in the sense given before yet not so personal as to have right to all Church-priviledges as is confessed by all Reply That sense given before is confuted before 2. If they have right to all Church-priviledges properly belonging to Members as such it is sufficient 3. Their want of actuall enjoyment of some Church-priviledges is not for want of right unto them but for want of such Qualifications as may make them fit for actuall enjoyment of them viz. Such increase of Faith as is requisite as Dr. Ames well expresseth it Medul Lib. 1. Chap. 32. Sect. 13. Proof 4. They are personally by means of the Covenant in a visible state of salvation To say they are not Members in their own persons but in their Parents would be as if one should say They are saved in their Parents and not in their own persons Ans It is granted they are in a state of Salvation and nearer the Kingdome of Heaven then Heathens are but they are not visibly at present in a state of Salvation Mark 12.34 But to infer That if they be not Members in their own persons but in their Parents then they shall not be saved in their own persons but in their Parents this is utterly inconsequent unless in should be said that all and onely they that are Members in their own persons shall be saved which were sad and Heterodox Reply To grant they are in a state of Salvation and yet not visibly so at present sheweth that this Argument is greatly mistaken The ground of the Argument is this It is the Priviledge of the Church by Gods Covenant to be the Redeemed and Saved People of the Lord Christ is the Saviour of his Body the Church Eph. 5.23 c. Thus it is with the visible Church visibly And hence saith Christ Salvation is of the Jews Joh. 4.22 And so speaking of the little ones he saith Of such is the Kingdome of Heaven Mark 10.14 And hence the Inference is also much mistaken which is this If their Membership by means of the Covenant setteth them in a visible state of Salvation as it doth upon the grounds laid down then supposing this Membership be in their Parents onely and not in their own persons it would follow that this visible state of Salvation is in their Parents onely and not in their own persons and so if they be saved according to this Covenant it must be in their Parents and not in their own persons And hereby it appeareth how greatly this Opinion bereaveth the Parents of that hope and comfort they take in their dying Infants by reason of Gods Covenant made with their seed Proof 5. When they commit iniquity they personally break the Covenane and therefore they are personal members Jer. 11.2 10. Eze. 16. Ans The Covenant there spoken of is the Moral Law as the Texts shew which any man never in or cast out of the Church may break Reply Truly this Answer as the rest is far from satisfying the Arguments of the Synod The Texts alledged expresly call their iniquities A breaking of the Covenant and what then if the Texts speak of the Moral Law is not the observation of the Moral Law a duty of the Covenant viz. Tâ— have God for our God To love him Fear him c. Or is the breach of the Moral Law no breach of the Covenant in them that are in Covenant because others not in Covenant may break it What sense and reason is in this When a Master chargeth his Apprentice with breach of his Covenant in Stealing his Masters goods should he answer It was no breach of Covenant because others that were never in Covenant may be guilty of Stealing also Would this answer prove it was no breach of Covenant Just so is the case here When the Lord chargeth the adult Members of the Church with breach of their Covenant in the Moral duties of the Covenant to say The Covenant there spoken of is the Moral Law which such as were never in or cast out of the Church may break Our Brethren here think fit to make a stand onely concluding in the words of the Presbyterian Ministers wherewith they would seem to be well satisfied But the known Practice of those Reverend Brethren that do Baptize divers Children whose Parents they receive not to the Lords Table doth perswade me that such a Profession as is deseribed in the fifth Proposition would be readily accepted of by them as a credible Profession for the Administration of Baptism to their seed And this is the more evident to me by that which is here alledged in the second Paragraph wherein they describe the persons to be Baptized thus Baptism is an holy Sacrament in which a person professing the Christian Faith or the Infant-seed of such is Baptized c. which is fully answered in the fifth Proposition Concerning the Sixth Proposition which dependeth upon the Fifth our Brethren onely declare their Dissent Concerning the Seventh Proposition they say It is cautelously penned and do not Object against it onely desice Care in the Application thereof with what Churches we have Communion Concerning the second Question About CONSOCIATION OF CHVRCHES they have declared their Consent in all the Propositions laid down by the Synod and here Object nothing And herein I do willingly and gladly acknowledge the ingenuity of our dear Brethren who though they be earnest and quick sometimes in such things wherein they differ yet do freely declare their Consent in other things which giveth me the more hope that after a fair Debate of this Question we may at length meet sweetly in the same Truth which perhaps neither of us do as yet so clearly apprehend as we may through the help of Christ attain unto We know but in part Believe in part and