saith, Mr. Wilson was always exceeding zealous against them. For the whole Church will bear him witness, he was a long time full of much forbearance towards them, and thought well of them, and bore witness to the ways of free Grace in such manner, as testified his good will to them and the Truth. Afterwards in some private conference, which one or more of them had with him, and (our beloved Sister) his Wife, he discerned some more rottenness in them, and their way, than he suspected before: And after that time indeed, he grew more zealous against them, but the occasion of the offence was private, and (for a good space) unknown both to me and the Church.  
2. But why they were not called to accounted by the Presbytery of the Church, the reason was evident: because their gross errors were not confirmed into us, by two or three witnesses. And this I can truly profess, That when the Elders of other Churches acquainted me with some of their Errors, (even when the noise of them was spread far and near:) yet they acknowledged, the Erroneous persons were so cautious, that they would never vent any gross Errors before two witnesses. And this I can further truly avouch, that myself dealt sadly and seriously with some chief leaders of them, both by word, and writing to recover them from the Error of their way: which though they would argue for, yet they would ever excuse themselves from settling upon any such things. I dealt also with others (whom I began to suspect might be leavened by their Leaders) and earnestly charged them to beware what Tenants they received from them, jest by that means they might be corrupted themselves, and their Leaders hardened. But they would not be known to me, that they drunk in any such dregss, as afterwards appeared.  
His next testimony is taken from Ms. Hutchinsons' speech in the open Court, Preferring my Ministry in holding forth free Grace, above some, or most of the other Elders. But of the invalidity of her testimony in these things I have spoken, (I suppose) enough above. An evil Spirit (which sometimes breatheth both in good and bad persons,) may give a glorious testimony to some servants of God, not so much to honour them, or their doctrine, as either to cover themselves under their shadow, or else (but that was not her aim) to bring them and their Doctrine into suspicion, and trouble, as the Spirit of the Pythonesse did to Paul and Silas, Act. 16, 17, to 20. That speech of hers, I bore witness against it, as prejudicial and injurious both to them and me.  
Another testimony he allegeth out of the Story, Page 50. That all the Ministers consented in bearing some witness against Mr. Whelewright, except their Brother the Teacher of Boston.  
Answ. The Story relateth those words, as the speech of the Elders; that they speak of me, as their Brother, to wit, the brother of the Elders, jest any should misconceive of their speech, as ranking me in a Brotherhood with erroneous persons.  
That I did not consent with the rest of my Brethrens (the Elders) in drawing the inference out of Mr. Whelewrights Sermon, which they (being required) presented to the Court, I had a twofold reason for it. 1. Because I was not present with them, when they searched Mr. Whelewrights Sermon, and gathered that inference from it.  
2 Because I could not speak it of mine own knowledge, That the Elders of the Country did walk in or teach such a way of Salvation, and evidencing thereof, as Mr. Whelewright describedeth, and accounteth to be a Covenant of Works.  
They knew what themselves taught in that point, better than I. The Elders might testify what they knew: I could not testify, what I knew not. But it seemeth any testimonies will serve turn, when such as these are thought unavoidable, to lay me under the guilt of an horrible fall.  
Yet one more remaineth, from page 21. That albeit the Assembly of the Churches had confuted and condemned most of these new opinions, and Mr. Cotton had in public view consented with the rest: yet the leaders in those Erroneous ways stood still to maintain their New Light. Mr. Whelewright also continued his Preaching, and Ms. Hutchinson her wont meetings: and much offence was still given by her, and others in going out from the Pastor's Exercise.  
Answ. 1. As the Assembly of the Churches confuted and condemned those Errors, so I will not say, That the motion of confuting them (as I remember) arose from myself. And myself also had an hand in confuting such of them, as the Elders committed to my hand, as themselves took several likewise tasks, none of us confuted all. My consent to the confutation, I have expressed above, and in what sense. What I did in public view (as the Story expresseth it) I spoke before the Lord, and from the truth of my heart.  
That notwithstanding this Act of the Assembly against the Errors, the leaders still stood to maintain their way, it was because the Assembly did not fasten these Errors upon any Persons either in our own, or other Churches. And what corrupt opinions were maintained by our Members, it was done in private, and not before such witnesses, as might reach to public conviction.  
Mr. Whelewrights continuance in his preaching, was 8. or 9 mile's distance from us. And having been put into that place before by the Church, whilst the Farmers there belonged to our Church, (which by reason of the distance, we soon after dismissed into a Church-estate amongst themselves) we that were Elders could not (if we would) discharge him from that work, without the consent of the Church. But though he gave some offence in some passages at the Assembly, (which he since upon further conference and consideration retracted:) yet neither the Church, nor myself (notwithstanding those unsafe expressions) did ever look at him, either as an Antinomian or Familist. Many of us knew that he had taken good pains against both, and in that very place, where he was want to preach; insomuch that one of his hearers (who since joined to Mr. Gortons' society) openly contested against his doctrine as false and Antichristian. And when Mr. Whelewright was put out of this Country (though he be since restored) yet if he had cleaved to the Errors which Ms. Hutchinsons company fell into, he would never have refused their earnest invitation and call of him, to Minister unto them. They sent to him, and urged him much to come to them, to a far richer soil, and richer company than where he lived: yet he constantly refused, and upon that very ground, because of the corruption of their judgements: Professing often, whilst they pleaded for the Covenant of Grace, they took away the Grace of the Covenant.  
Ms. Hutchinsons' continuance of her weekly meetings we could not proceed to the suppression thereof, with consent of the Church, before we received the conviction of her personal Errors, which she still closely carried, till after her civil censure. And than she declared herself more plainly, and witnesses arose more fully, and the Church proceeded against her accordingly.  
The going of herself and others out of the Congregation when our Pastor began to Exercise, though many feared it was a turning their backs upon his Ministry: yet the most of them were women, and they pretended many excuses for their going out, which it was not easy to convince of falsehood in them, or of their contempt of him.  
But in fine, when her Antinomian and Familisticall Errors were held forth by her before sufficient witnesses, our Church (as I said before) proceeded without delay, first, to admonish her according to the rule, Tit. 3.10, 11. Afterwards when upon serious pains taken with her, Mr. Davenport, and myself (as we thought) had convinced her of her erroneous ways in judgement and practice, so as that under her hand, she presented a Recantation before the whole Church, (indeed before many Churches than assembled at Boston) yet withal, (after some passages of speech) Professing that she never was of any other judgement, than what she now held forth, so many witnesses forthwith risen up to convince the contrary, that with common consent both of the Elders and Brethrens of our Church, she was cast out of our Communion.  
And now that (by the help of Christ) I have perused all the testimonies, which Mr. Bailiff hath alleged to convince me of an horrible fall into Antinomianism, and Familism, I desire him in the fear of God to consider, whether any or all these testimonies severally or jointly, will amount to make good such grievous scandals, as he hath charged upon me. Which if they neither will, nor can reach unto, let him remember his promise in his Epistle Dedicatory, That in all which he hath said over and above (just testimony) he will undertake to give ample satisfaction, wherein so ever he hath given the lest offence to any. Mean while the Lord lay not this sin to his charge.   

SECT. 14. Of Cottons humiliation upon his former fall, as is reported by Mr. Bailiff.  
But yet let me add a word more, to a word of Mr. Baylies in his entrance of this discourse of my Antinomianism, and Familism, which may else leave an inpression upon the minds of some Reader, as if I had acknowledged this my dangerous fall, and had been much humbled for it.  
This other more dangerous fall (saith he) as it hath already much humbled his Spirit, and opened his ear to instruction, and I trust will not leave working, till it have brought him yet nearer to his Brethrens: so to the world's end, it cannot but be a matter of fear and trembling to all, who shall know it, and of abundant caution, to be very wary of receiving any singularity from his hand, without due trial.  
Answ. 1. Suppose all this were true in terminis, as Mr. Bailiff hath expressed it, yet this were no impeachment at all to the doctrine and practice of that (which he calleth) our Independent Church way; nor is it any just ground of caution to be wary of receiving my testimony to it. Peter's dangerous and dreadful fall into the denial of Christ, (though he seemed to be a pillar) was no impeachment, but advancement to Christianity. And if my fall were so dangerous, walking in this Churchway, and stumbling so foully in it, the greater Grace and witness from heaven was upon his Churches in this way, who by the blessing of God were instruments of recovering me out of this fall, even by a consultatory conference in a Synod, which did not assume to themselves any power of Church-censures. Let me be accounted to have fallen, and to have fallen (as Mr. Bailiff representeth it) horribly, so that the truth and ways of Christ may stand and found free passage.  
Neither is this fall of mine such a just ground of caution (as he would make it) unto any, to be very wary of receiving my testimony to this Church way. For the way is no way of singularity from my hand, but that which the body of the rest of my Brethrens, and of the Churches in this Country do walk in with me.  
Answ. 2. But yet, let not Mr. Baily make further speech or use of my humiliation, than was performed, or intended by me. For God hath not given me to this day (upon my best search) to discern any such dangerous fall into Antinomianisme, or Familisme, as either hath, or might much humble my spirit.  
It is true, my spirit had much cause to be humbled, (and so through mercy it was) upon many just occasions at that time. As first, that so many Erroneous and Heretical opinions should be broached in the Country, and carried on with such Arrogancy, and censoriousness, and guile of spirit.  
Secondly, That the principal offenders in this kind were members of our own Church, and some of them such as had near relation to myself.  
Thirdly, that myself should be so sleepy and invigilant, as that these (not Tares only, but Briers) should be sown in our Field, and myself not discern them, till sundry persons up and down the Country were leavened by them.  
Fourthly, that such as endeavoured the healing of these distempers, did seem to me to be transported with more jealousies, and heats, and paroxysmes of spirit, than would well stand with brotherly love, or the rule of the Gospel.  
The bitter fruits whereof do remain to this day, in the Letters sent over that year from hence to England. Whence also it came to pass finally, that in the course taken for the cleansing of God's Field, it seemed to me, that some good Wheat was plucked up with the Tares, some simple hearted honest men, and some truths of God, fared the worse for the resemblance which the tares bore to them.  
Upon all which grounds, myself with our whole Church thought it needful to set a day apart for public humiliation before the Lord, wherein these and the like, both in Prayer and Preaching, were opened more at large before the Lord and his people.  
But all this will not amount to make good Mr. Baylies word, That my dangerous fall into Antinomianism and Familisme hath much humbled my Spirit.  
Nor can I say (as he doth) that it hath opened mine ears to instruction. For I do not know, that they have been shut to it, when I discerned the Spirit, and Word of truth breathing in it.  
Nor can I say after him, That the humbling of my spirit for those dangerous errors, will not leave working till it have brought me yet nearer to my brethrens.  
For though I bless the Lord, who hath brought me nearer to my brethrens, and them also nearer to me, which I trust will still grow whilst ourselves grow (in all the duties of brotherly love, wherein we have much sweet and frequent intercourse:) yet I do not interpret this as the fruit of my spirits humiliation for my Antinomy, and Familisme: but as the fruit of our clearer apprehension, both of the cause and of the state of our differences, and of our joint consent and concurrence in bearing witness against the common heresies, and errors of Antinomianism, and Familisme, which disturbed us all.  
But Mr. Baily as he began his discourse of my dangerous fall with relation of my humiliation for it: so he shutteth it up, pag. 58. with a like close of my grief of mind, and confusion for it.  
I have been informed (saith he) by a gracious Preacher who was present at the Synod in New-England, that all the Brethrens there, being exceedingly scandalised with Mr. Cottons carriage, in Mistress Hutchinsons' process, did so fare discountenance, and so severely admonish him, that he was thereby brought to the greatest shame, confusion and grief of mind, that ever in all his life he had endured.  
Answ. 1. I conceive it is not allowable in Presbyterial discipline, (sure I am, not in congregational) that an accusation shall be received against an Elder under one witness, though he gracious and a Preacher: especially when this gracious Preacher is nameless, and his testimony hovereth in generalities, without instance in particular offences: as That all the Brethrens were exceedingly scandalised with Mr. Cottons carriage in Mistress Hutchinsons' process, but not expressing what carriage, nor what process, nor wherein they were scandalised.  
And that all the Brethrens did so far discountenance him, and severely admonish him, as that he was thereby brought to the greatest shame, and confusion, and grief of mind, that ever in all his life he endured. But no mention for what offence they did so severely admonish him, nor wherein they did so fare discountenance him.  
Such words of infamy, and reproach may pass for Table talk, (which yet moral Philosophy would not approve:) but surely in orderly Church-Discipline, such dealing could not pass without just reproof, unless there were too much prejudice or partiality, the rule is plain and obvious, and not now the first time violated in the Dissuasive, 2 Tim. 5.19.  
Answ. 2. I must (as justly I may) protest against that testimony, not only as violating the rule of Love, but of Truth also. For,  
1. It is untrue, that all the Brethrens were scandalised with my carriage, much less exceedingly scandalised at the Synod, or in any process about Ms. Hutchinson. There were sundry godly brethrens otherwise minded, and otherwise affected.  
2. It is untrue also, that such as were scandalised, did so severely admonish me, or discountenance me; for I can neither call to mind any such deep discountenance, nor any such severe admonition of Brethrens, and yet I had reason to know it, and to remember it well, as well as any Brother at the Synod: the matter so nearly concerning myself, and more nearly and deeply, than any man else.  
3. It is most untrue, that I was so far discountenanced, and so severely admonished, as that I was brought to the greatest shame, confusion and grief of mind, that ever in all my life I had endured.  
I should have little comfort in my own spirit, to look either God or man in the face, if the discountenance or admonition of men (especially for such carriage) were the greatest shame, and confusion, and grief of mind, that ever in all my life I had endured. The rebukes of God upon the soul for sin will put a man to far greater shame, and confusion and grief of mind, than any discountenance, or admonition from Brethrens, (especially for such offences) Psal. 76.7. But whatsoever discountenance, or disrespect I met withal, from one hand or other, till the true state of my judgement, and carriage was clearly manifested, I have long ago left with the Lord: But I conceive I have met with more hard measure in Letters to England, and in ungrounded reports there, than ever I found from the admonition, or discountenance of any brethrens here.   

SECT. 15. Of the shameful absurdities said to be found in the way of Independency: notwithstanding the great helps, to prevent, or cover it: and first, of those helps.  
Mr. Bailiff now undertaketh to prove that which he calleth a broad Assertion, and well may he so call it: for it reacheth far beyond all dimensions of truth. His assertion is, That the way (which he calleth) Independency hath in a few years (less than one week of years) flown out into more shameful absurdities, than the Brownists to this day, in all their 50. year's trial have stumbled upon.  
How will Mr. Bailiff (think you) make this good?  
His affirmation, that the way of the Brownism, and Independency (as he styleth them) are both of them really one and the same, because he saith, it will appear hereafter, I refer it therefore to his place.  
But before he cometh to make his broad assertion good, yea and (as he promiseth) palpable, he maketh it also by the way, admirable, and that many ways.  
1. In that the Independency hath been brought to the utmost pitch of perfection, which the wit, and industry of its best Patrons were able to attain: and hath been fenced with the Laws of gracious Magistrates, who were at our absolute devotion, and yet hath flown out, etc.  
Answ. 1. We that judge that way (which he calleth Independency) to be of God, should accounted it blasphemy in ourselves to accept such a style put upon us, as to be the best Patrons of it. We do verily believe, that though ourselves, all of us, should employ our best wits and industry to join with Mr. Bailiff to subvert and deface it: yet the Lord Jesus would show himself a Patron to maintain his own Institutions, though with the confusion of the faces, and erterprises of us all. The Word which hath gone out of his mouth for the Government and ordering of his Church till his second appearing, he himself as he hath spoken it, will also show it forth in his times, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, 1 Tim. 6.14, 15.  
Answ. 2. We cannot but with thankfulness acknowledge the goodness of God in our gracious Magistrates, and their assistance to us in the work of the Lord: But when Mr. Bailiff maketh them to be at our absolute dev●●ion, his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is too too injurious in debasing them, and (in their eyes) advancing us. For neither are they devoted to us at all, nor much less absolutely. Though they sometimes consult with us in matters of conscience; yet they take our counsel not further than they see it cleared from the Word. And besides, it is too vast an advancement of us, to make them absolutely of our devotion. For devotion in matters of Religion, (or as Thomas speaketh, in iis quae ad Dei cultum, & famulatum pertinent) is a divine worship due to God only; in as much that Aquinas taketh it to be too high a worship to be terminated in Saints, 22 ae. Quest. 82. Art. 2. And yet he alloweth more divine worship to Saints, than any orthodox protestant can excuse from Idolatry.  
Again secondly, It may seem to make the palpableness of our outflowing the more admirable, in that (as he saith) much of our way is yet in the dark.  
Thirdly, In that none of ourselves have proclaimed our discords to our own shame.  
Fourthly, That none who have fallen from us, have of purpose put pen to Paper, to inform the world of our ways.  
Fiftly, That none of us have been willing to reply to any of the books written against us, etc.  
Answ. It were much I confess, if we had all these advantages of concealment which he mentioneth, and yet nevertheless so many, and so shameful absurdities of ou●s should fall out in so short a time, and become to palpable as Mr. Baily proclaimeth them. But the truth is, nei●her have we had those advantages, (he speaketh of:) but the contrary disadvantages, nor yet do we fear, that he will be able to found such absurdities to have fallen out in our way, much less so shameful.  
For first, the way of the New English Churches is not in the dark, but published to the view of the world, in the book so entitled (refuted by Mr. Rutherford:) as also in the Apology of these Churches, in the Covenant, in the Answer to 32. Questions; in another answer to 9 Questions; in the answer to Mr. Herle, and to Mr. Rathbone. Some of our most populous Churches do no Church Act, not not of discipline, but in the presence of the whole Town, (non-members, as well as members) so many of them as are pleased to be present. Ways of truth seek no corners; if any Church admonish a brother privately, it is because his offence is not known to non-members.  
Again, if in our discords, none of us have proclaimed our shame, whence hath Mr. Baily gathered all our shameful absurdities? The short story, (the greatest storehouse of his testimonies) what is it, but a fruit of our discords? Besides, if none that have fallen from us, have of purpose put pen to Paper to inform the world of our ways, what mean the bleat of Plain● dealing, and Mr. William's his Invectives against us, which yield a further supply to Mr. Bailies testimonies?  
Moreover, if none of us have been willing to reply to the Books written against us, how come it to pass that Mr. Hooker hath written a large answer to Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Davenpor● to Mr. Paget, Mr. Mader to Mr. Rathbone, Mr. Shepard and Mr. Allen to Mr. Ball, Mr. Norton in Latin to Mr. Appollonii; myself to Mr. Williams, both to his examination of my Letter, and to his bloody Tenent? If any of these have miscarried by the way, or in England have met with a suppression for an impression, it cannot be said, that none of us have been willing to reply to the Books written against us, nor that we have been wanting in endeavours, according as the Lord hath vouchsafed us means and opportunity.  
If still there be other Books written against us, unto which no Reply is yet made, it may be considered, our labourers (in that kind) are few, our hands feeble, our times took up with the duties of our calling, helps to ease us are wanting, Domestical Questions are not wanting, and many times Books are extant against us some years before they come to our hands. And yet let not Mr. Baily take our silence for a consent to what is written against us: or for a sign of our fear to lay open the true state of our cause, or the nakedness of our way, (as it seemeth to him:) but let him consider, that if many Books be written by several hands, of several subjects against any of us, he whom it concerneth, cannot Reply to them all at once, but to one after another, as the Lord giveth help and opportunity.   

