Church Government and Church Covenant, Title page 2 – Treatise 2

Church Government and Church Covenant · Title page 2 – Treatise 2

AN APOLOGIE OF THE CHVRCHES IN NEW-ENGLAND FOR CHVRCH-COVENANT. OR, A Diſcourſe touching the Covenant between God and men, and eſpecially concerning Church-Covenant, that is to ſay, The Covenant which a Company doe enter into when they become a Church; and which a particular perſon enters into when he becomes a member of a Church.

Sent over in Anſwer to Maſter BERNARD, in the Yeare 1639.

And now publiſhed for the ſatisfaction of all who deſire reſolution in this point.

LONDON, Printed by T. P. and M. S. for Benjamin Allen.

1643.

p. 1A DISCOVRSE TOVCHING THE Covenant between God and Men, and eſpecially concerning Church-Covenant, that is to ſay, the Covenant which a Company do enter into when they become a Church, and which a particular perſon enters into when he becomes a member of a Church. 1639.

JER. 50. 5.

Come let us joyne our ſelves to the Lord, in a perpetuall Covenant that ſhall not be forgotten.

ALthough that which is foretold in theſe two Chapters; and namely in the fourth and fifth verſes of this Chapter, was in part fulfilled when the people of God returned from Captivitie in Babylon at the end of ſeventie yeares: yet we muſt not limit the place to that time onelyonly, but may extend it further to the dayes of the Goſpel, and the ſpirituall return, not of the Jews onelyonly, but of the Gentiles alſo, when men ſhall be converted from Pagan, Antichriſtian, Babyloniſh, or Jewiſh bondage and captivitie, or from ſlavery to ſinne, and ſelf-righteouſneſſe, and ſhall be joyned to God in the fellowſhip of his Church, in the dayes of the New Teſtament. For as ſome paſſages in this Scripture were never fully accompliſhed at the returne from the captivitie of the ſeventie yeares, and namely this, that the children of Iſrael and Judah ſhould returne both together: (for the ten tribes returned not p. 2at all:) ſo many things that literally concerned the Jewes were types and figures, ſignifying the like things concerning the people of God in theſe latter dayes: In which reſpect ſincere converts are called Jewes, Rom 2. 29. and Iſraelites, Gal. 6. 16. Joh. 1. 47. and our Sacraments are made Antitypes of theirs, 1 Cor. 10. 1, 2, 3. and Rome is called Babylon, Rev. 17. 5. and Papiſts are called Gentiles, Rev. 11. 2. and therefore the captivitie of Babylon might well be a Type of the ſpirituall captivitie of Gods people to Antichriſtian bondage, and their returne from Babylon to Sion, a type of the returne of Chriſtians from Romiſh ſlavery to the true Sion, the Chriſtian Church. And this may be added further, that this place ſeemes not onelyonly to be meant of the private or perſonall converſion of this or that particular Chriſtian, but alſo further, of the open and joynt calling of a company, becauſe it is ſaid, they ſhall come, the children of Iſrael and the children of Judah together, and that their ſaying ſhall not be, Let me joyne, &c. but in the Plurall number, Let us joyne our ſelves unto the Lord, ſo noting the joyning of a company together in holy Covenant with God.

Concerning which Covenant with God, it will not be amiſſe for the better underſtanding of that which followes; firſt, briefly to ſhew how diverſly Covenant is taken in the Scripture, which ſometimes imports generally any firme appointment or promiſe of God, when man doth not promiſe unto God any thing backe againe: Thus the preſerving of Noah in the Arke, and of the world from being drowned any more by a floud; the interchangeable ſucceſſion of day and night; the giving of the Prieſthood unto Phineas; the ſetting forth of the Shew-bread every Sabbath before the Lord, and the giving of the heave-offering unto the Prieſts, are ſaid to be done by a Covenant, or an everlaſting Covenant of God, Gen. 6. 18. & 9. 9, 10, 11. Jer. 33. 20. Num. 25. 12, 13. Levit. 24. 8. Num. 18. 19. But ſometimes Covenant is taken more ſtrictly and properly, for an agreement which God doth make with men, when he promiſeth ſome bleſſing unto men, and bindes them to performe ſome dutie backe againe to him. Taken thus it hath two parts: firſt, a promiſe or ſtipulation of ſome bleſſing on Gods part: ſecondly, Reſtipulation or promiſe, or binding of man unto dutie back againe on his part: both theſe are in thoſe words of the Covenant, I will be to thee a God, thou ſhalt be to me a people: and ſo Gen. 17. 1. & v. 7, 8, 9, 10. The Covenant p. 3taken thus is either the Covenant of workes, or the Covenant of grace: And againe the Covenant may be conſidered; firſt as it is perſonall, private and particular, between God and one particular ſoule, making Covenant with God, and God with him, either at his firſt converſion; or at other times; of which we reade 2 Sam. 23. 5. & Pſal. 119, 106. & 66. 13, 14. & 27 8. & Pſal. 119. 7, 8 Secondly, it is generall and publick of a company joyntly together, of which this Text Jer. 50. 5. ſeemes moſt properly to ſpeake: as alſo that Deut. 29. 9, 10, &c. and that Exod. 19. 5, 6, and many others: A Covenant taken thus generally when it reſpects ſpirituall bleſſings, and ſpirituall duties, in the Communion of Saints, is that which is called Church-covenant, which Church-Covenant differs not in ſubſtance of the things promiſed from that which is between the Lord and every particular ſoule, but onelyonly in ſome other reſpects; as firſt, the one is of one Chriſtian in particular, the other of a company joyntly together. Secondly, if right Order be obſerved, a man ought not to enter into Church-Covenant, till he be in Covenant with God before, in reſpect of his perſonall eſtate. Thirdly, The one is uſually done in private, as in a mans Cloſet between the Lord and his ſoule, and the other in ſome publick aſſembly. Fourthly, The one in theſe dayes is of ſuch duties as the Goſpel requires of every Chriſtian as a Chriſtian, the other of ſuch duties as the Goſpel requires of every Church and the members thereof.

Now concerning Church-Covenant, two things are to be noted for the better underſtanding thereof: firſt, the deſcription of it: ſecondly, the uſe of it, and the benefit and fruit thereof. For the former it may be thus deſcribed, viz. A ſolemne and publick promiſe before the Lord, whereby a company of Chriſtians, called by the power and mercy of God to fellowſhip with Chriſt, and by his providence to live together, and by his grace to cleave together in the unitie of faith, and brotherly love, and deſirous to partake together in all the holy Ordinances of God, doe in confidence of his gracious acceptance in Chriſt, binde themſelves to the Lord, and one to another, to walke together by the aſſiſtance of his Spirit, in all ſuch wayes of holy worſhip in him, and of edification one towards another, as the Goſpel of Chriſt requireth of every Chriſtian Church, and the members thereof.

In this deſcription, there are compriſed ſix things: Firſt, the generall name of the thing: [a ſolemne and publick promiſe] a promiſe p. 4it is, and therefore it is called, a joyning in Covenant here: an entring into Covenant, Deut. 29. 10. Solemne and publick, and therefore it is by the children of Iſrael and the children of Judah together: and they ſay, let us joyne. Secondly, The object [the Lord, and one another] joyne our ſelves to the Lord it is not a promiſe onelyonly to man, but to the Lord himſelfe, and likewiſe to one another; for, come let us joyne, implyes mutuall conſent together. Thirdly, The Agents or the qualification of the perſons: [Chriſtians] not Turkes, Indians, &c. Saints, Pſal. 50. 5. 16, 17. [called to fellowſhip with Chriſt] ſo 1 Cor. 1. 9 elſe if they be not united to Chriſt by faith, they are not fit materialls for ſuch a building as a Church of God, which is the houſe of the living God, Epheſ. 1. 1. 1 Cor. 1. 2. Phil. 1. 1. Rev. 21. 27. [By his providence to live together] elſe they cannot partake in the Lords Ordinances together as Churches ought to doe, 1 Cor. 14. 23. Act. 14 27. the whole Church comes together in one place [cleaving together in faith and love] ſo Act. 4 32. If they differ, namely, in opinion, or in their affection, and ſhould joyne in this Covenant, breaches, factions, rents, and ſchiſmes, would be like to be the iſſue of ſuch joyning: things ſo unlike would not cloſe nor long hold together, Dan. 2. 43 [Deſirous to partake in all Ordinances] this ſhould be the ground of their joyning in Covenant together, Pſal. 110. 3. willing: and not pride, nor gaine, nor the like: Fourthly, The Act [binde themſelves] that now they are bound by their owne word and promiſe, that they may ſay now, as Pſal. 56. 12. Thy vowes are upon me, or as Num. 30. 2. if he binde his ſoule with a vow. Fiftly, The matter promiſed; [To walke together in all ſuch wayes of worſhip and mutuall edification, as the Goſpel requireth of Churches and Church-members] they binde not themſelves to obſerve any deviſes of their owne, nor inventions of men, but ſuch things as the word of God requireth; neither is it perfect obedience to the Law, for that were impoſſible to performe, and preſumption to promiſe; nor is it onelyonly in generall the duties of the Goſpel, but ſpecially ſuch duties of worſhip to God, & edification of one another as concerne Church-State, which now they enter into. Sixtly, The manner of performing [Confidence of Gods gracious acceptance and aſſiſtance through Chriſt] for in all our wayes God muſt be acknowledged, Pro. 3. 6. and much more in ſuch ſpeciall matters of weight: If men in entring into this Covenant looke for acceptance, through any worth p. 5of their owne, or promiſe dutie in their own ſtrength, they ſhew themſelves like to the Phariſees, Luk. 18. 10, 11. and turne the Church-Covenant into a Covenant of workes: and as many as are of the workes of the Law, are under the curſe, Gal. 3. 10.

The uſe and benefit of this Church-Covenant, and the fruit thereof, may be ſeene in two particulars; firſt, That this is that whereby a company of Chriſtians doe become a Church: It is the Conſtituting forme of a Church. Secondly, This is that by taking hold whereof a particular perſon becomes a member of a Church, which was conſtituted afore. For the former of theſe; every Chriſtian Church muſt have in it both matter and forme, and as the matter by Gods appointment are viſible Saints, or viſible beleevers, Epheſ. 1. 1. 1 Cor. 1. 2. and in the New Teſtament, onelyonly ſo many as may meete together in one Congregation: So the forme is a uniting, or combining, or knitting of thoſe Saints together into one viſible body, by the band of this holy Covenant. Some union or band there muſt be amongſt them, whereby they come to ſtand in a new relation to God, and one towards another, other then they were in before: or els they are not yet a Church, though they be fit materialls for a Church; even as ſoule and body are not a man, unleſſe they be united; nor ſtones and timber an houſe, till they be compacted and conjoyned.

Now that a company becomes a Church, by joyning in Covenant, may be made good ſundry wayes; firſt, By plaine Texts of Scripture; as from Deut. 29. 1, 10, 11, 12, 13. Yee ſtand this day all you before the Lord your God, your Captaines of your Tribes, your Elders, your Officers, with all the men of Iſrael, ver. 10. That thou ſhouldeſt enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God, ver. 12. and he may eſtabliſh thee for a people unto himſelfe, ver. 13. So that here is plain…y ſhewed, that here was a company, ver. 10. and this company were to be eſtabliſhed to be a people unto the Lord, that is to ſay, a Church, ver. 13. And this is done by the peoples entring into ſolemne Covenant with God, ver. 12. And therefore a company of people doe become a Church by entring into Covenant with God.

This Covenant was not like our Church-Covenants, for it was of all Object. 1the Nation together; whereas the Church-Covenant with us, is of ſome ſelect perſons, leaving out others.

1. This Objection concerns the matter of a Church, but theAnſwer. Covenant is not the materiall cauſe of a Church, but the formall p. 6cauſe thereof: and for this the Text is▪ plaine and expreſſe, that by entring into Covenant with God, a people come to be the Lords people, that is to ſay, his Church.

2. If it was of all the people together, the reaſon was becauſe that Church was a nationall Church: now if a nationall Church becomes a Church by entring into ſolemne Covenant with God, then a Congregationall Church becomes a Church by the ſame means; for there is no difference between them in this point.

3. Though it was of all the people, we may not ſay it proves that when we looke at the materiall cauſe of a Church, there may be a promiſcuous taking in of all Commers without diſtinction or ſeparation of the precious from the vile; for, firſt, when God took in this Nation to be his people, he ſeparated them from all the Nations of the earth beſides: ſo that there was a diſtinction and ſeparation of ſome from others. Secondly, this generation was generally a generation of beleevers; for it was they that were to enter into the land within a while after; for they were fortie yeares in the Wilderneſſe▪ & this Covenant was made in the laſt monethmonth ſave one of the laſt of thoſe fortie yeares, Deut. 1. 3. And their carkaſſes fell not in the Wilderneſſe through unbeliefe, as their Fathers did, Num 14. Heb. 3. but entred by faith, and when they were entred, ſubdued Kingdomes by their faith, Heb. 11. 33. and ſerved the Lord all the dayes of Joſhua, and of the Elders that out lived Joſhua, Joſh. 24 31. As for that which is ſaid of them, ver. 4, 5. of this Chap. that the Lord had not given them eyes to ſee, &c. that proves not that they were wholly hardned in a carnall eſtate, but onelyonly that they were dull and ſlow of heart to conſider of ſundry diſpenſations of God towards them; for as much is ſaid of the diſciples of Chriſt, Mar. 8. 17, 18. when doubtleſſe they were not meere carnall or naturall perſons.

