IT has been thought by many, that disputes in matters of religion, have been hurtful thereto; and from thence have rejected all disputes in religious affairs. Although, I be­lieve, that many controversies in religious affairs, where mas­tery has been sought, [...]a [...] tended much to destroy vital piety, and godliness; yet, I believe, that many controversies that have been in the christian church, have tended greatly to clear some truths, that have been in the christian church, and hath made them appear more bright and glorious, than ever they would as yet, if they had never been disputed. As for in­stance, Atheism, and Deism, that have been advanced in the world, have produced arguments against them, that have made the being of God, and the truth of divine revelation, appear in a very glorious light. And so it has been, respecting how much sinners can do towards their salvation by works of their own: And also who have right to church membership, and the special ordinances of the gospel.

Having had opportunity to read a senmon, and a charge, delivered by Mr. Isaac Foster, and the right hand of fellow­ship, delivered by Mr. Ruffel, at the ordination of Mr. Emer­son Foster, in Killingly, [...] society, 22d day of January, A. D. 1778; I thought there was a fit opportunity presented, to answer a question that has been asked by many, in these late years, viz. What is the difference, between those called Standing Churches, and those called Separates, (or a the law of this State hath termed them, Strict Congregationalists?) [Page 4] And this I shall attempt, by making some remarks upon said se [...]mon, charge, and right-hand of fellowship; and then give the reader a short account, of the sentiments of the separate churches, so far as it respects gathering churches, and church government; by which the difference may be seen, and so people will need to ask the question no more. And,

First. With respect to said sermon, I shall only remark the deficiency in it. The text laid a proper foundation, to have shewn, how ministers of Christ, come by the word of the Lord that they a [...]e to preach, or speak to the people; but this is in­tirely neglected, and only a few hints given, how the faithful preacher, will preach faithfully: And so people are left in the dark, as to what makes a gospel minister; whether it is Christ, or human learning, or both, or whether it is Pope, Bishop, Presbytery, or Association. But,

Secondly, I shall take notice and consider some things hand­ed out by Mr. F. in his charge to his son. ‘Always oppose in your preaching, (faith he) that wicked, abominable opi­nion, that prevails in the country at this day, viz. That the unregenerate can do nothing but sin;—nothing that will, in the least, forward their eternal salvation: That all their en­deavours can only aggravate guilt.’ This then is what he calls wicked and abominable. But let us examine what he calls wicked and abominable, and see if they are not some of the great truths of God, revealed in his word to lost sinners. Christ hath told us, that, ‘a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit; neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.’ The apostle faith, ‘The carnal mind, is enmity against God, is not sub­ject to his law, neither indeed can be.’ Further, God hath said of man, that, ‘Every imagination of the thoughts of his heart, was only evil continually.’ I know of no medium, be­tween a state of nature, and a state of grace; — between a state of entire enmity against God, and a state of reconciliation with God. An unregenerate person, is in a state of depraved na­ture, at enmity with God, every part, power, and faculty of his soul, fixt against God, and in opposition to his law. And i [...] [...] impossible that he can perform one act of obedience out of love to God; and love to God is what he requires, of all ra­tional [Page 5] beings, in order to their services being acceptable to him. And is it possible that a child of the devil, and enemy of God, can do any thing but sin against God? We are told in God's word, that their plowing is sin, and their sacrifices an abomination. But Mr. F. hath implicitly charged his son, to tell sinner, that they can do some hing besides sin; that is, that they can perform some holy actions: For there is no me­dium between sin, and holiness. Christ hath determined the point, that a corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit. And therefore, he hath charged his son, to preach directly against the word of God. I do not mean to be understood, that there is no actions done by sinners, that are considered abstractly in themselves, but what is sin; far from it: But then considered, as the sinners acts, they are all wrapt up in sin. This was the case with Jehu, he did right in executing God's wrath, upon the house of Ahab: And yet God declared by the prophet, that the days should come, when he would avenge the blood of Jezreel, upon the house of Jehu. And why? Because, Jehu did not act from a principle of love to God; but with a mur­derous mind; and therefore it was all sin in him. Hear what that great divine, Mr. Boston, hath said to this point; his words are these, ‘Object. But God is a merciful God, and he knows we are not able to answer these demands; we hope therefore to be saved if do as well as we can, and keep the commands as well as we are able. Ans. Though thou art able to do many things, thou art not able to do one thing aright; thou canst do nothing acceptable to God: John xv 5. Without me you can do nothing. An unrenewed man, as thou art, can do nothing but sin, as we have al­ready evinced. Thy best actions are sin, and so they increase thy debt to justice.’ Dr. Gill, in his sermon upon the pre­sent state of the church, faith, ‘There is no good thing in unregenerate men, and therefore no good thing can come out of them; they have no true knowledge of that which is good, and much less to do it; they have no inclination or desire, nay, an aversion to it; they have no free will there­unto, nor power to perform; it may as reasonably be ex­pected to gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thstles, as good [Page 6] works to be done by an evil man; a wicked man is to every good work reprobate and unfit. A man must first be a good man before he can do good works; men begin at the wrong end, when they propose to do good works, in order to make themselves good men; the first concern should be to have a good work of grace upon the heart, which is the Lord's work; the tree must first be made good, ere the fruit will be good.’

