SECT. 1.

MAster Baylie rightly observeth, That in our departure & flight from Rome, some took up their stand too soon, before they had passed the lines (he meaneth all the lines) of communication with the Whore: and others ran on too long (or too far) beyond the bounds of truth and love. The for­mer of these sorts he maketh the Lutherans, in respect of some defects in their Reformation. The latter, he maketh to be the Anabaptists in Germany. The successors of the former, he maketh [Page 3] to be Cranmer, Ridley, and those other Confessors and Martyrs who setled Episcopacy and Ceremonies in England. The suc­cesso [...]s of the latter sort, (the Anabaptists) he maketh to be those whom he styleth Brownists.

But as there is a vast difference between the Episcopacy of En­gland, and the Superintendency of Germany, (the one ruling by Monarchicall Power, the other by the consent of the Aristocra­ticall Presbytery:) so neither is there such correspondency be­tween the Germane Anabaptism, and the English Brownism, as to make Brownism a native branch of Anabaptism.

Yes, (saith the Disswader) That Brownism is a native branch of Anabaptism, is evidenced, by the frequent transition of the one to the other. The dissolution of ice and snow into water, argueth strongly their originall from that element; so the ordinary running over of the Separatists to the Anabaptists.

Answ. The dissolution of ice and snow into water, doth indeed argue strongly their originall from water, because they are easily resolved into it without putrefaction or corruption. But so i [...] not the Separatist resolved into a German Anabaptist, without a fur­ther degree of corruption and putrefaction. It is no argument a man is bred of worms, because he is next resolved into worms; for he is not so resolved without putrefaction. Say not, a man is resolved at last into dust from whence he was first taken; and yet the resolution is not made without putrefaction. For a man is not made of dust naturally, but by a transcendent creating power above Nature. But the Disswader maketh the Separation a native branch of Anabaptism.

Besides, I suppose, it is not an obvious thing to hear of an Ana­baptist turn Separatist, though some Separatists have turned Ana­baptists; which argueth there is not such a mutuall frequent transition from the one to the other, as is yearly found of ice and snow into water, and of water into ice or snow again.

SECT. II.

The first Separatist, which the Disswader saith he hath read of, was one Bolton, who was a Minister of an old separate Con­gregation, and afterwards felt the sense of his Errors so grie­vous to his soul, (by the finger of Gods Justice stirring in his [Page 4] conscience) that he did not onely publickly at Pauls-crosse re­cant them, but thereafter was so dogged with a desperate re­morse, that he rested not till he had hanged himself.

Answ. 1. Though Bolton may have been the first Separatist that the Disswader hath read of; yet he might have read of o­thers before him. For in the Book called The Register of memo­rable matters touching Reformation, there is recorded a story of an hundred persons, who refused the common Liturgie, and the Congregations attending thereunto, and used prayers and prea­chings, and Sacraments amongst themselves: whereof 14 or 15 were sent to prison: Of whom the chiefest was Mr. Smith, with Mr. Nixon, James Ireland, Robert Hawkins, Thomas Boweland, and Richard Morecroft. And these pleaded their separation before the Lord Mayor, Bishop Sands, and other Commissioners on June 20. in the year 1567. which is about fourscore years agoe; and this as it seemeth was many years before Bolton; for Mr. Bay­lie reckoneth the wandring of the Separatists to be about 50 years standing, ( page 59.) but this Smith and his company was 30 years before.

Answ. 2. Old Mr. Bruister (the reverend Elder of the Church of Plymouth, a man of long-approved piety, gravity, integrity) his testimony of this Bolton may take off the prejudice which the fearfull fall of Bolton seemeth to Mr. Baylie to cast upon the Sepa­ration: Which I will recite, not to justifie that way of his sepa­ration, but to take off unjust scandals. This Bolton (saith he) partly by the terrors of Bishops, and partly by flattery, was brought indeed to recant. But afterwards they sleighting him, the terrors of the Almighty fell upon him, and considering how he had sinned against his conscience, he ( Judas-like) laid violent hands upon himself.

But the Disswader may be pleased to consider, that Apostasie from the way of Separation, and terror of conscience even to de­speration, and self-murder following thereupon, are no just excep­tions against Separation: no more than Judas his apostasie from Christ, and terror of conscience even to desperation and self-hanging following thereupon, were any just exceptions against Christianity.

SECT. III. Of Mr. Brown, and Barrow.

Of Mr. Brown and Mr. Barrow, it is farre from me to make any defence either of their persons, or of their way of rigid Separa­tion: the hand of God upon their spirit, giving them up, one to a spirit of inconstancy and prophanenesse; the other to a spi­rit of bitternesse and rashnesse. Though it is no just conviction of the errors of their way of Separation: yet it is a shrewd argument that either their way was not right, or their hearts not upright in it.

But this let me say, be it so, that Brown did revolt from his way, and took a Parsonage from the Bishop, and that in a Town by name called A-church in Northampton-shire, (a reall check to his error, who formerly counted every Church in Eng­land no Church:) yet this back sliding of Brown from that way of Separation, is a just reason why the Separatists may disclaim denomination from him, and refuse to be called after his name, Brownists. If Judas, or Julian, or Ecebolius doe apostate from Christianity, no reason is there that all that professe the way of Christianity should be called Judaites, or Julianists, or Ecebo­lians. In the Ecclesiasticall History, though Photinus was the di­sciple of Marcellus in an hereticall opinion touching Christ: yet the followers of them both, when Marcellus had revoked his error, were not called Marcellini but Photiniani. To speak with reason, if any be justly to be called Brownists, it is onely such as revolt from Separation to Formality, and from thence to pro­phanenesse. For Mr. Barrow, though I neither excuse the un­soundnesse of his judgment, nor the bitternesse of his style: yet I doubt the Disswader is deceived, when he saith, That Queen Elizabeth was so impatient of his contumelies, that she caused him in a morning to be hanged on the Tower-hill. For there be grave Professors (who lived nearer those occurrences) who speak of Queen Elizabeth as ignorant of Barrow's execution, and Greenwood's, and displeased at it, when she heard of it afterwards: neither was their execution on Tower-hill, but at Tyburn, long after the sentence of death passed against them.

SECT. IV. Of Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Ainsworth.

The Disswader is deceived when he saith, Mr. Ainsworth with his half, did excommunicate Mr. Johnson and his half. For, as I am informed by some judicious Professors who lived in those parts, Mr. Ainsworth and his company did not excommunicate Mr. Johnson and his, but onely withdrew from them, when they could no longer live peaceably with them. Mr. Johnson his last Book, argueth he had learned more moderation of spirit, then he did put forth in his former times.

Mr. Ainsworth, a man of a more modest and humble spirit, and diligently studious of the Hebrew Text, hath not beene un­usefull to the Church in his Exposition of the Pentateuch, espe­cially of Moses his Rituals, notwithstanding some uncircum­cised, and ungrounded Rabbinicall observations recited, but not refuted.

But when the Dissawder saith, that M. Ainsworths company after his death, remained long without all Officers;

There bee sundry living that know the contrary. For when he dyed he left two Elders over the Church, Mr. Delacluse, and Mr. May.

And therefore I doe not see any ground of that speech,

That the weight and evidence of Gods hand against Ainsworth had so farre disgraced that Sect, as the Disswader expresseth. For though in simplicity of heart, in some things he went astray: yet the way he walked in, did not suffer dis­grace by him, nor by the weight and evidence of Gods hand upon him, for ought I have ever heard or read of him, save in Mr. Baylie. The Lord knoweth how to bee mercifull to such as seeke him in simplicity of heart, according to light revealed, though hee doe observe and chasten some Errour in their way.

SECT. V. of Mr. Smith, and Mr. Robinson.

The fall indeed of Mr. Smith, and the Spirit of errors and instability that fell upon him, was more observable: and a dread­full warning from heaven, against [...] selfe-fulnesse, and [Page 7] self-pleasing. For though the tyranny of the Ecclesiasticall Courts was harsh towards him, and the yokes put upon him in his Mi­nistery, too grievous to bee borne: yet neither was hee alone in suffering: Nor were those that suffered with him at that time, (Mr. Clifton, and Mr. Robinson) such inconsiderable Persons, that hee should affect to goe alone from them. It is true, he had found helpe by the conference (which himself had requested) with Mr. Dod, Mr. Hilderson, and Mr. Barbon, before he left England: yea and such helpe, that he thought he could have gained his Tutor Iohnson, from the Errors of his Rigid Separation. But hee had promised them, not to goe over to him, without their consents: and they utterly disswaded him there-from, as fearing his insta­bility. And yet contrary to his Promise he went over to him, yea, and that contrary to his owne pretence and offer of another conference with them before his going. Though the way of Ri­gid Separation had been lesse Heterodoxall, then it is, yet to venture upon it in such breach of manifest Rules, no marvell, if it led him into manifest temptations and Abberations.

The Disswader is mis-informed, when hee saith (page 16) he moved a great company to follow him to Ley in Holland. For as I understand by such as lived in those parts at that time, hee lived at Amsterdam, and there dyed, and at Ley in Holland he never came.

Of Mr. Robinson, the Disswader doth rightly observe, tha [...] hee was a man of the most learned, polished, and modest spi­rit of that way, and withall hee might have said, so piously studious, and conscientiously inquisitive after the Truth, that (as the Disswader rightly observeth) it had beene truely a marvell, if such a man as hee, had gone on to the end a rigid Separatist.

As a fruit of his studious inquisition after the Truth, hee re­sorted (as I have understood) to many judicious Divines in En­gland for the clearing of his Scruples, which inclined him to separation: and when hee came into Holland, hee addressed him­selfe to Doctor Ames, and Mr. Parker: rather preventing them with seeking counsell and satisfaction, then waiting for their compassion. But as they excelled in learning and godlinesse, so in compassion and brotherly love also; and therefore as they dis­cerned his weanednesse from selfe-fulnesse, so did they more [Page 8] freely communicate light to him, and received also somethings from him. The fruit of which was (through the Grace of Christ) that the Disswader himselfe confesseth, hee came backe indeed the one halfe of the way: Acknowledging the lawfulnesse of communicating with the Church of England, in the Word and Prayer: but not in the Sacraments and Discipline, which was (saith hee) a faire Bridge, at least a faire Arch of a Bridge for union. But when he saith, hee came on to communicate with the Church of England in the Word and Prayer, it must not bee understood of the Common-Prayer-Book, but of the Prayers conceived by the Preacher before and after Sermon: And yet in comming on so far as he did, he came more then halfe way of any just distance.

For though hee stuck at the Common Liturgy, Sacra­ments and Discipline: yet since then it hath appeared, there was no just ground of comming on to them. The Honourable Par­liament, and Reverend Assembly of Divines have (by the grace of Christ) seen just cause to remove the Liturgy, to abolish the Hierarchy (which was the Discipline hee chiefly stuck at) and to give order for restraint of ignorant and scandalous Persons from the Sacrament, which may well make up two or three Arches more (as Mr. Baylie calleth it) of that faire bridge for union, farre more then the halfe way.

It is true, Mr. Robinson did not acknowledge a Nationall Church governed by the Episcopacy to be a Church of Divine Institution. But though hee acknowledged the stile and privi­ledges of a Church in the New Testament to belong to a parti­cular Congregation of visible Saints: yet such Nationall Chur­ches, French or Dutch, as were governed by Presbyters, and se­parate from the world at the Lords Table, he did not disclaime Communion with them, I have beene given to understand, that when a Reverend and godly Scottish Minister came that way, (it seemeth to have been Mr. Iohn Tarbes) he offered him Com­munion at the Lords Table: though the other for feare of offence to the Scottish Churches at home, excused himselfe. Yea when some English men that offered themselves to become Members of his Church, would sometimes in their confessions professe their Separation from the Church of England, Mr. Robinson would beare witnesse against such profession: Avouching, they required [Page 9] no such professions of Separation from this or that, or any Church, but onely from the world. All which doe argue, that his comming on to Protestant Churches, was more then the half way. But (saith the Disswader) this new Doctrine (or way) of Mr. Robinson, though it was destructive to his old Sect; yet it became an occasion of a new one, not very good. It was the womb and seed of that lamentable Independency in Old and New-England, which hath been the fountain of many evils al­ready though no more should ensue, as anon shall be declared.

Answ. When this commeth to be declared, I hope it will come to be declared also, that the way of Independency hath been bred in the womb of the New-Testament of the immortall seed of the Word of Truth, and received in the times of purest Primitive antiquity, many hundreths of years before M. Robinson was born: and that it hath not been the fountain of any evils at all, much lesse of such evils, as to deserve the style of lamentable Indepen­dency.

SECT. VI. Of the contempt and contumelie said to be put upon the old Brownists by the Independents.

TO shut up this Chapter, the Disswader telleth us, That the way of the old Brownists is become contemptible not onely to all the rest of the world, but to their own children also; even they begin to heap coals of contumelies upon their Parents heads; as may be seen in the Elogies which both Mr. Cotton, and the five Apologists are pleased to give them in Print; yea, so much are these Children ashamed of their Fa­thers, that they usually take it for a contumelie to be called af­ter their name. No Independent will take it well at any mans hand to be called a Brownist either in whole, or in the smal­lest part.

Answ. 1. No marvail, if Independents take it ill to bee called Brownists, in whole, or in part. For neither in whole, nor in part doe we partake in his Schism. He separated from Churches and from Saints: we, onely from the world, and that which is of the world. He turned apostate from the Separation which he had professed: and it is absurd to denominate either Sect or right way, from such as apostate from it. If he had stood constant in his way, and his way had been the same with ours, yet we were [Page 10] not baptized into his Name; and why should we then be called after his Name? If schism be a manifest fruit of the flesh, then they that give Nick-names tending to the reproach and division of Brethren, they walk after the flesh; for they sow variance and schism amongst Brethren.

2. It is an unjust and unworthy calumny, to call either Cotton or the Apologers, the children of their Fathers, whom he styleth Brownists. They never begot us, either to God, or to the Church, or to their Schism: a Schism, which as we have lamented in them, (as a fruit of misguided ignorant zeal:) so we have ever born witnesse against it, since our first knowledg of it.

3. Though we put not such Honor upon those he calleth Brownists, as to own them for our Fathers; yet neither doe we put so much dishonor upon them, as to heap coals of contu­mely upon their heads. We look not at them with contempt, but compassion: Neither doe we bear witnesse against their Schism in any words of contempt and reproach, (which are the characters of contumelie) but in words of spirituall and just reproof; even in such terms, not which scornfull wit, but which holy Scripture suggesteth.

SECT. I. Of the Title put upon us of • A Sect, , and • Independents. 

THe way of the Churches in New-England is neither justly called a Sect, nor fitly called Independency. Not a Sect; for we professe the Orthodox Doctrine of Faith, the same with all Protestant Churches; we celebrate the same Sacraments; and submit to the spirituall government of the same lawfull Guides, so farre as Christ and our own choyce hath set them over us. And though we doe not subject our selves to the Government of the Elders of other Churches, (as many great Churches doe,) yet we acknowledge and reverence such Churches in the Lord, as [Page 11] true Churches of Christ, and are willing to make use of their Brotherly counsell and help as need shall require.

And though we doe not open the doors of our Churches so wide, as to receive all the Inhabitants of a Nation, or of every Town, into the fellowship of our Churches; yet we doe not se­parate from such Protestant Churches as doe take that liberty: but onely we separate from the world, that is, from the worldly sort of them, who either live in open scandall, or at least doe not openly hold forth any spirituall discerning of the Lords Body, and are therefore u [...]eet to communicate at the Lord Table.

Nor is Independency a fit name of the way of our Churches. For in some respects it is too strait, and in others too large; it is too strait, in that it confineth us within our selves, and holdeth us forth as Independent from all others: whereas indeed we doe professe dependence upon Magistrates for civil Govern­ment and protection: Dependence upon Christ and his Word, for the soveraign government and rule of our administrations: Dependence upon the counsell of other Churches and Synods; when our own variance or ignorance may stand in need of such help from them. And therefore this title of Independency strait­neth us, & restraineth us from our necessary duty, and due liberty.

Again, in other respects, Independency stretcheth it self too largely, and more generally, then that it can single out us. For it is compatible to a Nationall Church, as well as to a Congre­gationall. The Nationall Church of Scotland is Independent from the Government of the Nationall Church of England; and so is England Independent from Scotland. Nor is there any Sect at this day extant, but shrowdeth themselves under the title of In­dependency. The Antipaedobaptists, Antinomians, Familists, yea, and the Seekers too, do all of them style themselves Indepen­dents. Nay, even the Pope himself, (who exalteth himself above all Civill and Church-power) yet even he also arrogateth the title of Independency; Prima s [...]des à nemine judicatur; that is, the Sea of Rome is Independent. Why then should Independency be appropriated to us, as a character of our way, which neither truly describeth us, nor faithfully distinguisheth us from many others? Wherefore if there must needs be some note of difference to decypher our estate, and to dis [...]inguish our way from a Natio­nall Church-way, I know none fitter, then to denominate theirs Classicall, and ours Congregationall.

SECT. II. Of the number of the Congregationall Regi­ment, and of the wisdome threaped upon them, in en­gaging Persons of note to them.

The Disswader acknowledgeth, We are not numerous, but the fewest in number of the noted Sects, and not to consist of above One thousand persons within the Lines of the Cities Communication.

Answ. 1. If we be the fewest of noted Sec [...], it was sometime the lot of Gods Israel to be the fewest of all people, Deut. 7.7.

Answ. 2. If there be a thousand of our way within the Lines of the Cities Communication, I hope there want not divers more to be added to them in other parts of England, besides some thou­sands more in New-England. But it is not for us to follow Da­vids sinne in numbring the people of the Lord; onely the Lord increase their number an hundreth fold, (yea, a thousand fold) and make them as the stars of heaven for multitude.

But for the quality of the persons, the Disswader telleth us, They have been so wise, as to engage to their party some of chief note in both Houses of Parliament, in the Assembly of Divines, in the Army, in the City, and Countrey-Commit­tees.

But in so saying, the Disswader putteth a dishonor both upon God, and upon those persons of chief note. It is a dishonor to God, to attribute that to the wisdome of man, which is the mighty and gracious work of the wisdome of God. And it is a dishonor to such men, to hold them forth as engaged to this way by the wisdome and industry of men, who have been well known (and some of them for many years) not to have engaged them­selves or others any further, then the grace of Christ, and the conscience of his Word hath engaged them to doe and suffer, ac­cording to the will of God.

SECT. III. Touching the Line of the Pedegree of the Inde­pendents in New-England.

The Separatists (saith the Disswader) were their Fathers. This is demonstrable not onely by the consanguinity of their Tenents, (the one having borrowed all their chief Doctrines [Page 13] and practises from the other:) but also by deduction of their Pedegree in this clear Line. Mr Robinson did derive his way to his Separate Congregation at Leyden; a part of them did carry it over to Plymmouth in New-England: Here Mr. Cotton took it up, and did transmit it to Mr. Goodwin, who did helpe to propagate it to sundry others in Old-England first, and after to more in Holland; till now by many hands it is sown thick in divers parts of the Kingdom.

Answ. That the Separatists were our Fathers, we have justly denyed it above; seeing they neither begat us to God, nor to the Church, nor to their Schism. That we are (through grace) begotten to God, and to his Church, we received (many of us) from the blessing of Christ upon the Ministery of England. That we grew weary of the burden of Episcopacy and Conformity, we received from the Word of God by the help of the Non-con­formists there. That we laid aside the Book of Common-prayer, we received from the serious meditation of the second Com­mandement, and not from the Writings of the Separatists, though they also had taken up the same Conclusion upon other premises. The particular visible Church of a Congregation to be the first subject of the power of the Keyes, we received by the light of the Word from Mr. Parker, Mr. Baynes, and Dr. Ames: from whom also, (from two of them at least) we received light out of the Word, for the matter of the visible Church to be visible Saints; and for th [...] Form of it, to be a mutuall Cove­nant, whether an explicite or implicite Profession of Faith, and subjection to the Gospel of Christ in the society of the Church, or Presbytery thereof. And these be the chief Doctrines and practises of our way, so far as it differeth from other Reformed Churches. And having received these, not from the Separatists, but from the Lord Jesus, by gracious Saints, and faithfull witnes­ses of Jesus; the consanguinity of our Tenents with any the like found amongst the Separatists, will not demonstrate the Se­paratists to be our Fathers.

It is very likely (and by the fruits of some of them, it is very evi­dent) that the Church of Plymmouth in New-England received very much light and life, by the blessing of Christ upon Mr. Robinson his Ministry, whilst he lived with them in Holland: nor need we to be ashamed, to learn any truth of God from him, or them, or from any other Saints of God, of farre meaner gifts, then he or they [Page 14] had received. But I must confesse ingenuously, that his denyall of the Parishionall Congregations in England to be true Chur­ches, (either by reason of their mixt and corrupt matter, or for defect in their Covenant, or for excesse of their Episcopall Go­vernment) was never received into any heart, from thence to inferre a nullity of their Church-estate. Neither was our depar­ture from them even in those evill times, a Separation from them as no Churches, but rather a Secession from the corruptions found amongst them, unto which also we must have beene forced to conforme, even in our owne Practise through the Rigour of the times, unlesse wee had timely departed from them. In which case, Doctor Ames will excuse us (yea and the Holy Ghost also) from aspersion of schism or any other sin, in so doing, De Consci­entia, lib. 4. cap. 24. Numero 16. in Responsione 7. ad quaest. 3.

The Disswader is mistaken (when he saith Page 54.) That after the death of Ainsworth, there remained onely a small handfull of Separatists at Amsterdam, and another small com­pany at Leyden, under Mr. Robinsons Ministery, and besides them, no other at that time were knowen in the world of that Re­ligion.

For Mr. Iacob, whom Mr. Lothrop succeeded and after him Mr. Barbon being an Elder governed the same Separate Church in Leyden which held Communion with Mr. Robinsons Church, as ap­peareth by their Letters published in Print. And that Church as it began before Mr. Robinson, so it continued after him, and stil doth. And it is no lesse a mistake, when the Disswader maketh the Di­visions in Mr. Robinsons Church, or his desertion of many of their Principles to be an occasion of well-neare bringing that Church to nought: till some of them went over to New-England, and perswaded their neighbours who sate down with them in New- Plymmouth to erect with them a Congregation af­ter their Separate way.