This people Deut. 29. could not become the Lords people by entring Object. 2into ſolemne Covenant with God, for they were the Lords Church and people already before this.

1. If they were, yet that was by entring into ſolemne CovenantAnſwer. with God on Mount Sinai, when the Lord had brought them up out of the Land of Aegypt; for then they entred into ſolemne Covenant with God, and God with them, and ſo they bec…me the Lords peculiar people, Exod. 19▪ 4, 5, 6, 8. &c. If they were his people before that, yet that alſo was by Covenant made with them in p. 7the loynes of Abraham, when God tooke him and his ſeede to be his Church and people, yet ſeparating Iſhmael from Iſaac and Eſ… from Jacob, that the inheritance of the Covenant of God, and of being the Church of God, might reſt in the houſe of Jacob.

2. Yet it was not without great reaſon that the Lord ſhould now eſtabliſh them by ſolemne Covenant to be a people to himſelfe, becauſe the Nation had been much degenerated from the ſpirit and wayes of Abraham in Aegypt, and had broken that Covenant by their Idolatries there, Ezek. 20. 7, 8. And the Covenant made in Sinai or Hore… when they were come out of Aegypt, they had alſo broken by their Idolatries in the Wilderneſſe, Ezek 20. 13, 16. for which cauſes, and the like, the Lord conſumed that generation, that they never entred into the Land, Joſh. 5. 4, 6. And therefore now when their poſteritie and children were ready to enter in, the Lord entred into Covenant with them, and thereby eſtabliſhed them to be his people, their Fathers being cut off for breaking the Covenant. But ſtill it was by Covenant that both Fathers firſt, and children afterward became a Church and people unto God; and when this generation were entred into the Land, their Covenant made before between God and them, was confirmed by Circumciſion, Joſh. 5. 3. 7. they being not Circumciſed before.

But this Covenant was of the whole Church with God, and therefore Object. 3not like our Church-Covenants, which are between the Church and the members, concerning watchfulneſſe over one another, and the like.

Our Church-Covenants are with the Lord himſelfe, as wasAnſwer. ſhewed before in the deſcription thereof. For watchfulneſſe and duties of edification one towards another, are but branches of the Lords Covenant, being duties commanded by the Law: and ſo it was with that people of Iſrael, who when they promiſed and Covenanted to walke in all the wayes of God; in all his ſtatutes and commandements and judgements, they promiſed theſe duties of love and watchfulneſſe and edification one towards another, becauſe theſe were duties commanded and required of God, Lev. 19: 17. Deut. 29 8. the neglect whereof in the matter of Achan was the ſinne of all the Congregation▪ and brought judgement upon them all, Joſh. 7. 11, 12. Yea by this Covenant they were bound to duties towards them that were not then preſent, but children afterward to be borne, and proſelytes, that afterward ſhould be added p. 8to them, ver. 14, 15. Like as our Church-Covenants are with them that now are, and that hereafter ſhall become members of the ſame Church. When Jehojada made a Covenant between the King and the people, 2 King. 11. 17. that Covenant was but a branch of the Lords Covenant with them all, both King and people: for the King promiſed but to Rule the people righteouſly, according to the will of God: and the people to be ſubject to the King ſo Ruling. Now theſe duties of the King to them, and of them to the King, were ſuch as God required in his Covenant, both of him and them: and ſo it is in Church-Covenant, the duties of the Church to the members, and the members to the Church, and one another, are no other but ſuch as the Goſpel and the Covenant of grace requireth both of the Church and the members of it in their ſeverall places.

But this place of Deut. 29. is not ſufficient to prove a Church-Covenant Object. 4in theſe dayes: becauſe it is in the Scriptures of the old Teſtament, for what ſoever muſt be uſed in the dayes of the New Teſtament, muſt be proved from the Scriptures of the New Teſtament, or elſe it is to be layd aſide.

1. The Church-Covenant may be proved from the New TeſtamentAnſwer. alſo▪ as will afterwards appeare.

2. But ſuppoſe there were not pregnant places for it in the New Teſtament, yet it is not enough to prove the ſame unlawfull: for whatſoever Ordinance of the old Teſtament is not repealed in the New Teſtament, as peculiar to the Jewiſh Paedagogie, but was of morall and perpetuall equitie, the ſame bindes us in theſe dayes▪ and is to be accounted the revealed will of God in all ages, though it be not particularly and expreſſely mentioned in the writings of the New Teſtament, elſe how ſhall we prove it unlawfull for a man to marry his Siſter, or his Aunt? How ſhall we prove it warrantable and neceſſary for Magiſtrates to puniſh Sabbath-breaking, blaſphemy, and Idolatry? How ſhall we prove it lawfull to apply the ſeale of Gods Covenant unto Infants? or to admit women to eate of the holy things; for the Scriptures of the New Teſtament doe ſpeake little in theſe caſes; onelyonly the Scriptures of the Old Teſtament doe give direction, and light about them, Lev▪ 18. & 19. Neh. 13. 15. &c. 2 Chron. 15. 16. & 2 King. 23. Gen. 17. 2. & Exod. 12. 4. 6. And the New Teſtament hath nothing to the contrary, and they are all according to morall equitie and reaſon, p. 9and therefore they are to be obſerved from the Scriptures of the Old Teſtament, as the revealed will of God, though there were nothing expreſſely for them in the New. And the ſame we ſay of the particular in hand. For, that a company ſhould be combined together into one body, in way of Government and ſubjection, by way of mutuall free Covenant; as men doe when they enter into Church Eſtate, nothing is more naturall or agreeable to morall equitie; nay, it implyeth a contradiction in the very name of libertie or freedome, that free-men ſhould take upon them authoritie or power over free men without their free conſent, and voluntary and mutuall Covenant or Engagement. And therefore ſeeing this Covenant is not repealed in the Scriptures of the New Teſtament, the Scriptures of the Old are ſufficient warrant for it.

Another Scripture to prove the ſame, is Deut. 26. 16, 17, 18. with Deut. 27. 9. This day the Lord hath commanded thee to doe theſe Statutes and Judgements▪ thou ſhalt therefore keepe and doe them, &c. Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God, and to walke in his wayes, and to keepe his Statutes, &c. And the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people; Take heed and hearken, O Iſrael, this day thou art become the people of the Lord thy God. This Scripture plainly ſhewes theſe things: 1. That here was the making of a Covenant between God and man; for that avouching of God to them, and them to God, was the making of Covenant, ver. 17, 18. 2. This was not of one perſon, but of a company together, the whole people of Iſrael, 26. 18. & 27. 9. 3 Here is the effect of this Covenant, that thereby they become the Lords people, ver. 9. So that when a company doe enter into holy Covenant with God, they become thereby the Lords people, that is to ſay, his Church. So Ezech. 16. 8. proves the ſame likewiſe: I entred into Covenant with thee, ſaith the Lord, and thou becam…ſt mine. Here alſo is the making of Covenant between the Lord and men; and this Covenant was not perſonall, but of a company; for it was with Hieruſalem, ver. 2. which was a whole Citie; it was with them that were multiplied as the bud of the feild, ver. 7. and it was with them that did proſper into a kingdome, ver. 13. and therefore not meant onelyonly of any one particular perſon: And by this Covenant they became the Lords; that is, the Lords Church and people; for it is expreſly ſaid, I entred into Covenant with thee, and thou becameſt mine. So that when a company enter into Covenant with God, and God with p. 10them, they become thereby the Lords Church and people. Likewiſe Ezek. 20. 37. I will cauſe you to paſſe under the rod; and I will bring you into the bond of the Covenant. In which place, there is firſt mention of an holy Covenant. Secondly, This was not of one perſon, but of a company, the whole houſe of Iſrael, ver. 30. 39. Thirdly, And this Covenant is called a Bond, becauſe it is by Covenant that a people are bound, and tyed, and knit together, as one Church, all of them unto the Lord, and one unto another; So that the Covenant is the bond of union, by which a company are ſo combined and united, as that they become a Church. It is alſo obſervable, how the Lord before he would bring them into this bond of the Covenant, he would cauſe them to paſſe under the rod; by which phraſe, as Junius upon the place well obſerves, is meant tryall and probation; drawne from the manner of Shepheards or owners of Cattell, who went among their ſheepe, or other cattell with a rod, and therewith pointed out ſuch as were for the Lords holy uſe, as Lev. 27. 32. And ſo hereby is noted that God would not in the dayes of the Goſpel have men to be brought into his Church hand over head, but he would firſt cauſe them to paſſe under the rod of due tryall and probation; and then ſuch as upon tryall were found to be holy for God, or meete matter for his Church, ſhould ſolemnly enter into Covenant with God, and that Covenant ſhould be the bond that ſhould combine them, and knit them together into one, that ſo they that were many particular perſons, ſhould all become one body, that is to ſay, a Church.

And ſo much of the firſt Argument drawne from plaine Texts of Scripture.

A ſecond Argument may be taken from the Titles that are givenArgu. 2. to the Church; as firſt, that the Church is ſaid to be married or eſpouſed unto Chriſt, Jer. 2. 2. & 3. 14. 2 Cor. 11. 2. From whence the Argument may be formed thus: If every Church becomes a Church by being married or eſpouſed unto Chriſt, then a company becomes a Church by way of Covenant: But the former is true, therefore the latter is true alſo.

The Aſſumption, that a Church becomes a Church by being married unto Chriſt, is plaine from the former Scriptures, where the Church of Iſrael, and the Church of Corinth, in regard of their entring into Church-Eſtate, are ſaid to be eſpouſed and married unto Chriſt, as a loving and chaſt Virgine to one husband. Which p. 11ſpirituall marriage between Chriſt and his Church, is alſo taught in the type of the marriage between King Salomon and Pharoahs daughter, Pſal. 45.

The Conſequence of the Propoſition is plaine in reaſon; for there is no marriage but by way of Covenant; no woman becomes a mans wife, but by way of beſtowing her ſelfe in Covenant upon ſuch a man: neither doth a man become an husband, but by the ſame means; and therefore the Scripture ſpeaking of the violation of marriage, calls it a violation of Covenant, Prov. 2. 17.

Chriſt hath but one wife or Spouſe, Cant. 6 9.Object. 1.

The Catholique Church indeed is but one; viz▪ the whole companyAnſwer. of Gods Elect in heaven, in earth, dead, now living, and not yet borne: But as there is the Church-Catholique, which is but one; ſo there are particular and viſible Churches, which are in number many; and therefore the Scripture ſpeakes of Churches, 2 Cor. 8. 1. 19. Gal. 1. 2. Of the Churches of the Gentiles, Rom. 16. 4. Of ſeven Churches, Rev. 1. 4. Of all Churches, 1 Cor. 14. 33. & 7. 17. Rev. 2. 23.

But if every particular Church be the wife of Chriſt, how many hundred Obj. 2.wives ſhould he have?

1. If the Church of Iſrael, Jer. 2. 2. the Church of Corinth, 2Anſw. Cor. 11. 2. The Jewiſh Church, Rev. 19. 7. be the Spouſe and wife of Chriſt, there is no reaſon but others ſhould be the ſame alſo, eſpecially ſeeing there is no particular Church, but in reſpect of their Church eſtate, they may decline and goe a whoring from Chriſt, and that ſhews that they were firſt eſpouſed to him; for no woman can be ſaid to goe a whoring from a man, if ſhee were never married, nor eſpouſed to him at all.

2. This that ſeemes an abſurditie, and were a ſinfull practiſe among men, in reſpect of Chriſt, is a certaine truth, and no diſhonour unto him at all, to have more Spouſes then one upon earth, many ſpirituall Spouſes. Men cannot give themſelves wholly and intirely to many as Chriſt can. Every faithfull ſoule is eſpouſed and married unto Chriſt; and in that reſpect he hath not onelyonly many hundred but many thouſand, yea many millions of ſpirituall Spouſes.

But this ſpirituall marriage is between Chriſt and the Church, But Obj. 3.the Church-Covenant is between the Church and the members, and therefore this marriage doth not prove the Church-Covenant.

p. 121. In ſome ſort there may be ſaid to be a marriage between theAnſwer. Church and the members, viz. in reſpect of that deare love and affection, that ought to be between them; and therefore it is ſaid, As a young man marrieth a Virgine, ſo ſhall the children of the Church be married to the Church, Iſa. 62. 5.

