Quest. 1. Whether particular Churches ought to consist of Saints and true Believers in Christ?

It is granted that the matter of a particular Church (for the Question is not stated with reference to the Catholick) is visible Saints. And tho' the Answer is not given in the words, yet we would charitably hope his sense is the same, with the united Mini­sters in London. ‘That none shall be admitted as members in or­der to Communion, in all the special Ordinances of the Gospel, but such as are knowing and sound in the fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Religion, without scandal in their Lives, and to a judgment regulated by the word of God, are Persons of visible Godliness and honesty, credibly professing cordial subjection to Jesus Christ.’ Had our Reverend Author only said thus much (and indeed more is needless) he had saved us the labour of any Reflections on this part of his Essay. But there is one passage in p. 15 which we cannot but except against. ‘ A Scripture, saith he, which has respect in the times of the Gospel, severely rebukes those Ministers, which shall bring men that are uncircumcised in bear [...] (unregenerate persons) into the sanctuary, into the Church of God, to eat the Bread and drink the Blood, which [...]y that are there, partake o [...], Ezek. 44. 7, 9.’ A hard saying, and w [...]o can [...]ear it. The Text is here mangled, and the principal things left out. What God has joyned, our Reverend Author has seperated, to drive on his design. The Text saith Uncircumcised in heart, and uncir­cumcised in flesh: but here we have it only uncircumcise in hea [...]t, interpreted unregenerate persons. What a rebuke is this to the best of Ministers because (forsooth) they are not heart searchers, and dare not invade the prerogative of God. Did the Re­verend Author or the Church with him, never admit any un [...] ­ [...]erate [Page 2] Person to communion with them? He will not dare to pre­tend to it, and therefore the rebuke is to himself. We know our Lord Jesus Christ admitted Judas uncircumcised in heart, an unregenerate Person to holy things; and in the purest Ages of the Church there were Hypocrites crept in, many of whom turned Apostates. Nay, our Author is so sensible of this, that p. 19. he quotes the opinion of the Reverend M. Co [...]ton, That its better to admit diverse Hypocrites than to keep out one sincere Child of God. It is obvious then that Hypocrites may be admitted, and yet the Mi­nister incur neither the rebukes of Conscience, or of this Scripture: nay, he may be approved of God, as doing his Duty, though Hy­pocrisie may too well consist with sufficient Knowledge found belief, a blameless Life, a credible Profession, &c. To conclude, Its very observeable, the Reverend Author closes this first Enquiry, by saying, That the Churches here are free to admit those into their com­munion, who are thus qualified. We marvel then his Zeal is not stirred to rebuke them afresh.

But what will the Reader think if we should make an Apology after all for the Reverend Author, and assure him he means no more, than that Ministers ought not to admit known Infidels or Prophane; for, for his part, he pretends not to know mens hearts. We only can intreat the Reader not to rebuke the Author too severely for his inconsistency, for he may mean well, and all parties are agreed. Unless he should imagine himself at­tacqued by the Reverend Author of the Doctrine of instituted Churches.

Q 2. Whether there ought not to be a Tryal of Persons concerning their qualifications and fitness for Church communion, before they are admitted thereunto?

We shall not here examine the force of the Authors arguments, whether they unresistably conclude, or not; and whether the consequence is good from the tryal of the Apostles, the Porters at the Temple, or the 12 Angels at the Gates of the Mystical Jerusalem, to the tryal of Church Members. It suffices that the Reverend Au­thor has modestly stated this Truth, and cited us to a merciful Bar, the judgment seat of a rational Charity, where the Judge avoids severity, and the tryal is managed with abundant tenderness: the [Page 3] bruised Reed is not broken, nor the smoaking flax quenched: the tender Lambs find the kind Shepherds Arms to fold them, and a gentle car­riage in his bosom. This is indeed the part of the good shepherd, and we could now gladly commit our selves to the Reverend Au­thors Pastoral care. So many good words remove all jealousie of a rigid Tryal. But alas! the Clouds return upon us, and a black doubt is started, as follows.

Q 3 Whether are not the Brethren, and not the Elders of the Church only, to judge concerning the qualifications and fitness of those who art admitted into their Communion?

The Reverend Author allows there may be a difference of appre­hension, as to this point, and yet no breach of Union. We think so too, and therefore as we continue to honour the Person, though we expose his opinion; so we [...]o [...] the negative will not dele [...]ve the popular cry, Oh Apostacy! Apostacy! The difference, as the Reverend Author tells us, is between the Brethren of the Presbyterian and the Congregational way, the former giving this power only to the Eldership, the latter joyning the fraternity with them. He takes up for the latter; but whether he proves it, the world may see when we have considered his Arguments.

In the fore-going Chapter, when he would prove there ought to be a tryal of Persons, he tells us of the Porters that were set ut the gates of the Temple, 2 Chron. 23. 19 but those Porters were Officers 1 Coron. [...]6. 1. so he Instances in the Twelve Angels at the Gates of the Mystic [...] Jerusalem, which tho' it may imply that the G [...]es were kept, yet not that the fraternity were the keepers. He instances also in Phillip and John the Baptist, which if it argues any thing, is applicable only to the Officers, and not in the Brother-hood.

But to examine his strength in this Chapter what he calls argu­ment, may more truly be stiled dogmatical affirming, or a more mean begging the Question. Till pag. 24, 25. he quotes a crip­ture or two in proof of his assertions, [...]i [...]. 1 Corinth. 5. 12. 2 Cor. 2. 6. in both which places the Apostle is writing to the Church at Corinth, about excommunicating the l [...]cestuou [...] Person to h [...] [...]n, and the restoring him again upon his Repentance. And w [...]t the Reverend Author to the same holy Aposti [...] for an [...]swer. [...]t is that known place, 1 Corinth. 1 [...]. chap. where he compares the [Page 4] Church to a mans Body, and shows the distinct offices and opera­tions of the respective Members, as the Eye and Ear, the Hand and Foot. And to render the allusion the more intelligible, he names the Officers God had set over his Church, as more immediately re­ferred to v. 28. God has set some in his Church, first, Apostles, secondarily, Prophets, thirdly, Teachers—and in the close of the 14. chap. he adds, Let all things be done decently and in order. The result of all is this.

The Apostle would have every one to keep his proper place and sphere, and do his own work, soil in the Censure of the faulty Person, the Eldership were to do theirs, the Brotherhood not to usu [...]or arrogate any thing above their Province. For as the Apostle queries, v. 19 are all Apostles? are all Prophets? are all Teachers? i. e. in a govern'd Body we cannot expect all should be Governors, vid. Pool's Annot.

There is another Text also produced to prove the power of the Brethren, scil. Mat. 18. 17. and if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it to the Church. This Text has been often brought on this account, and sometimes on other accounts and as often answered, yet here brought again, but it will not answer the end.

The Context supposes an Offender, and the wronged party pro­ceeding against him; and here are three steps the dissatisfied Person is directed to take, in order to heal the wound given, 1.) To tell the Offender his fault in private. 2) To tell him before 2 or 3 wit­nesses, and if the end be not obtained; 3.) To tell it to the Church. Suppose now a Person acting according to this Rule (as we could give instances if need were) when the first step did not gain his Brother, nor the second answer the end, at last the dis­satisfied Person carried the case to the Pastor, and now he reckened he had told it to the Church. The Pastor sending so the Offendor presently convinced him, brought him to Repentance, and to give satisfaction, and the thing was issued. Here the Rule was attended, the Church told, the offendor healed, the wronged Person satisfied, and the matter issued, when the Brotherhood all this while knew nothing of it. It is evident from the next verse, that by the Church must be meant those who had Power to bind and loose, which Power Christ had given to the Apostles. Moreover let the sense be that the Offence is to be told to the Rulers first, and then by then to the [Page 5] multitude; not for the multitude to judge of it, but for their war­ning and example, for their prayers for the offendor, and their ap­probacion of the Elders Censure, and that they might take care to avoid the familiarity of such an insectious sinner, vid. Pools Annot.

But if Scripture will not prove the Power of the Brethren, possibly some venerable Maxim may do the feat. Quod [...]angie omnes debet ab omnibus approbari. But alas! this Maxim gives so much to the Sisters, as to the Brethren. Surely it is no divine Oracle, it neither came from Heaven, nor is it according to the man­ners of men upon Earth. If a master of a family take in a so [...]ou [...]nor or a servant; all are concerned, but their vote is not asked. If a Cap­tain list a Souldier, all the Company is concerned, but it is done by his Authority, without asking their leave. And pray carry this m [...]x [...]m to the Colledge, and see if the President and fellows will stand by it in their admissions. If it be objected, that even in all these cases if there be any sufficient reasons presented by those con­cerned, a prudent Ruler will yield to it; we easily grant it, and therefore its not unfit that men be proposed to the Congregation, if there be any thing to object against their lives, &c.

