V of p me- M O o A I 3 . ^ 0 . 41 . s^OGICAL SB^ CT"’' ^ HBraoH r SCD #2998 nnamn "n n rl np IT *3 T^r' 1 ! i r> •n.vxeu.u.0 f xx ex x. J.GQ x x uuexo f 1 r» -» er imp 0JJ-l^iJ f Antinomianism in the colony of Massachusetts Bay. opy j e THE $ufiltcattotts of tt)e prince §>octetp. Eftablifhed May 25th, 1858. ANTINOMIANISM IN THE COLONY OF MASSACHUSETTS BAY, 1636-1638. Boston: PRINTED FOR THE SOCIETY, By John Wilson and Son. 1894. TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY COPIES ANTING) MIANIS IN THE COLONY OF MASSACHUSETTS BAY, 1636-1638. INCLUDING THE SHORT STORY AND OTHER DOCUMENTS. EDITED BY y CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Boston: PUBLISHED BY THE PRINCE SOCIETY. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1894, by The Prince Society, In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. TABLE OF CONTENTS. Page Preface . 9 Introduction by the Editor. 11-65 The Short Story . 67-233 The Examination of Mrs. Anne Hutchinson.235-284 Trial of Mrs. Hutchinson before the Church in Boston . 285-336 Extracts from Cotton’s “Way of the Churches Cleared” 337-391 Extract from Robert Keayne’s Book, 1639.393-402 Index 405-415 - N t- Preface. QUESTION whether there is, in the literary way, ^ anything pleafanter than editorial work of the kind involved in preparing this volume, when that work is un¬ dertaken with proper facilities; when performed under difficulties, few things are more irkfome. The laft edition of the Short Story was brought out juft two centuries ago. To edit and annotate properly another edition now, implies a conftant reference to books but few copies of which are known to exift. If the ufe of thofe copies is reftricted, the labor of editing becomes almoft intolerable, involving poffibly a day’s journey in fearch of a flatement or to verify a reference. In finifhing my work on this volume, I with, therefore, to exprefs my fenfe of the obligation I have been under while engaged in it to John Nicholas Brown, of Providence, the prefent owner of the invaluable John Carter Brown col¬ lection, and to Mrs. Charles Deane, of Cambridge. The liberality with which Mrs. Deane — following in that re¬ flect the large-minded practice of her late hufband — and Mr. Brown — as his father before him — allow the treafures they control to go out to meet fcholarly needs, is nothing lefs than a public benefaction. C. F. A. Quincy, Mass., November, 1893 Introduction by the Editor. TD OS WELL’S Tour to the Hebrides was publifhed in 1785, and his Life of Johnfon fix years later, in 1791; but not until 1831 did John Wilfon Croker, the third editor of the Life , incorporate, at the fuggefiion apparently of Walter Scott and Lockhart, 1 the firft publifhed epifode in its proper place in the completed narrative. The Short Story , as it is commonly called, bore much the fame relation to Winthrop’s Hiftory of New England that Bofwell’s Tour to the Hebrides did to the Life of Johnf on. In the preface to his edition Mr. Croker not only referred to the Tour as part of Bofwells Johnfon , but he did not hefitate to pronounce it “ the mofl original, curious, and amufing portion of the whole ” book; and very fimilar lan¬ guage might with propriety be ufed of the Short Story in connection with Winthrop’s Hiftory: for, written by the fame hand as the Hiftory , though publifhed under different circumfiances and long anterior to it, the Short Story gave a graphic and detailed account of certain occurrences, only a comparatively brief fummary of which is contained in the more comprehenfive work. To the importance of thofe occurrences in his own efiimate Winthrop bore emphatic tefiimony 1 Croker’s Correfp on deuce and Diai'ies , Vol. I. p. 427. 12 The Antinomian Controverfy. teftimony by writing down at the time his own account of them, and lending that account to England for publication there, — fomething he is not known to have done on any other occafion ; and in confirmation of that judgment, look¬ ing back through the hiftorical perfpedtive of more than two hundred and fifty years, it is no exaggeration now to fay that in the early ftory of New England fubfequent to the fettlement of Bofton, there was in truth no epifode more charadteriftic, more interefling, or more far-reaching in its confequences, than the fo-called Antinomian controverfy. As a defignation, “ Antinomian ” is in this cafe a thorough mifnomer, — an epithet of opprobrium, rather than a name, affixed by a triumphant fadtion upon one defeated and exiled, which ever refufed to accept it. Neverthelefs, though two centuries and a half have fince elapfed, it is hill referred to as “ the Antinomian controverfy ” by the hiftorical hudent; though to the general reader the words convey only a vague idea of fome incomprehenfible theological complication long pah and now happily forgotten. In the theological fenfe, an Antinomian has been defined as “ one who maintains that Chrihians are freed from the moral law, as fet forth in the Old Tehament, by the new difpenfation of grace as fet forth in the gofpel; an opponent of legalifm in morals. Antinomianifm has exihed in three forms: in the early church, as a fpecies of Gnohicifm, in the dodtrine that fin is an incident of the body, and that a regenerate foul cannot fin; later, in the Reformation, as a readtion againh the dodtrine of good works in the Roman Catholic Church, in the antagonize dodtrine that man is faved by faith alone, regardlefs of his obedience to or difobe- dience Introduction. 13 dience of the moral law as a rule of life; finally, as a phafe of extreme Calvinifm, in Englifh Puritan theology, in the dodtrine that the fins of the eledt are fo transferred to Chriffc that they become his tranfgreflions, and ceafe to be the tranfgreffions of the actual finner.” 1 “ In Europe the fedl known as Antinomians were the difciples of John Agricola, a tailor, born at Eiflaban in 1492, afterwards a univerfity fcholar, rector, and preacher, and in 1526 chaplain of the Eledlor of Saxony at the Diet of Spire. As a difciple and worker with, and afterward an opponent of, Luther and Melanfthon, he carried to extreme the doc¬ trine of the former of juftification by faith, in oppofition to the Roman Church doctrine of good works. He afterward renounced his errors. Both his difciples and his enemies perverted doftrines which he had carefully and guardedly defined. So Antinomianifm came to ftand for — what the authorities of Maffachufetts held it to be — a groffly im¬ moral doctrine, fuperfeding the need of good works, and reaching the monftrous conclufion that nothing which a o o believer might do could be fin.” 2 And this general accept¬ ance of the term Antinomian was reflected in the warning words of John Wheelwright to thofe liftening to his famous Faft-day fermon of 1637, that they fhould in life fo bear themfelves “ that we give not others to fay we are libertines or Antinomians.” 3 As the twig is bent the tree inclines. Maffachufetts was at the period of the Antinomian controverfy in “ the twig,” — not yet paft the years of human infancy; and it is no exaggeration 1 Century Dillionary. 2 Ellis, Puritan Age in Maffachufetts , pp. 322, 323. 3 Bell’s Wheelwright , p. 175. 14 The Antinomian Controverfy. exaggeration to fay that the outcome of the controverfy influenced the courfe of Maffachufetts development both perceptibly and gravely through more than a century and a half. In point of faff, we can now fee that in 1636 the nafcent community came to a place where the roads forked. The iffue between religious toleration and a compelled theo¬ logical conformity was, as a matter of eftablifhed policy, then to be decided. It was decided. And the decifion reached was final fo far as colonial and provincial Maffachufetts was concerned. In other words, it held through the lives of five generations. In its earlieft days there was in the Maffachufetts fettle- ment a ftrong and outfpoken element of intellectual inquiry and religious proteft. It found intelligent expreffion in Roger Williams and Sir Harry Vane,* and inarticulate expreffion in Anne Hutchinfon. Roger Williams did not lack fympathy and fupport in his church and among his neighbors; 1 while Vane, as is well known, numbered among his aCtive adherents the great majority of thofe dwelling in Bofton. Thefe two both then and afterwards reprefented the ideas of extreme civil liberty and religious tolerance. The evidence is unmiftakable that in the early period the environment was moft favorable to the reception of thofe ideas. The Short Story is in itfelf conclufive on that point. The iffue was prefented, confufedly it is true, but ftill after a fafhion, in the written controverfy carried on between Vane and 1 Cotton ftates explicitly “ that the trates ... to put upon him a winters increafe of concourfe of people to [Wil- journey out of the Countrey.”— An- liams] on the Lords dayes in private, fwer to Majler Roger Williams, p. 57. to the negledt or deferting of publick Publications of Narraganfett Club, Ordinances . . . provoked the Magif- Vol. II. p. 93. Introduction. i5 and Winthrop in November, 1636; and thefe papers confti- tute, as it were, the pleadings in a great caufe. 1 The decifion took fhape in the outcome of the Antinomian controverfy. It was unmistakable, and, as the refult Showed, irreversible. For good or evil, it committed Maffachufetts to a policy of drift religious conformity. Hence its historical fignificance. 2 The domination eftablifhed in 1637 was not ferioufly Shaken until 1819, when at laft the Unitarian movement, under Channing, brought about, fo far as Maffachufetts was con¬ cerned, refults to Calviniftic theology Similar to thofe which, upon the larger ftage, the theories of Darwin worked half a century later on the Mofaic account of the origin of man. Owing to this historical importance and its far-reaching effects, the Antinomian controverfy has, almofl as matter of courfe, been, and indeed Still is, debatable ground, re¬ peatedly fought over by historical writers. Every line of evidence bearing upon it has been carefully fcanned. But, after all, the great body of this evidence is comprifed within a very narrow compafs, — a few paragraphs in Winthrop’s Hijiory and the Short Story. In bringing out, therefore, after an interval of almoft exactly two centuries, 3 a new edition of the Short Story , it is not neceffary to preface it with any detailed account of the controverfy of which that book is the original narrative. The history of the controverfy can be read in Hutchinfon’s Maffachufetts , the author of which was a lineal defcendant of 1 Infra , p. 139, n. originally intended to be a part of it. 2 This fubjedt is difcuffed in detail For obvious reafons it fubfequently in Adams’s Maffachufetts: Its Hifio- affumed an independent fhape. rians and its Hifory. That fludy, it 3 The laft previous edition, copies of maybe here added, was fuggefled by which are not uncommon, was publifhed the preparation of this volume, and was in London in 1692. 16 The Antinomian Controverfy. of Miftrefs Hutchinfon; it was again told by Dr. George E. Ellis in his Life of Anne H2itchinfon in Sparks’s American Biography, and retold by him after the lapfe of nearly half a century in the ninth chapter of his Puritan Age in Maf fachufetts. Dr. Palfrey devoted to it aim oft the whole of Chapter XII. of his Hiftory; and Charles H. Bell went minutely over the fame ground in his memoir prefixed to the John Wheelwright volume in the publications of this Society. John A. Vinton, in 1873, wrote a feries of four articles in the Congregational Quarterly , fubfequently pub- lifhed feparately, in which he attempted a full and com¬ plete defence of the courfe purfued by Winthrop and his affociates. The other fide of the iffue is more or lefs fully prefented in the two biographies of Vane by Upham and Hofmer. Finally “ The Antinomian Controverfy ” confti- tutes the fecond part of the Three Ep if odes of Maffachufetts Hiftory , by the editor of the prefent volume. It remains, therefore, only to fpeak of the authorfhip of the Short Story; the circumftances under which it was firffc printed; and the curious bibliographical intereft which has fince attached to it. The events which led to the preparation of the Short Story all took place during the eighteen months between November, 1636, and May, 1638. The General Court before which, while holding its fittings in Cambridge, the trial of Mrs. Hutchinfon took place, met on the ^ of November, and clofed its fittings on the of the fame month. Befides trying and convicting Mrs. Hutchinfon, it had recourfe to proceedings againft the whole body of her adherents, refulting in the difarmament of all, and the dif- franchifement Introduction. 17 franchifement and banifhment of a large number. Writing manifeftly at fome time fubfequent to the adjournment of the Court on the ^ of November, Governor Winthrop made a general entry in his Journal under date of the iff of that month, in which, after referring in fome detail to what had been done during the feffions of the Court, he added: “ All the proceedings of this court againft thefe perfons were fet down at large, with the reafons and other obfervations, and were fent into England to be publifhed there, to the end that all our godly friends might not be difcouraged from coming to us,” 1 etc. There was no printing-prefs then in America, and a comparifon of the text of Winthrop’s Jour¬ nal with that of the Short Story fhows conclufively that the manufcript of the Short Story was referred to in the fore¬ going extradt from the Journal, and that it was prepared by Winthrop. The purpofe of Winthrop in thus writing down and fending to England an account of thefe proceedings is obvious. He wifhed, in his paternal care for the infant colony, to anticipate and foreftall hofbile criticifm. The harfh and intolerant policy purfued from the beginning in Maffachufetts towards all intruders and diffentients had excited no little comment in England, and led to hoftile proceedings, caufing remonftrances from the friends of the enterprife. A renewal of thefe adverfe comments, and fubfequent remonftrances, might fairly be looked for as foon as the tidings of the decifive aftion of the General Court of November, 1637, reached England; for that aftion amounted to nothing lefs than a profcription. Moreover, prior to the General Court of November, the preceding Court 1 Savage’s Winthrop , Vol. I. p. * 248. 3 18 The Antinomian Controverfy. • Court, held in June of the fame year, had, with a view to preventing any increafe of the minority faction in the Colony through immigration, enadted an alien law, forbidding any town or perfon under heavy penalties from receiving any Grangers “ reforting hither with intent to refide,” or allowing any fuch to remain within the colonial limits for above three weeks without a magiftrate’s permiffion. 1 The whole body of the magiftrates, it was well known, belonged to the domi¬ nant party. This adt was paffed in June, and in July one party at leaft of emigrants had landed in Bofton, to thofe compofing which the provifions of the adt were applied. Notwithflanding the hardfhip involved, a delay of only four months in the enforcement of the law could be obtained, within which time the immigrants in queftion were com¬ pelled to find a place of refuge without the Mafiachufetts jurifdiction. The four months expired in November, when the general banifhment of the minority was entered upon; and under thefe circumftances it required no forefight on the part of the leaders of the dominant party to make them realize that a hoft of letters then were, or foon would be, on the way to England, which could hardly fail to give a ferious check to that weftward movement of population which was vital to Maffachufetts. Certainly people would hefitate long before embarking themfelves and their effedts for a diftant fhore, where, upon their arrival, they were to be met with a pofitive inhibition to remain except with the permif¬ fion of a magifirate. The talk of preparing an account of the proceedings in queftion which fliould counteradt the effedt of thefe rumors and letters was naturally affigned to Winthrop; and with his Introduction. J 9 his eager intereft in the welfare of the colony, it would be fafe to affume that he loft no time in addreffing himfelf to his work. On this point the internal evidence is conclufive not only of agency in preparation, 1 but of the time when the work was done. The account of the proceedings of the General Court againft Wheelwright and Mrs. Hutchinfon was prepared in Bofton between the ift of December, 1637, and the middle of March, 1638. 2 The “ Briefe Apologie ” had been prepared earlier, between the adjournment of the March General Court of 1637 and the meeting of the November Court of the fame year; 3 but it was fubfequently revifed by its author, and the references in its concluding lines 4 fhow that thefe at leaft were written in the early days of March, 1638. Having thus received final revifion, the internal evidence further indicates that all the documents were hurried off to England by fome veffel failing late in March or early in April, 1638. Apparently fix years then elapfed before the manufcript was printed; or, if any printed edition of it earlier than that of 1644 was publifhed, no copy of it has ever come to light. Not that it can, for this reafon, be affumed pofitively that there was no earlier edition, poffibly with another titlepage; but if fuch an edition was printed, it was probably fmall, and brought out with a wholly different end from that in view in the edition of 1644. It would have been defigned to circulate folely through the friends of the company, and been placed in the hands of the minifters of thofe churches the whole or a portion of the members of which were con¬ templating 1 Infra , pp. 143-144, 158, 186, 187- 3 Infra , p. 144. 19°, 233. 4 Infra , pp. 231, note 1, 233. 2 Infra , p. 186, note 2. 20 The Antinomian Controverfy , templating a transfer to New England. It hardly needs be faid that under fuch circumftances the chances would be largely againft the prefervation of copies. Again, in his preface to the edition of 1644, the Rev. Thomas Welde fpeaks of it as a book then “ newly come forth of the Preffe.” Had there been a prior edition, Welde could hardly have been ignorant of it; though, on the other hand, it is ftill poffible he might in his note to the reader of a new edition, brought out in 1644, and publifhed, as will prefently be feen, with a diftindt and novel end in view, have ignored a fmall earlier edition, printed fix years previoufly for a different purpofe and with another title, and then wholly forgotten. While, therefore, all thefe poffibilities exift, the probabilities are that the edition of 1644 was the earlieft printed publication of the Short Story , and accordingly that it remained in manufcript in England for fix years after its arrival. As Winthrop diftindlly fays that he prepared it to be “ fent into England to be publifhed there,” the reafons which induced the friends of the colony thus to fupprefs it, if they did fupprefs it, can now only be furmifed. In order to eftablifh any plaufible theory in the cafe, it will be necef- fary to review briefly the courfe of events at about that time both in Great Britain and in New England. While in 1638 the intercourfe between England and Maffachufetts was very great and tolerably conffant, it was far from regular, the great body of movement being weft- ward during the fpring and early fummer, while during the later fummer and autumn it was eaftward. In other words, immigrants came out to New England during the firft half of the year, and the veffels which brought them out went back Introduction. 21 back to Great Britain later in the feafon, either diredtly or by way of the fouthern ports. The average direct voyage occupied fome fixty days. Accordingly while, during the months from May to Auguft, news from England would reach Bofton almoft daily, from September to April it would come at long intervals only. In England thefe conditions were reverfed, the outgoing fleet of the fpring and early fummer finding its way home all through the autumn and winter. Thus it often happened that the two countries were mentally not in touch; that is, at any given time they might not in London and in Bofton be thinking of the fame public events. This could hardly have failed to be the cafe in 1638. In the fummer of 1637 the afpedl of political affairs in England was more favorable to the court party than ever before or after. The outlook was fo difcouraging for the ad¬ vocates of parliamentary government that the leaders were loflng all hope. The quo warranto proceedings againft the Maflachufetts company for the revocation of the charter had been long pending in the court of King’s Bench, and an adverfe decifion was looked for at each term of the court. It was in facft reached at the Eafter term, 1637, and a judgment declaring the charter vacated then entered. 1 The King had publicly declared his intention to appoint Sir Ferdinando Gorges the Governor-General of New England, thus taking into his own hands the entire government of the colonies. The Board of Lords Commiffioners for Foreign Plantations, at the head of which was Archbifhop Laud, was in the plenitude of its power, and merely waiting the decifion 1 Palfrey, Vol. I. p. 504, n. 22 The Antinomian Controverfy. decifion of the King’s Bench to begin adlive operations on the lines indicated by Gorges; and this was proven by the fadt that on the 26th of June George Cleeves, juft landing in Bofton, handed Governor Winthrop a fpecies of commif- fion iffued by the Board, creating a provifional government for New England, to a6t until final order fhould be made as to the governor-generalfhip. Hampden’s great fhip-money cafe was alfo pending, and what the decifion of the twelve judges would be was more than furmifed. Everything promifed well for King Charles. Such was the condition of affairs in London in the fummer of 1637, an d fuch muft have continued to be their afpecf in Bofton until the clofe of the year, and the time when the manufcript of the Short Story was prepared. But in Great Britain events big with confequences had in the mean time taken place. Sunday, the 23d of July, 1637, h a d been feledted by Archbifhop Laud as the date for eftab- lifhing in the churches of Scotland the ceremonial of the Church of England. The famous “ Stony Sabbath ” was the refult, and then and there began that fucceffion of events which refulted in the great Englifh Civil War. When, therefore, Winthrop penned the Short Story in Bofton, he did it with a view to the peaceful afpedt of public affairs in the fummer of 1637; when the manufcript reached London, it was read by thofe who faw public affairs in their ftormy fpring outlook of 1638. A great change had taken place. The eyes of King and Archbifhop were now diredled toward Scotland; their minds were intent on diforders, but not the diforders which troubled Maffachufetts. It was the fame throughout England. It would therefore feem wholly natural Introduction. 23 natural that the friends of the colony in London fhould, after reading Winthrop’s manufcript, conclude that the pur- pofe for which it was defigned could be accomplifhed quite as effectively without making any public printed ufe of it. The events narrated in it and the public policy which it was intended to explain had not attracted the attention which Winthrop affumed, or called forth the criticifm he feared. Accordingly it might be wife not to invite unnecef- fary difcuffion. Poffibly a few manufcript copies of the Short Story , in whole or in part, were made; but the origi¬ nal, whether for the reafons given or for other reafons, feems to have remained quietly in London from the fummer of 1638 until 1644. During thofe fix years many things happened on both fides of the Atlantic. In the mother country, for the reafon which has been dated, the fo-called Antinomian controverfy feems never, even among the friends of the colony, to have excited more than a languid interefl:. The public mind was intent on other iffues. It was full of the events then taking place in Scotland, and cared nothing for Maffachufetts, while by thofe in England who felt towards the colonifts no kindly interefl:, the Antinomian controverfy, if confidered at all, was probably looked upon as merely a meaninglefs feud in a family of fanatics. In New. England, on the other hand, the excitement of 1637 had in 1644 become an unfa- vory memory. 1 The Rev. John Wheelwright, having paffed fix 1 “ Such as endeavored the healing rule of the Gofpel. The bitter fruits of thefe diftempers did feem to me to whereof do remain to this day [1648] be tranfported with more jealoufies and in the letters fent over that year from heats and paroxyfms of fpirit, than would hence to England ” — Cotton’s 11 ay well Hand with brotherly love, or the Cleared , p. 62. Infra , pp. 359-362. 24 The Antinomian Controverfy . fix years at Exeter, N. H., had in the fpring of 1643 found himfelf compelled to abandon that place of exile, over which the jurifdiftion of Maffachufetts had been extended; for in Maffachufetts he was ftill under the ban. After leaving Exeter he had fat down in Wells in what is now the State of Maine, and later in the year was correfponding with the General Court of Maffachufetts with a view to the revoca¬ tion of his aft of banifhment. Accordingly on the 29th of May, 1644, it was ordered that “ Mr. Wheelwright hath his banifhment taken off, and is received in as a member of this commonwealth.” Winthrop, who fucceeded Vane as governor of the colony in May, 1637, had himfelf been replaced by Dudley in 1640, and again returned to office as the fucceffor to Bellingham in 1642. Now, after ferving two years, in May, 1644, he gave way to Endicott. John Cotton was ftill miniftering as teacher of the church of Bof- ton over which Wilfon continued as minifter; but Thomas Welde had in Auguft, 1641, gone back to England in com¬ pany with Hugh Peter, and was not deftined ever to return to Bofton. Anne Hutchinfon having removed from Rhode Ifland to New York, or as the localities were then called, from Aquidneck to Manhattan, fhe, with all the members of her family then with her, except one daughter, was there, in Auguft, 1642, fet upon by the favages and maffacred. In January, 1644, therefore, the memory of the contro¬ verfy of 1636-8 had faded out in Maffachufetts except in the minds and memories of the clergy. Other iffues had come to the front. The colony was no longer in continual apprehenfion of the lofs of its charter, or the arrival of Sir Ferdinando Gorges as the King’s Governor-General; for two Introdu&ion. 25 two years before, Charles I. had left London, never to re¬ turn there except as a prifoner, and on September 22 of the fame year, 1642, the fird fkirmidi of the civil war had taken place. The friends of the colony were in complete control of the Parliament, and Maffachufetts no longer had anything to apprehend from that quarter. It was left to care for itfelf. As iffue after iffue prefented itfelf, the public mind had accordingly for years been occupied with a wholly new clafs of queffions. The long druggie between the magiftrates and the deputies which originated in 1636 in the quarrel between Captain Keayne and the widow Sherman over the draying fow of the latter, refulted, in June, 1644, in the divifion of the legiflature into two independent chambers. In 1643 the firft New England confederation was formed; and in the early months of 1644 the minds of the rulers of Maffachufetts were altogether intent on the Indian compli¬ cations with the Narraganfetts, the bickerings with the fettlers of Rhode Ifland, the complaints of the Dutch au¬ thorities at New Amderdam over the Connecticut encroach¬ ments, and the warlike operations of La Tour and D’Aulnay in Nova Scotia. Thus, in Maffachufetts, it was as if Sir Henry Vane and Anne Hutchinfon had never been, and his unprinted account of the Antinomian controverfy mud have almod faded from Winthrop’s mind. Certainly no caufe for the printing of the forgotten manufcript can be found, or even fuggeded, in the condition of affairs in New England at that time ; and it is to the lad degree improbable that any movement towards its publication emanated from Bodon. 4 But 26 The Antinoniian Controver/y. But in the Britifti Iflands the cafe flood otherwife. On that fide of the Atlantic hiftory was being made rapidly. New queflions had come to the front; and as ufual in troublous, active times, the advanced thinker of yeflerday found himfelf the confervative of to-day. The voice of the radical was heard in the land; and young Sir Henry Vane was the typical radical in England. Returning home in the early autumn of 1637, Vane reprefented Kingflon upon Hull in what is known as the Short Parliament, fummoned by Charles in confequence of the Scotch complications in the fpring of 1640; and he was again returned by the fame conflituency to the Long Parliament, which affem- bled in the following September. It is not neceffary in this connection to narrate in detail the courfe of fubfequent events; but, coming at once to the year preceding the publication of the Short Story , the famous Weflminfter Affembly met in Henry the Seventh’s chapel on Saturday, July 1, 1643. In the fubfequent feffions of that Affembly, the firfl real Englifh battle over religious toleration was fought out, and it was in connection with that battle the Short Story appeared in print, — it was in faCt one of the pamphlet miffiles which the participants in that battle freely hurled at each other. And it is to this Thomas Welde refers when, in the clofing words of his preface, he fays, — “ I bow my knees to the God of truth and peace to grant thefe Churches as full a riddance from the fame or like opinions, which doe deftroy his truth, and difturbe their peace.” 1 In his detailed account of thofe times, — by far the molt thorough and virile account of them in exigence, — Dr. Maffon 1 Infra , p. 94. Introduction. 2 7 Maffon fays, — “Nowhere on earth prior to 1640, unlefs it were in Holland, was Toleration in any effective form what- foever anything more than the dream of a few poor perfe¬ cted fedlaries or deep private thinkers; ” and then he adds, — “ Immediately after the meeting of the Long Parlia¬ ment, Toleration rullied into the air. Everywhere the word ‘toleration’ was heard, and with all varieties of meaning.” 1 It might well admit of queftion whether adequate emphafis was given to the exceptional cafe of Holland in the firft of thefe ftatements; for not only is it a well-eftablifhed hiftori- cal fafl that Toleration did in 1640 exift in an “ effebtive form ” in Holland, but it had alfo then fo exifted there through the lives of two generations. The faff of its exig¬ ence there in “ effective form ” was moreover not confined to the knowledge of “ deep private thinkers,” but it was fo generally known among “ poor perfecuted febtaries,” that as early as 1607, — thirty-three years before the Long Parlia¬ ment met,— thofe compofing the little church at Scrooby in the fens of Lincolnfhire knew “that in the Low Countries was freedom of religion for all men,” and exiles “from Lon¬ don and other parts of the land ” had already gone thither. Dr. Maffon’s ftatement, therefore, would hand in more correbl form did it read “ except in Holland,” inftead of “ unlefs it were in Holland.” But it has always been the practice of Englifh fcholars and ftudents to fhut their eyes to the pio¬ neer experience of the Dutch on this great ilfue; and the American hihorian has fomewhat blindly followed them in fo doing. 2 While, therefore, it is undoubtedly true that in England 1 Life of Milton, Vol. III. pp. 108, 2 Campbell, The Puritan in Hol- 109. land\ England , and America, Vol. I. pp. xxxi, xxxix, 13, 79, 81, 197, 248-252. 28 The Antinomian Controverfy. England the idea of toleration “ rufhed into the air ” fhortly after 1640, 1 it is equally true that in the matter of toleration Holland had then flood a familiar and almoft obtrufive objedt- leffon to the Englifh people for more than half a century. The Weftminfter Affembly was made up almoft exclu- fively of Prefbyterians; indeed, to fuch a degree was this the cafe that the few of “ the Epifcopal perfuafion ” who at firft took part in it were “confpicuous by their canonical dreffes among the bulk of the members in all forts of plain Puritan fuits,” and thofe few fpeedily dropped away. “ The real tug of verbal war” did not begin until the end of Jan¬ uary, 1644. The ftruggle was between the Prefbyterian majority and a little knot of fo-called Independents; and the queftion at iffue is thus ftated by MafTon: — “ The battle was effentially between two principles of church- organization. Was every individual affembly, or affociation of Chriftians (it might be of hundreds of perfons, or it might be of as few as feven perfons, voluntarily drawn together), to be an indepen¬ dent ecclefiaftical organifm, entitled to eledt its own paftor and other officers, and to exercife the powers of admonition and excommunica¬ tion within itfelf, any adtion of furrounding congregations upon it being an adtion of mere obfervation and criticifm, and not of power or jurifdidtion; and no authority to belong to meetings of the office¬ bearers of congregations of the fame city or neighbourhood, or to general fynods of office-bearers, however ufeful for various purpofes fuch occafional meetings and fynods might be ? This was what the Independents maintained; and to this the Prefbyterians vehemently faid Nay. It was not defirable, they faid in the firft place, that congregations 1 “ There have been more Books for all other things, every day now writ, Sermons preached, words fpoken, brings forth Books for a Toleration.” befides plottings and adtings for a Tol- — Edwards’s Gangrcena (1646), p. eration, within thefe four laft years, than 59. Introduction. 29 congregations themfelves ffiould be mere gatherings of Chriftians drawn together by chance affinities. That would be to put an end to the parochial fyftem, with all the advantages of orderlinefs and effective adminiftration that belonged to it. Let every congregation confift, as heretofore, mainly of the inhabitants of one pariffi or definitely marked ecclefiaftical territory. Then let there be a ftridt inter-connedtednefs of all thefe parochial congregations over the whole land by means of an afcending feries of church-judicatories. Let the congregations of the fame town or diftridt be connedled by a Prefbyterial Court, confiding of the affembled minifters and the ruling lay-elders of all the congregations, periodically reviewing the proceedings of the faid congregations individually, or hearing appeals from them; and let thefe Prefbyteries or Prefbyterial Courts be in like manner under the authority and review of Synods, embracing many Prefbyteries within their bounds, and finally of National Af- femblies of the whole Church.” 1 Congregationalifm was then known diftindtively as the “ New England way.” John Cotton was its father and leading exponent, and fo referred to in the difcuffion, — “ if not the author, yet the greateft promoter and patron of Independency, a man of very excellent parts, of great wit and learning,” wrote Baillie, the Covenanter. 2 When at laft in the courfe of debate in the Affembly the five exponents of Independency faw defeat plainly impending, they took the precaution, before a final decifion was reached, to make what amounted to a practical appeal from the Affembly to Parliament, and their appeal took the fhape of a tradf, famous at the time, and Thill prominent in hiftory, under the name of the Apologetical Narration , which appeared and was in circulation by early January, 1644. In taking this ftep the Independents 1 Life of Milton, Vol. IIT p. 21. 2 Infra, p. 337, ti. See alfo HofmePs Young Sir Henry Vane, pp. 166-172. 3 <=> The Antinomian Controverfy. Independents appealed not only to Parliament but to public opinion, and confequently, in order to fuftain the formal decifion of the Affembly, it became neceffary for the cham¬ pions of the Prefbytery to meet the iffue and argue the queftion through the prefs. So, throughout the year which followed, pamphlet crowded on pamphlet. Among thefe pamphlets appeared, probably in June or July, the famous Bloudy Tenent of Roger Williams, in which “ the principle of abfolute liberty of confcience was proclaimed, for the benefit of all opinions whatfoever, in tones that could never more be filenced.” Roger Williams had then been in England about a year, fent there by the Rhode Ifland people to fecure a charter for eredting their fcattered Plantations into a diftindt Colony. During the year he had been going about England more or lefs, but had paffed moft of his time in London, in the fociety of the younger Vane; in frequent contadt alfo with other leading men in Parliament and in the Weftminfter Afifem- bly. “The New England way ” was thus more than ever brought into difcuffion, and affumed a far-reaching afpedt, — that of full religious freedom. The younger Vane alfo, who only eight years before had been governor of Maffachufetts, was its moft adtive exponent in the Houfe of Commons; for wrote Williams, referring to him, “ Mine eyes were glad and late witneffes of an heavenly fpeech of one of the moft eminent of that High Affembly of Parliament: ‘ Why fhould the labors of any be fuppreffed, if fober, though never fo different? We now profefs to feek God, we defire to fee light!’” 1 1 Hofmer’s Young Sir Henry Vane , p. 172. Thus Introduction. 31 Thus matters flood in the fummer of 1644. “ The New England way ” had been fet up by the Independents in oppofition to the Prefbytery; Religious Toleration in its wideft form had been frefhly enunciated by Roger Williams ; Sir Harry Vane, the ex-governor of Maffachufetts, was in Parliament the most adtive exponent of the new herefy; which the Prefbyterian party, ftimulated by “ the exquifite rancor of theological hatred,” was fighting with the energy of defperation. 1 Already the Independents had been upbraided “with the fa 61 that their Toleration principle had broken down even in their own Paradife of New England,” and for additional evidence on this head eager fearch was made. At this jundture Winthrop’s narrative, after refiing fix years in oblivion, went to the printer. It fupplied the Prefbyterian leaders with exadtly the ammunition they wanted. In it was fet forth not only the breaking down of the Toleration principle in the very land of its birth, but that breaking down had taken place under the magiftracy of him who was now in England the Parliamentary mouthpiece of the Independents. Both Williams and Vane were to be confounded by an anfwer out of their own mouths. Early in Auguft, 1644, the Weftminfter Affembly refumed its fittings after a fortnights vacation, and proceeded with¬ out any delay to fall paffionately on the archherefy of Tol¬ eration ; in the words of Baillie, — “ The firft day of our fit¬ ting, after our vacance, a number of complaints were given in again ft 1 “After the meeting of the Weft- neck of Independency, fluff the two minfter Affembly, and the publication of ftruggling monfters into one fack, and the Apologetical Narration of the In- fink them to the bottom of the fea.” — dependents, the one aim of the Prefby- Masson’s Life of Milton, Vol. III. pp. terians was to tie Toleration round the 129, 130. 32 The Antinomian Controverfy. againft the Anabaptids’ and Antinomians’ huge increafe and infolencies intolerable.” And the records of both Houfes of Parliament bear witnefs to the urgent appeals then made by official delegates from the Affembly for the prompt paffage of meafures deemed needful “ to prevent the fpreading opin¬ ions of Anabaptifm and Antinomianifm.” “ Thefe men,” it was urged, “ have caff off all affedtion and are fo imbitter- ated,” that the Affembly could not but urge on Parliament that “ it is high time to fupprefs them.” 1 There is no oc- cafion to emphafize the probable connection between this adtion and the publication of the firft edition of Winthrop’s documents. It is not known by whom the manufcript was hunted up and fent to the prefs; but the original titlepage of the pamphlet affords pofitive evidence as to the year, at lead, in which it was printed, and alfo that, as a publication, it was aimed at “Antinomians and Familids.” 2 The Rev. Thomas Welde was at that time fettled over a church at Gatefhead, oppofite Newcadle. The date of Welde’s birth is not known; but he came of pure Saxon dock long fettled in Suffolk. One of a family of nine chil¬ dren, he was graduated at Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1613, and was vicar of Terling from 1624 to 1631, when Laud, then Bifhop of London, depofed him for nonconform¬ ity. 3 Emigrating to America, he landed in Bodon in June, 1632, 1 MalTon’s Milton, Vol. III. pp. 89, 8 Young’s Chronicles of Maffachu- 150,161. fetts, pp. 511, 521, 522. As Savage 2 As will prefently appear, there characteriftically expreffes it ( Genea - were two differing titlepages to the logical Dittionary of A T ew England, pamphlet, for both of which, reproduced Vol, IV.p.459), he “enjoyed the benefit in fac-fimile and placed fide by fide, vide of being excommunicated ... by the infra , pp. 52, 53. drivelling malevolence of Archbifhop Laud, then only bifhop of London.” Introduction. 33 1632, and, the next month, was inftalled as the firft paftor of the Roxbury church. In the following November “the Apoftle ” Eliot was affociated with him as teacher. His unpleafant paftoral experiences during the Antinomian ex¬ citement can be inferred from the Preface to the Short Story; for the lapfe of feven years and a complete change of clime had in no way obliterated from his memory the “ half-a-dozen [theological] piftols ” then occafionally dif- charged on him “ in the open affembly,” or “ the dung caft on [the] faces [of] the faithful minifters of Chrift.” During the trial of Mrs. Hutchinfon before the General Court, he and his affociate, Eliot, were the two clerical witneffes called on to give teflimony under oath to fecure a judgment againft her; and, after the was fentenced to banifhment, fhe was configned as a prifoner to the charge of Welde’s brother Jofeph, a prominent refident of Roxbury, where, at his houfe, throughout the winter and fpring, fhe was fubje6ted to much importunity on the part of the minifter of the Rox¬ bury church. 1 In 1641 Thomas Welde and Hugh Peter were fent back to England, commiffioned to reprefent the colony in the mother country, and obtain, if poffible, financial aid. They fought a paffage by way of Newfoundland, and, being detained there waiting for a veffel homeward bound, they “ preached to the feamen of the Ifland, who were much affefted with the word taught, and entertained them with all courtefy.” 2 Reaching their deffination at laft, they in England had exceptional fuccefs in their miffion, though their efforts 1 Savage fays fhe was “fubje&ed to 2 New England Hiflorical and the perpetual buzzing of the clerical Genealogical Regijler (1851), Vol. V. tormentor” ( Wmlhrop , ed. 1853, Vol. p. 235. I. p. 295, «.). 5 34 The Antinomian Controverfy. efforts do not feem to have been appreciated by the General Court, which, in Oftober, 1645, adopted a vote that Mr. Peter and Mr. Welde, “having been long abfent, may un- derftand the Court’s mind, that they delire their prefence here, and fpeedy return.” Neither of them returned 1 in refponfe to this ungracious invitation, but both diffinguifhed themfelves during the civil troubles in England, and Welde for many years forwarded money contributed to the fupport of Harvard College. Much in London, he led generally an active, influential life, printing various tradls of no great value now. He difappears at the Refforation, and is fup- pofed to have died in London, March 23, 1661. 2 A man of intenfe and narrow mind, Thomas Welde was, like all men, and efpecially all theologians, of his type, natu¬ rally intolerant. He was a nonconformift, orthodox divine, adtive, ufeful, energetic, wholly unimaginative, and intereffing to pofterity only in an objedtive way. In the midft of the religious feething going on in England in 1644, Welde doubtlefs flood ready to ufe publicly the contemporaneous language of the “ Simple Cobler of Aggawam,” — “I dare take 1 “ I could tell Cratenfis of Mr. Pe¬ ters juglings and indirect walking for four years by gone between Old England and new England, having every Spring taken his leave in the Pulpit of old England, and yet he is not gone. . . . I could relate alfo Matter Wells his halt¬ ing between Giles Criplegate and New England, between Mr. Walker and the money for the poor children’s fending over to New England.” — Edwards’s Second Part of Gangrcena. p. 69. Vide alfo Proceedings of the Majfachiifetts Hiforical Society , June, 1862, pp. 63-65. But fee the paper entitled Rev. Thomas Welde's “ Innocency Clearedf in New EnglandHifloricaland Genea¬ logical Regijler (1882), Vol. XXXVI. pp. 62-70. 2 Some further fadls in regard to the Rev. Thomas Welde, and the refults of his miffion to England, have been com¬ municated by G. D. Scull, of Oxford, England, and are printed in the New England Hiflorical and Genealogical Regifer (1882), Vol. XXXVI. pp. 371- 373 , 405 - 4 0 7 5 and Vol. XXXIX. (1885), pp. 179, 182. See alfo Ibid. p. 300. Introduction. 35 take upon me to be the herald of New England fo far as to proclaim to the world in the name of the Colony, that all Familifls, Antinomians, Anabaptifls, and other enthufiafts fhall have free liberty to keep away from us; and fuch as will come to be gone as faff as they can, the fooner the better.” In Maffachufetts, Welde had been one of the moft aCtive and earneft fupporters of Winthrop and Wilfon in their conteft with Sir Harry Vane; and now, in England, all his fympathies were enlifted on the fide of Rutherford and Baillie, the intolerant leaders of the Prefbyterians in their even more bitter ftruggle with that fame Sir Harry Vane, of whom, as governor of the Maffachufetts Colony during one momentous year, — every incident of which rankled in the memory of the former paftor of the Rox- bury church, — it was impoffible that Thomas Welde fhould have friendly recollections; and Vane was now the recog¬ nized parliamentary head and mouthpiece of the hated and dreaded Independents. It is, therefore, frnall matter for furprife that it was afterwards confidently believed by well- informed perfons in America that Baillie, Rutherford and the Scotch Prefbyterians “ had a fecret hand to provoke Mr. Welde to fet forth his Short Story -” 1 In any event, it was under thefe circumftances that the manufcript of 1638 was rummaged up and fent to the printer; and apparently it went to him exactly in the fhape in which it had come over from New England fix years before. The references in its concluding pages can hardly be regarded as otherwife than decifive on this point. Thefe indicate that the manu¬ fcript, as it came to England from Winthrop, was in no refpecl 1 Savage’s Genealogical Dillionary of New England ,, Vol. IV. p. 463. 36 The Antinomian Controverfy. refpe6l changed, — was fubjedied to no revifion. Events which had occurred in 1638 were mentioned in the printed book of 1644 as ftill occurring, 1 and no allufion was made to anything which afterwards took place. An early copy of the newly printed pamphlet came, as he afferts, into Welde’s hands, and he naturally, from his clofe perfonal knowledge of the courfe of fubfequent events, fpoke of them to the leaders of the Prefbyterians. Thefe would of courfe wifh to make their controverfial miffile as effective as poffi- ble, and urged their friend and informant to fupplement and complete the narrative. This he finally did, writing a brief introductory note addreffed to the reader, and fifteen pages of additional prefatory matter. Meanwhile the type of the firft publication had been kept Handing; a partially new titlepage was then fet up, and a frefh edition of the pam¬ phlet (truck off and iffued under the name of A Short Story, by which it has fince been generally known. However much or little Winthrop’s book had been ufed at the earlier period for the purpofe he defigned it, there can be no doubt it was made to do good fervice in the hands of thofe in whofe behalf it was now publifhed. It was freely quoted from by Baillie and Rutherford, by Edwards and Paget, and by numerous others of the writers of the Prelbyterian manifeftoes of the day; indeed, according to Savage, who had doubtlefs, for reafons prefently to be ftated at length, made a careful count, Rutherford has no lefs than three hundred references to the Short Story in the fecond part of his Survey of Spiritual Antichrift, printed in London in 1648. Winthrop 1 Infra, pp. 141, 144, 160, 186, 233. Introduction. 37 Winthrop makes no mention of the Short Story fubfe- quent to its publication, but early copies of it doubtlefs found their way to New England; for not only does Cotton make conffcant reference to it in his Way Cleared\ but John Wheelwright, then pallor of the church of Wells, deep in the Maine wildernefs, received a copy, and prepared in his own vindication an anfwer to it under the title of Mercurius A mericanus . Neither as a literary nor as a controverfial production does this pamphlet add to Wheelwright’s reputa¬ tion, and it throws almoft no additional light on the events of the controverfy which originally called it forth, and no light at all on the authorfhip of the Short Story. Four editions of the Short Story feem to have been publifhed: — 1. The original (1644) edition, without Welde’s preface and with the titlepage reproduced on page 52. 2. A fecond (1644) edition, from the fame type, but with a flightly altered titlepage, reproduced on page 53, and with Welde’s preface and addrefs “ To the Reader.” 3. A third (1644) edition, for which the type was wholly refet, though the lall former titlepage appears to have been kept Handing and was alfo ufed for this edition. 4. A new edition, printed in 1692, from other type and with a frefh titlepage. A fingular and fomewhat interefting bibliographical con¬ troverfy, not without its comical features, arofe in regard to the Short Story about the year 1850, involving not only its authorfhip but the fequence of the feveral editions. In February, 1851, the late Dr. Charles Deane, noting the references 3 8 The Antinomian Controverfy. references to the Antinomian controverfy in Winthrop’s journal, firft called attention to the faCt that Winthrop evi¬ dently was the writer of a confiderable portion at leafb, if not the whole, of the Short Story. James Savage was then engaged on his fecond (1853) edition of Winthrop’s Hijiory of New England, reviling and greatly enlarging the notes to his previous (1825) edition. Mr. Savage was a man of marked character of the peculiar New England type. Though by nature an inveftigator, he was educated to the law, and followed its practice until the innate fenfe of call¬ ing drew him wholly into antiquarian and hiftorical purfuits. His Genealogical Dictionary of New England will endure, a monument of untiring induftry, well-nigh endlefs refearch and indomitable will. A man of high ftandards and the utmoft finglenefs and integrity of purpofe, he had a hot temper, a ftrong will and great courage. While a faft and true friend, he was alfo what Dr. Johnfon called “a good hater; ” his diflikes were as intenfe as his likes, nor was he chary in the expreffion of either. Though his judgment was not equal to his induftry, Savage had no fuperior in his day, nor has he had any fince, as an authority on matters con¬ nected with early New England hiftory; and the profound perfonal refpeCt infpired by the earneftnefs, the intenfe indi¬ viduality, and fmcere, lofty character of the man, combined with his kindly, companionable and vivacious difpofition, greatly enhanced, both generally and among thofe brought in clofer contaCt with him, the weight of thofe opinions to which he was wont freely to give utterance. Thus, taken al¬ together, Mr. Savage was locally one of the moft attractive as well as noticeable Bofton characters of his day; but perhaps the Introdticiion. 39 the moff ftriking thing about him was the individuality expreffed in his every word and adt. This is efpecially obfervable in his notes to Winthrop, and affords, indeed, a not unpleafant contraff with the text, — the latter calm, felf- reffrained and inclined to the profaic; the former intenfe, outfpoken, replete with pith, individuality, learning and prejudice. Thefe notes are, and will always remain, delight¬ ful as well as inftruftive reading; and to the fludent of New England hiftory it is almoft as difficult to think of Winthrop apart from Savage as it is for one learned in the Engliffi common law to feparate Littleton from Coke. Among the names of the men of Boffon, “ chief ftirrers,” as Winthrop expreffes it, “ in thefe [Antinomian] conten¬ tions,” and for that reafon ordered by the General Court of November, 1637, to be difarmed, was Thomas Savage, who had recently married Faith, the daughter of William and Anne Hutchinfon. And at the church trial of the mother of his young wife in March, 1638, this Thomas Savage did himfelf infinite credit by rifing and courageoufly protefting againft the admonition about to be beffowed ; and, as a refult of fo doing, he had the honor of being himfelf admonifhed together with her he fo manfully fought to protedb James Savage traced his lineal defcent in the fifth generation from Thomas and Faith (Hutchinfon) Savage. He was, therefore, one of the offfpring of Anne Hutchinfon, to whom indeed in a charadteriftic note to Winthrop he refers as “his great, great, great, great grandmother.” Confcious of a bias due to this remote relationfhip by defcent, Savage through¬ out his notes to Winthrop endeavored to hold himfelf under ftricf control while dealing with events of the Antinomian controverfy 4 o The Antinomian Controverfy. controverfy, and he fucceeded in fo doing to a, for him, con- fiderable extent; but the Short Story he looked upon as a difcreditable literary production, the fcurrilous produCt of a mind at once narrow, vindictive, virulent and malignant. Into the juftice of this eftimate it might be unneceffary to enter, for in thefe refpeCts the Short Story fpeaks for itfelf. But the book, taken as a whole, has certainly got a bad name. Bell, in his Wheelwright (p. 52), characterizes it “ as a very bitter and partifan production, even for that day;” and others have regarded it in much the fame light. With a book, as with other things, a bad name, once given, is apt to ftick; but none the lefs, in the cafe of the body of the Short Story , feparated from the preface, this unfavory reputation is diftinCtly undeferved. While, thus taken, the Short Story is an outfpoken and earneft prefentation in defence of one fide of a political ftruggle, written at the time and with a view to prejudge the cafe in the minds of thofe for whom it was prepared, a careful reading re¬ veals in it little that is vituperative, and nothing which can be properly called fcurrilous. Indeed, tefted by the ftandards of the time, if it is in any way unufual, it is in its modera¬ tion. As the pages of Milton’s profe works conclufively prove, the feventeenth-century controverfialift was apt to be quite outfpoken towards his opponent; but there is noth¬ ing in the Short Story which in this refpeCt exceeds the bounds then, or, for that matter, now, deemed permiffible. Mrs. Hutchinfon is, indeed, referred to as “ the Ameri¬ can Jezabel;” 1 but this is mild compared with the epithets freely 1 “A General Court held at Bofton Jezabel, Auguft the 30. where the opin- againft Mrs. Hutchinfon the American ions and errors of Mrs. Hutchinfon and Introduction. 4i freely hurled about by the author of Paradife Loft in his Pro Populo Anglicano Defenfio; 1 while in other refpects the reflraint fhown throughout the Short Story in the ab- fence of all references to Vane is moft noticeable. Neither is there in it any perfonal denunciation of the other leaders among the Antinomian faction; while, as to the detailed reference to the misfortunes in childbirth of Mrs. Hutch- infon and Mrs. Dyer, repellent to the laft degree, and the worft thing in the whole book, Winthrop muff, as the Hiftory proves, 2 be held accountable. 3 Unhappily, alfo, that fort of writing cannot be faid to be otherwife than charaCteriftic of him. He was fomewhat prone to congenital monftrofities. 4 Finally, there is nothing in the Short Story which at all approaches in vituperative intenfity Savage’s own references to Thomas Welde, prefently to be referred to. Still, Mr. Savage had always been in the cuftom of attrib¬ uting the authorfhip of this, to him, moft objectionable pamphlet to Thomas Welde; and, “good hater” as he by nature was, he grew to clafs the Rev. Thomas Welde with Dr. Cotton Mather and Governor John Hancock of fubfequent times, as an objeCt of his fpecial and hearty averfion. and her Affociates 80 errors were con¬ demned.” — Josselyn, Chronological Obfervations of America (1673), p. 257. 