SECT. 16. Of the first absurdity said to be found in our way of Independency.  But what may be those shameful absurdities, which in less than one week of years, we have flown out into more than (those he calleth) Brownists in 50. years of their trial. 
The fruits of our Church way, (saith he) are first; the holding out of all our Churches and Christian Congregation many thousands of People, who in former time have been reputed in Old England very good Christians.  
And this (saith he) seemeth a grievous absurdity, a great dishonour to God, and cruelty against men to spoil so many thousand Christians, whom they dare not deny to be truly religious of all the privileges of the Church, either to themselves, or to their children, or put them into the condition of Pagans', etc.  
Answ. 1. If all this were true, yet it is no greater an absurdity than that wherein those whom he calleth Brownists, have not only stumbled upon, but professedly walked in: yea it may be, denying Church Communion to as many Churches as we do to persons in this Country. And this Mr. Bailiff hath taxed them for, above in pag. 27. of his Book, though here he forget it.  
Answ. 2. It is not true, that we hold out any at all, English or Indian, out of our Christian Congregations. All without exception are allowed to be present, at our public Prayers and Psalms, at our reading of the Scriptures, and the preaching and expounding of the same, and also at the admitting of Members, and dispensing of seals and censures.  
Answ. 3. It is not truly spoken, that we hold out of all our Churches many thousands of People, who in former times have been reputed in Old England very good Christians, and whom ourselves dare not deny to be truly religious.  
I dare be bold to speak it, we hold not out any one such: but if any such be held out, we hold not of from them, but they from us: yea we seriously invite them (publicly and privately) to join with us: unless such religious persons lie under some scandal of corrupt life, or Doctrine.  
How than will Mr. Bailiff make good (that which he truly calleth) his broad assertion? yes, he undertaketh to make it good by three testimonies.  
1. Saith he, we have heard sundry to esteem the number of the English in that Plantation to exceed 40000. men and women. But when Mr. Cotton is put to it, he dareth hardly avow the one half of these to be Members of any Church.  
And to prove this, he quoteth (in P.) the answer to the 23. questions, page. 7.  
Whereto the Reply is ready, 1. Mr. Bailiff is mistaken, if he think the answer to the 32. questions was penned by me. Those questions were sent by some Ministers in Lancashire or Cheshire to one of their Countrymen, (a reverend Brother, and fellow-Elder amongst us) Mr. Mader: who to satisfy their desires returned them that answer, which (it seemeth) hath since been printed. Which I speak not, because I wave the answer, for when he wrote it, he wrote advisedly, and as his whole answer is solid, and judicious; so is his answer, to the question put to him, pertinent and full: but to Mr. Baylies Assertion, it cometh nothing near it. But Mr. Bailiff should have done well, to have taken his full answer to that question.  The New-English Plantations are scattered above two hundreth Miles in length upon the Sea Coasts: & of what they did in those remote Plantations, he could not than give present account. But (saith Mr. Mader) in the Churches within the Bay, where most of us are best acquainted, we may truly say, that for the heads of Families those that are admitted, are far more in number than the other, besides whom there are sundry children and servants, that are admitted also. 
And for the reasons (saith he) why many are not yet received to Church-Communion, they be sundry:  
" 1. Sundry are new come over, and so are not yet known.  
2. Sundry when they come to be known are found scandalous.  
3. Some godly persons forbear to join with us for a time, till they may try, which Church and Ministry they can best close withal.  
4. Those that are known to be godly (I may add, though but in judgement of charity) they are all admitted to some Church or other, presently upon their own desire, unless they have given some offence, which also is removed upon their giving due satisfaction.  
This testimony will will not reach (nothing near) Mr. Baylies assertion, That we hold out of all Churches many thousands of people, who were well reputed of in Old England, for very good Christians, and such as ourselves dare not deny to be truly religious.  
2. His second testimony is from Mr. Lechford, who styleth his Book against the Country, Plain dealing. And what saith he? In his page 73. Here are (saith he) such confessions, and professions required both of men, and women, both in private and public, before they be admitted, that three parts of the people of the Country remain out of the Church, so that in short time, most of the people will remain unbaptised.  
Answ. The Book is unfitly called plain dealing, which (in respect of many passages in it) might rather be called false and fraudulent. I forbear to speak of the man himself, because soon after the publishing of that Book, himself was called away out of the world to give account of his Book and whole life before the highest Judge. He was indeed himself not received into the Fellowship of the Church, for his professed Errors: as 1 That the Antichrist described in the Revelation was not yet come, nor any part of that Prophecy yet fulfilled from the 4. chapter to the end. 2. That the Apostolic function was not yet ceased: but that there still aught to be such, who should by their transcendent authority govern all Churches. To reclaim him from these Errors, he was seriously dealt withal both in conference, and (according to his desire) in writing. But when he saw, he could not defend the latter. Error, but by building again the Bishops, against whom he had witnessed (as he said) in soliciting the cause of Mr. Prynne, he rather than he would revoke his present tenant, acknowledged he was than in an Error, when he took part with Mr. Prynne, & Mr. Burton, & therefore he would now return to England again, to reduce those famous witnesses from the Error of their way. And accordingly, away he went: but see the wise hand of God disappointing his ends; When he came to England the Bishops were falling, so that he lost his friends, and hopes both in Old-England and New: yet put out his Book (such as it is) and soon after died. By the way, let no man think, he was kept out of our Churches, for maintaining the authority of Bishops. For we have in our Churches some well respected Brethrens, who do indifferently allow either Episcopal, or Presbyterial, or congregational Government, so be it they govern according to the rules of the Gospel. Neither do we disturb such, nor they us in our communion with them. But to return to Mr. Lechfords plain dealing: that which he testifieth, neither is it true; neither if it were, doth it reach Mr. Baylies assertion.  
It is not true, that three parts of the Country remain out of the Church, if he mean three parts of four, not though he should take in those remote English, who live a score of miles or more from any Church.  
But were his speech more true than it is, yet it will not make good Mr. Baylies assertion, unless those three parts of the Country, which (he saith) remain out of the Church, were reputed in old England for very good Christians, nor durst ourselves deny them to be truly religious, to which this testimony alleged giveth no evidence at all.  
Mr. Baylies third testimony is from Mr. Williams, whom he calleth one of us, who maketh such Protestants to be Heathens and publicans, who departed from the Beast in a false constitution of Nationall Churches, if the bodies of Protestant Nations remain in an unregenerate estate.  
Answ. I know not, why Mr. Bailiff should call Mr. Williams one of us, who renounceth our Churches, and is himself cast out both of Church-fellowship, and civil cohabitation with us.  
His testimony, which Mr. Bailiff quoteth out of him, of the estate of all such Protestants, as live in a Nationall Church estate, as if Christ did accounted them Heathens and Publicans.  
I say no more to it but this, they may be so accounted by Mr. Williams, but we do not believe they are so accounted of by Christ, but many thousands of them to be precious Saints in the eyes of the Lord Jesus.  
To these testimonies, Mr. Bailiff interserteth his own testimony and others of his judgement, It seemeth to us (saith he) a grievous absurdity, a great dishonour to God, and cruelty against men to spoil so many thousand Christians, whom we dare not deny to be truly Religious, of all the Privileges of the Church, etc.  
Answ. 1. It is not enough, that we dare not deny men to be truly Religions: but it were meet we should know them, at lest, conceive good hope, they are truly Religious, (at lest in the judgement of charity) before we receive them into the Church. And of such there are not many thousands, not nor many scores, not nor any scores, whom we dare spoil of Church privileges, unless their own offence, or choice spoil them.  
Secondly, if men be not Religious, not not so much as in profession, why should it be accounted a grievous absurdity, not to receive them into the Church? A thing is absurd, which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of place. Are men who are not spiritual, out of their place, when they are not placed in a spiritual society? If the Churches be (as Christ describeth them) golden Candlesticks (Revel. 1.20.) is Tin and Led out of place, when it is not sodered into a Golden vessel? Sure God himself thought otherwise, Isay 1.25. But is it not rather a grievous absurdity, and fare out of place, when such are admitted to the Lords Table, who either discern not the Lord's Body, or if they be admitted to drink his Blood, will be ready when they are got into the Field to spill the innocent blood of those Roundheads, whom they lately partaked withal at the Lords Table?  
And as for the great dishonour to God, (which Mr. Bailiff imputeth to this way of ours) Is it a dishonour to God, that such are withheld from the Lords Table, by whom the name of God is dishonoured either through their ignorance or scandal?  
Is it not rather a great dishonour to God, to set up Christ a visible head of such members, by whom his name is evil spoken of? And what cruelty is it against men, to keep such from eating and drinking the Lords Supper, who would eat and drink it unworthily, and so eat and drink their own damnation? 1 Cor. 11.29. The Lord himself thought it no cruelty to debar our first parents from the Tree of life, who if they had found free liberty to eat it, would have blessed themselves in a false hope of living for ever? Gen. 3.22, 23.   

SECT. 17. Of the second shameful absurdity said to be found in our way of Independency.  
Come we now to a second shameful absurdity, which he maketh to be another fruit of our Churchway.  
That it hath exceedingly hindered the conversion of the poor Pagans'. The principles and practice of Independents doth cross this work and hope of it. What have they to do with those that are without? Their Pastors preach not for conversion: their Relation is to their flock, who are Church-members, converted already to their hand by the labours of other men, before they can be admitted into their Church. Of all that ever crossed the American Seas, they are noted as most neglectful of the work of Conversion. I have read of none of them, that seem to have minded this matter.  
Answ. This is indeed a shameful absurdity, if it be true: but a sinful and shameful calumny, if it be false. As indeed false it is in every branch of it. First, there is no principle or allowed practice of ours that doth hinder (much less exceedingly hinder) the work or hope of the conversion of the Natives: though we profess we have nothing to do to censure Indians, and so to judge them that are without; yet we think it a principal (though not the only) work and duty of our Ministry to attend the work of conversion, both of carnal English, and other Nations, whether Christian, or Pagan. The neglect of it, we look at as an ungracious and uncharitable fancy. How shall men (ordinarily) be converted to the faith without hearing? and how shall they hear without preaching? and how shall they preach, unless they be sent? and who are now sent, but Pastors and Teachers?  
" But the Relation of our Pastors is to their Flock? What than? May there not fall out to be Hypocrites in our Flock? and must we not preach for their conversion? And are not the children of the Members of our Church, many of them such, as when they grow up stand in need of converting grace? and must we not preach for their conversion? Besides, when an Infidel or unbeliever cometh into the Church, do not all the Prophets that preach the Word, (and among them, surely the Pastors and Teachers are not the lest) do they not all apply their speech to his conviction and conversion? 1 Cor. 14.24, 25. What though a Pastor be a Feeder to his Flock already begotten unto God? Yet he may (and aught to endeavour to) become a Father also in Christ, to such as are yet unregenerate, whether of his Flock, or out of his Flock. To turn many to righteousness is prophesied of, to be the work of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the New Testament, Dan. 12.3. ● But our Church-members are converted already to our hands by the labours of other men, before they can be admitted into our Church.  
So saith Mr. Bailiff indeed: but if he were here, he would so ●n hear many of those who are admitted into our Churches, openly acknowledge, the first work of saving grace to have been wrought in their hearts by the ministry of the Word here, and sometime by the same, or like ministry in our Native Country. And the children of the faithful borne, and baptised in our Churches, will acknowledge no other Ministry, by whom they have believed, but that which they have attended upon, here.  
But (saith Mr. Bailiff) I have read of none of them that seem to have minded the matter of conversion.  
Answ. 1. What if he have not read, what we preach here of conversion? Doth he think it meet, we should print all the Sermons we preach? What if any of us should say, I have not read of any Scottish Minister who have published any of their labours in that argument, (save Mr. Rollock, and him in Latin, and that haply in the Schools, and many have not seen him neither:) shall we therefore think it credible, that so many holy faithful labourers in Christ's Vineyard in that whole Nation, do not seem to mind the matter of conversion?  
But whether he have read of any of our books of that Subject, or not, surely it is not, because none of such are extant to be read. He may read when he pleaseth Mr. Shepherds two Treatises, one styled The sincere Convert, the other The sound Believer, besides fundry Treatises of Mr. Hooker touching the Souls Preparation to Christ, Effectual Calling, and Justification, etc. and when he hath read them, let him than tell the world, whether of all that have crossed the American Seas (as he speaketh) the Ministers of this way have been justly noted to be most neglectful of the work of conversion. Yea let me make bold in Gods fear to pray Mr. Bailiff, and those others, who have noted us as most neglectful of this work, to inquire and consider whether among all the servants of Christ now living in any reformed Churches (put them all together) they have published so many Treatises of the work of conversion, as the Ministers of this way have done, in New-England, and London, which I speak not (the Lord is witness to my soul) out of carnal Arrogancy to boast of our labours, in so holy and weighty an Argument: but out of conscience to bear witness to the way of God's truth against such an unjust & unworthy scandal. But when I speak of these Treatises of Conversion, I do not include all that are written under the glorious and fallacious styles of Free Grace, and Gospel-Truth, which nevertheless do but indeed lay the Leaven of Arminian-universall-free Grace, and Antinomian Impenitency: but I speak of those Treatises which are pure from such Leaven, as keeping the pattern of wholesome words and sound doctrine, dividing the Word of truth aright, in the right use of the Law and Gospel, wherein though they sometime declare such works of Grace to be preparations to conversion, which others do take to be fruits of conversion: yet they all agreed in this, that such works are found in all that are under the powerful and effectual saving work of the Spirit, and Word of Christ, and in none else, which is the light and life of the Saints in Christ Jesus.  
I will not here speak of the conversion of Weaquash, which (as I hear) is published in a little Script, entitled, New-englands' First-fruits. Nor would I have mentioned the endeavours of some of our fellow-brethrens here, to help forward the work of conversion in Virginia, were it not that the blessing of the Lord Jesus upon their labours doth call for acknowledgement. Some honest minded people in Virginia discerning their want of spiritual Ministry, sent earnest Letters, and one or more messengers, to the Elders of these Churches here for some of our Ministers to break the Bread of Life to them. The Elders here seeking Counsel of God, and one of another, we borrowed two of the Pastors of our Churches, (Mr. Knolles of Watertowne, and Mr. Thomson of Braintree, the Churches being either of them supplied with two Ministers apiece) and sent them forth solemnly in the Name of the Lord to that work; who as they went along took with them one Mr. James, a Minister (though than out of employment) from New-Haven, to the fellowship of that work. And for their better encouragement, our Governor here wrote a Letter to the Governor of Virginia to acquaint him, and his Assistants, with the occasion and end of their coming, and expressed withal his desire of their Christian entertainment for a time, and peaceable return, if they found any inconvenience by their coming. What entertainment they found from the mayor part of the Government there, I forbear to speak. The bloody Massacre, which soon after their dismission, the Indians in those parts executed upon the English, cried aloud from heaven, that after a white Horse, God is want to sand forth a read, Rev. 6.2, 3, 4. But nevertheless, God so fare forth followed their labours with his blessing in the work of conversion, that sundry of them were effectually wrought upon by the power of the Lord Jesus; whereof some of them came along with our Ministers at their return, and are received into our Churches: others of them who could not so well dispose of their affairs there, joined with one Mr. Harrison a Minister there, (who was also mightily stirred up by our Ministers coming:) and they with him have since given up themselves to more holy communion and conversation before the Lord.  
Others of the Western Islands (as Barbadas, Antegua, Mevis) have desired the like help from us: but the departure of some of our Ministers since, (one to Heaven, others to England) have hitherto detained us from opportunity to afford unto them the like succour for the present.  
I will not speak, what opportunity of reaching forth a blessing to the Indians in this kind, God hath lately begun to open us a door of: in that divers of their Sachims', and Sagamores (as they call them, to wit, their Governors) have submitted themselves to the government of the English, and have willingly subjected themselves to the acceptance of the Ten Commandments, though some of them, do most stick at the seventh Commandment, as it forbiddeth Polygamy. Nevertheless otherwise they willingly consent to abandon Adultery and Fornication, and unnatural lusts.  
But though the Indians have been slow to learn our language, especially in matters of Religion (howsoever in Trading they soon understood us:) yet we have often offered to bring up their Indian children in our Schools, that they might learn to speak to their Countrymen in their own language. But because that might prove long, one of our Elders (Mr. Eliot, the Teacher of the Church of Rocksbury) hath (with the consent of the Natives) preached to them first by an Interpreter, but since having with much industry learned their language, he now preacheth to two Congregations of them in their own language weekly. One week on the fourth day to one Congregation, who sit down near to Dorchester Mill, and another week, on the sixth day, to another Congregation of them, who sit down in Cambridge, near Watertown Mill. To ease and encourage him in his work, the Ministers of neighbour Churches take of by turns his weekly Lecture on the third day. The fruit hitherto hath been, the Indians resort more and more to these Assemblies, hear with reverence and attention, reform (and make Laws amongst themselves, for reformation of) sundry abuses, ask sundry questions for their instruction, and among the rest, an old Counsellor of one of their Sagamores enquired, if it might be possible that our God, and our Christ should accept an old sinner such as himself? Mr. Eliot answered him, yes, there was hope, because he never had the means of the knowledge of God offered to him before. And our Saviour Christ did sometimes call into his Vineyard some to do him service, even in the last hour of the day, in the last part of their lives. And the old Indian being demanded if he understood this? He answered, yea, saith he, I understand it, and believe it.  
It is true, there may be doubt that for a time there will be no great hope of any Nationall conversion, till Antichrist be ruined, and the Jews converted; because the Church (or Temple) of God, is said to be filled with smoke, till the seven plagues (which are to be poured upon the Antichristian state) be fulfilled: And till than, no man (that is, no considerable number of men out of the Church, as Pagans' be) shall be able to enter into the Church, Rev. 15.8. yet nevertheless, that hindereth not, but that some sprinklings, & glean of them may be brought home to Christ, as now and than some Proselytes were brought into the fellowship of the Church of Israel, when there was a greater partition wall set up between Jews and Gentiles, than now there is between Christians and Pagans'. And the Lord shine upon them in mercy, in blessing the means of his Grace to them in the Lord Jesus.  
The proof that none of us seem to have minded the work of conversion, Mr. Bailiff allegeth out of the Book entitled Plain dealing, which saith, There hath not been sent forth any, by any Church, to learn the Natives-Language, or to instruct them in our Religion first, because they say they have not to do with them being without, except they come to hear and learn English.  
An. 1. What if there have not been any scent forth by any Church to learn the Indians language? That will not argue our neglect of minding the work of their conversion. For there be of the Indians that live amongst us, and daily resort to us; and some of them learn our language; and some of us learn theirs. And men that love the Lord Jesus do gladly take opportunity to instruct them in our Religion, and to teach them both Law and Gospel. And of late, the Word (as I have said) is publicly preached unto them in two several Indian Congregations, though we never thought it fit to sand any of our English to live amongst them, to learn their language: for who should teach them?  
Answ. 2. When the Authors of Plain Dealing saith, We have not instructed them in our Religion, upon this pretence, because we say, we have not to do with them being without, except they come to hear and learn English.  
I know not whether ever any gave him so weak an account or no: If any so did, it was his rashness, or ignorance both of us, and the truth. But if the Author speak it, as a Point of our Profession or practice, that we do neglect the instruction of the Indians, and especially upon such a reasonless reason, I will say no more to it but this, it seemeth there are two sorts of Plain dealing: Plain honest dealing, and Plain false dealing, of which latter sort, this speech is.  
But Mr. Bailiff acknowledgeth Mr. William's his endeavours in this kind, but doth thereby the more aggravate our corrupt principles and practice, who have neglected so great an opportunity as to prosecute his course. Only Mr. Williams (saith he) did assay,  what could be done with those desolate souls, and by little experience quickly found a wonderful great facility to gain thousands of them to so much and more Christianity both in profession and practice, than in the most of our people doth appear. 
But the unhappiness of these principles whereof we speak, did keep him (as he professeth) from making use of that great opportunity, and large door, which the Lord there hath opened to all who will be zealous of propagating the Gospel.  
Answ. 1. If Mr. William's his speech of the wonderful great facility he had of gaining so fare upon the Indians, be not too too prodigally hyperbolical (as I much fear it is) I think his sin is so much the greater before the Lord, that he did neglect to take the opportunity of preaching to them the Word of the Lord, that they might have been brought on, not only to an Antichristian conversion (such as he maketh the conversion of the common sort of Christians in Protestant Churches:) but to a sincere conversion unto Christ Jesus. But I confess with Mr. Bailiff, his own corrupt Principles, (his own I say, not ours) it seemeth have detained him from putting forth his hand to the Lords Plough in so large a Field. For if he look (as it seemeth) for new Apostles to be sent immediately from Christ for such a work: or if he think, no Church is, or will be extant upon the face of the earth, till Antichrist be abolished out of the world, these and such like principles are enough, not only to retard him from the planting of Churches amongst Indians, but also to further him in supplanting all the Churches of Christ in Christendom.  
Answ. 2. I said not without cause, that I feared Mr. William's his testimony of the facility of such a conversion of the Indians was too hyperbolical. For I received advertisement from Mr. James (one of the Ministers, who went to Virginia upon the Lords work, of which I spoke before) that whilst he was detained (by winds) in Mary-land (a Popish Plantation between us and Virginia) he saw, as I remember, (for his Letter is not present at hand with me) 40. Indians baptised in new Shirts, which the Catholics had given them for their encouragement unto Baptism. But he tarried there so long for a fair wind, that before his departure, he saw the Indians (when their shirts were foul, and they knew not how to wash them) come again to make a new motion, either the Catholic English there must give them new Shirts, or else they would renounce their Baptism. I doubt, the Indians about Mr. Williams are not of a much better spirit. I might mention a fairer instance in these parts, yet such as may argue what kind of facility there is in the Indians to conversion, so much as to outward profession. At our first coming hither, John Sagamore was the chiefest Sachim in these parts. He falling sick, our Pastor Mr. Wilson hearing of it (and being of some acquaintance with him) went to visit him, taking one of the Deacons of our Church with him, and withal, a little Mithridate, and strong water. When he came to his lodging (which they call a Wigwam) hearing a noise within, he looked over the Mat of the door to discern what it meant, and saw many Indians gathered together, and some Powwaws amongst them, who are their Priests, Physicians, and Witches. They by course spoke earnestly to the sick Sagamore, and to his disease, (in a way of charming of it and him) and one to another in a kind of Antiphonies. When they had done, all kept silence, our Pastor went in with the Deacon, and found the man fare spent, his eyes set in his head, he speech leaving him, his mother (old Squaw-Sachim) sitting weeping at his bed's head, Well (saith our Pastor) our God save Sagamore John, Powwaw Cram (that is, kill) Sagamore John: And thereupon he fell to prayer with his Deacon, and after Prayer, forced into the sick man's mouth with a Spoon, a little Mithridate dissolved in the strong water; soon after the Sagamore looked up, and three days after went abroad on hunting. This providence so fare prevailed with the Sagamore, that he promised to look after the English man's God, to hear their Sermons, to wear English apparel, etc. But his neighbour Indians Sagamores, and Powwaws hearing of this, threatened to Cram him (that is, to kill him) if he did so degenerate from his Country Gods, and Religion, he thereupon fell of, and took up his Indian course of life again. Whatsoever facility may seem to offer itself of the conversion of the Indians, it is not so easy a matter for them to hold out, not not in a semblance of profession of the true Religion. Afterwards God struck John Sagamore again, (and as I remember with the small Pox:) but than when they desired like succour from our Pastor, as before, he told them, now the Lord was angry with Sagamore John, and it was doubtful, he would not so easily be entreated. The Sagamore blamed himself and justified God, and confessed, he should not have been discouraged by their threats from seeking our God: For those Sagamores and Powwaws who did most terrify him, he had seen God sweeping them away by death, before himself, in a short time after. And therefore when he saw he must die (for he died of that sickness) he left his son to the education of our Pastor, that he might keep closer to the English, and to their God, than himself had done. But his son also died of the same disease soon after. All which I relate, to show, that though a form of Christian Religion may be professed amongst Christians with some facility: yet it is not so easy a matter to gain these Pagan Indians so much as to a form of our Religion, and to hold it, howsoever Mr. Williams did promise' himself greater possibilities.  
Answ. 3. Mr. Bailiff shall do well to consider, that Mr. William's his speech doth not so much hold forth the facility of the Indians to any such conversion, as might fit them for Church-estate, but rather the Hypocrisy and Formality of the ordinary Church-Members of Nationall Churches; which he professeth is so far of from true conversion, that it is the subversion of the souls of many Millions in Christendom, from one false worship to another.  
Answ. 4. It is no unhappiness of any principle of ours, that hath kept Mr. Williams from making use of his great opportunity, and open door, to propagate the Gospel amongst the Indians. For though their facility to such a carnal conversion, as he describeth, gave him no just warrant, to gather them into a Church-estate: yet it was a just encouragement to provoke him (who understood their Language) to have preached the Word of God unto them, which might have been mighty through God (if sincerely dispensed) to have turned them from darkness to light, from the power of Satan unto God, and so have prepared them, both for Church-fellowship here, and for heaven hereafter.  
But if Mr. Bailiff conceive that either Mr. Williams, or else we were to be blamed, because we do not presently receive Indians into the Fellowship of our Churches, seeing their facility to conform their outward man to us, and to so much of our religion, as Mr. Williams mentioneth: he shall do well to consider before hand, whether Jacobs children did well, to persuade the Sichemites, (Gen. 34.) to receive circumcision, before they better understood the Covenant of Abraham, (to which circumcision was a Seal) and had made some better profession of taking hold of it.   

