Skip to main content

Full text of "The creeds and platforms of Congregationalism"

See other formats 


FROM   THE   LIBRARY   OF 

REV.   LOUIS    FITZGERALD    BENSON.  D.  D. 

BEQUEATHED    BY   HIM   TO 

THE   LIBRARY  OF 

PRINCETON   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARY 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2012  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://archive.org/details/creedsplatOOwalk 


THE 


^  OF  PS/lV.. 
^  FEB  16  1932  * 


CREEDS   AND  PLATFORMS 


CONGREGATIONALISM 


WILLISTON    WALKER,    Ph.D. 

PROFESSOR  IN   HARTFORD   THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 


NEW    YORK 

CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S   SONS 

1893 


Copyright,  1893,  by  Williston  Walker. 


Press  of  The  Case,  Lockwood  &  Rrainard  Company,  Hartford,  Conn. 


TO   MY   FATHER 


GEORGE   LEON   WALKER 


WHOSE   INTEREST 


IN  CONGREGATIONAL   HISTORY   FIRST   AWAKENED   MY  DESIRE 


TO    KNOW   SOMETHING   OF 


Congregational  Grecos  ano  platforms 


AND   WHOSE   SYMPATHY 


HAS   ENCOURAGED   ME   THROUGHOUT  THESE  STUDIES 


THIS   VOLUME 


IS   AFFECTIONATELY   DEDICATED 


PREFACE 


CONGREGATIONALISM  has  always  accorded  large  liberty 
to  local  churches  in  their  interpretation  of  doctrine  and 
polity.  Its  creeds  are  not  exclusively  binding,  and  its  platforms 
have  always  been  held  to  be  open  to  revision.  They  have  been 
witnesses  to  the  faith  and  practice  of  the  churches  rather  than 
tests  for  subscription.  But  by  reason  of  this  liberty  a  collection 
of  Congregational  creeds  and  platforms  illustrates  the  history  of 
the  body  whose  expressions  they  are  better  than  if  those  symbols 
were  less  readily  amended.  The  points  wherein  they  agree  may 
therefore  confidently  be  believed  to  set  forth  that  which  is 
abiding  in  the  faith  and  practice  of  the  churches,  while  the 
features  of  change  and  the  traces  of  discussion  of  more  tem- 
porary importance  which  these  creeds  and  platforms  exhibit 
illustrate  as  clearly  that  which  is  mutable  in  our  ecclesiastical 
life..  It  is  because  the  writer  deems  such  a  collection  of  prime 
value  in  illuminating  the  history  of  Congregationalism  that  this 
compilation  has  been  made. 

This  volume  has  grown  out  of  the  experiences  of  the  class- 
room. In  his  endeavors  to  teach  the  story  of  Congregation- 
alism the  writer  has  been  hindered  at  all  points  by  the  inaccessi- 
bility of  much  of  the  material  which  must  be  before  the 
student  or  the  minister  if  a  knowledge  of  denominational 
history  is  to  be  more  than  second  hand.  He  has  therefore 
collected  the  most  important  Congregational  creeds  and  plat- 
forms, and  has  illustrated  them  as  far  as  he  is  able  by  such 
historic  notes  and  comments  as  may  serve  to  make  the  circum- 
stances of  their  composition  and  their  meaning  plain.  He  has 
had  in  mind  the  necessities  of  the  general  reader  whose  knowl- 
edge of  the  sources  of  our  denominational  history  is  rudimentary, 
and  has  endeavored  to  point  out  with  the  utmost  plainness  the 
basis  of  every  important  statement,  and  to  indicate  the  literature 
of  each  symbol,  hoping  that  by  this  fullness  of  annotation  the 
student     may   find     his    way    comparatively     readily    should     he 


(v) 


Vi  PREFACE 

desire  to   make   a   minute    study  of   Congregational    beliefs   and 
usages. 

In  reproducing  these  symbols  the  writer  has  reprinted  the 
text  of  the  earliest  editions  known  to  him  to  be  extant.  He 
has  endeavored  faithfully  to  reproduce  the  spelling  and  punctua- 
tion, and  even  the  misprints,  deeming  that  the  dress  in  which 
these  documents  were  presented  to  the  world,  sometimes  by 
persecuted  congregations  and  with  the  scantiest  resources,  is 
of  value  in  forming  our  estimate  of  the  impression  which  they 
were  calculated  to  produce  on  their  time.  That  the  writer  has 
wholly  avoided  misprints  of  his  own  in  this  reproduction  he 
hardly  dares  to  hope,— he  has  used  great  pains  so  to  do;  — 
but  he  trusts  that  before  the  reader  condemns  an  illprinted 
passage  it  may  be  compared  with  the  original  to  see  if  the  fault 
was  not  that  of  the  earliest  printer. 

The  writer  is  under  obligation  to  many  scholars  for  sugges- 
tions, but  he  would  especially  acknowledge  his  indebtedness  to 
the  librarians  of  the  American  Antiquarian  Society  at  Worces- 
ter, the  Public  Library  at  Boston,  the  Connecticut  Historical 
Society  and  Watkinson  Library  at  Hartford,  the  Massachusetts 
Historical  Society  at  Boston,  and  of  Yale  University,  for  the 
access  which  they  have  afforded  him  to  the  treasures  in  their 
custody. 

This  volume  is  sent  forth  with  the  hope  that  it  may  serve 
to  make  easier  the  pathway  to  a  knowledge  of  Congregational 
history,  and  may  illustrate  the  essential  unity  as  well  as  the 
healthful  growth  which  has  marked  the  development  of  creed 
and  practice  from  the  founders  of  Congregationalism  to  our 
own  day. 

Hartford,  Conn.,  July  15,  i8pj 


CONTENTS 


VII. 

VIII. 
IX. 
X. 

XI. 


Robert  Browne's  Statement  of  Congregational  Prin- 
ciples, 1582, 1-27 

Extracts  from  Browne's  Works, 18-27 

The     First    Confession     of    the     London-Amsterdam 

Church,  1589, 28-40 

Text  of  the  Confession, 33-40 

The    Second    Confession     of     the    London-Amsterdam 

Church,   1596, 4i~74 

Text  of  the  Confession, 49~74 

The  Points  of  Difference   between  Congregationalism 

and  the  Church  of  England,  1603,     .        .        .  75-80 

Text  of  the  Points, 77-8o 

The  Seven  Articles  of  1617  and  the   Mayflower  Com- 
pact of  1620, 81-92 

Text  of  the  Articles, 89,90 

Text  of  the  Compact, 92 

The    Development    of    Covenant    and    Creed    in    the 

Salem  Church,  1629-1665 93-122 

Texts  of  the  Covenants  of  1629  and  1636,        .          .          .  116-118 

The  Anti-Quaker  Article  of  1660-1, 118 

Text  of  the  Direction  of  1665, 119-122 

The   Covenant  of   the  Charlestown-Boston   Church, 

1630, 123-131 

Text  of  the  Covenant,       .         .         .         .         .         .         .  131 

Hooker's  Summary  of  Congregational  Principles,  1645,  132-148 

Extracts  from  the  "Survey," 143-148 

The  Windsor  Creed-Covenant,  1647,         ....  149-156 

Text  of  the  Covenant,       .......  154-156 

The  Cambridge  Synod  and  Platform,  1646-1648,     .        .  157-237 

Extracts  from  the  Tentative  Conclusions  of  1646,    .  189-193 

Preface  and  Text  of  the  Platform 194-237 

The  Half-Way  Covenant   Decisions   of    1657  and  1662,  238-339 

Extracts  from  the  Result  of  1657, 288-300 

Text  of  the  Conclusions  of  1662,      .....  301-339 

(Vii) 


XV. 

XVI. 
XVII. 
XVIII. 

XIX. 


CONTENTS 

The  Savoy  Declaration,  1658, 

Preface, ' 

Text  of  the  Confession 

The  Platform  of  Polity 

The    "Reforming    Synod"    of   1679-1680,  and   its   Con- 
fession of  Faith, 

Text  of  the  "Necessity  of  Reformation," 

Preface  to  the  Confession, 

Text  of  the  Confession  (Savoy  Confession  and  notes),      . 
The   "Heads   of    Agreement,"  1691,    and   other   Union- 
Efforts  of  the  Seventeeth  Century, 
Extracts  from  the  Agreement  of  1656,     . 
Preface  and  text  of  the  "  Heads,"    .         •         •         ■ 
The    Massachusetts    Proposals   OF  1705,    and   the   S. 
brook  Platform  of  1708, 
Text  of  the  Proposals, 
Prefaces  to  the  Saybrook  Result, 
Text  of  the  Platform, 


The  "Plan  of  Union,"  1801, 

Text  of  the  Plan.     . 
The  English  Declaration  of  1833, 

Text  of  the  Declaration,  . 
The   "Burial  Hill"  Declaration   of  "Faith 
Statement  of  Principles  of  Polity, 

Text  of  the  Declaration,  . 

Text  of  the  Statement,     . 


The  Constitution  of  the  National 
lin  Declaration,  1871,  . 
Text  of  the  Constitution, 
Text  of  the  Declaration,  . 

The  "Commission"  Creed  of  1883, 
Text  of  the  Creed,  . 

Index,    •••■•• 


Council, 


PAGE 

3S4-3&7 
367-402 

403-40S 


409-439 

423-437 

438,  439 

367-402 

440-462 
453,454 
455-462 

463-523 
486-490 
517-523 
503-506 

524-541 
530,531 
542-552 
548-552 

553-569 
562-564 
567,  568 

570-576 

572-574 
575,  576 

577-584 
580-582 

585-604 


I 

ROBERT     BROWNE'S     STATEMENT     OF    CONGRE- 
GATIONAL   PRINCIPLES,    1582 

Text 

I.  A  Books  I  which  Sheweth  the  \  life  and  manners  of  all  true  Christians,  \ 
and  howe  vnlike  they  are  vnto  I'urkes  and  Papistes,  \  and  Heathen  folke.  \  Also 
the  pointes  and  partes  of  all  diui-  \  nitie,  that  is  of  the  reitealed  will  and  worde  of 
God,  are  \  declared  by  their  seuerall  Definitions,  \  and  Diuisions  in  order  as  \  fol- 
loweth.  I  Robert  Browne,  \  Middelbvrgh,  \  Imprinted  by  Rickarde  Painter.  \  ijS=. 
4°,  pp.  in. 

II.  A  few  of  the  sections,  extracted  from  Browne's  work,  are  given  in  I  Ian- 
bury,  Historical  Memorials  Relating  to  the  Independents,  etc.,  London  1839,  I;  2°~ 
22;  in  Fletcher,  History  .  .  .  of  Independency,  London  1862,  II:  114-117; 
and  in  Punchard,  History  of  Congregationalism,  Boston  [1867],  III:    14-17. 

Literature 

The  works  of  Hanbury,  Fletcher,  and  Punchard,  above  cited;  [Waddington], 
Historical  Papers,  London  1861,  pp.  33-48;  Waddington,  Congregational  History, 
rj6j-lJoo,  London  1874,  p.  16  ;  Bacon,  Genesis  of  the  New  England  Churches, 
New  York  1874,  pp.  81-90;  Browne,  History  of  Congregationalism  .  .  .  in 
Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  London  1877,  cns-  I-HI;  Dexter,  The  Congregationalism  of 
the  last  three  hundred  years,  as  seen  in  its  Literature,  New  York  1S80,  pp.  61-12S. 

MODERN  Congregationalism  is  a  legitimate  outcome  of  a 
consistent  application  to  church  polity  of  the  principles  of 
the  Reformation.  The  fundamental  religious  thought  of 
that  movement  was  the  rejection  of  all  authority  save  that  of  the 
Word  of  God.  But,  while  this  cardinal  principle  was  recognized 
by  all  the  reformers,  there  was  great  variety  in  the  extent  to  which 
they  carried  its  application.  All  of  them  agreed  that  the  will  of 
God  had  prescribed  in  the  Bible  the  sufficient  test  of  Christian 
doctrine,  but  none  of  the  reformers  of  the  first  rank  felt  the  neces- 
sity of  a  complete  conformity  of  their  systems  of  church  polity  to 
the  same  standard.  The  paramount  importance  of  doctrinal  re- 
form, the  necessity  for  the  orderly  control  of  the  church  in  the 
trying  period  of  transition  from  its  ancient  form,  and  especially 
the  disorders  which  the  advent  of  ecclesiastical  freedom  excited 

(1) 


2  BROWNES    CONGREGATIONALISM 

among  the  lower  classes,  induced  Luther  and  Zwingli,  neither  of 
whom  were  organizers  by  nature,  to  put  aside  their  early  inclina- 
tions toward  the  substantially  Congregational  system'  which  they 
recognized  in  the  New  Testament  example,  in  favor  of  a  would-be 
temporary  dependence  on  the  civil  rulers  of  the  lands  in  which 
they  lived  for  the  organization  of  their  new  churches.  Calvin  was 
an  organizer,  and  though  he  sought  scripture  warrant  for  the  sys- 
tem which  he  established,  he  seems  to  have  been  led  to  its  adoption 
largely  by  the  necessities  of  his  position  in  the  foremost  outpost 
of  Protestantism  at  Geneva;  and  he  admitted,  on  one  occasion  at 
least,  that  his  eldership  was  primarily  a  device  of  expediency.2 
And  if  these  men  did  not  fully  recognize  that  the  legitimate  out- 
come of  the  principles  of  the  Reformation  was  the  test  of  church 
government  as  well  as  Christian  doctrine  by  the  standard  of  the 
Bible,  this  truth  was  even  less  clearly  perceived  in  England,  where 
the  state  Establishment  which  was  the  outcome  of  the  Reforma- 
tion was  designedly  a  compromise,  in  which  a  large  portion  of  the 
ancient  government  and  ceremonial  was  retained,  and  in  which  the 
fountain  of  ecclesiastical  authority  was  the  sovereign. 

But  if  the  leaders  of  the  Reformation  thus  fell  short  of  a  full 
application  of  their  principles,  there  were  those  from  almost  the 
beginning  of  the  movement  who  sought  to  go  further.  These 
men,  nicknamed  usually  by  their  opponents  the  "Anabaptists,"3 
first  came  to  notice  about  15 23-4 4  in  the  portions  of  Switzerland 
which  had  felt  the  reforming  touch  of  Zwingli.  Persecuted  at 
once  by  Protestants  and  Catholics,  they  were  dispersed  with  great 
rapidity  all  over  Germany  and  the  Netherlands  and  came  even  to 
England.5  They  were  drawn  chiefly  from  the  lower  orders  of  the 
population,  and  were  often  characterized  by  extreme  fanaticism.6 


1  See  inter  alia,  Gieseler,  Church  History,  ed.  New  York  1876.  IV:  518;  Fisher,  Reforma- 
tion, pp.  488-495;  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  51  ;  Schaff,  Hist.  0/  the  Christian   Church,  VI  :   538. 

2  For  valuable  quotations  illustrative  of  this  point  see  Dexter,  Ibid.,  pp.  52,  53. 

3  I.  e.,  "  Re-baptizers,"  because  they  held  infant  baptism  no  baptism. 

*  See  the  valuable  paper  of  Rev.  Dr.  Burrage,  Anabaptists  0/  the  Sixteenth  Century, 
Papers  0/  the  Am.  Soc.  Church  Hist.,  Ill:  145-164.  Keller  in  his  suggestive  Die  Reformation 
unci  die  alteren  Re/ormfiartcien,  Leipzig  1885,  holds,  as  many  others  have  done,  the  Anabaptists 
to  be  successors  of  mediaeval  sects,  but  his  thesis  is  not  fully  proven. 

s  As  early  as  1535  fourteen  were  burned  in  one  year  in  England.  Executions  continued  un- 
der English  Protestant  sovereigns,  e.  g.  under  Elizabeth  in  1575,  and  James  in  1612. 

•  The  most  conspicuous  illustration  is  of  course  the  Munster  anarchy,  1532-5. 


ANABAPTIST   PRINCIPLES  3 

But  the  fanatics  were  only  a  fraction  of  the  Anabaptists,  and  under 
the  lead  of  men  like  Menno  Simons,1  in  Holland  especially,  they 
settled  down  into  orderly  and  valuable  citizens.2  They  were 
everywhere  marked  by  a  desire  to  carry  the  principles  of  the 
Reformation  to  their  logical  outcome,  and  hence  they  tried  to  test 
not  only  doctrine  but  polity  and  Christian  life  by  the  same  rule. 
The  natural  tendency  of  men  to  put  differing  constructions  on  the 
same  facts  of  revelation,  increased  in  their  case  by  the  ignorance 
of  a  great  part  of  the  body  and  an  inclination  to  lay  stress  on  the 
direct  illumination  of  the  believers  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  led  to  diver- 
sities of  belief  among  them,  so  that  we  can  lay  down  no  rigid  creed 
for  the  Anabaptists  as  a  whole;  but  there  were  certain  features  in 
their  beliefs  which  appear  also  in  the  views  of  the  Baptists,  the 
Quakers,  and  the  Congregationalists.3 

The  Protestant  bodies  founded  by  the  great  reformers  of  the 
sixteenth  century  were  all  at  one  in  recognizing  every  baptized 
person,  residing  within  the  territories  where  they  were  established 
and  not  formally  excommunicate,  as  a  church  member.  Church 
and  state  were  practically  co-extensive.  Even  the  Puritans  of 
England,  who  labored  under  Elizabeth  for  the  purification  and  full 
Protestantizing  of  the  Establishment,  and  from  whom  the  majority 
of  early  Congregationalists  were  to  come,  held  to  the  church- 
membership  of  all  non-excommunicate  Englishmen,  and  looked 
upon  the  true  method  of  reform  as  a  vigorous  purging  from  within 
by  the  rigid  enforcement  of  discipline,  the  appointment  of  the 
officers  whom  they  believed  to  be  designated  in  the  Scripture 
model,  and  the  aid  of  civil  magistrates,  rather  than  a  separation 
from  the  national  church.4  The  Anabaptists,  on  the  other  hand, 
maintained  that  a  church  was  a  company  of  Christian  believers, 
gathered  out  of  the  world,5  to  which  men  were  admitted  by  con- 


*  H92-I559- 

2  See  the  articles  by  Prof,  de  Hoop  Scheffer  on  Menno  and  the  Mennonites  in  the  Herzog 
Real-Encyclopddie  fiir  protestantisc/te  Thcologie,  Leipzig,  1881  (briefly  abridged  in  the  Schaff- 
Herzog,  Encyclopa-dia,  New  York  [1882]). 

3  This  relation  has  been  positively,  perhaps  too  positively,  insisted  upon  by  Campbell,  Puri- 
tan in  Holland,  England,  and  America,  New  York,  1892,  II :  177-209. 

4  Compare  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  54-58.  Briggs,  American  Preslyterianism,  New 
York,  1885,  p.  43. 

5  For   the  doctrines  of   the  Anabaptists,  especially  the    Mennonite  branch,  which    had  the 


4  BROWNE'S    CONGREGATIONALISM 

fession  and  baptism;  that  each  congregation  of  believers  should  be 
independent  of  all  external  control,  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  and  that 
the  civil  magistrate  had  no  authority  over  the  church;  that  no 
believer  should  bear  the  sword,  take  oath,  or  hold  the  office  of  a 
magistrate;  that  each  congregation  should  be  kept  pure  by  disci- 
pline, and  should  be  led  by  elders  chosen  by  itself,  who  should 
serve  it  without  compensation.  So  they  held  the  New  Testament 
pattern  of  a  Christian  church  to  require. 

Like  the  modern  Baptists,  the  Anabaptists  had  no  creeds  of 
general  binding  force.  Some  confessions  were  issued  by  indi- 
viduals and  congregations,  and  some  as  formulae  of  union  between 
various  branches  of  the  much  divided  body,  but  each  congregation 
accepted  or  rejected  what  it  chose.  In  general,  however,  the 
agreement  regarding  all  the  more  essential  features  of  doctrine 
and  polity  was  close.  A  few  extracts  from  the  popular  confession 
prepared  by  the  Mennonite  ministers  Hans  de  Ries  and  Lubbert 
Gerrits  for  the  benefit  of  the  one  time  Congregationalist  John 
Smyth  and  his  company  in  1609  at  Amsterdam,  — a  confession 
based  on  and  representative  of  the  writings  of  the  older  Mennonite 
Anabaptists  and  widely  used  by  the  Mennonite  churches  of  Hol- 
land,—may  serve  to  set  forth  some  of  these  beliefs  more  clearly:1 

"22.  Such  faithful,  righteous  people,  scattered  in  several  parts  of  the  world, 
being  the  true  congregations  of  God,  or  the  church  of  Christ,  whom  he  saved,  and 
for  whom  he  gave  himself,  that  he  might  sanctify  them,  ye  [yea]  whom  he  hath 
cleansed  by  the  washing  of  water  in  the  word  of  life  :  of  all  such  is  Jesus  the  Head, 
the  Shepherd,  the  Leader,  the  Lord,  the  King,  and  Master.  Now  although  among 
these  there  may  be  mingled  a  company  of  seeming  holy  ones,  or  hypocrites  ;  yet, 
nevertheless,  they  are  and  remain  only  the  righteous,  true  members  of  the  body  of 

most  influence  in  Holland,  see  beside  the  articles  of  Prof,  de  Hoop  Scheffer,  before  cited  ;  Barclay, 
Inner  Life  of  the  Religious  Societies  of  the  Commonwealth,  London,  3d  ed.,  1879,  pp.  75-92  • 
Dr.  ISurrage,  Papers  Am.  Soc.  Ch.  Hist.,  Ill:  .57;  Prof.  Schaff,  in  Baptist  Quarterly  Review, 
July  1889.  Much  further  and  minuter  information  is  contained  in  the  works  of  the  Mennonite  his- 
torian, Hermann  Schyn,  Historia  Christianorum  Qui  in  Be/gio  Fwderato  inter  J'rotestantes 
Mennonita  appellantur,  Amsterdam,  1723,  and  Historic  Mennonitarum  Vlenior  Deductio,  ibid, 

1  Regarding  the  circumstances  of  the  appeal  of  Smyth  and  his  brethren  for  admission  to 
the  Amsterdam  Mennonite  church  of  which  Germs  was  minister,  and  the  preparation  of  this  Con- 
fession, see  Evans,  Early  English  Baptists,  London,  1862,  I.  201-224;  Barclay,  Inner  Life,  etc., 
pp.  68-73  ;  De  Hoop  S(  hctTer,  De  Brownisttn  te  Amsterdam,  etc.  (Memoir  before  the  Royal 
Academy),  published  Amsterdam,  1881  ;  Dexter,  True  Story  0/ John  Smyth,  the  Se-Baptist,  etc., 
Boston,  1881.  The  Confession  as  originally  prepared  consisted  of  38  articles,  drawn  up  by  Hans  de 
Ries  at  the  request  of  Smyth's  company.  Translated  into  English,  it  was  signed  by  Smyth  and  his 
friends  and  laid  before  the  Mennonite  congregation.     It  was  enlarged  by  its  author  and  put  forth 


ANABAPTIST    PRINCIPLES  5 

Christ,1  according  to  the  spirit  and  the  truth,  the  heirs  of  the  promises,  truly  saved 
from  the  hypocrites  and  dissemblers. 

"  23.  In  this  holy  church  hath  God  ordained  the  ministers  of  the  Gospel,  the 
doctrines  of  the  holy  Word,  the  use  of  the  holy  sacraments,  the  oversight  of  the  poor, 
and  the  ministers  of  the  same  offices  ;  furthermore,  the  exercise  of  brotherly  admoni- 
tion and  correction,  and,  finally,  the  separating  of  the  impenitent ;  which  holy  ordi- 
nances, contained  in  the  Word  of  God,  are  to  be  administered  according  to  the 
contents  thereof. 

"  24.  And  like  as  a  body  consisteth  of  divers  parts,  and  every  part  hath  its  own 
proper  work,  seeing  ever}'  part  is  not  a  hand,  eye,  or  foot;  so  it  is  also  in  the  church 
of  God;  for  although  every  believer  is  a  member  of  the  body  of  Christ,  yet  is  not 
every  one  therefore  a  teacher,  elder,  or  deacon,  but  only  such  who  are  orderly 
appointed  to  such  offices.  Therefore,  also,  the  administration  of  the  said  offices  or 
duties  pertaineth  only  to  those  that  are  ordained  thereto,  and  not  to  every  particular 
common  person. 

"25.  The  vocation  or  election  of  the  said  officers  is  performed  by  the  church, 
with  fasting,  and  prayer  to  God;  for  God  knoweth  the  heart;  he  is  amongst  the 
faithful  who  are  gathered  together  in  his  name;  and  by  his  Holy  Spirit  doth  so 
govern  the  minds  and  hearts  of  his  people,  that  he  by  them  bringeth  to  light  and 
propounded!  whom  he  knoweth  to  be  profitable  to  his  church. 

"26.  And  although  the  election  and  vocation  to  the  said  offices  is  performed 
by  the  foresaid  means,  yet,  nevertheless,  the  investing  into  the  said  service  is  accom- 
plished by  the  elders  of  the  church  2  through  the  laying  on  of  hands.     .     .     . 

"  2g.  The  Holy  Baptism  is  given  unto  these  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  the 
Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  hear,  believe,  and  with  penitent  heart  receive  the 
doctrines  of  the  Holy  Gospel.  For  such  hath  the  Lord  Jesus  commanded  to  be 
baptized,  and  no  unspeaking  children. 

"33.  The  church  discipline,  or  external  censures,  is  also  an  outward  handling3 
among  the  believers,  whereby  the  impenitent  sinner,  after  Christian  admonition  and 
reproof,  is  severed,  by  reason  of  his  sins,  from  the  communion  of  the  saints  for  his 
future  good;  and  the  wrath  of  God  is  denounced  against  him  until  the  time  of  his 
contrition  and  reformation.      .      .     . 

"  35.  Worldly  authority  or  magistracy  is  a  necessary  ordinance  of  God,  ap- 
pointed and  established  for  the  preservation  of  the  common  estate,  and  of  a  good, 
natural,  politic  life,  for  the  reward  of  the  good  and  the  punishing  of  the  evil:  we 
acknowledge  ourselves  obnoxious,  and  bound  by  the  Word  of  God  to  fear,  honour, 
and  show  obedience  to  the  magistrates  in  all  causes  not  contrary  to  the  Word  of 


for  the  use  of  the  Dutch  probably  in  1610,  apparently  with  the  approval  of  Gerrits.  Though  in  no 
sense  binding  upon  the  Mennonite  body,  it  has  been  their  most  venerated  expression  of  faith.  A 
full  Latin  version  of  the  enlarged  form  is  given  by  Schyn,  Historia,  etc.,  Amsterdam,  1723,  pp. 
172-220,  who  remarks:  "  Ecce  .  .  .  Confessionem,  non  solum  fere  per  sesqui  saeculum  apud 
plurimas  &  maximas  illorum  Ecclesias,  in  Belgio  pro  formula  Consensus  inter  Waterlandos  sic 
dictos  habitam,"  etc.  On  the  great  doctrinal  controversy  which  agitated  Holland  at  the  time  of  its 
composition  the  Confession  is  Arminian,  but  that  which  here  concerns  us  is  its  view  of  church 
polity,  in  which  it  is  representative  of  all  Mennonite  teaching  and  the  theories  doubtless  which  were 
current  among  the  Anabaptists  who  found  settlement  during  the  previous  half-century  in  England. 
The  extracts  are  from  the  English  version  signed  by  Smyth  and  his  associates  in  1609,  and  printed 
by  Evans,  Ibid.,  1 :  245-252.  It  is  substantially  and  almost  verbally  identical  with  the  revised 
form  given  by  Schyn. 

1  I.  e.,  the  righteous  are  the  only  true  members,  etc. 

2  Schyn,  "a  Senioribus  populi  coram  Ecclesia."  3  Ibid.,  " actio." 


6  BROWNES   CONGREGATIONALISM 

the  Lord.  We  are  obliged  to  pray  God  Almighty  for  them,  and  to  thank  the  Lord 
for  good  reasonable  magistrates,  and  to  yield  unto  them,  without  murmuring,  beseem- 
ing tribute,  toll,  and  tax.  This  office  of  the  worldly  authority  the  Lord  Jesus  hath 
not  ordained  in  his  spiritual  kingdom,  the  church  of  the  New  Testament,  nor 
adjoined  to  the  offices  of  his  church.  Neither  hath  he  called  his  disciples  or 
followers  to  be  worldly  kings,  princes,  potentates,  or  magistrates;  neither  hath  he 
burdened  or  charged  them  to  assume  such  offices,  or  to  govern  the  world  in  such 
a  worldly  manner;  much  less  hath  he  given  a  law  to  the  members  of  his  church 
which  is  agreeable  to  such  office  or  government.     .     .     . 

"36.  Christ,  the  King  and  Lawgiver  of  the  New  Testament,  hath  prohibited 
Christians  the  swearing  of  oaths;  therefore  it  is  not  permitted  that  the  faithful  of 
the  New  Testament  should  swear  at  all." 

It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  there  were  prevalent  in  the  domain 
of  Protestantism,  during  the  latter  half  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
two  radically  differing  theories  of  the  church, —  the  one  supported 
by  the  leading  reformers  and  their  successors  and  upheld  by  the 
civil  authorities,  but  representing  nevertheless  a  partial  rather 
than  a  complete  application  of  the  principles  of  the  Reformation; 
the  other  maintained  with  many  vagaries,  and  much  that  was 
positively  fanatical,  by  men  of  little  education  or  social  position, 
subject  to  almost  universal  persecution,1  but  representing,  how- 
ever mistakenly,  an  attempt  to  apply  the  principles  of  the  Word 
of  God  not  merely  to  doctrine  but  to  every  feature  of  polity 
and  life. 

Though  the  Anabaptists  nourished  in  Holland,  they  made 
few  direct  disciples  during  the  sixteenth  century  on  English  soil. 
Yet  they  were  present  in  the  island  and  cannot  have  been  with- 
out some  influence.  After  the  religious  and  political  tyranny  of 
Philip  II.  had  begun  its  reign  of  terror  in  the  Netherlands,  the 
Dutch  and  Walloons,  who  had  always  found  in  the  eastern  coun- 
ties of  England  a  favorite  field  for  immigration,  flocked  across  the 
North  Sea  in  almost  astounding  numbers.  By  1562  these  exiles 
on  English  soil  numbered  3o,ooo.2  Six  years  later  they  embraced 
some  5,225  of  the  population  of  London,  while  in  the  cities  of 
the  eastern  coast  they  were  yet  more  largely  represented,  forming 
a  majority  of  the  people  of  Norwich  in  1587,  and  making  a  con- 


'  The  one  exception  was  the  protection  of  the  Dutch  Anabaptists  by  William  of  Orange. 
Campbell,  Puritan,  I  :  247,  248. 

2  These  figures  are  from  Campbell,  Ibid.,  488. 


ANABAPTISTS    IN    ENGLAND  7 

spicuous  element  in  the  population  of  Dover,  Sandwich,  and  other 
important  towns.  Of  course  these  thousands  of  Hollanders  were 
not  to  any  large  extent  Anabaptists;  but  there  were  Anabaptists 
among  them,1  and  probably  many  more  than  openly  appeared, 
for  to  own  the  sentiments  of  the  hated  sect  under  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth  was  to  be  liable  to  death  at  the  stake.  It  seems  not 
unreasonable  to  suppose  that  their  views,  modified  and  partially 
presented,  may  have,  more  or  less  unconsciously,  become  part  of 
the  thinking  of  the  more  zealous  of  the  English  seekers  after  a 
fuller  reformation  with  whom  they  were  brought  in  contact.  But 
while  it  is  certainly  within  the  bounds  of  probability  to  admit 
such  a  degree  of  influence  on  the  part  of  the  Dutch  Anabaptists 
on  English  religious  thought  in  the  eastern  counties  during  the 
last  quarter  of  the  sixteenth  century,  it  should  not  be  forgotten 
that  the  New  Testament  was  before  the  English  reader  as  well  as 
in  the  hands  of  the  Dutch  Anabaptist,  and  that  its  pages  might 
convey  the  same  lesson  independently  to  the  English  student. 
Certainly  the  early  English  Congregationalists  had  no  conscious- 
ness that  their  views  were  derived  from  any  other  source  than  the 
New  Testament;  and  while  there  is  much  in  their  history,  and 
especially  in  the  geography  of  their  origin,  to  make  it  probable 
that  some  considerable  infiltration  of  Anabaptist  thought  aided  in 
shaping  their  interpretations  of  the  Scripture;  they  were  more  than 
mere  successors  or  offshoots  of  the  Anabaptists  of  the  Continent.2 
Some  attempt  to  realize  a  further  reformation  in  directions 
looking  toward  later  Congregationalism  may  have  been  made  by 
Richard  Fitz  and  his  associates  at  London  in  1567,  but  the  first 
Englishman3  to  proclaim  Congregational  principles  in  writing  was 


1  On  the  occasion  when  the  two  whose  burning  in  1575  has  already  been  noticed  were 
arrested  in  London,  twenty-five  others  were  taken  into  custody. 

2  Mr.  Douglas  Campbell,  in  his  suggestive  work.  The  Puritan  in  Holland,  England,  and 
America,  II:  180,  holds  strongly  that  Browne  received  his  ideas  directly  from  the  Anabaptists. 
This  matter  will  be  further  considered  later  in  this  chapter. 

3  The  origin  of  Congregationalism  as  an  organized  polity  has  been  frequently  attributed,  and 
notably  by  Waddington  (Congregational  History,  /200-IJ67,  London,  1869,  pp.  742-745),  to  a  com- 
pany broken  up  by  the  government  at  Plumbers'  Hall,  June  19,  1567.  But  though  the  evidence  of 
their  opposition  to  the  existing  state  of  the  Church  of  England  is  ample,  and  it  seems  certain  that 
they  had  adopted  Separatist  principles  and  chosen  their  own  ministry,  their  Congregationalism  was 
yet  very  rudimentary.  See  Punchard,  Hist.  0/  Cong.,  Boston  [1865],  II:  454-459;  Dexter,  Cong, 
as  seen,  pp.  114,  115,  631-4;  Scott,  Pilgrim  Fathers  neither  Puritans  nor  Persecutors,  London, 


8  BROWNE'S   CONGREGATIONALISM 

Robert  Browne,1  a  man  of  sincere  purpose,  at  least  in  early  life; 
but  one  whose  erratic  disposition  and  final  reconciliation  with  the 
English  Establishment  have  cost  him  the  personal  repute  which 
would  otherwise  have  been  his.  Possessed  of  only  ordinary  ability, 
he  nevertheless  saw  some  truths  clearly  which  had  been  ignored 
by  the  ecclesiastical  teachers  of  his  age. 

Browne  was  born  about  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
of  a  family  related  to  that  of  Elizabeth's  great  statesman,  Lord 
Burghley.  His  education  was  at  Corpus  Christi  College,  Cam- 
bridge, an  institution  which  he  entered  in  1570.  The  university 
was  already  strongly  Puritan,  and  under  the  vigorous  teaching  of 
the  greatest  of  the  early  Puritans,  Thomas  Cartwright/  was  filled 
with  the  idea  that  a  further  reformation  of  the  English  Church 
was   needful,  — a  reform  to  be  brought  about,  in  his   estimation, 


,891-  C.  R.  Palmer,  Historical  Address,  before  New  Haven  Cong.  Club,  Oct.,  1892,  New  Haven, 
,893;  MacKennal,  Story  of  the  Eng.  Separatists,  London,  .893;  Adeney,  Ch.  in  the  Prisons,  in 
Early  Independents,  London,  1893.  . 

1  The  discoveries  and  investigations  of  the  late  Dr.  Dexter  have  so  re-made  the  portrait  of 
Browne  that  all  previous  literature  regarding  him  is  of  secondary  value.  The  student  will  do  well, 
therefore,  to  consult  Dexter,  Congregationalism  as  seen,  etc.,  pp.  61-128.  The  article  on  Browne 
by  Aug.  Jessopp  in  the  Dictionary  of  National  Biography,  VII:  57-6'.  '*  *ls°  °*  val»e-  The 
main  facts  of  his  life,  so  far  as  not  related  in  the  text,  are  as  follows: -He  was  born,  probably  in 
1550  at  Tolethorpe,  Rutlandshire.  After  his  student  life  in  Cambridge,  and  chapla.n, 
Duke  of  Norfolk,  he  taught  school  till  1578  :  then  followed  his  second  period  of  Cambridge  study, 
his  preaching  and  silencing  by  the  bishop,  and  his  full  adoption  of  Congregational  principles  and 
settlement  in  Norwich  about  1580.  Late  in  .581,  probably,  he  went  to  Holland,  and  in  1582  pub- 
lished the  books  with  which  we  have  to  do.  Quarrels  distressed  his  church  in  Middelburg,  and  as  a 
result  Browne  and  a  few  followers  went  from  Holland  to  Scotland  in  .583.  At  Edinburgh  he  was 
received  with  much  disfavor  by  the  Presbyterian  authorities.  By  the  summer  of  1584  he  was  appar- 
ently back  in  London,  having  failed  to  found  a  permanent  congregation  either  in  Norwich,  Holland, 
or  Scotland.  Here  in  London  he  was  impnsoned,  as  he  had  been  repeatedly  before;  but  here,  as 
elsewhere  he  was  saved  from  the  most  serious  consequences  of  his  opposition  to  the  Lngl.sh  eccle- 
siastical system  by  his  relationship  to  Lord  Burghley.  Released  from  prison,  he  seems  to  have  gone 
to  Northampton  in  1586,  and  was  then  excommunicated  by  the  Bishop  of  Peterborough.  He  was 
now  it  would  appear,  utterly  discouraged.  Dr.  Dexter  held,  with  much  show  of  reason,  that  his 
mind  had  become  affected  by  his  long  disappointments  and  imprisonments.  At  all  events,  he  be- 
came reconciled  to  the  Establishment  late  in  ,586,  and  was  appointed  master  of  a  grammar  school 
in  Southwark,  a  position  which  he  held  till  September,  1501,  when,  hav.ng  been  restored  to  he 
ministry  of  the  Church  of  England,  he  received  from  his  ever  kindly  relative,  Lord  Burghley,  the 
living  of  Achurch  cum  Thorpe.  Here  he  ministered  till  near  his  death,  an  event  which  occurred 
in  Northampton  jail  (when  he  was  a  prisoner  probably  in  consequence  of  a  debt)  sometime  between 
June,  1631,  and  November,  ,633.  His  later  life  was  wholly  insignificant  and  comports  well  with  the 
view  that  he  was  a  broken-down  man.  _ 

.  Cartwright  was  about  forty  years  old  when  Browne  entered  the  university  and  was  at 
the  height  of  his  fame  and  influence.  He  had  been  identified  with  Cambridge  as  student,  fellow, 
and  teacher  since  1547.  In  1569  he  had  been  made  professor  of  divinity -but  his  Puritan  views 
were  at  once  attacked  by  the  Anglicans,  led  by  Whitgift,  the  later  archbishop,  and  he  was  com- 
pelled to  relinquish  his  professorship  in  December,  .570,  and  his  fellowship  in  September,  1571. 
This  discussion  must  have  stirred  Browne  profoundly. 


BROWNE'S    SPIRITUAL   DEVELOPMENT  9 

however,  from  within  and  not  by  separation  from  its  fold.  Browne 
soon  combined  the  duties  of  a  student's  life  with  the  occupation 
of  a  chaplain  in  the  family  of  the  Duke  of  Norfolk;  but  here 
he  showed  opinions  at  variance  with  those  of  the  ecclesiastical 
authorities,  the  exact  nature  of  which  it  is  impossible  to  affirm, 
but  which  were  probably  Puritan  rather  than  fully  Congregational. 
The  duke,  at  all  events,  sympathized  with  him  sufficiently  to  plead 
in  his  behalf  that  a  chaplaincy  was  a  privileged  office  beyond  the 
reach  of  the  ordinary  processes  of  ecclesiastical  law.  Whether  his 
patron's  intervention  was  sufficient  to  check  further  proceedings 
in  Browne's  case  or  not  does  not  appear;  but  for  about  three  years 
thereafter  he  taught  school,  apparently  at  Southwark,  preaching 
also  to  such  as  he  could  gather  in  illegal  meetings  in  a  gravel- 
pit  at  Islington.  But  desire  for  further  study  drew  him  back  to 
Cambridge,  and,  as  was  natural  for  an  earnest  young  Puritan  min- 
ister, he  entered  the  household  theological  school  of  Rev.  Richard 
Greenham,  an  eminent  Puritan  of  Dry  Drayton,  not  far  from  the 
university  town.  Here  he  was  encouraged  to  preach  in  pulpits  of 
the  Church  of  England  where  the  hearers  were  of  Puritan  sympa- 
thies, and  such  was  the  favor  with  which  he  was  regarded  that  he 
took  charge  of  a  church  in  Cambridge  itself.  Here  it  was,  appar- 
ently, that  he  underwent  the  spiritual  struggle  which  led  him  to 
Congregational  views.1  The  church  to  which  he  had  preached  for 
about  six  months  desired  him  to  remain,  but  Browne's  Puritan 
scruples  regarding  bishops  had  made  him  feel  that  an  appoint- 
ment dependent  upon  one  of  their  order  was  no  proper  ministry. 
The  conviction  now  came  to  him  that  the  all-inclusive  member- 
ship of  the  Church  of  England  was  well-nigh  fatal  to  real  piety. 
The  only  course  for  those  who  would  seek  a  full  Christian  life  was 
to  separate  from  it  and  unite  among  themselves.  He  felt  that 
"  the  kingdom  off  God  Was  not  to  be  begun  by  whole  parishes,  but 


1  Dr.  Dexter,  whose  admirable  account  of  Browne  is  the  source  of  the  facts  of  his  biography 
above  given,  was  the  discoverer  of  an  undated  little  work  by  Browne  himself,  A  True  and  Short 
Declaration,  both  of  the  Gathering-  and  Ioyning  Together  of  Certaine  Persons :  and  also  of 
the  Lamentable  Breach  and  Division  which  fell  Amongst  Them,  which  is  really  a  "spiritual 
autobiography."  A  manuscript  copy  is  in  the  Dexter  Collection,  now  in  the  possession  of  Yale 
University,  and  a  reprint  has  been  issued,  without  date  or  place,  [by  Dr.  Dale  ?] 


IO  BROWNE'S   CONGREGATIONALISM 

rather  off  the  worthiest,  Were  they  never  so  fewe."  '  Naturally 
such  views  were  offensive  to  his  ecclesiastical  superiors,  and  the 
result  was  that  Browne  was  silenced. 

Thus  far  Browne's  primary  desire  seems  to  have  been  the  de- 
velopment of  a  more  earnest  spiritual  life.  He  had  followed  the 
Puritan  path  and  he  had  gone  far  beyond  Puritanism  into  a  belief 
in  the  necessity  of  actual  separation  from  the  Establishment.  But 
he  had  not  yet  fully  thought  out  the  constitution  of  the  purified 
church  for  which  he  longed.  It  is  interesting  to  observe  that  in 
this  transition  period,  after  he  had  been  silenced  by  the  bishop,  he 
learned  that  in  the  neighboring  county  of  Norfolk,  a  county  in 
which  Dutch  artisans  were  present  in  large  numbers  and  presuma- 
bly Dutch  Anabaptists  among  them,  were  persons  who  were  eager 
for  religious  reform  in  the  direction  toward  which  his  own  thoughts 
turned,  and  he  resolved  to  go  to  them.  Before  this  determination 
was  put  into  practice,  however,  an  acquaintance,  Robert  Harrison,2 
who  was  also  to  be  a  fellow-laborer  with  Browne,  came  to  Cam- 
bridge from  Norwich,  the  principal  town  of  Norfolk.  With  him, 
probably  in  1580,  Browne  removed  to  Norwich,  and  here  in  con- 
versation with  Harrison,  in  study  of  the  Scripture,  and  it  may  be 
also  through  contact  with  Anabaptist  views  (though  on  this  point 
proof  is  lacking),  Browne  fully  thought  out  his  system  of  church- 
government.  Here,  too,  at  some  uncertain  time  in  1580  or  1581,3 
he  formed  with  others  whom  he  gathered  about  him  the  first  Con- 
gregational Church  of  the  long  series  which  has  continued  since 
that  day. 

So  conspicuous  action  in  defiance  of  constituted  ecclesiastical 
authorities  could  not  escape  notice,  the  more  so  that  Browne  ex- 
tended his  field  of  preaching  as  far  as  Bury  Saint  Edmunds.4     By 


1  Trve  and  Short  Declaration,  p.  6;  Dexter,  Cong,  as  scon,  p.  67. 

>  Robert  Harrison  had  entered  Cambridge  university  in  1564,  he  had  graduated  1'..  A.  at  Cor- 
pus Christi  in  1567,  and  M.  A.  in  1572.  After  the  latter  graduation,  at  some  uncertain  dale,  he  was 
made  master  of  a  Norwich  hospital.  At  Norwich,  Browne  lived  in  his  house.  Harrison  accompa- 
nied Browne  to  Middelburg  and  remained  there,  probably  as  pastor,  after  Browne's  departure.  He 
did  not  long  survive,  dying  about  1585.  See  Cooper,  Athena  Cantabrigienut,  11 :  177;  :>»d  Diet- 
National  Biography,  XXV:  38. 

3  Dexter,  Cong,  us  sen,  p.  70. 

*  Bishop  Freake  of  Norwich  declared  that,  apparently  at  Bury  Saint  Edmunds,  "the  vulgar 
sort  of  people  .  .  .  greatly  depended  on  him.  assembling  themselves  together  to  the  number  of  an 
hundred  at  a  time  in  private  houses  and  conventicles  to  hear  him."     See  quotations  in  Dexter,  p.  70. 


BROWNE  S   PUBLICATIONS  1 1 

April,  15S1,  the  bishop  of  Norwich  had  taken  official  cognizance  of 
his  doings.  But  the  relationship  of  the  young  Congregationalist 
to  Lord  Burghley,  and  the  help  extended  by  that  powerful  kins- 
man,1 prevented  any  more  serious  consequences  to  Browne  than  a 
six-months  of  great  personal  annoyance.  These  experiences,  how- 
ever, convinced  the  infant  church  that  it  had  nothing  to  hope  for 
in  England,  and  therefore  after  much  deliberation,  Browne,  Harri- 
son, and  a  part  of  the  Norwich  company  emigrated  to  the  city  of 
Middelburg  in  the  Dutch  province  of  Zeland,2  probably  in  the  au- 
tumn of  1581.  It  would  appear  that  some  of  the  Norwich  flock 
remained  behind  and  continued  a  Congregational  organization,  for 
a  time  at  least,  on  English  soil.3 

It  was  soon  after  his  arrival  in  Holland  that  Browne  put  forth, 
with  the  pecuniary  aid  of  Harrison,  some  time  in  1582,  three  tracts4 
designed  primarily  to  further  his  views  in  England,  and  from  one 
of  which  our  statement  of  his  principles  is  drawn.  These  little 
works  were  sent  to  England,  and  in  spite  of  a  proclamation  in  the 
name  of  Queen  Elizabeth  forbidding  their  circulation,5  they  were 
scattered  abroad;  at  Bury  Saint  Edmunds  they  were  distributed 
through  the  agency  of  two  of  Browne's  followers,  John  Coppin  and 
Elias  Thacker,  who  were  at  the  time  in  not  very  strict  imprison- 
ment for  their  religious  opinions,  but  who  for  their  connection 
with  these  tracts  were  condemned  and  hanged  in  the  summer  of 
I583-6 

With  Browne's  further  fortunes  we  have  little  to  do.  His  own 
impulsive  temperament,  and  the  value  placed  on  church  discipline 
by  the  early  Separatists,  led  to  quarrel  in  his  Middelburg  flock,  a 
quarrel  which  resulted  in  his  leaving  Harrison  and  the  majority  of 
his  congregation  on  Dutch  soil,  and  going  with  a  few  followers  to 


1  Burghley  had  no  sympathy  with  Browne's  views  on  church-gove 

2  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  72. 

3  Dexter,  pp.  73,  74,  shows  that  a  Congregational  church  existed  at  Norwich  as  late  as  1603, 
which  was  regarded  as  an  "  elder  sister"  by  the  church  formed  at  London  in  1592. 

4  Beside  the  Booke  which  sheweth,  etc.,  from  which  our  selections  are  taken,  these  tracts 
were  A   Treatise  vpon  the  23.  of  Matthewe,  and  A    Treatise  of  Reformation  without   Tarying 

6  Given  June  30,  15S3.  In  full,  Dexter,  p.  75.  The  tracts  were  described  as  "sundry  sedi- 
tious, scismaticall,  and  erronious  printed  Bookes  and  libelles,  tending  to  the  deprauing  of  the  Eccle- 
siastical gouernment  established  within  this  Realme." 

*  See  Dexter,  pp.  208-210  ;  Campbell  Puritan,  II :   182,  183. 


12 


BROWNE'S  CONGREGATK  (NALISM 


Scotland  late  in  1583.  Here  he  found  the  opposition  of  the  Pres- 
byterian authorities  as  fatal  to  his  peace  as  that  of  the  bishops  of 
England  had  been;  and,  after  some  time  vainly  spent  in  various 
Scotch  towns,  he  returned  to  England,  once  more  to  meet  defeat, 
with  the  added  pain  of  imprisonment.  Broken  down  in  body  and 
mind  at  last,  it  would  appear,  he  made  his  peace  with  the  Church 
Of  England  in  1586,  and  through  the  kindness  of  Lord  Burghley,  he 
obtained,  in  1591,  the  rectorship  of  Achurch  cum  Thorpe,  in 
which  office  he  passed  the  forty  remaining  years  of  his  now 
uneventful  life. 

The  system  which  Browne  laid  down  in  the  three  treatises  of 
1582,  is  imperfectly  worked  out  in  detail,  but  it  nevertheless  pre- 
sents with  great  clearness  the  essential  features  of  modern  Con- 
gregationalism. As  Dr.  Dexter  has  shown,1  the  starting  point  in 
Browne's  thinking  was  not  a  desire  to  establish  a  novel  polity,  but 
to  foster  the  spiritual  development  of  the  believer  by  his  separa- 
tion from  communion  with  the  non-faithful  whom  all  the  State 
churches  allowed  a  place  in  the  church.  He  broke  with  the 
Church  of  England  primarily,  because  its  bishops  and  other 
authorities  approved  its  general,  and,  as  Browne  thought,  anti- 
Christian,  inclusion  of  all  non-excommunicate  baptized  persons, 
an  inclusiveness,  which,  to  his  way  of  thinking,  made  the  real  ele- 
vation of  the  Establishment  in  spiritual  tone  impossible.  He 
broke  with  the  Puritans,  for,  though  they  desired  a  spiritual  refor- 
mation as  sincerely  as  he,  they  would  wait  for  it  from  the  hand  of 
the  civil  magistrate;2  and  Browne,  first  of  English  writers,  set 
forth  the  Anabaptist  doctrine  that  the  civil  ruler  has  no  control 
over  the  spiritual  affairs  of  the  church,  that  church  and  state  are 
separate  realms.  His  views  on  this  important  question  were 
expressed  in  the  clearest  fashion:3 

"  Yet  may  they  [magistrates]  doo  nothing  concerning  the  Church,  but  onelie  ciu- 


'    Cong,  as  seen,  PP-  96-104.  _ 

*  See  his  work  of  1582,  A  Treatise  of  Reformation  without  Tary.ng  for  anu  \x.  c.  w.th- 
out  waiting  for  the  civil  authorities  to  act,  as  the  Puritans  wished],  and  of  the  ™*£*~  «/ 
those  Preachers  Which  will  not  reforme  till  the  Magistrate  commaunde  or  eon, fell   A«». 

3  1  have  given  this  quotation  at  length  because  the  po.nt  IS  not  so  clearly  sho™  , 
tions  on  a  later  page.     It  is  from  the  Treatise  of  Reformation,  p. 


Dexter,    pp.  101, 


THE   CHURCH   AND    ITS   OFFICERS  1 3 

ilie,  and  as  ciuile  Magistrates;  that  is,  they  haue  not  that  authoritie  ouer  the  church, 
as  to  be  Prophetes  or  Priestes,  or  spiritual  Kings,  as  they  are  Magistrates  ouer  the 
same  :  but  onelie  to  rule  the  common  wealth  in  all  outwarde  Iustice,  to  maintaine  the 
right  welfare  and  honor  therof  with  outward  power,  bodily  punishment,  &  ciuii 
forcing  of  me.  And  therfore  also  because  the  church  is  in  a  common  wealth,  it  is 
of  their  charge  :  that  is  concerning  the  outward  prouision  &  outward  iustice,  they 
are  to  looke  to  it  ;  but  to  copell  religion,  to  plant  churches  by  power,  and  to  force  a 
submission  to  Ecclesiastical  gouernement  by  lawes  &  penalties,  belongeth  not  to 
them."  ' 

If,  then,  a  full  spiritual  life  in  a  community  was  impossible 
under  the  existing  government  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  if 
it  was  not  only  useless  but  wrong  to  wait  for  the  reform  of  that 
Establishment,  as  the  Puritans  were  waiting,  at  the  hand  of  the 
civil  authorities,  how  were  the  Christians,  who  must  thus  of  neces- 
sity separate  themselves  from  their  old  churchly  connections,  to  be 
organized  into  new  societies  ?  The  model  for  their  organization 
Browne  found  in  the  New  Testament.2  The  believers  should  be 
united  to  God  and  one  to  another  by  a  covenant,  entered  into,  not 
by  compulsion,  but  willingly.3  Such  a  body,  so  united,  and  recog- 
nizing their  obligations  to  God  the  Father  and  to  Christ  as  their 
law-giver  and  ruler,  are  a  church.  Of  this  church  Christ  is  the 
head,4  and  his  powers  and  graces  are  for  the  use  of  every  member,5 
There  are  officers  of  divine  appointment,  some  of  temporary  use  to 
aid  all  churches,  apostles,  prophets,  and  evangelists,  who  belong  to 
the  past  rather  than  the  present  ;6  and  others  designated  as  the 
abiding  officers  of  individual  churches,  the  pastor,  teacher,  elders, 
deacons,  and  widows,  who  "  haue  their  seuerall  charge  in  one 
Churche  onely."7  Yet  these  officers  do  not  stand  between  Christ 
and  the  ordinary  believer,  they  "  haue  the  grace  &  office  of  teaching 
and  guiding  ;  "  but  "  euerie  one  of  the  church  is  made  a  Kinge,  a 
Priest,  and  a  Prophet  vnder  Christ,  to  vpholde  and  further  the 
kingdom  of  God."8  The  offices  of  Christ  are  for  the  use  of  each 
member  of  the  church,  as  well  as  for  those  who  "  teach  and 
guide "    it.9       It    is    this    immediateness    of    relationship    between 


1  It  is  interesting  to  notice  that  Harrison  did  not  share  Browne's  view  on  this  point,  Dexter, 
p.  85. 

2  Compare  extracts  from  the  Bookc  which  Sheweth  at  the  close  of  this  chapter,  Answer  35. 

3  Ibid.,  Ans.  36-38.  "  Ibid.,  Ans.  44.  »  Ibid.,  Ans.  55. 
*  Ibid.,  52.               '  Ibid.,  53,  54.               *  Ibid.,  50,  55.                0  Ibid.,  56-58. 


14  BROWNE  S   CONGREGATIONALISM 

Christ,  the  head  of  the  church  and  each  member,  that,  as  Dr. 
Dexter  has  pointed  out,1  makes  Browne's  polity  essentially  though 
unintentionally  democratic,  and  that  gives  it  a  closer  resemblance 
in  some  features  to  the  purely  democratic  Congregationalism  of 
the  present  century  than  to  the  more  aristocratic,  one  might 
almost  say  semi-Presbyterianized,  Congregationalism  of  Barrowe 
and  the  founders  of  New  England. 

Church  officers  are  to  be  chosen  by  the  congregations  which 
they  serve,  and  ordination  is  to  be  at  the  hands  of  the  "  elders," 
an  expression  which  Browne  uses  as  signifying  in  this  connection 
the  "  forwardest  "  or  most  worthy  of  a  congregation,  rather  than  a 
particular  order  of  church  officers.2  Unlike  the  teachers  of  the 
prelatical  churches,  Browne  held  that  the  essence  of  a  minister's 
claim  to  office  lay  not  in  the  imposition  of  hands  in  ordination,  but 
in  his  inward  calling  by  divine  providence  and  his  choice  by  the 
people  of  his  charge.'  Among  the  duties  of  a  church  officer,  dis- 
cipline had  a  large  place,4  but  the  ordinary  member  was  in  no  way 
relieved  from  responsibility  regarding  his  brethren,  he,  too,  must 
"  watch  "  and  "  trie  out  all  wickednes."5  In  fact,  the  whole 
conception  entertained  by  Browne  of  the  position  of  a  church 
officer  was,  that  he  should  be  a  leader  and  example  to  his 
brethren  rather  than  a  master  and  judge. 

Browne  saw  that  not  only  individuals  within  a  local  church, 
but  the  local  churches  as  separate  bodies  had  duties  one  to  another. 
His  theory  on  this  point  was  not  elaborated  in  detail,  but  he  recog- 
nized clearly  the  propriety  of  "synodes,"  or  councils,  —  the  "meet- 
ings of  sundrie  churches:  which  are  when  the  weaker  churches 
seeke  helpe  of  the  stronger,  for  deciding  or  redressing  of  matters 
or  else  the  stronger  looke  to  them  for  redresse."  * 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Browne  perceived  that  his  theory 
of  the  relation  of  an  officer  to  a  church  was  applicable,  in  large 
measure,  to  civil  society.  Though  he  recognized  that  the  claims 
of  some  to  civil  office  were  based,  as  one  element,  on  "  parentage 
and  birth,"  he  held  that  all   in  rightful  authority  were  so  by  the 


Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  io6,  107.  2  Booke  which  Shtweih,  Arts.  117,  119,  also  51. 

Ibid.,  119.  *  Ibid.,  126.  s  Ibid.,  56.  •  Ibid.,  51. 


SOURCE   OF   HIS    SYSTEM  IF 

command  of  God  and  "agreement  of  men."  His  picture  of  the 
covenant-relation  of  men  in  the  church,  under  the  immediate  sov- 
ereignty of  God,  he  extended  to  the  state;  and  it  led  him  as 
directly,  and  probably  as  unintentionally,  to  democracy  in  the  one 
field  as  in  the  other.  His  theory  implied  that  all  governors  should 
rule  by  the  will  of  the  governed,  and  made  the  basis  of  the  state 
on  its  human  side  essentially  a  compact.1 

Whence  were  these  views  of  Browne  derived?  Glearly  from 
the  New  Testament,  in  whose  pages  he  thought  he  saw  delineated 
the  pattern  of  the  church  which  God  designed.  But  whether  he 
was  brought  to  this  system  of  polity  by  unaided  study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures and  thought  upon  the  state  of  the  Church  of  England;  or 
whether  his  theories  and  interpretations  were  assisted  by  some 
knowledge  of  the  beliefs  of  the  Dutch  Anabaptists,  is  a  question 
not  so  easy  to  answer.  The  late  Dr.  Dexter  held  strongly  to  the 
position  that  Browne  owed  nothing  to  Anabaptist  influences  and 
that  he  was  a  disciple  of  no  one.2  Mr.  Douglas  Campbell  main- 
tains, on  the  other  hand,  that  Browne  derived  one  of  his  most  im- 
portant doctrines,  —  that  of  the  separation  of  Church  and  State, — 
from  the  Anabaptists  ;3  and  the  inference  is  that  his  debt  to  these 
Dutch  exiles  was  extensive.  Much  may  be  said  in  defense  of 
either  of  these  views.  Browne  held,  as  we  have  seen,  that  it  was 
the  duty  of  Christians  to  separate  from  communions  where 
non-Christians  were  tolerated.  This  was  a  position  held 
by  the  Anabaptists.4  He  would  not  wait  for  reformation  at  the 
hand  of  the  civil  magistrate  with  the  Puritans,  for  he  believed  that 
the  magistrate  had  no  right  to  coerce  men's  consciences;  and  this 
was  the  view  also  of  the  Anabaptists.5  And  when  we  look  at  more 
particular  features  of  Browne's  system  we  find  that  his  theories  of 
the  independence  of  the  local  congregation,  its  right  to  choose  its 
own  officers,  and  the  fundamental  necessity  of  a  vigorous  exercise 
of  discipline,  were  all  exemplified  among  the  Anabaptists.  Then 
it  will  be  remembered  that  when  Browne  had  first  determined  on 


Ibid.,  114-118.  2  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  103.  3  Puritan  in  Holland,  etc.,  II:  179,  180,  200. 

See  ante,  p.  3. 

See    Schyn,  Historic   Mennonitarum    Plenior   Deductio,  Amsterdam,   1729,  pp.  147,  221, 


l6  BROWNE'S   CONGREGATIONALISM 

separation,  he  heard  that  some  far  advanced  in  religious  reforma- 
tion were  in  Norfolk,  and  planned  to  join  them;1  and  he  worked 
out  his  system  in  conversation  with  a  friend,  Robert  Harrison,  who 
had  been  sometime  a  resident  of  Norwich,  and  put  it  into  practice 
at  Norwich  and  probably  at  Bury  Saint  Edmunds  also.  These 
were  places  filled  with  Dutch  refugees,  and  in  both  he  found  a 
considerable  following  among  the  lower  classes.2  There  Anabap- 
tist ideas  must  have  been  considerably  disseminated.  These  con- 
siderations lend  weight  to  the  views  of  Mr.  Campbell. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  Browne  utterly  rejected  the  great 
Anabaptist  tenet  of  believers'  baptism.3  Furthermore,  unlike  the 
Anabaptists,  he  held  that  oaths  were  sometimes  not  only  lawful 
but  a  "speciall  furtheraunce  of  the  kingdome  of  God."4  He  evi- 
dently saw  nothing  unbecoming  to  a  Christian  in  the  tenure  of 
civil  office;5  and,  moreover,  he  would  not  have  hesitated  to  bear 
arms."  He  expressly  repudiated  the  charge  that  his  doctrine 
regarding  the  power  of  magistrates  deserved  the  name  of 
Anabaptist.1  And  though  a  strong  geographical  argument 
maybe  drawn  in  support  of  probable  contact  with  these  Christians 
of  the  Dutch  dispersion,  Browne's  candid  spiritual  autobiog- 
raphy8 gives  no  hint  of  any  such  indebtedness,  and  he  mentions 
no  Dutch  names  among  his  supporters.9  It  is  safe  to  affirm  that 
he  had  no  conscious  indebtedness  to  the  Anabaptists. 

Yet  if  a  balance  is  to  be  struck  between  the  views  of  Dr.  Dex- 
ter and  Mr.  Campbell,  I  venture  with  some  diffidence  to  hold  that 
the  truth  lies  between.  It  is  clear  that  Browne  belonged  in  large 
measure  to  that  great  radical  party  which  felt  that  the  early  reform- 
ers of  prominence  had  not  carried  their  principles  to  their  logical 
or  Scriptural  result.  Of  this  party  the  chief  representatives  were 
the  Anabaptists;  and  however  Browne  may  have  reached  his  theo- 
ries  it  is  with  the  radical  reformers  that  he  must  be  classed.     It 


i  A  »/.-.  p.  10.  *  Ante,  p.  10. 

3  Sec-  the  selections  from  the  Bookt  which  Sheweth,  on  later  page,  Ans.  40. 

4  Ibid     IIO  5  Ibid.,  ..2-1.8.  •  Booke  -which  She-.veth,  p.  .00. 

I  •  They  charge  vs  as  Anabaptistes  &  denying  Magistrates,  because  we  set  not  vp  them,  nor 
the  Magistrates,  aboue  Christ  Iesus  and  his  glorious  kingdome."- Treatise  0/ Reformation,  p. 
:3.     See  Dexter,  p.  103. 

6  The  Trve  and  Short  Declaration.  '  Compare  Dexter,  p.  73- 


SOURCE    OF    HIS    SYSTEM  1 7 

is  plain  also  that  many  of  Browne's  most  characteristic  views  had 
been  already  advanced  by  the  Anabaptists.  But  it  is  no  less 
evident  that  Browne  differed  from  the  Anabaptists  on  points  of 
great  importance,  and  had  no  conscious  connection  with  them. 
Yet  certain  of  their  views  may  have  circulated  much  more 
widely  in  the  manufacturing  cities  of  eastern  England  than  their 
acknowledged  disciples  penetrated;  and  Browne  may  have  uncon- 
sciously absorbed  much  from  this  atmosphere,  taking  into  his  own 
thinking  such  truths  as  were  acceptable  to  his  own  study  and 
speculation.  It  may  well  be  thus  that  Browne  was  really  indebted 
to  the  Anabaptists  for  some  features  of  his  system,  though  hon- 
estly believing  it  to  be  the  product  of  his  own  study  of  the  Word 
of  God. 

But  while  we  may  admit  thus  much  regarding  the  possible  in- 
debtedness of  Browne  to  older  thinkers  of  the  radical  school,  we 
must  recognize  that  he  made  the  polity  which  he  elaborated 
wholly  his  own.  Its  details  were  not  yet  fully  developed,  but 
its  great  outlines  were  there,  and  the  system  of  Browne  can 
be  mistaken  for  no  other  of  the  polities  of  the  Christian  church. 
It  had  a  definiteness  and  a  logical  consistency  which  the  Anabap- 
tists had  not  attained.  It  based  the  local  church  on  a  definite 
covenant,  entered  into  by  the  believers  with  God  and  with  one 
another,  more  clearly  than  they,  thus  affording  a  logical  and  Scrip- 
tural foundation  for  the  existence  and  obligations  of  the  local  fel- 
lowship. It  showed,  at  least  in  principle,  that  the  local  independ- 
ence of  the  individual  congregation  is  consistent  with  a  real  and 
efficient  unity  with  other  churches.  It  steered  a  safe  course  be- 
tween the  sacrifice  of  the  self-government  of  the  local  church  for 
the  sake  of  a  strong  central  authority  which  is  the  evil  feature  of 
all  systems  from  Romanism  to  Presbyterianism,  and  the  abandon- 
ment of  real  mutual  accountability  between  churches  which  had 
been  the  vulnerable  point  of  the  polity  of  the  Anabaptists.  Though 
he  proved  unfaithful  himself  to  the  beliefs  which  he  preached  and 
for  which  he  suffered,  Robert  Browne  must  be  accounted  the  father 
of  modern  Congregationalism. 


liROWNE  S    CONGREGATIONALISM 


Extracts    from    Browne's  "Booke  which    Sheweth    the 

and  manners  of  all  true  christians,"  etc.,' 

MlDDELBURG,  1582. 

[2]      The  state  of  Christians.  The  state  of  Heat  lien. 


Their  knowledge.     The  Godhead. 


WHerefore  are  we  called  the 
people  of  God  and  Chris- 
tians? 

Because  tbat  bg  a  willing  Coue= 
naunt  mabe  witb  our  Gob,  we  are 
vnoer    tbc   gouernement  of  <3oD 


Heathen.     Their  ignorance.     False  Gods. 


1  JXZHerefore  are  the  Heathen 
forsaken  of  God,  and  be 
the  cursed  people  of  the  worlde  / 
Because  they  forsake  or  refuse 
the  Lords  couenaunt  and  gou- 
ernement:     and     therefore    they 


anb  Cbristc,  anb  tbcrebg  bo  leabc    leade  an   vngodly  and   worldly 
a  goblg  anb  Cbrietian  life.  1  life. 


i  Browne's  Booke  embraces  185  Questions,  each  with  answer,  counter-question,  definition, 
and  division  as  above  given.  Each  series  extends  over  parts  of  two  opposite  pages.  This  first 
question,  with  its  train  of  subdivisions,  may  serve  as  an  example  of  the  whole  book,  but  so  little 
additional  is  contained  in  the  repetitious  matter  that  from  this  point  onward  I  give  only  the  ques- 
tions and  answers,  omitting  counter-questions,  definitions,  and  divisions.  I  have  also  changed  the 
type  from  here  onward  from  Old  English  to  Roman. 


[Questions  2  to  34  relate  to  the  knowledge  of  God  by  men,  His  nature,  attri- 
butes, providence,  the  fall  of  man  and  salvation  by  Christ.  These  doctrines  are 
treated  in  the  usual  Calvinistic  sense,  and  present  nothing  peculiar  to  Browne.] 

[20 '  ]  33     What  is  our  calling  and  leading  vnto  this  happines  ? 2 

In  the  new  Testament  our  calling  is  in  plainer  maner:  as  by 
the  first  planting  and  gathering  of  the  church  vnder  one  kinde  of 
gouernement. 

Also  by  a  further  plating  of  the  church  according  to  that 
gouernement. 

But  in  the  olde  Testament,  our  calling  was  by  shadowes  and 
ceremonies,  as  among  the  Iewes. 

36  Howe  must  the  churche  be  first  planted  and  gathered  vnder  one 
kinde  of  gouernement  1 


1   The  bracketed  numbeie  indicate  the  pages  of  Browne's  work. 
3  I.  e.,  the  happiness  purchased  by  Christ. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  BROWNE  S  BOOK 


l9 


Definitions. 


Diuisions. 


Their  knovvledg  . 


'The  Godhead. 


1  Christians  are  a  companie  or  number  of 
beleeuers,  which  by  a  willing  couenaunt 
made  with  their  God,  are  vnder  the  gou- 
ernement  of  God  and  Christ,  and  keepe 
his  Lawes  in  one  holie  communion:  Be- 
cause they  are  redeemed  by  Christe  vnto 
holines  &  happines  for  euer,  from  whiche 
they  were  fallen  by  the  sinne  of  Adam. 


Christians 

whiche 
should  leade 
a  godlie  life 


By  knowing 
Cod  and  the 
dueties  of 
godlinesse. 


By  keeping 
those  dueties. 


First  by  a  couenant  and  condicion,  made  on  Gods  behalfe. 

Secondlie  by  a  couenant  and  condicion  made  on  our  behalfe. 

Thirdlie  by  vsing  the  sacrament  of  Baptisme  to  seale  those 
condicions,  and  couenantes. 

J7      What  is  the  couenant,  or  condicion  on  Gods  behalfe  ? 

His  promise  to  be  our  God  and  sauiour,  if  we  forsake  not  his 
gouernement  by  disobedience. 

Also  his  promise  to  be  the  God  of  our  seede,  while  we  are  his 
people. 

Also  the  gifte  of  his  spirit  to  his  children  as  an  inwarde  calling 
and  furtheraunce  of  godlines. 

[22]  j>8      What  is  the  couenant  or  condicion  on  our  behalfe  ? 

We  must  offer  and  geue  vp  our  selues  to  be  of  the  church  and 
people  of  God. 

We  must  likewise  offer  and  geue  vp  our  children  and  others, 


20  BROWNE  S   CONGREGATIONALISM 

being  vnder  age,  if  they  be  of  our  householde  and  we  haue  full 
power  ouer  them. 

We  must  make  profession,  that  we  are  his  people,  by  sub- 
mitting our  selues  to  his  lawes  and  gouernement. 

jp     How  must  Baptisme  be  vsed,  as  a  scale  of  this  couenauntf 

They  must  be  duelie  presented,  and  offered  to  God  and  the 
church,  which  are  to  be  Baptised. 

They  must  be  duelie  receiued  vnto  grace  and  fellowship. 

40     How  must  they  be  presented  and  offered? 

The  children  of  the  faithfull,  though  they  be  infantes  are  to 
be  offered  to  God  and  the  church,  that  they  may  be  Baptised. 

Also  those  infantes  or  children  which  are  of  the  householde  of 
the  faithfull,  and  vnder  their  full  power. 

Also  all  of  discretion  which  are  not  baptised,  if  they  holde 
the  Christian  profession,  and  shewe  forth  the  same. 

[24]   41     How  must  they  be  reeeaued  vnto  grace  and  felloshippe  ? 

The  worde  must  be  duely  preached  in  an  holie  assemblie. 

The  signe  or  Sacrament  must  be  applied  thereto. 

42     Ho-ci<  must  the  word  be  preached! 

The  preacher  being  called  and  tneete  thereto,  must  shewe  the 
redemption  of  christians  by  Christ,  and  the  promises  reeeaued  by 
faith  as  before. 

Also  they  must  shewe  the  right  vse  of  that  redemption,  in 
suffering  with  Christ  to  dye  vnto  sinne  by  repetance. 

Also  the  raising  and  quickning  again  vpon  repentance. 

4J     Howe  must  the  signe  be  applied  thereto  ? 

The  bodies  of  the  parties  baptised,  must  be  washed  wl  water, 
or  sprinckled  or  dipped,  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  ye 
Sonne,  and  of  the  holy  Ghost,  vnto  the  forgeuenes  of  sinnes,  and 
dying  thereto  in  one  death  and  burial  with  Christ. 

The  preacher  must  pronounce  the  to  be  baptised  into  ye  bodie 
and  gouernement  of  Christ,  to  be  taught  &  to  professe  his  lawes, 
that  by  his  mediatio  &  victorie,  they  might  rise  againe  with  him 
vnto  holines  tV  happines  for  euer.  The  church  must  geue  thankes 
for  the  partie  baptised,  and  praye  for  his  further  instruction,  and 
traininge  vnto  saluation. 

[26]  44  How  must  it  [the  church]  be  further  bui/ded,  accord- 
inge  vnto  churche  gouernement  1 

First  by  communion  of  the  graces  &  offices  in  the  head  of  ye 
church,  which  is  Christ. 

Secondlly,  by  communion  of  the  graces  and  offices  in  the 
bodie,  which  is  the  church  of  Christ. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  BROWNE'S  BOOK  21 

Thirdly,  by  vsing  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lords  supper,  as  a 
seale  of  this  communion. 

4j  Howe  hath  the  churche  the  communion  of  those  graces  c^ 
offices,  which  are  in  Christ  / 

It  hath  the  vse  of  his  priesthoode  :  because  he  is  the  high 
Priest  thereof. 

Also  of  his  prophecie:  because  he  is  the  Prophet  thereof. 

Also  of  his  kingdome  and  gouernement:  because  he  is  the 
kynge  and  Lord  thereof. 

46     What  vse  hath  the  chit  re  lie  of  his  priesthoode  / 

Thereby  he  is  our  mediatour,  and  we  present  and  offer  vppe 
our  praiers  in  his  name,  because  by  his  intreatie,  our  sinnes  are 
forgeuen. 

Also  he  is  our  iustification,  because  by  his  attonement  we  are 
iustified. 

Also  he  is  our  sanctification,  because  he  partaketh  vnto  vs  his 
holines  and  spirituall  graces. 

[2c9]  <tf     What  vse  hath  the  church  of  his  prophecie  ? 

He  him  selfe  hath  taught  vs,  and  geuen  vs  his  lawes. 

He  preacheth  vnto  vs  by  his  worde  &:  message  in  the  mouthes 
of  his  messengers. 

He  appoynteth  to  euerie  one  their  callinges  and  dueties. 

48     What  vse  hath  the  churche  of  his  kinglie  office  ? 

By  that  he  executeth  his  lawes:  First,  by  ouerseeing  and  try- 
ing out  wickednes. 

Also  by  priuate  or  open  rebuke,  of  priuate  or  open  offenders. 

Also  by  separation  of  the  wilfull,  or  more  greeuous  offenders. 

[jo]  4p  What  vse  hath  the  churche  of  the  graces  and  offices 
vuder  Christ  ? 

It  hath  those  which  haue  office  of  teaching  and  guiding. 

Also  those  which  haue  office  of  cherishing  and  releeuing  the 
afflicted  &:  poore. 

Also  it  hath  the  graces  of  all  the  brethren  and  people  to  doo 
good  withall. 

jo     Who  haue  the  grace  cV  office  of  teaching  and  guiding  ? 

Some  haue  this  charge  and  office  together,  which  can  not  be 
sundred. 

Some  haue  their  seueral  charge  ouer  manie  churches. 

Some  haue  charge  but  in  one  church  onlie. 

51     How  haue  some  their  charge  and  office  together  ? 

There  be  Synodes  or  meetings  of  sundrie  churches:  which  are 
when  the  weaker  churches  seeke  helpe  of  the  stronger,  for  decid- 


22  BROWNE  S  CONGREGATIONALISM 

ing  or  redressing  of  matters:  or  else  the  stronger  looke  to  them  for 
redresse.      , 

There  is  also  prophecie,  or  meetings  for  the  vse  of  euerie 
mans  gift,  in  talk  or  reasoning,  or  exhortation  and  doctrine. 

There  is  the  Eldershippe,  or  meetings  of  the  most  forwarde 
and  wise,  for  lookinge  to  matters. 

[J2]  52     Who  haue  their  seueral  charge  oucr  many  churches  '! 

Apostles  had  charge  ouer  many  churches. 

Likewise  Prophetes,  which  had  their  reuelations  or  visions. 

Likewise  helpers  vnto  these,  as  Euagelistes,  and  companions 
of  their  iourneis. 

53  Who  haue  their  seuerall  charge  in  one  Churche  onely,  to  teache 
and  guide  the  same  ? 

The  Pastour,  or  he  which  hath  the  guilt  of  exhorting,  and 
applying  especiallie. 

The  Teacher,  or  he  whiche  hath  the  guift  of  teaching  espe- 
cially :   and  lesse  guift  of  exhorting  and  applying. 

They  whiche  helpe  vnto  them  both  in  ouerseeing  and  counsail- 
inge,  as  the  most  forward  or  Elders. 

54  Who  haue  office  of  cherishing  and  releeuing  the  afflicted  and 
/core  / 

The  Releeuers  or  Deacons,  which  are  to  gather  and  bestowe 
the  church  liberalitie. 

The  Widowes,  which  are  to  praye  for  the  church,  with  attend- 
aunce  to  the  sicke  and  afflicted  thereof. 

[JV]  55  How  hath  the  church  the  vse  of  those  graces,  which  al 
y'  brethre  &  people   haue  to  do  good  withal  ? 

Because  euerie  one  of  the  church  is  made  a  Kinge,  a  Priest, 
and  a  Prophet  vnder  Christ,  to  vpholde  and  further  the  kingdom 
of  Cod,  &  to  breake  and  destroie  the  kingdome  of  Antichrist, 
and  Satan. 

j6    Howe  are  we  made  Kinges  ! 

We  must  all   watch  one  an  other,  and  trie  out  all  wickednes. 

We  must  priuatlie  and  openlie  rebuke,  the  priuat  and  open 
offendours.  We  must  also  separate  the  wilful  and  more  greeuous 
offenders,  and  withdraw  our  seines  fro  them,  and  gather  the 
righteous  togither. 

57     How  are  all  Christians  made  Pricstcs  vnder  Christ? 

They  present  and  offer  vp  praiers  vnto  Cod,  for  them  seines 
&  for  others. 

They  turne  others  from  iniquitie,  so  that  attonement  is  made 
in  Christ  unto  Justification. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  BROWNE  S  BOOK  23 

In  them  also  and  for  them  others  are  sanctified,  by  partaking 
the  graces  of  Christ  vnto  them. 

58    How  are  all  Christians  made  prophctes  vnder  Christ  ? 

They  teach  the  lawes  of  Christ,  and  talke  and  reason  for  the 
maintenance  of  them. 

They  exhorte,  moue,  and  stirre  vp  to  the  keeping  of  his 
lawes.     They  appoint,  counsel,  and  tell  one  another  their  dueties. 

[j6]  jp  How  must  we  vse  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lords  supper, 
as  a  seale  of  this  communion  ? 

There  must  be  a  due  preparation  to  receaue  the  Lords  sup- 
per.    And  a  due  ministration  thereof. 

60  What  preparation  must  there  be  to  receaue  the  Lords  supper  ? 
There   must  be  a  separation  fro  those   which  are  none  of  the 

church,  or  be  vnmeete  to  receaue,  that  the  worthie  may  be  onely 
receaued. 

All  open  offences  and  faultings  must  be  redressed. 

All  must  proue  and  examine  them  selues,  that  their  conscience 
be  cleare  by  faith  and  repentance,  before  they  receaue. 

61  How  is  the  supper  rightlie  ministred? 
The  worde  must  be  duelie  preached. 

And  the  signe  or  sacrament  must  be  rightlie  applied  thereto. 

[jef]   62     How  must  the  worde  be  dulie preached? 

The  death  and  tormentes  of  Christ,  by  breaking  his  bodie  and 
sheading  his  bloud  for  our  sinnes,  must  be  shewed  by  the  lawfull 
preacher. 

Also  he  must  shewe  the  spirtuall  vse  of  the  bodie  &  bloud 
of  Christ  Jesus,  by  a  spirituall  feeding  thereon,  and  growinge  into 
it,  by  one  holie  communion. 

Also  our  thankefulnes,  and  further  profiting  in  godlines  vnto 
life  euerlasting. 

[40]   63     How  must  the  signe  be  applied  thereto  ? 

The  preacher  must  take  breade  and  blesse  and  geue  thankes, 
and  the  must  he  breake  it  and  pronounce  it  to  be  the  body  of 
Christ,  which  was  broken  for  the,  that  by  fayth  they  might  feede 
thereon  spirituallie  &  growe  into  one  spiritual  bodie  of  Christ, 
and  so  he  eating  thereof  him  selfe,  must  bidd  them  take  and  eate 
it  among  them,  &  feede  on  Christ  in  their  consciences. 

Likewise  also  must  he  take  the  cuppe  and  blesse  and  geue 
thankes,  and  so  pronounce  it  to  be  the  bloud  of  Christ  in  the  newe 
Testament,  which  was  shedd  for  remission  of  sinnes,  that  by 
fayth  we  might  drinke  it  spirtuallie,  and  so  be  nourished  in  one 
spirituall  bodie  of  Christ,  all  sinne  being  clensed  away,  and  then  he 


24  BROWNE'S   CONGREGATIONALISM 

drinking  thereof  himselfe  must  bydcl  them  drinke  there  of  like- 
wise and  diuide  it  amog  them,  and  feede  on  Christe  in  their  con- 
sciences. 

Then  muste  they  all  geue  thankes  praying  for  their  further 
profiting  in  godlines  cV_  vowing  their  obedience. 

[Questions  64  to  Si  relate  to  the  Jewish  dispensation  ;  and  Questions  82  to  in 
to  Christian  graces  and  duties.     Two  of  the  latter  are  of  interest.] 

[63]  no  What  special!  furtheraunce  of  the  kingdome  of  God  is 
ther  ? 

In  talke  to  edifie  one  an  other  by  praising  God,  and  declar- 
ing his  will  by  rebuke  or  exhortation. 

In  doubt  and  controuersie  to  sweare  by  his  name  on  iust  occa- 
sions, and  to  vse  lottes. 

Also  to  keepe  the  meetinges  of  the  church,  and  with  our 
especiall  friends  for  spirituall  exercises. 

///.      What  special  ditties  be  ther  for  the  Sabbathe  ? 

All  the  generall  duties  of  religion  &  holines  towards  God, 
and  all  the  speciall  dueties  of  worshipping  God,  <S:  furthering  his 
kingdome,  must  on  the  Sabbath  be  performed,  with  ceasing  from 
our  callinges  &  labour  in  worldlye  thinges.  Yet  such  busines 
as  can  not  be  putt  of  tyll  the  daie  after,  nor  done  the  daie  before, 
may  then  be  done. 

[Questions  112  to  185, —  the  remainder  of  the  book, —  relate  to  the  duties  of 

man  to  man.] 

[70]  112  Whiche  bee  the  dueties  of  righteousnes  concerning  man  ? 
They  be  eyther  more  bounden,  as  the  generall  dueties  in 
gouernement  betwene  gouernours  and   inferiours: 

Or  they  be  more  free,  as  the  generall  dueties  of  free- 
dome. 

Or  else  they  be  more  speciall  duties  for  eche  others 
name,  and  for  auoyding  couetousnes. 

iij     11 'hat  be  the  dueties  of  Gouernours? 

They  consist  in  the  entraunce  of  that  calling. 

And  in  the  due  execution  thereof  by  ruling  well. 

114     How  must  Superiours  enter  and  take  their  calling  1 

By  assuraunce  of  their  guift. 

By  speciall  charge  and  commaundemente  from  God  to  put  it 
in  practise. 

By  agreement  of  men. 

iij      What  gift  must  they  hauet 


EXTRACTS    FROM    BROWNE  S   BOOK  25 

All  Gouernours  must  haue  forwardnes  before  others,  in 
knowledge  and  godlines,  as  able  to  guide. 

And  some  must  haue  age  and  eldershippe. 

Also  some  must  haue  parentage  and  birth. 

[72]  116  What  charge  or  commaundement  of  God  must  they 
haue  to  vse  their  guift? 

They  haue  first  the  speciall  commaundement  of  furthering  his 
kingdome,  by  edifyinge  and  helping  of  others,  where  there  is  occa- 
sion and  persones  be  worthie. 

Also  some  speciall  prophecie  and  foretelling  of  their  calling, 
or  some  generall  commaundement  for  the  same. 

Also  particular  warninges  from  God  vnknowne  to  the  world, 
as  in  oulde  time  by  vision,  dreame,  and  reuelation,  and  now  by  a 
speciall  working  of  Gods  spirite  in  our  consciences. 

ny     what  agreement  must  there  be  of  men  ? 

For  Church  gouernours  there  must  be  an  agreement  of  the 
church. 

For  ciuil  Magistrates,  there  must  be  an  agreement  of  the 
people  or  Common  welth. 

For  Houshoulders,  there  must  be  an  agreement  of  the  hous- 
houldes.  As  Husbandes,  Parents,  Maisters,  Teachers,  or  Schole- 
maisters,  <xx. 

[74]  118  What  agreement  must  there  be  of  the  church,  for  the 
calling  of  church  gouernours  ? 

They  must  trie  their  guiftes  and  godlines. 

They  must  receyue  them  by  obedience  as  their  guides  and 
teachers,  where  they  plante  or  establish  the  church. 

They  must  receyue  them  by  choyse  where  the  church  is 
planted.1 

The  agreement  also  for  the  calling  of  ciuill  magistrates  should 
be  like  vnto  this,  excepting  their  Pompe  and  outward  power,  and 
orders  established  meete  for  the  people. 

up      What  choyse  should  there  be? 

The  praiers  and  humbling  of  all,  with  fasting  and  exhortation, 
that  God  may  be  chiefe  in  the  choise. 

The  consent  of  the  people  must  be  gathered  by  the  Elders  or 
guides,  and  testifyed  by  voyce,  presenting,  or  naming  of  some,  or 
other  tokens,  that  they  approue  them  as  meete  for  that  calling. 


1  The  meaning  of  this  blind  passage  is,  I  take  it,  that  where  the  minister  gathers  a  church 
and  it  originates  through  his  labors,  he  is  to  be  received  by  it  "by  obedience  ";  but  where  an  already 
established  church  calls  a  minister,  he  is  to  be  received  "by  choyse." 


26  BROWNE'S   CONGREGATIONALISM 

The  Elders  or  fonvardest  must  ordeine,  and  pronounce  them, 
with  prayer  and  imposition  of  handes,  as  called  and  authorised  of 
God,  and  receyued  of  their  charg  to  that  calling. 

Yet  imposition  of  handes  is  no  essentiall  pointe  of  their  call- 
ing, but  it  ought  to  be  left,  when  it  is  turned  into  pompe  or  super- 
stition. 

[~<5]  120  What  agreement  must  ther  be  in  the  householdes,  for 
the  gouernement  of  them  t 

There  must  be  an  agrement  of  Husband  and  Wife,  of 
Parentes  &  Children  :  Also  of  Maister  and  Seruant,  and  likewise 
of  Teachers  &  Schollers,  &c. 

This  agreement  betweene  parentes  and  children  is  of  natural! 
desert  and  duetie  betweene  them  : 

But  in  the  other  there  must  be  triad  and  iudgment  of  ech 
others  meetnes  for  their  likinge  and  callinge,  as  is  shewed  before. 

Also  there  must  be  a  due  couenaunt  betweene  them. 

[/<?]  121  How  must  Superiours  execute  their  callinge  by  ruling 
their  inferiours  ? 

They  must  esteeme  right  and  due. 

They  must  vphould  the  same 

By  appointing  to  others  their  dueties. 

They  must  take  accountes. 

122     How  must  they  esteeme  right  and  due  ? 

They  must  be  zealouse  for  equitie  and  innocencie. 

They  must  loue  those  and  reioyse  ouer  them,  which  doe  their 
dueties. 

They  must  hate  all  vanite  and  wickednes  and  be  angrie  and 
greeued  therat. 

[So]  72j  How  must  they  appoint  vnto  others  their  worke  and 
duetie  I 

They  must  teach  them. 

They  must  direct  them  by  their  guiding  and  helpe. 

They  must  giue  them  good  example. 

J 24     How  must  they  teach  them  I 

They  must  teach  them  the  groundes  of  religion,  and  the  mean- 
ing of  the  Scriptures. 

They  must  exhort  and  dehort  particularly  for  reformation  of 
their  Hues. 

They  must  require  thinges  againe  which  are  taught,  by 
particular  applying  and  trying  their  guift. 

[£2]   12 j     How  must  they  direct  them  by  their  guiding  and  helpe  t 


EXTRACTS   FROM   BROWNE'S   BOOK  27 

They  must  guide  the  in  the  worshipp  of  God,  as  in  the  Worde, 
Praier,  Thanksgiuing,  &c. 

They  must  gather  their  Voices,  Doubtes  and  Questions,  and 
determine  Controuersies. 

They  must  particulate  commaunde  and  tell  them  their 
dueties. 

126    How  must  they  take  accountes  ? 

They  must  continually  watch  them  by  visiting  and  looking  to 
them  them  selues,  and  by  others  helping  vnto  them. 

They  must  trie  out  and  search  their  state  and  behauiour  by 
accusations  and  chardgings  with  witnesses. 

They  must  reforme  or  recompense  by  rebuke  or  separation 
the  wicked  and  vnruly. 

[£4]  12J  what  say  you  of  the  dueties  of  submission  to  Supe- 
riours  ? 

They  consist  in  esteeming  them. 

In  honoring  them. 

In  seruing  them. 

[The  remaining  Questions  and  Answers  contain  so  little  that  is  peculiar  to 
Browne  that  I  have  omitted  them.] 


II 

THE    LONDON    CONFESSION    OF    1589 

Editions  and  Reprints 

I.  A  Trve  Description  ovt  \  of  tlie  Word  of  God,  |  of  the  visible  Church. 
Without  title  page.     Dated  15S9  at  the  end.     Printed  at  Dort.     40  pp.  S. 

II.  The  same  in  form  and  with  the  same  date,  the  only  variation  from  the 
first  edition  being  a  rearrangement  of  the  order  of  the  paragraphs  treating  of  ex- 
communication.    Printed  at  Amsterdam  before  1602. ' 

III.  With  the  substitution  of  Congregation  for  Church  in  the  title  and  other 
passages  ;  and  a  few  minor  verbal  changes.      Printed  at  [?]  1641.     40  pp.  8.s 

IV.  The  text  of  the  first  edition  was  reprinted  and  criticised  paragraph  by 
paragraph  by  R.  Alison,  A  Plaint  Confutation  of  a  Treatise  of  Brownisme,  Pub- 
lished by  some  of  that  Faction,  Entituled  A  Description,  etc.,  London,  1590. 

V.  The  text  of  the  second  edition  was  reprinted  in  Lawne,  Brownisme  Tvrned 
the  In-side  Out-ward,  etc.,  London,  1613.  Also,  VI.  in  Wall,  More  Work  for  the 
Dean,  London,  1681,  pp.  20-28.  Also,  VII.  in  Hanbury,  Historical  Memorials 
Relating  to  the  Independents,  etc.,  London,  1839-44,  I  :  28-34. 

Literature 

Beside  the  controversial  pamphlets  already  cited,  the  Creed  is  treated  briefly 
in  Hanbury,  Memorials,  I  :  25-27.  By  far  the  most  satisfactory  and  complete  dis- 
cussion of  this  interesting  document  is,  however,  to  be  found  in  Dexter,  The  Congre- 
gationalism of  the  last  three  hundred  years,  pp.  25S-262. 

THE  abandonment  by  Browne  of  the  work  which  he  had  un- 
dertaken and  the  rupture  of  his  exiled  flock  at  Middelburg 
did  not  bring  the  Congregational  movement  to  an  end.  As 
has  been  seen,  a  portion  of  Browne's  congregation  appear  to  have 
maintained    their    organization    at    Norwich,    though    nothing    is 


1  I  am  indebted  to  the  late  Rev.  Dr.  H.  M.  Dexter  for  the  following  facts  regarding  these  edi- 
tions:—The  place  of  publication  of  the  first  edition  and  the  circumstances  of  the  issuance  of  the 
second  are  made  clear  by  a  passage  in  Henoch  Clapham,  Errour  on  the  Right  Hand,  etc.,  Lon- 
don, 1608.  p.  n,  in  which  he  declared  that  this  Trve  Description  was  originally  printed  at  D[ort], 
where  Earrowe's  ether  writings  were  printed  ;  but  that  a  second  edition,  bearing  the  original  date, 
was  brought  out,  "some  yeares  after  his  [Earrowes]  death,"  at  Amsterdam]  at  the  expense  of 
Arthur  Billet  or  BeUot.  In  this  second  edition,  Clapham  affirms,  the  paragraph  beginning:  "All 
this  notwithstanding,"  was  transferred  from  its  original  place  "after  the  excommunication"  (ap- 
parently after  the  paragraph  commencing:  "  Further,  they  are  to  warne"),  and  inserted  after  the 
paragraph:  "If  the  fault  be  private;"  the  intention  being,  it  is  charged,  to  make  excommumca- 
tion  a  severer  matter  than  Earrowe  intended  — he  believing  it  to  be  "a  power  to  edification  not  to 
destruction."  Arthur  Billet  died  in  Febr.,  1602. 
2  See  Hanbury,  Memorials,  1 :  28. 

(23) 


BARROWE  AND   GREENWOOD  29 

known  regarding  their  state  and  fortunes.1  But  Congregational 
believers  carried  the  doctrine  to  other  cities,  though  their  move- 
ments are  now  impossible  to  trace.2  We  are  first  certainly  aware 
of  the  existence  of  a  Separatist  congregation  in  London  in  1587 
or  1588,  though  it  may  have  been  formed  a  year  or  two  earlier.3 
But  so  hunted  was  it  by  the  officers  of  the  law  that  a  large  pro- 
portion of  its  membership  were  imprisoned,  and  though  certain 
church  acts,  such  as  the  admission  of  members  and  the  excom- 
munication of  the  unworthy,  were  performed,  the  severity  of  the 
persecution  prevented  the  election  of  appropriate  church  officers 
till  September,  1592,  when  Francis  Johnson  was  chosen  pastor, 
John  Greenwood  teacher,  and  two  elders  and  two  deacons  asso- 
ciated with  them.4 

Yet  three  years  before  its  full  organization  this  struggling 
London  church,  in  the  persons  of  its  two  leading  members,  put 
forth  the  creed  which  is  the  subject  of  present  discussion.  The 
principles  enunciated  by  Browne,  which  have  just  been  considered, 
though  doubtless  those  in  accordance  with  which  his  congregation 
was  gathered,  were  published  by  him  and  his  friend  Harrison  as 
a  missionary  tractate  rather  than  a  church  creed.  The  publica- 
tion, and  probably  the  composition,  of  this  London  symbol  has 
been  traced  conclusively5  to  Henry  Barrowe6  and  John  Green- 


'See<i«/f,  p.  11. 

2  The  Preface  to  the  Confession  of  1596,  given  in  the  next  chapter,  speaks  of  sufferers  for 
Congregationalism  in  London,  Norwich,  Gloucester,  Bury  St.  Edmunds,  and  "  manye  other  places 
of  the  land." 

3  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  255,  634.  If  Greenwood's  arrest  was  in  1586,  the  congregation 
must  certainly  have  been  formed  even  earlier  than  1587. 

4  Ibid.,  pp.  232,  264,  265. 

5  Ibid.,  pp.  234,  258-262. 

6  Henry  Barrowe,  one  of  the  most  noted  and  deserving  of  the  proclaimers  of  modern 
Congregationalism,  was  of  a  good  Norfolk  family,  and  from  1566  to  his  graduation  as  Bachelor  in 
1569-70  he  was  a  student  at  Clare  Hall,  in  the  Puritanically  inclined  University  of  Cambridge. 
But  whatever  may  have  been  the  influences  with  which  he  was  then  surrounded,  he  left  the  Uni- 
versity an  irreligious  man.  Turning  his  attention  to  the  study  of  law,  he  was  admitted  a  member 
of  Gray's  Inn  in  1576  ;  and,  through  what  means  we  know  not,  he  became  personally  acquainted 
with  Queen  Elizabeth,  to  whose  court  and  presence  he  had  access.  A  chance  sermon  was  the 
means  of  his  conversion,  and  his  conversion  was  followed  by  the  adoption  of  the  strictest  Puri- 
tan principles.  Acquaintance  with  Greenwood,  it  would  appear,  led  him,  some  time  possibly  be- 
fore 1586,  to  embrace  Congregational  views.  His  visit  to  his  friend  Greenwood,  in  the  place  of  the 
latter's  imprisonment,  was  the  occasion  of  his  own  arrest  in  Nov.,  1586.  From  that  time  onward 
to  his  execution,  April  6,  1593,  he  was  a  prisoner,  at  first  in  the  Clink,  and  then  in  the  Fleet  in 
London.  His  unwearied  literary  activity,  under  the  most  discouraging  circumstances,  made  this 
long  period  of  imprisonment  the  most  productive  portion  of  his  life.     Beside  his  elaborate  exposi- 


30  THE   CONFESSION   OF    1589 

wood,'  then  prisoners  for  their  faith,  shut  up  in  the  Fleet  prison 
in  London,  and  four  years  later  to  give  their  lives  as  martyrs  to 
the  truths  here  set  forth.  Though  the  statement  nowhere  appears 
in  the  document  itself,  the  circumstances  of  the  publication  of 
the  first  and  second  editions,  as  far  as  they  can  now  be  ascer- 
tained, certainly  justify  the  conclusion  that  we  have  here  not 
only  the  expression  of  the  individual  beliefs  of  Barrowe  and 
Greenwood,  but  a  statement  which  the  partially  formed  church  in 
London  looked  upon  as  expressive  of  the  views  of  the  whole 
brotherhood.     It  is,  therefore,  essentially  a  church  creed. 

The  Tree  Description  is  substantially  an  ideal  sketch.  It 
could  not  well  be  otherwise.  Shut  up  in  prison  for  the  advocacy 
of  the  opinions  here  presented,  the  framers  of  this  creed  could 
look  nowhere  upon  earth  for  full  exemplification  of  the  polity  in 
which  they  believed.  The  church-order  which  they  longed  for 
was,  they  were  confident,  of  the  divinely  appointed  pattern. 
They  read  its  outlines  in  the  New  Testament.  But  they  had  had 
no  experience  with  its  practical  workings,  and  hence  they  pictured 
a   greater   degree  of    spiritual   unity  and   brotherliness  than  even 


lion  of  Congregational  principles  in  his  Brief  Discouerie  of  the  false  Church,  1590,  anil  the 
Plaine  Refutation  if  M.  GiJJanis  Booke,  etc.,  1591,  which  was  to  be  the  means  of  Francis  John- 
son's conversion  to  Congregationalism,  Barrowe  had  a  share  in  three  controversial  pamphlets.  I  1 
pathetic  story  of  Barrowe's  imprisonment  and  death,  with  some  account  of  his  writings,  may  be 
found  in  the  work  of  Dr.  Dexter,  already  cited,  pp.  211-245.  Other  sources  of  information  are 
Brook,  Lives  of  the  Puritans,  London,  1813,  II:  23-44;  Cooper,  Athena  Cantabrigienstt,  Cam- 
bridge [England],  1861,  II:  151-153;  Bacon,  Genesis  of  the  New  England  Churches,  New  Vork, 
1874,  pp.  91-154,  passim;  A.  1'..  Grosart,  in  the  Dictionary  of  National  Biography,  III:  297, 
298  (London  and  Xew  Vork,  18S5).  Additional  references  may  be  found  appended  to  the  articles 
of  Cooper  and  Grosart. 

1  John  Greenwood,  the  associate  of  Barrowe  in  his  imprisonment  ami  death,  and  his  fellow- 
worker  in  the  production  of  most  of  the  writings  mentioned  in  the  previous  note,  was  of  less  con- 
spicuous social  station  than  Barrowe,  and  somewhat  younger  in  age.  His  education  was  obtained 
at  Corpus  Christi  College,  Cambridge,  where  he  was  a  sizar  or  pecuniarily  assisted  student;  and 
upon  graduating  in  1580-1  he  had  entered  the  established  ministry,  and  been  duly  ordained  to  the 
diaconate  and  priesthood.  His  Puritan  views  led  him  for  a  time  to  serve  as  chaplain  in  the 
family  of  the  Puritan  Lord  Rich  of  Rockford,  Essex;  but  his  progress  toward  Congregationalism 
was  decided,  and  by  1586  he  was  preaching,  as  opportunity  would  permit,  in  London.  His 
ship  with  Barrowe  has  already  been   mentioned.     Cast   into  prison   in   the  autumn  of  1586, 

apparently  on  bail,  for  a  short  time  in  1592,  and  in  September  of  that  year  was  elected 
teacher  by  the  London  church,  then  for  the  first  time  choosing  officers.  His  recommittal  to  prison 
speedily  followed,  and  on  April  6,  1593,  he  was  hanged.  Though  a  man  of  considerable  ability, 
his  part  in  the  writings  issued  in  conjunction  with  Barrowe  was  evidently  secondary.  Coni|>  I1 
ter,  Congregationalism  as  seen,  pp.  211-245;  Brook,  Lives  of  the  Puritans,  11:23-44;  Bacon, 
<f  the  N.  £.  Clin  relies,  pp.  93-154,  Passim;  Cooper,  Athenr?  Cantaltrigicnses,  11:153, 
154:  Dictionary  of  National  Biography,  XXIII:  84,  85.  Further  bibliographical  references. 
found  in  connection  with  the  two  articles  last  cited. 


NATURE    OF   THE    CONFESSION  3 1 

Christian  men  and  women  have  usually  shown  themselves  capable 
of,  and  they  made  little  provision  for  the  avoidance  of  the  fric- 
tion inevitable  at  times  in  conducting  the  most  harmonious  socie- 
ties composed  of  still  imperfect  men.  But  the  essential  features  of 
early  Congregationalism  are  here.  It  is  first  of  all  a  "Description 
ovt  of  the  Word  of  God."  The  Bible  is  made  the  ultimate 
standard  in  all  matters  of  church  government,  as  well  as  points  of 
doctrine.  Its  delineations  of  church  polity  and  administration 
are  looked  upon  as  furnishing  an  ample  and  authoritative  rule  for 
the  church  in  all  ages.  This  true  church  is  not  the  whole  body 
of  the  baptized  inhabitants  of  a  kingdom,  but  a  company  of  men 
who  can  lay  claim  to  personal  Christian  experience,  and  who  are 
united  to  one  another  and  to  Christ  in  mutual  fellowship.  The 
nature  of  the  officers  of  this  church,  their  number,  duties,  and 
character,  are  all  held  to  be  ascertainable  from  the  same  God- 
given  Word.  They  are  not  the  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  of 
the  Anglican  hierarchy,  but  are  pastor  and  teacher,  elders,  deacons, 
and  widows  ;  and  they  hold  their  office  not  by  royal  appointment 
or  the  nomination  of  a  patron,  but  "  by  the  holy  &  free  election 
of  the  Lordes  holie  and  free  people."  The  whole  administration 
of  the  church  is  the  concern  of  all  the  brethren,  and  the  laws 
governing  this  administration  are  all  derivable  from  the  Script- 
ures. But  on  this  very  question  of  administration,  while  the 
True  Description  is  not  as  clear  as  we  could  wish,  it  is  plain  that 
the  creed  is  far  removed  from  the  practical  democracy  of  Robert 
Browne  or  the  usage  of  modern  Congregationalism.  The  elders 
are  indeed  chosen  by  the  whole  church,  but  once  having  chosen 
them,  the  people  are  to  be  "  most  humble,  meek,  obedient,  faith- 
full,  and  loving."  The  elders  are  to  see  that  the  other  officers 
do  their  duties  aright,  and  the  people  obey.  But  who  shall  see 
that  the  elders  do  their  duty,  or  who  shall  seriously  limit  them  in 
their  action  ?  That  is  not  made  clear.  It  is  evident  that  the 
Trve  Description  would  place  the  elders  apart  from  and  above  the 
brethren  as  a  ruling  class,  having  the  initiative  in  business,  being 
themselves  the  church  in  all  matters  of  excommunication,  and 
leaving  to  the  brethren   only  the  power  of  election,  approval  of 


32  THE   CONFESSION    OF    1 589 

the  elders'  actions,  and  an  undefined  right  to  reprove  the  eiders 
if  their  conduct  should  not  be  in  accord  with  the  New  Testament 
standard.  This  conception  of  the  elders  as  a  ruling  oligarchy  in 
the  church  is,  in  fact,  the  view  elaborated  by  Barrowe  in  his 
other  writings,  and  is  the  theory  which  Dr.  Dexter  happily  termed 
Barrowism,  in  distinction  from  the  unintentional  but  thorough- 
going democracy  of  Robert  Browne.'  It  is  a  theory  which  colors 
the  creeds  of  more  than  a  century  of  early  Congregationalism. 

The  almost  complete  absence  of  distinctly  doctrinal  state- 
ment in  this  creed  is  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  these  London 
Separatists  were  in  full  doctrinal  sympathy  with  the  then  pre- 
dominantly Calvinistic  views  of  the  English  Established  Church 
from  which  they  had  come  out,  and  did  not  feel  the  necessity  of 
demonstrating  their  doctrinal  soundness,  as  they  were  shortly 
after  impelled  to  do,  when  settled  among  strangers  in  a  foreign 
land. 


1  See  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  106,  107,  235-239,  351. 


The  Confession  of  1589 

A  TRVE  DESCRIPTION  OVT 

OF    THE    WORD   OF   GOD, 
of  the  visible  Church.  ' 

AS  there  is  but  *  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  one  Lord  over  all, 
and  one  Spirit  :  So  is   there  but  \  one   truth,  one  Faith,  one 
Salvation,  one  Church,   called   in   one   hope,   ioyned   in   one 
profession,  guided  by  one  f  rule,  even  the  Word  of  the  most  high. 

*  Genes.  1.  1.  Exod.  20.  3.  \i  Tim.  2.  4.  Phil.  1  27.  Ephe.  2.  18. 
Ioh.  8  41.  f  Dcut.  6.  25.  Rom.  10.  8.  2  Tim.  3.  13.  I  oh.  8,  31. 
I  Ioh  2.  3,  4.  <3*C. 

This  Church  as  it  is  vniversallie  vnderstood,  conteyneth  in  it 
all  the  #  Elect  of  God  that  have  bin,  are,  or  shalbe  :  But  being 
considered  more  particularlie,  as  it  is  seen  in  this  present  world,  it 
consisteth  of  a  companie  and  fellowship  of*  faithful  and  holie 
people  J  gathered  in  the  name  of  Christ  Iesus,  their  only  f  King, 
'  Priest,  and  *  Prophet,*  worshipping  him  aright,  being  J  peace- 
ablie  and  quietlie  governed  by  his  Officers  and  lawes,f  keping  the 
vnitie  of  faith  in  the  bond  of  peace  &:  love  'vnfained.  *  Genes.  17. 
chap.      1   Pet.   1   2.     Revel.   7.  9.     1   Cor.   10.  3.     Ioh.   17,   10.   20. 

*  Psal.  III.  I.  dr3  149.  1.  Isa.  62.  12.  Ephes.  1,  1.  1  Cor.  1.  2. 
Dcut.  14.  2.  I  Dent.  12,  5.  Ioh.  6,  37  6°  3.  14.  &=  12.  32.  In  he  ij. 
37.  f  Gen.  44.  10.  Psal.  43  6.  Zach  g.  p.  Hcb.  1,  8.  'Rom.  8.  34. 
Ioh  17.  chap.  Hcb.  3.  p.  cr=  8,  1.  <&■»  4.  14.  *  Dcut.  18,  13.  Mat. 
17.  3.  Hcb.  z,  2.  Gen.  14.  18.  *  Exo  20.  4.  3.  6.  7.  8  lev.  10. 
3.  Ioh  4.  23.  I  Mat.  11.  29.  1  Cor.  II,  16.  Mar.  13,  34.  Rev. 
22.  p.  f  Ephe.  4.  3.  1  Cor.  1.  13.  Mar.  p.  30.  '  Ioh.  13.  34.  1  Cor. 
13.  4.     1  Pet.  1.  22.     1  Ioh  3.  18. 

Most  *  ioyful,  excellent,  and  glorious  things  are  everie  where 
in  the  Scriptures  spoken  of  this  Church.  It  is  called  the  J  Citie, 
f  House  -tf.  Temple,  &:  'mountaine  of  the  eternal  God:  the  *chosen 
generation,  the  holie  nation,  the  peculiar  people,  the  J  Vineyard, 
the  f  garden  enclosed,  the  spring  shut  vp,  the  sealed  fountaine,  the 

1  From  the  2d  edition,  now  in  the  Dexter  Collection  of  Vale  University. 


34  THE   CONFESSION    OF    1 589 

orchyard  of  pomgranates,  with  sweet  fruites,  the  *  heritage,  the 
"kingdome  of  Christ  :  [2J  yea  his  *  sister,  his  love,  his  spouse,  his 
I  Queene,  &  his  f  bodie,  the  ioye  of  the  whole  earth.  To  this 
societie  is  the  *  covenant  and  all  the  promises  made  of  *  peace, 
of  love,  and  J  of  salvation,  of  the  f  presence  of  God,  of  his  graces, 
of  his  power,  and  of  his  *  protection.  *  Psal.  87.  3.  \Ibid. 
\  1  Tim.  3,  13.     Heb.  3,  6.     *  /  Cor.  3,  17.     'Isaiah  2,  2.     Micha,  4, 

I.  Zach.  S.  3.  *  1  Pet.  2.  p.  \  Isaiah.  3,  1.  &■"  2/,  2.  \  Song.  4, 
12.  Isa.  31,  3.  A  Isa.  ip,  2 j.  "  Micha.  5,  2.  Mat.  3.  2.  Ioh.  3,  3. 
"'  Song.  3.  2.  I  Psal.  43.  p.  \  1  Cor.  12.  27.  Ephcs.  1.  23.  «  Gil. 
4,  28.  lid.  p.  4.  *  Psalm.  147.  14.  2  Thes.  3.  16.  \  Isay.  46,  13. 
Zach.  14.  17.  \  Isa.  60.  ch.  Ezech.  47.  ch.  Zach.  4,  12.  *  Ezech.  48, 
33.     Mat.  2S,  20.     Isai.  62.  chap. 

And  surely  if  this  Church  be  considered  in  her  partes,  it  shal 
appeare  most  beautifull,  yea  most  wonderfull,  and  even  \  ravishing 
the  senses  to  conceive,  much  more  to  behold,  what  then  to  enioy 
so  blessed  a  communion.  For  behold,  her  f  King  and  Lord  is  the 
King  of  peace,  &  Lord  himself  of  all  glorie.  She  enioyeth  most 
holie  and  heavenlie  *  lawes,  most  faithfull  and  vigilant  *  Pastours, 
most  syncere  &  pure  "Teachers,  most  careful  and  vpright  \  Gov- 
ernours,  most  diligent  and  trustie  \  Deacons,  most  loving  and 
sober  *  Releevers,  and  a  most  *  humble,  meek,  obedient,  faithfull, 
and  loving  people,  everie  J  stone  living  elect  and  precious,  everie 
stone  hath  his  beautie,  his  f  burden,  and  his  *  order.  All  bound  to 
I  edifie  one  another,  exhort,  reprove,  &  comfort  one  another  f  lov- 
ingly as  to  their  owne  members,  *  faithfully  as  in  the  eyes  of  God. 
J  Song.  6.  4.  9.     f  Isai.  62.  11.     Ioh.   12.  15.     Heb.  2.  7.  8.      *  Mat. 

II,  30.  1  Ioh.  3,  3.  A  Eph.  4.  11.  Act.  20.  ch.  "  Ro.  12  7.  \i 
Cor.  12.  28.  Pom.  12.  8.  \Actcs.  6.  ch.  *  Rom.  12,  8.  *  Mat.  3,  3. 
Ezec.  36.  38.  Isa.  do,  8.  Dcut.  18.  p-13.  \  1  Pet.  2,  3.  1  King.  jy 
p.  Zac.  14,  21.  f  Gal.  6,  2.  *  1  Cor.  12  ch.  Rom.  12,  3.  &°c. 
I  Heb.  10.  24.     f  Lev.  ip,  17.     1  Thes.  4,  p.     *  Col.  3,  23.     1   Ioh. 

3.  20. 

No  J  Office  here  is  ambitiously  affected,  no  f  law  wrongfully 
wrested  or  *  wilfully  neglected,  no  »J«trueth  hid  or  perverted, 
"everie  one  here  hath  fredome  and  power  (not  disturbing  the 
peaceable  order  of  the  Church)  to  vtter  his  complaintes  and 
griefes,  &  freely  to  reprove  the  transgression  and  errours  of  any 
without  exception  of  persons.     J  2  Cor.  2,  17.     3  Ioh.  p.     \  1   Tim. 

4.  2.  3.  &*  5.  21.  &  6.  14.  Gal.  6,  12.  */  Cor.  3.  Jfclcr.  23,  28. 
1  Tim.  3,  13.     "  1  Cor.  6.  6°  14,  30.      Col.  4,  17. 


TEXT   OF   THE   CONFESSION  35 

[3]  Here  is  no  *  intrusion  or  climing  vp  an  other  way  into 
the  sheepefolde,  then  \  by  the  holy  l\:  free  election  of  the  Lordes 
holie  and  free  people,  and  that  according  to  the  Lordes  ordi- 
nance, humbling  themselves  by  fasting  and  prayer  before  the 
Lord,  craving  the  direction  of  his  holy  Spirit,  for  the  triad  and 
approving  of  giftes,  &c.  J  Ioh  10, 1.    \  Actes.  1,  23.  6-"  6,  3.  &*  14.  23. 

Thus  they  orderly  proceed  to  ordination  by  fasting  and 
prayer,  in  which  *  action  the  Apostles  vsed  laying  on  of  handes. 
Thus  hath  everie  one  of  the  people  interest  in  the  election  and 
ordination  of  their  officers,  as  also  in  the  administration  of  their 
offices,  vpon  J  transgression,  offence,  abuse,  &c.  having  an  especiall 
care  vnto  the  inviolable  order  of  the  Church,  as  is  aforesaid. 
*i  Tim.   4.    14.   &  5.    22.     JLuk.   17,3.  Rom.  16,  ij.     Col.  4,  ij. 

Likewise  in  this  Church  they  have  holy  f  lawes,  as  limits  & 
bondes,  which,  it  is  lawfull  at  no  hand  to  transgresse.  They  have 
lawes  to  direct  them  in  the  choise  of  everie  officer,  what  kind  of 
men  the  Lord  will  have.  Their  Pastour  must  be  apt  to  *  teach, 
no  yong  Scholer,  J  able  to  divide  the  worde  aright,  f  holding  fast 
that  faithful  word,  according  to  doctrine,  that  he  may  be  able  also 
to  exhort,  rebuke,  improve,  with  wholesome  doctrine,  &  to  con- 
vince them  that  say  against  it  :  He  must  be  *  a  man  that  loveth 
goodnes  :  he  must  be  wise,  righteous,  holy,  temperate  :  he  must 
be  of  life  vnreproveable,  as  Gods  Steward  :  hee  must  be  generally 
well  reported  of,  &  one  that  ruleth  his  owne  houshold  vnder  obed- 
ience with  al  honestie  :  he  must  be  modest,  humble,  meek,  gentle, 
&  loving  :  hee  must  be  a  man  of  great  \  patience,  compassion, 
labour  and  diligence  :  hee  must  alwaies  be  carefull  and  watchfull 
over  the  flock  whereof  the  Lord  hath  made  him  overseer,  with  al 
willingnes  &  chearefulnes,  not  holding  his  office  in  respect  of 
persons,  but  doing  his  duetie  to  everie  soule,  as  he  will  aunswer 
before  the  chief  Shepheard,  <xx.  f  Mat.  5.  19.  1  Tim.  1.  18. 
*Deut.  11.  10.  Mai.  2.  7.  /  Tim.  3,  1.  &c.  \2  Tim.  2,  13. 
f  Tit.  1,  p.  2  Tim.  4,  2.  *  Tit.  1,  7,  8.  \  Num.  12,  3.  7.  I  say.  30, 
4.  3.  6.  Iere  3,  13.  Ezec.  34,  18.  Act.  20  ch.  1  Pet.  3,  /,  2,  3,  4. 
1  Tim.  3,  21. 

Their  Doctor  or  Teacher  must  be  a  man  apt  to  teach,  able  to 
diuide  the  word  of  God  aright,  and  to  diliver  sound  and  whole- 
som  doctrine  from  the  same,  still  building  vpon  that  sound 
groundwork,  he  must  be  mightie  in  the  Scriptures,  able  to  con- 
vince the  gainsayers,  &  carefull  to  deliver  his  doctrine  pure, 
sound  &  plaine,  not  with  curiositie   or  affectation,  but   so  that  it 


36  THE  CONFESSION   OF    1 589 

may  edifie  the  most  simple,  approving  it  to  every  mans  con- 
science: he  must  be  of  life  vnreproveable,  one  that  can  [4]  governe 
his  owne  houshold,  he  must  be  of  manners  sober,  temperate, 
modest,  gentle  and  loving,  i\:c.  /  Tim.  j.  cliap.  Titus.  1.  ch.  2 
Tim.  2,  15.     1  Cor.  1.  iy.  &  2,  4. 

Their  Elders  must  be  of  wisedome  and  judgement  endued 
with  the  Spirit  of  God,  able  to  discerne  between  cause  &  cause, 
between  plea  &  plea,  &  accordingly  to  prevent  &  redres  evilles, 
alwayes  vigilant  &  intending  to  see  the  statutes,  ordinances,  and 
lawes  of  God  kept  in  the  Church,  and  that  not  onelie  by  the  peo- 
ple in  obedience,  but  to  see  the  Officers  do  their  dueties.  These 
men  must  bee  of  life  likewise  vnreproveable,  governing  their  owne 
families  orderly,  they  must  be  also  of  maners  sober,  gentle, 
modest,  loving,  temperate,  &c.  Numb.  n.  24,  25.  2  C/iro.  ip.  8. 
Actcs.  15.  ch.     1  Tim.  j.  &  j.  chap. 

Their  Deacons  must  be  men  of  honest  report,  having  the 
mysterie  of  the  faith  in  a  pure  conscience,  endued  with  the  holy 
Ghost  :  they  must  be  grave,  temperate,  not  given  to  excesse,  nor 
to  filthie  lucre.     Actcs.  6,  3.     1  Tim.  j,  8.  p. 

Their  Relievers  or  Widowes  must  be  women  of  60.  yeares  of 
age  at  the  least,  for  avoyding  of  inconveniences  :  they  must  be 
well  reported  of  for  good  works,  such  as  have  nourished  their 
children,  such  as  have  bin  harberous  to  straungers  :  diliger  &  ser- 
viceable to  the  Saints,  copassionate  &  helpful  to  them  in  adversi- 
tie,  given  to  everie  good  worke,  continuing  in  supplications  and 
prayers  night  and  day.     1  Tim.  3.  p.  10. 

These  Officers  muste  first  be  duely  proved,  then  if  they  be 
found  blameles,  administer,  &c.     1  Tim.  j  jo. 

Nowe  as  the  persons,  giftes,  conditions,  manners,  life,  and 
proofe  of  these  officers,  is  set  downe  by  the  holie  Ghost  :  So  are 
their  offices  limited,  severed,  and  divers  :  1  Cor.  12.  12.  18.  28. 

The  Pastours  office  is,  to  feed  the  sheep  of  Christ  in  green 
and  wholesome  pastures  of  his  word,  and  lead  them  to  the  still 
waters,  even  to  the  pure  fountaine  and  river  of  life.  Hee  must 
guyde  and  keep  those  sheep  by  that  heauenly  sheephook  &  pas- 
torall  staffe  of  the  word,  thereby  drawing  them  to  him,  thereby 
looking  into  their  soules,  even  into  their  most  secret  thoughtes  : 
Thereby  discerning  their  diseases,  and  thereby  curing  them  :  ap- 
plying to  every  disease  a  fit  and  couenient  medicine,  &  according 
to  the  qualitie  &  danger  of  the  disease,  give  warning  to  the 
Church,    that    they   may   orderly   proceed    to    excommunication. 


TEXT   OF   THE   CONFESSION  37 

Further,  he  must,  by  this  his  sheepehook  watch  over  and  defend 
his  flock  from  rauenous  beastes  and  the  Wolfe,  and  take  the  Iitle 
foxes.  &c.  Psa.  2j.  Lev.  jo,  10,  u.  Nu.  iS.  i.  Ezek.  44.  2j.  6° 
33,  ^  34-  I°h.  21.  if.  Act.  20.  28.  1  Pet.  j.  1.-4.  Zach.  11.  y. 
Rev.  22.  2.  Luk.  12.  42.  2  Cor.  10.  4.  5.  Heb.  4,  12.  Ioh.  jo,  ij, 
12.     Song.  2.  ij. 

[5]  The  Doctours  office  is  alreadie  sett  downe  in  his  descrip- 
tion :  His  speciall  care  must  bee.  to  build  vpon  the  onely  true 
groundwork,  golde,  silver,  and  pretious  stones,  that  his  work  may 
endure  the  triall  of  the  fire,  and  by  the  light  of  the  same  fire,  re- 
veale  the  Tymber,  Hay,  and  Stubble  of  false  Teachers  :  hee  must 
take  diligent  heed  to  keep  the  Church  from  errours.  And  further 
hee  must  deliver  his  doctrine  so  plavnlie  simplie,  and  purelie,  that 
the  church  may  increase  with  the  increasing  of  God,  &  growe  vp 
vnto  him  which  is  the  head,  Christ  Iesus.  /  Cor.  j  11.  12.  Levit. 
10.  10.  Ezcch.  JJ  1.  2,  &C.  and  44.  24  Mai.  2,  6  1  Cor.  j,  11. 
1  Cor.  1  17.  1  Tim.  4,  16.  6°  6.  20.  Ephe  2,  20  Heb.  6,  1.  1 
Pet  2,  2. 

The  office  of  the  Auncientes  is  expressed  in  their  descrip- 
tion :  Their  especiall  care  must  bee,  to  see  the  ordinaunces  of 
God  truely  taught  and  and  practized,  aswel  by  the  officers  in  dooing 
their  duetie  vpnghtlie,  as  to  see  that  the  people  obey  willinglie 
and  readily.  It  is  their  duetie  to  see  the  Congregation  holily  and 
quietly  ordered,  and  no  way  disturbed,  by  the  contentious  and  dis- 
obedient froward  and  obstinate  :  not  taking  away  the  libertie  of 
the  least,  but  vpholding  the  right  of  all,  wiselie  iudging  of  times 
and  circumstances.  They  must  bee  readie  assistauntes  to  the 
Pastour  and  Teachers,  helping  to  beare  their  burden,  but  not  in- 
truding into  their  office.  Num.  n.  16.  Deut.  1.  13  &  16.  18.  2 
Chro.  19,  8  Exo  jp,  42.  1  Tim.  j,  ij.  2  Tim.  1,  ij.  1  Cor.  11, 
16.  and  14  jj.  Gal.  2,  4.  j,  14  Col  4,  16,  ij.  Act.  20.  1  Pet.  j, 
1.     Pom.  12,  8. 

The  Deacons  office  is,  faithfully  to  gather  &  collect  by  the 
ordinance  of  the  Church,  the  goods  and  benevolence  of  the  faith- 
full,  and  by  the  same  direction,  diligentlie  and  trustilie  to  dis- 
tribute them  according  to  the  necessitie  of  the  Saincts.  Further 
they  must  enquire  &  consider  of  the  proportion  of  the  wantes 
both  of  the  Officers  and  other  poore,  and  accordinglie  relate  vnto 
the  Church,  that  provision  may  be  made.     Actes  6.     Rom  12,  8. 

The  Relievers  &  Widowes  office  is,  to  minister  to  the  sicke, 
lame,  wearie,  &  diseased,  such  helpefull  comforts  as  they  need, 


38  THE   CONFESSION   OF    1 589 

by  watching,  tending  and  helping  them :  Further,  they  must 
good  example  to  the  yonger  Women,  in   sober,  modest,  &  godly 
conversation,  avoyding    idlenes,  vaine    talke,  6c  light    behaviour. 
Rom.  12,  8.     1  Tim.  j,  p.  &c. 

These  Officers,  though  they  be  divers  and  severall,  yet  are 
they  not  severed,  least  there  should  be  a  division  in  the  body,  but 
they  are  as  members  of  the  bodie,  having  the  same  case  [care]  one 
of  another,  ioyntlie  doing  their  severall  dueties  to  the  service  of  the 
Sainctes,  and  to  the  edification  of  the  Bodie  of  Christ,  till  wee  all 
meet  together  in  the  perfect  measure  of  the  fulnes  of  Christ,  by 
whom  all  the  bodie  being  in  the  meane  whyle  thus  coupled  and 
knit  togither  by  everie  ioynt  for  the  [6]  furniture  thereof,  accord- 
ing to  the  effectuall  power  which  is  in  the  measure  of  everie  part, 
receiveth  increase  of  the  bodie,  vnto  the  edifying  of  it  self  in  love  : 
neither  can  any  of  these  Offices  be  wanting,  without  grievous 
lamenes,  &  apparant  deformitie  of  the  bodie,  yea  violent  injurie 
to  the  Head  Christ  Iesus.  Luk.  9.  46.  47.  48.  Ioh.  13.  12.-17.  1 
Cor.  12,  12.  25.  28.     Ephes  4.  11,  12.  jj.  id. 

Thus  this  holie  armie  of  saintes,  is  marshalled  here  in  earth 
by  these  Officers,  vnder  the  conduct  of  their  glorious  Emperour 
CHRIST,  that  victorious  Michaell.  Thus  it  marcheth  in  this 
most  heavenlie  order,  6c  gratious  araye,  against  all  Enimies  both 
bodilie  and  ghostlie :  peaceable  in  it  self  as  Ierusalem,  terrible  to 
the  enemy  as  an  Armie  with  baners,  triumphing  over  their  tyran- 
nic with  patience,  their  crueltie  with  mekenes,  and  over  Death  it 
self  with  dying.  Thus  through  the  blood  of  that  spotles  Lambe, 
and  that  Word  of  their  testimonie,  they  are  more  then  Con- 
querours,  brusing  the  head  of  the  Serpent:  yea  through  the 
power  of  his  Word,  they  have  power  to  cast  down  Sathan  like 
lightning:  to  tread  vpon  Serpents  and  Scorpions:  to  cast  downe 
strong  holds,  and  everie  thing  that  exalteth  it  self  against  GoD. 
The  gates  of  Hell  and  all  the  Principalities  and  powers  of  the 
world,  shall  not  prevayle  against  it.  Rom.  12.  ch.  1  Cor.  12. 
Rev.  14.  1.  2.  Song.  6.  3.  Rev.  12.  11.  Luk.  10,  /8,  ip.  2  Cor. 
10.  5.     Mat.  16,  18.     Ro.  8,  j8.  jp. 

Further,  he  hath  given  them  the  keyes  of  the  Kingdome  of 
Heaven,  that  whatsoever  they  bynd  in  earth  by  his  word,  shalbe 
bound  in  heaven:  and  whatsoever  they  loose  on  earth,  shalbe 
loosed  in  heaven.     Mat.  16,  ip.     Iohn.  20.  23.     Mat.  18,  18. 

Now  this  [lower  which  Christ  hath  given  vnto  his  Church,  and 
to  every  member  of  his  Church,  to  keep  it  in  order,  hee  hath  not 


TEXT   OF   THE   CONFESSION  59 

left  it  to  their  discretions  and  lustes  to  be  vsed  or  neglected  as 
they  will,  but  in  his  last  Will  and  Testament,  he  hath  sett  downe 
both  an  order  of  proceeding,  and  an  end  to  which  it  is  vsed.  Mat. 
16.  16.  19  &  1 8.  15.  16.  ij,  18.  of  28.  20.  Deut.  12,  31.  32.  Rev. 
22,  18.  1  p. 

If  the  fault  be  private,  holy  and  loving  admonition  &  reproof 
is  to  be  vsed,  with  an  inward  desire  &  earnest  care  to  winne  their 
brother :  But  if  hee  wil  not  heare,  yet  to  take  two  or  three  other 
brethren  with  him,  whom  he  knoweth  most  meet  for  that  purpose, 
that  by  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses,  every  word  may  be 
confirmed  :  And  if  he  refuse  to  heare  them,  then  to  declare  the 
matter  to  the  Church,  which  ought  severelie  and  sharpelie  to  repre- 
hend, gravelie  to  admonish,  and  lovinglie  to  perswade  the  partie 
offending:  shewing  him  the  heynousnes  of  his  offence,  &  the 
daunger  of  his  obstinacie,  &  the  fearefull  judgements  of  the  Lord. 
Lev.  19.  17.  18.     Mat.  18.  15.      Deut.  ip,  15.     Mat,  18,  16. 

[7]  All  this  notwithstanding  the  Church  is  not  to  hold  him  as 
an  enimie,  but  to  admonish  him  and  praye  for  him  as  a  Brother, 
prooving  if  at  any  time  the  Lord  will  give  him  repentaunce.  For 
this  power  is  not  given  them  to  the  destruction  of  any,  but  to  the 
edification  of  all.     2  T/ics.  3,  13.     2  Cor.  10,  8.  and  13,  io.x 

If  this  prevaile  not  to  draw  him  to  repentance,  then  are  they 
in  the  Name  aud  power  of  the  Lord  IESVS  with  the  whole  Con- 
gregation, reverently  in  prayer  to  proceed  to  excommunication, 
that  is  vnto  the  casting  him  out  of  their  congregation  &  fellow- 
ship, covenaunt  &  protectio  of  the  Lord,  for  his  disobedience  &  ob- 
stinacie, &  committing  him  to  Sathan  for  the  destructio  of  the 
flesh,  that  the  Spirit  may  be  saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Iesus,  if 
such  bee  his  good  wil  and  pleasure.     Mat.  18.  iy.     1  Cor  3  11. 

Further,  they  are  to  warne  the  whole  Congregation  and  all 
other  faithfull,  to  hold  him  as  a  Heathen  and  Publicane,  &  to  ab- 
steine  themselves  from  his  societie,  as  not  to  eat  or  drink  with 
him,  &c.  vnles  it  bee  such  as  of  necessitie  must  needes,  as  his 
Wife,  his  Children,  and  Familie  :  yet  these  (if  they  be  members  of 
the  Church)  are  not  to  joyne  to  him  in  any  spirituall  exercise. 
Mat.  18.  17.      1  Cor.  5.  11. 

If  the  offence  bee  publike,  the  partie  is  publiquely  to  bee  re- 
proved, and   admonished  :   if  hee   then   repent   not,  to  proceed  to 

1  The  difference  between  the  first  and  second  editions  of  this  creed  lies  in  the  position  of  this 
paragraph.  In  the  first  edition  it  was  placed  "after  the  excommunication,"  i.  e.,  apparently  after 
the  paragraph  beginning,  "  Further,  they  are  to  warne."  (See  note  to  page  28  as  to  the  alleged 
reasons  for  this  change.  1 


40  THE   CONFESSION   OF    1 589 

excommunication,  as  aforesaid.  1  Tim.  5.  20.  Gal.  2.  14.  Ios.  7. 
19.     2  Cor.  7.  9. 

The  repentance  of  the  partie  must  bee  proportionable  to  the 
offence,  viz.  If  the  offence  bee  publique,  publique  :  If  private,  pri- 
vate: humbled,  submissive,  sorrowfull,  vnfained,  giving  glorie  to 
the  Lord.  Lev.  ip,  17.  18.  Pro.  10,  12.  Rom.  12,  ip.  &  13,  10. 
and  14.  1. 

There  must  great  care  bee  had  of  admonitions,  that  they  bee 
not  captious  or  curious  finding  fault  when  none  is;  neyther  yet  in 
bitternes  or  reproch:  for  that  were  to  destroye  and  not  to  save 
our  brother :  but  they  must  bee  carefullie  done,  with  prayer  going 
before,  they  must  dee  seazoned  with  trueth,  grauitie,  love  &  peace. 
Mat.  18.  15.  &  26.  8.  Gal.  6.  1.  2.  2  Tim.  2.  24.  Mark,  p,  30. 
Ephes.  4,  29.     lam.  3,  13 ,  Ip,  20. 

Moreover  in  this  Church  is  an  especiall  care  had  by  every 
member  thereof,  of  offences  :  The  Strong  ought  not  to  offend  the 
Weak,  nor  the  weake  to  iudge  the  stronge  :  but  all  graces  here 
are  given  to  the  service  and  edification  of  each  other  in  love  and 
long  suffering.  Luke.  17,  1.  Pro.  10,  12.  Rom.  14,  13,  ip.  Gal. 
6,2. 

In  this  Church  is  the  Truth  purelie  taught,  and  surelie  kept : 
heer  is  the  Covenaunt,  the  Sacramentes,  and  promisses,  the 
graces,  the  glorie,  the  presence,  the  worship  of  God,  &c.  Gen. 
17.  ch.  Lev.  26.  11.  12.  Isa.  44.  3.  Gal.  4,  28 Ssf  6,  16.  /say,  do, 
15.     Deut.  4,  12.  13.     I  say,  36,  7.     1  Tim.  3,  13.     /say.  32.  8. 

[8]  Into  this  Temple  entreth  no  vncleane  thing,  neither  what- 
soever worketh  abhominatios  or  lyes,  but  they  which  are  write  in 
the  Lambes  Book  of  life.  /say.  32.  1.  Ezek.  44  p.  /say.  33.  8. 
Zach.  14.  2i.     Rev.  21,  27. 

But  without  this  CHVRCH  shalbe  dogs  and  Enchaunters,  & 
Whoremongers,  &  Murderers,  and  Idolatours,  and  whosover  loveth 
&  maketh  lyes.     Rom.  2.  p.     Rev.  22.  13. 

1  589. 


Ill 

THE    SECOND    CONFESSION    OF    THE    LONDON- 
AMSTERDAM    CHURCH,    1596 

Editions  and  Reprints 

I.  A  Trve  Confession,  etc.1  1596.  No  place  of  publication  given,  but  almost 
certainly  printed  at  Amsterdam. 

II.  Confessio  Fidei  Anglorvm  Qvorvndam  in  Belgia  E.xvlantivm  :  Vna  cum 
Prcefatione  ad  Lectori  in  :  Quam  ab  omnibus  legi  ct  animadverti  cupimus,  etc.. 
1598.  Probably  printed  at  Amsterdam.  A  Latin  translation  of  I.  with  a  new  pre- 
face and  some  slight  modification  of  a  few  articles. 

III.  The  Confession  of  faith  of  ccrtayne  English  people  living  in  exile  in  the 
Low  Countreys,  etc.,  1598.     Apparently  an  English  edition  of  II. 

IV.  A  Dutch  translation,  before  1600. 2 

V.  Printed  also  in  English  in  Ccrtayne  Letters?  translated  into  English,  etc.; 
1602. 

VI.  In  English  also  in  Johnson  and  Ainsworth's,  Apologie  or  Defence  of  sveh 
Trve  Christians  as  are  commonly  (but  vniustly)  called  Brovvnists  :  etc.,  1604.  pp. 
4-29.     (Reprint  of  III.). 

VII.  In  Latin,  Confessio  Fidei  Anglorum  quorundam  in  Lnferiori  Germania 
exulantium,  etc.,  1607.  160  pp.  ii,  56. 

VIII.  In  English,  same  title  as  No.  III.,  with  the  addition  of  the  Points  of 
Difference  from  the  Church  of  England,  given  in  the  next  chapter,  1607. 

IX.  In  Dutch,  in  a  translation  of  No.  VI.,  1614. 

X.  In  Dutch,  in  a  new  translation  of  No.  VI.,  Amsterdam,  1O70. 
Literature 

Hanbury,  Historical  Memorials,  I:  91-98,  with  extracts  from  the  preface  and 
articles;  Punchard,  History  of  Congregationalism,  2d  ed.,  Boston  [1867],  III:  223- 
226;  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  270,  271,  278-282,  299-301,  316;  Fletcher,  His- 
tory    ,     .      .     of  Independency,  2d  ed.,  London,  1862,  II:   215-222. 

THE  organization  of  the  London  Church,  perfected  in  Septem- 
ber, 1592,  by  the  choice  of  Francis  Johnson4  as  pastor  and 
John  Greenwood  as  teacher,  was  followed  by  Greenwood's  speedy 

1  Full  title  in  connection  with  the  reprint  at  the  close  of  this  chapter. 

2  Mentioned  by  Francis  Johnson  in  A  n  Answer  to  Maister  H.  lacob,  etc.,  p.  134.  I  owe 
this  information  to  the  late  Dr.  Dexter. 

3  The  letters  here  referred  to  were  between  Francis  Junius,  professor  of  Theology  at  Leyden, 
and  the  exiled  church.     See  Dexter,  Cong:  as  seen,  p.  301. 

■»  Francis  Johnson  was  born  in  1562,  of  a  Yorkshire  family  of  some  prominence.  While 
a  student  at  Cambridge,  and  still  more  as  a  fellow  of  Christ's  College  at  that  University,  he 
became  imbued  with  Presbyterian  principles.     His  public  proclamation  of  his  views  in  1589  was  fol- 

(40 


42  THE    CONFESSION    OF    1 596 

arrest  and  execution.  Johnson  shared  also  in  his  colleague's  com- 
mittal and  detention,'  though  his  life  was  spared;  and  in  the  spring 
of  1593  no  less  than  fifty-six  of  the  little  flock  followed  their  pastor 
and  teacher  into  confinement  in  the  London  prisons."  These  mul- 
tiplied arrests,  embracing  many  of  humble  position  and  little  polit- 
ical importance,  led  the  government  to  look  upon  emigration  as 
the  best  method  of  ridding  London  of  the  Separatists;  and  there- 
fore, though  Johnson  and  other  of  the  leaders  were  kept  in  prison, 
the  way  was  made  easy,  from  the  summer  of  1593  onward,  for  them 
to  slip  over  to  Holland.3  After  being  scattered  for  a  time,  it  would 
appear,  in  villages  in  the  neighborhood  of  Amsterdam,  the  bulk  of 
the  congregation  found  their  home  in  that  city  itself.  This  re- 
gathering  of  the  scattered  church  in  Amsterdam,  which  took  place 
as  early  as  1595,4  was  accompanied  or  followed  by  the  election6  of 


lowed  by  his  imprisonment.  After  considerable  influence  had  been  brought  to  bear  on  the  authori- 
ties by  his  friends,  he  was  allowed  to  leave  England,  and  became  pastor  of  the  Puritanically  inclined 
church  of  English  merchants  at  Middelburg  in  the  Dutch  province  of  Zeland.  It  was  whi 
in  1591,  that  Barrowe  and  Greenwood's  Plaint  Refutation  of M.  Giffards  Books,  etc.,  came  to 
his  knowledge,  as  it  was  passing  through  the  press  at  Dort.  Having  notified  the  English 
dor,  Johnson  was  commissioned  to  destroy  the  forth-coming  edition.  This  he  did,  saving  two  of 
the  volumes  for  himself  and  a  friend.  But  in  reading  the  work  he  was  convinced  of  the  truth  of 
the  principles  it  set  forth.  He  therefore  gave  up  his  pleasant  position  at  Middelburg,  and  going  to 
London  sought  out  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  in  prison.  From  that  time  onward  he  was  associated 
with  the  fortunes  of  the  London  church.  Elected  its  pastor  in  1592,  he  was  imprisoned  in  London 
from  1593  to  1597,  and  was  then  released  on  condition  of  going  to  a  newly  projected  colony  in  the 
Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence.  The  loss  of  one  of  the  vessels  on  the  Nova  Scotian  coast  compelled  the  re- 
turn of  the  expedition  to  England.  Once  back  in  London  Johnson  contrived  to  escape  to  Holland 
in  the  autumn  of  1597.  The  London  church  was  thus  completely  transferred  to  Amsterdam.  John- 
son's pastorate  here  was  stormy.  In  1610  the  church  was  divided  between  him  and  Ainsworth,  in  a 
quarrel  in  which  Ainsworth  seems  to  have  been  in  the  right.  But  whatever  his  faults  may  have 
been,  he  was  a  man  of  sincerity,  earnestness,  and  ability.  He  died  in  January,  1618,  .it  Amsterdam. 
His  controversial  works  were  numerous  and  vigorous.  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  Bibliog.  enumerates 
nine  titles.  Compare  for  Johnson's  biography  Brook,  Lives  of  the  Puritans,  II:  89-106.  Han- 
bury,  Memorials,  I,  Ch.  V.  and  following:  Dexter,  as  cited,  pp.  263,  264,  272-278,  283-310;  Gordon 
in  Dictionary  of  National  Biography,  XXX:  9-11.  The  account  of  his  conversion  is  given  by 
Gov.  William  Bradford  of  Plymouth,  in  a  Dialogue,  written  in  164S,  and  is  distinctly  stated  to  lie 
based  on  Johnson's  own  statement.  Young,  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims,  pp.  424,  425.  Boston,  1844. 
•\  few  facts  may  be  found  in  Xeal,  History  of  the  Puritans,  Toulmin's  ed.  Bath,  1793,  I:  468; 
II:  43-49. 

1  Both  were  arrested  Dec.  5,  1592.     Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  266.  -  Ibid. 

3  Ibid,  pp.  266-26S.  Their  departure  was  expedited  by  a  law  passed  by  Parliament  in  1593, 
entitled  "An  Act  to  retain  the  Queen's  Majesty's  subjects  in  due  obedience,"  providing  that  any 
above  16  years  of  age  who  should  refuse  to  go  to  church  for  a  month,  or  attend  any  religious  con- 
venticle, should  be  imprisoned  without  bail  until  he  publicly  submit  and  conform.  If  he  refuse 
this,  on  conviction  he  is  to  "abjure  this  realm  of  England,  and  all  other  the  Queen's  dominions  for 
ever."  If  he  return  he  is  guilty  of  "felony,  without  benefit  of  clergy."  i.  e.,  worthy  of  death.  35 
Eliz.,  1,  2,  3,  5.  T.  W.  Davids,  A  nnals  of  Evangelical  Nonconformity  in  the  County  of  Essex, 
London.  ,863,  pp.  86,  87.  See  also  Xeal,  History  of  the  Puritans,  I  :  465-467-  Perry,  History  of 
the  English  Church  (Student's  Series,  1881),  p.  336. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  268.  6  The  date  is  entirely 


JOHNSON   AND   AINSWORTH  43 

Henry  Ainsworth1  to  the  vacant  post  of  teacher,  the  pastor,  Francis 
Johnson,  still  remaining  in  his  London  prison.  Conscious  once 
more  of  a  distinct,  though  divided,  corporate  existence,  and  domi- 
ciled in  a  foreign  city,  the  church  desired  to  define  its  doctrinal 
position,  lest  it  should  fall  under  the  charge  of  heresy;  and  to 
make  clear  its  views  on  polity,  lest  its  separation  from  the  English 
Establishment  should  seem  unjustifiable  schism  or  rebellion  against 
civil  authority.  With  this  two-fold  object  in  view,  therefore,  the 
London-Amsterdam  church  put  forth  a  new  creed  sometime  in 
1596. 

Though  some  consultation  was  probably  held  between  the  exiles 
at  Amsterdam  and  those  of  the  flock  who  were  still  in  confinement 
in  London,2  the  Preface  of  the  Confession  clearly  indicates  it  was 
chiefly  the  work  of  the  former.3  Who  of  the  church  were  instru- 
mental in  its  preparation  cannot  be  surely  affirmed,  but  the  conjec- 
ture is  natural  that  a  large  share  of  the  labor  fell  to  Ainsworth. 
Probably  the  Preface  was  not  entirely  from  his  hand.     Its  tone  is 


1  Henry  Ainsworth,  the  most  learned  of  the  founders  of  modern  Congregationalism  and  one 
of  its  saintliest  ministers,  was  born,  according  to  his  own  testimony,  in  1570  or  '71 ;  but  all  the  de- 
tails of  his  early  life  are  tantalizingly  obscure.  It  is  probable  that  he  never  enjoyed  a  university 
education,  but,  however  acquired,  his  learning  was  from  our  first  acquaintance  with  him  far  beyond 
that  which  was  usual  even  among  professedly  learned  men.  He  wrote  a  Latin  style  of  considerable 
felicity,  while  his  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  quickened  and  increased  by  opportunities  for  intercourse 
with  Jews  which  Amsterdam  afforded,  was  such  that  Bradford  was  able  to  record  the  opinion  of 
competent  scholars  at  the  university  of  Leyden  that  "  he  had  not  his  better  for  the  Hebrew  tongue 
in  the  university,  nor  scarce  in  Europe."  Even  better  testimony  to  the  extent  and  modernness  of 
his  knowledge  of  Hebrew  is  the  fact  that  his  Annotations  on  the  Pentateuch  and  Psalms  are  held 
in  esteem  to  this  day  as  a  still  valuable  aid  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures.  The  same  obscurity 
which  veils  Ainsworth's  early  life  and  education  hides  from  us  all  certain  knowledge  as  to  the  cir- 
cumstances which  led  to  his  adoption  of  Congregational  views  or  his  first  association  with  the 
Separatists.  His  abilities,  when  once  known,  would  readily  account  for  his  election  to  the  teacher- 
ship  of  the  exiled  church.  A  man  of  peace,  Ainsworth's  service  in  the  Amsterdam  Church  was 
vexed  by  the  strifes  which  rent  that  distracted  body,  and  which  finally,  in  1610,  led  to  a  separation 
between  him  and  Johnson.  He  remained  in  his  ministry  at  Amsterdam  till  his  death  in  1622  or 
1623,  an  event  which  Neal  and  Brook  attributed  to  poison,  and  Dextec  in  his  Cong,  as  seen,  suggests 
may  have  been  due  to  pulmonary  complaints.  The  true  cause  was,  however,  later  discovered  by 
Dr.  Dexter,  and  the  full  proofs  will  doubtless  soon  be  published.  I  may  perhaps  be  permitted  to 
say  that  the  disease  was  the  stone,  and  that  poison  had  no  share  in  Ainsworth's  death.  Ainsworth's 
works  were  very  numerous.  Some  23  are  enumerated  by  Dr.  Dexter  in  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  346,  and 
further  particulars  may  be  found  in  the  Dictionary  of  Xational  Biography,  1 :   192,  193. 

For  Ainsworth's  biography  see  Bradford,  Dialogue,  in  Voting's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims, 
pp.  448,  449.  Neal,  History  of  the  Puritans,  Toulmin's  ed.,  II :  43-45.  Stuart  in  preface  to  re- 
print of  Two  Treatises,  i.  e.,  Ainsworth's  Communion  of  Saincts  and  Arrow  against  Idolatry, 
Edinboro,  1789.  Brook,  Lives  of  the  Puritans,  II:  209-303.  Hanbury,  Memorials,  I:  Chs.  V- 
XXIV  passim.  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  269,  270,  299-346.  W.  E.  A.  Axon  in  Diet.  National 
Biography,  I:   191-194. 

2  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  270.  3  See  Preface,  opening  paragraph. 


44  THE   CONFESSION    OF    1 596 

one  of  sense  of  personal  wrong,  somewhat  in  contrast  to  the  intro- 
duction to  the  Latin  translation  which  is  almost  certainly  the  work 
of  his  pen.  But  whether  many  or  few  of  the  London-Amsterdam 
church  shared  in  its  preparation,  the  Confession  was  put  forth  as  the 
symbol  of  the  whole  body,  and  its  value  in  witnessing  to  their  doc- 
trine, polity,  and  attitude  toward  the  English  Establishment  from 
which  they  had  come  out  is  correspondingly  great. 

The  Preface  breathes  a  spirit  of  hostility  to  the  supporters  of 
the  National  Church  natural  in  men  who  had  suffered  so  much  at 
the  hands  of  the  prelates.  But  it  is  a  hostility  based  clearly  on 
principle.  Whatever  added  touch  of  bitterness  the  arraignment 
may  have  derived  from  the  recollection  of  prisons  and  death,  the 
real  motive  of  its  composition  was  not  enmity  to  persons,  but  a  pro- 
found conviction  that  the  English  Church,  when  tried  by  the  Scrip- 
ture standards,  was  un-Christian.  As  such  it  was,  in  these  men's 
thinking,  a  positive  peril  to  the  soul  to  be  of  its  membership.  And 
if  the  premises  of  their  argument  are  correct,  if  their  principle, 
which  was  but  a  logical  application  of  the  fundamental  thought  of 
the  Reformation,  is  right  in  asserting  that  nothing  should  be  prac- 
ticed in  the  government  of  the  church  or  the  worship  of  God  which 
is  not  fully  patterned  in  the  Bible,  the  cogency  of  the  arguments  of 
the  Preface  is  undeniable.  With  far  more  readableness  of  style 
than  is  usual  in  controversial  writings  of  the  period,  the  writers  of 
this  introduction  put  questions  to  their  opponents  regarding  the 
divine  warrant  of  the  liturgy,  rites,  ministry,  and  membership  of 
the  Church  of  England  which  must  have  been  exceedingly  difficult 
for  the  Puritan  wing  of  the  Establishment  to  answer.  And  at  the 
same  time  they  gave  biographical  facts  regarding  the  martyrs  of 
their  own  body  which  are  not  elsewhere  to  be  found.  No  other 
single  document  of  so  brief  compass  so  well  sets  forth  the  suffer- 
ings and  the  motives  of  these  much-tried  Separatists. 

The  creed  itself  consists  of  forty-five  articles,  treating  some  of 
doctrine,  others  of  polity.  In  matters  of  belief  they  are  in  substan- 
tial harmony  with  the  positions  of  the  Calvinistic  churches  of  the 
Continent,  and  with  the   Puritan  wing  of  the  Church  of  England. 


NATURE   OF   THE   CONFESSION  45 

On  these  heads  their  creed  is  but  little  more  than  a  re-affirmation 
of  the  current  beliefs  of  a  vast  majority  of  the  Protestant  churches 
at  that  day.  In  polity  it  lays  down  the  propositions  already  pre- 
sented in  the  Trve  Description,  but  with  much  greater  fullness  of 
elaboration.  It  is  no  longer  an  ideal  sketch.  Questions  of  actual 
administration  have  evidently  led  to  minuter  definition  in  regard  to 
certain  problems.  An  instance  or  two  may  illustrate.  In  the  Trve 
Description  no  provision  was  made  for  the  reception  of  the  members 
of  one  church  into  another,  or  for  the  relations  of  church  to 
church.  Now  it  is  hard  to  see,  perhaps,  how  these  questions  could 
have  become  very  pressing  to  the  London-Amsterdam  church. 
But  the  divided  condition  of  that  body,  if  nothing  else,  had  caused 
them  to  be  thought  of  ;  and  therefore  the  creed  of  1596  enunciates 
the  truly  Congregational,  because  truly  Scriptural,  doctrine  that 
members  coming  from  one  church  to  another  should  bring  certifi- 
cates of  their  character  and  standing.1  It  declares  further  that 
while  the  individual  independence  of  each  church  is  to  be  recog- 
nized, churches  owe  counsel  and  help  to  one  another  in  matters  of 
more  than  usual  concern.2  The  Trve  Description,  in  similar  man- 
ner, made  no  provision  for  the  removal  of  such  church  officers  as 
might  prove  unworthy  of  their  trust,  save  what  might  be  implied  in 
the  very  general  remarks  as  to  the  right  of  a  church  to  excommuni- 
cate any  offending  member.  The  creed  before  us,  on  the  contrary, 
declares  that  a  church  may  depose  a  minister  unfit  for  his  post,  and 
counsels  procedure  to  excommunication  only  when  continued  evil 
conduct  demands  a  further  step.3  These  examples,  which  the  stu- 
dent can  readily  multiply  for  himself,  show  plainly  that  the  creed  of 
1596  is  not  merely  greater  in  verbal  extent  than  that  of  1589,  but 
marks  a  growth  in  appreciation  and  application  of  Congregational 
principles. 

The  document  is  more  than  a  general  statement  of  faith  and 
polity.  It  is  evidently  the  answer  of  its  writers  also  to  the  ques- 
tion which  must  frequently  have  been  put  to  them  as  to  the 
method  of  procedure  by  which  they  would  reform  the  Church  of 
England  if  they  could  have  their  way.     The  thirty-second  to  the 

1  Article  37.  2  Article  38.  3  Article  23. 


46  THE   CONFESSION    OF    1 596 

thirty-ninth  articles  arc  a  program  for  action.  They  would  have 
all  who  are  convinced  of  the  truth  of  the  charges  here  formulated 
against  the  Establishment  lay  down  any  offices  which  they  may 
have  held  within  it  and  at  once  renounce  its  communion.  Xo  one, 
holding  the  rightful  view  of  what  Christ  intended  a  church  to  be, 
is  to  contribute  longer  to  the  financial  support  of  the  legal  church, 
even  though  such  a  refusal  make  him  obnoxious  to  the  law.1  These 
religious  men,  who  have  come  forth  from  the  Church  of  England, 
are  next  to  join  in  local  congregations,  united  by  a  covenant  and  a 
common  confession  of  faith.2  In  these  congregations  any  who  are 
able,  and  have  the  approval  of  their  associates,  are  to  teach  and 
preach  ;  but  the  sacraments  are  not  to  be  administered  until  some 
of  these  preachers,  whose  qualifications  have  appeared  eminent, 
are  chosen  and  ordained  to  the  divinely  appointed  offices  of  pastor, 
teacher,  elder,  and  deacon,  or  as  many  of  these  offices  as  the 
church  finds  men  fitted  to  fill.  Then  baptism  is  to  be  administered 
to  the  children  and  wards  of  the  members  of  the  local  church,  and 
its  members  of  mature  years  are  to  unite  in  the  Lord's  supper.3 
But  baptism  does  not  admit  its  recipient  to  the  full  privileges  of 
the  church.  While  all  who  will  are  to  be  urged  to  be  present  at 
the  preaching  of  God's  word,  and  while  the  duty  of  professing 
faith  in  Christ  is  to  be  pressed  upon  them,  the  church  is  to  be  in- 
creased only  by  the  admission  of  those  who  make  a  profession  of 
personal  belief  and  who  publicly  unite  in  the  covenant  fellowship.4 
Thus  the  Christian  people  of  any  given  town  in  England,  so  the 
makers  of  this  creed  thought,  might  be  released  from  the  Estab- 
lishment and  organized  into  true  churches.  But  what  should  be 
done  with  the  Establishment  and  with  those  who  refused  to  come 
out  cf  it?  The  answer  is  characteristic  of  the  times,  and  illustra- 
tive of  the  partial  vision  to  which  these  men  had  attained.  The 
old  system  was  to  be  uprooted  and  the  buildings  and  revenues 
which  it  enjoyed  were  to  be  confiscated  by  civil  authority.  The 
magistrate  was  to  enforce  upon  the  reluctant  the  commands  of 
God.5     There   is  something  ludicrous  as  well   as  pathetic   in   the 


Article  32.  2  Article  33. 

Article  37.  5  Article  39. 