For the Church at Leyden was in peace, and free from any di­vision, when they tooke up thoughts of transporting themselves into America with common consent. Themselves doe declare it, That the proposition of Removall, was set on foote and prosecuted by the Elders upon just and weighty grounds. For (to use their owne words)

Their departure [Page 16] therefore was not in a way of division among themselves, but with mutuall consent, and common intendment of peaceable cohabitation.

Neither did that company which came over to Plymmouth, e­rect here a New-Church (as the Disswader taketh it,) for by con­sent of the Church which they left, they came over in Church-estate, and onely renewed their Covenant when they came hi­ther.

Neither did the Church of Plymmouth (as the Disswader report­eth them) incontinently leaven all the vicinity.

For (as themselves say) at the first comming there was no vicinity of Christian habitation. They came over in the yeare 1620. Mr. Endicot, (the Captaine with his Company) came not over till the yeare 1628. and sat downe at Salem, 8. yeares after Plymmouth. The yeare following, Mr. Skelton, and Mr. Higginson came over, and sitting downe with Mr. Endicot at Salem, entered into a Church there. How far they of Salem tooke up any practice from them at Plymmouth, I doe not know: sure I am, Mr. Skelton (their Pastor) was studious of that way, before he left Holland in Lincolnshire.

Nor was there any other Church planted after Salem till Mr. Winthrop, and some other godly gentlemen, and many good Chri­stians came over together with Mr. Wilson, and Mr. Philips, (Ministers of the Word:) whereof the one gathered a Church at Boston, the other at Water-Towne, in the yeare 1630. The next yeare followed Mr. Eliot, and the yeare after Mr. Weld, who gathered into a Church at Rocksbury, as old Mr. Na­verisk, and Mr. Warham had done the same before at Dor­chester.

It was in the yeare 1633. when Mr. Hooker, Mr. Stone, with my self arrived in the same Ship together: and being come, we found severall Churches gathered, and standing in the same Order, and way, wherein they now walke: at Salem, at Boston, at Water-Towne, at Charle-Towne, (which issued out of Boston) at Dorchester and Rockesbury. So that the Disswader is much mistaken, when hee saith, the Congregagation of Plymouth did incontinently lea­ven all the vicinity: seeing for many yeares there was no vicinity to bee leavened. And Salem it selfe that was gathered into Church-Order seven or eight yeares after them, was above 40. miles distant from them. And though it bee very likely, [Page 17] that some of the first commers might helpe their Theory by hearing and discerning their practice at Plymmouth: yet therein the Scripture is fulfilled, The Kingdome of Heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took and hid in three mea­sures of Meal, till all was leavened, Matth. 13.13.

But yet if the Disswader knew the spirit of those men who first came over hither, after Plymmoth, (though before us) hee would ea­sily discern, they were not such as would be leavened by vicinity of neighbours, but by the Divinity of the Truth of God shining forth from the Word. The body of the people at that time was not of such a carnall spirit, as so many of them to leave so faire accommodations, and dear relations in our native Countrey, to come over into a wildernesse, to take up a Forme of Go­vernment, upon any such ground as the Disswader conceit­eth, because it holdeth out so much liberty, and honour to the people.

This were indeed not to seek out for Liberty of Conscience, but Elbow-roomth of lust; and not to attend the honour, but the humor of the people. To passe such a judgment upon strangers, had need to arise from Divine Revelation, or else it will fall under the note of humane temerity.

But (saith the Disswader) howsoever it was in a few years, the most who setled their habitations in the Land, did agree to modell themselves after Robinsons pattern.

Answ. I do not know, that they agreed upon it by any common consultation: But it is true, they did as if they had agreed (by the same Spirit of Truth and unity) set up (by the help of Christ) the same modell of Churches, one like to another. But whether it was after Mr. Robinsons pattern, is spoken gratis: for I beleeve most of them knew not what it was, if any at all. And if any did know it, the men were such, as were not wont to attend to the pat­terns of men in matters of Religion, (for against that many of them had suffered in our native Countrey) but to the pattern of the Scriptures.

SECT. 4. Of Cottons pretended former dislike of the New-English way, and after closing with it.

In pursuing this pedegree and descent of New-English Di­scipline, the Disswader is pleased to present mee to the world, to [Page 18] be the first who appeared in displeasure against it, though after­wards to have fallen into a liking of it.

But how doth he make it appear, that I did appear in displea­sure against it? His proof is from a private Letter of mine to Mr. Skelton, where I call it an error, (whether in Mr. Skelton, or some of his people) to conceive, that our Congregations in England are none of them particular Reformed Churches. Surely, if that be all the proof, I willingly acknowledge, I did ap­pear against that Error. But neither was I the first that did appear against it, (but divers godly English Ministers before me:) nei­ther have I fallen to the liking of the contrary opinion since.

But the Disswader is much deceived, if he take that Error to be the judgment of the Churches of New-England, howsoever some particular persons may lean that way.

Nor will it yeeld any better proof, that which he alledgeth out of my Preface to Mr. Hildersons Sermon upon John. For that which I there wrote, concerneth the way of the Rigid Separa­tion, which renounceth the Churches of England as Antichri­stian, and the godly members thereof, as no visible Saints. Nei­ther is my judgment altered at all in this Point to this day: which also I have lately maintained in my Reply unto Mr. Williams his Answer of my Letter, and in a Treatise concerning the Baptism of Children. And what I have written in this Point is suitable to the judgme [...] of the Body of the Churches and Elders in New-England, and not at all repugnant to the way wherein we walk.

But I marvail, what should move the Disswader to report of me, That though in England I fell off from the practise of some Ceremonies, and but of some of them, and was distasted with Episcopall Government: yet so long as I abode in England, I minded no more then the Old Non-conformity: For in this one sentence he giveth a double misreport of me.

First, that in England I fell off but from some of the Cere­monies. For (by the grace of Christ) I forbore all the Ceremo­nies alike at once, many years before I left England. The first grounds which prevailed with me to forbear one Ceremony, would not allow me to practise any. The grounds I well remem­ber were two: 1 The significancy and efficacy put upon them in the Preface to the Book of Common-prayer: That they were neither dumb nor dark, but apt to stir up the dull minde of man to the remembrance of his duty to God, by some no­table [Page 19] table and speciall signification, whereby he may bee edified, or words to the like purpose.

The second was the limitation of Church-power, (even of the highest Apostolicall Commission) to the observation of the Commandements of Christ, Matth. 28.20. which made it ap­pear to me utterly unlawfull, for any Church-power to enjoyn the observation of indifferent Ceremonies which Christ had not commanded. And all the Ceremonies were alike destitute of the commandement of Christ, though they had been indifferent otherwise, which indeed others have justly pleaded they were not.

What favor I was offered not onely for connivence, but for preferment, if I would have conformed to any one of the Cere­monies, I forbear to mention. Yea, when I was suspended upon speciall complaint made against me to the King that then was, and all hope of restitution denyed to me, without yeelding to some conformity, at least in one Ceremony at least once; yet the good hand of the Lord so kept me, that I durst not buy my Mi­nistery so dear: And yet (I thank the Lord) my Ministery was dearer to me (to speak the least) then any preferment.

When the Bishop of Lincoln-Diocesse (Dr. Mountaigne) offe­red me liberty upon once kneeling at Sacrament with him the next Lords-day after: or else to give some reason, why (in con­science I could not) unto Dr. Davenant (then Bishop-elect of Salisbury, who was at that time present with him at Westminster) I durst not accept his offer of liberty upon once kneeling; but I gave them this reason for my excuse and defence,

The second misreport which the Disswader maketh of me in his former sentence, is, That howsoever when I was in Eng­land, I was then distasted with Episcopall Government; yet so long as I abode in England, I minded no more then the Old Non-conformity.

I passe by his unsavory metaphor of my distaste of Episcopall Government. Conscientious judgment in matters of Religion is not led by taste or distaste: will he say, that both the Parliaments of England and Scotland have abolished Episcopall Government upon a distaste?

But when he saith, I minded no more then the Old Non-Conformity whilst I abode in England, he must be more privie to my mind then any mortall man is, and then my self too, to make it good. There were some scores of godly persons in Boston in Lincoln-shire, (whereof some are there still, and some here, and some are fallen asleep) who can witnesse, that we en­tred into a Covenant with the Lord, and one with another, to follow after the Lord in the purity of his Worship; which though it was defective, yet it was more then the Old Non-con­formity. Besides, I had then learned of Mr. Parker, and Mr. Baynes, (and soon after of Dr. Ames) that the Ministers of Christ, and the Keyes of the Government of his Church are given to each particular Congregationall Church respectively: And therefore neither Ministers nor Congregations subject to the Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction of Cathedrall Churches, no, nor of Classicall Assemblies neither, but by voluntary consociation, and that in some cases; and those falling short of that which is pro­perly called subjection to their Jurisdiction. Which made mee then to mind not onely a neglect of the censures of Commissary Courts, (which bred not a little offence to them, and disturbance to my self) but also to breath after greater lib [...]rty and purity not onely of Gods Worship, but of Church estate. But suppose that I had then minded no more then the Old way of Non-conformity: yet the experience of the Godly will easily acknow­ledge, that the way of the Lord is light and strength to the up­right, and giveth more and more understanding and enlarge­ment to them that walk in it.

Nay, the Disswaders own words might convince him, that I minded more then the Old Non-conformity, whilst I abode in England. For if Mr. Cotton, and those Brethren who went along with me, came over to New-England, to joyn our selves with those American Churches, (as he saith) it argueth plainly we did not upon our coming hither, goe contrary to our for­mer judgment, and fall into a liking of this way. For then we would never have taken so long and hazardous a voyage to joyn to Churches, whose way was contrary to our judgments all the while of our abode in England. Rationall charity would con­ceive, that Christian men, who chose rather to forfeit our Mi­nistery, and maintenance, and all our dear relations in our na­tive Countrey, then to submit to a course contrary to our judg­ments, [Page 21] would never transport our selves to America, to run a con­trary course to our judgments in a land of liberty. But thus in heat of pursuit of an adversary (whether cause or person) men wil not stick to suffer their tongues and pens to run over, though for haste one word interfere with another.

SECT. V. Of the pretended danger of the New-English way unto the world, after Cotton and others closing with it.

But to proceed, why should the Disswader conceive, That our coming over into these parts, and joyning with these Ame­rican Churches, should cause this New-way (as he calleth it) to begin to grow dangerous to the rest of the world?

To which world (I pray you) hath this way grown dangerous? to the Christian world? or to the Antichristian world? or to the Pagan world?

The Pagan world of Indians here will acknowledg our sit­ting down by them, hath prevented the danger either of their dissolution or servitude. For the Indians in these parts being by the hand of God swept away (many multitudes of them) by the Plague, the manner of the Neighbor-Indians is either to de­stroy the weaker Countreys, or to make them Tributary: which danger ready to fall upon their heads in these parts, the coming of the English hither prevented. And of late (through the grace of Christ) one of our fellow-Elders, Mr. Eliot, Teacher of Rocksbury, having gotten the knowledg of the Indian language preacheth to them every week one week to one Congregation on the fourth day, to the other on the sixt the week following. And to him they willingly give eare, and reform their vicious living according to his Doctrine; and some of them offer themselves to be trained up in English Families, and in our Schools: and there be of them that give good hope of coming on to the ac­knowledgment of the grace of Christ. To them therefore our way is not dangerous.

To the Antichristian world, the more dangerous it is; I doubt not, it is the more acceptabl [...] to God, and I hope, it is not the lesse safe in Mr. Baylie's eye. Some of the Jesuites at Lisborn, and others in the Western Islands have professed to some of our Mer­chants and Mariners, they look at our Plantations, (and at some [Page 22] of us by name) as dangerous supplanters of the Catholick cause. If that be the greatest danger, I presume Mr. Baylie will not ab hoc dicto secundum quid, pronounce us dangerous (simplicitèr) to the rest of the world.

To the Christian world, what danger hath accrewed by our means? many that knew both our Magistrates and Elders, and the chief sort of our people, and knew how little we affected to travell into foraign Countreys to see fashions; they upon our departure grew more inquisitive into the cause of our voluntary exile; and thereupon, more jealous of corruptions at home in the Worship of God, and in Church-Discipline; more sensible of the burden and danger of Episcopall tyranny, and consequent­ly more ready to follow the good example of the Churches and Commonwealth of Scotland, in rejecting and shaking off Epi­scopall usurpations and intrusions of Liturgies. And hath this been so dangerous to the rest of the world?

Besides, if Books and Letters doe not delude us with false intel­ligence, the great salvation, and glorious Victories which the Lord hath wrought for England these late years by any English power, his own right hand hath brought to passe chiefly by such despised instruments as are sirnamed Independents. And are then the witnesses of that way so dangerous to the rest of the world?

Wherein then lyeth the danger of this way?

It seemeth the Disswader conceiveth (as some others have done) that this way hath bin a double danger to those Churches: 1 In becomming a dangerous inlet to all kinde of Sects, who shrowd themselves under the name of Independents, and claim impunity under their shadow. 2 In retarding the establishment and free passage of the work of Reformation.

But for the former, if the devill come and sow Tares, yea Bry­ars and Thornes, where Christ hath sowen Wheate, is therefore the wheate a dangerous graine? And if thereupon not onely tares, but bryers and thornes plead for freedome from eradicati­on, must therefore the wheat be plucked up, to root out the rest? Surely the way which is practised in New-England cannot justly be taxed for too much connivence to all kinde of Sects: wee here doe rather heare ill for too much rigour, which evident­ly argueth, our way is of it selfe no inlet at all to all kinde of Sects, unlesse it be meerely by accident: as Christianity hath been [Page 23] an inlet to all kinds of heresie; for where there is no Christianity, there is no heresie.

As for the latter, the retarding of the worke of Reformation, Surely we find it here the readiest way to a speedy Reformation. The common disorders obvious and ordinary in other Planta­tions are here either not found, or soone Reformed. The Re­tarding of Reformation in England springeth rather, partly from such as would have no Reformation at all, but affect el­bow-roomth to their owne lusts: partly from such as will have no Reformation, but in their owne way. But if it might please the Lord to bow the hearts, both of the Presbyterians, and of the Congregationalls, so farre as both of them are come, to walke by the same rule, and minde the same thing, (both of them to minde Reformation according to the rule of the Word, as they conceive it; both of them to redresse abases, the Presbyterians, the abuses found in their Churches, and the Congregationalls in theirs,) doubtlesse, it need not to bee feared the worke of Reformation will speedily find (by the blessing of Christ) a free and mighty passage through out the three Kingdomes.

SECT. 6. Of Cottons pretended misleading • Mr. Davenport , and • Mr. Goodwin. 

If it be true which the Disswader relateth from Mr. Edwards, Page 56. that before my departure from England, I had by conference in London brought off Mr. Davenport, and Mr. Goodwin, from some of the English Ceremonies.

Why doth he note me in his margent to be a Misleader of Mr. Goodwin and others? Is it a misleading to lead men away from the English Ceremonies? Were they Misleaders, who led the Ho­norable Houses of Ptrliament to fall off from the Ceremonies? Or did the Parliament mislead the people of England to the disuse of them?

But Mr. Baylie knoweth not Mr. Davenport, nor Mr. Goodwin, if hee thinke the ablest Divines in Christendome, much lesse such a poore weake thing as my selfe could bring them off to forsake their publike Ministery, wherein they were notable instruments of good service to God and man, unlesse they saw the light of the Word and Spirit of Grace to goe before them in such wayes. Virgin-soules are wont to follow the Lambe, wheresoever hee goeth ( Rev. 14.4.) And the Sonnes of God are led by the Spirit [Page 24] of God, ( Rom. 8.14.) And therefore let Mr. Baylie be intreated not so much to undervalue his holy Brethren, as to think they were rather misled by me, then led by the Spirit and Word of Grace in their own judgments and consciences. It is true, Mr. Davenport, Mr. Goodwin, with some other godly Brethren had some confe­rence with me at London, about the cause of my sufferings, and of my purpose to leave the Land; which they said, they desired the rather, because they did not look at mee as a passionate man, though the Disswader (who knoweth me not) be pleased so to re­present me to the world in this Paragraph. And upon their mo­tion two Points were chiefely debated: 1. Touching the limi­tation of Church-power, to matters of commandement, not of indifferency, (which I touched before.) The 2. touching the of­fice of Bishops, whether the Scripture Bishops bee appointed to rule a Diocesse, or a particular Congregation. Now both these being agreed upon amongst us, Mr. Edwards is much mistaken, and Mr. Baylie too, when they say, that neither Mr. Davenport, nor Mr. Goodwin, nor my selfe did mind any further then the leaving of some few ceremonies. For grant the former principle, of the limi­tation of Church-Power to matters of Commandement, and all the Ceremonies must bee left off at once. And grant the lat­ter, touching the limitation of Bishops to a particular Con­gregation; and it will necessarily inferre an unavoydable Se­paration from under the shadow of Diocesan-Episcopall-Go­vernment.

Besides, presently after, I received Letters from Mr. Goodwin, (and as I take it, before I left England) signifying, that as in our former conferences, wee had debated much of the negative part of the 2. Commandement, so hee had since meditated much, and seriously of the affirmative part of it, the positive institu­tions of Gods Divine Worship in opposition to humane inven­tions. Whereby I plainely discerned, ( England as the State of it stood then) could not hold him long. It is an usuall thing with God, in times of Reformation to enlighten his Servants, though farre distant one from another, with the same beams of light of Divine Truth, which the world interpreteth, they have learned one from another: but indeed all from the same Spirit, who di­stributeth to every one, even as he will. But whether Mr. Daven­port, and Mr. Goodwin received ought from me, I doe not know, sure I am, I have received much from them. The members of the [Page 25] Body of Christ, are wont to minister supply one to another, accor­ding to the effectuall working of the Spirit of Grace in every part, to the mutuall edifying of themselves, and of the whole Body in Love, Ephes. 4.16. And why should mutuall edification be made a matter of exprobration?

SECT. 7. Of Cottons pretended sudden change to the passionate affecting of the New-English way, and the conversi n of Mr. Goodwin to it.

It semeth to me a strange speech of the Disswader, and as far from Truth, as from ingenuity, that assoon as I had tasted of the New English aire, I fell into a passionate affection with the Re­ligion I found there.

For I knew their Religion before I came into New-England, and himself said above, that I came with a purpose to joyn with their Churches: Which argueth, I did not fall into an affection to their Religion, by tasting of New-English Aire. Nor hath his speech any reasonable construction, that with tasting the new English aire, I soon fell into a passionate affection to their Religion, unlesse he take me for one of those children, who are tossed to and fro, and carryed about with e­very winde (or aire) of doctrine, Ephes. 4.14. Nor doe I yet understand why he should account the Religion of New-England another Religion, then that of England and Scotland and other Reformed Churches. Difference in some externall form of Church admini­strations is not wont in the writings of judicious Divines, to make up the note and name of a different Religion.

Neither can I imagine what should move him to say, that I fell into a passionate affection with the Religion here. A passi­onate affection, is a strong, yea a violent, and inordinate affecti­on. Did the Disswader ever reade, or hear me, to expresse any such violent or inordinate affection to the Religion here pro­fessed?

How Mr. Goodwin cometh to be accounted, and called of the Disswader, my Convert, I doe not know. It is not good to take liberty to use Scripture Idioms, but in Scripture sense. The Scrip­ture speaketh not of conversion, but in the sense of Regeneration begun, or renewed: neither doth it style one man, another mans Convert, but reserveth that solely and solidly to the Lord.

But I marvail why the Disswader should say, That M. Good­win with little adoe was brought by my Letters from New-England to follow in this step of my progresse.

For first, I doe not remember that ever I wrote Letter to him from New-England about our way. And my Letter, which Mr. Baylie quoteth amongst his Testimonies (in G) was not written to him, but to a brother of mine (by Mariage) in Boston. Men that have been bred and brought up under a form of Doctrine, or Worship, or Government, and never saw ground to scruple it, they may with little adoe receive it, and embrace, and follow it: which, it may be, hath been the case of many thousands in Eng­land, and usually falleth out in setled Churches. But for M. Good­win to take up a way not onely contrary to that wherein he hath been bred and brought up, but also discrepant from the judge­ments of so many godly learned Brethren, to the hazzard of his Ministery, and to the smothering of himself in a cloud of calumny and obloquy, beleeve it who will, I cannot easily beleeve it, that he took up such a way with very little adoe. I cannot but beleeve, it cost him many prayers, and sighs, and grones, much study, meditation, and conference, before he could satisfie him­self in such a course; He being especially (as Mr. Baylie reporteth him) a man of a fine and dainty Spirit, (and therefore loving and tender:) to which sort of men, it is most unwelcome to offend Reverend Brethren by dissenting from them: and with whom it is most usuall to suspect their own judgments and wayes, when they goe alone. Luther was not accounted a man of a fine and dainty spirit, but of a more resolute and stern temper; and yet it was no small temptation even to him. Nunquid tu solus sa­pis? Quoties mihi palpitavit tremulum Cor, & reprehendens objecit fortissimum illud argumentum, Tu solus sapis? tóine errant univer­si? &c. Luther. in Praefat. de Abrogandâ Missa privata, &c.

Mr. Edwards his Antapology, I have not had the opportunity to come by, much lesse to read: and therefore I cannot tell what sense to make of those words which Mr. Baylie quoteth out of him (in H:) and wherein he saith, Mr. Goodwin was bold to boast of me in terms beyond the bounds of moderation. Sure I am, Mr. Goodwin was not wont to be accounted, either a bold man, or a boaster. I have many years known him and his modesty, and abhorrency both from boldnesse and boasting: and if Mr. Baylie take up a report to the contrary from Mr. Edwards [Page 27] (who is but one witnesse, and it may be prejudiced) I dare not follow Mr. Baylie herein, but must allow Mr. Goodwin the privi­ledge of an Elder, against whom no accusation is to be received under two or three witnesses, 1 Tim. 5.19. By what rule there­fore Mr. Baylie receiveth this testimony against Mr. Goodwin, by one single witnesse, he may doe well to consider. Sure I am, it agreeth not with the Rules either of Congregationall or Classi­call Church-government.

But if Mr. Goodwin himself doe acknowledge such a speech, he knoweth best in what sense he spake it. For my self, I can own it onely in the same sense wherein Agur spake it of himself, Prov. 30.2, 3. Surely I am more brutish then man; I have not the under­standing of a man: I have not learned wisdome, nor know the holy.

