Church-Government AND Church-Covenant DISCUSSED, In an Answer of the Elders of the several Churches in NEW-ENGLAND To two and thirty Questions, sent over to them by divers Ministers in England, to declare their judgements therein. Together with an Apology of the said Elders in New-England for Church-Covenant, sent over in Answer to Master Bernard in the year 1639. As also in an Answer to nine Positions about Church-Government. And now published for the satisfaction of all who desire resolution in those points. LONDON, Printed by R. O. and G. D. for Benjamin Allen and are to be sold at his Shop in Popes head-Ally, 1643. To the READER. IT is not hard to believe that such discourses as this will meet with divers censures, the profane and ignorant loathing Christ, and any thing concerning him; the Formalist accounting such truths troublesome that may engage him in the change of his opinions and practices, and some of the wisest will be apt to question the tyming such light as this: yea doubtless this pamphlet-glut●ed age will so look upon it, and lay it by. But because I do conceive that this sword will not be sheathed which is now drawn, till Church-work be better known, and more countenanced, and since safety is laid up in the Temple, Psa. 27. 3, 4, 5. I could not but help on this, which attended and practised may prove our security next to Christ. These were either sudden answers to our doubting and enquiring Brethren, or some satisfaction rendered about our so much slighted Church-Covenant, which we could not but think might come to view, for the present stay to some faithful souls, that call for light, and intent to use it well: for others, of what kind soever, we must bear their harder thoughts, among th●se usual loads of scandals, that men of our judgement must carry, especially if zeal for the Truth draw them forth to public observation; nor do we purpose (God helping us.) to succumb under calumny, being the livery of quieter times than these, let us be viler still, so God and his Ark may be more glorious. Yet this I do profess for myself and Brethren that as we have not been dealt with, nor convinced of any offence, so we shall ever be ready to give an account of that hope which is in us, being called thereunto; in the mean time we over look these barkings of black mouths, and wish a good Comment be made upon the text of our plain meaning. The only way I know to reach God's mind in Worship will be to love the truth for its own sake: yea to love it when it shall condemn our practices and persons also: Who hath not observed that the first step to error is the declining the truth in love to it? ⁂ Hence Popery begat her first brat, and hath nursed it up with thesame milk; we would earnestly desire that none would call that unsensonable or unreasonable, which God seems even now to call for, at the calling of this Synod, and will carry so much Reason with it, as God and his truth will own; more tenderness and respect to our Brethren we know not how to show, who sent us these 32. Questions, no other dealing would we have from our brethren not consenting with us. Some Rivers have been noted to differ in the colours of the water, yet running in the same Channel: let Jesus Christ be lifted up by us all; let us love him whilst we dispute about him. Presbytery and Independency (as it is called) are the ways of Worship and Church fellowship, now looked at, since (we hope) Episcop 〈…〉 out, and will be buried without expectation of another resurrection. We are much charged with what we own not, viz: Independency, when as we know not any Churches Reform, more looking at sister Churches for help then ours do only we cannot have rule yet discovered from any friend or enemy, that we should be under Canon, or power of any other Church; under their Council we are. We need not tell the wise whence Tyranny grew in Churches, and how common wealths got their pressure in the like kind. These be our sighs and hearty wishes, that self may be conquered in this poor Nation, which shuts the door against these truths. Know (good Reader) we do not hereby go about to whistle thee out of any known good way of God. Commonly Questions and Answers clear up the way, when other Treatises leave us to darkness. Read them, and what we say for a Church-Covenant, it may save charge and time in reading other Books, remember we strive not here for masteries, but give an account of our practice wherein if thou knowst we fail Candidus imperti; if we agree let us work by our platform; and may thy soul flourish as a green heath or watered garden. So prayeth Thine hearty H. PETER. THE XXXII QUESTIONS STATED. 1. WHether the greatest part of the English there (by estimation) be not as yet unadmitted to any Congregation among you, and the Reasons thereof? 2. What things do you hold to be Essential and absolutely necessary to the being of a true Visible Church of Christ? 3. Whether do you not hold all Visible Believers to be within the Visible Church as Members thereof, and not without in the Apostles sense; 1 Cor. 5. and therefore ought so to be acknowledged, and accepted in all Congregations wheresoever they shall come, and are so known: and ought (if they desire and be not otherwise unfit) of right to be permitted to partake in all God's ordinances and Church privileges there, so far as they personally concern themselves, although they be not as yet fixed Members in particular Covenant, either with that Congregation where for the present they reside, nor with any other? 4. Whether you do not hold that Baptism rightly (for substance) partaked doth make them that are so Baptised, Members of the Visible Church: and so to have right (at lest quoad nos) to all the privileges thereof (so far as they are otherwise fit) until they be cast out (if they so deserve) by Excommunication. 5. Whether do you not admit Children under age as Members of the Church, together with, and in the Admission of their Parent or Parents: So as thenceforth they may partake of all Church privileges being otherwise fit) without any other personal profession of Faith, or entering into Church Covenant, when they shall come to years? and how long do you count them under age? 6. Whether do not you admit Orphans under age, with and in their Guardians? 7. Whether do you admit or refuse Children under age only according to the present estate of their nearest Parents? Or do you not admit them if any of their next Ancestors before their parents were believers? 8. Whether do you require of all persons of age, whom you admit Members of any Church? 1. A public vocal declaration of the manner and soundness of their conversion? 2. A public profession of their faith concerning the Articles of Religion. 3. An express verbal covenanting to walk with the said Church in particular, in Church fellowship. 4. And not to depart from the said Church afterward without the consent thereof: or how do you hold and practise in these things? 9 Whether do you hold all, or the most of our Parish assemblies in Old-England to be true Visible Churches of Christ; with which you may lawfully join in every part of God's true worship (if occasion served thereto:) or if not all or the most, than what ones are those of which you so account, and with which you durst so partake or join; and in what respects? And why be not the rest such as well as they? 10. If you hold that any of our parishional Assemblies are true Visible Churches, and that the Members thereof are all, or some of them (at least) members of true visible Churches, then whether will you permit such members (at least) as are either famously known to yourselves to be godly, or do bring sufficient Testimonial thereof from others that are so known, or from the Congregation itself whereof they were members here, to partake with you in all the same Ordinances, and parts of God's true worship in any of your Congregations (as by occasion they may be there) in the same manner, and with the like liberty, as you would permit any that might happily come unto you from any of the Churches of Geneva, France, the Low-countrieses, or yet from any one Church to another among yourselves: Suppose from some Church about Connecticut, or that of Plymouth, etc. Unto the Church at Boston, Newtowne, Dorchester, etc. Or if not, what may be the Reason thereof? 11. Whether do you hold our present standing in our Parish Assemblies here in Old ENGLAND, to be lawful and safe to be continued in, or how f●rre it may be so? 12. Whether do you hold that every Believer is always bound to join himself as a fixed Member to some one particular Congregation, so as if he do not, and so oft and so long as he doth it not, so oft and so long he is without the Church in the Apostles sense, 1 Cor. 5. as an Heathen or Publican, out of the Kingdom of Christ, and possibility of salvation, according to that maxim in divinity, Extra Ecclesiam non est salus. 13. Whether do you think it lawful and convenient that a company of private and illiterate persons (into a Church body combined) should themselves ordinarily examine, elect, ordain, and depose their own Ministers of the word, without the assistance of any other Ministers of other Churches, where the same may be had? 14. Whether do you hold that every small Company of seven, or nine, or twenty, or forty persons, combined into a Church body, be such a Church (as by the ordinance of Christ) hath, and aught to have all power, and exercise of Church Government: So as they may transact all Ecclesiastical businesses independently amongst themselves? 15. Whether do you give the exercise of all Church power of Government to the whole Church, or to the Presbyters thereof alone? and if to those, than we desire to know what act of Government, and Superior authority (properly so called) may the Presbyters do, more than any other member may do, or without the particular consent of the rest, we crave to have those particular Acts mentioned: and how, and over whom in those Acts the Presbyters do rule (in propriety of speaking) more than the rest of the Congregation do? 16. Whether do you not permit Women to Vote in Church matters? 17. Whether in Voting do the Major part always, or at any time, carry Ecclisiasticall matters with you, or in what things doth it, in what not? 18. What means have you to preserve your Churches in Unity and Verity, or to correct or reduce any Church erring in Doctrine or practice. As, 1. Whether you have any platform of Doctrine and Discipline agreed upon; or if you have not, whether mean you to have one, and when; and think you it lawful and expedient so to have? 2. Whether have you combined yourselves together into Classes, or purpose so to do, so as to do no weighty matter without their counsel and consent? 3. Or give you any power to Synods and Counsels to determine and order things that cannot otherwise be ended, so as that their determination shall bind the particular Churches so assembled to due obedience, in case they decree nothing but according to Truth and right, and to peaceable suffering, in case they should do otherwise? Or what other course you have, or intent to have for that end aforesaid? 19 Whether hold you, that each particular Church may lawfully make such Laws or Orders Ecclesiastical, for the Government of itself, and the Members thereof; for decency, order, and Edification, as shall oblige all her Members, and may not be omitted without sin? 20. Wherein hold you that the whole Essence of a Ministers calling doth consist: As 1, whether is Election by the People it, yea or no? Or 2. is it so Essential, as that without it, the Ministers calling is a mere nullity? Or 3. is Ordination as Essential a part thereof, as the People's Election? Or 4. is it but a mere formality and solemnity of their calling? 21. Whether do you hold it lawful for mere lay or private men to ordain Ministers in any case? 22. What Essential difference put you between the Office of Pastor and Teacher, and do you obserate the same difference inviolably; and do not your Teachers by virtue of that Office give themselves usually to application of doctrine as, well as your Pastors? and do they not also usually apply the Seals? 23. What authority or Eminency have your Preaching Elders, above your sole Ruling Elders, or are they both equals? 24. Whether may a Minister of one congregation (being thereto requested) do as a Minister any act of his Ministry (as Preach, Baptise, Administer the Lords Supper, Ordain, etc. in and unto other Congregations besides his own? 25. Whether hold you that a Minister of a Congregation, leaving or losing his place (suppose without his fault) do withal lose both Nomen and Esse of his ministry, and do become a mere Lay, or private man, until he be a new elected, and ordained? 26. Whether do you allow, or think it lawful to allow and settle any certain & stinted maintenance upon your Ministers? 27. Whether do you permit and call upon mere Lay and private men (neither being in the ministry nor intended to it) ordinarily to preach or Prophesy publicly, in, and before the Congregation? and whether think you that prophesying mentioned, 1 Cor. 14. be to be understood of such, and be an ordinary and standing order of God in the Church? 28. Whether do you allow and call upon your people publicly before all the Congregation to propound Questions, move doubts, & argue with their ministers of matters delivered either by them or others, either at the same, or some other time? 29. Whether hold you that the conversion of sinners to God is ordinarily the proper fruit and effect of the word Preached, by a Minister alone, and that by virtue of his Office alone, or that it is alike common to ministers, and Lay persons, so they be gifted to preach? 30. Whether all and every of your Churches (including Plymouth, etc.) do precisely observe the same course both in Constitution and Government of themselves? 31. Whether would you permit any Company of Ministers and People (being otherwise in some measure approvable) to sit down by you, and set up and practise another form of Discipline, enjoying like liberty with yourselves in the Commonwealth, and accepted as a sister Church by the rest of your Churches? 32. Whether hold you it lawful to use any set forms of Prayer in public or private, as the Lords prayer and others, either made by himself that useth the same, or else by some other man? THE ANSWERS TO THE Aforegoing QUESTIONS. The first Question Answered. ALL the English and others also are freely admitted to be present in our Congregations, at the reading of the Scriptures, and exposition thereof (which is wont always to go along therewith) at the preaching of the word, singing of Psalms, Prayers, Admitting of Members, and dispencing of Censures; And many also are admitted to Church Communion, and so to partake in Church Ordinances and privileges, as Sacraments, power of Election, Censures, etc. though many also there are who are not yet admitted to this Church Communion. But whether is the greater number, those that are admitted hereunto, or those that are not we cannot certainly tell? But in the Churches in 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 then the other: besides whom there are likewise sundry children and Servants that are Admitted also. And for the Reason's why many are not yet received to Church Communion, they are sundry. 1. Many are not admitted because they are not yet known. Every year hitherto God hath replenished the Country with many new comers, and these at the first are not suddenly taken in, as Members of Churches, till by time there have been some trial of them, and better occasion to know them what they are. Sometimes once a year there are in the Land many hundreds, and some thousands of this sort. 2. When by time they come to be known, many do appear to be carnal, and give no Testimony of being Members of Christ, and therefore if they should offer themselves to be Members of Churches the Churches would not see Warrant to receive them, because the Church is the body of Christ. 3. Some that are Godly do of their own accord for a time forbear to offer themselves, till they be better acquainted with the Church and Ministry where they intent to join, and with the ways in which the Churches walk in this Country, and and till they be better informed what are the duties of Church Members. 4. Those that are known to be Godly, are all admitted in some Church or other presently, upon their own desire, when they offer themselves thereto: except any have given offence by walking (in any particular, in their Conversation) otherwise then becomes the Gospel; and then such are to give satisfaction to them to whom they have given offence, by acknowledging their offence, and showing repentance for it, and then they are Admitted. It is one thing what Churches ought to be by the appointment To. 2. of Jesus Christ, another, what weakness and swerving● from his appointment, he may bear withal for a time, before he renounce and cast off a People from being his Church. In respect of the former our Answer is, That when a Visible Church is to be e●rected planted or constituted, by the Appointment of Christ, it is necessary that the matter of it in regard of quality, should be Saints by calling, Visible Christians and Believers, 1 Cor. 1. 2. Eph. 1. 1. And in respect of Quantity no more in number in the days of the New Testament, but so many as may meet in one Congregation. 1 Cor. 11. 20 & 14. 23. Acts 14. 27. & 15. 22 30. And the form, a gathering together of these visible Christians, a combining and uniting of them into one body, by the bond of an holy Covenant, for which we refer you to the Apolgie of the Churches in N. E. sent the last year in way of Answer to Mr. Bernard. For the latter we deny not, but visible Churches rightly constituted at the first, may degenerate, and great corruptions may grow therein, both in respect of matter and form, and likewise in respect of their walking and Administrations, and yet the Lord in his patience may bear long with them, before he give them a Bill of Divorce, and make them Lo-ammi, not a People; as the example of the Church of Israel in the old Testament. Of the Church of Corinth, the Churches of Galatia, the 7 Churches of Asia, and others in the New Testament, do abundantly manifest. But what degrees of corruption may be, before the soul as it were, and life, and being of a Church be destroyed, is hard for us precisely and punctually to determine; or to say thus far a Church may err, and yet remain a Church; but if it proceed any further, than it ceaseth to be a Church any more; only in the general this we observe, the Lord doth not presently cast off a Church or give them a Bill of Divorce, no not for fundamental errors in Doctrine, or Idolatry in Worship, or Tyranny in Government, till after obstinate and rebellious rejection of Reformation, and the means thereof: for all these were found in the Church of Israel, when they crucified Christ, yet the Apostles rejected them not, till after the light of Grace offered, and blasphemously rejected, Acts 13. 45, 46. But if yourselves have so Studied this point, as to have ripened and form thoughts therein, we should gladly receive light from you. We do not know any visible Church of the N. T. properly To: 3. so called, but only a particular Congregation; and therefore when this Question in the first and last clause of it speaks of Believers within the visible Church, as Members thereof, although they be not Members of that particular Congregation, where for the present they reside, nor of any other: this speech seems to us according to our apprehension to imply a contradiction. They that are within the visible Church as Members thereof, must needs be Members of some particular Congregation, because all visible Churches are congregational, as Mr. Baine showeth at large from the Church of Antioch, Act. 14. 27. the Church at Corinth, 1 Cor. 11. & 14. and other examples and Reasons with Answers to the objections to the contrary in his Diocese. Trial Quest. 1. Whereto we refer you in this Point; neither is he alone in this Tenent, for Mr. Parker, and many other teach the same. Those silenced and deprived Ministers that wrote the Book called, The Christian and modest offer of Disputation, laying down 16. Propositions which they offer to maintain against the Prelates, give this for the fourth of them viz. There is no true visible Church of Christ, but a particular ordinary Congregation only. Doubtless every true visible Church hath power from Christ to exercise Excommunication and other Ordinances of Christ, so that they proceed therein according to the Rules of the word, 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5. Mat. 18. 17. Now Dr. Whitakers showeth against Bellarmine, that Excommunication belongs not to the universal Church, but only to a particular Congregation. Qui justè excommunicantur, saith he, co satanae traditos esse concedimu●, non t●men posse pr●priem, D●●i eject●s ex Ecclesia Catholica, Quia Excommunicatio non Catholica, sed particularis Ecclesiae censura est. De Eccles. Qu. 1. c. 6. Wherefore if Excommunication which belongs to the visible Church, belongeth to a particular Congregation, it followeth, that there is no visible Church, but only a particular Congregation. Secondly, As all visible Believers are not without Christ, but in Christ, according as they are believers, so we easily grant; that those without, of whom the Apostle speaks, 1 Cor. 5. were unbelievers, Pagans, and Heathens, both without Christ, and also without the visible Church. For those that were in Christ, and believers in Him, were not wont to abstain from joining to some particular Congregation or other; and so it come to pass, that as they were in Christ by their Faith, so by such joining they became also to be within the visible Church. 3. But this we conceive is clear also, that unless Believers, be Members of this or that particular Congregation, to whose inspection and Government they have commended themselves in the Lord, they also in some respect may be said to be without, that is without the jurisdiction and power of the visible Church, and without right to the privileges of it, as long as they continue in that State: for the Church hath nothing to do, either to dispense censures and Church privileges to Pagans, who are without all Churches, and without Christ also; or to such Christians, who though they are not without Christ, yet are not within any particular Church: for neither the Church, nor the Ministers thereof may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And though those without of whom the Apostle speaks, 1 Cor. 5. were Pagans and Heathens, both without Christ, and without the visible Church also, yet when he speaketh of judging, and saith they might judge them that are within, and not judge them that are without, he must not be understood as if he meant it simply of being in Christ or without Christ, and no more than so, but also of being in that particular Congregation, and without it: for it is plain, that those that were in Christ, if they were not also within their particular Congregation, they had nothing to do to judge them; and those that were within their particular Congregation, them they might judge, though they were not in Christ. 4. And that Church privileges do not belong to Believers, as such, but only to such as withal are Members of some particular Church: the Grounds and Reasons in the Answer to the third and fourth Proposition sent the last year, do seem to us to make manifest, whereto we do refer you, for further Answer to this Question. It is an opinion of the Anabaptists, that the Church is To: 4. made by Baptism, and therefore when they constitute or erect a Church, they do it by being all of them Baptised, which was the manner of Mr. Smith, Mr. Helwis, and the rest of that company when they set up their Church: The Papists also do imagine, that men enter into the Church by Baptism, and it is said, that their Founts were set near the doors of their Temples, to signify men's entering into the Church by Baptism, and they thought themselves to be christened, or made christian souls by being Baptised. But we do not believe that Baptism doth make men Members of the Church, nor that it is to be Administered to them that are without the Church, as the way and means to bring them in, but to them that are within the Church, as a seal to confirm the Covenant of God unto them. For 1. This is one point of the dignity and privilege of the Church, that Baptism and all Church Ordinances are given and committed to it, as Circumcision, and Church Ordinances were given and concredited to the Church of the Jews, joh. 7. 22. Now if Baptism in its first being and institution be given as a benefit and privilege to the Church, than Baptism is not that which makes the Church; but the Church is presupposed, and must be before it, for the dones, or persons to whom a thing is given, must needs be before the gift that is given to them. 2. The nature and use of Baptism is to be a seal to confirm the Covenant of Grace between God and his Church, and the Members thereof, as circumcision also was, Rom. 4. 11. Now a seal is not to make a thing that was not, but to confirm something that was before; and so Baptism is not that which gives being to the Church, nor to the Covenant, but is for confirmation thereof. To bring in Baptism before the Covenant, and before the Church, with whom God makes the Covenant and then to bring in the Church afterwards, is to make Baptism a seal unto a Blank, or to a falsehood. When the Jesuits of Rheims had said that Christ sent 12 Apostles to the Jews to move them to penance, and so by Baptism to make them of his Church. And that Paul was sent to the Gentiles to move them also to faith and penance, and by Baptism to make them of his Church. This saying of making men of the Church by Baptism, though uttered by them, as it were by the way, and not being the chief scope of their discourse, yet seemed to Mr. Cartwright so erroneous and unsound, that he would not let it pass without bearing special witness against the same. And therefore in opposition thereunto he hath these words, and in another Character for more conspicuousness, viz. That Baptism makes not men of the Church, but sealeth their incorporation into it, hath been declared afore. Argument of Acts 6. 1. And that Catechism which is commonly said to be penned by our Reverend Brother Mr. Ball, or Mr. Nicholas, now with God, giving this for the definition of Baptism, that it is a Sacrament of our engrafting into Christ, communion with him, and entrance into the Church, doth in the Exposition plainly declare, that when they called Baptism a Sacrament of our entrance into the Church, they did not mean that Baptism made men Members of the Church, but signified and sealed that they were Members afore: The seed of Abraham say they, Pag 144. Gal. 3. 7. or children of Christian Parents are within the Covenant, are Christians and Members of the Church, 1 Cor. 7. 14. Rom. 11. 16. Baptism therefore doth not make them Christian souls, but doth solemnly signify and Seal their engrafting into Christ, and that communion which the Members of Christ have with him their head, and doth confirm, that they are acknowledged Members of the Church, and entered into it, 1 Pet. 3. 21. 3. The Lord hath had his Church when there was neither Baptism nor circumcision, and therefore Baptism or circumcision cannot be that which constitutes the Church. The Church is one and the same in essence from the beginning of the world to the end thereof, viz. A company of People combined together by holy Covenant with God, and one with another, and this hath been before Baptism, and likewise before Circumcision in the days of the Patriarches afore Abraham. Yea if Baptism now, or Circumcision in former time did make men Members of the Church, then for forty years together there was no making Members of the Church, for so long circumcision was discontinued, when Baptism was not yet instituted, joss. 5. 2, 3. etc. And so by this means all that Generation of the Israelites that were not circumcised till their coming over Jordan unto Gilgall, should have been no Members of the Church afore that time of their circumcision, which is contrary to the Scripture, which as it gives the name and title of a Church to the body of this people, when they were in the Wilderness, Act. 7. ●8. (and they were in the Wilderness 40. years, in the latter parts of which time there were few left remaining that had been circumcised) so it witnesseth that afore this time of their circumcision they were in covenant with God and his Church, Deut. 29. 10, 11, 12. For that covenant was not made with their Fathers that came out of Egypt, and were circumcised there, because that generation was consumed in the Wilderness for their murmuring afore this time: but this covenant was made with the children, that as yet were uncircumcised, and therefore it was not circumcision that made men Members of the Church. 4. Baptism hath been Administered, and no Church nor Members made thereby, and men have been made Members of Churches and not then Baptised, but before. And therefore it is not Baptism that makes men Members of the Church, Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the Region round about Jordan were Baptised of john confessing their sins, Mat. 3. 6. And Christ made and Baptised more Disciples than john, joh. 4. 1. And yet neither Christ nor John did make new Churches, nor gather men into them themselves, both the one and the other living and dying Members of the Jewish Church, which was not yet dissolved, until upon their rejecting of Christ (not only of his person upon the cross, but of his Gospel in blaspheming and persecuting Grace offered them) the two staves of beauty and bands were broken and cut asunder, whereby God did break the Covenant that he had made with that People, and the Brotherhood between Juda and Israel, that is, he did un church them, Zach. 11. 10, 11. etc. to 15. So that here is Baptism Administered by John and Christ, and yet men not received thereby into the Church as Members, for they were Members long afore. Again, when any of those of Jerusalem, Judea, and the Region round about Jordan, that were Baptised of John, or any of those, many more that were Baptised of Christ, were afterward joined as Members to those christian Churches in Judea, Samaria, and Galilee, Act. 9 31. (As no doubt many of them were) they were not made Members of those Christian Churches by being Baptised, for they were Baptised long afore by John and Christ, so that those men were Members of the Jewish Church, which was not yet dissolved, and were Baptised afterward. And therefore it was not Baptism that made them members, either of the one Church or of the other. 5. There are sundry inconveniences, which for aught we see will unavoidably follow, if we shall say that Baptism makes men members of the Church; For first, if Baptism be that which constitute the Church, than Baptism may be dispensed by them that are no Ministers, for extraordinary Ministers, as Apostles, and such like are now ceased; and ordinary Ministers have no power to dispense Baptism to any, but only to them that are already members of the Church, seeing their Commission and power is limited to the Church, and the flock of God over which the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers, Acts 20. 28. Besides, the Church is before the Ministers, seeing the power of choosing Ministers is given by Christ unto the Church; and therefore if Baptism be that which makes the Church, than men must be Baptised afore there be Ministers to Baptism them, and consequently without Ministers. Secondly, if Baptism rightly for substance partaked, doth make men members of the visible Church, than it will follow that Papists are members of the Church: for they have Baptism so far right for substance, as that it needs not be repeated. But Mr. Perkins teacheth that this Baptism proves not the Church of Rome, of which all Papists are members, to be any true Church of God, and gives sundry Reasons for the same, in Answer to them, that from Baptism rightly for substance Administered in Popish Assemblies, would prove those Assemblies to be true Churches: Exposit. of Creed, in the Article, I believe the holy Catholic Church. And surely for our parts, we do not see how it will be avoided, but if Baptism made men members of the visible Church, either Papists are members of the visible Church, and the Church of Rome, of which they are Members, a true visible Church, or else we must renounce their Baptism as corrupt and false, even for the substance of it; and so all such as shall be converted from amongst them, must be Baptised again, as not having had the substance of Baptism before: such dangerous consequences do follow from saying, that Baptism, rightly for substance partaked, doth make them that are so Baptised Members of the visible Church. If any shall say, Though Baptism do not make men Members of Object. the Church, yet it proves them to be Members as a cause, is proved by the effect, or an Antecedent by a consequent: and therefore all Baptised Persons should be admitted to all Church privileges as Members, wherever they become. We Answer, that this will not hold neither, but suppose Answ. a man have received Baptism as a Member of some visible Church, which ought not to have been Administered to him, had he not been a member, yet this doth not prove him to be a member still and so give him right to all Church Privileges, though he do remain always as a Baptised person; and the Reason is, because his Baptism may remain, when his Church fellowship may be dissolved, as that he can have no right to Sacraments thereby: the Church member-ship of a Baptised Person may be thus dissolved by sundry means. 1. By some sentence of Excommunication justly passed against him for his sin; for that censure puts him away from the Communion of the Church, 1 Cor. 5. 2. 13. and makes him as an Heathen or Publican, Mat. 18. 17. So that in that case he can have no right to Sacraments by his Member-ship, though he still continue a Baptised Person. 2. By his voluntary departing from the Church and the communion of the same when it is unjustly done, 1 joh. 2. 19 jude 19 Heb. 10. 25. In which case Dr. Ames resolves such Schismatics to be no Members of the visible Church, Cas. Cons. Lib. 5. c. 12 Q. 4. Resp. 3. 3. By the dissolution of the Church of which he was a Member; for Church Member-ship is in relation to a Church, and therefore if the Church cease, the Membership must cease also; Relatum & correlatum Quâ ●alia sunt simul, adeoqueses mutuoponunt et tollunt. Now a Church may be dissolved, 1. By Apostasy and Gods giving them a bill of Divorce thereupon, jer. 3. 8. When yet there may be in such a Church some particular person or persons dear to God, who in such a case are bid to come out from such an Apostate Church, Rev. 18. 4. Hose. 2. 1, 2. & 4, 15, 17. 2. By death, as by some grievous Pestilence or Masacre, etc. in which case one particular person surviving, cannot be counted a Member of a Church, when that Church is extinct of which he was, and yet he remains a person Baptised if he were Baptised afore. 3. If that be true which is taught by Dr. Ames Cas. Cons. Lib. 5. c. 12. Q. 3. Resp. 2. that in some cases it is lawful and necessary to withdraw from the communion of a true Church (which seems to be agreeable to grounds of Scripture, Ephes. 5. 11. 2 Chr●. 11. 