CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 1891 BY HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE Cornell University Library BX7240 .W18 Creeds and platforms of Congreaationalis olin 3 1924 029 457 615 Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029457615 THE CREEDS AND PLATFORMS OP CONGREGATIONALISM BY WILLISTON WALKER, Ph.D. PROFESSOR IN HARTFORD THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY NEW YORK CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 1893 -3/ 724(3 006 fJriTe-ZVM,- Copyright, 1893, by Williston Walker. ^' ,c^ ^l, ^^ h Press 0/ The Case, Lockwood b? Brainard Company, Hari/ord, Conn. TO MY FATHER GEORGE LEON WALKER WHOSE INTEREST IN CONGREGATIONAL HISTORY FIRST AWAKENED MY DESIRE TO KNOW SOMETHING OF Congrcgattonal CrecDs an& iplatforms AND WHOSE SYMPATHY HAS ENCOURAGED ME THROUGHOUT THESE STUDIES THIS VOLUME IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED PREFACE CONGREGATIONALISM has always accorded large liberty to local churches in their interpretation of doctrine and polity. Its creeds are not exclusively binding, and its platforms have always been held to be open to revision. They have been witnesses to the faith and practice of the churches rather than tests for subscription. But by reason of this liberty a collection of Congregational creeds and platforms illustrates the history of the body whose expressions they are better than if those symbols were less readily amended. The points wherein they agree may therefore confidently be believed to set forth that which is abiding in the faith and practice of the churches, while the features of change and the traces of discussion of more tem- porary importance which these creeds and platforms exhibit illustrate as clearly that which is mutable in our ecclesiastical life. It is because the writer deems such a collection of prime value in illuminating the history of Congregationalism that this compilation has been made. This volume has grown out of the experiences of the class- room. In his endeavors to teach the story of Congregation- alism the writer has been hindered at all points by the inaccessi- bility of much of the material which must be before the student or the minister if a knowledge of denominational history is to be more than second hand. He has therefore collected the most important Congregational creeds and plat- forms, and has illustrated them as far as he is able by such historic notes and comments as may serve to make the circum- stances of their composition and their meaning plain. He has had in mind the necessities of the general reader whose knowl- edge of the sources of our denominational history is rudimentary, and has endeavored to point out with the utmost plainness the basis of every important statement, and to indicate the literature of each symbol, hoping that by this fullness of annotation the student may find his way comparatively readily should he (V) VI PREFACE desire to make a minute study of Congregational beliefs and usages. In reproducing these symbols the writer has reprinted the text of the earliest editions known to him to be extant. He has endeavored faithfully to reproduce the spelling and punctua- tion, and even the misprints, deeming that the dress in which these documents were presented to the world, sometimes by persecuted congregations and with the scantiest resources, is of value in forming our estimate of the impression which they were calculated to produce on their time. That the writer has wholly avoided misprints of his own in this reproduction he hardly dares to hope, — he has used great pains so to do; — but he trusts that before the reader condemns an illprinted passage it may be compared with the original to see if the fault was not that of the earliest printer. The writer is under obligation to many scholars for sugges- tions, but he would especially acknowledge his indebtedness to the librarians of the American Antiquarian Society at Worces- ter, the Public Library at Boston, the Connecticut Historical Society and Watkinson Library at Hartford, the Massachusetts Historical Society at Boston, and of Yale University, for the access which they have afforded him to the treasures in their custody. This volume is sent forth with the hope that it may serve to make easier the pathway to a knowledge of Congregational history, and may illustrate the essential unity as well as the healthful growth which has marked the development of creed and practice from the founders of Congregationalism to our own day. Hartford, Conn., July ij, -i&pj CONTENTS PAGE I. Robert Browne's Statement of Congregational Prin- ciples, 1582, 1-27 Extracts from Browne's Works, ..... 18-27 II. The First Confession of the London-Amsterdam Church, 1589, 28-40 Text of the Confession, 33-40 III. The Second Confession of the London-Amsterdam Church, 1596, 41-74 Text of the Confession, ....... 49-74 IV. The Points of Difference between Congregationalism and the Church of England, 1603, . . . 75-80 Text of the Points, 77-8o V. The Seven Articles of 1617 and the Mayflower Com- pact OF 1620, 81-92 Text of the Articles, ....... 89, 90 Text of the Compact, ....... 92 VI. The Development of Covenant and Creed in the Salem Church, 1629-1665, 93-122 Texts of the Covenants of 1629 and 1636, . . 116-118 The Anti-Quaker Article of 1660-1, 118 Text of the Direction of 1665, iig-122 VII. The Covenant of the Charlestown-Boston Church, 1630 123-131 Text of the Covenant, 131 VIII. Hooker's Summary of Congregational Principles, 1645, 132-148 Extracts from the "Survey," 143-148 IX. The Windsor Creed-Covenant, 1647, .... 149-156 Text of the Covenant, ....... 154-156 X. The Cambridge Synod and Platform, 1646-1648, . . 157-237 Extracts from the Tentative Conclusions of 1646, . . 189-193 Preface and Text of the Platform 194-237 XI. The Half-Way Covenant Decisions of 1657 and 1662, 238-339 Extracts from the Result of 1657, . '. "7 . . 288-300 Text of the Conclusions of 1662, 301-339 (vii) • VIU CONTENTS PAGE XII. The Savoy Declaration, 1658, 340-408 Preface 354-367 Text of the Confession, 367-402 The Platform of Polity, 403-408 XIII. The "Reforming Synod" of 1679-1680, and its Con- fession OF Faith, .....•■ 409-"439 Text of the "Necessity of Reformation," . . ■ 423-437 Preface to the Confession, 438, 439 Text of the Confession (Savoy Confession and notes), . 367-402 XIV. The " Heads of Agreement," 1691, and other Union Efforts of the Seventeeth Century, . . 440-462 Extracts from the Agreement of 1656, .... 453,454 Preface and text of the "Heads," ..... 455-462 XV. The Massachusetts Proposals of 1705, and the Say- brook Platform of 1708, 463-523 Text of the Proposals, ....... 486-490 Prefaces to the Saybrook Result, ..... 517-523 Text of the Platform, 503-506 XVI. The "Plan of Union," 1801, 524-541 Text of the Plan 530, 531 XVII. The English Declaration of 1833, 542-552 Text of the Declaration 548-552 XVIII. The "Burial Hill" Declaration of ^Faith ; and the Statement of Principles of Polity, 1865, . . 553-569 Text of the Declaration, ....... 562-564 Text of the Statement, 567, 568 XIX. The Constitution of the National Council, and Ober- LiN Declaration, 1871, 570-576 Text of the Constitution, ...... 572-574 Text of the Declaration, ....... 575, 576 XX. The "Commission" Creed of 1883 577-584 Text of the Creed, . . . . . . . . 580-582 Index 585-604 I ROBERT BROWNE'S STATEMENT OF CONGRE- GATIONAL PRINCIPLES, 1582 Text I. A Booke I which Sheweth the \ life and matmers of all true Christians^ \ and Iiowe vntike they are vnto Turkes and Papistes, \ and Heathen folke. \ Also the pointes and partes of all diui- \ nitie, that is of the reuealed will and worde of God, are \ declared by their seuerall DefinitionSy \ and Diuisions in order as ] fol- loweth. I Robert Browne. \ Middelbvrgh, \ Imprinted by Ricliarde Painter. \ ijSs. 40, pp. III. II. A few of the sections, extracted from Browne's work, are given in Han- bury, Historical Memorials Relating to the Independents, etc., London 1839, I- ^o- 22; in Fletcher, History . . . of Independency, London 1862, II; 114-117; and in Punchard, History of Congregationalism, Boston [1867], III; 14-17. Literature The works of Hanbury, Fletcher, and Punchard, above cited; [VVaddington], Historical Papers, London 1861, pp. 33—48; Waddington, Congregational History, ijdy—i'/oo, London 1874, p. i5 ; Bacon, Genesis of the New England Churches, New York 1874, pp. 8i-go; Browne, History of Congregationalism . . . in Norfolk and Suffolk, London 1877, chs. I-III; Dexter, Tlie Congregationalism of the last three hundred years, as seen in its Literature, New York 1880, pp. 61-128. MODERN Congregationalism is a legitimate outcome of a consistent application to church polity of the principles of the Reformation. The fundamental religious thought of that movement was the rejection of all authority save that of the Word of God. But, while this cardinal principle was recognized by all the reformers, there was great variety in the extent to which they carried its application. All of them agreed that the will of God had prescribed in the Bible the sufficient test of Christian doctrine, but none of the reformers of the first rank felt the neces- sity of a complete conformity of their systems of church polity to the same standard. The paramount importance of doctrinal re- form, the necessity for the orderly control of the church in the trying period of transition from its ancient form, and especially the disorders which the advent of ecclesiastical freedom excited (O 2 BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM among the lower classes, induced Luther and Zwingli, neither of whom were organizers by nature, to put aside their early inclina- tions toward the substantially Congregational system' which they recognized in the New Testament example, in favor of a would-be temporary dependence on the civil rulers of the lands in which they lived for the organization of their new churches. Calvin was an organizer, and though he sought scripture warrant for the sys- tem which he established, he seems to have been led to its adoption largely by the necessities of his position in the foremost outpost of Protestantism at Geneva; and he admitted, on one occasion at least, that his eldership was primarily a device of expediency." And if these men did not fully recognize that the legitimate out- come of the principles of the Reformation was the test of church government as well as Christian doctrine by the standard of the Bible, this truth was even less clearly perceived in England, where the state Establishment which was the Outcome of the Reforma- tion was designedly a compromise, in which a large portion of the ancient government and ceremonial was retained, and in which the fountain of ecclesiastical authority was the sovereign. But if the leaders of the Reformation thus fell short of a full application of their principles, there were those from almost the beginning of the movement who sought to go further. • These men, nicknamed usually by their opponents the "Anabaptists,"' first came to notice about 1523-4" in the portions of Switzerland which had felt the reforming touch of Zwingli. Persecuted at once by Protestants and Catholics, they were dispersed with great rapidity all over Germany and the Netherlands and came even to England.* They were drawn chiefly from the lower orders of the population, and were often characterized by extreme fanaticism.* 1 See inter alia, Gieseler, Church History, ed, New York 1876, IV: 518; Fisher, Reforma- tion, pp. 488-495; Dexter, Cong, as seen, p. 51 ; Scliaff, Hist. 0/ the Christian Church, VI : 538. "^ For valuable quotations illustrative of this point see Dexter, Ibid., pp. 52, 53. ^ I. e., " Re-baptizers," because they held infant baptism no baptism. * See the valuable paper of Rev. Dr. Burrage, A nabaptists of the Sixteenth Century, Papers of the Am. Soc. Church Hist., Ill: 145-164. Keller in his suggestive Die Reformation und die dlteren Rcformpartcien, Leipzig 1885, holds, as many others have done, the Anabaptists to be successors of mediaeval sects, but his thesis is not fully proven. ^ As early as 1535 fourteen were burned in one year in England. Executions continued un- der English Protestant sovereigns, e. g. under Elizabeth in 1575, and James in 1612. 8 The most conspicuous illustration is of course the Miinster anarchy, 1532-5. ANABAPTIST PRINCIPLES 3 But the fanatics were only a fraction of the Anabaptists, and under the lead of men like Menno Simons,' in Holland especially, they settled down into orderly and valuable citizens.^ They were everywhere marked by a desire to carry the principles of the Reformation to their logical outcome, and hence they tried to test not only doctrine but polity and Christian life by the same rule. The natural tendency of men to put differing constructions on the same facts of revelation, increased in their case by the ignorance of a great part of the body and an inclination to lay stress on the direct illumination of the believers by the Holy Spirit, led to diver- sities of belief among them, so that we can lay down no rigid creed for the Anabaptists as a whole; but thfere were certain features in their beliefs which appear also in the views of the Baptists, the Quakers, and the Congregationalists.^ The Protestant bodies founded by the great reformers of the sixteenth century were all at one in recognizing every baptized person, residing within the territories where they were established and not formally excommunicate, as a church member. Church and state were practically co-extensive. Even the Puritans of England, who labored under Elizabeth for the purification and full Protestantizing of the Establishment, and from whom the majority of early Congregationalists were to come, held to the church- membership of all non-excommunicate Englishmen, and looked upon the true method of reform as a vigorous purging from within by the rigid enforcement of discipline, the appointment of the officers whom they believed to be designated in the Scripture model, and the aid of civil magistrates, rather than a separation from the national church.* The Anabaptists, on the other hand, maintained that a church was a company of Christian believers, gathered out of the world,' to which men were admitted by con- ' 1492-1559- 2 See the articles by Prof, de Hoop Scheffer on Menno and the Mennonites in the Herzog Real-Encyclopddie fit-r protestantiscke Tkeologie^ Leipzig, 1881 (briefly abridged in the SchafF- Herzog, Encyclopcedia^ New York [1882]). 3 This relation has been positively, perhaps too positively, insisted upon by Campbell, Puri- tan in Holland^ England, and America, New Yorlt, 1892, II: 177-209. 4 Compare Dexter, Cong, as seen, pp. 54-58. Briggs, American Presbyierianisin, New York, 1885, p. 43. 6 For the doctrines of the Anabaptists, especially the JMennonite branch, which had the 4 BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM fession and baptism; that each congregation of believers should be independent of all external control, civil or ecclesiastical, and that the civil magistrate had no authority over the church; that no believer should bear the sword, take oath, or hold the office of a magistrate; that each congregation should be kept pure by disci- pline, and should be led by elders chosen by itself, who should serve it without compensation. So they held the New Testament pattern of a Christian church to require. Like the modern Baptists, the Anabaptists had no creeds of general binding force. Some confessions were issued by indi- viduals and congregations, and some as formulse of union between various branches of the much divided body, but each congregation accepted or rejected what it chose. In general, however, the agreement regarding all the more essential features of doctrine and polity was close. A few extracts from the popular confession prepared by the Mennonite ministers Hans de Ries and Lubbert Gerrits for the benefit of the one time Congregationalist John Smyth and his company in 1609 at Amsterdam, — a confession based on and representative of the writings of the older Mennonite Anabaptists and widely used by the Mennonite churches of Hol- land, — may serve to set forth some of these beliefs more clearly:' "22. Such faithful, righteous people, scattered in several parts of the world, being the true congregations of God, or the church of Christ, whom he saved, and for whom he gave himself, that he might sanctify them, ye [yea] whom he hath cleansed by the washing of water in the word of life : of all such is Jesus the Head, the Shepherd, the Leader, the Lord, the King, and Master. Now although among these there may be mingled a company of seeming holy ones, or hypocrites ; yet, nevertheless, they are and remain only the righteous, true members of the body of most influence in Holland, see beside the articles of Prof, de Hoop Scheffer, before cited ; Barclay, Inner Li/e of the Reiigioits Societies of the Coiiimonweatih, London, 3d ed., 1879, pp. 75-92 ; Dr. Barrage, Pafers Am, Soc. Ch. Hist., Ill: 157; Prof. Schaff, in Baptist Quarterly Review, July 1889. Much further and minuter information is contained in the works of the Mennonite his- torian, Hermann Schyn, Historia Christianoruin Qui in Belgio Fcederato inter Protesiantes Mennonito! appellantur, Amsterdam, 1723, and Historia: Mennonitaruin Ptetiior Deductio, ibid, 1729. 1 Regarding the circumstances of the appeal of Smyth and his brethren for admission to the Amsterdam Mennonite church of which Gerrits was minister, and the preparation of this Con- fession, see Evans, Early English Baptists, London, 1862, L 201-224 ; Barclay, Inner Life, etc., pp. 68-73 ; De Hoop Scheffer, De Brownisten te A msterdam, etc. (Memoir before the Royal Academy), published Amsterdam, 1881 ; Dexter, True Story of John Stnyth, the Se-Baptist, etc., Boston, 1881. The Confession as originally prepared consisted of 38 articles, drawn up by Hans de Ries at the request of Smyth's company. Translated into English, it was signed by Smyth and his friends and laid before the Mennonite congregation. It was enlarged by its author and put fortll ANABAPTIST PRINCIPLES 5 Christ,' according to the spirit and the truth, the heirs of the promises, truly saved from the hypocrites and dissemblers. "23. In this holy church hath God ordained the ministers of the Gospel, the doctrines of the holy Word, the use of the holy sacraments, the oversight of the poor, and the ministers of the same offices ; furthermore, the exercise of brotherly admoni- tion and correction, and, finally, the separating of the impenitent ; which holy ordi- nances, contained in the Word of God, are to be administered according to the contents thereof. " 24. And like as a body consisteth of divers parts, and every part hath its own proper work, seeing every part is not a hand, eye, or foot; so it is also in the church of God; for although every believer is a member of the body of Christ, yet is not every one therefore a teacher, elder, or deacon, but only such who are orderly appointed to such offices. Therefore, also, the administration of the said offices or duties pertaineth only to those that are ordained thereto, and not to every particular common person. "25. The vocation or election of the said officers is performed by the church, with fasting, and prayer to God; for God knoweth the heart; he is amongst the faithful who are gathered together in his name; and by his Holy Spirit doth so govern the minds and hearts of his people, that he by them bringeth to hght and propoundeth whom he knoweth to be profitable to his church. "26. And although the election and vocation to the said offices is performed by the foresaid means, yet, nevertheless, the investing into the said service is accom- plished by the elders of the church ^ through the laying on of hands. . . . "29. The Holy Baptism is given unto^ these in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, which hear, believe, and with penitent heart receive the doctrines of the Holy Gospel. For such hath the Lord Jesus commanded to be baptized, and no unspeaking children. "33. The church discipline, or external censures, is also an outward handling* among the believers, whereby the impenitent sinner, after Christian admonition and reproof, is severed, by reason of his sins, from the communion of the saints for his future good; and the wrath of God is denounced against him until the time of his contrition and reformation. "35- Worldly authority or magistracy is a necessary ordinance of God, ap- pointed and established for the preservation of the common estate, and of a good, natural, politic life, for the reward of the good and the punishing of the evil: we acknowledge ourselves obnoxious, and bound by the Word of God to fear, honour, and show obedience to the magistrates in all causes not contrary to the Word of for the use of the Dutch probably in 1610, apparently with the approval of Gerrits. Though in no sense binding upon the Mennonite body, it has been their most venerated expression of faith, A full Latin version of the enlarged form is given by Schyn, Hisioria, etc., Amsterdam, 1723, pp. 172-220, who remarks: " Ecce . . . Con/essionetn, non solum fere per sesqui sasculum apud plurimas & maximas illorum Ecclesias, in Belgio pro formula. Consensus inter Waterlandos sic dictos habitam," etc. On the great doctrinal controversy which agitated Holland at the time of its composition the Confession is Arminian, but that which here concerns us is its view of church polity, in which it is representative of all Mennonite teaching and the theories doubtless which were current among the Anabaptists who found settlement during the previous half-century in England. The extracts are from the English version signed by Smyth and his associates in 1609, and printed by Evans, Ibid., 1 : 245-252. It is substantially and almost verbally identical with the revised form given by Schyn. ' I. e., the righteous are the only true members, etc. 2 Schyn, "a Senioribus populi coram Ecclesia." ^ Ibid.., "actio." 6 BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM the Lord. We are obliged to pray God Almighty for them, and to thank the Lord for good reasonable magistrates, and to yield unto them, without murmuring, beseem- ing tribute, toll, and tax. This office of the worldly authority the Lord Jesus hath not ordained in his spiritual kingdom, the church of the New Testament, nor adjoined to the offices of his church. Neither hath he called his disciples or followers to be worldly kings, princes, potentates, or magistrates; neither hath he burdened or charged them to assume such offices, or to govern the world in such a worldly manner; much less hath he given a law to the members of his church which is agreeable to such office or government. . . . "36. Christ, the King and Lawgiver of the New Testament, hath prohibited Christians the swearing of oaths; therefore it is not permitted that the faithful of the New Testament should swear at all." It is clear, therefore, that there were prevalent in the domain of Protestantism, during the latter half of the sixteenth century, two radically differing theories of the church, — the one supported by the leading reformers and their successors and upheld by the civil authorities, but representing nevertheless a partial rather than a complete application of the principles of the Reformation; the other maintained with many vagaries, and much that was positively fanatical, by men of little education or social position, subject to almost universal persecution,' but representing, how- ever mistakenly, an attempt to apply the principles of the Word of God not merely to doctrine but to every feature of polity and life. Though the Anabaptists flourished in Holland, they made few direct disciples during the sixteenth century on English soil. Yet they were present in the island and cannot have been with- out some influence. After the religious and political tyranny of Philip II. had begun its reign of terror in the Netherlands, the Dutch and Walloons, who had always found in the eastern coun- ties of England a favorite field for immigration, flocked across the North Sea in almost astounding numbers. By 1562 these exiles on English soil numbered 30,000.^ Six years later they embraced some 5,225 of the population of London, while in the cities of the eastern coast they were yet more largely represented, forming a majority of the people of Norwich in 1587, and making a con- ■ The one exception was the protection of the Dutch Anabaptists by William of Orange, Campbell, Puritan^ 1 : 247, 248. ' 2 These figures are from Campbell, Ibid.^ 488. ANABAPTISTS IN ENGLAND 7 spicuous element in the population of Dover, Sandwich, and other important towns. Of course these thousands of Hollanders were not to any large extent Anabaptists; but there were Anabaptists among them,' and probably many more than openly appeared, for to own the sentiments of the hated sect under the reign of Elizabeth was to be liable to death at the stake. It seems not unreasonable to suppose that their views, modified and partially presented, may have, more or less unconsciously, become part of the thinking of the more zealous of the English seekers after a fuller reformation with whom they were brought in contact. But while it is certainly within the bounds of probability to admit such a degree of influence on the part of the Dutch Anabaptists on English religious thought in the eastern counties during the last quarter of the sixteenth century, it should not be forgotten that the New Testament was before the English reader as well as in the hands of the Dutch Anabaptist, and that its pages might convey the same lesson independently to the English student. Certainly the early English Congregationalists had no conscious- ness that their views were derived from any other source than the New Testament; and while there is much in their history, and especially in the geography of their origin, to make it probable that some considerable infiltration of Anabaptist thought aided in shaping their interpretations of the Scripture; they were more than mere successors or offshoots of the Anabaptists of the Continent.' Some attempt to realize a further reformation in directions looking toward later Congregationalism may have been made by Richard Fitz and his associates at London in 1567, but the first Englishman^ to proclaim Congregational principles in writing was 1 On the occasion when the two whose burning in 1575 has already been noticed were arrested in London, twenty-five others were taken into custody. 2 Mr. Douglas Campbell, in his suggestive work. The Purititn in Holland^ England^ and A merica, II ; i8o, holds strongly that Browne received his ideas directly from the Anabaptists. This matter will be further considered later in this chapter. 3 The origin of Congregationalism as an organized polity has been frequently attributed, and notably by Waddington {^Congregational History^ isoo-ijby^ London, 1869, pp. 742-745), to a com- pany broken up by the government at Plumbers' Hall, June 19, 1567. But though the evidence of their opposition to the existing state of the Church of England is ample, and it seems certain that they had adopted Separatist principles and chosen their own ministry, their Congregationalism was yet very rudimentary. See Punchard, Hisi. 0/ Cong., Boston [1865], II: 454-459; Dexter, Cong, as seen, pp. 114, 115, 631-4 ; Scott, Pilgrim Fathers neither Puritans nor Persecutors, London, 8 BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM Robert Browne/ a man of sincere purpose, at least in early life; but one whose erratic disposition and final reconciliation with the English Establishment have cost him the personal repute which would otherwise have been his. Possessed of only ordinary ability, he nevertheless saw some truths clearly which had been ignored by the ecclesiastical teachers of his age. Browne was born about the middle of the sixteenth century, of a family related to that of Elizabeth's great statesman, Lord Burghley. His education was at Corpus Christi College, Cam- bridge, an institution which he entered in 1570. The university was already strongly Puritan, and under the vigorous teaching of the greatest of the early Puritans, Thomas Cartwright,^ was filled with the idea that a further reformation of the English Church was needful, — a reform to be brought about, in his estimation, 1891: C. R. Palmer, Historical Address^ before New Haven Cong. Club, Oct., 1892, New Haven, 1893; MacKennal, Story 0/ the Eng. Separatists^ London, 1893; Adeney, Ck. in the PrisoTis^ in Surly Independents^ London, 1893. 1 The discoveries and investigations of the late Dr. Dexter have so re-made the portrait of Browne that all previous literature regarding him is of secondary value. The student will do well, therefore, to consult Dexter, Congregationalism as seen^ etc., pp. 61-128. The article on Browne by Aug. Jessopp in the Dictionary 0/ National Biography^ VII: 57-61, is also of value. The main facts of his life, so far as not related in the text, are as follows: — He was born, probably in 155a, at Tolethorpe, Rutlandshire. After his student life in Cambridge, and chaplaincy to the Duke of Norfolk, he taught school till 1578 : then followed his second period of Cambridge study, his preaching and silencing by the bishop, and his full adoption of Congregational principles and settlement in Norwich about 1580. Late in 1581, probably, he went to Holland, and in 1582 pub- lished the books with which we have to do. Quarrels distressed his church in Middelburg, and as a result Browne and a few followers went from Holland to Scotland in 1583. At Edinburgh he was. received with much disfavor by the Presbyterian authorities. By the summer of 1584 he was appar- ently back in London, having failed to found a permanent congregation either in Norwich, Holland, or Scotland. Here in London he was imprisoned, as he had been repeatedly before ; but here, as elsewhere, he was saved from the most serious consequences of his opposition to the English eccle- siastical system by his relationship to Lord Burghley. Released from prison, he seems to have gone to Northampton in 1586, and was then excommunicated by the Bishop of Peterborough. He was now, it would appear, utterly discouraged. Dr. Dexter held, with much show of reason, that his mind had become affected by his long disappointments and imprisonments. At all events, he be- came reconciled to the Establishment late in 1586, and was appointed master of a grammar school in Southwark, a position which he held till September, 1591, when, having been restored to the ministry of the Church of England, he received from his ever kindly relative. Lord Burghley, the living of Achurch cum Thorpe. Here he ministered till near his death, an event which occurred in Northampton jail (when he was a prisoner probably in consequence of a debt) sometime between June, 1631, and November, 1633. His later life was wholly insignificant and comports well with the view that he was a broken-down man. "^ Cartwright was about forty years old when Browne entered the university and was at the height of his fame and influence. He had been identified with Cambridge as student, fellow, and teacher since 1547. In 1569 he had been made professor of divinity; but his Puritan views, were at once attacked by the Anglicans, led by Whitgift, the later archbishop, and he was com- pelled to relinquish his professorship in December, 1570, and his fellowship in September, 1571. This discussion must have stirred Browne profoundly. BROWNE'S SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT 9 however, from within and not by separation from its fold. Browne soon combined the duties of a student's life with the occupation of a chaplain in the family of the Duke of Norfolk; but here he showed opinions at variance with those of the ecclesiastical authorities, the exact nature of which it is impossible to affirm, but which were probably Puritan rather than fully Congregational; The duke, at all events, sympathized with him sufficiently to plead in his behalf that a chaplaincy was a privileged office beyond the reach of the ordinary processes of ecclesiastical law. Whether his patron's intervention was sufficient to check further proceedings in Browne's case or not does not appear; but for about three years thereafter he taught school, apparently at Southwark, preaching also to such as he could gather in illegal meetings in a gravel- pit at Islington. But desire for further study drew him back to Cambridge, and, as was natural for an earnest young Puritan min- ister, he entered the household theological school of Rev. Richard Greenham, an eminent Puritan of Dry Drayton, not far from the university town. Here he was encouraged to preach in pulpits of the Church of England where the hearers were of Puritan sympa- thies, and such was the favor with which he was regarded that he took charge of a church in Cambridge itself. Here it was, appar- ently, that he underwent the spiritual struggle which led him to Congregational views." The church to which he had preached for about six months desired him to remain, but Browne's Puritan scruples regarding bishops had made him feel that an appoint- ment dependent upon one of their order was no proper ministry. The conviction now came to him that the all-inclusive member- ship of the Church of England was well-nigh fatal to real piety. The only course for those who would seek a full Christian life was to separate from it and unite among themselves. He felt that " the kingdom off God Was not to be begun by whole parishes, but * Dr. Dexter, whose admirable account of Browne is the source of the facts of his biography above given, was the discoverer of an undated little work by Browne himself, A Trve and Short Declaration, bath of the Gathering and loyning Together of Certaine PersoTis: and also of the Lamentable Breach and Division which fell Amongst Them, which is really a "spiritual autobiography." A manuscript copy is in the Dexter Collection, now in the possession of Yale University, and a reprint has been issued, without date or place, [by Dr. Dale ?] 2 lO BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM rather off the worthiest, Were they never so fewe.'" Naturally such views were offensive to his ecclesiastical superiors, and the result was that Browne was silenced. Thus far Browne's primary desire seems to have been the de- velopment of a more earnest spiritual life. He had followed the Puritan path and he had gone far beyond Puritanism into a belief in the necessity of actual separation from the Establishment. But he had not yet fully thought out the constitution of the purified church for which he longed. It is interesting to observe that in this transition period, after he had been silenced by the bishop, he learned that in the neighboring county of Norfolk, a county in which Dutch artisans were present in large numbers and presuma- bly Dutch Anabaptists among them, were persons who were eager for religious reform in the direction toward which his own thoughts turned, and he resolved to go to them. Before this determination was put into practice, however, an acquaintance, Robert Harrison,^ who was also to be a fellow-laborer with Browne, came to Cam- bridge from Norwich, the principal town of Norfolk. With him, probably in 1580, Browne removed to Norwich, and here in con- versation with Harrison, in study of the Scripture, and it may be also through contact with Anabaptist views (though on this point proof is lacking), Browne fully thought out his system of church- government. Here, too, at some uncertain time in 1580 or 1581,' he formed with others whom he gathered about him the first Con- gregational Church of the long series which has continued since that day. So conspicuous action in defiance of constituted ecclesiastical authorities could not escape notice, the more so that Browne ex- tended his field of preaching as far as Bury Saint Edmunds.* By 1 Trve and Short Declaration^ p. 6 ; De.xter, Cong, as seen, p. 67. 2 Robert Harrison had entered Cambridge university in 1564, he had graduated B. A. at Cor- pus Christi in 1567, and ]M. A. in 1572. After the latter graduation, at some uncertain date, he was made master of a Norwich hospital. At Norwich, Browne lived in his house. Harrison accompa- nied Browne to Middelburg and remained there, probably as pastor, after Browne's departure. He did not long survive, dying about 1585. See Cooper, Athence Cantairigiens.es, II : 177; and Diet. National Biography, XXV: 38. 3 Dexter, Cong, as seen, p. 70. ' Bishop Freake of Norwich declared that, apparently at Bury Saint Edmunds, " the vulgar sort of people . . . greatly depended on him, assembling themselves together to the number of an hundred at a time in private houses and conventicles to hear him." See quotations in De.Kter, p. 70. BROWNE'S PUBLICATIONS II April, 1581, the bishop of Norwich had taken official cognizance of his doings. But the relationship of the young Congregationalist to Lord Burghley, and the help extended by that powerful kins- man,' prevented any more serious consequences to Browne than a six-months of great personal annoyance. These experiences, how- ever, convinced the infant church that it had nothing to hope for in England, and therefore after much deliberation, Browne, Harri- son, and a part of the Norwich company emigrated to the city of Middelburg in the Dutch province of Zeland,' probably in the au- tumn of 1581. It would appear that some of the Norwich flock remained behind and continued a Congregational organization, for a time at least, on English soil.^ It was soon after his arrival in Holland that Browne put forth, ■with the pecuniary aid of Harrison, some time in 1582, three tracts' designed primarily to further his views in England, and from one of which our statement of his principles is drawn. These little works were sent to England, and in spite of a proclamation in the name of Queen Elizabeth forbidding their circulation,' they were scattered abroad; at Bury Saint Edmunds they were distributed through the agency of two of Browne's followers, John Coppin and Elias Thacker, who were at the time in not very strict imprison- ment for their religious opinions, but who for their connection with these tracts were condemned and hanged in the summer of 1583-' With Browne's further fortunes we have little to do. His own impulsive temperament, and the value placed on church discipline by the early Separatists, led to quarrel in his Middelburg flock, a quarrel which resulted in his leaving Harrison and the majority of his congregation on Dutch soil, and going with a few followers to ^ Burghley had no sympathy with Browne's views on church-government, 2 Dexter, Cong, as seen^ p, 72. 3 Dexter, pp. -j-^^ 74, sfiows that a Congregational church existed at Norwich as late as 1603, which was regarded as an " elder sister " by the church formed at London in 1592. * Beside the Books ivhich shewetk, etc., from which our selections are taken, these tracts were A Treatise %'pon the 23, of Maitkewe^ and A Treatise 0/ Re/ormation without Tarying /or anie. s Given June 30, 1583, In full, Dexter, p. 75. The tracts were described as "sundry sedi- tious, scismaticall, and erronious printed Eookes and libelles, tending to the deprauing of the Eccle- siastical gouernment established within this Realme," 8 See Dexter, pp. 208-210 ; Campbell Puritan^ II : 182, 183. 12 BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM Scotland late in 1583. Here he found the opposition of the Pres- byterian authorities as fatal to his peace as that of the bishops of England had been; and, after some time vainly spent in various Scotch towns, he returned to England, once more to meet defeat, with the added pain of imprisonment. Broken down in body and mind at last, it would appear, he made his peace with the Church of England in 1586, and through the kindness of Lord Burghley, he obtained, in 1591, the rectorship of Achurch cum Thorpe, in which office he passed the forty remaining years of his now uneventful life. The system which Browne laid down in the three treatises of 1582, is imperfectly worked out in detail, but it nevertheless pre- sents with great clearness the essential features of modern Con- gregationalism. As Dr. Dexter has shown,' the starting point in Browne's thinking was not a desire to establish a novel polity, but to foster the spiritual development of the believer by his separa- tion from communion with the non-faithful whom all the State churches allowed a place in the church. He broke with the Church of England primarily, because its bishops and other authorities approved its general, and, as Browne thought, anti- Christian, inclusion of all non-excommunicate baptized persons, an inclusiveness, which, to his way of thinking, made the real ele- vation of the Establishment in spiritual tone impossible. He broke with the Puritans, for, though they desired a spiritual refor- mation as sincerely as he, they would wait for it from the hand of the civil magistrate ; ^ and Browne, first of English writers, set forth the Anabaptist doctrine that the civil ruler has no control over the spiritual affairs of the church, that church and state are separate realms. His views on this important question were expressed in the clearest fashion:' ' ' Yet may they [magistrates] doo nothing concerning the Church, but onelie ciu- ^ Cong, as seen, pp. 96-104.. 2 See his work of 1582, A Treatise of Re/onnation without Tarying for anie [i. e., with- out waiting for the civil authorities to act, as the Puritans wished], and of the wickednesse of those Preachers -which will not refortne till the Magistrate comtnaunde or compell them. s I have given this quotation at length because the point is not so clearly shown in the selec- tions on a later page. It is from the Treatise of Reformation, p. 12. See also Dexter, pp. 101, 102. THE CHURCH AND ITS OFFICERS 1 3 ilie, and as ciuile Magistrates; that is, they haue not that authoritie ouer the church, as to be Prophetes or Priestes, or spiritual Kings, as they are Magistrates ouer the same ; but onelie to rule the common wealth in all outwarde lustice, to maintaine the right welfare and honor therof with outward power, bodily punishment, & ciuil forcing of me. And therfore also because the church is in a common wealth, it is of their charge : that is concerning the outward prouision & outward iustice, they are to looke to it ; but to copell religion, to plant churches by power, and to force a submission to Ecclesiastical gouernement by lawes & penalties, belongeth not to them." ' If, then, a full spiritual life in a community was impossible under the existing government of the Church of England, and if it was not only useless but wrong to wait for the reform of that Establishment, as the Puritans were waiting, at the hand of the civil authorities, how were the Christians, who must thus of neces- sity separate themselves from their old churchly connections, to be organized into new societies ? The model for their organization Browne found in the New Testament.'' The believers should be united to God and one to another by a covenant, entered into, not by compulsion, but willingly.' Such a body, so united, and recog- nizing their obligations to God the Father and to Christ as their law-giver and ruler, are a church. Of this church Christ is the head,'' and his powers and graces are for the use of every member,' There are officers of divine appointment, some of temporary use to aid all churches, apostles, prophets, and evangelists, who belong to the past rather than the present ;" and others designated as the abiding officers of individual churches, the pastor, teacher, elders, deacons, and widows, who " haue their seuerall charge in one Churche onely."' Yet these officers do not stand between Christ and the ordinary believer, they " haue the grace & office of teaching and guiding ; " but " euerie one of the church is made a Kinge, a Priest, and a Prophet vnder Christ, to vpholde and further the kingdom of God."" The offices of Christ are for the use of each member of the church, as well as for those who " teach and guide " it.' It is this immediateness of relationship between 1 It is interesting to notice that Harrison did not share Browne's view on this point. Dexter, p. 85. 2 Compare extracts from the Booke which Sheweth at the close of this chapter. Answer 35, ' Hid., Ans. 36-38. * Hid., Ans. 44. » Iliid., Ans. 55. « Hid., 52. ' Hid., 53, 54, 6 Hid., 50, 55. » Hid., 56-58. 14 BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM Christ, the head of the church and each member, that, as Dr. Dexter has pointed out,' makes Browne's poHty essentially though unintentionally democratic, and that gives it a closer resemblance in some features to the purely democratic Congregationalism of the present century than to the more aristocratic, one might almost say semi-Presbyterianized, Congregationalism of Barrowe and the founders of New England. Church ofificers are to be chosen by the congregations which they serve, and ordination is to be at the hands of the " elders," an expression which Browne uses as signifying in this connection the " forwardest " or most worthy of a congregation, rather than a particular order of church officers.^ Unlike the teachers of the prelatical churches, Browne held that the essence of a minister's claim to office lay not in the imposition of hands in ordination, but in his inward calling by divine providence and his choice by the people of his charge.' Among the duties of a church officer, dis- cipline had a large place,' but the ordinary member was in no way relieved from responsibility regarding his brethren, he, too, must "watch" and "trie out all wickednes."'* In fact, the whole conception entertained by Browne of the position of a church officer was, that he should be a leader and example to his brethren rather than a master and judge. Browne saw that not only individuals within a local church, but the local churches as separate bodies had duties one to another. His theory on this point was not elaborated in detail, but he recog- nized clearly the propriety of "synodes," or councils, — the "meet- ings of sundrie churches: which are when the weaker churches seeke helpe of the stronger, for deciding or redressing of matters or else the stronger looke to them for redresse." ° It is interesting to note that Browne perceived that his theory of the relation of an officer to a church was applicable, in large measure, to civil society. Though he recognized that the claims of some to civil office were based, as one element, on " parentage and birth," he held that all in rightful authority were so by the 1 Con^. as seen^ pp. io6, 107. '^ Booke which She-weth,Ans. 117, 119, also 51. 3 IHd., 119. 1 Jhid., 126. <■ Ibid., 56. " Ibid., 51. SOURCE OF HIS SYSTEM ir command of God and "agreement of men." His picture of the covenant-relation of men in the church, under the immediate sov- ereignty of God, he extended to the state; and it led him as directly, and probably as unintentionally, to democracy in the one field as in the other. . His theory implied that all governors should rule by the will of the governed, and made the basis of the state on its human side essentially a compact.' Whence were these views of Browne derived? Clearly from the New Testament, in whose pages he thought he saw delineated the pattern of the church which God designed. But whether he was brought to this system of polity by unaided study of the Scrip- tures and thought upon the state of the Church of England; or whether his theories and interpretations were assisted by some knowledge of the beliefs of the Dutch Anabaptists, is a question not so easy to answer. The late Dr. Dexter held strongly to the position that Browne owed nothing to Anabaptist influences and that he_ was a disciple of no one.° Mr. Douglas Campbell main- tains, on the other hand, that Browne derived one of his most im- portant doctrines, — that of the separation of Church and State, — from the Anabaptists f and the inference is that his debt to these Dutch exiles was extensive. Much may be said in defense of either of these views. Browne held, as we have seen, that it was the duty of Christians to separate from communions where non-Christians were tolerated. This was a position held by the Anabaptists.' He would not wait for reformation at the hand of the civil magistrate with the Puritans, for he believed that the magistrate had no right to coerce men's consciences; and this was the view also of the Anabaptists.* And when we look at more particular features of Browne's system we find that his theories of the independence of the local congregation, its right to choose its own officers, and the fundamental necessity of a vigorous exercise of discipline, were all exemplified among the Anabaptists. Then it will be remembered that when Browne had first determined on 1 fiiii., 114-118. " Cong, as seen, p. 103. ^ Puritan in Holland, etc., II : 179, 180, 200. ^ See ante, p. 3. > 5 See Schyn, Historia: Mennonitarum Plenior Deductio, Amsterdam, 1729, pp. 147, 221, 275, etc. 1 6 BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM separation, he heard that some far advanced in religious reforma- tion were in Norfolk, and planned to join them;' and he worked out his system in conversation with a friend, Robert Harrison, who had been sometime a resident of Norwich, and put it into practice at Norwich and probably at Bury Saint Edrhunds also. These were places filled with Dutch refugees, and in both he found a considerable following among the lower classes.' There Anabap- tist ideas must have been considerably disseminated. These con- siderations lend weight to the views of Mr. Campbell. But, on the other hand, Browne utterly rejected the great Anabaptist tenet of believers' baptism.' Furthermore, unlike the Anabaptists, he held that oaths were sometimes not only lawful but a "speciall furtheraunce of the kingdome of God."^ He evi- dently saw nothing unbecoming to a Christian in the tenure of civil office;* and, moreover, he would not have hesitated to bear arms." He expressly repudiated the charge that his doctrine regarding the power of magistrates deserved the name of Anabaptist.' And though a strong geographical argument may be drawn in support of probable contact with these Christians of the Dutch dispersion, Browne's candid spiritual autobiog- raphy' gives no hint of any such indebtedness, and he mentions no Dutch names among his supporters.^ It is safe to afifirm that he had no conscious indebtedness to the Anabaptists. Yet if a balance is to be struck between the views of Dr. Dex- ter and Mr. Campbell, I venture with some diffidence to hold that the truth lies between. It is clear that Browne belonged in large measure to that great radical party which felt that the early reform- ers of prominence had not carried their principles to their logical or Scriptural result. Of this party the chief representatives were the Anabaptists ;j and however Browne may have reached his theo- ries, it is with the radical reformers that he must be classed. It 1 A nie, p. lo. 2 A nte, p. lo. 3 See the selections from the Booke •which Sheweih^ on later page, Ans. 40. ■• Ibid., no. 6 Jliiil,^ 112-118. » Booke mhich Sheivetk, p. 100. ' " They charge vs as Anabaptistes & denying Magistrates, because we set not vp them, nor the Magistrates, aboue Christ lesus and his glorious kingdome." — Treatise of Reformation^ p. 13. See Dexter, p. 103. ^ The Trve and Short Declaration. " Compare Dexter, p. 73. SOURCE OF HIS SYSTEM 1 7 is plain also that many of Browne's most characteristic views had been already advanced by the Anabaptists. But it is no less evident that Browne differed from the Anabaptists on points of great importance, and had no conscious connection with them. Yet certain of their views may have circulated much more widely in the manufacturing cities of eastern England than their acknowledged disciples penetrated; and Browne may have uncon- sciously absorbed much from this atmosphere, taking into his own thinking such truths as were acceptable to his own study and speculation. It may well be thus that Browne was really indebted to the Anabaptists for some features of his system, though hon- estly believing it to be the product of his own study of the Word of God. But while we may admit thus much regarding the possible in- debtedness of Browne to older thinkers of the radical school, we must recognize that he made the polity which he elaborated wholly his own. Its details were not yet fully developed, but its great outlines were there, and the system of Browne can be mistaken for no other of the polities of the Christian church. It had a definiteness and a logical consistency which the Anabap- tists had not attained. It based the local church on a definite covenant, entered into by the believers with God and with one another, more clearly than they, thus affording a logical and Scrip- tural foundation for the existence and obligations of the local fel- lowship. It showed, at least in principle, that the local independ- ence of the individual congregation is consistent with a real and efficient unity with other churches. It steered a safe course be- tween the sacrifice of the self-government of the local church for the sake of a strong central authority which is the evil feature of all systems from Romanism to Presbyterianism, and the abandon- ment of real mutual accountability between churches which had been the vulnerable point of the polity of the Anabaptists. Though he proved unfaithful himself to the beliefs which he preached and for which he suffered, Robert Browne must be accounted the father of modern Congregationalism. BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM Extracts from Browne's "Booke which Sheweth the life and manners of all true christians," etc., MiDDELBURG, 1582. [2] The state of Christians. The state of Heathen. Christians. Their knuwledge. The Godhead. Heathen. Their ignorance. False Gods. 'W 'Herefore are we called the people of God and Chris- tians ? :Bccau6e tbat bg a willing Coue= naunt maDe wltb our (5oO, we are vnOer tbc gouernement of (Bo& anO Cbrlste, an& tbercbg Do Ica&e a goOlB an& Cbrlstian life. ' T/f7'JIerefo7-e are the Heathen forsaken of God, and be the cursed people of the worlde? Because they forsake or refuse the Lords couenaunt and gou- ernement: and therefore they leade an vngodly and worldly life. ^ Browne's Booke embraces 185 Questions, each with answer, counter-question, definition, and division as above given. Each series extends over parts of two opposite pages. This first question, with its train of subdivisions, may serve as an example of the whole book, but so little additional is contained in the repetitious matter that from this point onward I give only the ques- tions and answers, omitting counter-questions, definitions, and divisions. I have also changed the type from here onward from Old English to Roman. [Questions 2 to 34 relate to the knowledge of God by men. His nature, attri- butes, providence, tlie fall of man and salvation by Christ. These doctrines are treated in the usual Calvinistic sense, and present nothing pecu^ar to Browne.] [^'5' ] 35 What is our calling and leading vnto this happines ?* In the new Testament our calling is in plainer maner: as by the first planting and gathering of the church vnder one kinde of gouernement. Also by a further plating of the church according to that gouernement. But in the olde Testament, our calling was by shadowes and ceremonies, as among the lewes. j6 Howe must the churche be first planted and gathered vnder one kinde of gouernement! ^ The bracketed numbeiB indicate the pages of Browne's work. ^ I. e., the happiness purchased by Christ EXTRACTS FROM BROWNE S BOOK 19 Definitions. Diuisions. [3] Ckristiaiis, Their knovvledg: . The Godhead. ' Christians are a companie or number of beleeuers, which by a willing couenaunt made with their God, are vnder the gou- ernement of God and Christ, and keepe his Lawes in one holie communion: Be- cause they are redeemed by Christe vnto holines & happines for euer, from whiche they were fallen by the sinne of Adam. Christians whiche should leade a godlie life By knowing God and the dueties of godlinesse. By keeping those dueties. First by a couenant and condicion, made on Gods behalfe. Secondlie by a couenant and condicion made on our behalfe. Thirdlie by vsing the sacrament of Baptisme to scale those condicions, and couenantes. J J What is the couenant, or condicion on Gods behalfe ? His promise to be our God and sauiour, if we forsake not his gouernement by disobedience. Also his promise to be the God of our seede, while we are his people. Also the gifte of his spirit to his children as an inwarde calling and furtheraunce of godlines. ^^ j8 What is the couenant or condicion on our behalfe ? We must offer and geue vp our selues to be of the church and people of God. We must likewise offer and geue vp our children and others, 20 BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM being vnder age, if they be of our householde and we haue full power ouer them. We must make profession, that we are his people, by sub- mitting our selues to his lawes and gouernement. / jg How must Baptisme be vsed, as a seale of this couenaunt 1 They must be duelie presented, and offered to God and the church, which are to be Baptised. They must be duelie receiued vnto grace and fellowship. 40 How must they be presented and offered? The children of the faithfull, though they be infantes are to be offered to God and the church, that they may be Baptised. Also those infantes or children which are of the householde of the faithfull, and vnder their full power. Also all of discretion which are not baptised, if they holde the Christian profession, and shewe forth the same. \24\ 41 How must they be receaued vnto grace and felloshippe ? The worde must be duely preached in an holie assemblie. The signe or Sacrament must be applied thereto. 42 How must the word be preached ? The preacher being called and meete thereto, must shewe the redemption of christians by Christ, and the promises receaued by faith as before. Also they must shewe the right vse of that redemption, in suffering with Christ to dye vnto sinne by repetance. Also the raising and quickning again vpon repentance. 4j Howe must the signe be applied thereto ? The bodies of the parties baptised, must be washed w' water, or sprinckled or dipped, in the name of the Father, and of y" Sonne, and of the holy Ghost, vnto the forgeuenes of sinnes, and dying thereto in one death and burial with Christ. The preacher must pronounce the to be baptised into y' bodie and gouernement of Christ, to be taught & to professe his lawes, that by his mediatio & victorie, they might rise againe with him vnto holines & happines for euer. The church must geue thankes for the partie baptised, and praye for his further instruction, and traininge vnto saluation. [2(5] 144 How must it [the church^ be further builded, accord- I inge^vRTd' churche gouernement ? First by communion of the graces & offices in the head of y' church, which is Christ. Secondlly, by communion of the graces and offices in the bodie, which is the church of Christ. EXTRACTS FROM BROWNE'S BOOK 21 Thirdly, by vsing the Sacrament of the Lords supper, as a seale of this communion./ 45 Howe hath the churche the communion of those graces is' offices, which are in Christ ? It hath the vse of his priesthoode : because he is the high Priest thereof. Also of his prophecie: because he is the Prophet thereof. Also of his kingdome and gouernement: because he is the kynge and Lord thereof. 4.6 What vse hath the churche of his priesthoode 1 Thereby he is our mediatour, and we present and offer vppe our praiers in his name, because by his intreatie, our sinnes are forgeuen. Also he is our iustification, because by his attonement we are iustified. Also he is our sanctification, because he partaketh vnto vs his holines and spirituall graces. \28\ .J1.7 What vse hath the church of his prophecie ? He him selfe hath taught vs, and geuen vs his lawes. He preacheth vnto vs by his worde & message in the mouthes of his messengers. He appoynteth to euerie one their callinges and dueties. 48 What vse hath the churche of his kinglie office ? By that he executeth his lawes: First, by ouerseeing and try- ing out wickednes. Also by priuate or open rebuke, of priuate or open offenders. Also by sep aration of the wilfull, or more greeuous offenders. [jojl 4p What vse hath the churche of the graces and offices I vnder~CJirist ? I It hath those which haue office of teaching and guiding. Also those which haue office of cherishing and releeuing the afflicted & poore. Also it hath the graces of all the brethren and people to doo good withall. 50 Who haue the grace &' office of teaching and guiding ? Some haue this charge and office together, which can not be sundred. Some haue their seueral charge ouer manie churches. Some haue charge but in one church onlie. ji How haue some their charge and office together ? There be Synodes or meetings of sundrie churches: which are when the weaker churches seeke helpe of the stronger, for decid- 22 BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM ing or redressing of matters: or else the stronger looke to them for redresse. There is also prophecie, or meetings for the vse of euerie mans gift, in talk or reasoning, or exhortation and doctrine. There is the Eldershippe, or meetings of the most forwarde and wise, for lookinge to matters. ]^[^52 IVho haue their scucral charge ouer many churches ? Apostles had charge ouer man)' churches. Likewise Prophetes, which had their reuelations or visions. Likewise helpers vnto these, as Euagelistes, and companions of their iourneis. jj Who haue their seuerall charge in one Chvrche onely, to teache and guide the same i The Pastour, or he which hath the guift of exhorting, and applying especiallie. The Teacher, or he whiche hath the guift of teaching espe- cially : and lesse guift of exhorting and applying. They whiche heipe vnto them both in ouerseeing and counsail- inge, as the most forward or Elders. ^4 Who haue office of chei-ishing and releeuing the afflicted and poore ? The Releeuers or Deacons, which are to gather and bestowe the church liberalitie. The Widowes, which are to praye for the church, with attend- aunce to the sicke and afflicted thereof. ■^^ 55 How hath the church the vse of those graces, which al f brethre cr people haue to do good withal 1 Because euerie one of the church is made a Kinge, a Priest, and a Prophet vnder Christ, to vpholde and further the kingdom of God, & to breake and destroie the kingdome of Antichrist, and Satan. ^6 Howe are we made Kinges 1 We must all watch one an other, and trie out all wickednes. We must priuatlie and openlie rebuke, the priuat and open offendours. We must also separate the wilful and more greeuous offenders, and withdraw our selues fro them, and gather the righteous togither. ^Y How are all Christians made Priestes vnder Christ ? They present and offer vp praiers vnto God, for them selues & for others. They turne others from iniquitie, so that attonement is made in Christ unto iustification. EXTRACTS FROM BROWNE'S BOOK 23 In them also and for them others are sanctified, by partaking the graces of Christ vnto them. g8 How are all Christians made prophetes vnder Chiist? They teach the lawes of Christ, and talke and reason for the maintenauce of them. They exhorte, moue, and stirre vp to the keeping of his lawes. They appoint, counsel, and tell one another their dueties. .. [j'^] 59 How must we vse the Sacrament of the Lords supper, as a seale of this communion ? There must be a due preparation to receaue the Lords sup- per. And a due ministration thereof. 60 What preparation must there be to receaue the Lords supper ? There must be a separation fro those which are none of the church, or be vnmeete to receaue, that the worthie may be onely receaued. All open offences and faultings must be redressed. All must proue and examine them selues, that their conscience be cleare by faith and repentance, before they receaue. 61 How is the supper rightlie ministred? The worde must be duelie preached. And the signe or sacrament must be rightlie applied thereto. [jc?] 62 How must the worde be didie preached 7 The death and tormentes of Christ, by breaking his bodie and sheading his bloud for our sinnes, must be shewed by the lawfuU preacher. Also he must shewe the spirtuall vse of the bodie & bloud of Christ Jesus, by a spirituall feeding thereon, and growinge into it, by one holie communion. Also our thankefulnes, and further profiting in godlines vnto life euerlasting. [^o] 6j How must the signe be applied thereto ? The preacher must take breade and blesse and geue thankes, and the must he breake it and pronounce it to be the body of Christ, which was broken for the, that by fayth they might feede thereon spirituallie & growe into one spiritual bodie of Christ, and so he eating thereof him selfe, must bidd them take and eate it among them, & feede on Christ in their consciences. Likewise also must he take the cuppe and blesse and geue thankes, and so pronounce it to be the bloud of Christ in the newe Testament, which was shedd for remission of sinnes, that by fayth we might drinke it spirtuallie, and so be nourished in one snirituall bodie of Christ, all sinne being clensed away, and then he 24 BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM drinking thereof himselfe must bydd them drinke there of like- -wise and diuide it amog them, and feede on Christe in their con- sciences. Then muste they all geue thankes praying for their further profiting in godlines & vowing their obedience. [Questions 64 to 8 1 relate to the Jewish dispensation ; and Questions 82 to m to Christian graces and duties. Two of the latter are of interest.] [<5t?] 1 10 What speciall furtheraunce of the kingdome of God is ther ? In talke to edifie one an other by praising God, and declar- ing his will by rebuke or exhortation. In doubt and controuersie to sweare by his name on iust occa- sions, and to vse lottes. Also to keepe the meetinges of the church, and with our especiall friends for spirituall exercises. III. What special duties be ther for the Sabbathe ? All the generall duties of religion & holines towards God, and all the speciall dueties of worshipping God, & furthering his kingdome, must on the Sabbath be performed, with ceasing from our callinges & labour in worldlye thinges. Yet such busines as can not be putt of tyll the dale after, nor done the dale before, may then be done. [Questions 112 to 185, — the remainder of the book, — relate to the duties of man to man.] [70] 112 Whiche bee the dueties of righteousnes concerning man .? They be eyther more bounden, as the generall dueties in gouernement betwene gouernours and inferiours: Or they be more free, as the generall dueties of free- dome. Or else they be more speciall duties for eche others n ame, an d for auoyding couetousnes. [T 113 What be the dueties of Gouernours? lj They consist in the entraunce of that calling. And in the due execution thereof by ruling well. 114 How must Superiours enter and take their calling ? By assuraunce of their guift. By speciall charge and commaundemente from God to put it in practise. By agreement of men. JIJ What gift must they haue 2 EXTRACTS FROM BROWNE'S BOOK 25 All Gouernours must haue forwardnes before others, in knowledge and godlines, as able to guide. And some must haue age and eldershippe. Also some must haue parentage and birth. §^^7/(5 What charge or commaundement of God must they haue to vse their guiftl They haue first the speciall commaundement of furthering his kingdome, by edifyinge and helping of others, where there is occa- sion and persones be worthie. Also some speciall prophecie and foretelling of their calling, or some generall commaundement for the same. Also particular warninges from God vnknowne to the world, as in oulde time by vision, dreame, and reuelation, and now by a speciall working of Gods spirite in our consciences. lij what agreement must there be of men ? For Church gouernours there must be an agreement of the church. For ciuil Magistrates, there must be an agreement of the people or Common welth. For Houshoulders, there must be an agreement of the hous- houldes. As Husbandes, Parents, Maisters, Teachers, or Schole- maisters, &c. 1 [Y4.\llS What agreeme7it must there be of the church, for the calling of church gouernours ? They must trie their guiftes and godlines. "They must receyue them by obedience as their guides and teachers, where they plante or establish the church. They must receyue them by choyse where the church is planted.' The agreement also for the calling of ciuill magistrates should be like vnto this, excepting their Pompe and outward power, and orders established meete for the people. up What choyse should there be ? The praiers and humbling of all, with fasting and exhortation, that God may be chiefe in the choise. The consent of the people must be gathered by the Elders or guides, and testifyed by voyce, presenting, or naming of some, or other tokens, that they approue them as meete for that calling. 1 The meaning of this blind passage is, I take it, that where the minister gathers a church and it originates through his labors, he is to be received by it "by obedience "; but where an already established church calls a minister, he is to be received "by choyse." 3 I — ?; 26 BROWNE'S CONGREGATIONALISM The Elders or forwardest must ordeine, and pronounce them, with prayer and imposition of handes, as called and authorised of God, and receyued of their charg to that calling. Yet imposition of handes is no essentiall pointe of their call- ing, but it ought to be left, when it is turned into pompe or super- stition. [7(5] 120 What agreement must ther be in the householdes, for the gouernement of them ? There must be an agrement of Husband and Wife, of Parentes & Children : Also of Maister and Seruant, and likewise of Teachers & SchoUers, &c. This agreement betweene parentes and children is of naturall desert and duetie betweene them : But in the other there must be triall and iudgment of ech others meetnes for their likinge and callinge, as is shewed before. Also thfite-ffiust be a due couenaunt betweene them. [y^]fi2i How miLst Superioiirs execute their callinge by ruling TTieTrfTtfrriours ? They must esteeme right and due. They must vphould the same : By appointing to others their dueties. They must take accountes. 122 How must they esteeme right and due 1 They must be zealouse for equitie and innocencie. They must loue those and reioyse ouer them, which doe their dueties. They must hate all vanite and wickednes and be angrie and greeued therat. [(?o] I2J How must they appoint vnto others their worke and duetie ? They must teach them. They must direct them by their guiding and helpe. They must giue them good example. 124 How must they teach them ? They must teach them the groundes of religion, and the mean- ing of the Scriptures,. They must exhort and dehort particularly for reformation of their liues. They must require thinges againe which are taught, by particular applying and trying their guift. [c?2] 12^ How mtist they direct them by their guiding and helpe ? EXTRACTS FROM BROWNE'S BOOK 2/ They must guide the in the worshipp of God, as in the Worde, Praier, Thanksgiuing, &c. They must gather their Voices, Doubtes and Questions, and determine Controuersies. They must particularlie commaunde and tell them their dueties. 126 How must they take accouiites ? They must continually watch them by visiting and looking to them them selues, and by others helping vnto them. They must trie out and search their state and behauiour by accusations and chardgings with witnesses. They must reforme or recompense by rebuke or separation the wicked and vnruly. [S4\ I2y what say you of the dueties of submission to Supe- riours ? They consist in esteeming them. In honoring them. In seruing them. [The remaining Questions and Answers contain so little that is peculiar to Browne that I have omitted them.] II THE LONDON CONFESSION . OF 1589 Editions and Reprints I. A Trve Description ovt \ of the Word of God, \ of the visible Church. Without title page. Dated 1589 at the end. Printed at Dort. 4° pp. 8. II. The same in form and with the same date, the only variation from the first edition being a rearrangement of the order of the paragraphs treating of ex- communication. Printed at Amsterdam before 1602.' III. With the substitution of Congregation for Church in the title and other passages ; and a few minor verbal changes. Printed at [?] 1641. 4° pp. 8.^ IV. The text of the first edition was reprinted and criticised paragraph by paragraph by R. Alison, A Plaine Confutation of a Treatise of Brownisme, Pub- lished by some of that Factioit, Entituled A Description, etc., London, 1590. V. The text of the second edition was reprinted in Lawne, Brownisme Tvrned the In-side Out-ward, etc., London, 1613. Also, VI. in Wall, More Work for tlte Dean, London, 1681, pp. 20-28. Also, VII. in 'Haxihury, Historical Memorials Relating to the Independents, etc., London, 1839-44, I ; 28-34. Literature Beside the controversial pamphlets already cited, the Creed is treated briefly in Hanbury, Memorials, 1 : 25-27. By far the most satisfactory and complete dis- cussion of this interesting document is, however, to be found in Dexter, The Congre- gationalism of the last three hundred years, pp. 258-262. THE abandonment by Browne of the work which he had un- dertaken and the rupture of his exiled flock at Middelburg did not bring the Congregational movement to an end. As has been seen, a portion of Browne's congregation appear to have maintained their organization at Norwich, though nothing is 1 1 am indebted to the late Rev. Dr. H. M. Dexter for the following facts regarding these edi- tions : — The place of publication of the first edition and the circumstances of the issuance of the second are made clear by a passage in Henoch Clapham, Errour on the Right Hand, etc., Lon- don, 1608, p. II, in which he declared that this Trve Description was originally printed at D[ort], where Barrowe's other writings were printed ; but that a second edition, bearing the original date, was brought out, "some yeares after his [Earrowes] death," at A[msterdam] at the expense of Arthur Billet or Bellot. In this second edition, Claphai?! affirms, the paragraph beginning: "All this notwithstanding," was transferred from its original place "after the excommunication" (ap- parently after the paragraph commencing; " Further, they are to warne "), and inserted after the paragi'aph : "If the fault be private ; " the intention being, it is charged, to make excommunica- tion a severer matter than Barrowe intended — he believing it to be " a power to edification not to destruction." Arthur Billet died in Febr., 1602. "^ See Hanbury, Memorials, 1 : 28. (28) BARROWE AND GREENWOOD 29 known regarding their state and fortunes.' But Congregational believers carried the doctrine to other cities, though their move- ments are now impossible to trace." We are first certainly aware of the existence of a Separatist congregation in London in 1587 or 1588, though it may have been formed a year or two earlier.' But so hunted was it by the officers of the law that a large pro- portion of its membership were imprisoned, and though certain church acts, such as the admission of members and the excom- munication of the unworthy, were performed, the severity of the persecution prevented the election of appropriate church officers till September, 1592, when Francis Johnson was chosen pastor, John Greenwood teacher, and two elders and two deacons asso- ciated with them.'' Yet three years before its full organization this struggling London church, in the persons of its two leading members, put forth the creed which is the subject of present discussion. The principles enunciated by Browne, which have just been considered, though doubtless those in accordance with which his congregation was gathered, were published by him and his friend Harrison as a missionary tractate rather than a church creed. The publica- tion, and probably the composition, of this London symbol has been traced conclusively' to Henry Barrowe" and John Green- 1 See ante^ p. ii. 2 The Preface to the Confession of 1596, given in the next chapter, speaks of sufferers for Congregationalism in London, Norwich, Gloucester, Bury St. Edmunds, and " manye other places of the land," 3 Dexter, Cffw^. as seen^ pp. 255, 634. If Greenwood's arrest was in 1586, the congregation must certainly have been formed even earlier than 1587. ^ Jbid.y pp. 232, 264, 265. s Ibid., pp. 234, 258-262. 6 Henry Barrowe, one of the most noted and deserving of the proclaimers of modern Congregationalism, was of a good Norfolk family, and from 1566 to his graduation as Bachelor in 1569-70 he was a student at Clare Hall, in the Puritanically inclined University of Cambridge. But whatever may have been the influences with which he was then surrounded, he left the Uni- versity an irreligious man. Turning his attention to the study of law, he was admitted a member of Gray's Inn in 1576 ; and, through what means we know not, he became personally acquainted with Queen Elizabeth, to whose court and presence he had access. A chance sermon was the means of his conversion, and his conversion was followed by the adoption of the strictest Puri- tan principles. Acquaintance with Greenwood, it would appear, led him, some time possibly be- fore 1586, to embrace Congregational views. His visit to his friend Greenwood, in the place of the latter's imprisonment, was the occasion of his own arrest in Nov., 1586. From that time onward to his execution, April 6, 1593, he was a prisoner, at first in the Clink, and then in the Fleet in London. His unwearied literary activity, under the most discouraging circumstances, made this long period of imprisonment the most productive portion of his life. Beside his elaborate exposi- 30 THE CONFESSION OF 1 589 wood/ then prisoners for their faith, shut up in the Fleet prison in London, and four years later to give their lives as martyrs to the truths here set forth. Though the statement nowhere appears in the document itself, the circumstances of the publication of the first and second editions, as far as they can now be ascer- tained, certainly justify the conclusion that we have here not only the expression of the individual beliefs of Barrowe and Greenwood, but a statement which the partially formed church in London looked upon as expressive of the views of the whole brotherhood. It is, therefore, essentially a church creed. The Trve Description is substantially an ideal sketch. It could not well be otherwise. Shut up in prison for the advocacy of the opinions here presented, the framers of this creed could look nowhere upon earth for full exemplification of the polity in which they believed. The church-order which they longed for was, they were confident, of the divinely appointed pattern. They read its outlines in the New Testament. But they had had no experience with its practical workings, and hence they pictured a greater degree of spiritual unity and brotherliness than even tion of Congregational principles in his Brief Discouerie of the false Churchy 1590, and the Plaine Refutation of M. Giffards Booke^ etc., 1591, which was to be the means of Francis John- son's conversion to Congregationalism, Barrowe had a share in three controversial pamphlets. The pathetic story of Barrowe's imprisonment and death, with some account of his writings, may be found in the work of Dr. "Dexter, already cited, pp. 211-245. Other sources of information are 'Sixoo\l, Lives of the Puritans^l-.on^oTi^ 1613, 11:23-44; Qooptt^ A thence Cantabrigienses^Caxn- bridge [England], 1861, 11 : 151-153 ; Bacon, Genesis of the New England ChiircheSy New York, 1874, pp. 91-154, passion; A. B, Grosart, in the Dictionary of National Biography ^ III: 297,. 298 (London and New York, 1885). Additional references may be found appended to the articles of Cooper and Grosart. 1 John Greenwood, the associate of Barrowe in his imprisonment and death, and his fellow- worker in the production of most of the writings mentioned in the previous note, was of less con- spicuous social station than Barrowe, and somewhat younger in age. His education was obtained at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, where he was a sizar or pecuniarily assisted student; and upon graduating in 1580-1 he had entered the established ministry, and been duly ordained to the diaconate and priesthood. His Puritan views led him for a time to serve as chaplain in the family of the Puritan Lord Rich of Rockford, Essex ; but his progress toward CongregationaHsm was decided, and by 1586 he was preaching, as opportunity would permit, in London. His friend- ship with Barrowe has already been mentioned. Cast into prison in the autumn of 15S6, he was released, apparently on bail, for a short time in 1592, and in September of that year was elected teacher by the London church, then for the first time choosing officers. His recommittal to prison speedily followed, and on April 6, 1593, he was hanged. Though a man of considerable ability, his part in the writings issued in conjunction with Barrowe was evidently secondary. Compare Dex- ter, Congregationalism as seen^ ^^. 211-245; ^rooXi.^ Lives of the Ptiritans, 11:23-44; BacoDv Genesis of the N. E. Ckiirckes^ pp. 93-154, /rtJj/;;«/ Cooper, Athenm CantabrigienseS H : 153 154; Dictionary of National Biography^ XXIII: 84, 85. Further bibliographical references may be found in connection with the two articles last cited. NATURE OF THE CONFESSION 3 1 Christian men and women have usually shown themselves capable of, and they made little provision for the avoidance of the fric- tion inevitable at times in conducting the most harmonious socie- ties composed of still imperfect men. But the essential features of early Congregationalism are here. It is first of all a " Description ovt of the Word of God." The Bible is made the ultimate standard in all matters of church government, as well as points of doctrine. Its delineations of church polity and administration are looked upon as furnishing an ample and authoritative rule for the church in all ages. This true church is not the whole body of the baptized inhabitants of a kingdom, but a company of men who can lay claim to personal Christian experience, and who are united to one another and to Christ in mutual fellowship. The nature of the officers of this church, their number, duties, and character, are all held to be ascertainable from the same God- given Word. They are not the bishops, priests, and deacons of the Anglican hierarchy, but are pastor and teacher, elders, deacons, and widows ; and they hold their office not by royal appointment ~or the nomination of a patron, but " by the holy & free election of the Lordes holie and free people." The whole administration of the church is the concern of all the brethren, and the laws governing this administration are all derivable from the Script- ures. But on this very question of administration, while the Trve Description is not as clear as we could wish, it is plain that the creed is far removed from the practical democracy of Robert Browne or the usage of modern Congregationalism. The elders are indeed chosen by the whole church, but once having chosen them, the people are to be " most humble, meek, obedient, faith- full, and loving." The elders are to see that the other officers do their duties aright, and the people obey. But who shall see that the elders do their duty, or who shall seriously limit them in their action ? That is not made clear. It is evident that the Trve Description would place the elders apart from and above the brethren as a ruling class, having the initiative in business, being themselves the church in all matters of excommunication, and leaving to the brethren only the power of election, approval of J- THE CONFESSION OF 1 589 the elders' actions, and an undefined right to reprove the elders if their conduct should not be in accord with the New Testament standard. This conception of the elders as a ruling oligarchy in the church is, in fact, the view elaborated by Barrowe in his other writings, and is the theory which Dr. Dexter happily termed Barrowism, in distinction from the unintentional but thorough- going democracy of Robert Browne.' It is a theory which colors the creeds of more than a century of early Congregationalism. The almost complete absence of distinctly doctrinal state- ment in this creed is accounted for by the fact that these London Separatists were in full doctrinal sympathy with the then pre- dominantly Calvinistic views of the English Established Church from which they had come out, and did not feel the necessity of demonstrating their doctrinal soundness, as they were shortly after impelled to do, when settled among strangers in a foreign land. 1 See Dexter, Cong, as seen^ pp. io6, 107, 235-239, 351. The Confession of 1589 A TRVE DESCRIPTION OVT OF THE WORD OF GOD, of the visible Church. ' AS there is but * one God and Father of all, one Lord over all, and one Spirit : So is there but J one truth, one Faith, one Salvation, one Church, called in one hope, ioyned in one profession, guided by one f rule, even the Word of the most high. * Genes, i. i. Exod. 20. 3. %! Tim. 2. 4. Fhil. i 2j. Ephe. 2. 18. loh. 8 41. f Deut. 6. 25. Rom. 10. 8. 2 Tim. 3. ij. loh. 8, 57. / loh 2. J, 4. ar'c. This Church as it is vniversallie vnderstood, conteyneth in it all the * Elect of God that have bin, are, or shalbe : But being considered more particularlie, as it is seen in this present world, it consisteth of a companie and fellowship of* faithful and holie people \ gathered in the name of Christ lesus, their only f King, ' Priest, and ^ Prophet,* worshipping him aright, being J peace- ablie and quietlie governed by his Officers and Iawes,f keping the vnitie of faith in the bond of peace & love 'vnfained. ^ Genes. 17. chap. I Pet. I 2. Revel. 7. g. i Cor. 10. 3. loh. i"/, 10. 20. * Psal. III. I. 6r= i4g. I. Isa. 62. 12. Efhes. i, i. i Cor. i. 2. Deut. 14. 2. \ Deut. 12, 5. loh. d, 3/ cSf 3. 14. &= 12. 32. Luke ly. 3J. \ Gen. 44. 10. Fsal. 4J 6. Zach p. p. Heb. i, 8. ' Rom. 8. 34. loh ij. chap. Heb. 3. p. &= 8, i. &" 4. 14. # Deut. 18, 13. Mat. ij. 3. Heb. I, 2. Gen. 14. 18. * Exo 20. 4. 3. 6. 7. 8 Lev. 10. 3. Loh 4. 23. \ Mat. II. 2p. I Cor. 11, 16. Mar. 13, 34. Rev. 22. p. \ Ephe. 4. 3. I Cor. i. 13. Mar. p. 30. ' Loh. 13. 34. i Cor. 13. 4. I Pet. I. 22. I Loh 3. 18. Most * ioyful, excellent, and glorious things are everie where in the Scriptures spoken of this Church. It is called the J Citie, f House # Temple, & 'mountaine of the eternal God : the * chosen generation, the holie nation, the peculiar people, the \ Vineyard, the f garden enclosed, the spring shut vp, the sealed fountaine, the I From the 2d edition, now in the Dexter Collection of Yale University. (33> 34 THE CONFESSION OF 1589 orchyard of pomgranates, with sweet fruites, the * heritage, the "kingdome of Christ : [2] yea his * sister, his love, his spouse, his I Queene, & his f bodie, the ioye of the whole earth. To this societie is the « covenant and all the promises made of * peace, of love, and J of salvation, of the f presence of God, of his graces, of his power, and of his * protection. * Psal. 87. 3. \Ibid. f I Tim. J, ij. Heb. j, 6. ^ I Cor. j, ij. 'Isaiah 2, 2. Micha, 4, I. Zach. 8, J. * / Fet. 2. g. \ Isaiah. 5, I. &- 27, 2. f Song. 4^ 12. Isa. ji, J. ^ Isa. ip, 25. " Micha. 5, 2. Mat. j. 2. loh. j, 5. * Song. 5. 2. \ Psal. 4§. g. \ i Cor. 12. 2j. Ephes. 1. 2j. ^ Gil. 4, 28. Ho. p. 4. * Psalm, j-4/. 14. 2 Thes. j. 16. \ Isay. 46, ij. Zach. 14, ly. \ Isa. 60. ch. Ezech. 47. ch. Zach. 4, 12. * Esech. 48, jj. Mat. 28, 20. Isai. 62. chap. And surely if this Church be considered in her partes, it shal appeare most beautifuU, yea most wonderfull, and even \ ravishing the senses to conceive, much more to behold, what then to enioy so blessed a communion. For behold, her f King and Lord is the King of peace, & Lord himself of all glorie. She enioyeth most holie and heavenlie * lawes, most faithfull and vigilant ^ Pastours, most syncere & pure " Teachers, most careful and vpright \ Gov- ernours, most diligent and trustie f Deacons, most loving and sober * Releevers, and a most * humble, meek, obedient, faithfull, and loving people, everie \ stone living elect and precious, everie stone hath his beautie, his f burden, and his * order. All bound to \ edifie one another, exhort, reprove, & comfort one another f lov- ingly as to their owne members, * faithfully as in the eyes of God. JSong. 6. 4. 9. fisai. 62. II. loh. 12.15.- Heb. 2. 7. 8. * Mat. II, 30. I loh. 5, J. s. Eph. 4. II. Act. 20. ch. " Rd. 12 y. J j Cor. 12. 28. Rom. 12.8. \Actes.6.ch. * Rom. 12,8. 4t Mat s, 5- Ezec. 36. 38. Isa. 60, 8. Dciit. 18. p-13. 1 1 Pet. 2, 5. i King. 7 p. Zac. 14, 21. f Gal. 6, 2. * i Cor. 12 ch. Rotn. 12, 3. &'c. X Heb. 10. 24. \ lev. ip, 17. I Thes. 4, p. * Col. 3, 23. i loh. 3. 20. No \ Office here is ambitiously affected, no f law wrongfully wrested or * wilfully neglected, no 4«trueth hid or perverted, "everie one here hath fredome and power (not disturbing the peaceable order of the Church) to vtter his complaintes and griefes, & freely to reprove the transgression and errours of any without exception of persons. % 2 Cor. 2, 17. 3 loh. p. \i Tim. 4, 2. 3. 6- 5. 21. 6- 6. 14. Gal. 6, 12. * I Cor. 5. 4. ler. 23, 28. I Tim. 3, 13. " I Cor. 6. &= 14, 30. Col. 4, 17. TEXT OF THE CONFESSION 35 [3] Here is no * intrusion or climing vp an other way into the sheepefolde, then J by the holy & free election of the Lordes holie and free people, and that according to the Lordes ordi- nance, humbling themselves by fasting and prayer before the Lord, craving the direction of his holy Spirit, for the triall and approving of giftes, &c. I loh 10, i. f AcUs. i, 23. 6- (J, j. &- 14. 23. Thus they orderly proceed to ordination by fasting and prayer, in which * action the Apostles vsed laying on of handes. Thus hath everie one of the people interest in the election and ordination of their officers, as also in the administration of their offices, vpon J transgression, offence, abuse, &c. having an especiall care vnto the inviolable order of the Church, as is aforesaid. *i Tim. 4. 14. & 5. 22. I Luk. 17,3. Rom. 16, 17. Col. 4, 17. Likewise in this Church they have holy f lawes, as limits & bondes, which, it is lawfull at no hand to transgresse. They have lawes to direct them in the choise of everie officer, what kind of men the Lord will have. Their Pastour must be apt to * teach, no yong Scholer, J able to divide the worde aright, f holding fast that faithful word, according to doctrine, that he may be able also to exhort, rebuke, improve, with wholesome doctrine, & to con- vince them that say against it : He must be * a man that loveth goodnes : he must be wise, righteous, holy, temperate : he must be of life vnreproveable, as Gods Steward : hee must be generally well reported of, & one that ruleth his owne houshold vnder obed- ience with al honestie : he must be modest, humble, meek, gentle, & loving : hee must be a man of great \ patience, compassion, labour and diligence : hee must alwaies be carefull and watchfull over the flock whereof the Lord hath made him overseer, with al willingnes & chearefulnes, not holding his office in respect of persons, but doing his duetie to everie soule, as he will aunswer before the chief Shepheard, &c. f Mat. 5. 19. i Tim. i. 18. * Deut. 33. 10. Mai. 2. 7. i Tim. 3, i. Ib'c. \2 Tim. 2, ij. f Tit. I, g. 2 Tim. 4, 2. * Tit. i, 7, 8. \ Num. 12, 3. 7. Isay. 50, 4. J. 6. Ie!-e 3, 13. Ezec. 34, 18. Act. 20 ch. i Pet. 3, i, 2, 3, 4. I Tim. 3, 21. Their Doctor or Teacher must be a man apt to teach, able to diuide the word of God aright, and to diliver sound and whole- som doctrine from the same, still building vpon that sound groundwork, he must be mightie in the Scriptures, able to con- vince the gainsayers, & carefull to deliver his doctrine pure, sound & plaine, not with curiositie or affectation, but so that it 36 THE CONFESSION OF 1 589 may edifie the most simple, approving it to every mans con- science: he must be of Hfe vnreproveable, one that can [4] governe his owne houshold, he must be of manners sober, temperate, modest, gentle and loving, &c. i Tim. 3. chap. Titus, i. ch. 2 Tim. 2, 75. I Cor. i. 17. Ss^ 2, 4. Their Elders must be of wisedome and iudgement endued with the Spirit of God, able to discerne between cause & cause, between plea & plea, & accordingly to prevent & redres evilles, alwayes vigilant & intending to see the statutes, ordinances, and lawes of 'God kept in the Church, and that not onelie by the peo- ple in obedience, but to see the Officers do their dueties. These men must bee of life likewise vnreproveable, governing their owne families orderly, they must be also of maners sober, gentle, modest, loving, temperate, &c. Numb. 11. 24, 25. 2 Chro. ip. 8. Actes. i^. ch. I Tim. j. <2r= 5. chap. Their Deacons must be men of honest report, having the mysterie of the faith in a pure conscience, endued with the holy Ghost : they must be grave, temperate, not given to excesse, nor to filthie lucre. Actes. 6, j. i Tim. 3, 8. g. Their Relievers or Widowes must be women of 60. yeares of age at the least, for avoyding of inconveniences : they must be' well reported of for good works, such as have nourished their children, such as have bin harberous to straungers : diliger & ser- viceable to the Saints, copassionate & helpful to them in adversi- tie, given to everie good worke, continuing in supplications and prayers night and day. i Tim. 5. g. 10. These Officers muste first be duely proved, then if they be found blameles, administer, &c. i Tim. j 10. Nowe as the persons, giftes, conditions, manners, life, and proofe of these officers, is set downe by the holie Ghost : So are their offices limited, severed, and divers : i Cor. 12. 12. 18. 28. The Pastours office is, to feed the sheep of Christ in green and wholesome pastures of his word, and lead them to the still waters, even to the pure fountaine and river of life. Hee must guyde and keep those sheep by that heauenly sheephook & pas- torall staffe of the word, thereby drawing them to him, thereby looking into their soules, even into their most secret thoughtes : Thereby discerning their diseases, and thereby curing them : ap- plying to every disease a fit and couenient medicine, & according to the qualitie & danger of the disease, give warning to the Church, that they may orderly proceed to excommunication. TEXT OF THE CONFESSION 37 Further, he must, by this his sheepehook watch over and defend his flock from rauenous beastes and the Wolfe, and take the litle foxes. &c. Fsa. 23. Lev. 10, 10, 11. Mi. 18. i. Ezek. 44. 23. df 33, ^ 34- loh. 21. IS. Act. 20. 28. i Pet. 5. 1.-4. Zach. 11. 7. Rev. 22. 2. Luk. 12. 42. 2 Cor. 10. 4. 5. Heb. 4, 12. loh. 10, 11, 12. Song. 2. 13. [5] The Doctours office is alreadie sett downe in his descrip- tion : His speciall care must bee. to build vpon the onely true groundwork, golde, silver, and pretious stones, that his work may endure the triall of the fire, and by the light of the same* fire, re- veale the Tymber, Hay, and Stubble of false Teachers : hee must take diligent heed to keep the Church from errours. And further hee must deliver his doctrine so plavnlie simplie, and purelie, that the church may increase with the increasing of God, & growe vp vnto him which is the head, Christ lesus. i Cor. j 11. 12. Levit. 10. 10. Ezech. jj I. 2, &^e. and 44. 24 Mai. 2,6 i Cor. j, 11. I Cor. I 77. I Tim. 4, 16. &^ 6. 20. Ephe 2, 20 Heb. 6, i. I Pet 2, 2. The office of the Auncientes is expressed in their descrip- tion : Their especiall care must bee, to see the ordinaunces of God truely taught and and practized, aswel by the officers in dooing their duetie vprightlie, as to see that the people obey willinglie and readily. It is their duetie to see the Congregation holily and quietly ordered, and no way disturbed, by the contentious and dis- obedient froward and obstinate : not taking away the libertie of the least, but vpholding the right of all, wiselie iudging of times and circumstances. They must bee readie assistauntes to the Pastour and Teachers, helping to beare their burden, but not in- truding into their office. Num. 11. 16. Deut. i. 13 & 16. 18. 2 Chro. ig, 8 Exo jp, 42. i Tim. j, i^. 2 Tim. i, ij. i Cor. 11, 16. and 14 33. Gal. 2, 4. 5, 14 Col 4, 16, ij. Act. 20. i Pet. 3, I. Rom. 12, 8. The Deacons office is, faithfully to gather & collect by the ordinance of the Church, the goods and benevolence of the faith- full, and by the same direction, diligentlie and trustilie to dis- tribute them according to the necessitie of the Saincts. Further they must enquire & consider of the proportion of the wantes both of the Oificers and other poore, and accordinglie relate vnto the Church, that provision may be made. Actes 6. Rom 12, 8. The Relievers & AVidowes office is, to minister to the sicke, lame, wearie, & diseased, such helpefull comforts as they need, 38 THE CONFESSION OF 1 589 by watching, tending and helping them : Further, they must shew good example to the yonger Women, in sober, modest, & godly conversation, avoyding idlenes, vaine talke, & light behaviour. Rom. 12, 8. I Tim. 5, g. Ss^c. These Officers, though they be divers and severall, yet are they not severed, least there should be a division in the body, but they are as members of the bodie, having the same case [care] one of another, ioyntlie doing their severall dueties to the service of the Sainctes, and to the edification of the Bodie of Christ, till wee all meet together in the perfect measure of the fulnes of Christ, by whom all the bodie being in the meane whyle thus coupled and knit togither by everie ioynt for the [6] furniture thereof, accord- ing to the effectuall power wiAich is in the measure of everie part, receiveth increase of the bod/e, vnto the edifying of it self in love : neither can any of these /Offices be wanting, without grievous lamenes, & apparant deformitie of the bodie, yea violent injurie to the Head Christ lesus. /Luk. 9. 46. 47. 48. loh. 13. 12.-17. i Cor. 12, 12. 25. 28. Ephcs 4, II, 12, I J. 16. Thus this holie armie of saintes, is marshalled here in earth ' by these Officers, vnder the conduct of their glorious Emperour CHRIST, that victorious Michaell. Thus it marcheth in this most heavenlie order, & gratious araye, against all Enimies both bodilie and ghostlie : peaceable in it self as Jerusalem, terrible to the enemy as an Armie with baners, triumphing over their tyran- nie with patience, their crueltie with mekenes, and over Death it self with dying. Thus through the blood of that spotles Lambe, and that Word of their testimonie, they are more then Con- querours, brusing the head of the Serpent : yea through the power of his Word, they have power to cast down Sathan like lightning : to tread vpon Serpents aud Scorpions : to cast downe strong holds, and everie thing that exalteth it self against GoD. The gates of Hell and all the Principalities and powers of the world, shall not prevayle against it. Rom. 12. ch. i Cor. 12. Rev. 14. I. 2. Song. 6. 3. Rev. 12. 11. Luk. 10, 18, ig. 2 Cor. 10. 