Prophesie in part and are imperfect in all we do and therefore must wait for and endeavour after further discoveries of the minde of God And to this end in case what hath been and is here or what shortly may be Published about this Question should not clear up the Truth to satisfaction but that further Replies should be made My earnest Motion and Desire is 1. That all Reflections upon mens Persons and other impertinent Discourses being laid aside the main issue of the Question in Debate may be closely followed which I perceive is come in a manner to this narrow viz. Whether the Persons described in the fifth Proposition be regularly Church-members for this is all along denied by our Brethren and several wayes alledged whereby they should become Non-members as By their Self-Excommunication By Gods Excommunication c. 2. My Motion and Desire is That the Scriptures alone according to their true sense and scope may be made the Touchstone to discover the Truth These are able to make the man of God fully furnished to every good work I deny not the use of the Concurring Judgement of the godly Learned And it is well known how fully the advantage lieth on the Synods side in that respect yet I see men are too apt to make use of Sentences of Authors that seem to favour their Opinion though indeed contrary to the meaning and judgement of those Authors And this tends to amuse and puzzle the common sort of Readers and enlarge Disputes but doth not tend to clear up the Truth If these two things might be attended I doubt not but this Case would have a speedy and comfortable issue Now the Lord God of Truth Purity and Peace direct all our hearts into the Right Vnderstanding Vnfeigned Love and Vnited Practice of his Holy Will in all things Amen FINIS
Parish Churches we are no larger then our Dissenting Brethren who concur with us in the seventh Proposition about the first Question which speaks to this case But if it be meant of inlarging the Church to the Bounds of a Parish it is a meer Slander I do not believe that he can prove that any two Elders of these Churches have so declared their Judgement much less so many as are of the Synods minde It lieth upon the Author to make good this charge or to recant his rashness 2. He affirmeth That the general Judgement of the learned Elders and their Practice was as the Dissenters plead but now divers of those Elders do retreat and recant To prove this he alledgeth two Passages out of An Answer to Thirty two Questions Printed 1639. But those Passages are too weak to bear up this Assertion yea do evidence the quite contrary The first is taken out of Page 22. of the said Book the sum whereof is this That such whose Parents are not Believers and sanctâ—fied are not foederally holy Foederal Holiness or Sanctity being limited to the next Parents 1 Cor. 7.14 Ans 1. This Passage doth not agree with the Dissenters for it doth appear that the Author doth account Foederal Holiness to be Sanctity and therefore the next parents being in Covenant with God and so continuing they are Ecclesiastically holy sanctified and visible Believers 2. Do not the same Elders in this Synod deliver the very same Doctrine in the second Proposition and fifth particular viz. It is requisite to the Membership of Children that the next Parents one or both be in Covenant Citing the same Text 1 Cor. 7.14 And where then is the least shew of Recanting The second Proof is Page 23. of the said Book where it is said that We believe that all Members of Churches ought to be Saints and faithful in Christ Jesus none excepted Ephes 1.1 1 Cor. 1.2 Phil. 1.1 Ans 1. This passage speaketh of Members to be admitted in adult age and therefore might be as well alledged to prove a consent with the Anabaptists as with the Dissenters which was farre from the meaning of that Author Besides though they ought to be so yet that denieth not but being regularly admitted they are still Members of the Church till they be regularly cast out though they do not approve themselves to be such 2. Do not those Elders profess the same Doctrine in the Synod Propos 2. viz Members of the visible Church according to Scripture are Confederate visible Believers alledging the same Texts Eph. 1.1 c. Where then is this Recantation Sixthly The Author of this Preface excusing the Paucity of the Dissenters in comparison of the many able learned and godly Magistrates and Ministers that consented He objecteth three things against the Synod consenting 1. That divers of the Elders having Preached and Practised that Doctrine of late years were pre-engaged and it is strange that after Vows they should be called to enquire Ans Were not Paul Barnabas and others as much engaged in the Doctrine of that Synod Acts 15 and did they come after Vâ—ws to enquire 2. Were not the Dissenters as much pre-engaged in their Opinion why then did they come after Vows to enquire 2. It is Objected That divers Messengers being no Logicians to answer Syllogisms and discern Ambiguities were over-born by the many Opposers Ans It is incongruous and too high to make the Body of the Synod the Opâ—osers which more fitly agree to th few Dissenters 2. Though divers were not such Logicians yet Charity might allow the choyce Members of our Churches to be able to judge of Arguments drawn from the Scriptures and so farre consciencious as that discerning the Voice of Christ they would not be born down with number of Opposers To say nothing of the Logick of the Dissenters that might