his publick Worship and Service whereof Baptism is one and seeing God hath appointed us to Worship him both in it and in all other publick Duties and Services so as we may please him therein It followeth necessarily that he requireth true visible Faith in all whom he priviledgeth to baptize their Infants which yet is not expresly required in the fifth Proposition nor interpretatively in this Propos 7. The Members of Orthodox Churches being sound in the Faith and not scandalous in life and presenting due testimony thereof these occasionally coming from one Church to another may have their children baptized in the Church whither they come by virtue of Communion of Churches But if they remove their habitation they ought orderly to Covenant and to submit themselves to the Government of Christ in the Church where they settle their abode and so their children to be baptized It being the Churches duty to receive such into communion so far as they are regularly fit for the same Reply The regular Communion of approved Churches I look at as the Ordinance of Christ according to the 11th and 12th Posiâ—ions premised but this Proposition is so ambiguously expressed that it leaves me in the dark till some Questions be answered that the extent and compass of the sense and meaning of it may be better cleared They distribute it into two parts which they endeavour to prove severally but neither of them are sufficiently explained In the first part I Enquire What Churches they account Orthodox whether such onely as have the Truth of Doctrine as it is opposed to Heterodoxies and Errours about the Doctrine of Faith viz. Churches that are Heretical or such also which are right in Judgement and Practice in matters of Church-Order For both these the Church at Câ—losse was praised by Paul in Col 2.5 6. 2. What course the Church where the Members of such Churches desire to have their children baptized do take to know that such Members are sâ—und in the Fâ—ith For a Member of an Orthodox Church may hold and maintain dangerous Errours contrary to the Faith 1 Cor. 15.12 3. Whom they account to be not scandalous in life whether onely such as fall not under the censure of Civil Courts or also such as are justly offensive to Gods People by their sinful and disorderly walking For they say in their proof of the second part of this Proposition that to administer Baptism to such as walk in disorder would be to administer Christs Ordinance to such as are in a way of sin and disorder which ought not to be done 2 Thess 3.6 1 Chron 15.13 and would be contrary to that Rule 1 Cor. 14.40 4. What they account due Testimony whether that which is given of them by the Church from whence they come or onely that which they may have from some in the place where they live and have been but a little while whether they be Members of the Church or not 5. What they mean by their occasionally coming from one Church to another whether they take a due course to know that their occasion of coming be approved by the Church whence they come or not 6. When they say They may have their children baptized in the Church whither they come by virtue of the Communion of Churches Quaere 1. Whether they have Letters of Recommendation from the Church whence they come whereby that Church desireth this fruit of Communion with the Church where they would have their children baptized or not That being the orderly way of exercising Communion among Churches Rom. 16.1 2. 2 Cor. 3.1 3 Joh. ver 9 12. and Whether the Infant must be baptized as a Member in and by his Parents covevenanting for him of that Church whence his Parents come or as a Member of the Church where he is baptized and where the Parent is not a Member but onely hath this benefit of the Communion of Churches that himself is admitted to the Lords Supper pro tempore and his children to Baptism in a transient way When these and the like Questions are Answered I shall better know what to say to the first part of the Proposition then now I do In the mean time to the first Proof thereof I have already spoken in my Replies to Propos 1. 2. 5. 8. 2. To clear their meaning in the second part of this Proposition Quaere 1. Whether such Removers have an orderly dismission from the Church whence they come or not 2. Whether the Church where they settle their abode do subject themselves to the Government of Christ or not 3. Whether all refusing to Covenant with any Church whatsoever where they are necessita ed to settle their abode is to be judged to be disorderly walking and to savour of Profaneness and Separation 4. Whether if the Church in that place refuse to receive them into communion so far as they are regularly fit for the same or if they do not joyn in communion with that Church in the place where they dwelt it bâ—ing not to be approved Doth this their not being joyned dâ—bar their children from being baptized in another Church that is approved These and the like Questions being clearly Answered I shall understand the true and full sense of this Proposition and what to say to it So much may suffice for the present for Reply to their Answer to the first Question Quest II. Whether according to the Word of God there ought to be a Consociation of Churches and what should be the manner of it Answ The Answer may be given in the Propositions following Reply The Propositions following are eight As for the first four The first Concerning the full Power and Authority Ecclesiastical within it self of each particular Congregation of visible Saints in Gospel-Order furnished at least with a Teaching Elder and walking together in Truth and Peace And the second concerning The Sisterly Râ—lation of the Churches of Christ each to other And the third concerning The Vnion and Communion of such Churches And the fourth concerning The Acts of Communion I fully close with as well agreeing with the 11th and 12th Positions premised Excepting onely the sixth Act of Communion and that but in one part of it For To admonish one another when there is need and cause for it I confess is an Act of this Communion and which may be proved from Gal. 2.11 24. by proportion But for that other part of it To withdraw from a Church or peccant party therein after due means with patience used obstinately persisting in Errours or Scandals this must be taken with a grain of Salt They referre us to the Platform of Discipline Chap. 15. Sect. 2. Partic. 3. where they fetch a proof for this withdrawing from Mat. 18.15 16 17. by proportion But there seems to be a threefold dispr portiâ—â— between that and this For 1. There the Withdrawing is a consequent and ff ct of tâ—e Câ—urches authoritative Censure of aâ— obstinate offender after the first
Baptized Members of the Church are not orderly Continued and Confirmed Members unless when they grow up to years they do before the Lord and his People profess their Repentance and Faith in Jesus Christ To say no more of this Renowned Parker speaking of the Interpretation of those words Laying on of Hands in Heb. 6.2 cites many judicious Writers whose judgemâ—nts he expresseth in words to this purpose g Pâ—rker â—e Pâ—â— F â—les in â—ap â—e 〈◊〉 E lesia 〈◊〉 Seâ—â— 9. â— 13. That they who were baptized in their minority when they are grown up after that the Church had approved their Faith by the Symbol of Imposition of Hands they were admitted Members of the Church This was according to sound Doctrine in the Primitive times as Parker saith Now we demand How they can be admitted as Members who are already as compleat and perfect Members as any in the Church But the ancient Doctrine wâ—s h Tertullian Antiquissimum uâ—issimum That Children who were baptized in their minority after they shall come to profess their Faith so as to be accepted of the Church may be admitted as Members Therefâ—re according to the ancient Dâ—ctrine Such children are not as compleat and perfect Members as any in the Church Yea therefore it follows That when they are Adult in case they do not by holding forth Faith and Repentance joyn unto the Church that then they â—o not retain their Membe ship whicâ— tâ—ey had in minority Fourthly it hath beâ—n Obâ— cted That we will not suffer Children to come under the Watch and Care of the Church Answ We are so farre from being of that Opâ—nion aâ— thâ—t we verily fear there is great guilt lies upon thâ— Churches â—â—câ—use â—hey have neglected their duty towards the Children in questiâ—n Iâ— is as clear to us as the Light at Noon or to use Tertullians pâ—r sâ— as if it were written with the