The next testimony which Mr. Baylie quoteth out of Mr. Ed­wards to the same purpose, speaketh not of Mr. Goodwin, but of some other whom Mr. Edwards nameth not. But such Apocry­pha testimonies with judicious and equall mindes, will never goe for authenticall evidences. For the matter of the testimony it self, I conceive, the form of Church-government wherein we walk doth not differ in substance from that which Mr. Cartwright pleaded for. For two things chiefly there be wherein such as are for a Congregationall way, do seem to differ from Presbyte­rians: 1 In the matter of their Churches; they would have none allowed but visible Saints. 2 In the exercise of Church-censure, they leave that power to the Elders and Brethren of the same Church whereof the delinquent is a member. And in both these we find Mr. Cartwright's footsteps going plainly before us. For, 1. he taxeth in Bishop Whitgift, that speech of his; The Church is full of Drunkards and Whoremongers, &c. Whereas Mr. Cartwright would not have scandalous persons born withall in the Church. And for the 2. he speaketh fully, in 1 Cor. 5.4. Forasmuch (saith he) as the Apostle reproveth the Church of Corinth, for that they had no [...] (before his Letters) excommu­nicated the Incestuous; It is evident that the Ministers, and the rest of the Church there had power and authority thereunto.

The next Testimony which Mr. Baylie alledgeth to prove Mr. Goodwin's boasting of this new light (as he calleth it) beyond the lines of moderation, is from the words of Mr. Williams in his examination of a letter of mine. His words be, That some of the most eminent amongst them have affirmed, That even [Page 28] the Apostles Churches were not so pure as the New-English Churches.

But what is this to M. Goodwin? M. Williams speaketh of some of the most eminent in New-England, where Mr. Goodwin never came.

Besides, Mr. Williams doth not ascribe these words to any defi­nite persons in New-England. And, as I said before, Apocrypha testimonies will never goe with equall mindes for authenticall evidences. It is no new thing for Mr. Williams to mistake both himself and others, as hath appeared in the Reply both to his exa­mination of that Letter, and to his Bloody Tenent. I never heard of any mans speech in New-England so hyperbolicall in the praise of New-English Churches, nor coming nearer to the words in hand, then the words reported of Mr. Williams himself: That of all the Churches in the world, the Churches of New-England were the most pure; and of all New-English Churches, Salem (where­of himself was Teacher) was the purest. But such arrogant com­parisons are as smoke in Gods nostrils, Esay 65 5. the first born of vanity, and the first step to apostasie.

SECT. VIII. Of Cottons pretended rashness in the change of his mind in latter and former times.

Mr. Baylie proceedeth, and telleth us, It had been happy for England, that Mr. Cotton had taken longer time for delibera­tion, before that change of his minde. He might have re­membred his too precipitant rashnesse in former times, both to receive, and to send abroad to the world such Tenents, whereof after he had cause to repent.

I should think my self a most unhappy man, if England should be the lesse happy for my sake. Mr. Baylie doth either undervalue England, or overvalue me; if he think the happinesse or unhap­pinesse of England doth stand or fall upon any deliberate or pre­cipitate act of mine.

But what think ye, was that rash and precipitate act of mine, which hath impeached the happinesse of England? It was, saith he, that change of my minde. What change was that? That which I mention in a Letter to some friends in Boston, That if I were with them again, I durst not take that liberty which som­times I had done: I durst not joyn in Book-prayers: I durst not now partake in the Sacrament with you: to wit, in respect [Page 29] of those scandalous persons who communicate with you, and will settle upon their Lees with the more security by your fel­lowship with them.

I doe remember such a Letter I wrote; whether to one or moe in Boston, I remember not: Some say it is printed, but I know not, nor have I seen it: But I take the contents as Mr. Baylie repor­teth them. And concerning them, I durst appeal even to Mr. Baylie himself, (though a stranger to me, and professing opposition) yet let him speak in good earnest, whether if I had taken longer time of deliberation even to this [...]ay, I should not have found just cause to have changed my minde, as I then did? Did I change my minde then to any other judgment or practice, then what the Reverend Assembly of Divines, and the Honorable Houses of Parliament have found (by the grace given to them) to be the Truth, and by Publick consent approved, and by Publick autho­rity established? And doth he think, that it had been happy for England, if the Parliament and Assembly had neither of them changed their mindes, but still retained Book-service, and ad­mitted scandalous persons to the Lords Table? How shall a poor Christian doe to satisfie his Brethren, that are not satisfied with their own judgment and wayes; if he be of the same judgment, or speak the same thing with them? verily, it is not good in Gods sight (but even an abomination to him) to keep a weight and a weight, a measure and a measure: to judge the same act in themselves to be weighty, which in others they judge to be light and rash. But the comfort is, the righteous God judgeth righteously, not according to acceptance of persons, but accor­ding to Truth; and accepteth the work of his own Spirit of Truth and Grace wheresoever he findeth it.

As for my too precipita [...] rashnesse in former times, which he he is pleased to remember me of, let him be pleased to forbear his censure a while, till I may give account thereof to Reverend Do­ctor Twisse. In the mean time let him know, that those Tenents which he saith I sent abroad to the world, whereof I had cause after to repent, I neither sent them abroad to the world, (but wrote them privately for the satisfaction of a neighbor Minister) nor do I yet know, whether I have cause to repent of them or no, it being neer thirty years ago since I wrote them, and many years ago since I read them.

But in the mean time, let Mr. Baylie be pleased to understand, [Page 30] that I came hither in September in the year 1633. and that letter of mine which I sent to Boston, was dated (as himself quoteth) in October, 1635. And surely to write my Opinion of such a case, which I had considered of for the space of two whole years, doth not seem to be a rash and precipitate act: Nor can it be said with truth, That I did incontinent perswade to the New-English way, as soon as I had tasted of the New-English aire. Two whole years and more, giveth a man more then a taste of New-English air; nor is that an act done incontinently, which is done upon two years deliberation.

SECT. IX. Of Cottons pretended known failings, and Mr. Baylies pretended just cause to discover them to the world.

Mr. Baylie proceedeth to discover my evident and known failings, (as he calleth them) and he conceiveth neither piety nor charity will hinder him to remark them. And why so? me thinks it should be some great and weighty cause, that himself, who is wont (as he saith) to speak liberally to the praises of men, who in his thoughts are much inferior to Mr. Cotton; should now give up himself to speak liberally to the dispraise and disgrace of him, whom yet in his entrance thereinto he see­meth to reckon amongst such as he calleth the dear children of God. Surely there is not the least child of God, but is ordained of God to be a vessel of honor; and to make any such a vessel of dishonor, what is it else but to endevour to overthrow the eternall counsell of God? Nor is there the least child of God, but is a member of the Body of Christ; and the naturall mem­bers of the Body are wont to cover the nakednesse of such mem­bers as are most uncomely.

But Mr. Baylie is of opinion, as he saith, that when my gifts are turned into snares, and made inducements to others to follow me in my wandrings: then the discovery of my cleare weaknesse may be a retractive to every Prudent man, & a caveat from God, to beware of my wayes. Belike then it will follow, that though it be contrary both to the counsell and Commandement of God, and to the Communion of his Mysticall Body, to cast reproaches and dishonour upon the least of Gods servants: yet for a good [Page 31] end, to keep others from idolizing of them, it may be lawfull to rans [...]ck all their former lives, and to hang them up in the sight of the Sun, in chains of publike infamy, and obloquy. But I con­fesse, I have not so learned Christ, as to allow my self to doe evill that good may come of it. Nor doe I beleeve it had been a way of God, when the men of Lystra so highly Idolized Paul and Barnabas, as to account one of them to be Jupiter, and the other Mercurius, and to present them with Divine Worship, that then some godly brother of Pauls company should have stept in a­mongst them, and said, Sirs, why doe you these things? Paul hath been a bloody persecutor of the Truths of God, a Blasphemer, a scornfull oppressor: and Barnabas is a man subject to passion and dissimulation, and both of them mortall men, subject to all kind of sinfull corruption. Such zeale for the glory of God, I know not by what rule of piety or charity, it could have been justified. God hath sanctified other means, to wean his servants from ido­lizing their Brethren. Cornelius idolized Peter even with Divine ho­nour, Act. 10.25. But did Peter therefore, or any of the 6. Brethren that went along with him, think it a just warrant, to proclaim to Cornel. Take heed what you do, this man whom you idolize hath been a lyer, a perjured person, an horrible curser of himself, and re­nouncer of the Lord Jesus before many witnesses? God forbid. Yea of latter times, when the pregnant strength and glorious lustre of many heroicall and excellent gifts of Luther had bin so idolized, that many and great Nations followed him in some notorious errors of his way: yet Calvin thought it no just ground, why Bullinger or other Divines should break forth against him, as he had done ( atroci invectiva, to use Calvins word) against them, but sweetly professeth, Saepe dicere solitus sum, etiamsi me Diabolum vocaret, me tamen hoc illi honoris habiturum, ut insignem Die servum agnoscam: Calvin. Ep. 57. ad Bullingerum. The want of this spi­rit is Fundi Anglicani calamitas, the unhappinesse of England at this day. But what if all these heresies or errors, which Mr. Bay­lie chargeth upon me, be but so many errors of himself, or of his witnesses? Will he still make it an act of piety, or charity to re­marke them (as he calleth it) for my evident and known fai­lings, and follies: which are either no failings, nor follies at all, or none of mine?

Let us examine the particulars.

SECT. X. Of Cottons Prelaticall Tenents.

1. He instanceth in the Errors of my education, and my long continuance in them: sundry of them (as he saith) I confesse stuck by me all the time of my abode in England.

And this he proveth from the testimony of mine own Letter (above mentioned) from New-England to my friends at Boston, October 5. 1635. As joyning in Book-prayers and fellowship at the Lords Table with scandalous Communicants. It was but in the next foregoing Page, (pag. 56. of Mr. Baylie's Book) wherein he maketh it the unhappinesse of England, that I chan­ged my minde from those very Tenents, which he now calleth the Errors of my education, and Prelaticall Tenents? But if they be Errors, why doth he tax me for changing from them? And why doth he say, It had been happy for England, if Mr. Cot­ton had taken longer time, before he had changed his minde from such Tenents? Let Mr. Baylie choose which he will take; either these are no Errors nor Prelaticall Tenents; or if they were, it was no Error in me, nor unhappinesse to England that I chan­ged from them. A considerate and equall minde should not be so far transported studio partium; nor so soon forget it self, as to censure it in one Page for an unhappy change from such Tenents, which in the next Page he noteth for Erroneous and Prelaticall Tenents.

SECT. XI. Of Cottons pretended Pelagianism and Ar­minian Errors.

2. My next Error, he calleth, My more dangerous fall in­to the gulf of Pelagianism, some of the Arminian Errors. I did expect, he would have named what those Pelagian or Armi­nian Errors had been. But for that, he referreth me to the Anta­pology, a Book which I doe not know that ever I have seen. Sure I am, I have often assayed to get, but cannot yet procure it. The testimony which Mr Baylie quoteth out of it, referreth me to the Preface of Dr. Twisse his Answer. I have read his Preface, wherein I finde no particular Tenents of mine expressed as Er­roneous. But this testimony he is pleased to give me, (which [Page 33] might somewhat allay the ha [...]shnesse of the scandall of my fall into the gulf of Pelagianism and Arminianism:) Mr. Cotton (saith he) as I have heard, is very sound and orthodox in the Point of Election: and cometh to this work with a graci­ous intent to clear the Doctrine of Predestination, (and that, in the particular of Reprobation) from such harsh consequen­ces as seemeth to be derived from thence.

Dr. Twisse doth indeed truly expresse that which (through grace) was my true intent, to clear the Orthodox Doctrine of Predestination from such harsh consequences, as are wonted to be derived from absolute Reprobation. For when I was first called to Boston in Lincoln-shire, so it was, that Mr. Doctor Baron, son of Dr. Baron, (the Divinity Reader at Cambridge) who in his Lectures there, first broched that which was then called Luthe­ranism, since Arminianism:) this Dr. Baron, I say, had leavened many of the chief men of the Town with Arminianism; as be­ing indeed himself learned, acute, plausible in discourse, and fit to insinuate into the hearts of his Neighbors. And though he was a Physitian by profession, (and of good skill in that art:) yet he spent the greatest strength of his studies in clearing and promoting the Arminian Tenents. Whence it came to passe, that in all the great Feasts of the Town, the chiefest Discourse at Table did ordinarily fall upon Arminian Points, to the great offence of the Godly Ministers both in Boston, and Neighbor-Towns. I coming amongst them a yong man, (as having gone to Cambridge in the beginning of the 13 ^th year of my age, and tarrying there not above 14 years in all, before I was sent for to Boston:) I thought it a part both of modesty and prudence, not to speak much to the Points, at the first, amongst Strangers and Ancients: untill afterwards, after hearing of many Discourses in Publick meetings, and much private conference with the Do­ctor, I had learned at length where all the great strength of the Doctor lay. And then observing (by the helpe of Christ) how to avoid such expressions, as gave him any advantage in the expres­sions of others, I then began publickly to Preach, and in private Meetings to defend the Doctrine of Gods eternall Election be­fore all foresight of good or evil in the Creature: and the Redem­ption (ex gratiâ) only of the Ellict: the effectuall vocation of a Sin­ner per irresistibilem gratiae vim, without all respect of the prepara­tions of Free will: And finally, the impossibility of the fal of a sin­cere [Page 34] Beleever either totally or finally from the estate of grace. Hereupon, when the Doctor had objected many things, and heard my answers to those scruples which he was wont most plausibly to urge; presently after, our publick Feasts and neighborly meetings, were silent from all further debates about Predestina­tion, or any of the Points which depend thereon, and all mat­ters of Religion were carryed on calmly and peaceably. Inso­much, that when God opened mine eyes to see the sin of confor­mity, (which was soon after:) my neglect of conformity was at first tolerated without disturbance, and at length embraced in practise by the chief and g [...]eatest part of the Town. But so it fell out, that a neighbor Minister dwelling about 16 miles off (and my very loving friend) hearing of some Answers of mine tending to clear the Doctrine of Reprobation against the excep­tions of Dr. Baron, he seemed not to be satisfied therewith, but wrote to me seven or eight Questions about the same; whereto I willingly gave him such Answers as then came to hand, and that soon after the receipt of his Questions, which is now long since, about 30 years agoe. Little did I think, that a private Letter of mine written to a very friend, should ever have been divulged abroad. But it seemeth some got Copies of it; and in processe of time, one Copy multiplyed another, till at length it came to Dr. Twisse his hand. None of his Writings against Armi­nius or his followers had been then published: but he was then (by the report which went of him) of such high esteem with me, as I wrote him a thankfull Letter for the pains I heard he had taken in examining my Answer to Mr. Pells Queries: (for that was the neighbor Ministers name who sent them to me;) and desired from him leave to see the copy of his Answer. He lovingly granted it, onely with desire after a time to return his [...]: yet after that having got himself another Copy, he sent me word, he was content I should keep his. Whereupon I took it with me to New-England; but since my coming hither have found such constant diversion from such Contemplative Controversies, to attend Practicall, that I have not to this day been able to per­pend the Doctors Answer, which I see is now Printed: I hope, God will give me opportunity ere long (after two or three other Treatises perused) to consider of this his labor of Love. I bless the Lord, who hath taught me to be willing to be taught of a farre meaner Disciple then such a Doctor, whose Scholasticall [Page 35] acutenesse, pregnancy of wit, solidity of judgment, and dexte­rity of argument, all Orthodox Divines doe highly honor, and whom all Arminians and Jesuites doe fall down before with si­lence. God forbid I should shut mine eys against any light brought to me by him. Onely I desire I may not be condemned as a Pe­lagian or Arminian, before I be heard, or be found more slow in retracting an Error, then in discerning it.

SECT. XII. Of Cottons pretended Montanism.

3. The next Error which Mr. Baylie is pleased to threape up­on me is my old Montanism, which he saith, he hath heard from some gracious Ministers; and wherein some think I re­main to this day.

Who those gracious Ministers are from whom he heard this, he doth not mention; nor what this old Montanism of mine should be, he doth not expresse. But thus I must stand guilty in Mr. Baylie's judgment, and by his relation, in the judgment of all men that give credit to his testimony, of an horrible Heresie, but I must not know what; and by the accusation of gracious Ministers, but I must not know whom.

Augustine recordeth (in his Catalogue of Heresies) Chap. 26. the Heresies of Montanus to be: 1. That Montanus and his two harlot-Prophetesses, Prisca and Maximilla, had received the Holy-Ghost not in part, as the Apostles, but without mea­sure. 2 Second-mariages they condemn as whoredome. 3 The Bread in the Lords-Supper, they mingle with the blood of a yearling Infant.

Daneus in his Comment upon that Book of Augustine, addeth other Heresies, out of other Authors: as for a 4. That Monta­nus himself was the Comforter promised to the Apostles. 5 That incestuous copulations were not to be disallowed. 6 That Enthusiasms and Revelations were rather to be fol­lowed then the Word of God. 7 That they confounded the Persons in Trinity, as did the Sabellians and Patro­passiani.

Now amongst all these Montanistick Tenents, I would intreat Mr. Baylie to tell me (in faithfulness) which of them it is he char­geth upon me, and which he calleth, my old Montanism, wherein some think I do remain to this day.

Or if he say, (as he doth) that he hath heard of my old Mon­tanism, by some gracious Ministers, let him be pleased to intreat them to declare to me those Points of Montanism, which they know by me, or suspect in me. Otherwise I shall conceive, though they may be gracious Ministers that so told him, yet it was no part of their graciousnesse so to speak; a speech that neither savored of Truth, nor love, nor wisdom, nor faithful­nesse.

But in perusing the se [...]uel of this Discourse, I finde a passage, which maketh me suspect, what Tenent of Montanism it is which he aimeth at, in Page 61. speaking of the vilenesse of the errors of the members of our Churches; They did (saith he) avow openly, The personall inhabitation of the Spirit in all the godly; his immediate Revelations without the Word; and these as infallible as the Scripture it self. And this (saith he) is the vilest Montanism.

These two latter Tenents, immediate Revelations without the Word, and them as infallible as the Scripture it self, I willingly confesse they are vile Montanism; though I would not say (as he doth) the vilest. For the vilest is, to hold Montanus himself to be the Holy-Ghost, or to have received the Holy-Ghost in a more full measure then the Apostles themselves.

But for the first of these Tenents, touching the Personall In­habitation of the Holy-Ghost in the godly, it may further be considered before it be condemned. Personall Inhabitation may be taken in a double sense: For, 1 It may hold forth no more but this, the indwelling not onely of the Gifts of the Holy-Ghost, but of his Person also in the Regenerate. Or 2. it may hold forth further, the indwelling of the Person of the Holy-Ghost in the Regenerate, so farre forth as to make us one Person with himself, or to communicate with us some Personall propriety of his own.

In this latter sense Mr. Baylie may well be allowed to call it, vile Montanism: for the Errors are vile, and also wrapt up in Montanus his Tenents: But for the former, the indwelling not onely of the Gifts, but of the Person also of the Holy-Ghost in the Regenerate, I must professe, I neither beleeve the Tenent to be vile nor Montanism. Not Montanism, for amongst all the Errors of Montanus or his followers, I never read this imputed to them, by such as have been the most diligent Recorders and [Page 37] Refuters of ancient Heresies. Neither Augustine, nor Epiphanius before him, nor Daneus after him, did ever father this Tenent up­on the Montanists. Nor is the Tenent vile or erroneous, but an holy Truth of God delivered to us from the Word of Truth. As may appear,

1. From the testimony of the Lord Jesus, Joh. 14.16, 17, 26. with Joh. 15.26. The argument standeth thus, The Comforter which proceedeth from the Father and the Sonne; even the Spirit of Truth, he dwelleth in the Disciples of Christ Jesus.

The Comforter which proceedeth from the Father & the Son, even the Spirit of Truth, is the Person of the Holy-Ghost himself.

Therefore the Person of the Holy-Ghost himself dwelleth in the Disciples of Christ Jesus.

2. From the testimony of the Apostle Paul, 2 Tim. 1.14. That Good thing (saith he) which is committed to thee, keep, by the Holy Ghost, which dwelleth in us. That Good thing is fitly under­stood by our best Interpreters, Calvin and Beza, to be, not onely the sound Doctrine of [...]he Gospel, and his Ministeriall Office, but also the excellent gifts of the Spirit of Grace furnishing him for discharge of his Office, and dispensation of the Gospel. Whence the Argument holdeth thus;

The Holy-Ghost that keepeth the good gifts of Grace in us, dwelleth in us.

The Holy-Ghost that keepeth the good gifts of Grace in us, is not the gifts, but the person of the Holy-Ghost distinguished from them:

Therefore it is the Person of the Holy-Ghost, and not his gifts onely that dwelleth in us.

3. From another testimony of Paul, Rom. 8.11. If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead, dwell in you; he that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your mortall bo­dies, by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. Whence the Argument ari­seth thus,

The Spirit that dwelleth in us, is the Spirit that raised Christ from the dead, and shall also quicken our mortall bodies;

But it is not the Gifts and Graces of the Spirit, but the Person of the Spirit himself that raised up Christ from the dead, and shall quicken our mortall bodies:

Therefore it is the Person of the Spirit that dwelleth in us.

It was not the Gifts and Graces of the Spirit of Christ him­self, [Page 38] much lesse our Gifts and Graces that did raise up Christ from the dead. Not the Gifts and Graces of Christ himself; for they were but created. And it was an act farre above all created power, to raise up Christ from the dead. Much lesse were they our Gifts and Graces that raised him up; for ours, are not onely created, but imperfect, and which is more, they were not then in Being, when God raised up Christ from the dead.

To these three Divine Testimonies (which are the ground of my faith in this point) let me adde one humane Testimony of a learned Divine, who was never tainted, nor taxed with Montanis­me, I meane Zanchius, de Tribus Elohim Parte altera, lib. 4. cap. 1. His testimony cometh in thus: Praeter alia argumenta, quibus con­firmavimus Spiritum Sanctum verum esse Deum, illud etiam non fuit minimum, quod inde deduximus, quia Fideles vocantur Templum Spiritus Sancti, 1 Cor. 6.19. and 3.16.

Against this argument from the proof of the God-head of the Holy-Ghost, Ochinus gave this answer amongst others: Do­na Dei nobis concessa, hoc eodem nomine notari: sed non tertium suppo­situm, hoc est personam, a Patre & Filio distinctam, &c.