SECT. 18. Of the third shameful absurdity said to be found in our way of Independency.  
Come we now to consider of the third shameful Absurdity, which Mr. Bailiff maketh the fruit of our Independency, breaking forth in the practices and profession of the most, who have been admitted as very fit, if not the fittest Members of our Churches.  
And these evil fruits he brancheth out into five sorts: 

" 1. (Saith he) in the vileness of their Errors.  
" 2. In the multitude of the erring persons.  
" 3. In the hypocrisy joined with their Errors.  
4. In malice against their Neighbours, and contempt of their superiors, Magistrates and Ministers for opposition to their evil way.  
" 5. In their singular obstinacy, stiffly sticking unto their errors, etc.    
Answ. 1. Suppose all this to be true: yet this is so far from discrediting the way of Independency, or arguing the Tree to be bad by these bad fruits, that it doth rather justify the way to be of God, which so easily hath either healed, or removed, so many, so vile, so general, so subtle, so headstrong corruptions, and them that maintained them. Non seclus, non scelerum varietas aut atr●citas, is dedecus Politiae, sed scelerum impunitas. The Church of Ephesus was not blamed by Christ, because false Apostles and Nicolaitans were found amongst them: but commended, because she could not bear them, Rev. 2.2.6. Nor is Thyatira blamed, that Jezabell was found amongst them, but that they suffered her, Rev. 2.20. What if so many, so hideous vile Errors were found in our Churches? What if the number of erring persons were (as he speaketh) incredible? Multitudes of men and women every where infected? almost no Society, nor Family in the Land free from the pest? Boston (which he is pleased to style, the best and most famous of our Churches) so far corrupted, that few were untainted? What if they accounted the late Governor their true friend, and thought no less of Mr. Cotton, and Mr. Whelewright whom they adored? What if they had drawn to their sides not only multitudes of the people, but the ablest men for parts, in all Trades, especially the Soldiers? What if all these evils were carried forth with presumptuous contumacy against godly Magistrates, and the Orthodox Ministers? yea, what if to all the rest, they added obstinacy against all wholesome means of redress and remedy?  
Is it not therefore the more evident Demonstration of the gracious presence, and mighty power of God, in the Discipline of our Churches, that did so effectually, so speedily, so safely, so easily, purge out all this Leaven, either out of the hearts of the people, out of their Families, and Churches, or else out of the Country?  
Whence the argument seemeth to me to arise unavoidably.  
Those evils, which Independency doth either heal, or remove, they are not the fruits of Independency.  
But all these grievous and dangerous evils, Independency did either heal or remove.  
Therefore these grievous and dangerous evils were not the fruits of Independency.  
Again, That government, which by the blessing of Christ, doth safely, speedily, and effectually purge out such grievous and dangerous evils, as threaten the ruin of Church and State, that government is safely allowed, and justly and wisely established in any civil State.  
But Independency by the blessing of Christ doth speedily, safely, and effectually purge out such grievous and dangerous evils, as threaten the ruin of Church and State: therefore Independency is safely allowed, and justly, and wisely established in any civil State.  
Ob. 1. But this purging and healing of these grievous and dangerous evils was not the fruit of their Independent-Church-Government, but of their civil Government. We have often marvelled, that the Eldership of Boston did never so much, as call Ms. Hutchinson before them, to be rebuked for any of her errors, though their general Assembly had confuted them, and condemned them: yet still she was permitted to go on, till the zeal of the new Governor, and the general Court did condemn her to perpetual banishment. Than, and not till than, so far as we can perceive by the story, did the Church of Boston bring a process against her. And when the process was brought to an end, Mr. Cotton would by no means put it in execution; that burden was laid upon the back of Mr. Wilson his Colleague, how ever not the fittest Instrument, being the person to whom Ms. Huthinson had professed greatest opposition. And when the sentence was pronounced against her, they tell us, that the great cause of it was none of her Errors or Heresies, but her other practices, specially her gross lying.  
Answ. 1. What ever assistance the civil Government gave to the purging and healing of these evils, it was the fruit of Independent Church Government. For whether the Neighbour Churches suspected our Church of Boston might be partial, and indulgent to these erroneous persons: or whether they saw, we wanted sufficient witnesses upon which we might proceed against them in a Church way, they took a right course (according to the principles of the Independent Government) to gather into a Synod with the consent of the civil Magistrates: and in the Synod to agitate, convince and condemn the Errors, and the offensive carriages than stirring. Whereat the Magistrates being present, they saw just cause to proceed against the chief of those whom they conceived to have bred any civil disturbance: and the Churches saw cause to proceed against their Members, whom they found to be broachers or maintainers of such heresies.  
Answ. 2. It hath been declared above, why the Eldership of Boston did not call Ms. Hutchinson before them to rebuke her for her Errors, or to restrain her from going on, though the general Assembly had confuted and condemned her Errors and course.  
For though the Errors were condemned, (and by the Elders of Boston, as well as others:) yet the errors were not fastened personally upon her: nor had we any two witnesses, that would affirm it to us, that she did broach or maintain such errors or heresies, till after her sentence unto banishment by the general Court; And than indeed, as she was more bold and open in declaring her judgement before many witnesses: so the Elders of the Church of Boston called her to accounted before the Church, and convinced her of her Errors, and with the consent of the Church, laid her, and one or two more of her abettors under the censure of an admonition even for those corrupt opinions, which were charged upon her, and proved against her.  
Ob. 1. Yea but Mr. Cotton would by no means put the censure in execution upon her, that burden must be laid upon the back of Mr. Wilson, etc.  
Answ. The censure of admonition, because it was for matter of Erroneous doctrine, it was thought meet to be dispensed and administered by Mr. Cotton, who was their Teacher: which also (by the the help of Christ) he did perform, setting before her both the corrupt causes of her errors, and the bitter fruits of them: and charging her solemnly before the Lord, and his Angels, and Churches than assembled, to return from the Error of her way.  
Afterwards, when upon further serious debate and conference with her by Mr. Davenport, and myself, she was convinced of all her errors in particular, she being called again before the Church, did openly recant every error and heresy, and professed her repentance for every miscarriage against Magistrates and Elders: which fare exceeded the expectation of the whole Congregation, which than consisted of many Churches, and strangers. But when she had done, she added withal, That she had never been of other judgement, howsoever her expressions might seem to vary. This sounded so harshly, and falsely in the ears of many witnesses, that many risen up to convince her of her falsehood and lying, in so saying. Which when she did not harken to, she was esteemed, by the judgement of the Elders, and our whole Church, to be justly subject to excommunication. Which though I did not think meet to be dispensed by myself (because the offence was not in matter of Doctrine, but of practice, which more properly belonged to the Pastors' Office, or ruling Elders:) yet I declared to the whole Congregation the righteousness of the censure, and satisfied the Scruples of some Brethrens, who doubted of it. But yet if the Church, or other Elders had put that task upon me, I should not more have refused the dispensing of the censure of excommunication upon her, than I did before of admonition. Neither was her opposition against Mr. Wilson any just reason of exempting him from that duty. For she saw, we all with one accord, concurred in that sentence: it was no partial act of his, but the common vote both of the Presbytery, and Fraternity. And what if she had professed her opposition against us all? had that been a just excuse to exempt any of us from performing a service due to God, and the Church, yea and to herself also?  
Object. 2. But when the sentence was propounded against her, they tell us, the great cause of it was none of her Errors, and Heresies, but for other practices, especially her gross lying.  
Answ. We could not justly pronounce the cause of her sentence to be her errors and heresies, which she had openly recanted, and given her recantation under her handwriting. Neither did any of us say, That such Heresies did not deserve the censure of excommunication, if she had continued obstinate in them: but we thought it needful to follow the rule of the Apostle, not to reject an Heretic till after once or twice admonition, Tit. 3.10. under which if the Heretic relent, the Church proceeding stayeth, unless some other offence set it forward, as it did in her case.   

SECT. 19 Tending to rectify some mistakes of Mr. Bailiff in relating the former absurdities.  
But before I leave this close of Mr. Baylies third Chapter, touching the evil fruits of Independency, let me advertise him of some few further mistakes in his Narration of the same.  
First, when he reckoneth in the front of vile errors, the inhabitation of the person of the Spirit in all the godly, let him weigh what hath been said above, touching that point. And if he clear it to be an error, I willingly shall acknowledge, he shall teach me that, which I yet know not. I profess myself willing to learn of a meaner man, than Mr. Bailiff.  
Secondly, when he maketh the number of the erring persons incredible, almost no society, no family free from that pest, Boston itself so fare infected, that few there were untainted: let him be pleased to consider, whether his testimony will make it good. His testimonies (recited in his Marks F F. G G.) speak to the utmost of truth, but not so much as he avoucheth. The short Story in Preface, pag. 7. saith indeed, They had some of all sorts and qualities in all places to patronise and defend them: and almost in every family some were ready to defend them as the Apple of their own eye.  
But this will not make it good, that almost in every family some were infected with the pest of their errors. It is one thing to speak in the defence of erroneous persons, another to speak in defence of errors. Multitudes there were, that thought well of the persons, who knew nothing of their errors, but heard only of their unbottoming sandy foundations of a spiritual estate, which hath been mentioned above, Chap. 3.  
Which may also truly be said even of Boston likewise. The body of the Church, the greatest part of them were like those members of the Church in Thyatira, of whom it is said (Rev. 2.24.) They knew not the depths of Satan. The truth whereof may evidently appear by this, That when those errors of Mistress Hutchinson were publicly charged upon her before the Church, and proved by sufficient witnesses, the whole body of the Church, and all the Brethrens with one accord (save only her son) consented readily to her censure: which they would not have done,  if the whole Church of Boston (some excepted) had become her converts, and were infected with her opinions. 
Thirdly, when he saith, they adored some of their Ministers, and instanceth in Mr. Cotton, and Mr. Whelewright.  
Adoration is too vast an Hyperbole to be made good by just testimonies. All hyperbolical praises, though they may fare exceed the bounds of truth in comparisons of men with men; yet they will not reach adoration, which is divine worship. Neither will it be made good, That they magnified either Mr. Whelewright, or me, for the defence of their errors. Yea they soon forsook Mr. Whelewright (as well as he them) when they saw his judgement (as well as mine) against Antinomianism, and Familisme.  
Fourthly, when he saith, Mistress Hutchinson, and the late Governor, kept almost every day, so private and long discourse with Mr. Cotton, that made them conclude all was their own.  
I must needs profess, that cannot be made good by any witness of truth, Mistress Hutchinson seldom resorted to me: and when she did, she did seldom or never enter into any private speech between the former Governor and myself. And when she did come to me, it was seldom or never (that I can tell of) that she tarried long. I rather think, she was loathe to resort much to me, or, to confer long with me, jest she might seem to learn somewhat from me. And withal I know (by good proof) she was very careful to prevent any jealousy in me, that she should harbour any private opinions, differing from the course of my public Ministry. Which she could not well have avoided, if she had kept almost every day so private and long discourse with me▪  
But what Testimony, or proof doth Mr. Bailiff allege for this our private and long conference, almost every day? His mark [Y Y] referreth us to the short story, where it is said, They made full account the day had been theirs.  
But did they make this account upon occasion of these our private, and long, and frequent conferences every day? not a syllable of proof for this point. It is not righteous dealing, large charges, and narrow proofs.  
Fourthly, that which Mr. Bailiff further relateth from the testimony of Mr. Williams, is as fare from truth, as the former.  
Mr. Williams (saith Mr. Bailiff) told me, that he was employed to buy from the Savages, for their late Governor, and Mr. Cotton, with their Followers, a portion of Land without the English Plantation whither they might retire and live according to their mind, exempt from the jurisdiction of all others, whether Civil or Ecclesiastic, Mr. Williams was in so great friendship with the late Governor, when he told me so much, that I believe he would have been loath to havespoken an untruth of him.  
Answ. But this I dare be bold to say, if Mr. Williams told Mr. Bailiff so much, that he was employed by me to buy any Land from the Savages, for me and my followers (as he calls them) he spoke an untruth of me, whatsoever he did of the Governor. Yet because I would not speak nor think worse of Mr. of Williams than necessity constraineth, I cannot say but that he might speak as he thought, and as he was told; for it may well be, that such as abused the Governors' name to him for such an end, might also more boldly abuse mine. But I must profess, I neither wrote, nor spoke, nor sent to Mr. Williams for any such errand. If ever I had removed, I intended Quinipyack, and not Aquethnick. And I can hardly believe the Governor would sand to him for any such end, who I suppose never thought it likely, that himself should tarry longer in the Country, than he tarried in the Bay.  
Fiftly, when Mr. Bailiff objecteth the profaneness of these erroneous persons, and justifieth it by the testimonies of Mr. Weld and myself, And aggravateth the same by their profession of Piety (so fare, that they avow their standing loof from all reformed Churches as unclean, because of their mixture with the profane Multitude.)  
Let him be pleased to consider; First, what was said above, Non scelus, sed sceleris impunitas, is the guilt of a society, whether civil or sacred.  
Secondly, what Mr. Weld meant by fouler sins than pride, or lying, found in those persons, I cannot guess: nor have I heard of them: unless he meant the adultery of one, who upon his own confession was cast out of the Church for that crime.  
As for the testimony of mine, which he quoteth from some words in the vials, wherein the sins of the people were reproved, let him not improve them further than they will bear. Such reproofs do not always argue sins of our Church members: or if they did, yet not, that those sins are openly known: or if openly known, yet not, that they were tolerated. And yet all these must concur, or else the vices found amongst professors, will not argue the viciousness either of their doctrine or worship, or Church Government.  
Luther complaineth, in Postill. super Evangel. Dom. adventus, Sunt nunc homines magis vindictae cupidi, magis avari, magis ab omni misericordiâ remoti, magis immodesti, & indisciplinati, multoque deteriores, quam fuerunt sub papatu. And chrysostom, (in opere imperfect. in Matth. Hom. 49.) speaketh of Christians as becoming like the Heretics, or Pagans', or worse.  
Yet I suppose he that should improve the words either of chrysostom, to argue the discipline of Christians, worse than that of the Pagans': or of Luther, to argue the discipline of Protestants to be worse than that of Papists, he shall doubtless stretch their words upon the Rack, fare beyond the scope of their meaning. The words I spoke, were in comparison between the godly Professors in England, and ours here, and at such a time, when Episcopal persecution made them draw the nearer to God, and to walk the more circumspectly before men. But Sheep set at liberty from the fear of Wolves, will straggle further from their Shepherd, than when they resent danger.  
Thirdly, it is too gross and heavy an aggravation, which Mr. Bailiff putteth upon us, if he mean it of us, That our profession of piety is so fair that we stand aloof from all reformed Churches as unclean, because of their mixture with the profane multitude.  
For it is more than he can prove, or we do profess. Though in the Bishop's time, we did not forthwith receive all the members of the Church of England into the fellowship of our Churches: yet (for aught I know) we are not likely to stand aloof from Presbyterial Churches faithfully administered, nor from the testimony which they shall give of their members, that may have occasion to Traffic hither. And the like do I conceive of other reformed Churches in other Nations of Christendom. Presbyterian Churches faithfully administered, are not want to admit a mixed profane multitude to the Lords Table.  
Sixtly, let me take of one instance more, which Mr. Bailiff giveth of one abomination, which to him seemeth strange. That the Midwives to our most zealous women, should not only have familiarity with the Devil, but also in that service commit devilish Malefices: which so fare as they tell us, were not only passed over without punishment, but never so much as enquired after.  
Answ. This accusation is indeed of some weight, because it is of a grievous, and devilish crime, and it tolerated. But how doth it appear to him, that it was tolerated? not only passed over without punishment, but never so much as enquired after?  
Why, saith he, so fare as they tell us. So fare as they tell us? is the silence of a short story of this or that fact, a good argument, a non dici, ad non esse? yea it is a good argument on the contrary, that there was inquiry made after that Midwife, and diligent search into her, or else it would have been recorded, as some close conveyance of the erroneous party. The truth is, the woman, though she offered herself to the Elders of our Church, yet was not received, upon discovery of some unsound principles in her judgement. Being than no member, the Church had no power to deal with her. But when suspicion grew of her familiarity with the Devil, especially upon that occasion, which the short story relateth, she was convented before the Magistrates, and diligently examined about that, and other evils. But though no familiarity with the Devil could be proved against her; yet because of some other offences in dealing with young women, she was forbidden to stay in the Country.   

SECT. 20. Tending to consider what better fruits might have been expected from Presbyterian discipline, for the removing of the like absurdities.  
Having thus given account to Mr. Bailiff of the inconsequence of all his discourse from the errors of this country, to argue the unsoundness of our Church-discipline, let me now entreat him to consider, what better fruits might have been expected in the like case from Presbyterial Government. I demand, if Presbyterian Government had been established amongst us, should we not than have received all these Heretics, and erroneous persons, into our Church? Yes surely, for no member of the Commonwealth is excluded: well, therein our congregational discipline bringeth forth no worse fruit, than their Presbyterian.  
I demand again, if these persons should afterwards fall into error, or Heresy, which could not be proved by two witnesses, what course would Presbyterian government have taken? would it not have forborn process, till sufficient testimony might be brought to convince them? If suspicion of their unsound judgement had grown, would they not have examined them, and if they denied it, and no sufficient testimony could be brought against them, would not the Presbyters have let them alone? Hitherto we did the same.  
I demand further, if any Presbytery in a Church, were suspected to be too remiss in proceeding against such Delinquents, would not the Presbytery of the neighbour Churches have taken the matter in hand, and so gathering into a Synod, first convinced such errors, and than condemned them, and the maintainers of them too, if they were found guilty of them, and persistent in them? Thus fare also the Presbytery of our neighbour Churches did proceed as to gather into a Synod, and both convinced and condemned the errors. And though they did not proceed to condemn or censure the maintainers of them; yet when they had gotten proof thereof, they proceeded in their own congregations to the censure of their own erroneous members (after all other means to recover them used in vain:) And besides, they dealt with the Presbytery of our Church to do the same. And we hearing their complaints and their proofs, we respectively harkened to them, and proceeded to the like censure in our Church, as they had done in theirs; And in like sort traveled with our members for their conviction, as they had done with theirs, even so fare, that Mistress Hutchinson was brought to a recantation, though her prevarication of it brought her to a censure, yea the utmost censure, and that with general consent of our whole Church, and satisfaction of others. It seemeth than, that our Independency (as it is called) doth no more breed, nor nourish, nor tolerate errors, or Heresies, than Presbyterian discipline doth. And if there should a defect arise in any Church, there is the like remedy in the vigilancy of other Churches, and finally, obstinacy in all evils of notorious offence, whether in judgement or practice, meeteth at length with the same or like censure, in either government.  
Let not therefore Mr. Bailiff allow himself in saying as he doth (in the close of his third Chapter) That this new and singular way, the Lord hath so manifestly cursed with more bad fruits, and greater store of them, than ever yet did appear upon the tree of Brownism. For though it becometh not us to make comparisons of fruits with other Churches (unless themselves did provoke us to it:) nor doth it concern us to deal with them about any offence, unless we dwelled near them, and knew their estate:) yet this is enough to us, to clear us unto Mr. Bailiff, and to the world, against all his exceptions, That (through the mercy of Christ) not evil fruit at all hath sprung from our Church Government. What offence soever, in judgement or practice, hath been suspected or found among us, it hath not sprung from the government, but from personal defects, either among the Brethrens or Elders. And what hath been suspected, or found in either of them, hath either been cleared, or healed, or removed by the government. Blessed be the name of the Lord Jesus, whose throne is in Zion and his furnace in Jerusalem, who delighteth to bless his own ordinances with power and peace.    