Another argument for the Brethrens Power in admission, is, lest the whole Power should sometimes reside in the hands of a single Minister, and that this is unreasonable we have a Speech quoted from the Presbiterian Ministers in London. But it is strangely perverted from their true meanning, as appears not only from the whole series and scope of the Book, but also from what is expressed in the page quo­ted (p. 71.) where they say, ‘That the Power cannot be placed in the whole Church collectively taken.’ The Scripture makes an exact distinction between Rulers and ruled. They only plead that there should be more Rulers in a Church then one; or that, when there are more, then the Power belongs to the whole meaning, the ruling Elders as well as the Teaching. And what is that to the Power of the Brethren? One officer has Power in plain cases to act in the Kings name.

Indeed our Saviour did frequently send forth his Disciples two and two But yet Phillip was sent alone to baptize the Ethiopian Eunuc [...] It will not excuse a Minister in the neglect of Christs work, because he has no fellow labourers with him.

[Page 6]But the strongest argument comes last. The way to keep Popery our of the World, saith our Author, is for the fraternity to assert and main­tain that Power, which does of right belong to them. In answer to which, we need only blot out the word fraternity, and in its room write the word Ela [...]rship. An excellent argument that will equally prove either way; and by the change of a word serve, also to answer Doctor Owens long Speech, which ends that Chapter.

In short, all Power is firstly in Christs [...]a [...]ds, and our Reverend Author produces no commission or order from Christ, for the [...]re­thren [...] ma [...]ge the affairs o [...] his House in his name; for he has appointed Officers of his own to that end.

Q. 4. Whether is it necessary t [...]at Persons at their admission into the Church should make a publick relation of the time and manner of their Conversion?

The Reverend Author answers in the Negative, and adds, that the Churches of N. E▪ do not impose it, [...]or ought it to be re­quired or desired. He gives four substantial reasons why it ought not And had he stopt here, he had done well, or had he added more reasons to those four, as he could have done, it had been an accept­able performance.

But about he wheels again, and seems to plead hard for it, or something like it, which he calls the Practice of the Churches of New England.

This he would recommend from a story receiv'd from the Re­verend Mr. Eliot, but we have heard another story from the same Reverend Person, how when one of the Brethren was highly com­mending his neighbours Relation, and prefer [...]g it to others, the said Mr. Eliot turned upon him, and said, A [...] Brother! don't be so much taken with fine words, but look to the mans conversation. The Author relates another story from the Reverend Mr. Ho [...], of one who through importunity was brought to make a relation, and made the Congregation weep, when he did it; but whether for joy or grief, we are left in the dark.

The Author gives us his arguments, but they do not reach his end. He pleads for them in that they are edifying; but we have known some that have been no ways so; or granting they were always so, can that justifie the instituting and imposing them? would it [...]ot be [Page 7] edifying if every Sabbath day evening, some well disposed (talk­ative) Brethren should stand up and relate the experiences of the week past? yet shall we make it a law or custom? will not some people assure you, they have been wonderfully edified by a womans preaching in Publick? and yet will our Reverend Author be induced to prostitute his Pulpit to them, or part with a Sallary to cherish their zeal.

Again, the Relation of Experiences is pleaded for, in that God may be Honoured by them. But we have known some to Gods dishonour, being in [...]pid, sensless things, to use our Authors own words, meer formalities, too scandalous and superstitious. He saith, they are a means to gain love with the Children of God. But we have known some that have lost love and credit by them.

But the Question is, Whether they are an instituted means for any of these ends? Whether appointed by God, to promote his glory, edisie the Congregation, or gain love? If not, they are but the Institutions of men, and therefore to be rejected, as the before quo­ted Mr. Willard instructs us.

God has appointed the preaching the Gospel, the Sacraments, &c. for edification, and the promoting Christian love among his people; but we read nothing of these imposed relations, neither when Christ himself, nor when his Apostles after him, administred this holy Sacrament. Nor is there any appearance of such a Custom in the primitive Church.

Indeed, there are some occasions, as our Author observes, on which a Person who has had a remarkable Conversion, may declare it: but there's neither precept nor rule in the Word of God, that it should be done at this set time, and in publick. And with what sace can we impose it, when our Fathers fled from the impositions of men? whether arbitrary Impositions are insufferable in themselves, or not; yet certainly they are [...]old and insolent in New-England, where the greatest out-cry is made against them in others.

But it would make a man smile, were he never so serious or dis­pleased, to read the Texts that are brought for this Custom; as that Psal. [...]0 10. I have not concealed thy Truth from the great Congre­gation. And indeed the Royal Prophet had been inexcusable if he had, as a Minister would now, that should not declare to his flock the [Page 8] whole counsel of God.

Again, Psal. 66. 16. he says, Come and hear all you that fear God, and I will declare what he has done for my soul. We imagine the Reve­rend Author supposes the Psalmist thus calling aloud in some vast re­ligious Concourse, and that in order to his partaking of the privi­ledges of the Jewish Church. But should we grant a supposal so ri­diculous and extravagant, yet this makes nothing for imposing Relations, for then it should have been spoken and challenged by the People. Do you come, and stand forth, Sir, and tell us what God has done for your soul, and then we admit you to all the priviledges of the Temple. Another Text strangely perverted to scare some good people is, that, Mat. 10. 33. Whosoever denyeth me before men, him will I also deny before my father which is in Heaven. As if there were no confessing Christ, without making formal speeches in the Church.

And as if a credible profession of our faith in Christ, the taking his Name upon us in Baptism, and the renewal of our Baptismal Vow, and a devout attendance on the Ordinances of the Gospel, were not the true confession our Lord expects! Wo be to the world, if all were to be rated, denyers of Christ; who whether from in­ability, modesty or a just indignation, refuse to make a quaint Speech in the Church. The last Scripture we shall name, which has been equally abused with the rest is that in 1 Pet. 3. 15. That Christians should be ready to give a reason of the hope that is in them, to everyone that asketh it, to wit, in a proper place and time, for a fit end, and on sufficient Reasons, where there is Authority to command, or it is desired with modesty. The sense indeed is, that we should be ready to defend our Faith against the scoffs and cavils of Infidels and Perse­cutors: and that it is a shame to Christians not to be able to argue for their Religion, and confute gain-sayers. So that if you would infer hence any publick Speech in the Church, it must be rather an Apology for the Christian Religion, or a Sermon to prove its reason­ableness and evidence; but neither is it in the least intimated that this should be made a stated term of Communion; and we are sure the Church has no more power to debar the resuser from any Christian priviledge then to require Oaths, Subscriptions, and Conformity to a Thousand more Ceremonies.

[Page 9]We have but one Remark more to make here, and that is, the Apostle requires this reason of our hope to be given with meekness & fear. The true sense whereof is, that which we are contending even with Infidels, yet we must not argue with an intemperate Passion or Zeal. Or if we construe it, as in opposition to Pride and Presump­tion of a mans own g [...]f [...]s and abilities; It is a severe Rebuke to many of our bold and forward Zealots, who have been famed for their promptness to speak in the Church, and the first that have fallen un­der its deserved [...]ash. We should indeed be better reconciled to this custom of Relations, were this prescribed meekness and fear more visible in them. But this is the misery, the more meek and fearful are hereby kept out of Gods House, while the more conceited and pre­sum [...]tuous never boggle at this, o [...] any thing else.

But it seems there is a gross Corruption of this laudable practice which the Author does well to cen [...]ure; and that is, when some, who have no good intention of their own, get others to devise a Relation for them. The Author may be satisfied there is something of truth in such reports; neither Charity nor Interest should make us too incre­du [...]us. But then he passes a severe sentence on such Lyars to the holy Ghost. Which they truly deserve, i [...] in their relations they pre­tended to tell the time and manner of their Conversion, or if they so much as suggested it to be their own devising; but if it be only a pro­fession of their Faith & Repentance, it is not material who composes it, if they can conscientiously subscribe to it. And indeed a general. form might be best of all in the case, if they must needs be made us. To sum up all, we not only believe (with our Author) that such as delude the Church, by bringing relations not of their own devising, do exceedingly provoke the Lord; but also that the imposers of them as a term of Communion, do so too.

Q [...]. 5. Hath t [...] Church Covenant, as commonly practised in the Churches of New. England, any Scripture foundation?

In reference to this Question, the Reverend Author and others of his opinion, in their discourses about it, love much to keep in the dark. We confess our selves at a loss about those words ( as commonly prac­tised) and Solomon has long ago told us, that he that answers a mat­ter before he understands it, it is a folly and shame to him.