Beams of the Sun Thâ—◠〈◊〉 special Care even Church-care and Inspection is due over thos Children that are Born within the Gates of Zion Hâ—ppy â—ight it be for us all if the issue of these troublesome Controversies might be onely to awaken Churches to stricter Watch and Diligence in Overseeing those Children that are in minority Onely we conceive that the Watch over them is to be Mediate according to the state of their Membership The Church is to see that the Parents do their duty toward their Children in bringing them up in the Nurture and Admonition of the Lord. i 〈…〉 And if when they shall be adult they do not bring forth fruits of Repentance and Faith then as the Fig-tree which did not bear fruit was to be cut down the Church is to disown them as having no part in the Lord and to declare that they by their unbelief have Discovenanted themselves But we see not sufficient warrant from the Word of God to proceed to a formal Excommunication of the Children in question because that is applicable unto none but those who have been in full Communion Now if this be all that is striven after That Church-children might be brought under Church-watch why sâ—ould the Contentions of Brethren be like the bars of a Castle that cannot yield Lastly it hath been Objected That the reason of our Dissenting from the major part of the Synod was Weakness and Ignorance and meer Wilfulness in that we could bring no Arguments but what were sufficiently refuted Answ The very same thing hath been said of those Worthy Champions who stood up for the Congregational-Way in opposition to the Assembly at Westminster that k See tâ—esâ— wordâ— in The 〈◊〉 aâ—â—inst 〈…〉 P. p 21 â—â— Their Arguments were weak and ridiculous and had been Confuted and sufficiently answered and that themselves were Self-conceited and Obstinate But these Criminations were unworthy Calumniations It was a common Reproach cast upon the Christians of old That they were all weak and unlearned men which made Jerome write that Book De viris Illustribus So Stapleton makes no bones to call Whitaker An Asse and A Fool. And the same hissing of the Serpent have we seen in the Prelates against the Renowned Non-Conformists But we suppose their saying so did not prove it was so Nevertheless we are content to accept of the Charge when we are charged with Weakness and Folly Let us be fools for Christs sake or for his Truth Let us fall so the Truth may rise let us sit in the dust so that Truth may sit in the Throne We deserve not to be otherwise esteemed then as Weakness and Ignorance it self Yet let us not be reputed Obstinate and such as are and will be blinde because we dare not betray the Truth and sin against our Consciences For our weightiest Reasons never were Answered unto any tolerable satisfaction even to this day If it be demanded here What our Reasons were why we accorded not with the major part of the Synod We shall by the help of Christ and in the fear of God declare what our chief Reasons were which caused our Dissent which when they are Answered we shall lay down our Opinion as knowing that it is Nullus pudor ad meliora transire 1. The Synod did acknowledge That there ought to be true saving Faith in the Parent according to the judgement of rational charity or else the childe ought not to be baptized We intreated and urged again again that this which they themselves acknowledged was a Principle of Truth might be set down for a Conclusion and then we should all agree But those Reverend Persons against whom we placidly disputed would not consent to this though our Unity lay at the Stake for it 2. We have not Warrant in all the Scripture to apply the Seal of Baptism unto those Children whose Parents are in a state of unfitness for the Lords Supper Those Acts 2.41 who were Baptized continued breaking Bread also ver 42. 'T is granted That those Children were Circumcised amongst the Jews whose Parents were for a time debarred from the Passeover but that was onely upon accident of Ceremonial Uncleanness which alters not the case for Unless the father were in a state of fitness for the Passeover he was not fit to have his childe circumcised The like may be said concerning the Gospel-Passeover and the Gospel-Circumcision Neither do we reade that in the Primitive times Baptism was of a greater latitude as to the Subject thereof then the Lords Supper but the contrary The l Catechun eni ad Baptisterium nunquam admittendi sunt Concil Araus c. 19. Catechumeni were not to be Baptized before they were fit for the Lords Supper And thence when through the darkness of the times the Lords Supper was not administred except at Easter as 't is called the m Concil Gern dist 4. Baptism of the Catechumeni was deferred until then also In the Dawnings of Reformation in England our Juell could plead against Harding that n Juels Reply to Harding p.
2. Position 1 The Rules given of Christ Concerning the Communion of Christian Churches are 1. Concerning the Ground of it which is their Spiritual Union under one Head Christ Eph. 1.22 23. in one Body one Spirit one Hope of their calling one Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father of all and they must endeavour to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace Eph. 4.3 4 5 6. As they have one common Faith Tit. 1.4 so they must contend earnestly for the faith once given to the Saints Jude ver 3. They have also one and the same Rule Gal. 6 16. The same Officers in all Churches Tit. 1.5 The same Ordinances and Decrees 1 Cor. 7.17 16.1 Acts 16.4 The same Order Col. 2.5 The same Doctrine 1 Cor. 4.17 15.11 Gal. 1.7 which all the Churches must hold fast Rev. 3.3 and renounce all other Doctrines Gal. 1.8 9. 1 Tim. 1.3 6.3.14 2. Concerning the Manner of it for as the Church generally considered is the Mother of all the faithful Gal 4.26 so particular Churches are Sisters each to other Cant. 8.8 and there is a Brotherhood of visible Saints throughout the World 1 Pet. 5.9 Hence the manner of their communion must be social as between equals none exercising jurisdiction and authority over another Par in parem non habet imperium The giving of Laws to the Churches is Christs Prerogative Iâ—m 4.12 who hath also committed the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven to each particular instituted Church to be exercised by each Church within it self without dependance upon the Authority of other Churches in re propriâ Mat. 16.19 1 Cor. 5.12 3. Concerning the Things wherein this communion must be exercised 1. In general in mutual Helpfulness according to God by mutual care one of and for another 1 Cor. 10.24 Phil. 2.20 21. 2. Particularly 1. By Spiritual Helpfulness and care exercised 1. In mutual Prayer and endeavours for their edification Cant. 8.8 9. 1 Cor. 12 7. 1 Pet. 4.10 11. and for their confirmation and establishment in the truth Acts 15.41 16.4 5. and for strengthning each other in the regular application of Church-censures to their delinquent Members 2 Thess 3.14 2 Tim. 4.15 2. By outward Supplies unto their Necessities Acts 11.29 Rom. 15.26 27. 2 Cor. 8.2 c. throughout that Chapter 3. By their mutual care to avoid Offences 1 Cor. 10.32 4. That when a Church findeth need in respect of want of light or of competent consent within it self it is their duty to seek help by the counsel of some other Church or Churches and the other Church or Churches ought to give it in a brotherly way from the Word of God not by the Elders apart but in the presence and with concurrence of the Brethren Acts 15.4 22 23. nor may they bind such a Câ—urch to rest in their determination further then the same shall be found upon searching the Scriptures to seem gâ—od to the Holy Ghost as well as to them Acts 15.28 or if Neighbour-Churchâ—s finde it neâ—essary to offer their helpfulness to a Church in case of the Officers Male-administration or of Errours and Scandals and Schisms and the like cases to prevent the infection of themselves or to remove corruption from such a Church which being obstinate in their way seeketh not for help the Neighbour-Churches ought to exercise the Commâ—nion of Churches by enquiring to finde out the truth and by admonishing the offending Church in a brotherly way whereunto that Church ought to submit according to God Râ—m 16.17 Gâ—l 2 11-14 And if it obstinately persisteth in scandalous Evils after convincing light held forth the offended Churches may renounce communion with them to avoid fellowship in their sin Eph. 5.11 1 Tim. 5.22 Position 12 The Rules given by Christ to