2. But properly the marriage is between Chriſt & the Church, and ſo is the Covenant alſo, ſo farre as therein they give up themſelves to Chriſt as unto an head and Lord; as a woman in the Covenant of marriage doth give up her ſelfe unto her husband; And the performance of ſuch duties as the Church and the member owe one unto another, is a branch of that marriage-Covenant, wherein they are tyed to Chriſt; for Chriſt himſelfe in his Covenant requires, not onelyonly that they ſhould give up themſelves to him, but alſo that they ſhould performe theſe duties one unto another. And accordingly it is ſaid of the Churches in Macedonia, that they gave up themſelves firſt to the Lord, and then to us by the will of God, 2 Cor. 8. 5. True it is, they doe alſo binde themſelves by Covenant one unto another, but in that reſpect the Covenant is properly a brotherly Covenant; like that 1 Sam. 20 8. Amos 1. 9. becauſe there the engagement is to one another as brethren, fellow-members, and fellow-helpers, and not as to one head or Lord, as it is in reſpect of Chriſt, and therefore in that reſpect it is not ſo properly a marriage-Covenant as it is in reſpect of Chriſt: though duties to one another are promiſed in their Covenant with one another, and alſo in their Covenant with Chriſt. In briefe thus: They promiſe unto Chriſt duties to him, and duties to one another according to him: and ſo their Covenant is a marriage-Covenant with Chriſt: They promiſe alſo to one another, duties to one another, and ſo it is a brotherly Covenant.

Another Title given to the Church (which alſo proves that a Church is made by Covenant) is the Title of a Citie, or Citie of God, Pſal. 87. 3. & 48 1. 8. & 122. 3. Epheſ 2. 19. The Argument lyeth thus▪ If a true Church be a Citie of God, then a Church becomes a Church by Covenant: But every true Church is a Citie of God. Ergo.

The Aſſumption is proved by the Scriptures forealledged. The Conſequence of the Propoſition is plaine in reaſon, for every Citie is united by ſome Covenant among themſelves, the Citizens are received into jus Civitatis, or right of Citie priviledges, by ſome p. 13Covenant or Oath; And therefore it is ſo likewiſe in this Citie of God the Church; and men become Citizens of the Church by ſolemne Covenant.

The third Argument may be drawne from the meanes of reformingArgu. 3. and reſtoring a Church when it is corrupted, which is by entring into Covenant a new with God, 2 Chron. 15 10. & 29. 10. & Neh. 9. 38. & 10. 28, 29. Jer. 50. 4, 5. The reaſon may be taken thus: If a Church decayed is to be reſtored and reformed by renuing Covenant with God, then it was inſtituted and erected at the firſt by way of Covenant: The reaſon of which Conſequence is, becauſe abuſes and corruptions are to be reformed by bringing things back to the firſt Inſtitution: Thus Chriſt reformes the abuſes of marriage, by bringing them to the firſt Inſtitution of that Ordinance; From the beginning it was not ſo, Mat. 19 8. And thus Paul reformeth the Abuſes of the Lords Supper, by telling them what was the firſt Inſtitution thereof, 1 Cor. 11. 23, &c. And thus the Lord Jeſus calling on the declining Church of Epheſus for reformation, bids her remember from whence ſhee is fallen, and repent and doe her firſt workes, Rev. 2. 5.

Now the Aſſumption is plaine from the Texts above alledged, that at the reforming of a Church, there is to be a renuing of Covenant; and thence it follows, that at the firſt erecting of a Church, there was the making of a Covenant with God, for els this renuing of Covenant would not have been the way to reforme it.

The fourth Argument is taken from that which doth diſſolveArgu. 4. a Church, which is the diſſolving or breaking of the Covenant, Zach. 11. 9, 10, 14. If diſſolving the Covenant be that which doth diſſolve the Church, then the making of Covenant is that which conſtitutes a Church. The reaſon of the Conſequence is plaine, becauſe otherwiſe the Covenant might be diſſolved & the Church ſtand ſtill, if it were not the making of the Covenant that did conſtitute the Church: But if diſſipating ſtones in a building doe diſſolve the houſe, then the compacting and conjoyning of them is that which makes the houſe; If ſeparation of ſoule and body be that which deſtroyes the man, that then we ſay he is not: it muſt needs be the uniting of them, that did conſtitute & make the man: and ſo it is in this caſe. And that diſſolving the Covenant is that which diſſolves a Church, is plaine from the Text alledged, Zach. 11. where the breaking of the two ſtaves, of beautie and p. 14bands, that is, the unchurching of the Jewes, is interpreted to be the breaking of the Covenant that God had made with that people, and the brotherhood that was between Judah and Iſrael.

The fifth Argument is taken from the diſtinction which GodArgu. 5. hath appointed amongſt Churches, and the confounding of all Churches into one, if there be not this Covenant to diſtinguiſh them. If Churches be diſtinct Societies, and may not be confounded, then Churches are compacted and combined by Covenant: But the former is true. Ergo.

That Churches are diſtinct Societies, is plaine in the Scripture, where we have mention of many Churches in one Countrey or Province, Gal. 1. 1. 1 Theſ. 2. 14. Of ſeven Churches in Aſia, Rev. 1. 4. and of all the Churches, 1 Cor. 14. 33. Rev. 2. 23. Epheſus is not Smyrna, nor Smyrna is not Thyatira, nor either of them Pergamus, but each one diſtinct of themſelves, having Officers of their owne, which did not belong to others: vertues of their owne for which others are not praiſed, corruptions of their owne, for which others are not blamed; If it were not thus, then when Lacdicea is condemned for lukewarmeneſſe, or Epheſus for declining, all the reſt ſhould be reproved alſo: And when Philadelfia is praiſed, all the reſt ſhould be praiſed alſo, which we ſee is otherwiſe. Now from hence the Conſequence is certaine, that therefore they are combined by ſome Covenant each one amongſt themſelves; for there is nothing els without this that wil ſufficiently diſtinguiſh them. The Spirit of God and Faith in their hearts, is common to all Chriſtians under heaven, and in heaven alſo, and therefore this is not the thing that makes diſtinction. Nor is it habitation in the ſame Towne together, for that may be common to ſuch Chriſtians as are not of this Church, and uſually is to many that are no Chriſtians. As it is with Companies in London; as the Company of Goldſmiths, &c. that many others dwell in the ſame Towne with them, yea it may be in the ſame ſtreete that are not of their Company: and therefore it is not meerely habitation that doth diſtinguiſh them from others, but ſome combination and agreement amongſt themſelves; So it is not habitation in the ſame Towne that diſtinguiſheth Churches, and Church-members from other men, but their mutuall agreement and combination and joyning themſelves together in an holy Covenant with God.

p. 15If the Spirit of God and Faith in their hearts cannot diſtinguiſh one Object.Church from another, becauſe theſe are common to them all, then how can Covenant diſtinguiſh them, ſith all Churches are joyned by Covenant one as well as another?

It is not a Covenant ſimply or a Covenant in generall that dothAnſwer. conſtitute a Church, or diſtinguiſh one Church from another, but a Covenant with application and appropriation to theſe perſons. Even as it is in marriage, though all married couples be united by Covenant, and a Covenant wherein one couple promiſeth the ſame duties that another couple doth, yet a Covenant with application and appropriation of the duties covenanted to this man and this woman in particular, ſuch a Covenant is the very thing that make a couple, man and wife together, and gives them mutuall power over each other, as husband and wife, and puts a diſtinction between them and all other men and women in the world. And ſo it is in this caſe; a Covenant to performe Church-duties with application and appropriation to ſuch perſons, is the very thing that conſtitutes a Church, and diſtinguiſheth one Church from another.

And thus much concerning the former of the two particulars, to ſhew the uſe of Church-Covenant, viz. that it is that whereby a company doe become a Church.

The ſecond particular is this, that taking hold of the Covenant, or joyning in it, is that which makes a particular perſon a member of a Church. And this followes upon the former, and that may be the firſt Argument to prove it.

If joyning in Covenant be that which makes a company to becomeArgu. 1. a Church, then taking hold of that Covenant is requiſite to make a particular perſon become a member of the Church: But the firſt is true, as hath been ſhewed before; Therefore the ſecond is true alſo: If compacting and conjoyning of ſtones and pieces of Timber be, that that makes an houſe, then a particular ſtone cannot become a part of that houſe, till it be compacted and con…oyned to the reſt: But the former is true, even in the Church of God, which is the ſpirituall Spouſe and Citie of God, living ſtones, Chriſtians, beleevers muſt be compacted together, and builded up together, Epheſ. 2. 21. 22. Pſal. 12… 3. and therefore the latter is true alſo, that a particular Chriſtian becomes a member of the Church, a part of that building by being combined with the reſt.

p. 16A ſecond Argument may be drawne from the Scripture, Iſa. 56.Argu. 2. 3, 6, 7. Let not the ſonne of the ſtranger, that hath joyned himſelfe to the Lord, ſpeake, ſaying, the Lord hath utterly ſeparated me from his people, &c. The ſonnes of the ſtrangers that joyne themſelves to the Lord, to ſerve him, &c. and take hold of my Covenant, even them will I bring to my holy mountaine, and make them joyfull in my houſe of Prayer, &c. Concerning which Scripture, note three things to the preſent purpoſe. Firſt, That theſe ſtrangers were members of Chriſt, true beleevers, joyned to God by Faith; for it is ſaid, they have joyned themſelves to the Lord, v. 3 & v. 6. that they loved the name of the Lord, ſerved him, and kept his Sabbaths, v. 6. and yet for all this they were not as yet joyned as members of the viſible Church, for if they had been joyned, there would have been no cauſe for ſuch a complaint, the Lord hath ſeparated me from his people, v. 3. Beſides, bringing them into the Church as members, and granting them the priviledge of members, is promiſed as a reward and bleſſing upon this their joyning to the Lord by faith and obedience, v. 7. And therefore it is not the ſame, but a diſtinct thing from it; the one being promiſed as a reward and bleſſing upon the other. Secondly, The Lord promiſeth that he will make them members of his Church: Them will I bring to my holy mountaine, and make them joyfull in my houſe of Prayer. Thirdly, That among other things requiſite to make them members, this was one, viz. the taking hold of that Covenant which was between the Church of Iſrael and God, v. 6. So that hence we may gather, that men may be members of Chriſt, joyned to the Lord by faith and love, and yet for the preſent not be members of the viſible Church: And that when God is ſo gracious to true beleevers, as to make them members of his viſible Church, it is requiſite that they joyne in Covenant before.

But might not faith in Chriſt, beleeving in heart on the God of Iſrael, Object.be all the taking hold of the Covenant that is here meant.

Not ſo, but over and above that, here is alſo meant their openAnſwer. profeſſion of their Faith in the God of Iſrael, and open binding of themſelves by Covenant to all ſuch duties of faith and obedience, as God required of the Church of Iſrael, and the members thereof. Now diſtinctly take the Anſwer to this Objection in three or foure particular Propoſitions. Firſt, There was a Covenant between the Church of Iſrael and God, Exod. 19. 5, 6, 7, 8. Ezek 16. 8. Deut. 29. 10. &c. Secondly, This Covenant was mutuall; not p. 17onelyonly a promiſe on Gods part to be their God, and to take them for his people, but alſo reciprocally on their part to give up themſelves unto God to be his people, and to doe the dutie of people to their God; The Covenant is not meerely to receive from God, and promiſe nothing back againe to him; nor doth God binde himſelfe therein, and leave men at libertie, but it is mutuall on both parts, as theſe Scriptures declare; Gen. 17. 1. Exod. 197. 8. Deut. 5. 27. & 26. 16, 17. Hoſ. 2. 23. & Zach. 13. 9. Thirdly, Hereupon it followes, that if men had not promiſed, and alſo performed, in ſome meaſure of truth, the duties of Faith and obedience unto God, they had not taken hold of the Covenant, but had diſcovenanted themſelves, notwithſtanding all the promiſes of God unto their Fathers or others. Thus though God promiſed Abraham to be a God to him, and to his ſeede in their generations, Gen. 17. 7. yet the Iſhmaelites and Edomites deſcending from Abraham, were diſcovenanted by not promiſing nor performing thoſe duties of Faith and obedience, which God required on the peoples part: when a Covenant containes promiſes on Gods part, and duties alſo on mans, he doth not take hold of the Covenant that takes one part, and leaves another. Fourthly, To beleeve what God promiſed in the Covenant for his part, and to promiſe in a private way the duties of obedience on mans part, was not ſufficient to make theſe ſtrangers members of the Church, but they muſt doe it openly and in the view of the Church, elſe the Church could have had no warrant to have admitted ſuch into their Fellowſhip, if their faith and obedience had not been viſibly profeſſed, Exod. 12. 43. 48 2 Chron. 23. 19.

And in as much as the Covenant was mutuall, when theſe ſtrangers did manifeſt their taking hold of the Covenant, they manifeſted and profeſſed both Faith and obedience, both that they beleeved what God promiſed, and that they would be obedient to what he required; If any ſhould have claimed Church-fellowſhip, ſaying, I beleeve the promiſes, but would not binde himſelfe to any duties of Evangelicall obedience, this had been a taking hold of the Covenant by the halves, a taking of one part of it in ſeeming and pretence, and a leaving of another; but it would not have been ſufficient to have brought a man into the fellowſhip of the church: Such of the Congregation of Iſrael as would not come to Hieruſalem to enter into Covenant, were to be ſeparated from the Church p. 18in the dayes of Ezra, Ezra 10. 8. And therefore ſuch as being ſtrangers ſhould refuſe to enter into it, could not be admitted into the Church; So that the taking hold of Gods Covenant, which is there required to make theſe ſtrangers members of the Church, is a beleeving in heart on the God of Iſrael, and an open profeſſion that they did beleeve, and likewiſe a promiſe of obedience or ſubjection unto the God of Iſrael, and an open profeſſing of ſuch obedience and ſubjection; and that is the joyning in Covenant which we ſtand for, before a man can be a member of a Church, even an open profeſſion of Faith and of Obedience.