5. Mat. 16, 18. Rd. 8, 38, jp. Further, he hath given them the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven, that whatsoever they bynd in earth by his word, shalbe bound in heaven : and whatsoever they loose on earth, shalbe loosed in heaven. Mat. 16, ig. lohn. 20, 23. Mat. 18, 18. Now this power which Christ hath given vnto his Church, and to every member of his Church, to keep it in order, hee hath not TEXT OF THE CONFESSION 39 left it to their discretions and lustes to be vsed or neglected as they will, but in his last Will and Testament, he hath sett downe both an order of proceeding, and an end to which it is vsed. Mat. 16. 16. 19 & 18. 15. 16. ly, 18. e?^ 28. 20. Deut. 12, 31. 32. Rev. 22, 18. ig. If the fault be private, holy and loving admonition & reproof is to be vsed, with an inward desire & earnest care to winne their brother : But if hee wil not heare, yet to take two or three other brethren with him, whom he knoweth most meet for that purpose, that by the mouth of two or three witnesses, every word may be confirmed : And if he refuse to heare them, then to declare the matter to the Church, which ought severelie and sharpelie to repre- hend, gravelie to admonish, and lovinglie to perswade the partie offending: shewing him the heynousnes of his offence, & the daunger of his obstinacie, & the fearefuU judgements of the Lord. Lev. 19. 17. 18. Mat. 18. 15. Deut. ig, 15. Mat, 18, 16. [7] All this notwithstanding the Church is not to hold him as an enimie, but to admonish him and praye for him as a Brother, prooving if at any time the Lord will give him repentaunce. For this power is not given them to the destruction of any, but to the edification of all. 2 Thes. 3, 13. 2 Cor. 10, 8. and 13, 10.'^ If this prevaile not to draw him to repentance, then are they in the Name aud power of the Lord lESVS with the whole Con- gregation, reverently in prayer to proceed to excommunication, that is vnto the casting him out of their congregation & fellow- ship, covenaunt & protectio of the Lord, for his disobedience & ob- stinacie, &: committing him to Sathan for the destructio of the flesh, that the Spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord lesus, if such bee his good wil and pleasure. Mat. 18. //. i Cor 3 11. Further, they are to warne the whole Congregation and all other faithfull, to hold him as a Heathen and Publicane, & to ab- steine themselves from his societie, as not to eat or drink with him, &c. vnles it bee such as of necessitie must needes, as his Wife, his Children, and Familie : yet these (if they be members of the Church) are not to joyne to him in any spirituall exercise. Mat. 18. 17. I Cor. 5. 11. If the offence bee publike, the partie is publiquely to bee re- proved, and admonished : if hee then repent not, to proceed to 1 The difference between the first and second editions of this creed lies in the position of this paragraph. In the first edition it was placed "after the excommunication," i. e., apparently after the paragraph beginning, " Further, they are to warne." (See note to page 28 as to the alleged reasons for this change.) 40 THE CONFESSION OF 1 589 excommunication, as aforesaid, i Tim. 5. 20. Gal. 2. 14. los. 7. 19. 2 Cor. 7. 9. The repentance of the partie must bee proportionable to the offence, viz. If the offence bee publique, publique : If private, pri- vate : humbled, submissive, sorrowfull, vnfained, giving gloria to the Lord. Lev. ip, 17. 18. Pro. 10, 12. Rom. 12, up. &^ 13, 70. and 14. I. There must great care bee had of admonitions, that they bee not captious or curious finding fault when none is ; neyther yet in bitternes or reproch : for that were to destroye and not to save our brother : but they must bee carefullie done, with prayer going before, they must dee seazoned with trueth, grauitie, love & peace. Mat. 18. 15. &: 26. 8. Gal. 6. i. 2. 2 Tim. 2. 24. Mark, p, jo. Ephes. 4, 2p. lam. 5, 75, ip, 20. Moreover in this Church is an especiall care had by every member thereof, of offences : The Strong ought not to offend the Weak, nor the weake to iudge the stronge : but all graces here are given to the service and edification of each other in love and long suffering. Luke, ij, i. Pro. 10, 12. Rom. 14, ij, ip. Gal. 6, 2. In this Church is the Truth purelie taught, and surelie kept : heer is the Covenaunt, the Sacramentes, and promisses, the graces, the glorie, the presence, the worship of God, &c. Gen. 17. ch. Lev. 26. II. 12. Lsa. 44. j. Gal. 4, 28 &f d, id. Lsay, do, ij. Dent. 4, 12. 13. Lsay, j6, 7. I Tim. 3, 13. Lsay. 32. 8. [8] Into this Temple entreth no vncleane thing, neither what- soever worketh abhominatios or lyes, but they which are write in the Lambes Book of life. Lsay. 32. i. Ezek. 44 p. Lsay. 33. 8. Zach. 14. 21. Rev. 21, 2y. But without this CHVRCH shalbe dogs and Enchaunters, & Whoremongers, & Murderers, and Idolatours, and whosover loveth & maketh lyes. Rom. 2. p. Rev. 22. 13. 1589. Ill THE SECOND CONFESSION OF THE LONDON- AMSTERDAM CHURCH, 1596 Editions and Reprints I. A Trve Confession, etc' 1596. No place of publication given, but almost certainly printed at Amsterdam. II. Confessio Fidei Anglorvni Qvorvndam in Belgia Exvlantivm : Vna cum Prafatione ad Lectorem : Quam ab omnibus legi et animadverti nipimus, etc., 1598. Probably printed at Amsterdam. A Latin translation of I. with a new pre- face and some slight modification of a few articles. III. The Confession of faith of certayne English people living in exile in the Low Countreys, etc., 1598. Apparently an English edition of II. IV. A Dutch translation, before 1600.^ V. Printed also in English in Certayne Letters,^ translated into English, etc. ; 1602. VI. In English also in Johnson and Ainsworth's, Apologie or Defence of svch Trve Christians as are commonly (but vniustly) called Brovvnists : etc., 1604. pp. 4-29. (Reprint of III.). VII. In Latin, Confessio Fidei Anglorum quorundam in Inferiori Germania exulantium, etc., 1607. 16° pp. ii, 56. VIII. In English, same title as No. III., with the addition of the Points of Difference from the Church of England, given in the next chapter, 1607. IX. In Dutch, in a translation of No. VL, 1614. X. In Dutch, in a new translation of No. VI., Amsterdam, 1670. Literature Hanbury, Historical Memorials, I: gi-g8, with extracts from the preface and articles ; Punchard, History of Congregationalism, 2d ed., Boston [1867], III: 223- 226 ; Dexter, Cong, as seen, pp. 270, 271, 278-282, 299-301, 316 ; Fletcher, His- tory . . . of hidependency, 2d ed., London, 1862, II; 215-222. THE organization of the London Church, perfected in Septem- ber, 1592, by the choice of Francis Johnson' as pastor and John Greenwood as teacher, was followed by Greenwood's speedy 1 Full title in connection with the reprint at the close of this chapter. 2 Mentioned by Francis Johnson in An Answer to Maister H. lacob, etc., p. 134. I owe this information to the late Dr. Dexter. 3 The letters here referred to were between Francis Junius, professor of Theology at Leyden, and the exiled church. See Dexter, Cong, as seen, p. 301. * Francis Johnson was born in 1562, of a Yorkshire family of some prominence. While a student at Cambridge, and still more as a fellow of Christ's College at that University, he became imbued with Presbyterian principles. His public proclamation of his views in 1589 was fol- 4 (41) 42 THE CONFESSION OF IS96 arrest and execution. Johnson shared also in his colleague's com- mittal and detention/ though his life was spared; and in the spring of 1593 no less than fifty-six of the little flock followed their pastor and teacher into confinement in the London prisons.' These mul- tiplied arrests, embracing many of humble position and little polit- ical importance, led the government to look upon emigration as the best method of ridding London of the Separatists; and there- fore, though Johnson and other of the leaders were kept in prison, the way was made easy, from the summer of 1593 onward, for them to slip over to Holland.^ After being scattered for a time, it would appear, in villages in the neighborhood of Amsterdam, the bulk of the congregation found their home in that city itself. This re- gathering of the scattered church in Amsterdam, which took place as early as 1595/ was accompanied or followed by the election^ of lowed by his imprisonment. After considerable influence had been brought to bear on the authori- ties by his friends, he was allowed to leave England, and became pastor of the Puritanically inclined church of English merchants at Middelburg in the Dutch province of Zeland. It was while here, in 1591, that Barrowe and Greenwood's Plaine Refvtation 0/ M. Giffards Booke^ etc., came to his knowledge, as it was passing through the press at Dort. Having notified the English ambassa- dor, Johnson was commissioned to destroy the forth-coming edition. This he did, saving two of the volumes for himself and a friend. But in reading the work he was convinced of the truth of the principles it set forth, rie therefore gave up his pleasant position at Middelburg, and going to London sought out Barrowe and Greenwood in prison. From that time onward he was associated with the fortunes of the London church. Elected its pastor in 1592, he was imprisoned in London from 1593 to 1597, and was then released on condition of going to a newly projected colony in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The loss of one of the vessels on the Nova Scotian coast compelled the re- turn of the expedition to England. Once back in London Johnson contrived to escape to Holland in the autumn of 1597. The London church was thus completely transferred Co Amsterdam. John- son's pastorate here was stormy. In 1610 the church was divided between him and Ainsworth, in a quarrel in which Ainsworth seems to have been in the right. But whatever his faults may have been, he was a man of sincerity, earnestness, and ability. He died in January, 1618, at Amsterdam, - His controversial works were numerous and vigorous. Dexter, Cong, as seen^ Bibliog. enumerates nine titles. Compare for Johnson's biography Brook, Lives of the Puritans^ 11: 89-106. Han- bury, Memorials^ I, Ch. V, and following: Dexter, as cited, pp. 263, 264, 272-278, 283-310; Gordon in Dictio7iary of National Biography, XXX: 9-11. The account of his conversion is given by Gov. William Bradford of Plymouth, in a Dialogue, written in 1648, and is distinctly stated to be based on Johnson's own statement, Young, Chronicles of the Pilgrims, pp. 424, 425. Boston, 1844. A few facts may be found in Neal, History of the Puritans^ Toulmin's ed. Bath, 1793, 1 : 468 ; II: 43-49- * Both were arrested Dec. 5, 1592. Dexter, Cong, as seen, p. 266. 2 il^id, 3 Ibid, pp. 266-26S. Their departure was expedited by a law passed by Parliament in 1593, entitled "An Act to retain the Queen's Majesty's subjects in due obedience," providing that any above 16 years of age who should refuse to go to church for a month, or attend any religious con- venticle, should be imprisoned without bail until he publicly submit and conform. If he refuse this, on conviction he is to "abjure this realm of England, and all other the Queen's dominions for ever." If he return he is guilty of "felony, without benefit of clergy." /. e., worthy of death. 35 Eliz., I, 2, 3, 5. T. W. Davids, A nnals of Evangelical Nonconforiniiy in the County of Essex, London, 1863, pp. 86, 87. See also Neal, History of the Ptiritans, 1 : 465-467. Perry, History of the English Chiti-ch (Student's Series, 1881), p. 336. * Ibid., p. 268. The date is entirely uncertain. JOHNSON AND AINSWORTH 43 Henry Ainsworth^ to the vacant post of teacher, the pastor, Francis Johnson, still remaining in his London prison. Conscious once more of a distinct, though divided, corporate existence, and domi- ciled in a foreign city, the church desired to define its doctrinal position, lest it should fall under the charge of heresy; and to make clear its views on polity, lest its separation from the English Establishment should seem unjustifiable schism or rebellion against civil authority. AVith this two-fold object in view, therefore, the London-Amsterdam church put forth a new creed sometime in 1596. Though some consultation was probably held between the exiles at Amsterdam and those of the flock who were still in confinement in London,^ the Preface of the Confession clearly indicates it was chiefly the work of the former.^ Who of the church were instru- mental in its preparation cannot be surely affirmed, but the conjec- ture is natural that a large share of the labor fell to Ainsworth. Probably the Preface was not entirely from his hand. Its tone is 1 Henry Ainsworth, the most learned of the founders of modern Congregationalism and one ■of its saintliest ministers, was born, according to his own testimony, in 1570 or '71 ; but all the de- tails of his early life are tantalizingly obscure. It is probable that he never enjoyed a university ■education, but, however acquired, his learning was from our first acquaintance with him far beyond that which was usual even among professedly learned men. He wrote a Latin style of considerable felicity, while his knowledge of Hebrew, quickened and increased by opportunities for intercourse with Jews which Amsterdam afforded, was such that Bradford was able to record the opinion of competent scholars at the university of Leyden that '' he had not his better for the Hebrew tongue in the university, nor scarce in Europe." Even better testimony to the extent and modernness of his knowledge of Hebrew is the fact that his A nnotations on the Pentateuch and Psalms are held in esteem to this day as a still valuable aid to the study of the Scriptures. The same obscurity which veils Ainsworth's early life and education hides from us all certain knowledge as to the cir- cumstances which led to his adoption of Congregational views or his first association with the Separatists. His abilities, when once known, would readily account for his election to the teacher- ■ship of the exiled church. A man of peace, Ainsworth's service in the Amsterdam Church was vexed by the strifes which rent that distracted body, and which finally, in 1610, led to a separation between him and Johnson. He remained in his ministry at Amsterdam till his death in 1622 or 1623, an event which Neal and Brook attributed to poison, and Dexter in his Cong, as seen, suggests may have been due to pulmonary complaints. The true cause was, however, later discovered by Dr. Dexter, and the full proofs will doubtless soon be published. I may perhaps be permitted to say that the disease was the stone, and that poison had no share in Ainsworth's death. Ainsworth's works were very numerous. Some 23 are enumerated by Dr. Dexter in Cong, as seen, p. 346, and further particulars may be found in the Dictionaiy 0/ National Biography, 1 : 192, 193. For Ainsworth's biography see Bradford, Dialogue, in Young's Chronicles of the Pilgrivts., pp. 448, 449, Neal, History of the Puritans, Toulmin's ed., II: 43-45. Stuart in preface to re- print of T-wo Treatises, i. (?,, Ainsworth's Coinniitnion of Saincts and Arroiv against Idolatry, Edinboro, 1789. Brook, Lives of the Purita7is^ II: 299-303. Hanbury, Memorials, I: Chs. V- XXIV passim. Dexter, Cong, as seen, pp. 269, 270, 299-346. W. E. A. Axon in Diet, National Siography^ 1 : 191-194. 2 Dexter, Cong, as seen, p. 270. 3 gee Preface, opening paragraph. 44 THE CONFESSION OF 1 596 one of sense of personal wrong, somewhat in contrast to the intro- duction to the Latin translation which is almost certainly the work of his pen. But whether many or few of the London-Amsterdam church shared in its preparation, the Confession was put forth as the symbol of the whole body, and its value in witnessing to their doc- trine, polity, and attitude toward the English Establishment from which they had come out is correspondingly great. The Preface breathes a spirit of hostility to the supporters of the National Church natural in men who had suffered so much at the hands of the prelates. But it is a hostility based clearly on principle. Whatever added touch of bitterness the arraignment may have derived from the recollection of prisons and death, the real motive of its composition was not enmity to persons, but a pro- found conviction that the English Church, when tried by the Scrip- ture standards, was un-Christian. As such it was, in these men's thinking, a positive peril to the soul to be of its membership. And if the premises of their argument are correct, if their principle, which -was but a logical application of the fundamental thought of the Reformation, is right in asserting that nothing should be prac; ticed in the government of the church or the worship of God which is not fully patterned in the Bible, the cogency of the arguments of the Preface is undeniable. With far more readableness of style than is usual in controversial writings of the period, the writers of this introduction put questions to their opponents regarding the divine warrant of the liturgy, rites, ministry, and membership of the Church of England which must have been exceedingly difficult for the Puritan wing of the Establishment to answer. And at the same time they gave biographical facts regarding the martyrs of their own body which are not elsewhere to be found. No other single document of so brief compass so well sets forth the suffer- ings and the motives of these much-tried Separatists. The creed itself consists of forty-five articles, treating some of doctrine, others of polity. Li matters of belief they are in substan- tial harmony with the positions of the Calvinistic churches of the Continent, and with the Puritan wing of the Church of England. NATURE OF THE CONFESSION 45 On these heads their creed is but little more than a re-affirmation ■of the current beliefs of a vast majority of the Protestant churches at that day. In polity it lays down the propositions already pre- sented in the Trve Description, but with much greater fullness of elaboration. It is no longer an ideal sketch. Questions of actual administration have evidently led to minuter definition in regard to certain problems. An instance or two may illustrate. In the Trve Description no provision was made for the reception of the members of one church into another, or for the relations of church to church. Now it is hard to see, perhaps, how these questions could have become very pressing to the London-Amsterdam church. But the divided condition of that body, if nothing else, had caused them to be thought of ; and therefore the creed of 1596 enunciates the truly Congregational, because truly Scriptural, doctrine that members coming from one church to another should bring certifi- cates of their character and standing.' It declares further that while the individual independence of each church is to be recog- nized, churches owe counsel and help to one another in matters of more than usual concern.'' The Trve Description, in similar man- ner, made no provision for the removal of such church officers as might prove unworthy of their trust, save what might be implied in the very general remarks as to the right of a church to excommuni- cate any offending member. The creed before us, on the contrary, declares that a church may depose a minister unfit for his post, and counsels procedure to excommunication only when continued evil conduct demands a further step.* These examples, which the stu- dent can readily multiply for himself, show plainly that the creed of 1596 is not merely greater in verbal extent than that of 1589, but marks a growth in appreciation and application of Congregational principles. The document is more than a general statement of faith and polity. It is evidently the answer of its writers also to the ques- tion which must frequently have been put to them as to the method of procedure by which they would reform the Church of England if they could have their way. The thirty-second to the 1 Article 37. "^ Article 38. = Article 23. 46 THE CONFESSION OF 1 596 thirty-ninth articles are a program for action. They would haver all who are convinced of the truth of the charges here formulated against the Establishment lay down any offices which they may have held within it and at once renounce its communion. No one, holding the rightful view of what Christ intended a church to be, is to contribute longer to the financial support of the legal church, even though such a refusal make him obnoxious to the law.^ These religious men, who have come forth from the Church of England, are next to join in local congregations, united by a covenant and a common confession of faith.' In these congregations any who are able, and have the approval of their associates, are to teach and preach ; but the sacraments are not to be administered until some of these preachers, whose qualifications have appeared eminent, are chosen and ordained to the divinely appointed offices of pastor, teacher, elder, and deacon, or as many of these offices as the church finds men fitted to fill. Then baptism is to be administered to the children and wards of the members of the local church, and its members of mature years are to unite in the fiord's supper.' But baptism does not admit its recipient to the full privileges of the church. While all who will are to be urged to be present at the preaching of God's word, and while the duty of professing faith in Christ is to be pressed upon them, the church is to be in- creased only by the admission of those who make a profession of personal belief and who publicly unite in the covenant fellowship.'' Thus the Christian people of any given town in England, so the makers of this creed thought, might be released from the Estab- lishment and organized into true churches. But what should be done with the Establishment and with those who refused to come out of it ? The answer is characteristic of the times, and illustra- tive of the partial vision to which these men had attained. The old system was to be uprooted and the buildings and revenues which it enjoyed were to be confiscated by civil authority. The magistrate was to enfoixe upon the reluctant the commands of God.^ There is something ludicrous as well as pathetic in the ' Article 32. 2 Article 33. s Article 34, 35. < Article 37. s Article 39. HOW THEY WOULD REFORM THE CHURCH 47 readiness with which these exiles of Amsterdam and prisoners oi London call upon the power from which they had themselves suf- fered so much to enforce on others that which they had had to bear. But in this matter the nineteenth century is apt to judge the sixteenth hardly. Such a thought as that of honest difference of opinion in regard to the main, and even the minor truths of Christianity was foreign to the great mass of men for more than two centuries after the Reformation. Dissent from their own con- victions men believed to be due to defect in moral character, such failure to see the truth could be owing only to willfulness, or to a divine withholding of light which was in itself high evidence of the sinfulness of those thus deprived. There could be but one right view. These Separatists held it. They had called on their oppo- nents to show its falsity, and to their thinking their opponents had failed. And since it is the duty of a magistrate, they thought, to support the truth, the magistrates of England should overthrow an Establishment, which civil, government had so often altered during the last fifty years, and which the Separatists believed they had demonstrated to be utterly unworthy. We may well regret that these early Congregationalists and the founders of New Eng- land also did not share the truer view of Browne,' and of the Ana- baptists regarding the limits of civil authority, but there is little reason for surprise that they did not. This is, after all, a minor matter. England was not to be re- formed on the lines here laid down. But as a statement of Con- gregationalism this creed marks a decided gain in clearness. As a setting forth of the essential and permanent features of the system in definite form, it was fitted to stand for many years, as the frequent reprints show it did stand, as an adequate and valued exposition of Congregational doctrine and polity. As has already been seen, the creed, as it was issued in 1596, was preceded by an introduction breathing the spirit of strong in- dignation against the oppressors from whose hands the church had so recently escaped, and who still held some of the brethren in bondage. The very warmth of this feeling, justifiable as it was. 1 See ante^ p. 12. 48 THE CONFESSION OF 1 596 rendered this preface less likely to be favorably received by those unfamiliar with English ecclesiastical affairs. And as the church at last gathered together all its scattered membership at Amster- dam (1597), and came to be more and more a recognized, though humble, element in the religious life of the city, the desire to set themselves right in the eyes of Protestant Christendom, which had prompted the original draft of the creed, impelled the breth- ren to make a translation of their profession into the only tongue which learned Europe could understand, and preface it with an account of the government and rites of the legally established church of their native country designed to make clear to the non- English reader the reasons for their separation. The new preface is milder in tone than the old, though it retains passages from the latter. But it cannot be said to have gained in strength or cogency. The translation of the old creed, thus introduced, ap- peared late in 1598;^ and was, doubtless, the work of the scholarly Henry Ainsworth. Its typographical dress indicated the improved outward estate of the exiled company, as surely as the mute witness of the wretched printing and the scanty font of type revealed the dire poverty of these exiles for what they believed to be the truth of God at their first coming into Holland. 1 Dexter, Cong;, as seen, p. 299. The following articles were slightly revised, not for content, but for clearness of statement, in the edition of 1598 ; xvii, xxviii, xxx, xliii, and xliv. The Confession of 1596 A TRVE CONFESS!- | ON OF THE FAITH, AND HVM- J BLE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OE THE ALE- | geaiice, which wee hir Maiesties Subjects, falsely called Brownists, | doo hould towards God, and yeild to hir Majestic and all other that I are ouer vs in the Lord. Set down in Articles or Positions, for the I better & more easie vnderstanding of those that shall read yt : And | published for the cleerin^ of our selues from those vnchristian slan- | ders of heresie, schisme, pryde, obstinacie, dis- loyaltie, | sedicion, &c. which by our adversaries are | in all places given out against vs. | wee beleeue therfore haue we spoken. 2 Cor. 4, 13. I But, I who hath beleeued our report, and vnto ivhom is the I arme of the Lord reiiealed? Isai. 53, i. | M.D. XCVL [ii Blank.] [iii]. To all that desire to feare, to loue, & to obey our Lord lesus Christ, grace, wisdom and vnderstanding. "Thou ' canst not lightly bee ignorant (gentle Reader) what eviils and afflictions, for our profession and faith towards God wee haue sustained at the hands of our owne Nation : How bytterly wee haue been, an yet are, accused, reproched and per- secuted wich [with] such mortall hatred, as yf wee were the most notorious obstinate hereticks, and disloyall subiects to our gracious Queen Elizabeth, that are this day to bee found in all the Land. And therfore, besides the dayly ignominie wee susteine at the hands of the Preachers and Prophets of our tyme, who have given theyr tongnes the reins to speacke despightfully of vs, wee haue been furtlfer miserably en- treated by the Prelats and cheef of the Clergie : some of vs cast into most vile and noysome prisons and dungeons,*" "^ laden with yrons, and there, withont all pitie, de- teyned manie yeeres, no man remembring our affliction : vntill our God released some of vs out of theyr cruell bands by death, as the Cities of Londo, Norwich, Glocester, Bury,' and manye other places of the land can testifie. Yet heere the malice of Satan stayed not it self, but raysed vp against vs a more greevous persecu- tion, even vnto the violent death of some.f" and lamentable exile of vs all ; causing heavie decrees to come forth against vs, that wee should forsweare our own Contrey *" Thqy shut op our lyves in the Dungeon, they cast a stone upon vs. Lam. 3- 53- f" Anno 1593. April. 10.'' ^ From this point onward the preface is in Old English black letter. I have tried to give it HteratiiK, even to the misprints. "^ This and the subsequent notes are on the margin of the pages, often with no mark indicat- ing their exact reference to the text. When not so indicated I have added a o. 3 Bury St. Edmunds. * The martyrdom of Barrowe and Greenwood is probably meant, though that was Apl. 6. (49) 50 THE CONFESSION OF 1 596 & depart, or els bee slayne therein. This have onr adversaries vsed, as their last and best argument against vs, (when all other fayled) followinge the stepps of theyr bloody Predecessors, the popish Priests and Prelats. Now therfore that the true cause of this their hostilitie & hard vsage of vs may appeere vnto all men ; wee haue at lengh arayds our manie troubles, through Gods favonr, obteyned to publish vnto the view of the world, a confession of our fayth & hope in Christ, and loyal harts, towards our Prince, the rather to stop the mouths of impious and vnreasonable men, who have not ceased some of them, both openly in their Sermons & printed pamph- lets, notoriously to accuse and defame vs, as alsoo by all indirect meanes secretly to suggest the malice of their owne evill harts, therby invegling our soveraign Prince and Rulers against vs : that when the true state of the controversie between them and vs shalbe manifested, the christian (or but indifKrent) Reader may iuge whether our adversaries have not followed the way of Cain and a Balaam, to kill and curse vs Gods sernants without cause. For if in this onr Confession appeere no matter worthie such mortal inmitie and persecution, then we protest (good Reader) that, to our knowledge, they neyther haue cause nor colour of cause so to entreat vs, the mayne and entire difference betwixt their Synagogs and vs, beeing in these Articles fully cS: wholly comprised. An other motive inducing vs to the publication of this our testimonie, is, the rufull estate of our poore Contrymen, who remayne yet fast locked in Egipt, that hous of servants, in slavish subjection to strange LLs ' & lawes, enforced to beare the burdens and iutoUerable yoke of their popish canons & decrees, beeing subiect every day they rise to * 38 antichristian ecclesiasticall offices, and manie moe Romish statutes and traditions, almost without number : besides their high trangression dayly in their vaine will-worship of God, by reading over a few prescribed prayers and collects, which they haue translated verbatim out of the Mass-book, and which are yet taynted with manie popish hereticall errors and superstions, instead of true spirituall invocation vpon the name of the Lord. [iv ] These and manie other greevous enormities are amongst them, not suffred only but with a high hand malnteyned, and Gods servants, which by the powre of his Word and Spirit witnes against & condemne such abhominations, are both they & their testimonie, reiected, persecuted & plasphemed. What a wofuU plight then are such people in, how great is their iniquitie, howfearfuU indgments doo abide them; wee have therfore, for their sakes, manifested this onr Confession of and vowed obedience vnto that Fayth which was once gyven vnto the a Saincts, wherby they may bee drawne (God shewing mercy vnto them) vnto the same faith and obedience with vs, that they perish not in their sinnes. For how could wee behould so manie soules of our dear Contrymen to dye before our eyes & wee hould our peace : And wheras they have been heertofore greatly abused by their tyme-serving Priests, beeing give to vnderstad that wee were a dangerous people, holding manie errors, renting our selves 1 Lords ? ""Arch Bbs. L.[ord] Bbs. Suffragans, Chancellors, Deanes, Arch-Deacos, Commissaries, Officials, Doctors, Proctors, Registers, scribes, Purcevants, Sum- moners, Subdeans, chaplaines, Prebedaries, Cannons, Peti-Canons, Gospellers, pistellers Chanters, Sub-chanters, Vergiers, organ-players, Queristers, Parsons, Vicars, Curats, Stipendaries, Vagrant-Preachers, Priests, Deacons or half Priests, Churchwardens, Sideme Collectors, Clerks, Sextins. a Gen. 4. Num. 12. a Jude 3. PREFACE TO THE CONFESSION 5 1 from the tue Church, because of some infirmities in men, some falts in their worship, Ministerie, Church-gouvernment, etc. that wee were Donatists, Anabaptists, Brown- ists, Schismaticlcs, &c. these few leaves (wee trust) shal now cleer vs of these and such lilte criminations, and satisfie anie godly hart, yea every reasonable man, that will but with an indifferent ear heare our cause. For wee have always protested, and doo by these presents testifie vnto all me, that wee neyther our selves doo, neyther accompt it lawfuU for others to seprrate fro anie true church of Crist, for infirmities falts or errors whatsoever except their iniquitie bee come to such an heith, that for obstinatie they cease to be a true visible Church, aud bee refused and forsaken of God. And for this their renowmed Church of England, wee a have both by word and writing, proved it vnto them to bee false and counterfeit, deceyving hir children with vaine titles of the word. Sacraments, Ministerie, &c. having indeed none of these in the or- dinance and powre of Christ emongst them. They have been shewed, that the people in Their Parish-assemblies, neyther were nor are meet stones for Gods house, meet members for Christs glorious body, vntill they b bee begotten by the seed of his word vnto fayth, and renewed by repentance. Their generall irreligious profannes ignor- ance, Atheisme and Machevelisme on the one side, & publique Idolitrie, vsuall blas- phemie, swearing, lying, kylling, stealing, whoring, and all maner of imptetie [im- piety] on the other side,^ vtterly disableth them from beeing Citizens in the new Hierusalem, sonnes of God & heires with Christ and his Saints, vntill they become new creatures. Their slavish bondage vnto the antichristiaen tyrannous Prelats, whom they celibrate and honour as their Lords & reverend Fathers spiritnall, accept- ing their popish Canons and Iniunctions for laws in their Church, their marcked Priests, Preachers, Parsons, and Vicars &c. in lewe of Christs true Pastors and Teachers, running to their Courts and Consistories at every summons &c. doo mani- fest li whose servants they are, & to whom they yeeld their obedience. Their learned Ministerie even from the highest Arch-prelat to the lowest Vicare & half-Priest, thath [hath] been, by the powre of our Lord Jesus Christ, cast down into the smoky fornace of that pyt of bottomles diepth e from whence they arose, revealed by the light of his word, to bee strange, false, popish & antichristian, the very same, and no other, then were hatched and advanced in their Metropolitane Sinagoge of Rome, from whence they have feched the very patterne nnd mould of their Church, Ministerie, Service & Regiment, even the very expresse Character and image of that first wild beast of Italy, as all in whom anie spark of true light is, may easely discerne. With these and manie other lyke weightie arguments have wee . pleaded against that our whorish mother, hir Priests and Prelats, which as a heavie mylstone presseth hir down to hell; for the vyalls of Gods wrathfull iudgments are powred vpon them, which maketh a Conferences betwixt certeine Preachers and prysoners Marc, 1590'. Discoverey of the false Church 1590.^ Refutation of Mr. Giffard prynted. 1591.' b I Peter I, 23. John 3, 3. c Revel. 21, 27. 2 Cor. 5, 17. Ezech. 44, 9. Act 8, 37. (/Rom. 6, 16. Mat. 6, 24. Reue. 13, 16, & 14, g. 10. &c. e See Revel. 9, 3. with their owne annotatation, vpon that place. 2 King. 16, 10. II. &c. Reu. 13, 14. Hos. 2, 2. Rev. 16, 10, 11. 1 [Barrowe & Greenwood], A collection of certaine Letters and Conferences^ lately passed Betwixt Certaine Preachers^ d^ Two Prisoners in the Fleet [Dort], 1590. 2 Barrowe, A Brief Discouerie of the false Churchy etc. [Dort], 1590. 3 Barrowe & Greenwood, A Plaine Refvtation of M. Giffards Booke^ intituled^ A short treatise gai-nst the Donatistes of Englandy etc. [Dort], 1591. 52 THE CONFESSION OF 1 596 them so to [v] storme rage and curse, gnawing their tongues for sorrow & payne of these wounds, and not yet finding grace to repent of and turne from their smnes. For when wee have proclamed this our testimonie against them, how have they be- haved themselves, but as savage beasts renting and tearing vs with their teeth, never daring to come vnto the triall of the word of God, eyther by free wryting or confer- ence, but greedily hunting after Christs poore lambes, and so manie as they could get into their pawes, misvsing their bodyes with all exqvisite tyrannic in long and lament- able emprisonment, bedsies [besides] despight and reproches without mesure. So that through their barbarous crueltie* 24. soules have perished in their prisons, with m the Cittie of London only, (besides other places of the Land) & that of late yeeres. Manie also have they, by their immanitie, caused to blaspheme and forsake the faith of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, and many mo they terrific and keep from the same. For all this, yet were not these savage men satisfied, though blood in abonndance ran out of their v\'yde mouths, but they procured certeine of vs (after manie yeeres emprisonment) to be indighted, arrayned, condemned and hanged as felons (how uniustly, thou Lord iust and true knowest) Henry Barrow, John Greenwood, and John Penry, whose perticular examinations araignments and maner of execution, with the circumstances about them, if thou didst truly vnderstand (gentle Reader) it would make thy hart to bleed, considering their vnchristian and vnnaturall vsage. About the same tyme they executed also one William Denis,' at Thetford in North- folke, and long before they kylled two men, at Bury in Suffolk, Coppyn and Elias,^ for the like testimonie. Others they deteyne in their prysons to this day, who looke for the like measure at their mercelesse hands, yf God in mercye release them not be- fore. Our God (wee trust) will one day rayse vp an other John Fox, to gather and compile the Actes and Monuments of his later Martyrs, for the vew of posteritie, tho yet they seem to bee buryed in oblivion, and sleep in the dust. Then will this last infernall Clergie alsoo appeere in their proper colours, and be found nothing inferi- our to their bloody predecessours in poysoned malice and and tyrannic, but rather even to exceed them, in regard of the tyme. Alas for our poore Countreye, that it should bee so againe defiled with the blood of the seints, which cryeth lowde from vnder the Altar, and speaketh no beter things for it, then did the blood oia Habel. Needs * In Newgate Mr. Crane a man about 60 yeers of age Richard Jacson, Thomas Stevens, William Howton, Thomas Drewet, John Gwalter, Roger Ryppon, Robert Awoburne, Scipio Bellot, Robert Bowie, John Barnes beeing sic vnto death, was caryed forth & departed this lyfe shortly after. Mothor Maner of 60. yeers, Mother Roe of 60. yeers, Anna Tailour, Judeth Myller, Margaret Farrer beeing sick vnto death was caried forth, and ended hir lyfe within a day or two after. John Purdy in Brydwel, Mr. Denford in the Gate-house about 60. yeers of age. Father Debnham in the white-lyon about 70. yeers, George Bryty in Counter wood street, Henry Thoms5 in the clynk, John Chandler in the Count. Poultry, beeing sick vuto death was carryed forth & dyed within few dayes. Waltar Lane in the Fleet, Thomas Hewet in Counter Woodstreet.^ a Gen. 4, 10. ^ Of him nothing is known beyond the fact above given. Even Bradford knew no details. Young, ChrorJcles of the Pilgrim Fathers^ Boston, 1844, p. 427. 2 John Coppin and Elias Thacker of Bury St. Edmunds. Executed for circulating Browne's books on June 4 and 5, 1583. See Dexter, Cong, as seen^ p. 208-210. ^ Unfortunately we know nothing of most of these men and women. Regarding Roger Rip- pon see Dexter, Cong, as seen, p. 207. PREFACE TO THE CONFESSION 5 must the righteons Lord reserue a fearfull vengeance for such a Land, and make it £ example to all Natons, yf speedely they purge not thewselnes [themselves] by notab repentance. But oh how far are they from this, which harden their harts against v as did the Egiptians, and cease not to add vnto their former iniquities, still pursuir vs with their accustomed hatred, who seeke the welfare of their soules, & Offer the the things which concerne their peace, which they refuse. Thy peace o Englar hath wrought thy woe, and thy long prosperitie, thy ruin, thou hast been fat, the has waxed grosse, thy hart is covered, thow hast forsaken the God that made thee, ar despised the rock of thy salvation, thy sinnes have reached vp to Heaven, & Gc hath remembred thine iniquities to gyue vnto thee according to thy worcks. BehoL the tempest of the Lord is gon forth with wrath, the wirlewinde that hangeth ov shall light vpon the heads of the wicked, the indignation of the Lords wrath shall a returne vntill hee hane [have] doon, and vntil hee hane performed the intents of h hart ; In the later dayes thow shalt vnderstand it.* Our God shew mercy to the that are his in thee, and hastely draw them out ot the fire, that they perish not in tl sinnes. And most of all wee are sorie for our dread sovereigne Queen, whom wi haue alwayes loued, reverenced and obeyed in the Lord, that shee should so b( drawn by the subtle suggestion ot the Prelats to smyte hir faithfullest subjec ha[vi]ving hir finger so deep in the blood of Gods children, wherby shee hath n^ only defiled hir precious soule in the eyes of hir God, but also brought an ev name vpon hir meek and peaceable Government heere on Earth, in all Nations rowr aboul hir who doo with greef behold that Land to persecute and waste true Christiai now, which was erewhiles an harbour and refuge for Christians persecuted in oth places. But as wee are verily perswaded that hir Matis. clemencie hath been mm abused by the wretched vnconcionable false reports and instigations of the Priests, i will wee not cease (though wee bee exiled hir Dominions) with fervent harts to desi' hir Highnesse prosperitie, & pray that hir sinnes may bee forgiven hir, lamenting th Gods benefits, and great delyverances, should so soone of hir bee forgotten, & so requited, by this hard vsage of his poore servants for his sake. And if shee procei in this course, alas how shall shee ever bee able to behold the face of hir God wi comfort ; wherfore our soules shall weep in secret for hir, and wee will not cease pray the Lord to shew hir mercy, and open hir eyes before shee dye. And lykewy for those honorable Peeres hir grave Councellors, who also have consented to this oi hard measure, although our innocencie hath been sufKcietly manifested vnto the c scieces of some of the cheefest of the, our humble reqnest is, that they in the feare God may weigh their proceedings against vs, & rcmeber [remember] their accom that they shall shortly make vnto the Judge of heave and earth,f° where Christ w reckon vnto them al the tribulations of his poore despised members on earth, as if th( had been inflicted vpon his own glorious person, and will render reward accordingl The Lord giue them true wisdome, that they may learne, at last, to kisse the Soone b fore hee bee angry, and they prrish in the way.j:° As for the Priests and Preachers the land, they, of all other men, haue bewrayed their notable hypocrisie, that Stan. ing erewhile against the English Romish hierachie, and their popish abhomination haue now so redely submytted themselves to the Beast, and are not only content yeeld their canonicall obedience vnto him, and receiue his mark, but in most hosti * Och that they were wise, then would they vnderstand this, they would consid their later end. Deut. 32 2g. f° Mat. 10. 40. 41. & 25. 44. 45. t° Psal. 2. 10. 54 THE CONFESSION OF 1 596 maner oppose and set themselues against vs, not ceasing to add vnto our aflictions, scorning and reviling vs, and alienating the mynds of manie simple harted people, whoe are (wee doubt not) inclinable enough vnto the truth, were it not that these their lying Prophets did strengthen their hands, that they may not returne from their wicked wayes, by promising them lyfe and peace, where no peace is. These haue long busied themselues in seeking out new shifts and cavills to turne away the truth, which presseth them so sore, and haue at last been dryven to palpaple & grosse ab- surdities, seeking to dawbe vp that ruinous autichristan muddy wall, which them- selves did once craftily vndermine. And heerin wee report vs to the learned discourses of Dr. Robert Some,' and Mr. Giffard,' who haue so referced their wryt- ings with reproches, slanderous vntruths, and false collections on the one side, and manifest digressions, shiftings & turnings from the state of the question in hand, on the other side, as wee think the lyke presidents can hardly be shewed in anie wrytings of controversie in these times, and specially Mr. Giffards last answere^ which (it seemeth) hee did in haste : whcrin besides his boyes-play, in skipping over many whol leaves of his adversaries booke, (leaving the both vnanswered & vntouched) hee hath so wisely caryed himself in those things which hee professeth to answere, as a man afrayd once to come neere the battel and mayne coutroversie in hand, running out into vaine and frutlesse excursories, never approving by the word of God the places and offices of his Lords the Prelats, with their retinue, Courts, Canons, &c. neither the publick worship, ministerie, or people of this their Church of England. No hee knew well his adversaries were fast locked & wached in pry[Yii]son from wryt- ing anie more, and their books intercepted, so that few men could come to the view of them ; Hee might therfore deale as hee lysted himself for his own best advantage, and beare the people in hand that hee had confuted the Brownists and Donatists, for the prynt was as free for him, as the close pryson for them. But God (wee trust) will give meanes one day, that some things, which as yet are hid, shall come to light. In the meane t)me, thow for thy satisfying (Christian Reader) examin the mans wr)'t- ings, and see how hee hath answered vnto these criminations, or purged his Church of them. Look what scriptures hee hath brought for defence of his spirituall Lords, their places and procedings, their Courts, Cannons, Dignities, &c. what warrant in Christs Testament hee hath found for his service-booke and all the abhominable rites therin, for his Angelles, Saincts and Lady-days, popish Fastes, Lent, Embers and Eves : Hoav hee hath approved their English missall Prayers, Letanie, Collects aud Trentalls, their maryng, burying, churching of women, wretched abuse of both Sac- 1 R. Some, A Godly Treatise containing and deciding certaine questions^ mooned o/ late in London and other places tozicki?tgthe Ministerie^ Sacraments^ and Church. London, 158S ; Ibid, A De/encc 0/ svclt foints in K. Somes last treatise as M. Penry hath dealt against., etc., London, 1588 ; Ibid, A Godly Treatise •wherein are examined dj' con/vted many execrable fan- cies giuen ont ^ holden^ partly by Hen. Barroive and John Greenwood: partly by other 0/ the Ayiabaptisticall order, etc., London, 1589. Some was rector of Girton and master of Peterhouse Coll., Cambridge, a man somewhat in- clined to Puritanism. For his biography see Cooper Athents Cantabrigienses, ii: 510-3. 2 G. Gifford, A Short Treatise against the Donatists 0/ England, -whovie we call Brown- ists, etc., London, 1590 ; Ibid, A Plaine Declaration that our Brownists be .full Donatists, etc., London, 1590; Ibid, A short Reply vnto the last printed books 0/ Henry Barrow and John Greenwood, etc., London, 1591. Gifford was a prominent and learned Puritan, vicar of Maldon, Essex, and a sufferer for the Puritan cause. See Brook, Lives of the Puritans, London, 1813, ii : 273-8 ; Bradley in Diet. Na- tional Biog., xxi : 300. ^ See previous note. PREFACE TO THE CONFESSION 55 laments, their Romish Gossipps, hollowed Font, Crosse, inchanted Collects, their processions, bishopping of children, and a thowsand such like trnmperies, which were all blamed vnto him. yea, come vnto their own Ministerie, & behold from whence hee hath fetched the genealogie of those Anakims and horned heads of the Beaste. Archbbs, Lordbbs, Deanes, Arch-Deacons, Chancellors, &c. or of their Mr. Parson, Vicar, Curat, and the rest of that rable : How hee approveth their offices, ellections, callings, entrace, administrations, Bishopricks, Deanries, Prebends, benefices, &c. by the ordinance of our Lord Jesus in his newe Testament/ left vnto his Church to the worlds end. These are some of the innumerable abhominations, wherwith wee charged their Church, which they must eyther justifie by Gods word, or cleere their Church of them. Now hee that findeth not these things approved in his wrytings, may easely perceiue how hee hath never [never] medled with the mayne coutroversie between vs. Wher- fore eyther let him dischardge his Church of these accusations, or els must wee and all Gods children still by the powre of the word of God condenme them, and send home againe these Romish wares into the Land of Shinar*° from whence they came, and the Lord that condemneth them is a strong God. On the other side wee desire the that they wold shew vs by the Scriptures our errors wherwith they chardge vs, & for which they thus hate vs, what they reproue in our Doctrine or practise. As for our selves, wee protest with simple harts in the presence of God, and his holy Angelles, vnto al men, that wee doo not wittingly & willingly mataine anie one error against the word of truth (though wee doubt not but as all other men wee are liable to error, which our God wee trust will in mercy for- giue vnto vs,) but hold the grounds of Christian Religion with all Gods antient Churches in ludea, Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, Galatia, Pontus, Cappadocia, Asia and Bythinia, and with all faythfuU people at this day in Germanic, France, Scotland, the Low-Contries, Bohemia, and other Christian Churches rownd about vs, whose confes- sions publishedf ° wee call heere to wytnes the sinceritie of our [fjaith, and our agreement and vnitie with them in the points of greatest moment and controversie between vs and our adversaries. And wheras our Preachers were wont to tell vs, that their Church holdeth the foundation and substantiall grounds of Rilligion, Faith in God and Justi- fication by Christ alone, iS:c. and therfore, notwithstanding their wants and corrup- tions, they had the essence, lyfe and beeing of a true people of God: wee trust now they will let vs that make the lyke plea, find the lyke favour, & accompt of vs as a true Congregation of Christ, and blaspheme vs no longer by the names [viii] of Brownists, Donatists, Anabaptists, Schismaticks &c. for will they slay those that Christ gyveth lyfe vnto ? shall profession of faith saue them, and shall yt not vs lyke- wise, that make the same profession ? Or yf they take exception at ours, let them shew what one truth they hold, wherin wee agree not with the, or what good thing they have in practice, that wee do not the samew. ee [same. We] worship the true /Mat. 28. 20. Heb. i. 2. Eph. 4. 11 ; 12. 13. Gal. i. 9. 10. *° Zach. 5. II. ■|-° Harmanie of Confess.' 1 The collection here referred to is the Har-monia Con/essionum Fidei Orthodoxaruiu, et Reyormatarum EccUsiartnn^ quae in pracipuis quibusgiie Eitropm Rcgtiis^ Nationibus^ tt Provinclis, sacram Evangelii docirznatn pure profitentur : . . . Geneva, 1581. An English translation was published at Cambridge in 1586. This was the chief general epitome of the doctrines of the Reformed (Calvinistic) Churches, with some Lutheran creeds added. See Schaff, Creeds of Christendom^ New York, 1877, 1 : 354. S6 THE CONFESSION OF 1 596 God in spirit and truth, *° having his word truly taught, his Sacraments rightly admin- istred (at such tyme as our God vouchafeth vs the meanes for administration of the- at all:) That ministerie of Pastors, Teachers, Elders, Deacons, &c. which they som- tymes stood for,' wee (through Gods great mercy) obteyned them before their faces, which they yet never did. That government of Christ by his own lawes, ordinances, & holy censures (which they call Discipline) wee faithfully obey and execute:^ receiving into our societie all that with faith and repentance come vnto vs willingly:,^ casting out againe, and removing by the powre of our Lord Jesus Christ all notorious & ob- stinate sinners, hereticks, schismaticks, or wicked lyvers whosoever, without respect of persons. Only wee reiect the abominable Romish reliques which they yet retein and mainteine, to the high dishonour of God. And for the sinnes wherwith wee charge them, they are so apparant, as even our forest adversarie somtymes confessed and complayned of them, & that in great measure openly, muchmore secretly emongst themselves, as is well known. But let vs heare themselves speak, as they have pu"b- lished in prynt to the view of the world. Of their people, the members of their Church they gyve this commendation.' /The greaeest multitude, by many partes doo not vnderstand the Lords prayer, the ten Commandements, or the articles of the faith, or the Doctrine and vse of the Sacraments, in anie competent measure. There bee thouvvsands, which bee men & vvoemen grovvne, which if a man aske them how [how] they shalbee saued, they cannot tell. As for vvickednesf ° in pryde, euwe, hatred, and all sinnes that can bee named almost, yt doth overfloze/: & yet you are not ashmed to say, are they not C/^ristians? Concerning their own ministerie and government, they haue lykewise^ complayned how they lack both a rig/it Ministerie of God, and a rigkt govern- ment of /zis C/zurc/z, according to the Sc/?riptures. More particu- larly/ T/iat t/iat prop/zane iurisdiction of Lordly Lord Arc/z. bb". Bb'. Arc/z-Deacous, C/zancellors, Officials, &c. are contrary to Gods gowernment, and w/;olly z/nderpropt by t/ze Canon and popis/z law, ~° Thou Lord prepares! a table before vs in sight of our adversaries. Psal. 23. 5. ^o-Act. 2. 41. /;iVIat. 18. 8. 17, I Cor. 5. 4. 5, Tit. 3. 10. Rom. 16. 17. z Dialogue of the strife of their Church, Page, gg.^ t° Are not these meet stones now for gods hous? i Pet. 2. 5. g. Heb. 8. 11. /■ Admonition to the Pari, in the Preface, defended by T. C.** / Table of Articles propounded by the Divinitie Reader in Cambridg. T. C 1 Reference is here made to the Puritan wing of the Church of England which desired many of these reforms but refused to separate from the Establishment. So also in the succeeding passages. ^ These quotations are in Roman, mixed with Italics. 3 A Dialogue concerning the strife of our churche . . . -with a hrie/e declaration of some such 7nottstroi,s abuses, as our Byshofs haue not hone ashamed to foster. London ? 1584. * Cartwright is meant. The original work quoted was, I suppose, that by J. Field and T. Wilcox of 'London, An Admonition to Parliament. London, 1571. This was answered by Whit- cift and defended by Cartwright in a series of pamphlets. s With the bibHographical means at my disposal I am unable fully to identify the work of Cartwright indicated. PREFACE TO THE CONFESSION 57 and rmt/^all ioyned with /^ypocrisie, vaineglorie, lordlines & tyran- nic, eue for t/^ese respects, if t/^er were no more, are to bee z'tterly rooted out of th& Chnrch, except possible wte meane by reconcilia- tion to radik& Christ and antichrist friends. Item m tha.t t/at ougly & ylfauored /zyerarc/4ie or C/mrc/2-princelynes, whicli instituted at tht first by Antic/^rists dewise, did afterward wilely serue tht Pope of Rome to accomplis/^e t//e mysterie of iniquitie, and to distroy the. Chxxvch of Orist, and dot/z yet still at t/^is day serue hira, must bee so abolis/^ed thaX. no remnants, ne yet anie shew theroi re- mayne, yf so bee wee will [ix] haue C/^rist to reign ouer vs. Item ?i that the Lord Gouerners of their Church bee Peti-popes, & Peti- Antic/^rists, and Bis/^ops of the Deuill. These' Testimonies have wee from their own wrytings,' and manie such lyke. For these impieties haue wee seperated our selues from those cages of vncleane byrds, following the counsell of the Holy-Gost, lest wee should communicate with their sinnes, and bee partakers of their plagues. With what equitie now can these Priests so blaspheme and persecute vs for reiecting the heavie yoke of their tyranous Prelats, whom they themselues call antichristian & Bishops of the Devill ; for forsaking their Priesthood, which they haue complayned is not the right Ministerie. With what conscience could Mayster Giffard (of all other men)^ so vehemently charge vs with intoUerable pryde, presumption, and intrusion into Gods iudgment seate, to judg and condemn whoU assembles which professe the Faith of Christ sincerely &c. in most savage and desperate maner to rend and teare vp the weake plants &c. The Lord rebuke Sathan, and iudge betwixt vs. Our enimies cheefest arguments against vs hitherto, haue been reproch and cursed speaking, with violence and oppression. But let them know and vnderstand, that for all these things God wil bring them vnto iudgment, whe they shall receiue such recompence of their error and wickednes as is meet. The last and great scandall which offendeth manie and turneth them out of the way, is the seed of discord which Sathan hath sought to sowe emongst our selues, set- ting variance emong brethren, prevayling mightely in the children of perdition, whom hee hath eyther turned back into apostacie, or dryven into heresie or schisme. Heerby hee hath caused the truth of God to bee much evill spoken of, and to suffer great re- proch at our aduersaries hands, whoe haue long wayted for our halting. Such things (good Reader) are neyther new nor strange vnto vs,"* (though much to bee lamented,) m In the same Table. « Martin Marprelat.' Gen. 19, 14. Isa. 52, II. Jir. 51. 9. Act. 2, 40. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Rev. 18, 4. p Answere to the Brownists, pag. 4. & 50.* 1 Regarding the tracts published under this pseudonym see, inter aita, Dexter, Cong, as seen. pp. 13T-202. 2 Black Letter again. ^ /. e. Those of the Puritans. ■1 Some of the quarrels in this church, always a discordant body, are described by Dexter, Cong, as seen^ pp. 271-351. 5 The reference fits Gifford's Plains Declaration that our Broijunists he full Donatists, LonJon, 1590, better than his Short Reply vnto the last printed books of Henry Barrow and fohn Greenwood^ London, 1591. 5 58 THE CONFESSION OF IS96 yt beeing the lot of Christs Church *° to haue such trobles within yt self, and as inci- dent to the same as is the crosse of outward tribulation. Neyther can anie that knoweth the state of Gods people, or the word of God aright, looke for other things in this world, where wee are but strangers & pylgrims, warring against manie and mightie adversaries, even the Prince of darknes, with his band of spirituall wicked- nesses, wee are taught of God a that ther must bee discentios & heresies emogst our selves, that they which are approved may bee knowne,^ that greevous wolves should enter in emongst vs, and of our selves men arise, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them. By such suborned guests of satan doth our c Lord sift & trye vs, whither wee love him with our whoU harts or no. wherfore though endijc U. White, N. E. Congregationalism., 187, 188, 7 Ed. 1853-5, I: 71, "Covenant . . . which was about seven years after solemnly ■re- newed?'' ^ Worcester, Ibid. White. Ibid. ^ Upham, Address at the Re-Dedication of the Fourth Meeting-House of the First Church in Salem^ Salem, 1867, 20-30. He is disposed to give weight to the fact that a later hand has underscored the sentence in question, as if to render it specially conspicuous, in the copy recorded in the church-book of 1660-1. It" History of Congregationalism^ IV: 14. Punchard leaves the general controversy unde- cided. Webber and Nevins, in Old Naumkeag^ 13, 14, take the same view as Upham, but with- out argument. They also hold that the introduction to the enlarged covenant dates from 1660, a theory which a glance at Rathband proves untenable. 11 D. A. White, born in 1776, graduated at Harvard, 1797. After studying law, he was chosen to the Mass. legislature. He was made Probate Judge of Essex County in 1815 and held the office till 1853. From 1848 till his death he was president of the Essex Institute. He died in 1861. He was a Unitarian of the old school, a member of the First Church in Salem. See Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc, VI : 262-330 (Sept. 1862) ; and Hist. Coll. Essex Institute, VI : 1-24, 49-71 {1864). 12 In various writings, all of which are summed up in his New England Congregationalism., Salem, 1861. ' 96 CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM ■« records themselves amply account for the origin of the Direction in 1665. The use of any other standard than the Covenant at the formation of the church is to be denied because of the silence of those records as to any confession of faith adopted by the church, and the fact that the Magnalia, though preserving the Covenant, does not hint at the existence of any other document, while the words of the other his- torians' do not necessarily imply more than one formula, since, as he claims, the de- scription "confession" and "covenant" is not an unnatural one to apply to the many-articled Covenant [of 1636]. But Judge White goes so far as to claim also that the whole of the enlarged Covenant, except the brief foriitula of renewal at its begin- ning, should be dated back to 1629.' It is with considerable diffidence that the writer presumes to pass judgment upon the views of these learned contestants. But, it seems to him that material evidence has been overlooked on both sides. In his opinion Drs. Worcester and Felt were wholly wrong in claiming that the Direction of 1665 can be the creed of 1629, as they would have it. The arguments of Judge White against this view are conclusive. But, if any proof was wanting, the writer would find it in the fact, which a few moments' examination seems to him to demonstrate, that the "confession of faith " of the Direction is es- sentially an epitome of portions of the Westminster Catechism, from which much of its phraseology appears to be borrowed. It can therefore by no possibility be dated back to 1629. The utmost that can be claimed for the phrase employed by John Hig- ginson in the title of the Direction is that, in his judgment, it represented the doc- trinal position approved, in general, by the church from the beginning. But while Judge White was right on this point, he fell into error regarding the enlarged cove- nant, when he claimed that it dates back, in its entirety, to 1629. Dr. Worcester's surmise was correct ; the main portion of this Covenant is, at the earliest, of 1636 f and the covenant of 1629 which has come down to us is a single brief sentence em- bedded in it. Evidence which Dr. Worcester seems to have overlooked enables us not only to bring fresh weight to the correctness of his surmise, but to assert with con- siderable confidence that the preamble and articles of the Covenant in its enlarged form are from the pen of Hugh Peter. William Rathband has preserved in a work published in London in 1644,'' two covenants as illustrative of the practice of the Congregational churches. One is that adopted by the church in Rotterdam, Holland, when Peter became its pastor, * the other our enlarged Salem Covenant. So similar are they in phraseology that the conclusion is hard to avoid that they were written by the same person. The en- larged Covenant, with the exception of the single sentence which the preamble distinctly affirms to be the original Covenant, cannot therefore antedate Peter's coming to Salem.* 1 /. (T., Morton and Hubbard, see ante^ p. 95, note 5. ^"White's arguments were summed up and reinforced by Dr. Dexter in an article in the Congre- gationalisi^ Jan. 28, 1875, p. 3. See note 6, below. 2 Since Peter was not settled at Salem till December of that year. ■1 Rathband. A Brief e Narration of some Church Courses lield in Opinion and Practise in the Churches lately erected in Nein England^ pp. 17-19. This portion of Rathband's work is quoted by Hanbury, Memorials^ II : 309, 310. White twice alludes to Hanbury's reprint of the Salem Covenant, New England Cong., pp. 21, 258 ; but seems not to have compared it with the Rotterdam Covenant preserved in the same passage. ^ In 1629. ^ The strongest argument which can be brought against the view here presented is the state- ment of Morton (and Hubbard) that the Salem church adopted "a confession of faith and cove- nant" in 1629. This dual expression, which applies admirably to the nine articled and lengthy covenant of 1636, cannot be made to fit the single sentence of 1629. It should, however, be remem- bered that Morton was not a contemporary writer. His work was published in 1669. Let it be con- PURITANS AND SEPARATISTS 97 THE Congregationalists whose standards have thus far been presented were Separatists, but the vast majority of those who were to come to the shores of New England were not Sepa- ratists but Puritans.' Doctrinally there was little difference be- tween the two parties. Both were Calvinists of a pronounced type and both belived that in the Bible is to be found a sufficient rule for faith and church practice. But while the Separatist would withdraw from the English Establishment at once and for- ever, the Puritan remembered that the sixteenth century had seen the constitution, liturgy, and doctrinal standards of the English Church essentially altered at least four times by the united action of the sovereign and of Parliament. ° He was not inclined, there- fore, to look upon the State Church as by any means in a hope- less condition. At first, in the early days of Elizabeth, Puritan opposition had been directed chiefly against certain rites and vestments; as the movement went on, the Puritans began to question more and more the warrant for the whole church con- stitution in its episcopal form ; but they constantly hoped that that which had been established by law would be changed by legislative act. Nor was there, at first, anything which seemed unlikely in this supposition. Throughout the reign of Elizabeth the Puritans were a growing party ; they might soon, it was easy to believe, incline the sovereign and Parliament to enact the re- forms for which they longed. But, as we have seen,' there grew ceded, nevertheless, that he may have got his information from John Higginson, one of the mem- bers of the church in 1629 and a contemporary. Higgins«n was only 13 in 1629. He left Salera within a year or two and did not return till 1659. The church records were not kept from 1629 to 1636 or 1637 ; and the book of records which John Higginson found on his return bore on its open- ing pages the covenant as enlarged in 1636. (See ante^ p. 93, note 2.) The opening paragraph of that enlarged covenant declares that something which follows is the " Church Covenant we find this Church bound unto at theire first beginning." It is not easy, from the document itself, to see hoiii much of what follows that declaration implies. In the absence of any ready means of test, such as Rathband affords, Higginson, or Morton, made the mistake of applying it to all rather than to a single sentence. The error was easy and natural and once made was readily followed by Hubbard and Mather. It is with satisfaction that I am able to record that the late Dr. Dexter, to whose judgment the conclusions thus outlined were submitted, expressed his concurrence, in a letter of Oct. 29, 1890, not only in this note but in the entire position here taken in regard to the merits of the discussion. 1 The contrasts between the Separatist colony of Plymouth and the Puritan settlements of Massachusetts Bay have been sharply drawn by 8. N. Tarbox, Plymouth and the Bay, in Cong. Quarterly, XVII : 238-252. 2 The extent to which the Church of the Tudor period was the creature of the State is clearly shown in G. W. Childs' Church and State under the Tudors, London, 1890. 3 See ante, p. 77, note. 98 CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM up alongside of Puritanism, as the sixteenth century waned, the new Jure divino Episcopacy of Bancroft and Bilson, a view which much increased the opposition between the Puritan and the High Anglican parties, while just in the degree in which it dominated those charged with the conduct of government it made vain the expectation of legislative change. Yet it was not till the elevation of Laud to the bishopric of London by Charles I., in 1628, put a man at the head of one of the most Puritanically inclined of English dioceses who was deter- mined to enforce absolute conformity to his high church views and who at the same ti^e heartily supported the growing ab- solutism and tyranny of the crown, that the great majority of the Puritan party began Jjfc despair of churchly reform at home. Laud's elevation to the- see of Canterbury in 1633, as well as his influence over the kinff, placed all ecclesiastical England at his mercy; while the frustration by Charles of all attempts of Parlia- ment to limit the exercise of royal authority made men doubtful as to the prospects of civil liberty. It was natural, therefore, that the descriptions of the experiences of the Plymouth settlers, such as Mourt's Relation, or Winslow's Good News from New England,^ should attract attention among the Puritans and stimu- late inquiry among the more adventurous as to the feasibility of planting colonies beyond the ocean out of the reach of Laud. It would be far from correct to say that it was any general long- ing for freedom of conscience or universal toleration that moved these men to think of America ; it was an impulse of a much simpler and, considering the age in which they lived, of a far more natural character. They believed certain practices in the government and worship of the Church of England to be contrary to the Word of God. They did not desire to separate from that great body,' or brand it as in its entirety anti-Christian, as some ^ Published in 1622 and 1624, respectively. 2 See the views on separation reported by Mather (Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, 1 : 362) to have been uttered by Francis Higginson as he left England. Bnt perhaps the kindly feeling of these emi- grants toward the Church of England, in spite of its errors, is best seen in the Hvmblc Regvcst of . . . the Governoiir and the Co7npany late gone for New-England : To the rest of their Brethren, in and of the Churoh of England. For the obtaining of their Prayers, etc. Lon- don, 1630 (also Hubbard, Gen. Hist., pp. 126-128 ; Hutchinson, Hist. Mass. Bay, I : 487-489 ■ Hazard, PURITAN SETTLEMENTS 99 of the extremer Separatists had done. They wanted to get out of the way of the ecclesiastical courts and the high church bishops to some place where they could discard such of the cere- monies of the .church as seemed superstitious and practice such things as seemed to them directly enjoined by Scripture. It was not long after the landing of the Plymouth founders that attempts looking toward further settlements on the coast of the present State of Massachusetts were made. Some of these attempts were by Church of England and royalist sympathizers, sent out by Sir Ferdinando Gorges and others, to take posses- sion of the lands about Massachusetts Bay, to which he held claim. These settlements, begun in 1622, and permanently carried on after 1623, caused trouble enough to the Separatists of Plymouth and to the Puritans who afterward occupied the soil on which they were established.' But our concern here is with the endeavors of the Puritans to secure a home in the new world. These efforts had their remote beginnings in the fishing trade, which then, as now, could advantageously be carried on by vessels making those shores Historical CoHections^ Philadelphia, 1792-4, 1:305-307; Young, Chron. . . . Mass., 295-298. Palfrey, f/isi. N. E., 1 : 312, reports a rumor ascribing its composition to Rev. John White of Dor- chester, Eng.). This document was signed by Winthrop, Dudley, Johnson, Phillips, and others. A single extract will suffice : "Wee desire you would be pleased to take Notice of the Principals, and Body of our Company, as those who esteeme it our honour to call the Church of England^ from whence wee rise, our deare Mother. , . . Wee leave it not therefore, as loathing that milk wherewith we were nourished there, but blessing God for the Parentage and Education, as Members of the same Body, shall always rejoice in her good.'* Of course there were differences in degree of opposition against English ecclesiastical officers and institutions. When Winthrop and his brethren came to choose Wilson as teacher of the Boston-Charlestown church, August 27, 1630, they " used imposition of hands, but with this protestation by all, that it was only as a sign of election and confirmation, not of any intent that Mr. Wilson should renounce the ministry he re- ceived in England." Winthrop Hist. N. E. {qx Jotirnal)^ Savage's 2d ed., Boston, 1853, 1 : 38-39. But the same George Phillips, who signed the Hvtiible Regvest with Winthrop, and who had been a minister of the Church of England in Essex, told Doctor Fuller of Plymouth, in June, 1630, 16 days after landing, that " if they will have him stand minister, by that calling which he received from the prelates in England, he will leave them." Bradford's Letter Book, / Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc, III : 74 ; Dexter, Cong, as seen^ p. 417. The Boston church was so well known to be Non-conformist rather than Separatist, that when Roger Williams was invited in 1631 to supply its pulpit during Wilson's absence, he refused because he " durst not officiate to an unseparated peo- ple, as, upon examination and conference, I [he] found them to be." Williams' Letter to Cotton the younger, in i Proc.Mass. Hist. Soc, III: 316, Mch. 1858. See also Dexter, As to Roger IVilliams, p. 4 ; and G. E. Ellis, Puritan Age . . in . . Mass., Boston, 1888, p. 271. Many illustra- tions of the varying positions taken by the founders of New England on the validity of episcopal ordination are given by Dr. J. H. Trumbull in a note to his reprint of Lechford's Plain Dealing^ Boston, 1867, pp. 16, 17. I The best account of these anti-Puritan settlements, and of the doings of Thomas Morton and other leaders in them, is that of Charles Francis Adams, Three Ei>isodes 0/ Massachusetts History, Boston, 1892, I: 1-360. lOO CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM a base of supply. Since more men could be employed in fishing than were needed to sail the vessels home, it occurred to some of those interested in the business that it would be well to have the unnecessary members of the crews remain in New England and form a permanent colony, from which supplies could be drawn. Such a plan was put into practice by the Dorchester (county of Dorset) Fishing Company, a stock partnership organized by the Puritan, Rev. John White, of that place; and in 1623 or 1624 men were actually sent out and settled on Cape Ann.' About a year after the beginning of this settlement Roger Conant, an earnest Puritan, who had been some time at Plymouth, but in disfavor, went thither to take its affairs in charge. The colony proved a poor venture, but Conant was minded to stay; and accordingly, since he did not think the rocky shores of Cape Ann favorable for a settlement, he removed, in 1626, to the spot then called Naum- keag, but better known by its later name of Salem.^ Thus far the work had been done without a special or certainly valid patent,' and had had trade as its principal aim. But White had conceived the idea of a Puritan colony beyond the sea, and set ^ See J. W. Thornton's handsome monograph, Landing at Cape Anne, etc. Boston, 1854, pp. 39-60. The Plymouth colonists secured a grant from Lord Sheffeild (one of the Council for New England) dated Jan. i, 1623 (O. S.), i. e. Jan. 11, 1624, of our reckoning, authorizing them to establish a fishing settlement and town where Gloucester now is. Thornton gives the full text of the patent (pp. 31-35) and a beautiful fac-simile. Capt. John Smith, in his Generall Historie, Lon- don, 1624, p. 247, records that the Dorchester company's colony sheltered itself under the Plymouth colonist's patent. But they cannot have much regarded it, indeed, it was really worthless (see Mejnorial Hist. 0/ Boston, 1 : 60, 74, 92), and they were soon in open quarrel with Standish and others of Plymouth, and were holding the Cape-Ann territory by force. Compare also Prof. H. B. Adams, Fisher-Plantation on Cape Anne, in Hist. Coll. Essex l7ist., XIX: 8i-go (1882). See also Hubbard, no, iii ; and a note, by Deane, to Bradford, Hist. Plym. Plant., ed, 1856, 168, 169. A good sketch of Conant is that by Felt, in N. E. Plist. and Genealogical Register, II : 233-239, 329- 335 (1848). The whole matter of this colony and its enlargement into a Puritan settlement is set forth briefly in John White's most valuable Planter s Plea, London, 1630 ; reprinted in part in Young, Chron. . . . Mass., pp. 3-16. 2 Our chief source of information, aside from White, Planter^ s Plea, on all these matters is Hubbard, General History of New England, printed at Boston (2d ed.) 1848, pp. 101-120. See also Young, Chronicles . . . of Massachusetts, Boston, i^^6, passim ; and Phippen in i//jA Coll. Essex Inst., I ; 94, 145, 185. Palfrey, History of N. E.,l: 283-301, and Deane in Winsor's Narrative and Critical Hist. Ill : 295-312, have good accounts of these events. Prof. Adams's Origin of Salem Plantation, in Hist, Coll. Essex Inst. XIX: 153-166, has facts of value; and Haven's The Mass. Company, in Winsor's Memorial Hist, of Boston, Boston, 1882, 1 : 87-98, is worth consulting. = See above, note i. Conant was a Puritan, but, like White, a conformist enough to be attached to the Church of England and opposed to Separatism. With him came to minister to the wants of the little colony a John Lyford, a clergyman of the Church of England in sympathy with the Establishment, who had made much trouble at Plymouth when there with Conant, and who THE MASSACHUSETTS COMPANY lOI out now to procure a patent and enlist Puritan sympathy. The body having nominal authority over New England was the "Coun- cil established at Plymouth, in the County of Devon, for the plant- ing, ruling, ordering, and governing of New England in America," a corporation whose charter had been sealed on November 3, 1620;' and which, though possessing a title, in name at least, to all land between 40° and 48° from the Atlantic to the Pacific, was essen- tially a trading and fishing monopoly for Sir Ferdinando Gorges and his friends, and soon attracted the unfavorable notice of Par- liament." This Plymouth Council, being anxious to make such use of their property as they could, was persuaded to grant to a Puri- tan land company,' of which John Endicott was a member, that portion of the New World lying between lines drawn three miles north of the Merrimac and the same distance to the south of the Charles, by an instrument issued March 19, 1628. As the agent of this new company, Endicott came out with a few settlers, landing at Salem September 6 of the same year. Meanwhile White was zealously introducing the Puritanly inclined members of this new land company to like-minded men in England, with a view to building up large Puritan settlements in America. The result was that the land company was re-formed with many new mem- bers, and, on March 4, 1629, was provided with a royal charter* organizing it into the " Governor and Company of the Mattachu- setts Bay in Newe England," and giving it power to admit freemen, elect officers, and make laws of local application to all its territories. This organization at once pushed on the work with vigor. A large band of colonists was got together, to be sent over to Salem in the spring of 1629. As the Company was strongly Puritan and the aim of the emigration chiefly religious, it is no wonder that we find them early negotiating for ministers to serve the spiritual had left Plymouth for Nantasket in Conant's company. Lyford's character was none of the best. See Hubbard, pp. io6, 107. Bradford, Hist. Plym. Plant., pp. 171, 173, 192-196. Young, Chron. Mass., p. zo. There was no church at Salem, in a Congregational sense, till after the com- ing of Endicott. 1 The text of this patent may be found in Hazard, Historical Collections, Philadelphia, 1792- 1794, 1 : 103-118. '^ See C. F. Adams, Three Ejfiisodes of Mass. History, 1 : 127-129. 3 Some quotations from this charter are preserved in the charter of 1629. See note 4. 4 Text, Records of . . . Mass. Bay, Boston, 1853, 1 : 3-20. I02 CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM wants of the new colony. Three were secured,' Francis Bright,' Francis Higginson," and Samuel Skelton;' and another, Ralph Smith,' obtained passage in the Company's ships; but only Higgin- son and Skelton remained permanently with the Salem colonists. On their arrival, late in June, 1629, the ministers found the ground fully prepared for the planting of religious institutions. As has been already pointed out, the Salem settlers, though Puri- tans, were not Separatists, and had most of them been inclined to look upon the men of Plymouth as dangerous innovators. But sickness had laid heavy hand on the little company under Endicott at Salem during the winter preceding the minister's arrival, and the governor had sent to Plymouth for the professional help of Dr. Samuel Fuller, a deacon of the Plymouth church. With him came more definite acquaintance with the Plymouth way and the removal of much prejudice; so much so that Endicott acknowl- edged, in a letter to Bradford, that he recognized that the outward ^ See Young, Chronicles . . . of Mass., pp. 65, 96, gg, 134, 135, 142-144, 207-212. Hub- bard, pp. ri2, 113. Felt, Annals of Salem, ad ed., Salem, 1845, 1 : 510-513. 2 Francis Bright, it would appear, quarrelled with the rest of the company before he had been long with them. He soon left Salem, and after a little time in Charlestown, returned to England in August, 1630. The e.\-act cause of his disagreement we do not know ; but we may conjecture that he was more of a conformist than either Higginson or Skelton, and failed to agree with them re- garding church discipline. Hubbard, pp. 112, 113, asserts this to be a fact, and quotes with appro- bation a passage of much obscurity from Johnson's Wonder-working Proi'idence, London, 1654, p. 20 (reprinted by W. F. Poole, Andover, 1867). But the Company state in a letter to Endicott, April 17, 1629, that the ministers had "declared themselves to us to be of one judgment, and to be fully agreed on the manner how to exercise their ministry." (Young, C/zrow. . . . Afa^j., p. 160.) 3 Francis .Higginson, the teacher of the Salem church, was born in 1588, graduated at Cam- bridge, A.B. in 1609-10, and A.]\I. in 1613. He then became minister at Claybrooke, a parish of Lei- cester ; but while there the influence of Thomas Hooker, afterwards of Hartford, and others, turned his Puritan inclinations into non-conformity. Like many other Puritans, he was silenced ; but his friends employed him as a "lecturer." While still at Leicester he was engaged to go to Salem. Here he arrived June 29, 1629 ; and was ordained on July 20, following. He died August 6, 1630. His life is treated in Mather, Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, 1 : 354-366; Bentley, Description and Hist, of Salem, m I Colt. Mass. Hist. Soc.,V\\^l\ot,Biog: Diet. . . . of the First Settlers . . . in N. E., Boston, 1809, pp. 248-253 ; Brook, Lives of the Puritans, II ; 369-375 ; Young, Chron. . . . Mass., p. }ij; Fdt, in M. £. Hist, and Goiealogical J!egister,'VI: ios-i'27{iSs2); SpTSigae, Annals of the Am. Pulfit, New York, 1857, I; 6-10; White, N. E. Congregationalism, pp. 283, 284; Appleton's Cyclop. Am. Biog., Ill: 198; T. W. Higginson, Life of Francis Higginson, New York, 1891. Samuel Skelton, the pastor of the Salem church, is less well known than Higginson. He was graduated at Cambridge, A.B. in 1611, and A.IM, in 1615. He then probably settled in Dorset- shire (though Mather, Magnalia, ed. 1855, 1 : 68, says Lincolnshire). Endicott had known him and profited by his ministry in England. He was ordained over the Salem church on the same day as Higginson. He died Aug. 2, 1634. See Brook's Lives, III : 520; Bentley, as cited in previous note ; Young, Chrott. . . . Mass., pp. 142, 143 ; White, N. E. Cong., pp. 284, 285. 1 Young, Ibid, pp. 151, 152. His passage was granted before the Company understood his Separatist tendencies. He soon went from Salem to Nantasket, and thence to Plymouth, where he became pastor of the church, but not meeting with entire success in the work, he resigned in 1636. He died in Boston in 1662. See also Bradford, Hist. Plym. Plant., pp. 263, 278, 351. THE SALEM CHURCH IO3 form of God's worship, as observed at Plymouth, and explained by- Fuller, was the same that he had himself long believed to be the true method.' The miles of ocean between Salem and England made the separation from the English Establishment a practical fact, whatever the theory might be; and the exigencies of life in a new settlement, where so much had to be created anew, brought out the real unity of belief regarding Scriptural doctrine and polity which had always characterized Puritans and Separatists. So it came about that, not long after Higginson and Skelton had landed, Endicott appointed a day for the choice of pastor and teacher, and in spite of the fact that both were ministers of the Church of Eng- land, Skelton and Higginson were chosen and ordained to their new work. We are fortunately in possession of a graphic and ab- solutely contemporary account of these events, from the pen of one who was afterward a deacon in the Salem church, and written to Bradford at Plymouth:^ " S' : I make bould to trouble you with a few lines, for to certifie you how it hath pleased God to deale with us, since you heard from us. How, notwithstanding all opposition that hath been hear, & els wher, it hath pleased God to lay a founda- tion, the which I hope is agreeable to his word in every thing. The 20. of July, it pleased y° Lord to move y° hart of our Gov' to set it aparte for a solemne day of humilliation, for y' choyce of a pastor & teacher. The former parte of y" day being spente in praier & teaching, the later parte aboute y' election, which was after this maner. The persons thought on (who had been ministers in England) were de- manded concerning their callings ; they acknowledged ther was a towfould calling, the one an inward calling, when y" Lord moved y" harte of a man to take y' calling upon him, and fitted him with guiftes for y' same; the second was an outward call- ing, which was from y° people, when a company of beleevers are joyned togither in covenante, to walke togither in all y' ways of God, and every member (being men) are to have a free voyce in y" choyce of their officers, &c. Now, we being per- swaded that these 2. men were so quallified, as y' apostle speaks to Timothy, wher he saith, A bishop must be blamles, sober, apte to teach, &c., I thinke I may say, as y' eunuch said unto Philip, What should let from being baptised, seeing ther was water? and he beleeved. So these 2. servants of God, clearing all things by their answers, (and being thus fitted,) we saw noe reason but we might freely give our voyces for their election, after this triall. [Their choice was after this manner : every fit member wrote, in a note,' his name whom the Lord moved him to think 1 Letter in Bradford, Nhi. Plym. Plant., pp. 264, 265. See also Dexter, Cong, as seen, pp. 414-420. 2 Letter in Bradford, Hist. Plym. Plant., pp. 265, 266, and Bradford's Letter-Book, / Coll, Mass. Hist. Soc, III : 67, 68. Gott had spent the winter of 1628-9 '" Salem. 3 On the possibly Dutch derivation of this system of voting,— the first use of the written ballot in America, — see Douglas Campbell, The Puritan in England, Holland, and America, New York, 1892, II : 438. 104 CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM was f5t for a pastor, and so likewise, wliom they would have for teacher ; so the most voice was for Mr. Skelton to be Pastor, and Mr. Higginson to be Teacher; '] So M'. Skelton was chosen pastor and Mr. Higgison to be teacher;' and they accept- ing y« choyce, M'. Higgison, with 3. or 4. of y' gravest members of y" church, laid their hands on M'. Skelton, using prayer therwith. This being done, ther was imposission of hands on M'. Higgison also. [Then there was proceeding in election of elders and deacons, but they were only named, and laying on of hands deferred, to see if it pleased God to send us more able men over;^] And since that time, Thursday (being, as I take it, y" 6.-' of August) is appoynted for another day of hu- milliation, for y" ' choyce of elders & deacons, & ordaining of them. And now, good S', I hope y' you & y" rest of Gods people (who are aquainted with the ways of God) with you, will say that hear was a right foundation layed, and that these 2. blessed servants of y" Lord came in at y» dore, and not at y'^ window. Thus I have made bould to trouble you with these few lines, desiring you to remem- ber us, &c. And so rest, At your service in what I may, Salem, July 30. 1629. Charles Gott." The transaction thus narrated seems to be plain. Higginson and Skelton were ministers duly engaged by the Company in England to assume the spiritual charge of the Salem settlement. Gov. Endicott, as representative of the Company, might properly have been expected to welcome them and aid them in beginning their work. But he, and the majority of those who had wintered with him at Salem, had come to the conclusion that the Plymouth method of ordering the church-estate was the right one ; and hence the governor appointed a day for some at least of the colo- nists to vote for pastor, teacher, and other officers. But here a difficulty appears. The uniform representation of the later writers is that the church in Salem was not formed till August 6,° and that its covenant was prepared by Mr. Higginson at the request of some of the members about to be. Yet the absolutely contemporary letter of Gott speaks three times of " members " in a way which certainly seems to imply that a covenant had 1 This statement is omitted in tlie letter as given in Bradford's History^ but is contained in the copy in Bradford's Letter Boole, / Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc.^ Ill : 67, 68. 2 Letter Book copy omits tliis clause. 3 In Letter Book, but not in History. ■1 Letter Book says 5. An error, for the 6 Aug., 1629, was Thursday. s Letter Book inserts full. A number of minor variations between the two copies I have left unnoticed. « This opinion is first put on record by John Higginson, himself present as a 13-year-old boy at the ordination of his father, on the title page of his brief Direction printed in 1665 ; Morton, iVemoriall, 1669, pp. 73-76 (Davis ed., pp. 145, 146) gives an extended account. Hubbard (writing not far from 1680), pp. 116-120, gives many details chieily drawn from Morton. Mather, Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, pp. 70-72, has a brief narrative. WHEN WAS THE SALEM CHURCH FORMED 105 been entered into at some time previous to July 20. The state- ment tliat the votes were cast by " every fit member " would seem to render untenable the natural supposition that the elec- tion on July 20 was by all the colonists, while the ordination of that day is expressly declared to have been by " 3. or 4. of y° gravest members of y' church." And the letter which records these events was written, it will be remembered, a week before the supposed gathering of the church on August 6. Hence, in spite of the circumstantial accounts of later historians, the earli- est of whom wrote nearly forty years after the events he de- scribes, we are forced to the conclusion that there was some sort of covenanted church organization at Salem, previous to July 20, 1629, and that it was this church, and not the colonists as a whole,' that chose Higginson and Skelton on that day. At the same time much new material was brought into the religious life of the colony by the influx of emigrants in June and July of that year ; and it may well have been that the existing covenant was submitted to Higginson for approval or revision, and that the 6th of August saw, in addition to the ordination of ruling elders and deacons, the acceptance of the covenant by a number of the recently arrived emigrants, who now became members of the church. It can hardly be doubted, too, that on August 6, the Plymouth church, in the persons of Gov. Bradford and other representatives, extended the hand of fellowship to their new brethren of Salem. ^ But that the church in Salem was first formed 1 Hubbard, General History, p. 119; and Gov. Hutchinson, Hist. Colony of Mass. Bay, London, 1765, I : ny-12, represent the choice distinctly as the work of the colonists before the formation of the church. Palfrey, Hist. N. E., 1 : 295, is more guarded, but implies the same thing. Webber and Nevins, Old Naumkeag, p. 11, speak of this assembly of July 20, as a "town meeting" ; Bacon, Genesis N. E. Chs., pp. 472-4751 elaborates this view at length. On the other hand, Punchard, Hist. Cong., IV : 12-31, is in substantial accord with the view taken by the writer ; but I am not able to follow him in all particulars. The observations of Rev. Mr. Willson, Hist, of Essex County, pp. 22, 23, are also of value. 2 The statement in Morton's Memoriall, p. 75, is too circumstantial to be without a sub- stantial basis of truth : " Mr. Bradford .... and some others with him, coming by Sea, were hindered by cross winds that they could not be there at the beginning of the day, but they came into the Assembly afterward, and gave them the right hand of fellowship^' though Brad- ford himself makes no mention of it in his Hist. Plym. Plant. Hubbard, p. 119, repeats the story. It seems hardly likely, in spite of the intimations of Morton and Hubbard, that the Salem church formally invited the Plymouth church to assist them. Had such been the case some allusion ought to be found in Gott's letter. It is more probable that, on. receipt of Gott's letter, Bradford and others started on their own motion to welcome the new church. 8 I06 CREED DEVELOP-MENT AT SALEM ' on August 6, seems certainly an error. Yet, however originating, the fact is of prime importance that the first Puritan church on New England soil was formed on the Congregational model. The example thus set was one easy to follow. The Salem covenant of 1629 was a single sentence, embracing a simple promise to walk in the ways of the Lord. In brevity and contents it resembles other covenants of the period which have come down to us.' From this brevity and simplicity it has been errone- ously concluded that our New England churches, in their early state, applied no doctrinal tests as a condition of membership. ° No opinion could be farther from the truth. The causes which led our ancestors to America related to church polity rather than to doc- trinal views ; and hence the public formulae of our churches on this side of the water concern themselves at first with matters of organ- ization rather than with points of faith. ^ This agreement with the Puritan-Calvinistic portion of the English establishment was so entire that their doctrinal position could be taken for granted, and was not therefore at first formulated. But if the doctrinal beliefs of the churches as a whole needed no general statement, the case was far different with the individual applicants for church-member- ship. They had to submit to a searching private examination by the elders of the church both as to " their knowledge in the princi- ples of religion, & of their experience i?i the waxes of grace, zxiAoi ^ Some illustrations will be given in connection with the text of this covenant. 2 This matter has given rise to a considerable literature, much of it cast in a controversial mould. The following articles, on one side or the other, may be cited as likely to prove of value to the student : Cummings, Diet, of Cong. Usages and Prineiples^ Boston, 1855, Art. Creeds^ pp. 131-139 ; Bacon, Ancient IVayviarks, New Haven, 1853; Oilman, Confessions of Faith, in Cong. Quarterly, IV : 179-191 (April, 1862); Mead, A New Deelaration of Faith : Is it Desirable, etc.. Minutes of National Coujicil Cong. Chs., 1880, pp. 144-173 ; Dexter, A Serious Misconception, in Congregationalist for Jan. 2, 1890 ; Calkins, Creeds cts Tests of Church Mem- bership, in Andover Revieia, XIII: 237-255 (Mch., 1890); Dexter, Did the early Churches of New England Require assent to a Creed? in Magazine of Christian Literature, II : 129-138 (June, 1890). Of less value are Thompson, Formation of Creeds, New Englander, IV : 265-274 (Apl. 1846); Shedd, Congregationalism and Symbolism, Bibl. Sacra, XV: 661-690 (July, 1858); Pond, Church Creeds, Bibl. Sacra, XXXIX: 538-546 (July, 1872). 3 Compare the opening paragraphs of the preface to the Cambridge Platform, and the pre- face to the Confession of 1680, both of which will be found on a later page. Even when nearly a century had elapsed since the foundation of our churches, Cotton Mather was able to declare (Ratio Disciplines, Boston, 1726, p. 5): "The Doctrinal Articles of the Church of England, also, are more universally held and preached in the Churches of Ne-w-Englatid, than in any Nation . . . It is well known, that the Points peculiar to the Churches of New-England, are those of their Church Disciplined^ CREED-TESTS IN NEW ENGLAND IO7 their god/y conversation amongst men.'" And the evidence is ample that this "knowledge" implied familiarity with and assent to the main doctrines of the Scripture as expounded by the Calvinism of the period. Once accepted by the elders, the candidate had to render an account to the church, dwelling largely, of course, on ex- perience, but not wholly omitting doctrine.^ In case of men this relation was usually oral ; the women frequently rendered it by Bieans of a written statement, and men sometimes exercised the same privilege.^ But so far were these tests from being matters of form, that even in the early days of the first generation of our New England settlers the decided majority of the colonists were unable to show sufficient evidence of faith and experience to enter into ■church relationship/ But circumstances soon compelled our New England churches to bear a more public testimony to their corporate and collective faith. There were troubles at home, notably in the doctrinal dis- 1 Cotton, IVa^ of the Churches^ London, 1645, p, 54. See Cotton's "Twelve Fundamental Articlesof Christian Religion : the Denialwhereof . . . makesaman an Heretick." Tract published in 1713. These articles are summed up by Dexter in Magazine of Christ. Literature^ II : 135 ; and are given in more detail by Lechford, Plain Dealings London, 1642, pp. 9, 10 (Trumbull's reprint, Boston, 1867, pp. 25-28). Lechford declares them to be from a sermon preached in Oct., 1640. 