positively reject the Gospel and that the membership of Children hath no tendency in it to pollute the Church any more now then under the Old Testament and that children are under Church discipline and that some persons Adult may be admitted to Baptisme and yet not to the Lords Supper c. The whole Letter being already published we shall not here insert it or any thing further concerning it only assure the Reader that the Letter it self even the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is still to be seen as it was written by Mr. Shepards own hand Also the same Author in his printed defence of the nine positions pag. 143. does maintain the Church membership of childâ—en and their Subjection to Discipline In the year after these mentioned viz. Anno 1636. here arrived two other of New-Englands Worthies Mr. Partriches and Mr. Rogers Concerning the Subject of Baptisme Namely Mr. Ralph Partrich and Mr. Nathaâ—â—el Rogers As for Mr. Partrich sometimes faithful Pastor of the Church in Duxberry in Plimouth Colony what his Judgement was touching the present controversy is to be seen from that Model of Church Discipline when was by him composed and presented to the Synod at Cambridg Anno 1648. and which is still extant under the hand writing of the Reverend Author in which Manuscript are these words The persons unto whom the Sacrament of Baptisme is dispensed and as we conceive ought to be are such as being of years and converted from their Sins to the Faith of Jesus Christ do joyn in Communion and Fellowship with a particular visible Church as also the children of such Parents or Parent as having laid hold of the Covenant of grace in the judgement of Charity are in a visible Covenant with his Church and all their Seed after them that cast not off the Covenant of God by some Scandalous and obstinate going on in Sin as may appear by Math. 28.19 and 1 Cor. 7.14 with Gen. 17 c. compared Thus for Mr. Partrich his Judgement Concerning Mr. Nathaniel Rogers late eminent Pastor of the Church of Ipswich in New-England that his Judgement did concur with the Doctrine of the late Synod touching Baptisme is certain from what himself did publickly teach some years before his Decease Also from a Letter of his written to the Reverend Mr. Richard Mather some years before Mr. Rogers went to his Rest which Letter still remains under the Authors own hand writing we shall therefore insert the substance of it which followeth Reverend and dear Sir I Received a Letter with a Book from you and do return you this Testimony of my most thankful acceptance of your kindness and good will both in your Letter and worthy Treatise of Justification which as yours are wont to be is nervous and this is compendious in a special manner and yet perspicuous I see my defect in Hen. Den's matters supplyed by your Diligence To the Question concerning the Children of Chuch members I have nothing to oppose and I wonder any should deny them to be members They are members in Censa Ecclesiastico God so calls them the Church is so to account thew and when they are Adulia aâ—atis though having done no personal act yet are to be judged members still until after due Calling upon they shall refuse or neglect to acknowledge and own the Covenant of their Parents and profess their belief of and Subjection to the Contents thereof which if they shall deny the Church may Cashier or disown them Now for practice I confess I account it a great default that we have made no more real distinction between these and others that they have been no more attended as the Lambs of the flock of Christ and whether it be not the cause of the corruption and woful defection of our youth disquiri permittimus We are this week to meet in the Church about it and I know nothing but we must speedily fall to practice If we in this shall be Leaders I pray beg wisdom from the Father of Lights and him who is our Wisdom as well as our Righ cousness I commit you to the blessed Communion of the Spirit of the Lord Jesus and rest Yours in him Cordially N. Rogers XI 18. 1652. These Testimonies are more then abundantly sufficient to evince that the first Fa hers of this Country were for that Enlargement of Baptisme which the late Synod Book pleads for And that therefore such a practice is no â—postacy from our Primitive Principles yet further Testimonies might be superadded unto these for Mr Hâ—nr Sm â—h sometimes Minister of the Word at Wethersfield on Connecticot In a Letter of his dated August 23. Anno 1647. which Letter was also written to Mr. Mather thus expresses himself we are at a Loss in our parts about members Children being received into Communion because it is undetermined in the extent of it at the Synod our thoughts here are that the promise made to the Seed of Confederates Gen. 17. takes in all Children of Confederating Parents whether baptized here or else where whether younger or Elder if they do either expressly or otherwayes may be Conceived in the Judgement of Charity to Consent thereunto Now because many have Children grown up which were born in England who would gladly express their Consent and desire to their Parents Covenant only we are loth to walk alone in the thing we could heartily wish we had the Concurrence of your Judgement c. Thus Mr. Smith Likewise Mr. Prudden late faithful Pastor of the Church in