14.) then that will be another case wherein Church Membership is disannulled; for how a man can be counted in that state a Member of a Church, when he hath lawfully and necessarily withdrawn himself from the communion of the Church, we do not understand. And this shall suffice for Answer unto this Point, whether Baptism make men Members of a visible Church, which as we conceive, is the scope and drift of this Question. Yet before we proceed to make Answer to the next, something also may be said concerning some passages in your Amplification of this fourth Question. As first concerning those words wherein you ask, Whether they that are Baptised have not right, quoad nos, to all the privileges of the visible Church (so far as they are otherwise fit:) concerning which words we may say, 1. That those words of your Parenthesis (so far as they are otherwise fit:) do plainly imply, that in your judgement, though one hath received Baptism, yet this doth not give him right to the privileges of the visible Church, unless other things do concur to make him fit, wherein we consent with you. Now if this be so, than this seems to be an Answer to that which (as we conceive) is the main intent of the Question. For how can it be, that Baptism alone should give men right to the privileges of the Church (as Members thereof, as the Question seems to import) when in the Amplification of it, it is granted, that Persons Baptised have no such right, except other things do concur to make them fit: we do not see how these things do stand together. Secondly, those words as far as they are otherwise fit:) as they seem to imply that which contradicts the main scope of the Question; so they are so general and of such a latitude, as that when the Question is Answered the Reader is still left at uncertainty: For if such a Parenthesis may be annexed (so far as men are otherwise fit:) then the like Question may be applied to many other things besides Baptism, and would receive the very same Answer, as in case of Baptism it would receive. As for example, if one should ask whether Moral honesty or literal knowledge in the Scriptures, or Historical Faith, or the use of Reason, whether any of these do not give men right to Church privileges, so far as they are otherwise fit? You know the Answer would be, Yea. For though none of these be sufficient alone, to give men right to the privileges of the Church, yet they are such as they that have them, have right so far as they are otherwise fit, and so if it were granted that they that have received Baptism have right, as you say, to all the privileges of the Church, so far as they are otherwise fit: yet as this doth not prove that Baptism alone doth give men such a right, so still it remains to be considered, and more particularly declared, what those other things are that besides Baptism must concur to make one fit; and unless those things be expressed in particular, the Question with such a general Qualification as is here set down, may be Answered affirmatively, and yet the Reader will be still in the dark, and as much to seek as before. Lastly, those words in the latter end of this Question had need to be further cleared, wherein you ask, Whether Baptised persons have not right to all the privileges of the Church, quoad nos, until they be cast out by Excommunication? For suppose an open Blasphemer, a Sabath-breaker, an Adulterer, a Drunkard, etc. that deserves to be Excommunicated, be not proceeded against according to rule, but be suffered to continue in the Church through bribery or other corruption of the times, would you say that such a person had right either before God, or quoad nos to all the privileges of the Church, only because he is Baptised? Surely your words do import so much, unless that Parenthesis (so far as they are otherwise fit) may be any help in this case. And yet we hope you doubt not but such Dogs and Swine have no right either quoad nos, or otherwise, to the privileges of the Church as long as they continue in that State, although they have received Baptism, and although through the sinful neglect of men they be not cast out by Excommunication, as they do deserve; For if gross sinners have such right to Church privileges, only because they are Baptised, then by what right can the Church cast them out by Excommunication, as you seem to confess that she may: for can she castimen out from such privileges whereunto they have right? doubtless such proceedings were not right, unless the Church have such a Transcendent power as the Apostles never had, for they could do nothing against the truth but for the truth, nor had they any power for destruction, but for Edification, 2 Cor. 13. 8. 10. Wherefore we dare not say such men have right to Church privileges (quoad nos) until they be actually cast out, because before they be cast out, it must be clear to the Church, that they have no such right, or else she can have no lawful Right to cast them out. 1. Infants with us are Admitted Members in and with To 5. & 6. their Parents, so as to be Admitted to all Church privileges of which Infants are capable, as namely to Baptism; and therefore when Parents are once Admitted, their Children are thereupon Baptised, if they were not Baptised afore, as sometimes it falls out. 2. But whether they should thereupon be admitted to all other privileges when they come to age, without any personal profession of Faith, or entering into Church Covenant, is another Question, of which by Reason of the Infancy of these Churches, we have had no occasion yet to determine what to judge or practise one way or other. 3. But for the present this we would say; It seems by those words of your Parenthesis (being otherwise fit) you do acknowledge, that Children of Church Members are not to be admitted to Church privileges, unless they be fit, wherein we consent with you as counting it altogether unsafe, that Idiots, frantics, or persons openly ungracious and profane, should be admitted to the Lords Table, though they were the Children of Church Members, and thence we may infer the necessity of their personal profession of their faith, when they come to years, and taking hold of Church-Covenant, whereby we mean only a Renewing of Covenant, or a new professing of their Interest in God's Covenant, and walking according to it, when they shall be Adulti: for otherwise we do confess, Children that are borne when their Parents are Church Members, are in Covenant with God even from their birth, Gen. 17. 7. 12. and their Baptism did seal it to them. But notwithstanding their Birthright, we conceive there is a necessity of their personal profession of Faith, and taking hold of Church-Covenant when they come to years (though you seem to think it not needful:) for without this it cannot so well be discerned; what fitness is in them for the Lords Table and other Church privileges, as by this means it might? And inasmuch as entering into Church-Covenant is nothing else but a solemn promise to the Lord, before him and the Church, to walk in all such ways as the Gospel requireth of Church Members, if they shall refuse to make any such promise, and shall be unable, or unwilling to make any profession of their Faith, when it is required of them, this would be an evidence against them, of their unfitness for Church privileges, inasmuch as they openly break that Rule, 1 Pet. 3. 15. Be ready to give a Reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear. What hope is there that they will examine themselves when they eat of that Bread and drink of that Cup, 1 Cor. 11. 28. Who when others do examine them they are unable or unwilling to give Answer? Or how shall we think that they will receive the Lords Supper worthily, or walk as becomes the Gospel if they do refuse to profess or promise any such matter? Wherefore in this Point we cannot but fully approve the practice of the Reformed Churches, among whom it is the manner as Zepporus writeth, to admit Children that were Baptised in their Infancy unto the Lord's Table, by public profession of their Faith, and entering into Covenant, consuetum est, saith he ut qui per aetatem, neque Doctrina Catechetica perfectum ad sacram Coenam primum admittuntur, fidei confessionem coram tota Ecclesiâ publicè edant, etc. Polit. Ecles. l. 1. c. 14. p. 158. that is, The manner is, that they who by reason of age and perficiency in the Doctrine of Catechism are first Admitted to the Lords Supper, should publicly before the whole Church, make confession of their Faith, being brought forth into the sight of the Church by their Parents, or them that are instead of Parents, at the appointment of the Minister: and likewise should promise and Covenant by the Grace of God to continue in that faith which they have confessed, and to lead their lives according to it: yea and moreover, to subject themselves freely and willingly to the Discipline of the Church; these words we see are full and plain, that Children are not in those Churches received to the Lords Table without personal confession of Faith, and entering into Covenant before. 4. But how long Children should be counted under age, and whether Orphans are not to be admitted with their Guardians (which is your sixth Quaery) we should be willing to hear your judgement therein, as having of ourselves hitherto had no occasion to search into those Questions; only this we think, that one certain rule cannot be given for all, whereby to determine how long they are under age, but according as God gives experience and maturity of natural understanding, and Spiritual; which he gives sooner to some then unto others. Such Children whose Father and Mother were neither To 7. of them Believers, and sanctified, are counted by the Apostle (as it seems to us) not faederally holy, but unclean, what ever their other Ancestors have been, 1 Cor. 7. 14. And therefore we Baptism them not. If you can give us a sufficient Answer, to take us off from that Scripture, 1 Cor. 7. which seems to limit this faederal sanctity or holiness to the Children whose next Parents one or both were Believers, we should gladly hearken to you therein; but for the present, as we believe we speak, and practise according to our light. And if we should go one degree beyond the next Parents, we see not but we may go two, and if two, why not 3. 4 20, 100, or 1000? For where will you stop? And if we shall admit all Children to Baptism, whose Ancestors within a thousand Generations have been Believers, as some would have us, we might by this Reason Baptism the Children of Turks, and of all the Indians, and Barbarians in the Country; for there is none of them but they have had some Believing Ancestors within less than a 1000 Generations, it being far from so much since Noah and his Sons came forth out of the Ark. We do believe that all Members of Churches ought to be To 8. Saints, and faithful in Christ Jesus, Eph. 1. 1. 1 Cor. 1. 2. Col. 1. 2. Phil. 1. 1. and thereupon we count it our duty to use all lawful and convenient means, whereby God may help us to discern, whether those that offer themselves for Church Members, be persons so qualified or no: and therefore first we hear them speak concerning the Gift and Grace of Justifying Faith in their souls, and the manner of Gods dealing with them in working it in their hearts: which seems to be your first particular in this Quaery. Secondly, we hear them speak what they do believe concerning the Doctrine of Faith, so taking a trial what measure they have of the good knowledge of the Lord, as knowing that without knowledge men cannot well Examine themselves and discern the Lords body, as Church Members ought to do when they come to the Lords Table. And hereby also we would prevent (as the Lord shall help us) the creeping in of any into the Church that may be infected with corrupt opinions of Arminianism Familisme, etc. or any other dangerous error against that faith which was once delivered to the Saints, as knowing how easily such men if they were admitted, might infect others, and perhaps destroy the Faith of some. And this seems to be intended in your second particular. For both these we have our warrant as in General, from those places which show how Church Members ought to be qualified, that they ought to be Saints, faithful in Christ Jesus, etc. So in special from that, Math. 3. 6. Acts 19 18, & Acts 8. 37. 38. Where men before they were admitted, made profession of Repentance towards God, and faith towards the Lord Jesus Christ; for it is expressly said, that they confessed their sins, they confessed and showed their deeds, they professed their faith in Jesus Christ the Son of God. Thirdly, when this is done, those that by manifestation of Repentance and Faith are approved; as fit Members for a Church do openly profess their subjection to the Gospel of Christ, and to all the Ordinances of God in that Church, where now they join as Members, which seems to be your third particular in this Quaerie. The Distinction of particular Churches one from another, as several and distinct Societies, seems to us a necessary ground for this practice; for without this kind of Covenanting, we know not how it would be avoided, but all Churches would be confounded into one, inasmuch as it is neither Faith, nor entire affection, nor Towne-dwelling, nor frequenting the Assemblies that can make a man a Member, or distinguish Church Members from other men: See the Apology. 4. Your fourth particular in this Quaerie is Answered in the Answer to the sixth Position sent the last year: Besides all these, we hear the testimony of others, if there be any that can speak of the conversion and Godly conversation of such persons: which we judge to be a warrantable course from Acts 9 26, 27. It is the second of your Queries, what things we hold necessary To 9 to the Being of a true visible Church in General: which being Answere●; this of the Parish Assemblies in England in particular, whether we hold all or the most of them to be Churches, we conceive might well have been spared. They that now the state of those Assemblies may make application of the General to the particulars, if they have a calling thereunto. Yet because you are pleased to put us to this also, we thus Answer. 1. That we doubt not but of Ancient time there have been many true Churches in England consisting of right matter, and compacted and united together by the right form of an holy Covenant. For Mr. Fox showeth at large, that the Gospel was brought into England in the Apostles times, or within a little while after, Acts & Mo●. lib. 2. beginning p. 137. Where he reporteth out of Gildas, that England received the Gospel in the time of Tiberius the Emperor, under whom Christ suffered; and that Joseph of Arin. athea was sent of Philip the Apostle from France to England, about the year of Christ 63. and remained in England all his time, and so he with his fellows laid the first foundation of Christian Faith among the Britain people, and other Preachers and Teachers coming afterwards, confirmed the same and increased it. Also the said Mr. Fox reporteth out of T●rtullian, that the Gospel was dispersed abroad by the sound of the Apostles into many Nations, and amongst the rest into Britain, yea into the wildest places of Britain, which the Romans could never attain unto, and allegeth also out of Necephorus, that Simon Zelotes did spread the Gospel to the West Ocean, and brought the same into the Isles of Brittany, and sundry other proofs he there hath for the same Point. Now if the Gospel and Christian Religion were brought into England in the Apostles times, and by their means, it is like there were Churches planted there of Saints by calling (which is the right matter of Churches) and by way of holy Covenant, as the right form: for that was the manner of Constituting Churches in the Apostles times, as also in the times afore Christ, as hath been showed from the Scripture in the Apology. And the footsteps hereof (though mixed with manifold corruptions that have grown in aftertimes) are remaining in many places of the Land to this day, as appeareth by those 3 Questions and Answers at Baptism. Abrenuntias? Abrenuntio; Credis? Credo: Spondes? Spondeo: Dost thou renounce the Devil and all his works? I renounce them all. dost thou believe in God the Father & c? I do believe. Dost thou promise to walk according to this Faith & c? I do promise. For though it may be they conceived, that men entered into the Church by Baptism, yet hereby it appears that their judgement was that, when men entered into the Church there ought to be a renouncing of sin, and believing on Christ, and an open professing of these things, with a promise to walk accordingly. Secondly, Though Popish Apostasy did afterwards for many ages overspread all the Churches in England (as in other Countries) yet we believe God still reserved a remnant according to the Election of Grace amongst them, for whose sake he reserved the Holy Scriptures amongst them, and Baptism in the name of the Trinity only. And when God of his rich Grace was pleased to stir up the Spirit of King Edward the sixth, and Queen Elizabeth to cast off the Pope and all fundamental errors in Doctrine and Worship, and a great part of the Tyranny of Popish Church Government though at first some Shires and sundry Parishes stood out against that Reformation for a time, yet afterwards they generally received the Articles of Religion agreed upon Anno 1562. which are published and consented to by all the Ministers endowed in every Congregation, with the silent consent also of the people, and subscription of the hands of the chief of them; wherein they do acknowledge no rule of Faith or manners, but the holy Scriptures; no divine Worship but to God only; no mediation nor salvation but in Christ only: no conversion by man's free will, but by God's free Grace: no Justification but by Faith: no perfection nor merit of works, with sundry other necessary and saving truths; all which containing the Marrow and Sum of the Oracles of God which are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the eloquia Des, concredited only to the Church. Rom. 3. 1. 2. and which are that saving Doctrine of truth, which is fruitful in all the world where it comes, ●olo. 1. 5, 6. and upon which the Church is grounded and built, and which also it holdeth forth and maintaineth, 1 Tim. 3. 15.) we do therefore acknowledge, that where the people do with common and mutual consent gather into settled Congregations ordinarily every Lord's day, as in England they do, to hear and teach this Doctrine, and do profess their subjection thereunto, and do bind themselves and their Children (as in Baptism they do) to continue therein, that such Congregations are true Churches, notwithstanding sundry defects and dangerous corruptions found in them, wherein we follow the judgement of Calvin Instit. 4. 1. 9 10. etc. W●itaker, de notis ●cclesiae cap. 17. and many other Divines of chief note: nor can we judge or speak harshly of the Wombs that bore us, nor of the paps which gave us suck. Thirdly, But inasmuch as grievous corruptions of latter years have greatly increased in some of those Assemblies (as we hear) both in Doctrine, in Worship, and in the Government thereof, besides those that were when some of us were there, and in former Years: Therefore we are not without fear (and with grief we speak it) what things may come unto at length. If Corruptions should still increase and grow ' they might come in time (if the Lord be not more merciful) unto such an height as unto obstinacy in evil, and to wilifull rejection of Reformation, and the means thereof; and than you know it might be just with God to cast off such utterly, out of the account and number of his Churches; so as never to walk among them any more: which we heartily pray the Father of mercies to prevent that such a day may never be: But if Ephesus repent not of her declinings, the Lord hath threatened that he will come unto her quickly, and remove her Candlestick; that is, he will un-Church them, Rev. 2. 4, 5. and Lukewarm Laodicea shall be spewed out of his Mouth, Rev. 3. 16. And therefore it behoves such of them to Repent, and Reform themselves betime, lest the Lord deal with them as he ha●h done with others. And it much concerns yourselves (in hearty love and faithfulness we speak i●, and so we desire you wou●d accept of it) it very much concerns you (dear Brethren) whilst you live amongst them, to bear faithful witness against the corruptions that are remaining in any of them, in respect of their Constitution, Worship, Discipline and Ministry, l●st by any sinful silence or slackness of yours that should blow the Trumpet and stand in the gap, the breach should be made wider, and the iniquity increase; and lest men should flatter themselves in their sins, under the Name and Title of the true Church, as the Jews thought themselves secure because of the Temple of the Lord, Jer. 7. 4. 4. Because you would know not only whether we count those Assemblies to b● Churches, but what we would do for joining in God's Worship in them, if occasion served thereunto: We Answer, that if we were in England, we should willingly join in▪ some parts of Gods true Worship, and namely in hearing the Word, where it is truly Preached in sundry Assemblies there; Yea though we do not know them to be Churches, or knew not what they were, whether true Churches or no? For some Worship, as Prayer, and Preaching, and Hearing the Word, is not peculiar to Church Assemblies, but may be performed in other meetings. Mars-hill at Athens was no Church, nor the Prison at Philippi, and yet the Word of GOD was Preached and heard lawfully w●th good success in th●se places, Act. 17. and Act. 16. How much more might it be lawful to hear the w●rd in many Parish assemblies in England, in when generally there is a professing of Christ; and in many of them: M●n, Soul●s that are sincere and upright hearted Christians, as any are this day upon the face of the Earth; and m●ny Congregations indeed that are the true Churches of Jesus Christ, See Mr. Robinson's Treatise of the lawfulness of hearing the Ministers in the Church of ENGLAND. 5. But why we durst not partake in their prescript liturgy, and such Ordinances though true, as are administered therein; We gave you account the last Year, in Answer to the first and second Position: As al●o in an Answer to a Discourse of that Subject, Penned by our Reverend Brother Mr. Ball. What we have done in our ignorance whilst we lived amongst you, we have seen cause rather to bewail it in ourselves here, then to it in others there. Our Answer to this Question is this, 1. That we never yet To 10. knew any to come from England in such a manner as you do here describe (● the things you mention may be taken conjunctim, and not severally) viz: to be Men famously known to be godly, and to bring sufficient Testimonial thereof from others that are so known, and from the Congregation itself, whereof they were Members: We say we never yet knew any to come to us from thence in such a manner, but one or other of the things here mentioned are wanting: and generally this is wanting in all of them, that they bring no Testimonial from the Congregation itself: And therefore no marvel if they have not been admitted (further then before hath been expressed in Answer to Quest. 1.) to Church Ordinances with us, before they have joined to one or other of our Churches; for though some that come over be famously known to ourselves to be Godly, or bring sufficient Testimonial with them from private Christians, yet neither is our knowledge of them, nor Testimonal from private Christians sufficient to give us Church-power over them, which we had need to have, if we must dispense the Ordinances of Church communion to them? though it be sufficient to procure all due Reverend respect, and hearty love to them in the Lord. 2. If the things mentioned were all to be found, yet it w●u●d be also requisite (if they would partake of Church Ordinances with us, and yet not join to any of our Churches) that w●● should know the Congregation itself, from which they come, not only to be a true Church, but also what manner of one it is: For such persons cannot communicate with us in Church Ordinances in their own right; because they join not as Members in any of our Churches; but it must be in right of the Congregation in England, to which they do belong, and by virtue of the communion of Churches, and so our admitting of them to communion with us in such a manner, and upon such terms, is not only an Act of Communion with the persons themselves, but also with the Congregation of which they are: Now as we cannot of Faith admit men to Church Ordinances, which we believe belong only to Church Members; unless we know the Congregation of which they are Members to be a true Church. So sometimes a Congregation may be so corrupt, that though it do remain a true Church, yet for the corruption and impurities of it, it may be lawful and necessary to withdraw communion from the same (for which Dr. Ames gives sundry grounds and Reasons, Cas. Cons. lib. c. 12. Q. 3. Resp. 2.) or at least to protest against some gross corruptions therein. In regard whereof we had need to have some knowledge and information what that Congregation is, with whom now we have Church communion; when in heir right we admit m●n into communion, that we may know how to admit such M●n, and what to require from them more or l●sse. And this together with that want of testimonial from the congregation is one main● Reason, why some few godly men that have come from England upon occasion, not with purpose of continuance here, but of returning against; have not been received to Church Ordinances during thei● abode in the Country (though this we may say also, that we know not of any such that have requested to be received) whereas ●uch as have come in l●ke manner from one C●u●ch to another amongst ourselves, upon their request have been received: the Reason ne say is, because these Church's are better known then the Parish Assemblies are. 3. But if men come from one Church in this Country to another with purpose there to stay, and not to return to the Church from whence they came, (which is the manner of all, or the most that come from England) they are not received into our Churches; but upon the very same terms, and in the same manner, as men are received that come from England; viz: upon personal profession of their faith, and entering into Church Covenant, in that Church to which they now come (And the same we say of such as come from any of the Churches in other Countries) and wherefore are they not received otherwise, because we renounce the Church of which they were Members as no true Church? Not so, but because we believe in matter of Faith, (such as is the admitting of Members) any true Church may err: and there may now be seen some unworthiness in the man which did not appear when he was admitted in the other Church: and therefore no reason that the Act of one Church in the admitting of Members or the like, should be a binding Rule unto another; for all Churches are left to their liberty to admit and receive such into their Church; as they shall find to be fit according to the Rule of the word, and to refuse others, without respect of what they have been before, whether Members of this Church, or that Church, or of any Church, or none: and therefore in this, our walking and practice, is alike towards one another, and towards others as it is towards yours. In which practice we are not alone, for the very same as Mr. Parker reporteth, is the manner of the Reformed Churches, amongst whom, no man is admitted for a Member; but upon personal profession of faith, and entering into Church covenant, though it may be he have formally been admitted in the very same manner in the Church where he lived before, Polit. Eccles. l. 3. c. 16. 3. 4. p. 171. If the ground of this Qu. were any doubt in your own consciences To 11. concerning your own way, there were no fault in propounding such a Qu. for further light and satisfaction, if we were able to give it. Or if it did ari●e from any unnecessary intermeddling of ours in your matters, so as to take on us to condemn or judge your present standing, when we have no calling thereunto, there were then Reason why we should give account of our own doings or sayings. But if it came from some men we should look at it as a tempting Question, tending only to make matter, and pick quarrels; and then we should leave it to them that framed it, to consider the ground of it; and to fr●me their own Answer to it. As for us, we have always been slow and loath to judge or condemn your present standing; remembering the saying of the Apostle, Who art thou that judgest another Man's Servant, he standeth or falleth to his own Master, Rom. 14. 4. But now knowing you well (Reverend and Dear Brethren) and your integrity, we think we may lawfully and safely Answer, and that we would do by promising a few distinctions, for explaining the Terms of the Question. 1. Concerning the persons in the Parish Assemblies, which may be meant of such as the providence of God hath so disposed that they are free and at liberty: or of such as are bound, and it may be not sui juris, as Wives, Children under the government of Parents, Servants, Apprentices, Prisoners, Sickefolkes, etc. 2. Concerning the Parish Assemblies, which may be meant either of such as want the Preaching of the Word or Sacraments, or Discipline, or any other holy Ordinance of Christ, or have many Ordinances in them which are not of God, but of Men: or else it may be meant of some others, which in both respects are Reform and pure, if there be any such. 3. Concerning standing in them, which may be meant only of habitation, and dwelling upon House or Land within the Precincts of the Parish; or else in conforming in judgement or practice to the corrupt Ecclesiastical Ordinances used in those Assemblies; and contenting themselves therewith. 4. Concerning lawful and safe; where safety may be meant either of safety from sin, or from danger by persecution, these Distinctions we judge necessary to be premised, because your Question is, whether we count your standing in the Parish Assemblies lawful and safe; or how far it may be so? And so our Answer is in 3. Propositions. 1. Some Persons, and namely those that are not sui juris, may lawfully and without sin; though it may be not safely without danger of persecution, continue such standing in the Parish Assemblies, as do dwell within the Pr●c●●cts of them, so long as they neither conform themselves to the corruptions of men by such continuing of their standing, nor live in the neglect or want of any Ordinance of CHRIST through their own default. 2. Such standing in the Parish Assemblies, where a man shall, and must conform to the corruptions of men, in Doctrine or Worship; or the Government of the Church, is not lawful for any to be continued in. 3. To continue such standing in the Parish Assemblies, as to live in the want of any Ordinance of Christ is not lawful, nor can be done safely without sin of them, to whom the providence of God doth open a door of further enlargement. The first of these Propositions we suppose you doubt not of. The second is confirmed by many places of Scripture; and namely by such as these. Though Israel play the Harlot, yet let not judah offend, and come not ye to gilgal, nor go up to Bethaven, nor swear the Lord liveth: Ephraim is joined to Idols, let him alone, Hos, 4. 15. 17. Come out from among them, and be ye separate saith the Lord, and touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you, 2 Cor. 6. 17. Be not partaker of other men's sins, keep thyself pure, 1 Tim. 5. 22. Come out of her my People, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her Plagues, Rev. 18. 4. Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but reprove them rather, Eph. 5. 11. Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgement; because he willingly walked after the Commandment, Hos. 5. 11. We ought to obey God rather than Men, Act. 4 19 and 5. 29. Jeroboam made Priests of the lowest of the People, which were not of the sons of Levi, and ordained a Feast in the fifteenth day of the vl Month, in the Month which he had devised of his ●w●e heart, etc. and then the Levites left their Suburbs and their posessions, and came to judah and jerusalem, for jeroboam and his Sons had cast them off from executing the Priest's Office unto the Lord; and after them out of all the Tribes of Israel, such as set their hearts to seek the Lord God of Israel, came to jerusalem to Sacrifice to the Lord God of their Fathers, 1 King. 12. 31 32 33. with 2 Chron. 11. 14. 16. Upon these and such like grounds of holy Scripture we are persuaded that such standing in the Parish Assemblies, as this second Proposition mentions, is not lawful for any to be continued in. And we hope, you doubt not of the truth of this second Proposition neither, though we are afraid that many Christians, when it comes to practice, do sinfully pollute themselves by partaking in the Ceremonies, and other corruptions in the prayers, in the Doctrine, and in the Ministry remaining in sundry of those Assemblies, whom it will be your part whilst you live among them faithfully and by all good means to instruct and teach, and exhort, to save themselves from the corruptions and pollutions of the times and places wherein they live; as well in this particular of Church matters, and God's Worship as in other things: Wherein we wish with all our hearts that ourselves when time was, had been more watchful and faithful to God and the souls of his People, than the best of us were: The Lord lay not our Ignorance to our charge. The third Proposition may be made good sundry ways, 1. By precepts, wherein we are commanded to observe all things whatsoever Christ hath commanded, Mat. 28. 20. to seek the Kingdom of God and his Righteousness, Mat. 6. 33. to yield ourselves unto the Lord, and to enter into his Sanctuary, 2 Chr. 30. 8. And therefore we may not please ourselves to live in the neglect of any Ordinance which he hath instituted and appointed. 2. By examples, for the Spouse of Christ will not rest seeking her beloved until she find him in the fullest manner, Cant. 1. 7, 8. and 3. 1, 2. etc. and the same mind was in David; as appears by his heavy Lamentation, when he wanted the full fruition of God's Ordinances, and his longings, and prayer to be restored thereto, Psal. 63. and Psal. 42. and 84. although he enjoyed Abiathar the High Priest, and the Ephod with him; and likewise Gad the Prophet, 1 Sam. 23. 6, 9, 10. etc. 1 Sam. 22. 5. when good Ezra in his journey from Babylon to jerusalem, viewing the People at the River Ahava found none of the Sons of Levi there, afore he would go any further, he sent unto Iddo a the place Ca●iphia for Ministers for the House of God, Ezra 8. 15. 16. etc. And when being come to jerusalem they found by the law, that it was an Ordinance of God to dwell in Booths, and keep the Feast of Tabernacles in the seventh Month, they presently set upon the practice thereof, in the appointed season; when the like had not been done in Israel, from the day's o● joshua the son of Nun unto that day, Neh. 8. 14. etc. Yea, and our Lord Jesus himself, though ●ee had no need of Sacraments, to be to him any scale of Remission or forgiveness of sins, yet in conscience to the Ordinance of GOD, (that he might fulfil all righteousness, Mat. 3. 15▪) and for our example, did both observe the Passover, and likewise was Baptised, and did eat with his Disciples at his last Supper. All which examples being written for our learning, do show us how far we should be from contenting ourselves to live in the Voluntary want of any Ordinance and appointment of GOD. 3. There is none of the Ordinances of Christ, but they are needful and very profitable in the right use of them to the souls of his Servants: And therefore they should not be neglected. To think of any of them, as things that may well be spared; and therefore to content ourselves to be without them, is to call in question the wisdom of him that did appoint them, and to make ourselves wiser then God. 4. Our own infirmities and Spiritual w●nts are such, as that we have continual need of all the holy means which the Lord hath appointed, for supplying what is wanting in us; for correcting what is amiss; and for our continuance and growth in grace. He is a proud man, and knows not his own heart in any measure, who thinks he may well be without any spiritual Institution and Ordinance of Jesus Christ. Upon these and such like ground, we hold i● not lawful nor safe, for any Christian that is free, to continue such standing in the Parish Assemblies where he cannot enjoy all the spiritual and holy Ordinances of Christ. And hereupon we do exhort you lovingly in the Lord, to take heed that this be not the sin of any of you, nor of any other, whom your example may embolden thereunto: For necessity is laid upon you, and upon all Christians, by th●se and such like grounds of the holy word of the Lord; That neither you, nor others do live in the voluntary want of any holy Ordinance of Christ Jesus, but either ●et them up, and observe them in the places where you are; or else (if you be free) to remove for the enjoyment of them, to some place where they may be had; and it may be of the two, rather this latter. For sometimes i● Israel Sacrifice to their God in the Land, they shall Sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians to the Lord: And ●o say they, shall we sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians before their eyes, and will they not stone us? It is better therefore in such a case to go into the Wilderness, and to do it there, Exo. 8. 25. 26, 27. Hos. 2. 14. Mat. 10. 23. As for that opinion that may be in the minds of some, that if any Obj: Ordinance of Goa be wanting, it is the sin of them that are in Authority, and they must answer for it? But the people of God may without sin, live in the want of such Ordinances as Superiors provide not for them. The Answer hereuntois, that indeed the Ordinances of God Answ: may more peaceably and quietly be observed where the Commandment and countenance of Magistrates is afforded; for than is fulfiled the saying that is written, Kings shall be thy nursing Fathers, and Queens thy nursing Mothers, Esa. 49. 