2 Compare on these proceedings, Lechford, as cited, pp. 4-11 (Trumbull's reprint, 18-29) I Cotton, as cited, 54-65 ; Weld, Brie/ Narration of the Practices of the Chs. in N. £., London, 1645 (reprinted in Cong. Quarterly., XVII: 253-271, see pp. 255, 261, 262). The method em- ployed at Boston is shown by the account of the admission of Rev. John Cotton, and his wife, in 1633, Winthrop, Hist. N. E, {Journal)^ Savage's ed., 1853, I; 130-132. At the Hartford church, under Hooker, fitness for membership was shown by public question and answer, rather than by re- lation, Mather, Magjzalia, ed. 1853-5, I^ '■ 68. The method of the Salem church in 1661 is given in its records, White, N. E. Cong.y p. 50. 3 A considerable number of these relations have come down to our own day. Fifty, dating from the ministry of Thos. Shepard of Cambridge, and most of them previous to 1640, are still in ex- istence. (See Paige, History of Cambridgey Boston, 1877, pp. 252, 253, where a specimen is given.) More than 20 exist in the records of the Wenham church under John Fiske, 1644-1656, and are of a strongly doctrinal character. (See Dexter, Serious Misconception in Congregational ist.^ Jan. 2, 1890.) Other specimens, dating from a much later period when the severity of the test had been considerably relaxed, may be found in Hill, Hist, of Old South Churchy Boston, 1890, 1 : 309 (of 1744) ; and in Oilman, A'ncicnt Confessions 0/ Faith ^ in Cong. Quarterly., XI : 516-527 (of 1752-58). 4 Lechford, Plain Dealings p. 73; "Againe, here is required such confessions, and profes- ■sions, both in private and publique, both of men and women, before they be admitted, that three parts of the people of the Country remaine out of the Church." Dr. Trumbull has illustrated this statement with valuable notes (Reprint, p. 151). Cotton, Way of the Congregational Churches Cleared^ London, 1648, pp. 71,72, denied the accuracy of Lechford' s statement ; but in Richard Mather's reply to the first of the XXXII Questions propounded by English Puritans to New Eng- land divines, a reply written in 1639, and published at London in 1643 under the title Church~Cov- ernment and Church-Covenant Discvssed^ pp. 7, 8, it is said: " Whether is the greater number, those that are admitted hereunto [church-communion], or those that are not we cannot certainly tell? But ... we may truely say, that for the heads of Families, those that are admitted are Jarre more in number then the other." Io8 CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM turbances engendered by Mrs. Hutchinson and afterwards by the Quakers ; and there were doubts cast upon the orthodoxy of our churches by their enemies in England." As similar criticisms had led the London-Amsterdam church to put forth its doctrinal statement in 1596 and 1598, so our New England churches at last felt constrained to make the doctrinal positions which they had held from the beginning more evident to the world. We there- fore find traces of the use, soon after 1640, of what we would now call confessions of faith by a few churches;^ and in 1648 we see the Westminster Assembly's Confession heartily endorsed by the representatives of all our churches as a substantially adequate doctrinal expression. ° Of course when such standards were rec- ognized as presenting the views of a church, or of the whole of the churches, it would be natural to ask the assent of the candi- date thereto, in addition to his relation, or occasionally instead of his relation. But the adoption of such standards did not in- troduce the doctrinal test as a precedent to church-membership, that had existed from the beginning. A good illustration of this general evolution of definite written creed statement is afforded by the Salem church, whose brief cove- nant of 1629 has just been considered. The years following its adoption were stormy seasons in that church's history. Higginson died in 1630, Skelton followed him in 1634 ; and for a brief time in 1631, and again from 1633 onward Skelton had been assisted by the famous and exceedingly erratic Roger Williams.^ On 1 See preface to Cambridge Platform, later in this volume, regarding such criticisms. 'i John Fiske's church at Wenham records, among other similar entries, the following: " 8 NoTj. 1644 : Voted, that a consent & assent should be required to ye profession of faith of ye church; and that y" Confession should be read distinctly to them [candidates] & time given them to returne y» answer." " 28 Sept. 1645 : Geo. Norton gave his assent to Confess" n of faith, Sl y" cov' administred to him." Quoted by Dexter in Magazine Chris. Lit., 11 : 137 (June, 1890). See also the strongly doctrinal creed-covenant of the Windsor, Conn., church, of 1647, which maybe found on a later page of this volume. 3 See preface to Cambridge Platforin, later in this volume. " The story of Roger Williams has been well told by De.xter, As to Roger Williams, Boston [1876],— an indispensable monograph for any who would know the truth regarding this much mis- represented man. The student will do well also to consult the chapter on Roger Williams in G. E. Ellis, Pitritan Age . . in . . Mass., Boston, 1888, pp. 267-299 ; and an article by the same writer in Winsor's Memorial Hist, of Boston, Boston, 1882, 1 : 171, 172 ; to which Dr. Winsor has added an extensive note on the bibliogi'aphy of the subject. Ibid., 172, 173. Williams was not at this time a Baptist, nor did he become so before his "banishment." It is possible, though not certain, that he was ordained at Salem in 1631. In that year he began ministerial work in Plymouth and remained there till 1633, when he went back to Salem. Dexter, as cited, pp. 5, 7, 26. ROGER WILLIAMS AT SALEM IO9 Skelton's death, the Salem people asked Williams to be their pastor, though he had already made himself obnoxious to the government of the Company by his denunciations of the patent as no valid title, and his attack on the character of the king and the churches of England.' Circumstances into which we need not enter here in further detail led to the cognizance of Williams's doings by the Court, and a considerably prolonged ■controversy, in which the government appears to have acted with a good degree of forbearance. While this controversy was in progress a petition relative to some lands claimed by the Salem people was presented to the Court, and by it laid on the table pending the adjustment of the disputes already existing between it and Williams, who had the support of his church at Salem. This act of the Court roused Williams's anger, and on his insist- ance the Salem church called on the other churches of the col- ony to discipline such of their members as had voted as magis- trates in the General Court on the land question.^ The time was most unwise for such an attack, even if far more justifiable than it was, as the enemies of the colony in England were ac- tively at work and had already taken steps looking toward the immediate destruction of the legal existence of the Massachusetts Company.^ In this crisis the government needed the help of all loyal men. And it is, therefore, not surprising that the Salem church, which had been persuaded by its young pastor to cen- sure the officers of the imperilled Company, soon began to yield to the reasonable arguments of the other churches and feel a degree of shame for what they had done." Seeing that he no longer had the support of his people, Williams, with his usual headstrongness, sent a letter to his flock, on August 16, 1635, an- nouncing that he had cast off all communion with the churches of the Bay as false and unclean ; and that he would have noth- ing more to do with the people of Salem unless they would join him in cutting loose from all the other churches of the colony.* The good sense of the church prevailed, and as a whole they did 1 Dexter, Ibid., 26-28. = Ibid., 38-40. ' Ibid., 20-23. ^ Ibid., 43. ' Ibid., 43-45. no CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM not heed him; but, as is usual in such cases, it cost heart rnrngs and sore divisions, and some went off to the new service which Williams set up. But now the Court, before which his case had some, time been pending, after a considerable hearing in which it was aided by the advice of the most prominent ministers then in New England, ordered him out of its jurisdiction, by a sentence passed October 9, 1635;' and based on his attacks on the authority of the magistrates, and his persistence in defam- ing them and the churches of which they were members, in spite of all warnings to desist.' His settlement of Providence, his adoption of Baptist views while there, and his after changes are aside from the purpose of the present narrative. Enough has been said to show that when Williams left the Salem plantation, in January, 1636,^ the church must have been in a divided and distracted state." But it was at last provided with a pastor in the person of the able, versatile, and distinguished Hugh Peter,^ who was settled at Salem December 21, 1636. Under 1 Ibid.^ 46-60. 2 Ibid.^ 65 and following. ^ Jhid.^ 6i, 62. ■* Compare also, as illustrative of the state of the church after Williams left, Winthrop, Hist. 0/ N. E. {Journal)^ 2d ed., Boston, 1853, I: 221. s Hugh Peter was one of the most picturesque characters among the early ministry of New- England. Born in 1599, in Cornwall, he studied at Cambridge, graduating A.M. in 1622. Contact with such eminent Puritans as Thomas Hooker and John Davenport led him to abandon his early profligacy and devote himself to the ministry. Admitted to Episcopal orders, he preached with much success at St. Sepulcre's, London ; but his growing Puritanism led to his association with the leaders of the Massachusetts Company, of which he was one of the early members. Being silenced by Laud in London, he went to Rotterdam in 1629, and was settled over the church there, with Dr. William Ames as colleague. The tongue of slander has attacked his moral character while in Lon- don, but seemingly with no cause save enmity. Here In Holland he remained till the English authorities moved the Dutch to render his position insecure. He therefore came to New England, arriving Oct. 6, 1635; and was from the first a man of prominence. After visiting all the new towns of the infant colony, he settled at Salem. Here his work was universally beneficial. Under his ministry more were added to the church in five years than in eighteen under his successor. The wounds in the church were healed. But Peter had an aptitude for the practical side of life. He did much to develop the manufactures of Salem, such as salt, glass, ship-building, and hemp rais- ing. He showed great success in promoting trade ; so that at the earnest solicitation of the govern- ment, and with much reluctance on the part of his people, he was persuaded to go to England^ Aug. 3, 1641, as one of the agents for the Colony. His connection with the Salem church was ended. Arrived in England just as the civil conflict was about to begin, his talents soon secured him prominence on the Puritan side. He almost immediately became secretary to Cromwell, and then a popular chaplain in the army. His fame was soon that of one of the most effective of the king's opponents. In April, 1646, he preached before the Houses of Parliament, a body which estimated his general services to the cause to be worthy of a pension. His work as army chaplain, took him with Cromwell's expedition to Ireland in 1649. Parliament then, 1651, employed him on a commission to revise the laws. 1654 ^^w him one of the tryers of candidates for ministerial ap- pointments. By 1658 Peter was chaplain to the garrison of Dunkirk. At the Restoration the hatred of the royalist party against Peter showed its intensity. Absurd rumors were circulated, such as that he was the actual executioner of Charles I. ; he was charged with high treason for having had THE COVENANT OF 1636 III him the church enjoyed a degree of growth, unity, and prosperity in marked contrast to its distraction under Wilhams. And as one of the earliest steps toward this desirable result, probably at Peter's ordination, the covenant of 1629 was renewed, and very much enlarged by the addition of nine specific articles of promise, several of which were more or less directly occasioned by the late disturbances. In view of what we have seen, it is no wonder that the members of the church felt it incumbent upon them to pledge themselves " to walke with our brethren and sisters . . . avoyd- ing all jelousies, suspitions, backbyteings, censurings, provoakings, secrete risings of spirite against them."' Nor was it unnatural that their repentance for their opposition to the other churches and the magistrates of the colony should find expression in a promise to act " noe way sleighting our sister Churches, but use- ing theire Counsell as need shalbe ";' and "to carrye our selves in all lawfuU obedience, to those that are over us, in Church or Com- monweale." ' Truly it is the sense of contrition for disagreement and ill-feeling that finds expression in this enlarged and particu- larized pledge of fellowship. But other changes brought addition also to the written sym- bols of the Salem church. Their pastor, Peter, ended his ministry in 1641;' and was succeeded, in the full duties of ministerial office, by one who, since March, 1640, had been his colleague as teacher, Edward Norris.'' It was while Norris was fulfilling a respected but not very eventful ministry that the new sect of the Quakers first made their appearance in Salem, in 1656.* At this time they an active share in the king's death. On Oct. i6, 1660, he was executed with all the barbarous cir- cumstances then attendant upon the punishment for treason. Among the many sources of inform- ation, or of defamation, the following may be cited: Harris, Historical and Critical Account of the Lives . . , 0/ James I. and Charles I., &tc. New ed. London, 1814, I: ix-li ; Bentley, Descrip. Salem, in / Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc, VI : 250-254 ; Eliot, Bioff. Diet. . . . 0/ the First Settlers . . . in A^. £., Boston, 1809, pp. 372-377; Brook, Z./z<«j, III ; 350-369 ; Young, C/K. . . . Mass., pp. 134, 13s ; Felt, Memoir, in N. E. Hist, and Genealogical Register, V : g-20, 231-238, 275-294, 415-439 (with portrait), (1851 and separately same year) ; Felt, Ecclesiastical Hist. N. E., Boston, 1855, I: 228, 229, 267, 426, 434-436; Sprague, Annals Am. Pulpit, I: 70-75; Pal- frey, Hist. N. E.,\: 582-584, II : 426-428 ; White, N. E. Cong., 287, 288 ; Appleton's Cyclop. A m. Biog., IV: 741, 742. 1 Art. 3. '^ Art. 6. ' Art. 7. * See White, N. E. Congregationalism, pp. 289, 290. s Bentley, / Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc, VI : 255, says 1657 ; but Felt, A nnals 0/ Salevt, 2d ed.. Salem, 1849, 11 : 580, puts the beginnings of prosecution of Quakers in Salem in July, 1656. 112 CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM were far from being the staid and law-abiding citizens who, in our own day, have made the name of Quaker synonymous with honesty, piety, and good order; and if we are sometimes tempted to think that the fathers dealt out hard measure to them, it is well to re- member that the provocation was great and such as would attract the speedy notice of law in our own century.' It was while these new elements of disturbance were turmoiling the Salem community that Norris died, December 23, 1659. A few months earlier had seen the almost chance beginning of the work of his successor, John Higginson,' the son of the first teacher, and the connecting link between the founders of New England and the historians at the close of the seventeenth century.' Higginson's settlement fol- lowed more than a year of ministerial supply, August 29, 1660. The influence of the new ministry speedily showed itself in the toning up of the church's affairs. The Quaker disturbances con- tinued,^ and other questions, especially the great discussion regard- ing the proper subjects of baptism, occupied men's minds/ Hig- ginson evidently saw the need of more careful doctrinal instruction, and therefore, less than a month after his ordination,^ and probably 1 Compai-e, among many sources of information regarding the New England Quakers, the following : Palfrey, Hist. N. £., 11 : 452-485 ; Dexter, As to Roger Williams, pp. 124-141, with cita- tions from Quaker documents and historians. YXi\%^ The Puritan Age . . . in . . . Mass,^ Boston, 1888, pp. 408-491. 2 John Higginson was born in August, t6i6, in England, from which land his parents did not remove till 1629. He appears to have been an early member of the Salem church, uniting with it during the year of his arrival. His father dying in 1630, John was aided by the ministers and magistrates toward an education. By April, 1636, before he was 20, he was chaplain at the Fort at Saybrook, Conn.; a post which he occupied about four years. In 1637 he was one of the scribes at the Hutchinson Synod. By 1641 he was a teacher in Hartford and a student under Thomas Hooker. He thence removed to Guilford, Conn., in 1643, and was one of the prominent members of the church there and assistant to its pastor, Henry Whitfield. Here he remained, in sole pastoral service after 1651, till 1659, when he started for England, On his voyage the vessel was forced to put into Salem, Here he was asked to preach, and agreed to remain a year — March or April, 1659, In March, 1660, he was called to a permanent settlement, and was ordained August 29 of that year, by the hands of two deacons and a brother of the church's fellowship, though in the presence of the ministers and representatives of the neighbor-churches. Here he continued as minister till his death, Dec. 9, 170S, 92 years of age. His good sense, and his familiarity with the elder generation, gave him much weight throughout the colony. See Bentley, Desc. of Salem, i Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc, VI: 259-272; Felt, Annals 0/ Salem, passim; Felt, Eccles. Hist. New England, I: 253, 312,517,519-521,11: 218,224; 'S^'czigue.^Annalso/theAm.PulJiit^l: 91-93; y^hit^, N. E. Cong., 45-96, 290-292. 3 As illustrative, see his Attestation to the Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, 1 : 13-18, ^ See Felt, A nnals 0/ Salem^ 2d ed., II : 580-587, for instances between 1656 and 1669. 6 See later in this volume, in connection with the Synod of 1662 (Chapter XI). ^ Sept. 10, 1660. Church records in White, N. E. Cong., p. 47. THE QUAKER CLAUSE OF 1661 II3 at his motion, tiie church voted " that Mr. Cotton's Catechism' be used in their families in teaching their children in order to public catechising in the congregation." Soon after the beginning of this teaching, the brethren were induced not only solemnly to renew their former covenant but to add to the nine articles, which had come down from Peter's day, a tenth, pledging the members " to take heed and beware of the leaven of the doctrine of the Quakers."" Thus, by degrees, and chiefly owing to the rise of errors in faith or practice in the church itself, the single sentence of 1629 became expanded into a fairly elaborate and particularized rule. Mr. Higginson was evidently a believer in the value of written creeds, and desirous of having the customs of the church which had been handed down from the beginning put in documentary form. At the same time he was a warm advocate, in company with many of the best men in New England at that day, of what is known as the half-way covenant, — a system which to his mind, as to that of many others, was designed to give the church a larger hold upon its children and ultimately to bring a large portion of them into the enjoyment of full spiritual privilege.' But to accom- plish these results Higginson clearly felt that improved instruction by parents at home, and a careful examination of all applicants for church membership by the elders, were needed.* All these consid- erations had increased force when the half-way principles, some of which the church had already adopted, were made part of the recognized ecclesiastical usage of the colony by the Synod of 1662, 1 /. e.^ Cotton's Milk /or Babes, London, 1646, long a popular catechism in New England. A heliotype copy of the title-page may be found in Ellis, Hist. First Ch. in Boston, Boston, 1881, between pp. 36, 37. 2 This occurred March 6, 1661. See page 118 of this chapter. 3 That this view of the probable effects of the half-way covenant system, erroneous as it may seem to us, was held by Higginson, is clear from his record of the " propositions concerning the state of the children of members" agreed upon by the church Sept. g, 1661 ; and his speech urging the adoption of the practices recommended by the Synod of 1662, delivered in July, 1665 ; see Church records, in White, N. E. Cong., pp. 49, 50, 60, 61. 4 The " propositions " of 1661 declare the belief of the Salem church in the membership of all baptized children in the covenant fellowship of the church, so as to be under the church's watch and care. They are silent on the other great question, as to whether these covenanted children of the church, who have not yet made profession of personal regeneration, can claim baptism for their children. That further principle was adopted July 18, 1665, and put in practice on the 30th. Re- cords, Ibid. 114 CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM and fully put into practice at Salem in 1665. With these aims in view, therefore, we find Higginson promising the church, at a meeting, November 6, 1664, when the recommendations of the Sy- nod of 1662 were publicly read, that "he would communicate unto the brethren a short writing as a help for the practice of the Sy- nod's propositions."' It was not till nearly a year later, however, October 5, 1665, that the pastor was able to announce to the church that his " writing " was printed and ready for distribution.^ The document has fortunately come down to our day. The little pam- phlet bears on its face the evidence of its purpose ; it is expressly declared to be A Direction for a pitblick Profession in the Church Assembly, after private examination by the Elders / dind it contains a creed and a covenant answering to the documents which modern Congregationalism would understand by those now somewhat tech- nical terms. The phraseology of the confession of faith, modeled on that of the Westminster catechism, is of course Trinitarian and Calvinistic ; and, while there is no ground for the assertion, which some have made, that this creed was adopted by the church in 1629,^ there can certainly be no impropriety in concluding that the opinion which John Higginson expressed in the title of the Di- reciion, thirty-six years after the formation of the church, — " Being the same for Substance which was propounded to, and agreed upon by the Church of Salem at their beginning, the sixth of the sixth Moncth, 1629," — warrants us in holding the creed to be fairly representative of the type of theologic belief which the candi- dates for membership in the Salem church were expected to mani- fest to " the elders " from the beginning. As such, it may in a true sense be taken as representative of the kind of doctrinal test applied to members entering this first Puritan church in New Eng- land during the first half century of its existence. But while this affirmation is doubtless warranted, too much must not be claimed regarding this document of 1665 itself. A careful reading of the church records regarding it shows that, unlike the covenants of ' Church records, Ibid.^ 59. ''Ibid., 61. ^ See ante, p. 95. THE DIRECTION OF 1665 II5 1629 and 1636, the Direction was not formally adopted by the church. It remained a recognized, but, in some sense, private, guide, and was designed primarily for the use of the candidates for church privileges under the half-way covenant, and for those who would pass from the baptized membership of the church to its full communion. For those not already of the church by baptism, who desired full membership, the older method of relation and personal profession was still employed.* The steps have thus been pointed out by which the Salem church passed from a brief and simple covenant to an elaborate compact ; and to the use, if not the for- mal adoption, of a somewhat extended creed. The process was not one of change of doctrine, save perhaps on the question of baptism as applied to the offspring of the " children of the church.'' It was one of increasing written definition, a definition induced by the rise of errors and differences of belief in the church or commu- nity. In this matter the story of the Salem church is typical of New England ecclesiastical development as a whole.^ 1 White has pointed out, and the church records amply warrant him in the assertion, that " children of the covenant " since members of the church already by baptism, were admitted to full communion after examination by the pastor and a public confession and renewal of covenant before the church — but nvithoiit church vote. It is for such confession and covenanting, after examina- tion, that the Z'zVi^ci'zVw was designed. On the other hand "non-members" were voted into full communion on the old terms. An instance or two may illustrate. " 1667. At a Church meeting, 4th of sth month. John Gidney, Sam. Archer, jun., Jo. Peas, Martha Earten, Martha Foster, were presented before the Church, the Pastor expressed himself that after examination he approved of them as able to examine themselves, and discern the Lord's body, they professing their consent to the Confession of Faith and Covenant read unto them \i. ^., the Direction of 1665], they had their liberty to partake of the Lord's Supper, as other children of the Covenant formerly [/. ^., since the full adoption of the half-way principles in 1665, White, 67]. Goodie Guppa, Eliz. Clifford, Mary Merit, being non-members, having been propounded a month, and no exception against them, they made their confession and were on the Lord's day following received unto membership by vote of the Church, and by their own entering into Covenant." Church records^ White, 71. How this confession»was still made, in the admission of non-members, is shown by a further entry : " 1678. At a Church Meeting, March g, Sam. Eburn, [etc.] . . . these eight . . . making their pro- fession of faith and repentance in their own way, some by speech, others by writing, which was read for them, they were admitted to membership in this Church, by consent of the brethren, they engaging themselves in the Covenant." Ibid.^ 83. 2 The adoption of new forms and covenants by the Salem church did not stop here. A new covenant " more accomodated to our times " was adopted, apparently in addition to the old cove- nant, April 15,1680, in consequence of the exhortations of the "Reforming Synod" of 1679. Church records^ White, pp. 84, 85. The text was printed at Boston in that year (Thomas, Hist. Printing in A merica, Albany, 1874, II : 323) ; and exists in a MS. copy, among the records of the Tabernacle Church, Salem. This text may be found in White, N. E. Cong.^ pp. 186, 187, 207-209, in rather a disjointed form, from the Tabernacle Ch. Centennial Discourse, by Worcester, 1835, Appendix U ; and the Salem Gazette of Apl, 6, 1854. As it is, however, largely devotional and penitential, and presents nothing that is new ia doctrine or practice, I have thought best to omit it. THE SALEM SYMBOLS The Covenant of 1629 We Covenant with the Lord and one with an other; and doe bynd our selves in the presence of God, to walke together in all his waies, according as he is pleased to reveale himself unto us in his Blessed word of truth. ^ The Enlarged Covenant of 1636^ Gather my Saints together unto me^ that have made a Cov- enant with me by sacrifyce. Psa. 50:5 :^ Wee whose names are here under written, members of the present Church of Christ in Salem, having found by sad experi- 1 This simplicity is characteristic of the early covenants. It seems probable that the essence of the covenant of the London-Amsterdam (Johnson's) church has been preserved for us in the examination of Daniel Buck, scrivener, in 1593, who being inquired of as to "what promise hee made when he came first to y' Societie he annswereth & sayth that he made y^ Protestation ; that he wold walke with the rest of y™ so longe as they did walke in the way of the Lorde, & so farr as might be warranted by the Word of God," HarleianMS. 7042, communicated to me by Dr. Dex- ter. See also his Cong, as seen, p. 265 ; and Strype, A nnals IV. No. CXV, ed. 1824, p. 244, A sug- gestion as to the possible original covenant of the Mayflower church has already been made, see ante^ p. 83. The covenant of Henry Jacobs' church organized in 1616 in London, and the first Congregational church to gain a permanent foothold in that city, is thus described ; they "sol- emnly covenanted with each other in the presence of Almighty God, to walk together in all God's ways and ordinances, according as he had already revealed, or should further make them known to them." Neal, Hist.of the Puritans, Toulmin's ed., Bath, 1794, II: 100. Hanbury, Memorials, 1 : 292, 293. No covenant of the Dorchester company, whose church was organized in March 1630, at Plymouth, Eng., and emigrated bodily to our shores, has been preserved earlier in date than 1647 (given later in this work). But the next in order of our New England churches, that of Boston, had a covenant as simple as that of Salem. (See Ch. VII of this work.) The Charlestown church, of Nov. 2, 1632, has the following covenant : "Wee whose names are heer written Being by his most wise and good providence brought together, and desirous to vnite o^ selus into one Congre- gation or Church, vnder o"- Lord lesus Christ our Head : In such sort as becometh all those whom he hath Redeemed and sanctified vnto himselfe, Doe heer sollemnly and Religeously as in his most holy presence, Promice and bynde of selus to walke in all o' waves according to the Rules of the Gospell, and in all sinceer conformity to his holy ordinances : and in mutuall Love and Respect each to other; so near as God shall give vs grace." Photographic fac-simile in The Comi7teinora- tion 0/ the 3S0th Anniversary of the First Churchy Chariestotun, Mass. Privately Printed, 1B82. It is evident, therefore, that in simplicity and brevity the Salem covenant conforms to the general custom of our earliest Congregational churches. A seeming exception is perhaps the cov- enant of the Watertown church of July 30, 1630 {Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, 1:377; Punchard, IV: 43, 44) ; but the exception is more apparent than real, for though the form is long and descriptive, the content is simple, 2 From White's text of the copy in the church-book of 1660-1. 3 Fiske's copy. Hist. Coll. Essex Iiist., 1 . 37, 38, inserts jr^.r, i. e. those. I have not noticed variations In spelling between Fiske and the church-book. ■» A favorite text, John Higginson preached on it at the renewing of this covenant in 1661. Ch. records. White, p. 48, (ii6' TEXT OF THE COVENANT II7 ence how dangerous it is to sitt loose to the Covenant wee make with our God : and how apt wee are to wander into by pathes, even to the looseing of our first aimes in entring into Church fellowship : Doe therefore solemnly in the presence of the Eter- nall God, both for our own comforts, and those which' shall or maye be joyned unto us, renewe that Church Covenant we find this Church bound unto at theire first beginning, viz: That We Covenant with the Lord and one with an other; and doe bynd our selves in the presence of God, to walke together in all his waies, according as he is pleased to reveale himself unto us in his Blessed word of truth." And doe more explicitely in the name and feare of God, profess and protest to walke as foUoweth through the power and grace of our Lord Jesus/ 1 first wee avowe the Lord to be our God, and our selves his people in the truth and simplicitie of our spirits. 2 We give our selves to the Lord Jesus Christ, and the word of his grace, fore the teaching, ruleing and sanctifyeing of us in matters of worship, and Conversation, resolveing to cleave to him alone for life and glorie ; and oppose all contrarie wayes, can- nons and constitutions of men in his worship. 3 Wee promise to walke with our brethren and sisters in this Congregation with all watchfullnes and tenderhes, avoydin^ all jelousies, suspitions, backbyteings, censurings, provoakings, se- crete risings of spirite against them; but in all offences to follow the rule of the Lord Jesus, and to beare and forbeare, give and forgive as he hath taught us. 4 In publick or in private, we will willingly doe nothing to the ofence of the Church but will be willing to take advise for our selves and ours as ocasion shalbe presented. 5 Wee will not in the Congregation be forward eyther to shew oure owne gifts or parts in speaking or scrupling, or there discover the fayling of oure brethren or sisters butt atend an orderly cale there unto ; knowing how much the Lord may be dishonoured, and his Gospell in the profession of it, sleighted, by our distempers, and weaknesses in publycjc. 6 Wee bynd our selves to studdy the advancement of the Gospell in all truth and peace, both in regard of those that are within, or without, noe way sleighting our sister Churches, but useing theire Counsell as need shalbe : nor laying a stumbling 1 Fiske reads who. 2 This sentence, the original covenant of the church, ends in Fiske's copy with a comma, s Fiske reads j/i? helpe &= foux of ye Lord Jesus. Il8 CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM block before any, noe not the Indians, whose good we desire to promote, and soe to converse, as we may avoyd the verrye ap- pearance of evill. 7 We hearbye promise to carrye our selves in all lawfull obedience, to those that are over us, in Church or Common- weale,' knowing how well pleasing it will be to the Lord, that they should have incouragement in theire places, by our not greiveing theyre spirites through our Irregularities." 8 Wee resolve to approve our selves to the Lord in our perticular calings, shunning ydleness as the bane of any state, nor will wee deale hardly, or oppressingly with any, wherein we are the Lord's stewards :" 9 alsoe promyseing to our best abilitie to teach our children and servants, the knowledg of God* and his will, that they may serve him also ; and all this, not by any strength of our owne, but by the Lord Christ, whose bloud we desire may sprinckle this our Covenant made in his name.'' The Anti-Quaker Article of i66o-i° This Covenant' was renewed by the Church on a sollemne day of Humiliation 6 of i moneth i66o.' When also considering the power of Temptation amongst us by reason of j' Quakers doctrine to the leavening of some in the place where we are and endangering of others, doe see cause to remember the Admoni- tion of our Saviour Christ to his disciples Math. i6. Take heed and beware of y' leaven of the doctrine of the Pharisees and doe judge so farre as we understand it y' y" Quakers doctrine is as bad or worse than that of y'^ Pharisees ; Therefore we doe Cov- ennant by the help of Jesus Christ to take heed and beware of the leaven of the doctrine of the Quakers. 1 Fiske reads co7ii7non wealth. 2 This is the article to which Morton refers {Memoriall., p, 75 ; Davis ed, pp. 145, 146) : " And because they foresaw tliat this Wilderness might be looked upon as a place of Liberty, and there- fore might in time be troubled with erroneous spirits, therefore they did put in one Article into the Confession 0/ Faith on purpose about the Duty and Power of the Magistrate in Matters of Religion^ He attributes its adoption, mistakenly, to 1629 — his own work was published 40 years later — but it fits in admirably with the repentant spirit of the church for its actions under the lead of Roger Williams. See ante^ p. 109. ^ In Fiske's copy this article and the following are joined in one. '^ Fiske reads ye Lord. ^ Fiske reads we desire should be sprinkle. This our covenant^ etc. " From White's text of the copy in the church-book of 1660-1. N. E. Cong., p. 14. ' I.e., the enlarged covenant of 1636, to which it is immediately appended. " In modern reckoning 1661. Seeante, p. 113. The article was prepared in 1660 and "added" TEXT OF THE DIRECTION II9 The Direction of 1665 ' A DIRECTION FOR A PUBLICK PROFESSION In the Church AsseiMbly, after private Examination by the ELDERS. Which Direction is taken out of the Scripture, and Points unto that Faith and Covenant contained in the Scripture. Being the same for Substance which was propounded to, and agreed upon by the Church of Salem at their beginning. the sixth of the sixth Moneth, 1629. In the Preface to the Declaration of the Faith owned and prof essed by the Cotigregationall Churches in England. The Genuine use of a Confession of Faith is, that under the same Form of Words they express the substance of the same common Salvation or unity of their Faith. Accordingly it is to be looked upon as a fit meanes, whereby to express that their Common Faith and Salvation, and not to be made use of as an imposition upon any.^ [2] YYE Beseech you Brethren to know them that labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you and to esteem thein very highly in love for their work sake and be at peace among your selves, i Thess. 5. 12, 13. Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves, for they watch for your souks, as they that must give an account, that they may do it with joy and not with grief, for that is unprofitable for you, Heb. 13. 17. Who is that wise and faithfull steward, whom his Lord shall make Ruler over his houshold, to give them their portion of meat in due season, Luk. 12. 42. March 6-16, 1661. Church-records, White, p. 48. The date in the text is not an error, however. The year was held to begin March 25, and March was therefore the first month, though its first 24 days were held to belong to the previous year. Yet the usage in dating during the early days of March was not absolutely uniform, some even then would have written 1661. See Preface to Savage's Winthrop'sy(7«rM(j/, I : xi. 1 Text from original. 2 Savoy Declaration, ed. 1658. Preface, pp. iii, iv. 120 CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM One Faith, one Baptism. Eph. 4. 5. The Common Faith. Tit. i. 4. The common Salvation. Jude Ver. 3. Christ Jesus the high priest of our Profession, Heb. 3. 11. The profession of our Faith. Heb. 10. 22. One shall say I am the Lords, Isai. 44. 5. Hold fast the form of sound words, z Tim. i. 13. The form of Knowledge, and of the truth, Rom. 2. 20. The form of Doctrine delivered unto you, Rom. 6. 17. [3J THE CONFESSION OF FAITH. I do believe with my heart and confess with my mouth. Concerning God. THat there is but one only true God in three persons, the Father, the 'Son, and the Holy Ghost, each of them God, and all of them one and the same Infinite, Eternall God, most Wise, Holy, Just, MercifuU and Blessed for ever. Concerning the Works of God. THat this God is the Maker, Preserver, and Governour of all things according to the counsel of his own Will, and that God made man in his own Image, in Knowledge, Holiness and Right- eousness. Concerning the fall of Man. THat Adam by transgressing the Command of God, fell from God and brought himself and his posterity into a state of Sin and death, under the Wrath and Curse of God, which I do believe to be my own condition by nature as well as any other. [4] Concerning Jesus Christ. THat God sent his Son into the World, who for our sakes be- came man, that he might redeem and save us by his Obedi- ence unto death, and that he arose from the dead, ascended unto Heaven and sitteth at the right hand of God, from whence he shall come to judge the World. Concerning the Holy Ghost. THat God the holy Ghost hath fully revealed the Doctrine of Christ and will of God in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, which are the Word of God, the perfect, perpetuall and only Rule of our Faith and Obedience. Concerning the Benefits we have by Christ. THat the same Spirit by Working Faith in Gods Elect, applyeth unto them Christ with all his Benefits of Justification, and Sanctification, unto Salvation, in the use of those Ordinances which TEXT OF THE DIRECTION 121 God hath appointed in his written word, which therefore ought to be observed by us until the coming of Christ. Concerning the Church of Christ. THat all true Believers being united unto Christ as the Head, make up one Misticall Church which is the Body of Christ, the members wherof having fellowship with the Father Son and Holy- Ghost by Faith, and one with an other in love, doe receive here upon earth forgiveness of Sinnes, with the life of grace, and at the Resurrection of the Body, they shall receive everlasting life. Amen. [S] THE COVENANT: Ido heartily take and avouch this one God who is made known to us in the Scripture, by the Name of God the Father, and God the Son even Jesus Christ, and God the Holy Ghost to be my God, according to the tenour of the Covenant of Grace; wherein he hath promised to be a God to the Faithfull and their seed after them in their Generations, and taketh them to be his People, and therfore unfeignedly repenting of all my sins, I do give up myself wholy unto this God to believe in love, serve & Obey him sin- cerely and faithfully according to his written word, against all the temptations of the Devil, the World, and my own flesh and this unto the death. Ido also consent to be a Member of this particular Church, prom- ising to continue stedfastly in fellowship with it, in the publick Worship of God, to submit to the Order Discipline and Govern- ment of Christ in it, and to the Ministerial teaching guidance and oversight of the Elders of it, and to the brotherly watch of Fellow Members: and all this according to Gods Word, and by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ enabling me thereunto. AMEN. 1 It has been pointed out, ante, p, 115, that one of the uses of this confession and covenant was when a baptized child of the church wished to pass from its baptismal fellowship to its full communion. For such use its expressions of personal piety seem natural. But there is every reason to suppose, also, that this creed and covenant were employed for those who could not claim a work of grace sufficient to enable them to ask for full communion, but who simply " owned the covenant " and had their children baptized. Yet New England custom sanctioned as strenuous a covenant as this in their cases. That used by the First Church of Hartford for " half-way " members in 1696 is as follows : " We do solemnly in ye presence of God and this Congregation avouch God in Jesus Christ to be our God one God in three persons y« Father ys Son & y» Holy Ghost & y' we are by nature childr'.of wrath & y' our hope of Mercy with God is only thro' y" righteousnesse of Jesus Christ apprehended by faith & we do freely give up ourselves to y" Lord to walke in communion with him in ye ordinances appointed in his holy word & to yield obedience to all his comands tfe submit to his governm*. & wheras to ye great dishon"^ of God, Scandall of Religion & hazard of ye damnation of Souls, yo Sins of drunkenness & fornication are Prevailing amongst us we do Solemnly engage before God this day thro his grace faithfully and conscientiously to strive against those Evills and y temptations that May lead thereto." Church records, G. L. Walker, Hist. First Ch. in Hartford, Hartford, 1884, p. 248. Like this Salem Direction the Hartford covenant was not formally adopted by the church, though prepared by its pastor and used by its services. For a century, at Hartford, each pastor wrote his own form. 9 122 CREED DEVELOPMENT AT SALEM [6] Questions to be Answered at the Baptizing of Children, or the substance to be expressed by the Parents. Quest Doe you present and give up this child, or these children, unto God the Father, Sonne and Holy Ghost, to be baptized in the Faith, and Engaged in the Covinant of God prof essed by this Church ? Quest. Doe you Sollemnly Promise in the Presence of God, that by the grace of Christ, you will discharge your Covinant duty towards your Children, soe as to bring them ip in the Nurture and Admonition of the Lord, teaching and commandiiig the7n to keep the way of God, that they may be able (through the grace of Christ') to make a personall profession of their Faith and to own the Covinant of God themselves in due time. FINIS VII THE COVENANT OF THE CHARLESTOWN-BOS- TON CHURCH, 1630 The Covenant is preserved in the Records of the First Church in Boston. Printed Texts I. Foxcroft, Observations^ Historical and Practical, on the Rise and Primitive State of Neii) England, Boston, 1730, p. 3.' II. Emerson, Historical Sketch of the First Church in Boston, Boston, 1812, pp. II, 12.^ III. Budington, History of the First Church, Charlestown, Boston, 1845, PP- 13, 14- IV. Drake, History and Antiquities of Boston, Boston, 1856, p. 93. V. EUiott, New England History, New York, 1857, I : 398. VI. R. C. Winthrop, Life and Letters of John Winthrop, Boston 1864-7 11:45. VII. Waddington, Congregational History, i^dy—iyoo, p. 269. VIII. Punchard, History of Congregationalism, Boston, 1880, IV : 42. IX. Commemoration by the First Church . . of the Completion of sjo years since its foundation, Boston, 1881, p. 201. X. A. B. ElHs, History of the First Church in Boston, Boston, 1881, p. 3. XI. R. C. Winthrop, Boston Founded, in Winsor's Memorial History of Boston, Boston, 1882, p. 114. XII. G. E. Ellis, Puritan Age in . . Massachusetts, Boston, 1888, p. 58. Literature The circumstances of the adoption of this covenant are described in two con- (. temporary letters to Gov. Bradford of Plymouth, from Samuel Fuller and Edward Winslow, preserved in Bradford, History of Plymouth Plantation, pp. t.'j'j-i'jc) ; and in Bradford's Letter-Book, / Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc, III ; 74-76. The essential portions of these letters were given in abstract by Prince, Chron. Hist, of New England, I : 242-244. The facts, thus preserved, have been treated with more or less fullness in each of the works from which texts of the covenant have been cited. I will only add to the list there given. Felt, Eccles. Hist. N. E.,\: 138, 139 ; Pal- frey, Hist. N. E., 1:316; Dexter, Congregationalism as seen, 417. Governor Winthrop gives no account of the adoption of this covenant, his History of New England (or Journal") having a large blank at this point ; though he describes the election and installation of the officers of the church four weeks after (Savage's 2d. «d. Boston, 1853, I : 36-39). Hubbard {Gen. Hist. N. E., ed. Boston, 1848, p. 135) and Mather {Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, I : 79) observe the same silence. ^ Century Sermon. Thomas Foxcroft was minister of the First Church, Boston, from 1717 to his death in 1769. ^ William Emerson was pastor of the First Church, 1799-1811 ; father of Ralph Waldo Emerson. (123) 124 THE BOSTON COVENANT, 163O IN the previous chapter' the story was told of the rapid growth of the enterprise for Puritan colonization in New England under the fostering care of Rev. John White, the securing of a large land grant from the Plymouth Council in March, 1628, and the sending of Endicott to Salem as representative of the new company in the summer of the same year; and, finally, the grant of a patent by the crown to the now much enlarged body of ad- venturers, on March 4, 1629, organizing it into the " Governour and Company of the Mattachusetts Bay." The first governor of the corporation thus created was Matthew Cradock,'' a London merchant of wealth; and the evident intention was that the con- trol of the Company should remain in England and its authority be exercised through agents like Endicott. But as the tyranny of church and crown pressed with increasing severity upon the Puritans of England, men of so great prominence and in such numbers announced their intention of casting in their lot with the Company as actual settlers on the shores of New England, that a change of policy seemed advisable. Accordingly, on July 28, 1629, Cradock himself proposed that the government of the Company be transferred to New England soil' Decision was not immediately given by the Company as a whole, but the de- sires of a prominent body of Puritans, embracing such men as Winthrop, Saltonstall, Dudley, Pynchon, and Nowell, who entered into a mutual covenant at Cambridge, Eng., August 26, 1629, to emigrate to New England provided the government and patent should be legally carried thither,'' caused matters to come to a head ; and on August 29 the transfer was voted. ^ Since Cradock and others of the old officers of the Company could not leave England, they naturally resigned; and the vacant governorship 1 See ante^ p. lOO, '^ Some biographical facts regarding him may be found in Young, CJiron. . . Mass.^ pp. 137. 138. 3 Records . . of Massachusetts^ Boston, 1853, I : 49. Young, Chron. . . Mass.y pp. 8s, 86. ^ Young, liid.^ pp. 281, 282. 5 Records, I ; 50, 51. Young, Il>id., pp. 85-88. Compare iPalfrey, 1 : 301, 302, and G. E. 'EXVls, Puritan Age . . in . . jl/ajj., pp. 46-49. THE PURITAN EXODUS 125 was filled, October 20, 1629/ by the choice of John AVinthrop.^ Preparations for departure now went on apace, and hundreds of emigrants decided to avail themselves of the facilities afforded by the Company. With the opening spring of 1630 these colonists now began pouring across the Atlantic. First of all to leave England was a body organized by the influence of John White of Dorchester, England, and which had been joined together into Congregational church-estate at Plymouth, England, in March, 1630, just' before sailing, and had there chosen John Warham and John Maverick its ministers.^ Arrived in Massachusetts Bay on May 30 of that year, they named their new settlement Dorchester, in memory of their English home. , These Dorchester emigrants did not much anticipate, either in sailing or arrival, their companions in the great emigration* of 1630. Winthrop and his immediate company got away from English shores April 8, and reached Salem, June 12.° But Salem proved not to their liking," and they almost immediately removed to Massachusetts Bay, where the majority of Winthrop's immediate associates settled on the north side of Charles river at Charlestown, but a few took up their abode on the south side at what was soon to be named Boston.' 1 Records^ I : 59, 60 ; Young, Ibid.^ pp. 104, 105. 2 Of Winthrop, one of the greatest names in New England history, little need here be said. Born at Edwardston, Suffolk, Jan., 1588, of a family of considerable prominence, he studied at Cambridge for two years, beginning with 1602 ; but left without taking a degree. He practiced law, and discharged the duties of a justice, coming also into connection with many who were in Parliament ; but repeated domestic bereavement in early life increased the always serious bent of his spirit and inclined him to a profound interest in religious things. Precisely how his thoughts _ were turned toward New England we know not, but by May, 1629, he was seriously weighing the advisability of going thither. His agreement with others to undertake the voyage followed in August, and in October he was chosen governor of the Company. He arrived at Salem June 12, 1630; and thenceforward, till his death in March, 1649, he lived in New England, and was intimately concerned with its affairs. From the foundation of Boston he was identified with that town. He held the governorship till 1634, and again 1637-1640, 1642-1644, 1646-1649. Strong, patient, courage- ous, and above all profoundly religious, the influence which he exercised in moulding the infant colony can hardly be over estimated. The best work regarding him is that of his descendant Robert C. Winthrop, Life and Letters of John Winthrop, 2 vols., Boston, 1864-1867. Of the many other sketches of him I will refer only to one of the earliest, Mather, Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, I:n8-i3i; and the latest, Appleton's Cyclopcedia of Arn. Biography, 1889, VI 1572-574, and J. H. Twichell, y£7/zw Winthrop, New York, 1891. 8 The circumstances of their organization, and the later removal of a portion of this Dor- chester Company to what is now Windsor, Conn., will be related in a subsequent chapter. < Prince, Chron. Hist. N. E., p. 240 ; Hutchinson, Hist. . . Mass. Bay, I : 19 ; and Young, Chron . . Mass., p. 127, estimate the number of Puritan emigrants to New England in 1630 at 1500. s Winthrop, History {Journal), Savage's 2d ed., I : 6-29. • Dudley's Letter to the Countess of Lincoln, Young, Chron. . . Mass., p. 312. ' IMd., 313, This settlement took place about July 10 or 12. See Prince, Chron. Hist. N. E., p. 240. 126 THE BOSTON COVENANT, 163O If Samuel Fuller, the physician and deacon of Plymouth, was correctly informed the attention of Winthrop's company had already been drawn by a minister whom they held in high esteem and who was later to fill a distinguished teachership in the Boston church, John Cotton, then of Boston, England, to the model set by Plymouth.' It was on ready soil, therefore, that the seeds fell when Fuller, who had been called to the medical aid of AVinthrop's company and the Dorchester emigrants before the governor had been three weeks on the New England shores, expounded the Ply- mouth church-way in public and private.^ We may be sure also that Fuller's earlier friend and sympathizer, Endicott, was of mate- rial aid in setting forth Congregational principles since Fuller speaks of him at this time as a second Barrowe.' But the Plymouth church was to have a yet more active share in directing the affairs- of Winthrop's company toward church organization. On Sunday, July 25, Isaac Johnson, AVinthrop's companion, being then at Salem, received a letter** from the governor at Charlestown entreating the 1 Fuller to Bradford. Dated Massachusetts, June 28, 1630. Bradford's Letter-Book, i ColL Mass. Hist. Soc, III : 74, 75. " Here is a gentleman, one Mr. Cottington, a Boston [Eng.] man, who told me that Mr. Cotton's charge at Hampton was, that they should take the advice of them at * Plymouth, and should do nothing to offend them." z. £■., at Southampton before sailing. ^ /did. " We have some privy enemies in the bay, but (blessed be God) more friends; the Governour hath had conference with me, both in private and before sundry others . . . the Governour hath told me he hoped we will not be wanting in helping them, so that I think you [/. e., Bradford and his associates] will be sent for." 3 Ibid., "a second Burrow." ^ This letter and the consequent action, is made known to us in a letter to Gov. Bradford, Pastor Ralph Smith and Elder William Brewster, of Plymouth, written from Salera, July 26, 1630, by Winslow, and signed by Winslow and Fuller. Text in Bradford, Hist. Plym. Plant.., pp. 277, 278 ; and Letter Book, / Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc.^ HI : 75, 76. Some important parts of Winslow's letter are as follows: "Sr: Being at Salem y» 25. of July, being y** saboath, after y« eveing exercise, M'. Johnson received a letter from y'' Gov', M'. John Winthrop, manifesting y° hand of God to be upon them, and against them at Charles-towne ... It was therfore by his desire taken into y" Godly consideration of yo best hear, what was to be done to pacific y" Lords wrath. [And they would do nothing without our advice, I mean those members of our cliurch, there known unto them, viz. Mr. Fuller, Mr. Allerton, and myself, requiring our voices as their own.] Wher it was con- cluded, that the Lord was to be sought in righteousnes ; and to that end, y** 6. day (being Friday) of this present weeke, is set aparte, that they may humble them selves before God, and seeke him in his ordenances ; and that then also such godly persons that are amongst them, and know each to other, may publickly, at y^ end of their exercise, make known their Godly desire, and practise y» same, viz. soleinly to enter into covenante with y« Lord to walke in his ways. And since they are so disposed of in their outward estats, as to live in three distinct places, each having men of abilitie amongst them, ther to observe y" day, and become 3. distincte bodys ; not then intending rashly to proceed to yo choyce of officers, or yo admitting of any other to their societie then a few, to witte,. such as are well knowne unto them ; promising after to receive in such by confession of faith, as shall ap'peare to be fitly qualified for y estate. They doe ernestly entreate that ye church of Pli- moth would set apparte y" same day, for yo same ends, beseeching y" Lord, as to withdraw his hand of correction fro.m them, so also to establish and direct them in his wayes." From Brad- ford's History.^ clause in brackets added in Letter Book. FORMATION OF THE CHURCH 12/ advice of the Salem church in view of the severe mortality which was afflicting the new settlers on the Charles river. Deacon Fuller, Edward Winslow, and Isaac Allerton, of the Plymouth church, were at Salem, and the good people of that church sought their counsel also in the weighty matter laid before them.' Possibly Winthrop had outlined, in the letter to Johnson, a plan for which he desired the approval of the Salem brethren; more probably Johnson was him- self sufficiently identified with Winthrop and his company to accept counsel in their behalf and to agree to a definite line of action in their stead. At all events, it was determined that Sabbath evening at Salem that the three settlements into which Winthrop's immediate company had already divided, Charlestown, Watertown, and proba- bly either Roxbury or Medford,^ should observe the coming Fri- day, July 30, as a fast ; and that those who were fit among their inhabitants should enter into church-estate by covenant. At the same time the Plymouth church, in the persons of its three mem- bers at Salem, was entreated to " set apparte y= same day, for y' same ends," beseeching God's mercy on the afflicted people of Massachusetts Bay and His blessing on their new church insti- ^ The letter just quoted is indeed obscure. Prince, Chron. Hist. iV. .ff ,, pp. 242, 243, represents it as conveying information to Johnson at Salem, rather than asking advice. I have interpreted it as seems more probable to me. Winslow's letter to Bradford certainly implies that the advice of the Salem people was sought, and given. That advice seems to include the establishment of covenant church relationships, as one means of seeking the Lord in righteousness. There was not time between Sunday evening, when Winthrop's letter was received, and Monday, when Winslow's letter was written, for any action embodying the Salem advice to be taken at Charlestown and reported back to Salem. Hence the setting apart of Friday must have been definitely determined upon at Salem, and probably that Sabbath evening. As representative of the only other church which had had experience on New England soil (that of Dorchester had only just arrived) it was natural for Johnson and the Salem brethren to consult the men from Plymouth. Probably Winthrop may have suggested such a course, though it is hard to assert that to be the case from Winslow's letter. We may assume also, though it does not appear on the record, that Salem observed the day in prayer for Winthrop's company in the same way that was urged upon Plymouth. 2 What are signified by the " three distinct places " and " 3. distincte bodys " of Winslow's letter is hard to say with certainty. Prince, Chron. Hist. N. E., p. 243, interprets them as Salem, Dorchester, and Charlestown. This view is, however, obviously incorrect, as Winslow's letter clearly implies that the three places were inhabited by Winthrop's immediate company, and by per- sons not yet gathered in church-estate ; while Salem and Dorchester already had well-established churches. Of course one of the places is Charlestown, where Winthrop then was. Another is clearly Watertown, where a church was to be formed on the same day as the Charlestown-Boston church, and doubtless as a result of the same Salem advice. The third place is more obscure ; but it can hardly have been Boston, which was regarded for two years longer as ecclesiastically one with Charlestown. Reasons which space does not permit me to elaborate incline me to think that either Roxbury or Medford is the third. The question is of little importance, for, whatever the third place may have been, we have no evidence of the formation of a church at this time else- where than at Charlestown and Watertown. 128 THE BOSTON COVENANT, 163O tutions. Thus, though the Boston church was to remain Non- conformist rather than Separate in its attitude toward the Church of England, it from the very first held out the hand of brother- hood, really if a little indirectly, to the Separatist body at Ply- mouth. In accordance with this advice, and upon the day des- ignated, Congregational churches were gathered at Charlestown and at Watertown,' by the solemn adoption of a covenant. Agree- ably also to the counsel that there should be no rashness or haste in the admission of members, the church at Charlestown was formed, on this initial day of its history,^ by four men only, John Winthrop, Isaac Johnson,^ Thomas Dudley, ■" and Rev. John Wil- son^ — the four most considerable personages in the little com- ^ Mather, Magnalia^ ed. 1853-5, I ■ 377i gives the text of the Watertown covenant, and its date as July 30, 1630. Some unsuccessful attempts have been made to dispute the correctness of this date, but there can be no reasonable doubt as to its accuracy. See Francis, Hist. Sketch of VFatertoiuji, Cambridge, 1830, appendix, pp. 132-135 ; Note, by Savage, to Winthrop' s Hist. N. E. {Journal), ed. 1853, I : 112-114 ; Bond, Genealogies . . Early Settlers 0/ Watertown^ Boston, 1855, pp. 979-982 ; Dexter, Cojig. as seen, p. 413. 2 Our knowledge of the circumstances under which the formation of the Charlestown-Boston church was effected is based on a letter of Samuel Fuller to Gov. Bradford, dated Charlestown, Aug. 2, 1630. Letter Book, i Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc, III : 76 • and Bradford, Hist. Plym. Plant., pp. 278, 279 ; in which he says : " Some are here entered into church covenante ; the first were 4. namly, y^ Gov', M'. John Winthrop, M'. Johnson, I\I''. Dudley, and M^. Willson ; since that 5. more are joyned unto them, and others, it is like, will adde them selves to them dayly." 3 Isaac Johnson, the largest subscriber to the stock of the Mass. Company, and a man of prominence in every way, was from Clipsham, County of Rutland. His wife was the daughter of the Earl of Lincoln, Both were victims of the sickness which swept away so many of the first set- tlers of Charlestown, she dying in Aug. and he Sept. 30, 1630. See Dudley, Letter to Countess of Lincoln^ Young, Chron. . . Mass., pp. 317, 318 ; Hutchinson, Hist. . . Colony of Mass. Bay, 1 : 16 ; Eliot, Biog. Diet., pp. 281-283 \ Savage's Winthrop, ed. 1853, 1:5; Allen, A m. Biog. Diet., ed, Boston, 1857, p. 477, etc, 4 Thomas Dudley, born at Northampton, Eng., 1576, gained some knowledge of law, served as the captain of a company of volunteers under Henry IV, of France in 1597. Then after some time became steward to the Earl of Lincoln, and embraced Puritan sentiments. Lived for a time at Boston, Eng. He united with Winthrop in the Cambridge Agreement, Aug. 26, 1629. On March 23, 1630, he was chosen deputy governor of the Company. He was always prominent in the colony, being elected governor four times, deputy thirteen times, and major-general. He died July, 1653. See Mather, Magnalia, ed, 1853-5, I : 132-135 ; Hutchinson, 1 : 14-15 ; Young, Chron. . . Mass., p. 304 ; Savage's Winthrop, I : 60-62 ; i Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., XI : 207-222. 5 John Wilson, at first teacher, then pastor of the Charleston-Boston church, was born at Windsor, Eng., 1588, his father being canon of the castle chapel. His mother was a niece of Archbishop Grindatl. Wilson was educated at Eton, and then at Cambridge, where he gradu- ated A. B., 1605, and A. M., 1609. His father persuaded him to study law, not approving of his Puritan tendencies, but Wilson's bent was for the ministry. After serving as chaplain in Puritan families and preaching in various places, he settled at Sudbury, Suffolk, where he came to know Winthrop. Here, though a minister of the Church of England, his Puritan inclinations were so marked as to lead the bishop of Norwich to suspend and silence him. The prohibition was re- moved, through influence, but Wilson preferred to go to New England and therefore joined with Winthrop. He was chosen teacher of the Boston church at Charlestown, Aug. 27, 1630; and pastor Nov. 22, 1632 (Winthrop, Savage's ed. 1853, I = 36-391 iM- "s). He remained in office till his death, Aug. 7, 1667. Though inferior in ability to his ministerial associate, John Cotton, he was a. man of mark, well liked for his sweet temper, and popular in the community. He wrote little. CHOICE OF OFFICERS I29 munity." Within three days five more had been admitted to fel- lowship, and other members joined in rapid succession. The church so begun was not yet equipped with officers ; though all men knew who was to be its minister, and preaching was doubtless maintained. The next step was taken by the Gen- eral Court of the Company, on August 23, 1630, when support, to be raised by taxation from those places under the Massachusetts jurisdiction where churches had not been formed previous to July 30, was voted to Mr. Wilson of Charlestown-Boston and Mr. Phillips of Watertown." It was not till after the salary of its minister had thus been provided, that the Charlestown-Boston church held another fast, and solemnly chose and installed its officers August 27, 1630. At that time John Wilson was elected teacher, Increase Nowell ruling-elder, and William Gager and William Aspinwall deacons.' The officers thus selected were then installed by the laying on of hands, but with the express reservation, in the case of Mr. Wilson, that the act was not to be construed as a denial of the validity of his English and Episcopal ordination.* But Charlestown was not to be the permanent home of the majority of its early settlers; by the time that the officers were chosen the exodus to Boston was well begun, by November the governor himself had removed thither,' — soon Boston was more populous than Charlestown. Naturally services began to be held See Mather, Magnalia^ ed, 1853-5, I • 302-321; Eliot, pp. 496-499; Emerson, Hist. Sketch First Ch. in Boston^ Boston, zZii, passim : Young, Chron. . . Mass., pp. 325, 326; Savage's Winthrop, passim; A. W. M'Clure, Lives 0/ the Chief Fathers 0/ N. F., Boston, (1846) 1870, 11 : 7-172 ; Sprague, Annals Am. Pulpit, 1 : 12-15 ; A. B. Ellis, Hist. First Ch. Boston, Boston, 1881, pp. 4-6, 98-102 ; Appleton's Cyclop. A ni. Biog., VI : 553, etc. 1 Their only rivals in station, Sir Richard Saltonstall and Rev. George Phillips, were the leaders of the branch of the -settlement at Watertown. 2 Mess. Colonial Records, I ; 73. Both were to have houses built at public expense. Mr. Phillips was to have also specified provisions and £,10 per annum, or £^o without provisions, at his option. Mr. Wilson ;^20 " till his wife come ouer." " All this to be att the coiiion charge, those of Mattapan [Dorchester] & Salem onely exempted," i. e., because these two places had churches of their own. 3 Winthrop, Hisi, N. E. {^Journal), Savage's ed. 1853, 1 : 36-39. * Ibid. See ante, p. 99. s Winthrop's letter to his wife is dated " Boston . . . Nov. 29, 1630." . Ibid., 1 : 456. The Early Records 0/ Charlestown, given in Young, Chron. . . . Mass., 371-387, contain a picturesque and circumstantial account of the settlement of Charlestown and Boston. Doubtless it rests upon good traditional evidence, and is accurate in general impression ; but it was compiled in 1664, and should by no means be treated as a contemporary authority, as many historians have done. I30 THE BOSTON COVENANT, 163O on the Boston side," though the two peoples were looked upon as one congregation. The preponderance of Boston so increased that, in August, 1632, a meeting-house was begun there at the joint expense of the people of both places.^ But the river was a barrier difficult to cross in bad weather, and it is no wonder that the people of Charlestown amicably withdrew from their brethren at Boston in October, 1632, and were formed into a church of their own on November 2 of that year.' Thenceforward the Boston and Charlestown congregations pursued independent paths. The emi- nence already attained by the Boston church was crowned when Its ministerial equipment was completed according to the ideas of the time, by the ordination of John Cotton, certainly the ablest of the early Massachusetts ministry, to the office of teacher, October 10, 1633.' The Charlestown-Boston covenant is a plain, sweet, simple promise of obedience to God and of aid to one another.'^ It does not touch upon doctrinal questions for the same reason that the early covenant of Salem does not treat of them, — such questions were not yet mooted in Winthrop's company. But it was of the highest importance for the development of Congregationalism on our shores; for it was the work of men who were, essentially con- servative, who had no desire to break with the Church of England and did not regard themselves as separating from her. And it was the work, too, of those who were, and were to be, above all others, the leaders and founders of civil institutions in Massachu- setts. In thus heartily embracing Congregationalism at the outset * Probably the services were thenceforth held chiefly in Boston, as the pastor and governor moved thither. Hunnewell, Conimetnoration 0/ the 250th Anniversary First Ch., Charlestown, p. 30, records a tradition that preaching was had at first alternately in Boston and Charlestown. 2 Winthrop, as cited, 1 : 104. While at Charlestown the services were held in part in the open air and in part in the "great house" built at the expense of the Company in 1629. Hunnewell, as cited, p. 30. 2 Winthrop, as cited, I; 112. Hunnewell, as cited, p. 31. For the covenant then adopted, see ante, p. 116. * Winthrop, as cited, 1 : 135-137. The church had advanced in its opposition to Episcopal rites and ordinances since the days of Wilson's election, for though Cotton had long been a minister of the Church of England, he was now explicitly ordained to his Boston office, by the imposition of the hands of the pastor and elders and prayer. s Dr. McKenzie, in his Discourse printed in connection with the address of Mr. Hunnewell, just cited, p. 8, suggests that the covenant is propably from the pen of Winthrop. It is still in use by the First Church in Boston (now Unitarian). TEXT OF THE COVENANT I3I the Charlestown-Boston Christian community made it certain that Congregationalism was to be the polity of Puritan New England. THE CHARLESTOWN-BOSTON COVENANT.' In the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, & in Obedience to His holy will & Divine Ordinaunce. Wee whose names are herevnder written, being by His most wise, & good Providence brought together into this part of America in the Bay of Masachusetts, & desirous to vnite our selves into one Congregation, or Church, vnder the Lord Jesus Christ our Head, in such sort as becometh all those whom He hath Redeemed, & Sanctifyed to Himselfe, do hereby solemnly, and religiously (as in His most holy Proesence) Promisse, & bind o'selves, to walke in all our wayes according to the Rule of the Gospell, & in all sincere Conformity to His holy Ordinaunces, & in mutuall love, & respect each to other, so neere as God shall give vs grace. ' Text from A. B. Ellis, History of the First Church in Boston^ p. 3. Mr. Ellis, now clerk of the First Church, has kindly verified the text in his History by a fresh comparison with the copy of the Records of the First Church made by David Pulsifer in 1847. VIII HOOKER'S SUMMARY OF CONGREGATIONAL PRINCIPLES, 1645 I. These articles were originally published in Hooker's preface to his Survey of the Summe of Church-Discipline, etc., London, . . 1648, pp. [xvii-xix.] Thence they were reproduced in II. Hanbury, Historical Memorials, etc., London, 1839-44, III ; 266, 267; and III. Felt, Ecclesiastical History of New England, Boston, 1855, I : 566 ; and IV. G. L. Walker, History of the First Church in Hartford, Hartford, 1884, pp. 144, 145. THE coming of Winthrop's company was but the beginning of a great outpouring' from Old England to the New, — an emigration which continued in full force till the changes in the English political horizon at the opening of the Long Parliament gave promise to the Puritans of satisfactory reforms at home, and thus removed the chief impulse toward the planting of Puritan colonies beyond the Atlantic. As a whole, this great emigration was remarkably homogeneous in character and united in habits of religious thought. But it was impossible that in so large a body some degree of diversity should not be found. It is remark- able that, freed as the emigrants were from the restraints of the English Establishment, their divisions were so few and so com- paratively unimportant. The first really serious question to disturb the peace of our rising churches was that occasioned by the coming of Mrs. Anne ^ Johnson, IVonder-Workzng Providence, London, 1654, Poole's reprint, Andover, 1867, p. 31, estimated the number who had come to New England by 1643 as 21,200. These figures were approved by Pres. Stiles in a glowing sermon preached Apl. 23, 1760, at Bristol, R. I., before the Congregational Convention of that province — a sermon in which the preacher indulged in pre- dictions as to the growth of New England's population during the next 100 years which far exceed anything which has been realized on New England soil. Pres. Stiles added the observation that between 1643 ^'^d 1760 more persons probably left New England than came to her shores. Palfrey, Hist. N. E., I : vii (Preface), substantially accepts these statements ; and doubtless they are approx- imately true, though Savage in a note to Winthrop, ed. 1853, II : 403, 404, intimates that the figures may not be taken as final. (132) THE ANTINOMIAN DISPUTE 1 33 Hutchinson to Boston in 1634, Mr. Henry Vane in 1635, and Mrs. Hutchinson's husband's brother-in-law, Rev. John Wheelwright, in 1636. The views of Mrs. Hutchinson, embraced as they were in large degree not only by the two whose names have been associated with hers, but by a majority of the Boston church, were stigma- tized by her opponents as "Antinomian"; and certainly laid far too much stress on the believer's confidence in his good estate, rather than visible betterment in his character, as evidence of his ac- ceptance with God. However worthy of respect Mrs. Hutchinson herself may have been, there can be no doubt that the contro- versy raised by her came perilously near wrecking the infant col- onies ; and the greatness of the danger explains in part, without justifying, the severe measures of repression employed by the churches and the government.' The dispute occasioned the call- ing by the Massachusetts General Court'' of the first Synod ever held in New England, an assembly which met on Aug. 30, 1637,^ at what is now Cambridge, and continued in session, with Thomas Hooker* and Peter Bulkeley,'* as moderators, for twenty-four days. By this Synod some eighty-two opinions, ascribed to or said to be deducible from the teachings of Mrs. Hutchinson, and other disturbers of the churches at the time, were condemned." * The sources and literature of this controversy are presented in an admirable bibliographical note by Winsor in the Memorial History of BostoHy Boston, 1882, 1:176, 177. To the summary there given the writer may add as having appeared since the publication of the History^ a. contem- porary document of the first importance, communicated by Prof. F. B. Dexter, to the 2Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc.y IV : 159-igi, from the MSS. collected by Pres. Stiles, and giving a report of the trial of Anne Hutchinson. The controversy has been discussed from various points of view by G. L. Walker, Hist. First Ch. in Hartford, Hartford, 1884, pp. 97-103 ; Brooks Adams, Emancipation of Mass., Boston, 1887, pp. 44-78; Doyle, The English in ATnerica, Puritan Colonies, London, 1887, 1 : 173-1B9 ; G. E. Ellis, Puritan Age . . in . . Mass., Boston, 1888, pp. 300-362. Dr. Winsor does not include Punchard, History of Congregationalism, Boston, 1880, IV : 196-248, who gives a good sketch of the controversy and its results ; and since Winsor's note was written Charles Francis Adams has published a picturesque and valuable narrative of the dispute in his Three Episodes of Mass. History, Boston, 1892, pp. 363-578. 2 The fact of this call is not mentioned in the Colony Records or Winthrop, but may be de- duced from the latter's statement that the diet of the Synod and the traveling expenses of the delegates from Connecticut were paid by the government. Savage's ed. 1853, I '• 288. 3 A contemporary account of its proceedings is to be found in Winthrop, Ibid., I : 284-288. In attendance " were all the teaching elders through the country, and some new come out of England." < Of Hartford, Conn. 5 Of Concord, Mass. ^ These opinions are given in Winthrop and Welde's Short Story of the Rise, reign, and ruine of the Antinomian^, Eamilisis df Libertines, that infected the Churches of New Eng- land, London, 1644 ; but are more accessible in Felt, Ecclesiastical History of N. E,, Boston, 1855. I : 313-319- 134 hooker's CONGREGATIONALISM, 1645 But the most effective, if least creditable, termination to the dan- gerous dispute was given not by the Synod, but by the Court, in banishing Wheelwright and Mrs. Hutchinson and some of their prominent supporters from the Massachusetts jurisdiction, by its sentence on November 2, 1637.' These internal conflicts were, however, only a portion of the difficulties in which the early New England churches found them- selves involved. As has already been pointed out, though the churches of Massachusetts Bay and of Connecticut had left Eng- land as Non-Conformists rather than Separatists, and though in- fluential churches, like that of Boston, still refused to reject the Church of England as anti-Christian, they had all of them never- theless organized on the model set by Separatist Plymouth. It was natural that such action should excite a degree of alarm in the minds of those Puritans in England who still hoped for the reformation of the Establishment, and especially that dominant wing of English Puritanism whose non-conformity looked rather in the direction of Presbyterianism than Congregationalism. Such alarm found expression in 1636 or 1637 in A Letter of Many Minis- ters in Old England, requesting The Judgement of their Reverend Brethren in New England concerning Nine Positions, written Anno Dom. 1637.^ These questions have to do with the use of a liturgy, admission to the sacraments, church-membership, excommunication, and ministerial standing. To this letter of inquiry the ministers of New England responded at some length in 1638 and 1639, by the pen of John Davenport,' pastor of the church at New Haven. 1 Records, . . Mass. Bay, I : 207. 2 So the title page of the first edition of this document, 1643 ; but Shepard and Allin credit its sending to 1636. See Felt, Eccles, Hist. N. £., 1 : 277. The Letter to New England, the Reply, and Ball's Rejoinder were printed in one small volume in London in 1643. The same year, also, the New England answers were printed at London, together with Richard Mather's Answer to the XXXII Questions, about to be noted, and his reply to Bernard regarding Church-Covenant — the whole under the title of Church-Government and Church-Covcna7it Discvssed, etc., and fur- nished with a preface by Hugh Peter. The Letter, Replies, and Rejoinder are given in copious extract by Hanbury, Historical Memorials, II; 18-39; and the Positions may be found also in Felt, Eccles. Hist. N. E., I ; 277 ; and a summary of the Answers, Ibid., 366-368. 3 On its authorship see I. Mather, Discourse Concerning the Unlawfulness of Common Prayer, [1689] p. 14. The first copy miscarried, 1638, and the reply was sent anew in 1639. See Church-Government, as cited, pp. 24, 28 ; and Shepard and Allin's Defence (Hanbury Memorials, III: 36). TRACTS BY DAVENPORT AND MATHER 1 35 A rejoinder, by Rev. John Ball on the part of the English critics, followed in 1640; and a defense of the New England answers by Rev. Thomas Shepard of Cambridge, Mass., and Rev. Thomas Allin of CharlestOAvn, in 1645.' About the time^ that the Nine Positions were sent over to New England the English Puritans also forwarded to their brethren across the sea a list of Thirty-two Questions for answer.' These inquiries covered the whole field of church polity and procedure, treating of such matters as the constitution of a church, the con- ditions of membership therein, the churchly character of English parishes, the ministry, the brethren and their methods of proce- dure, ministerial settlement and standing, and lay-preaching; as well as of doctrinal symbols and the legislative powers of synods and councils. And to these questions also the churches of New England sent a full and candid reply by the pen of Rev. Richard Mather, of Dorchester, in 1639.'' The Congregationalism of both these replies is of the type of Barrowe rather than that of Browne. It gives practically all power into the hands of the officers of the church, and leaves to the brethren little more than a bare right to consent.^ But if this 1 A Defence of the A nsnver made unto the g questions . . . agahist the Reply thereto of John Ball^ etc., London, 1645. The more essential portions are reprinted in Hanbury, Memo- rials^ III : 33-43. 2 Felt, Eccles. Hist. N. E., 1 : 278. 3 These Questions were published, with Mather's Answers, at London in 1643, in the book entitled Church-Govern-tnent and Church-Covenant Discvssed^ etc., cited in note, p. 134. The Questions are also given in Felt, Ibid,^ 1 : 278-282 ; and the Answers are epitomized, Ibid.^ pp. 380-386. * Mather speaks in the name of the New England ministers throughout his tract, and his son. Increase Mather, expressly affirmed that " what he wrote was approved of by other Elders, espe- cially by Mr. Cotton^ unto whom he Communicated it." Order of the Gospel^ Boston, 1700, p. 73. See also Dexter, Cong, as seen, p. 426. But a passage in Cotton's Reply to Mr. Williams his ex- amination (printed in 1647, reprinted in Pub. Narragansett Club^ Providence, 1867, II: lo'^), which Dr. Dexter seems to have overlooked, makes it evident that though Mather's sentiments had the approval of the New England ministry, the Answers were not submitted to them. " Though he [R. Williams] say, that M"". Cotton^ and the New-English Elders returned that Answer [the 31^'] : yet the answer to that Question, and to all the other thirty-two Questions, were drawne up by M*". Mader, and neither drawne up nor sent by me, nor {for ought I know) by the other Elders here, though published by one of our Elders [Hugh Peter] there." But though Cotton had no share in the composition of the Answers, he approved them, for he goes on, in the next paragraph, to say; " I have read it, and did readily approve it (as I doe the substance of all his Answers) to be judi- cious, and solide." The same fact is attested by the Preface to, the Disputation concerning Church Members, London, 1659 (/. e., result of Half-Way Covenant Convention of 1657): "The 32 Questions, the Answerer whereof was Mr, Richard Mather, and not any other Elder or Elders in New England." ^ See Davenport's answer to the 5th Position, Church-Government and Church-Covenant Discvssed, p. 72 ; and Richard Mather's reply to the 15th Question, Ibid., pp, 47-60. Conipare also Dexter, Cong, as seen^ pp. 425-430. 136 hooker's CONGREGATIONALISM, 1645 type of Congregationalism was not far removed from Presbyteri- anism in the administration of the internal affairs of the individual church by its officers, it was widely at variance with the Presby- terian model in regard to the power of synods over the churches and the right of each church to set apart its ministry.' In these matters the New England apologists asserted a much larger liberty than Presbyterianism would countenance. But Presbyterianism had always been popular among the Puri- tans of England, and as the struggle with Charles wore on, and Scotch influence grew in English counsels, Presbyterian predomi- nance in the mother-land became more marked. The first of July, 1643, saw the meeting of the Westminster Assembly, the great ecclesiastical council which Parliament had summoned by an ordi- nance of June 12, of that year, to give advice as to the reformation of the Church of England.^ This body, as is well known, was over- whelmingly Presbyterian in sentiment, the Congregationalists be- ing represented by only five men of prominence and a few of com- parative insignificance in the Assembly ; though this proportion, fair enough perhaps at the time when the Assembly was called, was far from representing the strength of Congregationalism in • See answers to the 7th and 8th Positions, IMd.^ PPs 76-78 ; and to the i8th Question, Ibid., pp. 62-66. "•, 2 The Westminster Assembly was in regular session from July i, 1643, to Feb. 22, 1649. It never formally adjourned, and continued to meet, in some sort, till March 25, 1652. Its work em- braced {a) Directory for ike Piibliqiie Worship 0/ God., etc., prepared in 1644, and approved by Parliament Jan. 3, 1645. (3) Advice for (Jrdination of Ministers and the Settling of Presbyterian Government ; modified and approved by Parliament in November, 1645, June, 1646, and June, 1647 (see also Dexter, Cong, as seen. Eibliog. Nos, 1233, 4, 96). By the approval of these recommenda- tions, and by express ordinances in August, 1645, Presbyterianism became the legal form of church- government in England, though actually put into complete practice only in London and Lancashire. (c) Humble Adznce . . . concerni7ig a Confession of Faith (the Westminster Confession), presented to Parliament Dec. 4, 1646 ; adopted by the Scotch General Assembly, Aug. 27, 1647 ; somewhat amended by Parliament in the governmental articles, and issued for England June 20, 1648. {d) A Larger Catechistn^ and A Shorter Catechism, presented to Parliament in October and November, 1647, and by it approved Sept. 15, 1648. The Scotch General Assembly approved July 20 and 28, 1648, respectively. It is hardly necessary to observe that this great council, which formulated the beliefs of Scot- land and Presbyterian America, was essentially Puritan in composition. One hundred and fifty persons were called to it by Parliament (149 only appear in the Lord's Journal, but Prof. Masson has shown this to be a probable error. See his Life of fohn Milton., II : 515-525, where the full list of members is given, with biographical notes). Of this 150, 30 were laymen, the remaining 120 being almost to a man clergymen of the Church of England. A considerable proportion absented themselves. To this body, eight Scotch commissioners, five clerical and three lay, had the right to add their presence and their voices in debate. They were chosen by the Scotch General Assembly, Aug. ig, 1643. The composition and work of the Assembly is well described, and its literature pointed out, by Schaff, Creeds of Christendom^ l"; 727-820 ; see also Masson, Life of fohn Milton., II: 609 — IV; di^ passim. PRESBYTERIANISM IN NEW ENGLAND 137 the nation after the acceptance of its main principles by Cromwell and the army.^ It was natural that, though New England had embraced Con- gregationalism of the Barrowist type, this growth of Presbyterian- ism in England should not be without its influence on this side of the water. Particularly was this the case at Newbury, where Thomas Parker and James Noyes were pastor and teacher. These honored ministers wished to do away with the right of consultation and assent which the Barrowist Congregationalism of New England left to the brethren in matters of church discipline. They would gladly see partial Presbyterianism introduced, and looked to the Westminster Assembly as a hopeful means for the accomplishment of this result. These views brought trouble into the church at New- bury, and the result was the assembly of a general meeting of the ministers of the colonies, a body which has sometimes, though erroneously, been styled a Synod, ^ and ranked the second in date among the Synods of New England. But the testimony of Richard Mather, himself a member, to its non-synodical character is too strong to be set aside,^ and is supported by Winthrop's statement ^ The Congregationalists or Independents in the Westminster Assembly, though few, vigor- ously sustained their views and were, on the whole, treated with much respect, though outvoted at all points. As early as Dec. 30, 1643 (on date see Masson's Milton^ III: 23, 24), Rev. Messrs. Thomas Goodwin, Philip Nye, Sidrach Simpson, Jeremiah Burroughes, and William Bridge, joined in a sweet-tempered and modest publication, under the title oi An Apologeticall Narration h-vmbly svbmiited to the Honourable Houses 0/ Parliament^ London, 1643. In this tract they declare, their entire agreement in points of doctrine with the Presbyterian wing of the Assembly, but desire permission to exercise a degree of liberty in matters of church-government. In 1645 we find these men, with William Greenhill and William Carter, uniting in A Remonstrance Lately Delivered in to the Assembly^ London, 1645, in which they excuse themselves for not presenting a full model of Congregational church-government, on the ground that in view of recent votes of Parliament and the tone of the Assembly it would be useless. A few other names of Congregationalists in the- Assembly, making perhaps a dozen in all, may be found in Schaff, Creeds, 1 : 737. See also Dexter; Cong, as seen^ pp. 647-659. Of the New England ministers, Cotton, Davenport, and Hooker were offered elections to the Assembly, but declined to go. 2 So Dexter, Cong, as seen, p. 432. 3 Samuel Rutherford, in his Due right 0/ Presbyteries^ London, 1644, pp. 476-481, gives some "Synodicall propositions" which he had received by letter from New England. Richard Mather, in his Reply to Mr. Rutherfurd, London, 1647, pp. 77, 78 (the pages should have been numbered 87, 88, the figures 71-80 being repeated), thus comments upon theih : " There was indeed at Cam.- bridgem the year 1643, a printed [private?] conference of some of the Elders of that Country; where sundry points of Church judgement were privatly discoursed of, and this was all. But asth& meeting was not any Synod, as Synods are usually understood, so neither were there any Synodicall propositions there agreed upon. . . . This I am able to testifie, having been present at that meeting from the beginning thereof unto the end : . . , What information he goeth upon, I know not : peradventure some notes may have come to his view, which one or other might gather at that conference for his own private use : Peradventure some in their simplicity meaning no hurt, 10 138 hooker's CONGREGATIONALISM, 1645 that it " was an assembl)' ... of all the elders in the country, (about 50 in all,) such of the ruling elders as would were present also, but none else.'" It lacked the presence of representatives of the brethren of the churches which distinguishes a Synod from a ministerial Convention. The sessions of the meeting were held at Cambridge, and the participants were entertained in the recently erected college build- ing much after the manner of students.^ The Convention opened on September 4, 1643, and had for its moderators Cotton and Hooker.^ How long its sessions lasted we do not know, but it ended in a presentation of arguments on both sides and a disap- proval of some features of Presbyterianism. The positive action of the meeting was summed up by a contemporary observer, doubt- less a member of the assembly, as follows: — ■" ' ' We have had a Synod lately, in our College, wherein sundry things were agreed on gravely; as, i. That the votes of the People are needful in all admissions and excommunications, at least in way of consent ; all yielding to act with their con- sent. — 2. That those that are fit matter for a church, though they are not always able to make large and particular relations of the work and doctrine of Faith, yet must not live in the commission of any known sin, or the neglect of any known duty. — 3. That Consociation' of churches, in way of more general meetings, yearly; and more privately, monthly, or quarterly ; as Consultative Synods ; are very comfortable, and necessary for the peace and good of the churches. — 4. It was generally desired That the exercitium of the churches' power might only be in the Eldership in each Particular Church;" unless their sins be apparent in their work. — 5. That Parish Churches in Old England could not be right without a renewed Covenant at least, and the refusers excluded." The grounds of these decisions, in so far as they were anti- Presbyterian, were referred to the brethren of Newbury for their further consideration;' but, unfortunately, the work of the minis- may have called that private conference by the name and tearme of a Synod . . . But howeve^ they [the] mistake a Rose [arose], sure I am, Synodicall propositions there were none ; nor any Synod at all." I Winthrop, ed. 1853, II : 165. 2 Ibid. s Ibid. " This statement of the result of the meeting was contained in a letter from an unnamed writer in New England to a minister in England, quoted in A Reply of tisjo 0/ the Brethren to A. S. . . , and some modest and innocent touches on the Letter from Zeland, and Mr. Parkers from New England, etc., London, 1644, p. 7. The passage is quoted by Hanbury, Me- morialSy II : 343. 5 This word was not yet used in the technical sense in which it was afterward employed in Connecticut — a modern "conference" is more the thought here. •^ This is pure Barrowism, ' Winthrop, 11 : 165 : " The assembly concluded against some parts of the presbyterial way, and the Newbury ministers took time .to consider the arguments, etc." We are fortunately in pes- THE MINISTERIAL CONVENTION, 1 643 1 39 ters neither changed the opinions of Noyes and Parker nor healed the trouble in the Newbury church.' But Presbyterianism was rapidly gaining ground in England since Scotch military support seemed indispensable to the main- tenance of the Parliamentary side in the conflict with the King. The same month in which the ministers'- Convention of 1643 held its sessions at Cambridge saw the adoption of the Scotch Covenant by Parliament and the army, and the completion of the alliance between Parliament and the northern kingdom. The political and religious activity of the period was productive of a flood of pamphlets and books, many of which bore upon questions of deep interest to the Congregationalists of New England; and som e directly criticized the New England polity from a Presbyterian standpoint. Such a work was Prof. Samuel Rutherford's Due right of Presbyteries, etc.," a treatise in favor of the government of the Church of Scotland, of which the author was one of the brightest ornaments. Rutherford here opposed, in kindly spirit and with much learning, the New England view, as set forth in Cotton's Way of the Churches^ then being circulated in England in manu- session of Mr. Parker's own version of the difficulty and the result. Under date of Dec. 17, 1643, he wrote to a friend in the Westminster Assembly as follows : "I assure you we have a great need o£ help in the way of Discipline, and we hope that we shall receive much light from you . although we [Parker and Noyes] hold a fundamental power of Government in the People, in respect of election of ministers, and of some acts in cases extraordinary, as in the want of ministers • yet v.'e judge, upon mature deliberation, that the ordinary exercise of Government must be so in the Pres- byters as not to depend upon the express votes and suffrages of the People. There hath been a convent, or meeting, of the Ministers of these parts, about this question at Cambridge, in the Bay ; and there we have proposed our arguments, and answered theirs ; and they proposed theirs, and answered us: and so the point is left to consideration." Trve Copy 0/ a. Letter written by Mr. T\homas\ P\arker'\ . . . Declaring his Judgement touching the Government practisect in the Chs. 0/ N. E., London, 1644. ^ Noyes published "what are the points he holds, and wherein he can or cannot concur with them [his fellow-ministers in N. E.], and the Reasons why," in The Temple Measured^ etc., Lon- don, 1647. In 'his work he takes Presbyterian ground, save on the matter of governing elders, who are not to be distinct in office but are the ministers. For the later troubles in Newbury church, see Coffin, Sketch 0/ the Hist. 0/ Newbury, Boston, 1845, pp. 44, 54, 72-115. 2 Printed at London, 1644. Rutherford — 1600 ?-i65i — was born at Nisbet, Scotland, and studied at Edinborough, where he taught after graduation. In 1627 he settled at Anworth, but was deprived in 1636 for opposition to the attempts to introduce Episcopacy into Scotland. In 1639 the Presbyterian reaction made him professor of divinity at St. Andrews. He sat as a Scotch commis- sioner in the Westminster Assembly. In 1661 he died, just as the restored monarchy was proceed- ing against him for treason. ' Cotton's Way of the Churches of Christ in New-England. Or the Way of Churches walking in Brotherly egualitie, or co-ordination, without Subjection of one Church to another, got to England in manuscript and was published in 1645, the year after Rutherford's work appeared, by " a Brownistical A uthor, without Mr. Cotton's Consent or Knowledge " ; though exactly why I40 hooker's CONGREGATIONALISM, 164S script, and in the recent works of Richard Mather in reply to the XXXII Questions, on Church-Coveaant,^ and in answer to Herlc^* He also controverted the positions of Robinson's Ivstification of Separation from the Church of England,'' and The Peoples Plea for the Exercise of Propheste," both of which had recently been re. printed. In general, Rutherford proved himself familiar with a wide range of Congregational literature, and showed himself able to put his own case clearly and effectively. Such a critic was not to be despised, nor was he alone in attacking the New England system. In spite of the publication of Cotton's great exposition of Congregational principles. The Keyes of the Kingdom of -Heaven, in the same year that_ Rutherford's work. .appeared, it was felt that a direct rej oind er must be made. And for this task rio^litter pen could be found than that of Thomas :^oker' of Hartford, the peer Cotton should have seriously objected is not very evident to a modern reader. See Owen, Defence of Mr. fohn Cotton^ etc., 165S, pp. 36-38 ; Mather, Ratio D2SciJ>iznce, p. ii ; Dexter, Cong: as seen, 434. Rutherford quotes from the manuscript, and with some verbal freedom, as tested by the printed text. ^ See ante, p. 134, note 2. 2 Mather and .Tompson, Modest &= Brotherly Answer to Mr. Charles Herle his Book, against the Independency of Churches. London, 1644. 