The Reverend Author knows we suppose, or if he don't, we do, [Page 10] that in some Churches of N. E. they have no Church Covenant at all, and that in other Churches it is differently p [...] ▪ Some un­derstand by it only a Covenanting with God to perform by his Grace the Duties we owe to him, and our Christian B [...]e [...]en, & accordingly [...]o propose it; others mean by it a Covenant with a particular Church, whereby they are bound to walk in Communion therewith, till by their consent dismissed. Others will have it to be a necessary Qualification in order to a persons partaking of the Lords Supper, either there or else where; And others have Notions of it quite different from all these.

The Reverend Author first bears us down with a formidable Au­thority, telling us the Question was considered at a General Con­vention of the Ministers, May, 1 [...]98 and that all the Ministers then present save one, did concur in the Affirmative, but we have heard q [...]te otherwise, and that it was then proposed and urged to have the Church Covenant more distinctly opened, though it was not hearkened to. It is a good policy to hurry on a vote their cause de­pends on, and like a first Principle, it must not be deliberated or debated; and such, as we hear, was the mannagement of that vote. And it is observeable the Reverend Author avoids (whether indust [...]i­ousty or no, we shall not guess) to state the nature of this Covenant, but confusedly saith, as it is practised by the Churches in N. E.

In the Preface we have the Authors own description of this Co­venant, where he calls it explic [...]t Covenanting with God and his Church, and sometimes with God and his People. But we renew our Com­plaint, that we are yet most miserably in the dark. It might be enquired here, whether it be two distinct Covenants, one with God and the other with his People? i [...] so, which of them is the proper Church Covenant? If but one, whether it binds the person that en­ters into it, to perform the same Duties to God, and to the Church▪ and in case a person be dismissed, whether it is from his whole duty or from a part of it? and whether God and his Church Promise [...]he same thing to the party covenanting? These Queries are offer'd only to provoke a clear state of the thing debated, which should be clear­ed to the understandings of people, before its imposed on their Con­sciences, as a term of Communion.

But before our Author ends this Chapter, he puts another disguise, [Page 11] and a more taking face on this matter. He would inf [...]uate that the Church Covenant, as practised in New-England, is nothing more than the publick Profession of Faith, and promise of a holy L [...]; for which he quotes both Synods and several private Reverend mens Names. But this unfair dealing may be stript of its disguise, by shewing in what sence we allow a Church Covenant, and in what sence we allow it not.

1 st. We own and plead for a Covenant with God, whereby a Person or People become his, and b [...]nd themselves to walk in all his ways. This was the Covenant that constituted Israel of old to be a Church and People of God, and which God made with Abraham and his Seed after him, by which [...] became, in a special manner, their God, and they his People▪ This is the Covenant that Israel renewed with God in the Wilderness, [...]cut. 26. 17, 18. To this God annex­ed his Seals, Circum [...]sion in the days of old, and Baptism under the Gospel. Its by this Covenant that a Person or People are united to Christ the head, and do become Members of his Body. By this the Catholick Church is constituted, and we have an Interest in all those Priviledges that belong to believers, as such. This is the Covenant we own, and which we renew every time we attend the publick Wor­s [...]i [...] of God, Psal. 50. 5. and this Covenant ought to be explicit, openly professed and published to the World. It is a false and abusive in nu [...]tion (but frequently made in an awful Desk) that People are against all explicit Covenanting, or the open renewal of it; for there is no pretence for such a C [...]lumny, that we can hear of: It must there­fore arise either from idle Fears, or some mischievous Policy.

2 [...]ly. We also highly approve of a Covenant of Reformation. A great [...]uty in times of Apostacy, and gross corruption of Manners; to covenant to put away these and those reigning sins, to return to the Lord, and perform such particular Duties as have been visibly neglected. O [...] this we have frequent instances in Scripture, Ezra 10 3 5.

3dly. We may also allow a Covenant between Minister & People, whereby they [...]i [...] themselves to th [...]se respective Duties, that the Word of God has made incumbent on them, on account of that Re­lation.

But we altogether deny a Church Covenant in the following sense, [Page 12] and say, Our Lord Jesus Christ has no where appointed in his Word, that there should be a Covenant ent [...]'d into by some Persons of a Christian Society, exclusive of the rest, whereby they being in Cove­nant one with another, should thereby call themselves a Church of Christ, making the Ordinances of Christ, or any of them to depend on this Covenant, so that those who scruple it, or refuse to joyn in it, shall on that account, not enjoy them. And that those who are thus covenanted, or the major part of them, have power to make or un­make Officers, to admit or reject Church Members, to mannage Dis­cipline, to order the affairs of Christs House in his Name, as if they had warrant and commission from him so to do. Of such a Church Covenant neither Moses, nor Christ himself, the Prophets nor the Aposties have spoke any thing. None of the Scriptures, Arguments or Quotations of our Reverend Author prove any thing of it. We will take leave therefore to call it Mans Covenant, and no [...] Gods, for it has nor Gods Seal affixed to it; & though good, wise or learned men may endeavour to obtrude it, and plead, its harmless, [...]ifying, or for the Interest of Religion, yet according to the afore-quoted Rule of the reverend Mr. Willard, we are to reject it, and shall do so, till it comes with a divine Stamp.

But possibly this may be called a Misrepresentation. You will say, Who owns it, or will plead for it in this Dress? We Answer, by querying, Whether there be not several that own and plead for the things contained in it? We wish there were a less Number. But to evince it, let us take it into the several parts. Are there none that plead for a seperate Covenant, which some (and generally the lesser part) must enter into? and if it be good, and for good ends, why must so many be excluded? If it be to reform Manners, if to maintain the Ministry and Worship of God, if to lay stricter Bonds of Duty, if to bring men more effectually to submit to Discipline, why then are not the whole brought in? for the whole Congregation are oblig'd to these Duties, and why must the Covenant be seperate?

Again, do not some plead, it is requisit, in order to a Persons par­taking of the Lords Supper? But did our Lord Jesus Christ require any such thing when he first instituted that holy Sacrament? Did the Apostles when they administred it? Was it the term of Communion in the primitive Church? or where i [...] the Scripture that commands [Page 13] it? and why should Gods holy Ordinances be annexed to Mens Cove­nant? Again, do not some plead, that those who thus covenant, have the Power to make and unmake Officers? The Reverend Au­thor will not scape here, whose Opinion in this matter we shall see hereafter. And, finally, do not some pretend, [...]at these are the Persons commissioned by Christ, for the admitting and rejecting of Church Members? This the Reverend Author defends with all his Might, under the third Question, tho', as we showed, he could find no Proof. And so much for the Church Covenant, which is a stranger to the Scripture, and has no foundation in the Word of God.

Q. 6. Is publick Reading of the Scriptures, without explication or ex­hortation there-with, part of the Work incumbent on a Minister of the Gospel?

The Author does not mean, (as we suppose,) if there be no ex­plication or exhortation throughout the whole time of exercise. If he doth, he fights with the air, for we know no Sect of Men but have some explication, tho' many among us neglect reading. We therefore take his sense to be this, If no explication follow immedi­ately without the interposition of Prayer, or any other part of divine Worship. For we conceive that the ordinary preaching the Word may very properly be call'd exposition, explication & exhortation, and that in every Sermon there is a competent portion of Scripture for one time explicated and applyed. No [...] can we imagine, the Re­verend Author means that every clause a Minister reads in publick should be in a formal manner explicated: Methinks it should satisfie, if after one or more Chapters read, some select clause, verse o [...] para­graph be insisted on and expounded, i. e. chosen as a Text, and preached on.

We are obliged to the Author, if but for quoting the Text in Ti­mothy, where it is given him in charge, as his Ministerial Work, To give attendance to Reading, as well as to Doctrine & Exhortation That the Jews were wont to read the Scriptures in their Synagogue, saith the Reverend Author, we all know; and that it was their Duty to read the Scripture at some set and solemn Times, we also know; for so it was ap­pointed, Deut. 31. 11. Again, he grants that in Just in Martyrs time the Scriptures were read, and thereupon followed a Sermon.

[Page 14]We should have been thankful if he had added more Proofs, by way of Encouragement (as he could easily have done) and thereby confirmed some that are apt to stagger. He could have to [...]d how the Assembly of Divines at West minster, do order and advise to i [...]: He could have quoted the many famous Churches that do practise it at this day: He could have named several famous Ministers in Eng­land, and some in New-England, that plead for it, and practise it. He could have told of more than the Bishop of Derry that complain of the neglect of it, and that (to use the wo [...]ds of a most eminent Divine not far from us) as the most just Reproach that the Churches of New-England labour under. He could have told, for encouragement, that it is a clause in our publick Confession of Faith in New-England, chap. 22. which treats of Religious Worship, and the Sabbath day, Sect. 5▪ The reading the Scriptures, Preaching and hearing the Word of God, singing of Psalms, as also the Administration of Baptism and the Lords Supper, are all parts of the Religious Worship of God, to be performed in Obedience to God with Ʋnderstanding, Faith, Reverence and godly [...]ear. Finally, He could have told us (had he searched all our New-England Antiquities on this head) how in the Preface to our Version of the Psalms, the reading of David's Psalms as other Scriptures) in Churches, is taught to be one end of them, as well as singing of them, which is another end. It is ridiculous to say, that reading, with exposition is here meant; for then why was it not so said?