To this Zanchius replyeth: Non potest Spiritus Ochinianus nisi impudenter inficiari, quin Spiritus Sanctus, hoc est, tertia haec perso­na (quae etiam Spiritus Dei, & virtus Dei appellatur) habitet in Sanctis hominibus, & quin illi sint hujus Templum, qui enim in iis habitat, judicio, & voluntate praeditus est, & loquitur; Spiritus Pa­tris vestri (inquit Christus) loquitur in vobis, Matth. 10.20. Spiritus autem Sanctus appellatur ipse Spiritus Dei, & Spiritus Christi. Spi­ritus igitur Sanctus, hoc est tertia Persona, habitat in Sanctis. Quod vero ait Spiritus Ochinianus, Non posse tertiam Personam habitare in Sanctis, quin ibi etiam habitent reliquae, dictum est bene. Nam etiam Christus dixit, Ego & Pater ad eum veniemus, & mansionem apud eum faciemus, Ioh. 14.23. Hoc vero ideo fit, quoniam omnes sunt una & eadem essentia, &c.

SECT. 13. Of Cottons pretended Antinomianisme and Familisme.

The Disswader proceedeth to point at (as hee calleth it) a­nother more dangerous fall of mine, which in his Margent, he nameth Mr. Cottons Antinomianisme, and Familisme: and within a few lines, his wandring into the horrible Errors of [Page 39] the Antinomians, and Familists, with his dear friend Ms. Hut­chinson, so far that he came to a resolution to side with her, and to Separate from all the Churches in New-England, as legall Synagogues.

If all this charge were true (as indeed, in all parts of it, it is false:) yet the errors of Antinomianisme, and Familisme, then stirring in the Countrey, and condemned in the Synod at New-Towne, were not more dangerous, then the old Montanisme. I confesse, the Familisme afterwards broached by Mr. Garton, and his followers, the same which Calvin in his Opuscula refuteth (in his Instructio adversus Libertinos) as Calvin judgeth it more danger­ous then Popery, so I conceive it to be as dangerous as Montanis­me, though I cannot say more dangerous: for both of them over­throw al principles & foundations of Christian Religion. But for the making good of this charge upon me, let Mr. Baylie be plea­sed to instance in those horrible errors either of Antinomianisme or Familisme, whereunto I either wandred or fell: Or let him make it appeare that I came to such a Resolution, to side with my dear friend Ms. Hutchinson, and to separate from all the Churches in New-England, [...]s legall Synagogues.

Let us examine his proofes and Testimonies.

1. The first is from the parties themselves, the followers of Ms. Hutchinson, who (saith he) boast of Mr. Cotton for their Ma­ster and Patron.

And it is true, they professed so: just as Wightman who was burnt at Lichfield for Montanisme, (avouching himself to be the Holy Ghost) professed he had received all his grounds from Mr. Hildersam. And I confesse my self, being naturally (I thank God) not suspicious, hearing no more of their Tenents from them, then what seemed to mee Orthodox [...]ll, I beleeved, they had been far off from such grosse errors, as were bruited of them. But when some of my fellow-Brethren (the Elders of Neighbour Churches) advertised me of the evill report that went abroad of their corrupt Tenents, I desired to know what the Tenents were, which were corrupt, and which they had vented here and there, in my name. They mentioned some to mee, some of those which are published in the short story of that Subject: and named also to me the persons, who had uttered the same. I therefore dealt with Mris. Hutchinson and others of them, declaring to them the erroneousnesse of those Tenents, and the injury done to my self [Page 40] in fathering them upon mee. Both shee, and they utterly de­nyed, that they held such Tenents, or that they had father­ed them upon mee. I returned their Answer to the Elders, who had spoken to mee of them: and I inquired, if any two of them, or of their Neighbours could bear witnesse in this case. They answered me, they had but one witnesse of any cor­rupt Tenent: and that one, loth to be known to bee an accuser of them. I replyed, what course would you then advise mee to take? They answered, that I could not indeed bring the mat­ter to the Church for want of witnesses: But the best way would bee, publikely and privately to bear witnesse against such errors. I tooke their counsell, and bare witnesse against the errors complained of, as well publikely as privately. Which when some Elders and Brethren heard, meeting soon after with some of these Opinionists: Loe, say they, now wee have heard your Teacher bearing witnesse openly against those very points, which you falsely father on him. No matter (say the other) what you heare him say in publick: we know what hee saith to us in private. This answer bred in some of my Brethren and friends, a jealousie, that my selfe was a secret fomenter of this spirit of Familisme, if not leavened my self that way. Whereupon sundry Elders and Brethren perceiving these Errors to spread, secretly and closely, they consulted among themselves, and with me what I thought of a Synod, whether it might bee of use in such a case for the clearing of these Points, and the allaying of the jealousies and differences in the Coun­trey? I answered, yea. Thereupon, with consent of the Magi­strates, a time, and place was appointed for a Synodicall meeting, and sundry Elders were sent for, from other jurisdictions, and messengers from all the Churches in the Country to assist in this worke.

Against which time three things principally were attended for preparation.

1. A Solemne Fast kept in all the Churches: in which it fell out, that Mr. Whelewrights Sermon was apprehended to give too much encouragement to the Opinionists. And himself hath since confessed, that being but new come into the Countrey, having but little acquaintance but with his kindred, and their friends, (who were many of them levened this way) he spake some things, which if he had before discerned their Familisme, he would not have expressed himself as he did.

The 2. thing attended to, for preparation to the Synod, was, the gathering up of all the corrupt and offensive Opinions that were scattered up and down the Countrey, and to commend them to Publique Disquisition in the Synod: that howsoever, the Authours of them were loth to owne them publikely, yet at least, they might see them publickely tryed, confuted, and condemned. The which was accordingly done in the Synod: and the Opinions with their Confutations are since printed in the short story, whence Mr. Baylie fetcheth many Testi­monies.

The 3. thing thought needfull for preparation to the Synod, was, to gather out of my Sermons to the people, and my confe­rences (in word and writing) with the Elders, all such opinions of mine as were conceived by some, to bee erroneous: and having gathered them together, to inquire in a brotherly conference with mee, how far I would own them, or how I did understand them, that so the true state of the questions in difference might appeare; and withall, if there were any aguish distemper, or disaffection growen in any of our spirits amongst our selves, it might be healed in a private brotherly way, and mutuall satis­faction given and taken on all hands. Accordingly we had such a meeting in private; wherein five questions were propounded unto mee, with desire of my plaine and explicite answer to the same: which also upon their demand, I gave suddenly.

How far there arose any consent or dissent about these questions, between my Fellow-Brethren (the Elders of these churches) & my self, it is not materiall now to particuralrize; it is enough, that up­on our clear understanding of one anothers mindes & judgments, and upon the due proceeding of our Church against convin­ced notorious errors and scandalls, wee have ever since (by the Grace of Christ) much amiable and comfortable Communion to­gether in al brotherly kindness. But this short relation may suffice.

To let Mr. Baylie know, and all them that shall read his Book, to consider, what slender ground hee had to speak of my wan­dring into the horrible Errors of the Antinomians, and Fa­milists, and siding therein with Mistris Hutchinson, and therein to tell the world of a more dangerous fall of mine, then that of Montanisme: And withall to clear up to him, what little ground Mistris Hutchinson had, to pretend, that shee was of Mr. Cottons judgement in all things: that so Mr. Baylie may likewise observe what ground himself had to take up such a re­port against me, upon her testimony. Which yet will the more ful­ly appeare, if I proceed to relate a principall passage or two in the Synod, after it was assembled. It was the first act of the Synod (after Prayer and choice of Moderators) to propound the seve­rall offensive opinions, which had been dispersed up and downe in the Countrey, and briefely to argue them, and bear witnesse against them. The opinions were about fourescore (more or lesse) which being orderly propounded and argued against, I perceived that some of the Members & Messengers of our Church, were rea­dy to rise up, and plead in defence of sundry corrupt Opinions, which I verily thought had been far from them; especially such as concerned union with Christ before Faith, Iustification without Fiath, inherent righteousnes, and evidencing a good estate by it at all, first or last. Whereupon assoon as I could get liberty of speech with them, Brethren (said I) if you be of that judgment, which you plead for, all these Bastardly Opinions, which are justly offensive to the Churches, will be fathered upon Boston. They answered me again, Though they were not clear for those Opi­nions, [Page 48] which they spake for, yet neither were they clear for condemning of them, considering the tendernesse of some Consciences: I replyed, if they were doubtfull of the Errone­ousnesse and danger of such Opinions, they should have dealt openly with the Church at home, when they were chosen Mes­sengers, and should have declared their judgments before the Church: as knowing such points amongst others were likely to come into agitation in the Synod: whereas now looke what they speak, it is conceived by the whole Countrey to bee the judgment of our Church.

Hereupon some of the Messengers of our Church withdrew themselves, and appeared no more in the Synod, such as did ap­pear, did much what forbear any prosecution of argument in such causes. But that (to my remembrance) was the first time of my discerning a real and broad difference, between the judgments of our Brethren (who leaned to Mistris Hutchinson) and my self. And therefore to clear my self, and the sounder Members of our Church from partaking in those manifold errors there presented, I declared my judgment openly before all the assembly, That I esteemed some of the Opinions, to bee blasphemous: some of them, hereticall: many of them, Erroneous: and almost all of them, incommodiously expressed: as intending to except those chiefly, wherein I had declared mine own opinion, as before.

But because I would deale openly and ingenuously with Mr. Baylie, and hide nothing from him, that might fortify his accusa­tion against me, there was some colour of my leaning to one An­tinomian Tenent in one day of the Synod. For though in an­swer to the questions of the Elders before the Synod, I had affirm­ed Faith to be an instrument for the receiving the righteousnesse of Christ to our justification: yet for as much as some great Di­vines had let fall some expressions, that seemed to favour the Antinomian party in a contrary Tenent, I was desirous to hear that Point a little further ventilated, and to see the difficulties a little more fully cleared. Dr. Twisse (not suspected for an Anti­nomian, much lesse for a Familist) in his vindiciae gratiae, de electione, Parte 2. Section. 25. Numero 5. bringeth in Arminius, arguing a­gainst Mr. Perkins, thus: ‘The righteousnesse of Christ wrought or performed, is not ours, as wrought or performed, but as by Faith imputed to us. ’Whereto the Dr. answereth,

Before Dr. Twisse, Chamier (a Divine, as free as the other from suspition of Antinomianisme) denyeth Faith to bee a cause of Justification; For if it were (saith hee) Justification should not be of Grace, but of us. But Faith is said to justifie, not because it effecteth Justification, but because it is effected in the justified person, and requisite to be found in him. De Fide libr. 13. cap. 6. And to the same purpose, De Justificatione, libr. 22. cap. 12. hee contendeth, that Faith as it doth not merit, nor bring Justi­fication,so neither doth it (impetrare) obtain it. For if it were so, then tum ratione, tum tempore Fides praecederet Justi­ficationem, Faith should goe before Justification, both in nature and time: Which (saith hee) in no sort may be granted. For Faith is it self a part of Sanctification; but there is no San­ctification, but after Justification, quae & re, & naturâ prior est, which both in the thing it self, and in nature is before it.

To the like purpose doth Mr. Pemble deliver his judgment in his Book of the Nature and Properties of Grace and Faith, [Page 50] Page 24. 26. of his Edition in Folio.

The Discrepance of all these Divines from the received expres­sions of the most, gave just occasion, why in such an Assembly, the judgment of sundry acute and judicious Elders, might be enqui­red. Accordingly, in one day of their dispute in the Synod (with Mr. Whelewright, if I forget not) I interposed such a word as this, God may bee said to justifie me before the habit, or act of Faith, and the habit is the effect of my Justification, intending the same sense, as hath been expressed out of those Divines: upon which, the next day was taken up in disputing and arguing that Point with mee. And when I saw their apprehensions, that they were suitable to Scripture phrase, and the contrary difficulties might bee removed sano sensu, I the next morning did of my self freely declare to them publikely, my consent with them in the point, which (as they professed) they gladly accepted.

Now upon all this relation (which is the substance of the whole Truth in this cause) I desire Mr. Baylie might consider what ground hee had, either to report mee to the World as sometimes dangerously fallen into the horrible Errors of An­tinomianisme, and Familisme: or to take Ms. Hutchinsons re­port in this cause, That she was of Mr. Cottons judgment in all things. Let him please to read the short story of the Errors and heresies, for which shee was admonished publickly in Boston Church, and compare them with the Tenents of mine now men­tioned, and let him judge of himself, whether she was of Mr. Cot­tons judgment in all things.

I would not have enlarged my self so much, either to clear her testimony, or to elevate it, were it not to take off some scru­ples and surmises in Mr. Baylie of some dangerous guilt in me of Antinomian, and Familisticall errors, which he thinkes cannot be avoided by what he collecteth from other testimonies, as well as hers which may fully be prevented and avoided by this relation of the true state of things.

But before I leave speech of her, let me speak a word to Mr. Bay­lie of the Epithet hee is pleased to give her, when hee styleth her, my dear friend, with whom I resolved to side and sepa­rate from all the Churches in New-England, as Legall Churches.

At her first comming she was well respected and esteemed of me, [Page 51] not onely because herself and her family were well beloved in England at Allford in Lincolnshire (not far beyond Boston:) nor onely because she with her family came over hither (as was said) for conscience sake: but chiefly for that I heard, shee did much good in our Town, in womans meeting at Childbirth-Travells, where­in shee was not onely skilfull and helpfull, but readily fell into good discourse with the women about their spiritual estates: And therein cleared it unto them, That the soul lying under a Spirit of Bondage, might see and sensibly feel the hainous guilt, and deep desert of sin, and thereby not onely undergoe affliction of Spirit but also receive both restraining, and constraining Grace likewise, (in some measure:) restraining from all known evill (both courses, and companies) (at least for a season) and con­straining to all knowen duties, as secret Prayer, Family Exer­cises, Conscience of Sabbaths, Reverence of Ministers, Frequent­ing of Sermons, Diligence in calling, honesty in dealing and the like: yea and that the Soul might find some tastes and flashes of spirituall comfort in this estate, and yet never see or feel the need of Christ, much lesse attain any saving Union, or Communion with him, being no more but Legall work, even what the Law, and the Spirit of bondage (breathing in it) might reach unto. By which means many of the women (and by them their hus­bands) were convinced, that they had gone on in a Covenant of Works, and were much shaken and humbled thereby, and brought to enquire more seriously after the Lord Jesus Christ, without whom all their Gifts and Graces would prove but common, and their duties but legall, and in the end wizzen and vanish. All this was well (as is reported truely, page 31. of her Story) and suited with the publike Ministery, which had gone along in the same way, so as these private conferences did well tend to water the seeds publikely sowen. Whereupon all the faithfull embraced her conference, and blessed God for her fruitfull discourses. And many whose spirituall estates were not so safely layed, yet were hereby helped and awakened to discover their sandy foundati­ons, and to seek for better establishment in Christ: which caused them also to blesse the Lord for the good successe, which appeared to them by this discovery.

Hitherto therefore shee wrought with God, and with the Ministers, the work of the Lord. No marvell therefore if at that time, shee found loving and dear respect both from our Church-Elders [Page 52] and Brethren, and so from my self also amongst the rest.

Afterwards, it is true, she turned aside not only to corrupt opini­ons, but to dis-esteem generally the Elders of the churches, (though of them shee esteemed best of Mr. Shepheard:) and for my selfe, (in the repetitions of Sermons in her house) what shee repeated and confirmed, was accounted sound, what shee omitted, was ac­counted Apocrypha. This change of hers was long hid from me: and much longer the evidence of it, by any two clear witnesses. I sent some Sisters of the Church on purpose to her Repetitions, that I might know the truth: but when shee discerned any such present, no speech fell from her, that could be much excepted a­gainst. But further discourse about her course is not pertinent to the present businesse. But by this Mr. Baylie may discerne, how farre Ms. Hutchinson was dear unto mee, and if hee speak of her as my deare friend, till shee turned aside, I refuse it not.

But yet thus much I must professe to him, That in the times of her best acceptance, shee was not so dear unto mee, but that (by the help of Christ) I dealt faithfully with her about her spirituall estate. There things I told her, made her spirituall estate un­clear to mee.

The truth is, I did intended to remove, but not to Separate; much lesse with Ms. Hutchinson, and least of all from all the Churches of New-England: and yet lesse then the least of all, to separate from them, as legall Synagogues.

The occasion of my intent of removall was this. After the [Page 53] banishment of Ms. Hutchinson and sundry others by occasion of her, the generall court made an order, that none should be re­ceived to abide as Inhabitants in this Jurisdiction, unlesse they were allowed under the hand of the Governour, or two Assi­stants. The Assistants are our Magistrates. When this Law came to be put in ure, I was informed that some godly passengers who hither arrived out of England, were refused to sit down amongst us, because (upon tryall) they held forth such an union with Christ by the Spirit giving Faith, as did precede the acting of Faith upon Christ: and such an evidence of that union, by the favour of God shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, as did precede the seeing (though not the being) of Sanctifica­tion.

This took the deeper impression upon me, because I saw by this meanes, wee should receive no more Members into our Church, but such as must professe themselves of a contrary judgment to what I beleeved to bee a Truth. Besides I was informed, that it was the judgment of some of place, in the Countrey, that such a Doctrin of Union, and evidencing of Union, as was held forth by mee, was the Trojan Horse, out of which all the erroneous Opinions and differences of the Countrey did issue forth.

Hereupon, fearing this might in time breed a renewall of Paro­zysmes, I called to mind the intent of my comming hither, which was, not to disturb, but to edify the Churches here: and there­fore began to entertain thoughts rather of peaceable removall then of offensive continuance. At the same time there was brought to mee a writing, subscribed with about threescore hands to encourage me to removall, and offering their readi­nesse to remove with mee into some other part of this Coun­trey.

I considered, If wee removed, it would be matter of much va­rious construction amongst such as knew us, both in Old-England, and New; and I was loth to doe any thing, (especially of impor­tance) but what I might give account of before God, and his peo­ple; I took advice therefore of some friends here, especially Mr. Davenport, and resolved, first to clear the certainty of the grounds of the information given mee of the rejections of those godly persons (of whom I had heard) for their judgments sake in those points. 2. To see if my continuance here would certainly, or [Page 54] probably breed any further offensive agitation: And 3. If both those things were found clearly, then to take opportunity with common consent to remove to Quinipya [...]k whereto at that time a door was opened.

But when I came to enquire the certainty of these informati­ons, in conference with some of our chief Magistrates and others, I found, though there had speach been about such points between themselves, and some passengers: yet their refusall of such pas­sengers was not upon those points, but (as I remember) upon denyall of inherent righteousnesse in beleevers, and of any evi­dence of a good estate from thence, first or last. Withall, they de­clared to mee their minds touching such points of Union, or evidencing of Union, which I had taught, that they did not looke at them to bee of such Fundamentall concernment either to civill or Church-Peace, as needed to occasion any distance in heart, (much lesse in place) amongst godly brethren. Which when I heard from them, and found upon search, the mis-infor­mations given mee, were but misprisions, I then layed down all thoughts of removall, and sat down satisfied in my aboad a­mongst them, and have so continued (by the help of God) to this day. By all this may appear the truth of what I said, that though I had thoughts of removall, yet not with Ms. Hutchin­son, shee being gone to Road Island, but I intending Quinipyack. Much lesse had I any thoughts of Separation from all the Chur­ches of New-England: for the Churches in Quinipiack are in New-England. And those Churches at the Bay (amongst whom I lived) It was far from my thoughts to separate from them, whom I ever truely honored as the holy Spouses of Jesus Christ. Nor did I ever look at such Points, as any just ground of Separation from any Church, (so much as in place, much lesse in Communion:) no nor any just ground of removall from them, unlesse a man were compelled to professe contrary to his judg­ment. And least of all durst I turn my back upon such Churches as Legall Synagogues, who do all of us hold Union with Christ, and evidencing of Union by the same Spirit, and the same Faith and the same holinesse: though some may conceive the Union wrought in giving the habit, and others rather refer it to the act: and some may give the second place to that, whereto others give the first.

It was therefore too much credulity in Mr. Baylie, either to [Page 55] take up the former testimony from Ms. Hutchinson, or this latter from Mr. Williams: though if both of them had joyned in one and the same Testimony, (which they doe not) yet the Testimo­ny of two excommunicate Persons doth not make up idoneum Testimonium in Ecclesiasticall causes.

No? Saith Mr. Baylie, if I mistake not the humor of the man, (Mr. Williams he meaneth) he is very unwilling to report a lie of his greatest enemy.

I look not at my self, as his greatest, or least, or any ene­my at all. I doe not know, that I did ever walke towards him either in the affection, or action of an enemy, notwithstan­ding the provoking injuries, and indignities hee hath put up­on mee.

Nor would I call it any mans humor (as Mr. Baylie calleth it, Mr. Williams his humor) to be very unwilling to report a lye of his greatest enemy.

But this I say, Mr. Williams is too too credulous of surmises and reports brought to him, and too too confident in divulging of them. Which if Mr. Baylie know not, hee may (at his leisure, if hee think it worth the while) peruse the Reply, I have made to his answer of my Letter, as also my answer to his bloody Tenent.

But Mr. Baylie giveth the more credit to Mr. Williams his Testimony, because Mr. Williams saith in his examination of my [...]etter, How could I possibly (saith hee) bee ignorant of their estate, when being from first to last in fellowship with them, an Officer amongst them, had private and pub­lick agitation concerning their Estate, with all, or most of their Ministers?

The answer is very easie both to Mr. Williams, and Mr. Baylie too, that Mr. Williams speaketh of the times before his banish­ment: then indeed he had some fellowship with us, and might have had more, but that hee supected all the Statos conventus of the El­ders to bee unwarrantable, and such as might in time make way to a Presbyteriall government. But this Testimony, which hee giveth about my neerenesse to Separation from these Chur­ches, was many yeares after his banishment from us, when hee was in no fellowship with us, sacred nor civill, nor came any whit neer any private or publick agitation amongst us, nor could have any intelligence of our affaires, but by report and fame, which is tam ficti pravique tenax, quam nuncia veri, and is indeed in this point, most false. [Page 56]

Notwithstanding al this confident charge of Mr. Baylie, there will be no need at al of any Art to clear Mr. Cotton, from seduction into any such horrible fall, the naked truth (by the helpe of Christ) will clear both it self, and him. The Testimonies of Mr. Winthrop, and Mr. Wells, are all delivered (as it seemeth) in the short Story. There

In the Preface, page 7. It is said, By this time, they had to pa­tronise them, some of the Magistrates, and some men eminent for Religion, Parts and Wit.