23. and doubtless it is a great blessing, when God (that hath the hearts of Kings and Princes in his hands, Prov. 21. 1.) doth incline them to favour, and further the service of the House of GOD, as sometimes he doth, even when themselves are Alients and Strangers. Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes, gave great countenance and encouragement to the Jews to build the House of God, that they might offer sacrifices of sweet savour to the God of Heaven, and pray for the life of the King and of his Sons, Ezra 6. 8 9, 10. I● which case good Ezra blesseth the Lord, that had put such a thing into the King's heart, to beautify the House of the God of Heaven, Ezra 7. 27. And therefore Kings and all in Authority, should be prayed for, that we may lead a godly and peaceable life, in Godliness and honesty, 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2. Nevertheless, the things that are ordained and commanded of GOD, the observing of them in a peaceable way (yielding out reverence to all that are in Authority, and praying for them) this observing of the Ordinances of God cannot be unlawful, for lack of the Commandment of Man, as appears by the doctrine and practise of the Apostles, Act. 4. 19 & 5. 29. and the approved practice of Believers in their times, if they had neglected the Ordinances of God and namely Church Ordinances, till they had had the commandment of Magistrate therein, such neglect would have been their grievous sin, and for aught we know they might have lived and died without them, the Magistrates at that time being all either Heathens or Jews, yet enemies; and if Church Communion and the exercise of such Ordinances, as Christ hath appointed for his Churches, was lawful, and needful, and profitable, when Magistrates were enemies to the Gospel; and be not so when Magistrates do profess the Gospel, we do not see but Christians may sometimes be losers by having Christian Magistrates, and in worse condition, then if they had none but professed Enemy's. Besides this, if▪ Superiors should neglect to provide bodily sustenance for them that are under their charge; we do not think that any Man's Conscience would be so scrupulous, but he would think it lawful b●y all good means to provide for himself in such case, rather than to sit▪ still and say, if I perish for hunger, it is the sin of them that have Authority over me, and they must answer for It: Neither can we tell how the Conscience of any Christian can excuse himself, if he thinks no● the Ordinances of Christ, as necessary for the good of his soul, as food is necessary for his temporal life; or do not willingly in this spiritual hunger break through stone Walls as the Proverb i●, and run from Sea to Sea to seek God in his own way, rather than to perish without spiritual food, because others provide not for him. And this is our Answer to this eleventh Quere, concerning your standing in the Parish Assemblies: which Answer of ours, and the exhortation therein, as we pray the Father of mercies to make effectual by his blessing for those good ends, which we intent therein, so we cannot in the same, but reflect upon ourselves and our own ways in times past; as seeing not a little cause to judge ourselves before the Lord, as long as we live, for our sinful ignorance and negligence, when we were in England, ●o observe and walk according to those Rules of the Word, which now upon occasion given by this Qu. we do commend to yourselves and other Christians. The Lord in mercy pardon our offences, and direct yourselves and his servants in ●ur dear Native Country, both in remaining and removing to do that which is pleasing in his sight. Whereas this Qu. in the first clause and last but one compared To 12. together speaks of Believers out of the Kingdom of GOD, and possibility of salvation, we conceive it is a contradiction, for those that are true Believers, cannot be out of possibility of salva●on, but possibly may, yea most undoubtedly shall be saved, Joh. 3. 16. and 5. 24. the contrary whereof is to overthrow all the promises of the Gospel, and with the Papists and Arminians to establish falling from grace. 2. For that saying, Extra Ecclesiam non est salus, we conceive it cannot be universally true, if it be meant of the visible Church, which in the New-Testament is a particular Congregation; but only being taken for the Church invisible, or the Universal Church, which is the whole company of the elect in Heaven, in Earth, and not yet borne, joh. 10. 16. and 17. 20. out of which elected Company there is not one that shall be saved, nor any of the elect neither, but in the way of Regeneration, joh 3. 3. but as for the Visible, we believe the old saying is true, there are many Wolves within, and many Sheep without, Joh. 10. 16. and therefore it cannot be universally true, that out of the Visible Church there is no salvation: Inasmuch as all Christ's Sheep shall be saved, joh. 10. 28. of whom yet notwithstanding there are some not joined to the Visible Church: If the Thief that repented on the Cross was a Gentile, as it was possible he was; then he was uncircumcised, and then it will trouble a Man to tell of what Visible Church he was: and yet there is no doubt but he was saved. The like may be said of job and of his friends, of whose salvation we make no question, and yet it is a great question whether they were of any Visible Church or no, inasmuch as the Visible Church in those times seemed to be appropriated to the House and posterity of Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, of which line & race it cannot easily be proved that all these men did come, nor that they joined themselves in Visible fellowship with that Church. The Centurion, Mat. 8. 10. and the Woman of Canaan, Mat. 15. were both of them believers and saved, and yet it doth not appear that they were members of the Visible Church of the jews, which was the only visible Church of God in those times. Men of years ought to be believers, and so in the state of Salvation afore they be joined to the Visible Church, and therefore there may be salvation out of that Church: For it is possible that such an one as being a Believer is fit to be joined to the Church m●y di● and depart this life afore he can be joined, as that good Emperor Valenti●ian 2. died before he could be baptize●. And for yourselves if you should think that Baptism makes men members of the Visible Church; as is intimated in your fourth Question: you may not then deny but there may be salvation out of the visible Church: unless you will say that there is no salvation without Baptism, which we believe is far from you to imagine. 3. We do hold that so; oft and so long as a believer doth not join himself as a Member to some particular Congregation or other, so oft and so long: he is without the Church in the Apostles sense, 1 Cor. 5. for the Church in the Apostles sense, is a particular Congregation; for he writeth to, and of the Church at Corinth, which Church was a particular Congregation, 1 Cor. 5, 4, & 14. 23. & 11. 17. 20. and having power of judging her own Members (as all visible Churches have) yet had no power of judging any, but such as were within that particular Congregation, as all them they had power to judge, whether they were believers in Christ or no. Mr. B●i●● (as we said before) is very large and clear in proving this Position, that the Churches instituted by Christ and the Apostles, were only such as might meet in one Congregation ordinarily, and answers many objections to the contrary, Di●ces. trial. Q. 1. 4. For the Question itself, we hold that every believer (if possibly he can) is always bound to join himself as a Member to some particular Congregation or other; and yet not because, else he is a Heathen and Publican, or out of possibility of salvation, as this Question suggests, but upon other grounds. 1. Because of the Commandment of God, Cant. 1. 8. Math. 6. 10. 33. 2. Because willingly not to do this is a secret disparagement to the wisdom of God that hath ordained▪ Churches with giving power and privilegdes thereunto Mat. 18. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4. and promises of his gracions presence to be with them and amongst them, Mat. 18. 20. Rev. 2. 1. Exod. 20. 24. Now to what end were all these, if believers should live and no● join themselves to some Church? These privileges and promises would in such case be all in vain, and the mercy of God offered therein, unthankfully neglected. Thirdly, voluntarily abstaining from joining to the Church is noted and condemned as a sin, Heb. 10. 25. and a sign of fearful unbelievers, Act. 5. 13. of the rest durst no man join unto them. Fourthly, good men in Scripture have been forward in practise this way, Isay 2. 2, 3. Zach. 8. 23. Act. 2. 41, 42. and 9 26. and have mourned with much bitterness when they have been deprived of Liberty so to do, Isay 56. 3. and Ps. 42. and 63. and 84. Fiftly, this joining is a part of that Order, and orderly walking which is required of believers, Col. 2. 5. 1 Cor. 14. 40. Sixtly, If Believers do neglect this joining, it is not only a wrong to themselves, but also a great unkindness to God: for if one believer may do this, why not another, and if two why not three, four etc. and▪ if all believers should do thus, God should have no visible Churches upon Earth, unless he will acknowledge the Assemblies to be of unbelievers Churches: foras stones in the Mountains are not an house until they be joined together, though they be digged up out of the Quarry, and squared & hewn, and hereby are made fit to be joined together, and so to become an house: so believers are not a Church till they be joined in holy Covenant in some Congregation, though the work, of Grace and Faith in their souls have made them fit, and meet to be a Church of God, which is the House of the living God: or as the humane soul and body are not a man unless they be united; so Christian or believers are not a visible Church without visible union into some particular. Congregation. Mr. Perkins having said that forth of the militant Church: there are no means of salvation, no preaching of God's word, no invocation of God's Name, no Sacraments, and therefore no Salvation; concludes with these words; For this cause every man must be admonished evermore to join himself to some particular Church, being a sound Member of the Catholic Church, Expos. of Creed in the Article of the Church; and Doctor Ames gives 6. Reasons, why every Christian should join himself to some particular Church or other Cas. Cons●. L. 4. c. 24. Q. 1. and in another place he hath these words. Illi igitur qui▪ occasion●● habent adjungendi sese Ecclesiae, & ●am negligunt, gravissimè peccant, non tantum in Deum ratione Institutionis, sed etiam in suas proprias animas ratione benedictionis adjunctae, etsi obstinatè persistant in ipsa incu●ia, quicquid alias profitentur, vix possunt haberi pro fidelibus Regnum Dei verè quaerentibus. Medul. Theol. l. 1. c. 32. Sect. 28. First, whereas this 13th. Question speaks of private To 13. and illiterate persons into a Church Body combined, we look at this as an incongruous expression, if not a contradiction. For a company so combined as to make a Church, are not fitly called private, (though they be illiterate in respect of humane learning) in as much as a Church or a Church-body, especially in times and places of peace and liberty, is a public Congregation and society: and the acts of Communion which they have among themselves (such as is the election and deposing of Ministers, whereof the Question makes mention) are not private acts but public or people-like. Neither are literate or learned men therefore public, because they are endued with humane learning, unless withal they be called to public office or employment in Church or Commonwealth: and therefore if illiterate be an exegesis of private, we conceive that exegesis is not good. Secondly, whereas this Question asketh Whether it be lawful and convenient that such a company should themselves ordinarily examine elect, ordain and depose their own Ministers? if ordinarily be as much as frequently, we answer three things. First, that if one Church do frequently come to such actions, that is, to take in and put out the same men, this is not without suspicion of much levity and rashness in the people, or unfaithfulness or unworthy walking in the Ministers, or both; and therefore ordinarily, that is, frequent taking in and putting out again in this manner, is as much as may be to be avoided. Secondly, when such things do often and frequently fall out, it is doubtless a Judgement of God upon such a people to have so many changes in their Ministers; as was that of which it was said, three shepherds have I cut off in one month, Zach. 11. 8. that People should be so oft as sheep having no Shepherd; for the transgression of a land many are the Princes thereof, Pro. 28. 2. So in like sort for the transgressions of a Church many are the Ministers thereof; we mean, when they have many Ministers, by the coming in and going out of the same men, or the removing of some and the taking in of others in their room: for otherwise, it is a blessing of God, when a Church is furnished with variety of Ministers at the same time, Acts 13. 1. & 21. 18. Phil. 1. 1. Thirdly, yet this word (ordinarily) doth seem to imply, that in your judgement sometimes this may be lawful and convenient to be done; Now upon the same ground on which it may be done sometimes, upon the same it may be done at other times, if there be just occasion. Thirdly, for the assistance of the Ministers of other Churches, of which this Question maketh mention, if this be only by way of counsel or advice, we know nothing unlawful or inconvenient in such assistance, because Churches are as Sisters one to another, Cant. 8. 8. And therefore it is our practice in ordination of Ministers, as also in removal of them, to have such assistance. But for authority and power, we know none that Ministers have properly so called in any Congregation or Church, save that one, over which the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers: and therefore we think it not lawful nor convenient, when a Church is to ordain Officers, to call in such assistance (viz. by way of authority or power) of the Ministers of other Churches. Fourthly, we judge it lawful and convenient that every Church of Christ (what ever their humane learning be, whether much or less) should elect and choose their Ministers: God doth not (for aught we know) give this power of calling their own Ministers unto such Churches as have many learned men in them, and deny it unto others; but gives it indifferently to every Church, as they are a Church, and so to one Church as much as to another. If we thought you doubted whether the power of calling Ministers were given by Christ unto the Church, we might here allege many Reasons for it; but this being the constant judgement of the eminent Lights of this age, and the former who have been studious of Reformation, we must hope (till we hear to the contrary) that yourselves do not differ from them in this point. As for us, those grounds and reasons from the holy Scripture which are alleged by 1 Calvin, 2 Zanchius, 3 Mr Cartwright, 4 Dr Aims, and (5) others do satisfy us in this particular. (1) Institut 4. 3. 14. 15. (2) De redemp. in 4. praecep. p. 1015. 1016. etc. who allegeth Bucer and Musculus. (3) 1. Reply p. 44. etc. (4) M●dul. Theol. l. 1. c. 21. Sect. 30 & cas. consc. lib. 4. c. 25. Q. 5. (5) Demonist. of disc. c. 4. Fifthly as for that objection which seems to be employed in the word illiterate, that it should not be lawful or convenient for a body to choose their own Ministers, because they are illiterate, or want men of humane learning among them, we further answer thereto; first, that among us when a company are to be combined into a Church-body, (as you speak) there is usually one or other among them who do not want all humane learning but have been trained up in Universities and usually have been Ministers and Preachers of the Word in our native Country, and approved by the godly there; and are here by the company that do so combine intended to be chosen afterwards for Pastors or Teachers: and accordingly, after the Church is gathered, are in due time elected and ordained into their places. Secondly, but yet if there were none such among them at their first combining and uniting, we do not see how this could hinder them of liberty to choose Ministers to themselves afterward, when God shall send any to them that may be fit for the work; because this is a liberty that Christ hath purchased for them by his precious blood, and they that are fit matter to be combined into a Church-body, are not so illiterate but they have learned the Doctrine of the holy Scripture in the fundamental points thereof; they have learned to know the Lord and their own hearts, they have learned Christ, the need they have of him, and of all the means of enjoying him, the worth that is in him, and the happiness laid up for them in him: and therefore they may not be reproached as illiterate or unworthy to choose their own Ministers: nay, they have the best learning, without which all other learning is but madness and folly, and science falsely so called, 1 Tim. 6. 20. and indeed of none account with God, nor available for direction and guidance in the affairs of the house of God, such as is this election of Ministers, nor for the salvation of the soul in another world, 1 Cor. 1. 19 20. & 2. 14▪ Job 32. 8. 9 though it may be, and is very useful therewith. Thirdly, you know and (we doubt not) do abhor as much as we the spirit of those men that are proud of their own learning, and vilified Believers in Christ for want thereof, saying, Do any of the Rulers, or of the Pharisees believe in him? but this people which know not the Law are cursed, John 7. 47. 48. 49. First, a company of forty persons, or twenty, or less, is To 14. not such a small company, but they may be a Church properly and truly so called, if there be nothing against them but this, that such a number may seem not sufficient: We do not find that God doth any where say, they must be above forty, or else they cannot be a Church; and therefore no mortal man can justly say it: Nay, rather that speech of Christ, of two or three gathered together in his name, Matth. 18. 20. doth plainly imply that if there be a greater number than two or three, whom they being not satisfied in the answer of an offendor may appeal unto, and in so doing tell the Church, such a small number may be a Church, and may have the blessing of his presence to be among them. Besides, the time hath been, in the days of Adam and Noah, when there was not forty persons in the world, and yet Adam's family in his time, and Noah● in his, was in those days a Church, if there was any Church on earth. And if Christ and his twelve Disciples were the first Christian Church, it is too much for any man to say, that twenty or forty is such a small company that they cannot be a Church. Secondly, for the matter of Government, there is a difference between ability and right: In respect of the former, in as much as some cases are more difficult than others, and some Churches of less spiritual abilities than others, and God doth not afford assistance and direction at some times so much as at others; therefore in such cases it is requisite that Churches should seek for light, and counsel, and advice, from other Churches: as the Church at Antioch did send unto the Church at jerusalem in a Question, which could not be determined among themselves, Act. 15. 2. But this is not because they have no right, but when they are not able. Thirdly, as for right let it be considered how the Church at Antioch did long endeavour to have ended that matter amongst themselves, before they determined to send to jerusalem, vers. 2. which shows that they had power or right to have transacted that business among themselves, if ability had served; or otherwise, that endeavour had been sinful, as being a presuming to do that, whereunto they had no right. We conceive then that every Church, properly so called, though they be not above forty, or twenty persons, or ten, or the least number that you mention, have right and power from Christ to transact all their own Ecclesiastical businesses among themselves, if so be they be able, and carry matters justly, and according to the Rules of the Word. The power of the Keys, Matth. 16. 19 among other things noteth Ministerial or delegated power of Government; and this power is committed by Christ unto the Church, as may appear, if we consider, first, to whom Christ directed his Speech in that place of Scripture; not to Peter alone, but to all the Disciples also, for to them all the Question was propounded by Christ, verse. 15. And ●eter answered in all their names. Secondly, that he and they were not then looked upon as Apostles, or general officers of all Churches (for that Commission was not yet given them) but as Disciples and Believers, believing with the heart, and confessing with the mouth Jesus Christ, the rock upon whom the Church is built; wherein as they did represent all Believers, so in Peter and the rest, the Keys are committed to all Believers that shall join together in the same confession, according to the order and ordinance of Christ. And therefore afterward this power of Government is expressly given to the Church, Matth. 18. 17. according hereunto in that description of the visible Church, as it is instituted by Christ in the new Testament, Rev. 4. The members of the Church are seen by John in a vision sitting on thrones, clothed with white raiment, having on their heads Crowns of Gold, verse. 14. Now Thrones and Crowns are ensigns of authority and power, to note unto us that authority and governing power, which is committed by Christ unto the Church. Doctor Fulke hath this saying; The Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven (whatsoever they are) be committed to the whole Church, and not to one person only, as Cyprian, Augustine, chrysostom, Jerome, and all the ancient Doctors (agreeably to the Scriptures) do confess, against the Pope's pardons chap. 3. P. 381. And elsewhere he saith; The authority of Excommunication pertaineth to the whole Church, although the judgement and execution thereof is to be referred to the Governors of the Church; which exercise that authority, as in the name of Christ, so in the name of the who●e Church whereof they are appointed Governors, to avoid confusion: against the Rhemists on 1 Cor. 5. Sect. 3. And Doctor Whitaker hath these words: Hoc est quod nos dicimus Petrum gessisse personam omnium Apostolorum; quare hanc promissionem non uni Petro, sed toti Ecclesiae factam esse, & totam Ecclesiam in illo claves accepisse. De pontiff. Roman. Q. 2. c. 4. Sect. 17. And in that Book he is pregnant and plain in this, that by the Keys is meant all Ecclesiastical power and Jurisdiction, and that these Keys are given in Peter to the whole Church: The same is also taught by Master Parker Polit. Eccles. l. 3. c. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5, 6. where he proves by many Arguments, that every visible Church (which he acknowledgeth to be no other but a particular congregation) hath the power of all Ecclesiastical Government and Jurisdiction committed to it by Christ Jesus; and answereth many Objections to the contrary: And page 2 of that third Book, making mention of four Opinions concerning those words of the Keys, and power of binding and losing Matth. 16. 19 the first of them that understand the Pope only to be meant thereby as Peter's successor: the second of them that understand it of the Diocesan Bishop: The third of them that understand those words as meant of the Ministers but the Ministers alone: The fourth of them that understand Peter to represent the Church in that place, and therefore that that promise is made unto the Church: Of these he refuseth the three first as unsound, and maintains the fourth as only agreeing to the truth. And Master Baine saith, Every Church by Christ's institution hath power of Government, Diocese. Trial Quest. 1. p. 8. And he tells us page 11. what he meant by Church: The word Church (saith he) we understand here not figuratively tataken Metonymically for the place, Syn●cdochecally for Ministers administering ordinances; but properly, for a body politic standing of People to be taught and governed, and of Teachers and Governors: So that in his judgement every Church (properly so called) hath power of Government within itself: and by these words of his it may also be concluded, that all power of Government is not in the Elders alone for the power of Government by Church institution is in every Church properly so called; But Ministers are not a Church in propriety of speech, but only figuratively by a synecdoche; And therefore all power of Government is not in the Ministers alone, but a Church properly so called is the Body politic, consisting of people and Ministers: But of this more may be said in the next Question. Fourthly, for the matters of Independency, whereof this Question also makes mention: We do confess the Church is not so independent but that it ought to depend on Christ both for direction from the rules of his holy Word, joh. 10. 27. Act. 3. 23. and for the assistance of his holy Spirit, to discern those rules, and to walk according to them when they shall be discerned, joh. ●5. 5. and 16. 13. but for dependency upon men, or other Churches, or other subordination unto them in regard of Church Government or power, We know not of any such appointed by Christ in his Word. Our Saviour's words are plain, If a man hear not the Church, let him beto thee as an Heathen or Publican. And his promise unto his Church is plain also, that whatsoever they shall bind on earth, shall be bound in Heaven, etc. Mat. 18. 17. etc. And the Apostle bids the Church deliver the impenitent sinner unto Satan, 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5, 6. Now when the man upon the Church's censure comes to be in case as an Heathen or Publican, yea becomes bound in Heaven as well as bound in earth, and also delivered unto Satan, this seems to us to be such a firm ratification of the Church's censure, as leaves no room for any other Ecclesiastical power on earth to reverse or disannul the same, and so takes away that kind of dependency and subordination of Churches. Nos plane dicimus ●cclesias initiò regi solitas esse à suis pastoribus, sic quidem ut nullis essent externis, aut Ecclesi●s, aut Episcopis subditae, non Colossensis, Ephaesi●ae, non Philippensis, Thessaloniensi, non h● Romanae, non Romanae cuiquam, se● paris omnes inter se juris essent, id est, sui omnes juris et mancipij Whitak de Pontif. Roman. Question 1. Chapter 1. Section 3. That is in sum. The Churches were not dependent and subordinate to others, but all of them absolutely free, and independent. We affirm saith Master Baine, that all Churches were singular Congregations equal in dependent each of other in regard of subjection, Diocese trial. Q 1. pag. 13. The twentieth Chapter of Mr. Parker his third Book of Eccles. Polity, hath this Title De summitate Ecclesiae particularis. And the Title of the 21. is, De paritate Ecclesiarum, where he openeth and explaineth, and by many Arguments and Testimonies confirmeth what we hold of the independency and parity of Churches, to which learned discourse of his, we refer you for further satisfaction in this point. We do believe that Christ hath ordained that there To 15. should be a Presbytery or Eldership, 1 Tim. 4. 14. And that in every Church, ●it. 1 5. Acts 14. 23. 1 Cor. 12. 28. whose work is to teach and rule the Church by the Word and laws of Christ, 1 Tim. 5. ●7 and unto whom so teaching and ruling all the people ought to be obedient and submit themselves, Heb. 13. 17. And therefore a Government merely Popular or democratical (which Divines and Orthodox Writers do so much condemn in Morillius, and such like) is far from the practice of these Churches, and we believe far from the mind of Christ. Secondly, nevertheless a Government merely Aristocratical, wherein the Church government is so in the hands of some Elders, as that the rest of the body are wholly excluded from intermeddling by way of power therein, such a government we conceive also to be without Warrant of the Word, and likewise to be injurious to the people, as infringing that liberty which Christ hath given to them in choosing their own Officers, in admitting of Members, and censuring of offenders, even Ministers themselves when they be such; as the Church of Colosse must admonish Archippus of his duty, Col. 4. 17. Master Parker you know hath 22. Arguments to prove the superiority of the Churches over and above her officers, Polit. Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 12. And Master Baine saith, If the Church have power by election to choose a Minister, and so power of instituting him, then of destituting also: Instituere & destituere ejusdem est potestatis, Diocese. Trial P. 88 And again, no reason evinceth the Pope, though a general Pastor's subject to the censure of a Church ecumenical, but the same proveth a Diocesan Bishop (and we may add, and a congregational Minister) subject to the censure of the particular Church, pag. 89. And whereas it might be objected, then may Sheep censure the Shepherd, Children their fathers, which were absurd. To this he answereth, that similitudes hold not in all things, natural Parents are no ways Children, nor in state of subjection to their Children: but spiritual fathers are so fathers, that in some respects they are children to the whole Church. So Shepherds are no ways Sheep, but Ministers are in regard of the whole Church. 2. Parents and Shepherds are absolutely Parents and Shepherds, be they good or evil, but spiritual Parents and Pastors are no longer so, than they do accordingly behave themselves p. 89. (To the same purpose and more a● large is this Objection answered by Master Parker, Polit. Eccles. l. 3. c. 12. p. 78. 79. And again, if their own Churches have no power over them, it will be hard to show wherein others have such power of Jurisdiction over persons who belong not to their own Churches, p. 89. So that all power is not in the Officers alone, seeing the Officers themselves, if they offend, are under the power of the Church. Even Paul himself though an extraordinary Officer, yet would not take upon him to excommunicate the incestuous person, without the Church, but sends to them exhorting them to do it; and blames them because they had not done it sooner, 1 Cor. 5. which shows that the exercise of all Church power of government, is not in the Officers alone: And therefore the Lord jesus reproving Pergamus and Thyatira for suffering Balaamites, Nicholaitans, and the woman jezebel among them, and calling on them for reformation herein, Rev. 2. sends his Epistle, not only to the Angels of those Churches, but also to the Churches, or whole Congregations, as appeareth Rev. 1. 11. And also in the conclusion of those Epistle, where the words are, let him that hath an ear hear what the spirit saith, (not only to the Angels) but unto the Churches; whereby it appears, that the suffering of these corrupt persons and practices, was the sin of the whole Church, and the reforming of them, a duty required of them all▪ Now the reforming of abuses in the Church, argues some exercise of Church government, as the suffering of them argues some remissness therein; and therefore it follows, that some exercise of Church government was required of the whole Church and not all of the Angels alone. Sure it is the whole Congregation of Israel thought it their duty to see to the reforming of abuses, when they appeared to spring up amongst them, as appear by their behaviour & practice when the two Tribes and an half had set up the Altar upon the banks of Jordan, Ios. 22. for it is said, that the whole Congregation of the Children of Israel gathered themselves together at Shilo, to go up to war against them, v. 12. And when Phineas and ten Princes with him, were sent to expostulate with them about the matter, it was the whole Congregation that sent them, v. 13, 14. And when they delivered their Message they spoke in the name of the whole Congregation, saying, Thus saith the whole congregation of the Lord, what trespass is this? etc. v. 16. which plainly declares, that the whole congregation (and not the Elders or Rulers alone) thought it their duty to see abuses reform and redressed, which could not be without some exercise of government. And when Achan the Son of Ca●mi had committed a trespass in the accursed thing, ●is. 7. it is counted the sin of the whole congregation and such a sin as brought a Plague upon them all: for it is said the children of Israel committed a trespass in the accursed thing, v. 1. And God saith to joshua (not the El●ers have sinned, but) Israel hath sinned, and they have transgressed my Covenant, and they have stolen of the accursed thing, and put it among their own stuff. v. 11. And for this, wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel, and that man perished not alone in his iniquity, Iosh. 22. 20. Now why should not he have perished alone, but wrath must fall upon them all? and why should his sin, be the sin of all the congregation, if the care of preventing it, and timely suppressing the same, (which could not be without some exercise of Church government) had not been a duty lying upon all the whole congregation, but upon the Elders and Officers alone? doubtless the just Lord, who saith, every man shall bear his own burden, Gal. 6. 5. would not have brought wrath upon all the congregation for Achans sin, if such government as might have prevented, or timely reform the same, had not belonged to the whole congregation, but to the Elders alone. And before this time all the children of Israel (and not the Elders alone) are commanded to put Lepers and unclean persons out of the Camp, Numb. 5. 1, 2. By all which it appeareth, that all exercise of Church Government is not in the Elders alone, but some power is in the people. And elsewhere he counts it no Sacrilege for Members of the Church, though not in office, to handle those keys, Mat. 16. but rather a frivolous thing to think otherwise; Quasi absque sacrilegio, saith he, tractare claves priva●i nequeant, qui e●●s privatim tractare jubeatur. Quoties fratres suos admonere, consolari, et aedificare. Imò ve●ò est & publica clavium tractatio quam plebs Christiana in unum coacta sine ullo sacrilegio ministrat, 1 Cor. 5. Polit. Eccles. l. 3. c. 2. p. 8. And yet this is not a singular conceit of his or ours, but the concurrent judgement of many worthy witnesses of the truth in these latter days, who do with great consent hold the Ecclesiastical government to be of a mixed form compounded of all three Estates, and that the people are not to be wholly excluded from having any thing to do therein. Si velimus Christum ipsum respicere, fuit semper Ecclesiae Regimen monarchicum: Si Ecclesiae presbyter●s, qui in Doctrina et disciplina suas partes agebant, Aristocraticum: si totum corpus Ecclesiae quatenus in Electione Episcoporum et presbyterorum suffragia ferebat, it a tamen ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 semper à presbyteris servaretur, Democraticum: Sic partim Aristocritum partim Democraticum, partim etiam Monarchicum est, semper que fuit Ecclesiae Regimen, Whita. de pontiff. Rom. Qu. 1. c. 1. sect. 2. The Church (saith Mr. Cartwright) is governed with that kind of Government, which the Philosophers that write of the best Commonwealths affirm to be the best. For in respect of Christ the head it is a Monarchy, and in respect of the Ancients and Pastors that Govern in Common and with like Authority among themselves, it is an Aristocraty, or rule of the best men; and in respect that the people are not secluded, but have their interest in Church matters, it is a Democraty, or popular State, 1 Reply p. 51. And when Dr. Whitegift, from the Doctrine of the Authors of the Admonition would infer this consequence, viz. that then the more that ruled the better estate it should be, and so the popular state should be the best: In Answer hereunto he saith, I have spoken of this before, where I declared that the mixed estate is best, both by the example of the Kingdom of Christ, and also of this our Realm, pag. 181. 