be as little as the others 3. It is Objected That the corruption of man most inclineth to walk in the broadest way though the straiter way be never so clear especially when persons eminent in Place Power Learning and Piety are so linked together Ans Be it so that there is such a corruption in man yet when such persons as the Synod are confessed to be agree in one and that in so Solemn an Ordinance of God where Christ hath promised his Presence Chaâ—â—y that hopeth all things might well conceive that Grace would prevail above such a Corruption 2 If our Brother be not aware of it I can assure him that there is also a Corruption in man and in good men too under the not on of Strictness and Zeal to swerve as much to the other Extreme As when the Disciples would have kept little children from Christ Mark 10.13 14. When out of zeal against the Tares men would hazard to plack up the Wheat also Matth. 13.28 29. So when we are apt to judge others whom God hath received Rom. 14.3 which I wish our Brother seriously to consider The way of the Anabaptists is a straiter way yet I suppose this Brother doth not judge it his corruption to chuse a way somewhat larger So is the way of the Seekers and others who think their straiter wayes as clear as our Brother thinketh of his Seventhly In Page 5. this Brother answering another Objection That this Discourse may seem needless seeing all other Congregational Churches agree with them that they know of alledging the Savoy Meeting Chap. 29. Of Baptism 4. Yet saith he there needs abundant confirmation for no doubt this temptation will spread further when more then the third part of the Stars of Heaven here are swept down as is Prophesied Rev. 12. c. Furthermore saith he let the world know That the Lord hath still a few Names in New England who hold fast his Name and are stedfast in the Faith and Order of the Gospel and detest the Abominations of Antichrist Ans 1. This Author glorieth much in the Consent of other Churches We see here his ground which I shall examine The Position of that Meeting of the Churches is this Not onely those that do actually profess Faith in and Obedience unto Christ but also the Infants of one or both believing Parents are to be Baptized and those onely We can well consent with this Doctrine without any prejudice to the Doctrine of the Synod For we profess and prove in the Synod That the children of the Church being in Covenant with God owned by him as holy as his People his Children and manifesting their continuance in the Covenant according to the fifth Proposition these are visible Believers in Ecclesiastical account in Scripture account 1 Cor. 1.1 with 7.14 And I cannot believe but that Reverend and Learned Assembly would acknowledge Regular Church-members to be visible Believers And it doth appear that these are Regular Church-members in their judgement by their Second Position Concerning the Church Chap. 26. where they say All such as profess the Faith of the Gospel and Obedience
to God by Christ according to it not destroying their Profession by Errours everting the Foundation or unholiness of Conversation are Members of the visible Church Now it cannot be denied that the persons described in the fifth Proposition of the Synod are such for they profess their Assent to the Doctrine of Faith and subjection to the Rules and Discipline of Christ they give up themselves to God own the Covenant do not destroy their Profession by Errours nor unholiness of life holding the Doctrine of Faith and not being scandalous in life So that for ought that appears that Assembly agreeth rather with the Synod then with the Dissenters 2. In that our Brother maketh such a distinction between the third part of the Stars of New-England swept down and A few Names in New-England that hold fast the Name of God and are stedfast in the Faith and Order of the Gospel How well this Comparison aâ—reeth with the Rules of Charity Humility and Modesty I shall leave to the judgement of others 3. I must enquire into the Truth and Grounds of so deep a Charge laid upon more then the third part of the Stars the Lights set up in the Churches of New-England Is it the present Doctrine of this Synod inlarging the Subject of Baptism beyond the Opinion of the Dissenters that is their fall from Heaven And the more strict Opinion of our Brethren the Character of those few Names remaining that hold fast the Faith and Order of the Gospel as indeed it seemeth to be so For 1. This is the occasion taken up to make this Comparison And 2. Those other Imputations of Forsaking former Pâ—actices Recanting of Elders New Conversion of New-England in reference to this Doctrine seem to intimate as much 3. And that Expression of a few Names holding fast the Faith and Order of the Gospel doth plainly intimate that not only more then a third part of the Stars but also the generality of New England are greatly departed from the Faith and Order of the Gospel and that at the present in the judgement of this Author which is so high a strain that I am loth to say what might be spoken of it Now if this be our Fall from Heaven it is our comfort that we are not yet faln so farre as many bright Stars of the first Magnitude that have shined gloriously in the Churches such as Calvin Cartwright Perkins Ames and hundreds more whose judgement is well known to be larger in this Point then the Synod doth hold forth And we are faln no further then blessed Câ—ton Thâ—lip Shepard Roâ—ers and others of the Bay