1 “ Foot beetle, afs, blockhead ,, liar, Jlanderer, ap oft ate, idiot , wretch , igno¬ ramus, vagabond , French vagabond, Burgundian Jlave, —thefe or their equivalents are the epithets applied to Salmafius, page after page, and almoft fentence after fentence. . . . There are decencies and limits, how¬ ever, in civilized warfare; and with all allowance for the cuftoms of contro- verfy in Milton’s time, one cannot al¬ ways excufe him.” — Masson’s Milton, Vol. IV. pp. 263-264. 2 Savage’s Winthrop, Vol. I. pp. 3I3-3I7- 8 But fee Savage’s Genealogical Dillionary of New England, Vol. IV. pp. 459, 460. 4 For example, the very Angular cafe of circumftantial evidence defcribed in the Hijlory, Vol. II. p. *61. 42 The Antinomian Controverfy. % averfion. So far did he carry this prejudice that it became a byword and a jeft among his affociates; for at laft Mr. Savage never uttered the name of any one of thefe three Maffachufetts notabilities without accompanying the men¬ tion with fome intellectual effort the equivalent of a phyfical kick! 1 As Welde and Mather and Hancock were the objects of his contempt and averfion, fo John Winthrop was regarded by Savage with a warmth of admiration almoffc devout. He looked upon the firffc Bolton governor as the incomparable Father of Maffachufetts. When, therefore, his friend Charles Deane 1 There is a tradition that Rufus Choate once expreffed a hope that he fhould fome day have Mr. Savage called as a witnefs for the other fide in alawfuit, fo that he (Choate) might have a chance to crofs-queftion his learned brother as to why he fo hated Cotton Mather. There is likewife an extraordinary and amufing anecdote ftill lingering about the rooms of the Maffachufetts Hiftor- ical Society defcriptive of Savage’s return home late one evening from fome entertainment. Accompanied by a friend hardly lefs mature and quite as learned as himfelf, he fuddenly ftopped before the John Hancock manfion, then ftill Handing on Beacon Street, and proceeded with minatory geftures ex- preffive of hatred and contempt, to ob¬ jurgate the former owner of the houfe with a ftrength and point of language moft fecular, but more refrefhing than conventional. The following extremely charadter- iftic anecdote is from O. B. Frothing- ham’s Bojlon Unitarianifm (p. 178). The incident occurred at a meeting of the Maffachufetts Hiftorical Society. “It was at one of the darkeft epifodes of the war. Defeat had followed defeat. The credit of the government was fink¬ ing. Conflidt with England feemed imminent. An informal converfation on the fituation went round the circle; Mr. R-joined in and criticifed the proceedings at Wafhington, uttering fentiments that jarred on the ears of loyalifts. One of the members, an old man, influential and honored, who had loft a fon in battle, bore it as long as he could, chafing and fretting in his chair; but at length, unable to fit any longer, got up, faced the offender, fhook his clinched fift at him, and ejaculated, “Then” (in the event y of Northern overthrow and bankruptcy) “we will all go to hell together ! ” No member of the Society in thofe times could entertain the flighted: doubt as to who that “old man” was ; and it was fturdy ebullitions of this fort which conftituted one of the charms of Mr. Savage’s impetuous, outfpoken char¬ acter. Introduction . 43 Deane, whofe authority on fuch a point he could not but defer to, and whom otherwife he regarded with that deep refpeCt not unmixed with perfonal affeCtion which Dr. Deane infpired to fuch a marked degree in all who were fo fortunate as to come in contact with him, — when Charles Deane, by the careful collation of paffages proved incontrovertibly that John Winthrop and not Thomas Welde was the author of the Short Story , the refult was the reverie of agreeable to James Savage. The fa6t nevertheless was one not to be denied. In his firft edition of Winthrop, Mr. Savage, while deal¬ ing leniently with Winthrop himfelf in matters pertaining to the troubles of 1636-38, had referred to Welde, then affumed by him to be the author of the Short Story} in divers contemptuous ways, but more efpecially as an “ in- quifitor,” 2 or as “ one of the chief inquifitors,” 3 in that affair. When, therefore, it Suddenly appeared that Win¬ throp and not Welde was “ the virulent pamphleteer ” re- fponfible for the Short Story , Savage, though perplexed in the extreme, girded himfelf for the occafion. The refult was the following curioufly complacent allufion at the clofe of the Preface to his new edition (1853): — “ Expofure of the infirmity of unhappy Thomas Welde, in his Short Story of the Rife, Reign, and Ruin of Antinomianifm, will compenfate, I think, the curious hunter in bibliography.” The reference was to an extraordinary but molt character¬ istic note on pages 298, 299 of his firft volume. Winthrop, in 1 “Thomas Welde . . . himfelf fur- age’s Winthrop (ed. 1825), Vol. I. pp. nifhed a Narrative of it,” referring to 77 258 263 n. the Antinomian controverfy. — Sav- 2 Ibid. p. 215 n. 8 Ibid. p. 238 n. 44 The Antinomian Controverfy. in language already quoted, 1 mentioned the fa£l that the proceedings of the General Court had been “ fet down at large ” and fent to England to be publifhed there. Refer¬ ring to the original manufcript of Winthrop’s Hifiory , which lay before him, Mr. Savage then comments as follows: — “ In the margin was written, in a hand I thought to be Cotton Mather’s, ‘This was printed by Mr. Wells about feven years after.’ The miffpelling of the author’s name is ftrange. From diligent examination of Welde’s book, I think he muft be held anfwerable for 72 of its 85 pages; and that Gov. Winthrop wrote what is printed from the top of p. 46 to the third line of p. 59. This is entitled ‘ A Brief Apology in Defence of the General Proceedings of the Court,’ (probably Winthrop had written, Proceedings of the General Court,) ‘ holden at Bofton, the ninth day of the firft month, 1636, againft Mr. J. Wheelwright, a member there, by occafion of a Ser¬ mon,’ etc., etc. Welde, who went home in 1641, did not until 1644 publifh his ‘ Short Story of the Rife, Reign, and Ruin of the Anti- nomians, etc., that infedled the churches of New England; and how they were confuted by the affembly of minifters there ; as alfo of the magiftrates’ proceedings in Court againft them; together with God’s ftrange and remarkable judgments from heaven upon fome of the chief fomenters of thefe Opinions, and the lamentable death of Mrs. Hutchinfon ; very fit for thefe times, here being the fame Errors amongft us, and adfed by the fame fpirit. Publifhed at the inftant requeft of fundry, by one that was an eye and ear witnefs of the car¬ riage of matters there' Quotations follow from Ephef. 4: 14, and 2 Peter, 3:17. ‘ London : printed for Ralph Smith, at the fign of the Bible, in Cornhill, near the Royal Exchange, 1644.’ The book opens with a fhort addrefs, followed by fixteen very curious pages of preface, and a poftfcript, to which is figned the name of T. Welde. “ The intent of the addrefs to the reader, is to convince him, that T. W. met with the book, ‘newly come forth of the prefs,’ and was earneftly 1 Supra , p. 17. Introduction. 45 earneftly defired ‘ to perfedl it by laying down the order and fenfe of this ftory, (which in the book is omitted;)’ and that the names of the parties in our troubles thus being ‘already in print without any a6t of his,’ he thought it 1 requifite that God’s great works fhould be made known,’ whereupon he drew up the following preface, k with fome additions to the conclujion of the book! “ No fmall reafon to prefume, that this is altogether a pretence on the part of the virulent pamphleteer, would be drawn from infpedlion of the copy of the work in the Britifh Mufeum. It is in the wonder¬ ful collection, by Thomafon, of the pamphlets publifhed from 1640 to 1660, of near thirty thoufand pieces, in almoft two thoufand vol¬ umes, and is found in Vol. 143 of the fmall quartos, there marked 19 Feb. 1643, as the gatherer was careful, he fays, ‘that the very day is written upon moft of them that they came out.’ “ Very trifling importance would attach, however, to the queftion of Welde’s concern in the publication; and we might flightly regard his indication of himfelf on the title-page, that does not bear his name, as ‘ an eye and ear witnefs of the carriage of matters,’ had not the over-cunning writer caufed another title-page to be affixed to the fame work, omitting folely the addrefs and preface. It has every word, and part of a word, and abbreviation of names, and exaClly the fame references and figures, on every page, as the former book, from p. 1 to 66, and Finis inclufive. Yet, to myftify a heedlefs obferver, it is entitled, ‘ Antinomians and Familifts condemned by the Synod of Elders in New England; with the proceedings of the Magiftrates againft them, and their Apology for the fame; together with a mem¬ orable example of God’s judgments upon fome of thofe perfons, etc.; ’ and moft exaCt copy of the laft words and figures of the imprint, ‘ London: publifhed for Ralph Smith at the fign of the Bible, etc., 1644.’ It feems, as if the types had never been difturbed; and to a fkilful eye this tefb is decifive. My attention to this extraordinary inftance of bibliographical difingenuity was drawn in March, 1851, by Dr. Harris, the learned librarian of our Univerfity, where it is preferved; but probably it impofed upon nobody until within two or three 46 The Antinomian Controverfy. three years. Certainly, in fome ancient chirography, of which this fubftituted title-page is probably the foie poffeffor, as I prefume no other copy can be found in the world, (for Thomafon had not heard of it, we may be fure,) it is branded, ‘ By Mr. Wells.’ What a fneak- ing device it was, need not be argued. Nor can any one, it feems to me, hefitate to alk the unanfwerable queftion, What did Welde mean by acknowledging in his preface ‘ fome additiojis to the conclufion of the book ’ when not a word, or letter, or comma, or figure, is added to the laft fix pages or any part of what, for a fhield of his own cow¬ ardice, he wifhed to have pafs as a new edition of a work heretofore iffued from the prefs ? “ No doubt was ever expreffed about the true title-page, ‘A Short Story, etc.,’ by Baylie, in Diffuafive, 1645 1 by Wheelwright, in Mer- curius Americanus, 1645, both at London ; or by Cotton, 1648 ; by our own General Court, 1654, as in note to p. 216, ante; by the author of ‘A Glafs for the People of New England,’ 1676, as quoted by Hutchinfon, I. 72, charging Rev. Samuel Clark of London with ‘taking the lie out of his brother Welde’s Short Story’ into his book, ‘ God’s Judgments againft herefy;’ or by Mather, or by the Lon¬ don publifher of the fecond edition, 1692 ; or by the careful antiquary. Prince, in Catal. of N. E. Library; or by Chauncey, or Eliot, or any other of our New England divines ; and perhaps the reader may think I have derived too much gratification from difclosing the fhameless infirmity or petty malice of the ecclefiaftical hiftorian. Let it go for the leaft fkilful of all attempts at deception : an anony¬ mous title-page to a pamphlet, of which ‘additions to the conclufion,’ probably of feven pages, were before confeffed.” The epithets freely fhowered on the Rev. Thomas Welde, — a “virulent pamphleteer,” and “over-cunning writer” re- forting to the “ fneaking device ” of an “ extraordinary in- ftance of bibliographical difmgenuity ” “ for a fhield of his own cowardice,” thus affording him (Savage) the “ gratifica¬ tion ” Introduction. 47 tion ” of “ difclofing the fhamelefs infirmity or petty malice of the ecclefiaftical hiftorian,”— all this collection of epithets 1 freely fhowered on the head of the Rev. Thomas Welde could hardly fail to excite attention even among thofe not unaware of Mr. Savage’s editorial foibles. Efpecially was this the cafe fmce Mr. Savage, while contemptuoufly un- mafking this “ leaft fkilful of all attempts at deception,” did not fee fit to difclofe a motive, or to conftruCt even a theory upon which to bafe a motive for fuch a difplay of “ coward¬ ice.” Even fuppofing the Rev. Thomas Welde to be thus peculiarly fufceptible to fear, — an affumption not wholly rational in the cafe of one who had braved the anger of Archbifhop Laud, — it would have feemed that, before ap¬ plying fuch ftridures, the writer applying them would have been at fome pains to invent an hypothecs at leaft as to what the author of the Short Story apprehended, and why he adted as he did. As the cafe was left by the literary detedtive, the criminal fo completely and fuccefsfully ex- pofed was adtuated apparently by no motive other than an innate depravity of difpofition, which revealed itfelf in an inclination to cheat, lie and fteal for the mere fatisfaction to be derived from fo doing . 2 Later it became fomewhat a matter 1 In the edition of 1853 Welde is at one time referred to as an “ inquifitor ” (p. 257, ni) ; and then as a “ clerical tormentor ” (p. 295, ni) ; a few pages further on (p. 301, ni) he becomes “ the mild and candid Thomas Welde ; ” and then (p. 310, ni) allufion is made to “ the fimplicity of his bigotry;” next he is reprefented as, in his own belief, “ proxy or attorney of the Mott High ” (p. 315, ni ); finally, a remark of Winthrop’s that Jane Hawkins was under “ ‘ fufpicion to be a witch, 5 is elegantly expanded, in the Short Story of Welde,” who, fome years later, “ might then have en¬ joyed . . . the delight imputed to fome of his brethren of the clergy ... in the delufion of 1692” (p. 316, ni). 2 In a letter addreffed to Dr. Thad- deus William Harris, then librarian of Harvard College, dated March 4, 1853 (the preface to the fecond edition of Winthrop’s 48 The Antinomian Controverfy. matter of furprife that the editor failed to point out the degree in which certain of thefe qualities of Thomas Welde were manifefted in his immediate offspring . 1 Thus the very vaguenefs Winthrop’s Hiflory is dated June, 1853), which letter Dr. Harris filed in a copy of the earlieft, or “Antinomians and Familifts” edition of the Short Story then, and now, belonging to the College, Mr. Savage thus charaCteriftically ex- preffed himfelf: “ I owe you many thanks for the volume of Weld’s Rife, Reign and Ruin, with a fpurious title- page, and the moft curious matter of the Preface fuppreffed. Finding that E. A. [Ezra Abbot] had put a written bibliographical decifion of the matter, of which my conviction is complete that it is erroneous, I have added two lines to his twenty two, to challenge attention to the fubjeCt. . . . No rafcal in making counterfeit bills, having true impreffions from the plates, ever fucceeded better than Welde in giving this abnormal punCtuation mark. . . . Welde might well be afraid of young Harry Vane, who had been his Governour here fo few years before ; [or] any other fear might have induced him to [word torn out ] this facred thield of cowardice, that any weapon and even eyefhot could penetrate. “ But the refource of the oltrich wholly expofes his tail. “ I have a counterfeit piftareen, worth far more than any genuine one, being ftamped here in Bolton, ‘ Philip V. by the grace of God, &c., 1810/ But I do not know, that any defcendant of Rev. Thomas Welde had a hand, or a foot, in making the lie on the die.” Dr. Abbot had, in his “ bibliograph¬ ical decifion ” referred to in the above, ftated the order of editions in accord¬ ance with Welde’s affertion in his note “ To the Reader.” To this “ decifion ” Savage appended thefe two lines : “ But the later edition was publilhed firjl, afferts Jas. Savage, and thus is fhown the difingenuoufnefs of Welde.” It would thus feem that Mr. Savage perfifted in his theory, though otherwife advifed in advance by competent au¬ thority, more judicious than himfelf. 1 Savage’s Winthrop , Vol. II. p. * 167, n. “ Two of our minifters’ fons, being ftudents in the college, robbed two dwelling houfes in the night of fome 15 pounds. Being found out, they were ordered by the governours of the college to be there whipped, which was performed by the prefident himfelf — yet they were about 20 years of age; and after they were brought into the court and ordered to two fold fatisfac- tion, or to ferve fo long for it.” To this ftatement of Winthrop, Mr. Savage ap¬ pends a note, in part as follows, — “ One [of thefe offenders] was James Ward. . . . The other was a fon of Rev. Thomas Welde of Roxbury; and one of the houfes fo robbed by the youthful bur¬ glar was that of his uncle Jofeph, then gone to London. He gave up hope of the college honors, though his father, fo often named in our former volume, was one of the overfeers. Certainly the fons of minifters have not become worfe fince the firft generation.” Introduction. 49 vaguenefs combined with the vehemence of the attack feemed at firft to filence criticifm ; for, unlefs the attention of a defcendant or hiftorical ftudent interefted in the fubjedt was called to the charge, a general impreffion of fomething very bad unqueftionably difclofed was created by the lan¬ guage of the note, fultained by the reputation of him who wrote it. Accordingly, though Savage brought out his fecond edi¬ tion of Winthrop in 1853, it was not until November, 1857, four years later, that his “ expofure of the infirmity of un¬ happy Thomas Welde ” feems to have attracted the notice of any queftioning eye. 1 Then at laft a communication on the fubjedt of the “ authorfliip of the Short Story ” appeared in the Hiftorical Magazine. It was written by J. Wingate Thornton under the fignature of “ Hutchinfon,” and in clear language pointed out the obvious fadts in the cafe, and the wholly gratuitous nature of Savage’s affumptions. Savage had, without the flighted; evidence or authority for fo doing, inverted the order of the editions, making the laft what was obvioufly the firft; and having thus created a myftery where none exifted, had proceeded to belabor the unfortunate Thomas Welde for a fraud and crime of the belaborer’s own device. It was not in Mr. Savage’s nature to accept this corredtion, and revife his judgment. On the contrary, in the light of Mr. Thornton’s criticifms, he became only the more fet in his own belief and determined to prove its corredtnefs. So in 1 it was alluded to by Samuel G. Hijlorical and Genealogical Regijler Drake in a review of Savage’s 1853 edi- (pp. 84, 85) ; but the critic in this cafe tion of Winthrop, printed in the eighth did not undertake to “ fet the matter volume (1854) of the New England right.” 7 50 The Antinomian Controverfy . in the following number of the Hiftorical Magazine (Janu¬ ary, 1858) he publifhed an anfwer to Mr. Thornton’s paper. This anfwer reads to-day like a curious exemplification of how completely a man of a mind at once acute and educated may be befogged and led affray by paffion and prejudice fo as to fee in everything, no matter how unexpected or con¬ tradictory, only new evidence of an utterly erroneous pre¬ conceived theory. After writing his note to the 1853 edition of Winthrop, Mr. Savage had learned of the exiftence of two other copies of the Short Story in the famous Choules collection. Thefe copies bore the two different titlepages upon which, in the note which has been quoted from his 1853 edition, Mr. Savage laid fo much ftrefs, — the one beginning with the words “ Antinomians and Families,” 1 and the other with the words “ A Short Story.” Both of thefe titlepages are here reproduced in fac-fimile (pp. 52, 53). In his original note, already quoted in full, “ difclofing the fhamelefs infirmity or petty malice of the ecclefiaftical hifto- rian,” Mr. Savage, it will be remembered, referred to the “ Antinomians and Familifts ” titlepage copy in the library of Harvard College, faying, “ I prefume no other copy can be found in the world.” When, therefore, he fuddenly came acrofs another copy in the Choules collection, this alfo, it might be fuppofed, would have given him paufe, and led him to reconfider the conclufion to which he had fo haftily com¬ mitted himfelf. Copies of the book, with “a fpurious title- page, and the moft curious matter of the Preface fuppreffed,” were 1 This copy, at the fale of the Nicholas Brown, for that purpofe, has Choules collection, in May, 1856, was been ufed in the editing of the prefent bought by the late John Carter Brown, volume, and now, kindly lent by his fon, John Introduction. 5i were, it was evident, by no means fo rare as he had at firft fuppofed. After all, might not Thomas Welde have told the truth when he faid that he had met the “ Book, newly come forth of the Preffe,” and a copy with the “ Antinomians and Familifts ” titlepage been the book thus met with ? If any fuch queftion or doubt ever fuggefted itfelf to Mr. Savage’s mind, it certainly never effedted a lodgment there. He had conceived a theory; he was bound to eftablifh its truth. But, in fo doing, his troubles were not yet over; new difficulties prefented themfelves. The charge of fraud and a fpurious titlepage, fo confidently advanced, had been bafed on the abfolute identity of the body of the book, whether under the “ Antinomian and Familifts ” titlepage, or the “Short Story” titlepage. In his introductory “ To the Reader,” Welde had fpoken of “ fome additions ” made by him “ to the conclufion of the Book; ” and Savage, taking the expreffion in the verbal, literal fenfe, had proceeded to fhow that the clofing pages of the two editions were exadtly the fame, — verbatim , punOluatim, et literatim , — while, in one cafe, the firft fignature (A) confifted of a titlepage and feventeen fubfequent pages of prefatory matter, but in the other cafe that fignature was confined to the titlepage alone. This, to his mind, fhowed conclufively that, after publica¬ tion, all of the firft fignature except the titlepage had been fuppreffed, while “ the additions to the conclufion,” confeffed to by “ T. W.,” neceffarily made up a confiderable portion of the clofing part of the body of the work. For this unaf- certainable quantity of the obnoxious publication, as well as for the whole of the fuppreffed preface, Thomas Welde was refponfible, and John Winthrop was not. So er&» ANTINOMIANS FAMILISTS CONDEMNED By the SYNOD of ELDERS NEW ENGLAND: WITH THE Proceedings of the Magi (Irate s againft them, And their Apology for the fame. Together with A Memorable example of Gods Iudgements upon fome of thofe Perfons fo proceeded againft. LONDON , Printed for Ralph Smith at the figne of the Biblein Cornhill neare the Rojall Exchange, 1644. SHORT STORY OF THE Rife, reign, and ruine of the nAntinomians, Familijls z? Libertines ft hat infected the Churches _ NEW ENGLAND: |f| And how they were confuted by the Aflembty of Mi — niftemhere: AsalFoofthc Magiftratesproceedings m Court againft them. Together with Gods ftrange and remarkable judge¬ ments From Heaven upon fbme of the chief fomenters of thefe Opinions j And the lamentable death of M^.Hutcbifon: Very fit for thefe times ; here being the fame errours amongjl m, and. acted by the fame ftirit. Publifhed at theinftam requeft of fundry, by one that was an eye ttk . anc * care* wicneHTe of the carriage of matters there. EpheC 4. 14^ Be no more children tiffed to andfro^ and carryed about with every wind of dotirim^ by ike jl eight of men y ind cunning cr fftineffe^wbereby they lie in wait to deceive . Beware^ left yeebeing led army with the tYror of the wicked\ yte fall from your own ftedUftneffe.z Pet. 3. 17. LON DO N, ~ Prirrted.for Ralph Smith at the Figne of the Bible in Cornhill ^ neare the Royall Exchange. 1644. 54 The Antinomian Controverfy. So far as the firft of thefe two points, — the fuppreffion of the preface, — was concerned, the very obvious explanation, that originally the titlepage alone conftituted the firft figna- ture, and that, as Welde quite truly faid, the preliminary matter prepared by him was fubfequently inferted between the titlepage and the fecond fignature, — this obvious expla¬ nation Mr. Savage wholly declined to liften to. The fa6t that the titlepage alone conftituted the firft (A) fignature, and that the next (B) fignature began with the fecond page, though by no means unufual, might ftill at firft glance excite fufpicion of fuppreffed matter. But, in the prelent cafe, it does not feem to have occurred either to Mr. Savage, or the practical printers he confulted, that the fig- natures of the Short Story , it being a fmall quarto, confided of eight pages each. Welde’s preliminary matter, fuppofed on Savage’s theory of fuppreffion to have been part of the original firft edition, required eighteen pages, — feventeen of them printed and one blank. If, therefore, Savage was correft, the firft two (A and B) fignatures of the earlieft, bona fide , edition would have included the titlepage and fourteen pages of introductory matter; the next (C) figna¬ ture would have included the remainder of the introductory matter (four pages, one of them blank) and the firft four pages of the body of the book; while the fourth (D) figna¬ ture would have begun on what is, in the original, page 5 of the Short Story . Upon Savage’s theory, therefore, a quarto originally began with a fingle fignature (A) of twenty pages; and the neceffary inference would have been that the Rev. Thomas Welde defigned the fraud and fuppreffion, including the “fpurious titlepage,” from the ftart, and ar¬ ranged Introduction. 55 ranged for a fignature (A) of an irregular number of pages, fo that afterwards, the preliminary matter having been at the proper time withdrawn, the apparently regular fucceffion of fignatures fhould begin at what was originally the twenty- firffc, but would then become the firff, page of the body of the book. On the other hand, if Mr. Savage had not been obfiinately prepoffeffed by a convidlion of Welde’s wicked- nefs, the mere faffs that the introductory matter was not paged, and that an irregular and wholly unufual number of pages was found between the titlepage and the beginning of the fecond (B) fignature, — thefe obvious faffs would alone have convinced him of the truth of Welde’s fimple and natural ftatement, that “ meeting with this Book, newly come forth of the Preffe,” he had, at the inftance of others, “ drawne up this following Preface, and prefixed hereunto.” So far as the fecond point made by Mr. Savage, — the argument from abfolute typographic identity that the “ addi¬ tions to the conclufion of the Book ” had been made by Welde before the firft edition was firuck off, — fo far as this point bafed on typographic identity was concerned, it now fo chanced that one of the two copies of the Short Story in the Choules collection was a copy of the fecond edition under that title of 1644, — the edition for which the type, except that of the titlepage, had been refet. When, therefore, Mr. Savage fent on to New York and caufed a complete collation of the two copies to be made, inftead of the abfolute identity of type in “ every word, and part of a word, and abbreviation of names, and exaCtly the fame references and figures, on every page, as the former book, from p. 1 to 66, and Finis inclufive,” on which he had fo confidently bafed his argu¬ ment, 56 The Antinomian Controverfy. ment, — in place of this abfolute identity, the new collation revealed “ thirty, forty, or more than fifty, if not one hun¬ dred ” variations; and, having before argued from abfolute identity, Mr. Savage now triumphantly appealed to this great lack of identity as conclufive proof of his hypothecs! His amended theory was that the newly difcovered and varying edition was yet an earlier imprint, alfo containing Welde’s preliminary matter, the typographical errors of which earlier impreffion had been corrected for the later imprint and the yet fubfequent imprint from which the introductory matter had been fuddenly dropped and fup- preffed. 1 The knowledge of his calling poffeffed by “any printer’s apprentice,” he contended, would fuffice to eftablifh this as an “ irrefiftible inference.” The real fad was, as clearly appears on clofe examination, that two wholly diftinCt editions of the pamphlet, both of them with Welde’s prefatory matter, were printed in 1644, from the fame font of type. The titlepage was identical, and had evidently been kept {landing; but, for the reft, the variations average fome twenty to a page, the paging itfelf is not the fame, while different ornamental fcroll-work is found at the beginning of the chapters. Yet to the end Mr. Savage maintained that thefe were mere prefs correc¬ tions ; fo that even the impoffible was made to afford addi¬ tional evidence of the correftnefs of an otherwife untenable theory. To this fingular difplay of perverted mental acumen, not to fay wrong-headednefs, Mr. Thornton, ftill writing under the 1 See the paper by W. B. Trafk, in logical Regijler (1882), Vol. XXXVI. New England Hijlorical and Genea- p. 36. Introduction. 57 the fignature of “ Hutchinfon,” replied in the Hijiorical Magazine of June, fix months later (1858). The fabts and reafoning he now prefented can hardly be confidered other- wife than conclufive ; for he demolifhed completely the “ printer’s apprentice ” argument bafed on the abfence of all but one page in the firft fignature of the firft edition, claimed by Savage to be the laft. The controverfy between Mr. Thornton and Mr. Savage here came to a clofe. Mean¬ while Samuel G. Drake had taken the fubjeft up, and, in his Hiftory of Bofton} controverted the pofition of Savage, calling him to fevere account. Dr. Palfrey alfo, in his Hif tory of New England , 1 2 indicated his diffent; and, above all, Charles Deane correfponded with Mr. Savage, endeavoring to induce him to fee the thing in a correct light. Felt, in his Ecclefafiical Hiftory , 3 enforced the efforts of the others, — all, with one exception, friends and warm admirers of the editor of Winthrop. 4 It was in vain. Savage, hating Welde, had conceived a theory; nothing fufficed to difabufe him of it. On the contrary, every new development, no matter what, only confirmed him in it, until at laft, in 1862, he finally delivered himfelf on the fubjedt at great length under the head of “ Welde, Thomas,” in his Genealogical Dictionary 1 The Hijlory and Antiquities of Bofton (1856), p. 148, n. 2 Hiftory of New England , Vol. I. p. 495, n. 3 Ecclefafiical Hifory , Vol. I. p. 329 - 4 The fame conclufion was reached by Rev. John A. Vinton, who, in his Antinomian Controverfy of 1637, {peak¬ ing of the author of the Short Story, fays he “ could be no other than Gov¬ ernor Winthrop himfelf,” baling the affertion on “a careful comparifon of fome paffages in Winthrop’s Jour 7 ial with fome paffages in the Short Story ” (pp. 39, 40). Drake, on the fame evi¬ dence, afferts : “ It may fafely be af¬ firmed, that, if Welde wrote the Short Story, he alfo wrote Winthrop’s Jour¬ nals — New England Hiforical a 7 id Ge 7 iealogical Regifer (1854), Vol. V 111 . p. 84. 58 The Antinomian Controverfy. DiElionary of New England , making his final appeal “ to the competent tribunal of gentlemen and fcholars in this and all fucceeding ages.” What he there fays is too long to quote at length, filling, as it does, twelve clofely printed pages packed with abbre¬ viated words. A mod diffufe and intricate ftatement, it is in parts hardly intelligible; but in it he made no retrac¬ tion or confeffion of error. He ftill referred to Welde as “ the crafty writer,” the “ reverend cafuift,” whofe “ fneaking devife,” at laffc expofed, had been defigned to “ fupply a fliield for his temerity or a cover for his cowardice.” But now, at lad, he did undertake to fupply an anfwer to the natural quedion,— What motive had Welde in his courfe of deceit and fupprefdon ? He finds that motive in Welde’s datement in the note “ To the Reader” that “the names of fome parties . . . are already in print without any a6t of mine.” His fuggedion is that Welde “ might fear profecu- tion for libels by one or another.” But for a perfon curious in fuch matters it would be neceffary to read all that Savage here fays to realize fully how a learned, confcientious and acute invedigator may at times unadvifedly advance a theory, and in fupport of it wander into a wholly gratuitous affault upon fome well-nigh forgotten hidorical perfonage whofe only crime was that he made a fimple and draightforward datement of fa6fs not altogether palatable. The controverfy does indeed, as Sav¬ age remarks, though not in the way he intended, afford compenfation to “ the curious hunter in bibliography.” 1 While 1 The following is from the Genea- “Whatever hand reported thefe pro- logical Dictionary (Vol. IV. p. 459): ceedings, it could not well have been Governor Introduction. While it is unneceffary to follow the difcuffion further, it is a very effential portion of the introduction to a new edi¬ tion of the Short Story , for it involves the queftion of a joint authorfhip. Starting from Welde’s flatement in the note “ To the Reader,” that he had “drawn up this following Preface, and prefixed hereunto, with fome additions to the conclufions of the Book,” Savage, eager to reduce Win- throp’s refponfibility for the Short Story to the narrowed poffible limits, concludes, as the refult of “ diligent examina¬ tion,” that Winthrop “wrote what is printed from the top of page 46 to the third line of page 59.” For the reft, dropping the queftion of authorfhip, treating Welde’s ftatement that he had met the book “ newly come forth of the Preffe ” as a simple downright falfehood, and falling back on Welde’s acknowledgment of refponfibility for “ fome additions to the conclufion of the Book,” Savage argued that Welde, as editor, was “ refponfible for all but the ftridtly official document Governor Winthrop, at leaft in the full tranfcript, for on page 27 it is alleged that Wheelwright was required ... 4 to render himfelf at the houfe of Mr. Stan¬ ton, one of the magiftrates.’ . . . Now this could not have fallen from the Governor, whofe narrative [in the Hif- tory~\ in feveral items varies from this report, and does not name the magif- trate, but ufes the phrafe ‘one of the magiftrates/ which were then only feven, befide himfelf and the Deputy. But Colonial Records (I. 207) has the name of Stoughton ; and no Stanton was ever one of the magiftrates.” Vide note, infra , p. 148. It feems almoft incredible that it fhould never have occurred to a man of Mr. Savage’s experience in fuch matters that in this cafe the name written in the manufcript was Stouton, — being, by the pronun¬ ciation of that day, idem fonans as Stoughton, — and the compofitors in England read and fet it up Stanton. In another than Mr. Savage fuch an argu¬ ment, bafed on fo obvious an error of mifreading, would be attributed rather to perverfity than to obtufenefs ; efpe- cially as no one living was so familiar as he with the almoft illegible charadler of what he himfelf refers to as Win- throp’s “ chirography.” In the Short Story , alfo, many of the proper names arecurioufly abbreviated; Wheelright, for inftance, being printed Wheel., and Wilfon, Wil. (; infra , pp. 132, 133). 6 o The Antinomian Controverfy , document . . . becaufe it was printed under his direction and moft of it is evidently his own compofition.” 1 And he even goes fo far as to affert that if “ refort be had to critical comparifon of ftyle, flight difficulty will attend the feparation of what is between the two covers of the binding. Againft the errors of Wheelwright, and the fantaftic revela¬ tions of Mrs. Hutchinfon, Welde could not more fmcerely fhow his zeal than Winthrop; but his zeal is denunciatory, fierce, and virulent, while that of the Governor feems cau¬ tious, calm, and moderate, in terms, decifive in fpirit. Even in type of the fame forms, it may be followed, like that fabled river in its namelefs courfe under the fea, as told by Virgil, En . III. 686, bearing the true, unmixed proof of its fountain, — “ ‘ Nunc Ore, Arethufa, tuo Seculis confunditur undis.’ ” On the flrength of this “ critical comparifon,” he then arbitrarily affigns feventy-two of the eighty-five printed pages to Welde, and thirteen to Winthrop, quite regardlefs of the fa6t that other, and much more decifive, internal evidence fhows that the portions affigned to Welde were written in Bofton fix years before Welde made his “ additions to the conclufion of the Book.” Dr. Palfrey, while “ differing with great reluctance from Winthrop’s learned editor,” afcribed to Winthrop’s hand all of the body of the Book, — excluding the prefatory matter to which Welde’s initials were attached, — adding merely an uncertainty “ whether it is the laft three or the laft eight pages of the volume that conftitute the ‘ additions ’ referred to in the ‘ Addrefs to the Reader.’ ” A 1 Genealogical DIG ion ary of New England , Vol. IV. p. 464. Introduction. 61 A careful and unprejudiced examination would feem to fhow no good reafon for putting this clofe, verbal confiruc- tion on Welde’s language. The words “ fome additions to the conclufion of the Book ” by no means neceffarily imply that a part of what was added was tacked on to the laffc printed pages of it. By the “conclufion of the Book” Welde prefumably meant the end of the ftory narrated in it up to the time when it left the hands of the writer. Welde then completed it by bringing the courfe of events down to the time of publication ; and this part of the narrative, all included in the preface, conffituted his “ additions to the conclufion [or ending] of the Book.” On this point there feems no Q-ood reafon to diffent from the fiatement of Mr. Thornton : — “Mr. Welde’s ‘additions to the conclufion of the Book’ relate to Mrs. Hutchinfon. Winthrop’s manufcript being prepared ‘foon after the court brake up,’ could contain nothing of a date fubfequent to her banifhment from the colony. Welde takes up the wondrous tale, from that date, narrates fome incidents of her life in Rhode Ifland, her removal ‘ to live under the Dutch, neare a place called by Sea-men, and in the map, Hell-gate,’ and the news of the deftruc- tion of herfelf and family by the Indians, as he had ‘ received it very lately from a godly hand in New-England.’ In ‘A Poftfcript ’ he * thinkes it fit to adde a comfortable paffage of newes from thofe parts written to me very lately by a faithfull hand,’ about ‘ two Saga¬ mores, or Indian Princes ’ having ‘ voluntarily fubmitted themfelves to the will and law of our God.’ Thefe were his ‘ additions.’ ’’ But the whole quefiion of authorfhip as between Winthrop and Welde may be faid to have originated in this century with Savage, and to have been difpelled by Deane. In both England 62 The Antinomian Controverfy. England and in America at the time of its publication, thofe referring to the book attributed it, as a matter of courfe, to Winthrop. Baillie, for inftance, in his Diffuajive (1645) makes three diftindt references to the authorfhip of the Short Story , and in fuch a way as to fhow that he was corredily informed. The firft reference is in the lift of “ Principall Authors ” prefixed to his book. Among thefe is, “ A fhort ftory of the rife &c publifhed with Mr. Welds large preface, 1644.” Later on (p. 57) he fpeaks of “the witneffe of Matter Winthrop, the wife ft of all the New Eng- lifh Governours hitherto, and of Matter Weis, a gracious minifter of that Land, in their printed relations of the Schifms there.” And finally (p. 64), referring to a paffage in the body of the work, he fays, — “Out of the Governour Winthrop’s Narration, I remark one abomination.” In like manner Rutherford in his Survey of Spiritual Antichriji (1648) refers to the Short Story as being “penned (as I am informed) by M. Winthrope, Governour, a faithfull witnes, and approved by M. T. Weld in his preface to the book” (p. 171). Finally, John Cotton, in his Way of Congrega¬ tional Churches Cleared 1 (1648), refers to a paffage in the body of the Short Story as being “ teftimony . . . which (it is likely) was delivered by Mr. Winthrop, being then Governor.” All thefe references indicate that by thofe at the time at all informed on the fubjedt the Short Story itfelf, apart from the preface, was underftood to be Winthrop’s work. Other writers of the fame period, uninformed as to the matter, but feeing Welde’s name figned in full to the Preface, fimply refer to the book as “Mr. Wells, his narration,” 2 or, in another 1 Infra , pp. 364, 366. 2 Edwards’s GangrcFiia, p. 3. Introduction. 63 another cafe, to the fafts “ fet downe by Mr. Wells in a book printed for Ralph Smith.” 1 Finally, it is a conclufive anfwer to Palfrey’s fuggeftions that Welde may have referred to the laft three or eight pages as his “ additions to the conclufion of the Book,” that the language ufed in thofe pages, as already more than once pointed out, fhows that they muft have been written in Bof- ton at the fame time as the reft of the book, and prior to the middle of March, 1638, while there is no evidence what¬ ever that any portion of Welde’s “ additions ” was written before 1644. 2 What Welde wrote deals wholly with the events, or “ conclufions,” fubfequent to the completion of the original narrative, including its clofmg pages. If, as Welde fays, — and, Mr. Savage and his elaborate theory to the contrary notwithftanding, no ground whatever exifts for difcrediting Welde’s flatement, while there is every ground for accepting it, — if, as Welde in his addrefs “ To the Reader ” fays, he met the “ Book newly come forth from the Prelfe,” meaning a copy of the edition bearing the “ Antinomians and Families ” titlepage, it would then be apparent that everything found in this, the earlieft and authentic 1 Paget’s Herefography , p 91. 2 The term “American Jezabel ” is found on the laft page (66) of the Short Story (infra, p. 232), and, as an epi¬ thet, is fuppofed to be charadteriftic of Welde, and not at all fo of Winthrop. On the fame page, and in the fame par¬ agraph, are thefe words : “ God giving her up fince the fentence of excommu¬ nication, to that hardnefs of heart, as the is not affedted with any remorfe but glories in it, and fears not the ven¬ geance of God, which fhe lyes under,” &c. Yet Mr. Savage periiftently argued that this language, becaufe at the end of the book, was neceflarily part of Welde’s “additions to the conclufion” of it, and was written by Welde in Lon¬ don, in 1644, and not by Winthrop in Bofton, in 1638. And this, too, though Welde defcribes in the preface figned by him how Mrs. Hutchinfon had been killed by the Indians in 1643. 64 The Antinomian Controverfy . authentic imprint, was fet up diredtly from a copy of the manufcript “ fent into England to be publifhed there ” in the fpring of 1638. Welde’s “additions ” were limply thofe portions of the fubfequent imprints in which they differed from the earlieff and authentic imprint. What thofe por¬ tions were was clearly fhown as the refults of Mr. Savage’s careful collations. They were confined fimply and firidtly to the prefatory matter figned with Welde’s initials or name. It has already been faid that the Short Story fupplies the only confecutive narrative of the events of the fo-called Anti¬ nomian controverfy. Certain documents, printed and in manufcript, have neverthelels from time to time come to light bearing on portions of that epifode. 1 Among thefe the more important are,— 1. A portion of the Hutchinfon Papers. 2. The Report of the church trial of Mrs. Hutchinfon. 3. References in portions of Cotton’s Way of Congrega¬ tional Churches Cleared. As the feveral documents in Hutchinfon’s State Papers relating to the Antinomian controverfy are included in the edition of the Hutchinfon papers in the Publications of the Prince Society, and can be confulted there, they are not reproduced in the prefent volume. 2 The report of the trial of 1 There is a valuable monograph on the bibliography of the Antinomian controverfy in Harvard College Library Bulletin No. n (1879), prepared by Dr. Winfor. The conclufions therein reached as to the fequence in the edi¬ tions of the Short Story are fimilar to thefe in the text. The 1692 edition differs in no effential refpedt from thofe of 1644. Dr. Winfor in his monograph indicates the collections, private and public, which own original copies of the feveral works referred to. 2 Johnfon devotes a confiderable portion of his Wonder-Working Pro¬ vidence to the Antinomian controverfy, and, Introduction. of Mrs. Hutchinfon before the church of Bofton is repro¬ duced in the prefent volume, in order that the publications of the Society may include in an annotated form all the known documents and material of any confiderable moment relating to this, as has already been faid, moft interefling as well as moffc far-reaching and charafteriftic epifode in New England hiftory. and, as he arrived in Bofton while that controverfy was in its moft exciting phafe, he is a contemporaneous author¬ ity in regard to it. “ He evidently never comprehended the new difpen- fation ; but, underftanding well the old landmarks, he oppofed the Antinomians with all the energy of his being. Nearly forty pages of his book are devoted to this unintelligible fubjedl, and ferve as a curious illuftration of the intenfity of feeling exhibited in that controverfy.” This ftatement of Dr. Poole, in the introdudtion to his edition of the Won¬ der-Working Providence , fufficiently explains why the portions of that work referred to are not here repro¬ duced. POSTSCRIPT. As the laft pages of this volume were paffing through the prefs, Profeffor Willifton Walkers volume, entitled Creeds and Platforms of Congregationalifm , appeared ; as alfo Mr. Abner C. Goodell, Jr.’s paper in the firft publication of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts. Each contained valuable matter relating to the Antinomian controverfy of 1636-1638, to which it was impoffible to refer in this vol¬ ume. They are important contributions to the literature of the fubjedl, and fhould be confulted in connection with it. 9 SHORT STORY OF THE Rile, reign, and ruine of the ayfntinomians, FamiliJJs Libertinesfhz t infe&ed the Churches NEW ENGLAND: And how they were confuted by the AfTembly of Mi niftere there: Asalfoofthe Magiftrates proceedings in Court againft them. Together with Gods ftrange and remarkable judge¬ ments from Heaven upon fome of the chief fomenters of thefe Opinions 5 And the lamentable death of W.Hutcbifon: Very fit for thefe times; here being the fame err outs amongjl us, and acted by the fame fpirit . Publiflied at theinflant requeft of fundry, by one that was an eye , and eare>-witneflfe of the carriage of matters there. EphcC 4. Be no more children tejftd to andfro, and carry ed -about frith every wind of dollrine, by the ft eight of men, tnd cunning craftincjje,wbei'eby they lie hi wait to deceive. Beware, left yee being led army with theefrorof the wicked, yte fall front your own ftedfaftnejfe.i Pet. 3.17% LONDON , Printed, for Ralph S?nith at the figne of the Bible in CornhilL neare the Roy all Exchange. 1644. it *&* To the Reader. Meeting with this Book, newly come forth of the Preffe, and being earneftly preffed by diverfe to perfedl it, by laying downe the order and fenfe of this ftory, (which in the Book is omitted) Though for mine owne part, I was more flow unto it; not as if I thinke it containes any thing but truth; names of fome parties, that adled in our troubles, that have, fince that time, (I hope) repented, and fo God having pardoned their fins in Heaven, I fhould have beene loath to have revived them on earth; But confidering that their names are already in Print without any a6t of mine, and that the neceffity of the times call for it, and it’s requisite that Gods great works fhould be made knowne; I therefore, in a flraight of time, not having had many houres, have drawne up this following Preface, and prefixed here¬ unto, with fome additions to the conclufion of the Book. I commend thy felfe and this to the blefsing of God. T. W. The THE PREFACE. FTER we had efcaped the cruell hands of perfe- cuting Prelates, and the dangers at Sea, and had prettily well outgrowne our wildernes troubles in our firfiplantings in New-England ; And when our Common-wealth began to be founded , and our Churches fweetely fettled in Peace, {God abounding to us in more happy enjoyments then we could have expected:) Left we fhould, now, grow fecure, our wife God (who feldome fuffers his owne, in this their wearyfome Pilgrimage to be long without trouble ) fent a new Jlorme after us, which proved the forefl try all that ever befell us fence we left our Native foyle . Which was this, that fome going thither from hence full fraught with many unfound and loofe opinions, after a time, began to open their packs, and freely vent their wares to any that zvould be their cufeomers; Afulliludes of men and women, Church-members and others, having tafeed of their Commodities, were eager after them, and were freight infeCled before they were aware, and fome being tainted conveyed the infection to others : and thus that Plague firfe began amongd us. 72 The Antinomian Controverjy. us, that had not the wifedome and faithfulneffe of him, that watcheth over his vineyard night and day, by the beames of his Light and Grace cleared and purged the ay re, certainely, we had not beene able to have breathed there comfortably much longer. Our difcourfe of them fhall tend to fhew, 1. What thefe opinions were. 2. How they fpread fo faft and prevailed fo fuddainely. 3. How they did rage and raigne when they had once gotten head. 4. How they fell and were ruined, when they were at higheft. The opinions , (fome of them) were fuch as thefe ; I fay, fome of them, to give but a toftfor afterwards you fhallfee a litter offourefcore and eleven of their brats hung up a gain ft the Sunne, befides many new ones of Miftris Hutchinfons, all which they hatched and dandled', As 1. That the Law, and the Preaching of it is of no ufe at all, to drive a man to Chrift. 2. That a man is united to Chrift, and juftifted without faith ; yea from eternity. 3. That faith is not a receiving of Chrift, but a mans difcerning that he hath received him already. 4. That a man is united to Chrift onely, by the worke of the Spirit upon him, without any ad of his. 5. That a man is never effectually Chrifts, till he hath affurance. 6 . This affurance is onely from the witneffe of the Spirit . 7. This witneffe of the Spirit is meerly immediate without any refpeCl to the word, or any concurrence with it. 8. When 8. When a man hath once this witneffe he never doubts more. g. To question my affurance,, though I fall into Murther or Adultery, proves that I never had true affurance. 10. Sanctification can be no evidence of a mans good efiate. 11. No comfort can be had from any conditionall promife. 12. Poverty in fpirit (to which Chrifi pro 7 iounceth bleffed- neffe , Mat. 5. 3.) is onely this, to fee I have 710 grace at all. 13. To fee I have no grace m me, will give me comfort ; but to take comfort from fight of grace, is legall. 14. A 71 hypocrite may have Adams graces that he had in Innocency. 15. The graces of Saints a 7 id Hypocrites differ 7 iot. 16. All graces are in Chrifi as in the SubjeTt, a 7 id none in us,fo that Chrifi beleeves, Chrifi loves , &c. 17. Chrifi is the new Creature. 18. God loves a man never the better for any holineffe in him, a 7 id never the leffe, be he never fo unholy. 19. Sinne in a childe of God mifi never trouble him. 20. Trouble in co 7 ifcience for fins of commiffion, or for neglect of duties, fhewes a man to be wider a Covena 7 it of workes. 21. All Covenants to God expreffed in words are legall workes. 22. A Chrifiian is not bou 7 id to the Law as a mile of his converfatio 7 t. 23. A Chrifiian is not bound to pray except the Spirit moves him. 24. A Minifier that hath not this {new) light is 710 1 able to edifie others that have it. 25. The 10 74 The Antinomian Controverfy. 25. The whole letter of the Scripture is a covenant of works . 26. No Chriflian mufi be preft to duties of holineffe. 27. No Chriflian mufi be exhorted to faith, love, a 7 td prayer, &c. except we know he hath the Spirit. 28. A man may have all graces, and yet want Chrifl . 29. All a beleevers activity is onely to ad sinne. Now thefe, 772< 9/7 of them, being fo grojfe, one would wonder how they fhould fpread fo fafl a,nd fuddenly amo 7 igfl a people fo religious and well taught. For declaring of this, be pleafed to attend two things. 1. The nature of the Opinions themfelves, which ope 7 i fuch a faire and eafe way to Heaven, that men may paffe without difficulty. For, if a 77 ian need not be troubled by the Law, before faith, but may ftep to Chrifl fo eafely ; and then, if his faith be no going out of himfelfe to take Chrifl, but onely a difcerning that Chrifl is his owne already , and is 07 tely a 7 i ad of the Spirit upon him, no ad of his ozone done by hhn ; and if he, for his part, mufi see nothing in himfelfe, have nothing, doe nothmg, 07 iely he is to fiazid Jlill a 7 id waite for Chrifl to doe all for him. And then if after faith, the Law 710 rule to walke by, no forrow or repentance for finne ; he mufi not he preffed to duties, and need never pray, mileffe moved by the Spirit: A 7 id if he fals into finne, he is never the more difi liked of God, nor his co 7 idition never the worfe. And for his affurance, it bemg given him by the Spirit, he mufi never let it goe, but abide in the height of comfort, though he fals into the groffefi finnes that he can. Then their way to life was made eafie, if fo, 710 marvell fo ma 7 ty like of it. And this is the very reafon, befides the novelty of it, that this 75 Preface. this kind of doctrine takes fo well here in London, and other parts of the Kingdome, and that you fee fo many dance after this pipe, running after fuch and fuch, crowding the Churches andfilling the doores and windowes, even fuch carnall and vile perfons (many of them) as care not to heare any other godly Miniflers, but onely their Leaders . Oh, itpleafeth nature well to have Heaven, and their lufis too. 2. Confider their Jleights they ufed in fomenting their Opinions ; fome of which I will fet downe : as 1. They laboured much to acquaint themfclves with as many, as pofsibly they could , that fo they might have the better opportunity to communicate their new light unto them. 2. Being once acquainted with them, they wouldfirangely labour to infnuate themfelves into their ajfedlions, by loving falutes, humble carriage, kind invitements, friendly vifits , and fo they would winne upon men, and fieale into their bofomes before they were aware. Yea, affoone as any new-commers (efpecially, men of note, worth, and activity, fit in/lruments to adva?ice their defigne) were landed, they would be fure to wel¬ come them, fiiew them all courtefie, and offer them roome in their owne houfes, or of fome of their owne Sell, and fo hav- ing gotten them into their Web, they could eafily poyfon them by degrees ; It was rare for any man thus hooked in, to efcape their Leaven. 3. (Becaufe fuch men as would fedzice others, had need be fome way eminent) they would appeare very humble, holy, and fpirituall Chrifiians, and full of Chrifi ; they would deny themf elves farre,fpeake excellently, pray with fuch foule-ravifh - ing exprefsions and off ell ions, that a firanger that loved good - neffe, could not but love and admire them, and fo be the more 76 The Antinomical Controverfy. eafily drawne after them ; looking upon them as men and women as likely to know the fecrets of Chrifl , and bofome- counfels of his Spirit, as aziy other. A nd this opinion of them was the more lifted up through the fimplicitie and weakneffe of their followers, who would', in admiration of them, tell others , that , fince the Apoftles times, they were perfwaded, none ever received fo much light from God ’ as fuck and fuch had done, naming their Leaders. 4. would lift up themfelves, fo alfo their Opinions, ^ guilding them over with fpecious termes of Free Grace, glorious light, Gofpel truths, as holding forth naked Chrifl:: and this tooke much with fimple honefl hearts that loved Chrifl, efpecially with new converts, who were lately in bondage under finne and wrath, and had newly taficd the fweetneffe of Free Grace ; being now in their firfi love to Chrifl, they were ex¬ ceeding glad to imbrace any thing, that might further advance Chrifl and Free Grace ; and fo drank them in readily. 