182. And again, whereas Mr. Dr. saith, that Excommunication, and consequently Absolution or restoring to the Church again pertaineth only to the Minister: it remaineth that I show that the Presbytery or Eldership, and the whole Church also, hath interest in the excommunication, and consequently in the absolution or restoring unto the Church again, p. 183. And again, it is certain Saint Paul did both understand and observe the rule of our Saviour Christ (viz. that rule, Mat. 18. Tell the Church) but he communicateth this power of Excommunication with the Church: and therefore it must needs be the meaning of our Saviour Christ, that the Excommunication should be by many, and not by one, and by the Church, and not by the Minister of the Church alone, for he biddeth the Church of Corinth twice in the first Epistle, once by a Metaphor, another time in plain words, that they should Excommunicate the Incestuous person. And in the 2d. Epistle, understanding of the Repentance of the man, he intreateth them that they would receive him again: And therefore considering that the Absolution of the Excommunication doth pertain unto the Churches, it followeth that the excommunication doth in like manner appertainunto it, p. 184. And again that the Ancients had the ordering of these things, and that the people's consent was required, & that the Ministers did not take upon them of their own Authority to Excommunicate, etc. It may appear almost in every page of Cyprians Epistles. In Augustine's time it appeareth also, that that consent of the Church was required, p. 187. To these may be added, Mr. Fenner, who speaking of the Ecclesiastical Presbytery, and of the business which the Presbytery is to deal in, which he distinguisheth into judiciary, as deciding of doubts, and dispencing of Censures. and extrajudiciary, as Election, Ordination etc. hath these words, Atque haec sunt negotia quae praestari debent: In quibus per omnes Ecclesias summa Ecclesiastica potestas presbyterio demandata est, ita tamen ut in his quae maximi sunt momenti, et ad ecclesiae totius bonum velruinam maxime spectant, post 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 suam de his captum consilia Ecclesiae denunciantur, ut si quid habeant quod consulant vel objiciant in ●●edium proferant: postea, autem auditis et assentien ibus (nisi ad majorem Senatum negotium deferri fuerit, necesse ad turbas vita●das sive componendas, quod tum cum Major pars Ecclesiae dissentit, faciendum est) decervenda et pro decretis Ecclesiis pro●onenda sunt, and then he declares what he means by those matters maxim momenti, viz. excommunication, absolution, elections, and deposings of Ministers and such like, Sacrae The. lib. 7. c 7. wherein he plainly showeth, that though the power of the Presbytery be very great yet in things of greatest moment, as Censures and Elections, the people if they have any thing to counsel or object, have liberty to bring it in; and afterwards matters are to be concluded when they have been heard speak, and have given their consent, for which liberty and power of the people, he bringeth these Scriptures, 2 Chro. 30. 23. Acts 1. 15. 23. 26. 1 Cor. 5. 4. & 2 Cor. 1. 6. 7. Zanchius speaking of that Question, per quos exerceri debet excommunicatio, answers thus, nempe per Ecclesia●, seu per ministros Ecclesiae nomine, eoque et cum consensu totius Ecclesiae Promissio illa, Quaecunque ligaveritis, ad totam Ecclesiam est facta, Ergo etc. Praeterea Apostolus hoc expressius declaravit, 1 Cor. 5. congregatis vobis, etc. alloquebatur autem totam Ecclesiam. Patres idem docent: Cyprianus ad Cornelium Rom. Episcopum seribit se multum laborasse apud plebem, ut par daretur lapsis p●enitentibus: Si ergo non erat unius Episcopi cum suo Presbyterio solvere quempiam, sed requirebatur plebis eoque totius Ecclesiae consensus: Ergo neque ligari quispiam poterat, id est Excommunicari, sine totius Ecclesiae consensu. Augustinus etiam contra Donatistas ait, supersedendum esse excommunicatione Quando tota plebs laborant eodem merbo, Quid ita? causam adfert, Quia inquit, non assentientur excommunicationi. etc. Satis aperte docet tunc temporis non solitum fuisse excommunicationem ferri in Quempiam sine totius Ecclesiae consensu; et ratio est in promptu, Quae enim adomnes pertinent eum consensu omnium fieri debent: Ergo sine totius Ecclesiae consensu excommunicari nemo debet. And then comparing the Government of the Church, to the Roman Commonwealth which had the Dictator's, the Senate and the Quirites, and showing that the Church government in respect of Christ is a Monarchy, in respect of the Presbyters an aristocraty, and in respect of the people a Democraty, he concludes thus, In rebus igitur gravissimis, quae ad totum corpus pertinent, uti est Excommunicatio, sine consensu et authoritate totius Ecclesiae nihil fieri debet, de Redempt, in prae c. 4. pag. 983. etc. Calvin's words are these, Cyprianus cum meminit per quos suo tempore exerceretur (viz. potestas jurisdictionis) adjungere solet totum Clerum Episcopo, sed. libi quoque demonstrat, sic praefuisse clerum ipsum, ut plebs inter●m à cognitione non excluderetur, sic enim scribit; Ab initio Episcopatus mei statui sine Cleri consilio & plebis consensu nihil agere, Instit. 1. 4. c. 11. Sect. 6. And again, Hoc addo, illam esse legitimam in excommunicando homine progressionem quam demonstrat Paulus, si non soli Seniores seorsim id faciant, sed conscia & approbante Ecclesia, in eum scilicet modum, ut plebis multitudo non regat actionem, sed observet, ut testis & custos, ne quid per libidinem à paucis geratur, Instit. l. 4. c. 12. Sect. 7. Those Ministers that penned the Christian and modest offer of disputation, do say, That the Pastor and Elders that exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, ought not to perform any main and material Ecclesiastical act, without the free consent of the congregation, in Propos. 8. The Refuter of Doctor Downams' Sermon for the superiority of Diocesan Bishops, is plain and full also in this point, in Part 2. of his reply p. 104 105, 106. where answering Doctor Downam, that counted it schismatical novelty, that the form of the Church Government should be holden in part to be Democrattcall, and that his Refuter for so holding was a Brownist or Anabaptist; he not only proves the power of the people from the Scripture, and delivers his own judgement, that the Ecclesiastical Government is of a mixed form, compounded of all three Estates; but for the same tenant, and that the Church government is in part democratical or popular, he allegeth the testimonies of the Centuries, of Illyricus, of Doctor Fulke. Doctor Willet, Cyprian, Augustine, P. Martyr, Dr Whitaker, and others: Master Baines his judgement we heard before in the former Question. Vrsinus speaking of that Question. Quibus commissa est potestas clavium▪ hath these words: Quibus denunciatio verbi divini delegata est, iisdem & potestas illa clavium; quae verò denunciatio fit in Ecclesiastica disciplina est totius Ecclesie, ad totam enim Ecclesiam pertinet disciplina & jurisdictio spiritualis, sed alio modo fit illa denunciatio in verbi divini ministerio, quam in Ecclesiae judicio. And then telling how this denunciation is done in the Ministry, and by the Ministers of the Word, he comes to declare how it is done in Church censures: In Ecclesiastico judicio (saith he) gratiae & irae Dei non fit denunciati. ab uno aliquo privatim▪ sed à tota Ecclesia aut nomine totius Ecclesiae' ab its qui ad hoc delecti sunt communi omnium consensu. And a little after answering objections brought against the use of Excommunication, he hath these words: Potest concedi quod Christus non intelligat Presbyterium (viz. in that place Matth. 18. Tell the Church) sed propriè sumat vocabulum Ecclesiae ante Christum Jdaicae●, post Christum Christianae: Sed in Ecclesiae jurisdictione oportet aliquem esse ordinem, aliquos oportet esse constitutos ab Ecclesia, alioquin esset 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And speaking of that Question, Quis ordo servari debeat in exercenda clavium potestate (he saith) principalis pars in excommunicatione est denunciatio, qua etc. atque haec denunciatio qua quis excommunicatur non est penes Ministrum Ecclesiae, sed penes ipsam Ecclesiam, & ejus nomine fit, quia mandatum hoc à Christo datum est Ecclesiae; nam ipse ait expressè, Dic Ecclesiae. And finally, speaking of abuses to be avoided, and cautions to be observed in Excommunication, he hath such words in the fourth Proposition, or Rule there annexed, as do declare it to be his judgement▪ that if Excommunication should be passed by a few, without the consent of the whole Church, such proceedings would be both Oligarchy and Tyranny: Attentem expendatum (saith he) à toto Presbyterio, probetur ab Ecclesia, non suscipiatur privat â authoritate, ne ministerium Ecclesiae convertatur in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & Tyrannidem, in his Comment upon the Catechism, in the place De clavibus regni coelorum. Pareus delivering certain porismata or, conclusions concerning Excommunication, hath this for the fifth of them, Quòd excommunicandi potestas non fit penes unum Episcopum, vel paucos pastors, sed penes Ecclesiam; proindelicet pastors & presbyteri ordinis cau▪ â primas habeant partes circa censuras Ecclesiasticas, & per eos h● administrentur; quod tamen citra consensum Ecclesiae pastores ad exclusionem proced●re non debeant, alibi demonstravimus in 1 Cor. 5. And a little after, answering Stapletons' objections that would have the power of Excommunication to be in the Bishop alone▪ he brings in the case of Cyprian, who could not absolve the Lapsi without the people: Cyprianus (saith he) ad Cornelium Romanum Episcopum scribit s● multum apua plebem laborasse ut pax daretur lapsis, quam si per se dare potuisset, non erat cur adeo in persuadenda plebe se fatigasset. So that in the judgement of Pareus and Cyprian all power of Church government was not in the Presbyters, but some power was in the people. Musculus, although he think there be little use of Excommunication and Church discipline, where there is a Christian Magistrate, yet when it is to be used, he would not have the people excluded from having any hand therein, as may appear by those words of his, where he speaks De disciplina Ecclesiastica: Hisce de rebus non constituet Minister suo proprio arbitratu, sed erit ad institutionem earum director, & adhibebit suffragia & consensum sue plebis, ne quicquam invitae Ecclesie imponatur. Denique curabit ut plebs ipsa viros graves, timentes Dei, ac boni testimonii deligat, quorum curâ & vigilantiâ disciplina Ecclesiastica administratur, & si quid gravioris momenti accidat, ad ipsam Ecclesiam referatur: Loc. come. de Ministris verbi Dei, in tit. de potestate Ministrorum p. 377. And afterward, in the latter end of that place, coming to speak of the deposing of unworthy Ministers, he hath these words: Quaeritur hic per quos disciplina ista administrari debeat? Respondeo, primum Ecclesiae populus potestatem habens elegendi dignum Ministrum, habet etiam (teste Cypriano) potestatem indignum recusandi: deinde qui Judices sunt Censoresque morum in Ecclesia ex officio tenentur redargnere peccantem Ministrum, si duobus aut tribus testibus fide dignis coram Ecclesia Dei convictus fuerit. Tertiò, iidem cum consensu & suffragiis plebis deponent Ministrum, vel ad ltempus, vel in universum, vel excommunicabunt tandem juxta quaitatem peccati vel defectus illius, p. 429. Doctor Ames saith, Potestas hujus disciplinae (viz. of Excommunication) quoad jus ipsum pertinet ad Ecclesiam illam in communi, cujus membrum est peccator: ad illos enim pertinet ejicere, ad quos pertinet primò admittere, & corporis totius interest ex aequo membrorum conservatio vel amputatio, cum Ecclesi● idcirco consensu (eoque Magistratu non permittente tantum, sed & approbante & constituente) est executioni mandanda. Medul. Theol. l. 1. c. 37. Sect. 26. Lastly, Master Parker observing a distinction between power, and the dispencing of power; that the one is in the Church and the other in the Presbyters, hath these words: Neque tamen dispensatio omnis, omneque exercitum est penes rectores solos, sed juxta temperamentum formae partim Aristocratice, partim Democraticae de manda●ae Rectoribus suis Ecclesi●, que ipsa per se obire satis commodè nequit, retinente vero dispensationem illam illudque exercitium quod & ipsi convenit, & pertinet ad ejus lignitatem, authoritatem, & libertatem à Christo donatam. Posit. Eccles. l. 3. c. 7. And elsewhere he saith, Imo vero est & publica clavium tractatio, quam plebes Christiana in unum coacta, sine ullo acrilegio administrat. Polit. Eccles. l. 3 c. 2 p. 8. These testimonies we thought good to produce in this Question, lest any should think that to give any Church power of Government to the people, were some singular opinion of ours, swerving from the truth, and disallowed by Orthodox Writers of the Reformed Churches; and no doubt but besides these here cited, the same is taught by others also, whom now we spare to allege, intending only ●hese few for a taste instead of many. 2. And therefore when this Question demandeth whether we give the exercise of all Church power of government to the whole Congregation, or to the Presbyters thereof alone? Our Answer is, neither thus nor so, neither all to ●he people excluding the Presbytery, nor all to the Presbytery excluding the People. For this were to make the government of the Church either merely democratical, or merely Aristocratical, neither of which we believe it ought to be. 3. Whereas this Question demandeth to know what acts of Government the Presbyters may do more than any other may do, and to have those particular acts mentioned: this seemeth to us to be a very large demand, for who is able to mention all the particular acts of government, which any one Governor may perform in his time, especially if he continue long in his place? But if your meaning in this Point be not of the individuals, but of the species or kinds, yet even there also it is much to require the particular mentioning of all; yet to give you a taste take these. The calling of Assemblies and dismissing of the same again; The ordinary preaching of the Word, which is done by way of Office; and being the people's mouth unto God in Prayer; The dispensing of Baptism, and the Lords Supper: The permitting of any to speak in an orderly way; and again enjoining silence: The putting of matters to Vote, and pronouncing of sentence in the censure of offenders, or receiving in of Penitents after their fall, and blessing of the people in the name of the Lord; These are Acts of Church Government, which the Presbyters may do according to the Word and another member may not do without breach of Order and presuming above his place. 4. It is also here demanded, what the Presbyters may do without the particular consent of the rest? To which we answer, that when they do what the Lord Christ (whose Stewards they are) by his word requires of them in their places, this should not be without the consent of the rest, ●or the rest of the Church ought to consent thereto: Christ's Sheep ought to hear his voice, john 10. 27. and to obey them that speak unto them in his name, Heb. 13. 17. And if any man should in such case wilfully descent, the Church ought to deal with such an one, for not consenting to the will and ways of Christ, or else they shall all be guilty of the sinful dissent of such an one. So that this Passage (if it be meant of Presbyters doing their duty) without the consent of the people, goes upon a supposal (in respect of the people) of that which never ought to be, neither are we to suppose but that there may be rule when the Elders and Brethren do not descent nor are divided one from another: The multitude of them that believed in the first Christian Church at jerusalem, were of one heart and of one soul, A l. 4. 32. Yet none needs to doubt, but there was rule and Government amongst them, when yet their agreement was such, that the Apostles and Flders did nothing without the full consent of the rest. It is a miserable mistake either to think that in the Church of Christ the Elders and Brethren must needs descent one from another, or if they all consent, that then there can be no ruling but against the people's mind. They were none of the best Shepherds to their flocks unto whom the Lord saith, with force and rigour have you ruled them. Ezech. 34. 4. As for doing any thing in their places▪ which the word of Christ, the Lord and Master of the Church, commandeth not, nor alloweth such things▪ they neither aught to do nor ought the Church to consent unto them if they should; for that were to make themselves partakers of their Rulers sins, and so to bring Judgement upon them all, as when the Priests did wickedly bear rule, and the people loved to have it so, jeremiah 5. 31. 5. Lastly, this Question demandeth how, and over whom in those Acts of Government, which are done by the Elders more than by other Members, or without the consent of the rest, the Presbyters do rule in propriety of speaking more than the rest of the Congregation? wherein are sundry particulars. 1. How they rule? Whereunto we answer, that neither the Elders nor the people do rule with Lordly and Princely rule, and Sovereign authority and power; for that is proper to Christ over his Church: who is the only Lord, 1 Cor. 12. 5. And King and Lawgiver that is able to save and to destroy, Isa. 33. 23. Psal. 2. Luk. 19 27. Jam. 4. 12. The Elders are forbidden to be Lords over God's heritage, 1 Pet. 5. 3. Or to exercise authority as the Kings and Princes of the earth do, Matth. 20. 25, 26. Luk. 22. 25, 26. They are not so to rule, as to do what themselves please, but they must do whatsoever Christ hath commanded, Mat. 28. 20. Mr. Baine showeth from these words there are diversities of Ministeries, but one Lord, 1 Cor. 12. 5. That it is contrary to the Scripture that there should be in the Church more Lords than one: (and saith he) look as great Lords have in their Houses Ministers of more and less honour, from the Steward to the Scullery, but no Lordlike or Master-like power in any besides themselves: So is it with Christ and his Church, which is the House of God, wherein he is the Lord, Apostles and others having more or less honourable services, but no Masterlike power over the meanest of their fellow servants: On Ephes. 1. 22. p. 395. and elsewhere he saith, no Minister of the Word hath any power but Ministerial in the Church, the power of the Apostles themselves and Evangelists is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Acts 20. 2 Tim. 4. Yea such a service as doth make the Ministers having it so servants, that they are no way Lords; many Ministers, one Lord; we preach Christ jesus the Lord; ourselves your servants for jesus sake, Diocese. Trial. Q. 2. p. 74. The Elders are to rule as Stewards, Mat. 24. 45. Luke 12. 42. As Shepherds, Act. 20. 28. As Captains, guides, leaders or overseers, by going before the People, and showing them the word and way of the Lord, 1 Tim. 3. 1. 5. & 5. 17. 1 Thes. 5. 12. H●b. 13. 17. 2. How they rule more than the rest of the Congregation do? Whereto the Answer is, that this is more than the rest of the Congregation do in these acts, even as acting is more than consenting, and as it is more to be a Steward over of the House then one of the household, or to be a guide or leader, then to be guided or led. 3. Over whom they do rule? even over the whole Church in general, and every Member in particular, even all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers, Act. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 3. 2. The rule is express and plain that women ought not to To 16. speak in the Church, but to be in silence, 1 Cor. 14. 34. 1 Tim. 2 11, 12. And therefore they ought not to vote in Church matters; besides voting imports some kind of government, and authority and power: now it is not government and authority, but subjection and obedience which belongs unto women, by the rule, and so is the practice of women amongst us. Church matters ought not to be determined merely by To 17. multitude or plurality of Votes, but by rules from the word of Christ, whose will▪ (and not the will either of the Major, or Minor part of men,) is the only rule and Law for Churches, jam. 4. 12. Isa. 33. 22. Mat. 23. 8, 9 Exod. 23. 2. 21. 22. For our practice among us, the Major part of the Church, yea usually the whole Church doth consent and agree in one mind, and one judgement, and so gives a joint unanimus Vote; and the rule requires it should be so Rom. 15. 6. and the example of the Primitive Apostolic Churches, where things were carried (nor merely by the Major or Minor part, the rest dissenting, but) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or with one accord. Act. 1. 14. & ●. 46 & 4. 24. & ●. 12. & 15. 25. So that in this sense, matters with us are carried according to the Vote of the Major part, that is, with the joint consent of the whole Church, but yet because it is the mind of Christ. But it may be your meaning is in this Question to take it for granted that the Churches will be divided in their Votes, and to know what course we take at such times: But if Churches lay aside their own affections, and give attendance to the rule, and be (as all Churches ought to be) men of humble spirits, and sincere, and withal depend on Christ their head and King for guidance, in their work, we know no necessity of such a supposal, that they must needs be divided in their votes, especially considering what promises he hath made unto his Church, of godly concord and agreement among themselves, and of his own gracious presence in the midst of them, jer. 32. 39 Zeph. 3. 9 Mat. 18. 20. which promifes we believe are not in vain. Nevertheless, we deny not but through the corruptions & distempers of men, some dissension may arise for a time in a true Church, as it was in the Church at Corinth: and if any such thing fall out among us (which we bless God is not often) then before matters be put to the vote, our course of proceeding is after this manner. If the Elders and Major part of the Church consent in one conclusion, yet if any brother dissent, he is patiently heard, and his alledgements of Scripture or good reasons are duly weighed: If it appear that his judgement is according to the rule, the whole Church will readily yield, though before they were otherwise minded. But if it appear they who descent from the Major part, are factiously or partially carried, the rest labour to convince them of their error by the rule, if they yield, the consent of all comfortably concurreth in the matter; if they still continue obstinate, they are admonished, and so standing under censure, their vote is nullified. If they without obstinate opposition of the rest, do descent still, yet refer the matter to the judgement of the Major part of the body they are not wont to proceed to sentence (if the matter be weighty as in Excommunication) till the reasons on both sides have been duly pondered, and all brotherly means have been used for mutual information and conviction. If the difference still continue the sentence (if the matter be weighty) is still demurred, even till other Churches have been consulted with, who in such a case will send their Elders to communicate their apprehensions and light, which they do not pro imperio, binding the Church to rest in their dictates but by propounding their grounds from the Scripture. These courses with God's presence and blessing (which usually accompanieth his Ordinance) faithfully taken and followed, will prevail either to settle one unanimous consent in the thing▪ or at least to preserve peace in the Church by the dissentors submission to the judgement of the Major part, though they see not light sufficient to warrant them to act in the business: Such subjection is according to the rule, Ephes. 5. 21. 1 Pet. 5. 5. If the Church or the Elders should refuse the testimony of other Churches according to God, they will (after brotherly admonition and due patient waiting) deny them the right hand of fellowship, till they shall give better evidence of their subjection to the Gospel of Christ. But thanks be to God we never had occasion of such withdrawing communion of one Church from another, though now and then (as need requireth) Churches send to other Churches for their counsel and advice. Means to preserve the Churches in unity and verity, To 18. and to reform any that may err, thanks be to God we have sundry. First, the holy Scriptures, which are a perfect rule for Doctrine and practice, 2 Tim. 3. 15 16. 2 Pet. 1. 19 Psal. 19 7, 8. Secondly, the Ministry appointed by Christ, viz. of Pastors, Teachers, Elders, and Deacons, Ephes. 4. 11, 12. 1 Cor 12. 28. 1 Tim. 5. 17. 1. Tim. 3. 1, 2. &c and verse. 8. and in both these we have frequently holden forth unto us the Commandment of God, wherein he requires Churches to be of one mind and one judgement in the truth, 1 Cor. 1. 10. & 2. 13. 11. Ephes. 4. 3. & Phil. 1. 27. & 2. 1. 2. and his promise to lead his people into all truth, and holy agreement therein, Jer. 32. 29. Isa 11 6, 7 etc. Zeph. 3. 9 joh. 16. 13. with many motives and Rules from Scripture for continuing in the said truth and love. Now Faith makes use of these promises and submits to these precepts and exhortations, and so both these being mixed with Faith are profitable means by the blessing of God for that end aforesaid, Heb. 4. 2. as these Churches have found by experience, for these years since our coming into this Country: And any other means sanctified of God for the aforesaid end, we hope we should be glad with thankful hearts to improve and make use of as the Lord shall help. As for a Platform of Doctrine and Discipline which you mention, as one means hereunto, if thereby you mean no more but a confession of Faith of the holy doctrine which is according to godliness, we know nothing but it may be lawful and expedient in some cases for any particular person that hath received the gift to do it; or any Church, or a●l the Churches in any Christian Commonwealth, to compile and set forth such a platform. The practice of those Churches, whose Confessions are contained in that book called The harmony of Confessions, as also of Master Robinson at Leiden, and others of our Nation in other parts in the Low-countries, who have published such platforms, we see no reason to condemn or disallow: neither count we it unlawful or inexpedient for any Church or Churches, or person or persons in the country, upon just occasion to do the like. But if your meaning be of a platform to be imposed by authority upon others, or ourselves, as a binding Rule of Faith and practice, so that all men must believe and walk according to that platform, without adding, altering, or omitting▪ than we are doubtful whether such platforms be lawful or expedient. For if the Doctrine contained therein do in any particular swerve from the Doctrine contained in Scripture then the imposing of them is so far forth unlawful; and if they be according to it, than they may seem needless, in as much as the form of wholesome words contained in Scripture is sufficient. Which reason against such Platforms, makes nothing against Sermons or Preaching, though Sermons must be according to the Doctrine contained in Scripture, because Preaching is an ordinance of God and therefore not needless; which we cannot say of such Platforms. Besides, as they are not necessary, so they may be a snare unto men, and a dangerous temptation of attending more to the form of Doctrine delivered from the authority of the Church, and the imposers, then to the examining thereof according to the Rule of Scripture; and so their faith may by this means stand in the wisdom or will of man, rather than in the power of God, as if men had dominion over their faith; which things ought not so to be, 1 Cor. 2. 5. & 2. 1. ver. Christians have liberty from God to search the Scriptures, and try all things, and hold fast that which is good, Act. 17. 11. joh. 5. 39 1 Thess. 5. 21. but the foresaid imposing of platforms and confessions compiled by men, doth seem to abridge them of that liberty; and if it be any means of unity, yet it may be a dangerous hindrance of some verity and degree of truth as binding men to rest in their former apprehensions and knowledge, without liberty, to better their judgement in those points, and shutting the door against any further light which God may give to his best servants, and most discerning, beyond what they saw at first: And therefore we doubt such imposed platforms are not lawful, or at least wise not expedient. The consociation of Churches into Classes and Synods we hold to be lawful and in some cases necessary; as namely in things that are not peculiar to one Church, but common to them all: And likewise when a Church is not able to end any matter that concerns only themselves, than they are to seek for counsel and advice from neighbour Churches; as the Church at Antioch did send unto the Church at jerusalem, Acts 15. 2. the ground and use of Classes and Synods, with the limitations therein to be observed, is summarily laid down by Doctor Ames, Medul. Theol. l 1. c. 39 Sect. 27. unto whom we do wholly consent in this matter. But when you speak of doing no weighty matter without the consent and counsel of a Classes, we dare not so far restrain the particular Churches as fearing this would be to give the Classes an undue power and more than belongs unto them by the Word; as being also an abridgement of that power which Christ hath given to every particular Church, to transact their own matters (whether more or less weighty) among themselves (if so be they be able) without such necessary dependence upon Classes, as we have showed before in answer to Q. 14. Sect. 3. & 4. of that Answer. And Master Parker testifieth, that in Genevah, and in the Low-countries, where they have some use of Classes, yet it cannot be said that their particular Congregations are absque potestate omni in rebus grandtoribus, ut in excommunicatione; the particular Churches are not without power in the more weighty matters, as in Excommunication, Polit. Eccles. li. 2. c. 36. Sect. 11. p. 310. And Master Baine showeth the same, saying, They have power of governing themselves, but for greater edification voluntarily confederate, not to use or exercise their power but with mutual communion, one ask the counsel and consent of the other, Diocese. Trial Q. 1. p. 21. And a little after Geneva made his consociation, not as if the prime Churches were imperfect, and to make one Church by this union; but because though they were entire Churches, and had the power of Churches, yet they needed support in exercising of it, etc. which is the very same that we said before in Q. 14 viz. That all Churches have right of Government within themselves, but some had need of counsel and advice of others, because they are of less ability to transact their own matters of themselves. And Master Parker in the same place afore alleged in the page immediately precedent, clearly showeth against Doctor Downham, Doctor Sutcliffe, and others, that those particular Congregations which have Presbyters of their own, with power within themselves, are the most perfect, and are precisely form juxta formam illam quae in verbo patefacta est, according to that form which is revealed in the Word; whereas others which have not the like are more defective and imperfect. And if this be so, then to bind Churches to do no weighty matters without the counsel and consent of Classes, were to blind them to be imperfect. And for Synods, if they have such power that their determination shall bind the Churches to obedience (as you speak) it is more than we yet understand. Indeed Bellarmine makes Bishops in a Council or Synod to be Judges; and that standum sit corum sententiae, quia ipsi sic statuerunt, quomodo statur sententia Praetoris in causis politicis; that is, either to obey or suffer: the Concil. & Eccles. l. 1. c. 18. But the Orthodox Writers do not consent to him therein; for in their judgement the sentence of a Council or Synod is only inquisitio quaedam & dictio sententiae ministrato●ia & limitata, ita ut tantum valeat decretum Concilii quantum valeat ejus ratio, as Doctor Ames hath it in his Bellarminus enervatus, upon that place of Bellarmine: that is, The sentence of a Synod is only a certain enquiring and giving of sentence by way of Ministry, and with limitation; so that the decree of the Council hath so much force as there is force in the reason of it. And Junius expresseth it thus; Sententia Concilii per se ipsam suasionis non coactionis est judicium ministeriale, non authoritatem, per se necessitatemque adferens, Animadvers. upon Bellarmine in that place: that is, The sentence of a Council is of itself only of advice, not of compulsion or constraint, and brings with it a judgement ministerial, not authority of itself nor necessity; whereunto we do wholly consent. As for that clause in this Question, That the determination of a Synod should bind if not to obedience, yet to peaceable suffering, we know not what sufferings those should be: for punishments in Purse or Person, in respect of the body or outward man, are not to be inflicted by Synods, but by civil Magistrates; and Church-censures of Excommunication, or the like, belong to the particular Church of which an offendor is a member, out of the communion whereof a man cannot be cast, but only by his own Church. Only Christ hath Authority to make Laws for the government To 19 of each particular Church, and the Members thereof, and h●s laws do oblige all the Members, and may not be omitted without sin, Jam. 4. 12. Jsa. 33. 22. ● Mat. 23. 8, 9 10. ●ct. 3. 23. But for particular Churches, they have no power to make Laws for themselves or their Members, but to observe and see all their Members observe those Laws which Christ hath given and commanded Mat. 28. 20. Deu●. 33. 3. john 10. 27. If any Church shall presume further, they go beyond their Commission, and in such case their Ecclesiastical Laws may be omitted without sin, nay it would be sin to be subject to them Col. 2. 20. To walk after them, Hos. 5. 11. to be such servants of men as not to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, 1. or. 7. 23. Gal. 5. 1. The outward calling of a Minister consisteth properly To 20. and essentially in election by the people, as Doctor ●mes showeth, Cas. Cons. l. 4. c. 25. Q. 6. And this election is so essential, that without it the Ministers calling (if you speak of an ordinary Church officer) is a nullity; And therefore Mornay, that learned noble man of France, approveth that saying of chrysostom, election by the people is so necessary, as that without it there is neither Altar, nor Church, nor Priesthood, where (omitting other things) it appears to be their judgement, that without election by the people, the Ministry is void; And Mornay addeth of his own, concerning the Bishops amongst the Papists, that they were nullá plane 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nulla proinde, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for the one presupposed the other, no Imposition seeing without election, in his book of the Church, c. 11. p. 375. Yet sometimes the people's acceptance and approbation afterward may supply the want of election at the first, as Jacob's after consent and acceptance of Lea, made her to be his wife, though he chose her not at the first. And by this we hold the calling of many Ministers in England may be excused, who at first came into their places without the consent of the people. If ordination by imposition of hands, were of the essence of a Ministers calling then in those Churches, where such ordination is not used, their Ministers should want a lawful calling, which were an hard sentence against many Ministers in Scotland, where (as is reported) this ordination is not thought necessary, and therefore used or omitted indifferently. We look at Ordination by Imposition of hands, as a solemn investing of men into their places, whereto they have right and calling by election, like to the inauguration of a Magistrate in the Commonwealth, yet necessary by divine Institution. 1 Tim. 4. 14. But not so necessary as if the Ministers calling were a nullity without it. Essentia ipsa vocationis, in electione legitima consistit; Ordinatio pendet ab electione, sicut Coronatio Principi●, aut Magistratus inauguratio, ab electione, successione, aut aequivalente aliqua constitutione. Ames Bellarm. enervat. Lib. 3. de clericis, c. 2. Sect. 3. That is, the essence of a Ministers calling consists in lawful election, Ordination depends upon Election, as the Coronation of a Prince, or the Inauguration of a Magistrate, depends upon Election, Succession, or some other Constitution equivalent. And again, Ritus impositionis manuum non est absolute necessarius ad esse Pastoris, non magis quam Coronatio ad esse Regis, aut celebratio nuptiarum ad earum esse. sect. 10. That is, the right of Imposition of hands is not absolutely necessary to the essence of a Pastor, no more than the Coronation to the essence of a King, or the Celebration of Marriage to the essence thereof. Ordination of Ministers is not a private action but public, To 21. and aught to be done publicly in the Assembly of the Church, and therefore the persons that perform it, (whether they be ordinary Church Officers or no) cannot in any congruity of speech be called mere private persons in that Action. 