Milford in New-Haven Colon in New-England in a Letter to the same Reverend person which the last mentioned was sent unto does not only express his own thoughts but gives Reason for his belief concerning the Question under Agitation with whose Testimony we shall conclude And because his Letter is of Weighty and worthy Consideration Consideration albeit part of it as of that of Mr. Rogers is already published in the Preface to the Synod Book yet we shall here insert the substance of it which now follows Dear Brother I was glad at the receipt of your Letters but I am sorry to hear of such breaches in Churches and no way nor means found out and applyed for healing which I fear with you does strengthen the Presbyterian Objection against our Congregational way when the writings of some for our defence and our practice agree not in that particular I think with you that man to be much blessed whom God should make helpful in those things though as he ha's but little encouragement to attempt it so can he expect less thanks from man who possibly may have erred but loth to be judged so to have done Touching your own Exercises you are not alone in them the power of the Elders in preparing matters of offence and other things for the Church has been much questioned by some But me-thinks hat which Mr Hooker ha's written in the Case Survey pt 3d. pag. 33. should satisfy those who are not of a
3. pag. 11. 12. Now if they that are Confederate and members of the visible Church have a right to Baptisme and if also the Children in Question are Confederate and mâ—mbers of the visible Church both which are affirmed by Mr. Hooker it must needs be that in his Judgement the Children in Question have right to Baptisme At the same Time and in the same Vessel with Mr. Cotton and Mr. Hooker there came the godly learned Mr. Samuel Stone late Teacher of the Church in Hartford concerning whom what his Judgement was touching the now agitated Controversies is known from his practice in the last years of his Life And that his Judgement was suitable to that practice many years before his decease appears from a Letter of his written to the Reverend Mr. Mather of Dorchester and bearing date June 6. 1650. In which Letter he thus expresseth himself I Conceive saith Mr. Stone that Children of Church members have right to Church membership by virtue of their Fathers Covenant it being granted that they are in Abrahams Covenant they have Membership by Birth Gal. 2.15 2 dly God is their God Gen. 17.7 3 dly They are Branches Rom. 11. 4. they are Subjects of Christs visiâ—le Kingdome Ezek. 37.25 Hence 1. If they be presented to a Church and Claim their Interest they cannot be denyed according to the Rules of the Gospel 2. Hence there hath been a sinful neglect in New-England of such Children who have either not been presented or not Received when they have claimed their right I spake with Mr. Warham and we question not the right of Children but we Conceive it would be Comfortable to have some Concurrence which is that we have waited for a Long Time And I think unless there may be some Conference of Elders this year in the Bay about it that we may see some Reason to the Contrary our Churches will Adventure to practice according to their Judgement i. e. take in all such Children as members I much desire that there may be some meeting of the Elders this year that these things may be Considered and setled in the Churches according to the mind of Christ c. These things do sufficiently manifest what was the Judgement of Mr. Cotton Mr. Hooker and Mr. Stone who all three as was Intimated Came into New-England in the same Vessel Anno 1633. And they may justly be reckoned amongst the first three of New-Englands Worthies In the year 1635. God brought into this Country three more of our Worthies Another Triumâ—irate not unlike the former viz. Mr. Mather Mr. Norton and Mr. Shâ—pard whose Judgement touching the Question before us that it did Concur with the Doctrine of the late Synod will appear from the Sequel As for Mr. Mather late Teacher of the Church in Dorchester what the Apprehensions of that Reverend man of God were Concerning the present Controversie in his Latter Time is well known The Ancients had an opinion that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dying words of worthy men were Oracutous because the Soul near its transâ—â—graâ—ion groweth more Divine Be that Notion as it is yet the dying Counsel of that blessed man to his Son is of weighty Consideration And that Mr. Mather did not take up his perswasion concerning the Enlargenent of Baptisme in his last years only but that he was of the same Judgement four and twenty years and more before his decease is evident from some Manuscripts of his left written with his own hand For that Roverend Author did in the year 1645 prepare for the Press an elaborate discourse which he entituleth A plea for the Churches of Christ in New-England and in the second part of that discourse which contains positive grounds from Scripture and Reason for the Iustification of the way of the Churches of Christ in New-England there is this Question propounded Quest When those that were baptized in Infaney by the Covenant of their Parents being come to Age are not yet found fit to be received to the Lords Table although they be matried and have Children