5. If they met with Chriflians that were full of doubts and feares about their conditions, {as many tender and godly hearts there were) they would tell them, they had never taken a right courfe for comfort, but had gone on (as they zvere led) in a legall way of evidencing their good eflate by Sanctification, and gazing after qualifications in themfelves ; and would/hew them from their owne experience, that themf elves for a long time were befooled even as they are now, in poring upon graces in themfelves, and while they did fo they never prof¬ fered, but were driven to pull all that building downe , and lay better and fafer foundations in Free Grace ; and then would tell them of this Gofpel-way we fpeake of, how they might come to fuch a fitted peace that they might never doubt more , 77 more, though they JJiould fee no grace at all in themfelves: and fo (as it is faid of the Harlots dealing with the young man, Prov. 7. 21.) with much faire fpeech they caufed them to yeeld', with the flattering of their lips they forced them . 6. They commonly laboured to worke firft itpon women, being (as they conceived ) the weaker to refifi\ the more flexi¬ ble, tender ; and ready to yeeld: and if once they could winde in them, they hoped by them, as by an Eve, to catch their hus¬ bands alfo, which indeed often proved too true amongft us there . 7. As foone as they had thus wrought in themfelves, and a good conceit of their Opinions, by all thefe wayes of fubtilty, into the hearts of people ; nextly they flrongly endeavored with all the craft they could, to undermine the good Opinion of their Minifters, and their doBrine, and to worke them cleane out of their affections, telling them they were forry that their Teachers had fo mifled them, and trained them up under a Covenant of workes, and that themfelves never having beene taught of God, it is no wonder they did no better teach them the truth, and how they may ft till doomes day under their legall Sermons, and never fee light ; and withall fometimes cafling afperfions on their perfons, and praBife, as well as their do Brine, to bring them quite out of efeeme with them. And this they did fo effeBually, that many de¬ clined the hearing of them , though they were members of their Churches, and others that did heare, were fo filled with prejudice that they profited not, but fludied how to objeB againfi them, and cenfure their doBrine, which (whiles they flood right) was wont to make their hearts to melt and tremble . Yea, 78 The Antinomian Controverfy. Yea , fome that had beene begotten to Chriji by fome of their faithfull labours in this Land , for whom they could have laid downe their lives , and not being able to beare their ab - fence, followed after them thither to New-Engl and to injoy their labours ; yet thefe falling acquainted with thofe Seducers , were fuddenly fo altered in their affections towards thofe their fpirituall fathers , that they would neither heare them , nor willingly come in their company , prof effing they had never received any good from the?n. 8. They would not , till they knew men well\ z?/z?zz //z mortall like the beafts. That there is no fuch thing as inherent righteoufneffe . That thefe bodies of ours fhall not rife againe. That their owne revelations of particular events were a infallible as the Scripture, &c. 2. They alfo grew (many of them) very loofe and degenerai in their praRifes (for thefe Opinions will certainly produce < filthy life by degrees ) As no prayer in their families, no Sal bath, infupfenable pride, frequent and hideous lying', diverj of them being proved guilty, fome of five, other of ten grof/ lies ; another falling into a lie, God fmote him in the very afi that he funke downe into a deepe fwoune, and being by ho* waters recovered, and comming to himfelfe, faid, Oh God, tlioi mightft haveftrucke me dead, as Ananias and Saphira .for . have maintained a lie. Miftris Hutchifon and others caj out of the Church for lying, and fome guilty of fouler finne then all thefe, which I here name not. 1 1 The reference is to Captain John nection with thefe troubles, and hi Underhill, in regard to whom, his con- fubfequent confeffions and experience: via ■' 9 1 Preface . Thefe things exceedingly amazed their followers, (efpecially fuch as were led after them in the fimplicity of their hearts, as many were) and now they began to fee that they were deluded by them. A great while they did not beleeve that Miflris Hutchifon and fome others did hold fuch things as they were taxed for, but when themfelves heard her defending her twenty nine curfed opinions in Bofton Church, and there falling into fear full lying , with an impudent fore-head in the open Affem- bly, then they beleeved what before they could not, and were af tamed before God and men, that ever they were fo led afede from the Lord and his truth, and the godly Counfell of their faithfull Minfers, by fuch an Impofler as fie was. Now no man could lay more upon them, then they would upon themfelves, in their acknowledgment} Many after this came unto us, who before flew from us, with fuch defires as thofe in Aft. 2. Men and brethren what fhall we doe ? and did willingly take fhame to themfelves in the open Affemblies by confefsing (fome of them with many teares) how they had given offence to the Lord and his people, by departing from the truth, and being led by a fpirit of error, their alienation from their brethren in their affeflions, and their crooked and perverfe walking in contempt of author¬ ity, flighting the Churches, and defpifing the counfell of their godly Teachers. Now they would freely difcover the fleights the Adverfaries had ufed to undermine them by, and fteale away their eyes from the truth and their brethren, which before (whiles their hearts vide Savage’s Wi?ithrop, pagan, and 1 The reference is to Cotton. Vide Adams’s Three Epifodes (Vol. II. pp. Savage’s Winthrop, Vol. I. p. *253. 551- 558) ; alfo, vifra , pp. 180-182. 92 The Antinoniian Controverfy. hearts were Jieled ) they could not fee. A nd the fruit of this was, great praife to the Lord, who had thus wonderfully wrought matters about ; gladneffe in all our hearts and faces, exprefsions of our renued affections by receiving them againe into our bofomes, <2/^ from that time untill now have walked (according to their renued Covenants) humbly and lovingly amongfi us, holding forth Truth and Peace with But for the ref, which (n otwithfta n ding all thefe meanes of conviction from heaven and earth, and the example of their feduced brethrens returne) yet food obdurate, yea more hardned (as we had caufe to feare) then before', we converted thofe of them that were members before the Churches, and yet, laboured once and againe to convince them, not onely of their errors, but alfo of fundry exorbitant praCtifes which they had fallen into ; as manifeft Pride, contempt of authority, negleCling to feare the Church, and lying, &c. but after no meanes pre¬ vailed, we were driven with fad hearts to give them up to Satan: Yet not fimply for their Opinions (for which I find we have beene fianderoufiy traduced) but the chief eft caufe of their cenfure was their mifcarriages (as have beene faid) per- fified in with great obftinacy. The perfons cafi out of the Churches, were about nine or ten, as farre as I can reme 7 nber ; who, for a fpace, continued very hard and impenitent, but afterward fome of them were received into fellowfhip againe, upon their repentance. Thefe perfons cafi out, a 7 id the refi of the Ringleaders that had receivedfentence of banifhment, with many others infeCted by them, that were neither ce7ifured in Court, 7tor in Churches, went all together out of our jurifdiCtion a 7 id precindt into an Ila 7 id 93 Hand.', called Read -1 land, (fur named by fonte, Ike Hand of errors) and there they live to this day, mofl of them, but in great flrife and contention in the civ ill eflate and otherwife, hatching and multiplying new Opinions, and cannot agree, but are miferably divided into fundry fells and fallions. But Miflris Hutchifon being weary of the Hand, or rather the Hand weary of her, departed from thence with all her family, her daughter, and her children, to live under the Dutch, neare a place called by Sea-men, and in the Map, Hell- gate . (And now 1 am come to the lafl all of her Tragedy, a mofl heavie Jlroake upon herfelfe and hers, as I received it very lately from a godly hand in New-Engl and) There the In¬ dians fet upon them, and flew her and all her family, her daughter, and her daughters Jmsband, and all their children, fave one that efcaped\ 1 (her owne hufband being dead before ) a dreadfull blow. Some write that the Indians did burne her to death with fire, her houfe and all the refl named that belonged to her ; but I am not able to affirme by what kind of death they flew her, but flaine it feemes file is, according to all reports. I never heard that the Indians in thofe parts did ver before this, commit the like outrage upon any one family , or 1 In regard to the deftrudlion of rs. Hutchinfon and the members of her family, and the captivity and fub- f lequent redemption of the one child not killed, vide Bolton’s Hijlory of the County of Wefichefler, Vol. II. pp. 29- - 34 The child in queftion is fometimes referred to as a granddaughter of Mrs. Hutchinfon (Brodhead’s New York , Vol. I. p. 366); but Savage fpeaks of her as daughter ( Genealogical Diction¬ ary, Vol. I. pp. 427-428). Sufannah 1 Hutchinfon, the child in queftion, mar¬ ried John Cole, December 30, 1651, and died in 1726, in what is now North Kingftown, R. I., where a large number of lineal defcendants from her yet re- fide. The Cole genealogy is included in Auftin’s Genealogical Dictionary of Rhode Ifland (p. 50) ; and there is alfo an account of John and Edward Cole, two of the grandfons of Sufannah (Hutchinfon) Cole, in Updiker’s Hif tory of the Narraganfett Church , pp. 104-107. 94 The Antinomian Controverfy . or families, therefore Gods hand is the more apparently feene herein, to pick out this wofull woman, to make her and thofe belonging to her, an unheard of heavie example of their cruelty above al others. Tints the Lord heard our groanes to heaven, and freed us from this great and fore ajfliTtion, which firfl was fmall like Elias cloud, but after fpread the heavens , and hath (through great mercy ) given the Churches ref from this difurbance ever Jince, that we know none that lifts itp his head to difurbe our fweet peace in any of the Churches of Chrif amongfi its, bleffed for ever be his name. I bow my knees to the God of truth and peace, to grant thefe Churches as full a riddance from the fame or like Opinions, which doe deflroy his truth , and difurbe their peace. A Poftfcript. Thinke it fit to adde a comfortable paffage of newes from ^ thofe parts written to me very lately by a faithfull hand, which as it affeCted mine owne heart, fo it may doe many others, viz. That two Sagamores 1 (or Indian Princes) with all their men, women and children, have voluntarily fubmitted themfelves to the will and law of our God, with expreffed defires to be taught the fame\ and have for that end put them - felves under our government and protection, even in the fame manner, as any of the Englifh are: which morningpeepe of mercy to them (faith he) is a great meane to awaken the fpirit of prayer and faith for them in all the Churches. T. VVelde. 1 “Probably Pomham and Sacononoco, who fubmitted in June, 1643.” — Deane, MS. note. [I] A Catalogue of fuch erroneous opinions as were found to have beene brought into New England, and fpread under-hand there, as they were condemned by an Affembly of the Churches, at New Town, Aug . 30.1637. The Errors I. N the conversion of a Tinner, which is fay¬ ing and gracious, the faculties of the foule, and workings thereof, in things partaining to God, are destroyed and made to ceafe. The Confutation . 1. This is contrary to the Scripture, which fpeaketh of the faculties of the foule, (as the understanding and the will) not as destroyed in converfion, but as changed, Luk. 24. 45. ChriSt is faid to have opened their understandings: Joh . 21. 18. Peter is faid to be led whither he would not, there¬ fore he had a will. Againe, to deftroy the faculties of the foule, is to deftroy the immortality of the foule. Error 2. In Stead of them, the Holy Ghoft doth come and take place, and doth all the works of thofe natures, as the faculties of the human nature of Chrift do. ) Confutation g6 The Antino7nian Controverfy. Confutation 2. This is contrary to Scripture which fpeaketh of God, as fanbtifying our foules and fpirits; 1 Thejf. 5. 23. purging our confciences, Heb. 9. 14. refrefhing our memories, Joh. 14. 26. Error 3. That the love which is faid to remain, when faith and hope ceafe, is the Holy Ghoft. Confutation 3. This is contrary to the Scriptures, which put an expreffe difference betweene the Holy Ghoft and love, 2 Cor . 6. 6. And if our love were the Holy Ghoft, we cannot bee faid to love God at all, or if wee did, it was, becaufe we were personally united to the Holy Ghoft. Error 4, 5. That thofe that bee in Chrift are not under the Law, and commands of the word, as the rule of life. Alias , that the will of God in the Word, or direbtions thereof, are not the rule whereunto Chriftians are bound to conforme themfelves, to live thereafter. Confutation 4, 5. This is contrary to the Scriptures, which direbt us to the Law and to the Teftimony, Esay 8. 20. which alfo Speaks of Chriftians, as not being without Law to God, but under the Law to Chrift, 1 Cor. 9. 22. Error 6. The example of Chrifts life, is not a patterne according to which men ought to abb [2] Confutation 6 . This pofition (thofe abfions of Chrift excepted which hee did as God, or as Mediatour, God and Man, or on fpeciall occafions, which concerne not us,) is unfound, being contrary to the Scripture, wherein the ex¬ ample of Chrifts life is propounded to Chriftians as a pat¬ terne of imitation, both by Chrift and his Apoftles. Mat. 11. 29. Learne of mee, for I am meek, &c. 1 Cor. 11. 2. Bee. yee followers of mee, as I am of Chrift, Ephef 5. 2. Walk in love A Short Story. 97 love as Chrifb hath loved us, i Pet. 2. 21. Chriffc also suf¬ fered for us, leaving us an example, that yee fhould follow his fteps, 1 Joh. 2. 26. Hee that faith hee abideth in him, ought fo to walke, even as hee hath walked. Error 7. The new creature, or the new man mentioned in the Gofpell, is not meant of grace, but of Chrifb Confutation 7. The falfe-hood of this proportion appear- eth from the Scriptures, which firft propound Chrift and the new creature as diftindt one from another, 2 Cor. 5. 17. If any man bee in Chrift, hee is a new creature. Secondly, The new man is oppofed to the old man, the old man is meant of lufts and vices, and not of Adams perfon, Ephef 2. 22. 24. Therefore the new man is meant of graces and vertues, and not of the perfon of Chrift, Col. 3. 9. 10. Thirdly, The new man is expreffely laid to confift in righteoufneffe and true holineffe, Ephef. 4. 25. and to bee renewed in know¬ ledge, Col. 3. 10. which are graces, and not Chrift. Error 8. By love, 1 Cor. 13. 13. and by the armour men¬ tioned Ephef. 6. are meant Chrift. Confutation 8. This pofition is neere of kin to the former, but fecondly, the oppofite, 1 Cor. 13. meaneth that love which hee exhorteth Chriftians to beare one towards another, which if it were meant of Chrift, hee might bee said to ex¬ hort them to beare Chrift one to another, as well as to love one another, 2. Faith and hope there mentioned, have Chrift for their objeft, and if by love bee meant Chrift, hee had put no more in the latter word, then in the two former. 3. And befides, it may as well be faid, Faith in love, as Faith in Chrift, and hope in love, as hope in Chrift, if that were the meaning. And by armour, Ephef 6. cannot bee meant 98 The Antinomian Controverfy. meant (Thrift. Firft, becaufe two parts of that armour are Faith and Hope, whereof the Scriptures make Chrift the objedt: Col. 1. 5. Beholding the ftedfaftneffe of your faith in Chrift, 1 Cor. 15. 19. If in this life only wee had hope in Chrift, &c. now thefe graces, and the objedt of them can¬ not bee the fame. Secondly, a perfon armed with that armour, may bee faid to bee a fmcere righteous patient Chriftian, but if by the armour bee meant Chrift, fweete predication fhould have been deftroyed, and you might more properly fay, a Chriftifyed Chriftian. Error 9. The whole letter of the Scripture holds for a covenant of workes. Confutation 9. This pofition is unfound, and contrary to the conftant tenor of the Gofpel, a maine part of the Scrip¬ tures which in the letter thereof holds not forth a covenant of works, but of grace, as appeareth, Joh. 3. 16. 1 Tim. 1. 15. Mat. 11. 28. Heb. 8. 10, 11, 12. [3] Error 10. That God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, may give themfelves to the foule, and the foule may have true union with Chrift, true remiffion of fins, true marriage and fellowfhip, true fandtification from the blood of Chrift, an'd yet bee an hypocrite. Confutation 10. The word [true] being taken in the fenfe of the Scriptures, this alfo croffeth the dodtrine of Ephef 4. 24. where righteoufneffe and true holineffe are made proper to him, that hath heard and learned the truth, as it is in Jefus. Error 11. As Chrift was once made flefh, fo hee is now firft made flefh in us, ere wee bee carryed to perfection. Confutation 11. Chrift was once made flefh, Joh. 1. 14. no other incarnation is recorded, and therefore not to bee believed. Error 99 A Short Story. Error 12. Now in the covenant of workes, a legalift may attaine the fame righteoufneffe for truth, which Adam had in innocency before the fall. Confutation 12. Hee that can attaine Adams righteouf- nefTe in fincerity, hath his fin truely mortifyed, but that no legalift can have, becaufe true mortification is wrought by the covenant of grace, Rom . 6. 14. Sin fhall not have dominion over you, for you are not under the Law, but under Grace. Error 13. That there is a new birth under the covenant Of workes, to fuch a kind of righteoufneffe, as before is men¬ tioned, from which the foule muft bee againe converted, before it can bee made partaker of Gods Kingdome. Confutation 13. This is contrary to Titus 3. 4. where the new birth is made a fruit of Gods love towards man in Chrift; of any new birth befides this, the Scripture fpeaketh not. It is alfo contrary to 2 Cor. 3. where it is made the worke of the Spirit, (that is, the Gofpel) oppofed to the letter (that is, the Law) to give life; the new birth brings forth the new creature, and the new creature argueth our being in Chrift, 2 Cor. 5. 17. It is true indeed Gods children that are borne againe, muft be converted againe, as Mat. 18. 3. but that converfion is not from that grace which they have received, but from the corruption that ftill remaines. Error 14. That Chrift workes in the regenerate, as in thofe that are dead, and not as in thofe that are alive, or, the regenerate after converfion, are altogether dead to fpirituall a6ts. Confitation 14. This is contrary to Rom. 6. n. Yee are alive unto God, in Jefus Chrift, Ephef 2. 1. 5. Hee hath quickned us, 1 Pet. 2. 5. Living ftones, Gat. 2. 20. The life that I now live. Error IOO The Antinomian Controverfy. Error 15. There is no inherent righteoufneffe in the Saints, or grace, and graces are not in the foules of beleev- ers, but in Chrift only. Confutation 15. This is contrary to 2 Tim. 1. 5. The unfained faith that dwelt in thee, and dwelt firft in thy Grandmother, 2 Pet. 1. 4. partakers of the divine nature; which cannot bee, but by inherent righteoufneffe, 2. Timi 1. 6. Stirre up the grace of God which is in thee, John 1, 16. Of his fulneffe wee all receive grace for grace: but: [4] if there be no grace in us, wee receive nothing from hi^ fulneffe, 2 Cor. 4. 16. Our inward man is renewed day by day, Rom. 12. 2. with Ephef. 4. 23. wee are changed Oir renewed. Error 16. There is no difference betweene the graces of hypocrites and beleevers. in the kinds of them. Confutation 16. If this be true, then hypocrites are wife, humble, merciful], pure, &c. and fo fhall fee God, Mat. 5. 8. but they are called fooles, Mat. 7. 26. Mat. 25. 1, 2, 3. nei¬ ther fhall they fee God, Mat. 24. 51. Mat. 13. 20, 21, 22, 23. Heb. 6. 7, 8, 9. the difference of the grounds, argueth the difference in the kinds of graces. Error 17. True poverty of fpirit doth kill and take away the fight of grace. Confutation 17. This is contrary to Mark . 9. 24. Lord, I beleeve, help my unbeleefe : if this were fo, then poverty of fpirit fhould hinder thankfulneffe, and fo one grace fhould hinder another, and the graces of the Spirit fhould hinder the worke of the Spirit, and croffe the end why hee is given to us, 1 Cor. 2. 12. Error 18. The Spirit doth worke in Hypocrites, by gifts and graces, but in Gods children immediately. Confutation IOI A Short Story. Confutatio7i 1 8 . This is contrary to Nehem . 5. 15. So did I becaufe of the feare of the Lord: Heb. 11. 17. Noah moved with feare, prepared an Arke. Error 19. That all graces, even in the truely regenerate, are mortall and fading. Confutation 19. This is contrary to John 4. 14. they are graces which flow from a fountaine which fpringeth up to eternall life, and therefore not fading, Jer . 31. 39. 40. Error 20. That to call into queflion whether God be my deare Fa.ther, after or upon the commiflion of fome hainous finnes (as Murther, Inceft, &c.) doth prove a man to be in the Covenant of workes. Confutation 20. It being fuppofed that the doubting here fpoken of, is not that of finall defpaire, or the like, but onely that the pofition denyeth a poffibility of all doubting to a man under a Covenant of grace, this is contrary to Scrip¬ ture, which fpeaketh of Gods people under a Covenant of grace, in thefe or other cafes, exercifed with fweete doubtings and queftions: David was a juflified man, (for his finnes were pardoned, 2 Sam . 12. 12, 13.) yet his bones waxed old through his roaring all the day long, and the heavineffe of Gods hand was upon him night and day, and the turning of his moyflure into the drought of Summer, Pfal. 32. 3, 4. And Gods breaking his bones by with-holding from him the joy of his Salvation; Pfal. 51.8. fhew that he was exercifed with fweete doubts, and queftions at leaft, as this pofition fpeaketh of: and the like may be gathered out of Pfal. 77. 3, 4. where the holy man Afaph, mentioneth himfelfe, being troubled when he remembred God, and that he was fo troubled, he could not fpeake nor fleepe, and expoflulateth with 102 The Antinomian Controverfy. with God, will the Lord caft off for ever ? and will he [5] be favourable no more ? and verj. 6, 7, 8, 9. Thefe fhew that he had at leaft fweete doubts, as the pofition men¬ tioned!, and yet he was not thereby proved to be under a Cov¬ enant of workes, for he doth afterward confeffe this to bee his infirmity, verf 10. and receiveth the comfort of former expe¬ riences, in former dayes, and his fongs in the nights, and of Gods former workes, verf. 5, 6. 10, 11, 12. and he refumeth his claime of his right in God by vertue of his Covenant, verf 13. Errour 21. To be juftified by faith, is to be jufbified by workes. Confutation 21. If faith, in this pofition be confidered not fimply as a worke, but in relation to its objedt, this is contrary to the Scripture, that fo appropriateth Juftification to faith, as it denieth it to workes, fetting faith and workes in oppofition one againft another in the point of Juftification, as Rom. 3. 27. Where is boafting then ? It is excluded. By what Law ? by the Law of workes. no, but by the Law of faith, and verf 28. We conclude, that a man is juftified by faith, without the workes of the Law, and chap. 4. 16. Therefore it is by faith, that it may be by grace, compared with verf 4. To him that worketh is the reward reckoned not of grace, but of debt. Errour 22. None are to be exhorted to beleeve, but fuch whom we know to be the eledt of God, or to have his Spirit in them effedtually. Confutation 22. This is contrary to the Scriptures, which maketh the commiffion which Chrift gave his Difciples in thefe words, Go preach the Gofpel to every creature, he that beleeveth and is baptized ftiall be faved, Marke 16. 15. 16. where A Short Story. 103 where the latter words imply an exhortation to beleeve, and the former words diredl that this fhould not onely be fpoken to men knowne to be elected, or onely to men ef¬ fectually called, but to every creature; The Scripture alfo telleth us, that the Apoftles in all places called upon men to repent, and beleeve the Gofpel, which they might not have done, had this pofition beene true. Errour 23. We muft not pray for gifts and graces, but onely for ChrifL Confutation 23. This is contrary to Scripture which teacheth us to pray for wifdome, Jam . 1. 5. and for every grace beftowed by vertue of the new Covenant, Ezech. 36. 37. as acknowledging every good gift, and every perfedt giving is from above, and commeth downe from the Father of lights. The whole 119. Pfalme, befides innumerable texts of Scrip¬ ture, doth abundantly confute this, by fhewing that the fer- vants of God have beene taught by the Spirit of God to pray for every gift and grace needfull for them, and not onely for Ch rift. Errour 24. He that hath the feale of the Spirit may cer- tainely judge of any perfon, whether he be eledted or no. Confutation 24. This is contrary to D eut. 29. 29. Secret things belong to God; and fuch is eledtion of men not yet called. Errour 25. A man may have all graces and poverty of fpirit, and yet want ChrifL Confutation 25. This is contrary to Matth . 5. 3. Bleffed are the poore in fpirit: but without Chrift none can be bleffed, Ephef 4. 22. 24. he that hath righteoufneffe and true holineffe, hath learned the truth, as it is in Jefus, and therefore hath Chrift. Errour 104 The Antinomian Controver/y. [6] Errour 26. The faith that juftifieth us is in Chrift, and never had any aftuall being out of Chrift. Confutation 26. This is contrary to Scripture, Luke 17. 5. Lord encreafe our faith, Ergo , faith was in them, 2 Tim. 1. 6. faith is faid to dwell in fuch and fuch perfons, therefore faith was in them, Efay 64. 7. No man ftirres up himfelfe to lay hold upon thee. Errour 27. It is incompatible to the Covenant of grace to joyne faith thereunto. Confutation 27. This is contrary to Marke 16. 16. Preach the Gofpel, hee that beleeveth fhall be faved, Rom . 4. 3. Abraham beleeved, and it was counted to him for righteouf- neffe, and Abraham is a patterne to all under the Covenant of grace, Rom. 4. 24. Errour 28. To affirme there muft be faith on mans part to receive the Covenant; is to undermine Chrift. Confutation 28. Firft, Faith is required on mans part to receive the Covenant of grace, according to thefe Scrip¬ tures, John 1. 12. To as many as received him, even to them that beleeved on his name, Marke 16. 16. He that beleeveth fhall be faved. Secondly, to affirme there muft be faith on mans part to receive Chrift, is not to undermine Chrift, but to exalt him, according to thefe Scriptures, John 3. 33. He that beleeveth hath put to his feale that God is true; and fo honours Gods truth, which cannot undermine Chrift; Rom . 4. 20. but was ftrong in the faith, giving glory to God, &c. Errour 29. An hypocrite may have thefe two witneffes, 1 John 5. 5. that is to fay, the water and bloud. Confutation 29. No hypocrite can have thefe two wit¬ neffes, A Short Story. 105 neffes, water and bloud, that is, true juftification and fanfti- fication, for then he fhould be faved, according to thefe Scriptures, Rom. 8. 30. 2 Theff. 2. 13. A 5 ls 26. 18. Errour 30. If any thing may be concluded from the water and bloud, it is rather damnation, then falvation. Confutation 30. This is contrary to the Scriptures laffc mentioned. Errour 31. Such as fee any grace of God in themfelves, before they have the affurance of Gods love fealed to them are not to be received members of Churches. Confutation 31. This is contrary to Abts 8. 37. 38. where the Eunuch faw his faith only, and yet was prefently bap¬ tized, and therfore by the fame ground might be admitted. Errour 32. After the revelation of the fpirit, neither Devill nor finne can make the foule to doubt. Confutation 32. This pofition favours of errour, elfe Afaph had not the revelation of the Spirit, feeing he doubted, (.Pfal ’ 73. 13) whether he had not clenfed his heart in vaine, and that God had forgotten to be gracious; then alfo faith fhould be perfect which was never found, no not in our father Abraham. Errour 33. To aft by vertue of, or in obedience to a command, is legall. Confutation 33. So is it alfo Evangelicall, the myftery [7] of the Gofpel is faid to be revealed for the obedience of faith, Rom . 16. 25. Alfo the Lord Jefus is faid to be the author of falvation to all that obey him, Hebr. 5. 9. If we love Chriffc we are to keep his Commandements, John 14. 29. Errour 34. We are not to pray againft all finne, becaufe the old man is in us, and muft be, and why fhould we pray againft that which cannot be avoyded ? ~ 0 J Confutation r 4 io6 The Antinomian Controverfy. Confutation 34. This is contrary to 1 Theff. 5, 23. 1 Cor. I3 ‘ 7 ‘ Errour 35. The efficacy of Chrifts death is to kill all ac¬ tivity of graces in his members, that he might a6t all in all. Confutation 35. This is contrary to Rom . 6. 4. Our old man is crucified with him, that the body of finne might be deftroyed, that we fhould not ferve finne : contrary alfo to Hebr. 4. 14. that he might through death defiroy him, &c. and 1 John 3. 8. whence we infer, that if Chrift came to defiroy the body of fin, to defiroy the Devill, to diffolve the workes of the Devill,-then not to kill his owne graces, which are the workes of his owne Spirit. Errour 36. All the activity of a beleever is to a< 5 t to finne. Confutation 36. Contrary to Rom . 7. 15. as alfo to Gal. 5. 17. the fpirit lufieth againft the flefh. Errour 37. We are compleatly united to Chrift, before, or without any faith wrought in us by the Spirit. Confutation 37. The terme [united] being underftood of that fpirituall relation of men unto Chrift, whereby they come to have life and right to all other bleffings in Chrift, 1 John 5. 12. He that hath the Son hath life: And the terme [compleatly] implying a prefence of all thofe bands and ligaments and meanes as are required in the word, or are any wayes neceffary to the making up of the union, we now conceive this affertion to be erroneous, contrary to Scripture, that either expreffely mentioneth faith when it fpeaketh of this union, Ephef 3. 17. that Chrift may dwell in your hearts by faith, Gal. 2. 20. Chrift liveth in me by faith; or ever implyeth it in thofe phrafes that doe expreffe union ; as comming to Chrift, John 6. 35. and eating A Short Story. 107 eating and drinking Chrift, verf 47 compared with verf. 54. having the Sonne, 1 John 5. 12. and receiving Chrift, John 1. 12. and marriage unto Chrift, EpheJ 5. 32. if there be no dwelling of Chrift in us, no comming to him, no receiving him, no eating nor drinking him, no being married to him before and without faith; but the former is true, therefore alfo the latter. Errour 38. There can be no true clofing with Chrift in a promife that hath a qualification or condition expreffed. Confutation 38. This opinion we conceive erroneous, contrary to Efay 55. 1, 2. Ho! every one that thirtieth come yee to the waters, Matth. 11. 28. Come to me all yee that are weary and heavy laden, John 7. 37. If any man thirft, let him come to me and drinke, Revel. 22. 17. Let him that is athirft come, Marke 1. 15. Repent and beleeve the Gofpel: if the word indefinitely be fandtified, for the [8] begetting of faith, if the Gofpel it felfe be laid downe in a conditionall promife, if the Apoftles and Prophets, and Chrift himfelfe, have laid hold upon fuch promifes to help to union, and clofing with himfelfe, then there may be a true clofing with Chrift in a promife that hath a qualification or condition expreffed. Errour 39. The due fearch and knowledge of the holy Scripture, is not a fafe and fure way of fearching and finding Chrift. Confutation 39. This is contrary to expreffe words of Scripture, John 5. 39. Search the Scriptures, for they teftifie of me, Alts 10. 43. To him give all the Prophets witneffe, Rom. 3. 21. the righteoufneffe of God witneffed by the Law and the Prophets, If a. 8. 20. To the Law and to the Tefti- mony io8 The Antinomian Controver/y. mony, Adis 17. 11. The Bereans were more noble, in that they fearched the Scriptures daily. If the Prophets give witneffe to Chrift, if his righteoufneffe bee witneffed by Law and Prophets, and that they bee noble that daily fearch the Scriptures, and that Chrift fo farre alloweth their teftimony of him, that the Scripture faith, there is no light but in and according to them, then the due fearching and knowledg of Scriptures, is a fafe way to fearch Chrift; but the former is true, therefore alfo the latter. Error 40. There is a teftimony of the Spirit, and voyce unto the Soule, meerely immediate, without any refpeCt unto, or concurrence with the word. Confutation 40. This immediate revelation without con¬ currence with the word, doth not onely countenance but confirme that opinion of Enthufianifme, juftly refufed by all the Churches, as being contrary to the perfection of the Scriptures, and perfection of Gods wifedome therein : That which is not revealed in the Scripture, (which is objec- tum adczquahim fidei') is not to be beleeved: but that there is any fuch revelation, without concurrence with the word, is no where revealed in the Scripture, Ergo. 1 Cor. 4. 16. Prefume not above that which is written. Againe, if there be any immediate Revelation without concurrence of the word, then it cannot be tryed by the word, but wee are bid to try the fpirits. To the law and Teftimony, Efay 8. 20. to try all things, 1 Thejf. 5. 21. So the Bereans, Adis 17. 11. and the rule of tryall is the word, Joh. 5. 39. Error 41. There bee diftinCt feafons of the workings of the feverall Perfons, fo the foule may bee faid to bee fo long under the Fathers, and not the Sons, and fo long under the Sons work, and not the Spirits. Confutation A Short Story. 109 Confutation 41. This expreffion is not according to the patterne of wholefome words, which teacheth a joynt con¬ currence of all the Perfons, working in every worke that is wrought, fo that wee cannot fay, the Father works fo long and the Son works not, becaufe the fame worke at the fame time is common to them both, and to all the three Perfons, as the Father drawes, Joh. 6 . 44. fo the Son fends his Spirit to convince, and thereby draws, Joh. 16. 7, 8. Error 42. There is no affurance true or right, unleffe it bee without feare and doubting. Confutation 42. This is contrary to Scripture; the [9] penman of Pfal. 77. had true affurance, ver. 6 . and yet hee had doubts and feares of Gods eternall mercy, ver. 7, 8, 9. The beft Faith is imperfedt and admits infirmity, ver. 10. 1 Cor. 13. 10, 11, 12. Where there is flefh that doth fight againfi; every grace, and adt thereof, and is contrary to it, there can bee no grace perfedt, Ergo , doubting may ftand with affurance, Gal. 5. 17. Error 43. The Spirit adts moft in the Saints, when they indevour leaft. Confutation 43. Referving the fpeciall feafons of Gods preventing grace to his owne pleafure, In the ordinary con- flant courfe of his difpenfation, the more wee indevour, the more affiftance and helpe wee find from him, Prov. 2. 3, 4, 5. Hee that feeks and digs for wifdome as for treafure fhall find it, Hof 6. 3. 2 Chron. 15. 2. The Lord is with you, while you are with him ; If by indevour be meant the ufe of lawfull meanes and Ordinances commanded by God, to feeke and find him in, then is it contrary to Mat. 7. 7. Afke, feeke, knock, &c. Error I IO The Antinomian Controver/y. Error 44. No created worke can bee a manifeft figne of Gods love. Confutation 44. If created workes flowing from union with Chrift bee included, it’s againft Johns Epiftles, and many Scriptures, which make keeping the Commandements, love to the Brethren, &c. evidences of a good eftate, fo con- fequently of Gods love. Ei'ror 45. Nothing but Chrift is an evidence of my good eftate. Confutation 45. If here Chrift manifefting himfelfe in workes of holineffe, bee excluded, and nothing but Chrift nakedly revealing himfelfe to faith, bee made an evidence, it is againft the former Scriptures. Error 46. It is no flnne in a beleever not to fee his grace, except he be wilfully blinde. Confutation 46. This is contrary to the Scripture, which makes every tranfgreflion of the Law flnne, though wilful- neffe be not annexed; and this croffeth the worke of the Spirit which fheweth us the things that are given us of God; 1 Cor . 2. 12. and croffeth alfo that command, 2 Cor . 13. 5. Prove your faith, and therefore we ought to fee it. Error 47. The Seale of the Spirit is limited onely to the immediate witnefle of the Spirit, and doth never witneffe to any worke of grace, or to any conclufion by a Syllogifme. Confutation 47. This is contrary to Rom. 8. 16. to that which our Spirit beares witnefle, to that the Spirit of God beares witneffe, for they beare a joynt witneffe, as the words will have it: but our Spirits beare witneffe to a worke of grace, namely that beleevers are the children of God, Ergo . Error 48. That conditionall promifes are legall. Confutation 111 A Short Story. Confutation 48. Contrary to John 3. 16. Matthew 5. 3. &c. Error 49. We are not bound to keepe a conftant courfe of Prayer in our Families, or privately, unleffe the Spirit ftirre us up thereunto. Confutation 49. This is contrary to Ephef 6 . 18. 1 Thef 5 - 17 - Error 50. It is poverty of fpirit, when wee have [10] grace, yet to fee wee have no grace in our felves. Confutation 50. The weake beleever Mark. 9. 24. was poore in fpirit, yet faw his own Faith weak though it were. Peter when hee was brought to poverty of fpirit by the bitter experience of his pride, hee faw the true love hee had unto Chrift, and appealed to him therein, Joh. 21. 15. Paul was leffe then the lead of all Saints in his owne eyes, therefore poore in fpirit, yet faw the grace of God, by which hee was that he was, and did what hee did, and was truly nothing in his own eyes, when hee had fpoken of the beffc things hee had received and done, Ephef 3. 18. If it bee poverty of the fpirit to fee no grace in our felves, then fhould poverty of fpirit croffe the office of the Spirit, which is to reveale unto us, and make us to fee what God gives us, 1 Cor. 2. 9. 10, n, 12. then it fhould make us finne, or croffe the will of God, which is, that wee fhould not bee ignorant of the gracious workings of Chrift in us from the power of his death and refurredtion, Rom. 6. 3. Know yee not, &c. then would it de- ftroy a great duty of Chriftian thankfulneffe, in, and for all the good things which God vouchfafeth us, 1 Thef 5. 18. Error 51. The foule need not to goe out to Chrift for freffi fupply, but it is adted by the Spirit inhabiting. Confutatioyi 51. Though wee have the Spirit adting and inhabiting I 12 The Antinomian Controverfy. inhabiting us, this hinders not, but I may and need goe out to Chrift for frefh fupply of Grace, Joh. i. 16. Of whole ful- neffe wee have all received, and grace for grace ; 2 Cor. 12.8. Paul fought thrice to Chrift for frefh fupply; Heb. 12. 2. Looke unto Chrift the Authour and finifher of our faith. Wee muft looke up to the hils from whence commeth our helpe, Ephef 4. 16. by whom all the body receiveth increafe, and to the edifying of it felf. Error 52. It is legal to fay, wee aft in the ftrength of Chrift. Confutation 52. This is contrary to the Scriptures, the Gofpel bids us bee ftrong in the Lord, and in the power of his might, Ephef 6. 10 and bee ftrong in the grace that is in Chrift Jefus, 2 Tim. 2. 1. and Paul faith, I can do all things through Chrift that ltrengtheneth me, Phil. 4. 13. and that was not legall ftrength. Error 53. No Minifter can teach one that is anoynted by the Spirit of Chrift, more then hee knowes already un- leffe it be in fome circumftances. Confutation 53. This is alfo contrary to Scripture, 2 Cor. 1. It is God that ftablifheth us with you, &c. Ephef 1. 13. and 4. 12. 14. The Corinthians and Ephef ans, were an¬ oynted and fealed, and yet were taught more of Paul in his Epiftles then only in fome circumftances. Error 54. No Minifter can bee an inftrument to convey more of Chrift unto another, then hee by his own experience hath come unto. Confutation 54. This is contrary to Ephef. 4. 11, 12. the weakeft Minifter may edify the ftrongeft Chriftian which hath more experience then himfelfe. Error A Short Story . 113 Error 55. A man may have true Faith of depend- [11] ance, and yet not bee juftifyed. Confutation 55. This is contrary to the Scripture, Aits 13. 39. A 1 believers are juftifyed, but they that have true faith of dependance are believers, therefore juftifyed. Error 56. A man is not effectually converted till hee hath full affuranee. Confutation 56. This is crofte to the Scripture, If a. 5. 10. wherein wee fee that a man may truely feare God (there¬ fore truely converted) and yet walke in darkneffe, without cleare evidence or full affurance. Error 57. To take delight in the holy fervice of God, is to go a whoring from God. ConfUation 57. No Scripture commands us to go a whoring from God, but firft, the Scripture commands us to delight in the fervice of God, Pfal. 100. 2. Serve the Lord with gladnefte, Ifa. 58. 13. Thou fhalt call the Sabbath thy delight, Ergo. Secondly, God loves not fuch as go a whoring from him, Pfal. 73. ult. but God loves a cheerful ferver of God, 2 Cor. 8. Therefore, fuch as ferve him cheer¬ fully, do not thereby go a whoring from him. Error 58. To help my faith, and comfort my confcience in evill houres, from former experience of Gods grace in mee, is not a way of grace. Confutation 58. What the Saints have done and found true comfort in, that is a way of grace; but they did help * their faith, and comfort their confcience from former evi¬ dences of Gods grace in them: Pfal. 77. 5, 6, 11. I confidered the dayes of old, and called to remembrance my fongs in the night; and by this raifed hee up his faith, as the latter part 15 of 114 The Antinomian Controverfy . of the Pfalm flieweth ; and this was in evil houres, ver. 2, 3. 2 Cor. 1. 12. This is our rejoycing, that in fimplicity and godly pureneffe, wee have had our converfation, and this was in fad houres, ver. 4, 5, 8, 9, 10. Job 35. 10. None faith, Where is God that made mee, which giveth fongs in the night ? here the not attending to former confolation, is counted a fmful negledt. Error 59. A man may not bee exhorted to any duty, becaufe hee hath no power to do it. Confutation 59. This is contrary to Phil. 2. 12, 13. Work out your falvation &c. For it is God that worketh in you both the will and the deed, Ephef 5. 14. Awake thou that fleepeft, fo 1 Cor. 15. ult. Error 60. A man may not prove his election by his vocation, but his vocation by his eledtion. Confutation 60. This is contrary to 1 Thef 2. 4. knowing your election, becaufe our Gofpel came unto you, not in word only, but in power, 2 Thef. 2. 13, 14. God hath eledted you to life, through fandtification of the Spirit, whereunto hee hath called you by our Gofpel. Error 61. All Dodtrines, Revelations and Spirits, muft be tried by Chrift the word, rather then by the Word of Chrift. Confutation 61. This affertion of it intends to exclude the word, we conceive it contrary to Efay 8. 20. John 5. 39. Afts 17. 11. alfo to 2 John 4. 1, 2. Trye the fpirits, every fpirit that confeffeth that Jefus Chrift is come in the flefh, [12] &c. where Spirits and Dodtrines confeffing that Chrift is come in the flefh, are made diftindt from Chrift. Error 62. It is a dangerous thing to clofe with Chrift in a promife. ^ r , ,. Confutation A Short Story. 115 Confutation 62. This is contrary to Joh. 3. 16. AD. 10. 43. Ifa. 55. 1, 2. Matth. 11. 28. Joh. 7. 37. If Chrift in thefe places invite men to come unto him, and bids them incline and hearken, and tells them their Soules fhall live, and they fhall drinke and be refrefhed by hm, and by thefe promifes encourageth them to clofe with him, then it is no dangerous thing to clofe with him in a promife, it is no danger to obey a Command of God: but we are commanded to beleeve the Gofpell, Mar. 1.15, 1. the promife being a part of the Gofpell. Error 63. No better is the evidence from the two wit- neffes of water and blood, mentioned 1 John. 5. 6, 7, 8. then mount Calvary , and the Souldiers that fhed Chrifts bloud, and thefe might have drunke of it; poore evidences. Confutation 63. Then what God hath ordained or made an evidence, is no better then what he hath not made, then Chrift lofeth his end in comming by water and blood, verf 6. then the Spirit fhould agree no better with the witneffe of water and bloud, then it doth with Mount Calvary , and the Souldiers: but the Spirit doth agree with the water and the bloud, and not with the other, 1 Joh. 5. 7. Thefe three agree in one. Error 64. A man muff take no notice of his finne, nor of his repentance for his finne. Confutation 64. This is contrary to David , whofe fmnes were ever before him, Pfal. 51. hee confidered his wayes (and the evill of them) that he might turne his feete to Gods Teftimonies, Pfal. 119 59. If we confeffe our ftnnes, he is faithfull and juft, &c. If we fay we have not finned we make him a lyar, 1 Joh. 1. 8, 9, 10. Job tooke notice of finne and of his repentance, I abhorre my felfe and repent in duft and allies, 116 The Antinomian Controver/y. allies, Job 42 6. David feeth, and faith, I am forry for my finnes, Pfal. 38 28. Solomons penitent muft know the Plague in his heart, that is, his finne and the punifhment thereof, 1 Kings 8 38. Error 65. The Church in admitting members is not to looke to holineffe of life, or Teftimony of the fame. Confutation 65. This is contrary to Rom. 1. 7. and the infcriptions of divers Epiftles, being diredted to Saints, and Saints by calling, and 1 Cor. 14 33. Churches of the Saints, Alts 2. the members there, were faid to repent before they were admitted, and 1 Cor. 5. the inceftuous perfon fhould not then have beene caft out for want of holineffe, and Paul could not be received into communion without Teftimony, Alls 9. 26. Error 66. To lay the brethren under a Covenant of works, hurts not, but tends to much good to make men looke the better to their evidences. Confutation 66. If that bee done ungroundedly, it is con¬ trary to If a. 5. 20. where woe is pronounced to fuch as [13] call good evill, &c. and Ezek. 13. 22. that make fuch hearts fad, as the Lord would not have fadded; and it is againft the rule of the Covenant, 1 Cor. 13. befides, it may trench upon the devils office in accufing the Brethren, and then it will be good to tell untruth, good to breake houfe and Church Communion, then good to break neareft rela¬ tions, then good to bite one another, and good to offend the little ones, Matth. 18. Errour 67. A man cannot evidence his juftificatio'n by his fandlification, but he muft needs build upon his fandfifi- cation, and trufl to it. Confutation 117 A Short Story. Confutation 67. Fird, this is contrary to 1 John 3. 18, 19. where the holy Ghod faith, that by unfained and hearty love we may have affurance, and yet neither there nor any where elfe would have us trull to our fandlidcation, fo verf 7. He that doth righteoufneffe is righteous, as he is righteous. Secondly, if poverty of fpirit, which emptieth us of all confi¬ dence in our felves, may evidence a mans junification with¬ out trading to it, then may fandlidcation without trailing to it; but the former is true, therefore alfo the latter. Thirdly, if it be an ordinance of God to evidence ou*r junification by our fandtiHcation, then we may doe this without trading to it: but that is apparent from, 2 Pet . 1. 10. Ergo. Errour 68. Faith judides an unbeleever, that is, that faith that is in Chrid, judideth me that have no faith in my felfe. Co7ifutation 68. - This is contrary to Hab . 2. 4. For if the jud lhall live by his faith, then that faith that judides is not in Chrid. So John 3. ult. He that beleeveth not, the wrath of God abideth on him: it is not anothers faith will fave me. Errour 69. Though a man can prove a gracious worke in himfelfe, and Chrid to be the authour of it, if thereby he will prove Chrid to be his, this is but a Tandy foundation. Confutation 69. This is contrary to thefe Scriptures, John 14. 21. and 28. He that keepeth my commandements, is he that loveth me, and he that loveth me, fhall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will diew my felfe unto him, 1 John 3. 14. We know that we have paffed from death to life, becaufe we love the brethren, and 1 John 5. 12. He that hath the Sonne hath life: therefore he that can prove that he hath fpirituall life, may allure himfelfe that hee hath Chrid. Errour 118 The Antinomian Controverfy. Errour 70. Frequency or length of holy duties or trouble of confcience for negleft thereof, are all fignes of one under a Covenant of workes. Confutation 70. This is contrary to thefe Scriptures, 1 Cor. 15. 58. Be abundant alwayes in the worke of the Lord: if the faithfull in Chriffc Jefus be commanded to abound al¬ wayes in the worke of the Lord, that is, holy duties, then frequency in holy duties is no figne of one under a Covenant of workes: but the former is true, therefore alfo the latter; as alfo 1 Thef 4. 17. 18. Pfat. 55. 17. Evening and morning and noone will I pray and make a noyfe, and he will heare me; and elfewhere, Seven times a day doe I praife thee, Pfal. 119. 146. Pfal. 1. 2. So alfo contrary is the third [14] branch to thefe Scriptures, 2 Cor. 7.8. 11. the Co¬ rinthians were troubled in confcience, and forrowed that they had negledled the holy duties of Church cenfure towards the inceftuous perfon, and Ifa. 64. 7. and 8. Cant. 5. 2. Rom. 7. 19, I doe not the good I would, which he lamenteth and complaineth of. Errour 71. The immediate revelation of my good eftate, without any refpedt to the Scriptures, is as cleare to me, as the voyce of God from Heaven to Paul. Confutation 71. This is contrary to John 14. 26. He fhall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remem¬ brance, &c. whence we reafon thus. If the Spirit reveale nothing without concurrence of the Word, then this revela¬ tion of the Spirit without refpedl to the Word is not cleare, nor to be trufted: but the Spirit doth reveale nothing, but with refpedl to the Word, for John 14. 26. If the office of the Spirit be to teach and to bring to remembrance the things that Chrift hath taught us, Efay 8. 20. what ever fpirit A Short Story. 1i9 fpirit fpeakes not according to this Word, there is no light there. Errour 72. It is a fundamentall and foule-damning er- rour to make fandification an evidence of junification. Confutation 72. This is contrary to thefe Scriptures, 5 Rom . 8. 1. They that walke after the Spirit, are freed from condemnation, and are in Chrift, and fo juflified : fo 1 John 3. 10. In this are the children of God knowne, &c. Errour 73. Chrifts worke of grace can no more diftin- guifh betweene a Hypocrite and a Saint, then the raine that fals from Heaven betweene the juft and the unjuft. Confutation 73. This propofition being generall includes all gracious works, and being fo taken is contradicted in the parable of the fower, Matth. 13. 20. 21, 22. where the good ground is diftinguifhed from the ftony by this, that it brings forth fruit with patience, fo Hebr. 6 . 9. there is fome- thing better in the Saints then thofe common gifts which are found in Hypocrites. Errour 74. All verball Covenants, or Covenants expreffed in words, as Church Couenants, vowes, &c. are Covenants of workes, and fuch as ftrike men off from Chrift. Confutation 74. Firft, this is contrary to Scripture, Efay 44 5. One fhall fay, I am the Lords, another fhall call himfelfe by the name of the God of Jacob'. Rom. 10. 10. With the mouth confeffton is made to falvation. Secondly, contrary to reafon, for then the Covenant of grace is made a Covenant of workes, by the writing, reading, and preach¬ ing of the fame, for they are verball exprefllons of the Cove¬ nant on Gods part, as Church Covenants verbally expreffe our doling herewith. Errour 120 The Antinomian Controverfy. Errour 75. The Spirit giveth fuch full and cleare evi¬ dence of my good eftate, that I have no need to be tried by the fruits of fandlification, this were to light a candle to the Sun. Confutation 75. This opinion taken in this fenfe, that after the Spirit hath teftified a mans good eftate, the [15] perfon need not to be tried by the fruit of fandtifica- tion, is contrary to the fcope of the whole firft Epiftle of Saint John , where variety of arguments are propounded to all beleevers in common, 1 John 5. 13. to diftinguifh the perfons of beleevers from unbeleevers; the water is annexed to the Spirit and bloud, 1 Iahn 5. 8. Errour 76. The Devill and nature may be caufe of a gracious worke. Confutation 76. The words are unfavoury, and the peti¬ tion unfound, for taking [gracious] according to the lan¬ guage of the Scripture, gracious words, Luke 4. 22. Let your fpeech be gracious, gracious words are fuch as iffue from the faving grace of Chrifts Spirit indwelling in the foule, which neither the Devill, nor nature is able to produce, for Chriffc profeffeth, Iohn 15. 3, 4. Without me yee can doe nothing, nothing truly gracious, Iohn 3. What ever is borne of the flefh is flefh, and Rom. 7. 18. In my flefh dwels no good, (truly fpirituall and gracious) Gen. 6. 5. Every imagi¬ nation of the thoughts of a mans heart, are evill, and that continually; Betides, the Devill is that evill and wicked one, onely wickedneffe, an adverfary to Gods grace and glory, that which is contrary to corrupt nature, and the hellifh nature of Satan, and above the power of both, they cannot be the caufes of gracious works. Errour 12 I A Short Story . Errour 77. Sanctification is fo farre from evidencing a good eftate that it darkens it rather, and a man may more clearely fee Chrift, when he feeth no fandification then when he doth, the darker my fanCtification is, the brighter is my junification. Confutation 77. This is contrary to the Scripture of truth, which rather giveth the name of light to fanflification and holineffe, and even for this ufe, to cleare our junification, 1 John 1. 6, 7. For the holy Ghofi concludes as from a cleare and infallible promife, and propofition, that if we walke in the light, as he is in the light, then doth the bloud of Chrifi cleanfe us from all finne; meaning, that then and thereby it appeareth that it is done: as by the contrary un- holineffe, and unholy walking is like darknefie, which obfcu- reth all the goodly prefumption fiourifhes and hopes of an unregenerate man, verf 6. For this purpofe, 1 Iohn 5. 8. the water of fanCtification is made a witneffe, now the nature of a witneffe is not to darken and obfcure matters in quefiion, but to cleare them, and Pfal. 51. 10, 11, 12. when David faw his heart fo uncleane, and his fpirit fo altogether out of order, his jufiification was not then brighter, for then he fhould have had the joy of his falvation more full, and not fo to finke as that he begs it might be reftored to him, as implying, that his joy for the prefent was wanting to him. Errour 78. God hath given fixe witneffes, three in Heaven and three in earth, to beget and build juftifying faith upon. Confutation 78. This expreflion anfwers not the patterne of wholefome words, for if this pofition be taken thus, God hath given all thefe fixe witneffes both, to beget and alfo to 16 build 122 The Antinomian Controverfy. build juftifying faith upon, it is contrary to Scripture, for God hath not given all thefe fixe witneffes to beget juftifying faith, becaufe the water of fandlification, which is one of the [16] fixe, doth not goe before juftifying faith, but followeth after it: for our hearts are juflified by faith, ACts 15.9. Errour 79. If a member of a Church be unfatisfied with any thing in the Church, if he expreffe his offence, whether he hath ufed all meanes to convince the Church or no, he may depart. Confutation 79. Contrary to the rule of our Saviour, Matth. 18. If thy brother offend (convidlingly) admonifh; whence it is evident, that in our carriage towards a private brother we muff convince him, before admonifh him, much leffe feparate from him. Therefore our carriage towards the whole Church muft upon greater reafon be with like pru¬ dence, and tenderneffe; whence the argument followes thus. An offence taken before convidlion will not beare an admo¬ nition, much leffe feparation from a brother or Church: but the offence in the queftion propounded is fuch, Ergo. Errour 80. If a man thinlce he may edifie better in an¬ other congregation then in his owne, that is ground enough to depart ordinarily, from word, feales, fallings, feaftings, and all adminiflrations in his owne Church, notwithflanding the offence of the Church, often manifefled to him for fo doing. Confutatioii 80. It is contrary to the condition and flation of a member of the body in which he Hands, 1 Cor. 12. 27. A member muff not put it felfe from the body upon its owne thoughts; as the admiffion of a member was by the confent of the whole, fo likewife mufl his difmiffion be. It is contrary alfo to the duty of a member, Ephef. 