2. The Church that hath no Officers, may elect Officers or Ministers unto themselves, therefore it may also ordain them; which Argument Dr. Whitaker useth as we shall see anon. If it have Commission and power from Christ for the one, and that the greater, it hath it also for the other which is the lesser: Now ordination is less than election, and depends upon it as a necessary Antecedent by divine Institution, by virtue of which it is justly administered, being indeed nothing else but the admission of a person lawfully elected into his Office, or a putting of him into possession thereof, whereunto he had right before by election, as was said before in answer to the precedent Question. 3. If a Church have Ministers or Elders before, than this ordination is to be performed by the Elders of the Church, and in their Assembly. 1 Tim. 4. 14. as also many other acts are to be performed by them. 4. This Ordination thus performed by the Elders for the Church, may fitly be called the Act of the whole Church, as it is the whole man that seeth, that heareth, that speaketh, when these acts are instrumentally performed by the eye, the ear, and the tongue, in which sense Master Parker saith, Ecclesia per alios docet, baptisa●que, Polit. Eccles. l. 3. c. 7. p. 26. 5. But when a Church hath no Officers, but the first Officers themselves are to be ordained, than this Ordination by the Rite of imposing of hands may be performed for the Church by the most prime grave and able men from among themselves, as the Church shall depute hereunto, as the children of Israel did lay their hands upon the Levites, Numb. 8. 10. Now all the Congregation could not impose all their hands upon them together, all their hands could not possibly reach them together, and therefore it must needs be that some of the Congregation in the name of the whole body performed this Rite: And as this Scripture showeth, that the people may in some cases lay their hands upon Church Officers, (for the Levites were such, upon whom the children of Israel did lay their hands) so let it be considered, whether these reasons do not further make it manifest. 1. Men that are in no Office may elect, therefore they may ordain, because ordination is nothing else but the execution of Election. 2. If it were not so then one of these would follow, either that the Officers must minister without any Ordination at all, or else by virtue of some former Ordination received in some other Church or else they must be ordained by some other Minister or Ministers of some other Church, that were ordained afore them, and so the Ministry to be by succession. But the first of these is against the Scripture, 1 Tim. 4. 14. Heb. 6. 2. And the second were to establish the Popish opinion of the indelible Character, imprinted as they imagine in their Sacrament of holy Orders. Whereas for aught we can discern. If when they are called to Office in any Church, they have need of a new Election, notwithstanding their former election into another Church than they have by the same ground need of a new Ordination, for Ordination depends upon Election: If their former Election be ceased, their former Ordination is ceased also; and they can no more minister by virtue of a former Ordination unto another Church, then by virtue of a former Election. And for the third, we do not understand what authority ordinary Officers can have to ordain Ministers to such a Church, of which themselves are not so much as Members Besides at some times, namely at the first Reformation after the times of Popery, there were no others to be had but from the Pope, and his Bishops and Priests. Now it were a pitiful case, if the Sheep must have no Shepherd but such as are appointed to them by the wolves, That is, if God's people might not have Ministers, but only from the popish Bishops. This were to say, either that the Ministers of Antichrist, must, or may ordain Ministers to the Church of Christ, or else that the popish Bishops are true Ministers of Christ. And if Protestants think it necessary, that their first Ministers should be ordained by the popish Bishops, it is no marvel if the Papists do thereupon believe that their Church is the true Church, and their Bishops true Ministers. Such a scandal is it unto them to maintain this personal succession of the Ministry. But God doth so much abhor Antichrist, that he would not have his people to seek to him, nor his Priests to ordain Christ's Ministers, as he would not take of Babylon a stone for a Corner, nor a stone for a foundation, jer. 51. 26. 3. It is thus in civil Corporations and Cities, the Major, Bailiff, or other chief Officer elect, is at his entrance and inauguration to receive at the hands of his Predecessors the Sword or Keys of the City, or to have some other solemn Ceremony by him performed unto him yet if either there be no former as at the first or that the former be dead or upon necessity absent, when his Successor entereth, then is this Ceremony and work performed by some other, the fittest Instrument; neither need that City borrow any Officer of another City, neither could he intermeddle there without usurpation, though both the Corporations have the same Charter under the same King. And so it is in this spiritual Corporation or City, the Church of God. 4. That this point may seem the less strange to you, we pray you consider with us a little further the nature of this Ordination, and then we will add the Testimonies of some eminent Protestant Writers in this case, that you may see this is not any singular opinion of ours. For the former, some indeed have so highly advanced this Ordination, that they have preferred it far above preaching the Word, ministering the Sacraments, and Prayer, making it and the power of Excommunication, the two incommunicable Prerogatives of a Bishop above an ordinary Minister; yet the Scripture teacheth no such thing, but rather the contrary, for when the Apostles were sent out by Christ, there was no mention of Ordination in that Commission of theirs, but only of teaching & preaching & baptising Mat. 28. 19, 20. Mark. 16. 15, 16. If Ordination of Ministers had been such a special work, there would belike have been some mention of it in their Commission. And certain it is, the Apostles counted preaching the Word their principal work, and after it Prayer, and the ministering of the Sacraments, Act. 6. 4. 1 Cor. 1. 17. If ordaining of Ministers had been in their account so prime a work, it may seem Paul would rather have tarried in Crete to have ordained Elders there then have gone himself about preaching, seaving Titus for the other, Tit. 1 5. By all which it appears, that ordaining of Ministers is not such an eminent work as that it is to be preferred above preaching the Word, and ministering the Sacraments, and therefore to be performed by them that are superiors unto ordinary Ministers; preaching and ministering the Sacraments, being left as inferior works unto Ministers, of an inferior rank, as they would have it, that stand for the superiority of Docesan Bishops; neither is it equal unto those other works afore mentioned, that only he that doth those, may perform this other also, as some others think; but being nothing else in the true nature and use of it but the execution and accomplishment and confirmation of election, it may be performed by the people of God, that yet have no Officers, even as Election may upon which it doth depend. 5. Lastly, let these sayings of some Protestant Writers of singular note, either for holiness, or learning, or both, be well considered of. Master Perkins saith, Succession of Doctrine alone is sufficient; for this Rule must be remembered, that the power of the Keys (that is, of order and jurisdiction) is tied by God and annexed in the New Testament to Doctrine. If in Turkey, or America, or elsewhere, the Gospel should be received by the counsel and persuasion of private persons, they need not send into Europe for consecrated Ministers, but they have power to choose their own Ministers from within themselves; because where God gives the Word he gives the power also; upon Gal. 1. 11. Doctor Willet saith, Whereas Bellarmine objecteth that as in the old Law the Priesthood went by carnal generation and lineal descent from Aaron, so in the New it must be derived by succession from the Apostles; we answer, first, that our Saviour Christ and his Apostles could show no lineal descent from Aaron, neither had their ordination from his Successors, and yet were the true Pastors of the Church. And a little after, This we say further, that both before Christ there were true Pastors and Prophets, which were not ordained by the Priests of Aaron; and since Christ, that received not their ordination successively from the Apostles. First, in the old Law, when the ordinary Priesthood was corrupted, God raised up Prophets from other Tribes that received not from the Priests their ordination and allowance: such an one was Amos, who was among Herdsmen, and was made a Prophet as he was gathering wild blackberries. After the same manner in the corrupt times of the Gospel, the Lord hath raised up faithful Ministers to his Church, that could show no succession from the degenerate Clergy. And a little after, If Paul were made an Apostle without the ordination of the lawful Apostles much more may the Lord raise up new Pastors to his Church without ordination from the usurpers of the Apostles: Synops. Papism. contr. 2. Q. 3. of Succession Error 20. p. 81. Mor●●y his words are full and plain to the same purpose. viz Although some of our men in such a corrupt state of the Church, as we have seen in our time, without waiting for calling or allowance of them who under the title of Pastors oppressed the Lords Flock, did at first preach without this formal calling, and afterward were chosen and called to the holy Ministey by the Churches which they had taught; yet this aught to seem no more strange, then if in a free commonwealth the people without waiting either for the consent, or for the voices of those that tyrannize over them, should (according to the Laws) make choice of good and wise Magistrates, such (happily) as God would serve his turn of for their deliverance, and for the public restitution. And hereof we have examples, first, in the Acts, where we read that Philip, who was but a Deacon, preacheth in Samaria without the calling of the Apostles, yea without their privity, who for all that gave their allowance to his work. In Frumentius, carried upon another occasion into the Indies, a mere Layman, who yet there preacheth the Gospel, and a good while after is there made Bishop. In those of whom Origen speaketh, that shall come by chance into a City where never any Christian was borne, shall there begin to teach, and labour to instruct the people in the Faith, whom the People shall afterward make their Pastors and Bishops: and besides, in all the Scriptures there is not one place that bindeth the Ministry of the Gospel to a certain succession; but chose the Scripture showeth, that God would send two special witnesses to prophesy against Antichrist: Of the Church chap. 11. p. 371. Doctor Whitaker answering Bellarmine, that would prove Protestant's to have no Church, because their Ministers had no Ordination by Bishops, saith, That as sometimes Bishops were chosen by the Clergy and sometimes by the People, so the same may be said of Ordination, viz. that it was sometimes by the Clergy and sometimes by the People; and then addeth, Quod si vocationem corum Episcoporum legitimam fuisse concedat Bellarminus, De ordinatione minus laboramus. Qui enim habent authoritatem vocandi, iidem etiam authoritatem ordinandi habent, si legitima ordinatio non possit impetrari: nam ordinatio sequitur vocationem; qui vocatur, i● quasi in sui muneris possessionem mittitur: de Eccles. Q. 5. cap. 6 p. 510. Finally, Doctor Ames doth also witness the same in many places of his works: for a taste take these few sayings of his in this case, viz. Ad totam Ecclesiam semper pertinet ordinatio, quoad jus, vim, virtutem illam quam habet in Ministro Ecclesiae constituendo; sicut celebratio matrimonii vim aut virtutem omnem acceptam refert legitimo consensui conjugum: Ecclesie statu (ministerio & ordine deficiente) collapso vel corrupto, à plebe etiam actus iste ordinationis, quatenus necessarius est ad Ministri constitutionem in tali casu, potest legitimè exerceri, Bellarm. enervat. lib. 3. de clericis, cap. 2 de ordinatione. And again, a little after; Episcopos veros à veris Episcopis ordinariè dicimus ordinand●s esse, sed nomine Ecclesiae cui ordinantur. And again, a little after, Potestas ordinandi est aliqu● modo originaliter in tota Ecclesia, sicut potestas videndi originaliter est in toto animali, quamvis formaliter & subjectiuè sit in oculo tantùm; tum etiam ordinationis exercitium pendet à tota Ecclesia, sicut actus videndi hoc vel illud determinatè pendet non ab oculo sed à toto. And again, Quamvis in Ecclesia benè constituta non debeat aliis quam presbyteris ordinandi manus mandari; in defectu tamen idoneorum presbyterorum potest non presbyteris mandari. And yet again in the next place, Si concedatur hoc, quòd ex ordine nemo possit esse legitimus pastor, nisi sit à legitimo Pastore & Episcopo ordinatus: In ordinis tamen defectu, cum jam primò instaurari debet ordo, non potest●tam accuratè observari, atque adeo extraordinarium aliquid tum potest intervenire sine ullo vitio. These words you see are punctual and plain, that the power of ordaining Ministers is originally in the Church; and that though when a Church hath Presbyters, the act of ordaining is to be done by those Presbyters; yet in defect of such it may be performed by them that are no Presbyters, lawfully, and without fault; which is the case of our Churches that are in their beginnings, and may be the case of any Church when they come to be without Officers, as by war, pestilence, etc. it may come to pass. There are some things common to Pastors with Teachers; T● 22. as, that they are both Officers of the Church appointed by Christ; both Elders or Bishops to rule and feed the Church, by labouring in the Word and Doctrine, Act. 20 28 1 Tim. 3. 1. Tit. 1. 5, 7. and therefore the name of Pastor, in a general sense may be given to them both, jer. 3. 15. as also the name of Teacher, Isa. 30. 20. as those names may also be given to Apostles, in as much as they also are Elders, Pastors, Teachers, to rule, to feed, to teach the Church of God, 1 Pet. 5. 1. joh. 21. 15. 16. 1 Tim. 2. 7. & 2. 1. 11. And if Pastors and Teachers be both of them Church officers, to feed and rule the Church▪ by labouring in the Word and Doctrine, they must not do this without application of it to the consciences and states of the hearers, as God shall help them: for this application is one part of his work, that is by his office to preach the Word, without which the Word is not handled in such a manner as it ought to be, 2 Tim. 2. 15. 1 Cor. 14. 25. Luk. 12. 42. and many hearers need this, the Word delivered in general without application of it being to them as bread set before children in the whole loaf. And if both of them must labour in the Word and Doctrine, and not only in a general way, but with application, we see not but they may both of them administer the Seals or Sacraments, wherein there is a special application of the promises of the Gospel, and the grace of Christ therein, unto the faithful and believing receivers. 2. And yet for all this community between them, they are not in propriety of speech the same Officers, but distinct, and so the Scripture speaketh of them Ephes. 4. 11. For if a man would say their Offices are confounded, because the same general work of preaching the Word, and applying the same, belongs unto them both: By the same reason a man might say the offices of Apostles and Evangelists were confounded; for both of them were to preach the Word, with application of the same by doctrine, and Seals; and also that the ordinary Pastors were the same office with them both, because he also is to do the same work of preaching and applying: But an Apostle is to feed, and rule, and teach, by way of Doctrine and Application, as an Apostle; an Evangelist as an Evangelist, and an ordinary Pastor as an ordinary Pastor, and therein lies the difference: and we may add, a Teacher as a Teacher; and therein is he distinguished both from the Pastor, and from all other Church Officers, even as by the same they all are distinguished one from another, the same general work of Doctrine and Application being common to them all. 3. And for the Teacher and Pastor, the difference between them lies in this, that the one is principally to attend upon points of Knowledge and Doctrine, though not without Application; and the other to points of Practice, though not without Doctrine: and therefore the one of them is called▪ He that teacheth, and his work is thus expressed, let him attend on teaching; and the other, He that exhorteth, and his work, to attend on exhortation, Rom. 12. 7, 8. and the gift of the one is called a word of knowledge, and the gift of the other, a word of wisdom, 1 Cor. 12. 8. as experience also showeth, that one man's gift is more doctrinal, and for points of knowledge; and another's more exhortatory, and for points of practice. It is not the manner of Elders among us, whether Ruling To 23. only, or Ruling and Teaching also, to strive for authority or pre-eminence one above another; as remembering what lesson our Saviour taught his Disciples, when they were at strife among them, which of them should be the greatest, Luk. 22. 24, 25. etc. If Diotrephes strive for pre-eminence 3 joh. 9, 10. verily we abhor such striving, and by the grace of God respect one another as Brethren. As for the people's duty toward their Elders, it is taught them plainly in that place, 1 Thes. 5. 12, 13. as also in that of 1 Tim. 5. 17 Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, specially they that labour in the Word and Doctrine; and this Word (specially) shows them, that as they are to account all their Elders worthy of double honour, so in special manner their Teaching or Preaching Elders. These are answered in that which was sent the last To 24. & 25. year. We do believe that every Minister of the Gospel ought To 26. to be maintained with sufficient and honourable maintenance, according to his need and occasions, in regard of his person, calling, charge of children and hospitality, so as he that preacheth the Gospel may in all these respects live of the Gospel, 1 Cor. 9 14. Gal 6. 6. 1 Tim. 5. 17. And this maintenance is not to be allowed as alms and courtesy, but as debt and duty, to be paid according to the rule of Justice; the Labourer is worthy of his wages, Luk. 10. 17. which the Apostle showeth to be according to all Laws of nature, nations, Moses and Christ, 1 Cor. 9 But for settled and stinted maintenance, there is nothing done that way amongst us, except from year to year, because the conditions of Ministers may vary, and of the Church to which they do belong: Neither do we know any such thing to be appointed by Christ our Lord, for the maintenance of the Ministry in these days; but this we know that the great mountain burning with fire, cast into the sea upon the sounding of the second Trumpet Rev. 8. 8, 9 is applied by some good Writers to those times, when Constantine brought settled endowments into the Church, with ampla praedia (as they are called) are counted by some to be no better than poison to the Church; as the Stories say that upon the fact of the good Emperor a voice was heard, which said, Hodie seminatum est virus in Ecclesiam. And if those Writers be not deceived which so expound that Scripture (as for our parts we know not but they expound it truly) then in as much as upon the casting of that mountain into the sea, a third part of it became blood and a third part of living creatures died, and a third part of ships were destroyed, it may be truly gathered thence that the bringing in of settled endowments and eminent preferments into the Church, hath been the corruption, and to some the destruction of such as lived by them, both Church-officers and Church-members. We do not permit, and call upon (such whom you call) To 27. mere Lay men, and private persons, neither being in the Ministry nor intended to it, ordinarily to preach or prophesy publicly, in or before the Congregation, if by ordinarily, you mean frequently and usually. For where ordinary Officers are not wanting to a Church, and neither detained from their work by sickness, nor just absence, we think it most meet to offer our Sacrifice to God and to the Church of our best gifts. But yet if you oppose ordinary to extraordinary, we do confess that some private members (to wit such as are eminently fitted with knowledge and utterance, being also men of humble spirits, and holy lives, all which qualifications we find but in a few) may without an extraordinary calling from God be called forth by by the Church upon some occasion (and namely in the absence or bodily weakness of Ministers, or for trial of gifts when a man intends the Ministry) to speak to edification, exhortation and comfort. jehosaphat sent Princes (who neither were Ministers, nor intended so to be) to teach with the Priests and Levites, to wit, at least to encourage the people, to hearken to the Priests and Levites come amongst them, 2 Chron. 17. 7, 8, 9 As Jehosaphat himself also did the like, 2 Chron. 20. 20. Yea, and was their mouth also to God in prayer, v. 2. 5. to 13. As for that prophesying 1 Cor. 14. We conceive as some things in it be extraordinary, so some things ordinary. Extraordinary, that private men, and new converts should be so soon & so suddenly, & so much enlightened & enlarged, as to be able to prophesy publicly to the edification of a whole Church: But yet this we conceive to be ordinary, that some private men may be found (at least in some Churches) grown Christians, of able gifts, who may have received a gift of Prophecy, and for such we do not think it requireth any more an extraordinary calling for them to prophesy in our Churches, then for jehosaphat and his Princes to prophecy in the Church of Israel. Our Answer to this Question is that we never knew any To 28. Ministers that did call upon the people thus to do: and as for us, such calling upon them is far from us. All that we know to be holden in this case is this, that some think the people have a liberty to ask a Question publicly for their better satisfaction upon very urgent and weighty cause, though even this is doubted of by others, and all judge the ordinary practice of it, not necessary: but (if it be not meekly and wisely carried) to be inconvenient if not utterly unlawful, and therefore such ask of Questions is seldom used in any Church among us, and in most Churches never. True it is, in the times a little afore the Synod divers that were infected with corrupt opinions were very bold, & forward in this kind of ask Questions, after Sermons, especially when they had heard something delivered publicly that did make against their Tenants; by which kind of ask Questions, they plainly discovered of what spirit they were, but for being called upon by us thus to do, (as it seems to your Question that you have been informed) the truth is, there was no such matter. But now these men are long since, (the greatest part of them) to an Island (called Aquedneck) departed from amongst us, some of them being excommunicated or banished, or both, & others departing voluntarily, or for fear of the like censure, by means of which departure of these troublesome spirits from amongst us, and the blessing of God upon the Synod & Sermons that have laid open & reproved this disorderly ask of Questions, a man may now live from one end of the year unto another in these Congregations, & not hear any man open his mouth in such kind of ask Questions. 1. The conversion of sinners unto God doth not always To 29. follow the preaching of every one, that is in a lawful office of ministry, as experience and Scripture do abundantly witness, Isay. 49. 4, 5. & 53. 1. Ezech. 3. 7. 2 King. 17. 13 14. Mat. 11. 20, 21. etc. john 12. 37. 2. And when it doth follow, it is not by virtue of him, or of his office, but by virtue of God's blessing, and the mighty operation of his spirit as he pleaseth, without which the Minister and his office could have had no virtue at all to convert sinners unto God, 1 Cor. 3. 6. no more than Peter and john could heal the lame man, by virtue of any power or holiness that was in them, Act. 3. 12. For otherwise faithful Ministers should not have their labours blessed for conversion some more and some less▪ but all in the same measure, inasmuch as one of them is no more a Minister then another, nor no more in Office then another, their office being the same, the effect in conversion would be the same if conversion were by the virtue of their office. The truth it is, the Law of the Lord, (the whole Word of God) that converts the soul, Psal. 19 7. And the Gospel that is the power of God unto Salvation. Rom. 1. 16. And therefore the conversion of a man to God is to be ascribed to God, and to the Word of his Grace; and not to the Minister, nor any virtue of his office. 3. But this we do acknowledge, that the sound conversion of sinners, whensoever such a thing comes to pass, doth argue that the Instruments of such conversion are sent of God: God would not so have blessed them, as to convert any by them, if himself had not sent them at all, Rom. 10. 14, 15. jer. 23. 32. 4. And yet we dare not say, that God's Word is not made effectual to conversion, unless the man that speaks it be a Minister, that is to say, a Church Officer, for the contrary is evident from the Scripture, John 4. 39 Act. 8. 4. with 11. 19, 20, 21. 1 Cor. 7. 16. They that were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Steven, were not Church Officers, at least all of them (for the Apostles who were their chief, if not their only preaching Officers, were not scattered abroad upon that persecution, but remained still at Jerusalem, Acts 8. 1.) and yet these men did so preach the Word of the Lord Jesus to the jews and the Grecians, that through the good hand of the Lord that was with them, a great number believed and turned to the Lord; And the same we say of the woman of Samaria, by whose Testimony of Christ many of the Samaritans believed on him. To restrain the efficacy of God's Word in such sort as to say that none can be converted by it, unless he that speaks it be a Minister, is to limit the spirit of the Lord, where he hath not limited himself, who is free in working by whom he pleaseth, and as he will, 1 Cor. 12. 11. Even as the wind bloweth where it listeth, john 3. 8. and sometimes doth bring to pass great things by weak means, that his own glory may be the more, 1 Cor. 1. 27, 28, 29. If any say, how can these things stand together, that a man that is no Minister may be an Instrument of conversion, and yet conversion of sinners argues that the man is sent of God? We answer, that we must distinguish of sending according to the divers degrees thereof. For sometimes it imports no more but such an Act of Gods disposing providence, whereby men are gifted and enabled for such or such a work, and permitted thereunto, though they have no command from him for the doing thereof, nor do it not with a sincere mind in any obedience to God, but for corrupt and sinister ends of their own. Thus God sent the King of Assyria against the jews, Isa. 10. 6. And bands of the Caldees, and bands of other Nations against Jehojakim, and against judah, to destroy it, 2 King. 24. 2. And yet they had no command from him to do this, but sinned grievously in so doing. Thus they that preached Christ not sincerely, but of envy and strife, to add affliction to Paul's bands, yet inasmuch as they preached Christ, might be said to be sent of God, and therefore the Apostle joyed at their preaching, Phil. 1. 15, 16. Thus Baalam in his Prophecies against the enemies of Israel and for the happy state of God's people, might be said to be sent of God, though his heart and ends were corrupt and sinful. But if men be not only enabled with gifts for such or such a work, but besides this, have a sincere mind and desire in the using thereof, to seek the glory of God, and the good of souls, such men may much more be said to be sent of God, john 7. 18. For these men have not only abilities and gifts from God, and permission to employ them as the former had but also his spirit within them, which doth set their hearts on right and holy ends, which the other wanted. And yet if men do want a lawful office of Ministry, wherein to exercise those gifts or a lawful calling to that office or exercise, they may in that respect be said not to be sent of God, or not to be called of him though sent of him, in the first or second respect. Thus in the Scriptures it is said of some they ran and I sent them not, jer. 23. 21. I perceived that God had not sent him, but he pronounced his Prophecies, because Sanballat and Tobiah had hired him, Neh. 6. 12. And yet doubtless in respect of Gods disposing providence, he had sent them, as the Scripture witnesseth, that God sends strong delusions and lying Prophets, and unfaithful Shepherds, 2 Thes. 2. 11. 1 King. 22. 22, 23. Zech. 11. 16. to be a plague unto the Sons of men, and for trial to his servants, Deut. 13. 3. 1 Cor. 11. 19 Now let these distinctions be applied to the case in hand, and we may perceive how, if a man convert sinners, certainly God sends him; and yet some that are not called to any office in the Ministry, may through his blessing convert sinners: A man converts none unless God send him in the first or second sense and yet he may convert, and not be sent, if sending be taken in the third sense, that is for a lawful calling into some office in the Church. And we may add, further a man may be sent in this third sense and yet convert none if he be not also sent in the first and second respect; that is a man may have a lawful calling outwardly unto a lawful office in the Church, and yet not convert sinners, if he want gifts or sincerity of heart, which might be the case of judas, and of many wicked Priests in the old Testament: Yea, happily convert none though he be truly sent in all three respects, as was said before in the beginning of the Answer to this Quaere. But if comparison be made, we doubt not, but whilst the Ministry remains uncorrupt, God is wont to follow with a greater blessing the labours of those who have gifts and an office of Ministry also, then of those who have gifts alone without office. He is willing, and wont to honour himself most, where most of his ways are observed. Master Parker Polit. Eccles. l. 2. c. 39 etc. 41. observes a difference To 30. between the substantials in Church Polity, and the accessaries or accidentals▪ and circumstantials: And again, that of circumstances some are general, and some particular and individual; and so showeth that the Church Polity in regard of the substantials thereof is prescribed in the Word, and therefore immutable. According to which distinction we Answer, that if those words (precisely the same course) mentioned in this Question, be not meant of particular and individual circumstances, but only of the substantials or general circumstances, then for aught we know there is no material point, either in constitution, or government, wherein the Churches in N. E. (viz. In the bay, in the jurisdiction of Plymouth, at Connectacute, and Quilipiake) do not observe the same course. (And sure it is if they do not they ought, because Christ hath left but one way for all Churches, and the same to be observed to the World's end, 1 Tim. 6. 13, 14.) Only, that conformity to the liturgy and Ceremonies in some places, to the Northward, that Anabaptism at Providence, and Familisme at Aquidneck▪ hinders that we cannot say the same of them, nor of any other in N. E. that concur with them in their unwarrantable ways▪ if there be any such, though thanks be to God there is none within this Jurisdiction. Who must have liberty to sit down in this Commonwealth To 31. and enjoy the liberties thereof is not our place to determine, but the Magistrates who are the rulers and governor's of the Commonwealth, and of all persons within the same. And as for acknowledging a company to be a sister Church, that shall set up, and practise another form of Church Discipline, being otherwise in some measure, as you say, approvable, we conceive the company that shall so do, shall not be approvable therein. For the Discipline appointed by Jesus Christ for his Churches is not arbitrary, that one Church may set up and practise one form, and another another form, as each one shall please, but is one and the same for all Churches, and in all the Essentials and substantials of it unchangeable, and to be kept, till the appearing of Jesus Christ, 1 Tim. 6. 13, 14. from which place Master Cartwright observes the perpetuity of Church Government taught by the Apostles, unto the end of the World, and is plain and large in this point, 1 Rep. p. 177. as is likewise Mr. Parker Polit. Eccles. l. 2. c. 42. and so forward to the end of that Book, unto whom we refer you herein. And if that Discipline which we here practise, be (as we are persuaded of it) the same which Christ hath appointed, and therefore unalterable, we see not how another can be lawful; and therefore if a company of people shall come hither, and here set up and practise another, we pray you think not much, if we cannot promise to approve of them in so doing, especially until we see how approvable the men may be, and what Discipline it is that they would set up. For should we in such general words as is there expressed, promise to accept of a company as a Sister Church▪ that shall set up and practise another Discipline, and then should be taken at the utmost extent of our words, we might by this means be bound to accept of a company of Papists, or Arminians, or Familists, or Anabaptists, as a sister Church, for there is none of these but something may be found in them, and in their Discipline, that is in some measure approvable. And yet we pray you heartily in the Lord, so conceive of us in this passage, that we are far from making any such comparison, as if yourselves were not approved in our consciences far above the best of such men, yea and above ourselves in many respects. We have said before in that which we sent you the last year, and upon this occasion we say it now again, that you are in our hearts (if the Lord would suffer) to live and die together: and therefore if this Question were meant of yourselves, or any of you, and a company of godly people joining with you (as it may be it is, though we cannot certainly say it, because you do not express so much) we think if you were here, we should gladly accept of you and your people as a sister-Church, and that you would do the like to ours; and yet not when you should set up and practise one form of Church-discipline, and we another, but because we are persuaded if you were here, you would set up and practise the very same that we do, and not any other: or else if we be swerving from the rule in any particular (as God knows we are but weak men, and far from dreaming of perfection in this life) God would by you send in more light unto us then yet we see, and make you instruments in his hand for perfecting what is here begun according to his will, for strengthening what is weak, and reforming what may be found to be amiss: For we trust in the Lord, that as we are desirous that you might join with us in the ways wherein we now walk, (which we do not see but they are according to the Rule) so we should be as willing to receive light from you, and to redress (as God shall help us) whatsoever by you or any other he may discover to us to stand in need of Reformation. For which cause among others we do the more earnestly desire, if it were the Lords will that he might send you hither, nothing doubting but if you were here, there would be such agreement between you and us, that either you would approve of the things which we believe and practise, or that we should approve of what you may show us to be more agreeable to the mind of Christ: and then there would be no occasion of such a Question, Whether we may set up and practise another discipline, and yet be accepted as a sister-Church: but rather of blessing the Lord, when that shall be accomplished in you and us which is written in the Prophets, I will give them one heart and one way: I will turn unto the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the Name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent, Jer. 32. 