CHAP. FOUR Of the antiquity of congregational discipline, compared with Classical.  

SECTION I  
MR. Bailiff speaketh of our congregational, and (as he calleth it) our Independent way, as not having continued a week of years (that is, not 7. years) when the errors broke forth in New-England, Pag. 59 Sometimes he maketh us the same in reality with the Brownists (Pag. 58) to whom he attributeth about 50. year's continuance, Pag. 59 sometimes he maketh us followers of Mr. Robinson, who stepped in to support (as he speaketh) languishing Brownism, when it was ●eady to fall, Pag. 17. and 54. All which expressions tend to make the world believe, that our congregational way, or (as he calleth it) Independent, is but of yesterday, newly sprung up, unknown and unheard of in the former Ages of the Church; which if it, were true, were no small prejudice to the way we walk in. The way of God is the old way, Jer. 6.16. yea so old, as fetcheth his antiquity from the ancient of days, and from the Lord Jesus, who is the way of Truth and of Life. Id verum, quod primum: id primum quod ab initio. There is no false way, but is an aberration from the first institution.  
Give me therefore leave to profess freely without offence, what I truly believe without scruple, that though the Acts of Church-government (in the ordination of officers, and censure of offenders) by the Presbyters of neighbour Churches, be very ancient: yet not more ancient than Huma●us Episcopatus (as Beza calleth it:) nor so ancient, as the way of our congregational government of each Church within itself, by the space of 300. years. I will not here speak of those Texts of Scripture (Matth. 18.15, 16, 17. 1 Cor. 5.) which convince us, that congregational discipline was instituted by Christ, and his Apostles. I refer them to the sequel, wherein our particular Tenants are discussed by Mr. Bailiff, which will come in due place (God willing) to be reviewed and examined. But,  
In the first century, whilst the Apostles lived, we read of no act of Church-power put forth by the Elders of Churches over absent Congregations, but only in Act. 15.28. with Chap. 16.4. But let it be considered:  
1. That this Synod was not Status Conventus, a set monthly, or yearly Assembly, the ordinary standing Judicatory of the Church: nor assembled for administration of ordinary Church-power (as ordination of Officers, or censure of offenders) but called together upon urgent, and unwonted occasion, the dissension of the Church of Antioch, which both craved, and needed direction in such a case, Act. 15.1.2. And we easily grant (what we willingly practise in a congregational way) that neither doctrine, nor discipline can well proceed unto public Edification, when the Church is rend with dissension. The promise of Christ's presence with his Church, is given to them met in his name, and agreeing in his Name, Matth. 18.18, 19 But when a Congregation wanteth agreement and peace amongst themselves, it is than a way of God (according to the pattern, Act. 15.2.) to consult with some other Church, or Churches, either by themselves or their messengers met in a Synod. But than they sand not to them for power to administer any ordinance amongst themselves, but for light to satisfy dissenters, and so to remove the stumbling block of the suspicion of maladministration of their power, out of the way.  
But otherwise, when Churches want not peace nor light within themselves, to exercise that power without distraction, which the Lord hath given them, Christ doth not direct his Churches to gather into a Synod for removing of known offences either in Doctrine or manners: but only sendeth to the Pastors or Presbyters of each Church, to reform within themselves, what is amongst them. Rev. chap. 2. and chap. 3. A plain pattern to Churches, in case of public offences tolerated in neighbour Churches, not forthwith to gather into a Synod (or Classical meeting) for redress thereof: but by Letters and messengers to admonish one another of what is behooveful; unless upon such admonition, they refuse to harken to the wholesome counsel of their Brethrens. And than the dissension of this Church from others hindering the free passage of the Gospel (as much as dissension amongst themselves doth) it may give just and necessary occasion of assembling a Synod of the Elders, and messengers of Neighbor-Churches for the conviction of their sin with common consent, and if (after long patience) they remain obstinate, to withdraw from them the right hand of Fellowship in the communion of Churches.  
2. The Synod assembled at Jerusalem, (Acts 15.) was not a convention or consisttory of Elders apart from brethrens: but such a number of Brethrens were admitted into their Assembly, as carried the name of a whole Church, distinguished expressly from the Apostles, and Elders, Acts 15.22, 23. The same who are called the Brethrens, distinct from the Apostles and Elders, ver. 23. are called also the whole Church, ver. 2●. And with them is the power communicated, which the Apostles and Elders put forth in those Synodical Letters, ver. 22. to 29. If the Classis do admit the Brethrens of the Church where they meet, to sit with the Elders, in debating and determining the matters of the Synod, even such a number of Brethrens, as may denominate them a whole church, as than they shall come nearer to the Primitive pattern, so they may expect a freer passage of the presence and blessing of the Holy Ghost with them.  
3. That Synod having heard and argued the whole cause in controversy, they give their judgement both of the doctrine taught at Antioch, and of the persons that taught it, as troublesome to the Church, and subversive to their souls, and unwarranted by themselves, ver. 24. Nevertheless, they neither excommunicate them themselves, nor command the Church to excommunicate them: but leave that to the Church to exercise their own power according to the rule of the Word, in case any of their members should be found to persist obstinately in such pernicious doctrine after conviction.  
4. That Synod laid indeed a burden (or weighty charge) not only of a doctrine to be believed, but of a duty in matter of practice to be performed (for avoiding of offence:) and lay it they did with the greater power, according to the greater measure of Grace and light received, both from Texts of Scriptures clearly opened, and from direction of Apostles personally present. But though we dare not allow alike equal power to ordinary Synods, unless they had the like equal presence and assistance of infallible guides, (such as the Apostles were:) yet our Congregational way doth easily allow the like power to the like orderly Synods so far forth, that when they have cleared from the Scriptures any doubtful point of doctrine or practice, to be of necessary observation, they will readily submit as to a counsel & command of God, both from the Word, and the Word dispensed in the way of an Ordinance. In such a case we acknowledge (with our best Divines) Potestatem in Synodis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a power in Synods to direct and appoint, what spiritual prudence from the Word shall determine. But it is one thing, to direct and charge Churches from the Word of the Lord; what should be done by them: another thing to do their Acts of power for them. The one guideth them in the use and exercise of their power: the other taketh their power, or at lest the exercise of it, out of their hand, which is more than the pattern of Synods (in Acts 15.) doth hold forth.   

SECT. II.  
In the second century of years, the Government of the Church was administered, not in a Classical, but in a congregational way, as in the former century, of which we need no better evidence, than the evident Testimony of the Magdeburgenses, in the second century, chap. 7, tit. de consociatione ecclesiarum, cat rum (say they) si quis probatos authores hujus seculi perspiciat, videbit Forman Gubernationis propemodum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similem fuisse. Singulae enim parem habebant postestatem, verbum Dei pure dicendi, Sacramenta Administrandi, Excommunicandi Haereticos, & sceleratos, ministros eligendi, vocandi, ordinandi, & justissimas ob causas iterum deponendi, conventus & Synodos congregandi, etc. that is, If a man search the approved Authors of this age, he shall see the Form of the Government, to be almost like to a Democracy: For every single Church had equal power of preaching the Word, administering Sacraments, excommunicating heretics and notorious offenders, absolving penitents, choosing, calling, ordaining Ministers, and upon just and weighty causes deposing them again: power also of gathering Conventions and Synods, etc.  
What is congregational Government, and Independent from other Churches, and Presbyters, if this be not? Though he mentioneth Conventions and Synods, yet he speaketh of them, not as having power to govern the Churches, but of the Churches, as having power to gather them. But the Synods left the power of choosing, calling, ordaining Ministers, of censuring heretics and offenders, and of absolving Penitents to the single Churches, each one enjoying equal power within themselves. The help which neighbour Churches yielded one to another, was not Cum imperio, & subjectione, (as he speaketh in the same place) not with Dominion of some, and subjection of others, but Charitatis & aedificationis study, out of brotherly love and care and desire of mutual edification. Which made him say, their Form of Government was like well-nigh, or almost to a Democracy: like to a Democracy, in regard of mutual equality of power in one Church towards another: & yet but almost like to a Democracy, in regard each Church within itself had an Aristocracy of Presbytery for their guidance and Government, though they did no act of Church-Government without concourse and censure of the Brethrens.  
The rash attempt of Victor (Bishop of Rome) in this age against the Churches of Asia, to censure them for a different observation of Easter, it only argueth, that the Mystery of iniquity did more early, and earnestly work in Rome, than in other Churches: but doth not hold forth any received custom of that age, the officers of one Church to proceed to the censure of their Brethrens in other Churches. For this attempt of Victor was generally contested against by Irenaus, and other Bishops.   

SECT. III.  
In the third century of years, the Churches enjoyed (to use the words of the Centurists, Cent. 3. cap. 7.) almost the like form of Government, according to the course of the Former Age, though somewhat more enlarged by ambition.  
For it appeareth, Novatus was excommunicate by a council at Rome under Cornelius. And Samosatenus was excommunicate and deposed by a council at Antioch. But yet where the Bishops did more attend to the rule of Scripture, and former precedents, Congregationull Churches did still enjoy their wont liberty and power.  
Their Bishops and other Officers were not chosen to their hands by a consistory of Bishops (or Pastors) amongst themselves in the absence of the people: but (as Cyprian telleth us) amongst them, in Carthage, and almost throughout all the Provinces, As they have received from the Apostles, so they hold it, that for the orderly Celebration of Ordination, all the neighbour Bishops, (or Pastors) of the same Province, where a Minister is to be Ordained, they come to gether to that people, and the Bishop is chosen in the presence of the people, to whom his life is best known. As (saith he) was done amongst us in the Ordination of our fellow-Minister Sabinus; his Office was put upon him by the suffrage of the whole Brotherhood, and by the judgement of all the Pastors both present, and such as by Letters gave testimony of him: and so hands were imposed upon him. Cyprian Epistolarum l. 1. Epistola 4. And in the same Epistle he saith, The people fearing God, and obedient to the Ordinances of Christ aught to separate from a wicked Ruler, Cum ipsa maxime potestatem habeat vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes, vel indignos recusundi: Seeing the people chief have the power of choosing worthy Ministers, and refusing the unworthy. And as Election and Ordination of Ministers was transacted in the presence and with the suffrage of the people; so was excommunication also: for upon this ground, Cyprian argueth and aggravateth the offence of the Brotherhood in other Churches, who took upon them to question and wave that censure, post Divinum Judicium, (he meaneth, the judgement of God's Ministers the Elders) post populi suffragium, post Coepiscoporum consensum: after the Divine judgement of their Elders, after the suffrage of the people, after the consent of neighbour Ministers, Cyprian. Epistolarum l. 1. Epistola 3. where he giveth to each rank, their proper act in passing Church-censure: he assigneth to the Elders of the Church Judicium, the judgement: to the people, Suffragium, suffrage or vote: to neighbour Ministers, Consensum, consent.  
And that the people had the like concourse in the absolution and admission of penitents, appeareth by Cyprian in the same Epistle,  Vix Pl●bi persuadeo (saith he) immo extorqueo, ut tales patiantur Admitti: (tales nempe, de quorum sincera Paenitentia vix Plebi constabat) & justior factus est Fraternitatis Dolour, ex eo quod unus atque alius obnitente Plebe, & contradicente, mea tamen facilitate suscepti, p●jores extiterunt quam prius fuerant. 
With much ado I persuade people, & even wrist it from them, that they would suffer such to be admitted, (of whose repentance they were doubtful: and the grief of the brotherhood is so much the more just, because one or two before having been received by my facility (the people gainsaying, and striving against it) proved worse afterwards than they were before.  
Where though he spoke of the people's gainsaying and striving against his receiving of one or two: yet it evidently appeareth that in his ordinary and usual course, he was not want to receive any without the people's consent. And even than when they did gainsay and strive against his act at first, yet he was not want to proceed, till with importunate persuasions, and wrestlings with them, he had prevailed with them to give way.  
But of others he speaketh (Epistolarum lib. 3. Epistola 11.) Caeteros, saith he, cum ingenti populi suffragio recipimus: the rest were received with the free and general suffrage of the people. And again, (Epistola 16. of the same book) he thus speaketh ad plebem, Examinabuntur singula, praesentibus, & judicantibus vobis.  
And indeed (in the end of the tenth Epistle of his third Book) he professeth his resolution to perform no act of Church-Government without consent of the Elders and Deacons, and Brethrens of the Church: A primordio Episcopatus mei, statui, nihil sine consilio vestro, & sin● consensu Plebis, mea privatim sententia gerere.  
All these are express and lively lineaments of the very body of congregational discipline, the same (for substance) wherein we walk at this day. And therefore let it not be slighted or despised, as a Novel invention, of seven, or twenty, or fifty years standing.    

CHAPT. V Of the fruits of congregational discipline.  

SECT. I. Of the fruits of it in the primitive times.  
We have heard of the corrupt fruits, which Mr. Bailiff chargeth (but corruptly, and causelessly) upon congregational discipline: Let us now see, whether better fruits have not been found to grow upon it, even such fruits as do argue the discipline to be the plantation of the Lord Jesus.  
1 Presupposing that which hath been proved, that our congregational discipline, is the same (for substance) wherein the Primitive Churches walked for the first 300. years, (to wit, during all the time of the Primitive Persecutions) I conceive (without arrogancy) we may acknowledge the fruits of their discipline to be the fruits of ours.  
First, their exact strictness in examining and trying their Cate●humeni, before they received them into Ecclesiam Fidelium, brought forth this savoury and spiritual fruit, the purity of Churches. Pagan's themselves could not charge them with any crime, but the name and profession of Christianity, see Pliny Epistolarum lib. 10. Epistolam 97. Tertullian Apologetic Chap. 3. That which he saith of Cajus Sejus, was a general Elegy of their Church-members, Bonus vir, malus tantum quòd Christianus. A like fruit to that of Daniel against whom his enemies could found no occasion of complaint of error or fault, except it were for the profession of the Law of his God, Chap. 6.4, 5.  
And as their strict examination received their members pure: so their strict censure kept them pure. For in the Church, judicabatur magno cum pondere:— And in their Feasts they were temperate and religiously fruitful in savoury and gracious conference, and so departed better than they met,  qui non tam Caenam caenaverint, quam disciplinam. Tertul. Apol. Cap. 39  
2 From this purity and vigilancy of their discipline, in the admission of their members, and in the administration of their censures, there sprung forth many other gracious fruits, as their holy and constant and confident confessions of the Name of Christ before judgement seats, the patiented and glorious Martyrdoms of innumerable Saints, to the conviction and astonishment of a world of persecutors.  
Whence also sprung at last, the conversion of a great part of the word unto the truth, the advancement of a Christian Emperor, the rooting out of Paganish Idolatry, and propagation of the profession of Christian Religion, not only through the Roman Empire, but in many other Nations exempt from the power of Roman Arms, yet not from the power of the Name of Christ, and of his Church.  
Afterwards, in the days of Constantine, when the external peace and liberty of the Churches, encouraged all sorts of men (clean and unclean) to offer themselves to the fellowship of the Church, and congregational discipline began to be neglected through the usurped authority of the Bishops, and Presbyters, the limits of the Church began to be as large as the Precincts of the Parish: and the Church itself (which before was want to be as a Garden enclosed, Cant. 4.12.) did now become as a Wilderness lying open to all the Beasts of the Field; who so would offer himself, might have free passage into the bosom of the Church: and offer themselves they did, not from the savour of spiritual gifts (as was want to be done in congregational discipline:) but from respect to the countenance of higher powers, and the privileges and preferments flowing therefrom; Church members being fare more readily received to place of trust and honour, than men without. But this inundation of corrupt members was prevented by the vigilancy of congregational discipline, whilst it stood in force, in the former centuries.  
3. This was another good Fruit of the Congreationall discipline in those primitive times, That whilst it took place in the Churches, there could be no place, nor way open for the advancement of Antichrist, not nor for the usurpation of Episcopal prelacy. For whilst every Church kept their Government within their own Congregation, they knew not the heavy and Lordly yoke of Cathedral Church's, much less were they trodden down with impositions from the Sea of Rome. It is true, Victor Bishop of Rome attempted a censure against the Churches of Asia, but his Arrogancy was speedily repressed by Ireneus, and sundry others both in Europe & Asia. And when some scandalous persons in the African Churches, did appeal in Cyprians time from those Churches unto Rome, Cyprian, and his fellow Bishops (or Presbyters) in the African Churches, did easily prevent the impeachment of their Church-Government from remote Churches, and kept still their Government within themselves.   

SECT. 2. Of the Fruits of congregational discipline in our Churches in New-England.  
2. FOr the fruits of congregational discipline, as it hath been exercised amongst us (though in much weakness) the Lord hath not left us without testimony from Heaven.  
First, in making these Churches a little sanctuary (through his grace) to many thousands of his servants, who fled over hither to avoid the unsupportable pressures of their consciences by the Episcopal tyranny.  
Secondly, in blessing the Ministry of our Preachers here with like fruits of conversion (as in our native Country) of sundry elder and younger persons, who came over hither not out of respect to conscience, or spiritual ends, but out of respect to friends, or outward inlargements: but have here found that grace, which they sought not for.  
Thirdly, in discovering and suppressing those errors of Antinomians, and Familists, which broke forth here amongst us, and might have proceeded to the subversion of many souls, had not the blessing of Christ upon the vigilancy of congregational discipline, either prevented or removed, or healed the same.  
Fourthly, it hath been also a testimony from Heaven of God's blessing upon our way, that many thousands in England in all the Quarters of the kingdom, have been awakened to consider of the cause of Church discipline, for which we have suffered this hazardous and voluntary banishment into this remote Wilderness: and have therefore by letters conferred with us about it, & been (through mercy) so fare enlightened, as to desire an utter subversion of Episcopacy, and conformity, yea and the Honourable Houses of Parliament, the Lord hath been pleased to help them so fare to consider of our sufferings, and of the causes thereof, as to conclude a necessity of reformation of the Ecclesiastical state, (amongst other causes, so) by reason of the necessity put upon so many English subjects to departed from all our employments, and enjoyments in our Native Country, for conscience sake.   

SECT. 3. Of the Fruits of congregational discipline in England.  
3 For the fruits of congregational discipline in England, they that walk in that way amongst you, might speak far more particularly, and largely, than I here can do at such a remote distance. But if Books, and Letters, and reports do not too much abuse us with false intelligence, the great, and gracious, and glorious victories, whereby the Lord hath wrought salvation for England in these late wars, have been as so many testimonies of the blessing of God upon our way. For the chiefest instruments, which God hath delighted to use herein, have been the Faith and fidelity, the courage, and constancy of Independents. And when I say Independents, I mean not those corrupt Sects and Heresies, which shrowded themselves under the vast title of Independency, and in the mean time cast of all Church Government, and Churches too; but such as profess the Kingdom of Christ in the government of each holy Congregation of Saints within themselves.  
Far be it from me to undervalue the brotherly assistance of the Scottish Churches and Commonwealth in working so great a deliverance for England. Yea I accounted their concurrence a greater matter than assistance in this great work. Their exemplary pi●ty and zeal, their courage, and confidence in rising up, and standing out against the invasion of Episcopal tyranny, and superstition, did doubtless quicken and encourage England to stand for the like liberty in the like cause: and to put forth that zeal, which the Lord had kindled in the hearts of many for Reformation. And this was more than an assistance, even a guidance. Afterwards the forwardness of the Scottish Nation to advance their Armies into the English Fields for the help of England against the Common Enemies of Church and State, was an Act of brotherly love never to be forgotten without due and thankful acknowledgement, and encouragement. But yet let the good pleasure of the Lord be acknowledged, who out of his abundant grace, hath granted the chiefest successes to the English designs by the Forces of the Independents, which may not be denied without too much ingratitude both to God and man. Let all the glory thereof be wholly and solely given to the Lord: but yet let not the instruments be accounted unfruitful, by whom the Lord hath brought forth such blessed Fruits of victory, and liberty, both from civil servitude, and superstitious thraldom, and withal so great an advancement of Reformation both in Church and State.  
The inundation of Sects and Heresies in London, and the retarding of Reformation in England, which have both of them been objected as the bitter fruits of the congregational way, have been cleared above, to spring from other Roots, not from that way. See Chap. 3. Sect. 5. the end of it.     

The second Part (being Doctrinal, and Controversal) Concerning Congregational Churches and their Government.  