4. 16. there mufl be an effedluall 123 A Short Story. effedtuall working in every part for the edification of the whole which this departure from the adminiftration of all the holy ordinances in the Church will neceffarily hinder. It is contrary alfo to the good of the whole Church, and the rule which the Lord hath appointed for the prefervation thereof, i Cor. 14. 33. God is not the author of confufion, and therefore not of this pradtife which will certainly bring it, for if one member upon thefe his imaginations may de¬ part, why may not ten, yea twenty, yea an hundred ? Why may not the Paftor upon fuch grounds leave his people, as well as they him, confidering the tye is equall on both parts ? Error 81. Where faith is held forth by the Miniftery, as the condition of the covenant of grace on mans part, as alfo evidencing juflification by fandtification, and the activity of faith, in that Church there is not fufficient bread. Confutation 81. This pofition feemeth to deny faith to be a condition at all, or at all adtive, and fo if condition in this place fignifie a qualification in man wrought by the holy Ghoft, without which the promifes doe not belong to men, this is contrary to Scripture, for John 6. 48. Chriffc is the bread of life, and yet in the fame chapter faith is held out as a condition of the covenant by the Miniftery of Chrift himfelfe; and the adtivity of it is held forth in thefe words, Verily I fay unto you, unleffe yee eate the flefli, and drinke the bloud of the Sonne of man, you have no life in you, and who fo eateth, &c. As for the lawfulneffe of evidencing juftification by fandtification (if it be underftood of that [17] fandtification which is by faith in Chrift) it is contrary to the intent of the whole Epiftle of John , befides many other places 124 The Antinomian Controverfy. places of Scripture which yet hold forth bread fufficient (if by fufficient is meant that dodtrine, which in its right ufe is wholfome and good food) for it was written that their joy might be full; yet the evidencing of junification by fanftifi- cation is expreffely held forth chap. i. verf. 7. where he faith, If we walke in the light, as Chrid is in the light, we have fellowfhip one with another, and the bloud of Jefus Chrid cleanfeth us from all dnne; by walking in the light, in op- podtion to walking in darkneffe fpoken of before, verfe 6. Sandtification is evidently meant, and this is expreffely noted to be an evidence of our good condition, when it is faid, if we fo walke, the bloud of Chrid cleanfeth us from all dnne. Errour 82. A Minider mud not pray nor preach againd any errour, unleffe he declare in the open Congregation, upon any members enquiry, the names of them that hold them. Confutation 82. This is contrary to Scriptures, which teach Miniders to pray and preach againd all errours by whom foever they be held, when it calleth them Watchmen and Stewards, in whom faithfulneffe is required in all ad- minidrations: yet withall it enjoyneth them if a brother dnne not openly, to admonifh him in fecret, drd betweene them two alone, and afterwards in the prefence of two or three witneffes, and after that (and not before) to bring the matter to the Church, Matth . 18. 15, 16, 17. Vnfavoury A Short Story. 125 Vnfavoury fpeeches confuted. Thefe that follow were judged by the Ajfembly aforefaid , as unfafe fpeeches. 1. r T '0 fay that we are juftified by faith is an unfafe fpeech , ^ we muftfay we are juflifed by Chrift . Anfwer 1. Falfe, for the conftant language of the Scrip¬ ture is not unfafe; but we are juftified by faith, is the con¬ ftant language of the Scripture, Rom . 5. 1. being juftified by faith ; the righteoufneffe of faith, Rom . 10. 31, 32. Right- eoufneffe by faith, Phil 3. 9, 10. 2. The diftindt phrafe of the Scripture ufed in diftinguifh- ing Legall and Evangelicall righteoufneffe is no unfafe fpeech, but fuch is this, Rom . 9. 31, 32. Ifrael found not righteoufneffe, becaufe they fought it of the Law, and not of, or by faith, fo Rom . 10. 5, 6. The righteoufneffe of faith, faith thus, &c. The Apoftle makes thefe two fo direftly oppofite, as membra dividentia , or contrary fpecies, that there is no danger one fhould be taken for another, but that it’s fo fafe, as that he that affirmes the one denies the other: yea in the moft exadt expreffion that ever Paul made, to exclude whatfoever might be unfafe towards a mans juftification, [18] you have this phrafe, yea twice in the fame verfe, Phil. 3. 9. not having mine owne righteoufneffe, which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Chrift; And againe, The righteoufneffe which is of God by faith (hni ttj nisei) Ergo , it is no unfafe fpeech, yea it muft be faid on the contrary from thofe grounds, that to fay a man is jufti¬ fied 126 The Antinoniian Controverfy . fied before faith, or without faith is unfafe, as contrary to the language of the Scriptures. And for the fecond part, that we muft fay, we are juftified by Chrift;, it is true fo farre, as that it cannot be denyed, nor is it unfound or unfafe at all fo to fpeake, but if it meane a muft of neceffity alwayes, or onely fo to fpeake as it is here fet in oppofition to the phrafe of being juftified by faith, then it is utterly falfe, for as much as the Scripture leades us along in the way of other expreffions ordinarily, and the Apoftle gives us the truth of dodtrine and foundneffe of phrafe together, Rom. io. 3. Chrift is the end of the Law for righteoufneffe to every one that beleeveth. 2. To evidence jujiijication by fandlification, or graces, fa¬ vours of Rome. Anfwer. Not fo. 1. Rome acknowledged^ not junifica¬ tion in our common fenfe, Soil, by righteoufneffe imputed. 2. Rome demies evidencing of our junification and peace with God, and teacheth a dodtrine of doubting, and profeffeth that a man cannot know what God will doe with him for life or death, unleffe by fpeciall revelation, which is not or¬ dinary. But if they meane old Rome , or Pauls Rome , to which he wrote, it’s true, that it favours of the dodtrine that they received, as appeareth, Rom. 8 . 28. All things co-worke for good (the evill of every evill being taken away, which is a point of juftification, and this is propounded under the evidence of the love of God) to them that love him, becaufe Rom. 8. 2. 9. 13. 14. the evidencing of our being in Chrin, freedome from condemnation, and adoption is profecuted by arguments from fandtification, as by having the fpirit, being led by the fpirit, walking after the fpirit, mortifying the deeds 127 A Short Story. deeds of the fledi by the fpirit: and if hereto were added the dodlrine of Saint John fo abundant this way in his fird Epiftle (whereof I have already made mention) I doubt not, but it was the faith of the Church of Rome that then was, fo that the fpeech is unfavoury, and calling a foule afperfion upon a good thing exprelfed in the Scriptures, but as for the point it felfe, that is included, we referre it to its place, to be difcuffed, when it is rightly dated. 3. If I be holy I am never the better accepted of God\ if / be unholy / am never the worfe , this I am fure of he that hath elected me mufi fave me . Anfw. Thefe words favour very ill, and relifh of a careleffe and ungracious fpirit, for howfoever we grant that our ac¬ ceptation unto judification is alwayes in and through Chrid the fame in Gods account, yet this exprefdon imports, that though a mans converfation be never fo holy and gracious, yet hee can expedl never the more manifedation of Gods kindneffe and love to him, contrary to Pfal. 50. ult. To him that orders his converfation aright I will diew the falvation of God, and John 14. 21. It implies fecondly, that though a mans converfation be never fo vile and fenfuall, yet [19] he neede not feare nor expebl any further exprefdon of Gods difpleafure and anger to breake forth againd him, or withdrawings of his favour from him, contrary to PfaL 51. 8. 11, 12. where God breakes Davids bones for his finne, and Jonah 2. 4. Jonah was as one cad out of Gods prefence, and 2 Chron. 15. 2. If you forfake him hee will forfake you: And in a word it imports, as if God neither loved righteouf- neffe, nor hated wickedneffe, contrary to Pfal. 45. 6. 7. and did take no delight in the obedience of his people, contrary to 128 The Antinomian Controverfy. to Pfal. 147. 11. The Lord delighteth in thofe that feare him, &c. As concerning the lafl claufe, he that hath eledled me muft fave me: it is true, the foundation of Gods eledtion remaineth fure, yet it is as true, that whom he choofeth, he purpofeth to bring to Salvation, through fandtification of the Spirit, 2 TheJ. 2. 13. 4. If Chrifi will let me finne, let him looke to it, upon his honour be it. Anfw. This retorts the Lords words upon himfelfe, Prov. 4. 23, 24 Keepe thine heart, &c. Ponder thy paths, &c. and therefore no leffe blafphemous, and is contrary to the pro- feffed pradtife of David , Pfal. 18 23. I was upright before him, and kept my felfe from mine iniquity : The latter claufe puts the caufe of Gods difhonour upon himfelfe, no leffe blafphemous then the former, and contrary to Rom. 2. 23. where the difhonouring of God is laid upon themfelves. 5. Here is a great ftirre about graces and looking to hearts, but give me Chrifi, I feeke not for graces, but for Chrifi, / feeke not for promifes, but for Chrifi, I feeke not for fandlifi- cation, but for Chri/l , tell not me of meditation and duties, but tell me of Chrifi. Anfw. 1. This fpeech feemeth to make a flat oppofltion betweene Chrifi: and his graces, contrary to that in foh. 1. 16. Of his fulneffe we all received, and grace for grace; and betweene Chrift and his promifes, contrary to Gal. 3. 13, 14. Chrifi: was made a curfe that wee might receive the promife of the Spirit, and Luke 1. 70. with 74. And betwixt Chrifl: and all holy duties, contrary to Tit. 2.14. and therefore hold forth expreffions not agreeing to wholefome dodlrine. 6. A living faith, that hath living fruits, may grow from the livmg Law. Anfw. 129 A Short Story. Anfw . This whole fpeech is utterly crofle to the found forme of words required, 2 Tim. 1. 13. Hold faff the forme of found words. 1. That a Hypocrite may have a living Law, is contrary to James 2. 17. where the hypocrites faith is called a dead faith. 2. That a hypocrite may bring forth living fruite, is contrary to that, Heb . 9. 14. 3. That all this growes from a living law, contrary to 2 Cor . 3 6 . where the law is called a killing letter, and to Gal. 3. 21. If there had beene a law which could have given life, &c. 7. / know I am Chrijls , becaufe I doe crucijie the htfts of the flejh , but becaufe I doe not crucifie them , be- leeve in Chrifl that crucified my lifts for me. Anfw. 1. The phrafe is contrary to the Scripture lan¬ guage, Gal. 5. 24. They that are Chrifts, have crucified the flefh with the affections and lulls. 2. It favours [20] of the flefh, for thefe three things may feeme to be ex- preffed in it. 1. If Scripture makes not oppofite, but fub- ordinate, Rom. 8 . 13. I through the Spirit crucifie the flefh. 2. That if I doe not crucifie my lulls, then there is an open and free way of looking to Chrift, contrary to the Scripture, Mat. 5. 8. Bleffed are the pure in heart, for they fhall fee God, both in boldneffe of faith here, and fruition hereafter, 2 Tim. 2. 19. Let every one that names the Lord Jefus, depart from iniquity. 3. That beleeving in Chrifl, may eafe me from endeavouring to crucifie my lulls in my owne perfon ; which is fo groffe, that it needes no more confutation then to name it. 4. The fafe fenfe that may be poffibly intended in fuch a fpeech is this, If I crucifie the flefh in my own flrength, it is no fafe evidence of my being in Chrifl, but if renounc¬ ing my felfe, I crucifie the flefh in the flrength of Chrifl, applying 17 130 The Antinomian Controverfy. applying his death by faith, it is a fafe evidence of my being in Chrift: but this fenfe conveighed in thefe words, is to conveigh wholefome dodtrine in an unwholefome Chan- nell, and a darkening and lofing the truth in an unfavoury expreffion. 8. Peter more leaned to a Covenant of workes then Paul, Pauls do Urine was more for free grace then Peters. Anfw. To oppofe thefe perfons and the dodtrine of thefe two Apoftles of Chrift, who were guided by one and the fame Spirit in preaching and penning thereof, (2 Pet. 1. 21. Holy men of God fpake as they were moved by the holy Ghoft, 2 Tim. 3. 16. All Scripture is given by infpiration of God) in fuch a point as the Covenant of workes and grace, is little lelfe than blafphemy. 9. If Chrift be my SanTtification , what neede I looke to any thing in my felfe , to evidence my juft if cation ? Anfw. This pofition is therefore unfound, becaufe it holds forth Chrift to be my falsification, fo as that I neede not looke to any inherent holineffe in my felfe; whereas Chrift is therefore faid to be our fandtification, becaufe he workes fandtification in us, and we daily ought to grow up in him, by receiving new fupply and increafe of grace from his fulneffe, according to 2 Pet. 3. 18. Grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jefus Chrift. 1 The 1 “For fome account of this Synod, Story muft have been written at the fee Winthrop , Vol. I. pp. *237 and time, probably by fome minifter.”— * 240; Cotton’s Way Cleared , pp. 39-41 Deane, MS. note. Vide , alfo, Cotton et feq. The Affembly broke up Sep- Mather’s chapter Hydra Decapitata in tember 22. This account in the Short the Magnalia (B. VII. chap. iii.). [ 21 ] The proceedings of the Generali Court holden at New Towne in the Maffachufets in New England , OCtobl 2. 1637. Againft Mr. Wheelwright and other erroneous and feditious perfons for their difturbances of the publick peace. 1 2 Lthough the Affembly of the Churches had confuted and condemned moft of thofe new opinions which were fprung up amongft us, and Mr. Cotton 3 had in publique view contented with the reft, yet the leaders in thofe erroneous wayes would not give in, but flood {till to maintain their new light, which they had boafted of, and 1 This is an error, due, probably, to the careleffnefs of the perfon who fuper- vifed the prefs when the Short Story was publifhed. The feffion of the Court here referred to was held in November. 2 “ This document, pp. 21 and 43 inclufive [37-00 of this edition], and probably from p. 59, fourth line [00- 000], to the end, fhould properly come laft, in the order of the three official or /£?/zz-official papers, being an account of the proceeding of the General Court , which convened at Cambridge Novem¬ ber 2, 1637, at which Wheelwright, Mrs. Hutchinfon, and others of their friends were fentenced to baniffiment. This paper might properly be called alfo an ‘ Apology,’ as it not only gives the. pro¬ ceedings of the court, but is alfo a jujiifi- cation of thofe proceedings. It agrees with Winthrop’s defcription of it. He fays (Vol. I. pp. *297, *298) : ‘All the proceedings of this court againft thefe perfons were fet down at large, with the reafons arid other obfervations, and were fent into England to be publifhed there, to the end that all our godly friends might not be difcouraged from coming to us, etc.’ This paper, I think, was written by WinthropS — Deane, MS. note. 3 The Rev. John Cotton was born in Derby, England, December 4, 1585, arrived 132 The Antinomian Controverfy . and that the difference was ftill as wide as before, viz. as great as between heaven and hell: Mr. Wheelwright 1 alfo continued his preaching after his former manner, and Mif- tris Hutchifon her wonted meetings and exercifes, and much offence was ftill given by her, and others in going out of the ordinary affemblies, when Mr Wil? began any exercife; and fome of the meffengers of the Church of Bojlon , had contemp- tuoufly withdrawn themfelves from the generall Affembly, with profeffed diflike of their proceedings, and many evi¬ dences brake forth of their difcontented and turbulent fpirits; it was conceived by the Magiftrates, and others of the Coun¬ trey, that the means which had been ufed, proving uneffec- tuall, the cafe was now defperate, and the laft remedy was to bee applyed, and that without further delay, left it fhould bee attempted too late, when fitter opportunity might bee offered for their advantage, as they had boafted, and did certainly arrived in Bofton September 4, 1633, and died there December 23, 1652. Full accounts of Cotton and his writ¬ ings will be found in the Magnalia (B. III. P. I. chap, i.), and in Eliot and Allen’s dictionaries. All the bio¬ graphical cyclopedias contain notices of him. See alfo Prof. Enoch Pond’s annotated edition of Norton’s Life a 7 id Death of John Cotton , publifhed in London in 1648 ; and the Rev. A. W. M‘Clure’s biography, written for the Maffachufetts Sabbath School Society, and publifhed in 1846 as the firft in the feries of Lives of the Chief Fathers of New England. 1 The Rev. John Wheelwright was born in England, probably in 1592, ar¬ rived in Bofton May 26, 1636, and died in Salifbury, Mafs., November 15, 1679. Full accounts of his life and connection with the events recorded in the Short Story are to be found in C. H. Bell’s me¬ moir, prefixed to the John Wheelwright in the Prince Society Publications, and in the fecond of Adams’s Three Epi- fodes of Maffachufetts Hifory. 2 The Rev. John Wilfon was born in Windfor, England, in 1588, and ar¬ rived in America with Governor Win- throp in 1630; he died Auguft 7, 1667. Full accounts of his life are contained in the Magnalia (B. III. P. I. chap, iii.), in the various biographical dictionaries and cyclopedias, and in Ellis’s Hiflory of the Firfl Church of Bofton. There is a highly charaCteriftic detailed notice of him in Savage’s Genealogical Dic¬ tionary (Vol. IV. pp. 583-584). 133 A Short Story. certainly expedl upon the returne of fome of their chiefe fup- porters, who by a fpeciall providence were now abfent from them: And for this end the generall Court being affembled in the ordinary courfe, it was determined to begin with thefe troublers of our peace, and to fuppreffe them by the civill authority, whereunto there was a faire occafion offered upon a feditious writing, which had been delivered into the Court in March , when Mr. Wheel, was convift of fedition, &c. under the hands of more than threefcore of them, and inti- tled A Remonftrance or Petition , the Contents whereof were as followeth: Wee whofe names are under written (have diligently obferved this honoured Courts proceedings againft our deare and reverend brother in Chrift, Mr. Wheel, now under cen- fure of the Court, for the truth of Chrift) wee do humbly befeech this honourable Court to accept this Remonftrance and Petition of ours, in all due fubmiffion tendred to your Worfhips. For firft, whereas our beloved Brother Mr. Wheel, is cen- fured for contempt, by the greater part of this honoured Court, wee defire your Worfhips to confider the fincere intention of our Brother to promote your end in the [22] day of Faft, for whereas wee do perceive your principal intention the day of Faft looked chiefely at the publick peace of the Churches, our Reverend Brother did to his belt ftrength, and as the Lord affifted him, labour to promote your end, and therefore indevoured to draw us neerer unto Chrift, the head of our union, that fo wee might bee eftab- liflied in peace, which wee conceive to bee the true way, fandtifyed of God, to obtaine your end, and therfore deferves no fuch cenfure as wee conceive. Secondly, 134 The Antinomian Controverfy. Secondly, Whereas our deare Brother is cenfured of fedi- tion ; wee befeech your Worfhips to confider, that either the perfon condemned mutt bee culpable of fome feditious faft, or his doftrine muft bee feditious, or muff breed fedition in the hearts of his hearers or elfe wee know not upon what grounds hee fhould bee cenfured. Now to the firft, wee have not heard any that have witneffed againft our brother for any feditious faft. Secondly, neither was the doftrine it felfe, being no other but the very expreffions of the Holy Ghoft himfelfe, and therefore cannot juftly be branded with fedition. Thirdly, if you look at the effects of his Dodlrine upon the hearers, it hath not ftirred up fedition in us, not fo much as by accident; wee have not drawn the fword, as fometimes Peter did, rafhly, neither have wee refcued our innocent Brother, as fometimes the Ifraelites did Jonathan , and yet they did not feditioufly. The Covenant of free Grace held forth by our Brother, hath taught us rather to become humble fuppliants to your Worfhips, and if wee fhould not prevaile, wee would rather with patience give our cheekes to the fmiters. Since therefore the Teacher, the Doftrine, and the hearers bee moft free from fedition (as wee conceive) wee humbly befeech you in the name of the Lord Jefus Chrift, your Judge and ours, and for the honour of this Court, and the proceedings thereof, that you will bee pleafed either to make it appeare to us, and to all the world, to whom the knowledge of all thefe things will come, wherein the fedition lies, or elfe acquit our Brother of fuch a cenfure. Further, wee befeech you remember the old method of Satan, the ancient enemy of Free Grace, in all ages of the Churches, who hath raifed up fuch calumnies againft the faithfull 135 A Short Story. faithfull Prophets of God, Eliah was called the troubler of Ifrael ’ i King. 1 8 . 17, 18. Amos was charged for confpir- acy, Amos 7. 10. Paul was counted a peftilent fellow, or moover of fedition, and a ring-leader of a Se6t, A As 24. 5. and Chrift himfelfe, as well as Paul was charged to bee a Teacher of New Dodtrine, Mark. 1. 27. A As 1719. Now wee befeech you confider, whether that old ferpent work not after his old method, even in our daies. Further, wee befeech you confider the danger of medling againft the Prophets of God, Pfal. 105. 14. 15, for what yee do unto them, the Lord Jefus takes as done unto himfelfe ; if you hurt any of his members, the head is very fenfible of it: for fo faith the Lord of Hofls, Hee that toucheth you toucheth the apple of mine eye, Zach . 2 8. And better a mill-ftone were hanged about our necks, and that wee were caft into the fea, then that wee fliould offend any of [23] thefe little ones, which beleeve on him, Matthew 18. 6. And laftly, wee befeech you confider, how you fliould ftand in relation to us, as nurfing Fathers, which gives us encouragement to promote our humble requefls to you, or elfe wee would fay with the Prophet, If a. 22. 4. Look from mee that I may weep bitterly, Labour not to comfort mee, &c. or as Jer. 9. 2. O that I had in the wilderneffe a lodging place of a wayfaring man. And thus have wee made known our griefes and defires to your Worfhips, and leave them upon record with the Lord and with you, knowing that if wee fliould receive repulfe from you, with the Lord wee fliall A mono: ft find grace. 1 1 This remonftrance, copied by Sav- (Vol. I. pp. 481-483), together with the age from the Short Story, is reprinted following letter of Winthrop in relation in his edition of Winthrop’s Hijlory to it: — Beloved 136 The Antinomian Controverfy. Amongft others who had fubfcribed to this writing, Wil¬ liam Afpinwall 1 was one, and being returned for one of the Deputies of Bojion , it was propounded in the Court, whether hee was fit to bee received a member of the Court, having fubfcribed Beloved Brethren, — I met lately with the remonftrance fubfcribed by your- felves with others. I mull confefs I faw it once before, but had not then time to read it advifedly, as now I have. I hope foon (by God’s affiftance) to make it appear, what wrong hath been done to the court, yea, and to the truth itfelf, by your rafli, unwarranted and feditious delinquency. In the mean time, I thought fit to advertife you of fome mifcarriages therein; and though your coun¬ tenancing of others in the like pra6tice leaves me fmall hope, that you will hearken to my counfel in this, yet, in difcharge of my duty and brotherly refpecft towards you, I have given this attempt, and fliall leave the fuccefs to God. 1. In this you have broke the ends of your calling, that you did publifh fuch a writing, when you were no members of the court. 2. In that you tax the court with in- juftice. 3. In that you affirm, that all the a£ts of that major part of that court are void, whereby you go about to overthrow the foundation of our commonwealth and the peace thereof, by turning all our magiftrates out of office, and by nullifying all our laws. 4. In that you invite the body of the people to join with you in your feditious attempt againft the court and the authority here eftablifhed, againft the rule of the apof- tle, who requires every foul to be fubjedt to the higher powers, and every Chriftian man to ftudy to be quiet and to meddle with his own bufinefs. I earneftly defire you to confider ferioufly of thefe things, and if it pleafe the Lord to open your eyes to fee your failings, it will be much joy to me, and (I doubt not but) the court will be very ready to pafs them by, and accept of your fubmiffion, and it may be a means of a further and firm recon¬ ciliation ; which the Lord grant, and in his good time effedt. So I reft Your loving brother, J. W. Xlth, 15, 1637. To my worthy Friends and beloved \ Brethren, Mr. Coddington, Mr. > Coggeshall, and Mr. Colburn. ) 1 Of William Afpinwall, Savage (Genealogical Dictionary , Vol. I. pp. 70, 71) gives the following record: Firft mentioned at Charleftown, in 1630; he probably came in the fleet with Winthrop. He ferved on the ear- lieft jury of inqueft in the colony, Sep¬ tember 28 of that year, and was one of the firft members of the church, his name being tenth on the lift ; he was chofen one of the two deacons at the church organization. He foon removed to Bofton, and was made freeman April 3,1632. In Auguft, 1637, when Gov. Sir Harry Vane returned to England, Afpin¬ wall was chofen reprefentative by Bofton to fucceed him ; but as a fupporter of Wheelwright and follower of the teach- ings of Mrs. Hutchinfon, was difmifled, difarmed, disfranchifed, and banifhed. Firft he went to Rhode Ifland, “with fo many other of his fellow faints,” and figned the incorporation of Portfmouth of March 7, 1638; appointed fecretary of the colony, he was fubfequently fuf- pedted of fedition, and, January 2, 1638, “ it was ordered that they would deal with 137 A Short Story. fubfcribed to the faid writing, which was fo much to the difhonour and contempt thereof, &c. Whereupon hee was demanded if hee would juffcifie the matter contained in the faid writing: which when hee had peremptorily affirmed, by the vote of the Court hee was prefently difmilfed: Where¬ upon Mr. Cogjhall'} another of the Deputies of Bojion , who had with William Afpinwall concerning his defaults, as alfo concerning invafions foreign and domeftic ” (i R. /. Col. Rec. 64). He then appears to have left Rhode Ifland and to have gone to Con¬ necticut. He lived at New Haven in 1641-42, but came again, by favor of the General Court (1 Mafs. Col. Rec. 338) to Bofton, where in 1643 he ferved as clerk of the writs, or recorder, and was of the artillery company. It is cer¬ tain that he was a proprietor at Water- town, though he never refided there. He returned to England, and in 1653 “publifhed a queer book as prognoftic of the millennium to open in twenty years. No mortification was felt prob¬ ably by him for non-arrival of this fifth monarchy, as I fuppofe he did not even live to fee the fuccefs of the rival dy- nafty. Cromwell alone was powerful enough to retard fuch event, and the whole body of people of England with unanimity that was never before or fince equalled in that kingdom, by calls for the reftoration of the houfe of Stuart, poftponed the fuccefs of fuch enthufiafm.” It is not known that there are any defcendants of William Afpinwall in America. 1 John Coggefhall, or Coxfall, mer¬ cer, born in Eflex in 1591, came to New England in the fhip Lion , landing in Bofton Sunday, September 16, 1632. He was admitted freeman on the 6th of the following November, and removed from Roxbury, where he firft fat down, to Bofton, which place he reprefented in the firft three General Courts, and alfo in the fixth, feventh, eighth, and ninth. While living in Bofton he had three children, Hanamel, Wait, and Bedaiah, of which laft Savage remarks, “whether fon or daughter is not known.” After his banifhment by the twelfth General Court, as fet forth in the text, he removed to Rhode Ifland, where he was chofen as Affiftant in 1641, and in 1647, firft Prefident of the col¬ ony. He was alfo the firft Treafurer of Rhode Ifland, and, one of the chief men of Newport, died on November 16, 1647, in the fifty-fixth year of his age. He was buried in a lot on his own farm in Newport, where a subftantial monu¬ ment ereCted by one of his defcendants now marks the place of his interment. His refidence in Bofton was near that of Mrs. Hutchinfon, at the inter- feCtion of School Street with Wafhing- ton Street. A man of high character, he died generally lamented, leaving a numerous progeny. Vide Savage’s Winthrop , Vol. I. p. * 130 n., and Genealogical Dictionary , Vol. I. p. 421, where the date of death is conjeCturally but erroneoufly affigned as 1689; alfo Auftin’s Genealogical Dictionary of Rhode Ifland, p. 49. 8 138 The Antinomian Controverfy. had not fubfcribed to the faid writing, being then a Deputy of the Court, fpake very boldly to the Court, and told them, that feeing they had put out Mr. Afpinwall for that matter, they were belt make one work of all, for as for himfelfe, though his hand were not to the Petition, yet hee did ap¬ prove of it, and his hand was to a Protection, which was to the fame effeCt; Whereupon the Court difmiffed him alfo, and fent word to Bojlon to chufe two new Deputies: then Mr. Coddington 1 the third Deputy, moved the Court (by Or¬ der from the Town of Bojloni) that the former cenfure againft Mr. Wheel, might bee reverfed, and that the Order made againft receiving fuch as fhould not bee allowed by the Magiftrates might bee repealed; whereby the Court per¬ ceived their obftinate refolution in maintaining this faction, and thereupon gave Order hee fhould be fent for; and for the Law, the anfwer was, that whereas a Declaration had been made of the equity of that Law, and that fpecially for the fatisfaflion of thofe of Bojlon , and an Anfwer had been publifhed by fome of them, wherein much reproach and dan¬ der had been call; upon the Court, to which a reply had been made above fix weeks fince, but was kept in upon expectation that the late Affembly would have had fome good effeCt, in clearing the points in controverfie, and reconciling the minds of the adverfe party, but they continuing obftinate and irre- conciliable 1 William Coddington, commonly- referred to as the “founder of the col¬ ony of Rhode Ifland,” was born in England in 1601, and lived there in Bolton. He came to Maffachufetts with Winthrop, in 1630, and, in confequence of the a6tion of the General Court, re¬ moved to Rhode Ifland in March, 1638. He died in Newport, November r, 1678. Biographical notices of him will be found in the cyclopedias, in Savage’s Genealogical Dictionary (Vol. I. p. 416), and in his notes to Winthrop (Vol. I. p. *50). Vide also Auftin’s Genealogical DiClionary of Rhode IJl- and, pp. 276-279, and Magazine of New England Hiflory (October, 1891), Vol. I. pp. 228-238. A Short Story . 139 conciliable, it was thought fit the whole proceedings about the law fhould bee brought forth, and accordingly the next day, the Declaration, the Anfwer and the Reply 1 were all brought to the Court, and there openly read; which gave fuch fatisfadlion to thofe which were prefent as no man ought to object, and fome that were of the adverfe party, and had taken offence at the themfelves fully fatisfyed. 1 The law, or “order,” here re¬ ferred to was that of November, 1637 ( Records , Vol. I. p. 211), and was as follows: — “Whereas the opinions & revela¬ tions of Mr. Wheelwright & Mrs. Hutchinfon have feduced, & led into dangerous errors, many of the people heare in Newe England, infomuch as there is juft caufe of fufpition, that they, as others in Germany, in former times, may, upon fome revelation, make fome fuddaine irruption upon thofe that differ from them in judgment: for prevention whereof, it is ordered, that all thofe, whofe names are underwritten, fhall, (upon warning given or left at their dwelling houfes.) before the 30th day of this month of November, deliver in at Mr. Cane’s houfe at Bofton all fuch guns, piftols, fwords, powder, fhot, & match, as they fhalbee owners of, or have in their cuftody, upon paine of ten pound for evry default to bee made thereof; which armes are to bee kept by Mr. Cane till this Court fhall take further order therein. Alfo it is or¬ dered, upon like penalty of X £, that no man, who is to render his armes by this order, fhall buy or borrow any guns, fwords, piftols, powder, fhot, or match, Law, did openly acknowledge When untill this court fhall take further order therein. . . . “ It was ordered, that if any that are to bee difarmed acknowledge their finn in fubfcribing the feditious libell, or do not juftify it, but acknowledge it evill to two magiftrates, they fhalbee thereby freed from delivering in their armes according to the former order.... “ The towme of Roxberry is required to take order for the fafe cuftody of Mrs. Hutchinfon; & if any charge arife, to bee defrayed by her hufband.” The “ Declaration ” and “ Reply ” referred to in the text were written by Winthrop, and the “Anfwer” was by Vane. Thefe papers are included in Hutch in foil’s State Papers (pp. 67- 100), reprinted in the Collections of the Prince Society, and an abftraCt of the difcuftion is given in Upham’s Vane (Sparks’s American Biography , Vol. IV. pp. 123-164), in Hofmer’s Vane (pp. 61-67), and in R. C. Winthrop’s Life and Letters of John Winthrop (Vol. II. pp. 182-191). J.A. Doyle in his Englifh in America : the Puritan Colonies (Vol. I. p. 178) offers a brief but impartial and judicious criticifm of thefe papers, none of which, he intimates, rofe to the height and dignity of the occafion. 140 The Antinomian Controversy. When the Warrant came to the Town of Bojlon , they affembled together and agreed (the greater part of [24] them) to fend the fame Deputies which the Court have rejected, pretending that it was their liberty, and thofe were the ablelt men, &c. but Mr. Cotton comming amongft them, and perceiving their rafh and contemptuous hehav- iour, by his wifdome diverted them from that courfe : fo they chofe two other, 1 but one of them they knew would bee rejedted, becaufe his hand was alfo to the feditious writing, as it fell out, for hee refuting to acknowledge his fault in it, was alfo difmiffed, and a new Warrant fent for another to bee chofen, which they never made any return of, but that contempt the Court let paffe. When Mr. Wheelwright appeared, it was declared to him, that whereas hee was long fince convidl of fedition and con¬ tempt of authority, and time had been given him from Court to Court, to come to the knowledge of his offence, the Court thought it now time to know how his mind flood, whether he would acknowledge his offence, or abide the fentence of the Court? His Anfwer was to this effedl, that hee had committed no fedition nor contempt, hee had delivered nothing but the truth of Chrift, and for the application of his dodlrin it was by others, and not by him, &c. To which it was anfwered by the Court, that they had not 1 The two delegates referred to banifhed. The firft remained in Bofton, were William Colburn and John Oliver. and ferved feveral times as feledtman The name of the laft was fubfcribed to fubfequent to 1638 ; while Oliver, re- the Remonftrance, and permiffion to maining for a time in Bofton, afterwards take his feat was on this ground refufed removed to Newbury (Savage, Genea- him (1 Mafs. Col. Rec. 206; Savage’s logical Diftionary, Vol. I. p. 423, 424; Winthrofi, Vol. I. p. *24672). Neither Vol. III. p. 309). Colburn nor Oliver was among thofe A Short Story. 141 not cenfured his doCtrine, but left it as it was; but his ap¬ plication, by which hee laid the Magiftrates, and the Minif- ters, and moft of the people of God in thefe Churches, under a Covenant of works, and thereupon declared them to bee enemies to Chrift, and Antichrifts, and fuch enemies as Herod and Pilate , and the Scribes and Pharifees, &c. per- fwading the people to look at them, and deale with them as fuch, and that hee defcribed them fo, as all men might know who hee meant, as well as if hee had named the parties; for he was prefent in the Court 1 a little before, when both Magiftrates and Minifters did openly profeffe their judge¬ ment in that point, and that they did walk in fuch a way of evidencing junification by fandtification, &c. as hee held forth to bee a Covenant of works. Secondly, the fruits of that Sermon of Mr. Wheelwright , together with the Declaration of his judgement in that point both before and fince, have declared it to tend to fedition: for whereas before hee broached his opinions, there was a peaceable and comely order in all affaires in the Churches, and civill ftate, &c. now the difference which hee hath raifed amongft men, by a falfe diftindion of a Cove¬ nant of grace and a Covenant of works; whereby one party is looked at as friends to Chrift, and the other as his ene¬ mies, &c. all things are turned upfide down among us: As firft, in the Church, hee that will not renounce his fandtifi- cation, and waite for an immediate revelation of the Spirit, cannot bee admitted, bee hee never fo godly; hee that is already in the Church, that will not do the fame, and ac¬ knowledge 1 The Court held in November, 1636. Vide Savage’s Wintlirop , Vol. I. p. *215. v 142 The Antinomian Controverfy. knowledge this new light, and fay as they fay, is prefently noted, and under-efteemed, as favouring of a Covenant of works: thence it fpreads into the families, and fets divifions between hufband and wife, and other relations there, till the weaker give place to the ftronger, otherwife it turnes to [25] open contention : it is come alfo into Civill and publike affaires, and hath bred great difturbance there, as appeared in the late expedition againft the Pequeds; for whereas in former expeditions the Towne of Bojton was as forward as any others to fend of their choyce members, and a greater number then other Townes in the time of the former Governour; now in this laft fervice they fent not a member, but one or two whom they cared not to be rid of, and but a few others, and thofe of the moft refufe fort, and that in fuch a careleffe manner, as gave great difcouragement to the fervice, not one man of that fide accompanying their Paftour, when he was fent by the joynt confent of the Court, and all the Elders upon that expedition, nor fo much as bid¬ ding him farewell 1 ; what was the reafon of this difference? Why, 1 Vide Savage’s Winthrop , Vol. I. p. * 222. The MalTachufetts proportion of the total levy for this expedition was one hundred and fixty men, of which number twenty-fix were apportioned to Bofton. If the relative population of the place at the two periods is taken into account, this would have been equivalent to a levy of twenty-three hundred men at the outbreak of the Confederate rebellion in 1861. The great prominence given to the clergy in the Prefbyterian and earlier Puritan warfare of the feventeenth century, and the influence they exerted over military operations even in the face of an enemy are well known, though the familiar tra¬ dition that it was only through their interference with Leflie’s plans that Cromwell was faved from ferious dif- after at Dunbar is now difcredited. Neverthelefs, it is a well eftablifhed hiftorical fadt that in this very Pe- quot campaign Captain John Mafon of Connedticut left the courfe to be pur- fued at the turning-point of operations to the chaplain of the expedition, who during the night was “ to feck Divine direction A Short Story, 143 Why, nothing but this, Mr. Wheelwright had taught them that the former Governour and fome of the Magiftrates then were friends of Chrift and Free-grace, but the prefent were enemies, &c. Antichrifts, perfecutors: What was the reafon that the former Governour never ftirred out, but attended by the Serjeants, with Halberts or Carbines, but this prefent Governour neglected? 1 Why, the people were taught to looke at this, as an enemy to Chrift, &c. The fame differ¬ ence hath beene obferved in Towne lots, rates, and in neighbour meetings, and almoft in all affaires, whereby it is apparent what difturbance the feditious application of Mr. Wheelwright hath wrought among us; therefore as the Apoflle faith, I would they were cut off that trouble you; and as Cain, Hagar , and Ifmael, 2 were expelled as troublers of diredtion in prayer” (2 Mafs. Hifl. Coll. Vol. VIII. p. 134; Palfrey, Vol. I. p. 464). The prominence fubfe- quently conceded to the Rev. John Wilfon in the Maffachufetts contingent of this fame campaign is clearly fhown in the letter of its commander, Ifrael Stoughton, to Governor Winthrop, writ¬ ten on the 14th of Auguft, 1637, and printed in Savage’s Winthrop (Appen¬ dix D, Vol. I. pp. 478-481). I am not aware that any other reference, befides that in the text, exifts to the difficulty experienced in raifing men for the Boflon contingent in the Pequot war; but in the hiftories of the Antinomian controverfy much ftrefs has been laid on the fadt as illuftrating the dangerous charadter of the diffenfion (Palfrey, Vol. I. pp. 49b 492, 502; J. A. Vinton, Antinomian Controverfy , p. 62; Twich- ell, John Winthrop , p. 165). In view of the intenfe feeling which during the fummer of 1637 prevailed in the Boflon church, and the great perfonal antipathy felt towards Wilfon, the paftor, the lo¬ cal reluctance at going into the contin¬ gent is explicable on obvious grounds. It was the fame as if men were in more recent times afked to enlift for military or naval fervice of a molt dangerous charadter under an unpopular comman¬ der, in regard to whofe capacity there was a general feeling of diflruft. No general inference could fafely be drawn from the fadt. The trouble, as fhown in the text, was largely perfonal, and fuch as would be experienced at all times under fimilar conditions. 1 Vide Savage’s Winthrop, Vol. I. p. * 220 and Editor’s note, and p. * 224. 2 “ So, by the example of Lot in Abraham’s family, and after Hagar and Ifhmael, he faw they muft be fent away.” — Savage’s Winthrop, Vol. I. p. *250. 144 The Antinomian Controverfy. of the families, (which were then as commonwealths) fo juftice requires, and the neceffity of the peace cals for it, that fuch diflurbers fhould be put out from among us, feeing it is one of their tenents, that it is not poffible their opinions, and externall peace, can fiand together; and that the differ¬ ence betweene them and us is (as they fay) as wide as between Heaven and Hell. Further the Court declared what meanes had beene ufed, to convince him and to reduce him into the right way, as firfl at the Court, when he was convict of his offence, the Miniflers being called together did labour by many found arguments, both in publike and private to convince him of his errour and finne, but he contemptuoufly flighted what- foever they or the Magiflrates faid to him in that behalfe; and fince that much paines had beene taken with him, both by conference and writing, not onely privately, but alfo by the late Affembly of the Churches, wherein his erroneous opinions, which were the groundworke of his feditious Ser¬ mon, were clearely confuted, and himfelfe put to fllence, yet he obflinately perflfled in junification of his erroneous opin¬ ions; and befides there was an Apologie 1 written in defence of the proceedings of the Court againft him, which though it were kept in for a time in expectation of a Remonftrance, which fome of his party were in hand with, for juftification of his Sermon, yet it was long fince publifhed, and without queftion he hath feene it: befides the Court hath ufed much patience towards him from time to time, admonifhing him of his danger, and waiting for his repentance, in ftead whereof 1 The “Apologie ” referred to was fubfequently printed as part of the Short Story. Vide infra , pp. 191-233. 145 A Short Story. whereof he hath threatned us with an appeale, and urged us to proceed: To this Mr. Wheelwright replyed, [26] that he- would, by the helpe of God, make good his dodtrines, and free them from all the arguments which had beene brought againft them in the late Affembly, and denyed that he had feene the Apology, but confeffed that he might have feene it if he would. This was obferved as an argument of the pride of his fpirit, and wilfull negledt of all the meanes of light in that he would not vouchfafe to read a very briefe writing, and fuch as fo much concerned him. Although the caufe was now ready for fentence, yet night being come, the Court arofe, and enjoyned him to appeare the next morning. The next morning he appeared, but long after the houre appointed; the Court demanded what he had to alleadge, why fentence fhould not proceed againft him ; He anfwered, that there was no fedition or contempt proved againft him, and whereas he was charged to have fet forth the Magiflrates and Minifters, as enemies to Chrift, &c. he de- fired it might be fhewed him in what page or leafe of his Sermon he had fo faid of them; The Court anfwered, that he who defignes a man by fuch circumftances, as doe note him out to common intendments, doth as much as if he named the party: when Paul fpake of thofe of the circum- cifion, it was as certaine whom he meant as if he named the Jewes; when in Bohemia they fpake of differences be- tweene men, /ub una & fub utraque , it was all one as to have faid Papifts and Proteftants; fo of the Monflrants and Re- monftrants: for by the meanes of him and his followers, all the people of God in this Countrey were under the diftinc- tion 19 146 The Antinomian Controverfy . tion of men under the Covenant of grace, and men under a Covenant of workes. Mr. Wheelwright alleadged a place in Alatth . 21. where Chrift fpeaking againft the Scribes and Pharifees, no advantage could they take againft him becaufe he did not name them, but it was anfwered they did not fpare him for that caufe, for then they would have taken their advantage at other times, when he did name them. One or two of the Deputies fpake in his defence, but it was to fo little purpofe (being onely more out of affebiion to the party, then true judgement of the hate of the caufe) that the Court had little regard of it. Mr. Wheelwright being de¬ manded if he had ought elfe to fpeake, faid that there was a double Pharifee in the charge laid upon them. 1. In that the troubles of the Civill State were imputed to him, but as it was by accident, as it is ufuall in preaching of the Gofpel. 2. That it was not his Sermon that was the caufe of them, but the Lord Jefus Chrift. To which the Court anfwered, that it was apparent he was the inftrument of our troubles, he muft prove them to be by fuch accident, and till then the blame muft reft upon himfelfe, for we know Chrift would not owne them, being out of his way. After thefe and many other fpeeches had palfed, the Court declaring him guilty for troub¬ ling the civill peace, both for his feditious Sermon, and for his corrupt and dangerous opinions, and for his contemptuous behaviour in divers Courts formerly, and now obftinately main¬ taining and juftifying his faid errours and offences, [27] and for that he refufed to depart voluntarily from us, which the Court had now offered him, and in a manner perfwaded him unto ; Seeing it was apparent unto him, from that of our Saviour, Matth. that we could not continue together H7 A Short Story. together without the ruine of the whole, he was fentenced O 7 to be disfranchifed and banifhed our jurifdidlion, and to be put in fafe cuftody, except he fhould give fufficient fecurity to depart before the end of March: Upon this he appealed to the Kings Majefty, but the Court told him an appeale did not lie in this cafe, for the King having given us an author¬ ity by his graunt under his great Seale of England to heare and determine all caufes without any refervation, we were not to admit of any fuch appeales for any fuch fubordinate ftate, either in Ireland , or Scotland , or other places ; and if an appeale fhould lie in one cafe, it might be challenged in all, and then there would be no ufe of government amongft us : neither did an appeale lie from any Court in any County or Corporation in England, but if a party will remove his caufe to any of the Kings higher Courts, he muff bring the Kings Writ for it; 1 neither did he tender any appeale, nor call any witneffes, nor defired any Aft to be entered of it: then he was demanded if he would give fecurity for his quiet departure, which he refufing to doe, he was committed to the cuftody of the Marfhall. The next morning he be¬ thought himfelfe better, and offered to give fecurity, alleadg- ing that he did not conceive the day before that a fentence of banifhment was pronounced againft him, he alfo fuffered to relinquifh his appeale, and faid he would accept of a fimple banifhment; The Court anfwered him, that for his appeale 1 In this and many other fimilar a criminal offence juftifying the inflic- cafes the right of appeal from the colo- tion of punifhment. Savage’s Win- nial magiftracy to the King was de- throp , Vol. II. p. *189. Vide alfo nied ; but in one cafe at leaft,— that of Adams’s Three Epifodes of Majfachu- Thomas Morton, in 1644, the fa6t of fetts Hiflory , Vol. I. pp. 348-350. having made an appeal was alleged as 148 The Aniinomian Controver/y. appeale, he might doe as he pleafed, and for his departure, he fhould have the liberty the Court had offered him, pro¬ vided he fhould not preach in the meane time; but that he would not yeeld unto; fo in the end the Court gave him leave to goe home, upon his promife, that if he were not departed out of his jurifdidlion within foureteene dayes, he would render himfelfe at the houfe of Mr. Stanton} one of the Magiftrates, there to abide as a prifoner, till the Court fhould difpofe of him. Mr. Cogjhall. / T A He next who was called, was Mr. John Cogjhall , one of -*■ the Deacons of Bojlon , upon his appearance the Court declared that the caufe why they had fent for him, was partly by occafion of his fpeeches and behaviour in this Court the other day, and partly for fome light mifcarriages at other times, and that they did looke at him as one that had a principall hand in all our late difturbances of our pub¬ like peace. The firfl thing we doe charge you with, is your juftifying a writing called a Remonftrance or Petition, but indeed a feditious Libell, and that when Mr. Afp . was queftioned by the Court about it, you flood up uncalled, and juftified the fame, faying to this effedl, that if the Court meant 1 This is a compofitor’s mifreading of copy, the name having apparently been written Stouton, the magiftrate in queftion having been Ifrael Stoughton, of Dorchefter ( Mafs . Col. Rec ., Vol. I. p. 207). Full accounts of the earlieft Stoughton are to be found in Savage’s notes to Winthrop and in his Genealog¬ ical Diffionary, in Allen, and in the hi dories of Dorchefter. At the time of the proceedings referred to in the text, Stoughton had juft returned from the Pequot campaign, in which he com¬ manded the Maffachufetts contingent; and his clofe perfonal relations with the Rev. John Wilfon are apparent in his letter of Auguft, 1637, to Winthrop, printed in the Appendix (D) of Sav¬ age’s Winthrop (Vol. I. pp. 478-481). A Short Story. 149 meant to difmiffe him for that, it was beft to make but one worke of all, for though your felfe had not your hand to the Petition, yet you did approve thereof, and your hand was to the Proteflation, which was to the fame effect; whereupon you being alfo difmiffed, ufed clamorous and unbefeeming fpeeches to the Court at your departure, whereby we take you to be of the fame minde with thofe who made [28] the Petition, and therefore liable to the fame punifh- ment; upon this the Petition was openly read, and liberty was granted to him to anfwer for himfelfe. His firft anfwer was, that what he then fpake, he fpake as a member of the Court: to which it was anfwered againe, that 1. hee was no member of the Court (landing upon tryall whether to be allowed or rejected, at fuch time as he uttered molt of thofe fpeeches. 2. Admit he were, yet it is no privilege of a mem¬ ber to reproach or affront the whole Court, it is licentiouf- neffe, and not liberty, when a man may fpeake what he lift; for he was reminded of fome words he uttered at his going forth of the Court, to this effedl, that we had cenfured the truth of Chrift, and that it was the greateft ftroke that ever was given to Free-grace. To which he anfwered, that his words were miftaken; for he faid that he would pray that our eyes might be opened to fee what we did, for he thought it the greateft ftroke that ever was given to N. E . for he did beleeve that Matter Wheelwright did hold forth the truth. He was further charged, that at the Court, after the day of eledlions, he complained of injury, that the Petition which was tendered, was not prefently read before they went to eledlion. To which being anfwered, that it was not then feafonable, and 150 The A 7 itinomian Co?itroverfy. and againft the order of that day, but the Court were then ready to heare it, if it were tendered; whereupon he turned his backe upon the Court, and ufed menacing fpeeches to this effeft. That fince they could not be heard then, they would take another courfe. To which he anfwered (con- feffing he fpake over haftily at that time) that his words were onely thefe, then we muff doe what God fhall diredt us. He was further charged that he fhould fay, that halfe the people that were in Church-covenant in N. E , were under a Covenant of workes, this he did not deny, but faid he proved it by the parable of the ten Virgins, Mat . 15. Af¬ ter thefe and many other fpeeches had paffed betweene the Court and himfelfe, by which it plainely appeared that he had beene a very bufie inftrument, in occafioning of our publike difturbances, and his juftifying of Mr. Wheelewrights Sermon; and the Petition or Remonftrance being feditious writings, a motion was made for his banifhment, but he pre¬ tended that there was nothing could be laid to his charge, but matter of different opinion, and that he knew not one example in Scripture, that a man was banifhed for his judge¬ ment ; it was anfwered, that if he had kept his Judgement to himfelfe, fo as the publike peace had not beene troubled or endangered by it, we fhould have left him to himfelfe, for we doe not challenge power over mens confciences, but when feditious fpeeches and pra< 5 tifes difcover fuch a cor¬ rupt confcience, it is our duty to ufe authority to reforme both. But though a great part of the Court did encline to a motion for his banifhment, yet becaufe his fpeech and be¬ haviour at prefent were more modeft and fubmiffe, then formerly they had beene, and for that he excufed his former intemperances A Short Story. 151 intemperances by his much employment and publike bufi- nelfes, it was thought fit to deliver him from that tempta¬ tion ; fo he was onely fentenced to be disfranchized, with admonition no more to occafion any difturbance [29] of the publicke peace, either by fpeech or otherwife, upon paine of banifhment and further cenfure. Mr. Afpin , HP He next who was called was Mr. William Afpin , to ** whom the Court faid that his cafe was in a manner the fame with Mafter Cogjhalls , his hand was to the Petition, he had juftified Mafter Wheelwright his Sermon, and had condemned the Court, and therefore what could he fay, why the Court fhould not proceede to fentence ? For he had beene prefent and heard what was faid to Mafter Cogfhall\ to have convinced him of his fault, and therefore it would be needleffe to repeate any thing. To this he anfwered and confeffed the Petition, and that his heart was to it as well as his hand, and that that for which Mafter Wheelwright was cenfured was for nothing but the truth of Chrift, and defired to know what we could lay to his charge therein. The Court told him that he being a member of this civill Body, and going contrary to his relation and oath, to flop the courfe of Juftice in countenancing feditious perfons and pradtifes againft the face of authority, this made him a fe¬ ditious perfon. He anfwered he did but' preferre a humble Petition, which he could not doe but he mufl intimate fome caufe why, and that Mephibofheth 1 in his Petition did imply as much of Davids unjuft fentence againft him as was in this Petition. The Court replyed that he was ill advifed to bring 1 2 Samuel xv i. 1-4; xix. 24-30. 