Christiâ—n Churche in the Premises and the lâ—ke are to be Received by all the Churches and the Members of them and to be obeyed as his Laws and Commandments who is our â—ne Law-giver In observing whereof and not otherwise the Purity and Peace of Christian Churches will â—e preserved by the blessing of Câ—rist Iam 4.12 Mat 28.20 1 Câ—â— 14.37 1 Tim. 6 13. Gal 6 16. These and the like being general Principles of Truth the particular Determinations of the Synod in the Two Questionâ— are to be Examined by them and so far and no further to be Approved and Receâ—ved as a consent and harmony of them with these may be cleared to the consciences of men rightly informed which may be manifested by a right application and compariâ—g them together 2. The Application of the former Theses or Posiâ—ions to the Questiâ—ns and Answerâ— as they are stated and expressâ—d by the Reverend Elders in their Printed Book followeth The first Quâ—stion propounded to them by the Honoured General Court was Quest 1. Who are the Subjects of Baptism Answ The Answer may be given in the following Propositions Which are seven in number Propos 1 They that according to Scripture are Members of the visib e Church are the Subjects of Baptism Propos 2. The Members of the visible Church according to Scripture are Confederate visible Believers in particulâ—r Churches and their infant-seed i. e. children in mâ—nority whose nexâ— Parents one or both are in Covenant Reply I cannot approve the two first Propositions without some change of the terms In the first thus they that accordâ—ng to Christ's Oâ—dâ—nance are regular and actual Membâ—â— c. The second thus The actual and regular Members of thâ— visible Câ—urch accoâ—ding to Christs Ordinance arâ— c. The necâ—ssity of this alteration will appear if either the p emised Positions be duely co sidered wherewith these Proposit onâ— wâ—ll not otherwâ—se agree or if the Proofs alledged by them from Scripture for coâ—firmation of these two Propositions be duely exâ—mined oâ— if what is hereafter to be Replied unto the following Propâ—sitions shall be duely weighed Propos 3. Thâ— infant-seed f confederate visible believers are Members of the same Church with their Parentâ— and when grown up are person lly under the Watcâ— Discipline and Government of the Churâ—h This Proposition câ—nsisteth of two parts both which they endeavour to prove distinctly 1 Thâ—t â—hey are Members of the same Church wiâ—h heir Parent This may pass in a rig t sense being understood of Mediâ—te Member in and by thâ—ir Parents covenantiâ—g for them in their infancy or minority I shall no oppose it 2 That when hâ—y are g own uâ— hey are pe sâ—n lly under the Wâ—â—ch D scipline aâ—d Government of the Churâ—â— This expressiâ—n câ—llâ— for serious consideration and the Proofs of it â—eâ—uiâ—e due exâ—â—inaâ—ion 1. F r the Expâ—â—ssion the meaning of â—t â—â—â—ms to be this That when the childâ—en that were baptized in their minority are grown up to years of discretion or become men they are Members or as they speak afterwâ—rd 〈◊〉 Membeâ— and by that membership are under the Watch Discipline and Government of the Church But what
suitably tâ— hâ—ir membersh p the first in and under their Parents the sâ—cond in and by th mselves being in full communâ—on with the Church Yet I do not finde any where in Sâ—riptâ—re that such adult pâ—rso s as they call meer Members are styled Disciple or accounted Membâ—â—s The adult persons in Mâ—â— 8 20. must observe and do all Chrâ—st commandmentâ— thâ—râ—fore the Disciples there intended with reference to adult persons are members in full communâ—on Arg 4. They are in Church-covenant thâ—râ—fore subject to Church-power Gen. 17.7 with 18.19 Reply They are not in covenant â—e fuâ—â— beâ—ng adâ—lt and not admitted into Câ—urch-communion in â—ll the Oâ—d n nces therefore are not subject to Church power That â—ext in â—en 17.7 hath respâ—ct especially to Isaac vâ—r â—9 for in Is â—c was Abrâ—hams seed to be called Geâ— 2â— 12 So the châ—ldren of the flâ—sh are not the children of God but th children of the promâ—sâ— are accounted for the seed Rom. 9.8 and The Gentiles are adopted through faith in Christ Gal. 3.26 for it is in Christ either apprehended by pe sonal fâ—ith as in adult p rsons or coâ—prehending châ—ldren in tâ—eir Parents Covenant that the Covenant is everlastiâ—g and so to be perpetuâ—lly continued in the substance of it though by mutable siâ—ns Jâ—â— us The Covenant of Grace is eternal though it was to be vâ—sibly sealed by circumcâ—siâ—n tâ—ll the coming of Câ—râ—st and after the comiâ—g of Christ by Baptism perptâ—ally unto tâ—e end of the World There is no difference between us concerning the infant-seed but onely concerning adult peâ—sons who arâ— by age in a capacity of covenant ng for themsâ—lves and theirs Let these approve thâ—n faith in Christ to the charitable discretion of the Church and so be râ—ceived into Covenant and Church-communion personally and then and not othâ—rwise they are râ—gularly subject to Châ—rch-power Their second proof from Gen 18.19 hath been spoken to before when I examined their fiâ—st Aâ—gument for this third Propositiâ—â— Aâ—g 5. They aâ—e Subjects of the Kingdome â—f Christ and thâ—â—eforâ— under the Laws and Government of his â—ingdome Ezek. 3 25 26 Reply This Aâ—gâ—ment may justly be retorted against themselves and â—he Pro f of it For th Subjects of Christs Kingdome there meant are voluntary Subjâ—cts according to that Prophesie in â—sal 110 3. and such Subjects have full communion in all pâ—iviledgâ—s of Christs Kingdome and so under the Government of â—t But they deny that the meer Mem erâ— of whom they speâ—k have communion in all the priviledges of Christs Kingdome Therefore they are not under the Laws and Government of it and by Consâ—qâ—ence they are not Subjects of it Arg. 7. Baptism leaves the bâ—ptized of which number these châ—ldren are iâ— a state of subjection to the authoritaâ—ive teaching of Christs Minâ—â—â—ers and to the observation of all his commandments Mat. 28.19 20 and therefore in a state of subjection unto D cipâ—ine Reâ—l This is not another Argumenâ— but tâ—e sâ—me witâ— the third Argument thou h clothed with other words Thâ—â— fâ—re the same Answer may serve for this also Arg. 7. Elders are châ—rged o take hâ—ed â—nto â—nd to feed i. e. bâ—â—h to Teach and Rule compâ—râ— Ezek 34.34 all the Flock r Church over which the Holy Ghâ—st â—a h mâ—dâ— them Oâ—e s ers Acts 20.28 Thâ—t childâ—en are a part of the â—lâ—â—k was pâ—oved bef re anâ— sâ— Pâ—ul â—ccoâ—nts then writing to the same Flâ—ck or Church of Ephesus Ep. 6.1 Repâ—â— Be it so that children are part of the Flock which is all that I finde bâ—fâ—re proved and thaâ— Elders are chaâ—â—ed to tâ—ke heed and to feed â— e. bâ—th Tâ—ach and Râ—lâ— all thâ— Flâ—ck suitably to their different capacities yet all this concernâ—th no such gâ—own persons to whom they deny full Câ—urcâ— commâ—nion For they that are of competent age and understanding must be orderly joyned to tâ—e Church by holding forth their calling and faith in Christ to the satisfaction of the Chuâ—ch accâ—rdâ—ng to tâ—e Rule and so to be received into fâ—llowshâ—p of the Covenant and Communion by their peâ—sonal right without whâ—ch they are not to be accounted â—f the Flock or Church Nor did Pâ—â—â— so accâ—unt such But tâ—ose children noted in Epâ— 6 1 were eitâ—er in their minority and so he puts in their duty in that Epistle as part of their Catechetical iâ—struction or if they were adult they were personally joâ—ned to the â—hurch in communion and so were under the teaching and dâ—scipline of the Câ—uâ—ch Arg. 8 â—t eâ—wise Iâ—â—eligion and Apostacy would inevitably break into Churches and no wâ—y lâ—fâ— by Chrâ—sâ— to prevent or heal the sâ—me which wâ—uâ—d also bring maâ—y Câ—â—rch-members under â—hat dreadfulâ— jâ—dgement of being let alone in their wickedness Hos 4 16 17. R â—ly 1. There is no cause of fear that Irreligion and Apostacy will break into Churches if tâ—e Poâ—ter look well unto the D ors of the Lords Housâ— that no adult persons be râ—ceâ—ved into peâ—sâ—nal Membership but such as regâ—larly approve their personal fi nes for all Church-communion Oâ— if such evâ—ls break into the Church thâ—ough the hypocrisiâ— of such aâ— creep in uâ— awares Jâ—de ve 4. yet then Christ â—ath lâ—ft a clear and plain way to prevent and heal the same by suâ—jecting such uâ—dâ—r â—he Wâ—tch and D scipl ne and Gâ—vernment of the Chuâ—câ— But the admitting of such adult persons as are