Now if what has been said, will stand for truth, as it most certainly will, then it will determine the two next particulars. That sinners can do nothing, that will forward their eternal salvation: That all their endeavours can only aggravate guilt. For how is it possible, if the unregenerate can do nothing but sin, that it should be otherwise? It is only increasing their debt to justice.

Further, Mr. F. charges his son to tell sinners, ‘They can do much towards their own salvation:—That if ever they are saved, they must work it out.’ Now, I conceive that the salvation of sinners, consists in these two things, the pay­ment of their debt to justice, and a real change of heart, from sin to holiness. Without these two things being done, for, and in, sinners, they can never be saved. Now, where is the son or daughter of Adam, that can do much towards pay­ing his debt to justice; or changing his heart, from sin to ho­liness? If they can do much, I pray how much? Can they do half, or two thirds? If so, why not all, as well as much? And so consequently, Christ is dead in vain. The word of God hath taught us, that the salvation of sinners, must be all by works; or all by grace; there is no mixing them together. See Rom. iv. 4, 5. and chap. xi. 6. ‘Now to him that worketh, is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifi­eth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. And if by grace, then it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more of grace; otherwise work is no more work.’

But Mr. F. says, ‘According to God's gracious constituti­on, they can do much towards their own salvation,’ &c. [Page 7] But let us inquire into this affair, and see how much a sinner can do, even under the gracious constitution of the gospel. The apostle sums up the whole of his preaching, in those few, but comprehensive expressions, viz. ‘Repentance towards God; and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ.’ Now, it is abso­lutely necessary for the salvation of sinners, even under the gracious constitution of the gospel, that sinners repent, and be­lieve the gospel; and that repentance, and faith, that are of a saving nature, are both the work of God's spirit upon the souls of men: And they are as unable to repent, and believe the gospel, as they are to satisfy the law by works of their own; for if they could do much towards repentance, and faith, of themselves, then salvation would not be all by free grace, from the foundation to the top stone. I wonder, how much Mr. F. thinks the Ephesian believers did towards their own salvation, that the apostle faith, were dead in trespasses and sins; and that it was God that quickened them; and that it was by grace they were saved, through faith, and that not of them­selves, but it was the gift of God. The bible hath [...] told sinners, that they can do much towards their own salvati­on; but the reverse, that it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runeth, but of God, that sheweth mercy. And that it is God, that must work in us both to will, and to do, or we never shall be saved. See the opinion of the Assembly of Di­vines at Westminster, upon this point. Consiss. chap. IX. fect. III. ‘Man by his fall, into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will, to any spiritual good, accompanying salvation; so as a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.’ Thus, I think Mr. F's. opinion, is not scriptural, nor calvinistical; but a motley mixture of works and grace, and contrary to the opinion of the most found orthodox Divines, that have wrote upon the subject.

Mr F. seems to insinuate, as if the opinion he opposes, is some new opinion, that is prevailing in the country at this day. But he is mistaken: It is the good old opinion, that has been held ever since there was a church on earth. Nor will I say, [Page 8] that his opinion is a new opinion, though I am sorry to see it prevailing in the country, at this day. It is as old as Caln's day, he attempted to do much towards his own salvation, by bringing the product of his own labour, an offering, to appease an offended Deity; and it was as good an offering, as any un­regenerate person ever brought to God since.

Mr. F. charges his son, to ‘stop the mouths of these unruly and vain talkers and deceivers.’ But pray, who are these vain, and unruly talkers, who must have their mouths stopt? Why, horrid to think! they are Christ, and his apostles, and prophets; and not only so, but that venerable Assembly of Di­vines at Westminster, with a cloud of calvinist writers. But he has set his son an hard tosk, that he never will accomplish in this world, and I am sure he will be of a different opinion from his father, when he arrives at the world to come.

There is one thing more, that Mr. F. calls a wicked opinion, viz. ‘That the unregenerate can do nothing that has any more tendency to holiness, than the exercise of lust.’ Which is an opinion I never heard of before, in them terms, and therefore I shall leave it as I found it.

Furthermore, Mr. F. has told his son, that, ‘Baptism is the only badge of church membership, appointed by Christ.’ And from thence has directed him, ‘to baptize all those chil­dren that are born of baptized parents, or whose ancestors were in covenant with God.’ Upon which I would say, that although I am fully persuaded in the doctrine of houshold baptism, yet I am very different in my opinion from Mr. F. in what he has said.