The PREFACE.  
THe Author of the Book entitled Vindiciae Clavium, thought good to conceal his own Name, though in matters of Accusation (whereof the Book is full.) It was the manner of the Romans (and that Roman manner was but just and equal) to have the Accuser show himself face to face. Acts. 25.16. And indeed the equity and equality of Brotherly love would have required him either to have declared his own Name, or to have concealed mine as well as his own. A little love amongst Brethrens would sooner heal the dissensions of Brethrens, than great store of Books, breathing lust to contention. It is neither Presbyterians, nor those of the Congregational way (whom they call Independents) that do hinder either Reformation or Peace: but only the want of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the want of following and holding forth the Truth (or that which we believe to be the Truth) in love, on both sides: It is love that edifieth both souls and States.  
But since the Author of Vindiciae is pleased to conceal his Name▪ I therefore think it not amiss (for brevity's sake, and to prevent a long Periphrasis of the Author of Vindiciae Clavium) when I am occasioned to name him (which is very often) only to take leave to call him Vindex, or (in English) sometime the Assertor, sometime the Avenger; which both the Title and Purport of his Book, do hold him forth to be, as acting the part of both.  
The scope of his Book (so far as it concerneth me) is chief to show forth my weaknesses and contradictions, as his Title manifesteth. But if Christ may have any glory by that, I shall willingly acknowledge (without his accusation, and much more without his conviction) that I am made up of weaknesses and contradictions. The best good in me is but weak at the best: and that which is corrupt, is weakness itself. If there be Old and New man in me (as by the grace of Christ I see what I am) verily I cannot but find a bundle, not only of contradictions, but of contrafactions in myself. I believe, I doubt: I allow, I condemn: I hope, I fear: I love, I hate: I rejoice, I grieve: I would, I would not: I do, I undo: the same self, the same thing, at the same time.  
Nevertheless all this will not argue that which the Avenger saith; He hath heard, that I have often altered my Judgement since I went to New-England: Nor that the Author of the Keys does contradict the Author of the Way, which is himself.  
I have not had liberty to peruse the Way, since it was published: but I see by the first words of it, that the Publishers had not the Copy which was taken hence from me, but an imperfect Transcript. But I do believe what the Publishers do report; That s●●ing aside some difference in Logical Terms, there is no material difference between the Keys and the Way, either in Doctrine ofDivinity, or in Church-practise.  
Yes, (saith the Avenger) I find, He doth (in these) as flatly contradict himself, as ever any man did. Instance in one place, (and leave the rest to the following discourse.) In the Keys, (Pag. 4.) he saith; The Keys were delivered to Peter as an Apostle, as an Elder, and as a Believer. The sense of the words (of Christ to Peter) will be most full, if all the several considerations be taken jointly together. But in the Way, (Pag. 27.) He saith, The Power of the Keys is given to the Church, to Peter not as an Apostle, not as an Elder, but as a professed Believer: Is not this a flat contradiction?  
Answ. 1. The words are not mine, but the Assertors, which he reporteth me to say in the Keys; The Keys were delivered to Peter, as an Apostle, as an Elder, and as a Believer. I would be loath to be found to speak so il-Logically, as to say, Socrates hath a power of motion given to him, as a living Creature, as a Man, as a Philosopher. It is a trivial rudiment in Schools, Whatsoever is attributed to any as such, is given to all such universally, and to such reciprocally, and only. If the Keys were delivered to Peter as an Apostle, than to all the Apostles, and only to the Apostles. My words expressed by me are plain enough, and (I thank God) not destitute of reason. It hath proved a busy question, how Peter is to be considered in receiving this Power of the Keys, whether as an Apostle, or as an Elder (for an Elder also he was) or as a Believer, professing his Faith before the Lord Jesus, and his fellow Brethrens.  
I added indeed, the sense of the words of Christ to Peter, (To thee will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of heaven) will be most full, if all the several considerations be taken jointly together.  
Wherein as I expound mine own meaning in the words following (in that Treatise of the Keys) So the Publishers of the Keys, do fitly express the same in their Epistle [The Disposal (say they)" of this Power, may lie in a due allotment into divers hands according to their several concernments; rather than in an entire and sole Trust committed to any one man, or any sort or rank of Men, or Officers.] What saith the Avenger to this? Herein (saith he) Perhaps we might agreed with them, but than not with the Author, who places all the power in one sort of men alone, that is, the Brethrens without Officers, in the Way, pag. 45. But the Assertor taketh too much liberty, to affirm, I say that in that place, which in the same passage I do expressly deny; My words are express, They, (that is the Brethrens) may not administer Sacraments in defect of all Officers, because by the appointment of Christ, that pertaineth only to such as are called by Office to preach the Gospel. Matth. 28.19.20.  
But (saith the Avenger) in the Way (page 27.) He saith The Power of the Keys is given to the Church, to Peter, not as an Apostle, nor as an Elder, but as a professed Believer, in the name of Believers. Is not this a flat contradiction? Not verily, the Solution is very easy and obvious, even to the Avenger himself, if he would but have cast his eye upon the very next words in the Keys, whence this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is fetched. The words run thus, The sense of the words will be most full, if all the several considerations be taken jointly together. Take Peter considered not only as an Apostle, but withal an Elder also, and a Believer too, professing his Faith, all may well stand together. For there is a different power given to all these, to an Apostle, to an Elder, to a Believer: and Peter was all these, and received all the Power which was given by Christ to any of these, or to all of these together.— So that Augustine did not mistake, when he said, Peter Received the Keys in the Name of the Church.  
I cannot conceive what should move the Avenger so confidently to charge a flat contradiction in these two passages, and that as flatly as ever man did contradict himself: unless it were partly through tmis-report of my words in the one place: whereof before) partly, hrough misapprehension what the force in Logic is, of a quatenus tale: For he that knoweth that, he is not ignorant, that if Peter had received the Power of the Keys, quatenus Apostolus, or quatenus Presbyter, as an Apostle, or as an Elder; than only Apostles, or only Elders had received all Church power, which all judicious Divines, and (I doubt not) himself amongst them will utterly deny. But he that saith Peter received the power of the Keys, as standing in the room of all sorts of Officers and Members of the Church, and so in the name of the whole Church, He affirmeth that Peter received all Church power, which is found in all professed Believers, whether Officers, or private Brethrens: and of Officers, whether Ordinary, as Elders; or Extraordinary, as Apostles, and Evangelists. And is there any passage in the Keys which crosseth or contradicteth this? and that flatly, and so flatly, as never any man more?  
Let this serve for my first Answer to this Contradiction: let me also add another.  
Answ. 2. If there had been some difference between the Way and the Keys in some expressions: yet (as the Praefacers related from a Letter of mine to a friend of theirs:) it lay rather in Logical Terms, than in Doctrine of Divinity, or Church-Practise: And such, amongst others, is this very point in hand. If there seem to be any difference in the expression of the one Treatise, or of the other, about this point, it is in the first Subject of the Power of the Keys (which is a Logical Notion:) but the point is the same, both in Doctrine of Divinity, and in Church-practise.  
As for the imputation of Inconstancy, which the Avenger is pleased to put upon me, He hath heard that I have often altered my Judgement since I went to New-England: I should thank him if he would tell me either wherein I have altered my Judgement, or from whom he so heard: Mean while, he may do well to remember, That a Citizen of Zion (a pure member of a pure Church) taketh not up a Reproach against his Neighbour. Psal. 15.3. John Baptist was surmised by some to be a Reed shaken with the wind; but it was a windy Fancy.  
3. And for a third Answer, It were no just matter of calumny if in some latter Tractate I should retract, or express more commodiously, what I wrote in a former lesle safely. Augustine (as much above me, as the Moon to a little Star,) lost no whit of his Reputation in the Church, by writing two whole Books of Retractations of his own Opinions and Expressions.   

§ CHAP. I. Of the CHURCH, to which Christ committed the Power of the Keys.  

Section I  
VIndex doth here first inquire what I mean by this Church: ●hereof, though he might fully have informed himself from the fifth point of the first Chapter of the Keys (which himself had in hand:) yet in hope of some advantage, He chose rather to fetch it from another Tract of mine, touching our Churchway: Which though he say, it went up and down in the dark; yet it's dark walking was no intent of mine, but that it should found either timely impression, or (by advice of friends) utter suppression. Now in that Tract I said, The Church to which the Lord Jesus committed the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, (Mat. 16.19.) is Coetus Fidelium, commonly called a particular visible Church, meeting together with common and joint consent into one Congregation, for public worship, and mutual edification.  
But (saith the Avenger) of all the rest this is the most improbable● sense of our Saviour's words, If by the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, he meaneth that Church of which he spoke before in vers. 18. But that was either the Catholic Visible Church: or rather the Invisible Mystical Church; for that only is built upon the Rock, and against that the gates of Hell shall never prevail: Whereas Particular Churches may fail.  
Answ. 1. It is not a more improbable sense of our Saviour's words, to understand the Kingdom of Heaven (Matth. 16.19.) of a Particular Visible Church, rather than of the Catholic Visible Church. For I do not read that the Scripture doth any where acknowledge a Catholic Visible Church at all. The Catholic Church is not Visible as a Church: and the Church that is Visible, is not Catholic. Doctor Ames his Judgement seems to me more Orthodoxal, Ecclesia non est tota simul Visibilis. Medulla. l. 1. c. 32. num. 1. For though the whole Church (or which is all one, the Catholic Church) may be Visible in her singular Members; yet so they are not a Church. Or though it may be Visible in the several Particular Congregations, yet none of them is Catholic. Or though all of them together may be called a Catholic Church, or General Assembly, if they were met together; Yet I suppose, Vindex would be loath to say, That Christ giveth the Power of the Keys (all Ecclesiastical Power) into their hands. Such general Assemblies are rare and extraordinary; and extraordinary Assemblies are not fit Judicatories to hear and censure ordinary offences, or to administer the ordinary Acts of Church-Power.  
Answ. 2. He therefore distrusting (as it seemeth) that to be the meaning of our Saviour's words (to understand the Kingdom of Heaven of the Catholic Visible Church) He expoundeth it rather to be meant of the Invisible Mystical Church. And indeed, true it is, that Peter and other Preachers of the Gospel have received such a Power of the Keys, as by the Ministry of the Word, to beget Faith in their Hearers, and so to open to them a door into the Invisible Church: as also to convince unbelievers of their damnable Estate, and so Ministerially to declare them shut out from the fellowship of the Invisible Church. But there is also a Power of the Keys, to open a door unto professed Believers into the Visible Church: and again to shut them out of the Visible Church, when they grow scandalous. And therefore the Visible Church cannot be excluded from one part of the meaning of the Kingdom of Heaven, whereof Peter received the Keys.  
Besides, certain it is, that when by the power of the Keys, a Believer is received into the Invisible Church, he can never be shut again out of that Church. But the Keys here given to Peter, have a Power to shut out of the Kingdom of heaven, even the same Persons, unto whom they have opened the door before. And therefore the Kingdom of Heaven (whereof Peter received the Keys) is not meant only of the Invisible Church, but of the Visible Church also,  
Answ. 3. The reasons which Vindex objecteth to the contrary, will not prevail against this Truth, not more than the gates of hell against the Church.  
Object. 1. It is the Invisible Church only which is built upon the Rock, and against that, the gates of Hell shall never prevail: whereas Particular Churches may fail.  
Answ. It is not true, that the Invisible Church only is built upon a Rock; for Particular Churches are built upon a Rock also. Built they are upon Divine Institution, and Christ is laid for the foundation of them; or else they are not Churches of Christ, which are described to be in God our Father, and in our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Thes. 1.1. The Apostle Paul laid Christ for the foundation of the Visible Church of Corinth; 1 Cor. 3.10, 11. Christ is not the head of that Church whereof he is not the foundation: and where he is the foundation, he is also the Rock, on which they are built; for he is not a sandy foundation.  
" Yea, but Particular Churches may fail.  
What than? So may the true Disciples of Christ fail (in respect of bodily subsistence) and yet the gates of Hell never prevail against them; For they will be received into everlasting habitations. Luke 16.9.  
Yea, but Particular Churches may fail and fall away from the Faith; all the Churches of Asia are fallen from Christ to Mahomet: and sundry in Europe, from Christ to Antichrist.  
Yet those Churches that were founded upon Christ, and builded upon that Rock, they neither failed, nor fell away. It was their Successors, and not they, that failed, and fell in that sort. If the Posterity of an holy Particular Church do degenerate, they were never founded upon Christ, but in an outward form. God may remove the Candlestick (that is) his particular Church) out of that place (say out of Corinth or Ephesus, Rev. 2.5.) yet he will ever have some or other Particular Churches visible in one place or other; and so against that Church state, the gates of hell shall never prevail. Dr Whitakers declareth the Judgement of Orthodox Protestants in this point; Nos dicimus, aliquam semper fore in mundo Ecclesiam, quae Christo pareat, eamque visibilem, De Ecclesia, Quest. 3. Cap. 2. Junius in his Animadverversions in Bellarm. Controu. 4. de Concil. & Eccles. Cap. 13. Art. 1. Concludimus inquit, ne visibilem quidem Ecclesiam, posse Desicere, atque interire, adeo ut in se ipsa sit invisibilis, etc. And Doctor Ames beareth the like witness. Ecclesia nunquam plane desinit esse visibilis. Medulla. l. 1 cap. 31. And this they intent of some Particular Visible Church or other. For a Catholic Visible Church they dispute against, but maintain the Catholic Church to be invisible. Whitakers de Ecclesia Q. 2a a. 10, Dicimus Ecclesiam Catholicam invisibilem esse, etiam tum cum Particularis quaeque Ecclesia vel maxime floret.  
Object. 2. The Kingdom of Glory is one part of the meaning of the Kingdom of Heaven, and it is not contradistinguished to a Particular Congregation, but to the General Visible Church on Earth.  
Answ. There is not any Particular Congregation on earth, but may be, upon just occasion, contradistinguished from the Kingdom of Glory. It may truly be said, whosoever is duly bound or loosed in any one Particular Church, is also bound and loosed in the Kingdom of Glory. There is no semblance of difficulty herein.  
Nevertheless, when (in the Keys page 2.) I spoke of the Power of the Keys given to Peter to bind on earth, I did not mean it in any one single Particular Church on earth alone, but generally and indefinitely, in every Particular Church on earth. For every Apostle had transcendent power in every Particular Church on earth: And every Particular Church on earth (being all of one common Nature militant here on Earth, and different from the Triumphant Church in Heaven) may justly be contradistinguished from the Kingdom of Glory. But yet I never dreamt of a General Visible Church on earth (as Vindex expoundeth me:) unless he mean it, as Visible in Particular Congregations. And if he so mean, it will better express the Truth, and my meaning, to say, That Peter received the Keys to bind and lose (as in the invisible Church in some sort, so) in the Particular Visible Church indefinitely; that is, in every Particular Visible Church on earth. For a Particular Visible Church is of a common and general nature, and comprehendeth in it every singular Particular Visible Church, as that of Corinth, Ephesus, Philippi, and the rest.  
Object. 3. That Church is meant (in Matth. 16.19.) whereof Peter was one (Way, Page 1.) But Peter was not a Member of such a Particular Congregation: for there was none such extant, when Christ spoke these words to Peter.  
Answ. I presume Vindex is not ignorant, that in rational discourses, and propositions of Art, The Copulae doth not Connotare Tempus, but only Connectere the Subject, and the Predicate: else he will open a way to insoluble fallacies  
As in that Sophism, 
Nullus Infans fuit Juvenis:  
Omnis Senex fuit Infans:  
Ergo, Nullus Senex fuit Juvenis.   
This Connotation of time in the Copula, breedeth the Fallacy; Let Vindex therefore be pleased to leave such arguings to Sophisters, or make use of them when he will refresh his wit in Argument with young Scholars. But amongst Brethrens, what if I should say, Resurrection to glory is given to the Bodies of the faithful, whereof Elect Infants are a part? Though the resurrection be not yet come, nor Elect Infants yet come to be faithful? yet the Proposition is true, because the Subject and Predicate have true Connexion in the nature of the thing, though not in the present order of time. When Christ directed his Disciples, and amongst them, Peter, in case of private offence, and obstinacy therein, at length, to tell the Church, whether by Church be meant the Particular Congregation, or the Presbytery; neither of them both were than extant, when Christ spoke these words to Peter. But will that be a good Argument to prove, That Christ did not direct the offended Brother either to tell the Particular Church, or to tell the Presbytery, because neither of them were than extant?  
Object. 4. That Church whereof Peter received the Keys, was such, whereto Peter or any offended Brother might tell an offence, and have it censured. But that was never done in a Church of Saints, Believers without Officers; nor was the Church of Corinth such a Church, but had Officers, who might authoritatively censure the incestuous Person, etc.  
Answ. This is another passage of Sophistry, but somewhat more open.— For if the Objection be cast into a true Syllogism, it will run thus: The Church of which Peter received the Keys, was such to which Peter, and any offended Brother might tell an offence, and have it censured. But the Church of Saints and Believers without Officers, was not such to whom Peter, or any offended Brother might tell an offence, and have it censured.  
Thus the minor is justly denied: and therefore Vindex chooseth rather to put his minor in other terms;  
The Church of Saints and Believers without Officers, was not such a Church, to whom Peter or any offended Brother did tell an offence.  
But now there is Quatuor Termini in his Syllogism: Might tell an offence, and Did tell an offence, make two different Mediums. What if the Church of Corinth when they censured the Incestuous Person, were not such a Church without Officers? Or, what if no Church wanted Presbyters in the Apostles times? If it were so, it was the greater bounty of Christ to them in those Primitive times, when the gifts of the Spirit were poured out in more abundance. But yet if a Church of Saints, or Believers without Officers, have power from Christ to elect Officers, than have they power also much more to admit Members. And if they have power to admit them without Officers, they have like power upon just offence to exclude them out of their holy Communion without Officers. For it is the same power to open and to shut, Instituere, & destituere.  Object. 5. The Church to which the Keys are given, are said to be such as do all of them meet in one place for the administration of the Ordinances of Christ: 
But the Ordinances of Christ are not to be found, much lesle administered in a Church of Believers without Officers.  
Answ. This latter Proposition is left naked and unguarded without proof. And I confess, Ipse dixit may go for a warrant in Pythagorean Philosophy: and teste me ipso may go for a warrant in Royal Grants of Favour: but not in matters of Faith, nor of Justice between King and Subject, much lesle in matters of controversy amongst Brethrens. The truth is, Though the Ordinances of Christ may not all of them be administered in a Church of Believers without Officers, and authoritative dispensing of the Word and Censures, and Ministration of Sacraments: yet some Ordinances of Christ may be found and administered in a Church of Believers without Officers. As it is an Ordinance of Christ, two or three of them (much more all of them) to meet and pray together, and admonish one another in Christ's Name, Matth. 18.20. It is an Ordinance of Christ, to elect Officers, (Deacons and Elders:) for this is the power and privilege of the Church of Brethrens. Though Titus was jest in Crete to ordain Elders in every City (Tit. 1.5.) yet not to elect them: As Cyprian argueth from sundry passages of the Acts of the Apostles, and other Scriptures; and thereupon inferreth, Plebs Dominicis Praeceptis obsequens, & Deum metuens— ipsa maxime potestatem habet, vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes, vel indignos recusandi. Cyprian. Epistolarum. l. 1. Epistola. 4.  
And if a Church of Believers may thus supply themselves with Officers when they want them, and if Officers and Brethrens have all ordinary Church power, (and so all Ordinances of Christ, which are ordinarily administered, found amongst them) than what hindereth, but that a Church of Believers hath in it, as some Ordinances formally, so all radically and virtually, and the same administered, and administrable amongst them?  Object. 6. When it is said (in the Way, pag. 1.) Christ committed the Keys to the Church, that is, to a Particular Congregation, it must be meant either Subjectiuè, or Objectiuè; If it be meant in this latter sense, That the Keys are committed to the Church, as the Object of the exercise of the Keys, that is, for the good and use of the Church, it is truly said, but nothing to the purpose. In this sense, the Keys are given first and more immediately to the Invisible Mystical Church (all are yours, whether Paul, etc.) than to the General Visible Church for their sakes; than to the Particular Congregation, as a part and Member of that General Visible Church. 
But if it be meant in the former sense (as it must be so meant, or else the Author of the Way doth equivocate with us from the beginning throughout the whole Book) than he falleth into the extreme of the Brownists, which he so laboureth to avoid. For to take the Church (in Matth. 16.) For a particular Congregation of Believers without Officers, is a new, strange, and false Gloss, maintained by none but Brownists, and such like Separatists.  
Answ. When I said Christ committed the Keys to the Church, that is, to a Particular Congregation, I meant it indeed Subjective, though not excluding Objective. For I do not make the Particular Visible Church a different Church from the Invisible. The distribution of the Church into Visible and Invisible, is not into divers kinds of Churches, nor into divers kinds of Members of the same Church, but into divers Adjuncts of the same Members of the same Church: who in respect of their Spiritual and Internal Estate (to wit, their Faith) are Invisible: but in respect of their External condition (to wit, the Profession of Faith) are Visible. The Particular Church (I speak of it indefinitely) receiveth the power of the Keys both Subjective to itself, and Objective for itself, though the saving benefit thereof redound only to the Elect amongst them, who are also of them. Neither is this to fall into the extreme of (those whom you call) Brownists, to take the Church for a Particular Congregation without Officers.  
For first, When I wrote that Proposition (in the first words of the Way) it was not than in my mind to understand any other Particular Congregation to which Christ had committed all ordinary Church Power, and the administration thereof, but to a Congregation of Believers furnished with Officers. For I spoke of such a Church whereof Peter was one; and he was an Officer. Though I perceive M. Rutterford understood me otherwise, (as you also do:) and so from thence raiseth his first controversy: Whether the Church of Believers destitute of the Eldership, have the power of the Keys?  
Which (to avoid misconstruction) I expressed more distinctly in the Tract of the Keys. But yet, take it as he doth, for a Church of Believers without Officers; They have received some part of the Power of the Keys formally, as the election of Officers, etc. and the whole ordinary Power of the Keys, radically and virtually. The stock of the Vine (which groweth in the bulk from the root) hath not immediate power to bring forth Grapes; but yet it hath power to produce branches, which do bring forth Grapes: So the Body of the Church of Believers, though they have not immediate power of rule authoritatively to dispense the Word, or to administer Sacraments at all: yet they have power to produce such Officers as may perform the same.  
Again secondly, Dr Whitakers was none of them whom you call Brownists, yet he speaking of this Text (which you quote in this Paragraph, to prove that Ministers are given to the Church objective, for their good, not subjective, so as the Church to have power over them. 1 Cor. 3.22.23. He beareth witness against your gloss: Apostolus saith he, non tantum ait Ministros institutos esse propter utilitatem, Ecclesiae: sed sic illos esse Ecclesiae, ut Ecclesia est Christi. At Ecclesia Christo subjicitur non propter Christi utilitatem instituta est. Et Apostolus Ecclesiam esse Dei Templum, affirmat: Ministri in Templo, non supra Templum. Whitak Controu. 4. Quaest. 1. Num. 11. in fine. Neither was Parker one of those whom you call Brownists, or such like Separatists, but wrote against them. But yet he understandeth the Church (Matth. 16.) of a particular Congregation of Believers, as distinct from Officers: yea and proveth it at large. Parker de Ecclesiastica Politia, l. 3. cap. 1, 2, 3.  
Object. 7. To conclude, the Church of which our Saviour speaketh, is called here the Kingdom of Heaven (on Earth:) But a Particular Congregation of Believers is never called the Kingdom of Heaven; being but a Member or Corporation of that Kingdom. It were as improper to call a Congregation, Christ's Kingdom, as to call London the Kingdom of England.  
Answ. 1. It is not material whether a Particular Congregation of Believers be ever expressly called the Kingdom of Heaven or not; It is enough it is called a Church, yea as it is distinguished from Church Officers. Those whom he calleth the whole Church distinguished from the Apostles and Elders (Acts 15.22.) the same he calleth the Brethrens, vers. 23. And if the Brethrens may be called the Church, they may justly also be called the Kingdom of Heaven, seeing the style of the Kingdom of Heaven is usually given to the Church. You may more truly observe, that the Presbytery is never called in Scripture the Kingdom of Heaven: not, nor are they called the Church, unless it be in that one place Matth. 18.17.) which yet may sooner be presumed, than proved to be understood of the Presbytery; I mean, a Consistory of Presbyters, distinct from the Congregation of Believers.  
Answ. 2. I dare not say that the Particular Visible Church is never called the Kingdom of Heaven. For when Christ went out to hire labourers into his Vineyard, it was into this or that Particular Church, respectively. And this Vineyard thus destitute of Labourers or Officers, and distinguished from them, is called the Kingdom of Heaven, Matth. 20.1.  
Again, when the Kingdom of Heaven is compared to ten Virgins, five wise, and five foolish, (Matth. 25.1, 2.) this is a description of the estate of each Particular Church, respectively; without respect to their Officers. Besides, when the Kingdom of God is said to be within us, (Luke 17.21. And all the faithful are said to be made Kings and Priests unto God (Rev. 1.6.) Even a Kingdom of Priests (1 Pet. 2.9.) can it than be termed an improper speech to call a Particular Church of Believers, the Kingdom of Heaven?  
Yes, they are but a Member, or Corporation of the Kingdom: and it were improper to call London the Kingdom of England.  
But every similar part of a similar Body doth properly partake both in the Name and Nature of the whole. Every part of water is water, and is both cold and moist, as the whole water is. And such a part of such a Body, is a Particular Visible Church. The Church of Corinth is said to be the Body of Christ, and the members thereof, members in particular. And Christ hath given unto them all his Officers, as well as unto other Churches, 1 Cor. 11.27, 28. But such is not the State of London. London is not a similar, but a dissimilar part of England, and different from all the Corporations of England, different in power, different in privileges: How than can a comparison of unequals, be drawn to parallel a state of equals.   