Churches Famous Hooker and Stone of Connecticoâ— Prudden of New-Haven Partridge and Newman of Plimouth with divers other Lights in Nâ—w-England of whom I am perswaded that they are gotten to Heaven in that Opinion whereby we are supposed to be swept down from Heaven But let this Brother beware lest himself and his few Names be not judged by some to be swept down from Heaven also who hold an Opinion That Infants of the Church are to be Baptized which is not so strict a Tenent as they would have 4. But if this so great a Charge be laid upon more then the third part of the Stars upon any other ground let it be considered whether the Rules of Charity and Gospel-Order would not require that he should first have Convinced his Brethren of their Faâ— yea indeed of their supposed Errour about the Subject of Baptism before he should cast so great a Scandal upon them before the face of the world even an Heretick may have two Admonitions before rejection However whether it be this or that ground surely this course doth not a little darken that loud Profession of our Brother's holding fast to the Order of the Gospel It hath been our portion all along to go through evil Reports from the mouthes of many discontented persons and corrupt Opinionists Familists Anabaptists Quakers and the like but I little expected such things as these from so near a Friend and Brother I will not deny or excuse the Declining of many Professors to corrupt Opinions to the World Loose Wayes and the like Neither will I justifie all things in all the Elders of New-England failings may be found in Judgement and Practice and perhaps some may be larger in their Judgement concerning The Subject of Baptism then the Synod doth hold forth But God forbid we should judge them to be swept down from Heaven that differ from us in greater matters then these or for such Blemishes as are incident to good men But whether the generality of the Stars in New-England Churches be not yet in the right hand of Christ shining in their Orbs with the light of Heavenly Doctrine and Christian Conversation I appeal to the Consciences of all the sober-minded People of God in the Country yea and also to the Conscience of the Author of this Preface himself who gives this Testimony of the Elders in the Synod being more then half the Elders of all the Churches of New-England pag. 5. viz. That they were able learned and godly and again Eminent in Learning and Piety However it be it is a very little thing to be judged of men whether approved or condemned Concerning that which is said of Mr. Parker by name for Publishing a Book in favour of Episcopacy our Brother doth or might know that the Book is distastful also to his Brethren as well as to himself yet the approved Learning and Piety of the person might have called for better language As for that Imputation That the Common-Prayer-Book findeth some Advocates in New-England who can finde Stakes and Materials to edifie Gods People in a Congregational Church as is said I wonder that a man of Piety and Gravity should venture to publish such things to the world upon As is said and to what end is it except to cast dirt upon his Brethren Much more then is true is said of that and other things The Lord help such as profess such stedfastness in the Faith and Order of the Gospel to walk up to the Rules of Gospel-Order and Charity more then this Brother hath done Thus much to the first Preface Concerning the second To the General Court I shall Animadvert onely upon two or three Passages of it And 1. Whereas pag. 8. they tell the Honoured Court That they have yielded and voted with the rest so farre that rightly considered and practised it would silence all sad Complaints against the many great and prevailing corruptions of Youth amongst us Ans It is true that one of the chief of our Dissenting Brethren did propound and earnestly promote the third Proposition viz. That the Infant-seed of the Church are Members of the same Church with their Parents and when they are grown up are personally under the Watch and Government of the Church and this rightly practised would indeed tend much to the end aforesaid for so the Church by an Ordinance of Christ
Esau are not clear that they did Excommunicate themselves but were cast out by the Lord. The Curse of Cain was to be A Vagabond and Fugitive in the earth which he understood of his casting out of the Church From thy face shall I be hid Gen. 4.14 As for Ishmael the case is plain that he was cast out by Abraham the Governour of the Church by the appointment of God And of Esau it is expresly said that when he would have inherited the Blessing he was rejected viz. of Isaac after which rejection he went away from the Church in Isaac's Family Concerning the instance of the Sons of Abraham by Keturah how long they continued to Worship the true God or how they fell off who can say or prove that they Excommunicated themselves without any act of God that had the nature of such a Censure As for Open and Obstinate Hereticks and Apostaâ—es which some call Excommunicati de Jure that hindreth not but that they may and ought to be Excommunicated in Fact also But if we speak of Gospel-times wherein the Lord Jesus hath so expresly instituted Church-censures for the saving of Offenders and purging of his Churches and hath confirmed the same with such Promises to Bâ—nde and Loose in Heaven what is bound and Loosed on Earth Mat. 18. I conceive with due respect to the Authors alledged That no