First, In what he has said respecting baptism's being the on­ly badge of church membership.—As the word baage signifies a cognizance, or coat of arms, and as cognizance signifies knowledge, or a privilege which a corporation has to hold a plea, &c. It will follow, from Mr. F's. principle, that all baptized persons, have a right to claim full privilege of mem­bership in the church of Christ: Or in other words, that they are members of the visible church. Baptism I allow to be ne­cessary to membership in the visible church; but not the only badge of church membership. Is a person baptized in the [Page 9] church of Rome, known to be a member of the church of Christ? Are children baptized in the half-way covenant, known to be members of the church of Christ? Surely, they are not more in the church, than their parents were which got them baptized; which were but half-way in. Suppose a Jew­ish priest had wandered from home, and got among the Mo­abites, and Amorites, and had fallen to circumcising their children: Would they thereby be known to be members of the visible church? Are all those persons baptized by the Se­parate and Baptist ministers, cognized members of the visible church? Surely Mr. F. won't allow it. Neither do I think that he believes his own assertion. It would be difficult to prove from the bible, that the primary design of the institution of cir­cumcision, or baptism, was to be the only badge of church membership; or even to be a badge of church membership to all upon whom them ordinances were administered. Dr. Owen saith, that in order to our being known to be members of Christ's visible church, it is necessary, ‘That every man's own voluntary consent, and submission to the ordinances of Christ in that church whereunto he is joined, is required for his union therewith, and fellowship therein.’ If baptism is the only badge, by which the church of Christ, and its mem­bers, are known; then the Protestant church of Scotland long ago, were mistaken in their notes, by which the church of Christ is known; which they avow, and affirm to be, ‘First, The true preaching of the word of God—Secondly, The right administration of the sacraments of Christ Jesus— Thirdly, Ecclesiastical discipline, uprightly ministred, as God's word prescribeth; whereby vice is repressed, and virtue nourished.’ But,

Secondly, If what Mr. F. has said, ‘That all those chil­dren that are born of baptized parents, or whose ancesters were in covenant with God,’ are to be baptized, then it will follow, that there is not a person on earth, of the human race, but what are proper subjects of baptism. If we may go back four generations, I see not why we may not go back a thousand generations; and as all men descended from pious Noah, that was in covenant with God, so all men have an equal right to baptism. I suppose, that it was upon this prin­ciple, that the Spanish missionaries drove the Mexico Indians, [Page 10] sword in hand, into the water, by thousands in a drove, and baptized them; or declared them to be baptized—And it seems by the manner of Mr. F.'s delivering himself to his son, in this affair, as if he intended he should baptize all he could lay hands upon, willing or unwilling, asked or unasked. But as his opinion in his affair has no foundation in the word of God, and as it has been so sully refuted, by the learned Mr. Boston, it will be needless for me to add.

I proceed, in the next place, to take notice, and consider, those words in the charge. ‘Ever reject that church-destroy­ing opinion, that makes grace a term of communion in the visible church; which opinion has no foot-steps in the word of God, nor was ever known in the church, till that man of sin arose, whose coming was after the working of satan, with all signs and lying wonders.’

When I first read these words, I was astonished that any man in this day of great light, should be so bold as to tread under foot, not only the word of God, but the opinion of great, learned, and pious divines, that have wrote upon the subject, and have demonstrated from the word of God, and from the nature of the ordinance of the Lord's supper, the necessity of grace in order to a due attendance thereupon, whose little­fingers were thicker in divinity, than Mr. F.'s loins. But when I came to consider the affair, I was satisfied that God, in his providence, so ordered it, that upon so public an occa­sion, the real sentiments of our standing churches, (as they are called) should be brought out to public view. I take it for granted, that as Mr. F. was appointed by the venerable coun­cil, that assisted in the ordination, to be their mouth in giving the charge, that he spake their minds, especially as none of them objected to what he said; and therefore, it may justly be said, that all those ministers, and churches, that assisted in said ordination, hold to, and profess, the same principles that Mr. F. advanced, (though I hope, and charitably believe, that not all who are called standing churches, and ministers, hold such unscriptural opinions; yet I have reason to fear, they are very scarce.) Thus, I think, that venerable council, have ingenuously published their sentiments to the world, so that from this time forward, we need not ask them what their sentiments are in the above particulars.