whether are those their Children to be baptized or no. The Answer is in these words I propound to Consideration this Reason for the Affirmative viz. That the Children of such Parents ought to be baptized the Reason is the Parents as they were born in the Covenant so they still continue therein being neither cast out nor deserving so to be and if so why should not their Children be baptized for if the Parents be in Covenant are not the Children so likewise Is not the Tenour of the Covenant I will be a God to thee and to thy Seed Is not the Text plain Act. 2.39 the promise is to you and to your Children And if these Children be in the Covenant why should they not be admitted to the Seal of the Covenant Sith they are partakers of that which is one main ground why other Infants are admitted thereto doth it not seem unreasonable that these Infants being partakers of the ground of Baptisme as well as others that nevertheless others should be admitted and these be refused If other Infants were admitted to Baptisme upon some ground whereof these were not partakers then there might be Reason to make a difference between these Infants and others but if the ground Reason of admitting others be Common to these as well as to others it seems then to be Reasonable that these as well as others should share in the priviledge If their Parents were east out of the Church by Censures or falln away from the same by wilful Apostacy and Schisme or deserving to be Cast out by reason of Scandal then there were more Reason that their Infants should be excluded from the Seal But sith no such thing can be said of the Parents of whom we speak a good Reason should be given why their Infants are debarred for if it be said the Parents are not Confirmed members nor have yet been found fit for the Lords Table I conceive this needs not to hinder their Infants from Baptisme so long as they I mean the Parents do neither renounce the Covenant nor doth the Church see just Cause to Cast them out from the same for it is not the Parents fitness for the Lords Supper that is the ground of baptizing their Children but the Parents and so their Children being in the Covenant this is that which is the main ground thereof and as long as this doth Continue not dissolved by any Church Censure against them nor by any Scandalous Sin of theirs so long the Children may be baptized These words are to be seen written with Mr. Mathers own hand Anno 1645. Now if six and twenty years ago in a Book written in defence of the Churches in New England When this Collection of Testimonies was first composed it was but 26 years but now it is 29 years since that Book was written and in justification of tho way of-hese Churches it were true Doctrine that persons might have
unfit to partake in the Seal of the Covenant c. He replies in these words Though they be not fit to make such profession of visible faith as to admit them to the Lords Table yet they may make profession full enough to receive them to Baptisme or to the same estate Isâ—mael stood in after Circumcission And to one who complained of being in the dark about the truth asserted in Mr. Cottons printed Book concerning the Baptisme of Infants and that amongst other made this Objection when said that Scrupler a child comes to know that his Parents are no visible Saints but appear to be contrary both in Life and Doctrine and the children had only words and water poured on them how came these persons to have right to it the Parents having no visible faith to act in that Ordinance and their children likewise being uncapable to hold forth the acts of faith before men He thus Answereth Ieroboam and his wife were neither of them visible Saints in your Sense but appeared to be contrary both in Life and Doctrine yet the Circumcision of their Son was not in vain to him 1 Kings 14.13 In this Case when the faith of the Parents is wanting and yet they still live within the Pale of the Church though the Church be Corrupt and the Parents also yet here the Speech of the Apostle takes place what though some believed not shall their unbelief make the faith of God of none effect God forbid Rom. 3. 3 4. now the Faithfulness of God who keepeth Covenant and mercy to thousands supplies the defect of the Faith of the next Parents and maketh good his Covenant to the Children in respect of the Faith of their former Ancestors in Elder Ages But against this sâ—me may object a passage in Mr. Cottons Book of the way of the Chuâ—ches pag. 81. where it is said where neither of the Parents can claim right to the Lords Supper their Infants cannot claim right to Bâ—ptisme therefore it mâ—y seem that Mr. Cottons Iudgement was not as haâ—h been now declared Unto this let the judicious Reâ—der attentively hear the Answer which is 1. In that very Book of Mr. Cottons there are sundry passages which plead for an Enlargement of Baptisme further then to the Immediate Children of persons in full Communion even to the Children of such Parents who have such a faith as denominateth them Christian Believers in opposition to Pagan Infidels yea if there be a Christian Sponsor for the Child of a Stranger or wicked man it may be baptized see the way pag 87. 88. 106 115. 