Answ. 1. This were something, if there were no more men eminent for Religion, Parts and Wit, in the Country but my self, who professe no eminency in any of these in respect of many of my Brethren. But if I were eminent, the testimony concludeth not. Let not Art judge, whether the conclusion will follow from both the premises particular: but let common sense judge of such men, as then lived in the Countrey, whether there were not many eminent persons for Religion, Parts, and Wit, who did patronise them, though I had been out of the Countrey.

2. I willingly confesse, that I my self, though I did not patro­nise them, yet I did countenance them (in my measure) whilst they held forth (to my knowledge) no more then I have formerly delivered of my own Tenents: which yet I hope he will not a­gain tax, as an horrible fall into Antinomianisme and Familism. When their Errors were brought to me, I bare publike witnesse a­gainst them, even before I was fully perswaded that those per­sons were guilty of them.

His next Testimony (which hee quoteth from page 25. of the short Story) the former part of it concerneth Mr. Whelewright, and not mee: though I must confesse I doe not know how it can be [Page 57] collected from Mr. Whelewrights doctrin, unlesse it were by a fore­stalled mis-apprehension and mis-application of those hearers, who were leavened with corrupt Opinions. The latter part of the testimony, That the former Governor never stirred out, but at­tended by the Serjants with Halberts or Carrabines, but the pre­sent Governor was neglected: I do not remember, that ceremony was any more then once neglected: and when I heard it, I bore witnesse against it. And they excused their former observance, by the eminency of the person. But sure I am, the present Govern­or (as he well deserveth all honor from this Peopole, so) he is sel­dome or never seen in publick, but in like sort attended with Hal­berts or Carrabines.

Next, he alledgeth a testimony from the Court, which (it is like­ly) was delivered by Mr. Winthrop, being then Governor, page 35. of the short Story: They soon profited so well, as in a few moneths, they outwent their Teacher.

Answ. This testimony is so far from taxing mee of any horri­ble fall, that it clearly acquiteth mee from the fellowship thereof. For if they outwent their Teacher, as the Court said (and said truely:) then I went not along with them in their Tenents. And Teacher I was called, and their Teacher, as being called to that Office in that Church, whereof many of them were Members.

The next testimony (from page 33. of the story) expres­seth, That upon the countenance it took from some emi­nent Persons, her Opinions began to hold up their heads in Courts of Justice.

Answ. This might indeed argue, that some Magistrates leaned more or lesse to that way: but it reacheth not me, who am seldome present at any Courts, but when with other Elders I am sent for. And let it not be forgotten, what I related above, that many held with those Opinionists (as they were called) when they knew of no other opinions held forth by them, but what was publickly taught in our Church: but after they were discovered to overgoe not so much their Teachers, as the truth, and that so evidently, as could clearly be convinced by the testimony of two or three wit­nesses, they were soon forsaken by those, who esteemed better of them before.

His next testimony is from the story page 32.

Answ. That most of the Church of Boston consented with Ms. Hutchinson, (whilst shee openly held forth no more, then what was publickly taught) is true; but nothing to prove Mr. Cottons horrible fall, for after shee fell into any horrible, or evident er­ors, it may clearly appear, the whole Church were not become her canverts, by this undenyable evidence, that the whole body of the Church (ezcept her own son) consented with one accord, to the publick censure of her, by admonition first, and excommuni­cation after.

But (saith Mr. Baylie) None of these erroneous persons were ever called to account by the Presbytery of that Church, till after the Assembly, though the Pastor of the Church, Mr. Wilson was alwayes exceeding zealous against them.

Answ. 1. Mr. Baylie is mistaken, when he saith, Mr. Wilson was alwayes exceeding zealous against them. For the whole Church will bear him witnesse, hee was a long time full of much forbear­ance towards them, and thought well of them, and bare witnesse to the wayes of free Grace in such manner, as testified his good will to them and the Truth. Afterwards in some private confe­rence, which one or more of them had with him, and (our belo­ved Sister) his Wife, he discerned some more rottennesse in them, and their way, then he suspected before: And after that time in­deed, he grew more zealous against them, but the occasion of the offence was private, and (for a good space) unknown both to mee and the Church.

2. But why they were not called to account by the Presbytery of the Church, the reason was evident: because their grosse errors were not confirmed into us, by two or three witnesses. And this I can truely professe, That when the Elders of other Churches acquainted mee with some of their Errors, (even when the noise of them was spred far and neer:) yet they acknowledged, the Erroneous persons were so cautious, that they would never vent any grosse Errors before two witnesses. And this I can further truely avouch, that my self dealt sadly and seriously with some chief leaders of them, both by word, and writing to recover them from the Error of their way: which though they would argue [Page 59] for, yet they would ever excuse themselves from setling upon any such things. I dealt also with others (whom I began to sus­pect might be leavened by their Leaders) and earnestly charged them to beware what Tenents they received from them, lest by that means they might be corrupted themselves, and their Leaders hardned. But they would not bee known to me, that they drunke in any such dregs, as afterwards appeared.

His next testimony is taken from Ms. Hutchinsons speach in the open Court, Preferring my Ministery in holding forth free Grace, above some, or most of the other Elders. But of the invalidity of her testimony in these things I have spoken, (I sup­pose) enough above. An evill Spirit (which sometimes breath­eth both in good and bad persons,) may give a glorious testi­mony to some servants of God, not so much to honour them, or their doctrine, as either to cover themselves under their sha­dow, or else (but that was not her aime) to bring them and their Doctrin into suspition, and trouble, as the Spirit of the Pythonesse did to Paul and Silas, Act. 16, 17, to 20. That speach of hers, I bore witnesse against it, as prejudiciall and injurious both to them and mee.

Another testimony hee alledgeth out of the Story, Page 50. That all the Ministers consented in bearing some witnesse against Mr. Whelewright, except their Brother the Teacher of Boston.

Answ. The Story relateth those words, as the speach of the El­ders; that they speak of me, as their Brother, to wit, the brother of the Elders, lest any should misconceive of their speach, as ran­king me in a Brotherhood with erroneous persons.

That I did not consent with the rest of my Brethren (the El­ders) in drawing the inference out of Mr. Whelewrights Sermon, which they (being required) presented to the Court, I had a twofold reason for it. 1. Because I was not present with them, when they searched Mr. Whelewrights Sermon, and gathered that inference from it.

2 Because I could not speake it of mine own knowledge, That the Elders of the Country did walk in or teach such a way of Salvation, and evidencing thereof, as Mr. Whele­wright describedeth, and accounteth to bee a Covenant of Works.

They knew what themselves taught in that point, better [Page 60] then I. The Elders might testifie what they knew: I could not te­stifie, what I knew not. But it seemeth any testimonies will serve turn, when such as these are thought unavoidable, to lay me un­der the guilt of an horrible fall.

Yet one more remaineth, from page 21. That albeit the Assem­bly of the Churches had confuted and condemned most of these new opinions, and Mr. Cotton had in publick view consented with the rest: yet the leaders in those Erroneous wayes stood still to maintain their New Light. Mr. Whelewright also con­tinued his Preaching, and Ms. Hutchinson her wonted meetings: and much offence was stil given by her, and others in going out from the Pastors Exercise.

Answ. 1. As the Assembly of the Churches confuted and con­demned those Errors, so I will not say, That the motion of confuting them (as I remember) arose from my self. And my self also had an hand in confuting such of them, as the Elders com­mitted to my hand, as themselves took severall likewise taskes, none of us confuted all. My consent to the confutation, I have expressed above, and in what sense. What I did in publick view (as the Story expresseth it) I spake before the Lord, and from the truth of my heart.

That notwithstanding this Act of the Assembly against the Er­rors, the leaders still stood to maintain their way, it was because the Assembly did not fasten these Errors upon any Persons ei­ther in our own, or other Churches. And what corrupt opini­ons were maintained by our Members, it was done in private, and not before such witnesses, as might reach to publick conviction.

Mr. Whelewrights continuance in his preaching, was 8. or 9. miles distance from us. And having been put into that place be­fore by the Church, whilst the Farmers there belonged to our Church, (which by reason of the distance, wee soon after dis­missed into a Church-estate amongst themselves) wee that were Elders could not (if wee would) discharge him from that worke, without the consent of the Church. But though hee gave some offence in some passages at the Assembly, (which hee since upon further conference and consideration retracted:) yet neither the Church, nor my self (notwithstanding those unsafe expressions) did ever look at him, either as an Antinomian or Familist. Many of us knew that hee had taken good paines against both, and in that very place, where hee was wont to preach; insomuch that [Page 61] one of his hearers (who since joyned to Mr. Gortons society) open­ly contested against his doctrine as false and Antichristian. And when Mr. Whelewright was put out of this Countrey (though hee be since restored) yet if hee had cleaved to the Errors which Ms. Hutchinsons company fell into, he would never have refused their earnest invitation and call of him, to Minister unto them. They sent to him, and urged him much to come to them, to a far richer soyle, and richer company then where hee lived: yet hee constantly refused, and upon that very ground, because of the cor­ruption of their judgments: Professing often, whilst they plead­ed for the Covenant of Grace, they took away the Grace of the Covenant.

Ms. Hutchinsons continuance of her weekly meetings we could not proceed to the suppression thereof, with consent of the Church, before wee received the conviction of her personall Errors, which shee still closely carryed, till after her civill censure. And then shee declared her self more plainly, and wit­nesses arose more fully, and the Church proceeded against her accordingly.

The going of her self and others out of the Congregation when our Pastor began to Exercise, though many feared it was a turn­ing their backs upon his Ministery: yet the most of them were women, and they pretended many excuses for their going out, which it was not easie to convince of falshood in them, or of their contempt of him.

But in fine, when her Antinomian and Familisticall Errors were held forth by her before sufficient witnesses, our Church (as I said before) proceeded without delay, first, to admonish her according to the rule, Tit. 3.10, 11. Afterwards when upon se­rious paines taken with her, Mr. Davenport, and my self (as wee thought) had convinced her of her erroneous wayes in judgment and practice, so as that under her hand, shee presented a Recan­tation before the whole Church, (indeed before many Churches then assembled at Boston) yet withall, (after some passages of speach) Professing that shee never was of any other judg­ment,then what she now held forth, so many witnesses forth­with rose up to convince the contrary, that with common con­sent both of the Elders and Brethren of our Church, shee was cast out of our Communion.

And now that (by the help of Christ) I have perused all the [Page 62] testimonies, which Mr. Baylie hath alledged to convince me of an horrible fall into Antinomianism, and Familism, I desire him in the fear of God to consider, whether any or all these testimonies severally or jointly, will amount to make good such grievous scandalls, as hee hath charged upon mee. Which if they neither will, nor can reach unto, let him remember his promise in his Epistle Dedicatory, That in all which he hath said over and a­bove (just testimony) he will undertake to give ample satisfa­ction, wherein so ever he hath given the least offence to any. Meane while the Lord lay not this sin to his charge.

SECT. 14. Of Cottons humiliation upon his former fall, as is reported by Mr. Baylie.

But yet let me adde a word more, to a word of Mr. Baylies in his entrance of this discourse of my Antinomianism, and Fami­lism, which may else leave an inpression upon the minds of some Reader, as if I had acknowledged this my dangerous fal, and had been much humbled for it.

This other more dangerous fall (saith hee) as it hath already much humbled his Spirit, and opened his eare to instruction, and I trust will not leave working, till it have brought him yet nearer to his Brethren: so to the worlds end, it cannot but be a matter of fear and trembling to all, who shall know it, and of abundant caution, to bee very wary of receiving any singula­rity from his hand, without due tryall.

Answ. 1. Suppose all this were true in terminis, as Mr. Baylie hath expressed it, yet this were no impeachment at all to the doctrin and practice of that (which hee calleth) our Independent Church way; nor is it any just ground of caution to bee wary of receiving my testimony to it. Peters dangerous and dreadfull fall into the denyall of Christ, (though hee seemed to be a pillar) was no impeachment, but advancement to Christianity. And if my fall were so dangerous, walking in this Church-way, and stumbling so foully in it, the greater Grace and witnesse from hea­ven was upon his Churches in this way, who by the blessing of God were instruments of recovering me out of this fall, even by a consultatory conference in a Synod, which did not assume to themselves any power of Church-censures. Let mee be accounted to have fallen, and to have fallen (as Mr. Baylie representeth it) [Page 63] horribly, so that the truth and wayes of Christ may stand and find free passage.

Neither is this fall of mine such a just ground of caution (as he would make it) unto any, to bee very wary of receiving my testimony to this Church way. For the way is no way of singu­larity from my hand, but that which the body of the rest of my Brethren, and of the Churches in this Country doe walk in with mee.

Answ. 2. But yet, let not Mr. Baily make further speech or use of my humiliation, then was performed, or intended by me. For God hath not given mee to this day (upon my best search) to discerne any such dangerous fall into Antinomianisme, or Familisme, as either hath, or might much humble my spirit.

It is true, my spirit had much cause to be humbled, (and so through mercy it was) upon many just occasions at that time. As first, that so many Erroneous and Hereticall opinions should be broached in the Country, and carried on with such Arrogan­cy, and Censoriousnesse, and guile of spirit.

Secondly, That the principall offenders in this kind were members of our own Church, and some of them such as had neer relation to my self.

Thirdly, that my self should be so sleepy and invigilant, as that these (not Tares onely, but Bryers) should be sowen in our Field, and my self not discerne them, till sundry persons up and down the Countrey were leavened by them.

Fourthly, that such as endeavoured the healing of these distem­pers, did seeme to me to be transported with more jealousies, and heates, and paroxysmes of spirit, then would well stand with brotherly love, or the rule of the Gospel.

The bitter fruits whereof doe remaine to this day, in the Let­ters sent over that year from hence to England. Whence also it came to passe finally, that in the course taken for the clensing of Gods Field, it seemed to me, that some good Wheat was pluckt up with the Tares, some simple hearted honest men, and some truths of God, fared the worse for the resemblance which the tares bare to them.

Upon all which grounds, my self with our whole Church thought it needfull to set a day apart for publick humiliation be­fore the Lord, wherein these and the like, both in Prayer and Preaching, were opened more at large before the Lord and his people.

But all this will not amount to make good Mr. Baylies word, That my dangerous fall into Antinomianisme and Familisme hath much humbled my Spirit.

Nor can I say (as he doth) that it hath opened mine eares to instruction. For I doe not know, that they have been shut to it, when I discerned the Spirit, and Word of truth breathing in it.

Nor can I say after him, That the humbling of my spirit for those dangerous errours, will not leave working till it have brought me yet nearer to my brethren.

For though I blesse the Lord, who hath brought me nearer to my brethren, and them also nearer to me, which I trust will still grow whilst our selves grow (in all the duties of brotherly love, wherein we have much sweet and frequent intercourse:) yet I doe not interpret this as the fruit of my spirits humiliation for my Antinomy, and Familisme: but as the fruit of our clearer ap­prehension, both of the cause and of the state of our differences, and of our joynt consent and concurrence in bearing witnesse against the common heresies, and errors of Antinomianisme, and Familisme, which disturbed us all.

But Mr. Baily as he began his discourse of my dangerous fall with relation of my humiliation for it: so hee shutteth it up, pag. 58. with a like close of my griefe of mind, and confusion for it.

I have been informed (saith he) by a gratious Preacher who was present at the Synod in New-England, that all the Bre­thren there, being exceedingly scandalized with Mr. Cottons carriage, in Mistris Hutchinsons processe, did so farre discoun­tenance, and so severely admonish him, that hee was thereby brought to the greatest shame, confusion and griefe of mind, that ever in all his life he had endured.

Answ. 1. I conceive it is not allowable in Presbyteriall disci­pline, (sure I am, not in Congregationall) that an accusation shall be received against an Elder under one witnesse, though he gra­tious and a Preacher: especially when this gratious Preacher is namelesse, and his testimony hovereth in generalities, without instance in particular offences: as That all the Brethren were exceedingly scandalized with Mr. Cottons carriage in Mistris Hutchinsons processe, but not expressing what carriage, nor what processe, nor wherein they were scandalized.

And that all the Brethren did so far discountenance him, and severely admonish him, as that he was thereby brought to the greatest shame, and confusion, and grief of minde, that e­ver in all his life he endured. But no mention for what offence they did so severely admonish him, nor wherein they did so farre discountenance him.

Such words of infamy, and reproach may passe for Table talke, (which yet morall Philosophy would not approve:) but surely in orderly Church-Discipline, such dealing could not passe without just reproof, unlesse there were too much prejudice or partiality, the rule is plain and obvious, and not now the first time violated in the Disswasive, 2 Tim. 5.19.

Answ. 2. I must (as justly I may) protest against that testi­mony, not onely as violating the rule of Love, but of Truth also. For,

1. It is untrue, that all the Brethren were scandalized with my carriage, much lesse exceedingly scandalized at the Synod, or in a­ny processe about Ms. Hutchinson. There were sundry godly bre­thren otherwise minded, and otherwise affected.

2. It is untrue also, that such as were scandalized, did so severe­ly admonish me, or discountenance me; for I can neither call to mind any such deep discountenance, nor any such severe admoni­tion of Brethren, and yet I had reason to know it, and to remem­ber it well, as well as any Brother at the Synod: the matter so neerly concerning my self, and more neerly and deeply, then any man else.

3. It is most untrue, that I was so far discountenanced, and so severely admonished, as that I was brought to the greatest shame, confusion and grief of mind, that ever in all my life I had endured.

I should have little comfort in my own spirit, to look either God or man in the face, if the discountenance or admonition of men (especially for such carriage) were the greatest shame, and confusion, and grief of mind, that ever in all my life I had endured. The rebukes of God upon the soule for sin will put a man to far greater shame, and confusion and grief of mind, then any discountenance, or admonition from Brethren, (especially for such offences) Psal. 76.7. But whatsoever discountenance, or dis-respect I met withall, from one hand or other, till the true state of my judgment, and car [...]iage was clearly manifested, I have [Page 66] long agoe left with the Lord: But I conceive I have met with more hard measure in Letters to England, and in ungrounded reports there, then ever I found from the admonition, or discoun­tenance of any brethren here.

SECT. 15. Of the shamefull absurdities said to be found in the way of Independency: notwithstanding the great helps, to prevent, or cover it: and first, of those helps.

Mr. Baylie now undertaketh to prove that which he calleth a broad Assertion, and well may hee so call it: for it reacheth far beyond all dimensions of truth. His assertion is, That the way (which he calleth) Independency hath in a few years (lesse then one week of yeares) flown out into more shamefull absurdi­ties, then the Brownists to this day, in all their 50. yeares try­all have stumbled upon.

How will Mr. Baylie (think you) make this good?

His affirmation, that the way of the Brownism, and Indepen­dency (as he styleth them) are both of them really one and the same, because he saith, it will appeare hereafter, I referre it there­fore to his place.

But before hee cometh to make his broad assertion good, yea and (as he promiseth) palpable, he maketh it also by the way, ad­mirable, and that many wayes.

1. In that the Independency hath been brought to the ut­most pitch of perfection, which the wit, and industry of its best Patrons were able to attain: and hath been fenced with the Laws of gracious Magistrates, who were at our absolute devo­tion, and yet hath flowen out, &c.

Answ. 1. We that judge that way (which he calleth Indepen­dency) to be of God, should account it blasphemy in our selves to accept such a style put upon us, as to be the best Patrons of it. We doe verily believe, that though our selves, all of us, should imploy our best wits and industry to joyn with Mr. Baylie to subvert and deface it: yet the Lord Jesus would show himself a Patron to maintain his own Institutions, though with the confusion of the faces, and enterprizes of us all. The Word which hath gone out of his mouth for the Government and ord [...]ring of his Church [Page 67] till his second appearing, he himself as he hath spoken it, will also shew it forth in his times, who is the blessed and onely Po­tentate, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, 1 Tim. 6.14, 15.

Answ. 2. Wee cannot but with thankfulnesse acknowledge the goodnesse of God in our gratious Magistrates, and their assi­stance to us in the work of the Lord: But when Mr. Baylie maketh them to be at our absolute dev [...]ion, his [...] is too too in­jurious in debasing them, and (in their eyes) advancing us. For neither are they devoted to us at all, nor much lesse absolutely. Though they sometimes consult with us in matters of consci­ence; yet they take our counsell no further then they see it clea­red from the Word. And besides, it is too vast an advancement of us, to make them absolutely of our devotion. For devotion in matters of Religion, (or as Thomas speaketh, in iis quae ad Dei cul­tum, & famulatum pertinent) is a divine worship due to God onely; in as much that Aquinas taketh it to be too high a worship to be terminated in Saints, 22 ^ae. Quest. 82. Art. 2. And yet he alloweth more divine worship to Saints, then any orthodox protestant can excuse from Idolatry.

Againe secondly, It may seeme to make the palpablenesse of our outflowings the more admirable, in that (as he saith) much of our way is yet in the dark.

Thirdly, In that none of our selves have proclaimed our discords to our own shame.

Fourthly, That none who have fallen from us, have of pur­pose put pen to Paper, to informe the world of our wayes.

Fiftly, That none of us have been willing to reply to any of the books written against us, &c.

Answ. It were much I confesse, if wee had all these advanta­ges of concealement which he mentioneth, and yet neverthe­lesse so many, and so shamefull absurdities of ou [...]s should fall out in so short a time, and become to palpable as Mr. Baily proclai­meth them. But the truth is, nei [...]her have we had those advan­tages, (he speaketh of:) but the contrary disadv [...]nta [...]es, nor yet do we feare, that he will be able to find such absurdi [...]ies to have fallen out in our way, much lesse so shamefull.

For first, the way of the New English Churches is not in the dark, but published to the view of the world, in the book so en­tituled (refuted by Mr. Rutherford:) as also in the Apology of these Churches, in the Covenant, in the Answer to 32. Questi­ons; [Page 68] in another answer to 9. Questions; in the answer to Mr. Herle, and to Mr. Rathbone. Some of our most populous Churches do no Church Act, no not of discipline, but in the presence of the whole Towne, (non-members, as well as members) so many of them as are pleased to be present. Wayes of truth seeke no cor­ners; if any Church admonish a brother privately, it is because his offence is not known to non-members.