However, it looks very oddly, that they who neither read nor ex­p [...]u [...]d, should talk so much, and quote so many Name [...], as our Author has done, for a Practice which they never intended to come up unto.

We have heard what our Author has said, and much more that he could have said to encourage this good Practice: His Discourage­ments follow:

And first, he brands it with a hard uncouth Name, and twice tells us, that som [...] call it Dumb Reading▪ We wish he had named those that so term it. There is so much Venom in the Epithite, and so complicated a Mali [...]nity in the Phrase, that we fear its infectious, and may propagate a Spirit of Pride, & contempt of his Neighbours, and irreverence to his Maker. The Author well thought, so odious a Mark on the Front, would give all honest People a disgust to [...] [Page 15] villanous and stigmatiz'd a Practice. But his Policy has failed him, for it raises a just Indignation in all sensible and [...]n [...]enuous Christians. We will for once inform the Reverend Author, that the Scriptures are read in Churches audibly and intelligibly. Nor can we guess what Dumb reading should mean, unless when men sleep over their Books; and in charity to the Author, we wish he had been a sleep when this unlucky word dro [...]t from his Pen.

We are further beholden to the Author for his judgment, that the reading of one Chapter, with a brief explication, wi [...] edifie the Con­gregation more than the bare reading of twenty Chapters. But this is only his single Opinion, and as it will not weigh against the daily experience of thousands of People, who must judge for them­selves; so neither does it favour of modesty, to think any one of his Sermons o [...] short Comments, can edifie more than the reading of twenty Chapters. We would not charge on the Reverend Author all the hard consequences of his own words, or we should say, that it is audacious so vilely to disparage the Inspirations of God. Alas! Sir, the Scripture wants nothing of ours to make it Perfect. We have the Confessions of many who have come to hear the Word read with prejudice, that God gives it authority from the lips of the Mi­nister▪ And we know, that as all Scripture is given by Inspiration of God, so it is in it self profitable (without any help or advantage from us) for Doctrine, for Reproof, for Correction, for Instruction in Righte­ousness— [...]o perfect the Man of God, the Minister as well as his People; and if it were not so in it self, it could not be so by being explained. Here let our Confession of Faith speak for us, chap. 1. Sect. 7. All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselues, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things w [...] are necessary to be known, believed and observed for Salvation, are so clearly propounded & opened in some place o [...] Scrip­ture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them.

There is one Argument in pag [...] 47, 48▪ brought by the Reverend Author against this Dumb Reading, but so picious a stu [...]ble, so miserable an incon [...]equence, that we are loath to name i [...].

To issue this Head, we are more and more confirmed, that the reading Gods Word in the great Congregation, is so far from being offensive to God, that it is the greatest Reverence and Honour we can do it, and the most suitable acknowledgment we can make to [Page 16] him, who in mercy has given us his Word, and will judge the World by it at the great Day.

Qu. 7. Is Baptism to be administred to all Children, whom any profes­sing Christians shall engage to see educated in the Christian Religion?

The Reverend Author, according to his wonted Bounty, a [...] first dash concedes to us, that he will not oppose the adoptive right. We then declare our selves satisfied, and crave no more; for we do not conceive that any man can engage or undertake for the Education of a Child in the Christian Religion, unless he has the Authority of a Parent devolved on him, for the government of the Child. Nor would any conscientious Minister accept the engagement of one who has no power or ability to perform his Vows. So that this engage­ment necessarily implyes the care and authority of a Father, and consequently there is an adoptive Right to Baptism.

But the Author stumbles at the phrase, professed Christians, and seems to think that the Question, if carried in the Affirmative, would conclude for Papists, Socinians, and the groslest Hereticks, as also for the most notorious Prostigates, and prophane Persons; as if it ever entered into the heart of a Protestant Divine to accept the Engagement of some lewd Debauchce or professed Papist to institute his Child for the Devil or Popery. Our complaint here is the same that the Reverend Mr. How once made of his Adversaries, That [...]e gravely falls a combating with his own Man of Straw, and so we are to be tortured in Effigie. But to pacific him, we would inform him what a charitable Man would understand by a professed Christian, vi [...]. the s [...]me that our Catechism does, when it instructs us, That Baptism is not to be administred to any till they profess their Faith in Christ, and obedience to him. We leave our Author therefore to fight it out with that Reverend Assembly, for truly his Argument is form [...]dable against them, in as much as Papists, Socinians, Heretick; the Prophane, &c. do all profess their Faith in Christ, and Obedience to him. Such is the Power of Interest, Faction, Passion and personal Opposition, that it blinds a Man on a suddain to fight with those Truths which he has learned and reverenced from his Infancy.

Qu. 8. Is Baptism in a private House, where there is no Church Assembly, allowable?

The Question seems to grant, there may be a Church Assembly in a private House (as we read, Rom. 16. 5. Phil. 2.) so there may be a publick place, and no Assembly▪

We agree with the Reverend Author, that Baptism is a part of the publick Ministry, nor may it be administred by one who is not called to the publick Ministry; neither should it usually and o [...]i­na [...]ly be administred but in a full Congregation, and in the most pub­lick manner, nor would we drop a word to discourage so pious a Practice.

Yet, let the Congregation be never so great, if the Administrator be not a publick Minister, commissioned by our Lord Jesus Christ, it may be called private Baptism, and altogether unallowable; and if the number of people be small, and the place otherwise private, yet if the Administrator be a publick Officer and Minister of Christ, the Baptism may in a sense be called Publick, and in some cases (as that of dangerous sickness) not only allowable but necessary, and a duty. When a Justice of the Peace acts in his Office, though but few are present, yet they are acts of publick Authority, as truly as those done in higher Courts, and with greater solemnity. Altho among us, where Churches are orderly settled, there is little occasion either for private preaching or Baptism, it being certain the more publick both are, the more God and his Ordinances are honoured, & th [...] ge­neral profit of his people consulted.

But yet (as was hinted before) there are some cases of necessity, wherein its ones duty to seek a more private Baptism; the pro­vidence of God not permitting a more publick attendance, and no Minister ought to refuse their desire.

As for instance, in apparent danger of death, it would be cru­elty to deny such a request, if privacy be the only Objection. We need not suggest, that all what we call private Baptism there may be a competent number of people present; the neighbourhood be­ing called in, and notice given to some of the Brethren of the Church. We observe a good Medium herein between the two danger­ous extreams. We avoid all unnecessary & common Baptizing in pri­vate, for which our Brethren in England are so very faulty; and we [Page 18] would correct our own defects here at home, in refusing to Baptise in private, be the extremity never so great, or life never so [...]azardous. Not that we are at all ti [...]ged with the error of St. Austin, namely, a pe [...]swasion of the absolute necessity of Baptism to Salvation: [...]ut we [...]eem i [...] the most publick owning of God which the state of the person admits of or the providence of God a [...] present allows, and [...] good to [...]e found in the way of blessing, and we may expect that [...] his own Instit [...]tions.

[...] the lawfulness of private Baptism, in cases of necessity, abun­dantly appears from that One instance of the Goaler, Acts 15. 33. To [...]ch our Author answers, St. Paul was an extraordinary Officer. But by his leave, that is nothing to the purpose; for the ordinary Ministers of the Gospel succeed the Apostles in those thing in ta [...]e of an ordinary and standing nature in the Church, as baptism i [...] ▪ [...]ndeed, his other reason is good, that it was difficult, if no [...] impossible to get a Congregation of Christians; and therefore necessity was put upon the Apostle to Baptize the Goaler and family in private; which plainly holds forth thus much, that in like cases of necessity, as in times of persecution, danger of Death &c. the same practice is allowable and a duty; wherein we have the promise of Christs gracious Presence with us, as well as when it i [...] administred in a larger Congregation Mat. 18. 20. For where two o [...] th [...]e are gathered together in any Name, there a [...] I in the midst of them.

Q. 9 O [...]ght all that contribute towards the maintenance to have the privileage of voting in the Election of a Pastor?

The Reverand Author in the very first line of his answer to this question, t [...]r [...]sts in a most [...]kind in [...]nuation, and not altogether free from Calumny, as if the affirmative could not be maintained, but the change of Simony must be incurred.