3 1610. ^ 1618. The works were reprinted in 1639 and 1641 respectively. fl Thomas Hooker, probably the ablest of the early New England ministers, was born at Mar- field, Leicester County, England, probably July 7, 1586. After preparation, probably at Market Bos- worth, he entered Queen's College and then Emmanuel at Cambridge, graduating A.B. in 1608 and A.M. in 1611, and holding a fellowship after graduation. About 1620 he became rector of Esher, Surrey, a " donative " living, or one which could be given without the necessity of an order from a bishop inducting the candidate. He then became "lecturer," or supplementary Puritan preacher, at St. Mary's, Chelmsford, about 1625 or 1626; preaching there with great popular success. This of course attracted the unfavorable notice of Laud, who, as bishop of London, compelled him to relinquish his place, apparently in 1629. Hooker then opened a school, in connection with John Eliot, the later Indian missionary, at Little Baddow, near Chelmsford ; but he was not long allowed to remain in peace. In 1630 he was summoned before the High Commission, and fled to Holland to avoid appearance. Here he lived for a short time at Amsterdam, and then for two years as asso- ciate minister of the English (Non-conformist) church at Delft. He went thence to Rotterdam, where he was associated in the ministry, over the Puritan church at that place, with Dr. William Ames. Meanwhile his English friends in considerable numbers had gone to New England, and settled first at Mt. WoUaston and then at Newtown — soon to be called Cambridge — and there awaited his ministry. He therefore came to New England in 1633, with Samuel Stone of Hertford and Towcester who was to be teacher of Mr. Hooker's congregation. On Oct. 11, 1633, Hooker and Stone were chosen pastor and teacher by the waiting congregation at Newtown. In 1636 they, with a majority of their church, removed to what was to be known as Hartford. Hooker was from his first coming prominent in all colonial affairs. He was a moderator at the Synod of 1637 and the Convention of 1643. He was instrumental in preparing the "Fundamental Laws," the first written constitution not only of Connecticut, but of English-speaking peoples, in 1639. He was in- ^ vited by the Independents in Parliament to be one of three (with Davenport and Cotton) to enter the Westminster Assembly from New England. Hooker died at Hartford, July 7, 1647. His preaching was effective ; his power in argument great. His theology was strongly Calvinistic, of the type later known as Hopk insia n. Among many sources of information respecting Hooker, the following may be mentioned: HOOKERS "SURVEY" I4I of Rutherford in learning and inferior to none of the New England ministry in ability. His answer, A Sicrvey of the Summe of Church- Discipline, was presented for the approval of a meeting of the min- isters of all the New England colonies held at Cambridge, July i, 1645, expressly to consider what action should be taken in view of the attacks of Presbyterians and Anabaptists/ But the original draft of the work was lost on its way to England, by the founder- ing of the ship which carried it,' and it was only after Hooker's death that a second, and somewhat imperfect, copy was put into print by his Hartford friends.^ Able as the ^z/trz^ unquestionably is, it may well be regretted, on the score of readableness and permanent influenceT^hat the author did not ^produce" a direct treatise on Congregadonalism, castjnthe mol^oFhis own systematized thought, rather than the repetitious wofF^hich his minute method of ans^wering Ruther- 3-5(1^33 er, Li/el. Mather, Magnalia, ed. 1 853-5 Jl:332-352j)Trumbun, Hist. 0/ Connecticut, New Haven, 1818, I : 293, 294; Edward W. Hooker, Li/e 0/ i%omas Hooker., Boston, 1849, 1870; Sprague, Annals of the Am. Puipit, New York, 1857, I: 30-37; Allen, Am. Biog. Diet.., 3d ed., Boston, 1857, p. 442; Appletons Cyclopedia of Am. Biog., Ill: 251 ; Goodwin, in Diet. National Biog., XXVII: 295. By far the fullest lives of Hooker are two by G. L. Walker, one in his Hist. First Church in Hart- ford, Hartford, 1884, pp. 20-145 ; and the other in the " Makers of America" Series, New York, 1891. Hooker's will, and a complete bibliography of Hooker's writings by Dr. J. H. Trumbull, are given in connection with both of these biographies. 1 Winthrop, Savage's ed., 1853, II : 304, 305, records : " Many books coming out of England, some in defence of anabaptism and other errors, and for liberty of conscience as a shelter for their toleration, etc., others in maintenance of the Presbyterial government (agreed upon by the assembly of divines in England) against the congregational way, which was practised here, the elders of the churches throughout all the United Colonies agreed upon a meeting at Cambridge this day [July i, 1645], where they conferred their councils and examined the writings which some of them had pre- pared in answer to the said books, which being agreed and perfected were sent over into England to be printed. The several answers were these : Mr. Hooker in answer to Mr. Rutterford the Scotch minister about Presbyterial government, {which being sent in the New Haven ship was lost)." What some of these "many books" may have been the reader may judge by consulting the crowded titles under 1643 and 1644 in the bibliographical portion of Dexter's Cong, as seen. So little is known of this meeting that the following note of a deacon of the . Dorchester church is of value : " i* July 1645 in this mo : the elders did meet at Cambridge in mattachusets baye in N : E to Consider of the motion made amonge the Comissioners of the 4 Confederate CoUoneyes : when they did meet at Conecticute viz to thinke of some things that might in ffuture give some testimony from new Engl about the great questio now in debate about church-Goverment [i, e., in the West- minster Assembly, then in session] : & notice hereof was given publikely in the Assembly at Dor- chester vicesimo nono Junii anno 45 that it was intended nothinge to bind the churches or ihovate the practice there of but only private amonge the elders & was no Synod but in such case the churches ought to have notice & to send their comissioners : & so might express at any tyme, but the p'sent notice was that the church might know how to direct their prayer written y" daye above- said by me Jo Wiswall." Records . . . First Ch. at Dorchester, Boston, 1891, pp. 253-4. 2 The celebrated " phantom ship," Magnalia^ ed. 1853-5, 1 : 84. 3 Printed at London 1648. The circumstances are narrated by Edward Hopkins and William Goodwin of Hartford, in an epistle prefixed to the Survey. 142 hooker's CONGREGATIONALISM, 1 645 ford seemed to him to require.' But in^ the, preface, which he pre- pared, it would appear before sending the first draft to England in January, 1646,' Hooker has drawn up as j^lear_aj3resentation of Congregational principles as has^ver been^giyen.in the Brief space orrirtle"more tlTaiTa page of print,^'and one which has a special value as having been approved by all the ministers of Connecticut and a large portion of those of other colonies. This statement, compact as it is, shows a decided advance in Congregational development beyond anything yet reached in Eng- land or Holland. And nowhere is this more manifest than in its theory of the relation of churches one to another, a subject on which it exhibits a definiteness of view to which English Congre- gationalists, even of the present day, have not yet attained. Coun- cils, or " consociation of churches," are the proper expedients by which the advisory and admonitory relations of church to church may be expressed. Such councils may advise and entreat an erring church; if the church persist in error, the churches com- posing the council may renounce fellowship with the offending congregation. But excommunication of the erring, or the publica- tion of sentences of a judicial character, are beyond the proper powers of a council. Here, then, is the historic New England theory of the authority of church councils clearly expressed, and as fully representative of present American usage as of the cus- toms of 1645. It need scarcely be pointed out that this view of \Hooker differs widely from the judicial theory of consociations '•Si afterwards adopted in Connecticut. In regard to ministerial standing. Hooker was clear, as were the New England Congregationalists of his day, that a man was a minister only in connection with a local church. On this point the usage of the church universal, which regards a man once set apart to the pastoral calling as permanently enrolled in ministerial ranks, has overcome the more logical theory of early Congrega- tionalism. In spite of the protests of some of the most earnest of ^ See observations by G. L. Walker, Hist, First Church in Hartford,^ pp. 143, 144. 2 There is nothing in the preface which implies that a copy of the work had been lost, or that this was a new draft. The conclusion therefore seems plain that this is the original preface, and if so, written between the meeting of July i, 1645, and January, 1646. TEXT OF THE PRINCIPLES I43 our modern exponents of Congregational polity/ the theory of Hooker on this matter does not represent present usage, and American Congregationalists view one who has been ordained to the ministry, whether over a local church or not, as possessed of an abiding ministerial character, ---^ ^ THE PRINCIPLES OF 1645 " 1/ the Reader shall demand how far this way of Church-pro- ceeding receives approbation by any common concurrence amongst us: / shall plainly and punctitally expresse iny self in a word of truths in these follozving points^ viz. Visible Saints^ are the only true and meet matter, whereof a visible Church should be gathered, and confcederation is the form.^ The Church as Totum essentiale, is, and may be, before Officers.'* 1 See a forcible defence of the older New England view by the late Dr. Dexter, Congrega- tionalism : What it is ; Whence it is ; How it works. Boston, 1865, pp. 154-159, 2 This subject is treated at length in the Survey^ Ft. I : pp. 13-34. Hooker understands by Visible Saints persons who give evidence of regeneration, and their infant offspring. " Saints as they are taken in this controversie . . . were members of the Churches, comprehending the Infants of confoederate believers under their Parents Covenant, according to i Cor. 7. 14 . . . Saints come under a double apprehension. Some are such according to Charity : Some according to truth. Saints according to charity are such, who in their practice and profession (if we look at them in their course, according to what we see by experience, or receive by report and testimony from others, or lastly, look we at their expressions) they savour so vzuch, as though they had been iu it h Jesus. . . . These we call visible Saints (leaving secret things to God).^' Survey, Pt. I: pp. 14, 15. 3 /. e., union in a church-covenant. Hooker defines a church as having God for its efficient cause, "visible saints" as its "materiall cause," and the church-covenant as its " formall cause." Survey, Pt. 1 : 12, 45. But Hooker is far from declaring that this covenant must be formally ex' pressed, though " Its most according to the compieatnesse of the rule, and for the better being of the Church, that there be an explicite covenant.^'' A covenant may be, '■^nplicite^^ "when in their practice they do that, whereby they make themselves ingaged to waljt in such a society, ac- cording to such rules of government, which are exercised amongst them, and so submit themselves thereunto : but doe not make any verball profession thereof. Thus the people in "Ccie. parishes in England, when there is a Minister put upon them by the Patro?ie or Bishop, they constantly hold them to the fellowship of the people in such a place, attend all the ordinances there used, and the dispensations of the Minister so imposed upon them, submit thereunto, perform all services that may give countenance or incouragement to the person in this work of his Ministery. By sitch actions, and z. fixed attendance upon all such services and duties, they declare that by their Practices, which others do hold forth by publike /rej/^j^r/tjw. This ... I would intreat the Reader to observe once for all : that if he meet with such accusations, that we nuUifie all Churches beside our own : that upon our grounds received there must be no Churches in the world, but in N. England, or some few set up lately in old : that we are rigid Separatists, &c . . . a wise meek spirit passeth by them, as an unworthy and ungrounded aspersion." Survey, Pt. I : pp. 47, 48. ^ This matter is discussed in the Survey, Pt. I : pp. 89-93. The position taken is that while the church as an organized body — a Totum organicum — mnst have officers, these officers exist by virtue of the choice of the church, which must therefore precede them and have an existence inde- pendent of them. To deny this is " As if one should say, It is not a Corporation of Aldermen, or freemen before the Maior be chosen. It is true, it is not a compleat corporation of Maior and Freemen, unlesse there be both: but that hinders not, but they be a corporation of Free-men united amongst themselves, though there be no Maior. Nay, they must be a corporation, before they can chuse a Maior. . . . Doth a Corporation, when it puts out a wicked Maior out of his place . . . nullifie their Corporation by that means . . . ? " Survey, Pt, I : p. 92. 144 hooker's CONGREGATIONALISM, 1645 There is no Presbyteriall Church (/. e. A Church made up of the Elders of many Congregations appointed Classickwise, to rule all those Congregations) in the N. T.' A Church Congregationall is the first subject of the keys.' Each Congregation compleatly constituted of all Officers, hath sufficient power in her self, to exercise the power of the keyes, and all Church discipline, in all the censures thereof/ 1 Discussed in Survey, Pt. I : pp. 94-139. The argument is varied and minute, but Hooker affirms that all offices and officers are the gift of Christ ; that where there is no office there is no right to rule, that a church officer is to rule only over his particular congregation, and that no com- bination with other church officers can give him any right to rule over a congregation not his own, for he has no office over that congregation. If Presbyterianism be true the following points must be proved : " i. That a person may be a Pastoiir to a people, by 'whom he ivas never chosen. 2. And that he may be a Pasiour (as the Office of a Pasteur is appointed by Christ) to such, to whom he neither can nor should preach constantly. 3. And that he is bound to exercise Jurisdiction of censure, and decision of doubts to such, to whom he neither needs, nor indeed is bound to feed by the word. 4. or Lastly, that the Churches may give power to a man or men that Christ never appointed," Survey, Pt, I: p, 124, 2 This technical expression of XVII century theology is thus defined by Hooker: " Ecclesi- astical power made known unto us usually in Scripture under the name of Keyes, the signe or ad- junct being put for the thing signified, the ensigne of authority for the authority it selfe. _,, . ■-,,,( Supreme and Monarch icall, This power is double, \ ^ , ■,„»■• ■ n ( Delegate and JVIinisteriall. 1. The ^Sz^^r^?;?;? and i1f(3«(2r(:^zV«/(? power resides onely in our Saviour, . . , 2, There is also a subordinate and delegated poiver, which is proper to our present disquisi- tion, and is nothing else, but A right given by commission from Christ to fit Persons, to act in his house, according to his order." Survey, Pt. I : p. 185. Cotton thus expresses the idea : *' The keys of the kingdom are the Ordinances which Christ hath instituted, to be administred in his Church ; as the preaching of the Word, (which is the opening and applying of it) also the adminis- tring of the Seals [sacraments] and censures." Keyes, p. 2. Hooker's conclusion is that " The power of the Keyes is committed to the Church of confederate SaintsJ''' Survey, Pt. I : p. 192. " In the Church, and by vertue of the Church, they are communicated to any that in any measure or manner share therein." Ibid, 195. " The power of the Keyes take it in the compleat nature thereof, its in the Church of beleevers, as in the first subject, but every part of it is jiot in the same vtanner and order to be attended for its ruling in the Church; but in the order and manner which Christ hath appointed''' Ibid. '* It is not beleevers, as beleevers, that have this power, but as beleevers Covenanting and fitly capable according to Christs appointment, that are the first subject of this power. For beleevers that are as scattered stones, and are not seated in a visible Church or Corporation, as setled in the wall, these have not any Ecclesiasticall power." Ibid., 203. But even within the church all believers do not share in the power of the Keys. " This power is given to suck beleevers, who are counted fit by Christ and capable, which women and Children, deafe, and dumbe, and distracted are not." Ibid., 204. 8 " These keyes, and the power signified by them, must be given to such, who have some of this power firstly, and formally^ and originally, and virtually can give the rest of the power, which so given, may be fully exercised in all the acts of binding and loosing, according to all the necessities of the Church and intendment of our Saviour Christ, And this may readily be accom- plished and easily apprehended to be done by a Church of beleevers : They can admit, elect ; this formally belongs to them: and officers being elected by them, the whole government of the Church, will then go on in all the operations thereof, and be fit to attain the ends, attended by our Saviour." Ibid., 216. The Officers appointed by the Gospel are as follows: Survey, Pt. II : p. 4. " Officers of the Gospel may be considered with refe- rence to their I Number J r ( Ruling onely,.as Elders. ""S: 1 Rolling and Teaching both, as j Pastors. \ Doctors [Teachers], Q,,„ ^. ^, ( State of the body, as Deacons. bupportmgthe \ „ ., -.^., ^' [ { Heaitn, as Widowes, T ^.^ . . ( Election, institution, in i' , ( Ordmation, TEXT OF THE PRINCIPLES I45 Ordination is not before election.^ There ought to be no ordination of a Minister at large, Namely^ such as should make him Pastour without a People? The election of the people hath an instrumental! causall ver- tue under Christ, to give an outward call unto an Officer.^ Ordination is only a solemn installing of an Officer into the Office, unto which he was formerly called." Children of such, who are members of Congregations, ought only to be baptized/ The consent of the people gives a causall vertue to the com- pleating of the sentence of excommunication.^ 1 Discussed in Survey^ Pt. 2, pp. 39-41, " Ordination doth depend upon \}ci& peoples law/ull Election, as an Effect upon the Cause, by vertue of which it is fully Administred." Ibid., 41. 2 See Ibid.^ Pt. z, Ch. 2. " I shall by way of prevention, desire to settle that which is our tenet : That Doctors [Teachers] and Pastors may preachy to all sorts, upon all occasions, when opportunity and liberty is offered^ nay they ought so to do. But this they do not as Pastors, but as gifted and inabled ChristiaTis. Pt. 4, pp. 31, 32. 3 ""^ Election of the People rightly ordered by the rule of Christ, gives the essentials to an Officer, or leaves the impression of a true outward call^ and so an Office-power upon a Pas- tor." Ibid,, Pt. 2, p. 66. See Ibid., 66-75. 4 Ordination is an approbation of the Officer, and solemn setling and confirmation 0/ him in his Office, by Prayer and laying on of hands.'''' Ibid., p. 75. " The maine>veight of the worke [ordination] lyes in the solemnity of Prayer; which argues no act of jurisdiction at all." Ibid., 74 [75]. " X. When the Churches are rightly constituted, and compieated zvith all the Orders and Officers of Christ, the Right [perhaps rite or right use, the editors were undecided] of Ordination belongs to the Teaching Elders : the Act appertaines to the Presbyters consti- tuted of Ruling and Teaching. ... 2. Though the act of Ordination belong to the Prfj- bytery, yet the jus &f potestas ordinandi, is conferred firstly upon the Church by Christ, and resides in her. . . . Thirdly, in case . . . the condition of the Church is such, that she is wholly destitute of Presbyters, she may then out of her ownpower, given her by Christ, provide for her own comfort, by ordaining her own Ministers." Ibid., pp. 76, 77. ^ Discussed in Survey^ Pt. 3, pp. 10-28. Hooker holds that all children of church-members, i. e., of persons in covenant church relationship, are to be baptized irrespective of the moral char- acter of the parents, so long as the parents are not excommunicate. "The pinch then of the Question \y&s here, Whether persons non confederate, and so (in our sense not Members of the Church) do entitle their children to the seal of Baptisme, being one of the Priviledges of the Church, their Parents (though godly) being yet unwilling to come into Church-fellowship." This he answers in the negative, for " Children as children have not right unto Baptisme " ; and " It be- longs not to any Predecessors, either neerer or further off removed from the next Parents, K.a.B ovto ^ and firstly, to give right of this priviledge to their Children." A child cannot be baptized on its / grandparent's church membership. Hooker is far from favoring what was afterwards to be known as the half-way covenant position. '^ 8 Survey, Pt. 3, pp. 33-46. Hooker holds that the offence must first be laid before the elders and it rests with them to decide whether it is of sufficient importance to lay before the church. If unimportant, the elders may dismiss the complaint, though the complainant may, at risk of personal censure if unsustained, appeal from them to the brethren. But if weighty, the elders are to exam- ine into the case, recording the accusation exactly and confining the disputants to the points at issue. This preliminary sifting of evidence is to be made by the elders " because the body of the people, if numerous, they will be unable with any comely conveniency, to consider and weigh all the circuinstanc'es, with all the emerging difficulties" p. 36, 37. But the elders are not to pass sentence without the consent of the brethren. "Thus the preparation is done, the cause rightly stated and cleered, doubts answered, mistakes removed, and by proofs fair and sufficient, the truth confirmed [all this by the elders] ; now the cause is ready and ripe for judgement, and may easily 146 hooker's CONGREGATIONALISM, 1645 Whilst the Church remains a true Church of Christ, it doth not loose this power, nor can it lawfully be taken away.' Consociation of Churches should be used, as occasion doth require.^ be determined in half an hour, which cost many weeks [to the elders] in the search and examina- tion thereof. The Execution of the sentence issues in four things. First, the caiise exactly recorded, is as fully and nakedly to h^ presented to the considera- tion of the Congregation. Secondly, the Elders are to goe before the Congregation in laying open the rtcle^ so far as reacheth any particular now to be considered, and to expresse their judgement and determina- tion thereof, so far as appertains to themselves. Thirdly, unlesse the people be able to convince them of errour and mistakes in their sen- tence, they are bound toj'oyn their judgement 'with theirs^ to ike compleating 0/ the sentence. Fourthly, the sentence^ thus corapleatly issued, is to be solemnly passed and Pronounced upon the Delinquent by the ruling Elder., whether it be the censure of admonition or excommu- nicatio7i," p. 38. It will be seen that Hooker's position is distinctly, though mildly, Barrowist. ^ Survey., Pt. 3, pp. 40-46. Some of his considerations are the following : '^ The fraternity have no more power to oppose the sentence 0/ the censure., thus prepared and propounded by the Elders., then they have to oppose their doctrine ivhich they shall publish. But they have as much power to oppose the one as the other. . . . Since then it is yeelded on all hands, that the fraternity may renounce and condemn the false., erronious and hereticall Doctrines of an Elder . . . a7id take away his Office fro^n him : they may do as Tnuch by parity of reason against his false and unjust censures propounded and concluded, and so interpose and oppose proceeding, as that they shall never take place and be established in the Congregation . . . The conclusion then is, Th^ fraternity put for th a [forth a] causall power in the censure of excomu- nication, whence it receives its compleat being, and here lyes the supream Tribunal in poynt of judgement.'''' Y^p. ^1-^2- Hooker holds that the church may proceed against any of its elders as against any other of its membership, though what preliminary steps shall be taken in the "prepara- tion " of the case he does not explain. " In case the Elders offend, and are complained of, to whom must the complaint be carried? the text saith, To the Church . . . and let it be sup- posed that where there be three Elders, two of them should turn Hereticks and continue so ; how could the Church proceed against them, unlesse there was a cazesall power in the fraternity to accomplish this censure ? " p. 44. Perhaps Hooker's view of the relation of the church to its offi- cers is most clearly brought out in a comparison which he draws between it and a city corporation : " The power of judgement and power of office are apparently distinct and different one from another: The Elders in poynt of rule and exercising the act of their Office, are supream, and above the Congregation : none have that Office-authority, nor can put forth the acts thereof but themselves: But m poynt of power of judgement or censure., the fraternity they are stipreatn., and above any member or Officer, in case of offence or delinquency : nor need any man- strange at this distinction, when the like is daily obvious in paralel examples presented before our eyes. The Lord Major is above the Court., as touching the wayes and works of his Office, none hath right, nor can put forth such acts, which are peculiar to his place, and yet the Court is above in poynt of censzire, and can answerably proceed to punish in a just way, according to the just desert of his sin. Thus the Parliament is above 'the King, the Souldiers and Captains above their Generall." Pt. 3, P- 45. 2 The whole matter of Synods and Councils is discussed in part 4 of the Survey. Unfortu- nately the author left this portion of his work in a fragmentary condition, but his meaning is clear. By "consociation of churches," Hooker did not signify the peculiar institution later known by that name in Connecticut, but what modern Congregationalism calls advisory councils. His views are summed up in the following statement : " The truth is, A particular Congregation is the highest Tribunall, unto which the grcived party may appeal in the third place : [omit ;] if private Councell, or the witnesse of two have seemed to proceed too much sharpely and with too much rigour against him[;3 before the Tribunal of the Church, the cause may easily be scanned and sentence executed according to Christ. If difficulties arise in the proceeding, the Counsell of other Churches should be sought to clear the truth : but the Power of Censure rests still in the Congregation where Christ plcaed [placed] it." Pt. 4, p. 19, TEXT OF THE PRINCIPLES I47 Such consociations and Synods' have allowance to counsell and admonish other Churches, as the case may require. And if they grow obstinate in errour or sinfull miscarriages, they should renounce the right hand of fellowship with them." But they have no power to excommunicate.^ Nor do their constitutions binde formaliter & juridic^.* >■ In a paper of Hooker's composition, found in his study, and printed as an appendix to the Survey, a Synod is thus defined : *' A Synod is an Ecclesiasticall meeting, consisting of fit persons, called by the Churches, and sent as their messengers, to discover and determine of doubtful! cases, either in Doctrine or practise, according to the truth." Pt. 4, p. 45. In such a Synod or council, "all have equall power, because equally sent and chosen, which are the substantial! ingredients to make up Synodicall members." Ibid., 46. 2*' The renouncing the right hand of felloivship, which other Churches may do, and should do as occasion requires, is a?toiher thing from excommunication . . . any Christian man or luojiian may^ upon just grounds, reject the right hand of fellowship luiih \_-with'] others, ivkom they ca7inot excominunicate. In a word, there may be a totall separation, where there is no excommunication. Because excommunication is- a sentence judiciall, presuppoung [presupposing] ever a solemn and superior power over the party sentenced ; but no such thing in separation, or rejection.''^ Pt. 4, pp. 23, 24. 3 That there should be Synods, which have Potestatem juridicam, is no where proved in Scripture, because it is not a truth." Appended paper. Survey, Pt. 4, pp. 48, 49. ^ " They {Synods and Councils'\ have no power to impose their Canons or Co?iclusions upon them [the Churches\. i. Because the Churches power is above them, in that they sent them. 2. Because the Churches have power to call another Synod, and send other Messengers, and passe sentence against them [i, e., decide against the members of the first council]. 3. Because in many cases it may injoyne a man to beleeve contradictions. As suppose a man under one Prov- ince, which hath determined a case one way, and therefore he must beleeve that [provided Synods can "binde formaliter"]: He removes himselfe the next month or week into another Province, and they have determined a contrary Conclusion, and he must beleeve that." Ibid., 54. " But if Synods and such meetings be attended onely in way of consultation, as having no other power, nor meeting for any other end : Then as they are lawful!, so the root of them lyes in a common prin- ciple which God in providence hath appointed for humane proceeding, and that is. He that hearkens to counsell shall be safe. In the multitude of councellers tliere is safety. Hence all con- ditions and callings, as they need, so they use a Combination of counsell, for the carrying on of their occasions under their hand. Hence arise the Companies of Merchants, and all men of all Crafts. Hence Common Councels in all Kingdomes and States. And therefore in the Course of Christianity also the Churches of Christ should use the means, which God hath appointed for their more confortable and succesfull proceeding in a Church-way. And hence one Church may send to another, or to many, and that severally or joyntly meeting." Ibid., p. 61. Hooker's gen- eral theory of the independence and communion of churches is perhaps best expressed in the fol- lowing passage : " When this Church is said to be Independent, we must know That Indepen- ] i. Either an absolute Suprejnacy, and then it is opposed to subordination. DENCy implies \ 2. Or else a suffi.ciency in its kind, for the attainment of its end, and so its two things ; J opposed to imperfection. Take that word in the first sence, so a particular Church or Congregation is not abso- lutely supreaine : For its subject unto, and under the supreme power politicke in the place where it is; so that the Magistrate hath a coactive power to zom^^\y\^Ociwxzh. to execute the ordinances of Christ, according to the order and rules of Christ, given to her in that behalfe in his holy Word ; and in case she swerves from her rule, by a strong hand to constraine her to keepe it. Hee is a nursing Father thus to the Church, to make her attend that wholesome dyet which is provided and set out, as her share and portion m the Scripture. Nay, should the supream Magis- trate unjustly oppresse or persecute, she must be subject, and meekly according to justice, beare that which is unjustly mflicted. Againe, she is so farre subject to the consociation of Churches, that. she is bound, in case of doubt and difficulty, to crave their counsell, and if it be according to God, to follow it ; and if she shall erre from the rule, and continue obstinate therein, they have authority to renounce the right hand of fellowship with her. In the second sence, the Church may be said to be Independent, vAva^y sufficient to attaine her end : and therefore hath coin- 148 hooker's CONGREGATIONALISM, 1645 In all these I have leave to prof esse the joint judgement of all the Elders upon the river :^ (9/ New-haven/ Guilford/ Milford/ Strat- ford/ Fairfield": and of most of the Elders of the Churches in the Bay/ to whom I did send in particular^ and did receive approbation from them^ under their hands : Of the rest (to whom I could not se?id) I cannot so affirm ; but this I ca?i say^ That at a common meeting/ / was desired by them all, to publish what now I do. pleat power ^ being rightly constituted, to exercise all the ordinances of God. As all A rts are thus zompieat in their kinde^ and have a compleat sufficiency in themselves to attaine their owne end ; BxiA.yet are truely said to be subordinate each to the other in their workes. T^^i? Word, then, in its faire and inoffensive sence, imports thus tnuch^ Every particular Cofigregation^ rightly consti- tuted and compleated^ hath sufficiency in it sel/e^ to exercise all the ordinances oj" Christ. ^^ Pt. 2, pp. 79, 80. ^ I. e., on the Connecticut. These churches were Hartford, under Hooker and Samuel Stone ; Windsor, under John Warham ; Wethersfield, under Henry Smith; Springfield, Mass., under George IMoxon ; and Old Saybrook, under James Fitch. ^ Under John Davenport and William Hooke. 3 Under Henry Whitfield and John Higginson, the latter later of Salem, ■* Under Peter Prudden. ^ Under Adam Blakeman. ^ Under John Jones. ''' I. e., of Massachusetts Colony, 8 At Cambridge, July i, 1645 ; see ante^ p. 141. IX THE WINDSOR CREED-COVENANT, 1647 The extant contemporary record of this document is contained in a note-book of Deacon Matthew Grant of Windsor, now in the possession of Dr. J. H. Trum- bull of Hartford. It has been printed in the Congregational Quarterly, Vol. IV, pp. 168, 169 (April, 1862). THE members of the church which ultimately found its resting place at Windsor, Connecticut, were originally part of a company organized in the west-of-England counties of Devon, Dorset, and Somerset, in 1629 and 1630.' This was a region where the influence of Rev. John White, the distinguished Puritan of Dorchester, had long been felt; and he was doubtless largely in- strumental in bringing together the adventurers in the enter- prise. The personal following of Rev. John Warham, a Puritan minister of the Established Church at Exeter, formed a considera- ble portion of the body.'' Their church organization was effected, unlike that of any other of the Puritan churches of New England, before leaving English shores, at Plymouth, where the company had gathered preparatory to sailing ; " and there John Warham 1 Our informant regarding the early history of this company is Capt. Roger Clap, one of its original members, whose Memoirs, written after 1676, in his old age, for the instruction of his children, were first printed at Boston in 1731. They have since been a number of times repub- lished ; in 1844 by the Dorchester, Mass., Antiquarian and Historical Society, at Boston. The more essential portions are given by Young, Chron. . . . Mass., pp. 344-367. The general history of the company and the church, both in their early experiences and later story, may be found in the Dorchester Ant. and Hist. Society's Hist. 0/ the Town 0/ Dorchester, Boston, 1859 ; Stiles' Hist. 0/ A ncient Windsor, New York, 1859 (a new edition is, just out) ; and Messrs. Tuttle, Wilson, and Hayden's contributions to the history of Windsor in Trumbull's Memorial History of Hartford County, Boston, 1886, II : 497-560. The 250th Anniversary of the church in 1880 was commemorated by a sketch of the church's history by its late pastor. Rev. G. C. Wilson, Record of the Services held at the Cong. Ch. of Windsor, Conn., in celebration of its2S0th Anniv. Mch.30, 18S0, [Hartford] 1880, pp. 8-35. ^ Roger Clap's yi/(?wz(7zrj, pp. 18, 19. Yo\xt).%, Chron. . . . Mass., p. 3 Brinley Sale Catalogue, Hartford 1878, Nos. 737, 5S78. ' Dexter, IHd., No. 1507. « Brinley Cat., 3382. ' Dexter, Tiid., No. 1635. " Brinley Cat., 5879. (157) 158 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM XIII. In The Reszilts of Three Synods (i. e., 1646-8, 1662, 1679). Boston, 1725. 16° pp. ii, vi, 118. [Platform, pp. I-49-] XIV. Boston, 1731.' XV. Boston, 1749. 16° pp. 83. XVI. Boston, 1757, with Confession of 1680.' XVII. Boston, 1772, with Wise, Vindication of the Government of N. E. Churches, XVIII. Boston, 1808, 12° pp. 70. XIX. Boston, 1819, 12° pp. xvi, 52. XX. In The Discipline Practised in the Churches of New England, Whit- church, Shropshire, Eng., 1823. 12° pp. xxiv, 130. XXI. In The Cambridge and Saybrook Platforms . . . with the Confes- sion of . . . ibSo ; and the Heads of Agreement . . . i6go. Boston, 1829, 12° pp. iv, 132 ; Platform, 13-67. XXII. In Congregational Order, The Ancient Platforms of the Congrega- tional Churches of New England [etc.] Published by Direction of the General Association of Connecticut. Middletown, 1843, 12° pp. x, 351 ; with Saybrook Con- fession, Articles, and the Heads of Agreement, etc. Platform, pp. 73-152. ^ XXIII. In Report on Congregationalis7n, including a Manual of Church Discipline , together with the Cambridge Platform, adopted in 1648, and the Confes- sion of Faith, adopted in 16S0. Boston, 1846, 18° pp. vi, 128. Platform, pp. 47-85.* XXIV. Reprint of the Platform and Confession from the edition of 1846, Boston, 1850. XXV. The Cambridge Platform [etc.] and the Confession . . . 16S0, to which is prefixed a Platform of Ecclesiastical Government, by Nath. Emmons. Boston, 1855, 12° pp. ii, 20, 84. Sources I. Records of the Governor and Cojnpany of t)ie Massachusetts Bay. Boston, 1853-4, II: 154-155, 200, 285 ; III: 70-73, 177, 178, 204, 235, 236, 240. II. Winthrop, History of New England {Jotirnal), Savage's ed. Boston, 1853, II: 323, 324, 329-332, 338, 376, 402, 403- III. The sources are well epitomized in Felt, Ecclesiastical History of Nevf England, Boston, 1855, 1862, I: 570-574, 577-579, 597, 598, 601, 602, 613; II: 5, 6, 16, 18, ig, 45, 46, 96, 97. Literature Among the various accounts of the Synod and Platform by later writers the fol- lowing may be pointed out : I. Hubbard, General History of New England {written about l58o). Boston, 1848, pp. 532-540- II. Mather, Magnalia, London, 1702, Ed. Hartford, 1853-5, II : 207-211, ^yj— 2^2 passim. 1 Ibid., 7465. 2 Ibid., 7466. 3 Dexter notes 3 editions of Cong. Order. Hartford, [1842] ; Middletown, 1843 ; 1845, Cong, as seen, Bibl. No. 5633. ^ By a Committee of which Drs. Leonard Woods, Heman Humphrey, Thomas Snell, Thomas Shepard, Timothy Cooley, R. S. Storrs, and Rev. Parsons Cooke were the members, appointed in May, 1844, by a meeting of Congregational ministers in Boston. The story is told by Dexter, Cong, as seen, pp. 514, 515 ; and in the report itself. PRESBYTERIAN ASCENDENCY IN ENGLAND 1 59 III. Neal, History of New- England, London, 1720, 1 : 272-275 (largely from Mather). Neal gives an abridgment of the Platform, II : 643-655. IV. Historical Preface to The Cambridge and Saybrook Platforms, etc., Bos- ton, 1829, pp. 5-12. V. Clark, Historical Sketch of the Congregational Churches in Massachusetts, Boston, 1858, pp. 39-43. VI. Palfrey, History of New England, Boston, 1858-64, II : 165-186. VII. Dexter, Congregationalism . . . as seen in its Literature, New York, l88o, pp. 435-448. VIII. A very unsympathetic presentation of the motives of the fraraers of the Cambridge Platform, though with but little account of the work itself, may be found in Mr. Brooks Adams's Emancipation of Massachusetts, Boston, 1887, pp. 79-104. IX. Doyle, Tlu English in Avierica, The Puritan Colonies, London, 1887, II: 91-94. AS has already been pointed out in a previous chapter," the course of events during the first half of the fifth decade of the seventeenth century in England was strongly in favor of Presbyteri- anism. Politics had forced Parliament into a union with the Scotch, when the arduous nature of the military struggle with the king had become evident; and union had signified the adoption of the Scotch type of church polity, — a Presbyterianism not unwelcome at first to a large portion of the English Puritans. The Westmin- ster Assembly had begun its sessions in July, 1643. Its Presby- terian complexion had been evident even before its coming together,'' and by the close of 1645 it had prepared a full scheme of Presbyterian government, which soon received the approval of Parliament in its substantial entirety.^ These were indeed momen- tous changes, and it might well be anxiously questioned by the Congregational ists of New England whether a Parliament which had seemingly brought the ecclesiastical institutions of England into conformity with those of Scotland* might not next proceed to enforce a similar uniformity in New England. Nor were there those wanting in New England itself who ^ See ante, p. 136. 2 When Cotton, Davenport, and Hooker were sounded by the Independents in Parliament in 1642 as to whether they would put themselves in the way of appointment to the Assembly, " Mr. Hooker liked not the business, nor thought it any sufficient call for them to go 3,00c miles to agree with three men {meaning those three ministers who were for independency)." Winthrop, II : 92. 3 See ante, p. 136, note 2. * "Seemingly," because, though adopted by Parliament, Presbyterian institutions were never successfully established in most parts of the Kingdom. l6o THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM would have been glad to welcome Parliamentary interference in affairs of church and state alike. Thie Presbyterian movements at Newbury, which resulted in the meeting of ministers at Cambridge in 1643, have already been pointed out;' and the futility of the attempts made to change the views of Noyes and Parker shows that their convictions were such that they would be likely to look with favor upon Parliamentary limitation of the " New England way." Nor were they the only ministers who advocated Presby- terian views. Peter Hobart, the pastor at Hingham, was essentially a believer in the Scotch polity, at least in the internal management of the affairs of his own congregation.^ And, in addition to these conscientious supporters of Presbyterianism, there is ample evi- dence that there were many in the Massachusetts Colony, and some of them men of weight in the community, who felt the limit- ation of the franchise' and of the rights of baptism to those in church-covenant to be a grievous burden, and one which Parlia- mentary interference, or the free allowance of Presbyterianism, would speedily remove. An illustration of this temper of mind, and of the curiously mixed motives which made some look with favor on Parliamentary interference in the affairs of the Colony, occurred in 1645. The people of Hingham,* tiring of their former commander of militia, chose another and presented his name to the magistrates of the General Court for confirmation. The magistrates thought the ac- tion inexpedient, and ordered the affair to rest till further consid- eration could be had by the Court. But the Hingham soldiery were not so to be put off, and again chose their new captain, Allen. Of course this action was opposed by the former commander, Eames, and some discussion took place as to the exact nature of the magistrate's order. The Allen party charged Eames, before ' See ante^ p. 137, 2 " Mr. Hubbert, the pastor there [at Hingham], being of a Presbyterial spirit, did manage all affairs without the church's advice, which divers of the congregation not liking of, they were divided into two parts." Winthrop, 11 : 288. = This limitation of the franchise to church-members was peculiar to Massachusetts and New Haven, It did not obtain in Plymouth and Connecticut. " The story is told at length by Winthrop, II : 271-313. See also Records of Mas- sachusetts Bay {CdiomaX'S.etioris), III: 17-26. THE HINGHAM CONTROVERSY l6l the church, with untruth, and the minister, Peter Hobart, urged his instant excommunication. Eames appealed to Winthrop and three other magistrates for redress, and they, lending a willing ear to his complaints, ordered the five leaders in the renewed choice of Allen and the subsequent attack upon Eames, to appear and give surety for trial before the next General Court. It so hap- pened that the Rev. Mr. Hobart was brother to three of the five accused, a fact which doubtless accounts in part for his eagerness to see Eames cast out of church-fellowship ; and he now presented himself before the magistrates and protested in no measured terms against their recent action. But matters did not rest here. Five more of the Hinghamites were summoned, " for speaking untruths of the magistrates in the church," and appeared, this time before Winthrop alone. They refused to give bonds, and two of them re- peating the refusal at a later appearance, Winthrop ordered the two committed. This step was warmly resented by the people of Hingham, who now, under the lead of their minister and to the number of "about ninety,"' presented a petition to the next Gen- eral Court asking that body to take cognizance of Winthrop's acts, — though avoiding the mention of his name in the document. The matter being thus presented before the highest colonial tribu- nal, and Winthrop being thus charged with having exceeded the rightful powers of a magistrate, the case was tried by the General Court. The Legislature itself was much divided, but the outcome of the trial was that Winthrop was acquitted and the petitioners fined. But the sympathy of the lower house — the deputies of the towns — was largely against the magistrates of the upper house, who were felt by very many, even of the Legislature, to be too high handed in their general administration. While these proceedings had been taking place in the Court, the meeting of ministers from the various colonies, of which men- tion has been made as approving Hooker's Survey, occurred at Cambridge." Their sympathies were declaredly on the side of the magistrates, who had therefore proposed that their advice should 1 The Colonial Records (Vol. Ill : 17) say " to the noumber of 81." 2 July I, 1645, see ante^ p. 141. 1 62 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM. be taken in the dispute; but this the deputies of the towns opposed so firmly that the proposition failed.' But the ministers were brought into the dispute, nevertheless, for when Rev. Mr. Hobart perceived that matters were going against him, and that his oppo- nents at Hingham were withdrawing from his congregation, he called in the advice of the " elders," who, as might be expected, found him to be in the wrong and sustained the magistrates. Under these circumstances the temper of Rev. Mr. Hobart and his friends at Hingham rose; and when attempt was made to levy the fines imposed, it was forcibly resisted. For this Rev. Mr. Hobart and his associates were proceeded against by the magis- trates, in March, 1646, and in due time brought before the " court of assistants.'" Here it was proved that Mr. Hobart had publicly attacked the authority of the Colony by declaring, among other things, "That we were but as a corporation in England"; and " That by our patent (as he understood it) we could not put any man to death, nor do divers other things which we did." ' For this he was fined ;^2o. Doubtless it has seemed to the reader that the measure dealt out to Mr. Hobart was hard. But the situation was certainly one to excite serious alarm. The danger of Parliamentary interference in the affairs of church and state in New England was great. A division at home at such a time was most unfortunate ; and the state of affairs was rendered doubly perilous by the evidence which the Hingham quarrel revealed, even among the church-members of the lower house, of restiveness under the existing state of affairs. 1 " The deputies would by no means consent thereto, for they knew that many of the elders understood the cause, and were more careful to uphold the honor and power of the magistrates than themselves well liked of." Winthrop, II: 278. 2 It need hardly be pointed out that according to the charter of 1629 the government of the Mass. Company consisted of a governor, deputy-governor, and assistants (the whole body popularly known as magistrates), chosen by the magistrates .^nd freemen assembled in General Court each spring. As the freemen grew in number, their presence as a whole became impossible ; in 1634, therefore, they were allowed to appear by deputies from each town. In 1644 the deputies and magis- trates were separated into two houses. In accordance with the charter the governor, deputy-gov- ernor, and assistants (i, i?., the magistrates), could hold a judicial and legislative court whenever necessary between the meetings of the General Court. There was at this time no sharp distinction between the enactment of laws and the administration of justice in any of these courts. See, inter alia^ Records Mass, Bay^ 1 : 11, 12, 118, 119 ; II : 58, 59 ; Hutchinson, Hist, Mass. Bay^ 1 : 25, 26, 35-37; Palfrey, ///.rf. A^. .£■,, I ; 371-382,617-623; II: 8-18. 3 Winthrop, II : 313. ■ WIDE-SPREAD UNREST 1 63 Nor were matters bettered by the denunciations of the acts of the colonial government as unauthorized, and their whole body of liberties as subject to Parliamentary revision, in which one of the ministers of the Colony had indulged. Having thus declared him- self, the next logical step for Mr. Hobart to take was to appeal for the same Parliamentary redress which might have been invoked against the proceedings of any English corporation; and if Parlia- ment once began interference no man could predict where it would end. The further step which Hobart did not take was actually taken by others of more determination, in a movement inimical to the Colony, and a t one t ime exceedingly formidable. It is perhaps unwarrantable to say that this more serious attack upon the gov- ernment would not have been made had the Hingham affair never occurred, but it seems not too much to affirm that its immediate occasion was the excitement aroused by the course of events at Hingham. And while it is doubtful whether any very determined love of Presbyterianism, as a system of church polity, moved these opponents of the Massachusetts system, they were willing enough to welcome those features of Presbyterianism' and of Parliament- ary interference which would aid them in their main purpose, the overthrow of existing institutions. This new movement^ began with a neighbor of Mr. Hobart, William Vassall, one of the assistants of the Company named in the charter of 1629 ; but apparently a man of discontented spirit always.' For some years Vassall had been a resident of Scituate, under the Plymouth jurisdiction ; where, indeed, no necessity of church-membership laid restriction upon suffrage, but where the usual New England customs prevailed in religious matters. His plan of action was simple and promised success. Taking ad- 1 Palfrey, II ; 166, calls the movement a " Cabal of Presbyterians," but as Brooks Adams has pointed out, Emancipation of Mass., p. 95, the proof that this was primarily a religious move- ment seems wanting. = For its history, see Winthrop, II : 319-392, /omj/ot ,• Hubbard, 499-518 ; Hutchinson, 1 : 145- r49 ; Palfrey, II : i66-r79. 3 Winthrop, II : 319, speaks of him as : "a man of a busy and factious spirit, and always op- posite to the civil governments of this country and the way of our churches"; and Palfrey, 1 : 167, declares that this view has " some confirmation " from other sources. Savage gives an account of him in a note to Winthrop, II : 319. 1 64 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM. vantage of the political situation on both sides of the Atlantic, he determined that petitions should be presented to the General Courts of " Massachusetts and of Plimouth, and (if that succeeded not) then to the parliament of England, that the distinctions which were maintained here, both in civil and church estate, might be taken away, and that we might be wholly governed by the laws of England." As a first step, Vassall had the case laid before the Plymouth Court, in October, 1645, and proposed, so Winslow records,^ " to allow and maintaine full and free tollerance of religion to all men that would preserve the civill peace and submit unto government." Nor did the proposition meet a wholly unfavorable hearing on the part of some of the Court ; but Bradford refused to let the matter come to a vote and thus brought the petition to naught. The next step seems to have been the preparation of a petition^ ' ' to the parliament, pretending that they being freeborn subjects of England, v .re denied the liberty of subjects, both in church and commonwealth, themselves and their children debarred from the seals of the covenant, except they would submit to such a way of entrance and church covenant, as their consciences could not admit, and take such a civil oath as would not stand with their oath of allegiance. " But Vassall was not working alone in the matter. His sym- pathizers in Massachusetts were numerous ; and now, at the Gen- eral Court held at Boston in May, 1646, some seven of them, Dr. Robert Child, Thomas Fowle, Samuel Maverick, Thomas Burton, John Smith, David Yale, and John Dand* — the first-named a reputed graduate of Padua, and all the others of sufficient stand- ing to be given the title of " Mr." by Winthrop, — presented a pe- tition* in which the statements of the proposed memorial to Par- 1 Winthrop, II ; 319. 2 Our information is derived from a letter of Winslow to Winthrop preserved in Hutchinson, Hist. . . . Mass. Bay^ III {Collection) : 153-155, under date of Nov. 24, 1645. The letter carefully omits the names of the petitioners. 9 Winthrop, II : 319, 320. ■1 Brief biographical notes regarding most of the signers, by Savage, will be found in his second edition of Winthrop, II : 320, 321. <• The text of the petition may be found in Hutchinson, III (Collection) : 188-196. Some of its more important passages are the following: '' i. Whereas this place hath been planted by the incouragement, next under God, of letterts patent given and granted by his JMajesty of England . . . . we cannot, according to our judgments, discerne a setled forme of government accord- ing to the lawes of England, . . . 2. Whereas there are many thousands in these plantations, of the English nation, freeborne, quiett and peaceable men, righteous in their dealings, forward with hand, heart and purse, to advance the publick good . . . who are debarred from all civill im- ployments (without any just cause that we know) not being permitted to bear the least office GROUNDS OF DISSATISFACTION 1 65 liament were amplified and strengthened, and formal notice was given that, unless the prayer was heard, recourse would be had to Parliament. It is impossible not to have a high degree of sympathy with these men in their complaint. The formidable barriers which stood in the way of church-membership have already been pointed out,' and justifiable as they seemed from a Congregational stand- point as to the proper composition of a church, they were a de- parture from the practice of all ecclesiastical bodies of import- ance then to be found in the Protestant world. The matter of the franchise was even more galling. Though the population of Massachusetts was probably over 15,000 at the time of the petition, up to 1643 only 1,708 persons had become citizens in the Colony, and of them a number had removed to Connecticut. If the ecclesiastical test was not applied in Plymouth, the case was even worse there; so difficult was it to obtain citizenship that out of some 3,000 inhabitants only about 230 had been enfran- chised by 1643.'' Not only were the majority of the male inhabit- ants thus shut out from any active share in the government, the ranks of the excluded contained many of wealth, character, and in- fluence in the community. But while it must be admitted that the complaints of the disfranchised had much justification, the time was no fit season for a change in the constitution. The leaders (though it cannot be denyed but some are well qualifyed) no not so much as to have any vote in choosing magistrates, captains or other civill and military officers ; notwithstanding they .have . . , paid all assessments, taxes, rates, . . . We therefore desire that civill liberty and free- dom be forthwith granted to all truely English, equall to the rest of their countrymen 3. Whereas their are diverse sober, righteous and godly men, eminent for knowledge and other gracious gifts of the holy spirit, no wayes scandalous in their lives and conversation, members of the church of Endland . . . not dissenting from the latest and best reformation of England, Scotland, &c. yet they and their posterity are deteined from the scales of the covenant of free grace, because, as it is supposed, they will not take these churches covenants, for which as yet they see no light in Gods word . . , They are compelled, under a severe fine, every Lords day to ap- pear at the congregation, and notice is taken of such who stay not till baptism be administred to other mens children, though deneyed to their owne ; . . . We therefore humbly intreat you . . . to give liberty to members of the church of England, not scandalous in their lives and conversations . . , to be taken into your congregation and to enjoy with you all those liberties and ordinances Christ hath purchased for them ... or otherwise to grant liberty to settle themselves here in a church way, according to the best reformations of England and Scotland, if not, we and they shall be necessitated to apply our humble desires to the honourable houses of parliament," 1 See ante^ p. io6. 2 These figures may be found in Palfrey, History of New England, II : 5-8. l66 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM of New England felt that they were the champions of a religious cause not only in their own land but in England, — a cause, too, which was unpopular in the eyes of the majority of Parliament. They feared that their system was to be attacked by the English authorities in its political and ecclesiastical features ; and they felt, therefore, that instead of effecting any changes, the result of which it was impossible to foresee, they must strengthen the foundations of existing institutions and prepare to meet opposi- tion. The petition was. .therefore. laid over till the jiext-session.' But though the petition wa^ not dealt with at this time, the movement which led to the petition, rather than the petition itself,^ had determined the ministers and magistrates of the Col- ojiy to secure, if jx)ssible^.-a.._.united ecclesiastical constitution. Congregationalism had passed the experimental stage. It was no longer the polity of small and isolated congregations, like those of Amsterdam or Scrooby. It was now substantially the established church of New England, and as such was united by common interests, and bound together by the necessarily con- servative attitude toward other polities which such a position im- plied. As yet this essential unity had had no expression. Its features had been delineated in many works of recognized value, but they had found no authoritative statement. There was no standard by which the relations of one church to another could be determined ; none which decided whether a certain course of action was Congregational or not. Whether the creation of such a standard was strictly in accordance with the original principles of Congregationalism may be questioned; but there can be no doubt that it was a logical and necessary step in development if Congregationalism was to be enforced by the civil government as an exclusive polity. The difference between English and American Congregationalism is chiefly due to this unlikeness of re- ^ Winthrop, II : 321. 2 Whether the order for a Synod followed the presentation of the petition is doubtful — the Court began May 6, 1646, and lasted "near three weeks" (i. e., till about the 25th). The order for the Synod is entered in the Colony Records (II : 154), under date of May 15. It was the subject also of considerable discussion before its passage. But Winthrop (II ; 321), declares that the petition was presented, " the court being then near at an end." THE COURT CALLS A SYNOD 167 lationship to the state and to other ecclesiastical bodies. English Independency has always occupied a more or less conscious po-. sition of protest against the established Episcopacy. It has never had state support. It has therefore always had a certain radical and innovating character, and the necessity of fixing its own standards has never been sharply impressed upon it ; rather its whole course has been one of protest against standards erected and imposed by authority. But New England Congregationalism, in becoming a dominant church-system enjoying the support of the state, took of necessity a conservative position. Other bodies, including the Church of England itself, when they appeared on New England soil, were the innovators who T^ere to show cause for their departure from the New England way. . Such a position •demands the establishment of standards and the recognition of certain uniform methods of procedure, that the established pol- ity may maintain its integrity.' The natural and Congregational way to arrive at any such agreement in regard to the common polity of the churches was by means of a Synod, or, as modern Congregationalism would prefer to call it, a Council. But as the Congregationalism of the seventeenth century was largely imbued with the feeling that the ofificers of civil government were to be consulted in all affairs of moment concerning the churches, the motion toward this Synod took the form of an application by some of the ministers to the General Court of the Massachusetts Colony, at its May session in 1646, for the summons of such a meeting.' The bill, which would appear to have been drawn up in form for enact- ment by the ministers who presented it, encountered the same di- versity of feeling which had been shown in the Hingham affair. The magistrates, in sympathy with the clerical applicants, passed the bill as presented ; but the deputies of the towns objected to the mandatory form of the enactment:^ " First, because therein civil authority did require the churches to send their messengers to it, and divers among them [the deputies] were not satisfied of any ^ See the suggestive remarks of Palfrey, Hist. N. E., II ; 179-183. = Winthrop, II : 323. ^ Ibid. l68 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM such power given by Christ to the civil magistrate over the churches in such cases ; secondly, whereas the main end of the synod was propounded to be, an agreement upon one uniform practice in all the churches, the same to be commended to the general court, etc., this seemed to give power either to the synod or the court to compel the churches to practise what should so be established." The magistrates were ready in the main to defend the posi- tions to which the deputies objected. They declared the right of the magistrates to summon representatives from the churches when occasion demanded;' and though they were clear that the proposed Synod would have no power to command, but only to counsel, they were positive that the Court could enforce or reject the result, as it seemed to the mind of the Legislature to accord or not with the Word of God. Yet it was evident that something should be conceded to the deputies' scruples, and it was therefore decided that, though the Court would waive none of the theoretic rights asserted by the magistrates, the call should take the form of invitation rather than command. Agreement being thus reached, both houses united in a request for the de- sired Synod. The length of the document which embodies this Call might well seem to make its omission here desirable, Astas. it not for the light which it sheds on the matters which the General Court supposed would form the topic of the Synod's discussions. A careful reading will show that the Court intended a more direct treatment of the questions raised by Vassall, Child, and their as- sociates than the Synod actually gave ; and it certainly shows that problems which have usually been associated with a later stage of New England history were uppermost in the minds of those who issued the call. " Boston, y» is'i" 3"" m, 1646.'' The right forme of church gov'mn' & discipline being agreed ' pt of y" king- dome of Christ upon earth, therefore y' establishing & settleing thereof by y" ioynt & publike agreem' & consent of churches, & by y' sanction of civill authority, must ^ The reason given is that God has laid on^the civil rulers the duty of maintaining the purity of the churches, both in doctrine and discipline. Idt'd. 2 The call is recorded in the Journal of the upper house, Records . . . Mass. Bay^ IT : 154-156, and of the lower, Ibid,^ III ; 70-73. There are a few minor verbal differences, which will be noted only when they affect the sense. The text here given is that of the upper house. 3 Deputies' Record, a. goodpte. TEXT OF THE CALL 169 needs greatly conduce to y" hono' & glory of 0' Lord Jesus Christ, & to y" settleing & safety of church and comon wealth, where such a duty is diligently ' attended & p'formed ; & in asmuch as times of publike peace, w"*" by y= m'cy of God are vouchsafed to these plantations, but how long y= same may continue wee do not know, are much more coinodious for y" effecting of such a worke then those trouble- some times of warr & publike disturbances thereby, as y' example of 0' deare native country doth witnes at this day, where by reason of y' publike comotions & troubles in y» state of reformation of religion, & y' establishing of y" same is greatly retarded, & at y' best cannot be p'fected w"'out much difficulty & danger, & whereas divers of o' Christian country men & freinds in England, both of y° ministry & oth's, con- sidering y' state of things in this country in regard of o' peace & otherwise, have sun- dry times, out of their broth'ly faithfulnes, & love, & care of our weldoing, earnestly by left" from thence solicited, & called upon us y' wee would not neglect y" oportunity w''' God hath put in our hands for ye effecting of so glorious & good a worke as is mentioned, whose advertisem" are not to be passed over without due regard had thereunto, & consid'ing w"'all y', through want of y" thing here spoken of, some differences of opinion & practice of one church fro" anoth' do already appeare amongst us, & oth" (if not timely p'vented) are like speedily to ensue, & this not onely in lesser things, but even in pointes of no small consequence & very materiall, to instance in no more but onely those about baptisme, & y« p'sons to be received thereto, in w'^'' one pticular y' app'hensions of many p'sons in y" country are knowne not a little to differ; for whereas in most churches the minist" do baptize ^ onely such children whose nearest parents, one or both of them, are setled memb", in full coinunion w"" one or other of these churches, there be some who do baptize y" chil- dren if y' grandfather or grandmother be such members, though the irnediate parents be not,* & oth" though for avoyding of offence of neighbo' churches, they do not as yet actually so practice, yet they do much incline thereto, as thinking more liberty and latitude in this point ought to be yeilded then hath hitherto bene done,^ & many p'sons liveing in y" country who have bene members of y" congregations in England, but are not found fit to be received at y» Lords table here, there be not- w'^standing considerable p'sons in these churches who do thinke that y" children of these also, upon some conditions & tearmes, may & ought to be baptized likewise ; on the oth' side there be some amongst us who do thinke that whatever be y" state of y° parents, baptisme ought not to be dispensed to any infants whatsoever,' w'' va- rious app'hensions being seconded w"" practices according thereto, as in part they already are, & are like to be more, must needs, if not timely remedied beget such differences as wilbe displeasing to the Lord, offensive to others, & dangerous to our selues, therefore ' for the further healing & preventing of the further groth of the said differences, and upon other groundes, and for other ends aforementioned. 1 Ibid.^ dewly. "^ Ibid. y*. ^ Ibid., omits baptize. 4 Cotton had declared this to be the view held by him and the Boston church, in a letter Written to the Dorchester church as early as Dec. i6, 1634. See Increase Mather, First Principles ■of New England., Concerning The Subject 0/ Baptisme, etc., Cambridge, 1675, p. 2 ; Hooker took the opposite view. Survey, Pt. 3, pp. 9-27. 5 As early as 1645, Richard Mather had advocated what was substantially the half-way-cov- fenant position. First Principles, etc., p. 11. ^ Instances of Baptist believers, at Salem and elsewhere in Massachusetts colony, previous to 1646, will be found in G. E. Ellis, Puritan Age . . .in Mass., pp. 379-386. It is possible that some inkling of the views of Henry Dunster, which were to compel him to resign the presidency of Harvard College in 1654, had already got abroad. ^ In the Deputies' Record this clause beginning there/ore opens the next paragraph. 12 I70 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM Althrough this Courte make no question of their lawfull power by the word of God to assemble the churches, or their messeng", upon occasion of counsell, or any thing w'"" may concerne the practise of the churches, yet because all members of the churches (though godly & faithfuU) are not yet clearely satisfied in this point, it is therefore thought expedient, for the p'sent occasion, not to make use of that power, but rather to exprese' o'' desire that the churches will answere the desire of this p'sent Generall Co'te, that there be a publike assembly of the elders & other messen- gers of the severall churches within this iurisdiction, who may come together & m.eete at Cambridge upon the first day of September now next ensuing, there to discusse, dispute, & cleare up, by the word of God, such questions of church gov- ernm' & discipline in y' things aforementioned, or any oth', as they shall thinke needful! & meete, & to continue so doing till they, or y" maior part of them, shall have agreed & consented upon one forme of gov'ment & discipline, for the maine & substantiall pts thereof, as that w"' they iudge agreeable to the Holy Scriptures, which worke, if it be found greater then can well be dispatched at one meeting, or session of y' said assembly, they may then, as occasion & neede shall require, make two sessions or more, for y' finishing of y" same ; c& what they shall agree upon they shall exhibite y' same in writing to y" Govern', or Deputy Gov'n', for y" time being, who shall p'sent y" same to y" Gen' all Courte then next ensuing, to y' end that the same being found agreeable to y* word of God, it may receive from y' said Gen'all Co'te such app'bation as is meete, that y" Lord being thus acknowledged by church & state to be o' Iudge, o' Lawgiver, & o' King, he may be graciously pleased still to save us, as hith'to hee hath done, & glory may still dwell in o' land, truth & peace may abide still in these churches & plantations, & o' posterity may not so easily decline fro'" y' good way, when they shall receive y" same thus publikely & sol- emnly coniended to them, but may rath' ad to such beginings of reformation & purity as wee in o' times have endeav'ed after, & so y° churches in Newe England may be Jehovahs, & hee may be to us a God from gen'ation to generation. And as for y' cost & charges of y" said Assembly, its thought meete, iust, & equall that those churches who shall thinke meete to send their eld's & messeng's shall take such care as that, dureing their attendance at y" said Assembly, they may be p'vided for, as is meete, & what strangers or oth" shall, for their owne edification, be p'sent -at the said Assembly, they to p'vide for themselues & bear their owne charge. And,' forasmuch as ye plantations w"in y' iurisdictions of Plimoth, Coriectecott, & Newe Haven are combined & united w* these plantations w"'in y" Massachusets, in y' same civill combination & confederacy, — ' It is therefore hereby ordered & agreed, that y" churches w"'in y' said iurisdic- tions shalbe requested to send their elders & messeng" to y° Assembly aforemen- tioned, for w'^'' end y" Secretary for y" time being shall send a sufficient number of coppies of this p'sent '' declaration unto y" eld's of ye churches w"'in ye iurisdictions aforementioned, or unto y" governer or govern", coinission' or comission", for y* said confederate iurisdictions respectively, that so those churches, haveing timely no- tice thereof, may y'' bett' p'vide to send their eld'» & messengers to y" Assembly, who, being so sent, shall be received as pts & members* thereof, & shall have like 1 Deputies' Record reads, rather hereby declare it to be ye desire of this J>sent Gennerall Courte, yt tJiere he a puhticke assembly. 2 In the Deputies' Record this sentence begins the ne.\t paragraph. 3 Reference is here made to the union effected between the four colonies in 1643. * Deputies' Record, psent order or dcclareon. s fljid., pte 7ncvil>'s, RECEPTION BY THE CHURCHES 171 lib'ty & poW of disputing & voting therein, as shall y" messeng" & eld" of y« churches w"'iny'' iurisdiction of y" Massachusets." It is evident that the Court intended that the Synod should pass upon the questions regarding baptism and church-member- ship which were already agitating the community, and which ap- peared in the petition of Dr. Child and his associates. The summer between the adjournment of the Court and the time set for the meeting of the Synod was spent largely in discus- sion, in which that petition and its supporters came in for a full share of condemnation from the upholders of existing institutions.' But it is plain that the frequent sermons to which Massachusetts congregations listened that summer did not wholly remove the ob- jections entertained by many as to the propriety of a Synod, and especially of a Synod called by the General Court, in spirit if not in letter. When the appointed first of September arrived, how- ever, all the Massachusetts churches had sent their representa- tives, "except Boston, Salem, Hingham, Concord."" The absence of the latter was accidental, for Concord had not been able to find any brother fit to send and its pastor was hindered. Hingham, in view of recent events, would hardly have been likely to respond to an invitation of the General Court, even if the Presbyterian sym- pathies of its minister had been less pronounced. But with Boston and Salem the case was more serious. These churches, one the oldest and the other the largest in the Colony, took exception to the Synod' — " I. Because by a grant in the Liberties the elders had liberty to assemble without the compliance of civil authority, 2. It was reported, that this motion came originally from some of the elders, and not from the court, 3. In the order was ex- pressed, that what the major part of the assembly should agree upon should be pre- sented to the court, that they might give such allowance to it as should be meet, hence was inferred that this synod was appointed by the elders, to the intent to make eccle- siastical laws to bind the churches, and to have the sanction of the civil authority put upon them." 1 A defence of the petitioners was published at London in 1647 by J. Child, brother of the petitioner, under the title of Neiv-Englands Jonas cast up at London ; or a Relation of the Pro- ceedings 0/ the Court at Boston in N. E. etc., in which much complaint is made of pulpit attacks upon the petitioners. The work has been several times reprinted, 2 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc, IV: 107-120 ; Force, Tracts, Washington, 1836-46, IV ; and with prefatory matter by W. T. R. Marvin, Boston, 1869. 2 Winthrop, II : 329. = Hid. 172 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM These views, Winthrop tells us, were chiefly advanced by those "who came lately from England, where such a vast liberty was allowed, and sought for by all that went under the name of Inde- pendents.'" Their advocates were able to quote in their behalf not only such stout defenders of English Congregationalism as Goodwin, Nye, and Burroughes, but a positive order enjoining " that all men should enjoy their liberty of conscience," issued by the Commissioners for Plantations, a board recently established by Parliament,^ to the English settlers in the West Indies and Ber- muda, — an order which the Commissioners had sent to Massachu- setts in the softened form of advice. This party of opposition to the Synod embraced some thirty or forty of the Boston church. Here, then, was material for a serious division, the more so that some of the points raised were of a nature exceedingly diffi- cult to answer. The first objection, for instance, was based on the provision of the Body of Liberties of 1641, that^ — ' ' The Elders of the Churches have free libertie to meete monthly, Quarterly, or otherwise, in convenient numbers and places, for conferences, and consultations about Christian and Church questions and occasions." But the majority of the church, of whom Winthrop was doubt- less the leader, had a ready reply to all the criticisms. That to the first demurrer is perhaps the most curious. They affirmed that the permission to ministers to meet upon their own motion,' was granted only for a help in case of extremity, if, in time to come, the civil au- thority should either grow opposite to the churches, or neglect the care of them, and not with any intent to practise the same, while the civil authority were nursing fathers to the churches." It was further urged, as an answer to the second objection, that it was really no concern of the churches ' 1 Ibid. 2 xhe Commissioners for Plantations were a board of six lords and twelve commoners, created by Parliament Nov. 2, 1643 ; and designed to exercise whatever authority had been enjoyed by King Charles over these plantations. Among the commoners was Samuel Vassall, a brother of the New England agitator, William Vassall,— a fact which explains something of the confidence with which he and the petitioners proposed to appeal to English authority, and the dread with which the min- isters and Court regarded his schemes. See Palfrey, I : 633, 634. ' The Body of Liberties was a code of laws drawn up chiefly by Rev. Nathaniel Ward of Ipswich, and adopted by the General Court, for trial and approval by use, in December, 1641. The code may be found in 3 Coll. Mass. Hist. Sac, VIII : 191-237. See also Winthrop, II ; 66 ; and Felt, Ecclesiastical History, 1 : 439, 440. The law is section 95, clause 7. ■• Winthrop, II : 330, 6 /^,-^. RELUCTANCE OF THE BOSTON CHURCH 1 73 " to inquire, wliat or who gave the court occasion to call the synod, ... it was the churches' duty to yield it to them [the Court]; for so far as it concerns their com- mand or request it is an ordinance of man, which we [the churches] are to submit unto for the Lord's sake, without troubling ourselves with the occasion or success." To the third point of criticism it was answered that the lan- guage of the Court did not forbid the Synod to submit their finding to the churches for approval before returning it to the Court, and did not imply that the Court intended to make it penally binding. But, spite of these reasonings, the objectors were not con- vinced; and after two Sabbaths spent in vain agitation, the pastor and teacher, Wilson and Cotton, " told the congregation, that they thought it their duty to go notwithstanding, not as sent by the church, but as specially called by the order of the court.'" Mean- while the Synod had met, and had sent an urgent appeal to the Boston church to choose delegates, since it was clear to the Synod that a refusal on the part of Boston and Salem would peril the whole enterprise. On the reception of these letters the ruling elders, Thomas Oliver and Thomas Leverett, hastily summoned such of the church as they could gather on Wednesday, September 2; but " nothing could be done."^ On the following day, however, the regular Thursday lecture was given, and thither the greater part of the Synod repaired. It is probable that the Boston minis- ters felt that, under the circumstances, a stranger's voice would be more persuasive, and Rev. John Norton of Ipswich, later to be teacher of the Boston church, was well fitted for the task. He^ "took his text suitable to the occasion, viz., of Moses and Aaron meeting in the mount and kissing each other, where he laid down the nature and power of the synod, as only consultative, decisive, and declarative, not coactive, etc. He showed also the power of the civil magistrate in calling such assemblies, and the duty of the churches in yielding obedience to the same. He showed also the great offence and scandal which would be given in refusing, etc." Norton's sermon was not without considerable effect, and when the question was next brought up by the Boston church, on Sunday, September 6, the matter was finally put to vote by show of hands. The majority was clearly in favor of representation in the Synod; but the minority objected that the church had hitherto 1 Ibid. = Ibid., 331. = Ibid. 174 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM required a unanimous vote for important decisions. The force of the objection was felt; but the majority replied that the case was one demanding action, unanimous if possible, if not, the majority must act. At this stage of proceedings the spirit of well meant but impracticable compromise took hold of some of the brethren, and it was seriously proposed that, instead of sending delegates, the church should attend the Synod in a body. Happily good sense prevailed, and "in the end it was agreed by vote of the major part, that the elders and three of the brethren should be sent as messengers.'" The absence of records and of a chronicler like Winthrop make it impossible to follow the course of the dis- cussion in the Salem church, but we may presume, since we hear nothing further regarding its opposition to the Synod, that argu- ments similar to those used at Boston overcame its reluctance. The Synod, therefore, was able to set about its work with the moral support of twenty-eight of the twenty-nine churches in the Massachusetts Colony (to which the two churches of New Hamp- shire should be added, that province being then under the protec- tion of Massachusetts); and the good-will, together with a few representatives, of the twenty-two churches of Plymouth, Con- necticut, and New Haven.' Though ready for deliberation at last, a variety of causes pre- vented the doing of much of importance at this session of the Synod. The disputes at Boston had taken a number of days, the season was late,'' and " few of the elders of other colonies [than. 1 Ihzd.^ 332. 2 Under no claim of infallibility the following list of churches in the four confederate colonies is subjoined — the dates are those of organization. Massaclnisetts^ Salem, 1629, Boston, 1630, Watertown, 1630, Roxbury, 1632, Lynn, 1632, Charlestown, 1632, Ipswich, 1634, Newbury, 1635, Hingham, 1635, Weymouth, 1635, Cambridge, 1636, Concord, 1636, Dorchester, 1636, Springfield, 1637, Salisbury, 1638, Dedham, 1638, Quincy, 1639, Rowley, 1639, Sudbury, 1640, Edgartown, 1641? Woburn, 1642, Gloucester, 1642, Hull, 1644, Wenham, 1644, Haverhill, 1645, Andover, 1645, Read- ing, 1645, Topsfield, 1645, IManchester, 1645. [New Hampshire^ Hampton, 1638, Dover, 1638, E.xeter, 1638, was dead.) Plymouth^ Plymouth, 1602 ? Duxbury, 1632, Marshfield, 1632, Scituate [London, 1616], 1634 (removed to Barnstable 1639), Taunton, 1637, Sandwich, 1638, Yarmouth, 1639, Scituate (new), 1639, South Scituate, 1642, Rehoboth, 1644, Eastham, 1646. Conneciicut, Windsor, 1630, Hartford, 1633, Wethersfield, i636[4i] ? Saybrook, i639[46]? Fairfield, i639[5o]? Stratford, 1640? South Hampton, L. 1. (under Conn, jurisdiction), 1640? New Haveii^ New Haven, 1639, Milford, 1639, Stamford, 1641 ? Guilford, 1643, Branford, 1644 (from South Hampton, L. I.). The question mark indicates doubt as to date of organization. See Dexter, Co7ig. as seen, p. 412 ; and Cong. Quarterly, IV : 269, 270 (July, 1862) ; Clark, Hist. Sketch of the Cong. Chs. in Mass., Bos- ton, 1858; Punchard, Hist. 0/ Congregationalism, \y , passim. 3 It should be remembered that we have to do with old style dates — the day of meeting^ therefore, corresponded with the modern Sept. 11. THE FIRST SESSION, 1 646 1 75 Massachusetts] were present.'" Yet substantial progress was made. A committee prepared and presented a paper of some length on the much debated problems regarding the power of the civil magistrate to interfere in matters of religion, the nature and powers of a Synod, and the right of the magistrates to call such assemblies." The opinion expressed on the first and third points was strongly affirmative, while a Synod was declared to be, as Norton pictured it to the Boston church, an advisory rather than a judicial body. But the Synod treated the report with great cau- tion, it " being distinctly read in the Assembly, it was agreed thus farre onely, That they should be commended unto more serious consideration against the next Meeting."^ A yet more important matter was the appointment by the Synod of Rev. Messrs. John Cotton of Boston, Richard Mather of Dorchester, and Ralph Partridge of Duxbury in Plymouth Colony, each to prepare a " model of church government " for submission to the assembly at its next session.* And so, having sat "but about fourteen days,'" the Synod adjourned to the eighth of June, 1647. On October 7th, following the close of the Synod, the General Court met once more. To its thinking the outlook was serious enough. Samuel Gorton, who had successively turmoiled Massa- chusetts, Plymouth, and Rhode Island, and had received severe treatment in all, had gone to England with two followers, Greene and Holden, in 1644, and laid complaint against Massachusetts before the Commissioners for Plantations. Holden had returned. ^ Winthrop, II : 332. ^ Some extracts from this Report will be given at the close of this introduction. It cannot be too frequently pointed out that by a " Synod " the New England fathers meant what is now known as a council. 3 Report — Result 0/ a Synod at Cavibridge in N. E. Anno 1646^ p. i. Hubbar^l, Gen. Hist,f 536, 537 ; and Mather, who follows him, Magnalia^ ed. 1853-5, 11 : 210, quote a single passage from this report and imply that the Synod endorsed it. Such was not the case, save as represented above. The statement that it was "accompanied with a discour.se of Mr. Tho. Allen, wherein this doctrine was further explained," is also erroneous. Allen wrote a simple preface to this tract and two others which he bound with it. On the joint title-page Allen attributed its authorship to John Cotton, but a careful reading of the preface fails to give certainty to this conjecture. ^ Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, IJ- 211. Mather is doubtless correct in this statement, His grand- fathers were two of the three designated, and the draft by Ralph Partridge still exists in the manuscript collections of the American Antiquarian Society at Worcester. ^ Winthrop, II : 332. 176 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM arriving at Boston in September, 1646, armed with orders from tiie Commissioners directing that free passage should be granted to the three complainants through Massachusetts to Narragansett Bay," and not obscurely intimating that an answer to the charges was expected from the Massachusetts government.' The situa- tion was most embarrassing. To refuse to honor the orders of the Commissioners would mean a breach with the home govern- ment, but to admit their authority would be practically to abandon the local autonomy of the colonial government. It was clear, too, that Dr. Child and his fellow petitioners were alive to the fact that their prayer was to meet no favoring response in Massa- chusetts, and were about to carry out their threat and take the case before the Commissioners. If the authority of that board was admitted by the colonial government in one matter, what was to prevent the imposition by the Commissioners of all the changes desired by Vassall or Child? On Holden's coming the magistrates in Boston had consulted the ministers who happened to be in the town for the Thursday lecture, and they had decided, on the whole, to allow Holden free passage, without raising the question of the validity of his documents.' But it was impossible to temporize much longer. The court, therefore, at its October meeting took prompt steps. A committee of four was appointed to* ' ' examine all the answ" y' are brought into this Co'te to y" petition of Docto' Child & M' Fowle, etc, & out of all to draw up such an ansW thereto as they thinke most meete, & p'sent y' same to this Co'te, & furth' to tteate w" M' Winslow,* & to agree "w"* him as an agent for us, to answer to what shalbe obiected against us in England." Pending the labors of this committee the Court adjourned till November 4, following. On its reassembling the Court adopted a most remarkable document, doubtless the work of the committee as authors or re- visers. In a " Declaration," " intended evidently for effect in Eng- 1 To follow the story of these men, Antinomians whom the age hardly knew how to deal with, is aside from our purpose. Among many sources of information I may cite Winthrop, passim: Hutchinson, Hist. . . . Mass. Bay, 1 : 117-124 ; Allen, Biograpkical Did., Boston, 1857, pp. 390, 391 ; Palfrey, Hist. N. E., 11; 116-140, 205-220. 2 Winthrop, II: 333, 342-344. 3 Ihid., 334. "1 Records . . . Mass. Bay, 11 : 162. ^ Edward Winslow, the Plymouth pilgrim. 8 The text may be found in Hutchinson, Collection ; 196-218. CONTINUED OPPOSITION IN THE COLONY 1 77 land, they opposed the petition of Child and his associates, and justified the form and methods of the Massachusetts government. In parallel columns they placed the main provisions of the magna diarta and English common law and the answering enactments of the charter, liberties and laws of Massachusetts. They denied that taxation had been unfair or burdensome, they claimed that the petitioners did not really represent the unenfranchised,^ that ad- mission to the church and its ordinances was readily attained by , all who were fit,'^ while the right of baptism of their children was at that moment under discussion by the Synod/ Before their agent should go to England, however, it seemed to the Court that some understanding as to the extent of their claims to local autonomy should be reached ; and, therefore, " such of the elders as could be had were sent for, to have their advice in the matter." ^ After much discussion it was the conclusion of both min- isters and magistrates that, though the Colony owed allegiance to the English authorities, its powers of self-government were so great that no appeals from its proceedings could be allowed.^ These * " These remonstrants would be thought to be a representative part of all the non-free- men in the countrie ; but when we have pulled off theire vizards, we find them no other but Robert Child, Thomas Fowle, &c. For first, although their petition was received with all gentle- nes, yet we heare of no other partners that have appeared in it, though it be four months since it was presented. . . . These \i. e.^ the non-petitioning] non-freemen also are well satisfyed (as we ■conceive) and doe blesse God for the blessings and priviledges they doe enjoy under this government. They think it is well, that justice is equally adrainistred to them with the freemen ; that they have ■equall share with them in all towne lotts, commons, &c., that they have like libertie of accesse to the church assemblies, and like place and respect there, according to theire qualities ... as also like freedome of trade and commerce." Ibid.^ 210, 211. 2 " These remonstrants are now come to the church doore. . . . They tell us, ' that divers sober, righteous, and godly men . . . are detained from the scales, because . . . they will not take these churches covenant.' The petitioners are sure mistaken or misrepresent the matter; for the true reasons why many persons in the country are not admitted to the scales are these : First, many are fraudulous in theire conversation ; or 2dly, notoriously corrupt in their opinions ; or 3dly, grossly ignorant in the principles of religion ; or 4thly, if any have such knowledge and gifts, yet they doe not manifest the same by any publick profession before the church or before the elders, and so it is not knowne that they are thus qualified. . . . The truth is, we account all our countrymen brethren by nation, and such as in charity we may judge to be beleevers are ac- counted also brethren in Christ. If they [the petitioners] be not publickly so called (especially in the church assemblies) it is not for want of due respect or good will towards them, but only for dis- tinction sake, to putt a difference betweene those that doe communicate together at the Lords table, and those who doe not." Ibid., 213, 214, 217. ^ " Concerning the baptisme of the children of such as are not members of our churches, there is an assembly of the elders now in being, and therefore we think fitt to deferr any resolution about that and some other pointes concerning the church discipline, untill we shall understajad theire con- clusion therein, for further light in these things." Ibid., 217. ^ Winthrop, II: 340. ^ Ibid., 341, 345. John Allin, of Dedham, was the spokesman of the ministers. 178 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM points being settled, and the ministers' views regarding the petition of Child and his associates having been heard, the Court now pro- ceeded to deal with the petitioners without ministerial advice.' Two of their number, Fowle and Smith, were arrested, the former as he was about to set sail for England, and informed that the Court held them to account for the allegations of the petition." This brought all the petitioners except Maverick into Court, and a scene fol- lowed in which much heated speech was indulged on both sides ; and ending in an announcement by Child of appeal to the Commis- sioners, and a declaration by Winthrop that no appeal would be admitted.^ A committee of the Court then drew up a list of some twelve particulars in which they declared the statements of the petition false and scandalous ; * to which the petitioners replied seriatim, and the Court rejoined " extempore." ' But through all this cloud of charge and countercharge it is easy to see that the real question in the minds of the Court was that which Massachu- setts was to champion for all America a century and a quarter later, whether New England affairs were to be controlled by New Eng- land men, or by the will of Parliament. This local independence Child denied. The Court as stoutly affirmed it." And in this reso- lution of the Court lay the future not only of the New England churches, but of New lingland liberty. Yet while we cannot but rejoice that the Court took this attitude, its own course of action was arbitrary enough ; and it is with a feeling of regret that we learn that it proceeded to fine Child fifty pounds. Smith forty, Maverick ten, and the rest thirty each ; ' and that when, about a week later, Child attempted to go to England to prosecute his appeal, he was arrested, and Band's study forcibly entered and searched. Here papers were found, designed for presentation to the Commissioners, setting forth the character and conduct of the 1 Ikid., 346, 347. 2 Ibid. See also Records, III : 83, 89. The petitioners were all summoned by the Court. ^ Ibid. The petitioners were informed that they were arraigned not for petitioning but for the false statements of the petition. ■■ /iiV., 348-350. Records . . . Mass. Bay, 111 : go, gi. ^i Winthrop, II : 350-354. Ibid., 354-355. " His [Child's] argument was this, every corporation of England is subject to the laws of England ; but this was a corporation of England, ergo, etc." ' Ibid., 355 ; Records, III : 94. Fowle was " tfien at sea." WINSLOW'S MISSION TO ENGLAND 1 79 Massachusetts government in no favorable light, questioning whether the talk of the ministers and magistrates in the Colony did not amount to high treason, and whether the patent might not be forfeited ; and also praying that a governor or commissioner should be appointed to rule the Colony, and that Presbyterian churches be established.' For this presentation and request, which struck at the foundations of church and state in the Colony, three of the petitioners were committed. But though the Court might imprison, the case was sure of a hearing in England for, before the close of 1646, Fowle and Vassall set sail. Those petitioners who were still in the Massachusetts jurisdiction, Child, Smith, Burton, Dand, and Maverick, were all condemned by the Court in May, 1647, to fines of one and two hundred pounds each." Dand made his sub- mission to the Court and was released without payment in May 1648.' Maverick secured an abatement of one-half in 1650 when the matter had somewhat quieted,* but Child was in England by October, 1647, still a considerable debtor to the Colony.'' In the meanwhile Gov. Edward Winslow, of Plymouth, had sailed for England in Deceraber, 1646,° as the duly accredited agent of the Colony,' provided with a formal answer to the charges of Gorton for presentation to the Commissioners," and a variety of secret instructions as to how to meet the questions raised by Child and his friends." His position was at first anything but easy. The brother of Vassall, the New England malcontent, was one of the Commissioners ; the brother of Child was an active and able opponent of the Massachusetts government, and some of the petitioners had come over to push their own cause. But Wins- low went to work with vigor; in a few weeks after his landing, and pending the decision of the Commissioners, he published a sharp attack upon Gorton and his followers," and not without ^ Winthrop, II : 356-358 ; Hutchinson, Hist. . . . Mass. Bay, ed. London, 1765, 1 : 146-149. 2 Records, III ; 113. Maverick was fined ;^50 in addition, since he was a freeman, making a total for him of ;^i5o. ' /Jzrf., II : 241. ■! Ibid., Ill : 200. « ji,ij,^ n : 199. ' Winthrop, II : 387. ^ /iJr"^., 364, 365 ; Records, 111:93, 94. The Court considered Winslow's mission of such general interest that letters were sent to Plymouth, Connecticut, and New Haven asking them to share In the expense. Records, II : 165. 