39 Zeph. 3. 9 We have confidence in you through the Lord, that you will be none otherwise minded; but if in any thing ye be otherwise minded God shall reveal even this unto you, Gal. 5. 10. Phil. 3. 15. This was answered in the answer to Posit. 1. & 2. sent unto you To 32. the last year. FINIS. AN APOLOGY OF THE CHURCHES IN NEW-ENGLAND FOR CHURCH-COVENANT. OR, A Discourse touching the Covenant between God and men, and especially concerning Church-Covenant, that is to say, The Covenant which a Company do enter into when they become a Church; and which a particular person enters into when he becomes a member of a Church. Sent over in Answer to Master BERNARD, in the Year 1639. And now published for the satisfaction of all who desire resolution in this point. LONDON, Printed by T. P. and M. S. for Benjamin Allen. 1643. A DISCOURSE TOUCHING THE Covenant between God and Men, and especially concerning Church-Covenant, that is to say, the Covenant which a Company do enter into when they become a Church, and which a particular person enters into when he becomes a member of a Church. 1639. JER. 50. 5. Come let us join ourselves to the Lord, in a perpetual Covenant that shall not be forgotten. ALthough that which is foretold in these two Chapters; and namely in the fourth and fifth verses of this Chapter, was in part fulfilled when the people of God returned from Captivity in Babylon at the end of seventy years: yet we must not limit the place to that time only, but may extend it further to the days of the Gospel, and the spiritual return, not of the Jews only, but of the Gentiles also, when men shall be converted from Pagan, Antichristian, Babylonish, or Jewish bondage and captivity, or from slavery to sin, and self-righteousness, and shall be joined to God in the fellowship of his Church, in the days of the New Testament. For as some passages in this Scripture were never fully accomplished at the return from the captivity of the seventy years, and namely this, that the children of Israel and Judah should return both together: (for the ten tribes returned not at all:) so many things that literally concerned the Jews were types and figures, signifying the like things concerning the people of God in these latter days: In which respect sincere converts are called Jews, Rome 2. 29. and Israelites, Gal. 6. 16. Joh. 1. 47. and our Sacraments are made Antitypes of theirs, 1 Cor. 10. 1, 2, 3. and Rome is called Babylon, Rev. 17. 5. and Papists are called Gentiles, Rev. 11. 2. and therefore the captivity of Babylon might well be a Type of the spiritual captivity of God's people to Antichristian bondage, and their return from Babylon to Zion, a type of the return of Christians from Romish slavery to the true Zion, the Christian Church. And this may be added further, that this place seems not only to be meant of the private or personal conversion of this or that particular Christian, but also further, of the open and joint calling of a company, because it is said, they shall come, the children of Israel and the children of Judah together, and that their saying shall not be, Let me join, etc. but in the Plural number, Let us join ourselves unto the Lord, so noting the joining of a company together in holy Covenant with God. Concerning which Covenant with God, it will not be amiss for the better understanding of that which follows; first, briefly to show how diversely Covenant is taken in the Scripture, which sometimes imports generally any firm appointment or promise of God, when man doth not promise unto God any thing back again: Thus the preserving of Noah in the Ark, and of the world from being drowned any more by a flood; the interchangeable succession of day and night; the giving of the Priesthood unto Phineas; the setting forth of the Shewbread every Sabbath before the Lord, and the giving of the heave-offering unto the Priests, are said to be done by a Covenant, or an everlasting Covenant of God, Gen. 6. 18. & 9 9, 10, 11. Jer. 33. 20. Num. 25. 12, 13. Levit. 24. 8. Num. 18. 19 But sometimes Covenant is taken more strictly and properly, for an agreement which God doth make with men, when he promiseth some blessing unto men, and binds them to perform some duty back again to him. Taken thus it hath two parts: first, a promise or stipulation of some blessing on God's part: secondly, Restipulation or promise, or binding of man unto duty back again on his part: both these are in those words of the Covenant, I will be to thee a God, thou shalt be to me a people: and so Gen. 17. 1. & v. 7, 8, 9, 10. The Covenant taken thus is either the Covenant of works, or the Covenant of grace: And again the Covenant may be considered; first as it is personal, private and particular, between God and one particular soul, making Covenant with God, and God with him, either at his first conversion; or at other times; of which we read 2 Sam. 23. 5. & Psal. 119, 106. & 66. 13, 14. & 27 8. & Psal. 119. 7, 8 Secondly, it is general and public of a company jointly together, of which this Text Jer. 50. 5. seems most properly to speak: as also that Deut. 29. 9, 10, etc. and that Exod. 19 5, 6, and many others: A Covenant taken thus generally when it respects spiritual blessings, and spiritual duties, in the Communion of Saints, is that which is called Church-covenant, which Church-Covenant differs not in substance of the things promised from that which is between the Lord and every particular soul, but only in some other respects; as first, the one is of one Christian in particular, the other of a company jointly together. Secondly, if right Order be observed, a man ought not to enter into Church-Covenant, till he be in Covenant with God before, in respect of his personal estate. Thirdly, The one is usually done in private, as in a man's Closet between the Lord and his soul, and the other in some public assembly. Fourthly, The one in these days is of such duties as the Gospel requires of every Christian as a Christian, the other of such duties as the Gospel requires of every Church and the members thereof. Now concerning Church-Covenant, two things are to be noted for the better understanding thereof: first, the description of it: secondly, the use of it, and the benefit and fruit thereof. For the former it may be thus described, viz. A solemn and public promise before the Lord, whereby a company of Christians, called by the power and mercy of God to fellowship with Christ, and by his providence to live together, and by his grace to cleave together in the unity of faith, and brotherly love, and desirous to partake together in all the holy Ordinances of God, do in confidence of his gracious acceptance in Christ, bind themselves to the Lord, and one to another, to walk together by the assistance of his Spirit, in all such ways of holy worship in him, and of edification one towards another, as the Gospel of Christ requireth of every Christian Church, and the members thereof. In this description, there are comprised six things: First, the general name of the thing: [a solemn and public promise] a promise it is, and therefore it is called, a joining in Covenant here: an entering into Covenant, Deut. 29. 10. Solemn and public, and therefore it is by the children of Israel and the children of Judah together: and they say, let us join. Secondly, The object [the Lord, and one another] join ourselves to the Lord it is not a promise only to man, but to the Lord himself, and likewise to one another; for, come let us join, implies mutual consent together. Thirdly, The Agents or the qualification of the persons: [Christians] not Turks, Indians, etc. Saints, Psal. 50. 5. 16, 17. [called to fellowship with Christ] so 1 Cor. 1. 9 else if they be not united to Christ by faith, they are not fit materials for such a building as a Church of God, which is the house of the living God, Ephes. 1. 1. 1 Cor. 1. 2. Phil. 1. 1. Rev. 21. 27. [By his providence to live together] else they cannot partake in the Lords Ordinances together as Churches ought to do, 1 Cor. 14. 23. Act. 14 27. the whole Church comes together in one place [cleaving together in faith and love] so Act. 4 32. If they differ, namely, in opinion, or in their affection, and should join in this Covenant, breaches, factions, rents, and schisms, would be like to be the issue of such joining: things so unlike would not close nor long hold together, Dan. 2. 43 [Desirous to partake in all Ordinances] this should be the ground of their joining in Covenant together, Psal. 110. 3. willing: and not pride, nor gain, nor the like: Fourthly, The Act [bind themselves] that now they are bound by their own word and promise, that they may say now, as Psal. 56. 12. Thy vows are upon me, or as Num. 30. 2. if he bind his soul with a vow. Fiftly, The matter promised; [To walk together in all such ways of worship and mutual edification, as the Gospel requireth of Churches and Church-members] they bind not themselves to observe any devises of their own, nor inventions of men, but such things as the word of God requireth; neither is it perfect obedience to the Law, for that were impossible to perform, and presumption to promise; nor is it only in general the duties of the Gospel, but specially such duties of worship to God, & edification of one another as concern Church-State, which now they enter into. Sixtly, The manner of performing [Confidence of God's gracious acceptance and assistance through Christ] for in all our ways God must be acknowledged, Pro. 3. 6. and much more in such special matters of weight: If men in entering into this Covenant look for acceptance, through any worth of their own, or promise duty in their own strength, they show themselves like to the Pharisees, Luk. 18. 10, 11. and turn the Church-Covenant into a Covenant of works: and as many as are of the works of the Law, are under the curse, Gal. 3. 10. The use and benefit of this Church-Covenant, and the fruit thereof, may be seen in two particulars; first, That this is that whereby a company of Christians do become a Church: It is the Constituting form of a Church. Secondly, This is that by taking hold whereof a particular person becomes a member of a Church, which was constituted afore. For the former of these; every Christian Church must have in it both matter and form, and as the matter by God's appointment are visible Saints, or visible believers, Ephes. 1. 1. 1 Cor. 1. 2. and in the New Testament, only so many as may meet together in one Congregation: So the form is a uniting, or combining, or knitting of those Saints together into one visible body, by the band of this holy Covenant. Some union or band there must be amongst them, whereby they come to stand in a new relation to God, and one towards another, other than they were in before: or else they are not yet a Church, though they be fit materials for a Church; even as soul and body are not a man, unless they be united; nor stones and timber an house, till they be compacted and conjoined. Now that a company becomes a Church, by joining in Covenant, may be made good sundry ways; first, By plain Texts of Scripture; as from Deut. 29. 1, 10, 11, 12, 13. Ye stand this day all you before the Lord your God, your Captains of your Tribes, your Elders, your Officers, with all the men of Israel, ver. 10. That thou shouldest enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God, ver. 12. and he may establish thee for a people unto himself, ver. 13. So that here is plainly showed, that here was a company, ver. 10. and this company were to be established to be a people unto the Lord, that is to say, a Church, ver. 13. And this is done by the people's entering into solemn Covenant with God, ver. 12. And therefore a company of people do become a Church by entering into Covenant with God. This Covenant was not like our Church-Covenants, for it was of all Object. 1 the Nation together; whereas the Church-Covenant with us, is of some select persons, leaving out others. 1. This Objection concerns the matter of a Church, but the Answer. Covenant is not the material cause of a Church, but the formal cause thereof: and for this the Text is▪ plain and express, that by entering into Covenant with God, a people come to be the Lords people, that is to say, his Church. 2. If it was of all the people together, the reason was because that Church was a national Church: now if a national Church becomes a Church by entering into solemn Covenant with God, than a congregational Church becomes a Church by the same means; for there is no difference between them in this point. 3. Though it was of all the people, we may not say it proves that when we look at the material cause of a Church, there may be a promiscuous taking in of all Comers without distinction or separation of the precious from the vile; for, first, when God took in this Nation to be his people, he separated them from all the Nations of the earth besides: so that there was a distinction and separation of some from others. Secondly, this generation was generally a generation of believers; for it was they that were to enter into the land within a while after; for they were forty years in the Wilderness▪ & this Covenant was made in the last month save one of the last of those forty years, Deut. 1. 3. And their carcases fell not in the Wilderness through unbelief, as their Fathers did, Num 14. Heb. 3. but entered by faith, and when they were entered, subdued Kingdoms by their faith, Heb. 11. 33. and served the Lord all the days of Joshua, and of the Elders that out lived Joshua, Josh. 24 31. As for that which is said of them, ver. 4, 5. of this Chap. that the Lord had not given them eyes to see, etc. that proves not that they were wholly hardened in a carnal estate, but only that they were dull and slow of heart to consider of sundry dispensations of God towards them; for as much is said of the disciples of Christ, Mar. 8. 17, 18. when doubtless they were not mere carnal or natural persons. This people Deut. 29. could not become the Lords people by entering Object. 2 into solemn Covenant with God, for they were the Lords Church and people already before this. 1. If they were, yet that was by entering into solemn Covenant Answer. with God on Mount Sinai, when the Lord had brought them up out of the Land of Egypt; for than they entered into solemn Covenant with God, and God with them, and so they bec●me the Lords peculiar people, Exod. 19▪ 4, 5, 6, 8. etc. If they were his people before that, yet that also was by Covenant made with them in the loins of Abraham, when God took him and his seed to be his Church and people, yet separating Ishmael from Isaac and Es●● from Jacob, that the inheritance of the Covenant of God, and of being the Church of God, might rest in the house of Jacob. 2. Yet it was not without great reason that the Lord should now establish them by solemn Covenant to be a people to himself, because the Nation had been much degenerated from the spirit and ways of Abraham in Egypt, and had broken that Covenant by their Idolatries there, Ezek. 20. 7, 8. And the Covenant made in Sinai or Hore● when they were come out of Egypt, they had also broken by their Idolatries in the Wilderness, Ezek 20. 13, 16. for which causes, and the like, the Lord consumed that generation, that they never entered into the Land, Josh. 5. 4, 6. And therefore now when their posterity and children were ready to enter in, the Lord entered into Covenant with them, and thereby established them to be his people, their Father's being cut off for breaking the Covenant. But still it was by Covenant that both Father's first, and children afterward became a Church and people unto God; and when this generation were entered into the Land, their Covenant made before between God and them, was confirmed by Circumcision, Josh. 5. 3. 7. they being not Circumcised before. But this Covenant was of the whole Church with God, and therefore Object. 3 not like our Church-Covenants, which are between the Church and the members, concerning watchfulness over one another, and the like. Our Church-Covenants are with the Lord himself, as was Answer. showed before in the description thereof. For watchfulness and duties of edification one towards another, are but branches of the Lords Covenant, being duties commanded by the Law: and so it was with that people of Israel, who when they promised and Covenanted to walk in all the ways of God; in all his statutes and commandments and judgements, they promised these duties of love and watchfulness and edification one towards another, because these were duties commanded and required of God, Leu. 19: 17. Deut. 29 8. the neglect whereof in the matter of Achan was the sin of all the Congregation▪ and brought judgement upon them all, Josh. 7. 11, 12. Yea by this Covenant they were bound to duties towards them that were not then present, but children afterward to be borne, and proselytes, that afterward should be added to them, ver. 14, 15. Like as our Church-Covenants are with them that now are, and that hereafter shall become members of the same Church. When Jehojada made a Covenant between the King and the people, 2 King. 11. 17. that Covenant was but a branch of the Lords Covenant with them all, both King and people: for the King promised but to Rule the people righteously, according to the will of God: and the people to be subject to the King so Ruling. Now these duties of the King to them, and of them to the King, were such as God required in his Covenant, both of him and them: and so it is in Church-Covenant, the duties of the Church to the members, and the members to the Church, and one another, are no other but such as the Gospel and the Covenant of grace requireth both of the Church and the members of it in their several places. But this place of Deut. 29. is not sufficient to prove a Church-Covenant Object. 4 in these days: because it is in the Scriptures of the old Testament, for what soever must be used in the days of the New Testament, must be proved from the Scriptures of the New Testament, or else it is to be laid aside. 1. The Church-Covenant may be proved from the New Testament Answer. also▪ as will afterwards appear. 2. But suppose there were not pregnant places for it in the New Testament, yet it is not enough to prove the same unlawful: for whatsoever Ordinance of the old Testament is not repealed in the New Testament, as peculiar to the Jewish pedagogy, but was of moral and perpetual equity, the same binds us in these days▪ and is to be accounted the revealed will of God in all ages, though it be not particularly and expressly mentioned in the writings of the New Testament, else how shall we prove it unlawful for a man to marry his Sister, or his Aunt? How shall we prove it warrantable and necessary for Magistrates to punish Sabbath-breaking, blasphemy, and Idolatry? How shall we prove it lawful to apply the seal of God's Covenant unto Infants? or to admit women to eat of the holy things; for the Scriptures of the New Testament do speak little in these cases; only the Scriptures of the Old Testament do give direction, and light about them, Lev▪ 18. & 19 Neh. 13. 15. etc. 2 Chron. 15. 16. & 2 King. 23. Gen. 17. 2. & Exod. 12. 4. 6. And the New Testament hath nothing to the contrary, and they are all according to moral equity and reason, and therefore they are to be observed from the Scriptures of the Old Testament, as the revealed will of God, though there were nothing expressly for them in the New. And the same we say of the particular in hand. For, that a company should be combined together into one body, in way of Government and subjection, by way of mutual free Covenant; as men do when they enter into Church Estate, nothing is more natural or agreeable to moral equity; nay, it implieth a contradiction in the very name of liberty or freedom, that freemen should take upon them authority or power over free men without their free consent, and voluntary and mutual Covenant or Engagement. And therefore seeing this Covenant is not repealed in the Scriptures of the New Testament, the Scriptures of the Old are sufficient warrant for it. Another Scripture to prove the same, is Deut. 26. 16, 17, 18. with Deut. 27. 9 This day the Lord hath commanded thee to do these Statutes and Judgements▪ thou shalt therefore keep and do them, etc. Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God, and to walk in his ways, and to keep his Statutes, etc. And the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people; Take heed and hearken, O Israel, this day thou art become the people of the Lord thy God. This Scripture plainly shows these things: 1. That here was the making of a Covenant between God and man; for that avouching of God to them, and them to God, was the making of Covenant, ver. 17, 18. 2. This was not of one person, but of a company together, the whole people of Israel, 26. 18. & 27. 9 3 Here is the effect of this Covenant, that thereby they become the Lords people, ver. 9 So that when a company do enter into holy Covenant with God, they become thereby the Lords people, that is to say, his Church. So Ezech. 16. 8. proves the same likewise: I entered into Covenant with thee, saith the Lord, and thou becamest mine. Here also is the making of Covenant between the Lord and men; and this Covenant was not personal, but of a company; for it was with Jerusalem, ver. 2. which was a whole City; it was with them that were multiplied as the bud of the field, ver. 7. and it was with them that did prosper into a kingdom, ver. 13. and therefore not meant only of any one particular person: And by this Covenant they became the Lords; that is, the Lords Church and people; for it is expressly said, I entered into Covenant with thee, and thou becamest mine. So that when a company enter into Covenant with God, and God with them, they become thereby the Lords Church and people. Likewise Ezek. 20. 37. I will cause you to pass under the rod; and I will bring you into the bond of the Covenant. In which place, there is first mention of an holy Covenant. Secondly, This was not of one person, but of a company, the whole house of Israel, ver. 30. 39 Thirdly, And this Covenant is called a Bond, because it is by Covenant that a people are bound, and tied, and knit together, as one Church, all of them unto the Lord, and one unto another; So that the Covenant is the bond of union, by which a company are so combined and united, as that they become a Church. It is also observable, how the Lord before he would bring them into this bond of the Covenant, he would cause them to pass under the rod; by which phrase, as Junius upon the place well observes, is meant trial and probation; drawn from the manner of Shepherds or owners of cattle, who went among their sheep, or other cattle with a rod, and therewith pointed out such as were for the Lords holy use, as Leu. 27. 32. And so hereby is noted that God would not in the days of the Gospel have men to be brought into his Church hand over head, but he would first cause them to pass under the rod of due trial and probation; and then such as upon trial were found to be holy for God, or meet matter for his Church, should solemnly enter into Covenant with God, and that Covenant should be the bond that should combine them, and knit them together into one, that so they that were many particular persons, should all become one body, that is to say, a Church. And so much of the first Argument drawn from plain Texts of Scripture. A second Argument may be taken from the Titles that are given Argu. 2. to the Church; as first, that the Church is said to be married or espoused unto Christ, Jer. 2. 2. & 3. 14. 2 Cor. 11. 2. From whence the Argument may be form thus: If every Church becomes a Church by being married or espoused unto Christ, than a company becomes a Church by way of Covenant: But the former is true, therefore the latter is true also. The Assumption, that a Church becomes a Church by being married unto Christ, is plain from the former Scriptures, where the Church of Israel, and the Church of Corinth, in regard of their entering into Church-Estate, are said to be espoused and married unto Christ, as a loving and chaste Virgin to one husband. Which spiritual marriage between Christ and his Church, is also taught in the type of the marriage between King Solomon and Pharoahs' daughter, Psal. 45. The Consequence of the Proposition is plain in reason; for there is no marriage but by way of Covenant; no woman becomes a man's wife, but by way of bestowing herself in Covenant upon such a man: neither doth a man become an husband, but by the same means; and therefore the Scripture speaking of the violation of marriage, calls it a violation of Covenant, Prov. 2. 17. Christ hath but one wife or Spouse, Cant. 6 9 Object. 1. The Catholic Church indeed is but one; viz▪ the whole company Answer. of God's Elect in heaven, in earth, dead, now living, and not yet borne: But as there is the Church-Catholique, which is but one; so there are particular and visible Churches, which are in number many; and therefore the Scripture speaks of Churches, 2 Cor. 8. 1. 19 Gal. 1. 2. Of the Churches of the Gentiles, Rom. 16. 4. Of seven Churches, Rev. 1. 4. Of all Churches, 1 Cor. 14. 33. & 7. 17. Rev. 2. 23. But if every particular Church be the wife of Christ, how many hundred Obj. 2. wives should he have? 1. If the Church of Israel, Jer. 2. 2. the Church of Corinth, 2 Answ. Cor. 11. 2. The Jewish Church, Rev. 19 7. be the Spouse and wife of Christ, there is no reason but others should be the same also, especially seeing there is no particular Church, but in respect of their Church estate, they may decline and go a whoring from Christ, and that shows that they were first espoused to him; for no woman can be said to go a whoring from a man, if she were never married, nor espoused to him at all. 2. This that seems an absurdity, and were a sinful practice among men, in respect of Christ, is a certain truth, and no dishonour unto him at all, to have more Spouses than one upon earth, many spiritual Spouses. Men cannot give themselves wholly and entirely to many as Christ can. Every faithful soul is espoused and married unto Christ; and in that respect he hath not only many hundred but many thousand, yea many millions of spiritual Spouses. But this spiritual marriage is between Christ and the Church, But Obj. 3. the Church-Covenant is between the Church and the members, and therefore this marriage doth not prove the Church-Covenant. 1. In some sort there may be said to be a marriage between the Answer. Church and the members, viz. in respect of that dear love and affection, that aught to be between them; and therefore it is said, As a young man marrieth a Virgin, so shall the children of the Church be married to the Church, Isa. 62. 5. 2. But properly the marriage is between Christ & the Church, and so is the Covenant also, so far as therein they give up themselves to Christ as unto an head and Lord; as a woman in the Covenant of marriage doth give up herself unto her husband; And the performance of such duties as the Church and the member owe one unto another, is a branch of that marriage-Covenant, wherein they are tied to Christ; for Christ himself in his Covenant requires, not only that they should give up themselves to him, but also that they should perform these duties one unto another. And accordingly it is said of the Churches in Macedonia, that they gave up themselves first to the Lord, and then to us by the will of God, 2 Cor. 8. 5. True it is, they do also bind themselves by Covenant one unto another, but in that respect the Covenant is properly a brotherly Covenant; like that 1 Sam. 20 8. Amos 1. 9 because there the engagement is to one another as brethren, fellow-members, and fellow-helpers, and not as to one head or Lord, as it is in respect of Christ, and therefore in that respect it is not so properly a marriage-Covenant as it is in respect of Christ: though duties to one another are promised in their Covenant with one another, and also in their Covenant with Christ. In brief thus: They promise unto Christ duties to him, and duties to one another according to him: and so their Covenant is a marriage-Covenant with Christ: They promise also to one another, duties to one another, and so it is a brotherly Covenant. Another Title given to the Church (which also proves that a Church is made by Covenant) is the Title of a City, or City of God, Psal. 87. 3. & 48 1. 8. & 122. 3. Ephes 2. 19 The Argument lieth thus▪ If a true Church be a City of God, than a Church becomes a Church by Covenant: But every true Church is a City of God. Ergo. The Assumption is proved by the Scriptures forealledged. The Consequence of the Proposition is plain in reason, for every City is united by some Covenant among themselves, the Citizens are received into jus Civitatis, or right of City privileges, by some Covenant or Oath; And therefore it is so likewise in this City of God the Church; and men become Citizens of the Church by solemn Covenant. The third Argument may be drawn from the means of reforming Argu. 3. and restoring a Church when it is corrupted, which is by entering into Covenant a new with God, 2 Chron. 15 10. & 29. 10. & Neh. 9 38. & 10. 28, 29. Jer. 50. 4, 5. The reason may be taken thus: If a Church decayed is to be restored and reform by renewing Covenant with God, than it was instituted and erected at the first by way of Covenant: The reason of which Consequence is, because abuses and corruptions are to be reform by bringing things back to the first Institution: Thus Christ reforms the abuses of marriage, by bringing them to the first Institution of that Ordinance; From the beginning it was not so, Mat. 19 8. And thus Paul reformeth the Abuses of the Lords Supper, by telling them what was the first Institution thereof, 1 Cor. 11. 23, etc. And thus the Lord Jesus calling on the declining Church of Ephesus for reformation, bids her remember from whence she is fallen, and repent and do her first works, Rev. 2. 5. Now the Assumption is plain from the Texts above alleged, that at the reforming of a Church, there is to be a renewing of Covenant; and thence it follows, that at the first erecting of a Church, there was the making of a Covenant with God, for else this renewing of Covenant would not have been the way to reform it. The fourth Argument is taken from that which doth dissolve Argu. 4. a Church, which is the dissolving or breaking of the Covenant, Zach. 11. 9, 10, 14. If dissolving the Covenant be that which doth dissolve the Church, than the making of Covenant is that which constitutes a Church. The reason of the Consequence is plain, because otherwise the Covenant might be dissolved & the Church stand still, if it were not the making of the Covenant that did constitute the Church: But if dissipating stones in a building do dissolve the house, than the compacting and conjoining of them is that which makes the house; If separation of soul and body be that which destroys the man, that then we say he is not: it must needs be the uniting of them, that did constitute & make the man: and so it is in this case. And that dissolving the Covenant is that which dissolves a Church, is plain from the Text alleged, Zach. 11. where the breaking of the two staves, of beauty and bands, that is, the unchurching of the Jews, is interpreted to be the breaking of the Covenant that God had made with that people, and the brotherhood that was between Judah and Israel. The fifth Argument is taken from the distinction which God Argu. 5. hath appointed amongst Churches, and the confounding of all Churches into one, if there be not this Covenant to distinguish them. If Churches be distinct Societies, and may not be confounded, than Churches are compacted and combined by Covenant: But the former is true. Ergo. That Churches are distinct Societies, is plain in the Scripture, where we have mention of many Churches in one Country or Province, Gal. 1. 1. 1 Thes. 2. 14. Of seven Churches in Asia, Rev. 1. 4. and of all the Churches, 1 Cor. 14. 33. Rev. 2. 23. Ephesus is not Smyrna, nor Smyrna is not Thyatira, nor either of them Pergamus, but each one distinct of themselves, having Officers of their own, which did not belong to others: virtues of their own for which others are not praised, corruptions of their own, for which others are not blamed; If it were not thus, then when Lacdicea is condemned for lukewarmness, or Ephesus for declining, all the rest should be reproved also: And when Philadelfia is praised, all the rest should be praised also, which we see is otherwise. Now from hence the Consequence is certain, that therefore they are combined by some Covenant each one amongst themselves; for there is nothing else without this that will sufficiently distinguish them. The Spirit of God and Faith in their hearts, is common to all Christians under heaven, and in heaven also, and therefore this is not the thing that makes distinction. Nor is it habitation in the same Town together, for that may be common to such Christians as are not of this Church, and usually is to many that are no Christians. As it is with Companies in London; as the Company of Goldsmiths, etc. that many others dwell in the same Town with them, yea it may be in the same street that are not of their Company: and therefore it is not merely habitation that doth distinguish them from others, but some combination and agreement amongst themselves; So it is not habitation in the same Town that distinguisheth Churches, and Church-members from other men, but their mutual agreement and combination and joining themselves together in an holy Covenant with God. If the Spirit of God and Faith in their hearts cannot distinguish one Object. Church from another, because these are common to them all, then how can Covenant distinguish them, sith all Churches are joined by Covenant one as well as another? It is not a Covenant simply or a Covenant in general that doth Answer. constitute a Church, or distinguish one Church from another, but a Covenant with application and appropriation to these persons. Even as it is in marriage, though all married couples be united by Covenant, and a Covenant wherein one couple promiseth the same duties that another couple doth, yet a Covenant with application and appropriation of the duties covenanted to this man and this woman in particular, such a Covenant is the very thing that make a couple, man and wife together, and gives them mutual power over each other, as husband and wife, and puts a distinction between them and all other men and women in the world. And so it is in this case; a Covenant to perform Church-duties with application and appropriation to such persons, is the very thing that constitutes a Church, and distinguisheth one Church from another. And thus much concerning the former of the two particulars, to show the use of Church-Covenant, viz. that it is that whereby a company do become a Church. The second particular is this, that taking hold of the Covenant, or joining in it, is that which makes a particular person a member of a Church. And this follows upon the former, and that may be the first Argument to prove it. If joining in Covenant be that which makes a company to become Argu. 1. a Church, then taking hold of that Covenant is requisite to make a particular person become a member of the Church: But the first is true, as hath been showed before; Therefore the second is true also: If compacting and conjoining of stones and pieces of Timber be, that that makes an house, than a particular stone cannot become a part of that house, till it be compacted and con●oyned to the rest: But the former is true, even in the Church of God, which is the spiritual Spouse and City of God, living stones, Christians, believers must be compacted together, and builded up together, Ephes. 2. 21. 22. Psal. 12● 3. and therefore the latter is true also, that a particular Christian becomes a member of the Church, a part of that building by being combined with the rest. A second Argument may be drawn from the Scripture, Isa. 56. Argu. 2. 