not qualâ—fied for Church communion in all O dinances will be found in the â—ssâ—e the cause of the breaking in of Irreligion and Apostacy into Churches by the fault of men who gaâ—heâ— wi hout Chrâ—st and â—â—â—ive suâ—h as he rej ctâ—tâ— Nor w ll the Churcâ—es censuring of such prevent or heal those evâ—ls sâ—eing â—e blâ—ssâ—th onely his own Instâ—tutions not mens Devices Humane Inventions usually cause the Evils wh ch they pretend to cure as we see in the Lov-feasts which brake love among the Coâ—inâ—hians 1 Cor. 11 18-22 2 Though no Chuâ—ch-way is left by Chrâ—st for preventing or healing such evils in men that should not be of the Chuâ—ch yet if they were kept out of the Church till their fitness of communion should appear as these evils and the like would not inevitably break into Churches so neither need any Church-members be let alone in their wickedness sâ—eing Christ hath delegated the Keys of the Kingdome of Heaven to binde and â—â—sâ— and Diâ—ections how tâ— manage them toward delinquent Members that are orderly admitted into Church-communion Mat. 16.17 18 19. Nor need they who are not thus joyned to the Church be let alonâ— if the Authority in Familâ—es and in the Common-wealth be wisely aâ—d faithfâ—lly managed by the Rulers of both to restrain tâ—ose under their power f om evil companies and courses and to constrain them to a constant reverent attendance to all Family duties of Relig on and to the Word publickly Preachâ—d in Church-Assemblâ—es and to the Sanct fâ—i g of the Christian Sabbâ—th
while they are such leaving his adult children to Covenant for themselves if he hath any such children when himself enters into Covenant 2. Adams Covenant was onely with the Lord not with any Church as the Covenant of coâ—federate Parents is and therefore if Adam had stood his posterity had not been Church-members thereby as the infants of Church-confederates 3. Nor doth the Parents breaking his Covenant make his children Heirs of Condemnation as Adams did all Mankinde So that this example of Adam is impertinently produced in this case of infants and their Parents confederating for them not as their publick person but as Undertakers for their infant-seed by Gods Institution Nor indeed is any to be accounted a publick person as Adam was but Jesus Christ for all that are in him Rom. 5.14 to 20. Nor doth their similitude of a Prince giving Lands to a man and his heirs successively while they continue loyal suit the case in question concerning Infants who cannot be visibly disloyal nor that concerning adult persons not regularly joyned to the Church as immediate Members whose Parents were godly when they covenanted for them in their infancy For they have cut off the Entail of the Covenant from themselves and their Posterity by their personal disloyalty so that nothing is given to them and theirs by their Covenant which they presume to usurp without warrant from God They say true that A member is one who according to Rule or according to divine Institution is within the visible Church But that refutes nothing that I have said concerning mediate and immediate Members for both are within the Church according to Rule and Divine Institution though both have not full communion with the Church in all Ordinances which is the priviledge of all adult persons who are immediate Members by their own personal right 1 Cor. 5.12 They frame an Objection thus Obj. If children be compleat and immediate members as their Parents are then they shall immediately have all Church-priviledges as their Parents have without any further act or qualification And they Answer it thus Ans It followeth not All priviledges that belong to members as such do belong to the children as well as to the parents But all Church-priviledges do not so A member as such or all members may not partake of all priviledges but they are to make progress both in memberly duties and priviledges as their age and capacity and qualifications do fit them for the same Reply The intendment of the Objection as I apprehend is to shew that compleat and immediate Membership as such doth infer compleat and immediate communion in all Church-priviledges But children in minority have not compleat and immediate communion in all Church-priviledges without some further act or qualification Therefore such children are not compleat and immediate Members as such Now to this their Answer is insufficient For the best Members have need to make progress in memberly duties and qualifications to fit them more and more for Church-priviledges Yet all have that communion that suits their Membership Infants in Baptism the Watch Prayers and Blessing of the Church by their Parents covenanting for them Adult persons orderly and regularly joyned by their personal covenanting for themselves in the Seals Voting and Censures which belong to them as such Members Nor doth the Scripture any where allow the Church to admit any one by personal covenanting for themselves and theirs into any other Membership then compleat and immediate But Infants are not capable of such Membership without some further personal act and qualification when they shall become adult Therefore their Infant-membership is not compleat and immediate 3. That their Membership still continues in adult age and ceaseth not with their Infancy appears 1. Because Scripture persons are broken off onely for notorious sins or incorrigible impenitency and unbelief not for growing up to adult age Rom. 11.20 Reply 1. When I affirm that their mediate Membership continueth during their minority while they are under the Institution and Government of Parents c. I deny that that Membership continues in adult age and when they are at their own disposal or have children of their own to covenant for because then the reason of their mediate Membership ceaseth they being by age capable of covenanting for themselves 2. Their first Reason doth not prove that the Membership of all baptized in Infancy continues in adult age For the Text alledged speaketh onely of such as have been received into compleat and immediate membership regularly by their personal Faith and Covenanting with the Church visibly who are broken off either by the just judgement of God as the unbelieving Nation of the Jews are or by the just Censure of the Church Whereas our question is not of such but of adult persons that break off themselves from the Covenant by profane neglect or contempt of the Ordinances or unsuitable Conversation Who ever said that any were broken off for growing up to adult age Such intimations should be forborn by godly men 2. The Jews children circumcised did not cease to be members by growing up but continued in the Church and were by virtue of their membership received in infancy bound unto various duties and in special unto those solemn professions that pertained unto adult members not as then entring into a new membership but as making progress in memberly duties Deut. 26 2-10 16.16 17. with Gal. 5.3 Reply 1. That the Jews children circumcised were bound to various duties and to those solemn professions that pertained to adult members when themselves were grown up is clear enough by the Texts alledged and sundry other Whereunto I willingly adde that Baptism also bindeth the Infant-seed of Confederates to various Gospel-duties and especially this of using all means that Faith may be wrought in their hearts unto obeying the Call of God and then holding forth their Faith unto the Church that they may take hold of the Covenant for themselves and theirs and so become compleat and immediate Members But 2. It is not proved by those Texts that when they were adult they did not enter into a new Membership rather the contrary appears in Deut. 26.17 18. For they entred into that Covenant personally and immediately not in and by their Parents as they did in Infancy Gen. 17.7 If convenanting be the Form of Church-membership which they affirm then a different form of covenanting makes a different kinde of Church-membership Immediate covenanting makes immediate Members Mediate covenanting makes mediate Members Their third Reason is Those relations of Born-servants and Subjects which the Scripture makes use of to set forth the state of children in the Church by Lev. 25.41 42. Ezek. 37.25 do not as all men know cease with infancy but continue in adult age Whence also it follows that one special end of membership received in infancy is to leave persons under engagement to service and subjection to Christ in his Church when grown up when they are fit