8 Winthrop, II : 360-364 ; Records, III : 95-98. ^ Winthrop, II : 365-367. '0 Hypocrisie Vmitasked : by A True Relatioil of the Proceedings of the Governour and Coiftpany of the Mcissachitsets against Sa^nvet Gorton, etc., London, 1646 [in new style, 1647]. l8o THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM decided effect. In a similar way he replied, during the course of 1647, to the defence of the petitioners published by Child's brother in that year.' Yet it may well be questioned whether these efforts would have availed to save the Massachusetts gov- ernment from serious defeat and the churches from dreaded in- terference had not an entire change come over the political sit- uation in England. In 1645 ^^'^ 1646, when Vassall and Child began their agitation, the Presbyterians were in the ascendant. But the influence of the army was constantly growing — an army which was predominantly Independent ; and with the Independ- ents the New Englanders were held in high esteem. Just before Winslow reached England the king had been surrendered to Par- liament by the Scotch. It was a great Presbyterian triumph ; that party seemingly secure in control of Parliament, appeared free to carry out whatever policy it wished. But the Presbyteri- ans had scarcely begun to enjoy their apparent supremacy, when the scale turned against them. In March, 1647, just as Winslow's first pamphlet was appearing, Parliament tried to disband the army. The army refused to obey, and demanded arrears of pay. And, in June, 1647, it obtained possession of the person of the king by force. The same month the army compelled eleven prom- inent Presbyterians to leave Parliament, and the Independents came into power. Presbyterian London asserted itself in July, but was soon overawed. Presbyterianism as a political force had lost the day ; by the dawn of 1648 its great defenders, the Scotch, were openly on the side of the king. Their defeat by Cromwell at Preston, August 17, 1648, put an end to any hope of their return to power till after Cromwell's death. The effect on the New England cause of these sudden overturnings was apparent at once. In May, 1647, the Commissioners saw their way clear to inform the Massachusetts authorities that they had neither in- tended to encourage appeals from colonial justice, nor limit colo- nial jurisdiction by anything that had been done in the Gorton case." By July the Commission was satisfied to leave the ques- 1 Child's book was, Ne'w-E7iglands Jonas cast up at London^ London, 1647 (see anie^p. 171, note i); that by Winslow, New-Englands Salamander^ etc., London, 1647. (Reprinted in 3 Coll. Mass. Hist. Sac, II : 110-145). 2 Winthrop, 1 1 : 389, 390. EFFECT OF ITS SUCCESS ON THE SYNOD l8l tion of jurisdiction over the lands of the Gortonites to the New England colonial governments." Nor was Winslow less success- ful against Child and his associates. The ships which arrived at Boston in May, 1648, informed the magistrates " how the hopes and endeavors of Dr. Child and other the petitioners, etc., had been blasted by the special providence of the Lord, who still wrought for us."° This long negotiation formed the political background of the Cambridge Synod . It s perilou s course wa s watched witE ljjgxietv. a nd whe n it was clearj_by_ the autumn of 1647, that the existing institutions of New England were not to be distur bed," the relief w as proportionatej y— gfTBat.' It produced one change of import- ance, however, in the work of the Synod. The prime questions propounded by the General Court had been those of baptism and church membership. These problems had been forced to the fore-front by the movement which had given rise to the petition. But they were questions regarding which there was much divers- ity of view, and therefore the Synod chose to pass them by, when they ceased to be pressing by reason of the defeat of the peti- tioners; and gave instead a merely subsidiary and somewhat am- biguous treatment to the topics which the Court had made chief.^ No doubt most men in New England were glad to have it so at the time, yet the questions were such as could not be ignored, and half a generation later they demanded and obtained a solu- tion. But it was fortunate indeed that the discomfort of their enemies gave the representatives of the New England churches opportunity to work out the declaration of their polity in peace. 1 Ibid., 387, 388. 2 Ibid., 391, 392. ^ The Preface to the Result of the Synod of i66z, Propositions Concer7ting the Subject 0/ Baptism., etc., Cambridge, 1662, p. xii, says: ''^ And in the Synod held at Cambridge in the year 1648, that particular point of Baptizing the children 0/ such as were admitted jnembers in minority, but not yet in full communion, was inserted in some 0/ the drattghts thai were prepared for that Assembly, andiuas then debated and confirmed by the like Arguments as we now use, and was generally consented to ; though because some few dissented, and there was not the like urgency of occasion for present prcfctise, it was not then put i7ito the Plat^ iotm that was after Printed.^^ (See later page of this work.) Allin, in h\s Animadversions upon the Antisynodalia Americana, Cambridge, 1664, p. 5, is more definite. He uses language which implies that Charles Chauncy of Scituate, later presi- dent of Harvard, was the opponent : " When this matter was under Consideration in the Synod, 1648, the Author of this Preface [Chauncy] knoweth well who it was that professed, He would op- pose it with all his might : by reason whereof, and the dissent of some few more, it was laid aside at that time." For the statement in the draft submitted by Mather to the Synod, see post, p. 224. 1 82 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM. The Synod which had adjourned in mid-September, 1646, re-assembled at Cambridge, on June 8, 1647. The attendance em- braced men as far removed in residence from the place of meet- ing as Gov. Bradford of Plymouth, and Rev. Messrs. Stone of Hartford, and Warham of Windsor. On June 9, the Synod listened in the morning to a denunciatory sermon from Rev. Ezekiel Rogers of Rowley, in which the preacher inveighed against the late pe- titioners, and attacked the growing habit of the brethren in the churches " making speeches in the church assemblies," and found fault with various customs, such as the wearing of long hair. " Divers were offended at his zeal in some of these pass- ages;" and doubtless the pleasure of the Synod was greater, if their comprehension of the sermon was less, when " Mr. [John] Eliot preached to the Indians in their own language before all the assembly," in the afternoon.' But the session did not long continue. An epidemic, which cost Hartford Thomas Hooker, and Boston Gov. Winthrop's wife, cornpelled it to break up be- fore it had accomplished much of moment.^ As the Synod went on,tJiexoxi£eption_onts_£Ossibleji^^ magnified. The original thought of the Court had been a settle- ment of church polity, with special attention to the disputed questions of baptism and church membership. Circumstances had made those questions less pressing, and had brought into greater prominence the broader function of the Synod, that of giving a constitution to the churches. But it might do even more. The Westminster Assembly had prepared a Confession of Faith in regard to which much secrec)^ was still observed.^ It had not yet been adopted by Parliament, though approved Au- gust 27, 1647, by the Scotch General Assembly. There was rea- son to fear that it might not be wholly satisfactory. And there- fore, at its session on October 27, 1647, the Massachusetts Gen- 1 Our account of this session is in Winthrop, II : 376. 2 Iljid^^ 378, 379. 3 The Confession was finished Dec. 4, 1646, and presented to Parliament. That body at once ordered that '* 600 copies, and no more be printed," and the printer was directed not to make any public. Matters then dragged on till April, 1647, when the Commons ordered proof texts furnished. This was done and the result printed under the same charge of secrecy. Discussion continued till the Confession, in slightly modified form, was adopted, June 20, 1648. See SciiafE, Creeds^ 1 : 757, 758 ; Dexter, Cong, as seen, Bibliog,, Nos. 1287, 1305. THE SECOND AND THIRD SESSIONS, 1647-8 1 83 eral Court added to the duties of the Synod that of preparing a Confession of Faith, by the following order : ' "Whereas there is a synode in being, & it is y" purpose, beside y" clearing of some points in religion questioned,' to set forth a forme of church govern', accords to y= ord' of y" gospell, & to that end there are certeine members of y" synode that have in •charge to prepare y' same against the synode; ^ but this Co'te conceiving that it is as fully meete to set fourth a confession of y" faith we do p'fesse touching y" doctrinall pt of religion also, we do desire, therefore, these rev'end eld's following to take some paines each of them to p'pare a breife forme of this nature, & p'sent y" same to y' next session of y" synode, that, agreeing to one, (out of them all,) it may be printed w"'the otV M' Norrice," M' Cotton, « M' Madder,' M' Rogers, of Ipswich,' M' Sheopard,' M' Norton," & M' Cobbet." Doubtless the matter was taken into consideration; but before the Synod again met copies of the Westminster Confession had been received and the nature of that symbol had become fully known. The Court's order regarding a Confession was obeyed, as will be seen, but in a somewhat different way from that which the Court suggested. The final session of the Synod opened at Cambridge on Au- gust 1 5, 1648 ;" and, as at the previous meeting, the body began its work by listening to a sermon. This time the preacher was John Allin of Dedham, and the theme an exposition of the teaching of the fifteenth chapter of Ads in regard to the nature and power of Synods, a treatment which led the divine to expose and rebuke a number of errors which had appeared affecting this subject during the late discussions throughout the Colony. The sermon was "very godly, learned, and particular";" yet it may be questioned whether it awakened as decided an interest in the congregation as ■did a snake that wriggled into the elder's seat, behind the preacher, during its delivery. And when Rev. William Tompson of Braintree had effected the reptile's death, the members of the Synod, like all their generation, eager to discover signs and divine interposition'^ in the occurrences of life, felt that'* " it is out of doubt, the Lord discovered somewhat of his mind in it. The serpent," so they interpreted the imagined symbolism, "is the devil ; the synod, the represent- ^ Records^ . . . Afass.Bay,ll:-2ao. 2 /_ ^_^ Baptism and church membership. ^ /. (?., Rev. IWessrs. Cotton, Mather, and Partridge ; see anfe, p. 175. * /. ^., with the Platform of government. ^ Edward Norris, of Salem. ' John Cotton, of Boston. ' Richard Mather, of Dorchester. 8 Nathaniel Rogers. " Thomas Shepard, of Cambridge. ^° John Norton, of Ipswich, later of Boston. ^i Thomas Cobbett, of Lynn. " Winthrop, II : 402, 403. 1' liiW. n /h'li. 1 84 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORIVt atives of the churches of Christ in New England. The devil had formerly and lately attempted their disturbance and dissolution ; but their faith in the seed of the woman overcame him and crushed his head." The Synod went on harmoniously and rapidly with its work. The Platform of. Church Discipline, draw nj^p-%:-Richard_Mather^ of Dorchester, with large-use _ of previous writings of his own and of Cotton, was preferred as the basis of the Synod's ecclesiastical constitution, and substantially adopted.' To it was prefixed a Preface by Rev. John Cotton of Boston,' designed to explain some 1 Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, 1 : 453. Richard Mather, the first of a distinguished New England family, was born at Lowton, Lancashire, in 1596. He studied at Oxford for a brief time, and then >vas asked to settle as minister of the Puritan congregation at Toxteth Park, near Liverpool, where he had already taught school. He was ordained by the bishop of Chester in 1620, but his Puritan- ism was so pronounced that he was silenced in 1633 and 1634, having never worn the surplice. Obliged thus to relinquish his ministry at Toxteth, he came to New England in 1635. He was settled at Dorchester in 1636, and was from the first prominent in the affairs of the Colony. His answer to the XXXII Questions has already been noticed. He replied to the Presbyterian treatises, of Herle and Rutherford ; and, at a later period, took an active part in the half-way covenant con- troversy. He died at Dorchester, April 22, i66g. Of his sons, the youngest, Increase, was the: most famous, and Increase's son, Cotton, kept the family name in prominence. Only a few of the biographical sources need be mentioned. Increase Mather, Life of Richard Mather (1670), in Coll. Dorchester Antiquarian Soc., Boston, 1850; Magnalia, 1 : 443- 458; Allen, Am. Biog. Diet., ed. 1857, pp. 555, 556; Sprague, Annals Am. Pulpit, I: 75-79; Ap- pleton's Cyclop. A m. Biog., IV : 251 ; H. E. Mather, Lineage of Rev. Richard Mather, Hartford, iSgo, pp. 33-51 (with portrait). Mather's works are enumerated by Sprague and H. E. Mather. 2 Valuable extracts from Partridge's draft, not adopted by the Synod, may be found in Dex- ter, Cong, as seen, pp. 444-447. He would not have given so much authority to the magistrates in matters of belief as the Synod did. Mather's first draft, which like that of Partridge is in the possession of the Am. Antiquarian Soc. at Worcester, a little more than twice as long as the form finally adopted, and was not only abridged, but a good deal modified by the Synod. The final form, also at Worcester, is in Mather's handwriting. 3 See Increase Mather, Order of the Gospel, Professed and Practised by the Churches of Christ in New England, etc., Boston, 1700, p. 137. John Cotton, who might contest with Hooker the claim to rank as the ablest of the New England ministry, was born at Derby, Eng., Dec. 4, 1585.. He was educated at Cambridge, entering Trinity College about 1598, and graduating A.M. in 1606. He became a fellow of Emmanual College, then the Puritan center, and later served as head lecturer, dean, and catechist. He became religiously awakened, and inclined toward Puritanism ; and about 1612 was made minister of the fine old church of St. Botolph, at Boston in Lincolnshire. Here he remained for twenty years, in spite of one suspension for Puritanism. His work was laborious, but eminently successful. Beside his regular Sunday sermons and his exposition of *' the body of divin- ity in a catechetical way " on Sunday afternoons, he preached four times in the week, and conducted a kind of theological seminary in his own home. Attracting the attention of Laud, he escaped seri- ous consequences by flight, and arrived at the New England Boston in September, 1633. Here he immediately became teacher of the Boston church. He was the ecclesiastical leader of the Massa- chusetts colony, a part of about all that was done in church or state till his death at Boston, Dec. 23, 1652. His works were very numerous, and embrace doctrinal, devotional, ecclesiastical, and con- troversial treatises. His Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven, London, 1644, has always been con- sidered one of the most authoritative expositions of Congregationalism. Cotton's life has been frequently treated. The earliest sketch is that of Rev. Samuel Whit- ing of Lynn, Young, Chron. . . . Mass., 419-430; his successor, John Norton, published his. life, Abel being Dead yet speaketh ; or the Life &r= Death of . . . Cotton, London, 1658, re- printed Boston, 1834. See also Mather, Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, 1 : 252-286 ; A. W. M'Clure, Life of fohn C(7//o«, Boston, 1846 (1870); Allen, Z^zV^. .^ ;«. ^z't?^., ed. 1857, 265-268 ; Sprague, Annals A vt. Pulpit, I: 25-30; J. S. Clark, in Cong. Quarterly, III: 133-148 {April, 1861, with portrait); other references may be found in a note by Justin Winsor to Memorial History of Boston, 1 : 157, 158. A list of Cotton's writings is given by Allen and Clark. CHARACTER OF THE PLATFORM 1 85 features of New England church practices and to combat the charge frequently made by the Presbyterian party in England, as well as by the Episcopalians, that the churches of New England were of doubtful orthodoxy. And we may be sure that it was with especial pleasure, in view of the allegations of doctrinal unsound- ness brought against them by some of their English brethren, that the Synod proceeded to fulfill the spirit rather than the letter of the Court's injunction in regard to a Confession of Faith by a hearty acceptance of the doctrinal part of the work of the West- minster Assembly ("for the substance therof") which had just ( received the approval of Parliament.' These things were quickly done, and as the Synod united in a parting hymn," after a session of less than a fortnight,^ it was doubtless with a feeling of satisfac- tion in their work. They had put the churches of New England, by formal declaration, where they had always been in fact, at one in doctrine with the Puritan party in England, whether Presbyte- rian or Independent. Their orthodoxy could not be impugned. They had formulated their polity in strict and logical order, and had given the churches a standard by which their practice might be regulated and innovation resisted. They had presented it, too, in a form not likely to arouse the jealousy of either faction in England or give excuse for Parliamentary interference. The C ambridge Platform is the most important mnnrimpni- of early New E ngland Congregationalism, because it is the clearest reflection of the system as it lay in the minds of the first genera- tion on our soil after nearly twenty years of practical experience. _ The Platform is Barrowisl . It does not reco gnize strongly the democratic element in our polity, beca use Congregational ism at that"3ay~was BarrowistT'It urges the ri ght of the civil mag istrate to interfere in matters of doctrine and practice, be cause Congre- gati onalism t jien believed that such rights were his., It upholds Congregationalism as a polity _of_exc-Lusiv€ divine warrant, because ■ See Preface to the Platform, p. 195 of this volume. "^ Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, II; 211. They sang "the song of Moses and the Lamb in the fif- ■ teenth chapter of the Revelation — adding another sacred song from the nineteenth chapter of that^. book ; which is to be found metrically paraphrased in the New-England psalm-book." 8 Winthrop, II : 403. 13 1 86 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM Congregationalism in the seventeenth century so regarded itself. But it affirm s the permanenLBliQ£ipl^eS_of Congregatimialism with equal clearness and insistence. The autonomy of the local church, the dependence of the churches upon one another for counsel, the representative character of the ministry, are all plainly taught and have given to the Platform a lasting value and influence. The Platform thus adopted was put forth in print by means of the rude press at Cambridge in 1649, and at the October session of the General Court of that year was duly presented to the Mas- sachusgt ts au thorities. The Court proceeded with its usual caution and adopted the following vote ' — ' ' Whereas a booke hath bene presented to this Cour', intituled a Platforme of Church-DiscipHne out of the Word of God, etc., being the result of what the synod did in their assembling, 1647,' at Cambridge, for the ' consideration & acceptance, the Court doth conceive it meet to be comended to the judicious & pious consideration of the seuerall churches w'^in this jurisdiction, desiring a returne from them at the next Gefill Court how farr its suiteable to their judgmen" & approbations, before this Court proceed any furthe' therein." But, thus urged, the churches were slow in their compliance; and on June 19, 1650, the Court further voted that' — "forasmuch as (it is sajd) that some of the churches were ignorant of the sajd order, & therefore little hath ben done in that pticular, this Courte . . . doe hereby order, that the sajd booke be duly considered off of all the sayd churches witliin this pattent, & that they, without fayle, will returne theire thoughts and judgments touch- inge the pticulars thereof to the next session of this Court . . . and further, it is hereby desired, y' euery church will, by the first oppertunity, take order for the p'cureingc of that booke, published by the synod at London, concerninge the doctrine of the gosple,^ that the churches may consider of that booke, also, as soone as they can be gotten." Thus admonished, the churches seem generally to have obeyed. If a judgment may be based on the instances in which records have come down to us, the books were read to the churches, and the opinion of the membership expressed by a vote.' Of course, as the "^Records . . . Mass. Bay, 11: 283; III: 177, 178. The te.tt is from the Magistrate's Record. 2 A mistake for 1648. ' Deputies' Record reads more correctly their, i. e., the Court's. ■■ Records, III : 204 ; IV : 22. ^ I. e., the Westminster Confession. « A few examples are given by Felt, Eeclesiast. Hist., II : iS, 19, 29. Some of the communi- , cations of the churches are in the MSS. Collections of the Am. Antiquarian Soc, Worcester, Mass. 1 have not seen them. RECEPTION BY COURT AND CHURCHES 187 elders framed the proposition, their influence in the decision of each church would be great. When the Court came together once more, in May, 1651, it was moved to a vote, apparently on the 22d, expressing its thanks to the Synod now nearly three years ad- journed ; but declaring that ' — "many of whom [the churches of Massachusetts] were pleased to p'sent to the last session of the last Court, by the deputyes of the seuerall townes, seuerall objections against the id confession of disciphne, or seuerall ptyculers therein, wherevppon the Court judged it convenient & conduceinge to peace to forbeare to giue theire approba- tion therevnto vnles such objections as were p'sented were cleared & remoued ; for which purpose this Court doth order the secritary to draw vp y" sd objections, or the princypall of them, & to deliuer the same to Reuerend Jr Cotten within one raoneth, to be coihunicated to the elders of the seuerall churches, who are desired to meete & cleare the sd doubts, or any other that may be imparted to them by any other p'son concerninge the sd draught of discipline, & to returne theire advice & helpe herein to the next session of this Generall Court, which will alwayes be zealous acording to theire duty to giue theire testimony to euery truth of Jesus Christ, though they cannot se light to impose any formes as necessary to be obserued by the churches as a bind- inge rule." Little as this cautious vote seems to indicate any disposition of the General Court to be domineering over the churches, there were four of the deputies, including the representatives of the town and church of Boston, who voted against it.'' The ministers met duly, at some uncertain date that summer, and having considered the objections referred to them by the Court, they " appointed Mr. Richard Mather to draw up an answer to them" [the criticisms]; and this "answer by him composed, and by the rest approved, was given in"^ to the Court at its October session, 165 1. _Ajaiijaawr"more -J:haB_._y}_ree_yeaxs_aite.r the close of the_S ynod, the Court finally put t he_stariip of its approval nn the Platform, yet in no mandatory way. On October 14 it voted : * "Whereas this Court did, in the yeare 1646, giue encouragment for an assem- bly of the messengers of the churches in a synode, and did desire theire helpe to draw vpp a confession of the fayth & discipline of the churches, according to the word of God, which was p'sented to this Court, & coiiiended to the seuerall churches, many of whom returned theire approbation & assent to the sd draught in generall, & diverse of the churches p'sented some objections & doubtes agaynst some perticulers in the sd 1 Records . . . Masa. Bay, III; 235, 236; IV: 54, 55. ^ John Leverett and Thomas Clarke of Boston, William Tyng of Braintree, and Jeremiah, Hutchins of Hingham. It is evident that at Boston and Hingham feeling against the Synod still continued. ^ Magnalta, ed. 1853-5, II : 237. The manuscript, in Mather's handwriting, is at Wor- cester. ' Records, III : 240 ; IV : 57, 58. 1 88 TPIE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM draught, wherevppon, by order of this Court, the sd objections were commended to the consideraCo of the elders, to be cleared & remoued, who haue returned theire answer in writinge, which the Court, havinge p'vsed, doe thankfully acknowledge theire learned paynes therein, & account themselues called of God (especially at this time, when the truth of Christ is so much opposed in the world) to giue theire testi- mony to the sd Booke of Discipline, that for the substance thereof it is that we haue practised & doe beleeue." The magistrates, always stronger than the deputies in their- support of existing institutions in church and state, appear to have passed the resolution without dissent ; but, spite of its inoffensive form, fo urteen of th e forty deputies_TOted_again£^jts_adoption.' But with this action of the Court the Cambridge Platform became the recognized, if not the unquestioned,^ pattern of ecclesiasti- cal practice in Massachusetts. Endorsed, " for the substance of it," by the Reforming Synod in September, 1679,' it continued the legally recognized standard till 1780. Unfortunately the absence of any mention of action concern- ing the Platform in the contemporary records of the colonies of Plymouth, Connecticut, and New Haven veils the story of its re- ception in those jurisdictions. But a considerable, though uncer- tain, number of the ministers and laymen of those colonies had taken, part in the sessions of the Synod, and there is no rea- son to suppose that the result was any less acceptable to their churches than to those of Massachusetts. Though written a cen- tury and a half later, the affirmation of Trumbull is doubtless essentially true that ■* — "the ministers and churches of Connecticut and New Haven were present [at the Cambridge Synod], and united in the form of discipline which it recommended. By this Platform of discipline, the churches of New-England, in general, walked for more than thirty years." 1 William Hawthorne, Henry Bartholomew,* Salem ; Thomas Clarke, John Lcverett,* Bos-' ton ; Stephen Kinsley, William Tyng,+ Braintree ; Richard Browne, Watertown ; John Johnson, Roxbury ; Esdras Reede,* Wenham ; William Cowdry,* Reading ; Walter Haynes,* Sudbury ; Roger Shaw,* Hampton, N. H. ; John Holbrooke,* Weymouth ; Jeremiah Hutchins, Hingham. Where marked * the whole delegation of the town voted negatively. 2 Mather, Magnalia, 11: 237-247, gives four points, n, the Platform's lack of clearness re- garding the right of a minister to dispense the sacraments to any congregation not his own ; b, its assertion of the distinct ofBce of ruling elders ; c, the practice of ordaining at the hands of the brethren of the local church rather than of ministers of other churches; rf, the use of personal rela- tions and confessions in the admission of members ; as cases in which the thought of the churches in his day varied from the Platform. ^ Result of Synod of 1679, in Necessity of Reformation^ etc., Boston, 1679, Epistle Dedica- tory, p. V ; see also Magnaliay II : 237. "* Trumbull, History of Comiecticiit, New Haven, 1818, I : 289. THE CAMBRIDGE SYMBOLS THE TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS OF 1 646 (Extracts) The Result of the Disputations of the Synod, or Assembly, at Cambridge in New England, Begun upon the first day of the 7"" Month, An. Dom, 1646. About the power of t/ie Civill Alagistrate in matters of the first Table ; and also about the grounds of Synods, with their power, and the potver of calling of them . Being drawn up by some of the Members of the Assembly, deputed thereunto, and being distinctly read in the Assembly, it was agreed thus farre onely, That they should be commended unto more serious consideration against the next Meeting. Touching the Question of the Civill Magistrate in matters of Religion, we shall crave leave to narrow and limit the state of it in the mannner of the Proposall of it, and shall therefore propound it thus. Quest. Whether the Civil Magistrate in matters of Religion, or of the first [2] Table, hath power civilly to command or forbid things respecting the outward man, which are clearly commanded and forbidden in the word, and to inflict sutable pun- ishments, according to the nature of the transgressions against the same, and all this with reference to godly peace ? Answ. The want of a right stating of this Question, touching the Civil Mag- istrates power in matters of Religion, hath occasioned a world of Errours, tending to infringe the just power of the Magistrate, we shall therefore explaine the termes of the Question, and then confirme it in the Affirmative. 'Zj]} Commanding, Forbidding, and Punishing] we meane the coercive power of the Magistrate, which is seen in such acts. By {Matters of Religion commanded or forbidden in tlu word, respecting the outward man] we understand indefinitely, whether those of Doctrine or Discipline, of faith or practice; his power is not limited to such matters of Religion onely, which are against the light of Nature, or against the Law of Nations, or against the fundamentals of Religion ; all these are matters of Re-[3] ligion, which may be expressed by the outward man, but not onely these ; therefore we say not barely thus [/« matters of the first Table] but joyn therewith [In matters of Religion] that all ambiguity may be avoided, and that it may be un- derstood as well of matters which are purely Evangelicall, so far as expressed by the outward man, as well as of other things. And we say, {Commanded or forbid- den in the word] meaning of the whole word, both of the Old and New Testament; exception being onely made of such things which were meerly Ceremoniall, or other- wise peculiar to the Jewish polity, and cleered to be abolished in the New Testa- ment ; By which limitation of the Magistrates power to things commanded or for- bidden in the word, we exclude any power of the Magistrate, either in command- ing any new thing, whether in doctrine or discipline, or any thing in matters of Re- ligion, which is beside or against the word, or in forbidding any thing which is ac- cording to the word. ' [ ] instead of " ". (189) I go THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM 1 Hence he is not to mould up and impose what Erastian forme of Church polity he pleaseth; because if there be [4] but one form commanded now of God, he cannot therefore command what forme he will. 2 Hence he is not to force all persons into the Church, or to the participation of the seals ; because he is not thus commanded. 3 Hence he is not to limit to things indifferent, which are neither commanded, nor forbidden in the word, without apparent expediency or inexpediency of attend- ing the same. By that expression [i:herfy] commanded or forbidden in the word, we understand that which is cleer, either by express words, or necessary Consequence from the Scripture ; and we say cleerly commanded or forbidden ifi the word. Not simply that which the Magistrate or others think to be cleerly commanded or. for- bidden; for they may thinke things commanded, to be forbidden, and things forbid- den to be commanded ; but that which is in it selfe in such sort cleer in the word, de jure, the Civil Magistrate in these days since Christs ascension, may and ought to command and forbid such things so cleared in the word, albeit de facto, oft-times he doe [5] not. \Sutably inflicting punishments according to the nature of the transgressions'] This clause needeth not much explication, being so plaine of it selfe; some things commanded and forbidden in the Law of God, are of a smaller nature in respect of the Law of man, and in this respect 'tis true which is often said, that De minimis non curat lex, i. e. Mans Law looks not after small matters, but other things commanded or forbidden in Gods Law, are momentous, and of a higher nature, and though small in themselves, yet weighty in the consequence or circum- stance. And in this case if he inflict a slight paper punishment when the offence is of an high nature ; or contrariwise, when he inflicts that which is equivalent to a capitall punishment, when the offence is of an inferiour nature, he doth not punish sutably. There are sundry rules in the word in matters of this sort, as touching the punishment of Blasphemy, Idolatry, Heresie, prophanation of the Lords day, and sundry other like matters of Religion, according to w°'' Magistrates of old have held, and others now may observe proportions, in ma-[6] king other particular Laws in matters of Religion, with sanctions of punishments, and inflicting the same, they inflict sutable punishments [7] .... By this, which hath been already spoken touching the acts and rule of the Magistrates coercive power in mat- ters of Religion, the impertinency and invalidity of many objections against this his power will appear, as .... [8] .... 3. That thereby tyranny is ex- ercised over mens tender consciences, and true liberty of conscience is infringed ; when as he de jure commands nothing but that which, if men have any tendernesse of conscience, they are bound in conscience to submit thereto, and in faithfull sub- mitting to which is truest liberty of conscience, conscience being never in a truer or better estate of liberty here on earth, than when most ingaged to walke according to Gods Commandements [9] ■ • ■ ■ [10] .... 7. That thereby the civill Magistrate is put upon many intricate perplexities & hazards of conscience, how to judge in and of matters of Religion. But this doth not hinder the Magistrate from that use of his coercive power, in matters commanded or forbidden in the first Table, no more then it doth hinder him from the like power in matters of the second Table; ' none being ignorant what per- plexing intricacies there are in these as well as in the former ; as conscientious Mag- i It need scarcely be pointed out that what is signified are the actions, murder, adultery, theft, falsewitness, etc., which are the subjects of criminal law as well as of the second half of the Commandments, Exodus, x.\ : 12-17. THE CONCLUSIONS OF 1646 I9I istrates finde by dayly experience. . . [11]. . . [12] . . [13] . . [14] H. That thereby we shall incourage and harden Papists and Turks in their cruell persecutions of the Saints ; whereas for the Magistrate to command or forbid ac- cording to God, as it is not persecution, so neither doth it of it selfe, tend to perse- cution. Power to presse the Word of God and his truth, doth not give warrant to suppresse or oppresse the same ; the times are evill indeed when the pressing of obe- dience to the rule shall be counted persecution [15-19] • • . Will not this Thesis arme and stir up the Civill power in Old England, against godly Orthodox ones of the Congregationall way ; or exasperate Civill power in New Eng- land, against godly, moderate, and Orthodox Presbyterians, if any such should de- sire their liberty here? we conceive no,' except the civill disturbance of the more rigidly, unpeaceably, and corruptly minded, be very great; yet betwixt men godly and moderately minded on both sides, the difference upon true and due search is found so small, by judicious. Orthodox, godly, and moderate Divines, as that they may both stand together in peace and love ; if liberty should be desired by either sort here or there so exercising their liberty, as the .[20] publick peace be not in- fringed. [48] .... '^^at be the grounds from Scripture to warrant Synods? In answer to this Question, we shall propound to consideration three Arguments from Scripture, and five Reasons. Arguments. Aitgum : I Taken from Acts 15. An orderly Assembly of qualified Church- messengers (Elders and other Brethren) in times of controversie and danger, con- cerning weighty matters of Religion, for the considering, disputing, finding out and clearing of the truth, from the Scripture, and establishing of Peace amongst the Churches, is founded upon Acts 15. But a Synod is an orderly Assembly [etc.] . . . [49] . . . Ergo, A Synod is founded upon Acts 15. [63] . . . . V\' Hat is the Power of a Synod? The Power of a Synod I Decisive j Is < Directive, c;^ ^ of the truth, by ' Declarative ) clearing and evidencing the same out of the word of God, non coactive, yet more than discretive. For the better understanding hereof, consider that Ecclesiasticall Power is 1 Decisive, in determining by way of discussion and .disputation, what is truth, and so consequently resolving [64] the Question in . weighty matters of Religion, Acts 15, i6, 28. & 16. 4. This belongs to the Synod. 2 Discretive, in discerning of the truth or falshood that is determined ; this belongs to every Believer. 1 It will be remembered that the Presbyterians were now in power in England. Yet the course of events in New England had made the statement not wholly without justiiication. Wins- low in 1647 was able to cite the cases of the ministers of Newbury and Hingham as illustrations of toleration of Presbyterian views, Hypocrisie Vnmasked, pp. gg, 100. 192 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM 3 Coactive or judicial (for we omit to speak in this place of Official judgement) in judging of the truth determined Authoritatively, so as to impose it with Authority, and to censure the disobedient with Ecclesiastical censure, i Cor. 5. 12. Mat. 18. 17. This belongeth to every particular Church. The judgement of a Synod is in some respect superiour, in some respect infe- riour to the judgement of a particular Church ; it is superiour in respect of direction ; inferiour in respect of jurisdiction, which it hath none. Quere. How, and how far doth the sentence of a Synod bind? Anszu. We must distinguish between the Synods declaration of the truth, and the politicall imposition of the truth declared by the Synod. The Synods declaration of the truth binds not politically, but formally onely, [65] {i. e.) in foro interiori (i. e.) it binds the conscience, and that by way of the highest institution that is meerly doctrinall. The politicall Imposition of the truth declared by the Synod, is Ecclesiasticall, or Civill : Ecclesiastlcall, by particular Churches, and this binds not onely formally, but politically, in foro exteriori, i. e. it binds the outward man, so as the disobedient in matters of offence, is subject unto Church censure, affirmatively, towards their own Members ; negatively, by non com- munion, as concerning others, whether Church or Members. Civil, by the Magis- trate strengthening the truth thus declared by the Synod, and approved by the Churches, either by his meer Authoritative suffrage, assent, and testimony, (if the matter need no more) or by his authoritative Sanction of it by Civill punishment, the nature of the offence so requiring. [66] , . To whom belongeth the power of calling a Synod? Answ. For satisfaction to this Question, we shall propound one distinction, and answer three Queries. Distin : The power of calling Synods is either _. ( Authoritative, belonging to the Magistrates. ( Ministerial!, belonging to the particular Churches. Mixt -I When both proceed orderly and joyntly in the use of their severall powers. [70] Queries. Qicerie i In what case may the Magistrate proceed to call a Synod without the consent of the Churches ? Answ, The Magistrate in case the Churches be defective, and not to be pre- vailed with, for the performance of their duty, (just cause so requiring) may call a Synod, and the Churches ought to yield obedience thereunto. [71] But notwithstanding the refusall, he may proceed to call an Assembly, and that for the same end that a Synod meetes for, namely, to consider of, and clear the truth from the Scriptures, in weighty matters of Religion : But such an Assembly called and gathered without the consent of the Churches, is not properly that which is usually understood by a Synod, for though it be in the power of the Magistrate to Call, yet it is not in his power to Constitute a Synod, without at least the implicite consent of the Churches : Because Church-Messengers, who necessarily presuppose an explicite (which order calls for) or implicite consent of the Churches, are essen- tial! to a Synod. Querie 2 In what case may the Churches call a Synod without tlie consent of the Magistrate ? THE CONCLUSIONS OF 1 646 I93 [72] Anstu. In case the Magistrate be defective, and not to be prevailed witli for the performance of his duty ; just cause, providence, and prudence concurring : The Churches may both Call and Constitute a Synod : The Reason why the Churches can Constitute a Synod without the consent of the Magistrate, although the Magistrate cannot constitute a Synod without the consent of the Churches, is because the essentialls of a Synod, together with such other cause, as is required to the being (though not so much to the better being) of a Synod, ariseth out of par- ticular churches [74] Querie 3 In case the Magistrate and Churches are both willing to proceed orderly in the joynt exercise of their severall Powers^ whether it is lawfiill for eitlier of them to call a Synod witJwut tJie Consent of the other ? Answ. No ; they are to proceed now by way of a mixt Call The Churches desire, the Ma- [75] gistrate Commands ; Churches act in a way of liberty, the Ma- gistrate in a way of Authority. Moses and Aaron should goe together, and kiss one another in the Mount of GOD. 194 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM THE CAMBRIDGE PLATFORM, 1648 A I Platform of | CHURCH DISCIPLINE | GATHERED OUT OF THE WORD OF GOD : \ AND AGREED UPON BY THE ELDERS: \ AND MESSENGERS OF THE CHURCHES | ASSEMBLED IN THE SYNOD AT CAMBRIDGE | IN NEW ENGLAND \ To be presented to the Churches and Generall Court | for their consideration and ac- ceptance, I in the Lord. | The Eighth Moneth Anno 1649 | | Psal : 84 I. How amiable are thy Tabernacles O Lord of Hosts 1 \ Psal : 26. 8. Lord I have loved the habitation of thy house dr' the | place where thine honour dwelleth. \ Psal : 27. 4. One thing have I desired of the Lord that tuill I seek | after, that 1 may dtvell in the house of the Lord all the I dayes of my life to behold the Beauty of the Lord 6-' to \ inquire in his Temple. \ | Printed hy S G sX Cambridge in New Eng- land I and are to be sold at Cambridge and Boston | Anno Dom : 164P. [ii Blank] THE PREFACE' THE setting forth of the PiMick Confession of the Faith of Churches hath a double end, &= both tending to publick edification, first the maintenance of the faith entire within it self : secondly the holding forth of Unity Gf Harmony, both amongst, oi' with other Churches. Our Churches here, as (by the grace of Christ^ wee beleive cf profess the same Doctrine of the trueth of the Gospell, which generally is received in all the reformed Churches of Christ in Europe : so especially, wee desire not to vary from the doctrine of faith, &■' truth held forth by the churches of our native country. For though it be not otie native country, that can breed vs all of one mind ; nor ought wee for to have the glorious faith of our Lord Jesus with respect of persons : yet as Paul who was himself a Jew, professed to hold forth the doctrine of justification by faith, &= of the resurection of the dead, according as he knew his godly countrymen did, who were Lewes by nature [Galat. 2. 15. Acts 26. 6, 7.) soe wee, who are by nature, English men, doe desire to hold forth the same doctrine of religion {especially in fundamentalist lohich wee see &= know to be held by the churches of England, according to the truth of the Gospell The more wee discern, (that which wee doe, &= have cause to doe with incessant mourning &= tranbhng) the unkind, &' unbrotherly, dr' unchristian contentions of our godly brethren, &' countrymen, in matters of church-government : the more ernestly doe wee desire to see them joyned ' This work, apparently the first specimen of the printing of Samuel Green of Cambridge, is thus truly characterized by Thomas, History o/Prliiti?ig in A merica, 2d ed., Albany, 1874, 1 : 63, 64, " This book appears to be printed by one who was but little acquainted with the typographic art . . . the press work is very bad, and that of the case no better .' . . the compositor did not seem to know the use of points . . . Letters of abbreviation are frequently used . The spelling is very ancient." PREFACE TO THE PLATFORM 1 95 together in one common faith, 6^ our selves with them. For this end, having perused the publick confession of faith, agreed tipon by the Rever- end assembly of Divines at Westminster, cs^ finding the summ &^ substance therof (in matters of doctrine) to express not their own judgements only, but ours also : and being likewise called upon by our godly Magistrates, to draw up a publick confession of that faith, which is constantly taught, • 6^ generafy professed amongst us, wee thought good to present unto them, &" with them to our churches, &' with them to all the churches of Christ abroad, our professed &• hearty assent &= attestation to the whole confession of faith (for substance of doctrine) which the Reverend assem- bly presented to the Religious &" Hononrable Parlamet of England : Ex- cepting only some sectiotis in the 25 30 &= 31. Chapters of their confession, which concern points of controversie in church-discipline j Touching which wee refer our [2] selves to the draught of church-discpline in the ensueing treatise. The truth of what we here declare, may appear by the unanimous vote of the Synod of the Elders cs' messengers of our churches assembled at Cambridg, the last of the sixth month, 1648 : which joyntly passed i7i these words ; This Synod having perused, & considered (with much gladness of heart, & thankfullness to God) the cofession of faith published of late by the Reverend Assembly in England, doe judge it to be very holy, orthodox, & judicious in all matters of faith : & doe therfore freely & fully consent therunto, for the substance therof. Only in those things which have respect to church govern- ment & discipline, wee refer our selves to the platform of church- discipline, agreed upon by this present assebly : & doe therfore think it meet, that this confession of faith, should be comended to the churces of Christ amongst us, & to the Honoured Court, as worthy of their due consideration & acceptance. Howbeit, wee may not conceal, that the doctrine of vocation expressed in Chap 10. S I. &' summarily repeated Chap, 13. & i. passed not without some debate. Yet considej-ing, that the term of vocation, &= others by which it is described, are capable of a large, or more strict sense, &= use, and that it is not intended to bind apprehensions precisely in point of order or method, there hath been a ge?ierall condescendency therunto. Now by this our prof essed consent &= free concurrence with them in all the doctrinalls of religion, wee hope, it may appear to the world, that as wee are a remnant of the people of the same nation with them : so wee are professors of the same common faith, 6^ fellow-heyres of the same common salvation. Yea moreover, as this our profession of the same faith with them, will exempt us (even in their judgmets) from suspicion of heresy : so (wee trust) it may exempt us in the like sort from suspicion of schism : that though wee are forced to dissent from them in matters of church-discipline : Yet our dissent is not taken up out of arrogancy of spirit in our selves (whom they see willingly condescend to learn of them .•) neither is it cartyed with uncharitable censoriousness towards them, (both which are the proper, US' essentiall charracters of schism) but in meekness of wisdom, as wee walk along with them, Sy follow them, as they follow Christ : so where wee conceiv a different apprehention of the mind of Christ (as it falleth out in some few points touching church- 196 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM order) wee still reserve due reverence to them {^hom wee judge to be, through Christ, the glorious lights of both nations:) &= only crave leave {as in spirit wee are bound) to follow the Lamb withersoever he goeth, 6- {after the Apostles example) as wee beleive, so wee speake. And if the example of such poor outcasts as our selves, might pre- vaile if not with all {for that were too great a blessing to hope for) yet 7vith some or other of our brethren in England, so farr as they are come to mind cs' speake the same thing with such as dissent from them, wee hope in Christ, it would not onely moderate the harsh judging [3] and condemning of one another in such differences of judgment, as may be found in the choysest saints : but also prevent {by the mercy of Christ) the perill of the distraction 6^ desti-uction of all the churches in both king- doms. Otherwise, if brethren shall goe on to bite &= devour e one another, the Apostle feared {as wee also, with sadness of heai-t doe) it will tend to the consuming of them, &= us all : which the Lord prevent. Wee are not ignorant, that {besides these aspertions of Heresy &= Schism) other exceptions also are taken at our way of church-govern- ment : but {as wee conceive) upon as little ground. As I That by admitting none into the fellowship of our Church, but saints by calling, wee Rob many parish-churches of their best members, to make up one of our congregations: which is not only, to gather churches out of churches (a thing unheard of in Scripture:) but also to weaken the hearts & hands of the best Ministers in the parishes, by dispoyling them of their best hearers. 2 That wee provide no course for the gayning, & calling in, of ignorant, & erronious, & scandalous persos, whom wee refuse to receive into our churches, & so exclude from the wholsom remedy of church-discipline. 3 That in our way, wee sow seeds of division & hindrance of edificatio in every family: whilst admitting into our churches only voluntaries, the husbad will be of one church, the wife of another: the parents of one church, the children of another the maister of one church, the servants of another. And so the parents & mais- ters being of different churches from their children & servants, they cannot take a just account of their profiting by what they heare, yea by this meanes the husbands, parents, & maisters, shall be chargable to the maintenace of hiany other churches, cSc church- officers, besides their own: which will prove a charge & burden unsupportable. But for Answer, as to the first. For gathering churches out of churches, wee cannot say, that is a thing unheard of in Scripture. The first christian church was gathered out of the Jewish church, Ss" out of many Synagogues in) that church, &= consisted partly of the Lnhabitants of Jerusalem, partly of the Galileans : who though they kept some com- munion in some parts of publick worship, with the Temple : yet neither _ did they frequent the Sacrifices, nor repair to the Sanedrim for the de- termining of their church-causes : but kept entire a" constant communion with the Apostles church in all the ordinances of the gospell. And for the first christian church of the Gentiles at Antoch, it appeareth to have been gathered &= constituted partly of the dispersed brethren of the church PREFACE TO THE PLATFORM 197 at lentsalem (wherof some were men of Cyprus, and Cyrene) &f partly of the beleiving Gentiles. Acts. 11. 20, 21. If it be said the first christian church at lerusalem, & that at Antioch were gathered not out of any christian church, but out of the Jewish Temple and [4] Synagogues, which were shortly after to be abolished: & their gathering to Antioch, was upon occasion of dispersion in time of persecution. Wee desire, it may be considered, i That the members of the Jewish Church were more strongly and straitly tyed by express holy covenant, to keep fellowship 'ivith the Jewish church, till it was abolished, then any members of christian parish-churches are ivont to be tyed to keep fellowship with their parish-churches. The Episcopall Canons, which bind them to attend on theier parish church, it is likely they are now abolished with the Episcopacy. The common Law of the Land is satisfyed (as wee concive) if they attend upon the worship of God in any other church though not within their own parish. But no such like covenant of God, nor any other religious tye lyeth upon them to attend the worship of God in their own parish church, as did lye upon the Lewes to attend upon the worship of God in their Temple and Synagogues. 2 Though the Lewish Temple Church at Lerusalem was to be abolished, yet that doeth not make the desertiofi of it by the members, to be lawfull, till it was abolished. Future abolition is no warrant for present desertio : unless it be lawfull in some case whitest the church is yet in present standing to desert it j to witt, either for avoyding of present polu- tions, or for hope of greater edification, and so for better satisfaction to conscience in either [.] future events (or foresight of them) do not disolve pj-esent relations. Else wives, children, servants, might desert their hus- bands, parents, masters, when they be mortally sick. 3 What the members of the Lewish church did, in joyning to the church at Antioch, in time of persecution, it may well be concived, the members of any christian church may do the like, for satisfaction of con- science. Peace of conscience is more desirable, then the peace of the out- ward man : and freedome from scruples of consciece is more cotnfortable to a sincere heart, then freedome from persecution. If it be said, these members of the Christian Church at Jeru- salem, that joyned to the church at Antioch, removed their habita- tions together with their relations: which if the brethren of the congregational! way would doe, it would much abate the grievance of their departure from their presbyteriall churches. Wee verily could wish them so to doe, as well approving the like re- movall of habitations, in case of changing church-relations (provided, that it may be done without too much detriment to their oiUward estates') and wee for our partes, have done the same. But to put a necessity of re- movall of habitation ill such a case, it is to foment and cherish a corrupt principle of making civil cohabitation, if not a formall cause, yet at least a proper adjunct of church-relation ; which the truth of the Gospel doeth not acknowledg. Now to foment an err our to the prejudice of the trueth of the Gospell, is not to walke with a right foot according to the truth of the Gospel as Paul judgeth. Galat. 2. 14. [5] 4 Wee do not think it meet, or safe, for a member of a pres- 1 98 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM byteriall Church, forthwith to desert his relation to his Church., betake himself to the fellowship of a Congregationall Church, though he may discern some defect in the estate, or gover7iment of his owne. For I. Faithfullness of brotherly love in Church-relation, re- quireth, that the members of the Church should first convince their brethren of their sinfull defects, & duely wait for their ref- ormation, before they depart from them. For if vi^ee must take such a course for the healing of a private brother, in a way of brotherly love, with much meekness, & patience: how more more ought wee so to walk with like tendrness, towards a whole church. Again 2 By the hasty departure of sound members from a defective church, reformation is not promoted, but many times re- tarded, & corruption increased. Wheras on the contrary, while sincere merrlbers breathing after purity of reformation abide to- gether, they may (by the blessing of God upon their faithfull en- deavours) prevaile much with their Elders, & neighbours towards a reformation; it may be, so much, as that their Elders in their own church shall receive none to the Scales, but visible saints: and in the Classis shall put forth no authoritive act (but consultative only) touching the members of other churches: nor touching their own, but with the consent (silet consent at least) of their own church: which two things, if they can obteyn with any humble, meek, holy, faithfull endeavours, wee coceiv, they might (by the grace of Christ) find liberty of conscience to continue their rela- tion with their own presbyteriall church without scruple. 5 But to add a word farther, touching the gathering of Churches out of Churches, what if there were no express example of such a thing extant in the Scriptzires ? that which wee are wont to answer the Antipczdobaptists, may suffice hear : it is enoitgh, if any evidence therof may be gathered from just cosequenc of Scripture light. Doctor Ames his judgmet concerning this case, passeth {for ought wee know") without exceptio, which he gave in his 4 booke of cosciece^ in Ans to 2 Qu : C 14. JVujn 16. If any (saith he) wronged with unjust vexation, or providing for his own edificatio or in testimony against sifi depart from a church where some evills are toUerated, & joyn himself to another more pure, yet without c5demning of the church he leaveth, he is not therfore to be held as a schismatick, or as guilty of any other sinn. Where the Tripartite disjutiction, which the judicious Doctor putteth, declareth the lawfullness of the departure of a Church-mem- ber from his church, when either through ivearyyiess of unjust vexa- tio7i, or in way of provisioyi for his own edification, or in testimony against sinn, he joyneth himself to another congregation more re- formed. Any one of these, he judgeth a just & lawfull cause of departure, [6] Though all of the7n do not concurr together. Neither will such a practise dispoyle the best Ministers of the parishes of their best hearers. For I Sometimes the Ministers themselves are willing to joyn with their better sort of hearers, in this way of reformation: & ' Dr. William Ames, De Conscientta, Amsterdam, 1635. The reference should be Q. 3 : C. =4. PREFACE TO THE PLATFORM 199 then they Sz: their hearers continue stil their Church relation to- gether, yea & confirm it more straitly & strongly, by an express renewed covenant, though the Ministers may still continue their wonted preaching to the whole parrish. 2 If the Ministers do dislike the way of those, whom they otherwise count their best members, & so refuse to joyn with them therin; yet if those members can procure some other Ministers to joyn with them in their own way, & still continue their dwelling together in the same town, they may easily order the times of the publick assembly, as to attend constantly upon the ministery of their former Church: & either after or before the publick assembly of the parish take an opportunity to gather together for the admin- istratis of Sacramets, & Censures, & other church ordinances amongst themselves. The first Apostolick church assembled to hear the word with the Jewish church in the open courts of the Tenlple: but afterwards gathered together for breaking of bread, & other acts of church-order, from house to house. 3 Suppose, Presbyterian churches should comunicate some of their best gifted members towards the erecting & gathering of another church: it would not forthwith be their detriment, but may be their enlargment. It is the most noble & perfect work of a living creature (both in nature & grace) to propagate, & multiply his kind; & it is the honour of the faithfuU spouse of Christ, to set forward the work of Christ as well abroad as at home. The church in Cant, the 8. 8. to help forward her little sister-church, was will- ing to part with her choyse-materialls, even beames of Cedar, & such pretious living stones, as weer fit to build a Silver pallace. In the same book, the church is compared sometime to a garden, sometime to an orchard. Cant 4. 12, 13. No man planteth a gar- den, or orchard, but seeketh to get the choysest herbes, & plants of his neighbours, & they freely impart them: nor doe they accout it a spoyle to their gardens, & orchards, but rather a glory. Never- theless, wee go not so farr: we neither seek, nor ask the choyse- members of the parishes but accept them being offered. If it be said, tliey are not offered by the Ministers, nor by the parish churches (who have most right in them) but only by themselves. It may justly be demaunded, what right, or what powr have either the ministers, or parish church over them? Not by solemn church covenant: for that, though it be the firmest engagement, is not owned, but rejected. If it be, by [7] Their joyning with the parish, in the calling & election of a minister to such a congrega- tion at his first comming, there is indeed just weight in such an ingagement: nor doe wee judge it safe for such to remove from such a minister, unless it be upon such grounds, as may justly give him due satisfactio. But if the unio of such members to a parish Church, & to the ministery therof, be only by cohabitation within the precincts of the parish, that union, as it was founded upo hu- mane law: so by humane law it may easily be released. Or other- wise, if a man remove his habitation, he removeth also the bond of his relation, & the ground of offence. 200 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM 4 It need not to be feared, that all best hearers of the best ministers, no nor the most of them, will depart from them upon point of church-govermet. Those who have found the presence & powr of the spirit of Christ breathing in their ministers, either to their conversion, or ediiication, will be slow to change such a min- istry of faith, & holyness, for the liberty of church-order. Upon which ground, & sundry other such like, their be doubtless sundry godly & judicious hearers in many parishes in England that doe & will prefer their relation to their ministers (though in a presby- teriall way) above the Congregationall confcederation. 5 But if all, or the most part of the best hearers of the best ministers of parishes, should depart from them, as prefering in their judgments, the congregationall way: yet, in case the congre- gationall way should prove to be of Christ, it will never greiv the holy hearts of godly ministers, that their hearers should follow after Christ : yea many of themselves (upon due deliberation)'will be reaedy to go along with them. It never greived, nor troubled John Baptist, that his best disciples, departed from him to follow after Christ. Joh. 3. But in case the congregationall way should prove to be, not the institution of Christ (as wee take it) but the invetion of men : then doubtless, the presbyteriall form (if it be of God) will swallow up the other, as Moses rod devoured the rods of the Egyptians. Nor will this put a necessity upon both the oppo- site partyes, to shift for themselves, & to seek to supplant one another : but only, it will call upon them dXriOevsiv ev dydnrj to seek & to follow the trueth in love, to attend in faithfullness each uto his own flock, & to administer to them all the holy things of God, cSc their portio of food in due season : & as for others, quietly to forbear them, & yet to instruct them with meekness that are con- trary minded : leaving it to Christ (in the use of all good meanes) to reveal his own trueth in his own time : & mean while endeavour- ing to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Philip. 3. 15, 16. Ephesians. 4. 3. [8] To the 2 Exception, That wee take no course for the gayning & healing & calling in of ignorant, & erronious, & scandal- ous persos, whom wee refuse to receive into our churches & so ex- clude them from the remidy of church-disciplie. Wee conceive the receiving of them into our churches would rather loose &• corrupt our Churches, then gain & heale them. A little leaven layed in a lump of dough, will sooner leaven the whole lump, then the whole lump will sweeten it. Wee therefore find it safer, to square rough & unhewen stories, before the[y] be layed into the build- ing, rather then to hammer & hew them, when they lye unevenly in the building. And accordingly , two meanes (wee use to gayn &" call in such as are ignordt or scandalous. 1 The pub lick ministery of the word, upon 7'jhich they are invited by counsel, & t^equired by wholsome lawes to attend. And the word it is, which is the powr of God to salvation, to the calling & winning of soules. 2 Private conference, & con- viction by the Elders, & other able brethren of the church : whom they PREFACE TO THE PLATFORM 20I doe the more respectively hearken unto, when they see no hope of en- joying church-fellowship, or participation in the Sacraments for them- selves, or their children, till they approve their judgments to be sound & orthodox, & their lives subdued to some hope of a godly conver- sa{io7i. Wliat can Classical discipline, or excbmunication it selfe do m,ore in this case. The 3 Exception wrappeth up in it a three fold domestical in- convenience : & each of them meet to be eschewed, i Disunion in families between each relation : 2 Disappointmet of edificatio, for want of opportunity in the governours of familyes to take ac- cout of things heard by their children & servants. 3 Disburs- ments of chargeable maintenance to the several churches, wherto the several persons of their familyes are joyned. All which inconveniences either do not fall out in congregationall- chiirches ; or are easily redressed. For none are orderly admitted into congregational-churches, but such as are well approved by good testimony, to be duly observant of family-relations. Or if any other- wise disposed should creep in, they are either orderly healed, or duly removed in a way of Christ. Nor are they admitted, unless they can. give some good account of their prof ti?ig by ordinances, before the Elders & brethren of the church : & much m.ore to their par ets, & masters. Godly Tutors in the university can take an account of their pupills : & godly housholders in tlie Citiy can take account of their children & servants, how they profit by the word they have heard in several churches : & that to the greater edification of the whole family, by the variety of such ad-ministrations. Bees may bring m.ore hony, & wax into the hive, when they are not limited to one garden of flowers, but may fly abroad to many. Nor is atiy charge expected from wives, children, or servants to the maintenance of congregationall churches, further then they be fur- nished with personall estates, or earnings, which may enable thetn to contribute of such things as they have, & not of [9] Such as they have not. God accepteth not Robbery for a sacrifice. And though a godly housholder may justly take himself e bound in conscience, to contribute to any such Church, wherto his wife, or children, or servants doe staiid in relation : yet that will not aggravate the burden of his charge, no more then if they were received members of the same Church wherto himself is related. But why doe wee stand thus long to plead exemptions from ex- ceptions 9 the Lord help all his faithfull servants {whetlier presbyteriall, or congregationall^ to judge <5j^ shame our selves before the Lord for all our former complyances to greater enormityes in Church-govern- ment, then are to be found either in the congregationall, or presbyteriall way. And then surely, either the Lord will cleare up his own will to us, & so frame, & subdue us all to one mind, & one way, (^Ezek. 43. 10, II.) or else wee shall learn to beare one another s burdens in a spirit of meekness. It will then doubtless be farrfrom. us, so to attest the discipline of Christ, as to detest the disciples of Christ : so to con- tend for the seameless coat of Christ, as to crucifie the living members 14 202 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM of Christ : soe to divide our selves about Church co7nmunion, as through breaches to open a wide gap for a deluge of Antic hrisiian & prophane malignity to swallow up both Church & civil state. What shall wee say more? is difference about Church-order becom the inlett of all the disorders in the kingdom ? liath the Lord indeed left us to such hardness of heart, that Church-government shall become a snare to Zion, (as somtimes Moses was to ALgypt, Exod. lo. 7.) that wee cannot leave contesting & contending about it, till the kingdom be destroyed? did not the Lord fesus, when he dedicated his sufferings for his church, & his also unto his father, make it his earn- est & only prayer for us in this world, that wee all might be one in him? fohn. 17. 20, 21, 22, 23. And is it possible, that he {whom the Father heard alwayes, fohn. 11. 42.) s/iould not have this last most solemn prayer Jieard, & graunted? or, shall it be graunted for all the saints elsewhere, & not for the saints in England ; so that amongst them disunion shall grow even about Church-union, & communion ? If it is possible, for a little faith (so much as a grai7i of mustai'dseed) to remove a mountaine : is it not possible, for so much strength of faith, as is to be found in all the godly in the kingdorn, to remove those Images of jealousie, & to cast those stumbling -blockes out of the way, which may hinder the free passage of brotherly love amongst brethren? It is true ijideed, the National covenanf doth justly engage both partyes, faithfully to endeavour tlie utter extirpa- tion of the Antichristia Hierarchy , & much m-ore of all Blasphemyes, Heresies, & damnable errours. Certainly, if co?igregational disci- pline be Independent from the inventions of inen, is it not m-uch more Independent from the delusions of Sata7i ? what fellowship hath Christ with Belial? light with darkness? trueth with errour? The faith- full lewes needed not the help of the Sa^naritans, to [10] Reedify the Temple of God: yea they rejected their help when it was offered. Ezra the 1, 2, 3. A7id if the congregationall way be a way of trueth {as wee believe') & if the brethren that walk in it be zealous of the triieth, & hate every false way {as by the rule of their holy dis- cipline they are instructed, 2 fohn. 10, 11.) then verily, there is no branch in the Nationall covenant, that engageth the covenanters to ab- hore either Congregationall Churches, or their way: which being duely administred, doe no less effectually extirpate the Antichristian Hierarchy, (r. all Blasphe^nies, Heresy es, cr petnicious errours, then the other way of discipline doeth, which is more generally & publickly received is' 7'atifyed. But the Lord fesus comm7cne with all our heaTis in secret: dr he who is the King of his Church, let him be pleased to exercise his Kingly powr 771 our spirites, that so his kingdome may come into our Chirches in Purity &> Peace. Amen. A7ne7i. 1 /. e. The Scotch Covenant, adopted by Parliament, to secure Scotch aid in its struggle with the King, in Sept., 1643. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 203 CHAPTER I. Of the form of Church- Government ; and that it is one, immutable, and prescribed in the Word of God. I Ecclesiasticall Polity or Church Government, or dis- Ezek 43. II Col, 2, 5 cipUne is nothing els, but that Forme & order that is to 1 xim. be observed in the Church of Christ vpon earth, both for the Constitution of it, & all the Administrations that therein are to bee performed. 2 Church-Government is Considered in a double re- spect either in regard 0/ the parts of Government them- selves, or necessary Circumstances thereof. The parts of Government are prescribed in the word, because the Lord Hebr 3, s, 6 lesus Christ the King and Law-giver of his Church, is no less faithfull in the house of God then was Moses, who Exod 25 40 from the Lord delivered a form & pattern of Govern- 2 Tim 3 16 ment to the Children of Israel in the old Testament: And the holy Scriptures are now also soe perfect, as they are able to make the man of God perfect & thorough-ly fur- nished vnto euery good work ; and therefore doubtless to the well ordering of the house of God. 3 The partes of Church-Government are all of them i Tim 3 15 exactly described in the word of God being parts ori3E.x20 4 means of Instituted worship according to the second Com- v 16 Heb 12 ji o 1 • /- ■ 01 27 28. I Cor, mandement : & therefore to contmue one & the same, 15 22 vnto the apearing of our Lord lesus Christ as a kingdom that cannot be shaken, untill hee shall deliver it up unto God, euen the Father.' Soe that it is not left in theDeuti2 32. Ezek 43 8. power of men, officers, Churches, or any state m the i Kings 12. world to add, or diminish, or alter any thing in the least measure therein. 4 The necessary circumstances, as time & place fec^.^^^^" belonging unto order and decency, are not soe left unto i^' ^913- I Tlie same idea is expressed, though not in identical language, by Mather, Church-Government and Church-Covenant Discvssed^ (answer to XXXII Ques- tions,) London, 1643, p. 83. 204 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM Col 2 22 23 men as that under pretence [2] of them, they may thrust '^^^^^ their own Inventions vpon the Churches : Being Circum- scribed in the word with many Generall limitations ; where they are determined in respect of the matter to Matt IS 9 •' I Cor II 23 be neither worship it self, nor Circumstances seperable from worship .• in respect of their end, they must be done vnto edification : in respect of the manner, decently, and I Cor 14 26 in order, according to the nature of the things them I Cor 14 40 I Cor II 14 selves, & Civill, & Church Custom, doth not euen nature I Cor II 16 . ■ , I Cor 14 12 It selfe teach you ? yea they, are m some sort determmed 28! particularly, namely that they be done in such a manner, as all Circumstances considered, is most expedient for edification : so, as if there bee no errour of man concern- ing their determination, the determining of them is to be accounted as if it were divine. CHAP : II. 0/ the nature of the Catholick Church in Generall, & in speciall, of a particular visible Church. Eph^i22 23 Thc Catholick Church,' is the whole company of 30. Hebi2 those that are elected, redeemed, & in time effectually called from the state of sin & death vnto a state of Grace, & salvation in lesus Christ. Rom 8 17. 2 This church is either Triumphant, or Militant. 2 Tim 2 12 . C48. Eph Irmmphant, the number of them who are Gloryfied in heaven : Militant, the number of them who are conflict- ing with their enemies vpon earth. 3 This Militant Church is to bee considered as In- 2Tim2ig. visible, & Visible. Invisible, in respeot of their relation Rev 2 17 ' ^ 1 Cor 6 17. wherin they stand to Christ, as a body unto the head, Eph 3 17. . ■' Rom I, 8 bemg united unto him, by the spirit of God, & faith in I Thes I 8 . 1 J r 1 isay 2, 2 their hearts : Visible, in respect of the profession of I Tim 6 12. . . . , ' ^ ^ their faith, m their persons, & in particular Churches : & so there may be acknowledged an universall visible Church." Ac's '9 '^ 4 The members of the Militant visible Church,^ con- Colos 2, 5. ' 1 Compare R. Mather, Apologie . . . for Ckvrch-Covenant, London, 1643, p. II. 2 /. (?., The body of those who outwardly profess faith in Christ, viewed as brought into one class by that profession, but not as thereby organized into one visible body corporate. 3 We may perhaps insert are to be in conformity to the preceding paragraph. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 205 sidered either as not yet in churcli-order, or as walking Matt i8 17. according to the church-order of the Gospel. In order,' ' ^°'' ^ ^^ & so besides the spiritual union, & communion, com- mon to all believers, they injoy more over an union & communion ecclesiasticall-Political:" So wee deny an uni- versal! visible church.' 5 The state the members of the Militant visible Gen. 18 19 church [3] walking in order, was either before the law, ^"""^ ' '' ^' Oeconomical, that is in families ; or under the law. Na- tional : or, since the comming of Christ, only congre- gational:* (The term Independent, wee approve not:') Therfore neither national, provincial, nor classical." 6 A Congregational-church, is by the institution of i Cor : 14, n Christ a part of the Militant-visible-church, consisting of ' cor \ W^^ a company 0/ Saints by calling, united into one body, by exo' ig 5? a holy covenant, /or the publick worship of God, & the&g'tois '' mutuall edification one of another, in the Fellowship 0/ i Cor i/as. the Lord lesus.' CHAP: III. 0/ the matter of the Visible Church Both inresped of Quality and Quantity. Thc matter 0/ a visible church are Saints by calling.' i,c°r: i j •^ J b Ephe I I. 2 By Saints, wee understand, Hebr : e. i. ■' ' ' I Cor. I 5. I Such, as haue not only attained the knowledge of Ro™' ^s m- . ' ■' * Psal : so 16- the pnnciples of Religion, & are free from gros & open 17. Act s 37. scandals, but also do together with the profession of Rom. e 17 their faith & Repentance, walk in blameles obedience to the word, so as that in charitable discretion they may be ^ /. e., The members of the company of professed disciples of Christ on earth are to be considered in this treatise, not as isolated believers but as united in the cor- porate fellowships established by the Gospel. ^ /. ^., This Gospel-order implies the union of Christians into local covenanted corporations. ^ I. e.y There is no corporate union and communion of all the professed followers of Christ, only an association of local churches, if by the word church the organized body of believers is signified. Compare Mather, Church-Govermneni and Church- Covenant Dtscvssed, (Answer to XXXII Questions,) London, 1643, pp. 9, 10. * Compare Cotton, Keyes^ p. 30. ^ See Cotton's reasons why the fathers of New England disliked the name In- dependent^ Way o/the Cong. Churches Cleared^ p. 11. ^ Compare Cotton, Way o/the Churches^ p. 2. ' Compare Mather, Apalogie . . . /or Chvrch-Covenant^ pp. 3-5. ^ Compare Mather, Church-Govern-ment and Church-Covenant Discvssed, (Answer to XXXII Questions,) pp. 8, 9. 2o6 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM I Cor. 1 2. accounted Saints by calling, (though perhaps some or Cuiios'''i'2'' more of them be unsound, & hypocrites inwardly :) be- cause the members of such particular churches are com- monly by the holy ghost called Saints & faithfull brethren Ephes. I I. in Christ, and sundry churches haue been reproued for 1 Cor 5 2 13 •' . . . ,, Rev. I 14 15 receiving, & suffering such persons to contmu m fellow- 44. 7 & 9- &' ship amongst them, as have been offensive & scandal- :,9. Num29 ous : the name of God also by this means is Blasphemed : 2 13 14- ' & the holy things of God defiled & Prophaned. the hearts 29. Psai. 37 of godly grieved : & the wicked themselves hardned : & 6. I Cor. 7: holpen forward to damnation, the example of such doeth endanger the sanctity of others. A litle Leaven Leaven- eth the whole lump, ler. 2 21, 2 The children of such, who are also holy.' ier.°i4.^ Gal. 3 The members of churches though orderly consti- L'*ii.^ Rev. tuted, may in time degenerate, & grow Corrupt & scan- 2/2^.'^' dalous, which though they ought not to be tolerated in the church, yet their continuance therein, through the defect of the execution of discipline & Just censures, doth not immediately dissolv the being of the church, as appeares in the church of Israeli, & the churches of Galatia & Corinth, Pergamus, & Thyatira. I Cor 14 21 [4] 4 The matter of the Church in respect of it's quan- tity ought not to be of gteater number then may ordinarily Matt 18 17 meet together conveniently'' in one place : nor ordinarily fewer, then may conveniently carry on Church-work. Hence when the holy Scripture maketh mention of the Rom 16 I Saints combined into a church-estate, in a Town or Citty, I Thes II ' ^ Rev2 8c3 where was but one Congregation, it usually calleth those Saints \the churc/i] " in the singular number, as the church of the Thessalonians the church of Smyrna, Philadelpliia, & the like : But when it speaketh of the Saints in a Nation, or Province, wherin there were sundry Congregations, It frequently & usually calleth them by the name of churches, 1 Cor 16 I in the plurall number, as the \churches\ of Asia, Galatia, 2 Cor si. Macedo7iia,?iL'Ca.&\\\i&: which is further confirmed by what I Thes 2, 14 . ^ is written of sundry of those churches in particular, how they were Assembled & met together the whole church in one place, as the church at Jerusalem, the church at Antioch, 1 Ibid., p. 20. 2 Compare Cotton's remarks, Way of the Churches, London, 164s, pp. 53, 54. 3 [ ] sic, and later. * TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 207 the church at Corinth^ is' Cenchrea, though it were more Acts 2 46 near to Corinth, it being the port thereof, &^ answerable to^. Acts'^14, a Village, yet being a distinct Congregation from Corinth, "tCm^f^. it had a church of its owne as well as Corinth had.' . Rom 16, i 5 Nor can it with reason be thought but that every church appointed & ordained by Christ, had a ministrie ordained & appointed for the same : & yet plain it is, that there were no' ordinary officers appointed by Christ for any other, then Congregational churches : Elders being* appointed to feed, not all flocks, but the particular flock of Actszo 28. God over which the holy Ghost had made them the over- seers, & that flock they must attend, even the whole flock: & one Congregation being as much as any ordinary Elders can attend, therfore there is no greater Church then a Congregation, which may ordinarily meet in one place. C//AP: IV. Of the Form of A Visible Church &= of Church Covenant. Saints by Calling, must have a Visible-Political-Union i Cor 12 27. , , I Tim 3 15. amongst themselves, or else they are not yet a particular Ephe 2 22 church .• as those similitudes hold forth, which Scripture 16 17 makes use [5] of, to shew the nature of particular Churches: As a Body, A building, or House, Hands, Eyes, Feet, &= other members must be united, or else, remaining seperate are not a body. Stones, Timber, though squared, hewen & poUished, are not an house, untill they are compacted & united: so Saints or believers in judgment of charity, are not a church, unless Orderly knit together." 2 Particular churches cannot be distinguished one from another but by their formes. Ephesus is not Smyrna, & Pergamus Thyatira, but each one a distinct society of it Rev i self, having officers of their owne, which had not the charge of others : Vertues of their own, for which others are not praysed : Corruptions of their owne, for which others are not blamed.' 3 This Form is the Visible Covenant, Agreement, or Exod 19 5 consent wherby they give up themselves unto the Lord, tODeu'29 12 1 Compare Richard Mather and William Tompson's Modest &* Broiherly A n- svver to Mr. Charles Herle his Book, London, 1644, pp. 32, 33. 2 Compare Mather, Apologie . . . for Chvrch-Covenant, p. 5 ; Church- Government, p. 39. 3 Compare Ibid., Apologie, p. 14. 208 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM 13. Zachii the observing of the ordinances of Christ together in the T4. cap9 II g^jjjg society, which is usually called the Chiwch-Covena'nt ; For wee see not otherwise how members can have Church- pviver one over another mutually.' Ephe 2, 19 The comparing of each particular church unto a Citty, II 2 &= unto a Spouse^ seemeth to conclude not only a Form, Gen 17 7. but that that Form, is by way of a Covenant. i3^"l?phl2, The Covenant, as it was that which made the Family ^^ '' Teacher, appears to be dis- tinct. The Pastors special work is, to attend to exhortation : & therein to Administer a word of Wisdom: the Teacher is to attend to Doctrine, e^ therein to Administer a word of Knowledg ■." & either of them to administer the Scales of ^i^™^'* ' ''■ that Covenant, unto the dispensation wherof the' are alike called: as also to execute the Censures, being but a kind of application of the word, the preaching of which, to- gether with the application therof they are alike charged g^ 4 ^y ^12 withall." 6 And for as much as both Pastors 6^ Teachers are given by Christ for the perfecting of the Saints, & edify- ing of his body, which Saints, & body of Christ is his church ; Therfore wee account Pastors cr' Teachers to be both of them church-officers; & not the Pastor for the ^/^^ '° " ^ " church: & the Teacher only for the Schools, Though this ^ '''"s = 3 v is, wee gladly acknowledg, that Schooles are both lawfull, profitable, & necessary for the trayning up of such in good Litrature, or learning, as may afterwards be called forth unto office of Pastor or Teacher in the church. ' Compare Cotton, Way 0/ the Churches, p. 10. '■i Ibid. ' Ibid., pp. lo, 14. < Ibid., 11-13 ; and Mather, Church-Government {Answer to Quest. 22), pp. 74-76. 5 Read they, see errata. ", Compare Mather, Ibid., 74, 75. 212 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM CHAP VII. Of Ruling Elders &= Deacons. Rom 12 7 8 9. Tne Ruling Elders'^ office is distinct from the office I Cor 12 28. of Pastor &= Teacher. The Ruling Elders are not so called to exclude the Pastors dr Teachers irom- Ruling, \i\A be- cause Ruling 6" Governing is common to these with the Heb 13 17 other ; wheras attending to teach and preach the word I Tim 5 17 . . f. IS peculiar unto the former. I Tim 5, 17. 2 The Ruling Elders worV is to joyn with \.h.t Pas- tor 6^ Teacher in those acts of spiritual Rule [9] which are distinct from the ministry of the word & Sacraments committed to them, of which sort, these be, as follow- 2Chro. 2319. eth.^ I to open &= shiitt the dores of Gods house, by the 1 Tim 4. 14 Admission of members approved by the church: by Ordina- Matt i8 17. , ,^ , ; , , , o 1- 2 Cor 2 7, 8 tion of officers chosen by the church : 6: by excommuni- Acts 26 cation of notorious & obstinate offenders renounced by the church: & by restoring of poenitents, forgive by the Acts2i. 1822,23. church. II To call the church together when there is occasion, & seasonably to dismiss them agayn. Ill To prepare matters in private, that in publick they may be carried an end with less trouble, & more speedy dispatch. IV To moderate the carriage of all matters in the church assembled, as, to propound matters to the church, to Acts 6. 2, 3 c 13, Qj-j^gy the season of speech & silence; & to pronoictice sen- 2 Cor 8, 10 tence according to the minde of Christ, with the con- Web 13. 7, 17 " ' 2Thes2.ioir,i2ggj^^ of the church. V To be Guides &^ Leaders to the church, in all matters what-soever, pertaining to church administrations & actions. VI To see that none in the church hve inordinately out of rank & place ; without a ' Of all church offices in early New England practice none were so much the subjects of discussion as the ruling eldership. Of no office was the theoretic necessity more stoutly maintained, and yet none was so speedily abandoned in practice. A mo- ment's examination of the catalogue of duties here enumerated will show in large measure the reason of this neglect of the office. The functions are such as would tend to ill-feeling and they are not counter-balanced by any ordinary share in the more pleasing duties of preaching the word. In the Barrowist Congregationalism of the day, the ruling elder trenched on matters which Modern Congregationalism has left some to the brethren, others to the minister. He occupied a position between the minister and the brethren sure to be full of embarrassment and of no real use. See I. N. Tarbox, Ruling Elders in ike Early N. E. Cks., Cong. Quarterly^ XIV: 401-416 (July, 1872). The divine institution and antiquity of the ruling eldership is argued at length by Cotton, Way of the Churches^ pp. 13-33. 2 The duties here enumerated as belonging to the ruling elders are given by Cotton, Ibid.^ 36, 37, in language so similar th^t the passage must have been under Mather's eye as he wrote this chapter, unless Cotton himself wrote it. Mather's orig- inal draft was much fuller. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 213 calling, or Idlely in their calling. VII To prevent Sz heal Acts 20, 28 V32. such offences in life, or in doctrin; as might corrupt the church. IIX To feed the flock of God with a word of ', '^'^^^ s- 12 ■' Jam, 5. 14 admonition. IX And as they shall be sent for, to visit, &Acts2o. 20 to pray over their sick brethren. X & at other times as opportunity shall serve therunto. 3 The office of a Deacon is Instituted in the church Acts e. 3. v 6 Phil I. I by the Lord Jesus, somtime they are called Helps.^ ' Tims, s •' ■' -' ^ I Cor 12, 28 The Scripture telleth us, how they should be quali- 1 Tim 3 s, 9. fied: Grave, not double tongued, not given to much to wine, not given to filthy lucre, they must first be proved & then use the office of a Deacon, being found Blameless. The office and work of the Deacons'' is to receive the Acts 4,35,06.2, offrings of the church, gifts given to the church, & to ^' keep the treasury of the church: & therewith to serve the Tables which the church is to provide for : as the Lords Table, the table of the ministers, & of such as are Rom 12. 8 in necessitie, to whom they are to distribute in simplicity. 4 The office therefore being limited unto the care i Cor 7 17. of the temporal] good things of the church, it extends not unto the attendance upon, & administration of the spiritual] things thereof, as the word, and Sacraments, or the like. 5 The ordinance of the Apostle, & practice of the i cor 16, i, 2, 3 church, commends the Lords day as a fit time for the contributions of the Saints. [10] 6 Thelnstitutingof all these officers in the Church, I Cor 12, 28 is the work of God himselfe ; of the Lord Jesus Christ ; Acts 20, is of the holy Ghost. & there/ore such officers as he hath • not appointed, are altogether unlawfull either to be placed in the church, or to be retained therin, & are to be looked at as humane creatures, meer Inventions & appointments of man, to the great dishonour of Christ Jesus, the Lord of his house, the King of his church, whether Popes, Patriarkes, Cardinals, Arch-bishops, Lordbishops, Arch-dea- cons, Officials, Commissaries, & the like. These & the rest of that Hierarchy & Retinue, not being plants of the Lords Matt is, 13 planting, shall all be certeinly be' rooted out, & cast forth. 1 Compare Cotton, Way of the Churches^ p, 38. 2 The paragraphs describing the duties of deacons closely follow the description given by Cotton, Ibid.^ which Mather had before him, 3 Omitted in errata. 214 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM I Tim s, 9, lo. 7 The Lord hath appointed ancient widdows, (where they may be had) to minister in the church, in giving attendance to the sick, & to give succour unto them, & others in the like necessities.' CHAP : IIX. Of the Election of Church-Officers. Hebs, 4 No man may take the honour of a Church-Officer unto himself, but he that was called of God, as was Aaron? 9^iat I, I 2 Calling unto office is either Immediate, by Christ Acts 14. 23 '^ ' ^ <^p6-3 himself: such was the call of the Apostles, & Prophets: this manner of calling ended with them, as hath been said:' O'c Mediate, by the church/ I Tim 5. 22 7 It is meet, that before any be ordained or chosen cap 7, 10 "^ Acts 16. 2 officers, they should first be Tryed dr proved; because hands are not * suddenly to be laid upon any,^ & both Elders S^ Deacons must be of honest & good report. 4 The things in respect of which they are to be Tryed, are those gifts 6^ virtues which the Scripture re- quireth in men, that are to be elected into such places. viz, that Elders must be blameless, sober, apt to teach, & endued with such other qualifications as are layd downe, I Tim : 3 & 2. Tit : i, 6 to 9. Deacons to be fitted, as is directed. Acts. 6, 3. i Tim : 3. 8, to ii.' Acti4 23. CI. J Officers are to be called by such Churches, where unto they are to minister, of such moment is the preser- vation of this power, that the churches exercised it in the presence of the Apostles.' 6 A church being /r^^ cannot become subject to any, but by a free election; [11] Yet when such a people do chuse any to be over them in the Lord, then do they Hebr. 13, 17 becom subject, & most willingly submit to their min- istry in the Lord, whom they have so chosen. Gal s, 13 1 Compare Cotton, Way 0/ the Churches, p. 39. 2 Compare Mather and Tompson, Modest &^ Brotherly A nsvver, p. 57. 3 Ibid. < Ibid., 55-58. Compare Mather, Church-Government, (Answer to Quest. 20,) pp. 67, 68. '• Compare Cotton, Way of the Churches, p. 39. See also the Modest b' Broth- erly A nsvver, p. 51. " Way of the Churches, p. 39. Here again the writer must have had Cotton's work before him. ■^ Compare Mather and Tompson, Modest &* Brotherly A nsvver, pp. 55, 56. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 215 7 And if the church have powr to chuse their offi- Rom. i6, ^^ cers & ministers, then in case of manifest unworthyness, & delinquency they have powr also to depose them.' For to open, & shut: to chuse & refuse ; to constitute in office, & remove from office : are acts belonging unto the same powr. 8 Wee judge it much conducing to the wel-being, &Cant. 8,8,9 communion of churches, that where it may conveniently be done, neighbour-churches be advised withall, & their help made use of in the triall of church-officers, in order to their choyce.'' 9 The choyce of such Church-officers belongeth not to the civil-magistrates, as such, or diocesan-bishops, or patrones : for of these or any such like, the Scripture is wholly silent, as having any power therin. CHAP : IX. Of Ordination, 6^ Imposition of hands. CHurch-officers are .not only to be chosen by the Acts. 13, 3 , cap 14, 23 Church, but also to be ordeyned by Imposition of hands, & i Tim. 5, 22 prayer.' with which at ordination of Elders, fasting also is to be joyned." 2 This ordination wee account nothing else, but the^^™j8''° solemn putting of a man into his place & office in the "p ^3, =. 3 Church wher-unto he had right before by election, being like the installing of a magistrat in the common wealth.' Ordination therefore is not to go before, but to Acts. e. 5. 6 cap 14. 23 follow election. The essence & substance of the outward calling of an ordinary officer in the Church, doth not consist in his ordination, but in his voluntary & free election by the Church, & in his accepting of that election. ^Compare Davenport, Ansiuer . . . itnto Nine Positions, London, 1643, PP* 7^, 77) (Position 7). 2 Compare Cotton, IVay of the Churches, pp. 40, 45. ^ Compare Ibid., 40-42. * " For our calling of Deacons, we hold it not necessary to ordaine them with like solemnitie, of fasting and prayers, as is used in the Ordination of Elders.'''' Ibid., 42. It was sufficient that they should be ordained by the hands and prayers of the ministers of the local church without a public invitation of neighboring churches, etc. = From Mather, Church-Government, (Answer to Quest. 20,) p. 67. Compare ■the Modest 6* Brotherly A nsvver, p. 47. 2l6 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM wher-upon is founded the relation between Pastor & flock, between such a minister, & such a people.' Ordination doth not constitute an officer, nor give him the essentials of his office. The Apostles were elders, without Imposition of hands by men: Paul 6- Barnabas were officers, before that Imposition of hands. Acts. 13. 3." The posterity of Levi were Preists, & [12] Levits, before hands were laid on them by the Children of Israel. I Tim 4 14 -, In such Churches where there are Elders, Impo- Acts 1% "x I Tim i 22 sition of hands in ordination is to be performed by those Elders.' 4 In such Churches where there are no Elders, Numb 8. 10 Imposition of hands may be performed by some of the Brethren orderly chosen by the church therunto. For if the people may elect officers which is the greater, & wherin the substance of the Office consists, they may much more (occasion & need so requiring) impose hands in ordination, which is the less, & but the accomplishment of the other.* 5 Nevertheless in such Churches where there are no Elders, & the Church so desire, wee see not why Imposition of hands may not be performed by the Elders of other Churches.^ Ordinary officers laid hands upon the officers of many Churches: the presbytery of Ephesus I Tim 4 14 layd hands upon Timothy an Evangelist. The presbytery ./Vets, ^3i 3 at Antioch laid hands upon Paul &' Barnabas!' I Pet. 5. 2 6 Church Officers, are officers to one church, even Acts 20. 28 JJ 1 7 that particular, over which the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers. Insomuch as Elders are comanded to feed, not all flocks, but that flock which is comitted to their faith & trust, & dependeth upon them.' Nor can costant residence at one cogregation, be necessary for 1 Compare, Churck-Government, 68 ; and Mather, Reply to My. Ruther/urd, London, 1647, pp. 102, 103. 2 Compare the Reply, etc., pp. 104-106. 3 Mather, Church-Government (Answer to Quest. 21), pp. 68, 69, 74. Compare Mather and Tompson, Modest &^ Brotherly A nsvver, pp. 45, 49. ^ Mather, Church-Governvtent (Answer to Quest. 21), pp. 69-74, Mather and Tompson, Modest ^ Brotherly Answer, pp. 45-53. 5 Ibid., ifi, 48, 49, 53 : Mather, Reply to Mr. Rutherfurd, p. 94. Cotton dis- sented. Way of the Churches, pp. 50, 51. ^ Modest £^ Brotherly A nsvver, 45, 54. ' Ibid., 48. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM a minister, no nor yet lawfull, if he be not a minister to one cogregation only, but to the church universall: because he may not attend one part only of the church. Acts 20. 28 wherto he is a minister, but he is called to attend unto all the flock. 7. Hee that is clearly loosed from his office-relation unto that church wherof he was a minister, canot be looked at as an officer, nor perform any act of Office in any other church, vnless he be again orderly called unto Office: which when it shall be, wee know nothing to hinder, but Imposition of hands also in his Ordination ought to be used towards him again.' For so Paul the Apostle received Imposition of hands twice at least, from Ananias. Acts. 9. 17. & Acts. 13, 3. CHAP X. Of the powr of the Church, &• its Presbytery. Supream & Lordly power over all the Churches Psai 2. 6 upon earth, doth only belong unto Jesus Christ, who is i^y 9.' T' ""^ King of the church, & the head therof. He hath the Governmet upon his shoulders, & hath all powr given to him, both in heaven & earth." [13] 2 A Copany of professed believers Ecclesiastically Confxderat, as they are a church before they have officers, & without them; so even in that estate, subordinate Church- power under Christ deligated to them by him, doth belong Acts i. 23 to them, in such a mafier as is before expressed. C. 5. S.l'-. ^6.'l\ 2. & as flowing from the very nature & Essece of a church: , co! 5, \^\ It being naturall to all bodyes, & so unto a church body, to be furnished with sufficient powr, for its own preser- vatio & subsistace. 3 This Government of the church, is a mixt Gover- ment (& so hath been acknowledged long before the term of Indepedency was heard of:) In respect of Christ, the head & King of the church, & the Soveraigne power residing in ^im, & exercised by him, it is a Monarchy : In Rev: 3.7 respect of the body, or Brotherhood of the church, & powr from Christ graunted unto them, it resembles a Democracy, i Tim 5. 17 1 See Mather, Ckurch-Governjnent (Answer to Quest. 21), pp. 6g, 70. Compare Davenport, A nswer . . . unto Nine Positio7iSy pp. 76, 77 (Position 7). 2 Compare Cotton, Keyes, 29, 30. 15 217 21 8 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM In respect of the Fresbyetry Si powr comitted to them, it is an Aristocracy.^ 4 The Soveraigne pawn which is peculiar unto Christ, is exercised, I In calling the church out of the world Gal 1. 4. unto holy fellowship with himselfe. II In instituting Matt 28.' 2o the ordinaces of his worship, & appointing his ministers Eph 4, 8. 12 i / i i ^ Jam 4. 12 & officers for the dispensing of them.^ Ill In giving lawes for the ordering of all our wayes, & the wayes of 2 Cot 10 4% ^'^ house:' IV In giving powr & life to all his Insti- Luke^°' \ tutions, & to his people by them. V In protectig & delivering his church against & from all the enemies of their peace. 5 The power graunted by Christ unto the body of the church & Brotherhood, is a prerogative or priviledge which the church doth exercise: I In Choosing their own officers, whether Elders, or Deacons.' II In admission of their own members & therfore, there is great reason Acts 6. 3, s they should have power to Re7nove any from their fellow- C9.26 ship again. Hence in case of offence any one brother hath powr to convince & Admonish an offending brother: Matt 18. IS, & in case of not hearing him, to take one or two more to ID, 17 ^ sett on the Admonitio, & in case of not hearing them, to proceed to tell the church: & as his offence may require Tit 3. 