HOW    THEY    WOULD    REFORM    THE    CHURCH  4/ 

readiness  with  which  these  exiles  of  Amsterdam  and  prisoners  oi 
London  call  upon  the  power  from  which  they  had  themselves  suf- 
fered so  much  to  enforce  on  others  that  which  they  had  had  to 
bear.  But  in  this  matter  the  nineteenth  century  is  apt  to  judge 
the  sixteenth  hardly.  Such  a  thought  as  that  of  honest  difference 
of  opinion  in  regard  to  the  main,  and  even  the  minor  truths  of 
Christianity  was  foreign  to  the  great  mass  of  men  for  more  than 
two  centuries  after  the  Reformation.  Dissent  from  their  own  con- 
victions men  believed  to  be  due  to  defect  in  moral  character,  such 
failure  to  see  the  truth  could  be  owing  only  to  willfulness,  or  to  a 
divine  withholding  of  light  which  was  in  itself  high  evidence  of  the 
sinfulness  of  those  thus  deprived.  There  could  be  but  one  right 
view.  These  Separatists  held  it.  They  had  called  on  their  oppo- 
nents to  show  its  falsity,  and  to  their  thinking  their  opponents 
had  failed.  And  since  it  is  the  duty  of  a  magistrate,  they  thought, 
to  support  the  truth,  the  magistrates  of  England  should  overthrow 
an  Establishment,  which  civil  government  had  so  often  altered 
during  the  last  fifty  years,  and  which  the  Separatists  believed  they 
had  demonstrated  to  be  utterly  unworthy.  We  may  well  regret 
that  these  early  Congregationalists  and  the  founders  of  New  Eng- 
land also  did  not  share  the  truer  view  of  Browne,1  and  of  the  Ana- 
baptists regarding  the  limits  of  civil  authority,  but  there  is  little 
reason  for  surprise  that  they  did  not. 

This  is,  after  all,  a  minor  matter.  England  was  not  to  be  re- 
formed on  the  lines  here  laid  down.  But  as  a  statement  of  Con- 
gregationalism'this  creed  marks  a  decided  gain  in  clearness.  As 
a  setting  forth  of  the  essential  and  permanent  features  of  the 
system  in  definite  form,  it  was  fitted  to  stand  for  many  years,  as 
the  frequent  reprints  show  it  did  stand,  as  an  adequate  and  valued 
exposition  of  Congregational  doctrine  and  polity. 

As  has  already  been  seen,  the  creed,  as  it  was  issued  in  1596, 
was  preceded  by  an  introduction  breathing  the  spirit  of  strong  in- 
dignation against  the  oppressors  from  whose  hands  the  church 
had  so  recently  escaped,  and  who  still  held  some  of  the  brethren 
in  bondage.     The  very  warmth  of  this  feeling,  justifiable  as  it  was, 


48  THE    CONFESSION    OF    1 596 

rendered  this  preface  less  likely  to  be  favorably  received  by  those 
unfamiliar  with  English  ecclesiastical  affairs.  And  as  the  church 
at  last  gathered  together  all  its  scattered  membership  at  Amster- 
dam (1597),  and  came  to  be  more  and  more  a  recognized,  though 
humble,  element  in  the  religious  life  of  the  city,  the  desire  to 
set  themselves  right  in  the  eyes  of  Protestant  Christendom,  which 
had  prompted  the  original  draft  of  the  creed,  impelled  the  breth- 
ren to  make  a  translation  of  their  profession  into  the  only  tongue 
which  learned  Europe  could  understand,  and  preface  it  with  an 
account  of  the  government  and  rites  of  the  legally  established 
church  of  their  native  country  designed  to  make  clear  to  the  non- 
English  reader  the  reasons  for  their  separation.  The  new  preface 
is  milder  in  tone  than  the  old,  though  it  retains  passages  from  the 
latter.  But  it  cannot  be  said  to  have  gained  in  strength  or 
cogency.  The  translation  of  the  old  creed,  thus  introduced,  ap- 
peared late  in  1598  ;'  and  was,  doubtless,  the  work  of  the 
scholarly  Henry  Ainsworth.  Its  typographical  dress  indicated  the 
improved  outward  estate  of  the  exiled  company,  as  surely  as  the 
mute  witness  of  the  wretched  printing  and  the  scanty  font  of  type 
revealed  the  dire  poverty  of  these  exiles  for  what  they  believed  to 
be  the  truth  of  God  at  their  first  coming  into  Holland. 


1  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  299.     The  following  articles  were  slightly  revised,  not  for  content, 
but  for  clearness  of  statement,  in  the  edition  of  1598  ;  xvii,  xxviii,  xxx,  xliii,  and  xhv. 


The  Confession  of  1596 

A  TRVE  COXFESSI-  |  OX  OF  THE  FAITH,  AXD 
HVM-  I  BLE  ACKNOWLEDGMENT  OE  THE  ALE-  |  geance, 
which  wee  hir  Maiesties  Subjects,  falsely  called  Brownists,  | 
doo  hould  towards  God,  and  yeild  to  hir  Majestie  and  all  other 
that  I  are  ouer  vs  in  the  Lord.  Set  down  in  Articles  or  Positions, 
for  the  I  better  &  more  easie  vnderstanding  of  those  that  shall 
read  yt  :  And  |  published  for  the  cleering-  of  our  selues  from  those 
vnchristian  slan-  |  ders  of  heresie,  schisme,  pryde,  obstinacie,  dis- 
loyaltie,  |  sedicion,  &c.  which  by  our  adversaries  are  j  in  all 
places  given  out  against  vs.  |  wee  beleeue  therfore  haue  we  spoken. 
2  Cor.  4,  13.  I  But,  I  who  hath  beleeued  our  report,  and  vnto  whom 
is  the  I  arme  of  the  Lord  reuealed?     Isai.  53,  1.  |       M.D.  XCVI. 

[ii     Blank.] 

[iii].     To  all  that  desire   to  feare,   to  loue,  &   to  obey  our  Lord    Iesus  Christ, 
grace,  wisdom  and  vnderstanding. 

'T'hou  '  canst  not  lightly  bee  ignorant  (gentle  Reader)  what  eviils  and  afflictions,  for 
our  profession  and  faith  towards  God  wee  haue  susteined  at  the  hands  of  our 
owne  Nation  :  How  bytterly  wee  haue  been,  an  yet  are,  accused,  reproched  and  per- 
secuted wich  [with]  such  mortall  hatred,  as  yf  wee  were  the  most  notorious  obstinate 
hereticks,  and  disloyall  subiects  to  our  gracious  Queen  Elizabeth,  that  are  this  day  to 
bee  found  in  all  the  Land.  And  therfore,  besides  the  dayly  ignominie  wee  susteine 
at  the  hands  of  the  Preachers  and  Prophets  of  our  tyme,  who  have  given  theyr 
tongnes  the  reins  to  speacke  despightfully  of  vs,  wee  haue  been  further  miserably  en- 
treated by  the  Prelats  and  cheef  of  the  Clergie  :  some  of  vs  cast  into  most  vile  and 
noysome  prisons  and  dungeons,*0  2  laden  with  yrons,  and  there,  withont  all  pitie,  de- 
teyned  manie  yeeres,  no  man  remembring  our  affliction  :  vntill  our  God  released 
some  of  vs  out  of  theyr  cruell  bands  by  death,  as  the  Cities  of  Londo,  Norwich, 
Glocester,  Bury,3  and  manye  other  places  of  the  land  can  testifie.  Yet  heere  the 
malice  of  Satan  stayed  not  it  self,  but  raysed  vp  against  vs  a  more  greevous  persecu- 
tion, even  vnto  the  violent  death  of  some,+°  and  lamentable  exile  of  vs  all  ;  causing 
heavie  decrees  to  come  forth  against  vs,  that  wee  should  forsweare  our  own  Contrey 


*°  They  shut  op  our  lyves  in  the  Dnngeon,  they  cast  a  stone  upon   vs.      Lam. 
3-  53- 

t°  Anno  1593.     April.  10. " 

1  From  this  point  onward  the  preface  is  in  Old  English   black  letter.     I  have  tried  to  give  it 
literatim,  even  to  the  misprints. 

2  This  and  the  subsequent  notes  are  on  the  margin  of  the  pages,  often  with  no  mark  indicat- 
ing their  exact  reference  to  the  text.     When  not  so  indicated  I  have  added  a  o. 

3  Bury  St.  Edmunds. 

4  The  martyrdom  of  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  is  probably  meant,  though  that  was  Apl.  6. 

(49) 


50  THE   CONFESSION    OF    1 596 

&  depart,  or  els  bee  slayne  therein.  This  have  onr  adversaries  vsed,  as  their  last 
and  best  argument  against  vs,  (when  all  other  fayled)  followinge  the  stepps  of  theyr 
bloody  Predecessors,  the  popish  Priests  and  Prelats.  Now  therfore  that  the  true 
cause  of  this  their  hostilitie  &  hard  vsage  of  vs  may  appeere  vnto  all  men  ;  wee  haue 
at  lengh  amyds  our  manie  troubles,  through  Gods  favonr,  obteyned  to  publish  vnto 
the  view  of  the  world,  a  confession  of  our  fayth  &  hope  in  Christ,  and  loyal  harts, 
towards  our  Prince,  the  rather  to  stop  the  mouths  of  impious  and  vnreasonable  men. 
who  have  nut  ceased  some  of  them,  both  openly  in  their  Sermons  ..V  printed  pamph- 
lets, notoriously  to  accuse  and  defame  vs,  as  alsoo  by  all  indirect  meanes  secretly  to 
suggest  the  malice  of  their  ownc  evill  harts,  therby  invegling  our  soveraign  Prince 
and  Rulers  against  vs  :  that  when  the  true  state  of  the  controversie  between  them 
and  vs  shalbe  manifested,  the  christian  (or  but  indiffirent)  Reader  may  iuge  whether 
our  adversaries  have  not  followed  the  way  of  Cain  and  n  Balaam,  to  kill  and  curse  vs 
Cods  sernants  without  cause.  For  if  in  this  onr  Confession  appeere  no  matter 
worthie  such  mortal  inmitie  and  persecution,  then  we  protest  (good  Reader)  that,  to 
our  knowledge,  they  neyther  haue  cause  nor  colour  of  cause  so  to  entreat  vs,  the 
mayne  and  entire  difference  betwixt  their  Synagogs  and  vs,  beeing  in  these  Articles 
fully  &  wholly  comprised. 

An  other  motive  inducing  vs  to  the  publication  of  this  our  testimonie,  is,  the 
rufull  estate  of  our  poore  Contrymen,  who  remayne  yet  fast  locked  in  Fgipt,  that 
hous  of  servants,  in  slavish  subjection  to  strange  LLs  '  &  lawes,  enforced  to  beare 
the  burdens  and  iutollerable  yoke  of  their  popish  canons  &  decrees,  beeing  subiect 
every  day  they  rise  to  *  3S  antichristian  ecclesiastical]  offices,  and  manie  moe  Romish 
statutes  and  traditions,  almost  without  number  :  besides  their  high  trangression  dayly 
in  their  vaine  will-worship  of  Clod,  by  reading  over  a  few  prescribed  prayers  and 
collects,  which  they  haue  translated  verbatim  out  of  the  Mass-book,  and  which  are 
yet  taynted  with  manie  popish  hereticall  errors  and  superstions,  instead  of  true 
spirituall  invocation  vpon  the  name  of  the  Lord. 

[iv  ]  These  and  manie  other  greevous  enormities  are  amongst  them,  not  suffred 
only  but  with  a  high  hand  maintcyned,  and  Cods  servants,  which  by  the  powre  of  his 
Word  and  Spirit  witnes  against  c\:  condemne  such  abhominations,  are  both  the)-  &  their 
testimonie,  reiected,  persecuted  &  plasphemed.  What  a  wofull  plight  then  are  such 
people  in,  how  great  is  their  iniquitie,  how  fearfull  indgments  doo  abide  them:  wee 
have  therfore,  for  their  sakes,  manifested  this  onr  Confession  of  and  vowed  obedience 
vnto  that  Fayth  which  was  once  gyven  vnto  the  a  Saincts,  wherby  they  may  bee 
drawne  (Cod  shewing  mercy  vnto  them)  vnto  the  same  faith  and  obedience  with  vs, 
that  they  perish  not  in  their  sinnes.  For  how  could  wee  behould  so  manie  soules  of 
our  dear  Contrymen  to  dye  before  our  eyes  &  wee  hould  our  peace  :  And  wheras 
they  have  been  heertofore  greatly  abused  by  their  tyme-serving  Priests,  beeing  give  to 
vnderstad  that  wee  were  a  dangerous  people,  holding  manie  errors,  renting  our  selves 


1  Lords  ? 

"Arch  Bbs.  L.[ord]  Bbs.  Suffragans,  Chancellors,  1  Vanes.  Arch- 1  >cacos, 
Commissaries,  Officials,  Doctors,  Proctors,  Registers,  scribes,  1'urcevaiUs,  Sum- 
moners,  Subdeans,  chaplaines,  Prebedaries,  Cannons,  Peti-Canons,  Gospellers, 
pistellers  Chanters,  Sub-chanters,  Vergiers,  organ-players,  Queristers,  Parsons, 
Vicars,  Curats,  Stipendaries,  Vagrant-Preachers,  Priests,  Deacons  or  half  Priests, 
Churchwardens,  Sideme  Collectors,  Clerks,  Sextins. 

oG-en.  4.     Num.  12.  a  Jude  3. 


PREFACE   TO    THE   CONFESSION  5  I 

from  the  tue  Church,  because  of  some  infirmities  in  men,  some  falts  in  their  worship, 
Ministerie,  Church-gouvernment,  etc.  that  wee  were  Donatists,  Anabaptists,  Brown- 
ists,  Schismaticks,  &c.  these  few  leaves  (wee  trust)  shal  now  cleer  vs  of  these  and  such 
like  criminations,  and  satistie  anie  godly  hart,  yea  every  reasonable  man,  that  will  but 
with  an  indifferent  ear  heare  our  cause.  For  wee  have  always  protested,  and  doo  by 
these  presents  testifie  vnto  all  me,  that  wee  neyther  our  selves  doo,  neyther  accompt 
it  lawffull  for  others  to  seprrate  fro  anie  true  church  of  Crist,  for  infirmities  falts  or 
errors  whatsoever  except  their  iniquitie  bee  come  to  such  an  heith,  that  for  obstimitie 
they  cease  to  be  a  true  visible  Church,  aud  bee  refused  and  forsaken  of  Ood.  And  for 
this  their  renowmed  Church  of  England,  wee<7  have  both  by  word  and  writing, 
proved  it  vnto  them  to  bee  false  and  counterfeit,  deeeyving  hir  children  with  vaine 
titles  of  the  word,  Sacraments,  Ministerie,  &c.  having  indeed  none  of  these  in  the  or- 
dinance and  powre  of  Christ  emongst  them.  They  have  been  shewed,  that  the  people 
in  Their  Parish-assemblies,  neyther  were  nor  are  meet  stones  for  Gods  house,  meet 
members  for  Christs  glorious  bod}-,  vntill  they  6  bee  begotten  by  the  seed  of  his  word 
vnto  fayth,  and  renewed  by  repentance.  Their  generall  irreligious  profannes  ignor- 
ance, Atheisme  and  Machevelisme  on  the  one  side,  &  publique  Idolitrie,  vsuall  blas- 
phemie,  swearing,  lying,  kylling,  stealing,  whoring,  and  all  maner  of  imptetie  [im- 
piety] on  the  other  side,  if  vtterly  disableth  them  from  beeing  Citizens  in  the  new 
Hierusalem,  sonnes  of  God  &  heires  with  Christ  and  his  Saints,  vntill  they  become 
new  creatures.  Their  slavish  bondage  vnto  the  antichristiaen  tyrannous  Prelats, 
whom  they  celibrate  and  honour  as  their  Lords  &  reverend  Fathers  spiritnall,  accept- 
ing their  popish  Canons  and  Iniunctions  for  laws  in  their  Church,  their  marcked 
Priests,  Preachers,  Parsons,  and  Vicars  &c.  in  lewe  of  Christs  true  Pastors  and 
Teachers,  running  to  their  Courts  and  Consistories  at  every  summons  &c.  doo  mani- 
fest*/ whose  servants  they  are,  ec  to  whom  they  yeeld  their  obedience.  Their  learned 
Ministerie  even  from  the  highest  Arch-prelat  to  the  lowest  Vicare  &  half-Priest,  thath 
[hath]  been,  by  the  powre  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  cast  down  into  the  smoky  fornace 
of  that  pyt  of  bottomles  diepth  <•  from  whence  they  arose,  revealed  by  the  light  of  his 
word,  to  bee  strange,  false,  popish  &  antichristian,  the  very  same,  and  no  other,  then 
were  hatched  and  advanced  in  their  Metropolitane  Sinagoge  of  Rome,  from  whence 
they  have  feched  the  very  patterne  nnd  mould  of  their  Church,  Ministerie,  Service  & 
Regiment,  even  the  very  expresse  Character  and  image  of  that  first  wild  beast  of 
Italy,  as  all  in  whom  anie  spark  of  true  light  is,  may  easely  discerne.  With  these  and 
manie  other  lyke  weightie  arguments  have  wee  pleaded  against  that  our  whorish 
mother,  hir  Priests  and  Prelats,  which  as  a  heavie  mylstone  presseth  hir  down  to  hell: 
for  the  vyalls  of  Gods  wrathfull  iudgments  are  powred  vpon  them,  which  maketh 


a  Conferences  betwixt  certeine  Preachers  and  prysoners  Marc,  1590'.  Discoverey 
of  the  false  Church  1590. !     Refutation  of  Mr.  Giffard  prynted.     I59I-3 

/'  I  Peter  I,  23.     John  3,  3. 

c  Revel.  21,  27.     2  Cor.  5,  17.     Ezech.  44,  9.     Act  8,  37. 

i/Rom.  6,  16.     Mat.  6,  24.     Reue.  13,  16,  &  14,  9.    10.    &c. 

c'  See  Revel.  9,  3.  with  their  owne  annotatation,  vpon  that  place.  2  King.  16, 
10.     11.     &c.     Reu.  13,  14.     Hos.  2,  2.     Rev.  16,  10,  11. 

1  [Barrowe  &  Greenwood],  A  collection  of  ccrtainc  Letters  and  Conferences,  lately  passed 
Betwixt  Certaine  Preachers,  &■=  Two  Prisoners  In  the  Fleet  [Dort],  1590. 

2  Barrowe,  A  Brief  Discouerie  of  the  false  Church,  etc.  [Dort],  1590. 

3  Barrowe  &  Greenwood,  A  Plaine  Refvtation  of  M.  Giffards  Booke,  intituled,  A  short 
treatise  gainst  the  Donatistes  of  England,  etc.  [Dort],  1591. 


5-  THE   CONFESSION    OF    1 596 

them  so  to  [v]  storme  rage  and  curse,  gnawing  their  tongues  for  sorrow  &  payne 
of  these  wounds,  and  not  yet  finding  grace  to  repent  of  and  turne  from  their  sinnes. 
For  when  wee  have  proclamed  this  our  testimonie  against  them,  how  have  they  be- 
haved themselves,  but  as  savage  beasts  renting  and  tearing  vs  with  their  teeth,  never 
daring  to  come  vnto  the  triall  of  the  word  of  God,  eyther  by  free  wryting  or  confer- 
ence, but  greedily  hunting  after  Christs  poore  lambes,  and  so  manie  as  they  could  get 
into  their  pawes,  misvsing  their  bodyeswith  all  exqvisite  tyrannic  in  long  and  lament- 
able emprisonment,  bedsies  [besides]  despight  and  reproches  without  mesure.  i 
through  their  barbarous  crueltie*  24.  soules  have  perished  in  their  prisons,  with  in  the 
Cittie  of  London  only,  (besides  other  places  of  the  Land)  ec  that  of  late  yec-res. 
.Manie  also  have  they,  by  their  immanitie,  caused  to  blaspheme  ami  forsake  the  faith 
of  our  glorious  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  many  mo  they  terrihe  and  keep  from  the  same. 
For  all  this,  yet  were  not  these  savage  men  satisfied,  though  blood  in  abonndance  ran 
out  of  their  wyde  mouths,  but  they  procured  certeine  of  vs  (after  manie  yeeres 
emprisonment)  to  be  indighted,  arrayned,  condemned  and  hanged  as  felons  (how 
uniustly,  thou  Lord  iust  and  true  knowest)  Henry  Barrow,  John  Greenwood,  and 
John  Penry,  whose  perticular  examinations  araignments  and  maner  of  execution, 
with  the  circumstances  about  them,  if  thou  didst  truly  vnderstand  (gentle  Reader)  it 
would  make  thy  hart  to  bleed,  considering  their  vnchristian  and  vnnaturall  vsage. 
About  the  same  tyme  they  executed  also  one  William  Denis,'  at  Thetford  in  North- 
folke,  and  long  before  they  kylled  two  men,  at  Bury  in  Suffolk,  Coppyn  and  Elias,'2 
for  the  like  testimonie.  Others  they  deteyne  in  their  prysons  to  this  day,  who  looke 
for  the  like  measure  at  their  mercelesse  hands,  yf  God  in  mercye  release  them  not  be- 
fore. Our  God  (wee  trust)  will  one  day  rayse  vp  an  other  John  Fox,  to  gather  and 
compile  the  Actes  and  Monuments  of  his  later  Martyrs,  for  the  vew  of  posteritie,  tho 
yet  they  seem  to  bee  buryed  in  oblivion,  and  sleep  in  the  dust.  Then  will  this  last 
infernall  Clergie  alsoo  appeere  in  their  proper  colours,  and  be  found  nothing  inferi- 
our  to  their  bloody  predecessours  in  poysoned  malice  and  and  tvrannie,  but  rather  even 
to  exceed  them,  in  regard  of  the  tyme.  Alas  for  our  poore  Countreye,  that  it  should  bee 
so  againe  defiled  with  the  blood  of  the  seints,  which  cryeth  lowde  from  vnder  the 
Altar,  and  speaketh  no  beter  things  for  it.  then  did  the  blood  of<?  Habel.     Needs 


••  In  Newgate  Mr.  Crane  a  man  about  60  veers  of  age  Richard  Jacson,  Thomas 
Stevens,  William  Howton,  Thomas  Drewet,  John  Gwalter,  Roger  Ryppon,  Robert 
Awoburne,  Scipio  Bellot,  Robert  Bowie,  John  Barnes  beeing  sic  vnto  death,  was 
carved  forth  &  departed  this  lyfe  shortly  after.  Mothor  Maner  of  60.  veers,  Mother 
Roe  of  60.  veers,  Anna  Tailour,  Judeth  Myller,  Margaret  Farrer  beeing  sick  vnto 
death  was  caried  forth,  and  ended  hir  lyfe  within  a  day  or  two  after.  John  Purdy  in 
Brydwel,  Mr.  Denford  in  the  Gate-house  about  Co.  veers  of  age.  Father  Debnham  in 
the  white-lyon  about  70.  veers,  George  Bryty  in  Counter  wood  street.  Henry  Thomso 
in  the  clynk,  John  Chandler  in  the  Connt.  Poultry,  beeing  sick  vuto  death  was 
carryed  forth  ..V  dyed  within  few  dayes.  Waltar  Lane  in  the  Fleet,  Thomas  Hewet  in 
Counter  Woodstreet.3 

a  Gen.  4,  10. 

1  Of  him  nothing  is  known  beyond  the  fact  above  given.  Even  Bradford  knew  no  details, 
Young,  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  Boston,  1S44,  p.  427. 

2  John  Coppin  and  Elias  Thacker  of  Bury  St.  Edmunds.  Executed  for  circulating  Browne's 
books  on  June  4  and  5,  1583.     See  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  20S-210. 

3  Unfortunately  we  know  nothing  of  most  of  these  men  and  women.  Regarding  Roger  Rip- 
pon  see  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  207. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  CONFESSION  53 

must  the  righteons  Lord  reserue  a  fearfull  vengeance  for  such  a  Land,  and  make  it  an 
example  to  all  Natons,  yf  speedely  they  purge  not  thewselnes  [themselves]  by  notable 
repentance.  But  oh  how  far  are  they  from  this,  which  harden  their  harts  against  vs, 
as  did  the  Egiptians,  and  cease  not  to  add  vnto  their  formor  iniquities,  still  pursuing 
vs  with  their  accustomed  hatred,  who  seeke  the  welfare  of  their  soules,  &  Offer  them 
the  things  which  concerne  their  peace,  which  they  refuse.  Thy  peace  o  England 
hath  wrought  thy  woe,  and  thy  long  prosperitie,  thy  ruin,  thou  hast  been  fat,  thou 
has  waxed  grosse,  thy  hart  is  covered,  thow  hast  forsaken  the  God  that  made  thee,  and 
despised  the  rock  of  thy  salvation,  thy  sinnes  have  reached  vp  to  Heaven,  &  God 
hath  remembred  thine  iniquities  to  gyue  vnto  thee  according  to  thy  worcks.  Behold, 
the  tempest  of  the  Lord  is  gon  forth  with  wrath,  the  wirlewinde  that  hangeth  over 
shall  light  vpon  the  heads  of  the  wicked,  the  indignation  of  the  Lords  wrath  shall  not 
returne  vntill  hee  hane  [have]  doon,  and  vntil  hee  hane  performed  the  intents  of  his 
hart :  In  the  later  dayes  thow  shalt  vnderstand  it.*  Our  God  shew  mercy  to  them 
that  are  his  in  thee,  and  hastely  draw  them  out  ot  the  lire,  that  they  perish  not  in  thy 
sinnes.  And  most  of  all  wee  are  sorie  for  our  dread  sovereigne  Queen,  whom  wee 
haue  alwayes  loued,  reverenced  and  obeyed  in  the  Lord,  that  shee  should  so  bee 
drawn  by  the  subtle  suggestion  of  the  Prelats  to  smyte  hir  faithfullest  subjects 
ha[vi]ving  hir  finger  so  deep  in  the  blood  of  Gods  children,  wherby  shee  hath  not 
only  defiled  hir  precious  soule  in  the  eyes  of  hir  God,  but  also  brought  an  evill 
name  vpon  hir  meek  and  peaceable  Government  heere  on  Earth,  in  all  Nations  rownd 
aboul  hir  who  doo  with  greef  behold  that  Land  to  persecute  and  waste  true  Christians 
now,  which  was  erewhiles  an  harbour  and  refuge  for  Christians  persecuted  in  other 
places.  But  as  wee  are  verily  perswaded  that  hir  Matis.  clemencie  hath  been  much 
abused  by  the  wretched  vnconcionable  false  reports  and  instigations  of  the  Priests,  so 
will  wee  not  cease  (though  wee  bee  exiled  hir  Dominions)  with  fervent  harts  to  desier 
hir  Highnesse  prosperitie,  &  pray  that  hir  sinnes  may  bee  forgiven  hir,  lamenting  that 
Gods  benefits,  and  great  delyverances,  should  so  soone  of  hir  bee  forgotton,  &  so  ill 
requited,  by  this  hard  vsage  of  his  poore  servants  for  his  sake.  And  if  shee  proceed 
in  this  course,  alas  how  shall  shee  ever  bee  able  to  behold  the  face  of  hir  God  with 
comfort ;  wherfore  our  soules  shall  weep  in  secret  for  hir,  and  wee  will  not  cease  to 
pray  the  Lord  to  shew  hir  mercy,  and  open  hir  eyes  before  shee  dye.  And  lykewyse 
for  those  honorable  Peeres  hir  grave  Councellors,  who  also  have  consented  to  this  our 
hard  measure,  although  our  innocencie  hath  been  sufficietly  manifested  vnto  the  co- 
scieces  of  some  of  the  cheefest  of  the,  our  humble  reqnest  is,  that  they  in  the  feare  of 
God  may  weigh  their  proceedings  against  vs,  &  rcmeber  [remember]  their  accompt 
that  they  shall  shortly  make  vnto  the  Judge  of  heave  and  earth, f°  where  Christ  will 
reckon  vnto  them  al  the  tribulations  of  his  poore  despised  members  on  earth,  as  if  they 
had  been  inflicted  vpon  his  own  glorious  person,  and  will  render  reward  accordingly. 
The  Lord  giue  them  true  wisdome,  that  they  may  learne,  at  last,  to  kisse  the  Soone  be- 
fore hee  bee  angry,  and  they  prrish  in  the  way 4°  As  for  the  Priests  and  Preachers  of 
the  land,  they,  of  all  other  men,  haue  bewrayed  their  notable  hypocrisie,  that  stand- 
ing erewhile  against  the  English  Romish  hierachie,  and  their  popish  abhominations, 
haue  now  so  redely  submytted  themselves  to  the  Beast,  and  are  not  only  content  to 
yeeld  their  canonicall  obedience  vnto  him,  and  receiue  his  mark,   but   in  most   hostile 


*  Och  that  they  were  wise,  then  would  they  vnderstand  this,  they  would  consider 
their  later  end.      Deut.  32  29. 

f°  Mat.  10.  40.  41.  &  25.  44.  45.  \°  Psal.  2.  10. 


54 


THE    CONFESSION    OF 


maner  oppose  and  set  themselues  against  vs,  not  ceasing  to  add  vnto  our  aflictions, 
scorning  and  reviling  vs,  and  alienating  the  mynds  of  manie  simple  harted  people, 
whoe  are  (wee  doubt  not)  inclinable  enough  vnto  the  truth,  were  it  not  that  these  their 
lying  Prophets  did  strengthen  their  hands,  that  they  may  not  returne  from  their 
wicked  waves,  by  promising  them  lyfe  and  peace,  where  no  peace  is.  These  hauc 
long  busied  themselues  in  seeking  out  new  shifts  and  cavills  to  turne  away  the  truth, 
which  presseth  them  so  sore,  and  haiie  at  last  been  dryven  to  palpaple  cV  gro 
surdities,  seeking  to  dawbe  vp  that  ruinous  autichristan  muddy  wall,  which   them- 

did  once  craftily  vndermine.  And  heerin  wee  report  vs  to  the 
discourses  of  Dr.  Robert  Some,1  and  Mr.  Giffard.-'  who  haue  so  referced  their  wryt- 
ings  with  reproches,  slanderous  vntruths,  and  false  collections  on  the  one  side,  and 
manifest  digressions,  shiftings  &  turnings  from  the  state  of  the  question  in  hand,  on 
the  other  side,  as  wee  think  the  lyke  presidents  can  hardly  be  shewed  in  anie  wrytings 
of  controversie  in  these  times,  and  specially  Mr.  Giffards  last  answere8  which  (it 
seemeth)  hee  did  in  haste  :  wherin  besides  his  boyes-play,  in  skipping  over  many 
whol  leaves  of  his  adversaries  booke,  (leaving  the  both  vnanswered  cY  vntouched)  hee 
hath  so  wisely  carved  himself  in  those  things  which  hee  professeth  to  answere,  as  a 
man  afrayd  once  to  come  neere  the  battel  and  mayne  controversie  in  hand,  running 
out  into  vaine  and  frutlesse  excursories,  never  approving  by  the  word  of  ' 
places  and  offices  of  his  Lords  the  Prelats,  with  their  retinue,  Courts,  tan- 
neither  the  publick  worship,  ministerie,  or  people  of  this  their  Church  of  England. 
No  hee  knew  well  his  adversaries  were  fast  locked  &  wached  in  pry[vii]son  from  writ- 
ing anie  more,  and  their  books  intercepted,  so  that  few  men  could  come  to  the  view 
of  them  :  Hee  might  therfore  deale  as  hee  lysted  himself  for  his  own  best  advantage, 
and  beare  the  people  in  hand  that  hee  had  confuted  the  Brownists  and  Donatists,  for 
the  prynt  was  as  free  for  him,  as  the  close  pryson  for  them.  But  God  (wee  trust)  will 
give  meanes  one  day,  that  some  things,  which  as  yet  are  hid,  shall  come  to  light.  In 
the  meane  tyme,  thow  for  thy  satisfying  (Christian  Reader)  examin  the  mans  wryt- 
ings, and  see  how  hee  hath  answered  vnto  these  criminations,  or  purged  his  Church  of 
them.  Look  what  scriptures  hee  hath  brought  for  defence  of  his  spirituall  Lords, 
their  places  and  procedings,  their  Courts,  Cannons,  Dignities,  &c.  what  warrant 
in  Christs  Testament  hee  hath  found  for  his  service-booke  and  all  the  abhominable  rites 
therin,  for  his  Angelles,  Saincts  and  Lady-days,  popish  Fastes,  Lent,  Embers  and 
PNes:  How  hee  hath  approved  their  English  missall  Prayers,  Lctanie.  Collects  aud 
Trentalls,  their  maryng,  burying,  churching  of  women,  wretched  abuse  of  both  Sac- 


i  R.  Some,  ./  Cully  Treatise  containing  and  deciding  certaine  questions,  mooued  of  late 
in  London  and  other  places  touchingthe  Ministerie,  Sacraments,  and  Church.  London,  i583; 
tbid,  A  Defence  of  sveh  points  in  R.  Somes  last  treatise  as  M.  Penry  hath  dealt  against,  etc., 
London,  i5S8  ;  Ibid,  .1  Godly  Treatise  wherein  are  examined  &  confuted  many  execrable  fan- 
cies giuen  out  &  holden,  partly  by  Hen.  Barrowe  and  John  Greenwood:  partly  by  other  of 
the  Anabaptist icall order,  etc.,  London,  1589. 

Some  was  rector  of  Girtonand  master  of  Peterhouse  Coll.,  Cambridge,  a  man  somewhat  in- 
clined to  Puritanism.     For  his  biography  see  Cooper  .  Uhena  Cantabrigienses,  ii :  510-3- 

2  (',.  Gifford,  .1  Short  Treatise  against  the  Donatists  of  England,  whome  we  eall  Brown- 
ists, et< .,  London!  1590;  Ibid.  A  Plaine  Declaration  that  our  Brownists  be  full  Donatists,  etc., 
London,  1590;    Ibid,  A   short  Reply  -onto  the  last  printed  books  of  Henry  Barrow  and  John 

>od,  etc.,    London,  1591. 
Gifford  was  a  prominent  and  learned  Puritan,  vicar  of  Maldon.   Kssex,  and  a  sufferer  for  the 
Puritan  cause.     See  Brook,  Lives  of  the  J'uritans,  London,  .8:3,  ii  :  273-8  ;  Bradley  in  Di,  t.  Na- 
tional Biog.,  xxi  : 

3  See  previous  note. 


PREFACE    TO    THE    CONFESSION  55 

raments,  their  Romish  Gossipps,  hollowed  Font,  Crosse,  inchanted  Collects,  their 
processions,  bishopping  of  children,  and  a  thowsand  such  like  trnmperies,  which  were 
all  blamed  vnto  him.  yea,  come  vnto  their  own  Ministerie,  tS:  behold  from  whence 
hee  hath  fetched  the  genealogie  of  those  Anakims  and  horned  heads  of  the  Beaste. 
Archbbs,  Lordbbs,  Deanes,  Arch-Deacons,  Chancellors,  &c.  or  of  their  Mr.  Parson, 
Vicar,  Curat,  and  the  rest  of  that  rable  :  How  hee  approveth  their  offices,  ellections, 
callings,  entrace,  administrations,  Bishopricks,  Deanries,  Prebends,  benefices,  &c.  by 
the  ordinance  of  our  Lord  Jesus  in  his  newe  Testament/  left  vnto  his  Church  to  the 
worlds  end. 

These  are  some  of  the  innumerable  abhominations,  wherwith  wee  charged  their 
Church,  which  they  must  eyther  Justine  by  Gods  word,  or  cleere  their  Church  of  them. 
Now  hee  that  findeth  not  these  things  approved  in  his  wrytings,  may  easely  perceiue 
how  hee  hath  uever  [never]  medled  with  the  mayne  coutroversie  between  vs.  Wher- 
fore  eyther  let  him  dischardge  his  Church  of  these  accusations,  or  els  must  wee  and 
all  Gods  children  still  by  the  powre  of  the  word  of  God  condenme  them,  and  send 
home  againe  these  Romish  wares  into  the  Land  of  Shinar*0  from  whence  they  came, 
and  the  Lord  that  condemneth  them  is  a  strong  God. 

On  the  other  side  wee  desire  the  that  they  wold  shew  vs  by  the  Scriptures  our 
errors  wherwith  they  chardge  vs,  &  for  which  they  thus  hate  vs,  what  the}-  reproue  in 
our  Doctrine  or  practise.  As  for  our  selves,  wee  protest  with  simple  harts  in  the 
presence  of  God,  and  his  holy  Angelles,  vnto  al  men,  that  wee  doo  not  wittingly  & 
willingly  mataine  anie  one  error  against  the  word  of  truth  (though  wee  doubt  not  but 
as  all  other  men  wee  are  liable  to  error,  which  our  God  wee  trust  will  in  mercy  for- 
giue  vnto  vs,)  but  hold  the  grounds  of  Christian  Religion  with  all  Gods  antient 
Churches  in  Iudea,  Rome,  Corinth,  Ephesus,  Galatia,  Pontus,  Cappadocia,  Asia  and 
Bythinia,  and  with  all  faythfull  people  at  this  day  in  Germanie,  France,  Scotland,  the 
Lovv-Contries,  Bohemia,  and  other  Christian  Churches  rownd  about  vs,  whose  confes- 
sions published!0  wee  ca"  heere  to  wytnes  the  sinceritie  of  our  [f]aith,  and  our  agreement 
and  vnitie  with  them  in  the  points  of  greatest  moment  and  controversie  between  vs  and 
our  adversaries.  And  wheras  our  Preachers  were  wont  to  tell  vs,  that  their  Church 
holdeth  the  foundation  and  substantiall  grounds  of  Rilligion,  Faith  in  God  and  Justi- 
fication by  Christ  alone,  eve.  and  therfore,  notwithstanding  their  wants  and  corrup- 
tions, they  had  the  essence,  lyfe  and  beeing  of  a  true  people  of  God:  wee  trust  now 
they  will  let  vs  that  make  the  lyke  plea,  find  the  lyke  favour,  &  accompt  of  vs  as  a 
true  Congregation  of  Christ,  and  blaspheme  vs  no  longer  by  the  names  [viii]  of 
Brownists,  Donatists,  Anabaptists,  Schismaticks  &c.  for  will  they  slay  those  that 
Christ  gyveth  lyfe  vnto?. shall  profession  of  faith  saue  them,  and  shall  yt  not  vs  lyke- 
wise,  that  make  the  same  profession?  Or  yf  they  take  exception  at  ours,  let  them 
shew  what  one  truth  they  hold,  wherin  wee  agree  not  with  the,  or  what  good  thing 
they  have  in  practice,  that  wee  do  not  the  samew.  ee  [same.     We]  worship  the  true 


/Mat.  28.  20.      Heb.  1.  2.     Eph.  4.  11  ;    12.  13.     Gal.  1.  9.  10. 

*°  Zach.  5.    11. 

|°  Harmanie  of  Confess.1 

'  The  collection  here  referred  to  is  the  Harmonia  Confessionum  Fidei  Orthodo.xamm,  et 
Reformatarum  Ecclcsiarum,  quae  in  pra-cipuis  quibusque  Europw  Regnis,  Nationibus,  et 
Provinciis,  sacrum  Evangelii  doctrinam  jure profttentur :  .  .  .  Geneva,  158 1.  An  English 
translation  was  published  at  Cambridge  in  1586.  This  was  the  chief  general  epitome  of  the  di «  trims 
of  the  Reformed  (Calvinistic)  Churches,  with  some  Lutheran  creeds  added.  See  Schaff,  Creeds  of 
Christendom,  New  York,  1877,  I:   354. 


56  THE   CONFESSION   OF    1 596 

God  in  spirit  and  truth,*0  having  his  word  truly  taught,  his  Sacraments  rightly  admin- 
istred  (at  such  tyme  as  our  God  vouchafeth  vs  the  meanes  for  administration  of  the 
at  all:)  That  ministerie  of  Pastors,  Teachers,  Elders,  Deacons,  ccc.  which  they  som- 
tymes  stood  for,1  wee  (through  Gods  great  mercy)  obteyned  them  before  th< 
which  they  yet  never  did.  That  government  of  Christ  by  his  own  lawes,  ordinances, 
cc  holy  censures  (which  they  call  Discipline)  wee  faithfully  obey  and  execute:-  receiving 
into  our  societie  all  that  with  faith  and  repentance  come  vnto  vs  willingly://  casting 
out  againe,  and  removing  by  the  powre  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  all  notorious  iV  ob- 
stinate sinners,  hereticks,  schismaticks,  or  wicked  lyvers  whosoever,  without  respect 
of  persons.  Only  wee  reiect  the  abominable  Romish  reliques  which  they  yet  retein 
and  mainteine,  to  the  high  dishonour  of  God.  And  for  the  sinnes  wherwith  wee 
charge  them,  they  are  so  apparant,  as  even  our  forest  adversarie  somtymes  confessed 
and  complayned  of  them,  &  that  in  great  measure  openly,  muchmore  secretly  emongst 
themselves,  as  is  well  known.  But  let  vs  heare  themselves  speak,  as  they  have  pub- 
lished in  prynt  to  the  view  of  the  world.  Of  their  people,  the  members  of  their 
Church  they  gyve  this  commendation.2 

/The  greaeest  multitude,  by  many  partes  doo  not  vnderstand 
the  Lords  prayer,  the  ten  Commandements,  or  the  articles  of  the 
faith,  or  the  Doctrine  and  vse  of  the  Sacraments,  in  anie  competent 
measure.  There  bee  thouvvsands,  which  bee  men  e\:  vvoemen 
grovvne,  which  if  a  man  aske  them  bo7i'  [how]  they  shalbee  sailed, 
they  cannot  tell.  As  for  vvickednesf0  in  pryde,  euz'ie,  hatred,  and 
all  sinnes  that  can  bee  named  almost,  yt  doth  overflow:  &  yet  you 
are  not  ashmed  to  say,  are  they  not  Christians?  Concerning  their 
own  ministerie  and  government,  they  haue  lykeTi'ise/t  complayned 
how  they  lack  both  a  rig//t  Ministerie  of  God,  and  a  rig//t  govern- 
ment of  //is  C//urc//,  according  to  the  Sc/riptures.  More  perticu- 
larly  /  TZ/at  t//at  prop//ane  iurisdiction  of  Lordly  Lord  Arc//.  bbs. 
Bb*.  Arc//-Deacous,  Chancellors,  Officials,  &c.  are  contrary  to  Cods 
goz/ernment,  and  wholly  pnderpropt  by  t//e  Canon  and  popish  law, 


^:'°  Thou  Lord  preparest  a  table  before  vs  in  sight  of  our  adversaries.     1'sal.  23.  5. 

g  Act.  2.  41. 

li  Mat.  i>.  S.  17,    1  Cor.  5.  4.  5,   Tit.  3.    10.   Rom.  16.    17. 

i  Dialogue  of  the  strife  of  their  Church,  Page.  99. 3 

■|°  Are  not  these  meet  stones  now  for  gods  hous  ?     1  Pet.  2.  5.  9.      Ileb.  8.  11. 

/•Admonition  to  the  Pari,  in  the  Preface,  defended  by  T.  C.4 

/  Table  of  Articles  propounded  by  the  Divinitie  Reader  in  Cambridg.  T.  C.5 

1  Reference  is  here  made  to  the  Puritan  win),'  of  the  Church  of  England  which  desired  many 
of  these  reforms  but  refused  to  separate  from  the  Establishment.    Soalsoin  the  si; 
notations  are  in  Roman,  mixed  with  Italics. 

*  A  Dialogue  concerning  the  strife  of  our  churche    .     .     .     with  a  brUft  declaration  of 

some  such  monstrous  abuses,  as  our  Byskops  luiuc  not  bene  ashamed  to  foster.     London  - 

*  Cartwright  is  meant.  The  original  work  quoted  was,  I  suppose,  that  by  J.  Field  and  T 
Wilcox  of  London,  .  / n  Admonition  to  Parliament.  London,  1571.  This  was  answered  by  Whit- 
eift  .ind  defended  by  Cartwright  in  a  series  of  pamphlets. 

•'•  With  the  bibliographical  means  at  my  disposal  I  am  unable  fully  to  identify  the  work  of 
Cartwright  indicated. 


PREFACE   TO   THE   CONFESSION  57 

and  7tntAa.ll  ioyned  with  //ypocrisie,  vaineglorie,  lordlines  ec  tyran- 
nie,  eue  for  t//ese  respects,  if  t//er  were  no  more,  are  to  bee  utterly 
rooted  out  of  t//e  C//urc//,  except  possible  7cee  meane  by  reconcilia- 
tion to  ma/'e  Christ  and  antic/zrist  friends.  Item///  t//at  t/iat  ougly 
&  ylfauored  //yerarc//ie  or  C//urc//-princelynes,  which  instituted  at 
t//e  first  by  Antichrists  derise,  did  afterward  Hlely  serue  t//e  Pope 
of  Rome  to  accomplish  t//e  mysterie  of  iniquitie,  and  to  distroy 
t//e  C7/urc//  of  Christ,  and  dot//  yet  still  at  t//is  day  serue  Mm,  must 
bee  so  abolished  t/zat  no  remnants,  ne  yet  anie  shew  t//erof  re- 
mayne,  yf  so  bee  wee  will  [ix]  haue  Christ  to  reign  ouer  rs.  Item// 
that  the  Lord  Gouerners  of  their  Church  bee  Peti-popes,  &  Peti- 
Antic/rists,  and  Bis//ops  of  t//e  Deuill. 

These0  Testimonies  have  wee  from  their  own  wrytings,3  and  manie  such  lyke. 
For  these  impieties  haue  wee  seperated  our  selues  from  those  cages  of  vncleane  byrds, 
following  thee  counsell  of  the  Holy-Gost,  lest  wee  should  communicate  with  their 
sinnes,  and  bee  partakers  of  their  plagues.  With  what  equitie  now  can  these  Priests 
so  blaspheme  and  persecute  vs  for  reiecting  the  heavie  yoke  of  their  tyranous  Prelats, 
whom  they  themselues  call  antichristian  &  Bishops  of  the  Devill  :  for  forsaking  their 
Priesthood,  which  they  haue  complayned  is  not  the  right  Ministerie.  With  what 
conscience  could  Mayster  Giffard  (of  all  other  men)/  so  vehemently  charge  vs  with 
intollerable  pryde,  presumption,  and  intrusion  into  Gods  judgment  seate,  to  judg  and 
condemn  wholl  assembles  which  professe  the  Faith  of  Christ  sincerely  &c.  in  most 
savage  and  desperate  maner  to  rend  and  teare  vp  the  weake  plants  &c.  The  Lord 
rebuke  Sathan,  and  iudge  betwixt  vs.  Our  enimies  cheefest  arguments  against  vs 
hitherto,  haue  been  reproch  and  cursed  speaking,  with  violence  and  oppression.  But 
let  them  know  and  vnderstand,  that  for  all  these  things  God  wil  bring  them  vnto 
iudgment,  whe  they  shall  receiue  such  recompence  of  their  error  and  wickednes  as  is 
meet. 

The  last  and  great  scandall  which  offendeth  manie  and  turneth  them  out  of  the 
way,  is  the  seed  of  discord  which  Sathan  hath  sought  to  sowe  emongst  our  selues,  set- 
ting variance  emong  brethren,  prevayling  mightely  in  the  children  of  perdition,  whom 
hee  hath  eyther  turned  back  into  apostacie,  or  dryven  into  heresie  or  schisme.  Heerby 
hee  hath  caused  the  truth  of  God  to  bee  much  evill  spoken  of,  and  to  suffer  great  re- 
proch at  our  aduersaries  hands,  whoe  haue  long  wayted  for  our  halting.  Such  things 
(good  Reader)  are  neyther  new  nor  strange  vnto  vs,4  (though  much  to  bee  lamented,) 


m  In  the  same  Table. 

n  Martin  Marprelat.1 

c  Gen.  19,  14.     Isa.  52,  11.     Jir.  51.  9.     Act.  2,  40.     2  Cor.  6.  17.      Rev.  18,  4. 

/  Answere  to  the  Brownists,  pag.  4.  &  50. 5 

1  Regarding  the  tracts  published  under  this  pseudonym  see,  inter  alia,  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen, 
pp.  131-202. 

2  Black  Letter  again.  3  /.  e.  Those  of  the  Puritans. 

4  Some  of  the  quarrels  in  this  church,  always  a  discordant  body,  are  described  by  Pexter, 
Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  271-351. 

5  The  reference  fits  Gifford's  Plaine  Declaration  that  our  Brownists  be  full  Donatists, 
London,  1590,  better  than  his  Short  Reply  vnto  tlu  last  printed  books  0/  Henry  Barro-u*  and 
John  Greenwood,  London,  1501. 


58  THE   CONFESSION   OF    I  596 

yt  beeing  the  lot  of  Christs  Church  *°  to  haue  such  trebles  within  yt  self,  and  as  inci- 
dent to  the  same  as  is  the  crosse  of  outward  tribulation.     Neyther  can  anie  that 
knoweth  the  state  of  Gods  people,  or  the  word  of  God  aright,  looke  for  other  things 
in  this  world,  where  wee  are  but  strangers  &  pylgrims,  warring  against  manie  and 
mightie  adversaries,  even  the  Prince  of  darknes,  with  his  band  of  spirituall  wicked- 
nesses,    wee  are  taught  of  God<;  that  ther  must  bee   dfecentiSs   &   heresies  emogst 
our  selves,  that   they  which  are  approved  may  bee  knowne,/>  that  greevous  wolves 
should  enter  in  emongst  vs,  and  of  our  selves  men  arise,  speaking  perverse  things  to 
draw  away  disciples  after  them.     By  such  suborned  guests  of  satan  doth  our  c  Lord 
sift  &  try'e  vs,  whither  wee  love  him  with  our  wholl  harts  or  no.     wherfore  though  d 
never  so  many  forsake  vs,  &  oure  own  e  frends  dele  vnfaithfully  with  vs,/  yet  wee 
know  assuredly  it  shalbe  well  with  Israeli,  even  to  the  pure  in  hart,     when  wee  call 
to  mynde.^  the  murder  of  Cain,/;  the  deviding  of  Cham,/  the  flowting  of  Ismael,  k  the 
hatred  of  Esau,/  the  envie  of  the  Patriarks.w  the  rebellion  of  Corah,//  the  conspiracie 
of  Absalon.o  the  treason  of  Judas,/  the  hypocrisie   of   Ananias  and   Saphira,  q  the 
Apostacie  of  Demas.r  the  heresie  of  Nicholas,  and  manie  suchlike  mischevous  prac- 
tises in  old  tyme,  with  in  the  housholds  of  the  Saincts,  and  Churches  of  God,  wee 
mervell  not  though  in  these  last  &  evill  dayes  some  childre   of  Belial,  that  were  of  old 
ordeyned  vnto  this  condemnation,  rise  vp  in  the  Church  and  work  the  vnrest  and  sor- 
row of  the  same.     The  tyme  is  come  that  iudgment  must  begin  at  the  house  of  God, 
the  Lord  will  proue  vs  'to  the  vtmost,  and  suffer  Sathan  to  wynnow  vs  as  wheat,  but 
Peters  Faith  is  prayed  for  that  it  fayle  not,  and  hee  that  shall  contynue  to  the  end, 
hee  shalbee  saued. '   This  is  our  comfort,  that  God  will  heerby  purge  his  vine,  and  dis- 
close [x]  the  disguysed  hypocrits  which  come  vnto  vs  in  sheeps  garments,  but  his  own 
portion  hee  will  bring  thorow  the  fire,  and  fine  them  as  tine  Silver  is  fined,  and  will 
trve  them  as  the  Gold  is  tryed,  to  the  prase  &  glory  of  his  own  great  name.*0     These 
things  are  stumbling  blocks  vnto  the  blynde  and  hard  harted  worldlings,  who  haue  no 
loue&vnto  the  truth,  nor  wilbee  brought  vnto  the  obedience  of  the  same.     It  is  iust 
with  God  to  let  them  bee  offended  by  such  things.     But  hee  knoweth  to  delyuer  the 
godly  out  of  temptation.     Let  him  therfore  that  readeth  consider,  &  the  Lord  gyue 
nim  vnderstanding  in  all.f     Weigh  all  things  vprightly  in  the  ballance  of  the  Sanetu- 
arie,  and  iudg  righteous  iudgment.     Bee  not  offended  at  the  sunplicitie  [simplicity]  of 
the  G.  .spell,  neyther  hold  the  Faith  of  our  glorious  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  respect  of 
mens  persons.  '  Gods  cause  shall  stand  when  al  that  handle  yt  amisse  shall  fall  before 
yt  +0     Wee  offer  heere  our  Favth  to  the  view  and  tryall  of  all  men.     Try  all  things 
and  keep  that  which  is  good  :  and  yf  thou  shall  reape  anie  frute  by  these  our  labors 
(gentel  Reader)  gyue  God  the  glory. 

,,  h  Babel  should  mount  vp  to  keauen,  and  though  she  should  defend 
/,;,.  strengh  on  high,    Yet  from  me  shall  Air  destroyers  come  saith  the  Lord. 

lerem.  51.  53-  ,      . 

Saue  vs  o  Lord  our   God  and  gather  vs  from   among  the  nations,  for  to 

celebrate  thy  holy  name,  For  to  glory  in  thy  fray  se.     Psal.  106.  47- 


'  Dan.  11,  34.  «  1  Cor.  11,  15.  *Act.  20,  29,  30. 

Deut.  13.  3-  aTJoh.  6,5,6.  <  Lam.  1,  2. 

i'Gen.  4.  //Gen.  9. 

k  Gen.  27.  /Gen.  37. 


/Psal.  73 

/Gen.  2. 


m  Num.  16.  «  2  Sam.  15 

p  Act,  5.  I2  Tim-  + 

*°  2  Thes.  2,  10.  i 


2  Sam.  15.  0  Mat.  26. 


Revel. 


j°2Pet.  2.  9.  X°  Mat.  II.  5-  6. 


T 


TEXT   OF   THE   CONFESSION  59 

[xi]  A1  TRVE  CONFESSION  of  the  faith,  and  hvmble 
acknowledgment  oe  the  ALEgeance,  which  we  hir  Maiesties 
Subjects,  falsely  called  Brovvnists,  doo  hould  towards  God,  and 
yeild  to  hir  Majestie  and  all  other  that  are  ouer  vs  in  the  Lord. 
Set  down  in  Articles  or  Positions,  for  the  better  &  more  easie 
vnderstanding  of  those  that  shall  read  yt :  And  published  for  the 
cleering  of  our  selues  from  those  vnchristian  slanders  of  heresie, 
schisme,  pryde,  cbstinacie,  disloyaltie,  sedicion,  &c.  which  by  our 
adversaries  are  in  all  places  given  out  against  vs. 

Wee  beleeue  with  our  hearts  c^  confes  with  our  mouths. 
Hat  ther  is   but*  one  God,  one  Christ,  one  Spirit,  one  Church, 
one  truth,  one  Faith,b  one    Rule  of  obedience  to  all  Chris- 
tians, in  all  places. 

aDeut.  6,  4.  Hos.  13,  4.  Mark.  12,  29,  32.  Eph.  4,  4.  5.  6.  I  Cor.  12,  13. 
bRom.  16,  26.     1  Cor.  4,  17.  &  16.  1.     Gal.  1,  8.  9. 

2  That  God  is  a  c Spirit,  whose d  beeing  is  of  himself,  and" 
giveth  beeing,  moving,  and  preservation  to  all  other  things  beeing 
himselff  eternall,  most  holy,  every  way  infinit,  in  greatnes,  wis- 
dome,  povvre,  goodnes,  justice,  truth,  &c.  And  that  in  this  God- 
head there  bee  three8  distinct  persons  hcoeternall,  coequall,  &  kco- 
essentiall,  beeing  every  one  of  the  one  &  the  same  God,  &  ther- 
fore  not  divided  but  distinguished  one  fro  another  by  their  sev- 
erall  &  peculiar  propertie  :  The  father  of  none,  the  Sonne™  be- 
gotten of  the  Father  from  everlasting,  the  holy  nGost  proceding 
from  the  Father  and  the  Sonne  before  all  beginnings. 

cjohn.  4,  24.  d  Exod.  3,  14.  Esa.  43,  10,  11.  eRom.  11,  36.  Act  17,  28. 
Gen.  1.  f  1  tim.  I,  17.  Reu.  4,  iS.  Esa.  6,  3.  and  66.  1.  2.  Fsal.  145,  3.  8.  9. 
17.  &  147.  5.  Rom.  1,  20.  gi.  Joh.  5,  7.  Mat.  2S,  19.  Hag.  2,  5.  6.  Heb. 
9,  14.  hPro.  S,  22.  Joh.  1.  1.  Heb.  9,  14.  i Phil.  2,  6.  Joh.  5,  18.  Eph.  4, 
4.  5.  6.  kjoh.  10,  30.  38.  1  Corint.  2,  II.  12.  Heb.  I,  3.  1  Joh.  5,  26.  1  Cor. 
8,  6.  mjoh.  1,  14.  18.  &  3.  16.  Mica.  5,  2.  Psal.  2,  7.  njoh.  14,  26.  &  1.  16. 
Gal.  4,  16. 

3  That  God0  hath  decreed  in  himself  from  everlasting 
touching  all  things,  and  the  very  least  circumstances  of  every 
thing,  effectually  to  work  and  dispose  the  according  to  the  coun- 
sell  of  his  own  will,  to  the  prayse  and  glorie  of  his  great  name. 
And  touching  his  cheefest  Creatures  that  God  hath  inp  Christ'1  be- 
fore the  foundation  of  the  world,r  according  to  the  good  pleasure 
of  his  will,"    ordeyned  som  men  and  Angells,  to  eternall  lyfe  to 

1  The  Confession  is  printed  in  Roman,  with  the  texts  on  the  margin  of  the  page.  I  have  put 
the  texts  after  each  section  for  convenience,  following  in  this  the  Latin  edition  of  1598. 


60  THE   CONFESSION   OF    1 596 

bee1  accomplished  through  Iesus  Christ,  to  the  'prayse  of  the 
glorie  of  his  grace.  And  on  thother  hand  hath  likewise  "before 
of  old  according1  to  his  iust  purpose"  ordeirurd  other  both  Angels 
and  men,  toe  ternall  condemna-[xii]tion,  to  becz  accomplished 
through  their  own  corruption  to  the*  prayse  of  his  iustice. 

oEsa.  46,  10.  R6.  11,  34- 35- 36-  Act.  15,  18.  &  2,  22.  Gen.  45.  5- 6- 7- 8. 
Mat.  10,  29,  30.  and  20.  15.  Eph.  1,  II.  pEph.  1,  3-  4-  "•  qib»d  &  mat-  25- 
",4.  rEph.  1,  5.  Rom.  9,  11,  12,  13.  Mai.  1,  2.  2,  Tim.  1,  9.  sAct.  13.  48. 
Eph.  1,  4.  5.  1.  Tim.  5.  21.  Mat.  25,  31.  34-  tEphes.  1,  5-  7-  10.  Col.  1,  14 
17  iS.  19.  cS:  2.  10.  Rom.  8.  19.  30.  Rev.  19.  10.  veph.  1,  6  to  9,  11.  wjud 
ver.  4.  xRom.  9,  11.  12.  15.  17-  18.  with  Mai.  1,  3-  Eiod.  9-  16.  yjud.  ver.  4 
cV  6.  ro  9,  22.  Mat.  25,  41-  «■  Pet.  2,  12.  2.  Cor.  4,  3.  4-  I  pet.  2,  S.  joh 
3.  19.     &  Pro.  16,  4.     rom.  2,  5.  and  9.  22. 

4  That  in  the  'beginning  God  made  all  things  of  not/zing 
z>ery  good:  and  & created  man  after  his  oicn\  image  and  lykenes  in 
rig//teousnes  and  //olines  of  trut//.  That*  streig//t  ways  after  by 
the  subtiltie  of  the  Serpent  7c>//ich  Sathan  vsed  as  his  instrument1 
himself  with  //is  Angells  having  sinned  before  and  not  kept  t//eir 
first  estate,  but  left  their  own  //abitation  ;  first  «Er-a,  then  Adam  by 
hir  meanes,  did  wittingly  &  willingly  fall  into  disobedience  & 
transgression  of  the  commadement  of  God.  For  the  w//ic//  deat//h 
reigned  over  all:  yea  ee'en1  ouer  infants  also,  which  have  not 
sinned,  after  the  lyke  maner  of  the  transgression  of  Adam,  t//at  is, 
actually:  Yet  are"  all  since  the  fall  of  Adam  begotten  in  his  own 
likenes  after  //is  image,  beeing  conceyued  and  borne  in  iniquitie, 
and  soo  by  nature  the  chi/dren  of  wrath  and  servants  of  sinne, 
and  subiect  to  deat//,  and  all  ot//er  calamities  clue  vnto  sinne  in 
this  world  and  for  euer. 

cGen.  1.  Col.  1,16.  Esa.  45,  12-  Heb.  11,3-  Revel.  4."-  dGen.  1, 
26.  27.  Eph.  4,  24-  Eccles.  7,  3i-  eCen.  3,  l-  4-  5-  2.  Cor.  II,  3.  Joh.  8, 
44.  12.  Pet.  2,  4-  Joh  8,  44-  M-  6-  g Genes.  3,  I-  2-  3-  6  I.  Tim.  2,  14. 
Eccles.  7,31.  Gal.  3.  22.  hRom.  5.  12-  18.  19.  and  6.  23.w1thC.cn.  2,  17. 
i Rom.  5.14.  and9.11.     k Gen.  5,  3-     Psal.  51,  5-     Eph.  2,  3. 

5  7%at  all  man/-inde  beeing  thus  fallen  and  become  alto- 
gether dead  in  sinne,  &  subiect  to  t//e  eternall  wrath  of  God  both 
by  original/  and  actuall  corruption:  T//e  'elect  are  redeemed, 
quickned,  ravsed  vp  and  saued  againe,  not  of  fc&emselues,  neither 
by  vrorks,  lest  aiw  man  s//ould  host  //imself ;  but  vv//olly  and 
only  by  God  of  //is  free  grace  and  mercy  through  faith  in  Christ 
Iesus,1"  who  of  God  is  made  vnto  vs  vvisdome,  &  rightcousnes, 
&  sanctificatio,  &  redemption,  that  according  as  it  is  written,  Hee 
that  reioyceth  let  him  reioyce  in  the  Lord. 


TEXT   OF   THE   CONFESSION  6l 

lGen.  3,  15.  Eph.  2,  4.  5.  Gen.  15.  6.  with  Rom.  4,  2.  3.  4.  5.  and  3.  24. 
25.  26.  Joh.  3,  16.  mi.  Cor.  1,  30.  31.  Phil.  3,  8.  9.  10.  11.  Jir.  23.  5.  0.  and 
9.  23.  24. 

6  That  this  therfore  only  is  lyfen  eternall  to  X'novv  the  only 
true  God,  &  whom  hee  hath  sent  into  the  world  Iesus  Crist. 
And  that  on  the  contrarie  the  "Lord  will  reder  vengeance  in 
flaming  fire  vnto  them  that  know  not  God,  &  which  obey  not 
the  Gospell  of  our  Lord  Iesus  Christ. 

njoh.  17,  3.  and  3  36.  Jir.  31,  33.  34.  02.  Thes.  1,  3.  Eph.  1,  6.  joh. 
3,  36. 

7  That  the  rule  of  this  knowledge  faith  &  obedience,  con- 
cerning the  pworship  &  service  of  God  &  q all  other  christia 
dutyes,  is  not  the  'opinions,  devises,  lavves,  or  constitutions  of 
me,  but  the  written  word  of  the  everlyving  God,  conteyned  in 
the  canonicall  bookes  of  the  old  and  new  Testament. 

pExod.  10,  4.  5.  6.  Deu.  4,  2.  5.  6.  Gen.  6,  22.  Exod.  39,  42.  43.  1. 
Chron.  2S.  19.  ql'sal.  119.  105.  rEsa.  29,  13.  Mat.  15,  9.  Joh.  5,  39.  2. 
Pet.  16,  19.     2.  tim.  3,  16.  17. 

8  That  in  this  word5  Iesus  Christ  hath  reveled  watsoever 
his  father  thought  needfull  for  vs  to  know,  beleeue  &  obey  as 
touching  his'  person  &  Offices,  in*  vrhom  all  the  promises  of  God 
are  yea,  &  in  vrhom  they  are  Amen  to  the  prayse  of  God  through 
vs. 

s  Deut.  iS,  18.  Joh.  1,  i3.  <N:  15,  15.  &  4.  25.  Act.  3.  22.  t  the  vhol  Epis.- 
tle  to  the  Hebr.  throughout,  &  2.  Cor.  1,  28. 

[xiii]  9  That  touching  his  person,  the  Lord  Iesus,  of  who" 
Moses  &  the  Prophets  wrote,  &:  who  the  Apostles  preached,  is  the 
^everlasting  >Sonne  of  t?od,  by  eternall  generation,  the  brightnes 
of  his  Fathers  glorie,  &:  the  engrauen  forme  of  his  Person;  coes- 
sentiall,  coequall,  &:  coeternall,  god  with  him  &  with  the  holy 
Gost,  by  who  hee  hath  made  the  worlds,  by  whom  hee  vphould- 
eth  and  governeth  all  the  works  hee  hath  made;  who  also  when 
the*  fulnes  of  tyme  was  come,  rras  made  man  of  a  woman,  of  "the 
Tribe  of  Aidah,  of  the  b  seed  of  Dauid  &  Abraham,  to  wyt  of 
Mary  that  blessed  Virgin,  by  the  holy  Ghost  comming  vpon  hir,  & 
the  povvre  of  the  most  high  ouershadowing  hir;  &  was  alsoc  in  all 
things  lyke  rnto  vs,  sinne  only  excepted. 

x  Luk.  24,  44.  Joh.  5,  46.  Act.  10,  41.  43.  y  Tro.  8,  22.  mica.  5,2.  Joh. 
1,  1.  2.  3.  Heb.  1.  Collos.  1,  15.  16.  17.  7.  Gal.  4,  4.  Gen.  3,  15.  a  Ileb.  7. 
14.  Revel.  5.  5.  b  Rom.  I,  3.  Gen.  22,  18.  Mat.  1.  1.  etc.  Luk.  3,  23  etc. 
Esa.  7,  14.  Luk.  1.  26.  27.  etc.  Hebr.  2,  16.  c  Heb.  4.  15.  Esa.  53,  3.  4.  9. 
Phil.  2,  7.  8. 


Ilet 

)  g.  15.  &  13.  20. 

Dan.   9  24.  25. 

e  Deut.    iS,    15.    iS. 

45, 

Esa.   9,   6.   7. 

Act.   5.   31.     Esa. 

55.  4.     Heb.   7,  24. 

62  THE   CONFESSION   OF    1 596 

10  That  touching  his  Office,  heed  only  is  made  the  Mediator 
of  the  new  Testament,  eren  of  the  euerlasting  Couenant  of  grace 
between  God  &  man,  to  bee  perfectly  &  fully  the  'Prophet,  Priest 
cc  Kiny  of  the  Church  of  God  for  euermore. 

d  1.  Tim.  2,  5. 
Psal.   no.  4.     Psal. 
Luk.   1,  32,  33. 

11  :That  heef  7'vas  fro  euerlasting,  by  the  iust  &  sufficient 
authoritie  of  the  father,  &  in  respect  of  his  manhood  fro  the  womb, 
called  &  seperated  heervnto,  &  anoynted  also  most  fully  &:  abound- 
antly  with  all  necessarie^ifts,  as  is  g  written;  God  hath  not  meas- 
ured out  the  Spirit  vnto  him. 

f  Fro.  8,  23.  Esa.  42,  6.  &  49.  I.  5-  and  11,  2.  3.  4.  5.  Act.  10.  3S.  g  Joh. 
3,  34- 

12  That  thish  Office,  to  bee  Mediator,  that  is,  Prophet,  Priest 
and  King  of  the  Church  of  God,  is  so  proper  to  him,  as  neither  in 
the  ze/hol,  nor  in  anie  part  therof,  it  ca  be  trasferred  fro  him  to 
anie  ot//er. 

h  1.  Tim.  2,  5.  Heb.  7.  24.  Dan.  7.  14-  Act.  4,  12.  Esa.  43,  11.  Luk. 
1,  33- 

13  77/at  touching  his1  Prop//ecie,  Christ  //at//  perfectly  re- 
realed  out  of  the  bozome  of  his  father,  the  vvholl  word  &  will  of 
God,  that  is  needfull  for  his  seruants,  either  ioyntly  or  seuerally  to 
know,  beleeue  &  obey  :  That  hee  hath  spoken  &  doth  speake  to 
his  Church  in  his  own"  ordinance,  by  his  own  ministers  and  in- 
struments only,  and  not  by  anie  false1  ministrie  at  anie  tyme. 

i  Deu.  iS,  15.  18.  Act.  3,  22.  23.  24.  Mat.  3,  17.  Joh.  1.  iS.  &  17.  S. 
Eph.  1.  S.  9.  2.  Tim.  3.  15.  16,  17.  k  Pro.  9,  3.  Joh.  13,  20.  Luk.  10.  16. 
Mat.  10.  40.  41.  Deu.  33,  §.  10.  1  Mat.  7,  15-  16.  &  24.  23.  24.  2.  Pet.  2.  2. 
Tim.  4.  3.  4.     Rom.  10,  14.  15.     ier.  23,  21.     2.  ioh.  10. 

14  That  toching  his™  Priesthood,  beein  consecrated,  hee 
hath  appeered  once  to  put  away  sinne,  by  offring  &  sacrificing  of 
himsell  ;  and  to  th/s  end  hath  fully  performed  and  suffred  all 
those  things,  by  which  God  through  the  blood  of  that  his  crosse, 
in  an  acceptable  sacrifice,  might  bee  reconciled  to  his  elect;  & 
//avingu  broke  down  the,  partition  wall,  &  Merrvith  finished  &  re- 
moued  al  those  legal  rites,  shadovves,  &  ceremonies,  is  now0  en- 
tred  within  the  rayle  into  t//e  holy  of  holies  to  the  z>ery  heauen, 
and  presence  of  Cod,  where  hee  for  euer  lyueth,  and  sitteth  at  the 
right  hand  of  Maiestie*  appering  before  the  face  of  his  Father,  to 
make  intercession  for  [xiv]  such  as  come  vnto  the  Throne  of  grace 


TEXT   OF   THE   CONFESSION  63 

by  that  new  &  living  way;  And  not  that  only,  but  maketh  his  peo- 
ple ap  spirituall  howse,  an  holy  Priesthood,  to  offer  up  spirituall 
sacrifices,  acceptable  to  God  through  him.  Neither  doth  the 
Father  accept,  or  Christ  offer  anie  other  sacrifice,  worship,  or 
worshippers. 

m  Joh.  17,  ig-  Heb.  5,  7.  8.  9.  &  gi  [g.  26]  r.  Esa.  53,  Ro.  5,  ig.  1.  Pet. 
1,  2.  Collos.  1,  20.  Eph.  5,  2.  n  Eph.  2,  1.  4.  15.  16.  Heb.  g,  &  10.  o  Heb. 
4,  14.  16.  &  9.  24.  and  10.  19.  20.  *  Rom.  3,  34.  p  1.  Pet.  2,  5.  Rev.  I,  5.  6. 
and  8.  3.  4.  Rom.  12,  1.  Mar.  9,  49.  50.  Mai.  1,  14.  Joh.  4  23.  24.  Mat.  7, 
6.  7.  8.     Esa.  1,  12.  etc. 

15  That  touching  his''  A'ingdom,  beeing  risen,  ascended,  en- 
tred  into  glory,  set  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  al  powre  in  Heaven 
and  earth  giue  vnto  him;  which  powre  heer  now  exerciseth  ouer 
all  Angells  and  men,  good  and  dad  [bad],  to  the  preservation  and 
saluation  of  the  elect,  to  the  overruling  and  destruction  of  the 
reprobate;8  communicating  and  app/ying  the  benefits,  virtue  and 
frutes  of  his  prophecy  and  Priesthood  vnto  his  elect,  namely  to  the 
remission,  subduing,  and  takeing  away  of  their  sinnes,  to  their  ius- 
tification,  adoption-of-sonnes,  regeneration,  sanctification,  pre- 
servation &  stregthning  in  all  their  spirituall  conflicts  against 
Sathan,  the  world  &  the  flesh  ccc.  continually  dwelling  in,  govern- 
ing &:  keeping  their  hearts  in  his  tue  [true]  faith  and  fear  by  his 
holy  spirit,  which  having'  once  give  yt,  hee  never  taketh  away 
from  them,  but  by  yt  still  begetteth  and  nourisheth  in  them  repent- 
ance, faith,  loue,  obedience,  comfort,  peace,  ioy,  hope,  and  all 
christian  vertues,  vnto  immortallitie,  notwithstanding  that  yt  be 
sometymes  through  sinne  and  tentation,  interrupted,  smothered, 
and  as  yt  were  overwhelmed  for  the  tyme.  Againe  on  the  con- 
trary ,T  ruling  in  the  world  over  his  enimies,  Nathan,  and  all  the  ves- 
sels of  wrath;  limiting,  vsing,  restrayning  them  by  his  mightie 
powre,  as  seemeth  good  in  diuiue  wisdome  and  iustice,  to  the  ex- 
ecution of  his  determinate  counsell,  to  wit  to  their  seduction, 
hardning  &  condemnation,  delyvering  them  vp  to  a  reprobate 
mynde,  to  bee-£ept  in  darcknes,  sinne  and  sensuallitie  vnto  iudg- 
ment. 

q  1.  Cor.  15,  4.  etc.     1.  Pet.  3,  21.  22.     Mat.  28,  iS,  20.     r  Josh.  5,  14.     Zech. 

1,  8.  etc.  Mark  1,  27.  Heb.  1.  14.  s  Eph.  5,  26,  27.  Ro.  5,  and  6.  and  7.  and 
8.  Chap.  Rom.  14,  17.  Gal.  5,  22.  23.  1.  Joh.  4,  13.  etc.  t  Psal.  51,  10.  11.  12. 
and  89.  30.  31.  32.  33.  34.  Job.  33,  29.  30.  Esa.  54,  8.  9.  10.  Joh.  13,  1.  and 
16.  31.  32,  with  Luc.  22,  31.  32.  40.  2.  Cor.  12,  7.  8.  9.  Eph.  6,  10.  11.  etc. 
Rom.  11,  29.  Gal.  5,  17.  22.  23.  v  Job.  1,  6.  and  2.  Chap.  1.  King.  22.  19. 
Esa.  10,  5.  15.     Rom.  9,  17.  18.     Rom.  I,   21.  and  2.  4.  5.  6.     Eph.  4,  17.  iS.  19. 

2.  Pet.  3,  3.      1.  Thess.  5,  3.  7.     Esa.  57,  20.  21.     2.  Tet.  2,  the  whol  Chapter. 


64  THE   CONFESSION   OF    1 596 

16  That  this  Kingdom  shall  bee  then  fully  perfected  when 
hee  shal  the1  second  tyme  come  in  glorie  with  his  mightie  Angells 
vnto  iudgment,  to  abolish  all  rule,  authoritie  and  povvre,  to  put 
all  his  enimies  vnder  his  feet,  to  seperate  and  free  all  his  chosen 
from  them  for  ever,  to  punish  the  wicked  with  ererlasting  perdi- 
tion from  his  presence,  to  gather,  ioyne,  and  carry  the  godly  with 
himself  into  endlesse  ^lory,  an(l  tnen  to  delyrer,  rp  the  Kingdome 
to  God,  eren  the  Father,  that  so  the  glorie  of  the  father  may  bee 
full  and  perfect  in  the  Sonne,  the  glorie  of  the  Sonne  in  all  his 
members,  and  God  bee  all  in  all. 

x  Dan.  12.  2.  3.  Joh  5,  22.  23.  29.  Mat.  25,  31.  I.  Cor.  15.  24.  Mat.  13, 
41.  49.     2.  Thes.  1,  9.   10.     1.  Thes.  4,  17.     Joh.  17,  22.  23.     I.  Cor.  15,  28. 

[xv]  1 7  That  in  the  meane  tyme,  bisides  his  absolute  rule  in  the 
world,  Christ  hath  here  in  earth  ay  spirituall  A'ingdome  and  x  can- 
onical! regiment  in  his  Church  ouer  his  sen'ants,  which  Church  hee 
hath2  purchased  and  redeemed  to  himself,  as  a  peculiar  inheritance 
(notwithstanding*  manie  hypocrites  do  for  the  tyme  lurk  emongest 
the)  hcalling  and  a/inning  them  by  the  pozc're  of  his  7^ord  rnto  the 
faith,  cseperating  them  from  emongst  rnbeleej'ers,  from  idolitrie, 
false  worship,  superstition,  ranitie,  dissolute  lyfe,  &  7<.'orks  of  dark- 
nes,  &c;  making  them  a  royall  Priesthood,  an  holy  Nation,  a  peo- 
ple set  at  libertie  to  shea'  foorth  the  rirtues  of  him  that  //ath  called 
them  out  of  darknes  into  his  meruelous  light,  fathering  and  unit- 
ing the  together  as  members  of  one  body  in  his  faith,  loue  and  holy 
order,  rnto  all  generall  and  mutuall  dutyes,e  inducting  & ^orern- 
ing  the  by  such  officers  and  lawes  as  hee  hath  prescribed  in  his 
word;  by  which  Officers  and  lari-es  hee  gorerneth  his  Church,  and 
byf  none  other. 

y  Joh.  i3.  36.  Ileb  3,  6.  and  10.  21.  I.  Tim.  3,  15.  Zach.  4,  17. 
20.  28.  Tit.  2,  14.  a  Mat.  13,  47.  and  22.  12.  Luk.  13,  25.  b  Mar.  16,  15.  16. 
Col.  1,  21,  i.  Cor.  6  11.  Tit.  3,  3.  4.  5.  c  Esa.  52.  11,  Ezr.  6,  21.  Act.  2,40. 
2.  Cor.  (>.  14.  Act.  17,  3.  4-  and  19.  9.  1.  Pet.  2,  4.  5.  9.  25.  d  Esa.  60,  4.  8. 
Psal.  IIO,  3.  Act.  2  41.  Eph.  4,  16.  Col.  2,  5.  6.  e  Esa.  62,  6.  Jer.  3,  15, 
Ezek.  34.  Zech.  11,  8.  Ileb.  12,  2S.  29.  Mat.  28,  20.  f  Mat.  7,  15.  and  24.  23. 
24.      2.  Tim.  4,  3.  4.     Jer.  7,  30.  31.  and  23.  21.     Deu.  12,  32.      Reu.  2,  2.   <.V  22. 

[8  That  to  this"  Church  hee  hath  made  the  promises,  and 
giuen  the  seales  of  his  Covenant,  presence,  loue,  blessing  and  pro- 
tection:11 Heere  are  the  holy  Oracles  as  in  the  side  of  the  Arke, 
suerly  kept  &  puerly  taught.  Heere  are1  all  the  fountaynes  and 
springs  of  his  ^race  continually  replenished  and  floTc'ing  forth. 
Heere  ;>k  hee  lyfted  rp  to  all  Nations,  hither  hee1  inuiteth  all  me  to 


TEXT    OF   THE    CONFESSION  65 

his  supper,  his  manage  feast;  hither  ought1"  all  men  of  all  estates 
and  degrees  that  ac&ioze/ledg  him  their  Prophet,  Priest  and 
.fiTing  to  repayre,  to  bee"  enrolled  emon^st  his  houshold  seruants, 
to  bee  rnder  his  heauenly  conduct  and  government,  to  leade  their 
lyues  in  his  walled  sheepfold,  &  ?<.'atered  orchard,  to  haue  com- 
munion heere  with  the  Saincts,  that  they  may  bee  made  meet  to 
bee  partakers  of  their  inherita.ee  in  the  kingrlome  of  God. 

g  Lev.  26,  11.  12.  Mat.  28,  19.  20.  Rom.  9,  4.  Ezek.  48.  35,  2.  Cor.  6. 
IS  h  Esa.  3,  16.  1.  tim.  3,  15.  and  4.  16.  &  6.  3.  5.  2.  Tim.  I,  15.  tit.  I,  9. 
Deu.  31.  26.  i  Psal.  46,  4.  5.  Ezek.  47,  I.  etc.  Joh.  3S,  39.  k  Isa.  11.  12. 
Joh.  3,  14.  Isa.  49,  22.  1  Esa.  55.  1.  Mat.  6,  33.  &  22.  2.  Pro.  9,  4.  5.  Joh. 
7,  37.  m  Deu.  12,  5.  11.  Esa.  2,  2.  3.  Zach.  14,  16.  17.  iS.  19.  n  Esa.  44.  5. 
Psal.   S7,  5.  6.     Can.  4.  12.     Gal.  6,  10.     Col.  1,  12.  13.     Eph.  2,  19. 

19  That  as"  all  his  seruants  and  subiects  are  called  hither,  to 
present  their  bodyes  and  soules,  and  to  bring  the  ^uyfts  God  hath 
giren  them;  so  beeing  come,  they  are  heer  by  himself  bestori'ed  in 
their  sererall  order,  peculiar  place,  due  r-se,  beeing  fitly  compact 
and  knit  together  by  euery  ioynt  of  help,  according  to  the  effect- 
uall  7<vork  in  the  measure  of  euery  parte,  rnto  the  edification  of  yt 
self  in  loue;  7c'herrnto  7che  haev  ascended  vp  on  high  hee  gaue 
guifts  rnto  men,  [xvi]  that  hee  might  fill  all  these  things,  and  hath 
distributed  these  guifts,  rnto  seuerall  functions  in  his  Church,  hau- 
ing  instituted  and  ratified  toq  contynue  7'iito  the  f.'orlds  end,  only 
this  publick  ordinarie  Ministerie  of  Pastors,  Teachers,  Elders,  Dea- 
cons, Helpers  to  the  instruction,  goz'ernment,  and  seruice  of  his 
Church. 

oSee  the  iS.  Article  before,  and  Exod.  25.  2.  and  35.  5.  1  Cor.  12,  4.  5.  6.  7. 
12.  iS.  Rom.  12.  4.  5.  6.  1.  Fet.  4.  10.  Eph.  4,  16.  Colos.  2,  5.  p  Eph.  4,  8. 
10.  11.  12.  13.  Rom.  12,  7.  8.  &  16.  1.  1.  Cor.  12.  4.  5.  6.  7,  3.  11.  14.  15.  16. 
17.  iS.  28.  1.  Tim.  3,  &  5.  3.  9.  17.  21.  Act.  6,  2.  3.  &  14.  23.  and  20.  27.  2S. 
Phil.  1,  1.     q  Rev.  22,  iS.  19.      Mat.  2S,  20.      1.  Tim.  6,  13,  14. 

20  That  this  ministerie  is  exactlyr  described,  du/inguished, 
limited,  concerning  their  office,  their  calling  to  their  office,  ther 
administration  of  their  office,  and  their  maintenance  in  their  office, 
by  most  perfect  and  playne  sla7i'es  in  Gods  tt'ord,  which  Iawes  it  is 
not  lari'full  for  these  Ministers,  or  for  the  7£/holl  Church  Tmttinly  to 
neglect,  trans°resse,  or  7'iolate  in  anie  parte;  nor  yet  to  receiue 
anie  other  larces  brought  into  the  Church  by  anie  person  7A'hatso- 
e7'er. 

rPro.  8,  3.  9.  heb.  3.  2.  6.  the  first  Epistle  to  Timothy  wholly.  Act.  6,  3. 
5.  6.  &  14.  23.  &  20,  17.  etc.  1.  pet.  5,  2.  3.  I.  Cor.  5,  4.  5.  11.  12.  13.  etc.  and 
9.  7.  9.  14.  s  Heb.  2.  3.  and  3.  3.  and  12.  25.  etc.  2.  Tim  3,  14.  15.  Gal.  1,  8.  g. 
1  tim.  6,  13.  14.     Deut.  12,  32.  and  4.  2.     Revel.  22,  18.  19. 


66  THE  CONFESSION  OF    1 596 

21  TV/at'  none  may  rsurp  or  execute  a  ministerie  but 
such  as  are  rightly  called  by  the  Church  7i'hereof  they  stand  minis- 
ters; and  that  such  so  called  ought  to  gyve  all  diligence  toT  fulfill 
ther  ministerie,  to  bee  found  faithfull  and  unblamable  in  all  things. 

t  Num.  16,  5.  40.  &  iS.  7.     2.  Chron.  26.  18.     Joh.  10.  I.  2  and  3.  27.  Heb. 

5.  4.     Act.  6,  3.  5.  6.  \  14.  23.     Tit.  1.  5.     vAct.  2.  28.     1.  cor.  4,  1.  2.  Col.  4, 

17.     1.  Tim.  1,  iS.  19.  &  4.  12.  and  5  21  i:  6.  11.   12.  13.   14.     2.  Tim.  1,  13.   14. 
and  3.  14.  and  4.  5,  1.  Pet.  5,  1.  2.  3.  4. 

22  That  this  ministerie  is  alyke  given  to  euery  Christian  con- 
gregation, 7<-ith  like  porrre  and  commission  to  haue  and  enioy  the 
same,  as  God  offereth  fit  men  and  meanes,  the  same  rules  giren  to 
all  for  the  election  and  execution  therof  in  all  places. 

Mat.  28,  20.  1.  cor  14,  33.  36.  1.  Cor.  12,  4.  5.  6.  7.  and  4.  17.  and  16.  I. 
eph.  4,  10.  11.  12.  13.      1.  cor.  3,  21.  22.  23.      Mat.  iS.  17.     see  Article  20. 

23  That  as  erery  christian  Congregation1  hath  povvre  and 
commandement  to  elect  and  ordeine  their  own  ministerie  accord- 
ing to  the  rules  prescribed,  andy  7<Tiilest  they  shal  faithfully  execute 
their  office,  to  haue  them  in  superaboundant  loue  for  their  vvorke 
sake,  to  prozide  for  them,  to  honour  them  and  reuerence  them,  ac- 
cording to  the  dignitie  of  the  office  they  execute.  So  have  they 
also2  porvre  and  commandement  ?.'hen  anie  such  defalt,  either  in 
their  lyfe,  Doctrine,  or  administration  breaketh  out,  as  by  the  rule 
of  the  word  debarreth  them  from,  or  depriveth  them  of  their  minis- 
terie, by  due  order  to  depose  them  from  the  ministerie  they 
exercised;  yea  if  the  case  so  require,  and  they  remayne  obstinate 
and  impenitent,  orderly  to  cut  them  off  by  excommunication. 

xAct.  6,  3.  5.  6.  &  14.  23.  2.  Cor.  3.  19.  Act.  15.  2.  3.  22.  25.  1.  Tim.  3, 
10.  and  4.  14,  ..V  5.  22.  Num.  S,  9.  10.  y  1.  Thes.  5,  12.  13.  I.  Tim.  5,  3.  17. 
Heb.  13,  17.  1.  cor.  9.  Gal.  6.  6.  zi.  Tim.  3,  10.  and  5.  22.  Rom.  16,  17. 
rhyl.  3,  2.  iS.  19.     I.  Tim.  6,  3.  5.     Ezek.  44,  11.  13.     Mat.  18,  17. 

24  That?  Christ  hath  given  this  porrre  to  receiue  in  or  to  cut 
off  anie  member,  to  the  vvholl  body  together  of  euery  Christian 
Congregation,  and  not  to  anie  one  member  aparte,  or  to  moe  mem- 
bers sequestred  from  the  rrholl,  or  to  anie  other  Congregation  to 
doo  it  for  the:  yet  thatb  ech  Congregation  ou^dit  to  vse  the  best 
help  they  can  heer  rnto,  and  the  most  meet  member  they  haue  to 
pronounce  the  same  in  their  publick  assembly. 

aPsal.  122.  3.  Act.  1,  47-  Rom.  16,  2.  Lev.  20,  4.  5.  &  24.  14.  Num.  5. 
3.  Deu.  13,  9.  Mat.  iS,  17.  1.  cor.  5,  4.  2.  cor.  2,  6.  7.  8.  bi.  Cor.  3,  21. 
22.  23.     Act.  15.     1.  cor.  3,  4.  5.  ..V  12.  20. 


TEXT   OF   THE   CONFESSION  6? 

[xvii]  25  That  euery  member  of  ech  Christian  Congregation, 
how  excellent,  great,  or  learned  soeiuT,  ought  to  be  subiect  to 
this  censure  &:  iudgment  of  Christ;  Yet  ought  not  the  Church 
without  great  care  &  due  advise  to  procede  against  such  publick 
persons.1 

Lev.  4.  Psal.  141,  5.  and  2,  10.  11.  12.  &  149.  8.  9.  1.  Chro  26,  20.  Act. 
11,  2.  4.     1.  Tim.  5,  19.  20.  21. 

26  TV/at  for  t//e  c keeping  of  this  C/zurc/z  in  /zoly  &  orderly- 
communion,  as  Christ  //at//  placed  some  speciall  men  orer  the 
Church,  who  by  t/zeir  office  are  to  governe,  ouersee,  visite,  watch, 
&c.  So'1  lykevrise  for  t//e  better  keeping  therof  in  all  places,  by 
all  t//e  members,  hee  hath  giuen  aut//oritie  &  layd  duty  <'pon  the 
all  to  watch  one  ouer  another. 

cCant.  3,  3.  Esa.  62,  6.  Eze.  33.  2.  Mat.  14,  45.  Luk.  12,  42.  Act.  20, 
28.  Heb.  13,  17.  b  Mar.  13,  34,  37.  Luk.  17,  3.  1.  Thes.  5,  14.  Gal.  6,  1. 
Jude.  3,  20.     Hebr.  10,  24,  25.  &  12.  15. 

27  That  rt'/zilest  the  Ministers  and  people  t/zus  remayne  to- 
gether in  this  holy  order  and  christian  communion,  ech  one  en- 
devoring  to  do  the  will  of  God  in  t//eir  calling,  6c  thus  to  walke 
in  t//e  obedience  of  fait//  C//rist  //at//  promised  to  bee  present  with 
t/zem,  to  blesse  &  defend  them  against  all  adverserie  powre,  & 
that  t/ze  gates  of  Hell  s/zall  not  prevayle  against  t/zem. 

Deu.  28,  1.  etc.  Mat.  28,  20.  Luk.  12,  35.  36.  37.  3S.  Mat.  16.  18.  Zach. 
2,  5.  &  12,  2.  3.  4.     Psal.  125,  2.  &  132.  12.  13.  etc. 

28  But  when  &  w/zere  this  holy  order  &:  diligent  watch  'was 
intermitted,  neglected,  violated.  Antichrist  that  man  of  sinne 
corrupted  &  altered  t/ze  holy  ordinances,  offices,  &  administratios 
of  the  c/zurc/z  broug/zt  in  &  erected  a  strange  ne7t'  forged  minis- 
terie,  leitourgie  and  government  &:  the  Nations  A'ingdoms  &  in- 
habitants of  the  eart/z,  were  made  drunken  with  t//is  cup  of  forni- 
cations &  abhominations,  &  all  people  enforced  to  receiue  the 
Beasts  marke  and  wors/zip  his  image  &  so  brought  into  confusion 
&  babilonish  bondage. 

Rev.  9.  &  13.  &  17.  &  18.  1.  Thes.  2,  3.  4.  9.  10.  11.  12.  psal.  74.  Esa. 
14.  13.  14.     Dan.  7.  25.  and  S.  10.  11.  12.  &  11.  31.     1.  Tim.  4,  1.  2.      1.  joh.  2, 

18.  22.  &  4.  3. 

29  T/zat  the  present  ministerie  reteyned  &  vsed  in  Englad  of 
Arch.  bbb.  Lo^.2  Deanes,  Prebendaries,  Canons,  Peti-Canons,  Arch- 

1  An  answer  to  the  frequent  question  what  would  they  do  with  a  sovereign  worthy  of  excom- 


2  Lord  bishops,  the  favorite  Separatist  designation  for  a  diocesan  bishop  as  distinguished  from 
a  New  Testament  bishop. 


68  THE   CONFESSION    OF    1 596 

Deacons,  Chancellors,  Commissaries,  Priests,  Deacons,  Parsons, 
Viccars  Curats,  Hireling  rouiny  Preachers,  Church-wardens, 
Parish-clerkes  tieir  Doctors,  Proctors,  &  wholl  rable  of  those 
Courts  with  all  from  &  vnder  t//cra  set  ouer  these  Cathedral!  & 
Paris//ionull  Assemblies  in  this  confusion,  are  a  strange  &  Anti- 
christian  ministerie  &  offices;  &  are  not  that  ministerie  aboue 
named  instituted  in  Christs  Testament,  or  allowed  in  or  ouer  his 
Church. 

Revel.  9,  3.  etc.  &  13.  15.  16.  17.  &  iS.  15.  17.  compared  with  Rom.  12,  7. 
8.  Eph.  4,  11.  12.  1.  Tim.  3.  15.  &  5.  17.  Compare  this  Art.  with  the  1.  7.  12. 
13.  14.  19.  20.  21.  22.  23.  24.  2S.  Articles  aforesaid. 

30  7nat  their  'Offices,  Entrance,  Administration  and  main- 
tenance, with  their  'names,  titles,  prr'ileges,  &  prerogatiues  the 
porrre  &  rule  they  j'surp  ouer  and  in  these  Ecclesiasticall  assem- 
blies ouer  the  wholl  ministerie,  wholl  ministration  and  affaires 
therof,  yea  one  ouer  another  by  their  making  Priests,  citing,  sus- 
pending, silencing,  deposing,  absoluing,  excommunicating,  <S:c. 
Their  confounding  of  Ecclesiasticall  and  Civile  Jurisdiction, 
causes  ec  proceedings  in  ther  persons,  courts,  [xviii]  comissions, 
Visitations,  the  rest  of  lesse  rule,  taking  their  ministerie  fro  and 
exercising  it  vnder  them  by  their  prescription  and  limitation, 
swearing  Canonicall  obedience  vnto  them,  administring  by  their 
devised  impose*/,  minted  popish  Leiturgie,  ccc.  are  sufficient  proofs 
of  the  former  assertion,  the  perticulars  therin  beeing  duly  exam- 
ined by  and  compared  to  the  Rules  of  Christs  Testament. 

e Compare  with  Articles  1,  7.  12.  13.  14.  19.  etc.  Rev.  9.  3,  etc.  &  iS.  15.  17. 
Joh.  10,  1.  Dan.  7,  S.  25.  and  8.  10.  11.  12.  2  Thes.  2.  3.  4.  S.  9.  rev.  17,  4. 
5.  16.  fLuk.  22,  25.  26.  Rev.  14.  11.  &  17.  3.  4.  5.  &  13.  15.  iC.  17  1.  ret.  5, 
3.  with  Joh.  3,  29.  &  with  Rev.  2.  1.  1.  King.  12.  27.  zac.  11.  15.  16.  gRev. 
13,  15.  16.  17.  Esa.  29.  13.  Mat.  7,  7.  8.  Ga.  I,  10.  etc.  &  2,  4.  5.  Col.  2,  20. 
22.  23.     Ezek.  S,  5.  &  13.  9.  10.  11.  iS.  19.      Mica  2,  11.     mal.  I,  8.  13.  14. 

31  That  these  Ecclesiasticall  Assemblies,  remayning  in  con- 
fusion and  bondage  vnder  this  Antichristian  Ministerie,  Courts, 
Canons,  worship,  Ordinances.  &c.  without  freedom  or  porrre  to 
redresse  anie  enormitie,  have  not  in  this  confusion  and  subiection, 
Christ  their  Prophet,  Priest,  and  King,  neither  can  bee  in  this 
estate,  (whilest  ?i'ee  iudge  them  by  the  rules  of  Cods  word)  es- 
teemed the  true,  orderly  gathered,  or  costituted  churc//es  of 
Christ,  Ti-herof  the  faithfull  ought  to  beecome  or  stand  .Members, 
or  to  haue1'  anie  Sp/rituall  communion  with  them  in  their  publick 
vvors/np  and  Administration. 


TEXT   OF   THE   CONFESSION  69 

Rev.  iS,  2.  1.  Cor.  14,  33.  Jir.  15,  19.  Mai.  1,  4.  6.  S.  IIos.  4,  14.  etc. 
Rom.  6,  16.  2.  Fet  2,  19.  compare  with.  Art.  1.  7.  11.  12.  13.  14.  15.  17.  iS.  19. 
20.  24.  2S.  29.  30.  aforesaid.  hLevit.  17,  IIos.  4,  15,  1.  Cor.  10.  iS.  19.  20.  2. 
Cor.  6,  14.  15,   16.      Rev.  iS,  4.     Cant.  1,  6.  7. 

32  That'  by  Gods  Commandement  all  that  will  bee  saued, 
must  with  speed  come  forth  of  this  Antichristian  estate,k  leaving 
the  suppression  of  it  vnto  the  Magistrate  to  whom  it  belongeth.1 
And  that  both  all  such  as  haue  receyued  or  exercised  anie  of  these 
false  Offices  or  anie  pretended  function  or  Ministerie  in  or  to  this 
false  and  Antichristian  constitution,  are  willingly  in  Gods  feare,  to 
giue  ouer  and  leaue  those  vnlavz'full  Offices,  and  no  longer  to  minis- 
ter in  this  maner  to  these  Assemblies  in  this  estate  And  that1  none 
also,  of  what  sort  or  condition  soever,  doo  giue  anie  part  of  their 
Goods,  Lands,  Money,  or  money  worth  to  the  maintenance  of  this 
false  Ministerie  and  vz-'orship  vpon  anie  Commandement,  or  vnder 
anie  colour  z/vhatsoeuer. 

i  Reu.  iS,  4.  Esa.  48,  20.  and  52.  11.  Jir.  50,  8.  &  51.  6.  45.  Zech.  2,  6. 
k  2.  Chro.  15,  and  27.  6.  2.  Ring.  23,  5.  etc.  Rom.  13,  4.  Mat.  22,  21.  rev. 
17,  16.  1  Zech.  13,  2.  4.  5.  6.  Jir.  51,  26.  Tsal.  119,  59.  60.  12S.  Prov.  5,  20. 
Esa.  8,  11.  12.  and  35.  8.  Zach.  14,  21.  Frov.  3,  9.  10.  compared  with  Exod.  20. 
4.  5-  Judg-  17-  3-  4-  5-  Ezek.  16.  17.  18.  19.  I.  Cor.  10.  19.  20.  21.  22.  com- 
pared with  Heb.  13,  10.  &  with  2.  Cor.  8.  3.  4.  5.     1.  Tim.  5,  17. 

33  That  beeing  come  forth  of  this  antic/zristian  estate  OTito 
the  freedom  and  true  profession  of  Christ,  besides  the'"  instructing 
and  [xix]  t'vell  guyding  of  their  own  Families,  they  are"  willingly 
to  ioyne  together  in  christian  communion  and  orderly  couenant, 
and  by  confession  of  Faith  and  obedience  of  Christ,  to0  mite  them- 
selues  into  peculiar  Congregatios;  wherin,  as  members  of  one  body 
znmerof  Christ  is  the  only  head,  t/iey  are  to  ?<vorship  and  serue 
God  according  to  his  word,  remembringp  to  keep  holy  the  Lords 
day. 

m  Gen.  iS.  19.  Exod.  13,  S.  14.  Fro.  31,  26.  27.  Eph.  6,  4.  Deut.  6,  7. 
Psal.  78,  3.  4  n  Luk.  17,  37.  Psal.  no,  3.  Mat.  6,  Esa.  44.  5.  Act.  2,  41,  42. 
Jir.  50,  4.  5.  Neh.  9,  38.  Act.  2,  41.  42.  o  1.  Cor.  1,  2.  and  12.  14.  Rev.  1, 
20  and  2.  1.  8.  12.  iS.  &  3.  1.  7.  14.  Eph.  2,  19.  Col.  2,  19.  p  Exod.  20,  8. 
Rev.  1,  10.     Act.  20,  7.     1.  Cor.    16,  2. 

34  That  such  asq  God  hath  giuen  ^uiftes  to  enterpret  the 
Scriptures,  tryed  in  the  exercise  of  Prophecie,  giving  attendance  to 
studie  and  learn/ng,  may  and  ousdit  by  the  appointment  of  the  Con- 
gregation, to  teach  publickly  the  word,  pntill  the  people  bee  meet 
for,  and  God  manifest  men  z>vith  able  guifts  and  fitnes  to  such  Of- 


1  See  ante,  p.  46. 


JO  THE   CONFESSION    OF    1 596 

fice  or  Offices  as  Christ  hath  appointed  to  the  publick  ministerie  of 
his  church;  but  'no  Sacraments  to  bee  administred  rntill  the  Pas- 
tors or  Teachers  bee  chosen  and  ordeyned  into  their  Office. 

q  1.  Cor.  14,  rom.  12.  6.  1.  Cor.  12,  7.  1.  Pet.  4,  10.  Act.  13.  15. 
1.  Thes.  5,  20.     r  Num.  16,  10.  39.  40.      Rom.  12.  7.      Ileb.  5,  4.     Joh.  I,  23.  25. 

35  That*  vrheras  ther  shalbee  a  people  fit,  and  men  fur- 
nished a/ith  meet  and  necessarie  .g-uifts,  they  doo  not  only  still  con- 
tinue the  exercise  of  Prophecie  aforesayd,  but  doo  also  vpon  due 
tryall,  proceed  vnto  choyce  and  ordination  of  Officiers  for  the  min- 
isterie and  serrise  of  the  Church,  according  to  the  rule  of  C7ods 
7701-d;  And  that  soe  they'  hold  on  still  to  vvalke  fora'ard  in  the 
7t'ayes  of  Christ  for  their  mutuall  edification  and  comfort,  as  it 
shall  please  God  to  giue  knowledge  and  grace  thervnto.  And  par- 
ticularly, that'  such  as  bee  of  the  seed,1  or  vnder  the  goz'ernment 
of  anie  of  the  Church,  bee  euen  jn  their  infancie  receiued  to  Bap- 
tisme,  ond  made  perta/'ers  of  the  signe  of  Gods  Couenant  made 
with  the  faithfull  and  their  seed  throughout  all  Generations.  And 
that1  all  of  the  Church  that  are  of  yeeres,  and  able  to  examine 
themselues,  doo  communicate  also  in  the  Lords  Supper  both  men' 
and  women,  and  in*  both  kindes  bread  and  vvyne  in  ze/hich"  Ele- 
ments, as  also  in  the  water  of  baptisme,  euen  after  their  are  con- 
secrate, there  is  neyt//er  transubstantiation  into,  nor  Consubstan- 
tiation  with  t//e  bodye  and  bloode  of  Tesus  Christ  ;  vvhome  bthe 
.//eauens  must  conteyne;  mtill  the  tyme  [xx]  that  al  things  bee  re- 
stored. "But  they  are  in  the  ordinance  of  God  signes  and  seales  of 
Gods  euerlasting  couenant,  representing  and  offring  to  all  the  re- 
ceiuers,  but  exhibiting  only  to  the  true  beleevers  the  Lord  Iesus 
Christ  and  all  his  benefits  vnto  righteousnes,  sanctification  and 
eternall  lyfe,  through  faith  in  his  name  to  the  glorie  and  prayse  of 
God. 

s  Lev.  S.  Act.  6,  3.  5.  6.  &  14.  21.  22.  23.  Tit.  1,  5.  etc.  1.  Cor.  12,  7.  8. 
14.  15.  1.  Tim.  3.  t  Col.  2,  5.  6.  7.  2.  Thes.  2.  15.  Jud.  3,  etc.  Mat.  28, 
20.  v  Act.  2,  38,  39.  1.  Cor.  7,  14.  Rom.  11,  16,  Gen.  17,  7.  12.  27.  1.  cor. 
10,  2.  Psal.  22,  30.  Exod.  12,  4S.  49.  Act.  16,  15.  33.  1.  Cor.  1,  16.  Mar.  10, 
13,  14.  15.  16.  Gal.  3,  29.  x  Mat.  26,  26.  27.  1.  Cor.  11.  28.  and  10.  3,  4.  16. 
17.  act.  2,  42,  &  20.  7.  8.  y  Gal.  3,  2S.  Act.  2.  42.  with  1.  1  4.  1.  Cor.  12, 
13.  z  Mat.  26,  26.  27.  1.  Cor.  10,  3.  4.  16.  &  11.  23.  24.  25.  26.  27.  28.  20. 
a  I.  Cor.  10,  16.  17.  &  11.  23.  24.  25.  26.  etc.  Mat.  26,  26.  27.  29.  &  15.  17. 
Joh.  12,  8.  b  Act.  3,  21.  &  7.  56.  c  Gen.  17,  11.  rom.  4,  11.  Exod.  12,  13. 
with  Heb.  13,  20.  d  1.  Cor.  11,  26.  27.  28.  29.  &  10.  3.  4.  5.  Rom.  2.  28.  29. 
Act.  15.  9.     Rom.  5,  &  6.  7.  &  8.  Chapt. 


/.  <'.,  Children  of  those  who  are  members  of  the  local  church,  thus  in  covenant  relation  with 


TEXT   OF   THE   CONFESSION  yi 

36  That  thus*  beeing  righly  gathered,  established,  and  still 
proceeding  in  christian  communion  &  obedience  of  the  Gospell  of 
Christ,  none  is  to  seperate  for  falts  and  corruptions  which  may  and 
so  long  as  the  Church  consisteth  of  mortall  men,  will  fall  out  & 
arise  emong  them,  e.ven  in  a  true  constituted  Church,  but  by  duef 
order  to  seeke  redresse  therof. 

e  Lev.  4.  13.  etc.     2.  Chro.  15,  9.  17.  and  30.  iS.  19.     rev.  2,  and  3.     1.  Cor. 

1.  10.  Phil.  2,  1.  2.  3.  4.  5.  6.  and  3.  15.  16.  heb.  10.  25.  ind  Qude]  19.  f  2.  Cor. 
13.  1.  2.  rev.  2.  and  3.  I.  Thes.  5.  14.  2.  Thes.  3,  6.  14.  Mat.  18,  17.  1.  Cor. 
5,  4.  5.     Act.  15.  1.  2. 

37  That8  such  as  yet  see  not  the  truth,  may  heare  the  publik 
doctrine  and  prayers  of  the  church,  and  rcith  al  mee/hies  are  to  bee 
sought  by  all  meanes:  Yet  hnone  7i'ho  are  gro7fne  in  yeeres  to 
bee  received  into  their  communion  as  members,  but  such  as  doo 
make  confession  of  their  faith,  publickly  desiring  to  bee  receiued  as 
members,  and  promising  to  7calke  in  the  obedience  of  Christ. 
Neither  anie1  Infants,  but  such  as  are  the  seed  of  t//e  faithfull  by 
one  of  the  parents,  or  rnder  their  education  and  gouernment.  And 
further  not  aniek  from  one  Congregation  to  bee  receiued  members 
in  another,  7idthout  bringing  certificate  of  their  former  e^/ate  and 
present  purpose. 

g  1.  cor.  14,  24.  25.  Psal.  18.  49.  rom.  15,  9.  10.  1.  Tim.  2,  4.  2.  Tim.  2, 
25.  h  2.'  Cor.  6,  14.  15.  16.  Ezra.  4,  3.  Exod.  12,  43.  Lev.  22.  25.  Exod,  34. 
12.  Deu.  7,  Esa.  44.  5.  Act.  19,  18.  i  Exod.  20,  5.  6.  1.  Cor.  7,  14.  Gen.  17, 
7.  12.  27.     Exod.  12,  4S.  49.     Act.  16.  15,  33.     k  Act.  9,  26.  27.     rom.   16,   r.  2. 

2.  Cor.  3,  23.     Col.  4,  10, 

38  That  though  Congregations  bee  thus  distinct  and  ser-erall 
bodyes,  every  one  as  a  compact  Citie  in  it  self,  yet  are  they  all  to 
7(.'alke  by  one  and  the  same  rule,  &:  by  all  meanes  convenient  to 
haue  the  counsell  and  help  one  of  another  in  all  needfull  affayres 
of  the  Church,  as  members  of  one  body  in  the  common  Faith,  vnder 
Christ  their  head. 

Look  Articles  1.  22.  23.     Psal.  122  3.     Cant.  8.  8.  9.     1.  cor.  4,  17.  and  16.  1. 

39  That  it  is  the  Office  and  duty  of  Princes  and  Magestrates, 
haho  by  the  ordinance  of  God  are  supreme  Governers  7'nder  him 
over  all  persons  and  causes  7x/ithin  their  Realmes  and  Dominions, 
tom  suppress  and  root  out  by  their  authoritie  all  false  ministeries, 
7-oluntarie  Relligions  and  counterfeyt  7£>orship  of  God,  to  abolish 
and  destroy  the  Idoll  Temples,  Images,  Altares,  Vestments,  and 
all  other  monuments  of  Tdolatrie  and  superstition  and  to  take  and 
com'ert  to  their  OTcn  ciz'ile  vses  not  only  the  benefit  of  all  such 


72  THE   CONFESSION  OF    150 

idolitrous  buyldings  &  monuments,  but  also  the  Revenues,  De- 
raeanes,  I.ortlships,  Possessions,  Gleabes  and  maintenance  of  anie 
false  ministcries  and  vnlarcfull  Ecclesiasticall  functions  whatsoever 
within  their  Dominions,  [xxi]  And  on  the  other  hand"  to  estab- 
lish &  mayntein  by  their  la7«:'es  erery  part  of  Cods  word  his  pure 
Relligion  and  true  ministerie  to  cherish  and  protect  all  such  as  are 
carefull  to  worship  God  according  to  his  word,  and  to  leade  a 
godly  lyfe  in  all  peace  and  loyalltie;  yea  to  enforce  al  their 
iects  whether  Ecclesiasticall  or  civile,  to  do  their  dutyes  to  God 
and  men,  protecting  &  mainteyning  the  good,  punishing  and  re- 
streyning  the  evill  according  as  God  hath  commanded,  whose 
Lieuetenants  they  are  Steer  on  earth. 

1  Rom.  13,  3.  4.  1.  Pet.  2.  3,  14.  2.  Chro.  19,  4-  etc.  and.  29.  and  34.  Chap. 
Judg.  17,  5.  6.  Math.  ae.  21.  Tit.  3,  1.  m  2.  King.  23,  5,  etc.  Psal.  no.  Deu. 
12,  2.  3.  with  17.  14.  18.  19.  20.  2  King.  10.  26.  27.  28.  2.  Chro.  17,  6.  Pro. 
16!  12.  and  25.  2.  3.  4-  5-  Act.  19,  27.  Rev.  17.  16.  n  Deut.  17.  14,  18.  19.  20. 
Josua.  1,  7.  S.  2  Chro.  17,  4.  7-  8.  9.  &  19.  4.  etc.  &  29.  &  30.  Dan.  6,  25.  26. 
Psal.  2,  10.  11.  12.  &  72.  1.  etc.     Esa.  49.  23-      Rev.  21.  24.     Ezra.  7.  26. 

40  That  therfore  the0  protection  &  commandement  of  the 
Princes  and  Magistrats  maketh  it  much  more  peaceable,  though1' 
no  a/hit  at  all  more  larrfull,  to  rvalke  in  the  waves  and  ordinances 
of  Iesus  C/rist  which  hee  hath  commanded  his  church  to  keep 
without  spot  and  vnrebukeable  vntill  //is  appcering  in  the  end  of 
the  world.  qAnd  that  in  this  behalf  the  brethren  thus  mynded 
and  proceeding  as  is  beforesaid,  doo  both  contynually  supplicate 
to  God,  and  as  t//ey  may,  to  their  Princes  and  Gouernours  that  thus 
and  vnder  them  they  may  leade  a  quiet  and  peaceable  lyfe  in  all 
^-odlynes  and  honestie. 

oPro.  16,  15.  Ezr.  5.  aud  6.  Act.  9,  31-  *•  Tim.  2,  2.  Dan.  6.  25.  26. 
Rev.  21,  24.  pAct.  4,  iS.  19.  and  5.  28.  29.  Dan.  6,  7.  8.  9.  10.  22.  Luk.  21, 
12.  13.  Mat.  28,  20.  1.  titn.  5,  21.  and  6.  13.  14.  q  Psal.  72,  I.  etc.  1.  tim.  2, 
2.     2  chro.  15,  1.  2.     Hag.  1.  4-  U-  and  2.  5. 

41  That  if  God  encline  the  Magistrates  hearts  to  the  allor- 
vance  &  protection  of  them  therin  they  accompt  it  a  happie 
blessing  of  God  who  granteth  such  nourcing  Fathers  and  nourc- 
ing  Mothers  to  his  Church,  &  be  carefull  to  ze/alke  worthie  so 
great  a  mercy  of  God  in  all  thankfulnes  and  obedience. 

Tsal.  126,  1.  etc.  Esa.  49,  13-  and  60  16.  Psal.  72,  1.  etc.  Rom.  13,  3-  «■ 
Tim.  2,  2.  3.  4. 

42  That  if  God  withold  the  Magistrates  allowance  and 
furtherace  heerin,  they1   yet  proceed  together  in  christian  coue- 


TEXT   OF   THE   CONFESSION  73 

nant  &  communion  thus  to  vvalke  in  the  obedience  of  Christ  eve 
through  the  middest  of  all  tryalls  and  aflictions,  not  accompting 
their  goods,  Lands  VVyves,  Children,  Fathers,  Mothers,  brethren, 
Sisters,  no  nor  their  own  lyues  dear  vnto  the,  so  as  they  may 
finish  t//eir  course  7#ith  ioy,  remembring  alovayes  that  wee  s  ought 
to  obey  God  rather  the  ma,  &:  grounding4  vpon  the  commande- 
ment,  commission  and  prom/se  of  our  Saviour  Christ,  who  as  hee 
hath  all  povvre  in  heaue  &  in  earth,  so  hath  also  promised  if  they 
keep  his  commandements  which  hee  hath  giue  without  limitatio 
of  tyme,  place,  Magistrates  allowance  or  disallowance,  to  bee 
a/ith  them  rnto  tbe  end  of  the  world  and  rvhen  they  haue  finished 
their  course  and  kept  the  fait//,  to  giue  them  t//e  crorrn  of  right- 
eousnes  z/vhich  is  layd  vp  for  all  them  that  loue  his  appeering. 

r  Act.  2,  40.  41.  42.  and  4.  19.  and  5.  28.  29.  41.  and  16.  20.  etc.  and  17.  6.  7. 
and  20.  23.  24.  1.  Thes.  3.  3.  Phil.  1.  27.  28.  29.  Dan.  3,  iC.  17.  18.  and  6.  7. 
10.  22.  23.  24.  Luk.  1  4,  26.  27.  &  21.  12.  13,  14.  2.  tim.  2,  12.  and  3,  12.  heb 
10,  32.  etc.  1.  Pet.  4.  Rev.  2,  10.  25.  26.  and.  6.  9.  and  12.  11  "Act.  5,  29.  and 
17.  6.  7.  tMat.  2S.  iS.  19.  20.  1.  Tim.  6,  13.  14.  15.  16.  2.  Tim.  4,  7.  S.  Rev. 
2,  10.  and  14.  12.  13.  and  22.   16.  17.  18.  19.  20. 

43  That  they  doo  also  rvillingly  and  orderly  pay  and  per- 
forme  all  maner  of  larziull  and  accustomed  dutyes  z'nto  all  men, 
submitting  [xxii]  in  the  Lord  themselues,  their  bodyes,  Landes, 
£oods  and  lyves  to  the  J/agistrates  pleasure.  And  t//at  euery 
77'ay  they  ac-tnorvledge,  reverence  and  obey  them  according  to 
godlynes,  not  because  of  wrath  only  but  also  for  conscience  sake. 

Rom.  13,  1.  5.  6.  7.  Mat.  22,  21.  2.  chro  27,  Ezr  7,  26.  Tit.  3,  1.  1. 
Pet.  2,  13  etc. 

44  And  thus  doo  wee  the  .Subiects  of  God  and  hir  Ma"'- 
falsely  called  Brownists  labour  to  giue  vnto  God  that  which  is 
Gods,  &  vnto  Caesar  that  which  is  Caesars,  endevoring  our  selues 
to  haue  alwayes  a  cleere  conscience  towards  God  and  towards 
men  :  And  if  anie  ta/'e  this  to  be  heresie,  then  doo  wee  with  the 
v  Apostle  freely  confesse  that  after  the  way  vvhic//  they  call 
heresie  we  worship  Cod  the  Father  of  our  Lord  /esus  Christ ; 
beleeving  all  things  that  are  written  in  the  Larr,  and  in  the 
Prophets  &  Apostostles :  And  vvhatsoeuer  is  according  to  this 
word  of  truth  published  by  this  .State  or  holden  by  anie  reformed 
churches  abrode  in  the  world. 

vAct.  24,  14. 

45  Finally,  wheras  wee  are  much  slandered,  as  if  we 
denyed  or  misliked   t//at  forme  of    prayer  commonly  called  the 

6 


74  THE   CONFESSION   OF    1 596 

Lords  Prayer  wee  thought  it  needfull  heere  also  concerning  it  to 
make  known  that  wet  beleeue  and  acknor'7'ledg  it  to  bee  a  most 
absolute  &:  most  excellent  forme  of  prayer  sush  [such]  as  no  men 
or  Angells  can  set  downe  the  like  And  that  it  was  taught  &  ap- 
pointed by  our  Lord  Iesus  Christ,  not  that  wee  should  bee  tyed 
to  the  rse  of  those  very  words,  but  /hat  wee  should  according  to 
that  rule  mak^  all  our  requests  &:  /hanksgyuing  rnto  God,  foras- 
much as  \t  is  a  perfect  forme  and  patterne  conteynin^  in  it  playne 
&  sufficient  directions  of  prayer  for  all  occasions  and  necessities 
that  haue  been,  are,  or  shalbee  to  the  church  of  God,  or  anie 
member  therof  to  the  end  of  the  world. 

Mat.  6,  9.  etc.  Luk.  11,2.  etc.  compared  with  Mat.  14,  30.  and  26.  39.  42. 
Act.  1.  24.  25.  and  4.  24.  etc.  Rom.  8,  26.  27.  Rev.  8,  3,  4.  Eph.  6.  18,  19. 
Phyl.  4,  6.     Heb.  11,  iS.  19.  20.  21.     Jude  vers.  24,  25. 

Now  vnto  liim  that  is  a  hie  [able]  to  keep  vs  that  wee  fall  not,  &  to 
present  us  faltlesse  before  the  presence  of  his  glorie  with  joy  ;  that  is  to 
God  only  wise  out  Sauiour,  bee  glory,  &>  Majestie  d"°  dominion,  c~ 
powre  both  now  <S-"  for  ever.     Amen. 


IV 

THE  POINTS  OF  DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN  CON- 
GREGATIONALISM AND  THE  CHURCH  OF 
ENGLAND,    1603 

Editions  and  Reprints 

I.  In  Johnson  and  Ainsworth's  Apologie  or  Defence  of  sveh  Trve  Christians 
as  are  commonly  (but  vniustly)  called  Brovvnists  :  etc.,  1604,  pp.  36-3S.1 

II.  With  the  Confession  of  1596-98  in  Confessio  Fidei  Atiglorum  quorundam 
in  Inferiori  Germania  exnlantium.  Vnd  cum  annotatione  brevi  proecipuarum 
rerum  in  quibus  differimus  ab  Ecclesia  Anglite,  etc.      1607. 2 

III.  Also  with  the  Confession  of  1596-98  in  The  Confession  of  faith  of  cer- 
tain English  people,  living  in  exile,  in  the  Low  Countreyes.  Together  with  a  brief 
note  of  the  special  heads  of  those  things  wherin  we  differ  fro  the  Church  of  Eng- 
lad,  etc.     1607.3 

IV.  Dutch  version  of  the  Apologie,  1614,4  (probably). 
V.     Dutch  version  of  the  Apologie,  1670. 5 

VI.     Dexter,  Congregationalism,  as  seen  in  its  Literature,  pp.  307,  30S. 
Literature 

Our  chief  source  of  information  regarding  these  petitions  and  the  circumstances 
under  which  they  were  presented  is  Johnson  and  Ainsworth's  Apologie,  already  cited ; 
Hanbury,  Memorials,  I:  112-117,  with  extracts  from  the  enlarged  form  of  the  Points 
of  Difference  ;  Punchard,  History  of  Congregationalism,  III:  253-265,  with  an  ab- 
stract of  the  Points  and  extracts  from  the  petitions  ;  Dexter,  Congregationalism  as 
seen,  pp.  306-3 10. 

WHEN  death  removed,  in  1603,  the  great  queen  under  whose 
reign  the  London-Amsterdam  church  had  been  driven  into 
exile,  the  throne  was  taken  by  James  I.,  —  a  man  whose  affiliations 
and  promises  had  excited  the  hopes  of  all  parties,  from  the  Catho- 
lics to  the  Puritans,  but  who  was  to  disappoint  religious  men  of 
every  shade  of  opinion  except  the  supporters  of  the  royal  preroga- 
tive and  the  Church  in  the  form  established  by  Elizabeth.  At 
first,  however,  the  king's  real  sentiments  were  unknown,  and  it 
was  with  some  confidence  of  a  favorable  hearing  that  about  750 
ministers  of  the  Establishment,  of  Puritan  sympathies,  laid  before 


See  ante,  p.  41,  VI,  "  Ante,  p.  41,  VII.  3  Ante,  p.  41,  VIII. 

i  Ante,  p.  41,  IX.  *  Ante,  p.  41,  X. 

(75) 


76  THE    POINTS    OF   DIFFERENCE,    1603 

him  the  famous  Millenary  Petition,1  praying  for  a  reform  of  the 
English  Church  in  the  direction  of  a  more  thorough-going  Protest- 
antism. These  hopes  of  the  Puritans  were  shared  by  the  little 
Separatist  body  at  Amsterdam,  and  in  like  manner  they  prepared 
a  petition  and  sent  it  to  London  with  a  copy  of  their  perfected 
creed  of  1598,  to  convince  the  new  king  at  once  of  their  loyalty 
and  the  correctness  of  their  views.  There  seems  little  doubt  that 
Johnson  and  Ainsworth  were  its  bearers.2  Not  hearing  from  this 
petition,  the  representatives  of  the  church  sent  to  the  king  a  sec- 
ond appeal,  containing  the  brief  summary  of  the  fourteen  points  of 
difference  between  the  petitioners  and  the  Church  of  England, 
which  is  the  document  here  republished.  Whether  the  king,  or 
his  ministers,  saw  fit  to  make  any  inquiries  or  not,  we  do  not  know; 
but  the  Separatists  now  prepared  a  third  petition,  recapitulating 
the  points  already  presented  and  supporting  them  elaborately  by 
arguments  and  citations  from  the  Scriptures.  This  document 
seems  to  have  failed  of  a  hearing  altogether,  and  after  a  consider- 
able waiting,  a  man  of  position  or  influence  at  court  was  persuaded 
to  present  in  their  behalf  a  brief  little  prayer3  that  the  Amsterdam 
Separatists  might  be  permitted  to  live  in  their  native  land  on  the 
same  terms  as  the  French  and  Dutch  churches  then  enjoyed  on 
English  soil,  and  that  their  opponents  might  be  required  to  answer 
their  points  and  arguments,  and  the  whole  question  be  fairly  laid 
before  the  king.  The  result  was  unsatisfactory  enough.  The 
Separatists  received  none  of  the  things  for  which  they  sued.  And 
by  the  close  of  Tanuary,  1604,  the  Hampton  Court  Conference  must 
have  made  it  plain  to  all  men  that  no  essential  reforms  of  any  sort 
were  to  be  looked  for  from  the  new  English  ruler. 

Doubtless  the  Convocation  of  the  province  of  Canterbury,  which 
considered  and  adopted  161  canons  during  May,  June,  and  July, 
1603,  had  little  if  any  knowledge  of  the  petitions  which  the  obscure 
brethren  from  Amsterdam  were  pressing  upon  the  attention  of  the 


'The  Petition  may  he  found  in  full  in  Fuller,  Church  History  of  Britain,  ed.  London, 
1842,  III :  193-196;  or  in  Perry,  History  of  the  English  Church  (Student's  Series),  London,  i88iv 
pp.  372,  373  (from  Fuller). 

2  Dexter.  Cong,  as  sen,  p.  306.      All  these  Separatist  petitions  are  in  the  Apologie. 

3  Johns  m  and  Ainsworth,  Apologie,  p.  82  ;  see  also,  Punchard,  III :  264. 


THE   PETITIONS   TO   KING   JAMES  TJ 

king.1  But  as  one  reads  the  rules  for  church  government  which 
that  body  prepared,  under  royal  license,  and  which  the  king's  let- 
ters-patent soon  approved,2  one  sees  clearly  that  Johnson  and  Ains- 
worth  had  nothing  to  hope  from  men  so  diametrically  opposed  to 
the  theories  of  the  church  which  the  Separatists  drew  from  the 
New  Testament.  Those  canons  declared  that  to  deny  the  true 
and  apostolic  character  of  the  Church  of  England,  as  then  estab- 
lished; to  hold  that  the  forms  of  prayer  or  the  rites  of  that  Church 
were  in  any  way  repugnant  to  Scripture,  or  superstitious;  to  ques- 
tion the  Christian  character  of  such  offices  as  archbishoprics, 
bishoprics,  or  deaneries;  to  doubt  the  lawfulness  of  the  ordination 
and  call  of  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  when  tested  by  the  Word 
of  God;  to  separate  from  the  Church  of  England,  or  to  assert  that 
any  other  bodies  of  English  subjects  than  those  assembling  accord- 
ing to  the  forms  established  by  law  can  constitute  a  true  church; 
to  do  or  declare  any  one  of  these  things  is  ipso  facto  to  incur  the 
penalty  of  excommunication,  in  such  severity  that  naught  but  a 
public  recantation  and  the  satisfaction  of  the  archbishop  as  to  the 
genuineness  of  his  repentance  can  restore  the  offender  to  the 
Church.  The  Separatists  might  well  feel  that  if  Elizabeth  had 
chastised  them  with  whips,  James  bade  fair  to  chastise  them  with 
scorpions.  The  best  that  they  could  hope  to  do  was  to  remain  be- 
yond his  reach  in  their  Amsterdam  exile. 

THE    POINTS    OF    DIFFERENCE. 

"  i.  That  Christ  the  Lord  hath  by  his  last  Testament  given  to 
his  Church,  and  set  therein,  sufficient  ordinary  Offices,  with  the 
maner  of  calling  or  Entrance,  Works,  and  Maintenance,  for  the 
administration  of  his  holy  things,  and  for  the  sufficient  ordinary 
instruction  guydance  and  service  of  his  Church,  to  the  end  of  the 
world.3 


1  Perry,  History  of  the  English  Church,  pp.  367,  368.  Neal,  History  0/  the  Puritans,  II  : 
■27,  31-36,  gives  an  epitome  of  the  canons  which  concern  dissent.  See  also  Punchard,  Hist.  0/  Cong., 
Ill:  273,  274. 

2  James  ordered  that  these  canons  should  be  read  in  every  church  at  least  once  a  year. 

3  This  was  a  point  of  difference  from  the  old  ecclesiasticism  of  the  early  Elizabethan  divines 
rather  than  from  the  rising  school  of  high  churchmen  which  had  its  beginnings  about  the  time  of 
the  publication  of  the  Trve  Description.  As  Perry  has  pointed  out,  the  early  Elizabethan  church 
theories  were  Erastian,  —  that  the  sovereign  preferred  Episcopacy  was  the  real  warrant  for  its  exist- 
ence.    Even  Whitgift,  the  archbishop  who  was  instrumental  in  the  deaths  of  Barrowe  and  Green- 


;S  THE   POINTS   OF  DIFFERENCE,    1603 

2.  That  every  particular  Church  hath  like  and  full  interest 
and  power  to  enioy  and  practise  all  the  ordinances  of  Christ  given 
by  him  to  his  Church  to  be  observed  therein  perpetually. 

3.  That  every  true  visible  Church,1  is  a  company  of  people 
called  and  separated  from  the  world  by  the  word  of  God,  and 
joyned  together  by  voluntarie  profession  of  the  faith  of  Christ,  in 
the  fellowship  of  the  Gospell.  And  that  therfore  no  knowne  Athe- 
ist, vnbelever,  Heretique,  or  wicked  liver,  be  received  or  reteined  a 
member  in  the  Church  of  Christ,  which  is  his  body;  Cod  having  in 
all  ages  appointed  and  made  a  separation  of  his  people  from  the 
world,  before  the  Law,  vnder  the  Law,  and  now  in  the  tyme  of  the 
Gospell. 

4.  That  discreet,  faithfull,  and  able  men  (though  not  yet  in 
office  of  Ministerie)  may  be  appointed  to  preach  the  gospell  and 
whole  truth  of  God,  that  men  being  first  brought  to  knowledge, 
and  converted  to  the  Lord,  may  then  be  ioyned  togeather  in  holy 
communion  with  Christ  our  head  and  one  with  another. 

5.  That  being  thus  ioyned,  every  Church  hath  power  in  Christ 
to  chuse  and  take  vnto  themselves  meet  and  sufficient  persons, 
into  the  Offices  and  functions  of  Pastors,  Teachers,  Elders,  Dea- 

wood,  used  language  which  at  least  implied  that  there  might  be  other  systems  of  church-govern- 
ment more  warranted  by  Scripture  example  than  Episcopacy.  I*"t  with  Bancroft's  sermon  at 
Paul's  Cross,  in  1589,  the  claim  was  set  up  (rather  indistinctly  and  indirectly,  it  must  be  said)  that 
Episcopacy  is  of  divine  warrant  and  apostolic  example.  This  view  was  further  developed  by 
Thomas  Bilson,  bishop  of  Worcester  1596-7,  and  of  Winchester  from  1597  to  his  death  in  1616,  in 
his  Perpctval  Governement  of  Christes  Chvrch,  1593,  wherein  not  only  is  Episcopacy  asserted  to 
be  the  only  Scriptural  method  of  church  government,  but  apostolic  succession  is  affirmed  to  be 
essential  to  the  very  existence  of  the  church.  Even  the  moderate  Richard  Hooker,  in  his  Ecclesi- 
astical/ J'olitie,  1594,  while  denying  that  Episcopacy  is  necessary  to  the  existence  of  the  church,  or 
under  all  circumstances  to  be  required,  asserted  it  to  be  the  form  of  government  most  a^i<  ■ 
Scripture.  Bancroft  and  Bilson's  views  gained  constantly  over  the  Erastian  theories,  and  with 
Bancroft's  appointment  as  archbishop,  in  1604,  mounted  the  throne  of  Canterbury.  Vet  the  diverg- 
ence of  this  article  even  from  their  view  is  considerable,  for  though  the  high  churchmen  would  find 
in  Episcopacy  the  only  form  of  polity  warranted  by  the  Word  of  God,  they  hardly  claimed  that  all 
the  minutia:  of  offices  and  rites  were  prescribed  in  the  New  Testament.  See  Perry,  History  0/  the 
Church  0/  England,  (Student's  Series,)  342-349.  Bancroft's  sermon  may  be  found  in  Hicks,  Bib- 
liotheca  Script.  Eccles.  A  ngi.,  London,  1709,  pp.  247-315  (where  the  old  style  date  of  1588  is  assigned 
to  it).  His  views  are  set  forth  with  more  elaboration  in  his  Svrvay  0/  the  Pretended  Holy  Disci- 
pline, 1593.  A  new  edition  of  Bilson's  Perpctval  Governement  was  brought  out  by  Robert  Eden, 
at  Oxford,  1S42. 

1  It  may  not  be  amiss  to  add,  as  an  illustration  of  the  conception  of  the  form  of  a  church  here 
set  forth,  the  definition  given  by  Henry  Jacob,  Johnson's  opponent  in  the  extreme  Separatism  of 
the  latter,  but  a  Congregationalist  of  great  desert,  the  friend  of  Robinson,  who  founded,  in  1616,  in 
Southwark,  London,  the  first  Congregational  church  to  maintain  a  continuous  existence  on  English 
soil.  It  is  in  his  Divine  Beginning  and  Institution  of  Christs  True  I'isii-lc  or  Ministerial 
Church,  Leyden,  1610,  p.  [18]:  "A  true  Visible  A;  Ministerial!  Church  of  Christ  is  a  nomber  of 
faithfull  people  joyned  by  their  willing  consent  in  a  spiritual!  outward  society  or  body  politike,  or- 
dinarily comming  togeather  into  one  place,  instituted  by  Christ  in  his  New  Testament,  &  having 
the  power  to  exercise  Ecclesiasticall  government  and  all  Gods  other  spirituall  ordinances  (the  meanes 
of  salvation)  in  A;  for  it  selfe  immediatly  from  Christ." 


TEXT   OF   THE   POINTS   OF   DIFFERENCE  79 

cons  and  Helpers,  as  those  which  Christ  hath  appointed  in  his 
Testament,  for  the  feeding,  governing,  serving,  and  building  vp  of 
his  Church.  And  that  no  Antichristia  Hierarchie  or  Ministerie,  of 
Popes,  Arch-bishops,  Lord-bishops,  Suffraganes,  Deanes,  Arch-dea- 
cons, Chauncellors,  Parsons,  Vicars,  Priests,  Dumb-ministers,  nor 
any  such  like  be  set  over  the  Spouse  and  Church  of  Christ,  nor  re- 
teined  therein. 

6.  That  the  Ministers  aforesaid  being  lawfully  called  by  the 
Church  where  they  are  to  administer,  ought  to  continew  in  their 
functions  according  to  Gods  ordinance,  and  carefully  to  feed  the 
flock  of  Christ  committed  vnto  them,  being  not  inioyned  or  suf- 
fered to  beare  Civill  offices  withall,  neither  burthened  with  the 
execution  of  Civill  affaires,  as  the  celebration  of  marriage,  burying 
the  dead  &c.  which  things  belong  aswell  to  those  without  as  within 
the  Church.1 

7.  That  the  due  maintenance  of  the  Officers  aforesaid, 
should  be  of  the  free  and  voluntarie  contribution  of  the  Church, 
that  according  to  Christs  ordinance,  they  which  preach  the  Gospell 
may  live  of  the  Gospell:  and  not  by  Popish  Lordships  and  Livings, 
or  Iewish  Tithes  and  Offerings.  And  that  therefore  the  Lands 
and  other  like  revenewes  of  the  Prelats  and  Clergie  yet  remayning 
(being  still  also  baits  to  allure  the  Iesuites  and  Seminaries2  into 
the  Land,  and  incitements  vnto  them  to  plott  and  prosecute  their 
woonted  evill  courses,  in  hope  to  enioy  them  in  tyme  to  come)  may 
now  by  your  Highnes  be  taken  away,  and  converted  to  better  vse, 
as  those  of  the  Abbeyes  and  Nunneries  have  been  heertofore  by 
your  Maiestyes  worthie  predecessors,  to  the  honor  of  God  and 
great  good  of  the  Realme. 

8.  That  all  particular  Churches  ought  to  be  so  constituted, 
as  having  their  owne  peculiar  Officers,  the  whole  body  of  every 
Church  may  meet  togeather  in  one  place,  and  iointly  performe 
their  duties  to  God  and  one  towards  another.  And  that  the  cen- 
sures of  admonition  and  excommunication  be  in  due  maner  exe- 
cuted, for  sinne,  convicted,  and  obstinatly  stood  in.     This  power 


1  This  article,  the  last  clauses  of  which  are  so  foreign  to  modern  Congregational  sentiment, 
represents  the  view  also  of  the  founders  of  New  England  regarding  marriages  and  funerals.  As  far 
as  known,  the  first  instance  of  prayer  at  a  Xew  England  funeral  was  at  Roxbury  in  1685  (Palfrey, 
Hist.  N.  B.,  Ill:  495).  The  next  year,  1686,  saw  the  first  marriage  by  a  minister  in  Mass.  (Proc. 
Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  1858-60,  p.  283).  Connecticut  permitted  ministers  to  join  in  marriage  by  a  law  of 
Oct.  1694  (Conn.  Records,  IV:   136). 

2  /.  e.,  the  priests  from  the  Seminary  which  Cardinal  William  Allen  established  in  1568  at 
Douai  in  the  then  Spanish  Netherlands.  These  men,  trained  for  work  in  England,  from  1577  on- 
ward were  looked  upon  as  the  most  dangerous  foes  of  English  Prote 


80  THE    POINTS   OF   DIFFERENCE,    1603 

also  to  be  in  the  body  of  the  Church  wherof  the  partyes  so  offend- 
ing and  persisting  are  members. 

9.  That  the  Church  be  not  governed  by  Popish  Canons, 
Courts,  Classes,  Customes,  or  any  humane  inventions,  but  by  the 
lawes  and  rules  which  Christ  hath  appointed  in  his  Testament. 
That  no  Apocrypha  writings,  but  only  the  Canonicall  scriptures 
be  vsed  in  the  Church.  And  that  the  Lord  be  worshipped  and 
called  vpon  in  spirit  and  truth,  according  to  that  forme  of  praier 
given  by  the  Lord  Iesus,  Math.  6.  and  after  the  Leitourgie  of  his 
owne  Testament,  not  by  any  other  framed  or  imposed  by  men, 
much  lesse  by  one  traslated  from  the  Popish  leitourgie,  as  the 
Book  of  common  praier  &c. 

10.  That  the  Sacraments,  being  seales  of  Gods  covenant, 
ought  to  be  administred  only  to  the  faithfull,  and  Baptisme  to 
their  seed  or  those  vnder  their  governement.  And  that  according 
to  the  simplicitie  of  the  Gospell,  without  any  Popish  or  other 
abuses,  in  either  Sacrament. 

11.  That  the  Church  be  not  vrged  to  the  observation  of 
dayes  and  tymes,  Iewish  or  Popish,  save  only  to  sanctify  the  Lords 
day:  Neyther  be  laden  in  things  indifferent,  with  rites  and  cere- 
monies, whatsoever  invented  by  men;  but  that  Christian  libertie 
may  be  reteined:  And  what  God  hath  left  free,  none  to  make 
bound. 

12.  That  all  monuments  of  Idolatry  in  garments  or  any 
other  things,  all  Temples,  Altars,  Chappels,  and  other  place,  dedi- 
cated heertofore  by  the  Heathens  or  Antichristians  to  their  false 
worship,  ought  by  lawfull  aucthoritie  to  be  rased  and  abolished, 
not  suffered  to  remayne,  for  nourishing  superstition,  much  lesse 
imploied  to  the  true  worship  of  God. 

13.  That  Popish  degrees  in  Theologie,  inforcement  to 
single  life  in  Colledges,  abuse  of  the  study  of  prophane  heathen 
Writers,  with  other  like  corruptions  in  Schooles  and  Academies, 
should  be  remooved  and  redressed,  that  so  they  may  be  the  wel- 
springs  and  nurseries  of  true  learning  and  godlinesse. 

14.  Finally  that  all  Churches  and  people  (without  excep- 
tion) are  bound  in  Religion  only  to  receave  aud  submit  vnto  that 
constitution,  Ministerie,  Worship,  and  order,  which  Christ  as  Lord 
and  King  hath  appointed  vnto  his  Church:  and  not  to  any  other 
devised  by  Man  whatsoever. 


THE   SEVEN   ARTICLES    OF    1617   AND   THE    MAY- 
FLOWER  COMPACT   OF    1620 

A.  The  Seven  Articles,   1617 

This  important  declaration  long  remained  forgotten  among  the  documents  of  the 
State  Paper  Office  at  Westminster.  It  was  at  last  brought  to  light  by  the  historian, 
George  Bancroft,  and  communicated  by  him  to 

I.  Collections  of  the  New  York  Historical  Society,  Second  Series,  New  York, 
1857;    III.     Pt.  I.  pp.  301,  302.     It  was  reprinted  by 

II.      Punchard,  History  of  Congregationalism ,  Boston,  1867.   Ill  :  454,  455  ; 

III.  Waddington,  Congregational  History,  i^bj-iyoo,  London,  1874,  206,  207; 

IV.  Doyle,   The  English  in  America,   The  Puritan  Colonies,  London,  1887,   I  : 
49,   50  ;    and 

V.     Goodwin,  The  Pilgrim  Republic,  Boston,  1888,  p.  41. 

Beside  some  brief  comments  in  the  works  of  Doyle,  Goodwin,  and  Punchard,  and 
an  important  letter  from  Bancroft  in  communicating  the  document  to  the  New  York 
Society  {Collections,  as  cited,  295-99),  a  few  facts  will  be  found  in  Bradford's  His- 
tory of  Plymouth  Plantation,  pp.  30,  31  (ed.  Boston,  1856),  and  a  somewhat  ex- 
tended discussion  in  Bacon's  Genesis  of  the  A'cio  England  Churches,  New  York, 
1S74,  pp.  264-8. 

B.  The  Brief  Notes  of  Explanation,  161S 

These  supplementary  definitions  are  preserved  for  us  by  Bradford,  Hist.  Ply  in. 
Plantation,  pp.  34,  35.  They  were  copied  from  Bradford's  manuscript  by  Nathaniel 
Morton  into  the  records  of  the  Plymouth  Church,  and  may  be  found  in  Hazard,  His- 
torical Collections,  Philadelphia,  1792,  1794,  I  :  364,365  ;  and  in  Young,  Chroni- 
cles of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  pp.  64,  65,  from  that  source.  They  are  discussed  by 
Bacon,  Genesis  of  tJie  JV.  E.  Chs.,  pp.  267-269,  and  are  given  by  Waddington. 

C.  The  Mayflower  Compact,   1620 

Texts  and  Reprints.  —  Since  the  original  manuscript  is  not  known  to  be  extant, 
we  are  dependent  upon  copies  for  our  knowledge  of  this  important  document.  Of 
these  there  are  three  which  may  claim  about  equal  rank  as  original  sources  and  are  in 
substantial  harmony. 

I.  In  G.  Mourt's  (*,  e.  George  Morton's1)  A  Relation  or  Iournall  of  the  begin- 
ning and  proceedings  of  the  English  Plantation  settled  at  Plimotk,  etc.,  London, 
1622,  p.  3.  Reprinted  (among  others)  by  Young,  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrim 
Fathers,  Boston,  1841-4,  p.  121  ;  Geo.  B.  Cheever  in  partial  fac-simile,  New  York, 
1848,  pp.  30,  31:  Dr.  Dexter,  with  introduction  and  notes,  and  in  fac-simile,  Boston, 
1865,  pages  6,  7. 


1  Dexter' s  reprint,  introduction,  xviii-xxxi.     This  portion  of  the  Relation  was  probably 
Bradford.  (  R\   \ 


82  THE    MAYFLOWER    CHURCH 

II.  In  Gov.  Bradford's  History  of  Plymouth  Plantation,  long  in  manuscript. 
The  compact  was  printed  from  this  manuscript  by  Thomas  Prince,  A  Chronological 
History  of  New  England,  etc.,  Boston,  1736,  I  :  84,  85.  Gov.  Hutchinson  again 
printed  it,  either  from  the  manuscript  or  from  Prince,  in  The  History  of  the  Province 
of  Mass.  Bay,  Boston,  1767,  II.  Appendix  455,  456.1  It  may  now  be  found  also 
in  the  careful  edition  of  Bradford's  whole  work  issued  by  the  .Mass.  Hist.  Society, 
History  of  Plymouth  Plantation,  etc.,  Boston,  1856,  pp.  8g,  90. 

III.  In  Nathaniel  Morton's  (son  of  George)  New  England's  Memorial!,  etc., 
Cambridge,  N.  E.,  1669,  p.  15.  (Fifth-  edition,  John  Davis,  Boston,  1826,  pp.  37,  38  ; 
Sixth,  Boston,  1855,  pp.  24-26).  It  was  reprinted  from  Morton  by  Xeal,  History 
of  New  England,  etc.,  London,  1720,  I:  81,  82;3  and  by  Hazard,  Historical Col- 
lections, etc.,  Philadelphia,  1792,  1794,  I:  119.  Morton,  as  keeper  of  the  public 
records  of  the  Colony  from  1645  to  1685,  may  well  have  had  access  to  the  original 
document.      He  alone  gives  the  list  of  signatures. 

Reprints  of  one  or  other  of  these  forms,  in  addition  to  those  already  pointed  out, 
are  numerous.     The  following  may  perhaps  be  cited  : 

1.  J.  Belknap,  American  Biography,  Boston,  1794-8,  II  :  190. 

2.  Baylies,  Historical  Memoir  of  the  Colony  of  Xe-o  Plymouth,  Drake's  ed. 
Boston,  1866,  p.  2S. 

3.  Hanbury,  Memorials,  1 :  39S. 

4.  Elliott,  New  England  History,  New  York,  1857,  I  :    102. 

5.  Uhden,  Xew  England  Theocracy,  Conant's  translation,  Boston,  1858,  p.  57. 

6.  Talfrey,  History  of  New  England,  Boston,  1S59,  I  :  165. 

7.  Punchard,  History  of Congregationalism,  III:  411. 

S.  YVaddington,  Congregational  History,  1 567-1 700,  p.  222. 

9.  Bancroft,  History  of  the  United  States,  ed.  Boston,  1S76,  I:   243. 

10.  Windsor,  Narrative  and  Critical  History  of  America,  Boston,  1S84,  III: 
269. 

11.  Goodwin,   The  Pilgrim  Republic,  Boston,  1S8S,  p.  63. 

12.  Thwaites,   The  Colonies,  1492-1750,  New  York,  1891,  p.  118. 

13.  Fisher,   The  Colonial  Era,  New  York,  1S92,  p.  93. 

THE  documents  thus  far  considered  have  been  the  product  of 
the  London-Amsterdam  church  ;  the  one  now  presented  had 
for  its  source  the  Scrooby-Leyden-Plymouth  company.  Obscure 
as  is  the  origin  of  the  London  church,  the  beginnings  of  the  Scrooby 
congregation  are  yet  more  involved  in  darkness.  But  it  seems  cer- 
tain that  a  Separatist  congregation  was  gathered  by  the  afterwards 
celebrated  John  Smyth,  probably  about  1602,  at  Gainsborough,  a 
town  some  forty  miles  southeast  of  York  and  nearly  half  way  be- 
tween York  and  Boston.     This  church  attracted  members  from  the 


1  Carelessly— three  misreadings. 

'-'  Possibly  sixth,  see  Dexter,   Cong,  as  seen,   Bibl.  1986 
transposition  in  the  dating  clause. 


ORIGIN   OF   THE   CHURCH  83 

adjacent  parts  of  Nottinghamshire,  Lincolnshire,  and  Yorkshire.1 
Hither  came,  not  far  from  1604,  John  Robinson,  from  his  studies  at 
Cambridge  and  several  years  of  labor  near  Norwich,  where  his  Con- 
gregational sentiments  had  attracted  the  unfavorable  notice  of  his 
ecclesiastical  superiors.  But  Gainsborough  was  distant  from  the 
residences  of  a  number  of  the  congregation,  and,  being  a  town  of 
some  size,  the  church  was  likely  to  bring  down  governmental  cen- 
sure, and,  therefore,  in  1605  or  more  probably  1606,  a  portion  of  the 
Gainsborough  church  organized  separately  and  met  statedly  at  the 
house  of  William  Brewster,  the  postmaster  at  Scrooby,  a  station 
on  the  main  road  between  London  and  Berwick,  about  ten  miles 
from  Gainsborough.  In  1606  also  the  congregation  remaining  at 
Gainsborough  removed,  together  with  Smyth,  to  Amsterdam,  where 
they  united  with  and  turmoiled  the  London-Amsterdam  church  for 
a  time.  Probably  the  Scrooby  company  now  further  perfected  its 
organization,  if  it  had  not  already  done  so,  by  the  choice  as  officers 
of  Richard  Clyfton  and  John  Robinson.2  But  this  church,  too, 
soon  found  England  a  hard  place  in  which  to  worship  God  after 
the  Congregational  fashion,  and  through  much  difficulty  they, 
therefore,  made  their  way  to  Amsterdam  in  1607  and  1608.  Here 
the  major  part  of  the  church  soon  came  to  look  with  concern  on 
the  havoc  which  the  well-meaning  but  unstable  Smyth  had  already 
wrought  in  the  always  contentious  London-Amsterdam  church  ; 
and  so,  fearing  lest  their  own  brotherhood  be  drawn  into  like  con- 
fusion, they  emigrated  in   1609  to  Leyden.     Clyfton  preferring  to 


1  It  seems  not  impossible  that  Bradford  has  given  us  the  form,  as  well  as  the  substance,  of  the 
covenant  of  this  church.  He  tells  us  (Hist.  Plym.  Plant.,  9.)  "  They  shooke  of  thisyoake  of  anti- 
christian  bondage,  and  as  ye  Lords  free  people,  joyned  them  selves  (by  a  covenant  of  the  Lord) 
into  a  church  estate,  in  ye  felowship  of  y«  gospell,  to  walke  in  all  his  wayes,  made  known,  or 
to  be  made  known  unto  t/iew,  according-  to  their  best  endeaours,  whatsoever  it  should  cost 
them,  the  Lord  assisting  them."  [The  italics  are  mine.]  It  is  true  that  Bradford  wrote  at  least 
a  quarter  of  a  century  after  the  events  he  here  describes,  and  therefore  absolute  identity  is  hardly  to 
be  affirmed.  But  the  tone  and  form  of  this  sentence-long  covenant  is  very  like  that  which  we  shall 
see  used  at  Salem  in  1629  and  Boston-Charlestown  in  1630,  and  some  others  which  will  be  cited  in 
connection  with  them. 

2  Bacon,  Genesis  0/ the  N.  E.  Chs.,  pp.  207,  230,  231,  says  that  Clyfton  was  pastor  and  Robin- 
son teacher  at  Scrooby.  The  greater  age  and  long  pastoral  experience  of  Clyfton  would  make  his 
choice  as  pastor  of  the  new  church  probable  ;  but  it  seems  to  me  that  the  records  do  not  warrant  us 
in  asserting  positively  that  he  held  this  ofifice  rather  than  that  of  teacher.  Bradford  is  obscure.  See 
his  Hist,  Plym.  Plant.,  pp.  10,  16,  17. 


84 


THE    MAYFLOWER   CHURCH 


remain  at  Amsterdam,  Robinson1  was  now  chosen  to  the  pastorate, 
if  not  already  in  that  office,  and  probably  for  want  of  a  suitable 
candidate  in  the  little  company,  the  teachership  was  left  vacant.5 
The  post  of  elder  was  now  worthily  filled3  by  the  selection  of  Wil- 
liam Brewster.4     Here  at  Leyden  all  the  company  were  to  remain 


1  John  Robinson,  the  most  celebrated  member  of  the  Leyden  company,  was  born  in  1575  or  '76, 
probably  in  the  neighborhood  of  Gainsborough,  where  we  have  seen  Smyth  gathering  a  Separatist 
church  at  a  later  period.  In  1592  he  entered  Corpus  Christi  College  in  the  great  Puritan  univer- 
sity of  Cambridge,  and  here  rose  in  1598-9  to  the  dignity  of  Fellow.  About  1600,  it  would  appear, 
he  went  to  the  vicinity  of  Norwich,  or  to  that  city  itself,  and  entered  on  religious  work,  probably  as  a 
curate.  But  here  his  Separatist  views  became  so  pronounced  that,  about  1604,  he  appears  to  have 
incurred  censure  from  his  bishop  and  to  have  left  Norwich  for  the  region  of  Gainsborough,  where  we 
have  seen  him  joining  himself  to  the  Separatist  church.     His  election  as  pastor  of  the  Scr. 

den  body  has  already  been  noticed.  At  Leyden  he  made  his  home  to  the  end  of  his  days.  Here, 
with  others,  he  purchased  a  considerable  property,  more  for  the  use  of  the  church  than  his  own 
comfort  ;  and  here  he  not  only  ministered  to  his  flock,  but  enjoyed  the  privileges  of  the  University 
and  participated  in  the  controversies  aroused  by  the  followers  of  Arminius,  taking  the  Calvinistic 
side  with  much  earnestness.  Here,  too,  he  ministered  to  those  of  his  congregation  who  did  not  cross 
the  ocean,  till  his  death  in  March,  1625  ;  and  here  he  was  buried  in  lowly  fashion  indicative  of  a  con- 
siderable degree  of  poverty  ;  but  with  evidence  of  public  estimate  of  his  real  worth  on  the  part  of  the 
Dutch  community.  His  numerous  works  are  written  in  a  sweet-tempered  spirit,  but  are  far  from 
presenting  the  inclination  toward  so-called  progressive  thought  in  doctrinal  matters,  which  has 
often  been  attributed  to  him.  In  regard  to  the  polity  of  the  church  he  looked  upon  change  as  not 
impossible  in  consequence  of  further  study  of  God's  word.  Among  the  many  sources  of  informa- 
tion regarding  his  life  and  labors  I  may  cite  J.  Belknap,  American  Biography,  Boston,  1794-98,  II : 
151-178  ;  Brook,  Lives  0/  the  Puritans,  II  :  334-44:  Hanbury,  Memorials.  I  :  185-463,  passim 
(with  much  reference  to  his  writings)  ;  Hunter,  Collections  Concerning  the  Church  .  .  . 
formed  at  Scrooby,  London,  1854,  pp.  90-99  ;  Fletcher,  History  .  .  .  of  Independency  in 
England,  London,  1862,  II:  249-III:  80,  passim  :  Punchard,  History  of  Congregationalism,  III: 
300-344  (a  summary  of  his  writings);  Bacon,  Genesis  of  the  .V.  E.  Chs.,  passim:  Dexter,  Cong,  as 
seen,  359-410.  Dexter's  Bibliography  gives  the  titles  of  eleven  separate  writings  of  which  Robin- 
son is  the  author  ;  ten  of  which  may  be  found  in  R.  Ashton's  Works  of  John  Robinson,  etc.,  3 
vols.,  London,  1851.  A  somewhat  extended  memoir,  by  the  editor,  may  be  found  in  the  Works,  I  : 
xi-lxxiv.,  and  is  reprinted  in  4  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,   1  :  m-164. 

2  Bacon,  Genesis,  p.  232,  makes  this  suggestion. 

3  That  this  event  did  not  occur  till  the  company  reached  Leyden  is  implied  by  Gov.  Bradford, 
History  of  Plymouth  Plantation,  pp.  10,  17. 