2dly That Book of the way was printed from an imperfect Copy in which respect it is not to be wondâ—ed at if there be therein some passages contradictory to Mr. Cottons known Iudgement 3. Mr. Coâ—ton himself was much troubled when he saw that Book come forth and was desirous that the Reader should understand that his Judgement in such things wherein the Book of the way is discrepant from that of the Keyes should be sought for not in the Book of the way but in that of the Keys And that no one may think that these things are Imaginary or conjectural only let us hear Mr. Cotton speaking in his own words in his printed defence against the Imputations of Mr. Cawdrey written not long before his death and Published by Doctor Owen In which Book pag. 36. 37 38 39. The truth is saith Mr. Cotton that many years ago I was seriously moved by some of our Brethren and Fellow Elders here to draw up an Historical narration of our Church way together with some familiar Grounds of the same briefly In short time as God helped I dispatched it which when our Brethren had perused it I saw they did not close with it yet a Brother going for England got some where a Copy of it and presented it to some of the Congregational way there and I afterwards heard neither did they close with it and in particular not with that passage which is here recited which since appeareth more openly by the Asterisk put upon that passage and upon sundry other in the Book but before I saw that and had only heard that they did not fully accord I hoped that it had met with a timely Suppression rather then an Impression for I heard no more of it for two or three years after mean while perceiving that one main point of dissatisfaction was the Authority given to the Fraternity I consiered more seâ—iously and distinctly of the whole power of the Keys and expressed my apprehensions in that treatise of the Keys which our Brethren here did well accept and so did the Brethren of like Judgement in England and some of them were pleased to arrest it with the Preface that is now Extant before it This was sundry years after the Treatise of the way had been finished and carryed to England and as I hoped suppressed but it seemeth some Brother there caused his Copy which was indeed abrupt in the Entrance and imperfect otherwise to be published in print which when I saw it troubled me not a little as knowing that the discrepant Expressions in the one and in the other might trouble Friends and give Advantages to Adversaries I suffered both to stand as they did especially seeing I could not help it the Book of the way being published without my Consent and both the way and the Keys past my revoking so that if the Replier find some discrepancy in one of these Books from the other Let him know that the Doctrine of the way in such few points wherein it differs from the Keys was not mine when the Keys was published much less when the way was published which was many years after though it had been penned many years before Thus much may suffice for the clearing of Mr. Cottons Judgement concerning the Subject of Baptisme In the same year and in the same Vessel with Mr. Cotton came into this Country that famous Mr. Thomas Hooker late Pastor of the Church in Hartford upon Connecticot Now that in Mr. Hookers Judgement the Children concerning whom the Question is have a continued standing and membership in the visible Church upon which hinge the Controversy about the Enlargement of the Subject of Baptisme turns is evident from a passage in his most Judicious and accurate Survey of Church Discipline in which Book pag. 4â— are these words in some Cases saith Mr. Hooker an Implicit Covenant may be fully Sufficient as Suppose a whole Congregation should consist of such who were Child on to the Parents now deceased who were Confederate their children were true members according to the Rules of the Gospel by professing of their Fathers Covenant though they should not make any personal and vocal Expression of their Engagement as the Fathers did Also he lays it down for a Maxim that faederati sunt baptizandi proving by several Arguments that Confederates are the proper Subject of Baptisme see in the same Book part
right to Baptisme for their Children and yet themselves not be fit for the Lords Table If six and twenty years agoe this was written in a Book whose whole designe was to Justifie the way of these Churches how then can it be said that the present pleading for such Enlargement of Baptisme is any Apostacy from Primitive Principles Also the same thing was Asserted and urged by this Reverend Author in his Model of Church Government presented to the Synod Anno 1647. And in the years 1648. and 1649. he did frequently in his publick Ministry in Dorchester thus instruct his people as is to be seen in the Sermon Notes left written propria manu And in the year 1653. this Question was fully largly and Elaborately discussed by the same Author Also in a Letter to a Friend bearing date 30th 5 Moneth 1651. He thus expresseth himself for my part my thoughts have been this long Time that our Churches in general do fall short in their practice of that which the Rule requires in this particular which I think ought to be thus viz. that the Children of Church members submitting themselves to the Discipline of Christ in the Church by an act of their own when they are grown up to mens and womens Estate ought to be watched over as other members and to have their