[Page 11] I proceed therefore, to give some evidence of what I have said—That Mr. F. in asserting, that grace is not a necessary term of communion in the visible church, hath trodden under foot, not only the word of God, but the writings of some of the greatest divines. And

First, The scriptures, in giving the characters of the mem­bers of Christ's visible church, every where speak the reverse of his opinion. I shall name a few of them. Psalm xv. 1, 2. Lord, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? Who shall dwell in thy holy hill? He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righ­teousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart.—Psalm xxiv. 3, 4. Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He that hath clean hand and a pure heart."—From which it may be seen, that truth in the heart, or heart purity, was necessary even in the old testament times, for those that would dwell [...] holy hill. And it always was, and always will be, a truth, that without faith it­is impossible to please God. So Rom. i. 7. To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints. I Cor. i. 2. Unte the church of God, which is at Corinth, to them that are sanc­tified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints. Eph. i. 1. To the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus. Heb. iii. 1. Wherefore holy brethren, partakers of the hea­venly calling. I Peter, ii. 5. Ye also as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spi­ritual sacrifices, &c. All which scriptures hold forth, not on­ly the necessity of grace, but the profession of grace, by such as were members of Christ's visible church.—Now, with what propriety graceless persons, by their own profession children of the devil, can be called faints, holy brethren, and lively stones, is beyond me to explain. But,

Secondly, The scriptures that speak of the union, between Christ and his church, all suppose grace as necessary to that union. Read the whole book of Canticles; and many ex­pressions in the prophets, as, I am married unto you, faith the Lord—Thy Maker is thy husband, the Lord of Host is his name. All which suppose, that there was not only an inward union, subsisting between the Lord, and his church; but a vi­sible covenant relation, wherein the church had professed to be a chaste virgin, espoused to one husband, even Christ.

[Page 12] So the near union between the members of Christ's visible body, supposes grace as necessary to that union, The apostle compares the church of Christ to the human body; and tells us it was knit together in love. Now, if the saving grace of love, or true charity, is not necessary to be in the church in this world, in order for its union, and communion; or if Christ can be pleased with a graceless bride, in this world; I see not, why he may not have a church in hell, where hatred reigns, and be well pleased with it; especially when (accord­ing to Mr. F.) he sees them have the only badge of church membership. But the apostle hath fully settled the point, in telling us, ‘That our fellowship is with the Father, and his son Jesus Christ; and one with another.’ That is, that fel­lowship, or union with God, in Christ, is that, that lays a foundation, for our [...] fellowship one with another, in his church in this world. Again,

Thirdly, The express command of God forbids graceless membership, and communion, in his visible church. See Ezek. xliv. 7, 8, 9. In that ye have brought into my sanctuary, strangers, uncircumcised in heart, and uncircumcised in flesh, to be in my sanctuary, to pollute it. And ye have not kept the charge of my holy things. Thus saith the LORD, no stran­ger, uncircumcised in HEART, nor uncircumcised in flesh, shall enter into my sanctuary.

I shall, in the next place, cite some passages, out of some of the most approved divines, that speak very different from Mr. F. in the point now under consideration. Ursin, upon the question, Who ought to come to the supper? tells us, ‘The sacraments are appointed, for the faithful and converted only, to seal the promises of the gospel to them, and to con­firm their faith.’ And further he saith, ‘That God com­mands to all the use of the sacraments, yet the lawful use, which is not without faith and repentance.’ Mr. Boston, in his sermon upon the union of the body of Christ, faith, ‘It is not in your power to know certainly, and infallibly, who are real members of this body; but the visible body of Christ, is made up of saints by profession; and as such, they admitted to the Lord's table, upon their desire.’ The pi­ous Mr. Willison, in his sacramental catechism, has this que­stion, ‘Ought all who come to the Lord's table, to have sav­ing [Page 13] grace, as necessary to qualify them for it? Aos. Yes; for without saving grace in the heart, we are uncapable [...] hold communion with God, or of putting forth those act [...] [...] faith, love, and repentance, which are necessary in partak­ing of this ordinance.’ The late Mr. Edwards, has de­monstrated the necessity of grace, in order for church commu­nion, in such a light, that all his opponents, have not been able to gain-say his arguments, from scripture or reason. The Protestant church of Scotland, in their confession of faith, say, ‘The supper of the Lord, we confess to appertain to such only, as be of the houshold of faith.’