4  William  Brewster,  in  whose  house  at  Scrooby  the  church  had  gathered  after  its  separation 
from  the  Gainsborough  body,  was  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  the  company  in  station  and  influence. 
His  birthplace  is  uncertain,  but  was  not  improbably  in  the  vicinity  of  Scrooby,  and  his  life  began 
some  time  between  1560  and  1564.  He  studied  Latin  so  as  to  have  a  ready  use  of  the  language,  had 
some  knowledge  of  Greek,  and  was  for  a  brief  and  uncertain  period  at  the  University  of  Cam- 
bridge. We  next  find  him  in  the  service  of  the  Puritan,  William  Davison,  Ambassador  and  Secre- 
tary of  State  to  Queen  Elizabeth.  With  Davison,  Brewster  went  on  a  mission  to  Holland  in  1585, 
and  doubtless  may  have  cherished  hopes  of  political  advancement  till  the  Queen  dismissed  Davison 
in  disgrace,  in  1587,  as  having  been  too  zealous  in  procuring  the  execution  of  Mary,  Queen  of  Scots. 
Thrown  thus  out  of  employment,  Brewster  went  to  Scrooby,  and  there  succeeded  his  father  as 
postmaster  about  the  beginning  of  1589.  (His  father,  also  named  William  Brewster,  survived  till 
the  summer  of  1590.)  His  office  implied  the  furnishing  of  lodging  and  transport  for  government 
servants,  as  well  as  the  forwarding  of  letters.  In  discharge  of  his  duties  he  occupied  a  large 
"manor  house,"  belonging  to  the  Archbishop  of  York  for  centuries,  and  which,  though  in  bad  re- 
pair, gave  ample  room  for  the  gathering  of  the  Separatist  church.  He  held  office  till  Sept.,  1607, 
just  previous  to  his  attempt  to  leave  England  for  Holland  in  company  with  his  brethren  of  the 
church.  Settled  at  last  in  Leyden,  he  supported  himself  by  teaching  and  printing.  Here  he  was 
elected  ruling  elder,  and  when  a  portion  of  the  church  emigrated  to  Plymouth  in  1620,  he  was  the 
spiritual  leader  of  the  expedition.     As  the  Plymouth  company  looked  upon  themselves  as  in  a  de- 


ITS   LIFE   AT   LEVDEN  85 

for  eleven  years  and  many  for  the  remainder  of  their  earthly  lives. 
But,  though  settled  in  one  of  the  most  attractive  cities  of  Europe, 
their  life  was  hard  and  their  circumstances  uncongenial.  As 
Englishmen  they  longed  to  be  under  English  law.  They  would 
gladly  live  on  English  soil  could  they  find  a  spot  where  they  might 
worship  God  and  train  up  their  children  in  the  institutions  of  the 
Gospel.  Probably  their  type  of  Separatism  was  not  so  uncompro- 
mising as  that  of  the  London-Amsterdam  Church,  and  certainly  we 
have  much  evidence  that  the  opposition  of  their  pastor,  Robinson, 
as  he  advanced  in  years,  was  more  against  the  ceremonies  of  the 
Church  of  England  than  the  doctrine  of  royal  supremacy.1  They 
were  anxious  to  go  to  America,  and  they  were  desirous  of  going  as 
Englishmen  and  under  an  English  charter.  And  so  it  happened  that 
when  they  applied  to  the  London-Virginia  company,  in  161 7,  for  per- 
mission to  settle  somewhere  on  the  wide  stretch  of  American  coast 
then  known  by  the  name  of  Virginia,  the  agents  of  the  church,  Dea- 
con John  Carver  and  Robert  Cushman,  carried  with  them  to  London 
the  seven  articles  of  belief  which  are  here  presented,  designing 
them  to  serve  as  an  assurance  to  the  company  or  the  king  should 
doubt  be  cast  upon  their  orthodoxy  or  loyalty.  Of  course,  under 
such  circumstances,  the  points  of  difference  between  them  and  the 
Church  of  England  would  be  minimized.    Vet  that  these  differences 

gree  still  part  of  the  Leyden  body  and,  while  competent  to  act  for  themselves,  as  still  under  Robin- 
son's pastorate.  Brewster,  though  retaining  the  title  of  ruling  elder,  was  practically  the  pastor 
of  the  Plymouth  church  in  all  save  the  administration  of  the  sacraments  for  the  ten  years  or  there- 
about which  elapsed  between  the  landing  in  1620  and  the  beginning  of  the  pastorate  of  Ralph  Smith. 
Here  he  was  noted  as  a  vigorous  and  effective  preacher  and  as  possessed  of  much  gift  in  prayer. 
He  died  in  April,  1643  or  1644.  His  friend  Bradford,  and  Morton  in  his  Memorial!,  give  the  former 
date  ;  the  Plymouth  church  records,  from  the  hand  of  Morton,  give  the  latter.  His  memory  is  that 
of  a  strong,  earnest,  spiritual-minded  man.  The  facts  of  his  life  may  be  found  in  Bradford,  History 
of  Plymouth  Plantation,' passim,  especially  the  biographical  sketch  on  pp.  408-14.  This  memoir 
is  also  printed  in  Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  pp.  461-69,  and  in  substance  from 
the  Plymouth  Ch.  records  by  Davis  in  his  edition  of  Morton's  Memorial  (1826),  222-224.  Belknap, 
American  Biography,  II  :  252-266,  has  a  sketch.  Hunter,  Collections  concerning  the  Ch.  .  .  . 
formed  at  Scrooby,  etc.,  (1S54,)  53-90,  has  many  valuable  facts.  A  life  of  Brewster  was  published 
by  A.  Steele,  Chief  of  the  Pilgrims,  etc.,  Philadelphia,  1857.  Bacon,  Genesis  of  the  .V.  E.  Chs., 
passim.  T.  F.  Henderson  in  Dipt.  National  Biography,  (1886,)  vi :  304,  305.  Deane  has  pub- 
lished a  letter  of  Stanhope  to  Davison,  of  Aug.  22,  1590,  throwing  light  upon  the  time  when  Brad- 
ford became  postmaster.     Proc.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  May  1871,  98-103. 

1  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  392-397,  notes  and  illustrates  his  gradual  change  from  extreme 
Separatism  to  a  position  not  far  from  that  of  the  Puritans,  a  position  which  held  that  the  English 
Church  was  unchristian  in  ceremonies  and  constitution,  but  not  in  a  condition  where  reform  was 
hopeless  or  Christian  life  within  its  fold  impossible.  This  view  seems  to  prevail  in  Robinson's, 
h>st  and  Necessarie  Apologie,  1625,  Works,  III:  5-79.  See  also  Cotton's  testimony,  Way  of 
Cong.  Churches  Cleared,  London,  1648,  Pt.  I :  pp.  8,  9. 


86  THE    MAYFLOWER    CHURCH 

should  be  ignored  to  such  a  degree,  and  that  Robinson  and  Brew- 
ster should  be  willing  to  sign  the  document,  seems  little  less  than 
amazing.  At  the  first  glance  it  seems  the  surrender  of  much  for 
which  they  witnessed  and  suffered  ;  and  further  examination  but 
confirms  this  opinion.  But  we  shall  do  injustice  to  men  in  a  very 
difficult  position  should  we  deem  it  a  complete  surrender.  Robin- 
sun  and  Brewster  were  willing  to  accept  a  substantially  Erastian 
theory  of  the  relations  of  church  and  sovereign.  They  were  will- 
ing to  admit  that  there  is  no  "  apeale  from  his  authority  or  judg- 
ment in  any  cause  whatsoever,  but  y  in  all  thinges  obedience  is 
dewe  unto  him,"  at  least  passive  obedience,  even  when  his  com- 
mands are  contrary  to  God's  word.  The  '  king's  right  to  appoint 
bishops,  or  other  officers,  and  endow  them  with  civil  authority  to 
rule  the  churches  "  civilly  according  to  ye  Lawes  of  ye  Land  "  was 
fully  admitted.  But  they  nowhere  acknowledged  or  implied  that 
the  officers  of  the  Church  of  England  have  any  divine  warrant  or 
spiritual  authority.  They  said,  in  effect,  that  the  bishops  and  other 
clergy  are  magistrates,  like  the  justices  or  sheriffs,  whom  the  king 
as  absolute  civil  ruler  has  a  legal  right  to  appoint,  and  to  whom 
the  laws  give  certain  powers.  The  Separatists  of  Leyden  were  not 
rebels,  and  even  if  they  disliked  the  system  they  would  not  oppose 
the  undoubted  royal  right.  Yet  as  to  the  spiritual  character  or 
powers  of  these  persons  they  would  maintain  their  own  opinions. 
They  wished  peace  with  the  king  and  the  realm,  and  to  secure  it, 
while  not  willing  to  unite  with  the  Established  Church,  they  were 
willing  to  show  respect  to  the  constituted  officers  of  that  Church  so 
far  as  they  represent  the  royal  authority. '  That  it  was  by  no 
means  regarded  by  the  English  authorities  in  church  and  state  as  a 
submission  to  the  Church  by  law  established  is  shown  by  the  fact 
that  though  many  of  the  Virginia  company  found  the  articles  satis- 
factory, King  James,  and  Abbot,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
opposed  the  request  for  a  charter.3      In   hope,  therefore,  that  a 


1  This  duty  of  obedience  or  at  least  passive  submission  to  the  will  of  the  magistrate  is  further 
set  forth  by  Robinson,  Ivst  and  Necessarit  Afiologic,  Works,  III:  62,  63. 

2  As  illustrative  of  this  interpretation  compare  Robinson  Ivst  and  Necessary  Analogic,  (1625,) 
Works,  III:  69-71. 

3  Compare  Bradford,  Hist.  Pfym.  Plant,  pp.  29-41. 


CHARACTER   OF   THE   SEVEN   ARTICLES  S/ 

further  explanation  would  accomplish  the  desired  result,  Robin- 
son and  Brewster  sent,  in  January,  1618,  two  notes  to  Sir  John 
Wolstenholme,  a  member  of  the  Virginia  company  whom  they  had 
reason  to  think  was  favorably  disposed  toward  their  enterprise. 
These  notes  were  designed  to  define  the  beliefs  of  the  Leyden 
church  more  clearly,  and  were  alternate  forms  to  be  laid  before  the 
Privy  Council  as  Sir  John  should  deem  best.1  As  of  value  in  show- 
ing the  position  of  the  Leyden  church  at  this  period,  they  will  be 
found  appended  to  the  Seven  Articles.  In  spite  of  all  explanations, 
however,  the  utmost  that  the  church  could  obtain  was  an  unre- 
corded promise  that  if  its  members  behaved  themselves  peaceably 
the  king  would  overlook  their  doings,  and  a  patent  from  the  Vir- 
ginia company  granting  to  one  of  their  friends  in  England  (of 
course  in  intention  as  their  representative)  some  lands  supposed  to 
lie  not  far  from  the  Hudson  river  ; 2  a  document  which,  as  the 
event  proved,  was  never  to  be  used. 

But  though  the  end  of  their  preparation  of  creeds  for  submis- 
sion to  the  English  authorities  had  come,  their  difficulties  in 
going  to  America  were  by  no  means  over,  and  it  was  not  till 
after  further  tedious  negotiation,  into  the  details  of  which  it 
would  be  aside  from  our  purpose  to  enter,  that  somewhat  less 
than  half  the  church,  under  the  spiritual  guidance  of  Brewster, 
got  away  at  last  from  Leyden,  in  July,  1620,  leaving  the  remainder 
under  Robinson  to  keep  a  place  for  their  return  should  the  adven- 
ture fail,  or  follow  them  in  case  of  success,  as  opportunity  would 
permit.  Never  did  an  enterprise  start  more  unpropitiously.  It 
was  only  after  numberless  hindrances  in  England,  and  two  un- 
successful attempts  to  sail  from  that  island,  that  the  more  steadfast 
members  of  the  little  company  were  able  to  get  off  in  their  single 
ship  from  the  English  Plymouth,  September  6,  (O.  S.)  1620.  On 
November  9,  they  were  in  sight  of  Cape  Cod,  and  on  November  11, 
having  been  compelled  to  abandon  the  attempt  to  reach  the  neigh- 
borhood of  the  Hudson,  they  came  to  anchor  in  Provincetown  Har- 
bor.    Here   it  was,  on  this  eleventh  of  November,  that  the  little 


1  Compare  Ibid.,  pp.  33-36. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  40-41.     This  charter,  granted  to  a  John  Wincob,  probably  a  Puritan 
the  service  of  the  Countess  of  Lincoln,  was    early  lost  and  its  exact  provisions  are  unkn 


88  THE   MAYFLOWER   CHURCH 

company  combined  themselves  into  a  civil  body  politic.     They  were 

in  a  region  belonging  nominally  indeed  to  the  English  crown,  but 

they  were  outside  the  limits  of  their  patent,  for  though  we  do  not 

know  the  terms  of  that  document,  we  know  that  the  London-Virginia 

company  had  no  jurisdiction  north  of  410.1     Then,  too,  there  were 

others  beside  the  Leyden  Separatists  on  the  ship,  whose  loyalty  to 

the  purposes  of  the  colony  was  dubious,  and  the  organized  force 

of  the  community  might  be  needed  to  hold  them  in  check.     Gov. 

Bradford  thus  explains  the  circumstances:2 

"I  shall  a  litle  returne  backe  and  begine  with  a  combination  made  by  them 
before  they  came  ashore,  being  y°  first  foundation  of  their  govermente  in  this 
place  ;  occasioned  partly  by  ye  discontented  &  mutinous  speeches  that  some  of 
the  strangers  amongst  them  had  let  fall  from  them  in  ye  ship  —  That  when  they 
came  a  shore  they  would  use  their  owne  libertie  ;  for  none  had  power  to  comand 
them,  the  patente  they  had  being  for  Virginia,  and  not  for  Xewengland,  which 
belonged  to  an  other  Goverment,  with  which  ye  Virginia  Company  had  nothing 
to  doe.  And  partly  that  shuch  an  acte  by  them  done  (this  their  condition  consid- 
ered) might  be  as  firme  as  any  patent,  and  in  some  respects  more  sure." 

It   is  more  than  possible,  also,  that  such  a  combination  had 

been  planned  even  before  the  expedition  left  Leyden.     A  letter 

of  Robinson  has  been  preserved,  written  to  the  company  just  after 

they  had  left  Holland,  in  the  summer  of  1620,  in  which  he  warns 

them  : 

"  Your  intended  course  of  ciuill  communitie  wil  minister  continuall  occasion  of 
offence,  and  will  be  as  fuell  for  tlrnt  fire,  except  you  diligently  quench  it  with 
brotherly  forbearance." 

And,  a  little  later  adds  the  exhortation  : 

"  Lastly,  whereas  you  are  to  become  a  body  politik,  vsing  amongst  your  selues 
ciuill  gouernment,  and  are  not  furnished  with  any  persons  of  speciall  eminencie 
aboue  the  rest,  to  be  chosen  by  you  into  office  of  gouernment  :  Let  your  wisedome 
and  godlinesse  appeare,  not  onely  in  chusing  such  persons  as  do  entirely  loue,  and 
will  diligently  promote  the  common  good,  but  also  in  yeelding  vnto  them  all  due 
honour  and  obedience  in  their  lawfull  administrations.3 


1  The  forty-first  degree  of  latitude  falls  a  little  north  of  New  York  city. 

-  Bradford,  Hist.  Plym.  Plant,  p.  89. 

>  1  quote  from  Mourt's  Relation,  pp.  x,  xi  (Dr.  Dexter's  edition  xliv-xlvi).  A  note  of 
Dr.  Dexter  puts  this  interpretation  on  the  passages.  The  letter  may  also  be  found  in  Brad- 
ford, Hist.  Ply m.  Plant,  pp.  64-67  ;  Morton's  Mcmoriall,  pp.  6-9  (Davis  ed.  pp.  25-29)  ;  Hazard's 
Historical  Collections,  I  :  96-99  ;  Hanbury,  Memorials,  I  :  394-396.  I  am  aware  that  Bradford 
omits  the  important  word  to  in  the  clause  beginning  Lastly,  whereas;  and  that  Robinson  may 
be  made  to  mean  simply  that  they  an-  now  under  the  Virginia  patent ;  but  he  seems  to 
me  10  mean  more  than  that,  when  both  passages  are  considered. 


THE    MAYFLOWER   COMPACT  89 

The  Mayflower  Compact  is  in  no  sense  a  creed  or  a  religious 
covenant  ;  but  it  is  none  the  less  the  direct  fruit  of  the  teachings 
of  Congregationalism.  That  system  recognized  as  the  constitu- 
tive act  of  a  church  a  covenant  individually  entered  into  between 
each  member,  his  brethren,  and  his  God,  pledging  him  to  submit 
himself  to  all  due  ordinances  and  officers  and  seek  the  good 
of  all  his  associates.  In  like  manner  this  compact  bound  its 
signers  to  promote  the  general  good  and  to  yield  obedience  to 
such  laws  as  the  community  should  frame.  The  Separatist  Pilgrims 
on  the  Mayflower  constituted  a  state  by  individual  and  mutual 
covenant,  just  as  they  had  learned  to*  constitute  a  church  ;  and 
therefore  the  Mayflower  Compact  deserves  a  place  among  the 
creeds  and  covenants  of  Congregationalism.1 

The  Seven  Articles  2 

Seven  Artikes  which  ye  Church  of  Leyden  sent  to  ye  Counsell 
of  England  to  bee  considered  of  in  respeckt  of  their  judgments 
occationed  about  theer  going  to  Virginia  Anno  161 8. 

1.  To  ye  confession  of  fayth  published  in  ye  name  of  ye  Church 
of  England  3  &  to  every  artikell  theerof  wee  do  wth  ye  reformed 
churches  wheer  wee  live  &  also  els  where  assent  wholy. 

2.  As  wee  do  acknolidg  ye  docktryne  of  fayth  theer  tawght  so 
do  wee  ye  fruites  and  effeckts  of  ye  same  docktryne  to  ye  begetting  of 
saving  fayth  in  thousands  in  ye  land  (conformistes  &;  reformistes) 
as  ye  ar  called  \vth  whom  also  as  wth  our  bretheren  wee  do  desyer 


1  The  literature  having  to  do  with  the  history  of  the  Scrooby-Leyden  Plymouth  church  is 
very  voluminous  ;  but  the  following  readily  accessible  works  will  either  put  the  student  in  posses- 
sion of  about  all  the  facts  or  show  him  where  they  may  be  obtained.  Sources.  Bradford,  History 
of  Plymouth  Plantation;  Mourt's  Relation:  Young's  Chronicles  of  tin-  Pilgrim  Fathers  (Boston, 
1841-4)  ;  Morton's  Memoriall  (for  these  works  see  ante  p.  81) ;  Dexter,  English  E.ri/es  in  A  mster- 
dam,  in  2  Proc.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.,Vl:  41  (June,  1890).  Literature,  a.  Formation  of  the  church  and 
sojourn  in  Holland.  Geo.  Sumner,  Memoirs  of  the  Pilgrims  at  Leyden,  in  3  Coll.  Mass.  Hist. 
Soe.,  IX:  42-74;  W.  H.  Bartlett,  The  Pilgrim  Fathers,  London,  1853  (especially  valuable  for  its 
beautiful  engravings  of  the  scenes  associated  with  the  Pilgrims)  ;  Hunter,  Collections  concerning 
the  Church  .  .  .  formed  at  Scrooby,  London,  1854  ;  Dexter,  Recent  Discoveries  concerning 
the  Plymouth  Pilgrims,  in  Cong.  Quarterly,  IV  :  58-66,  (Jan.  1862)  ;  Ibid.,  Letter,  in  /  Proc. 
Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  XII :  184-186  (Jan.  1872)  ;  Ibid.,  Cong,  as  seen,  316,  317,  359-410 ;  Ibid.,  The  Pil- 
grims of  Leyden,  in  the  New  England  Magazine,  I  :  49-61  (Sept.  1889.  This  number  is  filled 
with  interesting  sketches  of  Scrooby  and  Plymouth),  b.  General  accounts  of  the  origin  of  the 
church  and  settlement  of  the  colony.  Palfrey,  Hist.  New  England,  1 :  133-231  ;  Punchard,  Hist. 
Congregationalism,  III  :  277-434  ;  Bacon,  Genesis  of  the  N.  E.  Churches,  pp.  199  et  scqq  ;  Prof. 
F.  B.  Dexter,  in  Winsor's  Narrative  and  Crit.  Hist.,  Ill  :  257-294  ;  Goodwin,  The  Pilgrim 
Republic,  Boston,  1888  (a  valuable  treasure-house  of  facts  regarding  Plymouth  colony). 

a  Text  from  Bancroft.  3  i.  e.,  the  XXXIX  Articles. 


9° 


THE    MAYFLOWER    CHURCH 


to  keepe  sperituall  communion  in  peace  and  will  pracktis  in  our 
parts  all  lawfull  thinges. 

3.  The  King's  Majesty  wee  acknolidg  for  Supreame  Governer 
in  his  Dominion  in  all  causes  and  over  all  parsons,1  and  y  2  none 
maye  decklyne  or  apeale  from  his  authority  or  judgment  in  any 
cause  whatsoever,  but  y  in  all  thinges  obedience  is  dewe  unto  him, 
ether  active,  if  ye  thing  commanded  be  not  agaynst  God's  woord, 
or  passive  yf  itt  bee,  except  pardon  can  bee  obtayned.3 

4.  Wee  judg  itt  lawfull  for  his  Majesty  to  apoynt  bishops,  civill 
overseers,  or  officers  in  awthoryty  onder  hime,  in  ye  severall  prov- 
inces, dioses,  congregations  or  parrishes  to  oversee  ye  Churches4 
and  governe  them  civilly  according  to  ye  Lawes  of  ye  Land,  untto 
whom  ye  5  ar  in  all  thinges  to  geve  an  account  &  by  them  to  bee 
ordered  according  to  Godlynes. 

5.  The  authoryty  of  ye  present  bishops  in  ye  Land  wee  do  ac- 
knolidg so  far  forth  as  ye  same  is  indeed  derived  from  his  Majesty 
untto  them  and  as  ye  proseed  in  his  name,  whom  wee  will  also 
theerein  honor  in  all  things  and  hime  in  them.0 

6.  Wee  beleeve  y*  no  sinod,  classes,  convocation  or  assembly 
of  Ecclesiasticall  Officers  hath  any  power  or  awthoryty  att  all  but 
as  ye  same  by  ye  Majestraet  geven  unto  them.7 

7.  Lastly,  wee  desyer  to  geve  untto  all  Superiors  dew  honnor 
to  preserve  ye'  unity  of  ye  speritt  wth  all  y  feare  God,  to  have  peace 
wth  all  men  what  in  us  lyeth  &  wheerein  wee  err  to  bee  instructed 

'  Subscribed  by 

John  Robinson, 
and 

WlLLYAM    BRUSTER. 

The  Notes  of  Explanation  " 
The  first  breefe  note  -was  this. 
Touching  ye  Ecclesiasticall  ministrie,  namly  of  pastores  for 
teaching,  elders  for  ruling,  &  deacons  for  distributing  y«  churches 


1  Persons  2  '■  *n  //"!/'  and  so  elsewhere. 

3  The  article  does  not  mean  that  the  signers  are  willing  to  do  all  that  the  king  commands. 
But  they  promise  that  if  the  action  required  is  so  contrary  to  the  law  of  God  that  they  cannot  per- 
form it,  they  will  peacefully  submit  to  the  penalties  for  its  omission,  making  no  resistance  to  the 
ordinary  courae  of  the  law  other  than  a  proper  effort  to  obtain  a  pardon. 

•  I  (bserve  the  plural  form.  s    /.  e.,  the  churches.  _ 

the  care  with  which  this  article  avoids  ascribing  any  spiritual  authority  to  the  clergy 
of  the  Establishment. 

1  This  article  is  designed  to  be  a  denial  of  Presbyterianism. 

8  Text  from  Bradford's  History  Ply'"-  Plant. 


TEXT   OF  THE   ARTICLES  91 

contribution,  as  allso  for  ye  too  Sacrements,  baptisme,  and  ye  Lords 
supper,  we  doe  wholy  and  in  all  points  agree  with  ye  French  re- 
formed churches,  according  to  their  publick  confession1  of  faith. 

The  oath  of  Supremacie  we  shall  willingly  take  if  it  be  required 
of  us,  and  that  conveniente  satisfaction  be  not  given  by  our  taking 
ye  oath  of  Alleagence.2 

John  Rob: 
William  Brewster. 

V  2.  was  this. 
Touching  ye  Ecclesiasticall  ministrie,  &c.  as  in  ye  former,  we 
agree  in  all  things  with  the  French  reformed  churches,  according 
to  their  publick  confession  of  faith;  though  some  small  differences 
be  to  be  found  in  our  practises,  not  at  all  in  ye  substance  of  the 
things,  but  only  in  some  accidentall  circumstances. 

1.  As  first,  their  ministers  doe  pray  with  their  heads  covered; 
ours  uncovered. 

2.  We  chose  none  for  Governing  Elders  but  such  as  are  able 
to  teach;  which  abilitie  they  doe  not  require. 

3.  Their  elders  &  deacons  are  anuall,  or  at  most  for  2.  or  3. 
years;  ours  perpetuall. 

4.  Our  elders  doe  administer  their  office  in  admonitions  &  ex- 
communications for  publick  scandals,  publickly  &  before  ye  congre- 
gation; theirs  more  privately,  &  in  their  consistories. 

5.  We  doe  administer  baptisme  only  to  such  infants  as  wherof 
ye  one  parente,  at  ye  least,  is  of  some  church,  which  some  of  ther 
churches  doe  not  observe;  though  in  it  our  practice  accords  with 
their  publick  confession3  and  ye  judgmente  of  yc  most  larned 
amongst  them. 

Other  differences,  worthy  mentioning,  we  know  none  in  these 
points.     Then  aboute  ye  oath,  as  in  ye  former.4 

Subscribed, 

John  R. 
W.  B. 

1  This  confession  may  be  found  in  Schaffs  Creeds  of  Christendom,  III :  356-382.  See  espe- 
cially Articles  XXIX-XXXVIII. 

2  The  oath  of  Supremacy,  imposed  by  Henry  VIII.  in  1531,  was  reestablished  in  the  first  year 
of  Elizabeth.  The  person  taking  it  swore  "that  the  queen's  highness  is  the  only  supreme  governor 
of  this  realm  ...  as  well  in  all  spiritual  and  ecclesiastical  things  or  causes  as  temporal."  All 
allegiance  to  foreign  powers  or  prelates  is  renounced.  The  oath  of  Allegiance  was  imposed  in  1605 
under  James,  and  implied  complete  submission  to  the  king  as  temporal  sovereign.  See  Young, 
Chron.  0/  the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  p.  64,  note.  The  text  of  the  oath  of  Supremacy  may  be  found  in 
Hallam,  Constit.  Hist.  England,  Ch.  Ill,  note  (ed.  New  York,  1882,  p.  121). 

3  Article  XXXV  of  French  Confession.     Schaff,  Creeds,  III :  379. 

4  This  sentence  and  the  opening  clause  of  this  note  are  doubtless  simply  Bradford's  sum- 
mary of  the  statements  given  in  full  in  the  preceding  note. 


q2  THE   MAYFLOWER   CHURCH 

The  Mayflower  Compact  ' 

In  the  name  of  God,  Amea.  We  whose  names  are  vnderwritten, 
the  loyall  Subiects  of  our  dread  soveraigne  Lord  King  Iames, 
by  the  grace  of  God  of  Great  Britain*,  France,  and  Ireland  King, 
Defender  of  the  Faith,  &c. 

Having  vnder-taken  for  the  glory  of  God,  and  advancement 
of  the  Christian  Faith,  and !  honour  of  our  King  and  Countrey,  a 
Voyage  to  plant  the  first  Colony  in  the  Northerne  parts  of  Vir- 
ginia, doe  by  these  presents  solemnly  &  mutually  in  the  presence 
of  God  and  one  of3  another,  covenant,  and  combine  our  selues 
together  into  a  civill  body  politike,  for  our  better  ordering  and 
preservation,  and  furtherance  of  the  ends  aforesaid  ;  and  by 
vertue  hereof  to4  enact,  constitute,  and  frame  such  iust  and  equall 
Lawes,  Ordinances,  acts,  constitutions,5  offices6  from  time  to  time, 
as  shall  be  thought  most  meet  and  convenient  for  the  generall 
good  of  the  Colony  :  vnto  which  we  promise  all  due  submission 
and  obedience.  In  witnesse  whereof  we  haue  here-vnder7  sub- 
scribed our  names,8  Cape  Cod'  n.  of  November  in  the  yeare  of" 
the  raigne  of  our  soveraigne  Lord  King  Iames,  of  England,  France, 
and  Ireland  18."  and  of  Scotland  54"     Anno  Domino  1620. 


1  Text  from  Mourf  s  Relation.  *  Morton,  Memorials  inserts  the  after  and. 

3  Morton,  Memorial!,  omits  of.  4  Morton  reads  do. 

*  Bradford  and  Morton  insert  and.  6  Morton  reads  officers. 

'  Morton  reads  hereunto.  8  Bradford  and  Morton  insert  rf. 

»  Bradford  and  Morton  insert  the.  '»  Morton  omits  the  yeare  of. 

"  Bradford  and  Morton  read  the  eighteenth. 

12  Bradford  and  Morton  read  the  fif  tie  fourth. 


VI 

THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  COVENANT  AND  CREED 

IN    THE    SALEM    CHURCH,    1629-1665 
Texts 

No  record  appears  to  have  been  kept  during  the  first  six  or  seven  years  of  the 
history  of  the  church  at  Salem.  About  1637  a  church-book  was  started,  but  as  it  came 
to  be  in  dilapidated  condition  and  was  filled  with  personal  reflections  of  a  somewhat 
censorious  nature,  it  was  sequestered  in  1660  ;'  and  its  more  important  portions  copied  in 
that  year,  or  the  year  following,  into  a  new  book,  which  still  exists, —  a  second  and 
older  copy  will  be  described  shortly.  This  record  of  1637  began,  it  is  well-nigh 
certain,  with  the  covenant2  as  renewed  at  the  settlement  of  Hugh  Peter  in  1636.  The 
covenant  of  1629  is  nowhere  separately  preserved  ;  it  exists  embedded  in  the  renewal 
and  enlargement  of  1636.  But,  as  already  noted,  even  the  original  record  of  this  re- 
newal is  lost.  The  renewed  covenant  of  1636  is  preserved  in  the  two  copies,  already 
mentioned,  either  of  which  may  be  considered  as  representative  of  the  original  text, 
and  differing  only  in  slight  verbal  points,  as  follows  : 

A.  It  is  to  be  found  in  a  book  of  excerpts  from  the  original  records  of  the  Salem 
church,  made  by  Rev.  John  Fiske,3  between  1636  and  1641,  while  he  was  serving  as 
an  occasional  assistant  to  Rev.  Hugh  Peter,  then  pastor  of  the  church.  This  little 
book  was  apparently  a  private  record  of  parochial  affairs.4  The  covenant  here  con- 
tained is  printed  in  the  Hist.  Coll.  Essex  Institute,  Vol.  I.  No.  2,  pp.  37,  38  (May, 
I859)-5 

B.  The  other  copy  is  in  the  revised  church-book  of  1660  or  1661,  prepared  soon 
after  the  settlement  of  John  Higginson.  This  document  is  printed  verbatim  in  the 
Proceedings  of  Essex  Institute,  I  :  262-264  (^S0)  ;  by  White,  ATeiv  England  Con- 
gregationalism, pp.  13,  14  ;  by  Webber  and  Nevins,  Old  Naumkeag,  Salem,  1877, 
pp.  14-16;  by  Rev.  Edmund  B.  Willson  in  the  History  of  Essex  County,  Mass., 
Philadelphia,  1888,  p.  24  ;  and  in  modern  spelling,  by  Upham,  Address  at  the  Re- 
Dedication  of  the  Fourth  Meeting-House  of  the  First  Church  hi  Salem,  Salem,  1867, 
pp.  63-65. 


1  The  record  of  these  transactions  is  to  be  found  in  White,  Mew  England  Congregational- 
ism, Salem,  1861,  pp.  47,  48.     The  first  vote  is  Sept.  10,  1660. 

2  So  to  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  it  begins  the  church-book  copy,  Ibid.,  117. 

3  A  life  of  Rev.  John  Fiske  may  be  found  in  Mather,  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  I:  476-480; 
Brook,  Lives,  III:  468,  469;  Sprague,  Annals  0/  the  Am.  Pulpit,  New  York,  1857,  I:  !°6,  107. 
He  came  to  New  England  in  1637,  lived  in  Salem,  but  soon  moved  to  Wenham,  where  he  became 
pastor  of  the  church  gathered  there  in  1644.  About  1656  he  removed  to  Chelmsford,  and  there  died 
in  1676,  leaving  records  of  great  value  for  New  England  Church  History. 

4  See  some  observations  by  J.  A.  Emmerton,  in  Hist.  Coll.  Essex  Ins.,  XV :  70-72  (1878). 

5  From  the  MS.  note  book,  then  in  the  possession  of  David  Pulsifer,  Esq.,  of  Boston.     Some 
:  of  the  preservation  of  this  book  may  be  found  in  White,  N.  E.  Cong.,  p.  20. 


(93) 


94 


CREED    DEVELOPMENT    AT    SALEM 


Other  Trinted  Copies 

Beside  the  carefully  printed  texts,  already  noticed,  this  renewal  covenant  of 
1636  early  found  a  place  on  the  pages  of  writers  on  New  England  ecclesiastical 
affairs. 

I.  Rathband,  A  Briefe  Narration  of  some  Church  Courses  held  in  Opinion 
and  Practise  in  the  Churches  lately  erected  in  New  England,  London,  1644,  PP-  *7~ 
19. ■  From  Rathband  it  was  copied  into  Hanbury,  Memorials,  II  :  31"-  IL  A  Copy 
of  the  Church  Covenants  which  have  been  used  in  the  Church  of  Salem,  Boston, 
1680.2     III.   Mather,  Magnolia,  ed.   1702,  Bk.  I:  Ch.   IV.      Ed.    1853-5,   I:  7*- 

IV.  Neal,  History  of  New  England,   London,   1720,   I  :    126-28  (from  Mather). 

V.  Rev.  William  Bentley,  A  Description  and  History  of  Salem,  in  /  Coll.  Mass. 
[list.  Soc.,Vl:  2S3-2S5.  VI.  Morton's  Memoriall,  Davis,  ed.  Boston,  1826,  Ap- 
pendix, 389-90.  VII.  Upham,  Second  Century  Lecture  of  the  First  Churchman, 
1829,  pp.  07,  68.  VIII.  S.  M.  Worcester,  Discourse  delivered  on  the  First  Centen- 
nial .  ■  .  of  the  Tabernacle  Church,  Salem,  1835  ;  Appendix  U.a  IX.  Han- 
bury, Memorials,  1841,  as  cited  under  I.  X.  N.  E.  Historical  and  Genealogical 
Register,  I:  224,  225  (1847).  XL  Morton's  Memoriall,  ed.  Boston,  1S55, 
Appendix,  pp.  462-464.  XII.  Uhden,  New  England  Theocracy,  Conant's  transla- 
tion, Boston,  1S58,  pp.  61,  62.  XIII.  Fletcher,  History  .  .  .  of  Independency 
in  England,  London,  1862,  III:  131,  132.  XIV.  Waddington,  Congregational 
History,  1367-1700,  pp.  260,  261.  XV.  T.  W.  Higginson,  Life  of  Francis 
Higginson,  New  York  I.1S91],  pp.  80,  81. 

The  Anti-Quaker  Clause  of  1660-1  is  to  be  found  in  the  new  church  record, 

made  earl)-  in  John  lligginson's  pastorate,  and  is  printed  verbatim  at  the  close  of  the 

renewed  covenant  of  1636  in  the  Proceedings  of  Essex  Institute,!:  264;  in  White, 

New  England  Congregationalism,  ■p.  14;  and  in  Webber  and  Nevins,   Old  Naum- 

1  (,  ;  and  in  Willson's  article  in  the  History  of  Essex  County,  p.  24. 

Tht  Direction  of  /66j  was  printed  in  that  year  and  does  not  appear  in  full  on 
the  church  records,  as  it  was  not  formally  adopted  by  the  church,  though  used  by  the 
pastor  in  certain  admissions.  This  pamphlet  was  long  lost  to  sight,  but  was  discov- 
ered by  Rev.  Dr.  J.B.  Felt,  the  antiquary,  and  communicated  by  him  to  Rev.  Dr.  S. 
M.  Worcester.  It  has  since  been  printed  in  I.  S.  M.  Worcester,  New  England's 
Glory  and  Crown.  A  Discourse  delivered  at  Plymouth,  Dec.  23,  1848,  Boston, 
1849,  pp.  54,  55.  II.  Ibid.,  in  Salem  Gazette,  April  $,  1854.4  III.  Morton,  Memo. 
rial/,  ed.  1855,  Appendix,  pp.  459-402.  IV.  Felt,  Did  the  First  Church  of  Salem 
Originally  have  a  Confession  of  Faith  distinct  from  their  Covenant .'  Boston,  1856, 
Appendix,  pp.  23-25.  V.  White,  New  England  Congregationalism,  Salem,  1861, 
190-192  (from  Worcester).  VI.  Felt,  Reply  to  the  New  England  Congregationalism, 
etc.,  Salem,  1861,  Appendix.  The  Confession  of  Faith  may  also  be  found  in  the 
Congregationalist,  Jan.  2,  1890. 


1  Rathband  gives  with  it  the  covenant  of   the  church  of   Rotterdam,  Holland,  "renewed 
when  Mr,  II.  P.  [Hugh  Peter]  was  made  their  Pastour."     More  will  be  said  of  this  later. 

•-  T'hi-  excessively  ran   pamphlet  is  mentioned  by  Thomas,  Hist.  Printing  in  America,  Al- 
bany   1874,  II:  323.     A  MS.  copy  exists  among  the  records  of  the  Tabernacle  Church.  Salem. 

'  3  White,  A'.  E.Cong.,  p.  185.  In  the  controversy  between  Worcester,  White,  and  Kelt,  the  docu- 
ment was  several  times  printed  in  newspapers  or  pamphlets. 

<  White,  N.  E.  Cong-,  P-  206. 


CONTROVERSIAL    LITERATURE.  95 

Literature 

The  Salem  Covenant  and  Direction  have  given  rise  to  a  considerable  literature, 
much  of  it  of  a  sharply  controversial  nature  and  not  a  little  affected  by  doctrinal  polem- 
ics. On  the  one  hand,  Rev.  Dr.  S.  M.  Worcester1  and  Rev.  J.  B.  Felt,  LL.D.,2  in- 
sisted, in  numerous  publications,3  that  the  Salem  church  had  a  creed  as  well  as  a  covenant 
at  its  beginning  and  that  the  Direction  of  1665  contains,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  the 
form  of  creed  adopted  by  the  church  in  1629;  basing  their  arguments,  for  the  most 
part,  on  a  strict  construction  of  the  phrase  employed  by  John  Iligginson  in  the  title 
to  the  Direction  itself  ;4  and  the  expressions  of  Morton  in  writing  of  the  formation  of 
the  Salem  church.5  They  also  held  from  the  phraseology  of  its  opening  paragraph, 
the  adaptation  of  its  articles  to  1636  rather  than  1629,  and  possible  hints  in  a  pamphlet 
issued  by  the  Salem  church  in  1680, 6  and  in  the  Magnolia?  that  the  full  covenant 
with  nine  articles  (styled  by  me  the  "Covenant of  1636"),  could  not  date  from  1629. 
Dr.  Worcester  also  shrewdly  guessed,  simply  from  the  wording  of  the  opening  sen- 
tences of  this  fuller  covenant,  that  it  embedded  the  covenant  of  1629  in  a  single  sen- 
tence.8 This  latter  view  of  Dr.  Worcester's  was  adopted,  though  without  any  special 
advance  in  clearness  of  proof  over  his  argument,  by  Hon.  Charles  W.  Upham''  and 
by  Mr.  George  Punchard,10  who  do  not,  however,  follow  him  in  his  claims  for  the 
Direction.       On  the  other  hand,  Judge   D.  A.  White11  has  shown12  that  the  church 


1  S.  M.  Worcester  was  born  in  1801,  graduated  at  Harvard  1822,  taught  in  Amherst  College  1823- 
1835.  In  the  latter  year  he  became  pastor  of  the  Tabernacle  Church,  Salem,  and  so  remained  till 
i860.  He  died  in  1866.  He  was  always  a  warm  defender  of  Trinitarian  Congregationalism.  See 
Appleton's  Cyclopeaia  Am.  Biog.,  VI :  613. 

2  J.  IS.  Felt  was  born  1789,  graduated  at  Dartmouth  in  1813.  He  waspastorat  Sharon,  Mass., 
1821-1824,  and  at  Hamilton,  Mass.,  1S24-1833.  Being  compelled  by  ill-health  to  abandon  the  ac- 
tive work  of  the  ministry,  he  obtained  employment  congenial  to  his  antiquarian  tastes,  engaging 
from  1836  to  1846  in  the  arranging  of  the  Mass.  State  Archives  at  Boston.  In  1853  he  became  libra- 
rian of  the  Congregational  Library,  Boston.  He  died  in  1869.  In  theology  he  sympathized  with  Dr. 
Worcester,     See  A'.  E.  Hist.  and  Genealogical  Register,  XXIV  :  1-5  (1870). 

3  The  most  important  of  these  have  been  cited  in  the  list  of  reprints  of  the  various  Salem  docu- 
ments, especially  those  under  the  title  "Direction  of  1665,"  in  the  preceding  paragraphs  of  this 
chapter.  I  may  add  Felt,  A  niials  of  Salem,  2d  ed.,  Salem,  1845,  1849,  II  :  567  ;  and  Felt,  Ect  lesi- 
astical  Hist.  N.  E.,  Boston,  1855,  1 :  115,  116,  267.  Some  references  to  newspaper  publications  are 
gathered  up  by  White  in  his  N.  E.  Congregationalism.  *  See  text  on  page  no. 

6  Morton,  Memorial!,  73-76  ;  Davis  ed.,  145-147  ;  Hubbard,  Gen.  Hist.  N.  E.,  118-120,  follows 
Morton. 

6  Worcester,  Discourse  delivered  on  the  First  Centennial  .  .  .  of  the  Tabernacle  Ch., 
Salem,  1835,  A/>J>endix  U.     White,  N.  E.  Congregationalism^  187,  188. 

7  Ed.  1853-5,  I:  71,  "Covenant  .  .  .  which  was  about  seven  years  after  solemnly  re- 
newed." *  Worcester,  Hid.    White,  Ibid. 

9  Upham,  Address  at  the  Re-Dedication  of  the  Fourth  Meeting-House  of  the  First  Church 
in  Salem,  Salem,  1867,  20-30.  He  is  disposed  to  give  weight  to  the  fact  that  a  later  hand  has 
underscored  the  sentence  in  question,  as  if  to  render  it  specially  conspicuous,  in  the  copy  recorded  in 
the  church-book  of  1660-1. 

1°  History  of  Congregationalism,  IV  :  14.  Punchard  leaves  the  general  controversy  unde- 
cided. Webber  and  Nevins,  in  Old  Naumkeag,  13,  14,  take  the  same  view  as  Upham,  but  with- 
out argument.  They  also  hold  that  the  introduction  to  the  enlarged  covenant  dates  from  1660,  a 
theory  which  a  glance  at  Rathband  proves  untenable. 

11  D.  A.  White,  born  in  1776,  graduated  at  Harvard,  1797.  After  studying  law,  he  was  chosen 
to  the  Mass.  legislature.  He  was  made  Probate  Judge  of  Essex  County  in  1815  and  held  the  office 
till  1853.  From  1848  till  his  death  he  was  president  of  the  Essex  Institute.  He  died  in  1861.  He 
was  a  Unitarian  of  the  old  school,  a  member  of  the  First  Church  in  Salem.  See  Proc.  Mass.  Hist. 
Soc.,  VI :  262-330  (Sept.  1862) ;  and  Hist.  Coll.  Essex  Institute,  VI  :  1-24,  49-71  (1864). 

12  In  various  writings,  all  of  which  are  summed  up  in  his  New  England  Congregationalism, 
Salem,  1861. 


96  CREED  DEVELOPMENT  AT   SALEM 

records  themselves  amply  account  for  the  origin  of  the  Direction  in  1665.  The 
use  of  any  other  standard  than  the  Covenant  at  the  formation  of  the  church  is  to 
be  denied  because  of  the  silence  of  those  records  as  to  any  confession  of  faith  adopted 
by  the  church,  and  the  fact  that  the  Magnolia,  though  preserving  the  Coven:, 
not  hint  at  the  existence  of  any  other  document,  while  the  words  of  the  other  his- 
torians1 do  not  necessarily  imply  more  than  one  formula,  since,  as  he  claims,  the  de- 
scription "confession"  and  "covenant"  is  not  an  unnatural  one  to  apply  to  the 
many-articled  Covenant  [of  1636].  But  Judge  White  goes  so  far  as  to  claim  also  that 
the  whole  of  the  enlarged  Covenant,  except  the  brief  formula  of  renewal  at  its  begin- 
ning, should  be  dated  back  to  1629. * 

It  is  with  considerable  diffidence  that  the  writer  presumes  to  pass  judgment  upon 
the  views  of  these  learned  contestants.  But,  it  seems  to  him  that  material  evidence  has 
been  overlooked  on  both  sides.  In  his  opinion  Drs.  Worcester  and  Felt  were  wholly 
wrong  in  claiming  that  the  Direction  of  1665  can  be  the  creed  of  1629,  as  they  would 
have  it.  The  arguments  of  Judge  White  against  this  view  are  conclusive.  But,  if  any 
proof  was  wanting,  the  writer  would  find  it  in  the  fact,  which  a  few  moments'  examination 
seems  to  him  to  demonstrate,  that  the  "confession  of  faith"  of  the  Direction  is  es- 
sentially an  epitome  of  portions  of  the  Westminster  Catechism,  from  which  much  of 
its  phraseology  appears  to  be  borrowed.  It  can  therefore  by  no  possibility  be  dated 
back  to  1629.  The  utmost  that  can  be  claimed  for  the  phrase  employed  byjohn  Hig- 
ginson  in  the  title  of  the  Direction  is  that,  in  his  judgment,  it  represented  the  doc- 
trinal position  approved,  in  general,  by  the  church  from  the  beginning.  But  while 
Judge  White  was  right  on  this  point,  he  fell  into  error  regarding  the  enlarged  cove- 
nant, when  he  claimed  that  it  dates  back,  in  its  entirety,  to  1629.  Dr.  Worcester's 
surmise  was  correct ;  the  main  portion  of  this  Covenant  is,  at  the  earliest,  of  1636  ;3 
and  the  covenant  of  1O29  which  has  come  down  to  us  is  a  single  brief  sentence  em- 
bedded in  it.  Evidence  which  Dr.  Worcester  seems  to  have  overlooked  enables  us 
not  only  to  bring  fresh  weight  to  the  correctness  of  his  surmise,  but  to  assert  with  con- 
siderable confidence  that  the  preamble  and  articles  of  the  Covenant  in  its  enlarged  form 
are  from  the  pen  of  Hugh  Peter.  William  Rathband  has  preserved  in  a  work  published  in 
London  in  1644,4  two  covenants  as  illustrative  of  the  practice  of  the  Congregational 
churches.  One  is  that  adopted  by  the  church  in  Rotterdam,  I  Iolland,  when  Peter  became 
its  pastor,1  the  other  our  enlarged  Salem  Covenant.  So  similar  are  they  in  phraseology 
that  the  conclusion  is  hard  to  avoid  that  they  were  written  by  the  same  person.  The  en- 
larged Covenant,  with  the  exception  of  the  single  sentence  which  the  preamble  distinctly 
affirms  to  be  the  original  Covenant,  cannot  therefore  antedate  Peter's  coming  to  Salem." 


Morton  and  Hubbard,  see  antt\  p.  95,  note  5. 
*"White"s  arguments  were  summed  up  and  reinforced  by  Dr.  Dexter  in  an  article  in  tl 
Rationalist,  Jan.  28,  1875,  p.  3.     See  note  6,  below. 

S  Sim  -  Peter  was  not  settled  at  Salem  till  December  of  that  year. 

>  Rathband.  A  Briefe  Narration  0/ some  Church  Courses  held  in   Opinion  an,/  Practise 

in  the  Churches  lately  erected  in  New  England,  pp.  17-19-     This  portion  of  Rathband's  work  is 

Hanburv,  Memorials,  II:    3°9.  3>°-      White  twice  alludes  to  Hanbury's  reprint  of    the 

I       mant,  New   England  Cong.,  pp.  2.,  258;  but  seems  not  to  have  compared  it  with  the 

Rotterdam  Covenant  preserved  in  the  same  passage. 

s  In  11 

«  The  strongest  argument  which  can  be  brought  against  the  view  here  presented  is  the  State- 
ment of  Morton  (and  Hubbard)  that  the  Salem  church  adopted  "a  confession  of   faith  an 
nant"    in    1629.     This  dual  expression,  which  applies  admirably  to  the  nine  articled  and  lengthy 
covenant  of  1636,  cannot  be  made  to  fit  the  single  sentence  of  1629.     It  should,  however,  be  remem- 
bered that  Morton  was  not  a  contemporary  writer.     His  work  was  published  in  1669.     Let  it  be  con- 


PURITANS   AND    SEPARATISTS  97 

The  Congregationalists  whose  standards  have  thus  far  been 
presented  were  Separatists,  but  the  vast  majority  of  those 
who  were  to  come  to  the  shores  of  New  England  were  not  Sepa- 
ratists but  Puritans.1  Doctrinally  there  was  little  difference  be- 
tween the  two  parties.  Both  were  Calvinists  of  a  pronounced 
type  and  both  belived  that  in  the  Bible  is  to  be  found  a  sufficient 
rule  for  faith  and  church  practice.  But  while  the  Separatist 
would  withdraw  from  the  English  Establishment  at  once  and  for- 
ever, the  Puritan  remembered  that  the  sixteenth  century  had  seen 
the  constitution,  liturgy,  and  doctrinal  standards  of  the  English 
Church  essentially  altered  at  least  four  times  by  the  united  action 
of  the  sovereign  and  of  Parliament.2  He  was  not  inclined,  there- 
fore, to  look  upon  the  State  Church  as  by  any  means  in  a  hope- 
less condition.  At  first,  in  the  early  days  of  Elizabeth,  Puritan 
opposition  had  been  directed  chiefly  against  certain  rites  and 
vestments;  as  the  movement  went  on,  the  Puritans  began  to 
question  more  and  more  the  warrant  for  the  whole  church  con- 
stitution in  its  episcopal  form ;  but  they  constantly  hoped  that 
that  which  had  been  established  by  law  would  be  changed  by 
legislative  act.  Nor  was  there,  at  first,  anything  which  seemed 
unlikely  in  this  supposition.  Throughout  the  reign  of  Elizabeth 
the  Puritans  were  a  growing  party  ;  they  might  soon,  it  was  easy 
to  believe,  incline  the  sovereign  and  Parliament  to  enact  the  re- 
forms for  which  they  longed.     But,  as  we  have  seen,3  there  grew 


ceded,  nevertheless,  that  he  may  have  got  his  information  from  John  Higginson,  one  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  church  in  1629  and  a  contemporary.  Higginson  was  only  13  in  1G29.  He  left  Salem 
within  a  year  or  two  and  did  not  return  till  1659.  1'ne  church  records  were  not  kept  from  1629  to 
1636  or  1637  ;  and  the  book  of  records  which  John  Higginson  found  on  his  return  bore  on  its  open- 
ing pages  the  covenant  as  enlarged  in  1636.  (See  ante,  p.  93,  note  2.)  The  opening  paragraph  of 
that  enlarged  covenant  declares  that  something  which  follows  is  the  "  Church  Covenant  we  find 
this  Church  bound  unto  at  theire  first  beginning."  It  is  not  easy,  from  the  document  itself,  to  see  how 
much  of  what  follows  that  declaration  implies.  In  the  absence  of  any  ready  means  of  test,  such  as 
Rathband  affords,  Higginson,  or  Morton,  made  the  mistake  of  applying  it  to  all  rather  than  to  a 
single  sentence.  The  error  was  easy  and  natural  and  once  made  was  readily  followed  by  Hubbard 
and  Mather. 

It  is  with  satisfaction  that  I  am  able  to  record  that  the  late  Dr.  Dexter,  to  whose  judgment 
the  conclusions  thus  outlined  were  submitted,  expressed  his  concurrence,  in  a  letter  of  Oct.  29,  1890, 
not  only  in  this  note  but  in  the  entire  position  here  taken  in  regard  to  the  merits  of  the  discussion. 

1  The  contrasts  between  the  Separatist  colony  of  Plymouth  and  the  Puritan  settlements  of 
Massachusetts  Bay  have  been  sharply  drawn  by  S.  N.  Tarbox,  Plymouth  and  the  Bay,  in  Cong: 
Quarterly,  XVII  :  238-252. 

2  The  extent  to  which  the  Church  of  the  Tudor  period  was  the  creature  of  the  State  is 
clearly  shown  in  G.  W.  Childs'  Church  and  State  under  the  Tudors,  London,  1S90. 

3  See  ante,  p.  77,  note. 


90  CREED   DEVELOPMENT  AT   SALEM 

up  alongside  of  Puritanism,  as  the  sixteenth  century  waned,  the 
new  Jure  divino  Episcopacy  of  Bancroft  and  Bilson,  a  view  which 
much  increased  the  opposition  between  the  Puritan  and  the 
High  Anglican  parties,  while  just  in  the  degree  in  which  it 
dominated  those  charged  with  the  conduct  of  government  it 
made  vain  the  expectation  of  legislative  change.  Yet  it  was 
not  till  the  elevation  of  Laud  to  the  bishopric  of  London 
by  Charles  L,  in  1628,  put  a  man  at  the  head  of  one  of  the 
most  Puritanically  inclined  of  English  dioceses  who  was  deter- 
mined to  enforce  absolute  conformity  to  his  high  church  views 
and  who  at  the  same  time  heartily  supported  the  growing  ab- 
solutism and  tyranny  of  the  crown,  that  the  great  majority  of 
the  Puritan  party  began  to  despair  of  churchly  reform  at  home. 
Laud's  elevation  to  the  see  of  Canterbury  in  1633,  as  well  as  his 
influence  over  the  king,  placed  all  ecclesiastical  England  at  his 
mercy;  while  the  frustration  by  Charles  of  all  attempts  of  Parlia- 
ment to  limit  the  exercise  of  royal  authority  made  men  doubtful 
as  to  the  prospects  of  civil  liberty.  It  was  natural,  therefore, 
that  the  descriptions  of  the  experiences  of  the  Plymouth  settlers, 
such  as  Mourt's  Relation,  or  Winslow's  Good  News  from  New 
England,1  should  attract  attention  among  the  Puritans  and  stimu- 
late inquiry  among  the  more  adventurous  as  to  the  feasibility 
of  planting  colonies  beyond  the  ocean  out  of  the  reach  of  Laud. 
It  would  be  far  from  correct  to  say  that  it  was  any  general  long- 
ing for  freedom  of  conscience  or  universal  toleration  that  moved 
these  men  to  think  of  America  ;  it  was  an  impulse  of  a  much 
simpler  and,  considering  the  age  in  which  they  lived,  of  a  far 
more  natural  character.  They  believed  certain  practices  in  the 
government  and  worship  of  the  Church  of  England  to  be  contrary 
to  the  Word  of  God.  They  did  not  desire  to  separate  from  that 
great  body,2  or  brand  it  as  in  its  entirety  anti-Christian,  as  some 


hed  in  1622  and  1624,  respectively. 
views  on  separation  reported  by  Mather  (Magnalia,ed.  1853-5,  ' :  362)  t0  have  been 
uttered  by  Francis  Higginson  as  he  left  England.  But  perhaps  the  kindly  feeling  of  thi 
grams  toward  the  Church  of  England,  in  spite  of  its  errors,  is  best  seen  in  the  Hvmbh  Reqvest  of 
.  .  .  the  Governour  and  the  Company  late  gone  for  New-England :  To  the  rest  0/  their 
Brethren,  in  and  of  the  Church  of  England.  For  the  obtaining  of  their  Prayers,  etc.  Lon- 
don, 1630  (also  Hubbard,  Gen.  Hist.,  pp.  126-128  ;  Hutchinson,  Hist.  Mass.  Bay,  I  :  4S7-4S9  ;  Hazard, 


PURITAN    SETTLEMENTS  99 

of  the  extremer  Separatists  had  done.  They  wanted  to  get  out 
of  the  way  of  the  ecclesiastical  courts  and  the  high  church 
bishops  to  some  place  where  they  could  discard  such  of  the  cere- 
monies of  the  church  as  seemed  superstitious  and  practice  such 
things  as  seemed  to  them  directly  enjoined  by  Scripture. 

It  was  not  long  after  the  landing  of  the  Plymouth  founders 
that  attempts  looking  toward  further  settlements  on  the  coast  of 
the  present  State  of  Massachusetts  were  made.  Some  of  these 
attempts  were  by  Church  of  England  and  royalist  sympathizers, 
sent  out  by  Sir  Ferdinando  Gorges  and  others,  to  take  posses- 
sion of  the  lands  about  Massachusetts  Bay,  to  which  he  held  claim. 
These  settlements,  begun  in  1622,  and  permanently  carried  on  after 
1623,  caused  trouble  enough  to  the  Separatists  of  Plymouth  and 
to  the  Puritans  who  afterward  occupied  the  soil  on  which  they 
were  established.1  But  our  concern  here  is  with  the  endeavors  of 
the  Puritans  to  secure  a  home  in  the  new  world.  These  efforts  had 
their  remote  beginnings  in  the  fishing  trade,  which  then,  as  now, 
could  advantageously  be  carried  on  by  vessels  making  those  shores 


Historical  C  llections,  Philadelphia,  1792-4,  I  :  305-307  ;  Young,  Chron.  .  .  .  Mass.,  295-298. 
Palfrey,  Hist.  N.  E.,  1 :  312,  reports  a  rumor  ascribing  its  composition  to  Rev.  John  While  of  Dor- 
chester, Eng.).  This  document  was  signed  by  Winthrop,  Dudley,  Johnson,  Phillips,  and  others. 
A  single  extract  will  suffice:  "Wee  desire  you  would  be  pleased  to  take  Notice  of  the  Principals, 
and  Body  of  our  Company,  as  those  who  esteeme  it  our  honour  to  call  the  Church  of  England, 
from  whence  wee  rise,  our  deare  Mother.  .  .  .  Wee  leave  it  not  therefore,  as  loathing  that 
milk  wherewith  we  were  nourished  there,  but  blessing  God  for  the  Parentage  and  Education,  as 
Members  of  the  same  Body,  shall  always  rejoice  in  her  good."  Of  course  there  were  differences  in 
degree  of  opposition  against  English  ecclesiastical  officers  and  institutions.  When  Winthrop  and 
his  brethren  came  to  choose  Wilson  as  teacher  of  the  Boston-Charlestown  church,  August  27,  1630, 
they  "  used  imposition  of  hands,  but  with  this  protestation  by  all,  that  it  was  only  as  a  sign  of 
election  and  confirmation,  not  of  any  intent  that  Mr.  Wilson  should  renounce  the  ministry  he  re- 
ceived in  England."  Winthrop  Hist.  N.  E.  (ox  Journal),  Savage's  2d  ed.,  Boston,  1853,  I  :  38-39. 
But  the  same  George  Phillips,  who  signed  the  Hvmble  Reqvest  with  Winthrop,  and  who  had  been 
a  minister  of  the  Church  of  England  in  Essex,  told  Doctor  Fuller  of  Plymouth,  in  June,  1630, 
16  days  after  landing,  that  "  if  they  will  have  him  stand  minister,  by  that  calling  which  he  received 
from  the  prelates  in  England,  he  will  leave  them."  Bradford's  Letter  Book,  /  Coll.  Mass. 
Hist.  Soc,  III  :  74  ;  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  417.  The  Boston  church  was  so  well  known  to  be 
Non-conformist  rather  than  Separatist,  that  when  Roger  Williams  was  invited  in  1631  to  supply  its 
pulpit  during  Wilson's  absence,  he  refused  because  he  "  durst  not  officiate  to  an  unseparated  peo- 
ple, as,  upon  examination  and  conference,  I  [he]  found  them  to  be."  Williams'  Letter  to  Cotton 
the  younger,  in  /  Proc.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  III:  316,  Mch.  1858.  See  also  Dexter,  As  to  Roger  Williams, 
p.  4  ;  and  G.  E.  Ellis,  Puritan  Age  .  .  in  .  .  Mass.,  Boston,  1888,  p.  271.  Many  illustra- 
tions of  the  varying  positions  taken  by  the  founders  of  New  England  on  the  validity  of  episcopal 
ordination  are  given  by  Dr.  J.  H.  Trumbull  in  a  note  to  his  reprint  of  Lechford's  Plain  Dealing, 
Boston,  1867,  pp.  16,  17. 

1  The  best  account  of  these  anti-Puritan  settlements,  and  of  the  doings  of  Thomas  Morton 
and  other  leaders  in  them,  is  that  of  Charles  Francis  Adams,  Three  Episodes  0/  Massachusetts 
History,  Boston,  1892,  1 :   1-360. 


IOO  CREED    DEVELOPMENT   AT    SALEM 

a  base  of  supply.  Since  more  men  could  be  employed  in  fishing 
than  were  needed  to  sail  the  vessels  home,  it  occurred  to  some  of 
those  interested  in  the  business  that  it  would  be  well  to  have  the 
unnecessary  members  of  the  crews  remain  in  New  England  and 
form  a  permanent  colony,  from  which  supplies  could  be  drawn. 
Such  a  plan  was  put  into  practice  by  the  Dorchester  (county  of 
Dorset)  Fishing  Company,  a  stock  partnership  organized  by  the 
Puritan,  Rev.  John  White,  of  that  place;  and  in  1623  or  1624  men 
were  actually  sent  out  and  settled  on  Cape  Ann.1  About  a  year 
after  the  beginning  of  this  settlement  Roger  Conant,  an  earnest 
Puritan,  who  had  been  some  time  at  Plymouth,  but  in  disfavor, 
went  thither  to  take  its  affairs  in  charge.  The  colony  proved  a 
poor  venture,  but  Conant  was  minded  to  stay;  and  accordingly, 
since  he  did  not  think  the  rocky  shores  of  Cape  Ann  favorable  for 
a  settlement,  he  removed,  in  1626,  to  the  spot  then  called  Naum- 
keag,  but  better  known  by  its  later  name  of  Salem.2 

Thus  far  the  work  had  been  done  without  a  special  or  certainly 
valid  patent,3  and  had  had  trade  as  its  principal  aim.  But  White 
had  conceived  the  idea  of  a  Puritan  colony  beyond  the  sea,  and  set 


1  See  J.  W.  Thornton's  handsome  monograph,  Landing  at  Cape  Anne,  etc.  Boston,  1854, 
pp.  39-60.  The  Plymouth  colonists  secured  a  grant  from  Lord  Sheffeild  (one  of  the  Council  for 
New  England)  dated  Jan.  1,  1623  (O.  S.),  1,  e.  Jan.  11,  1624,  of  our  reckoning,  authorizing  them  to 
establish  a  fishing  settlement  and  town  where  Gloucester  now  is.  Thornton  gives  the  full  text  of 
the  patent  (pp.  31-35)  and  a  beautiful  fac-simile.  Capt.  John  Smith,  in  his  Genera//  Historic,  Lon- 
don, 1624,  p.  247,  records  that  the  Dorchester  company's  colony  sheltered  itself  under  the  Plymouth 
colonist's  patent.  But  they  cannot  have  much  regarded  it,  indeed,  it  was  really  worthless  (see 
Memorial  Hist.  of  Boston,  1 :  60,  74,  92),  and  they  were  soon  in  open  quarrel  with  Standish  and 
others  of  Plymouth,  and  were  holding  the  Cape-Ann  territory  by  force.  Compare  also  Prof.  H.  B. 
Adams,  Fisher-Plantation  on  Cape  Anne,  in  Hist.  Coll.  Essex  Inst.,  XIX:  81-90  (1SS2).  See  also 
Hubbard,  no,  m  ;  and  a  note,  by  Deane,  to  Bradford,  Hist.  Plym.  Plant.,  ed.  1856,  168,  169.  A 
good  sketch  of  Conant  is  that  by  Felt,  in  N.  E.  Hist,  and  Genealogical  Register,  II :  233-239,  329- 
335  (1848).  The  whole  matter  of  this  colony  and  its  enlargement  into  a  Puritan  settlement  is  set 
forth  briefly  in  John  White's  most  valuable  Planter's  Plea,  London,  1630;  reprinted  in  part  in 
Young,  Chron Mass.,  pp.  3-16. 

2  Our  chief  source  of  information,  aside  from  White,  Planter's  Plea,  on  all  these  matters  is 
Hubbard,  General  History  of  New  England,  printed  at  Boston  (2d  ed.)  1848,  pp.  101-120.  See 
also  Young,  Chronicles  .  .  .  of  Massachusetts,  Boston,  1846,  passim;  and  Phippen  in  Hist. 
Coll.'Essex  Inst.,  I  :  94,  145,  185.  Palfrey,  History  of  AT.  E.,  1 :  283-301,  and  Deane  in  Winsor's 
Narrathe  and  Critical  Hist.  Ill:  295-312,  have  good  accounts  of  these  events.  Prof.  Ada'ms's 
Origin  of  Salem  Plantation,  in  Hist.  Coll.  Essex  Inst.  XIX:  153-166,  has  facts  of  value;  and 
Haven's  The  Mass.  Company,  in  Winsor's  Memorial  Hist,  of  Boston,  Boston,  1882,  1 :  87-98,  is 
worth  consulting. 

3  See  above,  note  1.  Conant  was  a  Puritan,  but,  like  White,  a  conformist  enough  to  be 
attached  to  the  Church  of  England  and  opposed  to  Separatism.  With  him  came  to  minister  to  the 
wants  of  the  little  colony  a  John  Lyford,  a  clergyman  of  the  Church  of  England  in  sympathy  with 
the  Establishment,  who  had  made  much  trouble  at  Plymouth  when  there  with  Conant,  and  who 


THE   MASSACHUSETTS   COMPANY  IOI 

out  now  to  procure  a  patent  and  enlist  Puritan  sympathy.  The 
body  having  nominal  authority  over  New  England  was  the  "Coun- 
cil established  at  Plymouth,  in  the  County  of  Devon,  for  the  plant- 
ing, ruling,  ordering,  and  governing  of  New  England  in  America," 
a  corporation  whose  charter  had  been  sealed  on  November  3,  1620;1 
and  which,  though  possessing  a  title,  in  name  at  least,  to  all  land 
between  400  and  480  from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Pacific,  was  essen- 
tially a  trading  and  fishing  monopoly  for  Sir  Ferdinando  Gorges 
and  his  friends,  and  soon  attracted  the  unfavorable  notice  of  Par- 
liament.5 This  Plymouth  Council,  being  anxious  to  make  such  use 
of  their  property  as  they  could,  was  persuaded  to  grant  to  a  Puri- 
tan land  company,3  of  which  John  Endicott  was  a  member,  that 
portion  of  the  New  World  lying  between  lines  drawn  three  miles 
north  of  the  Merrimac  and  the  same  distance  to  the  south  of  the 
Charles,  by  an  instrument  issued  March  19,  1628.  As  the  agent  of 
this  new  company,  Endicott  came  out  with  a  few  settlers,  landing 
at  Salem  September  6  of  the  same  year.  Meanwhile  White  was 
zealously  introducing  the  Puritanly  inclined  members  of  this  new 
land  company  to  like-minded  men  in  England,  with  a  view  to 
building  up  large  Puritan  settlements  in  America.  The  result 
was  that  the  land  company  was  re-formed  with  many  new  mem- 
bers, and,  on  March  4,  1629,  was  provided  with  a  royal  charter4 
organizing  it  into  the  "  Governor  and  Company  of  the  Mattachu- 
setts  Bay  in  Newe  England,"  and  giving  it  power  to  admit  freemen, 
elect  officers,  and  make  laws  of  local  application  to  all  its  territories. 
This  organization  at  once  pushed  on  the  work  with  vigor.  A  large 
band  of  colonists  was  got  together,  to  be  sent  over  to  Salem  in 
the  spring  of  1629.  As  the  Company  was  strongly  Puritan  and  the 
aim  of  the  emigration  chiefly  religious,  it  is  no  wonder  that  we 
find  them   early  negotiating  for  ministers  to  serve  the   spiritual 

had  left  Plymouth  for  Nantasket  in  Conant's  company.  Lyford's  character  was  none  of  the  best. 
See  Hubbard,  pp.  106,  107.  Bradford,  Hist.  Plym.  Plant.,  pp.  171,  173,  192-196.  Young,  Chron. 
.  .  .  Mass.,  p.  20.  There  was  no  church  at  Salem,  in  a  Congregational  sense,  till  after  the  com- 
ing of  Endicott. 

1  The  text  of  this  patent  may  be  found  in  Hazard,  Historical  Collections,  Philadelphia,  1792- 
1794,  1 :   103-118. 

3  See  C.  F.  Adams,  Three  Episodes  0/  Mass.  History,  1 :  127-129. 

3  Some  quotations  from  this  charter  are  preserved  in  the  charter  of  1629.     See  note  4. 

*  Text,  Records  0/    .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  Boston,  1853,  1 :  3-20. 


102  CREED    DEVELOPMENT   AT   SALEM 

wants  of  the  new  colony.  Three  were  secured,1  Francis  Bright,* 
Francis  Higginson,3  and  Samuel  Skelton;3  and  another,  Ralph 
Smith,"  obtained  passage  in  the  Company's  ships;  but  only  Higgin- 
son and  Skelton  remained  permanently  with  the  Salem  colonists. 

On  their  arrival,  late  in  June,  1629,  the  ministers  found  the 
ground  fully  prepared  for  the  planting  of  religious  institutions. 
As  has  been  already  pointed  out,  the  Salem  settlers,  though  Puri- 
tans, were  not  Separatists,  and  had  most  of  them  been  inclined  to 
look  upon  the  men  of  Plymouth  as  dangerous  innovators.  But 
sickness  had  laid  heavy  hand  on  the  little  company  under  Endicott 
at  Salem  during  the  winter  preceding  the  minister's  arrival,  and 
the  governor  had  sent  to  Plymouth  for  the  professional  help  of 
Dr.  Samuel  Fuller,  a  deacon  of  the  Plymouth  church.  With  him 
came  more  definite  acquaintance  with  the  Plymouth  way  and  the 
removal  of  much  prejudice;  so  much  so  that  Endicott  acknowl- 
edged, in  a  letter  to  Bradford,  that  he  recognized  that  the  outward 

i  See  Young,  Chronicles  .  .  .  of  Mass.,  pp.  65,  96,  99,  134,  135,  142-144,  207-212.  Hub- 
bard, pp.  112,  113.     Felt,  Annals  of  Salem,  2d  ed.,  Salem,  1845,  1 :  510-513. 

2  Francis  Bright,  it  would  appear,  quarrelled  with  the  rest  of  the  company  before  he  had  been 
long  with  them.  He  soon  left  Salem,  and  after  a  little  time  in  Charlestown,  returned  to  England 
in  August,  1630.  The  exact  cause  of  his  disagreement  we  do  not  know ;  but  we  may  conjecture  that 
he  was  more  of  a  conformist  than  either  Higginson  or  Skelton,  and  failed  to  agree  with  them  re- 
garding church  discipline.  Hubbard,  pp.  112,  113,  asserts  this  to  be  a  fact,  and  quotes  with  appro- 
bation a  passage  of  much  obscurity  from  Johnson's  Wonder-working  Providence,  London,  1654, 
p.  20  (reprinted  by  W.  F.  Poole,  Andover,  1867).  But  the  Company  state  in  a  letter  to  F.ndicott, 
April  17,  1620,  that  the  ministers  had  "declared  themselves  to  us  to  be  of  one  judgment,  and  to  be 
fully  agreed  on  the  manner  how  to  exercise  their  ministry."    (Young,  Chron.    .    .    .    Mass.,  p.  160.) 

3  Francis  Higginson,  the  teacher  of  the  Salem  church,  was  born  in  1588,  graduated  at  Cam- 
bridge, A.B.  in  1609-10,  and  A.M.  in  1613.  He  then  became  minister  at  Claybrooke,  a  parish  of  Lei- 
cester;  but  while  there  the  influence  of  Thomas  Hooker,  afterwards  of  Hartford,  and  others,  turned 
his  Puritan  inclinations  into  non-conformity.  Like  many  other  Puritans,  he  was  silenced  ;  but  his 
friends  employed  him  as  a  "lecturer."  While  still  at  Leicester  he  was  engaged  to  go  to  Salem. 
Here  he  arrived  June  29,  1629;  and  was  ordained  on  July  20,  following.  He  died  August  6,  1630. 
His  life  is  treated  in  Mather,  Afagnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  I :  354~3°6 ;  Bentley,  Description  and  Hist,  of 
Salem,  in  /  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.,  VI  ;  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  .  .  .  of  the  First  Settlers  .  .  .  in 
N.  £.,   Boston,  1809,  pp.  248-253;    Brook,  Lives  of  the  Puritans,   II:  369"375  ;    Young,   Citron. 

Mass.,  p.  317 ;  Felt,  in  A'  E.  Hist,  and  Genealogical  Register,  VI:  105-127  (1852) ;  Sprague, 
Annals  of  tie  Am.  Pulpit,  New  York,  1857,  I:  6-10;  White,  N.  E.  Congregationalism,  pp.  283, 
284;  Appleton's  Cyclop.  Am.  Biog.,  Ill:  198;  T.  W.  Higginson,  Life  of  Francis  Higginson, 
New  York,  if  |i. 

Samuel  Skelton,  the  pastor  of  the  Salem  church,  is  less  well  known  than  Higginson.  He 
was  graduated  at  Cambridge,  A.B.  in  1611,  and  A.M.  in  1615.  He  then  probably  settled  in  Dorset- 
shire (though  Mather,  Mogilalia,  ed.  1855,  I:  68,  says  Lincolnshire).  Endicott  had  known  him 
and  profited  by  his  ministry  in  England.  He  was  ordained  over  the  Salem  church  on  the  same  day 
as  Higginson.  He  died  Aug.  2,  1634.  See  Brook's  Lives,  III:  520;  Bentley,  as  cited  in  previous 
note;  Young,  Chron.     .     .     .     Mass.,  pp.  142,  143  ;  White,  N.  E.  Cong.,  pp.  284,  285. 

«  Young,  Ibid,  pp.  151,  152.  His  passage  was  granted  before  the  Company  understood  his 
Separatist  tendencies.  He  soon  went  from  Salem  to  Nantasket,  and  thence  to  Plymouth,  where  he 
became  pastor  of  the  church,  but  not  meeting  with  entire  success  in  the  work,  he  resigned  in  1636. 
He  died  in  Boston  in  1662.     See  also  Bradford,  Hist.  Plym.  Plant.,  pp.  263,  278,  351. 


THE   SALEM   CHURCH  IO3 

form  of  God's  worship,  as  observed  at  Plymouth,  and  explained  by- 
Fuller,  was  the  same  that  he  had  himself  long  believed  to  be  the 
true  method.1  The  miles  of  ocean  between  Salem  and  England 
made  the  separation  from  the  English  Establishment  a  practical 
fact,  whatever  the  theory  might  be;  and  the  exigencies  of  life  in 
a  new  settlement,  where  so  much  had  to  be  created  anew,  brought 
out  the  real  unity  of  belief  regarding  Scriptural  doctrine  and  polity 
which  had  always  characterized  Puritans  and  Separatists.  So  it 
came  about  that,  not  long  after  Higginson  and  Skelton  had  landed, 
Endicott  appointed  a  day  for  the  choice  of  pastor  and  teacher,  and 
in  spite  of  the  fact  that  both  were  ministers  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, Skelton  and  Higginson  were  chosen  and  ordained  to  their 
new  work.  We  are  fortunately  in  possession  of  a  graphic  and  ab- 
solutely contemporary  account  of  these  events,  from  the  pen  of 
one  who  was  afterward  a  deacon  in  the  Salem  church,  and  written 
to  Bradford  at  Plymouth:2 

"  Sr  :  I  make  bould  to  trouble  you  with  a  few  lines,  for  to  certifie  you  how  it 
hath  pleased  God  to  deale  with  us,  since  you  heard  from  us.  How,  notwithstanding 
all  opposition  that  hath  been  hear,  &  els  wher,  it  hath  pleased  God  to  lay  a  founda- 
tion, the  which  I  hope  is  agreeable  to  his  word  in  every  thing.  The  20.  of  July,  it 
pleased  ye  Lord  to  move  ye  hart  of  our  Govr  to  set  it  aparte  for  a  solemne  day  of 
humilliation,  for  ye  choyce  of  a  pastor  &  teacher.  The  former  parte  of  ye  day  being 
spente  in  praier  &  teaching,  the  later  parte  aboute  ye  election,  which  was  after  this 
maner.  The  persons  thought  on  (who  had  been  ministers  in  England)  were  de- 
manded concerning  their  callings ;  they  acknowledged  ther  was  a  towfould  calling, 
the  one  an  imvard  calling,  when  ye  Lord  moved  ye  harte  of  a  man  to  take  y*  calling 
upon  him,  and  fitted  him  with  guiftes  for  ye  same;  the  second  was  an  outward  call- 
ing, which  was  from  ye  people,  when  a  company  of  beleevers  are  joyned  togither  in 
covenante,  to  walke  togither  in  all  ye  ways  of  God,  and  every  member  (being  men) 
are  to  have  a  free  voyce  in  ye  choyce  of  their  officers,  &c.  Now,  we  being  per- 
swaded  that  these  2.  men  were  so  quallified,  as  ye  apostle  speaks  to  Timothy,  wher 
he  saith,  A  bishop  must  be  blamles,  sober,  apte  to  teach,  &c,  I  thinke  I  may  say, 
as  ye  eunuch  said  unto  Philip,  What  should  let  from  being  baptised,  seeing  ther  was 
water?  and  he  beleeved.  So  these  2.  servants  of  God,  clearing  all  things  by  their 
answers,  (and  being  thus  fitted,)  we  saw  noe  reason  but  we  might  freely  give  our 
voyces  for  their  election,  after  this  triall.  [Their  choice  was  after  this  manner: 
every  fit  member  wrote,  in  a  note,3  his  name  whom  the  Lord  moved  him  to  think 


1  Letter  in  Bradford,  Hist.  Plym.  Plant.,  pp.  264,  265.     See  also  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  pp. 
414-420. 

8  Letter  in  Bradford,  Hist.  Plym.  Plant.,  pp.  265,  266,  and  Bradford's  Letter-Book,  /  Coll. 
Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  III  :  67,  63.     Gott  had  spent  the  winter  of  1628-9  in  Salem. 

3  On  the  possibly  Dutch  derivation  of  this  system  of  voting, —  the  first  use  of  the  written 
ballot  in   America,— see  Douglas  Campbell,  The  Puritan  in   England,  Holland,  and  Ai 
New  York,  1892,  II:  438. 


104  CREED   DEVELOPMENT   AT   SALEM 

was  fit  for  a  pastor,  and  so  likewise,  whom  they  would  have  for  teacher  ;  so  the  most 
voice  was  for  Mr.  Skelton  to  be  Tastor,  and  Mr.  Higginson  to  be  Teacher;1]  So 
Mr.  Skelton  was  chosen  pastor  and  Mr.  Higgison  to  be  teacher;2  and  they  accept- 
ing ye  choyce,  Mr.  Higgison,  with  3.  or  4.  of  ye  gravest  members  of  ye  church,  laid 
their  hands  on  Mr.  Skelton,  using  prayer  thenvith.  This  being  done,  ther  was 
imposission  of  hands  on  Mr.  Higgison  also.  [Then  there  was  proceeding  in  election 
of  elders  and  deacons,  but  they  were  only  named,  and  laying  on  of  hands  deferred, 
to  see  if  it  pleased  God  to  send  us  more  able  men  over;3]  And  since  that  time, 
Thursday  (being,  as  I  take  it,  ye  6.4  of  August)  is  appoynted  for  another  day  of  hu- 
milliation,  for  ye5  choyce  of  elders  &  deacons,  &  ordaining  of  them. 

And  now,  good  Sr,  I  hope  y*  you  &  ye  rest  of  Gods  people  (who  are  aquainted 
with  the  ways  of  God)  with  you,  will  say  that  hear  was  a.  right  foundation  layed,  and 
that  these  2.  blessed  servants  of  ye  Lord  came  in  at  y«  dore,  and  not  at  ye  window. 
Thus  I  have  made  bould  to  trouble  you  with  these  few  lines,  desiring  you  to  remem- 
ber us,  &c.     And  so  rest, 

At  your  service  in  what  I  may, 
Salem,  July  30.  1629.  Charles  Gott." 

The  transaction  thus  narrated  seems  to  be  plain.  Higginson 
and  Skelton  were  ministers  duly  engaged  by  the 'Company  in 
England  to  assume  the  spiritual  charge  of  the  Salem  settlement. 
Gov.  Endicott,  as  representative  of  the  Company,  might  properly 
have  been  expected  to  welcome  them  and  aid  them  in  beginning 
their  work.  But  he,  and  the  majority  of  those  who  had  wintered 
with  him  at  Salem,  had  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Plymouth 
method  of  ordering  the  church-estate  was  the  right  one  ;  and 
hence  the  governor  appointed  a  day  for  some  at  least  of  the  colo- 
nists to  vote  for  pastor,  teacher,  and  other  officers.  But  here 
a  difficulty  appears.  The  uniform  representation  of  the  later 
writers  is  that  the  church  in  Salem  was  not  formed  till  August 
6,"  and  that  its  covenant  was  prepared  by  Mr.  Higginson  at  the 
request  of  some  of  the  members  about  to  be.  Yet  the  absolutely 
contemporary  letter  of  Gott  speaks  three  times  of  "members" 
in   a  way   which    certainly   seems   to   imply   that   a   covenant   had 


1  This  statement  is  omitted  in  the  letter  as  given  in  Bradford's  History,  but  is  containad  in 
the  copy  in  Bradford's  Letter  Book,  /  Cell.  Mass.  Hist.  Sec.,  Ill  :  67,  68. 

2  Letter  Book  copy  omits  this  clause. 

3  In  Letter  Book,  but  not  in  History. 

*  Letter  Book  says  5.     An  error,  for  the  6  Aug.,  1629,  was  Thursday. 

6  Letter  Book  inserts  full.  A  number  of  minor  variations  between  the  two  copies  I  have 
left  unnoticed. 

«  This  opinion  is  first  put  on  record  by  John  Higginson,  himself  present  as  a  13-year-old  boy 
at  the  ordination  of  his  father,  on  the  title  page  of  his  brief  Direction  printed  in  1665  ;  Morton, 
Memoriall,  1669,  pp.  73-76  (Davis  ed.,  pp.  145.  146)  gives  an  extended  account.  Hubbard  (writing 
not  far  from  1680),  pp.  116-120,  gives  many  details  chiefly  drawn  from  Morton.  Mather,  Magnolia, 
ed.  1853-5,  pp.  70-72,  has  a  brief  narrative. 


WHEN    WAS   THE    SALEM    CHURCH    FORMED  105 

been  entered  into  at  some  time  previous  to  July  20.  The  state- 
ment that  the  votes  were  cast  by  "  every  fit  member "  would 
seem  to  render  untenable  the  natural  supposition  that  the  elec- 
tion on  July  20  was  by  all  the  colonists,  while  the  ordination  of 
that  day  is  expressly  declared  to  have  been  by  "  3.  or  4.  of  ye 
gravest  members  of  ye  church."  And  the  letter  which  records 
these  events  was  written,  it  will  be  remembered,  a  week  before 
the  supposed  gathering  of  the  church  on  August  6.  Hence,  in 
spite  of  the  circumstantial  accounts  of  later  historians,  the  earli- 
est of  whom  wrote  nearly  forty  years  after  the  events  he  de- 
scribes, we  are  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  there  was  some  sort 
of  covenanted  church  organization  at  Salem,  previous  to  July  20, 
1629,  and  that  it  was  this  church,  and  not  the  colonists  as  a 
whole,1  that  chose  Higginson  and  Skelton  on  that  day.  At  the  same 
time  much  new  material  was  brought  into  the  religious  life  of 
the  colony  by  the  influx  of  emigrants  in  June  and  July  of  that 
year  ;  and  it  may  well  have  been  that  the  existing  covenant  was 
submitted  to  Higginson  for  approval  or  revision,  and  that  the 
6th  of  August  saw,  in  addition  to  the  ordination  of  ruling  elders 
and  deacons,  the  acceptance  of  the  covenant  by  a  number  of  the 
recently  arrived  emigrants,  who  now  became  members  of  the 
church.  It  can  hardly  be  doubted,  too,  that  on  August  6,  the 
Plymouth  church,  in  the  persons  of  Gov.  Bradford  and  other 
representatives,  extended  the  hand  of  fellowship  to  their  new 
brethren  of  Salem.2    But  that  the  church  in  Salem  was  first  formed 


1  Hubbard,  General  History,  p.  119;  and  Gov.  Hutchinson,  Hist.  Colony  of  Mass.  Bay, 
London,  1765,  I  :  10-12,  represent  the  choice  distinctly  as  the  work  of  the  colonists  before  the 
formation  of  the  church.  Palfrey,  Hist.  N.  E.,  I  :  295,  is  more  guarded,  but  implies  the  same 
thing.  Webber  and  Nevins,  Old  Naumkeag,  p.  n,  speak  of  this  assembly  of  July  20,  as  a  "town 
meeting"  ;  Bacon,  Genesis  .V.  E.  Chs.,  pp.  472-475,  elaborates  this  view  at  length.  On  the  other 
hand,  Punchard,  Hist.  Cong.,  IV:  12-31,  is  in  substantial  accord  with  the  view  taken  by  the  writer 
but  I  am  not  able  to  follow  him  in  all  particulars.  The  observations  of  Rev.  Mr.  Willson,  Hist,  of 
Essex  County,  pp.  22,  23,  are  also  of  value. 

2  The  statement  in  Morton's  Memorial!,  p.  75,  is  too  circumstantial  to  be  without  a  sub 
stantial  basis  of  truth  :  "  Mr.  Bradford  ....  and  some  others  with  him,  coming  by  Sea 
were  hindered  by  cross  winds  that  they  could  not  be  there  at  the  beginning  of  the  day,  but  they 
came  into  the  Assembly  afterward,  and  gave  them  the  right  hand  of  fellowship,"  though  Brad 
ford  himself  makes  no  mention  of  it  in  his  Hist.  Plym.  Plant.  Hubbard,  p.  119,  repeats  the  story 
It  seems  hardly  likely,  in  spite  of  the  intimations  of  Morton  and  Hubbard,  that  the  SatEm  church 
formally  invited  the  Plymouth  church  to  assist  them.  Had  such  been  the  case  some  allusion 
ought  to  be  found  in  Gott's  letter.  It  is  more  probable  that,  on  receipt  of  Gott's  letter,  Bradford 
and  others  started  on  their  own  motion  to  welcome  the  new  church. 

3 


IOG  CREED   DEVELOPMENT   AT   SALEM 

on  August  6,  seems  certainly  an  error.  Yet,  however  originating, 
the  fact  is  of  prime  importance  that  the  first  Puritan  church  on 
New  England  soil  was  formed  on  the  Congregational  model.  The 
example  thus  set  was  one  easy  to  follow. 

The  Salem  covenant  of  1629  was  a  single  sentence,  embracing 
a  simple  promise  to  walk  in  the  ways  of  the  Lord.  In  brevity  and 
contents  it  resembles  other  covenants  of  the  period  which  have  come 
down  to  us.1  From  this  brevity  and  simplicity  it  has  been  errone- 
ously concluded  that  our  New  England  churches,  in  their  early 
state,  applied  no  doctrinal  tests  as  a  condition  of  membership.2  No 
opinion  could  be -farther  from  the  truth.  The  causes  which  led  our 
ancestors  to  America  related  to  church  polity  rather  than  to  doc- 
trinal views  ;  and  hence  the  public  formulae  of  our  churches  on  this 
side  of  the  water  concern  themselves  at  first  with  matters  of  organ- 
ization rather  than  with  points  of  faith.3  This  agreement  with  the 
Puritan-Calvinistic  portion  of  the  English  establishment  was  so 
entire  that  their  doctrinal  position  could  be  taken  for  granted,  and 
was  not  therefore  at  first  formulated.  But  if  the  doctrinal  beliefs 
of  the  churches  as  a  whole  needed  no  general  statement,  the  case 
was  far  different  with  the  individual  applicants  for  church-member- 
ship. They  had  to  submit  to  a  searching  private  examination  by 
the  elders  of  the  church  both  as  to  "  their  knowledge  in  the  princi- 
ples of  religion,  &  of  their  experience  in  the  way <es  of grace,  and  of 


1  Some  illustrations  will  be  given  in  connection  with  the  text  of  this  covenant. 

a  This  matter  has  given  rise  to  a  considerable  literature,  much  of  it  cast  in  a  controversial 
mould.  The  following  articles,  on  one  side  or  the  other,  may  be  cited  as  likely  to  prove  of 
value  to  the  student:  Cummings,  Diet,  of  Cong.  Usages  and  Principles,  Boston,  1855,  An. 
Creeds,  pp.  131-139;  Bacon,  Ancient  Waymarks,  New  Haven,  1853;  Oilman,  Confessions  0/ 
Faith,  in  Cong.  Quarterly,  IV:  179-191  (April,  1862);  Mead,.)  New  Declaration  of  Faith  :  Is  it 
Desirable,  etc.,  Minutes  of  National  Council  Cong.  C/ts.,  1SS0,  pp.  144-173  ;  Dexter,  A  Serious 
eption,  in  Congregationalist  for  Jan.  2,  1S90;  Calkins,  Creeds  as  Tests  of  Church  Mem- 
bership, in  Andover  Review,  XIII:  237-255  (Mch.,  1890);  Dexter,  Didthe  early  Churches  of 
New  England  Require  assent  to  a  Creed f  in  Magazine  of  Christian  Literature,  II:  129-138 
(June,  1890).  Of  less  value  are  Thompson,  Formation  of  Creeds,  New  Englander,  IV:  265-274 
(Apl.  1S46);  Shedd,  Congregationalism  and  Symbolism.  Bibl.  Sacra,  XV:  661-690  (July,  1858); 
Pond,  Church  Creeds,  Bibl.  Sacra,  XXXIX:  538-540  (July, 

3  Compare  the  opening  paragraphs  of  the  preface  to  the  Cambridge  Platform,  and  the  pre- 
face to  the  Confession  of  1CS0,  both  of  which  will  be  found  on  a  later  page.  Even  when  nearly  a 
century  had  elapsed  since  the  foundation  of  our  churches.  Cotton  Mather  was  able  to  declare  (Ratio 
Disciplines,  Boston,  1726,  p.  5):  "The  Doctrinal  Articles  <>1  the  Church  of  England,  also,  are 
more  universally  held  and  preached  in  the  Churches  of  New-England,  than  in  any  Nation  .  . 
It  is  well  known,  that  the  Points  peculiar  to  the  Churches  of  Xczo-£nglartd,  are  those  of  their 
Church  Discipline." 


CREED-TESTS   IN   NEW   ENGLAND  1 07 

their  godly  conversation  amongst  men."'  And  the  evidence  is  ample 
that  this  "knowledge"  implied  familiarity  with  and  assent  to  the 
main  doctrines  of  the  Scripture  as  expounded  by  the  Calvinism  of 
the  period.  Once  accepted  by  the  elders,  the  candidate  had  to 
render  an  account  to  the  church,  dwelling  largely,  of  course,  on  ex- 
perience, but  not  wholly  omitting  doctrine.2  In  case  of  men  this 
relation  was  usually  oral  ;  the  women  frequently  rendered  it  by 
means  of  a  written  statement,  and  men  sometimes  exercised  the 
same  privilege.3  But  so  far  were  these  tests  from  being  matters  of 
form,  that  even  in  the  early  days  of  the  first  generation  of  our  New 
England  settlers  the  decided  majority  of  the  colonists  were  unable 
to  show  sufficient  evidence  of  faith  and  experience  to  enter  into 
church  relationship." 

But  circumstances  soon  compelled  our  New  England  churches 
to  bear  a  more  public  testimony  to  their  corporate  and  collective 
faith.     There  were  troubles  at  home,  notably  in  the  doctrinal  dis- 


1  Cotton,  Way  of  the  Churches,  London,  1645,  p.  54.  See  Cotton's  "Twelve  Fundamental 
Articlesof  Christian  Religion  :  the  Denial  whereof  .  .  .  makesaman  an  Heretick."  Tract  published 
in  1713.  These  articles  are  summed  up  by  Dexter  in  Magazine  of  Christ.  Literature,  II  :  135  ;  and 
are  given  in  more  detail  by  Lechford,  Plain  Dealing,  London,  1642,  pp.  9,  10  (Trumbull's  reprint, 
Boston,  1867,  pp.  25-28).     Lechford  declares  them  to  be  from  a  sermon  preached  in  Oct.,  1640. 

2  Compare  on  these  proceedings,  Lechford,  as  cited,  pp.  4-11  (Trumbull's  reprint,  18-29); 
Cotton,  as  cited,  54-65  ;  Weld,  Brief  Narration  of  the  Practices  of  the  Chs.  in  X.  £.,  London, 
1645  (reprinted  in  Cong.  Quarterly,  XVII:  253-271,  see  pp.  255,  261,  262).  The  method  em- 
ployed at  Boston  is  shown  by  the  account  of  the  admission  of  Rev.  John  Cotton,  and  his  wife,  in 
16331  W'inthrop,  Hist.  N.  E.  (Journal),  Savage's  ed.,  1853,  I:  130-132.  At  the  Hartford  church, 
under  Hooker,  fitness  for  membership  was  shown  by  public  question  and  answer,  rather  than  by  re- 
lation, Mather,  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  II:  68.  The  method  of  the  Salem  church  in  1661  is  given  in 
its  records,  White,  X.  E.  Cong.,  p.  50. 

3  A  considerable  number  of  these  relations  have  come  down  to  our  own  day.  Fifty,  dating 
from  the  ministry  of  Thos.  Shepard  of  Cambridge,  and  most  of  them  previous  to  1640,  are  still  in  ex- 
istence. (See  Paige,  History  of  Cambridge,  Boston,  1S77,  pp.  252,  253,  where  a  specimen  is  given.) 
More  than  20  exist  in  the  records  of  the  Wenham  church  under  John  Fiske,  1644-1656,  and  are  of  a 
strongly  doctrinal  character.  (See  Dexter,  Serious  Misconception  in  Congregationalist,  Jan.  2, 
1890.)  Other  specimens,  dating  from  a  much  later  period  when  the  severity  of  the  test  had  been 
considerably  relaxed,  may  be  found  in  Hill,  Hist,  of  Old  South  Church,  Boston,  1890,  I:  309  (of 
1744);  and  in  Oilman.  Ancient  Confessions  of  Faith,  in  Cong.  Quarterly,  XI:  516-527(011752-58). 

4  Lechford,  Plain  Dealing,  p.  73:  "  Againe,  here  is  required  such  confessions,  and  profes- 
sions, both  in  private  and  publique,  both  of  men  and  women,  before  they  be  admitted,  that  three 
parts  of  the  people  of  the  Country  remaine  out  of  the  Church."  Dr.  Trumbull  has  illustrated  this 
statement  with  valuable  notes  (Reprint,  p.  151).  Cotton,  Way  of  the  Congregational  Churches 
Cleared,  London,  1648,  pp.  71,72,  denied  the  accuracy  of  Lechford' s  statement ;  but  in  Richard 
Mather's  reply  to  the  first  of  the  XXXII  Questions  propounded  by  English  Puritans  to  New  Eng- 
land divines,  a  reply  written  in  1639,  and  published  at  London  in  1643  under  the  title  Church-Gov- 
ernment and  Church-Covenant  Discvssed,  pp.  7,  8,  it  is  said:  "Whether  is  the  greater  number, 
those  that  are  admitted  hereunto  [church-communion],  or  those  that  are  not  we  cannot  certainly 
tell?  But  .  .  .  we  may  truely  say,  that  for  the  heads  of  Families,  those  that  are  admitted  are 
farre  more  in  number  then  the  other." 


IOS  CREED    DEVELOPMENT   AT    SALEM 

turbances  engendered  by  Mrs.  Hutchinson  and  afterwards  by  the 
Quakers  ;  and  there  were  doubts  cast  upon  the  orthodoxy  of  our 
churches  by  their  enemies  in  England.1  As  similar  criticisms  had 
led  the  London-Amsterdam  church  to  put  forth  its  doctrinal 
statement  in  1596  and  159S,  so  our  New  England  churches  at  last 
felt  constrained  to  make  the  doctrinal  positions  which  they  had 
held  from  the  beginning  more  evident  to  the  world.  We  there- 
fore find  traces  of  the  use,  soon  after  1640,  of  what  we  would 
now  call  confessions  of  faith  by  a  few  churches;"  and  in  1648  we 
see  the  Westminster  Assembly's  Confession  heartily  endorsed  by 
the  representatives  of  all  our  churches  as  a  substantially  adequate 
doctrinal  expression.3  Of  course  when  such  standards  were  rec- 
ognized as  presenting  the  views  of  a  church,  or  of  the  whole  of 
the  churches,  it  would  be  natural  to  ask  the  assent  of  the  candi- 
date thereto,  in  addition  to  his  relation,  or  occasionally  instead 
of  his  relation.  But  the  adoption  of  such  standards  did  not  in- 
troduce the  doctrinal  test  as  a  precedent  to  church-membership, 
that  had  existed  from  the  beginning. 

A  good  illustration  of  this  general  evolution  of  definite  written 
creed  statement  is  afforded  by  the  Salem  church,  whose  brief  cove- 
nant of  1629  has  just  been  considered.  The  years  following  its 
adoption  were  stormy  seasons  in  that  church's  history.  Higginson 
died  in  1630,  Skelton  followed  him  in  1634  ;  and  for  a  brief  time 
in  1631,  and  again  from  1633  onward  Skelton  had  been  assisted 
by    the    famous    and    exceedingly    erratic    Roger   Williams.4      On 


1  See  preface  to  Cambridge  Platform,  later  in  this  volume,  regarding  s 

2  John    Fiske's   church   at    Wenham    records,  among    other   similar   entries,  the    following  : 

44  :  Voted)  that  a  consent  £c  assent  should  be  required  to  yc  profession  of  faith  of  ye 
church:  and  that  y"  Confession  should  be  read  distinctly  to  them  [candidates]  &  lime  given  them 
to  returne  yr  answer."  "28  Sept.  1645  :  Geo,  Norton  gave  his  assent  to  Confess  n  of  fa 
covt  administred  to  him."  Quoted  by  Dexter  in  Magazine  Chris.  Lit.,  II  :  137  (June,  1890).  See 
also  the  strongly  doctrinal  creed-covenant  of  the  Windsor,  Conn.,  church,  of  1647,  which  may  be 
found  on  a  later  page  of  this  volume. 

3  See  preface  to  Cambridge  Platform,  later  in  this  volume. 

,-y  of  Roger  Williams  has  been  well  told  by  Dexter,  As  to  Roger  Williams,  Boston 
[1876J,— an  indispensable  monograph  for  any  who  would  know  the  truth  regarding  this  much  mis- 
represented man.  The  student  will  do  well  also  to  consult  the  chapter  on  Roger  Williams  in  G.  E. 
Ellis,  Puritan  Age  .  .  in  .  .  Mass.,  Boston.  1SS8,  pp.  267-299;  and  an  article  by  the  same 
writer  in  Winsor's  Memorial  Hist,  of  Boston,  Boston,  1SS2,  I:  171,  172;  to  which  Dr.  Winsor  has 
added  an  extensive  note  on  the  bibliography  of  the  subject,  Ibid.,  172,  173.  Williams  was  not  at  this 
time  a  Baptist,  nor  did  he  become  so  before  his  "banishment."  It  is  possible,  though  not  certain, 
that  he  was  ordained  at  Salem  in  1631.  In  that  year  he  began  ministerial  work  in  Plymouth  and 
remained  there  till  1633,  when  he  w<  at  back  to  Saiem.     Dexter,  as  cited,  p] 


ROGER   WILLIAMS   AT    SALEM  IO9 

Skelton's  death,  the  Salem  people  asked  Williams  to  be  their 
pastor,  though  he  had  already  made  himself  obnoxious  to  the 
government  of  the  Company  by  his  denunciations  of  the  patent 
as  no  valid  title,  and  his  attack  on  the  character  of  the  king 
and  the  churches  of  England.1  Circumstances  into  which  we 
need  not  enter  here  in  further  detail  led  to  the  cognizance  of 
Williams's  doings  by  the  Court,  and  a  considerably  prolonged 
controversy,  in  which  the  government  appears  to  have  acted  with 
a  good  degree  of  forbearance.  While  this  controversy  was  in 
progress  a  petition  relative  to  some  lands  claimed  by  the  Salem 
people  was  presented  to  the  Court,  and  by  it  laid  on  the  table 
pending  the  adjustment  of  the  disputes  already  existing  between 
it  and  Williams,  who  had  the  support  of  his  church  at  Salem. 
This  act  of  the  Court  roused  Williams's  anger,  and  on  his  insist- 
ance  the  Salem  church  called  on  the  other  churches  of  the  col- 
ony to  discipline  such  of  their  members  as  had  voted  as  magis- 
trates in  the  General  Court  on  the  land  question.2  The  time 
was  most  unwise  for  such  an  attack,  even  if  far  more  justifiable 
than  it  was,  as  the  enemies  of  the  colony  in  England  were  ac- 
tively at  work  and  had  already  taken  steps  looking  toward  the 
immediate  destruction  of  the  legal  existence  of  the  Massachusetts 
Company.3  In  this  crisis  the  government  needed  the  help  of  all 
loyal  men.  And  it  is,  therefore,  not  surprising  that  the  Salem 
church,  which  had  been  persuaded  by  its  young  pastor  to  cen- 
sure the  officers  of  the  imperilled  Company,  soon  began  to  yield 
to  the  reasonable  arguments  of  the  other  churches  and  feel  a 
degree  of  shame  for  what  they  had  done.4  Seeing  that  he  no 
longer  had  the  support  of  his  people,  Williams,  with  his  usual 
headstrongness,  sent  a  letter  to  his  flock,  on  August  16,  1635,  an- 
nouncing that  he  had  cast  off  all  communion  with  the  churches 
of  the  Bay  as  false  and  unclean  ;  and  that  he  would  have  noth- 
ing more  to  do  with  the  people  of  Salem  unless  they  would  join 
him  in  cutting  loose  from  all  the  other  churches  of  the  colony.5 
The  good  sense  of  the  church  prevailed,  and  as  a  whole  they  did 


Dexter,  Ibid.,  26-28.  2  Ibid.,  38-40.  3  Ibid.,  ■ 

Ibid.,  43.  5  Ibid.,  43-45- 


IiO  CREED   DEVELOPMENT   AT    SALEM 

not  heed  him;  but,  as  is  usual  in  such  cases,  it  cost  heart  rn.ngs 
and  sore  divisions,  and  some  went  off  to  the  new  service  which 
Williams  set  up.  But  now  the  Court,  before  which  his  case  had 
some  time  been  pending,  after  a  considerable  hearing  in  which 
it  was  aided  by  the  advice  of  the  most  prominent  ministers 
then  in  New  England,  ordered  him  out  of  its  jurisdiction,  by 
a  sentence  passed  October  9,  1635 ;'  and  based  on  his  attacks  on 
the  authority  of  the  magistrates,  and  his  persistence  in  defam- 
ing them  and  the  churches  of  which  they  were  members,  in  spite 
of  all  warnings  to  desist.2  His  settlement  of  Providence,  his 
adoption  of  Baptist  views  while  there,  and  his  after  changes  are 
aside  from  the  purpose  of  the  present  narrative. 

Enough  has  been  said  to  show  that  when  Williams  left  the 
Salem  plantation,  in  January,  1636,2  the  church  must  have  been  in 
a  divided  and  distracted  state.4  But  it  was  at  last  provided  with 
a  pastor  in  the  person  of  the  able,  versatile,  and  distinguished 
Hugh  Peter,5  who  was  settled  at  Salem  December  21,  1636.     Under 


'  Ibid.,  46-60.  2  Ibid.,  65  and  following.  3  Ibid..  61.  62. 

4  Compare  also,  as  illustrative  of  the  state  of  the  church  after  Williams  left,  Winthrop,  Hist. 
0/  X.  E.  (Journal),  2d  ed.,  Boston,  1853,  1 :  221. 

5  Hugh  Peter  was  one  of  the  most  picturesque  characters  among  the  early  ministry  of  New 
England.  Born  in  1599,  in  Cornwall,  he  studied  at  Cambridge,  graduating  A.M.  in  1622.  Contact 
with  such  eminent  Puritans  as  Thomas  Hooker  and  John  Davenport  led  him  to  abandon  his  early 
profligacy  and  devote  himself  to  the  ministry.  Admitted  to  Episcopal  orders,  he  preached  witli 
much  success  at  St.  Sepulcre's,  London;  but  his  growing  Puritanism  led  to  his  association  with  the 
leaders  of  the  Massachusetts  Company,  of  which  he  was  one  of  the  early  members.  Being  silenced 
by  Laud  in  London,  he  went  to  Rotterdam  in  1629,  and  was  settled  over  the  church  there,  with  Dr. 
William  Ames  as  colleague.  The  tongue  of  slander  has  attacked  his  moral  character  while  in  Lon- 
don, but  seemingly  with  no  cause  save  enmity.  Here  in  Holland  he  remained  till  thi  1 
authorities  moved  the  Dutch  to  render  his  position  insecure.  He  therefore  came  to  New  England, 
arriving  Oct.  6,  1635;  and  was  from  the  first  a  man  of  prominence.  After  visiting  all  the  new 
towns  of  the  infant  colony,  he  settled  at  Salem.  Here  his  work  was  universally  beneficial.  Under 
his  ministry  more  were  added  to  the  church  in  five  years  than  in  eighteen  under  his  successor.  The 
wounds  in  the  church  were  healed.  But  Peter  had  an  aptitude  for  the  practical  side  of  life.  He 
did  much  to  develop  the  manufactures  of  Salem,  such  as  salt,  glass,  ship-building,  and  hemp  rais- 
ing. He  showed  great  success  in  promoting  trade  ;  so  that  at  the  earnest  solicitation  of  the  govern- 
ment, and  with  much  reluctance  on  the  part  of  his  people,  he  was  persuaded  to  go  to  England, 
Aug.  3,  1641,  as  one  of  the  agents  for  the  Colony.  His  connection  with  the  Salem  church  was 
ended.  Arrived  in  England  just  as  the  civil  conflict  was  about  to  begin,  his  talents  soon  secured 
him  prominence  on  the  Puritan  side.  He  almost  immediately  became  secretary  to  Cromwell,  and 
then  a  popular  chaplain  in  the  army.  His  fame  was  soon  that  of  one  of  the  most  effective  of  the 
kind's  opponents.  In  April,  1646,  he  preached  before  the  Houses  of  Parliament,  a  body  which 
estimated  his  general  services  to  the  cause  to  be  worthy  of  a  pension.  His  work  as  army  chaplain 
took  him  with  Cromwell's  expedition  to  Ireland  in  1649.  Parliament  then,  1651,  employed  him  on 
a  commission  to  revise  the  laws.  1654  saw  him  one  of  the  fryers  of  candidates  for  ministerial  ap- 
pointments. By  1658  Peter  was  chaplain  to  the  garrison  of  Dunkirk.  At  the  Restoration  the  hatred 
of  the  royalist  party  against  Peter  showed  its  intensity.  Absurd  rumors  were  circulated,  such  as 
that  he  was  the  actual  executioner  of  Charles  I.  ;  he  was  charged  with  high  treason  f..r  having  had 


THE   COVENANT   OF    1636  III 

him  the  church  enjoyed  a  degree  of  growth,  unity,  and  prosperity 
in  marked  contrast  to  its  distraction  under  Williams.  And  as  one 
of  the  earliest  steps  toward  this  desirable  result,  probably  at 
Peter's  ordination,  the  covenant  of  1629  was  renewed,  and  very 
much  enlarged  by  the  addition  of  nine  specific  articles  of  promise, 
several  of  which  were  more  or  less  directly  occasioned  by  the  late 
disturbances.  In  view  of  what  we  have  seen,  it  is  no  wonder  that 
the  members  of  the  church  felt  it  incumbent  upon  them  to  pledge 
themselves  "  to  walke  with  our  brethren  and  sisters  .  .  .  avoyd- 
ing  all  jelousies,  suspitions,  backbyteings,  censurings,  provoakings, 
secrete  risings  of  spirite  against  them."  '  Nor  was  it  unnatural 
that  their  repentance  for  their  opposition  to  the  other  churches 
and  the  magistrates  of  the  colony  should  find  expression  in  a 
promise  to  act  "  noe  way  sleighting  our  sister  Churches,  but  use- 
ing  theire  Counsell  as  need  shalbe  ";2  and  "  to  carrye  our  selves  in 
all  lawfull  obedience,  to  those  that  are  over  us,  in  Church  or  Com- 
monweale."3  Truly  it  is  the  sense  of  contrition  for  disagreement 
and  ill-feeling  that  finds  expression  in  this  enlarged  and  particu- 
larized pledge  of  fellowship. 

But  other  changes  brought  addition  also  to  the  written  sym- 
bols of  the  Salem  church.  Their  pastor,  Peter,  ended  his  ministry 
in  1641;  and  was  succeeded,  in  the  full  duties  of  ministerial  office, 
by  one  who,  since  March,  1640,  had  been  his  colleague  as  teacher, 
Edward  Norris.4  It  was  while  Norris  was  fulfilling  a  respected 
but  not  very  eventful  ministry  that  the  new  sect  of  the  Quakers 
first  made  their  appearance  in  Salem,  in  1656. 5     At  this  time  they 


an  active  share  in  the  king's  death.  On  Oct.  16,  1660,  he  was  executed  with  all  the  barbarous  cir- 
cumstances then  attendant  upon  the  punishment  for  treason.  Among  the  many  sources  of  inform- 
ation, or  of  defamation,  the  following  may  be  cited:  Harris,  Historical  and  Critical  Account  0/ 
the  Lives  .  .  .  0/  James  I.  and  Charles  /.,  etc.  New  ed.  London,  1814,  I:  ix-li;  Bentley, 
Descrip.  Salem,  in  /  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Sac,  VI :  250-254  ;  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.  .  .  .  0/  the  First 
Settlers  .  .  .  in  N.  E.,  Boston,  1809,  pp.  372-377;  Brook,  Lives,  III:  350-369;  Young,  Chron. 
.  .  .  Mass.,  pp.  134,  135;  Felt,  Memoir,  in  N.  E.  Hist,  and  Genealogical  Register,  V:  9-20, 
231-238,  275-294,  415-439  (with  portrait),  (1851  and  separately  same  year) ;  Felt,  Ecclesiastical  Hist. 
N.  £.,  Boston,  1855,  I:  228,  229,  267,  426,  434-436;  Sprague,  Annals  Am.  Pulpit,  I:  70-75;  Pal- 
frey, Hist.  N.  £.,  1 :  582-584,  II :  426-428  ;  White,  .V.  E.  Cong,  287,  288  ;  Appleton's  Cyclop.  Am. 
Biog.,  IV  :  741,  742. 

1  Art.  3.  2  Art.  6.  3  Art.  7. 

4  See  White,  A".  E.  Congregationalism,  pp.  289,  290. 

6  Bentley,  /  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  VI  :  =55,  says  1657;  but  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem,  2d  ed., 
Salem,  1849,  II :  580,  puts  the  beginnings  of  prosecution  of  Quakers  in  Salem  in  July,  1656. 


112  CREED    DEVELOPMENT    AT    SALEM 

were  far  from  being  the  staid  and  law-abiding  citizens  who,  in  our 
own  day,  have  made  the  name  of  Quaker  synonymous  with  honesty, 
piety,  and  good  order;  and  if  we  are  sometimes  tempted  to  think 
that  the  fathers  dealt  out  hard  measure  to  them,  it  is  well  to  re- 
member that  the  provocation  was  great  and  such  as  would  attract 
the  speedy  notice  of  law  in  our  own  century.1  It  was  while  these 
new  elements  of  disturbance  were  turmoiling  the  Salem  community 
that  Xorris  died,  December  23,  1659.  A  few  months  earlier  had 
seen  the  almost  chance  beginning  of  the  work  of  his  successor, 
John  Higginson,2  the  son  of  the  first  teacher,  and  the  connecting 
link  between  the  founders  of  New  England  and  the  historians  at 
the  close  of  the  seventeenth  century.3  Higginson's  settlement  fol- 
lowed more  than  a  year  of  ministerial  supply,  August  29,  1660. 
The  influence  of  the  new  ministry  speedily  showed  itself  in  the 
toning  up  of  the  church's  affairs.  The  Quaker  disturbances  con- 
tinued,4 and  other  questions,  especially  the  great  discussion  regard- 
ing the  proper  subjects  of  baptism,  occupied  men's  minds.5  Hig- 
ginson  evidently  saw  the  need  of  more  careful  doctrinal  instruction, 
and  therefore,  less  than  a  month  after  his  ordination,6  and  probably 


1  Compare,  among  many  sources  of  information  regarding  the  New  England  Quakers,  the 
following:  Palfrey,  Hist.  X.  £.,  II:  452-485;  Dexter,  As  to  Roger  Williams,  pp.  124-141,  with  cita- 
tions from  Quaker  documents  and  historians.  Ellis,  The  Puritan  Age  .  .  .  in  .  .  .  Mass.. 
Boston,  1888,  pp.  408-491. 

2  John  Higginson  was  born  in  August,  1616,  in  England,  from  which  land  his  parents  did  not 
remove  till  1629.  He  appears  to  have  been  an  early  member  of  the  Salem  church,  uniting  with  it 
during  the  year  of  his  arrival.  His  father  dying  in  1630,  John  was  aided  by  the  ministers  and 
magistrates  toward  an  education.  By  April,  1636,  before  he  was  20,  he  was  chaplain  at  the  Fort  at 
Saybrook,  Conn.;  a  post  which  he  occupied  about  four  years.  In  1637  he  was  one  of  the  scribes  at 
the  Hutchinson  Synod.  By  1641  lie  was  a  teacher  in  Hartford  and  a  student  under  Thomas 
Hooker.  He  thence  removed  to  Guilford,  Conn.,  in  1643,  and  was  one  of  the  prominent  members 
of  the  church  there  and  assistant  to  its  pastor,  Henry  Whitfield.  Here  he  remained,  in  sole  pastoral 
service  after  1651,  till  1659,  when  he  started  for  England.  On  his  voyage  the  vessel  was  forced  to 
put  into  Salem.  Here  he  was  asked  to  preach,  and  agreed  to  remain  a  year—  March  or  April,  1659. 
In  March,  1660,  he  was  called  to  a  permanent  settlement,  and  was  ordained  August  29  of  that  year, 
by  the  hands  of  two  deacons  and  a  brother  of  the  church's  fellowship,  though  in  the  preseme  of 
the  ministers  and  representatives  of  the  neighbor-churches.  Here  he  continued  as  minister  till  his 
death,  Dec.  9,  1708,  92  years  of  age.  His  good  sense,  and  his  familiarity  with  the  elder  generation, 
gave  him  much  weight  throughout  the  colony.  See  Bentley,  Desc.  0/  Salem,  r  Coll.  Mass.  Hist. 
Soe.,  VI:  259-272;  Felt,  Annals  0/  Salem,  passim;  Felt,  Eccles.  Hist.  New  England,  I:  253, 
312,  517,  519-521,  II :  218,  224  ;  Sprague,  A  nnats  0/  the  A  m.  Pulpit-,  I  :  91-93  ;  White,  X.  E.  Cong., 
45-96,  290-292. 

3  As  illustrative,  see  his  Attestation  to  the  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  I  ■   13-18. 

*  See  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem,  2d  ed.,  II:  580-587,  for  instances  between  1656  and  1669. 
5  See  later  in  this  volume,  in  connection  with  the  Synod  of  1662  (Chapter  XI). 
•Sept.  10,  1660.     Church  records  in  White,  X.  E.  Cot 


THE    QUAKER    CLAUSE    OF    1 66 1  I  I  3 

at  his  motion,  the  church  voted  "  that  Mr.  Cotton's  Catechism1  be 
used  in  their  families  in  teaching  their  children  in  order  to  public 
catechising  in  the  congregation." 

Soon  after  the  beginning  of  this  teaching,  the  brethren  were 
induced  not  only  solemnly  to  renew  their  former  covenant  but  to 
add  to  the  nine  articles,  which  had  come  down  from  Peter's  day,  a 
tenth,  pledging  the  members  "  to  take  heed  and  beware  of  the 
leaven  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Quakers."2  Thus,  by  degrees,  and 
chiefly  owing  to  the  rise  of  errors  in  faith  or  practice  in  the  church 
itself,  the  single  sentence  of  1629  became  expanded  into  a  fairly 
elaborate  and  particularized  rule. 

Mr.  Higginson  was  evidently  a  believer  in  the  value  of  written 
creeds,  and  desirous  of  having  the  customs  of  the  church  which 
had  been  handed  down  from  the  beginning  put  in  documentary 
form.  At  the  same  time  he  was  a  warm  advocate,  in  company 
with  many  of  the  best  men  in  New  England  at  that  day,  of  what  is 
known  as  the  half-way  covenant, —  a  system  which  to  his  mind,  as 
to  that  of  many  others,  was  designed  to  give  the  church  a  larger 
hold  upon  its  children  and  ultimately  to  bring  a  large  portion  of 
them  into  the  enjoyment  of  full  spiritual  privilege.3  But  to  accom- 
plish these  results  Higginson  clearly  felt  that  improved  instruction 
by  parents  at  home,  and  a  careful  examination  of  all  applicants  for 
church  membership  by  the  elders,  were  needed.4  All  these  consid- 
erations had  increased  force  when  the  half-way  principles,  some  of 
which  the  church  had  already  adopted,  were  made  part  of  the 
recognized  ecclesiastical  usage  of  the  colony  by  the  Synod  of  1662, 

1  /.  e..  Cotton's  Milk  for  Babes,  London,  1646,  long  a  popular  catechism  in  New  England. 
A  heliotype  copy  of  the  title-page  may  be  found  in  Ellis,  Hist.  First  Ch.  in  Boston,  Boston,  1881, 
between  pp.  36,  37. 

2  This  occurred  March  6, 1661.     See  page  118  of  this  chapter. 

3  That  this  view  of  the  probable  effects  of  the  half-way  covenant  system,  erroneous  as  it  may 
seem  to  us,  was  held  by  Higginson,  is  clear  from  his  record  of  the  ''propositions  concerning  the 
state  of  the  children  of  members"  agreed  upon  by  the  church  Sept.  9,  1661 ;  and  his  speech  urging 
the  adoption  of  the  practices  recommended  by  the  Synod  of  1662,  delivered  in  July,  1665  ;  see  Church 
records,  in  White,  .V.  E.  Cong.,  pp.  49,  50,  60,  61. 

4  The  "  propositions  "  of  1661  declare  the  belief  of  the  Salem  church  in  the  membership  of  all 
baptized  children  in  the  covenant  fellowship  of  the  church,  so  as  to  be  under  the  church's  watch 
and  care.  They  are  silent  on  the  other  great  question,  as  to  whether  these  covenanted  children  of 
the  church,  who  have  not  yet  made  profession  of  personal  regeneration,  can  claim  baptism  for  their 
children.  That  further  principle  was  adopted  July  18,  1665,  and  put  in  practice  on  the  30th.  Re- 
cords, Ibid. 


114  CREED   DEVELOPMENT   AT   SALEM 

and  fully  put  into  practice  at  Salem  in  1665.  With  these  aims  in 
view,  therefore,  we  find  Higginson  promising  the  church,  at  a 
meeting,  November  6,  1664,  when  the  recommendations  of  the  Sy- 
nod of  1662  were  publicly  read,  that  "he  would  communicate  unto 
the  brethren  a  short  writing  as  a  help  for  the  practice  of  the  Sy- 
nod's propositions."1  It  was  not  till  nearly  a  year  later,  however, 
October  5,  1665,  that  the  pastor  was  able  to  announce  to  the  church 
that  his  "  writing  "  was  printed  and  ready  for  distribution.2  The 
document  has  fortunately  come  down  to  our  day.  The  little  pam- 
phlet bears  on  its  face  the  evidence  of  its  purpose  ;  it  is  expressly 
declared  to  be  A  Direction  for  a  publick  Profession  in  the  Church 
Assembly,  after  private  examination  by  the  Elders  ;  and  it  contains  a 
creed  and  a  covenant  answering  to  the  documents  which  modern 
Congregationalism  would  understand  by  those  now  somewhat  tech- 
nical terms.  The  phraseology  of  the  confession  of  faith,  modeled 
on  that  of  the  Westminster  catechism,  is  of  course  Trinitarian 
and  Calvinistic  ;  and,  while  there  is  no  ground  for  the  assertion, 
which  some  have  made,  that  this  creed  was  adopted  by  the  church 
in  1629,3  there  can  certainly  be  no  impropriety  in  concluding  that 
the  opinion  which  John  Higginson  expressed  in  the  title  of  the  Di- 
rection, thirty-six  years  after  the  formation  of  the  church, — "Being 
the  same  for  Substance  which  was  propounded  to,  and  agreed  upon 
by  the  Church  of  Salem  at  their  beginning,  the  sixth  of  the  sixth 
Moncth,  1629," — warrants  us  in  holding  the  creed  to  be  fairly 
representative  of  the  type  of  theologic  belief  which  the  candi- 
dates for  membership  in  the  Salem  church  were  expected  to  mani- 
fest to  "the  elders  "  from  the  beginning.  As  such,  it  may  in  a 
true  sense  be  taken  as  representative  of  the  kind  of  doctrinal  test 
applied  to  members  entering  this  first  Puritan  church  in  New  Eng- 
land during  the  first  half  century  of  its  existence.  But  while  this 
affirmation  is  doubtless  warranted,  too  much  must  not  be  claimed 
regarding  this  document  of  1665  itself.  A  careful  reading  of  the 
church  records  regarding  it  shows   that,  unlike  the  covenants  of 

1  Church  records.  Ibid.,  59. 

- 


THE   DIRECTION    OF    1665  I  I  5 

1629  and  1636,  the  Direction  was  not  formally  adopted  by  the 
church.  It  remained  a  recognized,  but,  in  some  sense,  private, 
guide,  and  was  designed  primarily  for  the  use  of  the  candidates  for 
church  privileges  under  the  half-way  covenant,  and  for  those  who 
would  pass  from  the  baptized  membership  of  the  church  to  its  full 
communion.  For  those  not  already  of  the  church  by  baptism,  who 
desired  full  membership,  the  older  method  of  relation  and  personal 
profession  was  still  employed.1  The  steps  have  thus  been  pointed 
out  by  which  the  Salem  church  passed  from  a  brief  and  simple 
covenant  to  an  elaborate  compact  ;  and  to  the  use,  if  not  the  for- 
mal adoption,  of  a  somewhat  extended  creed.  The  process  was 
not  one  of  change  of  doctrine,  save  perhaps  on  the  question  of 
baptism  as  applied  to  the  offspring  of  the  "  children  of  the  church." 
It  was  one  of  increasing  written  definition,  a  definition  induced  by 
the  rise  of  errors  and  differences  of  belief  in  the  church  or  commu- 
nity. In  this  matter  the  story  of  the  Salem  church  is  typical  of 
New  England  ecclesiastical  development  as  a  whole.2 


1  White  has  pointed  out,  and  the  church  records  amply  warrant  him  in  the  assertion,  that 
"children  of  the  covenant"  since  members  of  the  church  already  by  baptism,  were  admitted  to  full 
communion  after  examination  by  the  pastor  and  a  public  confession  and  renewal  of  covenant  before 
the  church — but  without  church  vote.  It  is  for  such  confession  and  covenanting,  after  examina- 
tion, that  the  Direction  was  designed.  On  the  other  hand  "non-members"  were  voted  into  full 
communion  on  the  old  terms.  An  instance  or  two  may  illustrate.  "  1667.  At  a  Church  meeting,  4th 
of  5th  month.  John  Gidney,  Sam.  Archer,  jun.,  Jo.  Peas,  Martha  Barten,  Martha  Foster,  were 
presented  before  the  Church,  the  Pastor  expressed  himself  that  after  examination  he  approved  of 
them  as  able  to  examine  themselves,  and  discern  the  Lord's  body,  they  professing  their  consent  to 
the  Confession  of  Faith  and  Covenant  read  unto  them  \i.  e.,  the  Direction  of  1665],  they  had  their 
liberty  to  partake  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  as  other  children  of  the  Covenant  formerly  [/'.  e.,  since  the 
full  adoption  of  the  half-way  principles  in  1665,  White,  67].  Goodie  Guppa,  Eliz.  Clifford,  Mary 
Merit,  being  non-members,  having  been  propounded  a  month,  and  no  exception  against  them,  they 
made  their  confession  and  were  on  the  Lord's  day  following  received  unto  membership  by  vote  of 
the  Church,  and  by  their  own  entering  into  Covenant."  Church  records.  White,  71.  How  this 
confession  was  still  made,  in  the  admission  of  non-members,  is  shown  by  a  further  entry  :  "  1678.  At 
a  Church  Meeting,  March  9,  Sam.  Eburn,  [etc.]  .  .  .  these  eight  .  .  .  making  their  pro- 
fession of  faith  and  repentance  in  their  own  way,  some  by  speech,  others  by  writing,  which  was 
read  for  them,  they  were  admitted  to  membership  in  this  Church,  by  consent  of  the  brethren,  they 
engaging  themselves  in  the  Covenant."     Ibid.,  83. 

2  The  adoption  of  new  forms  and  covenants  by  the  Salem  church  did  not  stop  here.  Anew 
covenant  "  more  accomodated  to  our  times  "  was  adopted,  apparently  in  addition  to  the  old  cove- 
nant, April  15,  1680,  in  consequence  of  the  exhortations  of  the  "Reforming  Synod"  of  1679. 
Church  records,  White,  pp.  84,  85.  The  text  was  printed  at  Boston  in  that  year  (Thomas,  Hist. 
Printing  in  America,  Albany,  1874,  II :  323)  ;  and  exists  in  a  MS.  copy,  among  the  records  of  the 
Tabernacle  Church,  Salem.  This  text  may  be  found  in  White,  A^.  E.  Cong.,  pp.  186,  187,  207-209, 
in  rather  a  disjointed  form,  from  the  Tabernacle  Ch.  Centennial  Discourse,  by  Worcester,  1835, 
Appendix  U  ;  and  the  Salem  Gazette  of  Apl.  6,  1854.  As  it  is,  however,  largely  devotional  and 
penitential,  and  presents  nothing  that  is  new  in  doctrine  or  practice,  I  have  thought  best  to  omit  it. 


THE    SALEM    SYMBOLS 
The  Covenant  of  1629 

We  Covenant  with  the  Lord  and  one  with  an  other;  and  doe 
bynd  our  selves  in  the  presence  of  God,  to  walke  together  in  all 
his  waies,  according  as  he  is  pleased  to  reveale  himself  unto  us 
in  his  Blessed  word  of  truth.1 

The  Enlarged  Covenant  of  16362 

Gather  my  Saints  together  unto  me3  that  have  made  a  Cov- 
enant with  me  by  sacrifyce.     Psa.  50:5  :4 

Wee  whose  names  are  here  under  written,  members  of  the 
present   Church  of  Christ  in  Salem,  having  found   by  sad  experi- 


1  This  simplicity  is  characteristic  of  the  early  covenants.  It  seems  probable  that  the  essence 
of  the  covenant  of  the  London-Amsterdam  (Johnson's)  church  has  been  preserved .  for  us  in  the 
examination  of  Daniel  Buck,  scrivener,  in  1593,  who  being  inquired  of  as  to  "what  promise  hee 
made  when  he  came  fust  to  y*  Societie  he  annswereth  &'  sayth  that  he  made  y8  Protestation  :  that 
he  wold  walke  with  the  rest  of  y=>  so  longe  as  they  did  walke  in  the  way  of  the  Lorde,  &  so  farr  as 
might  be  warranted  by  the  Word  of  God."  Harleian  MS.  7042,  communicated  to  me  by  Dr.  Dex- 
ter. See  also  his  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  265  ;  and  Strype,  A  una  is  IV.  No.  CXV,  ed.  1824,  p.  244.  A  sug- 
gestion as  to  the  possible  original  covenant  of  the  Mayflower  church  has  already  been  made,  sec 
ante,  p.  Sj.  The  covenant  of  Henry  Jacobs'  church  organized  in  1616  in  London,  and  the  first 
Congregational  church  to  gain  a  permanent  foothold  in  that  city,  is  thus  described  ;  they  "sol- 
emnly covenanted  with  each  other  in  the  presence  of  Almighty  God,  to  walk  together  in  all  God's 
ways  and  ordinances,  according  as  he  had  already  revealed,  or  should  further  make  them  known  to 
them."  Neal,  Hist.  0/  the  Puritans,  Toulmin's  ed.,  Rath,  1794,  II  :  100.  Hanbury,  Memorials, 
1 :  292,  293.  No  covenant  of  the  Dorchester  company,  whose  church  was  organized  in  March  1630,  at 
Plymouth,  F.ng.,  and  emigrated  bodily  to  our  shores,  has  been  preserved  earlier  in  date  than  1647 
(given  later  in  this  work).  Hut  the  next  in  order  of  our  New  England  churches,  that  of  Boston, 
had  a  covenant  as  simple  as  that  of  Salem.  (See  Ch.  VII  of  this  work.)  The  Charlestown  church, 
of  Nov.  2,  1632,  has  the  following  covenant  :  "Wee  whose  names  are  heer  written  Iieing  by  his 
most  wise  and  good  providence  brought  together,  and  desirous  to  vnite  o*  selus  into  one  Congre- 
gation or  Church,  vnder  or  Lord  Iesus  Christ  our  Head:  In  such  sort  as  becometh  all  those  whom 
he  hath  Redeemed  and  sanctified  vnto  himselfe,  Doe  heer  sollemnly  and  Religeously  as  in  his  most 
holy  presence,  Promice  and  bynde  or  selus  to  walke  in  all  or  waves  according  to  the  Rules  of  the 
Gospell,  and  in  all  sinceer  conformity  to  his  holy  ordinances:  and  in  mutuall  Love  and  Respect 
each  to  other  ;  so  near  as  God  shall  give  vs  grace."  Photographic  fac-simile  in  The  Commemora- 
tion 0/  the  Sjoth  Anniversary  of  the  First  Church,  Charlestown,  Mass.  Privately  Printed, 
1882.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  in  simplicity  and  brevity  the  Salem  covenant  conforms  to  the 
general  custom  of  our  earliest  Congregational  churches.  A  seeming  exception  is  perhaps  the  cov- 
enant of  the  Watertown  church  of  July  30,  1630  (Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  1:377;  Punchard,  IV  : 
43,  44)  ;  but  the  exception  is  more  apparent  than  real,  for  though  the  form  is  long  and  descriptive, 
the  content  is  simple. 

a  From  White's  text  of  the  copy  in  the  church-book  of  1660-1. 

3  Fiske's  copy,  Hist.  Coll.  Essex  Inst.,  I  .  37,  38,  inserts  yos,  i.  e.  those.  I  have  not  noticed 
variations  in  spelling  between  Fiske  and  the  church-book. 

1  A  favorite  text,  John  Higginson  preached  on  it  at  the  renewing  of  this  covenant  in  1661. 
Ch.  records,  White,  p.  48. 

(116) 


TEXT   OF   THE   COVENANT  WJ 

ence  how  dangerous  it  is  to  sitt  loose  to  the  Covenant  wee  make 
with  our  God  :  and  how  apt  wee  are  to  wander  into  by  pathes, 
even  to  the  looseing  of  our  first  aimes  in  entring  into  Church 
fellowship  :  Doe  therefore  solemnly  in  the  presence  of  the  Eter- 
nall  God,  both  for  our  own  comforts,  and  those  which1  shall  or 
maye  be  joyned  unto  us,  renewe  that  Church  Covenant  we  find 
this  Church  bound  unto  at  theire  first  beginning,  viz:  That  We 
Covenant  with  the  Lord  and  one  with  an  other;  and  doe  bynd  our 
selves  in  the  presence  of  God,  to  walke  together  in  all  his  waies, 
according  as  he  is  pleased  to  reveale  himself  unto  us  in  his 
Blessed  word  of  truth.'  And  doe  more  explicitely  in  the  name 
and  feare  of  God,  profess  and  protest  to  walke  as  followeth  through 
the  power  and  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus.3 

i  first  wee  avowe  the  Lord  to  be  our  God,  and  our  selves 
his  people  in  the  truth  and  simplicitie  of  our  spirits. 

2  AVe  give  our  selves  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  word 
of  his  grace,  fore  the  teaching,  ruleing  and  sanctifyeing  of  us  in 
matters  of  worship,  and  Conversation,  resolveing  to  cleave  to  him 
alone  for  life  and  glorie  ;  and  oppose  all  contrarie  wayes,  can- 
nons and  constitutions  of  men  in  his  worship. 

3  Wee  promise  to  walke  with  our  brethren  and  sisters  in  this 
Congregation  with  all  watchfullnes  and  tendernes,  avoydin§-  all 
jelousies,  suspitions,  backbyteings,  censurings,  provoakings,  se- 
crete risings  of  spirite  against  them;  but  in  all  offences  to  follow 
the  rule  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  to  beare  and  forbeare,  give  and 
forgive  as  he  hath  taught  us. 

4  In  publick  or  in  private,  we  will  willingly  doe  nothing  to 
the  ofence  of  the  Church  but  will  be  willing  to  take  advise  for 
our  selves  and  ours  as  ocasion  shalbe  presented. 

5  Wee  will  not  in  the  Congregation  be  forward  eyther  to 
shew  oure  owne  gifts  or  parts  in  speaking  or  scrupling,  or  there 
discover  the  fayling  of  oure  brethren  or  sisters  butt  atend  an 
orderly  cale  there  unto  ;  knowing  how  much  the  Lord  may  be 
dishonoured,  and  his  Gospell  in  the  profession  of  it,  sleighted,  by 
our  distempers,  and  weaknesses  in  publyck. 

6  Wee  bynd  our  selves  to  studdy  the  advancement  of  the 
Gospell  in  all  truth  and  peace,  both  in  regard  of  those  that  are 
within,  or  without,  noe  way  sleighting  our  sister  Churches,  but 
useing  theire   Counsell   as  need   shalbe  :    nor  laying  a   stumbling 

1  Fiske  reads  who. 

2  This  sentence,  the  original  covenant  of  the  church,  ends  in   Fiske's  copy  with  a  comma. 

3  Fiske  reads  ye  helpe  Sr'jioux  of  ye  Lard  Jesus. 


I  1 8  CREED   DEVELOPMENT   AT   SALEM 

block  before  any,  noe  not  the  Indians,  whose  good  we  desire  to 
promote,  and  soe  to  converse,  as  we  may  avoyd  the  verrye  ap- 
pearance of  evill. 

7  We  hearbye  promise  to  carrye  our  selves  in  all  lawful] 
obedience,  to  those  that  are  over  us,  in  Church  or  Common- 
weale,1  knowing  how  well  pleasing  it  will  be  to  the  Lord,  that 
they  should  have  incouragement  in  theire  places,  by  our  not 
greiveing  theyre  spirites  through  our  Irregularities.2 

8  Wee  resolve  to  approve  our  selves  to  the  Lord  in  our 
perticular  calings,  shunning  ydleness  as  the  bane  of  any  state, 
nor  will  wee  deale  hardly,  or  oppressingly  with  any,  wherein  we 
are  the  Lord's  stewards  :3 

9  alsoe  promyseing  to  our  best  abilitie  to  teach  our  children 
and  servants,  the  knowledg  of  God4  and  his  will,  that  they  may 
serve  him  also  ;  and  all  this,  not  by  any  strength  of  our  owne, 
but  by  the  Lord  Christ,  whose  bloud  we  desire  may  sprinckle  this 
our  Covenant  made  in  his  name.5 


The  Anti-Quaker  Article  ok   1660-C 

This  Covenant7  was  renewed  by  the  Church  on  a  sollemne 
day  of  Humiliation  6  of  1  moneth  1660/  When  also  considering 
the  power  of  Temptation  amongst  us  by  reason  of  ye  Quakers 
doctrine  to  the  leavening  of  some  in  the  place  where  we  are  and 
endangering  of  others,  doc  see  cause  to  remember  the  Admoni- 
tion of  our  Saviour  Christ  to  his  disciples  Math.  16.  Take  heed 
and  beware  of  ye  leaven  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Pharisees  and  doe 
judge  so  farre  as  we  understand  it  y'  y'  Quakers  doctrine  is  as 
bad  or  worse  than  that  of  ye  Pharisees  ;  Therefore  we  doe  Cov- 
ennant  by  the  help  of  Jesus  Christ  to  take  heed  and  beware  of 
the  leaven  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Quakers. 

1  I  "iske  reads  common  wealth. 

2  This  is  the  article  to  which  Morton  refers  (Memoriall,  p.  75  ;  Davis  ed,  pp.  145.  146) :  "  And 
because  they  foresaw  that  this  Wilderness  might  be  looked  upon  as  a  place  of  Liberty,  and  there- 
fore might  in  time  be  troubled  with  erroneous  spirit-,  therefore  they  did  put  in  one  Article  into 
the  Confession  0/ Faith  on  purpose  about  the  Duty  ami  Power  0/ the  Magistrate  in  Matters  0/ 
Religion."  He  attributes  its  adoption,  mistakenly,  to  1629  —  his  own  work  was  published  40  years 
later  — but  it  fits  in  admirably  with  the  repentant  spirit  of  the  church  for  its  actions  under  the  lead 
of  Roger  Williams.     See  ante,  p.  109. 

3  In  Fiske's  copy  this  article  and  the  following  are  joined  in  one. 

4  Fiske  reads  ye  Lord. 

«  Fiske  reads  we  desire  should  l<e  sprinkle.     This  our  ,  orenant,  etc. 

•  From  White's  text  of  the  copy  in  the  church-book  of  1660-1.     A".  E.  Cong.,  p.  14. 

'  I.e.,  the  enlarged  covenant  of  1636,  to  which  it  is  immediately  appended. 

f  In  modern  reckoning  i66t.    See  ante,  p.  113.    The  article  was  prepared  in  1660  and  "added" 


TEXT   OF   THE    DIRECTION  119 

The  Direction  of  1665 ' 

A 

DIRECTION 

FOR 

A  PUBLICK  PROFESSION 

In  the  Church  Assembly,  after  private  Examination 

by  the  ELDERS. 

Which   Direction   is   taken  out   of  the  Scripture,  and  Points   unto 

that  Faith  and  Covenant  contained  in  the  Scripture. 

Being    the   same   for   Substance   which    was    propounded    to,   and 

agreed  upon  by  the  Church  of  Salem  at  their  beginning. 

the  sixth  of  the  sixth  Moneth,   1629. 


In  the  Preface  to  the  Declaration  of  the  Faith  owned  and  prof essed  by 

the  Congregational/  Churches  in  England. 

The  Genuine  use  of  a  Confession  of  Faith  is,  that  under  the 
same  Form  of  Words  they  express  the  substance  of  the  same 
common  Salvation  or  unity  of  their  Faith.  Accordingly  it  is  to 
be  looked  upon  as  a  fit  meanes,  whereby  to  express  that  their 
Common  Faith  and  Salvation,  and  not  to  be  made  use  of  as  an 
imposition  upon  any." 

[2]  VYE  Beseech  you  Brethren  to  know  them  that  labour 
among  yon,  and  arc  over  you  in  the  Lord,  and  admonish  you  and  to 
esteem  them  very  highly  in  love  for  their  work  sake  and  be  at  peace 
among  your  selves.     1  Thess.  5.  12,  13. 

Obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you  and  submit  your  selves, 
for  they  watch  for  your  soules,  as  they  that  must  give  an  account,  that 
they  may  do  it  with  joy  and  not  with  grief,  for  that  is  unprofitable  for 
you,  Heb.  13.  17. 

Who  is  that  wise  and  faithfull  steward,  whom  his  Lord  shall  make 
Ruler  over  his  houshoLl,  to  give  the///  their  portion  of  meat  in  due  season, 
Luk.  12.  42. 

March  6-16,  1661.  Church-records,  White,  p.  48.  The  date  in  the  text  is  not  an  error,  however. 
The  year  was  held  to  begin  March  25,  and  March  was  therefore  the  first  month,  though  its  first  24 
days  were  held  to  belong  to  the  previous  year.  Vet  the  usage  in  dating  during  the  early  days  of 
March  was  not  absolutely  uniform,  some  even  then  would  have  written  1661.  See  Preface  to 
Savage's  Winthrop's_/>tt/-«<!/,  I  :  xi. 

1  Text  from  original. 

2  Savoy  Declaration,  ed.  1658.     Preface,  pp.  iii,  iv. 


1-0  CREEL)  DEVELOPMENT  AT  SALEM 

One  Faith,  one  Baptism.     Eph.  4.  5. 
The  Common  Faith.     Tit.  1.  4. 
The  common  Salvation.     Jude  Ver.  3. 
Christ  Jesus  the  high  priest  of  on?-  Profession,  Heb.  3.  11. 
The  profession  of  our  Faith.     Heb.  10.  22. 
One  shall  say  I  am  the  Lords,  Isai.  44.  5. 
Hold  fast  the  form  of  sound  words.     2  Tim.  1.  13. 
The  form  of  Knowledge,  and  of  the  truth,  Rom.  2.  20. 
The  form  of  Doctrine  delivered  unto  you,  Rom.  6.  17. 
[3 J      THE    COXFESSIOX    OF    FAITH. 

I  do  believe  with  my  heart  and  confess  with  my  mouth. 
Concerning  God. 

THat  there  is  but  one  only  true  God  in  three  persons,  the  Father, 
the  Son.  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  each  of  them  God,  and  all  of 
them  one  and  the  same  Infinite,  Eternall  God,  most  Wise,  Holy, 
Just,  Merciful]  and  Blessed  for  ever. 

Concerning  the  Works  of  God. 

THat  this  God  is  the  Maker,  Preserver,  and  Governour  of  all 
things  according  to  the  counsel  of  his  own  Will,  and  that  God 
made  man  in  his  own  Image,  in  Knowledge,  Holiness  and  Right- 
eousness. 

Concerning  the  fall  of  Man. 

THat  Adam  by  transgressing  the  Command  of   God,   fell  from 
God  and  brought  himself  and  his  posterity  into  a  state  of  Sin 
and  death,  under  the  Wrath  and  Curse  of   God,  which  I  do  believe 
to  be  my  own  condition  by  nature  as  well  as  any  other. 
[4]  Concerning  Jesus  Christ. 

THat  God  sent  his  Son  into  the  World,  who  for  our  sakes  be- 
came man,  that  he  might  redeem  and  save  us  by  his  Obedi- 
ence unto  death,  and  that  he  arose  from  the  dead,  ascended  unto 
Heaven  and  sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  from  whence  he  shall 
come  to  judge  the  World. 

Concerning  the  Holy  Ghost. 

THat  God  the  holy  Ghost  hath  fully  revealed  the  Doctrine  of 
Christ  and  will  of  God  in  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament,  which  are  the  Word  of  God,  the  perfect,  perpetuall  and 
only  Rule  of  our  Faith  and  Obedience. 

Concerning  the  Benefits  we  have  by  Christ. 

THat  the  same  Spirit  by  Working  Faith    in  Gods  Elect,  applyeth 
unto  them  Christ  with  all   his  Benefits   of  Justification,  and 
Sanctification,  unto  Salvation,  in  the  use  of  those  Ordinances  which 


TEXT   OF  THE   DIRECTION  121 

God  hath  appointed  in  his  written  word,  which  therefore  ought  to 
be  observed  by  us  until  the  coming  of  Christ. 

Concerning  the  Church  of  Christ. 

THat  all  true  Believers  being  united  unto  Christ  as  the  Head, 
make  up  one  Misticall  Church  which  is  the  Body  of  Christ,  the 
members  wherof  having  fellowship  with  the  Father  Son  and  Holy- 
Ghost  by  Faith,  and  one  with  an  other  in  love,  doe  receive  here 
upon  earth  forgiveness  of  Sinnes,  with  the  life  of  grace,  and  at  the 
Resurrection  of  the  Body,  they  shall  receive  everlasting  life.  Amen. 
[5]  THE    COVENANT: 

Ido  heartily  take  and  avouch  this  one  God  who  is  made  known 
to  us  in  the  Scripture,  by  the  Name  of  God  the  Father,  and 
God  the  Son  even  Jesus  Christ,  and  God  the  Holy  Ghost  to  be  my 
God,  according  to  the  tenour  of  the  Covenant  of  Grace;  wherein 
he  hath  promised  to  be  a  God  to  the  Faithfull  and  their  seed  after 
them  in  their  Generations,  and  taketh  them  to  be  his  People,  and 
therfore  unfeignedly  repenting  of  all  my  sins,  I  do  give  up  myself 
wholy  unto  this  God  to  believe  in  love,  serve  &  Obey  him  sin- 
cerely and  faithfully  according  to  his  written  word,  against  all  the 
temptations  of  the  Devil,  the  World,  and  my  own  flesh  and  this 
unto  the  death. 

Ido  also  consent  to  be  a  Member  of  this  particular  Church,  prom- 
ising to  continue  stedfastly  in  fellowship  with  it,  in  the  publick 
Worship  of  God,  to  submit  to  the  Order  Discipline  and  Govern- 
ment of  Christ  in  it,  and  to  the  Ministerial  teaching  guidance 
and  oversight  of  the  Elders  of  it,  and  to  the  brotherly  watch  of 
Fellow  Members:  and  all  this  according  to  Gods  Word,  and  by  the 
grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  enabling  me  thereunto.     AMEN. 


1  It  has  been  pointed  out,  ante.  p.  115,  that  one  of  the  uses  of  this  confession  and  covenant 
was  when  a  baptized  child  of  the  church  wished  to  pass  from  its  baptismal  fellowship  to  its  full 
communion.  For  such  use  its  expressions  of  personal  piety  seem  natural.  But  there  is  every  reason 
to  suppose,  also,  that  this  creed  and  covenant  were  employed  for  those  who  could  not  claim  a  work 
of  grace  sufficient  to  enable  them  to  ask  for  full  communion,  but  who  simply  "  owned  the  covenant " 
and  had  their  children  baptized.  Yet  New  England  custom  sanctioned  as  strenuous  a  covenant  as 
this  in  their  cases.  That  used  by  the  First  Church  of  Hartford  for  "half-way"  members  in  1696  is 
as  follows:  "We  do  solemnly  in  ye  presence  of  God  and  this  Congregation  avouch  God  in  Jesus 
Christ  to  be  our  God  one  God  in  three  persons  y"  Father  y8  Son  &  y«  Holy  Ghost  &  y'  we  are  by 
nature  childr"  of  wrath  &  y«  our  hope  of  Mercy  with  God  is  only  thro'  ye  righteousnesse  of  Jesus 
Christ  apprehended  by  faith  it  we  do  freely  give  up  ourselves  to  ye  Lord  to  walke  in  communion 
with  him  in  ye  ordinances  appointed  in  his  holy  word  &  to  yield  obedience  to  all  his  coiriands  & 
submit  to  his  governm'.  &  wheras  to  ye  great  dishon'  of  God,  Scandall  of  Religion  &  hazard  of  y« 
damnation  of  Souls,  y*  Sins  of  drunkenness  &  fornication  are  Prevailing  amongst  us  we  do  Solemnly 
engage  before  God  this  day  thro  his  grace  faithfully  and  conscientiously  to  strive  against  those 
Evills  and  ye  temptations  that  May  lead  thereto."  Church  records,  G.  L.  Walker,  Hist.  First 
Ch.  in  Hartford,  Hartford,  1884,  p.  248.  Like  this  Salem  Direction  the  Hartford  covenant  was 
not  formally  adopted  by  the  church,  though  prepared  by  its  pastor  and  used  by  its  services.  For  a 
century,  at  Hartford,  each  pastor  wrote  his  own  form. 
9 


]--  CREEL)  DEVELOPMENT  AT  SALEM 

[6J  Questions  to  be  Answered  at  the  Baptizing  of  Children,  or 
the  substance  to  be  expressed  by  the  Parents. 

Quest  Doe  you  present  and  give  up  this  child,  or  these  children, 
unto  God  the  Father,  Sonne  and  Holy  Ghost,  to  be  baptized  in  the  Faith, 
and  Engaged  in  the  Covinant  of  God  professed  by  this  Church  ? 

Quest.  Doe  you  Sollemnly  Promise  in  the  Presence  of  God,  that 
by  the  grace  of  Christ,  you  will  discharge  your  Covinant  duty  towards 
your  Children,  soe  as  to  bring  them  up  in  the  Nurture  and  Admonition 
of  the  Lord,  teaching  and  commanding  them  to  keep  the  way  of  God, 
that  they  may  be  able  {through  the  grace  of  Christ)  to  make  a  per  so  nail 
profession  of  their  Faith  and  to  own  the  Covinant  of  God  themselves 
in  due  time. 


FINIS 


VII 

THE     COVENANT    OF    THE    CHARLESTOYYN-BOS- 
TON    CHURCH,    1630 

The  Covenant  is  preserved  in  the  Records  of  the  First  Church  in  Boston. 
Printed  Texts 

I.  Foxcroft,  Observations,  Historical  and  Practical,  on  the  Rise  and  Primitive 

State  of  Xew  England,  Boston,  1730,  p.  3.1 

II.  Emerson,  Historical  Sketch  of  the  First  Church  in  Boston,  Boston, 
1812,  pp.  II,   12." 

III.  Budington,  History  of  the  First  Church,  Charleston/!,  Boston,  1S45, 
PP-  13,  14- 

IV.  Drake,  History  and  Antiquities  of  Boston,  Boston,  1856,  p.  93. 

V.  Elliott,  New  England  History,  New  York,  1S57,  I  :  39S. 

VI.  R.  C.  YVinthrop,  Life  and  Letters  of  John  Winthrop,  Boston,  1S64-7, 
11:45- 

VII.  Waddington,  Congregational  History,  ij6/-iyoo,  p.  269. 

VIII.  Punchard,  History  of  Congregationalism,  Boston,  1S80,  IV  :  42. 

IX.  Commemoration  by  the  First  Church  .  .  of  the  Completion  of  250 
years  since  its  foundation,  Boston,  1SS1,  p.  201. 

X.  A.  B.  Ellis.  History  of  the  First  Church  in  Boston,   Boston,  1S81,  p.  3. 

XI.  R.  C.  Winthrop,  Boston  Founded,  in  Winsor's  Memorial  History  of 
Boston,  Boston,  1SS2,  p.  114. 

XII.  G.  E.  Ellis,  Puritan  Age  in     .      .     Massachusetts,  Boston,  iSSS,  p.  58. 
Literature 

The  circumstances  of  the  adoption  of  this  covenant  are  described  in  two  con- 
temporary letters  to  Gov.  Bradford  of  Plymouth,  from  Samuel  Fuller  and  Edward 
Winslow,  preserved  in  Bradford,  History  of  Plymouth  Plantation,  pp.  277-279  ; 
and  in  Bradford's  Letter-Book,  /  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  III  :  74-76.  The  essential 
portions  of  these  letters  were  given  in  abstract  by  Prince,  Chron.  Hist,  of  New 
England,  I  :  242-244.  The  facts,  thus  preserved,  have  been  treated  with  more  or 
less  fullness  in  each  of  the  works  from  which  texts  of  the  covenant  have  been  cited. 
I  will  only  add  to  the  list  there  given,  Felt,  Eccles.  Hist.  X.  £.,  I  :  13S,  139  ;  Pal- 
frey, Hist.  X.  £.,  I  :  316  ;  Dexter,  Congregationalism  as  seen,  417.  Governor 
Winthrop  gives  no  account  of  the  adoption  of  this  covenant,  his  History  of  New 
England  {ox  Journal)  having  a  large  blank  at  this  point;  though  he  describes  the 
election  and  installation  of  the  officers  of  the  church  four  weeks  after  (Savage's  2d. 
ed.  Boston,  1S53,  I  :  36-39).  Hubbard  (Gen.  Hist.  X.  £.,  ed.  Boston,  1S48,  p.  135) 
and  Mather  (Magnolia,  ed.  1853-5,  I  :  79)  observe  the  same  silence. 


1  Century  Sermon.     Thomas  Foxcroft  was  minister  of  the  First  Church,  Boston,  from  1717 
his  death  in  1769. 

2  William    Emerson  was   pastor   of  the    First   Church,    1799-1811  ;  father  of    Ralph    Waldo 


(123) 


124  THE   BOSTON   COVENANT,    1630 

IN  the  previous  chapter'  the  story  was  told  of  the  rapid  growth 
of  the  enterprise  for  Puritan  colonization  in  New  England 
under  the  fostering  care  of  Rev.  John  White,  the  securing  of  a 
large  land  grant  from  the  Plymouth  Council  in  March,  1628,  and 
the  sending  of  Endicott  to  Salem  as  representative  of  the  new 
company  in  the  summer  of  the  same  year;  and,  finally,  the  grant 
of  a  patent  by  the  crown  to  the  now  much  enlarged  body  of  ad- 
venturers, on  March  4,  1629,  organizing  it  into  the  "  Governour 
and  Company  of  the  Mattachusetts  Bay."  The  first  governor  of 
the  corporation  thus  created  was  Matthew  Cradock,2  a  London 
merchant  of  wealth;  and  the  evident  intention  was  that  the  con- 
trol of  the  Company  should  remain  in  England  and  its  authority 
be  exercised  through  agents  like  Endicott.  But  as  the  tyranny 
of  church  and  crown  pressed  with  increasing  severity  upon  the 
Puritans  of  England,  men  of  so  great  prominence  and  in  such 
numbers  announced  their  intention  of  casting  in  their  lot  with 
the  Company  as  actual  settlers  on  the  shores  of  New  England, 
that  a  change  of  policy  seemed  advisable.  Accordingly,  on  July 
28,  1629,  Cradock  himself  proposed  that  the  government  of  the 
Company  be  transferred  to  New  England  soil.3  Decision  was 
not  immediately  given  by  the  Company  as  a  whole,  but  the  de- 
sires of  a  prominent  body  of  Puritans,  embracing  such  men  as 
Winthrop,  Saltonstall,  Dudley,  Pynchon,  and  Nowell,  who  entered 
into  a  mutual  covenant  at  Cambridge,  Eng.,  August  26,  1629,  to 
emigrate  to  New  England  provided  the  government  and  patent 
should  be  legally  carried  thither,4  caused  matters  to  come  to  a 
head  ;  and  on  August  29  the  transfer  was  voted.5  Since  Cradock 
and  others  of  the  old  officers  of  the  Company  could. not  leave 
England,   they  naturally  resigned;    and   the   vacant  governorship 

1  See  ante,  p.  100. 

2  Some   biographical   facts   regarding   him   may  be  found  in  Young,    Chron.     .     .     Mass., 
pp.  137,  138. 

•  Records     .      .     of  Massachusetts,    Boston,   1853,    1:49.      Young,    Chron.      .      .     Mass., 
pp.  85,  86. 

4  Young,  Hid.,  pp.  281,  282. 

5  Records,   I  :  50,  51.     Young,   Hid.,  pp.  86-88.     Compare  Palfrey,    1 :  301,  302,   and   G.   E. 
Ellis,  Puritan  Age     .     .     in     .     .     .1  [ass.,  pp.  46-49. 


THE    PURITAN    EXODUS  1 25 

was  filled,  October  20,  1629, '  by  the  choice  of  John  Winthrop.2 
Preparations  for  departure  now  went  on  apace,  and  hundreds  of 
emigrants  decided  to  avail  themselves  of  the  facilities  afforded  by 
the  Company.  With  the  opening  spring  of  1630  these  colonists 
now  began  pouring  across  the  Atlantic.  First  of  all  to  leave 
England  was  a  body  organized  by  the  influence  of  John  White 
of  Dorchester,  England,  and  which  had  been  joined  together  into 
Congregational  church-estate  at  Plymouth,  England,  in  March, 
1630,  just  before  sailing,  and  had  there  chosen  John  Warham  and 
John  Maverick  its  ministers.3  Arrived  in  Massachusetts  Bay  on 
May  30  of  that  year,  they  named  their  new  settlement  Dorchester,  in 
memory  of  their  English  home.  These  Dorchester  emigrants  did 
not  much  anticipate,  either  in  sailing  or  arrival,  their  companions 
in  the  great  emigration4  of  1630.  Winthrop  and  his  immediate 
company  got  away  from  English  shores  April  8,  and  reached 
Salem,  June  12.5  But  Salem  proved  not  to  their  liking,6  and 
they  almost  immediately  removed  to  Massachusetts  Bay,  where 
the  majority  of  Winthrop's  immediate  associates  settled  on  the 
north  side  of  Charles  river  at  Charlestown,  but  a  few  took  up  their 
abode  on  the  south  side  at  what  was  soon  to  be  named  Boston.7 


1  Records,  I  :  59,  60  ;    Young,  Ibid.,  pp.  104,  105. 

2  Of  Winthrop,  one  of  the  greatest  names  in  New  England  history,  little  need  here  be  said. 
Born  at  Edwardston,  Suffolk,  Jan.,  1588,  of  a  family  of  considerable  prominence,  he  studied  at 
Cambridge  for  two  years,  beginning  with  1602 .;  but  left  without  taking  a  degree.  He  practiced 
law,  and  discharged  the  duties  of  a  justice,  coming  also  into  connection  with  many  who  were  in 
Parliament ;  but  repeated  domestic  bereavement  in  early  life  increased  the  always  serious  bent  of 
his  spirit  and  inclined  him  to  a  profound  interest  in  religious  things.  Precisely  how  his  thoughts 
were  turned  toward  New  England  we  know  not,  but  by  May,  1629,  he  was  seriously  weighing  the 
advisability  of  going  thither.  His  agreement  with  others  to  undertake  the  voyage  followed  in 
August,  and  in  October  he  was  chosen  governor  of  the  Company.  He  arrived  at  Salem  June  12, 
1630;  and  thenceforward,  till  his  death  in  March,  1649,  he  lived  in  New  England,  and  was  intimately 
•concerned  with  its  affairs.  From  the  foundation  of  Boston  he  was  identified  with  that  town.  He 
held  the  governorship  till  1634,  and  again  1637-1640,  1642-16.14,  1646-1649.  Strong,  patient,  courage- 
ous, and  above  all  profoundly  religious,  the  influence  which  he  exercised  in  moulding  the  infant 
colony  can  hardly  be  over  estimated.  The  best  work  regarding  him  is  that  of  his  descendant 
Robert  C.  Winthrop,  Life  and  Letters  0/  John  Winthrop,  2  vols.,  Boston,  1S64-1867.  Of  the 
many  other  sketches  of  him  I  will  refer  only  to  one  of  the  earliest,  Mather,  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5, 
1:118-131;  and  the  latest,  Appletnn's  Cyclopaedia  0/ Am.  Biography,  18S9,  VI  :  572-574,  and 
J.  H.  Twichell,  John  Winthrop,  New  York.  1891. 