¶ What the KEYS of the Kingdom of HEAVEN be. Section II.  
IN opening what the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven be, it was not my intent to enumerate them all distinctly and particularly in that first Chapter of the description of the Keys, which was but a Preface and Introduction to the whole Tractate. I thought it enough to give an instance only in general, there, in two or three examples; reserving a more exact distribution of them to the chapters following: and referring each sort of them to their several Subjects in their proper place, jest I might clog myself and the Reader with needles repetitions. I therefore contented myself to say in general, The Keys are the Ordinances of Christ, which he hath instituted to be administered in his Church, as the preaching of the Word, as also the administering of the Seals and Censures.  
I instanced in these, as most obvious, and of easiest apprehension to any vulgar Reader. But in instancing these, I supposed no man would be of so narrow apprehension, as not to conceive those things to be included, without which, these cannot duly be performed. As, the word cannot be preached, nor the Sacraments dispensed, without a vocation unto such spiritual Administrations. Nor can it be doubted, that if there must be a vocation to administer these, there must be also some, who have power from Christ to give such a vocation.  
Albeit, If it had been of any weight for the expediting of any controversy about the Keys (which I know none:) I might easily have given some definition of the Keys; as to say, The Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are spiritual Powers given by Christ to his Church to dispense the Treasures of his Kingdom, for the opening and shuting, binding and losing the spiritual Estates of men in the Church. By spiritual Powers, I mean spiritual callings, and spiritual gifts fitting for them, enabling to some spiritual Acts: By the treasures of the Kingdom I mean the Word, Seals, and Censures, and the spiritual blessings laid up in them. But Callings, Gifts, and Treasures, are all of them Ordinances. The other parts of the Definition, what be the Acts, and Ends, Objects, and Subjects of this power, I opened formerly in the third, fourth, and fifth Paragraphs of the first chapter of the Keys.  
But upon what I expressed in this Paragraph, Vindex is pleased to animadvert some things.  
1. In this Paragraph (saith he) as you do clearly lay down the state of the Question: so do you strongly confute the scope of your whole book, which is to give the People a share in the Government of the Church.  
Answ. Vindex doth clearly mistake my scope and meaning, to think I did lay down the state of the Question in this Paragraph. For I think it is no Question at all, That the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, are the Ordinances of Christ, which he hath instituted to be administered in his Church. Neither is it the scope of my whole Book, to give the people a share in the Government of the Church: Nay, it is not the scope of the greater part of the Book: Nay further, there be that blame the Book for the other Extreme, That it placeth the Government of the Church not at all in the hands of the People, but of the Presbytery. So various are the apprehensions of Books by variety of Readers, and by their sometime judicious, sometime cursory reading.  
Lest of all is there any colour for this apprehension, that I do in this Paragraph strongly confute the scope of my whole Book. Yes (saith he) For if the Keys be the Ordinances of Christ, they are given indeed for the Church of Believers, that is, for their good and benefit, objectiuè; but are never in all the Scripture, nor in all Antiquity said to be given to the Church Subjectiuè.  
Answ. What Power I acknowledge given to the Church of Believers Subjective, either in admission of Members, or election of Officers, or censure of Offenders, I do allege Scriptures for it; which when Vindex taketh in hand to evade them, I shall return him (God willing) further answer, which in this place were an unseasonable prevention: But when he affirmeth that such power as I acknowledge given to the Church, is not to be read of in all Antiquity; it maketh me to suspect, that either he hath not read All Antiquity, (which yet is no crime, only he should not than have denied them all, to own this Power; for it is not safe to avouch more than we know:) or if he have read them all, he ●ath forgotten what is recorded by the most ancient Antiquity for the space of the first three hundred years, during all the time of the Primitive persecutions. Of which I have given account to Mr Baily in answer to the Historical part of his Dissuasive, (chap. 4. Sect. 1, 2, 3.) whereto I refer him.  
But saith Vindex, it soundeth ill at first hearing, to say, that the People have any power to exercise Ordinances, of Preaching, or administering the Seals or Censures. The power of Preaching or administering Sacraments by the People, as none but Separatists do usurp; so yourself complain of it, Page 6. And why you should allow them power in censures, there is very little reason.  
Answ. If Preaching the Word, or Administering the Seals, were all the Ordinances which Christ hath instituted, and no more but they, Vindex saith true, it would sound ill at first hearing (and if he will, at second and third hearing too) to say, The People have any power to exercise these Ordinances; unless that kind of Preaching be understood, which D. Ames approveth, l. 4. de Casibus Conscientiae, cap. 25. in respons. 3. ad Quaest. 1.  
But to allow the people a power in Censures, I marvel it should sound so ill at first hearing, of such whose ears have been long wont to hear of Suspensions, and Excommunications; not only of private Christians, but even of many Ministers, by Chancellors and Commissaries, who generally are not Ministers, and it were to be wished, that the most of them, (yea, or the best of them) were as good as Brethrens. But yet I somewhat wonder, that he that in this Paragraph could allege all Antiquity, should think it to sound ill at first hearing, That the Brethrens of the Church should have any hand in Church Censures; who knoweth what reverend Testimony Ancient Tertullian giveth of them (Apologetici Capite 39) Quum Probi, Cum Boni Coeunt, Cum Pii, Cum Casti Congregantur, non Factio dicenda est, sed Curia. And what an hand Cyprian giveth to the People in Church censures, none that have read him can be ignorant. What reason there is for their Power in Church-censures (whether little, or much) we shall further consider (God willing) in its place: for here you neither give reasons against it, nor refute our reasons for it.  
2. A second thing which Vindex animadverts in the former Paragraph is,  that I call the Keys, Ordinances, which Christ hath instituted to be administered in his Church, the Church of Believers, a Particular Congregation. 
But mark it (saith he) not by a Church without Officers: but by the Officers instituted in the Church.  
Answ. He need not have bid me to mark that, which if himself had marked, He could not but see, That I never acknowledged it to be in the power of the people to administer all Ordinances, but to administer some Ordinances themselves, and to elect and call such to them, as might administer all the rest.  
3. His third Animadversion is, That I say, the Keys are neither Sword nor Sceptre: for they convey not Sovereign power; but Stewardly and Ministerial: which clearly (saith he) excludeth the People; for they have no Stewardly or Ministerial Power over themselves.  
Answ. As if the People were not Stewards of the Grace of God given to them! The Apostle Peter maketh accounted, That as every man hath received the gift, so he should minister the same, as good Stewards of the manifold Grace of God. 1 Pet. 4.10. If the people have received any gift of Grace, they are either Stewards of it, or Lords: Lords they are not, who must give account to the Lord for the employment and improvement of their gifts: what are they else than but Stewards? Yea, (you will say) but private men may bestow their Gifts privately. But election of Officers is a public Gift, whatsoever else beside; and that must be dispensed publicly; and that not as Lords, to elect whom they list, but as Stewards and Ministers to Christ, to elect whom the Lord hath chosen.  I said indeed (in that Paragraph) That Christ in giving the Keys, investeth those to whom he giveth them, with a power to, open and shut the Gates both of the Church and Heaven; and that this power lieth partly in their spiritual calling (whether it be their Office, or their Place, and Order in the Church) and partly in the concourse and co-operation of Christ, accompanying the right dispensation of those Keys or Ordinances. 
But (saith Vindex) I suppose the word Calling, should be taken here of some special Calling or Office: which again would exclude the people, as having no Office in the Church.  
Answ. There is no reason why you should suppose, That Calling here should be taken of some special Calling or Office; if special denotate a specification of a Calling distinct from other Members of the Church: But if it only specify a distinct calling, or state, or order different from such as are not members of the Church: so it is true indeed, every Member of the Body hath a special Calling distinct from such Believers or others, as are not yet received into Member like communion with this or that particular Church; Yea, and every Member of this or that particular Church, hath a calling to put forth some Acts of Power in his own Church, which Members of another particular Church have not power to put forth there, though they may put forth the same each one in his own Church, respectively: Every Member of the Body of a Particular Church hath some Function, or Action, (or as the New Translation termeth it) some office in the Body. For that which is expressed in the Protasis of the Apostles comparison, is employed in the reddition; Rom. 12.4, 5. As we have many Members in one Body, and all Members have not the same office: so we being many, are one Body in Christ, etc. If all the Members of the Body have not the same office, it implieth, they have all of them some office or function, or action, though not the same. But custom hath obtained, that they only are accounted to have a special calling or office in the Church, who are set apart for the eminent administrations in the Church; as the Pastors, Teachers, Elders, Deacons. And such a special calling, it is not requisite that the common Brethrens of the Church should have, to dispense that power of the Keys which is committed to them. For Christ hath neither called them to it, nor given them gifts suitable for it.  
But (saith Vindex) when you say the Power of the Keys lieth in their spiritual calling (whether it be their Office or Place, and Order in the Church:) you add this explication on purpose to steal in the interest of the People in some share of the Keys.  
Answ. It is not stealth, but Justice to give every man his own: Liberty, to whom liberty; power, to whom power; honour, to whom honour belongeth. The Psalmist foretold it in a new song (all which new songs have special accomplishment in the new Testament) That this honour have all his Saints, to wit, in the Congregation of Saints to execute the spiritual censures (or Judgements) written, Psal. 149.9. And if the Lord have given them this honour, it is rather stealth (yea sacrilege) to take it from them, than to allow it to them.  
But (saith Vindex) if place, or Order in the Church, do give the People out of Office, any Power in the Keys; that is, in the Ordinances; than may Women and Children claim an Interest in those Keys, for they have a Place and Order in the Church as well as men.  
Answ. It is not every place or order in the Church, that giveth power to receive the ordinances administered by others, much lesle power, themselves to dispense ordinances. Children have not power to receive the Lords Supper, much lesle to administes it. And for Women, God hath expressly forbidden them all place of speech and power in the Church: 1 Cor. 14.34. 1 Tim. 2.11, 12. unless it be to join with the rest of the Church, in singing forth the public praises of the Lord. Let every soul enjoy such privileges and liberties, as the Lord hath given him in his place and order: and neither affect nor attempt more. The Female Sex, and Nonage, fall short of some power, which Christ hath given to the Brotherhood.   

¶ Of the Subject to whom the Power of the KEYS is given. Section III.  
I Conceive it would be some loss of time and labour, to argue this Question with Vindex alone: whose exceptions so far as they concern the point in controversy, are but collections out of the writings of others, who have more distinctly and elabourately disputed the cause. And therefore it will be requisite, in this, and the like points in controversy, rather to consider what hath been written by learned and reverend M. Rutterford, and M. Baily, and yet by the way, not to neglect what personal exceptions Vindex hath taken at myself.  
In the Way of the Churches of New-England, chap. 1. sect. 1. it was laid down for the first Proposition: That the Church which Christ in the Gospel hath instituted, and to which he hath committed the Keys of his Kingdom, The power of binding and losing, the Tables and Seals of the Covenant, the Officers and Censures of his Church, the administration of all his public Worship and Ordinances, is C●etus Fidelium, a company of Believers, m●●ting in one place e●●●y Lords day, for the administration of the holy Ordinances of God to public edification.  
Upon this Proposition M. Rutterford (as he excelleth in acuteness and Scholastical Argumentativenes) hath raised four Questions, though some of them more than I did intent to point at in the Proposition. Let us consider of them in their order, not with a spirit of contention (which himself in his Epistle to the Reader, candidly professeth against) but with a spirit studious of Truth and Peace.  
The first Question he raiseth from that Proposition, is this: Whether a company of Believers and Saints, builded by Faith upon the Rock Christ, and united in a Church-Covenant, be the only instituted Visible Church of the New-Testament, to the which Christ hath given the Keys?  
Himself understandeth the Proposition, as if it held forth the Affirmative. But in very Truth, as the word [only] is not in the Proposition: so it was far from my intendment, to exclude an Organical Church (a Church furnished with all her officers) from being an instituted Visible Church of the New Testament, as well as Coetus Fidelium, a company of Christians without Officers. When the Proposition speaketh of Officers as given to the Church, it intendeth them not as mere adjuncts given to a Subject, but as Integral parts given to the whole Body of the Church, for completing the integrity and perfection of it. And so much the very words of the Proposition do imply; for it speaketh of such a Church, to whom Christ hath given the administration of all his public Worship and Ordinances: which is not a power given to a Church of private Believers, destitute of Officers. Howsoever they may be capable (more or lesle) of some spiritual Administrations: yet doubtless they are not capable of all: and for instance, not of the administration of Sacraments, without Officers.  
Neither was it my intendment in that Proposition, to exclude lawful Synods (gathered, and proceeding according to the pattern, Acts 15.) from all participation in some part of the power of the Keys. For they have a power to decide controversies from the Word, and to appoint a course for the preventing and healing of offences, and for agreement in the Truth according to the Word. But these Synods are not the ordinary standing Judicatories of the Church: neither do they convene, nor exercise their directive Power, but when the particular Churches lie under variance or offence; or are not yet settled in a way of Truth and Peace. But my intendment simply was, That each particular Church when it is organised with all his Officers, and walketh in a way of Truth and Peace; There is no part of the power of the Keys, but a particular Church hath received it within itself, and may administer the same to the edification of the whole body.  
Neither let it be thought (in that first Proposition) That I intended to invest a Church of Believers (without officers) with all the power of the Keys, because I speak of the Election and ordination of officers afterwards. For so I speak also of the gathering and admission of Members: and yet it may not be inferred, that I should intent a Church invested with all power, which yet is destitute both of Members, and Officers. But it is a well known rule of Method, to define or describe at first, Totum Integrale, with the proper Adjuncts (or Passions) of it, and than to descend to set forth the several Members, and integral parts thereof, with their several operations in due place.  
So that this first question raised from this first Proposition is no question at all; and therefore it will not be needful to examine the distinctions, or conclusions raised up against it. For they do not contradict the true meaning of the Proposition, unless it be some parts of the second conclusion, which come in their place to be considered of in the sequel.   