Againe, if in our discords, none of us have proclaimed our shame, whence hath Mr. Baily gathered all our shamefull absur­dities? The short story, (the greatest storehouse of his testimo­nies) what is it, but a fruit of our discords? Besides, if none that have fallen from us, have of purpose put pen to Paper to informe the world of our wayes, what meane the bleatings of Plain [...] dealing, and Mr. Williams his Invectives against us, which yeeld a further supply to Mr. Bailies testimonies?

Moreover, if none of us have been willing to reply to the Books written against us, how come it to passe that Mr. Hooker hath written a large answer to Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Davenpor [...] to Mr. Paget, Mr. Mader to Mr. Rathbone, Mr. Shepard and Mr. Allen to Mr. Ball, Mr. Norton in Latine to Mr. Appollonii; my self to Mr. Williams, both to his examination of my Letter, and to his bloody Tenent? If any of these have miscarried by the way, or in England have met with a suppression for an impression, it cannot be said, that none of us have been willing to reply to the Books written against us, nor that wee have been wanting in endeavours, according as the Lord hath vouchsafed us meanes and opportunitie.

If still there be other Books written against us, unto which no Reply is yet made, it may be considered, our labourers (in that kind) are few, our hands feeble, our times took up with the duties of our calling, helpes to ease us are wanting, Domesticall Questions are not wanting, and many times Books are extant against us some yeers before they come to our hands. And yet let not Mr. Baily take our silence for a consent to what is written against us: or for a signe of our feare to lay open the true state of our cause, or the nakednesse of our way, (as it seemeth to him:) but let him consider, that if many Books be written by severall hands, of severall subjects against any of us, hee whom it concer­neth, cannot Reply to them all at once, but to one after ano­ther, as the Lord giveth help and opportunity.

SECT. 16. Of the first absurdity said to be found in our way of Independency.

Answ. 1. If all this were true, yet it is no greater an absurdity then that wherein those whom hee calleth Brownists, have not onely stumbled upon, but professedly walked in: yea it may be, denying Church Communion to as many Churches as wee doe to persons in this Countrey. And this Mr. Baylie hath taxed them for, above in pag. 27. of his Book, though here hee forget it.

Answ. 2. It is not true, that wee hold out any at all, En­glish or Indian, out of our Christian Congregations. All without exception are allowed to be present, at our publick Prayers and Psalmes, at our reading of the Scriptures, and the preaching and expounding of the same, and also at the admitting of Members, and dispensing of seales and censures.

Answ. 3. It is not truly spoken, that wee hold out of all our Churches many thousands of People, who in former times have been reputed in Old England very good Christians, and whom our selves dare not deny to be truely religious.

I dare be bold to speak it, wee hold not out any one such: but if any such be held out, we hold not off from them, but they from us: yea we seriously invite them (publickly and privately) to joyne with us: unlesse such religious persons lye under some scandall of corrupt life, or Doctrin.

How then will Mr. Baylie make good (that which he truely cal­leth) his broad assertion? yes, he undertaketh to make it good by three testimonies.

1. Saith hee, wee have heard sundry to esteeme the number of the English in that Plantation to exceed 40000. men and women. But when Mr. Cotton is put to it, he dareth hardly a­vow the one half of these to be Members of any Church.

And to prove this, he quoteth (in P.) the answer to the 23. que­stions, page. 7.

Whereto the Reply is ready, 1. Mr. Baylie is mistaken, if hee think the answer to the 32. questions was penned by me. Those questions were sent by some Ministers in Lancashire or Cheshire to one of their Country-men, (a reverend Brother, and fellow-Elder amongst us) Mr. Mader: who to satisfie their desires returned them that answer, which (it seemeth) hath since been printed. Which I speak not, because I wave the answer, for when he wrote it, he wrote advisedly, and as his whole ans [...]er is solid, and judi­cious; so is his answer, to the question put to him, pertinent and full: but to Mr. Baylies Assertion, it cometh nothing neer it. But Mr. Baylie should have done well, to have taken his full answer to that question.

This testimony will will not reach (nothing neere) Mr. Baylies assertion, That wee hold out of all Churches many thousands of people, who were well reputed of in Old England, for very good Christians, and such as our selves dare not deny to bee truely religious.

2. His second testimony is from Mr. Lechford, who styleth his Book against the Country, Plain dealing. And what saith he? In his page 73. Here are (saith he) such confessions, and professions required both of men, and women, both in private and pub­lick, before they be admitted, that three parts of the people of the Countrey remain out of the Church, so that in short time, most of the people will remain unbaptized.

Answ. The Book is unfitly called plaine dealing, which (in re­spect of many passages in it) might rather be called false and frau­dulent. I forbear to speak of the man himself, because soon after the publishing of that Book, himself was called away out of the world to give account of his Book and whole life before the highest Judge. He was indeed himself not received into the Fel­lowship of the Church, for his professed Errors: as 1 That the Antichrist described in the Revelation was not yet come, nor any part of that Prophesie yet fulfilled from the 4. chapter to the end. 2. That the Apostolick function was not yet ceased: but that there still ought to be such, who should by their transcendent authority govern al Churches. To reclaim him from these Errors, he was seriously dealt withall both in conference, and (according to his desire) in writing. But when hee saw, he could not defend the latter. Error, but by building again the Bishops, against whom he had witnessed (as he said) in soliciting the cause of Mr. Prynne, he rather then he would revoke his present tenent, acknowledged he was then in an Error, when he took part with Mr. Prynne, & Mr. Burton, & therefore he would now return to England again, to re­duce those famous witnesses from the Error of their way. And ac­cordingly, away he went: but see the wise hand of God disap­pointing his ends; When he came to England the Bishops were falling, so that he lost his friends, and hopes both in Old-England and New: yet put out his Book (such as it is) and soon after dyed. By the way, let no man think, he was kept out of our Churches, for maintaining the authority of Bishops. For we have in our Churches some well respected Brethren, who doe indifferently allow either Episcopall, or Pre [...]byteriall, or Congregationall [Page 72] Government, so be it they governe according to the rules of the Gospel. Neither do we disturbe such, nor they us in our com­munion with them. But to returne to Mr. Lechfords plain dealing: that which he testifieth, neither is it true; neither if it were, do­eth it reach Mr. Baylies assertion.

It is not true, that three parts of the Countrey remaine out of the Church, if he meane three parts of foure, no though hee should take in those remote English, who live a score of miles or more from any Church.

But were his speech more true then it is, yet it will not make good Mr. Baylies assertion, unlesse those three parts of the Coun­trey, which (he saith) remaine out of the Church, were re­puted in old England for very good Christians, nor durst our selves deny them to be truely religious, to which this testimo­ny alledged giveth no evidence at all.

Mr. Baylies third testimony is from Mr. Williams, whom hee calleth one of us, who maketh such Protestants to be Heathens and publicans, who depart from the Beast in a false constitu­tion of Nationall Churches, if the bodies of Protestant Na­tions remaine in an unregenerate estate.

Answ. I know not, why Mr. Baylie should call Mr. Williams one of us, who renounceth our Churches, and is himself cast out both of Church-fellowship, and civill cohabitation with us.

His testimony, which Mr. Baylie quoteth out of him, of the estate of all such Protestants, as live in a Nationall Church estate, as if Christ did account them Heathens and Publicans.

I say no more to it but this, they may be so account [...]d by Mr. Williams, but wee doe not beleeve they are so accounted of by Christ, but many thousands of them to be pretious Saints in the eyes of the Lord Jesus.

To these testimonies, Mr. Baylie interserteth his own testimo­ny and others of his judgement, It seemeth to us (saith he) a grievous absurdity, a great dishonor to God, and cruelty against men to spoyle so many thousand Christians, whom wee dare not deny to be truely Religious, of all the Priviledges of the Church, &c.

Answ. 1. It is not enough, that wee dare not deny men to bee truely Religions: but it were meet we should know them, at least, conceive good hope, they are truely Religiou [...], (at least in the judgement of charity) before wee receive them into the Church. [Page 73] And of such there are not many thousands, no nor many scores, no nor any scores, whom wee dare spoile of Church priviledges, unlesse their own offence, or choice spoyle them.

Secondly, if men be not Religious, no not so much as in pro­fession, why should it be accounted a grievous absurdity, not to receive them into the Church? A thing is absurd, which is [...] out of place. Are men who are not spirituall, out of their place, when they are not placed in a spirituall society? If the Churches be (as Christ describeth them) golden Candlesticks ( Revel. 1.20.) is Tinne and Lead out of place, when it is not sodered into a Golden vessell? Sure God himselfe thought otherwise, Isay 1.25. But is it not rather a grievous absurditie, and farre out of place, when such are admitted to the Lords Table, who either discerne not the Lords Body, or if they be admitted to drink his Blood, will be ready when they are got into the Field to spill the inno­cent blood of those Roundheads, whom they lately partaked withall at the Lords Table?

And as for the great dishonour to God, (which Mr. Baylie im­puteth to this way of ours) Is it a dishonour to God, that such are withheld from the Lords Table, by whom the name of God is dishonoured either through their ignorance or scandall?

Is it not rather a great dishonour to God, to set up Christ a visi­ble head of such members, by whom his name is evill spoken of? And what cruelty is it against men, to keep such from eating and drinking the Lords Supper, who would eate and drink it un­worthily, and so eate and drinke their own damnation? 1 Cor. 11.29. The Lord himselfe thought it no cruelty to debarre our first parents from the Tree of life, who if they had found free libertie to eate it, would have blessed themselves in a false hope of living for ever? Gen. 3.22, 23.

SECT. 17. Of the second shamefull absurditie said to be found in our way of Independency.

Come we now to a second shamefull absurditie, which he ma­keth to be another fruit of our Church-way.

That it hath exceedingly hindred the conversion of the poor Pagans. The principles and practise of Independents doth crosse this work and hope of it. What have they to do with those that are without? Their Pastors preach not for [Page 74] conversion: their Relation is to their flock, who are Church-members, converted already to their hand by the labours of other men, before they can be admitted into their Church. Of all that ever crossed the American Seas, they are noted as most neglectfull of the work of Conversion. I have read of none of them, that seeme to have minded this matter.

Answ. This is indeed a shamefull absurditie, if it be true: but a sinfull and shamefull calumny, if it be false. As indeed false it is in every branch of it. First, there is no principle or allowed pra­ctise of ours that doth hinder (much lesse exceedingly hinder) the work or hope of the conversion of the Natives: though wee professe we have nothing to do to censure Indians, and so to judge them that are without; yet wee think it a principall (though not the only) work and duty of our Ministry to attend the work of conversion, both of carnall English, and other Nations, whether Christian, or Pagan. The neglect of it, we look at as an ungratious and uncharitable fancy. How shall men (ordinarily) be conver­ted to the faith without hearing? and how shall they heare with­out preaching? and how shall they preach, unlesse they be sent? and who are now sent, but Pastors and Teachers?

"But the Relation of our Pastors is to their Flock? What then? May there not fall out to be Hypocrites in our Flock? and must wee not preach for their conversion? And are not the children of the Members of our Church, many of them such, as when they grow up stand in need of converting grace? and must wee not preach for their conversion? Besides, when an In­fidell or unbeleever commeth into the Church, doe not all the Prophets that preach the Word, (and among them, surely the Pastors and Teachers are not the least) do they not all apply their speech to his conviction and conversion? 1 Cor. 14.24, 25. What though a Pastour bee a Feeder to his Flock already begot­ten unto God? Yet he may (and ought to endeavour to) become a Father also in Christ, to such as are yet unregenerate, wheth [...]r of his Flock, or out of his Flock. To turne many to righte­ousnesse is prophesied of, to bee the work of the [...] of the New Testament, Dan. 12.3. [...] But our Church-members are converted already to our hands by the labours of other men, before they can be admitted into our Church.

So saith Mr. Baylie indeed: but if hee were here, hee would so [...]n heare many of those who are admitted into our Churches, [Page 75] openly acknowledge, the first work of saving grace to have been wrought in their hearts by the ministery of the Word here, and sometime by the same, or like ministery in our Native Countrey. And the children of the faithfull borne, and baptized in our Churches, will acknowledge no other Ministery, by whom they have beleeved, but that which they have attended upon, here.

But (saith Mr. Baylie) I have read of none of them that seeme to have minded the matter of conversion.

Answ. 1. What if he have not read, what we preach here of conversion? Doth hee thinke it meet, wee should print all the Sermons wee preach? What if any of us should say, I have not read of any Scottish Minister who have published any of their la­bours in that argument, (save Mr. Rollock, and him in Latine, and that haply in the Schooles, and many have not seene him neither:) shall we therefore thinke it credible, that so many ho­ly faithfull labourers in Christs Vineyard in that whole Nation, doe not seeme to minde the matter of conversion?

But whether he have read of any of our books of that Subject, or no, surely it is not, because none of such are extant to bee read. He may read when he pleaseth Mr. Shepards two Treatises, one stiled The sincere Convert, the other The sound Beleever, besides fundry Treatises of Mr. Hooker touching the Soules Prepa­ration to Christ, Effectuall Calling, and Justification, &c. and when he hath read them, let him then tell the world, whether of all that have crossed the American Seas (as hee speaketh) the Mi­nisters of this way have been justly noted to be most neglectfull of the work of conversion. Yea let me make bold in Gods feare to pray Mr. Baylie, and those others, who have noted us as most neglectfull of this work, to enquire and consider whether among all the servants of Christ now living in any reformed Churches (put them all together) they have published so many Treatises of the work of conversion, as the Ministers of this way have done, in New-England, and London, which I speak not (the Lord is witnesse to my soule) out of carnall Arrogancy to boast of our labours, in so holy and weighty an Argument: but out of con­science to beare witnesse to the way of Gods truth against such an unjust & unworthy scandall. But when I speak of these Treatises of Conversion, I do not include all that are written under the glorious and fallacious stiles of Free Grace, and Gospel-Truth, which neverthelesse doe but indeed lay the Leaven of Arminian-universall-free [Page 76] Grace, and Antinomian Impenitency: but I speak of those Treatises which are pure from such Leaven, as keeping the patterne of wholesome words and sound doctrin, di­viding the Word of truth aright, in the right use of the Law and Gospel, wherein though they sometime declare such works of Grace to be preparations to conversion, which others do take to be fruits of conversion: yet they all agree in this, that such works are found in all that are under the powerfull and effectuall sa­ving work of the Spirit, and Word of Christ, and in none else, which is the light and life of the Saints in Christ Jesus.

I will not here speak of the conversion of Weaquash, which (as I heare) is published in a little Script, intituled, New-Englands First-fruits. Nor would I have mentioned the endeavours of some of our fellow-Brethren here, to helpe forward the work of conversion in Virginia, were it not that the blessing of the Lord Jesus upon their labours doth call for acknowledgment. Some honest minded people in Virginia discerning their want of spirituall Ministery, sent earnest Letters, and one or more mes­sengers, to the Elders of these Churches here for some of our Mi­nisters to break the Bread of Life to them. The Elders here see­king Counsell of God, and one of another, wee borrowed two of the Pastors of our Churches, (Mr. Knolles of Watertowne, and Mr. Thomson of Braintree, the Churches being either of them supplyed with two Ministers apeece) and sent them forth so­lemnely in the Name of the Lord to that work; who as they went along took with them one Mr. James, a Minister (though then out of employment) from New-Haven, to the fellowship of that work. And for their better incouragement, our Gover­nour here wrote a Letter to the Governour of Virginia to ac­quaint him, and his Assistants, with the occasion and end of their comming, and expressed withall his desire of their Chri­stian entertainment for a time, and peaceable returne, if they found any inconvenience by their comming. What entertaine­ment they found from the major part of the Government there, I forbeare to speak. The bloody Massacre, which soon after their dismission, the Indians in those parts executed upon the English, cried aloud from heaven, that after a white Horse, God is wont to send forth a red, Rev. 6.2, 3, 4. But neverthelesse, God so farre forth followed their labours with his blessing in the work of conversion, that sundry of them were effectually [Page 77] wrought upon by the power of the Lord Jesus; whereof some of them came along with our Ministers at their returne, and are received into our Churches: others of them who could not so well dispose of their affaires there, joyned with one Mr. Harri­son a Minister there, (who was also mightily stirred up by our Ministers comming:) and they with him have since given up themselves to more holy communion and conversation before the Lord.

Others of the Westerne Islands (as Barbadas, Antegua, Mevis) have desired the like helpe from us: but the departure of some of our Ministers since, (one to Heaven, others to England) have hi­therto detained us from opportunity to afford unto them the like succour for the present.

I will not speak, what opportunity of reaching forth a bles­sing to the Indians in this kind, God hath lately begun to open us a door of: in that divers of their Sachims, and Sagamores (as they call them, to wit, their Governors) have submitted them­selves to the government of the English, and have willingly sub­jected themselves to the acceptance of the Ten Commandements, though some of them, doe most stick at the seventh Comman­dement, as it forbiddeth Polygamy. Neverthelesse otherwise they willingly consent to abandon Adultery and Fornication, and unnaturall lusts.

But though the Indians have been slow to learne our language, especially in matters of Religion (howsoever in Trading they soon understood us:) yet wee have often offered to bring up their Indian children in our Schooles, that they might learne to speake to their Countreymen in their own language. But be­cause that might prove long, one of our Elders (Mr. Eliot, the Teacher of the Church of Rocksbury) hath (with the consent of the Natives) preached to them first by an Interpreter, but since having with much industry learned their language, hee now preacheth to two Congregations of them in their own language weekly. One week on the fourth day to one Congregation, who sit down neer to Dorchester Mill, and another week, on the sixth day, to another Congregation of them, who sit down in Cam­bridge, neer Watertown Mill. To ease and encourage him in his work, the Ministers of neighbour Churches take off by turnes his weekly Lecture on the third day. The fruit hitherto hath been, the Indians resort more and more to these Assemblies, [Page 78] heare with reverence and attention, reforme (and make Lawes amongst themselves, for reformation of) sundry abuses, aske sun­dry questions for their instruction, and among the rest, an old Counsellor of one of their Sagamores enquired, if it might bee possible that our God, and our Christ should accept an old sinner such as himselfe? Mr. Eliot answered him, yes, there was hope, because hee never had the meanes of the knowledge of God offered to him before. And our Saviour Christ did sometimes call into his Vineyard some to doe him service, even in the last houre of the day, in the last part of their lives. And the old Indian being demanded if hee understood this? Hee an­swered, yea, saith he, I understand it, and beleeve it.

It is true, there may be doubt that for a time there will bee no great hope of any Nationall conversion, till Antichrist be ruined, and the Jewes converted; because the Church (or Temple) of God, is said to bee filled with smoak, till the seven plagues (which are to be poured upon the Antichristian state) be fulfilled: And till then, no man (that is, no considerable number of men out of the Church, as Pagans be) shall be able to enter into the Church, Rev. 15.8. yet neverthelesse, that hindreth not, but that some sprinklings, & gleanings of them may be brought home to Christ, as now and then some Proselytes were brought into the fellow­ship of the Church of Israel, when there was a greater partiti­on wall set up between Jewes and Gentiles, then now there is between Christians and Pagans. And the Lord shine upon them in mercy, in blessing the meanes of his Grace to them in the Lord Jesus.

The proof that none of us seeme to have minded the work of conversion, Mr. Baylie alledgeth out of the Book intituled Plain dealing, which saith, There hath not been sent forth any, by a­ny Church, to learn the Natives-Language, or to instruct them in our Religion first, because they say they have not to do with them being without, except they come to hear and learne En­glish.

An. 1. What if there have not bin any sent forth by any Church to learn the Indians language? That will not argue our neglect of minding the work of their conversion. For there be of the In­dians that live amongst us, and dayly resort to us; and some of them learne our language; and some of us learn theirs. And men that love the Lord Jesus doe gladly take opportunity to instruct [Page 79] them in our Religion, and to teach them both Law and Gospell. And of late, the Word (as I have said) is publickly preached unto them in two severall Indian Congregations, though wee never thought it fit to send any of our English to live amongst them, to learn their language: for who should teach them?

Answ. 2. When the Authors of Plain Dealing saith, We have not instructed them in our Religion, upon this pretence, be­cause wee say, we have not to doe with them being without, ex­cept they come to hear and learn English.

I know not whether ever any gave him so weake an account or no: If any so did, it was his rashnesse, or ignorance both of us, and the truth. But if the Author speake it, as a Point of our Pro­fession or practise, that we doe neglect the instruction of the Indi­ans, and especially upon such a reasonlesse reason, I will say no more to it but this, it seemeth there are two sorts of Plain dealing: Plain honest dealing, and Plain false dealing, of which latter sort, this speach is.

But Mr. Baylie acknowledgeth Mr. Williams his endeavours in this kind, but doth thereby the more aggravate our corrupt prin­ciples and practise, who have neglected so great an opportunity as to prosecute his course. Onely Mr. Williams (saith hee) did as­say,

Answ. 1. If Mr. Williams his speech of the wonderfull great facility hee had of gaining so farre upon the Indians, be not too too prodigally hyperbolicall (as I much fear it is) I thinke his sinne is so much the greater before the Lord, that he did neglect to take the opportunitie of preaching to them the Word of the Lord, that they might have been brought on, not onely to an Antichristian conversion (such as hee maketh the conversion of the common sort of Christians in Protestant Churches:) but to a sincere conversion unto Christ Jesus. But I confesse with Mr. [Page 80] Baylie, his own corrupt Principles, (his own I say, not ours) it seemeth have detained him from putting forth his hand to the Lords Plough in so large a Field. For if hee look (as it seemeth) for new Apostles to be sent immediately from Christ for such a work: or if hee think, no Church is, or will be extant upon the face of the earth, till Antichrist bee abolished out of the world, these and such like principles are enough, not onely to retard him from the planting of Churches amongst Indians, but also to further him in supplanting all the Churches of Christ in Chri­stendome.