3  1  he  circumstances  of  their  organization,  and  the  .later  removal  of  a  portion  of  this  Dor- 
chester Company  to  what  is  now  Windsor,  Conn.,  will  be  related  in  a  subsequent  chapter. 

4  Prince,  Chron.  Hist.  N.  E.,  p.  240;  Hutchinson,  Hist.  .  .  Mass.  Bay,  I  :  19  ;  and 
Young,  Chron  .  .  Mass.,  p.  127,  estimate  the  number  of  Puritan  emigrants  to  New  England  in 
1630  at  1500. 

5  Winthrop,  History  (Journal),  Savage's  2d  ed.,  I  :  6-29. 

6  Dudley's  Letter  to  the  Countess  of  Lincoln,  Young,  Chron.     .     .     Mass.,  p.  312. 

7  Ibid.,  313.  This  settlement  took  place  about  July  ro  or  iz.  See  Prime,  Chron.  Hist.  N. 
E.,  p.  240. 


126  THE    BOSTON"    COVENANT,    163O 

If  Samuel  Fuller,  the  physician  and  deacon  of  Plymouth,  was 
correctly    informed    the    attention    of    Winthrop's    company    had 

already  been  drawn  by  a  minister  whom  they  held  in  high  esteem 
and  who  was  later  to  fill  a  distinguished  teachership  in  the  Boston 
church,  John  Cotton,  then  of  Boston,  England,  to  the  model  set  by 
Plymouth.1  It  was  on  ready  soil,  therefore,  that  the  seeds  fell 
when  Fuller,  who  had  been  called  to  the  medical  aid  of  Winthrop's 
company  and  the  Dorchester  emigrants  before  the  governor  had 
been  three  weeks  on  the  New  England  shores,  expounded  the  Ply- 
mouth church-way  in  public  and  private.2  We  may  be  sure  also 
that  Fuller's  earlier  friend  and  sympathizer,  Endicott,  was  of  mate- 
rial aid  in  setting  forth  Congregational  principles  since  Fuller 
speaks  of  him  at  this  time  as  a  second  Barrowe.3  But  the  Plymouth 
church  was  to  have  a  yet  more  active  share  in  directing  the  affairs 
of  Winthrop's  company  toward  church  organization.  On  Sunday, 
July  25,  Isaac  Johnson,  Winthrop's  companion,  being  then  at  Salem, 
received  a  letter4  from  the  governor  at  Charlestown  entreating  the 

1  Fuller  to  Bradford.  Dated  Massachusetts,  June  28,  1630.  Bradford's  Letter-Book,  /  Call. 
Mass.  Hist.  Sec.,  III  :  74,  75.  "  Here  is  a  gentleman,  one  Mr.  Cottington,  a  Huston  [Eng.]  man, 
who  told  me  that  Mr.  Cotton's  charge  at  Hampton  was,  that  they  should  take  the  advice  of  them  at 
Plymouth,  and  should  do  nothing  to  offend  them."  i.  <•.,  at  Southampton  before  sailing. 

■Ibid.  "  We  have  some  privy  enemies  in  the  bay,  but  (blessed  be  Clod)  more  friends;  the 
Governour  hath  had  conference  with  me,  both  in  private  and  before  sundry  others  .  .  .  the 
Governour  hath  told  me  he  hoped  we  will  not  be  wanting  in  helping  them,  so  that  I  think  you 
[/.  e.,  Bradford  and  his  associates]  will  be  sent  for." 

3  Hid.,  "a second  Burrow." 

4  This  letter  and  the  consequent  action,  ismade  known  to  us  in  a  letter  to  Gov.  Bradford, 
Pastor  Ralph  Smith  and  Elder  William  Brewster,  of  Plymouth,  written  from  Salem,  July  26,  1630,  by 
Winslow,  and  signed  by  Winslow  and  Fuller.  Text  in  Bradford,  Hist.  Plym.  Plant.,  pp.  277,  278  ; 
and  Letter  Book,  /  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Ill :  75,  76.  Some  important  partsof  Winslow's  letter  are 
as  follows:  "  Sr :  Being  at  Salem  ye  25.  of  July,  being  y«  saboath,  after  y«  eveing  exercise,  Mr. 
Johnson  received  a  letter  from  >•  Gov',  Mc.  John  Winthrop,  manifesting  y  hand  of  God  to  be  upon 
them,  and  against  them  at  Charles-towne  ...  It  was  therfore  by  his  desire  taken  into  y» 
Godly  consideration  of  y«  best  hear,  what  was  to  be  done  to  pacifie  ye  Lords  wrath.  [And  they 
would  do  nothing  without  our  advice,  I  mean  those  members  of  our  church,  there  known  unto  them, 
viz.  Mr.  Fuller,  Mr.  Allerton,  and  myself,  requiring  our  voices  as  their  own.]  Wher  it  was  con- 
cluded, that  the  Lord  was  to  be  sought  in  righteousnes ;  and  to  that  end,  y«  6.  day  (being  Friday)  of 
this  present  weeke,  is  set  aparte,  that  they  may  humble  them  selves  before  God,  and  seeke  him  in 
his  ordenances  ;  and  that  then  also  such  godly  persons  that  are  amongst  them,  and  know  each  to 
other,  may  publickly,  at  ye  end  of  their  exercise,  make  known  their  Godly  desire,  and  practise  >•• 
same,  viz.  solemly  to  enter  into  covenante  with  y<>  Lord  to  walke  in  his  ways.  And  since  they  are 
so  disposed  of  in  their  outward  estats,  as  to  live  in  three  distinct  places,  each  having  men  of  abilitie 
amongst  them,  ther  to  observe  y*  day,  and  become  3.  distincte  bodys  ;  not  then  intending  rashly  to 
proceed  to  ye  choyce  of  officers,  or  y«  admitting  of  any  other  to  their  societie  then  a  few,  to  witte, 
such  as  are  well  knowne  unto  them  ;  promising  after  to  receive  in  such  by  confession  of  faith,  as 
shall  appeare  to  be  fitly  qualified  for  y  estate.  They  doe  emestly  entreate  that  y«  church  of  Pli- 
moth  would  set  apparte  y«  same  day.  for  y«  same  ends,  beseeching  y«  Lord,  as  to  withdraw  his 
hand  of  correction  from  them,  so  also  to  establish  and  direct  them  in  his  wayes."  From  Brad- 
ford's History,  clause  in  brackets  added  in  Letter  Book. 


FORMATION    OF   THE    CHURCH  12/ 

advice  of  the  Salem  church  in  view  of  the  severe  mortality  which  was 
afflicting  the  new  settlers  on  the  Charles  river.  Deacon  Fuller, 
Edward  Winslow,  and  Isaac  Allerton,  of  the  Plymouth  church,  were 
at  Salem,  and  the  good  people  of  that  church  sought  their  counsel 
also  in  the  weighty  matter  laid  before  them.1  Possibly  Winthrop 
had  outlined,  in  the  letter  to  Johnson,  a  plan  for  which  he  desired  the 
approval  of  the  Salem  brethren;  more  probably  Johnson  was  him- 
self sufficiently  identified  with  Winthrop  and  his  company  to  accept 
counsel  in  their  behalf  and  to  agree  to  a  definite  line  of  action  in 
their  stead.  At  all  events,  it  was  determined  that  Sabbath  evening 
at  Salem  that  the  three  settlements  into  which  Winthrop's  immediate 
company  had  already  divided,  Charlestown,  Watertown,  and  proba- 
bly either  Roxbury  or  Medford,2  should  observe  the  coming  Fri- 
day, July  30,  as  a  fast  ;  and  that  those  who  were  fit  among  their 
inhabitants  should  enter  into  church-estate  by  covenant.  At  the 
same  time  the  Plymouth  church,  in  the  persons  of  its  three  mem- 
bers at  Salem,  was  entreated  to  "set  apparte  ye  same  day,  for 
ye  same  ends,"  beseeching  God's  mercy  on  the  afflicted  people  of 
Massachusetts   Bay  and   His  blessing  on  their  new  church  insti- 


1  The  letter  just  quoted  is  indeed  obscure.  Prince,  Chron.  Hist.  -V.  E.,  pp.  242,  243,  represents 
it  as  conveying  information  to  Johnson  at  Salem,  rather  than  asking  advice.  I  have  interpreted  it 
as  seems  more  probable  to  me.  Winslow's  letter  to  Bradford  certainly  implies  that  the  advice  of  the 
Salem  people  was  sought,  and  given.  That  advice  seems  to  include  the  establishment  of  covenant 
church  relationships,  as  one  means  of  seeking  the  Lord  in  righteousness.  There  was  not  time 
between  Sunday  evening,  when  Winthrop's  letter  was  received,  and  Monday,  when  Winslow's  letter 
was  written,  for  any  action  embodying  the  Salem  advice  to  be  taken  at  Charlestown  and  reported 
back  to  Salem.  Hence  the  setting  apart  of  Friday  must  have  been  definitely  determined  upon  at 
Salem,  and  probably  that  Sabbath  evening.  As  representative  of  the  only  other  church  which  had 
had  experience  on  New  England  soil  (that  of  Dorchester  had  only  just  arrived)  it  was  natural  for 
Johnson  and  the  Salem  brethren  to  consult  the  men  from  Plymouth.  Probably  Winthrop  may  have 
suggested  such  a  course,  though  it  is  hard  to  assert  that  to  be  the  case  from  Winslow's  letter.  We 
may  assume  also,  though  it  does  not  appear  on  the  record,  that  Salem  observed  the  day  in  prayer 
for  Winthrop's  company  in  the  same  way  that  was  urged  upon  Plymouth. 

2  What  are  signified  by  the  "three  distinct  places"  and  "3.  distincte  bodys"  of  Winslow's 
letter  is  hard  to  say  with  certainty.  Prince,  Chron.  Hist.  X.  £.,  p.  243,  interprets  them  as  Salem, 
Dorchester,  and  Charlestown.  This  view  is,  however,  obviously  incorrect,  as  Winslow's  letter 
clearly  implies  that  the  three  places  were  inhabited  by  Winthrop's  immediate  company,  and  by  per- 
sons not  yet  gathered  in  church-estate  ;  while  Salem  and  Dorchester  already  had  well-established 
churches.  Of  course  one  of  the  places  is  Charlestown,  where  Winthrop  then  was.  Another  is 
clearly  Watertown,  where  a  church  was  to  be  formed  on  the  same  day  as  the  Charlestown-Boston 
church,  and  doubtless  as  a  result  of  the  same  Salem  advice.  The  third  place  is  more  obscure  ;  but 
it  can  hardly  have  been  Boston,  which  was  regarded  for  two  years  longer  as  ecclesiastically  one 
with  Charlestown.  Reasons  which  space  does  not  permit  me  to  elaborate  incline  me  to  think  that 
either  Roxbury  or  Medford  is  the  third.  The  question  is  of  little  importance,  for,  whatever  the 
third  place  may  have  been,  we  have  no  evidence  of  the  formation  of  a  church  at  this  time  else- 
where than  at  Charlestown  and  Watertown. 


128  THE    BOSTON    COVENANT,     1630 

tutions.  Thus,  though  the  Boston  church  was  to  remain  Non- 
conformist rather  than  Separate  in  its  attitude  toward  the  Church 
of  England,  it  from  the  very  first  held  out  the  hand  of  brother- 
hood, really  if  a  little  indirectly,  to  the  Separatist  body  at  Ply- 
mouth. In  accordance  with  this  advice,  and  upon  the  day  des- 
ignated, Congregational  churches  were  gathered  at  Charlestown 
and  at  Watertown,1  by  the  solemn  adoption  of  a  covenant.  Agree- 
ably also  to  the  counsel  that  there  should  be  no  rashness  or  haste 
in  the  admission  of  members,  the  church  at  Charlestown  was 
formed,  on  this  initial  day  of  its  history,2  by  four  men  only,  John 
Winthrop,  Isaac  Johnson,3  Thomas  Dudley/  and  Rev.  John  Wil- 
son5 —  the  four  most  considerable  personages  in  the  little  com- 

1  Mather,  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  I  :  377,  gives  the  text  of  the  Watertown  covenant,  and  its 
date  as  July  30,  1630.  Some  unsuccessful  attempts  have  been  made  to  dispute  the  correctness  of 
this  date,  but  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  as  to  its  accuracy.  See  Francis,  Hist.  Sketch  0/ 
Watertown,  Cambridge,  1830,  appendix,  pp.  132-135  ;  Note,  by  Savage,  to  Winthrop's  Hist.  .V.  E. 
(Journal),  ed.  1853,  I  :  112-114  ;  Bond,  Genealogies  .  .  Early  Settlers  of  Watertown,  Boston, 
1855,  pp.  979-982  ;  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  413. 

2  Our  knowledge  of  the  circumstances  under  which  the  formation  of  the  Charlestown-Boston 
church  was  effected  is  based  on  a  letter  of  Samuel  Fuller  to  Gov.  Bradford,  dated  Charlestown, 
Aug.  2,  1630.  Letter  Book,  I  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.,  Ill  :  76;  and  Bradford,  Hist.  Plym.  Plant., 
pp.  278,  279  ;  in  which  he  says  :  "  Some  are  here  entered  into  church  covenante  ;  the  first  were  4. 
namly,  ye  Gov1,  M*.  John  Winthrop,  Mr.  Johnson,  Mr.  Dudley,  and  M*.  Willson  ;  since  that  5. 
more  are  joyned  unto  them,  and  others,  it  is  like,  will  adde  them  selves  to  them  dayly." 

3  Isaac  Johnson,  the  largest  subscriber  to  the  stock  of  the  Mass.  Company,  and  a  man  of 
prominence  in  every  way,  was  from  Clipsham,  County  of  Rutland.  His  wife  was  the  daughter  of 
the  Earl  of  Lincoln.  Both  were  victims  of  the  sickness  which  swept  away  so  many  of  the  first  set- 
tlers of  Charlestown,  she  dying  in  Aug.  and  he  Sept.  30,  1630.  See  Dudley,  Letter  to  Countess  0/ 
Lincoln,  Young,  Chron.  .  .  Mass.,  pp.  317,318;  Hutchinson,  Hist.  .  .  Colony  0/ Mass. 
Bay,  I  :  16  ;  Eliot,  Biog.  Diet.,  pp.  281-283  ;  Savage's  Winthrop,  ed.  1853,  1:5;  Allen,  Am,  Biog. 
Diet.,  ed.  Boston,  1857,  p.  477,  etc. 

4  Thomas  Dudley,  born  at  Northampton,  Eng.,  1576,  gained  some  knowledge  of  law,  served 
as  the  captain  of  a  company  of  volunteers  under  Henry  IV.  of  France  in  1597.  Then  after  some 
time  became  steward  to  the  Earl  of  Lincoln,  and  embraced  Puritan  sentiments.  Lived  for  a  time 
at  Boston,  Eng.  He  united  with  Winthrop  in  the  Cambridge  Agreement,  Aug.  26,  1629.  On 
March  23,  1630,  he  was  chosen  deputy  governor  of  the  Company.  He  was  always  prominent 
in  the  colony,  being  elected  governor  four  times,  deputy  thirteen  times,  and  major-general.  He 
died  July,  1653.  See  Mather,  Mogilalia,  ed.  1853-5,  I  :  132-135  ;  Hutchinson,  I  :  14-15  ;  Young, 
Chron.     .     .     Mass.,  p.  304  ;  Savage's  Winthrop,  I  :  60-62  ;  /  Proc.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  XI  :  207-222. 

5  John  Wilson,  at  first  teacher,  then  pastor  of  the  Charleston-Boston  church,  was  born  at 
Windsor,  Eng.,  1588,  his  father  being  canon  of  the  castle  chapel.  His  mother  was  a  niece  of 
Archbishop  Grindall.  Wilson  was  educated  at  Eton,  and  then  at  Cambridge,  where  he  gradu- 
ated A.  B.,  1605.  and  A.  M.,  1609.  His  father  persuaded  him  to  study  law,  not  approving  of  his 
Puritan  tendencies,  but  Wilson's  bent  was  for  the  ministry.  After  serving  as  chaplain  in  Puritan 
families  and  preaching  in  various  places,  he  settled  at  Sudbury,  Suffolk,  where  Ik-  came  to  know 
Winthrop.  Here,  though  a  minister  of  the  Church  of  England,  his  Puritan  inclinations  wire  so 
marked  as  to  lead  the  bishop  of  Norwich  to  suspend  and  silence  him.  The  prohibition  was  re- 
moved, through  influence,  but  Wilson  preferred  to  go  to  Xew  England  and  therefore  joined  with 
Winthrop.  He  was  chosen  teacher  of  the  Boston  church  at  Charlestown,  Aug.  27,  1630;  and  pastor 
Nov.  22,  1632  (Winthrop,  Savage's  ed.  1853,  ':  36-39.  "4.  «S>-  He  remained  in  office  till  his 
death,  Aug.  7,  1667.  Though  inferior  in  ability  to  his  ministerial  associate,  John  Cotton,  he  was 
a  man  of  mark,  well  liked   for  his  sweet  temper,  and  popular  in  the  community.     He  wrote  little. 


CHOICE    OF   OFFICERS  1 29 

munity.1  Within  three  days  five  more  had  been  admitted  to  fel- 
lowship, and  other  members  joined  in  rapid  succession. 

The  church  so  begun  was  not  yet  equipped  with  officers ; 
though  all  men  knew  who  was  to  be  its  minister,  and  preaching 
was  doubtless  maintained.  The  next  step  was  taken  by  the  Gen- 
eral Court  of  the  Company,  on  August  23,  1630,  when  support,  to 
be  raised  by  taxation  from  those  places  under  the  Massachusetts 
jurisdiction  where  churches  had  not  been  formed  previous  to  July 
30,  was  voted  to  Mr.  Wilson  of  Charlestown-Boston  and  Mr.  Phillips 
of  Watertown.2  It  was  not  till  after  the  salary  of  its  minister  had 
thus  been  provided,  that  the  Charlestown-Boston  church  held 
another  fast,  and  solemnly  chose  and  installed  its  officers  August 
27,  1630.  At  that  time  John  Wilson  was  elected  teacher,  Increase 
Nowell  ruling-elder,  and  William  Gager  and  William  Aspinwall 
deacons.3  The  officers  thus  selected  were  then  installed  by  the 
laying  on  of  hands,  but  with  the  express  reservation,  in  the  case  of 
Mr.  Wilson,  that  the  act  was  not  to  be  construed  as  a  denial  of  the 
validity  of  his  English  and  Episcopal  ordination.4 

But  Charlestown  was  not  to  be  the  permanent  home  of  the 
majority  of  its  early  settlers;  by  the  time  that  the  officers  were 
chosen  the  exodus  to  Boston  was  well  begun,  by  November  the 
governor  himself  had  removed  thither,5 — soon  Boston  was  more 
populous  than  Charlestown.     Naturally  services  began  to  be  held 


See  Mather,  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  I  :  302-321;  Eliot,  pp.  496-499;  Emerson,  Hist.  Sketch  First  Ch. 
in  Boston,  Boston,  1812,  passim  ;  Young,  Ckron.  .  .  Mass.,  pp.  325,  326  :  Savage's  Winthrop, 
passim  ;  A.  W.  M'Clure,  Lives  0/  the  Chief  Fathers  of  X.  £.,  Boston,  (1846)  1870,  II  :  7-172  ; 
Sprague,  Annals  Am.  Pulpit,  I  :  12-15  ;  A-  B-  Ellis.  Hist.  First  Ch.  Boston,  Boston,  1881,  pp. 
4-6,  98-102;  Appleton's  Cyclop.  Am.   Biog.,  VI  :  553.  etc. 

1  Their  only  rivals  in  station,  Sir  Richard  Saltonstall  and  Rev.  George  Phillips,  were  the 
leaders  of  the  branch  of  the  settlement  at  Watertown. 

2  Mass.  Colonial  Records,  I:  73.  Both  were  to  have  houses  built  at  public  expense.  .Mr. 
Phillips  was  to  have  also  specified  provisions  and  ^20  per  annum,  or  ^40  without  provisions,  at  his 
option.  Mr.  Wilson  ^20  "  till  his  wife  come  ouer."  "  All  this  to  be  att  the  comon  charge,  those  of 
Mattapan  [Dorchester]  &  Salem  onely  exempted,"  i.  e.,  because  these  two  places  had  churches  of 
their  own. 

3  Winthrop,  Hist.  X.  E.  (Journal),  Savage's  ed.  1853,  1 :  36-39. 

4  Ibid.     See  ante,  p.  99. 

5  Winthrop's  letter  to  his  wife  is  dated   "  Boston     .     .     .     Nov.  29,  1630."     Ibid.,  1 :  456. 

The  Early  Records  of  Charlestown,  given  in  Young,  Ckron Mass.,  371-387,  contain  a 

picturesque  and  circumstantial  account  of  the  settlement  of  Charlestown  and  Boston.  Doubtless 
it  rests  upon  good  traditional  evidence,  and  is  accurate  in  general  impression  ;  but  it  was  compiled 
in  1664,  and  should  by  no  means  be  treated  as  a  contemporary  authority,  as  many  historians  have 
done. 


I30  THE    BOSTON    COVENANT,    1630 

on  the  Boston  side/  though  the  two  peoples  were  looked  upon  as 
one  congregation.  The  preponderance  of  Boston  so  increased 
that,  in  August,  1632,  a  meeting-house  was  begun  there  at  the 
joint  expense  of  the  people  of  both  places.2  But  the  river  was  a 
barrier  difficult  to  cross  in  bad  weather,  and  it  is  no  wonder  that 
the  people  of  Charlestown  amicably  withdrew  from  their  brethren 
at  Boston  in  October,  1632,  and  were  formed  into  a  church  of  their 
own  on  November  2  of  that  year.3  Thenceforward  the  Boston  and 
Charlestown  congregations  pursued  independent  paths.  The  emi- 
nence already  attained  by  the  Boston  church  was  crowned  when 
its  ministerial  equipment  was  completed  according  to  the  ideas  of 
the  time,  by  the  ordination  of  John  Cotton,  certainly  the  ablest  of 
the  early  Massachusetts  ministry,  to  the  office  of  teacher,  October 
10.  1633-' 

The  Charlestown-Boston  covenant  is  a  plain,  sweet,  simple 
promise  of  obedience  to  God  and  of  aid  to  one  another.5  It  does 
not  touch  upon  doctrinal  questions  for  the  same  reason  that  the 
early  covenant  of  Salem  does  not  treat  of  them,  —  such  questions 
were  not  yet  mooted  in  Winthrop's  company.  But  it  was  of  the 
highest  importance  for  the  development  of  Congregationalism  on 
our  shores;  for  it  was  the  work  of  men  who  were  essentially  con- 
servative, who  had  no  desire  to  break  with  the  Church  of  England 
and  did  not  regard  themselves  as  separating  from  her.  And  it 
was  the  work,  too,  of  those  who  were,  and  were  to  be,  above  all 
others,  the  leaders  and  founders  of  civil  institutions  in  Massachu- 
setts.    In  thus  heartily  embracing  Congregationalism  at  the  outset 


1  Probably  the  services  were  thenceforth  held  chiefly  in  Boston,  as  the  pastor  and  governor 
moved  thither.  Hunnewell,  Commemoration  of  the  250th  Anniversary  First  Ch.,  Chartestown, 
p.  30,  records  a  tradition  that  preaching  was  had  at  first  alternately  in  Boston  and  Charlestown. 

-  Winthrop,  as  cited,  1 :  104.  While  at  Charlestown  the  services  were  held  in  part  in  the  open 
air  and  in  part  in  the  "great  house"  built  at  the  expense  of  the  Company  in  1629.  Hunnewell,  as 
cited,  p.  30. 

3  Winthrop,  as  cited,  I:  112.  Hunnewell,  as  cited,  p.  31.  For  the  covenant  then  adopted, 
see  ant,:  p.  116. 

4  Winthrop,  as  cited,  1 :  135-137.  The  church  had  advanced  in  its  opposition  to  Episcopal 
rites  and  ordinances  since  the  days  of  Wilson's  election,  for  though  Cotton  had  long  been  a  ministi  r 
of  the  Church  of  England,  he  was  now  explicitly  ordained  to  his  Boston  office,  by  the  imposition 
of  the  hands  of  the  pastor  and  elders  and  prayer. 

5  Dr.  McKenzie,  in  his  Discourse  printed  in  connection  with  the  address  of  Mr.  Hunnewell, 
just  cited.  it  the  covenant  is  propably  from  the  pen  of  Winthrop.  It  is  still  in  use 
by  the  First  Church  in  Boston  (now  Unitarian). 


TEXT   OF   THE    COVENANT  I  3  I 

the  Charlestown-Boston  Christian  community  made  it  certain  that 
Congregationalism  was  to  be  the  polity  of  Puritan  New  England. 

THE    CHARLESTOWN-BOSTON    COVENANT.1 

In  the  Name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  &  in  Obedience  to  His 
holy  will  &  Divine  Ordinaunce. 

Wee  whose  names  are  herevnder  written,  being  by  His  most 
wise,  &  good  Providence  brought  together  into  this  part  of  America 
in  the  Bay  of  Masachusetts,  &  desirous  to  vnite  our  selves  into  one 
Congregation,  or  Church,  vnder  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  our  Head, 
in  such  sort  as  becometh  all  those  whom  He  hath  Redeemed,  tt 
Sanctifyed  to  Himselfe,  do  hereby  solemnly,  and  religiously  (as  in 
His  most  holy  Proesence)  Promisse,  &  bind  orselves,  to  walke  in 
all  our  wayes  according  to  the  Rule  of  the  Gospell,  &  in  all  sincere 
Conformity  to  His  holy  Ordinaunces,  &  in  mutuall  love,  &  respect 
each  to  other,  so  neere  as  God  shall  give  vs  grace. 

1  Text  from  A.  B.  Ellis,  History  of  the  First  Church  in  Boston,  p.  3.  Mr.  Ellis,  now  clerk 
of  the  First  Church,  has  kindly  verified  the  text  in  his  History  by  a  fresh  comparison  with  the  copy 
of  the  Records  of  the  First  Church  made  by  David  Pulsifer  in  1847. 


VIII 

HOOKER'S   SUMMARY   OF   CONGREGATIONAL 
PRINCIPLES,  1645 

I.  These  articles  were  originally  published  in  Hooker's  preface  to  his  Survey 
of  the  Summe  of  Church-Discipline,  etc.,  London,  .  .  1648,  pp.  [xvii-xix.] 
Thence  they  were  reproduced  in 

II.  Hanbury,  Historical  Memorials,  etc.,  London,  1839-44,  III  :  266,  267;  and 

III.  Felt,  Ecclesiastical  History  of  New  England,  Boston,  1855,  I  :  566  ;  and 

IV.  G.  L.  Walker,  History  of  the  First  Church  in  Hartford,  Hartford,  1884, 
pp.  144,  145- 


THE  coming  of  Winthrop's  company  was  but  the  beginning  of 
a  great  outpouring'  from  Old  England  to  the  New,  —  an 
emigration  which  continued  in  full  force  till  the  changes  in  the 
English  political  horizon  at  the  opening  of  the  Long  Parliament 
gave  promise  to  the  Puritans  of  satisfactory  reforms  at  home,  and 
thus  removed  the  chief  impulse  toward  the  planting  of  Puritan 
colonies  beyond  the  Atlantic.  As  a  whole,  this  great  emigration 
was  remarkably  homogeneous  in  character  and  united  in  habits 
of  religious  thought.  But  it  was  impossible  that  in  so  large  a 
body  some  degree  of  diversity  should  not  be  found.  It  is  remark- 
able that,  freed  as  the  emigrants  were  from  the  restraints  of  the 
English  Establishment,  their  divisions  were  so  few  and  so  com- 
paratively unimportant. 

The  first  really  serious  question  to  disturb  the  peace  of  our 
rising  churches  was  that  occasioned  by  the  coming  of  Mrs.  Anne 


1  Johnson,  Wonder-Working  Providence,  London,  1654,  Poole's  reprint,  Andover,  1867,  p. 
31,  estimated  the  number  who  had  come  to  New  England  by  1643  as  21,200.  These  figures  were 
approved  by  Pres.  Stiles  in  a  glowing  sermon  preached  Apl.  23,  1760,  at  Bristol,  R.  I.,  before  the 
Congregational  Convention  of  that  province  —  a  sermon  in  which  the  preacher  indulged  in  pre- 
dictions as  to  the  growth  of  New  England's  population  during  the  next  100  years  which  far  exceed 
anything  which  has  been  realized  on  New  England  soil.  Pres.  Stiles  added  the  observation  that 
between  1643  and  '76°  morc  persons  probably  left  New  England  than  came  to  her  shores.  Palfrey, 
Hist.  X.  E.,  I :  vii  (Preface),  substantially  accepts  these  statements  ;  and  doubtless  they  are  approx- 
imately true,  though  Savage  in  a  note  to  Winthrop,  ed.  1853,  11:403,  404,  intimates  that  the  figures 
may  not  be  taken  as  final. 

(132) 


THE   ANTINOMIAN   DISPUTE  I33 

Hutchinson  to  Boston  in  1634,  Mr.  Henry  Vane  in  1635,  and  Mrs. 
Hutchinson's  husband's  brother-in-law,  Rev.  John  Wheelwright,  in 
1636.  The  views  of  Mrs.  Hutchinson,  embraced  as  they  were  in  large 
degree  not  only  by  the  two  whose  names  have  been  associated 
with  hers,  but  by  a  majority  of  the  Boston  church,  were  stigma- 
tized by  her  opponents  as  "Antinomian";  and  certainly  laid  far  too 
much  stress  on  the  believer's  confidence  in  his  good  estate,  rather 
than  visible  betterment  in  his  character,  as  evidence '  of  his  ac- 
ceptance with  God.  However  worthy  of  respect  Mrs.  Hutchinson 
herself  may  have  been,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  contro- 
versy raised  by  her  came  perilously  near  wrecking  the  infant  col- 
onies ;  and  the  greatness  of  the  danger  explains  in  part,  without 
justifying,  the  severe  measures  of  repression  employed  by  the 
churches  and  the  government.'  The  dispute  occasioned  the  call- 
ing by  the  Massachusetts  General  Court2  of  the  first  Synod  ever 
held  in  New  England,  an  assembly  which  met  on  Aug.  30,  1637, 3 
at  what  is  now  Cambridge,  and  continued  in  session,  with  Thomas 
Hooker4  and  Peter  Bulkeley,5  as  moderators,  for  twenty-four 
days.  By  this  Synod  some  eighty-two  opinions,  ascribed  to  or 
said  to  be  deducible  from  the  teachings  of  Mrs.  Hutchinson,  and 
other  disturbers  of  the   churches  at  the  time,  were  condemned.6 


1  The  sources  and  literature  of  this  controversy  are  presented  in  an  admirable  bibliographical 
note  by  Winsor  in  the  Memorial  History  of  Boston,  Boston,  1882,  1:176,  177.  To  the  summary 
there  given  the  writer  may  add  as  having  appeared  since  the  publication  of  the  History,  a  contem- 
porary document  of  the  first  importance,  communicated  by  Prof.  F.  B.  Dexter,  to  the  2 Proc.  Mass. 
Hist.  Soc,  IV  :  159-191,  from  the  MSS.  collected  by  Pres.  Stiles,  and  giving  a  report  of  the  trial  of 
Anne  Hutchinson.  The  controversy  has  been  discussed  from  various  points  of  view  by  G.  L. 
Walker,  Hist.  First  Ck.  in  Hartford,  Hartford,  1884,  pp.  97-103  ;  Brooks  Adams,  Emancipation 
of  Mass.,  Boston,  1S87,  pp.  44-78;  Doyle,  The  English  in  America,  Puritan  Colonics,  London, 
1887,  I  :  173-189  ;  G.  E.  Ellis,  Puritan  Age  .  .  in  .  .  Mass.,  Boston,  1888,  pp.  300-362. 
Dr.  Winsor  does  not  include  Punchard,  History  of  Congregationalism,  Boston,  1880,  IV  :  196-248. 
who  gives  a  good  sketch  of  the  controversy  and  its  results  ;  and  since  Winsor's  note  was  written 
Charles  Francis  Adams  has  published  a  picturesque  and  valuable  narrative  of  the  dispute  in  his 
Three  Episodes  of  Mass.  History,  Boston,  1892,  pp.  363-578. 

"  The  fact  of  this  call  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Colony  Records  or  Winthrop,  but  may  be  de- 
duced from  the  latter's  statement  that  the  diet  of  the  Synod  and  the  traveling  expenses  of  the 
delegates  from  Connecticut  were   paid  by  the  government.     Savage's  ed.  1853,  1 :  288. 

3  A  contemporary  account  of  its  proceedings  is  to  be  found  in  Winthrop,  Ibid.,  I  :  284-288. 
In  attendance  "  were  all  the  teaching  elders  through  the  country,  and  some  new  come  out  of 
England." 

4  Of  Hartford,  Conn. 

5  Of  Concord,  Mass. 

4  These  opinions  are  given  in  Winthrop  and  Welde's  Short  Story  of  the  Rise,  reign,  and 
ruine  of  the  Antinomians,  Familists  b>  Libertines,  that  infected  the  Churches  of  New  Eng- 
land, London,  1644  ;  but  are  more  accessible  in  Felt,  Ecclesiastical  History  of  N.  £.,  Boston, 
1855,  I  :  3I3-3I9- 


134  HOOKER'S   CONGREGATIONALISM,    1645 

But  the  most  effective,  if  least  creditable,  termination  to  the  dan- 
gerous dispute  was  given  not  by  the  Synod,  but  by  the  Court,  in 
banishing  Wheelwright  and  Mrs.  Hutchinson  and  some  of  their 
prominent  supporters  from  the  Massachusetts  jurisdiction,  by  its 
sentence  on  November  2,  1637.' 

These  internal  conflicts  were,  however,  only  a  portion  of  the 
difficulties  in  which  the  early  New  England  churches  found  them- 
selves involved.  As  has  already  been  pointed  out,  though  the 
churches  of  Massachusetts  Bay  and  of  Connecticut  had  left  Eng- 
land as  Non-Conformists  rather  than  Separatists,  and  though  in- 
fluential churches,  like  that  of  Boston,  still  refused  to  reject  the' 
Church  of  England  as  anti-Christian,  they  had  all  of  them  never- 
theless organized  on  the  model  set  by  Separatist  Plymouth.  It 
was  natural  that  such  action  should  excite  a  degree  of  alarm  in 
the  minds  of  those  Puritans  in  England  who  still  hoped  for  the 
reformation  of  the  Establishment,  and  especially  that  dominant 
wing  of  English  Puritanism  whose  non-conformity  looked  rather  in 
the  direction  of  Presbyterianism  than  Congregationalism.  Such 
alarm  found  expression  in  1636  or  1637  in  A  Letter  of  Manx  Minis- 
ters in  Old  England,  requesting  Tlie  judgement  of  their  Reverend 
Brethren  in  New  England  concerning  Nine  Positions,  written  Anno 
Dom.  1637.2  These  questions  have  to  do  with  the  use  of  a  liturgy, 
admission  to  the  sacraments,  church-membership,  excommunication, 
and  ministerial  standing.  To  this  letter  of  inquiry  the  ministers 
of  New  England  responded  at  some  length  in  163S  and  1639,  by 
the  pen  of  John  Davenport,3  pastor  of  the  church  at  New  Haven. 


1  Records,     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  I  :  207. 

2  So  the  title  page  of  the  first  edition  of  this  document,  1643  ;  but  Shepard  and  Allin  credit 
its  sending  to  1636.  See  Felt,  Eccles.  Hist.  X.  £.,  1 :  277.  The  Letter  to  New  England,  the  Reply, 
and  Rail's  Rejoinder  were  printed  in  one  small  volume  in  London  in  1643.  The  same  year,  also, 
the  New  England  answers  were  printed  at  London,  together  with  Richard  Mather's  Answer  to  the 
XXXII  Questions,  about  to  be  noted,  and  his  reply  to  Bernard  regarding  Church-Covenant  —  the 
whole  under  the  title  of  Church-Government  and  Church-Covenant  Discvssed,  etc.,  and  fur- 
nished with  a  preface  by  Hugh  Peter.  The  Letter,  Replies,  and  Rejoinder  are  given  in  copious 
extract  by  Hanbury.  Historical  Memorials,  II:  18-39;  an^  tne  Positions  may  be  found  also  in 
Felt,  Eccles.  Hist.  X.  E.,  I  :  277  ;  and  a  summary  of  the  Answers,  Ibid.,  366-368. 

3  On  its  authorship  see  I.   Mather,  Discourse  Concerning  the  Unlawfulness  0/  Common 
Prayer,  [1689]  p.  14.     The  first  copy  miscarried,  1638,  and  the  reply  was  sent  anew  in  1 
Church-Government,  as  cited,  pp.  24,  28  ;  and  Shepard  and  Allin's  Defence  (Hanbury,  Memorials, 
III:  36)- 


TRACTS   BY   DAVENPORT   AND   MATHER  1 35 

A  rejoinder,  by  Rev.  John  Ball  on  the  part  of  the  English  critics, 
followed  in  1640;  and  a  defense  of  the  New  England  answers  by 
Rev.  Thomas  Shepard  of  Cambridge,  Mass.,  and  Rev.  Thomas 
Allin  of  Charlestown,  in  1645.' 

About  the  time2  that  the  Nine  Positions  were  sent  over  to  New 
England  the  English  Puritans  also  forwarded  to  their  brethren 
across  the  sea  a  list  of  Thirty-two  Questions  for  answer.3  These 
inquiries  covered  the  whole  field  of  church  polity  and  procedure, 
treating  of  such  matters  as  the  constitution  of  a  church,  the  con- 
ditions of  membership  therein,  the  churchly  character  of  English 
parishes,  the  ministry,  the  brethren  and  their  methods  of  proce- 
dure, ministerial  settlement  and  standing,  and  lay-preaching;  as 
well  as  of  doctrinal  symbols  and  the  legislative  powers  of  synods 
and  councils.  And  to  these  questions  also  the  churches  of  New 
England  sent  a  full  and  candid  reply  by  the  pen  of  Rev.  Richard 
Mather,  of  Dorchester,  in  1639. * 

The  Congregationalism  of  both  these  replies  is  of  the  type  of 
Barrowe  rather  than  that  of  Browne.  It  gives  practically  all  power 
into  the  hands  of  the  officers  of  the  church,  and  leaves  to  the 
brethren   little  more  than  a  bare  right  to  consent.5     But  if  this 


l  A  Defence  of the  Answer  made  unto  the  g  questions  .  .  .  against  the  Reply  thereto 
of  John  Bali,  etc.,  London,  1645.  The  more  essential  portions  are  reprinted  in  Hanbury,  Memo- 
rials, III:  33-43. 

"  Felt,  Secies.  Hist.  N.  £.,  1 :  278. 

3  These  Questions  were  published,  with  Mather's  Answers,  at  London  in  1643,  in  the  book 
entitled  Church-Government  and  Church-Covenant  Discvssed,  etc.,  cited  in  note,  p.  134.  The 
Questions  are  also  given  in  Felt,  Ibid.,  1 :  278-282  ;  and  the  Answers  are  epitomized,  Ibid.,  pp.  380-386. 

*  Mather  speaks  in  the  name  of  the  New  England  ministers  throughout  his  tract,  and  his  son, 
Increase  Mather,  expressly  affirmed  that  "what  he  wrote  was  approved  of  by  other  Elders,  espe- 
cially by  Mr.  Cotton,  unto  whom  he  Communicated  it."  Order  of  the  Gospel,  Boston,  1700,  p.  73. 
See  also  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  426.  But  a  passage  in  Cotton's  Reply  to  Mr.  Williams  his  ex- 
amination (printed  in  1647,  reprinted  in  Pub.  Xarraga nsett  Club,  Providence,  1867,  II:  ro3), 
which  Dr.  Dexter  seems  to  have  overlooked,  makes  it  evident  that  though  Mather's  sentiments  had 
the  approval  of  the  Xew  England  ministry,  the  Answers  were  not  submitted  to  them.  "  Though 
he  [R.Williams]  say,  that  M».  Cotton,  and  the  New-English  Elders  returned  that  Answer  [the  31"]: 
yet  the  answer  to  that  Question,  and  to  all  the  other  thirty-two  Questions,  were  drawne  up  by  Mr. 
Mader,  and  neither  drawne  up  nor  sent  by  me,  nor  (for  ought  I  know)  by  the  other  Elders  here, 
though  published  by  one  of  our  Elders  [Hugh  Peter]  there."  But  though  Cotton  had  no  share  in 
the  composition  of  the  Answers,  he  approved  them,  for  he  goes  on,  in  the  next  paragraph,  to  say: 
"  I  have  read  it,  and  did  readily  approve  it  (as  I  doe  the  substance  of  all  his  Answers)  to  be  judi- 
cious, and  solide."  The  same  fact  is  attested  by  the  Preface  to  the  Disputation  concerning 
Church  Members,  London,  1659  (/.  e.,  result  of  Half- Way  Covenant  Convention  of  1657):  "The 
32  Questions,  the  Answerer  whereof  was  Mr.  Richard  Mather,  and  not  any  other  Elder  or  Elders  in 
New  England." 

6  See  Davenport's  answer  to  the  5th  Position,  Church-Government  and  Church-Covenant 
Discvssed,  p.  72  ;  and  Richard  Mather's  reply  to  the  15th  Question,  Ibid.,  pp.  47-60.  Compare  also 
Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  425-430. 


136  HOOKER'S  CONGREGATIONALISM,    1645 

type  of  Congregationalism  was  not  far  removed  from  Presbyteri- 
anism  in  the  administration  of  the  internal  affairs  of  the  individual 
church  by  its  officers,  it  was  widely  at  variance  with  the  Presby- 
terian model  in  regard  to  the  power  of  synods  over  the  churches 
and  the  right  of  each  church  to  set  apart  its  ministry.'  In  these 
matters  the  New  England  apologists  asserted  a  much  larger  liberty 
than  Presbyterianism  would  countenance. 

But  Presbyterianism  had  always  been  popular  among  the  Puri- 
tans of  England,  and  as  the  struggle  with  Charles  wore  on,  and 
Scotch  influence  grew  in  English  counsels,  Presbyterian  predomi- 
nance in  the  mother-land  became  more  marked.  The  first  of  July, 
1643,  saw  the  meeting  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  the  great 
ecclesiastical  council  which  Parliament  had  summoned  by  an  ordi- 
nance of  June  12,  of  that  year,  to  give  advice  as  to  the  reformation 
of  the  Church  of  England.2  This  body,  as  is  well  known,  was  over- 
whelmingly Presbyterian  in  sentiment,  the  Congregationalists  be- 
ing represented  by  only  five  men  of  prominence  and  a  few  of  com- 
parative insignificance  in  the  Assembly ;  though  this  proportion, 
fair  enough  perhaps  at  the  time  when  the  Assembly  was  called, 
was  far  from  representing  the  strength  of  Congregationalism  in 


'  Sec  answers  to  the  7th  and  8th  Positions,  /did.,  pp.  76-78  ;  and  to  the  18th  Question,  Ibid., 
pp.  62-66. 

2  The  Westminster  Assembly  was  in  regular  session  from  July  1,  1643,  to  Feb.  22,  1649.  It 
never  formally  adjourned,  and  continued  to  meet,  in  some  sort,  till  March  25,  1652.  Its  work  em- 
braced (a)  Directory  for  the  Publique  Worship  of  God,  etc.,  prepared  in  1644,  and  approved  by 
Parliament  Jan.  3,  1645.  (b)  Advice  for  Ordination  of  Ministers  and  the  Settling  >>f  Presbyterian 
Government ;  modified  and  approved  by  Parliament  in  November,  1645,  June,  1646,  and  June,  1647 
(see  also  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen.  Bibliog.  Xos.  1233,  4,  96).  By  the  approval  of  these  recommenda- 
tions, and  by  express  ordinances  in  August,  1645,  Presbyterianism  became  the  legal  form  of  church- 
government  in  England,  though  actually  put  into  complete  practice  only  in  London  and  Lancashire. 
(c)  Humble  Advice  .  .  .  concerning  a  Confession  of  Faith  (the  Westminster  Confession), 
presented  to  Parliament  Dec.  4,  1646;  adopted  by  the  Scotch  General  Assembly,  Aug.  27,  1647; 
somewhat  amended  by  Parliament  in  the  governmental  articles,  and  issued  for  England  June  20, 
1648.  (</)  A  Larger  Catechism,  and  A  Shorter  Catechism,  presented  to  Parliament  in  October 
and  November,  1647,  and  bv  !t  approved  Sept.  15,  1648.  The  Scotch  General  Assembly  approved 
July  20  and  28,  1648,  respectively. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  observe  that  this  great  council,  which  formulated  the  beliefs  of  Scot- 
land and  Presbyterian  America,  was  essentially  Puritan  in  composition.  One  hundred  and  fifty 
persons  were  called  to  it  by  Parliament  (149  only  appear  in  the  Lord's  Journal,  but  Prof.  Masson 
has  shown  this  to  be  a  probable  error.  See  his  Life  of  John  Milton,  II :  515-525,  where  the  full 
list  of  members  is  given,  with  biographical  notes).  Of  this  150,  30  were  laymen,  the  remaining  120 
being  almost  to  a  man  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England.  A  considerable  proportion  absented 
themselves.  To  this  body,  eight  Scotch  commissioners,  five  clerical  and  three  lay,  had  the  right  to 
add  their  presence  and  their  voices  in  debate.  They  were  chosen  by  the  Scotch  General  Assembly, 
,  1643.  The  composition  and  work  of  the  Assembly  is  well  described,  and  its  literature 
pointed  out,  by  Schaff,  Creeds  of  Christendom.  1 :  727-820  ;  see  also  Masson,  Life  of  John  Milton* 
II:  609  — IV:  63,  passim. 


PRESBYTERIANISM    IN   NEW   ENGLAND  1 37 

the  nation  after  the  acceptance  of  its  main  principles  by  Cromwell 
and  the  army.1 

It  was  natural  that,  though  New  England  had  embraced  Con- 
gregationalism of  the  Barrowist  type,  this  growth  of  Presbyterian- 
ism  in  England  should  not  be  without  its  influence  on  this  side  of 
the  water.  Particularly  was  this  the  case  at  Newbury,  where 
Thomas  Parker  and  James  Noyes  were  pastor  and  teacher.  These 
honored  ministers  wished  to  do  away  with  the  right  of  consultation 
and  assent  which  the  Barrowist  Congregationalism  of  New  England 
left  to  the  brethren  in  matters  of  church  discipline.  They  would 
gladly  see  partial  Presbyterianism  introduced,  and  looked  to  the 
Westminster  Assembly  as  a  hopeful  means  for  the  accomplishment 
of  this  result.  These  views  brought  trouble  into  the  church  at  New- 
bury, and  the  result  was  the  assembly  of  a  general  meeting  of  the 
ministers  of  the  colonies,  a  body  which  has  sometimes,  though 
erroneously,  been  styled  a  Synod,2  and  ranked  the  second  in  date 
among  the  Synods  of  New  England.  But  the  testimony  of  Richard 
Mather,  himself  a  member,  to  its  non-synodical  character  is  too 
strong  to  be  set  aside,3  and  is  supported  by  Winthrop's  statement 


1  The  Congregationalists  or  Independents  in  the  Westminster  Assembly,  though  few,  vigor- 
ously sustained  their  views  and  were,  on  the  whole,  treated  with  much  respect,  though  outvoted  at 
all  points.  As  early  as  Dec.  30,  1643  (on  date  see  Masson's  Milton,  III:  23,  24),  Rev.  Messrs. 
Thomas  Goodwin,  Philip  Nye,  Sidrach  Simpson,  Jeremiah  Burroughes,  and  William  Bridge,  joined 
in  a  sweet-tempered  and  modest  publication,  under  the  title  of  A  n  Apologeticall  Narration  hvmbly 
submitted  to  the  Honourable  Houses  of  Parliament,  London,  1643.  In  this  tract  they  declare 
their  entire  agreement  in  points  of  doctrine  with  the  Presbyterian  wing  of  the  Assembly,  but  desire 
permission  to  exercise  a  degree  of  liberty  in  matters  of  church-government.  In  1645  we  find  these 
men,  with  William  Greenhill  and  William  Carter,  uniting  in  .-1  Remonstrance  Lately  Delivered  in 
to  the  Assembly,  London,  1645,  in  which  they  excuse  themselves  for  not  presenting  a  full  model  of 
Congregational  church-government,  on  the  ground  that  in  view  of  recent  votes  of  Parliament  and 
the  tone  of  the  Assembly  it  would  be  useless.  A  few  other  names  of  Congregationalists  in  the 
Assembly,  making  perhaps  a  dozen  in  all,  may  be  found  in  Schaff,  Creeds,  1 :  737.  See  also  Dexter, 
Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  647-659.  Of  the  New  England  ministers,  Cotton,  Davenport,  and  Hooker  were 
offered  elections  to  the  Assembly,  but  declined  to  go. 

2  So  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  432. 

3  Samuel  Rutherford,  in  his  Due  right  of  Presbyteries,  London,  1644,  pp.  476-481,  gives  some 
"Synodicall  propositions"  which  he  had  received  by  letter  from  New  England.  Richard  Mather, 
in  his  Reply  to  Mr.  Ruther/urd,  London,  1647,  pp.  77,  78  (the  pages  should  have  been  numbered 
87,  88,  the  figures  71-80  being  repeated),  thus  comments  upon  them  :  "  There  was  indeed  at  Cam- 
bridge in  the  year  1643,  a  printed  [private?]  conference  of  some  of  the  Elders  of  that  Country; 
where  sundry  points  of  Church  judgement  were  privatly  discoursed  of,  and  this  was  all.  But  as  the 
meeting  was  not  any  Synod,  as  Synods  are  usually  understood,  so  neither  were  there  any  Synodicall 
propositions  there  agreed  upon.  .  .  .  This  I  am  able  to  testifie,  having  been  present  at  that 
meeting  from  the  beginning  thereof  unto  the  end  :  .  .  .  What  information  he  goeth  upon,  I 
know  not :  peradventure  some  notes  may  have  come  to  his  view,  which  one  or  other  might  gather 
at  that  conference  for  his  own  private  use:  Peradventure  some  in  their  simplicity  meaning  no  hurt, 

10 


138  HOOKER'S   CONGREGATIONALISM,    1 645 

that  it  "  was  an  assembly  ...  of  all  the  elders  in  the  country, 
(about  50  in  all,)  such  of  the  ruling  elders  as  would  were  present 
also,  but  none  else."1  It  lacked  the  presence  of  representatives  of 
the  brethren  of  the  churches  which  distinguishes  a  Synod  from  a 
ministerial  Convention. 

The  sessions  of  the  meeting  were  held  at  Cambridge,  and  the 
participants  were  entertained  in  the  recently  erected  college  build- 
ing much  after  the  manner  of  students.2  The  Convention  opened 
on  September  4,  1643,  and  had  for  its  moderators  Cotton  and 
Hooker.3  How  long  its  sessions  lasted  we  do  not  know,  but  it 
ended  in  a  presentation  of  arguments  on  both  sides  and  a  disap- 
proval of  some  features  of  Presbyterianism.  The  positive  action 
of  the  meeting  was  summed  up  by  a  contemporary  observer,  doubt- 
less a  member  of  the  assembly,  as  follows: — 4 

"We  have  had  a  Synod  lately,  in  our  College,  wherein  sundry  things  were 
agreed  on  gravely;  as,  1.  That  the  votes  of  the  People  are  needful  in  all  admissions 
and  excommunications,  at  least  in  way  of  consent ;  all  yielding  to  act  with  their  con- 
sent.—  2.  That  those  that  are  fit  matter  for  a  church,  though  they  are  not  always 
able  to  make  large  and  particular  relations  of  the  work  and  doctrine  of  Faith,  yet 
must  not  live  in  the  commission  of  any  known  sin,  or  the  neglect  of  any  known  duty. 
—  3.  That  Consociation5  of  churches,  in  way  of  more  general  meetings,  yearly  ;  and 
more  privately,  monthly,  or  quarterly  ;  as  Consultative  Synods  ;  are  very  comfortable, 
and  necessary  for  the  peace  and  good  of  the  churches. —  4.  It  was  generally  desired 
That  the  exercitium  of  the  churches'  power  might  only  be  in  the  Eldership  in  each 
Particular  Church;6  unless  their  sins  be  apparent  in  their  work.  —  5.  That  Parish 
Churches  in  Old  England  could  not  be  right  without  a  renewed  Covenant  at  least, 
and  the  refusers  excluded." 

The  grounds  of  these  decisions,  in  so  far  as  they  were  anti- 
Presbyterian,  were  referred  to  the  brethren  of  Newbury  for  their 
further  consideration;7  but,  unfortunately,  the  work  of  the  minis- 


may  have  called  that  private  conference  by  the  name  and  tearme  of  a  Synod  .  .  .  Hut  howevei 
they  [the]  mistake  a  Rose  [arose],  sure  I  am,  Synodicall  propositions  there  were  none ;  nor  any 
Synod  at  all." 

1  Winthrop,  ed.  1853,  II :  165.  2  Ibid.  3  Ibid. 

•'  This  statement  of  the  result  of  the  meeting  was  contained  in  a  letter  from  an  unnamed 
writer  in  New  England  to  a  minister  in  England,  quoted  in  A  Reply  0/  two  0/  the  Brethren  to 
A.  S.  .  .  ,  and  some  modest  and  innocent  touches  on  the  Letter  from  Zeland.  and  Mr. 
Parkers  from  New  England,  etc.,  London,  1644,  p.  7.  The  passage  is  quoted  by  Hanbury,  Me- 
morials. II :  343. 

6  This  word  was  not  yet  used  in  the  technical  sense  in  which  it  was  afterward  employed  in 
Connecticut —  a  modern  "conference"  is  more  the  thought  here. 

•  This  is  pure  Barrowism. 

'Winthrop,  II:  165:  "The  assembly  concluded  against  some  parts  of  the  presbyterial  way, 
and  the  Newbury  ministers  took  time  to  consider  the  arguments,  etc."     We  are  fortunately  in  pos- 


THE    MINISTERIAL   CONVENTION,   1 643  1 39 

ters  neither  changed  the  opinions  of  Noyes  and  Parker  nor  healed 
the  trouble  in  the  Newbury  church.' 

But  Presbyterianism  was  rapidly  gaining  ground  in  England 
since  Scotch  military  support  seemed  indispensable  to  the  main- 
tenance of  the  Parliamentary  side  in  the  conflict  with  the  King. 
The  same  month  in  which  the  ministers'  Convention  of  1643  held 
its  sessions  at  Cambridge  saw  the  adoption  of  the  Scotch  Covenant 
by  Parliament  and  the  army,  and  the  completion  of  the  alliance 
between  Parliament  and  the  northern  kingdom.  The  political 
and  religious  activity  of  the  period  was  productive  of  a  flood  of 
pamphlets  and  books,  many  of  which  bore  upon  questions  of  deep 
interest  to  the  Congregationalists  of  New  England;  and  some 
directly  criticized  the  New  England  polity  from  a  Presbyterian 
standpoint.  Such  a  work  was  Prof.  Samuel  Rutherford's  Due  right 
of  Presbyteries,  etc.,2  a  treatise  in  favor  of  the  government  of  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  of  which  the  author  was  one  of  the  brightest 
ornaments.  Rutherford  here  opposed,  in  kindly  spirit  and  with 
much  learning,  the  New  England  view,  as  set  forth  in  Cotton's 
Way  of  the  Churches,''  then  being  circulated  in  England  in  manu- 


session  of  Mr.  Parker's  own  version  of  the  difficulty  and  the  result.  Under  date  of  Dec.  17,  1643, 
he  wrote  to  a  friend  in  the  Westminster  Assembly  as  follows:  "  I  assure  you  we  have  a  great  need 
of  help  in  the  way  of  Discipline,  and  we  hope  that  we  shall  receive  much  light  from  you  . 
although  we  [Parker  and  Noyes]  hold  a  fundamental  power  of  Government  in  the  People,  in  respect 
of  election  of  ministers,  and  of  some  acts  in  cases  extraordinary,  as  in  the  want  of  ministers  •  yet  we 
judge,  upon  mature  deliberation,  that  the  ordinary  exercise  of  Government  must  be  so  in  the  Pres- 
byters as  not  to  depend  upon  the  express  votes  and  suffrages  of  the  People.  There  hath  been  a 
convent,  or  meeting,  of  the  Ministers  of  these  parts,  about  this  question  at  Cambridge,  in  the  Bay  ; 
and  there  we  have  proposed  our  arguments,  and  answered  theirs  ;  and  they  proposed  theirs,  and 
answered  us:  and  so  the  point  is  left  to  consideration."  Trve  Copy  of  a  Lett,;-  written  by  Mr. 
T\Jiomas\  P[arker]  .  .  .  Declaring  his  Judgement  touching  the  Government  practised  in 
the  Chs.  of  X.  E.,  London,  1644. 

1  Xoyes  published  "what  are  the  points  he  holds,  and  wherein  he  can  or  cannot  concur  with 
them  [his  fellow-ministers  in  N.  E.],  and  the  Reasons  why,"  in  The  Temple  Measured,  etc.,  Lon- 
don, 1647.  In  this  work  he  takes  Presbyterian  ground,  save  on  the  matter  of  governing  elders, 
who  are  not  to  be  distinct  in  office  but  are  the  ministers.  For  the  later  troubles  in  Newbury 
church,  see  Coffin,  Sketch  of  the  Hist,  of  Newbury,  Boston,  1845,  pp.  44,  54,  72-115. 

2  Printed  at  London,  1644.  Rutherford  —  i6oo?-i66i  —  was  born  at  Nisbet,  Scotland,  and 
studied  at  Edinborough,  where  he  taught  after  graduation.  In  if'27  he  settled  at  Anworth,  but  was 
deprived  in  1636  for  opposition  to  the  attempts  to  introduce  Episcopacy  into  Scotland.  In  1639  the 
Presbyterian  reaction  made  him  professor  of  divinity  at  St.  Andrews.  He  sat  as  a  Scotch  commis- 
sioner in  the  Westminster  Assembly.  In  1661  he  died,  just  as  the  restored  monarchy  was  proceed- 
ing against  him  for  treason. 

3  Cotton's  Way  of  the  Churches  of  Christ  in  Xe:o- England.  Or  the  Way  of  Churches 
■walking  in  Brotherly  eoualitie,  or  co-ordination,  -.vithout  Subjection  of  one  Church  to  another, 
got  to  England  in  manuscript  and  was  published  in  1645,  the  year  after  Rutherford's  work  appeared, 
by  "a  Brownistical  Author,  without  Mr.  Cotton's  Consent  or  Knowledge"  ;  though  exactly  why 


I40  HOOKER'S    CONGREGATIONALISM,    1645 

script,  and  in  the  recent  works  of  Richard  Mather  in  reply  to  the 
XXXII  Questions,  on  Church-Covenant,1  and  in  answer  to  Herle.5 
He  also  controverted  the  positions  of  Robinson's  testification  of 
Separation  from  tlic  Church  of  England?  and  The  Peoples  Plea  for 
the  Exercise  of  Prophcsie*  both  of  which  had  recently  been  re. 
printed.  In  general,  Rutherford  proved  himself  familiar  with  a 
wide  range  of  Congregational  literature,  and  showed  himself  able 
to  put  his  own  case  clearly  and  effectively.  Such  a  critic  was  not 
to  be  despised,  nor  was  he  alone  in  attacking  the  New  England 
system.  In  spite  of  the  publication  of  Cotton's  great  exposition  of 
Congregational  principles,  The  Keyes  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,  in 
the  same  year  that  Rutherford's  work  appeared,  it  was  felt  that  a 
direct  rejoinder  must  be  made.  And  for  this  task  no  fitter  pen 
could  be  found  than  that  of  Thomas  Hooker5  of  Hartford,  the  peer 


Cotton  should  have  seriously  objected  is  not  very  evident  to  a  modern  reader.  See  Owen,  Defence 
of  Mr.  Joh  1:  Cotton,  etc.,  1658,  pp.  36-38  ;  Mather,  Ratio  Discipline,  p.  ii  ;  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen. 
434.  Rutherford  quotes  from  the  manuscript,  and  with  some  verbal  freedom,  as  tested  by  the 
printed  text. 

!e,  p.  134,  note  2. 

S.Mather  and  Tompson,  Modest   tr  Brotherly  Answer  to  Mr.   Charles  Herle  his  Book, 
against  the  Independency  of  Churches.     London,  1644. 

3  1610.  *  1618.     The  works  were  reprinted  in  1639  and  1641  respectively. 

5  Thomas  Hooker,  probably  the  ablest  of  the  early  New  England  ministers,  was  born  at  Mar- 
field,  Leicester  County,  England,  probably  July  7,  1586.  After  preparation,  probably  at  M. 
worth,  he  entered  Queen's  College  and  then  Emmanuel  at  Cambridge,  graduating  A.B.  in  1608  and 
A.M.  in  1611,  and  holding  a  fellowship  after  graduation.  About  1620  he  became  rector  of  Eshcr, 
Surrey,  a  "  donative  "  living,  or  one  which  could  be  given  without  the  necessity  of  an  order  from  a 
bishop  inducting  the  candidate.  He  then  became  "lecturer,"  or  supplementary  Puritan  preacher, 
at  St.  Mary's.  Chelmsford,  about  1625  or  1626;  preaching  there  with  great  popular  succ-  - 
of  course  attracted  the  unfavorable  notice  of  Laud,  who,  as  bishop  of  London,  compelled  him  to 
relinquish  his  place,  apparently  in  1629.  Hooker  then  opened  a  school,  in  connection  with  John 
:ater  Indian  missionary,  at  Little  Baddow,  near  Chelmsford  ;  but  he  was  not  long  allowed 
t<>  remain  in  peace.  In  1630  he  was  summoned  before  the  High  Commission,  and  fled  to  Holland  to 
avoid  appearance.  Here  he  lived  for  a  short  time  at  Amsterdam,  and  then  for  two  years  as  asso- 
ciate minister  of  the  English  (Non-conformist)  church  at  Delft.  He  went  thence  to  Rotterdam, 
where  he  was  associated  in  the  ministry,  over  the  Puritan  church  at  that  place,  with  Dr.  William 
Ames.  Meanwhile  his  English  friends  in  considerable  numbers  had  gone  to  New  England,  and 
settled  f\r-l  at  Mt.  Wollaston  and  then  at  Newtown  — soon  to  be  called  Cambridge  — and  there 
awaited  his  ministry.  He  therefore  came  to  New  England  in  1633,  with  Samuel  Stone  of  Hertford 
and  Towcester  who  was  to  be  teacher  of  Mr.  Hooker's  congregation.  On  Oct.  n,  1633,  Hooker 
and  Stone  were  chosen  pastor  and  teacher  by  the  waiting  congregation  at  Newtown,  In  1636  they, 
with  a  majority  of  their  church,  removed  to  what  was  to  be  known  as  Hartford.  Hooker  was  from 
his  first  coming  prominent  in  all  colonial  affairs.  He  was  a  moderator  at  the  Synod  of  1637  and 
the  Convention  of  1643.  He  was  instrumental  in  preparing  the  "Fundamental  Laws,"  the  first 
written  constitution  not  only  of  Connecticut,  but  of  English-speaking  peoples,  in  1639.  He  was  in- 
vited by  the  Independents  in  Parliament  to  be  one  of  three  (with  Davenport  and  Cotton)  to 
enter  the  Westminster  Assembly  from  New  England.  Hooker  died  at  Hartford,  July  7,  1647. 
His  preaching  was  effective  ;  his  power  in  argument  great.  His  theology  was  strongly  Calvinistic, 
of  the  type  later  known  as  Hopkinsian. 

Among  many  sources  of  information   respecting  Hooker,  the  following  may  be  mentioned: 


HOOKER'S   "  SURVEY  '  141 

of  Rutherford  in  learning  and  inferior  to  none  of  the  New  England 
ministry  in  ability.  His  answer,  A  Survey  of  the  Sum  me  of  Church- 
Discipline,  was  presented  for  the  approval  of  a  meeting  of  the  min- 
isters of  all  the  New  England  colonies  held  at  Cambridge,  July  1, 
1645,  expressly  to  consider  what  action  should  be  taken  in  view  of 
the  attacks  of  Presbyterians  and  Anabaptists.1  But  the  original 
draft  of  the  work  was  lost  on  its  way  to  England,  by  the  founder- 
ing of  the  ship  which  carried  it,2  and  it  was  only  after  Hooker's 
death  that  a  second,  and  somewhat  imperfect,  copy  was  put  into 
print  by  his  Hartford  friends.3 

Able  as  the  Survey  unquestionably  is,  it  may  well  be  regretted, 
on  the  score  of  readableness  and  permanent  influence,  that  the 
author  did  not  produce  a  direct  treatise  on  Congregationalism, 
cast  in  the  mold  of  his  own  systematized  thought,  rather  than  the 
repetitious  work  which  his  minute  method  of  answering  Ruther- 


Mather,  Magnalia,  ed.  1S53-5,  1 :  332-352  ;  Trumbull,  Hist.  of  Connecticut,  New  Haven,  1S18,  I : 
293,  294;  Edward  W.  Hooker,  Life  of  Thomas  Hooker,  Boston,  1849,  1870;  Sprague,  Annals  of 
the  Am.  Pulpit,  New  York,  1857,  I:  30-37;  Allen,  Am.  Biog.  Diet.,  3d  ed.,  Boston,  1857,  p.  442  ; 
Applcton's  Cyclopaedia  of  Am.  Biog.,  Ill :  251  ;  Goodwin,  in  Diet.  National  Biog.,  XXVII :  2g5. 
By  far  the  fullest  lives  of  Hooker  are  two  by  G.  L.  Walker,  one  in  his  Hist.  First  Church  in  Hart- 
ford, Hartford,  1884,  pp.  20-145;  and  the  other  in  the  "Makers  of  America"  Series,  X"e\v  York, 
1891.  Hooker's  will,  and  a  complete  bibliography  of  Hooker's  writings  by  Dr.  J.  H.  Trumbull,  are 
given  in  connection  with  both  of  these  biographies. 

1  Winthrop,  Savage's  ed.,  1853,  H  :  3°4.  3°5>  records:  "  Many  books  coming  out  of  England, 
some  in  defence  of  anabaptism  and  other  errors,  and  for  liberty  of  conscience  as  a  shelter  for  their 
toleration,  etc.,  others  in  maintenance  of  the  Presbyterial  government  (agreed  upon  by  the  assembly 
of  divines  in  England)  against  the  congregational  way,  which  was  practised  here,  the  elders  of  the 
churches  throughout  all  the  United  Colonies  agreed  upon  a  meeting  at  Cambridge  this  day  [July  1, 
1645],  where  they  conferred  their  councils  and  examined  the  writings  which  some  of  them  had  pre- 
pared in  answer  to  the  said  books,  which  being  agreed  and  perfected  were  sent  over  into  England  to 
be  printed.  The  several  answers  were  these:  Mr.  Hooker  in  answer  to  Mr.  Rutterford  the  Scotch 
minister  about  Presbyterial  government,  (which  being  sent  in  the  New  Haven  ship  was  lost)." 
What  some  of  these  "many  books"  may  have  been  the  reader  may  judge  by  consulting  the 
crowded  titles  under  1643  and  1644  in  the  bibliographical  portion  of  Dexter's  Cong,  as  seen.  So 
little  is  known  of  this  meeting  that  the  following  note  of  a  deacon  of  the  Dorchester  church  is  of 
value :  "  ia  July  1645  in  this  mo  :  the  elders  did  meet  at  Cambridge  in  mattachusets  baye  in  N  :  E 
to  Consider  of  the  motion  made  amonge  the  Comissioners  of  the  4  Confederate  Colloneyes:  when 
they  did  meet  at  Conecticute  viz  to  thinke  of  some  things  that  might  in  ffuture  give  some  testimony 
from  new  Engl  about  the  great  questio  now  in  debate  about  church-Goverment  [1.  e.,  in  the  West- 
minster Assembly,  then  in  session]  :  &  notice  hereof  was  given  publikely  in  the  Assembly  at  Dor- 
chester vicesimo  nono  Junii  anno  45  that  it  was  intended  nothinge  to  bind  the  churches  or  inovate 
the  practice  there  of  but  only  private  amonge  the  elders  &  was  no  Synod  but  in  such  case  the 
churches  ought  to  have  notice  &  to  send  their  comissioners:  &  so  might  express  at  any  tyme,  but 
the  prsent  notice  was  that  the  church  might  know  how  to  direct  their  prayer  written  ye  daye  above- 
said  by  me  Jo  Wiswall."     Records     .     .     .     First  Ch.  at  Dorchester,  Boston,  1891,  pp.  253-4. 

2  The  celebrated  "  phantom  ship,"  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  1 :  84. 

3  Printed  at  London  1648.  The  circumstances  are  narrated  by  Edward  Hopkins  and  William 
Goodwin  of  Hartford,  in  an  epistle  prefixed  to  the  Survey. 


[42  HOOKER'S   CONGREGATIONALISM,    1645 

ford  seemed  to  him  to  require.1  But  in  the  preface,  which  he  pre- 
pared, it  would  appear  before  sending  the  first  draft  to  England  in 
January,  1646,2  Hooker  has  drawn  up  as  clear  a  presentation  of 
Congregational  principles  as  has  ever  been  given  in  the  brief  space 
of  little  more  than  a  page  of  print,  and  one  which  has  a  special 
value  as  having  been  approved  by  all  the  ministers  of  Connecticut 
and  a  large  portion  of  those  of  other  colonies. 

This  statement,  compact  as  it  is,  shows  a  decided  advance  in 
Congregational  development  beyond  anything  yet  reached  in  Eng- 
land or  Holland.  And  nowhere  is  this  more  manifest  than  in  its 
theory  of  the  relation  of  churches  one  to  another,  a  subject  on 
which  it  exhibits  a  definiteness  of  view  to  which  English  Congre- 
gationalists,  even  of  the  present  day,  have  not  yet  attained.  Coun- 
cils, or  "consociation  of  churches,"  are  the  proper  expedients  by 
which  the  advisory  and  admonitory  relations  of  church  to  church 
may  be  expressed.  Such  councils  may  advise  and  entreat  an 
erring  church;  if  the  church  persist  in  error,  the  churches  com- 
posing the  council  may  renounce  fellowship  with  the  offending 
congregation.  But  excommunication  of  the  erring,  or  the  publica- 
tion of  sentences  of  a  judicial  character,  are  beyond  the  proper 
powers  of  a  council.  Here,  then,  is  the  historic  New  England 
theory  of  the  authority  of  church  councils  clearly  expressed,  and 
as  fully  representative  of  present  American  usage  as  of  the  cus- 
toms of  1645.  It  need  scarcely  be  pointed  out  that  this  view  of 
Hooker  differs  widely  from  the  judicial  theory  of  consociations 
afterwards  adopted  in  Connecticut. 

In  regard  to  ministerial  standing,  Hooker  was  clear,  as  were 
the  New  England  Congregationalists  of  his  day,  that  a  man  was  a 
minister  only  in  connection  with  a  local  church.  On  this  point 
the  usage  of  the  church  universal,  which  regards  a  man  once  set 
apart  to  the  pastoral  calling  as  permanently  enrolled  in  ministerial 
ranks,  has  overcome  the  more  logical  theory  of  early  Congrega- 
tionalism.    In  spite  of  the  protests  of  some  of  the  most  earnest  of 


1  See  observations  by  G.  L.  Walker,  Hist.  First  Church  in  Hartford,  pp.  143,  144. 
>  There  is  nothing  in  the  preface  which  implies  that  a  copy  of  the  work  had  been  lost,  or  that 
new  draft.     The  conclusion  therefore  seems  plain  that  this  is  the  original  preface,  and  if 
so,  written  between  the  meeting  of  July  1,  1645,  and  January,  1646. 


TEXT   OF   THE   PRINCIPLES  I43 

our  modern  exponents  of  Congregational  polity,1  the  theory  of 
Hooker  on  this  matter  does  not  represent  present  usage,  and 
American  Congregationalists  view  one  who  has  been  ordained  to 
the  ministry,  whether  over  a  local  church  or  not,  as  possessed  of 
an  abiding  ministerial  character. 

THE    PRINCIPLES    OF    1 645 

"  If  the  Reader  shall  demand  how  far  this  way  of  Church-pro- 
ceeding receives  approbation  by  any  common  concurrence  amongst 
us:  I  shall  plainly  and  punctually  expresse  my  self  in  a  word  of  truth, 
in  these  following  points,  viz. 

Visible  Saints2  are  the  only  true  and  meet  matter,  whereof  a 
visible  Church  should  be  gathered,  and  confoederation  is  the  form.3 

The  Church  as  Totum  essentiale,  is,  and  may  be,  before  Officers.4 


1  See  a  forcible  defence  of  the  older  New  England  view  by  the  late  Dr.  Dexter,  Congrega- 
tionalism;   What  it  is :    Whence  it  is;  How  it  works.     Boston,  1865,  pp.  154-159. 

2  This  subject  is  treated  at  length  in  the  Survey,  Pt.  I:  pp.  13-34.  Hooker  understands  by 
Visible  Saints  persons  who  give  evidence  of  regeneration,  and  their  infant  offspring.  "  Saints  as 
they  are  taken  in  this  controversie  .  .  .  were  members  of  the  Churches,  comprehending  the 
Infants  of  confeederate  believers  under  their  Parents  Covenant,  according  to  1  Cor.  7.  14  .  .  . 
Saints  come  under  a  double  apprehension.  Some  are  such  according  to  Charity  :  Some  according 
to  truth.  Saints  according  to  charity  are  such,  who  in  their  practice  and  profession  (if  we  look  at 
them  in  their  course,  according  to  what  we  see  by  experience,  or  receive  by  report  and  testimony 
from  others,  or  lastly,  look  we  at  their  expressions)  they  savour  so  much,  as  though  they  had 
been  with  Jesus.  .  .  .  These  we  call  visible  Saints  (leaving  secret  things  to  God)."  Survey, 
Pt.  I:  pp.  14,  15. 

3  /.  e.,  union  in  a  church-covenant.  Hooker  defines  a  church  as  having  God  for  its  efficient 
cause,  "visible  saints"  as  its  "  materiall  cause,"  and  the  church-covenant  as  its  "  formall  cause." 
Survey,  Pt.  1 :  12,  45.  But  Hooker  is  far  from  declaring  that  this  covenant  must  be  formally  ex- 
pressed, though  "  Its  most  according  to  the  compleatnesse  0/  the  rule,  and  for  the  better  being  of 
the  Church,  that  there  be  an  explicite  covenant."  A  covenant  may  be  "  implicite"  "when  in 
their  practice  they  do  that,  whereby  they  make  themselves  ingaged  to  walk  in  such  a  society,  ac- 
cording to  such  rules  of  government,  which  are  exercised  amongst  them,  and  so  submit  themselves 
thereunto:  but  doe  not  make  any  verbal!  profession  thereof.  Thus  the  people  in  the  parishes  in 
England,  when  there  is  a  Minister  put  upon  them  by  the  Patrone  or  Bishop,  they  constantly  hold 
them  to  the  fcllo-.uship  of  the  people  in  such  a  place,  attend  all  the  ordinances  there  used,  and 
the  dispensations  of  the  .Minister  so  imposed  upon  them,  submit  thereunto,  perform  all  services 
that  may  give  countenance  or  incouragement  to  the  person  in  this  work  of  his  Ministery.  By  such 
actions,  and  a  fixed  attendance  upon  all  such  services  and  duties,  they  declare  that  by  their 
practices,  which  others  do  hold  forth  by  publike  profession.  This  ...  I  would  intreat  the 
Reader  to  observe  once  for  all :  that  if  he  meet  with  such  accusations,  that  we  nullifie  all  Churches 
beside  our  own  :  that  upon  our  grounds  received  there  must  be  no  Churches  in  the  world,  but  in  N. 
England,  or  some  few  set  up  lately  in  old  :  that  we  are  rigid  Separatists,  &c  .  .  .  a  wise  meek 
spirit  passeth  by  them,  as  an  unworthy  and  ungrounded  aspersion."     Survey,  Pt.  I :   pp.  47,  48. 

4  This  matter  is  discussed  in  the  Survey,  Pt.  I :  pp.  89-93.  The  position  taken  is  that  while 
the  church  as  an  organized  body  —  a  Totum  organicum  —  must  have  officers,  these  officers  exist  by 
virtue  of  the  choice  of  the  church,  which  must  therefore  precede  them  and  have  an  existence  inde- 
pendent of  them.  To  deny  this  is  "  As  if  one  should  say,  It  is  not  a  Corporation  of  Aldermen,  or 
freemen  before  the  Maior  be  chosen.  It  is  true,  it  is  not  a  compleat  corporation  of  Maior  and 
Freemen,  unlesse  there  be  both  :  but  that  hinders  not,  but  they  be  a  corporation  of  Free-men 
united  amongst  themselves,  though  there  be  no  Maior.  Nay,  they  must  be  a  corporation,  before 
they  can  chuse  a  Maior.  .  .  .  Doth  a  Corporation,  when  it  puts  out  a  wicked  Maior  out  of  his 
place     .     .     .     nullifie  their  Corporation  by  that  means     .     .     .  ?  "     Survey,  Pt.  I :  p.  92. 


144  hooker's  Congregationalism,  1645 

There  is  no  Presbyteriall  Church  (/.  e.  A  Church  made  up  of 

the  Elders  of  many  Congregations  appointed  Classickwise,  to  rule 

all  those  Congregations)  in  the  N.  T.1 

A  Church  Congregationall  is  the  first  subject  of  the  keys.2 
Each  Congregation  compleatly  constituted  of  all  Officers,  hath 

sufficient  power  in  her  self,  to  exercise  the  power  of  the  keyes,  and 

all  Church  discipline,  in  all  the  censures  thereof.8 


1  Discussed  in  Survey,  Pt.  I :  pp.  94-139.  The  argument  is  varied  and  minute,  but  Hooker 
affirms  that  all  offices  and  officers  are  the  gift  of  Christ ;  that  where  there  is  no  office  there  is  no 
right  to  rule,  that  a  church  officer  is  to  rule  only  over  his  particular  congregation,  and  that  no  com- 
bination with  other  church  officers  can  give  him  any  right  to  rule  over  a  congregation  not  his  own, 
for  he  has  no  office  over  that  congregation.  If  Presbyterianism  be  true  the  following  points  must 
be  proved  :  "  1.  That  a  person  may  be  a  Pastour  to  a  people,  by  whom  he  was  never  chosen.  2. 
And  that  he  may  be  a  Pastour  (as  the  Office  of  a  Pastour  is  appointed  by  Christ)  to  such,  to  whom 
he  neither  can  nor  should  preach  constantly.  3.  And  that  he  is  bound  to  exercise  Jurisdiction 
0/  censure,  and  decision  of  doubts  to  such,  to  whom  he  neither  needs,  nor  indeed  is  bound  to  feed 
by  the  word.  4.  or  Lastly,  that  the  Churches  may  give  power  to  a  man  or  men  that  Chri 
appointed."     Survey,  Pt.  I:  p.  124. 

2  This  technical  expression  of  XVII  century  theology  is  thus  defined  by  Hooker:  "  Ecclesi- 
astical power  made  known  unto  us  usually  in  Scripture  under  the  name  of  Keyes,  the  signe  or  ad- 
junct being  put  for  the  thing  signified,  the  ensigne  of  authority  for  the  authority  it  selfe. 

_,  .  .     ,     , ,      (  Supreme  and  Monarchicall, 

I  his  power  is  double,  i  _  ,  ,  ...   .       .  „ 

I  Delegate  and  Mimstenall. 

1.  The  Supreme  and  Monarchicall  power  resides  onely  in  our  Saviour.     .     .     . 

2.  There  is  also  a  subordinate  and  delegated  fower,  which  is  proper  to  our  present  disquisi- 
tion, and  is  nothing  else,  but  A  right  given  by  commission  from  Christ  to  fit  Persons,  to  act  in 
his  house,  according  to  his  order."  Survey,  Pt.  I  :  p.  185.  Cotton  thus  expresses  the  idea  :  "The 
keys  of  the  kingdom  are  the  Ordinances  which  Christ  hath  instituted,  to  be  administrcd  in  his 
Church;  as  the  preaching  of  the  Word,  (which  is  the  opening  and  applying  of  it)  also  the  adminis- 
tnng  of  the  Seals  [sacraments]  and  censures."  Keyes,  p.  2.  Hooker's  conclusion  is  that  "  The 
power  of  the  Keyes  is  committed  to  the  Church  of  confederate  Saints."  Survey,  Pt.  I  :  p.  192. 
"  In  the  Church,  and  by  vertue  of  the  Church,  they  are  communicated  to  any  that  in  any  measure 
or  manner  share  therein."  Ibid,  195.  "  The  power  of  the  Keyes  take  it  in  the  compleat  nature 
thereof,  its  in  the  Church  of  beleevers,  as  in  the  first  subject,  but  every  part  of  it  is  not  in  the 
same  manner  and  order  to  be  attended  for  its  ruling  in  the  Church:  but  in  the  order  and 
manner  which  Christ  hath  appointed."  Ibid.  "  It  is  not  beleevers,  as  beleevers,  that  have  this 
power,  but  as  beleevers  Covenanting  and  fitly  capable  according  to  Christs  appointment,  thai  are 
the  first  subject  of  this  power.  For  beleevers  that  are  as  scattered  stones,  and  are  not  seated  in  a 
visible  Church  or  Corporation,  as  setled  in  the  wall,  these  have  not  any  Ecclesiastical]  power." 
Ibid.,  203.  But  even  within  the  church  all  believers  do  not  share  in  the  power  of  the  Keys.  "  This 
power  is  given  to  such  beleevers,  who  are  counted  fit  by  Christ  and  capable,  which  women  and 
Children,  deafe,  and  dumbe,  and  distracted  are  not."     Ibid.,  204. 

»  "  These  keyes,  and  the  power  signified  by  them,  must  be  given  to  such,  who  have  some  of 
this  power  firstly,  and  formally,  and  originally,  and  virtually  can  give  the  rest  of  the  power, 
which  so  given,  may  be  fully  exercised  in  all  the  acts  of  binding  and  loosing,  according  to  all  the 
necessities  of  the  Church  and  intendment  of  our  Saviour  Christ.  And  this  may  readily  be  accom- 
plished and  easily  apprehended  to  be  done  by  a  Church  of  beleevers:  They  can  admit,  elect;  this 
formally  belongs  to  them:  and  officers  being  elected  by  them,  the  whole  government  of  the 
Church,  will  then  go  on  in  all  the  operations  thereof,  and  be  fit  to  attain  the  ends,  attended  by  our 
Saviour."     Ibid.,  216. 

The  Officers  appointed  by  the  Gospel  are  as  follows:  Survey,  Pt.  II  :  p.  4. 
\  Ruling  onely,  as  Elders. 
Idling    )  RuUng  Bnd  Teaching  both,  as  \  Pastors. 

I  Doctors  [Teachers]. 
if  the  body,  as  Deacons. 
I  Health,  as  Widowes. 
I  Election. 
"(  Ordination. 


"  Officers  of 

f 

the  Gospel 

Number  J 

may  be 

considered 

with  refe- 

1 

their 

Institution 

Supporting  the 


TEXT   OF   THE   PRINCIPLES  145 

Ordination  is  not  before  election.1 

There  ought  to  be  no  ordination  of  a  Minister  at  large, 
Namely,  such  as  should  make  him  Pastour  without  a  People.2 

The  election  of  the  people  hath  an  instrumentall  causall  ver- 
tue  under  Christ,  to  give  an  outward  call  unto  an  Officer.* 

Ordination  is  only  a  solemn  installing  of  an  Officer  into  the 
Office,  unto  which  he  was  formerly  called." 

Children  of  such,  who  are  members  of  Congregations,  ought 
only  to  be  baptized.5 

The  consent  of  the  people  gives  a  causall  vertue  to  the  com- 
pleating  of  the  sentence  of  excommunication.6 


1  Discussed  in  Survey,  Pt.  2,  pp.  39-41,  "  Ordination  doth  depend  upon  the  peoples  lawfull 
Election,  as  an  Effect  upon  the  Cause,  by  vertue  of  which  it  is  fully  Administred."     Ibid.,  41. 

2  See  Ibid.,  Pt.  2,  Ch.  2.  "I  shall  by  way  of  prevention,  desire  to  settle  that  which  is  our 
tenet  :  That  Doctors  [Teachers]  and  Pastors  may  preach,  to  all  sorts,  upon  all  occasions,  -alien 
opportunity  and  liberty  is  offered,  nay  they  ought  so  to  do.  But  this  they  do  not  as  Pastors, 
but  as  gifted  and  inabled  Christians.   Pt.  4,  pp.  31,  32. 

3  "  Election  of  the  People  rightly  ordered  by  the  rule  of  Christ,  gives  the  essentials  to  an 
Officer,  or  leaves  the  impression  of  a  true  outward  call,  and  so  an  Office-power  upon  a  Pas- 
tor."   Hid.,  Pt.  2,  p.  66.     See  Ibid.,  66-75. 

4  Ordination  is  an  approbation  of  the  Officer,  and  solemn  selling  and  confirmation  of 
him  in  his  Office,  by  Prayer  and  laying  on  of  ha  nds.' '  Ibid.,  p.  75.  "  The  maine  weight  of  the 
worke  [ordination]  lyes  in  the  solemnity  of  Prayer;  which  argues  no  act  of  jurisdiction  at  all." 
Ibid.,  74  [75].  "  1.  When  the  Churches  are  rightly  constituted,  and  compleated  with  all  the 
Orders  and  Officers  of  Christ,  the  Right  [perhaps  rite  or  right  use,  the  editors  were  undecided] 
of  Ordination  belongs  to  the  Teaching  Elders  ;  the  Act  appertaines  to  the  Presbyters  consti- 
tuted of  Ruling  and  Teaching.  ...  2.  Though  the  act  of  Ordination  belong  to  the  Pres- 
bytery, yet  the  jus  & potcstas  ordinandi,  is  conferred  firstly  upon  the  Church  by  Christ,  and 
resides  in  her.  .  .  .  Thirdly,  in  case  .  .  .  the  condition  of  the  Church  is  such,  that  she  is 
■wholly  destitute  if  Presbyters,  she  may  then  out  of  her  own  power,  given  her  by  Christ,  provide 
for  her  own  comfort,  by  ordaining  her  own  Ministers."   Ibid.,  pp.  76,  77. 

6  Discussed  in  Survey,  Pt.  3,  pp.  10-28.  Hooker  holds  that  all  children  of  church-members, 
i.  e.,  of  persons  in  covenant  church  relationship,  are  to  be  baptized  irrespective  of  the  moral  char- 
acter of  the  parents,  so  long  as  the  parents  are  not  excommunicate.  "  The  pinch  then  of  the 
Question  lyes  here,  Whether  persons  non  confederate,  and  so  (in  our  sense  not  Members  of  the 
Church)  do  entitle  their  children  to  the  seal  of  Baptisme,  being  one  of  the  Priviledges  of  the 
Church,  their  Parents  (though  godly)  being  yet  unwilling  to  come  into  Church-fellowship."  This 
he  answers  in  the  negative,  for  "  Children  as  children  have  not  right  unto  Baptisme";  and  "  It  be- 
longs not  to  any  Predecessors,  either  neerer  or  further  off  removed  from  the  next  Parents,  ko.9  clvt'o 
and  firstly,  to  give  right  of  this  priviledge  to  their  Children."  A  child  cannot  be  baptized  on  its 
grandparent's  church  membership.  Hooker  is  far  from  favoring  what  was  afterwards  to  be  known 
as  the  half-way  covenant  position. 

6  Survey,  Pt.  3,  pp.  33-46.  Hooker  holds  that  the  offence  must  first  be  laid  before  the  elders 
and  it  rests  with  them  to  decide  whether  it  is  of  sufficient  importance  to  lay  before  the  church.  If 
unimportant,  the  elders  may  dismiss  the  complaint,  though  the  complainant  may,  at  risk  of  personal 
censure  if  unsustained,  appeal  from  them  to  the  brethren.  But  if  weighty,  the  elders  are  to  exam- 
ine into  the  case,  recording  the  accusation  exactly  and  confining  the  disputants  to  the  points  at 
issue.  This  preliminary  sifting  of  evidence  is  to  be  made  by  the  elders  "because  the  body  of  the 
people,  if  numerous,  they  will  be  unable  with  any  comely  conveniency,  to  consider  and  weigh  all 
the  circumstances,  with  all  the  emerging  difficulties,"  p.  36,  37.  But  the  elders  are  not  to  pass 
sentence  without  the  consent  of  the  brethren.  "  Thus  the  preparation  is  done,  the  cause  rightly 
stated  and  cleered,  doubts  answered,  mistakes  removed,  and  by  proofs  fair  and  sufficient,  the  truth 
confirmed  [all  this  by  the  elders]  ;  now  the  cause  is  ready  and  ripe  for  judgement,  and  may  easily 


146  HOOKER'S  CONGREGATIONALISM,    1645 

Whilst  the  Church  remains  a  true  Church  of  Christ,  it  doth 
not  loose  this  power,  nor  can  it  lawfully  be  taken  away.' 

Consociation  of  Churches  should  be  used,  as  occasion  doth 
require.3 


be  determined  in  half  an  hour,  which  cost  many  weeks  [to  the  elders]  in  the  search  and  examina- 
tion thereof. 

The  Execution  of  the  sentence  issues  in  four  things. 

First,  the  cause  exactly  recorded,  is  as  fully  and  nakedly  to  be  presented  to  the  considera- 
tion of  the  Congregation. 

Secondly,  the  Elders  are  to  goe  before  the  Congregation  in  laying  open  the  rule,  so  far  as 
reacheth  any  particular  now  to  be  considered,  and  to  expresse  their  judgement  and  determina- 
tion thereof,  so  far  as  appertains  to  themselves. 

Thirdly,  unlesse  the  people  be  able  to  convince  them  of  errour  and  mistakes  in  their  sen- 
tence, they  are  ton  ud  to  joy  n  their  judgement  with  theirs,  to  the  compleating  of  the  sentence. 

Fourthly,  the  sentence,  thus  compleatly  issued,  is  to  be  solemnly  passed  and  pronounced 
upon  the  Delinquent  by  the  ruling  Elder,  whether  it  be  the  censure  of  admonition  or  excommu- 
nication" p.  3S.     It  will  be  seen  that  Hooker's  position  is  distinctly,  though  mildly,  Barrowist. 

1  Surrey,  Pt.  3,  pp.  40-46.  Some  of  his  considerations  are  the  following  :  "  The  fraternity 
hare  no  more  power  to  oppose  the  sentence  of  the  censure,  thus  prepared  and  propounded  ty 
the  Elders,  then  they  hare  to  oppose  their  doctrine  which  they  shall  publish.  But  they  have  as 
much  power  to  oppose  the  one  as  the  other.  .  .  .  Since  then  it  is  yeelded  on  all  hands,  that 
the  fraternity  may  renounce  and  condemn  the  false,  crronious  and  heretical!  Doctrines  of  an 
Elder  .  .  .  and  take  away  his  Office  from  him:  they  may  do  as  much  by  parity  of  reason 
against  his  false  and  unjust  censures  propounded  and  concluded,  and  so  interpose  and  oppose 
proceeding,  as  that  they  shall  never  take  place  and  be  established  in  the  Congregation  .  .  .  The 
conclusion  then  is,  'The  fraternity  put  for  th  a  [forth  a]causall  power  in  the  censure  of  excomu- 
nication,  whence  it  receives  its  compleat  being,  and  here  lyes  the  supream  Tribunal  in  poynt  of 
judgement."  pp.  41-43.  Hooker  holds  that  the  church  may  proceed  against  any  of  its  elders  as 
against  any  other  of  its  membership,  though  what  preliminary  steps  shall  be  taken  in  the  "prepara- 
tion "  of  the  case  he  does  not  explain.  "  In  case  the  Elders  offend,  and  are  complained  of,  to 
whom  must  the  complaint  be  carried  ?  the  text  saith,  To  the  Church  .  .  .  and  let  it  be  sup- 
posed that  where  there  be  three  Elders,  two  of  them  should  turn  Hereticks  and  continue  so  ;  how 
could  the  Church  proceed  against  them,  unlesse  there  was  a  causall power  in  the  fraternity to 
accomplish  this  censure  ?"  p.  44.  Perhaps  Hooker's  view  of  the  relation  of  the  church  to  its  offi- 
cers is  most  clearly  brought  out  in  a  comparison  which  he  draws  between  it  and  a  city  corporation  : 
"  The  power  of  judgement  and  power  of  office  are  apparently  distinct  and  different  one  from 
another:  The  Elders  in  poynt  of  rule  and  exercising  the  act  of  their  Office,  are  supream,  and 
atorc  the  Congregation  :  none  have  that  Office-authority,  nor  can  put  forth  the  acts  thereof  but 
themselves:  But  in  poynt  of power  of  judgement  or  censure,  the  fraternity  they  are  supream, 
and  above  any  member  or  Officer,  in  case  of  offence  or  delinquency  :  nor  need  any  man  strange  at 
this  distinction,  when  the  like  is  daily  obvious  in  paralel  examples  presented  before  our  eyes.  The 
Lord  Major  is  above  the  Court,  as  touching  the  wayes  and  works  of  his  Office,  none  hath  right, 
nor  can  put  forth  such  acts,  which  are  peculiar  to  his  place,  and  yet  the  Court  is  above  in  poynt  of 
censure,  and  can  answerably  proceed  to  punish  in  a  just  way,  according  to  the  just  desert  of  his 
sin.  Thus  the  Parliament  is  above  the  King,  the  Souldiers  and  Captains  above  their  General]." 
Pt.  3,  p.  45. 

'-'  The  whole  matter  of  Synods  and  Councils  is  discussed  in  part  4  of  the  Survey.  Unfortu- 
nately the  author  left  this  portion  of  his  work  in  a  fragmentary  condition,  but  his  meaning  is  clear. 
By  "consociation  of  churches,"  Hooker  did  not  signify  the  peculiar  institution  later  known  by  that 
name  in  Connecticut,  but  what  modern  Congregationalism  calls  advisory  councils.  His  views  are 
summed  up  in  the  following  statement :  "The  truth  is,  A  particular  Congregation  is  the  highest 
Trilunall,  unto  which  the  greived  party  may  appeal  in  the  third  place  :  [omit  ;]  if  private 
Councell,  or  the  witnesse  of  two  have  seemed  to  proceed  too  much  sharpely  and  with  too  much 
rigour  against  him  [J  before  the  Tribunal  of  the  Church,  the  cause  may  easily  be  scanned  and 
sentence  executed  according  to  Christ.  If  difficulties  arise  in  the  proceeding,  the  Counsell  of 
other  Churches  should  be  sought  to  clear  the  truth:  but  the  Power  of  Censure  rests  still  in  the 
Congregation  where  Christ  plcaed  [placed]  it."  Pt.  4,  p.  19. 


TEXT  OF   THE   PRINCIPLES  147 

Such  consociations  and  Synods1  have  allowance  to  counsell 
and  admonish  other  Churches,  as  the  case  may  require. 

And  if  they  grow  obstinate  in  errour  or  sinfull  miscarriages, 
they  should  renounce  the  right  hand  of  fellowship  with  them.2 

But  they  have  no  power  to  excommunicate.3 

Nor  do  their  constitutions  binde  formaliter  &  juridice.4 


1  In  a  paper  of  Hooker's  composition,  found  in  his  study,  and  printed  as  an  appendix  to  the 
Survey,  a  Synod  is  thus  defined  :  "A  Synod  is  an  Ecclesiasticall  meeting,  consisting  of  fit  persons, 
called  by  the  Churches,  and  sent  as  their  messengers,  to  discover  and  determine  of  doubtfull  cases, 
either  in  Doctrine  or  practise,  according  to  the  truth."  Pt.  4,  p.  45.  In  such  a  Synod  or  council, 
"all  have  equall  power,  because  equally  sent  and  chosen,  which  are  the  substantiall  ingredients  to 
make  up  Synodicall  members."    Ibid.,  46. 

2  "  The  renouncing  the  right  hand  of  fellowship,  which  other  Churches  may  do,  and 
should  do  as  occasion  requires,  is  another  thing  from  excommunication  .  .  .  any  Christian 
man  or  woman  may,  upon  just  grounds,  reject  the  right  hand  of  fellowship  wiih  [with'] 
others,  whom  they  cannot  excommunicate.  In  a  word,  there  may  be  a  total/  separation,  where 
there  is  no  excommunication,  Because  excommunication  is  a  sentence  judicially  presuppoung 
[presupposing")  ever  a  solemn  and  superior  power  over  the  party  sentenced  ;  but  no  such  thing  in 
separation,  or  rejection."   Pt.  4,  pp.  23,  24. 

3  That  there  should  be  Synods,  which  have  Potestatem  juridicam,  is  no  where  proved  in 
Scripture,  because  it  is  not  a  truth."     Appended  paper,  Survey,  Pt.  4,  pp.  48,  49. 

4  "  They  [Synods  and  Councils']  ha7rc  no  power  to  impose  their  Canons  or  Conclusions 
upon  them  [the  Churches].  1.  Because  the  Churches  power  is  above  them,  in  that  they  sent 
them.  2.  Because  the  Churches  have  power  to  call  another  Synod,  and  send  other  Messengers,  and 
passe  sentence  against  them  [i.  e.,  decide  against  the  members  of  the  first  council].  3.  Because  in 
many  cases  it  may  injoyne  a  man  to  beleeve  contradictions.  As  suppose  a  man  under  one  Prov- 
ince, which  hath  determined  a  case  one  way,  and  therefore  he  must  beleeve  that  [provided  Synods 
can  "binde  formaliter"]:  He  removes  himselfe  the  next  month  or  week  into  another  Province, 
and  they  have  determined  a  contrary  Conclusion,  and  he  must  beleeve  that."  Ibid.,  54.  "  But  if 
Synods  and  such  meetings  be  attended  onely  in  way  of  consultation,  as  having  no  other  power,  nor 
meeting  for  any  other  end  :  Then  as  they  are  lawfull,  so  the  root  of  them  lyes  in  a  common  prin- 
ciple which  God  in  providence  hath  appointed  for  humane  proceeding,  and  that  is,  He  that 
hearkens  to  counsell  shall  be  safe.  In  the  multitude  of  councellers  there  is  safety.  Hence  all  con- 
ditions and  callings,  as  they  need,  so  they  use  a  Combination  of  counsell,  for  the  carrying  on  of 
their  occasions  under  their  hand.  Hence  arise  the  Companies  of  Merchants,  and  all  men  of  all 
Crafts.  Hence  Common  Councels  in  all  Kingdomes  and  States.  And  therefore  in  the  Course  of 
Christianity  also  the  Churches  of  Christ  should  use  the  means,  which  God  hath  appointed  for 
their  more  confortable  and  succesfull  proceeding  in  a  Church-way.  And  hence  one  Church  may 
send  to  another,  or  to  many,  and  that  severally  or  joyntly  meeting."  Ibid.,  p.  61.  Hooker's  gen- 
eral theory  of  the  independence  and  communion  of  churches  is  perhaps  best  expressed  in  the  fol- 
lowing passage  :  "  When  this  Church  is  said  to  be  Independent,  we  must  know 

That  Indepen*-  "1    1.     Either  an  absolute  Supremacy,  and  then  it  is  opposed  to  subordination. 

dencv  implies   \  2.     Or  else  a  sufficiency  in  its  kind,  for  the  attainment  of  its  end,  and  so  its 

two  things ;        J  opposed  to  imperfection. 

Take  that  word  in  the  first  sence,  so  a  particular  Church  or  Congregation  is  not  abso- 
lutely supreame:  For  its  subject  unto,  and  under  the  supreme  power  politicke  in  the  place 
where  it  is;  so  that  the  Magistrate  hath  a  coactive  power  to  compel  the  Church  to  execute  the 
ordinances  of  Christ,  according  to  the  order  and  rules  of  Christ,  given  to  her  in  that  behalfe  in  his 
holy  Word  ;  and  in  case  she  swerves  from  her  rule,  by  a  strong  hand  to  constraine  her  to  keepe  it. 
Hee  is  a  nursing  Father  thus  to  the  Church,  to  make  her  attend  that  wholesome  dyet  which  is 
provided  and  set  out,  as  her  share  and  portion  in  the  Scripture.  Nay,  should  the  supream  Magis- 
trate unjustly  oppresse  or  persecute,  she  must  be  subject,  and  meekly  according  to  justice,  beare 
that  which  is  unjustly  inflicted.  Againe,  she  is  so  farre  subject  to  the  consociation  of  Churches, 
that  she  is  bound,  in  case  of  doubt  and  difficulty,  to  crave  their  counsell,  and  if  it  be  according  to 
God,  to  follow  it :  and  if  she  shall  erre  from  the  rule,  and  continue  obstinate  therein,  they  have 
authority  to  renounce  the  right  hand  of  fellowship  with  her.  In  the  second  sence,  the  Church 
may  be  said  to  be  Independent,  namely  sufficient  to  attaine   her  end ;  and  therefore   hath  com- 


148  HOOKER'S  CONGREGATIONALISM,    1645 

/;/  all  these  I  have  leave  to  prof  esse  the  Joint  judgement  of  all  the 
Elders  upon  the  river.-1  Of  New-haven,s  Guilford,3  Milford,4  Strat- 
ford,5 Fairfield6:  and  of  most  of  the  Elders  of  the  Churches  in  the 
Bay,7  to  whom  I  did  send  in  particular,  and  did  receive  approbation 
from  them,  under  their  hands  :  Of  the  rest  (to  whom  I  could  not  send) 
I  cannot  so  affirm  ;  but  this  I  can  say,  That  at  a  common  meeting,8  / 
was  desired  by  them  all,  to  publish  -what  now  I  do. 

pleat  power,  being  rightly  constituted,  to  exercise  all  the  ordinances  of  God.  As  all  A  rts  are  thus 
:ompleat  in  their  kinde,  and  have  a  compleat  sufficiency  in  themselves  to  attaine  their  owne  end  ; 
and  yet  are  truely  said  to  be  subordinate  each  to  the  other  in  their  workes.  TAeWord,  then,  in  its 
faire  and  inoffensive  sence,  imports  thus  much,  Every  particular  Congregation,  rightly  consti- 
tuted and  compleated,  hath  sufficiency  in  it  sel/e,  to  exercise  all  the  ordinances  of  Christ.'" 
Pt.  2,  pp.  79,  80. 

1  I.  e.,  on  the  Connecticut.  These  churches  were  Hartford,  under  Hooker  and  Samuel  Stone  ; 
Windsor,  under  John  Warham ;  W'ethersfield,  under  Henry  Smith ;  Springfield,  Mass.,  under 
George  Moxon  ;  and  Old  Saybrook,  under  James  Fitch. 

2  Under  John  Davenport  and  William  Hooke. 

3  Under  Henry  Whitfield  and  John  Higginson,  the  latter  later  of  Salem. 
*  Under  Peter  Prudden. 

5  Under  Adam  P.lakeman. 

6  Under  John  Jones. 

7  I.e.,  of  Massachusetts  Colony. 

8  At  Cambridge,  July  i,  1645  ;  see  ante,  p.  141. 


IX 

THE   WINDSOR   CREED-COVENANT,   1647 

The  extant  contemporary  record  of  this  document  is  contained  in  a  note-book 
of  Deacon  Matthew  Grant  of  Windsor,  now  in  the  possession  of  Dr.  J.  H.  Trum- 
bull of  Hartford.  It  has  been  printed  in  the  Congregational  Quarterly,  Vol.  IV, 
pp.  16S,  169  (April,  1S62). 

THE  members  of  the  church  which  ultimately  found  its  resting 
place  at  Windsor,  Connecticut,  were  originally  part  of  a 
company  organized  in  the  west-of-England  counties  of  Devon, 
Dorset,  and  Somerset,  in  1629  and  1630. '  This  was  a  region  where 
the  influence  of  Rev.  John  White,  the  distinguished  Puritan  of 
Dorchester,  had  long  been  felt;  and  he  was  doubtless  largely  in- 
strumental in  bringing  together  the  adventurers  in  the  enter- 
prise. The  personal  following  of  Rev.  John  Warham,  a  Puritan 
minister  of  the  Established  Church  at  Exeter,  formed  a  considera- 
ble portion  of  the  body.2  Their  church  organization  was  effected, 
unlike  that  of  any  other  of  the  Puritan  churches  of  New  England, 
before  leaving  English  shores,  at  Plymouth,  where  the  company 
had  gathered  preparatory  to  sailing;3   and  there   John  Warham 


1  Our  informant  regarding  the  early  history  of  this  company  is  Capt.  Roger  Clap,  one  of  its 
original  members,  whose  Memoirs,  written  after  1676,  in  his  old  age,  for  the  instruction  of  his 
children,  were  first  printed  at  Boston  in  1731.  They  have  since  been  a  number  of  times  repub- 
lished ;  in  1844  by  the  Dorchester,  Mass.,  Antiquarian  and  Historical  Society,  at  Boston.  The  more 
essential  portions  are  given  by  Young,  Chron.     .     .     .     Mass.,  pp.  344-367. 

The  general  history  of  the  company  and  the  church,  both  in  their  early  experiences  and  later 
story,  may  be  found  in  the  Dorchester  Ant.  and  Hist.  Society's  Hist.  of  the  Town  0/  Dorchester, 
Boston,  1859;  Stiles'  Hist.  0/  Ancient  Windsor,  New  York,  1859  (a  new  edition  is  just  out); 
and  Messrs.  Tuttle,  Wilson,  and  Hayden's  contributions  to  the  history  of  Windsor  in  Trumbull's 
Memorial  History  of  Hartford  County,  Boston,  1886,  II:  497-560.  The  250th  Anniversary  of 
the  church  in  1880  was  commemorated  by  a  sketch  of  the  church's  history  by  its  late  pastor,  Rev. 
G.  C.  Wilson,  Record  of  the  Services  held  at  the  Cong.  Ch.  of  Windsor,  Conn.,  in  celebration  of 
its  250th  Anniv.  Mch.  30,  1SS0,  [Hartford]  1880,  pp.  8-35. 

2  Roger  Clap's  Memoirs,  pp.  18,  19.     Young,  Ckron.     .     .     .    Mass.,  p.  346. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  39:  "These  godly  People  resolved  to  live  together;  and  therefore  as  they  had 
made  choice  of  those  two  Revd.  Servants  of  God,  Mr.  John  Warham  and  Mr.  John  Maverick  to 
be  their  Ministers,  so  they  kept  a  solemn  Day  of  Fasting  in  the  New  Hospital  in  Plymouth,  in 
England,  spending  it  in  Preaching  and  Praying:  where  that  worthy  Man  of  God,  Mr.  John 
White  of  Dorchester,  in  Dorset,  was  present,  and  Preached  unto  us  the  Word  of  God  in  the  fore- 
part of  the  Day  ;  and  in  the  latter  part  of  the  Day,  as  the  People  did  solemnly  make  Choice  of, 

(149) 


150  THE    WINDSOR   CREED-COVENANT,    1 647 

was  chosen  and  installed  as  pastor,  and  John  Maverick  as  teacher.1 
After  a  voyage  lasting  from  March  20  to  May  30,  1630,  the  com- 
pany landed  at  Xantasket,  and  within  a  few  days  after  their  ar- 
rival took  up  their  abode  at  Mattapan,  soon  to  be  known  as  Dor- 
chester, in  memory  of  the  home  of  their  friend  and  promoter,  Rev. 
John  White. 

The  coming  of  the  Dorchester  company  was  followed  in  a 
few  days  by  the  arrival  in  Massachusetts  Bay  of  the  emigrants 
who  accompanied  Winthrop,  and  the  settlements  thus  begun  were 
rapidly  multiplied  by  fresh  Puritan  arrivals  during  the  years  fol- 
lowing 1630.  One  of  the  chiefest  of  these  later  companies  was 
that  which  settled  at  Mt.  Wollaston  and  then  at  Newtown  (the 
later  Cambridge,  Mass.).  This  company,  like  that  of  Dorchester, 
had  a  distinct  unity  and  character.  Its  church  enjoyed,  from  1633 
onward,  the  ministrations   of  Thomas  Hooker  and  Samuel  Stone  ; 


and  call  these  godly  Ministers  to  be  their  Officers,  so  also  the  Revd.  Mr.  Warham  and  Mr.  Mav- 
erick did  accept  thereof,  and  expressed  the  same."  When  Dr.  Samuel  Fuller  of  Plymouth,  Ma.—., 
met  Warham  soon  after  his  landing  on  these  shores,  he  found  Warham's  views  as  to  the  composition 
of  a  church  not  quite  so  strenuous  as  those  of  the  majority  of  Puritans  who  came  t<>  New  I 
"  Mr.  Warham  holds  that  the  invisible  [visible]  church  may  consist  of  a  mixed  people,  godly  and 
openly  ungodly."  Bradford's  Letter-book,  /  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Sac.,  Ill  :  74.  But  the  practice  of  the 
church  cannot  have  much  differed  from  that  of  other  New  England  churches,  for  it  was  not  till  after 
the  settlers  had  arrived  at  Dorchester  that  Roger  Clap,  though  a  member  of  the  company  before 
leaving  England,  was  admitted  to  the  church  :  "  After  God  had  brought  me  into  this  Country,  He 
was  pleased  to  give  me  Room  in  the  Hearts  of  his  Sen-ants,  so  that  I  was  admitted  into  the  Church 
Fellowship  at  the  first  beginning  in  Dorchester,  in  the  year  1630."  Memoirs,  p.  24. 

1  John  Warham,  for  one  so  prominently  associated  with  the  early  history  of  a  company  of 
settlers  of  mark  in  Massachusetts  and  Connecticut,  is  very  little  known.  The  fact  that  he  lived  till 
1670  shows  that  he  must  have  been  comparatively  young  when  he  came  to  America.  Before  leav- 
ing England  he  had  been  a  successful  minister  of  the  Establishment  at  Exeter.  Mather,  in  one  of 
his  most  padded  biographies,  records  his  supposition  that  Warham  was  "  the  first  preacher  that 
ever  thus  preached  with  notes  in  our  New-England":  but  the  passage  is  so  obscure  that 
the  writer  feels  by  no  means  clear  whether  Mather  meant  that  Warham  was  the  first  to  preach 
from  notes,  or  as  Judge  Davis  interpreted  it,  the  first  to  preach  from  notes  in  a  free  and  natural 
manner  (Davis'  ed.  Morton's  Memorial,  Boston,  1826,  p.  482)  ;  Mather  also  declares  that  he  was 
so  subject  to  melancholy  as  to  deny  himself  the  Lord's  Supper  when  offering  it  to  others.  He 
attended  at  least  one  of  the  sessions  of  the  Cambridge  Synod  of  1646-48  ;  and  was  sent  to  the  meet- 
ing of  1657  at  Boston,  by  the  Connecticut  General  Assembly.  He  died  April  1,  1670.  See  Mather, 
Magna! '/a,  ed.  1853-5,  1:441,442;  Young,  Citron 1//im.,  pp.  347,  348  (where  a  few  fur- 
ther references  may  be  found);  Allen,  Am.  Biog.  Did.,  3d  ed.,  p.  820;  Sprague,  Annals  Am. 
Pulpit,  I  :  10,  11  ;    Wilson,  in  Memorial  Hist.  Hartford  County,  Boston,  1886,  II :  534-5j8- 

John  Maverick  is  even  less  known  than  Warham.  Roger  Clap,  in  his  Memoirs,  speaks  of 
him  as  "  Mr.  Maverick,  who  lived  forty  miles  off"  [i.e.,  from  Exeter,  England!  Young,  Citron. 

.  .  .  Mass.,  p.  347  j  and  Winthrop  in  recording  his  death  under  date  of  Feb.  3,  1636,  S| 
him  as  "  being  near  sixty  years  of  age."  Savage's  ed.,  1 :  216.  He  must  therefore  have  been  con- 
siderably older  than  Warham.  Winthrop  fixes  his  office  as  that  of  "  teacher  of  the  church  of  Dor- 
chester," and  speaks  of  him  as  "  a  man  of  a  very  humble  spirit,  and  faithful  in  furthering  the  work 
..(  the  Lord  here,  both  in  the  churches  and  civil  state."  [bid.  His  death  prevented  his  emigration 
to  Conn.  The  facts  regarding  Maverick  may  be  found  in  W.  H.  Sumner's  Hist.  0/ East  Boston, 
Boston,  1858,  pp.  57-68. 


SETTLEMENT   OF   CONNECTICUT  I  5  I 

and  its  chief  layman,  John  Haynes,  was  of  sufficient  honor  to  be 
chosen  governor  of  the  Massachusetts  Colony  in  1635.  It  need 
be  no  matter  of  surprise  therefore  that,  united  as  were  all  the 
Puritan  settlements  about  the  Bay  in  the  main  purpose  of  their 
enterprise,  a  certain  degree  of  restlessness  should  be  felt  on  ac- 
count of  the  close  proximity  in  location  of  different  companies, 
each  possessing  a  distinct  individuality  and  each  believing  its 
ministers  and  prominent  laymen  to  be  the  superiors  of  any  in  the 
Colony.  In  the  case  of  the  Newtown  company,  at  least,  there  is 
much  reason  to  believe  that  the  views  of  Hooker  led  to  a  more 
democratic  conception  of  the  true  character  of  civil  government, 
and  an  unwillingness  to  limit  the  franchise  to  church-members, 
which  put  the  company  in  a  measure  out  of  sympathy  with  most  of 
its  fellows  in  Massachusetts.  Whether  their  divergences  were 
publicly  expressed  or  not,  unrest  existed.'  By  May,  1634,  the 
Newtown  (Cambridge)  people  were  complaining  to  the  General 
Court  of  insufficiency  of  land,  and  during  the  following  months 
were  sending  spies  to  examine  into  the  character  of  the  soil  along 
the  Connecticut."  In  September  of  that  year  the  people  of  New- 
town were  before  the  General  Court  once  more,  this  time  with  a 
formal  demand  to  be  allowed  to  go  to  Connecticut.3  The  matter 
was  compromised  at  the  time,  and  the  proposed  emigration  de- 
layed ;  but  adventurous  spirits  were  already  finding  their  way  to 
the  river,4  and  by  1635  the  outflow  of  permanent  settlers  from 
Massachusetts  to  Connecticut  was  large.  In  the  autumn  of  that 
year  many  of  the  people  of  Dorchester  journeyed  across  the  wilder- 


1  Compare  G.  L.  Walker,  Hist.  First  C/i.  in  Hartford,  pp.  73-83  ;  Thomas  Hooker,  pp. 
82-90 ;  I.  N.  Tarbox  in  Memorial  Hist.  Hartford  County,  I  :  19-28  ;  Palfrey,  Hist,  of  New  Eng- 
land, I  :  446. 

s  Winthrop,  Savage's  ed.,  1853,  I  :  157,  162  ;  Records  of     .     .     .     Mass.  Bar,  I  :  119. 

3  Winthrop,  I  :  166-170.  Winthrop  notes  "  the  main  business,  which  spent  the  most  time, 
and  caused  the  adjourning  of  the  court  [to  Sept.  25],  was  about  the  removal  of  Newtown."  It 
did  not  get  into  the  Colonial  Records,  probably  because  compromised  for  the  time-being.  "  This 
matter  was  debated  divers  days,  and  many  reasons  alleged  pro  and  con.  The  principal  reasons  for 
their  removal  were  :  1.  Their  want  of  accommodation  for  their  cattle  ...  2.  The  fruitfulness 
and  commodiousness  of  Connecticut,  and  the  danger  of  having  it  possessed  by  others,  Dutch  or 
English.  3.  The  strong  bent  of  their  spirits  to  remove  thither."  Doubtless  the  last-mentioned 
was  the  most  important. 

4  The  beginnings  of  settlement  from  Watertown  in  what  is  now  Wethersfield  were  made  in 
1634.  S.  W.  Adams,  in  Memorial  Hist.  Hartford  County,  II  :  435,  436.  Andrews,  River  Towns 
of  Connecticut,  Johns  Hopkins  Hist.  Studies,  Ser.  VII :  7-9,  pp.  13-17. 


152  THE   WINDSOR   CREED-COVENANT,    1647 

ness  and  settled  in  what  is  now  Windsor,  Conn.;  and  with  them 
came,  it  would  appear,  some  of  Hooker  and  Stone's  congregation 
from  Newtown  to  join  those  straggling  settlers  who  had  begun, 
during  the  summer  of  1635,  to  break  the  soil  of  the  later  Hart- 
ford.' The  prior  claims  of  the  Dutch  and  of  Plymouth  Colon}- 
were  practically  disregarded,3  the  new  settlers,  though  still  viewed 
as  under  the  jurisdiction  of  Massachusetts,3  felt  that  they  were 
building  for  themselves  and  their  kindred.  But  the  year  1636  was 
the  time  of  greatest  exodus.  With  the  opening  spring  Hooker 
and  Stone,  with  the  major  portion  of  the  Newtown  church,  made 
their  way  to  Hartford,4  while  not  far  from  the  same  time,  perhaps 
a  little  earlier  than  those  of  Newtown,  many  of  the  Dorchester 
colonists,*  and  with  them  probably  their  pastor,  John  Warham,6 
joined  those  of  their  number  who  had  wintered  on  the  Windsor 
soil.  It  would  be  clearly  too  much  to  affirm,  as  some  have  done, 
that  there  was  here  the  emigration  of  three  organized  towns  to 


1  Winthrop,  I  :  204,  under  date  of  Oct.  15.  For  the  return  of  some  see  Ibid.,  p.  207  (Nov.  26), 
and  208,  209  (Dec.  10).  Winthrop  does  not  expressly  describe  this  company  as  from  Dorchester, 
hence  some  have  held  it  to  be  from  Newtown.  It  was  probably  from  both,  but  largely  from  the 
former,  since  under  date  of  April  1,  1636,  Winthrop  records  that  a  great  part  of  the  church  at  Dor- 
chester had  already  gone  to  Connecticut,  and  that  those  who  had  taken  their  cattle  before  winter 
had  lost  nearly  the  value  of  ,£2,000,  p.  219.  These  in  all  probability  are  the  "  cows,  horses,  and 
swine,"  to  which  he  refers  under  date  of  Oct.  15.  See  Tarbox,  in  Memorial  Hist.  Hartford 
County,  I  :  34,  35.     Andrews,  River  Towns,  19-23. 

2  The  Dutch  captain,  Adriaen  Block,  had  sailed  up  the  Connecticut  as  far  as  Windsor  in 
1614.  A  doubtful  tradition  had  it  that  the  Dutch  had  begun  a  fort  at  Hartford  as  early  as  1623. 
They  certainly  purchased  land  of  the  Indians  June  8,  1633,  and  completed  their  fort.  In  the  same 
year,  1633,  the  people  of  Plymouth  erected  a  trading  post  in  Windsor.  See  Savage's  Winthrop, 
I  :  '34.  '35  1  Bradford,  Hist.  Pfym.  Plant.,  311-314;  O'Callaghan,  Hist,  of  New  Netherlands 
2d  ed.,  New  York,  1S53,  I  :  150-155  ;  Brodhead,  Hist,  of  State  of  New  York,  1853,  1 :  56,  234,  235  ; 
Tarbox,  in  Memorial  Hist.  Hartford  County,  I  :  15-18. 

3  The  Mass.  General  Court,  at  its  session  of  March  3,  1636,  issued  a  commission  in  which  it 
rehearsed  the  facts  that  "dyv  [divers]  of  >,'  loveing  ffriends,  neighb",  rTreemen  &  members  of  Xewe 
Towne.  Dorchest',Waterton,  &  other  places,whoe  are  resolved  to  transplant  themsclues  &  their  estates 
vnto  the  Ryver  of  Conecticott,  there  to  reside  &  inhabite,  &  to  that  end  dyv"  are  there  already,  & 
dyv"  others  shortly  to  goe"'  and  appointed  a  commission  of  eight  to  govern  the  settlements  on  the 
river  for  a  year  from  date.  Records  .  .  .  Mass.  Bay,  I  :  170,  171.  As  these  eight  commis- 
sioners were  all  settlers  upon  the  river,  their  rule  naturally  passed  without  friction  into  self-govern- 
ment on  or  before  the  expiration  of  the  allotted  year,  it  having  become  evident  that  however  it 
might  be  with  Springfield  (to  which  colony  of  1636  two  of  the  commissioners  belonged)  the  three 
lower  settlements  were  outside  of  Massachusetts  jurisdiction. 

*  Winthrop,  1 :  223,  under  date  of  May  31,  1636,  records  :  "  Mr.  Hooker,  pastor  of  the  church 
of  Newtown,  and  the  most  of  his  congregation,  went  to  Connecticut.  His  wife  was  carried  in  a 
horse  litter  ;  and  they  drove  one  hundred  and  sixty  cattle,  and  fed  of  their  milk  by  the  way." 

5  See  above,  note  1. 

6  Whether  Warham  came  to  Connecticut  in  the  autumn  of  1635  or  the  spring  of  1636  is  a 
disputed  point  ;  the  probabilities  seem  to  favor  the  latter  supposition.  See  Andrews,  River  Towns, 
21,  22.  Maverick  would  doubtless  have  joined  in  the  emigration  had  he  not  been  prevented  by 
death,  Feb.  3,  1636.      Winthrop,  I  ;  216. 


CHARACTER   OF   THE   SETTLEMENT  I  53 

Connecticut;1  but  in  the  case  of  two  of  the  three  companies,  Wind- 
sor and  Hartford,  there  was  a  transfer  of  church  organization, 
so  that  new  ecclesiastical  institutions  had  to  be  established  on 
the  soil  which  they  had  left.'2  The  present  first  churches  of  Wind- 
sor and  Hartford  are  no  product  of  Connecticut  soil,  the  one 
traces  its  continuous  existence  back  to  the  shores  of  Massachu- 
setts Bay,  the  other  beyond  the  ocean  to  the  New  Hospital  at 
Plymouth. 

The  colony  thus  established  showed  itself  from  the  first  self- 
reliant  and  creative.  Though  closely  allied  to  Massachusetts,  its 
civil  and  ecclesiastical  development  has  always  had  a  distinct 
character.3  And  though  by  reason  of  numbers,  wealth,  and  the 
ability  of  its  inhabitants,  Hartford  became  the  leader  of  the 
three  original  river  towns,  Windsor  has  shared  in  all  that  is  pecu- 
liar in  Connecticut  story. 

It  was  eleven  years  after  the  full  establishment  of  the  Windsor 
church  in  its  Connecticut  domicile  that  the  Creed-Covenant  now 
under  consideration  was  adopted.  Of  the  immediate  circumstan- 
ces we  know  nothing,  and  we  are  ignorant  also  as  to  the  possession 
by  the  church  of  any  statement  of  belief  previous  to  this  time. 
Had  any  been  in  use  (a  matter  more  than  doubtful),  it  has  com- 
pletely disappeared.  The  Creed-Covenant  of  Oct.  23,  1647,  is 
the  oldest  symbol  of  the  Windsor  church  which  exists;  not  only 
so,  it  is  the  oldest  symbol  at  all  answering  to  what  modern  usage 

1  The  view  that  the  settlers  of  Connecticut  came  into  the  land  as  "three  distinct  and  indi- 
vidual town  organizations"  was  advocated  by  the  late  Prof.  Alexander  Johnston  in  his  Genesis  of 
a  New  England  State,  Johns  Hopkins  Studies,  I  Series,  n  (Sept.,  1883);  and  his  Connecticut, 
American  Cotnmonwealths  Series,  Boston,  1887,  pp.  n,  12.  It  has,  however,  been  successfully 
challenged  by  Hon.  Mellen  Chamberlain  in  his  Remarks  on  the  New  Historical  School,  Proc. 
Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  Jan.,  1890  ;  and  Dr.  Charles  M.  Andrews  in  his  Origin  of  Connecticut  Towns, 
A  nnals  A  m.  Acad.  Political  and  Social  Science,  Oct.,  1890. 

2  The  learned  introduction  to  the  Records  of  the  First  Ch.  at  Dorchester,  Boston,  1891, 
shows  that  only  a  part  of  the  Dorchester  members  went  to  Windsor,  and  holds  that  "  whether  the 
Windsor  party  went  as  a  church  organization  or  simply  as  a  colony  of  fellow  church  members  is 
not  known."  Bur.  it  does  not  set  aside  the  fact  that  a  reorganization  of  the  Dorchester  church  had 
to  take  place  after  the  Windsor  emigration.  The  Newtown  emigrants  certainly  went  to  Hartford 
as  an  organization,  and  it  would  need  considerable  evidence  in  rebuttal  to  show  that  the  Windsor 
settlers  did  not  also.     The  presumption  is  certainly  that  they  did. 

3  As  illustrations  of  some  of  these  peculiarities  I  may  cite  the  fact  that  Connecticut  (as  dis- 
tinct from  Massachusetts  and  New  Haven),  never  made  church-membership  a  condition  of  voting 
citizenship  ;  the  Consociational  system  of  Connecticut  church  government  never  found  a  home  in 
Massachusetts;  on  the  other  hand,  Connecticut  has  never  welcomed  Massachusetts  Unitarianism. 


154  THE    WINDSOR   CREED-CQVENANT,    1647 

calls  a  "confession  of  faith,"  to  be  found  in  Connecticut  ;  and  one 
of  the  earliest  church  creeds  of  New  England.  But  while  we  do 
not  know  the  exact  circumstances  of  its  adoption,  we  have  vari- 
ous hints  which  enable  us  to  form  a  conjecture  as  to  what  was 
passing  in  the  pastor's  mind.  The  growing  Presbyterianism  of 
England  and  the  need  of  some  recognized  standards  of  doctrine 
and  polity  at  home  had  led  to  the  calling  of  the  celebrated  Cam- 
bridge Synod  in  1646, —  the  body  which  was  to  put  forth,  in  1648, 
the  Cambridge  Platform.1  Two  sessions  of  that  assembly  had  al- 
ready been  held,  in  Sept.,  1646,  and  in  June,  1647  ;  and  Mr.  War- 
ham  had  been  present  at  the  latter.2  On  his  return  he  had 
preached,  August  15,  a  sermon  based  in  large  part  on  Hooker's 
then  unpublished  Survey,1  in  which  he  had  entered  at  length  into 
discussion  of  the  constitution  of  a  true  church.  It  is  plain,  there- 
fore, that  questions  of  doctrine  and  polity  were  uppermost  in  the 
Windsor  pastor's  mind  during  the  summer  and  autumn  months  of 
1647,  and  this  Creed-Covenant  was  the  natural  outcome. 

The  Creed-Covenant  is  of  course  Calvinistic  in  point  of  view, 
but  its  non-polemic  tone  is  noticeable.  Of  the  distinctive  doc- 
trines of  Calvinism  only  that  of  the  perseverence  of  the  saints  is 
made  at  all  conspicuous.  It  is  distinctly  Congregational  in  its 
assertion  of  the  necessity  of  the  local  organization  by  covenant  ; 
while  its  concluding  section  is  the  covenant  proper,  by  which 
the  believers  at  Windsor  promised  to  walk  in  fellowship  with  one 
another.  Probably  Warham  would  have  been  far  from  claiming 
that  this  creed  covered  the  range  of  Christian  doctrine.  But  it 
certainly  contains,  in  simple  phrase,  the  essentials  of  the  Gospel, 
redemption  from  sin  through  repentance  and  faith  in  the  atoning 
work  of  Christ,  and  a  life  of  love  toward  God  and  our  neighbor 
through  the  strength  which  comes  from  Him. 

THE    WINDSOR   CREED-COVENANT,    1647. 

1.  We  believe  though  God  made  man  in  an  holy  and  blessed 
condition,  yet  by  his  fall  he  hath  plunged  himself  and  all  his  pos- 
terity into  a  miserable  state.  —  Rom.  iii:   23;  v:   12. 

1  See  following  chapter. 

«  See  note  by  Dr.  Trumbull,  Cong.  Quarterly,  IV:  168  (April,  1862). 

3  Ibid. 


TEXT   OF   THE   CREED-COVENANT  155 

2.  Yet  God  hath  provided  a  sufficient  remedy  in  Christ  for 
all  broken  hearted  sinners  that  are  loosened  from  their  sins  and 
selves  and  world,  and  are  enabled  by  faith  to  look  to  Him  in  Christ, 
for  mercy,  inasmuch  as  Christ  hath  done  and  suffered  for  such 
whatever  His  justice  requires  to  atonement  and  life;  and  He  doth 
accept  His  merits  and  righteousness  for  them  that  believe  in  Him, 
and  imputeth  it  to  them  to  their  justification,  as  if  they  had  satis- 
fied and  obeyed,  themselves.  —  Heb.  vii:  25;  Mat.  xi:  28;  xxii:  24; 
v:  4,  6;   1  Cor.  i:  30;   Rom.  iv:   3,  5;  v:   19. 

3.  Yet  we  believe  that  there  is  no  other  name  or  means  to 
be  saved  from  guilt  and  the  power  of  sin.  —  John  xiv:  6;  Acts  iv:  12. 

4.  We  believe  God  hath  made  an  everlasting  covenant  in 
Christ  with  all  penitent  sinners  that  rest  on  him  in  Christ,  never  to 
reject,  or  cease  to  do  them  good.  —  Heb.  viii:  6;  vii:  22;  1  Sam. 
xii:   22;  Jere.  xxxii:  40. 

5.  We  believe  this  covenant  to  be  reciprocal,  obliging  us  to 
be  his  people,  to  love,  fear,  obey,  cleave  to  him,  and  serve  him 
with  all  our  heart,  mind,  and  soul;  as  him  to  be  our  God,  to  love, 
choose,  delight  in  us,  and  save  and  bless  us  in  Christ:  yea,  as  his 
covenant  binds  us  to  love  him  and  his  Christ  for  his  own  sake,  so 
to  love  our  brethren  for  his  sake. —  Deut.  x:  12;  Hos.  iii:  3;  ii: 
21;  Deut.  xxvi:   17-19;  John  iv:   21. 

6.  We  believe  that  God's  people,  besides  their  general  cove- 
nant with. God,  to  walk  in  subjection  to  him,  and  Christian  love  to 
all  his  people,  ought  also  to  join  themselves  into  a  church  covenant 
one  with  another,  and  to  enter  into  a  particular  combination  to- 
gether with  some  of  his  people  to  erect  a  particular  ecclesiastical 
body,  and  kingdom,  and  visible  family  and  household  of  God,  for 
the  managing  of  discipline  and  public  ordinances  of  Christ  in  one 
place  in  a  dutiful  way,  there  to  worship  God  and  Christ,  as  his 
visible  kingdom  and  subjects,  in  that  place  waiting  on  him  for  that 
blessing  of  his  ordinances  and  promises  of  his  covenant,  by  hold- 
ing communion  with  him  and  his  people,  in  the  doctrine  and  dis- 
cipline of  that  visible  kingdom,  where  it  may  be  attained.  —  Rom. 
xii:  4,5,6;  1  Cor.  xii:  27,28;  Ephes.  iv:  11,12;  Acts  ii:  47;  Exod. 
xii:  43,  44,  45;  Gen.  xvii:   13;  Isa.  xxiii:  4. 

7.  We  for  ourselves,  in  the  sense  of  our  misery  by  the  fall 
and  utter  helplessness  elsewhere,  desire  to  renounce  all  other  sav- 
iours but  his  Christ,  and  to  rest  on  God  in  him  alone,  for  all  happi- 
ness, and  salvation  from  all  misery;  and  do  here  bind  ourselves,  in 
the  presence  of  men  and  angels,  by  his  grace  assisting  us,  to  choose 


156  THE  WINDSOR  CREED-COVENANT,    1 647 

the  Lord,  to  serve  him,  and  to  walk  in  all  his  ways,  and  to  keep  all 
his  commandments  and  ordinances,  and  his  Christ  to  be  our  king, 
priest  and  prophet,  and  to  receive  his  gospel  alone  for  the  rule  of 
our  faith  and  manners,  and  to  [be]  subject  to  the  whole  will  of 
Christ  so  far  as  we  shall  understand  it;  and  bind  ourselves  in  spe- 
cial to  all  the  members  of  this  body,  to  walk  in  reverend  subjection 
in  the  Lord  to  all  our  superiours,  and  in  love,  humility,  wisdom, 
peaceableness,  meekness,  inoffensiveness,  mercy,  charity,  spiritual 
helpfulness,  watchfulness,  chastity,  justice,  truth,  self-denial,  one 
to  another,  and  to  further  the  spiritual  good  one  of  another,  by 
example,  counsel,  admonition,  comfort,  oversight,  according  to 
God,  and  submit  or[selves]  subject  unto  all  church  administration 
in  the  Lord. 

Finis. 


THE  CAMBRIDGE  SYNOD  AND  PLATFORM, 
i 646- i 648 

Text  and   Reprints 

a.     the   tentative   conclusions   respecting   the    power   of   magistrates 

AND   THE   NATURE   OF   SYNODS,    1646 

I.  The  Result  \  of  a  \  Synod  \  at  \  Cambridge  \  in  \  New-England,  \  Anno. 
1646.  I  Concerning  \   The  Power  of  Magistrates  in  mat-  \  fers  of  the  First  Table. 

I  Nature  &*  Tower  of  Synods  ;  \  and  other  matters  thereun-  \  to  belonging.  \  Lon- 
don I  Printed  by  M.  S,  for  John  Allen  \  and  Francis  Eglesfield  in  Pauls  \  Church- 
yard.    1654.      160  pp.  ii,  76. 

II.  A  second  edition  was  issued  at  London  in  1655. 

B.       THE   CAMBRIDGE   PLATFORM,    164S 

The  manuscript  is  in  the  possession  of  the  American  Antiquarian  Society,  Wor- 
cester, Mass. 

I.  A  Platform  of  Church  Discipline  .  .  .  Printed  by  S[amuel]  C[reen] 
at  Cambridge  in  Areiu  England     .      .     .     i64Q.x     40  pp.  x,  32. 

II.  A  Platform  of  Church  Discipline  [etc.]  London,  1653?  (Suppressed  as 
incorrect  by  Edward  Winslow.)2 

III.  A  Platform  of  Church  Discipline  [etc.]  Printed  in  N'cw-England  ; 
and  Reprinted  in  London  [etc.]  i6jj.  (With  two  pages  of  preface  by  Edward  Wins- 
low.)     40  pp.  vi,  viii,  30. 

IV.  A  Platform  [etc.]  Cambridge:  Printed  by  Marmaduke  Johnson,  1671. 
4°  pp.  xii,  34. 

V.  At  Boston  in  1680,  with  the  first  edition  of  the  Confession  of  that  year. 

VI.  At  Boston  in  1699  in  English  and  Indian,  with  the  Confession  of  1680. 3 

VII.  At  Boston  1701.  With  an  appendix  of  five  pages  on  Congregational 
practices  and  principles.4     8°  pp.  xxv,  64,  6.     Reprinted  for  Boston  First  Church. 

VIII.  In  Mather,  Magnalia,  London,  1702.  Ed.  Hartford,  1S53-5,  II: 
211-236. 

IX.  In  Indian,  1704. 5 

X.  At  New  Vork,  1711.     A  reprint  of  the  Boston  edition  of  1701.6 
XL     1713.     Boston?7 

XII.     Boston,  1717,  8°  pp.  xvi,  40.8 


1  Full  title  in  connection  with  the  reprint  of  the  text  of  the  Plat/or7n,  at  the  close  of  this 
chapter. 

'Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  Bibliography  No.  1631. 

3  Catalogue  of  Coll.  of  Mr.  Brayton  Ives,  New  York,  1891,  No.  145. 

4  Brinley  Sale  Catalogue,  Hartford  r8y8,  Nos.  737,  5878.  6  Dexter,  Ibid.,  No.  1507. 
6  Brinley  Cat.,  3382.              7  Dexter,  Ibid.,  No.  1635.  8  Brinley  Cat.,  5879. 

(157) 


158  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

XIII.  In  The  Results  of  Three  Synods  (i.  e.,  1646-8,  1662,  1679).  Boston, 
1725.      1 6°  pp.  ii,  vi,  118.     [Platform,  pp.  1-49.] 

XIV.  Boston,  1731.' 

XV.  Boston,  1749.      160  pp.  S3. 

XVI.  Boston,  1757,  with  Confession  of  16S0.5 

XVII.  Boston,  1772,  with  Wise,  Vindication  of  the  Government  of  N.  E. 
Churches. 

XVIII.  Boston,  1808,  12°  pp.  70. 

XIX.  Boston,  1819,  120  pp.  xvi,  52. 

XX.  In  The  Discipline  Practised  in  the  Churches  of  New  England,  'Whit- 
church, Shropshire,  Eng.,  1S23.     12°  pp.  xxiv,  130. 

XXI.  In  The  Cambridge  and  Saybrook  Platforms  .  .  .  with  the  Confes- 
sion of  .  .  .  ibSo ;  and  the  Heads  of  Agreement  .  .  .  i6qo.  Boston, 
1829,  12°  pp.  iv,  132;  Platform,  13-67. 

XXII.  In  Congregational  Order.      The  Ancient  Platforms  of  the  Con. 
tional  Churches  of  New  England  [etc.]      Published  by  Direction  of  the   General 
Association  of  Connecticut.      Middletown,  1S43,  I2°  PP-  x.  351  :  with  Saybrook  Con- 
fession, Articles,  and  the  Heads  of  Agreement,  etc.     Platform,  pp.  73-1 52. 3 

XXIII.  In  Report  on  Congregationalism,  including  a  Manual  of  Church 
Discipline,  together  with  the  Cambridge  Platform,  adopted  in  J64S,  and  the  Confes- 
sion of  Faith,  adopted  in  1680.    Boston,  1S46,  1S0  pp.  vi,  128.     Platform,  pp.  47-85.'' 

XXIV.  Reprint  of  the  Platform  and  Confession  from  the  edition  of  1846, 
Boston,  1S50. 

XXV.  The  Cambridge  Platform  [etc.]  and  the  Confession  .  .  .  1680,  to 
which  is  prefixed  a  Platform  of  Ecclesiastical  Government,  by  Nath.  Emmons. 
Boston,  1855,  120  pp.  ii,  20,  84. 

Sources 

I.  Records  of  the  Governor  and  Company  of  the  Massachusetts  Bay.  Boston, 
1853-4,  II:    154-156.  200,  2S5  ;  III:   70-73,  177,  17S,  204,  235.  236,  240. 

II.  Winthrop,  History  of  New  England  (Journal),  Savage's  ed.  Boston, 
1S53,  II:   323,  324.  329-332,  33S,  370,  402,  403. 

III.  The  sources  are  well  epitomized  in  Felt,  Ecclesiastical  History  of  New 
England,  Boston,  1855,  1862,  1 :  570-574.  577-579.  597.  59§.  601,  602,  613  ;  II : 
5,  6,  16,  18,  19,  45,  46,  96,  97. 

Literature 

Among  the  various  accounts  of  the  Synod  and  Platform  by  later  writers  the  fol- 
lowing may  be  pointed  out : 

I.  Hubbard,  General  History  of  New  England  (written  about  16S0).  Boston, 
1848,  pp.  532-540. 

II.  Mather,  Magnolia,  London,  1702,  Ed.  Hartford,  1S53-5,  II:  207-211, 
237-272  passim. 


1  /bid.,  7465.  2  Ibid.,  7466. 

3  Dexter  notes  3  editions  of  Cong.  Order.  Hartford,  [1842]  ;  Middletown,  1843;  1845.  Cong, 
as  seen.  Bibl.  Xo.  5633. 

*  By  a  Committee  of  which  Drs.  Leonard  Woods,  Heman  Humphrey,  Thomas  Snell,  Thomas 
Shepard,  Timothy  Cooley,  R.  S.  Storrs,  and  Rev.  Parsons  Cooke  were  the  members,  appointed  in 
May,  1844,  by  a  meeting  of  Congregational  ministers  in  Boston.  The  story  is  told  by  Dexter,  Cong, 
as  seen,  pp.  514,  515 ;  and  in  the  report  itself. 


PRESBYTERIAN   ASCENDENCY    IN    ENGLAND  1 59 

III.  Neal,  History  of  New-England,  London,  1720,  1 :  272-275  (largely  from 
Mather).     Neal  gives  an  abridgment  of  the  Platform,  II :  643-655. 

IV.'  Historical  Preface  to  The  Cambridge  and  Saybrook  Platforms,  etc.,  Bos- 
ton, 1829,  pp.  5-12. 

V.  Clark,  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Congregational  Churches  in  Massachusetts, 
Boston,  1S58,  pp.  39-43. 

VI.  Palfrey,  History  of  New  England,  Boston,  1858-64,  II  :   165-1S6. 

VII.  Dexter,  Congregationalism  .  .  .  as  seen  in  its  Literature,  New 
York,  1880,  pp.  435-448. 

VIII.  A  very  unsympathetic  presentation  of  the  motives  of  the  framers  of  the 
Cambridge  Platform,  though  with  but  little  account  of  the  work  itself,  may  be  found 
in   Mr.  Brooks  Adams's  Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,  Boston,  1S87,  pp.  79-104. 

IX.  Doyle,  The  English  in  America,  The  Puritan  Colonies,  London,  1887, 
II:  91-94. 

AS  has  already  been  pointed  out  in  a  previous  chapter,1  the 
course  of  events  during  the  first  half  of  the  fifth  decade  of  the 
seventeenth  century  in  England  was  strongly  in  favor  of  Presbyteri- 
anism.  Politics  had  forced  Parliament  into  a  union  with  the  Scotch, 
when  the  arduous  nature  of  the  military  struggle  with  the  king 
had  become  evident;  and  union  had  signified  the  adoption  of  the 
Scotch  type  of  church  polity,  —  a  Presbyterianism  not  unwelcome 
at  first  to  a  large  portion  of  the  English  Puritans.  The  Westmin- 
ster Assembly  had  begun  its  sessions  in  July,  1643.  Its  Presby- 
terian complexion  had  been  evident  even  before  its  coming 
together,2  and  by  the  close  of  1645  it  had  prepared  a  full  scheme 
of  Presbyterian  government,  which  soon  received  the  approval  of 
Parliament  in  its  substantial  entirety.3  These  were  indeed  momen- 
tous changes,  and  it  might  well  be  anxiously  questioned  by  the 
Congregationalists  of  New  England  whether  a  Parliament  which 
had  seemingly  brought  the  ecclesiastical  institutions  of  England 
into  conformity  with  those  of  Scotland4  might  not  next  proceed  to 
enforce  a  similar  uniformity  in  New  England. 

Nor  were  there  those  wanting  in   New   England  itself  who 

1  See  ante,  p.  136. 

2  When  Cotton,  Davenport,  and  Hooker  were  sounded  by  the  Independents  in  Parliament  in 
1642  as  to  whether  they  would  put  themselves  in  the  way  of  appointment  to  the  Assembly,  "  Mr. 
Hooker  liked  not  the  business,  nor  thought  it  any  sufficient  call  for  them  to  go  3,000  miles  to  agree 
with  three  men  (meaning  those  three  ministers  who  were  for  independency)."     Winthrop,  II :  92. 

3  See  ante,  p.  136,  note  2. 

4  "  Seemingly,"  because,  though  adopted  by  Parliament,  Presbyterian  institutions  were  never 
successfully  established  in  most  parts  of  the  Kingdom. 


l6o  THE    CAMBRIDGE   SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM 

would  have  been  glad  to  welcome  Parliamentary  interference  in 
affairs  of  church  and  state  alike.  The  Presbyterian  movements  at 
Newbury,  which  resulted  in  the  meeting  of  ministers  at  Cambridge 
in  1643,  have  already  been  pointed  out;'  and  the  futility  of  the 
attempts  made  to  change  the  views  of  Noyes  and  Parker  shows 
that  their  convictions  were  such  that  they  would  be  likely  to  look 
with  favor  upon  Parliamentary  limitation  of  the  "  New  England 
way."  Nor  were  they  the  only  ministers  who  advocated  Presby- 
terian views.  Peter  Hobart,  the  pastor  at  Hingham,  was  essentially 
a  believer  in  the  Scotch  polity,  at  least  in  the  internal  management 
of  the  affairs  of  his  own  congregation.2  And,  in  addition  to  these 
conscientious  supporters  of  Presbyterianism,  there  is  ample  evi- 
dence that  there  were  many  in  the  Massachusetts  Colony,  and 
some  of  them  men  of  weight  in  the  community,  who  felt  the  limit- 
ation of  the  franchise3  and  of  the  rights  of  baptism  to  those  in 
church-covenant  to  be  a  grievous  burden,  and  one  which  Parlia- 
mentary interference,  or  the  free  allowance  of  Presbyterianism, 
would  speedily  remove. 

An  illustration  of  this  temper  of  mind,  and  of  the  curiously 
mixed  motives  which  made  some  look  with  favor  on  Parliamentary 
interference  in  the  affairs  of  the  Colony,  occurred  in  1645.  1'ne 
people  of  Hingham,"  tiring  of  their  former  commander  of  militia, 
chose  another  and  presented  his  name  to  the  magistrates  of  the 
General  Court  for  confirmation.  The  magistrates  thought  the  ac- 
tion inexpedient,  and  ordered  the  affair  to  rest  till  further  consid- 
eration could  be  had  by  the  Court.  But  the  Hingham  soldiery 
were  not  so  to  be  put  off,  and  again  chose  their  new  captain,  Allen. 
Of  course  this  action  was  opposed  by  the  former  commander, 
Eames,  and  some  discussion  took  place  as  to  the  exact  nature  of 
the  magistrate's  order.     The  Allen  party  charged  Eames,  before 

1  See  ante \  p.  137. 

•  "  Mr.  Hubbert,  the  pastor  there  [at  Hingham],  being  of  a  Presbyterial  spirit,  did  manage  all 
affairs  without  the  church's  advice,  which  divers  of  the  congregation  not  liking  of,  they  were  divided 
into  two  parts."     Winthrop,  II:  288. 

3  This  limitation  of  the  franchise  to  church-members  was  peculiar  to  Massachusetts  and  New 
Haven.     It  did  not  obtain  in  Plymouth  and  Connecticut. 

*  The  story  is  told  at  length  by  Winthrop,  II :  271-313.  See  also  Records  0/  .  .  .  Mas- 
sachusetts Bay  (Colonial  Records),  III :   17-26. 


THE    HINGHAM   CONTROVERSY  l6l 

the  church,  with  untruth,  and  the  minister,  Peter  Hobart,  urged 
his  instant  excommunication.  Eames  appealed  to  Winthrop  and 
three  other  magistrates  for  redress,  and  they,  lending  a  willing  ear 
to  his  complaints,  ordered  the  five  leaders  in  the  renewed  choice 
of  Allen  and  the  subsequent  attack  upon  Eames,  to  appear  and 
give  surety  for  trial  before  the  next  General  Court.  It  so  hap- 
pened that  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hobart  was  brother  to  three  of  the  five 
accused,  a  fact  which  doubtless  accounts  in  part  for  his  eagerness 
to  see  Eames  cast  out  of  church-fellowship  ;  and  he  now  presented 
himself  before  the  magistrates  and  protested  in  no  measured  terms 
against  their  recent  action.  But  matters  did  not  rest  here.  Five 
more  of  the  Hinghamites  were  summoned,  "  for  speaking  untruths 
of  the  magistrates  in  the  church,"  and  appeared,  this  time  before 
Winthrop  alone.  They  refused  to  give  bonds,  and  two  of  them  re- 
peating the  refusal  at  a  later  appearance,  Winthrop  ordered  the 
two  committed.  This  step  was  warmly  resented  by  the  people  of 
Hingham,  who  now,  under  the  lead  of  their  minister  and  to  the 
number  of  "  about  ninety," '  presented  a  petition  to  the  next  Gen- 
eral Court  asking  that  body  to  take  cognizance  of  Winthrop's  acts, 
—  though  avoiding  the  mention  of  his  name  in  the  document. 
The  matter  being  thus  presented  before  the  highest  colonial  tribu- 
nal, and  Winthrop  being  thus  charged  with  having  exceeded  the 
rightful  powers  of  a  magistrate,  the  case  was  tried  by  the  General 
Court.  The  Legislature  itself  was  much  divided,  but  the  outcome 
of  the  trial  was  that  Winthrop  was  acquitted  and  the  petitioners 
fined.  But  the  sympathy  of  the  lower  house  —  the  deputies  of  the 
towns — was  largely  against  the  magistrates  of  the  upper  house, 
who  were  felt  by  very  many,  even  of  the  Legislature,  to  be  too 
high  handed  in  their  general  administration. 

While  these  proceedings  had  been  taking  place  in  the  Court, 
the  meeting  of  ministers  from  the  various  colonies,  of  which  men- 
tion has  been  made  as  approving  Hooker's  Survey,  occurred  at 
Cambridge.2  Their  sympathies  were  declaredly  on  the  side  of  the 
magistrates,  who  had  therefore  proposed  that  their  advice  should 


1  The  Colonial  Records  (Vol.  Ill : 
'July  i,  1645,  see  ante,  p.  141. 


162  THE   CAMBRIDGE   SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM. 

be  taken  in  the  dispute;  but  this  the  deputies  of  the  towns  opposed 
so  firmly  that  the  proposition  failed.1  But  the  ministers  were 
brought  into  the  dispute,  nevertheless,  for  when  Rev.  Mr.  Hobart 
perceived  that  matters  were  going  against  him,  and  that  his  oppo- 
nents at  Hingham  were  withdrawing  from  his  congregation,  he 
called  in  the  advice  of  the  "  elders,"  who,  as  might  be  expected, 
found  him  to  be  in  the  wrong  and  sustained  the  magistrates. 

Under  these  circumstances  the  temper  of  Rev.  Mr.  Hobart 
and  his  friends  at  Hingham  rose;  and  when  attempt  was  made  to 
levy  the  fines  imposed,  it  was  forcibly  resisted.  For  this  Rev.  Mr. 
Hobart  and  his  associates  were  proceeded  against  by  the  magis- 
trates, in  March,  1646,  and  in  due  time  brought  before  the  "court 
of  assistants."2  Here  it  was  proved  that  Mr.  Hobart  had  publicly 
attacked  the  authority  of  the  Colony  by  declaring,  among  other 
things,  "That  we  were  but  as  a  corporation  in  England";  and 
"  That  by  our  patent  (as  he  understood  it)  we  could  not  put  any 
man  to  death,  nor  do  divers  other  things  which  we  did."3  For 
this  he  was  fined  ^20. 

Doubtless  it  has  seemed  to  the  reader  that  the  measure  dealt 
out  to  Mr.  Hobart  was  hard.  But  the  situation  was  certainly  one 
to  excite  serious  alarm.  The  danger  of  Parliamentary  interference 
in  the  affairs  of  church  and  state  in  New  England  was  great.  A 
division  at  home  at  such  a  time  was  most  unfortunate;  and  the 
state  of  affairs  was  rendered  doubly  perilous  by  the  evidence  which 
the  Hingham  quarrel  revealed,  even  among  the  church-members 
of  the  lower  house,  of  restiveness  under  the  existing  state  of  affairs. 


1  "  The  deputies  would  by  no  means  consent  thereto,  for  they  knew  that  many  of  the  elders 
understood  the  cause,  and  were  more  careful  to  uphold  the  honor  and  power  of  the  magistrates  than 
themselves  well  liked  of."     Winthrop,  II:  278. 

2  It  need  hardly  be  pointed  out  that  according  to  the  charter  of  1629  the  government  of  the 
Mass.  Company  consisted  of  a  governor,  deputy-governor,  and  assistants  (the  whole  body  popularly 
known  as  magistrates),  chosen  by  the  magistrates  and  freemen  assembled  in  General  Court  each 
spring.  As  the  freemen  grew  in  number,  their  presence  as  a  whole  became  impossible;  in  1634, 
therefore,  they  were  allowed  toappear  by  deputies  from  each  town.  In  1644  the  deputies  and  magis- 
trates were  separated  into  two  houses.  In  accordance  with  the  charter  the  governor,  deputy-gov- 
ernor, and  assistants  (/.  e.,  the  magistrates),  could  hold  a  judicial  and  legislative  court  whenever 
necessary  between  the  meetings  of  the  General  Court.  There  was  at  this  time  no  sharp  distinction 
between  the  enactment  of  laws  and  the  administration  of  justice  in  any  of  these  courts.  See,  inter 
alia,  Records  Mass.  Bay,  I:  11,  12,  118,  119;  II:  58,  59;  Hutchinson,  Hist.  Mass.  Bay,  I:  25,  26, 
35-37  .  Palfrey,  Hist.  N.  E.,  I     371-382,  617-623:  II:  8-18. 

3  Winthrop,  II .   313. 


WIDE-SPREAD   UNREST  163 

Nor  were  matters  bettered  by  the  denunciations  of  the  acts  of  the 
colonial  government  as  unauthorized,  and  their  whole  body  of 
liberties  as  subject  to  Parliamentary  revision,  in  which  one  of  the 
ministers  of  the  Colony  had  indulged.  Having  thus  declared  him- 
self, the  next  logical  step  for  Mr.  Hobart  to  take  was  to  appeal  for 
the  same  Parliamentary  redress  which  might  have  been  invoked 
against  the  proceedings  of  any  English  corporation;  and  if  Parlia- 
ment once  began  interference  no  man  could  predict  where  it 
would  end. 

The  further  step  which  Hobart  did  not  take  was  actually 
taken  by  others  of  more  determination,  in  a  movement  inimical  to 
the  Colony,  and  at  one  time  exceedingly  formidable.  It  is  perhaps 
unwarrantable  to  say  that  this  more  serious  attack  upon  the  gov- 
ernment would  not  have  been  made  had  the  Hingham  affair  never 
occurred,  but  it  seems  not  too  much  to  affirm  that  its  immediate 
occasion  was  the  excitement  aroused  by  the  course  of  events  at 
Hingham.  And  while  it  is  doubtful  whether  any  very  determined 
love  of  Presbyterianism,  as  a  system  of  church  polity,  moved  these 
opponents  of  the  Massachusetts  system,  they  were  willing  enough 
to  welcome  those  features  of  Presbyterianism1  and  of  Parliament- 
ary interference  which  would  aid  them  in  their  main  purpose,  the 
overthrow  of  existing  institutions. 

This  new  movement2  began  with  a  neighbor  of  Mr.  Hobart, 
William  Vassall,  one  of  the  assistants  of  the  Company  named  in 
the  charter  of  1629  ;  but  apparently  a  man  of  discontented  spirit 
always.3  For  some  years  Vassall  had  been  a  resident  of  Scituate, 
under  the  Plymouth  jurisdiction  ;  where,  indeed,  no  necessity  of 
church-membership  laid  restriction  upon  suffrage,  but  where  the 
usual  New  England  customs  prevailed  in  religious  matters.  His 
plan    of   action  was  simple  and  promised   success.      Taking  ad- 


1  Palfrey,  II :  166,  calls  the  movement  a  "  Cabal  of  Presbyterians,"  but  as  Brooks  Adams  has 
pointed  out,  Emancipation  of  Mass.,  p.  95,  the  proof  that  this  was  primarily  a  religious  move- 
ment seems  wanting. 

a  For  its  history,  see  Winthrop,  II  :  319-392,  passim  :  Hubbard,  499-518  ;  Hutchinson,  I  :  145- 
149  j  Palfrey,  II :  166-179. 