for it and have most need â—f it Reply 1. Those Relations of born Servants and Subjects in the Text alledg d have d fferent respects That Lev. 25. was typical figurin the time of Grace whereby now Christ hath freed u f o the servitude of Sin and Satan 〈◊〉 8.32 36. Râ—â— 6.14 18. to bâ—come the Servants of God in Christ Rom. 6 22. 1 C r. 7.23 Parents and children so far aâ— they have inâ—â—râ—st in the Redemption wrought by Christ as they are freed by him from other Lord so they are bound thereby serve him all the dayeâ— of their lâ—fâ— Luke 1.74 75. Therefore this relatâ—on doth not cease with infancy but continueth in adult age But this doth nothing concern the thing in question concerning M diate Membershi The other Text in Ezek. 37.25 is a Prophecy of the calling of the Elect Nation of the Jews and of the state of the Church under the New Jerusalem the difference between which and the Chrâ—stian Gentiles now I have formerly shewn so that neither doth â—hat fit the question But 2. I grant though not as following thence That one special end of membership received in infancy is to leave persons under engagement to service and subjection to Christ in his Church when grown up when they are fittest for it and have mâ—st need of it The engagement is strong both on the Parents To train up their children from their Infancy in the nurture and admonition of the Lord Eph. 6.4 and upon the Children To know the God of their Parents and to serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing minde 1 Chron. 28.9 and upon the Church To exercise their Watchfulness that both Parents and Children do their duty helping them also therein with their Instructions and Prayers and Power which is given for Edification as the case may require Yet when all this is done neither can the Parents nor the Church give Grace unto the Children that when they become adult they may be spiritually fit for personal and immediate Membership and to bring them into it without such fitness visibly is to profane the Ordinances and to pollute the Lords Sanctuary Reas 4. There is no ordinary way of cessation of membership but by Death Dismission Excommunication or Dissolution of the Society none of which is the case of the persons in question Reply This enumeration is insufficient there is another ordinary way of cessation of Membership i. e. Desertion Thus Esau's Membe sh p ceaâ—ed and so may the Membership of others though they abide in the place where the â—hurch â—s yet if being adult they regard nâ—t to joyn with the Church by their personal â—nd immediate Confederâ—tion nor to fit themselves for it these despise the Chuâ—ch of God And if that is sufficient to deprive thâ—se of all hurch priv ledg s who were before in personal and immediate Church fellowsh p when they forsake it 1 Job 2.19 much more those who never had such Membership nor have approved their Spirituâ—l fitness for it to the Churches charitable judgement nor truly desire and end aâ—our so to do What can the mediate Membershâ—p whâ—ch such had in Infancy advantage them for continuing thereby still in Membership when being adult they live in the breach of that Covenant whereby they were left under engagement in their Infancy unto service and subjection to Christ in the Church Reas 5. Either they are when adult Members or Non-members if Non-members then a person admitted a Member and sealed by Baptism not cast out nor deserving to be may the Church whereof he was still remaining become a Non-member and out of the Church and of the unclean world which the Scripture acknowledgeth not Reply A Freemans childe suppose of London or any other Corporation was free-born and might in his minority trade under his father yet being grown up he must personally enter into the common Engagement of Freemen and be accepted of the Company as his father was unto all Duties and Liberties of that Society in his own person else he may not trade for himself If it be said Why so either he is a Freeman or a Non-freeman It will be readily answered He is a Non-freeman and that by his own defaulâ— If it be said He was Free by his Fathers Copy and is not dis-franchised by any publick Censure nor hath deserved so to be may such an one the Society whereof he was still remaining become a Non-freeman and out of that Society c The answer will easily and readily be given He hath lost his Freedome by not entring in his own person into the common Engagement of Freemen to the Duties whereunto all Freemen are personally bound So and much more justly it is in this case An adult person makes himself to become a Non-member as to priviledges by not performing the Duties whereunto he was bound by his Parents Covenant for him in his minority and by his not regularly covenanting as his Parents did And his is according to Scripture which tells us that Circumcision received in Baptism may become by his own fault being adult no Circumcision Rom. 2.25 Those Texts in Rom. 11.16 1 Cor. 7.14 Gen. 17.7 are not applicable to the adult persons in question but onely to Infants and Children in minority Propos 6. Such Church-members who either by death or some other extraordinary Providence have been inevitably hindred from publick acting as aforesaid yet having given the Church cause in judgement of charity to look at them as so qualified and such as had they been called thereunto would so have acted their children are to be baptized Reply This Proposition may not be granted For 1. It granteth the priviledge of Church-membership to such as are not actually and regularly Church-members which is contrary to Christs Ordinance whereby Baptism being a publick Church-Ordinance is due onely to them who have a publick state and Interest such are onely the Members of the publick Ecclesiastical Body the Church Hence 1. An ordinary Minister cannot orderly perform an act proper to his Office in reference to Church-communion to any that are not regularly and actually Members of the visible Church without great usurpation as if a man do a work proper to Magistracy to one that is not under his Magistratical Power he is an Usurper So it is in this case of a Minister To administer Baptism is an act of his Office-power If he administer Baptism to children whose Parents are not regularly in Church-order in so doing why may not the Lord say He is an Usurper Suppose an unbaptized person professing his Faith and qualified according to the description in the sixth Proposition yet deferring for some probable causes to adjoyn himself to the Church for the present should desire Baptism of any of these Ministers who framed this Proposition Should they administer it to him and so do a proper work of their Office upon him If yea if they admit him to Baptism why not to the Lords
Supper and to the choice of Officers and to the Censures of the Church either actively or passively for all these are Actions and Ordinances of one general nature and it is meerly his want of Church-order that debars him from them 2. The Church may not receive into any priviledge of Church-communion such as Baptism is whatever cause they seem to have in the judgement of charity to think them fit for Church-membership and such as had they been called would have so acted until they be actually in publick Church-order no more then the children of every good Subject of the King may be admitted into the special Prerogatives of a Corporation whereof themselves or their next Parents are not regularly free All things must be done in order 1 Coâ— 14.40 whereunto what is more contrary then that he who is not regularly and personally of a publick Society should have Fellowship in a publick Priviledge proper to that Society Yet they say this which the Proposition holds forth is manifest 1. Because the main foundation of the right of the childe to priviledge remains viz. Gods Institution and the force of his Covenant carrying it to the generations of such as are keepers of the Covenant i. e. not visible breakers of it c. Reply The Parents of the children in question are visibly breakers of the Covenant which was sealed to them by Baptism in their Infancy and obliged them to service and subjection to Christ in his visible Church having confederated personally and regularly for themselves and theirs as their Parents did before them If they do not this they are out of that order by their own fault wherein they might have given their children right to Baptism according to Christs Institution That right which Parents have nor for themselves unto Baptism if