We therefore once for al profess, that we abhor as much as he pretend to do, the thought that Money should purchase us Church priviledges; but this is so wide a Ramble that it is not worth while to say more to it.

All the Authors arguments under this head infer only that it is the Churches priviledge to chuse their own Minister. And [...]der his 4th argument he tells us, that nothing is more evident, then that in the [Page 19] first Ages of the Church, Pastors were chosen by all and only their flocks. Which we verily believe, no [...] could he have expressed the truth in more apt words. For long since he has caught us, I [...]as adult baptized Persons are of the Church, and [...] proved it in his Treatise annixed to the first Principles of New England, under which denomination they claim the priviledge of voting in the election of a Minister.

Indeed there is one argument at first blush seems pretty plausible, p. 68. for them who have no rig [...] to the Lord [...] Supper themselves, [...]o ap [...]on [...]t [...] shall be the Dispencer o [...] that Ordinance to others, is [...]ig [...]ly irrational.

We Answer; The administration of the Lords Supper is but one part of a Ministers work, and but a little part, compared with all the rest. Let us turn the argument then, and say, For some few to appoint who shall be the Preacher to the whole Congregation, is as highly irrational.

Suppose we what is frequent in this Country) thirty or forty Communicants, and it may be two hundred to be admitted in con­venient time; is it not every whi [...] as absurd, that not one of these who are to be examined, prepared and admitted to this holy Ordi­nance, shall have liberty to chuse the Person who shall do this Work for t [...]em; but the Person must be altogether chose by others, wh [...] he has not this Work to do for. A hopeful argument that will help both sides!

The Reverend Author calls it A priviledge purchased for the Commu­nicants Only by the Blood of Christ; but he gives no proof a [...] all of any such Appropriation, and leaves [...] yet in the firm belief, that the Priviledge is purchased for the whole Flock, who had need stand for their own.

We might here borrow of the Author the Maxim he gave us in another case, Quod tangit omnes [...]b [...]t a [...] o [...]b [...]s app [...]ar [...] It was exploded in the other case, but if he will give u [...] leave to put in Aequaliter (Quod tangit omne [...] aequaliter, &c.) then [...]t would suit the cas [...], and afford him some conviction.

The Reverend Author also gives us another Maxim in pag. 87. with this Elogium, That it has its foundation in Nature and Reason, though we are sure it makes strongly against him here, namely▪ That which Pertains to all is not valid, if some of all sorts have not a consent in it; for [Page 20] some places have no Communicants, and there all grant this Right and Priviledge belongs to the whole: if afterwards they come to have some Communicants, by what Rule or Reason do they take away that Priviledge which belonged to others before? In short, let our Author find one Text that limits or confines it to the Communicants alone, and then deprive the Majority.

But since Scripture fails him, he has another Refuge, viz. the Au­thority of the Synod, and the Law of the Land. The last of these we think excepts Boston, and of both we need only say, that as they were done by men, so they may be altered and undone by the same men, when they please.

It is also hinted, That this may prove fatal to the Churches. But there is no danger, Truth does no harm; and we rather think it may be retorted on the Author and his Practice. There was lately a grievous Complaint made by a principal Man of Swanzy, before some Ministers and others, That the Law which gives the Power to the Communi­cants only to call a Minister, is like to ruin them and their Posterity forever, by excluding them from an able and orthodox Ministry, and the Ordinances; for the Baptists taking advantage thereby, have set up a gifted Brother, and spoil the place of the publick Ministry.

Qu. 10. Is it expedient that Churches should enter into a Cons [...]ciation or Agreement that matters of more than ordinary [...]ortance, such as the gathering a new Church, the Ordination, Deposition, or Translation of a Pastor, be done with common consent?

The Reverend Author answers, That it is both expedient and neces­sary; though he had answered as well, had he said, It is altogether needless. But le [...]t we be mis-understood in this matter, let the Reader carefully observe, We do not mean that the Communion, or Fellow­ship, or Prayer, or Assistance, or Duties that the Church or People of God owe to one another, are needless. But for particular Churches, that are parts, and result from the Catholick, and are united to the Head, and in Covenant with him, and bound to per­form all Duties both to the Head & to all the Members respectively; for such to talk of entering into an agreement on this account, seems very idle and needless. To i [...]ustrate the matter; if a Servant has [Page 21] bound himself to a Master, he need not go to make new Covenants to carry it dutifully to the Mistress, lovingly to the Children, faith­fully to the fellow Servants, this being all contained in the Masters Covenant. So, if a Person marry a Husband, she has no need to make a new Covenant with his Father, that he shall be her Father, or that his Brothers, Sisters or other Relations shall become hers, this being all [...]mplyed in the M [...]i [...]g [...] Covenant: The respective Duties must be performed, but there is no need of new agreements or cove­nants to be entered into Mr. Burroughs, as quoted by the Reverend Author, expresses this well. They are bound in Consc [...]ince to give an account of the wayes to Churches about them, or to any other who shall req [...]ir [...] it; and this not in an A [...]bitra [...] way, [...]t as a Duty they owe to God and Man. The united B [...]eth [...]e [...] in London speak yet more fully in the Chapter of Communion o [...] C [...]ur [...]es, [...]. 1. We agree that parti­cular Churches ought not to walk so dist [...]ct and seperate from each other, as o [...] to have care and tenderness to one another. But their Pastors ought to have frequent Meeting together, that by mutual advice, support, en­couragement and b [...]ot [...]ly intercourse, they may strengthen the [...]earts and hands of each other in the ways of the Lord. We may add here the whole Chapter of occasional Meetings of Ministers, and so dismiss this Question.

Qu. 11. May the Brethren in Churches, and not the Pastors only, be sent unto, and have their Voice in Ecclesiastical Councils?

It is to be observed, that by this means the Brethren in a Synod will surpass the Elders in Number, and by a Cabal may easily out vote them▪ Wherefore we can never believe that our Lord Jesus Christ has left every private Brother an equal Vote with any of his Officers, in ruling o [...] [...]agi [...]g his Church. It will be granted that the ad­vantage is of the Elders side, as to Learning, Prudence, Par [...], Piety, Zeal and Devotion, at least, taking the whole Synod together; yet that men of mean Parts, no Education, nor under the awe of an Office that obliges to the care of Souls peculiarly, should be equalled to the former in all Decisions, tho' not Debates, whereof they are uncapable, is very unaccountable. Indeed, had our Lord in his Word positively required this, we might expect that his Spirit of [Page 22] Counsel would more abundantly reside on the weaker Vessels; but otherwise, to fill a Council from the Plough, and the [...]all, is a tempting Christ, and betraying the Church. Neither are we igno­rant what Tools they are in the hands of any one designing Man of a Reverend and August Name, let his Opinions be what they will; these are Bigg [...]s, and the Man is himself a Synod. We co [...]s [...]ss such a Man would be tempted to stand up for the Brethrens Autho­rity, which is his own support, and the mean while the Church is like to be well govern'd.

But what is a further Outrage to the sacred Office, the Author will not let Ministers fit as Officers of Christ, or as Persons authorized by him; for thus he expresses himself, pag. 80 Its not their Office, but the Churches Delegation, that g [...]v [...] Power to th [...] Members of Sy [...] ▪ the specificating Act in which Synod all Power, and so the rig [...] o [...] a decisive Vote [...] [...]o [...]nded, is t [...]e Churches Delegation. And to prove this, he instancet [...] i [...] the first Synod that ever sate, as [...]e terms that Acts 15. a Copy and Samplar left to all succeding Generations. But how Comical is this? as if that was so constituted, or its Members delegated by particular Churches. Or, how long had this inspired Synod sat before that case was brought before them? or were they summoned upon this single occasion? Truly the Author beg [...] the whole, and proves nothing of it.

Indeed, the Reverend Author tells us in the same page, That of these Delegates from the Churches, the [...]l [...]ers o [...]g [...]t to be the principal, or principally concerned. A mighty grace ineed! yet even this cannot be allowed, and he consistent with himself; for in the next page he tells us, There are some Brethren in the Churches, whose Gifts and Abilities are beyond their Pastors, and some again are more Noble and Honourable. Now if they are alike delegated, and those can act no more in the Name of Christ than the other, pray why should they be the principal? Why may not a [...]rother of equal Authority as [...]ume and arrogate the first place to himself, which if he chance to do, we leave the Author to be catechized by him, and to do Pennance pati­ently by his own Principles.

Qu. 12. Doth the Essence of a Ministers Call consist in his being Ordained with the imposition of hands by other Ministers? [Page 23] Qu. 13. May a Men be ordained a Pastor, except to a particular [...], ana in the presence o [...] that Church?

We joyn these two together, partly because they are of near affinity, and partly because some things the Reverend Author asserts under one of them, may indifferently be referred to the other. Our chief Exceptions may be reduced to these five.