Answ. 2. I said not without cause, that I feared Mr. Williams his testimony of the facility of such a conversion of the Indians was too hyperbolicall. For I received advertisement from Mr. James (one of the Ministers, who went to Virginia upon the Lords worke, of which I spake before) that whilst he was detai­ned (by winds) in Mary-land (a Popish Plantation between us and Virginia) he saw, as I remember, (for his Letter is not pre­sent at hand with me) 40. Indians baptized in new Shirts, which the Catholicks had given them for their incouragement unto Baptisme. But he tarried there so long for a faire winde, that before his departure, he saw the Indians (when their shirts were foule, and they knew not how to wash them) come againe to make a new motion, either the Catholick English there must give them new Shirts, or else they would renounce their Bap­tisme. I doubt, the Indians about Mr. Williams are not of a much better spirit. I might mention a fairer instance in these parts, yet such as may argue what kind of facility there is in the Indians to conversion, so much as to outward profession. At our first comming hither, John Sagamore was the chiefest Sachim in these parts. He falling sick, our Pastor Mr. Wilson hearing of it (and being of some acquaintance with him) went to visit him, taking one of the Deacons of our Church with him, and withall, a little Mithridate, and strong water. When he came to his lodg­ing (which they call a Wigwam) hearing a noyse within, hee looked over the Mat of the door to discerne what it meant, and saw many Indians gathered together, and some Powwaws a­mongst them, who are their Priests, Physitians, and Witches. They by course spake earnestly to the sick Sagamore, and to his disease, (in a way of charming of it and him) and one to ano­ther in a kind of Antiphonies. When they had done, all kept [Page 81] silence, our Pastour went in with the Deacon, and found the man farre spent, his eyes set in his head, hee speech leaving him, his mother (old Squaw-Sachim) sitting weeping at his beds head, Well (saith our Pastour) our God save Sagamore John, Powwaw Cram (that is, kill) Sagamore John: And thereupon hee fell to prayer with his Deacon, and after Prayer, forced into the sick mans mouth with a Spoon, a little Mithridate dissolved in the strong water; soon after the Sagamore looked up, and three dayes after went abroad on hunting. This providence so farre prevailed with the Sagamore, that he promised to look after the English mans God, to heare their Sermons, to weare English ap­parell, &c. But his neighbour Indians Sagamores, and Powwaws hearing of this, threatned to Cram him (that is, to kill him) if he did so degenerate from his Countrey Gods, and Religion, he thereupon fell off, and took up his Indian course of life again. Whatsoever facility may seeme to offer it selfe of the conversion of the Indians, it is not so easie a matter for them to hold out, no not in a semblance of profession of the true Religion. After­wards God struck John Sagamore againe, (and as I remember with the small Pox:) but then when they desired like succour from our Pastour, as before, he told them, now the Lord was angry with Sagamore John, and it was doubtfull, hee would not so easily be intreated. The Sagamore blamed himself and justified God, and confessed, he should not have been discouraged by their threats from seeking our God: For those Sagamores and Pow­waws who did most terrifie him, hee had seene God sweeping them away by death, before himself, in a short time after. And therefore when hee saw hee must die (for hee died of that sick­nesse) hee left his sonne to the education of our Pastor, that he might keep closer to the English, and to their God, then him­self had done. But his sonne also dyed of the same disease soon after. All which I relate, to shew, that though a forme of Chri­stian Religion may be professed amongst Christians with some facility: yet it is not so easie a matter to gaine these Pagan Indi­ans so much as to a forme of our Religion, and to hold it, how­soever Mr. Williams did promise himself greater possibilities.

Answ. 3. Mr. Baylie shall do well to consider, that Mr. Wil­liams his speech doth not so much hold forth the facility of the Indians to any such conversion, as might fit them for Church-estate, but rather the Hypocrisie and Formalitie of the ordinary [Page 82] Church-Members of Nationall Churches; which he professeth is so far off from true conversion, that it is the subversion of the soules of many Millions in Christendome, from one false worship to another.

Answ. 4. It is no unhappinesse of any principle of ours, that hath kept Mr. Williams from making use of his great opportu­nity, and open door, to propagate the Gospell amongst the Indians. For though their facility to such a carnall conversion, as hee describeth, gave him no just warrant, to gather them into a Church-estate: yet it was a just encouragement to provoke him (who understood their Language) to have preached the Word of God unto them, which might have been mighty through God (if sincerely dispensed) to have turned them from darknesse to light, from the power of Satan unto God, and so have prepared them, both for Church-fellowship here, and for heaven hereafter.

But if Mr. Baylie conceive that either Mr. Williams, or else wee were to be blamed, because we doe not presently receive Indians into the Fellowship of our Churches, seeing their facility to con­form their outward man to us, and to so much of our re­ligion, as Mr. Williams mentioneth: hee shall doe well to consider before hand, whether Jacobs children did wel, to perswade the Si­chemites, (Gen. 34.) to receive circumcision, before they better un­derstood the Covenant of Abraham, (to which circumcision was a Seale) and had made some better profession of taking hold of it.

SECT. 18. Of the third shamefull absurdity said to bee found in our way of Independency.

Come wee now to consider of the third shamefull Absurdity, which Mr. Baylie maketh the fruit of our Independency, break­ing forth in the practises and profession of the most, who have been admitted as very fit, if not the fittest Members of our Churches.

And these evill fruits hee brancheth out into five sorts:

Answ. 1. Suppose all this to bee true: yet this is so far from discrediting the way of Independency, or arguing the Tree to be bad by these bad fruits, that it doth rather justifie the way to be of God, which so easily hath either healed, or removed, so many, so vile, so generall, so subtle, so headstrong corruptions, and them that maintained them. Non seclus, non scelerum varietas aut atr [...]citas, is dedecus Politiae, sed scelerum impunitas. The Church of Ephesus was not blamed by Christ, because false Apostles and Nicolaitans were found amongst them: but commended, because she could not beare them, Rev. 2.2.6. Nor is Thyatira blamed, that Jezabell was found amongst them, but that they suffered her, Rev. 2.20. What if so many, so hideous vile Errors were found in our Chur­ches? What if the number of erring persons were (as he speak­eth) incredible? Multitudes of men and women every where infected? almost no Society, nor Family in the Land free from the pest? Boston (which he is pleased to style, the best and most famous of our Churches) so far corrupted, that few were untainted? What if they accounted the late Governour their true friend, and thought no lesse of Mr. Cotton, and Mr. Whele­wright whom they adored? What if they had drawn to their sides not onely multitudes of the people, but the ablest men for parts, in all Trades, especially the Souldiers? What if all these evills were carryed forth with presumptuous contumacy against godly Magistrates, and the Orthodox Ministers? yea, what if to all the rest, they added obstinacy against al whol­some meanes of redresse and remedy?

Is it not therefore the more evident Demonstration of the gra­tious presence, and mighty power of God, in the Discipline of our Churches, that did so effectually, so speedily, so safely, so easily, purge out all this Leaven, either out of the hearts of the people, out of their Families, and Churches, or else out of the Country?

Whence the argument seemeth to mee to arise unavoidably.

Those evills, which Independency doth either heal, or remove, they are not the fruits of Independency.

But all these grievous and dangerous evils, Independency did ei­ther heal or remove.

Therefore these grievous and dangerous evills were not the fruits of Independency.

Again, That government, which by the blessing of Christ, doth safely, speedily, and effectually purge out such grievous and dan­gerous evills, as threaten the ruine of Church and State, that go­vernment is safely allowed, and justly and wisely established in any civill State.

But Independency by the blessing of Christ doth speedily, safe­ly, and effectually purge out such grievous and dangerous evills, as threaten the ruine of Church and State: therefore Independen­cy is safely allowed, and justly, and wisely established in any civill State.

Ob. 1. But this purging and healing of these grievous and danger­ous evills was not the fruit of their Independent-Church-Go­vernment, but of their civill Government. We have oft marvel­led, that the Eldership of Boston did never so much, as call Ms. Hutchinson before them, to be rebuked for any of her errors, though their generall Assembly had confuted them, and con­demned them: yet still shee was permitted to goe on, till the zeal of the new Governour, and the generall Court did con­demne her to perpetuall banishment. Then, and not till then, so far as wee can perceive by the story, did the Church of Bo­ston bring a processe against her. And when the processe was brought to an end, Mr. Cotton would by no meanes put it in execution; that burden was layed upon the back of Mr. Wilson his Colleague, how ever not the fittest Instrument, being the person to whom Ms. Huthinson had professed greatest opposi­tion. And when the sentence was pronounced against her, they tell us, that the great cause of it was none of her Errors or Heresies, but her other practises, specially her grosse lying.

Answ. 1. What ever assistance the civill Government gave to the purging and healing of these evils, it was the fruit of Independent Church Government. For whether the Neighbour Churches suspected our Church of Boston might bee partiall, and indul­gent to these erroneous persons: or whether they saw, we wan­ted sufficient witnesses upon which wee might proceed against them in a Church way, they took a right course (according to the principles of the Independent Government) to gather into a Synod with the consent of the civill Magistrates: and in the Sy­nod [Page 85] to agitate, convince and condemne the Errors, and the of­fensive carriages then stirring. Whereat the Magistrates being present, they saw just cause to proceed against the chief of those whom they conceived to have bred any civill disturbance: and the Churches saw cause to proceede against their Members, whom they found to bee broachers or maintainers of such here­sies.

Answ. 2. It hath been declared above, why the Eldership of Boston did not call Ms. Hutchinson before them to rebuke her for her Errors, or to restraine her from going on, though the generall Assembly had confuted and condemned her Er­rors and course.

For though the Errors were condemned, (and by the Elders of Boston, as well as others:) yet the errors were not fastened perso­nally upon her: nor had we any two witnesses, that would af­firm it to us, that shee did broach or maintain such errors or here­sies, till after her sentence unto banishment by the generall Court; And then indeed, as she was more bold and open in declaring her judgment before many witnesses: so the Elders of the Church of Boston called her to account before the Church, and convinced her of her Errors, and with the consent of the Church, layed her, and one or two more of her abet [...]ors under the censure of an admo­nition even for those corrupt opinions, which were charged upon her, and proved against her.

Ob. 1. Yea but Mr. Cotton would by no means put the cen­sure in execution upon her, that burden must be layed upon the back of Mr. Wilson, &c.

Answ. The censure of admonition, because it was for matter of Erroneous doctrine, it was thought meet to bee dispensed and administred by Mr. Cotton, who was their Teacher: which also (by the the help of Christ) hee did performe, setting be­fore her both the corrupt causes of her errors, and the bitter fruits of them: and charging her solemnly before the Lord, and his Angells, and Churches then assembled, to return from the Error of her way.

Afterwards, when upon further serious debate and conference with her by Mr. Davenport, and my selfe, she was convinced of all her errors in particular, shee being called againe before the Church, did openly recant every errour and heresie, and pro­fessed her repentance for every miscarriage against Magistrates [Page 86] and Elders: which farre exceeded the expectation of the whole Congregation, which then consisted of many Churches, and strangers. But when shee had done, she added withall, That she had never been of other judgement, howsoever her expressi­ons might seem to vary. This sounded so harshly, and falsly in the eares of many witnesses, that many rose up to convince her of her falshood and lying, in so saying. Which when shee did not hearken to, shee was esteemed, by the judgement of the Elders, and our whole Church, to be justly subject to excommu­nication. Which though I did not think meet to bee dispensed by my self (because the offence was not in matter of Doctrin, but of practise, which more properly belonged to the Pastours Office, or ruling Elders:) yet I declared to the whole Congre­gation the righteousnesse of the censure, and satisfyed the Scru­ples of some Brethren, who doubted of it. But yet if the Church, or other Elders had put that taske upon me, I should no more have refused the dispensing of the censure of excommunication upon her, then I did before of admonition. Neither was her opposition against Mr. Wilson any just reason of exempting him from that duty. For shee saw, wee all with one accord, concur­red in that sentence: it was no partiall act of his, but the com­mon vote both of the Presbytery, and Fraternity. And what if she had professed her opposition against us all? had that been a just excuse to exempt any of us from performing a service due to God, and the Church, yea and to herself also?

Object. 2. But when the sentence was propounded against her, they tell us, the great cause of it was none of her Er­rours, and Heresies, but for other practises, especially her grosse lying.

Answ. Wee could not justly pronounce the cause of her sen­tence to be her errors and heresies, which she had openly recan­ted, and given her recantation under her handwriting. Neither did any of us say, That such Heresies did not deserve the censure of excommunication, if she had continued obstinate in them: but wee thought it needfull to follow the rule of the Apostle, not to reject an Heretick till after once or twice admonition, Tit. 3.10. under which if the Heretick relent, the Church proceeding stayeth, unlesse some other offence set it forward, as it did in her case.

SECT. 19. Tending to rectifie some mistakes of Mr. Bay­lie in relating the former absurdities.

But before I leave this close of Mr. Baylies third Chapter, touching the evill fruits of Independency, let mee advertise him of some few further mistakes in his Narration of the same.

First, when he reckoneth in the front of vile errours, the in­habitation of the person of the Spirit in all the godly, let him weigh what hath been said above, touching that point. And if hee cleare it to be an errour, I willingly shall acknowledge, hee shall teach me that, which I yet know not. I professe my self willing to learn of a meaner man, then Mr. Baylie.

Secondly, when he maketh the number of the erring per­sons incredible, almost no society, no family free from that pest, Boston it self so farre infected, that few there were untainted: let him be pleased to consider, whether his testimony will make it good. His testimonies (recited in his Markes F F. G G.) speak to the utmost of truth, but not so much as he avoucheth. The short Story in Preface, pag. 7. saith indeed, They had some of all sorts and qualities in all places to patronize and defend them: and almost in every family some were ready to defend them as the Apple of their own eye.

But this will not make it good, that almost in every family some were infected with the pest of their errours. It is one thing to speak in the defence of erroneous persons, another to speak in defence of errours. Multitudes there were, that thought well of the persons, who knew nothing of their errours, but heard onely of their unbottoming sandy foundations of a spirituall estate, which hath been mentioned above, Chap. 3.

Which may also truely be said even of Boston likewise. The body of the Church, the greatest part of them were like those members of the Church in Thyatira, of whom it is said ( Rev. 2.24.) They knew not the depths of Satan. The truth whereof may evidently appeare by this, That when those errors of Mistris Hutchinson were publickly charged upon her before the Church, and proved by sufficient witnesses, the whole body of the Church, and all the Brethren with one accord (save onely her sonne) con­sented [Page 88] readily to her censure: which they would not have done,

Adoration is too vast an Hyperbole to be made good by just testimonies. All hyperbolicall praises, though they may farre exceed the bounds of truth in comparisons of men with men; yet they will not reach adoration, which is divine worship. Nei­ther will it bee made good, That they magnified either Mr. Whelewright, or me, for the defence of their errors. Yea they soon forsooke Mr. Whelewright (as well as he them) when they saw his judgement (as well as mine) against Antinomianisme, and Familisme.

Fourthly, when he saith, Mistris Hutchinson, and the late Governour, kept almost every day, so private and long dis­course with Mr. Cotton, that made them conclude all was their own.

I must needs professe, that cannot be made good by any wit­nesse of truth, Mistris Hutchinson seldome resorted to mee: and when she did, she did seldome or never enter into any private speech between the former Governour and my self. And when she did come to me, it was seldome or never (that I can tell of) that she tarried long. I rather think, she was loath to resort much to me, or, to conferre long with me, lest she might seeme to learne somewhat from me. And withall I know (by good proof) she was very carefull to prevent any jealousie in mee, that shee should harbour any private opinions, differing from the course of my publick Ministery. Which she could not well have avoyded, if she had kept almost every day so private and long discourse with me▪

But what Testimony, or proof doth Mr. Baylie alledge for this our private and long conference, almost every day? His marke [Y Y] referreth us to the short story, where it is said, They made full account the day had been theirs.

But did they make this account upon occasion of these our private, and long, and frequent conferences every day? not a syllable of proofe for this point. It is not righteous dealing, large charges, and narrow proofs.

Fourthly, that which Mr. Baylie further relateth from the [Page 89] testimony of Mr. Williams, is as farre from truth, as the former.

Mr. Williams (saith Mr. Baylie) told me, that he was employ­ed to buy from the Savages, for their late Governour, and Mr. Cotton, with their Followers, a portion of Land with­out the English Plantation whither they might retire and live according to their mind, exempt from the jurisdiction of all others, whether Civill or Ecclesiastick, Mr. Williams was in so great friendship with the late Governour, when he told me so much, that I beleeve he would have been loth to havespoken an untruth of him.

Answ. But this I dare be bold to say, if Mr. Williams told Mr. Baylie so much, that he was imployed by me to buy any Land from the Savages, for mee and my followers (as he calls them) he spake an untruth of me, whatsoever he did of the Governour. Yet because I would not speake nor thinke worse of Mr. of Wil­liams then necessitie constrayneth, I cannot say but that he might speak as he thought, and as he was told; for it may well bee, that such as abused the Governours name to him for such an end, might also more boldly abuse mine. But I must professe, I nei­ther wrote, nor spake, nor sent to Mr. Williams for any such er­rand. If ever I had removed, I intended Quinipyack, and not Aquethnick. And I can hardly beleeve the Governour would send to him for any such end, who I suppose never thought it likely, that himself should tarry longer in the Countrey, then he tarried in the Bay.

Fiftly, when Mr. Baylie objecteth the prophanenesse of these erroneous persons, and justifieth it by the testimonies of Mr. Weld and my self, And aggravateth the same by their profession of Piety (so farre, that they avow their standing loofe from all reformed Churches as uncleane, because of their mixture with the prophane Multitude.)

Let him be pleased to consider; First, what was said above, Non scelus, sed sceleris impunitas, is the guilt of a society, whether ci­vill or sacred.

Secondly, what Mr. Weld meant by fouler sinnes then pride, or lying, found in those persons, I cannot guesse: nor have I heard of them: unlesse hee meant the adultery of one, who upon his own confession was cast out of the Church for that crime.

As for the testimony of mine, which hee quoteth from some [Page 88] [...] [Page 89] [...] [Page 90] words in the vialls, wherein the sinnes of the people were repro­ved, let him not improve them further then they will bear. Such reproofs doe not alwayes argue sinnes of our Church members: or if they did, yet not, that those sinnes are openly known: or if openly known, yet not, that they were tolerated. And yet all these must concurre, or else the vices found amongst professors, will not argue the viciousnesse either of their doctrine or wor­ship, or Church Government.

Luther complaineth, in Postill. super Evangel. Dom. adventus, Sunt nunc homines magis vindictae cupidi, magis avari, magis ab omni misericordiâ remoti, magis immodesti, & indisciplinati, multoque de­teriores, quam fuerunt sub papatu. And Chrysostome, (in opere imper­fect. in Matth. Hom. 49.) speaketh of Christians as becomming like the Hereticks, or Pagans, or worse.

Yet I suppose he that should improve the words either of Chrysostome, to argue the discipline of Christians, worse then that of the Pagans: or of Luther, to argue the discipline of Protestants to be worse then that of Papists, he shall doubtlesse stretch their words upon the Rack, farre beyond the scope of their meaning. The words I spake, were in comparison between the godly Pro­fessors in England, and ours here, and at such a time, when Episcopall persecution made them draw the nearer to God, and to walke the more circumspectly before men. But Sheepe set at libertie from the feare of Wolves, will straggle further from their Shepheard, then when they resent danger.

Thirdly, it is too grosse and heavy an aggravation, which Mr. Baylie putteth upon us, if he meane it of us, That our pro­fession of pietie is so faire that wee stand aloose from all refor­med Churches as uncleane, because of their mixture with the prophane multitude.

For it is more then he can prove, or we doe professe. Though in the Bishops time, we did not forthwith receive all the mem­bers of the Church of England into the fellowship of our Chur­ches: yet (for ought I know) wee are not likely to stand aloose from Presbyteriall Churches faithfully administred, nor from the testimony which they shall give of their members, that may have occasion to Traffick hither. And the like doe I conceive of other reformed Churches in other Nations of Christendome. Presbyterian Churches faithfully administred, are not wont to admit a mixt prophane multitude to the Lords Table.

Sixtly, let me take off one instance more, which Mr. Baylie gi­veth of one abomination, which to him seemeth strange. That the Midwives to our most zealous women, should not onely have familiarity with the Devill, but also in that service com­mit devillish Malefices: which so farre as they tell us, were not onely past over without punishment, but never so much as en­quired after.

Answ. This accusation is indeed of some weight, because it is of a grievous, and devillish crime, and it tolerated. But how doth it appeare to him, that it was tolerated? not onely past over without punishment, but never so much as enquired after?

Why, saith he, so farre as they tell us. So farre as they tell us? is the silence of a short story of this or that fact, a good argu­ment, a non dici, ad non esse? yea it is a good argument on the contrary, that there was inquiry made after that Midwife, and diligent search into her, or else it would have been recorded, as some close conveyance of the erroneous party. The truth is, the woman, though she offered her self to the Elders of our Church, yet was not received, upon discovery of some unsound principles in her judgement. Being then no member, the Church had no power to deale with her. But when suspition grew of her fami­liarity with the Devill, especially upon that occasion, which the short story relateth, shee was convented before the Magistrates, and diligently examined about that, and other evills. But though no familiarity with the Devill could be proved against her; yet because of some other offences in dealing with young women, she was forbidden to stay in the Countrey.

SECT. 20. Tending to consider what better fruits might have been expected from Presbyterian discipline, for the removing of the like absurdities.

Having thus given account to Mr. Baylie of the inconsequence of all his discourse from the errors of this countrey, to argue the unsoundnesse of our Church-discipline, let me now intreat him to consider, what better fruits might have been expected in the like case from Presbyteriall Government. I demand, if Presby­terian Government had been estab [...]ished amongst us, should wee [Page 92] not then have received all these Hereticks, and erroneous persons, into our Church? Yes surely, for no member of the Common­wealth is excluded: well, therein our Congregationall disci­pline bringeth forth no worse fruit, then their Presbyterian.

I demand againe, if these persons should afterwards fall into error, or Heresie, which could not be proved by two witnesses, what course would Presbyterian government have taken? would it not have forborne processe, till sufficient testimony might bee brought to convince them? If suspicion of their unsound judge­ment had grown, would they not have examined them, and if they denied it, and no sufficient testimony could bee brought against them, would not the Presbyters have let them alone? Hitherto we did the same.