they were unbaptized they cannot â—e to their children They who are not Members in their own personal and immediate right cannot give a right of membership to their children And though their Membership in Infancy was distinct from their Parents yet being onely mediate by their Parents covenanting for them it ceaseth when they become adult by their own fault in that they were not orderly joyned to the Church immediately by their personal covenanting for themselves and theirs regularly 2. Because Parents not doing what is required in the fifth Proposition is through want of opportunity which is not to be imputed as their guilt so as to be a barre of the Childes priviledge Reply 1. It hath been already proved in our examining the fifth Proposition that more is required to fit one that is adult for Church-membership then is there expressed viz. Faith in Christ made visible to the Church without which they are not regularly Church-members Now Baptism administred by ordinary Church-Officers to such as are out of Church-order is profaned as Circumcision was by the Shechemites and would have been by the Ishmaelites and Edomites and the posterity of Abraham by Keturah if it had been administred to their children when their Parents were not joyned to the Church of God or abode not in it in the Families of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. For 1. One end of Baptism now as it was of Circumcision then is to seal Church-communion 1 Cor. 12.13 it is a publick Testimony of the Admission of the party baptized into the Family of God The Father Son and Holy Spirit into whose Name he is baptized Mat. 28.20 either immediately if he be adult by his personal Covenanting for himself and his seed or mediately if in his minority by his next immediate Parents Covenanting for him This the Parent in question hath not done Hence the want hereof is a bar to his childes Baptism 2. The regular and lawful use of Bâ—ptism now as of Circumcision of old presupposeth both Gods Promise and his Faith who is to use it either upon himself or upon his Infant Therefore he that presumeth to use it being not so qualified visibly viz. not having before the Promise of Christ and Faith for Justification with Abraham doth he not treacherously usurp the Great-Seal of the King of Heaven and Earth If not surely it had need to be soundly cleared 3. God reckoneth that as done in his service to which there was a manifest desire and endeavour albeit the acting of it be hindred c Reply We must distinguish between private and publick Service in a publick state and order 1. In private Service God accepts the will for the deed when the actâ—ng of it is hindred either by God himself as Abrahams sacrificing his Son and Davids building the Temple or by the parties inability to do so much as he would as in that case 2 Cor. 8.12 and the like 2. But in publick Service in a publick state and order he doth not accept of that as done which is not done so far as to bring them into that state and order whatsoever their desires and endeavours have been for this were to overthrow and subvert that Order which God hath by his Institution established and to bring in Confusion Will God accept a man in doing acts of Office power proper to a Minister of a Church because he desired and endeavoured to be a Minister when he is not actually and regularly in Office Or may a Church receive unto Fellowship of the outward Seals of the Covenant such as are not actually and regularly joyned to the Church because they desired and endeavoured to be of the Church albeit their joyning with the Church was hindred To be baptized in voto will nothing advantage any to Church-fellowship though a Martyr in voto is accepted of God as a Martyr because though God searcheth and knoweth the heart yet the Church doth not De occultis non judicat Ecclesia secret things belong to God but revealed things to men and things are not manifested to the Church otherwise then by congruous actings nor in this case can they or theirs have a right to Church-priviledges otherwise then by actual joyning with the Church 4. The terms of the Proposition import that in charity that is here done interpretatively which is mentioned to be done in the fifâ—h Proposition expresly Reply 1. It 's an unwarrantable charity that makes such an interpretation for it is without warrant of any Rule in Scripture or in good Reason 2. If that which is mentioned to be done in the fifth Proposition expresly is here done interpretatively both being put together will not avail to put the Parent regularly into Church-fellowship in any sense and to give his Infant a right to Baptism thereby For by Christs Ordinance onely adult persons who have true Faith in Him and Holiness are adult Members of the invisible Church and the same persons making holy Profession thereof outwardly in the order of him appointed may be Members of the visible Church and they onely can give their Infant-seed a right unto Baptism For seeing without faith it is impossible to please God in matters of
aforesaid among themselves with special reference to those Churches which by Providence are planted in a convenient viciniâ—y though with liberty reserved without offence to make use of others as the nature of the case or the advantage of the opportunity may lead thâ—reunto Propos 6. The Churches of Christ in this Country having so good opportunity for it it is meet to be commended to them as their duty thus to consociate For 1. Communion of Churches being commanded and Consociation being an Agreement to Practise it this must needs be a Duty also Psal 119.106 Neh. 10 28 29. Reply Before I proceed to argue upon these Propositions some things should be premised in way of Enquiry that the terms may be rightly understood Quaere Whether by mutual and solemn Agreement they mean a Vow It seems by the Texts alledged by them in the first Proof of the sixth Proposition that they mean so and therefore I shall take it for granted that that is their meaning 2. When they say This solemn Agreement or Covenant must â—e made with special reference to Churches in vicinity Quaere 1. How many Churches in Vicinity or Neighbour-Churches must thus Covenant together 2. Whether they must have set times of Meeting for this purpose and who are to meet Whether Elders alone or others also sent from the Churches with them and how frequent these Meetings must be and whether the set times must be kept constantly though they have no present need of counsel from another 3. Whereas they speak of Liberty reserved without offence to make use of others as the nature of the case c. may lead thereunto Quaere How they may avoid giving offence to Neighbour-Churches if they use the help of Churches more remote Whether they must have their consent thereunto before they use them 4. Concerning the end and issue of this Consociation of Churches Whether they are bound thereby to acquiesce in the judgement and determinations of those Neighbour-Churches and to practise accordingly whether they see convincing light in the Scriptures or Arguments propounded to them or not under a Penalty of being judged by the rest to be Obstinate in Errour and Scandal and accordingly in time to have all holy communion with them withdrawn from them It seemeth by what was before said in the fixth Act of Communion for Answer to the first Question pag. 31. that this will be the end and issue of this Consociation unto any Church that shall dissent from the rest This Consociation they endeavour to prove to be a duty incumbent upon the Churches in New-England I shall briefly weigh their Reasons For 1. Communion of Churches being commanded and Consociation being but an Agreement to practise it this must needs be a duty also Psal 119.106 Nehem. 10.28 29. Reply It doth not necessarily follow till they have proved that Consociation of Churches by a mutual and solemn Covenant is commanded as Communion of Churches is Nor do the Texts alledged prove it in Psal 119.106 David swore to keep Gods righteous judgements and would perform it because though he was not bound to swear yet he had voluntarily sworn it and so was under a double bond to perform it for both his keeping Gods righteous judgements and his performing that Vow were commanded of God Deut. 10.13 with Psal 76.11 2. And his Vow was private betwixt God and himself Hence it will not follow that Churches are bound to consociate with a Vow or Covenant after the manner here described which is not proved to be a duty and may be unsafe for particular Churches That Coveâ—ant in Neh. 10.28 29. was their Church-covenant renewed and explained and so was a mutual solemn Engagement by entring into a Curse and into an Oath to which form we are not bound and Church-covenanting is Gods Ordinance Isa 19.21 56.4 to 8. 