10 the whole church hath powr to proceed to the publick Coll 4- 17 Mat 18. 17 Censure of him, whether by Admonition, or Excomunica- 2 Cor 2. 7, 8 . „ , .' ^ ' tioii: is. upon his repentance to restore him againe unto his former comunion.^ 6 In case an Elder offend incorrigibly, the matter so requiring, as the church had powr to call him to office, Rom I'e V ^° ^^^y \i2isi& powr according to order (the counsell of other churches where it may be had, directing therto" to remove him fro his Office:' & beig now but a meber, 1 Quoted in substance by Mather, Church-Government (Answer to Quest. 15), p. 51 from Cartwright. 2 Compare Cotton, Keyes, 30. s Compare Ibid. * Compare Ibid., p. 12. s Compare Ibid., pp. 13-15 ; and Way 0/ the Churches, 89-92. « Insert ). ' This subject is one on which Mather was more positive than Cotton. The .alter in the Keyes (1644), pp. 16, 17, held that when all the ministry of a church were culpable the church could not excommunicate them, having no officers for the purpose; but only withdrav; from them. But by the time of the publication of the Way of the Chvrches (1645), p. loi, Cotton had so far modified his views as to take substantially the position here given, and asserted the right of the church to discipline all its minis- try. Davenport, yl MTOi^r . , . a«Co iVzMc />o«Vzokj, p. 77, agreed with the Plat- form. Cotton, Keyes, p. 43, suggested that in case all the elders of a church offended the "readiest course is, to bring the matter then to a Synod," i. e. council. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 219 in case, he add cotumacy to his sin, [14] the Church that Matt. is. 17 had powr to receive him into their fellowship, hath also the same powr to cast him out, that they have concerning any other member. 7 Church-government, or Rule, is placed by Christ ^j™. 5. 17 in the officers of the church, who are therefore called ' Thk 5, 12 Riders, while they rule with God: yet in case of mal-ad- ministration, they are subject to the power of the church, according as hath been said before, the Holy Ghost Rom. 12. s frequently, yea alwayes, where it mentioneth Church- 1 Cor.'it 28 29. Rule, & church-government, ascribeth it to Elders: wheras ^ ''' '^ '' '' the work & duty of the people is expressed in the phrase of obeying their Elders; and submiting themselves unto them in the Lord: so as it is manifest, that an organick or compleat church is a body politick, consisting of some that are Governors, & some that are governed, in the Lord." 8 The powr which Christ has committed to the Acts. 20. 28 C3.p 6. 2 Elders, is to feed & rule the church of God,'' & accord- Num! 16. 12 ingly to call the church together upon any weighty Acts.' iV 15 occasion,' when the members so called, without just cause, may not refuse to come : nor when they are come, depart Hosh, 4. 4. before they are dismissed: nor speak in the church, before they have leave from the elders: nor continue so doing, when they require silence,* nor may they oppose nor con- tradict the judgment or sentence of the Elders, without sufficient & weighty cause, becaus such practices are manifestly contrary unto order, & government, & in-lets of disturbance, & tend to confusion.' It belongs also unto the Elders to examine any Rey. 2. 2 I Tim. 5. ig ofiScers, or members, . before they be received of the Acts. 21. is 22, church: ° to receive the accusations brought to the i cor. 5. 4, s Church, & to prepare them for the churches hearing.' In handling of offences & other matters before the Church they have powr to declare & publish the CounsellNum.d 23,to26. & will of God touching the same, & to pronounce sentence with the consent of the Church:* Lastly they * Compare Mather, Ckurch-Government (Answer to Quest. 15), pp. 47-60 ; Cot- ton, Keyes^ pp. 20-23 \ Way 0/ the Churches, pp. 96-102. ^ Cotton, Keyes, p. 20. ^Mather, Church-Government, S7\ Cotton, ICeyes^ix', Way of the Churches, loi. * Mather, Ibid, Cotton, Ibid., Ibid. = Compare Mather, Ibid., 58. * Cotton, .ATify^j, 21. "^ Ibid., 22. ^ Ibid. 220 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM have powr, when they dismiss the people, to bless them in the name of the Lord.' 10 This powr of Government in the Elders, doth not any wise prejudice the powr of priviledg in the brotherhood; as neither the powr of priviledg in the brethren, doth prejudice the power of government in the Acts. ^14. 15 ve. Elders; but they niay sweetly agree together, as wee 1 Cor. 5. 4 may see in the example of the Apostles furnished with 2 Cor. 2. 6, 7 -^ the greatest church-powr, who took in the concurrence & consent of the brethren in church-administrations. [15] Also that Scripture, 2 Cor 2. 9. & chap 10: 6 doe declare, that what the churches were to act Sz: doe in Hebr. 13. 17 these matters, they were to doe in a way of obedience, & that not only to the direction of the Apostles, but also of their ordinary Elders." 11 From the premisses, namely, that the ordinary powr of Government belonging only to the elders, powr of priviledg remaineth with the brotherhood, (as powr of judg- ment in matters of censure, & powr of liberty, in matters of liberty:) It followeth, that in an organick Church, & right administration; all church acts, proceed after the manner of a mixt administration, so as no church act can be consummated, or perfected without the consent of both.' CHAP: XI. Of the maintenance of Church Officers.^ I ^°Matt' " 'Y'a.% Apostle C(7ncludes, that necessary & sufficient 38. c 10, JO maintenance is due unto the ministers of the word: from I iim. 5. x8 the law of nature & nations, from the law of Moses, the equity thereof, as also the rule of common reason, more- over the scripture doth not only call Elders labourers, & Gala. 6. 6. workmen, but also speaking of them doth say, that I Cor, g. 9 the labourer is worthy of his hire : & requires that he vers. 14. -^ ^ _ I Tim. 5. 18 which is taught in the word, should communicate to him, in all good things; & mentions it as an ordinance of the Lord, that they which preach the Gospel, should live of 1 Mather, Church-Governnient ^ 58 ; Cotton, Keyes, 22 ; IVay of the ChurcheSy 100. 2 Compare Mather, Church-Government^ pp. 58-60. = Ibid.y 57. ■* Compare the brief paragraph, Mather, Church-Govermnent^ {Answer to Quest. 26,) pp. 76, 77. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 221 the Gospel ; & f orbideth the muzling of the mouth of the ox, that treadeth out the corn. 2 The Scriptures alledged requiring this mainten- ance as a bounden duty, & due debt, & not as a matter of almes, & free gift therefore people are not at liberty to doe or not to doe, what & when they pleas in this matter, no more then in any other commanded duty, & ordinance of the Lord: but ought of duty, to minister of their carwa// R°™ 's =? " ■' ' I Cor. 9. 14 things to them, that labour amongst them in the word & doctrine, as well as they ought to pay any other work men their wages, or to discharge & satisfie their other debts, or to submit themselves to observe any other ordinance of the Lord. 3 The Apostle, Gal: 6, 6. injoyning that he which is Gala. 6. 6 taught communicate to him that teacheth in all good things: doth not leave it arbitrary, what or how much a man shall give, or in what proportion, [16] but even the later, as well ' Cor, 16. 2 as the former, is prescribed & appointed by the Lord. 4 Not only members of Churches, but all that are Gaiat. 6. 6. taught in the word, are to contribute unto him that teacheth, in all good things. In case that Congregations are defec- tive in their contributions, the Deacons are to call upon am. 6. 3, 4 them to doe their duty: if their call sufficeth not, the church by her powr is to require it of their members, & where church-powr through the corruption of men, doth not, or canot attaine the end, the Magistrate is to see' ministry be duely provided for, as appeares from the com- mended example of Nehemiah. The Magistrates are nurs- Neh. 13. n ing fathers, & nursing mothers, & stand charged with the custody of both Tables; because it is better to prevent aisay. 49. 23 scandal, that it may not come & easier also, then to re- move it when it is given. Its most suitable to Rule, that^ Cor. s. 13 14 , by the churches care, each man should know his proportion according to rule, what he should doe, before he doe it, that so his iudgment & heart may be satisfied in what he doeth, & just offence prevented in what is done. CHAP: XII. Of Admission of members into the Church. Tne doors of the Churches of Christ upon earth, doe jg^^'Xt.^i, " not by Gods appointment stand so wide open, that all sorts =5- & 22, 12 1 Insert that the. 222 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM of people good or bad, may freely enter therein at their pleasure; but such as are admitted therto, as members ought to be examined & tryed first; whether they be fit & meet to be received into church-society, or not.' The Acts. 8. 37 Evnuch of Ethiopia, before his admission was examined by Philip,^ whether he did beleive on Jesus Christ with all Rev. 2. 2 his heart ' the Angel of the church at Ephesus is com- mended, for trying such as said they were Apostles & were not. There is like reason for trying of them that profess themselves to be beleivers. Rex- 21- 1= The officers are charged with the keeping of the doors 2 Chr. 23. ig *^ . _ of the Church, & therfore are in a special maner to make tryall of the fitnes of such who enter. Twelve Angels are set at the gates of the Temple, lest such as were Cere- monially unclean should enter therinto. Acts 2. 3810 2 The things which are requisite to be found in all 42. c 8. 37 °^ ^ church members, are, Repentance from sin, Sa faith in Jesus Christ. [17] And therfore these are the things wherof men are to be examined, at their admission into the church & which then they must profess & hold forth in such sort, as may satisfie rationall charity that the things are there in- Arts i^' 8 deed. lohn Baptist admitted men to Baptism, confessing & bewayling their sinns: & of other it is said, that they came, & confessed, & shewed their deeds.' 3 The weakest measure of faith is to be accepted in those that desire to be admitted into the church: becaus Rom 14. I weak christians if sincere^ have the substance of that faith, repentance & holiness which is required in church mem- bers: & such have most need of the ordinances for their ^S";o.^ii.° confirmation & growth in grace." The Lord Jesus would not quench the smoaking flax, nor breake the bruised reed, but gather the tender lambes in his arms, & carry them gently in his bosome. Such charity & tenderness is to be used, as the weakest christian if sincere, may not be ex- cluded, nor discouraged. Severity of examination is to be avoyded. 1 Compare Mather, Church-Government, (Answer to Quest. 8,) pp. 23, 24 ; and Cotton, Way of the Churches, pp. 54-58. 2 See errata. 3 Cotton, Way of the Churches, pp. 5, 58. < See errata. » Mather, Church-Govern7nent, pp. 23, 24, Compare also Cotton, Way of the Churches, pp. 54, 55, 57, 58. • Cotton, Hid., p. 58. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 223 4 In case any through excessive fear, or other in- firmity, be unable to make their personal relation of their spirituall estate in publick, it is sufficient that the Elders having received private satisfaction, make relation therof in publick before the church, they testifying their assents therunto ; this being the way that tendeth most to edifi- cation. But wheras persons are of better abilityes, there it is most expedient, that they make their relations^ 6^ con- psai 66. 16 fessions personally with their own mouth, as David profes- seth of himselfe. 5 A personall & publick confession, & declaring of Gods manner of working upon the soul, is both lawfull, expedient, & usefull, in sundry respects, & upon sundry grounds. Those three thousands. Acts. 2. 37. 41. Be- fore they were admitted by the Apostles, did manifest that they were pricked in their hearts at Peters sermon, together with earnest desire to be delivered from their sinns, which now wounded their consciences, & their ready receiving of the word of promise and exhortation. Wee are to be ready to render a reason of the hope that is in us, to every one that asketh us : therfore wee must be i Pet 3. is able and ready upon any occasion to declare & shew oar repentance for sinn, faith unfagned j^ d^ effectuall calling, because these are the reason of a well grounded hope. I Hebr. n. i * ^ Ephe I. 18 have not hidden thy righteousness from the great congre- gation. Psal : 40. 10. [18] 6 This profession of faith & repentance, as it must be made by such at their admission, that were never in Church-society before: so nothing hindreth but the same way also be performed by such as have formerly been members of some other church, & the church to which they now joyn themselves as members, may law- fulFy require the same.' Those three thousand. Acts. 2. which made their confession, were mebers of the church of the Jews before, so were they that were baptised by John. Churches may err in their admission : & persons Matt. 3. s, 6 regularly admitted, may fall into offence. Otherwise, if i Tim.' 5.' 24 Churches might obtrude their members, or if church- members might obtrude themselves upon other churches, without due tryall, the matter so requring, both the lib- 1 Read unfeigned. 2 Compare Mather, Chtirch-Government ^ p. 30. 224 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM erty of churches would hereby be infringed, in that they might not examine those, concering whose fitness for Cant. 8. 8 commuuion, they were unsatisfied : & besides the infring- ing of their liberty, the churches themselves would uavoid- ably be corrupted, & the ordinances defiled, whilst they might not refuse, but must receive the unworthy : which is contrary unto the Scripture, teaching that all churches are sisters, and therfore equall. 7 The like tryall is to be required from such mem- bers of the church, as were born in the same, or received their membership, & were baptized in their infancy, or minority, by vertue of the covenat of their parents, when being grown up nnto' years of discretion, they shall desire Matt. 7. 6 to be made partakers of the Lords supper : unto which, because holy things must not be given unto the unworthy, therfore it is requisit, that these as well as others, should come to their tryall & examiation, & manifest their faith & repentance by an open profession therof, before they are received to the Lords supper, & otherwise not to be be^ admitted there unto,^ Yet these church-members that were so born, or re- ceived in their childhood, before they are capable of being made partakers of full comunion, have many priv- iledges which others (not church-mebers) have not : they are in covenant with God ; have the scale therof upon them, viz. Baptisme ; & so if not regenerated, yet are in a more hopefull way of attayning regenerating grace, & all the spiritual blessings both of the covenat & seal ; they are also under Church-watch, & consequently subject, to the reprehensions, admonitions, & censures therof, for their healing and amendment, as need shall require. [19] CHAP:Xin. Of Chiirch-viembers their removall from one Church to another, &= of letters of recomendation &" dismission. CHurch-members may not remove or depart from the Church, & so one from another as they please, nor with- 1 Read unto. 1 Omitted in errata. 3 Compare Cotton, Way 0/ the Churches, p. 5 ; Mather, Church-Got'ernjnent, pp. 20-22. Mather's first draft, now in the MSS. collections of the American Anti- quarian Society at Worcester, read : " Such as are borne in y" ch : as members, though yet they be not found fitt for y" Lords Supper, yet if they be not culpable of such scan- dalls in Conversation as do justly deserve ch : Censures, it seemeth to vs, w° they are marryed t& have children, those their children may be reed to Baptisme." p. 63. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 225 out just & weighty cause but ought to live & dwell to-Hebr. 1025 gather : for as much as they are comanded, not to forsake the assembling of themselves together. Such departure tends to the dissolution & ruine of the body : as the pulling of stones, & peeces of timber from the building, & of members from the naturall body, tend to the destruc- tion of the whole.' 2 It is therfore the duty of Church-members, in such times & places when counsell may be had, to consult with the Church wherof they are members, about their Prov. n. 16 removall, that accordingly they have their approbation, may be incouraged, or otherwise desist. They who are joyned with consent, should not depart without consent, except forced therunto.- 3 If a members departure be manifestly unsafe, and sinfull, the church may not consent therunto : for in so Rom 14. 23. doing, they should not act in faith: & should pertake Acts'^i'.'H.' with him in his sinn. If the case be doubtfull & the person not to be perswaded, it seemeth best to leave the matter unto God, & not forcibly to detayn him.' 4 Just reasos for a mebers removal of himselfe from the church are, I If a man canot continue without par- takig in sinn. II In case of personall persecution, so Paul Ephe. 5. n , ,, , ,.., „ ,. Acts 9. 25. & ver departed from the disciples at Damascus. Also, m case 29- 3° chap a. i of generall persecution, when all are scattered. Ill In case of real, & not only pretended, want of competent Nehe. 13. 20 subsistence, a door being opened for a better supply in another place, together with .the meanes of spirituall edifi- cation. In these, or like cases, a member may lawfully remove, & the church cannot lawfully detayne him. 5 To seperate from a Church, eyther out of conteinpt of their holy fellowship, or out of covetousness, or for greater = Tim 4. 10 inlargements wffh just greife to the church; or out of schisme, or want of love; & out of a spirit of contention in Rom 16. ^^ respect of some unkindness, or some evill only conceived, jude . 19. [20] or indeed,' in the Church which might & should be Esh[Eph]4,2, 3 tolerated & healed with a spirit of meekness, & of which CoU 3. 13 evill the church is not yet covinced, (though perhaps himselfe bee) nor admonished:* for these or the like rea- ^ Compare Davenport, Answer .... unto Nine Positions^ pp. 72-76. 2 Ibid., 74. 3 Ibid. * Compare Cotton, Way 0/ the Churches, 105. 226 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM sons to withdraw from publick comuni.on, in word, or scales, or censures, is unlawfull & sinfull. Acts9*'26 6 Such members as have orderly removed their hab- itation ought to joyn themselves unto the church in order, where they doe inhabit if it may bee: otherwise, they can neyther perform the dutyes, nor receive the priviledges of members; such an example tolerated in some, is apt to corrupt others ; which if many should follow, would 1 Cor. 14. 33 threaten the dissolution & confusion of churches, contrary to the Scripture.' Acts. 18. 27 y Order requires, that a member thus removing, have letters testimonial ; (^ of dismission from the church wherof he yet is, unto the church wherunto he desireth to be joyned, lest the church should be deluded; that the church may receive him in faith; & not be corrupted by receiving deceivers, cS; false brethren. Untill the person dismissed be received into another church, he ceaseth not by his letters of dismission to be a member of the church wherof he was.° The church caiiot make a member no member but by excomunication.^ Romi6. J, 2 8 jf a^ member be called to remove o)ily for a time, 2 Cor. 3. 1 where a Church is, letters of Recommendation are requisite, & sufficient for comunion with that church, in the ordi- nances, & in their watch: as Phoebe, a servat of the church at Cenchrea, had letters writte for her to the church of Rome, that shee might be received, as becometh saints.^ 9 Such letters of Recommendation criminall nature, to wit, such as are con-i^i^.^4, ^ See errata. 2 See Cotton, Way a/ the Churches, pp. 89-92; a passage which the writer had under his eye. Jer. 6. 14 Mat. 18 3. b. 14 228 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM dened by the light of nature; then the church without such gradual! proceeding, is to cast out the offender, from their holy comunion, for the further mortifying of his sinn & the healing of his soule, in the day of the Lord Jesus.' 4 In dealing with an offeder, great care is to be take, that wee be neither overstrict or rigorous, nor too indul- Gaiat. 6. 1. gent or remiss; our proceeding herein ought to be with a spirit of meelcness, considering our selves, lest wee also be tepted; & that the best of us have need of much forgiv- Matt 18. 34. 35 ness from the Lord. Yet the winig & healig of the offeders Ez'ek.' 13.' 10 soul, being the end of these edeavours, wee must not daub with utempered morter, nor heal the wounds of our breth- ren sleightly. on some have compassio, others save with fear. 2 The'. ^3.6', 14 [22] S While the offender remayns excomunicate, the Church is to refrayn from all member-like communion with him in spirituall things, St also from all familiar com- unio with him in civil things, farther then the necessity of natural, or domestical, or civil relatios doe require : & are therfore to forbear to eat & drike with him, that he may be ashamd!^ 6 Excomunication being a spirituall punishment, it doth not prejudice the excomunicate in, nor deprive him of his civil rights^ & therfore toucheth not princes, or other magistrates, in point of their civil dignity or authority. iCori4. 24. 25 And, the excomunicate being but as a publican & a hea- then, heathens being lawfully permitted to come to hear the word in church assemblyes; wee acknowledg therfore 2 Thcs 3. 14 the like liberty of hearing the word, may be permitted to persons excommunicate, that is permitted unto heathen. And because wee are not without hope of his recovery, wee are not to account him as an enemy but to admonish him as a brother.' 7 If the Lord sanctifie the censure to the offender, so as by the grace of Christ, he doth testifie his repent- 2 Cor 2. 7, 8 ance, with humble cofession of his sinn, & judging of him- selfe, giving glory unto God; the Church is then to forgive him, & to comfort him, & to restore him to the wonted brotherly communion, which formerly he injoyed with them." ^ Ibid.^ pp. 92, 93. 2 Compare Ibid,^ p. 93. 2 Compare Ibid.^ pp. 93, 94. •* [hid., p. 94. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 229 8 The suffring of prophane or scandalous livers to continue in fellowship, & partake in the sacraments, is doubtless a great sinn in those that have power in their Rev 2. 14. 15. hands to redress it; & doe it not. Nevertheless, inasmuch as Christ & his Apostles in their times, & the Prophets & Mat 23. 3. other godly in theirs, did lawfully partake of the Lords '^"'^■' commanded ordinances in the Jewish church, & neyther taught nor practiced seperation from the same, though un- worthy ones were permitted therin; & inasmuch as the faithfull in the church of Corinth, wherin were many un- worthy persons, & practises, are never commanded to i Cor. 6 chap 15. absent themselves from the Sacramets, because of the"'' '^' "^■'' same; therfore the godly in like cases, are not presently to seperate. 9 As seperation from such a Church wherin prophae & scandalous livers are tolerated, is not presently neces- sary: so for the members therof, otherwise worthy, here- upon to abstain from communicating with such a church, = Chron. 30 is 1 • * ■ ,- 1 r-, . Gen. 18. 25 m the participation of the Sacraments, is unlawfull. For as it were unreasonable for an inocent person to be pun- ished, for the faults of other, wherin he hath no hand, & wherunto he gave no consent: soe is it more unreasonable, that a godly [23] man should neglect duty, & punish him- selfe in not coming for his portion in the blessing of the seales, as he ought, because others are suffered to come, that ought not.- especially, considering that himselfe doth neyther consent to their sinn, nor to their approching to the ordinance in their sinn, nor to the neglect of others who should put them away, Sr doe not: but on the con-Ezekg. + trary doth heartily mourn for these things, modestly & seasonably stirr up others to doe their duty. If the Church cannot be reformed, they may use their liberty, as is speci- fied, chap.- 13. sect: 4. But this all the godly are bound unto, even every one to do his indeavour, according to his powr & place, that the unworthy may be duly proceeded against, by the Church to whom this matter doth apper- taine. CHAP: XV. Of the coniunion of Churches one with another. ALthough Churches be distinct, & therfore may not Rev i. 4 be confouded one with another: & equall, & therfore have Rom! 16. is 230 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM I Cor. i6. ig not dominion one over another: yet all the churches ought Acts 15, 23 • 1 1. 1 u Rev 2, 1 to preserve Church-communion one with another, because they are all united unto Christ, not only as a mysticall, but as a politicall head; whence is derived a communion suitable therunto. 2 The communion of Churches is exercised sundry wayes. Cant. 8. 8 I By Way of mutuall care in taking thought for one anothers wellfare. II By way of Consultation one with another, when wee have occasion to require the judgment & counsell of other churches, touching any person, or cause wherwith they may be better acquainted then our selves. As the church of Antioch consulted with the Apostles, & Elders of the Acts 15: 2 church at lerusalem, about the question of circumcision of the gentiles, & about the false teachers that broached that doctrine. In which case, when any Church wanteth light or peace amongst themselves, it is a way of commun- Acts 15. 6. JQn Qf churches (according to the word) to meet together by their Elders & other messengers in a synod, to con- : 22.23 sider & argue the points in doubt, or difference;'' & have- ing found out the way of truth & peace, to commend the same by their letters & messengers to the churches, whom the same may concern. [24] But if a Church be rent with divisions amongst themselves, or ly under any open scandal, & yet refuse to consult with other churches, for healing or removing of the same; it is matter of just offence both to the Lord Jesus, & to other churches, as Ezek 34. 4. bewraying too much want of mercy & faithfulness, not to seek to bind up the breaches & wounds of the church & brethren; & therfore the state of such a church calleth aloud upon other churches, to excertise a fuller act of brotherly communion, to witt, by way of admonition. III A third way then of comunion of churches is by way of admonition, to witt, in case any publick offece be found in a church, which they either discern not, or are slow in proceeding to use the meaes for the removing & Gall 2. II to 14. healing of. Paul had no authority over Peter, yet when he saw Peter not walking with a right foot, he publickly * Compare Cotton, Way o/ tJte Churches, pp. 102, 103. ' See Cotton, Keyes, 18, a passage which the writer must have had before hira. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 23 1 rebuked him before the church: though churches have no more authority one over another, then one Apostle had over another; yet as one Apostle might admonish another, so may one church admonish another, & yet without usur- pation.' In which case, if the church that lyeth under offence, do not harken to the church which doth admonish her, the church is to acquait other neighbour-churches'^^'*' 'S. 15,16, '^ 17- by proportion with that offece, which the offending church still lyeth under, together with their neglect of the brotherly admo- nition given unto them; wherupon those other churches are to joyn in seconding the admonitio formerly give: and if still the offeding church continue in obstinacy & im- penitency, they may forbear communion with them; & are to proceed to make use of the help of a Synod, or counsell of neighbour-churches walkig orderly (if a greater caiTot convenietly be had) for their conviction.^ If they hear not the Synod, the Synod having declared them to be ob- stinate, particular churches, approving & accepting of the judgmet of the Synod, are to declare the sentence of non- comunion respectively concerning them: &: therupon out of a religious care to keep their own communion pure, they may justly withdraw themselves from participation with them at the Lords table, & from such other acts of holy comunion, as the communion of churches doth otherwise allow, & require. Nevertheless, if any members of such a church as lyeth under publick offence; doe not consent to the offence of the church, but doe in due sort beare witness against it, they are still to be received to wonted commun- ion: for it is not equall, that the innocent should suffer with Gen 18. 25- the offensive. [25] Yea furthermore ; if such innocent members after due wayting in the use of all good meanes for the healing of the offence of their own church, shall at last (with the allowace of the counsel of neighbour- churches) withdraw from the fellowship of their own church & offer themselves to the fellowship of another; wee judge it lawfull for the other church to receive them (being otherwise fitt) as if they had been orderly dismissed to them from their own church. IV A fourth way of communion of churches, is by way oi participation: the members of one church occasion- ^ Ihid.y 19. Here, too, Cotton's language is closely followed. * Compare Ibid.^ pp. 18, 24, 25 ; also, Way of ike Churches^ 108, log. 232 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM ally comming unto another, wee willingly admitt them to partake with us at the Lords table, it being the seale of our communion not only with Christ, nor only with the 1 Cor 12. 13 members of our own church, but also with all the churches of the saints: in which regard, wee refuse not to baptize their children presented to us, if either their own minister be absent, or such a fruite of holy fellowship be desired with us. In like case such churches as are furnished with more ministers then one, doe willingly afford one of their own ministers to supply the place of an absent or sick minister of another church for a needfull season.' ^^°" '^<'- ' V A fifth way of Church-communion is, by way of recbmendation when a member of one church hath occa- sion to reside in another church; if but for a season, wee comend him to their watchfull ffellowship by letters o/ recommendation : but if he be called to settle his abode Acts i8. 27 there, wee commit him according to his desire, to the ffellowship of their covenant, by letter's of dismission.^ VI A sixt way of Church-communion, is in case of Need, to minister relief e zs' succour one unto another : Acts II. 22 either of able members to furnish them with officers; or vers 2g. ' of outward support to the necessityes of poorer churches; Rom 13. 26, 27. as did the churches of the Gentiles contribute liberally to the poor saints at lerusalem.' 3 When a copany of beleivers purpose to gather into church fellowship, it is requisite for their safer pro- ceeding, & the maintaining of the communion of churches, by proportion* ' ^^^^ ^^^^ siguifie their intent unto the neighbour-churches, walking according unto the order of the Gospel, & de- sire their presence, & help, & right hand of fellowship which they ought readily to give unto them, when their' is no just cause of excepting against their proceedings." 4 Besides these severall wayes of communion, there is also a way of propagation of churches ; when a church shall grow too nu- [26] merous, it is a way, & fitt season, isay 40. 20. to propagate one Church out of an other, by sending forth Cant 8. 8, 9. -^ '^^ ° ' -' ° such of their mebers as are willing to remove, & to pro- 1 Here again the writer made considerable use of Cotton, Keyes, p. 17 ; though the communion by baptism and exchange of ministers is his own conception. 2 Compare Cotton, Keyes^ pp. 17, 18. 3 Compare /^zrf., 18 ; Way of the Churches^ pp. 107, 108. * Read there. See errata. 5 Compare Cotton, Way of the Churches^ pp. 5, 6. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 233 cure some officers to them, as may enter with them into church-estate amongst themselves : as Bees, when the hive is too full, issue forth by swarmes, & are gathered into other hives, soe the Churches of Christ may doe the same upon like necessity; & therin hold forth to the the right hand of fellowship, both in their gathering into a church ; & in the ordination of their officers.' CHAP : XVI. Of Synods. Synods orderly assembled, & rightly proceeding ac- cording to the pattern. Acts. 15. we acknowledg as the ordinance of Christ:^ & though not absolutely necessary Acts 15. 2. to. 15. to the being, yet many times, through the iniquity of men, & perversness of times, necessary to the wel- being of churches, for the establishment of truth, & peace therin. 2 Synods being spirituall & ecclesiasticall assem- bles, are therfore made up of spirituall & ecclesiasticall causes. The next efficient cause of them under Christ, is the powr of the churches, sending forth their Elders, [&] other messengers; who being mett together in the name Acts 15 ,2,3 of Christ, are the matter of a Synod ■? & they in argueing, vers 6. debating & determining matters of religion according to vers 7 to 23 the word, & publishing the same to the churches whom it concerneth, doe put forth the proper & formall acts of a Synod ; to the convictio of errours, & heresyes, & the es- vers n. tablishment of truth & peace in the Churches, which is Acts 16 4. 15. the end of a Synod. 3 Magistrates, have powr to call a Synod, by calling to the Churches to send forth their Elders & other mes- ^ chron 29. 4. 5. to II. sengers, to counsel & assist them m matters of religion : but yett the constituting of a Synod, is a church act, & may be transacted by the churches, even when civil mag- Acts 15. istrates may be enemyes to churches and to church as- semblyes.'' 4 It belongeth unto Synods & counsels, to debate & ^ Here again the writer has made use of Cotton, Keyes, p. 19. See also IVay 0/ the Churches^ pp. 109, no. ^ Cotton, Keyes, p. 23, ^ Result 0/ a Synod at Cambridge . . . Anno, 1646, p. 49. * Compare Ibid., pp. 70-72. 16 Acts 15. 24 vers z8, 29. 234 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM Acts 15. 1. 2. 6. determine controversies of faith, & cases of consciece ; to 7. iChrois.i3. ^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ l^^j^ directions for the holy worship of God, & good government of the church ; to beare wit- 2Chron29: 6, 7. ness against mal-administration & [27] Corruption in doc- trine or mailers in any particular Church, & to give direc- tions for the reformation therof: Not to exercise Church- censures in way of discipline, nor any other act of church- authority or jurisdiction : which that presidentiall Synod did forbeare. 5 The Synods directions & determinations, so farr as consonant to the word of God, are to be received with reverence & submission ; not only for their agreement therwith (which is the principall ground therof, & with- out which they bind not at all:) but also secondarily, for Acts 15. the powr wherby they are made, as being an ordinance of God appointed therunto in his word. 6 Because it is difficult, if not impossible, for many churches to com altogether in one place, in all their mebers universally: therfore they may assemble by their delegates or messengers, as the church of Antioch went Acts IS. 2 not all to lerusalem, but some select men for that pur- pose. Because none are or should be more fitt to know the state of the churches, nor to advise of wayes for the good therof then Elders ; therfore it is fitt that in the choice of the messengers for such assemblies, they have Acts 15:2 special respect uto such. Yet in as much as not only Paul vers 22, 23 ^ ^ & Barnabas, but certayn others also were sent to Jeru- salem from Antioch. Acts. 15. & when they were come to lerusalem, not only the Apostles & Elders, but other brethren also doe assemble, & meet about the matter ; therfore Synods are to consist both of Elders, & other church-members, endued with gifts, & sent by the churches, not excluding the presence of any brethren in the churches. CHAP: XVII 0/ the Civil Magistrates powr in Matters Ecclesiastical. It is lawfull, profitable. & necessary for christians to gather themselves into Church estate, and therin Act2, 41. 47. to exercise all the ordinaces of christ according unto cap, 4, I, 2, 3 , J the word, although the consent of Magistrate could TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 235 not be had therunto,' because the Apostles & christians in their time did frequently thus practise, when the Magis- trates being all of them Jewish or pagan, & mostly persecuting enemies, would give no countenance or con- sent to such matters. 2 Church-government stands in no opposition to John 18, 36 civil govenment of comon-welths, nor any intrencheth upon the authority of [28] Civil Magistrates in their iurisdictions ; nor any whit weakneth their hands in gov- John 18. 36 ■" -^ Acts 25. 8. erning ; but rather strengthneth them, & furthereth the people in yielding more hearty & conscionable obedi- ence uto them, whatsoever some ill affected persons to the wayes of Christ have suggested, to alienate the affec- tions of Kings & Princes from the ordinances of Christ; as if the kingdome of Christ in his church could not rise & stand, without the falling & weakning of their government, which is also of Christ : wheras the contrary isay 49. 23. is most true, that they may both stand together & flourish the one being helpfull unto the other, in their distinct & due administrations. The powr & authority of Magistrates is not for the restraiing of churches, or any other good workes, but for helping in & furthering therof; & therfore the consent & Rom 13. 4. countenance of Magistrates when it may be had, is not to be sleighted, or lightly esteemed; but on the contrary; it is part of that honour due to christian Magistrates to de- sire & crave their consent & approbation therin: which being obtayned, the churches may then proceed in their way with much more encouragement, & comfort. ^ 4 It is not in the powr of Magistrates to compell their subjects to become church-members, & to partake at the Lords table: ' for the priests are reproved, that brought tiworthy ones into the sactuarie : then, as it was unlawful! Ezek 44. 7, for the preists, so it is as unlawful! to be done by civil Magistrates. Those whom the church is to cast out ifiCors. n they were in, the Magistrate ought not to thrust into the church, nor to hold them therin. ■ Cotton expresses the same view in different language, Way of the Churches, p. 6. 2 Compare Cotton's statement of New England theory and practice, Way of the Churches, pp. 6, 7. 2 Compare Cotton, Keyes, p. 51 ; the same idea is expressed in The Result of a Synod at Cambridge . *. , Anno, ib^,^. ^. See ante, p. igo. 236 THE CAMBRIDGE SYNOD AND PLATFORM 5 As it is unlawful! for church-officers to meddle with the sword of the Magistrate, so it is ulawfull for the Magis- trate to meddle with the work proper to church-officers. Matth 20 25, 26. the Acts of Moses & David, who were not only Prices, but Prophets, were extraordinary; therfore not imitable. 2Chron26i6. 17. Against such usurpation the Lord witnessed, by smiting Uzziah with leprosie, for presuming to offer incense 6 It is the duty of the Magistrate, to take care of matters of religion, & to improve his civil authority for the Psai82. 2 observing of the duties commanded in the first, as well as for observing of the duties commanded in the second table." They are called Gods. The end of the Magistrates I Tim 2. 1, 2 office, is not only the quiet & peaceable life of the subject, in matters of righteousness & honesty, but also in matters of godliness, yea of all godliness.' Moses, Joshua, David, Soloma, [29] Asa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah,' are much commended by the Holy Ghost, for the putting forth 1 Kings 15, 14. c their authority in matters of religion; on the contrary, 2 icings 12. 3 c such Kings as have been fayling this way, are frequently 14. 4. c 15. 35. 1 Kings 20. 42. taxed & reproved by the Lord. & not only the Kings of Job 2g, 25 c 3 I 26. 28. Judah, but also Job, Nehemiah, the king of Niniveh, Jonah 3. 7. Darius, Artaxerxes, Nebucadnezar,'' whom none looked at Dan 3.' 29. as types of Christ,'^ (thouh" were it soe, there were no place for any just objection,) are comeded in the book of God, for exercising their authority this way. 7 The object of the powr of the Magistrate, are not things meerly inward, & so not subject to his cognisance & view, as unbeleife hardness of heart, erronious opin- ions not vented; but only such things as are acted by the outward man;' neither is their powr to be exercised, in 1 Kings 20 commanding such acts of the outward man, & punishig the 28. vers 42 ° J r a neglect therof, as are but meer invetions, & devices of men; but about such acts, as are commanded & forbid- den in the word; yea such as the word doth clearly deter- mine, though not alwayes clearly to the judgment of the Magistrate or others, yet clearly in it selfe. In these he of right ought to putt forth his authority, though oft-times actually he doth it not.' ' Compare Result 0/ a Synods pp. 1 and following. 2 Ibid.^ pp. 34-36. 3 Idid., p. 22. * Ibid., pp. 22, 23, 25-29. ^ Ibid. * Read though. ' Compare Ibid., pp. 15, 16. ^ This passage shows that Mather must have been familiar with the tentative Result 0/ a Synod oi 1646. {,Ante, pp. 189-193.) See Ibid., p. 4. TEXT OF THE PLATFORM 237 8 Idolatry, Blasphemy Heresy, venting corrupt & Deut 13, .. ,, .... I Kings 20. 28, pernicious opinions, that destroy the foundation, open con- vers 42. tempt of the word preached, prophanation of the Lords Zach^is!'^ day, disturbing the peaceable administration & exercise of i Tim^2.'^2,' the worship & holy things of God, & the like, are to be ''' *' restrayned, & punished by civil authority.' 9 If any church one or more shall grow schismaticall, rending it self from the communion of other churches, or shall walke incorrigibly or obstinately in any corrupt way of their own, contrary to the rule of the word; in such case, the Magistrate is to put forth his coercive powr, Joshua 22 as the matter shall require. The tribes on this side Jordan intended to make warr against the other tribes, for building the altar of witness, whom they suspected to have turned away therin from following of the Lord. FINIS [ 30 Blank ] [31] A TABLE OF THE CONTENTS [A sim- ple list of the titles of the chapters, here omitted.] Errata ^ The faults escaped in some of the bookes thus amended Note that the first figures stands for page the next for line pag 8 19. r they. 10 11. r not, be. 13. 26. r admission, p 16. 28 r Philip. 17. 5. r Acts. 19. 18. 18. 28. r not bee adm. 19. r one. r to. 21. 21. r con- vinced. 25. 35. r there. ^ Compare Ibid., pp. 5, 6. XI THE HALF WAY COVENANT DECISIONS OF 1657 AND 1662 Editions and Reprints a. the conclusions of the ministerial assembly, 1657 The manuscript is in the possession of the American Antiquarian Society, Worcester, Mass. A Disputation concerning Church-Members and their Children in Answer to XXI. Questions : London, 1659, 4° pp. [viii] 31.' In abstract in I. Hubbard, General History of New England, ed. Boston, 1848, pp. 563-569. II. Felt, Ecclesiastical History of New England, Boston, 1855-62, II : 154- 158. B. THE RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1662 The manuscript is in the possession of the American Antiquarian Society. I. Propositions Concerning the Subject of Baptism and Consociation of Churclies, Collected and Confirmed out of ttu Word of God, by a Synod of Elders and Messengers of the Churches in Massachusets-Colony in New-England. Assem- bled at Boston, according to Appointment of the Honoured General Court, In the Year 1662, etc., Cambridge : Printed by S.[amuel] G.[reen^ for Hezekiah Usher at Boston in New-England, 1662. 4° pp. xvi, 32. II. With same title, but without naming; the place of publication, and with the addition of the Answer of the Dissenting Brethren, i, e., Chauncy, Anti-Synodalia Scripta Americana. [London], 1662. III. Mather, Magnalia, London, 1702. Ed. 1853-5, II : 279-301.' IV. Results of Three Synods, etc. Boston, 1725, pp. 50-93. V. The Original Constitution, Order and Faith of TJie New England Churches, etc. Boston, 1812, pp. 69-118. VI. Congregational Quarterly, IV : 275-286. (July, 1862.) Beside these publications of the full text of the result, the portion which has to do with Consociation of Churches was reprinted by Increase Mather, A Disquisition Concerning Ecclesiastical Councils, Boston, 1716, pp. 40-47; republished in Con- gregational Quarterly, XII: 366-369 (July, 1870). An abstract of the result was given by Hubbard, General History, pp. 587-590. Sources Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, Hartford, 1850, etc., 1 : 281, 288, 289, 293, 302, 437, 438 ; II : 53-55, 67, 69, 70, 84, 109, 516, 517. ^ The publication was effected by Nathanael (and probably Increase) Mather. See Brintey Catalogue, 1 : 133. 2 Dexter has pointed out that Mather's reprint is inaccurate ; see Cong. Quart., IV : 275. (238) ITS LITERATURE 239 Records of . . . Massachusetts, Boston, 1853-4, HI : 419 ; IV, Pt. I ; 280; Pt. II : 38, 60, 62. Records of the Colony . . . of Neiu Haven, Hartford, 1857-8, II : 195-198. Acts of the Commissioners of the United Colonies, (in Records of . . Ply- mouth,) Boston, 1859, II : 328. The sources are largely epitomized by Felt, Ecclesiastical History of Neia Eng- land, Boston, 1855, 1862, II; 153-159, 187, 189-191, 287-289, 291-296, 299-302, 310, 312, 333, 339-341. 365, 406, 407, 409. Controversial Pamphlets a. Opposed to the result. I. Charles Chauncy, Anti-Synodalia Scripta Americana, etc. [London] 1662 ; Printed in connection with the result of the Synod as issued at London ■} 2. Answer of the Dissenting Ministers in the Synod, respecting Baptism and the Consociation of Churches, Cambridge, 1662;' 3. John Davenport, Another Essay For Investigation of the Truth, in Answer to Two Questions, concerning (a) The svbject of Baptism . (b) The Consociation of Churches. Cambridge, 1663, with preface by Increase IMather' and an appendix by Nicholas Street f b. In defense of tlie result. I. John Allin, Animadversions upon the Antisynodalia Americana, etc., Cambridge, 1664 [Reply to Chauncy] ; 2. Jona- than Mitchell and Richard Mather,* A Defence of the Answer and Arguments of the Synod met at Boston in the year 1662 . . . Against the Reply made thereto by the Rev. Mr. J. Davenport [this portion of the work by R. Mather]* ... to- gether with an Answer to the Apologetical Preface set before tJiat Essay, [here Mitchell answers Increase Mather,] Cambridge, 1664; 3. Collection of the Testi- monies of the Fathers of the New England Churches respecting Baptism. Cam- bridge, 1665?'' 4. Increase Mather, The First Principles of New-England, Concerning the Subject of Baptisme ^ Communion of Churches. Collected partly out of the Printed Books, but chiefly out of the Original Manuscripts of the First and chief e Fathers in the New-English Churches, etc., Cambridge, 1675 ; 5. In- crease Mather, A Discourse concerning the Subject of Baptisme, Wherein the present Controversies . . . are enquired into. Cambridge, 1675. Literature I. Hubbard, General History of New England [Account written soon after 1675],* ed. Boston, 1848, pp. 562-571, 587-591 ; 2. Mather, Magnolia, London, 1702, ed. Hartford, 1853-5, II : 276-315 ; 3. Neal, History of New-England, Lon- 1 Thomas, Hist, of Printing, 1 : 255, believed this to have been Issued also at Cambridge, Mass., in 1662. This is almost certainly a mistake. See Brinley Catalogue, 1 : 114. 2 So given by Dexter, Cong, as seen, Bibl. No. 1935. May it not be identical with No. i? I have not been able to find it, and am inclined to believe it a mistake. 3 The youthful Mather soon changed his views, under the influence of Mitchell's arguments, and wrote in defense of the result. Compare Magnatia, ed. 1853-5, II: 310. 4 Nicholas Street was teacher of the church at New Haven of which Davenport was pastor. 5 The work was published anonymously. " Davenport made rejoinder to R. Mather, but the reply was never printed. See Cong. Quart., IV: 287. ^ I know nothing of this work save the title as given in Thomas, Hist. Printing in A merica, II : 315. This classification is, therefore, purely conjectural. May this not be an erroneous descrip- tion of I. Mather's First Principles ? 8 Hubbard speaks of Increase Mather's First Principles, etc., as " published not long since." 240 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT don, 1720, H : 335-337 ; 4. Hutchinson, History of the Colony of Mass. Bay, ed. London, 1765, I: 223, 224; 5. Trumbull, History of Connecticut, ed. New Haven, 1818, I ; 296-313, 456-472 ; 6. Upham, Ratio Disciplince, Portland, Me., 1829, pp. 221-228 ; 7. Leonard Bacon, Thirteen Historical Discourses, on the completion of 200 years, from the Beginning of the First Church in New-Haven, New Haven, 1839, pp. 108, 139-146; 8. Uhden, Geschichte der Congregationalisten in Neu- England, u. s. w., Leipzig, 1842, Conant's translation, TJie New England Theocracy, etc., Boston, 1858, pp. 163-200; 9. Clarlc, Historical Sketch of the Cong. Churches in Mass., Boston, 1858, pp. 44, 45, 69-73 ; 10. Palfrey, History of New England, Boston, 1858-64, II: 486-493, III: 81-88, 116-119 ; II. Leonard Bacon, Histori- cal Discourse, in Contributions to the Ecclesiastical History of Connecticut, New Haven, 1861, pp. 16-32; 12. H. M. Dexter, Two Hundred Years Ago, in New England, in Congregational Quarterly, IV : 268-291 (July, 1862) [a most valuable and almost exhaustive monograph on the Synod of 1662]; 13. D. T. Fiske, The Half- Way Covenant, in Contributions to the Ecclesiastical History of Essex County, Mass., Boston, 1865, pp. 270-282 ; 14. I. N. Tarbox, Minutes of the General As- sociation of Cong. Churches of Mass., Boston, 1877, pp. 35-42 ; I5. Dexter, Con- gregationalism . . . as seen in its Literature, New York, 1880, pp. 467-476 ; 16. G. L. Walker, History of the First Church in Hartford, Hartford, 1884, pp. 151-211 [corrects the misrepresentations as to the relations of the quarrel in the Hartford church to the Half- Way Covenant movement into which nearly all earlier writers have fallen]; 17. G. L. Walker, Jonathan Edwards ajtd the Half- Way Cove- nant, in New Englander, XLIII ; 601-614 (Sept., 1884); 18. Doyle, English in America, The Puritan Colotiies, London, 1887, II : 94-100. The Reception of the System a. By the Salem Church, White, New England Congregationalism, pp. 40-78 passim (original records); /). By the First Church, Boston, Hill, History of the Old South Chitrch, Boston, 1890, I: ^-2^?, passim ; c. By the Hartford Church, John Davenport, Letter to John Winthrop, Jr., in j Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc, X: 59- 62 ; Walker, History of the First Church, Hartford, 1884, pp. 182-211 ; d. By the Stratford Church, Cothren, History of Ancient Woodbury, Waterbury, 1854, pp. 113 -135 ; e. By the Dorchester Church, Records of First Ch. at Dorchester, Boston, i8gi, pp. 35, 40, 49, 55, 70 [original records of value]. The Stoddardean Discussion I. Increase Mather, The Order of the Gospel, Boston, 1700;' 2. Stoddard, The Doctrine of Instituted Churcluis Explained and Proved from t/ie Word of God, London, 1700;' 3- [!• & C. Mather?] 7"/;!? Young Man's claim unto the Sacrament of the Lords- Supper . . . by . . . John Quick . . . With a Defence 1 In general, a defense of the older New England views as to church-membership, rights ot the brethren in church administration, "relations," covenants, synods, etc. 2 Apparently drawn out by Mather's book, a large portion of the positions of which it tra- verses. Full presentation of the famous view on admission to the Supper, pp. 18-22. Stoddard affirms the existence of National Churches, denies the necessity of church covenants, and declares that the minister alone, without the intermeddling of the brethren, is to decide on fitness for ad- mission to the sacraments. ITS LITERATURE 24 1 of those Churc}ies from ivliat is Offensive to them in a Discourse lately Published, under the Title of , The Doctrine of Instituted Churches, 1700;' 4. Stoddard, The Inexcusableness of Neglecting the Worship of God, under A Pretence of being in an Unconverted Condition, Shewn in a Sermon Preached at Northampton, The ijth. Decemb. 1707. Boston, 1708; 5. Increase Mather,^ Dissertation, wherein the Strange Doctrine lately Published in a Sermon, the Tendency of which is to En- courage Unsanctified Persons (zohile such) to approach the Holy Table of the Lord, is Examined and Confuted. Boston, 1708 ; 6. Stoddard, An Appeal to the Learned. Being A Vindication of the Right of Visible Saints to the Lords Supper, Though they be destitute of a Saving Work of Gods Spirit on their ILearts : Against the Exceptions of Mr. Increase Mather. Boston, 1709; 7. An Appeal, Of some of the Unlearned, both to the Learned and Unlearned j Containing some Queries on S. Stoddard's Appeal, Boston, 1709. An article of some value is that of [W. Bement], Stoddardeanisin, in A^ew Englander, IV; 350-355 (1846). The Effort for the Abolition of the Half-Way System Opponents. I. Jonathan Edwards, An Humble Inquiry Into the Rules of the Word of God, Concernijig the Qualifications Requisite to a Compleat Standing and full Communion In tlie Visible Christian Church. Boston, 1749, Edinburgh, 1790;' 2. J. Edwards, Misrepresentations Corrected, and Truth Vindicated, Bos- ton, 1752 [Reply to No. 26, below]; 3- Bellamy, Dialogue on the Christian .Sacra- ments, Boston, 1762;^ 4. Jacob Green, Christian Baptism ["Sermon Delivered at Hanover, in New-Jersey, Nov. 4. 1764"];'' 5. J. Green, An Inquiry Into The Con- stitution and Discipline of the Jewish Church ; In order to cast some Light on the Controversy, concerni7ig QualiJicatio7is for tlie Sacraments of the New Testament,^ New York, 1768 ; 6. J. Green, A Reply to the Reverend Mr. George Beckwith's Answer, New Haven [1769], [Reply to No. 31]; 7. Bellamy, The Half-Way-Cove- nant. A Dialogue, New Haven, 1769;^ 8. Bellamy, The Inconsistence of Re- nouncing The Half- Way-Covenant, and yet retaining the Half- Way-Practice. A Dialogue,'^ New Haven [1769], [Reply to No. 30]; 9. Bellamy, That there is but one Covenant, whereof Baptism and the Lord's Supper are Seals, viz : the Cove- nant of Grace . . . and, the Doctrine of an External Graceless Covenant, Lately advanced. By the Rev. Mr. Moses Mather . . . Shewn to be an tmscriptural Doctrine [Reply to No. 27]. It has as preface, A Dialogue between a Minister and his Parishioner, concerning the Half- Way-Covenant,^ New Haven, 1769 [Reply to ^ Endorsed as a reply to the Instituted Churches, by John Higginson, William Hubbard, Zechariah Symmes, Sen., Samuel Cheever, Nicholas Noyes, Jeremiah Shepard, Joseph Gerrish, and Edward Paison. 2 Primarily an attack on Stoddardeanism ; opposes the Half- Way Covenant system on pp. 128-131. Edwards graduated at Yale in 1720. Pastor at Northampton, Mass. 2 Yale, 173s, pastor Bethlem, Conn. Written soon after Edwards's dismission from North- ampton, but not printed till 1762. A defence of Edwards. Opposed to the Half-Way Covenant by implication rather than explicitly. ■1 Harvard, 1744, pastor Hanover, N. J. A follower of Whitefield, Edwardean in spirit and opposed to seeking baptism for offspring when consciously unfit for the Lord^ Table. ^ A vigorous defence of Edwards's views. ^ Bellamy's first Half-Way Covenant dialogue — a readable and forcible attack on the system. ' Bellamy's second dialogue. 8 Bellamy's third dialogue. 242 THF HALF-WAY COVENANT No. 28]; 10. Bellamy, The Sacramental Conh-oversy brought to a Point. The Fourth Dialogue between a Minister and his Parishioner. New Haven [1770], [Reply to No. 33]; ll. Bellamy,^ careful and stj-ict Examination of tJie External Covenant . . . A Reply to the Rev. Mr. Moses Mather's Piece, entituled. The Visible Chttrch in Covenant with God ^ further illustrated^ New Haven [1770], [Re- ply to No. 34]; 12. Israel HoUey, A Letter to the Reverend Mr. Bartholomew of Harwinton : Containing A Few Remarks^ Upon some of his Arguments and Di- vinity ^^ Hartford, 1770, [Reply to No. 32]; 13. Rules of Trial.: Or Half-Way Covenant Examined. In a letter to the Parishioner. By an Observer of the Dis- pute, New London, 1770,^ [I^^ply to No. 28]; 14. Chandler Robbins, A Reply to some Essays lately published by fohti Cotton, Esq. {of PlymoutJi) Relating to Bap- tism,^ Boston, 1773, [Reply to No. 37]; 15, C. Robbins, Some brief Remarks on A Piece published by fohn Cotton, Esq, of Plymouth, Boston, 1774, [Reply to No. 38]; 16. Cyprian Strong, A Discourse on Acts II : 42. In which the Practice of Owning the Covenant is Examined,^ Hartford, 1780, 2d ed. 1791 ; 17- C. Strong, Animadversions on the Substance of Two Sermons preached at Stepney by John Lezuis, A.M., Hartford, 1789, [Reply to No. 25]; 18. C. Strong, An Inquiry Wherein the end and design of Baptism . . . a're particularly considered,^ Hartford, 1793; 19. Nathanael Emmons, Dissertation on the Scripture Qualifica- tions for Admission and Access to the Christian Sacraments: comprisijig Some Strictures on Dr. Hemmenway's Discourse concerning the Church,^ Worcester, 1793, [Reply to No. 43]; 20. Stephen West, An Inqtiiry into the Ground and Import of Infant Baptism,'^ Stockbridge, 1794 ; 21. N. Emmons, Candid Reply to Dr. Hem- menzvay's Remarks on his Dissertation, Worcester, 1795, [Reply to No. 44]; 22. C. Strong, A Second Inquiry into the Nature and Design of Christian Baptism.^ Hartford, 1796; 23. S. West, A Dissertation on Infant Baptism in reply to the Rev. Cyprian Strong's Second Inquiry on that Subject^ Hartford, 1798, [Reply to No, 22]; 24. Timothy Dwight, Sermon CLIX, in Theology; Explained and De- f ended in a Series of Sermons, ed. New Haven, 1823, IV : 338—344. Peculiar "Views. 25. John Lewis, Christian Forbearance to weak Con- sciences a Duty of the Gospel. The Substance of Two Sermons^^ Hartford, 17B9. 1 Pastor at Suffield, Conn. Edwardean in view and friendly to Bellamy. Not very valuable. ^ Anonymous. Unimportant. The writer asserts that conversion is a prerequisite to admis- sion to the Sacraments. 3 Yale, 1756, pastor Plymouth, Mass. A powerful argument against the system, which had been under discussion in the First Church since 1770. ■1 Yale, 1763, pastor Chatham, now Portland, Conn. A most vigorous attack on the system. 3 One of the great works in opposition to the Half Way Covenant. ^ Yale, 1767, pastor Franklin, Mass. ■^ Yale, 1755, pastor Stockbridge, Mass. » Has to do only incidentally with the Half-Way Covenant." Strong's views is: "that the children of believers are not in covenant, and are not to be baptized in token of their title to the blessings of the covenant, but as a mark and token that their parents will keep covenant, and that their children are dedicated to Gpd." p. 114, "^ West combatted the Half-Way Covenant, but opposed Strong's view that baptism was only a seal of the parents' dedication of the child of God. 1" Yale, 1770, pastor Stepney, now Rocky Hill, Conn. His view was that : *' The same quali- fications, which are necessary for an attendance on the Lord's Supper, are necessary to bring a child to baptism "... but : " the absenting of a person, who wishes to avoid every sin, and walk in newness of life, yet fears to approach the table of the Lord — is not such a breach of covenant as debars him from bringing his children to baptism." pp. 5, 6. ITS LITERATURE 243 Defendei'S. 26. Solomon Williams, True State of the Question concerning The Qualifications Necessary to lawful Communion in the Christian Sacraments } Boston, 1751, [Reply to No. i]; 27. Moses Mather, The Visible Church, in Cove- nant with God,'' New York, 1759, [error for 1769]; 28. [Ebenezer Devotion], The Half-way Covenant. A Dialogue between Joseph Bellamy, D.D., and a Parish- ioner, Continued, by the Parishioner,^ New London, 1769, [Reply to No. 7]; 29. The Parishioner having Studied the Point. Containing some Observations on the Half-Way Covenant, Printed 1769,'' [Reply to No. 7]; 30. [Nathanael Taylor?] A Second Dialogue, bet'cocen a Minister and his Parishioner, Concerning the Half- Way -Covenant,^ Hartford, 1769, [Reply to No. 7]; 31. George Beckwith, Visible Saints lawful Right to Communion in Christian Sacraments, Vindicated,'^ New- London, 1769, [Reply to No. 4]; 32. Andrew Bartholomew, A Dissertation, on The Qualifications, Necessary to A lawful Profession, and enjoying special Ordinances^ Hartford [1769]; 33. [E. Devotion?], A Letter to the Reverend Joseph Bellamy, D.D., Concerning Qualifications for Christian Commzmion . . . From the Parishioner,^ New Haven [1770], [Reply to the preface of No. 9]; 34. Moses Mather, Tlie Visible Church, in Covenant with God ; Further Illustrated, New Haven, 1770, [Reply to No. 9]; 35. [E. Devotion?], A Second Letter, to the Rev- erend Joseph Bellamy, D.D., Occasioned by his Jourth Dialogue . . . From- the Parishioner, New Haven [1770], [Reply to No. 10]; 36. Charles Chauncy, "Break- ing of Bread" in remembrance of the dying Love of Christ, a Gospel institution. Five Sermons,^ Boston, 1772 ; 37- John Cotton, The general Practice of the Churches of New-England, relating to Baptism, Vindicated : or. Some Essays . . . Delivered at several Church-Meetings in Plymouth,"^" Boston [1772]; 38. John Cotton, The General Practice of the Churches of New England, Relating to Baptism Further Vindicated, Boston, 1773, [Reply to No. 14]; 39. William Hart, A Scriptural Answer to this Question " What are tlie Necessary Qualifications for , Attendance upon the Sacraments of the New Covenant,^^ New London, 1772 ; 40. Moses Mather, A Brief View of the Manner in which the Controversy About Terms of Communion . . . Has been conducted, in the present day.^'' New Haven, 1772 ; 41. Nathan Williams, An Enquiry Concerning the Design and ^ Harvard, 1719, pastor Lebanon, Conn. Strongly Stoddardean, little direct reference to the system. 2 Yale, 1739, pastor Middlesex, now Darien, Conn. A powerful Stoddardean treatise. 3 Yale, 1732, pastor Scotland, Conn. Stoddardean. ■* Anonymous and without place — Ultra-Stoddardean. * Yale, 1745, pastor New Milford, Conn, Curiously enough Dr. H. M. Dexter, Bibliog. No. 3559, and the editors of Bellamy's Works, ed. Boston, 1850, II: 677-684, took this tract to be by Bellamy instead of against him. On the authorship see Israel Holly No, 12 above, and Prof. F. B. Dexter, Yale Graduates, p. 528. ^ Yale, 1728, pastor Lyme, Conn. Stoddardean. An earnest defence of the Half-Way Covenant. ' Yale, 1731, pastor Harwinton, Conn. Opposed to Bellamy. ^ Hot and personal. » Harvard, 1721, pastor First Church, Boston, See pp. 106-113 for a strong presentation of a theory essentially Stoddardean. i» Harvard, 1730, pastor Halifax, Mass., but ill health had compelled retirement. Was now a member of the First Church, Plymouth, and the holder of civil offices (county treasurer, etc.). He strenuously resisted Robbins's attempt to induce the Plymouth church to abandon the Half-Way practice, >' Yale, 1732, pastor Saybrook, Conn. Stoddardean. 12 A general reply to Bellamy and defence of the Stoddardean view. Mather is said to have adopted Edwards's view late in life, F, B, Dexter, Yale Graduates, p. 628. 244 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT Importance of Christian Baptism and Discipline, In way of a Dialogue Bettiieen a Minister and his Neighbour,^ Hartford, 1778, Boston, 1792; 42. Joseph Lathrop, A Church of God described, the Qualifications for Membership stated, and Christian Fellowship illustrated, in two Discourses,'^ Hartford, 1792 ; 43. Moses Hemmen- 'v&y, A Discourse conceriiing the Church, in which . . . a Right of Admission and Access to Special Ordinances, in their Outward Administrations and Inward Efficacy, [is] Stated and Discussed,^ Boston, 1792 ; 44. M. Hemmenway, Remarks on Rev. Mr. Emmons' Dissertation, Boston, 1794, [Reply to No. ig]. THE main purpose of the Massachusetts General Court in call- ing the Synod to meet at Cambridge in 1646 had been the settlement of the questions agitating the colonies as to baptism and church-membership.* The predominance of Presbyterianism at the time in England, and the machinations of those in New England who hoped by Presbyterian aid to overthrow the colonial churches and state, made these questions peculiarly pressing. But the cloud rolled away almost as quickly as it had arisen, and as the questions proposed by the Court encountered diversities of view among the representatives of the Congregational Churches assembled at Cambridge,'' the more generally accepted features of the Congre- gational system were embodied in the Platform, and the vexed points regarding baptism, no longer pressing for immediate solu- tion, were passed over in rather ambiguous phrases. This treat- ment of the subject was comparatively easy in 1648 because the opposition to the prevalent system had been largely championed by a defeated political party; but had the Cambridge Synod been pressed to a vote, the probability is that it would have substantially anticipated the decisions of 1662. /The question was really far more religious than political. It was one sure to arise in the state of New England society 77 And as the leaders of the first genera- tion passed rapidly away, soon after the close of the Cambridge 1 Yale, 1755, pastor Tolland, Conn. Favors the Half- Way Covenant. The first edition bears the endorsements of Rev. Eliphalet Williams, East Hartford, Conn.; Rev. John Willard, Stafford, Conn.; Rev. Elizur Goodrich, Durham, Conn.; and Rev. Joseph Lathrop, West Springfield, Mass. The second edition has, in addition, Pres. Joseph Willard of Harvard ; and Rev. Moses Hemmen- way of Wells, Me. 2 Yale, 1754, pastor West Springfield, Mass. An able defence of Stoddardeanisra. In 1753 Lathrop was offered the professorship of Divinity in Yale College; see N. H. Hist. Soc. Papers, IV: 269. 3 Harvard, 1755, pastor Wells, Me. Dislikes the name Half-Way Covenant ; but strongly favors the system and inclines toward Stoddardeanism. 4 See ante, pp. 168-171. ^ Ibid., p. iSi. A RELIGIOUS QUESTION 245 Synod, and the children of the emigrants grew to manhood and womanhood, the problem of baptism became every day more press- ing as a question vitally affecting the churches themselves, what- ever intermixture of political aspirations in regard to the franchise or taxation may have modified the discussions of 1645-8. The political element, slight at all times in comparison with the relig- ious motive in the controversy, practically dropped out of sight after the defeat of Child and his associates. The second stage of the controversy on which we now enter was purely ecclesiastical. It was now solely as a problem of church polity that the position of the baptized but not regenerate members of the community was discussed.' LXhe original settlers of New England were men of tried relig- ious experienceTj Most of those who occupied positions of promi- nence in the community could give a reason for the faith that was in them. They had been sifted out of the mass of the Puritans of England. The struggles through which they had gone, the type of piety which they had heard inculcated, and their efforts to over- come the spiritual inertia of the English Establishment, engendered prevailingly a deep, emotional, introspective faith, which looked upon a conscious regenerative work of the spirit of God in the heart as essential to Christian hope. And as'^e New England fathers held strongly to the doctrine that the visible church should consist of none but evident Christians, ° none were admitted to the adult membership of the churches who could not relate some in- stance of the transforming operation of God in their own livesTJ The peculiar experience of the Puritans made the test a natural one for the first generation of New England settlers, and the pre- ponderating weight of opinion in the community viewed those who could not meet it as unfit for a share in the ordinances of the Gos- pel.' This view involved a radical departure from the practice of the English Establishment; but the early Congregationalists clung ^ See the forcible assertion of the non-political character of this discussion in D. T. Fiske, Discourse^ in Cont. Eccles, Hist, Essex Co,, Mass,, Boston, 1865, pp. 271, 272. 2 See Mather, Church-Government, pp. 8, 9 (Answer to No. 2 of XXXII Quest.); Hooker, ante, p. 143, etc. 3 See e. g. Lechford, Plain Dealing, Trumbull's reprint, p. 29. 246 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT to a regenerate membership as an absolute essential to the prop- erly constituted church. But/there was one exception to this rule that none were ac- counted of the church save those who could claim a definite religious experience and who had taken covenant pledges to each other and to God. The constitutive element in the church was the covenant, and this covenant, like that made with the house of Israel by God, was held to include not only the covenanting adult but his children.' \ Hence, from the first, the fathers of New England insisted that the children of church members were them- selves members, or in the covenant, and as such were justly en- titled to those church privileges which were adapted to their state of Christian development, of which the chief were baptism and the watchful discipline of the church.'' They did not enter the church by baptism; they were entitled to baptism because they were al- ready members of the church.' Here then was an inconsistency in the application of the Congregational theory of the constitution of a church. While affirming that a proper church consisted only of those possessed of personal Christian character, the fathers ad- mitted to membership, in some degree at least, those who had no claim but Christian parentage. They sought to avoid the incon- venience of this duality of entrance by insisting that none who 1 Cotton affirmed: "The same Covenant which God made with the Nationall Church of Israel and their Seed, It is the very same (for substance) and none other which the Lord maketh with any Congyegationall Church and our Seed." Certain Queries Tending to Accommodation . . . o^ Presbyterian bf Congregationall Churches^ London, 1654, p. 13. 2 IVIorton recorded, under date of 1629 : " The two ministers [Skelton and Higginson at Salem] . . . considered of the state of their children, together with their parents; concerning which, let- ters did pass between Mr. Higginson and IVIr. Brewster, the reverend elder of the church at Pli- mouth, and they did agree in their judgments, namely, concerning the church membership of the children with their parents." Alcmoriail, ed. 1855, p. loi. Mather in Church-Government (Answer to 5 & 6 of the XXXII Questions), pp. 20, 21, said : " Infants with us are Admitted Members in and with their Parents, so as to be Admitted to all Church priviledges of which Infants are capable, as namely to Baptisme." "They [the baptized children of the church] are also under Church-watch, & consequently subject, to the reprehensions, admonitions, & censures therof, for their healing and amendment, as need shall require." Camb. Plat/orDi, See aiite^ p. 224. s "The nature and use of Baptisme is to be a seale to confirme the Covenant of Grace be- tween God and his Church, and the Members thereof, as circumcision also was, Rom. 4. 11. Now a seale is not to make a thing that was not, but to confirme something that was before ; and so Baptisme is not that which gives being to the Church, nor to the Covenant, but is for confirma- tion thereof." ..." 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 Baptisme did seale it to them." Mather, Chnrch-Govermnent (Ans. to 4, 5, & 6 of XXXII Quest.), pp. 12, 20, 21. WHY A PRESSING QUESTION 247 came into the church by birth ought to go on to the great privi- lege of adult years, the Lord's Supper, without a profession of per- sonal regeneration.' [But the difficulties of the situation were not apparent in any marked degree till the children of the first settlers came to maturity.^ Then, in addition to the two great divisions of early days, — the consciously regenerate and those who laid no claim to Christian character, — there arose a third class of the population, and one ever since familiarly known in every New England town, — a class of men and women whose parents had been actively Christian, who had themselves been baptized and educated in the Christian faith, were well grounded in the knowl- edge of Christian truth, were students of the Bible and interested listeners in the sanctuary, who were desirous of bringing up their families in the way in which they themselves had been trained, and who were moral and earnest in their lives; yet could lay claim to no such experience as that which their parents had called a change of heart, and when asked as to any conscious work of God in their souls were compelled to admit that they could speak with confi- dence of none. It was the rise of this class that thrust the Half- Way Covenant problem upon the New England churches. /Three courses of treatment were open to the churches in deal- ing with these persons, /- each course liable to serious objections. They^might have been admitted to all the privileges of commun- ion; and a few in New England, whose inclination toward the Presbyterian or Episcopal customs of the old country was strong, leaned even at an early period toward the admission to the Lord's Supper of all who were intellectually familiar with the truths of the Gospel and of exemplary moral life.' But this position met with no general advocacy even among the class whom it would be 1 " But notwithstanding their Birthright, we conceive there is a necessity of their personall profession of Faith, and taking hold of Church-Covenant when they come to yeares ... for without this it cannot so well be discerned ; what fitnesse is in them for the Lords Table." Ibid., p. 21. 2 Compare Preface to the Propositions ai 1662, p. xiii, on a later page. 3 This was the view of Child and his fellow petitioners in 1646. See ante, p. 165. At an earlier time, 1641-2, Lechford recorded : " Of late some Churches are of opinion, that any may be admitted to Church-fellowship, that are not extremely ignorant or scandalous: but this they are not very forward to practice, except at Newberry.'" Plain Dealing, pp. 21. 22, Trumbull's re- print, p. 56. 248 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT supposed most to benefit. It was too positive an abandonment of the principle that the church should consist only of visible saints to be acceptable to those who had been trained by the fathers of New England. cYet, though advocated by but few, the fear that such a lowering of the terms of communion would take place did much to secure the acceptance of the Half-Way Covenant as the lesser of^wo evils.'| A sW^ond way of disposing of the problem would have been to- have denied to this class any right to church membership or church privileges. But this method of dealing was open to grave objections, both theoretic and practical. The class thus cut off from the churches would be large, it would leave the membership of the churches in a minority, it would give substance to the criti- cisms freely offered by the Puritan party in England that too large a portion of the inhabitants of New England were outside the churches as it was.' But more serious was the objection that all New England authorities had held these men and women to be by birth church-members, and the Congregational system of the day knew no way out of church covenant save death, dismission to another covenant fold, personal withdrawal from a church in evi- dent error, or excommunication. And how was this class to be excommunicated when they had, in general, tried to live upright and godly lives, and the only charge against them was a want of a regenerative change which none but God could effect? (_The prin- ciple that men could enter a Congregational church by birth as. well as by profession once admitted, the membership of these per- sons was indubitable; and if members, why could they not enjoy and transmit the privileges of the church to their offspring, at least in so far as they themselves had received them? If church membership was a hereditary matter, what authority was there for limiting its descent to a single generation?^' (Then, too, there was ^ CompELVe Mitchell^ A Ve/ence t}/ ^ke Answer loi i.66z\ . . . Against the Reply Tnade thereto by . . , J. Dauenport . . . together ivith an Answer to the Apologetical Pre- face set be/ore thai Essay, Cambridge, 1664, p. 45 (Mitchell's reply to Increase Mather). See alsa Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, II : 309, 310. 2 See Quest, i of the XXXII Quest. Church-Government, p. i. Lechford, Plain Dealings p. 73, Trumbull's reprint, pp. 150-152. DIFFICULTIES OF A SOLUTION 249 a well-grounded fear on the part of many of the best men in New England that if the membership of the children of the church was denied, no basis would be left on which they could be held amena- ble to church discipline, and discipline was greatly valued by early Congregationalists as a means of Christian training. To deprive a !■ large class in the community of its benefits seemed like giving them up to heathenism. | Probably a dread of the prevalence of Baptist views, limiting baptism to adult believers, had also some- thing to do with the reluctance of the New England pastors to confine the rite to the children of visible saints.' [The objections to each of these two methods of dealing with the problem were so great that the New England churches at length settled down on what was practically a compromiseJnThe standing of the unregenerate members in the church was held to entitle them to transmit church membership and baptism to their offspring ; but their non-regenerate character made it impossible that they should become partakers of the Lord's Supper. Mem- bers of the church they were, but not in " full communionTj At the same time, so solemn was the privilege of baptism believed to be, that none of the non-regenerate members of the church could claim it for their children without assenting to the main truths of the Gospel scheme and promising fidelity and submission to the discipline of the church of which they were members; in the phrase of the time, " owning the covenant." j_This was the result reached by the Ministerial Convention of 1657 and the Synod of 1662. It gave standing in the church for the class of moral but not regen- erate people, it kept them under the influence of Christian obliga- tion and discipline, it required from them the evidence of an intelligent comprehension of religious truth, and a public profes- sion of willingness to guide their lives by Gospel principles and bring up their children in the fear of God. But it demanded no personal sense of a change of heart. It was an illogical and incon- sistent position ; and as such could not long be maintainedJ 1 John Allin of Dedham, in his Animadversions upon the Antisynodalia Americana^ Cambridge, 1664, preface p. [ii], says: "We see evidently, that the Principles of our Dissenting Brethren give great Advantages to the Aniipe^dobaptists, which if we be silent, will tend much to their Encouragement and Encrease, to the Hazard of our Churches." 17 250 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT Greatly modified early in the eighteenth century, it was wholly abandoned in the nineteenth. Its effects were on the whole evil, not so much from what it encouraged worldly men to do, as from its tendency to satisfy those who might have come out into full Christian experience with an intellectual faith and partial Christian privileges. It made a half-way house between the world and full Christian discipleship, where there should be none, and hence de- served the nickname given by its opponents, the Half-Way Cove- nant. It can scarcely be doubted that it would have been better for the New England churches had they either received all repu- table persons to baptism and the Lord's Supper, or rejected all from any membership in the church who could not give evidence of personal Christian character.' But the twofold theory of en- trance into the church prevented the adoption of either method of dealing with the second generation on New England soil, and that inconsistent theory was the real source of the Half-Way Covenant. Vrhe position formulated in 1657 and 1662 was reached only after a long discussion and by a gradual development of public thought. It was no part of the plan of the founders of New Eng- land at their coming. The class which was to make it seem need- ful was yet in childhood. Leading theologians, like Hooker, Cotton, Davenport, and Richard Mather, asserted that none but children of " visible saints " should be baptized,'' and while they declared at the same time that the children of such saints were church members, the consequences of such membership by birth had not become apparentj But it was not long before cases arose in which this strictness seemed to involve undue severity. In 1634 a godly grandfather, a member apparently of the Dorchester church, whose son or daughter could claim no regenerative work of God, desired bap- tism for his grandchild, since baptism was the outward witness to 1 See the remarks of Leonard Bacon, Discourse^ in Cont. Eccles. Hist. Conn., New Haven, 1861, pp. 20-22 ; and D. T. Fiske, Cont. Eccles. Hist. Essex Co., Mass., Boston, 1865, pp. 279, 280. 2 For Hooker's views see e. g. Survey, Pt. 3, pp. g-27 ; Cotton, Way of the Churches, p. 81 : " Infants cannot claime right unto Baptisme, but in the right of one of their parents, or both : where neither of the Parents can claime right to the Lords Supper, there their infants cannot claime right to i>rt/^zj;«t?." Davenport, Answer of the Elders . . . unto Nine Positions, pp. 61-71. R. Mather, Chiirch-Covermnent (Ans. to 5-7 of XXXII Quest.), pp. 20-23. BAPTISJI OF GRANDCHILDREN 25 I that interest in the covenant which children of visible saints were held to possess by birth. The advice of the Boston church was sought, and there the matter was pubhcly debated, with a result favorable to the grandfather's request. The teacher, Cotton, and the two ruling elders, Oliver and Leverett, wrote tc- the Dorchester church as follows: ' " Though the Child be unclean where both the Parents are Pagans and Infidels, yet we may not account such Parents for Pagans and Infidels, who are themselves baptized, and profess their belief of the Fundimental Articles of the Christian Faith, and live without notorious Scandalous Crime, though they give not clear evi- dence of tlieir regenerate estate, nor are convinced of the necessity of Church Cove- nant. . . . IVc do therefore profess it to be the judgement of our [Boston] Church . . . that the Grand-Father a member of the Church, may claim the privilege of Baptisme to his Grand-Child, though his next Seed the Parents of the Child be not received themselves into Church Covejiant"'^ This was indeed a modification of the original New England theory, and was disapproved in principle by Hooker and Richard Mather' within the next few years. But it will cause no surprise to learn that, holding such views in 1634, Cotton felt able, before his death in 1652, to say of the offspring of church members: * -' " Though they be not fit to make such profession of visible faith, as to admit them to the Lords Table, yet they may make profession full enough to receive them " to Baptisme, or to the same estate Ishmael stood in after Circumcision." i-\ The same feeling of the necessity of an enlargement of the terms of baptism which characterized Cotton was soon shared by other New England ministers. By 1642, Thomas Allen of Charles- town argued in favor of the extension of the rite to the children of godly parents not yet gathered into church fellowship." AVithin a year or two thereafter George Phillips of Watertown expressed in the most positive language the abiding church membership not only of the immediate offspring of visible saints, but of all de- ^ The letter, dated Dec. i6, 1634, is preserved in Increase Mather's First Princijiles 0/ New England, Cambridge, 1675, pp. 2-4. The absence of the signature of the Boston pastor, Wilson, is explained by his presence at the time in England. 2 Ibid., pp. 3, 4. The permission was coupled with the conditions that the grandfather un- dertake the education of the child, and that the parents make this no occasion for neglect. ^ See p. 250, note 2. * First Principles, p. 6. The letter is without date. Other examples of Cotton's views will be found in the preface to the Proposiiions of 1662, on a later page. ^ Teacher at Charlestown 1639-1651. The passage is found in a letter to Cotton quoted in Felt, Eccles. Hist. N. E., I: 480. 252 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT scended from them; and though he does not speak in the passage of their claim to baptism, his words leave little doubt as to what his attitude would have been." In 1645 Richard Mather of Dor- chester wrote as follows,' replying to the question: " When those that were baptized in Infancy by the Covenant of their Parents being come to Age, are not yet found fit to be received to the Lords Table, although they be married and have Children, whether are those their Children to be baptized or no; " — " I propound to Consideration this Reason for the Affirmative, viz. /Th at the Children of such Parents ought to be baptized : the Reason is, the Parents as they were born in the Covenant, so they still continue therein, being neither cast out, nor deserving so to be, and if so, why should not their Children be baptized, for if the Parents be in Covenant, are not the Children so likewise ? . . . If it be said the Parents are not Confirmed members, nor have yet been found fit for the Lords Table, I conceive this needs not to hinder their Infants from Baptisme so long as they, I mean the Parents do neither renounce the Covenant, nor doth the Church see just Cause to Cast them out from the same." ) In view of the declarations just cited, it is no wonder that the Massachusetts General Court, in its call for the Synod of 1646-8, was moved to say that in regard to "baptisme, & y' p'sons to be received thereto," "y" apphensions of many p'sons in y' country are knowne not a little to differ ; " and that, though the majority of churches baptized only the offspring of visible saints, there were some who were much inclined to extend the application of the rite "as thinking more liberty and latitude in this point ought to be yielded then hath hitherto bene done."^ These views were by no means confined to Massachusetts. Henry Smith of Wethersfield, Conn., wrote to Richard Mather, under date of August 23, 1647:* " We are at a Loss in our parts about members Children, being received into Communion, because it is undetermined, in the extent of it, at the Spiodf our thoughts here are that the promise made to the Seed of Confederates, Cen. 17, takes in all Children of Confederating Parents." Samuel Stone, the teacher of the Hartford church, sympa- 1 Pastor at Watertown 1630 to his death, July, 1644. His views are expressed in A Reply to a Confutation 0/ some Grounds for In/ant Baptism ; asalso. Concerning the /or7n of a Church, put forth against me by one T. Lamb, London, 1645. Quotations were made in the Preface to the Propositions of 1662, p. x. See later page of this worlc. 2 In a manuscript entitled A plea for the Churches of Christ in New-England, quoted b- Increase IVIather, First Principles, pp. 10, 11. 3 For the whode of this valuable statement, see ante, pp. 168-171. ■1 Pastor at Wethersfield 1641-1648. His letter is in I. Mather, First Principles, p. 24. ' The Cambridge Synod was still in being, having just adjourned for the second time. DEVELOPMENT OF HALF-WAY VIEWS 253 thized with his Wethersfield neighbor,' and John Warham of AVindsor, was of the same mind.'' Nor was Plymouth colony without its share of advocates for the larger practice. Ralph Partridge of Duxbury, one of the three ministers appointed to draw up a platform for the consider- ation of the Cambridge Synod,' inserted the following statement in the form which he laid before that body in 1648:'' ' ' The persons unto whom the Sacrament of Baptisme is dispensed (and as we conceive ought to be) are such as being of years, and converted from their Sins to the Faith of Jesus Christ, do joyn in Communion and Fellowship with a particular visi- ble Church, as also the children of such Parents or Parent, as having laid hold of the Covenant of grace (in the judgement of Charity) are in a visible Covenant, with his Church and all their Seed after them that cast not off the Covenant of God by some Scandalous and obstinate going on in Sin." A similar position was advocated by Richard Mather in the form of the Platform presented by him." These views were cham- pioned in the Synod by some influential members, and had the support of a majority; but were omitted from the final draft of the Platform owing to the opposition of a few led, it would seem, by Rev. Charles Chauncy." It must have been plain by 1650 in what direction the tide was running, and it could not be long before some church would begin to practice what so many eminent divines approved. Commenda- tions of the larger view continued. [The saintly Thomas Shepard of Cambridge declared himself in its favor just before his death in 1649.' By that time. Cotton was willing even to baptize adopt- -~ 1 Letter to R. Mather, June 6, 1650, First Principtes, p. g, in which he affirms " that Children of Church members have right to Church membership by virtue of their Fatliers Covenant .... Hence, i. If they be presented to a Church, and Claim their Interest, they cannot be denyed," and speaks as if he had long been of this mind. 2 Ibid., Warham changed his mind later on this question. As early as 1630, he told Fuller of Plymouth, that the visible "church may consist of a mixed people, godly and openly un- godly." He favored the Half- Way Covenant, and introduced its use into his own church in Jan- uary, 1658. In March, 1665, he announced that he had been convinced that he was in error, and the practice was abandoned by the church till 1668. See / Colt. Mass. Hist. See, III : 74 ; Walker, Hist. First Ch., Hart/ord, pp. 189, 190. 3 See ante, p. 175 . 4 First Principles, p. 23. ^ See ante, p. 224, for Mather's own words. ^ See ante, p. 181, and Preface to Propositions of 1662, p. xii post. Cotton Mather says that John Norton was one of the supporters of the larger view in the Synod, but " the fierce oppo- sitions of one eminent person caused him that was of 2^ peaceable temper to forbear urging them any further." Magnatia, ed. 1853-5, I : 291. ' Preface to Propositions of 1662, on later page; First Principles, p. 22. 254 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT ed children of church members, provided their parents had been religiously inclined, land John Eliot' and probably Richard Mather were of the same opinion.^ The year 1650 saw Samuel Stone of Hartford fully committed to the Half-Way Covenant theory, anxious to have a new Synod called which might introduce uni- formity of practice, and confident that, unless some such meeting was held that very year and reason to the contrary given, the Con- necticut churches would begin the use of the new system.' In 165 1, Peter Prudden of Milford, second only to Davenport in ability among the ministers of New Haven colony, declared in a letter of peculiar force of argument his hearty support of the Half- Way Covenant position.'' Thus,Imore than ten years before the Synod of 1662, there were warm advocates of the larger ap- plication of baptism among the chief religious leaders of each of the New England colonies, and the affirmation is within the bounds of probability that even then the weight of opinion among ministers in every colony, with the possible exception of New Haven, was on that side. But while this was true of the elders of the churches as a body, there was a considerable degree of op- position to the new theories among the brethren of the churchesTI Just how much it is impossible to say, but there is reason to believe that the pastors were more ready to welcome the larger practice than the churches.^ The ministers were, on the whole, -^keenly alive to the danger of losing hold of a large class of the population; their pastoral labors lent weight to those practical arguments which had much to do in convincing men of the de- sirability of the Half- Way Covenant; while in almost every church enough sticklers for the old ways would be found to make any- thing like unanimous action difficult to obtain in abandoning what 1 The Apostle to the Indians, teacher of the Roxbury church. 2 First Principles^ pp. 5, 6. 3 Ibid., p. g. Letter of June 6, 1650. ^ Preface to Propositions of 1662, pp. xi, xii, on later page of this work ; a selection is given in First Principles, pp. 25, 26. 5 Cotton Mather, Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, II : 3", 312, says, speaking of the state of affairs after 1662, "Very gradual was the procedure of the churches to exercise that church-care of their , children, which the synodical propositions had recommended ; for, though the pastors were generally ^ principled for it, yet, in very many of the churches, a number of brethren were so stiffly and fiercely set the other way, that the pastors did forbear to extend their practice unto the length of their Judgment." This must have been as true of the decade before 1662. ATTITUDE OF- THE CHURCHES 255 some deemed the safeguards of church purity. This fact accounts for the slowness with which the Half-Way Covenant practice was introduced into the churches, long after it had been largely ac- cepted by the ministers. In what church the agitation of this question as a practical issue was first commenced is hard to say. Certainly the matter was under discussion at Salem in 1652, and by 1654, if not earlier, had resulted in the acceptance of Half- Way Covenant principles. But though this adhesion to the new views was reaffirmed in 1661, the opposition of a few prevented the actual administration of baptism there till July, 1665.' The church in Dorchester, of which that earnest advocate of the new methods, Richard Mather, was pastor, discussed the question in the opening weeks of 1655, and with the result that:" ' ' it came to vote & by divers was voted y' they were members & that haveinge children they should have y" baptized if y'"selves did take hold of their ffathers Covenant (but w' that takeing hold of Covenant is, was not Clerely agreed upon) albeit y""selves beinge examinyed were Sound neither fiit flor the Lords table nor voteing in the Church but this & other thinges seemed strange and unsaffe unto Divers in Conclusio soe it was 4 Lres were sent to the churches of Boston, Rox- bury, Dedham & Braintree to intimate unto y"" w' was by us intended if in the space of a month or 5 weekes we did not heare Reasons from y" against or y' it would be offensive now y' 11, (i) 54' there came 3 Lres one fro Boston Dedham & Roxbury in all w'' after kind and Religious salutations we fifind . . . Boston desires Rather our fforbearance & declares ther 2 votes upo w' we had done Dedham sees not Light to goe so farre as we & Roxbury though divers of y" fleare it might make th . . . * & bring in time the Corruption of old England w""" we fHed ffrom yet have voted that they see noe cause to diswade us." Thus dissuaded on the whole, the matter continued one of debate for years at Dorchester,* and it was not till January 29, 1677, when Richard Mather had been more than seven years in 1 Church records in White, N. E. Congregationalism^ pp. 49, 50, 60, 61 ; First Princi- ples^ p. 27. 2 Records First Ck. at Dorchester^ Boston, iSgi, pp. 164, 165. ^ /. e., March ii, 1655. * Illegible. ^ See Dorch, Records, pp. ^5, 36, 69-75, An illustration of the diversity of feeling at Dor- chester is the exclamation of the writer in the church book: " 27 7 57 . . . same daye Martha minott p'sented by her ffather — though he was noe memb accordinge to our church order ; but a Corruptio Creepinge in as an harbenger to old england practice viz. to make all members ; (w<=ii god p'vent in mercye." Ibid., p. 168. It does not appear that the child was baptized till 1665, after her mother had been admitted to full communion (p. 174): but one can sympathize with the death- bed lament of Richard Mather over his ill-success in introducing the Half-Way practice. 256 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT his grave, that the Dorchester church adopted the Half-Way practice.' But other churches were meanwhile debating the subject also. A letter of Rev. Nathaniel Rogers, written from Ipswich, in January, 1653, declared of his church:" "We are this week to meet in the Church about it, and I know nothing but we must speedily fall to practice. If we in this shall be Leaders, I pray beg wis- dom from the Father of Lights." But the discussions of that week dragged on, and it was not till 1656, when Thomas Cobbett was preaching in Rogers's room, that the Ipswich church became in truth the leader in the new prac- tice. Its vote, which would seem to be the first actual adoption of the full system as the rule of a New England church, is in part as follows:^ " I. We look at children of members in full communion, which were about [i. e. , not more than] fourteen years old when their father and mother joined the Church, or have been born since, to be members in and with their parents. . . . 4. We look upon it as the Elder's duty to call upon such children, being adults, and are of understanding, and not scandalous, to take the covenant sol- emnly before our Assembly. 5. We judge that the children of such adult persons, that are of understanding, and not scandalous, and shall take the Covenant, shall be baptized. 6. That notwithstanding the baptizing the children of such, yet we judge that these adult persons are not to come to the Lord's Supper, nor to act in Church votes, unless they satisfy the reasonable charity of the Elders or Church, that they have a work of faith and repentance in them." ^ Naturally this debate was not confined to Massachusetts. The questions raised were of interest to the churches throughout New England, and nowhere more than in Connecticut, where Half- Way Covenant views had been advocated by Stone and Warham and Smith. It so happened, also, that from 1653 to 1659 one of the bitterest quarrels in New England ecclesiastical history raged at Hartford, and spite of the efforts of the ministers and legisla- ture of Connecticut and the advice of elders from other colonies, caused the secession of a considerable body from the Hartford ' Ihid.