I demand further, if any Presbytery in a Church, were suspe­cted to be too remisse in proceeding against such Delinquents, would not the Presbytery of the neighbour Churches have taken the matter in hand, and so gathering into a Synod, first convin­ced such errors, and then condemned them, and the maintainers of them too, if they were found guiltie of them, and persistent in them? Thus farre also the Presbytery of our neighbour Chur­ches did proceed as to gather into a Synod, and both convinced and condemned the errors. And though they did not proceed to condemne or censure the maintainers of them; yet when they had gotten proof thereof, they proceeded in their own congre­gations to the censure of their own erroneous members (after all other meanes to recover them used in vaine:) And besides, they dealt with the Presbytery of our Church to doe the same. And wee hearing their complaints and their proofs, wee respectively hearkned to them, and proceeded to the like censure in our Church, as they had done in theirs; And in like sort travelled with our members for their conviction, as they had done with theirs, even so farre, that Mistris Hutchinson was brought to a recantation, though her prevarication of it brought her to a cen­sure, yea the utmost censure, and that with generall consent of our whole Church, and satisfaction of others. It seemeth then, that our Independency (as it is called) doth no more breed, nor nourish, nor tolerate errors, or Heresies, then Presbyterian di­scipline doth. And if there should a defect arise in any Church, there is the like remedy in the vigilancy of other Churches, and finally, obstinacy in all evills of notorious offence, whether in [Page 93] judgement or practise, meeteth at length with the same or like censure, in either government.

Let not therefore Mr. Baylie allow himself in saying as he doth (in the close of his third Chapter) That this new and singu­lar way, the Lord hath so manifestly cursed with more bad fruits, and greater store of them, then ever yet did appeare upon the tree of Brownisme. For though it becommeth not us to make comparisons of fruits with other Churches (unlesse themselves did provoke us to it:) nor doth it concern us to deale with them about any offence, unlesse we dwelt neer them, and knew their estate:) yet this is enough to us, to cleare us unto Mr. Baylie, and to the world, against all his exceptions, That (through the mercy of Christ) no evill fruit at all hath sprung from our Church Government. What offence soever, in judgement or pra­ctise, hath been suspected or found among us, it hath not sprung from the government, but from personall defects, either among the Brethren or Elders. And what hath been suspected, or found in either of them, hath either been cleared, or healed, or removed by the government. Blessed bee the name of the Lord Jesus, whose throne is in Zion and his furnace in Jerusalem, who delight­eth to blesse his own ordinances with power and peace.

SECTION I.

MR. Baylie speaketh of our Congregationall, and (as hee calleth it) our Independent way, as not having continued a week of yeers (that is, not 7. yeers) when the errors brake forth in New-England, Pag. 59. Sometimes hee maketh us the same in realitie with the Brownists (Pag. 58) to whom he attributeth about 50. yeers continuance, Pag. 59. sometimes he maketh us followers of Mr. Robinson, who stept in to support (as hee speaketh) languishing Brownisme, when it was [...]eady to fall, Pag. 17. and 54. All which expressions tend to make the world beleeve, that our Congregationall way, or (as he calleth it) Independent, is but of yesterday, newly sprung up, unknown and unheard of in the former Ages of the Church; which if it, were true, were no [Page 94] small prejudice to the way wee walke in. The way of God is the old way, Jer. 6.16. yea so old, as fetcheth his antiquity from the antient of dayes, and from the Lord Jesus, who is the way of Truth and of Life. Id verum, quod primum: id primum quod ab initio. There is no false way, but is an aberration from the first institution.

Give me therefore leave to professe freely without offence, what I truely beleeve without scruple, that though the Acts of Church-government (in the ordination of officers, and censure of offen­ders) by the Presbyters of neighbour Churches, be very antient: yet not more antient then Huma [...]us Episcopatus (as Beza calleth it:) nor so antient, as the way of our Congregationall government of each Church within it self, by the space of 300. yeers. I will not here speak of those Texts of Scripture ( Matth. 18.15, 16, 17. 1 Cor. 5.) which convince us, that Congregationall discipline was in­stituted by Christ, and his Apostles. I refer them to the sequele, wherein our particular Tenents are discussed by Mr. Baylie, which will come in due place (God willing) to be reviewed and exa­mined. But,

In the first century, whilst the Apostles lived, wee read of no act of Church-power put forth by the Elders of Churches over absent Congregations, but onely in Act. 15.28. with Chap. 16.4. But let it be considered:

1. That this Synod was not Status Conventus, a set monethly, or yeerly Assembly, the ordinary standing Judicatory of the Church: nor assembled for administration of ordinary Church-power (as ordination of Officers, or censure of offenders) but called together upon urgent, and unwonted occasion, the dissen­tion of the Church of Antioch, which both craved, and needed di­rection in such a case, Act. 15.1.2. And wee easily grant (what we willingly practise in a Congregationall way) that neither do­ctrine, nor discipline can well proceed unto publick Edification, when the Church is rent with dissention. The promise of Christs presence with his Church, is given to them met in his name, and agreeing in his Name, Matth. 18.18, 19. But when a Congregation wanteth agreement and peace amongst themselves, it is then a way of God (according to the patterne, Act. 15.2.) to consult with some other Church, or Churches, either by themselves or their messengers met in a Synod. But then they send not to them for power to administer any ordinance amongst themselves, but for light to satisfie dissenters, and so to remove the stumbling block of [Page 95] the suspition of mal-administration of their power, out of the way.

But otherwise, when Churches want not peace nor light with­in themselves, to exercise that power without distraction, which the Lord hath given them, Christ doth not direct his Chur­ches to gather into a Synod for removing of knowen offences ei­ther in Doctrine or manners: but onely sendeth to the Pastors or Presbyters of each Church, to reforme within themselves, what is amongst them. Rev. chap. 2. and chap. 3. A plain pattern to Chur­ches, in case of publick offences tolerated in neighbour Churches, not forthwith to gather into a Synod (or Classicall meeting) for redresse thereof: but by Letters and messengers to admonish one a­nother of what is behovefull; unlesse upon such admonition, they refuse to hearken to the wholesome counsell of their Brethren. And then the dissention of this Church from others hindering the free passage of the Gospell (as much as dissention amongst themselves doth) it may give just and necessary occasion of assem­bling a Synod of the Elders, and messengers of Neighbor-Chur­ches for the conviction of their sin with common consent, and if (after long patience) they remain obstinate, to withdraw from them the right hand of Fellowship in the communion of Chur­ches.

2. The Synod assembled at Hierusalem, (Acts 15.) was not a convention or consisttory of Elders apart from brethren: but such a number of Brethren were admitted into their Assembly, as car­ried the name of a whole Church, distinguished expresly from the Apostles, and Elders, Acts 15.22, 23. The same who are called the Brethren, distinct from the Apostles and Elders, ver. 23. are called also the whole Church, ver. 2 [...]. And with them is the power com­municated, which the Apostles and Elders put forth in those Sy­nodicall Letters, ver. 22. to 29. If the Classis doe admit the Bre­thren of the Church where they meet, to sit with the Elders, in de­bating and determining the matters of the Synod, even such a number of Brethren, as may denominate them a whole church, as then they shall come neerer to the Primitive pattern, so they may expect a freer passage of the presence and blessing of the Holy Ghost with them.

3. That Synod having heard and argued the whole cause in controversie, they give their judgement both of the doctrine taught at Antioch, and of the persons that taught it, as trouble­some [Page 96] to the Church, and subversive to their soules, and unwarran­ted by themselves, ver. 24. Neverthelesse, they neither excom­municate them themselves, nor command the Church to excom­municate them: but leave that to the Church to exercise their owne power according to the rule of the Word, in case any of their members should be found to persist obstinately in such per­nicious doctrine after conviction.

4. That Synod layed indeed a burden (or weighty charge) not onely of a doctrine to be beleived, but of a duty in matter of pra­ctise to be performed (for avoiding of offence:) and lay it they did with the greater power, according to the greater measure of Grace and light received, both from Texts of Scriptures clear­ly opened, and from direction of Apostles personally present. But though wee dare not allow alike equall power to ordinary Sy­nods, unlesse they had the like equall presence and assistance of in­fallible guides, (such as the Apostles were:) yet our Congregation­al way doth easily allow the like power to the like orderly Synods so far forth, that when they have cleared from the Scriptures any doubtfull point of doctrin or practise, to be of necessary observa­tion, they wil readily submit as to a counsell & command of God, both from the Word, and the Word dispensed in the way of an Ordinance. In such a case wee acknowledge (with our best Di­vines) Potestatem in Synodis [...] a power in Synods to direct and appoint, what spirituall prudence from the Word shall determine. But it is one thing, to direct and charge Churches from the Word of the Lord; what should be done by them: another thing to doe their Acts of power for them. The one guideth them in the use and exercise of their power: the o­ther taketh their power, or at least the exercise of it, out of their hand, which is more then the pattern of Synods (in Acts 15.) doth hold forth.

SECT. II.

In the second century of yeares, the Government of the Church was administred, not in a Classical, but in a Congregationall way, as in the former century, of w ^ch we need no better evidence, then the evident Testimony of the Magdeburgenses, in the second centu­ry, chap. 7, tit. de consociatione ecclesiarum, cat rum (say they) si quis probatos authores hujus seculi perspiciat, videbit Forman Guberna­tionis propemodum [...] similem fuisse. Singulae enim pa­rem habebant postestatem, verbum Dei pure dicendi, Sacramenta Ad­ministrandi, [Page 97] Excommunicandi Haereticos, & sceleratos, ministros eligendi, vocandi, ordinandi, & justissimas ob causas iterum deponen­di, conventus & Synodos congregandi, &c. that is, If a man search the approved Authors of this age, he shall see the Form of the Government, to be almost like to a Democracy: For every single Church had equal power of preaching the Word, administring Sacraments, excommunicating hereticks and notorious offen­ders, absolving penitents, choosing, calling, ordaining Mini­sters, and upon just and weighty causes deposing them again: power also of gathering Conventions and Synods, &c.

What is Congregationall Government, and Independent from other Churches, and Presbyters, if this be not? Though he mentioneth Conventions and Synods, yet he speaketh of them, not as having power to govern the Churches, but of the Chur­ches, as having power to gather them. But the Synods left the power of choosing, calling, ordaining Ministers, of censuring he­reticks and offenders, and of absolving Penitents to the single Churches, each one enjoying equall power within themselves. The helpe which neighbour Churches yeelded one to another, was not Cum imperio, & subjectione, (as hee speaketh in the same place) not with Dominion of some, and subjection of others, but Charitatis & aedificationis studio, out of brotherly love and care and desire of mutuall edification. Which made him say, their Form of Government was like well-nigh, or almost to a Democracy: like to a Democracy, in regard of mutuall equality of power in one Church towards another: & yet but almost like to a Democracy, in regard each Church within it self had an Aristocracy of Pres­bytery for their guidance and Government, though they did no act of Church-Government without concourse and censure of the Brethren.

The rash attempt of Victor (Bishop of Rome) in this age against the Churches of Asia, to censure them for a different observation of Easter, it onely argueth, that the Mystery of iniquity did more early, and earnestly work in Rome, then in other Churches: but doth not hold forth any received custome of that age, the officers of one Church to proceed to the censure of their Brethren in o­ther Churches. For this attempt of Victor was generally contest­ed against by Irenaus, and other Bishops.

SECT. III.

In the third century of years, the Churches injoyed (to use the [Page 98] words of the Centurists, Cent. 3. cap. 7.) almost the like form of Government, according to the course of the Former Age, though somewhat more enlarged by ambition.

For it appeareth, Novatus was excommunicate by a councell at Rome under Cornelius. And Samosatenus was excommunicate and deposed by a councell at Antioch. But yet where the Bishops did more attend to the rule of Scripture, and former precedents, Congregationull Churches did still enjoy their wonted liberty and power.

Their Bishops and other Officers were not chosen to their hands by a consistory of Bishops (or Pastors) amongst themselves in the absence of the people: but (as Cyprian telleth us) amongst them, in Carthage, and almost throughout all the Provinces, As they have received from the Apostles, so they hold it, that for the orderly Celebration of Ordination, all the neighbor Bi­shops, (or Pastors) of the same Province, where a Minister is to be Ordained, they come to gether to that people, and the Bishop is chosen in the presence of the people, to whom his life is best knowen. As (saith hee) was done amongst us in the Ordination of our fellow-Minister Sabinus; his Office was put upon him by the suffrage of the whole Brotherhood, and by the judgment of all the Pastors both present, and such as by Letters gave testimony of him: and so hands were imposed upon him. Cyprian Epistolarum l. 1. Epistola 4. And in the same Epistle he saith, The people fearing God, and obedient to the Ordinances of Christ ought to separate from a wicked Ruler, Cum ipsa maxime potestatem habeat vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes, vel indignos recusundi: Seeing the people chiefly have the power of choosing worthy Ministers, and refusing the unworthy. And as Election and Ordination of Ministers was transacted in the presence and with the suffrage of the people; so was excommu­nication also: for upon this ground, Cyprian argueth and aggra­vateth the offence of the Brotherhood in other Churches, who took upon them to question and wave that censure, post Divinum Judicium, (he meaneth, the judgement of Gods Ministers the El­ders) post populi suffragium, post Coepiscoporum consensum: after the Divine judgment of their Elders, after the suffrage of the people, after the consent of neighbor Ministers, Cyprian. Epistolarum l. 1. Epistola 3. where he giveth to each rank, their proper act in pas­sing Church-censure: hee assigneth to the Elders of the Church [Page 99] Judicium, the judgement: to the people, Suffragium, suffrage or vote: to neighbour Ministers, Consensum, consent.

And that the people had the like concourse in the absolution and admission of penitents, appeareth by Cyprian in the same Epi­stle,

Where though he spake of the peoples gainsaying and striving against his receiving of one or two: yet it evidently appeareth that in his ordinary and usuall course, he was not wont to re­ceive any without the peoples consent. And even then when they did gainsay and strive against his act at first, yet he was not wont to proceed, till with importunate perswasions, and wrastlings with them, he had prevailed with them to give way.

But of others hee speaketh ( Epistolarum lib. 3. Epistola 11.) Caeteros, saith he, cum ingenti populi suffragio recipimus: the rest were received with the free and generall suffrage of the people. And againe, ( Epistola 16. of the same book) hee thus speaketh ad plebem, Examinabuntur singula, praesentibus, & judicantibus vobis.

And indeed (in the end of the tenth Epistle of his third Book) he professeth his resolution to performe no act of Church-Government without consent of the Elders and Deacons, and Brethren of the Church: A primordio Episcopatus mei, statui, nihil sine consilio vestro, & sin [...] consensu Plebis, mea privatim sen­tentia gerere.

All these are expresse and lively lineaments of the very body of Congregationall discipline, the same (for substance) wherein wee walke at this day. And therefore let it not bee sleighted or despised, as a Novell invention, of seven, or twenty, or fiftie yeers standing.

SECT. I. Of the fruits of it in the primitive times.

VVEe have heard of the corrupt fruits, which Mr. Baylie chargeth (but corruptly, and causelesly) upon Con­gregationall discipline: Let us now see, whether better fruits have not been found to grow upon it, even such fruits as do argue the discipline to be the plantation of the Lord Jesus.

1 Presupposing that which hath been proved, that our Con­gregationall discipline, is the same (for substance) wherein the Primitive Churches walked for the first 300. yeers, (to wit, du­ring all the time of the Primitive Persecutions) I conceive (with­out arrogancy) wee may acknowledge the fruits of their disci­pline to be the fruits of ours.

First, their exact strictnesse in examining and trying their Cate­ [...]humeni, before they received them into Ecclesiam Fidelium, brought forth this savory and spirituall fruit, the purity of Churches. Pagans themselves could not charge them with any crime, but the name and profession of Christianitie, see Pliny Epistolarum lib. 10. Epistolam 97. Tertullian Apologetick Chap. 3. That which hee saith of Cajus Sejus, was a generall Elogy of their Church-members, Bonus vir, malus tantum quòd Christia­nus. A like fruit to that of Daniel against whom his enemies could find no occasion of complaint of error or fault, except it were for the profession of the Law of his God, Chap. 6.4, 5.

And as their strict examination received their members pure: so their strict censure kept them pure. For in the Church, Iudicabatur magno cum pondere: — And in their Feasts they were temperate and religiously fruitfull in savory and gratious conference, and so departed b [...]tter then they met, Ʋt qui non tam Caenam caenaverint, quam disciplinam. Tertul. Apol. Cap. 39.

2 From this purity and vigilancy of their discipline, in the admission of their members, and in the administration of their censures, there sprung forth many other gratious fruits, as their holy and constant and confident confessions of the Name of Christ before judgement seates, the patient and glorious Martyr­domes of innumerable Saints, to the conviction and astonishment of a world of persecutors.

Whence also sprung at last, the conversion of a great part of the word unto the truth, the advancement of a Christian Empe­rour, the rooting out of Paganish Idolatry, and propagation of the profession of Christian Religion, not onely through the Roman Empire, but in many other Nations exempt from the power of Roman Armes, yet not from the power of the Name of Christ, and of his Church.

Afterwards, in the dayes of Constantine, when the externall peace and libertie of the Churches, encouraged all sorts of men (cleane and uncleane) to offer themselves to the fellowship of the Church, and Congregationall discipline began to be neglected through the usurped authority of the Bishops, and Presbyters, the limits of the Church began to bee as large as the Precincts of the Parish: and the Church it self (which before was wont to be as a Garden inclosed, Cant. 4.12.) did now become as a Wil­dernesse lying open to all the Beasts of the Field; who so would offer himself, might have free passage into the bosome of the Church: and offer themselves they did, not from the savour of spirituall gifts (as was wont to bee done in Congregationall di­scipline:) but from respect to the countenance of higher powers, and the priviledges and preferments flowing therefrom; Church members being farre more readily received to place of trust and honour, then men without. But this inundation of corrupt members was prevented by the vigilancy of Congregationall discipline, whilst it stood in force, in the former centuries.

3. This was another good Fruit of the Congreationall disci­pline in those primitive times, That whilst it took place in the Churches, there could be no place, nor way open for the advance­ment of Antichrist, no nor for the usurpation of Episcopall prela­cy. For whilst every Church kept their Government within their own Congregation, they knew not the heavy and Lordly yoke of Cathedrall Chu [...]ches, much lesse were they trodden down with impositions from the Sea of Rome. It is true, Victor Bishop of Rome attempted a censure against the Churches of Asia, but his Arrogancy was speedily repressed by Ireneus, and sundry others both in Europe & Asia. And when some scandalous persons in the African Churches, did appeale in Cyprians time from those Chur­ches unto Rome, Cyprian, and his fellow Bishops (or Presbyters) in the African Churches, did easily prevent the impeachment of [Page 102] their Church-Government from remote Churches, and kept still their Government within themselves.

SECT. 2. Of the Fruits of Congregationall discipline in our Churches in New-England.

2. FOr the fruits of Congregationall discipline, as it hath been exercised amongst us (though in much weaknesse) the Lord hath not left us without testimony from Heaven.

First, in making these Churches a little sanctuary (through his grace) to many thousands of his servants, who fled over hi­ther to avoide the unsupportable pressures of their consciences by the Episcopall tyranny.

Secondly, in blessing the Ministery of our Preachers here with like fruits of conversion (as in our native Countrey) of sundry elder and younger persons, who came over hither not out of re­spect to conscience, or spirituall ends, but out of respect to friends, or outward inlargements: but have here found that grace, which they sought not for.

Thirdly, in discovering and suppressing those errors of Anti­nomians, and Familists, which brake forth here amongst us, and might have proceeded to the subversion of many soules, had not the blessing of Christ upon the vigilancy of Congregationall discipline, either prevented or removed, or healed the same.

Fourthly, it hath been also a testimony from Heaven of Gods blessing upon our way, that many thousands in England in all the Quarters of the kingdome, have been awakened to consider of the cause of Church discipline, for which wee have suffered this hazardous and voluntary banishment into this remote Wilder­nesse: and have therefore by letters conferred with us about it, & been (through mercy) so farre enlightned, as to desire an utter subversion of Episcopacy, and conformity, yea and the Hono­rable Houses of Parliament, the Lord hath been pleased to helpe them so farre to consider of our sufferings, and of the causes thereof, as to conclude a necessitie of reformation of the Ecclesi­asticall state, (amongst other causes, so) by reason of the necessi­tie put upon so many English subjects to depart from all our em­ployments, and enjoyments in our Native Countrey, for consci­ence sake.

SECT. 3. Of the Fruits of Congregationall discipline in England.

3 For the fruits of Congregationall discipline in England, they that walke in that way amongst you, might speak far more particularly, and largely, then I here can doe at such a remote distance. But if Books, and Letters, and reports doe not too much abuse us with false intelligence, the great, and gratious, and glorious victories, wher [...]by the Lord hath wrought salvation for England in these late warres, have been as so many testimo­nies of the blessing of God upon our way. For the chiefest in­struments, which God hath delighted to use herein, have been the Faith and fidelity, the courage, and constancy of Indepen­dents. And when I say Independents, I meane not those corrupt Sects and Heresies, which shroud themselves under the vast title of Independency, and in the meane time cast off all Church Go­vernment, and Churches too; but such as professe the King­dome of Christ in the gouernment of each holy Congrega­tion of Saints within themselves.

Far bee it from me to undervalue the brotherly assistance of the Scottish Churches and Commonwealth in working so great a deliverance for England. Yea I account their concurrence a greater matter then assistance in this great work. Their exempla­ry pi [...]ty and zeale, their courage, and confidence in rising up, and standing out against the invasion of Episcopall tyranny, and su­perstition, did doubtlesse quicken and encourage England to stand for the like liberty in the like cause: and to put forth that zeale, which the Lord had kindled in the hearts of many for Re­formation. And this was more then an assistance, even a guidance. Afterwards the forwardnesse of the Scottish Nation to advance their Armies into the English Fields for the helpe of England against the Common Enemies of Church and State, was an Act of brotherly love never to be forgotten without due and thank­full acknowledgement, and encouragement. But yet let the good pleasure of the Lord bee acknowledged, who out of his abundant grace, hath granted the chiefest successes to the English designes by the Forces of the Independents, which may not be denied without too much ingratitude both to God and man. Let [Page 104] all the glory thereof be wholly and solely given to the Lord: but yet let not the instruments be accounted unfruitfull, by whom the Lord hath brought forth such blessed Fruits of victory, and li­bertie, both from civill servitude, and superstitious thraldome, and withall so great an advancement of Reformation both in Church and State.

The inundation of Sects and Heresies in London, and the re­tarding of Reformation in England, which have both of them been objected as the bitter fruits of the Congregationall way, have been cleared above, to spring from other Roots, not from that way. See Chap. 3. Sect. 5. the end of it.