[...]. That he asserts, she essence of a Ministers Call consists in a mutual election between him and his People, pag 91. If we under [...]tand the Author, he means, that a person cannot be a Minister without his mutual Election, and that with it he may, and is. He had just before no [...]ed, that some think the essence of the Ministry to he in Orai [...]on; others, in its being done by a Bishop; Which last No [...]o [...] [...]ts off (saith [...]) m [...]st of the Ministers in France, Switzerland, Denmark, [...]d, Scotland, &c. But, to retort you words, Sir, we think that your assertion cuts off more both for Number and for Eminence. It cuts off the Prophets, the Apostles and Evangelists! It cuts off all the Bishops that are and have been. And though these in general, may signifie l [...]tie with our Reverend Author, yet some of them he mentions as great and eminent Lights. He cuts off Thousands of Presbyters, famous Ministers, who apprehending the Essence of their Ministerial Call to [...]ie in their being ordained and sent of God, do who [...]y wave this mutual Election, as a little thing.

The Scipture speaks [...]ery highly and honourably of the Ministerial Calling. They are [...]a [...]ed Ministers of God, of Christ, of the New Testament, of the Gospe [...]: Ministers in the Lord, Ambassadors for Christ; Angels, Lights, Stewards of the Mysteries of God, &c. All whi [...] th [...]ws, that not only the [...]enc [...], but the Excellency of the Ministry con [...]sts in their Relation to God and our Lord Jesus Christ, and to that seperate and sacred Work that the holy Ghost has called them unto, Acts [...]3 2. But what scripture in [...]i [...]tes to us, That their Essence or Emmency lies in their Relation to this or that par­ticular People? The Prophets of old never pleaded their Election by Man, but that they were called, sent, ordained and commissioned by God.

The Authors chief Argument here is a Supposition of Shipwrack [Page 24] upon some desolate Island: and we easily grant, that one of the Company being elected, may become a Minster of God unto them, but it is more from the Providence and Call of God, than their Election. Its God must furnish [...] It [...] God must incline him to undertake it: Its God that [...]i [...]s up the People to receive and entertain him as a Minister: God gives success to his Ministry, &c. But besides this, it is to be considered, that God does not tye himself to those means which he has tyed us unto in ordinary cases; according to that usual saying, Jus divinum p [...]s [...]tivum cedit juri divino Natural [...]. The case is who [...]y extraordinary, and God that makes the Necessity wi [...] also dispence with our unavoid­able Complyance.

Were our Author in the right, the sinful Will of Man, whereon the Election does depend, might frustrate the whole Ministry that Christ has instituted. But, alas! whether men will hear, o [...] whe­ther they will for bear, our Lord will send his Ministers; and whe­ther Men will call them or no, they shall beforced to confess, Verily, we had Prophets among us, Ezek. 33▪ 33.

We wonder also, that they [...]o insist upon it, That it is Christs peculiar Prerogative to state his own Worship, should s [...]oil him of another part of it, to make his own Officers. If the People may do one, why not the other? And it increases our Wonder, that the Reverend Author should revive this Assertion at this ti [...] of day, Forty six years after it has been so learnedly and so fully refu [...]ed in Jus Divinum Ministerij Eva g [...]li [...]i, published by the Provincial As­sembly of London, chap. 9. without taking Notice of their Answers and Arguments.

2dly. We shall p [...]ss by several things in these Chapters, which in a severe Disquisition, we might justly except against. Our second Charge is, That he makes imposition of hands a little unnecessary Cere­mony. Though we can distinguish between Ordination and I [...]posi­tion of Hands, and approve what the afore-mentioned Assembly says, pag. 157. We must distinguish between the Substance, Essence and formal Act of Ordination, and the Rite used therein. The Essential Act of Ordination is the constit [...]ting or appointing a man to be a Minister, or the sending him with Power and Authority to preach the Gospel▪ The [Page 25] Rit [...] is Imposition of hands. Yet we can see no reason why this Rit [...], being of divine Institution, 1 T [...]m. 5. 22. used by the Apostles, the primitive Church, and generally since the Reformation, should now be run down as so triffling a Ceremony▪ We know the Reyerend Author could have quoted a whole L [...]af of famous Authors, who speak highly for it. If the Provincial Assembly at London displease him, the New-England Plat-form may satisfie him, That Church Officers are not only to be [...]o [...]n by the Church, but ab [...] ordained by Impo­sition of hands, and Prayer; or the Answer to the 32 Questions, that says expresly, Ordination is necessary by divine Institution. But, i [...] the Author indeed disquieted it the imposition of hands, because but a Ceremony? It is out looking back to pag 80 and we shall see he as much magnifies and contends for as meer a Rite, to be sure, s [...]l. the right hand of fellowship.

The Reverend Author not only speaks meanly of the laying on of hands of the Presbytery, but [...] too [...]ch countenances the Imposition of hands by Brethren, or Persons out of Office. His Text of Scripture, Numb. 8, 9, 10. respecting the Children of Israel▪s putting their hands on the Levites, is so fully and punctually answered by the Provincial Assembly of London, pag. 188. that we remit the Reader thither, for [...] love [...]ot to transeribe. In the New Testament he owns there is no instance of Persons out of Office imposing hands. And notwithstanding all his instances, the Apostles assertion stands good, Heb. 7. 7. and without all contradiction, the less is blessed of the greater.

The Authors next Essay is, to remove the weighty Objection, That none can give what himself hath not. And this he does by some Simi­li [...]udes. To touch upon one, pag. 99. A Woman (saith he) by giving her [...]el [...] in Marriage, causeth the Man, to [...]o [...] she giveth her self, [...] have the power of a Husband; but no man will be so absurd [...] to say, that a Woman has formally the power of an [...]sh [...]d.

A poor Return ind [...]d, to so weighty an Objection! An unmar­ri [...]d Woman has power over her self, to rule and govern her self and her Actions, as fully as the Husband has, when she is married: though a particular Church, without any Officer, has not power to [...]eed, teach, govern themselves, and ad [...] Ordinances. Here [...] a plain Disparity! Moreover, it is gro [...], [...]u [...]d to affirm, that [Page 26] the Wife gives the Power to the Husband. Indeed, she gives her self, but it is the Institution and Command of God, that gives the Power; and could we suppose that to be laid aside, they would be equal. To be sure, it Women once get this Notion by the end, that they give the Power to their Husbands, we should soon have them indenting, limiting and reserving in part to themselves, by a Marriage Contract, as well their Power and Authority, as their Estates.

4ly. The Author asserts, That no man ought to be ordained a Pastor, except unto a particular Church, pag. 101. Which kind of Doctrine doth indeed startle us, because it manifests the Reverend [...] to be very u [...]stable in his Judgment. It is credibly reported, That at a general Convention of Ministers at Boston, May 26. 1698. (and there are enough yet living, who knew the truth of [...]t, to whom we appeal) this Question was discussed, Whether a Minister might be ordained, though he had, as yet, no particular Church, in order to [...] Administration of Baptism, and the gathering & settling a Church? This, as we are told, had a more peculiar reference to Mr. Clap's Nation at Rhode Island, and it was voted and carried in the Affirma­tive; and what is yet stranger, was lead on and put to the Vote by the Author himself, he being the Moderator of the Assembly. Upon this conclusion Mr. Williams was ordained in the Colledge Hall, in order to his Voyage to Barbadoes. Now it is wonderful to us, how the contrary to that which was a truth two years ago, should obtain now. Possibly the Reverend Author' [...] modesty won't suffer him to think the Ballance equal, or we would put the late Vote of May, 98 in the Scale against the Council of Calcedon, p 105.

5ly, We crave the Readers patience, and will offer but one Re­mark upon these two Chapters. In pag. 102▪ its said, Pastar and Flock are Relates, and therefore one cannot be without the other. It is contrary to the Rules of Reason (as Logicians know) that the Relate should be without its Correlate. To say, that a wandering Levite, who has no Flock, is a Pastor, is as good sence as to say, to the who has no Children is a Father, and the Man who has no Wife, is a Husband

This is worn thred-bare, and answered long ago by the Assembly [Page 27] at London, and others, and sometimes by the Author himself. A Minister may be considered under a double Notion, as a Minister of C [...]t, or of this or that particular Church. In this latter sence they are Relate & Correlate, and no otherwise. Hence, if he leaves them, he ceases to be their Minister and they cease to be his Flock▪ but still he may be a Minister of Christ, and they a Church of Christ. And thus in that little Book that is en [...]it [...]led, The judgment of several Divines of the Congregational way, concerning a Pastors Power occa­sionally to exe [...]t Ministerial acts in another Church, besides that which is his particular Flock; the Reverend Author expresses him­self after this manner, pag. 1. The Ministerial Power which a Pastor has received from the Lord Jesus Christ, [...] not so [...]o [...]fined to his particular Flock, as that he shall cease to be a Minister when he shall act in the Name of the Lord else where. And a little after, I am, as to this par­ticular, fully of the same judgment with the learned Dr. J. Owen in [...] judicious Treatise concerning a Gospel Church, Pag. 100, 101 where he has these words, Although we have no concer [...]us in the sig [...]ent of an indelible Character accompanying sacred Orders, yet we do not think the Pastoral Office is such a thing as a man must leave be [...]nd him every time he goes from home; for my own part, [...] I did not think my self b [...]nd to preach as a Minister authorized, in all places, and [...] all occasions when I am called thereunto, I think I should never preach more in this World. Thus Dr. Owen.