^ pp. 69-75, vote of "29 II 76." = The letter is dated i8, ii. 1652, z. e., Jan. 18, 1653. First Principles^ pp. 23, 24. = Ipswich Ch. Rec. in Felt, Eccles. Hist. N. E., II : 141. ' Notice that voting is not a Half- Way Covenant privilege. This reservation is made equally clearly in the Decisions of 1657 and 1662. The statement of Prof. Johnston (Connecticut, p. 227) that the Half-Way system "gave every baptized person a voice in church government" is baseless. THE QUESTION IN CONNECTICUT 257 church and the settlement of Hadley, Mass." This quarrel has not infrequently been represented as the beginning of the Half-Way Covenant controversy in New England. No opinion is more erro- neous. At a later period, from about 1666 to 1670, the question of baptism tore the Hartford flock, and at the latter date resulted in its division for the second time and the formation of the present Second Church in Hartford; but in the first division baptism was no factor. A quarrel between Samuel Stone, the teacher, and Wil- liam Goodwin, the ruling elder, in regard to the choice of a suc- cessor to the pastorate made vacant by the death of Thomas Hooker, involved the whole church, and while essentially a per- sonal dispute, raised some interesting questions as to the relations of the officers and brethren in a Congregational church. But while there is no evidence that the extent of baptism was one of the dividing issues between 1653 and 1659 in the Hartford church, this condition of turmoil existing in the leading church in the colony very probably led to a considerable discussion of all ques- tions affecting church procedure throughout the little common- wealth. It was rather as the consequence of this general agitation than of the special problems at Hartford that a petition was pre- sented to the Connecticut General Court, at its session May 15, 1656, by persons whose names have not been preserved, but desir- ous, it would seem, of some enlargement of the terms of baptism. The form of the petition is unknown to us, but the Court voted that : ' "Mr. Governo' [John Webster], Mr, Deputy [Thomas Welles], Mr. [John] Cul- lick & Mr. Tailcoat [John Talcott] are desired in some convenient time to advise w"" the elders of this Jurisdiction about those things y' are p'sented to this Courte as grevances to severall persons amongst vs ; (and if they judge it nessisary,) to crave their healpe & assistance in drawing up an abstract from the heads of those things, to be p'sented to the Gen ; Courtes of the severall vnited CoUonyes, and to desire an an- swer thereunto as sone as conveniently may be." ' The work appointed to this committee was duly performed. 1 The story of this quarrel was told for the first time with fullness by G. L, Walker, History of the First Church in Hartford^ pp. 146-175. 2 Conn, Records^ 1 : 281. s How little this dispute was connected with the quarrel of 1653-g in the Hartford church is illustrated by the fact ' that Webster and CuUick were among the most prominent of Stone's opponents. 258 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT A list of questions was drawn up' and sent to the General Court of Massachusetts during the summer of 1656. Whether the other colonies were also consulted, as the vote directed, it is perhaps impossible to say.' Thus overtured, the Massachusetts Court took prompt action at its session October 14, 1656, as follows:' "A letter from the Generall Court of Conecticot was presented to this Court, (together w"" seuerall qutestions of practical! concernment in the churches,) wherein they propound theire desires of our concurranc w"" them in desiring the help of the elders, for the resolution and clearing the sajd questions, and for that end that a tjme and place of meeting be assigned by this Court, and notice thereof may be given to the rest of the colonjes, that they may haue the op'tunitje to contribute theire asistance to this worke. The Court, considering the premises, doth order, that M' Mather,* M' AUyn,' M' Norton, « M' Thatcher,' of the county of Suffolke, M' Bulkely,' if he cann come, M' Chauncey,' M' Syms,'» M' Sherman," M' Michells,'^ of the county of Midlesex, M' Norrice,'' M' Ezekiell Rogers,''' M' Whiting," iVt' Cobbet,'" of y' county of Essex, be desired to meet at Boston the first fifth day of June" next following, to conferr and debate the sajd qufestions, or any other of like nature that shall or maybe propounded to them by this Court, either amongst themselves or w"" such divines as shallbe sent to the sajd meeting from the other colonjes ; and it is expected that the resolution of the sajd qutestions, together w"' the grounds & reasons thereof, be pre- sented to the Generall Court, to be coinunicated and coinended to such of ours that want information therein ; and it is heereby ordered, that Robert Turner" take care to provide convenjent entertaynement for the sajd gent" during theire attendance on the sajd meeting, and that the charges of those of this jurisdiccon be defrajed by the Tresurer ; and it is further ordered, that, together w"" the letter & quserjes from Con- ecticott, a coppy of this order be sent to all the confoederated colonjes, w"" a letter from this Court desiring theire assistanc in this buisnes at the tjme & place afore- sajd, y'vthe secretary send a copy hereof, w"" the quserjes, to one of the elders of each county." Pursuant to this order the secretary, Edward Rawson, sent out the letters to the various colonial governments on October 22, 1 These were doubtless substantially the XXI Questions answered by the Assembly at Boston in 1657. The list given by Trumbull, Hist. Conn., 1 : 302, 303, is an error. It really belongs in 1666. See Conn. Records, II ; 54, 55, 2 The letter o£ the New Haven Court in reply to that of the Massachusetts body, February, 1657, seems to imply that they had not been directly consulted by Connecticut. 3 Records . . . Mass. Bay, III; 419; IV: i: 280. ^ Richard Mather, Dorchester: all the names are those of ministers. s John AIHn, Dedham. ^ John Norton, Boston. ' Thomas Thacher, Weymouth. s Peter Bulkeley, Concord ; nearly 74 years old. ^ Charles Chauncy, Pres. Harvard CoU. 1654-1672. ^° Zechariah Symmes,, Charlestown. 11 John Sherman, Watertown. 12 Jonathan Mitchell, Cambridge. 13 Edward Norris, Salem. *■* Of Rowley. 1^ Samuel Whiting, Lynn. ^^ Thomas Cobbett,Ipswich. 1^ /. e., June 4, 1657. IS Robert Turner was one of the licensed innkeepers of Boston. See Mass, Records, passim. CALL OF THE ASSEMBLY OF 1657 259 1656.' That to New Haven was thirty-six days on its way." Their reception by the three lesser colonies was various. Plymouth appears to have taken no action. Connecticut of course responded favorably, the Massachusetts Court had carried into effect the Connecticut request, and on February 26, 1657, the Court of Con- necticut voted :^ "This Court doth order that Mr. Warham/ Mr. Stone,* Mr. Bh'nman' & Mr. Russell' bee desired to meet, the first fifth day of June next, at Boston, to conferre & debate the questions formerly sent to the Bay Court, or any other of the like nature that shall bee p'pounded to them by that Court or by o' owne, w"' such divines as shall bee sent to the said meeting from the other Collonies; and that they make a returne to the Gen: Court of the issue of their consultations." At the same time a proposition to send twelve questions in addition, the nature of which it is now impossible to determine, was defeated.' With regard to provision for the expenses of their representatives the Court of Connecticut was no less careful than that of Massachusetts : " "It is also ordered, that the Deputies, w"" the Deacons of' the Church in each towne, take care that their said Eld" bee comely & honorably attended & suited w* necessaries in their journey to the Bay and home againe ; and that the same, w"" their p'portion of charge in the Bay, during their abode there vpon this seruice, bee dis- charged by the Treasurer; and also the Deputies are impowered to presse horses (if need bee,) for the end aforesaid." And, not content with providing for the material wants of the Assembly, the Court ordered that Wednesday, March 25th, should : " "bee obserued & kept a day of publicke humilliation, by all the Plantations in this [Connecticut] Jurisdiction, to seeke the presence, guidance & direction of the Lord in reference to the Synnod." Two days before the Court of Connecticut had given its favor- able response to the overtures from Massachusetts, the legislative body of New Haven colony had considered the same proposition and come to exactly opposite conclusions. In that colony the influence of John Davenport, the pastor of the New Haven church, was dominant and was set counter to the Half-Way Covenant 1 A^eTtj Haven Records, II : ig6. ^ fljid. 3 Conn. Records^ I; 288. "* John Warham, Windsor; all were ministers. ^ Samuel Stone, Hartford. ^ Richard Blinman, New London. ' John Russell, Wethersfield. ^ Conn. Records^ 1 : 288. » Ibid., p. 289. " Ibid., p. 293. 26o THE HALF-WAY COVENANT theories. It was natural, therefore, that when the letter from Massachusetts was read to the Court at New Haven on February 24, 1657,' and "the help of such elders as were present" was taken, that colony should refuse to have part in the proposed Assembly. Their declinature was set forth in a long letter signed by their governor, Theophilus Eaton, and addressed to the Massachusetts Court." They breathe not a little jealousy of their Connecticut neighbors, and hold that the Connecticut Court in dealing with its petitioners should have imitated the good example of Massachu- setts as illustrated in the summary treatment of Child and his associates in 1646. They are fearful that a synod may bring in results of which they could not approve, but which they would find it hard to resist.^ They are especially suspicious of the motives of the Connecticut petitioners, who, they tell the Massachusetts Court, they : ■" "heare . . . are very confident they shall obteyne great alterations, both in ciuill gouernm' and in church discipline, and that some of them haue procured or hyred one as their agent to maintayne in writing, (as is conceived) that parishes in England, consenting to and continewing their meetings to worship God, are true churches, and such persons comeing ouer hether, (w'hout holding forth any worke of faith, &c.,) haue right to all church priveledges." For their own part the New Haven representatives counsel a firm adherence to the old ways. They : ^ " hope the generall courts, who haue framed their ciuill polity and lawes according to the rules of Gods most holy word, and the elders and churches who haue gathered and received their discipline out of the same holy scriptures, will vnanimously im- prove their power and indeavours to preserue the same invyolably." And finally they plead the recent removal or death of a number of their ministers as an excuse for non-representation in the Assem- bly, a representation which, it is easy to see, they were anxious to 1 New Haven Records^ II : 195 ; the date is given in the old style as " 24*11 12*11 jn", 1656." 2 Ibid., 196-198. Dated Feb. 25, 1656 [7]. 3 " Though they [i. e. the N. H. Court] approved y" readines to afford help when the case requires it, yet themselues conceive that the elders of Connecticote colony, wMi due assistance from their court, had bine fully sufficient to cleare and maintayne the truth and to suppress the boldness of such petition's, (according to a good president you gaue y* colony, some yeares since, in a case not much diiTerring,) w^hout calling a synod, or any such meeting, woh in such times may prove dangerous to yo puritie and peace of these churches and colonies.'* For the case of Child see ante^ pp. 164-181. ■> Ibid. •■• Ibid., 197. MEETING OF THE ASSEMBLY, 1657 261 avoid. In order, however, that there should be no mistake regard- ing their conservative position on the points at issue, they accom- panied their letter by a formal reply to the proposed Questions, drawn up by John Davenport, and bearing the approval of the Court, — a document designed for presentation to the Assembly, should it be held.' The refusal of New Haven and the non-action of Plymouth had no effect on the meeting of the Ministerial Assembly." Most of the thirteen ministers chosen by Massachusetts and the four representatives of Connecticut came together at Boston, June 4, 1657, and their debates lasted till the 19th of the month." Of the course of discussion and the events of the meeting we know nothing. The result could not have been unanimous, if Chauncy, later the champion of the conservative view, was present. But there was doubtless substantial agreement in the conclusions at which the assembly arrived. The membership of the children of church members was affirmed. That membership was declared to be personal and permanent, and sufficient to entitle the mem- ber by birth, even though not personally regenerate, to trans- mit membership and a right to baptism to his children, on con- dition of an express acknowledgment on his part of at least an intellectual faith and a desire to submit to all the covenant obli- gations implied in membership. Yet though this membership is complete, as far as it goes, it is not sufficient to admit to full communion or to a vote in church affairs. For these further privileges a profession of personal regeneration is necessary. The result was drawn up in the form of answers to each of the twenty-one questions,* written in a clear and often forcible style; and was from the pen of Richard Mather of Dorchester." 1 Ibid., 198. ! This meeting, even in the action of the legislatures of the time, is loosely called a " Synod." It lacked however the essential element of representatives of the churches to make it a properly constituted synod. See Cambridge Platform, ante, p. 234. s The Result is thus dated. Regarding the attendance Nathanael Mather says: "There being but about twenty called . . . and of those twenty, two or three met not with the rest." Preface to A nswer to XXI Questions, on later page. * Large extracts are given at the conclusion of this chapter. 5 See Dexter, Congregationalism as seen: Bibl., p. 287. The result was never officially published. A copy was taken over to England, probably by Increase Mather, and published at London, 1659, with a preface by Nathanael Mather. 262 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT The Assembly having fully accepted the Half- Way Covenant principles, its members went to their homes. Whether the con- clusions were presented to the Massachusetts Court, as directed in the call, it is impossible to say. No action regarding them is entered in the Records of that commonwealth. But in Connecti- cut their reception was noted as follows:' ' ' A true coppy of the Counsells answere to seuerall questions sent to the Mas- sachusets from o' Generall Court, being p'sented to this Court, signed by the Reuer- end Mr. Sam ; Stone, in the name of the rest of the Counsell, They doe order that coppies should goe forth to the seu'all Churches in this Collony as speedily, & if any exceptions bee against any thing therein, by any Church that shall haue the consideration thereof, the Court desires they would acquaint the next Gen ; Court in Hartford, in Octo'' : that so suitable care may bee had for their solution & satis- faction." ■ .. " r Yet though the churches were thus urged and though the church at Windsor, if no other, began practicing the recommenda- tions of the Assembly on January 31, 1658," no "exceptions" are known to have been presented to the General Court. That this was the case was not due to any such degree of unanimity in favor of the newer views among the brethren of the churches of Connecti- cut as existed among the ministers. It is scarcely probable that other churches immediately followed the example of Windsor.' Public attention in Connecticut was diverted from the baptismal question by the aggravated form which the dispute in the Hart- ford Church had assumed, and by the fact that the quarrel had provoked a similar personal disagreement between a portion of the Wethersfield church and its minister, John Russell.* This protracted controversy, in which baptism was not a prime fac- tor, issued in 1659 and 1660, in the removal of ex-Gov. John Webster, William Goodwin, the ruling elder of the Hartford church. Rev. John Russell, and other persons of prominence in the com- munity to Hadley, Mass. But though public attention was drawn 1 Conn. Records^ 1 : 302, Aug. 12, 1657. " Church Records, in Stiles, History of Ancient Windsor, New York, 1859, p. 172. 3 As late as 1666, John Davenport was able to affirm that, beside the churches in what had been New Haven colony and at Stratford and Norwalk, Farmington, "the sounder parte of Wind- sor," and, he thinks, Norwich favored the old way. 3 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc, X : 60. The Half- Way Covenant was probably first used at Hartford soon after 1666. Trumbull, Hist. Conn., I ; 471, fell into the great error of holding that the system was not introduced into practice in Conn, till i6g6. ^ See Conn. Records, 1:319; Trumbull, Hist. Conn., T: 309, 310. CONTINUED DIVISION OF FEELING 263 aside for a time, the Half-Way Covenant views steadily won ground in Connecticut, and when the controversy reappeared the opponents in the churches were clearly in the minority." In Massachusetts a similar division of sentiment, greater by far among the brethren than among the pastors of the churches, probably prevented any immediate action favorable to the Half- Way Covenant system from the General Court. Discussion con- tinued, and brought with it danger of serious division. (The sit- uation was made more critical when the Restoration, in 1660, brought into power in England the party hostile to the New England church-way.'' It seemed more than ever desirable that uniformity of practice should prevail; and the civil power, which had taken the initiative in securing the decisions of 1648 and 1657, once more interfered. 1 The Assembly of 1657 had been a mere meeting of at most a score of ministers. (The General Court of Massachusetts determined to call a proper Synod, com- posed of all the ministers and the representatives of all the churches in the colony. Its action would not affect Connecticut, New Haven, or Plymouth, save by example, since these colonies were not asked to share in the Synod ; but for Massachusetts it was hoped the action would be definitiveTj The prime matter to be settled was that problem of baptism which the Cambridge Synod of 1646-8 had evaded, and which the Assembly of 1657 had answered so fully in the spirit of the Half-Way Covenant. Accordingly, on December 31, 1661, the Massachusetts Court is- sued this sharp and peremptory order: ' "This Court, hauing taken into consideration that there are seuerall questions & doubts yet depending in the churches of this jurisdiction concerning seuerall prac- ticall poynts of church disciplyne, doe therefore order & hereby desire, that the churches aforesajd doe send theire messengers of elders & brethren to Boston the 2* Twesday of the first moneth,'' then & there to discusse & declare what they 1 The year 1657 saw a curious limitation of the franchise in Connecticut, the causes of which are not very evident. {Conn. Records, 1 : 293 : " This Court doth order, that by admitted inhabi- tants, specified in the 7th Fundamental! [of the constitution of 1639], are meant only housholders that are one & twenty yeares of age, or haue bore ofBce, or haue 30 /. estate. ") But its connection with the Half-Way discussion, if any, is not apparent. See also Andrews, River Towns of Con- necticut, pp. 85-89. 2 See Palfrey, Hist. N. £■., If : 490. 8 Records . . . Mass. Bay, IV : 2 : 38. ^ I.e., March 11, 1662. 264 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT shall judge to be the minde of God, revealed in his word, concerning such ques- tions as shall be propounded to them by order of this Court referring to church orders as aforesajd, and that the seuerall churches take care to make due provition for the messengers by them sent. This Court doe further order, as a meete expedient for the furtheranc of th' ends proposed in calling a synod to be kept by the messengers of all y'' churches in this jurisdiction the 2'' Twesday in March next, that the neighbor- ing elders, w"" as much convenient speed as may be, doe meete together & con- sider of such questions, besides what is here vnder proposed, as they shall judge necessary to be then & there discussed for the setling of peace & trueth in these churches of Christ, & make theire returne w"" as much convenient speede as may be to y' Gou'no' or secretary, who is to speede away a copie thereof, w"" the Gen- erall Courts order, to the seuerall churches, requiring them to send theire messen- gers to attend the sajd meeting." The hasty gathering of the ministers of Boston and the adja- cent towns, thus peremptorily summoned, met at once, and added to the problem of baptism, which the Court had in mind, a second question, regarding councils and the mutual relations of. the churches, for the consideration of the Synod. The Court recorded the two subjects for discussion on the same page on which it min- uted the call for the deliberative body: ' Qucest I . Who are the subjects of baptisme. Quffist 2. Whither, according to the word of God, there ought to be a consco- ciation of churches, & what should be y" manner of it. This last question was returned to y" secretary by y' elders. Thus issued by the civil authorities of the commonwealth, the call for the Synod went forth to the Massachusetts churches. Its reception in them as a whole may perhaps be judged from the records of the Salem church' — " On the 26th of 12th month, ^ being the Sabbath day, was read an order from the Gen. Court, for calling of a Synod, this Church (as the rest of the Churches in the Colony) being desired to send their messengers of Elders and brethren to Boston on the loth of the ist month'' [etc]. ... It was left unto consideration till the ^ liz'd. This paragraph immediately follows the call quoted ahove, though of course a day or two must have intervened between the two votes to allow for a meeting of the ministers of the Boston vicinage, which the second vote implies had already taken place. The explanation is in the fact that the arrangement of the records of business at any particular meeting of the Court was seldom strictly chronological. See the editor's remarks in the prefaces to various volumes of the 2 White, iV. £. Congregationalism, p, 53. 3 This date is an error. It should be Jan. 26, 1662, a Sunday; Feb. 26, as here given, was Wednesday. ■1 The day mentioned in the call falls on March 11 and not the loth. MEETING OF THE SYNOD, 1 662 265 Lord's day following, when Major Hawthorne, Mr. Bartholmew, and the Pastor' were chosen to go to the Synod at the time appointed." The second Tuesday in March, 1662, saw, therefore, the com- ing together in the meeting-house of the First Church' in Boston of more than seventy representatives^ of the Massachusetts churches. We know nothing in detail of the organization of the body, nor are we able to identify more than a few of those who were probably present as actually there." It has been said, but the statement lacks positive proof, that the presiding officer at the sessions was Samuel Whiting, the venerable pastor at Lynn' — a man in every way fitted for the task. In the ranks of the minis- terial membership were such lights of the New England pulpit as John Wilson' and John Norton' of the First Boston Church, Richard Mather" of Dorchester, with his sons Eleazer" of Northampton, and Increase," just beginning his ministry in the Second Church of Bos- ton. John Allin" of Dedham was there, and Zechariah Symmes'^ of Charlestown; Salem sent John Higginson," Newbury the Presby- terianly inclined Thomas Parker.'* From Cambridge came the venerable Charles Chauncy,'" president of Harvard College; and the young, gifted Jonathan Mitchell,'" pastor of the Cambridge church; with them, also, was John Mayo," of the Second Boston 1 About this proportion of two representatives of the brethren to each minister must have been general, since all the ministers then in regular service in the colony numbered only 34, of whom, judging from the usual history of Synods, some must have been absent, and the total attend- ance was "above seventy." ^ Dexter, in Cong, Quart. ,^ IV: 274. 3 Ibid.^ from Mitchell, A nswer [to I. Mather] Apologetical Pre/ace^ p. 3. * A list, nearly complete, of those who would be entitled to a place in the Synod as ministers is given by Dexter, Cong. Quart.., IV: 274. 6 Dexter, Ibid. Drake, History 0/ Boston^ Boston, 1852-6, 1 : 361. His biography is in the Magnalia., ed. 1853-5, I: 501-511. Perhaps a hint of this is contained in Thompson's elegiac verses on Whiting, Ibid.^ " Profoundest judgment., writh a meekness rare, Preferr'd him to the Moderator's chair," etc. ^ Records . . . Mass. Bay, IV : 2 : 60. ' Dexter, Cong. Quart., IV: 274, omits Norton from his list of those possibly present. He returned from England, however, in time to take an active part in the closing session. See Letter of Increase Mather to John Davenport, in Hutchinson, Hist. Mass. Bay, ed. 1765, 1 : 224. s Records . . . Mass. Bay, Ibid. : Records First Ch. Dorchester, p 39. ^ Hutchinson, Ibid. " Increase Mather was a delegate from his father's church at Dorchester, Records, etc., p. 39. " Rec. Mass. Bay, Ibid. 12 Ibid. 13 White, N. E. Cong., p. 53. ^^ Hutchinson, Ibid. 15 Ibid. Doubtless as a representative of the Cambridge church. 18 Mather, Magnalia, ed. 1853-5, II: 99. " Hutchinson, Ibid. I8 266 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT church. The gathering included many from the rapidly thinning ranks of the first generation on New England soil; it numbered also the brilliant names which adorn the story of their children. And as the result of the Synod was but the working out of princi- ples inherent in the Congregationalism of the founders of New England, so the votes by which it was adopted came in no small measure from those who were among the pioneers in the settle- ment of our towns and churches. fOf all who were present, those most conspicuous in debate were Jonathan Mitchell' on the side favoring the Half-Way Cove- nant; and, probably, Pres. Chauncy'' among its opponents. To the persuasive skill of Mitchell, more than to any other, the result in 1662 was due, and the form in which it was cast was largely the product of his pen^ The Synod which assembled in March, 1662, found that it had a severe task. At least eight or nine of the seventy present,' and probably even more at the early sessions,' opposed any admission of Half-Way principles. This opposition included a man of great prominence, Pres. Chauncy, and the two ministers of the Second Church in Boston, Mayo and Increase Mather," the latter joined by his brother Eleazer of Northampton. They made a force formidable for quality if not for numbers. Thomas Parker of Newbury was a Presbyterian free-lance, though he had little fol- 1 Jonathan Mitchell was born in England in 1624, graduated Harvard College 1647, settled at Cambridge 1650, died July 9, 1668. Of brilliant powers of mind, marked piety, and kindly in spirit, he was one of the most prominent of the second generation of New England ministers. His biog- raphy is given by Mather, Magnalia^ II ; 66-113. See also Sibley, Harvard Graduates^ Cam- bridge, 1873, 1 : 141-157, where a full list of his writings and ample references to biographical sources will be found. 2 Charles Chauncy was born in England in 1589, educated at Cambridge, settled at Ware, Eng., in 1627, suspended by Laud 1635, came to Plymouth, Mass., 1638, and soon settled at Scituate. In 1654 he became the second president of Harvard, an ofhce which he retained till his death, Feb. ig, 1672. For his biography see Mather, Magnalia, 1 : 463-476 ; Allen, A m. Biog. Dict.y ed. 1857, pp. 213-215- 8 Mather, Magjtalia, II : 99. •• Mitchell, A nszver to Increase Mather's Apologeiical Pre/ace^ p. 3. " We suppose there were not FizJ Arg. 7. If no children be members of the visible Church, then we have no well-grounded hope according to ordinary course of dispensation, of the salvation of any dying Infants .• And the reason is, because salvation pertains to the Church, Isa. 45. 17. £p/i. 2. 12. & 5. 23, 26. /o/i. 4. 22. Act. 2. 27. Luke 19. 9. . . . [1. 23 — p. 7. 1. 3.] Arg. 8. If some children were Members of the Church of God in the old Testament, then some children are Members of the Church of God in the dales of the new Testament .• But some chil- dren were Members of the Church in the time of the old Testa- ment. . . . [1. 7 — p. 8. 1. 4.] But all the Question will be about the consequence of the Proposition, and that may be cleared thus. 1. If the Church of the old Testament and the Church of the Gentiles under the new Testament, be for kind essentially the same, then if children were Members of that Church, they are also Members of these .• [modern Gentile churches] ... [1 9 p. 9.1.3.] 2. Again, If the consequence be not good, then it will follow EXTRACTS FROM THE RESULT OF 1657 293 that such Jews as were brought in by the Gospel into Church- estate, were great losers by embracing the Gospel; and the chil- dren losers by their Parents Faith, inasmuch as though in the former state, the children were Members with the Parents [1. 8. -p. II. 1.4.] 5. If children were once Church-members and do not continue to be Church-members still, then their Membership must have been repealed by the Lord, who alone could make such an altera- tion. ... [1. 7 — 1. 15.] I. If the Lord had made such an alteration . . . then in all likelihood Christ or his Apostles would have made mention of it.- . . . but now Christ and his Apostles in stead of mention- ing any such thing, do confirm the contrary, Mark 10, 13, 14, i6. Acts 2. 39. I Cor. 7. 14. . . . [p. II. 1. 23 — p. 12. 1. 13.J Quest. 2. Whether all children of whatever years or condition be so, as, I. Absent children nei'er brought to the Church. 2. Born before their Parents Coi'enantiiig. 3. Incorrigible of seven, ten, or twelve years old. 4. Such as desire not to be admitted with their Parents, of such an age. _, Ans. LQriely such children as are in their minority, covenant v/ith their Parents; therefore not all children of whatsoever years and conditions. We do not hereby exclude such as being defective in their intellectuals, are as children in respect of their incapacity^ . . . Yh- Children in their minority, though absent, covenant in their Parents. ... 3. Children born before their Parents cove- nanting, yet if in their minority when their Parents enter into covenant, do covenant with them. ... [p. 4. 1. i.J 4. There is no sufficient reason (at least ordinarily) to conclude a child of seven, ten, or twelve years old to be incorrigibleA ... [1. 4 — 1- 15.] ^ Quest. 3. Till what age shall they enter into Covenant with their Parents, whether sixteen, twenty one, or sixty? Ans. As long as in respect of age or capacity they cannot according to ordinary account, be supposed able to act in a matter of this nature for themselves, . . . much is to be left unto the discretion of Officers and Churches in this case. — Quest. 4. What Discipline a child is subject to, from seven to six- teen years old? [14] Ans. I. Church Discipline is taken either more largely for the act of a Church-member dispensed to a Church-member as such, by way of Spiritual watch, rebuke, d^c. ... Or more strictly, for the act of the whole Church, dispensed by a Member n 294 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT thereof; as in case of publick rebuke, admonition, excommunica- tion. ... In the first sense, children in their minority, are subject to Church Discipline immediately, but not in the second. 2. It is the Duty of the Elders and Church to call upon Par- ents to bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, and to see as much as in them lieth, that it be effectu- ally done, . . . 3. Besides their subjection to Ecclesiastical Discipline, they are also subject to civil Discipline respectively according to their capacity, whether Domesticall, Scholasticall, or Magistraticall. Quest. 5. Whether a Father ?nay twice Covenant for his Children in Minority in several Churches 1 Ans. I. When a Parent is called to remove from one Church to another, he is also called to enter into covenant in that Church to which he removes. ... [p. 14. 1. 25 — p. 15. 1. 2.] 2. When the Parent thus removing, entreth into covenant, his children then in minority covenant in him : . . . 3. Hence it is the duty of Churches when they give Letters dimissory unto Parents, to insert the dismission of the children then in minority with them. "~ 4. Adult children yet under the power of the Parents and re- moving with them, are to give their personal consent unto this translation of their Membership, and so to be orderly dismissed and received with their Parents, otherwise they remain Members of the Church of which they were before. Quest. 6. Whether the end of a Deputy Covenant, be not to supply personall incapacity, or whether Children ripe for personall Covenanting in regard of age, should Covenant by a Deputy, as others that are unable thereunto ? Ans. I. Children in their minority, whose immediate Parents are in Church-Covenant, do covenant in their Parents; . . . ----^^. C hildren adult ought to covenant in their own Persons. To covenant in our own persons according to the sense of this Question, is nothing else but an orderly and Church profession of our P'aith, or a personall publick and solemn avouching of God, in an Ecclesiasticall way, to be our God, according to the covenant of his Grace, ... [p. 15. 1. 30 — p. 17. 1. 12.] Quest. 7. Whether as large Qualifications be not required of a Members child to the participation of the Lords Supper, and the privi- ledges of votes and censures, as were requirable of his Parents at their first entrance ? Ans. The holding forth of Faith and Repentance with an EXTRACTS FROM THE RESULT OF 1 65 7 295 ability to examine themselves, by way of confession, to the judg- ment of Charity, were all requirable in the Parent for admission into the Church to full communion, and the same is requisite for the regular admission of the Parents child being grown adult, unto his full communion with the Church. ... [p. 17. 1. 22 — p. 18. 1. 29.] . . . Concerning the power of voting, it is not rational that they should exercise a Church-power as to the administration of Church-Ordinances, which voting implies, who themselves are unfit for all Ordinances. ... [p. 18. 1. 33 — p. 19. 1. 6.] Ques. 8. Whether by Covenant seed, is meant the seed of immediate Parents onely, or of reinote also 1 Ans. The Gospel by Covenant seed, intends only the seed of immediate Parents in Church Covenant, as appears from i Cor. 7. 14. The Parents there spoken of are immediate Parents, their Progenitors were Heathens. The Gospel extends not the external Covenant beyond the immediate Parents. . . . [1. 13— 1. 26.] Ques. 9. Whether adopted Children and bond servants be Cove- nant-seed 2 Ans. Adopted children and Infant-servants, regularly and absolutely subjected to the Government and dispose of such heads of Families as are in Church-covenant, though they cannot be said to be their natural seed, yet in regard" the Scriptures (according to the judgment of many Godly Learned) extend to them the [20] same Covenant priviledges with their natural seed, we judge not any Churches who are like-minded with them, for their practise herein : All which nothwithstanding, yet we desire at present to leave this Question without all prejudice on our parts to after free disquisition. Ques. 10. Whether the child adtnitted by his Fathers Covenant, be also a Deputy for his seed, without or before personal Covenanting, or ■without &= before like personal qualifications in kind, as his Father was to enjoy when he became a Deputy ? Ans. The meaning of this Question in other terms we con- ceive to be this ; whether the child of a person joyned in Church- Covenant by means of his or her immediate Parents Covenant, though such a Parent be not admitted to, nor qualified for full communion, nor have covenanted in their own person, whether we say, the child of such a person is to be baptized: Whereunto we answer, in these following propositions. Propos. I. Infants either of whose immediate Parents are in Church-Covenant, do confEederate with their Parents, and are therefore Church-members with them. See Ans. to Quest, i. ' Perhaps to such children should be inserted. 296 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT Propos. 2. It is the duty of those Infants when grown up to years of discretion, though not yet fit for the Lords Supper, to own the Covenant they made with their Parents, by entring thereinto in their own persons, and it is the duty of the Church to call upon them for the performance thereof; as appeareth by Scripture examples of persons both called to, and entring into Covenant, many of whom could not be looked upon as person- ally Gracious, and therefor not fit for all Ordi- [21] nances and full communion, Deut. 29. 12, 14. 2 Chron. 15. 12. 2 Chron. 34. 31, 32. . . . Fropos. 3. Being accordingly called thereunto, if after Church- admonition and other due means with patience used, they shall refuse the performance of this great duty, or in case they shall (notwithstanding like means applied) any otherwise continue scandalous, it is the part of the Church to proceed with them to the censure of excommunication . . . [p- 21. 1- n — !• 24.] Propos. 4. In case they understand the grounds of Religion, are not scandalous, and solemnly own the Covenant in their own persons, wherein they give up both themselves and their children unto the Lord, and desire Baptism for them, we (with due reverence to any Godly Learned that may dissent) see not sufficient cause to deny Baptism unto their children, these rea- sons for the affirmative being proposed to consideration. 1. Church-Members without offence and not bapti- [22] zed, are to be baptized. The children in Question are Church-Members without of- fence and not baptized. Therefore the children in Question are to be baptized. 2. Children in the covenant of Abraham, as to the substance thereof, i. e. To whom the promise made to Abraham, as to the substance thereof doth belong, are to be baptized. The children in Question are children in the covenant of Abraham, as to the substance thereof. Therefore the children in Question are to be baptized. 3. Children in the same estate with those children under the Law, unto whom the seal of the righteousnesse of Faith, because in that estate was by Institution Divine to be applied, the Precept for so doing not repealed, and the reason for so doing still remaining are to be baptized. But the children in Question are children in the same estate [etc.] Therefore the children in Question are to be baptized. EXTRACTS FROM THE RESULT OF 1657 297 4. Either the children in question are to be baptized, or the Gospel dispensation forbids the application of the seal unto children regularly in Church-covenant, unto whom the Mosaical dispensation commanded it to be applied. [23] But the Gospel dispensation forbids not [etc.] . . . Therefore the children in question are to be baptized. [1. 6- 1. i6.] 5. Children unto whom the Gospel testifieth both the prom- ise and baptisme by vertue of that promise, to belong, ought to be baptized. The children in question are children unto whom [etc.] Therefore the children in Question ought to be baptized. Obj. The Parent though a Church-member, owning the Cov- enant in his own person, and qualified according to the prem- ises, is not admitted to full communion, therefore the child ought not to be baptized. Ans. The Church-act onely, and not any other act (much lesse defect) of the Parent is by Divine Institution, accounted to the child. The membership of the child is a distinct mem- bership, from the men;ibership [24] of the Parent. In case the Parents membership ceaseth by death or censure, the member- ship of the child remaineth still. The membership of the child is the same in kind with, and not inferiour to the membership of the Parent. Membership is a Relation, and therefore admits not of magis and minits, more or lesse : Members are better or worse, and communion is more or lesse; but membership admits not of degrees. Benjamin an Infant, but an hour old, is as truly a son as Reuben, a man of twenty two years of age. The child is baptized by vertue of his own membership, and not by vertue of his Parents membership. The Parents death is not with, us an obstacle of the Childs Baptism. Propos. 5. The same may be said concerning the children of such persons in question, who being dead or necessarily absent, either did or do give the Churches cause in judgment of charity, to look at them as thus qualified, and such, as had they been called thereunto would so acted.- For in Charity that is here done inter- pretatively, which is mentioned in the fourth Proposition expresly. Propos. 6. Though the persons forementioned own the Cove- ■nant according to the premises, yet before they are admitted to full communion (/. e. To the Lords Supper and voting) they must so hold forth their Faith and Repentance, unto the judgment of Charity by way of confession in the congregation, as it may appear 298 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT unto the Church, that they are able to examine themselves and to discern the Lords body. See the proof hereof in Ans. to Quest. 7"". Quest. II. Whether children begotten by an excommunicate person are to be baptized, he so remaining? [25] Ans. We cannot for the present answer the following Arguments for the Negative, i. Persons excommunicate are not members ... 2. Excommunicate Parents are to be looked at in Church-account as Heathens and Publicans. . . . 3. To baptize the children of the excommunicate, is to have Church-com- munion with the excommunicate.- ... [p. 25. 1. 12 — 1. 16.] Quest. 12. Whether a Child born of a justly ce?tsurable person, yet not actually excommunicate, be to be baptized 1 Ans. We answer affirmatively. ... [1. 19 — 1. 25.] Quest. 13. IVhether a Members Childs U7ifitness for seals, disableth not his seed for Membership or Baptism'! Ans. This question agreeing in scope with Quest. 10. We refer thither for Answer thereunto. ''""IJiiest. 14. Whether a Members Child be censurable for any thing buf scandalous actions, and not also for ignorance and inexperience 2 Ans. A Members child (like as it is with all other [26] mem- Jjers) is censurable only for scandalous sins. Mat. 18. 15, 18. i Cor. 5. II. . . . [1. 2 — 1. 6.] Quest. 15. Whether a Members Child must only examine himself, and may not be examined by others, of his finesse for seals 1 Ans. It is a duty of a Members child to examine himself, and yet he is also subject to the examination of others. . . . [1. II — 1. 24.] Quest. 16. Whether only Officers must examine in private or else publike before the Church ? Ans. Concerning their examination by the Elders in private, the former reasons conclude affirmatively. ... [27] Publick examination we also conceive to be regular, ... [p. 27. 1. 2.-1. 7.] Quest. 17. Whether the same grown Members Child must not be examined of his Cha7-itable' expei-ience, before Baptism, as well as before the Lords Supper 1 Ans. We think the Elders do well to take an account of chil- dren, concerning the Principles of Religion according to their capacity, before they be baptized. ... [1. 13 — 1. 23.] Quest. 18. Whether baptized Children sent away from the Church for settlement, and not intending return, are continually to be ac- counted Members ? EXTRACTS FROM THE RESULT OF 1 65 7 299 Ans. Baptized children though locally removed from the Church unto which they belong, are to be accounted Members, until dismission, death or censure dissolve that Relation, because Christ the Institutor of this Relation, onely by these waies dis- solveth the same. Quest. 19. Whether Historical Faith and a Mamelesse life fit a Members Child for all Ordinances and [28] Friviledges, and he must be examined only about them ? Ans. Not only historical Faith, /. e. The meer knowledge of the fundamental Doctrine of Faith and a blamelesse life, but also such an holding forth of Faith and Repentance, as unto judgment of Charity sheweth an ability to examine themselves and to dis- cern the Lords body, is requisite to fit a Members child for all Ordinances and Priviledges, and his blamelesse life notwithstand- ing, a Members child is to be examined concerning the other •qualifications. ... [p. 28. 1. 11. — 1. 32.] Quest. 20. Whether if a Church-Member barely say, it repents me, though seventy times seven times follo'W-\2g\ing he relapse into the same gross evils, as lying, slander, oppression, &c. He be to be forgiven, and not censured 1 Ans. . . . Without the fruits meet for repentance, we are not called to forgive, Mat. 3. 8. Zuh. 17. 3. Notwithstanding ? Brother offends seventy times seven times, that is, many times, a definite number being put for an indefinite, yet whilst God enables him to repent, it is our duty to forgive. 'Tis not the number of offences, but the holding forth of repent- ance in the offender, that is the measure of our forgivenesse. . . . [p. 29. 1. 17 — 1. 29.] Quest. 21. Whether a Member under offence and not censured, or not with the highest Censure, can authoritatively be denied the Lords Slipper or other Church-priviledges? Ans. I. None but the Church can Authoritatively [30] deny to the Member his accesse unto the Lords Supper, because the power thereof is only delegated to that subject. Mat. 18. 17. 2. The Church cannot deny unto a Member his accesse unto the Lords Supper, untill she hath regularly judged him to be an •offender. 3. The censure of admonition is the first act whereby a Church doth judicially declare a Member to be an offender; therefore till the censure of admonition be past, a Member cannot Authorita- tively be denied communion in the Lords Supper, or other Church- priviledges, because of offence. 300 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT 4. After the sentence of Admonition is past, the offender now- admonished, may be (yea thereby is) Authoritatively denied to come unto the Lords Supper, and to vote in the Church, because he is judicially unclean, Lev. 22. 3, 4. & 7. 20, 21. Mat. 5. 23, 24. Though he be not yet Censured with the Censure of Excommuni- cation. 5. All which notwithstanding, there are cases wherein a Brother apparently discerned to be in a condition rendring him (should he so proceed to the Lords Supper) an unworthy Commu- nicant, may and ought regularly to be advised to forbear, and it is his duty to hearken thereunto. 6. Yet two things are here carefully to be attended. 1. That Brethren be not many Masters, taking upon them to advise and to admonish others to abstain without cause, or before the time. Jam. 3. i. 2. That none forbear to come worthily, which is their duty, because to their private apprehension, another is [31] supposed (at least) to come unworthily, which is their sin. 7. In case the Church shall see cause to advise a Member to forbear, and he shall refuse to hearken thereunto, his refusal being also a violation of Church Order, addeth contumacy to his offence, and thereby ripens the Offender for Censure. 19 4'\ 1657. Boston. N. E, PREFACE TO THE RESULT OF 1662 301 Result of the Synod of 1662 PROPOSITIONS I CONCERNING THE | SUBJECT of BAP- TISM I AND I CONSOCIATION of CHURCHES, \ Collected and Confirmed out of the WORD of GOD, | by a | SYNOD of ELDERS I AND I MESSENGERS of the churches | in Massachusets- Colony in New- England. \ Assembled at BOSTON, according to Appointment of the | Honoured GENERAL COURT, \ In the Year 1662. | | At a General Court held at Boston in New- | England the 8"' of October, 1662. | IHe Court having Read over this Result of the Synod, Judge meet to \ Commend the same unto the Consideration of all the Churches and | People of this Juris- diction ; And for that end doe Order the Printing \ thereof. \ By the Court. Edward Rawson Secret'. | | CAMBRIDGE .- \ Printed by ^. G. for Hezekiah Usher at Boston in | New-England. 1662. [ii Blank] [iii] THE PREFACE' to the CHRISTIAN READER; And especially to the Churches of Massachusets-CoXony ■ in NEW-ENGLAND. THat one end designed by God's All-disposing Providence, in leading so many of his poor people into this Wilderness, was to lead them unto a distinct discerning and practise of all the Wayes and Ordinances of his House according to Scripticre- pattern, may seem an Observation not to be despised. That we are fit or able for so great a service, the sense of our own feebleness forbids us to think. But that we have large and great opportunity for it, none will deny. For, besides the useful Labours and Contemplations of many of the Lords Worthies in other places, and in former times, contributing to our Help, and shewing our Principles to be neither novell nor singular, the advantage of Experience and Practise, and 1 This Preface was prepared after the close of the Synod, by order of the Massachusetts General Court, by the Committtee appointed by the Synod to report the results to the Court. It is probably from the pen of Jonathan Mitchell. See ante, p. 269. 302 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT the occasion thereby given for daily searching into the Rule, is con- siderable. And He that hath made the path of the just as a shining- light, is wont still to give unto them further light, as the progress of their path requires further practise, making his "Word a Lanthorn to their feet, to shew them their way from step to step, though haply sometimes they may not see far before them. It is matter of humbling to us, that we have made no better improveinent of our opportunities this way ; but some Fruits God hath given, and is to be praised for. In former years, and while sundry of the Lords eminent Servants, now at rest from their labours, were yet with us, A Platform of Church-Discipline, comprizing the brief suimne thereof, especially in reference to the Constitution of Churches (which was ottr first work when we came ijito this Wilderness^ was agreed upon by a Synod held at Cambridge, and published to the world : From which (as to the substance thereof) we yet see no cause to recede. Some few par- ticulars referring to the Continuation and Combination of Churches, needed yet a more ex-\iv'\plicite stating and reducing unto practise. For though the Principles thereof ivere incltcded in ivhat is already published, yet that there hath been a defect in practise (especially since of late years there was more occasion for it) is too too apparent: For the rectifying whereof, a more particular Fxplication of the Doc- trine also about these things, is now necessary. In order hereitnto, by the Care and Wisdome of our Honoured General Court, calling upon all the Churches of this Colony, to send their Elders and Messengers, this Synod was assembled, who after earnest Supplications for Divine Assistance, having consulted the holy Scriptures touching the Questions proposed to them, have proceeded to the following Issue j hoping that if it might seem meet to the Father of Lights to guide the Churches unto a right Understanding and Practice of his Will in these things also, the beauty of Christ's wayes and Spiritual Kingdome among us would be seen in some more com- pleatness then formerly. For that which was the prayer of Epaphras for the Colossians, otight to be both the prayer and labour of us all ; viz. that we might stand perfect and compleat in all the will of God: And we trust it is our sincere desire, that his Will, all his Will, and nothing else but his Will, might be done among us. To the Law and to the Testimony we do wholly referre our selves and if any thing in the following Conclusions be indeed found mt to speak according thereunto, let it be rejected. We are not ignorajit that this our Labour will by divers be di- versly censured ; some will account us too strict in the Point of Bap- tism, and others too laxe and large : But let the Scriptures be Judge between us all. There are two things, the Honour whereof is in a special manner dear to God, and which He camiot endure to be wronged in; viz. His Holiness, and His Grace. The Scripture is often putting us in 7ninde how mitch the Lord loveth Holiness, and that in his House, and in the holy Ordinances thereof, and how he abhorreth the contrary, Mai 2. ii. Psal. 93. 5. & 2. 6. Lev. 11. 44, 45. Ezek 22. 26. & 44. 7, 8. And hence neither dare we admit those unto the holy Table of the Lord, that are short of Scripture-qual- PREFACE TO THE RESULT OF 1 662 303 ifications for it j viz. Ability to examine themselves, and discern the Lords body ; Nor yet receive or retain those in Church-estate, and own them as a part of the Lords holy People, that are visibly and notoriously unholy, wicked and prophane : such we are bidden to put away from among us, i Cor. 5. 13. and therefore ought not to continue [v] among us. Neither may we administer Baptism to those whose parents are not under any Churchpower or Government any where. To baptize such, would be to give the Title and Livery to those that will not bear the yoke of Christs Disciples, and to put the holy Name of God upon them, touching whom we can have no toler- able security that they will be educated in the wayes of LLoliness, or in the knowledge and practise of Gods holy Will. Baptism, which is the Seal of Membership in the Church the Body of Christ, and an engaging Sign, importing us to be the devoted Subjects of Christ, and of all his holy Government, is not to be made a coinmon thing, nor to be given to those, between whom and the God-less licentious world there is no visible difference : This would be a provocation and dishonour to the Holy One of Israel. On the other hand, we finde in Scripture, that the Lord is very tender of his Grace ; that he delighteth to manifest and magnifie the Riches of it, and that he cannot endure any straitning or eclipsing thereof, ivhich is both dishonourable unto God, and injurious unto men, Gal. 221. Eph. 2. 7. & 3. 2, 6, 8 Rom 11. i, 5. Acts 15. 10, II. & 10. 15 & 20. 24, 26, 27. And in special he is large in the Grace of his Covenant which he maketh with his visible Church and People, and tender of having the same straitned. ILence when he takes any into Covenant with himself, he will not only be their God, but the God of their seed after them in their generations, Genes. 17, 7, 9. And although the apostate wicked parent (that re- jecteth God and his Wayes) do cut off both himself and his Children after him, Exod. 20. 5. & 34. 7. Yet the Mercy and Grace of the Covenant is extended to the faithful and their seed unto a thousand generations, if the successive parents do but in the least degree shew themselves to be lovers of God, and keepers of his Covenant and Commandments, so as that the Lord will never reject them till they reject him, Exod 20. 6. Deut. 7. 9. Psal 105. 8, 9. Rom. 11. 16 - - 22. Hence we dare not (with the Antipadobaptist') exclude the Infant-children of the faithful /r^w the Covenant, or from Member- ship in the visible Church, and consequently not from Baptism the Seal thereof. Neither dare we exclude the same children from Mem- bership [or put them out of the Church) when they are grown up, while they so walk and act, as to keep their standing in the Covenant and doe not reject the same. God owns them still, and they doe in some measure [vi] own him : God rejects them not, and there- fore neither may we ; and consequently their children also are not to be rejected. Should we reject or exclude any of these, we should shorten and straiten the grace of God' s Covenant, more then God himself doth, and be injurious to the Souls of men, by putting them from under those Dispensations of Grace, which are stated upoyi the visible Church, whereby the children of God' s visible people are sue- 304 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT cessively in their Generations to be trained up for the Kingdome of Heaven, {whither the Elect member shall still be brought in the way of such means') a7id wherein he hath given unto Officers and Churches a sole7nn charge to take care of, and train up such, as a part of his flock, to that end; saying to them, as sometimes to Peter, If you love me, feed my lambs. In obedience to which charge we hope it is, that we are willing and desirous {though with the in- ference of no small labour and burthen to our selves) to commend these Truths to the Churches of Christ; that all the Flock, even the Lambs thereof, being duly stated under Pastoral Power, we might after a faithfull discharge of our Duty to them, be able to give up our account another day with joy and not with grief How hard it is to finde and keep the 7-ight middle way of Truth in these things, is known to all that are ought acquainted with the Co7itroversies there-about. As we have learned and believed, we have spokefi ; but not without remembrance that we are poor feeble frail men, and therefore desire to be conversant herein with much humility and fear before God and man. We are not ignorant of variety of judgetne7its concerni7ig this Subject ; which 7iotwithsland- ing, with all due 7'everence to Dissenters, after Religious search of the Scriptures, we have here offered what see7ns to us to have the fullest Evidence of Light from thence ; if 77iore ■)nay be added, and may be fou7id contained in the Word of God, this shall be 7io p7'ej- udice thereunto. He7ice also we are farre from desiring that there should be any rigorous i7nposition of these things {especially as to what is more nar7-ow therein, and more controversal among godly men.) If the Honoured Court see meet so farre to cuide their counte- nance and concurrence, as to commend a serious co7isideration hereof to the Churches, and to secure those that ca7i with clearness of judge7nent practise accordingly, from disturba7ice, that in this case 7nay be sicfficient. To tolerate, or to desire a Toleration of damnable He7'esies, or of Subverters of the Fundamentals &f Faith or Order, were an [vii] irreligious inconsistency with the love of true Religion : But to bear 07ie with another in lesser differences, about matters of a more difficult and controversal nature, and more remote f7'07n the Foundatio7i, and wherein the godly-wise are not like-fninded, is a Duty necessary to the peace a7id wel-fa7'e of Religion, while we are in the state of i7ifir7nity. In such thi7igs let not him that practiseth despise him thai forbeareth, a7id let not him that forbeareth judge him that practiseth, for God hath received him. But .as we do 7iot thus speak fro77i doubting of the Truth here delive7-ed (Paul knows where the Truth lyes, and is perswaded of it, Ro7n. 14. 14. yet he ca7i lovingly bear a Dissenter, and in like manner should we) So we do in the bowels of Christ fesus coTmnend the co7isideration of tliese thi7igs unto our Brethre7i i7i the several. Churches. What is here offered is fa7're fro77i bei7ig any declining from for7ner Principles, it is rather a pursua7ice the7-eqf; for it is all included z«, or deducible fro7n what we unanimously professed' PREFACE TO THE RESULT OF 1 662 305 and owned in the fore-mentioned Platform of Discipline, many years since. There it is asserted, that Children are Church-members ; That they have many priviledges which others (not Church-mem- bers) have not ; and that they are under Discipline in the Church, chap. 12. sect. 7. and that will infer the right of their children, they^ continuing to walk orderly. And the other viatter of Conso- ciation, or ^x^rm^ (?/■ Communion of Churches, is largely held forth Chap. 15. & 16. It may be an Objectioji lying in the mindes of some, and which many may desire a fuller Answer unto ; That these things, or some of them, are Innovations ?>? our Church-way es, and things which the Lord's Worthies in New-England, who are now with God, did never teach nor hold, and tlierefore why should we now, after so many years, fall upon new Opinions and Practises? Is not this a declining from our first Purity, and a blameable Alteration f To this : Although it were a sufficient Answer to say, That in -matters of Religion, not so much what hath been held or practised, as what should be, and what the Word of God prescribes, ought to be our Enquiry and our Rule. The people in Nehemiah's time are com- mended for doing as they found written in the Law, though from the dayes of Joshua the son of Nun, unto that day, the children of Israel had not done so, Nehem. 8. 14, 17. See the like 2 Chron. 30. 5, 26. 2 Kings 23. 21, 22. they did not tye themselves to former use and custome, but to the Rule of Gods written Word, and so [viii] should we. It was Thyatira'i' praise, that their good works were more at the last then at the first. Rev. 2. 19. The Lord's hum- ble andfaithfull Servants are not wont to be forward to think them,- selves perfect in their attainments, but desirous rather to make a progress in the knowledge and practise of God's holy Will. If there- fore the things here propounded concernijig the children of Chtcrch- members, and the Consociation of Churches, be a part of the Will of God contained in the Scriptures, {as we hope tlie Discourse ensuing will shew them to be) that doth sufficiently bespeak their entertain- ment, although .they had not formerly been held or heard of amongst us. Yet this must not be granted, tlie contrary being the Truth, viz. that the Points herein which may be most scrupled by some, are known to have been the judgement of the generality of the Elders of these Churches for many years, and of those that have been of most emitient esteem among us. As (besides what was before meiitioned from, the Platform of Discipline) may appear by the following Testi- monies frotn sundry Em,inent and Worthy Ministers of Christ in New-England, who are nozv with God. First, Touching the children of Church-members. Mr. Cotton hath this saying ; The Covenant and Blessing of Abraham is that which we plead for, which the Apostle saith is come upon us Gentiles, Gal. 3. 14. which admitteth the faithful and their Infant-seed, not during their lives, in case their lives should grow up to Apostacy or open Scandal, but during their infancy, and so long after as they shall continue in a visible profession of the 306 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT Covenant and Faith, and Religion of tiieir fathers: otherwise, if the children of the faithful grow up to Apostacy, or any open Scandal, (as Ishmad and Esau did) as they were then, so such like now are to be cast out of the fellowship of the Covenant, and of the Seals thereof. Grounds and Ends of Baptism of Children} p. io6. see also p. 133, 134. Again, The seed of the Israelites, though many of them were not sincerely godly, yet whilest they held forth the publick profession of God's people, Deut. 26. 3 11. and con- tinued under the wing of the Covenant, and subjection to the Ordi- nances, they were still accounted an holy seed, Ezra 9. 2. and so their children were partakers of Circumcision. Yea further, though them- selves were sometimes kept from the Lords Supper (the Passeover) for some or other uncleanness, yet that debarred not their children from [ix] Circumcision. Against this may it not seem vain to stand upon a difference between the Church of Israel and our Churches of the New-Testament — For the same Covenant which God made with the National Church of Israel and their seed, it is the very same for substance, and none other, which the Lord makes with any Congregational Church, and our seed. Quary g^ of Accommodation and Conununion of Presbyt. and Congregat. Churches} And the same for substance with those Queer ies, was delivered by hii7i in 12. Propositions, as Mr. Tho: Allen witnesseth in Epist. to the Reader before Treat, of Covenant and those Quxries? Now in the 8"" of those Propositions he hath these words : The children of Church-members with us, though baptized in their infancy, yet when they come to age they are not received to the Lords Supper, nor admitted to fellowship of Voting in Admissions, Elections, Censures, till they come to profess their Faith and Repentance, and to lay hold of the Covenant of their parents before the Church; and yet their being not cast out of the Church, nor from the Covenant thereof, their children as well as themselves being within the Covenant, they may be partakers of the first Seal of the Covenant.' Lastly, speaking to that Objection, That the Baptism of Infants overthrows and des- troys the Body of Christ, the holy Temple of God; and that in time it will come to consist of natural and carnal Members, and the power of Government rest in the hands of the wicked. He Answers, That this puts a fear where no fear is, or a causless fear. And in prose- cution of his Answer he hath these words ; Let the Primitive Practise be restored to its purity, (liz. that due care be taken of baptized me7n- bers of the Church for their fitting for the Lords Table) and then there will be no more fear of pestering Churches with a carnal generation of members baptized in their infancy, then of admitting a carnal company of hypocrites confessing their Faith and Repen- tance in the face of the Congregation. Either the Lord in the faithfulness of his Covenant will sanctifie the hearts of the baptized 1 London, 1647. "^ Certain Queries Tending to Accommodation and Communion 0^ Presbyterian and Congregatio7ial Churches, London, 1654, pp. 12, 13. 3 Allen's "To the Reader," p. [xiv]; prefaced to Cotton, Covenant 0/ Grace, etc. London, 1659. ^ Doubtless from a manuscript. PREFACE TO THE RESULT OF 1 662 307 Infants to prepare them for his Table, or else he will discover their hypocrisie and profaneness in the presence of his Church before men and Angels, and so prevent the pollution of the Lords Table, and corruption of the Discipline of the Church by their par- taking in them. Grounds and Ends of Baptism, &=€. p. 161, 163. See also Holiness of Church- [x] members^ p. 41, 51, 56, 57, 63, 87. Bloody Tenent washed,^ p. 44, 78. Mr. Hooker saith, Suppose a whole Congregation should con- sist of such who were children to Parents now deceased who were confederate, their children were true members according to the Rules of the Gospel, by the profession of their fathers Covenant, though they should not make any personal and vocal expression of their engagement as the fathers did. Survey,^ part i. p. 48. Again, We maintain according to truth, that the believing parent cove- nants and confesseth for himself and his posterity, and this covenanting then and now is the same for the kinde of it. Fart 3. /. 25. See p. 17, 18. &> part i. p. 69, 76, 77. And in the Preface, setting down sundry things, wherein he consents with Mr. R.* he ex- presseth this for one, thatlrA^sAs of visible Churches born of wicked parents, being members of the Church, ought to be baptized. In these (saith he) and several other particulars, we fully accord with Mr. jR. And Part t,. p. 11. It is not then the Question, whether wicked members while they are tolerated sinfully in the Church they and their children may partake of the Priviledges? for this is beyond question, nor do I know, nor yet ever heard it denied by any of ours. Mr. Philips, speaking of a people made partakers of Gods Covenant, and all the priviledges outwardly belonging thereto, he saith. Themselves and all that ever proceed from them, continue in the same state, parents and children successively, so long as the Lord continues the course of his Dispensation; nor can any alter- ation befall them, whereby this estate is dissolved, but some appar- ent act of God breaking them off from him. Reply, ^ p. 126. Again, speaking of that Holiness, i Cor. 7. 14. he saith, I take it of foederal holiness, whereby the children are with the believing parents taken by God to be his, and by him put under his covenant, and so they continue when men of years, though they never have any further grace wrought in them, nor have any other state upon them, then what they had when they were born. Ibid. p. 131. Again, a com- pany become or are a Church, either by conversion and initial con- stitution, or by continuance of the same constituted Churches successively by propagation of members, who all are born in Church-state, and under the covenant of God, and belong unto the Church, and are a Church successively so long as God shall con- tinue his begun dispensation, even as well & as fully as the first. Ibid, p. 145. ^ London, 1650. '^ London, 1647, 3 Survey o/the Summe of Churck-Discipiine^ London, 1648. ■* Prof. Samuel Rutherford. See ante^ p. 139. ^ George Phillips, pastor at Watertown, Mass. A Reply to a Confutation of some Grounds for Infant Baptism . . . put forth against me by one T. Lamb. London, 1645. 308 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT [xi] Mr. Shepard in Defence of the Nine Positions,^ p. 143. hath this expression. Concerning the Infants of Church-members, they are subject to Censures whensoever they offend the Church, as others are, though so long as they Uve innocently they need them not. And in the year 1649, not three moneths before his Death j' he wrote utito a friend a large Letter {yet extant under his own Hand) con- cerning the Membership of Children, wherein he proveth by sundry Arguments that they are Members, and answereth sundry Objections against it, and sheweth at large what great good there is in children's Membership. /;/ which Discourses he asserteth. That as they are Members in their infancy, so they continue Members when they are grown up, till for their wickedness they be cast out; and that they being Members, their seed successively are members also, until by Dissolution or Excommunication they be unchurched :■ That though they are Members, it follows not that they must come to the Lords Supper, but they must first appear able to examine themselves, and discern the Lords Body: That the children of godly parents, though they do not manifest faith in the Gospel, yet they are to be accounted of Gods Church, until they positively reject the Gospel, Rom. 11. That this Membership of children hath no tendency in it to pollute the Church, no more then in the Old Testament, but is a means rather of the contrary; And that there is as much danger (if not more) of the degenerating and apostatizing of Churches gathered of professing Believers, as of those that rise out of the seed of such. Mr. Prudden' in a Letter to a friend written in the year 1651. doth plainly express it to be his judgement. That the children of Church-members, are Members, and so have right to have their children baptized, though themselves be not yet admitted to the Lords Supper. LLis words are these : Touching the desire of such Members children as desire to have their children baptized, it is a thing that I do not yet hear practised in any of our Churches, But for my own part, I am inclined to think, that it cannot justly be denied, because their next Parents (however not admitted to the Lords Supper) stand as compleat Members of the Church, within the Church-Covenant, and so acknowledged that they might have right to Baptism. Now they being in Covenant, and standing Members, their Children also are Members by virtue of their Parents Covenant and Membership, as well as they themselves were by virtue of their Parents Covenant and Membership; And they have not renounced that Covenant, nor are justly censured for breach of that Covenant, but do own it and profess it, and by virtue of it claim the priviledge of it to their Children. T/ien he puts this his Argument into form thus : Those Children who are within the Covenant of the C[h]urch, and so Members of it. Bap- tism cannot be denied unto. But the Children in question are within the Covenant of the Church, and so Members of it. Therefore Baptism cannot be denied unto them. The Assumption is proved thus : The [xii] Children of such Parents as are within the Covenant of the Church, and so Members of the Church, are themselves within the Covenant of the Church, and so Members of it. But the Children in question are Children of such Parents as are in Covenant, and so Members of the ^ Thomas Shepard, pastor at Cambridge, Mass. T. Shepard & T. Allin, A Defence of the Answer jnade [by John Davenport] unto the q. Questions . . . against the Repty thereto by John Ball. London, 1645. 2 He died Aug. 25, 1649. 3 Peter Prudden, minister at Milford, Conn., died 1656. , PREFACE TO THE RESULT OF 1662 309 Church. Therefore they are so themselves. The Proposition is clear, because the Parents Covenant for themselves, and for their Children, Deut. 2g. 10, — 16. E%ek. 16. 8, 13. And God accepts both, Gen. 17. 12, 13. the whole Nation is fcederally holy, Ezra 9. 2. they are expresly said to be in Covenant with their fathers, Deut. 29. not partly or partially in Covenant, Rom. 9. 3, 4. Acts 2. 39. and God styles himself their God as well as their fathers. Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9. and to have God to be our God, is to be in compleat Church-Covenant with him. The Assumption is evi- dent, because else such their Parents had not had right to Baptism the Seal of the Covenant, but that they had right unto, and so received it ; and the same right that they had, their Children have, who are included in their Covenant, as they were in their fathers — and are not less truely or less compleatly in Covenant. Lastly, {to adde no more) Afr. Nath. Rogers/ in a Letter to a Friend, bearing date 18. 11. 1652. hath these words : To the Question concerning the Children of Church-members, I have nothing to oppose, and I wonder any should deny them to be Members. They are Members in censu Ecclesiastico ; God so calls them, the Church is so to account of them ; And when they are adulta cEtatis, though having done no personal act, yet are to be in Charity judged Members still, and till after due calling upon, they shall refuse or neglect to acknowledge and own the Covenent of their Parents, and profess their belief of, and subjection to the contents thereof — For Practise, I confess I account it our great default, that we have made no more real distinction between these and others, that they have been no more attended, as the lambs of the Flock of Christ : and whether it be not the cause of the corruption and woeful defection of our youth, dis- quiri permitthnus . So that it was the judgement of these Worthies in their time, that the children of Church-members are members of the Church as well as their parents, and do not cease to be members by becoming adult, but do still continue in the Church, untill in some way of God they be cast out ; and that they are subject to Church-discipline, even as other members, and may have their children baptized before themselves be received to the Lords Supper ; and yet that in this way there is no tendency to the corrupting of the Church by umvorthy members, or of the Ordinances by unworthy partakers. And in the Synod held at Cambridge in the year 1648. that particular point of Baptizing the children of such as were admitted members in minority, but not yet in full cofnmunion, was inserted in some of the draughts that were prepared for that Assembly, and was then de- bated and confirmed by the like Arguments as we now use, and was gen- erally consented to ; though because some few dissented, and there was not the like urgency of occasion for present practise, it was not then put into the Platform that was after P-rinted^ We need not mention the Meeting of Elders at Boston upon the Call of the Honoured Court in the year 1657. where in Answer to XXI. Questions, since Printed, this Point is particularly asserted. By all which it appear eth, that these are not things lately devised ; or before unheard-of, nor can they justly be censured [xiii] as Innovations or Declensions from the received Doc- trine in New-England. // is true, that in the beginning of these Plan- tations, and the Infancy of these Churches, there was not so much said touching these things as there hath been since ; and the reason is, Because then there was not the like occasion as since hath been : Few children of Church-members being then adult, at least few that were then married. 1 Nathaniel Rogers, pastor at Ipswich, Mass., died 1655. 2 See antCy p. i8i. 3IO THE HALF-WAY COVENANT and had children. Accordingly, when a Question was put about the priviledges of Members children, when come to years, these Churches then having been but of few years standing, our Answer was. That by reason of the Infatuy of these Churches, 7ve had then had no occasion to determine what to judge or practise in that matter.^ Answer to the s""' and 6"'- of 3 2. Questions: which may satisfie as to the Reason why in mir first beginnings there was no more said touching these Questions. But afterwards, when there was more cause for it, many of the Elders in these Churches, both such as are now living, and sundry who are now deceased, did declare their judgements as aforesaid, and this many years Secondly, Touching Consociation of Churches, take these few Testimonies, in stead of many more that might be alledged. Mr. Cotton, Keyes,'' p. 54, 55. It is a safe and wholsome and holy Ordinance of Christ, for particular Churches to joyn together in holy Covenant, or Communion & Consociation among them- selves, to administer all their Church-affairs (which are of weighty, and difficult and common concernment) not without common con- sultation and consent of other Churches about them. And how it is so, he there slieweth in all the particulars. See also p. 24, 25, 47 59. Air. Hooker, Survey, see part 4. p. i, 2. & p. 45. And in the \- Preface he professeth his consent with Mr. R. That Consociation of jV Churches is not only lawful, but in some cases necessary. That : ' when causes are difficult, and particular Churches want light and help they should crave the assistance of such a Consociation. That Churches so meeting have right to Counsel, Rebuke zs'c. as the case doth require. And in case any particular Church shall walk pertinaciously, either in the profession of Errour or sinful Practise, and will not hear their counsel, they may and should renounce the right hand of fellowship with them. And after he sets down this of Consociation of Churches amongst other things, wherein he had leave to profess the joynt Judgement of all the Elders upon the River ; of New-haven, Guilford, APilford, Stratford, Fairfield, and most of the Elders in the Bay.' By [xiv] which it is clear, that this point of Consociation of Churches is no new invention of ' these times, but was taught and prof essed in New-England many years '^S''^,for so it was we see in Mr. Hooker'^- time, and it is now above fifteen years since he departed this life. To these our own Ministers, we shall only adde a passage in the Apolo- getical Narration of Dr. Goodwyn, Mr. Nye, Mr. Sidrach Simpson, Mr. Burroughes, and Mr. Bridge; " wherein, besides much more to this purpose, touching^ the Remedy provided in the Congregational-way for mal- Administrations, or other miscarriages in Churches, p. 16-21. They set it down {in p. 21.) as their past and present Profession, That it is the most to be abhorred Maxime that any Religion hath ever ' R. Mather, Church-Government, London, 1643 (Answer to Nos. 2, 5, and 6 of the XXXII Questions), p. 22. (Written 1639.) "^ London, 1644. ^ See ante, p. 148. < The chief Congregationalists in the Westminster Assembly. PREFACE TO THE RESULT OF 1662 311 made profession of, and therefore of all other the most contradic- tory and dishonourable unto that of Christianity, that a single and particular Society of men, professing the Name of Christ, and pre- tending to be endowed with a Power from Christ, to judge them that are of the same Body and Society within themselves, should further arrogate unto themselves an exemption from giving account, or being censurable by any other, either Christian Magistrate above them, or Neighbour-Churches about them." See also Mr. Burroughes Heart-Divis." pag 43, 44. Brethren, bear with us : Were it for our own Sakes, or Names, or Interests, we should not be sollicitous to beg Charity of you. With us it is a small thing to be judged of man's day. But it is for your sakes, for your children's sake, and for the Lord's sake, that we intreat for a charitable, candid, and considerate Acceptation of our labour herein. It is that the Congregations of the Lord might be established before Him in Truth and Peace, and that they might have one heart and one way in the fear of God, for the good of them and of their children after them. Do we herein seek our selves '? our own advan- tage, ease or glory ? Surely we feel the contrary I What is it we de- sire, but that -we might do' our utmost to carry your poor Children to Heaven ; and that we might see these Churches bound up together in the Bonds of Truth and Peace ? Forgive us this wrong. But should the Church-education of your children be by the want of your hearty concur- rence, rendered either unfeizible or ineffectual; should they live as Lambs in a large place, for want of your agreement to own them of the Flock, we beseech you to consider how uncomfortable the account hereof would be another day: We pray with the Apostle, that you do no evil, not that we should appear approved, [xv] but that you should do that which \?, good and right, though we be rejected. For we can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth: and this also we wish, even your perfection, 2 Cor. 13. 7, 8, 9. However, we hope after-ages will bear witness, that we have been in some measure faithful to the Truth in these things, and to this part of Christs Xitig- dome also in our generation. But we may not let pass this opportunity, without a word of Cau- tion and Exhortation to the Youth of the Country, the children of our Churches, whose Interest we have here asserted. Be not you puffed up with Priviledges, but humbled rather, in the awful sense of the Engagement, Duty, and danger that doth attend them : It is an high favour to have a place in Bethel, in the house of God, and in the gate of Heaven; but it is a Dreadful place: God will be sanctified in all that come nigh him. A place nigh unto God (or among his people who are near to him, Ps. 148. 14.) is a place of great fear, Psa. 89. 7. Take heed therefore unto your selves, when owned as the people of the Lord your God, [Deut. 27, 9, 10.) lest there should be among you any root that beareth gall and wormwood. Take heed that you do not with a ^ An Apologeticall Narration Hvfnbly Svhmitted to the ■ Honourable Houses of Parlia ment, London, 1643. 2 Irentcvni, To the Lovers of Truth and Peace. Heart-Divisions opened 171 the Causes ■and Evils of thejn ; . . . And Endeavours to heal them, London, 1646. 312 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT Spirit of pride and haughtiness, or of vanity and sHghtness, either chal- lenge or use any of your Priviledges. Think not to bear the Name of Christians, without bearing the Yoke of Christ. Remember, that all Relations to God and to his people, do co7ne loaden with Duty; and all Gospel-duty must be done in humility. The wayes of the Lord are right, and the humble and serious shall walk in them, but proud Trans- gressors shall fall therein. Be not sons of Belial, that can bear no yoke : Learn subjection to Christs holy Government in all the parts and wayes thereof. Be subject to your godly Parents : Be subject to your spiritual Fathers and Pastors, and to all their Instructions, Admoni- tions and Exhortations : Be subject unto faithful Brethren, and to words of counsel and help from them : Ye younger, submit your selves unto the elder; and to that end, be clothed with humility. Lye under the Word and Will of Christ, as dispensed and conveyed to you by all his appointed Instruments in their respective places. Break not in upon the Lords Table {or ipon the Priviledges of full Communion) without due qualification, and orderly admission thereimto, lest you eat and drink your own damnation. Be ordered, and take not upon you to order the affairs of Gods Family ; that is not the place of those wha are yet but in the state of Initiation and Education in the Church of God. Carry it in all things with a spirit of humility, modesty, sobriety and [xvi] fear, that our soules may not weep in secret for your pride, and that God may not resist &• re]ect you as a generation of his wrath. Oh that the Lord would pour out a spirit of Humiliation &-= Repent- ance upon all the younger sort in the Country, {yea &" upon elder too, for our neglects) from Dan to Beersheba! Oh that we might meet at Bochim, because so many Canaanites of unsubdued, yea growing cor- rtptions are found among us ! Let it not be said, that when the first ir best generation in New-England were gathered to their fathers,, there arose another generation after them that knew not the Lord. Behold, the Lord had a delight in your fathers to love them, and he hath chosen yoii their seed after them, to enjoy these Liberties df Op- portunities, as it is this day: Circumcise therefore the fore-skin of your hearts, and be no more stiff-necked, but yield your selves to the Lord, and to the Order of His Sanctuary, to seek him, and wait on him in all his wayes with holy fear and trejnbling : for the Lord your - God is gracious and merciful, and will not turn away his face from you, if you return unto him ; if you seek him he will be found of you,, but if you forsake him, he will cast you off for ever. We shall conclude, when we have given the Reader a short ac- count of the Work ensuing. The Propositions zw Answer to the- first Question, were {after much discussion and consideration from- the Word of God) Voted and Concluded by the Assembly in the par- ticular terms as they are here expressed. The Arguments then used^ for their Confirmation, being drawn up by some deputed thereunto, after they had been several times read and considered in the Assembly, were Voted and Consented to, as to the summe and substance thereof. The answer to the second Question is here given with great brevity, partly because so much is already said there-about in the foresaid Platform of Discipline, and partly by reason of great straits of time .• ■ RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1662 313 But wliat is here presented was the joynt conclusion of the Synod. A Preface was desired by the Assembly to be prefixed by some ap- pointed thereunto, which is here accordingly by them performed. Now the God of truth & peace guide us & all his people in the wayes, & give us the fruits thereof; help us to feed his flock and his lambs, & to be fed by him, as the sheep of his pasture, that when the chief- Shepherd shall appear, we may receive together a Crown of glory that fadeth not away, & may enter into the joy of our Lord, as those that have neither despised his little ones, nor denied to be our Brother's keeper : But havijig faithfully endeavoured to prom,ote the continuation of his Kingdom, & Communion of his people, may Rest & Reign with all Saints in the kingdom of his glory : Unto whom be glory in the Church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages world without end. [i] THE ANSWER OF THE ELDERS AND OTHER MESSENGERS of the Churches, Assembled at Boston in the Year 1662, TO The Questions Propounded to them by ORDER of the Honoured GENERAL COURT. w. Quest, I. Answ : V V ff'^ are the Subjects of Baptism ? The Answer may be given in the following propositions, briefly confirmed from the Scriptures. 1 They that according to Scripture, are Members of the Visible Church, are the subjects of Baptisme. 2 The Members of the Visible Church according to scripture, are Confederate visible Believers, in particular Churches, and their infant-seed, i. e. children in minority, whose next parents, one of both, are in Covenant. 3 The Infant-seed of confederate visible Believers, are members of the same Church with their parents , and when grown up, are per- sonally under the watch, discipline and Government of that Church. 314 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT 4 These Adult persons, are not therefore to be admitted to full Communion, vieerly because they are and continue [2] members, with- out such further qualifications, as the Word of God requireth ther- unto. 5 Church-members who were admitted in viijiority, understand- ing tlie Doctritie of faith, and publickly professbig their assent thereto ; not scandalous i7i life, and solemnly owning the Covenant be- fore the Church, wherin they give up themselves and their children to the Lord, and subject themselves to the Government of Christ in the Church, their children are to be Baptised. 6 Such Church-members, who either by death, or some other extraordiriary Providence, have been inevitably hindred from publick acti7ig as aforesaid, yet have given the Church cause, in judgment of charity, to look at them as so qualified, and such as had they been called thereiinto, would have so acted, their children are to be Baptised. 7 The members of Orthodox Churches, being sound in the Faith, and not scandalous in life, ajid presenting due testimony thereof; these occasionally comming from one Church to another, may have their children Baptised iyi the church whither they come, by virtue of com7nunion of churches : btit if they remove their habitation, they ought orderly to covenant and subject themselves to the Government of Christ in the church where they settle their abode, and so their children to be Baptised. It being the churches duty to receive such unto com- munion, so fa7'r as they are regularly fit for the same. The Confirmation of these Propositions from the Scripture followeth. Proposition First. They that according to Scripture are members of the visible Church, are the subjects of Baptisme. The trueth hereof may appear by the following evidences from the word of God. I. When Christ saith, Go ye therefore and teach, or (as the Greek is) disciple all Nations, Baptising them. Mat. 28. 19 [3] he expres- seth the adequate subject of Baptisme, to be disciples, or discipled ones. But disciples there is the same with members of the visible Church: For the visible Church is Christs school, wherein all the mem- bers stand related and subjected to him, as their Master and Teacher, and so are his scholars or disciples, and under his teaching, as verse 20. And it is that visible spiritual Kingdome of Christ, which he there from his Kingly power, ver: 18. sendeth them to set up and RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1 662 315 administer in z-'^r : 19. the subjects whereof are under his Lawes and Government : verse 20. Which subjects (or members of that Kingdome /. e. of the visible church) are termed disciples verse 19. Also in the Acts of the Apostles (the story of their accomplish- ment of that commission) disciples are usually put for members of the visible church: Acts i. 15. In the midst of the disciples: who with others added to them, are called the church, Acts 2: 47: The members whereof are again called disciples. Acts 6: i, 2. Acts 9; I, ■ ■ . against the disciples of the Lord I. t. Against the chtirch of God. I Cor. 15 9 Gal i. 13 Acts g 26 He assayed to joyn himself to the disciples. The disciples at Lystra, Iconium and Antioch, Acts 14 21, 22 are called the church in each of those places verse 23 So the church verse 27 the disciples verse 28. Acts 18. 22 the church at Cesarea; Acts 21. 16 the disciples of Cesarea: So Acts 18. 23 with chap. 15. 41. and Gal. i. 2. Acts 18. 27 and chap. 20 i with verse 17. 28. From all which it appeareth that disciples in Mat. 28. 19 and tnembers of the visible church, are termes equivalent: and disciples being there by Christ himselfe made subjects of Baptism, it follows that the members of the visible Church are the subjects of baptisme. 2. Baptisme is the seal of first entrance or admission into the visible church; as appeareth from those texts i Cor: 12: 13. Bap- tised into one body, i. e. our entrance into the body or church of Christ, is sealed by Baptisme: and Rom; 6. 3, 5; Gal. 3: 27. where it is shewed that Baptisme is the Sacrament of union or of ingraft- ing into Christ the head, and consequently into the church his body & from the Apostles costant practise in baptising [4] persons upon their first comming in, or first giving up themselves to the Lord and them. Acts 8. 12. 6- 16. 15, 33. 6- 18. 8. and in Acts 2. 41, 42. they were baptized at their first adding to the church, or admission into the Apostles fellowship, wherin they afterward continued. And from its answering unto circumcision, which was a seal of initiation or admission into the church; Hence it belongs to all and onely those that are entred into, that are within, or that are members of the visible chuch. 3. They that according to Scripture are members of the visible Church, they are in Covenant. For it is the Covenant that consti- tuteth the Church, Deut 29. 12, 13. They must enter into covenant, that they might be established the people or Church of God. Now, the initiatory seal is affixed to the Covenant, and appointed to run parallel therewith, Gen. 17. 7, 9, 10, 11. so circumcision was: and hence called the covenant Gen. 17. 13. Acts 7. 8. and so Baptisme is, 3l6 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT being in like manner annexed to the promise or Covenant, Acts 2. 38, 39. and being the seal that answereth to circumcision; Col: 2. 11, 12. 4. Christ doth Sanctifie and cleanse the Church by the washing of water, i. e. by Baptisme Eph. 5. 25, 26. Therefore the whole Church and so all the members thereof (who are also said in Scripture to be Sanctified in Christ Jesus, i Cor : i. 2.) are the subjects of Bap- tisme: And although it is the invisible chtcrch, unto the spiritual and eternall good whereof, this and all other Ordinances lastly have respect, and which the place mentioned in Eph: 5. may in a special maner look unto, yet it is the visible Church that is the next and immediate subject of the administration thereof. For the sub- ject of visible external ordinances to be administred by men, must needs be visible. And so the Apostles Baptized sundry persons, who were of the visible, but not of the invisible Church, as Simon Magus, Ananias and Sapphira, and others. And these are visibly Purchased and Sanctified by the bloud of Christ, the Bloud of the covenant, Acts 20. 28. Heb 10. 29. Therefore the visible seal of the covenant and of cleansing by Christs bloud belongs to them. [s] 5. The Circumcision is of ten put for the whole Jewish Church or for the members of the visible Church under the Old Testament. Those within are expressed by [the circumcised'\ ' and those with- out by \the uncircumcised.^ Rom : 15. 8. & 3. 30. Eph : 2, 11, Judg : 14. 3. & 15. 18. I Sam: 14. 6 & 17. 26, 36. Jer. 9, 25, 26. Hence by proportion Baptisme (which is our Gospel circumcision. Col: 2. II, 12.) belongs to the whole visible Church under the new Testa- ment. Actual and personal circumcision was indeed proper to the males of old, females being but inclusively and virtually circum- cised, and so counted of the circumcision: but the Lord hath taken away that difference now, and appointed Baptisme to be personally applied to both sexes.- Acts : 8. 12. 6- 16. 15. Gal : 3 28. So that every particular member of the visible Church is now a subject of Baptisme. We conclude therefore that Baptisme pertaines to the whole visible Church, and to all and every one therein, and to no other. Proposition 2^. The members of the visible Church according to Scripture, are con- federate visible believers, in particular Churches, and their infant-seed, i. e. children in minority, whose next parents, one or both, are in Covenant. Sundry particulars are comprised in this proposition, which wee may consider and confirme distinctly. ^ [ ] in original, RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1 662 317 Partic: i. Adult persons who are members of the visible Church, are by rule confederate visible beleevers : Acts: 5. 14. believers were added to the Lord. The believing Corinthians were members of the Church there Acts 18: 8 with i Cor. i. 2. (Sr° 12. 27. The inscrip- tions of the Epistles written to Churches, and calling the members thereof Saints, asid faithfull, shew the same thing, Eph i. i. Fhi 1. I. Col. I. 2. And that confederation, i. e. coventing explicite or implicite, [the latter preserveth the essence of confederation, the former is duety and most desireablej is necessary to make one a member of the visible Church, appears, i. Because the Church is constituted by Covenant: for there is [6] between Christ and the Church the mutuall engagement and relation of King and subjects, husband and spouse; this cannot be but by Covenant (internal!, if you speak of the invisible Church, external of the visible) a church is a company that can say, God is our God and we are his people, this is from the covenant between God and them. Deut 29, 12, 13, Ezek : 16, 8. 3. [2] The church of the old Testament was the church of God by covenant Gen : 17, Deut 29 and was reformed still by renewing of the covenant 2 chron 15, 12. & 23, 16: 6^ 34, 31 32: Neh: 9 38: Now the churches of the Gentiles, under the new Tes- tament stand upon the same basis or root with the church of the Old Testament, & therefore are constituted by Covenant, as that was Rom: 11. 17. 18. Eph: 2 11, 12, 19 & 3: 6. Heb : 8: 10, 3. Bap- tisme enters us into the Church Sacramentally, /, e, by sealing the Covenant. The Covenant therefore is that which constitutes the Church and inferrs membership, and is the Vow in Baptisme com- monly spoken of. Partic: 2. The members of the visible Church are such as are confederate in Particular Churches. It may be minded that we are here speaking of Members so stated in the visible Church, as that they are Subjects to whom Church ordinances may regularly be administred, and that according to ordinary dispensation. For were it graunted, that the Apostles and Evangelists did sometimes Baptize such, as were not Members of any Particular Church, yet their extraordinary office, large Power and commission renders them not imitable therein by ordinary Offt.cers. For then they might Baptize in private without the presence of a Christian as- semblie, as Philip did the Eunuch. But that in ordinary dispensa- tion the Members of the visible Church according to Scripture, are such as are Members of some particular Church, appeares, i. Be- cause the visible beleever that professedly Covenants with God, doth therein give up himselfe to wait on God in all his ordinances. 3l8 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT Deut 26: 17, 18. Math: 28, 19, 20. But all the Ordinances of God are to be enjoyed onely in a particular Church. For how often do we find in the Scripture that they came together into one place (or met as a congregational particular Church) for the observation and enjoyment of the Ordinances. Acts: 2: i, 44, 46. [7] 6^ 4, 31: iSr' 11. 26.0^ 20: 7. I Cor. 5.- 4. (5r= II. 18. 20: 33. cf 14: 23. 2. The Apos- tle in his Epistles, writing to Saints or Beleevers, writes to them as vci particular Churches, i Cor. i .■ 2. Eph : i. i. Phil: i .■ i. Col: i. 2. And when the story of the Acts speakes of Disciples other places shew that those are understood to be Members of particular Churches, Acts 18. 23. with Gal.- i: 2. Acts 21 16. with Chap 18: 22. Acts II. 26. 6^ 14: 22, 23, 27, 28. All which shewes that the Scrip- ture acknowledgeth no settled orderly estate of visible beleevers in Covenant with God, but onely in particular Churches. 3. The members of the visible Church are Disciples, as was above cleared now Disciples are under Discipline and liable to Church-censures for they are stated subjects of Christs'Laws and Government, Mat , 28. 19, 20. but Church Government and censures are extant now in ordinary dispensation, onely in a particular Church. Alat 18. 17. I Cor: 5. 4. Partic : J. The Infant-seed of confederate visible beleevers are also members of the visible Church. The truth of this is evident from the Scriptures and reasons following. Argum : i. The covenant of Abraham as to the substance thereof, viz, that whereby God declares himself e to be the God of the faithfull &" their seed, Gen: 17. 