I will transcribe a few articles, from the confession of faith, of the Vaudois churches, in the vallies of Piedmont; which churches are ge­nerally allowed to have kept nearest to the primitive standard, in the dark days of popery, of any churches in the world. ‘Art. 24. That God hath gathered together a church in the world, for the salvation of mankind. Art. 25. That this church is the company of the faithful, who being elected of God, before the foundation of the world, and called by an holy vocation, are united together for to follow the word of God, believing that which he teaches, and living in his fear. Art. 30. That he has instituted his holy supper, for the nourishment of our souls, to the end, that by a true and lively faith, by the incomprehensible virtue of the Holy Ghost, eating effectively his flesh, and drinking his blood, and uniting us most inseparably to Christ, in him, and by him, we may have eternal life.’—Dr. Hugh Knox, in his essay upon a preparation for the Lord's supper, faith, ‘It is evident, from the very nature and design of this ordinance, that it belongs only to true disciples, and real christians. It is a nourishing ordinance; but such only can be nourished who have life: Besides, the grace of faith, love, hope, &c. which are properly exercised in this ordinance, can only be exercised by real, living christians. It is a solemn renewal of our covenant with God; but how can they renew a cove­nant which they never entered into at all? How can such as are in league with the devil and their lusts, be said to en­ter into covenant with God? What sincerity can there be in such a transaction as this! Does it not imply the most inso­lent, bare-faced mockery.’— [Page 14] Thus, reader, you have a fair opportunity of judging for yourself, whether Mr. F. is not criminally guilty, in asserting, that grace, as a term of communion in the visible church, has no footsteps in the word of God; but took its rise from the man of sin.

I remember, not many years since, in conversation with an eminent minister, in one of the standing churches, to have ask­ed him, how far he extended his communion? His answer was, to all that make the christian profession. I asked him if he held communion with those churches, that held, that grace was not necessary for membership in the visible church? His answer was, no, no more than he would with infidels. I ask­ed him why? His answer was, because they did not make the christian profession. And for my part, I never could find a church in all the bible, that was built upon a graceless pro­fession, that ever God owned for his visible church. There­fore, with a little variation from Mr. F's. words, I would say, that his opinion of graceless communion, has no foot-steps in the word of God: Nor was ever known in the church, till error arose, and taught that works were meritorious.

Those that hold to graceless communion, make use of the tares, and wheat, growing together, to prove their opinion: But stop, reader, a minute, and pause upon the parable, and ask, who sowed them tares among the wheat? Did God sow them; or even order them to be sowed? No, it was the devil that sowed them, while men slept. And may we not justly say, that all who plead for graceless communion, are advocates for the devil, and labouring to assist him in his work?

I always thought, when we give a minister a charge, we ought to take the same from the word of God; but that part of Mr. F's. charge, that respects graceless communion, was ne­ver taken from the word of God; and I am humbly of the opinion, was the first that ever was delivered in them terms, since there was a church on earth.

I only add, that as there is no difference, between the church militant, and the church triumphant, as to the nature of their union, and communion, only in the degree of it, I see not, why graceless sinners may not be as capable of holding com­munion with the church triumphant, as with the church mili­tant. The church militant is said to be one body, and one [Page 15] bread—one body and one spirit; and if sinners are capable of being one body, and one bread—one body, and one spirit, with the saints in this life, why not in the life to come? Eve­ry argument that might be brought, to bar sinners out of hea­ven, might be used with equal force, to bar them out of the church on earth. I do not mean to be understood, that I think there ever will be a pure church on earth: But I mean, as Mr. Boston has well said, that unregenerate persons, are no more of the body of Christ in reality, than a wooden leg is part of the human body. I proceed,

Lastly, To consider those words in the right-hand of fellow­ship, viz. ‘It is with real pleasure, that we once more behold a candle lighted in this golden candle-stick.’ The first thing that came into my mind, when I read these words, was, that it was calling things by wrong names. I suppose that the young gentleman, was of the same opinion with his honoured father, that gave him his charge; and the church over which he was ordained, was agreed with them in their principle of graceless communion. Now, it is beyond me to comprehend, how such a church can, with propriety, be called a golden candle-stick. They are not so by profession, but the reverse; they profess, that gold is not necessary, in building the church of Christ: Or in other words, that grace, [...] a term of com­munion, or membership among them, is a church-destroying opinion, that took its rise from the man of sin. Were I to give the right-hand of fellowship to a minister, and church, that held grace as a term of communion, a church-destroying opinion, it should be conceived in the following terms, viz. That it is with real sorrow of heart, that we once more behold a graceless minister, sit in this graceless church, (so by their own profession) a blind leader of the blind, that are in danger of falling into the ditch together.

It may be thought by some, that I reject all that was said in the sermon, charge, and right-hand of fellowship. Far from it; many things were excellently well said. But those things that I have remarked upon, especially in the charge, I take to be very poisonous. Neither would I be thought to insinuate, that there is no real saints in such churches, as hold to grace­less communion. But then they are not visible saints, nor do they have communion with the churches that they belong to, [Page 16] as the body of Christ; but live a lonely life, as to the commu­nion of saints, except it be in a private manner.

Thus, reader, I have made those remarks that I purposed, upon the proceedings of the foresaid ordination. And that you may have a clear view of the difference, between those ministers, and churches, that assisted in said ordination, and those church­es called strict congregationalists, I will represent them to you, in the following manner, by sitting the one over against the other.

I shall, in the next place, give a short account of the senti­ments, or principles, of the Separates, (so called) so far as it respects gathering churches, and church government.