62.5 all which are Prophesies of the Churches under the Gospel But between the covenanting of a Church within it self and such a covenanting as this for the consociating of Churches there are considerable differences 1. Because this wants Warrant from the Scripture which that hath there being neither any Precept in Scripture commanding it nor any Pattern among the Primitive Churches planted or approved by the Apostles commanding it unto us 2. Nor is there like Reason for such Consociation of Churches by a mutual and solemn Agreement or Covenant between Churches in a vicinity as is for a Church-covenant within it self For the Church-covenant is necessary because without it the ends of Church-fellowship cannot be attained For 1. Each particular Church is a Spiritual Corporation which therefore must receive its being from a Spiritual Combination or Foederal Engagement 2. By virtue hereof they that had no natural impression to subject them to others or to give them power over them have mutual power each over other to command constrain as the case requires of which power they could not have been made partakers without mutual Agreement and Engagement 3. Hereby they come to enjoy such Spiritual and Ecclesiastick Priviledges unto which none can be admitted without the approbation and allowance of the whole which necessarily requires this Engagement to the whole which is by Covenant Thus Mr. Hooker argues to prove the necessity of a Church-covenant Survey part 1. chap. 4. p. 50 to 55. But the ends of Church-communion which is mutual helpfulness by counsel may be attained without such a Consociation by mutual Engagement by the Communion of Churches which of it self without any other Engagement gives Churches a right and interest in another way mutually for their help by counsel when their needs require it The Churches in New-England have by the blessing of Christ found the benefit of the Communion of Churches for setling Truth and Peace among them without such a Consociation and may so still 3. Such an Agreement between Churches will become a Snare unto them by straitning them in the use and exercise of their Church-power within themselves in re propriâ 1. If by virtue hereof they may not administer Church-censures within themselves without concurrence of Neighbour-Churches or Elders approbation sought and attained thereunto before Or 2. If thereby they stand bound under the fore-noted Penalty to rest in and practise according to the judgement and advice of such Churches having sufficient light and consent within themselves without them 3. Mr. Rutherfurd affirms That a convenient number of Churches having ordinarily conversing one with another shall voluntarily combine themselves in one Society this last gives in the formality of Classical Membership Lib. 2. p. 320. He addes When God hath made him a combined Member now by institution of one Presbyterian Church not of another though by ordinary converse with other Churches in case of scandal his example may prove prejudicial and infestuous to others yet this Presbytery must proceed in Excommunication against him because he is combined with them Thus you see by this voluntary combination of Churches a Church
become a Classical or Presbyterian Church and the Members by consenting thereunto become Members of a Classical Church and under the power of it so as to be Excommunicated by it And is not this Consociation to be looked at as a Snare to the Churches which 1. Transforms them from Congregational Churches into a Classical Church And 2. Subjects them under the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction of that Classical Church And 3. Without any warrant of Christs Institution Let us see if there be more in their second Proof 2. Paul an Apostle sought with much labour the conference concurrence and right hand of fellowship of other Apostles and ordinary Elders and Churches have not less need each of other to prevent their running in vain Gal. 2.2 6 9. Reply 1. This necessity was proper to Paul's case who did not converse with Christ on earth as the other Apostles did but was as one born out of due time 1 Cor. 15.8 and so was more liable to be objected and excepted against then the other Apostles and therefore had more need to be countenanced among men by them then they by him Whence he wisely sought approbation from them But this is not the case of the Churches in New-England each of them having been approved by the right hand of fellowship given to them by other Churches at their first gathering and at the Ordination of their Teaching and Ruling-Elders 2. Paul did thus not by reason of such a consociation of Churches as is here described but for other Reasons 3. The running in vain of any Elders and Churches hath been hitherto prevented by the communion of Churches regularly exercised and still may be 3. Those general Rules touching the need and use of counsel and help in weighty cases concern all Societies and Polities Ecclesiastical as well as Civil Prov. 11.14 15.22 c. R ply It is true and it is their duty to make use of them in obedience and with thankfulness to God as need requires when they want light or consent within themselves by virtue of the communion of Churches without such a Consociation as they describe 4. The pattern in Acts 15. holds forth a warrant for Councils which may be greater or lesser as the matter shall require Reply But 1. Not with special respect to the vicinity of Churches for Paul and Barnabas and the Messengers fâ—om the Church of Antioch passed through other Churches nearer to go to Jerusalem for counsel 2. Nor by virtue of such a Consociation of the Church at Antioch with that at Jerusalem but of the communion of Churches 5. Concurrence and communion of Churches in Gospel-times is not obscurely held forth in Isa 19 23 24 25. Zeph. 3.9 1 Cor. 11.16 14.32 36. R ply Some of those Texts note onely a communion of Saints in one and the same Church 2. None of them hold forth a Consociation of Churches as they describe 6. There hath constantly been in these Churches a profession of Communion in giving the right hand of fellowship at the gathering of Churches and Ordination of Elders which importeth a Consociation and obligeth to the practice thereof Reply Together with the profession of communion hath been the practice of it in these Churches But that this communion importeth such a Consociation as they describe and obligation to the practice thereof was not expressed nor understood Worthy Mr. Cotton whose Name ought to be honourable among the Saints both in Old England and New in that Book which he entituled The Way of the Churches in New-England the sixth chapter speaketh of the Communion of Churches and sheweth seven wayes whereby it ought to be and is in these Churches exercised They do as I apprehend reach all the Duties to be performed by virtue of Church-communion mutually by each other But of this Consociation as it is here described he speaketh not a word nor I believe did apprehend any Necessity of it or Rule in Scripture for it Therefore when they say Without this we shall want an expedient and sufficient cure for emergent Church-difficulties and differences the constant experience of these Churches from their beginning to this day evinceth the contrary And though our Way is charged with the want hereof yet it is unjustly and by such as would bring us into their Way of Classical Churches which is not proved to be the Ordinance of Christ as this of the Communion of Churches is and hath been found effectual by the blessing of Christ and so will be still And though this part of the Doctrine of the Church as they call it concerning such a consociation it being not proved to be the Doctrine of Christ was never practised in these Churches For without it the Churches either have been or might have been and may be hereafter kept in purity and peace with Brotherly love among themselves mutually by the regular improving the communion of Churches which is manifested to be the Ordinance of Christ who hath given us perfect Rules in the New Testament for the ordering of the communion of Christian Churches which are sufficient for attainment of the ends for which Christ hath appointed it according to the second third fourth eleventh and twelfth