A third Argument is taken from thoſe Scriptures which ſhewArgu. 3. that men become members by being added to the Church, or being joyned to them, Act. 2. 47. & 5. 13. & 9. 26. If men become members of the Church by being added or joyned, then joyning in Covenant (or profeſſing of ſubjection to the Goſpel or Covenant of God) is that whereby a man becomes a member of a Church: But the former is true, as appeares by the Scriptures forementioned, and therefore the latter is true alſo.

But all the doubt in this Argument will be concerning the conſequence of the Major Propoſition; but that may be made good by this reaſon, and the confirmation of it, viz. that a man cannot be added or joyned to the Church by any other meanes without this joyning in Covenant. The truth of which Aſſertion will appeare by ſhewing the inſufficiency of all other means, without this joyning in Covenant, and that may be done in Anſwer to the Objections enſuing.

When men were added to the Church, it may be, no more is meant Object. 1.but that God did convert them and worke Faith in their hearts, and that converting of them was the adding of them to the Church.

This cannot be all; for, firſt, Saul was converted and had faithAnſwer. wrought in his heart, and yet he was not at the firſt received for a member of the Church at Hieruſalem (though he aſſayed to be joyned unto them,) till they were better ſatisfied in his ſpirituall eſtate by the teſtimony of Barnabas, Act. 9. 26, 27, 28. And thoſe ſtrangers, Iſa. 56. (as was ſaid before) were joyned to the Lord by being converted, and having Faith wrought in their hearts, and yet they doe lament it with griefe, that they were not joyned as members to the viſible Church: The Lord hath ſeparated me from his people, ſay they, ver. 3. The old ſaying is true concerning the p. 19viſible Church, There are many wolves within, and many ſheepe without. Secondly, Thoſe that were joyned were beleevers before they joyned; for it is ſaid, divers were added, ver. 14. Thirdly, Thoſe that were added to the Church, were added and joyned to them by ſuch an act as others durſt not put forth, Act. 5. 13. Of the reſt durſt no man joyne unto them, and therefore it was not by the irreſiſtable act of God in converting of them, but by ſome voluntary act of their owne choice and conſent; for Gods converting grace depends not upon mans daring, or not daring to receive it. If to be joyned be no more but to be converted, then when it is ſaid, Some durſt not be joyned, the meaning ſhould be, they durſt not be converted, nor ſuffer Faith to be wrought in them; which is groſſe Arminianiſme, ſuſpending the converting grace of God upon the free will of the creature. Fourthly, And as this joyning which others durſt not doe, cannot be meant of being converted; So if it be well conſidered, what the thing was wherein they durſt not joyne, it may appeare that it was nothing els but this, that they durſt not agree, and engage themſelves to be of their body and ſocietie; that is, they durſt not joyne in Covenant with them. For it cannot be meant of dwelling in the Towne with them, for this they both durſt doe and did: nor is it onelyonly of joyning to heare the Word in their aſſembly, for this alſo they durſt doe, and many did it in great multitudes, ſo that many by hearing the Word became beleevers, and were added to the Lord both of men and women, ver. 14. at this very time when it is ſaid of ſome they durſt not joyne unto them: Nor is it of joyning to them in affection, or approbation of their way, for this they alſo durſt doe and did expreſſe ſo much in magnifying and commending them, when yet they durſt not joyne unto them, ver. 13. Which magnifying of them doth imply that they heard their doctrine, and ſaw their practiſe, and approved it, and highly commended them for the ſame: Wherefore ſeeing this joyning, which ſome durſt not doe, cannot be meant of being converted, nor of joyning in habitation, nor of joyning in affection, nor in hearing the Word in their Aſſembly, nor of approbation, and expreſſions that way, it remaineth that it muſt be meant of joyning in that neere relation of Church-fellowſhip amongſt them, ſo as to be engaged by voluntary conſent and agreement to be members of their Church. Fiftly, If joyning to the Church, were no more but to be converted, p. 20then he that were converted were joyned as a member of every viſible Church throughout the world, which were a great confuſion of that Order, and diſtinction of Churches, which the Lord hath appointed.

Men may be joyned to the Church, in heartie affection and love, and Obj. 2.yet without any Covenant.

True, but this will not make them members of that Church,Anſw. for then Saul was a member of the Church at Hieruſalem, afore he was joyned a member, for he was joyned to them in heartie affection afore, and therefore aſſayed to joyne as a member; and ſo were they that durſt not joyne, Act. 5. 13. yea then a man ſhould be a member of many Churches, yea of all Chriſtian Churches in the world; for he is to love them, and beare heartie affection to them all; The true members of the Churches in England are united in heartie affection, to the Churches in Scotland, in Holland, in France, in New-England, &c. And yet they are not members of all theſe Churches, nor ſubject to their cenſures as members are.

But the reaſon of that is becauſe they doe not dwell among them in Obj. 3.the ſame Towne.

Neither would habitation with them in the ſame Towne, makeAnſwer. a man a member of the Church there, if there be no more then ſo. Suppoſe Saul to have dwelt in the ſame houſe afore his converſion in which he dwelt after, which is not unpoſſible nor unlikely; yet we ſee he was no member of the Church at Hieruſalem, afore his converſion, no nor of ſome time after, though he might have dwelt in an houſe in the midſt of the Chriſtians, and Churchmembers there. The members of the Dutch and French Churches in London, or other Townes in England, are not members of the Engliſh-Congregations or Churches, no more then the Engliſh are of theirs, and yet they dwell promiſcuouſly together in the ſame Streete of the ſame Towne. Towne-dwelling would not make a man a free-man of a Company in London, or ſome other Corporation; for many others dwell in the Towne with them; yea it may be in the ſame ſtreete, that are not free of their Company, and ſo it is in this caſe.

But the reaſon why ſuch as dwell in Towne with the Church, are Object. 4.not members thereof, may be, becauſe they frequent not their. Aſſemblies.

p. 21Idiots and Infidells might come into the publick meetings amongAnſw. the Corinthians, 1 Cor. 14. 23, 24, 25. yet Idiots and Infidells were not therefore members of the Church. And Saul after his converſion might have come in among the Church in time of publick duties, and have ſeene and heard all that they had done: yet this would not have made him of one body with them. Some Indians, Moores, and other naturall perſons come into our meetings in New-England, ſome of their owne accord, and others by the Command or Counſell of their Maſters and Governours yet no man can ſay, that all theſe are hereby made Church-members. Wherefore ſeeing neither converſion, nor loving affection, nor cohabitation, nor coming into their meetings, doth joyne a man as a member of the viſible Church (for ſome men have all theſe, and yet are not members, and others are ſometimes members of the viſible Churches, and yet want ſome of theſe, are hypocrites and want ſound converſion) it remaineth therefore that as ſound converſion makes a man fit matter for a Church; So profeſſion of his Faith, and of his ſubjection to the Goſpel, and the Churches approbation, and acceptance of him (which is the ſumme of Church-Covenant) is the formall cauſe that gives him the being of a member.

But joyning doth not alway ſignifie joyning in Covenant; Philip joyned Object. 5.to the Eunnuchs chariote, and duſt to mens feete, Act. 8. 29. & Luke 10, 11. and yet there was no Covenant, and therefore men may joyne to the Church without any Covenant.

The word indeed may expreſſe any cloſe joyning, whether naturall,Anſw. (as the branch is joyned to the Vine, or an arme or other member to the body) or artificiall, as when two ſtickes were joyned to become one in Ezekiels hand, Ezek. 37. Or when Carpenters or Maſons doe joyne pieces of ſtone or Timber together, to make one houſe, Neh. 4. 6. Ezr. 4. 12. but is not onelyonly the force of the word that is ſtood upon. But when joyning is uſed to expreſſe ſuch joyning, wherein a man voluntarily takes on him a new relation, there it alwayes implyes a Covenant, whether the relation be morall and civill, or religious and Eccleſiaſticall: We ſpeake of voluntary relation, for there are naturall relations, as betweene parents and children: and theſe need no Covenant, there is no Covenant to make a man a Parent, or a childe; There are alſo violent relations, as between Conquerour and Captives, and p. 22in theſe there is no Covenant neither; but others are voluntary, and theſe alwayes imply a Covenant, and are founded therein, whether they be morall and civill (as between husband and wife, Pro. 2. 17. between Maſter and ſervants, Luk. 15. 15. between Prince and ſubject, between Partners in Trade, 2 Chro. 20. 35, 36, 37. where the Covenant or agreement is, that men ſhall bare ſuch a ſhare of charges, and receive ſuch a ſhare of profits:) or religious, as between Miniſter and people, between the Church and the members: all theſe are done by way of Covenant. A man cannot joyne himſelfe to a woman as her husband, but by way of Covenant: A man cannot joyne himſelfe to another as a ſervant, or apprentiſe, but by way of Covenant; And ſo may we ſay of all the reſt; nor into any body corporate, but by the ſame way and means. If men be united into a body politick or incorporate, a man cannot be ſaid to be joyned to them by meere heartie affection, unleſſe withall he joynes himſelfe unto them by ſome Contract or Covenant. Now of this nature is every particular Church, a body incorporate, 1 Cor. 12. 27. Yee are the body of Chriſt, &c. and hath power to caſt out, 1 Cor. 5. 13. and to forgive and receive in Penitents, 2 Cor. 2. 7. 8 as a body incorporate; and therefore he that will joyne unto them, muſt doe it by way of Covenant or Agreement; and ſo this Anſwer to this Objection, may be a fourth Argument to prove the point in hand, that joyning in Covenant is that which makes a man, a member of a Church.

All voluntary relations, all relations which are neither naturallArgu. 4. nor violent, are entred into by way of Covenant.

But he that joynes into a Church as a member, or enters into a Church, doth take upon him ſuch a relation; Therefore joyning▪ to a Church as a member, is by way of Covenant.

A fifth Argument may be drawne from the power which allArgu. 5. Churches, Officers and members, have over all their members in the Lord. If all Churches, Officers, and members, have power in the Lord over all their members, then joyning in Covenant is neceſſary to make a man a member of a Church, but the former is true, therefore the latter is true alſo.

The Aſſumption in this Argument, that all Churches have power over their members, is proved from 1 Cor. 5. 4, 5. 13. where the Apoſtle reproveth the Corinthians for ſuffering the Inceſtuous p. 23man amongſt them, and commands them to deliver him to Satan, and caſt him out from amongſt them. Now this he would not have done, if they had had no power over him, or if there had been any roome for them to ſay, wee have nothing to doe with him, wee have no power over him. And the ſame is prooved in other Scriptures alſo; as, Mat. 18. 17. Pſal. 149. 6. 7, 8, 9.

And the Conſequence of the Major Propoſition, viz. that then members doe engage themſelves by Covenant, is proved by this reaſon; That Churches have no power over ſuch as have not engaged themſelves by Covenant, and committed power unto them, by profeſſing to be ſubject to all the Ordinances of Chriſt amongſt them.

The truth whereof may appeare by two Reaſons:

Firſt, Becauſe all Chriſtians have power and right, jure divino, to chooſe their owne Officers to whom they commit their ſoules, Act. 6. & 1. & 14. 23. where the word foreign, imports chooſing by Election: and ſo the word is uſed and tranſlated, 2 Cor. 8. 19. he was choſen by the Churches, &c. It is not miniſteriall gifts that makes a man a Miniſter to every Church, nor inveſteth him with ſpirituall power over them, nor though he dwell amongſt them, unleſſe they call him, and he accept of that call: And as they have power to chooſe their Officers, ſo likewiſe to chooſe their brethren according to God, Rom. 14. 1. Now if they have power to chooſe their Officers and brethren, then none can have power over them as Officers and brethren, without their owne conſent, and whom they never choſe, nor promiſed by any Covenant or Engagement to be ſubject to the Lord.

Secondly, If the Church ſhould exerciſe any Act of Churchpower over ſuch a man as never entred into Covenant with them (ſuppoſe to Excommunicate him for whoredome or drunkenneſſe, or the like) the man might proteſt againſt their Act, and their Sentence, as Coram non judice, and they could not juſtifie their proceedings, if indeed there have paſſed no Covenant or Engagement between him and them. If he ſhall ſay, you have nothing to doe to paſſe Sentence or Cenſure upon me, I am none of your Church, but of another Church; Suppoſe in Holland, in France, &c. and I am onelyonly here now for Merchandiſe ſake, or upon ſome other occaſion: what ſhall they ſay to ſtop his mouth, if there never p. 24paſſed any Covenant between him and them.

But Miniſters have power over the people by the word of God, Object.Heb. 13. 17. 1 Theſ. 5. 12. 1 Tim. 5. 17. and not by mens engaging themſelves by Covenant.