3  Winthrop,  II :  319,  speaks  of  him  as :  "a  man  of  a  busy  and  factious  spirit,  and  always  op- 
posite to  the  civil  governments  of  this  country  and  the  way  of  our  churches";  and  Palfrey,  I  :  167, 
declares  that  this  view  has  "  some  confirmation  "  from  other  sources.  Savage  gives  an  account  of 
him  in  a  note  to  Winthrop,  II :  319. 


164  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM. 

vantage  of  the  political  situation  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic, 

he  determined  that  petitions  should   be  presented  to  the  General 

Courts  of 

"  Massachusetts  and  of  Plimouth,  and  (if  that  succeeded  not)  then  to  the  parliament 
of  England,  that  the  distinctions  which  were  maintained  here,  both  in  civil  and  church 
estate,  might  be  taken  away,  and  that  we  might  be  wholly  governed  by  the  laws  of 

England." 

As  a  first  step,  Vassall  had  the  case  laid  before  the  Plymouth 

Court,  in  October,  1645,  and  proposed,  so  Winslow  records,2 

"  to  allow  and  maintaine  full  and  free  tollerance  of  religion  to  all  men  that  would 
preserve  the  civill  peace  and  submit  unto  government." 

Nor  did  the  proposition  meet  a  wholly  unfavorable  hearing 
on  the  part  of  some  of  the  Court  ;  but  Bradford  refused  to  let  the 
matter  come  to  a  vote  and  thus  brought  the  petition  to  naught. 
The  next  step  seems  to  have  been  the  preparation  of  a  petition 3 

"to  the  parliament,  pretending  that  they  being  freeborn  subjects  of  England,  v  .re 
denied  the  liberty  of  subjects,  both  in  church  and  commonwealth,  themselves  and 
their  children  debarred  from  the  seals  of  the  covenant,  except  they  would  submit  to 
such  a  way  of  entrance  and  church  covenant,  as  their  consciences  could  not  admit, 
and  take  such  a  civil  oath  as  would  not  stand  with  their  oath  of  allegiance." 

But  Vassall  was  not  working  alone  in  the  matter.  His  sym- 
pathizers in  Massachusetts  were  numerous  ;  and  now,  at  the  Gen- 
eral Court  held  at  Boston  in  May,  1646,  some  seven  of  them,  Dr. 
Robert  Child,  Thomas  Fowle,  Samuel  Maverick,  Thomas  Burton, 
John  Smith,  David  Yale,  and  John  Dand4 — the  first-named  a 
reputed  graduate  of  Padua,  and  all  the  others  of  sufficient  stand- 
ing to  be  given  the  title  of  "  Mr."  by  Winthrop, —  presented  a  pe- 
tition5 in   which  the  statements  of  the  proposed  memorial  to  Par- 


1  Winthrop,  II  :  319. 

2  Our  information  is  derived  from  a  letter  of  Winslow  to  Winthrop  preserved  in  Hutchinson, 
Hist.  .  .  .  Mass.  Bay,\\\  (Collection):  153-155.  under  date  of  Nov.  24,  1645.  The  letter 
carefully  omits  the  names  of  the  petitioners. 

3  Winthrop,  II  :  319,  320. 

■>  Brief  biographical  notes  regarding  most  of  the  signers,  by  Savage,  will  be  found  in  his 
second  edition  of  Winthrop,  II :  320,  321. 

5  The  text  of  the  petition  may  be  found  in  Hutchinson,  III  (Collection)  :  188-196.  Some  of 
its  more  important  passages  are  the  following  :  "  1.  Whereas  this  place  hath  been  planted  by  the 
incouragement,  next  under  God,  of  letterts  patent  given  and  granted  by  his  Majesty  of  England 
.  .  .  .  we  cannot,  according  to  our  judgments,  discerne  a  setled  forme  of  government  accord- 
ing to  the  lawes  of  England,  ...  2.  Whereas  there  are  many  thousands  in  t  hese  plantations,  of 
the  English  nation,  freeborne,  quiett  and  peaceable  men,  righteous  in  their  dealings,  forward  with 
hand,  heart  and  purse,  to  advance  the  publick  good  .  .  .  who  are  debarred  from  all  civill  im- 
ployments  (without  any  just  cause   that  we  know)  not   being  permitted  to  bear  the  least   office 


GROUNDS   OF   DISSATISFACTION  165 

liament  were  amplified  and  strengthened,  and  formal  notice  was 
given  that,  unless  the  prayer  was  heard,  recourse  would  be  had 
to  Parliament. 

It  is  impossible  not  to  have  a  high  degree  of  sympathy  with 
these  men  in  their  complaint.  The  formidable  barriers  which 
stood  in  the  way  of  church-membership  have  already  been  pointed 
out,1  and  justifiable  as  they  seemed  from  a  Congregational  stand- 
point as  to  the  proper  composition  of  a  church,  they  were  a  de- 
parture from  the  practice  of  all  ecclesiastical  bodies  of  import- 
ance then  to  be  found  in  the  Protestant  world.  The  matter  of 
the  franchise  was  even  more  galling.  Though  the  population 
of  Massachusetts  was  probably  over  15,000  at  the  time  of  the 
petition,  up  to  1643  only  1,708  persons  had  become  citizens  in  the 
Colony,  and  of  them  a  number  had  removed  to  Connecticut.  If 
the  ecclesiastical  test  was  not  applied  in  Plymouth,  the  case  was 
even  worse  there;  so  difficult  was  it  to  obtain  citizenship  that 
out  of  some  3,000  inhabitants  only  about  230  had  been  enfran- 
chised by  1643. 2  Not  only  were  the  majority  of  the  male  inhabit- 
ants thus  shut  out  from  any  active  share  in  the  government,  the 
ranks  of  the  excluded  contained  many  of  wealth,  character,  and  in- 
fluence in  the  community.  But  while  it  must  be  admitted  that  the 
complaints  of  the  disfranchised  had  much  justification,  the  time 
was  no  fit  season   for  a   change  in  the  constitution.     The  leaders 


(though  it  cannot  be  denyed  but  some  are  well  qualifyed)  no  not  so  much  as  to  have  any  vote  in 
choosing  magistrates,  captains  or  other  civill  and   military  officers ;   notwithstanding   they    have 

.  .  .  paid  all  assessments,  taxes,  rates.  .  .  .  We  therefore  desire  that  civill  liberty  and  free- 
dom be   forthwith  granted  to  all  truely  English,  equall  to  the  rest  of  their  countrymen 

3.  Whereas  their  are  diverse  sober,  righteous  and  godly  men,  eminent  for  knowledge  and  other 
gracious  gifts  of  the  holy  spirit,  no  wayes  scandalous  in  their  lives  and  conversation,  members  of 
the  church  of  Endland  .  .  .  not  dissenting  from  the  latest  and  best  reformation  of  England, 
Scotland,  &c.  yet  they  and  their  posterity  are  deteined  from  the  seales  of  the  covenant  of  free 
grace,  because,  as  it  is  supposed,  they  will  not  take  these  churches  covenants,  for  which  as  yet  they 
see  no  light  in  Gods  word  .  .  .  They  are  compelled,  under  a  severe  fine,  every  Lords  day  to  ap- 
pear at  the  congregation,  and  notice  is  taken  of  such  who  stay  not  till  baptism  be  administred  to 
other  mens  children,  though  deneyed  to  their  owne  ;     .     .     .     We  therefore  humbly  intreat  you 

.  .  .  to  give  liberty  to  members  of  the  church  of  England,  not  scandalous  in  their  lives  and 
conversations  .  .  .  to  be  taken  into  your  congregation  and  to  enjoy  with  you  all  those  liberties 
and  ordinances  Christ  hath  purchased  for  them  ...  or  otherwise  to  grant  liberty  to  settle 
themselves  here  in  a  church  way,  according  to  the  best  reformations  of  England  and  Scotland,  if 
not,  we  and  they  shall  be  necessitated  to  apply  our  humble  desires  to  the  honourable  houses  of 
parliament." 

1  See  ante,  p.  106. 

2  These  figures  may  be  found  in  Palfrey,  History  0/ New  England,  II  :  5-8. 


166  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

of  New  England  felt  that  they  were  the  champions  of  a  religious 
cause  not  only  in  their  own  land  but  in  England, —  a  cause,  too, 
which  was  unpopular  in  the  eyes  of  the  majority  of  Parliament. 
They  feared  that  their  system  was  to  be  attacked  by  the  English 
authorities  in  its  political  and  ecclesiastical  features  ;  and  they 
felt,  therefore,  that  instead  of  effecting  any  changes,  the  result 
of  which  it  was  impossible  to  foresee,  they  must  strengthen  the 
foundations  of  existing  institutions  and  prepare  to  meet  opposi- 
tion.    The  petition  was  therefore  laid  over  till  the  next  session.1 

But  though  the  petition  was  not  dealt  with  at  this  time,  the 
movement  which  led  to  the  petition,  rather  than  the  petition 
itself,2  had  determined  the  ministers  and  magistrates  of  the  Col- 
ony to  secure,  if  possible,  a  united  ecclesiastical  constitution. 
Congregationalism  had  passed  the  experimental  stage.  It  was 
no  longer  the  polity  of  small  and  isolated  congregations,  like 
those  of  Amsterdam  or  Scrooby.  It  was  now  substantially  the 
established  church  of  New  England,  and  as  such  was  united  by 
common  interests,  and  bound  together  by  the  necessarily  con- 
servative attitude  toward  other  polities  which  such  a  position  im- 
plied. As  yet  this  essential  unity  had  had  no  expression.  Its 
features  had  been  delineated  in  many  works  of  recognized  value, 
but  they  had  found  no  authoritative  statement.  There  was  no 
standard  by  which  the  relations  of  one  church  to  another  could 
be  determined  ;  none  which  decided  whether  a  certain  course  of 
action  was  Congregational  or  not.  Whether  the  creation  of  such 
a  standard  was  strictly  in  accordance  with  the  original  principles 
of  Congregationalism  may  be  questioned;  but  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  it  was  a  logical  and  necessary  step  in  development 
if  Congregationalism  was  to  be  enforced  by  the  civil  government 
as  an  exclusive  polity.  The  difference  between  English  and 
American  Congregationalism  is  chiefly  due  to  this  unlikeness  of  re- 

i  Winthrop,  II:  321. 

=  Whether  the  order  for  a  Synod  followed  the  presentation  of  the  petition  is  doubtful  — the 
Court  began  May  6,  1646,  and  lasted  "near  three  weeks"  (i.  e.,  till  about  the  25th).  The  order 
for  the  Synod  is  entered  in  the  Colony  Records  (II :  154),  under  date  of  May  15.  It  was  the 
subject  also  of  considerable  discussion  before  its  passage.  But  Winthrop  (II  :  321),  declares  that 
the  petition  was  presented,  "  the  «ourt  being  then  near  at  an  end." 


THE   COURT   CALLS   A   SYNOD  1 67 

lationship  to  the  state  and  to  other  ecclesiastical  bodies.  English 
Independency  has  always  occupied  a  more  or  less  conscious  po-* 
sition  of  protest  against  the  established  Episcopacy.  It  has  never 
had  state  support.  It  has  therefore  always  had  a  certain  radical 
and  innovating  character,  and  the  necessity  of  fixing  its  own 
standards  has  never  been  sharply  impressed  upon  it  ;  rather  its 
whole  course  has  been  one  of  protest  against  standards  erected 
and  imposed  by  authority.  But  New  England  Congregationalism, 
in  becoming  a  dominant  church-system  enjoying  the  support  of 
the  state,  took  of  necessity  a  conservative  position.  Other  bodies, 
including  the  Church  of  England  itself,  when  they  appeared  on 
New  England  soil,  were  the  innovators  who  were  to  show  cause 
for  their  departure  from  the  New  England  way.  Such  a  position 
demands  the  establishment  of  standards  and  the  recognition  of 
certain  uniform  methods  of  procedure,  that  the  established  pol- 
ity may  maintain  its  integrity.1 

The  natural  and  Congregational  way  to  arrive  at  any  such 
agreement  in  regard  to  the  common  polity  of  the  churches  was 
by  means  of  a  Synod,  or,  as  modern  Congregationalism  would 
prefer  to  call  it,  a  Council.  But  as  the  Congregationalism  of  the 
seventeenth  century  was  largely  imbued  with  the  feeling  that 
the  officers  of  civil  government  were  to  be  consulted  in  all  affairs 
of  moment  concerning  the  churches,  the  motion  toward  this 
Synod  took  the  form  of  an  application  by  some  of  the  ministers 
to  the  General  Court  of  the  Massachusetts  Colony,  at  its  May 
session  in  1646,  for  the  summons  of  such  a  meeting.2  The  bill, 
which  would  appear  to  have  been  drawn  up  in  form  for  enact- 
ment by  the  ministers  who  presented  it,  encountered  the  same  di- 
versity of  feeling  which  had  been  shown  in  the  Hingham  affair. 
The  magistrates,  in  sympathy  with  the  clerical  applicants,  passed 
the  bill  as  presented  ;  but  the  deputies  of  the  towns  objected  to 
the  mandatory  form  of  the  enactment:3 

"  First,  because  therein  civil  authority  did  require  the  churches  to  send  their 
messengers  to  it,  and  divers  among  them  [the  deputies]  were  not  satisfied  of  any 


1  See  the  suggestive  remarks  of  Palfrey,  Hist.  N.  E..  I 
»  Winthrop,  II :  323.  3  Ibid- 


168  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   ANT)    PLATFORM 

such  power  given  by  Christ  to  the  civil  magistrate  over  the  churches  in  such  cases  ; 
secondly,  whereas  the  main  end  of  the  synod  was  propounded  to  be,  an  agreement 
upon  one  uniform  practice  in  all  the  churches,  the  same  to  be  commended  to  the 
general  court,  etc.,  this  seemed  to  give  power  either  to  the  synod  or  the  court  to 
compel  the  churches  to  practise  what  should  so  be  established." 

The  magistrates  were  ready  in  the  main  to  defend  the  posi- 
tions to  which  the  deputies  objected.  They  declared  the  right  of 
the  magistrates  to  summon  representatives  from  the  churches 
when  occasion  demanded;1  and  though  they  were  clear  that 
the  proposed  Synod  would  have  no  power  to  command,  but  only 
to  counsel,  they  were  positive  that  the  Court  could  enforce  or 
reject  the  result,  as  it  seemed  to  the  mind  of  the  Legislature  to 
accord  or  not  with  the  Word  of  God.  Yet  it  was  evident  that 
something  should  be  conceded  to  the  deputies'  scruples,  and  it 
was  therefore  decided  that,  though  the  Court  would  waive  none 
of  the  theoretic  rights  asserted  by  the  magistrates,  the  call  should 
take  the  form  of  invitation  rather  than  command.  Agreement 
being  thus  reached,  both  houses  united  in  a  request  for  the  de- 
sired Synod. 

The  length  of  the  document  which  embodies  this  call  might 
well  seem  to  make  its  omission  here  desirable,  was  it  not  for 
the  light  which  it  sheds  on  the  matters  which  the  General  Court 
supposed  would  form  the  topic  of  the  Synod's  discussions.  A 
careful  reading  will  show  that  the  Court  intended  a  more  direct 
treatment  of  the  questions  raised  by  Vassall,  Child,  and  their  as- 
sociates than  the  Synod  actually  gave  ;  and  it  certainly  shows 
that  problems  which  have  usually  been  associated  with  a  later 
stage  of  New  England  history  were  uppermost  in  the  minds  of 
those  who  issued  the  call. 

"  Boston,  y"  15th  3th  m,  i646.s 
The  right  forme  of  church  gov'mn"  &  discipline  being  agreed3  pt  of  y*  king- 
dome  of  Christ  upon  earth,  therefore  ye  establishing  &  settleing  thereof  by  y'  ioynt 
&  publike  agreem'  &  consent  of  churches,  &  by  y6  sanction  of  civill  authority,  must 


'  The  reason  given  is  that  God  has  laid  on.the  civil  rulers  the  duty  of  maintaining  the  purity 
of  the  churches,  both  in  doctrine  and  discipline.     Ibid. 

■  The  call  is  recorded  in  the  Journal  of  the  upper  house,  Records  .  .  .  Mass.  Bay, 
II  :  154-156,  and  of  the  lower,  Ibid.,  Ill :  70-73.  There  are  a  few  minor  verbal  differences,  which 
will  be  noted  only  when  they  affect  the  sense.     The  text  here  given  is  that  of  the  upper  house. 

3  Deputies'  Record,  a  good  f>te. 


TEXT   OF  THE   CALL  1O9 

needs  greatly  conduce  to  y*  hono'  &  glory  of  or  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  &  to  y"  settleing  & 
safety  of  church  and  cofnon  wealth,  where  such  a  duty  is  diligently '  attended  & 
p'fonned  ;  &  in  asmuch  as  times  of  publike  peace,  wch  by  ye  mrcy  of  God  are 
vouchsafed  to  these  plantations,  but  how  long  ye  same  may  continue  wee  do  not 
know,  are  much  more  comodious  for  ye  effecting  of  such  a  worke  then  those  trouble- 
some times  of  warr  &  publike  disturbances  thereby,  as  ye  example  of  or  deare  native 
country  doth  witnes  at  this  day,  where  by  reason  of  ye  publike  comotions  &  troubles 
in  ye  state  of5  reformation  of  religion,  &  ye  establishing  of  yc  same  is  greatly  retarded, 
&  at  ye  best  cannot  be  p'fected  w'^out  much  difficulty  &  danger,  &  whereas  divers  of 
or  Christian  country  men  &  freinds  in  England,  both  of  ye  ministry  &  othrs,  con- 
sidering ye  state  of  things  in  this  country  in  regard  of  or  peace  &  otherwise,  have  sun- 
dry times,  out  of  their  brothTly  faithfulnes,  &  love,  &  care  of  our  weldoing,  earnestly  by 
lett"  from  thence  solicited,  &  called  upon  us  yl  wee  would  not  neglect  ye  oportunity 
wcU  God  hath  put  in  our  hands  for  ye  effecting  of  so  glorious  &  good  a  worke  as  is 
mentioned,  whose  advertisem'5  are  not  to  be  passed  over  without  due  regard  had 
thereunto,  &  considring  w,hall  y',  through  want  of  y"  thing  here  spoken  of,  some 
differences  of  opinion  &  practice  of  one  church  from  anothr  do  already  appeare 
amongst  us,  &  oth"  (if  not  timely  p'vented)  are  like  speedily  to  ensue,  &  this  not 
onely  in  lesser  things,  but  even  in  pointes  of  no  small  consequence  &  very  materiall, 
to  instance  in  no  more  but  onely  those  about  baptisme,  &  ye  p'sons  to  be  received 
thereto,  in  wch  one  pticular  ye  app'hensions  of  many  p'sons  in  ye  country  are  knowne 
not  a  little  to  differ;  for  whereas  in  most  churches  the  minist™  do  baptize 3  onely 
such  children  whose  nearest  parents,  one  or  both  of  them,  are  setled  membrs,  in  full 
comunion  wlb  one  or  other  of  these  churches,  there  be  some  who  do  baptize  ye  chil- 
dren if  ye  grandfather  or  grandmother  be  such  members,  though  the  imediate  parents 
be  not,4  &  othra  though  for  avoyding  of  offence  of  neighbor  churches,  they  do  not  as 
yet  actually  so  practice,  yet  they  do  much  incline  thereto,  as  thinking  more  liberty 
and  latitude  in  this  point  ought  to  be  yeilded  then  hath  hitherto  bene  done,6  & 
many  p'sons  liveing  in  ye  country  who  have  bene  members  of  ye  congregations  in 
England,  but  are  not  found  fit  to  be  received  at  ye  Lords  table  here,  there  be  not- 
wtbstanding  considerable  p'sons  in  these  churches  who  do  thinke  that  ye  children  of 
these  also,  upon  some  conditions  &  tearmes,  may  &  ought  to  be  baptized  likewise  ; 
on  the  othr  side  there  be  some  amongst  us  who  do  thinke  that  whatever  be  ye  state 
of  y*  parents,  baptisme  ought  not  to  be  dispensed  to  any  infants  whatsoever,6  wcb  va- 
rious app'hensions  being  seconded  w,h  practices  according  thereto,  as  in  part  they 
already  are,  &  are  like  to  be  more,  must  needs,  if  not  timely  remedied  beget  such 
differences  as  wilbe  displeasing  to  the  Lord,  offensive  to  others,  &  dangerous  to 
our  selues,  therefore 7  for  the  further  healing  &  preventing  of  the  further  groth  of  the 
said  differences,  and  upon  other  groundes,  and  for  other  ends  aforementioned. 


1  Ibid.,  dewly.  2  Ibid.    ye.  3  Ibid.,  omits  baptize. 

4  Cotton  had  declared  this  to  be  the  view  held  by  him  and  the  Boston  church,  in  a  letter 
written  to  the  Dorchester  church  as  early  as  Dec.  16,  1634.  See  Increase  Mather,  First  Principles 
if  New  England,  Concerning  The  Subject  0/  Baptisme,  etc.,  Cambridge,  1675,  p.  2  ;  Hooker 
took  the  opposite  view.     Survey,  Pt.  3,  pp.  9-27. 

5  As  early  as  1645,  Richard  Mather  had  advocated  what  was  substantially  the  half-way-cov- 
enant position.     First  Principles,  etc.,  p.  11. 

6  Instances  of  Baptist  believers,  at  Salem  and  elsewhere  in  Massachusetts  colony,  previous  to 
1646,  will  be  found  in  G.  E.  Ellis,  Puritan  Age  .  .  .  in  Mass.,  pp.  379-386.  It  is  possible  that 
some  inkling  of  the  views  of  Henry  Dunster,  which  were  to  compel  him  to  resign  the  presidency  of 
Harvard  College  in  1654,  had  already  got  abroad. 

7  In  the  Deputies'  Record  this  clause  beginning  there/ore  opens  the  next  paragraph. 


i;o  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

Althrough  this  Courte  make  no  question  of  their  lawfull  power  by  the  word  of 
God  to  assemble  the  churches,  or  their  messeng'8,  upon  occasion  of  counsell,  or  any 
thing  wch  may  concerne  the  practise  of  the  churches,  yet  because  all  members  of  the 
churches  (though  godly  &  faithfull)  are  not  yet  clearely  satisfied  in  this  point,  it  is 
therefore  thought  expedient,  for  the  p'sent  occasion,  not  to  make  use  of  that  power, 
but  rather  to  exprese1  or  desire  that  the  churches  will  answere  the  desire  of  this 
p'sent  Generall  Corte,  that  there  be  a  publike  assembly  of  the  elders  <.V  other  messen- 
gers of  the  severall  churches  within  this  jurisdiction,  who  may  come  together  & 
meete  at  Cambridge  upon  the  first  day  of  September  now  next  ensuing,  there  to 
discusse,  dispute,  &  cleare  up,  by  the  word  of  God,  such  questions  of  church  gov- 
ernm1  6c  discipline  in  ye  things  aforementioned,  or  any  othr,  as  they  shall  thinke 
needfull  &  meete,  &  to  continue  so  doing  till  they,  or  ye  maior  part  of  them,  shall 
have  agreed  &  consented  upon  one  forme  of  govrment  &  discipline,  for  the  maine 
&  substantiall  pts  thereof,  as  that  wch  they  iudge  agreeable  to  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
which  worke,  if  it  be  found  greater  then  can  well  be  dispatched  at  one  meeting,  or 
session  of  y°  said  assembly,  they  may  then,  as  occasion  &  neede  shall  require,  make 
two  sessions  or  more,  for  ye  finishing  of  ye  same  ;  &  what  the)-  shall  agree  upon  they 
shall  exhibite  y'  same  in  writing  to  y*  Govern',  or  Deputy  Govrnr,  for  y"  time  being, 
who  shall  p'sent  y*  same  to  y"  Genrall  Courte  then  next  ensuing,  to  ye  end  that  the 
same  being  found  agreeable  to  ye  word  of  God,  it  may  receive  from  y*  said  Gen'all 
Corte  such  app'bation  as  is  meete,  that  y"  Lord  being  thus  acknowledged  by  church 
&  state  to  be  or  Iudge,  or  Lawgiver,  &  or  King,  he  may  be  graciously  pleased  still 
to  save  us,  as  hithrto  hee  hath  done,  &  glory  may  still  dwell  in  or  land,  truth  &  peace 
may  abide  still  in  these  churches  &  plantations,  &  or  posterity  may  not  so  easily 
decline  from  ye  good  way,  when  they  shall  receive  y*  same  thus  publikely  &  sol- 
emnly contended  to  them,  but  may  rath'  ad  to  such  beginings  of  reformation  & 
purity  as  wee  in  or  times  have  endeav'ed  after,  &  so  y«  churches  in  Xewe  England 
may  be  Jehovahs,  &  hee  may  be  to  us  a  God  from  gen'ation  to  generation. 

And  as  for  y*  cost  &  charges  of  y«  said  Assembly,  its  thought  meete,  iust,  & 
equall  that  those  churches  who  shall  thinke  meete  to  send  their  eld's  &  messeng's  shall 
take  such  care  as  that,  dureing  their  attendance  at  ye  said  Assembly,  they  may  be  p'vided 
for,  as  is  meete,  tV  what  strangers  or  oth'8  shall,  for  their  owne  edification,  be  p'sent 
at  the  said  Assembly,  they  to  p'vide  for  themselues  &  bear  their  owne  charge.  And,5 
forasmuch  as  ye  plantations  w'hin  y"  iurisdictions  of  Plimoth,  Conectecott,  &  Xewe 
Haven  are  combined  <S:  united  w,h  these  plantations  w"'in  y"  Massachusets,  in  y" 
same  civill  combination  &  confederacy, — 3 

It  is  therefore  hereby  ordered  &  agreed,  that  ye  churches  w'Mn  ye  said  iurisdic- 
tions shalbe  requested  to  send  their  elders  &  messeng'5  to  y*  Assembly  aforemen- 
tioned, for  w'h  end  y"  Secretary  for  ye  time  being  shall  send  a  sufficient  number  of 
coppies  of  this  p'sent4  declaration  unto  ye  eld's  of  ye  churches  w"'in  ye  iurisdictions 
aforementioned,  or  unto  ye  governer  or  govern'8,  comission'  or  comission'*,  for  j* 
said  confederate  iurisdictions  respectively,  that  so  those  churches,  haveing  timely  no- 
tice thereof,  may  ye  bett'  p'vide  to  send  their  eld"  &  messengers  to  y"  Assembly, 
who,  being  so  sent,  shall  be  received  as  pts  &  members5  thereof,  &  shall  have  like 


1  Deputies'  Record  reads,  rather  hereby  declare  it  to  I>e  ye  desire  of  this  psent  Gennerali 
Courte.  yt  there  be  a  public kt  assembly. 

2  In  the  Deputies'  Record  this  sentence  begins  the  next  paragraph. 

3  Reference  is  here  made  to  the  union  effected  between  the  four  colonies  in  1643. 
*  Deputies'  Record,  psent  order  or  declarcon.  ""  Ibid.,  pte  memb's. 


RECEPTION   BY   THE   CHURCHES  I /I 

lib'ty  &  po\vr  of  disputing  &  voting  therein,   as  shall  y"  messeng"  &  eld"  of  ye 
churches  \v,hin  ye  iurisdiction  of  ye  Massachusets." 

It  is  evident  that  the  Court  intended  that  the  Synod  should 
pass  upon  the  questions  regarding  baptism  and  church-member- 
ship which  were  already  agitating  the  community,  and  which  ap- 
peared in  the  petition  of  Dr.  Child  and  his  associates. 

The  summer  between  the  adjournment  of  the  Court  and  the 
time  set  for  the  meeting  of  the  Synod  was  spent  largely  in  discus- 
sion, in  which  that  petition  and  its  supporters  came  in  for  a  full 
share  of  condemnation  from  the  upholders  of  existing  institutions.1 
But  it  is  plain  that  the  frequent  sermons  to  which  Massachusetts 
congregations  listened  that  summer  did  not  wholly  remove  the  ob- 
jections entertained  by  many  as  to  the  propriety  of  a  Synod,  and 
especially  of  a  Synod  called  by  the  General  Court,  in  spirit  if  not 
in  letter.  When  the  appointed  first  of  September  arrived,  how- 
ever, all  the  Massachusetts  churches  had  sent  their  representa- 
tives, "except  Boston,  Salem,  Hingham,  Concord."2  The  absence 
of  the  latter  was  accidental,  for  Concord  had  not  been  able  to  find 
any  brother  fit  to  send  and  its  pastor  was  hindered.  Hingham,  in 
view  of  recent  events,  would  hardly  have  been  likely  to  respond  to 
an  invitation  of  the  General  Court,  even  if  the  Presbyterian  sym- 
pathies of  its  minister  had  been  less  pronounced.  But  with  Boston 
and  Salem  the  case  was  more  serious.  These  churches,  one  the 
oldest  and  the  other  the  largest  in  the  Colony,  took  exception  to 
the  Synod3  — 

"  I.  Because  by  a  grant  in  the  Liberties  the  elders  had  liberty  to  assemble 
without  the  compliance  of  civil  authority,  2.  It  was  reported,  that  this  motion  came 
originally  from  some  of  the  elders,  and  not  from  the  court,  3.  In  the  order  was  ex- 
pressed, that  what  the  major  part  of  the  assembly  should  agree  upon  should  be  pre- 
sented to  the  court,  that  they  might  give  such  allowance  to  it  as  should  be  meet,  hence 
was  inferred  that  this  synod  was  appointed  by  the  elders,  to  the  intent  to  make  eccle- 
siastical laws  to  bind  the  churches,  and  to  have  the  sanction  of  the  civil  authority  put 
upon  them." 


1  A  defence  of  the  petitioners  was  published  at  London  in  1647  by  J.  Child,  brother  of  the 
petitioner,  under  the  title  of  Xe-v-Englands  Jonas  cast  up  at  London  ;  or  a  Relation  0/  the  Pro- 
ceedings of  the  Court  at  Boston  in  N.  E.  etc.,  in  which  much  complaint  is  made  of  pulpit  attacks 
upon  the  petitioners.  The  work  has  been  several  times  reprinted,  2  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  IV: 
107-120  ;  Force,  Tracts,  Washington,  1836-46,  IV  ;  and  with  prefatory  matter  by  W.  T.  R.  Marvin, 
Boston,  1869. 

2Winthrop,  II:  329.  S Ibid. 


172  THE   CAMBRIDGE   SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

These  views,  Winthrop  tells  us,  were  chiefly  advanced  by  those 
"  who  came  lately  from  England,  where  such  a  vast  liberty  was 
allowed,  and  sought  for  by  all  that  went  under  the  name  of  Inde- 
pendents."1 Their  advocates  were  able  to  quote  in  their  behalf 
not  only  such  stout  defenders  of  English  Congregationalism  as 
Goodwin,  Nye,  and  Burroughes,  but  a  positive  order  enjoining 
"  that  all  men  should  enjoy  their  liberty  of  conscience,"  issued  by 
the  Commissioners  for  Plantations,  a  board  recently  established 
by  Parliament,2  to  the  English  settlers  in  the  West  Indies  and  Ber- 
muda,—  an  order  which  the  Commissioners  had  sent  to  Massachu- 
setts in  the  softened  form  of  advice.  This  party  of  opposition  to 
the  Synod  embraced  some  thirty  or  forty  of  the  Boston  church. 

Here,  then,  was  material  for  a  serious  division,  the  more  so 
that  some  of  the  points  raised  were  of  a  nature  exceedingly  diffi- 
cult to  answer.  The  first  objection,  for  instance,  was  based  on  the 
provision  of  the  Body  of  Liberties  of  1641,  that3  — 

"  The  Elders  of  the  Churches  have  free  libertie  to  meete  monthly,  Quarterly,  or 
otherwise,  in  convenient  numbers  and  places,  for  conferences,  and  consultations  about 
Christian  and  Church  questions  and  occasions." 

But  the  majority  of  the  church,  of  whom  Winthrop  was  doubt- 
less the  leader,  had  a  ready  reply  to  all  the  criticisms.  That  to 
the  first  demurrer  is  perhaps  the  most  curious.  They  affirmed 
that  the  permission  to  ministers  to  meet  upon  their  own  motion,4 

"was  granted  only  for  a  help  in  case  of  extremity,  if,  in  time  to  come,  the  civil  au- 
thority should  either  grow  opposite  to  the  churches,  or  neglect  the  care  of  them,  and 
not  with  any  intent  to  practise  the  same,  while  the  civil  authority  were  nursing  fathers 
to  the  churches." 

It  was  further  urged,  as  an  answer  to  the  second  objection,  that  it 
was  really  no  concern  of  the  churches  b 

1  Ibid. 

2  The  Commissioners  for  Plantations  were  a  board  of  six  lords  and  twelve  commoners,  created 
by  Parliament  Nov.  2,  1643  ;  and  designed  to  exercise  whatever  authority  had  been  enjoyed  by  King 
Charles  over  these  plantations.  Among  the  commoners  was  Samuel  Vassall,  a  brother  of  the  New 
England  agitator,  William  Vassall,  —  a  fact  which  explains  something  of  the  confidence  with  which 
he  and  the  petitioners  proposed  to  appeal  to  English  authority,  and  the  dread  with  which  the  min- 
isters and  Court  regarded  his  schemes.     See  Palfrey,  1 :  633,  634. 

3  The  Body  of  Liberties  was  a  code  of  laws  drawn  up  chiefly  by  Rev.  Nathaniel  Ward  of 
Ipswich,  and  adopted  by  the  General  Court,  for  trial  and  approval  by  use,  in  December,  1641.  The 
code  may  be  found  in  3  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Sac.,  VIII:  191-237.  See  also  Winthrop,  II:  66;  and 
Felt,  Ecclesiastical  History,  I  :  439,  440.     The  law  is  section  95,  clause  7. 

■•Winthrop,  II:  330.  6  Ibid. 


RELUCTANCE    OF   THE    BOSTON   CHURCH  1 73 

"to  inquire,  what  or  who  gave  the  court  occasion  to  call  the  synod,  ...  it  was 
the  churches'  duty  to  yield  it  to  them  [the  Court];  for  so  far  as  it  concerns  their  com- 
mand or  request  it  is  an  ordinance  of  man,  which  we  [the  churches]  are  to  submit 
unto  for  the  Lord's  sake,  without  troubling  ourselves  with  the  occasion  or  success." 

To  the  third  point  of  criticism  it  was  answered  that  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Court  did  not  forbid  the  Synod  to  submit  their  finding 
to  the  churches  for  approval  before  returning  it  to  the  Court,  and 
did  not  imply  that  the  Court  intended  to  make  it  penally  binding. 

But,  spite  of  these  reasonings,  the  objectors  were  not  con- 
vinced; and  after  two  Sabbaths  spent  in  vain  agitation,  the  pastor 
and  teacher,  Wilson  and  Cotton,  "  told  the  congregation,  that  they 
thought  it  their  duty  to  go  notwithstanding,  not  as  sent  by  the 
church,  but  as  specially  called  by  the  order  of  the  court."1  Mean- 
while the  Synod  had  met,  and  had  sent  an  urgent  appeal  to  the 
Boston  church  to  choose  delegates,  since  it  was  clear  to  the  Synod 
that  a  refusal  on  the  part  of  Boston  and  Salem  would  peril  the 
whole  enterprise.  On  the  reception  of  these  letters  the  ruling 
elders,  Thomas  Oliver  and  Thomas  Leverett,  hastily  summoned 
such  of  the  church  as  they  could  gather  on  Wednesday,  September 
2;  but  "  nothing  could  be  done."2  On  the  following  day,  however, 
the  regular  Thursday  lecture  was  given,  and  thither  the  greater 
part  of  the  Synod  repaired.  It  is  probable  that  the  Boston  minis- 
ters felt  that,  under  the  circumstances,  a  stranger's  voice  would  be 
more  persuasive,  and  Rev.  John  Norton  of  Ipswich,  later  to  be 
teacher  of  the  Boston  church,  was  well  fitted  for  the  task.     He3 

"took  his  text  suitable  to  the  occasion,  viz.,  of  Moses  and  Aaron  meeting  in  the 
mount  and  kissing  each  other,  where  he  laid  down  the  nature  and  power  of  the  synod, 
as  only  consultative,  decisive,  and  declarative,  not  coactive,  etc.  He  showed  also  the 
power  of  the  civil  magistrate  in  calling  such  assemblies,  and  the  duty  of  the  churches 
in  yielding  obedience  to  the  same.  He  showed  also  the  great  offence  and  scandal 
which  would  be  given  in  refusing,  etc." 

Norton's  sermon  was  not  without  considerable  effect,  and 
when  the  question  was  next  brought  up  by  the  Boston  church,  on 
Sunday,  September  6,  the  matter  was  finally  put  to  vote  by  show 
of  hands.  The  majority  was  clearly  in  favor  of  representation  in 
the  Synod;  but  the  minority  objected  that  the  church  had  hitherto 


174  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

required  a  unanimous  vote  for  important  decisions.  The  force  of 
the  objection  was  felt;  but  the  majority  replied  that  the  case  was 
one  demanding  action,  unanimous  if  possible,  if  not,  the  majority 
must  act.  At  this  stage  of  proceedings  the  spirit  of  well  meant 
but  impracticable  compromise  took  hold  of  some  of  the  brethren, 
and  it  was  seriously  proposed  that,  instead  of  sending  delegates, 
the  church  should  attend  the  Synod  in  a  body.  Happily  good 
sense  prevailed,  and  "  in  the  end  it  was  agreed  by  vote  of  the 
major  part,  that  the  elders  and  three  of  the  brethren  should  be 
sent  as  messengers."1  The  absence  of  records  and  of  a  chronicler 
like  Winthrop  make  it  impossible  to  follow  the  course  of  the  dis- 
cussion in  the  Salem  church,  but  we  may  presume,  since  we  hear 
nothing  further  regarding  its  opposition  to  the  Synod,  that  argu- 
ments similar  to  those  used  at  Boston  overcame  its  reluctance. 
The  Synod,  therefore,  was  able  to  set  about  its  work  with  the 
moral  support  of  twenty-eight  of  the  twenty-nine  churches  in  the 
Massachusetts  Colony  (to  which  the  two  churches  of  New  Hamp- 
shire should  be  added,  that  province  being  then  under  the  protec- 
tion of  Massachusetts);  and  the  good-will,  together  with  a  few 
representatives,  of  the  twenty-two  churches  of  Plymouth,  Con- 
necticut, and  New  Haven.2 

Though  ready  for  deliberation  at  last,  a  variety  of  causes  pre- 
vented the  doing  of  much  of  importance  at  this  session  of  the 
Synod.  The  disputes  at  Boston  had  taken  a  number  of  days,  the 
season  was  late,3  and  "few  of  the  elders  of  other  colonies  [than 

1  Hid.,  332. 

-  Under  no  claim  of  infallibility  the  following  list  of  churches  in  the  four  confederate  colonies 
is  subjoined  —  the  dates  are  those  of  organization.  Massachusetts.,  Salem,  1620,  Poston,  1630, 
Watertown,  1630,  Roxbury,  1632,  Lynn,  1632,  Charlcstown,  1632,  Ipswich,  1634,  Newbury,  1635, 
Hingham,  1635,  Weymouth,  1635,  Cambridge,  1636,  Concord,  1636,  Dorchester,  1636,  Springfield, 
1637,  Salisbury,  1638,  Dedham,  163S,  Quincy,  1639,  Rowley,  1639,  Sudbury,  1640,  Edgartown,  1641  ? 
Woburn,  1042,  Gloucester,  1642,  Hull,  1644,  Wenham,  1644,  Haverhill,  1645,  Andover,  1645,  Read- 
ing, 1645,  Topsfield,  1645,  Manchester,  1645.  [New  Hampshire,  Hampton,  1638,  Dover,  1638, 
1638,  was  dead.)  Plymouth,  Plymouth,  ife..?  Duxbury,  1632.  Marshfield,  1632,  Siituate 
[1  ondon,  1616],  1654  (removed  to  Barnstable  1639),  Taunton,  1637,  Sandwich,  1638,  Yarmouth,  1639, 
Scituate  (new),  1639,  South  s.  ituati  ,11,  Rehoboth,  1644,  F.astham,  1646.  Connecticut,  Windsor, 
ti  .  II, ml. it,!,  1633,  Wethersfield,  i',<|(i]?  Saybrook,  1639U6]  ?  Fairfield,  1 639^0]?  Stratford, 
1640?  South  Hampton,  I..  I.  (under  Conn,  jurisdiction),  1640?  New  Haven,  Xew  Haven,  1639, 
Milford,  1639,  Stamford,  1641?  Guilford,  1643,  Branford,  1044  (from  South  Hampton,  I..  I.).  The 
question  mark  indicates  doubt  as  to  date  <>f  organization.  See  Dexter.  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  412  ;  and 
Cong.  Quarterly,  IV  :  26  ,,  270  (July,  1862) ;  Clark,  Hist.  Sketch  of  the  Cong.  Chs.  in  Mass.,  Bos- 
ton, 1858;  Punchard,  Hist.  <</  Congregationalism,  IV,  passim. 

3  It  should  be  remembered  that  we  have  to  do  with  old  style  dates  —  the  day  of  meeting, 
therefore,  corresponded  with  the  modern  Sept.  n. 


THE    FIRST    SESSION,    1 646  1 75 

Massachusetts]  were  present."1  Yet  substantial  progress  was 
made.  A  committee  prepared  and  presented  a  paper  of  some 
length  on  the  much  debated  problems  regarding  the  power  of  the 
civil  magistrate  to  interfere  in  matters  of  religion,  the  nature  and 
powers  of  a  Synod,  and  the  right  of  the  magistrates  to  call  such 
assemblies.2  The  opinion  expressed  on  the  first  and  third  points 
was  strongly  affirmative,  while  a  Synod  was  declared  to  be,  as 
Norton  pictured  it  to  the  Boston  church,  an  advisory  rather  than 
a  judicial  body.  But  the  Synod  treated  the  report  with  great  cau- 
tion, it  "  being  distinctly  read  in  the  Assembly,  it  was  agreed  thus 
farre  onely,  That  they  should  be  commended  unto  more  serious 
consideration  against  the  next  Meeting."3 

A  yet  more  important  matter  was  the  appointment  by  the 
Synod  of  Rev.  Messrs.  John  Cotton  of  Boston,  Richard  Mather  of 
Dorchester,  and  Ralph  Partridge  of  Duxbury  in  Plymouth  Colony, 
each  to  prepare  a  "  model  of  church  government  "  for  submission 
to  the  assembly  at  its  next  session.4  And  so,  having  sat  "  but 
about  fourteen  days,"5  the  Synod  adjourned  to  the  eighth  of  June, 
1647- 

On  October  7th,  following  the  close  of  the  Synod,  the  General 
Court  met  once  more.  To  its  thinking  the  outlook  was  serious 
enough.  Samuel  Gorton,  who  had  successively  turmoiled  Massa- 
chusetts, Plymouth,  and  Rhode  Island,  and  had  received  severe 
treatment  in  all,  had  gone  to  England  with  two  followers,  Greene 
and  Holden,  in  1644,  and  laid  complaint  against  Massachusetts 
before  the  Commissioners  for  Plantations.     Holden  had  returned. 


1  Winthrop,  II :  332. 

2  Some  extracts  from  this  Report  will  be  given  at  the  close  of  this  introduction.  It  cannot  be 
too  frequently  pointed  out  that  by  a  "  Synod  "  the  New  England  fathers  meant  what  is  now  known 
as  a  council. 

3  Report  —  Result  of  a  Synod  at  Cambridge  in  A".  E.  Anno  ib4b,  p.  1.  Hubbard,  Gen. 
Hist.,  536,  537  ;  and  Mather,  who  follows  him,  Magnalia,  ed.  1S53-5,  II :  210,  quote  a  single  passage 
from  this  report  and  imply  that  the  Synod  endorsed  it.  Such  was  not  the  case,  save  as  represented 
above.  The  statement  that  it  was  "accompanied  with  a  discourse  of  Mr.  Tho.  Allen,  wherein  this 
doctrine  was  further  explained,"  is  also  erroneous.  Allen  wrote  a  simple  preface  to  this  tract  and 
two  others  which  he  bound  with  it.  On  the  joint  title-page  Allen  attributed  its  authorship  to  John 
Cotton,  but  a  careful  reading  of  the  preface  fails  to  give  certainty  to  this  conjecture. 

*  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  II:  211.  Mather  is  doubtless  correct  in  this  statement.  His  grand- 
fathers were  two  of  the  three  designated,  and  the  draft  by  Ralph  Partridge  still  exists  in  the 
manuscript  collections  of  the  American  Antiquarian  Society  at  Worcester. 

*  Winthrop,  II:  332. 


176  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM 

arriving  at  Boston  in  September,  1646,  armed  with  orders  from  the 
Commissioners  directing  that  free  passage  should  be  granted  to 
the  three  complainants  through  Massachusetts  to  Xarragansett 
Bay,1  and  not  obscurely  intimating  that  an  answer  to  the  charges 
was  expected  from  the  Massachusetts  government.2  The  situa- 
tion was  most  embarrassing.  To  refuse  to  honor  the  orders  of 
the  Commissioners  would  mean  a  breach  with  the  home  govern- 
ment, but  to  admit  their  authority  would  be  practically  to  abandon 
the  local  autonomy  of  the  colonial  government.  It  was  clear,  too, 
that  Dr.  Child  and  his  fellow  petitioners  were  alive  to  the  fact 
that  their  prayer  was  to  meet  no  favoring  response  in  Massa- 
chusetts, and  were  about  to  carry  out  their  threat  and  take  the 
case  before  the  Commissioners.  If  the  authority  of  that  board 
was  admitted  by  the  colonial  government  in  one  matter,  what  was 
to  prevent  the  imposition  by  the  Commissioners  of  all  the  changes 
desired  by  Vassall  or  Child?  On  Holden's  coming  the  magistrates 
in  Boston  had  consulted  the  ministers  who  happened  to  be  in  the 
town  for  the  Thursday  lecture,  and  they  had  decided,  on  the  whole, 
to  allow  Holden  free  passage,  without  raising  the  question  of  the 
validity  of  his  documents.3  But  it  was  impossible  to  temporize 
much  longer.  The  court,  therefore,  at  its  October  meeting  took 
prompt  steps.     A  committee  of  four  was  appointed  to4 

"examine  all  the  answ"  yl  are  brought  into  this  Corte  to  ye  petition  of  Docto'  Child 
&  M'  P'ovvle,  etc,  &  out  of  all  to  draw  up  such  an  ans\vr  thereto  as  they  thinke  most 
meete,  &  p'sent  y'  same  to  this  Corte,  &  furthr  to  tteate  wth  M'  Winslow,5  &  to  agree 
w,h  him  as  an  agent  for  us,  to  answer  to  what  shalbe  obiected  against  us  in  England." 

Pending  the  labors  of  this  committee  the  Court  adjourned  till 
November  4,  following. 

On  its  reassembling  the  Court  adopted  a  most  remarkable 
document,  doubtless  the  work  of  the  committee  as  authors  or  re- 
visers.     In  a  "  Declaration."  ,;  intended  evidently  for  effect   in  Eng- 

1  To  follow  the  Story  of  these  men,  Antinomians  whom  the  age  hardly  knew  how  to  deal  with, 
is  aside  from  our  purpose.      Among  many  sources  of  information   I  may  cite  Winthrop,  passim  ; 

Hutchinson,  Hist Wats.  Bay,  1 :  117-134 ;  Allen,  Biographical  Diet.,  Boston,  1857,  pp. 

390,  391  ;  Palfrey,  Hist.  X.  /:'.,  II:   1 16-140,  205-220. 

*  Winthrop,  II:  333,  342-344.  3  Ibid.,  v,4- 

« Records    .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  II:  16a.  6  Edward  Winslow,  the  Plymouth  pilgrim. 

6  The  text  may  be  found  in  Hutchinson,  Collection  :   196-218. 


CONTINUED    OPPOSITION    IN   THE   COLONY  1 77 

land,  they  opposed  the  petition  of  Child  and  his  associates,  and 
justified  the  form  and  methods  of  the  Massachusetts  government. 
In  parallel  columns  they  placed  the  main  provisions  of  the  magna 
charta  and  English  common  law  and  the  answering  enactments  of 
the  charter,  liberties  and  laws  of  Massachusetts.  They  denied  that 
taxation  had  been  unfair  or  burdensome,  they  claimed  that  the 
petitioners  did  not  really  represent  the  unenfranchised,1  that  ad- 
mission to  the  church  and  its  ordinances  was  readily  attained  by 
all  who  were  fit,2  while  the  right  of  baptism  of  their  children  was 
at  that  moment  under  discussion  by  the  Synod.'1 

Before  their  agent  should  go  to  England,  however,  it  seemed  to 
the  Court  that  some  understanding  as  to  the  extent  of  their  claims 
to  local  autonomy  should  be  reached  ;  and,  therefore,  "  such  of  the 
elders  as  could  be  had  were  sent  for,  to  have  their  advice  in  the 
matter."  4  After  much  discussion  it  was  the  conclusion  of  both  min- 
isters and  magistrates  that,  though  the  Colony  owed  allegiance  to 
the  English  authorities,  its  powers  of  self-government  were  so  great 
that  no  appeals  from   its  proceedings  could  be  allowed.5     These 


1  "These  remonstrants  would  be  thought  to  be  a  representative  part  of  all  the  non-free- 
men in  the  countrie  ;  but  when  we  have  pulled  off  theire  vizards,  we  find  them  no  other  but 
Robert  Child,  Thomas  Fowle,  &c.  For  first,  although  their  petition  was  received  with  all  gentle- 
nes,  yet  we  heare  of  no  other  partners  that  have  appeared  in  it,  though  it  be  four  months  since  it 
was  presented.  .  .  .  These  \i.  c,  the  non-petitioning]  non-freemen  also  are  well  satisfyed  (as  we 
conceive)  and  doe  blesse  God  for  the  blessings  and  priviledges  they  doe  enjoy  under  this  government. 
They  think  it  is  well,  that  justice  is  equally  administred  to  them  with  the  freemen  ;  that  they  have 
equall  share  with  them  in  all  towne  lotts,  commons,  &c,  that  they  have  like  libertie  of  accesse  to 
the  church  assemblies,  and  like  place  and  respect  there,  according  to  theire  qualities  .  .  .  as  also 
like  freedome  of  trade  and  commerce."     Ibid.,  210,  211. 

2  "  These  remonstrants  are  now  come  to  the  church  doore.  .  .  .  They  tell  us,  'that  divers 
sober,  righteous,  and  godly  men  .  .  .  are  detained  from  the  seales,  because  .  .  .  they  will 
not  take  these  churches  covenant.'  The  petitioners  are  sure  mistaken  or  misrepresent  the  matter; 
for  the  true  reasons  why  many  persons  in  the  country  are  not  admitted  to  the  seales  are  these: 
First,  many  are  fraudulous  in  theire  conversation  ;  or  2dly,  notoriously  corrupt  in  their  opinions  ;  or 
3dly,  grossly  ignorant  in  the  principles  of  religion  ;  or  4thly,  if  any  have  such  knowledge  and  gifts, 
yet  they  doe  not  manifest  the  same  by  any  publick  profession  before  the  church  or  before  the 
elders,  and  so  it  is  not  knowne  that  they  are  thus  qualified.  .  .  .  The  truth  is,  we  account  all 
our  countrymen  brethren  by  nation,  and  such  as  in  charity  we  may  judge  to  be  beleevers  are  ac- 
counted also  brethren  in  Christ.  If  they  [the  petitioners]  be  not  publickly  so  called  (especially  in 
the  church  assemblies)  it  is  not  for  want  of  due  respect  or  good  will  towards  them,  but  only  for  dis- 
tinction sake,  to  putt  a  difference  betweene  those  that  doe  communicate  together  at  the  Lords  table, 
and  those  who  doe  not."     Ibid.,  213,  214,  217. 

3  "  Concerning  the  baptisme  of  the  children  of  such  as  are  not  members  of  our  churches,  there 
is  an  assembly  of  the  elders  now  in  being,  and  therefore  we  think  fitt  to  deferr  any  resolution  about 
that  and  some  other  pointes  concerning  the  church  discipline,  untill  we  shall  understand  theire  con- 
clusion therein,  for  further  light  in  these  things."     Ibid.,  217. 

4  Winthrop,  II :  340. 

5  Ibid.,  341,  345.     John  Allin,  of  Dedham,  was  the  spokesman  of  the  ministers. 


1 78  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

points  being  settled,  and  the  ministers'  views  regarding  the  petition 
of  Child  and  his  associates  having  been  heard,  the  Court  now  pro- 
ceeded to  deal  with  the  petitioners  without  ministerial  advice.'  Two 
of  their  number,  Fowle  and  Smith,  were  arrested,  the  former  as  he 
was  about  to  set  sail  for  England,  and  informed  that  the  Court  held 
them  to  account  for  the  allegations  of  the  petition.3  This  brought 
all  the  petitioners  except  Maverick  into  Court,  and  a  scene  fol- 
lowed in  which  much  heated  speech  was  indulged  on  both  sides  ; 
and  ending  in  an  announcement  by  Child  of  appeal  to  the  Commis- 
sioners, and  a  declaration  by  Winthrop  that  no  appeal  would  be 
admitted.3  A  committee  of  the  Court  then  drew  up  a  list  of  some 
twelve  particulars  in  which  they  declared  the  statements  of  the 
petition  false  and  scandalous;4  to  which  the  petitioners  replied 
seriatim,  and  the  Court  rejoined  "extempore."5  But  through  all 
this  cloud  of  charge  and  countercharge  it  is  easy  to  see  that  the 
real  question  in  the  minds  of  the  Court  was  that  which  Massachu- 
setts was  to  champion  for  all  America  a  century  and  a  quarter  later, 
whether  New  England  affairs  were  to  be  controlled  by  New  Eng- 
land men,  or  by  the  will  of  Parliament.  This  local  independence 
Child  denied.  The  Court  as  stoutly  affirmed  it/'  And  in  this  reso- 
lution of  the  Court  lay  the  future  not  only  of  the  New  England 
churches,  but  of  New  England  liberty.  Vet  while  we  cannot  but 
rejoice  that  the  Court  took  this  attitude,  its  own  course  of  action 
was  arbitrary  enough  ;  and  it  is  with  a  feeling  of  regret  that  we 
learn  that  it  proceeded  to  fine  Child  fifty  pounds,  Smith  forty, 
Maverick  ten,  and  the  rest  thirty  each  ; 7  and  that  when,  about  a 
week  later,  Child  attempted  to  go  to  England  to  prosecute  his 
appeal,  he  was  arrested,  and  Dand's  study  forcibly  entered  and 
searched.  Here  papers  were  found,  designed  for  presentation  to 
the  Commissioners,  setting  forth  the  character  and  conduct  of  the 


1  l!'i'<-<  346.  347- 

-  Ibid.     See  also  Records,  III  ;  88,  89.     The  petitioners  were  all  summoned  by  the  Court. 
3  Ibid.     The  petitioners  were  informed  that  they  were  arraigned  not  for  petitioning  but  for  the 
false  statements  of  the  petition. 

*  Ibid.,  34S-350.     Records    .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  III:  90,  91.  5  Winthrop,  II :  350-354. 

4-355-     "  His  [Child's]  argument  was  this,  every  corporation  of   Kngland  is  subject 
to  the  laws  ,,f  Kngland  ;  but  this  was  a  corporation  of  England.  <  rj 
•  ■'-.  Ill       1-     Fowle  was  "  then  at  sea." 


WINSLOW'S    MISSION   TO    ENGLAND  1 79 

Massachusetts  government  in  no  favorable  light,  questioning 
whether  the  talk  of  the  ministers  and  magistrates  in  the  Colony  did 
not  amount  to  high  treason,  and  whether  the  patent  might  not  be 
forfeited  ;  and  also  praying  that  a  governor  or  commissioner  should 
be  appointed  to  rule  the  Colony,  and  that  Presbyterian  churches  be 
established.1  For  this  presentation  and  request,  which  struck  at 
the  foundations  of  church  and  state  in  the  Colony,  three  of  the 
petitioners  were  committed.  But  though  the  Court  might  imprison, 
the  case  was  sure  of  a  hearing  in  England  for,  before  the  close  of 
1646,  Fowle  and  Vassall  set  sail.  Those  petitioners  who  were  still 
in  the  Massachusetts  jurisdiction,  Child,  Smith,  Burton,  Dand, 
and  Maverick,  were  all  condemned  by  the  Court  in  May,  1647,  to 
fines  of  one  and  two  hundred  pounds  each.2  Dand  made  his  sub- 
mission to  the  Court  and  was  released  without  payment  in  May, 
1648.3  Maverick  secured  an  abatement  of  one-half  in  1650  when 
the  matter  had  somewhat  quieted,4  but  Child  was  in  England  by 
October,  1647,  still  a  considerable  debtor  to  the  Colony.5 

In  the  meanwhile  Gov.  Edward  Winslow,  of  Plymouth,  had 
sailed  for  England  in  December,  1646,°  as  the  duly  accredited 
agent  of  the  Colony,7  provided  with  a  formal  answer  to  the  charges 
of  Gorton  for  presentation  to  the  Commissioners,"  and  a  variety 
of  secret  instructions  as  to  how  to  meet  the  questions  raised  by 
Child  and  his  friends.9  His  position  was  at  first  anything  but 
easy.  The  brother  of  Vassall,  the  New  England  malcontent,  was 
one  of  the  Commissioners  ;  the  brother  of  Child  was  an  active 
and  able  opponent  of  the  Massachusetts  government,  and  some  of 
the  petitioners  had  come  over  to  push  their  own  cause.  But  Wins- 
low  went  to  work  with  vigor;  in  a  few  weeks  after  his  landing, 
and  pending  the  decision  of  the  Commissioners,  he  published  a 
sharp   attack  upon    Gorton  and    his  followers,10  and    not  without 


1  Winthrop,  II :  356-358  ;  Hutchinson,  Hist Mass.  Bay,  ed.  London,  1765,  1 :  146-149. 

2  Records,  III  :  113.  Maverick  was  fined  ,£50  in  addition,  since  he  was  a  freeman,  making  a 
total  for  him  of  ,£150. 

3  I'oid.y  II :  241.  *  Ibid.,  Ill  :  200.  6  Hid.,  II :  T99.  «  Winthrop,  II  :  387. 

7  Ibid.,  364,  365  ;  Records,  111:93,  94-  The  Court  considered  Winslow's  mission  of  such 
general  interest  that  letters  were  sent  to  Plymouth,  Connecticut,  and  New  Haven  asking  them  to 
share  in  the  expense.     Records,  II  :  165. 

8  Winthrop,  II :  360-364  ;  Records,  III  :  95-98.  '•'  Winthrop,  II  :  365-367. 

"•"  Hypocrisie  Vnmasked :  by  A  True  Relation  0/  the  Proceedings  oj the  Cover nour  and 
Company  0/ the  Massachusets  against  Samvcl  Gorton,  etc.,  London,  1646  [in  new  style,  1647]. 


180  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

decided  effect.  In  a  similar  way  he  replied,  during  the  course 
of  1647,  to  the  defence  of  the  petitioners  published  by  Child's 
brother  in  that  year.1  Yet  it  may  well  be  questioned  whether 
these  efforts  would  have  availed  to  save  the  Massachusetts  gov- 
ernment from  serious  defeat  and  the  churches  from  dreaded  in- 
terference had  not  an  entire  change  come  over  the  political  sit- 
uation in  England.  In  1645  and  1646,  when  Vassall  and  Child 
began  their  agitation,  the  Presbyterians  were  in  the  ascendant. 
But  the  influence  of  the  army  was  constantly  growing  —  an  army 
which  was  predominantly  Independent  ;  and  with  the  Independ- 
ents the  New  Englanders  were  held  in  high  esteem.  Just  before 
Winslow  reached  England  the  king  had  been  surrendered  to  Par- 
liament by  the  Scotch.  It  was  a  great  Presbyterian  triumph  ; 
that  party  seemingly  secure  in  control  of  Parliament,  appeared 
free  to  carry  out  whatever  policy  it  wished.  But  the  Presbyteri- 
ans had  scarcely  begun  to  enjoy  their  apparent  supremacy,  when 
the  scale  turned  against  them.  In  March,  1647,  just  as  Winslow's 
first  pamphlet  was  appearing,  Parliament  tried  to  disband  the 
army.  The  army  refused  to  obey,  and  demanded  arrears  of  pay. 
And,  in  June,  1647,  it  obtained  possession  of  the  person  of  the 
king  by  force.  The  same  month  the  army  compelled  eleven  prom- 
inent Presbyterians  to  leave  Parliament,  and  the  Independents 
came  into  power.  Presbyterian  London  asserted  itself  in  July, 
but  was  soon  overawed.  Presbyterianism  as  a  political  force  had 
lost  the  day  ;  by  the  dawn  of  1648  its  great  defenders,  the  Scotch, 
were  openly  on  the  side  of  the  king.  Their  defeat  by  Cromwell 
at  Preston,  August  17,  1648,  put  an  end  to  any  hope  of  their 
return  to  power  till  after  Cromwell's  death.  The  effect  on  the 
New  England  cause  of  these  sudden  overturnings  was  apparent 
at  once.  In  May,  1647,  the  Commissioners  saw  their  way  clear 
to  inform  the  Massachusetts  authorities  that  they  had  neither  in- 
tended to  encourage  appeals  from  colonial  justice,  nor  limit  colo- 
nial jurisdiction  by  anything  that  had  been  done  in  the  Gorton 
case.2     By  July  the  Commission  was  satisfied  to  leave  the  ques- 

1  Child's  book  was,  Xew-Iinglands  Jonas  east  uf>  at  London,  London,  1647  (see  ante.  p.  171, 
note  1);  that  by  Winslow,  New-England*  Salamander,  etc.,  London,  1647.  (Reprinted  in  3 
Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.,  II:   1 10-145). 

2  Winthrop,  II:  -589,  390. 


EFFECT   OF   ITS   SUCCESS   ON   THE    SYNOD  l8l 

tion  of  jurisdiction  over  the  lands  of  the  Gortonites  to  the  New 
England  colonial  governments.'  Nor  was  Winslow  less  success- 
ful against  Child  and  his  associates.  The  ships  which  arrived  at 
Boston  in  May,  1648,  informed  the  magistrates  "  how  the  hopes 
and  endeavors  of  Dr.  Child  and  other  the  petitioners,  etc.,  had 
been  blasted  by  the  special  providence  of  the  Lord,  who  still 
wrought  for  us."2 

This  long  negotiation  formed  the  political  background  of  the 
Cambridge  Synod.  Its  perilous  course  was  watched  with  anxiety, 
and  when  it  was  clear,  by  the  autumn  of  1647,  that  the  existing 
institutions  of  New  England  were  not  to  be  disturbed,  the  relief 
was  proportionately  great.  It  produced  one  change  of  import- 
ance, however,  in  the  work  of  the  Synod.  The  prime  questions 
propounded  by  the  General  Court  had  been  those  of  baptism  and 
church  membership.  These  problems  had  been  forced  to  the 
fore-front  by  the  movement  which  had  given  rise  to  the  petition. 
But  they  were  questions  regarding  which  there  was  much  divers- 
ity of  view,  and  therefore  the  Synod  chose  to  pass  them  by,  when 
they  ceased  to  be  pressing  by  reason  of  the  defeat  of  the  peti- 
tioners; and  gave  instead  a  merely  subsidiary  and  somewhat  am- 
biguous treatment  to  the  topics  which  the  Court  had  made  chief.3 
No  doubt  most  men  in  New  England  were  glad  to  have  it  so  at 
the  time,  yet  the  questions  were  such  as  could  not  be  ignored, 
and  half  a  generation  later  they  demanded  and  obtained  a  solu- 
tion. But  it  was  fortunate  indeed  that  the  discomfort  of  their 
enemies  gave  the  representatives  of  the  New  England  churches 
opportunity  to  work  out  the  declaration  of  their  polity  in  peace. 


1  Ibid.,  387,  388.  2  Ibid.,  391,  392. 

3  The  Preface  to  the  Result  of  the  Synod  of  1662,  Propositions  Concerning  the  Subject 
0/ Baptism,  etc.,  Cambridge,  1662,  p.  xii,  says:  "And  in  the  Synod  held  at  Cambridge  in  the 
year  1648,  that  particular  point  0/  Baptizing  the  children  0/ such  as  were  admitted  members 
in  minority,  but  not  yet  in  full  communion,  was  inserted  in  some  of  the  draughts  that  were 
prepared  for  that  Assembly,  and  was  then  debated  and  confirmed  by  the  like  Arguments  as 
we  now  use,  and  was  generally  consented  to  :  though  because  some  few  dissented,  and  there 
was  not  the  like  urgency  of  occasion  for  present  practise,  it  was  not  then  put  into  the  Plat- 
form that  was  after  Printed."     (See  later  page  of  this  work.) 

Allin,  in  hSs  Animadversions  upon  the  A  ntisynodalia  Americana,  Cambridge,  1664,  p.  5, 
is  more  definite.  He  uses  language  which  implies  that  Charles  Chauncy  of  Scituate,  later  presi- 
dent of  Harvard,  was  the  opponent:  "When  this  matter  was  tinder  Consideration  in  the  Synod, 
1648,  the  Author  of  this  Preface  [Chauncy]  knoweth  well  who  it  was  that  professed,  He  would  op- 
pose it  with  all  his  might:  by  reason  whereof,  and  the  dissent  of  some  few  more,  it  was  laid 
aside  at  that  time."  For  the  statement  in  the  draft  submitted  by  Mather  to  the  Synod,  see 
post,  p.  214. 


1 82  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM. 

The  Synod  which  had  adjourned  in  mid-September,  1646, 
re-assembled  at  Cambridge,  on  June  8,  1647.  The  attendance  em- 
braced men  as  far  removed  in  residence  from  the  place  of  meet- 
ing as  Gov.  Bradford  of  Plymouth,  and  Rev.  Messrs.  Stone  of 
Hartford,  and  Warham  of  Windsor.  On  June  9,  the  Synod  listened 
in  the  morning  to  a  denunciatory  sermon  from  Rev.  Ezekiel  Rogers 
of  Rowley,  in  which  the  preacher  inveighed  against  the  late  pe- 
titioners, and  attacked  the  growing  habit  of  the  brethren  in 
the  churches  "  making  speeches  in  the  church  assemblies,"  and 
found  fault  with  various  customs,  such  as  the  wearing  of  long 
hair.  "  Divers  were  offended  at  his  zeal  in  some  of  these  pass- 
ages;" and  doubtless  the  pleasure  of  the  Synod  was  greater,  if 
their  comprehension  of  the  sermon  was  less,  when  "  Mr.  [John] 
Eliot  preached  to  the  Indians  in  their  own  language  before  all 
the  assembly,"  in  the  afternoon.1  But  the  session  did  not  long 
continue.  An  epidemic,  which  cost  Hartford  Thomas  Hooker, 
and  Boston  Gov.  Winthrop's  wife,  compelled  it  to  break  up  be- 
fore it  had  accomplished  much  of  moment.2 

As  the  Synod  went  on  the  conception  of  its  possible  functions 
magnified.  The  original  thought  of  the  Court  had  been  a  settle- 
ment of  church  polity,  with  special  attention  to  the  disputed 
questions  of  baptism  and  church  membership.  Circumstances 
had  made  those  questions  less  pressing,  and  had  brought  into 
greater  prominence  the  broader  function  of  the  Synod,  that  of 
giving  a  constitution  to  the  churches.  But  it  might  do  even 
more.  The  Westminster  Assembly  had  prepared  a  Confession 
of  Faith  in  regard  to  which  much  secrecy  was  still  observed.3  It 
had  not  yet  been  adopted  by  Parliament,  though  approved  Au- 
gust 27,  1647,  by  the  Scotch  General  Assembly.  There  was  rea- 
son to  fear  that  it  might  not  be  wholly  satisfactory.  And  there- 
fore, at  its  session  on  October  27,  1647,  the  Massachusetts  Gen- 


1  Our  account  (if  this  session  is  in  Winthrop,  II :  376.  -  Ibid.,  378,  379. 

3  The  Confession  was  finished  Dec.  4,  1646,  and  presented  to  Parliament.  That  body  at  once 
ordered  that  "  600  copies,  and  no  more  be  printed,"  and  the  printer  was  directed  not  to  make  any 
public.  Matters  then  dragged  on  till  April,  1647,  when  the  Commons  ordered  proof  texts  furnished. 
This  was  done  and  the  result  printed  under  the  same  charge  of  secrecy.  Discussion  continued  till 
the  Confession,  in  slightly  modified  form,  was  adopted,  June  20,  1648.  See  SchafI,  Creeds,  1 :  757, 
758  ;  Dexter,  Cong,  as  sen,  Bibliog.,  Nos.  1287,  1305. 


THE    SECOND   AND    THIRD    SESSIONS,    1 647-8  1 83 

eral  Court  added  to  the  duties  of  the  Synod  that  of  preparing  a 

Confession  of  Faith,  by  the  following  order  : ' 

"Whereas  there  is  a  synode  in  being,  &  it  is  ye  purpose,  beside  ye  clearing  of 
some  points  in  religion  questioned,'  to  set  forth  a  forme  of  church  govern',  accord^  to 
y"  ordr  of  ye  gospell,  &  to  that  end  there  are  certeine  members  of  ye  synode  that  have  in 
charge  to  prepare  ye  same  against  the  synode;  3  but  this  Corte  conceiving  that  it  is  as 
fully  meete  to  set  fourth  a  confession  of  ye  faith  we  do  p'fesse  touching  ye  doctrinall 
pt  of  religion  also,  we  do  desire,  therefore,  these  revrend  eldrs  following  to  take  some 
paines  each  of  them  to  p'pare  a  breife  forme  of  this  nature,  &  p'sent  ye  same  to  ye 
next  session  of  ye  synode,  that,  agreeing  to  one,  (out  of  them  all,)  it  may  be  printed 
wth  the  othr4  Mr  Norrice,5  Mr  Cotton,6  Mr  Madder,1  Mr  Rogers,  of  Ipswich,8  Mr 
Sheopard,9  M'  Norton,1"  &  Mr  Cobbet." 

Doubtless  the  matter  was  taken  into  consideration;  but  before 
the  Synod  again  met  copies  of  the  Westminster  Confession  had 
been  received  and  the  nature  of  that  symbol  had  become  fully 
known.  The  Court's  order  regarding  a  Confession  was  obeyed, 
as  will  be  seen,  but  in  a  somewhat  different  way  from  that  which 
the  Court  suggested. 

The  final  session  of  the  Synod  opened  at  Cambridge  on  Au- 
gust 15,  1648  ;'2  and,  as  at  the  previous  meeting,  the  body  began  its 
work  by  listening  to  a  sermon.  This  time  the  preacher  was  John 
Allin  of  Dedham,  and  the  theme  an  exposition  of  the  teaching  of 
the  fifteenth  chapter  of  Acts  in  regard  to  the  nature  and  power  of 
Synods,  a  treatment  which  led  the  divine  to  expose  and  rebuke  a 
number  of  errors  which  had  appeared  affecting  this  subject  during 
the  late  discussions  throughout  the  Colony.  The  sermon  was 
"very  godly,  learned,  and  particular";13  yet  it  may  be  questioned 
whether  it  awakened  as  decided  an  interest  in  the  congregation  as 
did  a  snake  that  wriggled  into  the  elder's  seat,  behind  the  preacher, 
during  its  delivery.  And  when  Rev.  William  Tompson  of  Braintree 
had  effected  the  reptile's  death,  the  members  of  the  Synod,  like  all 
their  generation,  eager  to  discover  signs  and  divine  interpositions 
in  the  occurrences  of  life,  felt  that14 

"  it  is  out  of  doubt,  the  Lord  discovered  somewhat  of  his  mind  in  it.     The  serpent," 
so  they  interpreted  the  imagined  symbolism,  "  is  the  devil ;  the  synod,  the  represent- 


1  Records,     .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  II :  200.  2  /.  c,  Baptism  and  church  membership. 

3  /.  e.,  Rev.  Messrs.  Cotton,  Mather,  and  Partridge  ;  see  ante,  p.  175. 

4  /.  <•.,  with  the  Platform  of  government.  5  Edward  Norris,  of  Salem. 

6  John  Cotton,  of  Boston.  »  Richard  Mather,  of  Dorchester. 

8  Nathaniel  Rogers.  »  Thomas  Shepard,  of  Cambridge. 
10  John  Norton,  of  Ipswich,  later  of  Boston.        "  Thomas  Cobbett,  of  Lynn. 

12  Winthrop,  II :  402,  403.  "  Hid.                              u  Ibid. 


I»4  TIIE   CAMBRIDGE   SYNOD   AND   PLATFORM 

atives  of  the  churches  of  Christ  in  New  England.  The  devil  had  formerly  and  lately 
attempted  their  disturbance  and  dissolution  ;  but  their  faith  in  the  seed  of  the  woman 
overcame  him  and  crushed  his  head." 

The  Synod  went  on  harmoniously  and  rapidly  with  its  work. 
The  Platform  of  Church  Discipline,  drawn  up  by  Richard  Mather' 
of  Dorchester,  with  large  use  of  previous  writings  of  his  own  and 
of  Cotton,  was  preferred  as  the  basis  of  the  Synod's  ecclesiastical 
constitution,  and  substantially  adopted.2  To  it  was  prefixed  a 
Preface  by  Rev.  John  Cotton  of  Boston,3  designed  to  explain  some 


'  Magnolia,  ed.  1853-5,  1 :  453.  Richard  Mather,  the  first  of  a  distinguished  New  England 
family,  was  born  at  Low  ton,  Lancashire,  in  1596.  He  studied  at  Oxford  for  a  brief  time,  and  then 
was  asked  to  settle  as  minister  of  the  Puritan  congregation  at  Toxteth  Park,  near  Liverpool,  where 
he  had  already  taught  school.  He  was  ordained  by  the  bishop  of  Chester  in  1620,  but  his  Puritan- 
ism was  so  pronounced  that  he  was  silenced  in  1633  and  1634,  having  never  worn  the  surplice. 
Obliged  thus  to  relinquish  his  ministry  at  Toxteth,  he  came  to  New  England  in  1635.  He  was 
settled  at  Dorchester  in  1636,  and  was  from  the  first  prominent  in  the  affairs  of  the  Colony.  His 
answer  to  the  XXXI I  Questions  has  already  been  noticed.  He  replied  to  the  Presbyterian  treatises 
of  Hcrle  and  Rutherford  ;  and,  at  a  later  period,  took  an  active  part  in  the  half-way  covenant  con-  1 
iroversy.  He  died  at  Dorchester,  April  22,  1669.  Of  his  sons,  the  youngest,  Increase,  was  the 
most  famous,  and  Increase's  son.  Cotton,  kept  the  family  name  in  prominence. 

Only  a  few  of  the  biographical  sources  need  be  mentioned.  Increase  Mather,  Life  of 
Richard  Mather  (1670),  in  Coll.  Dorchester  A  ntiquarian  Soc.,  Boston,  1850 ;  Magnolia,  I  :  443- 
458  ;  Allen,  Am.  Biog.  Diet.,  ed.  1857,  pp.  555,  556;  Sprague,  Annals  Am.  Pulpit,  I  :  75-79  ;  Ap- 
pleton's  Cyclop.  Am.  Biog.,  IV  :  251  ;  H.  E.  Mather,  Lineage  of  Re;<.  Richard  Mather,  Hartford, 
1890,  pp.  33-51  (with  portrait).     Mather's  works  are  enumerated  by  Sprague  and  H.  E.  Mather. 

2  Valuable  extracts  from  Partridge's  draft,  not  adopted  by  the  Synod,  may  be  found  in  Dex- 
ter, Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  444-447.     He  would  not  have  given  so  much  authority  to  the  magistrates  in 

of  belief  as  the  Synod  did.  Mather's  first  draft,  which  like  that  of  Partridge  is  in  the 
of  the  Am.  Antiquarian  Soc.  at  Worcester,  a  little  more  than  twice  as  long  as  the  form 
finally  adopted,  and  was  not  only  abridged,  but  a  good  deal  modified  by  the  Synod.  The  final 
form,  also  at  Worcester,  is  in  Mather's  handwriting. 

3  See  Increase  Mather,  Order  of  the  Gospel,  Professed  and  Practised  by  the  Churches  of 
Christ  in  New  England,  etc.,  Boston,  1700,  p.  137.  John  Cotton,  who  might  contest  with  Hooker 
the  claim  to  rank  as  the  ablest  of  the  New  England  ministry,  was  born  at  Derby,  Eng.,  Dec.  4,  1585. 
He  was  educated  at  Cambridge,  entering  Trinity  College  about  1598,  and  graduating  A.M.  in  1606. 
He  became  a  fellow  of  Emmanual  College,  then  the  Puritan  center,  and  later  served  as  head  lecturer, 
dean,  and  catechist.  He  became  religiously  awakened,  and  inclined  toward  Puritanism  j  and  about 
161;  was  made  minister  of  the  fine  old  church  of  St.  Botolph,  at  Boston  in  Lincolnshire.  Here  he 
remained  for  twenty  years,  in  spite  of  one  suspension  for  Puritanism.  His  work  was  laborious,  but 
eminently  successful.  Beside  his  regular  Sunday  sermons  and  his  exposition  of  "  the  body  of  divin- 
ity in  a  catechetical  way  "  on  Sunday  afternoons,  he  preached  four  times  in  the  week,  and  conducted 
a  kind  of  theological  seminary  in  his  own  home.  Attracting  the  attention  of  Laud,  he  escaped  seri- 
ous consequences  by  flight,  and  arrived  at  the  New  England  Boston  in  September,  1633.  Here  he 
immediately  became  teacher  of  the  Boston  church.  He  was  the  ecclesiastical  leader  of  the  Massa- 
chusetts colony,  a  part  of  about  all  that  was  done  in  church  or  state  till  his  death  at  Boston,  Dec. 
23,  1652.  His  works  were  very  numerous,  and  embrace  doctrinal,  devotional,  ecclesiastical,  and  con- 
troversial treatises.  His  Keyes  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,  London,  1644,  has  always  been  con- 
sidered one  of  the  most  authoritative  expositions  of  Congregationalism. 

Cotton's  life  has  been  frequently  treated.  The  earliest  sketch  is  that  of  Rev.  Samuel  Whit- 
ing of  Lynn,  Young,  Chron.  .  .  .  Mass.,  419-430;  his  successor,  John  Norton,  published  his 
life,  Abel  being  Dead  yet  speakctl •;  or  the  Life  6V  Death  of  .  .  .  Cotton,  London,  1658,  re- 
printed Roston,  1834.  See  also  Mather,  Magnolia,  ed.  1853-5,  1 :  252-286  ;  A.  W.  M'Clure,  Life  of 
John  Cotton,  Boston,  1846  (1S70);  Allen,  Diet.  Am.  Biog.,  ed.  1857,  265-268;  Sprague,  Annals  Am. 
Pulpit,  I:  25-30;  J.  S.  Clark,  in  Cong.  Quarterly,  III:  133-148  (April,  1861,  with  portrait);  other 
references  may  be  found  in  a  note  by  Justin  Winsor  to  Memorial  History  of  Boston,  1 :  157,  158. 
A  list  of  Cotton's  writings  is  given  by  Allen  and  Clark. 


CHARACTER    OF   THE    PLATFORM  185 

features  of  New  England  church  practices  and  to  combat  the 
charge  frequently  made  by  the  Presbyterian  party  in  England,  as 
well  as  by  the  Episcopalians,  that  the  churches  of  New  England 
were  of  doubtful  orthodoxy.  And  we  may  be  sure  that  it  was  with 
especial  pleasure,  in  view  of  the  allegations  of  doctrinal  unsound- 
ness brought  against  them  by  some  of  their  English  brethren,  that 
the  Synod  proceeded  to  fulfill  the  spirit  rather  than  the  letter  of 
the  Court's  injunction  in  regard  to  a  Confession  of  Faith  by  a 
hearty  acceptance  of  the  doctrinal  part  of  the  work  of  the  West- 
minster Assembly  ("for  the  substance  therof")  which  had  just 
received  the  approval  of  Parliament.1  These  things  were  quickly 
done,  and  as  the  Synod  united  in  a  parting  hymn,2  after  a  session 
of  less  than  a  fortnight,3  it  was  doubtless  with  a  feeling  of  satisfac- 
tion in  their  work.  They  had  put  the  churches  of  New  England, 
by  formal  declaration,  where  they  had  always  been  in  fact,  at  one 
in  doctrine  with  the  Puritan  party  in  England,  whether  Presbyte- 
rian or  Independent.  Their  orthodoxy  could  not  be  impugned. 
They  had  formulated  their  polity  in  strict  and  logical  order,  and 
had  given  the  churches  a  standard  by  which  their  practice  might 
be  regulated  and  innovation  resisted.  They  had  presented  it,  too, 
in  a  form  not  likely  to  arouse  the  jealousy  of  either  faction  in 
England  or  give  excuse  for  Parliamentary  interference. 

The  Cambridge  Platform  is  the  most  important  monument  of 
early  New  England  Congregationalism,  because  it  is  the  clearest 
reflection  of  the  system  as  it  lay  in  the  minds  of  the  first  genera- 
tion on  our  soil  after  nearly  twenty  years  of  practical  experience. 
The  Platform  is  Barrowist.  It  does  not  recognize  strongly  the 
democratic  element  in  our  polity,  because  Congregationalism  at 
that  day  was  Barrowist.  It  urges  the  right  of  the  civil  magistrate 
to  interfere  in  matters  of  doctrine  and  practice,  because  Congre- 
gationalism then  believed  that  such  rights  were  his.  It  upholds 
Congregationalism  as  a  polity  of  exclusive  divine  warrant,  because 


1  See  Preface  to  the  Platform,  p.  195  of  this  volume. 

2  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  H:  211.  They  sang  "the  song  of  Moses  and  the  Lamb  in  the  fif- 
teenth chapter  of  the  Revelation  —  adding  another  sacred  song  from  the  nineteenth  chapter  of  that 
book  ;  which  is  to  be  found  metrically  paraphrased  in  the  New-England  psalm-book." 

3  Winthrop,  TI :  403. 

13 


1 86  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM 

Congregationalism  in  the  seventeenth  century  so  regarded  itself. 
But  it  affirms  the  permanent  principles  of  Congregationalism  with 
equal  clearness  and  insistence.  The  autonomy  of  the  local  church, 
the  dependence  of  the  churches  upon  one  another  for  counsel,  the 
representative  character  of  the  ministry,  are  all  plainly  taught  and 
en  to  the  Platform  a  lasting  value  and  influence. 

The  Platform  thus  adopted  was  put  forth  in  print  by  means 
of  the  rude  press  at  Cambridge  in  1649,  and  at  the  October  session 
of  the  General  Court  of  that  year  was  duly  presented  to  the  Mas- 
sachusetts authorities.  The  Court  proceeded  with  its  usual  caution 
and  adapted  the  following  vote1 — 

"Whereas  a  booke  hath  bene  presented  to  this  Cour1,  intituled  a  Platforme  of 
Church-Discipline  out  of  the  Word  of  God,  etc.,  being  the  result  of  what  the  synod 
did  in  their  assembling,  1647, ■  at  Cambridge,  for  the3  consideration  ^  acceptance, 
the  Court  doth  conceive  it  meet  to  be  comended  to  the  judicious  &  pious  consideration 
of  the  seuerall  churches  w'Mn  this  jurisdiction,  desiring  a  returne  from  them  at  the  next 
Genii  Court  how  farr  its  suiteable  to  their  judgmenu  &  approbations,  before  this 
Court  proceed  any  furthe'  therein." 

But,  thus  urged,  the  churches  were  slow  in  their  compliance  ; 
and  on  June  19,  1650,  the  Court  further  voted  that4 — 

' '  forasmuch  as  (it  is  sajd)  that  some  of  the  churches  were  ignorant  of  the  sajd  order, 
&  therefore  little  hath  ben  done  in  that  pticular,  this  Courte  .  .  .  doe  hereby 
order,  that  the  sajd  booke  be  duly  considered  off  of  all  the  sayd  churches  within  this 
pattent,  &  that  they,  without  fayle,  will  returne  theire  thoughts  and  judgments  touch- 
inge  the  pticulars  thereof  to  the  next  session  of  this  Court  .  .  .  and  further,  it  is 
hereby  desired,  y'  euery  church  will,  by  the  first  oppertunity,  take  order  for  the 
p'cureinire  of  that  booke,  published  by  the  synod  at  London,  concerninge  the  doctrine 
of  the  g<  isple,6  that  the  churches  may  consider  of  that  booke,  also,  as  soone  as  they  can 
be  gotten." 

Thus  admonished,  the  churches  seem  generally  to  have  obeyed. 
If  a  judgment  may  be  based  on  the  instances  in  which  records  have 
come  down  to  us,  the  books  were  read  to  the  churches,  and  the 
opinion  of  the  membership  expressed  by  a  vote."     Of  course,  as  the 


Bay,  II:   285:  III:    >77,  '7S.     The  text  is  from  the  Magistrate's 
Record. 

2  A  mistake  for  1648. 

a  Deputies'  Record  reads  more  correctly  their,  i.  e.,  the  Court's. 

*  Records,  III:  204;  IV:  22. 

*  I.  e.,  the  Westminster  Confession. 

«  A  few  examples  are  given  by  Felt,  EccUtiast.  Hist.,  II :  18,  19,  29.  Some  of  the  communi- 
cations of  the  churches  are  in  the  MSS.  Collections  of  the  Am.  Antiquarian  Soc,  Worcester,  Mass. 
I  have  not  seen  them. 


RECEPTION    BY    COURT   AND    CHURCHES  \Sj 

elders  framed  the  proposition,  their  influence  in  the  decision  of 
each  church  would  be  great.  When  the  Court  came  together  once 
more,  in  May,  165 1,  it  was  moved  to  a  vote,  apparently  on  the  22d, 
expressing  its  thanks  to  the  Synod  now  nearly  three  years  ad- 
journed ;  but  declaring  that ' — 

•"many  of  whom  [the  churches  of  Massachusetts]  were  pleased  to  p'sent  to 
session  of  the  last  Court,  by  the  deputyes  of  the  seuerall  townes,  seuerall  ol 
against  the  sd  confession  of  discipline,  or  seuerall  ptyculers  therein,  wherevppon  the 
Court  judged  it  convenient  &  conduceinge  to  peace  to  forbeare  to  giue  theire  approba- 
tion therevnto    vnles  such  objections  as  were  p'sented  were  cleared  &  remoui 
which  purpose  this  Court  doth  order  the  secritary  to  draw  vp  y"  sd  objections,  or  the 
princypall  of  them,  &  to  deliuer  the  same  to  Keuerend  Mr  Cotten  within  one  moneth,  to 
be  comunicated  to  the  elders  of  the  seuerall  churches,  who  are  desired  to  meete  & 
cleare  the  Id  doubts,  or  any  other  that  may  be  imparted  to  them  by  any  other  p'son 
concerninge  the  sd  draught  of  discipline,  cV  to  returne  theire  advice  &  helpe  herein  to 
the  next  session  of  this  Generall  Court,  which  will  alwayes  be  zealous  an 
theire  duty  to  giue  theire  testimony  to  euery  truth  of  Jesus  Christ,  though  they  canni  t 
se  light  to  impose  any  formes  as  necessary  to  be  obserued  by  the  chun 
inge  rule." 

Little  as  this  cautious  vote  seems  to  indicate  ai 
of  the  General  Court  to  be  domineering  over  the  churches,  there 
were  four  of  the  deputies,  including  the  representatives  of  the  town 
and  church  of  Boston,  who  voted  against  it.2 

The  ministers  met  duly,  at  some  uncertain  date  that  summer. 

and   having  considered    the   objections  referred   to   them   by  the 

Court,  they  "appointed  Mr.  Richard  Mather  to  draw  up  an  answer 

to  them"  [the  criticisms];  and  this  "answer  by  him  composed,  and 

by  the  rest  approved,  was  given  in"3  to  the  Court  at  its  October 

session,  1651.     And  now,  more  than  three  years  after  the  close  of 

the  Synod,  the  Court  finally  put  the  stamp  of  its  approval  on  the 

Platform,  yet  in  no  mandatory  way.     On  October  14  it  voted  : " 

"Whereas  this  Court  did,  in  the  yeare  1646,  giue  encouragment  for  an  assem- 
bly of  the  messengers  of  the  churches  in  a  synode,  and  did  desire  theire  helpe  to  draw 
vpp  a  confession  of  the  fayth  &  discipline  of  the  churches,  according  to  the  word  of 
God,  which  was  p'sented  to  this  Court,  &  ccmended  to  the  seuerall  churches,  many  of 
whom  returned  theire  approbation  &  assent  to  the  sd  draught  in  generall,  &  diverse  of 
the  churches  p'sented  some  objections  &  doubtes  agaynst  some  perticulers  in  the  sd 

1  Records     .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  III:  235,  236;  IV:  54,  35. 

2  John  Leverett  and  Thomas  Clarke  of  Boston,  William  Tyng  of  Braintree,  and  Jeremiah 
Hutchins  of  Hingham.  It  is  evident  that  at  Boston  and  Hingham  feeling  against  the  Synod  still 
continued. 

3  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  H  :  237-  The  manuscript,  in  Mather's  handwriting,  is  at  Wor- 
cester. 

*  Records,  III :  240  ;  IV  :  57,  58. 


188  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM 

draught,  wherevppon,  by  order  of  this  Court,  the  sd  objections  were  commended  to 
the  consideracu  of  the  elders,  to  be  cleared  &  remoued,  who  haue  returned  theire 
answer  in  writinge,  which  the  Court,  havinge  p'vsed,  doe  thankfully  acknowledge 
theire  learned  paynes  therein,  6c  account  themselues  called  of  Cod  (especially  at  this 
time,  when  the  truth  of  Christ  is  so  much  opposed  in  the  world)  to  giue  theire  testi- 
mony to  the  sd  Booke  of  Discipline,  that  for  the  substance  thereof  it  is  that  we  haue 
practised  &  doe  beleeue." 

The  magistrates,  always  stronger  than  the  deputies  in  their 
support  of  existing  institutions  in  church  and  state,  appear  to  have 
passed  the  resolution  without  dissent  ;  but,  spite  of  its  inoffensive 
form,  fourteen  of  the  forty  deputies  voted  against  its  adoption.' 
But  with  this  action  of  the  Court  the  Cambridge  Platform  became 
the  recognized,  if  not  the  unquestioned,2  pattern  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal practice  in  Massachusetts.  Endorsed,  "  for  the  substance  of 
it,"  by  the  Reforming  Synod  in  September,  1679,3  it  continued  the 
legally  recognized  standard  till  1780. 

Unfortunately  the  absence  of  any  mention  of  action  concern- 
ing the  Platform  in  the  contemporary  records  of  the  colonies  of 
Plymouth,  Connecticut,  and  New  Haven  veils  the  story  of  its  re- 
ception in  those  jurisdictions.  But  a  considerable,  though  uncer- 
tain, number  of  the  ministers  and  laymen  of  those  colonies  had 
taken  part  in  the  sessions  of  the  Synod,  and  there  is  no  rea- 
son to  >uppose  that  the  result  was  any  less  acceptable  to  their 
churches  than  to  those  of  Massachusetts.  Though  written  a  cen- 
tury and  a  half  later,  the  affirmation  of  Trumbull  is  doubtless 
essentially  true  that J — 

"the  ministers  and  churches  of  Connecticut  and  New  Haven  were  present  [at  the 
Cambridge  Synod],  and  united  in  the  form  of  discipline  which  it  recommended.  By 
this  Platform  of  discipline,  the  churches  of  New-England,  in  general,  walked  for 

more  than  thirty  years." 


i  William  Hawthorne,  Henry  Bartholomew,*  Salem  ;  Thomas  Clarke,  John  Leverett,*  Bos- 
ton; Stephen  Kinsley,  William  Tyng,*  Braintree  ;   Richard  Browne,  Watertown  ;  John   J 
Roxbury;   Esdras   Reede,*  Wenham;  William   Cowdry,*  Reading;  Waller   Haynes,*  Sudbury; 
Roger  Shaw,*   Hampton.    N.  H.  ;   John  Holbrooke.*  Weymouth;    Jeremiah   Hutchins,  Hingham. 
Where  marked  *  the  whole  delegation  of  the  town  voted  negatively. 

.  ilia,  IT:  237-247,  gives  four  points,  a,  the  Platform's  lack  of  clearness  re- 
garding the  right  of  a  minister  to  dispense  the  sacraments  to  any  congregation  not  his  own  ;  />,  its 
assertion  oi  the  distinct  office  of  ruling  elders;  c,  the  practice  of  ordaining  at  the  hands  of  the 
brethren  of  the  local  church  rather  than  of  ministers  of  other  churches;  </,  the  use  of  personal  rela- 
tions and  confessions  in  the  admission  of  members  ;  as  cases  in  which  the  thought  of  the  churches 
in  his  day  varied  from  the  Platform. 

B  Result  of  Synod  of  1679,  in  Necessity  of  Reformation,  etc.,  Boston,  1679,  Epistle  Dedica- 
tory, p.  v  ;  see  also  Magnolia,  II  :  257. 

<    frumbull,  History  of  Connecticut,  New  Haven,  1S1S,  1  :  289. 


THE   CAMBRIDGE   SYMBOLS 

THE    TENTATIVE    CONCLUSIONS   OF    1 646    {Extracts) 

The  Result  of  the  Disputations  of  the  Synod,  or  Assembly,  at  Cambridge  in 
New  England,  Begun  upon  the  first  day  of  the  71'1  Month,  An.  Dom.  1646.  About 
the  power  of  the  Civill  Magistrate  in  matters  of  the  first  Table  ;  and  also  about 
the  grounds  of  Synods,  with  their  power,  and  the  power  of  calling  of  them .  Being 
drawn  up  by  some  of  the  Members  of  the  Assembly,  deputed  thereunto,  and  being 
distinctly  read  in  the  Assembly,  it  was  agreed  thus  farre  onely,  That  they  should  be 
commended  unto  more  serious  consideration  against  the  next  Meeting. 

TOuching  the  Question  of  the  Civill  Magistrate  in  matters  of  Religion,  we 
shall  crave  leave  to  narrow  and  limit  the  state  of  it  in  the  mannner  of  the 
Proposall  of  it,  and  shall  therefore  propound  it  thus. 

Quest.  Whether  the  Civil  Magistrate  in  matters  of  Religion,  or  of  the  first  [2] 
Table,  hath  power  civilly  to  command  or  forbid  things  respecting  the  outward  man, 
which  are  clearly  commanded  and  forbidden  in  the  word,  and  to  inflict  sutable  pun- 
ishments, according  to  the  nature  of  the  transgressions  against  the  same,  and  all  this 
with  reference  to  godly  peace  ? 

Answ.  The  want  of  a  right  stating  of  this  Question,  touching  the  Civil  Mag- 
istrates power  in  matters  of  Religion,  hath  occasioned  a  world  of  Errours,  tending  to 
infringe  the  just  power  of  the  Magistrate,  we  shall  therefore  explaine  the  termes  of 
the  Question,  and  then  confirme  it  in  the  Affirmative. 

By  [' Commanding,  Forbidding,  and  Punishing]  we  meane  the  coercive  power 
of  the  Magistrate,  which  is  seen  in  such  acts.  By  [Matters  of  Religion  commanded 
or  forbidden  in  the  word,  respecting  the  outward  man]  we  understand  indefinitely, 
whether  those  of  Doctrine  or  Discipline,  of  faith  or  practice;  his  power  is  not  limited 
to  such  matters  of  Religion  onely,  which  are  against  the  light  of  Nature,  or  against 
the  Law  of  Nations,  or  against  the  fundamental^  of  Religion  ;  all  these  are  matters 
of  Re-[3]  ligion,  which  may  be  expressed  by  the  outward  man,  but  not  onely  these  ; 
therefore  we  say  not  barely  thus  [/«  matters  of  the  first  Table]  but  joyn  therewith 
[In  matters  of  Religion]  that  all  ambiguity  may  be  avoided,  and  that  it  may  be  un- 
derstood as  well  of  matters  which  are  purely  Evangelicall,  so  far  as  expressed  by 
the  outward  man,  as  well  as  of  other  things.  And  we  say,  [Commanded  or  forbid- 
den  in  the  word]  meaning  of  the  whole  word,  both  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament; 
exception  being  onely  made  of  such  things  which  were  meerly  Ceremoniall,  or  other- 
wise peculiar  to  the  Jewish  polity,  and  cleered  to  be  abolished  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment :  By  which  limitation  of  the  Magistrates  power  to  things  commanded  or  for- 
bidden in  the  word,  we  exclude  any  power  of  the  Magistrate,  either  in  command- 
ing any  new  thing,  whether  in  doctrine  or  discipline,  or  any  thing  in  matters  of  Re- 
ligion, which  is  beside  or  against  the  word,  or  in  forbidding  any  thing  which  is  ac- 
cording to  the  word. 


[    ]  instead  of  "     ". 

(189) 


I90  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

1  Hence  he  is  not  to  mould  up  and  impose  what  Erastian  forme  of  Church 
polity  he  pleascth;  because  if  there  be  [4]  but  one  form  commanded  now  of  God, 
lie  cannot  therefore  command  what  forme  he  will. 

2  Hence  he  is  not  to  force  all  persons  into  the  Church,  or  to  the  participation 
of  the  seals  ;  because  he  is  not  thus  commanded. 

3  Hence  he  is  not  to  limit  to  things  indifferent,  which  are  neither  commanded, 
nor  forbidden  in  the  word,  without  apparent  expediency  or  inexpediency  of  attend- 
ing the  same.  By  that  expression  [c/eerfy]  commanded  or  forbidden  in  the  wordy 
we  understand  that  which  is  cleer,  either  by  express  words,  or  necessary  Consequence 
from  the  Scripture;  and  we  say  cleerly  commanded  or  forbidden  in  the  word.  Not 
simply  that  which  the  Magistrate  or  others  think  to  be  cleerly  commanded  or  for- 
bidden; for  they  may  thinke  things  commanded,  to  be  forbidden,  and  things  forbid- 
den to  be  commanded  ;  but  that  which  is  in  it  selfe  in  such  sort  cleer  in  the  word, 
de  jure,  the  Civil  Magistrate  in  these  days  since  Christs  ascension,  may  and  ought 
to  command  and  forbid  such  things  so  cleared  in  the  word,  albeit  de  facto,  oft-times 
he  doe  [5]  not.  [Sutaldy  inflicting  punishments  according  to  the  nature  of  the 
transgressions]  This  clause  needeth  not  much  explication,  being  so  plainc  of  it 
selfe;  some  things  commanded  and  forbidden  in  the  Law  of  God,  are  of  a  smaller 
nature  in  respect  of  the  Law  of  man,  and  in  this  respect  'tis  true  which  is  often  said, 
that  Be  minimis  non  curat  le.\ ,  i.  e.  Mans  Law  looks  not  after  small  matters,  but 
other  things  commanded  or  forbidden  in  Gods  Law,  are  momentous,  and  of  a  higher 
nature,  and  though  small  in  themselves,  yet  weighty  in  the  consequence  or  circum- 
stance. And  in  this  case  if  he  inflict  a  slight  paper  punishment  when  the  offence  is 
of  an  high  nature  ;  or  contrariwise,  when  he  inflicts  that  which  is  equivalent  to  a 
capitall  punishment,  when  the  offence  is  of  an  inferiour  nature,  he  doth  not  punish 
sutably.  There  are  sundry  rules  in  the  word  in  matters  of  this  sort,  as  touching  the 
punishment  of  Blasphemy,  Idolatry,  Hercsie,  prophanation  of  the  Lords  day,  and 
sundry  other  like  matters  of  Religion,  according  to  \vcb  Magistrates  of  old  have 
held,  and  others  now  may  observe  proportions,  in  ma-[6]  king  other  particular  Laws 
in  matters  of  Religion,  with  sanctions  of  punishments,  and   inflicting  the  same,  they 

inflict  sutable  punishments [7]     ....     By  this,  which  hath  been 

already  spoken  touching  the  acts  and  rule  of  the  Magistrates  coercive  power  in  mat- 
ters of  Religion,  the  impertinency  and  invalidity  of  many  objections  against  this  his 
power  will  appear,  as  ....  [8]  ....  3.  That  thereby  tyranny  is  ex- 
ercised over  mens  tender  consciences,  and  true  liberty  of  conscience  is  infringed  ; 
when  as  he  de  Jure  commands  nothing  but  that  which,  if  men  have  any  tendernesse 
of  conscience,  they  are  bound  in  conscience  to  submit  thereto,  and  in  faithfull  sub- 
mitting to  which  is  truest  liberty  of  conscience,  conscience  being  never  in  a  truer  or 
better  estate  of  liberty  here  on   earth,  than   when  most   ingaged  to  walke  according 

Commandemcnts [9]     .     .     .     .     [10]     ....      7.   That 

thereby  the  civill  Magistrate  is  put  upon  many  intricate  perplexities  &  hazards  of 
to  judge  in  and  of  matters  of  Religion. 
But  this  doth  not  hinder  the  Magistrate  from  that  use  of  his  coercive  power,  in 
matters  commanded  or  forbidden  in  the  first  Table,  no  more  then  it  doth  hinder  him 
from  the  like  power  in  matters  of  the  second  Table;  '  none  being  ignorant  what  per- 
plexing intricacies  there  are  in  these  as  well  as  in  the  former  ;  as  conscientious  Mag- 

1  It  need  scarcely  be  pointed  out  that  what  is  signified  are  the  actions,  murder,  adultery, 
theft,  falsewitness,  etc.,  which  are  the  subjects  of  criminal  law  as  well  as  of  the  second  half  of  the 
Commandments,  Exodus,  xx  :  12-17. 


THE   CONCLUSIONS   OF    1646  191 

istrates  finde  by  dayly  experience.  .  .  [n].  .  .  [12]  .  .  [13]  .  .  [14] 
II.  That  thereby  we  shall  incourage  and  harden  Papists  and  Turks  in  their  cruell 
persecutions  of  the  Saints ;  whereas  for  the  Magistrate  to  command  or  forbid  ac- 
cording to  God,  as  it  is  not  persecution,  so  neither  doth  it  of  it  selfe,  tend  to  perse- 
cution. Power  to  presse  the  Word  of  God  and  his  truth,  doth  not  give  warrant  to 
suppresse  or  oppresse  the  same  :  the  times  are  evill  indeed  when  the  pressing  of  obe- 
dience to  the  rule  shall  be  counted  persecution [I5-I9]     •     •     •     Will 

not  this  Thesis  arme  and  stir  up  the  Civill  power  in  Old  England,  against  godly 
Orthodox  ones  of  the  Congregationall  way  :  or  exasperate  Civill  power  in  ,V,  w  Eng- 
land, against  godly,  moderate,  and  Orthodox  Presbyterians,  if  any  such  should  de- 
sire their  liberty  here?  we  conceive  no,1  except  the  civill  disturbance  of  the  more 
rigidly,  unpeaceably,  and  corruptly  minded,  be  very  great;  yet  betwixt  men  godly 
and  moderately  minded  on  both  sides,  the  difference  upon  true  and  due  search  is 
found  so  small,  by  judicious,  Orthodox,  godly,  and  moderate  Divines,  as  that  they 
may  both  stand  together  in  peace  and  love  ;  if  liberty  should  be  desired  by  either 
sort  here  or  there  so  exercising  their  liberty,  as  the  [20]  publick  peace  be  not  in- 
fringed. 

[48]     ....     Vfnat  be  the  grounds  from  Scripture  to  warrant  Synods  ? 

In  answer  to  this  Question,  we  shall  propound  to  consideration  three  Arguments 
from  Scripture,  and  five  Reasons. 

Arguments. 

Augum  :  1  Taken  from  Acts  15.  An  orderly  Assembly  of  qualified  Church- 
messengers  (Elders  and  other  Brethren)  in  times  of  controversie  and  danger,  con- 
cerning weighty  matters  of  Religion,  for  the  considering,  disputing,  finding  out  and 
clearing  of  the  truth,  from  the  Scripture,  and  establishing  of  Peace  amongst  the 
Churches,  is  founded  upon  Acts  15. 

But  a  Synod  is  an  orderly  Assembly  [etc.]  .  .  .  [49]  .  .  .  Ergo,  A 
Synod  is  founded  upon  Acts  15. 


[63]     ....     Wnat  is  the  Power  of  a  Synod  ? 

The  Power  of  a  Synod 

/  Decisive  \ 

Is  -j  Directive,  &•  j-  of  the  truth,  by 
'  Declarative    ) 
clearing  and  evidencing  the  same  out  of  the  word  of  God,  non  coactive,  yet  more 
than  discretive. 

For  the  better  understanding  hereof,  consider  that  Ecclesiasticall  Power  is 

1  Decisive,  in  determining  by  way  of  discussion  and  disputation,  what  is  truth, 
and  so  consequently  resolving  [64]  the  Question  in  weighty  matters  of  Religion, 
Acts  15,  16,  2S.  &  16.  4.     This  belongs  to  the  Synod. 

2  Discretive,  in  discerning  of  the  truth  or  falshood  that  is  determined  ;  this 
belongs  to  every  Believer. 

1  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  Presbyterians  were  now  in  power  in  England.  Vet  the 
course  of  events  in  New  England  had  made  the  statement  not  wholly  without  justification.  Wins- 
low  in  1647  was  able  to  cite  the  cases  of  the  ministers  of  Newbury  and  Hingham  as  illustrations  of 
toleration  of  Presbyterian  views,  Hypocrisie  Vnmaskcd,  pp.  99,  100. 


192  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

3  Coactive  or  judicial  (for  we  omit  to  speak  in  this  place  of  Official  judgement) 
in  judging  of  the  truth  determined  Authoritatively,  so  as  to  impose  it  with  Authority. 
and  to  censure  the  disobedient  with  Ecclesiastical  censure,  1  Cor.  5.  12.  Mat.  iS.  17. 
This  belongeth  to  every  particular  Church. 

The  judgement  of  a  Synod  is  in  some  respect  superiour,  in  some  respect  infe- 
riour  to  the  judgement  of  a  particular  Church  ;  it  is  superiour  in  respect  of  direction  ; 
inferiour  in  respect  of  jurisdiction,  which  it  hath  none. 

Quere.     How,  and  how  far  doth  the  sentence  of  a  Synod  bind  ? 

Answ.  We  must  distinguish  between  the  Synods  declaration  of  the  truth,  and 
the  politicall  imposition  of  the  truth  declared  by  the  Synod. 

The  Synods  declaration  of  the  truth  binds  not  politically,  but  formally  onely, 
[65]  (i.e.)  in  foro  interiori  (i.e.)  it  binds  the  conscience,  and  that  by  way  of  the 
highest  institution  that  is  meerly  doctrinall.  The  politicall  Imposition  of  the  truth 
declared  by  the  Synod,  is  Ecclesiasticall,  or  Civill :  Ecclesiasticall,  by  particular 
Churches,  and  this  binds  not  onely  formally,  but  politically,  in  foro  exteriori,  i.  < . 
it  binds  the  outward  man,  so  as  the  disobedient  in  matters  of  offence,  is  subject  unto 
Church  censure,  affirmatively,  towards  their  own  Members  ;  negatively,  by  non  com- 
munion, as  concerning  others,  whether  Church  or  Members.  Civil,  by  the  Magis- 
trate strengthening  the  truth  thus  declared  by  the  Synod,  and  approved  by  the 
Churches,  either  by  his  meer  Authoritative  suffrage,  assent,  and  testimony,  (if  the 
matter  need  no  more)  or  by  his  authoritative  Sanction  of  it  by  Civill  punishment, 
the  nature  of  the  offence  so  requiring. 


[66]     .      .      To  whom  belongeth  the  power  of  calling  a  Synod? 

Answ.  For  satisfaction  to  this  Question,  we  shall  propound  one  distinction, 
and  answer  three  Queries. 

Distin  :  The  power  of  calling  Synods  is  either 
(  Authoritative,  belonging  to  the  Magistrates. 
(  Ministerial!,  belonging  to  the  particular  Churches. 

Mixt      -  When  both  proceed  orderly  and  joyntly  in  the  use  of  their  severall  powers. 

....     [70]  Queries. 

Querie  1  In  what  case  may  the  Magistrate  proceed  to  call  a  Synod  without 
the  consent  of  the  Churches  ? 

Answ.  The  Magistrate  in  case  the  Churches  be  defective,  and  not  to  be  pre- 
vailed with,  for  the  performance  of  their  duty,  (just  cause  so  requiring)  may  call  a 
Synod,  and  the  Churches  ought  to  yield  obedience  thereunto. 

[71]  But  notwithstanding  the  refusall,  he  may  proceed  to  call  an  Assembly, 
and  that  for  the  same  end  that  a  Synod  meetes  for,  namely,  to  consider  of,  and  clear 
the  truth  from  the  Scriptures,  in  weighty  matters  of  Religion  :  But  such  an  Assembly 
called  and  gathered  without  the  consent  of  the  Churches,  is  not  properly  that  which 
is  usually  understood  by  a  Synod,  for  though  it  be  in  the  power  of  the  Magistrate  to 
Call,  yet  it  is  not  in  his  power  to  Constitute  a  Synod,  without  at  least  the  implicite 
consent  of  the  Churches  :  Because  Church-Messengers,  who  necessarily  presuppose 
an  explicite  (which  order  calls  for)  or  implicite  consent  of  the  Churches,  are  essen- 
tiall  to  a  Synod. 

Querie  2  In  what  case  may  the  Churches  call  a  Synod  without  the  consent  of 
the  Magistrate  ? 


THE  CONCLUSIONS   OF    1 646  1 93 

[72]  Answ.  In  case  the  Magistrate  be  defective,  and  not  to  be  prevailed  with 
for  the  performance  of  his  duty  ;  just  cause,  providence,  and  prudence  concurring  : 
The  Churches  may  both  Call  and  Constitute  a  Synod  :  The  Reason  why  the 
Churches  can  Constitute  a  Synod  without  the  consent  of  the  Magistrate,  although 
the  Magistrate  cannot  constitute  a  Synod  without  the  consent  of  the  Churches,  is 
because  the  essentialls  of  a  Synod,  together  with  such  other  cause,  as  is  required 
to  the  being  (though  not  so  much  to  the  better  being)  of  a  Synod,  ariseth  out  of  par- 
ticular churches 

[74]  Querie  3  In  case  the  Magistrate  and  Churches  arc  both  willing  to  proceed 
orderly  in  the  joynt  exercise  of  their  severall  Powers,  whether  it  is  lawfull  for 
either  of  them  to  call  a  Synod  without  the  Consent  of  the  other? 

Answ.     No  ;  they  are  to  proceed  now  by  way  of  a  mixt  Call 

The  Churches  desire,  the  Ma- [75]gistrate  Commands;  Churches 
act  in  a  way  of  liberty,   the  Ma- 
gistrate in  a  way  of  Authority. 
Moses  and  Aaron  should 
goe  together,  and  kiss 
one  another  in 
the  Mount  of 
GOD. 


194  CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 


THE    CAMT.R1DGE    PLATFORM,   1648 

A   I   Platform  of   |   CHURCH    DISCIPLINE  |  GATHERED 

OUT  OF  THE  WORD  OF  GOD.  \  AND  AGREED  UPON  BY  THE 
ELDERS:  |  AM)  MESSENGERS  OF  THE  CHURCHES  |  ash  MB]  1  D  IN 
the  SYNOD  AT  CAMBRIDGE  |  IN  NEW  ENGLAND  |  To  be  presented 
to  the  Churches  and  Generall  Court  |  for  their  consideration  and  ac- 
ceptance, I  in  the  Lord.  |  The  Eighth  Moneth  Anno  1649  |  | 

Psal :  84  1.  How  amiable  are  thy  Tabernacles  0  Lord of Hosts  ?  |  Psal  : 
26. 8.  Lord  I  have  loved  the  habitation  of  thy  house  &°  the  \  place  where  thine 
honour  dwelleth.  |  Psal  :  27.  4.  One  thing  have  I  desired  of  the  Lord 
that  will  I  seek  \  after,  that  1  may  dwell  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  all 
the  I  dayes  of  my  life  to  behold  the  Beauty  of  the  Lord  6°  to  \  inquire 
in  his  Temple.  |  |  Printed  by  S  G  at  Cambridge  in  New  Eng- 
land I  and  arc  to  be  sold  at  Cambridge  and  Boston  \  Anno  Dom  :  1649. 

[ii  Blank] 

THE 
PREFACE' 

THE  setting  forth  of  the  Publick  Confession  of  the  Faith  of 
Churches  hath  a  double  end,  6°  both  tending  to  publick  edification,  first 
the  maintenance  of  the  faith  entire  within  it  self :  secondly  the  holding 
forth  of  I  nity  &  Harmony,  both  amongst,  i>  with  other  Churches. 
Our  Churches  here,  as  {by  the  grace  of  Christ)  wee  beleive  or1  profess 
the  same  Doctrine  of  the  trueth  of  the  Gospcll,  which  generally  is 
received  in  all  the  reformed  Churches  of  Christ  in  Europe :  so 
especially,  wee  desire  not  to  vary  from  the  doctrine  of  faith,  &  truth 
held  forth  by  the  churches  of  our  native  country.  For  though  it  be  not 
one  native  country,  that  can  breed  vs  all  of  one  mind ;  nor  ought  wee 
for  to  have  the  glorious  faith  of  our  Lord  Jesus  with  respect  of  persons  : 
yet  as  Paul  who  was  himself  a  Jew,  professed  to  hold  forth  the  doctrine 
of  justification  by  faith,  i>'  of  the  resurcction  of  the  dead,  according  as 
he  knew  his  godly  countrymen  did,  who  were  I  ewes  by  nature  (Galat.  2. 
15.  Acts  26.  6,  7.)  soe  wee,  who  are  by  nature,  English  men,  doe  desire 
to  hold  forth  the  same  doctrine  of  religion  [especially  in  fundamentalls) 
which  wee  see  6r*  know  to  be  held  by  the  churches  of  England,  according 
to  the  truth  of  the  Gospell 

The  more  wee  discern,  (that  which  wee  doc,  fir3  have  cause  to  doe 
with  incessant  mourning  fir*  trembling)  the  unkind,  &  unbrofhcrly.  fir* 
unchristian  contentions  of  our  godly  brethren,  fir5  countrymen,  in  matters 
of  church-government :  the  more  crnestly  doc  wee  desire  to  see  them  joy ned 


>  This  work,  apparently  the  first  specimen  of  the  printing  of  Samuel  Green  of  Cambridge,  is 
thus  truly  char.n  terized  by  Thomas,  History  of  Printing  it!  America,  sd  ed.,  Albany,  1874,  1 :  63, 
be  printed  by  one  who  was  but  little  acquainted  with  the  typographic 
art  .  .  .  the  press  work  is  very  bad,  and  that  of  the  case  no  better  .  .  .  the  compositor  did 
not  seem  to  know  the  use  of  points  .  .  .  Letters  of  abbreviation  are  frequently  used  . 
The  spelling  is  v 


PREFACE  TO  THE  PLATFORM  I 95 

together  in  one  common  faith,  o>-°  our  selves  with  them.  For  this  end, 
having  perused  the  publick  confession  of  faith,  agreed  upon  by  the  Rever- 
end assembly  of  Divines  at  Westminster,  &  finding  the  siimm  6^  substance 
therof  (in  matters  of  doctrine)  to  express  not  their  own  judgements  only, 
but  ours  also  :  and  being  likewise  called  upon  by  our  godly  Magistrates, 
to  draw  up  a  publick  confession  of  that  faith, which  is  constantly  taught, 
6^  generaly  professed  amongst  us,  wee  thought  good  to  present  unto 
them,  &*  with  them  to  our  churches,  fir»  with  them  to  all  the  churches  of 
Christ  abroad,  our  professed  &  hearty  assent  6"  attestation  to  the  whole 
confession  of  faith  \f or  substance  of  doctrine)  -which  the  Reverend  assem- 
bly presented  to  the  Religious  &°  Honourable  Par  lame  t  of  England:  Ex- 
cepting only  some  sections  in  the  25  30  &  31.  Chapters  of  their  confession, 
which  concern  points  of  controversie  in  church-discipline  ;  Touching 
which  wee  refer  our  [2]  selves  to  the  draught  of  church-discpline  in  the 
ensucing  treatise. 

The  truth  of  what  we  here  declare,  may  appear  by  the  unanimous 
vote  of  the  Synod  of  the  Elders  &  messengers  of  our  churches  assembled 
at  Cambridg,  the  last  of  the  sixth  mouth,  1648  :  which  joyntly  passed  in 
these  words  ;  This  Synod  having  perused,  &  considered  (with  much 
gladness  of  heart,  &  thankfullness  to  God)  the  cofession  of  faith 
published  of  late  by  the  Reverend  Assembly  in  England,  doe  judge 
it  to  be  very  holy,  orthodox,  <it  judicious  in  all  matters  of  faith  :  & 
doe  therfore  freely  &  fully  consent  therunto,  for  the  substance 
therof.  Only  in  those  things  which  have  respect  to  church  govern- 
ment &  discipline,  wee  refer  our  selves  to  the  platform  of  church- 
discipline,  agreed  upon  by  this  present  assebly  :  &  doe  therfore 
think  it  meet,  that  this  confession  of  faith,  should  be  comended  to 
the  churces  of  Christ  amongst  us,  &:  to  the  Honoured  Court,  as 
worthy  of  their  due  consideration  &  acceptance.  Howbeit,  wee  may 
not  conceal,  that  the  doctrine  of  vocation  expressed  in  Chap  10.  S 
1.  e°  summarily  repeated  Chap,  13.  ds:  1.  passed  not  -without  some 
debate.  Yet  considering,  that  the  term  of  vocation,  6°  others  by  which  it 
is  described,  are  capable  of  a  large,  or  more  strict  sense,  &■=  use,  and  that 
it  is  not  intended  to  bind  apprehensions  precisely  in  point  of  order  or 
method,  there  hath  been  a  generall  condescendency  therunto. 

Now  by  this  our  professed  consent  &  free  concurrence  with  them  in 
all  the  doctriualls  of  religion,  wee  hope,  it  may  appear  to  the  world,  that 
as  wee  are  a  remnant  of  the  people  of  the  same  nation  with  them  :  so  wee 
are  professors  of  the  same  common  faith,  6^  fellow-heyres  of  the  same 
common  salvation.  Yea  moreover,  as  this  our  profession  of  the  same 
faith  with  them,  -will  exempt  us  (even  in  their judgmcts)  from  suspicion  of 
heresy :  so  (wee  trust)  it  may  exempt  us  in  the  like  sort  from  suspicion 
of  schism  :  that  though  wee  are  forced  to  dissent  from  them  in  matters 
of  church-discipline  :  Yet  our  dissent  is  not  taken  up  out  of  arrogancy  op 
spirit  in  our  selves  (whom  they  see  -willingly  condescend  to  learn  of  them  .) 
neither  is  it  carryed  -with  uncharitable  censoriousness  towards  them, 
(both  7cdiich  are  the  proper,  6^  essentiall  charracters  of  schism)  but  in 
meekness  of  -wisdom,  as  -wee  walk  along  with  them,  6r>  follow  them,  as 
they  follow  Christ :  so  where  wee  eonceiv  a  (liferent  apprehention  of  the 
mind  of  Christ  (as  it  falleth  out  in  some  few  points  touching  church- 


I9C  THE   CAMBRIDGE   SYNOD   AND   PLATFORM 

order)  wee  still  reserve  due  reverence  to  them  (whom  wee  judge  to  be 
through  Christ,  the  glorious  lights  of  both  nations:)  &  only  crave  leave 
(asm  spirit  -wee  are  bound)  to  follow  the  Lamb  withersoever  he  goeth 
&  (after  the  Apostles  example)  as  -wee  beleive,  so  -wee  speake. 

And  if  the  example  of  such  poor  outcasts  as  our  selves,  might  pre- 
vaile  if  not  with  all  (for  that  -were  too  great  a  blessing  to  hofiefor)  vet 
with  some  or  other  of  our  brethren  in  England,  so  far  r  as  they  are  come 
to  mind  &  speake  the  same  thing  with  such  as  dissent  from  then,  -wee 
Hope  in  Christ,  it  would  not  onely  moderate  the  harsh  judging  \x\  and 
condemning  of  one  another  in  such  differences  of  judgment,  as  may  be 
pound  in  the  choysest  saints  :  but  also  prevent  [by  the  merer  of  Christ)  the 
penll  of  the  distraction  &•  destruction  of  all  the  churches  in  both  king- 
doms Otherwise,  if  brethren  shall  goe  on  to  bite  &  devoure  one  another 
the  Apostle  feared  (as  wee  also,  with  sadness  of  heart  doe)  it  will  tend 
to  the  consuming  of  them,  &=  us  all:  which  the  Lord  prevent. 

_  Wee  are  not  ignorant,  that  (besides  these  assertions  of  Heresy  & 
Schism)  other  exceptions  also  are  taken  at  our  way  of  church-govern- 
ment :  but  (as  -wee  conceive)  upon  as  little  ground. 

As  i  That  by  admitting  none  into  the  fellowship  of  our 
Church,  but  saints  by  calling,  wee  Rob  many  parish-churches  of 
their  best  members,  to  make  up  one  of  our  congregations-  which 
is  not  only,  to  gather  churches  out  of  churches  (a  thing  unheard 
of  in  Scripture:)  but  also  to  weaken  the  hearts  cS:  hands  of  the  best 
Ministers  in  the  parishes,  by  dispoyling  them  of  their  best  hearers. 

2  That  wee  provide  no  course  for  the  gayning,  &  calling  in,  of 
ignorant,  &  erromous,  &  scandalous  persos,  whom  wee  refuse  to 
receive  into  our  churches,  &  so  exclude  from  the  wholsom  remedy 
of  church-discipline. 

3  That  in  our  way,  wee  sow  seeds  of  division  &  hindrance  of 
edificatio  in  every  family:  whilst  admitting  into  our  churches  only 
voluntaries,  the  husbad  will  be  of  one  church,  the  wife  of  another- 
the  parents  of  one  church,  the  children  of  another  the  maister  of 
one  church,  the  servants  of  another.     And  so  the  parents  &  mais- 

.ters  being  of  different  churches  from  their  children  &  servants, 
they  cannot  take  a  just  account  of  their  profiting  by  what  they 
heare,  yea  by  this  meanes  the  husbands,  parents,  &  maisters,  shall 
be  chargable  to  the  maintenace  of  many  other  churches,  &  church- 
officers,  besides  their  own:  which  will' prove  a  charge  &  burden 
unsupportable. 

But  for  Ans-wcr,  as  to  the  first.  For  gathering  churches  out  of 
churches,  wee  cannot  say,  that  is  a  thing  unheard  of  in  Scripture.  The 
first  christian  church  was  gathered  out  of  the  Jewish  church,  &  out  of 
many  Synagogues  in  that  church,  6-  consisted  partly  of  the  Inhabitants 
of  Jerusalem,  partly  of  the  Galileans .-  who  though  they  kept  some  com- 
munion in  some  parts  of  publick  worship  with  the  Temple  :  yet  neither 
did  they  frequent  the  Sacrifices,  nor  repair  to  the  Sanedrim  for  the  de- 
termining of  their  church-causes  .-  but  kept  entire  &  constant  communion 
with  the  Apostles  church  in  all  the  ordinances  of  the  gospel/.  And  for 
the  first  christian  church  oj  the  Gentiles  at  Antoch,  it  appeareth  to  have 
been  gathered  &•  constituted  partly  of  the  dispersed  brethren  of  the  church 


PREFACE  TO  THE  TLATFORM  I 97 

at  lerusalem  (wherof  some  were  men  of  Cyprus,  and  Cyrene)  6°  partly 
of  the  beleiving  Gentiles.     Acts.  n.  20,  21. 

If  it  be  said  the  first  christian  church  at  lerusalem,  &:  that  at 
Antioch  were  gathered  not  out  of  any  christian  church,  but  out  of 
the  Jewish  Temple  and  [4]  Synagogues,  which  were  shortly  after 
to  be  abolished:  &  their  gathering  to  Antioch,  was  upon  occasion 
of  dispersion  in  time  of  persecution. 

Wee  desire,  it  may  be  considered,  1  T/iat  the  members  of  the  Jewish 
Church  were  more  strongly  and  slraitly  lyed  by  express  holy  covenant,  to 
keep  fellowship  with  the  lewish  church,  till  it  was  abolished,  then  any 
members  of  christian  parish-churches  are  wont  to  be  lyed  to  keep 
fellowship  with  their  parish-churches.  The  Episcopall  Canons,whieh  bind 
them  to  attend  on  theier  parish  church,  it  is  likely  they  are  now  abolished 
with  the  Episcopacy.  The  common  Law  of  the  Land  is  satisfyed  (as  wee 
concive)  if  they  attend,  upon  the  worship  of  God  in  any  other  church 
though  not  within  their  own  parish.  Lint  no  such  like  covenant  of  God, 
nor  any  other  religious  tye  lyeth  upon  them  to  attend  the  worship  of  God 
in  their  own  parish  church,  as  did  lye  upon  the  Lewes  to  attend  upon  the 
worship  of  God  in  their  Temple  and  Synagogues. 

2  Though  the  Lewish  Temple  Church  at  Lerusalem  was  to  be 
abolished,  vet  that  doeth  not  make  the  desertion  of  it  by  the  members,  to  be 
law  full,  till  it  was  abolished.  Future  abolition  is  no  warrant  for  present 
desertio  :  unless  it  be  lawfull  in  some  case  ivhilest  the  church  is  yet  in- 
present  standing  to  desert  it ;  to  witt,  cither  for  avoyding  of present polu- 
tions,  or  for  hope  of  greater  edification,  and  so  for  better  satisfaction  to 
conscience  in  either  [.]  future  events  (or  foresight  of  them)  do  not  disolve 
present  relations.  Else  wives,  children,  servants,  might  desert  their  hus- 
bands, parents,  masters,  when  they  be  mortally  sick. 

3  What  the  members  of  the  Lewish  church  did,  in  joyning  to  the 
church  at  Antioch,  in  time  of  persecution,  it  may  well  be  concived,  the 
members  of  any  christian  church  may  do  the  like,  for  satisfaction  of  con- 
science. Peace  of  conscience  is  more  desirable,  then  the  peace  of  the  out- 
ward man  ;  and  frccdome  from  scruples  of  consciecc  is  more  comfortable 
to  a  sincere  heart,  then  freedome  from  persecution. 

If  it  be  said,  these  members  of  the  Christian  Church  at  leru- 
salem, that  joyned  to  the  church  at  Antioch,  removed  their  habita- 
tions together  with  their  relations:  which  if  the  brethren  of  the 
congregationall  way  would  doe,  it  would  much  abate  the  grievance 
of  their  departure  from  their  presbyteriall  churches. 

Wee  verily  could  wish  them  so  to  doe,  as  well  approving  the  like  re- 
movall  of  habitations,  in  case  of  changing  church-relations  (provided,  that 
it  may  be  done  without  too  much  detriment  to  their  outward  estates)  and 
wee  for  our  partes,  have  done  the  same.  But  to  put  a  necessity  of  re- 
moval! of  habitation  in  such  a  ease,  it  is  to  foment  and  cherish  a  corrupt 
principle  of  making  civil  cohabitation,  if  not  a  for  mall  cause,  yet  at  least 
a  proper  adjunct  of  church-relation  ;  which  the  truth  of  the  Gospel  doeth 
not  acknowlcdg.  Now  to  foment  an  errour  to  the  prejudice  of  the  trueth 
of  the  Gospell,  is  not  to  walke  with  a  right  foot  according  to  the  truth 
of  the  Gospel,  as  Paul  judgeth.      Galat.  2.  14. 

[5]  4    Wee  do  not  think  it  meet,  or  safe,  for  a  member  of  a  prcs- 


198  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM 

byteriatt  Church,  forthwith  to  desert  his  relation  to  his  Church,  betake 
himself  to  the  fellowship  of  a  Congrcgationall  Church,  though  he  may 
discern  some  defect  in  the  estate,  or  governme?it  of  his  owne. 

For  1.  Faithfullness  of  brotherly  love  in  Church-relation,  re- 
quireth,  that  the  members  of  the  Church  should  first  convince 
their  brethren  of  their  sinful]  defects,  &  duely  wait  for  their  ref- 
ormation, before  they  depart  from  them.  For  if  wee  must  take 
such  a  course  for  the  healing  of  a  private  brother,  in  a  way  of 
brotherly  love,  with  much  meekness,  &  patience:  how  more  more 
ought  wee  so  to  walk  with  like  tendrness,  towards  a  whole  church. 

Again  2  By  the  hasty  departure  of  sound  members  from  a 
defective  church,  reformation  is  not  promoted,  but  many  times  re- 
tarded, «.\:  corruption  increased.  YVheras  on  the  contrary,  while 
sincere  members  breathing  after  purity  of  reformation  abide  to- 
gether, they  may  (by  the  blessing  of  Cod  upon  their  faithful]  en- 
deavours) prevaile  much  with  their  Elders,  6c  neighbours  towards 
a  reformation;  it  may  be,  so  much,  as  that  their  Elders  in  their 
own  church  shall  receive  none  to  the  Scales,  but  visible  saints:  and 
in  the  Classis  shall  put  forth  no  authoritive  act  (but  consultative 
only)  touching  the  members  of  other  churches:  nor  touching  their 
own,  but  with  the  consent  (silet  consent  at  least)  of  their  own 
church:  which  two  things,  if  they  can  obteyn  with  any  humble, 
meek,  holy,  faithfull  endeavours,  wee  coceiv,  they  might  (by  the 
grace  of  Christ)  find  liberty  of  conscience  to  continue  their  rela- 
tion with  their  own  presbyteriall  church  without  scruple. 

5  But  to  add  a  word  farther,  touching  the  gathering  of  Churches 
out  of  Churches,  what  if  there  -were  no  express  example  of  such  a 
thing  extant  in  the  Scriptures  ?  that  which  wee  are  wont  to  answer  the 
Antipeedobaptists,  may  suffice  hear:  it  is  enough,  if  any  evidence  iherof 
may  be  gathered  from  just  coscqucnc  of  Scripture  light.  Doctor 
Ames  his  judgmct  concerning  this  case,  passeth  {for  ought  wee  know) 
without  exceptio,  -which  he  gave  in  his  4  booke  of  coscicce1  in  Ans  to 
2  Qu  :    C  14.  Num  16. 

If  any  (saith  he)  wronged  with  unjust  vexation,  or  providing 
for  his  own  edificatio  or  in  testimony  against  sin  depart  from  a 
church  where  some  evills  are  tollerated,  &  joyn  himself  to  another 
more  pure,  yet  without  codemning  of  the  church  he  leaveth,  he  is 
not  therfore  to  be  held  as  a  schismatick,  or  as  guilty  of  any  other 
sinn.  Where  the  Tripartite  disjunction,  -which  the  judicious  Doctor 
puiteth,  declareth  the  lawj'ullncss  of  the  departure  of  a  Church-mem- 
ber from  his  church,  'when  cither  through  wearyness  of  unjust  vexa- 
tion, or  in  way  of  provision  for  his  own  edification,  or  in  testimony 
against  sinn,  he  joyneth  himself  to  another  congregation  more  re- 
formed. Any  one  of  these,  he  judgcth  a  just  &  lawfull  cause  of 
departure,  [6]  Though  all  of  them  do  not  concurr  together.  Neither 
will  such  a  practise  dispoyle  the  best  Ministers  of  the  parishes  of  their 
best  hearers. 

For  1  Sometimes  the  Ministers  themselves  are  willing  to  joyn 
with   their   better  sort  of  hearers,  in   this  way  of  reformation:   & 

1  Dr.  William  Ames,  Dt  Conscientia,  Amsterdam,  1635.     The   reference   should   be  Q.  3: 


TREFACE  TO  THE  PLATFORM  1 99 

then  they  &  their  hearers  continue  stil  their  Church  relation  to- 
gether, yea  &  confirm  it  more  straitly  &  strongly,  by  an  express 
renewed  covenant,  though  the  Ministers  may  still  continue  their 
wonted  preaching  to  the  whole  parrish. 

2  If  the  Ministers  do  dislike  the  way  of  those,  whom  they 
otherwise  count  their  best  members,  &  so  refuse  to  joyn  with  them 
therin;  yet  if  those  members  can  procure  some  other  Ministers  to 
joyn  with  them  in  their  own  way,  &  still  continue  their  dwelling 
together  in  the  same  town,  they  may  easily  order  the  times  of  the 
publick  assembly,  as  to  attend  constantly  upon  the  ministery  of 
their  former  Church:  &  either  after  or  before  the  publick  assembly 
of  the  parish  take  an  opportunity  to  gather  together  for  the  admin- 
istratis of  Sacramets,  &  Censures,  &  other  church  ordinances 
amongst  themselves.  The  first  Apostolick  church  assembled  to 
hear  the  word  with  the  Jewish  church  in  the  open  courts  of  the 
Temple:  but  afterwards  gathered  together  for  breaking  of  bread, 
&  other  acts  of  church-order,  from  house  to  house. 

3  Suppose,  Presbyteriall  churches  should  comunicate  some  of 
their  best  gifted  members  towards  the  erecting  &  gathering  of 
another  church:  it  would  not  forthwith  be  their  detriment,  but 
may  be  their  enlargment.  It  is  the  most  noble  &:  perfect  work  of 
a  living  creature  (both  in  nature  &  grace)  to  propagate,  &  multiply 
his  kind:  &  it  is  the  honour  of  the  faithfull  spouse  of  Christ,  to  set 
forward  the  work  of  Christ  as  well  abroad  as  at  home.  The  church 
in  Cant,  the  8.  8.  to  help  forward  her  little  sister-church,  was  will- 
ing to  part  with  her  choyse-materialls,  even  beames  of  Cedar,  &: 
such  pretious  living  stones,  as  weer  fit  to  build  a  Silver  pallace.  In 
the  same  book,  the  church  is  compared  sometime  to  a  garden, 
sometime  to  an  orchard,  Cant  4.  12,  13.  No  man  planteth  a  gar- 
den, or  orchard,  but  seeketh  to  get  the  choysest  herbes,  &  plants 
of  his  neighbours,  &  they  freely  impart  them:  nor  doe  they  accout 
it  a  spoyle  to  their  gardens,  &  orchards,  but  rather  a  glory.  Never- 
theless, wee  go  not  so  farr:  we  neither  seek,  nor  ask  the  choyse- 
members  of  the  parishes  but  accept  them  being  offered. 

If  it  be  said,  they  are  not  offered  by  the  Ministers,  nor  by  the 
parish  churches  {who  have  most  right  in  them)  but  only  by  themselves. 

It  may  justly  be  demaunded,  what  right,  or  what  powr  have 
either  the  ministers,  or  parish  church  over  them?  Not  by  solemn 
church  covenant:  for  that,  though  it  be  the  firmest  engagement, 
is  not  owned,  but  rejected.  If  it  be,  by  [7]  Their  joyning  with  the 
parish,  in  the  calling  &  election  of  a  minister  to  such  a  congrega- 
tion at  his  first  comming,  there  is  indeed  just  weight  in  such  an 
ingagement:  nor  doe  wee  judge  it  safe  for  such  to  remove  from 
such  a  minister,  unless  it  be  upon  such  grounds,  as  may  justly  give 
him  due  satisfactio.  But  if  the  unio  of  such  members  to  a  parish 
Church,  &  to  the  ministery  therof,  be  only  by  cohabitation  within 
the  precincts  of  the  parish,  that  union,  as  it  was  founded  upo  hu- 
mane law:  so  by  humane  law  it  may  easily  be  released.  Or  other- 
wise, if  a  man  remove  his  habitation,  he  removeth  also  the  bond  of 
his  relation,  &  the  ground  of  offence. 


200  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM 

4  It  need  not  to  be  feared,  that  all  best  hearers  of  the  best 
ministers,  no  nor  the  most  of  them,  will  depart  from  them  upon 
point  of  church-govermet.  Those  who  have  found  the  presenee  &; 
powr  of  the  spirit  of  Christ  breathing  in  their  ministers,  either  to 
their  conversion,  or  edification,  will  be  slow  to  change  such  a  min- 
istry of  faith,  &  holyness,  for  the  liberty  of  church-order.  Upon 
which  ground,  &  sundry  other  such  like,  their  be  doubtless  sundry 
godly  &  judicious  hearers  in  many  parishes  in  England  that  doe 
&  will  prefer  their  relation  to  their  ministers  (though  in  a  presby- 
teriall  way)  above  the  Congregational!  confeederation. 

5  But  if  all,  or  the  most  part  of  the  best  hearers  of  the  best 
ministers  of  parishes,  should  depart  from  them,  as  prefering  in 
their  judgments,  the  congregationall  way:  yet,  in  case  the  congre- 
gationall  way  should  prove  to  be  of  Christ,  it  will  never  greiv  the 
holy  hearts  of  godly  ministers,  that  their  hearers  should  follow 
after  Christ :  yea  many  of  themselves  (upon  due  deliberation)  will 
be  reaedy  to  go  along  with  them.  It  never  greived,  nor  troubled 
John  Baptist,  that  his  best  disciples,  departed  from  him  to  follow 
after  Christ.  Joh.  3.  But  in  case  the  congregationall  way  should 
prove  to  be,  not  the  institution  of  Christ  (as  wee  take  it)  but  the 
invetion  of  men  :  then  doubtless,  the  presbyteriall  form  (if  it  be  of 
God)  will  swallow  up  the  other,  as  Moses  rod  devoured  the  rods  of 
the  ^Egyptians.  Nor  will  this  put  a  necessity  upon  both  the  oppo- 
site partyes,  to  shift  for  themselves,  &  to  seek  to  supplant  one 
another  :  but  only,  it  will  call  upon  them  dXrjOeveiv  ev  dydrrr]  to  seek 
&  to  follow  the  trueth  in  love,  to  attend  in  faithfullness  each  Qto 
his  own  flock,  &  to  administer  to  them  all  the  holy  things  of  God, 
&  their  portio  of  food  in  due  season  :  &  as  for  others,  quietly  to 
forbear  them,  &  yet  to  instruct  them  with  meekness  that  are  con- 
trary minded  :  leaving  it  to  Christ  (in  the  use  of  all  good  meanes) 
to  reveal  his  own  trueth  in  his  own  time  :  &  mean  while  endeavour- 
ing to  keep  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace.  Philip.  3. 
15,  16.     Ephesians.  4.  3. 

[8]  To  the  2  Exception,  That  wee  take  no  course  for  the 
gayning  &  healing  &  calling  in  of  ignorant,  &  erronious,  &  scandal- 
ous persos,  whom  wee  refuse  to  receive  into  our  churches  &  so  ex- 
clude them  from  the  remidy  of  church-disciplle. 

J  ]  ee  conceive  the  receiving  of  them  into  our  churches  -would  rather 
loose  &  corrupt  our  Churches,  then  gain  &  hcale  them.  A  little 
leaven  layed  in  a  lump  of  dough,  will  sooner  leaven  the  whole  lump, 
then  the  whole  lump  will  sweeten  it.  Wee  therefore  find  it  safer,  to 
square  rough  &  unkewen  stones,  before  the\y]  be  layed  into  the  build- 
ing, rather  then  to  hammer  &  hew  them,  when  they  lye  unevenly  in 
the  building. 

And  accordingly,  two  meanes  (wee  use  to  gayn  &  call  in  such  as 
arc  ignordt  or  scandalous.  1  The  publick  minister}1  of  the  word,  upon 
which  they  are  invited  by  counsel,  &  required  by  wholsome  lawes  to 
attend.  And  the  word  it  is,  'which  is  the  powr  of  God  to  salvation, 
to  the  calling  &  winning  of  soulcs.  2  Private  conference,  &  con- 
viction by  the  Elders,  <Sf  other  able  brethren  of  the  church  :  whom  they 


PREFACE   TO   THE   PLATFORM  201 

doe  the  more  respectively  hearken  unto,  when  they  see  no  hope  of  en- 
joying church-fellowship,  or  participation  in  the  Sacraments  for  them- 
selves, or  their  children,  till  they  approve  their  judgments  to  be  soicnd 
&  orthodox,  &  their  lives  subdued  to  some  hope  of  a  godly  conver- 
sation. What  caii  Classical  discipline,  or  excomunication  it  selfe  do 
more  in  this  case. 

The  3  Exception  wrappeth  up  in  it  a  three  fold  domestical  in- 
convenience :  &  each  of  them  meet  to  be  eschewed,  i  Disunion 
in  families  between  each  relation  :  2  Disappointmet  of  edificatio, 
for  want  of  opportunity  in  the  governours  of  familyes  to  take  ac- 
cout  of  things  heard  by  their  children  &  servants.  3  Disburs- 
ments  of  chargeable  maintenance  to  the  several  churches,  wherto 
the  several  persons  of  their  familyes  are  joyned. 

All  which  incoyiveniences  cither  do  not  fall  out  in  congrcgationall- 
churches  ;  or  are  easily  redressed.  For  none  are  orderly  admitted 
into  congregational-churches,  but  such  as  are  well  approved  by  good 
testimony,  to  be  duly  observant  of  family-relations.  Or  if  any  other- 
wise disposed  should  creep  in,  they  are  either  orderly  healed,  or  duly 
removed,  in  a  way  of  Christ.  Nor  are  they  admitted,  unless  they 
can  give  some  good  account  of  their  profiting  by  ordinances,  before  the 
Elders  &  brethren  of  the  church  :  <2f  much  more  to  their  par ets,  & 
masters.  Godly  Tutors  in  the  university  ca?i  take  an  account  of  their 
pupills :  &  godly  housholders  in  the  Citty  can  take  account  of  their 
children  &  servatits,  how  they  profit  by  the  word  they  have  heard  in 
several  churches :  &  that  to  the  greater  edification  of  the  whole  family, 
by  the  variety  of  such  administrations.  Bees  may  bring  more  hony, 
<2f  wax  into  the  hive,  when  they  are  not  limited  to  one  garden  of 
flowers,  but  may  fly  abroad  to  many. 

Nor  is  any  charge  expected  from  wives,  children,  or  servants  to 
the  maintenance  of  congregational!  churches,  further  then  they  be  fur- 
nished with  personall  estates,  or  earnings,  which  may  citable  them  to 
contribute  of  such  things  as  they  have,  &  not  of  [9]  Such  as  they  have 
not.  God  acceptcth  not  Robbery  for  a  sacrifice.  And  though  a  godly 
housholder  may  justly  lake  himself e  bound  in  conscience,  to  contribide 
to  any  such  Church,  wherto  his  wife,  or  children,  or  servants  doe  stand 
in  relation  :  yet  that  will  not  aggravate  the  burden  of  his  charge,  no 
more  then  if  they  were  received  members  of  the  same  Church  wherto 
himself  is  related. 

But  why  doe  wee  stand  thus  long  to  plead  exemptions  from  ex- 
ceptions ?  the  Lord  help  all  his  faithful  I servants  (whether  presbyteriall, 
or  congregationall)  to  judge  6°  shame  our  selves  before  the  Lord  for 
all  our  former  complyaiices  to  greater  enormilyes  in  Church-govern- 
ment, then  are  to  be  found  either  in  the  congregationall,  or  presbyteriall 
way.  And  then  surely,  either  the  Lord  will  clear e  up  his  own  zvillto 
us,  &  so  frame,  &  subdue  us  all  to  one  mind,  &  one  way,  (Ezek. 
43.  10,  1 1.)  or  else  wee  shall  learn  to  beare  one  anothers  burdens  in  a 
spirit  of  meekness.  It  will  then  doubtless  be  farrfrom  us,  so  to  attest 
the  discipline  of  Christ,  as  to  detest  the  disciples  of  Christ :  so  to  con- 
tend for  the  seameless  coat  of  Christ,  as  to  crucifie  the  living  members 
14 


202  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   ANT)    PLATFORM 

of  Christ:  soe  to  divide  oar  selves  about  Church  communion,  as  through 
breaches  to  open  a  wide  gap  for  a  deluge  of  Antichristian  &  prophanc 
malignity  to  swallow  up  both  Church  <Sf  civil  state. 

IVJiat  shall  wee  say  more?  is  difference  about  Church-order 
becom  the  inlett  of  all  the  disorders  in  the  kingdom  f  hath  the  Lord 
indeed  left  us  to  such  hardness  of  heart,  that  Church-government  shall 
become  a  s?iare  to  Zion,  (as  somlimes  Moses  was  to  sEgypt,  Exod. 
10.  7.)  that  wee  cannot  leave  contesting  &  contending  about  it,  till  the 
kingdom  be  destroyed?  did  not  the  Lord  fesus,  when  he  dedicated  his 
stifferings  for  his  church,  &  his  also  unto  his  father,  make  it  his  earn- 
est &  only  prayer  for  us  in  this  world,  that  wee  all  might  be  one  in 
hi?n?  John.  17.  20,  21,  22,  23.  And  is  it  possible,  that  he  (re horn 
the  Father  heard  akvayes,  John.  11.  42.)  should  not  have  this  last 
most  solemn  prayer  heard,  &  grau?itcd?  or,  shall  it  be  graunted for 
all  the  saints  elsewhere,  &  not  for  the  saints  in  England ;  so  that 
amongst  them  disunion  shall  grow  even  about  Church-union,  & 
communion  ?  If  it  is  possible,  for  a  little  faith  (so  vmch  as  a  grain 
of  vuistardseed)  to  remove  a  mountaine:  is  it  not  possible,  for  so  much 
strength  of  faith,  as  is  to  be  found  in  all  the  godly  in  the  kingdom,  to 
remove  those  Images  of  jealousie,  &  to  cast  those  stumbling-blockcs 
out  of  the  way,  which  may  hinder  the  free  passage  of  brotherly  love 
amongst  brethren?  It  is  true  indeed,  the  National  covenant?  doth 
justly  engage  both  party cs,  faithfully  to  endeavour  the  utter  extirpa- 
tion of  the  Antichristia  Hierarchy,  &  much  more  of  all  Blasphemyes, 
Heresies,  <Sf  damnable  errou>s.  Certainly,  if  congregational  disci- 
pline be  Independent  from  the  inventions  of  men,  is  it  not  much  more 
Independent  from  the  delusions  of  Satan  ?  what  fellowship  hath  Christ 
with  Belial?  light  with  darkness?  tructh  with  errour?  The  faith- 
full  /ewes  needed  not  the  help  of  the  Samaritans,  to  [10]  Recdify  the 
Temple  of  God:  yea  they  rejected  their  help  when  it  was  offered. 
Ezra  the  1,  2,  3.  And  if  the  congregationall  way  be  a  'way  of 
trueth  (as  wee  believe)  &  if  the  brethren  that  walk  in  it  be  zealous 
of  the  trueth,  (2f  hate  every  false  -way  (as  by  the  1  ule  of  their  holy  dis- 
cipline  they  are  instructed,  2  John.  10,  11.)  then  verily,  there  is  no 
branch  in  the  National!  covenant,  that  cngagcth  the  covenanters  to  ab- 
hore  either  Congregalio?ia/l  CJnarhcs,  or  their  way:  -which  being 
diiely  administred,  doe  no  less  effectually  extirpate  the  Antichristian 
Hierarchy,  6°  all  Blasphemies,  Heresycs,  o~  pernicious  errours, 
then  the  other  way  of  discipline  doeth,  which  is  more  ge?ierally  & 
publickly  received  &°  ratifyed. 

But  the  Lord  fesus  com>n?/nc  with  all  our  hearts  in  secret :  6°  he  who 
is  the  King  of  his  Church,  let  him  be  pleased  to  exercise  his  A'iugly 
powr  in  our  spiritcs,  that  so  his  kingdomc  may  come  into  our 
Churches  in  Purity  &  Peace.      Amen.     Amen. 


1  /.   e.    The  Scotch   Covenant,  adopted  by   Parli, 
with  the  King,  in  Sept.,  1643. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  203 


CHAPTER    I. 

Of  the  form  of  Church-  Government ;    and  that  it  is   one, 
immutable,  and  prescribed  in  the    Word  of  God. 

I 

Ecclesiasticall  Polity  or  Church  Government,  or  dis-  Ezek  43,  n 
cipline  is  nothing  els,  but  that  Forme  Sz  order  that  is  to  1  Tim.  3,  iS 
be  observed  in  the  Church  of  Christ  vpon  earth,  both  for 
the  Constitution    of   it,  &:  all   the    Administrations    that 
therein  are  to  bee  performed. 

2  Church-Government  is  Considered  in  a  double  re- 
spect either  in  regard  0/  the  parts  of  Government  them- 
selves, or  necessary  Circumstances  thereof.     The  parts  of 
Government  are  prescribed  in  the  word,  because  the  Lord  Hebr  3, 5, 6 
Iesus  Christ  the  King  and  Law-giver  of  his  Church,  is  no 

less  faithf  ull  in  the  house  of  God  then  was  Moses,  who  Exod  25  4o 
from  the  Lord  delivered  a  form  <Sf  pattern  of  Govern-  2  Tim  3 :6 
ment  to  the  Children  of  Israel  in  the  old  Testament:  And 
the  holy  Scriptures  are  now  also  soe  perfect,  as  they  are 
able  to  make  the  man  of  God  perfect  &  thorough-ly  fur- 
nished vnto  euery  good  work  ;  and  therefore  doubtless 
to  the  well  ordering  of  the  house  of  God. 

3  The  partes  of  Church-Government  are  all  of  them  1  Tim  3 15 
exactly   described    in   the    word    of  God  being   parts  or  13  Ex  20^ 
means  of  Instituted  worship  according  to  the  second  Com-  v  16   Heb  12 
mandement  :  &  therefore  to  continue  one  &  the  same,  15  22' 
vnto  the  apearing  of  our  Lord  Iesus  Christ  as  a  kingdom 

that  cannot  be  shaken,  untill  hee  shall  deliver  it  up  unto 
God,  euen  the   Father.1     Soe   that   it   is  not   left  in   theDeuti232. 
power  of   men,  officers,    Churches,   or   any   state    in    the  1  King!  12. 
world  to  add,  or  diminish,  or  alter  any  thing  in  the  least 3Ij 
measure  therein. 

4  The  necessary  circumstances,  as  time  &  place  &c  ^nss  I2 
belonging  unto  order  and  decency,  are  not  soe  left  unto  Isai  2Q '3- 


1  The  same  idea  is  expressed,  though  not  in  identical  language,  by  Mather, 
Church-Government  and  Church-Covenant  Discvssed,  (answer  to  XXXII  Ques- 
tions,) London,  i643,  p.  83. 


Acts  : 


204  THE   CAMBRIDGE   SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

Coi 2 22 23  men  as  that  under  pretence  [2]  of  them,  they  may  thrust 
their  own  Inventions  vpon  the  Churches  :  Being  Circum- 
scribed in  the  word  with  many  Generall  limitations  ; 
_  where  they  are  determined   in   respect  of  the  matter    to 

1  cor  11 23  be  neither  worship  it  self,  nor  Circumstances  seperable 
from  worship.-  in  respect  of  their  end,  they  must  be  done 
vnto  edification  :   in  respect  of  the  manner,  decently,  and 

1  Cor  14  26        in   order,    according    to  the  nature  of  the    things    them 

1  Cor  11 14        selves,  &  Civill,  &  Church  Custom,  doth  not  euen  nature 

>  Cor  11  16  . 

Cor  14 12  it  selfe  teach  you  ?  yea  they,  are  in  some  sort  determined 
particularly,  namely  that  they  be  done  in  such  a  manner, 
as  all  Circumstances  considered,  is  most  expedient  for 
edification  :  so,  as  if  there  bee  no  errour  of  man  concern- 
ing their  determination,  the  determining  of  them  is  to  be 
accounted  as  if  it  were  divine. 


CHAP  :   II. 

Of  the  nature  of  the   Catholick  Church  in    Generall.  <5f  in 
speciall,   of  a  particular  visible  Church. 

EPhi22  23  THe    Catholick    Church,'   is    the    whole    company   of 

3o.°  Hebi2       those   that  are  elected,  redeemed,  &  in  time  effectually 
called    from    the    state  of   sin  &   death   vnto   a  state  of 
Grace,  &  salvation  in  Iesus  Christ. 
Rom  8  17.  2     This  church    is    either   Triumphant,   or    Militant. 

c48mEph2  Triumphant,  the  number  of  them  who  are  Gloryfied  in 
heaven  :  Militant,  the  number  of  them  who  are  conflict- 
ing with  their  enemies  vpon  earth. 

3  This  Militant  Church  is  to  bee  considered  as  In- 
2  Tim  2 19.  visible,  &  Visible.  Invisible,  in  respect  of  their  relation 
,Cor6I7i7.  wherin  they  stand  to  Christ,  as  a  body  unto  the  head, 
Rom3i,T  being   united   unto  him,  by  the   spirit  of  God,  <\r  faith  in 

U^2?28         their    hearts:    Visible,    in    respect    of    the    profession    of 
' Tim  6  "'        their  faith,   in   their  persons,  &    in  particular  Churches  : 
&   so  there    may    be   acknowledged   an   universall  visible 
Church.2 
Acts  i9  1  4     The  members  of  the  Militant  visible  Church,3  con- 


'  Compare  R.  Mather,  Apologie  .  .  .  for  Chvrch-Covenant,  London, 
1643,  p.  11. 

2  /.  e.,  The  body  of  those  who  outwardly  profess  faith  in  Christ,  viewed  as 
brought  into  one  class  by  that  profession,  but  not  as  thereby  organized  into  one  visible 
body  corporate. 

*  We  may  perhaps  insert  are  to  be  in  conformity  to  the  preceding  paragraph. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  205 

sidered  either  as  not  yet  in  church-order,  or  as  walking  Matt  18 17. 
according  to  the  church-order  of  the  Gospel.  In  order,1 
&  so  besides  the  spiritual  union,  &  communion,  com- 
mon to  all  believers,  they  injoy  more  over  an  union  & 
communion  ecclesiasticall-Political:2  So  wee  deny  an  uni- 
versall  visible  church.3 

5  The  state  the  members  of  the  Militant  visible  Gen.  18  i9 
church  [3]  walking  in  order,  was  either  before  the  law, 
Oeconomical,  that  is  in  families  ;  or  under  the  law,  Na- 
tional :  or,  since  the  comming  of  Christ,  only  congre- 
gational:1 (The  term  Independent,  wee  approve  not:5) 
Therfore  neither  national,  provincial,  nor  classical." 

6  A  Congregational-church,  is  by  the  institution  of  »  Cor :  14, 2^ 

0      &  '  J  i  Cor  :  14,  36 

Christ  a  part  of  the  Militant-visible-church,  consisting  of  •  Cor :  1  2. 
a  company  0/ Saints  by  calling,  united  into  one  body,  byExo:i956 

Deut  :  29  :  i. 

a  holy  covenant,  /or  the  publick  worship  of  God,  &  the  &  9  to  15 
mutuall  edification  one  of  another,  in  the  Fellowship  o/iCon426. 
the  Lord  Iesus.7 

CHAP:    III. 

Of  the  matter   of  the    Visible    Church    Both    inrespect  of 
Quality  and  Quantity. 

THe  matter  0/  a  visible  church  are  Saints  by  calling.8  pC£r: '  2 
2     By  Saints,  wee  understand,  Hebr:6. 1. 

'  '  1  Cor.  1  5. 

1  Such,  as  haue  not  only  attained  the  knowledge  of  R™;  >s  ^ 
the  principles  of  Religion,  &  are  free  from  gros  &  open  17-   Act837. 
scandals,  but   also   do    together    with    the    profession    of  Rom.  6°  17 
their  faith  &  Repentance,  walk  in  blameles  obedience  to 
the  word,  so  as  that  in  charitable  discretion  they  may  be 


1  /.  *.,  The  members  of  the  company  of  professed  disciples  of  Christ  on  earth 
are  to  be  considered  in  this  treatise,  not  as  isolated  believers  but  as  united  in  the  cor- 
porate fellowships  established  by  the  Gospel. 

a  /.  e..  This  Gospel-order  implies  the  union  of  Christians  into  local  covenanted 
corporations. 