Infants baptized but themselves not to be received to the Lords Table nor to voting in the Church till by the manifestation of Faith and Repentance they shall approve themselves to be fit for the same But we have not yet thus practiced but are now Considering of the matter and of sending to other Churches for advice Help us I pray you with your prayers that we may have grace to discern and do the Lords mind and will herein So that in the year 1651. it had for a long Time been the Judgement of this Seer that some have right to Baptisme for their Children that yet have not right to the Lords Supper for themselves But against this Testimony some may object a passage in Mr. Mathers printed Catechisme pag. 91. This holy man was sensible that some did take Advantage from an Expression therein to impute unto him a change of Iudgement touching this Question which had it been so indeed Ad meliora transiâ—e nullus pudor it is no dishonour to any man to change for the better but concerning this Question that Reverend man altered not but was all along of the same Apprehension wherefore knowing in his own heart that he was of the very same Judgement when that Catechisme was written as in his last years he was of he therefore left a Manuscript in his Study to clear himself from such an Imputation which for his Vindication we shall therefore here Insert and publish The words are as follow This Question who ought to be baptized being thus Answered in a Catechisme viz. men of years when once they are converted to the Faith and joyned to the Church and such Infants whose Parents both or one of them are so Converted and joyned The Question therefore now is whether this Answer if sound and true do infer that the Children of Persons Converted and joyned to the Church being now Adult and having Children may not be so qualified as to have these their Children Baptized afore they who are now the Parents be fit for the Lords Supper or if he that Answered the Question in the Catechisme as above do think they may doth not this infer a change in that mans Apprehension from what it formerly was Answer It seems not at all to infer any such change 1. Because these Apprehensions are no way contrary to one another nor at all Inconsistent For if a man say that the Children last mentioned may be baptized this does not at all infer that men of years converted to the Faith and Joyned to the Church may not be baptized nor that such Infants may not be baptized whose Parents one or both are so Converted and joyned Nor if a man Answer that such as the Catechisme speaks of may be baptized does this infer that those others may not there is no Colour sure no just ground for such Consequence no more then if one should say that such as are become Believers by hearing the Word preached are to be baptized which is a very Truth Act. 2.41 and 8.12 37. and 18 8. it could thence be proved that no Infants are to be baptized as not being become Believers at least not by that means of hearing preaching this would in no sort follow from the other as if one should say that such as do the will of God upon Earth shall enter into Heaven that such as feed Christ when hungry cloath him being naked shall be saved in Heaven which are very true Matth. 7.21 and 25.34 c. doth this prove that Little Infants and the Thief upon the Cross must not be saved because the one through Imbecillity of Age and the other through want of opportunity did not perform the things mentioned it doth not prove it at all but that Salvation in Heaven may be the Portion of these as well as of the others even so though such as the Catechisme speaks of are to be baptized it doth noâ— thence follow but that the Ordinance may be dispensed to the Infants of such members Children as are mentioned and though it be dispensed to such this is no denyal but that such as the late Catechisme speaks of may be baptized so that here is no Contradiction between the things Alledged but that both may be true and consist together 2 dly It the words in the Catechisme had any Exclusive particle in them there had been some more ground or Colour for the Inference as if the words had been thus only these or none but these are to be baptizâ—d but any such Exclusive or Negative particle there is none and therefore the Collection or Inference from them which is made is groundless 3dly The Author of the aforesaid Catechisme which was printed in the year 1650. had sundry Times before in the years 1646. 1648. 1649. publickly delivered his Judgement both by word of mouth and by writing that such Children of Church members might have their Infants baptized though themselves were not yet received to the Lords Supper and so divers Times again in the years following And therefore it is not probable that what is expressed in the said Catechisme should be intended by him to have such a meaning as is quite Contrary to what himself had publickly Delivered both before and after and that at sundry Times and in several wayes 4 ly Other Authors of much worth for holiness and Learning who never meant to deny Baptisme to such Children of Church members dâ—are spoked of yet in Answer to that Question who ought to be baptizâ—d or to whom is Baptisme to be administred have expressed themselves in Terms not far unlike to those in the aforesaid Catechisme Mr. Balls words are these