3, 6, 7. Let not the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak, saying, the Lord hath utterly separated me from his people, etc. The sons of the strangers that join themselves to the Lord, to serve him, etc. and take hold of my Covenant, even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of Prayer, etc. Concerning which Scripture, note three things to the present purpose. First, That these strangers were members of Christ, true believers, joined to God by Faith; for it is said, they have joined themselves to the Lord, v. 3 & v. 6. that they loved the name of the Lord, served him, and kept his Sabbaths, v. 6. and yet for all this they were not as yet joined as members of the visible Church, for if they had been joined, there would have been no cause for such a complaint, the Lord hath separated me from his people, v. 3. Besides, bringing them into the Church as members, and granting them the privilege of members, is promised as a reward and blessing upon this their joining to the Lord by faith and obedience, v. 7. And therefore it is not the same, but a distinct thing from it; the one being promised as a reward and blessing upon the other. Secondly, The Lord promiseth that he will make them members of his Church: Them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of Prayer. Thirdly, That among other things requisite to make them members, this was one, viz. the taking hold of that Covenant which was between the Church of Israel and God, v. 6. So that hence we may gather, that men may be members of Christ, joined to the Lord by faith and love, and yet for the present not be members of the visible Church: And that when God is so gracious to true believers, as to make them members of his visible Church, it is requisite that they join in Covenant before. But might not faith in Christ, believing in heart on the God of Israel, Object. be all the taking hold of the Covenant that is here meant. Not so, but over and above that, here is also meant their open Answer. profession of their Faith in the God of Israel, and open binding of themselves by Covenant to all such duties of faith and obedience, as God required of the Church of Israel, and the members thereof. Now distinctly take the Answer to this Objection in three or four particular Propositions. First, There was a Covenant between the Church of Israel and God, Exod. 19 5, 6, 7, 8. Ezek 16. 8. Deut. 29. 10. etc. Secondly, This Covenant was mutual; not only a promise on God's part to be their God, and to take them for his people, but also reciprocally on their part to give up themselves unto God to be his people, and to do the duty of people to their God; The Covenant is not merely to receive from God, and promise nothing back again to him; nor doth God bind himself therein, and leave men at liberty, but it is mutual on both parts, as these Scriptures declare; Gen. 17. 1. Exod. 197. 8. Deut. 5. 27. & 26. 16, 17. Hos. 2. 23. & Zach. 13. 9 Thirdly, Hereupon it follows, that if men had not promised, and also performed, in some measure of truth, the duties of Faith and obedience unto God, they had not taken hold of the Covenant, but had discovenanted themselves, notwithstanding all the promises of God unto their Fathers or others. Thus though God promised Abraham to be a God to him, and to his seed in their generations, Gen. 17. 7. yet the Ishmaelites and Edomites descending from Abraham, were discovenanted by not promising nor performing those duties of Faith and obedience, which God required on the people's part: when a Covenant contains promises on God's part, and duties also on man's, he doth not take hold of the Covenant that takes one part, and leaves another. Fourthly, To believe what God promised in the Covenant for his part, and to promise in a private way the duties of obedience on man's part, was not sufficient to make these stranger's members of the Church, but they must do it openly and in the view of the Church, else the Church could have had no warrant to have admitted such into their Fellowship, if their faith and obedience had not been visibly professed, Exod. 12. 43. 48 2 Chron. 23. 19 And in as much as the Covenant was mutual, when these strangers did manifest their taking hold of the Covenant, they manifested and professed both Faith and obedience, both that they believed what God promised, and that they would be obedient to what he required; If any should have claimed Church-fellowship, saying, I believe the promises, but would not bind himself to any duties of Evangelicall obedience, this had been a taking hold of the Covenant by the halves, a taking of one part of it in seeming and pretence, and a leaving of another; but it would not have been sufficient to have brought a man into the fellowship of the church: Such of the Congregation of Israel as would not come to Jerusalem to enter into Covenant, were to be separated from the Church in the days of Ezra, Ezra 10. 8. And therefore such as being strangers should refuse to enter into it, could not be admitted into the Church; So that the taking hold of God's Covenant, which is there required to make these stranger's members of the Church, is a believing in heart on the God of Israel, and an open profession that they did believe, and likewise a promise of obedience or subjection unto the God of Israel, and an open professing of such obedience and subjection; and that is the joining in Covenant which we stand for, before a man can be a member of a Church, even an open profession of Faith and of Obedience. A third Argument is taken from those Scriptures which show Argu. 3. that men become members by being added to the Church, or being joined to them, Act. 2. 47. & 5. 13. & 9 26. If men become members of the Church by being added or joined, then joining in Covenant (or professing of subjection to the Gospel or Covenant of God) is that whereby a man becomes a member of a Church: But the former is true, as appears by the Scriptures forementioned, and therefore the latter is true also. But all the doubt in this Argument will be concerning the consequence of the Major Proposition; but that may be made good by this reason, and the confirmation of it, viz. that a man cannot be added or joined to the Church by any other means without this joining in Covenant. The truth of which Assertion will appear by showing the insufficiency of all other means, without this joining in Covenant, and that may be done in Answer to the Objections ensuing. When men were added to the Church, it may be, no more is meant Object. 1. but that God did convert them and work Faith in their hearts, and that converting of them was the adding of them to the Church. This cannot be all; for, first, Saul was converted and had faith Answer. wrought in his heart, and yet he was not at the first received for a member of the Church at Jerusalem (though he assayed to be joined unto them,) till they were better satisfied in his spiritual estate by the testimony of Barnabas, Act. 9 26, 27, 28. And those strangers, Isa. 56. (as was said before) were joined to the Lord by being converted, and having Faith wrought in their hearts, and yet they do lament it with grief, that they were not joined as members to the visible Church: The Lord hath separated me from his people, say they, ver. 3. The old saying is true concerning the visible Church, There are many wolves within, and many sheep without. Secondly, Those that were joined were believers before they joined; for it is said, divers were added, ver. 14. Thirdly, Those that were added to the Church, were added and joined to them by such an act as others durst not put forth, Act. 5. 13. Of the rest durst no man join unto them, and therefore it was not by the irresistible act of God in converting of them, but by some voluntary act of their own choice and consent; for Gods converting grace depends not upon man's daring, or not daring to receive it. If to be joined be no more but to be converted, then when it is said, Some durst not be joined, the meaning should be, they durst not be converted, nor suffer Faith to be wrought in them; which is gross Arminianism, suspending the converting grace of God upon the free will of the creature. Fourthly, And as this joining which others durst not do, cannot be meant of being converted; So if it be well considered, what the thing was wherein they durst not join, it may appear that it was nothing else but this, that they durst not agree, and engage themselves to be of their body and society; that is, they durst not join in Covenant with them. For it cannot be meant of dwelling in the Town with them, for this they both durst do and did: nor is it only of joining to hear the Word in their assembly, for this also they durst do, and many did it in great multitudes, so that many by hearing the Word became believers, and were added to the Lord both of men and women, ver. 14. at this very time when it is said of some they durst not join unto them: Nor is it of joining to them in affection, or approbation of their way, for this they also durst do and did express so much in magnifying and commending them, when yet they durst not join unto them, ver. 13. Which magnifying of them doth imply that they heard their doctrine, and saw their practice, and approved it, and highly commended them for the same: Wherefore seeing this joining, which some durst not do, cannot be meant of being converted, nor of joining in habitation, nor of joining in affection, nor in hearing the Word in their Assembly, nor of approbation, and expressions that way, it remaineth that it must be meant of joining in that near relation of Church-fellowship amongst them, so as to be engaged by voluntary consent and agreement to be members of their Church. Fiftly, If joining to the Church, were no more but to be converted, than he that were converted were joined as a member of every visible Church throughout the world, which were a great confusion of that Order, and distinction of Churches, which the Lord hath appointed. Men may be joined to the Church, in hearty affection and love, and Obj. 2. yet without any Covenant. True, but this will not make them members of that Church, Answ. for then Saul was a member of the Church at Jerusalem, afore he was joined a member, for he was joined to them in hearty affection afore, and therefore assayed to join as a member; and so were they that durst not join, Act. 5. 13. yea than a man should be a member of many Churches, yea of all Christian Churches in the world; for he is to love them, and bear hearty affection to them all; The true members of the Churches in England are united in hearty affection, to the Churches in Scotland, in Holland, in France, in New-England, etc. And yet they are not members of all these Churches, nor subject to their censures as members are. But the reason of that is because they do not dwell among them in Obj. 3. the same Town. Neither would habitation with them in the same Town, make Answer. a man a member of the Church there, if there be no more than so. Suppose Saul to have dwelled in the same house afore his conversion in which he dwelled after, which is not impossible nor unlikely; yet we see he was no member of the Church at Jerusalem, afore his conversion, no nor of some time after, though he might have dwelled in an house in the midst of the Christians, and Church-members there. The members of the Dutch and French Churches in London, or other Towns in England, are not members of the English-Congregations or Churches, no more than the English are of theirs, and yet they dwell promiscuously together in the same Street of the same Town. Towne-dwelling would not make a man a freeman of a Company in London, or some other Corporation; for many others dwell in the Town with them; yea it may be in the same street, that are not free of their Company, and so it is in this case. But the reason why such as dwell in Town with the Church, are Object. 4. not members thereof, may be, because they frequent not their. Assemblies. Idiots and Infidels might come into the public meetings among Answ. the Corinthians, 1 Cor. 14. 23, 24, 25. yet Idiots and Infidels were not therefore members of the Church. And Saul after his conversion might have come in among the Church in time of public duties, and have seen and heard all that they had done: yet this would not have made him of one body with them. Some Indians, Moors, and other natural persons come into our meetings in New-England, some of their own accord, and others by the Command or Counsel of their Masters and Governors yet no man can say, that all these are hereby made Church-members. Wherefore seeing neither conversion, nor loving affection, nor cohabitation, nor coming into their meetings, doth join a man as a member of the visible Church (for some men have all these, and yet are not members, and others are sometimes members of the visible Churches, and yet want some of these, are hypocrites and want sound conversion) it remaineth therefore that as sound conversion makes a man fit matter for a Church; So profession of his Faith, and of his subjection to the Gospel, and the Church's approbation, and acceptance of him (which is the sum of Church-Covenant) is the formal cause that gives him the being of a member. But joining doth not always signify joining in Covenant; Philip joined Object. 5. to the Eunnuchs' chariot, and dust to men's feet, Act. 8. 29. & Luke 10, 11. and yet there was no Covenant, and therefore men may join to the Church without any Covenant. The word indeed may express any close joining, whether natural, Answ. (as the branch is joined to the Vine, or an arm or other member to the body) or artificial, as when two sticks were joined to become one in Ezekiel's hand, Ezek. 37. Or when Carpenters or Masons do join pieces of stone or Timber together, to make one house, Neh. 4. 6. Ezr. 4. 12. but is not only the force of the word that is stood upon. But when joining is used to express such joining, wherein a man voluntarily takes on him a new relation, there it always implies a Covenant, whether the relation be moral and civil, or religious and Ecclesiastical: We speak of voluntary relation, for there are natural relations, as between parents and children: and these need no Covenant, there is no Covenant to make a man a Parent, or a child; There are also violent relations, as between Conqueror and Captives, and in these there is no Covenant neither; but others are voluntary, and these always imply a Covenant, and are founded therein, whether they be moral and civil (as between husband and wife, Pro. 2. 17. between Master and servants, Luk. 15. 15. between Prince and subject, between Partners in Trade, 2 Chro. 20. 35, 36, 37. where the Covenant or agreement is, that men shall bare such a share of charges, and receive such a share of profits:) or religious, as between Minister and people, between the Church and the members: all these are done by way of Covenant. A man cannot join himself to a woman as her husband, but by way of Covenant: A man cannot join himself to another as a servant, or apprentice, but by way of Covenant; And so may we say of all the rest; nor into any body corporate, but by the same way and means. If men be united into a body politic or incorporate, a man cannot be said to be joined to them by mere hearty affection, unless withal he joins himself unto them by some Contract or Covenant. Now of this nature is every particular Church, a body incorporate, 1 Cor. 12. 27. Ye are the body of Christ, etc. and hath power to cast out, 1 Cor. 5. 13. and to forgive and receive in Penitents, 2 Cor. 2. 7. 8 as a body incorporate; and therefore he that will join unto them, must do it by way of Covenant or Agreement; and so this Answer to this Objection, may be a fourth Argument to prove the point in hand, that joining in Covenant is that which makes a man, a member of a Church. All voluntary relations, all relations which are neither natural Argu. 4. nor violent, are entered into by way of Covenant. But he that joins into a Church as a member, or enters into a Church, doth take upon him such a relation; Therefore joining▪ to a Church as a member, is by way of Covenant. A fifth Argument may be drawn from the power which all Argu. 5. Churches, Officers and members, have over all their members in the Lord. If all Churches, Officers, and members, have power in the Lord over all their members, then joining in Covenant is necessary to make a man a member of a Church, but the former is true, therefore the latter is true also. The Assumption in this Argument, that all Churches have power over their members, is proved from 1 Cor. 5. 4, 5. 13. where the Apostle reproveth the Corinthians for suffering the Incestuous man amongst them, and commands them to deliver him to Satan, and cast him out from amongst them. Now this he would not have done, if they had had no power over him, or if there had been any room for them to say, we have nothing to do with him, we have no power over him. And the same is proved in other Scriptures also; as, Mat. 18. 17. Psal. 149. 6. 7, 8, 9 And the Consequence of the Major Proposition, viz. that then members do engage themselves by Covenant, is proved by this reason; That Churches have no power over such as have not engaged themselves by Covenant, and committed power unto them, by professing to be subject to all the Ordinances of Christ amongst them. The truth whereof may appear by two Reasons: First, Because all Christians have power and right, jure divino, to choose their own Officers to whom they commit their souls, Act. 6. & 1. & 14. 23. where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, imports choosing by Election: and so the word is used and translated, 2 Cor. 8. 19 he was chosen by the Churches, etc. It is not ministerial gifts that makes a man a Minister to every Church, nor investeth him with spiritual power over them, nor though he dwell amongst them, unless they call him, and he accept of that call: And as they have power to choose their Officers, so likewise to choose their brethren according to God, Rom. 14. 1. Now if they have power to choose their Officers and brethren, than none can have power over them as Officers and brethren, without their own consent, and whom they never chose, nor promised by any Covenant or Engagement to be subject to the Lord. Secondly, If the Church should exercise any Act of Church-power over such a man as never entered into Covenant with them (suppose to Excommunicate him for whoredom or drunkenness, or the like) the man might protest against their Act, and their Sentence, as Coram non judice, and they could not justify their proceedings, if indeed there have passed no Covenant or Engagement between him and them. If he shall say, you have nothing to do to pass Sentence or Censure upon me, I am none of your Church, but of another Church; Suppose in Holland, in France, etc. and I am only here now for Merchandise sake, or upon some other occasion: what shall they say to stop his mouth, if there never passed any Covenant between him and them. But Ministers have power over the people by the word of God, Object. Heb. 13. 17. 1 Thes. 5. 12. 1 Tim. 5. 17. and not by men's engaging themselves by Covenant. But what is it that makes men Ministers to such a people, Officers Answer. to such a Church, or maketh them sheep of my flock? Is it not those Scriptures that makes every man a Pastor, or Teacher, or Ruler to a people, unless they call him to that Office; and then in so doing they Covenant and Engage themselves to be subject to him in the Lord, and then those Scriptures take hold on them. One might as well say, it is not the Covenanting of a wife to her husband that gives him power over her, but the Word of God; For as the Word of God commands people to obey their Ministers, so it commands wives to be subject to their husbands, Ephes. 5. 22. And yet all men know, a man cannot take this woman for his▪ wife but by Covenant. So that if she once makes herself a wife by her own voluntary Covenant, than the word of God takes hold on her, and binds her to do the duties of a wife: but if she▪ hath made no Covenant, the man hath no power over her as her husband, neither is she his wife; So if men once make themselves members of such a Church, sheep of such a man's flock, by their own voluntary Covenant, than the word of God takes hold of them, and binds them to do the duties of members to their fellow-brethrens, and of people to their Pastors or Ministers. But if they never chose such a man to be their Minister, nor Covenanted to be subject to him in the Lord, he then can have no power over them as a Minister unto them, because they have right to choose their own Ministers. A sixth Argument may be taken from the distinction that is Argu. 6. between members, and not members. If there be by the word of God a distinction, between members of the Church and such as are no members, then joining in Covenant is necessary to the being of a member; but the former is true, as appears 1 Cor. 5. 12. Some are within, and may be judged by the Church, and others are without, and may not▪ and therefore the latter is true also. And the reason of the Consequence is because there is nothing else without this joining in Covenant, that can sufficiently distinguish them; It is not Faith and Grace in their hearts, for some men are members of the visible Church, and yet have no Grace, and others may have Grace, and yet be no members, and therefore this is not the thing that doth distinguish them, nor is it affection, nor cohabitation, nor every approbation of the Word of God, and the ways of his Church, nor coming into their Assemblies to hear the Word; But these things were touched before, and therefore may be here the more briefly passed over. And so much shall suffice to have spoken of the second particular, concerning the use of Church-Covenant, that it is by joining therein that a particular person becomes a member of a Church. But here it will be needful to remove sundry Objections, which may seem to some to be of great weight against Church-Covenant, that so by the removing of them, the truth may be the more cleared, to fuller satisfaction, if it be the will of God. Church-Covenant is a Term that is not found in Scripture. Object. 1. Answer. First, So is Sacrament, Trinity, etc. and yet those terms may be lawfully used, because the thing meant thereby is found. Secondly, But seeing the Covenant is between the Lord and his Church, as the two parties that are confederate, it is all one whether it be called the Lords Covenant, or the Church-Covenant: As when Mamre, Aver, & Eschol were confederate with Abraham, Gen. 14. 13. might not one truly say, Abraham was confederate with them? Relatives do mutually put and establish one another. Thirdly, The Scripture allows both the Lords Covenant with the Church, Eze. 16. 8. & the people's covenant or Saint's covenant, or Church's Covenant with him, Deut. 29. 12. Psal. 50. 5. Jer. 50. 5. Fourthly, There is good reason for both the words; both the Lords Covenant, and the Church-Covenant, because both are confederate; And for that of Church-Covenant, there is this reason also, viz. to distinguish it from other Covenants, as a marriage-Covenant, Pro. 2. 17. and a brotherly Covenant, 1 Sam. 20. 8. The Church-Covenant being thus called not only because they are a Church, or members thereof that make it, but also because they enter into it in reference to Church-Estate and Church-duties: The duties which they bind themselves unto in this Covenant being such especially as concern a Church and the members thereof. But this Church-Covenant puts some disparagement upon the Covenant Object. 2. of Grace, which every believer is already entered into with God, and seem to charge the same with insufficiency; for every second Covenant doth argue that the first was not faultless, Heb. 8. 7. 1. A second Covenant doth argue that the first was not faultless, Answ. where the Covenants are contrary one to another, as the covenant of Grace, and the covenant of works are, and so it is most true, that the bringing in of the free Covenant of Grace did argue that righteousness and life could not be attained by the Law, or Covenant of works; for if there had been a Law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the Law. Gal. 3. 21. Rom. 8. 3. 2. But if it be the same Covenant that is renewed or made again, though upon a new occasion, no man can say that entering into the same the second time, or a third, or a fourth, doth disannul the first, or cast disparagement upon the same. The covenant of works given to Adam was not blamed or faulted, because it was renewed in Sinai. The Covenant of Grace was first given to Adam in Paradise after his fall, afterward to Abraham, then to the people of Israel under types and shadows; And again after the coming of Christ in the flesh; yet none of these doth disannul the former, or argue the same to be faulty; and the reason is, because it is still the same Covenant though renewed upon new occasions; and in some particulars in some other manner. And the like we say concerning Church-Covenant, or the Covenant which a man makes when he enters into the Church, viz. that it is not another Covenant contrary to the Covenant of Grace, which every believer is brought into at his first conversion, but an open profession of a man's subjection to that very Covenant, specially in the things which concern Church estate, into which estate the man is now entering. It is not lawful to make such a Covenant as the Church-Covenant, Obj. 3. because it is not in our power to keep it, and we do not know whether God will give us power. This ground is very true, that no man hath power of himself Answ. to any thing that good is, but all a man's power and ability must come of God through Christ, 2. Cor. 3. 5. Phil. 2. 13. Joh. 15. 5. But the inference is not good, that therefore it should be unlawful to ento into Church-Covenant: for 1. By the same reason, all promises are unlawful, and all covenants whatsoever; as the covenant of marriage, the covenant of service, yea and the personal covenant of Grace, when a particular soul promiseth faith and new obedience; for there is none of these, no not the covenant of Marriage, which a man is able of himself to keep, as the adultery of David and Bathsheba, among others, doth plainly prove. 2. God hath promised to give power to them that in self-denial seek it of him, and trust to his promise for it. Ezek. 36. 27. Jer. 31. 33. Rom. 6. 14. Jer. 32. 40. The true inference therefore from this ground, from man's disability to perform were this, that therefore a man should not enter into Church Covenant in his own strength, for that was Peter's fault in promising not to deny Christ, but to die with him rather: but Church-Covenant, as also all other promises, should be entered into, in an humble looking up to Christ Jesus for help and assistance to perform. Thou therefore my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, 2. Tim. 2. 1. God disalloweth covenants of man's making (and so our Church-Covenant) Obj. 4. in those words, But not by thy Covenant. Ezek. 16. 61. God doth not reprove them there for making Covenant, for Answ. than he were contrary to himself, who elsewhere called them to do it, Exod. 29. Deut. 29. and commended them for it, Psal. 50. 5. Yea and in that very place of Ezek. 16. acknowledgeth a Covenant between him and them, ver. 60. 62. But the meaning is, he would do them good, but not for their good keeping the Covenant of works, for they had very sinfully broken it, ver. 59 but even as he saith elsewhere, not for their sakes, or for their righteousness, Ezek. 36. 32. Deut. 9 4, 5, 6. But what force is there in this arguing, viz. If God will do us good, but not for our good keeping the covenant of works, than it is not lawful to promise obedience to the covenant of Grace, in such things as concern Church estate; All men may easily see that here is a plain non sequitur. This entering into Covenant may keep out many good men from joining Obj. 5. to the Churches, because they are not satisfied about it: and therefore it is better laid aside. It is not impossible, but good men may for a time be unsatisfied Answ. about it, till they understand the nature and use of it, and yet the thing be warrantable enough for all that in the sight of God; the Tribes were troubled at the Altar set up upon the banks of Jordan by the two Tribes and an half, till they understood the intent and use of it, and for what purpose it was erected: and then they were satisfied. Josh. 22. And the same may be said of Peter's eating with the Gentiles, which at the first was very offensive to them of the circumcision, till they understood what Peter had to say for his defence therein, and then they rested well satisfied, Act. 11. But if men understand what the Church-Covenant is, there is no reason that good men should be troubled at it; it being nothing else but a promise of obedience unto the Gospel of Christ, or of such duties as the Gospel requireth of all Christians in Church-estate: For, will good men refuse to obey the Gospel, or submit to the ordinances of Christ? or will they refuse to profess and promise so much? If a man understand what it is, and what we mean by it, and yet refuse to enter into it when he hath opportunity thereto, such refusing is no part of his goodness, but is to be reckoned amongst his corruptions; It is ignorance at the best, and if not so, than it may be perverseness of will, or some want of will to perform obedience to the Gospel. And surely there is small hope that such would yield subjection and obedience to the Gospel, who do refuse to profess or promise it. But the Scripture, Act. 2. 41. tells of joining to the Church without Obj. 6. any Covenant. For it was not possible that 3000. should enter into covenant in one day. Two things may be said in Answer to this Objection. Answ. First, that 3000. were not so many, but that joining in Covenant might easily be done by them all, in one day. For, 1. it was at Penticost, at which time of the year the days were at the longest: And, 2. the Scripture tells us, that David made a Covenant with all the Tribes of Israel in one day, 2. Sam. 5 1, 2, 3. The Articles of the covenant between David and the Tribes, and so between this 3000. and the Lord might be openly declared, and they both the one and the other might by some sign or other, express their consent thereunto in one day. Secondly, as joining in Covenant is a thing that might be done, so it is more than probable that indeed it was done, by those 3000. souls For it is said, ver. 41. that they gladly received the word, that is, they openly professed that they did with all their hearts receive it, for this receiving of the Word is noted as a condition, upon which they were admitted to baptism, and therefore it was not only an inward receiving of it in their hearts, but also an open professing that they did receive it; for an inward receiving of it in their hearts, without an open professing thereof outwardly, would not have been sufficient for the admitting of them unto Baptism. Now this Word which they received was an exhortation to Repentance for sin, and to Faith in the promise, ver. 38 39 and to obedience in severing themselves from others, and saving themselves from that untoward generation, ver. 40. And therefore when they openly professed, that they gladly received this word, there was an open professing of their Repentance for sin, ver. 40. of their Faith in the promise, and of obedience to the Commandment, which is nothing else, but the very sum of Church-Covenant: yea, and further, their very preparation to this repentance, faith and obedience, in that true compunction and sorrow of soul, was also openly made manifest. ver. 37. But yet there would not be such long narrations, of every one severally Reply. as now are used, when men do enter into Church-Covenant, when each one makes a good long speech, in the profession of his Faith and Repentance. When the thing is certain, as was showed before, that they did Answ. openly profess repentance, faith and obedience, it is not difference in the length or largeness of their speeches in expressing of themselves, that can make any difference in the thing: Majus & minus non diversificant speciem. And we deny not but they might be briefer, because there was not such need they should be long in regard of some difference between them and us, their time and ours: First there were the Apostles present to hear their confessions, and to judge thereof, who were men of very good discerning, and therefore briefer expressing of men's selves might suffice; whereas the best Christians, yea the best Ministers amongst us are not to be compared to the Apostles; and therefore as we need more time for study, and for preparation for our Sermons then they did: so likewise we need more time to hear, and try the soundness of men's repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ. Yet this we may add withal, that if the Apostles and those primative Christians, men of such excellent discerning were sometimes deceived, and could not always so discern, but that some Hypocrites would creep into the Church: as the example of Ananias and Saphira doth witness; how much more need is there, that the Churches of God in these days (being far inferior to them) should be very watchful and circumspect in trying the spiritual estates of them that offer to come into the Church? Secondly, their times also differed from ours: for their Christianity was a matter of reproach and danger of excommunication, Joh. 9 22. of imprisonment, Act. 4. 3. and 5. 18. and the like. And therefore to see men now to make open profession of their faith in Christ Jesus, whose servants and disciples were so hated, and who himself but a while before was crucified, this was not an ordinary matter: and therefore in words, men might be the briefer when they came to be received into the Church: But our times in New England do not persecute Christ, and Christians, and Christian Churches, but countenance them, and protect them; and therefore there is more need now to be more studious in examination of men's estates when they offer themselves for Church members: when the Jews were in favour, many of the people of the Land became Jews, Esth. 8. 17. But why is there so little proof of this Church-Covenant in the New Obj. 7. Testament? 1. Suppose the New Testament said nothing of it, yet it might Answ. have ground sufficient from the Scriptures of the old Testament; for if it was Gods revealed will in those days, that a company should become a Church, and particular persons become members of that Church by way of Covenant, we may be sure it is so now likewise, unless covenanting were peculiar to the Jewish Paedigogie; indeed if it had never been used in those times, but were some new ordinance, peculiar to the days of the New Testament, in such cases also a ground from the Scriptures of the New Testament were necessary, as there is in all such things wherein there is any change or variation, from what was used in those times afore Christ, as that there should not be national Churches, but congregational, and not one visible Church, but many, that there should be baptism, and the Lords Supper: these are matters that are not found in the old Testament, nor were appointed to be used in those days, and therefore we must have warrant for them in the New, and so we have. But for the Covenant it is otherwise, it is no new ordinance peculiar to the days of the Gospel, nor any levitical ordinance peculiar to the Jewish Pedigogie; and therefore the Scriptures of the Old Testament that give warrant for it, may be sufficient as hath been showed afore. 2. And yet there is not wanting good warrant for it, that it ought to be used, in the days of the New Testament. For, 1. the Prophets do foretell it, Isa. 56. 6, 7. and 44. 5. and Jer. 50. 5. Ezek. 20. 37. and in sundry other places, to omit the rest at this time, because some of them have been spoken of before; Only let those words of Isa. 44. 5. be well considered, and see if they do not plainly hold forth that in the days of the New Testament, men should openly profess their faith, and solemnly bind themselves by Covenant, to be the Lords people, one shall say, I am the Lords, and another shall call himself by the name of Jacob, and another shall subscribe with his hand, and surname himself by the name of Israel. These words are so plain for open professing of faith in the Lord, and open binding of men's selves by Covenant unto him, as we conceive nothing need be more. 2. The Apostles do sufficiently testify, that such a thing was practised in their days, else how should we understand that fellowship in the Gospel in its full latitude and breadth, Phil. 1. 