3  /.  c,  There  is  no  corporate  union  and  communion  of  all  the  professed  followers 
of  Christ,  only  an  association  of  local  churches,  if  by  the  word  church  the  organized 
body  of  believers  is  signified.  Compare  Mather,  Church-Government  and  Church- 
Covenant  Discvssed,  (Answer  to  XXXII  Questions,)  London,  1643,  pp.  9,  10. 

4  Compare  Cotton,  A'eyes,  p.  30. 

6  See  Cotton's  reasons  why  the  fathers  of  New  England  disliked  the  name  In- 
dependent, Way  0/ the  Cong.  Churches  Cleared,  p.  XI. 

6  Compare  Cotton,  Way  0/ the  Churches,  p.  2. 

7  Compare  Mather,  Apologic     .     .     .    for  Chvrch-Covenant,  pp.  3-5. 

s  Compare  Mather,  Church-Government  and  Church-Covenant  Discvssed, 
<Answer  to  XXXII  Questions,)  pp.  8,  9. 


200  THE   CAMBRIDGE   SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

■  Cor.  i  7.         accounted   Saints  by  calling,    (though   perhaps   some    or 
Coi'ios'i"'       more  of  them  be  unsound,  &:  hypocrites  inwardly  :)  be- 
cause the  members  of  such  particular  churches  are  com- 
monly by  the  holy  ghost  called  Saints  &  faithfull  brethren 
Ephes.  i  i.        in  Christ,  and  sundry  churches  haue  been  reproued  for 

i  Cor  5  2  13  '  x 

Rev.  t  14  15       receiving,  &  suffering  such  persons  to  continu  in  fellow- 

44.  7&9-<fc       ship  amongst  them,  as   have    been    offensive  &  scandal- 
chap.  23  38 
39.    Xum2a       ous  :  the  name  of  God  also  by  this  means  is  Blasphemed  : 

2  1314.  &  the  holy  things  of  God  defiled  &;  Prophaned.  the  hearts 

29.   p^d.2377       of  godly  grieved  :  &  the  wicked  themselves  hardned  :  & 
V.  '  1  Cor.V:      holpen  forward  to  damnation,  the  example  of  such  doeth 
endanger  the  sanctity  of  others.     A  litle  Leaven  Leaven- 
eth  the  whole  lump. 
ler.  2  2i,  2     The  children  of  such,  who  are  also  holy.1 

ier.  T4.5  Gai.  3     The  members  of  churches  though  orderly  consti- 

i242i.2  Rev.  tuted,  may  in  time  degenerate,  &  grow  corrupt  &  scan- 
21  «.IS'  &  dalous,  which  though  they  ought  not  to  be  tolerated  in 
the  church,  yet  their  continuance  therein,  through  the 
defect  of  the  execution  of  discipline  &  Just  censures, 
doth  not  immediately  dissolv  the  being  of  the  church, 
as  appeares  in  the  church  of  Israeli,  &  the  churches  of 
Galatia  &  Corinth,  Pergamus,  &  Thyatira. 
1  Cor  14  21  [4]   4   The  matter  of  the  Church  in  respect  of  it's  quan- 

tity ought  not  to  be  of  gteater  number  then  may  ordinarily 
Matt  18  17         meet  together' conveniently2   in  one  place  :  nor  ordinarily 
fewer,    then    may    conveniently    carry     on    Church-work. 
Hence  when  the  holy  Scripture  maketh  mention  of  the 
Rom  16  1  Saints  combined  into  a  church-estate,  in  a  Town  or  Citty, 

RevTic3  where  was  but  one  Congregation,  it  usually  calleth  those 
Saints  [t/ie  church]  3  in  the  singular  number,  as  the  church 
of  the  Thessalonians  the  church  of  Smyrna,  Philadelphia, 
&  the  like  :  But  when  it  speaketh  of  the  Saints  in  a  Nation, 
or  Province,  wherin  there  were  sundry  Congregations,  It 
frequently  &  usually  calleth  them  by  the  name  of  churches^ 
1  Cor  16  1  in  the  plurall  number,  as  the  [churches]  of  Asia,  Galatia, 

29CorYi.2         Macedonia,  &  the  like:   which  is  further  confirmed  by  what 
2'  M       is  written  of  sundry  of  those  churches  in  particular,  how  they 
were  Assembled  &:  met  together  the  whole  church  in  one 
place,  as  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  the  church  at  Antioch, 


Ibid.,  p.  20. 

Compare  Cotton's  remarks,  Way  of -the  Churches,  London,  1645,  pp.  53,  54. 

[  ]  sic,  and  later. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  20y 

the  church  at  Corinth,  6°  Cenchrea,  though  it  were  more  Acts  246 
neer  to  Corinth,  it  being  the  port  thereof,  c^  answerable  to  2.  Act's  i4, 
a  Village,  yet  being  a  distinct  Congregation  from  Corinth,  i7coJV4. 
it  had  a  church  of  its  owne  as  well  as  Corinth  had.1  Romi^  1 

5  Nor  can  it  with  reason  be  thought  but  that  every 
church  appointed  &  ordained  by  Christ,  had  a  ministrie 
ordained  &  appointed  for  the  same  :  &  yet  plain  it  is, 
that  there  were  no  ordinary  officers  appointed  by  Christ 
for  any  other,  then  Congregational  churches  :  Elders  being 
appointed  to  feed,  not  all  flocks,  but  the  particular  flock  of  Acts  20  28. 
God  over  which  the  holy  Ghost  had  made  them  the  over- 
seers, &  that  flock  they  must  attend,  even  the  whole  flock: 
&  one  Congregation  being  as  much  as  any  ordinary  Elders 
can  attend,  therfore  there  is  no  greater  Church  then  a 
Congregation,  which  may  ordinarily  meet  in  one  place. 

C//AP:    IV. 

Of  the  Form  of  A    Visible  Church  &  of  Church  Covenant. 

Saints  by  Calling,  must  have  a  Visible-Political-Union  1  Cor  12  27. 
amongst  themselves,  or  else  they  are  not  yet  a  particular  EPhe  i 22' 
church:   as  those  similitudes  hold  forth,  which  Scripture  16  17 
makes  use  [5]  of,  to  shew  the  nature  of  particular  Churches: 
As  a  Body,  A  building,  or  House,  Hands,  Eyes,  Feet,  6°  other 
members  must  be  united,  or  else,  remaining  seperate  are 
not   a   body.      Stones,    Timber,   though   squared,  hewen  & 
pollished,  are  not  an  house,  untill  they  are  compacted  & 
united:  so  Saints  or  believers  in  judgment  of  charity,  are 
not  a  church,  unless  Orderly  knit  together.2 

2  Particular  churches  cannot  be  distinguished  one 
from  another  but  by  their  formes.     Ephesus  is  not  Smyrna, 

&:  Pergamus  Thyatira,  but  each  one  a  distinct  society  of  it  Rev  1 
self,  having  officers  of  their  owne,  which  had  not  the  charge 
of  others  :  Vertues  of  their  own,  for  which  others  are  not 
praysed  :  Corruptions  of  their  owne,  for  which  others  are 
not  blamed.3 

3  This   Form  is  the   Visible  Covenant,  Agreement,  or  Exod  19  5 
consent  wherby  they  give  up  themselves  unto  the  Lord,  tODeu'29  " 

1  Compare  Richard  Mather  and  William  Tompson's  Modest  £r>  Brotherly  An- 
swer in  Mr.  Charles  Herle  his  Book,  London,  3644,  pp.  32,  33. 

3  Compare  Mather,  Apologie  .  .  .  for  Chvreh-Covenant ,  p.  5  ;  Church- 
Government,  p.  39. 

3  Compare  Ibid.,  Apologie,  p.  14. 


208  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM 

I3.   Zachu       the  observing  of  the  ordinances  of  Christ  together  in  the 
same  society,  which  is  usually  called  the  Church-Covenant ; 
For  wee  see  not  otherwise  how  members  can  have  Church- 
power  one  over  another  mutually.1 
ECdefcI9i  r^e  cornPar'n&  °f  each  particular  church  unto  a  Citty, 

"  2  &"  unto  a  Spouse*  seemeth  to  conclude  not  only  a  Form, 

Gen  i7  7.  but  that  that  Form,  is  by  way  of  a  Covenant. 

i3.uf?Phl2,  The  Covenant,  as  it  was  that  which   made  the   Family 

of  Abraham  and  children  of  Israel  to  be  a  church  and  peo- 
ple unto  God,3  so  it  is  that  which  now  makes  the  several! 
societyes  of  Gentil  believers  to  be  churches  in  these  dayes. 

4  This  Voluntary  Agreement,  Consent  or  Covenant  (for 
all  these  are  here  taken  for  the  same):  Although  the  more 
express  &  plain  it  is,  the  more  fully  it  puts  us  in  mind  of 
our  mutuall  duty,  &  stirreth  us  up  to  it,  &  leaveth  lesse 
room  /or  the  questioning  of  the  Truth  o/ the  Church-estate 
of  a  Company  of  pro/essors,  &  the  Truth  of  membership 
of  particular  persons  :  [6]  yet  wee  conceive,  the  substance 
of  it  is  kept,  where  there  is  a  real  Agreement  &  consent, 
of  a  company  of  faithful  persons  to  meet  constantly 
together  in  one  Congregation,  for  the  publick  worship  of 
God,  &  their  mutuall  edification  :   which   real  agreement 

Exod  19  s  &  consent  they  doe  express  by  their  constant  practise  in 
i7.  iosh24  comming  together  for  the  publick  worship  of  God,  &  by 
Psal  50  5  their  religious  subjection  unto  the  ordinances  of  God  there: 

Gen  the  rather,  if  wee  doe  consider  how  Scripture  covenants 
have  been  entred  into,  not  only  expressly  by  word  of 
mouth,  but  by  sacrifice  ;  by  hand  writing,  &  seal  ;  &;  also 
somtimes  by  silent  consent,  without  any  writing,  or  expres- 
sion of  words  at  all.4 

5  This  /orme  then  being  by  mutuall  covenant,  it 
followeth,  it  is  not  faith  in  the  heart,  nor  the  profession  of 
that  faith,  nor  cohabitation,  nor  Baptisme;6  1  Not  /aith  in 
the  heart?  becaus  that  is  invisible:6  2  not  a  bare  pro/es- 
sion;  because  that  declareth  them  no  more  to  be  members 

1  Compare  Hid.,  and  Cotton,  Way  of  the  Churches,  pp.  2-4. 

2  Compare  Mather,  Afologic,  pp.  10-13. 

3  Compare  Ibid.,  6,  7. 

*  Compare  Ibid.,  pp.  36-41 ;  and  Mather,  Church-Government  and  Church- 
Covenant  Discussed,  (Answer  to  No.  9,  of  the  XXXII  Questions,)  pp.  24-28.  The 
fathers  of  New  England  of  Puritan  education  were  careful  to  maintain  the  churchly 
character  of  English  parish  Assemblies. 

6  Insert  that  constitutes  a  church. 
8  Compare  Mather,  Afologie,  pp.  16-20;  and  Church-Government,  p.  24. 


Deu  29. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  2CX) 

of  one  church  then  of  another:  '  3  not  Cohabitation;  Athe- 
ists or  Infidels  may  dwell  together  with  beleivers:2  4  not 
Baptism;  because  it  presupposeth  a  church  estate,  as  cir- 
cumcision in  the  old  Testament,  which  gave  no  being  unto 
the  church,  the  church  being  before  it,  &  in  the  wildernes 
without  it.  seals  presuppose  a  covenant  already  in  being, 
one  person  is  a  compleat  subiect  of  Baptism:  but  one  per- 
son is  uncapable  of  being  a  church.3 

6     All  believers  ought,  as  God  giveth  them  oppor-  Acts247.&g26. 
tunity  there  unto,  to  endeavour  to  joyn  themselves  unto  &  28*19  20.14 15' 
a  particular  church  &  that   in   respect  of  the  honour  of  g7,a7  I33 
Jesus  Christ,  in  his  example,  &:  Institution,  by  the  pro- ,  f^hn  1*3. 
fessed  acknowledgment  of,  &  subiection  unto  the  order  &: 
ordinances  of  the  Gospel:  as  also  in  respect  of  their  good 
of  communion,  founded  upon  their  visible  union,  &  con- 
taind  in  the  promises  of  Christs  special  presence  in  the 
church:  whence  they  have  fellowship  with  him,  &  in  him 
one  with  an  other:  also,  for  the  keeping  of  them  in  the  Psai  n9  last 
way  of  Gods  commandments,  6°  recovering  of  them  inEPh4i6:> 
case  of  wandring,  (which  all  Christs  sheep  are  subiect  to  Matt "isVie  17. 
in   this  life),  being  unable  to  returne  of  themselves;   to- 
gether with  the  benefit  of  their  mutual  edification,  and  of 
their  posterity,   that   they  may  not   be   cut  off  from  the 
priviledges  of  the  covenant,  otherwis,  if  a  believer  offends, 
he  remaines  destitute  of  the  remedy  provided  in  that  be- 
half.    &  should  all  believers  neglect  this  duty  of  joyning 
to  all  particular  congregations:  it  might  follow  thereupon, 
that  Christ  should  have  no  visible  political  churches  upon 
earth,4 

[7] 

CHAP  V.     Of  the  first  subject  of  church  poiur  or,  to  7uhom 
church  powr  doth  first  lelong? 

THe  first  subject  of  church  powr,  is  eyther  Supream,  Matt a8  18. 
or  Subordinate  6°  Ministerial,     the  Supream  (by  way  of  gift  isal^e7' 
from  the  father)  is  the  Lord  Iesus  Christ.6  the  Ministerial,  iCm^lV3' 


1  Compare   Mather,   Church-Government,  (Answer   to   No.  3,  of  the  XXXII 
Questions,)  pp.  g-n. 

2  Compare  Mather,  Apologie,  pp.  20,  21. 

3  Compare  Ibid.,  32  ;  and  Mather,  Church-Government,  (Answer  to  Quest.  4,) 
pp.  12-20. 

4  Ibid.     (Answer  to  Quest.  12,)  pp.  38,  39.  6  Read  belong. 
6  Compare  Cotton,  Keyes,  pp.  29-31. 


2IO  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM 

Titus  1 5.  is  either  extraordinary;  as  the  Apostles,  Prophets,  6f  Evan- 

gilists.-1  or  Ordinary  ■  as  every  particular  Congregational 
church.2 

2  Ordinary  church  powr,  is  either  the  power  of  office, 
that  is  such  as  is  proper  to  the  eldership:3  or,  power  of 
priviledge,  such  as  belongs  unto  the  brotherhood.4     the 

Rom  12  +  s.       latter  is  in   the   brethren  formally,  &  immediately  from 

Acts  12  3  C  6  3  -"  J 

4  Ci423.  Christ,  that  is,  so  as  it  may  according  to  order  be  acted 

1  Cor  12  29  30.  ° 

or  exercised  immediately  by  themselves:5  the  former,  is 
not  in  them  formally  or  immediately,  and  therfore  cannot 
be  acted  or  exercised  immediately  by  them,  but  is  said  to 
be  in  them,  in  that  they  design  the  persons  unto  office, 
who  only  are  to  act,  or  to  exercise  this  power.' 


CHAP  VI. 

Of  the  Officers  of  the  Church,  &  especially  of  Pastors  &* 
Teachers. 

A  Church  being  a  company  of  people  combined  to- 

Actsi423         gether  by  covenant  for  the  worship  of  God,  it  appeareth 

therby,  that  there  may  be  the  essence  &  being  of  a  church 

without  any  officers,  seeing  there  is  both  the  form  and 

matter  of  a  church,  which  is  implyed  when  it  is  said,  the 

Rom  10  17         Apostles  ordained  elders  in  every  church, 

1  Cor  12  28.  2     Nevertheless,   though  officers   be   not   absolutely 

Ephe  4  n  '  °  ' 

Psai  68  18.  necessary,  to  the  simple  being  of  churches,  when  they  be 
called:  yet  ordinarily  to  their  calling  they  are,  and  to 
their  well  being:  and  therfore  the  Lord  Iesus  out  of  his 
tender  compassion  hath  appointed,  and  ordained  officers 

EPh  4  12  13.  which  he  would  not  have  done,  if  they  had  not  been  use- 
full  &  need  full  for  the  church;  yea,  being  Ascended  into 
heaven,  he  received  gifts  for  men,  and  gave  gifts  to  men, 
whereof  officers  for  the  church  are  Justly  accounted  no 

1  cor  12  2S        small  parts;    they  being  to  continue  to  the  end  of  the 

Eph  4  II  (>a  1 

Act  8  6  26  19  c  world,  and  for  the  perfecting  of  all  the  Saints. 

Rom  11 78.  3'  The  officers  were  either  extraordinary,  or  ordinary, 


1  Compare  Cotton,  IVay  0/  the  Churches,  p.  10. 
3  Compare  Cotton,  Keyes,  pp.  31,  32. 

3  Ibid.,  20-23.  4  Ibid.,  12-19.  5  Hid.,  33,  34. 

8  Ibid.,  34-37.     Compare  on  whole  paragraph   Mather,  Church-Government 
(Answer  to  Quest.  15),  pp.  47-60. 


TEXT   OF   THE   PLATFORM  2 

extraordinary,  as  Apostles,  Prophets,  Evangilists.1  ordinary 
as  Elders  &  Deacons? 

[8]  The  Apostles,  Prophets,  6°  Evangelists,  as  they  were  »  Cor  4  9- 
called  extraordinarily  by  Christ,  so  their  office  ended  with 
them  selves  whence  it  is  that  Paul  directing  Timothy  how 
to  carry  along  Church-Administrations,  Giveth  no  direc-lTim3  h  * 
tion  about  the  choice  or  course  of  Apostles,  Prophets,  orT't  i,  s- 
Evangelists,  but  only  of  Elders  &  Deacons.  &  when  Pauhmsnz 
was  to  take  his  last  leave  of  the  church  of  Ephesus,  he 
committed  the  care  of  feeding  the  church  to  no  other,  but 
unto  the  Elders  of  that  church.     The  like  charge  doth  ^T.jm  3  * 
Peter  commit  to  the  Elders.  A«S2°  '7  ^ 

i   Iim  5  17. 

4  Of  Elders  (who  are  also  in  Scripture  called  Bishops) 
Some  attend  chiefly  to  the  ministry  of  the  word,  As  the  Pas- 
tors 6°  Teachers     Others,  attend  especially  unto  Pule,  who  F.ph4  « 

r  J  '  Rom  12  7  8. 

are  therfore  called  Puling  Elders.  1  Cor  «  8 

5  The  office  of  Pastor  6°  Teacher,  appears  to  be  dis- 
tinct. The  Pastors  special  work  is,  to  attend  to  exhortation  : 
ik  therein  to  Administer  a  word  of  Wisdom :  the  Teacher 
is  to  attend  to  Doctrine,  &  therein  to  Administer  a  word 

of  Knowledg  :4  &  either  of  them  to  administer  the  Scales  of  \Ji™*  " *' 
that  Covenant,  unto  the  dispensation  wherof  the5  are  alike 
called:  as  also  to  execute  the  Censures,  being  but  a  kind 
of  application  of  the  word,  the  preaching  of  which,  to- 
gether with  the  application  therof  they  are  alike  charged  £ph*y  " 
withall.6 

6  And  for  as  much  as  both  Pastors  6°  Teachers  are 
given  by  Christ  for  the  perfecting  of  the  Saints,  &  edify- 
ing of  his  body,  which  Saints,  <\r  body  of  Christ  is  his 
church;  Therfore  wee  account  Pastors  6°  Teachers  to  be 

both  of  them  church-officers;   &  not  the  Pastor  for  thelSami°12^ 
church:  &  the  Teacher  only  for  the  Schools,  Though  this2kins2  3V1 
wee  gladly  acknowledg,   that   Schooles  are   both    lawfull, 
profitable,  &  necessary  for  the  trayning  up  of  such  in  good 
Litrature,  or  learning,  as  may  afterwards  be  called  forth 
unto  office  of  Pastor  or  Teacher  in  the  church. 


1  Compare  Cotton,  Way  0/  the  Churches,  p.  10. 

2  Ibid.  3  Ibid.)  pp.  10,  14. 

4  Ibid.,  11-13;  and  Mather,   Church-Government  (Answer  to  Quesl 
74-76. 

5  Read  they,  see  errata.  6  Compare  Mather,  Ibid.,  74,  75. 


212  THE   CAMBRIDGE   SYNOD   AND   PLATFORM 

CHAP  VII.      Of  Ruling  Elders  6r-  Deacons. 

fxun"7!?.9"  THe  RulinK  Elders*  office  is   distinct  from  the  office 

i  Cor  12  28.  0f  pastor  &  Teacher.  The  Ruling  Elders  are  not  so  called 
to  exclude  the  Pastors  c^  Teachers  from  Ruling,  but  be- 
cause Ruling  6*  Governing  is  common  to  these  with  the 

Hebi3i7  other;  wheras  attending  to  teach  and  preach  the  word 

is  peculiar  unto  the  former. 

i  Tim  5,  i7.  2     The  Ruling  Elders  work  is  to  joyn  with  the  Pas- 

tor 6°  Teacher  in  those  acts  of  spiritual  Rule  [9]  which 
are  distinct  from  the  ministry  of  the  word  &  Sacraments 
committed  to  them,     of  which  sort,  these  be,  as  follow- 

2  Chro.  23  19.     eth.2     I  to  open  &»  shutt  the  dores  of  Gods  house,  by  the 

Rev.  21  12.  -"  '       J 

1  Tim  4.  ,4        Admission  of  members  approved  by  the  church:  bv  Ordina- 

Matt  18  17.  "  ;  J 

2  Cor  2  7. 8        tion  of  officers  chosen  by  the  church:  &   by  excommuni- 

cation of  notorious  &  obstinate  offenders   renounced   by 

the  church:  &  by  restoring  of  pcenitents,   forgive  by  the 

Acts2i.  1822,23.  church.     II  To  call   the   church   together  when   there   is 

occasion,  &  seasonably  to  dismiss  them  agayn.     Ill  To 

prepare  matters  in   private,  that  in   publick   they  may  be 

carried  an  end  with  less  trouble,  &  more  speedy  dispatch. 

IV    To  moderate  the  carriage  of  all  matters  in  the  church 

assembled,  as,    to    propound   matters    to    the    church,  to 

Acts  6. 2, 3  c  t3,  Qrjcr  the  season  of  speech  &  silence;   &:  to  pronounce  sen- 

Heb"i?'  7I.°i7      tence  according  to  the  minde  of  Christ,   with    the    con- 

2Thes2.10ij.12  sent   Qf   tne   church.     V  To  be   Guides  &  Leaders  to   the 

church,  in  all  matters   what-soever,  pertaining  to  church 

administrations  &  actions.     VI  To  see  that   none   in  the 

church  live  inordinately  out  of  rank  &  place  ;  without  a 


1  Of  all  church  offices  in  early  New  England  practice  none  were  so  much  the 
subjects  of  discussion  as  the  ruling  eldership.  Of  no  office  was  the  theoretic  necessity 
more  stoutly  maintained,  and  yet  none  was  so  speedily  abandoned  in  practice.  A  mo- 
ment's examination  of  the  catalogue  of  duties  here  enumerated  will  show  in  large 
measure  the  reason  of  this  neglect  of  the  office.  The  functions  are  such  as  would 
tend  to  ill-feeling  and  they  are  not  counter-balanced  by  any  ordinary  share  in  the 
more  pleasing  duties  of  preaching  the  word.  In  the  Barrowist  Congregationalism  of 
the  day,  the  ruling  elder  trenched  on  matters  which  Modern  Congregationalism  has 
left  some  to  the  brethren,  others  to  the  minister.  He  occupied  a  position  between 
the  minister  and  the  brethren  sure  to  be  full  of  embarrassment  and  of  no  real  use. 
See  I.  X.  Tarbox,  Ruling  Elders  in  the  Early  .V.  E.  Chs.,  Cong.  Quarterly,  XIV: 
401-416  (July,  1S72). 

The  divine  institution  and  antiquity  of  the  ruling  eldership  is  argued  at  length 
by  Cotton,  Way  of  the  Churches,  pp.  13-33. 

2  The  duties  here  enumerated  as  belonging  to  the  ruling  elders  are  given  by 
Cotton,  Ibid.,  36.  37,  in  language  so  similar  that  the  passage  must  have  been  under 
Mather's  eye  as  he  wrote  this  chapter,  unless  Cotton  himself  wrote  it.  Mather's  orig- 
inal draft  was  much  fuller. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  213 

calling,  or  Idlely  in  their  calling.     VII  To  prevent  &  heal  Acts *>,  a8  v  32. 
such  offences  in  life,  or  in  doctrin;  as  might  corrupt  the 
church.     IIX  To  feed  the  flock  of  God  with  a  word  of  )™es s^' 
admonition.     IX  And  as  they  shall  be   sent  for,  to  visit,  &Acts2o.2o 
to  pray  over  their  sick  brethren.     X  &  at  other  times  as 
opportunity  shall  serve  therunto. 

7.     The  office  of  a  Deacon  is  Instituted  in  the  church  Acts  6. 3.  v  6 

J  Phil  1.  1 

by  the  Lord  Jesus,     somtime  they  are  called  Helps.1  1cim3'8* 

The  Scripture  telleth  us,  how  they  should  be  quali-  *  Tim  3  8, 9. 
fied:   Grave,  not  double  tongued,  not  given  to  much  to  wine,  not 
given  to  filthy  lucre,     they  must  first  be  proved  &  then  use 
the  office  of  a  Deacon,  being  found  Blameless. 

The  office  and  work  of  the  Deacons2  is  to  receive  the  Acts  4, 35,  c  6. 2, 
offrings   of   the   church,   gifts   given  to  the  church,   &   to 
keep   the   treasury  of   the   church:  &  therewith  to   serve 
the    Tables  which   the  church    is   to   provide    for  :   as  the 
Lords  Table,  the  table  of  the  ministers,  &   of  such   as   are  Rom  12.  8 
in  necessitie,  to  whom  they  are  to  distribute  in  simplicity. 

4  The  office  therefore  being  limited  unto  the  careiCor7i7. 
of  the   temporall   good   things  of  the  church,   it   extends 

not  unto  the  attendance  upon,  &  administration  of  the 
spirituall  things  thereof,  as  the  word,  and  Sacraments,  or 
the  like. 

5  The  ordinance  of  the  Apostle,  &  practice  of  the  1  Cor  16, 1, 2,  3 
church,   commends    the   Lords  day  as  a  fit    time    for    the 
contributions  of  the  Saints. 

[10]  6  The  Instituting  of  all  these  officers  in  the  Church,  » Cor  12, 28 
is  the  work  of  God  himselfe  ;  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  ;  Acts  20, 28 
of  the  holy  Ghost.  &:  there/ore  such  officers  as  he  hath 
not  appointed,  are  altogether  unlawfull  either  to  be  placed 
in  the  church,  or  to  be  retained  therin,  &:  are  to  be  looked 
at  as  humane  creatures,  meer  Inventions  &  appointments 
of  man,  to  the  great  dishonour  of  Christ  Jesus,  the  Lord 
of   his    house,    the    King   of  his  church,    whether  Popes, 
Patriarkes,   Cardinals,  Arch-bishops,  Lordbishops,  Arch-dea- 
cons, Officials,  Commissaries,  &  the  like.     These  &:  the  rest 
of  that  Hierarchy  &  Retinue,  not  being  plants  of  the  Lords  Matt  '5. 13 
planting,   shall   all   be   certeinly   be"  rooted    out,   &:    cast 
forth. 


1  Compare  Cotton,  Way  0/ the  Churches,  p.  38. 

2  The  paragraphs  describing  the  duties  of  deacons  closely  follow  the  description 
given  by  Cotton,  Ibid.,  which  Mather  had  before  him. 

3  Omitted  in  errata. 


214  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

i  Tim  5, 9,  io.  7     The  Lord  hath  appointed  ancient  widdows,  (where 

they  may  be  had)  to  minister  in  the  church,  in  giving 
attendance  to  the  sick,  &  to  give  succour  unto  them,  & 
others  in  the  like  necessities.1 

CHAP  :   IIX. 
Of  the  Election  of  Church-Officers. 

Hebs.  4  No    man  may  take  the  honour  of   a  Church-Officer 

unto  himself,  but  he  that  was  called  of  God,  as  was  Aaron? 

ActtV'  2  2     Calling  unto  office   is  either  Immediate,  by  Christ 

cap  °.  3  himself:  such  was  the  call  of  the  Apostles,  &  Prophets: 

this  manner  of  calling  ended  with  them,  as  hath  been 
said:'  or  Mediate,  by  the  church.4 

1  Tim  s.  22  3     It  is  meet,  that  before  any  be  ordained  or  chosen 

cap  7,  10  * 

Acts  16. 2  officers,   they    should  first    be    Tryed  &  proved',    because 

hands  are  not  suddenly  to  be  laid  upon  any,5  &  both 
Elders  &  Deacons  must  be  of  honest  &:  good  report. 

4  The  things  in  respect  of  which  they  are  to  be 
Tryed,  are  those  gifts  6°  virtues  which  the  Scripture  re- 
quireth  in  men,  that  are  to  be  elected  into  such  places. 
viz,  that  Elders  must  be  blameless,  sober,  aft  to  teach,  & 
endued  with  such  other  qualifications  as  are  layd  downe, 
i  Tim  :  3  &  2.  Tit  :  i,  6  to  9.  Deacons  to  be  fitted,  as  is 
directed,  Acts.  6,  3.     1  Tim  :  3.  8,  to  n.6 

Act  14, 23.  ci.  r     Officers    are    to  be  called  by  such  Churches,   where 

23.     c  6.  3.  4.   5.  J  _     _  J  . 

unto  they  are  to  minister,  of  such  moment  is  the  preser- 
vation of  this  power,  that  the  churches  exercised  it  in 
the  presence  of  the  Apostles.7 

Ga'5,13  6     A  church  being  free  cannot  become  subject  to  any, 

but  by  a  free  election;  [11]  Yet  when  such  a  people  do 
chuse  any  to  be   over  them  in  the  Lord,  then  do  they 

Hebr.  13, 17  becom  subject,  &  most  willingly  submit  to  their  min- 
istry in  the  Lord,  whom  they  have  so  chosen. 


'  Compare  Cotton,  Way  of  the  Churches,  p.  39. 

2  Compare  Mather  and  Tompson,  Modest  &  Brotherly  Answer,  p.  57. 

3  Ibid. 

«  Ibid.,  55-58.  Compare  Mather,  Church-Government,  (Answer  to  Quest.  20,) 
pp.  67,  68. 

s  Compare  Cotton,  Way  of  the  Churches,  p.  39.  See  also  the  Modest  &»  Broth- 
erly A  nsvver,  p.  51. 

•  Way  0/  the  Churches,  p.  39.  Here  again  the  writer  must  have  had  Cotton's 
work  before  him. 

'  Compare  Mather  and  Tompson,  Modest  b>  Brotherly  A  nsvver,  pp.  55,  56. 


TEXT   OF   THE   PLATFORM  21 5 

7  And  if  the  church  have  powr  to  chuse  their  offi-  R°m.  1°. 17 
cers  &  ministers,  then  in  case  of  manifest  unworthyness, 

&  delinquency  they  have  powr  also  to  depose  them.1  For 
to  open,  &  shut:  to  chuse  &  refuse  ;  to  constitute  in 
office,  &  remove  from  office  :  are  acts  belonging  unto 
the  same  powr. 

8  Wee  judge  it  much  conducing  to  the  wel-being,  &  Cant.  8,8,9 
communion  of  churches,  that  where  it  may  conveniently 

be  done,  neighbour-churches  be  advised  withall,  &:  their  help 
made  use  of  in  the  triall  of  church-officers,  in  order  to 
their  choyce.3 

9  The  choyce  of  such  Church-officers  belongeth  not 
to  the  civil-magistrates,  as  such,  or  diocesan-bishops,  or 
patrones :  for  of  these  or  any  such  like,  the  Scripture 
is  wholly  silent,  as  having  any  power  therin. 

CHAP  :   IX. 

Of  Ordination,  c^  Imposition  of  hands. 
CHurch-officers    are    not   only    to   be    chosen    by  the Acts-  '3. 3 

cap  14,  23 

Church,  but  also  to  be  ordeyned  by  Imposition  of  hands,  &  •  Tim.  5, 22 
prayer.3    with  which  at  ordination  of  Elders,  fasting  also 
is  to  be  joyned.4 

2     This  ordination  wee  account  nothing  else,  but  the^™^.8'  ™ 
solemn  putting  of  a  man  into  his  place  &  office  in  thecaP:3>2-3 
Church  wher-unto  he  had  right  before  by  election,  being 
like  the  installing  of  a  magistrat  in  the  common  wealth.6 

Ordination    therefore    is    not    to    2:0    before,    but    to  A«s.  6. 5. 6 

cap  14.  23 

follow  election.  The  essence  &  substance  of  the  outward 
calling  of  an  ordinary  officer  in  the  Church,  doth  not 
consist  in  his  ordination,  but  in  his  voluntary  &  free 
election  by  the  Church,  &  in  his  accepting  of  that  election. 


1  Compare  Davenport,  Answer  .  .  .  unto  Nine  Positions,  London,  1643, 
pp.  76,  77,  (Position  7). 

2  Compare  Cotton,  Way  of  the  Churches,  pp.  40,  45. 

3  Compare  Ibid.,  40-42. 

4  "  For  our  calling  of  Deacons,  we  hold  it  not  necessary  to  ordaine  them  with 
like  solemnitie,  of  fasting  and  prayers,  as  is  used  in  the  Ordination  of  Elders."  Ibid., 
42.  It  was  sufficient  that  they  should  be  ordained  by  the  hands  and  prayers  of  the 
ministers  of  the  local  church  without  a  public  invitation  of  neighboring  churches,  etc. 

5  From  Mather,  Church-Government,  (Answer  to  Quest.  20,)  p.  67.  Compare 
the  Modest  &r  Brotherly  A  nsvver,  p.  47. 


2l6  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM 

wher-upon    is    founded    the    relation    between    Pastor   & 

flock,  between  such  a  minister,  &  such  a  people.1 

Ordination  doth   not    constitute   an   officer,   nor    give 

him    the    essentials    of    his    office.      The    Apostles    were 

elders,   without    Imposition    of    hands    by   men:  Paul  o^ 

Barnabas  were  officers,  before  that  Imposition  of  hands. 

Acts.    13.    3."       The    posterity    of  Levi   were    Preists,    & 

[12]    Levits,    before    hands   were    laid    on    them    by    the 

Children  of  Israel. 

1  Tim 4 14  t     In  such  Churches  where  there  are  Elders,  Impo- 

Acts  13. 3  °  _  _  »       a 

1  Tim  5.  22        sition  of  hands  in  ordination  is  to  be  performed  by  those 

Elders.3 

4  In    such    Churches    where    there    are    no    Elders, 
Numb  8. 10        Imposition  of  hands  may  be  performed  by  some  of  the 

Brethren  orderly  chosen  by  the  church  therunto.  For 
if  the  people  may  elect  officers  which  is  the  greater, 
&  wherin  the  substance  of  the  Office  consists,  they  may 
much  more  (occasion  &  need  so  requiring)  impose  hands 
in  ordination,  which  is  the  less,  &  but  the  accomplishment 
of  the  other/ 

5  Nevertheless  in  such  Churches  where  there  are 
no  Elders,  &  the  Church  so  desire,  wee  see  not  why 
Imposition  of  hands  may  not  be  performed  by  the  Elders 
of  other  Churches?  Ordinary  officers  laid  hands  upon  the 
officers   of   many   Churches:    the    presbytery    of   Ephesus 

1  Tim  4 14  layd  hands  upon  Timothy  an  Evangelist.  The  presbytery 
at  Antioch  laid  hands  upon  Paul  6°  Barnabas? 

1  Pet.  5. 2  6     Church  Officers,  are  officers  to  one  church,  even 

that  particular,  over  which  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  made 
them  overseers.  Insomuch  as  Elders  are  comanded  to 
feed,  not  all  flocks,  but  that  flock  which  is  comitted  to 
their  faith  &  trust,  &  dependeth  upon  them.7  Nor  can 
costant   residence  at  one   cogregation,  be  necessary  for 


1  Compare,  Church-Government,  68;  and  Mather,  Reply  to  Mr.  Ruther/urd, 
London,  1647,  pp.  102,  103. 

2  Compare  the  Reply,  etc.,  pp.  104-106. 

3  Mather,  Church-Government  (Answer  to  Quest.  21),  pp.  68,  69,  74.  Compare 
Mather  and  Tompson,  Modest  &  Brotherly  A  nsvver,  pp.  45,  49. 

•>  Mather,  Church-Government  (Answer  to  Quest.  21),  pp.  69-74,  Mather  and 
Tompson,  Modest  &  Brotherly  Answer,  pp.  45-53. 

5  Hid.,  46,  48,  49,  53:  Mather,  Reply  to  Mr.  Ruthcr/urd,  p.  94.  Cotton  dis- 
sented, Way  0/  the  Churches,  pp.  50,  51. 

•  Modest  &=  Brotherly  A  nsvver,  45,  54. 

»  Ibid.,  48. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  217 

a  minister,  no  nor  yet   lawfull,  if  he   be   not  a  minister 
to   one   cogregation   only,   but   to   the   church   universall: 
because  he  may  not  attend  one  part  only  of  the  church,  Acts  20. 28 
wherto  he  is  a  minister,  but  he  is  called  to  attend  unto 
all  the  flock. 

7.  Hee  that  is  clearly  loosed  from  his  office-relation 
unto  that  church  wherof  he  was  a  minister,  canot  be 
looked  at  as  an  officer,  nor  perform  any  act  of  Office  in 
any  other  church,  vnless  he  be  again  orderly  called  unto 
Office :  which  when  it  shall  be,  wee  know  nothing  to  hinder, 
but  Imposition  of  hands  also  in  his  Ordination  ought  to 
be  used  towards  him  again.1  For  so  Paul  the  Apostle 
received  Imposition  of  hands  twice  at  least,  from  Ananias. 
Acts.  9.  17.  &  Acts.  13,  3. 

CHAP  X. 

Of  the  powr  of  the  Church.,  &>  its  Presbytery. 

Supream    &    Lordly  power    over    all    the    Churches  Psai  2. 6 
upon  earth,  doth  only  belong  unto  Jesus  Christ,  who  isisaygie' 
King  of  the  church,  &  the  head   therof.     He  hath  the 
Governmet   upon  his  shoulders,   &   hath  all    powr  given 
to  him,  both  in  heaven  &  earth.2 

[13]   2  A  Copany  of  professed  believers  Ecclesiastically 
Confcederat,  as  they  are  a  church  before  they  have  officers, 
&  without  them;  so  even  in  that  estate, subordinate  Church- 
power  under  Christ  deligated  to  them  by  him,  doth  belong  Acts  1. 23 
to  them,  in  such  a  maner  as  is  before  expressed.     C.  5.  S.  c\  64'3*34 
2.  &  as  flowing  from  the  very  nature  &r  Essece  of  a  church:  x  Co]  5. 4*5 
It  being  naturall  to  all  bodyes,  &  so  unto  a  church  body, 
to  be  furnished  with  sufficient  powr,  for  its  own  preser- 
vatio  &  subsistace. 

3  This  Government  of  the  church,  is  a  mixt  Gover- 
ment  (&  so  hath  been  acknowledged  long  before  the 
term  of  Indepedency  was  heard  of:)  In  respect  of  Christ, 
the  head  &  King  of  the  church,  &  the  Soveraigne  power 
residing  in  him,  &  exercised  by  him,  it  is  a  Monarchy:  InRey:  3. 7 
respect  of  the  body,  or  Brotherhood  of  the  church,  &  powr 
from  Christ  graunted  unto  them,  it  resembles  a  Democracy,  1  Tim  5.  i7 


1  See  Mather,  Church-Government  (Answer  to  Quest.  21),  pp.  69,  70.     Compare 
Davenport,  A  nswer    .     .     .     unto  Nine  Positions,  pp.  76,  77  (Position  7). 

2  Compare  Cotton,  Keyes,  29,  30. 

15 


Matt  28.  20 
Eph  4.  8.  12 


2  Cor 
Jsav  s 
Luke' 


2l8  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM 

In  respect  of  the  Prcsbyctry  &  powr  comitted  to  them, 
it  is  an  Aristocracy} 

4  The  Soveraigne  pawn  which  is  peculiar  unto  Christ, 
is  exercised,     I     In  calling  the  church  out  of  the  world 

Oaii-4.  unto    holy   fellowship   with   himselfe.      II     In    instituting 

the  ordinaces  of  his  worship,  &  appointing  his  ministers 
&  officers  for  the  dispensing  of  them/  III  In  giving 
lawes  for  the  ordering  of  all  our  waves,  &  the  wayes  of 
his  house:3  IV  In  giving  powr  &  life  to  all  his  Insti- 
tutions, &  to  his  people  by  them.  V  In  protectig  & 
delivering  his  church  against  &  from  all  the  enemies  of 
their  peace. 

5  The  power  graunted  by  Christ  unto  the  body  of 
the  church  &  Brotherhood,  is  a  prerogative  or  priviledge 
which  the  church  doth  exercise:  I  In  Choosing  their 
own  officers,  whether  Elders,  or  Deacons.4  II  In  admission 
of  their  own  members  &  therfore,  there  is  great  reason 

Acts  6. 3,  5        they  should  have  power  to  Remove  any  from  their  fellow- 

C94263  ship  again.     Hence   in   case  of  offence   any  one   brother 

hath  powr  to  convince  &  Admonish  an  offending  brother: 

Matt  18. 15,       &  in  case  of  not  hearing  him,  to  take  one  or  two  more  to 
16. 17 

sett  on  the  Admonitio,  &  in  case  of  not  hearing  them,  to 

proceed  to  tell  the  church:  &  as  his  offence  may  require 
Tit  3. 10  the  whole  church  hath  powr  to  proceed   to  the  publick 

MatJs.'iy         Censure   of   him,  whether  by  Admonition,  or  Excomunica- 

tion .-  &  upon  his  repentance  to  restore  him  againe  unto 

his  former  comunion.6 

6  In  case  an  Elder  offend  incorrigibly,  the  matter 
so  requiring,  as  the  church  had  powr  to  call  him  to  office, 

C0II04.  i7         so  thev  have  powr  according  to  order  (the  counsell  of 
other  churches  where   it   may  be  had,  directing  therto 
to  remove  him  fr5  his  Office:7  <S:  beig  now  but  a  meber, 


'  Quoted  in  substance  by  Mather,  Church-Government  (Answer  to  Quest.  15), 
p.  51  from  Cartwright. 

a  Compare  Cotton,  Keyes,  30.  3  Compare  Ibid. 

*  Compare  Ibid.,  p.  12. 

6  Compare  Ibid.,  pp.  13-15  ;  and  Way  of  the  Churches,  89-92.  •  Insert  ). 

'  This  subject  is  one  on  which  Mather  was  more  positive  than  Cotton.  The 
.atter  in  the  Keyes  (1644),  pp.  16,  17,  held  that  when  all  the  ministry  of  a  church  were 
culpable  the  church  could  not  excommunicate  them,  having  no  officers  for  the  purpose; 
but  only  withdraw  from  them.  But  by  the  time  of  the  publication  of  the  Way  of  the 
Churches  (1645),  p.  101,  Cotton  had  so  far  modified  his  views  as  to  take  substantially 
the  position  here  given,  and  asserted  the  right  of  the  church  to  discipline  all  its  minis- 
try. Davenport,  Answer  .  .  .  unto  Nine  Positions,  p.  77,  agreed  with  the  Platp 
form.  Cotton,  Keycs,  p.  43,  suggested  that  in  case  all  the  elders  of  a  church  offended 
the  "  readiest  course  is,  to  bring  the  matter  then  to  a  Synod,"  i.  e.  council. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  2IQ. 

in  case  he  add  cdtumacy  to  his  sin,  [14]   the  Church  that  Matt.  is.  17 
had  powr  to  receive  him  into  their  fellowship,  hath  also 
the  same  powr  to  cast  him  out,  that  they  have  concerning 
any  other  member. 

7  Church-government,  or  Rule,  is  placed  by  Christ  \^^Sm  \7 
in   the   officers  of  the  church,  who  are   therefore  called x  Thes-  5.  " 
Rulers,  while  they  rule  with  God:  yet  in  case  of  mal-ad- 
ministration,  they  are  subject  to  the  power  of  the  church, 
according   as    hath    been   said    before,     the    Holy   Ghost  Rom.  12. 8 
frequently,    yea    alwayes,    where    it    mentioneth    Church- 1  Cor.'ia.  2829. 
Rule,  &:  church-government,  ascribeth  it  to  Elders:  wheras 

the  work  &  duty  of  the  people  is  expressed  in  the  phrase 
of  obeying  their  Elders;  and  submiting  themselves  unto 
them  in  the  Lord:  so  as  it  is  manifest,  that  an  organick 
or  compleat  church  is  a  body  politick,  consisting  of  some 
that  are  Governors,  &  some  that  are  governed,  in  the 
Lord.1 

8  The  powr  which  Christ  has  committed  to  the  Acts.  20. 28 
Elders,  is  to  feed  &  rule  the  church  of  God,2  &  accord-  Num!  16. 12 
ingly  to  call  the  church  together  upon  any  weighty  Acts."  i43.'  is 
occasion,3  when  the  members  so  called,  without  just  cause, 

may  not  refuse  to  come:  nor  when  they  are  come,  depart  Hosh,  4. 4. 
before  they  are  dismissed:  nor  speak  in  the  church,  before 
they  have  leave  from  the  elders:  nor  continue  so  doing, 
when  they  require  silence,4  nor  may  they  oppose  nor  con- 
tradict the  judgment  or  sentence  of  the  Elders,  without 
sufficient  &  weighty  cause,  becaus  such  practices  are 
manifestly  contrary  unto  order,  &  government,  &  in-lets 
of  disturbance,  &  tend  to  confusion.5 

9  It  belongs  also  unto  the   Elders  to  examine  any  Rev.  2. 2 
officers,    or    members,    before    they    be    received    of    the  Acts.  21/1822, 
church:6    to    receive    the    accusations    brought    to    the  1  Cor.  5. 4, 5 
Church,   &  to   prepare   them   for   the   churches   hearing.' 

In    handling    of    offences    &    other    matters    before    the 
Church  they  have  powr  to  declare  &  publish  the  Counsell  Num.  6. 23, to  26. 
&    will    of    God    touching    the    same,    &    to    pronounce 
sentence  with  the  consent  of  the  Church:8     Lastly  thev 


1  Compare  Mather.  Church-Government  (Answer  to  Quest.  15),  pp.  47~6o ;  Cot- 
ton, Keyes,  pp.  20-23  ;   Way  of  the  Churches,  pp.  96-102. 
4  Cotton,  Keyes,  p.  20. 

3  Mather,  Church-Government,  57;  Cotton,  Keyes,  21;  Way  0/ the  Churches,  101. 
«  Mather,  Ibid.     Cotton,  Ibid.,  Ibid.  5  Compare  Mather,  Ibid.,  58. 

•  Cotton,  Keyes,  21.  '  Ibid.,  22.  »  Ibid. 


220  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

have  pour,  when  they  dismiss  the  people,  to  bless  them 
in  the  name  of  the  Lord.1 

10     This   powr  of   Government   in    the    Elders,  doth 

not    any    wise    prejudice    the    powr    of    priviledg    in    the 

brotherhood;    as    neither    the    powr    of   priviledg    in    the 

brethren,  doth  prejudice  the  power  of  government  in  the 

f3ctc'6!42 I5  ve'    EIders;   but   they   may   sweetly   agree    together,     as   wee 

I  Cot."  1 6, 7       may  see  in  the  example  of  the  Apostles  furnished  with 

the  greatest  church-powr,  who  took    in   the  concurrence 

&    consent    of    the    brethren    in    church-administrations. 

[15]    Also  that   Scripture,  2  Cor  2.  9.  &  chap  10:   6  doe 

declare,   that   what   the   churches  were  to   act   <N-   doe    in 

Hebr.  13.  17       these  matters,  they  were  to  doe  in  a  way  of  obedience,  & 

that  not  only  to  the  direction  of  the  Apostles,  but  also  of 

their  ordinary  Elders.2 

n  From  the  premisses,  namely,  that  the  ordinary 
powr  of  Government  belonging  only  to  the  elders,  powr  of 
priviledg  remaineth  with  the  brotherhood,  (as  powr  of  judg- 
ment in  matters  of  censure,  &  powr  of  liberty,  in  matters 
of  liberty:)  It  followeth,  that  in  an  organick  Church,  & 
right  administration;  all  church  acts,  proceed  after  the 
manner  of  a  mixt  administration,  so  as  no  church  act  can 
be  consummated,  or  perfected  without  the  consent  of  both.1 

CHAP:    XI. 

Of  the  maintenance   of   Church   Officers.'' 

i-C°Matt9V  r^He  -Apostle  concludes,  that   necessary  &  sufficient 

38  cio.  10       maintenance  is  due  unto  the  ministers  of  the  word:  from 

1   Tim.  5.  18 

the  law  of  nature  &:  nations,  from  the  law  of  Moses,  the 
equity  thereof,  as  also  the  rule  of  common  reason,     more- 
over the  scripture  doth  not  only  call  Elders  labourers,  & 
Gala.  6.  6.         workmen,    but    also   speaking    of   them    doth    say,    that 
i  Cor.  9.  9         the  labourer   is  worthy  of    his  hire:    &:  requires   that  he 

vers.  14.  '  ^ 

1  Tim.  5. 18  which  is  taught  in  the  word,  should  communicate  to  him, 
in  all  good  things;  &:  mentions  it  as  an  ordinance  of  the 
Lord,  that  they  which  preach  the  Gospel,  should  live  of 


1  Mather,  Church-Government,  58;  Cotton,  Keyes,  22;  Way  of  the  Churches, 
100. 

1  Compare  Mather,  Church-Government,  pp.  58-60. 

s  Ibid.,  57. 

4  Compare  the  brief  paragraph,  Mather,  Church-Government,  (Answer  to  Quest. 
26,)  pp.  76,  77. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  2: 

the  Gospel;  &  forbideth  the  muzlingof  the  mouth  of  the  ox, 
that  treadeth  out  the  corn. 

2  The  Scriptures  alledged  requiring  this  mainten- 
ance as  a  bounden  duty,  &  due  debt,  &  not  as  a  matter  of 
almes,  Si  free  gift  therefore  people  are  not  at  liberty  to  doe 
or  not  to  doe,  what  &  when  they  pleas  in  this  matter,  no 
more  then  in  any  other  commanded  duty,  &:  ordinance  of 

the  Lord:    but  ought  of  duty,  to  minister  of  their  carnall R°m  *s  27 

a  -"  1  Cor.  9.  14 

things  to  them,  that  labour  amongst  them  in  the  word  & 
doctrine,  as  well  as  they  ought  to  pay  any  other  work  men 
their  wages,  or  to  discharge  &:  satisfie  their  other  debts,  or 
to  submit  themselves  to  observe  any  other  ordinance  of  the 
Lord. 

3  The  Apostle,  Gal:  6,  6.  injoyning  that  he  which  is  Gala.  6. 6 
taught  communicate  to  him  that  teacheth  in  all  good  things: 

doth  not  leave  it  arbitrary,  what  or  how  much  a  man  shall 

give,  or  in  what  proportion,  [16]  but  even  the  later,  as  well z  Cor-  l6-  2 

as  the  former,  is  prescribed  &  appointed  by  the  Lord. 

4  Not  only  members  of  Churches,  but  all  that  are  Gaiat.  6. 6. 
taught  in  the  word,  are  to  contribute  unto  him  that  teacheth, 

in  all  good  things.     In  case  that  Congregations  are  defec- 
tive in  their  contributions,  the  Deacons  are  to  call  upon  Act.  6. 3, 4 
them  to  doe  their  duty:    if  their  call   sufficeth  not,  the 
church  by  her  powr  is  to  require  it  of  their  members,  & 
where  church-powr  through  the  corruption  of  men,  doth 
not,  or  cahot  attaine  the  end,  the  Magistrate   is  to  see1 
ministry  be  duely  provided  for,  as  appeares  from  the  com- 
mended example  of  Nehemiah.     The  Magistrates  are  nurs- Neh-  '3-  " 
ing  fathers,  &  nursing  mothers,  &  stand  charged  with  the 
custody  of  both  Tables;  because  it  is  better  to  prevent  aisay.  49-23 
scandal,  that  it  may  not  come  &  easier  also,  then  to  re- 
move it  when  it  is  given.     Its  most  suitable  to  Rule,  that  =  Cor.  8.  13  1 
by  the  churches  care,  each  man  should  know  his  proportion 
according  to  rule,  what  he  should  doe,  before  he  doe  it, 
that  so  his  iudgment  &  heart  may  be  satisfied  in  what  he 
doeth,  &  just  offence  prevented  in  what  is  done. 

CHAP:  XII. 

Of  Admission  of  members   into  the  Church. 
THe  doors  of  the  Churches  of  Christ  upon  earth,  doe2Ch™,n-  23- 

1  '  19.     Mat.  13. 

not  by  Gods  appointment  stand  so  wide  open,  that  all  sorts  2s- &  22>  '* 


Rev.  21.  12 

2  Chr.  23.  19 


THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD    AND    PLATFORM 

of  people  good  or  bad,  may  freely  enter  therein  at  their 
pleasure;  but  such  as  are  admitted  therto,  as  members 
ought  to  be  examined  &:  tryed  first;  whether  they  be  fit  & 
meet  to  be  received  into  church-society,  or  not.1  The 
Evnuch  of  /Ethiopia,  before  his  admission  was  examined 
by  Philip,2  whether  he  did  beleive  on  Jesus  Christ  with  all 
his  heart 3  the  Angel  of  the  church  at  Ephesus  is  com- 
mended, for  trying  such  as  said  they  were  Apostles  &  were 
not.  There  is  like  reason  for  trying  of  them  that  profess 
themselves  to  be  beleivers. 

The  officers  are  charged  with  the  keeping  of  the  doors 
of  the  Church,  &:  therfore  are  in  a  special  maher  to  make 
tryall  of  the  fitnes  of  such  who  enter.  Twelve  Angels  are 
set  at  the  gates  of  the  Temple,  lest  such  as  were  Cere- 
monially unclean  should  enter  therinto. 
Acts  2. 38  to  2     The  things  which  are  requisite  to  be  found  in  all 

church  members,  are,  Repentance  from  sin,  &  faith  in  Jesus 
Christ.  [17]  And  therfore  these  are  the  things  wherof  men 
are  to  be  examined,  at  their  admission  into  the  church  &: 
which  then  they  must  profess  &:  hold  forth  in  such  sort,  as 
may  satisfie  rationatt  charity  that  the  things  are  there  in- 
Matt  3.6.  deed.  Iohn  Baptist  admitted  men  to  Baptism,  confessing 
<$:  bewayling  their  sinns:  &  of  other  it  is  said,  that  they 
came,  &  confessed,  &  shewed  their  deeds.5 

3  The  weakest  measure  of  faith  is  to  be  accepted  in 
those  that  desire  to  be  admitted  into  the  church:  becaus 
Rom  i4.  1  weak  christians  if  sincere,  have  the  substance  of  that  faith, 
repentance  &  holiness  which  is  required  in  church  mem- 
bers: &  such  have  most  need  of  the  ordinances  for  their 
fea^JT'if5  confirmation  &  growth  in  grace.6  The  Lord  Jesus  would 
not  quench  the  smoaking  flax,  nor  breake  the  bruised  reed, 
but  gather  the  tender  lambes  in  his  arms,  &  carry  them 
gently  in  his  bosome.  Such  charity  &:  tenderness  is  to  be 
used,  as  the  weakest  christian  if  sincere,  may  not  be  ex- 
cluded, nor  discouraged.  Severity  of  examination  is  to  be 
avoyded. 


1  Compare  Mather,  Church-Gevemment,  (Answer  to  Quest.  8,)  pp.  23,  24  ;  and 
Cotton,  Way  0/  the  Churches,  pp.  54-58. 

rata.  3  Cotton,  Way  of  the  Churches,  pp.  5,  58.  «  See  errata. 

5  Mather,  Church-Government,   pp.  23,  24.    Compare  also  Cotton,  Way  0/  the 
Churches,  pp.  54-  55.  57.  58- 

8  Cotton,  Ibid.,  p.  58. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  223 

4  In  case  any  through  excessive  fear,  or  other  in- 
firmity, be  unable  to  make  their  personal  relation  of  their 
spirituall  estate  in  publick,  it  is  sufficient  that  the  Elders 
having  received  private  satisfaction,  make  relation  therof 
in  publick  before  the  church,  they  testifying  their  assents 
therunto  ;  this  being  the  way  that  tendeth  most  to  edifi- 
cation.     But  wheras  persons  are  of  better  abilitycs,  there 

it  is  most  expedient,  that  they  make  their  relations,  c^  eon-  psai  66. 16 
fessions  personally  with  their  own  mouth,  as  David  profes- 
seth  of  himselfe. 

5  A  personall  &  publick  confession,  &  declaring  of 
Gods  manner  of  working  upon  the  soul,  is  both  lawfull, 
expedient,  &  usefull,  in  sundry  respects,  &:  upon  sundry 
grounds.  Those  three  thousands.  Acts.  2.  37.  41.  Be- 
fore they  were  admitted  by  the  Apostles,  did  manifest 
that  they  were  pricked  in  their  hearts  at  Peters  sermon, 
together  with  earnest  desire  to  be  delivered  from  their 
sinns,  which  now  wounded  their  consciences,  &  their 
ready  receiving  of  the  word  of  promise  and  exhortation. 
Wee  are  to  be  ready  to  render  a  reason  of  the  hope  that  is 

in  us,  to  every  one  that  asketh  us  :  therfore  wee  must  be  1  Pet  3. 15 
able    and   ready   upon    any   occasion   to   declare    &    shew 
our  repentance  for  si////,  faith  unfagned ,-'  &>  effectuall  calling, 
because  these  are  the  reason  of  a  well  grounded  hope.     I  Hebr.  n.  1 

&  K  Ephe  1    18 

have  not  hidden  thy  righteousness  from  the  great  congre- 
gation.    Psal  :  40.  10. 

[18]  6  This  profession  of  faith  &  repentance,  as 
it  must  be  made  by  such  at  their  admission,  that  were 
never  in  Church-society  before:  so  nothing  hindreth  but 
the  same  way  also  be  performed  by  such  as  have  formerly 
been  members  of  some  other  church,  &  the  church  to 
which  they  now  joyn  themselves  as  members,  may  law- 
fully require  the  same.2  Those  three  thousand.  Acts.  2. 
which  made  their  confession,  were  mebers  of  the  church 
of  the  Jews  before,  so  were  they  that  were  baptised  by 
John.  Churches  may  err  in  their  admission:  &  persons  Matt.  3. 5,  6 
regularly  admitted,  may  fall  into  offence.  Otherwise,  if  ?Tim.' 5.' 24 
Churches  might  obtrude  their  members,  or  if  church- 
members  might  obtrude  themselves  upon  other  churches, 
without  due  tryall,  the  matter  so  requring,   both  the  lib- 


1  Read  unfeigned. 

a  Compare  Mather,  Churck-Govert 


224  THE    CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

erty  of  churches  would  hereby  be  infringed,  in  that  they 
might    not    examine    those,    concefing    whose    fitness  for 

Cant.  8.  8  communion,  they  were  unsatisfied:  cV  besides  the  infring- 

ing of  their  liberty,  the  churches  themselves  would  uavoid- 
ably  be  corrupted,  &  the  ordinances  defiled,  whilst  they 
might  not  refuse,  but  must  receive  the  unworthy  :  which 
is  contrary  unto  the  Scripture,  teaching  that  all  churches 
are  sisters,  and  therfore  equall. 

7  The  like  tryall  is  to  be  required  from  such  mem- 
bers of  the  church,  as  were  born  in  the  same,  or  received 
their  membership,  &  were  baptized  in  their  infancy,  or 
minority,  by  vertue  of  the  covenat  of  their  parents,  when 
being  grown  up  unto'  years  of  discretion,  they  shall  desire 

Mc" '  7' 6  to  ^e  made  partakers  of  the  Lords  supper:  unto  which, 

because  holy  things  must  not  be  given  unto  the  unworthy, 
therfore  it  is  requisit,  that  these  as  well  as  others,  should 
come  to  their  tryall  &  examiation,  &  manifest  their  faith 
i\:  repentance  by  an  open  profession  therof,  before  they 
are  received  to  the  Lords  supper,  &  otherwise  not  to  be 
be2  admitted  there  unto.3 

Yet  these  church-members  that  were  so  born,  or  re- 
ceived in  their  childhood,  before  they  are  capable  of 
being  made  partakers  of  full  comunion,  have  many  priv- 
iledges  which  others  (not  church-mebers)  have  not  :  they 
are  in  covenant  with  God  ;  have  the  seale  therof  upon 
them,  viz.  Baptisme  ;  &  so  if  not  regenerated,  yet  are  in  a 
more  hopefull  way  of  attayning  regenerating  grace,  &  all 
the  spiritual  blessings  both  of  the  covenat  &  seal  ;  they 
are  also  under  Church-watch,  &  consequently  subject,  to 
the  reprehensions,  admonitions,  &  censures  therof,  for 
their  healing  and  amendment,  as  need  shall  require. 

[19]  CHAP:  XIII. 

Of    Church-members    their    removall  from    one   Church    to 
another,  &  of  letters  of  recomendation  c-'  dismission. 

CHurch-members  may  not  remove  or  depart  from  the 
Church,  &  so  one  from  another  as  they  please,  nor  with- 

1  Read  unto.  2  Omitted  in  errata. 

3  Compare  Cotton,  Way  0/  tin-  Churches,  p.  s:  Mather,  Chutrh-Co-'i-riimrnt, 
pp.  2  >-22.  Mather's  first  draft,  now  in  the  MSS.  collections  of  the  American  Anti- 
quarian Society  at  Worcester,  read :  "  Such  as  are  borne  in  y*  ch :  as  members,  though 
yet  they  be  not  found  fitt  for  y«  Lords  Supper,  yet  if  they  be  not  culpable  of  such  scan- 
dalls  in  Conversation  as  do  justly  deserve  ch  :  Censures,  it  seemeth  to  vs,  w"  they  are 
marryed  &  have  children,  those  t'm-ir  children  may  be  reed  t<>  Baptisme."     p.  63. 


TEXT   OF   THE   PLATFORM  225 

out  just  &  weighty  cause  but  ought  to  live  &  dwell  to-  Hebr.  10  25 
gether  :  for  as  much  as  they  are  comanded,  not  to  forsake 
the  assembling  of  themselves  together.  Such  departure 
tends  to  the  dissolution  &  mine  of  the  body  :  as  the 
pulling  of  stones,  &  peeces  of  timber  from  the  building,  & 
of  members  from  the  naturall  body,  tend  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  whole.1 

2  It    is    therfore   the   duty  of   Church-members,  in 
such  times  &  places  when  counsell  may  be  had,  to  consult 

with   the  Church    wherof   they  are  members,  about  their Prov-  «•  rf 
removal/,   that   accordingly   they   have    their  approbation, 
may  be   incouraged,  or  otherwise   desist.     They  who  are 
joyned  with  consent,  should   not  depart  without  consent, 
except  forced  therunto.2 

3  If  a  members  departure  be  manifestly  unsafe,  and 
sinfull,  the  church   may  not   consent  therunto:  for  in  so  Rom  i4. 23. 
doing,   they  should   not  act   in   faith:    &  should   pertake  Acts  21/14.' 
with    him   in   his   sinn.     If   the   case  be   doubtfull   &   the 
person  not  to  be  perswaded,  it  seemeth  best  to  leave  the 
matter  unto  God,  &  not  forcibly  to  detayn  him.;! 

4  Just  reasos  for  a  mebers  removal  of  himselfe  from 
the  church  are,  I     If  a  man  canot  continue  without  par- 

taklg  in  sinn.     II     In  case  oi  personal! persecution,  so  Paul  Ephe.  5.  n 
departed  from   the  disciples  at  Damascus.     Also,  in  case  =9-  3° chap  8. 1 
of  generall  persecution,  when   all   are    scattered.     Ill     In 
case  of  real,  &  not  only  pretended,  want  of  competent  Nehe.  13. 20 
subsistence,  a  door  being  opened   for  a  better  supply  in 
another  place,  together  with  the  meanes  of  spirituall  edifi- 
cation.    In  these,  or  like  cases,  a  member  may  lawfully 
remove,  &  the  church  cannot  lawfully  detayne  him. 

5  To  seperate  from  a  Church,  eyther  out  of  contempt 

of  their  holy  fellowship,  or  out  of  covetousness,  or  for  greater  a  Tim  4. 10 

inlargements   with   just  greife   to   the   church;  or  out   of 

schisme,  or  want  of  love;  &  out  of   a  spirit  of  contention  in  Rom  16.  17 

respect  of  some  unkindness,  or  some  cvill  only  conceived,  Jude .  19. 

[20J  or  indeed,  in   the  Church  which  might  &  should  be  Esh[Eph]4.2. 3 

tolerated  &  healed  with  a  spirit  of  meekness,  &  of  which  Coil  3. 

c  ' 
evill   the   church   is   not   yet    covinced,    (though   perhaps 

himselfe  bee)  nor  admonished:4  for  these  or  the  like  rea- 


Gala  6 


1  Compare  Davenport,  Answer  ....  unto  Nine  Positions,  pp.  72-76. 

2  Ibid.,   74.  3  Hid. 

1  Compare  Cotton,  Way  of  the  Churches,  105. 


226  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD  AND    PLATFORM 

sons  to  withdraw  from  publick  comunion,  in  word,  or  seales, 
or  censures,  is  unlawfull  &  sinfull. 

Arts9?26  6     Such  members  as  have  orderly  removed  their  hab- 

itation ought  to  joyn  themselves  unto  the  church  in  order, 
where  they  doe  inhabit  if  it  may  bee:  otherwise,  they  can 
neyther  perform  the  dutyes,  nor  receive  the  priviledges  of 
members;  such  an  example  tolerated  in  some,  is  apt  to 
corrupt    others ;     which    if    many    should    follow,    would 

i  Cor.  i4.  33       threaten  the  dissolution  &  confusion  of  churches,  contrary 
to  the  Scripture.' 

Acts-  l8-  27  7     Order  requires,  that  a  member  thus  removing,  have 

letters  testimonial;  fir»  of  dismission  from  the  church  wherof 
he  yet  is,  unto  the  church  wherunto  he  desireth  to  be 
joyned,  lest  the  church  should  be  deluded;  that  the  church 
may  receive  him  in  faith;  &  not  be  corrupted  by  receiving 
deceivers,  &  false  brethren.  Untill  the  person  dismissed 
be  received  into  another  church,  he  ceaseth  not  by  his  letters 
of  dismission  to  be  a  member  of  the  church  wherof  he 
was."  The  church  canot  make  a  member  no  member  but 
by  excomunication.3 

Rom  16. 1, 2  g     jf  a  member  be   called  to  remove  only  for  a  time, 

2  Cor.  3. 1  where  a  Church  is,  letters  of  Recommendation  are  requisite, 

&  sufficient  for  comunion  with  that  church,  in  the  ordi- 
nances, &  in  their  watch:  as  Phcebe,  a  servat  of  the 
church  at  Cenchrea,  had  letters  writte  for  her  to  the 
church  of  Rome,  that  shee  might  be  received,  as  becometh 
saints.' 

9  Such  letters  of  Recommendation  &  dismission  were 
written  for  Apollos:  For  Marcus  to  the  Colosias;  for 
Phcebe  to  the  Romaes;  for  sudry  others  to  other  churches. 
&  the  Apostle  telleth  us,  that  some  persons,  not  sufficient- 
ly known  otherwise,  have  special  need  of  such  letters, 
though  he  for  his  part  had  no  need  therof.5  The  use  of 
them  is  to  be  a  benefit,  &  help  to  the  party,  for  whom  they 
are  writte;  and  for  the  furthering  of  his  receiving  amongst 
the  Saints  in  the  place  wherto  he  goeth;  &  the  due  satis- 
faction of  them  in  their  receiving  of  him. 


Acts.  18.  2 
Coll  4.  10 
Rom.  16.  1 


Compare  Mather,  Church-Government,  pp.  37-39. 
1  Compare  Cotton,  Keyes,  pp.  17,  18;   Way  of  the  Churches,  pp.  76,  103,  104. 
'  Hid.,  Way,  p.  104. 
1  It-id.,  A'eyes,  p.  17;   Way,  p.  103. 
'  Ibid.,  A'eyes,  p.  17. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  227 

CHAP  :  XIV. 

Of  excommunication  &  other  Censures. 

THe  Censures  of  the  church,  are  appointed  by  Christ,  ^J™-  5'I22° 
for  the  preventing,  removing,  [21]   &  healing  of  off ences  J^  29  ten 
in  the  Church:   for  the  reclayming  &  gayning  of  offending  ?Cor-  5-  6 
brethren:   for  the   deterring  others  from  the  like  offeces: 
for  purging  out  the   leaven   which   may  infect  the  whole 
lump:  for  vindicating  the  honour  of  Christ,  &  of  his  church,  Re^-  £  *4- 15. 
&  the  holy  profession  of  the  gospel:    &  for  preventing  the 
wrath  of  God,  that  may  justly  fall  upon  the  church,  if  they 
should   suffer  his   covenant,  and  the  seales  therof,  to  be 
prophaned  by  notorious  &  obstinate  offenders. 

2     If  an  offence  be  private  (one  brother  offending  an-  Mat.  5. 23,  24 
other)  the  offender  is  to  goe,  &  acknowledg  his  repentace 
for  it  unto   his   offended   brother,  who  is   then   to  forgive 
him,  but  if  the  offender  neglect  or  refuse  to  doe  it,  the 
brother  offeded  is  to  goe,  &:  covince  <Si  admonish  him  of  it, 
between   themselves    privatly:    if   therupon    the    offender Matt.  ^.  15 
bee  brought  to  repent  of  his  offece,  the  admonisher  hath 
won  his  brother,  but  if  the  offender  heare  not  his  brother, 
the  brother  offended  is  to  take  with  him  one  or  two  more, 
that  in  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses,  every  word  v  l6- 
may  be  established,   (whether  the   word   of  admonition  if 
the  offender  receive  it,  or  the  word  of  complaint,  if  he  re- 
fuse it:)  for  if  he  refuse  it,  the  offeded  brother  is  by  the  v  17. 
mouth  of  the  Elders  to  tell  the  church.    &  if  he  heare  the 
church.  &:  declare  the  same  by  penitet  confession,  he  is  re- 
covered  &   gayned  ;    &  if  the   church  discern  him  to  be 
willing  to  hear,  yet  not  fully  coviuced1  of  his  offence,  as  in  Tit.  3. 10 
case  of   heresy;    They  are   to  dispece  to  him  a  publick 
admonition;  which  declaring  the  offeder  to  ly  under  the 
publick   offence  of  the  church,  doth  therby  with-hold  or 
suspend  him  from  the  holy  fellowship  of  the  Lords  Supper,  Man.  18.  i7 
till  his  offence  be  removed  by  penitent  cofession.      If  he 
still  continue  obstinate,  they  are  to  cast  him  out  by  ex- 
comunication.2 

3.     But  if  the  offece  be  more  publick  at  first,  &:  of  a 
more  heinous  6°  criminal/  nature,  to  wit,  such   as  are  con- 1  Cor .  5.  4, 


2  See  Cotton,  Way  0/ the  Churches,  pp.  89-92; 
his  eye. 


228  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

dened  by  the  light  of  nature;  then  the  church  without  such 
graduall  proceeding,  is  to  cast  out  the  offender,  from  their 
holy  comunion,  for  the  further  mortifying  of  his  sinn  &  the 
healing  of  his  soule,  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Jesus.1 

4  In  dealing  with  an  offeder,  great  care  is  to  be  take, 
that  wee  be  neither  overstrict  or  rigorous,  nor  too  indul- 

Gaiat.  6.  i.  gent  or  remiss;  our  proceeding  herein  ought  to  be  with  a 
spirit  of  meekness,  considering  our  selves,  lest  wee  also  be 
tepted;  &  that  the  best  of  us  have  need   of   much  forgiv- 

Matt  is.  34. 35  ness  from  the  Lord.    Yet  the  winig  &  healig  of  the  offeders 

F.zek.'  13.' iJ       soul,  being  the  end  of  these  edeavours,  wee  must  not  daub 
6-  *<  with  Qtempered  morter,  nor  heal  the  wounds  of  our  breth- 

ren sleightly.    on    some    have  compassio,  others  save  with 

Mat.  18.  ,7.         fear- 

2 The.  3. "i4  \22]   5      While   the   offender   remayns   excomunicate, 

the  Church  is  to  refrayn  from  all  member-like  communion 
with  him  in  spirituall  things,  &:  also  from  all  familiar  com- 
unid  with  him  in  civil  things,  farther  then  the  necessity  of 
natural,  or  domestical,  or  civil  relatios  doe  require  :  & 
are  therfore  to  forbear  to  eat  &  drike  with  him,  that  he 
may  be  as/iamd.'2 

6  Excomunication  being  a  spirituall  punishment,  it 
doth  not  prejudice  the  excomunicate  in,  nor  deprive  him  of 
his  civil  rights,  &  therfore  toucheth  not  princes,  or  other 
magistrates,  in  point  of  their  civil   dignity  or  authority. 

1  Cor  i4. 24.  25  And,  the  excomunicate  being  but  as  a  publican  &  a  hea- 
then, heathens  being  lawfully  permitted  to  come  to  hear 
the  word  in  church  assemblyes;    wee  acknowledg  therfore 

2Thes  3.  i4  the  like  liberty  of  hearing  the  word,  may  be  permitted  to 
persons  excommunicate,  that  is  permitted  unto  heathen. 
And  because  wee  are  not  without  hope  of  his  recovery, 
wee  are  not  to  account  him  as  an  enemy  but  to  admonish 
him  as  a  brother.3 

7  If  the  Lord  sanctifie  the  censure  to  the  offender, 
so  as  by  the  grace  of  Christ,  he  doth  testifie  his  repent- 

2 Cor  2. 7,8  ance,  with  humble  cofession  of  his  sinn,  &:  judging  of  him- 
selfe,  giving  glory  unto  God;  the  Church  is  then  to  forgive 
him,  &  to  comfort  him,  &:  to  restore  him  to  the  wonted 
brotherly  communion,  which  formerly  he  injoyed  with 
them.4 


1  Hid.,  pp.  92,  93.  2  Compare  Ibid.,  p.  93. 

3  Compare  Ibid.,  pp.  93,  94.  •>  Ibid.,  p.  94. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  229 

8  The  suffring  of  prophane  or  scandalous  livers  to 
continue   in   fellowship,  &  partake   in   the   sacraments,  is 
doubtless  a  great  sinn  in  those  that  have  power  in  their  Rev  2.  i4.  15. 
hands  to  redress  it;  &  doe  it  not.     Nevertheless,  inasmuch 

as  Christ  &  his  Apostles  in  their  times,  &  the  Prophets  &  Mat  23. 3. 

r  Acts  3.  1 

other  godly  in  theirs,  did  lawfully  partake  of  the  Lords 
commanded  ordinances  in  the  Jewish  church,  <S:  neyther 
taught  nor  practiced  seperation  from  the  same,  though  un- 
worthy ones  were  permitted  therin;  &  inasmuch  as  the 
faithfull  in  the  church  of  Corinth,  wherin  were  many  un- 
worthy persons,  &  practises,  are  never  commanded  to  »  c°r.  6  chap  15. 
absent  themselves  from  the  Sacramets,  because  of  the 
same:  therfore  the  godly  in  like  cases,  are  not  presently  to 
scperate. 

9  As  seperation  from  such  a  Church  wherin  prophae 
&  scandalous  livers  are  tolerated,  is  not  presently  neces- 
sary: so  for  the  members  therof,  otherwise  worthy,  here- 
upon to  abstain  from  communicating-  with  such  a  church  »  Chron.  30  is 

^  &  Gen.  18.  25 

in  the  participation  of  the  Sacraments,  is  unlawfull.  For 
as  it  were  unreasonable  for  an  inocent  person  to  be  pun- 
ished, for  the  faults  of  other,  wherin  he  hath  no  hand,  cV 
wherunto  he  gave  no  consent:  soe  is  it  more  unreasonable, 
that  a  godly  [23]  man  should  neglect  duty,  &  punish  him- 
selfe  in  not  coming  for  his  portion  in  the  blessing  of  the 
seales,  as  he  ought,  because  others  are  suffered  to  come, 
that  ought  not.-  especially,  considering  that  himselfe  doth 
neyther  consent  to  their  sinn,  nor  to  their  approching  to 
the  ordinance  in  their  sinn,  nor  to  the  neglect  of  others 
who  should  put  them  away,  &  doe  not:  but  on  the  con-Ezek9.  4 
trary  doth  heartily  mourn  for  these  things,  modestly  & 
seasonably  stirr  up  others  to  doe  their  duty.  If  the  Church 
cannot  be  reformed,  they  may  use  their  liberty,  as  is  speci- 
fied, chap.-  13.  sect:  4.  But  this  all  the  godly  are  bound 
unto,  even  every  one  to  do  his  indeavour,  according  to  his 
powr  &  place,  that  the  unworthy  may  be  duly  proceeded 
against,  by  the  Church  to  whom  this  matter  doth  apper- 
taine. 

CHAP:  XV. 
Of  t/ie  coniunion  of  Churches  one  with  anotlier. 
Although  Churches  be  distinct,  &  therfore  may  not  Rev  1. 4 
be  confouded  one  with  another:  &:  equall,  &  therfore  have  Rom!  16.  i6 


23O  THE   CAMBRIDGE    SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

AcwVV9       not  dominion  one  over  another:  yet  all  the  churches  ought 
Rev  2,:  to  preserve  Church-communion  one  with  another,1  because 

they  are  all  united  unto  Christ,  not  only  as  a  mysticall, 

but  as  a  politicall  head;   whence  is  derived  a  communion 

suitable  therunto. 

2     The  communion  of  Churches  is  exercised  sundry 

waves. 
Cant- 8-  8  I     By  way  of  mutuall  care  in  taking  thought  for  one 

anothers  wellfare. 

II  By  way  of  Consultation  one  with  another,  when  wee 
have  occasion  to  require  the  judgment  &  counsell  of  other 
churches,  touching  any  person,  or  cause  wherwith  they 
may  be  better  acquainted  then  our  selves.  As  the  church 
of  Antioch  consulted  with  the  Apostles,  &  Elders  of  the 

Acts  15:  2  church  at  Ierusalem,  about  the  question  of  circumcision 
of  the  gentiles,  &  about  the  false  teachers  that  broached 
that  doctrine.  In  which  case,  when  any  Church  wanteth 
light  or  peace  amongst  themselves,  it  is  a  way  of  commun- 

a«s  15.  6.  jon  Qf  churches  (according  to  the  word)  to  meet  together 
by  their  Elders  &  other  messengers  in  a  synod,  to  con- 
:  22.23  sider  &  argue  the  points  in  doubt,  or  difference;2  &  have- 
ing  found  out  the  way  of  truth  &  peace,  to  commend  the 
same  by  their  letters  &  messengers  to  the  churches,  whom 
the  same  may  concern.  [24]  But  if  a  Church  be  rent 
with  divisions  amongst  themselves,  or  ly  under  any  open 
scandal,  &  yet  refuse  to  consult  with  other  churches,  for 
healing  or  removing  of  the  same;  it  is  matter  of  just 
offence  both  to  the  Lord  Jesus,  &  to  other  churches,  as 

Ezek34. 4-  bewraying  too  much  want  of  mercy  cV  faithfulness,  not  to 
seek  to  bind  up  the  breaches  &  wounds  of  the  church  & 
brethren;  &  therfore  the  state  of  such  a  church  calleth 
aloud  upon  other  churches,  to  excertise  a  fuller  act  of 
brotherly  communion,  to  witt,  by  way  of  admonition. 

III  A  third  way  then  of  comunion  of  churches  is  by 
way  of  admonition,  to  witt,  in  case  any  publick  offece  be 
found  in  a  church,  which  they  either  discern  not,  or  are 
slow  in  proceeding  to  use  the  meaes  for  the  removing  & 

Gail  2.  11  to  i4.  healing  of.  Paul  had  no  authority  over  Peter,  yet  when 
he  saw  Peter  not  walking  with  a  right  foot,  he  publickly 


1  Compare  Cotton,  Way  of  the  Churches,  pp 
a  See  Cotton,  Keyes,  iS,  a  passage  which  the 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  23I 

rebuked  him  before  the  church:  though  churches  have  no 
more  authority  one  over  another,  then  one  Apostle  had 
over  another;  yet  as  one  Apostle  might  admonish  another, 
so  may  one  church  admonish  another,  &  yet  without  usur- 
pation.1 In  which  case,  if  the  church  that  lyeth  under 
offence,  do  not  harken  to  the  church  which  doth  admonish 
her.  the   church   is   to   acquait   other   neighbour-churches  Ma'h  l8-  I5..16. 

>  ^  °  17.  by  proportion 

with  that  offece,  which  the  offending  church  still  lyeth 
under,  together  with  their  neglect  of  the  brotherly  admo- 
nition given  unto  them;  wherupon  those  other  churches 
are  to  joyn  in  seconding  the  admonitio  formerly  give:  and 
if  still  the  offeding  church  continue  in  obstinacy  «Sc  im- 
penitency,  they  may  forbear  communion  with  them;  &  are 
to  proceed  to  make  use  of  the  help  of  a  Synod,  or  counsell 
of  neighbour-churches  walkig  orderly  (if  a  greater  canot 
convenietly  be  had)  for  their  conviction.2  If  they  hear 
not  the  Synod,  the  Synod  having  declared  them  to  be  ob- 
stinate, particular  churches,  approving  &  accepting  of  the 
judgmet  of  the  Synod,  are  to  declare  the  sentence  of  non- 
comunion  respectively  concerning  them:  &  therupon  out 
of  a  religious  care  to  keep  their  own  communion  pure, 
they  may  justly  withdraw  themselves  from  participation 
with  them  at  the  Lords  table,  &  from  such  other  acts  of  holy 
comunion,  as  the  communion  of  churches  doth  otherwise 
allow,  &  require.  Nevertheless,  if  any  members  of  such  a 
church  as  lyeth  under  publick  offence;  doe  not  consent  to 
the  offence  of  the  church,  but  doe  in  due  sort  beare  witness 
against  it,  they  are  still  to  be  received  to  wonted  commun- 
ion: for  it  is  not  equall,  that  the  innocent  should  suffer  withGt,n  l8-  2s- 
the  offensive.  [25]  Yea  furthermore;  if  such  innocent 
members  after  due  wayting  in  the  use  of  all  good  meanes 
for  the  healing  of  the  offence  of  their  own  church,  shall 
at  last  (with  the  allowace  of  the  counsel  of  neighbour- 
churches)  withdraw  from  the  fellowship  of  their  own 
church  &  offer  themselves  to  the  fellowship  of  another; 
wee  judge  it  lawfull  for  the  other  church  to  receive  them 
(being  otherwise  fitt)  as  if  they  had  been  orderly  dismissed 
to  them  from  their  own  church. 

IV     A  fourth  way  of  communion  of  churches,  is  by 
way  of  participation:  the  members  of  one  church  occasion- 

1  Ibid.,  19.     Here,  too,  Cotton's  language  is  closely  followed. 

2  Compare  Ibid.,  pp.  18,  24,  25  ;  also,  Way  of  the  Ckurckes,  108,  109. 


232  THE   CAMBRIDGE   SYNOD   AND    PLATFORM 

ally  comming  unto  another,  wee  willingly  admitt  them  to 
partake  with  us  at  the  Lords  table,  it  being  the  scale  of 
our  communion  not  only  with  Christ,  nor  only  with  the 

i  Cor  12.  13  members  of  our  own  church,  but  also  with  all  the  churches 
of  the  saints:  in  which  regard,  wee  refuse  not  to  baptize 
their  children  presented  to  us,  if  either  their  own  minister 
be  absent,  or  such  a  fruite  of  holy  fellowship  be  desired 
with  us.  In  like  case  such  churches  as  are  furnished  with 
more  ministers  then  one,  doe  willingly  afford  one  of  their 
own  ministers  to  supply  the  place  of  an  absent  or  sick 
minister  of  another  church  for  a  needfull  season.' 

kom  l6-  '  V     A  fifth  way  of  Church-communion  is.  by   way  of 

reebmendation  when  a  member  of  one  church  hath  occa- 
sion to  reside  in  another  church;  if  but  for  a  season,  wee 
comend  him  to  their  watchfull  ffellowship  by  letters  0/ 
recommendation  :  but  if  he  be  called  to  settle  his  abode 

Acts  18. 27  there,  wee  commit  him  according  to  his  desire,  to  the 
ffellowship  of  their  covenant,  by  letters  of  dismission. ' 

VI  A  sixt  way  of  Church-communion,  is  in  case  of 
Need,   to    minister  reliefe  &  succour   one    unto   another  : 

Acts  11. 22         either  of  able  members  to  furnish  them  with  officers;  or 
of  outward  support  to  the  necessityes  of  poorer  churches; 
•■:•    as  did  the  churches  of  the  Gentiles   contribute   liberally 
to  the  poor  saints  at  Ierusalem.3 

3  When  a  copany  of  beleivers  purpose  to  gather 
into  church  fellowship,  it  is  requisite  for  their  safer  pro- 
ceeding, &  the  maintaining  of  the  communion  of  churches, 

^proportion*  9 lnat  ^Y  signifie  their  intent  unto  the  neighbour-churches, 
walking  according  unto  the  order  of  the  Gospel,  &  de- 
sire their  presence,  &  help,  &;  right  hand  of  fellowship 
which  they  ought  readily  to  give  unto  them,  when  their4 
is  no  just  cause  of  excepting  against  their  proceedings.5 

4  Besides  these  severall  waves  of  communion,  there 
is  also  a  way  of  propagation  of  churches  ;  when  a  church 
shall  grow  too  nu-  [26]  merous,  it  is  a  way,  &:  fitt  season, 

isay  40.  20.  to  propagate  one  Church  out  of  an  other,  by  sending  forth 
such  of  their  mebers  as  are  willing  to  remove,  &  to  pro- 


'  Here  again  the  writer  made  considerable  use  of  Cotton,  A'eyes,  p.  17  ;  though 
the  communion  by  baptism  and  exchange  of  ministers  is  his  own  conception. 
»  Compare  Cotton,  A'eyes,  pp.  17,  18. 

3  Compare  Ibid.,  18  ;   Way  of  the  Churches,  pp.  107,  108. 

4  Read  there.     Sue  errata. 

5  Compare  Cotton,  Way  0/ the  Churches,  pp.  5,  6. 


TEXT   OF   THE   PLATFORM  233 

cure  some  officers  to  them,  as  may  enter  with  them  into 
church-estate  amongst  themselves  :  as  Bees,  when  the 
hive  is  too  full,  issue  forth  by  swarmes,  &  are  gathered 
into  other  hives,  soe  the  Churches  of  Christ  may  doe  the 
same  upon  like  necessity;  &  therin  hold  forth  to  the 
the  right  hand  of  fellowship,  both  in  their  gathering  into 
a  church  ;  &  in  the  ordination  of  their  officers.' 

CHAP  :  XVI. 
Of  Synods. 
Svnods  orderly  assembled,  &  rightly  proceeding  ac- 
cording to  the  pattern,  Acts.  15.     we  acknowledg  as  the 
ordinance  of  Christ:2  &  though   not  absolutely  necessary  Acts  15. 2.  to.  15. 
to  the   being,   yet   many   times,   through    the   iniquity   of 
men,    &    perversness    of    times,     necessary    to   the    wel- 
being    of    churches,    for    the    establishment    of   truth,    & 
peace  therin. 

2  Synods  being  spirituall  &  ecclesiasticall  assem- 
bles, are  therfore  made  up  of  spirituall  &  ecclesiasticall 
causes.  The  next  efficient  cause  of  them  under  Christ, 
is  the  powr  of  the  churches,  sending  forth   their  Elders, 

[&]  other  messengers;  who  being  mett  together  in  the  name  Acts  15  ,2,3 
of  Christ,  are  the  matter  of  a  Synod  :3  &  they  in  argueing,  vers  6. 
debating  &  determining  matters  of  religion  according  to  vers  7  to  23 
the  word,  &  publishing  the  same  to  the  churches  whom  it 
concerneth,  doe  put  forth  the  proper  &  formall  acts  of  a 
Synod;  to  the  convictio  of  errours,  &  heresyes,  &:  the  es-vers^i. 
tablishment  of  truth  &  peace  in  the  Churches,  which  is  Acts  16  4. 15. 
the  end  of  a  Synod. 

3  Magistrates,  have  powr  to  call  a  Synod,  by  calling 

to  the  Churches  to  send  forth  their  Elders  &  other  mes- 2  Chron  2<>- 

sengers,  to  counsel  &  assist  them  in  matters  of  religion  : 

but  yett  the  constituting  of  a  Synod,  is  a  church  act,  & 

may  be  transacted   by  the  churches,  even  when  civil  mag-  Acts  15. 

istrates  may  be  enemyes  to  churches  and  to  church  as- 

semblyes.4 

4     It  belongeth  unto  Synods  &  counsels,  to  debate  & 


1  Here  again  the  writer  has  made  use  of  Cotton,  Keyes,  p.  19.     See  also  Way  of 
the  Churches,  pp.  109,  no. 

2  Cotton,  A'eyes,  p.  23. 

3  Result  0/  a  Synod  at  Cambridge     .     .     .     A  nno,  1646,  p.  49. 

4  Compare  Ibid.,  pp.  70-72. 

16 


234  T1IE   CAMBRIDGE   SYNOD   AND   PLATFORM 

Acts  .-.  .   2.  6.  determine  controversies  of  faith,  &  cases  of  consciece  ;   to 

7.     1  Chro  15.13. 

cleare  from  the  word  holy  directions  for  the  holy  worship 
of  God,  &  good  government  of  the  church  ;  to  beare  wit- 
1  Chron  29:  6, 7.  ness  against  mal-administration  &  [27]  Corruption  in  doc- 
YersasVag.  trine  or  mailers  in  any  particular  Church,  &  to  give  direc- 
tions for  the  reformation  therof:  Not  to  exercise  Church- 
censures  in  way  of  discipline,  nor  any  other  act  of  church- 
authority  or  jurisdiction  :  which  that  presidentiall  Synod 
did  forbeare. 

5  The  Synods  directions  &  determinations,  so  farr 
as  consonant  to  the  word  of  God,  are  to  be  received  with 
reverence  &  submission  ;  not  only  for  their  agreement 
therwith  (which  is  the  principall  ground  therof,  &  with- 
out which  they  bind  not  at  all:)  but  also  secondarily,  for 

Acts  15.  the  powr  wherby  they  are  made,  as  being  an  ordinance  of 

God  appointed  therunto  in  his  word. 

6  Because  it  is  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  for  many 
churches  to  com  altogether  in  one  place,  in  all  their 
mebers  universally:  therfore  they  may  assemble  by  their 
delegates  or  messengers,  as  the  church  of  Antioch  went 

Acts  15. 2  not  an  to  ierusalem,  but  some  select  men  for  that  pur- 

pose. Because  none  are  or  should  be  more  fitt  to  know 
the  state  of  the  churches,  nor  to  advise  of  wayes  for  the 
good  therof  then  Elders:  therfore  it  is  fitt  that  in  the 
choice  of  the  messengers  for  such  assemblies,  they  have 

Acts  15:2  special  respect  uto  such.     Yet  in  as  much  as  not  only  Paul 

&  Barnabas,  but  certayn  others  also  were  sent  to  Ieru- 
salem from  Antioch.  Acts.  15.  &  when  they  were  come 
to  Ierusalem,  not  only  the  Apostles  &  Elders,  but  other 
brethren  also  doe  assemble,  &  meet  about  the  matter  ; 
therfore  Synods  are  to  consist  both  of  Elders,  &  other 
church-members,  endued  with  gifts,  &  sent  by  the 
churches,  not  excluding  the  presence  of  any  brethren  in 
the  churches. 

CHAP:    XVII 

Of  the  Civil  Magistrates  powr  in  Matters  Ecclesiastical. 

It   is   lawfull,   profitable.   &   necessary   for    christians 

to    gather    themselves    into    Church    estate,    and    therin 

Act  2. 41.47.      to    exercise    all    the    ordinaces    of    Christ  according  unto 

the    word,    although    the    consent    of    Magistrate    could 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  235 

not  be  had  therunto,1  because  the  Apostles  &  christians  in 
their  time  did  frequently  thus  practise,  when  the  Magis- 
trates being  all  of  them  Jewish  or  pagan,  «Sc  mostly 
persecuting  enemies,  would  give  no  countenance  or  con- 
sent to  such  matters. 

2     Church-government    stands    in    no    opposition    to  John  18, 36 
civil    govenment    of   comon-welths,   nor    any   intrencheth 
upon    the    authority   of    [28]    Civil    Magistrates    in    their 
iurisdictions  ;  nor  anv  whit  weakneth  their  hands  in  gov- Johr.  18. 36 

Acts  2-   8. 

erning  ;  but  rather  strengthneth  them,  &  furthereth  the 
people  in  yielding  more  hearty  <\:  conscionable  obedi- 
ence iito  them,  whatsoever  some  ill  affected  persons  to 
the  waves  of  Christ  have  suggested,  to  alienate  the  affec- 
tions of  Kings  &:  Princes  from  the  ordinances  of  Christ; 
as  if  the  kingdome  of  Christ  in  his  church  could  not  rise 
&  stand,  without  the  falling  &  weakning  of  their 
government,  which  is  also  of  Christ  :  wheras  the  contrary  isay  49. 23. 
is  most  true,  that  they  may  both  stand  together  <$: 
flourish  the  one  being  helpfull  unto  the  other,  in  their 
distinct  &  due  administrations. 

The  powr  &  authority  of  Magistrates  is  not  for  the 
restraiing  of  churches,  or  any  other  good  workes,  but  for 
helping  in  <$:  furthering  therof;  &  therfore  the  consent  &Romi3.  4. 
countenance  of  Magistrates  when  it  may  be  had,  is  not  to 
be  sleighted,  or  lightly  esteemed;  but  on  the  contrary;  it 
is  part  of  that  honour  due  to  christian  Magistrates  to  de- 
sire &  crave  their  consent  &  approbation  therin:  which 
being  obtayned,  the  churches  may  then  proceed  in  their 
way  with  much  more  encouragement,  &  comfort.2 

4  It  is  not  in  the  powr  of  Magistrates  to  compell  their 
subjects  to  become  church-members,  &:  to  partake  at  the 
Lords  table:3  for  the  priests  are  reproved,  that  brought 
uworthy  ones  into  the  sactuarie  :  then,  as  it  was  unlawf ull Ezek 44. 7,  9 
for  the  preists,  so  it  is  as  unlawfull  to  be  done  by  civil 
Magistrates.  Those  whom  the  church  is  to  cast  out  ifxC0r5.11 
they  were  in,  the  Magistrate  ought  not  to  thrust  into  the 
church,  nor  to  hold  them  therin. 


1  Cotton  expresses  the  same  view  in  different  language.  Way  of  the  Churches, 
p.  6. 

s  Compare  Cotton's  statement  of  New  England  theory  and  practice,  Way  of  the 
Churches,  pp.  6,  7. 

3  Compare  Cotton,  Keyes,  p.  51  ;  the  same  idea  is  expressed  in  The  Result  of  a 
Synod  at  Cambridge     .     .     .     Anno,  1646,  p.  4.     See  ante,  p.  190. 


236  THE   CAMBRIDGE   SYNOD   AND   PLATFORM 

5  As  it  is  unlawfull  for  church-officers  to  meddle  with 
the  sword  of  the  Magistrate,  so  it  is  ulawfull  for  the  Magis- 
trate to  meddle   with   the  work  proper  to  church-officers. 

Matth  20  25,26.  the  Acts  of  Moses  &  David,  who  were  not  only  Pricesj  but 
Prophets,    were    extraordinary;     therfore     not     imitable. 

2chron26i6.  i7.  Against  such  usurpation  the  Lord  witnessed,  by  smiting 
Uzziah  with  leprosie,  for  presuming  to  offer  incense 

6  It  is  the  duty  of  the  Magistrate,  to  take  care  of 
matters  of  religion,  &  to  improve  his  civil  authority  for  the 

Psai82.  2  observing  of  the  duties  commanded  in  the  first,  as  well  as 

for  observing  of  the  duties  commanded  in  the  second 
table.1    They  are  called  Gods.     The  end  of  the  Magistrates 

1  Tim  2.  1, 2  office,  is  not  only  the  quiet  &  peaceable  life  of  the  subject, 
in  matters  of  righteousness  &  honesty,  but  also  in  matters 
of  godliness,  yea  of  all  godliness.2  Moses,  Joshua,  David, 
Soloma,  [29]  Asa,  Jehoshaphat,  Hezekiah,  Josiah,3  are 
much  commended  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  for  the  putting  forth 

1  Kings  15. 14.  c  their  authority  in  matters  of    religion:    on  the  contrary, 

2  kings  12.  3c  such  Kings  as  have  been  fayling  this  way,  are  frequently 
^kings  20'.  42'.  taxed  &  reproved  by  the  Lord.  &  not  only  the  Kings  of 
26. 28.'  °  Judah,  but  also  Job,  Nehemiah,  the  king  of  Niniveh, 
jonuh33. 7.  Darius,  Artaxerxes,  Nebucadnezar,4  whom  none  looked  at 
Da"  3.'  29.          as  types  of  Christ,5  (thouh6  were  it  soe,  there  were  no  place 

for  any  just  objection,)  are  comeded  in  the  book  of  God, 
for  exercising  their  authority  this  way. 

7  The  object  of  the  powr  of  the  Magistrate,  are  not 
things  meerly  inward,  &  so  not  subject  to  his  cognisance 
&;  view,  as  unbeleife  hardness  of  heart,  erronious  opin- 
ions not  vented;  but  only  such  things  as  are  acted  by  the 
outward  man;'  neither   is   their    powr  to  be  exercised,  in 

1  Kings  20  commanding  such  acts  of  the  outward  man,  &  punishig  the 
neglect  therof,  as  are  but  meer  invetions,  &  devices  of 
men;  but  about  such  acts,  as  are  commanded  &  forbid- 
den in  the  word;  yea  such  as  the  word  doth  clearly  deter- 
mine, though  not  alwayes  clearly  to  the  judgment  of  the 
Magistrate  or  others,  yet  clearly  in  it  selfe.  In  these  he 
of  right  ought  to  putt  forth  his  authority,  though  oft-times 
actually  he  doth  it  not.e 

'  Compare  Result  0/ a  Synod,  pp.  1  and  following. 
a  Ibid.,  pp.  34-36.  3  Ibid.,  p.  22. 

4  Ibid.,  pp.  22,  23,  25-29.  .6  Ibid. 

»  Read  though.  7  Compare  Ibid.,  pp.  15,  16. 

8  This  passage  shows  that  Mather  must  have  been  familiar  with  the  tentative 
Result  of  a  Synod  of  1646.     (Ante,  pp.  189-193.)     See  Ibid.,  p.  4. 


TEXT   OF   THE    PLATFORM  237 

sphemy,  Heresy,  venting  corrupt    & 
pernicious  opinions,  that  destroy  the  foundation,  open  con- 


8     Idolatry,  Blasphemy,   Heresy,  venting  corrupt    &  Deut  13 


Dan  3.  29. 

tempt  of  the   word   preached,  prophanation  of   the  Lords  Zach  13.  3 
day,  disturbing  the  peaceable  administration  &  exercise  of  1  Tim  2. 2. 
the  worship  &  holy  things  of   God,  &  the  like,  are  to  be 
restrayned,  &  punished  by  civil  authority.' 

9     If  any  church  one  or  more  shall  grow  schismaticall, 
rending  it  self  from  the  communion  of  other  churches,  or 
shall  walke  incorrigibly  or  obstinately  in  any  corrupt  way 
of  their  own,  contrary  to   the   rule    of   the   word;    in  such 
case,  the   Magistrate   is   to   put   forth   his  coercive  powr,  Joshua  22 
as    the    matter    shall    require.      The    tribes    on    this    side 
Jordan  intended  to  make  warr  against  the  other  tribes, 
for  building  the  altar  of  witness,  whom  they 
suspected  to  have  turned  away 
therin  from  following 
of  the  Lord. 
FINIS 
[  30     Blank  ] 

[31]     A  TABLE  OF  THE  CONTENTS     [A  sim- 
ple list  of  the  titles  of  the  chapters,  here  omitted.] 


Errata 

The  faults  escaped  in  some  of  the  bookes  thus  amended 
Note  that  the  first  figures  stands  for  page  the  next  for  line     pag  8 
19.  r  they.  10  11.  r  not,  be.  13.  26.  r  admission,  p  16.  28  r  Philip.  17.  5. 
t  Acts.  19.  18.     18.  28.  r  not  bee  adm.  19.  r  one.  r  to.   21.  21.  r  con- 
vinced. 25.  35.  r  there. 


Compare  Hid.,  pp.  5,  6. 


XI 

THE   HALF  WAY  COVENANT  DECISIONS  OF 
1657  AND   1662 
Editions  and  Reprints 

a.     the  conclusions  of  the  ministerial  assembly,  1657 
The  manuscript   is  in  the   possession   of   the  American  Antiquarian   Society, 
Worcester,  Mass. 

.-/  Disputation  concerning  Church-Members  and  their  Children  in  Answer  to 
XXI.  Questions  :  London,  1659,  40  pp.  [viii]  31. ' 

In  abstract  in  I.  Hubbard,  General  History  of  New  England,  ed.  Boston, 
1S4S,  pp.  563-569- 

II.  Felt,  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Xe-o  England,  Boston,  1855-62,  II  :  154- 
153. 

B,      THE   RESULT   OF   THE   SYNOD   OF     1662 
The  manuscript  is  in  the  possession  of  the  American  Antiquarian  Society. 

I.  Propositions  Concerning  the  Subject  of  Baptism  and  Consociation  of 
Churches,  Collected  and  Confirmed  out  of  the  Word  of  God,  by  n  Synod  of  Elders 
and  Messengers  of  the  Churches  in  Massachusets-Colony  in  New-England.  Assem- 
bled at  Boston,  according  to  Appointment  of  the  Honoured  General  Court,  In  the 

Year  1662,  etc.,  Cambridge  :  Printed  by  S.[amuel]   G.[reen]  for  Hezekiah   Usher 
at  Boston  in  New-England,  1662.     40  pp.  xvi,  32. 

II.  With  same  title,  but  without  naming  the  place  of  publication,  and  with  the 
addition  of  the  Answer  of  the  Dissenting  Brethren,  i.  e.,  Chauncy,  Anti-Synodalia 
Scripta  Americana.     [London],  1662. 

III.  Mather,  Magnolia,  London,  1702.     Ed.  1853-5,  II:   279-301. ■ 

IV.  Results  of  Three  Synods,  etc.     Boston,  1725,  pp.  50-93. 

V.  The  Original  Constitution,  Order  and  Faith  of  The  New  England 
Churches,  etc.     Boston,  1S12,  pp.  69-118. 

VI.  Congregational  Quarterly,  IV :   275-2S6.     (July,  1S62.) 

Beside  these  publications  of  the  full  text  of  the  result,  the  portion  which  has  to 
do  with  Consociation  of  Churches  was  reprinted  by  Increase  Mather,  A  Disquisition 
Concerning  Ecclesiastical  Councils,  Boston,  1 716,  pp.  40-47;  republished  in  Con- 
gregational Quarterly,  XII:   366-369  (July,  1S70). 

An  abstract  of  the  result  was  given  by  Hubbard,  General  History,  pp.  587-590. 

Sources 

Public  Records  of  the  Colony  of  Connecticut,  Hartford,  1S50,  etc.,  I  :  2S1,  283, 
2S9,  293,  302,  437,  43S  ;   II  :   53-55,  67,  69,  70,  S4,  109,  516,  517. 


1  The  publication  was  effected  by  Xathanael  (and  probably  Increase)  Mather.     Sec  Brinlcy 

■  '  :  '33- 

2  Dexter  has  pointed  out  that  Mather's  reprint  is  inaccurate  ;  see  Cong.  Quart..  IV  :  275. 

(238) 


ITS    LITERATURE  239 

Records  of  .  .  .  Massachusetts,  Boston,  1853-4,  III:  419;  IV,  Ft.  I:  280; 
Pt.  II:  38,  60,  62. 

Records  of  the  Colony    .     .     .    of  New  Haven,  Hartford,  1857-8,  II :  195-198. 

Acts  of  the  Commissioners  of  the  United  Colonies,  (in  Records  of  .  .  Ply- 
mouth,) Boston,  1859,  II :  328. 

The  sources  are  largely  epitomized  by  Felt,  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Hew  Eng- 
land, Boston,  1855,  1862,  II  :  153-159,  187,  189-191,  287-289,  291-296,  299-302, 
310,  312,  333,  339-34L  365.  406,  407,  409. 

Con  i  R<  iversial  Pamphlets 

a.  Opposed    to    the    result.       1.    Charles    Chauncy,    Anti-Synodalia 

Scrip/a  Americana,  etc.  [London]  1662  ;  Printed  in  connection  with  the  result  of  the 
Synod  as  issued  at  London  ;'  2.  Answer  of  the  Dissenting  Ministers  in  the  Synod, 
respecting  Baptism  and  the  Consociation  of  Churches,  Cambridge,  1662  ;2  3.  John 
Davenport,  Another  Essay  For  Investigation  of  the  Truth,  in  Answer  to  Tzvo 
Questions,  concerning  (a)  The  subject  of  Baptism,  (b)  The  Consociation  of  Churches. 
Cambridge,  1663,  with  preface  by  Increase  Mather3  and  an  appendix  by  Nicholas 
Street  ;4 

b.  Ill  defense  Of  the  result.  I.  John  Allin,  Animadversions  upon 
the  Antisynodalia  Americana,  etc.,  Cambridge,  1664  [Reply  to  Chauncy];  2.  Jona- 
than Mitchell  and  Richard  Mather,5  A  Defence  of  the  Answer  and  Arguments  of 
the  Synod  met  at  Boston  in  the  year  1662  .  .  .  Against  the  duply  made  thereto 
by  the  Rev.  Mr.  J.  Davenport  [this  portion  of  the  work  by  R.  Mather]6  ...  to- 
gether with  an  Answer  to  the  Apologetical  Preface  set  before  that  Essay,  [here 
Mitchell  answers  Increase  Mather,]  Cambridge,  1664;  3.  Collection  of  the  Testi- 
monies of  the  Fathers  of  the  New  England  Churches  respecting  Baptism.  Cam- 
bridge, 1665  ?7  4.  Increase  Mather,  The  First  Principles  of  New-England, 
Concerning  the  Subject  of  Baptisme  &°  Communion  of  Churches.  Collected  partly 
out  of  the  Printed  Books,  but  chiefly  out  of  the  Original  Manuscripts  of  the  First 
and  chief e  Fat  hers  in  the  New-English  Churches,  etc.,  Cambridge,  1675  ;  5.  In- 
crease Mather,  A  Discourse  concerning  the  Subject  of  Baptisme,  Wherein  the 
present  Controversies     .      .      .     are  enquired  into.     Cambridge,  1675. 

Literature 

I.  Hubbard,  General  History  of  New  England  [Account  written  soon  after 
1675]/  ed.  Boston,  1848,  pp.  562-571,  587-591  ;  2.  Mather,  Magnolia,  London, 
1702,  ed.  Hartford,  1853-5,  II  :  276-315  ;  3.   Neal,  History  of  New-England,  Lon- 


1  Thomas,  Hist,  of  Printing,  I:  255,  believed  this  to  have  been  issued  also  at  Cambridge, 
lass.,  in  1662.     This  is  almost  certainly  a  mistake.     See  Brinley  Catalogue,  I  :   114. 

2  So  given  by  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  Eibl.  No.  1935.  May  it  not  be  identical  with  No.  1  ?  I 
ave  not  been  able  to  find  it,  and  am  inclined  to  believe  it  a  mistake. 

3  The  youthful  Mather  soon  changed  his  views,  under  the  influence  of  Mitchell's  arguments, 
nd  wrote  in  defense  of  the  result.     Compare  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  II :  310. 

4  Nicholas  Street  was  teacher  of  the  church  at  New  Haven  of  which  Davenport  was  pastor. 

5  The  work  was  published  anonymously. 

6  Davenport  made  rejoinder  to  R.  Mather,  but  the  reply  was  never  printed.  See  Cong.  Quart., 
V:  287. 

7  I  know  nothing  of  this  work  save  the  title  as  given  in  Thomas,  Hist.  Printing  in  A  mcrica, 
I  :  315.  This  classification  is,  therefore,  purely  conjectural.  May  this  not  be  an  erroneous  descrip- 
on  of  I.  Mather's  First  Principles' 

8  Hubbard  speaks  of  Increase  Mather's  First  Princiilcs.  etc..  as  "  published  not  long  since." 


240  THE    HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

don,  1720,  II :  335-337  ;  4-  Hutchinson,  History  of  the  Colony  of  Mass.  Bay,  ed. 
London,  1765,  I:  223,  224;  5.  Trumbull,  History  of  Connecticut,  ed.  New  Haven, 
1S1S.  I:  296-313,  456-472;  6.  Upham,  Ratio  Discipline,  Portland,  Me.,  1S29.  pp. 
221-22S  ;  7.  Leonard  Bacon,  Thirteen  Historical  Discourses,  on  the  completion  of 
200  years,  from  the  Beginning  of  the  First  Church  in  New-Haven,  New  Haven, 
1839,  pp.  IOS,  139-146;  8.  Uhden,  Geschichte  ,/cr  Congregationalisten  in  Neu- 
England,  u.  s.  w.,  Leipzig,  1S42,  Conant's  translation.  The  New  England  Theocracy, 
etc.,  Boston,  185S,  pp.  163-200;  9.  Clark,  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Cong.  Churches 
in  Mass.,  Boston,  1S5S,  pp.  44,  45,  69-73  ;  IO.  Palfrey,  History  of  New  England, 
Boston,  185S-64,  II  :  486-493,  III:  Sl-SS,  116-119;  II.  Leonard  Bacon,  Histori- 
cal Discourse,  in  Contributions  to  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Connecticut,  New 
Haven,  1861,  pp.  16-32;  12.  H.  M.  Dexter,  Two  Hundred  Years  Ago,  in  New 
England,  in  Congregational  Quarterly,  IV  ;  26S-291  (July,  1862)  [a  most  valuable 
and  almost  exhaustive  monograph  on  the  Synod  of  1662]  ;  13.  D.  T.  Fiske,  The 
Half-  Way  Covenant,  in  Contributions  to  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Essex  County, 
Mass.,  Boston,  1S65,  pp.  270-282  ;  14.  I.  N.  Tarbox,  Minutes  of  the  General  As- 
sociation of  Cong.  Churches  of  Mass.,  Boston,  1877,  PP-  35_42  '•  '5-  Dexter,  Con- 
gregationalism .  .  .  as  seen  in  its  Literature,  New  York,  1SS0,  pp.  467-476; 
16.  G.  L.  Walker,  History  of  the  First  Church  in  Hartford,  Hartford,  1884,  pp. 
1 5 1-2 1 1  [corrects  the  misrepresentations  as  to  the  relations  of  the  quarrel  in  the 
Hartford  church  to  the  Half- Way  Covenant  movement  into  which  nearly  all  earlier 
writers  have  fallen];  1 7.  G.  L.  Walker,  Jonathan  Edwards  and  the  Half-  Way  Cove- 
nant, in  Xc7o  Englander,  XLIII :  601-614  (Sept.,  1SS4);  18.  Doyle,  English  in 
America,   The  Puritan  Colonies,  London,  1S87,  II  :  94-100. 


The  Reception  of  the  System 

a.  By  the  Salem  Church,  White,  New  England  Congregationalism,  pp.  40-78 
passim  (original  records);  />.  By  the  First  Church,  Boston,  Hill,  History  of  tin- 
Old  South  Church,  Boston,  1890,  I:  5-24S /<7j\t;'w  /  c.  By  the  Hartford  Church, 
John  Davenport,  Letter  to  John  Winthrop,  Jr.,  in  j  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  X  :  59- 
62;  Walker,  History  of  the  First  Church,  Hartford,  1SS4,  pp.  1S2-211  ;  d.  By  the 
Stratford  Church,  Cothren,  History  of  Ancient  Woodbury,  Waterbury,  1S54,  pp.  113 
-135  ;  e.  By  the  Dorchester  Church,  Records  of  First  Ch.  at  Dorchester,  Boston, 
1891,  pp.  35,  40,  49,  55,  70  [original  records  of  value]. 


The  Stoddardean  Discission 

I.  Increase  Mather,  The  Order  of  the  Gospel,  Boston,  1700  ;'  2.  Stoddard, 
The  Doctrine  of  Instituted  Churches  Explained  and  Troved  from  the  Word  of  God, 
London,  1700  ;■  3.  [I.  &  C.  Mather?]  The  Young  Man's  claim  unto  the  Sacrament 
of  the  Lords-Supper     .      .     .     by     .     .     .    John  Quick     .     .      .      With  a  Defence 


1  In  genera!,  a  defense  of  the  older  New  England  views  as  to  church-membership,  rights  ot 
the  brethren  in  church  administration,  "relations,"  covenants,  synods,  etc. 

2  Apparently  drawn  out  by  Mather's  book,  a  large  portion  of  the  positions  of  which  it  tra- 
verses. Full  presentation  of  the  famous  view  on  admission  to  the  Supper,  pp.  18-22.  Stoddard 
affirms  the  existence  of  National  Churches,  denies  the  necessity  of  church  covenants,  and  declares 
that  the  minister  alone,  without  the  intermeddling  of  the  brethren,  is  to  decide  on  fitness  for  ad- 

ithe: 


ITS   LITERATURE  241 

of  those  Churches  from  what  is  Offensive  to  them  in  a  Discourse  lately  Published, 
tinder  the  Title  of  ,  The  Doctrine  of  Instituted  Churches,  1700;1  4.  Stoddard,  The 
Inexcusableness  of  Neglecting  the  Worship  of  Cod,  under  A  Pretence  of  being  in 
an  Unconverted  Condition,  Shewn  in  a  Sermon  Preached  at  Northampton,  The 
17th.  Decemb.  1707.  Boston,  1708;  5.  Increase  Mather,  A  Dissertation,  wherein 
the  Strange  Doctrine  lately  Published  in  a  Sermon,  the  Tendency  of  which  is  to  En- 
courage Unsanctified  Persons  {while  such)  to  approach  the  Holy  Table  of  the  Lord,  is 
Examined  and  Confuted.  Boston,  1708  ;  6.  Stoddard,  An  Appeal  to  the  Learned. 
Being  A  Vindication  of  the  Right  of  Visible  Saints  to  the  Lords  Supper,  Though 
they  be  destitute  of  a  Saving  Work  of  Gods  Spirit  on  their  Hearts  :  Against  the 
Exceptions  of  Mr.  Increase  Mather.  Boston,  1709;  7.  An  Appeal,  Of  some  of 
the  Unlearned,  both  to  the  Learned  and  Unlearned  ;  Containing  some  Queries  on  S. 
Stoddard's  Appeal,  Boston,  1709.  An  article  of  some  value  is  that  of  [\Y.  Bement], 
Stoddardeanism,  in  New  Englander,  IV:  350-355  (1S46). 


The  Effort  for  the  Abolition  of  the  Half-Way  System 

Opponents.  I.  Jonathan  Edwards,  An  Humble  Inquiry  Into  the  Rules  of 
the  Word  of  God,  Concerning  the  Qualifications  Requisite  to  a  Compleat  Standing 
and  full  Communion  In  the  Visible  Christian  Church.  Boston,  1749,  Edinburgh, 
1790  ;2  2.  J.  Edwards,  Misrepresentations  Corrected,  and  Truth  Vindicated,  Bos- 
ton, 1752  [Reply  to  No.  26,  below];  3.  Bellamy,  Dialogue  on  the  Christian  Sacra- 
ments, Boston,  1762  ;3  4-  Jacob  Green,  Christian  Baptism  ["Sermon  Delivered  at 
Hanover,  in  New-Jersey,  Nov.  4.  1764  "];4  5.  J.  Green,  An  Inquiry  Into  The  Con- 
stitution and  Discipline  of  the  Jewish  Church  ;  In  order  to  cast  some  light  on  the 
Controversy,  concerning  Qualifications  for  the  Sacraments  of  the  New  Testament* 
New  York,  1768  ;  6.  J.  Green,  A  Reply  to  the  Reverend  Mr.  George  Beckwith's 
Answer,  New  Haven  [1769],  [Reply  to  No.  31];  7.  Bellamy,  The  Half-Way-Cove- 
nant.  A  Dialogue,  New  Haven,  1769;6  8.  Bellamy,  The  Inconsistence  of  Re- 
nouncing The  Half- Way-Covenant ,  and  yet  retaining  the  Half- Way-Practice.  A 
Dialogue,1  New  Haven  [1769],  [Reply  to  No.  30];  9.  Bellamy,  That  there  is  but 
one  Covenant,  whereof  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  are  Seals,  viz  :  the  Cove- 
nant of  Grace  .  .  .  and,  the  Doctrine  of  an  External  Graceless  Covenant,  Lately 
advanced,  By  the  Rev.  Mr.  Moses  Mather  .  .  .  Shewn  to  be  an  unscriptural 
Doctrine  [Reply  to  No.  27].  It  has  as  preface,  A  Dialogue  between  a  Minister  and 
his  Parishioner,  concerning  the  Half- Way-Covenant*  New  Haven,  1 769  [Reply  to 

1  Endorsed  as  a  reply  to  the  Instituted  Churches,  by  John  Higginson,  William  Hubbard, 
Zechariah  Symmes,  Sen.,  Samuel  Cheever,  Nicholas  Noyes,  Jeremiah  Shepard,  Joseph  Gerrish, 
and  Edward  Paison. 

2  Primarily  an  attack  on  Stoddardeanism  ;  opposes  the  Half-Way  Covenant  system  on  pp. 
128-131.     Edwards  graduated  at  Yale  in  1720.     Pastor  at  Northampton,  Mass. 

3  Yale,  1735,  pastor  Bethlem,  Conn.  Written  soon  after  Edwards's  dismission  from  North- 
ampton, but  not  printed  till  1762.  A  defence  of  Edwards.  Opposed  to  the  Half-Way  Covenant  by 
implication  rather  than  explicitly. 

4  Harvard,  1744,  pastor  Hanover,  N.  J.  A  follower  of  Whitefield,  Edwardean  in  spirit  and 
opposed  to  seeking  baptism  for  offspring  when  consciously  unfit  for  the  Lord's  Table. 

5  A  vigorous  defence  of  Edwards's  views. 

*  Bellamy's  first  Half- Way  Covenant  dialogue  — a  readable  and  forcible  attack  on  the  system. 
'  Bellamy's  second  dialogue. 
s  Bellamy's  third  dialogue. 


242 


THF   HALF-WAY    COVENANT 


No.   28];    IO.   Bellamy,    The   Sacramental  Controversy  brought  to  a  Point.      The 
Fourth  ' Dialogue  between  a  Minister  and  his  Parishioner.     New  Haven  [1770], 
[Reply  to  No.  33];   II.   Bellamy,  A  careful  and  strict  Examination  of  the  External 
Covenant     .      .      .     A   Reply  to  the  Per.  Mr.  Moses  Mather's  Piece,  entituled,    The 
Visible  Church  in  Covenant  with  God,  further  illustrated,  New  Haven  [1770].  [Re- 
ply to  No    34];    12.   Israel  Holley,  A  Letter  to  the  Reverend  Mr.  Bartholomew  of 
Harwinton:    Containing  A  Pew  Remarks,   Upon  some  of  his  Arguments  and  Di- 
vinity? Hartford,  1770,  [Reply  to  No.  32];    13-  Rules  of  Trial:  Or  Half-Way 
Covenant  Examined.      In  a  letter  to  the  Parishioner.      By  an  Observer  of  the  Dis- 
pute   New  London,  i77°,2  [Reply  to  No.  28];    14.   Chandler  Robbins,  A  Reply  to 
some  Essays  lately  published  by  John  Cotton,  Esq.  {of  Plymouth)  Relating  to  Bap- 
tism? Boston,  1773,  [I-ply  to  No.  37];    «5-   C.  Robbins,  Some  briej  Remarks  on 
4  Piece  published  by  John  Cotton,  Esq,  of  Plymouth,  Boston,  1774,  [Reply  to  Xo. 
38]-    16    Cyprian  Strong,  ,4  Discourse  on  Acts  II:  42-    **  ™hich  /7"'  Puttee  oj 
Owning  the  Covenant  is  Examined,"  Hartford,  1780,  2d  ed.  1791  !    >7     C.  Strong, 
Animadversions  on   the   Substance  of  Two   Sermons  preached  at  Stepney  by  John 
lewis,  A.M.,  Hartford,   17S9,   [Reply  to  No.   25];   18.  C.  Strong,   An   Inquiry 
Wherein    the   end  and  design   of  Baptism      .      .      .      are  particularly   considered, 
Hartford    1-93  ;    19-   Nathanael  Emmons,  Dissertation  on  the  Scripture  Qualifica- 
tions  for  Admission   and  Access   to   the   Christian    Sacraments:    comprising  Some 
Stricture*  on  Dr.  Ilemmenways  Discourse  concerning  the  Church,"  Worcester,  1793, 
[Reply  to  No.  43];    20.   Stephen  West,  An  Inquiry  into  the  Ground  and  Import  of 
Infant  Baptism:  Stockbridge,  1794:    21.   N.  Emmons,  Candid  Reply  to  Dr    Ilem- 
menways Remarks  on   his  Dissertation,  Worcester,  1795,  [Reply  to  No.  44];  22. 
C    Strong     I  Second  Inquiry  into  the  Nature  and  Design  of   Christian  Baptism. 
Hartford"  1796;   23.   S.  West,  A   Dissertation  on  Infant  Baptism  in  reply  to  the 
Rev    Cyprian  Strong's  Second  Inquiry  on  that  Subject,'  Hartford,  1798,  [Reply  to 
No    22];    24.    Timothy  Dwight,    Sermon  CLIX,   in    Theology:  Explained  and  De- 
fended in  a  Series  of ' Sermons,  ed.  New  Haven,  1823,  IV:   33S-344- 

Peculiar  Views.     25.  John  Lewis,  Christian    Forbearance   to  weak  Con- 
sciences a  Duty  of  the  Gospel.       The  Substance  of  Two  Sermons,-  Hartford,  1789. 
^id",  Conn.     Echvardean  in  view  and  friendly  to  Bellamy.     No.  very  valuable 


Pastor  ; 


2  Anonymous.     Unimportant.     The  writer 


prerequisite  to  admis- 


sion  'V^Xtior  Plymouth,  Mass.     A  powerful  argument  against  the  system,  which  had 
been  under  discussion  in  the  First  Church  since  1770.  '       ,„m 

.  Vale    .763,  pastor  Chatham,  now  Portland,  Conn.     A  most  v.gorous  attack  on  the  system. 

:.  One 'of 'the  great  works  in  opposition  to  the  Half  Way  Covenant. 

a  Vale,  .767,  pastor  Franklin,  Mass. 

1  Yale,  1755,  pastor  Stockbridge,  Mass.  ...       „..„,   ,. 

-  Has  to  do  only  incidentally  with  the  Half-Way  Covenant.     Strongs  v.ews  ,s:         hat     he 

their  ^;:;:: 25  t  S££  S£U  *.  «_*  *«*  *.  ^  ***.  ™  on,y 

a  seal  of  the  parents'  dedication  of  t«**Hdof  God.  ^    ,.  The  ^  quali. 

newness  of  life,  yet   fears  to  approach    the  table  of  the  Lord  -is  not  such  a  breach  of  tenant 


debar 


children  to  bapti! 


ITS    LITERATURE  243 

Defenders.  26.  Solomon  Williams,  True  State  of  the  Question  concerning 
The  Qualifications  Necessary  to  lawful  Communion  in  the  Christian  Sacraments} 
Boston,  1751,  [Reply  to  No.  1];  27.  Moses  Mather,  The  Visible  Church,  in  Cove- 
nant with  God,'2  New  York,  1759,  [error  for  1769];  28.  [Ebenezer  Devotion],  The 
Half-way  Covenant.  A  Dialogue  between  foseph  Bellamy,  D.D.,  and  a  Parish- 
ioner, Continued,  by  the  Parishioner*  New  London,  1769,  [Reply  to  No.  7];  29. 
The  Parishioner  having  Studied  the  Point.  Containing  some  Observations  on  the 
Half-Way  Covenant,  Printed  1769, 4  [Reply  to  No.  7];  30.  [Nathanael  Taylor?] 
A  Second  Dialogue,  let-ween  a  Minister  and  his  Parishioner,  Concerning  the  Half- 
Way-Covenant ',6  Hartford,  1769,  [Reply  to  No.  7];  31.  George  Beckwith,  Visible 
Saints  lawful  Right  to  Communion  in  Christian  Sacraments,  Vindicated*  .New- 
London,  1769,  [Reply  to  No.  4];  32.  Andrew  Bartholomew,  A  Dissertation,  on  The 
Qualifications,  Necessary  to  A  lawful  Profession,  and  enjoying  special  Ordinances,1 
Hartford  [1769];  33.  [E.  Devotion?],  A  Letter  to  the  Reverend  foseph  Bellamy, 
D.D.,  Concerning  Qualifications  for  Christian  Communion  .  .  .  prom  the 
Parishioner*  New  Haven  [1770],  [Reply  to  the  preface  of  No.  9];  34.  Moses 
Mather,  The  Visible  Church,  in  Covenant  -with  God;  Further  Illustrated,  New 
Haven,  1770,  [Reply  to  No.  9];  35.  [E.  Devotion?],  .-/  Second  Letter,  to  the  Rev- 
erendJoseph  Bellamy,  D.D.-,  Occasioned  by  his  fourth  Dialogue  .  .  .  From  the 
Parishioner,  New  Haven  [1770],  [Reply  to  No.  10];  36.  Charles  Chauncy,  "Break- 
ing of  Bread"  in  remembrance  of  the  dying  Love  of  Christ,  a  Gospel  institution. 
Five  Sermons*  Boston,  1772  ;  37.  John  Cotton,  The  general  Practice  of  the 
Churches   of  New-England,    relating  to  Baptism,   Vindicated :    or,    Some    Essays 

.  Delivered  at  several  Church-Meetings  in  Plymouth}"  Boston  [1772];  38. 
John  Cotton,  The  General  Practice  of  the  Churches  of  Xew  England,  Relating  to 
Baptism  Further  Vindicated,  Boston,  1773,  [Reply  to  No.  14];  39.  William  Hart, 
A  Scriptural  Answer  to  this  Question  "  What  are  the  Necessary  Qualifications  for 

.  Attendance  upon  the  Sacraments  of  the  X,  w  Covenant ,"  New  London, 
1772  ;  40.  Moses  Mather,  A  Brief  View  of  the  Manner  in  which  the  Controversy 
A  lout  Terms  of  Communion  .  .  .  Lias  been  conducted,  in  the  present  day.13 
Xew  Haven,  1772  ;    41.    Nathan  Williams,  An  Enquiry  Concerning  the  Design  and 


1  Harvard,  1719,  pastor  Lebanon,  Conn.  Strongly  Stoddardean,  little  direct  reference  to  the 
system. 

2  Yale,  1739,  pastor  Middlesex,  now  Darien,  Conn.     A  powerful  Stoddardean  treatise. 

3  Yale,  1732,  pastor  Scotland,  Conn.     Stoddardean. 

4  Anonymous  and  without  place  —  Ultra-Stoddardean. 

5  Yale,  1745,  pastor  New  Milford,  Conn.  Curiously  enough  Dr.  H.  M.  Dexter,  Bibliog.  No. 
3559,  and  the  editors  of  Bellamy's  Works,  ed.  Boston,  1850,  II  :  677-684,  took  this  tract  to  be  by 
Bellamy  instead  of  against  him.  On  the  authorship  see  Israel  Holly  No.  12  above,  and  Prof.  F.  B. 
Dexter,   Yale  Graduates,  p.  528. 

6  Yale,  1728,  pastor  Lyme,  Conn.  Stoddardean.  An  earnest  defence  of  the  Half-Way 
Covenant. 

'  Yale,  1731,  pastor  Harwinton,  Conn.     Opposed  to  Bellamy. 

8  Hot  and  personal. 

9  Harvard,  1721,  pastor  First  Church,  Boston.  See  pp.  106-113  for  a  strong  presentation  of  a 
theory  essentially  Stoddardean. 

10  Harvard,  1730,  pastor  Halifax,  Mass.,  but  ill  health  had  compelled  retirement.  Was  now 
a  member  of  the  First  Church,  Plymouth,  and  the  holder  of  civil  offices  (county  treasurer,  etc.).  He 
strenuously  resisted  Robbins's  attempt  to  induce  the  Plymouth  church  to  abandon  the  Half-Way 
practice. 

11  Yale,  1732,  pastor  Saybrook,  Conn.     Stoddardean. 

12  A  general  reply  to  Bellamy  and  defence  of  the  Stoddardean  view.  Mather  is  said  to  have 
adopted  Edwards's  view  late  in  life.     F.  B.  Dexter,  Yale  Graduates,  p.  628. 


244  THE    HALF- WAV    COVENANT 

Importance  of  Christian  Baptism  and  Discipline,  In  way  of  a  Dialogue  Between  a 
Minister  and  his  Neighbour}  Hartford,  1778,  Boston,  1792;  42.  Joseph  Lathrop, 
A  Church  of  God  described,  the  Qualifications  for  Membership  stated,  and  Christian 
Fellowship  illustrated,  in  two  Discourses}  Hartford,  1792  ;  43.  Moses  Hemmen- 
way ',  A  Discourse  concerning  the  Church,  in  which  .  .  .  a  Right  of  Admission 
and  Access  to  Special  Ordinances,  in  their  Outward  Administrations  and  Inward 
Efficacy,  [is]  Stated  and  Discussed}  Boston,  1792;  44.  M.  Hemmenway,  Remarks 
on  Rev.  Mr.  Emmons'  Dissertation,  Boston,  1794,  [Reply  to  No.  19]. 

THE  main  purpose  of  the  Massachusetts  General  Court  in  call- 
ing the  Synod  to  meet  at  Cambridge  in  1646  had  been  the 
settlement  of  the  questions  agitating  the  colonies  as  to  baptism 
and  church-membership.4  The  predominance  of  Presbyterianism 
at  the  time  in  England,  and  the  machinations  of  those  in  New. 
England  who  hoped  by  Presbyterian  aid  to  overthrow  the  colonial 
churches  and  state,  made  these  questions  peculiarly  pressing.  But 
the  cloud  rolled  away  almost  as  quickly  as  it  had  arisen,  and  as  the 
questions  proposed  by  the  Court  encountered  diversities  of  view 
among  the  representatives  of  the  Congregational  Churches  assembled 
at  Cambridge,6  the  more  generally  accepted  features  of  the  Congre- 
gational system  were  embodied  in  the  Platform,  and  the  vexed 
points  regarding  baptism,  no  longer  pressing  for  immediate  solu- 
tion, were  passed  over  in  rather  ambiguous  phrases.  This  treat- 
ment of  the  subject  was  comparatively  easy  in  1648  because  the 
opposition  to  the  prevalent  system  had  been  largely  championed 
by  a  defeated  political  party;  but  had  the  Cambridge  Synod  been 
pressed  to  a  vote,  the  probability  is  that  it  would  have  substantially 
anticipated  the  decisions  of  1662.  The  question  was  really  far 
more  religious  than  political.  It  was  one  sure  to  arise  in  the  state 
of  New  England  society.  And  as  the  leaders  of  the  first  genera- 
tion passed  rapidly  away,  soon  after  the  close  of  the  Cambridge 


1  Vale,  1755,  pastor  Tolland,  Conn.  Favors  the  Half-Way  Covenant.  The  first  edition  bears 
the  endorsements  of  Rev.  Eliphalet  Williams,  East  Hartford,  Conn.;  Rev.  John  Willard,  Stafford, 
Conn.;  Rev.  Elizur  Goodrich,  Durham,  Conn.;  and  Rev.  Joseph  Lathrop,  West  Springfield,  Mass. 
The  second  edition  has,  in  addition,  Pres.  Joseph  Willard  of  Harvard  ;  and  Rev.  Moses  Hemmen- 
way of  Wells,  Me. 

2  Vale,  1754,  pastor  West  Springfield,  Mass.  An  able  defence  of  Stoddardeanism.  In  1793 
Lathrop  was  offered  the  professorship  of  Divinity  in  Vale  College;  see  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc.  Papers, 
IV:  269. 

3  Harvard,  1755,  pastor  Wells,  Me.  Dislikes  the  name  Half-Way  Covenant;  but  strongly 
favors  the  system  and  inclines  toward  Stoddardeanism. 

4  See  ante,  pp.  168-171.  6  Ibid.,  p.  1S1. 


A    RELIGIOUS    QUESTION  245 

Synod,  and  the  children  of  the  emigrants  grew  to  manhood  and 
womanhood,  the  problem  of  baptism  became  every  day  more  press- 
ing as  a  question  vitally  affecting  the  churches  themselves,  what- 
ever intermixture  of  political  aspirations  in  regard  to  the  franchise 
or  taxation  may  have  modified  the  discussions  of  1645-8.  The 
political  element,  slight  at  all  times  in  comparison  with  the  relig- 
ious motive  in  the  controversy,  practically  dropped  out  of  sight 
after  the  defeat  of  Child  and  his  associates.  The  second  stage  of 
the  controversy  on  which  we  now  enter  was  purely  ecclesiastical. 
It  was  now  solely  as  a  problem  of  church  polity  that  the  position 
of  the  baptized  but  not  regenerate  members  of  the  community 
was  discussed.1 

The  original  settlers  of  New  England  were  men  of  tried  relig- 
ious experience.  Most  of  those  who  occupied  positions  of  promi- 
nence in  the  community  could  give  a  reason  for  the  faith  that  was 
in  them.  They  had  been  sifted  out  of  the  mass  of  the  Puritans  of 
England.  The  struggles  through  which  they  had  gone,  the  type 
of  piety  which  they  had  heard  inculcated,  and  their  efforts  to  over- 
come the  spiritual  inertia  of  the  English  Establishment,  engendered 
prevailingly  a  deep,  emotional,  introspective  faith,  which  looked 
upon  a  conscious  regenerative  work  of  the  spirit  of  God  in  the 
heart  as  essential  to  Christian  hope.  And  as  the  New  England 
fathers  held  strongly  to  the  doctrine  that  the  visible  church  should 
consist  of  none  but  evident  Christians,2  none  were  admitted  to  the 
adult  membership  of  the  churches  who  could  not  relate  some  in- 
stance of  the  transforming  operation  of  God  in  their  own  lives. 
The  peculiar  experience  of  the  Puritans  made  the  test  a  natural 
one  for  the  first  generation  of  New  England  settlers,  and  the  pre- 
ponderating weight  of  opinion  in  the  community  viewed  those  who 
could  not  meet  it  as  unfit  for  a  share  in  the  ordinances  of  the  Gos- 
pel.3 This  view  involved  a  radical  departure  from  the  practice  of 
the  English  Establishment;  but  the  early  Congregationalists  clung 


1  See  the  forcible  assertion  of  the  non-political  character  of  this  discussion  in  D.  T.  Fiske, 
Discourse,  in  Cont.  Secies.  Hist.  Essex  Co.,  Mass.,  Boston,  1865,  pp.  271,  272. 

2  See  Mather,-  Church-Government,  pp.  8,  9  (Answer  to  No.  2  of  XXXII  Quest.);  Hooker, 
ante,  p.  143,  etc. 

3  See  e.  g.  Lechford,  Plain  Dealing,  Trumbull's  reprint,  p.  29. 


246  THE    HALF-WAV    COVENANT 

to  a  regenerate  membership  as  an  absolute  essential  to  the  prop- 
erly constituted  church. 

But  there  was  one  exception  to  this  rule  that  none  were  ac- 
counted of  the  church  save  those  who  could  claim  a  definite 
religious  experience  and  who  had  taken  covenant  pledges  to 
each  other  and  to  God.  The  constitutive  element  in  the  church 
was  the  covenant,  and  this  covenant,  like  that  made  with  the  house 
of  Israel  by  God,  was  held  to  include  not  only  the  covenanting 
adult  but  his  children.1  Hence,  from  the  first,  the  fathers  of  New 
England  insisted  that  the  children  of  church  members  were  them- 
selves members,  or  in  the  covenant,  and  as  such  were  justly  en- 
titled to  those  church  privileges  which  were  adapted  to  their  state 
of  Christian  development,  of  which  the  chief  were  baptism  and  the 
watchful  discipline  of  the  church.2  They  did  not  enter  the  church 
by  baptism;  they  were  entitled  to  baptism  because  they  were  al- 
ready members  of  the  church.3  Here  then  was  an  inconsistency 
in  the  application  of  the  Congregational  theory  of  the  constitution 
of  a  church.  While  affirming  that  a  proper  church  consisted  only 
of  those  possessed  of  personal  Christian  character,  the  fathers  ad- 
mitted to  membership,  in  some  degree  at  least,  those  who  had  no 
claim  but  Christian  parentage.  They  sought  to  avoid  the  incon- 
venience  of  this  duality  of  entrance  by  insisting  that  none  who 


1  Cotton  affirmed :  "  The  same  Covenant  which  God  made  with  the  Xationall  Church  of 
Israel  and  their  Seed,  It  is  the  very  same  (for  substance)  and  none  other  which  the  Lord  maketh 
with  any  Congregationall Church  and  our  Seed."  Certain  Queries  Tending  to  Accommodation 
.     .     .     of  Presbyterian  i~  Congregationall  Churches,  London,  1654,  p.  13. 

2  Morton  recorded,  under  date  of  1620  :  "  The  two  ministers  [Skelton  and  Higginson  at  Salem] 
.  .  .  considered  of  the  state  of  their  children,  together  with  their  parents;  concerning  which,  let- 
ters did  pass  between  Mr.  Higginson  and  Mr.  Brewster,  the  reverend  elder  of  the  church  at  Pli- 
mouth,  and  they  did  agree  in  their  judgments,  namely,  concerning  the  church  membership  of  the 
children  with  their  parents."     Memorial!,  ed.  1855,  p.  101. 

Mather  in  Church-Government  (Answer  to  5  &  6  of  the  XXXII  Questions),  pp.  20,  21,  said: 
"  Infants  with  us  are  Admitted  Members  in  and  with  their  Parents,  so  as  to  be  Admitted  to  all 
Church  priviledges  of  which  Infants  are  capable,  as  namely  to  Baptisme."  "They  [the  baptized 
children  of  the  church]  are  also  under  Church-watch,  &  consequently  subject,  to  the  reprehensions, 
admonitions,  A:  censures  therof,  for  their  healing  and  amendment,  as  need  shall  require."  Cam//. 
Plat/orm.     See  ante,  p.  224. 

'  "  The  nature  and  use  of  Baptisme  is  to  be  a  seale  to  confirme  the  Covenant  of  Grace  be- 
tween God  and  his  Church,  and  the  Members  thereof,  as  circumcision  also  was,  Rom.  4.  11.  Now 
a  seale  is  not  to  make  a  thing  that  was  not,  but  to  confirme  something  that  was  before  ;  and  so 
Baptisme  is  not  that  which  gives  being  to  the  Church,  nor  to  the  Covenant,  but  is  for  confirma- 
tion thereof."  ..."  Children  that  are  borne  when  their  Parents  are  Church  Members,  are  in 
Covenant  with  God  even  from  their  birth.  Gen.  17.  7.  12.  and  their  Baptisme  did  seale  it  to  them." 
Mather,  Church-Government  (Ans.  to  4,  5,  <Sl  6  of  XXXII  Quest),  pp.  12,  20,  21. 


WHY   A   PRESSING    QUESTION  247 

came  into  the  church  by  birth  ought  to  go  on  to  the  great  privi- 
lege of  adult  years,  the  Lord's  Supper,  without  a  profession  of  per- 
sonal regeneration.1  But  the  difficulties  of  the  situation  were  not 
apparent  in  any  marked  degree  till  the  children  of  the  first  settlers 
came  to  maturity.2  Then,  in  addition  to  the  two  great  divisions 
of  early  days,  —  the  consciously  regenerate  and  those  who  laid  no 
claim  to  Christian  character, —  there  arose  a  third  class  of  the 
population,  and  one  ever  since  familiarly  known  in  every  New 
England  town,  —  a  class  of  men  and  women  whose  parents  had 
been  actively  Christian,  who  had  themselves  been  baptized  and 
educated  in  the  Christian  faith,  were  well  grounded  in  the  knowl- 
edge of  Christian  truth,  were  students  of  the  Bible  and  interested 
listeners  in  the  sanctuary,  who  were  desirous  of  bringing  up  their 
families  in  the  way  in  which  they  themselves  had  been  trained,  and 
who  were  moral  and  earnest  in  their  lives;  yet  could  lay  claim  to 
no  such  experience  as  that  which  their  parents  had  called  a  change 
of  heart,  and  when  asked  as  to  any  conscious  work  of  God  in  their 
souls  were  compelled  to  admit  that  they  could  speak  with  confi- 
dence of  none.  It  was  the  rise  of  this  class  that  thrust  the  Half- 
Way  Covenant  problem  upon  the  New  England  churches. 

Three  courses  of  treatment  were  open  to  the  churches  in  deal- 
ing with  these  persons,  —  each  course  liable  to  serious  objections. 
They  might  have  been  admitted  to  all  the  privileges  of  commun- 
ion; and  a  few  in  New  England,  whose  inclination  toward  the 
Presbyterian  or  Episcopal  customs  of  the  old  country  was  strong, 
leaned  even  at  an  early  period  toward  the  admission  to  the  Lord's 
Supper  of  all  who  were  intellectually  familiar  with  the  truths  of 
the  Gospel  and  of  exemplary  moral  life.8  But  this  position  met 
with  no  general  advocacy  even  among  the  class  whom  it  would  be 

1  "  But  notwithstanding  their  Birthright,  we  conceive  there  is  a  necessity  of  their  personall 
profession  of  Faith,  and  taking  hold  of  Church-Covenant  when  they  come  to  yeares  ...  for 
without  this  it  cannot  so  well  be  discerned;  what  fitnesse  is  in  them  for  the  Lords  Table."  Ibid., 
p.  21. 

2  Compare  Preface  to  the  Propositions  of  1662,  p.  xiii,  on  a  later  page. 

3  This  was  the  view  of  Child  and  his  fellow  petitioners  in  1646.  See  ante,  p.  165.  At  an 
earlier  time,  1641-2,  Lechford  recorded:  "Of  late  some  Churches  are  of  opinion,  that  any  may  be 
admitted  to  Church-fellowship,  that  are  not  extremely  ignorant  or  scandalous:  but  this  they  are 
not  very  forward  to  practice,  except  at  Newberry."  Plain  Dealing,  pp.  21.  22,  Trumbull's  re- 
print, p.  56. 


248  THE   HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

supposed  most  to  benefit.  It  was  too  positive  an  abandonment  of 
the  principle  that  the  church  should  consist  only  of  visible  saints 
to  be  acceptable  to  those  who  had  been  trained  by  the  fathers  of 
New  England.  Yet,  though  advocated  by  but  few,  the  fear  that 
such  a  lowering  of  the  terms  of  communion  would  take  place  did 
much  to  secure  the  acceptance  of  the  Half- Way  Covenant  as  the 
lesser  of  two  evils.1 

A  second  way  of  disposing  of  the  problem  would  have  been  to 
have  denied  to  this  class  any  right  to  church  membership  or 
church  privileges.  But  this  method  of  dealing  was  open  to  grave 
objections,  both  theoretic  and  practical.  The  class  thus  cut  off 
from  the  churches  would  be  large,  it  would  leave  the  membership 
of  the  churches  in  a  minority,  it  would  give  substance  to  the  criti- 
cisms freely  offered  by  the  Puritan  party  in  England  that  too  large 
a  portion  of  the  inhabitants  of  New  England  were  outside  the 
churches  as  it  was.2  But  more  serious  was  the  objection  that  all 
Xew  England  authorities  had  held  these  men  and  women  to  be  by 
birth  church-members,  and  the  Congregational  system  of  the  day 
knew  no  way  out  of  church  covenant  save  death,  dismission  to 
another  covenant  fold,  personal  withdrawal  from  a  church  in  evi- 
dent error,  or  excommunication.  And  how  was  this  class  to  be 
excommunicated  when  they  had,  in  general,  tried  to  live  upright 
and  godly  lives,  and  the  only  charge  against  them  was  a  want  of  a 
regenerative  change  which  none  but  God  could  effect?  The  prin- 
ciple that  men  could  enter  a  Congregational  church  by  birth  as 
well  as  by  profession  once  admitted,  the  membership  of  these  per- 
sons was  indubitable;  and  if  members,  why  could  they  not  enjoy 
and  transmit  the  privileges  of  the  church  to  their  offspring,  at 
least  in  so  far  as  they  themselves  had  received  them?  If  church 
membership  was  a  hereditary  matter,  what  authority  was  there  for 
limiting  its  descent  to  a  single  generation?     Then,  too,  there  was 


1  Compare  Mitchell,  A  Defence  0/ the  Answer  [of  1662]  .  .  .  Against  the  Reply  made 
thereto  by  .  .  .  J.  Davenport  .  .  .  together  with  an  Answer  to  the  Apologetical  Pre- 
face set  before  that  Essay,  Cambridge,  1664,  p.  45  (Mitchell's  reply  to  Increase  Mather).  See  also 
Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  II  :  309,  310. 

Quest.  1  of  the  XXXII  Quest.     Church-Government,?.  1.     Lechford,  Plain  Dealing,, 
p.  73,  Trumbull's  reprint,  pp.  150-152. 


DIFFICULTIES    OF    A    SOLUTION  249 

a  well-grounded  fear  on  the  part  of  many  of  the  best  men  in  New 
England  that  if  the  membership  of  the  children  of  the  church  was 
denied,  no  basis  would  be  left  on  which  they  could  be  held  amena- 
ble to  church  discipline,  and  discipline  was  greatly  valued  by  early 
Congregationalists  as  a  means  of  Christian  training.  To  deprive  a 
large  class  in  the  community  of  its  benefits  seemed  like  giving 
them  up  to  heathenism.  Probably  a  dread  of  the  prevalence  of 
Baptist  views,  limiting  baptism  to  adult  believers,  had  also  some- 
thing to  do  with  the  reluctance  of  the  New  England  pastors  to 
confine  the  rite  to  the  children  of  visible  saints.1 

The  objections  to  each  of  these  two  methods  of  dealing  with 
the  problem  were  so  great  that  the  New  England  churches  at 
length  settled  down  on  what  was  practically  a  compromise.  The 
standing  of  the  unregenerate  members  in  the  church  was  held  to 
entitle  them  to  transmit  church  membership  and  baptism  to  their 
offspring;  but  their  non-regenerate  character  made  it  impossible 
that  they  should  become  partakers  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  Mem- 
bers of  the  church  they  were,  but  not  in  "full  communion."  At 
the  same  time,  so  solemn  was  the  privilege  of  baptism  believed  to 
be,  that  none  of  the  non-regenerate  members  of  the  church  could 
claim  it  for  their  children  without  assenting  to  the  main  truths  of 
the  Gospel  scheme  and  promising  fidelity  and  submission  to  the 
discipline  of  the  church  of  which  they  were  members;  in  the  phrase 
of  the  time,  "owning  the  covenant."  This  was  the  result  reached 
by  the  Ministerial  Convention  of  1657  and  the  Synod  of  1662.  It. 
gave  standing  in  the  church  for  the  class  of  moral  but  not  regen- 
erate people,  it  kept  them  under  the  influence  of  Christian  obliga- 
tion and  discipline,  it  required  from  them  the  evidence  of  an 
intelligent  comprehension  of  religious  truth,  and  a  public  profes- 
sion of  willingness  to  guide  their  lives  by  Gospel  principles  and 
bring  up  their  children  in  the  fear  of  God.  But  it  demanded  no 
personal  sense  of  a  change  of  heart.  It  was  an  iiiogical  and  incon- 
sistent   position ;    and    as    such    could    not    long   be    maintained. 

'John  Allin  of  Dedham,  in  his  Animadversions  ufion  the  Antisynodalia  Americana, 
Cambridge,  1664,  preface  p.  [ii],  says:  "We  see  evidently,  that  the  Principles  of  our  Dissenting 
Brethren  give  great  Advantages  to  the  Anti/>a-do/>a/>tists,  vyhich  if  we  be  silent,  will  tend  much  to 
their  Encouragement  and  Encrease,  to  the  Hazard  of  our  Churches." 


250  THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

Greatly  modified  early  in  the  eighteenth  century,  it  was  wholly 
abandoned  in  the  nineteenth.  Its  effects  were  on  the  whole  evil, 
not  so  much  from  what  it  encouraged  worldly  men  to  do,  as  from 
its  tendency  to  satisfy  those  who  might  have  come  out  into  full 
Christian  experience  with  an  intellectual  faith  and  partial  Christian 
privileges.  It  made  a  half-way  house  between  the  world  and  full 
Christian  discipleship,  where  there  should  be  none,  and  hence  de- 
served the  nickname  given  by  its  opponents,  the  Half-Way  Cove- 
nant. It  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  it  would  have  been  better 
for  the  New  England  churches  had  they  either  received  all  repu- 
table persons  to  baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  or  rejected  all 
from  any  membership  in  the  church  who  could  not  give  evidence 
of  personal  Christian  character.1  But  the  twofold  theory  of  en- 
trance into  the  church  prevented  the  adoption  of  either  method  of 
dealing  with  the  second  generation  on  New  England  soil,  and  that 
inconsistent  theory  was  the  real  source  of  the  Half-Way  Covenant. 

The  position  formulated  in  1657  and  1662  was  reached  only 
after  a  long  discussion  and  by  a  gradual  development  of  public 
thought.  It  was  no  part  of  the  plan  of  the  founders  of  New  Eng- 
land at  their  coming.  The  class  which  was  to  make  it  seem  need- 
ful was  yet  in  childhood.  Leading  theologians,  like  Hooker, 
Cotton,  Davenport,  and  Richard  Mather,  asserted  that  none  but 
children  of  "  visible  saints  "  should  be  baptized,2  and  while  they 
declared  at  the  same  time  that  the  children  of  such  saints  were 
church  members,  the  consequences  of  such  membership  by  birth 
had  not  become  apparent. 

But  it  was  not  long  before  cases  arose  in  which  this  strictness 
seemed  to  involve  undue  severity.  In  1634  a  godly  grandfather, 
a  member  apparently  of  the  Dorchester  church,  whose  son  or 
daughter  could  claim  no  regenerative  work  of  Cod,  desired  bap- 
tism for  his  grandchild,  since  baptism  was  the  outward  witness  to 


■  See  the  remarks  of  Leonard  Bacon,  Discourse,  in  Cont.  Ecclcs.  Hist.  Conn.,  New  Haven, 
1S61,  pp.  20-22  ;  and  D.  T.  Fiske,  Cont.  Ecclcs.  Hist.  Essex  Co.,  Mass.,  Boston,  1865,  pp.  279,  280. 

-  For  Hooker's  views  see  e.  g.  Survey,  Pt.  3,  pp.  9-27  ;  Cotton,  Way  0/  the  Churches,  p.  81 : 
"Infants  cannot  claime  right  unto  Baptisme,  but  in  the  right  of  one  of  their  parents,  or  both: 
where  neither  of  the  Parents  can  claime  right  to  the  Lords  Supper,  there  their  infants  cannot 
claime  right  to  Baptisme."  Davenport,  Answer  of the  Elders  .  .  .  unto  Nine  Positions,??, 
61-71.     R.  Mather,  Church-Government  (Ans.  to  5-7  of  XXXII  Quest.),  pp.  20-23. 


BAPTISM    OF    GRANDCHILDREN  25  I 

that  interest  in  the  covenant  which  children  of  visible  saints  were 

held  to  possess  by  birth.     The  advice  of  the  Boston  church  was 

sought,  and  there  the  matter  was  publicly  debated,  with  a  result 

favorable  to  the  grandfather's  request.     The  teacher,  Cotton,  and 

the  two  ruling  elders,  Oliver  and  Leverett,  wrote  tc  the  Dorchester 

church  as  follows: ' 

"  Though  the  Child  be  unclean  where  both  the  Parents  are  Pagans  and  Infidels, 
yet  we  may  not  account  site//  Parents  for  Pagans  and  Infidels,  who  are  themselves 
baptized,  and  profess  their  belief  of  the  Fundimental  Articles  of  the  Christian 
Faith,  and  live  without  notorious  Scandalous  Crime,  though  they  give  not  clear  evi- 
dence of  their  regenerate  estate,  nor  are  convinced  of  the  necessity  of  Church  Cove- 
nant. .  .  .  We  do  therefore  profess  it  to  be  the  judgement  of  our  [Boston] 
Church  .  .  .  that  the  Grand-Father  a  member  of  the  Church,  may  claim  the 
privilege  of  Baptisiue  to  his  Grand-Child,  though  his  next  Seed  the  Parents  of  the 
Child  be  not  received  themselves  into  Church  Covenant."  ■ 

This  was  indeed  a  modification  of  the  original  New  England 

theory,  and  was  disapproved  in  principle  by  Hooker  and  Richard 

Mather3  within  the  next  few  years.     But  it  will  cause  no  surprise 

to  learn  that,  holding  such  views  in  1634,  Cotton  felt  able,  before 

his  death  in  1652,  to  say  of  the  offspring  of  church  members:4 

"Though  they  be  not  fit  to  make  such  profession  of  visible  faith,  as  to  admit 
them  to  the  Lords  Table,  yet  they  may  make  profession  full  enough  to  receive  them 
to  Baptisme,  or  to  the  same  estate  Ishmael  stood  in  after  Circumcision." 

The  same  feeling  of  the  necessity  of  an  enlargement  of  the 
terms  of  baptism  which  characterized  Cotton  was  soon  shared  by 
other  New  England  ministers.  By  1642,  Thomas  Allen  of  Charles- 
town  argued  in  favor  of  the  extension  of  the  rite  to  the  children 
of  godly  parents  not  yet  gathered  into  church  fellowship.5  Within 
a  year  or  two  thereafter  George  Phillips  of  Watertown  expressed 
in  the  most  positive  language  the  abiding  church  membership  not 
only  of  the  immediate  offspring  of  visible  saints,  but  of  all  de- 


1  The  letter,  dated  Dec.  16,  1634,  is  preserved  in  Increase  Mather's  First  Principles  0/  New 
England,  Cambridge,  1675,  pp.  2-4.  The  absence  of  the  signature  of  the  Boston  pastor,  Wilson,  is 
explained  by  his  presence  at  the  time  in  England. 

a  Ibid.,  pp.  3,  4.  The  permission  was  coupled  with  the  conditions  that  the  grandfather  un- 
dertake the  education  of  the  child,  and  that  the  parents  make  this  no  occasion  for  neglect. 

3  See  p.  250,  note  2. 

4  First  Principles,  p.  6.  The  letter  is  without  date.  Other  examples  of  Cotton's  views  will 
be  found  in  the  preface  to  the  Propositions  of  1662,  on  a  later  page. 

5  Teacher  at  Charlestown  1639-1651.  The  passage  is  found  in  a  letter  to  Cotton  quoted  in 
Felt,  Eccles.  Hist.  N.  £.,  1 :  480. 