152 The Antinomian Controverfy. bring that example for his juftification which makes clearely againft him, for Mephibofheth doth not charge David with any injuftice not fo much as by implication, but excufeth himfelfe and layeth all the blame upon his fervant. Then he alledged the Petition of EJiher to AhafuerusJ but neither would that ferve his turne, for fhe petitioned for her life, &c. without charging the King with injuftice. Hee ftill fled to this plea, that it is lawfull for Subjects to Petition ; the Court anfwered that this was no Petition, but a feditious Libell, the mif-naming of a thing doth not alter the nature of it: befides they called it in the firft place a Remonftrance, which implies that they pretended intereft, and is in the nature of it a plea, which challengeth a right of a party: befides they give peremptory Judgement in the caufe, and that direflly oppofite to the judgement of the Court; the Court declared Mr. Wheelwright guilty, they proclaime him innocent, the Court judged his fpeech to be falfe and fedi¬ tious, they affirmed it to be the truth of Chrift, and the very words of the holy Ghoft, which is apparently untrue if not blafphemous. Further in pretending their moderation, they put arguments in the peoples mindes to invite them to vio¬ lence, by bringing the example of Peter 2 drawing his Sword, wherein they blame not his fa6t, but his rafhneffe. And that of the People refcuing Jonathan, 3 which to make the more effedtuall, they fay that it was not feditious. Laflly, it was great arrogance of any private man thus openly to advance his owne judgement of the Court, there¬ fore it will appeare to their Pofterity as a brand of infamy, upon thefe erroneous opinions, that thofe who maintained them 1 EJiher v. 6-8; viii. 3-6. 2 John xviii, 10. 3 1 Samuel xiv 45. A Short Story. 153 them were not cenfured for their judgement, but for [30] feditious pradtifes: He further pleaded, that no Peti¬ tion can be made in fuch a cafe, but fomething may bee miftaken through mifprifion as trenching upon authority, the Court anfvvered, that if they had onely petitioned the Court to remit his cenfure, or had defired refpite for further confiderations, or leave to propound their doubts, there could have beene no danger of being miftaken. Befides there was no neede of fuch hafte in Petitioning, feeing the fentence was not given, but deferring till the next Court, Matter Wheelwright enjoyned onely to appeare there. The Court then being about to give fentence, Matter Afpin defired the Court to fhew a rule in Scripture for banifhment; the Court anfwered as before, that Hagar and Ifmael x were banifhed for difturbance: hee replied that if a Father give a child a portion and fent him forth, it was not banifhment: but it was anfwered, the Scripture calls it a catting out, not a fending forth; and one faid further that he was a childe worthy of fuch a portion. Then the fentence of the Court was for his dif-franchife- ment and banifhment, and time given him to the laft of March upon fecurity for his departure then, which hee pref- ently tendered, and fo was difmiffed. The Court intended onely to have dif-franchifed him, as they had done Mr. Cogfhall\ but his behaviour was fo contemptuous, and his fpeeches fo peremptory, that occafioned a further aggrava¬ tion, and it appeared afterward to bee by an over-ruling hand of God, for the next day it was difcovered, that hee was the man that did frame the Petition, and drew many to fubfcribe 1 Genefis xxi. io, 14; Jupra , p. 143. 20 154 The Antinomian Controversy. fubfcribe to it, and fome had their names put to it without their knowledge, and in his firft draught there was other paffages fo foule, as hee was forced to put them out, and yet many had not fubfcribed, but upon his promife that it fhould not bee delivered without advice of Mr. Cotton , which was never done. William Baulfton , Ed. Hutchifon . A Fter thefe, two of the Serjeants of Bojlon were called, William Baulfton} & Ed. Hutchifon , 2 thefe both had their hands to the Petition, and juftifyed the fame, William Baulfton told the Court, that 1 William Baulfton, or Balftone, was a member of Bofton’s firft board of af- feffors, appointed November 10, 1634. Of him Savage fays in his Ge 7 iealogical Dictionary (Vol. I. p. 109): “ William Balftone came, no doubt, with Win- throp’s fleet; he defired admiflion as freeman of the company 19 Odlober, 1630, and took the oath 18 May follow¬ ing. ... He was in fteady employment for town affairs, trufted among the wor- thieft, chofen a feledtman in 1637; yet in the latter part of the fame year was difarmed, with the majority of his fellow- worfhippers, as being under the fafcina- tion of Mrs. Hutchinfon, and went, in 1638, to Portfmouth, R. I., which his aflociates purchafed that feafon. He was there held in high regard, chofen as an Affiftant in 1639, 1641, and 1656, named in the royal charter of 1663, and died 14 March, 1678, aged feventy- eight.” Vide Auftin’s Genealogical Dictionary of Rhode IJla?id, pp. 16-17. 2 Savage in his notes to Winthrop’s Hiflory (Vol. I. p. *247, note 1) fpeaks hee knew that if fuch a peti¬ tion of Edward Hutchinfon, included in the lift of thofe of Bofton who were dif¬ armed under the order of November, 1637, as a “foil of the prophetefs.” This was probably the fame Edward Hutchinfon referred to in the text, but he would feem to have been not a fon of Anne Hutchinfon, but a brother of her hufband. It will be noticed that the Edward Hutchinfon referred to fpeaks of his “ wife and children,” and Anne Hutchinfon’s fon Edward was not married until 1636, or early in 1637, and the record of the birth of his firft child was November 5, 1637, while the event recorded in the Short Story oc¬ curred on the 2d of that month, or three days previous. The elder Ed¬ ward Hutchinfon, according to Savage (Genealogical Dictionary, Vol. II. p. 508) came to Bofton with his wife in 1633, probably in the Griffin, together with John Cotton, Edmund Quincy, and other prominent perfons. He was ad¬ mitted into the church in October of the fame year, and was made a freeman, March 155 A Short Story. tion bad been made in any other place in the world, there would have been no fault found with it. The other told the Court, (turning himfelfe in a fcornfull manner) that if they took away his eftate, they muff keep his wife and chil¬ dren ; for which hee was prefently committed to the Officer. The Court reafoned a good while with them both, but they were peremptory, and would acknowledge no failing, and becaufe of their contemptuous fpeeches, and for that they were known to bee very bufie perfons, and fuch as had offered contempt to the Magiftrates, for that they were not of their opinion, they were dif-franchifed and fined, William Banljlon twenty pounds, Ed. Hutchifon forty pounds. The next morning Ed. Hutchifon acknowledged his fault in his mif-behaviour in the face of the Court, and fo was releafed of his imprifonment, but both were dif- [31] abled from bearing any publick Office. Tho. Marfhal\ Dynely , Dier, Rich. Gridly. \ Nother day were called ftirring men, who had March 4, 1634. Two fons were born to him in Bofton, one in 1634 and an¬ other in September, 1637. In the Bofton church records he is referred to as “ fenior,” to diftinguifh him from his nephew, who came over before his parents with the Rev. John Cotton and his uncle. In the records and bio¬ graphical notices the two Edwards feem to have been frequently confounded. Except from the genealogical point of view the matter is of no importance; both the two Edwards were among the firft fettlers in Newport, but the uncle foure more of the principall fubfcribed to the Petition, Thomas is reported as having foon after gone back to England, whence he never re¬ turned to America ; while the nephew, preferring Bofton as his refidence, re¬ turned there from Rhode Ifland a few years later, and was killed by the In¬ dians while holding important military rank in King Philip’s War. He died Auguft 19, 1675, leaving a numerous progeny, and was the anceftor of Gov. Thomas Hutchinfon (N. E. Hift. and Gen. Reg., 1847, p. 297 ; Drake’s Bofton, pp. 226-227). 156 The Antinomian Controverfy. Thomas Marjhal 1 the Ferryman, who juftifyed the Petition fo farre, that hee would not acknowledge any fault; yet hee anfwered more modeftly then the former, therefore hee was not fined, but dif-franchifed, and put out of his place. Dynely, 2 and Dier, 3 had little to fay for themfelves, but per- fifting 1 Thomas Marfhall, fhoemaker, or ferryman, or both, is referred to as “widower,” on admiffion to the Bolton church, Augult 31, 1634. Wheelwright, in his Mercurius Americanus (p. 5), fays that he plied his trade as ferryman “ in a River called Charles River , di¬ rectly betwixt Bofton and Charles Town , and other Towns, where his fpirits be¬ ing predifpofed by the roughnefie of winds and waves, and agitated by the Counterbuffes of Divinitie, which the refpeCtive paflengers vented, he might eafily be inflamed.” Marfhall was made a freeman March 4, 1635. He was among thofe required to furrender their arms in November, 1637; “but, like molt of the reft thus abufed, regained high efteem, was feleCtman of Bofton, 1647-58, deacon and reprefentative in 1650, and died perhaps in 1665” (Sav¬ age’s GenealogicalDittionaiy , Vol. III. p. 158). There were two Thomas Mar- fhalls in Bofton at this period, cauftng fubfequently much genealogical con- fufton. 2 William Dinely, barber furgeon, is mentioned in the records only in the lift of thofe difarmed in November, 1637, and fubfequently as one of “five men and youths [who] perifhed between Mattapan and Dorchefter ” in the north- eafter of December 15, 1638, when, in the words of Winthrop (. Hijlory , Vol. I. p. *286), “there was fo great a tem- peft of wind and fnow all the night and the next day, as had not been fince our time.” Ten days later Dine- ly’s widow, Alice, gave birth to a fon to whom was given the name Father- gone. Johnfon, in his Wonderworking Providence (p. 138), has the following reference to William Dinely and the circumftances of his death : “ One of Roxbury fending to Bofton his fervant maid for a barber-chirurgeon to draw his tooth, they loft their way in the paflage between, and were not found till many days after, and then the maid was found in one place, and the man in another, both of them frozen to death ; in which fad accident this was taken into confideration by divers people, that this barber was more than ordinary la¬ borious to draw men to thofe finful errors, that were formerly fo frequent, and now newly overthrown,—by the blefftng of the Lord upon the endeavor of his faithful fervants with the word of truth, — he having a fit opportunity, by reafon of his trade, fo foon as any were fat down in his chair, he would com¬ monly be cutting of their hair and the truth together; notwithftanding fome report better of the man, the example is for the living; the dead is judged of the Lord alone.” 3 William Dier, Dyer, or Dyre, was the hufband of Mary Dyer, whofe name is aflociated with fome of the moft tragic incidents 157 A Short Story. lifting in their j unification, they were alfo dif-franchifed: likewife Rich. Gridly / an honeft poore man, but very apt to meddle in publick affaires, beyond his calling or fkill, (which indeed was the fault of them all, and of many others in the Country) meane condition, and weake parts, having nothing to fay, but that he could find no fault, &c. was dif-franchifed. Mijiris Hutchifon. A LI thefe (except Mr. Wheelwright ) were but young branches, fprung out of an old root, the Court had now to do with the head of all this faction, {Dux foemina fafii 2 ) a woman had been the breeder and nourifher of all thefe incidents of early Mafiachufetts hiftory. A woman of unfound mind, living at a time when infanity was not underftood, the became a religious monomaniac, and was finally executed on Bofton Common and there buried ( Memorial Hiflory of Bofton , Vol. I. p. 185 n.; Adams’s Three Ef if odes, pp. 408, 532, 548). One of the palTages of Winthrop’s Hiftory which might beft have been omitted (Vol. I. pp. *261-263) relates to this unfortunate female. Both huf- band and wife came from London to Bofton in 1635, and Winthrop refers to the former as “a milliner in the New Exchange,” and to both as “notorioufly infedled with Mrs. Hutchinfon’s errors, and very cenforious and troublefome (fhe being of a very proud fpirit, and much addidled to revelations).” The name given by the couple to one of their children — Maherlhalalhafhbaz (.Ifaiah viii) — is fuggeftive of their weaknefs and tendencies. They went to Rhode Ifland with the Hutchinfons in the fpring of 1638, where William Dyer afterwards ferved as fecretary of the colony, and, living in good efteem, died at Newport in 1677. Auftin ( Gen¬ ealogical Dictionary of Rhode Ifland\ pp. 290-292) gives detailed memoranda of both the Dyers and their progeny. 1 Richard Gridley, according to Sav¬ age ( Genealogical Dillionary , Vol. II. P 3 T 3 )> came to Bofton as early as 1631. He was made a freeman in 1634. He does not feem to have been the New England progenitor of the Richard Gridley who, nearly one hundred and fifty years later, planned the works on Bunker Hill on the night preceding the 17th of June, 1775, and fubfequently held the rank of major-general in the provincial army. Of the firft Richard Gridley and his religious tendencies, Wheelwright, referring to the proceed¬ ings narrated in the text, remarks, “the Court cured him of his pragmatical- neffe very well ; for they took from him his imployment” (Mercurius America¬ na s, p. 6). 2 rEneid , B. I. 1 . 364. 158 The Antinomian Controverfy . thefe diftempers, one Miftris Hutchifon , the wife of Mr. William Hutchifon of Bofton 1 (a very honed: and peaceable man of good eftate) and the daughter of Mr. Marbury , 2 fome- times a Preacher in Lincolnfhire , after of London , a woman of a haughty and fierce carriage, of a nimble wit and adtive fpirit, and a very voluble tongue, more bold then a man, though in underftanding and judgement, inferiour to many women. This woman had learned her fkil in England , and had difcovered fome of her opinions in the Ship, 3 as fhee came over, which had caufed fome jealoufie of her, which gave occafion of fome delay of her admiffion, when fhee firft defired fellowfhip with the Church of Boflon , but fhee cunningly diffembled and coloured her opinions, as fhee foon got over that block, and was admitted into the Church, then fhee began to go to work, and being a woman very help- full in the times of child-birth, and other occafions of bodily infirmities, and well furnifhed with means for thofe purpofes, fhee eafily infinuated her felfe into the affedtions of many, and the rather, becaufe fhee was much inquifitive of them about their fpiritual efiates, and in difcovering to them the danger they were in, by trufting to common gifts and graces, without 1 “ A man of a very mild temper and weak parts, and wholly guided by his wife ” (Savage’s Winthrop , Vol. I. p. *295), “ a woman of a ready wit and bold fpirit” (lb. *200). “The genius of that family hath not much inclined to fubtilties, fcarce any of the Hutchin- fons have been Sectaries, unleffe a latere , and indirectly ” ( Mercurius Americanus , p. 4). 2 In the New England Gcnealogi- o t) cal and Antiquarian Regijler for 1866 (Vol. XX. pp. 355-367) there is an elaborate paper by J. L. Chefter on “The Hutchinfon Family of England and New England, and its Connection with the Marburys and Drydens.” 8 William Hutchinfon and his wife came over in the Griffin, the Rev. John Lothrop and the Rev. Zachariah Symmes, “two godly minifters, coming in the fame fhip” (Savage’s Winthrop , Vol. I. p. * 143). Infra , p. 313. A Short Story. without any fuch witneffe of the Spirit, as the Scripture holds out for a full evidence; whereby many were convinced that they had gone on in a Covenant of works, 1 and were much humbled thereby, and brought to inquire more after the Lord Jefus Chrift, without whom all their gifts and graces, all their contributions, &c. would prove but legall, and would vanifh: all this was well, and fuited with the publick Miniftery, which went along in the fame way, and all the faithful imbraced it, and bleffed God for the good fucceffe that appeared from this difcovery. 2 But when fhee had 1 In regard to the theological tenets known as the Covenant of Grace and the Covenant of Works, a difcuffion will be found in Ellis’s Puritan Age of MaJJ'achufetts (pp. 301-362) and in Adams’s Three Epifodes (pp. 402- 406). 2 “At her firft comming the was well refpedted and efteemed of me, not onely becaufe herfelf and her family were well beloved in England at All¬ ford in Lincolnfhire (not far beyond Bofton :) nor onely becaufe the with her family came over hither (as was faid) for confcience fake : but chiefly for that I heard, fhee did much good in our Town, in womans meeting at Childbirth- Travells, wherein fhee was not onely fkilfull and helpfull, but readily fell into good difcourfe with the women about their fpiritual eftates: And therein cleared it unto them, That the foul lying under a Spirit of Bondage, might fee and fenfibly feel the hainous guilt, and deep defert of fin, and thereby not onely undergoe afflidtion of Spirit but alfo receive both reftraining, and conftraining Grace likewife, (in fome meafure:) reftrainipg from all known evill (both courfes, and companies) (at leaft for a feafon) and conftraining to all knowen duties, as fecret Prayer, Fam¬ ily Exercifes, Confcience of Sabbaths, Reverence of Minifters, Frequenting of Sermons, Diligence in calling, hon- efty in dealing, and the like: yea and that the Soul might find fome taftes and flafhes of fpirituall comfort in this eftate, and yet never fee or feel the need of Chrift, much lefle attain any faving Union, or Communion with him, being no more but Legall work, even what the Law, and the Spirit of bondage (breathing in it) might reach unto. By which means many of the women (and by them their hufbands) were con¬ vinced, that they had gone on in a Cov¬ enant of Works, and were much thaken and humbled thereby, and brought to enquire more ferioufly after the Lord Jefus Chrift, without whom all their Gifts and Graces would prove but com¬ mon, and their duties but legall, and in the end wizzen and vanifh. All this was well (as is reported truely, page 31 of her Story) and fuited with the pub¬ like 160 The Antinojnian Controverfy. had thus prepared the way by fuch wholefome truths, then fhee begins to fet forth her own ftuffe, and taught that [32] no fandlification was any evidence of a good eflate, except their junification were firft cleared up to them by the immediate witnefTe of the Spirit, and that to fee any work of grace, (either faith or repentance, &c.) before this immediate witneffe, was a Covenant of works: whereupon many good foules, that had been of long approved godlineffe, were brought to renounce all the work of grace in them, and to wait for this immediate revelation : then fprung up alfo that opinion of the in-dwelling of the perfon of the Holy Ghoft, and of union with Chrift, and Juftification before faith, and a denying of any gifts or graces, or inherent quali¬ fications, and that Chrift was all, did all, and that the foule remained alwayes as a dead Organ: 1 and other of thofe groffe errours, which were condemned in the late Affembly, and whereof diverfe had been quafhed, by the publick Min- iftery; like Miniftery, which had gone along in the fame way, fo as thefe private con¬ ferences did well tend to water the feeds publikely fowen. Whereupon all the faithful embraced her conference, and bleffed God for her fruitful dif- courfes. And many whofe fpirituall eftates were not fo fafely layed, yet were hereby helped and awakened to difcover their fandy foundations, and to feek for better eftablifhment in Chrift: which caufed them alfo to blelfe the Lord for the good fuccelfe, which appeared to them by this difcovery ” (Cotton, Way Cleared \ 1648], pp. 50-51). 1 “Two dangerous errors: I. That the perfon of the Holy Ghoft dwells in a juftified perfon. 2. That no fan< 5 tifi- cation can help to evidence to us our juftification. — From thefe two grew many branches; as, 1, Our union with the Holy Ghoft, fo as a Chriftian re¬ mains dead to every fpiritual action, and hath no gifts nor graces, other than fuch as are in hypocrites, nor any fanc- tification but the Holy Ghoft himfelf ” (Savage’s Winthrop, Vol. I. p. *200). “ Mr. Cotton . . . agreed . . . thatfanc- tification did help to evidence juftifica¬ tion. . . . but, for the indwelling of the perfon of the Holy Ghoft, he held that ftill . . . but not union with the perfon of the Holy Ghoft (as Mrs. Hutchinfon and others did) fo as to amount to a perfonal union ” (/b . p. *201). A Short Story. 161 iftery; but the maine and bottom of all, which tended to quench all indevour, and to bring to a dependance upon an immediate witneffe of the Spirit, without light of any gift or grace, this fhick fall, and prevailed fo, as it began to bee oppofed, and fhee being queftioned by fome, who marvelled that fuch opinions Ihould fpread fo faff, fhee made anfwer, that where ever fhee came they muff and they fhould fpread, and indeed it was a wonder upon what a fudden the whole Church of Bojlon (fome few excepted) were become her new converts, and infefted with her opinions, and many alfo out of the Church, and of other Churches alfo, yea, many pro- phane perfons became of her opinion, for it was a very eafie, and acceptable way to heaven, to fee nothing, to have noth¬ ing, but waite for Chrift to do all; fo that after fhee had thus prevailed, and had drawn fome of eminent place and parts to her party (whereof fome profited fo well, as in a few moneths they outwent their teacher) then fhee kept open houfe for all commers, and fet up two Lefture dayes in the week, when they ufually met at her houfe, threefcore or fourefcore perfons, the pretence was to repeate Sermons, 1 but 1 “ It had been a cuftom in many congregations that the minifters allowed their people the liberty ftill, after fer- mon, to propofe what queftions they thought fit for their further fatisfadiion about any points which had been deliv¬ ered" ( Magnalia , B. VII. chap. 3, §6). This cuftom feems to have been common in the Calviniftic churches of both Eng¬ land and Scotland. Burnet ( Hi/iory of his own Times , Vol. I. p. 280) thus defcribes the practice as it prevailed in the latter country: “ Their minifters generally brought [the people] about them on the Sunday nights, where the fermons were talked over; and every one, women as well as men, were de- fired to fpeak their fenfe and their expe¬ rience : and by thefe means they had a comprehenfion of matters of religion, greater than I have feen among people of that fort any where. The preachers went all in one track, of raifing obferva- tions on points of doftrine out of their text, and proving thefe by reafons, and then of applying thofe, and fhewing the ufe 2 r 162 The Antinomian Controverfy . but when that was done, fhee would comment upon the Doc¬ trines, and interpret all paffages at her pleafure, and expound dark places of Scripture, fo as whatfoever the Letter held forth (for this was one of her tenents, that the whole Scrip¬ ture in the Letter of it held forth nothing but a Covenant of works) fhee would bee fure to make it ferve her turn, for the confirming of her maine another, That the darker our ufe that was to be made of fuch a point of doCtrine, both for inftruCtion and terror, for exhortation and comfort, for trial of themfelves upon it, and for furnifhing them with proper directions and helps: and this was fo methodical, that the people grew to follow a fermon quite through every branch of it. To this fome added, the refolving of doubts concerning the ftate they were in, or their progrefs or decay in it; which they called cafes of confcience: and thefe were taken from what their people faid to them at any time, very oft being under fits of melancholy, or vapours, or obfiructions, which, though they flowed from natural caufes, were looked on as the work of the Spirit of God, and a particular exercife to them ; and they fed this difeafe of weak minds too much.” Cotton Mather goes on to fay that in the early New England churches this practice “ was oftentimes made an occa- fion of much contention, vexation and folly in the affemblies.” It was accord¬ ingly condemned by the Cambridge Synod of Augult, 1637, and the following rules laid down in regard to it: — “ 1. That though women might meet (fome few together) to pray and edify one another; yet fuch a fet affembly, principles, whereof this was fancTification is, the cleerer is our (as was then in practice at Bofton,) where fixty or more did meet every week, and one woman (in a prophetical way, by refolving queftions of doCtrine, and expounding fcripture) took upon her the whole exercife, was agreed to be diforderly, and without rule. “ 2. Though a private member might afk a queftion publicly, after fermon, for information ; yet this ought to be very wifely and fparingly done, and that with leave of the elders : but queflions of reference, (then in ufe) whereby the doCtrines delivered were reproved, and the elders reproached, and that with bitternefs, etc., was utterly condemned. “3. That a perfon, refuting to come to the affembly, to abide the cenfure of the church, might be proceeded againft, though abfent; yet it was held better, that the magiftrates’ help were called for, to compel him to be prefent. “ 4. That a member, differing from the reft of the church in any opinion, which was not fundamental, ought not for that to forfake the ordinances there ; and if fuch did defire difmiffion to any other church, which was of his opinion, and did it for that end, the church whereof he was ought to deny it for the fame end.” A Short Story. - 163 our j unification ; And indeed moft of her new tenents tended to flothfulneffe, and quench all indevour in the creature: and now was there no fpeech fo much in ufe, as of vilifying fanftification, and all for advancing Chrift and free grace, and the whole Pedegree of the Covenant of works was fet forth with all its Complements, beginning at Cain, If thou doft well (halt thou not bee accepted ? then it is explained and ratifyed at Mount Sinai , and delivered in the two Ta¬ bles, and after fprinkled with the blood of Chrift, Exod. 24. and fo carryed on in the Letter of the Scripture, till it bee compleat, as the Covenant of Grace by the Spirit, feales, forgiveneffe of fins, one of the venters whereon Chrift begets children, &c. and in the end wherefore is all this adoe, but that having a more cleanly way, to lay all that [33] oppofed her, (being neere all the Elders and moft of the faithfull Chriftians in this Countrey) under a Covenant of workes, fhee might with the more credit, difclofe and advance her mafterpiece of immediate revelations, under the faire pretence of the Covenant of free Grace; wherein fhee had not failed of her ayme, to the utter fubverfion both of Churches and civill ftate, if the moft wife and mercifull providence of the Lord had not prevented it by keeping fo many of the Magiftrates, and Elders, free from the infection : for upon the countenance which it took from fome eminent perfons, her opinions began to hold up their heads, in Church Affemblies, and in the Court of Juftice, fo as it was held a matter of offence to fpeak any thing againft them in either Alfembly: thence fprang all that trouble to the Paftour of Bojlon , for his free and faithfull fpeech in the Court, though required and approved: thence took Mr. Wheelwright cour¬ age 164 The Antinomian Controverfy. age to inveigh in his fermon againft men in a Covenant of works (as hee placed them) and to proclaim them all enemies to Chrift, Scribes and Pharifees, &c. whereas before hee was wont to teach in a plaine and gentle ftile, and though hee would fometimes glaunce upon thefe opinions, yet it was modeftly and refervedly, not in fuch a peremptory and cen- forious manner, as hee did then and after; for they made full account the day had been theirs, But blefted bee the Lord, the lnare is broken, and wee are delivered, and this woman who was the root of all thefe troubles, hands now before the feat of Juftice, to bee rooted out of her ftation, by the hand of authority, guided by the finger of divine provi¬ dence, as the fequell will fhow. When fhee appeared, the Court fpake to her to this effedt. 1 Miftris Hutchifon. You are called hither as one of thofe who have had a great fhare in the caufes of our publick difturbances, partly by thofe erroneous opinions which you have broached and divulged amongft us, and maintaining them, partly by countenancing and incouraging fuch as have fowed feditions amongft us, partly by calling reproach upon the faithfull Minifters of this Countrey, and upon their Min- iftery, and fo weakning their hands in the work of the Lord, and raifing prejudice againft them, in the hearts of their people, and partly by maintaining weekly and publick meet¬ ings in your houfe, to the offence of all the Countrey, and the 1 Befides the report of the trial of 482-526). Whence he derived it is Mrs. Hutchinfon in the Short Story , not known. This fecond report, not another and diftindt report was printed included in Hutchinfon’s State Papers, by Hutchinfon in the Appendix to his is reprinted as part of the prefent pub- HiJlo 7 y of Majfachufetts (Vol. II. pp. lication. Vide infra, pp. 235-284. A Short Story . 165 the detriment of many families, and {till upholding the fame, fince fuch meetings were clearely condemned in the late generall Affembly. Now the end of your fending for, is, that either upon fight of your errors, and other offences, you may bee brought to acknowledge, and reforme the fame, or otherwife that wee may take fuch courfe with you as you may trouble us no further. Wee do defire therefore to know of you, whether you will Juftifie and maintaine what is laid to your charge or not ? Mistris Hutchifon . I am called here to anfwer to fuch things as are laid to my charge, name one of them. Court Have you countenanced, or will you juftifie [34] thofe feditious practifes which have been cenfured here in this Court ? Hutch . Do you ask mee upon point of confcience ? Court No, your confcience you may keep to your felf, but if in this caufe you fhall eountenance and incourage thofe that thus tranfgreffe the Law, you muft bee called in queftion for it, and that is not for your confcience, but for your praftife. Hutch . What Law have they tranfgreffed ? the Law of God? Court Yes, the fifth Commandement, which commands us to honour Father and Mother, which includes all in author¬ ity, but thefe feditious praftifes of theirs, have caft reproach and difhonour upon the Fathers of the Commonwealth. Hutch. Do I intertaine, or maintaine them in their adlions, wherein they ftand againft any thing that God hath appointed ? Court 166 The Antinomian Controverfy. Cotirt Yes, you have juftified Mr. Wheelwright his Ser¬ mon, for which you know hee was convidt of fedition, and you have likewife countenanced and encouraged thofe that had their hands to the Petition. Hutch. I deny it, I am to obey you only in the Lord. Court You cannot deny but you had your hand in the Petition. Hutch. Put cafe, I do feare the Lord, and my Parent doe not, may not I entertain one that feares the Lord, becaufe my Father will not let mee ? I may put honour upon him as a childe of God. Court That’s nothing to the purpofe, but wee cannot ftand to difpute caufes with you now, what fay you to your weekly publick meetings ? can you fhew a warrant for them ? Hutch. I will fhew you how I took it up, there were fuch meetings in ufe before I came, and becaufe I went to none of them, this was the fpeciall reafon of my taking up this courfe, wee began it but with five or fix, and though it grew to more in future time, yet being tolerated at the firfl, I knew not why it might not continue. Court There were private meetings indeed, and are ftill in many places, of fome few neighbours, but not fo publick and frequent as yours, and are of ufe for increafe of love, and mutuall edification, but yours are of another nature, if they had been fuch as yours they had been evill, and ther- fore no good warrant to jufiifie yours; but anfwer by what authority, or rule, you uphold them. Hutch . By Tit. 2. where the elder women are to teach the younger. Court A Short Story. 167 Court So wee allow you to do, as the Apoftle there meanes, privately, and upon occafion, but that gives no war¬ rant of fuch fet meetings for that purpofe; and befides, you take upon you to teach many that are elder than your felfe, neither do you teach them that which the Apoftle com¬ mands, viz. to keep at home. Hutch. Will you pleafe to give mee a rule againft it, and I will yeeld? Court You muft have a rule for it, or elfe you [35] cannot do it in faith, yet you have a plaine rule againft it; I permit not a woman to teach. Hutch. That is meant of teaching men. Coitrt If a man in diftreffe of confcience or other temp¬ tation, &c. fhould come and ask your counfell in private, might you not teach him ? Hutch. Yes. Court Then it is cleare, that it is not meant of teaching men, but of teaching in publick. Hutch. It is faid, I will poure my Spirit upon your Daughters, and they fhall prophefie, &c. If God give mee a gift of Prophecy, I may ufe it. Court Firft, the Apoftle applies that prophecy unto thofe extraordinary times, and the gifts of miracles and tongues were common to many as well as the gift of Prophecy. Sec¬ ondly, in teaching your children, you exercife your gift of prophecy, and that within your calling. Hutch. I teach not in a publick congregation : The men of Berea are commended for examining Pauls Dodtrine; wee do no more but read the notes of our teachers Sermons, and then reafon of them by fearching the Scriptures. Court 168 The Antinomian Controverfy. Court You are gone from the nature of your meeting, to the kind of exercife, wee will follow you in this, and fhew you your offence in them, for you do not as the Bereans 1 fearch the Scriptures for their confirming in the truths de¬ livered, but you open your teachers points, and declare his meaning, and corredl wherein you think he hath failed, &c. and by this meanes you abafe the honour and authority of the publick Miniftery, and advance your own gifts, as if hee could not deliver his matter fo clearely to the hearers capacity as your felf. Hutch. Prove that, that anybody doth that. Court Yes, you are the woman of moft note, and of belt abilities, and if fome other take upon them the like, it is by your teaching and example, but you fhew not in all this, by what authority you take upon you to bee fuch a publick inftrudter: (after fhee had flood a fhort time, the Court gave her leave to fit downe, for her countenance difcovered fome bodily infirmity.) Hutch . Here is my authority, Aquila and Prifcilia, tooke upon them to inftrudt Apollo , more perfectly, 2 yet he was a man of good parts, but they being better inflrudled might teach him. Court See how your argument flands, Prifcilla with her husband, tooke Apollo home to inftrudt him privately, there¬ fore Miftris Hutchifon without her husband may teach fixty or eighty. Hutch. I call them not, but if they come to me, I may inflrudl them. Court Yet you fhew us not a rule. Hutch. I have given you two places of Scripture. v** (J H r I? 1 Afts xvii. ir. 2 Ads xviii. 26. 169 A Short Story. Court But neither of them will fute your prabtife. Hutch . Muft I fhew my name written therein? Court You muft fhew that which muft be mquiva¬ lent, feeing your Miniftry is publicke, you would have [36] them receive your inftrubtion, as comming from fuch an Ordinance. Hutch . They muft not take it as it comes from me, but as it comes from the Lord Jefus Chrift, and if I tooke upon me a publick Miniftery, I fhould breake a rule, but not in exercifing a gift of Prophecy, and I would fee a rule to turne away them that come to me. Court, It is your exercife which drawes them, and by occafion thereof, many families are negledted, and much time loft, and a great damage comes to the Common-wealth thereby, which wee that are betrufted with, as the Fathers of the Common-wealth, are not to fuffer. Divers other fpeeches palled to and fro about this matter, the iffue was, that not being able to bring any rule to juflifie this her difordered courfe, fhe faid fhe walked by the rule of the Apoftle, Gal, which fhe called the rule of the new creature, but what rule that was, fhe would not, or fhe could not tell, neither would fhe confent to lay downe her meetings, except authority did put them downe, and then fhe might be fubjedt to authority. Then the Court laid to her charge, the reproach fhe had call upon the Minifters, and Miniftery in this Country, fay¬ ing that none of them did preach the Covenant of free Grace, but Mafter Cotton, and that they have not the Seale of the Spirit, and fo were not able Minifters of the New Teftament: fhe denyed the words, but they were affirmed 22 by 170 The Antinomian Controverfy . by divers of the Minifters, being defired by the Court to be prefent for that end. The matter was thus, It being reported abroad that Miftris Hutchifon did flight them and their Miniftery in their common talke, as if they did preach noth¬ ing but a Covenant of workes, becaufe they prefTed much for faith and love, &c. without holding forth fuch an imme¬ diate witnefle of the Spirit as flie pretended, they advifed with Mafter Cotton about it, and a meeting was appointed at his houfe, and flie being fent for, and demanded the reafon why flie had ufed fuch fpeeches, at firfl flie would not acknowledge them, but being told that they could prove them by witneffes, and perfwaded to deale freely and truely therein, flie faid that the feare of man was a fnare, and therefore fhe was glad flie had this oppor¬ tunity to open her minde, and thereupon fhe told them, that there was a wide difference betweene Mafter Cottons Miniftery and theirs, and that they could not hold forth a Covenant of free Grace, becaufe they had not the Seale of the Spirit, and that they were not able Minifters of the New Teftament. It was neare night, fo the Court brake up, and flie was enjoyned to appeare againe the next morning. When flie appeared the next day, fhe objected that the Minifters had fpoken in their owne caufe, and that they ought not to be informers and witneffes both, and required that they might be fworne to what they had fpoken: to which the Court anfwered, that if it were needfull, an oath fhould be given them: but becaufe the whole Court (in a manner man by man) did declare themfelves to be fully fatisfied of the truth of their teftimones, they being 6 or 7. men of long approved A Short Story. 171 approved godlineffe, and fincerity in their courfe, and [37] for that it was alfo generally obferved, that thofe of her party did looke at their miniftery (for the moft part) as a way of the Covenant of workes, and one had beene punifhed about halfe a yeere before, 1 for reporting the like of them. The Court did paufe a while at it, whereupon fhe faid that fire had Mr. Wilfons notes of that conference, 2 which were otherwife then they had related: the Court willed her to fliew them, but her anfwer was fhee had left them at home: whereupon Mr. Wilfon (with the leave of the Court) faid, that if flie brought forth his notes, they fhould finde written at the foote of them, that he had not written downe all that was fpoken, but being often interrupted, he had omitted divers paffages; then fhe appealed to Mr. Cotton , who being called, and defired to declare what he remembred of her fpeeches, faid, that he remembred onely that which tooke impreffion on him, for he was much grieved that fhe fhould make fuch comparifon betweene him and his brethren, but yet he tooke her meaning to be onely of a graduall differ¬ ence, when fire faid that they did not hold forth a Covenant of nation of the governorfhip, “ every oc- cafion increafed the contention, and caufed great alienation of minds ; . . . and it began to be as common here to diftinguifh between men, by being under a covenant of grace or a covenant of works, as in other countries between Proteftants and Papifts.” The records of the colony contain no reference to the conference, the details of which are to be learned only from the allufions in the text and in the Governor Hutchin- fon report of the trial of Mrs. Hutchin- fon (vide infra , pp. 246-249). 1 “One Stephen Greenfmith, for faying that all the minifters, except A. B. C., did teach a covenant of works, was cenfured to acknowledge his fault in every church, and fined £ 40 ” (Sav¬ age’s Winthrop, Vol. I. p. *215 ; Records , Vol. I. p. 189). 2 This conference took place in Bofton, December 12 and 13, 1636, and there is an extended reference to it in Winthrop (Vol. I. pp. * 207-210). Held during the fittings of the fpecial feffion of the General Court fummoned to fill the vacancy occafioned by Vane’s refig- 172 The Antinomian Controverjy. of Free-grace, as he did, for fhe likened them to Chrifts Dif- ciples, and their miniftery, before his afcenfion, and before the holy Ghoft was come downe upon them; and when fhe was afked by fome of them, why they could not preach a Covenant of Free-grace, fhe made anfwer, becaufe they had not the Seale of the Spirit: upon this the Court wifhed her to confider, that Mr. Cotton did in a manner agree with the teftimony of the reft of the Elders: and as he rembembred onely fo much as at prefent tooke moft impreffion in him, fo the reft of the Elders had reafon to remember fome other paffages, which he might not heare, or not fo much obferve as they whom it fo neerely and properly concerned; All this would not fatisfie Miftris Hutchifon , but fhe ftill called to have them fworne, whereupon the Court being weary of the clamour, and that all mouths might be flopped, required three of the Minifters to take an oath, and thereupon they confirmed their former teftimony. Upon this file began to fpeake her mind, and to tell of the manner of Gods dealing with her, and how he revealed himfelfe to her, and made her know what fhe had to doe ; The Governour perceiving whereabout fhe went, interrupted her, and would have kept her to the matter in hand, but feeing her very unwilling to be taken off, he permitted her to proceed. Her fpeech was to this effedl. Miftris Hutchifon. When I was in old England, I was much troubled at the conftitution of the Churches there, fo farre, as I was ready to have joyned to the Separation, whereupon I fet apart a day for humiliation by my felfe, to feeke direction from God, and then did God difcover unto me the unfaithful- neffe 173 A Short Story. neffe of the Churches, and the danger of them, and that none of thofe Minifters could preach the Lord Jefus aright, for he had brought to my mind, that in the i John 4. 3. 1 Every fpirit that confefleth not, that Jefus Chrift is come in the flefh, is the fpirit of Antichrift; I marvelled what this fhould meane, for I knew that neither Proteftants [38] nor Papifts did deny that Chrift was come in the flefh; and are the Turkes then the onely Antichrifts? now I had none to open the Scripture to me, but the Lord, he muft be the Prophet, then he brought to my mind another Scripture, He that denies the Teftament, denies the death of the Tef- tator; from whence the Lord did let me fee, that every one that did not preach the New Covenant, denies the death of the Teftator; then it was revealed to me that the Minifters of England were thefe Antichrifts, but I knew not how to beare this, I did in my heart rife up againft it, then I begged of the Lord that this Atheifme might not be in my heart: after I had begged this light, a twelve moneth together, at laft he let me fee how I did oppofe Chrift Jefus, and he re¬ vealed to mee that place in Efay 46. 12, 13.2 and from thence fhewed me the Atheifme of my owne heart, and how I did turne in upon a Covenant of works, and did oppofe Chrift Jefus; from which time the Lord did ailcover to me all forts 1 “2 Hereby know ye the Spirit “4 Ye are of God, little children, of God: every fpirit that confeffeth and have overcome them: becaufe that Jefus Chrift is come in the flefh is greater is he that is in you, than he that of God : is in the world.” “3 And every fpirit that confefleth 2 “ 12 Hearken unto me, ye ftout- not that Jefus Chrift is come in the flelh hearted, that are far from righteoufnefs : is not of God : and this is that fpirit of “ 13 I bring near my righteoufnefs; antichrift, whereof ye have heard that it fhall not be far off, and my falvation it fhould come, and even now already fhall not tarry: and I will place falva- it is in the world. tion in Zion for Ifrael my glory."’ 174 The Antinomian Controver/y. forts of Minifters, and how they taught, and to know what voyce I heard, which was the voyce of Mofes , which of John Baptiji , and which of Chrift; the voyce of my beloved, from the voyce of ftrangers ; and thenceforth I was the more carefull whom I heard, for after our teacher Mr. Cotton , and my brother Wheelwright were put downe, there was none in England that I durft heare. Then it pleafed God to re- veale himfelfe to me in that of Efay 30. 20. 1 Though the Lord give thee the bread of adverfity, &c. yet thine eyes fhall fee thy teachers; after this the Lord carrying Mr. Cotton to New England (at which I was much troubled) it was revealed to me, that I muft go thither alfo, and that there I fliould be perfecuted and fuffer much trouble. I will give you another Scripture, Jer. 46. 2 Feare not Jacob my fervant, for I am with thee, I will make a full end of all the Nations, &c. then the Lord did reveale himfelfe to me, fitting upon a Throne of Juftice, and all the world appearing before him, and though I muff come to New England, , yet I muff not feare nor be difmaied. The Lord brought an¬ other Scripture to me, Efay. 8. 9? The Lord fpake this to me 1 “ 20 And though the Lord give you the bread of adverfity, and the water of affliction, yet fhall not thy teachers be removed into a corner any more, but thine eyes fhall fee thy teachers.” 2 “ 27 But fear not thou, O my fervant Jacob, and be not difmayed, O Ifrael: for, behold, I will fave thee from afar off, and thy feed from the land of thy captivity; and Jacob fhall return, and be in reft and at eafe, and none fhall make him afraid. “28 Fear not thou, O Jacob my fervant, faith the Lord: for I am with thee; for I will make a full end of all the nations whither I have driven thee: but I will not make a full end of thee, but correct thee in meafure; yet will I not leave thee wholly unpunifhed.” 3 “11 For the Lord fpake thus to me with a ftrong hand, and inflruCled me that I fhould not walk in the way of this people, faying, “ 12 Say ye not, A confederacy, to all them to whom this people fhall fay, 175 A Short Story. me with a ftrong hand, and inftru6ted me that I fhould not walke in the way of this people, &c. I wil give you one place more which the Lord brought to me by immediate revelations, and that doth concerne you all, it is in Dan . 6. 1 When the Prefidents and Princes could find nothing againft him, becaufe he was faithfull, they fought matter againft him concerning the Law of his God, to caft him into the Lions denne; fo it was revealed to me that they fhould plot againft me, but the Lord bid me not to feare, for he that delivered Daniel\ and the three children, his hand was not fhortened. And fee this Scripture fulfilled this day in mine eyes, therefore take heed what yee goe about to doe unto me, for you have no power over my body, neither can you do me any harme, for I am in the hands of the eternall Jehovah my Saviour, I am at his appointment, the bounds of my habitation are caft in Heaven, no further doe I ef- teeme of any mortall man, then creatures in his hand, I feare none but the great Jehovah, which hath foretold me of thefe things, and I doe verily beleeve that he will deliver A Confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid. “ 13 Sandtify the Lord of hofts him- felf: and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread. “14 And he fhall be for a fandtuary; but for a ftone of humbling and for a rock of offence to both the houfes of Ifrael, for a gin and- for a fnare to the inhabitants of Jerufalem. “15 And many among them fhall humble, and fall, and be broken, and be fnared, and be taken. “ 16 Bind up the teftimony, feal the law among my difciples. “ 17 And I will wait upon the Lord, me that hideth his face from the houfe of Jacob, and I will look for him. “18 Behold, I and the children whom the Lord hath given me are for figns and for wonders in Ifrael from the Lord of hofts, which dwelleth in mount Zion.” 1 “4 Then the prefidents and princes fought to find occafion againft Daniel concerning the Kingdom; but they could find none occafion nor fault; forafmuch as he was faithful, neither was there any error or fault found in him. “ 5 Then faid thefe men, he fhall not find any occafion againft this Dan¬ iel, except we find it againft him con¬ cerning the law of his God.” 176 The Antinomian Controverfy. me out of our hands, therefore take heed how you pro- [39] ceed againft me; for I know that for this you goe about to doe to me, God will ruine you and your pofterity, and this whole State. When flie had thus vented her mind, the Court demanded of her, how fhe expected to be delivered, whether by miracle as Daniel was, to which fhe anfwered, yes, by miracle as Daniel was. Being further demanded how fliee did know that it was God that did reveale thefe things to her, and not Satan ? She anfwered, how did Abraham know that it was the voyce of God, when he commanded him to facrifice his fonne ? Mr. Cotton being prefent, and defired by the Court to deliver his judgement about Miftris Hutchifon her Revela¬ tions, anfwered, there be two forts of Revelations, fome are without or befides Scripture, thofe I looke at as Satanicall, and tending to much danger, other are fuch as the Apoftle fpeakes of, Ephef. i . 1 where he praieth for a fpirit of revela¬ tion to be given them, thofe are never difpenfed but accord¬ ing to the word of God, though the word revelation be uncouth, yet in Scripture fenfe I thinke it not lawfull fo to expreffe it, and when ever it comes, it comes with the miniftery of the word. Being againe defired to expreffe himfelfe particularly concerning her revelations, he de¬ manded of her (by the leave of the Court) whether by a miracle 1 “17 That the God of our Lord what the riches of the glory of his in- Jefus Chrift, the Father of Glory, may heritance in the faints, give unto you the fpirit of wifdom, and “ 19 And what is the exceeding revelation in the knowledge of him: greatnefs of his power to us-ward who “ 18 The eyes of your underltanding believe, according to the working of his being enlightened; that ye may know mighty power.” what is the hope of his calling, and 177 A Short Story. miracle fhe doth meane a worke beyond the power of nature, or onely above common providence ? for if (as you fay) you expedt deliverance from this Court beyond the power of nature, then I fhould fufpedt fuch a revelation to be falfe. To this flie anfwered, you know when it comes, God doth not defcribe the way. Mr. Cotton asked her againe, whether (when fhee faid fhee fhould be delivered) flie meant a deliv¬ erance from the fentence of the Court, or from the calamity of it ? She anfwered, yes, from the calamity of it. Miftris Hutchifon having thus freely and fully difcovered her felfe, the Court and all the reft of the Affembly (except thofe of her owne party) did obferve a fpeciall providence of God, that (while fliee went about to cover fuch offences as were laid to her charge, by putting matters upon proofe, and then quarrelling with the evidence) her owne mouth fhould de¬ liver her into the power of the Court, as guilty of that which all fufpedted her for, but were not furnifhed with proofe fufficient to proceed againft her, for here fhe hath manifefted, that her opinions and pradtife have been the caufe of al our difturbances, & that fhe walked by fuch a rule as cannot hand with the peace of any State; for fuch bottomleffe revelations, as either came without any word, or without the fenfe of the word, (which was framed to humane capacity) if they be allowed in one thing, muft be admitted a rule in all things; for they being above reafon and Scripture, they are not fubjedt to controll: Againe, fhe hath given a reafon why fhe hath fo much flighted the faithfull Minifters of Chrift here, why ? it was revealed to her long fince in Eng¬ land , that all the packe of them were Antichriftians, fo as fhe durft heare none of them, after Mr. Cotton and Mr. Wheelwright 2 3 178 The Antinomian Controverfy. Wheelwright were once gone ; for they could not preach Chrift and the new Covenant (as the affirmes), why, but they did preach fomewhat, and if they could not hold forth Chrift in a Covenant of Free-grace, then mult they needs [40] hold him forth in a Covenant of workes, then are they not able Minifters of the New Teftament, nor fealed by the Spirit; for the fervants of God, who are come over into New England, do not thinke themfelves more fpirituall then other of their brethren whom they have left behind, nor that they can or doe hold forth the Lord Jefus Chrift in their miniftery, more truly then he was held forth in England , and feeing their miniftery was a moft precious fweete favour to all the Saints before fhe came hither, it is eafie to difcerne from what finke that ill vapour hath rifen, which hath made fo many of her feduced party to loath now the fmell of thofe flowers which they were wont to find fweetneffe in: yet this is not all (though it be too too vile) fhe can fetch a revelation that {hall reach the Magiftrates and the whole Court, and the fucceeding generations, and fhe hath Scripture for it alfo, Daniel muft be a type of Miftris Hutchifon , the Lions denne of the Court of juftice, and the Prefidents and Princes of the reverend Elders here, and all muft fort to this conclufion, flie muft be delivered by miracle, and all we muft be ruined; See the impudent boldnefle of a proud dame, that Athaliah - like 1 makes havocke of all that ftand in the way of her am¬ bitious fpirit; fhe had boafted before that her opinions muft prevaile, neither could fhe endure a flop in her way, as ap¬ peared 1 “1 And when Athaliah the “3 And Athaliah did reign over the mother of Azakiah faw that her fon was land.” dead, fhe arofe and deftroyed all the (2 Kings xi.; 2 Chronicles xxii. feed royal. . . . 10-12.) A Short Story. 179 peared once upon a flight occafion when her reputation being a little touch’d upon a miftake, yet fo carried as fhe could not get the party upon that advantage which fhe expedled, fhe vented her impatience with fo fierce fpeech and countenance, as one would hardly have gueffed her to have been an Anti¬ type of Daniel\ but rather of the Lions after they were let loofe. The like appeared in her, when fhe could not have her will againft her faithfull Paftor for his oppofing her opinions, as fhe apprehended, fo as neither reafon, nor Scrip¬ ture, nor the judgement and example of fuch as fhe rever¬ enced could appeafe her difpleafure. So that the Court did clearely difcerne, where the fountaine was of all our diftem- pers, and the Tragedy of Munjler 1 (to fuch as had read it) gave juft occafion to feare the danger we were in, feeing (by the judgement of Luther writing of thofe troublous times) we had not to doe with fo fimple a Devill, as managed that bufmeffe, and therefore he had the leffe feare of him ; but Satan feemed to have commiffion now to ufe his utmoft cunning to undermine the Kingdome of Chrift here (as the fame Luther foretold, he would doe, when he fhould enter- prize 1 The Anabaptift uprifing at Mun- fter under John of Leyden and Knipper- doling was fupprefted in June, 1536, almoft exadtly one century before the events referred to in the text, the dif- turbances having extended over a period of about three years. For about a century and a half after the Anabap¬ tift commotions, if not, indeed, for a longer period and until the French revolution, they were, as in the prefent cafe, referred to as a concluftve objedt- leffon, and made the pretext and excufe for a policy of rigid fuppreffton in all acute cafes of religious difference. A precifely fimilar reference to that in the text is found in the declaration of the Maffachufetts General Court of 1659 (Records, Vol. IV. Pt. I. p. 385) in rela¬ tion to the Quakers; and “ the example of theire predeceffors in Munfter” was folemnly cited in evidence of the defign of two women from the Barbadoes to “ undermine and ruine ” the “ peace and order here eftablifhed.” Vide , alfo, Paget’s Herefiography , pp. 1-44. i8o The Antinomian Controver/y . prize any fuch innovation under the cleare light of the Gofpel) fo as the like hath not beene knowne in former ages, that ever fo many wife, fober, and well grounded Chriftians, fhould fo fuddenly be feduced by the meanes of a woman, to fticke fo fail to her, even in fome things wherein the whole current of Scripture goeth againft them, and that notwithftanding that her opinions and pradtife have beene fo groffe in fome particulars, as their knowledge and fmcer- ity would not fuffer them to approve, yet fuch intereft hath flie gotten in their hearts, as they feeke cloakes to cover the nakedneffe of fuch deformities, as in the meane time they are afhamed to behold. ^ [41] The Court faw now an inevitable neceffity to rid her away, except wee would bee guilty, not only of our own ruine, but alfo of the Gofpel, fo in the end the fentence of banifhment was pronounced againft her, and fhee was committed to the Marfhall, till the Court fhould difpofe of her. Another day, Captaine John UnderhilU was fent for, and being charged with joyning in the faid Petition, acknowl¬ edged the fame, profeffing that hee could fee no fault in it: being demanded a rule by which hee might take fo much upon him, as publickly to contradict the fentence of the Court, &c. hee alledged the example of Joab his rough fpeech to David, when hee retired himfelf for Abfaloms death, 1 John Underhill came to New Eng- age’s Winthrop (Vol. I. p. *55) and land in the fleet with Winthrop. The Genealogical Dictionary (Vol. IV. p. place and time of his birth are not 358), and in Adams’s Three Epifodes known; he is reported to have died at (pp. 551-558). Alfo in Bolton’s Hif Oyfter Bay, L. I., in 1672. Full refer- tory of Weft Chefler (Vol. II. p. ences to his life will be found in Sav- 229). A Short Story. 