5. if this combining into Church-fellowship be no part thereof; yea when it is said, they continued steadfastly, or as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may well be translated, they strongly did cleave together, or hold together in such a Fellowship, which was not preaching and hearing the doctrine of the Apostles, nor Sacraments, nor Prayer, but a thing distinct from all these. If this combining themselves into a spiritual fellowship and society of Church-state be no part thereof, we know not how to understand it, nor what that fellowship should mean; If Doctrine, and Sacraments, and Prayer had not been particularly mentioned, in the same place, it might have been thought that the Fellowship in which they so steadfastly clavae together had been no more, but their coming together to observe these said ordinances, and their communion therein. But when all these are particularly mentioned, and Fellowship mentioned among them, as a thing distinct from the rest, we may not confound it with the rest. We might as well say, that by doctrine is meant Sacraments, and by Sacraments is meant Prayer; as to say that by Fellowship is meant nothing else but the exercise of doctrine, and Sacraments, and Prayer. And if these as they are distinctly named, be distinct ordinances, and may not be confounded, than Fellowship being named in the same manner imports something distinct from them all, and may not be confounded with them, nor with any of them, no more than the other may be confounded one with another. And if so, then as this Fellowship may import, the communion of their gift and goods one for the help of another, so it must first of all imply a combining of themselves into Church-state by mutual agreement, consent, or covenant. Furthermore, when the Apostle writeth, that by experience of the Corinthians liberal contribution to the poor Saints, men glorified God for their professed subjection to the Gospel of Christ, 2. Cor. 9 13. he plainly employs thereby, that the Corinthians had made a profession or promise of such subjection to the Gospel as did comprehend this particular of distributing to the necessity of the Saints, among other things. And their liberal distribution which he there speaks of, was looked at as one point of their real performance of that subjection to the Gospel, which they had before professed, and promised. Now the Church-Covenant is nothing else, but the professing or promising of such subjection, and therefore this place is another proof of Church-Covenant. Besides, it hath been showed afore in Argument 3. that those places which speak of being added to the Church, of joining, or assaying to join unto the Church, Act. 2. 47. and 5 13. and 9 26. are not expounded according to the full meaning of them, when they are understood of any other joining, if joining in Covenant be left out. And therefore the Scriptures of the New Testament do bear good witness unto Church-Covenant, though, as we said before, the Scriptures of the Old Testament might have been sufficient if the New Testament had spoken nothing of it. But Baptism makes men members of the visible Church, and therefore Obj. 8. the Covenant is needless. This is answered in the Answer to the fourth of the 32. Questions, Answ. where it is showed at large that Baptism ●● a seal of the Covenant between God and the Church, but neither makes the Church, nor members of the Church, nor always so much as proves men to be members. This Church-Covenant is a late devise, and was not known in ancient Obj. 9 time, and therefore is to be rejected. First, True Antiquity is that of the Scriptures. Now sith Answ. Church Covenant is warranted by the Scripture, as hath been showed before in this discourse, it cannot be charged to want true Antiquity. When the Papists are wont to charge the doctrine of Protestants with Novelty, and such as was never heard of before Luther, the Orthodox are wont to answer, that if the doctrine do not agree with the Scripture, then let it be condemned for Novelty; and if it do, it is warranted by the best Antiquity, even the testimony of God himself who is the Ancient of days: Our Faith, faith Doctor White, is in all points the same that is contained in the Scripture, and so consequently of the same Antiquity: and therefore all they that say it came up but of late, must first prove it contrary to the Word of God, or else hold their peace. White, Way, 44. 1. And the same we say in this particular of the Church-Covenant. Secondly, And yet they that search the Stories and Writers of the times and ages next after the Apostles, may find some testimony of Church-Covenant in those days: For instance, Justine Martyr in his Apol. 2. makes mention of three things which were required of all that were admitted into the Church as members, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is regeneration, and soundness in the Faith, and a promise to walk in obedience to the Gospel. And generally this was the practice of all those times, that never any man was admitted to Baptism, nor his children neither, but they put him to answer three questions, Abrenuntios? whereto he answered, Abrenuntio. Credis? whereto his answer was, Credo: and Spondes? to which he answered, Spondes. So that here was an open declaration of his Repentance from dead works, and of the soundness of his Faith, in the two first particulars, and an open binding himself by covenant or promise to walk according to the Gospel, in the third. But much needs not to be said in this point, unto them that do acknowledge Scripture Antiquity to be sufficient, though after times should be found to swerve from the Rules and Patterns that are therein contained. If Church-Covenant be so necessary, than all the Reformed Churches Obj. 10. are to be condemned as no Churches; for they have no such Covenant. They that have known those Churches, not only by their Answ. writings, and confessions of their faith, in Synods and otherwise; but also by living amongst them, and being eye-witnesses of their Order, do report otherwise of them, viz. that they are combined together by solemn Covenant with God and one another. Zepperus, speaking of the manner, used in the reformed Churches, in admitting the children of Church-members to the Lords Table, when they came to age, and have been sufficiently catechised, and instructed in the doctrine of Religion▪ tells us, that such children are admitted to the Lords table, by public profession of Faith, and entering into Covenant. Consuetum est, saith l●e, ut qui per atatem inque Doctrinâ Catecheticâ profectum ad sacram Coenam primum admittuntur, fidei confessionem coram totâ Ecclesiâ publice edant per parentes aut qui parentum loco sunt, jussû ministri, in Ecclesia conspectum producti: quòdque in illa confession, per Dei gratiam perstare, ac, juxta illam, vitam instituere, insuper etiam disciplina Ecclesiasticae ultrò ac spoute suâ subjicere sese velint, spondeant atque stipulentur, Polit. Eccles. lib. 1. cap. 14. p. 158. that is, The manner is, that they who by reason of age and proficiency in the doctrine of Catechism are first admitted to the Lords Supper, should publicly before the whole Church make confession of their faith, being brought forth into the sight of the Church by their parents, or them that are instead of parents, at the appointment of the Minister; and likewise should promise and covenant by the grace of God to continue in that Faith which they have confessed, and to lead their lives according to it; yea, and moreover to subject themselves freely and willingly to the discipline of the Church. These words we see are full and plain, that children are not in those Churches received to the Lords Supper, without personal confession of Faith, and entering into Covenant before; And if they took this course with children come to age, there is as much reason, or more, that the same course should be holden with men of years, when they are admitted members. And so the same Zepperus, speaking of the consociation of Churches amongst themselves by mutual confederation, hath these words, which as they may be applied to the combining of many Churches, so may they be combining of many members of the same Church, 〈◊〉 illa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, quam in Symbolo profite nunc Apostolico, nihil aliud hic requirit, & vult, quam obligationem omnium Ecclesiae membrorum & confoederationem, etc. that is, that communion of Saints which we profess in the Creed, doth require and mean nothing else but an obligation of all the members of the Church, and a binding of them together by Covenant. Polit. Eccles. li. 3 c. 8. p 721. To these testimonies of Z●pp●r●●, those words may be added of Mr. Parker our own countryman, a man of singular note for learning and holiness, who also himself lived sometimes beyond Sea in the reformed Churches, and there ended his days, so that we may safely give the more credit to his testimony, he having so good means fully to know the state and order of those Churches. Now he speaketh of a Solennis forma absque quâ in Ecclesiae alicujus communionem nullus ritè recipitur: of a solemn form, without which no man is rightly received into the communion of the Church, hath these words. Hic mos ille est reformatarum Ecclesiarum non solum in lapsis restituendis, sed in extra●eis, i●ò quibuscunque recipiendis qui ad habitandum alicubi confident, etsi fortè in Ecclesiâ illius loci quo ante commo● abantur, juxta hanc formam admissi prius fuerant. Examinat Presbyterium, plebs consentit, quisque testes vita sua secum adfert, vel testimonia sal●em: publicatur nomen cuiusque competentis pro con●io●e, admonetur quisque siquid habeat quod excipiat, ut denunciet presbyteris. Si nihil contrà adferatur, admittitur quidem, sed non nisi solerni pactione cum Deo & cum Ecclesiâ▪ Spondet verò Ecclesiae▪ se ambulaturum prout sanctam illam communionem decet; Disciplinae illius Ecclesiae subjacere velle, se fratribus illius communionis invigilaturum juxta Christi praeceptum, Matth. 18. 17. ut praeveniantur sanentur que scandala, & illi ad studium bonorum operum provehantur. That is, This is the manner of the reformed Churches, not only in restoring such as have fallen, but in admitting of strangers, yea of all whoever they be, who do sit down in any place for habitation, though perhaps they have been formerly admitted after the same manner in the Church where they have formerly dwelled; The Presbytery doth examine, the people do consent, every man brings with him witnesses of his life, or at leastwise testimonies: The name of each one that desires to be a member, is published in the Assembly, every one is admonished if he have any exception against the party, to bring it to the Presbytery. If nothing be brought against him, than indeed he is admitted; but yet no otherwise then by a solemn covenant with God and the Church; And to the Church he promiseth that he will walk as becometh that holy Fellowship, that he will be subject to the discipline of that Church, that he will watch over the brethren of that Communion, according to the Command of Christ, Mat. 18. 17. that offences may be prevented and healed, etc. Polit. Eccles lib. 3 cap. 16. § 4. Pag. 171, 172. Much more he hath to the same purpose in that place, alleging sundry Canons and Decrees of Synods of reformed Churches, wherein they have determined that none should be received into their Churches, but by this way of solemn Covenant. And others that have lived amongst them may have been eye-witnesses that this is their usual practice. But what shall be said of the Congregations in England, if Churches Obj 11. must be combined by Covenant? Doth not this doctrine blot out all those Congregations out of the Catalogue of Churches? For what ever Covenant may be found in the reformed Churches in other parts, yet it is plain that the English have none. Though we deny not but the Covenant in many of those Congregations Ans●. is more implicit and not so plain as were to be desired; (and what is amiss in them, in their materials, or in want of explicit combining of pure matter, or many of their ways, we will not take upon us to defend) yet we hope we may say of them with Master Parker, Polit. Eccles. lib 3. cap. 16. § 1. pag. 167. Non abost ea realis & substantialis (quanquam magis quam par●rat implicita) coitio in foedus, eaque voluntaria professio fidei substantialis: quâ (Deo gratia) essentiam Ecclesiae idque visibilis hacusque sartam tectam in Angliâ conservavit; That is, there wants not that real and substantial coming together, (or agreeing in Covenant, though more implicate then were meet) and that substantial profession of Faith, which (thanks be to God) hath preserved the essence of visible Churches in England unto this day. The reasons why we are loath to say, that the Congregations in England are utterly without a Covenant, are these: First, Because there were many Christian Churches in England in the Apostles time, or within a while after, as Master Fox showeth at large, Act. & Mon. lib. 2. beginning pag 137. where he reporteth out of Gildas, that England received the Gospel in the time of Tiberius the Emperor, under whom Christ suffered, and that Joseph of Arimathea was sent of Philip the Apostie from France to England about the year of Christ 63. and remained in England all his time, and so he with his fellows laid the first foundation of Christian Faith among the Britain people, and other Preachers and Teachers coming afterward, confirmed the same and increased it. Also the said Master Fox reporteth out of Tertullian, that the Gospel was dispersed abroad by the sound of the Apostles into many Nations, and amongst the rest into Britain, yea into the wildest places of Britain, which the Romans could never attain unto: and allegeth also out of Ni●●phorus, that Simon Zelotes did spread the Gospel to the West Ocean, and brought the same into the Isles of Britain: and sundry other proofs he there hath for the same point. Now if the Gospel and Christian Religion were brought into England in the Apostles times, and by their means, it is like that the English Churches were then constituted by way of Covenant, because that was the manner of constituting Churches in the Apostles time, as also in the times afore Christ, as hath been showed from the Scripture before in this discourse. And if Christian Congregations in England were in those times combined by Covenant, than eternity of God's Covenant is such, that it is not the interposition of many corruptions that may arise in after times that can disannul the same, except when men wilfully break Covenant and reject the offers of the Gospel through obstinacy, which we persuade ourselves they are not come unto: and consequently the Covenant remains which hath preserved the essence of Churches to this day; though the mixture of manifold corruptions, have made the Covenant more implicit than were meet. Secondly, Because there want no good Records (as may be seen in selden's History of Tithes) to prove that in former times in England it was free for men to pay their Tithes and Oblations where themselves pleased: Now this paying of Tithes was accounted as a duty of people to their Minister, or sheep to their Pastor: and therefore seeing this was by their own voluntary agreement and consent, their joining to the Church as members thereof, & to the Ministry thereof as sheep of such a man's flock, was also by their own voluntary agreement and consent: and this doth imply a Covenant ●● was not the precincts of Parishes that did limit men in those days, but their own choice. Thirdly, Those Questions and Answers ministered at Baptism, spoken of before, (viz. Do●st thou renounce? I do renounce: dost thou believe? I do believe: dost thou promise? I do promise) as they were used in other places, so were they also in England, and are unto this day, though not without the mixture of sundry corruptions. Now this doth imply a Covenant. And when the children came to age, they were not to be admitted to the Lords Supper, before they had made personal Confession of their own Faith, and ratified the Covenant which was made at their Baptism by their Parents, which course indeed afterward did grow into a Sacrament of Confirmation, but that was an abuse of a good Order. If here it be said, that the Members of the Parishional Assemblies are not brought in by their own voluntary profession, but by the Authority and Proclamation of the Prince, and therefore they have no such Covenant. The Answer is, that the Christian Prince doth but his duty when he doth not tolerate within his Dominions any open Idolatry, or the open worship of false Gods by baptised persons, but suppresseth the same: and likewise when he gives free liberty to the exercise of all the Ordinances of true Religion, according to the mind of Christ, with countenance also and encouragement unto all those whose hearts are willingly bend thereunto, Ezra. 1. 1. 3. & 7. 13. And therefore this practice of his cannot overthrow the freeness of men's joining in Church▪ Communion, because one duty cannot oppose nor contradict another. And suppose that this course of the Magistrate should seem to be a forcing of some to come in for members who were unfit, (in which case it were not justifiable) yet this doth not hinder the voluntary subjection of others, who with all their hearts desired it. When the Israelites departed out of Egypt, there went a mixed multitude with them, many going with them that were not Israelites indeed, Exod. 12. And in the days of Mordecay and Hesther, many of the people of the lands became Jews, when the Jews were in favour and respect, Est. 8. 17. and so joined to them not of their own voluntary mind, nor of any sincere heart towards God, but merely for the favour or ●eare of men; yet this forced or seined joining of some could not hinder those that were Israelites indeed from being Israelites, nor make the Jews to be no Jews, no Church-members. And the same may be said in this case, Suppose the Magistrates Proclamation should be a cause, or an occasion rather, of bringing some into the Church, who came not of their own voluntary mind, but for fear, or for obtaining favour, yet this cannot hinder, but others might voluntarily and freely Covenant to be subject to the Gospel of Christ: Such subjection and the promise of it being the thing which themselves did heartily desire, though the Magistrate should have said nothing in it. If any shall hereupon infer, that if the Parishional Assemblies be Churches, than the members of them may be admitted to Church privileges in New England, before they join to our Churches: Such one may find his Answer in the Answer to the tenth of the thirty-two Questions; Whereunto we do refer the Reader for this point. Only adding this, that this were contrary to the judgement and practice of the Reformed Churches, who do not admit a man for member without personal profession of his Faith, and joining in Covenant, though he had formerly been a member of a Church in another place, as was showed before out of Master Parker. Lastly, If any say, that if these reasons prove the English Congregations to have such a Covenant as proves them to be Churches, then why may not Rome, and the Assemblies of Papists go for true Churches also? For some man may think that the same things may be said for them that here in Answer to this eleventh Objection are said for the Parishes in England: Such one must remember two things: first, that we do not say simply, a Covenant makes a company a true Church, but (as was said before) a Covenant to walk in such ways of worship to God and edification of one another, as the Gospel of Christ requireth. For who doubts▪ but there may be an agreement among thiefs, Pro. 1. A confederation among God's enemies, Psal. 83. A conspiracy among the Arabians, the Ammonites and Ashdodites, to hinder the building of Jerusalem, Neh. 4. 7, 8. And yet none of these are made true Churches by such kind of confederacies or agreements. And so we may say of the Assemblies of Papists, especially since the Counsel of Trent. If there be any agreement or confederacy among them, it is not to walk in the ways of the Gospel, but in ways contrary to the fundamental truths of the Gospel, as Idolatry in worship, Heresy in doctrine, and other Antichristian pollutions and corruptions: and therefore if they combined in these things, such combinations will never prove them true Churches. The Church is the Pillar and ground of truth, 1 Tim. 3. 15. But the Religion of Papists is so far from truth, that whosoever liveth and believeth according to it, without repentance, cannot be saved. Witness their doctrine in the point of vilifying the Scriptures, and in point of freewill, and of Justification by works, of the Pope's Supremacy, of the Sacrifice of the Mass, of worshipping of Images, etc. In regard of which, and such like, the Holy Ghost saith, that their Religion is a Sea, become as the blood of a dead man, and every soul in that Sea dyeth, Rev. 16. 3. And therefore agreement in such a Religion will never prove them to be true Churches; nor any Assemblies of Arrians, Antitrinitaries, Anabaptists, or Famelists, supposing them also to be combined by Covenant among themselves. But now for the Assemblies in England, the case is far otherwise; for the Doctrine of the Articles of Religion which they profess, and which they promise to hold and observe (though some things are amiss in some of those Articles, and though many persons live contrary in their lives) yet the doctrine is such that whosoever believeth, and liveth according to it, shall undoubtedly be saved, and many thousands have been saved therein▪ and therefore Assemblies united by Covenant to observe this doctrine may be true Churches, when the Assemblies of Papists and others may be false, although they also were combined by Covenant: the reason of the difference rising from the difference that is in the doctrine and Religion which they severally profess, and by Covenant bind themselves to observe, the one being fundamentally corrupt, and consequently pernicious: The other in the fundamental points Orthodoxal and sound. Secondly, It must be remembered also (which was intimated before) that if fundamental corruptions be professed in with impenitency and obstinacy, than God may disannul the Covenant on his part, and give a Bill of divorce to such a people, Jere. 3. 8. Now experience and the Scripture also doth witness of the Jesuited and Trent-Papists, that they repented not of the works of their hands, of worshipping Devils, and Idols of Gold, etc. neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornications, nor of their thefts, Rev. 9 20, 21. But now for the Parish Assemblies in England, we hope that we may safely say, they do not sin of obstinacy, but of ignorance, having not been convinced (and many of them never having had means to be convinced) of the corruptions that are amongst them, in respect of their constitution, and worship, and Ministry, and so the Covenant remaining among them, may prove them to be Churches, when it cannot stand the Papists in like stead, they being impenitent and obstinate: Which we do not speak to justify the Parishes altogether, as if there were not dangerous corruptions found in them, nay rather (the Lord be merciful to the sins of his people) we may lament it with tears, that in respect of their members and Ministry, in respect of their worship and walkings, in many of those Assemblies there are found such apparent corruptions, as are justly grievous to a godly soul, that is enlightened to discern them, and greatly displeasing to the Lord, and indeed had need to be repent of betime, lest otherwise the Lord remove the Candlestick and unchurch them, Rev. 2. 5. In a word, the corruptions remaining are just causes of repentance and humiliation: but yet in as much as the Articles of Religion, which they profess, contain such wholesome doctrine, that whosoever believeth and walketh according thereunto, in sincerity, shall undoubtedly be saved, and in as much as the corruptions are not persisted in with obstinacy, therefore we deny not but they have the truth of Churches remaining. But this opinion of Church-Covenant, is holden by none but the Obj. 12. Brownists, or those of the Separation, and therefore it is not to be received. This ground cannot be made good, that none but they of the Answ. Separation are for Church-Covenant, for all the Reformed Churches generally, as was showed before in Answer to Objection the tenth, are for it in their judgement & practice; and shall all they be condemned for * By Brownists and Separatists you are to understand those of the riged Separation. Brownists, or maintaining unlawful Separation from the Church? Also Master Parker and Doctor Ames, men of our own Nation, famous for holiness and learning, and moderation, both of them plead for Church-Covenant, and yet neither of them were Brownists, but bare witness against that riged Separation. For Doctor Ames, his judgement of Church-Covenant may be seen in his Medulla, Theol. lib. 1. cap. 32. § 14, 15, 17. Fideles non constitunt Ecclesiam particularem, quamvis simul forsan plures in eodem loco conveniant aut vivant, nisi speciali vinculo intersese conjunguntur, etc. That is, believers do not make a particular Church, though perhaps there be many of them that meet▪ together, and live in the same place, unless they be joined together by some special bond amongst themselves: for so one Church would many times be dissolved into many, and many Churches confounded into one. Now this bond is a Covenant, either expressed or implicit, whereby believers do bind themselves particularly to perform all such duties, both towards God and mutually to one another, as pertain to the nature of a Church, and their edification. And thereupon no man is rightly admitted into the Church, but by confession of his Faith, and stipulation, or promise of obedience. These words do plainly and fully show his judgement of Church-Covenant, to be the very same that is held and practised in New-England at this day. And that he was not for that severity and regiditie of separation, may be cleared from sundry of his works, wherein he plainly and fully bears witness against the same, and namely, in his Fresh suit against Ceremonies, pag. 207. and in his second Manuduction, wherein he purposely and at large deals in this Argument of Separation. Sure it is Master Can in his Book, wherein he goes about to prove the necessity of separation from the Non-Conformists principles, doth professedly and expressly oppose himself against Doctor Ames in the point of Separation, which shows how far the good Doctor was from favouring that way, when they most zealously therein do count him to be a special opposite of theirs, as indeed he was. And for Master Parker, his judgement of Church-Covenant was heard before in part; where he so much approveth the practice of the Reformed Churches in this point. And much more may be seen of his judgement herein, in the sixteenth Chap. of the third book of his Polit. Ecclesiastica. And yet in the same place, and likewise lib 1. cap. 13. 14. of the same Treatise he plentifully and plainly shows his dislike of the ways of Separation, as is also acknowledged in an Admonition to the Reader, prefixed before that Book, by I. R. suo, suorumque nomine. So that this Assertion appears to be untrue, wherein it is said, that none but Brownists and Separatists do approve of Church-Covenant. As for the Inference from this ground, that therefore Church-Covenant should not be received, because it is pleaded for and practised by the Separatists. We Answer, that this will not follow, unless it could be proved, that the Separatists hold no truth; or if they hold a truth we must not hold it, that so it may appear we differ from them; Either of which, it were unreasonable to affirm. If the Papists hold sundry Articles of Faith, as that there is a unity of the Divine Essence, and Trinity of Persons, that Jesus Christ is God and man, and that true Messiah that was promised, and the only Saviour of the world, and many such like, must we deny these things because they are holden by the Papists? This were as unreasonable as to condemn the doctrine of the Resurrection, because it was maintained by the Pharisees, Act. 23. 8. And so we say of Church-Covenant, holden and practised by them of the Separation; as also many other truths are maintained by them: No reason that truth should be refused, because the Separatists maintain it. When Doctor Bancroft in a Sermon at Pauls-Crosse, had avouched that the Superiority of Bishops above other Ministers, is by Gods own Ordinance, and to make the contrary opinion odious, affirmed that Aerius persisting in it, was condemned for an Heretic by the general consent of the whole Church, and that Martin and his Companions, do maintain the same opinion of Aerius; What saith learned Doctor Reinolds hereunto, in a Letter to Sir Francis Knolls, who required him to show his judgement herein: Touching Martin, saith he, if any man behave himself otherwise then in discretion and charity he ought, let the blame be laid where the fault is, and defend him not; but if by the way he utter a truth, mingled with whatsoever else, it is not reason that that which is of GOD should be condemned for that which is of man: no more than the doctrine of the Resurrection should be reproved, because it was maintained and held by the Pharisees: Wherefore removing the odious name of Martin from that which is sincerity and love, is to be dealt with, etc. And the very same do we say to them that would make Church-Covenant to be odious, because it is held by those of the Separation, who are commonly called Brownists: If men behave themselves otherwise then they ought, we defend them not therein, but if they hold any truth mingled with whatsoever else, we would not have that which is of God to be condemned, for that which is of man: truth should not be refused, because of other corruptions that may be found in them that hold it. If you with them hold Church-Covenant, you justify them in all Reply. their ways of separation and erroneous opinions. Not so, for many of them hold that there are no visible Christians Answ. that stand members of the Parishes in England, and that it is not lawful to hold any private Religious communion with such persons; and that the parishional Assemblies are none of them true Churches, and that it is not lawful to hear any of those Ministers to preach the Word, none of which are justified at all by holding Church-Covenant, though they do hold the same; There is no such necessary and inseparable connexion between these opinions, and that of Church-Covenant, that he that holds this, must needs hold the other also. But the time hath been, when yourselves did not hold Church-Covenant, Obje. 13. as now you do; when you were in England you were not of this mind, and therefore no marvel if your change since your coming to New England be suspected, and offensive. If you change your judgement and practice in this manner, God knows whether you may come at last, and therefore men may well be afraid of holding with you in this point, which yourselves did not hold when you lived in your native Country. Some of us when we were in England, through the mercy of Answ. God, did see the necessity of Church-Covenant; and did also preach it to the people amongst whom we ministered, though neither so soon nor so fully as were meet, for which we have cause to be humbled, and to judge ourselves before the Lord. But suppose we had never known nor practised the same before our coming into this country, yet if it be a truth of God, there is no reason why we should shut our eyes against the light, when God holds it forth unto us, nor that others should be offended at us for receiving the same. For by the same reason men might still continue in their sins, and not make any progress in knowledge and holiness, that so they may not seem unconstant, which were contrary to the Scripture, wherein we are commanded nor to fashion ourselves according to the former lusts of our ignorance. 1. Pet. 1. 14. But to be changed, Rom. 12. 2. and renewed, Ephes. 4. 23. and put off the old man, and put on the new, Ephes. 4. yea to grow in grace and holiness, 2. Pet. 3. 18. and be stronger and stronger, Job 17. 9 that our good works may be more at the last, then at the first, Revel. 2. 19 Sure it is, the Apostle tells the Corinthians and Ephesians, that the time had been when they were not the same men that now they are when he wrote unto them; and yet he doth not blame them for leaving their former opinions or practice, but commends them for it, 1. Cor. 6. 11. Ephes. 2. 3. etc. And it is said of Apollo's an eloquent man, and mighty in the Scripture, that when he came to Ephesus the way of God was expounded unto him more perfectly by Aquila and Priscilla, whereas before he was instructed in the way of the Lord, knowing only the Baptism of John: yet this was no dispraise at all to him, that now upon better information he would change his judgement to the better, nor unto them that were the means thereof: Act. 18. 25, 26. Nullus pudor est ad maliura transire. The time hath been, (and we may be humbled for it) when we lived without God in the world, and some of us in many sinful courses: and shall any be offended, because we are not still the same? and when God called us from the ways of sin and death, to the Fellowship of his grace in Christ; yet some of us lived a long time in conformity to the ceremonies imposed in our native Country, and saw not the evil of them. But when God did open our eyes, and let us see the unlawfulness thereof, we cannot see but it would have been a withholding the truth in unrighteousness, and a great unthankfulness to God for light revealed to us, if we should still have continued in that course through an inordinate desire of seeming constant: and therefore it is not any just cause of offence that we have changed our judgement and practice in those things, when we once perceived the Word of God to disallow them. Indeed it hath been sometime objected against Mr. Cartwright, and others, that desired the reformation of the Churches in England, in regard of Discipline and Church-Order, that they which stood so much for Reformation in Discipline, did in after times add and alter some things, beyond what they saw at first, and what themselves had formerly desired; and that therefore being so murable, and inconstant in their apprehensions, they were not to be regarded, nor harkened unto: to which Objection Mr. Pa●k●r makes full Answer in Eccles. lib. 2. ca 36. p. 307▪ where he showeth from the Scripture, and the testimony of Bishop Jewel, Doctor Reinolds, and others, that in the Reformation of Religion God brings not his servants into perfection in knowledge and zeal at the first, but by degrees, so as they grow and make progress in these things in such wise, that their good works are more at the last then at the first, as was said of the Church of Thyatira, even as the man that had been blind, when Christ ●● stored him to his sight, could at the first but see men like tr●… walking, and afterward saw every man clearly; and therefore●… is no good arguing to say these men have altered and correc●… such things from what their apprehensions were at first, and therefore they are not to be regarded. Now if this be no good arguing against Mr. Cartwright, and those that in England have been studious of Reformation (as indeed it is not) than it is no good Argument against us in this m●●ter of Church-Covenant, to say we now hold and practise otherwise then we have done in former time. If any shall here reply, that change from conformity to the ceremonies Reply. to worship God more purely is warranted by the Word, and therefore not blame-worthy, and that the same may be said of the case of Apollo's, of the Corinthians, and Ephesians forementioned, and of Cartwright, and the rest in his times. We answer, that this is true, and thereby it appears, that it is not Answ. simply the changing a man's opinion or practice that can be counted blame-worthy, or offensive, but changing without warrant of the Word; and therefore in point of Church-Covenant, the iss●● must not be whether we or others have formerly known and practised it, but whether it have ground from God's Word; For if it have (as we hope have been proved before in this discourse) than the observing of it, can be no cause of just offence unto others, not imputation of inconstancy to ourselves, though in time passed we had not had so much light as to discern the necessity and use thereof. The good Lord pardon every one that prepareth his heart to seek God, though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the Sanctuary: and grant unto all his Churches and servants▪ that their love may abound yet more and more in knowledge, and in all judgement, that they may discern the things that differ▪ and approve the things that are excellent, and by his Spirit of truth be led forward into all truth, till Antichrist be utterly consumed with the breath of his mouth, and the brightness of his coming, and the holy City new Jerusalem come down from God out of heaven, as a Bride adorned for her husband the Lamb, the Lord Jesus, to whom be all glory of affiance and service for ever. Amen. FINIS.