We see then, that our Reverend Author and the famous Dr. Owen plainly hold, that though there be a Relation to a particular flock, yet a Minister is so au [...]hro [...]zed by Jesus Christ, that he is capable in his Name to perform Ministerial Acts in other places, and upon all occasions. And were not our Author sincerely of this Opinion, we cannot but think he would highly condemn any Minister that should be absent from his Flock four years together, upon any service what­soever. [...]ure, if he be no way capable to act as a Minister of Jesus Christ, he is all that while but as a stray Bird, idly wandering from its Nest.

Yet at this time, our Author would bear the World in hand, that a Minister has no power to act as such, but to his particular Flock▪ and therefore quotes the words of the Plat-form, chap. 9. sect. 7. He that is clearly loosed from his Office Relation to that Church whereof he was. [Page 28] a Minister, cannot be looked on as an Officer, nor perform any act of O [...]e in any other Church, unless he be again called unto Office. But a more eminent Assembly of Divines at London, have quoted this very Para­graph, pag 1 [...]5 and severely, but justly answered it as a great [...]b­s [...]rdity, and contrary to sound Doctrine.

The answer to the other part of the Question, Whether a Minister should be ordained only in the presence of that Church where he is [...]serve [...] Will result from what has been already laid down.

The presence of Christ must be supposed, when ever a person is seperated to his Ministry; but seeing our Lord Commissions none immediately, such must be present as have Power to authorize, Com­mission and give the charge in his Name. When ever a Call is given, received and accepted, whether it be by Words, Message or letter, both Minister and People are conceived, as present face to face. But the Circumstances of Times, Places, Persons, Distance, &c. must determine this matter; which as they m [...] fall out, may sometimes render it both prodent, regular and necessar [...], (& then its the Voice of Providence) for a Min [...] to be ordained on one Land, and to serve in another.

Q. 14. Is the Practice of the Churches of New-England in granting Letters of Dismission or Recommendation from one Church to another, ac­cording to Scripture, and the Example of other Churches?

The Reverend Author refers to many Scriptures to prove the Af­firmative, but not one of them reaches the Question, or proves [...] dismission for this end, soil to take a person off from being a Mem­ber of one Church, to be made a Member of another. The Epistles or Letters he refers to, are all Apo [...]ta [...]cal or Ministerial; not the Let­ters of one Church to another, some only excepted, which is men­tioned as writ by the Brethren; but Apol [...], on whole behalf they wrote, was not a Member of their Church; nor do they write to those in Achaia to receive him as a Member, but rather as a Minister, or as a Christian of eminence and singular goodness.

Indeed there may be a good use of Letters of Recommendation, and especially among strangers and where a Member removes from one Church to another, a mutual satisfaction may be laboured after. [Page 29] But we cannot but think such Letters frivilous, when in the same Town, and at two streets distance, a Person known over all the Town for an exemplary Conversation, prefers anothers Ministry. Civility will constrain such persons to acquaint then Ministers of their pur­poses, and the same Christian Civility obliges such a Minister to ac­quaint the other Pastor (if need be) to whose Ministry they repair, that they have carried themselves well in his Communion, and that he hopes they may prove blessings in all other.

But as for the Brethren, We need not go to them, to make a second Speech, now to ask leave to with-draw, and to render an ac­count to every impertinent Talker who thinks the man Married to him, and that his bed is broke into, or that there's no just reason for a divorce.

Moreover, some people are forever dissatisfied; neither con­veniencies of Habitation, liking the others Ministry, profiting under it, or dislike of some Customs and Practices which he would willingly be rid of the light of, can satisfy. And what must the grieved person do further in this case? Why, truly he has done his duty, and may hear and communicate, where God and his own sober Conscience directs him. No [...] ought any Minister of Christ, to reject his claim to the Lords Table with him.

To say no more, our Reverend Author having in a former Treatise proved that persons baptized are thereby subjects of Discipline, We think they all ought to be accountable to the Society where they are; there persons being dismissed by the Providence of God, whether they have letters of dismission or not. Else by their principles, an ordained Minister in London, formerly of Communion with a Church in Boston, being called to Office in a particular Church, and having accepted the Pastoral Care thereof, must first send over a Pacquet to New-England for a Letter of dismission. And don't you think he would be well imployed?

Qu. 15 Is not the asserting that a Pastor may administer the Sacra­ment to another Church besides his own particular Church, at the a [...]fire of that other Church, a declension from the first principles of New-England, and of the Congregational way?

[Page 30]The Reverend Author Answers, No, not at all. Had the Question been, whether this be a deci [...]sion from the Tru [...], we had fully joyned with him in the Answer. It being true Doctrine, that a Mi­nister upon desire, may as well Minister to another Church, as to [...] own: both being Churches of Christ, and he a Minister of Christ, there being but one Faith, one Body, one Baptism.

But had we been of the Authors Principles, which he pleads for in this Book, we must have answered, that [...] is a great A [...]stacy and Declension. And when the Reverend Author first put out this in the year 1693▪ some of the old men and women did express themselves after this Rate— That it was not thus from the beginning, and that he had pull'a such a Pin out of the good ole [...]ay, as would in a little w [...]ile bring the whole abri [...]k to the ground. No [...] was this complaint without reason, for if particular Churches are specifically distin [...] ▪ if Pastor and Flock are Relate [...] Correlate, that give being to one another, as Husband and Wife; if the [...]ssence of a Ministers Call lie in a mu [...]l Election between the Church and him; then we can by no means allow the Authors assertion, That a Pastor may administer, &c T [...] in vain to plead, I were may be at well commu [...] of Officers, as of Mem­bers; for these Principles will not allow so much as a Member of one Church to communicate in another. Hence the ac [...]e Mr. Hooker ( [...] the Author [...]iles him) could never get over that difficulty, but looks upon it as unwarrantable or private Members to communicate in a­nother Church. Neither can Dr. Oven or Dr. Goodwin (whom he [...] pillars among the Congregational) though they twist and squeze and strain hard, maintain this [...] on these Principles, no [...] satisfy a [...]a­tional mind about it. Tho' they plead they are transient Members for that time, yet this no more excuses it, than if an A [...]ult [...]s [...]o hi [...] [...] shame and folly, should excuse it by saying— She made the Man her Husband for that turn and act. For if we run it to the narrow, the Administrator must deliver the Sacrament as an Officer, or not, there is no Medium: If as an Officer, then he his Power from Christ, as such, to administer the Sacrament where he i [...] occasionally called. And then down go the Authors Principles at once, of the Churches being specifically distinct, of the Essence of the Ministerial Call lying in the mutual Election of Minister and People, of Pastor and Flock being Relate and Correlate, so as to give being to each [Page 31] other, as such; or else on the other hand, it must be said, That a Minister, when he administers to another Flock, acts not as an Officer, but as a private Man; and this lays all in common, and destroys the Ministerial Power at once. And to attempt to reconcile it with our New-England Platform, will be but (as Mr. Hooker has the expression) to make the Plat-form to speak Daggers and Contradictions. Neither can it be pretended, that the generality of the Ministers in New-England were of that mind in the beginning. In the Answer of the Elders of several Churches in N. England, unto the Nine Positions, it is said, Position 8. If you mean by a Ministerial Act, such an act of Authority and Power in dispensing Gods Ordinances, as a Minister does perform to the Church whereunto [...] is called to be a Minister, then we a [...]ny that he can perform any Ministerial Act to any other Church but his own, because his Office extends no farther t [...]a [...] his Call. And now we appeal to the Reader, if the Reverend Author must not either Renounce these his darling Principles, or own himself guilty of that Declension from the first Principles of New-England, which in another he would call Apostacy.

And indeed, we know well enough, that a few years ago, no young man could have escaped that odious Brand, that durst have printed such a Principle. But all is well that we do our selves, and every other Congregational Tenet had been laudably rejected, had some men the doing of it. Let another presume, he is a Back­ [...]i [...]er, an Apos [...]a [...], [...]u [...], [...]a [...]b, Contemptuous, and Despis [...] of his Fathers. The same thing▪ (to a [...]ude to the Authors words, pag. 71.) in one man, is a modest inoffensive Dissent in another, a daring Contradiction to Synods.