But what is it that makes men Miniſters to ſuch a people, OfficersAnſwer. to ſuch a Church, or maketh them ſheepe of my flocke? Is it not thoſe Scriptures that makes every man a Paſtour, or Teacher, or Ruler to a people, unleſſe they call him to that Office; and then in ſo doing they Covenant and Engage themſelves to be ſubject to him in the Lord, and then thoſe Scriptures take hold on them. One might as well ſay, it is not the Covenanting of a wife to her husband that gives him power over her, but the Word of God; For as the Word of God commands people to obey their Miniſters, ſo it commands wives to be ſubject to their husbands, Epheſ. 5. 22. And yet all men know, a man cannot take this woman for his▪ wife but by Covenant. So that if ſhee once makes her ſelfe a wife by her owne voluntary Covenant, then the word of God takes hold on her, and bindes her to doe the duties of a wife: but if ſhee▪ hath made no Covenant, the man hath no power over her as her husband, neither is ſhee his wife; So if men once make themſelves members of ſuch a Church, ſheepe of ſuch a mans flocke, by their own voluntary Covenant, then the word of God takes hold of them, and bindes them to doe the duties of members to their fellow-brethren, and of people to their Paſtours or Miniſters. But if they never choſe ſuch a man to be their Miniſter, nor Covenanted to be ſubject to him in the Lord, he then can have no power over them as a Miniſter unto them, becauſe they have right to choſe their owne Miniſters.

A ſixth Argument may be taken from the diſtinction that isArgu. 6. between members, and not members. If there be by the word of God a diſtinction, between members of the Church and ſuch as are no members, then joyning in Covenant is neceſſary to the being of a member; but the former is true, as appeares 1 Cor. 5. 12. Some are within, and may be judged by the Church, and others are without, and may not▪ and therefore the latter is true alſo. And the reaſon of the Conſequence is becauſe there is nothing elſe without this joyning in Covenant, that can ſufficiently diſtinguiſh them; It is not Faith and Grace in their hearts, for ſome men are members of the viſible Church, and yet have no p. 25Grace, and others may have Grace, and yet be no members, and therefore this is not the thing that doth diſtinguiſh them, nor is it affection, nor cohabitation, nor every approbation of the Word of God, and the wayes of his Church, nor comming into their Aſſemblies to heare the Word; But theſe things were touched before, and therefore may be here the more briefly paſſed over.

And ſo much ſhall ſuffice to have ſpoken of the ſecond particular, concerning the uſe of Church-Covenant, that it is by joyning therein that a particular perſon becomes a member of a Church.

But here it will be needfull to remove ſundry Objections, which may ſeeme to ſome to be of great weight againſt Church-Covenant, that ſo by the removing of them, the truth may be the more cleared, to fuller ſatisfaction, if it be the will of God.

Church-Covenant is a Terme that is not found in Scripture.Object. 1. Anſwer.

Firſt, So is Sacrament, Trinitie, &c. and yet thoſe termes may be lawfully uſed, becauſe the thing meant thereby is found.

Secondly, But ſeeing the Covenant is between the Lord and his Church, as the two parties that are confederate, it is all one whether it be called the Lords Covenant, or the Church-Covenant: As when Mamre, Aver, & Eſchol were confederate with Abraham, Gen. 14. 13. might not one truely ſay, Abraham was confederate with them? Relatives doe mutually put and eſtabliſh one another.

Thirdly, The Scripture allowes both the Lords Covenant with the Church, Eze. 16. 8. & the peoples covenant or Saints covenant, or Churches Covenant with him, Deut. 29. 12. Pſal. 50. 5. Jer. 50. 5.

Fourthly, There is good reaſon for both the words; both the Lords Covenant, and the Church-Covenant, becauſe both are confederate; And for that of Church-Covenant, there is this reaſon alſo, viz. to diſtinguiſh it from other Covenants, as a marriage-Covenant, Pro. 2. 17. and a brotherly Covenant, 1 Sam. 20. 8. The Church-Covenant being thus called not onelyonly becauſe they are a Church, or members thereof that make it, but alſo becauſe they enter into it in reference to Church-Eſtate and Church-duties: The duties which they bind themſelves unto in this Covenant being ſuch eſpecially as concern a Church and the members thereof.

But this Church-Covenant puts ſome diſparagement upon the Covenant Object. 2.of Grace, which every beleever is already entred into with God, and ſeeme to charge the ſame with inſufficiency; for every ſecond Covenant doth argue that the firſt was not faultleſſe, Heb. 8. 7.

p. 261. A ſecond Covenant doth argue that the firſt was not faultleſſe,Anſw. where the Covenants are contrary one to another, as the covenant of Grace, and the covenant of works are, and ſo it is moſt true, that the bringing in of the free Covenant of Grace did argue that righteouſnes and life could not be attained by the Law, or Covenant of works; for if there had been a Law given which could have given life, verily righteouſneſſe ſhould have been by the Law. Gal. 3. 21. Rom. 8. 3.

2. But if it be the ſame Covenant that is renewed or made againe, though upon a new occaſion, no man can ſay that entring into the ſame the ſecond time, or a third, or a fourth, doth diſanull the firſt, or caſt diſparagement upon the ſame. The covenant of works given to Adam was not blamed or faulted, becauſe it was renewed in Sinai. The Covenant of Grace was firſt given to Adam in Paradiſe after his fall, afterward to Abraham, then to the people of Iſrael under types and ſhadows; And againe after the coming of Chriſt in the fleſh; yet none of theſe doth diſanull the former, or argue the ſame to be faulty; and the reaſon is, becauſe it is ſtill the ſame Covenant though renewed upon new occaſions; and in ſome particulars in ſome other manner. And the like we ſay concerning Church-Covenant, or the Covenant which a man makes when he enters into the Church, viz. that it is not another Covenant contrary to the Covenant of Grace, which every beleever is brought into at his firſt converſion, but an open profeſſion of a mans ſubjection to that very Covenant, ſpecially in the things which concerne Church eſtate, into which eſtate the man is now entring.

It is not lawfull to make ſuch a Covenant as the Church-Covenant, Obj. 3.becauſe it is not in our power to keep it, and we do not know whether God will give us power.

This ground is very true, that no man hath power of himſelfeAnſw. to any thing that good is, but all a mans power and abilitie muſt come of God through Chriſt, 2. Cor. 3. 5. Phil. 2. 13. Joh. 15. 5. But the inference is not good, that therefore it ſhould be unlawfull to ento into Church-Covenant: for 1. By the ſame reaſon, all promiſes are unlawfull, and all covenants whatſoever; as the covenant of marriage, the covenant of ſervice, yea and the perſonall covenant of Grace, when a particular ſoule promiſeth faith and new obedience; for there is none of theſe, no not the covenant of p. 27Marriage, which a man is able of himſelf to keep, as the adultery of David and Bathſheba, among others, doth plainly prove.

2. God hath promiſed to give power to them that in ſelf-deniall ſeek it of him, and truſt to his promiſe for it. Ezek. 36. 27. Jer. 31. 33. Rom. 6. 14. Jer. 32. 40. The true inference therefore from this ground, from mans diſabilitie to performe were this, that therefore a man ſhould not enter into Church Covenant in his owne ſtrength, for that was Peters fault in promiſing not to deny Chriſt, but to die with him rather: but Church-Covenant, as alſo all other promiſes, ſhould be entred into, in an humble looking up to Chriſt Jeſus for help and aſſiſtance to performe. Thou therefore my ſonne, be ſtrong in the grace that is in Chriſt Jeſus, 2. Tim. 2. 1.

God diſalloweth covenants of mans making (and ſo our Church-Covenant) Obj. 4.in thoſe words, But not by thy Covenant. Ezek. 16. 61.

God doth not reprove them there for making Covenant, forAnſw. then he were contrary to himſelfe, who elſewhere called them to do it, Exod. 29. Deut. 29. and commended them for it, Pſal. 50. 5. Yea and in that very place of Ezek. 16. acknowledgeth a Covenant betweene him and them, ver. 60. 62. But the meaning is, he would do them good, but not for their good keeping the Covenant of works, for they had very ſinfully broken it, ver. 59 but even as he ſaith elſewhere, not for their ſakes, or for their righteouſneſſe, Ezek. 36. 32. Deut. 9. 4, 5, 6. But what force is there in this arguing, viz. If God will do us good, but not for our good keeping the covenant of works, then it is not lawfull to promiſe obedience to the covenant of Grace, in ſuch things as concerne Church eſtate; All men may eaſily ſee that here is a plaine non ſequitur.

This entring into Covenant may keep out many good men from joyning Obj. 5.to the Churches, becauſe they are not ſatisfied about it: and therefore it is better laid aſide.

It is not impoſſible, but good men may for a time be unſatisfiedAnſw. about it, till they underſtand the nature and uſe of it, and yet the thing be warrantable enough for all that in the ſight of God; the Tribes were troubled at the Altar ſet up upon the banks of Jordan by the two Tribes and an halfe, till they underſtood the intent and uſe of it, and for what purpoſe it was erected: and then they were ſatisfied. Joſh. 22. And the ſame may be ſaid of Peters eating with the Gentiles, which at the firſt was very offenſive to them of the p. 28circumciſion, till they underſtood what Peter had to ſay for his defence therein, and then they reſted well ſatisfied, Act. 11.

But if men underſtand what the Church-Covenant is, there is no reaſon that good men ſhould be troubled at it; it being nothing elſe but a promiſe of obedience unto the Goſpel of Chriſt, or of ſuch duties as the Goſpel requireth of all Chriſtians in Churcheſtate: For, will good men refuſe to obey the Goſpel, or ſubmit to the ordinances of Chriſt? or will they refuſe to profeſſe and promiſe ſo much? If a man underſtand what it is, and what we meane by it, and yet refuſe to enter into it when he hath opportunitie thereto, ſuch refuſing is no part of his goodneſſe, but is to be reckoned amongſt his corruptions; It is ignorance at the beſt, and if not ſo, then it may be perverſeneſſe of will, or ſome want of will to performe obedience to the Goſpel. And ſurely there is ſmal hope that ſuch would yeeld ſubjection and obedience to the Goſpel, who do refuſe to profeſſe or promiſe it.

But the Scripture, Act. 2. 41. tels of joyning to the Church without Obj. 6.any Covenant. For it was not poſſible that 3000. ſhould enter into covenant in one day.

Two things may be ſaid in Anſwer to this Objection.Anſw.

Firſt, that 3000. were not ſo many, but that joyning in Covenant might eaſily be done by them all, in one day. For, 1. it was at Penticoſt, at which time of the yeer the dayes were at the longeſt: And, 2. the Scripture tels us, that David made a Covenant with all the Tribes of Iſrael in one day, 2. Sam. 5 1, 2, 3. The Articles of the covenant betweene David and the Tribes, and ſo betweene this 3000. and the Lord might be openly declared, and they both the one and the other might by ſome ſigne or other, expreſſe their conſent thereunto in one day.

Secondly, as joyning in Covenant is a thing that might be done, ſo it is more then probable that indeed it was done, by thoſe 3000. ſoules For it is ſaid, ver. 41. that they gladly received the word, that is, they openly profeſſed that they did with all their hearts receive it, for this receiving of the Word is noted as a condition, upon which they were admitted to baptiſme, and therefore it was not onelyonly an inward receiving of it in their hearts, but alſo an open profeſſing that they did receive it; for an inward receiving of it in their hearts, without an open profeſſing thereof outwardly, would not have been ſufficient for the admitting of them unto Baptiſme. p. 29Now this Word which they received was an exhortation to Repentance for ſinne, and to Faith in the promiſe, ver. 38 39. and to obedience in ſevering themſelves from others, and ſaving themſelves from that untoward generation, ver. 40. And therefore when they openly profeſſed, that they gladly received this word, there was an open profeſſing of their Repentance for ſinne, ver. 40. of their Faith in the promiſe, and of obedience to the Commandement, which is nothing elſe, but the very ſumme of Church-Covenant: yea, and further, their very preparation to this repentance, faith and obedience, in that true compunction and ſorrow of ſoul, was alſo openly made manifeſt. ver. 37.

But yet there would not be ſuch long narrations, of every one ſeverally Reply.as now are uſed, when men do enter into Church-Covenant, when each one makes a good long ſpeech, in the profeſſion of his Faith and Repentance.

When the thing is certaine, as was ſhewed before, that they didAnſw. openly profeſſe repentance, faith and obedience, it is not difference in the length or largeneſſe of their ſpeeches in expreſſing of themſelves, that can make any difference in the thing: Majus & minus non diverſificant ſpeciem. And we denie not but they might be briefer, becauſe there was not ſuch need they ſhould be long in regard of ſome difference betweene them and us, their time and ours: Firſt there were the Apoſtles preſent to heare their confeſſions, and to judge thereof, who were men of very good diſcerning, and therefore briefer expreſſing of mens ſelves might ſuffice; whereas the beſt Chriſtians, yea the beſt Miniſters amongſt us are not to be compared to the Apoſtles; and therefore as we need more time for ſtudy, and for preparation for our Sermons then they did: ſo likewiſe we need more time to heare, and try the ſoundneſſe of mens repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jeſus Chriſt. Yet this we may adde withall, that if the Apoſtles and thoſe primative Chriſtians, men of ſuch excellent diſcerning were ſometimes deceived, and could not alwayes ſo diſcern, but that ſome Hypocrites would creep into the Church: as the example of Ananias and Saphira doth witneſſe; how much more need is there, that the Churches of God in theſe dayes (being far inferiour to them) ſhould be very watchfull and circumſpect in p. 30trying the ſpirituall eſtates of them that offer to come into the Church?