25^  THE    HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

scended  from  them;  and  though  he  does  not  speak  in  the  passage 
of  their  claim  to  baptism,  his  words  leave  little  doubt  as  to  what 
his  attitude  would  have  been.'  In  1645  Richard  Mather  of  Dor- 
chester wrote  as  follows.2  replying  to  the  question: 

"  When  those  that  were  baptized  in  Infancy  by  the  Covenant  of  their  Parents 
being  come  to  Age,  are  not  yet  found  fit  to  be  received  to  the  Lords  Table,  although 
they  be  married  and  have  Children,  whether  are  those  their  Children  to  be  baptized 
or  no;  " — "  I  propound  to  Consideration  this  Reason  for  the  Affirmative,  viz.  That 
the  Children  of  such  Parents  ought  to  be  baptized  :  the  Reason  is,  the  Parents  as 
they  were  born  in  the  Covenant,  so  they  still  continue  therein,  being  neither  cast  out, 
nor  deserving  so  to  be,  and  if  so,  why  should  not  their  Children  be  baptized,  for  if 
the  Parents  be  in  Covenant,  are  not  the  Children  so  likewise?  .  .  .  If  it  be  said  the 
Parents  are  not  Confirmed  members,  nor  have  yet  been  found  fit  for  the  Lords  Table, 
1  conceive  this  needs  not  to  hinder  their  Infants  from  Baptisme  so  long  as  they, 
I  mean  the  Parents  do  neither  renounce  the  Covenant,  nor  doth  the  Church  see  just 
Cause  to  Cast  them  out  from  the  same." 

In  view  of  the  declarations  just  cited,  it  is  no  wonder  that  the 
Massachusetts  General  Court,  in  its  call  for  the  Synod  of  1646-8, 
was  moved  to  say  that  in  regard  to  "baptisme,  &  ye  p'sons  to  be 
received  thereto,"  "ye  apphensions  of  many  p'sons  in  ye  country 
are  knowne  not  a  little  to  differ;"  and  that,  though  the  majority 
of  churches  baptized  only  the  offspring  of  visible  saints,  there 
were  some  who  were  much  inclined  to  extend  the  application  of 
the  rite  "as  thinking  more  liberty  and  latitude  in  this  point  ought 
to  be  yielded  then  hath  hitherto  bene  done."3 

These   views  were   by  no  means   confined   to   Massachusetts. 

Henry  Smith  of   Wethersfield,   Conn.,  wrote    to  Richard   Mather, 

under  date  of  August  23,  1647:4 

"We  are  at  a  Loss  in  our  parts  about  members  Children,  being  received  into 
Communion,  because  it  is  undetermined,  in  the  extent  of  it,  at  the  Synod,'  our 
thoughts  lure  are  that  the  promise  made  to  the  Seed  of  Confederates,  Gen.  17, 
takes   in  all   Children  of  Confederating  Parents." 

Samuel   Stone,  the  teacher  of  the   Hartford  church,  sympa- 


1  Pastor  at  Watertown  1630  to  his  death,  July,  1644.  His  views  are  expressed  in  A  Reply  to 
a  Confutation  of  some  Grounds  for  Infant  Baptism  ;  as  a/so,  Concerning  the  form  of  a  Church, 
put  forth  ,<■•,>;  nst  me  by  one  T.  Lamb,  London,  1643.  Quotations  were  made  in  the  Preface  In 
the  Propositions  of  1662,  p.  x.     See  later  page  of  this  work. 

:  Ina  manuscript  entitled  A  plea  for  the  Churches  of  Christ  in  New-England,  quoted  b- 
Increase  Mather,  First  Principles,  pp.  10,  11. 

3  For  the  whole  of  this  valuable  statement,  see  ante,  pp.  168-171. 

*  Pastor  at  Wethersfield  1641-1648.     His  letter  is  in  I.  Mather,  First  Principles,  p.  24. 

5  The  Cambridge  Synod  was  still  in  being,  having  just  adjourned  for  the  second  time. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF  HALF-WAY   VIEWS  253 

thized    with    his    Wethersfield    neighbor,1    and    John    Warham    of 
Windsor,  was  of  the  same  mind.2 

Nor  was  Plymouth  colony  without  its  share  of  advocates  for 
the  larger  practice.  Ralph  Partridge  of  Duxbury,  one  of  the 
three  ministers  appointed  to  draw  up  a  platform  for  the  consider- 
ation of  the  Cambridge  Synod,3  inserted  the  following  statement 
in  the  form  which  he  laid  before  that  body  in  1648: 4 

"The  persons  unto  whom  the  Sacrament  of  Baptisme  is  dispensed  (and  as  we 
conceive  ought  to  be)  are  such  as  being  of  years,  and  converted  from  their  Sins  to  the 
Faith  of  Jesus  Christ,  do  joyn  in  Communion  and  Fellowship  with  a  particular  visi- 
ble Church,  as  also  the  children  of  such  Parents  or  Parent,  as  having  laid  hold  of  the 
Covenant  of  grace  (in  the  judgement  of  Charity)  are  in  a  visible  Covenant,  with  his 
Church  and  all  their  Seed  after  them  that  cast  not  off  the  Covenant  of  God  by  some 
Scandalous  and  obstinate  going  on  in  Sin." 

A  similar  position  was  advocated  by  Richard  Mather  in  the 
form  of  the  Platform  presented  by  him.6  These  views  were  cham- 
pioned in  the  Synod  by  some  influential  members,  and  had  the 
support  of  a  majority;  but  were  omitted  from  the  final  draft  of 
the  Platform  owing  to  the  opposition  of  a  few  led,  it  would  seem, 
by  Rev.  Charles  Chauncy.6 

It  must  have  been  plain  by  1650  in  what  direction  the  tide  was 
running,  and  it  could  not  be  long  before  some  church  would  begin 
to  practice  what  so  many  eminent  divines  approved.  Commenda- 
tions of  the  larger  view  continued.  The  saintly  Thomas  Shepard 
of  Cambridge  declared  himself  in  its  favor  just  before  his  death 
in  1 649/     By  that  time,  Cotton  was  willing  even  to  baptize  adopt- 


>  Letter  to  R.  Mather,  June  6,  1650,  First  Principles,  p.  9,  in  which  he  affirms  "  that 
Children  of  Church  members  have  right  to  Church  membership  by  virtue  of  their  Fathers 
Covenant  ....  Hence,  1.  If  they  be  presented  to  a  Church,  and  Claim  their  Interest,  they 
cannot  be  denyed,"  and  speaks  as  if  he  had  long  been  of  this  mind. 

2  Ibid.,  Warham  changed  his  mind  later  on  this  question.  As  early  as  1630,  he  told  Fuller 
of  Plymouth,  that  the  visible  "church  may  consist  of  a  mixed  people,  godly  and  openly  un- 
godly." He  favored  the  Half-Way  Covenant,  and  introduced  its  use  into  his  own  church  in  Jan- 
uary, 1658.  In  March,  1665,  he  announced  that  he  had  been  convinced  that  he  was  in  error,  and 
the  practice  was  abandoned  by  the  church  till  1668.  See  /  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  III  :  74  ; 
Walker,  Hist.   First  Ch.,  Hartford,  pp.  189,  190. 

3  Seeante,  p.  175. 

4  First  Principles,  p.  23. 

6  See  ante,  p.  224,  for  Mather's  own  words. 

9  See  ante,  p.  181,  and  Preface  to  Propositions  of  1662,  p.  xii  post.  Cotton  Mather  says 
that  John  Norton  was  one  of  the  supporters  of  the  larger  view  in  the  Synod,  but  "  the  fierce  oppo- 
sitions of  one  eminent  person  caused  him  that  was  of  a  peaceable  temper  to  forbear  urging  them 
any  further."     Magnalia,  ed.  1833-5,  I  :  29'- 

'  Preface  to  Propositions  of  1662,  on  later  page;  First  Principles,  p.  22. 


254  T11E   HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

ed  children  of  church  members,  provided  their  parents  had  been 
religiously  inclined,  and  John  Eliot1  and  probably  Richard  Mather 
were  of  the  same  opinion.5  The  year  1650  saw  Samuel  Stone  of 
Hartford  fully  committed  to  the  Half- Way  Covenant  theory, 
anxious  to  have  a  new  Synod  called  which  might  introduce  uni- 
formity of  practice,  and  confident  that,  unless  some  such  meeting 
was  held  that  very  year  and  reason  to  the  contrary  given,  the  Con- 
necticut churches  would  begin  the  use  of  the  new  system.3  In 
165 1,  Peter  Prudden  of  Milford,  second  only  to  Davenport  in 
ability  among  the  ministers  of  New  Haven  colony,  declared  in 
a  letter  of  peculiar  force  of  argument  his  hearty  support  of  the 
Half-Way  Covenant  position.4  Thus,  more  than  ten  years  before 
the  Synod  of  1662,  there  were  warm  advocates  of  the  larger  ap- 
plication of  baptism  among  the  chief  religious  leaders  of  each  of 
the  Xew  England  colonies,  and  the  affirmation  is  within  the 
bounds  of  probability  that  even  then  the  weight  of  opinion  among 
ministers  in  every  colony,  with  the  possible  exception  of  New 
Haven,  was  on  that  side.  But  while  this  was  true  of  the  elders 
of  the  churches  as  a  body,  there  was  a  considerable  degree  of  op- 
position to  the  new  theories  among  the  brethren  of  the  churches. 
Just  how  much  it  is  impossible  to  say,  but  there  is  reason  to 
believe  that  the  pastors  were  more  ready  to  welcome  the  larger 
practice  than  the  churches.5  The  ministers  were,  on  the  whole, 
keenly  alive  to  the  danger  of  losing  hold  of  a  large  class  of  the 
population;  their  pastoral  labors  lent  weight  to  those  practical 
arguments  which  had  much  to  do  in  convincing  men  of  the  de- 
sirability of  the  Half-Way  Covenant;  while  in  almost  every  church 
enough  sticklers  for  the  old  ways  would  be  found  to  make  any- 
thing like  unanimous  action  difficult  to  obtain  in  abandoning  what 


the  Indians,  teacher  of  the  Roxbury  church. 
-  First  Principles,  pp.  5.  6. 
3  Ibid.,  p.  9.     Letter  of  June  6,  1650. 

to  Propositions  of  1662,  pp.  xi,  .\ii,  on  later  page  of  this  work  ;  a  selection  is  given  in 
First  Principles,  pp.  25,  26. 

Mather,  Magnolia,  ed.  1853-5,  II :  311,  312.  says,  speaking  of  the  state  of  affairs 
.  gradual  was  the  procedure  of  the  churches  to  exercise  that  church-care  of  their 
children,  which  the  synodical  propositions  had  recommended  ;  for,  though  the  pastors  were  generally 
principled  for  it,  yet,  in  very  many  of  the  churches,  a  number  of  brethren  were  so  stiffly  and  fiercely 
set  the  other  way,  that  the  pastors  did  forbear  to  extend  their  practice  unto  the  length  of  their 
judgment."     This  must  have  been  as  true  of  the  decade  before  1662. 


ATTITUDE    OF    THE    CHURCHES  255 

some  deemed  the  safeguards  of  church  purity.  This  fact  accounts 
for  the  slowness  with  which  the  Half-Way  Covenant  practice  was 
introduced  into  the  churches,  long  after  it  had  been  largely  ac- 
cepted by  the  ministers. 

In  what  church  the  agitation  of  this  question  as  a  practical 
issue  was  first  commenced  is  hard  to  say.  Certainly  the  matter 
was  under  discussion  at  Salem  in  1652,  and  by  1654,  if  not  earlier, 
had  resulted  in  the  acceptance  of  Half-Way  Covenant  principles. 
But  though  this  adhesion  to  the  new  views  was  reaffirmed  in  1661, 
the  opposition  of  a  few  prevented  the  actual  administration  of 
baptism  there  till  July,  1665. '  The  church  in  Dorchester,  of  which 
that  earnest  advocate  of  the  new  methods,  Richard  Mather,  was 
pastor,  discussed  the  question  in  the  opening  weeks  of  1655,  and 
with  the  result  that:2 

"it  came  to  vote  &  by  divers  was  voted  y' they  were  members  &  that  haveinge 
children  they  should  have  ym  baptized  if  yD1selves  did  take  hold  of  their  ffathers 
Covenant  (but  w'  that  takeing  hold  of  Covenant  is,  was  not  Clerely  agreed  upon) 
albeit  y"'selves  beinge  examinyed  were  ffound  neither  ffit  ffor  the  Lords  table  nor 
voteing  in  the  Church  but  this  &  other  thinges  seemed  strange  and  unsaffe  unto 
Divers  in  Conclusio  soe  it  was  4  Lres  were  sent  to  the  churches  of  Boston,  Rox- 
bury,  Dedham  &  Braintree  to  intimate  unto  y"1  w1  was  by  us  intended  if  in  the 
space  of  a  month  or  6  weekes  we  did  not  heare  Reasons  from  ym  against  or  y'  it 
would  be  offensive  now  y8  II,  (1)  54s  there  came  3  Lres  one  fro  Boston  Dedham 
&  Roxbury  in  all  wch  after  kind  and  Religious  salutations  we  ffind  .  .  .  Boston 
desires  Rather  our  fforbearance  &  declares  ther  2  votes  upo  w'  we  had  done  Dedham 
sees  not  Light  to  goe  so  farre  as  we  &  Roxbury  though  divers  of  ym  ffeare  it  might 
make  th  .  .  .  4  &  bring  in  time  the  Corruption  of  old  England  wch  we  fried  ffrom 
yet  have  voted  that  they  see  noe  cause  to  diswade  us." 

Thus  dissuaded  on  the  whole,  the  matter  continued  one  of 
debate  for  years  at  Dorchester,5  and  it  was  not  till  January  29, 
1677,  when  Richard   Mather  had  been  more  than  seven  years  in 

1  Church  records  in  White,  N.  E.  Congregationalism,  pp.  49,  50,  60,  61 ;  First  Princi- 
ples, p.  27. 

2  Records  First  Ch.  at  Dorchester,  Boston,  1891,  pp.  164,  165. 

3  I.e.,  March  11,  1655. 

4  Illegible. 

6  See  Dorch,  Records,  pp.  35,  36,  69-75.  An  illustration  of  the  diversity  of  feeling  at  Dor- 
chester is  the  exclamation  of  the  writer  in  the  church  book  :  "  27  7  57  .  .  .  same  daye  Martha 
minott  p'sented  by  her  ffather  —  though  he  was  noe  memb  accordinge  to  our  church  order:  but  a 
Corruptio  Creepinge  in  as  an  harbenger  to  old  england  practice  viz.  to  make  all  members  ;  (wch  god 
prvent  in  mercye."  Ibid.,  p.  168.  It  does  not  appear  that  the  child  was  baptized  till  1665,  after 
her  mother  had  been  admitted  to  full  communion  (p.  i74);  but  one  can  sympathize  with  the  death- 
bed lament  of  Richard  Mather  over  his  ill-success  in  introducing  the  Half-Way  practice. 


256  THE    HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

his  grave,    that   the    Dorchester    church    adopted    the    Half-Way 

practice.1 

But  other  churches  were  meanwhile  debating  the  subject 
also.  A  letter  of  Rev.  Nathaniel  Rogers,  written  from  Ipswich, 
in  January,  1653,  declared  of  his  church:2 

'*  We  are  this  week  to  meet  in  the  Church  about  it,  and  I  know  nothing  but 
we  must  speedily  fall  to  practice.  If  we  in  this  shall  be  Leaders,  I  pray  beg  wis- 
dom from  the  Father  of  Lights." 

But  the  discussions  of  that  week  dragged  on,  and  it  was  not  till 
1656,  when  Thomas  Cobbett  was  preaching  in  Rogers's  room,  that 
the  Ipswich  church  became  in  truth  the  leader  in  the  new  prac- 
tice. Its  vote,  which  would  seem  to  be  the  first  actual  adoption 
of  the  full  system  as  the  rule  of  a  New  England  church,  is  in  part 
as  follows:3 

"1.  We  look  at  children  of  members  in  full  communion,  which  were  about 
[i.  e.,  not  more  than]  fourteen  years  old  when  their  father  and  mother  joined  the 
Church,  or  have  been  born  since,  to  be  members  in  and  with  their  parents. 
.  '  4.  We  look  upon  it  as  the  Elder's  duty  to  call  upon  such  children,  beinir 
adults,  and  are  of  understanding,  and  not  scandalous,  to  take  the  covenant  sol- 
emnlybefore  our  Assembly.  5-  We  judge  that  the  children  of  such  adult  persons, 
that  are  of  understanding,  and  not  scandalous,  and  shall  take  the  Covenant,  shall 
be  baptized.  6.  That  notwithstanding  the  baptizing  the  children  of  such,  yet  we 
judge  that  these  adult  persons  are  not  to  come  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  nor  to  act  in 
Church  votes,  unless  they  satisfy  the  reasonable  charity  of  the  Elders  or  Church, 
that  they  have  a  work  of  faith  and  repentance  in  them."  4 

Naturally  this  debate  was  not  confined  to  Massachusetts. 
The  questions  raised  were  of  interest  to  the  churches  throughout 
New  England,  and  nowhere  more  than  in  Connecticut,  where  Half- 
Way  Covenant  views  had  been  advocated  by  Stone  and  Warham 
and  Smith.  It  so  happened,  also,  that  from  1653  to  1659  one  of 
the  bitterest  quarrels  in  New  England  ecclesiastical  history  raged 
at  Hartford,  and  spite  of  the  efforts  of  the  ministers  and  legisla- 
ture of  Connecticut  and  the  advice  of  elders  from  other  colonies, 
caused  the  secession  of  a  considerable  body  from  the  Hartford 


1  Hid.,  pp.  69-75,  vote  of  "29  11  76." 

a  The  letter  is  dated  iS.  n.  1652,  >■  e.,  Jan.  18,  1653-     First  Principles,  pp.  23.  *4- 

3  [pswich  Ch.  Rec.  in  Felt,  EccUs.  Mist.  X.  E.,  II  :  141. 

«  Notice  that  voting  is  not  a  Half-Way  Covenant  privilege.  This  reservation  is  made  equally 
clearly  in  the  Decisions  of  ,657  and  .662.  The  statement  of  Prof.  Johnston  {Connecticut,  p.  227) 
that  the  Half-Way  system  '« gave  every  baptized  person  a  voice  in  church  government     .s  baseless. 


THE  QUESTION   IN   CONNECTICUT  257 

church  and  the  settlement  of  Hadley,  Mass.1  This  quarrel  has  not 
infrequently  been  represented  as  the  beginning  of  the  Half-Way 
Covenant  controversy  in  New  England.  No  opinion  is  more  erro- 
neous. At  a  later  period,  from  about  1666  to  1670,  the  question 
of  baptism  tore  the  Hartford  flock,  and  at  the  latter  date  resulted 
in  its  division  for  the  second  time  and  the  formation  of  the  present 
Second  Church  in  Hartford;  but  in  the  first  division  baptism  was 
no  factor.  A  quarrel  between  Samuel  Stone,  the  teacher,  and  Wil- 
liam Goodwin,  the  ruling  elder,  in  regard  to  the  choice  of  a  suc- 
cessor to  the  pastorate  made  vacant  by  the  death  of  Thomas 
Hooker,  involved  the  whole  church,  and  while  essentially  a  per- 
sonal dispute,  raised  some  interesting  questions  as  to  the  relations 
of  the  officers  and  brethren  in  a  Congregational  church.  But 
while  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  extent  of  baptism  was  one  of 
the  dividing  issues  between  1653  and  1659  in  the  Hartford  church, 
this  condition  of  turmoil  existing  in  the  leading  church  in  the 
colony  very  probably  led  to  a  considerable  discussion  of  all  ques- 
tions affecting  church  procedure  throughout  the  little  common- 
wealth. It  was  rather  as  the  consequence  of  this  general  agitation 
than  of  the  special  problems  at  Hartford  that  a  petition  was  pre- 
sented to  the  Connecticut  General  Court,  at  its  session  May  15, 
1656,  by  persons  whose  names  have  not  been  preserved,  but  desir- 
ous, it  would  seem,  of  some  enlargement  of  the  terms  of  baptism. 
The  form  of  the  petition  is  unknown  to  us,  but  the  Court  voted 
that  : 2 

"  Mr.  Governed  [John  Webster],  Mr.  Deputy  [Thomas  Welles],  Mr.  [John]  Cul- 
lick  &  Mr.  Tailcoat  [John  Talcott]  are  desired  in  some  convenient  time  to  advise  \vth 
the  elders  of  this  Jurisdiction  about  those  things  y'  are  p'sented  to  this  Courte  as 
grevances  to  severall  persons  amongst  vs  ;  (and  if  they  judge  it  nessisary,)  to  crave 
their  healpe  &  assistance  in  drawing  up  an  abstract  from  the  heads  of  those  things,  to 
be  p'sented  to  the  Gen :  Courtes  of  the  severall  vnited  Collonyes,  and  to  desire  an  an- 
swer thereunto  as  sone  as  conveniently  may  be."3 

The  work  appointed  to  this  committee  was  duly  performed. 


1  The  story  of  this  quarrel  was  told  for  the  first  time  with  fullness  by  G.  L.  Walker,  History  of 
the  First  Church  in  Hartford,  pp.  146-175. 

2  Conn.  Records,  I:  281. 

3  How  little  this  dispute  was  connected  with  the  quarrel  of  1653-9  in  'he  Hartford  church  is 
illustrated  by  the  fact  that  Webster  and  Cullick  were  among  the  most  prominent  of  Stone's 
opponents. 


-5 


THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 


A  list  of  questions  was  drawn  up'  and  sent  to  the  General  Court 
of  Massachusetts  during  the  summer  of  1656.  Whether  the  other 
colonies  were  also  consulted,  as  the  vote  directed,  it  is  perhaps 
impossible  to  say.2  Thus  overtured,  the  Massachusetts  Court  took 
prompt  action  at  its  session  October  14,  1656,  as  follows:3 

"A  letter  from  the  Generall  Court  of  Conecticot  was  presented  to  this  Court, 
(together  w,h  seuerall  questions  of  practicall  concernment  in  the  churches,)  wherein 
they  propound  theire  desires  of  our  concurranc  w">  them  in  desiring  the  help  of  the 
elders,  for  the  resolution  and  clearing  the  sajd  qusestions,  and  for  that  end  that  a  tjme 
and  place  of  meeting  be  assigned  by  this  Court,  and  notice  thereof  may  be  given  to 
the  rest  of  the  colonies,  that  they  may  haue  the  op'tunitje  to  contribute  theire  asistance 
to  this  worke.  The  Court,  considering  the  premises,  doth  order,  that  Mr  Mather,4 
Mr  Allyn  5  Mr  Norton,6  Mr  Thatcher,1  of  the  county  of  Suffolke,  M'  Bulkely,8  if  he 
cann  come,  M'  Chauncey,8  M'  Syms,18  Mr  Sherman,11  M'  Michells,"  of  the  county  of 
Midlesex,  M'  Norrice,13  Mr  Ezekiell  Rogers,14  Mr  Whiting,15  Mr  Cobbet,,sof  y'  county 
of  Essex,' be  desired  to  meet  at  Boston  the  first  fifth  day  of  June1'  next  following,  to 
conferr  and  debate  the  sajd  questions,  or  any  other  of  like  nature  that  shall  or  maybe 
propounded  to  them  by  this  Court,  either  amongst  themselves  or  \v»'  such  divines  as 
shallbe  sent  to  the  sajd  meeting  from  the  other  colonjes  ;  and  it  is  expected  that  the 
resolution  of  the  sajd  questions,  together  w"'  the  grounds  &  reasons  thereof,  be  pre- 
sented to  the  Generall  Court,  to  be  comunicated  and  comended  to  such  of  ours  that 
want  information  therein  ;  and  it  is  heereby  ordered,  that  Robert  Turner1*  take  care  to 
provide  convenjent  entertaynement  for  the  sajd  gent"  during  theire  attendance  on  the 
sajd  meeting  and  that  the  charges  of  those  of  this  jurisdiccon  be  defrajed  by  the 
Tresurer  ;  and  it  is  further  ordered,  that,  together  w"1  the  letter  .V  qu.erjes  from  Con- 
ecticott,  a  coppy  of  this  order  be  sent  to  all  the  confeederated  colonjes,  wlh  a  letter 
from  this  Court  desiring  theire  assistanc  in  this  buisnes  at  the  tjme  &  place  afore- 
sajd,  y1  the  secretary  send  a  copy  hereof,  w'b  the  qucerjes,  to  one  of  the  elders  of  each 
county." 

Pursuant  to  this  order  the  secretary,  Edward  Rawson,  sent  out 
the  letters  to  the  various  colonial   governments  on   October   22, 


■  These  were  doubtless  substantially  the  XXI  Questions  answered  by  the  Assembly  at  Boston 
in  .657.  The  list  given  by  Trumbull,  Hist.  Conn.,  I:  302,  3°3.  «  an  error.  It  really  belongs  in 
1666.     See  Conn.  Records,  II  :    54.  55-  .     .      _  . 

*  The  Utter  of  the  New  Haven  Court  in  reply  to  that  of  the  Massachusetts  body,  February. 

as  to  imply  that  they  had  not  been  directly  consulted  by  Connecticut. 
ords     .     .     .     .!/««'.  AVi>-,  III:  419;  IV:  I:  s8°- 
<  Richard  Mather,  Dorchester:  all  the  names  are  those  of  ministers. 

*  John  Allin,  Dedham.  •  John  Norton,  Boston.  '  Thomas  Thacher,  Weymouth, 
e  Peter P.ulkeley, Concord;  nearly  74  years  old. 

»  Charles  Chauncv,  Pres.  Harvard  Coll.  .654-.67?.         10  Zechariah  Symmes,  Charlestown. 
"   John  Sherman,  Watertown.  '-  Jonathan  Mitchell,  Cambridge. 

13  Edward  Xorris,  Salem.  l«  Of   Rowley. 

u  Samuel  Whiting,  Lynn.  "  Thomas  Cobbett, Ipswich. 

>-  KobcrtTurtef  was  one  of  the  licensed  innkeepers  of  Boston.     See  Mass.  Records,  passim. 


CALL   OF   THE   ASSEMBLY    OF    1657  259 

1656. '  That  to  New  Haven  was  thirty-six  days  on  its  way.2  Their 
reception  by  the  three  lesser  colonies  was  various.  Plymouth 
appears  to  have  taken  no  action.  Connecticut  of  course  responded 
favorably,  the  Massachusetts  Court  had  carried  into  effect  the 
Connecticut  request,  and  on  February  26,  1657,  the  Court  of  Con- 
necticut voted: 3 

"This  Court  doth  order  that  Mr.  YVarham,4  Mr.  Stone,5  Mr.  Blinman6  &  Mr. 
Russell1  bee  desired  to  meet,  the  first  fifth  day  of  June  next,  at  Boston,  to  conferre  & 
debate  the  questions  formerly  sent  to  the  Bay  Court,  or  any  other  of  the  like  nature 
that  shall  bee  prpounded  to  them  by  that  Court  or  by  or  owne,  \v,h  such  divines  as 
shall  bee  sent  to  the  said  meeting  from  the  other  Collonies;  and  that  they  make  a  returne 
to  the  Gen:  Court  of  the  issue  of  their  consultations." 

At  the  same  time  a  proposition  to  send  twelve  questions  in 

addition,  the  nature  of  which  it  is   now  impossible  to  determine, 

was  defeated."     With  regard  to  provision  for  the  expenses  of  their 

representatives  the  Court  of  Connecticut  was  no  less  careful  than 

that  of  Massachusetts  : 9 

"  It  is  also  ordered,  that  the  Deputies,  \vlh  the  Deacons  of  the  Church  in  each 
towne,  take  care  that  their  said  Eld™  bee  comely  ec  honorably  attended  .X:  suited  w,h 
necessaries  in  their  journey  to  the  Bay  and  home  againe  ;  and  that  the  same,  \vlh  their 
prportion  of  charge  in  the  Bay,  during  their  abode  there  vpon  this  seruice,  bee  dis- 
charged by  the  Treasurer;  and  also  the  Deputies  are  impowered  to  presse  horses  (if 
need  bee,)  for  the  end  aforesaid." 

And,  not    content  with  providing  for  the    material  wants   of 

the  Assembly,   the  Court  ordered  that    Wednesday,  March    25th, 

should  ;  10 

"bee  obserued  &  kept  a  day  of  publicke  humilliation,  by  all  the  Plantations  in  this 
[Connecticut]  Jurisdiction,  to  seeke  the  presence,  guidance  &  direction  of  the  Lord  in 
reference  to  the  Synnod." 

Two  days  before  the  Court  of  Connecticut  had  given  its  favor- 
able response  to  the  overtures  from  Massachusetts,  the  legislative 
body  of  New  Haven  colony  had  considered  the  same  proposition 
and  come  to  exactly  opposite  conclusions.  In  that  colony  the 
influence  of  John  Davenport,  the  pastor  of  the  New  Haven  church, 
was   dominant  and   was    set   counter    to   the   Half-Way   Covenant 


New  Haven  Records.  II :  196.  2  //./,/. 

Conn.  Records,  1 :  288.  4  John  Warham,  Windsor  ;  all  wet 

Samuel  Stone,  Hartford.  6  Richard  Blinman,  New  London. 

John  Russell,  Wethersfield.  *■  Conn.  Records,  I  :  288. 

Ibid.,  p.  289.  io  Ibid.,  p.  293. 


26o  THE   HALF-WAV   COVENANT 

theories.  It  was  natural,  therefore,  that  when  the  letter  from 
Massachusetts  was  read  to  the  Court  at  New  Haven  on  February 
24,  1657, '  and  "the  help  of  such  elders  as  were  present"  was  taken, 
that  colony  should  refuse  to  have  part  in  the  proposed  Assembly. 
Their  declinature  was  set  forth  in  a  long  letter  signed  by  their 
governor,  Theophilus  Eaton,  and  addressed  to  the  Massachusetts 
Court.2  They  breathe  not  a  little  jealousy  of  their  Connecticut 
neighbors,  and  hold  that  the  Connecticut  Court  in  dealing  with  its 
petitioners  should  have  imitated  the  good  example  of  Massachu- 
setts as  illustrated  in  the  summary  treatment  of  Child  and  his 
associates  in  1646.  They  are  fearful  that  a  synod  may  bring  in 
results  of  which  they  could  not  approve,  but  which  they  would  find 
it  hard  to  resist.3  They  are  especially  suspicious  of  the  motives  of 
the  Connecticut  petitioners,  who,  they  tell  the  Massachusetts 
Court,  they  :  ' 

"heare  ...  are  very  confident  they  shall  obteyne  great  alterations,  both  in 
ciuill  gouernm1  and  in  church  discipline,  and  that  some  of  them  haue  procured  or 
hyred  one  as  their  agent  to  maintayne  in  writing,  (as  is  conceived)  that  parishes  in 
England,  consenting  to  and  continewing  their  meetings  to  worship  God,  are  true 
churches,  and  such  persons  comeing  ouer  hether,  (w'hout  holding  forth  any  worke 
of  faith,  &c.,)  haue  right  to  all  church  priveledges." 

For  their  own  part  the  New  Haven  representatives  counsel  a 
firm  adherence  to  the  old  ways.     They  : 6 

"  hope  the  generall  courts,  who  haue  framed  their  ciuill  polity  and  lawes  according 
to  the  rules&of  ( lods  most  holy  word,  and  the  elders  and  churches  who  haue  gathered 
and  received  their  discipline  out  of  the  same  holy  scriptures,  will  unanimously  im- 
prove their  power  and  indeavours  to  preserue  the  same  invyolably." 

And  finally  they  plead  the  recent  removal  or  death  of  a  number 
of  their  ministers  as  an  excuse  for  non-representation  in  the  Assem- 
bly, a  representation  which,  it  is  easy  to  see,  they  were  anxious  to 

•  JVot  Haven  Records,  II :  195  \  the  date  is  given  in  the  old  style  as  "  24'"  12'"  m°,  .656." 

2  Ibid.,  196-198.     Dated  Feb.  25,  1656  [7]. 

3  ••  Though  they  [i.  e.  the  X.  H.  Court]  approved  y»  readines  to  afford  help  when  the  case 
requires  it,  vet  theraselues  conceive  that  the  elders  of  Connecticote  colony,  w'h  due  assists 

the.r  court   had  bine  fully  sufficient  to  cleare  and  maintayne  the  truth  and  to  suppress  the  boldness 
of  such  petition's,  (according  to  a  good  president  you  gaue  y.  colony,  some  yeares  since, 
not  much  diflerring,)  w'hout  calling  a  synod,  or  any  such  meeting,  Wb  in  such   t.mes  may  prove 
dangerous  to  y  puritie  and  peace  of  these  churches  and  colonies."     For  the  case  of  Chdd  see  ante, 
pp.  164-181. 


Ibid. 


n-id.,  197. 


MEETING   OF    THE   ASSEMBLY,    1657  261 

avoid.  In  order,  however,  that  there  should  be  no  mistake  regard- 
ing their  conservative  position  on  the  points  at  issue,  they  accom- 
panied their  letter  by  a  formal  reply  to  the  proposed  Questions, 
drawn  up  by  John  Davenport,  and  bearing  the  approval  of  the 
Court, —  a  document  designed  for  presentation  to  the  Assembly, 
should  it  be  held.' 

The  refusal  of  New  Haven  and  the  non-action  of  Plymouth 
had  no  effect  on  the  meeting  of  the  Ministerial  Assembly.2  Most 
of  the  thirteen  ministers  chosen  by  Massachusetts  and  the  four 
representatives  of  Connecticut  came  together  at  Boston,  June  4, 
1657,  and  their  debates  lasted  till  the  19th  of  the  month.3  Of 
the  course  of  discussion  and  the  events  of  the  meeting  we  know 
nothing.  The  result  could  not  have  been  unanimous,  if  Chauncy, 
later  the  champion  of  the  conservative  view,  was  present.  But 
there  was  doubtless  substantial  agreement  in  the  conclusions  at 
which  the  assembly  arrived.  The  membership  of  the  children  of 
church  members  was  affirmed.  That  membership  was  declared 
to  be  personal  and  permanent,  and  sufficient  to  entitle  the  mem- 
ber by  birth,  even  though  not  personally  regenerate,  to  trans- 
mit membership  and  a  right  to  baptism  to  his  children,  on  con- 
dition of  an  express  acknowledgment  on  his  part  of  at  least  an 
intellectual  faith  and  a  desire  to  submit  to  all  the  covenant  obli- 
gations implied  in  membership.  Yet  though  this  membership  is 
complete,  as  far  as  it  goes,  it  is  not  sufficient  to  admit  to  full 
communion  or  to  a  vote  in  church  affairs.  For  these  further 
privileges  a  profession  of  personal  regeneration  is  necessary. 
The  result  was  drawn  up  in  the  form  of  answers  to  each  of  the 
twenty-one  questions,4  written  in  a  clear  and  often  forcible  style; 
and  was  from  the  pen  of  Richard  Mather  of  Dorchester.5 


'  Ibid.,  198. 

2  This  meeting,  even  in  the  action  of  the  legislatures  of  the  time,  is  loosely  called  a  "  Synod." 
It  lacked  however  the  essential  element  of  representatives  of  the  churches  to  make  it  a 
properly  constituted  synod.     See  Cambridge  Platform,  ante,  p.  234. 

3  The  Result  is  thus  dated.  Regarding  the  attendance  Nathanael  Mather  says:  "There 
being  but  about  twenty  called  .  .  .  and  of  those  twenty,  two  or  three  met  not  with  the  rest." 
Preface  to  A  nswer  to  XXI  Questions,  on  later  page. 

4  Large  extracts  are  given  at  the  conclusion  of  this  chapter. 

5  See  Dexter,  Congregationalism  as  seen;  KM.,  p.  287.  The  result  was  never  officially 
published.  A  copy  was  taken  over  to  England,  probably  by  Increase  Mather,  and  published  at 
London,  1659,  with  a  preface  by  Nathanael  Mather. 


262  THE   HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

The  Assembly  having  fully  accepted  the  Half-Way  Covenant 
principles,  its  members  went  to  their  homes.  Whether  the  con- 
clusions were  presented  to  the  Massachusetts  Court,  as  directed 
in  the  call,  it  is  impossible  to  say.  No  action  regarding  rhem  is 
entered  in  the  Records  of  that  commonwealth.  But  in  Connecti- 
cut their  reception  was  noted  as  follows:1 

"  A  true  coppy  of  the  Counsells  answere  to  seuerall  questions  sent  to  the  Mas- 
sachusets  from  o'  Generall  Court,  being  p'sented  to  this  Court,  signed  by  the  Reuer- 
end  Mr.  Sam  :  Stone,  in  the  name  of  the  rest  of  the  Counsell,  They  doe  order  that 
coppies  should  goe  forth  to  the  seu'all  Churches  in  this  Collony  as  speedily,  &  if 
any  exceptions  bee  against  any  thing  therein,  by  any  Church  that  shall  haue  the 
consideration  thereof,  the  Court  desires  they  would  acquaint  the  next  (len  :  Court 
in  Hartford,  in  Octor :  that  so  suitable  care  may  bee  had  for  their  solution  &  satis- 
faction." 

Yet  though  the  churches  were  thus  urged  and  though  the 
church  at  Windsor,  if  no  other,  began  practicing  the  recommenda- 
tions of  the  Assembly  on  January  31,  1658,2  no  "exceptions"  are 
known  to  have  been  presented  to  the  General  Court.  That  this  was 
the  case  was  not  due  to  any  such  degree  of  unanimity  in  favor  of  the 
newer  views  among  the  brethren  of  the  churches  of  Connecti- 
cut as  existed  among  the  ministers.  It  is  scarcely  probable  that 
other  churches  immediately  followed  the  example  of  Windsor.3 
Public  attention  in  Connecticut  was  diverted  from  the  baptismal 
question  by  the  aggravated  form  which  the  dispute  in  the  Hart- 
ford Church  had  assumed,  and  by  the  fact  that  the  quarrel  had 
provoked  a  similar  personal  disagreement  between  a  portion  of 
the  Wethersfield  church  and  its  minister,  John  Russell.4  This 
protracted  controversy,  in  which  baptism  was  not  a  prime  fac- 
tor, issued  in  1659  and  1660,  in  the  removal  of  ex-Gov.  John 
Webster,  William  Goodwin,  the  ruling  elder  of  the  Hartford  church, 
Rev.  John  Russell,  and  other  persons  of  prominence  in  the  com- 
munity to  Hadley,  Mass.     But  though  public  attention  was  drawn 

1  Conn.  Records,  1 :  302,  Aug.  12,  1657. 

-  Church  Records,  in  Stiles,  History  0/  Ancient  Windsor,  New  York,  1859,  p.  172. 

3  As  late  as  1666,  John  Davenport  was  able  to  affirm  that,  beside  the  churches  in  what  had 
been  New  Haven  colony  and  at  Stratford  and  Xorwalk,  Farmington,  "the  sounder  parte  of  Wind- 
s  .r."  and,  he  thinks,  Norwich  favored  the  old  way.  3  Coil.  Mass.  Hist.  Sec.,  X  :  60.  The  Half- 
Way  Covenant  was  probably  first  used  at  Hartford  soon  after  1666.  Trumbull,  Hist.  Conn., 
1 :  471,  fell  into  the  great  error  of  holding  that  the  system  was  not  introduced  into  practice  in 
Conn,  till  1696.      - 

*  See  Conn.  Records,  1 :  319 ;  Trumbull,  Hist.  Conn.,  1 :  309,  310. 


CONTINUED    DIVISION   OF    FEELING  263 

aside  for  a  time,  the  Half-Way  Covenant  views  steadily  won 
ground  in  Connecticut,  and  when  the  controversy  reappeared  the 
opponents  in  the  churches  were  clearly  in  the  minority.1 

In  Massachusetts  a  similar  division  of  sentiment,  greater  by 
far  among  the  brethren  than  among  the  pastors  of  the  churches, 
probably  prevented  any  immediate  action  favorable  to  the  Half- 
Way  Covenant  system  from  the  General  Court.  Discussion  con- 
tinued, and  brought  with  it  danger  of  serious  division.  The  sit- 
uation was  made  more  critical  when  the  Restoration,  in  1660, 
brought  into  power  in  England  the  party  hostile  to  the  New 
England  church-way.2  It  seemed  more  than  ever  desirable  that 
uniformity  of  practice  should  prevail;  and  the  civil  power,  which 
had  taken  the  initiative  in  securing  the  decisions  of  1648  and 
1657,  once  more  interfered.  The  Assembly  of  1657  had  been 
a  mere  meeting  of  at  most  a  score  of  ministers.  The  General 
Court  of  Massachusetts  determined  to  call  a  proper  Synod,  com- 
posed of  all  the  ministers  and  the  representatives  of  all  the 
churches  in  the  colony.  Its  action  would  not  affect  Connecticut, 
New  Haven,  or  Plymouth,  save  by  example,  since  these  colonies 
were  not  asked  to  share  in  the  Synod ;  but  for  Massachusetts 
it  was  hoped  the  action  would  be  definitive.  The  prime  matter 
to  be  settled  was  that  problem  of  baptism  which  the  Cambridge 
Synod  of  1646-8  had  evaded,  and  which  the  Assembly  of  1657 
had  answered  so  fully  in  the  spirit  of  the  Half- Way  Covenant. 
Accordingly,  on  December  31,  1661,  the  Massachusetts  Court  is- 
sued this  sharp  and  peremptory  order:3 

"  This  Court,  hairing  taken  into  consideration  that  there  are  seuerall  questions  & 
doubts  yet  depending  in  the  churches  of  this  jurisdiction  concerning  seuerall  prac- 
ticall  poynts  of  church  disciplyne,  doe  therefore  order  &  hereby  desire,  that  the 
churches  aforesajd  doe  send  theire  messengers  of  elders  &  brethren  to  Boston  the 
2d    Twesday  of   the  first  moneth,4  then  &  there  to  discusse  &  declare  what  they 


>  The  year  1657  s3"'  a  curious  limitation  of  the  franchise  in  Connecticut,  the  causes  of  which 
are  not  very  evident.  (Conn.  Records,  1:293:  "  This  Court  doth  order,  that  by  admitted  inhabi- 
tants, specified  in  the  7th  Fundamental!  [of  the  constitution  of  1639],  are  meant  only  housholders 
that  are  one  &  twenty  yeares  of  age,  or  haue  bore  office,  or  haue  30/.  estate.")  But  its  connection 
with  the  Half- Way  discussion,  if  any,  is  not  apparent.  See  also  Andrews,  River  Towns  of  Con- 
necticut, pp.  85-89. 

2  See  Palfrey,  Hist.  N.E.,ll:  490. 

»  Records    .     .     .    Mass.  Bay,  IV :  2  :  38. 

*f.e.,  March  11,  1662. 


264  THE   HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

shall  judge  to  be  the  minde  of  God,  revealed  in  his  word,  concerning  such  ques- 
tions as  shall  be  propounded  to  them  by  order  of  this  Court  referring  to  church 
orders  as  aforesajd,  and  that  the  seuerall  churches  take  care  to  make  due  provition 
for  the  messengers  by  them  sent. 

This  Court  doe  further  order,  as  a  meete  expedient  for  the  furtheranc  of 
th'  ends  proposed  in  calling  a  synod  to  be  kept  by  the  messengers  of  all  y" 
churches  in  this  jurisdiction  the  2'1  Twesday  in  March  next,  that  the  neighbor- 
ing elders,  w,h  as  much  convenient  speed  as  may  be,  doe  meete  together  &  con- 
sider of  such  questions,  besides  what  is  here  vnder  proposed,  as  they  shall  judge 
necessary  to  be  then  &  there  discussed  for  the  setting  of  peace  &  trueth  in  these 
churches  of  Christ,  &  make  theire  returne  w,h  as  much  convenient  speede  as  may 
be  to  yr  Gou'nor  or  secretary,  who  is  to  speede  away  a  copie  thereof,  w,h  the  ( ien- 
erall  Courts  order,  to  the  seuerall  churches,  requiring  them  to  send  theire  messen- 
gers to  attend  the  sajd  meeting." 

The  hasty  gathering  of  the  ministers  of  Boston  and  the  adja- 
cent towns,  thus  peremptorily  summoned,  met  at  once,  and  added 
to  the  problem  of  baptism,  which  the  Court  had  in  mind,  a  second 
question,  regarding  councils  and  the  mutual  relations  of  the 
churches,  for  the  consideration  of  the  Synod.  The  Court  recorded 
the  two  subjects  for  discussion  on  the  same  page  on  which  it  min- 
uted the  call  for  the  deliberative  body:  ' 

Quaest  1.     Who  are  the  subjects  of  baptisme. 

Qusest  2.  Whither,  according  to  the  word  of  God,  there  ought  to  be  a  consco- 
ciation  of  churches,  &  what  should  be  ye  manner  of  it. 

This  last  question  was  returned  to  ye  secretary  by  yc  elders. 

Thus  issued  by  the  civil  authorities  of  the  commonwealth,  the 

call  for  the  Synod  went  forth  to  the  Massachusetts  churches.     Its 

reception  in  them  as  a  whole  may  perhaps  be  judged  from  the 

records  of  the  Salem  church2 — 

"  On  the  26th  of  12th  month,3  being  the  Sabbath  day,  was  read  an  order  from  the 
Gen.  Court,  for  calling  of  a  Synod,  this  Church  (as  the  rest  of  the  Churches  in  the 
Colony)  being  desired  to  send  their  messengers  of  Elders  and  brethren  to  Boston  on 
the  10th  of  the  1st  month4  [etc].     ...     It  was  left  unto  consideration  till  the 


1  Ibid.  This  paragraph  immediately  follows  the  call  quoted  above,  though  of  course  a  day 
or  two  must  have  intervened  between  the  two  votes  to  allow  for  a  meeting  of  the  ministers  of  the 
Boston  vicinage,  which  the  second  vote  implies  had  already  taken  place.  The  explanation  is  in 
the  fact  that  the  arrangement  of  the  records  of  business  at  any  particular  meeting  of  the  Court  was 
seldom  strictly  chronological.  See  the  editor's  remarks  in  the  prefaces  to  various  volumes  of  the 
Records. 

■  White,  A".  E.  Congregationalism,  p.  53. 

3  This  date  is  an  errfcr.  It  should  be  Jan.  26,  1662,  a  Sunday,  Feb.  26,  as  here  given,  was 
Wednesday. 

*  The  day  mentioned  in  the  call  falls  on  March  11  and  not  the  10th. 


MEETING    OF    THE    SYNOD,    1662  265 

Lord's  day  following,   when  Major  Hawthorne,    Mr.   Bartholmew,   and   the   Pastor1 
were  chosen  to  go  to  the  Synod  at  the  time  appointed." 

The  second  Tuesday  in  March,  1662,  saw,  therefore,  the  com- 
ing together  in  the  meeting-house  of  the  First  Church2  in  Boston 
of  more  than  seventy  representatives3  of  the  Massachusetts 
churches.  We  know  nothing  in  detail  of  the  organization  of  the 
body,  nor  are  we  able  to  identify  more  than  a  few  of  those  who 
were  probably  present  as  actually  there.4  It  has  been  said,  but 
the  statement  lacks  positive  proof,  that  the  presiding  officer  at  the 
sessions  was  Samuel  Whiting,  the  venerable  pastor  at  Lynn5  —  a 
man  in  every  way  fitted  for  the  task.  In  the  ranks  of  the  minis- 
terial membership  were  such  lights  of  the  New  England  pulpit  as 
John  Wilson6  and  John  Norton7  of  the  First  Boston  Church,  Richard 
Mather8  of  Dorchester,  with  his  sons  Eleazer9  of  Northampton,  and 
Increase,10  just  beginning  his  ministry  in  the  Second  Church  of  Bos- 
ton. John  Allin"  of  Dedham  was  there,  and  Zechariah  Symmes12  of 
Charlestown;  Salem  sent  John  Higginson,13  Newbury  the  Presby- 
terianly  inclined  Thomas  Parker.14  From  Cambridge  came  the 
venerable  Charles  Chauncy,16  president  of  Harvard  College;  and 
the  young,  gifted  Jonathan  Mitchell,16  pastor  of  the  Cambridge 
church;  with  them,  also,  was  John  Mayo,17  of  the  Second  Boston 


1  About  this  proportion  of  two  representatives  of  the  brethren  to  each  minister  must  have 
been  general,  since  all  the  ministers  then  in  regular  service  in  the  colony  numbered  only  34,  of 
whom,  judging  from  the  usual  history  of  Synods,  some  must  have  been  absent,  and  the  total  attend- 
ance was  "above  seventy.'1  v 

2  Dexter,  in  Cong.  Quart. ,  IV:  274. 

3  Ibid.,  from  Mitchell,  Answer  [to  I.  Mather]  Afologetical  Preface,  p.  3. 

*  A  list,  nearly  complete,  of  those  who  would  be  entitled  to  a  place  in  the  Synod  as  ministers 
is  given  by  Dexter,  Cong.  Quart.,  IV:  274. 

5  Dexter,  Ibid.  Drake,  History  of  Boston,  Boston.  1852-6,  1 :  361.  His  biography  is  in  the 
Magnolia,  ed.  1853-5,  I:  501-511.  Perhaps  a  hint  of  this  is  contained  in  Thompson's  elegiac 
verses  on  Whiting,  Ibid., 

"  Profoundest  judgment,  with  a  meekness  rare, 
Preferr'd  him  to  the  Moderator's  chair."  etc. 
'Records     .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  IV:  2:  60. 

7  Dexter,  Cong.  Quart.,  IV:  274,  omits  Norton  from  his  list  of  those  possibly  present.  He 
returned  from  England,  however,  in  time  to  take  an  active  part  in  the  closing  session.  See  Letter 
of  Increase  Mather  to  John  Davenport,  in  Hutchinson,  Hist.  Mass.  Bay,  ed.  1765,  1 :  224. 

8  Records     .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  Ibid.  :  Records  First  Ch.  Dorchester,  p    39. 
s  Hutchinson,  Ibid. 

10  Increase  Mather  was  a  delegate  from  his  father's  church  at  Dorchester,  Records,  etc.,  p.  39. 

11  Rec.  Mass.  Bay,  Ibid.  12  Ibid. 

13  White,  N.  E.  Cong.,  p.   53.  «  Hutchinson,  Ibid. 

15  Ibid.     Doubtless  as  a  representative  of  the  Cambridge  church. 

16  Mather,  Magna/ia,  ed.  1853-5,  II:  99.  "  Hutchinson,  Ibid. 

18 


266  THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

church.  The  gathering  included  many  from  the  rapidly  thinning 
ranks  of  the  first  generation  on  New  England  soil;  it  numbered 
also  the  brilliant  names  which  adorn  the  story  of  their  children. 
And  as  the  result  of  the  Synod  was  but  the  working  out  of  princi- 
ples inherent  in  the  Congregationalism  of  the  founders  of  New 
England,  so  the  votes  by  which  it  was  adopted  came  in  no  small 
measure  from  those  who  were  among  the  pioneers  in  the  settle- 
ment of  our  towns  and  churches. 

Of  all  who  were  present,  those  most  conspicuous  in  debate 
were  Jonathan  Mitchell1  on  the  side  favoring  the  Half-Way  Cove- 
nant; and,  probably,  Pres.  Chauncy"  among  its  opponents.  To  the 
persuasive  skill  of  Mitchell,  more  than  to  any  other,  the  result  in 
1662  was  due,  and  the  form  in  which  it  was  cast  was  largely  the 
product  of  his  pen.3 

The  Synod  which  assembled  in  March,  1662,  found  that  it  had 
a  severe  task.  At  least  eight  or  nine  of  the  seventy  present,4  and 
probably  even  more  at  the  early  sessions,5  opposed  any  admission 
of  Half-Way  principles.  This  opposition  included  a  man  of  great 
prominence,  Pres.  Chauncy,  and  the  two  ministers  of  the  Second 
Church  in  Boston,  Mayo  and  Increase  Mather,"  the  latter  joined 
by  his  brother  Eleazer  of  Northampton.  They  made  a  force 
formidable  for  quality  if  not  for  numbers.  Thomas  Parker  of 
Newbury  was  a  Presbyterian  free-lance,  though  he  had  little  fol- 


'  Jonathan  Mitchell  was  born  in  England  in  1624,  graduated  Harvard  College  1647,  settled  at 
Cambridge  1650,  died  July  9,  166S.  Of  brilliant  powers  of  mind,  marked  piety,  and  kindly  in  spirit, 
he  was  one  of  the  most  prominent  of  the  second  generation  of  New  England  ministers.  His  biog- 
raphy is  given  by  Mather.  Magnalia,  II:  66-113.  See  also  Sibley,  Har-ard  Graduates,  Cam- 
bridge, 1873,  1 :  141-157,  where  a  full  list  of  his  writings  and  ample  references  to  biographical  sources 
will  be  found. 

2  Charles  Chauncy  was  born  in  England  in  1589,  educated  at  Cambridge,  settled  at  Ware, 
Eng.,  in  1627,  suspended  by  Laud  1635,  came  to  Plymouth,  Mass.,  1638,  and  soon  settled  at  Scituate. 
In  1654  he  became  the  second  president  of  Harvard,  an  office  which  he  retained  till  his  death,  Feb. 
rg,  1672.  For  his  biography  see  Mather,  Magnolia,  I:  463-476;  Allen,  Am.  Biog.  Diet.,  ed.  1857, 
pp.  213-215. 

3  Mather,  Magnalia,  II:  99. 

<  Mitchell,  Answer  to  Increase  Mather's  Apologetical  Prc/aee.  p.  3.  "We  suppose  there 
were  not  Five  twice  told  that  did  in  any  thing  Vote  on  the  Negative. "     Ibid. 

5  Chauncy  says:  "  Diverse  of  the  Messengers  [in  this  case  the  lay  messengers]  being  no  Lo- 
gitians.  and  so  unable  to  answer  Syllogismes,  and  discern  Ambiguities,  were  over-born."  Anti- 
Synodalia,  p.  5. 

•  Increase  Mather  was  of  course  not  yet  settled,  though  preaching  at  Boston.  He  sat  for 
Dorchester.  He  later  changed  his  views  through  the  influence  of  Mitchell,  and  supported  the  re- 
sult of  the  Synod,  which  his  father,  Richard  Mather,  always  approved. 


DEBATES    IN     THE    SYNOD  267 

lowing ; '  and  others  criticised  various  features  of  the  existing 
usages  of  the  churches.2  So  it  came  about  that  "  the  Synod  con- 
tinuing together  almost  a  fortnight,  finding  the  questions  to  be 
weighty,  and  that  divers  of  them  could  not  then  stay  longer  to- 
gether, they  adjourned  the  Synod  to  the  10th  of  the  4th  month 
next."3 

The  session  thus  suspended  was  resumed  on  June  10th;  but 
was  once  more  adjourned,  this  time  to  September  10th.4  Soon 
after  the  close  of  the  second  session  Eleazer  Mather  had  written  to 
John  Davenport  of  New  Haven,5  and  that  champion  of  the  older 
method  was  stirred,  either  by  Mather's  letter  or  the  news  of  the 
Synod's  doings  which  came  to  him  through  other  channels,  to  send 
on  in  writing  his  objections  to  the  views  of  the  majority.  This 
document,  which,  as  emanating  from  a  minister  of  another  colony, 
had  no  pertinence  in  a  Massachusetts  Synod,  Increase  Mather 
attempted  to  read  to  the  body  on  its  reassembling  in  September. 
The  opposition  of  John  Norton  of  Boston  prevented,  but  a  copy 
was  put  in  circulation  by  Increase  Mather  and  attracted  consider- 
able attention.6 

It  was,  we  may  suppose,  at  the  September  session  that  the 
Propositions  in  which  the  Synod  embodied  its  conclusions  took  on 
their  final  form.  Their  exact  phraseology  was  the  subject  of  much 
debate  and  was  fixed  by  the  Synod  itself  in  each  case.'  The  most 
fiercely  contested  battle  ground  was  the  fifth  Proposition,  of  which 
three  draughts  were  submitted  to  the  body.8     Against  this  Chauncy 

1  "  Mr.  Parker,  of  Newbury,  was  one  of  the  great  antagonists  of  the  congregational  way  and 
order,  though  it  not  being  the  work  of  the  present  synod,  his  many  motions,  to  consider  whether  we 
were  in  the  right  ecclesiastical  order,  were  not  attended."     E.   Mather  to  J.   Davenport,  Hutchin- 

2  "  There  was  scarce  any  of  the  congregational  principles,  but  what  were  layen  at,  by  some 
or  other  of  the  assembly  ;  as  relations  of  the  work  of  grace,  power  of  voting  of  the  fraternity  in  ad- 
mission," etc.     Ibid. 

3  Salem  Ch.  Records,  in  White,  N.  E.  Congregationalism,  p.  54.  In  each  instance  of  ad- 
journment "notice  was  given  the  [Salem]  Church." 

4  Ibid. 

5  July  4.  1662,  quoted  by  Hutchinson. 

6  Letter  of  I.  Mather  to  J.  Davenport,  Oct.  21,  1662,  quoted  in  Hutchinson,  1 :  224. 

7  "  The  Propositions  .  .  .  were  (after  much  discussion  and  consideration  from  the  Word 
of  God)  Voted  and  Concluded  by  the  Assembly  in  the  particular  terms  as  they  are  here  expressed." 
Preface  to  Propositions  of  1662,  on  later  page. 

8  Chauncy  said  :  "  There  hath  been  three  expressions  of  this  proposition,  and  this  [in  the  Re- 
sult] swerves  further  off  from  Scripture  then  both  the  former."     Anti-Synodalia,  p.  27. 


268  THE    HALF-WAV    COVENANT 

and  his  friends  energetically  labored,  since  it  granted  baptism  to 
all  children  of  persons  themselves  baptized  who  professed  an  in- 
tellectual faith,  owned  the  covenant,  and  submitted  to  church  dis- 
cipline. But  it  is  with  a  little  surprise  that  we  learn  that  the  third 
Proposition,  declaring  the  membership  by  birth  of  the  children  of 
visible  believers,  was  brought  forward  by  one  of  the  leaders  of  the 
minority,  possibly  Chauncy  himself.1  No  wonder  that  Mitchell 
could  say  of  this  proposition  "some  think  [it]  tarries  the  whole 
cause;"11  and  the  championing  of  this  view  of  the  status  of  the 
children  of  church  members,  while  their  right  to  bring  their  off- 
spring to  baptism  was  denied,  is  an  illustration  of  the  inconsistency 
of  the  position  taken  throughout  the  controversy  by  the  opponents 
of  the  Half-Way  Covenant,  an  inconsistency  which  gave  them  less 
weight  than  the  general  merits  of  their  criticisms  deserved.  Having 
carefully  formulated  the  Propositions  regarding  baptism,  the  Synod 
listened  to  several  readings  of  the  arguments  by  which  they  were 
supported,  and  voted  their  approbation.8 

The  first  of  the  two  Questions  propounded  by  the  Court  hav- 
ing thus  been  disposed  of  by  a  vote  of  more  than  seven  to  one4  in 
favor  of  the  Half-Way  Covenant  system,  the  Synod  hastily 5  took 
up  the  second  Question,  that  in  relation  to  "Consociation  of 
Churches,"  or,  as  modern  usage  would  say,  Fellowship  between 
Churches.  Here  the  Synod,  wearied  with  its  work,  and  deeming 
the  query  of  comparatively  minor  importance,  did  little  more  than 
reaffirm  by  a  vote  lacking  but  one  of  unanimity,"  the  principles  laid 
down  in  the  Cambridge  Platform. 

Soon  after  the  termination  of  the  Synod,7  its  conclusions  were 
reported  to  the  Massachusetts  Court,  October  S,  1662,  by  a  com- 
mittee consisting  of  four  ministers,  John  Wilson.  Richard  Mather, 


>  "  One  of  the  chief  of  our  Dissenting  Brethren  did  propound,  and  earnestly  promote  the  third 
Proposition, "  Allin,  Animadversions  upon  the  Anti-Synodalia.  p.  13. 

2  Mitchell.  Answer  to  Increase  Mather's  Apologetical  Pre/ace,  p.  3,  margin. 
»  Preface  to  Propositions  of  1662,  on  later  page. 

*  Mather,  Magnalia.  ed.  1853-5,  II :  302. 

*  "  The  Answer  to  the  second  Question  is  here  given  with  great  brevity  .  .  .  partly  by 
reason  of  great  straits  of  time."  Preface  to  Propositions  of  1662. 

*  "  There  was  a  marvellous  Unanimity ;  not  one  Elder,  nor  so  much  as  two  Brethren  in  all 
that  Reverend  Assembly  dissenting."  Increase  Mather,  Disquisition  Concerning  Ecclesiastical 
Councils.  Boston,  1716.  p.  37.     Reprinted  Cong.  Quart.,  XII  :  365. 

7  The  day  of  adjournment  is  unknown. 


RECEPTION    OF    THE    RESULT  269 

John  Allin,  and  Zechariah  Symmes.1  At  the  same  time  Increase 
Mather  presented  to  the  Court  the  objections  formulated  by  John 
Davenport  which  the  Synod  had  refused  to  hear.  This  he  accom- 
panied by  a  preface  signed  by  Chauncy,  Mayo,  Eleazer  Mather,  and 
himself,  in  the  name  of  the  opposition.2  The  objectors'  protest 
fared  scarcely  better  than  in  the  Synod;  the  utmost  that  the  Court 
would  grant  was  freedom  from  interference  should  the  opponents 
see  fit  to  print.3  As  for  the  Propositions  voted  by  the  majority,  on 
the  other  hand:4 

"  the  Court,  on  their  pervsall,  judged  it  meete  to  cornend  the  same  vnto  the  consider- 
ation of  all  the  churches  &  people  of  this  [Massachusetts]  jurisdiction,  and  for  that 
end  ordered  the  printing  thereof,  the  originall  copie  being  left  on  file." 

At  the  same  time  the  Court  advised  that  the  committee  should 

see  to  it:5 

"  that  an  epistle  or  p'face  suiteable  to  the  sajd  worke  be  forthwith  prepared,  &  sent  to 
the  presse,  &  that  Mr  Mitchell  doe  take  the  ouersight  of  the  same  at  the  presse,  for 
the  p'venting  of  any  errata"." 

The  result  was  the  publication  of  the  Propositions  by  the  press 
at  Cambridge  within  a  few  weeks,  while  before  the  conclusion  of 
the  year  an  unofficial  edition  was  brought  out  at  London,  having 
as  an  appendix  the  answer  written  by  Chauncy  and  known  as  the 
Anti-Synodalia  Scripia  Americana. 

These  publications  started  a  flood  of  controversial  pamphlets 
heretofore  unexampled  in  the  history  of  the  new  world,  and  which 
must  have  taxed  the  capacities  of  the  Cambridge  press,  though 
they  added  little  light  to  the  controversy.  Chauncy  and  Daven- 
port were  promptly  in  the  field  urging  that  the  new  method  would 
open  the  doors  of  the  churches  to  the  unworthy;  and  with  them 
stood  Increase  Mather  of  Boston  and  Nicholas  Street  of  New 
Haven.  Mitchell,  Allin,  and  Richard  Mather  were  as  forward  to 
defend  the  result  of  the  Synod;6  and  with  more  effect  than  is  usual 


1  Records     .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  IV  :  2  :  60. 

2  Letter  to  John  Davenport,  Hutchinson,  Hist.     .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  1 :  224. 

3  "  Some  of  the  court  would  fain  have  thrown  them  out  [the  objections]  without  reading,  but 
the  major  part  were  not  so  violent.  It  was  moved  they  might  be  printed.  All  the  answer  we  could 
get,  was,  that  we  might  do  as  we  would.  We  count  it  a  favour  we  were  not  commanded  to  be 
silent."     Ibid. 

*  Records     .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  IV :  2  :  60. 

6  Ibid.,  62. 

6  For  details  of  these  pamphlets  see  ante,  p.  239. 


270  THE    HALF-WAV    COVENANT 

in  such  controversies,  for  the  arguments  of  Mitchell  won  over  In- 
crease Mather,1  who  became  within  less  than  ten  years  after  the 
Synod  the  chief  defender  of  its  conclusions.2  The  Massachusetts 
Court  left  the  question  to  the  churches  without  further  interfer- 
ence, and  the  Half-Way  Covenant  view,  though  the  popular  and 
growing  theory,  long  met  with  disapproval  among  the  brethren  of 
many  congregations.3  Fifty  years  after  the  Synod  there  were  still 
opposing  churches4  in  Massachusetts. 

The  result  of  the  Synod  of  1662,  being  purely  local  in  its  appli- 
cation, called  for  no  action  on  the  part  of  the  General  Court  of 
Connecticut.  That  colony  had,  at  the  moment,  a  most  delicate 
question  on  its  hands.  The  diplomatic  ability  of  the  younger 
WTinthrop  had  secured  from  the  recently  restored  Charles  II.  of 
England,  in  1662,  a  charter  not  only  granting  practical  local  in- 
dependence but  adding  the  colony  of  New  Haven  to  the  Connecti- 
cut jurisdiction,  much  against  the  will  of  the  former.  The  situation 
was  made  the  more  difficult  because  New  Haven,  owing  to  the 
influence  of  Davenport,  was  as  much  opposed  to  the  Half-Way 
Covenant  as  the  authorities  of  Connecticut  were  in  its  favor.  No 
action  on  the  part  of  the  General  Court  for  or  against  the  new 
system  took  place  at  once. 

But  though  the  Connecticut  Court  took  no  immediate  steps  in 
favor  of  larger  church  privileges,  the  matter  was  agitated  in  the 
colony  and  with  results  that  at  last  demanded  the  Court's  interfer- 
ence. When  Norton  had  returned,  during  the  closing  days  of  the 
Synod,  from  his  embassy  to  England,5  he  had  brought  with  him  a 


■  Magnalia,e&.  1853-5,  II:  310. 

2  Though  not  published  till  1675,  the  Preface  to  Increase  Mather's  First  Principles  is  dated 
May  1,  1671. 

a  Magnalia,  II :  311,  312.  Even  so  strong  a  favorer  of  the  Half-Way  Covenant  as  Richard 
Mather  declared  on  his  death-bed  in  1669  to  his  son  Increase:  "A  speciall  thing  which  I  would 
commend  to  you,  is,  Care  concerning  the  Rising  Generation  in  this  Country,  that  they  be  brought 
under  the  Government  of  Christ  in  his  Church  ;  and  that  when  grown  up  and  qualified,  they  have 
Baptism  for  their  Children.  I  must  confess  I  have  been  defective  as  to  practise,  yet  I  have  pub- 
Iickly  declared  my  judgement,  and  manifested  my  desires  to  practise  that  which  I  think  ought  to  be 
attended,  but  the  Dissenting  of  some  in  our  Church  discouraged  me."  Increase  Mather,  Lift  and 
Death  of    .     .     .     Richard  Mat/n-r,  Cambridge,  1670,  p.  27. 

*  Magnalia,  II :  313-315.  The  Boston  First  Church  did  not  adopt  the  Half-Way  Covenant 
practice  till  17 -,i,  Emerson,  Hist.  Sketch  of  the  First  Ch.,  Boston,  1812,  p.  175. 

»  John  Norton  and  Simon  Bradstreet  had  been  sent  by  Mass.  to  England  to  propitiate  the 
restored  monarchy.     See  Palfrey,  Hist.  -V.  £.,  II  :  520-531. 


FURTHER   AGITATION    IN   CONNECTICUT  2JI 

letter  of  Charles  II.  to  the  government  of  Massachusetts,  direct- 
ing that  all  who  so  chose  and  were  peaceable  should  have  freedom 
to  worship  according  to  the  Prayer  Book;  and  in  general,  that:1 

"all  persons  of  good  and  honest  lives  and  conversations  be  admitted  to  the  sacrament 
of  the  Lords  supper,  according  to  the  said  booke  of  common  prayer,  and  their  children 
to  baptisme." 

This  letter  had  been  received  by  the  same  Court  which  ap- 
proved the  result  of  the  Synod,  Octobers,  1662;2  and  compliance 
had  been  avoided  by  a  temporizing  policy;3  but  in  July,  1664, 
royal  commissioners,4  charged  with  a  general  revision  of  the  affairs 
of  the  colonies  arrived.  There  was  from  the  first  no  doubt  that 
their  views  favored  a  much  broader  admission  to  church  privileges 
than  the  Half-way  Covenant  contemplated;5  and  at  a  later  period 
they  secured  the  consent  of  the  colony  of  Plymouth  to  concessions 
substantially  in  accord  with  the  king's  letter  to  Massachusetts.6 
The  known  attitude  of  the  English  government  and  its  commis- 
sioners doubtless  increased  the  impatience  in  every  colony  of 
opponents  of  the  strictness  of  early  Congregationalism  at  the  slow 
progress  of  the  Half-Way  Covenant  practice,  especially  in  view  of 
the  result  of  the  Massachusetts  Synod  and  the  favor  of  many 
ministers. 

This  impatience  found  expression  in  Connecticut  in  a  peti- 
tion from  William  Pitkin7  of  Hartford  and  six  other  men  of  respect- 
able position  in  the  colony,  presented  to  the  General  Court  at  its 
session  in  October,  1664,  and  setting  forth  much  the  same  griev- 
ances that  Child  and  his  associates8  had  once  preferred  against  the 
churches  of  Massachusetts.  The  petitioners  declare  that,  though 
baptized  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  they  are  refused  com- 

1  Hutchinson,  Collection,  p.  379,  dated  June  28,  1662. 

2  Records     .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  IV  :   2  •  58. 

3  Ibid.  "Concerning  liberty  to  use  the  common  Prayer  Book,  none  as  yet  among  us  have 
appeared  to  desire  it ;  touching  administration  of  the  sacraments,  this  matter  hath  been  under  con- 
sideration of  a  synod,  orderly  called,  the  result  whereof  our  last  General  Court  commended  to  the 
several  congregations,  and  we  hope  will  have  a  tendency  to  general  satisfaction."  Answer  to  the 
king,  2  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  VIII :  48. 

4  For  their  doings  see  Palfrey,  II :  578-634. 

5  /.  e.,  admission  of  all  respectable  persons  to  the  Lord's  Supper. 
«  Plymouth  Records,  IV:  85-87.     February,  1665. 

7  Some  facts  regarding  Pitkin,  who  was  a  man  of  piety,  and  the  names  of  his  fellow-signers 
may  be  found  in  G.  L.  Walker,  Hist.  First  Church  in  Hartford,  pp.  195,  196. 


2J2  THE    HALF-WAV    CONEXANT 

munion  for  themselves  and  baptism  for  their  children,  in  contradic- 
tion of  the  king's  letter  to  Massachusetts,  and  they  beg  the  Court 
to  compel  the  ministers  of  the  colony  to  grant  them  such  ordi- 
nances as  they  desire,  or  to  relieve  them  from  the  necessity  of 
contributing  to  the  support  of  any  minister  who  should  refuse.1 

This  petition  evidently  met  with  some  approval  in  the  Connec- 
ticut Court,  and  determined  that  body  to  take  action  which,  while 
not  granting  all  that  the  petitioners  desired,  favored  a  large  inter- 
pretation of  the  Half- Way  Covenant:" 

"  This  Court  vnderstanding  by  a  writing  presented  to  them  from  seuerall  persons 
of  this  Colony,  that  they  are  agrieved  that  they  are  not  interteined  in  church  fellow- 
ship ;  This  Court  haueing  duely  considered  the  same,  desireing  that  the  rules  of 
Christ  may  be  attended,  doe  commend  it  to  the  ministers  and  churches  in  this  Colony 
to  consider  whither  it  be  not  their  duty  to  enterteine  all  such  persons,  whoe  are  of 
honest  and  godly  conuersation,  haueing  a  competency  of  knowledg  in  the  principles 
of  religion,  and  shall  desire  to  joyne  w"'  them  in  church  fellowship,  by  an  explicitt 
couenant,  and  that  they  haue  their  children  baptized,  and  that  all  the  children  of  the 
church  be  accepted  and  accotd  reall  members  of  the  church,  and  that  the  church  exer- 
cise a  due  christian  care  and  watch  ouer  them  ;  and  that  when  they  are  growne  up, 
being  examined  by  the  officer  in  the  presence  of  the  church,  it  appeares,  in  the  judg- 
ment of  charity,  they  are  duely  qualifyed  to  perticipate  in  that  great  ordinance  of  the 
Lords  Supper,  by  theire  being  able  to  examine  themselues  and  discerne  the  Lords 
body,  such  persons  be  admitted  to  full  comunion. 

The  Court  desires  y'  the  seuerall  officers  of  ye  respectiue  churches,  would  be 
pleased  to  consider  whither  it  be  not  the  duty  of  the  Court  to  order  the  churches  to 
practice  according  to  the  premises,  if  they  doe  not  practice  w,bout  such  an  order. 

If  any  dissent  from  the  contents  of  this  writing  they  are  desired  to  help  the  Court 
wth  such  light  as  is  wlh  them,  the  next  Session  of  this  Assembly. 

The  Court  orders  the  Secrefy  to  send  a  copy  of  this  writing  to  the  seuerall  min- 
isters and  churches  in  this  Colony." 

Such  an  order,  in  the  somewhat  divided  state  of  public  opin- 
ion in  regard  to  the  Half-Way  Covenant,  could  only  produce  fur- 
ther controversy  and  division.  Adam  Blakeman  and  Thomas 
Hanford,  pastors  of  the  churches  of  Stratford  and  Norwalk  re- 
spectively, sent  in  to  the  Court  a  joint  letter  of  earnest  protest 
against  the  new  way.3  By  June,  1666,  the  Hartford  church  was 
torn  by  contesting  factions,  of  which  the  larger,  led  by  the 
younger   minister,   Joseph   Haynes,    favored    the    larger    practice; 


1  The  full  text  is  in  Stiles,  Ancient  Windsor,  ed.  1859,  pp.  167,  168. 

2  Conn.  Rec,  I  :  437.     Court  of  Oct.  13,  1664. 

3  The    MS.  is  in   the  possession  of  Dr.  J.  H.  Trumbull.     Extracts  are  given  by  G.  L,  Walker, 
Hist.  First  Ch.  Hartford,  p.  198. 


CONNECTICUT    CHURCHES    DIVIDED  2J$ 

while  a  strong  minority,  championed  by  Haynes's  colleague,  John 
Whiting,  opposed.1  In  April  of  that  year  Abraham  Pierson,  the 
pastor  of  the  church  at  Branford,  with  a  majority  of  his  flock, 
and  some  persons  from  Guilford,  New  Haven,  and  Milford,  made 
arrangements  to  leave  the  colony  for  Newark,  New  Jersey,  an 
agreement  which  they  carried  into  execution  the  year  follow- 
ing." To  this  step  they  were  led  in  part  by  dislike  to  the  admis- 
sion of  non-church-members  to  the  franchise,  which  was  one  of 
the  consequences  to  New  Haven  colony  of  its  absorption  by  Con- 
necticut ;  but  hostility  toward  the  Half- Way  Covenant  added 
strength  to  their  desire  to  remove.3  At  about  the  same  time  the 
church  in  Stratford  was  torn  by  a  quarrel  regarding  the  allow- 
ance of  the  Half-Way  principles  which  resulted  eventually  in  the 
division  of  the  church  and  the  settlement  of  Woodbury.4  The 
Windsor  church  was  in  a  chronic  state  of  controversy,  to  which 
the  question  of  baptism  only  added  fuel.5 

No  wonder  the  General  Court  of  Connecticut  felt  that  it  was 
time  to  bring  these  matters  to  a  settlement,  and  therefore,  at  its 
session,  October  n,  1666,  it  voted  to  call  a  "Synod"  to  meet  at 
Hartford,  May  15,  1667,  to  discuss  seventeen  questions  pro- 
pounded by  the  Court  "to  an  issue."6  As  to  the  composition  of 
the  "  Synod":7 

"  This  Court  orders  that  all  y8  Preacheing  Elders  and  Ministers  that  are  or  shalbe 
setled  in  this  Colony  at  ye  time  of  ye  meeting  of  the  Synod  shalbe  sent  to  attend 
as  members  of  ye  Synod.  This  Court  orders  that  Mr.  Michil,8  Mr.  Browne,9  Mr. 
Sherman  10  and  Mr.  Glouer,11  shalbe  desired  as  from  this  Court  to  assist  as  mem- 
bers of  this  Synod." 


1  See  Ibid.,  pp.  184-211. 

2  See  T.  P.  Gillett,  Hist.  Cong:.  C/i.     .     .     .    of  Branford.     A  Semi-Centcnnial  Dii 
New  Haven,  1858,  pp.  7-9. 

a  Felt,  Eccles.  Hist.  X.  E.,  II  :  412. 

4  See  Cothren,  Hist.  Ancient  Woodbury,  Waterbury,  1854,  pp.  113-134.  The  first  docu- 
ment in  the  dispute  is  of  Jan.,  1666. 

s  See  Stiles,  Hist.  A  ncient  Windsor,  New  York,  1859,  PP-  '63-193. 

6  Conn.  Records,  II  :  53-55. 

»  Ibid. 

*  Jonathan  Mitchell  of  Cambridge,  Mass.,  one  of  the  chief  leaders  in  the  Half-Way  Cove- 
nant movement.  All  were  ministers,  distinguished  for  learning,  and  presumably  favorable  to  the 
newer  view. 

9  Edmund  Browne,  Sudbury,  Mass. 

10  John  Sherman,  Watertown,  Mass. 
»  Pelatiah  Glover,  Springfield,  Mass. 


274  TIIE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

The  Court  then  declared  that  the  body  should  proceed  with 
the  prescribed  business:  "Provided  that  ye  maior  part  of  y"  Teache- 
ing  Elders'  of  ye  Churches  be  present;"2  and  that  in  the  mean- 
time every  minister  in  the  colony  should  be  provided  with  a  copy 
of  the  questions,  and  all  the  churches  be  recommended  to  ab- 
stain from  controversy  pending  the  result  of  the  "  Synod." 

The  questions3  thus  sent  forth  cover  a  far  greater  range  of 
topics  than  those  communicated  to  the  Massachusetts  Court  in 
1656.  Those  which  head  the  list  are  substantially  a  repetition  of 
the  queries  addressed  by  the  Massachusetts  legislature  to  the 
Synod  of  1662,  viz.: 

"1.  Whether  federall  holines  or  couen1  interest  be  not  ye  propper  ground  of 
Baptisme.  2.  Whether  Coniunion  of  Ch",  as  such,  be  not  warrantable  by  the 
word  of  God." 

But  others  bear  directly  on  the  questions  raised  by  Pitkin 
and  his  friends,  and  show  the  dawnings  of  that  system  by  which 
those  who  contributed  to  support  of  a  minister,  though  not  them- 
selves church  members,  claimed  a  voice  in  his  election,  — a  sys- 
tem which  has  been  so  peculiar  a  feature  of  New  England  Con- 
gregationalism: 4 

"4.  Whether  ministeriall  officers  are  not  as  truly  bound  to  baptize  the  visible 
disciples  of  X'  providentially  setled  amongst  them,  as  officially  to  preach  the  Word. 
5.  Whether  setled  inhabitants  of  the  Countrey,  being  members  of  other  Churches, 
should  haue  their  children  baptized  amongst  vs  w,hout  themselues  first  ordMy  ioyne- 
ing  in  Churches  here.  9.  Whether  it  doth  not  belong  to  ye  body  of  a  Towne  col- 
lectiuely,  taken  joyntly,  to  call  him  to  be  their  minister  whom  the  Church  shal  choose 
to  be  their  officer.  13.  Whether  the  Church  her  invitation  and  election  of  an  officer 
or  preacheing  Elder  necessitates  the  whole  Congregation  to  sit  downe  satisfied,  as 
bound  thereby  to  accept  him  as  their  Minister  though  invited  and  setled  w"'out  ye 
Townes  consent." 

Here  then  were  matters  enough  for  a  general  discussion  of 
a  great  part  of  what  had  heretofore  been  Congregational  usage. 
It  is  easv  to  see  that  Connecticut  was  in  a  ferment,  and  that  the 


'  /.  «•.,  ministers  in  relationship  to  particular  Conn,  churches-the  Court  drew  no  distinction 
between  pastors  and  teachers.  Its  purpose  was  to  secure  a  representation  of  a  majority  of  the 
churches. 

2  Conn.  Ree.y  Ibid. 

3  Text,  Ibid.,  54,  55.  Trumbull,  Hist.  Con,,.,  1 :  302,  303,  457-  He  makes  the  mistake  of  at- 
tributing the  same  questions  to  1656. 

*  An  interesting  account  of  the  development  of  the  parish  system  in  Massachusetts  is  that 
of  D.  T.  Fiske.  Cont.  Ecclts.  Hist.  Essex  County,  pp.  262-269. 


THE    PROPOSED    "  SYNOD,"    1667  275 

process  had  begun  which  was  to  lead  to  the  erection  of  an  eccle- 
siastical constitution  imposed  by  state  authority  at  Saybrook  in 
1708.  Indeed,  the  main  question  which  the  Saybrook  Platform 
was  to  attempt  to  answer  was  already  asked  in  the  thirteenth 
of  this  series  of  1666  : 

"  Vnto  whom  shal  such  persons  repaire  that  are  grieued  at  any  Church  process 
or  censure,  or  whether  they  must  acquiesce  in  the  Churches  sentence  vnto  wch  they 
doe  belong." 

But  though  of  great  importance,  these  questions  never  came 
to  discussion  in  the  way  planned  by  the  Court.  Opposition  to 
the  proposed  meeting  manifested  itself  strongly.  The  stricter 
Congregationalists,  doubtless,  objected  to  the  gathering  as  likely 
to  impose  the  Half-Way  Covenant  upon  them,  and  to  its  title 
of  "Synod"  as  a  misnomer  for  an  assemblage  of  ministers  only.1 
At  all  events  the  Court,  at  its  session  May  9,  1667,  while  reaffirm- 
ing the  summons,  changed  the  title  of  the  meeting  to  "  Assem- 
bly."2 Thus  softened  in  title  the  body  met,3  but  before  it  could 
do  any  business  except  discuss  whether  its  debates  should  be 
public  or  private,  it  adjourned  to  the  following  October.  Pending 
the  reassembly  a  shrewd  move  was  made  by  the  leaders  of  the 
opposition  to  the  Half- Way  Covenant,  —  Rev.  Messrs.  John  Whit- 
ing of  Hartford,  John  Warham  of  Windsor,  and  Samuel  Hooker  of 
Farmington, —  a  move  which  abruptly  terminated  the  Assembly. 
The  Commissioners  of  the  United  Colonies  met  at  Hartford,  Sep- 
tember 15,  16J7,4  and  were  induced  to  vote  to:5 

' '  propound  that  wher  any  questian  may  or  doth  arise  .  .  .  that  are  of  comon  con- 
cernment whether  in  the  Matters  of  faith  or  order  and  any  of  the  Collonies  shall 
apprehend  it  needfull  to  call  in  the  helpe  of  a  Councell  or  Synode  for  the  orderly 
Desision  therof  ;  That  the  Members  of  such  Councell  or  .Synode  May  consist  of  the 
Messengers  of  the  Churches  called  Indifferently  out  of  all  the  vnited  Collonies  by  an 
orderly  agreement  of  the  severall  Generall  Courts  and  the  place  of  meeting  to  be  att 
or  neare  Boston." 


1  See  remarks  of  G.  L.  Walker,  Hist.  First  Ck.  Hart/ord,  p.  201. 

2  Conn.  Records,  11:67. 

3  Ibid.,  70.     Trumbull,  1 :  457,  458. 

4  The  Commissioners,  two  from  each  colony,  had  met  annually  from  1643  till  the  union  of 
Conn,  and  New  Haven.     Their  importance  was  now  little  and  they  met  biennially. 

5  Acts  0/  Comm.  0/ United  Colonies,   II  :  328,  in  Records  0/ Plymouth,   Boston,  1859,  X. 
See  also  Conn.  Records,  II :  69,  70. 


2/6  THE   HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

On  the  strength  of  this  vote  the  three  ministers  named  ap- 
proached the  Connecticut  Court  at  its  meeting  October  10,  1667, 
and  declared  that  the  Assembly  wished  the  Court  to  lay  the 
questions  before  a  larger  Council,  composed  of  representatives  of 
the  other  colonies  as  well  as  of  Connecticut.'  To  this  Rev.  Messrs. 
Joseph  Haynes  of  Hartford,  and  Gershom  Bulkley  of  Wethersfield, 
the  former  Whiting's  colleague  and  rival,  responded  in  an  address 
to  the  Court,  in  which  they  denied  that  the  Assembly  had  desired 
a  larger  Council.2  In  this  they  doubtless  represented  the  senti- 
ment of  their  Half-Way  Covenant  friends.  But  to  the  Court  the 
idea  of  a  Council  of  all  the  colonies  proved  attractive,  and  it  there- 
fore voted  requesting  the  churches  to  send  their  ministers  to  meet 
with  those  of  Massachusetts  and  Plymouth,  and  asking  the  Massa- 
chusetts Court  to  appoint  the  time  and  place  of  meeting'  —  a  desire 
which  the  Connecticut  Court  expressed  by  letter  to  the  authorities 
in  Boston,  October  16,  and  transmitted  by  John  Whiting.4  But 
the  Massachusetts  Court  was  disinclined  to  move  and  made  an 
evasive  reply.5  Thus  all  the  elaborate  preparations  for  such  a  set- 
tlement of  disputed  points  in  Connecticut  as  Massachusetts  had 
attempted  in  1662  ended  in  failure. 

The  Court  recognized  the  unavailing  character  of  its  attempts, 

but  the  quarrels  still  continued  at  Hartford  and  elsewhere.     As  a 

last  resort,  therefore,  on  May  16,  1668,  the  Connecticut  legislature 

requested  Rev.  Messrs.  James  Fitch  of  Norwich,  Gershom  Bulkley 

of  Wethersfield,  Joseph  Eliot  of  Guilford,  and  Samuel  Wakeman  of 

Fairfield,  to  meet  at  Saybrook  or  Norwich  on  the  following  8th  or 

9th  of  June,  and: 6 

"Consider  of  some  expedient  for  our  peace,  by  searching  out  the  rule  and  thereby 
cleareing  up  how  farre  the  churches  and  people  may  walke  together  within  themselues 
and  one  \vlh  another  in  the  fellowship  and  order  of  the  Gospel,  notwithstanding  some 
various  apprehensions  amonge  them  in  matters  of  discipline  respecting  membership 
and  baptisme  &c." 

1  Conn.  Records,  II :  69,  70.  2  Trumbull,  Hist.  Conn.,  1 :  458. 

3  Conn.  Records,  II :  70.  *  Ibid.,  516,  517. 

6  Ibid.     Records     .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  I V :  2 :  354. 

•  Conn.  Records,  II :  84.  Bacon,  Discourse,  in  Cont.  Eccles.  Hist.  Conn.,  p.  27,  has  pointed 
out  that  one  of  the  ministers  was  chosen  from  each  of  the  four  then  newly  established  counties  of 
the  colony. 


THE   DISCUSSION   ENDS    IN   TOLERATION  277 

It  was  a  confession  of  failure  to  secure  union  and  a  declaration  of 

a  willingness  to  admit  variety  in  ecclesiastical  practice. 

In  accordance  with  the  request  of  the  Court  the  four  ministers 

met,  and  at  the  session  of  the  legislature,  May  13,  1669,  presented 

their  "  returne."     Exactly  what  this  was  we  do  not  know,  but  it 

appears  to  have  been  of  a  conciliatory  nature.     The  same  Court 

voted  thereupon  as  follows,  a  vote  which  was  the  practical  solution 

of  the  Half-way  Covenant  dispute  as  far  as  the  government  of 

Connecticut  was  concerned:' 

"  This  Court  .  .  .  doe  declare  that  whereas  the  Congregationall  Churches  in 
these  partes  for  the  generall  of  their  profession  and  practice  haue  hitherto  been  ap- 
proued,  we  can  doe  no  less  than  still  approue  and  countenance  the  same  to  be  w,bout 
disturbance  vntill  better  light  in  an  orderly  way  doth  appeare  ;  but  yet  forasmuch  as 
sundry  persons  of  worth  for  prudence  and  piety  amongst  us  are  otherwise  perswaded, 
.  .  .  This  Court  doth  declare  that  all  such  persons  being  allso  approued  accord- 
ing to  lawe  as  orthodox  and  sownd  in  the  fundamentals  of  Christian  religion  may 
haue  allowance  of  their  perswasion  and  profession  in  church  wayes  or  assemblies 
wtbout  disturbance." 

Here  was  a  formal  toleration  for  both  the  supporters  of  the 
Half-Way  Covenant  and  its  opponents,  and  permission  also  for 
churches  hopelessly  split  upon  the  question  to  divide.  Of  this 
latter  privilege  the  minority  in  the  church  at  Hartford  availed 
themselves  at  once.2  But  it  curiously  illustrates  the  strength  of 
the  Half-Way  Covenant  movement,  in  spite  of  the  brave  and  in 
many  ways  successful  fight  made  against  it,  that  the  withdrawing 
party  at  Hartford  should,  apparently  on  the  very  day  of  their 
formation  into  a  separate  church,  have  begun  the  use  of  the  sys- 
tem hostility  toward  which  had  been  their  original  ground  of 
quarrel  with  the  majority  of  the  old  church.3  From  this  permis- 
sion that  both  systems  should  exist  side  by  side  in  Connecticut, 
interest  in  the  dispute  waned.  In  Massachusetts  similar  toleration 
had  come  to  be  practiced,  though  without  leaving  so  distinct  a 
mark  upon  the  records  of  the  colony.  In  Connecticut  and  Massa- 
chusetts alike  the  supporters  of  the  Half- Way  Covenant  were  the 


1  Conn.  Records,  II :  109. 

2  Conn.  Records,  II:  120.     Walker,  Hist.  First  Ch.  Hartford,  pp.  204-209.     The  Second 
Ch.  Hartford  was  organized  Feb.  12-22,  1670. 

3  Ibid. 


278  THE    HALF-WAV    COVENANT 

growing  party.     Yet  the  stricter  usage  continued  to  have  its  rep- 
resentatives and  was  never  wholly  abandoned  for  the  larger.' 


Though  aside  from  the  main  purpose  of  this  introduction 
to  the  results  of  1657  and  1662,  a  few  words  as  to  the  later  his- 
tory of  the  Half-AVay  Covenant  may  not  be  inappropriate.  The 
theory  on  which  the  action  of  the  Ministerial  Assembly  of  1657, 
and  the  Synod  of  1662,  was  based,  was  that  only  children  of 
church  members  were  entitled  to  baptism,  because  they  alone 
had  inherited  membership.  Children  of  those  who  were  not  in 
covenant  were  not  to  be  baptized,  they  were  not  members  of  the 
church,  and  could  only  become  so  (save  in  the  case  of  adoption 
into  the  household  of  a  church  member)  by  a  profession  of  per- 
sonal piety.  So  too  "owning  the  covenant"  was,  in  the  view  of 
the  originators  of  the  Half-Way  Covenant  practice,  a  solemn 
personal  acceptance,  as  far  as  it  lay  in  a  man's  power  unaided 
by  divine  grace,  of  his  place  in  the  visible  Kingdom  of  God,  and 
a  formal  declaration  of  his  intention  to  do  his  best  to  lead  a 
Christian  life  by  association  in  worship  and  discipline  with  the 
recognized  people  of  God.  He  who  was  himself  by  birth  one  in 
covenant  with  God,  and  who  made  that  covenant  his  own  by  a 
public  declaration,  was  deemed  to  be  in  a  state  where  he  might 
hopefully  expect  that  work  of  grace  in  the  heart  which  it  was 
believed  God  alone  could  effect.  But  as  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury closed,  and  the  eighteenth  with  its  prevailingly  low  type  of 
piety  wore  on,  the  original  basis  of  the  baptismal  right  in  the 
existing  membership  of  the  recipient  was  less  and  less  insisted 
upon,  though  never  absolutely  forgotten.  To  "own  the  cove- 
nant" and  to  present  one's  children  for  baptism  became  less  a 
solemn  claiming  of  rights  already  possessed,  and  more  an  act 
deemed  of  value  in  itself.  The  membership  of  the  claimant  sank 
into  the  background;  the  rite,  which  was  at  first  but  a  symbol 
of  that  membership,  became  the  important  thing,  and  to  receive 
it  was  looked  upon  as  a  duty,  something  to  be  done  for  one's 


1  Bellamy  was  able  to  write  in  1769,  when  the  reaction  against  the  system  was  beginning: 
"  Even  to  this  day  the  custom  is  not  universal."  The  Half-Way-Covcnant,  a  Dialogti.,  New 
Haven,  1769,  p.  3. 


ITS   LATER    HISTORY  279 

children  just  as  it  was  a  duty  to  teach  them  to  pray.  So  it  came 
about  that,  by  the  time  Cotton  Mather  wrote  the  Ratio  Disciplines, 
many  ministers  admitted  all  applicants  of  good  moral  character  to 
the  covenant  and  granted  them  and  their  children  baptism,  with- 
out question  as  to  whether  the  recipients  were  members  by  birth 
or  not.1  This  was  a  wide  departure  from  the  original  Half- Way 
Covenant  practice,  and  one  which  tended  vastly  more  than  that 
to  cheapen  the  Gospel  ordinances.  Indeed,  there  is  reason  to 
believe  that  in  many  places  admission  to  the  covenant  came  to 
be  looked  upon  much  as  signing  a  temperance  pledge  has  fre- 
quently been  regarded  in  our  day, —  as  a  means  by  which  large 
bodies  of  young  people  might  be  induced  to  start  out  in  the 
right  path  in  life.2  And  while  some  churches  admitted  to  bap- 
tism those  who  had  no  other  claim  than  a  respectable  life  and 
a  willingness  to  take  the  covenant  obligations,  others  granted 
the  rite  to  the  children  of  those  who  had  themselves  been  bap- 
tized, without  requiring  any  covenant  promises  from  the  parents 
at  all.3 

It  was  natural  that  when  the  barriers  which  the  Ministers' 
Convention  and  the  Synod  had  erected  between  the  non-church 
member  and  baptism  were  so  broken  down,  that  those  other 
obstacles  which  they  had  placed  between  the  member  by  birth 
who  could  not  claim  to  be  personally  regenerate  and  the  Lord's 
Supper  should  be  lightly  regarded  in  many  quarters.  If  a  man 
was  member  enough  to  be  presumed  fit  for  one  sacrament  in 
the  absence  of  flagrant  immorality,  why  was  he  not  competent  to 


1  Published  1726,  Preface  dated  1719.  "  It  may  be  added,  There  having  been  some  Insinu- 
ations made  unto  the  World,  as  if  the  Streets  here  were  crouded  with  Unbaptized  People,  because 
the  Churches  have  not  such  Terms  0/  Initiation  here,  as  are  practised  in  other  Protestant 
Churches, 'tis  to  be  now  declared,  that  this  is  a  most  unaccountable  Cainmny,  for  'tis  well  known 
there  is  not  one  Person  in  all  the  Country  free  from  a  scandalous  and  notorious  disqualifying 
Ignorance  and  Impiety,  but  what  may  repair  to  some  Hundred  Ministers  in  these  Colonies  and 
be  Baptised,"  p.  80. 

2  Compare  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  475. 

3  On  April  30,  1789,  the  First  Church,  Haverhill,  Mass.,  voted:  "Whereas  it  has  been 
customary  for  persons  in  order  to  obtain  baptism  for  their  children,  to  make  a  public  profession  of 
faith  called  'owning  the  Covenant,'  and  as  this  condition  may  hinder  some  persons  (though  other- 
wise qualified)  from  complying  with  the  institution  ;  voted  that  it  be  no  longer  required,  but  the 
children  of  all  baptized  persons  may  be  admitted  to  this  holy  ordinance  unless  they  (the  parents) 
have  forfeited  this  privilege  by  scandalous  immorality."  Quoted  by  D.  T.  Fiske,  Cont.  Eec/es. 
Hist.  Essex  Co.,  Mass.,  p.  279. 


28o  THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

receive  the  other?  So  some  men  in  New  England  reasoned,  and 
the  result  was  what  may  be  called  "  Stoddardeanism,"  from  the 
name  of  its  chief  exponent,  though  Stoddard  was  by  no  means 
the  originator  of  the  view.  Its  essence  was  that  it  was  the  duty 
of  all  who  were  sincerely  desirous  of  living  a  Christian  life,  and 
who  were  church  members  by  birth,  even  though  not  consciously 
regenerate,  to  partake  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  Though  never 
adopted  by  a  majority  of  the  New  England  churches,  it  was  wide- 
spread in  Western  Massachusetts  and  Connecticut  during  the 
eighteenth  century. 

As  early  as  1677,  Increase  Mather,  in  a  sermon  before  the 
Massachusetts  General  Court,  complained  of  the  spread  of  Stod- 
dardean  principles1  in  the  ranks  of  the  ministry.  Xor  was  the 
region  about  Boston  the  only  section  of  New  England  where 
such  views  were  taught.  They  came  into  debate  at  the  so-called 
Reforming  Synod  of  1679,  where  they  exercised  some  influence 
on  the  result.'  They  were  widely  prevalent  during  the  last 
quarter  of  the  seventeenth  century,  but  it  is  in  the  writings 
of  Solomon  Stoddard '  that   they  have   their  sharpest  expression. 


1  '•  I  wish  there  be  not  teachers  found  in  our  Israel,  that  have  espoused  loose  large  princi- 
ples here,  designing  to  bring  all  persons  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  who  have  an  historical  faith,  and 
are  not  scandalous  in  life,  though  they  never  had  experience  of  a  work  of  regeneration  in  their 
souls."  A  Call from  Heaven  To  the  Present  and  Succeeding  Generations,  Boston,  1679,  quoted 
by  L.  Withington,  Cent.  Eccles.  Hist.  Essex  Co.,  Mass.,  pp.  389,  390. 

oddard,  in  his  Appeal  to  the  Learned,  pp.  93.  94.  t<;"s  the  following  story :  "  The  words- 

of  the  Synod  [of  1679]  are  these,  //  is  requisite  that  Persons  he   not  admitted  unto  Communion 

in  the  Lords  Supper  without   making  a   Personal  and  Public  Profession  0/ their  Faith   and 

Repentance,  [etc..  The  passage  is  in  Necessity  of  Reformation,  p.  10;  to  be  found  later  in  this 

work.]     I   shall  give  the  World  an   Account  how  the  matter  was  acted.     Some  of  the  Elders  in 

the  Synod  had  drawn  up  a  Conclusion,  That   persons  should  make  a  Relation  of   the  work  of  Gods 

Spirit  upon  their  hearts,  in  order  to  coming  into  full  I  oe  others  of  the  Elders  ob- 

je.  ted    against    it,  and   after   some    discourse    it    was  agreed   to  have  a   dispute  on  that   question. 

Whether  those  Professors  of  Religion  as  are  of  good  Conversation,  are  not  to  be  admitted  to  full 

lion,    provided  they  are  able  to  Examine  themselves,  and  discern   the  Lords  body.     Mr. 

Mather,  held    the  Negative;  I  laboured  10  make  good  the  Affirmative  ;  The  result  was, 

j  blotted  out  that  clause  of  Making  a  Relation  of   the  work  of  Gods  Spirit,  and  put  in  the 

.   /'/,<•  Making  a  Profession  of  their  Faith  and  Repentance;  and  so  I  Voted  will)  I 

and  am  of  the  same  judgment  still."     To  this  statement  of  Stoddard  the  anonymous  writer  of  the 

Appeal  of  Some  of  the  Unlearned replied,  p.  17:     "The  Story  told  of  the  blotting  out  a  Passat 

in  the   result  of  the  Synod,  we  are  upon  good   Information  from  the  Moderator  [Increase  Mather] 

himself,  who  drew  up  that  Result,  assured  it  is  a  mistake,  and  a  gross  one."      Put  the  definite  stale- 

Stoddard  over  his  own  name  is  to  be  preferred  to  the  hearsay  of  a  nameless  writer.     Fur- 

dard's  accuracy  may  be  found  in    Thacher's  account  of  the  Reforming 

Synod  quoted  in  chapter  xiii  of  this  • 

dard  was  lor,  at  Boston  in  1643,  educated  at  Harvard,  where  he  graduated 
in  1662,  and  after  serving  the  college  as  tutor  and  librarian,  he  accepted  an  invitation  to  preach  at 
Northampton  in  i66j,  and  a  formal  call  in  167a.      H'-re  he  remained  till  he  died,  Feb.  11. 


"  STODDARDEANISM  "  28l 

That  able  and  devout  minister  left  the  impress  of  his  thought 
throughout  the  Connecticut  valley.  In  1700  he  published  his 
Doctrine  of  Instituted  C/iurc/ies,1  a  treatise  which  is  widely  at  va- 
riance with  the  theories  of  early  Congregationalism  and  is  es- 
sentially a  step  in  the  direction  of  the  parish  systems  of  Europe. 
Not  only  did  he  assert  the  desirability  of  National  Churches,2  a 
doctrine  against  which  the  founders  of  New  England  set  their 
faces;  he  denied  the  necessity  of  local  covenants,  in  which  they 
firmly  believed;3  while  his  views  as  to  the  authority  of  the  min- 
ister in  church  administration  would  have  suited  the  Presbyte- 
rian Parker  of  Newbury  had  he  lived  a  generation  earlier.4  But 
his  theory  of  access  to  the  Supper  is  more  important.  He  asks 
the  question  and  gives  the  answer:5 

' '  Whether  such  Persons  as  have  a  good  Conversation  and  a  Competent  Knowledge, 
may  come  to  the  Lords  Supper,  with  a  good  Conscience,  in  case  they  know  them- 
selves to  be  in  a  Natural  Condition  ? 

Answ.  They  may  and  ought  to  come  tho  they  know  themselves  to  be  in  a 
Natural  Condition  ;  this  Ordinance  is  instituted  for  all  the  adult  Members  of  the 
Church  who  are  not  scandalous,  and  therefore  must  be  attended  by  them  ;  as  no  Man 
may  neglect  Prayer,  or  hearing  the  Word,  because  he  cannot  do  it  in  Faith,  so  he 
may  not  neglect  the  Lords  Supper." 

Increase  Mather's  Order  of  the  Gospel*  had  apparently  called 
out  the  treatise  of  Stoddard,  and  Mather  now  hastened  to  reply, 
reasserting  his  well  known  views,  which  were  essentially  a  COnserV- 


his  piety  and  pastoral  zeal  there  can  be  no  doubt,  both  were  conspicuous,  and  his  ministry  was 
marked  by  at  least  five  revivals.  A  man  of  much  personal  modesty,  he  was  one  of  the  great 
preachers  of  his  day  and  easily  the  foremost  minister  in  western  Massachusetts,  indeed  Pres. 
Dwight  declared  that  he  "  possessed,  probably,  more  influence  than  any  other  Clergyman  in  the 
province,  during  a  period  of  thirty  years."  An  excellent  sketch  of  him  maybe  found  in  Sibley, 
Graduates  of  Harvard,  II  :  111-122,  where  a  list  of  his  writings  and  a  considerable  bibliography 
of  his  life  is  given.  For  the  tradition  as  to  Stoddard's  conversion  at  the  Supper,  see  I.  N.  Tarbox, 
in  New  Englander,  XLIII  :  624-626  (Sept.,  1884). 

1  For  the  writings  of  Stoddard  and  his  opponents  see  ante,  p.  240. 

2  Instituted  Churches,  p.  25. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  8. 

4  "The  Teaching  Officer  is  appointed  by  Christ  to  Baptize  and  Administer  the  Lords 
Supper,  and  therefore  he  is  made  Judge  by  God,  what  Persons  those  ordinances  are  to  be  Admin- 
istred  to,  and  it  is  not  the  work  either  of  the  Brethren  or  Ruling  Elders,  any  ways  to  intermeddle 
in  that  Affair  or  Limit  him  .  .  .  The  Teaching  Elders  with  the  Ruling  Elders,  make  the  Pres- 
bytery of  the  Church  ;  with  whom  the  Government  of  the  Church  is  entrusted  :  The  Power  of 
Censuring  offenders  in  the  Church  and  absolving  of  Penitents,  doth  belong  alone  to  these,  the 
Brethren  of  the  Church  are  not  to  intermeddle  with  it."     Ibid.,  p.  12. 

6  Ibid.,  p.  21.  Exactly  when  Stoddardeanism  was  adopted  by  the  Northampton  church  is 
uncertain.  The  records  show  that  as  late  as  1706  a  distinction  was  made  between  covenant  mem- 
bers and  those  in  full  communion. 

6  Boston,  1700.     See  ante,  p.  240. 
19 


282  THE    HALF-WAV    COVENANT 

ative  presentation  of  the  general  positions  of  the  leaders  of  the 
Half- Way  Covenant  movement  forty  years  before.  Stoddard  made 
no  immediate  answer,  but  did  not  change  his  opinion,  which  he 
reasserted  after  a  time  in  a  published  sermon,  printed  in  1708, 
which  again  called  out  Mather  and  led  to  Stoddard's  elaborate 
defense  of  his  theory  in  his  Appeal  to  t/ie  Learned.  In  this  work  he 
affirms:  ' 

"  This  Ordinance  [Supper]  has  a  proper  tendency  in  its  own  nature  to  Convert 
men.  Herein  men  may  learn  the  necessity  &  sufficiency  of  the  Death  of  Christ  in 
order  to  Pardon.  Here  is  an  affecting  offer  of  Christ  crucifyed  ;  here  is  a  Sealing  of 
the  Covenant,  that  if  men  come  to  Christ,  they  shall  be  Saved,  which  is  a  great  means 
to  convince  of  safety  in  coming  to  Christ. 

All  Ordinances  are  for  the  Saving  good  of  those  that  they  are  to  be  administred 
unto.  This  Ordinance  is  according  to  Institution  to  be  applyed  to  visible  Saints,5 
though  Unconverted,  therefore  it  is  for  their  Saving  good,  and  consequently  for  their 
Conversion." 

These  views  of  Stoddard  spread  widely  and  were  adopted  by 
many  good  men.  The  majority  of  the  churches  in  Western  Massa- 
chusetts accepted  them,  they  were  largely  entertained  in  Connecti- 
cut, and  the  region  about  Boston  was  not  without  their  represen- 
tatives.3 But  though  they  might  be  held  by  devoted  ministers  and 
in  earnest  communities,  they  were  a  nullification  of  the  conception 
of  a  church  entertained  by  the  founders  of  New  England.'  Yet  the 
root  of  Stoddardeanism  is  to  be  found  in  the  dual  and  inconsistent 


'  Page  25. 

2  Stoddard's  conception  of  "visible  saints"  was  "Such  as  make  a  serious  profession  of  the 
true  Religion,  together  with  those  that  do  descend  from  them,  till  rejected  of  God."  Instituted 
Churches,  p.  6. 

3  In  1750.  at  the  time  of  Edwards's  dismission  from  Northampton,  the  old  Hampshire  Asso- 
ciation might  be  divided  as  follows;  Stoddardcan,  Amherst,  Brimfield,  Deerfield,  East  Granville, 
Great  Harrington,  Greenwich,  Hadley,  South  Hadley,  Longmeadow,  New  Marlborough,  Northfield, 
Northampton,  Sheffield,  Shutesbury,  Southampton,  Springfield,  West  Springfield.  Sunderland, 
Westfield,  Wilbraham  ;  Somers.  Conn.;  Suffield,  Conn.;  A  nti-Stoddardcan,  Eelchertown  ;  En- 
field, Conn.;  Pelham.  Hatfield  was  doubtful.  See  New  Engiander,  IV:  353.  The  following 
ministers  defended  these  views  at  various  times  in  print,  George  Beckwith,  Lyme,  Conn.;  Charles 
Chauncy,  First  Church,  Boston;  Ebenezer  Devotion,  Scotland,  Conn.;  Moses  Hemmenway,  Wells, 
Me.;  Joseph  I.athrop,  West  Springfield,  Mass.;  Moses  Mather,  Darien,  Conn.;  Solomon  Williams, 
Lebanon,  Conn.  These  of  course  represent  but  a  few  of  the  real  number  of  adherents.  Their 
geographical  distribution  may  suggest  something  as  to  the  wide  spread  of  these  opinions;  while  the 
later  history  of  most  of  the  churches  represented  may  also  suggest  a  degree  of  hesitation  in  claim- 
ing, as  has  often  been  done,  that  Unitarianism  was  the  direct  fruit  of  Stoddardeanism  and  the  Half- 
Way  Covenant. 

4  Could  anything  much  more  foreign  to  the  ideas  of  Hooker  or  of  Cotton  be  imagined  than 
the  following  church-act?  "At  a  church  meeting  holden  in  Westfield  [Mass.]  Feb.  25th,  1728, 
voted,  that  those  who  enter  full  communion,  may  have  liberty  to  give  an  account  of  a  work  of 
saving  conversion  or  not.  It  shall  be  regarded  by  the  church  as  a  matter  of  indifference."  Ne-a> 
Englander,  IV:  354. 


OPPOSED   BY   THE    REVIVAL   SPIRIT  283 

theory  of  those  founders  as  to  church-membership,  by  experience 
and  by  birth.  It  is  the  complete  demonstration  of  that  original 
incongruity. 

Perhaps  the  best  illustration  of  the  change  of  feeling  which 
had  come  over  New  England  in  regard  to  the  privileges  of  church 
membership  is  the  statement  of  Cotton  Mather  in  the  Ratio  Disci- 
pline?, where  he  speaks  of  the  Stoddardean  view  as  held  by  "some 
eminent  Pastors  (and  some  of  their  Churches),"  and  then  describes 
the  more  conservative  theory,  defended  by  his  father,  that  none 
should  be  admitted  to  the  Supper  but  those  who  could  testify  to 
'■'■Experimental  Piety."     He  declares: ' 

"  Indeed  there  is  a  Variety  both  of  Judgment  and  Practice  in  the  Churches  of  Mew- 
England  upon  this  Matter  ;  However  it  produces  no  troublesome  Variance  or  Con- 
tention among  them." 

Fortunately  this  condition  of  apathy  was  not  of  long  duration. 
The  rise  of  a  new  type  of  theology  led  to  an  earnest  and  ultimately 
successful  effort  to  overthrow  not  only  Stoddardeanism  but  the 
Half-Way  Covenant;  and  the  struggle  began  where  Stoddardeanism 
was  most  intrenched,  at  Northampton,  Mass.  Stoddard's  successor 
was  his  grandson,  Jonathan  Edwards,2  who  became  pastor  of  the 
Northampton  church  February  15,  1727.  For  nearly  twenty  years 
after  the  commencement  of  his  ministry  Edwards  practiced  the 
system  introduced  by  his  grandfather.  But  Edwards  was  deeply 
moved  by  the  revival  spirit  of  the  second  quarter  of  the  eighteenth 
century.  Though  essentially  Calvinistic,  the  prevailing  type  of 
theology  in  New  England  during  the  second  half  of  the  seven- 
teenth century  had  laid  great  stress  on  the  external  means  of 
grace.  It  was  an  unemotional '  age  in  religion.  Revivals  were 
almost  unknown.     No  very  sharp  distinction  was  drawn,  either  in 


2  Born  at  East  Windsor,  Conn.,  Oct.  5,  1703,  graduated  at  Yale  1720,  studied  theology  at 
Yale  till  1722,  preached  till  April,  1723,  in  New  York,  became  tutor  at  Yale  May,  1724,  and  held  the 
post  till  September,  1726.  Settled  at  Northampton  February,  1727,  dismissed  June,  1750.  Settled 
at  Stockbridge  August,  1751,  dismissed  to  become  president  of  Princeton,  January,  1758.  Died 
March  22,  1758.  Among  the  numerous  biographies  of  Edwards  perhaps  the  most  valuable  is  S.  E. 
Dwight,  Life  of  President  Edwards,  New  York,  1830.  It  is  amply  illustrated  with  letters  and 
documents.  A  suggestive  sketch  is  that  of  Prof.  A.  V.  G.  Allen,  Jonathan  Edwards  (American 
Religious  Leaders  Series),  Boston,  1889  (Reviewed  by  Dr.  J.  W.  Wellman,  Boston,  1890).  A  com- 
plete bibliography  of  Edwards's  writings  and  a  list  of  biographical  authorities  will  be  found  in  Prof. 
F.  B.  Dexter,  Biog.  Sketches  of  the  Grad.  of  Yale,  pp.  221-226. 


284  THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

experience  or  teaching,  between  the  converted  and  unconverted. 
Though  believed  to  be  clearly  distinguished  by  the  eye  of  God,  to 
human  vision  a  careful  discrimination  was  difficult.  Hence  great 
value  was  set  on  those  means  by  which  a  soul  might  be  nurtured 
in  the  Kingdom  of  God.  As  the  eighteenth  century  opened  this 
tendency  increased,  and  to  a  considerable  extent  the  type  of 
preaching  became  "  Arminian,"  as  it  was  termed,  —  that  is,  increas- 
ing weight  was  laid  upon  the  cultivation  of  morality  as  a  means  to 
a  Christian  life,  rather  than  upon  an  insistance  on  the  prime  neces- 
sity of  a  divinely  wrought  change  in  a  man's  nature,  a  change  of 
which  morality  should  not  be  the  means,  but  the  fruit.  It  was  the 
prevalence  of  these  views  in  greater  or  less  degree  which  made 
the  acceptance  of  the  Half- Way  Covenant  easy,  and  it  is  from  them, 
rather  than  directly  from  that  Covenant,  that  New  England  Uni- 
tarianism  derives,  in  large  part,  its  origin.  But  the  revival  move- 
ments in  the  fourth  and  fifth  decades  of  the  eighteenth  century 
reproduced  in  large  degree  the  type  of  preaching  and  experience 
which  characterized  the  Puritans  at  their  exodus  from  England. 
Conversion,  that  is,  a  conscious  sense  of  a  change  in  a  man's  rela- 
tions to  God,  was  insisted  on  as  the  prime  test  of  Christianity. 
Such  an  experience  is  individual,  not  corporate;  and  in  proportion 
as  conscious  regeneration  was  made  the  standard  of  trial,  the  cor- 
porate theory  of  hereditary  covenant  relationship  to  God  sank  into 
the  background.  And,  as  nothing  short  of  a  distinct  sense  of 
reconciliation  with  God's  plans  was  held  to  give  ground  for  a  valid 
Christian  hope,  the  supporters  of  the  revival  movements  insisted 
that  any  dependence  on  means,  however  good  in  themselves,  was 
illusory  and  dangerous, —  many  going  so  far  as  to  say  that  no  ac- 
tion of  an  unconverted  man,  not  even  prayer,  could  be  acceptable 
in  the  sight  of  God.  The  "  Great  Awakening  "  under  the  preach- 
ing of  Whitefield  in  1740-41,  led  to  a  sharp  division  between  the 
holders  of  the  two  positions,  nicknamed  at  that  time  the  "  Old 
Lights  "  and  the  "  New  Lights."  The  principles  of  the  school  of 
theology  which  came  out  of  the  revivals  were  thus  of  necessity 
opposed  to  the  Half-Way  Covenant,  and  to  that  school  its  destruc- 


EDWARDS   AND    BELLAMY  285 

tion  was  due.  Of  that  school  the  founder  and  pioneer  was  Jona- 
than Edwards. 

As  has  been  seen,  Edwards  practiced  Stoddardeanism  far  into 
his  Northampton  ministry,  and  at  first  without  very  serious  scru- 
ples. But  the  revivals  in  which  he  bore  a  large  share  gradually 
produced  a  change  of  feeling  in  him,  and  by  1744  he  was  fully  con- 
vinced that  the  theory  of  Stoddard  was  wrong.1  No  opportunity, 
however,  permitted  him  to  put  his  changed  ideas  into  practice  till 
December  1748,  when  he  denounced  the  system  in  vogue  in  the 
Northampton  church  with  his  accustomed  courage,  and  the  contro- 
versy began  between  him  and  his  people  which  led  to  his  dismission 
in  June  1750.3  In  the  heat  of  this  discussion  he  published,  in 
August,  1749,  his  Humble  Inquiry  .  .  .  Concerning  the  Qualifi- 
cations Requisite  to  .  .  .  full  Communion.3  The  work  was  pri- 
marily an  argument  against  Stoddardeanism,  that  was  the  point 
under  debate  between  Edwards  and  the  Northampton  church;  but 
it  contained,  in  a  subsidiary  paragraph,  a  vigorous  and  consistent 
attack  on  the  Half-Way  Covenant  system  as  conducive  to  a  false 
sense  of  security  and  the  neglect  of  a  true  seeking  for  conversion.4 
To  this  tract  Rev.  Solomon  Williams  of  Lebanon,  Conn.,  replied,5 
touching,  of  course,  chiefly  on  the  Stoddardean  problem  involved 
in  the  dispute;  but  in  his  rejoinder  to  Williams,  Edwards  did  not 
fail  to  make  clear  once  more  his  opposition  not  only  to  Stoddard- 
eanism, but  to  the  Half- Way  Covenant. 

With  this  reply  the  discussion  of  the  subject  in  print  ceased 
for  a  number  of  years,  but  Edwards's  criticisms  had  their  direct 
fruitage.  Probably  no  disciple  of  Edwards  more  fully  shared  his 
views  regarding  conversion  than  Joseph  Bellamy,6  from  1738  to 


1  See  Dwight,  Life  of  Pres.  Ed-wards,  pp.  435-438. 

2  For  a  full  account  of  the  circumstances  leading  to  the  dismission  see  Ibid.,  pp.  298-403. 

3  See  ante,  p.  241. 

4  Dr.  D.  T.  Fiske  in  his  valuable  account  of  the  Half-Way  Covenant,  Cont.  Eccles.  Hist. 
Essex  Co.,  p.  281,  has  fallen  into  the  error  of  affirming  that  Edwards  opposed  Stoddardeanism,  but 
not  directly  the  Half-Way  Covenant.  Dr.  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  487,  quotes  Dr.  Fiske's  state- 
ment with  approval,  and  cites  in  confirmation  the  fact  that  Edwards  administered  the  covenant  in 
1742.  But  neither  writer  has  made  allowance  for  the  change  in  Edwards's  views,  and  both  must 
have  overlooked  pp.  126-131  of  the  Humble  Inquiry.  Compare  G.  L.  Walker,  New  Englandcr, 
XLIII:  611. 

5  See  ante,  p.  243. 

8  Bellamy  was  born  in  Cheshire,  Conn.,  Feb.  20,  1719  ;  graduated  at  Yale  1735  ;  studied  the- 
ology to  some  extent  under  Edwards.     Began  preaching  at   Bethlem  in  November,  1738,  and  was 


286  THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

1790  the  minister  at  Bethlem,  Conn.  On  him  and  the  church 
under  his  charge  the  effect  of  Edwards's  tracts  was  decisive.  The 
Bethlem  Church  Records  bear  testimony  that:1 

"  Upon  the  publishing  of  Mr.  Edwards'  Book  on  the  Sacrament,  this  Practice  [the 
Half-Way  Covenant]  was  laid  aside,  as  not  warranted  by  the  holy  scriptures  —  there 
being  no  other  scriptural  owning  the  covenant,  but  what  implies  a  profession  of 
Godliness." 

But,  in  spite  of  this  vote,  and  in  spite  of  a  defense  of 
Edwards  which  shows  that  Bellamy  was  fully  in  sympathy  with 
the  Northampton  pastor's  opposition  to  Stoddardeanism  and  could 
logically  hold  no  other  position  than  that  of  hostility  to  the  Half- 
Way  Covenant,2  it  was  not  till  nearly  twenty  years  after  Edwards's 
dismission  that  Bellamy  began  his  determined  public  attack  on 
the  system.  In  January  1769,  he  published  his  first  dialogue 
against  the  Half-Way  Covenant.3  Its  homely  but  vigorous  put- 
ting of  the  case  had  an  immediate  effect.  Within  the  next  few 
months  three  replies,  two  of  which  are  of  considerable  ability, 
appeared.  In  April,  Bellamy  issued  a  second  dialogue,  and  soon 
followed  it  by  a  third,  with  which  he  combined  an  attack  upon 
a  Stoddardean  treatise  on  the  Visible  Church,  in  Covenant  with  God* 
which  had  just  been  put  forth  by  Rev.  Moses  Mather  of  Darien, 
Conn.  Answers  followed  from  Mather  and  others,  and  the  fight 
of  pamphlets  waxed  hotter  and  more  personal.  A  fourth  dialogue 
and  a  reply  to  Mather  came  from  Bellamy's  pen.  Meanwhile  a 
second  controversy  on  the  same  subject  was  in  progress  between 
Jacob  Green,  an  Edwardean  pastor  at  Hanover,  New  Jersey,  and 
Rev.  George  Beck  with  of  Lyme,  Conn.  At  the  same  time  the 
question  rose,  apparently  independently,  to  prominence  in  the 
church  at  Plymouth,  Mass.,6  of  which  Chandler  Robbins,  a  pupil 
of  Bellamy,  was  pastor. 


settled  there  in  April,  1740.  He  remained  in  Bethlem  till  he  died,  Mch.  6,  1790.  He  was  a  prolific 
writer  and  a  keen,  if  not  always  very  generous,  controversialist.  His  home  was  a  Theological  School, 
in  which  a  number  of  New  England  theologians  were  trained,  e.  g.,  the  younger  Jonathan  Ed- 
wards, Samuel  Spring,  and  Joseph  Eckley.  His  works  were  published  in  3  vols.,  New  York,  1811, 
and  2  vols.,  Boston,  1850.  A  valuable  biographical  sketch,  with  a  list  of  authorities,  is  that  of  F.  B. 
Dexter,  Biog.  Sketches  Grad.  Vale,  pp.  523-529.  Lives  in  Sprague,  Annals  Am.  Pulpit,  I:  404- 
4u  ;  and  by  Prof.  Park,  Schaff-Herzog  Religious  Encyclopedia,  may  be  mentioned. 

1  In  Cothren,  Hist.  Ancient  Woodbury,  p.  244. 

2  Dialogue  on  the  Christian  Sacraments,  Boston,   1762,  but  apparently  written  not   long 
after  Edwards's  dismission. 

3  For  the  treatises  in  this  controversy,  see  ante,  pp.  241-244. 

te,  p.  243.  6  Ibid.,  pp.  243,  244. 


THE    SYSTEM    ABANDONED  287 

The  controversy  thus  begun  continued,  though  with  less  fre- 
quency of  publication,  throughout  the  rest  of  the  century.  After 
Bellamy  had  laid  down  his  pen  forever,  the  battle  was  waged 
with  most  vigor  by  Rev.  Cyprian  Strong  of  Portland,  Conn.,  who 
attacked  the  system  as  early  as  1780,  but  whose  most  powerful 
work  dates  from  1793.'  Strong  went  so  far  as  to  deny  that  the 
children  of  believers  are  personally  in  covenant.  Their  baptism 
is  not  a  right,  but  an  act  of  dedication  and  a  pledge  of  parental 
faithfulness.  At  the  same  time,  Rev.  Nathanael  Emmons,  of 
Franklin,  Mass.,  and  Rev.  Stephen  West  of  Stockbridge,  Mass., 
two  of  the  leaders  of  the  school  of  so-called  "New  Divinity"  of 
which  Jonathan  Edwards  was  the  founder,  engaged  in  the  attack. 
From  the  representatives  of  the  Edwardean  theology  and  its 
later  modifications  came  the  overthrow  of  the  system.  Able  sup- 
porters of  the  older  type  of  New  England  theology,  like  Rev. 
Messrs.  Joseph  Lathrop  of  West  Springfield,  Mass.,  and  Moses 
Hemmenway  of  Wells,  Maine,  defended  the  Half-Way  Covenant, 
and  even  Stoddardeanism,  with  vigor  during  the  last  decade  of 
the  eighteenth  century;  but  the  gradual  dominance  of  the  idea 
of  conversion  held  by  the  representatives  of  the  "New  Divinity  " 
throughout  the  Trinitarian  body  of  the  churches,  emphasized  by 
the  remarkable  series  of  revivals  which  began  in  the  closing  years 
of  the  last  century  and  lasted  well  into  the  present,  brought  the 
system  to  an  end.  In  most  of  the  New  England  churches  the 
change  of  feeling  caused  it  to  be  quietly  laid  aside.  At  the  Old 
South  Church,  Boston,  it  has  never  been  formally  voted  out, 
though  last  administered  in  1818,2  and  there  is  reason  to  believe 
that  this  tacit  disuse  of  the  system  was  not  unusual.  At  Windsor, 
Conn.,  it  was  in  use  as  late  as  1822, 3  in  Essex  County,  Mass.,  it 
lasted  till  about  1825,4  while  the  church  at  Charlestown,  Mass., 
continued  the  practice  till  1828.6 


1  See  ante,  p.  242.  2  See  H.  A.  Hill,  Hist.  Old  South  C/i.,  II  :  235. 

3  New  Englander,  XLIII:  614.  See  also  Stiles,  Ancient  Windsor,  p.  173.  A  prominent 
member  of  the  Conn.  Hist.  Society  at  the  present  time,  1893,  Dea.  Jabez  H.  Hayden,  was  baptized 
under  the  Half-Way  Covenant  at  Windsor.  Mr.  Hayden  informs  me  that  about  the  beginning  of 
this  century  there  was  a  general  understanding  among  the  ministers  of  central  Connecticut  not  to 
practice  the  system  except  in  families  in  which  it  had  already  been  begun. 

4  Cont.  Eccles.  Hist.  Essex  Co.,  p.  279. 

5  New  Englander,  Ibid* 


THE  DECISIONS  OF  1657  AND  1662 
Result  of  the  Assembly  of  1657  (Extracts) 

a  I  DISPUTATION  I  concerning  I  Church- -Members 
I  and  their  I  CHILDREN,  |  in  |  ANSWER  |  to  |  XXI. 
QUESTIONS:  |  Wherein  the  State  of  such  Children  when  Adult,  \ 
Together  with  their  Duty  towards  the  Church,  |  And  the  Churches 
Duty  towards  them  |  is  DISCUSSED.  |  by  an  |  ASSEMBLY  of 
DIVINES  I  meeting  at   Boston   in  |  NEW  ENGLAND,  \  June 

4th.   1657.  I  I  Now   Published   by   a   Lover  of  Truth.  ]  | 

London,  Printed  by  J.  Hayes,  for  Samuel  Thomson  at  the  Bishops  | 
Head  in  Pauls  Church-yard.    1659 

[ii  blank] 
[iii] 

To  the  READER.1 

IT  is  justly  accounted  one  of  the  glories  of  the  English  Nation,  that 
God  hath  honoured  them  with  special  light  in  some  momentous  Truths, 
above  what  he  hath  other  Protestant  Churches  round  about  them. 
The  morality  of  the  Christian  Sabbath,  deep  and  spiritual  insight  info 
those  secret  transactions  between  the  Lord  and  the  soulcs  of  his  elect  at 
their  first  conversion,  &*  also  in  their  after  walking  in  communion  'with 
God,  arc  usually  observed  as  instances  hereof.  And  of  the  same  kind, 
though  perhaps  in  a  lower  rank,  are  those  Truths  about  [t]he  instituted 
Worship  of  God,  which  have  been  now  for  some  years  a  considerable 
part  of  those  disquisitions,  which  do  also  at  this  day  exercise  the  most 
searching  thoughts  and  oldest  pens  that  are  amongst  us.  .  .  .  [iii  line 
13-v  line  26]  It  is  true  indeed  the  Civil  Magistrates  of  that  Jurisdiction 
of  the  English  in  New-England  that  lies  upon  the  River  Connectiquot, 
sent  these  Questions  to  the  Magistrates  of  the  Massachusets,  and  they 
mutually  called  together  sundry  of  the  ablest  Ministers  of  each  Colony, 
and  recommended  to  their  search  and  considerations  these  enquiries  thus 
stated,  thus  framed :  And  this  was  the  happy  rise  of  this  Disputation; 


1  The  reader  should  be  %varned  that  this  Preface  is  no  part  of  the  official  result  of  the  Assem- 
bly of  1657.  It  is  simply  a  private  explanation  written  by  Nathanael  Mather.  On  its  authorship,  see 
Increase  Mather,  The  Life  and  Death  of  .  -  .  Mr.  Richard  Mather,  Cambridge,  1670,  p.  3a. 
Nathanael  Mather  was  the  third  son  of  Richard  Mather,  born  1630,  graduated  at  Harvard,  1647, 
went  to  England  about  1650,  and  received  a  living  at  Harberton  in  1655.  In  1656  Cromwell  ;ave 
him  a  living  at  Barnstaple,  which  he  held  till  1662,  when,  debarred  from  preaching  in  En 
became  minister  at  Rotterdam,  Holland.  In  1671  he  became  Congregational  pastor  at  Dublin,  Ire- 
land, and  in  :688  went  to  London,  where  he  preached  till  he  died,  July  26,  1697.  Sec  Sibley,  Biog. 
Sketches  Graduates  Harvard,  1 :  157-161,  where  a  list  of  biographical  sources  will  be  found. 

(288) 


PREFACE   TO   THE    RESULT   OF    1657  289 

what  is  here  tints  tendered  to  the  'world,  being  the  result  and  product  of 
the  consultations  and  debates  on  this  occasion  had,  which  was  by  the 
Elders  met  together  agreed  to,  and  accordingly  presented,  to  the  Magis- 
trates of  the  aforesaid  Jurisdictions  respectively.  But  never thelesse,  it 
was  especially  and  nextly  for  the  service  of  the  Churches,  the  pious  and 
careful  Magistrates  being  herein  indeed  nursing  Fathers  to  them,  for 
they  finding  doubts,  and  [vi]  perhaps  some  differences  about  these  points, 
likely  to  arise  and  disquiet  the  Churches,  took  this  prudent  and  happy 
course,  timely  to  bring  forth  such  light,  as  might  be  to  universal  satisfac- 
tion, before  darknesse  had  brought  forth  difference  in  judgment  and 
perhaps  practise  also,  and  that  contentions,  and  they  such  animosities  and 
paroxysmes  as  would  afterwards  more  hardly  be  healed,  than  [then]1 
prevented. 

These  Papers  came  some  moncths  ago  to  England,  and  it  was  then 
in  his  thoughts  that  had  them  in  his  hands,  to  have  made  them  publick  ; 
but  for  some  reasons  which  then  prevailed  with  him  he  forbore,  yet  hath 
since  given  -way  thereto,  partly  expecting,  according  to  some  intimation 
which  lie  had  from  New-England,  that  the  Magistrates  there  would 
have  ordered  the  printing  of  them.  But,  not  hearing  since  that  it  is 
there  done,  he  hath  given  way  to  the  desires  of  some  Friends  here,  -who 
were  acquainted  with  them,  and  with  his  having  of  them,  that  they  should 
now  thus  be  made  publick  ;  hoping  withall,  that  what  is  done  herein,  will 
not  be  unacceptable  to  those  Reverend  persons,  that  were  the  authors 
of  this  Disputation.  Especially  considering,  that  God  who  formes  the 
Spirit  of  man  within  him,  and  in  an  especial  manner  guides  the  hearts 
and  studies  of  his  servants,  hath  of  late  set  awork  some  of  them  in  Old 
England  also,  to  search  into  these  Questions,  and  communicate  the  issue 
of  their  enquiries  to  the  world  in  print ;  whence  likewise  many  more,  are 
awakened  to  desire  and  long,  for  further  light  in  these  points  about 
which  the  main  part  of  this  disputation  is.  .  .  .  [vi  line  24-vii  line 
6]  .  .  .  And  these  Papers  with  the  truths  therein,  having  in  them- 
selves a  tendency  to  this  happy  end,  the  midwifeing  of  them  by  the  press 
into  the  publick  and  common  light,  in  compliance  with  the  aforesaid 
providence  (they  being  likely  otherwise  to  have  lien  hid  in  a  private  hand 
or  two)  cannot  be  loold  upon  as  at  all  injurious  to  those  honoured  and 
reverend  Elders  that  were  the  Authors  of  them,  much  lesse  to  any 
others ;  for  'tis  here  done,  (saving  the  Errata  of  the  press)  with  such 
faithfulnesse  as  cannot  be  impeached. 

And  this  is  the  rather  said,  because  perhaps  the  Reader  may  have 
been  deceived  in  some  other  Treatises,  -which  have  gone  abroad,  and  gen- 
erally been  look't  upon,  as  the  compilement  of  the  Elders  ///  New-Eng- 
land; whereas  they  had  but  one  private  person  for  their  Author.  So  it 
is  indeed  in  the  32  Questions,  the  Answerer  whereof  was  Mr.  Richard 
Mather,  and  not  any  other  Elder  or  Elders  in  New-England,  who  likewise 
is  the  Author  of  the  discourse  concerning  Church-Covenant  printed 
therewith,  which  latter  he  wrote  for  his  private  use  in  his  own  Study, 
never  intending,  nor  indeed  consenting  to  its  publication,  nor  so  much  as 
knowing  unto  this  day  how  the  copy  of  it  came  abroad  into  those  hands  by 


MS.  addition   (by  Inc 


29O  THE    HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

whom  it  is  made  publick,  save  that  he  conjectures  some  procured  a  copy  of 
it  from  Mr.  Cotton,  to  whom  (such  was  their  intimacy  in  his  life  time) 
he  communicated  it,  as  he  writes  in  a  late  Letter  to  a  Son  of  his  now  in 
England  who  it  seems  had  enquired  of  him  concerning  those  Treatises  ; 
and  much  lesse  is  there  any  truth  in  that  'which  is  said  in  the  Title  page 
prefixed  to  the  Discourse  of  Church-Covenant,  as  if  it  were  sent  over 
to  Mr.  Barnard  Anno  1639;  Mr.  Mather  having  neither  acquaintance 
nor  any  intercourse  by  Letters  with  Mr.  Barnard. 

Nor  indeed,  are  these  Papers,  now  in  thy  hands,  the  declared  judg- 
ment of  all  the  Elders  in  New- England,  there  being  but  about  twenty 
called  together  by  the  Magistrates  to  consult  of  these  things,  and  declare 
their  judgments  in  them,  and  of  those  twenty,  two  or  three  met  not  with 
the  rest.  They  are  ncverthelcssc  the  genuine  product  of  that  [viiij  Meet- 
ing of  Elders  which  on  the  forementioned  occasion  was  held  in  the  4th 
Moneth  1657  at  Boston  in  New-England. 

What  entertainment  they  will  meet  with  ncrw  they  arc  abroad  it  is 
not  for  me  to  say.  They  must  now  run  the  same  hazard  with  other 
writings  of  this  kind.  Some  passages  there  are  which  L  fear  will  be 
wrested  by  one  kind  of  men  or  other  to  serve  their  own  hypothesis.  Lt  was 
in  my  thoughts,  having  some  special  advantages  for  it,  here  to  have  in- 
serted somthing  as  to  those  particulars  for  the  prevention  of  such  an  abuse. 
But  L  shall  only  say  this,  let  but  such  passages  in  this  short  tract  as  seem 
most  to  vary  from  -what  the  Elders  and  Churches  of  New-England 
have  been  accounted  to  prof  esse  and  practise,  receive  an  interpretation  as 
they  will  bear,  from  their  own  declared  judgment,  either  in  their  plat- 
form of  Church  Discipline,  or  in  other  writings  of  their  own,  and  I 
doubt  not  but  it  will  be  found,  they  are  not  -warped  from  their  former 
Faith  and  Order :  Whatever  some  may  think  from  this  Treatise,  or 
whatever  Mr.  Giles  Firmin1  hath  born  the  -world  in  hand,  in  any  of  his 
late  misrepresentations  of  them  ;  -whom  L  rather  chuse  to  instance  in,  for 
that  his  reports  of  New-England  have  perhaps  therefore  found  the  more 
credit,  because  he  above  others  is  not  without  advantages  to  knorv  New- 
England,  and  the  waies  of  the  Churches  there,  better  than  it  seems  he 
doth?     .     .     . 

1  Giles  Firmin  (1614-1697)  was  a  Puritan  of  much  mark  both  as  a  preacher  and  as  a  physician. 
He  came  to  Boston  in  1632,  practiced  medicine  and  was  a  deacon  of  the  First  Church.  In  1647  he 
returned  to  England  and  became  pastor  at  Shalford,  Essex,  an  office  which  he  held  till  1662.  His 
views  on  church-government  were  substantially  those  of  Baxter,  and  led  him  to  critise  the  Congre- 
gational system.     See  Diet.  National  Biog.,  rij 

2  The  18  concluding  lines  of  the  Preface  are  omitted. 


N 


EXTRACTS   FROM     THE    RESULT   OF    1 65 7  291 


DISPUTATION 
CONCERNING 

Church- -Members 

AND   THEIR 

CHILDREN 

IN 

Answer  to  21  Questions. 


Quest.  1.  T  T  1  Hether  any  Children  of  confederate 
\j\j  Parents  be  under  their  Parents  Co- 
™    *     venant  and  members  with  them. 

Ajisw.  Some  Children  of  con- 
federate Parents  are  by  meanes  of  their  Parents 
Covenanting,  in  Covenant  also,  and  so  Members  of  the  Church  by- 
divine  Institution.  For,  [2]  Arg.  1.  They  that  are  in  that  Cov- 
enant for  substance  which  was  made  with  Abraham,  Gen.  17.  7. 
they  are  in  Covenant,  and  Members  of  the  Church,  by  divine 
Institution,  because  that  Covenant  doth  inferre  Church-Member- 
ship, as  being  the  formall  cause  thereof;  For  1.  A  people  that 
are  in  that  Covenant,  are  thereby  the  visible  People  or  Church 
of  God,  Gen.  17.  7.  compared  with  Dcut.  29.  12,  13.  by  this  Cove- 
nant the  Family  of  Abraham,  and  so  afterwards  the  People  of 
Israel,   was    made    and    established   the    visible    Church    of   God. 

2.  Many  were  in  that  Covenant,  which  never  were  in  saving 
state  of  grace;  Therefore  that  was  the  externall  or  Church  Cov- 
enant,   which    God    makes   with    his   visible    Church    or    People. 

3.  Circumcision  sealed  that  Covenant,  which  was  the  distinguish- 
ing mark  between  those  within  and  those  without  the  Church. 

But  some  children  are  in  that  Covenant  for  substance  which 
was  made  with  Abraham,  Gen.  17.  7.  as  appears  by  sundry  Scrip- 
tures, which  being  rightly  considered,  and  compared,  do  inferre 
the  continuance  of  the  substance  of  that  Covenant,  whereby  God 
is  a  God  to  his  People  and  their  seed,  under  the  new  Testament, 
Acts  2.  39.  Gal.  3.  14.  with  Gen.  28.  4.  Rom.  n.  16,  17  .  .  .  [p.  2 
line  23  —  p.  3,  line  12.]     .     .     . 

Arg.  2.  Such  children  as  are  by  Christ,  affirmed  to  have  a 
place  and  portion  in  the  Kingdome  of  Heaven,  they  have  a  place 
and  portion  in  the  visible  Church,  and  so  consequently  are  mem- 
bers thereof.     .     .     .      [p.  3.  1.  15  —  p.  4.  1.  4.] 

Arg.  3.  If  no  children  be  members  of  the  visible  Church, 
then  was  not  the   Lord  Jesus  (when  a  child)  a  member  of  the 


292  THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

visible  Church,  but  none  (we  presume)  will  venture  to  say  so 
of  Christ. 

Arg.  4.  If  it  were  not  so,  no  children  might  be  Baptized:  For 
Baptisme  being  a  Church  Ordinance,  and  a  seal  of  being  incor- 
porated into  the  Church,  1  Cor.  12.  13.  and  succeeding  circum- 
cision, which  was  proper  to  the  Church,  none  can  be  subjects 
immediately  capable  thereof,  but  Church-Members;  Nor  doth  the 
Power  of  Officers,  as  such,  extend  further  then  to  the  Churches; 
as  they  cannot  judge,  so  they  may  not  Baptize  them  that  are 
without,  or  non-members. 

Arg.  5.  They  that  are  some  of  the  Disciples  intended  in 
Mat.   28.   19.   are  Church-members.     .  .     [  1.  18  —  1.  31.]     But 

some  children  are  some  of  the  Disciples  intended  in  Mat.  28.  19. 
For  1.  some  children  were  some  of  those  whom  the  Apostles  in 
accomplishing  that  com- [5]  mission,  did  Disciple,  Acts  15.  20. 
.  .  .  [1.  1.  — 1.9.]  And  that  the  Apostles  took  in  children  with 
Parents  when  they  were  conversant  in  the  work  of  Discipling, 
further  appears  from  Acts  2.  39.  &  16.  15,  31,  ^^.  1  Cor.  7.  14. 
...      [1.  13-1-  23.J 

Arg.  6.  They  that  are  subjects  of  the  Lords  visible  Spirit- 
ual Kingdom,  servants  and  children  of  the  Lords  Family,  they 
are  Members  of  the  Church,  which  is  called  the  Lords  Kingdom, 
and  House  and  Family  in  the  Scripture:  But  so  are  some  chil- 
dren, Ezck.  37.  25,  26,  27     .     .      [1.  28 — p.  6.  1.  18.] 

Arg.  7.  If  no  children  be  members  of  the  visible  Church, 
then  we  have  no  well-grounded  hope  according  to  ordinary  course 
of  dispensation,  of  the  salvation  of  any  dying  Infants.-  And  the 
reason  is,  because  salvation  pertains  to  the  Church,  Jsa.  45.  17. 
Eph.  2.  12.  &  5.  23,  26.  J0J1.  4.  22.  Act.  2.  27.  Luke  19.  9.  .  .  . 
[1.  23  — p.  7.  1.  3.] 

Arg.  8.  If  some  children  were  Members  of  the  Church  of 
God  in  the  old  Testament,  then  some  children  are  Members  of  the 
Church  of  God  in  the  daies  of  the  new  Testament  .•  But  some  chil- 
dren were  Members  of  the  Church  in  the  time  of  the  old  Testa- 
ment.    ...     [1.  7  —  p.  8.  1.  4.] 

But  all  the  Question  will  be  about  the  consequence  of  the 
Proposition,  and  that  may  be  cleared  thus. 

1.  If  the  Church  of  the  old  Testament  and  the  Church  of  the 
Gentiles  under  the  new  Testament,  be  for  kind  essentially  the 
same,  then  if  children  were  Members  of  that  Church,  they  are  also 
Members  of  these  .•  [modern  Gentile  churches]     .     .     .     [1.  9.  —  p. 

9-  1-  3-] 

2.  Again,  If  the  consequence  be  not  good,  then  it  will  follow 


EXTRACTS   FROM    THE    RESULT   OF    1657  293 

that  such  Jews  as  were  brought  in  by  the  Gospel  into  Church- 
estate,  were  great  losers  by  embracing  the  Gospel;  and  the  chil- 
dren losers  by  their  Parents  Faith,  inasmuch  as  though  in  the 
former  state,  the  children  were  Members  with  the  Parents.  .  .  . 
[1.8.  — p.  11.  I.4.] 

5.  If  children  were  once  Church-members  and  do  not  continue 
to  be  Church-members  still,  then  their  Membership  must  have 
been  repealed  by  the  Lord,  who  alone  could  make  such  an  altera- 
tion.    ...      [1.  7  —  I.  15.] 

1.  If  the  Lord  had  made  such  an  alteration  .  .  .  then  in 
all  likelihood  Christ  or  his  Apostles  would  have  made  mention  of 
it;  .  .  .  but  now  Christ  and  his  Apostles  in  stead  of  mention- 
ing any  such  thing,  do  confirm  the  contrary,  Mark  10,  13,  14,  16. 
Acts  2.  39.      1  Cor.  7.  14.     .     .     .      [p.  11.  1.  23  — p.  12.  1.  13. J 

Quest.  2.  Whether  all  children  of  whatever  years  or  condition  be 
so,  as,  1.  Absent  children  never  brought  to  the  Church.  2.  Born  before 
their  Parents  Covenanting.  3.  Incorrigible  of  seven,  ten,  or  twelve  years 
'old.  4.  Such  as  desire  not  to  be  admitted  with  their  Parents,  of  such 
an  age. 

Ans.  Onely  such  children  as  are  in  their  minority,  covenant 
with  their  Parents;  therefore  not  all  children  of  whatsoever  years 
and  conditions.  We  do  not  hereby  exclude  such  as  being  defective 
in  their  intellectuals,  are  as  children  in  respect  of  their  incapacity. 
.  .  .  2.  Children  in  their  minority,  though  absent,  covenant  in 
their  Parents.  ...  3.  Children  born  before  their  Parents  cove- 
nanting, yet  if  in  their  minority  when  their  Parents  enter  into 
covenant,  do  covenant  with  them.  .  .  .  [p.  4.  I.  i.J  4.  There 
is  no  sufficient  reason  (at  least  ordinarily)  to  conclude  a  child  of 
seven,  ten,  or  twelve  years  old  to  be  incorrigible.  ...  [1  4  — 
I-  I5-] 

Quest.  3.  Till  what  age  shall  they  enter  into  Covenant  with  their 
Parents,  whether  sixteen,  tiventy  one,  or  sixty? 

Ans.  As  long  as  in  respect  of  age  or  capacity  they  cannot 
according  to  ordinary  account,  be  supposed  able  to  act  in  a  matter 
of  this  nature  for  themselves,  .  .  .  much  is  to  be  left  unto  the 
discretion  of  Officers  and  Churches  in  this  case. 

Quest.  4.  What  Discipline  a  child  is  subject  to,  from  seven  to  six- 
teen years  old? 

[14]  Ans.  1.  Church  Discipline  is  taken  either  more  largely 
for  the  act  of  a  Church-member  dispensed  to  a  Church-member  as 
such,  by  way  of  Spiritual  watch,  rebuke,  6°r.  ...  Or  more 
strictly,  for  the  act  of  the  whole  Church,  dispensed  by  a  Member 


254  THE   HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

thereof;  as  in  case  of  publick  rebuke,  admonition,  excommunica- 
tion. ...  In  the  first  sense,  children  in  their  minority,  arc 
subject  to  Church  Discipline  immediately,  but  not  in  the  second. 

2.  It  is  the  Duty  of  the  Elders  and  Church  to  call  upon  Par- 
ents to  bring  up  their  children  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of 
the  Lord,  and  to  see  as  much  as  in  them  lieth,  that  it  be  effectu- 
ally done,     .     .     . 

3.  Besides  their  subjection  to  Ecclesiastical  Discipline,  they 
are  also  subject  to  civil  Discipline  respectively  according  to  their 
capacity,  whether  Domestical!,  Scholasticall,  or  Magistraticall. 

Quest.  5.  Whether  a  Father  may  twice  Covenant  for  his  Children 
in  Minority  in  several  Churches! 

Ans.  1.  When  a  Parent  is  called  to  remove  from  one  Church 
to  another,  he  is  also  called  to  enter  into  covenant  in  that  Church 
to  which  he  removes.     ...      [p.  14.  1.  25 —  p.  15.  1.  2.] 

2.  AVhen  the  Parent  thus  removing,  entreth  into  covenant, 
his  children  then  in  minority  covenant  in  him:     .     .     . 

3.  Hence  it  is  the  duty  of  Churches  when  they  give  Letters 
dimissory  unto  Parents,  to  insert  the  dismission  of  the  children 
then  in  minority  with  them. 

4.  Adult  children  yet  under  the  power  of  the  Parents  and  re- 
moving with  them,  are  to  give  their  personal  consent  unto  this 
translation  of  their  Membership,  and  so  to  be  orderly  dismissed 
and  received  with  their  Parents,  otherwise  they  remain  Members 
of  the  Church  of  which  they  were  before. 

Quest.  6.  Whether  the  end  of  a  Deputy  Covenant,  he  not  to  supply 
personail  incapacity,  or  whether  Children  ripe  for  pcrsonall  Covenanting 
in  regard  of  age,  should  Covenant  by  a  Deputy,  as  others  that  arc  unable 
thereunto! 

Ans.  1.  Children  in  their  minority,  whose  immediate  Parents 
are  in  Church-Covenant,  do  covenant  in  their  Parents;     .     .     . 

2.  Children  adult  ought  to  covenant  in  their  own  Persons. 
To  covenant  in  our  own  persons  according  to  the  sense  of  this 
Question,  is  nothing  else  but  an  orderly  and  Church  profession  of 
our  Faith,  or  a  personail  publick  and  solemn  avouching  of  God,  in 
an  Ecclesiasticall  way,  to  be  our  God,  according  to  the  covenant 
of  his  Grace,     ...     [p.  15.  1.  30  —  p.  17.  1.  12.] 

Quest.  7.  Whether  as  large  Qualifications  be  not  required  of  a 
Members  child  to  the  participation  of  the  Lords  Supper,  and  the  privi- 
ledgcs  of  votes  and  censures,  as  were  rcquirable  of  his  Parents  at  their 
first  entrance  ? 

Ans.     The  holding  forth  of  Faith   and   Repentance  with  an 


EXTRACTS   FROM    THE    RESULT   OF    1657  295 

ability  to  examine  themselves,  by  way  of  confession,  to  the  judg- 
ment of  Charity,  were  all  requirable  in  the  Parent  for  admission 
into  the  Church  to  full  communion,  and  the  same  is  requisite  for 
the  regular  admission  of  the  Parents  child  being  grown  adult,  unto 
his  full  communion  with  the  Church.  .  .  .  [p.  17.  1.  22 —  p.  18. 
1.  29.]  .  .  .  Concerning  the  power  of  voting,  it  is  not  rational 
that  they  should  exercise  a  Church-power  as  to  the  administration 
of  Church-Ordinances,  which  voting  implies,  who  themselves  are 
unfit  for  all  Ordinances.     .     .     .     [p.  18.  1.  33  —  p.  19.  1.  6.] 

Ques.  8.  Whether  by  Covenant  seed,  is  meant  the  seed  of  immediate 
Parents  onely,  or  of  remote  also  ? 

Ans.  The  Cospel  by  Covenant  seed,  intends  only  the  seed 
of  immediate  Parents  in  Church  Covenant,  as  appears  from  1  Cor, 
7.  14.  The  Parents  there  spoken  of  are  immediate  Parents,  their 
Progenitors  were  Heathens.  The  Gospel  extends  not  the  external 
Covenant  beyond  the  immediate  Parents.     ...     [1.  13 — 1.  26. J 

Ques.  9.  Whether  adopted  Children  and  bond  servants  be  Cove- 
nant-seed"l 

Ans.  Adopted  children  and  Infant-servants,  regularly  and 
absolutely  subjected  to  the  Government  and  dispose  of  such 
heads  of  Families  as  are  in  Church-covenant,  though  they  cannot 
be  said  to  be  their  natural  seed,  yet  in  regard1  the  Scriptures 
(according  to  the  judgment  of  many  Godly  Learned)  extend  to 
them  the  [20]  same  Covenant  priviledges  with  their  natural  seed, 
we  judge  not  any  Churches  who  are  like-minded  with  them,  for 
their  practise  herein  :  All  which  nothwithstanding,  yet  we  desire 
at  present  to  leave  this  Question  without  all  prejudice  on  our 
parts  to  after  free  disquisition. 

Ques.  10.  Whether  the  child  admitted  by  his  Fathers  Covenant,  be 
also  a  Deputy  for  his  seed,  without  or  before  personal  Covenanting,  or 
'without  &  before  like  personal  qualifications  in  kind,  as  his  Father 
was  to  enjoy  when  he  became  a  Deputy  ? 

Ans.  The  meaning  of  this  Question  in  other  terms  we  con- 
ceive to  be  this  ;  whether  the  child  of  a  person  joyned  in  Church- 
Covenant  by  means  of  his  or  her  immediate  Parents  Covenant, 
though  such  a  Parent  be  not  admitted  to,  nor  qualified  for  full 
communion,  nor  have  covenanted  in  their  own  person,  whether 
we  say,  the  child  of  such  a  person  is  to  be  baptized:  Whereunto 
we  answer,  in  these  following  propositions. 

Propos.  1.  Infants  either  of  whose  immediate  Parents  are 
in  Church-Covenant,  do  confederate  with  their  Parents,  and  are 
therefore  Church-members  with  them.     See  Ans.  to  Quest.  1. 

1  Perhaps  to  such  children  should  be  inserted. 


296  THE   HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

Propos  2.  It  is  the  duty  of  those  Infants  when  grown  up 
to  years  of  discretion,  though  not  yet  fit  for  the  Lords  Supper, 
to  own  the  Covenant  they  made  with  their  Parents,  by  entr.ng 
thereinto  in  their  own  persons,  and  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Church 
to  call  upon  them  for  the  performance  thereof;  as  appeareth  by 
Scripture  examples  of  persons  both  called  to,  and  entring  into 
Covenant  many  of  whom  could  not  be  looked  upon  as  person- 
ally Gracious,  and  therefor  not  fit  for  all  Ordi- [21]  nances  and 
full  communion,  Deut.    29.    12,   14.     2  Chron.    15.    12.     2  Chron.   34. 

['  ^Propos.  3.  Being  accordingly  called  thereunto,  if  after  Church- 
admonition  and  other  due  means  with  patience  used,  they  shall 
refuse  the  performance  of  this  great  duty,  or  in  case  they  shall 
(notwithstanding  like  means  applied)  any  otherw.se  continue 
scandalous,  it  is  the  part  of  the  Church  to  proceed  with  them 
to  the  censure  of  excommunication     .     .     .     [p.  21.  1.  n      1.  24. J 

Propos  4  In  case  they  understand  the  grounds  of  Religion, 
are  not  scandalous,  and  solemnly  own  the  Covenant  in  their 
own  persons,  wherein  they  give  up  both  themselves  and  their 
children  unto  the  Lord,  and  desire  Baptism  for  them,  we  (with 
due  reverence  to  any  Godly  Learned  that  may  dissent)  see  not 
sufficient  cause  to  deny  Baptism  unto  their  children,  these  rea- 
sons for  the  affirmative  being  proposed  to  consideration. 

1.  Church-Members  without  offence  and  not  bapti-  [22J  zed, 

are  to  be  baptized.  . 

The  children  in  Question  are  Church-Members  without  of- 
fence and  not  baptized. 

Therefore  the  children  in  Question  are  to  be  baptized. 
«    Children  in  the  covenant  of  Abraham,  as  to  the  substance 
thereof,  i.  c  To  whom  the  promise  made  to  Abraham,  as  to  the 
substance  thereof  doth  belong,  are  to  be  baptized. 

The  children  in  Question  are  children  in  the  covenant  of 
Abraham,  as  to  the  substance  thereof. 

Therefore  the  children  in  Question  are  to  be  baptized. 

3  Children  in  the  same  estate  with  those  children  under 
the  Law  unto  whom  the  seal  of  the  righteousnesse  of  Faith, 
because  in  that  estate  was  by  Institution  Divine  to  be  applied, 
the  Precept  for  so  doing  not  repealed,  and  the  reason  for  so 
doing  still  remaining  are  to  be  baptized. 

But  the  children   in  Question  are  children  in  the  same  estate 

Tetc  1 

Therefore  the  children  in  Question  are  to  be  baptized. 


EXTRACTS   FROM   THE    RESULT   OF    1657  297 

4.  Either  the  children  in  question  are  to  be  baptized,  or 
the  Gospel  dispensation  forbids  the  application  of  the  seal  unto 
children  regularly  in  Church-covenant,  unto  whom  the  Mosaical 
dispensation  commanded  it  to  be  applied. 

[23]   But  the  Gospel  dispensation  forbids  not  [etc.]     .     .     . 
Therefore  the  children  in  question  are  to  be  baptized.   [1.  6- 
1.  16.] 

5.  Children  unto  whom  the  Gospel  testifieth  both  the  prom- 
ise and  baptisme  by  vertue  of  that  promise,  to  belong,  ought  to 
be  baptized. 

The  children  in  question  are  children  unto  whom  [etc.] 

Therefore  the  children  in  Question  ought  to  be  baptized. 

Obj.  The  Parent  though  a  Church-member,  owning  the  Cov- 
enant in  his  own  person,  and  qualified  according  to  the  prem- 
ises, is  not  admitted  to  full  communion,  therefore  the  child  ought 
not  to  be  baptized. 