¶ Touching the power of the Keys in the Church of Believers without Officers. Sect. FOUR  
THe second question, which M. Rutterford raised out of the first Proposition formerly mentioned, is  
Whether or not, Christ hath committed the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to the Church of Believers, which as yet wanteth all Officers, Pastors, Teachers, etc.  
But this question, so far as it concerns my Proposition, (to speak with leave and due Reverence) is as ungrounded as the former. For the Proposition speaketh not of a Church that wanteth all Officers, but of a Church that having received Officers from Christ, hath power to Administer all the Public worship, and Ordinances of Christ. This point and my plain meaning therein, is more fully and distinctly opened in the small treatise of the Keys. But for the present stating of the question, our judgement is expressed in two Conclusions; which so far as they are controverted, are to be cleared.  
First that the Church of Believers destitute of Officers, hath received some part of the Power of the Keys: as Power to receive Members, to elect Officers, and to do such other Church Acts, as do not require Office-Rule, or Office-Power.  
Secondly, that the Church of Believers, though for the present destitute of Officers, hath in it a Radical or Virtual Power, whereby it may call forth such Officers, as may Administer all those Acts of office Rule, or Power, which of itself without them, it could not exercise.  
Against these two Assertions, I do not found any thing in his distinctions or conclusions, or Arguments which doth prevail with me to departed from them, as indeed he doth not directly so much dispute against these conclusions which we hold, as against that question (which himself by mistake gathered from the Proposition) which we hold not.  
Though I said the Keys were given to a Church of Believers, whereof Peter was one, yet that was only to show, that Peter in his lowest spiritual relation in the Church (as a Professed Believer) had his share in the power of the Keys: but not that he had his share in the whole power of the Keys, as a Professed Believer: but that he had other parts of the power of the Keys, as an Elder, and as an Apostle immediately given Him by the Lord Jesus.  
In his second Distinction (pag. 7.) I do not understand the safety of that speech; That Pastors and Teachers are Gifts, of which the Church is not capable, as a Subject. For the Apostle saith, Christ hath given (amongst other Officers) Pastors, and Teachers to his Church. Ephes. 4.8.11. And if He have given them to the Church, the Church is the recipient Subject of them. As if the Eye be given to the Body, the Body is the recipient Subject of it. And though the Church cannot exercise the Pastors, and Teacher's place by themselves; yet they may by their Pastors and Teachers. As the Body though it cannot s●e by itself, yet it may by the eye, which is given to it of God for that end: Neither is it a safe speech (as I conceive) to say, That the Church is capable of these Gifts (Pastors and Teachers) as the object and end, because the fruit and effect of these Gifts re●ou●deth to the good of the Church; if that be meant as the only respect, in regard of which they are said to be given to the Church. For Pastors and Teachers are given to the Church, as Integral parts of the Church, as the Church is Totum Integrale. Now integral parts are in●●insecall and essential to a Totum Integrale, and not extrinsecall, as the object, and end be to a thing.  
The Testimony which he allegeth from Reverend Parker, and Baynes, and the Parisian School, doth indeed argue, that the fruit and effect of the gifts of Pastor and Teacher doth redound to the good of the Church (which no man denieth:) but M. Rutterford well knoweth, that Parker, and the Parisian School, do grant further (even more than I argue for) that the Church is not only the object and end, but the first subject also of all Church-Power: which though M. Baynes wave (in the place alleged by him:) and dispute thereupon both against M. Parker and the Parisian School (under the name of Sorbonists;) yet he clearly closeth with M. Parker and us, in the conclusion; That the visible Church instituted by Christ and his Apostles, to which the Keys are given, is not a Diocesan, or Provincial, or Nationall Assembly, but a particular Congregation: Diocesans trial, Q. 1. But if M. Rutterford intent no more but this, That the Church is not capable of exercise of the Pastors and Doctor's place, and therefore is not the first subject of their Office-power; I for my part readily close with him therein, reserving due respect to others of different judgement.  
In his third Distinction, which he putteth between a formal ordinary power, and a virtual or extraordinary power, I do not well reach his meaning: For when He cometh to apply this distinction in his second Conclusion, He granteth a virtual Power, not Formal, in the Church of Believers to ordain Pastors, or to do some such Act, as may supply the defect of ordination: As in a Church in an Island, where the Pastors are all dead, or taken away otherways; and yet he maketh not this an official, or an authoritative Power properly, but a virtual, and extraordinary Power, not ordinary: like that which David had to eat the show Bread. And in like case of extreme necessity, he alloweth a private man endued with gifts and zeal to teach publicly. But I confess, I do not well understand, how a man in case of necessity hath any virtual power to do this or that Act, but he hath also a formal power to do such an Act in that case of necessity. Such an Act I say, either the same in kind, or the same in Analogy. When David did eat the shewbread, he had a lawful not only virtual, but formal power, as an Israelite in necessity (to whom moral duties were to be preferred before Ceremonial) to eat for the sustentation of life. When a free People choose a King, and Crown him, though they be not endued with a formal, but a virtual Sovereign Power, to give Kingly authority which they have not; yet they have formally a Power to yield up themselves unto subjection to such a Person as they have chosen; and that doth virtually and analogically set up him in the Throne. For He that hath formal Power to make one Relative, He hath an Analogical Power, to set up his Correlative. They that can make themselves Subjects, can make another to be their Sovereign.  
But this I willingly admit which he saith; That the ordination of Pastors by the Church of Believers, is not an official, nor properly an Authoritative Act of Power. For the election of a Pastor by the Brethrens of the Church, is an higher Act of power than their ordination is: As the Election of a King is an Act of higher Power, than his Coronation. And yet the Election of a Pastor, is not an Act of official, or Authoritative power: no more than the Election of a King by a free People is an Act of official, or Authoritative Soveraingtie.  
As for the public Teaching of a private man endued with gifts and zeal, I know not why it may not be allowed, not only in case of extreme necessity, but in some cases of expediency, as when his gifts are to be proved, before he be called into office.  
In the third conclusion, M. Rutterford telleth us, That as a Reasonable man is the first, immediate, and principal subject of Aptitude to laugh, and the mediate and secondary subjects are Peter and John, and such particular men: So it is the order of Nature to give Church properties, and powers, first to the Species and common Nature of the Church, and not to this or that particular Church.  
But this conclusion of his crosseth nothing in that first Proposition of mine, nor any other Tenent of ours. For that Proposition doth not make this or that particular Church (which is indeed a singular Church) the first subject of Church Power: But a particular visible Church, which holdeth forth the Species or common nature of each particular, or singular Church.  
It is readily admitted what he saith, That to be builded on a Rock, victory over hell, and such like, are given principally and immediately to the Catholic, and Invisible Church, as to the first and principal Subject.  
But we cannot so easily admit that which he subjoineth, that the Keys are given to the Catholic Invisible Church, as the first and principal Subject (though we grant they are given for their end and use:) But we rather believe they are given to the particular Visible Church, wherein the power of the Keys is only exercised and used. The Invisible Catholic Church doth never convene for the Administration of Church-power: And it were in vain to give power to such a subject, which never is called to bring it forth into act.  
In his Arguments, M. Rutterford doth chief aim at this conclusion; To prove that the Keys are not given to a Church of professed Believers, destitute of Pastors and Teachers, etc. A conclusion which he is pleased to frame unto himself, but had not occasion to collect it from any words in my Proposition; which only affirmeth, that the Keye● were given to such a particular Visible Church, whereof Peter was one, and to whom Peter in case of offence might complain, even to the Congregation. I might therefore omit this Question wholly, but that he so handleth it, as if there were no Church-power at all, but only that which he calleth official, and Authoritative power: and so he maketh all the Acts of the Brethrens of the Church (who are no officers) as no Acts of power at all, and consequently, no part left to the People in the power of the Keys: which putteth upon me a necessity of clearing some expressions in his Arguments.  
1. His first Argument (pag. 9) is,  The Church to which the Keys were given, is builded upon a Rock, is the House of Wisdom, the house of God. 
But such is not a company of Professing Believers, united by Church-Covenant, and destitute of Pastors and Teachers. etc.  
Answ. This latter Proposition is justly denied.  
For M. Rutterford himself acknowledgeth a Church in an Island, where the Pastors are taken away by death, or otherwise, pag. 8. And if such be a Church, than truly it is built upon a Rock, the Rock of Divine Institution, and the Rock of Christ believed on, and professed. Such a Church is also an House of Wisdom, and an House of God: or else the Wisdom, and presence, and grace of God given to the Church (yea too two or three of the Church) dieth and perisheth with their Church-Officers.  
Object. The Church of Believers gathered without Pastors and Teachers, though united in a Church-Covenant, yet not being builded by Pastors and Teachers (who are given to gather and to edify the Body) they are only the materials of the House, But not the House.  
Answ. 1. The Church is truly said to be builded by Pastors and Teachers, upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, when by their Doctrine they were first brought on to believe, and by the same Doctrine taught to assemble into Church-Fellowship. It is true, the faith which they received by the edifying Ministry of Pastors and Teachers, doth not make them Members of the Visible Church, but of the Invisible; and so fit materials only of the Visible Church. But yet they being also taught to make profession of their faith before the Lord, and his people, in covenanting or professing subjection to the Lord, and one to another in the use of his Ordinances (so far as they are or shall be committed to them) they thereby receive the form of a Visible Church upon them. For as faith is the essential form of the Catholic Invisible Church: So is the profession of faith, and the obedience of faith to Christ in his Ordinances amongst themselves, the essential form of a Particular Visible Church, amongst themselves I say. For profession of faith, and of the obedience of faith at large, without respect of subjection to Ordinances in this or that Church, maketh a man not more a member of the Church at York, than of the Church at Edinburgh. But when such a Society of Believers is combined together by profession of faith, and obedience of faith to the Ordinances administered, or administrable amongst themselves; they are now not only the materials of a Visible Church, but have the true form of Church-Estate, notwithstanding their want of Pastors and Teachers. Otherwise Pastors themselves should be the form of the Church, by which it is, and without which it cannot be a Church. As if the Body of a man could not be an Human body, without eyes or arms: Or had only the matter of a Man, (or some part of the matter) but not the form.  
What though such 〈◊〉 society of Believers be not a ministerial Church, without Pastors and Teachers? yet it is not Pastors and Teachers, that giveth them the form of a Church, not not of a Ministerial or Organical Church, much lesle of an Homogeneal. For Ministers (Pastors, or Teachers) themselves are only materials (parts, and members) of a ministerial Church, not the form of it. The form of such a Church, is the mutual profession (or stipulation) or (that which amounteth thereto) the Agreement and consent between ministers and people to administer and submit unto, the holy ordinances of Christ amongst themselves, according to the rule of the Gospel. Say not, a Church of Believers without Ministers, wanteth the power of edifying the body of Christ, which is required in a Visible Church, Eph. 4.11.  
For every member of the Church hath an edifying power, received from the head Christ Jesus, to the effectual working of the increase of the body, unto the edifying of itself in love. Ephes. 4.16.  
And though neither all, nor most of the Brethrens of a Church have ordinarily received a gift of public Prophesying, or Preaching: yet in defect of public ministers, it is not an unheard of novelty; That God should enlarge private men with public gifts, and that they that have received such gifts, should take liberty to dispense them unto edification. For we read that when the Church at Jerusalem were all of them scattered abroad, except the Apostles; yet they that were scattered went every where preaching the Word. Acts 8.5. & 11.19, 20, 21.  
Neither let it be said, That such a Church (or Society) of Believers is not Wisdoms house, because it is not builded by Pastors and Teachers, who are given to edify, and gather the Body. For though in a material house of wood or stone, the bvilders do not only prepare the materials, but do also introduce the form: yet in a spiritual house (such as a Church of Believers is) the form is induced not by any formal Act of the Ministry of Pastors and Teachers (though they may be instrumental, in giving a word of Direction:) but by the voluntary stipulation or profession of subjection of this society of Believers to the Lord Jesus in the use of his ordinances. The Church as it is the house of God; so it is also the Spouse of Christ: Ministers are the friends of the Bridegroom, and of the Bride. The ministers have done their work in preparing the Bride for the Bridegroom; as also in ministering to her when she is married. But in Betrothing her to Christ, the Bride in that work, must herself profess her own acceptance of the Lord Jesus, and subjection to him: which she may do effectually, whether ministers be present and Assistant or no. It is true, ministers are ordinarily present and directive in this Work, and in that respect are sometimes said to espouse them to Christ; 2 Cor. 11.2. but the formal bond of their Spousage lieth not in the presence or assistance of ministers, but in their own professed yielding up of themselves unto the Lord in his Covenant. As in the c nsummation of marriage between man and wife; the bond of the Espousage lieth not in the presence, or assistance of ministers or magistrates, but in the Husband's open profession of his acceptance of her, and in her open profession of her acceptance of him, and subjection to him in the duties of marriage.  
His second Argument is taken from the Stewardship of them to whom the Keys are committed.  To them (saith he) are the Keys promised, who are the Stewards of the mysteries of God. 1 Cor. 4.1. and servants of the house by Office, 2 Cor. 4.5. and by office to open the doors, and behave themselves aright in God's house, 1 Tim. 3.16. and to divide to those of the house their portion of meat in due season, Mat. 24.45. and to cut out the Word. 2 Tim, 2.15. 
But a Company of Professing Believers, joined together in Church Covenant, and destitute of Officers, are not stewards by office, nor servants over the house. etc.  
The Assumption Mr Rutterford taketh for granted, and so he well may; unless office be taken in a large sense (as it i● in Tully's Offices) for a duty, which we own to every one in his place respectively; and as he saith (add Terent.) In Familia bene instituta, dicimus omnes in officio esse opportere. In which sense also the Translators take it in Rom. 12.5. where they speak of all the members of the Body (whether Natural Body or Ecclesiastical) as having all of them received an office, though not all of them the same office, Rom. 12.4. And in the same sense, the Apostle Peter exhorteth all the Saints of God to administer the good gifts they have received, as good Stewards of the manifold grace of Christ. 1 Pet. 4.10, 11. In this sense ●very member of the Church may be said to have an office, and a stewardly office in the Church.  
But take office properly, for a calling invested with Power to perform special Acts of public service to the Church; so indeed it implieth a contradiction, That the Church should be its own officer. For the very term of officer implieth subordination: and Mr Rutterford speaketh properly; That they are servants of the House by Office, whom he putteth for the Officers of the House. Now the Church cannot be her own servant.  
But yet this giveth the more just ground of denying the Mayor Proposition. That to them only are the Keys promised, who are the stewards and servants of the House by Office. The Mater familias in the House, hath Keys of power over her children, and servants, and yet is neither steward nor servant of the House.  
It is true, the Keys are a symbol of power. And power is either Supreme, and Sovereign; or Subordinate, and Subservient. Sovereign power in the Church belongeth to the Lord Jesus, who is therefore said to have the Key of David, to open and none to shut; to shut, and none to open. Rev. 3.7.  
And yet in proper speech, Christ, is no Church Officer, no officer in the Church, (unless it be to God the Father) no more than the King can be said to be an Officer in the Commonwealth. Officers are of an inferior rank, Deut. 16.18. But subordinate power is twofold: 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Officiaria Potestas, stewardly Ministerial Office-Power. And secondly, Honoraria Potestas, an honourable Power: such as a King going into a far Country may leave to his Queen; whom though He leave her subject to the Laws and Officers of his Court and Kingdom; yet he betrusteth her with this power, that in defect of officers, she ●●all have power to choose new, according to the Law: and together with the officers, joint power, either to admit servants into her family, or upon just cause to remove any of them out of her Family. And that Christ (the King, and Husband of his Church) being gone himself in bodily presence into a far Country, hath left this honourable p●wer to his Church, as to choose their own officers, to join in admission of Members, and censure of Offenders; I presume Mr Rutterford will not gainsay. To give a touch of each; Plain it is, that when Deacons were to be chosen into office, the Apostles referred the choice of them to the multitude of Brethrens, and they performed it. Acts 6.1, 2, 3.5. When Saul essayed to join himself to the Church at Jerusalem, he was not received till the brethren's fear of his carnal estate was removed, and themselves satisfied, that he was a Disciple; Acts. 9.26. Let no man except, Paul did not essay to join himself as a a member to the Church at Jerusalem: for he was (as being an Apostle) an Officer, (and therefore a member) in all Churches: For his call to the Apostleship was at first unknown to them: and the Argument holdeth so much the stronger, that if the Brethrens must be satisfied in the Discipleship of an Apostle, before he can be admitted to join with them; much more may they require probable ground of the Discipleship of a Brother, before he be admitted to join with them in Church-Communion. And when the Incestuous Corinthian was to be cast out of the Family of the Church; Paul referreth the Administration of that power to the joint proceeding of the Elders and Brethrens of that Church, leaving to either sort their concourse of several power respectively.  
Now than to apply this distinction of power to the Argument. All the places alleged by Mr Rutterford, do indeed prove That the Keys were promised and given to the Stewards and Officers, and Servants in the House of God: which we willingly acknowledge. We acknowledge also that which he affirmeth, That a company of professing Believers joined together in Church Covenant, and destitute of Officers, are not stewards by Office, nor servants in the House of God. But this we deny, that all the Keys, all kind of Power in the Church, is promised and given to the officers of the Church, solely and solidly. All Office-power indeed, is given to the Officers: Nor do we permit the Church of Brethrens to usurp any part of office-power unto themselves. But we see the Scripture acknowledgeth other Power in the Church, besides office-power.  
I shall not need to enlarge further answer to this second Argument. The Testimonies which he allegeth to prove his Proposition; they prove, that the Keys signify Power, and Authority, and that Stewardly, or Office-Power, is given to the Officers of the Church. But none of them prove, that all power is Office-Power, or that the Keys hold forth no other power but office-power: or that the Church of Believers hath received no power at all. The Text in Isa. 22. 2●. speaketh not of a spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power, but of a Civil Power. The Text in Isa. 9.6. and Rev. 3.7. speaks not of a Ministerial, or Office-Power, but of a Sovereign Power in Christ Jesus.  
What Schindler speaks of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it crosseth not us: so it concerneth not the Keys spoken of in Mat. 16. where the word in the Syriack is not, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word (as it seemeth) taken up from the Greek.  
What those many other Authors say of the Keys in the places alleged by him, do not at all weaken our defence: which maketh me (I confess) the more to wonder, that he should conclude that Troup of witnesses with this Period: That he thinks while of late, never any Interpreter dreamt, that in this Text, Matt. 16. That the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are given to all Believers, but only to the stewards of the House.  
M. Rutterford knoweth well, that Bucer expounding Mat. 16. saith expressly De Potestate clavium, Haec Potestas penes Ecclesiam omnem est; Authoritas modo Ministerii penes Presbyteros & Episcopos, ut Romae olim Potestas populi fuit, Authoritas Senatus, Ferus: (not later than Bucer) upon Mat. 16. affirmeth; Claves datas Ecclesiae, ut Dominae, & Sponsae: Petro, ut Ministro. Reverend Baines, though in the first subject of the power of the Keys he do somewhat descent from us: yet he confesseth in that third conclusion of his, upon Question 3. page 83. of his Diocesans Trial: That he setteth down that Conclusion against the Divines of Conscience against our prime Divines, as Luther and Melancton, and against the Sorbonists. But though all these might be said to be of late, surely Augustine is not of late, whom I think best to quote, as his Testimonies are at large alleged by Doctor Whitakers against Bellarmine; the rather, that so we may take in the judicious Doctor's Notes upon them, Augustine, tractat. 50. in Johannem, Si in Petro, inquit, non esset, Ecclesiae Sacramentum, non ei diceret Dominus, Tibi dabo claves Regni Coelorum. Si hoc Petro tantum dictum est, non facit hoc Ecclesia: Si autem hoc in Ecclesia sit; Petrus quando claves accepit, Ecclesiam sanctam significavit.  
Again, De Agon. Christ. c. 30. He saith, Petrum inter omnes Apostolas, Ecclesiae Personam sustinuisse: & claves datas esse Ecclesiae, cum Petro datae sunt.  
On which, and some such like passages in Augustine, Doctor Whitaker giveth this Exposition: This is not saith he, That the Church should receive the Keys suo quodam modo, after a certain sort, but that in Peter they did receive them properly, truly, and more principally, than Peter himself.  
Let no man except, that by the Church he understood not the Brethrens of the Church, but only the Apostles, and their successors the Presbyters.  
For though it be true, that Office-power was given to them only, yet it is clear; he acknowledgeth (as others do) a power likewise of the people in the government of the Church. In stateing Church-Government, He giveth it thus for a Conclusion. Si velimus Christum ipsum respicere, fuit semper Ecclesiae Regimen Monarchicum: si Ecclesiae Presbyteros, qui in Doctrina & Disciplina suas partes agebant, Aristocraticum: si totum Corpus. Ecclesiae, quatenus in Electione Episcoporum & Presbyterorum, Suffragia serebat, Democraticum. Sic partim Aristocraticum, partim Democraticum, partim etiam Monarchicum, est, semperque fuit Ecclesiae Regimen. Whitaker. Controu. 4. Q. 1. c. 1. Num. 2.  
Nor let any put of Whitakers or Augustine, with this evasion, that Peter is said to have receiv●d the Keys in the Person of the Church, not because the Church is any subject of that power, but because it is the end of that power: all the power of the Keys being given to Peter, not for himself, but for the good, and utility of the Church.  
Such an evasion Chamier rejecteth with indignation, Hoccine vero (inquit) est candide agere? hoccine Augustinum interpretari? Atqui Augustinus non quaerit, quem in finem datae sint claves, sed quaerit cui. Hae vero Quaestiones quanto separentur intervallo, quis non videt? Sed & exemplo facile docetur. Vnicuique datur declaratio Spiritus ad utilitatem, inquit Paulus, 1 Cor. 12. id est, in Bonum Ecclesiae, ut totus sermo ostendit. An dicat aliquis, eum cui datur Declaratio Spiritus, Figuram gestare Ecclesiae, quum eam accipit? minime vero: est enim non publicum sed privatum donum: publicum quidem ipsa utilitate, sed privatum donatione, possessioneque. Cum igitur quaerit Augustinus, cui sint datae claves, Petro soli, an toti Ecclesiae, importune inculcatur, datas esse in Bonum Ecclesiae qui● nihil obstaret, quo minus & datae essent in incommune Bonum Ecclesiae, & tamen soli Petro. At Augustinus haec opponit, datae sunt soli Petro, & datae sunt Ecclesiae, ut si soli Petro, non Ecclesiae: & si Ecclesiae, non soli Petro. Si Petro inquit hoc tantum dictum est, non facit hoc Ecclesia.  
I forbear (for brevity sake) to recite what he further disputeth against Horantius to the same purpose in the words following, De Oecumen. Pontifice. l. 11. cap. 10.  
3 I come to consider of M. Rutterfords third Argument, which he propoundeth thus:  
To those (in Matth. 16.) Doth Christ give the Keys, to whom he giveth warrant for the actual exercise of the Keys? But this warrant is official Authority of binding and losing, Christ giveth to Peter only, as representing Apostles, Teachers, and Elders: and not to a Church of Believers converted covenant-wise, and destitute of Officers, Ergo, etc.  
Answ. The proposition is not always universally safe, if it be understood of the Actual exercise of the Keys, (by them who receive them) in their own person. For Christ himself, who received from the Father the power of all Church Administrations: yet in the Days of his flesh, He in his own person baptised no man: John 4.2. And after his Ascension, though the Sovereign power of the Keys do still remain with him, yet he performeth all the Externall exercise of Church-power by his Ministers.  
If it be said, that though Christ did not exercise all Church-power in his own person, yet he had warrant so to do: It may justly be replied, Christ best understood his own warrant, and he that did not exercise this or that Act of the Church-power in his own person, surely he did not think it expedient to exercise it in his own Person. And quicquid non expedit, quatenus non expedit, non licet: That which is not expedient, so far forth as it is not expedient, is not warrantable.  