I. As to a confession of faith, and platform of church go­vernment, we are generally agreed, in Westminster confession of faith, and Cambridge platform of church discipline (with some few exceptions.) But then, we look upon no human composures of divine authority, no further than they agree ex­actly with the word of God. And therefore we believe, that the word of God, contained in the scriptures, of the old, and new testament, to be the only uncring rule of faith and practice.

II. We believe, that where there is a competent number of visible professing saints, so situated in the providence of God, as that they can conveniently meet together; and other cir­cumstances of providence concurring, to make duty plain, have a good right to embody together, in a church state, without any respect to town, or parish lines.

III. That the manner of their embodying together, ought to be, by a declaration of each other, of a work of God's grace upon their souls—And a special respect, ought also to be had, to the fruits of grace, that will certainly discover themselves, in the life and conversation of true believers. And they ought also, to enter into a voluntary covenant to walk together, in all the laws, ordinances, and institutions of the gospel; and to be subject to the discipline of his kingdom. And these rules ought to be observed in all after admissions into their society.

[Page 18] IV. We believe, that a competent number of visible pro­fessing saints, thus embodying, and covenanting together, are a visible church of Christ; and have good right, full power, and lawful authority, delegated to them, by Christ their law­ful head, to act, and transact; every thing within themselves, that is necessary to their well-being, as a church of Christ, viz. To admit their own members; and reject them in case of sin unrepented of—To try, prove, and examine their own can­didates for the ministry—To chuse them into office; and to put them into office by ordination; and to depose them from officeship, in case of sin, by which their officeship is forfeited.

V. We believe, that as a church is a free voluntary society, and ought to be in bondage to no man, in matters of religion; that as they have right to chuse their own ministers, so it is their duty to support them, without ever making use of civil law for that purpose.

VI. We believe, that brethren in church covenant together, ought never, in any ordinary cases, to go to law with one another, while they remain in that relation together.

VII. We believe, that all those gifts of prayer, exhortation, or preaching, that are in the church; and are approved by the church; ought to be improved in the church, in their proper place, for the edification of the church, which is the body of Christ in a mystery.

Thus, reader, I have gone throngh with what I proposed, in shewing the difference between those called Standing Churches, and those called Strict Congregationalists, by which I think the difference may be seen; and so the question may be determined in peoples minds.

Therefore, I shall conclude this small piece, by answering some objections; and making some reflections upon the fore­going remarks; and some addresses to several sorts of persons, or professors.

From what has been said respecting sinners being unable to do any thing but sin, I foresee that some objections will arise. As first. If sinners be under an utter inability to do any good, how can God require it of them? &c. I find this objection stated by Mr. Boston, and therefore I will answer it in his words, viz. God made man upright, gave him a power to do every thing he should require of him: This power man lost by his own fault. We were bound to serve God, and to do whatsoever he commanded us, as being his creatures; and also, [Page 19] we were under the superadded tie of a covenant, for that ef­fect. Now, we having, by our own fault, disabled ourselves, shall God lose his right of requiring our task, because we have thrown away the strength he gave us, where-withal to perform it? Has the creditor no right to require payment of his money, because the debtor has squandered it away, and is not able to pay him? Truly, if God can require no more of us than w are able to do, we need no more to save us from wrath, but to make ourselves unable for every duty: And so the deeper one is immersed in sin, he will be the more secure from wrath. Now, if God can require of men the duty they are not able to do, he can in justice punish them for not doing it, notwith­standing their inability. If he has power to exact the debt of obedience, he has power also to cast the insolvent debtor into prison, for not paying of it.

I find another objection stated, and answered, by the same author, that I suppose will naturally arise, in some people's minds, against what I have said, viz. Why then do you preach Christ to us; call us to come to him, to believe, repent, and use the means of salvation? Ans. Because it is your duty so to do. It is your duty to accept of Christ, as he is offered in the gospel, to repent of your sins, and to be holy in all man­ner of conversation: These things are commanded you of God, and his command, not your ability, is the measure of your duty. Moreover, the calls, and exhortations, are the means, that God is pleased to make use of, for converting his elect, and working grace in their hearts:—Upon very good ground may we, at the command of God, who raileth the dead, go to their graves and cry in his name, ‘Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.’

But, methinks it would be well for sinners to consider, that their inability is a voluntary, wilful inability. It is not a na­tural inability, that hinders sinners from doing their duty to God, and their neighbour: But it is a moral inability, that hinders them from doing what God requires of them. Their wills are opposed to the will of God: Their understandings are dark, and they chuse to have them so. Their affectio [...] are turned away from God, and set upon the creature more than upon the creator; and sinners are well pleased that it should be so. God requires that we give him our hearts, in all that we do; but an unregenerate sinner, never did give his [Page 20] heart to God, in any thing that ever he did; he never gave his heart to God, in one religious duty that ever he attempted to do: And the reason is, because he does not love to give his heart to God; if he chose to give his heart to God, it would not be in the power of men, or devils, to hinder him from it; and therefore, the whole of the blame lies at the sinner's door. Therefore, sinners should know, that unless their hearts are changed by renewing grace, they never will, they never can perform one act of obedience acceptable to God. And there­fore, are far from doing much towards their own salvation. They must be born again—born from above, or they cannot see the kingdom of God.