Positions premised With which if this way of Consociation of Churches shall be clearly proved to agree which I do not finde to be yet done I shall readily and heartily close with it and submit unto it For it is onely the Truth that I search for and desire to bear witness unto that when my time shall come to lay down this earthly tabernacle which I expect daily I may give up my account with joy 2. And if any Church be refractory we have the help of the Civil Power which is ordained of God for the just punishment of those that do evil whether in Church or Common-wealth Rom. 13. Every Oâ—dinance of God hath Gods blessing annexed which we cannot expect in this way till it be proved to be Gods Ordinance which yet is not done Propos 7. The manner of the Churches agreement herein may be by the Churches open consenting unto the things here declared in Answer to this second Question as also to what is said thereabout in Chap. 15 16. of the Platform of Discipline with reference to what is before expressed in Proposition 5th Reply If the Churches do express their Agreement herein openly they do voluntarily engage themselves and covenant to practise according to the things declared not onely in the point of Church-communion but also of such consociation as is here expressed which they have need to see to be warranted by the Word if they will act accordingly in faith knowing that whatsoever is not of faith is sin Rom. 14.23 What is said in the Platform chap. 15 hath been in part examined before in chap. 16.5 They say The Synods Directions and Determinations so farre as consonant to the Word of God are to be received with reverence and submission not onely for their agreement therewith
as a Day of holy Rest unto the Lord. Such means will bâ— blessed of Christ to thâ— preventiâ—g of the â—ut-breakings and some of them to the healing oâ— those evils Fai h being wâ—ou ht in their hearts through the efficacy of the Spirit in and by the Preaching of the Word and so thâ—y will become fit to be received into Church-membership and commun on Havâ—ng thus examined their third Propâ—sition I finde it dâ—stitute of Scripture-pâ—oofs and therefore must leave it as Irregular a d not agreeing with the Posiâ—ions formerly gâ—ven for Rules of Tryal whether Doctrines and Prâ—ct sâ—s in matâ—er of Church-Order â—gree wiâ—h the Princâ—ples of Truth or not I proceed to examine their fourth Proposition for answer to the fiâ—st Question Propos 4. Those adult persons are not theref re to be admitted o fâ—ll Communion meerly because they are â—nd continue Members without such furtheâ— qualâ—fica iâ—ns as the Woâ—d of God requireth thereunto The truth hereof they say is plain Reply Though it seems to them plain yet it seems not sufficâ—ently cleared by their Proâ—fs 1. From 1 Cor. 1â— 28 29. where it is râ—quired th t such as come to the Lords Suppe be able to examine then serves and to diâ—cern the Lords Body else they will eat and drink unworthily and eat and drink damnation or judgement to themselves when they partake of this Oâ—dâ—nance But meer membership is separable from such ability to examine one's self and discern the Lords Body as in the children of the Covenant that grow up to years is too ofâ—en seen Reâ—l 1. The want of such abil ties in the children of the Covenant is indeed too â—ften se n through the too frequent neglect of Paâ—ents in their Education and of Ministers and Churches in their Institution and Catecâ—â—zing and Watcâ—ing over them whicâ— shâ—uld â—w ken their circumspection in look ng narrowly to their fitness for personal Membership when they grow up to years 2. Though Membershâ—p be sâ—parable fâ—om yea dâ—stâ—tute of such ability in the infant-seed or c ildren â—f the Covenant in their minority and therefore they are nâ—t to be admitted unto the Lords S ppâ—â— and that text proves it yet it may not be granted thaâ— when they are grown up to years they are and continue Menbers râ—gularly being through want of that ability nâ—t fit foâ— Churâ—h-communâ—on personally For as if adult persons being unbaptized should dâ—sire to have the Covenâ—nt and their Church-meâ—bership sealed by Baptism thâ—y must hold forth Faith in Chr st wrought in their hearts as Pâ—ilâ—â— required the Eunuch before thâ—y may be bâ—ptized Acts 8 36 37. So by parity â—f reason if one baptized in infancy beinâ— grown up to years desires to be joyned to the â—hurch by his own personal Rigâ—t â—e must hâ—ld foâ—th his personal Faith in the Son of God to their charitable satisfaction that they may know his ability to examine himself and discern the Lords Body b fore they admit him into personal Membership which infers full communion with the Church 2. They say that In the Old Testamenâ— â—hoâ—gh men did continue members of the Church yet for ceremonial uncleanness they were to be kept from full communion in the h ly things Lev. 7.20 21. Numb 9.6 7. 19.13 20. yea and the â—ri sts and Porters had special charge that mâ—n should not partake in all the holy things unless duely qualified for th saâ—â— notwithstandâ—ng their membership 2 Chron. 23.19 Ezek 22.26 44.7 8 â— 23. and therefore much more in thâ—se times where Moral fi nâ—ss and Spiritual qualâ—fications are wanting Membership â—l ne is not sufficienâ— for full communion More was required to adult persons eaâ—ing the Paâ—sover theâ— meer membership therâ—fore so there is now to the Lords Suppeâ— c. Râ—ply 1. The invalidity of Proofs from the Old Testament under Moseâ— being applâ—ed to Gospel-Ordinances under Christ and so this of Baptism under the New Testament in things whereof there is not the like reason hath been declared in the f urth sixth and eighth Positions with which this Proof doth not agree 2. If the Texts alledged were applicable to Church-members in the times of the Gospel yet they suit not the case in question For all men that were accounted Members of that Jewish Church had full communion with that Church in all Legal Ordâ—nances even they that were ceremonially unclean had so before their uncleanness and after they were healed of their uncleannesses as well as others 3. Particularly 1. The typical uncleanness in Levit. 7.20 21 c. signified that all Unbelievers Hypocrites and Wicked ones that professing the Gospel partake of the outward Signs and Seals of Grace unworthily do eat and drink condemnation or judgement to themselves according to 1 Corinth 11.28 29. 2. Those in Numb 9.6 who were unclean by the dead might not come into the Lords Sanctuary nor into the Lords Camp as also every Leper or one that hath an Issue Numb 5.2 Those legal pollutions signified sin of all sorts and the removal of such out of the Lords Sanctuary and Camp figured the removal of scandalous and impenitent sinners out of Church-communion though they were in it before and the keeping them from admittance into Church-fellowship if they were not in before for The unclean may not come into iâ— Isa 52.1 Any thing thâ—t defileth may in no wise enter into it Rev. 21.27 3. That Text in Numb 19.13 20. concerns one who being defiled by the dead yet presumptuously came into the Tabernacle that is into the Court of it in his uncleanness that man must be cut off Otherwise if he did it igno antly he was to bring a sacrifice Lev. 5 3-6 because he defiled the Sanctuary by coming into it before he was puâ—ified This and the former Texts figured in reference to Gâ—spâ—l-Churches not the distinction between meer M mbâ—rs and Members in Communion for no such distinctions of adult Members was known or made in that Church but that they should not admit any that are spiritually unclean as all that are vâ—sibly unregenerate are Tit. 1.15 16. into Church-communion And that they should put away from Church-commun on by Excommunication such as were in Church-communion before such unclâ—anness appea ed in them till their healing should be n an f sted 4. That which is added concerning the charge given to the â— r ests and Por ers had been more fully and so more truly expressed if they had said Their câ—aâ—ge was that men should not partake of all the holy â—â—ingâ— unless â—â—â—y qualified for the same notwi â—standing theiâ— not Membeâ—ship in their sense but Membership in full commâ—niâ—n with the Chuâ—câ— For such Members the men of â—srae were b fore their Legal uncleanness and they were also charged to keep out the Heathen uncircumcâ—sed in flesh who never were Members That text in Eâ—â—â— 44 7 8 9. is a Prophesie of the times of the Gospel expressed under legal phrases according to the