Secondly, their times alſo differed from ours: for their Chriſtianitie was a matter of reproach and danger of excommunication, Joh. 9. 22. of impriſonment, Act. 4. 3. and 5. 18. and the like. And therefore to ſee men now to make open profeſſion of their faith in Chriſt Jeſus, whoſe ſervants and diſciples were ſo hated, and who himſelfe but a while before was crucified, this was not an ordinarie matter: and therefore in words, men might be the briefer when they came to be received into the Church: But our times in New England do not perſecute Chriſt, and Chriſtians, and Chriſtian Churches, but countenance them, and protect them; and therefore there is more need now to be more ſtudious in examination of mens eſtates when they offer themſelves for Church members: when the Jews were in favour, many of the people of the Land became Jews, Eſth. 8. 17.

But why is there ſo little proofe of this Church-Covenant in the New Obj. 7.Teſtament?

1. Suppoſe the New Teſtament ſaid nothing of it, yet it mightAnſw. have ground ſufficient from the Scriptures of the old Teſtament; for if it was Gods revealed will in thoſe dayes, that a companie ſhould become a Church, and particular perſons become members of that Church by way of Covenant, we may be ſure it is ſo now likewiſe, unleſſe covenanting were peculiar to the Jewiſh Paedigogie; indeed if it had never been uſed in thoſe times, but were ſome new ordinance, peculiar to the dayes of the New Teſtament, in ſuch caſes alſo a ground from the Scriptures of the New Teſtament were neceſſarie, as there is in all ſuch things wherein there is any change or variation, from what was uſed in thoſe times afore Chriſt, as that there ſhould not be Nationall Churches, but congregationall, and not one viſible Church, but many, that there ſhould be baptiſme, and the Lords Supper: theſe are matters that are not found in the old Teſtament, nor were appointed to be uſed in thoſe dayes, and therefore we muſt have warrant for them in the New, and ſo we have. But for the Covenant it is otherwiſe, it is no new ordinance peculiar to the dayes of the Goſpel, nor any Leviticall ordinance peculiar to the Jewiſh Pedigogie; and therefore the Scriptures of the Old Teſtament that give warrant for it, may be ſufficient as hath been ſhewed afore.

p. 312. And yet there is not wanting good warrant for it, that it ought to be uſed, in the dayes of the New Teſtament. For, 1. the Prophets do foretell it, Iſa. 56. 6, 7. and 44. 5. and Jer. 50. 5. Ezek. 20. 37. and in ſundrie other places, to omit the reſt at this time, becauſe ſome of them have been ſpoken of before; OnelyOnly let thoſe words of Iſa. 44. 5. be well conſidered, and ſee if they do not plainly hold forth that in the dayes of the New Teſtament, men ſhould openly profeſſe their faith, and ſolemnly bind themſelves by Covenant, to be the Lords people, one ſhall ſay, I am the Lords, and another ſhall call himſelf by the name of Jacob, and another ſhall ſubſcribe with his hand, and ſirname himſelf by the name of Iſrael. Theſe words are ſo plaine for open profeſſing of faith in the Lord, and open binding of mens ſelves by Covenant unto him, as we conceive nothing need be more.

2. The Apoſtles do ſufficiently teſtifie, that ſuch a thing was practiſed in their dayes, elſe how ſhould we underſtand that fellowſhip in the Goſpel in its full latitude and breadth, Phil. 1. 5. if this combining into Church-fellowſhip be no part thereof; yea when it is ſaid, they continued ſtedfaſtly, or as the word foreign, may well be tranſlated, they ſtrongly did cleave together, or hold together in ſuch a Fellowſhip, which was not preaching and hearing the doctrine of the Apoſtles, nor Sacraments, nor Prayer, but a thing diſtinct from all theſe. If this combining themſelves into a ſpirituall fellowſhip and ſocietie of Church-ſtate be no part thereof, we know not how to underſtand it, nor what that fellowſhip ſhould meane; If Doctrine, and Sacraments, and Prayer had not been particularly mentioned, in the ſame place, it might have been thought that the Fellowſhip in which they ſo ſteadfaſtly clave together had been no more, but their coming together to obſerve theſe ſaid ordinances, and their communion therein. But when all theſe are particularly mentioned, and Fellowſhip mentioned among them, as a thing diſtinct from the reſt, we may not confound it with the reſt. We might as well ſay, that by doctrine is meant Sacraments, and by Sacraments is meant Prayer; as to ſay that by Fellowſhip is meant nothing elſe but the exerciſe of doctrine, and Sacraments, and Prayer. And if theſe as they are diſtinctly named, be diſtinct ordinances, and may not be confounded, then Fellowſhip being named in the ſame manner imports ſomething diſtinct from them all, and may not be confounded p. 32with them, nor with any of them, no more then the other may be confounded one with another. And if ſo, then as this Fellowſhip may import, the communion of their gift and goods one for the helpe of another, ſo it muſt firſt of all imply a combining of themſelves into Church-ſtate by mutuall agreement, conſent, or covenant.

Furthermore, when the Apoſtle writeth, that by experience of the Corinthians liberall contribution to the poore Saints, men glorified God for their profeſſed ſubjection to the Goſpel of Chriſt, 2. Cor. 9. 13. he plainly imployes thereby, that the Corinthians had made a profeſſion or promiſe of ſuch ſubjection to the Goſpel as did comprehend this particular of diſtributing to the neceſſitie of the Saints, among other things. And their liberall diſtribution which he there ſpeaks of, was looked at as one point of their reall performance of that ſubjection to the Goſpel, which they had before profeſſed, and promiſed. Now the Church-Covenant is nothing elſe, but the profeſſing or promiſing of ſuch ſubjection, and therefore this place is another proofe of Church-Covenant. Beſides, it hath been ſhewed afore in Argument 3. that thoſe places which ſpeake of being added to the Church, of joyning, or aſſaying to joyne unto the Church, Act. 2. 47. and 5 13. and 9 26. are not expounded according to the full meaning of them, when they are underſtood of any other joyning, if joyning in Covenant be left out. And therefore the Scriptures of the New Teſtament do beare good witneſſe unto Church-Covenant, though, as we ſaid before, the Scriptures of the Old Teſtament might have been ſufficient if the New Teſtament had ſpoken nothing of it.

But Baptiſme makes men members of the viſible Church, and therefore Obj. 8.the Covenant is needleſſe.

This is anſwered in the Anſwer to the fourth of the 32. Queſtions,Anſw. where it is ſhewed at large that Baptiſme … a ſeale of the Covenant betweene God and the Church, but neither makes the Church, nor members of the Church, nor alwayes ſo much as proves men to be members.

This Church-Covenant is a late deviſe, and was not known in ancient Obj. 9.time, and therefore is to be rejected.

Firſt, True Antiquitie is that of the Scriptures. Now ſithAnſw. Church Covenant is warranted by the Scripture, as hath been p. 33ſhewed before in this diſcourſe, it cannot be charged to want true Antiquitie. When the Papiſts are wont to charge the doctrine of Proteſtants with Novelty, and ſuch as was never heard of before Luther, the Orthodoxe are wont to anſwer, that if the doctrine do not agree with the Scripture, then let it be condemned for Noveltie; and if it do, it is warranted by the beſt Antiquitie, even the teſtimonie of God himſelf who is the Antient of dayes: Our Faith, faith Doctor White, is in all points the ſame that is contained in the Scripture, and ſo conſequently of the ſame Antiquitie: and therefore all they that ſay it came up but of late, muſt firſt prove it contrary to the Word of God, or elſe hold their peace. White, Way, 44. 1. And the ſame we ſay in this particular of the Church-Covenant.

Secondly, And yet they that ſearch the Stories and Writers of the times and ages next after the Apoſtles, may find ſome teſtimonie of Church-Covenant in thoſe dayes: For inſtance, Juſtine Martyr in his Apol. 2. makes mention of three things which were required of all that were admitted into the Church as members, foreign, that is regeneration, and ſoundneſſe in the Faith, and a promiſe to walke in obedience to the Goſpel. And generally this was the practiſe of all thoſe times, that never any man was admitted to Baptiſme, nor his children neither, but they put him to anſwer three queſtions, Abrenuntios? whereto he anſwered, Abrenuntio. Credis? whereto his anſwer was, Credo: and Spondes? to which he anſwered, Spondes. So that here was an open declaration of his Repentance from dead works, and of the ſoundneſſe of his Faith, in the two firſt particulars, and an open binding himſelf by covenant or promiſe to walke according to the Goſpel, in the third. But much needs not to be ſaid in this point, unto them that do acknowledge Scripture Antiquitie to be ſufficient, though after times ſhould be found to ſwerve from the Rules and Patterns that are therein contained.

If Church-Covenant be ſo neceſſarie, then all the Reformed Churches Obj. 10.are to be condemned as no Churches; for they have no ſuch Covenant.

They that have knowne thoſe Churches, not onelyonly by theirAnſw. writings, and confeſſions of their faith, in Synods and otherwiſe; but alſo by living amongſt them, and being eye-witneſſes of their Order, do report otherwiſe of them, viz. that they are combined p. 34together by ſolemne Covenant with God and one another. Zepperus, ſpeaking of the manner, uſed in the reformed Churches, in admitting the children of Church-members to the Lords Table, when they came to age, and have been ſufficiently catechiſed, and inſtructed in the doctrine of Religion▪ tells us, that ſuch children are admitted to the Lords table, by publick profeſſion of Faith, and entring into Covenant. Conſuetum eſt, ſaith l…e, ut qui per atatem inque Doctrinâ Catecheticâ profectum ad ſacram Coenam primum admittuntur, fidei confeſſionem coram totâ Eccleſiâ publice edant per parentes aut qui parentum loco ſunt, juſſû miniſtri, in Eccleſia conſpectum producti: quòdque in illa confeſſione, per Dei gratiam perſtare, ac, juxta illam, vitam inſtituere, inſuper etiam diſciplina Eccleſiaſticae ultrò ac ſpoute ſuâ ſubjicere ſeſe velint, ſpondeant atque ſtipulentur, Polit. Eccleſ. lib. 1. cap. 14. p. 158. that is, The manner is, that they who by reaſon of age and proficiencie in the doctrine of Catechiſme are firſt admitted to the Lords Supper, ſhould publickly before the whole Church make confeſſion of their faith, being brought forth into the ſight of the Church by their parents, or them that are inſtead of parents, at the appointment of the Miniſter; and likewiſe ſhould promiſe and covenant by the grace of God to continue in that Faith which they have confeſſed, and to lead their lives according to it; yea, and moreover to ſubject themſelves freely and willingly to the diſcipline of the Church. Theſe words we ſee are full and plaine, that children are not in thoſe Churches received to the Lords Supper, without perſonall confeſſion of Faith, and entring into Covenant before; And if they tooke this courſe with children come to age, there is as much reaſon, or more, that the ſame courſe ſhould be holden with men of yeers, when they are admitted members. And ſo the ſame Zepperus, ſpeaking of the conſociation of Churches amongſt themſelves by mutuall confederation, hath theſe words, which as they may be applyed to the combining of many Churches, ſo may they be combining of many members of the ſame Church, … illa foreign, quam in Symbolo profite nunc Apoſtolico, nihil aliud hic requirit, & vult, quam obligationem omnium Eccleſiae membrorum & confoederationem, &c. that is, that communion of Saints which we profeſſe in the Creed, doth require and meane nothing elſe but an obligation of all the members of the Church, and a binding of them together p. 35by Covenant. Polit. Eccleſ. li. 3 c. 8. p 721.

To theſe teſtimonies of Z…pp…r…, thoſe words may be added of Mr. Parker our own countreyman, a man of ſingular note for learning and holineſſe, who alſo himſelfe lived ſometimes beyond Sea in the reformed Churches, and there ended his dayes, ſo that we may ſafely give the more credit to his teſtimonie, he having ſo good meanes fully to know the ſtate and order of thoſe Churches. Now he ſpeaketh of a Solennis forma abſque quâ in Eccleſiae alicujus communionem nullus ritè recipitur: of a ſolemne forme, without which no man is rightly received into the communion of the Church, hath theſe words. Hic mos ille eſt reformatarum Eccleſiarum non ſolum in lapſis reſtituendis, ſed in extra…eis, i…ò quibuſcunque recipiendis qui ad habitandum alicubi conſident, etſi fortè in Eccleſiâ illius loci quo ante commo… abantur, juxta hanc formam admiſſi prius fuerant. Examinat Presbyterium, plebs conſentit, quiſque teſtes vita ſua ſecum adfert, vel teſtimonia ſal…em: publicatur nomen cuiuſque competentis pro con…io…e, admonetur quiſque ſiquid habeat quod excipiat, ut denunciet presbyteris. Si nihil contrà adferatur, admittitur quidem, ſed non niſi ſolerni pactione cum Deo & cum Eccleſiâ▪ Spondet verò Eccleſiae▪ ſe ambulaturum prout ſanctam illam communionem decet; Diſciplinae illius Eccleſiae ſubjacere velle, ſe fratribus illius communionis invigilaturum juxta Christi praeceptum, Matth. 18. 17. ut praeveniantur ſanentur que ſcandala, & illi ad ſtudium bonorum operum provehantur. That is, This is the manner of the reformed Churches, not onelyonly in reſtoring ſuch as have fallen, but in admitting of ſtrangers, yea of all whoever they be, who do ſit down in any place for habitation, though perhaps they have been formerly admitted after the ſame manner in the Church where they have formerly dwelt; The Preſbytery doth examine, the people do conſent, every man brings with him witneſſes of his life, or at leaſt-wiſe teſtimonies: The name of each one that deſires to be a member, is publiſhed in the Aſſembly, every one is admoniſhed if he have any exception againſt the party, to bring it to the Presbytery. If nothing be brought againſt him, then indeed he is admitted; but yet no otherwiſe then by a ſolemne covenant with God and the Church; And to the Church he promiſeth that he will walk as becometh that holy Fellowſhip, that he will be ſubject to the diſcipline of that Church, that he will watch over the brethren p. 36of that Communion, according to the Command of Chriſt, Mat. 18. 17. that offences may be prevented and healed, &c. Polit. Eccleſ lib. 3 cap. 16. § 4. Pag. 171, 172. Much more he hath to the ſame purpoſe in that place, alledging ſundry Canons and Decrees of Synods of reformed Churches, wherein they have determined that none ſhould be received into their Churches, but by this way of ſolemne Covenant. And others that have lived amongſt them may have been eye-witneſſes that this is their uſuall practiſe.

