A LETTER From One in the Country, Concerning some of the Present Differen●es.  
WE in the Country have seen the late Books Printed about Church Discipline, and have had thoughts of Heart what it may come to if proceeded in Be sure neither, the times nor our, Churches will bear any way or side contended for, if stretched to the utmost Latitude. Some have been considering how to accommodate the Principles contended for, and to bring them together again. Among the rest, I have made an Essay. As for the wild excrescencies or hard Reflections I concern not my, self with them: Love and Humility and Self denial exercised will cure them. And when the heat is over, they that are most active in Grace will bewail them first.  
I find Seventeen Questions Debated, and by either side strained through zeal of Spirit, if I may so call it. My endeavour is to pick up the Truth granted by each, in which, I would have all Moderate Persons agree; and all see how little disagreement there is, notwithstanding the great noise of Contention.  
The First Question proposed in Gospel Order Vindicated, is, Whether Particular Churches ought to consist of Saints& true Believers in Christ?  
Here we find a full agreement in the Words of the United Brethren in London. Gospel Order Vindicated mentions the Article: That none shall be Admitted as Members in order to Communion in all the Special Ordinances of the Gospel, but such persons as are knowing and sound, in the Fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Religion, without ●candal in their lives, and to a judgement regulated by the Word of God are persons of visible Godliness and Honesty, credibly professing cordial subjection to Jesus Christ.  
This Gospel Order Revived professes for, and acquiesces in; here is good agreement, let us leave the rest.  
The Second Question, Whether there ought not to be a trial of pere sons concerning their Qualifications of fitness for Church Communion before they are admitted thereunto?  
The Affirmative of this is pleaded for in Gospel Order Vindicated, and fully consented to in Gospel Order Revived. Here there is no difference nor pretence for it.  
The Third Question. Whether are not the Brethren and not the Elders of the Church only, to judge concerning the Qualifications and fitness of these who are admitted into their Communion?  
The Reverend Author of Gospel Order Vindicated supposes that there may be some difference of apprehension here, and yet without 〈…〉 find also in the Defence of Evangelical Churches,( to which the same Reverend Author subscribes) page. 30, 31. We readily grant, That the Elders of the Churches are to be the Rulers of them. And that it is a gross piece of Merellian and Brownistical Anarchy for the Votes of the Brethren to be valid without their Concurrence, and that the Brethren taking the work out of their hands is very offensive to the God of Order. I find in Gospel, Order Revived, that they pled not to have the Brethren excluded from all acting: But that the Apostle would have every one to keep his proper place and sphere, and do his own Work, the Eldership theirs, and the Brethren theirs. And moreover I find that they think it fit to have Members proposed to the Congregation, that they may either consent or object. If each be candidly interpnted, either there is no difference, or the difference is very minute.  
Qu. 4. Whether is it necessary that persons at their Admission into the Church should make a public Relation of the time and manner of their Conversion?  
This Question in Gospel Order Vindicated, is answered negatively: And in Gospel Order Revived, the Answer is assented to and highly approved. In after discourses there seems to be some difference, but as far as I can understand, One part stands for that, that it ought not to be imposed, and the other, that it may be practised where it is useful and edifying; Both which may be consistent.  
Quest. 5. Hath the Church Covenant as commonly practised in the Churches of Now England, any Scripture Foundation?  
The Answer to this Question may at first view seem to contain great difference, it did so to me. But after I had looked into it, I quickly perceived the Reverend Authors might easily be reconciled in this matter. Gospel Order Vindicated pleads hard for a Church Covenant, but in the explication and pleas for it, I find it reduced to much such a Covenant as Israel was in of old, and sometimes to a public profession of Faith, and a promise to walk according thereunto. And I find in that fore quoted Book, A Defence of Evangelical Churches, Subscribed by the Reverend Author and his Son. page. 40. For our Church Covenant is nothing else but an acknowledgement of our obligations unto those duties which become incumbent on us, as relating unto such or such a Church of His, No man that knows any thing ever took it for any other. As much is owned and pleaded for in Gospel Order Revived. page. 11.  
Quest. 6. Is public Reading of the Scriptures without any Explication or Exhortation therewith, part of the Work incumbent on a Minister of the Gospel? Give me leave to join to this the Sixteenth Question, in that the same Comment may indifferently serve either.  
Quest. 16. Is it the duty for Christians in their Prayers, to make use of the words of that which is commonly called. The Lord's Prayer?  
In answer to the first, in Gospel Order Vindicated, tis said the Question is not whether such Readings are lawful, for who doubts that? 〈…〉 it is lawful to make use of those words in prayer. No man can rotionally doubt but that the words in that, as well as the words of other Prayers in the Scripture may be made use of in our Addresses to Heaven. The Questions being not about their lawfulness or unlawfulness, it must be about their expediency, when things lawful are expedient. And if this were the Question, it is like there would be no disagreement, or besure none that need make any difference in any of our Churches.  