181 death, and that David did not reprove him for it. 1 To this the Court anfwered. Firft, That Joab was then in the matters of his own calling, and being Generali of the Army, had liberty by his place to give advice to the King in caufes of that nature, but when hee failed in the manner of his fpeech, therein hee is not to bee excufed, and therefore not to bee followed. Secondly, Joab did not contradi< 5 t or reprove any Ju- diciall fentence of the King, but only an inordinate paffion. Thirdly, Hee was occafioned by an urgent neceffity of the fafety of the King and State. Fourthly, That which hee fpake was in private, for the Kins; had withdrawn himfelf. Fifthly, It appeares that David did take it as a great mifcarriage, for hee prefently difplaced him. 2 Againe, in our caufe, the Captain was but a private maq, and had no calling to deale in the affaires of the Court, therefore no warrant from hence. Hee infifted much upon the 1 “4 But the king covered his face, and the king cried with a loud voice, O my fon Absalom, O Abfalom, my fon, my fon ! “5 And Joab came into the houfe to the king, and faid, Thou haft fhamed this day the faces of all thy fervants, which this day have faved thy life, and the lives of thy fons and of thy daugh¬ ters, and the lives of thy wives, and the lives of thy concubines ; “6 In that thou loveft thine enemies, and hateft thy friends. For thou haft declared this day, that thou regarded: neither princes nor fervants: for this day I perceive, that if Abfalom had lived, and all we had died this day, then it had pleafed thee well. “ 7 Now therefore arife, go forth, and fpeak comfortably unto thy fervants: for I fwear by the Lord, if thou go not forth, there will not tarry one with thee this night: and that will be worfe unto thee than all the evil that befell thee from thy youth until now. “8 Then the king arofe, and fat in the gate.” — 2 Sa 7 nuel xix. 2 2 Samuel xix. 13. 182 The Antinomian Co?itroverfy. the liberty which all States do allow to Military Officers, for free fpeech, &c. and that hirnfelf had fpoken fometimes as freely to Count Naff aw} But it was anfwered, wee are not to look at what fome do tolerate, but what is lawfull, and there may bee a reafon of State, to connive at that diforder at fome feafon, which may not with honour and fafety bee permitted at another. Being further demanded, how they came fo many of them, to bee fo fuddenly agreed in fo weighty and doubtfull a cafe, hee anfwered, that many of them being prefent when Mr. Wheelwright was convidt of fedition, they were fore grieved at it, and fuddenly rufhing out of the Court, a ftrange motion came into all their mindes, fo as they faid (in a manner all together) Come let us petition; and for his part, from that time to this, his confcience which then led him to it, will not fuffer him to retradl it. The Court pityed him much, and were grieved at his obftinacy, that when all his arguments were taken away, hee had no defence left, hee would yet maintaine a bad caufe by the light of a deluded confcience, and withall they tooke notice how thefe ungrounded revelations began to work, and what dangerous confequences were like to follow [42] of them, when fo many perfons upon fuch a fudden motion had no fcruple to enterprize fuch a feditious adtion, nor can bee brought by any light of reafon or Scrip¬ ture, to fee their error: fo the Court (when they faw no other remedy) dif-franchifed him, and difcharged him of his place, but allowed him his quarters means. There 1 Prince Maurice, fecond fon of Wil- 1625 ; ftadtholder of Holland from 1584 liam of Orange, born in 1567, died in to his death. A Short Story. 183 There were diverfe who were not prefent when that fudden motion or revelation firft fet the Petition on foot, but were drawn in after, who foon found their error, and did as freely acknowledge it, and defired to have their names put out of it, which was eafily granted, and their offence with a loving admonition remitted. It had been obferved a good time fince, that fome of the leaders of this faction (by occafion of new Difciples, being inquifitive about their tenents) would let fall thefe anfwers, I have many things to tell you, but you cannot beare them now; and there is a great light to break forth, if men do not refill it, and you fhall fee the bottom hereafter; and one of them reproved the reft, telling them that they had spoyled their caufe, by being over hafty and too open, &c. And now it began to appeare, what their meanings were, for after Miflris Hutchifon had difcovered the fecret by her fpeech in the Court, then others opened their minds, and profeffedly maintained thefe Enthufiafmes as the Oracles of God. And that fuch revelations as Abraham had to kill his Son, and as Paul had in the Ship, and when hee was caught up into the third heaven, &c. were ordinary, fo that Mr. Cotton took notice of the danger of them, and publickly confuted them in diverfe Sermons. Among other like paffages there was one that fell out, at Mr. Wheel his farewell to thofe whom hee ufed to Preach unto at the Mount. One of his own Scholars told him openly, that hee had Preached Antichriftianifme, and had fet up a Chrift againft a Chrift; the fame party maintained immediate revelations without any word at all, faying, that the free promifes were only for thofe under the Law, but wee are to look for all our 184 The Antinomian Controverfy. our affurance by immediate Revelation, and that in the New Teftament there are no fignes, no not our baptifme, for the baptifme of water is of no ufe to us, when once wee are bap¬ tized with the Holy Ghoft: hee faid alfo that a man might bee adopted and not juftified, and that every new creature is as a dead lump, not adting at all, but as Chrift afts in him, and denyed all inherent righteoufneffe, and that the com- mandements were a dead Letter. Thefe things were fo groffe, as Mr. Wheelwright could not but contradict him, yet hee did it fo tenderly, as might well difcover his neere agree¬ ment in the points, though his wifdome ferved him to bee more referved till a fitter feafon; for that poore man being newly come on to the profeffion of Religion, muft needs learn thofe points of Mr. Wheel, or draw them as neceffary confequences from fome of his tenents: And it is frequently found to bee an effeCt of all unfound and unfafe doCtrines, that ftill the Scholar goeth a ftep further then his Teacher. So it hath proved in former times, Luther , and no doubt many of thofe who did imbrace his errors, in the firft edi¬ tion of them, yet lived and dyed in the true faith [43] of Chrift, but the fucceeding generations (inheriting thofe erroneous tenents, which they had drawn from their godly forefathers, but not their godlineffe) proved hereticks and fchifmaticks to this day. So it hath been in the Churches of Rome , and others, and fo wee may juftly feare in thefe Churches in New England ,, howfoever that many that now adhere to thefe Familifticall opinions, are indeed truely godly, and (no doubt) fhall perfevere fo to the end, yet the next generation, which fhall bee trained up under fuch dodrines, will bee in great danger to prove plain A Short Story. 185 plain Families 1 and Schifmaticks. This difcovery of a new rule of pracfife by immediate revelations, and the confidera- tion of fuch dangerous confequences, which have and might follow thereof, occafioned the Court to difarm all fuch of that party, as had their hands to the Petition, and fome others, who had openly defended the fame, except they fhould give fatiffaftion to the Magiftrates therein ; which fome prefently did, others made a great queftion about it, for bringing in their armes, but they were too weake to ftand it out. 2 Thus it pleafed the Lord to heare the prayers of his afflifted people (whofe foules had wept in fecret, for the reproach which was caft upon the Churches of the Lord Jefus in this Countrey, by occafion of the divifions which were grown amongft us, though the vanity of fome weake minds, which cannot ferioufly affeCt any thing long, except it bee offered them under fome renewed fhape) and by the care and indevour of the wife and faithfull Minifters of the Churches, affifted by the Civill authority, to difcover this Mafter-piece of the old Serpent, and to break the brood by fcattering the Leaders, under whofe conduft hee had pre¬ pared 1 The religious fe< 5 t known as the 2 “ The court alfo ordered, that the Family of Love, or Familifts, was reft, who had fubfcribed the petition, founded in Holland in the fixteenth (and would not acknowledge their fault, century by Hans Niklas, a difciple of and which near twenty of them did,) the Dutch Anabaptift, David George, and fome others, who had been chief or Joris. Its creed was myftical and ftirrers in thefe contentions, etc., fhould fomewhat allied to modern Pantheifm, be difarmed. This troubled fome of being bafed on the theory that religion them very much, efpecially becaufe confifts wholly in love independently of they were to bring them in themfelves; the form of faith. Vide Maffon’s Mil- but, at laft, when they faw no remedy, ton, Vol. II. p. 152. they obeyed.” — Savage’s Winthrop , Vol. I. p. * 247. 24 186 The Antinomian Controverfy. pared fuch Ambufhment, as in all reafon would foon have driven Chrift and Gofpel out of New England, (though to the ruine of the inftruments themfelves, as well as others) and to the repoffeffing of Satan in his ancient Kingdom; It is the Lords work, and it is marvellous in our eyes. Mr. Wheel, is now gone to Pafcal} Miftris Hutchifon is confined in a private houfe, till the feafon of the yeer (hall bee fit for her departure, 1 2 fome of thofe whom God hath left to bee molt ftrongly deluded, are preparing to follow them, and wee hope the Lord will open the eyes of the reft, and per- fwade them to joyn again with their fometime deare and moft beloved brethren, that peace and truth may again flourifh in New England , Amen . After the Court had thus proceeded, fome of the Churches dealt with fuch of their members as were found guilty of thefe erroneous and feditious pradfifes, the Church of Rox- bury (after much pains and patience to reduce them) excom¬ municated five or fix; 3 and the Church of Bofton , by the folicitation 1 “ Pafcataqua was then the general defignation applied by people redding elfewhere to the region bordering on the river of that name,” now known as the Pifcataqua. — Bell’s Wheelwright , p. 30. 2 This fixes the exadt time at which this part of the Short Story was pre¬ pared. Writing under the general date of November 1, 1637, though evidently at a confiderably later day, Winthrop fays (Vol. I. p. *248): “All the pro¬ ceedings of this court againft thefe per- fons were fet down at large, with the reafons and other obfervations, and were fent into England to be publifhed there.” The proceedings referred to took place in November, 1637, occupying nearly the entire month ; and Mrs. Hutchin- fon was detained at the houfe of Jofeph Weld, in Roxbury, until fhortly before the 15th of the following March. In the interim, therefore, this portion of the Short Story was prepared, and, probably, tranfmitted immediately to London. Vide infra , p. 231, n. 3 The church records of Roxbury give the names of three perfons, Philip Sherman, Thomas Wilfon, and Henry Bull; but the records are evidently in¬ complete. Vide Sixth Report of the Bof¬ ton Record Commiflioners, pp. 79, 81. A Short Story. 187 folicitation of fome of the Elders of the other Churches, proceeded againft Miflris Hutchifon , the manner and iffue whereof is fet down in the next. A T Bofton in New England , upon the 17. day of Odlober 1637. the wife of one William Dyer , fometimes a Citizen & Millener of London , a very proper and [44] comely young woman, was delivered of a large woman childe, it was ftilborn, about two moneths before her time, the childe having life a few houres before the delivery, but fo monftrous and mif-fhapen, as the like hath fcarce been heard of: it had no head but a face, which flood fo low upon the breft, as the eares (which were like an Apes) grew upon the fhoulders. The eyes flood farre out, fo did the mouth, the nofe was hooking upward, the breft and back was full of fharp prickles, like a Thornback, the navell and all the belly with the dif- tindtion of the fex, were, where the lower part of the back and hips fhould have been, and thofe back parts were on the fide the face flood. The arms and hands, with the thighs and legges, were as other childrens, but in ftead of toes, it had upon each foot three claws, with talons like a young fowle. Upon the back above the belly it had two great holes, like mouthes, and in each of them fluck out a piece of fiefh. It had no forehead, but in the place thereof, above the eyes, foure homes, whereof two were above an inch long, hard, and fharpe, the other two were fomewhat fhorter. Many 188 The Antinomian Controverfy. Many things were obfervable in the birth and di/covery of this Monfier . 1. The Father and Mother were of the higheft forme of our refined Familifts, and very adtive in maintaining their party, and in reproaching fome of the Elders, and others, who did oppofe thofe errors. 2. The Midwife, one Hawkins wife of St. Ives , was notorious for familiarity with the devill, and now a prime Familift. 1 3. This Monfier was concealed by three perfons above five moneths. 4. The occafion of concealing it was very flrange, for molt of the women who were prefent at the womans travaile, were fuddenly taken with fuch a violent vomiting, and purging, without eating or drinking of any thing, as they were forced to goe home, others had their children taken with convulfions, (which they had not before, nor fince) and fo were fent for home, fo as none were left at the time of the birth, but the Midwife and two other, whereof one fell afleepe. 5. At 1 “. . . It was certainly known, that Hawkins’s wife (who continued with [Mrs. Hutchinfon at Aquidneck] and was her bofom friend) had much famil¬ iarity with the devil in England, where fhe dwelt at St. Ives, where divers minifters and others reforted to her and found it true” (Savage’s Winthrofi , Vol. II. p *9). In Bofton “fhe grew into great fufpicion to be a witch, for it was credibly reported, that, when fhe gave any medicines, (for fhe pradtifed phyfic,) fhe would afk the party, if fhe did believe, fhe could help her, &c.” (/A Vol. I. p. *263). Wheelwright in the Merciirius Americanus (pp. 7-8) refers contemptuoufly to Mrs. Hawkins as “a poore filly woman,” who “complied with her patronejfe, not fo much out of love to her pofitions as pojgets , being guilty I think of no other sorcerie , unleffe it were conjuring the fpirit of Err our into a Cordial IT A Short Story. 189 5. At fuch time as the child dyed (which was about two houres before the birth) the bed wherein the mother lay fhook fo violently, as all which were in the roome per¬ ceived it. 6 . The after birth wherein the childe was, had prickles on the infide like thofe on the childes brefl. 7. The manner of the difcovery was very ftrange alfo, for it was that very day Miftris Hutchifon was caft out of the Church for her monftrous errours, and notorious falfehood; for being commanded to depart the Affembly, Miftris Dyer accompanied her, which a ftranger obferving, asked another what woman that was, the other anfwered, [45] it was the woman who had the Monfter, which one of the Church of Boflon hearing , 1 enquired about it from one to another, and at length came to Miftris Hutchifon , with one of the Elders of the Church, to whom fhee revealed the truth of the thing in generall onely; this comming to the Governours eare, hee called another of the Magiftrates and fent for the Midwife, and (in the prefence of the Elder, to whom Miftris Hutchifon had revealed it) they examined her, who at firft confefied it was a monftrous birth, but concealed the horns and claws, and fome other parts, till being ftraitly charged, and told it fhould bee taken up, and viewed, then fhee confeffed all, yet for further affurance, the childe was taken up, and though it were much corrupted, yet the horns, and claws, and holes in the back, and fome fcales, &c. were found and feen of above a hundred perfons. g ^ 1 “Another thing obfervable was, woman it was. The others anfwered, the difcovery of it, which was juft when it was the woman which had the mon- Mrs. Hutchinfon was caft out of the fter; which gave the firft occafion to church. For Mrs. Dyer going forth fome that heard it to fpeak of it.” — with her, a ftranger afked, what young Savage’s Winthrop, Vol. I, p. *263. 190 The Antinomian Controverfy . 8. The Father of this Monfter, having been forth of the Town, about a Moneth, and comming home juft at this time, was upon the Lords day (by an unexpected occafion) called before the Church for fome of his monftrous opinions, as that Chrift and the Church together, are the new crea¬ ture, there is no inherent righteoufneffe in Chriftians, Adam was not made after Gods Image, &c. which hee openly maintained, yet with fuch fhuffling, and equivocating, as hee came under admonition, &C. 1 1 “ Thefe two pages, 44 and 45, and put in without a proper connection with two lines on page 43, are, unfortunately, the order of the narrative, which has in the arrangement of the book placed but little order indeed. Evidently from fo as to interrupt the narrative. It Winthrop’s pen.” - — Deane, MS. note. feems to be an ifolated paper, abruptly A briefe Apologie in defence of the generall proceedings of the Court, holden at Bojlon the ninth day of the firft moneth, 1636, againft Mr. J. Wheelwright a member there, by occafion of a Sermon delivered there in the fame Congregation. 1 Orafmuch as fome of the Members of the Court (both of the Magiftrates and Deputies) did dif- fent from the major part, in the judgement of the caufe of Mr. Wheelwright , and divers others have fince cenfured the proceedings againft him as unjuft, or (at beft) over hafty, for maintaining of which cenfures, many untruths are like to be fpread abroad, whereby the 1 “ This ‘ Apology/ pp. 46-59, fhould, in the order of time, be placed fir/l in this volume. It relates to the proceed¬ ings of the G. Court , not Synod, on Wheelwright, whofe fermon preached on a Faft-day, Jan. 20 (Win. 1, 213), was pronounced /editions. It feems that a Synod had before been refolved upon, to confider the erroneous opinions abroad, and among the preparations for the Synod, the Faft-day was ap¬ pointed. On this occafion Wheelwright preached his offenfive fermon ; fee Cot¬ ton’s ‘ Way ,’ did plead for Creature Graces, & did acknowledge them, & flood for them, / but fince fhe hath ufed thefe Expreffions in way of Diflike I have pleaded as much for Graces as others, now if yow doe not deny, created Graces in us , than cleer that Expreffion. M r f Hutchifon. I confes I have denyed the Word Graces, but not the Thinge itfelfe, & whan I fayd I had pleaded for them as much as others, I ment only in feekinge Comfort from them. AI r Simes. In the Ship, 1 fhe may remember that fhe was often 1 Supra, p. 158, note 3. 328 The Antinomian Controverfy. often offended at the Expreffion of growinge in Grace and laying up a Stock of Grace, & that ail Grace is in Ch: Je: Brother Willfon . I know file hath fayd it & affirmed it dogmatically, that the Graces of God is not in its, & we have no Graces, in us, but only the Righteoufnes of Ch: Imputed to us, and if thear be any Affcinge in us it is Ch: only that afts. 53. Efa. Gal. 2. M r Mather} M r ? Hutchifon may remember that in her Speakinge wth me that fhe denyed all Graces to be in us, that thear was nayther faith, nor knowledge, nor Gifts & Graces, no nor Life itfelfe, but all is in Ch: Je:/& fhe brought fome Scriptures, to prove her Opinions, as that befor Union, thear was Graces & Fayth in us, but not after Union, and fhe Coted Romans 11, Thow ftandeft by Fayth be not high minded but fear, left thow alfo be cut of, whar fayth fhe, befor Union thear is Fayth, thow ftandeft by fayth, but if yow be high minded, yow fhall be cut of, & for knowledge it is not in us. but in Ch: & foe than yow brought Efa. 53, by his Knowledge fhall my Righteows Servant Juftifie many, thear, fayth fhe, we are Juftified by his Knowledge, y l is in him, & not by owr Knowledge, & for [fo] fayth that in Galat. 2. Yow brought I live but not I but Je: Ch: lives in me: ther- for I wonder that M rs Huchifon doth fo far forget herfelfe, as to deny that fhe did not formerly hould this Opinion of denying Gifts & Graces to be in us. M r Peters. I would defier M rs Huchifon in the name of the Lord that fhe would ferch into her hart farther to helpe on her Repentance/, for though fhe hath confeffed fome Thinges yet it is far fhort of what it fhould be, & therfore 1. 1 The Rev. Richard Mather, of Dorchefter. The Church Trial. 3 2 9 1. I fear yow are not well principled & grownded in yo r Catechifme. 2. I would commend this to yo r Confideration that yow have ftept owt of yo r place, yow have rather bine a Hujband than a Wife , & a preacher than a Hearer ; & a Magiflrate than a Subject , & foe yow have thought to carry all Thinges in Church & Common¬ wealth. as yow would, & have not bine humbled for this. Governor; Seinge divers Sifters of the Congregation have builded upon her Experience, therfor I thinke it w d be very Expedient, & much to Gods Glory if fhe would declare har what here Eftate is, or wherin her good Eftate is, if not by Ingraftinge into Ch : Je: for the Eftate fhe held owt before the Elders / was not by Ingrafting into Ch: for a Man may be Ingrafted into Ch: Je: & yet fait away. M r Wells. I defire that Motion may go on. M r Shephard. Yow have not only to deale wth a Woman this day that houlds diverfe erronius Opinions, but wth one, that never had any trew Grace in her hart & that by her owne Tenedl/ yea this day fhe hath fhewed herfelfe to be a Notorius Impofter, it is a Tricke of as notorious Subtiltie as ever was held in the Church, to fay thear is no Grace in the Saints, & now to fay fhe hath, & that fhe all this while hath not altered her Judgment, but only her Expreffions. 2. I would have yow quell, whether fhe was ever in a date of Grace or no, [feeing] her horrible Untruths, that flie hath affirmed in the Congregation & proved by many Witneffes, & yet fhe hath not confeffed it before the Lord. 42 3 - 33 ° The Aniinomian Controverfy. 3. I would have the Congregation judge whether ever thear was any Grace in her hart or no; or whither the Spirit of Glory refts upon her in the Caufe fhe buf¬ fers. Soe her Cawfe w r . good, for wch fhe buffers, & doth not buffer as an evell doer, than the bpirit of Glory & Ch: fhall reft upon them that buffer, as Peter fpeaks; now if in her Reftraynt God hath foe left her, foe fur to her belfe as fhe hath now con- feffed, that fhe never held any of theabe Opinions till her Impriffonment, wch is the Time of her Humiliation & perbecution fhe thinkes, therfor by Peter her bufferings is not for good, becaufe fuch an evell bpirit hath refted upon her in this Time of her Humilliation. 4. Upon this Ground, I thinke yow are to deale wth her, not only for her Opinions, as wth one who is to be queftioned whether ever fhe was in a good Eftate, becaufe the Grownd of her Opinions hath bine built upon fayned & fantafticall Revelations, as fhe held forth 2. in the Court, 1 one for the certayne Deftruc- tion of Ould England & another for the Ruine of this Cuntrie & the people therof for thear proceed- inge agaynft her: therefor I pray conbider of it, & the rather I note this that all thofe Weomen & others that have bine led by her & doted foe much upon her & her Opinions. M r Peters. We are not fatisfied in her Repentance, in that file hath exprefbed, wherin fhe layes her Cenbuer or Impriffonment to be the Cawbe of all her Errors, as if fhe wear Inocent befor. D , T Brother 1 Supra, pp. 176, 270. The Church Trial. 33 1 Brother Will/bn. I cannot but reverence & adore the wife hand of God in this thinge, & canot but acknowledge that the Lord is juft in leavinge owr Sifter to pride & Ly - inge, & owt of hith Spirit to fal into Errors & divers unfound Judgments, & I looke at her as a dayngerus Inftrument of the Divell rayfed up by Sathan amongft us to rayfe up Divifions & Contentions & to take away harts & affedlions one from another, / wheras befor thear was much Love & Union & fweet agreement amongft us before die came, yet fmce all Union & Love hath bine broken & thear hath bine Cenfurings & Judgings & Condemnings one of another / & I doe conceve all thefe wofull Opinions doe come from this Botome, for if the Botome hath bine unfound & corrupt, than muft the Building be fuch, & the Mifgovernment of this Woman’s Townge hath bine a great Cawfe of this Dif- order, wch hath not bine to fet up the Miniftry of the Word ayther hear or elce whear, but to fet up her felfe, & to draw deciples after her, & therfor fhe fayth one Thinge to day & another thinge to morrow: & to fpeake falfely & doubtfully & dullye, wheras we fhould fpeake the Truth playnly one to another. I doe therfor this conceave in the poynt of Reli¬ gion & in the poynt of Dodtrine, thay take away the bot- tome, woe be to that fowle that fliall build upon fuch botoms. Owr fowles fhould abhor & loth to come foe far fhort in Repentance, therfor I thinke as fhe was lyable to an Admo¬ nition befor, foe thear fhould be a ... of our Church, & a proceedinge therin, to Eafe our felves of fuch a member, Efpetially for her untruth, or Lyes, as that fhe was all ways of the fame Judgment, only fhe hath altered her Expref- fions./ Therfor I leave it to the Church to confider how fafe it 332 The Antinomian Controver/y. it is to fuffer foe eronius & foe fchifmaticall & foe unfound a member amongh us, & one that hands guiltie of foe fowle a falfhood / therfor confider whether we fhall be faythfull to Je : Ch : or whether it cane hand wth his hono r to fuffer fuch an one any longer amongh us; if the blind lead the blind, whether fhall we goe. Confider how we cane or whether we may longer fuffer her, to goe on hill in feducinge to feduce, & in deacevinge to deaceve, & in lyinge to lye, & in condemninge Authoritie & Magihracie, hill to contemne. Therfor we fhould fine agaynh God if we fhould not put away from us foe Evell a Woman, guiltie of fuch fowle Evells. Therfor if the church be of an other minde Let them exprefs themfelves, if hie may not be feperated from the Congregation of the Lord. Elder Oliver. I did not thinke the Church would have come thus far foe foone, efpetially feinge whan I taulked wth her in the morninge I faw her to come of foe freely in her Confehion of her fine in contemninge Magihrats & Minihers. M r Elliot. It is a wonderfull Wifdom of God to let them fall by that whearby they have upheld thear Opinions, & carried them as to let her fall into fuch Lies, as hie hath done this day, for hie hath caried on all her Erors by Lies, as that hie held nothinge but what M r Cotten did, & that he & the was all one in Judgment, & foe it fared with divers others, that we have cah out of our Church of thefe opinions. [Rev.] 22. 15. M r Cotten. The matter is now tranhated, the lah day fhe was delt wth in poynt of Dochrine, now fhe is delt wth in poynt of praftife, & foe it belongs to the Pahors Office to inhru6t The Church Trial. 333 indrudt & alfo to correct in Righteowfnes, whan a Lye is open & perdded in, in the face of the Congregation after proved by Witnes. I know not how to fatisfye myfelfe in it, but accordinge to that in Revel. 22. 15. If it come to this to the makinge of a Lye; than wthowt fhall be doges, 1 & fuch as love & makes lyes, therfor though fine have con- feffed, that Hie fees many of the Thinges wch die held to be Errors, & that it proceded from the Roote Pride of Spirit, yet I fee this pride of Harte is not healed but is working dill, & therfor to keep fecret fome unfownd Opinions, God hath lett her fall into a manifed Lye, yea to make a Lye, & therfor as we receaved her in amongd us I thinke we are bownd upon this Grownd to remove her from us & not to retayne her any longer, feeinge die doth prevaricate in her Words, as that her Judgment is one Thinge & her Expref don is another. M r Damphord. God will not bare with Mixtures in this kinde, therfor yow mud freely Confeffe the Truth, take Shame to yo r felfe, that God may have the Glory, & I fear that God will not let you fee yo r dne, & confes it, till the Ordinance of God hath taken place agaynd yow. Soe that it femes to me God hath a purpofe to goe on in the Courfe of his Judgment agaynd you. Quejl. I defire to be fatisded in this how the Church may profced to Excommunication , whan the Scripture faythe he that confeffeth & forfaketh fine diall have Mercy, & whether we fhould not bare with Patience the contrary minded. M r Cotten. Confefdon of Sine thear is ment wthall the Agrivations 1 “For without are dogs, and for- and maketh a lie.” — Revelation cerers. and whoremongers, and murder- xxii. 15. ers, and idolaters, and whofoever loveth 334 The Antino 7 nian Controverfy ., Agrivations of it . . wch yet hath not appeared to us, & by baring wth the contrary minded, is ment of thefe that are wthowt M r Scot} I defire to propownd this one Scruple, wch keepes me that I canot foe freely in my fpirit give way to Excommunication / whether it wear not better, to give her a little time to confider of the Thinges that is . . . vifed agaynft her, becawfe JJie is not yet convinced of her Lye & foe things is with her in Diffraction, & fhe canot recoiled her Thoughts. M r Cotten. This now is not for poynt of Dodrine, wherin we muff fuffer her wth patience, but we now deal wth her in poynt of fad or pradife, as the makinge & houldinge of a Lye: now in poynt of groce fad, thear may be a prefent proceedinge. M r Shephard. I perceve it is the Defire of many of the Brethren to ftav her Excommunication, & to let a fecond Admonition lye upon her; 2 but now for one not to drop a Lye, but to make a Lye, & to mayntayne a Lye : & to doe it in a day of Humilliation, & in the fight of God, & fuch a Congregation as this is, I would have this Church confider. whether it will be for the Honor of God & the hono r of this Church to bare with patience foe groce an offendor. M r Mather. The Apoffle fayth an Hereticke after once or twife Admonition rejed & cut of like a Gangrene as the word 1 Richard Scott, the hufband of in connexion with the efforts at expof- Catherine Mabury, a fitter of Mrs. tulation of Scott and the “ Queftioner ” Hutchinfon ; in regard to Richard Scott and “ Straynger ” whofe names are not fee Savage’s Genealogical Dittionary given, as indicating the undercurrent of New England , Vol. IV. p. 138, and of fympathy with Mrs. Hutchinfon Savage’s Winthrof , Vol. I. p. *293. which ftill exitted in the Botton church. 2 Attention is called to this ftate- The church adtion taken was apparently ment, or admilfion, of Shepard’s, taken forced by the clergy and magittrates. The Church Trial. 335 word fignifies : now, fhe hath bine once admonifhed allready, why than fhould not the Church proceed. M r Lever it. The Word is after once or twice by a Cop¬ ulative. 1 Deputie. I would anfwer this to M r Leverit, to his Objec¬ tion after twife Admonition; Now M rs Huchifon hath bine delt [with] and admoniflied, not once, twife nor thrice, but many Times, by privat Bretheren, & by Elders of other Congregations, & by her owne Church, therfor that fhould be no fcruple, befides I thinke that text doth not fpeake of the Admonition of the Church but of privat Admonition. Straynger. I would defire to knowe, if the Church pre¬ cedes agaynft her, whether it be for DoFtrine, or for her Lye: if for her Lye. than I confent: if it be for her Doc¬ trine, flie hath renownced that as Eroneus, & than I want Light to goe wth the Church in it. Brother Willfon. For my part, if the Church proceds. I thinke it is, & it fhould be, for her Errors in Opinion, as well as for poynt of PraFtife, for though fhe hath made fome fhowe of Repentance yet it doth not feme to be cordial & fincere, & that of A chan tho he did confes & acknowledge his fine , yet Jofhua , & that by the apoyntment of God , did proced agaynft him , & in Corinth, as soon as ever the Apoftle herd of that fine committed agaynft them, he writes his Let¬ ter, to caft them out forthwth wthout delay. M r Cotten : For yow to propownd Termes of Delay: what Rule have yow for it, whan in poynt of praFtife, thear hath bine a prefant proceeding, as in AFts 5. as foon as ever Annanias had tould a Lye , the Church caft them out. Brother 1 “ A man that is an heretic, after the firft and fecond admonition rejedt.” — Titus iii. io. 336 The Antinomian Controverfy. Brother Willfon . The Church confentinge to it we will proced to Excomunication. Forafmuch as yow, M r . s Huchifon, have highly tranfgreffed & offended, & forafmuch as yow have foe many ways troubled the Church wtli yo r Erors & have drawen away many a poor foule, & have upheld yo r Revelations: & forafmuch as yow have made a Lye , &c. Therfor in the name of our Lord Je: Ch: & in the name of the Church I doe not only pronownce yow worthy to be caff owt, but / doe cajiyow out & in the name of Ch. I doe deliver you up to Sathan , that yow may learne no more to blafpheme, to feduce & to lye, & I doe ac¬ count yow from this time forth to be a Hethen & a Publican & foe to be held of all the Bretheren & Sifters, of this Con¬ gregation, & of others: therfo r I command yow in the name of Ch : Je: & of this Church as a Leper to wthdraw yo r felfe owt of the Congregation; that as formerly yow have difpifed & contemned the Holy Ordinances of God, & turned yo r Backe one them, foe yow may now have no part in them nor benefit by them.” The Way of Congregational Churches Cleared . 1 Sett. 13. Of Cottons pretended Antinomianifme and Famitifme . The Diffwader proceedeth to point at (as hee calleth it) “ another more dangerous fall of mine, which in his Margent, “ he 1 THE WAY OF CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHES CLEARED: In two Treatifes In the former, From the Hiftorical Af- perfions of Mr. Robert Baylie , in his Book, called [A Diffwafive from the Errors of the Time.] In the latter, From fome Contradictions of ViNDrcTE Clavium : And from, Some Mif-conftrudtions of Learned Mr. Rutherford in his Book inti¬ tuled [The due Right of Prefbyteries.] ByMr. John Cotton, fometime Preacher at Bofion in Lincoln-JJiire , and now Teacher of the Church at Bojlon, in Neiu-England. London, Printed by Matthew Simmons , for Joint Bclla- mie , at the figne of the three Golden- Lions, in Cornhill. 1648. The prominence of “the New Eng¬ land way,” as it was called, or the Congregational fyftem of church govern¬ ment, in the difcuflions which attended the Weftminfter Affembly, has been referred to in the introductory matter of the prefent volume ( fupra , p. 29). Cotton was recognized generally as the father and leading exponent of the fyftem, and the moft famous and im¬ portant of all his writings was that entitled The Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven, and Power Thereof, publifhed in London in 1644. But two years before, in 1642, he had fent over a prior traCt, entitled The True Confli- tvtion of a particular viftble Church, Proved by Scripture. Of this earlier publication Maffon fays (Milton, Vol. II. p. 598) : “ It was much read, and it palled into a fecond edition, with a changed title, within a year; and Cot¬ ton became from that moment the expo¬ nent of moderate Independency whom the Prefbyterians felt themfelves moft bound 43 338 The Antinomian Controverfy. “he nameth Mr. Cottons Antinomianifme, and Familifme: “and within a few lines, his wandring into the horrible “ Errors bound to anfwer.” When, therefore, The Keyes appeared, it was accepted at once “ as the moft complete and influential ftatement of the aCtual early New England Congregationalifm ; a pofltion,” adds Henry M. Dexter, “ which I may fay it has never loft. Two or three editions were iffued within the year, with the general endorfement of the leaders of the Independent party in the [Weftminfter] Affembly, as fet- ting forth ‘ that very Middle-way (which in our Apologie we did in the generall in¬ timate and intend) between that which is called Brownifme, and the Prefbyte- riall-government, as it is practiced ’ ” (Congregationalifm as feen in its Lit¬ erature, , pp. 433, 434). Robert Baillie — better known from the title of Carlyle’s eflay as “ Bail- lie the Covenanter ” — was a member of the Weftminfter Affembly, and among the moft adtive and earned; of the advo¬ cates of Prefbyterianifm. His recogni¬ tion and eftimate of Cotton have already been quoted ( fupra , p. 29), and refer¬ ence made to the faCt that he was at the time fufpeCted of being inftrumental in cauflng the publication of the Short Story {fupra, p. 35). If fuch was the cafe, the printing in London, in 1642, of Cotton’s True Conftitution may ac¬ count for the publication there in 1644 — two years later — of the Short Story , as it may then have been brought out with a view to difcrediting “the New England way,” by connecting its recog¬ nized exponent with the Antinomians, — a fed the “ huge increafe and info- lencies intolerable ” of which were at this particular junclure cauflng Par¬ liament and the Prefbyterians great mental anguifh (Maffon’s Milton , Vol. HI. p- 161). This view of the matter was certainly taken by Cotton Mather, who fays (. Magnalia , B. III. Chap. i. § 21), “ the report given of Mr. Cotton on this occafion [Antinomianifm, &c.] by one Baily, a Scotchman, in a moft fcandalous pamphlet, called, A Diffua- five, written to caft an odium on the churches of New-England, by vilifying him, that was one of their moft eminent fervants, are moft horrid injuries.” But whether there was, or was not, any fecret connection between the printing of Winthrop’s manufcript at this junc¬ ture, and a pre-arranged onflaught upon the exponent of “the New England way,” it is certain that when in the fol¬ lowing year (1645) Baylie brought out his Dijfuafive from the Err ours of the Time, he made in it free ufe of the Short Story as an arfenal from which to obtain weapons of offenfe againft Cotton. Copies of both the Short Story and the Diffuafive reached New England not long after their publication, and, as its titlepage fhows, largely in refponfe to the afperfions or “ teftimonies ” on hi in- fed found in the latter, Cotton prepared his Way of Congregational Churches Cleared, publifhed in London in 1648. The Way Cleared, as it is commonly defignated, has never been reprinted, or publifhed in an annotated form. It is a fmall quarto trad of 158 pages, and Cotion’s “IVay Cleared'.' 339 “ Errors of the Antinomians, and Familifts, with his [39] “ dear friend Ms. Hutchinfon , fo far that he came to a “ refolution to fide with her, and to Separate from all the “ Churches in New-England, as legall Synagogues. If all this charge were true (as indeed, in all parts of it, it is falfe:) yet the errors of Antinomianifme, and Familifme, then ftirring in the Countrey, and condemned in the Synod at New-Towne, were not more dangerous, then the old Montanifme. 1 I confeffe, the Familifme afterwards broached by Mr. Garton , and his followers, the fame which Calvin in his Opufcula refuteth (in his Injlrzitdio adverfus Libertinos ) as Calvin judgeth it more dangerous then Popery, fo I conceive it to be as dangerous as Montanifme, though I cannot fay more dangerous: for both of them overthrow al principles & foundations of Chriftian Religion. But for the making good of this charge upon me, let Mr. Bay lie be pleafed to inflance in thofe horrible errors either of Antino¬ mianifme or Familifme, whereunto I either wandred or fell: Or and copies of it are to be found in almoft all the large collections. So far as the Antinomian controverfy is concerned, the Way Cleared is of value as giving Cotton’s account of the matter. The fubjedt was one not agree¬ able to him, and towards the end of his life he is reported to have deftroyed all his papers and manufcripts relating to it. Only that portion of the Way Cleared which relates to the Antinomian con¬ troverfy is included in this publication; nor has it been deemed neceffary to verify its references or annotate it, ex¬ cept in fo far as the ltatements or allu- fions in it relate to the events in that controverfy, or the parties to it. 1 The Montanifts were a feCt of the Chriftian Church founded during the feconcl century by Montanus of Phrygia. Enthufiafts and rigorous afcetics, they conftituted a fpecies of proteft againft the fecularizing tendencies of the church as a body. They believed in the infpi- ration of Montanus, the continuance of miraculous gifts, the fecond advent, and the eftablifhment of the heavenly Jerufalem. See the references to the modern Montaniftic refearches in the Encyclopedia Britannica , article Mon- tanifm. 340 The Antinomian Controverfy . Or let him make it appeare “ that I came to fuch a Refolu- “ tion, to fide with my dear friend Ms. Hutchinfon , and to “ feparate from all the Churches in New England\ as legall “ Synagogues. Let us examine his proofes and Teftimonies. “ i. The firft is from the parties themfelves, the followers “of Ms. Hutchinfon , who (faith he) boafl of Mr. Cotton for “their Matter and Patron. And it is true, they profeffed fo: juft as Wightman who was burnt at Lichfield for Montanifme, (avouching himfelf to be the Holy Ghoft) profeffed he had received all his grounds from Mr. Hilderfam. And I confeffe my felf, being naturally (I thank God) not fufpicious, hearing no more of their Tenents from them, then what feemed to mee Ortho- doxall, I beleeved, they had been far off from fuch groffe errors, as were bruited of them. But when fome of my fellow-Brethren (the Elders of Neighbour Churches) adver- tifed me of the evill report that went abroad of their corrupt Tenents, I defired to know what the Tenents were, which were corrupt, and which they had vented here and there, in my name. They mentioned fome to me, fome of thofe which are publifhed in the fhort ffory of that Subject: and named alfo to me the perfons, who had uttered the fame. I therefore dealt with Mris. Hutchinfon and others of them, declaring to them the erroneoufneffe of thofe Tenents, [40] and the injury done to my felf in fathering them upon mee. Both fhee, and they utterly denyed, that they held fuch Tenents, or that they had fathered them upon mee. I returned their Anfwer to the Elders, who had fpoken to mee of them: and I inquired, if any two of them, or of their Neighbours Cottons “Way Cleared, 34 i Neighbours could bear witneffe in this cafe. They anfwered me, they had but one witneffe of any corrupt Tenent: and that one, loth to be known to bee an accufer of them. I replyed, what courfe would you then advife mee to take ? They anfwered, that I could not indeed bring the matter to the Church for want of witneffes: But the beft way would bee, publikely and privately to bear witneffe againft fuch errors. I tooke their counfell, and bare witneffe againft the errors complained of, as well publikely as privately. Which when fome Elders and Brethren heard, meeting foon after with fome of thefe Opinionifts: “ Loe, fay they, now wee “ have heard your Teacher bearing witneffe openly againft “ thofe very points, which you falfely father on him. No “ matter (fay the other) what you heare him fay in publick: “ we know what hee faith to us in private. This anfwer bred in fome of my Brethren and friends, a jealoufie, that my felfe was a fecret fomenter of this fpirit of Familifme, if not leavened my felf that way. Whereupon fundry Elders and Brethren perceiving thefe Errors to fpread, fecretly and clofely, they confulted among themfelves, and with me what I thought of a Synod, whether it might bee of ufe in fuch a cafe for the clearing of thefe Points, and the allaying of the jealoufies and differences in the Countrey ? I anfwered, yea. Thereupon, with confent of the Magiftrates, a time, and place was appointed for a Synodicall meeting, and fundry Elders were fent for, from other jurifdidfions, and meffengers from all the Churches in the Country to affift in this worke. Againft which time three things principally were attended for preparation. 1. 342 The Antinomian Controver/y. i. A Solemne Fall kept in all the Churches: in which it fell out, that Mr. Whelewrights Sermon was apprehended to give too much encouragement to the Opinionilts. And himfelf hath fince confeffed, that being but new come into the Countrey, having but little acquaintance but with his kindred, and their friends, (who were many of them levened this way) he fpake fome things, which if he had before difcerned their Familifme, he would not have expreffed himfelf as he did. 1 [41] The 2. thing attended to, for preparation to the Synod, was, the gathering up of all the corrupt and offenfive Opinions that were fcattered up and down the Countrey, and to commend them to Publique Difquifition in the Synod: that howfoever, the Authours of them were loth to owne them publikely, yet at leah, they might fee them publickely tryed, confuted, and condemned. The which was accordingly done in the Synod: and the Opinions with their Confutations are fince printed in the fhort ftory, whence Mr. Bay lie fetcheth many Tehimonies. The 3. thing thought needfull for preparation to the Synod, was, to gather out of my Sermons to the people, and my conferences (in word and writing) with the Elders, all fuch opinions of mine as were conceived by fome, to bee erroneous: and having gathered them together, to inquire in a brotherly conference with mee, how far I would own them, or how I did underhand them, that fo the true hate of the quehions in difference might appeare; and withall, if there were any aguifh dihemper, or difaffedlion growen in any of our fpirits amongh our felves, it might be healed in a 1 Bell’s Wheelwright , pp. 47-52. Cottons “Way Cleared, 343 a private brotherly way, and mutuall fatisfadlion given and taken on all hands. Accordingly we had fuch a meeting in private; wherein five queftions were propounded unto mee, with defire of my plaine and explicite anfwer to the fame: which alfo upon their demand, I gave fuddenly. Queft. i. “ Whether our Union with Chriji be compleat before and “ without Faith ? Where I gave this anfwer, which was taken in writing: “ Not without, nor before the habit (or gift) of Faith, but “ before the a6t of Faith; that is, not before Chrift hath “ wrought Faith in us (for in uniting himfelf to us, he work- “ eth Faith in us:) yet in order of nature, before our faith “ doth put forth it felf to lay hold on him. For indeed I looked at Union with Chrifb, as equipollent to Regeneration. And looke as in Generation we are in a paffive way united to Adam : fo in Regeneration wee are united to Chrift. And as the foule habet fe mere pafjive (in the judgement of our beft Divines) in Regeneration, fo alfo in union, and by the judgment of Chrift himfelf, who faith, without Chrift abiding in us (and fo united to us) [42] we can doe nothing, not bring forth any fpiritual fruit at all: much leffe can we before union with Chrift, unite our felves to Chrift, which is the greateft and moft fpirituall fruit of all. I was not ignorant, that fome of the Schoolmen (even fome Dominicans) & out of them Ferius , and fome others, (even of judicious Proteftants) are of opinion, that Chrift doth give the Soule by the Almighty power of the auxilium efficax of his Spirit, to put forth an a6t of Faith, to lay 344 The Antinomicm Controverfy. lay hold on Chrift, before hee give them a habit or gift of Faith. But I could not underftand how this could ftand with Chrifts Word, That without Chrift abiding in us , wee can doe nothing. Which argueth, no fpirituall adt can bee done by us without Chrift habitually permanent in us. And as acute and judicious Baynes faith, (in Ephef. i) This were to give a man to fee, without an eye to fee withall: which though God can doe by his Almighty power, yet as the Philofopher faid of Entia: fo it may be much more faid of Miracula (which are extraordinary Entia) Miraculafine 7 ieceJJitate non funt multiplicanda. QUEST. II. Whether Faith be an inftrumentall caufe in applying Chrifts righteoufneffe to our Juftification. Whereto I anfwered, “ Faith is an inftrument to receive the righteoufnelfe of “ Chrift applyed to us of God, for our Juftification: but not “ properly an inftrumentall caufe. Where I underftood Inftrument, as the Hebrews doe, which they indifferently put for Inftrument, or Veffel: For Faith emptying the foule of all confidence in its own right- eoufneffe, is a fit veffell or inftrument to receive the right- eoufneffe of Chrift offered and imputed; and fo I tooke Faith rather as a fit difpofition of the fubjedt to be juftified, then as a proper inftrumentall caufe of our juftification : like the empty veffels of the Prophets widow, which whilft they were empty, the oyle ran forth into them (the empty veffels being fit to receive it:) But yet the empty veffels were not properly inftrumentall caufes of the running forth of the Oyle, but onely fit inftruments to receive it. QUEST. Cotton s ‘ ‘ PVay Cleared. 345 QUEST. 3. [43] Whether the Spirit of God in evidencing our Jufiification doth beare witnejfe in an abfolute promife of free Grace, without Qualification , or condition . My anfwer was, “ The Spirit in evidencing our Juftification doth bear “ witneffe either in an abfolute promife, or in a conditionall: “ in cafe, the condition bee underftood, or applyed abfolutely, “ not attending the condition as the ground or caufe of the “ affurance, but as the effedt and confequence of it: or (as I “ might have added, as before) as a fit difpofition of the “fubjedt to receive it. For I conceived, though the Spirit may evidence to us our Juftification in a Qualification or condition: yet fome- time the condition is not there before the promife, but freely given with the promife, as Adis 10. 43, 44. where though Cornelius and his houfhold were beleevers, yet many of his kindred and friends were not: who yet upon hearing the promife of Remiffion (or Juftification) unto Faith, they received both Faith and Juftification, and the evidence of both, all together: as did alfo the Jailor in the like fort, Adi. 16. 31. Sometime, though the Qualification or condi¬ tion bee there before, and the Spirit doe bear witneffe to our Juftification in that condition : yet the condition is not the caufe either of juftification, or of the evidence of it, as in Luke 7, 47. Chrift beareth evident witneffe of the Re¬ miffion or Juftification of Mary Magdalen , in her love to him. Nevertheleffe her love was not the caufe, neither of her Juftification, nor of the affurance of it, but an effedt of both. 44 346 The Antinomian Controverfy. both. For fhee exprefifed thofe evidences of her love to Chrift, becaufe her fins were forgiven her, and becaufe her felf was affured of the forgivenefie of them. Sometimes the Qualification or condition mentioned in the promife, though it bee in the foule before, yet it is not evident there before. And then the evidence of Jufiification fpringeth not from the condition, but from the Grace of the promife, clearing and evidencing both the condition and the Jufiification. Thus Chrifi applyeth himfelfe by his Spirit, to bruifed Reeds, or broken hearts. If a. 57. 15. Lafily, if Faith it felf bee meant to be the faving [44] qualification or condition, and be alfo found, and that evidently in the foul to whom the Promife of Jufiifica¬ tion is made; yet the Spirit may bear witneffe in the Promife of Grace to the Jufiification of fuch a foul, without either the word expreffing the Condition in that place, or the foul attending the Condition at that time : As when Chrifi faid to the Woman, Luk . 7. 48. Thy Jinnes are for - given thee , He neither mentioneth her Faith in that word, nor doth it appear, that fhe did reflect upon her Faith in receiving that Promife at that time. Many an Ifraelite fiung by the fiery Serpents in the wilderneffe, might look up to the brazen Serpent for healing, and yet at that time not look to their eye, nor think upon their eye by which they looked. And though afterwards Chrifi doe make expreffe mention of the womans Faith, to which he attributeth her falvation, ( Woman , faith he, thy Faith hath faved thee , ver. 50.) Neverthelefie, that Faith, though it be an Evidence of Affurance in the fubjecfi Perfon of his Jufiification : yet it is alfo an Effecfi or Confequence of the Evidence and Aflur- ance Cottons “ Way Cleared!’ 347 ance of the Object, that is, of the grace and mercy of God clearly revealed and applyed to the foul in the Promife, even to the begetting of Faith it felf, and the Affurance of it. As when Chrift did promife (by the Miniftery of Paul) falvation to the Jaylor in Beleeving; the Grace of Chrift clearly revealed and applyed in the Promise did beget Faith in the Jaylor, and the Affurance of Faith. And fo his Faith, and the Affurance of it was an Effedt and Confe- quence of the Grace and Affurance of it offered to him in the Promife. F'aith though it be an Evidence of things not feen (with bodily eye;) yet it is an effedt of a former Evi¬ dence, even of the light of Gods Countenance fhining forth through Chrift in the Promife of Grace upon the foul, to the begetting of Faith, and the affurance of it. But howfoever, Faith being always of a felf humbling efficacy, it is a fit difpofition of the fubjedt to receive comfort and affurance, Ifa. 57. 15. Calvin defineth Faith to be Divines ergo nos benevolentice fir mam certamque cognitionein , quee gratuitez in Chrijlo Promififiionis verilale fundata, per Spiritum SanPtum & revelalur mentibus nojlris & cordibus objignatur. Injlitut. 1 . 3. c. 2. Seel . 7. Now when hee cometh to expound what he meaneth by the free promife of grace in Chrift, upon which this knowledg (or affurance) of Faith is [45] founded, he maketh it to be, nor conditionall. And he giveth this reafon, “ Quoniam (faith he) Conditionalis Pro- “ miffio qua ad opera nofira remittimur , non aliter vitam “ promittit, quam fi perfpiciamus efife in nobis fitam. Ergo , “ niji Fidem tremere , ac vacillare volumus , illam Salutis Pro- “ miffione fulciamus oportet , quee a Domino ultro ac libera - “ liter. 348 The Antinomian Controverfy. “ liter, potiusque miferice nojlrce quam dignitatis refpedtu “ offer a tur ; ibidem Sedt. 29. But what was the occafion of this Queftion whether from any fpeech or writing of mine, I cannot cal to minde, unleffe it were concerning the Firfb evidence of junification, which is the purport of the next Queflion. For otherwife, if Faith and Affurance be firfl founded and bottomed upon a Promife of Free-grace, I never doubted, but that Sanctification or Faith, (any having qualification) may be, (and is by the help of the Spirit) a clear and certain Evidence of Junification. So that put the Quefiion in terminis , “Whether the Spirit of God in Evidencing our Jufiifica- “ tion doth bear witnefs in an abfolute Promife of Free- “ Grace, without qualification or condition ? I fhould anfwer plainly and roundly, The Spirit doth Evi¬ dence our Jufiification both wayes, fometime in an abfolute Promife, fometime in a conditionall. QUEST. 