But what ſhall be ſaid of the Congregations in England, if Churches Obj 11.must be combined by Covenant? Doth not this doctrine blot out all thoſe Congregations out of the Catalogue of Churches? For what ever Covenant may be found in the reformed Churches in other parts, yet it is plaine that the Engliſh have none.

Though we deny not but the Covenant in many of thoſe CongregationsAnſ…. is more implicite and not ſo plaine as were to be deſired; (and what is amiſſe in them, in their materialls, or in want of explicite combining of pure matter, or many of their wayes, wee will not take upon us to defend) yet we hope we may ſay of them with Maſter Parker, Polit. Eccleſ. lib 3. cap. 16. § 1. pag. 167. Non aboſt ea realis & ſubſtantialis (quanquam magis quàm par…rat implicita) coitio in foedus, eaque voluntaria profeſſio fidei ſubſtantialis: quâ (Deo gratia) eſſentiam Eccleſiae idque viſibilis hacuſque ſartam tectam in Angliâ conſervavit; That is, there wants not that reall and ſubſtantiall comming together, (or agreeing in Covenant, though more implica…e then were meete) and that ſubſtantiall profeſſion of Faith, which (thanks be to God) hath preſerved the eſſence of viſible Churches in England unto this day.

The reaſons why wee are loath to ſay, that the Congregations in England are utterly without a Covenant, are theſe:

Firſt, Becauſe there were many Chriſtian Churches in England in the Apoſtles time, or within a while after, as Maſter Fox ſheweth at large, Act. & Mon. lib. 2. beginning pag 137. where he reporteth out of Gildas, that England received the Goſpel in the time of Tiberius the Emperour, under whom Chriſt ſuffered, and that Joſeph of Arimathea was ſent of Philip the Apoſtie from France to England about the yeare of Chriſt 63. and remained in England all his time, and ſo he with his fellowes layd the firſt foundation p. 37of Chriſtian Faith among the Britaine people, and other Preachers and Teachers comming afterward, confirmed the ſame and increaſed it. Alſo the ſaid Maſter Fox reporteth out of Tertullian, that the Goſpel was diſpearſed abroad by the ſound of the Apoſtles into many Nations, and amongſt the reſt into Britaine, yea into the wildeſt places of Britaine, which the Romans could never attaine unto: and alledgeth alſo out of Ni…phorus, that Simon Zelotes did ſpread the Goſpel to the Weſt Ocean, and brought the ſame into the Iles of Britaine: and ſundry other proofes he there hath for the ſame point. Now if the Goſpel and Chriſtian Religion were brought into England in the Apoſtles times, and by their means, it is like that the Engliſh Churches were then conſtituted by way of Covenant, becauſe that was the manner of conſtituting Churches in the Apoſtles time, as alſo in the times aſore Chriſt, as hath been ſhewed from the Scripture before in this diſcourſe. And if Chriſtian Congregations in England were in thoſe times combined by Covenant, then eternitie of Gods Covenant is ſuch, that it is not the interpoſition of many corruptions that may ariſe in after times that can diſanull the ſame, except when men wilfully breake Covenant and reject the offers of the Goſpel through obſtinacy, which we perſwade our ſelves they are not come unto: and conſequently the Covenant remaines which hath preſerved the eſſence of Churches to this day; though the mixture of manifold corruptions, have made the Covenant more implicite then were meete.

Secondly, Becauſe there want no good Records (as may be ſeene in Seldens Hiſtory of Tithes) to prove that in former times in England it was free for men to pay their Tithes and Oblations where themſelves pleaſed: Now this paying of Tithes was accounted as a dutie of people to their Miniſter, or ſheepe to their Paſtour: and therefore ſeeing this was by their owne voluntary agreement and conſent, their joyning to the Church as members thereof, & to the Miniſtery thereof as ſheepe of ſuch a mans flock, was alſo by their owne voluntary agreement and conſent: and this doth imply a Covenant … was not the precincts of Pariſhes that did limit men in thoſe dayes, but their owne choice.

Thirdly, Thoſe Queſtions and Anſwers miniſtred at Baptiſme, ſpoken of before, (viz. Do…ſt thou renounce? I doe renounce: doeſt thou beleeve? I doe beleeve: doeſt thou promiſe? I doe promiſe) as they p. 38were uſed in other places, ſo were they alſo in England, and are unto this day, though not without the mixture of ſundry corruptions. Now this doth imply a Covenant. And when the children came to age, they were not to be admitted to the Lords Supper, before they had made perſonall Confeſſion of their owne Faith, and ratified the Covenant which was made at their Baptiſme by their Parents, which courſe indeed afterward did grow into a Sacrament of Confirmation, but that was an abuſe of a good Order.

If here it be ſaid, that the Members of the Pariſhionall Aſſemblies are not brought in by their owne voluntary profeſſion, but by the Authority and Proclamation of the Prince, and therefore they have no ſuch Covenant.

The Anſwer is, that the Chriſtian Prince doth but his dutie when he doth not tollerate within his Dominions any open Idolatry, or the open worſhip of falſe Gods by baptized perſons, but ſuppreſſeth the ſame: and likewiſe when he gives free libertie to the exerciſe of all the Ordinances of true Religion, according to the minde of Chriſt, with countenance alſo and encouragement unto all thoſe whoſe hearts are willingly bent thereunto, Ezra. 1. 1. 3. & 7. 13. And therefore this practiſe of his cannot overthrow the freeneſſe of mens ioyning in Church▪ Communion, becauſe one dutie cannot oppoſe nor contradict another. And ſuppoſe that this courſe of the Magiſtrate ſhould ſeeme to be a forcing of ſome to come in for members who were unfit, (in which caſe it were not juſtifiable) yet this doth not hinder the voluntary ſubjection of others, who with all their hearts deſired it. When the Iſraelites departed out of Aegypt, there went a mixed multitude with them, many going with them that were not Iſraelites indeed, Exod. 12. And in the dayes of Mordecay and Heſther, many of the people of the lands became Jewes, when the Jewes were in favour and reſpect, Eſt. 8. 17. and ſo joyned to them not of their owne voluntary minde, nor of any ſincere heart towards God, but meerely for the favour or …eare of men; yet this forced or ſeined joyning of ſome could not hinder thoſe that were Iſraelites indeed from being Iſraelites, nor make the Jewes to be no Jewes, no Church-members.

And the ſame may be ſaid in this caſe, Suppoſe the Magiſtrates Proclamation ſhould be a cauſe, or an occaſion rather, of bringing p. 39ſome into the Church, who came not of their owne voluntary minde, but for feare, or for obteining favour, yet this cannot hinder, but others might voluntarily and freely Covenant to be ſubject to the Goſpel of Chriſt: Such ſubjection and the promiſe of it being the thing which themſelves did heartily deſire, though the Magiſtrate ſhould have ſaid nothing in it.

If any ſhall hereupon inferre, that if the Pariſhionall Aſſemblies be Churches, then the members of them may be admitted to Church priviledges in New England, before they joyne to our Churches: Such one may finde his Anſwer in the Anſwer to the tenth of the thirty-two Queſtions; Whereunto we doe referre the Reader for this point. OnelyOnly adding this, that this were contrary to the judgement and practiſe of the Reformed Churches, who doe not admit a man for member without perſonall profeſſion of his Faith, and joyning in Covenant, though he had formerly been a member of a Church in another place, as was ſhewed before out of Maſter Parker.

Laſtly, If any ſay, that if theſe reaſons prove the Engliſh Congregations to have ſuch a Covenant as proves them to be Churches, then why may not Rome, and the Aſſemblies of Papiſts goe for true Churches alſo? For ſome man may thinke that the ſame things may be ſaid for them that here in Anſwer to this eleventh Objection are ſaid for the Pariſhes in England: Such one muſt remember two things: firſt, that we doe not ſay ſimply, a Covenant makes a company a true Church, but (as was ſaid before) a Covenant to walke in ſuch wayes of worſhip to God and edification of one another, as the Goſpel of Chriſt requireth. For who doubts▪ but there may be an agreement among theeves, Pro. 1. A confederation among Gods enemies, Pſal. 83. A conſpiracy among the Arabians, the Ammonites and Aſhdodites, to hinder the building of Hieruſalem, Neh. 4. 7, 8. And yet none of theſe are made true Churches by ſuch kind of confederacies or agreements. And ſo wee may ſay of the Aſſemblies of Papiſts, eſpecially ſince the Counſell of Trent. If there be any agreement or confederacy among them, it is not to walke in the wayes of the Goſpell, but in wayes contrary to the fundamentall truths of the Goſpel, as Idolatry in worſhip, Hereſie in doctrine, and other Antichriſtian pollutions and corruptions: and therefore if they combined in theſe things, ſuch combinations will never prove them true Churches. p. 40The Church is the Pillar and ground of truth, 1 Tim. 3. 15. But the Religion of Papiſts is ſo farre from truth, that whoſoever liveth and beleeveth according to it, without repentance, cannot be ſaved. Witneſſe their doctrine in the point of vilifying the Scriptures, and in point of free-will, and of Juſtification by works, of the Popes Supremacy, of the Sacrifice of the Maſſe, of worſhipping of Images, &c. In regard of which, and ſuch like, the Holy Ghoſt ſaith, that their Religion is a Sea, become as the bloud of a dead man, and every ſoule in that Sea dyeth, Rev. 16. 3. And therefore agreement in ſuch a Religion will never prove them to be true Churches; nor any Aſſemblies of Arrians, Antitrinitaries, Anabaptiſts, or Fameliſts, ſuppoſing them alſo to be combined by Covenant among themſelves.

But now for the Aſſemblies in England, the caſe is farre otherwiſe; for the Doctrine of the Articles of Religion which they profeſſe, and which they promiſe to hold and obſerve (though ſome things are amiſſe in ſome of thoſe Articles, and though many perſons live contrary in their lives) yet the doctrine is ſuch that whoſoever beleeveth, and liveth according to it, ſhall undoubtedly be ſaved, and many thouſands have been ſaved therein▪ and therefore Aſſemblies united by Covenant to obſerve this doctrine may be true Churches, when the Aſſemblies of Papiſts and others may be falſe, although they alſo were combined by Covenant: the reaſon of the difference riſing from the difference that is in the doctrine and Religion which they ſeverally profeſſe, and by Covenant binde themſelves to obſerve, the one being fundamentally corrupt, and conſequently pernicious: The other in the fundamentall points Orthodoxall and ſound.

Secondly, It muſt be remembred alſo (which was intimated before) that if fundamentall corruptions be profeſſed in with impenitency and obſtinacy, then God may diſanull the Covenant on his part, and give a Bill of divorce to ſuch a people, Jere. 3. 8. Now experience and the Scripture alſo doth witneſſe of the Jeſuited and Trent-Papiſts, that they repented not of the workes of their hands, of worſhipping Devills, and Idolls of Gold, &c. neither repented they of their murthers, nor of their ſorceries, nor of their fornications, nor of their thefts, Rev. 9. 20, 21.

But now for the Pariſh Aſſemblies in England, we hope that we may ſafely ſay, they doe not ſinne of obſtinacy, but of ignorance, p. 41having not been convinced (and many of them never having had means to be convinced) of the corruptions that are amongſt them, in reſpect of their conſtitution, and worſhip, and Miniſtery, and ſo the Covenant remaining among them, may prove them to be Churches, when it cannot ſtand the Papiſts in like ſtead, they being impenitent and obſtinate: Which we doe not ſpeake to juſtifie the Pariſhes altogether, as if there were not dangerous corruptions found in them, nay rather (the Lord be mercifull to the ſinnes of his people) wee may lament it with teares, that in reſpect of their members and Miniſtery, in reſpect of their worſhip and walkings, in many of thoſe Aſſemblies there are found ſuch apparent corruptions, as are juſtly grievous to a godly ſoule, that is enlightened to diſcerne them, and greatly diſpleaſing to the Lord, and indeed had need to be repented of betime, leaſt otherwiſe the Lord remove the Candleſticke and unchurch them, Rev. 2. 5. In a word, the corruptions remaining are juſt cauſes of repentance and humiliation: but yet in as much as the Articles of Religion, which they profeſſe, containe ſuch wholeſome doctrine, that whoſoever beleeveth and walketh according thereunto, in ſinceritie, ſhall undoubtedly be ſaved, and in as much as the corruptions are not perſiſted in with obſtinacy, therefore wee deny not but they have the truth of Churches remaining.