Quest. 7. Is Baptism to be administered to all Children whom any professed Christian shall engage to see Educated in the Christian Religion?  
Gospel Order Vindicated, or the Rd. Author of it saith, if the Question were only whether all Children adopted by Believing Parents might not be Baptized, we should not oppose. Gospel Order Revived saith, on this we declare ourselves satisfied, and crave no more. There is under this head a large discourse upon another Question: Who are Professed Christians? But I do not see but that one part takes it as narrow as the other.  
Quest. 8. Is Baptism in a private house where there is no Church Assembly allowable?  
Gospel Order Revived saith, We agree with the Reverend Author, That Baptism is a part of the public Ministry, nor may it be administered by one who is not Called to the public Ministry; neither should it usually or ordinarily be administered but in a full Congregation, nor would we drop a word to discourage so pious a practise. I cannot see that the Reverend Author of Gospel Order Vindicated, can by his Question and Answer drive at any more than what is yielded.  
Quest. 9. Ought all that contribute towards the Maintenance to have the privilege of Voting to the Election of a Pastor?  
Here we find some good agreement: Gospel Order Revived speaking of the Reverend Author of the other Book, saith, and under his fourth argument he tells us, that nothing is more evident than that in the First Ages of the Church, Pastors were Chosen by all and only their Flocks, which we verily believe. Nor could he have expressed the truth in more apt words. This seems to be the sense of both; if there should arise difference about the latitude of the Flock, Churches must exercise prudence to preserve peace.  
Quest. 10. Is it expedient that Churches should enter into a Consociation or Agreement that matters of more than ordinary importance, such as Gathering of a New Church, the Ordination, Deposi ion or Translation of a Pastor he done with Common consent?  
All the difference in Answer to this as far as I can find is, that the one pleads, that it is Expedient to enter into a Conlociation and Agreement, and the other, that they are already bound by virtue of their profession and Christian Covenant: And, what if it be yielded that they are already bound, and may sometimes have occasion to renew their bonds?  
Quest. 11. May the Brethren in Churches and not the Pastors only be sent 〈…〉 their Voice in Ecclesiastical Councils?  
〈…〉 the Pastors should be Principal or Principally concerned. I do not 〈◇〉 that Gospel Order Revived doth wholly exclude the Brethren from such Councils, but rather admits them for some ends or use or benefit, though not of equal Voice.  
Quest. 12. Does the Essence of a Ministers Call consist in his being Ordained with the Imposition of hands by other Ministers?  
In Gospel Order Revived, this is joined with the next,& for brevity sake, I shall follow the same method.  
Quest. 13. May a man be Ordained a Pastor except to a Particular Church, and in the presence of that Church?  
I find the greatest difficulty to show the plain& distinct Agreement in the Answers to these Questions of any, But I shall Essay it. As it is most certain that a Minister may be considered under a double Relation, the One referring to Christ and him whereby he is Christs Minister, and the other referring to the particular Flock to which he is Ordinarily appropriated, and so is theirs; as this double relation is true, so I find it owned of both sides. The Reverend Author of Gospel Order Vindicated, though he speaks mostly of that relation to the Church, yet he doth in some measure own the other here, and in his other writings more fully. So Gospel order Revived though it speaks mostly respecting the Relation betwixt Christ and the Minister, yet they own the other Relation also. Now, let what is spoken one way or other be given to the respective Relations only, and the difference will presently cease.  
Quest. 14. Is the practise of the Churches of New England in granting Letters of Recommendation, or Dismission from one Church to another according to Scripture, and the examples of other Churches?  
I take notice of a passage that the Reverend Author of Gospel Order Vindicated lays down in his Answer hereunto towards the latter end. By the Letters in Controversy nothing else is intended but Letters Testimonial from some Church of Christ, or the Elders thereof concerning some of their Communion Removing from them to another People, be it for lesser or longer time. I find it said in Gospel Order Revived. Indeed there may be a good use of Letters of Recommendation& especially among Strangers: And this I think agrees well with the other.  
Quest. 15 Is not the asserting that a Pastor may Administer the Sacrament to another Church besides his own particular Flock, at the desire of that other Church, a declension from the first Principles of New-England, & of the Congregational way?  
The Reverend Author Answers not at all. Gospel Order Revived saith it is no declension from Truth, but agreeable to it. And why not both agree, it is no declension from either.  
Quest. 17. May the Churches under the Presbyterian and Congregational Discipline maintain Communion with one another notwithstanding their differing Sentiments as to Church Government?  
The Reverend Author Answers, They may and ought to do so. Gospel Order Revived highly approves of the Answer, and doctrine of it.  
And now it appears there is a very Tolerable and Comfortable Agreement in Principles: And why then should height or heat of Spirit hinder our walking together, and good Agreement? It is desired that all that love ZION would put in and forward our Peace and Concord, and Fellowship in the Gospel.  
IRENEUS ALETHEIAN