4. Whether fome Saving Qualification may be a firfi Evidence of Jufiification ? Hereto I anfwered, “ A man may have an argument from thence, (yea, I doubt “ not a firm and firong argument) but not a firfi Evidence. For I conceived, Faith it felf, which is an evidence of things not feen, and the firfi having Qualification that doth Evidence Jufiification, is it helf founded upon a former evidence, even the Free-Grace of God in Chrifi, revealed in the promife of Grace, and applyed to the foul effectually by the Spirit of grace both in our effectual Calling (even to the begetting Cottons “Way Cleared, 349 begetting of Faith) and in our Junification. Accordingly, the Apoftle reckoning the Evidences that bear witneffe of our life in Chrift, giveth the firft place to the Spirit, before any fruit of the Spirit; There are three (faith he) that bear witneffe on earth, the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood, 1 Joh. 5. 8. Firft, the Spirit, to wit, of illumination [46] and drawing, whereby he revealeth Chrift to us, and worketh Faith in us, 2 Cor . 4. 6 . Ephef. 1. 17, 18. Joh. 6, 44, 45. Secondly, the water of Sanctification. And thirdly, the Blood of atonement (or pacification) pacifying the confcience. Calvin alfo is of the fame judgment in this Queftion, in 2 Pet. 1. 10 & in 1 Joh 3. 14 & 19. And Zanchy likewife doth at large difpute this Queftion, and conclude it againft Dr. Marbachius in his Mifcellanies , in that part of it entituled, Dijceptatio inter duos Theologos , from pag. 598. to pag. 605. Editionis in quarto. QUEST. 5. Whether Chrift and his benefits be di/penfed in a Covenant of Works l Whereunto my anfwer was, “ Chrift is difpenfed to the Eleft in a Covenant of Grace: “ to others he may be difpenfed in fome fort, (to wit, in a “ tafte of him) either in a Covenant of works, or in a Cove- “ nant of grace legally applyed. To give an hint of the reafon of mine anfwer. The Cov¬ enant on Mount Sinai , (wherein Chrift was difpenfed in facrifices and ceremonies) though to the faithfull feed of Abraham it was a Covenant of Grace, (wherein they faw Chrift 35 ° The Antinomian Controversy. Chrift and his benefits gracioufly difpenfed to them, Pfal. 51, 7.) yet to the carnall feed, it feemed to me to be a Cove¬ nant of Works, to prepare them for the having benefits of that Covenant of Grace which was formerly given to Abra¬ ham and his feed, (but negledted by them in Egypt) and afterwards renewed in the plains of Moab , Deut. chap. 29 & Chap. 30. And fo Paul maketh that Covenant on Mount Sinai , to be exprefly a different Covenant from that of grace, to wit, a Covenant gendring unto bondage, Gal. 4. 24, 25. and the other Covenant {Deut. 30) to be of Grace, Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8. Mofes alfo himfelf, having recited the Covenant on Mount Sinai {Deut. 5.) he maketh the obfer- vation of all the Commandements to be the righteoufneffe of the people, Deut. 6. 25. and their life, Levit. 18. 4. And fo Patil underftandeth him, Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Now that Covenant which gendreth unto bondage, and [47] holdeth forth righteoufneffe and life upon obedience to all the Commandements, it is a Covenant of Works. And fo have the chiefeft Germane Divines, as well as Pifcator , and Polanus , taken the Covenant on Mount Sinai to bee a covenant of Workes. See Pifcator , Ezek. 16. Obfervat , ultima in verf. 60. 62 & Polanus ibidem. How far there arofe any confent or diffent about thefe queftions, between my Fellow-Brethren (the Elders of thefe churches) & my felf, it is not materiall now to particularize; it is enough, that upon our clear underftanding of one anothers mindes & judgments, and upon the due proceed¬ ing of our Church againft convinced notorious errors and fcandalls, wee have ever fince (by the Grace of Chrift) much amiable Cottons “Way Cleared, 351 amiable and comfortable Communion together in al broth¬ erly kindnefs. But this fhort relation may fuffice. To let Mr. Bay lie know, and all them that fhall read his Book, to confider, what flender “ ground hee had to fpeak “ of my wandring into the horrible Errors of the Antino- “ mians, and Families, and Tiding therein with Miftris “ Hutchinfon , and therein to tell the world of a more dan¬ gerous fall of mine, then that of Montanifme: And withall “to clear up to him, what little ground Miftris Hutchinfon “ had, to pretend, that fhee was of Mr. Cottons judgement in “ all things: that fo Mr. Baylie may likewife obferve what ground himfelf had to take up fuch a report againft me, upon her teftimony. Which yet will the more fully appeare, if I proceed to relate a principall paffage or two in the Synod, after it was afiembled. It was the firft a6t of the Synod (after Prayer and choice of Moderators) to propound the feverall offenfive opinions, which had been difperfed up and downe in the Countrey, and briefely to argue them, and bear witneffe againft them. The opinions were about four- fcore (more or leffe) which being orderly propounded and argued againft, I-perceived that Tome of the Members & Meflengers of our Church, were ready to rife up, and plead in defence of fundry corrupt Opinions, which I verily thought had been far from them; efpecially fuch as con¬ cerned union with Chrift before Faith, Juftification without Fiath, inherent righteoufnes, and evidencing a good eftate by it at all, firft or laft. Whereupon, affoon as I could get liberty of fpeech with them, “ Brethren (faid I) if you be of “ that judgment which you plead for, all thefe Bafiardly “Opinions, which are juftly offenfive to the Churches, will “ be 352 The Antinomicm Controver/y . “ be fathered upon Bojlon. They anfwered me again, [48] “ Though they were not clear for thofe Opinions, “ which they fpake for, yet neither were they clear for “ condemning of them, confidering the tenderneffe of fome “ Confciences: I replyed, if they were doubtfull of the “ Erroneoufneffe and danger of fuch Opinions, they fhould “ have dealt openly with the Church at home, when they “ were chofen Meffengers, and fhould have declared their “judgments before the Church: as knowing fuch points “ amongft others were likely to come into agitation in the “ Synod: whereas now looke what they fpeak, it is con¬ ceived by the whole Countrey to bee the judgment of our “ Church. Hereupon fome of the Meffengers of our Church with¬ drew themfelves, and appeared no more in the Synod, fuch as did appear, did much what forbear any profecution of argument in fuch caufes. But that (to my remembrance) was the firft time of my difcerning a real and broad differ¬ ence, between the judgments of our Brethren (who leaned to Miflris Hutchinfon ) and my felf. And therefore to clear my felf, and the founder Members of our Church from partaking in thofe manifold errors there prefented, I de¬ clared my judgment openly before all the affembly, “ That I “ efleemed fome of the Opinions, to bee blafphemous: fome “ of them, hereticall: many of them, Erroneous: and almoft “ all of them, incommodiously exprefled: as intending to “except thofe chiefly, wherein I had declared mine own “opinion, as before. But becaufe I would deale openly and ingenuoufly with Mr. Baylie , and hide nothing from him, that might fortify his Cottons “Way Cleared!' 353 his accufation againft me, there was fome colour of my leaning to one Antinomian Tenent in one day of the Synod. For though in anfwer to the queftions of the Elders before the Synod, I had affirmed Faith to be an inftrument for the receiving the righteoufneffe of Chrift to our junification: yet for as much as fome great Divines had let fall fome expreffions, that feemed to favour the Antinomian party in a contrary Tenent, I was defirous to hear that Point a little further ventilated, and to fee the difficulties a little more fully cleared. Dr. Twijffe (not fufpedted for an Antinomian, much leffe for a Familift) in his vindicicz graticz, de eledtione, Parte 2. Sedlion. 25. Numero 5. bringeth in Arminius, arguing againft Mr. Perkins , thus: “ The righteoufneffe of “ Chrift wrought or performed, is not ours, as wrought or “ performed, but as by Faith imputed to us. Whereto “ the Dr. anfwereth, Before Faith, this Righteoufneffe [49] “ of Chrift was ours, and in the intention of God the “ Father, and of Chrift our Mediator, was wrought for us. “ And becaufe it is wrought for us, therefore God in his “ own time will give it us, and Grace of every kind, even “ Faith it felf amongft the reft. But Faith coming, (which “ the Holy Ghoft kindleth in our hearts) then at length this “ love of God to us in Chrift , is acknowledged & perceived. “ Whence it is, that the Righteoufneffe of Chrift is faid to “ bee imputed to us, by Faith, becaufe it is not defcerned to “ be imputed to us, but by Faith : and then we are faid to be “juftified with that kind of Juftification, & abfolution from “ fin, which breedeth peace in our Confciences. “And this (faith he) I confirm by two arguments. 1. Be- “caufe by the Righteoufneffe of Chrift, wee obtain not onely “ Remiffion 45 354 The Antinomian Controverfy. “ Remiffion of finnes, but Faith it felf, and Repentance, as “ it is writen, God hath bleffed us with all fpirituall bleffmgs “in Chrift, Ephef. i. 3. Therefore even before Faith and “ Repentance, the Righteoufneffe of Chrift is applyed to us, “ as for which wee obtain Grace effeCtuall to believe in “Chrift, and to repent. 2. Becaufe Junification and ab- “ folution, as they fignify an immanent aft in God, are ab “ eterno, &c. “ Wherto he fubjoyneth the Poets ingenuous verfe to the reader. “ Si quid novijii rectius ijiis , “ Candidus imperti; fi non , bis utere mecum. Before Dr. Twifie , Chamier (a Divine, as free as the other from fufpition of Antinomianifme) denyeth Faith to bee a caufe of Juftification: “ For if it were (faith hee) Juftification “ fhould not be of Grace, but of us. But Faith is faid to “juftifie, not becaufe it effeCteth Juftification, but becaufe it “ is effected in the juftified perfon, and requifite to be found “ in him. De Fide libr. 13. cap. 6. And to the fame pur- pofe, De Juftifie atione, libr. 22. cap. 12. hee contendeth, “that Faith as it doth not merit, nor bring Juftification, fo “ neither doth it ( impetrare ) obtain it. For if it were fo, “ then turn ratione , turn tempore Fides prezeederet Jufiificatio- “ nem, Faith fhould goe before Juftification, both in nature “and time: Which (faith hee) in no fort may be granted. “ For Faith is it felf a part of SanCtification; but there is no “ SanCtification, but after Juftification, quee & re , & naturci “prior efi , which both in the thing it felf, and in nature is “ before it. To Cottons ‘‘IVay Cleared'.' 355 To the like purpose doth Mr. Pemble deliver his judg¬ ment in his Book of the Nature and Properties of Grace and Faith, Page 24. 26. of his Edition in Folio. [50] The Difcrepance of all thefe Divines from the received expreffions of the molt, gave juft occafion, why in fuch an Affembly, the judgment of fundry acute and judi¬ cious Elders, might be enquired. Accordingly, in one day of their difpute in the Synod (with Mr. Wheelwright , if I forget not) I interpofed fuch a word as this, God may bee faid to justifie me before the habit, or adt of Faith, and the habit is the effeft of my Junification, intending the fame fenfe, as hath been exprefied out of thofe Divines: upon which, the next day was taken up in difputing and arguing that Point with mee. And when I faw their apprehenfions, that they were fuitable to Scripture phrafe, and the contrary difficulties might bee removed fano fenfu , I the next morn¬ ing did of my felf freely declare to them publikely, my confent with them in the point, which (as they profeffed) they gladly accepted. Now upon all this relation (which is the fubftance of the whole Truth in this caufe) I defire Mr. Bay lie might con- fider what ground hee had, “ either to report mee to the “World as fometimes dangeroufly fallen into the horrible “ Errors of Antinomianifme, and Familifme: or to take Ms. “ Hutchinfons report in this caufe, That fhe was of Mr. “ Cottons judgment in all things. Let him pleafe to read the fhort ftory of the Errors and herefies, for which fliee was admonifhed publickly in Bofion Church, and compare them with the Tenents of mine now mentioned, and let him judge of himfelf, whether fhe was of Mr. Cottons judgment in all things. I 356 The Antinomian Controverfy. I would not have enlarged my felf fo much, either to clear her teftimony, or to elevate it, were it not to take off fome fcruples and furmifes in Mr. Bay lie of fome dan¬ gerous guilt in me of Antinomian, and Familifticall errors, which he thinkes cannot be avoided by what he collefteth from other teflimonies, as well as hers which may fully be prevented and avoided by this relation of the true date of things. But before I leave fpeech of her, let me fpeak a word to Mr. Bay lie of the Epithet hee is pleafed to give her, “ when “ hee ftyleth her, my dear friend, with whom I refolved to “ fide and feparate from all the Churches in New-England , “ as Legall Churches. At her firft comming fhe was well refpefted and [51] efteemed of me, not onely becaufe herfelf and her family were well beloved in England at Allford in Lincoln/hire (not far beyond Bojloni) nor onely becaufe fhe with her family came over hither (as was faid) for confcience fake: but chiefly for that I heard, fhee did much good in our Town, in womans meeting at Childbirth-Travells, wherein fhee was not onely fkilfull and helpfull, but readily fell into good difcourfe with the women about their fpirituall eftates: And therein cleared it unto them, That the foul lying under a Spirit of Bondage, might fee and fenfibly feel the hainous guilt, and deep defert of fin, and thereby not onely undergoe affliction of Spirit but alfo receive both reftraining, and conftraining Grace likewife, (in fome meaf- ure:) reftraining from all known evill (both courfes, and companies) (at leaft for a feafon) and conftraining to all knowen duties, as fecret Prayer, Family Exercifes, Con¬ fcience Cottons “Way Cleared 357 icience of Sabbaths, Reverence of Miniders, Frequenting of Sermons, Diligence in calling, honefby in dealing and the like: yea and that the Soul might find fome taftes and dailies of fpirituall comfort in this edate, and yet never fee or feel the need of Chrid, much leffe attain any faving Union, or Communion with him, being no more but Legall work, even what the Law, and the Spirit of bondage (breath¬ ing in it) might reach unto. By which means many of the women (and by them their hufbands) were convinced, that they had gone on in a Covenant of Works, and were much fhaken and humbled thereby, and brought to enquire more ferioudy after the Lord Jefus Chrid, without whom all their Gifts and Graces would prove but common, and their duties but legall, and in the end wizzen and vanidi. All this was well (as is reported truely, page 31 of her Story) and fuited with the publike Minidery, which had gone along in the fame way, fo as thefe private conferences did well tend to water the feeds publikely fowen. Whereupon all the faith- full embraced her conference, and blefled God for her fruit- full difcourfes. And many whofe fpirituall edates were not fo fafely layed, yet were hereby helped and awakened to difcover their fandy foundations, and to feek for better edablidiment in Chrid: which caufed them alfo to bleffe the Lord for the good fucceffe, which appeared to them by this difcovery. Hitherto therefore diee wrought with God, and with the Miniders, the work of the Lord. No marvell therefore if at that time, diee found loving and dear refpedl both from our Church-Elders and Brethren, and fo from my [52] felf alfo amongd the red. Afterwards, 358 The Antinomian Coniroverfy. Afterwards, it is true, fhe turned afide not only to corrupt opinions, but to dif-efteem generally the Elders of the churches, (though of them fhee efteemed befl of Mr. Shep- heard :) and for my felfe, (in the repetitions of Sermons in her houfe) what fhee repeated and confirmed, was accounted found, what fhee omitted, was accounted Apocrypha. This change of hers was long hid from me : and much longer the evidence of it, by any two clear witneftes. I fent fome Sifters of the Church on purpofe to her Repetitions, that I might know the truth: but when fhee difcerned any fuch prefent, no fpeech fell from her, that could be much excepted againft. But further difcourfe about her courfe is not per¬ tinent to the prefent bufineffe. But by this Mr. Baylie may difcerne, how farre Ms. Hutchinfon was dear unto mee, and if hee fpeak of her as my deare friend, till fhee turned afide, I refufe it not. But yet thus much I muft profeffe to him, That in the times of her beft acceptance, fhee was not fo dear unto mee, but that (by the help of Chrift) I dealt faithfully with her about her fpirituall eftate. There 1 things I told her, made her fpirituall eftate unclear to mee. 1. “That her Faith “ was not begotten nor (by her relation) fcarce at any time “ ftrengthened, by publick Miniftery, but by private Medita- “ tions, or Revelations onely. “2. That fhee clearly difcerned her Juftification (as fhee “ profeffed:) but little or nothing at all, her Sanctification: “ though (flie faid) fhee beleeved, fuch a thing there was by “ plain Scripture. “ 3. That flie was more fharply cenforious of other mens “ fpirituall 1 Mifprint for “three.” Cotton’s “Way Cleared'.' 359 “ fpirituall edates and hearts, then the fervants of God are “wont to be, who are more taken up with judging of them- “ felves before the Lord, then of others. Now a word of that other paffage, in Mr. Bay lies fpeech, “ touching my refolution to fide with Ms. Hutchinfon , and “ to feparate from all the Churches of New-England , as “ legall Synagogues. The truth is, I did intend to remove, but not to Separate; much leffe with Ms. Hutchinfon , and lead; of all from all the Churches of New-England: and yet leffe then the lead of all, to feparate from them, as legall Synagogues. The occafion of my intent of removall was this. After the banifliment of Ms. Hutchinfon and fundry [53] others by occafion of her, 1 the generall court made an order, that none fhould be received to abide as Inhabitants in this JurifdiCtion, unleffe they were allowed under the hand of the Governour, or two Affidants. The Afddants are our Magidrates. When this Law came to be put in ufe, I was informed that fome godly paffengers who hither arrived out of England, were refufed to fit down amongd us, becaufe (upon tryall) they held forth fuch an union with Chrid by the Spirit giving Faith, as did precede the afting of Faith upon Chrid 2 : and fuch an evidence of that union, by the favour of God died abroad in their hearts by the Holy Ghod, as did precede the feeing (though not the being) of Sanctification. This 1 Writing careleffly and from mem- Mrs. Hutchinfon was tried and banifhed ory, Cotton here falls into an error as in the following November by another to the fequence of events. The Alien General Court chofen in Odlober. law of 1637 was palled at the May fef- 2 Savage’s Winthrop , Vol. I. p. fion of the General Court of that year; * 224. 360 The Antinomian Controverfy. This took the deeper impreffion upon me, becaufe I faw by this meanes, wee fhould receive no more Members into our Church, but fuch as muft profeffe themfelves of a con¬ trary judgment to what I beleeved to bee a Truth. Befides I was informed, that it was the judgment of fome of place, in the Countrey, that fuch a DoCtrin of Union, and eviden¬ cing of Union, as was held forth by mee, was the Trojan Horfe, out of which all the erroneous Opinions and differ¬ ences of the Countrey did iffue forth. Hereupon, fearing this might in time breed a renewall of Paroxyfmes, I called to mind the intent of my comming hither, which was, not to difturb, but to edify the Churches here: and therefore began to entertain thoughts rather of peaceable removall then of offenfive continuance. At the fame time there was brought to mee a writing, fubfcribed with about threefcore hands to encourage me to removall, and offering their readineffe to remove with mee into fome other part of this Countrey. I confidered, If wee removed, it would be matter of much various conftruftion amongft fuch as knew us, both in Old- England , and New; and I was loth to doe any thing, (efpe- cially of importance) but what I might give account of before God, and his people; I took advice therefore of fome friends here, efpecially Mr. Davenport , and refolved, firft to clear the certainty of the grounds of the information given mee of the rejections of thofe godly perfons (of whom I had heard) for their judgments fake in thofe points. 2. To fee if [54] my continuance here would certainly, or probably breed any further offenfive agitation: And 3. If both thofe things were found clearly, then to take opportunity with Cottons “Way Cleared'.' 361 with common confent to remove to Qninipyatk 1 whereto at that time a door was opened. But when I came to enquire the certainty of thefe infor¬ mations, in conference with fome of our chief Magiftrates and others, I found, though there had fpeach been about fuch points between themfelves, and fome paffengers: yet their refufall of fuch paffengers was not upon thofe points, but (as I remember) upon denyall of inherent righteoufneffe in beleevers, and of any evidence of a good eftate from thence, firft or laffc. Withall, they declared to mee their minds touching fuch points of Union, or evidencing of Union, which I had taught, that they did not looke at them to bee of fuch Fundamentall concernment either to civill or Church-Peace, as needed to occafion any diftance in heart, (much leffe in place) amongft godly brethren. Which when I heard from them, and found upon fearch, the mif-informa- tions given mee, were but mifprifions, I then layed down all thoughts of removall, and fat down fatisfied in my aboad amongft them, and have fo continued (by the help of God) to this day. By all this may appear the truth of what I faid, that though I had thoughts of removall, yet not with Ms. Hutchinfon , fhee being gone to Road I/land\ but I intending Quinipyack. Much leffe had I any thoughts of Separation from all the Churches of New-England: for the Churches in Quinipiack are in New-England. And thofe Churches at the Bay (amongft whom I lived) It was far from my thoughts to feparate from them, whom I ever truely honored 1 Quilipeak, the Indian defignation was fettled by members of the church of the locality of New Haven. The of which Rev. John Davenport became events referred to in the text took place paftor, in the fpring of 1638. Supra, during the fummer of 1637 ; New Haven P- 12 8, n. 46 362 The Antinomian Controverfy. honored as the holy Spoufes of Jefus Chrift. Nor did I ever look at fuch Points, as any juft ground of Separation from any Church, (fo much as in place, much leffe in Com¬ munion :) no nor any juft ground of removall from them, unleffe a man were compelled to profeffe contrary to his judgment. And leaft of all durft I turn my back upon fuch Churches as Legall Synagogues, who do all of us hold Union with Chrift, and evidencing of Union by the fame Spirit, and the fame Faith and the fame holineffe: though fome may conceive the Union wrought in giving the habit, and others rather refer it to the adt: and fome may give the fecond place to that, whereto others give the firlt. It was therefore too much credulity in Mr. Baylie , [ 55 ] either to take up the former teftimony from Ms. Hutchinfon , or this latter from Mr. Williams.- 1 though if both of them had joyned in one and the fame Teftimony, (which they doe not) yet the Teftimony of two excommuni¬ cate Perfons doth not make up idoneum Tejlimonium in Ecclefiafticall caufes. “ No ? Saith Mr. Baylie , if I miftake not the humor of the “man, (Mr. Williams he meaneth) he is very unwilling to “ report a lie of his greateft enemy. I look not at my felf, as his greateft, or leaft, or any enemy at 1 Roger Williams. In his tradt entitled Mr. Cotton's Letter lately printed,\ Examined and Anfwered\ printed in London in 1644, Williams ufed the following language of Cotton : “ Should he diffent from the New Eng- lifh Churches, and joyn in worfhip with fome other (as fome few yeares fince he was upon the point to doe, in a fepara- tion from the Churches there as legall) would he count it a mercy,” &c. (p. 12). To this Cotton replied at length in his Majler John CottotCs anfwer to Majler Roger Williams; and he there (pp. 50, 51) dates the fadts connected with his propofed removal from Bodon in 1637 much as they are dated in the text. Vide Publications of the Narra- ganfett Club, Vol. I. p. 337; Vol. II. pp. 80-84. Cottons “IVay Cleared'.' 363 at all. I doe not know, that I did ever walke towards him either in the affedtion, or adtion of an enemy, notwithftand- ing the provoking injuries, and indignities hee hath put upon mee. Nor would I call it any mans humor (as Mr. Bay lie calleth it, Mr. Williams his humor) “ to be very unwilling to report “ a lye of his greateft enemy. But this I fay, Mr. Williams is too too credulous of fur- mifes and reports brought to him, and too too confident in divulging of them. Which if Mr. Baylie know not, hee may (at his leifure, if hee think it worth the while) perufe the Reply, I have made to his anfwer of my Letter, as alfo my anfwer to his bloody Tenent. But Mr. Baylie giveth the more credit to Mr. Williams his Teftimony, becaufe Mr. Williams faith in his examina- “ tion of my Letter, How could I poffibly (faith hee) bee “ ignorant of their eflate, when being from firffc to lafl in “ fellowfhip with them, an Officer amongft them, had private “ and publick agitation concerning their Eftate with all, or “ moft of their Miniffers ? The anfwer is very eafie both to Mr. Williams , and Mr. Baylie too, that Mr. Williams fpeaketh of the times before his banifhment: then indeed he had fome fellowfhip with us, and might have had more, but that hee fupedted all the Statos conventus of the Elders to bee unwarrantable, and fuch as might in time make way to a Prefbyteriall govern¬ ment. But this Teftimony, which hee giveth about my neereneffe to Separation from thefe Churches, was many yeares after his banifhment from us, when hee was in no fellowfhip with us, facred nor civill, nor came any whit neer any 364 The Antinomian Controverfy. any private or publick agitation amongft us, nor could have any intelligence of our affaires, but by report and fame, which is tam fitti pravique tenax , quam nuncia veri , and is indeed in this point, moft falfe. [56] “ But yet (faith Mr. Bay lie) the truth of this horrible “fall (of Mr. Cotton ) if you will not take it, neither “from the followers of Ms. Hutchinfon , nor from the Tefti- “ mony of Mr. Williams: yet wee may not reject the witneffe “of Mr. Winthrop , and of Mr. Wells in their printed rela- “ tions of the Schifmes there. “ Both thefe, albeit, with all care and ftudy, they endeavour “to fave Mr. Cottons credit: yet they let the truth of Mr. “ Cottons Sedudlion fall from their Pens in fo clear termes, “ as cannot bee avoided : yea fo clear, as no Art will o;et Mr. “ Cotto7i cleared. Notwithftanding al this confident charge of Mr. Bay lie, there will be no need at al of any Art to clear Mr. Cotton, from fedudtion into any fuch horrible fall, the naked truth (by the helpe of Chriff) will clear both it felf, and him. The Teftimonies of Mr. Winthrop , and Mr. Wells, are all deliv¬ ered (as it feemeth) in the fhort Story. There “ In the Preface, page 7. It is faid, by this time, they had “ to patronife them, fome of the Magiftrates, and fome men “eminent for Religion, Parts and Wit. Anfw . 1. This were fomething, if there were no more men eminent for Religion, Parts and Wit, in the Countrey but my felf, who profeffe no eminency in any of thefe in refpect of many of my Brethren. But if I were eminent, the teftimony concludeth not. Let not Art judge, whether the conclufion will follow from both the premifes particular: but Cottons “IVay Cleared!' 365 but let common fenfe judge of fuch men, as then lived in the Countrey, whether there were not many eminent per- fons for Religion, Parts, and Wit, who did patronife them, though I had been out of the Countrey. 2. I willingly confeffe, that I myfelf, though I did not patronife them, yet I did countenance them (in my meafure) whilffc they held forth (to my knowledge) no more then I have formerly delivered of my own Tenents: which yet I hope he will not again tax, as an horrible fall into Antino- mianifme and Familifm. When their Errors were brought to me, I bare publike witneffe againft them, even before I was fully perfwaded that thofe perfons were guilty of them. His next Teftimony (which hee quoteth from page 25. of the fhort Story) the former part of it concerneth Mr. Whele- wright , and not mee: though I mud: confeffe I doe not know how it can be collected from Mr. Whele- [57] wrights dodlrin, unleffe it were by a foreftalled mif- apprehenfion and mif-application of thofe hearers, who were leavened with corrupt Opinions. The latter part of the teftimony, “ That the former Governor never ftirred out, but “attended by the Serjants with Halberts or Carrabines, but “ the prefent Governor was negledted: I do not remember, that ceremony was any more then once neglected : and when I heard it, I bore witneffe againft it. And they excufed their former obfervance, by the eminency of the perfon. But fure I am, the prefent Governor (as he well deferveth all honor from this Peopole, fo) he is feldome or never feen in publick, but in like fort attended with Hal¬ berts or Carrabines. Next, he alledgeth a teftimony from the Court, which (it is 366 The Antinomian Controverfy. is likely) was delivered by Mr. Winthrop , being then Gov¬ ernor, page $5. of the fhort Story: “ They foon profited fo “ well, as in a few moneths, they outwent their Teacher. Anfw . This teflimony is fo far from taxing mee of any horrible fall, that it clearly acquiteth mee from the fellowfhip thereof. For if they outwent their Teacher, as the Court faid (and faid truely:) then I went not along with them in their Tenents. And Teacher I was called, and their Teacher, as being called to that Office in that Church, whereof many of them were Members. The next teflimony (from page 33. of the ftory) expreffeth, “ That upon the countenance it took from fome eminent Perfons, her Opinions began to hold up their heads in Courts of Juftiee.” Anfw. This might indeed argue, that fome Magiflrates leaned more or lelfe to that way: but it reacheth not me, who am feldome prefent at any Courts, but when with other Elders I am fent for. And let it not be forgotten, what I related above, that many held with thofe Opinionifts (as they were called) when they knew of no other opinions held forth by them, but what was publickly taught in our Church : but after they were difcovered to overgoe not fo much their Teachers, as the truth, and that fo evidently, as could clearly be convinced by the teflimony of two or three witneffes, they were foon forfaken by thofe, who efleemed better of them before. His next teflimony is from the ftory page 32. “ It was a “ wonder, upon what a fuddain, the whole Church of [58] “ Bofton (fome few excepted) were become her new “ Converts, and infedled with her Opinions. “And Cottons “IVay Cleared 367 “ And Preface page 7. moft of the Seducers lived in the “ Church of Bofton. Anfw. That moft of the Church of Bofton confented with Ms. Hutchinfon , (whilft fhee openly held forth no more, then what was publickly taught) is true; but nothing to prove Mr. Cottons horrible fall, for after fhee fell into any horrible, or evident erors, it may clearly appear, the whole Church were not become her converts, by this undenyable evidence, that the whole body of the Church (except her own fon) confented with one accord, to the publick cenfure of her, by admonition firft, and excommunication after. “ But (faith Mr. Bay lie) None of thefe erroneous perfons “ were ever called to account by the Prefbytery of that “ Church, till after the Affembly, though the Paftor of the “ Church, Mr. Wilfon was alwayes exceeding zealous againft u them. Anfw . 1. Mr. Bay lie is miftaken, when he faith, Mr. Wilfon was alwayes exceeding zealous againft them. For the whole Church will bear him witneffe, hee was a long time full of much forbearance towards them, and thought well of them, and bare witneffe to the wayes of free Grace in fuch manner, as teftified his good will to them and the Truth. Afterwards in fome private conference, which one or more of them had with him, and (our beloved Sifter) his Wife, he difcerned fome more rottenneffe in them, and their way, then he fufpefted before. And after that time indeed, he grew more zealous againft them, but the occafion of the offence was private, and (for a good fpace) unknown both to mee and the Church. 2. But why they were not called to account by the Pref¬ bytery 368 The Antinomian Controverfy. bytery of the Church, the reafon was evident: becaufe their grofle errors were not confirmed into us, by two or three witneffes. And this I can truely profeffe, That when the Elders of other Churches acquainted mee with fome of their Errors, (even when the noife of them was fpred far and neer:) yet they acknowledged, the Erroneous perfons were fo cautious, that they would never vent any grofle Errors before two witneffes. And this I can further truely avouch, that my felf dealt fadly and ferioufly with fome chief leaders of them, both by word, and writing to recover them from the Error of their way: which though they would [59] argue for, yet they would ever excufe themfelves from fetling upon any fuch things. I dealt alfo with others (whom I began to fufpedt might be leavened by their Leaders) and earneftly charged them to beware what Ten- ents they received from them, left by that means they might be corrupted themfelves, and their Leaders hardned. But they would not bee known to me, that they drunke in any fuch dregs, as afterwards appeared. His next teftimony is taken from Ms. Hutchinfons fpeach in the open Court. “ Preferring my Miniftery in holding “forth free Grace, above fome, or moft of the other Elders. But of the invalidity of her teftimony in thefe things I have fpoken, (I fuppofe) enough above. An evill Spirit (which fometimes breatheth both in good and bad perfons,) may give a glorious teftimony to fome fervants of God, not fo much to honour them, or their dodtrine, as either to cover themfelves under their fhadow, or elfe (but that was not her aime) to bring them and their Doctrin into fufpition, and trouble, as the Spirit of the Pythoneffe did to Paul and Silas, Cottons “Way Cleared!' 369 Silas, Atl. 16, 17, to 20. That fpeach of hers, I bore wit- neffe againft it, as prejudiciall and injurious both to them and mee. Another teftimony hee alledgeth out of the Story, Page 50. “ That all the Minifters confented in bearing fome witneffe “againft Mr. Whelewright , except their Brother the Teacher “of Bofton. Anfw. The Story relateth thofe words, as the fpeach of the Elders; that they fpeak of me, as their Brother, to wit, the brother of the Elders, left any fhould mifconceive of their fpeach, as ranking me in a Brotherhood with erroneous perfons. That I did not confent with the reft of my Brethren (the Elders) in drawing the inference out of Mr. Whelewrights Sermon, which they (being required) prefented to the Court, I had a twofold reafon for it. 1. Becaufe I was not prefent with them, when they fearched Mr. Whelewrights Sermon, and gathered that inference from it. 2. Becaufe I could not fpeake it of mine own knowledge, “ That the Elders of the Country did walk in or teach fuch “ a way of Salvation, and evidencing thereof, as Mr. Whele- “ wright defcribedeth, and accounteth to bee a Covenant of “ Works. They knew what themfelves taught in that point, better then I. The Elders might teftifie what they [60] knew: I could not teftifie what I knew not. But it feemeth any teftimonies will ferve turn, when fuch as thefe are thought unavoidable, to lay me under the guilt of an horrible fall. Yet one more remaineth, from page 21. “ That albeit the 7 “ Affembly 370 The Antinomian Controverfy. “ Affembly of the Churches had confuted and condemned “ moft of thefe new opinions, and Mr. Cotton had in publick “ view confented with the reft: yet the leaders in thofe “ Erroneous wayes flood ftill to maintain their New Light. “ Mr. Whelewright alfo continued his Preaching, and Ms. “ Hutchinfon her wonted meetings: and much offence was “ ftil given by her, and others in going out from the Paftors “ Exercife. Anfw . i. As the Affembly of the Churches confuted and condemned thofe Errors, fo I will not fay, That the motion of confuting them (as I remember) arofe from my felf. And my felf alfo had an hand in confuting fuch of them, as the Elders committed to my hand, as themfelves took feverall likewife taskes, none of us confuted all. My confent to the confutation, I have expreffed above, and in what fenfe. What I did in publick view (as the Story expreffeth it) I fpake before the Lord, and from the truth of my heart. That notwithflanding this A6t of the Affembly againft the Errors, the leaders ftill flood to maintain their way, it was becaufe the Affembly did not faften thefe Errors upon any Perfons either in our own, or other Churches. And what corrupt opinions were maintained by our Members, it was done in private, and not before fuch witneffes, as might reach to publick conviction. Mr. Whelewrights continuance in his preaching, was 8. or 9. miles diftance from us. And having been put into that place before by the Church, whilft the Farmers there be¬ longed to our Church, (which by reafon of the diftance, wee foon after difmiffed into a Church-eftate amongft themfelves) wee that were Elders could not (if wee would) difcharge him from Cottons “Way Cleared'.' 37i from that worke, without the confent of the Church. But though hee gave fome offence in fome paffages at the Af- fembly, (which hee fince upon further conference and con- fideration retraced:) yet neither the Church, nor my felf (notwithdanding thofe unfafe expreffions) did ever look at him either as an Antinomian or Familift. Many of us knew that hee had taken good paines againd both, and in that very place, where hee was wont to preach ; infomuch that one of his hearers (who fince joyned to Mr. Gortons [61] fociety) openly contefted againft his dodtrine as falfe and Antichriftian. And when Mr. Whelewright was put out of this Countrey (though hee be fince redored) yet if hee had cleaved to the Errors which Ms. Hutchinfons com¬ pany fell into, he would never have refufed their earned invitation and call of him, to Minifter unto them. They fent to him, and urged him much to come to them, to a far richer foyle, and richer company then where hee lived: yet hee conftantly refufed, and upon that very ground, becaufe of the corruption of their judgments : “ Profeffing often, “ whilffc they pleaded for the Covenant of Grace, they took “ away the Grace of the Covenant. Ms. Hutchinfons continuance of her weekly meetings we could not proceed to the fuppreffion thereof, with confent of the Church, before wee received the conviction of her perfonall Errors, which fhee dill clofely carryed, till after her civill cenfure. And then fhee declared her felf more plainly, and witneffes arofe more fully, and the Church proceeded againd her accordingly. The going of her felf and others out of the Congregation when our Pador began to Exercife, though many feared it was 372 The Antinomian Controverfy . was a turning their backs upon his Miniftery: yet the moft of them were women, and they pretended many excufes for their going out, which it was not eafie to convince of falf- hood in them, or of their contempt of him. But in fine, when her Antinomian and Familifticall Errors were held forth by her before fufficient witneffes, our Church (as I faid before) proceeded without delay, firft, to admonifh her according to the rule, Tit . 3. 10, 11. Afterwards when upon ferious paines taken with her, Mr. Davenport , and my felf (as wee thought) had convinced her of her erroneous wayes in judgment and practice, fo as that under her hand, fhee prefented a Recantation before the whole Church, (indeed before many Churches then afTembled at Bofton ) yet withall, (after fome paffages of fpeach) “ Profeffmg that “ fhee never was of any other judgment, then what fhe now “ held forth, fo many witneffes forthwith rofe up to convince “the contrary, that with common confent both of the Elders “ and Brethren of our Church, fhee was caff out of our “ Communion. And now that (by the help of Chrift) I have [62] perufed all the teftimonies, which Mr. Baylie hath alledged to convince me of an horrible fall into Anti- nomianifm, and Familifm, I defire him in the fear of God to confider, whether any or all thefe teftimonies feverally or jointly, will amount to make good fuch grievous fcandalls, as hee hath charged upon mee. Which if they neither will, nor can reach unto, let him remember his promile in his Epiftle Dedicatory, “ That in all which he hath faid over “and above (juft teftimony) he will undertake to give ample “ fatisfadtion, wherein fo ever he hath given the leaft offence to Cottons “Way Cleared'.' 373 “ to any. Meane while the Lord lay not this fin to his charge. Sect. 14. Of Cottons humiliation upon his former fall , as is reported by Mr. Baylie. But yet let me adde a word more, to a word of Mr. Baylies in his entrance of this difcourfe of my Antinomianifm, and Familifm, which may elfe leave an impreffion upon the minds of fome Reader, as if I had acknowledged this my dangerous fal, and had been much humbled for it. “ This other more dangerous fall (faith hee) as it hath “already much humbled his Spirit, and opened his eare to “ inftrudtion, and I truft will not leave working, till it have “ brought him yet nearer to his Brethren: fo to the worlds “ end, it cannot but be a matter of fear and trembling to all, “ who fhall know it, and of abundant caution, to bee very “ wary of receiving any Angularity from his hand, without “ due tryall. Anfw. 1. Suppofe all this were true in terminis , as Mr. Baylie hath expreffed it, yet this were no impeachment at all to the docftrin and pradlice of that (which hee calleth) our Independent Church way; nor is it any juft ground of caution to bee wary of receiving my teftimony to it. Peters dangerous and dreadful fall into the denyall of Chrift, (though hee feemed to be a pillar) was no impeachment, but ad¬ vancement to Chriftianity. And if my fall were fo danger¬ ous, walking in this Church-way, and ftumbling fo foully in it, the greater Grace and witnefte from heaven was upon his Churches in this way, who by the bleffing of God were inftruments of recovering me out of this fall, even by a confultatory 374 The Antinomian Controver/y. confultatory conference in a Synod, which did not affume to themfelves any power of Church-cenfures. Let mee be accounted to have fallen, and to have fallen (as Mr. [63] Bay lie reprefen teth it) horribly, fo that the truth and wayes of Chrift may ftand and find free paffage. Neither is this fall of mine fuch a juft ground of caution (as he would make it) unto any, to bee very wary of receiv¬ ing my teftimony to this Church way. For the way is no way of fmgularity from my hand, but that which the body of the reft of my Brethren, and of the Churches in this Country doe walk in with mee. Anfw . 2. But yet, let not Mr. Baily make further fpeech or ufe of my humiliation, then was performed, or intended by me. For God hath not given mee to this day (upon my beft fearch) to difcerne any fuch dangerous fall into Antino- mianifme, or Familifme, as either hath, or might much humble my fpirit. It is true, my fpirit had much caufe to be humbled, (and fo through mercy it was) upon many juft occafions at that time. As fir ft, that fo many Erroneous and Hereticall opinions fhould be broached in the Country, and carried on with fuch Arrogancy,. and Cenforioufneffe, and guile of fpirit. Secondly, That the principall offenders in this kind were members of our own Church, and fome of them fuch as had neer relation to my felf. Thirdly, that my felf fhould be fo fleepy and invigilant, as that thefe (not Tares onely, but Bryers) fhould be fowen in our Field, and my felf not difcerne them, till fundry perfons up and down the Countrey were leavened by them. Fourthly, Cottons “Way Cleared 375 Fourthly, that fuch as endeavoured the healing of thefe diftempers, did feeme to me to be tranfported with more jealoufies, and heates, and paroxyfmes of fpirit, then would well ftand with brotherly love, or the rule of the Gofpel. The bitter fruits whereof doe remaine to this day, in the Letters fent over that year from hence to England. Whence alfo it came to paffe finally, that in the courfe taken for the clenfing of Gods Field, it feemed to me, that fome good Wheat was pluckt up with the Tares, fome fimple hearted honeft men, and fome truths of God, fared the worfe for the refemblance which the tares bare to them. Upon all which grounds, my felf with our whole Church thought it needfull to fet a day apart for publick humiliation before the Lord, wherein thefe and the like, both in Prayer and Preaching, were opened more at large before the Lord and his people. But all this will not amount to make good Mr. [64] Baylies word, “ That my dangerous fall into Antino- “ mianifme and Familifme hath much humbled my Spirit. Nor can I fay (as he doth) that it hath opened mine eares to inftrudlion. For I doe not know, that they have been fhut to it, when I difcerned the Spirit, and Word of truth breathing in it. Nor can I fay after him, “ That the humbling of my fpirit “for thofe dangerous errours, will not leave working till it “ have brought me yet nearer to my brethren. For though I bleffe the Lord, who hath brought me nearer to my brethren, and them alfo nearer to me, which I truft will ftill grow whilft our felves grow (in all the duties of brotherly love, wherein we have much fweet and frequent intercourfe 376 The Antinomian Controverfy. intercourfe:) yet I doe not interpret this as the fruit of my fpirits humiliation for my Antinomy, and Familifme : but as the fruit of our clearer apprehenfion, both of the caufe and of the hate of our differences, and of our joynt content and concurrence in bearing witneffe againh the common herehes, and errors of Antinomianifme, and Familifme, which dihurbed us all. But Mr. Baily as he began his difcourfe of my dangerous fall with relation of my humiliation for it: fo hee fhutteth it up, pag. 58, with a like clofe of my griefe of mind, and con- fuhon for it. “ I have been informed (faith he) by a gratious Preacher “ who was prefent at the Synod in New-England , that all “ the Brethren there, being exceedingly fcandalized with Mr. “ Cottons carriage, in Mihris Hutchinfons proceffe, did fo “ farre difcountenance, and fo feverely admonifh him, that “ hee was thereby brought to the greateh fhame, confufion “ and griefe of mind, that ever in all his life he had endured. Anfw. 1, I conceive it is not allowable in Prefbyteriall difcipline, (fure I am, not in Congregationall) that an accu- fation fhall be received againft an Elder under one witneffe, though he gratious and a Preacher: efpecially when this gratious Preacher is nameleffe, and his teftimony hovereth in generalities, without inftance in particular offences: as “ That all the Brethren were exceedingly fcandalized with “ Mr. Cottons carriage in Miftris Hutchinfons proceffe, but not expreffing what carriage, nor what proceffe, nor wherein they were fcandalized. [65] “ And that all the Brethren did fo far difcountenance “ him, and feverely admonifh him, as that he was “ thereby Cottons “IVay Cleared'.' 377 “ thereby brought to the greateft fhame, and confufion, and “grief of mind, that ever in all his life he endured. But no mention for what offence they did fo feverely admonifh him, nor wherein they did fo farre difcountenance him. Such words of infamy, and reproach may paffe for Table talke, (which yet morall Philofophy would not approve:) but lurely in orderly Church-Difcipline, fuch dealing could not paffe without juft reproof, unleffe there were too much preju¬ dice or partiality, the rule is plain and obvious, and not now the firft time violated in the Diffwalive, 2 Tim. 5. 19. Anfw. 2. I muft (as juftly I may) proteft againft that teftimony, not onely as violating the rule of Love, but of Truth alfo. For, 1. It is untrue, that all the Brethren were fcandalized with my carriage, much leffe exceedingly fcandalized at the Synod, or in any proceffe about Ms. Hutchinfon. There were fundry godly brethren otherwife minded, and otherwife affedled. * 2. It is untrue alfo, that fuch as were fcandalized, did fo feverely admonifh me, or difcountenance me ; for I can neither call to mind any fuch deep difcountenance, nor any fuch fevere admonition of Brethren, and yet I had reafon to know it, and to remember it well, as well as any Brother at the Synod : the matter fo neerly concerning my felf, and more neerly and deeply, then any man elfe. 3. It is moffc untrue, that I was fo far difcountenanced, “ and fo feverely admonifhed, as that I was brought to the “greateft fhame, confufion and grief of mind, that ever in “ all my life I had endured. I fhould have little comfort in my own fpirit, to look 48 either 378 The Antinomian Controverfy. either God or man in the face, “ if the difcountenance or “admonition of men (efpecially for fuch carriage) were the “ greateft fliame, and confufion, and grief of mind, that ever “ in all my life I had endured. The rebukes of God upon the foule for fin will put a man to far greater fliame, and confufion and grief of mind, then any difcountenance, or admonition from Brethren, (efpecially for fuch offences) Pfal. 76. 7. But whatfoever difcountenance, or dif-refpedt I met withal, from one hand or other, till the true flate of my judgment, and carriage was clearly manifefted, I have [66] long agoe left with the Lord. But I conceive I have met with more hard meafure in Letters to England ,, and in ungrounded reports there, then ever I found from the admonition, or difcountenance of any brethren here. [82] Sect. 18. Of the third fhamefull abfurdity /aid to bee found in our way of Independency . Come wee now to confider of the third fhamefull Abfurd¬ ity, “which Mr. Baylie maketh the fruit of our Independ- “ ency, breaking forth in the pradtifes and profeffion of the “ moft, who have been admitted as very fit, if not the fitted: “ Members of our Churches. And thefe evill fruits hee brancheth out into five forts : “ 1. (Saith he) in the vileneffe of their Errors. “ 2. In the multitude of the erring perfons. “ 3. In the hypocrifie joyned with their Errors. “4. In malice againft their Neighbors, and con- [83] tempt of their fuperiors, Magifirates and Minifters for oppofition to their evill way. Cotton’s “IVay Cleared'.' 379 “5. In their lingular obftinacy, fliffly flicking unto their errors, &c. Anfw . 1. Suppofe all this to bee true: yet this is fo far from difcrediting the way of Independency, or arguing the Tree to be bad by thefe bad fruits, that it doth rather juftifie the way to be of God, which fo eafily hath either healed, or removed, fo many, fo vile, fo generall, fo fubtle, fo headflrong corruptions, and them that maintained them. Non feclus , non fcelerum varietas aut atrocitas, is dedecus Politico , fed fcelerum impunitas . The Church of Ephefus was not blamed by Chrift, becaufe falfe Apoftles and Nicolaitans were found amongft them : but commended, becaufe fhe could not beare them, Rev . 2. 2. 6. Nor is Thyatira blamed, that Jezabell was found amongft them, but that they fuffered her, Rev. 2. 20. What if fo many, fo hideous vile Errors were found in our Churches ? What if the number of erring perfons were (as he fpeaketh) incredible? “ Multitudes of men and women everywhere infefted ? almoft “ no Society, nor Family in the Land free from the peft ? “ Bofion (which he is pleafed to ftyle, the beft and moft fa- “ mous of our Churches) fo far corrupted, that few were “ untainted ? What if they accounted the late Governour “their true friend, and thought no leffe of Mr. Cotton , and “ Mr. JVhelewright whom they adored ? What if they had “ drawn to their fides not onely multitudes of the people, “but the ableft men for parts, in all Trades, efpecially the “ Souldiers ? What if all thefe evills were carryed forth “ with prefumptuous contumacy againft godly Magiftrates, “ and the Orthodox Minifters ? yea, what if to all the reft, “ they added obftinacy againft al wholfome meanes of re- “ dreffe and remedy ? I 380 The Antinomian Controverfy. Is it not therefore the more evident Demonftration of the gratious prefence, and mighty power of God, in the Difci- pline of our Churches, that did fo effectually, fo fpeedily, fo fafely, fo eafily, purge out all this Leaven, either out of the hearts of the people, out of their Families, and Churches, or elfe out of the Country ? Whence the argument feemeth to mee to arife unavoid¬ ably. Thofe evills, which Independency doth either heal, or remove, they are not the fruits of Independency. But all thefe grievous and dangerous evils, Independency did either heal or remove. [84] Therefore thefe grievous and dangerous evills were not the fruits of Independency. Again, That government, which by the bleffmg of Chrift, doth fafely, fpeedily, and effectually purge out fuch grievous and dangerous evills, as threaten the ruine of Church and State, that government is fafely allowed, and juftly and wifely eftablifhed in any civill State. But Independency by the bleffmg of Chrift doth fpeedily, fafely, and effectually purge out fuch grievous and dangerous evills, as threaten the ruine of Church and State: therefore Independency is fafely allowed, and juftly, and wifely eftab¬ lifhed in any civill State. Ob . 1. But this purging and healing of thefe grievous and dangerous evills was not the fruit of their Independent- Church-Government, but of their civill Government. “ We “ have oft marvelled, that the Elderfhip of Bofton did never “ fo much, as call Ms. Hutchinfon before them, to be rebuked “ for any of her errors, though their generall Affembly had confuted Cottons “Way Cleared 381 “ confuted them, and condemned them: yet ftill fhee was “ permitted to goe on, till the zeal of the new Governour, “ and the generall Court did condemne her to perpetuall “ banifhment. Then, and not till then, fo far as wee can “ perceive by the ftory, did the Church of Bojion bring a “ proceffe againft her. And when the proceffe was brought “ to an end, Mr. Cotton would by no meanes put it in execu- “ tion; that burden was layed upon the back of Mr. Wilfon “ his Colleague, how ever not the fitted; Inftrument, being “ the perfon to whom Ms. Hutchinfon had profeffed greateft “ oppofition. And when the fentence was pronounced “ againft her, they tell us, that the great caufe of it was none “ of her Errors or Herefies, but her other praftifes, fpecially “ her groffe lying. Anfw. \< Whatever affiftance the civill Government gave to the purging and healing of thefe evils, it was the fruit of Independent Church Government. For whether the Neighbour Churches fufpebted our Church of Bofton might bee partiall, and indulgent to thefe erroneous perfons: or whether they faw, we wanted fufficient witneffes upon which wee might proceed againft them in a Church way, they took a right courfe (according to the principles of the Independ¬ ent Government) to gather into a Synod with the confent of the civill Magiftrates: and in the Synod to [85] agitate, convince and condemne the Errors, and the offenfive carriages then ftirring. Whereat the Magiftrates being prefent, they faw juft caufe to proceed againft the chief of thofe whom they conceived to have bred any civill difturbance : and the Churches faw caufe to proceede againft their Members, whom they found to bee broachers or main- tamers of fuch herefies. A , Anjw. 382 The Antinomian Controverfy. Anfw . 