Qu. 16. Is it a Duty for Christians in their Prayers, to make use of the words of that which is commonly called the Lords Prayer?

Though the Authors answer hereto be very large, yet we shall say very little to it, or against it. He yeilds and allows, it may be law­fully used, as well as other Prayers and Passages in Scripture, in our Addresses to Heaven: That it has been used in antient Times, he does not deny; and we know that it is most frequently used by the most famous Divines in these days. And he gives us an instance of [Page 32] Mr. Je [...]. Burroughs, which we thank him for, having never heard it before. That it has been abused to Superstition, and the Tryal of Witch-craft, we also know; but the abuse of a thing does not take away the proper lawful Use of it; nor is it fit so far to gratifie those that made it a Charm, as [...]o [...] [...]h [...]t reason to [...]rain to use it.

But verily the Author would have us more superstitious that we are willing to be; for he quarrels [...] the varying but of one word or clause in this excellent form of Prayer: If instead of Debts or Sin [...] we say Trespasses, it is a fearful Crime. For why? says the Author, It smells rank of the Li [...]gy, its le [...]n'd [...] of the Common-Prayer Book. He might have said rather, That we learn first to read [...] so in our Horn-Books, and are mis-taught from our infancy. But truly, we account this difference of Translation a petty thing. And if in­stead of Hallowed, the Author would say sanctified; and instead of daily Bread, he would chuse to say convenient Food, we should not full foul on him.

No, says the Author, pag. 123. why then you give up the Cause. In truth, then the Author has no adversary in the world, where the Lords Prayer is used in any Language beside the Greek; for who bind [...] himself to a Translation, as to an Original? but the Author's meaning is apparent, he would insinuate into the heedless Reader, That whoever useth the Lords Prayer, ought not to vary one word from the words Christ gave it in▪ and truly, then they must, like Barbarians to the People, tone it in the Original Greek.

We would offer here one Query more. Does the Author mean, in stating this Question, to enquire whether it be an indispensible Duty to use the words of the Lords Prayer in all our Addresses to God, so that as often as we bow our Knees in Prayer, we should think it neces­sary to repeat this Form? Here again he would have no Adversary under Heaven Yet the Question may be strained to all this, and he has taken no care to bound it.

But to detain the Reader no longer, 'tis enough and enough that the Reverend Author justifies it as lawful; for then doubtless it may be sometimes proper: for that would be a strange thing indeed, that is always lawful, and never (in no Circumstances, not in that of Mr. Burroughs himself I can be proper. But since 'tis lawful, I' [...]or once give my sence when it is proper, s [...]il, When People have been [Page 33] long taught and made to believe, that the Use of it is Superstitious, To place a great part of their Religion in the dislike of it; To think this a principal ground of Non-conformity, and a distinguishing Badge of a Dissenter; or, that it is too vain a Formality to comport w [...]h the Spirit of Devotion. Then, if ever, it is high time to cor­rect such a Prejudice, and to show the People it may be used without Superstition, and that neither the Spirit of Religion, nor yet the Arguments for Episcopacy, Presbyteria [...]sm nor Independency are any ways concerned in this affair.

Here we would crave the Readers patience for one Quotation, and the rather inasmuch as the N [...] of Mr. Philip Henry may be of more Authority with the Reverend Author, than many arguments, when barely offered by us. It is said in the 97th page of Mr Henry's Life, ‘That he looked upon the Lords Prayer to be not only a Directory or Pattern for Prayer, but (according to the advice of the Assembly of Divines) proper to be used as a Form. He thought it was an Error on the o [...]e hand to lay so much stress upon it, as some do, who think no solemn Prayer accepted, nor [...]o solemn administration of Wor­ship compleat without it; and he thought it an Error on the other hand not to use it at all, since it is a Prayer, a compendious com­prehensive Prayer, and may be of Use to us, at least, as other Scripture Prayers; but he thought it a much greater Error to be angry at those who do use i [...], to judge and censure them, and for no other reason to conceive Prejudices against them and their Ministry. A great strait (faith he) poor Ministers are in, when some will not hear them, if they do not use the Lords Prayer, and others will no [...] hear them it they do! What is to be done in this case? We must walk according to the light we have, and approve our selves to God, either in using or no [...] using it, and wait for the day when God will mend the matter, which I [...] he will do in his own due time.’——Thus spake the holy and heavenly Mr Henry, and with [...]i [...] the late Reverend Dr. Bates, who writ [...]s the Dedication of his Life, and as h [...] hath fully expressed our sense in this matter, so we would wait and pray with him, for the Happy Day.

Well, but if the case be so circumstanced, says the Author, pag. 135. that it cannot be done without Offence, it is rather a Duty, and will be most pleasing to Christ, not to use it as a [...]orm. But then such Offence must [Page 34] be manifested, and appear to be conscientious. This confirms what I before suggested, That there is a riv [...]ed Prejudice people are edu­cated in against this Practice, that they start at it as a thing in it self sinful and scandalous.

But to show we are in Charity with the Author, and all those who omit the Use of this excellent Form of Prayer, we shall close this Chapter in the words of St. Paul, Rom 14. 3. Let u [...] h [...]m that ca [...]th de [...]p [...] him that [...]a [...]e [...] no [...]; and let not [...]m that [...]a [...]eth no [...], judge him that [...]ateth.

Qu. 17. May the Churches under the Presbyterian and Congrega­tional Discipline maintain Communion with one another, notwithstanding their different Sentiments, as [...] Church Government?

The Author answers, That they may and ought to do so. And truly, had this Book contained only this one Question and Answer, it might have turned to more Edification than the whole. He tells us, There was greater Differences than these in the Apostolick Churches [...] thinks then we of latter Days may the better [...]ear with one another▪ the effusions of the Spirit of Peace and Truth being since much restrained

The Reverend Author observes further, That both Perswasions have been Confessors and fellow Sufferers, and he thinks this should endear them. We think so too, but to our sorrow, some of us have heard ho [...] it hath been in England, & now, alas! we see it verified in our [...]uthor▪ that when their own Persecution ceases, they carry on the Tragedy on others▪ We do not wonder at what the Author saith Mr. Baxter told him, That if all Independants were like N. England Independants, he would soon be [...] ▪ For we can easily guess what deceived that ex­cellent Person (whose Moderation s [...]ited his Pie [...]y & Devotion) into so endearing an Expression. He form'd his Idea of New-England Independency by the Authors Plausible carriage when in London, which though for that time might be very sincere, yet either the difference of the Climate, or that his Dominion here is more rightful, quite a [...]e [...] him. We are assured, the Author is esteemed more a Presby­terian than a Cengregational Man, by scores of his Friends in London▪ [...] is lov'd and reverenced for a moderate Spirit, a peaceable Dis­position, [Page 35] and a Temper so widely different from his late Brothers in Lo [...]don. He was most conversant at the Presbyterian Board, and of [...]est in their Pulpits, and professed the greatest Reverence for their Persons. And no wonder Mr. Baxter should be so e [...]amoured of such Independents! Did our Reverend Author appear the same here, we should be his [...] P [...]oselites too. But we are loath to say how he forfeits that venerable Character, which might have conse­crated his Name to Posterity, more than his Learning, or other honorary Titles can. To confirm what we have here said, the Author deelar [...]s how Instrumental he was to promote the Union betwixt the United Brethren in London. We only wish he would be as cordial and active to keep it, as he was to make it; or else the World will think his Zeal [...] it was, because far enough from home, where In­terest was not touched.

As for the three Articles of Ʋnion, which the Author transcribes, we would endeavour to maintain them, and all the rest. But there are some Cases and Times, when Ministers of some particular Opi­nions will not bear to be consulted with. Or if there is a necessity of disobeying their Opinions for once, it is best not to consult them, meerly to do their Counsels the more Despight. We think this modest and ingenuous. Nor can it be reasonably expected that a Congregational Classis (if such there be) should be consulted in those things which are properly Presbyterian, their Prejudice, in favour of their own Opinions, rendering them unfit to advise with in that matter; and the more serious the application to such is, the more severely would they think themselves [...]antered.

As to his Query, Whether the embodying into a Church state be not a mighty matter? We must needs profess, we want some better account what that is, before we can so esteem it. We read nothing in Scripture of gathering a Church, or embodying it into a Church state, unless it refers to the converting and baptizing of Heathen, and then admi­nistring the Ordinances of the Gospel in a stated way to competent Numbers, whose convenience will permit them to meet constantly at one and the same place of Worship. All further Solemnity in this matter is ex abundant [...], and therefore the matter seems not so very weighty.