But this opinion of Church-Covenant, is holden by none but the Obj. 12.Browniſts, or thoſe of the Separation, and therefore it is not to be received.

This ground cannot be made good, that none but they of theAnſw. Separation are for Church-Covenant, for all the Reformed Churches generally, as was ſhewed before in Anſwer to Objection the tenth, are for it in their judgement & practiſe; and ſhall all they be condemned for **By Browniſts and Separatiſts you are to underſtād thoſe of the riged Separation.Browniſts, or maintaining unlawfull Separation from the Church? Alſo Maſter Parker and Doctor Ames, men of our owne Nation, famous for holineſſe and learning, and moderation, both of them plead for Church-Covenant, and yet neither of them were Browniſts, but bare witneſſe againſt that riged Separation. For Doctor Ames, his judgement of Church-Covenant may be ſeene in his Medulla, Theol. lib. 1. cap. 32. § 14, 15, 17. Fideles non conſtitunt Eccleſiam particularem, quamvis ſimul forſan plures in eodem loco conveniant aut vivant, niſi ſpeciali vinculo interſeſe conjunguntur, &c. That is, beleevers doe not make a particular p. 42Church, though perhaps there be many of them that meete▪ together, and live in the ſame place, unleſſe they be joyned together by ſome ſpeciall bond amongſt themſelves: for ſo one Church would many times be diſſolved into many, and many Churches confounded into one. Now this bond is a Covenant, either expreſſed or implicite, whereby beleevers do binde themſelves particularly to performe all ſuch duties, both towards God and mutually to one another, as pertaine to the nature of a Church, and their edification. And thereupon no man is rightly admitted into the Church, but by confeſſion of his Faith, and ſtipulation, or promiſe of obedience.

Theſe words doe plainely and fully ſhew his judgement of Church-Covenant, to be the very ſame that is held and practiſed in New-England at this day. And that he was not for that ſeveritie and regiditie of ſeparation, may be cleared from ſundry of his workes, wherein he plainly and fully beares witneſſe againſt the ſame, and namely, in his Freſh ſuite againſt Ceremonies, pag. 207. and in his ſecond Manuduction, wherein he purpoſely and at large deales in this Argument of Separation. Sure it is Maſter Canne in his Booke, wherein he goes about to prove the neceſſitie of ſeparation from the Non-Conformiſts principles, doth profeſſedly and expreſſely oppoſe himſelfe againſt Doctor Ames in the point of Separation, which ſhewes how farre the good Doctor was from favouring that way, when they moſt zealouſly therein doe count him to be a ſpeciall oppoſite of theirs, as indeed he was. And for Maſter Parker, his judgement of Church-Covenant was heard before in part; where he ſo much approveth the practiſe of the Reformed Churches in this point. And much more may be ſeene of his judgement herein, in the ſixteenth Chap. of the third booke of his Polit. Eccleſiaſtica. And yet in the ſame place, and likewiſe lib 1. cap. 13. 14. of the ſame Treatiſe he plentifully and plainly ſhewes his diſlike of the wayes of Separation, as is alſo acknowledged in an Admonition to the Reader, prefixed before that Booke, by I. R. ſuo, ſuorumque nomine. So that this Aſſertion appeares to be untrue, wherein it is ſaid, that none but Browniſts and Separatiſts doe approve of Church-Covenant.

As for the Inference from this ground, that therefore Church-Covenant ſhould not be received, becauſe it is pleaded for and practiſed by the Separatiſts. We Anſwer, that this will not follow, p. 43unleſſe it could be proved, that the Separatiſts hold no truth; or if they hold a truth wee muſt not hold it, that ſo it may appeare wee differ from them; Either of which, it were unreaſonable to affirme. If the Papiſts hold ſundry Articles of Faith, as that there is a unitie of the Divine Eſſence, and Trinitie of Perſons, that Jeſus Chriſt is God and man, and that true Meſſiah that was promiſed, and the onelyonly Saviour of the world, and many ſuch like, muſt wee deny theſe things becauſe they are holden by the Papiſts? This were as unreaſonable as to condemne the doctrine of the Reſurrection, becauſe it was maintained by the Phariſees, Act. 23. 8. And ſo we ſay of Church-Covenant, holden and practiſed by them of the Separation; as alſo many other truths are maintained by them: No reaſon that truth ſhould be refuſed, becauſe the Separatiſts maintaine it. When Doctor Bancroft in a Sermon at Pauls-Croſſe, had avouched that the Superioritie of Biſhops above other Miniſters, is by Gods owne Ordinance, and to make the contrary opinion odious, affirmed that Aerius perſiſting in it, was condemned for an Heretique by the generall conſent of the whole Church, and that Martin and his Companions, doe maintaine the ſame opinion of Aerius; What ſaith learned Doctor Reinolds hereunto, in a Letter to Sir Francis Knolls, who required him to ſhew his judgement herein: Touching Martin, ſaith he, if any man behave himſelfe otherwiſe then in diſcretion and charitie he ought, let the blame be laid where the fault is, and defend him not; but if by the way he utter a truth, mingled with whatſoever elſe, it is not reaſon that that which is of GOD ſhould be condemned for that which is of man: no more then the doctrine of the Reſurrection ſhould be reproved, becauſe it was maintained and held by the Phariſees: Wherefore removing the odious name of Martin from that which is ſinceritie and love, is to be dealt with, &c.

And the very ſame doe wee ſay to them that would make Church-Covenant to be odious, becauſe it is held by thoſe of the Seperation, who are commonly called Browniſts: If men behave themſelves otherwiſe then they ought, we defend them not therein, but if they hold any truth mingled with whatſoever elſe, wee would not have that which is of God to be condemned, for that which is of man: truth ſhould not be refuſed, becauſe of other corruptions that may be found in them that hold it.

p. 44If you with them hold Church-Covenant, you iuſtifie them in all Reply.their wayes of ſeperation and erronious opinions.

Not ſo, for many of them hold that there are no viſible ChriſtiansAnſw. that ſtand members of the Pariſhes in England, and that it is not lawfull to hold any private Religious communion with ſuch perſons; and that the pariſhionall Aſſemblies are none of them true Churches, and that it is not lawfull to hear any of thoſe Miniſters to preach the Word, none of which are juſtified at all by holding Church-Covenant, though they do hold the ſame; There is no ſuch neceſſarie and inſeparable connexion betweene theſe opinions, and that of Church-Covenant, that he that holds this, muſt needs hold the other alſo.

But the time hath been, when your ſelves did not hold Church-Covenant, Obje. 13.as now you do; when you were in England you were not of this mind, and therefore no marvell if your change ſince your coming to New England be ſuſpected, and offenſive. If you change your judgement and practiſe in this manner, God knows whether you may come at laſt, and therefore men may well be afraid of holding with you in this point, which your ſelves did not hold when you lived in your native Countrey.

Some of us when we were in England, through the merciemercy ofAnſw. God, did ſee the neceſſitie of Church-Covenant; and did alſo preach it to the people amongſt whom we miniſtred, though neither ſo ſoone nor ſo fully as were meete, for which we have cauſe to be humbled, and to judge our ſelves before the Lord.

But ſuppoſe we had never knowne nor practiſed the ſame before our coming into this countrey, yet if it be a truth of God, there is no reaſon why we ſhould ſhut our eyes againſt the light, when God holds it forth unto us, nor that others ſhould be offended at us for receiving the ſame. For by the ſame reaſon men might ſtill continue in their ſinnes, and not make any progreſſe in knowledge and holineſſe, that ſo they may not ſeeme unconſtant, which were contrary to the Scripture, wherein we are commanded nor to faſhion our ſelves according to the former luſts of our ignorance. 1. Pet. 1. 14. But to be changed, Rom. 12. 2. and renued, Epheſ. 4. 23. and put off the old man, and put on the new, Epheſ. 4. yea to grow in grace and holineſſe, 2. Pet. 3. 18. and be ſtronger and ſtronger, Job 17. 9. that our good workes may be more at the laſt, then at the firſt, Revel. 2. 19. Sure it is, the Apoſtle tells the Corinthians and Epheſians, that the time had been p. 45when they were not the ſame men that now they are when he wrote unto them; and yet he doth not blame them for leaving their former opinions or practiſe, but commends them for it, 1. Cor. 6. 11. Epheſ. 2. 3. &c. And it is ſaid of Apollos an eloquent man, and mighty in the Scripture, that when he came to Epheſus the way of God was expounded unto him more perfectly by Aquila and Priſcilla, whereas before he was inſtructed in the way of the Lord, knowing onelyonly the Baptiſme of John: yet this was no diſpraiſe at all to him, that now upon better information he would change his judgement to the better, nor unto them that were the means thereof: Act. 18. 25, 26. Nullus pudor eſt ad maliura tranſire.

The time hath been, (and we may be humbled for it) when we lived without God in the world, and ſome of us in many ſinfull courſes: and ſhall any be offended, becauſe we are not ſtill the ſame? and when God called us from the wayes of ſin and death, to the Fellowſhip of his grace in Chriſt; yet ſome of us lived a long time in conformity to the ceremonies impoſed in our native Countrey, and ſaw not the evill of them. But when God did open our eyes, and let us ſee the unlawfulneſſe thereof, we cannot ſee but it would have been a with-holding the truth in unrighteouſneſſe, and a great unthankfulneſſe to God for light revealed to us, if we ſhould ſtill have continued in that courſe through an inordinate deſire of ſeeming conſtant: and therefore it is not any juſt cauſe of offence that we have changed our judgement and practiſe in thoſe things, when we once perceived the Word of God to diſallow them.

Indeed it hath been ſometime objected againſt Mr. Cartwright, and others, that deſired the reformation of the Churches in England, in regard of Diſcipline and Church-Order, that they which ſtood ſo much for Reformation in Diſcipline, did in after times adde and alter ſome things, beyond what they ſaw at firſt, and what themſelves had formerly deſited; and that therefore being ſo murable, and inconſtant in their apprehenſions, they were not to be regarded, nor hearkened unto: to which Objection Mr. Pa…k…r makes full Anſwer in Eccleſ. lib. 2. ca. 36. p. 307▪ where he ſheweth from the Scripture, and the teſtimonie of Biſhop Jewel, Doctor Reinolds, and others, that in the Reformation of Religion God brings not his ſervants into perfection in knowledge and zeale at the firſt, but by degrees, ſo as they grow and make p. 46progreſſe in theſe things in ſuch wiſe, that their good works are more at the laſt then at the firſt, as was ſaid of the Church of Thyatira, even as the man that had been blind, when Chriſt … ſtored him to his ſight, could at the firſt but ſee men like tr… walking, and afterward ſaw every man cleerly; and therefore… is no good arguing to ſay theſe men have altered and correc… ſuch things from what their apprehenſions were at firſt, and therefore they are not to be regarded.

Now if this be no good arguing againſt Mr. Cartwright, and thoſe that in England have been ſtudious of Reformation (as indeed it is not) then it is no good Argument againſt us in this m… ter of Church-Covenant, to ſay we now hold and practiſe otherwiſe then we have done in former time.

If any ſhall here reply, that change from conformity to the cerem… nies Reply.to worſhip God more purely is warranted by the Word, and therefore not blame-worthy, and that the ſame may be ſaid of the caſe of Apollos, of the Corinthians, and Epheſians forementioned, and of Cartwright, and the reſt in his times.

We anſwer, that this is true, and thereby it appears, that it is notAnſw. ſimply the changing a mans opinion or practiſe that can be counted blame-worthy, or offenſive, but changing without warrant of the Word; and therefore in point of Church-Covenant, the iſſ… muſt not be whether we or others have formerly known and practiſed it, but whether it have ground from Gods Word; For if it have (as we hope have been proved before in this diſcourſe) then the obſerving of it, can be no cauſe of juſt offence unto others, not imputation of inconſtancy to our ſelves, though in time paſt we had not had ſo much light as to diſcerne the neceſſitie and uſe thereof.

The good Lord pardon every one that prepareth his heart to ſeek God, though he be not cleanſed according to the purification of the Sanctuary: and grant unto all his Churches and ſervants▪ that their love may abound yet more and more in knowledge, and in all judgement, that they may diſcerne the things that differ▪ and approve the things that are excellent, and by his Spirit of truth be led forward into all truth, till Antichriſt be utterly conſumed with the breath of his mouth, and the brightneſſe of his coming, and the holy City new Jeruſalem come down from God out of heaven, as a Bride adorned for her husband the Lambe, the Lord Jeſus, to whom be all glory of affiance and ſervice for ever.

Amen.

FINIS.

End of the text · Richard Mather, Church Government and Church Covenant (1643)