2 It hath been declared above, why the Elderfhip “ of Bofton did not call Ms, Hutchinfon before them to “ rebuke her for her Errors, or to reftraine her from going “ on, though the generall Affembly had confuted and con- “ demned her Errors and courfe. For though the Errors were condemned, (and by the Elders of Bofton , as well as others:) yet the errors were not fattened perfonally upon her: nor had we any two witneffes, that would affirm it to us, that ffiee did broach or maintain fuch errors or herefies, till after her fentence unto baniffiment by the generall Court; And then indeed, as ffie was more bold and open in declaring her judgment before many wit¬ neffes; fo the Elders of the Church of Bofton called her to account before the Church, and convinced her of her Errors, and with the content of the Church, layed her, and one or two more of her abettors under the cenfure of an admoni¬ tion even for thofe corrupt opinions, which were charged upon her, and proved againft her. "Ob. 1. Yea but Mr. Cotton would by no means put the “ cenfure in execution upon her, that burden muff be layed “upon the back of Mr. Wilfon , &c. Anfw . The cenfure of admonition, becaufe it was for matter of Erroneous doftrine, it was thought meet to bee dispenfed and adminiftred by Mr Cotton , who was their Teacher: which alfo (by the help of Chrift) hee did performe, fetting before her both the corrupt caufes of her errors, and the bitter fruits of them: and charging her folemnly before the Lord, and his Angells, and Churches then affembled, to return from the Error of her way. Afterwards, when upon further ferious debate and con- * ference Cottons “IVay Cleared, 383 ference with her by Mr. Davenport , and my felfe, fhe was convinced of all her errors in particular, fhee being called againe before the Church, did openly recant every errour and herefie, and profeffed her repentance for every mifcarriage againft Magiftrates and Elders: which [86] farre exceeded the expectation of the whole Congrega¬ tion, which then confided of many Churches, and ftrangers. But when fhee had done, fhe added withall, “ that fhe had “ never been of other judgement, howfoever her expreffions “ might feem to vary. This founded fo hardily, and faldy in the eares of many witneffes, that many rofe up to convince her of her falfhood and lying, in fo faying. Which when fhee did not hearken to, fhee was efteemed, by the judge¬ ment of the Elders, and our whole Church, to be juftly fubjeft to excommunication. Which though I did not think meet to bee difpenfed by my felf (becaufe the offence was not in matter of Doftrin, but of praftife, which more properly belonged to the Paftours Office, or ruling Elders:) yet I declared to the whole Congregation the righteoufneffe of the cenfure, and fatisfyed the Scruples of fome Brethren, who doubted of it. But yet if the Church, or other Elders had put that taske upon me, I fhould no more have refufed the difpenfing of the cenfure of excommunication upon her, then I did before of admonition. Neither was her oppo- fition againft Mr. Wilfon any juft reafon of exempting him from that duty. For fhee faw, wee all with one accord, concurred in that fentence; it was no partiall aft of his, but the common vote both of the Prefbytery, and Fraternity. And what if fhe had profeffed her oppofition againft us all ? had that been a juft excufe to exempt any of us from per¬ forming 384 The Antinomian Controverfy . forming a fervice due to God, and the Church, yea and to herfelf alfo ? ObjeEl . 2. “ But when the fentence was propounded “ againft her, they tell us, the great caufe of it was none of “ her Errours, and Herefies, but for other pradlifes, efpecially “ her groffe lying. Anfw. Wee could not juftly pronounce the caufe of her fentence to be her errors and herefies, which fhe had openly recanted, and given her recantation under her handwriting. Neither did any of us fay, That fuch Herefies did not deferve the cenfure of excommunication, if fhe had con¬ tinued obftinate in them: but wee thought it needfull to follow the rule of the Apoftle, not to rejeft an Heretick till after once or twice admonition, Tit. 3. 10. under which if the Heretick relent, the Church proceeding ftayeth, unleffe fome other offence fet it forward, as it did in her cafe. [87] Sect. 19. Tending to reTtifie fome miftakes of Mr. Baylie in relating the former abfurdities. But before I leave this clofe of Mr. Baylies third Chapter, touching the evill fruits of Independency, let mee advertife him of fome few further miftakes in his Narration of the fame. Firft, when he reckoneth in the front of vile errours, the inhabitation of the perfon of the Spirit in all the godly, let him weigh what hath been faid above, touching that point. And if hee cleare it to be an errour, I willingly fhall ac¬ knowledge, hee fhall teach me that, which I yet know not. I profeffe my felf willing to learn of a meaner man, then Mr. Baylie . “ Secondly, Cottons “Way Cleared 385 “ Secondly, when he maketh the number of the erring “ perfons incredible, almoft no fociety, no family free from 44 that peft, Bojlon it felf fo farre infedted, that few there were “ untainted : let him be pleafed to confider, whether his tefti- mony will make it good. His teftimonies (recited in his Markes FF. GG.) fpeak to the utmofl of truth, but not fo much as he avoucheth. The fhort Story in Preface, pag. 7. faith indeed, “ They had fome of all forts and qualities in “ all places to patronize and defend them : and almoft in “ every family fome were ready to defend them as the Apple “ of their own eye. But this will not make it good, that almoft in every family fome were infedled with the peft of their errours. It is one thing to fpeak in the defence of erroneous perfons, another to fpeak in defence of errours. Multitudes there were, that thought well of the perfons, who knew nothing of their errours, but heard onely of their unbottoming fandy founda¬ tions of a fpirituall eftate, which hath been mentioned above, Chap. 3. Which may alfo truely be faid even of Bojlon like wife. The body of the Church, the greateff part of them were like thofe members of the Church in Thyatira , of whom it is faid (Rev. 2. 24) They knew not the depths of Satan. The truth whereof may evidently appeare by this, That when thofe errors of Miftris Htitchinfon were publickly charged upon her before the Church, and proved by sufficient wit- neffes, the whole body of the Church, and all the Brethren with one accord (fave onely her fonne) con- [88] fented readily to her cenfure: which they would not “ have done, if the whole Church of Bojlon (fome excepted) 49 “ had 386 The Antinomian Controverfy. “ had become her converts, and were infefted with her “ opinions. “ Thirdly, when hee faith, they adored fome of their Min- “ ifters, and inftanceth in Mr. Cotton , and Mr. Whelewright . Adoration is too vaft an Hyperbole to be made good by juft teftimonies. All hyperbolicall praifes, though they may farre exceed the bounds of truth in comparifons of men with men; yet they will not reach adoration, which is divine worfhip. Neither will it bee made good, That they magni¬ fied either Mr. Whelewright , or me, for the defence of their errors. Yea they foon forfooke Mr. Whelewright (as well as he them) when they faw his judgement (as well as mine) againft Antinomianifme, and Familifme. Fourthly, when he faith, “ Miftris Hutchin/on , and the late “ Governour, kept almoft every day, fo private and long dif- “ courfe with Mr. Cotton , that made them conclude all was “ their own. I muft needs profeffe, that cannot be made good by any witneffe of truth, Miftris Hutchin/on feldome reforted to mee: and when fhe did, fhe did feldome or never enter into any private fpeech between the former Governour and my felf. And when Hie did come to me, it was feldome or never (that I can tell of) that fine tarried long. I rather think, file was loath to refort much to me, or, to conferre long with me, left fhe might feeme to learne fome what from me. And withall I know (by good proof) fhe was very carefull to prevent any jealoufie in mee, that fhee fhould harbour any private opinions, differing from the courfe of my publick Miniftery. “ Which fhe could not well have avoyded, if fine “ had kept almoft every day fo private and long difcourfe with me. But Cottons “Way Cleared'.' 387 1 But what Teftimony, or proof doth Mr. Bay lie alledge for this our private and long conference, almoft every day ? His marke ( YY) referreth us to the fhort ftory, where it is faid, “ They made full account the day had been theirs. But did they make this account upon occafion of thefe our private, and long, and frequent conferences every day ? not a fyllable of proofe for this point. It is not righteous dealing, large charges, and narrow proofs. Fourthly, that which Mr. Baylie further relateth from the teftimony of Mr. Williams , is as farre from [89] truth, as the former. “ Mr. Williams (faith Mr. Baylie ) told me, that he was “ employed to buy from the Savages, for their late Gover- “ nour, and Mr. Colton , with their Followers, a portion of “ Land without the Englijli Plantation whither they might “ retire and live according to their mind, exempt from the “ jurifdidtion of all others, whether Civill or Ecclefiaftick, “ Mr. Williams was in fo great friendfhip with the late Gov- “ ernour, when he told me fo much, that I beleeve he would “ have been loth to have fpoken an untruth of him. Anfw. But this I dare be bold to fay, if Mr. Williams told Mr. Baylie fo much, that he was imployed by me to buy any Land from the Savages, for mee and my followers (as he calls them) he fpake an untruth of me, whatfoever he did of the Governour. Yet becaufe I would not fpeake nor thinke worfe of Mr. of Williams then neceftitie conftrayneth, I cannot fay but that he might fpeak as he thought, and as he was told; for it may well bee, that fuch as abufed the Governours name to him for fuch an end, might alfo more boldly abufe mine. But I muft profeffe, I neither wrote, nor 388 The Antinomian Controverfy. nor fpake, nor fent to Mr. Williams for any fuch errand. If ever I had removed, I intended Quinipyack , and not Aquethnick . And I can hardly beleeve the Governour would fend to him for any fuch end, who I fuppofe never thought it likely, that himfelf fhould tarry longer in the Countrey, then he tarried in the Bay . Fiftly, when Mr. Baylie objedleth the prophanenefs of thefe erroneous perfons, and juftifieth it by the teftimonies of Mr. Weld and my felf, “And aggravateth the fame by “ their profeffion of Piety (fo farre, that they avow their “{landing loofe from all reformed Churches as uncleane, be- “ caufe of their mixture with the prophane Multitude.) Let him be pleafed to confider; Firft, what was faid above, Non fcelns , fed fceleris impunitas , is the guilt of a fociety, whether civill or facred. Secondly, what Mr. Weld meant by fouler fmnes then pride, or lying, found in thofe perfons, I cannot gueffe: nor have I heard of them : unleffe hee meant the adultery of one, who upon his own confeffion was caft out of the Church for that crime. As for the teflimony of mine, which hee quoteth from [90] fome words in the vialls, wherein the fmnes of the people were reproved, let him not improve them fur¬ ther then they will bear. Such reproofs doe not alwayes argue fmnes of our Church members: or if they did, yet not, that thofe fmnes are openly known : or if openly known, yet not, that they were tolerated. And yet all thefe muft concurre, or elfe the vices found amongft profelfors, will not argue the vicioufneffe either of their doblrine or worfhip, or Church Government. Luther Cottons “IVay Cleared!' 389 Luther complaineth, in Pofiill. fuper Evangel . Dom. ad - ventus , Sunt nunc homines magis vindictee cupidi , magis avari , magis ab omni mifericordia remoti, magis immodefti , Cf indifeiplinati , multoque deteriores , quam fuerunt fub pa- patu. And Chryfojlome , (zVz imperfect, in Matth. Horn . 49) fpeaketh of Chriftians as becomming like the Hereticks, or Pagans, or worfe. Yet I fuppofe he that fhould improve the words either of Chryfojlome , to argue the difeipline of Chriftians, worfe then that of the Pagans: or of Luther , to argue the difeipline of Proteflants to be worfe then that of Papifts, he fhall doubt- leffe ftretch their words upon the Rack, farre beyond the fcope of their meaning. The words I fpake, were in com- parifon between the godly Profeffors in England\ and ours here, and at fuch a time, when Epifcopall perfecution made them draw the nearer to God, and to walke the more cir- cumfpeftly before men. But Sheepe fet at libertie from the feare of Wolves, will draggle further from their Shepheard, then when they refent danger. Thirdly, it is too groflfe and heavy an aggravation, which Mr. Baylie putteth upon us, if he meane it of us, “ That our “ profeffion of pietie is fo faire that wee Hand aloofe from all “ reformed Churches as uncleane, becaufe of their mixture “ with the prophane multitude. For it is more then he can prove, or we doe profeffe. Though in the Bifhops time, we did not forthwith receive all the members of the Church of England into the fellow- fhip of our Churches: yet (for ought I know) wee are not likely to ftand aloofe from Prefbyteriall Churches faithfully adminiftred, nor from the teftimony which they fhall give of their 390 The Antinomian Controverfy. their members, that may have occafion to Traffick hither. And the like doe I conceive of other reformed Churches in other Nations of Chriftendome. Prefbyterian Churches faithfully adminiftred, are not wont to admit a mixt prophane multitude to the Lords Table. [91] Sixtly, let me take off one inftance more, which Mr. Baylie giveth of one abomination, which to him feem- eth ftrange. “ That the Midwives to our moft zealous “women, fhould not onely have familiarity with the Devill, “ but alfo in that fervice commit devillifh Malefices: which “ fo farre as they tell us, were not onely paft over without “ punifhment, but never fo much as enquired after. Anfw. This accufation is indeed of fome weight, because it is of a grievous, and devillifh crime, and it tolerated. But how doth it appeare to him, that it was tolerated ? “ not “ onely paft over without punifhment, but never fo much as “ enquired after ? Why, faith he, fo farre as they tell us. So farre as they tell us ? Is the filence of a fhort ftory of this or that fa6t, a good argument, a non did , ad non effe ? yea it is a good argument on the contrary, that there was inquiry made after that Midwife, and diligent fearch into her, or elfe it would have been recorded, as fome clofe conveyance of the erro¬ neous party. The truth is, the woman, though fhe offered her felf to the Elders of our Church, yet was not received, upon difcovery of fome unfound principles in her judgement. Being then no member, the Church had no power to deale with her. But when fufpition grew of her familiarity with the Devill, efpecially upon that occafion, which the fhort ftory relateth, 1 fhee was convented before the Magiftrates, and 1 Supra , p. 188. Cottons “IVay Cleared!' 39* and diligently examined about that, and other evills. But though no familiarity with the Devill could be proved againft her; yet becaufe of fome other offences in dealing with young women, fhe was forbidden to stay in the Countrey. 1 1 Winthrop fays (Vol. I. p. *263), “ The midwife, prefently after this dif- covery, went out of the jurifdidtion.” The records of the General Court {Col. Rec. Vol. I. p. 224) indicate that “Jane Hawkins, the wife of Richard Hawkins, had liberty till the beginning of the third month, called May, and the Magif- trates (if fhe did not depart before) to difpofe of her.” Robert Keayne of Boflon in New England his Book 1639/ Paftor. Thefe 3 Brethren that was fent by the church to thofe wandringe fheepe at the Hand 2 beinge now returned, accordinge Mr. John Oliver. Robert Keayne was in the cuftom of making elaborate notes of the fermons preached by Cotton and Wilfon, and alfo of what took place at certain church meetings. Thefe notes were contained in at leaft three books, one of which is now in the poffeffion of the MalTachufetts Hiflorical Society, a fecond in that of the Rhode Ifland Hif¬ torical Society (Proc. Mafs. Hijl. Soc. Series II. Vol. V. p. 435), while a third was in exiftence in 1771, but has fmce difappeared (Ibid. Vol. IV. p. 160; fu- ftra , p. 285, ri). The report in the text was taken from the firft mentioned of thefe three books. Of the three members of the delega¬ tion who went to Rhode Ifland, Edward Gibbons is moft frequently mentioned in the early Maffachufetts hiflory. The time when he came to New England is not known; but he is reputed to have _ been 2 Aquidneck, or Newport, whither years at the time the “brethren” of the Mrs. Hutchinfon and thofe banifhed in Bolton church vifited them as recorded the fpring of 1638 had then removed. in the text. They had been fettled there nearly two 50 1 Captain Robert Keayne came to New England from London in 1635 ; he died in 1656. A man of fubltance and Handing, he was one of the found¬ ers, and the firft commander, of the artillery company, having been “ trained up in military difcipline from his younger years,” and is chiefly remembered be- caufe of his lawfuit with the widow Sherman in regard to the ownerfhip of “a ftray fow” (Palfrey, Vol. I. p. 618), which led to the divifion of the American legiflative body into double chambers. Welde, in his Preface to the Short Story (fuftra, p. 89), refers at fome length to the delegation from the Boflon church fent to Aquidneck early in 1640 to “convince and reduce” Mrs. Hutch¬ infon. Thofe who went on this miffion were three in number, Captain Edward Gibbons, Mr. William Hibbins, and 394 The Antinoniian Controverfy. accordinsre to the cuftome of the churches & fervants of o^od in the fcripture when thay did returne, thay gave an accownt to the church of gods dealinge with them & the paffages of his providences & how god carried them a Longe, it is expedled of the church that fome one of you, or all of you one after another, fhould declare the fame, that the church may have matter to prayfe god with you. Brother Hibbens. we thinke it our dutie to give an ac¬ cownt to the church of gods dealinge with us in our jorny owt & in & of the fucceffe of our buffines when we came to our jornies end, at the Hand. The fecond day of the weeke, we reached the firft night to mownt wollifton, whear we were refrefhed at our Brother Savidges Houfe 1 wherby we were comfortably been one of the company with Thomas Morton at Mount Wollafton in 1628. He died at Bofton in December, 1654. The moft detailed account of his checkered and venturefome career is in Three Epifodes , Vol. I. pp. 354-360. William Hibbins was a merchant of Bofton. He came to New England probably in 1634, was prominent in town and colony af¬ fairs, and died in July, 1654 (Savage’s Genealogical Dictionary, Vol. II. p.409). John Oliver is furmifedby Savage to have been the “ younger brother or, perhaps, nephew ” of Elder Thomas Oliver ( fu - pra, p. 286). He came to New England in 1632, and in November, 1637, was among thofe difarmed as adherents of Wheel¬ wright. He fubfequently removed from Bofton to Newbury, and died in 1642. The members of the delegation left Bofton the g* 0 f and reached Newport on the fgj| of Return- ing, they made their report, as recorded by Keayne in his note-book, in the Bof¬ ton meeting-houfe on March 1640, after Mr. Cotton had ended hisdiicourfe. The report has been printed by Dr. Ellis in his Life of Anne Hutchinfon (pp. 329-337), and alfo by A. B. Ellis in his Hiflory of the Fir ft Church ofBofon (pp. 65-68). In both cafes the fpelling, etc., has been modernized and the text punctuated ; and the narrative, in fo far, rendered more intelligible. 1 In the earlieft days of the fettle- ment, as now, there were two routes from Bofton to Aquidneck, or Newport, — the eafterly route, by way of Brain¬ tree, leaving the Blue Hills on the right, that fubfequently followed by the Old Colony and Fall River railroad line; and the wefterly route up the valley of the Neponfet, leaving the Blue Hills on the left, the natural water line fubfequently taken by the Bofton & Providence Railroad Co. When Mrs. Hutchinfon Robert Keaynes Book. 395 comfortably fitted for our jorny, the next day, in wch, by the good mercy of god, & the helpe of yor prayers, god did accompany us with feafonable weather, & in our jorny the firft obfervable providence of god that prefented itfelfe to our vew & efpecially to my owne obfervation, wch was in providinge for me a comfortable Lodginge, that fecond Night, wch was the thinge I moft feared becas I never was ufed to lye with out a Bead, & there was one that mett us in the way, that came from Cohannet, 1 who had a Howfe to him felfe & he of his owne accord, did give us Leave to Lodg & abide in his Howfe that night, where my felfe efpe¬ cially, & all of us had comfortable Lodginge for that night, wch was a greate refrefhinge to us & a deliverance from my fear. The Hutchinfon flatted to go into exile, on what is now the 7th of April, 1638, the took the eafterly route, going from Bof- ton by water to her hufband’s houfe at “the Mount.” This houfe flood in the Hutchinfon grant fomewhere in the vi¬ cinity of the prefent Wollafton Heights ftation in Quincy (Three Epifodes , Vol. II. p. 536, n.). From thence fhe fubfe- quently went to Newport. The church delegates of 1640 took the fame route. * Thomas Savage, who married Mrs. Hutchinfon’s daughter Faith, probably in 1637, has already been referred to ( fupra , p. 39). He came to New Eng¬ land in April, 1635, and was admitted to the Bolton church the following January. He was among the difarmed of Novem¬ ber, 1637, and in the fpring of 1638 ac¬ companied the exiles to Aquidneck, but feems foon to have returned to Bolton, where he afterwards lived, holding im¬ portant civil and military portions, and died in February, 1682. His wife Faith died in February, 1652. The fite of Thomas Savage’s houfe at “the Mount” cannot be fixed. It may have been the Hutchinfon houfe at what is now Wollafton Heights, then temporarily held by him, or it may have flood on land he is fuppofed to have owned in what is now Braintree, near where Quincy Avenue, fo called, crolTes the marfhes to Braintree Neck, or on Commercial Street, not far from the fite of the old Braintree Iron Works of 1644. In going from Braintree to Aquidneck the party probably followed a trail confiderably to the eaftward of that gone over five years later by John Winthrop, Jr., and defcribed in his itinerary, printed in the Proceedings of the Maffachufetts Hiflorical Society Series II. Vol. VIII. pp. 11, 12. 1 Taunton. 396 The Antinomian Controverfy. The next providence of god that fell out in our jorny, was some manifeftations of gods hand agaynft us, for beinge the 4th day to paffe over a River 1 in a canew, in wch was 8 of us our canew did hange upon a tree, to very great daynger, the water runinge fwiftly away, now my Ignorance was Such that I feared no daynger, though thofe wch had more fkill fawe we were in iminent daynger, here our god delivered us. But now, we cominge fafe over the water it pleafed god to exercife us much in the Loffe of our Brother Oliver, whofe Company we mift & did not perceave it, he fallinge unto mr. Luttalls company that was a goinge that way to the Hand, then they Loft thear way. & as our hartes was full of fear & care for our Brother, foe was his of us & the fear was increfed one both ftdes, becaus thear fell a greate fnowe, & very hard weather upon it, & it was to our greate reioyfmge when we met one another agayne in helth & fafetie accordinge to the good hand of our god, that was upon us in our jorny, & they had bin expofed to much daynger in that could feafon, for want of a fiar, & all meanes to make it, had not the Lord beyond expectation provided for them, to bring forth a little powder through the fhott of the peece, now the 5th day we were to goe over another River, 2 where we were in greate daynger, our Canew fallinge upon a Rocke, wch had not fome of our Brethren more fkilfull fteped out of the Rocke & put of the canew our daynger had bin very greate, but god brought us fafe at Laft one the 6th day viz 28 day ot the 12th month, to our greate reioyfmge. Brother 1 Probably the Taunton River. of the journey, the party had reached 2 It is impoffible to locate this river. Tiverton, and ftruck the rock in crofling Not improbably, it being the fifth day over to Aquidneck. Robert Keayne's Book. 397 Brother Oliver. Now for the fucces of our jorny to our Brethren at the Hand, we acquaynted them with our pur- pofe in Cominge, & defired that they would procure us a meetinge that daye, but for reafons in thear owne breft, & becaufe of the fnowe thay did not thinke meete then to give us a meetinge but the next day thay promifd & did give us a meetinge, mr Aflipinwall 1 our Brother Bofton, 1 Brother Sanfoard 2 & others & we delivered our meffage & the churches Letter, wch thay Read & gave us fatisfadfory Anfwers. the next day we went to portfmouth where beinge entertayned at our Brother Cogfhalls 3 Howfe we defired them to procure us a meetinge, to deliver our meffage & the churches Letter, But when we expected a meetinge mr Cogfhall fent us word that by refon of a Civell meetinge that was befor apoynted; But for a meetinge thay did not know what power one church had over another church, & thay denyed our comiffion & refufed to Let our Letter be read, & they Confeave one church hath not power over the members of another church, & doe not thinke thay are tide to us by our covenant & foe were we fayne to take all thair Anfwers by goinge to thear feverall Howfes, mr Hutchifon tould us he was more nearly tied to his wife than to the church; he thought her to be a dear ft & fervant of god. We came then to mrs Hutchifon & tould her that we had a meffage to doe to her from the Lord & from our church. She 1 Supra , pp. 151, 157. ’ 2 John Sanford came to New Eng¬ land in 1631, was a member of the Bofton church, and one of thofe dif- armed in November, 1637, and went with the other exiles to Aquidneck in 1638. He fubfequently lived at Portf¬ mouth, R. I. 3 Supra , p. 137. 398 The Antinomian Controverfy. She Anfwered, There are Lords many & gods many, but I acknowledge but one Lord, which Lord doe you meane We Anfwered, we came in the Name but of one Lord, & that is god. then fayth fhe, foe far we agree & where we doe asfree, Let it be fet downe Then we tould her we had a meffage to her from the church of ch in Bofton She replyed, fhe knew no church but one we tould her: in fcripture the Ho. Ghoft calls them churches She fayd Ch. had but one Spoufe we tould her he had in fome fort as many fpoufes as fts; but for our church fhe would not ac¬ knowledge it any church of Ch. Mr. Cotton Time beinge farr fpent it will not be feafon- able to fpeake much, we bleffe god with our Brethren for thear protedlion in thear jorny, affunder & together & we finde thay have faythfully & wifely difcharged the truft & care put upon them For the Anfwers of our Brethren at the Hand thay are divers, as for thofe at Portfmouth that thay would not reafeve thear meffage & comiffion, except thay would pre- fent it to thear church well had bin to have acknowledged them a Lawfull church, wch thay had no comiffion to doe, now thefe doe wholy refute to hear the church or to hold any fubmiffion or fubiedlion to the church: I would not expeft any Anfer now but that the church confider of it till the next day now, Confider 1 whether this be not a tranfgreffion of that Rule in math 18 if thay will not hear you tell the church & foe fall under the fenfure of the church 2 I'hay were in covenant with us as a wife to the Huf- band (i Cor 7. 15) but like a Harlot fhe weibe gone for all her 399 Robert Keayne's Book. her covenant, now if thay will goe whether we be not dif- charged of our Covenant with them & foe cut them of as no members, we fhall confider with elders of other churches what is beffc to be done in fuch cafes Others doe not refufe to hear the church but Anfer as farr as thay can goe, only fome fcruple the covenant, & others other things but doe not reiedl the church : but doe honor & eheeme of us as churches of Ch now confider whether, it is not meete that we fhould firh wright to them & Labor to fatisfi them & to take of thear growndes & fee if thay may be redufed befor we goe to further profedinges with them. & I would knowe how farr the wives doe content or diffent from thear Hufbands or whether thay be as refolut & obhinatle peremptory as thay Thear is another fort & that was of fuch as are excomunicate, now we have gone as far with them as I thinke we can goe except thay did fhowe fome pertenacy & obhenacy agaynft ch Je & then the greate cenfure of anathama marinatha that is for mrs Huchifon But fuch as hart afide from church cenfure & Rules out of Ignorance, another corfe is to be taken with them to redufe them agayne if we can ; as mrs Harding 1 & mrs dyar, 2 who acknowledgeth the churches & defiar Com¬ munion with us hill And for mr Afhpinwall, he now beinge fatished of the Righteous & juh profeedings of the church in cahinge out fome of our members & foe refufeth to have any communion with them in the thinges of god I pray confider of thefe thinges agaynh the next Lords day 1 Philippa, wife of Robert Harding, church. They moved to Rhode Ifland came with her hufband, though they in 1638. were not then married, to New England 2 Supra , p. 156, note 3. in 1631, and were members of the Bolton 400 The Antinomian Controverfy. day, accordinge to the diflributions of the qualetie & nature of thear offenfes, as thofe that are neceffarily tied thear for a home as children to thear parents & wives to Hufbands, and others that hand out of obftenacy I fee the divel goes abowt to harden the harts of Brethren agaynfl church cenfure & foe to difpife all church profeed¬ ings & therupon quell church covenant to fhake all churches & to quell it alltogeather; or fome parts of it, & how fare it bindes, & whether it be a part of the covenant of grace or no, wch I hope wilbe more & more cleared up & manafefted. [Two weeks intervened before the matter was again fub- mitted to the church. On the ^ of after the Teacher, Cotton, had concluded his difcourfe, Mr. Wilfon made the following ftatement to the congregation :] Paftor Brethren you know the Buffines of the Hand hath bin a Longe time propounded, & taken by the church into Confederation & now we fhould drawe to fome Iffue & determination you know the Cafes of them thear doe much differ, fome are under admonition & fome under excomunication : & fome have given fatisfaftion in part to the church & doe hould themfelves flill as members of the church & doe yet harken to us & feeke to give fatisfac- tion & others thear be that doe renounce the power of the church & doe refufe to hear the church as mr Coddington mr Dyar & mr Cogfhall, the 2 firft have been queftioned in the church & delt with & are under Admonition & have bine foe longe, yet this aft of the church hath bin foe farr from doinge them any good, that thay are rather growen worfe under Robert Keaynes Book : 401 under the fame, for mr Coddington beinge delt withall abowt hearinge of excomunicate perfons prophecy, he was fenfable of an evell in it, & fayd he had not before foe well confiderd of it, yet lince he hath not only hearde fuch by accident as befor, But hath himfelfe & our Brother diar & mr Cogfhall have gathered themfelves into church fellow- fhip, not regardinge the Covenant that thay have made with this church, neyther have taken our advife & confent herin, neyther have they regarded it, but thay have joyned them¬ felves in fellowfhip with fome that are excoin unicated wherby thay come to have a coftant fellowfhip with them, & that in a church way, & when we fent the meffengers of the church to them to admonifh them & treate with them about fuch offences, they wear foe farr from expreffing any forrow or givinge any fatisfadtion that thay did alto¬ gether refufe to hear the church & in this cafe the Rule of ch is playne we know not how otherwife to profeed with fuch than by cuttinge them of from us: they that will not hear the church, Let them be to you as a Heathen & a Publicane; yet becawfe we know not how far god may worke relentinge in any of thear hartes, fince the churches meffengers came from them, it is thought meete to forbare our profeeding yet a little Longer, agaynft them & patiently to wayte a while to fee if yet thay will indeavor to give fatisfadtion, if not we fhall take a feafonable time to proceed with them 1 1 No further church proceedings are church to which to difmifs him (Ellis’s recorded except in the cafe of Francis Anne Hutchinjon , pp 338-340). The Hutchinfon. He by letter defired dif- matter was again brought before the miffion from the church of Bofton, which church by Mr. Wilfon on the ^ of was refufed on the ground that there was S octob^ r ? but the record contains nothing in the place where he then lived no of intereft, hiftorically or otherwife, with 402 The Antinomian Controverfy. the exception of the following from the paper of objections fubmitted by the members of the church then under dif- cipline, to which objections the anfwers are, in the record, appended: — “ Objection 4. But the Court hath cenfured us, and drove us out of the country, and Mr. Winthrop advifed us to depart. “ Anfwer. Mr. Winthrop affirms his advice was not as Governor, nor as the mouth of the Court, but only in Chriftian love, to depart for a time, till they could give the Court fatisfaCtion. He anfwers, he did not advife all to depart, for he perfuaded Mr. Coddington earneftly to flay, and did undertake to make his peace with the Court. Neither did the Court banifh or drive any away but two, Mr. Afpinwall and Mrs. Hutchinfon. Some were under no offence at all with the Court, as our brother Hazard/’ The principal portions of the record in this cafe are printed by Mr. Ellis in his Life of Anne Hutchinfon , pp. 343- 346 . INDEX. INDEX. A. Abbot, Ezra, 48. Agricola, John, founded Antinomian- ifm, 13. Alien Law pafled, 359 n. Anabaptift uprifing in Munfter, 179 n. Anabaptifts, 32, 35, 276, 314. Antinomian controverfy, far reaching in its confequences, 12, 15, 65; a mifnomer, 12; Wheelwright’s reflec¬ tion on, 13 ; influenced the develop¬ ment of Maffachufetts, 13-14; the refult of intelledlual inquiry, 14-15 ; hiftorical fignificance of the, 15, 139; was and is debatable ground, 15; the Short Story, and Winthrop’s Hiflory a confecutive narrative of, 15,64; works relative to, 15-16, 64; excited but little intereft in England, 23 ; of unfavory memory in New Eng¬ land, 23 ; nearly forgotten in Maffa¬ chufetts, 24, 25; references to, in Winthrop’s Journal, 37-38; Thomas Savage one of the “ chief ftirrers,” 39; James Savage and the, 39-40; documents relating to, 64; Johnfon’s reference to, 64 n .; strefs laid upon the influence of the clergy in mili¬ tary affairs during, 142, 143 n .; Cot¬ ton’s account of, in The Way Cleared, 339 n .; the fubjedt dis¬ agreeable to Cotton, 339 n. Antinomianifm, has exifted in three forms, 12-13 5 i ts meaning in Maffa¬ chufetts, 13 ; influenced the courfe of the colony’s hiflory, 13-14; com¬ pared to Montanifm, 339; Cotton accufed of, 351, 355, 367, 371, 372, 373, 375; Mrs. Hutchinfon and, 372. Antinomians, defined, 12; the firft, 13; Wheelwright’s warning againft, 13; complaints againft, in the Weftmin- fter Affembly, 31-32; meafures taken to fupprefs them, 32; Win¬ throp’s narrative aimed at, 32; to keep out of New England, 34-35 ; Wheelwright confidered one, 371. Apologetical Narrative, the, 29. Apology, fet forth by the magiftrates, 191 ; written by Winthrop, 191 n. Appeal, right of, denied, 147, 147 n. Aquidneck, 24, 188 n., 393 n ., 394 n., 395 «•, 39 6n - Afpinwall, William, account of, 136 n .; 138, 148, 151, 153, 397, 399, 402. Index. B. Baillie, Robert, quoted, 29, 31, 302 n .; 35, 36, 46, 62, 337 zz., 338 339 »M 342, 351, 352, 355, 356, 358, 359, 362, 363, 364, 367, 372, 373? 374,376, 384, 387, 388, 389, 390. Balftone, William, disfranchifed, 154- 155; biographical notice of, 154 //., 154, 397- Bartholomew, William, 271, 271 n. Bell, Charles H., quoted, 13, 40, 186, 196. Bellingham, Gov. Richard, 24. Bibliographical controverfy concern¬ ing the Short Story, 37-43. Bibliography of the Antinomian con¬ troverfy, 15-16, 64; of the Short Story, 37; of the trial of Mrs. Hutchinfon, 64, 164 n. Bilney, Thomas, 265 n. Blue Hills, 394 n. Body of Liberties, the, 254. Bofton (England), 159 n ., 337 zz., 385, 393, 394 «■, 395* Bofton, Maffachufetts, 19, 21, 22, 25, 32, 39, 40 zz., 44, 136, 136 zz., 137, 137 zz., 140, 140 zz., 142, 143, 154 zz., 171 zz.. 191, 231 zz., 271, 285. Bofton, Church of, 80, 89, 90, 91, 132, 143 zz., 158, 161, 186, 189, 193, 201, 217, 223, 223 zz., 231 zz., 285, 285 zz., 286 zz., 318, 334 335, 337 355, 366, 367, 380, 381, 382, 385, 395 397, 397 *•, 399 «•» 401, 401 »• Bofton Common, execution on, 157. Bofwell, James, n. Bradftreet, Simon, 242 zz. Brief Apologie, the, prepared, 19, 44, 191 n. Brown, John Carter, 9, 50. Brown, John Nicholas, 9, 50. Brownifm, 338 zz. Bulkley, Peter, 86, 86 zz., 301, 302,314. Bull, Henry, 186. Burnet, quoted, 161 zz. C. Calvin, John, 339, 347. Cambridge, 285 n .; aflembly of minif- tersat, 85,95-124, 130 zz., 162; Gen¬ eral Court convened at, 131, 141 zz. Campbell, D. G., quoted, 27. Cane, Mr., 139 n. Catalogue of erroneous opinions brought into New England, fpread underhand there, condemned by an affembly of the churches at New Town, 95-124. Chamier, Dr., 354. Charles I., 22, 25. Charleftown, 136 zz., 249 zz., 257 zz. Chauncey, 46. Chefter, J. L., quoted, 158 zz. Choules Collection, 50, 50 zz., 55. Chryfoftome, 389. Clark, Samuel, 46. Cleeves, George, 22. Clergy, influence of, in military opera¬ tions, 142 zz.; forced the church to action againft Mrs. Hutchinfon, 334 n. Coddington, William, moved that the cenfure againft Wheelwright be re- verfed, 138 ; biographical notice of, 138; 283 ; refufed to return to Bof¬ ton, 400, 401, 402. Coggefhall, Bedaiah, 137 zz. Coggefhall, Hanamel, 137 zz. Cogfhall, John, deputy, 137; biograph- Index. ical notice of, 137#.; 137, 148, 153, 397, 400, 401. Coggefhall, Wait, 137 n. Cohannet, 395. Colburn, William, 140 zz., 262, 283. Cole, Edward, 93. Cole, John, 93 n. Collicott, Richard, 278 zz. Community of Women, 301, 302, 314. Congregationalifm, 29. Connecticut, 25, 137. Cotton, John, minifter of church in Bofton, 24; father of Congregation¬ alifm, 29, 337 n .; refers to the Short Story, 37, 46, 62; 130 zz., 131 ; bio¬ graphical notice of, 131 zz. ; pre¬ vented the fending the fame deputies to the court and church trial, 140 ; the petition for Wheelwright not to be delivered without the advice of, 154; 154 zz., 155; on fanClification and juftification, 160 zz.; 169; Mrs. Hutchinfon at a meeting in his houfe, 170 ; grieved with Mrs. Hutchinfon’s comparifon of, 171 ; did not agree with teftimony of the other elders, 172; followed by Mrs. Hutchinfon to New England, 174, 272 ; 222 zz., 224, 244, 247, 249, 250, 253, 260, 262, 263, 264, 267 ; opinion of, concerning revelations, 176, 274, 278; queftioned Mrs. Hutchinfon, 177; preached againft the new doc¬ trines, 183, 370 ; difliked the fpeech of Wilfon, 203, 203 zz.; Mrs. Hutch¬ infon to remain at the houfe of, 225 ; left the examination to Wilfon, 227; denied that he was a follower of Mrs. Hutchinfon, 243, 282-283, 351, 355; flood to juftify her, 277, 278, 283 ; 301, 310, 340, 359, 364; his fall 407 given by Baillie anfwered, 373 ; 376, 379, 382; adored, 379, 386; 387, 400; quoted, 14 zz., 24 zz., 160 zz., 362 n. Covenant of Grace, 159, 172, 178, 196, 202, 205, 243, 247, 248, 249, 260, 266, 327, 328, 368. Covenant of Works, 159, 159 zz., 160, 1 7 i, 171 n., 173, 195, 196-198, 199, 200, 201 zz., 202, 205, 244, 246, 253, 369- Croker, John Wilfon, 11. D. Damphord. See Davenport. D’Aulnay, 25. Davenport, John, 90 n., 222 zz., 225, 296 n., 297, 298, 299, 360, 361, 372, 333 - Deane, Charles, 37, 43, 57, 61 ; quoted, 94 n., 130 zz., 131 zz., 190, 190 zz., 191 n. Deane, Mrs. Charles, 9. Declaration and Reply, the, brought to the court, 139; author of, 139 n. Dexter, H. M., quoted, 338. Dinely, William, disfranchifed, 156- 157 ; biographical notice of, 156 n. Doyle, J. A., quoted, 139 zz. Drake, S. G., 49, 57, 57 n. Dudley, Gov. Jofeph, 24. Dudley, Thomas, 242 zz., 250, 324 n. Dutch, the, 25 ; not given credit for being pioneers in religious toleration, 27- Dyer, Mary, 41, 88, 156 zz., 157 zz., 187, 189, 189 zz. Dyer, William, disfranchifed, 156-157; biographical notice of, 156 zz. ; 187 ; Index. 408 refufed to return to the church at Bofton, 400, 401. E. Edwards, Thomas, 36; quoted, 28, 34, 223. Eliot, John, 33, 46, 252 n., 272, 281, 288. Ellis, George E., quoted, 13. Endicott, John, 24, 243. England, 18, 20; hoftile proceedings againft Maffachufetts, 17, 21 ; inter- courfe with Maffachufetts in 1638, 20, 23; religious toleration, 26-30, 3 i; 178. Enthufiafts, 276. F. Familifm, 339, 342, 355, 372, 373. Familifts, 32, 35, 184, 185, 185 n., 188, 301, 301 302, 302 n., 314, 339. Faft Day, appointed before the Synod, 191 n. Firmin, Giles, quoted, 224 n. Free-Lovers, 301. Froft, Edmund, 387 n. Frothingham, O. B., quoted, 42. G. General Court, proceedings of, againft John Wheelwright, 131, 131 n., 133; 137, 137 145. 147, 148, 15 1 ? I9 1 »•, * 93 . 194 , 195 «•, 201, 254 n., 285, 359 . 359 «•» 402. George, David, 185. Gibbens. See Gibbons. Gibbons, Capt. Edward, 307, 393 n. Gorges, Sir Ferdinando, 21, 22, 24. Gorton, Samuel, 339, 371. Greenfmith, Stephen, 171 n. Gridley, Richard, disfranchifed, 157; biographical notice of, 157 n . Gridley, Gen. Richard, 157 n. Griffin, the, 158 n. H. Haines, Mr., 250. Hampden, 22. Hancock, John, 41, 42 n. Harding, Philippa, 399. Harding, Robert, 399. Harlakenden, Roger, 259 n. Harris, William, 45, 47 n, 48 n. Harvard ftudents whipped, 48 n. Harvard College, 34, 47, 48, 50. Hawkins, Mrs., 188 n. Hawkins’s wife, 188, 188 n. Hawkins, Jane, 47, 391 n. Hawkins, Richard, 391 n. Hellgate, 93. Hibbins, William, 393 n., 394 n. Holland, a pioneer in religious tolera¬ tion, 27-28. Hooker, Edward W., 86 n. Hooker, Thomas, 85 n .; biographical notice of, 86 n. ; 272, 272 n. Hofmer, J. K., quoted, 30. Hutchinfon, Anne, a leader in intel¬ lectual inquiry, 14; trial of, 16, 19, 33. 33 #•, 39. 64-65 ; her adherents difarmed, disfranchifed and banifhed, 16-17,18 ; death of, 24, 44, 61, 63, 93, 93 n .; forgotten in Maffachufetts, 2 5> 33 I fubjeCted to the buzzing of Index. 409 the clerical tormentor, 33 n. ; 41, 60, 136 71., 157, 187, 188 n. ; the Ameri¬ can Jezabel, 40, 63 n., 232; 240; diffufed her opinions among the people, 72, 79, 139 71., 160-161, 161 n., 243; her double weekly lec¬ ture, 79, 132, 161, 161 71. ; birth of her child, 88 ; teft of her fpirit, 89, 240, 242, 271, 278, 289, 316, 325, 339, 340 , 35352 , 359 361, 364^ 368 , 37°, 37b 376, 377, 3 8i I delegation fent to her from the church of Bof- ton, 89, 393 n., 394 395 n., 397 ; her anfwer to the delegation, 89, 397-398, 399; call out of the church for lying and other fouler fins, 90-91, 131 n ., 139#., 189, 227, 284; went to Rhode Ifland, 92-93; moved to Hellgate, 93; fafcinated Balftone, 154 71 .; a breeder and nourifher of diftemper and ftrife, 157-158, 235, 242; her character as given by Winthrop, 158, 158 n. ; difplayed her opinions on the paffage to Amer¬ ica, 158, 172, 271; joined the church at Bofton, 158 ; at firft efteemed and refpedted, 159 11., 356-357? began her teachings, 160-161, 161 n., 243; charges brought againft, 164-165, 170; objected to informers being witneffes, 170, 256, 326; her confer¬ ence with Wilfon, 171 ; demanded the fwearing of the elders, 172, 256- 263, 281 ; herfpeech, 172-176 ; came to New England for Mr. Cotton’s fake, 174, 272 ; her revelations, 176, 273-278, 330; Cotton’s judgment concerning, 176-177 ; condemned out of her mouth, 177; flighted the minifters, 170, 177-178, 249, 253, 260; compared to Daniel, 178; re- fult of her fpeech, 183; detained at Roxbury till a feafon fit for her de¬ parture, 139 71., 186,186 7i., 217, 285 revealed the birth of the mon- ftrofity, 189, 189;/.; vifited by her followers, 217, 243, 329; the elders labored with her in vain, 217; or¬ dered to appear before the church, 217-218, 285; accufations found by the church, 218-220, 287-288 ; ac- cufed the elders of trying to entrap her, 221, 247, 253, 288-289; her fon excommunicated becaufe he did not vote againft her, 224, 367, 385; re¬ mained at Mr.Cotton’s, 225; partially acknowledged her errors, 225-226 ; denounced the fentence of excom¬ munication, 228; abftradl of the proceedings againft, 228, 233 ; date of her baniftiment and excommunica¬ tion, 231 71., 283, 284, 285 71., 359 71. ; date of her leaving Bofton, 231 71 .; the report of her trial as given by Governor Hutchinfon differs from that in the Short Story, 235 71. ; knew when to fpeak and when to hold her tongue, 245 ; of an in¬ temperate fpirit, 246; faid there were no able minifters in the Bay, 251, 259, 260-261, 268, 282 ; charges againft, 255, 260 ; accufed Wilfon of giving falfe teftimony, 256, 259 ; fhe fhould be delivered by a miracle, 273, 283; her trial before the church, 285 ; not able to appear at the be¬ ginning of the trial, 286; deflred to know why fhe was banifhed, 295- 296; fecond examination by the church, 318; denied all graces to be in us, 328 ; called a notorious impoftor, 329; held erroneous opin- 5 2 Index. 410 ions, 329 ; the clergy forced the ac¬ tion of the church againft, 334 zz.; the a6t of excommunication, 336; dear to Cotton, 358; Cotton’s refo- lution to fide with, 359; the church confented with her while the held forth no more than what was pub¬ licly taught, 367; continued her meetings, 370; guilty of Antino- mianifm, 372; a marvel that the elders did not rebuke her errors, 380, 382; feldom vifited Cotton for religious inftruCtion, 386; her an- fwer to the delegation fent by the church, 397-398; her influence, 399; 402 zz. Hutchinfon, Edward, Jr., 154 n. Hutchinfon, Edward, Sr., disfranchifed, I54~i55 ; biographical notice of, 154 71 . Hutchinfon, Faith, 39, 395 zz. Hutchinfon, Francis, 401 n. Hutchinfon, Sufannah, 93 zz. Hutchinfon, Thomas, 15, 16, 39, 155 zz., 158, 158 zz., 171 zz., 235, 235 zz., 273 ; quoted, 235. Hutchinfon, William, 158 zz. I. Independency, 378, 380, 384 ; Cotton as exponent of, 337. Independents, 28, 29, 31, 35, 380, 381. Indian complications, 25. Indians murdered Mrs. Hutchinfon and her family, 93. J- James I., quoted, 301 zz. Jennifon, William, 284. Johnfon, quoted, 64 ZZ.-65 zz. Joris, David, 185. Joffelyn, quoted, 41. K. Keayne, Robert, 25, 285 zz., 393,393 zz., 394 n. King Philip’s War, 153 zz. Kingfton, R. I., 93 zz. L. La Tour, 25. Laud, Archbifhop, 22, 32, 47. Ledfure Day, 79, 161, 161 zz., 162 zz., 218, 285. Leverett, Thomas, 264 zz., 286. Lion, the, 137 zz. London, 271. Lothrop, John, 158, 249. Luther, Martin, 13, 179, 184, 389. M. Mabury, Catherine, 334 zz. Manhattan, 24. Mansfield, Ann, 285 zz. Marbachius, Dr., 349. Marbury, Mr., 158. Marfhall, Thomas, disfranchifed, 156; biographical notice of, 156 zz. Mafon, David, quoted, 27, 28, 31, 32, 41, 302 zz., 337 zz. Mafon, Capt. John, 142 zz. Maflachufetts, hiftorical fignificance of the Antinomian controverfy in, 12, 15 ; the development of, influenced by the controverfy, 13-14; early fpirit of inquiry in, 14; ftri< 5 t religious conformity broken by the Unitarian Index. movement, 15; Mrs. Hutchinfon’s adherents difarmed, disfranchifed or banifhed from, 16; letters fent to England that would check the emi¬ gration to, 18; directions of the intercourfe with England in 1638, 20-21 ; the diforders in, of no intereft to England, 22-23 ; obliged Wheel¬ wright to leave Exeter, 23, 24; Anti- nomian controverfy nearly forgotten in, 24, 25 ; apprehended no fear from England, 24-25 ; 35 ; levy for the Pe- quot War, 142, 142 n ., 143 n. Mather, Cotton, 41, 42 n., 44, 46, 222 n. Mather, Richard, 328. Maurice, Prince, 182 n. MelanCthon, 13. Mercurius Americanus, 37. Minifter’s fons whipped for robbery, 48 n. Monftrofity, birth of a, 187, 188, 189, 189 n ., 190, 390, 391 n. Montanifm, 339, 351. Montanifts, 339 n. Montanus, 339 71. Morton, Thomas, 147 «., 394 71. Mount, the, 183, 395 71. Mount Wollafton, 231 n., 394 71., 395 n. Munfter, Anabaptift uprifing in, 179, 179 n. N. Narraganfetts, 25. Naffaw, Count, 182. Neponfet, 394 71 . New Amfterdam, 25. New England, importance of the Anti- nomian controverfy in, 12; review of the events in, 20-23; the Antino- 411 mian controverfy of an unfavory memory, 23 ; the firft colonial con¬ federation formed, 25; 34 71. \ Anti- nomians fhall have full liberty to keep out of, 35 ; Savage has no fuperior in matters relating to the hiftory of, 38-39; 93; catalogue of the erroneous opinions brought into, 95; people of, led into dangerous errors, 139 71. ; Mrs. Hutchinfon came to, for Mr. Cotton’s fake, 174, 272; the clergy of, do not think themfelves more fpiritual than thofe of England, 178 ; fear of the fpread- ing of Familiftical opinions in, 184, 186; tyranny of the churches in, 223 n. ; 286 7 t. ; copies of the Short Story, and the Diffuafive arrived in, foon after publication, 338 71. New England Confederation formed, 25. New England Way, the, 29, 30, 31, 337 338 n. New Haven, 137 n. Newport, 137 n., 155 n. New-Town, afifembly of miniflers at, 85, 95-124, 130 162. Niklas, Hans, 185 71. Nowell, Increafe, 257 n. O. Oliver, John, 140 393 394 396. Oliver, Thomas, 286. P. Paget, Ephraim, 36; quoted, 63, 302 n. Palfrey, J. G., 57, 60, 63, 393 n. 412 Index. Pafcataqua, 1 86 n. Pemble, Mr., 355. Pequot War, 143 71., 148 71. Pequots, 142, 142 n. Perkins, Mr., 353. Peter, Hugh, 24, 33, 34, 34 n., 245, 248, 249, 253, 264. Phillips, George, 248. Pifcator, 350. Polanus, 350. Pomham, converted, 94 n. Portfmouth, R. I., 136 71., 154 7 i. Prefbyterians, 28, 29, 31, 35, 36, 337 n., 338 , 39 °- Prince, Thomas, 46. Q Quakers, 179 n. Quilipeak, Indian name of New Haven, 361, 361 n., 388. Quincy, Edmund, 154;/. Quinipyack, 388. R. Religious toleration, firft Englifh battle over, 26. Revelations, two kinds of, 176. Rhode Ifland, 25, 92, 93, 136 71., 137 n., 231, 361, 393 n.\ called “Ifland of Errors,” 93. Rogers, John, quoted, 301 71. Route of the journey of Mrs. Hutchin- fon into exile, 394 71., 395 n. Roxbury, 48 71., 137, 139, 139«., 186, 186 n., 225, 225 71., 242, 248 71., 252 n., 285 71., 286 71., 321. Roxbury, Church of, 33, 186. Rutherford, Samuel, 35, 36, 62, 337 n. S. Sacononoco converted, 94 n. St. Ives, 188, 188 71., 221. Sanctification, queftion concerning, 195, 195 n. Sanford, John, 397, 397 7 t. Savage, James, character of, 38-39, 42, 42 71., 49; dealings with the An- tinomian controverfy, 39-40 ; his name connected with Winthrop’s, 39; his opinion of the Short Story, 40, 43; on the authorfhip of the fame, 41, 43, 44; men of his fpecial averfion, 41-42,42 n. ; an admirer of Winthrop, 42 ; firft edition of Win- throp, 43; fecond edition of the fame, 44; criticifed by Thornton, 49-50, 56-57, 57 71 .; controverfy about the Short Story, 51-63 ; 63 n. ; quoted, 32 n., 33 n ., 36 n., 43 71., 46 n., 47 71., 48 71., 58 n., 86 n., 135 n., 136 71 ., 137 71 ., 143 71 ., 154 71 ., 158 71 ., 160 n., 171 n., 185 7 i., 188 7 i., 189 71., 195 71 ., 203 71 ., 228 71 . Savage, Thomas, 39, 293, 306, 394, 395 Savidge. See Savage. Schifmaticks, 185. Scott, Richard, 334 71. Scull, G. D., quoted, 34 71. Sea-man, 93. Sermons, difcufled by the clergy and people, 161 n. Shepard, Thomas, 268, 286, 287, 287 71., 321, 324 71., 358. Sherman, the Widow, 25, 393 71. Sherman, Philip, 186. Short Parliament, 26. Short Story, the, laft edition of, 9, 15 7 t .; the relation of, to Winthrop’s Hif- Index. 4 i 3 tory, 11 ; an evidence of the early intellectual inquiry in the colony, 14; the pleading of a great caufe, 14-15 ; a hiftory of the Antinomian contro- verfy, 15, 64 ; events which led to its preparation, 16, 22-23 ; authorfhip of, 17, 18-19, 20, 38, 41, 43, 57 62, 366; why it was written, 17, 22; editions of, 19-20, 23, 25, 32, 36, 37, 44, 46, 50, 56; a pamphlet miffile in a battle for toleration, 26, 32 ; the two titlepages of, 32 7Z., 45-46, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56; Welde’s preface to, 33, 36; Welde fent it to the printer, 35-36; Winthrop does not mention it, 37 ; bibliographical con- troverfy concerning it, 37-43 ; con- fidered a difcreditable production, 40; its unfavory reputation unde- ferved, 40-41 ; erroneoufly attributed to Welde, 41, 43, 44, 45, 51,60; parts of, attributed to Welde, 43; com¬ ments of Savage upon the author¬ fhip of, 44-46, 47 n., 51; prefaces of, 46, 50-51, 55, 62; references to, by others, 46, 62; Savage’s affumptions queltioned, 49; the queftion of joint authorfhip, 59-63 ; Thornton’s ftate- ment, 61; the date of its preparation fixed, 186 n ., 231 71 .; Winthrop’s Hiftory a paraphrafe of, 231 11. \ dif¬ fers in many eflential refpeCts from the report publifhed by Hutchinfon, 235 n. ; copies reached New Eng¬ land foon after its publication, 338 71. Simple Cobler of Aggawam, the, 34-35, 254 71 . Smith, Ralph, 44, 45, 63. Stiles, Ezra, 285. Stony Sabbath, the, 22. Stoughton, Ifrael, 59, 143, 148, 148 n. Symmes, Zachariah, 158 71., 249. Synod, Cambridge, 130 71., 162, 191, 195 n. t 222 71., 339, 351, 353, 355, 374 , 376 , 377 , 381. T. Taunton, 395 n . Taunton River, 396 7 t. Thomafon, Mr., 45, 46. Thornton, J. Wingate, 49, 50, 56, 57; quoted, 61. Toleration. See Religious toleration. Trafk, W. B., 56. Twifle, Dr., 353, 354. U. Underhill, Capt. John, 90 ti. ; accufed of joining in the petition, 180; bio¬ graphical notice of, 180. Unitarian movement, the, broke reli¬ gious conformity in Maffachufetts, 15 * Unfavory fpeeches confuted, 125-130. V. Vane, Sir Harry, 14, 24, 25, 26, 30, 31, 35, 41, 48, 136, 139 171 n., 243, 246, 256. Vinton, John A., 57 n. Voyages, time occupied in the early, 21. W. Ward, James, 48 n. Ward, Nathaniel, 254, 254 7 t., 267. 4 H Index. Watertown, 137, 248 n. Way Cleared, the, defcribed, 338 n. Weekly Ledture, 79, 161, 161 71., 162 n. Welde, Thomas 20, 34 n. ; fpeaks of the Short Story as newly from the prefs, 20, 44, 51, 59, 63; returned to England, 24, 33 ; his prayer that the churches be delivered from erroneous opinions, 26, 94; bio¬ graphical account of, 32-33 ; intol¬ erant, 34; a fupporter of Winthrop and Wilfon, 35, 60; 46, 48, 48 n ., 49; believed to have publifhed the Short Story, 35-36, 45, 51; hated by Savage, 41, 42, 46, 47 71., 48 n , 58; fuppofed author of the Short Story, 43, 44; his preliminary matter, 44, 54, 55, 56, 59, 60; unjuftly referred to as a coward, 46, 47, 58 ; completed the book, 60, 61, 63 «., 64; his au- thorfhip difproved, 61-63, 64; 248, 249; held converfation with Mrs. Hutchinfon, 264, 268; obliged to take the oath, 281; 286, 286 71., 288, 364, 338 . Welde, Jofeph, 33, 48 n ., 186 285. Wells. See Welde. Wells, Maine, 24, 37. Weftminfter Affembly, 26, 28, 30, 31, 337 «•, 338 n. Wheelwright, John, 44, 46, 59 71., 60, 174, 178, 182, 183, 184, 192; date of preparations of proceedings againft, 19, 44, 201 n. ; obliged to leave Ex¬ eter, 23-24; lived at Wells, 24, 37; 237, 267, 355, 365, 369, 370; return to Maflachufetts, 24, 371; wrote his Mercurius Americanus, 37; proceed¬ ings of the General Court againft, 131; banifhed, 131 71 ., 139 n., 153; continued his preaching, 132; bio¬ graphical notice of, 132 n. ; convidled of fedition and contempt of court, 133,139 «•> Hi, 143 ,152, 201, 204?/.; motion that the cenfure on, be re- verfed, 138; his reply to the fen- tence, 140; fruits of his fermon, 141-144, 370-371 ; will make good his dodlrines, 145-148 ; his right of appeal to the King’s court denied, 147, 147 n.\ juftified by Cogfhall and Afpinwall, 149, 150, 151; peti¬ tion for reverfton of fentence not to be delivered without Cotton’s advice, 154; preached againft men in cove¬ nant, 163-164: went to Pafcataqua, 186 n. ; his Faft Day fermon pro¬ nounced feditious, 139, 191 ?i .; judg¬ ment pronounced againft, 191 71 .; queftioned concerning his fermon, 194, 196, 199, 200, 201; did not be¬ lieve in juftification by fandtification, 195 71 ., 200 ; juftified his fermon, 199; ufed with humanity and re- fpedl, 200; date of his Faft Day fermon, 201 ; diflent of part of the court, 201, 212 ; grounds of the cafe againft, 202-204; mifquoted in the charges, 209 ; ftirred up the people and hindered the public unity, 214, 215, 216; one of his fympathizers not disfranchifed, 262 71. ; influenced by Mrs. Hutchinfon, 278; his fer¬ mon gave encouragement to opinion- ifts, 342 ; adored, 379, 386; quoted, 157 71., 158 7 t., 188 71 . Wightman, 340. William of Orange, 182 71. Williams, Roger, 14, 30, 31, 362, 363, 387, 388; quoted, 30, 362. Wilfon, John, 24, 35, 132, 143, 148 n., 1 71, 171 71 ., 195 71 ., 203 71 ., 222 71 ., Index. 227, 231 n 248, 256, 259, 285, 285 n ., 367, 380, 382, 383, 400, 401 n .; biographical notice of, 132 tz. Wilfon, Thomas, 186. Winfor, Juftin, quoted, 64 n. Winthrop, John, his teftimony in re¬ gard to the Antinomian controverfy, 11—12; 23, 59 n .; the author of the Short Story, 15, 17, 18-19, 20, 43, 57 n., 62, 364, 366; his purpofe in writing the fame, 17, 44; received notice of the creation of a provincial government, 22; conditions under which he wrote the Short Story, 22- 23; governor at various times, 24; his narrative printed, 31, 32, 35-36; fupported by Welde, 35 ; his manu- fcript of the Short Story unchanged, 35-36; reference in his journal to the Antinomian controverfy, 38; ad¬ mired by Savage, 42; fuppofed to have been affifted by Welde, 43, 51, 58 n., 59, 60 ; wrote the Brief Apol- 4 i 5 ogy, 44, 191 n .; compared to Welde, 60; letter of, concerning the remon- ftrance, 136 n .; author of the Decla¬ ration and Reply, 139; date of his preparation of the Short Story, 186 zz.; advifed the excommunicated to depart, 402; his Hiftory quoted, 39 n ., 43 47 n., 48, 59 131 n., 157 186 191 n., 231 n., 28472., 39 1 ». Winthrop, John, Jr., 395 n. Wollafton Heights, 395 n. Woman of Elis, the, 325. Y. Yale College, 285 n. Z. Zanchy, 349.