7. continues under the Gospel, as appears, i Because the Beleeving inchurched Gentiles under the new Testament, do stand upon the same root of covenanting Abraham: which the J ewes were broken off from, Rom 11, 16, 17 18. 2 Because Abraham in regard of that Covenant was made a Father of many nations. Gen: 17. 4, 5. even of Gentiles as well as Jewes, under New-Testament as well as Old, Pom: 4. 16 17. Gal 3, 29. /, e, in Abraham as a patterne and root, God (not onely shewed how he Justifies the be- leever. Gal: 3, 6,-9. Rom: 4. but also) conveied that covenant to the faithfull and their seed in all nations, Luk: 19. 9. If a Son of Abraham, then Salvation i, e: the Covenant dispensation, of Salva- tion is come to his house. 3. As that covenant was communicated to proselyte Gentiles under the Old Testament, so its communica- tion to the inchurched Gentiles under the new Testament is clearly held forth in diverse places Gal: 3. 14 the blessing [8] of Abraham comprizeth both the internal benefits of Justification by faith &c: which the Apostle is there treating of; and the external dispensa- RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1662 319 tion of Grace in the visible church to the faithfull & their seed, Gen: 28 4. but the whole Blessing of Abraham (and so the whole covenant) is come upon the Gentiles through Jesus Christ. Eph: 2. 12, 19 They had been strangers, but now were no more strangers from the covenants of promise, i, e, from the covenant of grace, which had been often renewed, especially with Abraham and the house of Israel, and had been in the externall dispensation of it, their pecul- iar portion, so that the Ephesians', who were a farr off, being now called and made nigh, v. 13-17. they have the promise or the Cove- nant of promise to them and to their Children, according to Acts: 2, 39. and so are partakers of that Covenant of Abraham, that we are speaking of. Eph : 3, 6. The inchurched Gentiles are put into the same inherita7ice for substance (both as to invisible & visible benefits, according to their respective conditions) are of the same body, and partakers of the same promise with the Jewes, the Children of Abra- ham, of old. The same may be gathered from Gen : 9, 27, Mat. 8. II, 6^ 21, 43. 4. Sundry Scriptures which extend to Gospel- times do confirme the same interest to the seed of the faithful which is held forth in the covenant of Abraham, and consequently, do confirme the continuance of that covenant.- as Exod : 20 : 6. there in the sanction of a moral and perpetual Commandement, and that respecting Ordinances, the portion of the church, God declareth himself to be a God of mercy, to them that love him, and to their seed after them in their generations : consonant to Gen: 17. 7. compare herewith Psal. 105. 8, 9 (Sr' Deut. 7. 9. Deut : 30. 6. The grace signified by circumcision is there promised to Parents and children, importing the covenant to both, which circumcision sealed. Gen: 17. and that is a Gospel- promise, as the Apostles citing part of that context, as the voice of the Gospel, shewes Rom\ 10, 6-8. with Deut: 30, 11-14. and it reacheth to the Jewes in the latter dayes, ver. 1-5. Isay : 65, 23. In the most Glorious Gospel-state of the church, ver. 17-19. the blessing of the Lord is the promised portion of the off-\()\spring or Children, as well as of the faithfull parents, so Isay: 44. 3, 4. Isai : 59. 20, 21. Ezek: 37. 25, 26. at the future calling of the Jewes, which those texts have reference to, (Rom: II. 26. Ezek: 37. 19-22, 23, 24.) their Children shall be under the promise or Covenant of special Grace to be conveyed to them in the Ordinances, Isai: 59. 21. and be subjects of David, i, e, Christ their King Ezek 37. 25. and have a portion in his Sanctuary, vers 26. and this according to the tenor of the ancient 320 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT covenant of Abraham, whereby God will be their God (viz. both of parents and Children) and they shall be his People, vers: 26, 27. Now although more abundant fruits of the Covenant may be seen in those times, and the Jewes then may have more abundant Grace given to the body of them to continue in the Covenant, yet the tenor and frame of the Covenant itselfe is one and the same, both to Jewes, and Gentiles under the New-Testament ; Gal : 3, 28. Coll: 3. 11. Heb. 8. 10. The house of Israel, i, e, the Church of God, both among Jewes and Gentiles under the new Testament, have that Covenant made with them, the summ whereof is, / will be their God, and they shall be my people : which is a renewing of that Covenant of Abraham in Gen 17. (as the same is very often over in those termes renewed in Scripture, and is distinguished from the Law, Gal: 3 16, 17. Heb 8. 9) wherein is implied Gods being a God to the seed as well as parents, and taking both to be his People, though it be not expressed : even as it is often plainly implied in that expression of the Cov- enant in other places of Scripture.- Deut. 29. 13. Jer. 31. i. 6^ 32. 38, 39. 6^ 24 : 7, 6-= 30 22, 20. Ezek : 37. 27, 25. Also the writing of the Law in the heart, in Heb : 8 : 10. is that heart circum- cision which Deut : 30. 6. extends both to parents and seed. And the terme. House of Israel, doth according to Scripture-use fitly expresse and take in (especially as to the external! administration of the Covenant) both parents and Children : among both which are found that elect and saved number, that make up the invisi- ble Israel.- compare Jer : 13. 11. 6-^9. 26. Isai. 5. 7. Has: i. 6. Ezek : 39. 25. Neither may we exclude the least in age from the good of that promise, Heb 8.- 11. (they being sometimes pointed to by that phrase, /r^^wz the least [10] to the greatest, Jer. 44. 12. with verse 7.) no more than the least in other respects; compare Isa. 54. 13. In Acts 2. 39. at the passing of those Jews into New Testament Church-estate, the Lord is so far from repealing the Covenant-interest that was granted unto children in the former Testament, or from making the children there losers by their Parents faith, that he doth expresly renew the old grant, and tells them that the promise or covenant (for the promise and the covenant are terms that do mutually infer each other; compare Acts 3. 25. Gal t,. 16, 17, 18, 29. Rom. 4. 16. Heb. 6 17,) is to them and to their children: and the same is asserted to be the appointed portion of the far off Gentiles, when they should be called. By all which it appeareth that the RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1662 321 covenant of Abraham, Gen. 17. 7. whereby God is the God of the faith- full and their seed, continues under the Gospel. Now if the seed of the faithful be still in the covenant of Abraham, then they are members of the visible Church ; i. Because that covenant of Abraham, Gen. 17. 7. was properly church-cove- nant, or the covenant which God makes with his visible church, i. e. the covenant of grace considered in the external dispensation of it, and in the promises and priviledges that belong to that dis- pensation. For many were taken into that covenant, that were never of the invisible church : and by that covenant, the family of Abraham, as also by the renewing thereof, the house of Israel afterward were established the visible church of God, Gen. 17. and Deut. 29. 12, 13. and from that covenant men might be broken off. Gen. 17.- 14. Rom. n .■ 17, 19. and to that covenant, Circum- dsion, the badg of church-membership, was annexed. Therefore the covenantees therein were & are church-members. 2. Because in that covenant, the seed are spoken of in terms describing or inferring church-membership, as well as their parents : for they have God for their God, and are his people, as well as the parents, Gen. 17 7, 8. with Deut: 29: 11, 13. They have the covenant made with them, Deut 29 : 14, 15. and the covenant is said to be between God &= them (between me (y thee, and between thy seed after thee: so the Hebrew runs) Gen: 17 : 7. They are also in that covenant appointed to be the subjects of the initiatory seal of the covenant, [11] the seal of membership. Gen. 17 .• 9, 10, 11. There- fore the seed are according to that covenant, members of the visible church, as well as their parents. Argum: 2. Such seed or children are federally holy, i Cor. 7. 14. The word \holy'\ as applied to any sort of persons, is never in Scrip- ture used in a lower sense than for federal or covenant-holiness, (the covenant-holiness of the visible Church;) but very often in that sense, Ezra 9: 2. Deut: 7: 6. 6^ 14: 2, 21: &" 26: 19 .• 6^ 28.- 9; Exod: 19 : 6 : Dan : 8 : 24 : dr^ 12 : 7 : Rom : 11 .■ 16 .• So that to say they are holy in this sense, viz. by covenant-relation and separation to God in his Church, is as much as to say, they are in the covenant of the visible church, or members of it. Argum: 3. From Mark 10: 14, 15, 16: Mat. 19: 14: childrens membership in the visible Church, is either the next and immediate sense of those words of Christ, Of such is the kingdome of heaven; and so the kingdome of heaven, or of God, is not rarely used in other Scriptures to express the visible church, or church-estate. Mat: 25 .■ I. 6^ 21 : 43 : iSj^ 8. II, 12 .• or it evidently follows from any 322 THF HALF-WAY COVENANT Other sense that can rationally be given of the words. For those may not be denied a place and portion in the visible church, whom Christ affirms to have a portion in the kingdome either of invisible grace, or of eternal glory: Nor do any in ordinary course pass into the Kingdome of Glory hereafter, but through the Kingdome of Grace in the visible Church here. Adde also, that Christ there graciously invites and calls little children to him, is greatly dis- pleased with those that would hinder them, asserts them, notwith- standing their infancy, to be exemplary in receiving the kingdome of God, embraceth them in his arms, and blesseth them : all which shews Christ's dear affection to, and owning of the children of the Church, as a part of his kingdome ; whom we therefore may not disown, lest we incurre his displeasure, as the Disciples did. Argum: 4. Such seed or children are disciples according to Mat 28.- 19: as appears, i. Because subjects of Christ's Kingdome are equiv- alent with disciples there, as the frame of that Text shews, verse 18, 19, 20. but such children are subjects of Christ's Kingdome, or of the kingdome of heaven, Mat : 19 : 14: In the discipling of all [12] Nations intended in Mat. 28. 19. the kingdome of God, which had been the portion of the Jews, was communicated to the Gentiles, according to Mat. 21. 43. But in the kingdome of God these chil- dren have an interest or portion, Mark 10. 14. 2. The Apostles in accomplishing that commission. Mat. 28. 19. did disciple some children, viz. the children of discipled parents. Acts 2. 39. er' 15. 10. They are there called and accounted disciples, whom the false teachers would have brought under the yoke of circumcision after the manner of Moses, verse i, 5. But many of those were children; Exod. 12. 48. Acts 21. 21. Lydia and her houshold, the Jaylor and all his, were discipled and baptized, Acts 16. 15, 31, ■^■^. Paul at Corinth took in the children into the holy school of Christ, i Cor 7. 14. 3. Such children belong to Christ; for he calls them to him as his, to receive his blessing, Mark 10. 13- -16. They are to be received in his Name, Mark 9. 37. Luke 9 48. They have a part in the Lord, Josh. 22. 24 25. therefore they are disciples: for to belong to Christ, is to be a disciple of Christ, Mark 9, 41. with Mat. 10. 42. Now if they be disciples, then they are mem- bers of the visible church, as from the equivalency of those terms was before shewed. Argum: 5. The whole current and harmony of Scripture shews, that ever since there was a visible church on earth, the children thereof have by the Lords appointment been a part of it. So it was in the Old, and it is and shall be so in the New Testament. Eve, the mother RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1 662 323 of all living, hath a promise made Gen. 3. 15. not only of Christ the head-seed, but through him also of a Church-seed, to proceed from her in a continual lineal succession, which should contin- ually be at visible enmity with, and stand at a distance, or be separated from the seed of the Serpent. Under that promise made to Eve and her seed, the children of Adam are born, and are a part of the Church in Adam's family : even Cain was so. Gen. 4. I, 3. till cast out of the presence of God therein, verse 14. being- now manifestly one of the seed of the Serpent, i John 3. 12. and so becoming the father of a wicked unchurched race. But then God appointed unto Eve another, viz : Seth, in whom to continue the line of her Church-seed, Gen 4. 25. How it did continue in [13] his- seed in their generations, Genes : 5"" sheweth. Hence the children of the Church are called Sons of God, (which is as much as members of the visible Church) in contradistinction to the daughters of me7i. Gen. 6. 2. If righteous Noah be taken into the Ark (then the onely preserving place of the Church) his children are taken in with him, Gen. 7. i though one of them, viz. Ham, after proved degenerate and wicked; but till he so appears, he is continued in the Church with his Brethren: So Gen. 9. 25, 26, 27. as the race of Hatn or his son Canaan (parent and children) are cursed; so Shem (parent and children) is blessed, and continued in the place of blessing, the Church : as Japhet also, or laphet's pos- terity (still parent and children) shall in time be brought in. The holy line mentioned in Gen. 11. 10-26 shews how the Church con- tinued in the seed of Shem from him unto Abraham. When that race grew degenerate, losh. 24. 2. then God called Abraham out of his countrey, and from his kindred, and established his covenant with him, which still took in parents and children. Gen. 17. 7, 9. So it did after in the house of Israel, Deut. 29. 11, 12, 13. and when any eminent restauration or establishment is promised to the Church, the children thereof are still taken in, as sharers in the same, Psal 102. 16, 28. 6^ 69. 35, 36. Jerem ; 32 : 38, 39. Isa : 65 : 18, 19, 23. Now when Christ comes to set up the Gospel- administration of his Church in the New Testament, under the term of the kingdome of heaven. Mat: 3: 2. &" 11. 11. he is so far from taking away children's portion and membership therein, that himself asserts it, Mat: 19 : 14. The children of the Gentile, but now believing Corinthians, are holy, i Cor : 7 : 14. The Apostle writing to the Churches of Ephesus and Colosse, speaks to children, as a part thereof, Eph : 6 : i. Col. 3 : 20. The inchurched Ro- mans, and other Gentiles, stand on the root of covenanting Abraham, 324 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT and in the Olive or visible Cliurch, they and their children, till broken off (as the Jews were) by positive unbelief, or rejection . of Christ, his Truth or Government, Rom. 11 13, 16, 17,-22. The children of the Jews, when they shall be called, shall be as afore- time in Church-estate, ler : 30. 20. with 31. i Ezekiel 37. 25-28. From all which it appears, that the [14] series or whole frame and current of Scripture-expressions, doth hold forth the continu- ance of childrens membership in the visible church from the begin- ning to the end of the world. Partic : 4. The seed or children who beco77ie members together with their Parents (i. e. by means of their parents covenanting) are children in minority. This appears, i. Because such children are holy by their parents covenanting, who would else be unclean., i Cor. 7. 14 but they would not else necessarily be unclean, if they were adult; for then they might act for themselves, and so be holy by their personal covenanting: Neither on the other hand would they necessarily be holy, if adult, (as he asserts the children there to be) for they might continue Pagans .• Therefore the Apostle intends onely infants or children in minority. 2. It is a principle that car- ries evidence of light and reason with it, as to all transactions, Civil and Ecclesiastical, that if a man be of age he should answer for him- self, John 9. 21. They that are come to years of discretion, so as to have knowledge and understanding, fit to act in a matter of that nature, are to covenant by their own personal act, Neh. 10. 28, 29. Isa. 44 5. 3. They that are regularly taken in with their parents, are reputed to be visible etitertainers of the covenajit, and avouchers of God to be their God, Deut : 26. 17, 18. with Deut. 29. 11, 12. But if adult children should, without regard to their own personal act, be taken in with their parents, then some might be reputed entertainers, that are manifest rejecters of the covenant .■ for so an adult son or daughter of a godly parent may be. Partic : 5. It is requisite to tJie membership of children, that the next parents, one or both, be in covenant. For although after-genera- tions have no small benefit by their pious Ancestors, who derive federal holiness to their succeeding generations, in case they keep their standing in the covenant, and be not apostates from it ; yet the piety of Ancestors sufficeth not, unless the next parent continue in covenant, Rom. 11. 22. i. Because if the next parent be cut or broken off, the following seed are broken off also, Exod: 20. 5. Rom. 11 17, 19, 20. as the Gentile believing parents and children were taken in; so the Jews, parents and chil- dren, were then [15] broken off. 2. One of the parents must be a RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1662 325, believer, or else the children are unclean, i Cor. 7. 14. 3. If childrea may be acc.ounted members and baptized, tliough the next parents be not in covenant, then the Church should be bound to baptize those whom she can have no power over, nor hope concerning, to see them brought up in the true Christian Religion, and under the Ordinances: For the next parents being wicked, and not in coven- ant, may carry away and bring up their children to serve other Gods. 4. If we stop not at the next parent, but grant that Ancestors may^ notwithstanding the apostacy of the next parents, convey member- ship unto children, then we should want a ground where to stop, and then all the children on earth should have right to member- ship and Baptism, Proposition 3''. The Infant-seed of confederate visible Believers, are members of the sam.e Church with their parents, and when grown up, are person- ally under tlie Watch, Discipline atid Government of that Church. I. That they are members of the same Church with their parents, appears; i. Because so were Zraair and Zr/^»za^/ of ^(Jra-^awzi' Family- church, and the children of the fews and Proselytes of Israels Na- tional Church: and there is the same reason for children now to be of the same Cotigregational Church with their parents. Christ's care for children, and the scope of the Covenant, as to obligatipn unto Order and Government, is as great now, as then. 2. Either they are members of the same Church with their parents, or of some other Church, or Non-members: But neither of the latter; there- fore the former. That they are not Non-members, was before proved in Propos. 2. Partic. 3. and if not members of the same Church with their parents, then of no other. For if there be not reason sufficient to state them members of that Church, where their parents have covenanted for them, and where ordinarily they are baptized and do inhabit, then much less is there reason to make them members of any other: and so they will be members of no particular Church at all; and it was be-[i6]fore shewed, that there is no ordinary and orderly standing estate of Church-mem- bers but in some particular Church. 3. The same covenant-act is accounted the act of parent and childe : but the parents covenanting rendred himself a member of this particular Church; Therefore so it renders the childe also. How can children come in with and by their parents, and yet come into a Church, wherein and whereof their parents are not, so as that they should be of one Church, and the parents of another? 4. Children are in an orderly and regular state: for they are in that state, wherein the order of Gods Cove- 326 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT nant, and his institution therein, hath placed them; they being members by vertue of the Covenant of God. To say their stand- ing is disorderly, would be to impute disorder to the order of Gods Covenant, or irregularity to the Rule. Now all will grant it to be most orderly and regular, that every Christian be a member in some particular Church, and in that particular Church, where his regular habitation is ; which to children usually is, where their parents are. If the Rule call them to remove, then their member- ship ought orderly to be translated to the Church, whither they remove. Again, order requires that the childe, and the power of govei-nmeiit over the childe, should go together. It would bi^rhg shame and confusion for the childe to be from under government, Prov. 29. 15. and Parental and Ecclesiastical government concurring, do mutually help and strengthen each other. Hence the parent and the childe must be members of the same Church; unless the childe be by some special providence so removed, as that some other person hath the power over him. 2. That when these children are grown up, they are personally un- der the Watch, Discipline and Government of that Church, is manifest: for, I. Children were under Patriarchal and Mosaical discipline of old. Gen. 18 19. &= 21. 7, 10, 12. Gal. 5. 3. and therefore under Congregational discipline now. 2. They are within the Church, or members thereof, (as hath been, and after will be further proved) and therefore subject to Church-judicature, i Cor. 5. 12. 3. They are disciples, and therefore under discipline in Christ's, school, Matth. 28. 19. 20. 4. They are [17] in Church-covenant, therefore subject to Church-power, Gen: 17. 7. with Chap. 18, 19. 5. They are sub- jects of the kingdome of Christ, and therefore under the laws and government of his Kingdome, Ezek. 37 25, 26. 6. Baptism leaves the baptized (of which number these children are) in a state of subjection to the authoritative teaching of Christ's Ministers, and to the observation of all his coinmandments. Mat. 28. 19, 20. and there- fore in a state of subjection unto Discipline. 7. Elders are charged to take heed unto, and to feed (i. e. both to teach and rule, compare Ezek. 34. 3, 4) all the flock or Church, over which the holy Ghost hath made the7n overseers, Acts 20. 28. That children are a part of the flock, was before proved: and so Paul accounts them, writing to the same flock or Church of Ephesus, Eph. 6. i. 8. Otherwise Irre- ligion and Apostacy would inevitably break into Churches, and no Church-way left by Christ to prevent or heal the same: which would also bring many Church-members under that dreadful judge- ment of being let alone in their wickedness, Hosea 4. 16, 17. RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1662 327 Proposition 4"". These Adult persons are not therefore to be admitted to full Com- munion, meerly because they are and contijiue members, without such further qualifications, as the Word of God requireth thereunto. The truth hereof is plain, i. From i Cor. 11. 28, 29. where it is required, that such as come to the Lords Supper, be able to examine themselves, and to discern the Lords body ; else they will eat and drink unworthily, and eat and drink damnation or judgement, to themselves, when they partake of this Ordinance. But meer membership is separable from such ability to examine one's self, and discern the Lords body : as in the children of the covenant that grow up to years is too often seen. 2. In the Old Testa- ment, though men did continue members of the Church, yet for ceremonial uncleanness they were to be kept from full commun- ion in the holy things, Levit. 7. 20, 21. Numb. 9. 6, 7. &• 19. 13, 20. yea and the Priests and Porters in the Old Testament had [18] special charge committed to them, that men should not partake in all the holy things, unless duely qualified for the same, notwith- standing their membership, 2 Chron. 23. 19. Ezekiel 22. 26, & 44. 7, 8, 9, 23. and therefore much more in these times, where moral fitness and spiritual qualifications are wanting, membership alone is not suffi- cient ioT full co7nmunion. More was required to adult persons eating the Passeover, then meer membership : therefore so there is now to the Lords Supper. For they were to eat to the Lord, Exodus 12. 14. which is expounded in 2 Chron. 30. where, keeping the Passeover to the Lord, verse 5. imports and requires exercising Repentance, verse 6, 7. their actual giving up themselves to the Lord, verse 8. heart- preparation for it, verse 19. and holy rejoycing before the Lord, verse 21, 25. See the like in Ezra 6. 21, 22. 3. Though all members of the Church are subjects of Baptism, they and their children, yet all members may not partake of the Lords Supper, as is further manifest from the different nature of Baptism and the Lords Supper. Baptism firstly and properly seals covenant-holiness, as circumcision did, Gen. 17. Church-membership, Rom : 15. 8. planting into Christ, Rom. 6. and so members, as such, are the sub- jects of Baptism, Matth. 28. 19. But the Lords Supper is the Sacrament of growth in Christ, and of special-communion with him I Cor. 10. 16. which supposeth a special renewal and exercise of Faith and Repentance in those that partake of that Ordinance. Now if persons, even when adult, may be and continue mem- bers, and yet be debarred from the Lords Supper, until meet qualifications for the same do appear in them; then may they 328 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT also (until like qualifications) be debarred from that power of Voting in the Church, which pertains to Males in full communion. It seems not rational that those who are not themselves fit for all Ordinances, should have such an influence referring to all Ordinances, as Voting in Election of Officers, Admission and Censure of Members, doth import. For how can they, who are not able to examine and judge themselves, be thought able and fit to discern and judge in the weighty affairs of the house of God ? I Cor. II. 28, 31. with I Cor. 5. 12. [19] Proposition 5*. Church-members who were admitted in minority, understanding the Doctrine of Faith, and publickly professing their assent thereto ; not scandalous in life, and solemnly owning the Covenant before the Church, wherein they give up themselves and their Children to the Lord, and sub- ject themselves to the Government of Christ in the Church, their Children are to be Baptized. This is evident from the Arguments following. Argum : i. These children are partakers of that which is the 7nain ground of baptizing any children whatsoever, and neither the parents nor the children do put in any bar re to hinder it. I. That they partake of that which is the main ground of baptizing any, is clear; Because interest in the Covenant is the main ground of title to Baptism, and this these children have. i. Interest in the Covenant is the main ground of title to Baptism; for so in the Old Testament this was the ground of title to Circumcision, Gen 17. 7, 9, 10, II. to which Baptism now answers, Col. 2. 11, 12. and in Acts 2- 38, 39 they are on this ground exhorted to be baptized, because the promise or covenant was to them and to their children. That a member, or one in covenant, as such, is the subject of Baptism, was further cleared before in Propos. i. 2, That these children have in- terest in the covenant, appears; Because if the parent be in the cove- nant, the cliilde is also : for the covenant is to parents and their seed in their generations. Gen: 17. 7, 9. 772^ promise is to you and to your children. Acts 2. 39. If the parent stands in the Church, so doth the childe, among the Gentiles now, as well as among the Jews of old. Pom : 11. 16, 20, 21, 22. It is unheard of in Scripture, that the progress of the covenant stops at the infant-childe. But the parents in question are in covenant, as appears, i. Because they were once in covenant, and never since discovenanted. If they had not once been in covenant, they had not warrantably been baptized; and they are so still, except in some way of God they have been RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1662 329 discovenanted, cast out, or cut off from their covenant-relation, which these have not been: neither are persons once in covenant, broken off from [20] it according to Scripture, save for notorious sin, and incorrigibleness therein, Rom 11. 20. which is not the case of these parents. 2. Because the tenor of the covenant is to the faithfull and their seed after them in their generations, Gen: 17. 7 even to a thousand generations, i. e. conditionally, provided that the parents successively do continue to be keepers of the covenant, Exod: 20. 6. Deut : 7.- 9, 11 Psalm 105.- 8. which the parents in ques- tion are, because they are not (in Scripture-account in this case) forsakers or rejecters of the God and Covenant of their fathers: see Deut: 29. 25, 26. 2 Kings 17. • 15-20. 2 Chron: 7: 22 Deut: 7: 10. 2. That these parents in question do not put in any barre to hinder their children from Baptism, is plain from the words of the Proposition, wherein they are described to be such as understand the doctrine of Faith, and publickly profess their assent thereto : there- fore they put not in any barre of gross Ignorance, Atheism, Heresie or Infidelity : Also they are not scandalous in life, but solemnly own the covenant before the Church ; therefore they put not in any barre of Profaneness, or Wickedness, or Apostacy from the covenant, whereinto they entred in minority. That the infant-children in question do themselves put any barre, none will imagine. Argum : 2. The children of the parents in question are either children of the covenant, or strangers from the covenant, Eph : 2 : 12. either holy or unclean, i Cor: 7 .■ 14 either within the Church or with- out I Cor: 5: 12, either such as have God for their God, or without God in the woidd, Eph: 2:12. But he that considers the Proposition will not affirm the latter concerning these children .- and the former being granted, infers their right to Baptism. Argum : 3. To deny the Proposition, would be, i. To straiten the grace of Christ in the Gospel-dispensation, and to make the Church in New Testament-times in a worse case, relating to their children successively, then were the Jews of old. 2. To render the children of the Jews when they shall be called, in a worse conditiom thenunder the legal administration; contrary to y^r: 30: 20. Ezekiel' 37 : 25, 26. 3. To deny the application of the initiatory Seal to such as regularly stand in the Church and Co-[2i]venant, to whom the Mosaical dispensation, nay the first institution in the covenant oi Abraham, appointed it to be applied, Gen: 17: 9, 10. John 7 22, 23. 4. To break Gods covenant by denying the initiatory Seal to those that are in covenant. Gen: 17 : 9, 10, 14. Argum : 4. Confederate visible Believers, though but in the lowest 22 330 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT degree such, are to have their children baptized; witness the practice of John Baptist and the Apostles, who baptized persons upon the first beginning of their Christianity. But the parents in question are confederate visible Believers, at least in some degree : For, i. Charity may observe in them sundry positive Arguments for it ; witness the terms of the Proposition, and nothing evident against it. 2. Chil- dren^'of the godly quahfied but as the persons in the Proposition, are said to be faithfull, Tit : i. 6. 3. Children of the Covenant (as the Parents in question are) have frequently the beginning of grace wrought in them in younger years, as Scripture and experi- ence shews .' Instance, Joseph, Samuel, David, Solomon, Abijah, Josiah, Daniel, John Baptist, and Timothy. Hence this sort of per- sons showing nothing to the contrary, are in charity, or to Ecclesiastical reputation, visible Believers. 4. They that are regularly in the Church (as the Parents in question be) are visible Saints in the account of Scripture (which is the account of truth :) for the Church is, in Scripture-account, a company of Saints, 1 Cor: 14 : 33. & I. 2. 5. Being in covenant and baptized, they have Faith and Repentance indefinitely given to them in the Promise, and sealed up in Baptism, Deut. 30 .• 6. which continues valid, and so a valid testimony for them, while they do not reject it. Yet it doth not necessarily follow, that these persons are immediately fit for the Lords Supper; because though they are in a latitude of expres- sion to be accounted, visible Believers, or in numero fidelium, even as infants in covenant are, yet they may want that ability to ex- amine themselves, and that special exercise of Faith, which is requisite to that Ordinance ; as was said upon Propos. 4*- Argum: 5. The denial of Baplism to the children in question hath a dangerous tendency to Irreligion and Apostacy ; because it denies them, and [22] so the children of the Church successively, to have any part in the Lord ; which is the way to make them cease from fearing the Lord, Josh 22. 24, 25, 27. For if they have a part in the Lord, i. e. a portion in Israel, and so in the Lord the God of Israel, then they are in the Church, or members of it, and so to be baptized, according to Propos. i. The owning of the children of those that successively continue in covenant to be a part of the Church, is so far from being destructive to the purity and prosper- ity of the Church, and of Religion therein, (as some conceive) that this imputation belongs to the contrary Tenet. To seek to be more pure then the Rule, will ever end in impurity in the issue. God hath so framed his covenant, and consequently the constitu- tion of his Church thereby, as to design a continuation and propa- RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1662 331 gation of his Kingdome therein, from one generation to another. Hence the covenant runs to us and to our seed after us m their gen- erations. To keep in the line, and under the influence and efficacy of this covenant of God, is the true way to the Churches glory: To cut it off and disavow it, cuts off the posterity of Sion, & hin- ders it from being (as in the most glorious times it shall be) an eternal excellency, and the joy of many generations. This progress of the covenant establisheth the Church, Deut. 29 13. Jer. 30. 20. The contrary therefore doth disestablish it. This obligeth and advan- tageth to the conveyance of Religion down to after-generations ; the care whereof is strictly commanded, and highly approved by the Lord, Psal: 78. 4, 5, 6, 7. Gen. 18. 19. This continues a nursery still in Christ's Orchard or Vineyard, Isa. 5. i, 7. the contrary neg- lects that, and so lets the whole run to ruine. Surely God was an holy God, and loved the purity and glory of the Church in the Old Testament : but then he went in this way of a successive progress of the covenant to that end, Jer. 13. 11. If some did then, or do now decline to unbelief and apostacy, that doth not make the faith of God in his covenant of none effect, or the advantage of in- terest therein inconsiderable : yea the more holy, reforming and glorious that the times are or shall be, the more eminently is a successive continuation and propagation of the Church therein designed, promised and intended, Isa. 60. 15 6^ 59. 21. Ezek. 37. 25 - - 28. Ps. 102. 16 - - 28. Jer. 32. 39. [23] Argiim: 6. The parents in queslion are personal, imme- diate, and yet- continuing members of the Church. I. That they are personal members, or members in their own persons, appears, i. Because they are personally holy, i Cor. 7 14: not parents onely, but [your children] ' are holy. 2. They are per- sonally baptized, or have had Baptism, the seal of membership, applied to their own persons : which being regularly done, is a divine testimony that they are in their own persons members of the Church. 3. They are personally under discipline, and liable to Church-censures in their own persons ; vide Propos. 3. 4. They are personally (by means of the covenant) in a visible state of sal- vation. To say they are not members in their own persons, but in their parents, would be as if one should say. They are saved in their parents, and not in their own persons. 5. When they commit iniquity, they personally break the covenant ; therefore are person- ally in it, Jer. 11. 2, 10. Ezek. 16. ^ [ ] in original. 332 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT 2. By the like Reasons it appears that children are immediate members, as to the essence of membership, (/. e, that they them- selves in their own persons are the immediate subjects of this adjunct of Church-membership) though they come to it by means of their parents covenanting. For as touching that dis- tinction of mediate and immediate, as applied to membership, (which some urge) we are to distinguish i. between the efficient and the essence of membership : 2. between the instrumental efficient or means thereof, which is the parents profession and covenant- ing ; and the principal efficient, which is divine Institution. They may be said to be mediate (or rather mediately) members, as they become members by means of their parents covenanting, as an instrumental cause thereof : but that doth nothing vary or diminish the essence of their membership. For divine Institution giveth or granteth a real and personal membership unto them, as well as unto their parents, and maketh the parent a publick person, and so his act theirs to that end. Hence the essence of member- ship, /. e. Covenant-interest, or a place and portion within the visible Church, is really, properly, personally and immediately the portion of the childe by divine gift and grant, Josh. 22. 25, 27. their children [24] have a part in the Lord, as well as themselves. A part in the Lord there, and Church-membership (or membership in Lsrael) are terms equivalent. Now the children there, and a part in the Lord, are Subject and Adjunct, which nothing comes between, so as to sever the Adjunct from the Subject ; therefore they are immediate subjects of that Adjunct, or iifimediate members. Again, their visible ingraffing into Christ the head, and so into the Church his body, is sealed in their Baptism : but in ingraffing nothing comes betwixt the graft and the stock : Their union is immediate ; hence they are immediately inserted into the visible Church, or immediate mem- bers there of. The little children in Deut. 29. 11. were personally and immediately a part of the people of God, or members of the Church of Israel, as well as the parents. To be in covenant, or to be a covenantee, is t\\t fon?ialis ratio of a Church-member. If one come to be in covenant one way, and another in another, but both are in covenant or covenantees (i. e. parties with whom the cove- nant is made, and whom God takes into covenant) as the children here are. Gen. 17. 7, 8 then both are in their own persons the immediate subjects of the formalis ratio of membership, and so immediate members. To act in covenanting, is but the instru- mental means of membership, and yet children are not without this neither. For the act of the parent (their publick person) is RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1662 333 accounted theirs, and they are said to enter into covenant, Deut. 29. n, 12. So that what is it that children want unto an actual, compleat, proper, absolute and immediate membership ? (so far as these terms may with any propriety or pertinecy be applied to the mat- ter in hand.) Is it Covenant-interest, which is the formalis ratio of membership? No, they are in covenant. 11,11 divine grant and in- stitution, which is the principal efficient 1 No : he hath clearly de- clared himself, that he grants unto the children of his people a portion in his Church, and appoints them to be members thereof. Is it an act of covenanting, which is the instrumental means ? No : they have this also reputatively by divine appointment, making the parent a publick person, and accounting them to covenant in his covenanting. A different manner and means of conveying the covenant to us, or of [25] making us members, doth not make a different sort of membership. We now are as truly, personally and immediately members of the body of fain mankinde, and by nature heirs of the condemnation pertaining thereto, as Adam was, though he came to be so by his own personal act, and we by the act of our publick person. If a Prince give such Lands to a man and his heirs successively, while they continue loyal ; the following heir is a true and immediate owner of that Land, and may be per- sonally dis-inherited, if disloyal, as well as his father before him. A member is one that is according to Rule (or according to Divine Institution) within the visible Church. Thus the child is properly, & personally or immediately. Paul casts all men into two sorts, those within and those without, i. e. members and non- members, i Cor. 5. 12. It seems he knew of no such distinction of mediate and immediate, as put a medium between these two. Object. If children be compleat and immediate members as their parents are, then they shall immediately have all Church-priviledges, as their parents have, without any further act or qualification. Ans. It foUoweth not. All priviledges that belong to members, as such, do belong to the children as well as the parents: But all Church- priviledges do not so. A member as such, (or all members) may not partake of all priviledges ; but they are to make progress both in memberly duties and priviledges, as their age, capacity and qualifications do fit them for the same. 3. Tliat tlieir membership still continues in adult age, andceaseth not with their infancy, appears, i. Because in Scripture persons are broken off, onely for notorious sin, or incorrigible impenitency and unbelief, not for growing up to adult age, Rom. 11. 20. 2. The Jew-children circumcised did not cease to be. members by growing 334 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT up, but continued in the Church, and were by virtue of their mem- bership received in infancy, bound unto various duties, and in special unto those solemn personal professions that pertained to adult members, not as then entring into a 7iew membership, but as making a progress in memberly duties, Deut. 26. 2-10. 6^ 16. 16, 17 with Gal. 5. 3. 3. Those relations of born-servants and subjects, which the Scripture makes use of to set forth the state of children in the Church by. Lev. 25 41, 42. Ezek. 37. 25. do not, (as all men know) cease with infancy, but continue in adult age. Whence also it follows, that one special end of [26] membership received in in- fancy, is to leave persons under engagement to service and subjec- tion to Christ in his Church, when grown up, when they are fittest for it, and have most need of it. 4. There is no ordinary way of cessation of membership but by Death, Dismission, Excommunica- tion, or Dissolution of the Society : none of which is the case of the persons in question. 5. Either they are when adult, members or non-members: if non-members, then a person admitted a member, and sealed by Baptism, not cast out, or deserving so to be, may (the Church whereof he was still remaining) become a non-mem- ber, and out of the Church, and of the unclean world; which the Scripture acknowledgeth not. Now if the parent stand member of the Church, the childe is a member also .• For no-w the root is holy, therefore so are the branches, Rom. 11. 16. i Cor. 7. 14. The parent is in covenant, therefore so is the childe. Gen. 17. 7. and if the childe be a member of the visible Church, then he is a subject of Baptism, according to Propos i. Proposition 6'. Such Church-members, who either by death, or some other extra- ordinary Provide7ice, have been inevitably hindred from publick act- ing as aforesaid, yet have given the Church cause in judgment of charity, to look at them as so qualified, and such as had they been called thereunto, woicld have so acted, their children are to be Baptized. This is manifest, i. Because the main foundation of the right of the childe to priviledge remains, viz: Gods institution, and the force of his covenant carrying it to the generations of such as con- tinue keepers of the covenant, i. e. not visible breakers of it. By virtue of which institution a?id covenant, the children in question are members, and their membership being distinct from the parents membership, ceaseth not, but continues notwithstanding the parents decease or necessary absence : and if members, then subjects of Baptism. 2. Because the parents not doing what is required in the RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1 662 335 fifth Proposition, is through want of opportunity;,, which is not to be imputed as their guilt so as to be a barre to the childes privi- ledge. 3. God reckoneth that as done in his service, to which there was a manifest desire and endeavour, albeit the acting of it was hindred; as in David to build the Temple, i Kings 8 18, 19. in Abraham to sacrifice his Son, Heb. 11. 17. according to that in 2 Cor. 8. 12. Where [27] is a willing 7ninde, it is accepted according to ivhat a man hath, and not according to what he hath not : which is true of this Church-duty, as well as of that of Alms. It is an usual phrase with the Ancients to style such and such Martyrs in voto, and baptized in vote, because there was no want of desire that way, though their desire was not actually accomplished. 4. The terms of the Proposition import that in charity, that is here done interpretively, which is mentioned to be done in the fifth proposition expresly. Proposition 7"". The members of Orthodox Churches, beitig sound in the Faith, and not scandalous in life, and presenting due testimony thereof; these occasionally commi?ig from one Church to another, may have their children Baptized in the church whither they come, by virtue of Com- munion of Churches : but if they remove their habitation, they ought orderly to covenant and subject themselves to the Governmejit of Christ in the Church where they settle their abode, and so their children to be Baptized. It being the churches duty to receive such unto communion, so farre as they are regularly fit for the same. I. Such members of other Churches as are here described, occa- sionally coming from, one Church to another, their children are to be baptized in the Church whither they come, by virtue of Communion of Churches : i. Because he that is regularly a member of a true par- ticular Church, is a subject of Baptism, according to Propos. 1" &' 2^. But the children of the parents here described are such, ac- cording to Proposition s"" &= 6"". therefore they are meet and lawful subjects of Baptism, or have right to be baptized. And Coiumunion of Churches infers such acts as this is, viz: to baptize a fit subject of Baptism, though a member of another Church, when the same is orderly desired. (See Platform of Discipline, chap. 15. sect. 4) For look as every Church hath a double consideration, wz. i. Of its own constitution and communion within it self; 2. Of that com- munion which it holds and ought to maintain with other Churches: So the Officer {the Pastor or Teacher) thereof, is there set, i. To administer to this Church constantly ; 2, To do acts of Communion 33^ THE HALF-WAY COVENANT occasionally, {viz: such as belong to his Office, as JSaptizing doth) respecting the members of other Churches, with whom this Church holds or ought to hold communion. 2. To refuse Communion with a true Church zVz /aw- [2 8] full and pious actions, is unlawful, and justly accounted Schis- matical. For if the Church be true, Christ holdeth some com- munion with it; therefore so must we : but if we will not have communion with it in those acts that are good and pious, then in none at all. Total separation from a true Church, is unlawful : But to deny communion in good actions, is to make a total sep- aration. Now to baptize a fit subject, as is the childe in question, is a lawfull and pious action, and therefore by virtue of Communion of Churches, in the case mentioned to be attended. And if Baptism lawfully administred, may and ought to be received by us for our children, in another true Church, where Providence so casts us, as that we cannot have it in our own, (as doubtless it may and ought to be ;) then also we may and ought in like case to dispense Baptism, when desired, to a meet and lawfull subject, being a member of another Church. To deny or refuse either of these, would be an unjustifiable refusing of Communion of Churches, and tending to sinful separation. 2. [3] Such as remove their habitation, ought orderly to cove- nant and subject themselves to the Government of Christ in the Church, where they settle their abode, and so their children to be baptized ; I. Because the regularly baptized are disciples, and under the Discipline and Government of Christ: But they that are absolutely removed from the Church whereof they were, so as to be unca- pable of being under Discipline there, shall be under it no where, if not in the church where they inhabit. They that would have Churchpriviledges, ought to be under Church-power : But these will be under no Church-power, but as lambs in a large place, if not under it there, where their setled abode is. 2. Every Christian ought to covenant for himself and his children, or professedly to give up himself and his to the Lord and that in the way of his Ordinances, Deut. 26 17 &• 12. 5. and explicite covenanting is a duty, especially where we are called to it, and have opportunity for it : nor can they well be said to covenant implicitely, that do explicitely refuse a professed covenanting, when called there- unto. And especially this covenanting is a duty, when we would partake of such a Church-priviledge, as Baptism for our children is. But the parents in question will now be professed covenanters no where, if not in the Church where their fixed habitation is. RESULT OF THE SYNOD OF 1662 337 Therefore they ought orderly to covenant there, and so their children [29] to be baptized. 3. To refuse covenanting and subjection to Christ's Government in the Church where they live, being so re- moved, as to be utterly uncapable of it elsewhere, would be a walking disorderly, and would too much savour of profaneness and separation and hence to administer Baptism to the children of such as stand in that way, would be to administer Christ's Ordinances to such as are in a way of sin and disorder ; which ought not to be, 2 Thess. 3.61 Chron. 15. 13. and would be contrary to that Rule, i Cor. 14. 40. Let all things be done decently and in order. Quest. II "1 yl J Hether according to the Word of God there ought V V to be a Consociation of Churches, and what should be the manner of it ? Answ. The answer may be briefly given in the Propositions following. I. Every church or particular Congregation of visible Saints in Gos- pel-order, being furnished with a Presbytery, at least with a Teaching Elder, and walking together in truth and peace, hath received from the Lord fesus full power and authority Ecclesiastical within it self, regularly to administer all the Ordinances of Christ, and is not under any other Ecclesi- astical Jurisdiction whatsoever. For to such a Church Christ hath given the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven, that what they binde or loose on earth, shall be bound or loosed in heaven. Matt. 16. 19. & 18. 17, i8. Elders are ordained in every Church, Acts 14. 23. Tit. i. 5. and are therein authorized officially to administer in the Word, Prayer, Sacra- . ments and Censures, Mat. 28. 19, 20. Acts 6. 4. i Cor. 4. i. & 5. 4, 12. Acts 20. 28. I Tim. 5. 17. 6^ 3. 5. The reproving of the Church of Corinth, and of the Asiatt Churches severally, imports they had power, each of them within themselves, to reform the abuses that were amongst them, i Cor. 5. Rev. 2 14, 20. Hence it follows, that Con- sociation of Churches is not to hinder the exercise of this, power, but by counsel from the Word of God to direct and strengthen the same upon all just occasions. 2. The Churches of Christ do stand in a sisterly relation each to 338 THE HALF-WAY COVENANT other, Cant. 8. 8., being united in the same Faith and Order, Eph. 4. 5. Col. 2. 5. to walk by the same Rule, Phil. 3. 16. in the exercise of the [30] same Ordinances for the same ends, Eph. 4 11, 12, 13. i Cor. 16. i. under one and the same political Head, the Lord Jesus Christ, Eph. i. 22, 23 & 4. 5. Rev. 2. I. Which Union infers a Communion sutable thereto. 3. Communion of Churches is the faithfull improvement of the gifts of Christ bestowed upon them for his service and glory, and their mutuall good and edification, according to capacity and opportunity, i Pet. 4. 10, II. I Cor. 12. 4, 7. & 10. 24. I Cor. 3. 21, 22. Cantic 8. 9. Rom I. 15. Gal. 6. 10 4. Acts of Communion of Churches are such as these : 1. Hearty Care and Prayer one for another, 2 Cor. 11. 28. Cant. 8. 8 Rom. I. 9. Cellos. 1. 9. Eph. 6. 18. 2. To afford Relief by communication of their Gifts in Temporal or Spiritual necessities. Rom. 15. 26, 27. Acts 11. 22, 29. 2 Cor. 8. I, 4, 14. 3. To maintain Unity and Peace, by givhig account 07ie to another of their publick actions, when it is orderly desired, Acts 1 1 . 2, 3, 4-18. Josh. 22. 13, 21, 30. I Cor. 10 32. and to strengtlien 07ie another in their regular Administrations ; as in special by a con- current testiinony against persons justly censured. Acts 15. 41. & 16. 4, 5. 2 Tim. 4. 15. 2 Thess. 3. 14. 4. To seek and accept Help from, and give Help unto each other: 1. In case of Divisions and Contentions, whereby the peace of any Church is disturbed. Acts 15. 2. 2. In matters of more then ordinary importance ^ [Prov. 24. 6. 15. & 22] a'* Ordination, Translation, and Deposition of Elders, and suchlike, I Tim. 5. 22. 3. In doubtful and difficult Questions and Controversies, Doctrinal or Prac- tical, that may arise. Acts 15 2, 6. 4. For the rectifying of mal-Administrations , and healing of Errours and Scandals, that are unhealed amojig themselves, 3 fohn ver : 9, 10. 2 Cor. 2. 6-II. I Cor. 15. Hev : 2 : 14, 15, 16. 2 Cor. 12. 20, 21, &= 13 2. Churches now have need of help in lil. L. And are to be sold in Paul's Church-yard, Fleet- \ Street, and Westminster-Hall, i6^g} V. 4. Another small print edition, London, \ Printed by J. P. and are to be sold in S Pauls Church- \ yard, Fleet-Street, and at Westminster-Hall, \ i6jg. VI. A Latin translation, by Prof. Johannes Hoornbeek of Leyden, appeared at Utrecht in 1662 under the title Confessio nuper edita Independentium. seu Congre- gationalium in Anglia.^ Other editions appeared in English as follows,'' VII. 1677, 18°. VIII. 1688, 18°. IX. 1729, 8°. X. Ipswich, 1745, 8°. XI. Oswestry, 1812, 8°. The revived interest in the history of Congregationalism has led to several reprints, more or less complete. I. In Hanbury, Memorials, III ; 517-548 ; entire. II. By Dr. A. H. Quint, Congregational Quarterly, Vl\l : 241-261, 341-344, (July and October 1866) ; without the preface. Dr. Quint gives a full list of vari- ations from the Westminster Confession and the Massachusetts Confession of 1680. 1 This edition may be distinguished from No. 11. by the presence, on an unnumbered page between pp. 53 and 54, oi a list o£ books for sale. In Nos. I. and II. this page is blank, and is reckoned in the paging of tlie book. In No. III. the title to Ch. V. p. 10 is inverted, in Nos. I. and II. it is in the usual order. Many differences of punctuation may also be found. 2 This is the text used by Dr. Quint in the Cong. Quart., viii : pp. 241-261, 341-344 ; and Prof. Schaff in \.\i& first edition of his Creeds, III, p. 707. 3 See Neal, Puritans, ed. New York, 1844, II; 178; Hanbury, Me7norials, III: 517: Schalf, Creeds, I : 829. ■• I am indebted for my information regarding Nos. VII-XI to William Orme's Memoirs of . . . John Owen, in Works of John Owen, London, 1826, I : 183. (340) ITS LITERATURE '341 III. By Prof. Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, III : 707-729 ; the preface and the portions relating to church government are given in full, but only those sec- tions of the Declaration of Faith which differ from the Westminster Confession, to be found earlier in the same volume. Sources Peck, Desiderata Curiosa, London 1779, II : 501-512 ; contains sixteen letters relating to the summons of the Synod. Literature Neal, History of the Puritans, ed. New York, 1844, II : 177-180 ; Bogue & Bennett, History of Dissenters, London, 1808, 2"'' ed. 1833, I : 181, 182 ; Orme, Memoirs of . . . John Owen, in Works of John Owen, London, 1826, I : 172-183; Price, History of Protestant Nonconformity in England, London, 1838, II : 619-623 ; Hanbury, Memorials, III : 515-548 ; Fletcher, History of . . . Independency in England, London, 1862, IV ; 1T]-1']() ; Schaff, Creeds of Christen- dom, 'i^ewYorV, 1877, I: 829-833; Masson, Life of John Milton, London, 1859-80, V : 343-345 ; Dexter, Congregationalism, as seen in its Literatttre, pp. 661-663 I Stoughton, History of Religion in England, ed. London, 1881, II : 488, 489. Some points of interest regarding this Declaration, and its relations to the New England Churches, may be found in Lawrence, Our Declaration of Faith and the Confession, in Congregational Quarterly, VIII : 173-190. IT was the desire of the Puritans, from the opening of the Long Parliament, that there should be a general council of representatives of the English Church to consider and recom- mend such changes as seemed necessary, in the opinion of a great party in the nation, for that Church's further reformation. This wish found expression in the Grand Remonstrance ; and bills authorizing such an assembly were enacted in June, Octo- ber, and December, 1642, but failed for lack of the king's assent.' But the increasing danger of the political situation, owing to the unexpected strength shown by the king after the outbreak of the civil war, induced Parliament to call the desired assembly by its own unsupported ordinance, on June 12, 1643, — a result doubt- less hastened by the knowledge that such a council would be acceptable to the Scotch, whose military aid seemed indispensa- ble. The composition of this celebrated body was determined by the Parliamentary call, which summoned one hundred and forty-nine persons'" by name to a share in its proceedings; and, in spite of the prohibition of the Westminster Assembly by the king, sixty-nine of those invited gathered on the opening day. 1 See Dexter, Cong, as seen, pp. 645-648. 2 Really 150, see ante, p. 136, 342 THE SAVOY DECLARATION July I, 1643. Its average attendance was from sixty to eighty. Of the membership of the ecclesiastical council thus constituted the vast majority were, of course, jure divino Presbyterians, since Presbyterianism was not only the form of church polity approved in Scotland, but that to which the greater portion of the Puri- tans of England looked with hope at the outbreak of the civil war. Parliament, however, intended to be catholic in its call, and therefore invited certain Episcopalians' (though scarce any came), a few Erastians, like the scholars, Selden, Lightfoot, and Coleman, and, what attracts our chief attention, nearly a dozen Congregationalists, — all, even the Episcopalians summoned, being affiliated more or less closely with the great Puritan party. Ten or eleven Congregationalists, or Independents^ as they were more usually called, could have no decisive influence among so many Presbyterians, and of this number only about five could be accounted at all times thorough-going opponents of Presby- terian designs. These were Thomas Goodwin and Philip Nye, the most powerful debaters on the Congregational side, William Bridge, Jeremiah Burroughes, and Sidrach Simpson. They had all suffered persecution under Laud, and had all gone to Holland, where they had ministered to English congregations at Rotter- dam,^ and Arnheim;* and had returned to take positions of influ- ence in England as soon as the tyranny of Laud was overthrown. With them were associated more or less intimately in the defense of Independency in the Assembly, William Carter of London, Joseph Caryl of Lincoln's Inn, William Green of Pentecomb, William Greenhill of Stepney, Peter Sterry of London, John Bond of the Savoy, London, and (possibly) Anthony Burgess of Sut- ton.* But though few in numbers, the Congregationalists in the Assembly were the peers of any of its membership in power of debate. They commanded respect much beyond that due to ^ A good account of these parties is given by Schaff, Creeds 0/ Christendom^ 1 : 734-747. 2 On the use of this name, compare Fletcher, Hist. . . . 0/ Independency., London, 1862, IV : 23, 24. 3 Bridge and Burroughes as pastor and teacher. ^ Goodwin. ^ See Baillie, Letters and Journals, ed. Edinburgh, 1841-2, II : no; Fletcher, Hist, Independency, IV : 23, 24 ; Schaff, Creeds, I : 737. Of the laymen in the Assembly, Lord Say and Sele, Lord Wharton, and Sir Harry Vane, sided with the Independents. CONGREGATIONALISTS AT WESTMINSTER 343 their numerical weight.' Their disagreement with the Presby- terians was not on points of doctrine ; the struggle between the two parties so unequally matched was over polity; and, later, over the degree of toleration to be granted to the minor differ- ences of religious sects as well/ Yet, while there can be no doubt as to the keenness and co- gency of the Congregational champions in argument, it is hardly conceivable that they would have been listened to and answered with such patience by the great men of the Presbyterian ma- jority, had it not early become evident that the progress of the war was resulting in the rapid spread of Independency in Eng- land. It was the consciousness that the Congregational debat- ers represented a party of unknown but increasing power in Par- liament and the army that made the Presbyterian leaders bear with their arguments and objections.' It was the same con- sciousness on the part of the Congregational members that made them oppose and delay the Presbyterian models of Church-gov- ernment, and, as early as January, 1644, led Goodwin, Nye, Bridge, Burroughes, and Simpson, to appeal from the Assembly to the Parliament which created it, and from which it derived all its right to be. This appeal, the Apologeticall Narration,'' though claiming to be nothing more than a request that the government would not send the adherents of Congregationalism into a second exile,* was really an attempt to transfer the so'lution of the ques- tion between Presbyterianism and Congregationalism from the Assembly to a higher tribunal, — the opinion of Parliament and of the nation. As such, it was in some measure successful. Nine months after its publication, Cromwell, fresh from his victory at 1 The work of the Independents in the Assembly is well described in Masson, Life o/John Milton^ III. passim. See also Dexter, Cong, as seen, pp. 656, 657. 2 " Moreover, if in all matters of Doctrine^ we [Congregationalists] were not as Ortkodoxe i.l our judgements as our brethren [the Presbyterians] themselves, we would never have exposed our selves to this tryall and hazard of discovery in this Assembly. . . . But it is sufiFiciently Vno'fin \^a.\.\.na>X points 0/ doctrine . . . our judgements have still concurred with the great- est part of our brethren, neither do we know wherein we have dissented," Apologeticall Nar- ration., pp. 28, 29. Regarding the growth of a spirit of toleration among the Independents in the Assembly see Fletcher, Hist. . . . Independency, IV : 29-74. 3 Compare Masson, Milton, III : 20-26. ^ An Apologeticall Narration, Hvvibly Submitted to the Honourable Houses 0/ Parlia- ment, London, 1643 (really January, 1644, .see on date Dexter, Cong, as seen, p. 659.) 5 Apol. Narration, pp. 30, 31. ^ 344 THE SAVOY DECLARATION Marston Moor, and well known to be a Congregationalist in sym- pathy, induced Parliament so far to recognize the rights of the Independents as to refer the general question of toleration to its most important committee, that of the "Two Kingdoms.'" But, spite of all they could do in debate, the weight of num- bers gave the victory to the Presbyterians in the Assembly point by point. And something beside numbers favored the Presby- terians also. They were ready with the offer of a definite plan of church government. The Independents were not. They op' posed the Presbyterian system in detail, but they could not be induced to present their own views in full systematic form. The Assembly justly complained of this unwillingness.^ But the rea- son of it is not far to seek. The power behind the Congrega- tionalists in the Assembly was the constantly growing ascend- ency of the Independents in the army. These army Independents were many shades of opinion,'' and for their diversities of view the leaders, like Cromwell, claimed large toleration. To come out with a definite statement of their own theories was to ex- pose the Congregationalists in the Assembly to the loss of a support that was very desirable, for though many were willing to unite with them in opposition to the proposed enforcement of Presbyterian uniformity, the diversity of opinion among the Independents in the army was too manifest to make union in anything but dissent probable. That this was the reason of the 1 See Masson, Milton, III : i68, 169. The composition of the committee is given, Ibid., p. 41. 2 See A Copy 0/ a Remonstrance lately delivered in to the Assembly. By Thomas Good- win. lerein: Burroughs. William Creenhill. William Bridge. Philip Nie. Sidrach Simson. and William Carter. Declaring the Grounds and Reasons 0/ their declining to bring into the Assembly, their Modell of Church-Government. London 1645. The Assembly answered the same year. The Answer Of the Assembly 0/ Divines . . . Unto the Reasons given in to this Assembly by the Dissenting Brethren [etc.] London 1645. They say : " The Assembly hath still great and just cause to expect a report from these Brethren ; Those of their way having pub- lished in Print that these Brethren are ivillingto do it. The Assembly having Ordered it, the Brethren having held the Assembly six moneths in expectation of it, . . . Vpon which con- siderations we think . . . that tljey have some other cause then what they pretend to, and that something lies behinde the curtain. . . . Possibly they cannot d^ree among themselves (for it is easier to agree in dissenting, then in affirming) or possibly if they seven can agree, yet some other of their. Brethren in the City, to whom it may be the Model was communicated, did not like it ; or if so, yet possibly the Brethren might foresee, that if this Model should be pub- lished, there are some who at present are a strength to them, and expect shelter from them, may disgust it," p. 24. ^ Some account of the sects in the army may be found in Masson, Milton, III : 84-91, 137-159. CONGREGATIONALISM IN POWER 345 refusal of the Congregationalists to formulate their views in the Assembly, the Presbyterians not obscurely hinted.' But these Congregationalists had conceptions definite enough, though they did not deem it politic to define them in their own words. They published and circulated with approval the works of the lead- ers of New England, like Cotton's Keyes^ and Way of the Churches, they assiduously propagated Congregational sentiments and op- posed Presbyterian positions ; but they did not expose themselves to condemnation in the Assembly, and the loss of needed, if somewhat uncertain, supporters without, by presenting their sys- tem in concrete and elaborated form. But a few years brought great changes. The rise of the army to the real control in England, the falling away of the Scotch and their defeat in the second civil war,' the successive expulsions of the Presbyterians from Parliament,' the execution of the king, and the establishment of a Commonwealth under the control of Cromwell, removed the Congregationalists from the position of suppliants for Parliamentary toleration and placed them at least on a political equality with the Presbyterians ; while their leaders enjoyed a greater degree of personal favor with Cromwell and the heads of his government than those of any other religious party. They were Cromwell's chaplains,' and the more distinguished Independents received educational and ecclesiastical livings at the hands of the government, the tenure of which, though agreeable, was not always very consistent with- Congregational principles." Such favor from the State, though it did not make Independency the State religibn, placed the Con- * Compare p. 344, note 2. 2 It bears the inscription on the title page, " Published By Tho. Goodwin and PHilipNye." ' s Battle of Preston, Aug. 18, 1648. 4 The dismissal of the eleven members, 1647, and " Pride's Purge," Dec. 6, 1648', brought Par-- liament wholly under the control of the army. * Of Cromwell's chaplains Peter Sterry and John Howe were English Congregationalists, while Hugh Peter and William Hooke had had ministerial experience in New England, the one- at Salem, the other at New Haven. William Bridge was offered the chaplaincy of the Council of_ State in Nov. 1649 ; but declined. 8 Thomas Goodwin became Pres. Magdalen Coll., Oxford: John Owen was Dean of Christ Church and Vice-Chancellor at Oxford ; Philip Nye, Rector of St. Bartholomew's, Lon- don ; Joseph Caryl, Rector of St. Mary's Magnus. To accept the last named positions implied,., in some degree at least, the acknowledgment of a National Church and of a right of appointment, other than the will of the congregation. 23 346 THE SAVOY DECLARATION gregationalists in a position where they naturally took a more conservative attitude than when they were simply struggling for a right to live, and were glad to accept aid from whatever source. Their numbers were multiplying, their preachers were respected, it seemed in every way desirable that they should now define their position doctrinally and ecclesiastically. Such action would bring them greater union, it would mark their separation from the various sectaries who sheltered themselves under the Inde- pendent name, and it was now open to none of the dangers which had threatened when Presbyterianism was all-powerful. The lead- ing Congregationalists determined to have a Confession of their own ; they would, without making their creed a test to which they required rigid conformity, bear testimony to their faith, and enjoy the fraternal communion to the existence of which no pub- lic declarations of Congregational ministers and churches in Eng- land had heretofore witnessed.' Thus far we can trace the probable course of events which led to the gathering at the Savoy, but unfortunately, as one of the most learned of modern English Congregationalists has ob- served, " very much obscurity rests " on the preparations for that Assembly.' It seems certain, however, that the motion toward a Synod went out from the Independent divines in Cromwell's neighborhood, and probably took the form of a petition.' The Protector was naturally reluctant to summon a meeting which might possibly increase that friction between Presbyterians and Congregationalists which was the most threatening feature of the political situation,' but he gave his consent and allowed the proposed Synod to have the countenance, in an informal way, of his government. The call for the Assembly did not run in the name of the Commonwealth. It was not official in the same sense as the summons of the Westminster Assembly by Parliament ; but the letters went forth from Henry Scobell, clerk 1 See Preface to Savoy Declaration^ pp. iii, iv, xiii. '^ Dr. John Stoughton, History of Religion in England^ II : 488, 489. 3 Such is the view of Neal. Echard, Omie, Stoughton, Dexter, Schaff, Fletcher, etc. It is probably true, though it would be grateful if documents should be discovered illuminating this obscure part of the story. < Neal, Hist. 0/ the Puritans^ ed. New York, 1844, II : 178. ORIGIN OF THE SYNOD 347 of the Council of State, and were recognized by their recipients as having governmental approval. The first summons was for a meeting preparatory to the Synod. On June 15, 1658, Scobell wrote to the ministers of London and vicinity as follows : ' "Sir, the meeting of the elders of the congregationall churches in & about London, is appointed at Mr. Griffith's'' on Monday next, at two of the clocke in the afternoone, where you are desired to be present. I am, Sir, yours to love & serve you in the Lord, Hen. Scobell." June XV. MDCLVIII. This preliminary meeting took place on the day appointed, June 21, and by its authorization letters were sent by Mr. Griffith, " in the name ... of the congregationall elders in & about London,'" to leading Congregational ministers in the several counties where such churches were to be found, asking them to notify the churches in their respective neighborhoods to be present by pastors and delegates at the Savoy* in London on Wednesday, the 29th of September following. These letters, which were sent out on or about the 20th of August,* are not known to me to have been preserved, but the replies, returned not to Griffith but to Scobell, exist to the number of fifteen. An example or two may suffice : ' "Sir, Two dayes ago I received a letter from Mr. Griffith, giving notice of a meeting that is to be of pastours or messengers of the severall congregationall churches on xxix of September next at the Savoy, & of some other things.' I am therein directed to signify the receipt of it by the first post to you ; which is the end of theis few lines from. Sir, your humble servant, Samuel Basnet, teacher of a church in Coventry. ^ Peck, Desiderata Curiosa^ London, 1779, II : 501, 2 George Griffith, minister at the Charter House, London, 1648-1661. See Wilson, Hist. . . . Dissenting Churches and Meeting: Houses in London^ 'Load.ony iZo'i, Tl : 516-518, 3 Reply in Peck, Desiderata Curiosa, II : 510. ^ The Savoy Palace was erected on the bank of the Thames by Peter, earl of Savoy and Richmond, in 1245. It passed through various vicissitudes, being the place of confinement of John II. of France, when a prisoner, 1357-63 ; John of Gaunt later made it his palace. It had been at one time a convent, and in 1505 was made a hospital by Henry VII. In Cromwell's time it sheltered various court officers ; and it had the reputation of being a meeting place for Dissenters, ,and for representatives of the Continental Protestant churches. s The replies, returned immediately on the receipt of the letters, are dated, with the excep- tion of two belated epistles, between August 24 and Sept, 4, The letter to William Bridge at Yar- mouth was dated Aug, 20. ^ Peck, Desiderata Curiosa^ II : 508, 509, 'The third point of Griffith's letter related to "subscription" — see Reply of Thomas Gilbert, Peck, II : 509. I am unable to say what was intended. 348 THE SAVOY DECLARATION Theis to the honourable Henery Scobell esq ; clerk of his hignes privy councill at Whitehall, present." "Worthy Sir, I have lately received a letter from Mr. Griffith, in name of the brethren at London, whereby I am desired to certify you of the receipt thereof. This is then only to let you understand, that on the xxvi. of August I received his letters dated the xx. of August. And I shall take care that coppyes of the letters be sent unto all the churches in our countye; ' continueing your servant in the gospel of Christ Jesus, Yarmouth, Aug. xxviii. William Bridge." MDCLVIII. In a similar way William Hughes of Marlborough promised to notify the churches of Wiltshire, Bankes Anderson of Boston and Edward Reyner of Lincoln those of Lincolnshire, Isaac Loeffs of Shenley the congregations of Hertfordshire, Thomas Gilbert of Edgemond those of Salop, Samuel Grossman of Sudbury those of Suffolk, Anthony Palmer and Carn[elms?] Helme of Bourton-on- the-water the churches of Gloucestershire, Thomas Palmer of Aston-upon-Trent those of Derby and Nottinghamshire, John Player of Canterbury those of Kent, while Vavasor Powell under- took to inform the churches of Wales. Most of the answers, though brief, are cordial, one or two are apparently guarded, and one slightly suspicious that some political design might be lurking behind the proposed Synod,'' but, speaking in general, the letters make it evident that the response of the ministers as a whole was hearty. Between the sending of the summons and the meeting of the Synod a momentous event occurred, the full political and ecclesi- astical significance of which was not at once apparent, but which was to render futile much of the work of the Synod. The great Protector died, September 3, 1658, and was succeeded by his feeble son, Richard. In spite of this untoward event, however, the Synod met at the Savoy at the time appointed, September 29, having present the representatives of about a hundred and twenty churches.' It is probable that the majority were laymen,' as at = Norfolk. 2 That of Thomas Gilbert of Edgemond, Peck, II: 509. 3 Increase Mather, who was in England during the session of the Synod, said, writing in 1700 [Order 0/ the Gospel, p. 75): " Messengers of One hundred and Twenty Congregational Churches in England, who met at the Savoy in London.^' Orme, Works 0/ John Owen, I ; 176, gives the total membership at the very probable figure of " about two hundred," and Dr. Dexter follows him. ■1 Neal, Puritans, ed. New York, 1844, II : 178, asserts this. ORGANIZATION OF THE SYNOD 349 the Massachusetts Synod of 1662; but the leading Congregational ministers of England were of the membership. Who its modera- tors were it is impossible to say, but Thomas Goodwin, John Owen, and Philip Nye ' were all prominent in its proceedings, and were each well fitted for such a duty; John Howe, the Protector's chap- lain, though conspicuous, was probably too young to have any very important part. The opening day was spent in discussion as to the course of procedure,'' the question being, as reported by tradition when Neal wrote, whether they should amend the Westminster Confession, or draw up a new symbol on substantially the same lines. ^ The latter plan prevailed, and a Committee of the most influential divines that Congregationalism could boast, Thomas Goodwin, John Owen, Philip Nye, William Bridge, Joseph Caryl, and WilHam Greenhill, were chosen to prepare and report the desired confession." Every member of this Committee except Owen had borne his share in the Westminster Assembly. At the same time George Griffith was elected scribe of the Synod." The work of the Committee, so far as completed, was reported each morning by the scribe to the whole Assembly," and discussed, sometimes in speeches of consid- erable elaboration;' but so little was there of novelty in the result, that the Synod, having much time on its hands, was able to devote a large portion of its hours to hearing disputes in churches" and to the more devotional exercises of fasting and prayer." Even thus the session was brief. The labors of the Committee were unani- mously approved," and the Savoy Synod adjourned on Tuesday, 1 Of Nye, Calamy records, he " was a principal person in managing the meeting of the cot> gregational churches at the Savoy" Non-Con/orniisf s Mejnorial^ ed. London, 177s, 1 : 87. 2 The Preface says, p. xi, " The first days meeting, in which we considered and debated what to pitch upon." Neal recorded, Puritans^ II : 178 : ** They opened their synod with a day of fast- ing and prayer." There is no necessary conflict between the two statements. 3 Neal, Puritans^ 11 : 178. Neal's work was originally published in 1732-38. 4 Ibid. " Ibid. « Ibid. ' "Such rare elaborate speeches my ears never heard before, nor since. All along, there was a most sweet harmony of both hearts and judgments amongst them." Rev. James Forbes, a mem- ber, quoted by Orme, Works 0/ John Owen^ I: 181. 8 Neal, Ibid. " '* We had some days of prayer and fasting, kept from morning till night," James Forbes, quoted by Orme. ^0 Calamy, Account 0/ the Ministers.^ etc., ed. London, 1713, II : 444. See also Pre/ace to the Declaration itself, p. xi. 350 THE SAVOY DECLARATION October 12, 1658, after a session of twelve working days.' Shortly after, the result was formally presented to the new Protector, Richard Cromwell, by Rev. Thomas Goodwin, who had been dele- gated for that work by the Assembly.'' The Savoy Synod seem to have been almost surprised at the unanimity which they discovered among the representatives of the churches, a unanimity that was the more gratifying since these churches had never had any previous consultation;* and the writer of the Preface to the Declaration was convinced that such unity must be the direct work of the Spirit of God.* Without question-, ing his faith, however, it is easy to discover causes less clearly supernatural. There was very little that was original in the work of the Synod. The Committee which prepared the result had shared, for the most part, in the deliberations of the Westminster Assembly. Like the Congregationalists of New England, they had nothing but approval for most of the doctrinal work of that famous body. Some sections of the Westminster Confession they desired to omit; but even here their task had largely been mapped out for them, for Parliament in approving the Westminster result had struck out those sections most displeasing to the Independ- ents. '^ The work of omission was thus comparatively easy; the Committee simply did more largely what Parliament had begun. But beside these omissions, the Savoy divines amended the phrase- ology of many passages, in general without important alteration of the sense; this is notably the case in the fifteenth chapter (on Re- pentance), which was wholly rewritten. They emphasized the 1 Compare Pre/ace^ p. xi, where eleven working days are reckoned, omitting the opening day. ^ See Orme, Works 0/ Jolm O'wen^ 1 : 182, 183, wliere a quotation is given from Goodwin's address to the Protector. Orme quotes from a Catalogue 0/ the places where Richard Cromwell was proclaimed^ p. 25. 3 Pre/ace^ p. xiii. ^ Ibid., p. xii. & The Westminster Confession was reported to Parliament Dec. 4, 1646, under the title of Hu77ible Advice 0/ the Assembly of Divines. But the Commons moved slowly. On April 22, 1647, they asked for proof-texts, which the Assembly furnished. Still they were not satisfied. The less reluctant General Assembly of Scotland adopted the Confession, as it came from the Assembly at Westminster, on Aug. 27, 1647; but Parliament still debated, and finally, on June 20, 1648, adopted the Confession, with the omission of Ch. XX, § 4 (relating to the punishment of heresy, etc.); Ch. XXIV, §8 4 (in part), 5, 6 (on divorce); Ch. XXX entire (on church censures); and Ch. XXXI en- tire (on synods and councils). At the same time Parliament changed the title to Articles 0/ Christian Religion. The fact that Scotland adopted the original form, and that Presbyterianism soon broke down in England, prevented the emendations of Parliament from acquiring permanency. NATURE OF THE DECLARATION 351 vicarious nature of Christ's sacrifice in cliapters eight and eleven. They defined the nature of the law given to Adam in chapter nine- teen. They asserted the rightfulness of toleration in non-essen- tials in chapter twenty-four. They omitted the declaration that baptism admits to the visible church in chapter twenty-nine. All these changes are of a minor nature. More important is the addi- tion of a whole chapter, the twentieth, Of the Gospel, and of the extent of the Grace thereof, which though intensely Calvinistic, and in no way antagonistic to the Westminster Confession, is neverthe- less a pleasing token of that readiness, always characteristic of Congregationalism, to hold forth the more gracious aspects of the religion of Christ, in at least as clear a light as the sanctions of law. Yet when these alterations in the Confession have been summed up, the impression remains that all that was really essen- tial had been anticipated in the omissions made by Parliament. No wonder such slight emendations, suggested by men of such influence, found ready acceptance. The really original work of the Savoy Synod was not upon the Confession, but is contained in the thirty sections relating to church-order appended to it. Here is a brief, compact, and lucid presentation of the main features of Congregationalism: — the headship of Christ, the constitution of the local church by the union of believers, its complete autonomy, its right to choose and ordain the officers appointed by Christ, the necessity of a call from a church to confer ministerial standing, the consent of the brethren as essential to all admissions and censures, synods or councils for advice but without judicial authority. But though these principles are made evident, and though they would hardly have been so fully formulated had it not been for the Cambridge Platform, the thirty sections adopted at the Savoy are far inferior as a working manual to the New England document. They breathe the hazy atmosphere of theoretic and non-consolidated Congregationalism, resembling in this respect the symbols of the closing years of the previous century. The grand outlines of the polity are rough-drawn, but the detail is not yet sketched in. The men who drew it had not beheld the workings of Congregational- 352 THE SAVOY DECLARATION ism as an exclusive or even predominant polity.' Had they done so they would have attempted to answer some of the practical questions which such an experience would have raised. There is also not the slightest hint in the document that the divines at the Savoy felt any interest in those questions regarding baptism and church membership by which contemporary New England was being turmoiled. As presented to the public, the result of the Savoy Assembly was preceded, it cannot be said fortified, by a long, dreary Preface, alleged to have been written by John Owen.^ If that able man really wrote it, and it is not improbable that he did, it is certainly one of the weakest productions that ever came from his pen.^ Its chief merit, aside from the few facts which it contains as to the course of events in the Synod, is its spirit of tolerance toward Christians of differing beliefs, — a tolerance as creditable as it was unusual in that age.' The Savoy Synod and its Declaration faded quickly from men's minds in the turmoils of Richard Cromwell's protectorate and the ruin which overtook Independents and Presbyterians alike at the Restoration. It excited no controversy, save a bitter de- nunciation from Richard Baxter, who looked upon it as a menace to the union of Presbyterians and Independents which he desired to effect;' and a criticism, at a later period, upon its orthodoxy and consistency by Peter du Moulin, an Anglican minister of French 1 A number of those who sat in the Assembly at the Savoy must have been in New England, but none such were of the committee to whom the formulation of the result was entrusted. 2 Orme, Works of John Owen, I; 177. Owen is too well known to need any extended notice. He was born in 1616, graduated at O.xford E.A. in 1632 and M.A. in 1635, entered holy orders, but believed that he experienced conversion some time after through a chance sermon. He became identified with the Presbyterian wing of Puritanism, but was turned to Congregationalism by Cotton's Keyes, which he first read with the intention of refuting. In 1651 he was made dean of Christ Church Coll., Oxford, he sat in Parliament as representative of the University, in 1654 he became one of the "Tryers" for ministerial fitness. The returned Presbyterian Parliament put him out of office at Oxford in March, 1660. In 1663 he was invited to fill the place of Norton as teacher of the Boston, Mass., church, but declined, thinking himself more needed in England. He died Aug. 24, 1683. The best account of him is that by Orme, Works of John Owen, London, 1826, Vol. I., where a full list of his numerous writings will be found. 3 Dexter, Cong: as seen, styles it : " over long and not over strong." ^ See Preface, pp. iii, iv, viii-x. " For the ungenerous criticisms passed by Baxter on the Declaration and its framers, see his autobiogi-aphy, Mr, Richard Baxter^ s Narrative of the Most Me7norable Passages of his Life and Times, Sylvester's ed., London, 1696, Pt. I: pp. 103, 104. Compare Neal, Puritans, ed. New York, 1844, II : 179, i8o. FATE OF THE DECLARATION 353 birth, who had misunderstood its teachings or obtained an erroneous copy of its Declaration. To the latter critic Owen replied with some asperity.' In England the course of events buried the Savoy Declaration in such oblivion that when Neal wrote, three-quarters of a century after its publication, he could affirm that even the Independents of his day had largely laid it aside for the more familiar works of the AVestminster Assembly.^ Had the Savoy Declaration never gone beyond the shores of the land of its birth it would have been one of the most ephemeral of symbols; but its lasting use was to be in New England. Adopted by a Massachu- setts Synod at Boston in 1680 with a few immaterial modifications, and similarly accepted for Connecticut at Saybrook in 1708, its doctrinal confession long continued a recognized standard for the Congregational churches of America. They have never formally set it aside, and though in Congregational polity a general creed has binding authority only in so far .as local churches accept it, this Savoy Confession, as slightly changed in 1680, was declared by the Council of 1865 — an assembly representative of the whole body of the Congregational churches of the United States — to embody substantially the faith to which those churches are pledged.^ In its Saybrook form it was established by law as the recognized doctrinal standard of the churches of Connecticut, and so continued till 1784. The appended sections regarding church order were never ratified on this side of the Atlantic; in New Eng- land the ampler Platform adopted at Cambridge in 1648 rendered them superfluous, and it was, therefore, only the Savoy Synod's amended form of the Westminster Confession that survived the downfall of the English Commonwealth. 1 The reply of Owen to Du Moulin gives us our knowledge of this controversy. It may be found in Orme's Memoir, Works of John Owen, 1 : 365-368. Though undated, a reference to Owen's Doctrine 0/ Justification shows that the letter must be later than 1677. 2 Neal, Puritans, II : 178. 3 Burial Hill Declaration, on later page of this work : " We, Elders and Messengers of the Congregational churches of the United States in National Council as.sembled, ... do now de- clare our adherence to the faith and order of the apostolic and primitive churches held by our fathers, and substantially as embodied in the confessions and platforms which our Synods of 1648 and 1680 set forth or reaffirmed." THE SAVOY DECLARATION A I DECLARATION | of the | FAITH and ORDER | Owned and practised in tiie | Congregational Churches I IN I ENGLAND ; | Agreed upon and consented unto | By their I ELDERS and MESSENGERS | IN | Their Meeting at the SAVOY, October 12. 1658. | | | LONDON: \ Printed by John Field, and are to be sold by | John Allen 2A. the Sun Rising in Pauls \ Church-yard, 1658. [ii blank] [iii] A PREFACE. Confession of the Faith that is in us, when justly called for, is so indispen- sable a due all owe to the Glory of the Soveraign GOD, that it is ranked among the Duties of the first Commandment, such as Prayer is ; and there- fore by Paul yoaked with Faith it self, as necessary to salvation : With the heart fiiaji believeth unto righteousness, and with mouth confession is made unto sal- vation. Our Lord Christ himself, when he was accused of his Doctrine, consid- ered simply as a matter of fact by preaching, refused to answer; because> as such, it lay upon evidence, and matter of testimony of others; unto whom therefore he refers himself : But when both the High Priest and Pilate expostulate his Faith, and what he held himself to be ; he without any demur at all, cheerfully makes declaration. That he was the Son of GOD ; so to the High Priest: And that he was a King, and borti to be a King ; thus to Pilate ; though upon the uttering of it his life lay at the stake : Which holy profession of his is celebrated for our example, i Tim. 6. 13. Confessions, when 7nade by a company of professors of Christianity joyntly meeting to that end, the most genuine and natural use of such Confessions is, That under the same form of words, they express the substance of the same com- mon salvation, or unity of their faith ; whereby speaking the same things, they shew themselves perfectly joyned in [iv] tJu same minde, and in the ^ Cor. i.' same jitdgeinent. And accordingly such a transaction is to be looked upon but as a meet or fit inediuvi or means whereby to express that their common faith and salvation, and 1 In the original these references are on the margin. (354) PREFACE TO THE DECLARATION 355 no way to be made use of as an imposition upon any ; Whatever is of force or constraint in matters of this nature causeth them to degenerate from the name and nature of Confessions, and turns tlrem from being Confessions of Faith, into exac- tions and impositions of Faith. And such common Confessions of the Orthodox Faith, made in simplicity of heart by any such Body of Christians, with concord among themselves, ought to be entertained by all others that love the truth as it is in Jesus, with an answerable rejoycing : For if the unanimous opinions and Acts 15. assertions but in some few points of Religion, and that when by two Churches, namely, that of Jerusalem, and the Messengers of Antioch met, assisted by some of the Apostles, were by the Believers of those times received with so much joy, (as it is said, Tliey rejoyced for the consolation) much more this is to be done, when the whole substance of Faith, axiiform of wholesome words shall be declared by the Messengers of a multitude of Churches, though wanting those advantages of counsel and authority of the Apostles, which that Assembly had. Which acceptation is then more specially due, when these shall (to choose) utter and declare their Faith, in the same substance for matter, yea, words, for the most part, that other Churches and Assemblies, reputed the most Orthodox, have done before them : For upon such a correspondency, all may see tfiat actually accomplished, which the Apostle did but exhort unto, and pray for, in those two more eminent Churches of the Corinthians and the ^ °^'l^' Romans ; [v] (and so in them for all the Christians of his time) that both Jew and Gentile, that is, men of different perswasions, (as they were) might glorife GOD with one minde and with one mouth. And truly, the very turning of the Gentiles to the owning of the same Faith, in the substance of it, with the Christian Jew (though differing in greater points then we do from our brethren) is presently after dignified by the Apostle with this stile. That it is the Confession of Jesus Christ himself; not as the Object onely, but as the Author and Maker thereof : / will confess to thee (saith Christ to God) v. 9. among the Gentiles. So that in all such accords, Christ is the great and first Confessor ; and we, and all our Faith uttered by us, are but the Epistles, (as Paul) and Confessions (as Isaiah there) of their Lord and ours ; He, but ex- pressing what is written in his heart, through their hearts and mouthes, to the glory of God the Father : And shall not we all rejoyce herein, when as Christ himself is said to do it upon this occasion : as it there also follows, / will sing unto thy Name. Further, as the soundness and wholsomness of the matter gives the vigor and life to such Confessions, so the inward freeness, willingness and readiness of the spirits of the Confessors do contribute the beauty and loveliness thereunto : as it is in Prayer to God, so in Confessions made to men. If two or three met, do agree, it renders both, to either the more acceptable. The Spirit of Christ is in himself Xoo free, great and generous a Spirit, to suffer himself to be used by any humane arm, to whip men into belief ; he drives not, but gently leads into all truth, and perswades men to dwell in the tents of like precious Faith ; which would lose of its preciousness and value, if that sparkle of freeness shone not in it ; The char- acter of his people is to be a willing people in the day of his [vi] power, (not Mans) in the beauties of holiness, which are the Assemblings of the Saints : one glory of which Assemblings in that first Church, is said to have been. They met with one accord; which is there in that Psalm prophesied of, in the instance of that first Church, for all other that should succeed. 356 THE SAVOY DECLARATION And as this great Spirit is in himself free, when, and how far, and in whom to work, so where and when he doth work, he carrieth it with the same freedom, and is said to be a free Spirit, as he both is, and works in us : And where this Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty. Now, as to this Confession of ours, besides, that a conspicuous conjunction of the particulars mentioned, hath appeared therein : There are also four remark- able Attendants thereon, which added, might perhaps in the eyes of sober and indifferent spirits, give the whole of this Transaction a room and rank amongst other many good and memorable things of this age ; at least all set together, do cast as clear a gleam and manifestation of Gods Power and Presence, as hath appeared in any such kinde of Confessions, made by so numerous a company these later years. The first, is the Temper, (or distemper rather) of the times, during which, these Churches have been gathering, and which they have run through. All do (out of a general sense) complain that the times have been perillous, or difficult times ; (as the Apostle foretold) and that in respect to danger from seducing spirits, more perillous then the hottest seasons of Persecution. We have sailed through an ^stuation. Fluxes and Refluxes of great varieties of Spirits, Doctrines, Opin- ions and Occurrences ; and especially in the matter of Opinions, which have been accompanied [vii] in their several seasons, with powerful perswasions and tempta- tions, to seduce those of our way. It is known men have taken the freedom (not- withstanding what Authority hath interposed to the contrary) to vent and vend their own vain and accursed imaginations, contrary to the great and fixed Truths of the Gospel, insomuch, as take the whole round and circle of delusions, the Devil hath in this small time, ran, it will be found, that every truth, of greater or lesser weight, hath by one or other hand, at one time or another, been ques- tioned and called to the Bar amongst Us, yea, and impleaded, under the pretext (which hath some degree of Justice in it) that all should not be bound up to the Traditions of former times, nor take Religion upon trust. Whence it hath come to pass, that many of the soundest Professors were put upon a new search and disquisition of such truths, as they had taken for granted, and yet had lived upon the comfort of : to the end they might be able to convince others, and establish their own hearts against that darkness and unbe- lief, that is ready to close with error, or at least to doubt of the truth, when error is speciously presented. And hereupon we do professedly account it one of the greatest advantages gained out of the temptations of these times ; yea the honor of the Saints and Ministers of these Nations, That after they had sweetly been exer- cised in, and had \ra^x