Member of a particular Church having the Power and Exercise of Church-Discipline can so cut off his Relation to that Church actually but that the Church may and ought to dispense the Censures to him as the case shall require My Reasons are Reason 1 1. From the Ends of Church-Discipline viz. To reduce and save Offenders Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5.5 To purge the Church 1 Cor. 5.7 To vindicate the Name and Glory of God in bearing fall testimony against Scandals 2 Sam. 12.14 2 Cor. 7.11 You have approved your selves to be clear in this matter For the Example and Terrour of others 1 Tim. 5.20 Whence the Reason stands thus If the Lord Jesus hath betrusted his Church with the Power of Church-Discipline for these and the like Ends then it is the duty of the Church to put forth this Power whensoever these or any of these ends may be attained with the Edification of the Church But there is no case can befall any Church member wherein these or some of these ends may not be attained For put case a Member be turned Arrian Quaker Turk and what you will yet the Censure denounced will Acquit the Church Vindicate the Name and Glory of God in bearing full testimony against such Scandals and tend to the Terrour of others yea who knoweth how farre the Lord may improve it upon the sinner for his good Reason 2 2. If in Scripture-patterns the worst of Hereticks and Blasphemers were laid under Censures notwithstanding their supposed Self-Excommunication then we ought to follow such Patterns in all such cases But such was the Practice in Scripture-examples Tit. 3.10 1 Tim. 1.20 1 Cor. 16.22 Therefore c. Reason 3 3. That Position that openeth a door for Church-members to evade and frustrate Church-Discipline is not to be admitted But this Position doth open a door to evade and frustrate Church-Discipline For by this means any Member in danger of Church-censures may Withdraw himself Renounce the Church and then they cannot proceed against him for it were in vain to cut off a Member that hath already Excommunicated himself If any shall say It is sufficient punishment and judgement of God to leave a man so to Excommunicate himself Ans But how then shall the Church be discharged of their duty to save the Offender by Excommunication that tends to destroy the flesh and save his Soul I never read that God blessed Self-Excommunication to that end Yea by this Position a wicked Schismatical Member shall take the Keyes out of the hands of the Church and Censure the whole Church as oft they do and the Church hath no Power to lay any Punishment upon him for it And hence those Scriptures alledged Hebr. 10.21 1 John 2.19 may receive a just Answer for that Forsaking of the assembling of themselves and Going out doth not exempt them from Church-censures or prove that they were cut off before Church-censures If the foot saith I am not of the Body is it therefore not of the Body Or can this Withdrawing discharge the Church from using the means of their recovery or exempt themselves from the just Censure and Punishment appointed by Christ for such Offenders Reas 5. These adult persons are Members or Non-members if Non-members then a person admitted a Member and sealed by Baptism not cast out nor deserving so to be may the Church still remaining become a Non-member out of the Church and of the unclean world which the Scripture acknowledgeth not Ans 1. Members and Non-members are not opposites but with taking in the conditions of all opposites as in this case ad idem or in the same respect they may be Non-members in full communion and yet Members in Parental Right Reply 1. This Distinction is not ad idem for the want of full Communion is not such a respect as makes a man a Non-member for so a man under Admonition for some Scandal or in a Frenzy should be a Non-member 2. The question is not Whether these be Members in full Communion but Whether that Membership which was sealed up unto them in Baptism doth continue in adult age And this seems once more here to be granted Ans 2. They may deserve Censures though not put upon them Râ—ply This is not the case of these Members in question And if it were so that they deserved Censures yet no man is actually cut off till the Censure be applied And if they may deserve Censures then are they Personal Members under Church-Discipline CHAP. V. Concerning the fourth Proposition Propos 4. THese adult persons are not therefore to be admitted to full Communion meerly because they are and continue Members without such further Qualifications as the Word of God requireth thereunto Our Brethren granting this Proposition yet in reference to the fifth Proposition are pleased by way of Prevention to state this Question viz. Whether there are or should be in the Church such persons as have publickly and personally Covenanted that are not in full Communion The Negative they prove Reas 1. Because publick and personal Covenanting is the formality of a Church-member such have all the constituent causes and so all the consequences of the Form and all the priviledges of that Subject which in this case is full Communion Hence the Form introduced and the Covenant personally owned doth necessarily imply all the priviledges belongingâ—th reunto Ans Every Publick and Personal Covenanting is not the Form of Church-membership The Covenant was oft renewed publickly owned or Entred into by such as were Members of the Church before as in Deut. 29. and other Scriptures doth appear And this is the