Perhaps some unregenerate sinner will say, If I thought I should do nothing towards my salvation, by all my prayers, reading the word of God, attending upon public worship, maintaining the gospel, and giving alms to the needy, &c. I would leave off all those duties, and try no more.—Truly thou hast brought out the affair just as it is; and at once has discovered the spring, and motive of all thy good doings. Not a love to God, nor to his law; but a seeking justification by thy own doings. And this is the highest motive, of all the doings of the unregenerate. But let me tell thee, if ever thou art converted, thou wilt be brought to closer work than this; thou wilt be brought to as great extremity, as Israel was in Egypt; that keep the law you must; and keep the law you cannot, till you are driven out of all self-dependance, and brought to fall into the hand of God just as you be, a poor, wretched, helpless, miserable, blind and naked creature; and will have no plea before God, but sovereign mercy, and that only, through the merits of a crucified Redeemer.

Again, from what has been said, it may be seen, what was the grounds, and reasons of our separation from the establish­ed churches—The three capital articles in our separation from the standing churches, were these, viz. First, Their holding to, and practising upon, the principle of graceless communion.—Secondly, The ministers, or ministry, ingrossing into their hands, the power of church government, and the power of minister-making, or the sole right of ordination.—Thirdly, The churches submitting under the government of a certain body of ecclesiastical laws, made in this State. To which may be added, many things of lesser note, as may be seen in the pre­ceding pages.

[Page 21] Moreover, from the preceding remarks, and observations, it may be seen, that the people called Separates, are, as to their profession of faith, and practice, truly scriptural, apostolical, calvinistical, and congregational.

Once more, from the foregoing remarks, it may be seen, that the sentiments advanced by Mr. F. and his brethren, are the soul, life, nerves, and sinews of arminianism, and border very closely upon the popish doctrine of merit. It seems that their notion about the salvation of sinners, is, that by the death of Christ, sinners are set again upon their own legs, to work out their own salvation; or at least that they can do much towards it. That sinners can be better to-day, than they were yesterday, and to-morrow, than they were to day, and so by little and little, they can grow into true christians—They do not tell sinners, th [...] they are totally depraved, and can never bear any fruit to God until they be born again. And that the new birth, is entirely effected by the agency of the spirit of God, ordinarily working by the word of truth.

What remains shall be by way of address. And, First, To those of my brethren of the strict congregational profession.

Beloved brethren, It appears that the days we live in, are perilous days; perilous on various accounts; but in none more than in the overspreading of errors, and false opinions, in matters of religion—The doctrine of justification by works, seems strangely to insinuate itself into mens minds—The doc­trine of graceless communion in the church, is again openly avowed by some—The doctrine of universal redemption, is making a strange, and unaccountable progress, in our land, of late—To which may be added, an ove [...] flowing of sin, and wickedness of every sort; cursing, swearing, lying, cheating, stealing, oppression, blasph my. sabbath breaking, and con­tempt of the gospel, &c. And to make the scene yet more dreadful, christians, that should b [...] the [...]alt of the earth, have lost their savor; wise and foolish virgins, slumbering and sleep­ing together; and to close up the horrors of our day, God himself, hath in a great measure, withdrawn the kind influ­ences of his good spirit from this people, and is leaving us to blindness of mind, and hardness of heart; and is become al­most as a stranger in our land, except it be by the judgments of his hand. Therefore, my brethren, let me entreat you to live up to the profession you have made; it is high time to awake out of sleep, to stand upon your watch, to witness a [Page 22] good confession, by your lives and conversation in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation. Especially have your minds rooted and grounded in the truth, that so you may not be easily carried about with every wind of doctrine; study the word of God; make it the man of your council; conform to its rules and precepts, in your whole conduct in the world; hold fast the things you have been taught, knowing of whom you have learned them; labour according to your ability, and op­portunity, to instill into the minds of those you are conversant with, the pure doctrines of the gospel; such as the total de­pravity of man by the fall; the necessity of regeneration, in order to seeing the kingdom of God; justification by faith without the deeds of the law; the absolute unfitness for church communion, without saving grace; the eternity of hell tor­ments, unless we be washed from our sins, in the blood of Christ, &c. Labour especially to instill these truths, and all other truths of the gospel, into the young and tender minds of your children, and those under your immediate care; that so they may be a generation of God's praise, and not of his wrath. Let your light so shine before men, that others beholding good work, may glorify your father which is in heaven, and ye become the epistle of Christ, read and known of all men.