Besides it is a disputable case amongst Civil, and Canon-Lawyers, and by Covarruvias judged for the Affirmative, that in some Cases, the Wife after her Husband's death hath a just Interest in some such Offices as she cannot warrantably exercise in his own Person.  
And he instanceth in Officio Decurionatus. Covarr. Tom. 2. lib. 3. cap. 19 Num. 4.  
Queen Elizabeth whilst she lived, had lawful power to punish her enemies by slaughter in War; Her criminal Subjects by hanging: other offenders by scourging: but it were an hard saying to affirm, that she had Warrant to exercise all these Acts of Power in her own Person.  
Answ. 2. I willingly grant that Peter (in Matth. 16.) Received the Promise of all Office-power, as representing the Officers of the Church, Apostles, Teachers, and Elders: and with that Power, a Warrant of Official Exercise of that Power.  
But this I say withal, That Peter in receiving the Keys (or the Promise of them) He received from Christ both sorts of subordinate Church-Power, not only Officiariam, but Honorariam Potestatem. And in receiving this latter, He represented the Person of all professing Believers. For it were not reasonable to think, that Peter receiving the Keys as a reward of the Profession of his Faith, should receive no power at all to professing Believers as such, but all Power only to professing Officers.  
Ob. But if professing Believers, as such, had received any part of the Power of the Keys, they had than received the Power of binding and losing, which they have not: For binding and losing are the Acts of the Official-Power of the Keys: Ergo, The Church of Believers being destitute of Officers, and Governors hath not received any part of the Power of the Keys.  
Answ. The proof of the assumption of this Argument will not hold, unless binding and losing were the Adequate Acts of the Official-Power of the Keys. But though binding and losing, or (which is all one) opening and shutting, be indeed the Adequate Acts of the Power of the Keys; yet not so of their official-Power. The Lord Jesus hath the Key of David, He bindeth and none looseth, He looseth and none bindeth: (Rev. 3.7.) and yet this his binding and losing are not the Acts of the Official, but of the Sovereign power of the Keys. The Brethrens of the Church at Jerusalem, who were scattered upon the persecution that arose about Stephen: they preached the Word of Christ to Jews and Grecians about Antioch, and by the good hand of the Lord upon them, a great number believed, and turned to the Lord; Acts 11.19, 20, 21. These Brethrens in opening the Door of Faith to their Hearers, though they wanted Office, yet they wanted not the Power of the Keys, to open the Kingdom of Heaven unto them.  
The Brethrens of the Church of Corinth concurred with their Officers, in delivering the incestuous person to Satan, and afterwards in the public pardon of him, and release of his censure. In both which they put forth the Spiritual Power of the Lord Jesus, which is, the Power of the Keys, 1 Cor. 5.4, 5. with 2 Cor. 2.7. to 11. And yet they neither had the official-power of the Keys, nor did they exercise it. It was also an Act of Church Power, which the Church of Brethrens at Jerusalem did put forth in joining in the Definitive sentence of the Synod, and in sending forth Letters and Messengers to the Churches of Antioch. Syria, and Cilicia, for the publishing and promulgating of the Sentence. And yet the Brethrens themselves neither had office-power in themselves, nor did they exercise it.  
Ob. But these Brethrens in Corinth, and Jerusalem, though they had not office-power in themselves, yet they had it amongst themselves in the Apostles, and in the Elders than Assembled; And so with them they might join in some Act of Church-power, which without them, they might not have been put forth at all: or if they had, It had been of no power.  
Answ. This were indeed to make the Church-Power in Brethrens a mere Cipher, yea less than a Cipher. For a Cipher though it be of no number or account, unless some Figure of the Decad be joined before it; yet if it be joined before it, the Cipher will increase the number and account, and make it at lest tenfold more than it was before. But all the Brethrens of the Church without officers, are not only made as so many cyphers, as those who of themselves can do no Act of number or accounted at all: But also though an Officer, or a whole Presbytery join with them, and go before them, yet the Act of the whole Church of Brethrens, maketh the Act of no more account, not more value or validity, than it was before; which seemeth to me an unworthy thing and unreasonable. For seeing that the profession of the Faith in Christ was the original ground, (or at lest the occasion) of the grant of all Church Power unto Peter in the name of the Church, how can it stand either with Faith or Reason, That a Church of Believers professing the same Faith with Peter, shall receive no part of Church-Power at all, in respect of their profession of the Faith, but only in respect of their Officers that preach the Faith? whereas Peter than spoke not as a Preacher only, but as a Professor of the Faith. Faith when it seethe a Promise made to another in respect of this or that Qualification or Duty, It is apt (by the help of the Spirit of Grace) to apply the same blessing, or some part of it at lest, unto itself in the same case.  
Again, if it were so, that a Church of Believers destitute of officers, should have received from Christ no part of the power of the Keys, than in case the whole Presbytery of a Church should be removed by Death, or Crime, o● otherwise, the Church should cease to be a Church. For the Power of the Keys comprehendeth the Latitude of all Church-power. And ut se res habet in esse, sic in operari. Take away all power of Action, and operation from a Church, and you take away the Church itself. And so you will make Ministers to be not only the Integral parts of a Church, but the Essential parts also. Yea by this means, The estate of the Church is in worse condition, than is the estate of any civil Commonwealth. For take away all the Magistrates, and Governors of th' Commonwealth, yet still the Commonwealth subsisteth in itself; It ceaseth not to be a Commonwealth, nor is it left destitute of all Actions of a Commonwealth. The Body of the People may solemnly assemble together, and choose out of themselves new Magistrates: or if they want g●od choice among themselves, they may supply themselves from their confederates. But the Church of Christ (which of all Societies is the most Honourable, and most completely supplied with Power to attain its own end, and is built upon the most sure Foundation) If it be once deprived of her Officers and Rulers, it straightway becometh Null, both in Essence and Action. Time was, when David speaking to the Church said, Glorious things are spoken of thee, thou City of God, Psal. 87.3. And one of those glorious things were, That her Foundations are in the Holy Mountains, v. 1. And the Lord loveth the Gates of Zion, more than all the dwellings of Jacob, v. 2. But surely, if the Churches Being, did so easily vanish with the loss of their Officers, This would turn their glory into shame, above all other societies.  
4. Proceed we now to the fourth and last Argument, whereby M. Rutterford goeth about to prove, that the Church of Believers destitute of an Eldership, hath no power of the Keys.  
If the power of the Keys lay in competition between a Church of Believers destitute of its own Eldership, and a Church of Believers furnished with it (as the question might seem to import) I should easily grant more ample power to a Church with its Eldership, than to a Church without it; or if the competition of the power of the Keys lay, whether in the Church without the Eldership, or in the Eldership without the Church, (especially when the greater part of the Eldership consisteth of the Elders of other Churches) though we give not much power to a Church without an Eldership: yet we should give less to an Eldership without the Church.  
But the true state of the question is, whether a Congregational Church of Believers furnished with Officers, and walking in the Truth and Peace of the Gospel, have not received the power of Keys (the power of binding and losing) within themselves? or, whether this power be first given to a Classical, or Provincial, or National Assembly of the Church Officers, or Presbyters: and from them be derived to a Congregational Church of Believers with their Officers?  
But it may be also a second question touching a Congregational Church of Believers, whether no power of the Keys (that is, no part of the power of the Keys) be given to them without an Eldership.  
This hath M. Rutterford put for the question, and maketh it the Title of every leaf of Chap. 1. Sect. 2. The Church of Believers destitute of an Eldership have No Power of the Keys.  
Three of his Arguments in this question we have already perused: come we now to his fourth.  
His fourth Argument than is this: If Christ do not say in this place (Mat. 16.) nor in Mat. 18. That the Keys and the Acts of the Keys (to wit, binding and losing) are given to a Church of Believers without their Officers, than neither of the places prove, that the Keys are given to such a Church.  
" But Christ doth not say it: Ergo, The Text cannot bear it.  
Answ. 1. If this Text in Matth. 16. Do prove that the Keys are given to a Church of Believers with their Officers, It is as much as I infer from it.  
Answ. 2. Yet two things there be in the words of the Text, which do infer, that some part of the Power of the Keys is given to a Church of Believers without their officers.  
The first may be collected thus; If the Keys be the power of edifying the Church, and the Church be edified of Believers by the Public profession of their Faith, Than Believers publicly professing the Faith, have some part of the power of the Keys given to them.  
But the Keys are the power of edifying the Church, and the Church is edified of Believers, by the Public Profession of their Faith.  
Therefore Believers Publicly professing the Faith, have some part of the power of the Keys given to them.  
What may here justly be denied, I see not. The mayor Proposition is evident of itself. For no man can do any Act of spiritual efficacy, but he hath received from Christ some spiritual Power to do it.  
And habenti dabitur, to him that edifieth the Church by any power received, to him shall the more abundant power be given to do the same.  
The minor Proposition is as clear: For the Keys are nothing else, but the Instruments of edifying the Church. Though their immediate and proper work be to open and shut (and Metaphorically, to bind and lose:) yet both these are nothing else but Acts of edifying the Church. And that the Church is edified or builded of Believers, Publicly professing their Faith: the Lord himself doth acknowledge in the words of the Text: when he saith, Upon this Rock, (that is, upon this Public Profession of Faith in me) I will build my Church. Peter by this public profession of his Faith, did edify himself, and his fellow-Disciples: and thereby obtained both a reward of his Profession, to become the foundation of the Church: and a reward to himself, of receiving the Keys; that is, a power both by gift, and office to edify the Church in a more settled manner, and abundant measure, not only as a Believer, but as a chief Elder, and Apostle.  
The second thing in the Text, that may infer some part of the power of the Keys to be given to a Church of Believers even without officers, may thus be taken up.  
If Peter had the Keys given him as a reward, not for doing an Act or Duty of his office, but for doing an Act or Duty common to him with other Believers; than Believers making the same public confession of Faith with him: As they do partake with him in the Duty, so do they partake also (in some measure) in the reward.  
But Peter had the Keys given him as a reward, not for doing any Act or Duty of his Office, but for doing an Act or Duty common to him with other ordinary Believers.  
Therefore other ordinary Believers making the same public confession of Faith with him, they do partake with him in the Duty; so do they also partake in some measure in the promised reward of the power of the Keys.  
The former Proposition is not only the collection of many Divines both ancient and modern, but it dependeth upon a principal ground of the work of our ministry. For our Ministry taketh it for a sure ground of the Application of Scriptures; That what promise we found given to any upon occasion of this or that qualification or condition, the same is intended by God, and easily applied by us to all others, in whom the like condition or qualification is found according to their measure.  
The latter Proposition is so clear, as needs no proof, unless we shall make the public confession of Faith in Christ, not to be the duty of ordinary Believers, and Church-members, but only of Church-officers: or unless we could found some other occasion, upon which Christ made this Gracious promise of the Keys to Peter, beside the public confession of his Faith in Christ - the Lord, and his Brethrens.  
Ob. 1. When Christ gave the Promise of the Keys, he speaketh not to the Church, but turneth his speech to Peter, v. 19 saying, I will give to thee (Peter, not to the Church) the Keys of the kingdom of Heaven. Surely none needeth to teach our Lord to speak: This change of the Persons to whom the Keys are promised, wanteth not a reason, etc.  
Answ. As we need not, so we do not go about, to teach the Lord to speak. Here is no changing of Persons, nor turning of speech, in giving the promise of the Keys. Christ began his speech to Peter, and he continueth his speech to Peter, from v. 17. to 19 All upon occasion of Peter's confession. In v. 17. Christ giveth to Peter a promise of blessedness from the cause of his confession. In v. 18 He giveth a promise of reward to his confession; That upon it, as upon a rocky foundation, He will build his Church in impregnable stability. In v. 19 He giveth a promise of reward unto himself upon occasion of his gracious public confession, even a pr●mise of the Keys of the Church. And the promise is more fitly given to Peter in the Name of the Church, than to the Church by Name; because it was not the Church by Name that made that confession, but Peter in the Name of the Church.  
Ob. 2. If the Promise were given to Peter in the Name of Believers, how will that stand with the judgement of the way, who will not allow every company of Believers, because they are Believers to be an Instituted visible Church; (to whom the Keys are given) but they must be a company of Believers professing Covenant-wise, Faith in Christ and Church-Communion. But than the Keys are not given to Believers because they are Believers, and the Spouse of Christ, but because they are such Professors, and so combined in Church-Covenant.  
Answ. The Author of the Way doth no where say, That the Keys are given to a company of Believers, only because they are Believers; but because they are Believers making public confession of their faith before the Lord, and their Brethrens. For Peter himself received not the Keys merely as a Believer, but as a Believer publicly professing his Faith before Christ, and his fellow Disciples in Christ's School. If other Writers speak otherwise, (that the Keys were given to Peter a Believer in the name of Believers) they must be understood to speak of Believers, not as keeping their Faith to themselves, but as making profession of their Faith publicly; so as they come to be received into the society of the visible Church. Faith giveth a man fellowship in the Invisible Church, and in all the inward spiritual blessings of the Church. But it is profession of Faith, that giveth a man fellowship in the visible Church. It is not a society of Believers, as such, that maketh them a Church: for a society of Christian Merchants may meet together in a ship to transport themselves to Hamburrough, or Lubeck but they are not thereby a Church, nor have received Church-power. But if they do publicly profess their Faith, and their obedience of Faith to the Lord Jesus in the public ordinances of his worship, which he hath committed to his Church, and they are capable of; than indeed they are a professed visible Church of Christ, and a Body united to him, and one to another by such profession, and do also partake in the power of the Keys according to their measure.  
Ob. 3. I ask, whether true or false profession be the nearest intervening cause of these, to whom the Keys are given?  
Answ. True or false profession may be attended, either in respect of the Doctrine of Faith in Christ professed, or in respect of the Grace of Faith professing it. If the profession of the Doctrine of Faith be true, though the Grace of Faith in the Professor of it be uncertain, and it may be hypocritical (and so false:) yet we dare not deny the nature and power of a Church to such. As the Church judgeth not of hidden crimes, so neither do the Faithful judge of the Churches by their hidden hypocrisy, but by their open scandals in Doctrine, or life. God would have his people live without anxious perplexity, (as in point of marriage, 1 Cor. 7.32. so) in every society. It were an inextricable perplexity, to suspend the Essence or validity of Churches or Church Administrations, upon the hidden sincerity of Churches, and of Church-Officers, or Members. It is true, that Church-estate and Church-priviledges, and Church-power are given to Believers, making public profession of their holy Faith: to them are the Keys given, and for them. And yet for their sakes God doth vouchsafe both the Name, and Style, and Power of a Church to such as make the like profession of the Faith with them, though not with the like sincerity. The Church of Sardis had a name to live, yet was dead, Rev. 3.2. Nevertheless, the Lord reckoneth it amongst the golden Candlesticks, and walketh amongst them, Rev. 2.1. It appeareth there were a few Names amongst them, that were sincere: Rev. 3.4. And Dr Ames maketh it most probable, That there is no Particular Church, wherein the profession of the true faith doth take place, but that in the same are found some true Believers. Medulla. Theolog. l. 1. c. 32. num. 10.  
Object. 1. If a false Profession be sufficient to make Persons a true Visible Church; than 1. The Keys are not given to Believevers, because they are Believers, and united to Christ as his Body and Spouse.  
Answ. The Keys are given to Believers, because they are Believers, making public confession of their faith. To hypocrites they are given, not for their hypocrisy, but for the truth of that faith which they do profess in common with sincere Believers: and for the sake of those true Believers who do communicate with them, and for whose sake the whole Body is united to Christ, and his Spouse, though adulterous in heart.  
Object. 2. Than the Author of the Way saith amiss, That the Church instituted by Christ, is a company of Believers, faithful and godly men; for a company of hypocrites are not such.  
Answ. The Author of the Way speaketh of the Church as it aught to be, and as it is in outward visible profession. Hypocrites in outward profession and appearance, go for faithful and godly, and such in truth they aught to be, as well as in appearance.  
Object. 3. Our Brethrens prove the Keys to be a part of the liberty of redeemed Ones; but counterfeit Professors are not redeemed Ones: nor have they that liberty purchased to them in Christ.  
Answ. It is true, the Keys are a part of the liberty of redeemed ones. For the Keys hold forth an Ecclesiastical power, and all power in heaven and earth was given to Christ upon his resurrection from the dead, Mat. 28.18. And though counterfeit professors be not the redeemed one's of Christ (properly so called:) yet for the sake of the redeemed ones, counterfeit Professors have that liberty purchased to them by Christ, as to partake in the power of the Keys. Otherwise what can be said of hypocritical elders, of whom M. Rutterford doubt●th not, they have received the power of the Keys: and yet though their persons be not the redeemed one's of Christ, yet they have this liberty, or service rather purchased to them by Christ, as to be serviceable t● the Church in the administration of the power of the Keys. The spiritual gifts (though common) whereby Apostates are said to be sanctified, were purchased to them by the blood of Christ. Heb. 10.29. And yet the power whereby hypocrites or Apostates lord it over the redeemed one's of God, is but a service. Rom. 9.12.  
Object. 4. It shall follow, that our Brethrens widely mistake a supposed difference, which they device betwixt the Jewish and Christian Church; to wit, that to make men members of the Jewish Ehurch, external holiness was sufficient, as to be born Jews, to be circumcised, etc. but that the Visible Church of the Gentiles after Christ, must be the Bride of Christ, and by true faith united to him. Whereas the members of a Visible Christian Church, are and may be hypocrites, though not known to be such, as were the members of the Jewish Church.  
Answ. Who it is that M. Rutterford meaneth, to have put this difference between the members of the Jewish and Christian Church, I do not know: but thus far I own it, 1. That the Church of the Jews was National in their solemn assemblies, as well as Congregational in their Synagogues: and that accordingly they had National Congregations in Jerusalem, national sacrifices, and National high Priests, besides national government: but the visible instituted Churches of Christ in the new Testament, are Congregational: 1 Cor. 14.23. 2. That we do not read of the children of Israel, who were circumcised in their infancy, to have been afterwards debarred from the Passeover upon point of moral profaneness: they having many sacrifices to expiate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ceremonially, which Christian Churches have not, but only penitential acknowledgement after censure. In which respect, I suppose (under correction) there was more toleration of sundry moral crimes in the Church-fellowship of the Jews, than aught to be born in Christian Churches. But otherwise I easily acknowledge, that in Christian Churches, as well as in Jewish, many hypocrites creep in, and are long tolerated therein (it may be all their days) and yet without impeachment of the truth and essence of the estate of Churches whereof they are members, and without infringement of the power of their Church administrations (when dispensed otherwise according to rule) notwithstanding the hypocrisy of sundry members, yea, and of officers also.  
To this place it belongeth (I mean to the clearing of this Text, Mat. 16.) to consider of the reasons whereby M. Rutterford goeth about to prove, That Christ spoke to Peter, as to one ropresenting the Apostles, and not as to one representing all Believers.  
I suppose he understandeth Apostles in a large sense, for all messeng●rs sent of Christ for the ministry of the Gospel in the Church. Otherwise, if he should mean, Christ spoke to Peter, as to one representing the Apostles properly so called (the 12. Apostles) than the Elders of Churches could claim no interest in the power of the Keys from Christ's words to Peter.  
Nor do I maintain from this place, that Christ spoke to Peter as representing all Believers; but as representing Believers making public profession of the Name of Christ before the Lord and their Brethrens. Against this his Arguments be.  
Arg. 1. Binding and losing are denied of our Boethrens to belong to many that make Peter's confession [Thou art the Son of the living God] as to believing Women and Children.  
Answ. 1. Women and children, though they being Believers, may make Peter's confession, yet they make not public confession before the Lord and his people, as Peter did. Now it is to Believers making public confession of their faith in Christ, to whom the promise of the Keys is made.  
Answ. 2. Women are expressly forbidden public speech in the Church (and therefore public profession.) 1 Cor. 14.34. And children are not able to make public profession; And therefore both of them are justly exempted from the power of the Keys.  
If it be objected, that it is a new and uncouth exposition of the Text, to interpret Petere confession, of the confession which members make of their faith, when they enter into the fellowship of the Church: n●r were Christ and his Apostles at that time in hand with any such work.  
I answer, Though Peter's confession of his faith at that time was not made for such an end, for his admission into the household or Church of Christ: yet it is enough, That Christ rewardeth that confession of his, with such a promise of all Believers into his Church by such a door. It is true, the same confession may be made upon other occasions: but yet this appeareth to be one occasion and use of this confession, to receive professed Believers into the fellowship of the Church, and the ordinances thereof; seeing we r●ad that Philip made it a necessary praecedential act unto the Eunuch to make the like confession before he would receive him unto Baptism, which was the seal of his admission, as into Christ, so into the fellowship of his Church. And accordingly it hath been anciently observed in the Primitive Churches, not to receive Competentes, or Catechumen into the fellowship of the Church, and unto Baptism, before they had made public confession of their faith before the Lord and his Church: Which is a thing I doubt not, well known to M. Rutterford, to no man more; that I might seem to do him wrong to allege testimonies for it.  
Arg. 2. If Christ had spoken to Peter here of building a ministerial Church upon his confession, and gifting it with the Power of the Keys, than the Visible Church should be made as stable and firm from defection, as the Church of elect Believers, against whom the gates of Hell cannot prevail. Now this is most untrue, since Visible Churches do fall away (as the seven Churches in Asia, the Church of Corinth, Ephes●●, etc.) and likewise this would warrant the Papists to make use of this place, as they do, to prove the Invincible stability of the Church and their impossibility of Apostasy, etc.  
Answ. 1. Though this or that Visible Church do fall away, yet Christ hath ever had some or other Visible Church upon the face of the earth, in one Country or other. Else the gates of hell had more prevailed against the Visible Christian Church, than ever this could do against the Visible Jewish Synagogue.  
Answ. 2. This or that Visible Church that did fall away, was not a society of such professed believers as were built upon a rock; but rather the sinful generation that risen up after them, who did degenerate from their Parent's faith and Profession, and so fell into the gulf of Apostasy, whether Turkish or Antichristian.  
Answ. 3. Though the gates of hell have sometimes prevailed against this or that particular Visible Church, holding fast the profession of their faith without wavering: yet they have not prevailed to their destruction, but to their dispersion only; which tendeth to the multiplication and enlargement of Particular Churches. The persecution raised by the gates of hell against the Primitive Church at Jerusalem about Stephen, it prevailed indeed to the dispersion of the whole Church (save the Apostles) Acts 8.1. but that dispersion was as seed scattered out of the garner into the field, which bringeth forth a more plentiful harvest. And so did their dispersion propagate Churches both in Samaria and Antioch.  
Answ. 4. Nor will this stability of Visible Churches promised by Christ, strengthen the Popish plea of the stability of their Church at Rome. For it is neither that promise of Christ, Mat. 16. nor any other that doth promise' stability to any one particular Church in this City or Town: nor doth any exposition of ours, reach forth such a thing. The woman may be in the wilderness, and fed by witnesses, (the Church may be in obscure places, and fed by faithful witnesses) when yet neither herself, nor her witnesses devil in Babylon.    
FINIS