Secondly, To those ministers, and churches, that hold to, and profess the principles advanced by Mr. F. in his charge to his son, Suffer me to propose the following queries: First, Whether it can be proved from the word of God, that a person believing in his heart, that an unregenerate person can do something besides sin; that is, can bear good fruit; that they can do much towards their own salvation; that if ever they are saved, they must work it out—can be a true believer in Je­sus Christ? Secondly, Whether a person professing the above sentiments, can be a visible saint? Thirdly, Whether it can be proved from the bible, that a minister, believing in his heart, and professing with his mouth, the above sentiments, can be a true minister of Jesus Christ? Or that a church, pro­fessing the above opinions, and also that grace, as a term of communion in the visible church, is a church-destroying opi­nion, that took its rise from the man of sin—can be a visible church of Christ?

Now, if the affirmative of the above queries, cannot be proved from the word of God, then I affirm these two things: First, That no rational being of the human race, is bound in [Page 23] duty, to hear such ministers preach; or to hold communion with such churches. Secondly, That it is the indispensable duty of all people, to come out from, or be separate from such ministers, or churches, and touch not the unclean thing.

Thirdly, As there is some ministers, and churches, in this land, that are called standing ministers, and churches, that differ as widely from the opinions advanced by Mr. F. as any of the Separates do; some at least, that I have some knowledge of; and I trust, are labouring to promote the same interest of the Redeemer, that I hope the people called Separates are en­gaged in. To all such, suffer me to propose the following queries: First, Whether it is not the duty of christians, that are agreed in the essentials of religion, to labour to walk toge­ther as far as possibly they can; especially in such a day as we live in, when the united strength of all true christians is called for, to oppose that flood of corruption, both in doctrine and practice, that is so prevailing in our land at this day? Thirdly, Whether the difference between such churches, and those of us that are called strict congregationalists, is so great, that it ought to bar us from a fellowship together, or a free communi­on one with another? Thirdly, Whether it is not the duty of such churches, to break off their connection with such churches as hold to, and practise upon, the principles, and opinions, advanced by Mr. F. at the aforesaid ordination?

Lastly, To people in general, into whose hands these pa­pers may come, especially in the State of Connecticut, I shall only say, that matters of a religious nature, are things of the highest concern; and therefore ought not to be taken up upon trust. The doctrine of an implicit faith, held to in the church of Rome, has long since been exploded by the Protestant churches. We ought not, therefore, to condemn others, in the thing that we allow. It is the duty of all men to search the scriptures for themselves; and form their opinions, and practice, in matters of religion, according to the best under­standing they can obtain, of the will of God, in his holy word. This is a duty, and a privilege, that all men have a right to enjoy, (provided they do not abuse it to acts of licentiousness, or disturbance of the commonwealth) and cannot be deprived of, without an infringement upon the liberties of conference; a liberty which no man ought to give up, or can give up, without parting with his birthright; and ought to be contend­ed for, even to the loss of all earthly things.—The principal [Page 24] design of my writing these papers, is to put people upon search­ing the scriptures for themselves; especially in those things that I have opposed Mr. F. in. And to let people know what the difference is, between those called standing churches, and those called (by an act of assembly passed in May sessions, 1777) strict congregationalists; who by said act are freed from taxes to support the established ministry, or meeting-houses in this State, under certain limitations, and restrictions; ¹ that so people, that are like minded with us, may take the benefit of said act of assembly, and not be obliged to pay their money for that which is not bread, nor their labour for that which satisfieth not.—It is likely, that many people, when they hear the words strict congregationalist used, form some barbarous ideas about the principle, and the professors of it; but if I may use the term without offence, I would say, that it is true christian whigism, and raises the noble mind of man above the low, servile, priest-ridden condition, that christendom has been of­ten sunk into, as whigism in a civil state does the minds of men above tyranny▪ and therefore, I have given a short ac­count of our principles, so far as it relates to gathering church­es, and church government; and hope, all my readers will carefully examine the same by the word of God, and form their practice according to the best light they can obtain therefrom.

P. S. It may be thought by some, that in what I have said, respecting those that plead for graceless communion, are ad­vocate, for the devil that I have reproached that good man, Mr. Stoddard. To which I would say, that we look upon it no unjust reproach to say that Solomon of old was an idolater, or at least introduced idolatry into Israel; and as his great grand-son Josiah, beat down his high places; [...] Mr. Stod­dard's grand-son Jonathan, hath fairly beat down what his grand-father laboured to build up! So that none since, have been able, to exculpate Mr. Stoddard, from being an advocate for the devil, in his pleading for graceless communion in the church. Although he was, perhaps, as good a man, as King Solomon of old.