Ans.  The  Church-act  onely,  and  not  any  other  act  (much 
lesse  defect)  of  the  Parent  is  by  Divine  Institution,  accounted 
to  the  child.  The  membership  of  the  child  is  a  distinct  mem- 
bership, from  the  membership  [24]  of  the  Parent.  In  case  the 
Parents  membership  ceaseth  by  death  or  censure,  the  member- 
ship of  the  child  remaineth  still.  The  membership  of  the  child 
is  the  same  in  kind  with,  and  not  inferiour  to  the  membership 
of  the  Parent.  Membership  is  a  Relation,  and  therefore  admits 
not  of  inagls  and  minus,  more  or  lesse  :  Members  are  better  or 
worse,  and  communion  is  more  or  lesse;  but  membership  admits 
not  of  degrees.  Benjamin  an  Infant,  but  an  hour  old,  is  as  truly 
a  son  as  Reuben,  a  man  of  twenty  two  years  of  age.  The  child 
is  baptized  by  vertue  of  his  own  membership,  and  not  by  vertue 
of  his  Parents  membership.  The  Parents  death  is  not  with  us 
an  obstacle  of  the  Childs  Baptism. 

Propos.  5.  The  same  may  be  said  concerning  the  children  of 
such  persons  in  question,  who  being  dead  or  necessarily  absent, 
either  did  or  do  give  the  Churches  cause  in  judgment  of  charity, 
to  look  at  them  as  thus  qualified,  and  such,  as  had  they  been  called 
thereunto  would  so  acted:  For  in  Charity  that  is  here  done  inter- 
pretatively,  which  is  mentioned  in  the  fourth  Proposition  expresly. 

Propos.  6.  Though  the  persons  forementioned  own  the  Cove- 
nant according  to  the  premises,  yet  before  they  are  admitted  to 
full  communion  (/.  e.  To  the  Lords  Supper  and  voting)  they  must 
so  hold  forth  their  Faith  and  Repentance,  unto  the  judgment  of 
Charity  by  way  of  confession  in  the  congregation,  as  it  may  appear 


298  THE    HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

unto  the  Church,  that  they  arc  able  to  examine  themselves  and  to 
discern  the  Lords  body.     See  the  proof  hereof  in  Arts,  to  Quest.  7th. 
Quest.  11.     Whether  children  begotten  by  an  excommunicate  person 
are  to  be  baptized,  lie  so  remaining? 

[25]  Ans.  We  cannot  for  the  present  answer  the  following 
Arguments  for  the  Negative.  1.  Persons  excommunicate  are  not 
members  ...  2.  Excommunicate  Parents  are  to  be  looked  at 
in  Church-account  as  Heathens  and  Publicans.  ...  .5.  To 
baptize  the  children  of  the  excommunicate,  is  to  have  Church-com- 
munion with  the  excommunicate:     .     .     .      [p.  25.  1.  12 — 1.  16.] 

Quest.  12.  Whether  a  Child  born  of  a  justly  censurable  person,  yet 
not  actually  excommunicate,  be  to  be  baptized? 

Ans.     We  answer  affirmatively.     ...      [1.  19  —  1.  25.] 
Quest.  1 3.     Whether  a  Members  Childs  unfitness  for  seals,  disableth 
not  his  seed  for  Membership  or  Baptism  ! 

Ans.  This  question  agreeing  in  scope  with  Quest.  10.  We  refer 
thither  for  Answer  thereunto. 

Quest.  14.  Whether  a  Members  Child  be  censurable  for  any  thing 
but  scandalous  actions,  and  not  also  for  ignorance  and  inexperience/ 

Ans.  A  Members  child  (like  as  it  is  with  all  other  [26]  mem- 
bers) is  censurable  only  for  scandalous  sins,  Mat.  18.  15,  18.  1  Cor. 
5.  11.     -     •     •      [I.2-I.6.] 

Quest.  15.  Whether  a  Members  Child  must  only  examine  himself, 
and  may  not  be  examined  by  others,  of  his  finesse  for  seals? 

Ans.  It  is  a  duty  of  a  Members  child  to  examine  himself, 
and  yet  he  is  also  subject  to  the  examination  of  others.  .  .  . 
[1.  11  — 1.  24.] 

Quest.  16.  Whether  only  Officers  must  examine  in  private  or  else 
publike  before  the  Church  ? 

Ans.  Concerning  their  examination  by  the  Elders  in  private, 
the  former  reasons  conclude  affirmatively.     .     .     . 

[27]  Publick  examination  we  also  conceive  to  be  regular, 
.     .     .    »[p.  27.  1.  2.-1.  7.] 

Quest.  17.  Whether  the  same  grown  Members  Child  must  not  be 
examined  of  his  Charitable  experience,  before  Baptism,  as  -well  as  before 
the  Lords  Supper  / 

Ans.  We  think  the  Elders  do  well  to  take  an  account  of  chil- 
dren, concerning  the  Principles  of  Religion  according  to  their 
capacity,  before  they  be  baptized.     .     .     .      |1.  13  —  h  23-] 

Quest.  18.  Whether  baptized  Children  sent  away  from  the  Church 
for  settlement,  and  not  intending  return,  are  continually  to  be  ac- 
counted Members? 


EXTRACTS    FROM    THE    RESULT   OF    1657  299 

Ans.  Baptized  children  though  locally  removed  from  the 
Church  unto  which  they  belong,  are  to  be  accounted  Members, 
until  dismission,  death  or  censure  dissolve  that  Relation,  because 
Christ  the  Institutor  of  this  Relation,  onely  by  these  waies  dis- 
solveth  the  same. 

Quest.  19.  Whether  Historical  Faith  and  a  blamelesse  life  fit  a 
Members  Child  for  all  Ordinances  and  [28]  Priviledges,  and  he  must 
be  examined  only  about  them  ? 

Ans.  Not  only  historical  Faith,  i.  e.  The  meer  knowledge  of 
the  fundamental  Doctrine  of  Faith  and  a  blamelesse  life,  but  also 
such  an  holding  forth  of  Faith  and  Repentance,  as  unto  judgment 
of  Charity  sheweth  an  ability  to  examine  themselves  and  to  dis- 
cern the  Lords  body,  is  requisite  to  fit  a  Members  child  for  all 
Ordinances  and  Priviledges,  and  his  blamelesse  life  notwithstand- 
ing, a  Members  child  is  to  be  examined  concerning  the  other 
qualifications.     ...      [p.  28.  1.  11.  —  1.  32.] 

Quest.  20.  Whether  if  a  Church-Member  barely  say,  it  repents 
me,  though  seventy  times  seven  times  follow-\2g\ing  he  relapse  into  the 
same  gross  evils,  as  lying,  slander,  oppression,  &c.  He  be  to  be  forgiven, 
and  not  censured  I 

Ans.  .  .  .  Without  the  fruits  meet  for  repentance,  we  are 
not  called  to  forgive,  Mat.  3.  8.     Luk.  17.  3. 

Notwithstanding  ?  Brother  offends  seventy  times  seven  times, 
that  is,  many  times,  a  definite  number  being  put  for  an  indefinite, 
yet  whilst  God  enables  him  to  repent,  it  is  our  duty  to  forgive. 
'Tis  not  the  number  of  offences,  but  the  holding  forth  of  repent- 
ance in  the  offender,  that  is  the  measure  of  our  forgivenesse.  .  .  . 
[p.  29.  1.  17  — 1.  29.] 

Quest.  2i.  Whether  a  Member  under  offence  and  not  censured,  or 
not  with  the  highest  Censure,  can  authoritatively  be  denied  the  Lords 
Supper  or  other  Church-privilcdgesl 

Ans.  1.  None  but  the  Church  can  Authoritatively  [30]  deny 
to  the  Member  his  accesse  unto  the  Lords  Supper,  because  the 
power  thereof  is  only  delegated  to  that  subject,  Mat.  18.  17. 

2.  The  Church  cannot  deny  unto  a  Member  his  accesse  unto 
the  Lords  Supper,  untill  she  hath  regularly  judged  him  to  be  an 
offender. 

3.  The  censure  of  admonition  is  the  first  act  whereby  a  Church 
doth  judicially  declare  a  Member  to  be  an  offender;  therefore  till 
the  censure  of  admonition  be  past,  a  Member  cannot  Authorita- 
tively be  denied  communion  in  the  Lords  Supper,  or  other  Church- 
priviledges,  because  of  offence. 


300  THE   HALF-WAV    COVENANT 

4.  After  the  sentence  of  Admonition  is  past,  the  offender  now 
admonished,  may  be  (yea  thereby  is)  Authoritatively  denied  to 
come  unto  the  Lords  Supper,  and  to  vote  in  the  Church,  because 
he  is  judicially  unclean,  Lev.  22.  3,  4.  &  7.  20,  21.  Mat.  5.  23,  24. 
Though  he  be  not  yet  Censured  with  the  Censure  of  Excommuni- 
cation. 

5.  All  which  notwithstanding,  there  are  cases  wherein  a 
Brother  apparently  discerned  to  be  in  a  condition  rendring  him 
(should  he  so  proceed  to  the  Lords  Supper)  an  unworthy  Commu- 
nicant, may  and  ought  regularly  to  be  advised  to  forbear,  and  it  is 
his  duty  to  hearken  thereunto. 

6.  Yet  two  things  are  here  carefully  to  be  attended. 

1.  That  Brethren  be  not  many  Masters,  taking  upon  them 
to  advise  and  to  admonish  others  to  abstain  without  cause,  or 
before  the  time,     Jam.  3.  1. 

2.  That  none  forbear  to  come  worthily,  which  is  their 
duty,  because  to  their  private  apprehension,  another  is  [31] 
supposed  (at  least)  to  come  unworthily,  which  is  their  sin. 

7.  In  case  the  Church  shall  see  cause  to  advise  a  Member  to 
forbear,  and  he  shall  refuse  to  hearken  thereunto,  his  refusal  being 
also  a  violation  of  Church  Order,  addeth  contumacy  to  his  offence, 
and  thereby  ripens  the  Offender  for  Censure 

19  4th.   1657. 
Boston.  N.  E. 


PREFACE   TO   THE   RESULT   OF    1662  301 


Result  of  the  Synod  of  1662 

PROPOSITIONS  I  concerning  the  |  SUBJECT  of  BAP- 
TISM I  and  I  CONSOCIATION  of  CHURCHES,  |  Collected  and 
Confirmed  out  of  the  WORD  of  GOD,  |  by  a  |  SYNOD  of 
ELDERS  I  AND  I  messengers  of  the  churches  |  in  Massachusets- 
Colony  in  New-England.  |  Assembled  at  BOSTON,  according 
to  Appointment    of    the   |   Honoured    GENERAL    COURT,  |   In 

the  Year   1662.  |  |  At  a  General  Court    held  at  Boston 

in  New-  |  England  the  8th  of  October,  1662.  |  Tile  Court  having 
Read  over  this  Result  of  the  Synod,  judge  meet  to  \  Commend  the  same 
unto  the  Consideration  of  all  the  Chore  lies  and  \  People  of  this  Juris- 
diction ;  And  for  that  end  doe  Order  the  Printing  \  thereof.  |  By   the 

Court.      Edward  Rawson    Secret'.  |  |   CAMBRIDGE  ;    \ 

Printed  by  S.  G.  for  Hezekiali  Usher  at  Boston  in  |  New-England. 
1662. 

[ii         Blank] 

[in] 

THE   PREFACE1 

TO    THE 

CHRISTIAN   READER; 

And  especially  to  the  Churches  of  Massachusets-Co\or\y 

in  NEW-ENGLAND. 

TIfat  one  end  designed  by  God's  All-disposing  Providence,  in 
leading  so  many  of  his  poor  people  into  this  Wilderness,  was 
to  lead  them  unto  a  distinct  discerning  and  practise  of  all  the 
Wayes  and  Ordinances  of  his  House  according  to  Scripture- 
pattern,  may  seem  an  Observation  not  to  be  despised.  That  we  are  fit 
or  able  for  so  great  a  service,  the  sense  of  our  own  feebleness  forbids 
us  to  think.  But  that  we  have  large  and  great  opportunity  for  it, 
none  will  deny.  Ear,  besides  the  useful  Labours  and  Contemplations 
of  many  of  the  Lords  Worthies  in  other  plaees,  and  in  former  times, 
contributing  to  our  Help,  and  shewing  our  Principles  to  be  neither 
novell  nor   singular,   the  advantage  of  Experience  and  Practise,  and 

1  This  Preface  was  prepared  after  the  close  of  the  Synod,  by  order  of  the  Massachusetts 
General  Court,  by  the  Committtee  appointed  by  the  Synod  to  report  the  results  to  the  Court. 
It  is  probably  from  the  pen  of  Jonathan  Mitchell.     See  ante,  p.  269. 


302  THE   HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

the  occasion,  thereby  given  for  daily  searching  into  the  Rule,  is  con- 
siderable. And  lie  that  hath  made  the  path  of  the  just  as  a  shining 
light,  is  wont  still  to  give  unto  them  further  light,  as  the  progress 
of  their  path  requires  further  practise,  making  his  Word  a  Lanthorn 
to  their  feet,  to  shew  them  their  way  from  step  to  step,  though  haply 
sometimes  they  may  not  see  far  before  them.  Jf  is  matter  of  humbling 
to  us,  that  we  have  made  no  better  improvement  of  our  opportunities 
this  way  ;  but  some  Fruits  God  hath  given,  and  is  to  be  praised  for. 

In  former  years,  and  while  sundry  of  the  Lords  eminent  Servants, 
now  at  rest  from  their  labours,  were  yet  with  us,  A  Platform  of 
Church-Discipline,  comprizing  the  brief  summe  thereof,  especially  in 
reference  to  the  Constitution  of  Churches  {which  was  our  first  work 
when  we  came  into  this  Wilderness)  was  agreed  upon  by  a  Synod 
held  at  Cambridge,  and  published  to  the  world:  From  'which  [as  to 
the  substance  thereof)  we  yet  see  no  cause  to  recede.  Some  few  par- 
ticulars referring  to  the  Continuation  and  Combination  of  Churches, 
needed  yet  a  more  ex-[iv]plicite  stating  and  reducing  unto  practise. 
For  though  the  Principles  thereof  were  included  in  what  is  already 
published,  yet  that  there  hath  been  a  defect  in  practise  (especially  since 
of  late  years  there  was  more  occasion  for  it)  is  too  too  apparent :  For 
the  rectifying  whereof,  a  more  particular  Explication  of  the  Doc- 
trine also  about  these  things,  is  now  necessary. 

In  order  hereunto,  by  the  Care  and  Wisdome  of  our  Honoured 
General  Court,  calling  upon  all  the  Churches  of  this  Colony,  to  send 
their  Elders  and  Messengers,  this  Synod  was  assembled,  who  after 
earnest  Supplications  for  Divine  Assistance,  having  consulted  the  holy 
Scriptures  touching  the  Questions  proposed  to  them,  have  proceeded 
to  the  following  Issue  ;  hoping  that  if  it  might  seem  meet  to  the  Father 
of  Lights  to  guide  the  Churches  unto  a  right  Understanding  and 
Practice  of  his  Will  in  these  things  also,  the  beauty  of  Christ's  wayes 
and  Spiritual  Kingdome  among  us  would  be  seen  in  some  more  com- 
pleatness  then  formerly.  For  that  which  was  the  prayer  of  Epaphras 
for  the  Colossians,  ought  to  be  both  the  prayer  and  labour  of  us  all  ; 
viz.  that  we  might  stand  perfect  and  compleat  in  all  the  will  of 
Cod:  And  we  trust  it  is  our  sincere  desire,  that  his  Will,  all  his 
Will,  and  nothing  else  but  his  Will,  might  be  done  among  us.  To 
the  Law  and  to  the  Testimony  we  do  -wholly  referre  our  selves, 
and  if  any  thing  in  the  following  Conclusions  be  indeed  found  not 
to  speak  according   thereunto,  let  it  be  rejected. 

We  are  not  ignorant  that  this  our  Labour  'will  by  divers  be  di- 
versly  censured ;  some  'will  account  us  too  strict  in  the  Point  of  Bap- 
tism, and  others  too  laxe  and  large :  Put  let  the  Scriptures  be  Judge 
between  us  all.  There  are  two  things,  the  Honour  whereof  is  in 
a  special  manner  dear  to  God,  and  'which  He  cannot  endure  to  be 
wronged  in  ;  viz.  His  Holiness,  and  Ills  Grace.  The  Scripture  is 
often  putting  us  in  minde  how  much  the  Lord  loveth  Holiness,  and 
that  in  his  House,  and  in  the  holy  Ordinances  thereof,  and  how  he 
abhorreth  the  contrary,  Mai  2.  11.  Psal.  93.  5.  &  2.  6.  Lev.  11.  44, 
45.  Ezek  22.  26.  &:  44.  7,  8.  And  hence  neither  dare  we  admit  those 
unto    the  holy   Table  of    the  Lord,  that  are  short  of    Scripture-qual- 


PREFACE    TO    THE     RESULT   OF    1662  303 

ifications  for  it ;  viz.  Ability  to  examine  themselves,  and  discern 
the  Lords  body  ;  Nor  yet  receive  or  retain  those  in  Church-estate \ 
and  own  them  as  a  part  of  the  Lords  holy  People,  that  are  visibly 
and  notoriously  unholy,  wicked  and  prophane :  such  we  are  bidden  to 
put  away  from  among  us,  1  Cor.  5.  13.  and  therefore  ought  not  to 
continue  [v]  among  us.  Neither  may  we  administer  Baptism  to  those 
whose  parents  are  not  under  any  Church-power  or  Government  any 
where.  To  baptize  such,  would  be  to  give  the  Title  and  Livery  to 
those  that  will  not  bear  the  yoke  of  Christs  Disciples,  and  to  put  the 
holy  Name  of  God  upon  them,  touching  whom  we  can  have  no  toler- 
able security  that  they  will  be  educated  in  the  waxes  of  Holiness,  or 
in  the  knowledge  and  practise  of  Gods  holy  Will.  Baptism,  which 
is  the  Seal  of  Membership  in  the  Church  the  Body  of  Christ,  and 
a/i  engaging  Sign,  importing  us  to  be  the  devoted  Subjects  of  Christ, 
and  of  all  his  holy  Government,  is  not  to  be  ?nade  a  common  thing, 
nor  to  be  given  to  those,  between  whom  and  the  God-less  licentious 
world  there  is  no  visible  difference  :  This  would  be  a  provocation 
and  dishonour  to  the  Holy  One  of  Israel. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  finde  in  Scripture,  that  the  Lord  is  very 
tender  of  his  Grace  ;  that  he  delighteth  to  manifest  and  magnifie  the 
Riches  of  it,  and  that  he  cannot  endure  any  straituing  or  eclipsing 
thereof,  which  is  both  dishonourable  unto  God,  and  injurious  unto 
men,  Gal.  2  21.  Eph.  2.  7.  &  3.  2,  6,  8  Rom  11.  1,  5.  Acts  15.  10, 
11.  &  10.  15  &  20.  24,  26,  27.  And  in  special  he  is  large  in  the 
Grace  of  his  Covenant  which  he  makcth  with  his  visible  Church 
and  People,  and  tender  of  having  the  same  straitned.  Hence  when 
he  takes  any  into  Covenant  with  himself,  he  will  not  only  be  their 
God,  but  the  God  of  their  seed  after  them  in  their  generations, 
Genes.  17,  7,  9.  And  although  the  apostate  wicked  parent  [that  re- 
fecteth  God  and  his  1  fares)  do  cut  off  both  himself  and  his  Children 
after  him,  Exod.  20.  5.  &  34.  7.  Yet  the  Mercy  and  Grace  of  the 
Covenant  is  extended  to  the  faithful  and  their  seed  unto  a  thousand 
generations,  if  the  successive  parents  do  but  in  the  least  degree  shew 
themselves  to  be  lovers  of  God,  and  keepers  of  his  Covenant  and 
Commandments,  so  as  that  the  Lord  will  never  reject  them  till  they 
reject  him,  Exod  20.  6.  Deut.  7.  9.  Psal  105.  8,  9.  Rom.  11.  16 
-  -  22.  Hence  we  dare  not  (icith  the  Antipcedobaptist)  exclude  the 
Infant-children  of  the  faithful  from  the  Covenant,  or  from  Member- 
ship in.  the  visible  Church,  and  consequently  not  from  Baptism  the 
Seal  thereof.  Neither  dare  we  exclude  the  same  children  from  Mem- 
bership (or  put  them  out  of  the  Church)  when  they  are  grown  up, 
while  they  so  walk  and  act,  as  to  keep  their  standing  in  the  Covenant 
and  doe  not  reject  the  same.  God  owns  them  still,  and  they  doe 
in  some  measure  [vi]  own  him.  ;  God  rejects  them  not,  and  there- 
fore neither  may  we  ;  and  consequently  their  children  also  are  7iot 
to  be  rejected.  Should  zee  reject  or  exclude  any  of  these,  we  should 
shorten  and  straiten  the  gi'ace  of  God's  Covenant,  more  then  God 
himself  doth,  and  be  injurious  to  the  Souls  of  men,  by  putting  them 
from  under  those  Dispensations  of  Grace,  which  are  stated  upon  the 
visible  Church,  whereby  the  children  of  God' s  visible  people  are  sue- 


304  THE   HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

ccssivcly  in  their  Generations  to  be  trained  up  for  the  Kingdom* 
of  Heaven,  (whither  the  Elect  member  shall  still  be  brought  in  the 
way  of  such  means)  and  wherein  he  hath  given  unto  Officers  and 
Churches  a  solemn  charge  to  take  care  of  and  train  up  such,  as  a 
part  of  his  flock,  to  that  end;  saying  to  them,  as  sometimes  to  Peter, 
If  you  love  me,  feed  my  lambs.  In  obedience  to  which  clung, ■  we 
hope  it  is,  that  we  are  willing  and  desirous  {though  with  the  in- 
ference of  710  small  labour  and  burthen  to  our  selves)  to  commend 
these  Truths  to  the  Churches  of  Christ ;  that  all  the  Flock,  even 
the  Lambs  thereof,  being  duly  stated  wider  Pastoral  Power,  we  might 
after  a  faithful/  discharge  of  our  Duty  to  them,  be  able  to  give  up 
our  account  another  day  with  joy  and  not  with  grief. 

How  hard  it  is  to  fnde  and  keep  the  right  middle  -way  of  Truth 
in  these  things,  is  known  to  all  that  are  ought  acquainted  with  the 
Controversies  therc-about.  As  we  have  learned  and  believed,  we 
have  spoken;  but  not  without  remembrance  that  we  are  poor  feeble 
frail  men,  and  therefore  desire  to  be  conversant  herein  with  much 
humility  and  fear  bcfo)'e  God  and  man.  We  are  not  ignorant  of 
variety  of  judgements  concerning  this  Subject ;  which  notwithstand- 
ing, with  all  due  reverence  to  Dissenters,  after  Religious  search  of 
the  Scriptures,  zee  have  here  offered  -what  seems  to  us  to  have  the 
fullest  Evidence  of  Light  from  thence;  if  more  may  be  added,  and 
may  be  found  contained  in  the  Word  of  God,  this  shall  be  no  prej- 
udice thereunto.  Hence  also  we  a?-e  farre  from  desiring  that  there 
should  be  any  rigorous  imposition  of  these  things  (especially  as  to 
what  is  more  narrow  therein,  and  more  controvcrsal  among  godly 
men.")  If  the  Honoured  Court  see  meet  so  farre  toadde  their  counte- 
nance and  concurrence,  as  to  commend  a  serious  consideration 
hereof  to  the  Churches,  and  to  secure  those  that  can  with  clearness 
of  judgement  practise  accordingly,  from  disturbance,  that  in  this 
case  may  be  sufficient.  To  tolerate,  or  to  desire  a  Toleration  of 
damnable  Heresies,  or  of  Subvcrters  of  the  Fundamentals  of  Faith 
or  Order,  -were  an  [vii]  irreligious  inconsistency  with  the  love  of 
true  Religion  ;  But  to  bear  one  with  another  in  lesser  differences, 
about  matters  of  a  more  difficult  and  controversal  nature,  and  more 
ret)iote  from  the  Foundation,  and  wherein  the  godly-wise  are  not 
like-minded,  is  a  Duty  necessary  to  the  peace  and  welfare  of 
Religion,  -while  we  arc  in  the  state  of  infirmity .  In  such  things  let 
not  him  that  practiseth  despise  him  that  forbcareth,  and  let  not  him 
that  forbcarcth  judge  him  that  practiseth,  for  God  hath  received  him. 

But  as  we  do  not  thus  speak  from  doubting  of  the  'Truth  here 
delivered  (Paul  knows  where  the  Truth  lyes,  and  is  perswaded  of 
it,  Rom.  14.  14.  yet  he  can  lovingly  bear  a  Dissenter,  and  in  like 
manner  should  we)  So  we  do  in  the  bowels  of  Christ  fesus  commend 
the  consideration  of  these  things  unto  our  Brethren  in  the  several 
Churches.  J  That  is  here  offered  is  farre  from  being  any  declining 
from  former  Principles,  it  is  rather  a  pursuance  thereof;  for  it  is 
all  included  in,   or  dcduciblc  from  what  -we  unanimously  professed 


PREFACE   TO   THE   RESULT   OF    1662  305 

atid  owned  in  the  fore-mentioned 'Platform  of  Discipline,  many  years 
since.  There  it  is  asserted,  that  Children  are  Church-members  ; 
That  they  have  many  priviledges  which  others  (not  Church-mem- 
bers) have  not ;  and  that  they  are  under  Discipline  in  the  Church, 
chap.  12.  sect.  7.  and  that  will  infer  the  right  of  their  children, 
they  continuing  to  walk  orderly.  And  the  other  matter  of  Conso- 
ciation, or  exercise  of  Communion  of  Churches,  is  largely  held  forth 
Chap.  15.  &  16. 

It  may  be  an  Objection  lying  in  the  m hides  of  some,  and  which 
many  may  desire  a  filler  Answer  unto  ;  That  these  things,  or  some 
of  them,  are  Innovations  in  our  Church-way es,  and  things  which  the 
Lord's  Worthies  in  New-England,  who  are  now  with  God,  did 
never  teach  nor  hold,  and  therefore  why  should  we  now,  after  so 
many  years,  fall  upon  new  Opinions  and  Practises?  Is  not  this 
a  declining  from  our  first  Purity,  and  a  blamcable  Alteration  ?  To 
this :  Although  it  'were  a  sufficient  Answer  to  say,  That  in  matters 
of  Religion,  not  so  much  -what  hath  been  held  or  practised,  as  what 
should  be,  and  what  the  Word  of  God  prescribes,  ought  to  be  our 
Enquiry  and  our  Rule.  The  people  in  Nehemiah's  time  are  com- 
mended for  doing  as  they  found  written  in  the  Law,  though  from 
the  dayes  of  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun,  unto  that  day,  the  children 
of  Israel  had  not  done  so,  Nehem.  8.  14,  17.  See  the  like  2  Chron. 
30.  5,  26.  2  Kings  23.  21,  22.  they  did  not  lye  themselves  to  former 
use  and  custome,  but  to  the  Rule  of  Gods  written  Word,  and  so  [viii] 
should  we.  It  was  Thyatira'.?  praise,  that  their  good  works  were 
more  at  the  last  then  at  the  first,  Rev.  2.  19.  The  Lord's  hum- 
ble and  faithfull  Servants  are  not  wont  to  be  forward  to  think  them- 
selves perfect  in  their  attainments,  but  desirous  rather  to  make  a 
progress  in  the  knowledge  and  practise  of  God's  holy  Will.  If  there- 
fore the  things  here  propounded  concerning  the  children  of  Church- 
members,  and  the  Consociation  of  Churches,  be  a  part  of  the  Will  of 
God  contained  in  the  Scriptures,  (as  we  hope  the  Discourse  ensuing 
will  shew  them  to  be)  that  doth  sufficiently  bespeak  their  entertain- 
ment, although  they  had  not  formerly  been  held  or  heard  of  amongst 
us.  Yet  this  must  ?iot  be  granted,  the  contrary  being  the  Truth,  viz. 
that  the  Points  herein  "which  may  be  most  scrupled  by  some,  are 
known  to  have  been  the  judgement  of  the  generality  of  the  Elders  of 
these  Churches  for  many  years,  and  of  those  that  have  been  of  most 
eminent  esteem  among  us.  As  (besides  what  was  before  mentioned 
from  the  Platform  of  Discipline)  may  appear  by  the  following  Testi- 
monies from  sundry  Eminent  and  Worthy  Ministers  of  Christ  in 
New- England,  who  are  ?io?v  with  God. 

First,    Touching  the  children  of  Church-members. 

Mr.  Cotton  hath  this  saying  ;  The  Covenant  and  Blessing  of 
Abraham  is  that  which  we  plead  for,  which  the  Apostle  saith  is  come 
upon  us  Gentiles,  Gal.  3.  14.  which  admitteth  the  faithful  and  their 
Infant-seed,  not  during  their  lives,  in  case  their  lives  should  grow 
up  to  Apostacy  or  open  Scandal,  but  during  their  infancy,  and  so 
long    after  as  they    shall  continue  in  a  visible  profession    of    the 


3q6  THE   HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

Covenant  and  Faith,  and  Religion  of  their  fathers:    otherwise,  if 
the  children  of   the  faithful    grow    up    to  Apostacy,  or  any  open 
Scandal    (as  Lshmael  and  Esau  did)  as  they  were  then,  so  such   ike 
now  are  to  be  cast  out  of  the  fellowship  of  the   Covenant,  and  Oi 
the  Seals  thereof.     Grounds  and  Ends  of  Baptism  oj  Children,    p.  106. 
tee  also  p    133,   134.     Again,    The   seed  of    the    Israelites,   though 
many  of  them  were  not  'sincerely  godly,  yet  wh.lest  they  held  forth 
the  publick  profession  of  God's  people,  Deut.  26.  3  -  -  n.  and  con- 
tinued under  the  wing  of  the  Covenant,  and  subjection  to  the  Ordi- 
nances, they  were  still  accounted  an  holy  seed,  Ezra  9.  2  and  so  their 
children  were  partakers  of  Circumcision.  Yea  further,  though  them- 
selves were  sometimes  kept  from  the  Lords  Supper  (the  Passeoyer) 
for  some  or  other  uncleanness,  yet  that  debarred  not  their  children 
from    [ixl   Circumcision.      Against  this  may   it  not  seem  vain   to 
stand   upon  a   difference   between   the   Church   of   Israel   and   our 
Churches  of  the  New-Testament— For  the  same  Covenant  which 
God  made  with  the  National  Church  of  Israel  and  their  seed    it  is 
the  very    same  for    substance,  and    none    other,  which    the   Lord 
makes  with  any  Congregational  Church,  and  our  seed.     Query  9 
of  Accommodation  and  Communion  of  Presbyt.  and  Cow* regal.  Churches. 
And  the  same  for  substance  with  those  Queries,  was  delivered  by  him  in 
12   Propositions,  as  Mr.  Tho:  Allen  witnesseth  in  Efist.  to  the  Reader 
before  Treat,  of  Covenant  and  those  Queries?     Now  in  the y    of  those 
Propositions  he  hath  these  words:  The  children  of  Church-members 
with  us,  though  baptized  in  their  infancy,  yet  when  they  come  to 
age  they  are  not  received  to  the  Lords  Supper,  nor  admitted  to 
fellowship  of  Voting  in  Admissions,  Elections   Censures  till   they 
come  to  profess  their  Faith  and  Repentance,  and  to  lay  hold  of  the 
Covenant  of   their  parents  before  the  Church;  and  yet  their  being 
not  cast  out  of  the   Church,  nor   from  the  t  ovenant   thereof,  the. 
children  as  well  as  themselves  being  within  the  Covenant,  they  may 
be  partakers  of  the  first  Seal  of   the  Covenant.'1     Lastly,  sf caking  to 
that  Objection,    That  the   Baptism  of  Infants  overthrows  and  des- 
troys the  Body  of  Christ,  the  holy  Temple  of  God;  and  that  m  time 
it  will  come  to  consist  of  natural  and  carnal  Members,  and  the  power 
of  Government  rest  in  the  hands  of  the  wicked.    He  Answers,    1  hat 
this  nuts  a  fear  where  no  fear  is,  or  a  causless  fear      And  in  frost - 
cutio\,  of  his  Answer  he  hath  these  words  ;   Let  the  Primitive  Practise 
be  restored  to  its  purity,  {viz.  that  due  care  be  ^enofbapt  *'(  »~ 
hers  of  the  Church  for  their  fitting  for  the  Lords    Table)  and  then 
there   will  be  no  more  fear  of  pestering  Churches  with  a  canal 
generation  of  members  baptized  in  their  infancy,    hen  of  admitting 
a  carnal  company  of  hypocrites  confessing  their  Faith  and I  Repen- 
tance   in   the  face  of  the   Congregation.      Either  the  L01  1   m   the 
faithfulness  of  his  Covenant  will  sanctifie  the  hearts  of  the  baptized 

a  Certain   Queries   Tending  to  Accommodation  ami  Communion  of  Presbyterian  an, 
Churches,  London,  1654,  PP-  "1  '3-  .       ,         , 

ro  the  Reader,"  p.  |  Covenant  of  Grace,  etc.  London,  1650. 

1  I  loubtless  from  a  man- 


PREFACE   TO   THE   RESULT   OF    1 662  307 

Infants  to  prepare  them  for  his  Table,  or  else  he  will  discover 
their  hypocrisie  and  profaneness  in  the  presence  of  his  Church 
before  men  and  Angels,  and  so  prevent  the  pollution  of  the  Lords 
Table,  and  corruption  of  the  Discipline  of  the  Church  by  their  par- 
taking in  them.  Grounds  and  Ends  of  Baptism,  drc.  p.  161,  163.  See 
also  Holiness  of  Church-  [xj  members:'  p.  41,  51,  56,  57,  63,  87.  Bloody 
Tenent  washed,2  p.  44,  78. 

Mr,  Hooker  sa/lh.  Suppose  a  whole  Congregation  should  con- 
sist of  such  who  were  children  to  Parents  now  deceased  who  were 
confederate,  their  children  were  true  members  according  to  the 
Rules  of  the  Gospel,  by  the  profession  of  their  fathers  Covenant, 
though  they  should  not  make  any  personal  and  vocal  expression  of 
their  engagement  as  the  fathers  did.  Survey? part  1.  p.  48.  Again, 
We  maintain  according  to  truth,  that  the  believing  parent  cove- 
nants and  confesseth  for  himself  and  his  posterity,  and  this 
covenanting  then  and  now  is  the  same  for  the  kinde  of  it.  Part  3. 
p.  25.  See  p.  17,  18.  6°  part  1.  p.  69,  76,  77.  And  in  the  Preface, 
setting  down  sundry  things,  wherein  he  consents  with  Mr.  R.4  he  ex- 
presseth  this  for  one,  that  Infants  of  visible  Churches  born  of  wicked 
parents,  being  members  of  the  Church,  ought  to  be  baptized.  In 
these  (saith  he)  and  several  other  particulars,  we  fully  accord  with 
Mr.  R.  And  Part  3.  p.  11.  It  is  not  then  the  Question,  whether 
wicked  members  while  they  are  tolerated  sinfully  in  the  Church 
they  and  their  children  may  partake  of  the  Priviledges?  for  this  is 
beyond  question,  nor  do  I  know,  nor  yet  ever  heard  it  denied  by 
any  of  ours. 

Mr.  Philips,  speaking  of  a  people  made  partakers  of  Gods 
Covenant,  and  all  the  priviledges  outwardly  belonging  thereto,  he 
saith,  Themselves  and  all  that  ever  proceed  from  them,  continue 
in  the  same  state,  parents  and  children  successively,  so  long  as  the 
Lord  continues  the  course  of  his  Dispensation;  nor  can  any  alter- 
ation befall  them,  whereby  this  estate  is  dissolved,  but  some  appar- 
ent act  of  God  breaking  them  off  from  him.  Reply?  p.  126.  Again, 
speaking  of  that  Holiness,  1  Cor.  7.  14.  he  saith,  I  take  it  of  fcederal 
holiness,  whereby  the  children  are  with  the  believing  parents  taken 
by  God  to  be  his,  and  by  him  put  under  his  covenant,  and  so  they 
continue  when  men  of  years,  though  they  never  have  any  further 
grace  wrought  in  them,  nor  have  any  other  state  upon  them,  then 
what  they  had  when  they  were  born.  Ibid.  p.  131.  Again,  a  com- 
pany become  or  are  a  Church,  either  by  conversion  and  initial  con- 
stitution, or  by  continuance  of  the  same  constituted  Churches 
successively  by  propagation  of  members,  who  all  are  born  in 
Church-state,  and  under  the  covenant  of  God,  and  belong  unto  the 
Church,  and  are  a  Church  successively  so  long  as  God  shall  con- 
tinue his  begun  dispensation,  even  as  well  &  as  fully  as  the  first. 
Ibid.  p.  145. 

1  London,  1650.  2  London,  1647. 

3  Survey  of  the  Summc  of  Churck-Discipline,  London,  1648. 

4  Prof.  Samuel  Rutherford.     See  ante,  p.  139. 

5  George  Phillips,  pastor  at  Watertown,  Mass.  A  Reply  to  a  Confutation  of  some  Grounds 
for  Infant  Baftism     .     .     .    put  forth  against  me  by  one  T.  Lamb.     London,  1645. 


3o8  THE    HALF-WAV    COVENANT 

[xi]  Mr.  Shepard  in  Defence  of  the  Nine  Positions,'  p.  143-  hath 

this  expression,  Concerning  the  Infants  of  Church-members,  they 
are  subject  to  Censures  whensoever  they  offend  the  Church,  as 
others  are,  though  so  long  as  they  live  innocently  they  need  them 
not.  And  in  the  year  1649,  not  three  moneths  before  his  Death?  he 
wrote  unto  a  friend  a  large  Letter  {yet  extant  under  his  own  Hand)  con- 
cerning the  Membership  of  Children,  wherein  he  proveth  by  sundry 
Arguments  that  they  are  Members,  and  answereth  sundry  Objections 
against  it,  and  sheweth  at  large  what  great  good  there  is  in  children's 
Membership.  In  which  Discourses  he  asserteth,  That  as  they  are 
Members  in  their  infancy,  so  they  continue  Members  when  they 
are  grown  up,  till  for  the'ir  wickedness  they  be  cast  out;  and  that 
they'  being  Members,  their  seed  successively  are  members  also, 
until  by  Dissolution  or  Excommunication  they  be  unchurched  : 
That  though  they  are  Members,  it  follows  not  that  they  must  come 
to  the  Lords  Supper,  but  they  must  first  appear  able  to  examine 
themselves,  and  discern  the 'Lords  Body:  That  the  children  of 
godlv  parents,  though  they  do  not  manifest  faith  in  the  Gospel, 
yet  they  are  to  be  accounted  of  Gods  Church,  until  they  positively 
reject  the  Gospel,  Rom.  11.  That  this  Membership  of  children 
hath  no  tendencv  in  it  to  pollute  the  Church,  no  more  then  in  the 
Old  Testament, 'but  is  a  means  rather  of  the  contrary;  And  that 
there  is  as  much  danger  (if  not  more)  of  the  degenerating  and 
apostatizing  of  Churches  gathered  of  professing  Believers,  as  of 
those  that  rise  out  of  the  seed  of  such. 

Mr.  Prudden3  in  a  Letter  to  a  friend  written  in  the  year  1651. 
doth  plainly  express  it  to  be  his  judgement,  That  the  children  of 
Church-members,  are  Members,  and  so  have  right  to  have  their 
children  baptized,  though  themselves  be  not  yet  admitted  to  the 
Lords  Supper.     His  words  are  these  : 

Touching  the  desire  of  such  Members  children  as  desire  to  have  their  children 
baptized,  it  is  a  thing  that  I  do  not  vet  hear  practised  in  any  of  our  Churches.  But 
for  my  own  part,  I  am  inclined  to  think,  that  it  cannot  justly  be  denied,  because  their 
next  Parents  (however  not  admitted  to  the  Lords  Supper)  stand  as  compleat  .Members 
of  the  Church,  within  the  Church-Covenant,  and  so  acknowledged  that  they  might 
have  right  to  Baptism.  Now  they  being  in  Covenant,  and  standing  Members,  their 
Children  also  are  Members  by  virtue  of  their  Parents  Covenant  and  Membership,  as 
well  as  thev  themselves  were  by  virtue  of  their  Parents  Covenant  and  Membership; 
And  thev  have  not  renounced  that  Covenant,  nor  are  justly  censured  for  breach  of 
that  Covenant,  but  do  own  it  and  profess  it,  and  by  virtue  of  it  claim  the  pnviledge 
of  it  to  their  Children.  Then  he  puts  this  his  Argument  into  form  thus  :  lhose 
Children  who  are  within  the  Covenant  of  the  C[h]urch,  and  so  Members  of  it.  bap- 
tism cannot  be  denied  unto.  But  the  Children  in  question  are  within  the  Covenant 
of  the  Church,  and  so  Members  of  it.  Therefore  Baptism  cannot  be  denied  unto 
them.  The  Assumption  is  proved  thus:  The  [xii]  Children  of  such  Parents  as  are 
within  the  Covenant  of  the  Church,  and  so  Members  of  the  Church  are  themselves 
within  the  Covenant  of  the  Church,  and  so  Members  of  it.  But  the  Children  in 
question  are  Children  of  such  Parents  as  are  in  Covenant,  and  so  Members  of  the 


•  Thomas  Shepard,  pastoral  Cambridge,  Mas,.  T.  Shepard  &  T.  Al'.in,  A  Defence  of ike 
Answer  made  [by  John  Davenport]  unto  the  o.  Questions  .  .  .  against  the  Reply  thereto 
by  John  Ball.     London,  1645. 

2  He  died  Aug.  25,  1649. 

3  Peter  Prudden,  minister  at  Milford,  Conn.,  died  1656. 


PREFACE   TO   THE    RESULT   OF    1 662  309 

Church.  Therefore  they  are  so  themselves.  The  Proposition  is  clear,  because  the 
Parents  Covenant  for  themselves,  and  for  their  Children,  Dent.  29.  10, — 16.  Ezek. 
16.  8,  13.  And  God  accepts  both,  Gen.  17.  12,  13.  the  whole  Nation  is  federally 
holy,  Ezra  9.  2.  they  are  expresly  said  to  be  in  Covenant  with  their  fathers,  Dent. 
29.  not  partly  or  partially  in  Covenant,  Rom.  9.  3,  4.  Acts  2.  39.  and  God  styles 
himself  their  God  as  well  as  their  fathers,  Gen.  17.  7,  8,  9.  and  to  have  God  to  be 
our  God,  is  to  be  in  compleat  Church-Covenant  with  him.  The  Assumption  is  evi- 
dent, because  else  such  their  Parents  had  not  had  right  to  Baptism  the  Seal  of  the 
Covenant,  but  that  they  had  right  unto,  and  so  received  it  ;  and  the  same  right  that 
they  had,  their  Children  have,  who  are  included  in  their  Covenant,  as  they  were  in 
their  fathers  —  and  are  not  less  truely  or  less  compleatly  in  Covenant. 

Lastly,  (to  adde  no  more)  Mr.  Nath.  Rogers,1  in  a  Letter  to  a 
Friend,  bearing  date  18.  11.  1652.  liatlt  these  words : 

To  the  Question  concerning  the  Children  of  Church-members,  I  have  nothing  to 
oppose,  and  I  wonder  any  should  deny  them  to  be  Members.  They  are  Members  in 
cettsu  Ecclenastico  ;  God  so  calls  them,  the  Church  is  so  to  account  of  them  :  And 
when  they  are  adulta  tetatis.  though  having  done  no  personal  act,  yet  are  to  be  in 
Charity  judged  Members  still,  and  till  after  due  calling  upon,  they  shall  refuse  or 
neglect  to  acknowledge  and  own  the  Covenent  of  their  Parents,  and  profess  their  belief 
of,  and  subjection  to  the  contents  thereof  —  For  Practise,  I  confess  I  account  it  our 
great  default,  that  we  have  made  no  more  real  distinction  between  these  and  others, 
that  they  have  been  no  more  attended,  as  the  lambs  of  the  Flock  of  Christ :  and 
whether  it  be  not  the  cause  of  the  corruption  and  woeful  defection  of  our  youth,  dis- 
quiri  permittimus. 

So  that  it  was  the  judgement  of  these  Worthies  in  their  time,  that 
the  children  of  Church-members  are  members  of  the  Church  as  well  as 
their  parents,  and  do  not  cease  to  be  members  by  becoming  adult,  but  do 
still  continue  in  the  Church,  untill  in  some  way  of  God  they  be  cast  out ; 
and  that  they  are  subject  to  Church-discipline,  even  as  other  members,  and 
may  have  their  children  baptized  before  themselves  be  received  to  the  Lords 
Supper ;  and  yet  that  in  this  way  there  is  no  tendency  to  the  corrupting 
of  the  Church  by  unworthy  members,  or  of  the  Ordinances  by  unworthy 
partakers.  And  in  the  Synod  held  at  Cambridge  in  the  year  1648.  that 
particular  point  of  Baptizing  the  children  of  such  as  were  admitted 
members  in  minority,  but  not  vet  in  full  communion,  was  inserted  in  some 
of  the  draughts  that  were  prepared  for  that  Assembly,  and  7oas  then  de- 
bated and  confirmed  by  the  like  Arguments  as  we  now  use,  and  was  gen- 
erally consented  to ;  though  because  some  few  dissented,  and  there  was 
not  the  like  urgency  of  occasion  for  present  practise,  it  was  not  then  put 
into  the  Platform  that  was  after  Printed!1  We  need  not  mention  the 
Meeting  of  Elders  at  Boston  upon  the  Call  of  the  Honoured  Court  in 
the  year  1657.  where  in  Answer  to  XXI.  Questions,  since  Printed,  this 
Point  is  particularly  asserted.  By  all  which  it  appeareth,  that  these  are 
not  things  lately  devised ;  or  before  unheard-of,  nor  can  they  justly  be 
censured  [xiii]  as  Innovations  or  Declensions  from  the  received  Doc- 
trine in  New-England.  Lt  is  true,  that  in  the  beginning  of  these  Plan- 
tations, and  the  Lnfancy  of  these  Churches,  there  was  not  so  much  said 
touching  these  things  as  there  hath  been  since  ;  and  the  reason  is,  Because 
then  there  was  not  the  like  occasion  as  since  hath  been :  Few  children  of 
Church-members  being  then  adult,  at  least  few  that  were  then  married, 


1  Nathaniel  Rogers,  pastor  at  Ipswich,  Mass.,  died  1655. 
3  See  ante,  p.  181. 


310  THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

and  had  children.  Accordingly,  when  a  Question  was  put  about  the 
priviledges  of  Members  children,  when  come  to  years,  these  Churches 
then  having  been  but  of  fere  wars  standing,  our  Answer  was,  That  by 
reason  of  the  Infancy  of  these  Churches,  we  had  then  had  no  occasion  to 
determine  what  to  judge  or  practise  in  that  matter.1  Answer  to  the  5lh- 
and  6,h-  of  32. Questions:  which  may  satisjie  as  to  the  Reason  why  in 
our  first  beginnings  there  -was  no  more  said  touching  these  Questions. 
But  afterwards,  when  there  was  more  cause  for  it,  many  of  the  Elders 
in  these  Churches,  both  such  as  are  now  living,  and  sundry  who  an 
deceased,  did  declare  their  judgements  as  aforesaid,  and  this  many  years 
ago. 

Secondly,  Touching  Consociation  of  Churches,  take  these  few 

Testimonies,  in  stead  of  many  more  that  might  be  al/edged. 

Mr.  Cotton,  Keyes,2  p.' 54,  55.  It  is  a  safe  and  wholsome  and 
holy  Ordinance  of  Christ,  for  particular  Churches  to  joyn  together 
in  holy  Covenant,  or  Communion  &  Consociation  among  them- 
selves, to  administer  all  their  Church-affairs  (which  are  of  weighty, 
and  difficult  and  common  concernment)  not  without  common  con- 
sultation and  consent  of  other  Churches  about  them.  And  how  it 
is  so,  he  there  sheweth  in  all  the  particulars.     See  also  p.  24,  25,  47  59. 

Mr.  Hooker,  Survey,  see  part  4.  p.  1,  2.  &  p.  45.  And  in  the 
Preface  he  professeth  his  consent  with  Mr.  R.  That  Consociation  of 
Churches  is  not  only  lawful,  but  in  some  cases  necessary.  That 
when  causes  are  difficult,  and  particular  Churches  want  light  and 
help  they  should  crave  the  assistance  of  such  a  Consociation. 
That  Churches  so  meeting  have  right  to  Counsel,  Rebuke  <><\  as 
the  case  doth  require.  And  in  case  any  particular  Church  shall 
walk  pertinaciously,  either  in  the  profession  of  Errour  or  sinful 
Practise,  and  will  not  hear  their  counsel,  they  may  and  should 
renounce  the  right  hand  of  fellowship  with  them.  And  after  he 
sets  down  this  of  Consociation  of  Churches  amongst  other  things, 
-wherein  he  had  leave  to  profess  the  joynt  Judgement  of  all  the 
Elders  upon  the  River  ;  of  New-haven,  Guilford,  Milford,  Stratford, 
Fairfield,  and  most  of  the  Elders  in  the  Bay?  By  [xiv]  which  it  is 
clear,  that  this  point  of  Consociation  of  Churches  is  no  new  invention  of 
these  times,  but  was  taught  and  professed  in  New-England  many  years 
agoc,for  so  it  was  we  see  in  Mr.  HookerV  time,  and  it  is  now  above 
fifteen  years  since  he  departed  this  life. 

To  these  our  070/1  Ministers,  we  shall  only  adde  a  passage  in  the  Apolo- 
getical  Narration  of  Dr.  Goodwyn,  Mr.  Nye,  Mr.  Sidrach  Simpson, 
Mr.  Burroughes,  and  Mr.  Bridge;  *  wherein,  besides  much  more  to  this 
purpose,  touching  the  Remedy  provided  in  the  Congregational-'way  for 
mat- Administrations,  or  other  miscarriages  in  Churches,  p.  16-21. 
They  set  it  down  (in  p.  21.)  as  their  past  and  present  Profession,  That 
it  is  the  most  to  be  abhorred  Maxime  that  any  Religion  hath  ever 


R.  Mather,  Church-Government,  London,  1643  (Answer  to  Xos.  2,  5,  and  6  of  the  XXXII 
>ns),  p.  22.     (Written  1639.) 
London,  1644. 
See  ante,  p.  148. 
The  chief  CongTegationalists  in  the  Westminster  Assembly. 


PREFACE   TO   THE    RESULT   OF    1662  311 

made  profession  of,  and  therefore  of  all  other  the  most  contradic- 
tory and  dishonourable  unto  that  of  Christianity,  that  a  single  and 
particular  Society  of  men,  professing  the  Name  of  Christ,  and  pre- 
tending to  be  endowed  with  a  Power  from  Christ,  to  judge  them 
that  are  of  the  same  Body  and  Society  within  themselves,  should 
further  arrogate  unto  themselves  an  exemption  from  giving  account, 
or  being  censurable  by  any  other,  either  Christian  Magistrate 
above  them,  or  Neighbour-Churches  about  them.1  See  also  Mr. 
Burroughes  Heart-Divis.3  pag  43,  44. 

Brethren,  bear  with  as  ;  Were  it  for  our  own  Sakes,  or  Names,  or 
Interests,  we  should  not  be  sollicitous  to  beg  Charity  of  you.  With  us 
it  is  a  small  thing  to  be  judged  of  man's  day.  But  it  is  for  your 
sakes,  for  your  children's  sake,  and  for  the  Lord's  sake,  that  we  i //treat 
for  a  charitable,  candid,  and  considerate  Acceptation  of  our  labour 
herein.  It  is  that  the  Congregations  of  the  Lord  might  be  established 
before  Him  in  Truth  and  Peace,  and  that  they  might  have  one  heart 
and  one  way  in  the  fear  of  God,  for  the  good  of  them  and  of  their 
children  after  them.  Do  we  herein  seek  our  selves  ?  our  own  advan- 
tage, ease  or  glory  ?  Surely  we  feel  the  contrary  J  What  is  it  ice  de- 
sire, but  that  we  might  do  our  utmost  to  carry  your  poor  Children  to 
Heaven  ;  and  that  we  might  see  these  Churches  bound  up  together  in  the 
Bonds  of  Truth  and  Peaee  /  Forgive  us  this  wrong.  But  should  the 
Church-education  of  your  children  be  by  the  want  of  your  hearty  concur- 
rence, rendered  cither  unfeizible  or  ineffectual;  should  they  live  as 
Lambs  in  a  large  place,  for  want  of  your  agreement  to  own  them  of 
the  Flock,  we  beseech  you  to  consider  how  uncomfortable  the  account 
hereof  would  be  another  day :  We  pray  with  the  Apostle,  that  you  do 
no  evil,  not  that  we  should  appear  approved,  [xv]  but  that  you 
should  do  that  which  is  good  and  right,  though  we  be  rejected.  For 
we  can  do  nothing  against  the  truth,  but  for  the  truth:  and  this 
also  we  wish,  even  your  perfection,  2  Cor.  13.  7,  8,  9.  However,  we 
hope  after-ages  will  bear  witness,  that  we  have  been  in  some  measure 
faithful  to  the  Truth  in  these  things,  and  to  this  part  of  Christs  King- 
dome  also  in  our  generation. 

But  we  may  not  let  pass  this  opportunity,  without  a  word  of  Cau- 
tion and  Exhortation  to  the  Youth  of  the  Country,  the  children  of  our 
Churches,  whose  Lute  rest  we  have  here  asserted.  Be  not  you  pit fed  up  with 
Priviledges,  but  humbled  rather,  in  the  awful  sense  of  the  Engagement, 
Duty,  and  danger  that  doth  attend  them  :  Lt  is  an  high  favour  to  have  a 
place  in  Bethel,  in  the  house  of  God,  and  in  the  gate  of  Heaven; 
but  it  is  a  Dreadful  place:  God  -will  be  sanctified  in  all  that  come 
nigh  him.  A  place  nigh  unto  God  {or  among  his  people  who  are  near 
to  him,  Ps.  148.  14.)  is  a  place  of  great  fear,  Psa.  89.  7.  Take  heed 
therefore  unto  your  selves,  when  owned  as  the  people  of  the  Lord  your 
God,  (Deut.  27,  9,  10.)  lest  there  should  be  among  you  any  root 
that  beareth  gall  and  wormwood.      Take  heed  that  you  do  not  with  a 

1  An  Afiologeticall  Narration  Hvmbly  Svbmitted  to  the  Honourable  Houses  of  Parlia 
ment,  London,  1643. 

-  Irenicvm,  To  the  Lovers  of  Truth  and  Peace.  Heart-Divisions  opened  in  the  Causes 
■and  Evils  of  the:u  :     .     .     .    And  Endeavours  to  heal  them.     London,  1646. 


312  THE   HALF-WAV    COVENANT 

Spirit  of  pride  and  haughtiness,  or  of  vanity  and  slightness,  cither  chal- 
lenge or  use  any  of  your  Priviledges.  Think  not  to  bear  the  Name  of 
Christians,  without  /'earing  the  Yoke  of  Christ.  Remember,  that  all 
Relations  to  God  and  to  his  people,  do  come  loaden  with  Duty;  and  all 
Gospel-duty  must  be  done  in  humility.  The  wayes  of  the  Lord  are 
right,  and  the  humble  and  serious  shall  walk  in  them,  but  proud  Trans- 
gressors shall  fall  therein.  Be  not  sons  of  Belial,  that  can  bear  no 
yoke :  Learn  subjection  to  Christs  holy  Government  in  all  the  parts  and 
wayes  thereof.  Be  subject  to  your  godly  Parents  :  Be  subject  to  your 
spiritual  Fathers  and  Pastors,  and  to  all  their  Instructions,  Admoni- 
tions and  Exhortations  :  Be  subject  unto  faithful  Brethren,  and  to 
words  of  counsel  and  help  from  them  :  Ye  younger,  submit  your  selves 
unto  the  elder;  and  to  that  end,  be  clothed  with  humility.  Lye  under 
the  Word  and  Jl'i/l  of  Christ,  as  dispensed  and  conveyed  to  you  by  all 
his  appointed  Instruments  in  their  respective  places.  Break  not  in  upon 
the  Lord's  Table  (or  upon  the  Priviledges  of  full  Communion)  without 
due  qualification,  and  orderly  admission  thereunto,  lest  you  eat  and 
drink  your  own  damnation.  Be  ordered,  and  take  not  upon  you  to 
order  the  affairs  of  Gods  Family  ;  that  is  not  the  place  of  those  who 
are  yet  but  in  the  state  of  Initiation  and  Education  in  the  Church  of 
God.  Carry  it  in  all  things  with  a  spirit  of  humility,  modesty,  sobriety 
and  [xvi]  fear,  that  our  soules  may  not  weep  in  secret  for  your  pride, 
and  that  God  may  not  resist  &  reject  you  as  a  generation  of  his  wrath. 
Oh  that  the  Lord  would  pour  out  a  spirit  of  Humiliation  &*  Repent- 
ance upon  all  the  younger  sort  in  the  Country,  (yea  &  upon  elder  too, 
for  our  neglects)  from  Dan  to  Beersheba!  Oh  that  we  might  meet  at 
Bochim,  because  so  many  Canaanites  of  unsubdued,  yea  growing  cor- 
ruptions are  found  among  us  !  Let  it  not  be  said,  that  when  the  first 
&•  best  generation  in  New-England  were  gathered  to  their  fathers, 
there  arose  another  generation  after  them  that  knew  not  the  Lord. 
Behold,  the  Lord  had  a  delight  in  your  fathers  to  love  them,  and  he 
hath  chose /i  you  their  seed  after  them,  to  enjoy  these  Liberties  6°  Op- 
portunities, as  it  is  this  day.  Circumcise  therefore  the  fore-skin  of 
your  hearts,  and  be  no  more  stiff-necked,  but  yield  your  selves  to 
the  Lord,  and  to  the  Order  of  His  Sanctuary,  to  seek  him,  and  wait 
on  him  in  all  his  wayes  with  holy  fear  and  trembling :  for  the  Lord  your 
God  is  gracious  and  merciful,  and  will  not  turn  away  his  face  from 
you,  if  you  return  unto  him  ;  if  you  seek  him  he  'will  be  found  of  you, 
but  if  you  forsake  him,  he  will  cast  you  off  for  ever. 

We  shall  conclude,  'when  we  have  given  the  Reader  a  short  ac- 
count of  the  Work  ensuing.  The  Propositions  in  Answer  to  the 
first  Question,  were  (after  much  discussion  and  consideration  from 
the  Word  of  God)  Voted  and  Concluded  by  the  Assembly  in  the  par- 
ticular terms  as  they  are  here  expressed.  The  Arguments  then  used 
for  their  Confirmation,  being  drawn  up  by  sonic  deputed  thereunto, 
after  they  had  been  several  times  read  and  considered  in  the  Assembly, 
were  looted  and  Consented  to,  as  to  the  summe  and  substance  thereof. 
The  answer  to  the  second  Question  is  here  given  with  great  brevity, 
partly  because  so  much  is  already  said  fhere-about  in  the  foresaid 
Platform  of  Discipline,  and  partly  by  reason  of  great  straits  of  time : 


RESULT   OF   THE    SYNOD    OF    1662 


313 


But  what  is  here  presented  was  the  joynt  conclusion  of  the  Synod. 
A  Preface  was  desired  by  the  Assembly  to  be  prefixed  by  some  ap- 
pointed thereunto,  which  is  here  accordingly  by  them  performed. 

N<m '  the  God  of  truth  &  peace  guide  us  &  all  his  people  in  the 
wayes,  &  give  us  the  fruits  thereof ;  help  us  to  feed  his  flock  and  his 
lambs,  &  to  be  fed  by  him  as  the  sheep  of  his  pasture,  that  when  the 
chief-Shepherd  shall  appear,  we  may  receive  together  a  Crown  of 
glory  that  fadeth  not  away,  &  may  enter  into  the  joy  of  our  Lord,  as 
those  that  have  neither  despised  his  little  ones,  nor  denied  to  be  our 
Brother's  keeper  :  But  having  faithfully  endeavoured  to  promote  the 
continuation  of  his  Kingdom,  &  'Communion  of  his  people,  may 
Rest&  Reign  with  all  Saints  in  the  kingdom  of  his  (rlory  :  Unto 
whom  be  glory  in  the  Church  by  Christ'  Jesus  throughout  all  ages 
world  without  end. 


[1]  THE   ANSWER 

OF   THE  ELDERS   AND   OTHER 
MESSENGERS 

of  the  Churches,  Assembled  at  Boston 

in  the  Year  1662, 

TO 

The  Questions  Propounded  to  them  by  ORDER  of  the 

Honoured  GENERAL   COURT. 

Quest,  ,   yj 
Answ  :       V  V   HO  are  the  Subjects  of  Baptism  ? 

The  Answer  may  be  given  in  the  following  propositions,  briefly 
confirmed  from  the  Scriptures. 

1  They  that  according  to  Scripture,  arc  Members  of  the  Visible 
Church,  are  the  subjects  of  Baptisme. 

2  The  Members  of  the  I  Ysible  Church  according  to  scripture, 
are  Confederate  visible  Believers,  in  particular  Churches,  and  their 
infant-seed,  i.  e.  children  in  minority,  whose  next  parents,  one  or 
both,  are  in  Covenant. 

3  The  Infant- seed  of  confederate  visible  Believers,  are  members 
of  the  same  Church  with  their  parents,  and  when  grown  up,  are  per- 
sonally under  the  watch,  discipline  and  Government  of  that  Church. 


3»4 


THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 


4  These  Adult  persons,  arc  not  therefore  to  be  admitted  to  full 
Communion,  mccrly  because  they  are  and  continue  [2]  members,  with- 
out such  further  qualifications,  as  the  Word  of  God  rcquircth  ther- 
unto. 

=5  Church-members  who  were  admitted  in  minority,  understand- 
ing the  Doctrine  of  Faith,  and  publickly  professing  their  assent 
thereto  ;  not  scandalous  in  life,  and  solemnly  owning  the  Covenant  be- 
fore the  Church,  wherin  they  give  up  themselves  and  their  children 
to  the  Lord,  and  subject  themselves  to  the  Government  of  Christ  in 
the  Church,  their  children  are  to  be  Baptised. 

6  Such  Church-members,  who  cither  by  death,  or  some  other 
extraordinary  Providence,  have  been  inevitably  kindred  from  publick 
acting  as  aforesaid,  yet  have  given  the  Church  cause,  in  judgment 
of  charity,  to  look  at  them  as  so  qualified,  and  such  as  had  they  been 
called  thereunto,  would  have  so  acted,  their  children  are  to  be  Baptised. 

7  The  members  of  Orthodox  Churches,  being  sound  in  the 
Faith,  and  not  scandalous  in  life,  and  presenting  due  testimony 
thereof;  these  occasionally  camming  from  one  Church  to  another,  may 
have  their  children  Baptised  in  the  church  whither  they  come,  by  virtue 
of  communion  of  churches :  but  if  they  remove  their  habitation,  they 
ought  orderly  to  covenant  and  subject  themselves  to  the  Government  of 
Christ  in  the  church  where  they  settle  their  abode,  and  so  their  children 
to  be  Baptised.  It  being  the  churches  duty  to  receive  such  unto  com- 
munion, so  farr  as  they  arc  regularly  fit  for  the  same. 

The  Confirmation   of   these   Propositions   from   the   Scripture 

followeth. 

Proposition    First. 

Tliey  that  according  to  Scripture  arc  members  of  the  visible  Chinch, 
arc  the  subjects  of  Baptisme. 

The  trueth  hereof  may  appear  by  the  following  evidences  from 
the  word  of  God. 

1.  When  Christ  saith,  Go  ye  therefore  and  teach,  or  (as  the  Creek 
is)  disciple  all  Nations,  Baptising  them,  Mat.  28.  19  [3]  he  expres- 
sed the  adequate  subject  of  Baptisme,  to  be  disciples,  or  discipled 
or.es.  But  disciples  there  is  the  same  with  members  of  the  visible 
Church: 

For  the  visible  Church  is  Christs  school,  wherein  all  the  mem- 
bers stand  related  and  subjected  to  him,  as  their  Master  and 
Teacher,  and  so  are  his  scholars  or  disciples,  and  under  his  teaching, as 
verse  20  \nd  it  is  that  visible  spiritual  Kingdome  of  Christ,  which  he 
there  from  his  Kingly  power,  vcr:   18.   sendeth  them  to  set  up  and 


RESULT   OF   THE    SYNOD    OF    1662  315 

administer  in  ver :  19.  the  subjects  whereof  are  under  his  Lawes 
and  Government  :  verse  20.  Which  subjects  (or  members  of  that 
Kingdome  /.  e.  of  the  visible  church)  are  termed  disciples  verse  19. 
Also  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  (the  story  of  their  accomplish- 
ment of  that  commission)  disciples  are  usually  put  for  members  of 
the  visible  church:  Acts  1.  15.  In  the  midst  of  the  disciples:  who 
with  others  added  to  them,  are  called  the  church,  Acts  2:  47: 
The  members  whereof  are  again  called  disciples,  Acts  6:  1,  2.  Acts 
9;  1,  .  .  .  against  the  disciples  of  the  Lord  i.  e.  against  the  church 
of  God.  1  Cor.  15  9  Gal  r.  13  Acts  9  26  He  assayed  to  joyn  himself 
to  the  disciples.  The  disciples  at  Lystra,  Iconium  and  Antioch,  Acts 
14  21,  22  are  called  the  church  in  each  of  those  places  verse  23  So 
the  church  verse  27  the  disciples  verse  28.  Acts  18.  22  the  church  at 
Cesarea;  Acts  21.  16  the  disciples  of  Ccsarea:  So  Acts  18.  23  with 
chap.  15.  41.  and  Gal.  1.  2.  Acts  18.  27  and  chap.  20 '1  with  verse  17. 
28.  From  all  which  it  appeareth  that  disciples  in  Mat.  28.  19  and 
mernbers  of  the  visible  church,  are  termes  equivalent:  and  disciples 
being  there  by  Christ  himselfe  made  subjects  of  Baptism,  it  follows 
that  the  members  of  the  visible  Church  are  the  subjects  of 
baptisme. 

2.  Baptisme  is  the  seal  of  first  entrance  or  admission  into  the 
visible  church;  as  appeareth  from  those  texts  1  Cor:  12:  13.  Bap- 
tised into  one  body,  i.  e.  our  entrance  into  the  body  or  church  of 
Christ,  is  sealed  by  Baptisme:  and  Rom;  6.  3,  5;  Gal.  3:  27.  where 
it  is  shewed  that  Baptisme  is  the  Sacrament  of  union  or  of  ingraft- 
ing into  Christ  the  head,  and  consequently  into  the  church  his  body 
&  from  the  Apostles  costant  practise  in  baptising  [4]  persons  upon 
their  first  comming  in,  or  first  giving  up  themselves  to  the  Lord 
and  them.  Acts  8.  12.  e^  16.  15,  33.  &r°  18.  8.  and  in  Acts  2.  41,  42. 
they  were  baptized  at  their  first  adding  to  the  church,  or  admission 
into  the  Apostles  fellowship,  wherin  they  afterward  continued.  And 
from  its  answering  unto  circumcision,  which  was  a  seal  of  initiation 
or  admission  into  the  church;  Hence  it  belongs  to  all  and  onely 
those  that  are  entred  into,  that  are  within,  or  that  are  members 
of  the  visible  chuch. 

3.  They  that  according  to  Scripture  arc  members  of  the  visible 
Church,  they  are  in  Covenant.  For  it  is  the  Covenant  that  consti- 
tuted the  Church,  Deut  29.  12,  13.  They  must  enter  into  covenant, 
that  they  might  be  established  the  people  or  Church  of  God.  Now, 
the  initiatory  seal  is  affixed  to  the  Covenant,  and  appointed  to  run 
parallel  therewith,  Gen.  17.  7,  9,  10,  11.  so  circumcision  was:  and 
hence  called  the  covenant  Gen.  17.  13.  Acts  7.  8.  and  so  Baptisme  is, 


3I6  THE   HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

being  in  like  manner  annexed  to  the  promise  or  Covenant,  Acts  2.  38, 
39.  and  being  the  seal  that  answereth  to  circumcision;  Col:  2.  11,  12. 
4.  Christ  doth  Sanctifie  and  cleanse  the  Church  by  the  washing  of 
water,  i.  e.  by  Baptisme  Eph.  5.  25,  26.  Therefore  the  whole  Church 
and  so  all  the  members  thereof  (who  are  also  said  in  Scripture  to 
be  Sanctified  in  Christ  Jesus,  1  Cor:  1.  2.)  are  the  subjects  of  bap- 
tisme: And  although  it  is  the  invisible  church,  unto  the  spiritual 
and  eternall  good  whereof,  this  and  all  other  Ordinances  lastly 
have  respect,  and  which  the  place  mentioned  in  Eph:  5.  may  in  a 
special  maner  look  unto,  yet  it  is  the  visible  Church  that  is  the  next 
and  immediate  subject  of  the  administration  thereof,  tor  the  sub- 
ject of  visible  external  ordinances  to  be  admimstred  by  men,  must 
needs  be  visible.  And  so  the  Apostles  Baptized  sundry  persons, 
who  were  of  the  visible,  but  not  of  the  invisible  Church,  as  Simon 
Magus,  Ananias  and  Sapphira,  and  others.  And  these  are  visibly 
Purchased  and  Sanctified  by  the  bloud  of  Christ,  the  Bloud  of  the 
covenant,  Acts  20.  28.  Heb  jo.  29.  Therefore  the  visible  seal  of  the 
covenant  and  of  cleansing  by  Christs  bloud  belongs  to  them. 

[Sl  5  The  Circumcision  is  of  ten  put  for  the  whole  Jewish  Church 
or  for  the  members  of  the  visible  Church  under  the  Old  Testament 
Those  within  are  expressed  by  [the  circumcised]  '  and  those  with- 
out by  \the  uncircumcised.]  Horn  :  15.  8.  '&  3-  3°-  Eph  :  2,  1 1,  Judg: 
14  3  &  15.  18.  1  Sam:  14.  6  &  17.  26,  36.  Jer.  9,  25,  26.  Hence 
by  proportion  baptisme  (which  is  our  Gospel  circumcision,  Col:  2. 
1,  12  )  belongs  to  the  whole  visible  Church  under  the  new  1  la- 
ment Actual  and  personal  circumcision  was  indeed  proper  to  the 
males  of  old,  females  being  but  inclusively  and  virtually  circum- 
cised and  so  counted  of  the  circumcision:  but  the  Lord  hath  taken 
away  that  difference  now,  and  appointed  Baptisme  to  be  personally 
applied  to  both  sexes,  Acts:  8.  12.  C~  16.  ,5.  Gal:  3  28.  So  that 
every  particular  member  of  the  visible  Church  is  now  a  subject  of 
Baptisme  We  conclude  therefore  that  Baptisme  pertaines  to  the 
whole   visible  Church,  and  to  all  and  every  one  therein,  and  to  no 

other.  „  •  •       a 

Proposition  2". 

The  members  of  the  visible  Church  according  to  Scripture,  are  con- 
federate visible  believers,  in  particular  Churches,  and  their  infant-seed, 
i.    e.  children   in    minority,   whose   next  parents,  one   or    both,  are   in 

""sundry  particulars  are  comprised   in   this  proposition,  which 

wee  may  consider  and  confirme  distinctly. 

1  [    J  in  original. 


RESULT   OF   THE    SYNOD   OF    1662  3 1 7 

Partic:  1.  Adult  persons  who  are  members  of  the  visible  Church, 
are  by  rule  confederate  visible  bcleevcrs :  Acts:  5.  14.  believers  were 
added  to  the  Lord.  The  believing  Corinthians  were  members  of  the 
Church  there  Acts  18:  8  with  1  Cor.  1.  2.  6°  12.  27.  The  inscrip- 
tions of  the  Epistles  written  to  Churches,  and  calling  the  members 
thereof  Saints,  and  faithfull,  shew  the  same  thing,  Eph  1.  1.  Phi  1. 
1.  Col.  1.  2.  And  that  confederation,  i.  c.  coventing  explicite  or 
implicite,  [the  latter  preserveth  the  essence  of  confederation,  the 
former  is  duety  and  most  desireablej  is  necessary  to  make  one  a 
member  of  the  visible  Church,  appears.  1.  Because  the  Church  is 
constituted  by  Covenant:  for  there  is  [6]  between  Christ  and  the 
Church  the  mutuall  engagement  and  relation  of  King  and  subjects, 
husband  and  spouse;  this  cannot  be  but  by  Covenant  (internall,  if 
you  speak  of  the  invisible  Church,  external  of  the  visible)  a  church 
is  a  company  that  can  say,  Cod  is  our  God  and  we  are  his  people, 
this  is  from  the  covenant  between  God  and  them.  Deut  29,  12,  13, 
Ezek :  16,  8.  3.  [2]  The  church  of  the  old  Testament  was  the 
church  of  God  by  covenant  Gen  :  17,  Deut  29  and  was  reformed  still 
by  renewing  of  the  covenant  2  chron  15,  12.  &  23,  16:  &*  34,  31  32: 
Neh:  9  38:  Now  the  churches  of  the  Gentiles,  under  the  new  Tes- 
tament stand  upon  the  same  basis  or  root  with  the  church  of  the 
Old  Testament,  &  therefore  are  constituted  by  Covenant,  as  that 
was  Rom:  11.  17.  18.  Eph:  2  11,  12,  19  &  3:  6.  Hcb :  8:  10,  3.  Bap- 
tisme  enters  us  into  the  Church  Sacramentally,  /',  c,  by  sealing  the 
Covenant.  The  Covenant  therefore  is  that  which  constitutes  the 
Church  and  inferrs  membership,  and  is  the  Vow  in  Baptisme  com- 
monly spoken  of. 

Partic :  2.  The  members  of  the  visible  Church  arc  such  as  are 
confederate  in  Particular  Churches.  It  may  be  minded  that  we  are 
here  speaking  of  Members  so  stated  in  the  visible  Church,  as  that 
they  are  Subjects  to  whom  Church  ordinances  may  regularly  be 
administred,  and  that  according  to  ordinary  dispensation.  For 
were  it  graunted,  that  the  Apostles  and  Evangelists  did  sometimes 
Baptize  such,  as  were  not  Members  of  any  Particular  Church,  yet 
their  extraordinary  office,  large  Power  and  commission  renders 
them  not  imitable  therein  by  ordinary  Officers.  For  then  they 
might  Baptize  in  private  without  the  presence  of  a  Christian  as- 
semblie,  as  Philip  did  the  Eunuch.  But  that  in  ordinary  dispensa- 
tion the  Members  of  the  visible  Church  according  to  Scripture,  are 
such  as  are  Members  of  some  particular  Church,  appeares,  1.  Be- 
cause the  visible  beleever  that  professedly  Covenants  with  God, 
doth  therein  give  up  himselfe  to  wait  on  God  in  all  his  ordinances. 


3l8  THE   HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

Dent  26:  17,  18.  Math:  28,  19,  20.  But  all  the  Ordinances  of  God 
are  to  be  enjoyed  onely  in  a  particular  Church.  For  how  often  do 
we  find  in  the  Scripture  that  they  came  together  into  one  place  (or 
met  as  a  congregational  particular  Church)  for  the  observation  and 
enjoyment  of  the  Ordinances.  Acts:  2:  1,  44,  46.  [7]  fir-  4,  31:  fin  11. 
26.  c>"  20:  7.  1  Cor.  5  ;  4.  6*  11.  18.  20:  33.  of  14:  23.  2.  The  Apos- 
tle in  his  Epistles,  writing  to  Saints  or  Beleevers,  writes  to  them  as 
in  particular  Churches.  1  Cor.  1  .•  2.  Eph :  1.  1.  Phil:  1  ;  1.  Col:  1. 
2.  And  when  the  story  of  the  Acts  speakes  of  Disciples  other 
places  shew  that  those  are  understood  to  be  Members  of  particular 
Churches,  Acts  18.  23.  with  Gal.-  1:  2.  Acts  21  16.  with  Chap  18:  22. 
Acts  11.  26.  fir3  14:  22,  23,  27,  28.  All  which  shewes  that  the  Scrip- 
ture acknowledgeth  no  settled  orderly  estate  of  visible  beleevers 
in  Covenant  with  God,  but  onely  in  particular  Churches.  3.  The 
members  of  the  visible  Church  are  Disciples,  as  was  above  cleared: 
now  Disciples  are  under  Discipline  and  liable  to  Church-censures: 
for  they  are  stated  subjects  of  Christs  Laws  and  Government,  Mat: 
28.  19,  20.  but  Church  Government  and  censures  are  extant  now 
in  ordinary  dispensation,  onely  in  a  particular  Church.  Mat  18. 
17.      1  Cor:   5.  4. 

Partic :  J.  The  Infant-seed  of  confederate  visible  beleevers  are  also 
members  of  the  visible  Church.  The  truth  of  this  is  evident  from  the 
Scriptures  and  reasons  following. 

Argu in  :  1.  The  covenant  of  Abraham  as  to  the  substance  thereof, 
viz,  that  whereby  God  declares  himself e  to  be  the  God  of  the  faithful/  6»* 
their  seed.  Gen:  1 7.  7.  continues  under  the  Gospel,  as  appears.  1  Because 
the  Beleeving  inchurched  Gentiles  under  the  new  Testament,  do 
stand  upon  the  same  root  of  covenanting  Abraham:  which  the  /■  w 
were  broken  off  from,  Rom  11,  16,  17  18.  2  Because  Abraham  in 
regard  of  that  Covenant  was  made  a  Father  of  many  nations.  Gen: 
17.  4,  5.  even  of  Gentiles  as  well  as  Jewes,  under  Xew-Testament 
as  well  as  Old,  Rom:  4.  16  17.  Gal  3,  29.  /',  e,  in  Abraham  as  a 
patterne  and  root,  God  (not  onely  shewed  how  he  Justifies  the  be- 
leever,  Gal:  3,  6,-9.  Rom :  4.  but  also)  conveied  that  covenant  to 
the  faithfull  and  their  seed  in  all  nations,  Luk:  19.  9.  If  a  Son  of 
Abraham,  then  Salvation  i,  c:  the  Covenant  dispensation,  of  Salva- 
tion is  come  to  his  house.  3.  As  that  covenant  was  communicated 
to  proselyte  Gentiles  under  the  Old  Testament,  so  its  communica- 
tion to  the  inchurched  Gentiles  under  the  new  Testament  is  clearly 
held  forth  in  diverse  places  Gal:  3.  14  the  blessing  [8]  of  Abraham 
comprizeth  both  the  internal  benefits  of  Justification  by  faith  &c: 
which  the  Apostle  is  there  treating  of;  and  the  external   dispensa- 


RESULT   OF   THE    SYNOD    OF    1662  319 

tion  of  Grace  in  the  visible  church  to  the  faithfull  &  their  seed, 
Gen:  2S  4.  but  the  whole  Blessing  of  Abraham  (and  so  the  whole 
covenant)  is  come  upon  the  Gentiles  through  Jesus  Christ.  Eph:  2.  12, 
19  They  had  been  strangers,  but  now  were  no  more  strangers  from 
the  covenants  of  promise,  i,  e,  from  the  covenant  of  grace,  which  had 
been  often  renewed,  especially  with  Abraham  and  the  house  of 
Israel,  and  had  been  in  the  externall  dispensation  of  it,  their  pecul- 
iar portion,  so  that  the  Ephesians,  who  were  a  farr  off,  being  now 
called  and  made  nigh,  v.  13-17.  they  have  the  promise  or  the  Cove- 
nant of  promise  to  them  and  to  their  Children,  according  to  Acts: 
2,  39.  and  so  are  partakers  of  that  Covenant  of  Abraham,  that  we 
are  speaking  of. 

Eph  :  3,  6.  The  inchurched  Gentiles  are  put  into  the  same 
inheritance  for  substance  (both  as  to  invisible  &  visible  benefits, 
according  to  their  respective  conditions)  are  of  the  same  body,  and 
partakers  of  the  same  promise  with  the  Jewes,  the  Children  of  Abra- 
ham, of  old.  The  same  may  be  gathered  from  Gen  :  9,  27,  Mat. 
8.  11,  6°  21,  43.  4.  Sundry  Scriptures  which  extend  to  Gospel- 
times  do  confirme  the  same  interest  to  the  seed  of  the  faithful 
which  is  held  forth  in  the  covenant  of  Abraham,  and  consequently 
do  confirme  the  continuance  of  that  covenant;  as  Exod :  20:  6. 
there  in  the  sanction  of  a  moral  and  perpetual  Commandement, 
and  that  respecting  Ordinances,  the  portion  of  the  church,  God 
declareth  himself  to  be  a  God  of  mercy,  to  them  that  love  him,  and 
to  their  seed  after  them  in  their  generations  :  consonant  to  Gen: 
17.  7.  compare  herewith  Psal.  105.  8,  9  6°  Deut.  7.  9. 

Dcut  :  30.  6.  The  grace  signified  by  circumcision  is  there 
promised  to  Parents  and  children,  importing  the  covenant  to 
both,  which  circumcision  sealed,  Gen:  17.  and  that  is  a  Gospel- 
promise,  as  the  Apostles  citing  part  of  that  context,  as  the  voice 
of  the  Gospel,  shewes  Rom:  10,  6-8.  with  Dcut:  30,  11-14.  and 
it  reacheth  to  the  Jewes  in  the  latter  dayes,  ver.  1-5. 

Isay :  65,  23.  In  the  most  Glorious  Gospel-state  of  the 
church,  ver.  17-19.  the  blessing  of  the  Lord  is  the  promised 
portion  of  the  of -[9]  spring  or  Children,  as  well  as  of  the  faithfull 
parents,  so  Isay:  44.  3,  4.  Isai :  59.  20,  21.  Ezek:  37.  25,  26.  at 
the  future  calling  of  the  Jewes,  which  those  texts  have  reference 
to,  [Rom:  11.  26.  Ezek:  37.  19-22,  23,  24.)  their  Children  shall  be 
under  the  promise  or  Covenant  of  special  Grace  to  be  conveyed 
to  them  in  the  Ordinances,  Isai:  59.  21.  and  be  subjects  of  David, 
i,  e,  Christ  their  King  Ezek  37.  25.  and  have  a  portion  in  his 
Sanctuary,  vers  26.  and  this  according  to  the  tenor  of  the  ancient 


320  THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

covenant  of  Abraham,  whereby  God  will  be  their  God  (viz.  both  of 
parents  and  Children)  and  they  shall  be  his  People,  vers:  26,  27. 
Now  although  more  abundant  fruits  of  the  Covenant  may  be 
seen  in  those  times,  and  the  J  ewes  then  may  have  more  abundant 
Grace  given  to  the  body  of  them  to  continue  in  the  Covenant, 
yet  the  tenor  and  frame  of  the  Covenant  itselfe  is  one  and  the 
same,  both  to  Jewes,  and  Gentiles  under  the  New-Testament  ; 
Gal:  3,2$.  Coll:  3.  n.  Heb.  8.  10.  The  house  of  Israel,  i,  e,  the 
Church  of  God,  both  among  feroes  and  Gentiles  under  the  new 
Testament,  have  that  Covenant  made  with  them,  the  summ 
whereof  is,  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they  shall  be  my  people  :  which 
is  a  renewing  of  that  Covenant  of  Abraham  in  Gen  17-  (as  the 
same  is  very  often  over  in  those  termes  renewed  in  Scripture, 
and  is  distinguished  from  the  Law,  Gal:  3  16,  17.  Heb  8.  9) 
wherein  is  implied  Gods  being  a  God  to  the  seed  as  well  as  parents, 
and  taking  both  to  be  his  People,  though  it  be  not  expressed  : 
even  as  it  is  often  plainly  implied  in  that  expression  of  the  Cov- 
enant in  other  places  of  Scripture;  Dent.  29.  13.  Jer.  31.  1.  6" 
32.  38,  39.  &  24:  7,  &  30  22,  20.  Ezek:  37.  27,  25-  Also  the 
writing  of  the  Lav  in  the  heart,  in  Heb  :  8  :  10.  is  that  heart  circutn- 
cision  which  Dent:  30.  6.  extends  both  to  parents  and  seed.  And 
the  terme,  House  of  Israel,  doth  according  to  Scripture-use  fitly 
expresse  and  take  in  (especially  as  to  the  external!  administration 
of  the  Covenant)  both  parents  and  Children:  among  both  which 
are  found  that  elect  and  saved  number,  that  make  up  the  invisi- 
ble Israel:  compare  Jer:  13-  "•  &  9-  z6-  Isai-  5-  7-  Hos  :  1.  6. 
Ezek  :  39.  25.  Neither  may  we  exclude  the  least  in  age  from 
the  good  of  that  promise,  Heb  8.-  n.  (they  being  sometimes 
pointed  to  by  that  phrase,  from  the  least  [10]  to  the  greatest,  Jer. 
44.  12.  with  verse  7.)  no  more  than  the  least  in  other  respects; 
compare  lsa.  54.  13. 

In  Acts  2.  39.  at  the  passing  of  those  Jews  into  New  Testament 
Church-estate,  the  Lord  is  so  far  from  repealing  the  Covenant-interest 
that  was  granted  unto  children  in  the  former  Testament,  or  from 
making  the  children  there  losers  by  their  Parents  faith,  that  he 
doth  expresly  renew  the:  old  grant,  and  tells  them  that  the  promise 
or  covenant  (for  the  promise  and  the  covenant  are  terms  that  do 
mutually  infer  each  other;  compare  Acts  3.  25.  Gal  3.  16,  17,  18,  29. 
Rom.  4.  16.  Heb.  6  17,)  is  to  them  and  to  their  children:  and  the  same 
is  asserted  to  be  the  appointed  portion  of  the  far  off  Gei 
when  they  should  be  called.     By  all  which  it  appeareth  that  the 


RESULT   OF   THE    SYNOD    OF    1 662  32 1 

covenant  of  Abraham,  Gen.  17.  7.  whereby  God  is  the  God  of  the  faith- 
full  and  their  seed,  continues  under  the  Gospel. 

Now  if  the  seed  of  the  faithful  be  still  in  the  covenant  of 
Abraham,  then  they  arc  members  of  the  visible  Church  ;  1.  Because 
that  covenant  of  Abraham,  Gen.  17.  7.  was  properly  church-cove- 
nant, or  the  covenant  -which  God  makes  with  his  visible  church,  i.  e. 
the  covenant  of  grace  considered  in  the  external  dispensation 
of  it,  and  in  the  promises  and  priviledges  that  belong  to  that  dis- 
pensation. For  many  were  taken  into  that  covenant,  that  were 
never  of  the  invisible  church  :  and  by  that  covenant,  the  family 
of  Abraham,  as  also  by  the  renewing  thereof,  the  house  of  Israel 
afterward  were  established  the  visible  church  of  God,  Gen.  tj. 
and  Deut.  29.  12,  13.  and  from  that  covenant  men  might  be  broken 
off,  Gen.  17:  14.  Rom.  11  .-  17,  19.  and  to  that  covenant,  Circum- 
cision, the  badg  of  church-membership,  was  annexed.  Therefore 
the  covenantees  therein  were  &  are  church-members.  2.  Because 
in  that  covenant,  the  seed  are  spoken  of  in  terms  describing  or 
inferring  church-membership,  as  well  as  their  parents  :  for  they 
have  God  for  their  God,  and  are  his  people,  as  well  as  the  parents, 
Gen.  17  7,  8.  with  Deut:  29:  11,  13.  They  have  the  covenant 
made  with  them,  Deut  29  :  14,  15.  and  the  covenant  is  said  to  be 
between  God  cV  them  {between  me  c>  thee,  and  between  thy  seed  after 
thee:  so  the  Hebrew  runs)  Gen:  17  :  7.  They  are  also  in  that 
covenant  appointed  to  be  the  subjects  of  the  initiatory  seal  of  the 
covenant,  [11]  the  seal  of  membership,  Gen.  17  .•  9,  10,  11.  There- 
fore the  seed  are  according  to  that  covenant,  members  of  the 
visible  church,  as  well  as  their  parents. 

Arguin;  2.  Such  seed  or  children  are  federally  holy,  1  Cor.  7.  14. 
The  word  [holy]  as  applied  to  any  sort  of  persons,  is  never  in  Scrip- 
ture used  in  a  lower  sense  than  f or  federal  or  covenant-holiness,  (the 
covenant-holiness  of  the  visible  Church;)  but  very  often  in  that 
sense,  Ezra  9:  2.  Deut:  7:  6.  c>  14:  2,  21:  cV  26:  19  .•  6°  28;  9:  Exod; 
19:6:  Dan  :  8  :  24  :  &  12  :  7  :  Rom  :  1 1  :  16  .•  So  that  to  say  they 
are  holy  in  this  sense,  viz.  by  covenant-relation  and  separation 
to  God  in  his  Church,  is  as  much  as  to  say,  they  are  in  the  covenant 
of  the  visible  church,  or  members  of  it. 

Argum:  3.  Yrom  Mark  10:  14,  15,  16:  Mat.  19:  14:  childrens 
membership  in  the  visible  Church,  is  either  the  next  and  immediate 
sense  of  those  words  of  Christ,  Of  such  is  the  kingdome  of  heaven; 
and  so  the  kingdome  of  heaven,  or  of  God,  is  not  rarely  used  in  other 
Scriptures  to  express  the  visible  church,  or  church-estate.  Mat: 
25  ;   1.  6"  21  :    43  :  &•  8.  n,  12  .-  or  it  evidently  follows  from  any 


322  TIIF    HALF-WAV    COVENANT 

other  sense  that  can  rationally  be  given  of  the  words.  For  those 
may  not  be  denied  a  place  and  portion  in  the  visible  church,  whom 
Christ  affirms  to  have  a  portion  in  the  kingdome  either  of  invisible 
grace,  or  of  eternal  glory:  Nor  do  any  in  ordinary  course  pass  into 
the  Kingdome  of  Glory  hereafter,  but  through  the  Kingdome  of 
Grace  in  the  visible  Church  here.  Adde  also,  that  Christ  there 
graciously  invites  and  calls  little  children  to  him,  is  greatly  dis- 
pleased with  those  that  would  hinder  them,  asserts  them,  notwith- 
standing their  infancy,  to  be  exemplary  in  receiving  the  kingdome 
of  God,  embraceth  them  in  his  arms,  and  blcsscth  them  :  all  which 
shews  Christ's  dear  affection  to,  and  owning  of  the  children  of 
the  Church,  as  a  part  of  his  kingdome  ;  whom  we  therefore  may 
not  disown,  lest  we  incurre  his  displeasure,  as  the  Disciples  did. 

Argum:  4.  Such  seed  or  children  arc  disciples  according  to  Mat  28; 
19:  as  appears,  1.  Because  subjects  of  Christ's  Kingdome  are  equiv- 
alent with  disciples  there,  as  the  frame  of  that  Text  shews,  verse  18, 
19,  20.  but  such  children  are  subjects  of  Christ's  Kingdome,  or  of 
the  kingdome  of  heaven.  Mat:  19:  14:  In  the  discipling  of  all  [12] 
Nations  intended  in  Mat.  28.  19.  the  kingdome  of  God,  which  had 
been  the  portion  of  the  Jews,  was  communicated  to  the  Gentiles, 
according  to  Mat.  21.  43.  But  in  the  kingdome  of  God  these  chil- 
dren have  an  interest  or  portion,  Mark  10.  14.  2.  The  Apostles 
in  accomplishing  that  commission,  Mat.  28.  19.  did  disciple  some 
children,  viz.  the  children  of  discipled  parents,  Acts  2.  39.  &  15. 
10.  They  are  there  called  and  accounted  disciples,  whom  the  false 
teachers  would  have  brought  under  the  joke  of  circumcision  after 
the  manner  of  Moses,  verse  1,  5.  But  many  of  those  were  children; 
Exod.  12.  48.  Acts  21.  21.  Lydia  and  her  houshold,  the  Jay  lor  and 
all  his,  were  discipled  and  baptized,  Acts  16.  15,  31,  ^^.  Paul  at 
Corinth  took  in  the  children  into  the  holy  school  of  Christ,  1  Cor 
7.  14.  3.  Such  children  belong  to  Christ;  for  he  calls  them  to 
him  as  his,  to  receive  his  blessing,  Mark  10.  13- -16.  They  are 
to  be  received  in  his  Name,  Mark  9.  37.  Luke  9  48.  They  have 
a  part  in  the  Lord,  Josh.  22.  24  25.  therefore  they  are  disciples: 
for  to  belong  to  Christ,  is  to  be  a  disciple  of  Christ,  Mark  9,  41. 
with  Mat.  10.  42.  Now  if  they  be  disciples,  then  they  are  mem- 
bers of  the  visible  church,  as  from  the  equivalency  of  those  terms 
was  before  shewed. 

Argum:  5.  The  whole  current  and  harmony  of  Scripture  shews, 
that  ever  since  there  was  a  visible  church  on  earth,  the  children  thereof 
have  by  the  Lords  appointment  been  a  part  of  it.  So  it  was  in  the  Old, 
and  it  is  and  shall  be  so  in  the  New  Testament.     Eve.  the  mother 


RESULT   OF   THE    SYNOD   OF    1662  323 

of  all  living,  hath  a.  promise  made  Gen.  3.  15.  not  only  of  Christ 
the  head-seed,  but  through  him  also  of  a  Church-seed,  to  proceed 
from  her  in  a  continual  lineal  succession,  which  should  contin- 
ually be  at  visible  enmity  with,  and  stand  at  a  distance,  or  be 
separated  from  the  seed  of  the  Serpent.  Under  that  promise  made 
to  Eve  and  her  seed,  the  children  of  Adam  are  born,  and  are  a 
part  of  the  Church  in  Adam's  family  :  even  Cain  was  so,  Gen. 
4.  1,  3.  till  east  out  of  the  presence  of  God  therein,  verse  14.  being 
now  manifestly  one  of  the  seed  of  the  Serpent,  1  John  3.  12.  and 
so  becoming  the  father  of  a  wicked  unchurched  race.  But  then 
God  appointed  unto  Eve  another,  viz  :  Seth,  in  whom  to  continue 
the  line  of  her  Church-seed,  Gen  4.  25.  How  it  did  continue  in 
[13]  his  seed  in  their  generations,  Genes:  5,h  sheweth.  Hence, 
the  children  of  the  Church  are  called  Sons  of  God,  (which  is  as 
much  as  members  of  the  visible  Church)  in  contradistinction  to 
the  daughters  of  men,  Gen.  6.  2.  If  righteous  Noali  be  taken  into  the 
Ark  (then  the  onely  preserving  place  of  the  Church)  his  children 
are  taken  in  with  him,  Gen.  7.  1  though  one  of  them,  viz.  Ham, 
after  proved  degenerate  and  wicked;  but  till  he  so  appears,  he 
is  continued  in  the  Church  with  his  Brethren:  So  Gen.  9.  25,  26,  27. 
as  the  race  of  Ham  or  his  son  Canaan  (parent  and  children)  are 
cursed ;  so  Shem  (parent  and  children)  is  blessed,  and  continued  in 
the  place  of  blessing,  the  Church  :  as  Japhet  also,  or  Iaphefs  pos- 
terity (still  parent  and  children)  shall  in  time  be  brought  in.  The 
holy  line  mentioned  in  Gen.  11.  10-26  shews  how  the  Church  con- 
tinued in  the  seed  of  Shem  from  him  unto  Abraham.  When  that 
race  grew  degenerate,  Josh.  24.  2.  then  God  called  Abraham  out 
of  his  countrey,  and  from  his  kindred,  and  established  his  covenant 
with  him,  which  still  took  in  parents  and  children,  Gen.  17.  7,  9. 
So  it  did  after  in  the  house  of  Israel,  Deut.  29.  11,  12,  13.  and 
when  any  eminent  restauration  or  establishment  is  promised  to 
the  Church,  the  children  thereof  are  still  taken  in,  as  sharers  in 
the  same,  Psal  102.  16,  28.  6°  69.  35,  36.  Jerem  ;  32  :  38,  39.  Isa  : 
65  :  18,  19,  23.  Now  when  Christ  comes  to  set  up  the  Gospel- 
administration  of  his  Church  in  the  New  Testament,  under  the 
term  of  the  kingdome  of  heaven,  Mat:  3:  2.  6°  1 1.  1 1.  he  is  so  far 
from  taking  away  children's  portion  and  membership  therein, 
that  himself  asserts  it,  Mat :  19  :  14.  The  children  of  the  Gentile, 
but  now  believing  Corinthians,  are  holy,  1  Cor  :  7  :  14.  The  Apostle 
writing  to  the  Churches  of  Ephesus  and  Colosse,  speaks  to  children, 
as  a  part  thereof,  Eph  :  6:  1.  Col.  3:  20.  The  inchurched  Ro- 
mans, and  other  Gentiles,  stand  on  the  root  of  covenanting  Abraham, 


324  THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

and  in  the  Olive  or  visible  Church,  they  and  their  children,  till 
broken  off  (as  the  Jews  were)  by  positive  unbelief,  or  rejection 
of  Christ,  his  Truth  or  Government,  Rom.  n  13,  16,  17,-2:.  The 
children  of  the  Jews,  when  they  shall  be  called,  shall  be  as  afore- 
time in  Church-estate,  lev :  30.  20.  with  31.  1  Ezekiel  37.  25-28. 
From  all  which  it  appears,  that  the  [  14]  series  or  whole  frame 
and  current  of  Scripture-expressions,  doth  hold  forth  the  continu- 
ance of  children*  membership  in  the  visible  church  from  the  i 
ning  to  the  end  of  the  world. 

Partic :  4.  The  seal  or  children  who  become  members  together 
with  their  Parents  (/.  e.  by  means  of  their  parents  covenanting)  are 
children  in  minority.  This  appears,  1.  Because  such  children  are 
Jioly  by  their  parents  covenanting,  who  would  else  be  unclean,  1  Cor. 
7.  14  but  they  would  not  else  necessarily  be  unclean,  if  they  were 
adult;  for  then  they  might  act  for  themselves,  and  so  be  holy  by 
their  personal  covenanting:  Neither  on  the  other  hand  would  they 
necessarily  be  holy,  if  adult,  (as  he  asserts  the  children  there  to  be) 
for  they  might  continue  Pagans;  Therefore  the  Apostle  intends 
onely  infants  or  children  in  minority.  2.  It  is  a  principle  that  car- 
ries evidence  of  light  and  reason  with  it,  as  to  all  transactions,  Civil 
and  Ecclesiastical,  that  //  a  man  be  of  age  he  should  answer  for  him- 
self,  John  9.  21.  They  that  are  come  to  years  of  discretion,  so  as 
to  have  knowledge  and  understanding,  fit  to  act  in  a  matter  of  that 
nature,  are  to  covenant  by  their  own  personal  act,  Neh.  10.  28,  29. 
Isa.  44  5.  3.  They  that  are  regularly  taken  in  with  their  parents, 
are  reputed  to  be  visible  entertainers  of  the  covenant,  and  avouchers 
of  God  to  be  their  God,  Deut :  26.  17,  18.  with  Deut.  29.  11,  12. 
But  if  adult  children  should,  without  regard  to  their  own  personal 
act,  be  taken  in  with  their  parents,  then  some  might  be  reputed 
entertainers,  that  are  manifest  rejecters  of  the  covenant  .•  for  so  an 
adult  son  or  daughter  of  a  godly  parent  may  be. 

Partic :  5.  It  is  requisite  to  the  membership  of  children,  that  the 
next  parents,  one  or  both,  be  in  covenant.  For  although  after-genera- 
tions have  no  small  benefit  by  their  pious  Ancestors,  who  derive 
federal  holiness  to  their  succeeding  generations,  in  case  they 
keep  their  standing  in  the  covenant,  and  be  not  apostates 
from  it  ;  yet  the  piety  of  Ancestors  sufficeth  not,  unless  the 
next  parent  continue  in  covenant,  Rom.  11.  22.  1.  Because  if  the 
next  parent  be  cut  or  broken  off,  the  following  seed  are  broken 
off  also,  Exod:  20.  5.  Rom.  11  17,  19,  20.  as  the  Gentile  believing 
parents  and  children  were  taken  in;  so  the  Jews,  parents  and  chil- 
dren, were  then  [15]  broken  off.     2.  One  of  the  parents  must  be  a 


RESULT    OF   THE    SYNOD    OE    1662  325 

believer,  or  else  the  children  are  unclean,  1  Cor.  7.  14.  3.  If  children 
may  be  accounted  members  and  baptized,  though  the  next  parents 
be  not  in  covenant,  then  the  Church  should  be  bound  to  baptize 
those  whom  she  can  have  no  power  over,  nor  hope  concerning,  to  see 
them  brought  up  in  the  true  Christian  Religion,  and  under  the 
Ordinances:  For  the  next  parents  being  wicked,  and  not  in  coven- 
ant, may  carry  away  and  bring  up  their  children  to  serve  other  Gods. 
4.  If  we  stop  not  at  the  next  parent,  but  grant  that  Ancestors  may, 
notwithstanding  the  apostacy  of  the  next  parents,  convey  member- 
ship unto  children,  then  we  should  want  a  ground  where  to  stop, 
and  then  all  the  children  on  earth  should  have  right  to  member- 
ship and  Baptism. 

Proposition  3d. 

The  Infant-seed  of  confederate  visible  Believers,  are  members  of 
the  same  Church  with  their  parents,  and  when  grown  up,  are  person- 
ally under  the  Watch,  Discipline  and  Government  of  that  Church. 

1.  That  they  are  members  of  the  same  Church  with  their  parents, 
appears;  1.  Because  so  were  Isaac  and  Ishmacl  of  Abrahams  Family- 
church,  and  the  children  of  the  Jews  and  Proselytes  of  Israels  Na- 
tional Church:  and  there  is  the  same  reason  for  children  now  to  be 
of  the  same  Congregational  Church  with  their  parents.  Christ's  care 
for  children,  and  the  scope  of  the  Covenant,  as  to  obligation  unto 
Order  and  Government,  is  as  great  now,  as  then.  2.  Either  they 
are  members  of  the  same  Church  with  their  parents,  or  of  some 
other  Church,  or  Non-members:  But  neither  of  the  latter;  there- 
fore the  former.  That  they  are  not  Non-members,  was  before 
proved  in  Propos.  2.  Partic.  3.  and  if  not  members  of  the  same 
Church  with  their  parents,  then  of  no  other.  For  if  there  be  not 
reason  sufficient  to  state  them  members  of  that  Church,  where 
their  parents  have  covenanted  for  them,  and  where  ordinarily  they 
are  baptized  and  do  inhabit,  then  much  less  is  there  reason  to 
make  them  members  of  any  other:  and  so  they  will  be  members 
of  no  particular  Church  at  all;  and  it  was  be-[i6]fore  shewed,  that 
there  is  no  ordinary  and  orderly  standing  estate  of  Church-mem- 
bers but  in  some  particular  Church.  3.  The  same  covenant-act  is 
accounted  the  act  of  parent  and  childe :  but  the  parents  covenanting 
rendred  himself  a  member  of  this  particular  Church;  Therefore  so 
it  renders  the  childe  also.  How  can  children  come  in  with  and  by 
their  parents,  and  yet  come  into  a  Church,  wherein  and  whereof 
their  parents  are  not,  so  as  that  they  should  be  of  one  Church,  and 
the  parents  of  another?  4.  Children  are  in  an  orderly  and  regular 
state:  for  they  are  in  that  state,  wherein  the  order  of  Gods  Cove- 


326  THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

nant,  and  his  institution  therein,  hath  placed  them;  they  being 
members  by  vertue  of  the  Covenant  of  God.  To  say  their  stand- 
ing is  disorderly,  would  be  to  impute  disorder  to  the  order  of  Gods 
Covenant,  or  irregularity  to  the  Rule.  Now  all  will  grant  it  to  be 
most  orderly  and  regular,  that  every  Christian  be  a  member  in 
some  particular  Church,  and  in  that  particular  Church,  where  his 
regular  habitation  is;  which  to  children  usually  is,  where  their 
parents  are.  If  the  Rule  call  them  to  remove,  then  their  member- 
ship ought  orderly  to  be  translated  to  the  Church,  whither  they 
remove.  Again,  order  requires  that  the  childc,  and  the  power  of 
government  over  the  childe,  should  go  together.  It  would  bring  shame 
and  confusion  for  the  childe  to  be  from  under  government,  Prov. 
29.  15.  and  Parental  and  Ecclesiastical  government  concurring,  do 
mutually  help  and  strengthen  each  other.  Hence  the  parent  and  the 
childe  must  be  members  of  the  same  Church;  unless  the  childe  be 
by  some  special  providence  so  removed,  as  that  some  other  person 
hath  the  power  over  him. 

2.  That  when  these  children  are  grown  up,  they  are  personally  un- 
der the  Watch,  Discipline  and  Government  of  that  Church,  is  manifest: 
for,  1.  Children  were  under  Patriarchal  and  Mosaical  discipline  of 
old,  Gen.  18  19.  &  21.  7,  10,  12.  Gal.  5.  3.  and  therefore  under 
Congregational  discipline  now.  2.  They  are  within  the  Church,  or 
members  thereof,  (as  hath  been,  and  after  will  be  further  proved) 
and  therefore  subject  to  Church-judicature,  1  Cor.  5.  12.  3.  They 
are  disciples,  and  therefore  under  discipline  in  Christ's  school,  Matth. 
28.  19.  20.  4.  They  are  [17]  in  Church-covenant,  therefore  subject 
to  Church-power,  Gen:  17.  7.  with  Chap.  18,  19.  5.  They  arc  sub- 
jects of  the  kingdome  of  Christ,  and  therefore  under  the  laws  and 
government  of  his  Kingdome,  Ezek.  37  25,  26.  6.  Baptism  leaves 
the  baptized  (of  which  number  these  children  are)  in  a  state  of 
subjection  to  the  authoritative  teaching  of  Christ's  Ministers,  and  to 
the  observation  of  all  his  commandments,  Mat.  28.  19,  20.  and  there- 
fore in  a  state  of  subjection  unto  Discipline.  7.  Elders  are  charged 
to  take  heed  unto,  and  to  feed  (i.  e.  both  to  teach  and  rule,  compare 
Ezek.  34.  3,  4)  all  the  flock  or  Church,  over  which  the  holy  Ghost  hath 
made  them  overseers,  Acts  20.  28.  That  children  are  a  part  of  the 
flock,  was  before  proved:  and  so  Paul  accounts  them,  writing  to 
the  same  flock  or  Church  of  Ephesus,  Eph.  6.  1.  8.  Otherwise  Irre- 
ligion  and  Apostacy  would  inevitably  break  into  Churches,  and  no 
Church-way  left  by  Christ  to  prevent  or  heal  the  same:  which 
would  also  bring  many  Church-members  under  that  dreadful  judge- 
ment of  being  let  alone  in  their  wickedness,  Hosea  4.  16,  17. 


RESULT    OF   THE    SYNOD    OF    1662  327 

Proposition  4lh. 

These  Adult  persons  a?-e  not  their/ore  to  be  admitted  to  full  Com- 
munion, meerly  because  they  are  and  continue  members,  without  such 
further  qualifications,  as  the  Word  of  God  requireth  thereunto. 

The  truth  hereof  is  plain,  1.  From  1  Cor,  11.  28,  29.  where 
it  is  required,  that  such  as  come  to  the  Lords  Supper,  be  able  to 
examine  themselves,  and  to  discern  the  Lords  body  ;  else  they  will  eat 
and  drink  unworthily,  and  cat  and  drink  damnation  or  judgement, 
to  themselves,  when  they  partake  of  this  Ordinance.  But  meer 
membership  is  separable  from  such  ability  to  examine  one's  self, 
and  discern  the  Lords  body  :  as  in  the  children  of  the  covenant 
that  grow  up  to  years  is  too  often  seen.  2.  In  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, though  men  did  continue  members  of  the  Church,  yet  for 
ceremonial  uncleanness  they  were  to  be  kept  from  full  commun- 
ion in  the  holy  things,  Levit.  7.  20,  21.  Numb.  9.  6,  7.  6°  19.  13,  20. 
yea  and  the  Priests  and  Porters  in  the  Old  Testament  had  [18] 
special  charge  committed  to  them,  that  men  should  not  partake 
in  all  the  holy  things,  unless  duely  qualified  for  the  same,  notwith- 
standing their  membership,  2  Chron.  23.  19.  Ezekiel  22.  26,  &  44.  7, 
8,  9,  23.  and  therefore  much  more  in  these  times,  where  moral  fitness 
and  spiritual  qualifications  are  wanting,  membership  alone  is  not  suffi- 
cient for  full  communion.  More  was  required  to  adult  persons  eating 
the  Passeover,  then  meer  membership  :  therefore  so  there  is  now  to 
the  Lords  Supper.  For  they  were  to  eat  to  the  Lord,  Exodus  12.  14. 
which  is  expounded  in  2  Chron.  30.  where,  keeping  the  Passeover  to 
the  Lord,  verse  5.  imports  and  requires  exercising  Repentance,  verse 
6,  7.  their  actual  giving  up  themselves  to  the  Lord,  verse  8.  heart- 
preparation  for  it,  verse  19.  and  holy  rejoycing  before  the  Lord,  verse 
21,  25.  See  the  like  in  Ezra  6.  21,  22.  3.  Though  all  members 
of  the  Church  are  subjects  of  Baptism,  they  and  their  children, 
yet  all  members  may  not  partake  of  the  Lords  Supper,  as  is 
further  manifest  from  the  different  nature  of  Baptism  and  the 
Lords  Supper.  Baptism  firstly  and  properly  seals  covenant-holiness, 
as  circumcision  did,  Gen.  17.  Church-membership,  Rom  :  15.  8. 
planting  into  Christ,  Rom.  6.  and  so  members,  as  such,  are  the  sub- 
jects of  Baptism,  Matth.  28.  19.  But  the  Lords  Supper  is  the 
Sacrament  of  growth  in  Christ,  and  of  special-communion  with  him 
1  Cor.  10.  16.  which  supposeth  a  special  renewal  and  exercise  of 
Faith  and  Repentance  in  those  that  partake  of  that  Ordinance. 
Now  if  persons,  even  when  adult,  may  be  and  continue  mem- 
bers, and  yet  be  debarred  from  the  Lords  Supper,  until  meet 
qualifications   for  the  same   do   appear   in   them ;    then   may   they 


328  THE   HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

also  (until  like  qualifications)  be  debarred  from  that  power  of 
Voting  in  the  Church,  which  pertains  to  Males  in  full  communion. 
It  seems  not  rational  that  those  who  are  not  themselves  fit  for 
all  Ordinances,  should  have  such  an  influence  referring  to  all 
Ordinances,  as  Voting  in  Election  of  Officers,  Admission  and 
Censure  of  Members,  doth  import.  For  how  can  they,  who  are 
not  able  to  examine  and  judge  themselves,  be  thought  able  and  fit 
to  discern  and  judge  in  the  weighty  affairs  of  the  house  of  God? 
i  Cor.  ii.  28,  31.  with  1  Cor.  5.  12. 

[19] 

Proposition  5th. 

Church-members  who  were  admitted  in  minority,  understanding  the 
Doctrine  oj  Faith,  and  publicity  professing  their  assent  thereto  ;  not 
scandalous  in  life,  and  solemnly  owning  the  Covenant  before  the  Church, 
wherein  they  give  up  themselves  and  their  Children  to  the  Lord,  and  sub- 
ject themselves  to  the  Government  of  Christ  in  the  Church,  their  Children 
are  to  be  Baptized. 

This  is  evident  from  the  Arguments  following. 
Argum  :  1.     These  children  are  partakers  of  that  which  is  the  main 
ground  of  baptizing  any  children  whatsoever,  and  neither  the  parents  nor 
the  children  do  put  in  any  bar  re  to  hinder  it. 

1.  That  they  partake  of  that  -which  is  the  main  ground  of  baptizing 
any,  is  clear;  Because  interest  in  the  Covenant  is  the  main  ground 
of  title  to  Baptism,  and  this  these  children  have.  1.  Interest  in  the 
Covenant  is  the  main  ground  of  title  to  Baptism;  for  so  in  the  Old 
Testament  this  was  the  ground  of  title  to  Circumcision,  Gen  17.  7, 
9,  10,  11.  to  which  Baptism  now  answers,  Col.  2.  11,  12.  and  in  Acts 
2-  3s,  39  the>'  are  on  this  groun<-l  exhorted  to  be  baptized,  because 
the  promise  or  covenant  was  to  them  and  to  their  children.  That  a 
member,  or  one  in  covenant,  as  such,  is  the  subject  of  Baptism,  was 
further  cleared  before  in  Propos.  1.  2,  That  these  children  have  in- 
terest in  the  covenant,  appears;  Because  if  the  parent  be  in  the  cove- 
nant, the  childe  is  also:  for  the  covenant  is  to  parents  and  their  seed 
in  their  generations,  Gen:  17.  7,  9.  The  promise  is  to  you  and  to 
your  children,  Acts  2.  39.  If  the  parent  stands  in  the  Church,  so 
doth  the  childe,  among  the  Gentiles  now,  as  well  as  anion-  the 
lews  of  old,  Rom  :  11.  16,  20,  21,  22.  It  is  unheard  of  in  Scripture, 
that  the  progress  of  the  covenant  stops  at  the  infant-childe.  But 
the  parents  in  question  are  in  covenant,  as  appears,  1.  Because  they 
were  once  in  covenant,  and  never  since  discovenanted.  If  they  had 
not  once  been  in  covenant,  they  had  not  warrantably  been  baptized; 
and  they  are  so  still,  except  in  some  way  of  God  they  have  been. 


RESULT   OF   THE   SYNOD   OF    1662  329 

discovenanted,  cast  out,  or  cut  off  from  their  covenant-relation, 
which  these  have  not  been:  neither  are  persons  once  in  covenant, 
broken  off  from  [20]  it  according  to  Scripture,  save  for  notorious 
sin,  and  incorrigibleness  therein,  Rom  11.  20.  which  is  not  the  case 
of  these  parents.  2.  Because  the  tenor  of  the  covenant  is  to  the 
faith  full  and  their  seed  after  them  in  their  generations,  Gen:  17.  7 
even  to  a  thousand  generations,  i.  e.  conditionally,  provided  that  the 
parents  successively  do  continue  to  be  keepers  of  the  covenant, 
Exod:  20.  6.  Deut :  7:  9,  11  Psalm  105.-  8.  which  the  parents  in  ques- 
tion are,  because  they  are  not  (in  Scripture-account  in  this  case) 
forsakers  or  rejecters  of  the  God  and  Covenant  of  their  fathers:  see 
Deut:   29.  25,  26.   2  Kings  17:   15-20.   2  Chron:   7:    22  Deut:   7:    10. 

2.  That  these  parents  in  question  do  not  put  in  any  barre  to 
hinder  their  children  from  Baptism,  is  plain  from  the  words  of  the 
Proposition,  wherein  they  are  described  to  be  such  as  understand 
the  doctrine  of  Faith,  and  publickly  profess  their  assent  thereto :  there- 
fore they  put  not  in  any  barre  of  gross  Ignorance,  Atheism,  Heresie 
or  Infidelity  :  Also  they  are  not  scandalous  in  life,  but  solemnly  own 
the  covenant  before  the  Church ;  therefore  they  put  not  in  any  barre 
of  Profaneness,  or  Wickedness,  or  Apostacy  from  the  covenant, 
whereinto  they  entred  in  minority.  That  the  infant-children  in 
question  do  themselves  put  any  barre,  none  will  imagine. 

Argitm :  2.  The  children  of  the  parents  in  question  are  either 
children  of  the  covenant,  or  strangers  from  the  covenant,  Eph  :  2  :  12. 
either  holy  or  unclean,  1  Cor:  7:14  either  within  the  Church  or  with- 
out 1  Cor:  5:  12,  either  such  as  have  God  for  their  God,  or  without 
God  in  the  world,  Eph:  2:12.  But  he  that  considers  the  Proposition 
will  not  affirm  the  latter  concerning  these  children  .■  and  the  former 
being  granted,  infers  their  right  to  Baptism. 

Argum  :  3.  To  deny  the  Proposition,  would  be,  1.  To  straiten 
the  grace  of  Christ  in  the  Gospel-dispensation,  and  to  make  the 
Church  in  New  Testament-times  in  a  worse  case,  relating  to  their 
children  successively,  then  were  the  Jews  of  old.  2.  To  render  the 
children  of  the  Jews  when  they  shall  be  called,  in  a  worse  condition 
then  under  the  legal  administration;  contrary  to  Jer:  30:  20.  Ezckiel 
37  :  25,  26.  3.  To  deny  the  application  of  the  initiatory  Seal  to> 
such  as  regularly  stand  in  the  Church  and  Co-[2i]venant,  to  whom 
the  Mosaical  dispensation,  nay  the  first  institution  in  the  covenant 
of  Abraham,  appointed  it  to  be  applied,  Gen:  17:  9,  10.  John  7  22, 
23.  4.  To  break  Gods  covenant  by  denying  the  initiatory  Seal  to 
those  that  are  in  covenant,  Gen  :  17  :  9,  10,  14. 

Argum  :  4.     Confederate  visible  Believers,  though  but  in  the  lowest 


330  THE   HALF-WAY   COVENANT 

degree  sue//,  arc  to  have  their  children  baptized;  witness  the  practice  of 
John  Baptist  and  the  Apostles,  who  baptized  persons  upon  the  first 
beginning  of  their  Christianity.  But  the  parents  in  question  are 
confederate  visible  Believers,  at  least  in  some  degree :  For,  i.  Charity 
may  observe  in  them  sundry  positive  Arguments  for  it  ;  witness  the 
terms  of  the  Proposition,  and  nothing  evident  against  it.  2.  Chil- 
dren"of  the  godly  qualified  but  as  the  persons  in  the  Proposition,  are 
said  to  be  faithfull,  Tit:  1.  6.  3.  Children  of  the  Covenant  (as 
the  Parents  in  question  are)  have  frequently  the  beginning  of 
grace  wrought  in  them  in  younger  years,  as  Scripture  and  experi- 
ence shews.-  Instance,  Joseph,  Samuel,  David,  Solomon,  Abijah, 
Josiah,  Daniel,  John  Baptist,  and  Timothy.  Hence  this  sort  of  per- 
sons showing  nothing  to  the  contrary,  are  in  charity,  or  to 
Ecclesiastical  reputation,  visible  Believers.  4.  They  that  are 
regularly  in  the  Church  (as  the  Parents  in  question  be)  are  visible 
Saints  in  the  account  of  Scripture  (which  is  the  account  of  truth  :) 
for  the  Church  is,  in  Scripture-account,  a  company  of  Saints,  1  Cor: 
14:  2,$.  &  1.  2.  5.  Being  in  covenant  and  baptized,  they  have 
Faith  and  Repentance  indefinitely  given  to  them  in  the  Promise,  and 
sealed  up  in  Baptism,  Deut.  30  .•  6.  which  continues  valid,  and  so 
a  valid  testimony  for  them,  while  they  do  not  reject  it.  Yet  it  doth 
not  necessarily  follow,  that  these  persons  are  immediately  fit  for 
the  Lords  Supper;  because  though  they  are  in  a  latitude  of  expres- 
sion to  be  accounted  visible  Believers,  or  in  numero  fidclium,  even 
as  infants  in  covenant  are,  yet  they  may  want  that  ability  to  ex- 
amine themselves,  and  that  special  exercise  of  Faith,  which  is 
requisite  to  that  Ordinance  ;  as  was  said  upon  Tropos.  4,[u 

Argum:  5.  The  denial  of  Baptism  to  the  children  in  question 
hath  a  dangerous  tendency  to  I r religion  and  Apostacy ;  because  it 
denies  them,  and  [22]  so  the  children  of  the  Church  successively, 
to  have  any  part  in  the  Lord  ;  which  is  the  way  to  make  them  cease 
from  fearing  the  Lord,  Josh  22.  24,  25,  27.  For  if  they  have  a  part 
in  the  Lord,  i.  c.  a  portion  in  Israel,  and  so  in  the  Lord  the  God  of 
Israel,  then  they  are  in  the  Church,  or  members  of  it,  and  so  to  be 
baptized,  according  to  Propos.  1.  The  owning  of  the  children  of 
those  that  successively  continue  in  covenant  to  be  a  part  of  the 
Church,  is  so  far  from  being  destructive  to  the  purity  and  prosper- 
ity of  the  Church,  and  of  Religion  therein,  (as  some  conceive)  that 
this  imputation  belongs  to  the  contrary  Tenet.  To  seek  to  be 
more  pure  then  the  Rule,  will  ever  end  in  impurity  in  the  issue. 
God  hath  so  framed  his  covenant,  and  consequently  the  constitu- 
tion of  his  Church  thereby,  as  to  design  a  continuation  and  propa- 


RESULT   OF   THE   SYNOD    OF    1662  33 1 

gation  of  his  Kingdome  therein,  from  one  generation  to  another. 
Hence  the  covenant  runs  to  us  and  to  our  seed  after  us  in  their  gen- 
erations. To  keep  in  the  line,  and  under  the  influence  and  efficacy 
of  this  covenant  of  God,  is  the  true  way  to  the  Churches  glory: 
To  cut  it  off  and  disavow  it,  cuts  off  the  posterity  of  Sim,  cS:  hin- 
ders it  from  being  (as  in  the  most  glorious  times  it  shall  be)  an 
eternal  excellency,  and  the  joy  of  many  generations.  This  progress  of 
the  covenant  establisheth  the  Church,  Dent.  29  13.  Jer.  30.  20.  The 
contrary  therefore  doth  disestablish  it.  This  obligeth  and  advan- 
tageth  to  the  conveyance  of  Religion  down  to  after-generations  ; 
the  care  whereof  is  strictly  commanded,  and  highly  approved  by 
the  Lord,  Psal:  78.  4,  5,  6,  7.  Gen.  18.  19.  This  continues  a  nursery 
still  in  Christ's  Orchard  or  Vineyard,  Isa.  5.  1,  7.  the  contrary  neg- 
lects that,  and  so  lets  the  whole  run  to  ruine.  Surely  God  was  an 
holy  God,  and  loved  the  purity  and  glory  of  the  Church  in  the  Old 
Testament  :  but  then  he  went  in  this  way  of  a  successive  progress 
of  the  covenant  to  that  end,  Jer.  13.  n.  If  some  did  then,  or  do 
now  decline  to  unbelief  and  apostacy,  that  doth  not  make  the 
faith  of  God  in  his  covenant  of  none  effect,  or  the  advantage  of  in- 
terest therein  inconsiderable  :  yea  the  more  holy,  reforming  and 
glorious  that  the  times  are  or  shall  be,  the  more  eminently  is  a 
successive  continuation  and  propagation  of  the  Church  therein 
designed,  promised  and  intended,  Isa.  60.  15  &  59.  21.  Ezek.  37. 
25  -  -  28.     Ps.  102.  16 --28.     Jer.  32.  39. 

[23]  Argum:  6.  The  parents  in  question  are  personal,  imme- 
diate, and  yet-contintiing  members  of  the  Church. 

1.  That  they  are  personal  members,  or  members  in  their  own 
persons,  appears,  1.  Because  they  are  personally  holy,  1  Cor.  7  14: 
not  parents  onely,  but  [your  children] '  are  holy.  2.  They  are  per- 
sonally baptized,  or  have  had  Baptism,  the  seal  of  membership, 
applied  to  their  own  persons  :  which  being  regularly  done,  is  a 
divine  testimony  that  they  are  in  their  own  persons  members  of 
the  Church.  3.  They  are  personally  under  discipline,  and  liable  to 
Church-censures  in  their  own  persons  ;  vide  Propos.  3.  4.  They 
are  personally  (by  means  of  the  covenant)  in  a  visible  state  of  sal- 
vation. To  say  they  are  not  members  in  their  own  persons,  but  in 
their  parents,  would  be  as  if  one  should  say,  They  are  saved  in 
their  parents,  and  not  in  their  own  persons.  5.  When  they  commit 
iniquity,  they  personally  break  the  covenant ;  therefore  are  person- 
ally in  it,  Jer.  n.  2,  10.     Ezek.  16. 

1  [    ]  in  original. 


33-  THE    HALF-WAV    COVENANT 

2.  By  the  like  Reasons  it  appears  that  children  are  immediate 
members,  as  to  the  essence  of  membership,  (/.  e.  that  they  them- 
selves in  their  own  persons  are  the  immediate  subjects  of  this 
adjunct  of  Church-membership)  though  they  come  to  it  by 
means  of  their  parents  covenanting.  For  as  touching  that  dis- 
tinction of  mediate  and  immediate,  as  applied  to  membership,  (which 
some  urge)  we  are  to  distinguish  i.  between  the  efficient  and 
the  essence  of  membership ;  2.  between  the  instrumental  efficient 
or  means  thereof,  which  is  the  parents  profession  and  covenant- 
ing ;  and  the  principal  efficient,  which  is  divine  Institution.  They 
may  be  said  to  be  mediate  (or  rather  mediately)  members,  as  they 
become  members  by  means  of  their  parents  covenanting,  as  an 
instrumental  cause  thereof:  but  that  doth  nothing  vary  or 
diminish  the  essence  of  their  membership.  For  divine  Institution 
giveth  or  granteth  a  real  and  personal  membership  unto  them,  as 
well  as  unto  their  parents,  and  maketh  the  parent  a  publick  person, 
and  so  his  act  theirs  to  that  end.  Hence  the  essence  of  member- 
ship, i.  e.  Covenant-interest,  or  a  place  and  portion  within  the  visible 
Church,  is  really,  properly,  personally  and  immediately  the  portion 
of  the  childe  by  divine  gift  and  grant,  Josh.  22.  25,  27.  their  children 
[24]  have  a  part  in  the  Lord,  as  well  as  themselves.  A  part  in  the 
Lord  there,  and  Church-membership  (or  membership  in  Lsrael)  are 
terms  equivalent.  Now  the  children  there,  and  a  part  in  the  Lord, 
are  Subject  and  Adjunct,  which  nothing  comes  between,  so  as  to 
sever  the  Adjunct  from  the  Subject ;  therefore  they  are  immediate 
subjects  of  that  Adjunct,  or  immediate  members.  Again,  their  visible 
ingraffing  into  Christ  the  head,  and  so  into  the  Church  his  body,  is 
sealed  in  their  Baptism:  but  in  ingraffing  nothing  comes  betwixt 
the  graft  and  the  stock  :  Their  union  is  immediate  ;  hence  they  are 
immediately  inserted  into  the  visible  Church,  or  immediate  mem- 
bers there  of.  The  little  children  in  Deut.  29.  11.  were  personally 
and  immediately  a  part  of  the  people  of  God,  or  members  of  the 
Church  of  Israel,  as  well  as  the  parents.  To  be  in  covenant,  or 
to  be  a  covenantee,  is  the  formalis  ratio  of  a  Church-member.  If  one 
come  to  be  in  covenant  one  way,  and  another  in  another,  but  both 
are  in  covenant  or  covenantees  (1.  e.  parties  with  whom  the  cove- 
nant is  made,  and  whom  God  takes  into  covenant)  as  the  children 
here  are,  Gen.  17.  7,  8  then  both  are  in  their  own  persons  the 
immediate  subjects  of  the  formalis  ratio  of  membership,  and  so 
immediate  members.  To  act  in  covenanting,  is  but  the  instru- 
mental means  of  membership,  and  yet  children  are  not  without  this 
neither.     For    the    act    of   the    parent    (their   publick   person)    is 


RESULT   OF   THE    SYNOD   OF    1662  333 

accounted  theirs,  and  they  are  said  to  enter  into  covenant,  Dent.  29.  n, 
12.  So  that  what  is  it  that  children  want  unto  an  actual,  compleat, 
proper,  absolute  and  immediate  membership  ?  (so  far  as  these 
terms  may  with  any  propriety  or  pertinecy  be  applied  to  the  mat- 
ter in  hand.)  Is  it  Covenant-interest,  which  is  the  formalis  ratio  of 
membership?  No,  they  are  in  covenant.  Is  it  divine  grant  and  in- 
stitution, which  is  the  principal  efficient?  Xo  :  he  hath  clearly  de- 
clared himself,  that  he  grants  unto  the  children  of  his  people  a 
portion  in  his  Church,  and  appoints  them  to  be  members  thereof. 
Is  it  an  act  of  covenanting,  which  is  the  instrumental  means?  No  : 
they  have  this  also  reputatively  by  divine  appointment,  making  the 
parent  a  publick  person,  and  accounting  them  to  covenant  in  his 
covenanting.  A  different  manner  and  means  of  conveying  the 
covenant  to  us,  or  of  [25]  making  us  members,  doth  not  make  a 
different  sort  of  membership.  We  now  are  as  truly,  personally 
and  immediately  members  of  the  body  of  fain  mankinde,  and  by 
nature  heirs  of  the  condemnation  pertaining  thereto,  as  Adam  was, 
though  he  came  to  be  so  by  his  own  personal  act,  and  we  by  the  act 
of  our  publick  person.  If  a  Prince  give  such  Lands  to  a  man  and 
his  heirs  successively,  while  they  continue  loyal  ;  the  following 
heir  is  a  true  and  immediate  owner  of  that  Land,  and  may  be  per- 
sonally dis-inherited,  if  disloyal,  as  well  as  his  father  before  him. 
A  member  is  one  that  is  according  to  Rule  (or  according  to 
Divine  Institution)  within  the  visible  Church.  Thus  the  child  is 
properly,  &  personally  or  immediately.  Paul  casts  all  men  into 
two  sorts,  those  within  and  those  without,  i.  e.  members  and  non- 
members,  1  Cor.  5.  12.  It  seems  he  knew  of  no  such  distinction  of 
mediate  and  immediate,  as  put  a  medium  between  these  two.  Object. 
If  children  be  compleat  and  immediate  members  as  their  parents 
are,  then  they  shall  immediately  have  all  Church-priviledges,  as 
their  parents  have,  without  any  further  act  or  qualification.  Ans. 
It  followeth  not.  All  priviledges  that  belong  to  members,  as  such, 
do  belong  to  the  children  as  well  as  the  parents:  But  all  Church- 
priviledges  do  not  so.  A  member  as  such,  (or  all  members)  may 
not  partake  of  all  priviledges  ;  but  they  are  to  make  progress  both 
in  memberly  duties  and  priviledges,  as  their  age,  capacity  and 
qualifications  do  fit  them  for  the  same. 

3.  That  their  membership  still  continues  in  adult  age,  and ceaseth 
net  with  their  infancy,  appears,  1.  Because  in  Scripture  persons  are 
broken  off,  onely  for  notorious  sin,  or  incorrigible  impenitency  and 
unbelief,  not  for  growing  up  to  adult  age,  Rom.  11.  20.  2.  The 
Jew-children  circumcised  did  not  cease  to  be  members  by  growing 


334  THE    HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

up,  but  continued  in  the  Church,  and  were  by  virtue  of  their  mem- 
bership received  in  infancy,  bound  unto  various  duties,  and  in 
special  unto  those  solemn  personal  professions  that  pertained  to 
adult  members,  not  as  then  entring  into  a  new  membership,  but  as 
making  a  progress  in  memberly  duties,  Dent.  26.  2-10.  &  16.  16,  17 
with  Gal.  5.  3.  3.  Those  relations  of  born-servants  and  subjects, 
which  the  Scripture  makes  use  of  to  set  forth  the  state  of  children 
in  the  Church  by,  Lev.  25  41,  42.  Ezek.  37.  25.  do  not,  (as  all  men 
know)  cease  with  infancy,  but  continue  in  adult  age.  Whence  also 
it  follows,  that  one  special  end  of  [26]  membership  received  in  in- 
fancy, is  to  leave  persons  under  engagement  to  service  and  subjec- 
tion to  Christ  in  his  Church,  when  grown  up,  when  they  are  fittest 
for  it,  and  have  most  need  of  it.  4.  There  is  no  ordinary  way  of 
cessation  of  membership  but  by  Death,  Dismission,  Excommunica- 
tion, or  Dissolution  of  the  Society :  none  of  which  is  the  case  of  the 
persons  in  question.  5.  Either  they  are  when  adult,  members  or 
non-members:  if  non-members,  then  a  person  admitted  a  member, 
and  sealed  by  Baptism,  not  cast  out,  or  deserving  so  to  be,  may 
(the  Church  whereof  he  was  still  remaining)  become  a  non-mem- 
ber, and  out  of  the  Church,  and  of  the  unclean  world;  which  the 
Scripture  acknowledged!  not.  Now  if  the  parent  stand  member 
of  the  Church,  the  childe  is  a  member  also  :  For  now  the  root  is  holy, 
therefore  so  are  the  branches,  Rom.  11.  16.  1  Cor.  7.  14.  The  parent 
is  in  covenant,  therefore  so  is  the  childe,  Gen.  17.  7.  and  if  the 
childe  be  a  member  of  the  visible  Church,  then  he  is  a  subject  of 
Baptism,  according  to  Propos  1. 

Proposition  6'. 

Such  Church-members,  who  either  by  death,  or  some  other  extra- 
ordinary Providence,  have  been  inevitably  kindred  from  publick  act- 
ing as  aforesaid,  yet  have  given  the  Church  cause  in  judgment  of 
charily,  to  look  at  them  as  so  qualified,  and  such  as  had  they  been 
called  thereunto,  would  have  so  acted,  their  children  arc  to  be  Baptized. 

This  is  manifest.  1.  Because  the  main  foundation  of  the  right 
of  the  childe  to  priviledge  remains,  viz:  Cods  institution,  and  the 
force  of  his  covenant  carrying  it  to  the  generations  of  such  as  con- 
tinue keepers  of  the  covenant,  i.  e.  not  visible  breakers  of  it.  By 
virtue  of  which  institution  and  covenant,  the  children  in  question  are 
members,  and  their  membership  being  distinct  from  the  parents 
membership,  ceaseth  not,  but  continues  notwithstanding  the  parents 
decease  or  necessary  absence  :  and  if  members,  then  subjects  of 
Baptism.     2.  Because  the  parents  not  doing  what  is  required  in  the 


RESULT   OF  THE   SYNOD    OF    l662  335 

fifth  Proposition,  is  through  want  of  opportunity;  which  is  not  to 
be  imputed  as  their  guilt  so  as  to  be  a  barre  to  the  childes  privi- 
ledge.  3.  God  reckoneth  that  as  done  in  his  service,  to  which 
there  was  a  manifest  desire  and  endeavour,  albeit  the  acting  of  it 
was  hindred;  as  in  David  to  build  the  Temple,  1  Kings  8  18,  19. 
in  Abraham  to  sacrifice  his  Son,  Hcb.  11.  17.  according  to  that  in  2 
Cor.  8.  12.  Where  [27]  is  a  willing  minde,  it  is  accepted  according  to 
what  a  man  hath,  and  not  according  to  what  he  hath  not:  which  is 
true  of  this  Church-duty,  as  well  as  of  that  of  Alms.  It  is  an 
usual  phrase  with  the  Ancients  to  style  such  and  such  Martyrs  in 
voto,  and  baptized  in  voto,  because  there  was  no  want  of  desire  that 
way,  though  their  desire  was  not  actually  accomplished.  4.  The 
terms  of  the  Proposition  import  that  in  charity,  that  is  here  done 
interpretively,  which  is  mentioned  to  be  done  in  the  fifth  proposition 
expresly. 

Proposition  7  th. 

The  members  of  Orthodox  Churches,  being  so?c?id  in  the  Faith, 
and  not  scandalous  in  life,  and  presenting  due  testimony  thereof;  these 
occasionally  comming  from  one  Church  to  another,  may  have  their 
children  Baptized  in  the  church  whither  they  come,  by  virtue  of  Com- 
munion  of  Churches:  but  if  they  remove  their  habitation,  they  ought 
orderly  to  covenant  and  subject  themselves  to  the  Government  of  Christ 
in  the  Church  where  they  settle  their  abode,  and  so  their  children  to  be 
Baptized.  It  bei?ig  the  churches  duty  to  receive  such  unto  communion, 
sofarre  as  they  are  regularly  fit  for  the  same. 

1.  Such  members  of  other  Churches  as  are  here  described,  occa- 
sionally coming  from  one  Church  to  another,  their  childre?i  are  to  be 
baptized  in  the  Church  whither  they  come,  by  virtue  of  Communion  of 
Churches:  1.  Because  he  that  is  regularly  a  member  of  a  true  par- 
ticular Church,  is  a  subject  of  Baptism,  according  to  Propos.  ist  6° 
2d.  But  the  children  of  the  parents  here  described  are  such,  ac- 
cording to  Proposition  5"1  6°  6th.  therefore  they  are  meet  and  lawful 
subjects  of  Baptism,  or  have  right  to  be  baptized.  And  Communion 
of  Churches  infers  such  acts  as  this  is,  viz:  to  baptize  a  fit  subject 
of  Baptism,  though  a  member  of  another  Church,  when  the  same  is 
orderly  desired.  (See  Platform  of  Discipline,  chap.  15.  sect.  4) 
For  look  as  every  Church  hath  a  double  consideration,  viz.  1.  Of 
its  own  constitution  and  communion  within  it  self;  2.  Of  that  com- 
munion which  it  holds  and  ought  to  maintain  with  other  Churches: 
So  the  Officer  (the  Pastor  or  Teacher)  thereof,  is  there  set,  1.  To 
administer  to  this  Church  constantly;  2,  To  do  acts  of  Communion 


336  THE   HALF-WAV   COVENANT 

occasionally,  (viz:  such  as  belong  to  his  Office,  as  Baptizing  doth) 
respecting  the  members  of  other  Churches,  with  whom  this  Church 
holds  or  ought  to  hold  communion. 

2.  To  refuse  Communion  with  a  true  Church  in  Iazv-[2&] 
full  and  pious  actions,  is  unlawful,  and  justly  accounted  Schis- 
matical.  For  if  the  Church  be  true,  Christ  holdeth  some  com- 
munion with  it  ;  therefore  so  must  we  :  but  if  we  will  not  have 
communion  with  it  in  those  acts  that  are  good  and  pious,  then 
in  none  at  all.  Total  separation  from  a  true  Church,  is  unlawful  : 
But  to  deny  communion  in  good  actions,  is  to  make  a  total  sep- 
aration. Now  to  baptize  a  fit  subject,  as  is  the  childe  in  question, 
is  a  lawfull  and  pious  action,  and  therefore  by  virtue  of  Communion 
of  Churches,  in  the  case  mentioned  to  be  attended.  And  if  Baptism 
lawfully  administred,  may  and  ought  to  be  received  by  us  for  our 
children,  in  another  true  Church,  where  Providence  so  casts  us,  as 
that  we  cannot  have  it  in  our  own,  (as  doubtless  it  may  and  ought 
to  be  :)  then  also  we  may  and  ought  in  like  case  to  dispense  Baptism, 
when  desired,  to  a  meet  and  lawfull  subject,  being  a  member  of 
another  Church.  To  deny  or  refuse  either  of  these,  would  be  an 
unjustifiable  refusing  of  Communion  of  Churches,  and  tending  to 
sinful  separation. 

2.  [3]  Such  as  remove  their  habitation,  ought  orderly  to  cove- 
nant and  subject  themselves  to  the  Government  of  Christ  in  the  Church, 
where  they  settle  their  abode,  and  so  their  children  to  be  baptized ; 
1.  Because  the  regularly  baptized  are  disciples,  and  under  the 
Discipline  and  Government  of  Christ:  But  they  that  are  absolutely 
removed  from  the  Church  whereof  they  were,  so  as  to  be  unca- 
pable  of  being  under  Discipline  there,  shall  be  under  it  no  where, 
if  not  in  the  church  where  they  inhabit.  They  that  would  have 
Church-priviledgcs,  ought  to  be  under  Church-power  :  But  these  will 
be  under  no  Church-power,  but  as  lambs  in  a  large  place,  if  not 
under  it  there,  where  their  setled  abode  is.  2.  Every  Christian 
ought  to  covenant  for  himself  and  his  children,  or  professedly 
to  give  up  himself  and  his  to  the  Lord  and  that  in  the  'way  of  his 
Ordinances,  Deut.  26  17  6r"  12.  5.  and  cxplicitc  covenanting  is  a 
duty,  especially  where  we  are  called  to  it,  and  have  opportunity 
for  it  :  nor  can  they  well  be  said  to  covenant  implicitely,  that 
do  cxplicitcly  refuse  a  professed  covenanting,  when  called  there- 
unto. And  especially  this  covenanting  is  a  duty,  when  we  would 
partake  of  such  a  Church-priviledge,  as  Baptism  for  our  children 
is.  Hut  the  parents  in  question  will  now  be  professed  covenanters 
no   where,  if   not   in   the  Church  where   their   fixed    habitation   is. 


RESULT   OF   THE   SYNOD   OF    1662  337 

Therefore  they  ought  orderly  to  covenant  there,  and  so  their  children 
[29]  to  be  baptized.  3.  To  refuse  covenanting  and  subjection  to 
Christ's  Government  in  the  Church  where  they  live,  being  so  re- 
moved, as  to  be  utterly  uncapable  of  it  elsewhere,  would  be  a  walking 
disorderly,  and  would  too  much  savour  of  prof  oneness  and  separation 
and  hence  to  administer  Baptism  to  the  children  of  such  as  stand  in 
that  way,  would  be  to  administer  Christ's  Ordinances  to  such  as  are 
in  a  way  of  sin  and  disorder  ;  which  ought  not  to  be,  2  Thess.  3.  6  1 
Chron.  15.  13.  and  would  be  contrary  to  that  Rule,  1  Cor.  14.  40. 
Let  all  things  be  done  decc7itly  and  in  order. 


Quest.  II    \\  J Hethcr  according  to  the  Word  of  God  there  ought 
V  V      to  be  a  Consociation  of  Churches,  and  what  should 
be  the  maimer  of  it  ? 

Answ.  The  answer  may  be  briefly  given  in  the  Propositions 
following. 

1.  Every  church  or  particular  Congregation  of  visible  Saints  in  Gos- 
pel-order, being  furnished  with  a  Presbytery,  at  least  with  a  Teaching 
Elder,  and  walking  together  in  truth  and  peace,  hath  received  from  the  Lord 
Jesus  full  power  and  authority  Ecclesiastical  within  it  self,  regularly  to 
administer  all  the  Ordinances  of  Christ,  and  is  not  under  any  other  Ecclesi- 
astical Jurisdiction  whatsoever.  For  to  such  a  Church  Christ  hath 
given  the  Keyes  of  the  Kingdome  of  Heaven,  that  what  they  binde  or  loose 
on  earth,  shall  be  bound  or  loosed  in  heaven,  Matt.  16.  19.  &:  18.  17,  18. 
Elders  are  ordained  in  every  Church,  Acts  14.  23.  Tit.  1.  5.  and  are 
therein  authorized  officially  to  administer  in  the  Word,  Prayer,  Sacra- 
ments and  Censures,  Mat.  28.  19,  20.  Acts  6.  4.  1  Cor.  4.  1.  &  5.  4,  12. 
Acts  20.  28.  1  Tim.  5.  17.  6°  3.  5.  The  reproving  of  the  Church  of 
Corinth,  and  of  the  Asian  Churches  severally,  imports  they  had  power, 
each  of  them  within 'themselves,  to  reform  the  abuses  that  were 
amongst  them,  1  Cor.  5.  Rev.  2  14,  20.  Hence  it  follows,  that  Con- 
sociation of  Churches  is  not  to  hinder  the  exercise  of  this  power,  but 
by  counsel  from  the  Word  of  God  to  direct  and  strengthen  the  same 
upon  all  just  occasions. 

2.  The  Churches  of  Christ  do  stand  in  a  sisterly  relation  each  to 


338  THE   HALF-WAY    COVENANT 

other,  Cant.  8.  8.,  being  united  in  the  same  Faith  and  Order,  Eph.  4.  5. 
Col.  2.  5.  to  -walk  by  the  same  Rule,  Phil.  3.  16.  in  the  exercise  of  the 
[30]  same  Ordinances  for  the  same  ends,  Eph.  4  1 1,  12,  13.  1  Cor.  16.  1. 
under  one  and  the  same  political  Head,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  Eph.  1. 
22,  23  &  4.  5.  Rev.  2.  1.  Which  Union  infers  a  Communion  sutable 
thereto. 

3.  Communion  of  Churches  is  the  faithfull  improvement  of  the 
gifts  of  Christ  bestowed  upon  them  for  his  service  and  glory,  and  their 
mutual  I  good  and  edification,  according  to  capacity  and  opportunity.  1  Pet. 
4.  10,  11.  1  Cor.  12.  4,  7.  &  10.  24.  1  Cor.  3.  21,  22.  Cantic  8.  9. 
Rom  1.  15.    Gal.  6.  10 

4.  Acts  of  Communion  of  Churches  are  such  as  these  : 

1.  Hearty  Care  and  Prayer  one  for  another,  2  Cor.  11.  28.  Cant. 
8.  8    Rom.  1.  9.    Collos.  1.  9.    Eph.  6.  18. 

2.  To  afford  Relief  by  communication  of  their  Gifts  in  'Tonporal 
or  Spiritual  necessities.  Rom.  15.  26,  27.  Acts  11.  22,  29.  2  Cor. 
8.  1,  4,  14. 

3.  To  maintain  Unity  and  Peace,  by  giving  account  one  to 
another  of  their  publick  actions,  when  it  is  orderly  desired,  Acts  1 1 . 
2,  3,  4-18.  Josh.  22.  13,  21,  30.  1  Cor.  1032.  and  to  strengthen 
07ie  another  in  their  regular  Administrations  ;  as  in  special  by  a  con- 
current testimony  against  persons  justly  censured,  Acts  15.  41.  &  16. 
4,  5.  2  Tim.  4.  15.  2  Thcss.  3.  14. 

4.  To  seek  and  accept  Help  from,  and  give  Help  unto  each  other: 

1.  ///  case  of  Divisions  and  Contentions,  whereby  the  peace  of  any  Church 
is  disturbed,  Acts  15.  2. 

2.  In  matters  of  more  then  ordinary  importance,  [Prov.  24.  6.  15.  &  22]  a"" 
Ordination,    Translation,  and  Deposition  of  Elders,  and  such  like,   I  Tim.  5.  22. 

3.  In  doubtful  and  difficult  Questions  and  Controversies,  Doctrinal  or  J'rai. 
deal,  that  may  arise,  Acts  15   2,  6. 

4.  For  the  rectifying  of  mat- Administrations ,  and  healing  of  Errours  and 
Scandals,  that  are  unhealed  among  themselves,  3  fohn  rer  :  9,  10.  2  Cor.  2.  6-1 1. 
1  Cor.  15.  Rev:  2:  14,  15,  16.  2  Cor.  12.  20,  21,6-°  13  2.  Churches  now  have 
need  of  help  in  like  cases,  as  well  as  Churches  then.  Christ's  care  is  still  for  whole 
Churches,  as  well  as  for  particular  persons  ;  and  Apostles  being  now  ceased,  there 
remains  the  duty  of  brotherly  love,  and  mutual  care  and  helpfulness,  incumbent 
upon  Churches,  especially  Elders  for  that  end. 

[31]  5.  Li  love  and  faithfulness  to  take  notice  of  the  Troubles 
and  Difficulties,  Errours  and  Scandals  of  another  Church,  and  to 
administer  help  (ivhcn  the  ease  manifestly  calls  for  it)  though  they 
should  so  neglect  their  own  good  and  duty,  as  not  to  seek  it,  Exod.  23. 
4,  5.    Prov.  24.  11,  12. 

6.  To  Admonish  one  another  when  there  is  need  and  cause  for  it : 
and  after  due  means  with  patience  used,  to  withdraw  from  a  Church  or 
peccant  party  therein,  obstinately  persisting  in  Errour  or  Scandal;  as  in 
tin  Platform  of  Discipline  {chap.  15.  sect.  2.  fa/tie.  3.)  is  more  at  large 
declared  :   Gal.  2.  11-14.    2  Thess.  3.  6.    Rom.  16.  17. 


RESULT   OF   THE    SYNOD    OF    1662  339 

5.  Consociation  of  Churches,  is  their  mutual  and  solemn  Agreement 
to  exercise  communion  in  such  acts,  as  aforesaid,  amongst  themselves,  with 
special  reference  to  those  Churches,  which  by  providence  arc  planted  in  a 
convenient  vicinity,  though  with  liberty  reserved  without  offence,  to  make 
use  of  others,  as  the  nature  of  the  ease,  or  the  advantage  of  opportunity 
may  lead  thereunto. 

6.  The  Churches  of  Christ  in  this  Counlrey  having  so  good  op- 
portunity for  it,  it  is  meet  to  be  commended  to  them,  as  their  duty, 
thus  to  consociate.  For  1.  Communion  of  Churches  being  com- 
manded, and  Consociation  being  but  an  Agreement  to  practise  it, 
this  must  needs  be  a  duty  also,  Psal.  119.  106.  Nehem.  9.  28.  2. 
Paul  an  Apostle  sought  with  much  labour  the  conference,  concur- 
rence, and  right  hand  of  fellowship  of  other  Apostles :  and  ordinary 
Elders  and  Churches  have  not  less  need  each  of  other,  to  prevent 
their  running  in  vain,  Gal.  2.  2,  6,  9.  3.  Those  general  Scripture- 
rules  touching  the  need  and  use  of  counsel  and  help  in  weighty 
cases,  concern  all  Societies  and  Polities,  Ecclesistical  as  well  as 
Civil,  Prov.  n.  14.  6°  15.  22.  d^  20  18.  &  24.  6.  Pedes.  4.  9,  10,  12. 
4.  The  pattern  in  Acts  15  holds  forth  a  warrant  for  Councils,  which 
may  be  greater  or  lesser,  as  the  matter  shall  require.  5.  Concur- 
rence and  Communion  of  Churches  in  Gospel  times,  is  not 
obscurely  held  forth  in  Isa  19.  23,  24,  25.  Zeph.  3.  9.  1  Cor.  11.  61,  & 
14.  32,  36.  6.  There  hath  constantly  been  in  these  Churches  a 
profession  of  Communion,  in  giving  the  right  hand  of  fellowship  at 
the  gathering  of  Churches,  and  Ordination  of  Elders:  Which  im- 
porteth  a  Consociation,  and  obligeth  to  the  practice  [32J  thereof. 
Without  which  we  should  also  want  an  expedient  and  sufficient 
Cure  for  emergent  Church-difficulties  and  Differences  :  with  the 
want  whereof  our  Way  is  charged,  but  unjustly,  if  this  part  of  the 
Doctrine  thereof  were  duely  practised. 

7.  The  manner  of  the  Churches  agreement  herein,  or  entring  into 
this  Consociation,  may  be  by  each  Church's  open  consenting  unto  the  things 
here  declared  in  Answer  to  this  2d.  Question,  as  also  to  what  is  said 
thereabout  in  chap.  15.  &  16.  of  the  Platform  of  Discipline,  with  refer- 
ence to  other  Churches  in  this  Colony  c^  Countrcy,  as  in  Propos.  5  th.  is 
before  expressed. 

8.  The  manner  of  exercising  and  practising  that  Communion, 
which  this  consent  or  agreement  specially  tendeth  unto,  may  be,  by  making 
use  occasionally  of  Elders  or  able  Brethren  of  other  Churches  ;  or  by  the 
more  solemn  Meetings  of  both  Elders  and  Messengers  in  lesser  or  greater 
Councils,  as  the  matter  shall  require. 

FINIS. 


XII 

THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION,    1658 
Editions  and  Reprints 

I.  A  I  Declaration  \  of  the  \  Faith  and  Order  \  Owned  and  practised  in  the  \ 
Congregational  Churches  \  in  |  England ;  \  Agreed  upon  and  consented  unto  \  By 
their   I   Elders    and   Messengers  \   in   \    Their   Meeting  at   the    Savoy,    October   12. 

163S.  I    I    I  London  :  \  Printed  by  John  Field,  and  are  to  be  sold  by  \ 

John  Allen  at  the   Sun   Rising  in   Pauls  \  Church-yard,  jbjS.     40  pp.  [xxx],  64. 

Four  editions  appeared  in  1659,  viz. 

II.  1.  The  edition  of  165S  with  the  date  on  the  title-page  altered  to  1659,  DUt 
without  other  changes. 

III.  2.  An  edition  with  the  same  title  page  as  No.  II.,  and  by  the  same  pub- 
lisher, but  re-set  in  parts,  and  with  minor  variations.1 

IV.  3.  A  small  print  edition,  London  \  Printed  for  D.  L.  And  are  to  be  sold  in 
Paul's  Church-yard,  Fleet-  \  Street,  and  Westminster-Hall,  ib^g} 

V.  4.  Another  small  print  edition,  London,  \  Printed  by  J.  P.  and  are  to  be  sold 
in  S  Pauls  Church-  \  yard,  fleet-Street,  and  at  Westminster-Hall,  \  /6jg. 

VI.  A  Latin  translation,  by  Prof.  Johannes  Hoornbeek  of  Leyden,  appeared  at 
Utrecht  in  1662  under  the  title  Con/essio  nupcr  edita  Independentium  sen  Cougre- 
gationalium  in  Anglia? 

Other  editions  appeared  in  English  as  follows,4 

VII.  1677,  1S0. 

VIII.  16S8,  180. 

IX.  1729,  8°. 

X.  Ipswich,  1745,  8°. 

XI.  Oswestry,  1812,  8°. 

The  revived  interest  in  the  history  of  Congregationalism  has  led  to  several 
reprints,  more  or  less  complete. 

I.  In  Ilanbury,  Memorials,  III  :  517-548  ;  entire. 

II.  By  Dr.  A.  H.  Quint,  Congregational  Quarterly ,  VIII  :  241-261,  341-344, 
(July  and  October  1866)  ;  without  the  preface.  Dr.  Quint  gives  a  full  list  of  vari- 
ations from  the  Westminster  Confession  and  the  Massachusetts  Confession  of  1680. 

1  This  edition  may  be  distinguished  from  No.  II.  by  the  presence,  on  an  unnumbered  pa^e 
between  pp.  53  and  54,  of  a  list  of  books  for  sale.  In  Nos.  I.  and  II.  this  page  is  blank,  and  is 
reckoned  in  the  paging  of  the  book.  In  No.  III.  the  title  to  Ch.  V.  p.  10  is  inverted,  in  Nos.  1.  and 
II.  it  is  in  the  usual  order.      Many  differences  of  punctuation  may  also  be  found. 

2  This  is  the  text  used  by  Dr.  Quint  in  the  Cong.  Quart.,  viii :  pp.  241-261,  341-344  ;  and 
Prof.  Schaff  in  thejirst  edition  of  his  Creeds,  III,  p.  707. 

3  See  Neal,  Puritans,  ed.  New  York,  1844,  II:  178;  Hanbury,  Memorials,  III:  31;; 
Schaff,  Creeds,  I  :  829. 

*  I  am  indebted  for  my  information  regarding  Nos.  VII-XI  to  William  Orme's  Memoirs 
0/    .     .     .    John  Owen,  in  Works  0/ John  Owen,  London,  1826,  I  :  183. 

(340) 


ITS    LITERATURE 


341 


III.    By  Prof.  Philip  Schaff,  Creeds  of  Christendom,  III  :  707-729  ;  the  preface 
and  the  portions  relating  to  church  government  are  given  in  full,  but  only  those  sec- 
tions of  the  Declaration  of  Faith  which  differ  from  the  Westminster  Confession,  to 
be  found  earlier  in  the  same  volume. 
Sources 

Peck,  Desiderata  Curiosa,  London  1779,  II  :  501-512  ;  contains  sixteen  letters 
relating  to  the  summons  of  the  Synod. 
Literature 

Neal,  History  of  the  Puritans,  ed.  New  York,  1844,  II  :  177-180  ;  Bogue  & 
Bennett,  History  of  Dissenters,  London,  1808,  2nd  ed.  1833,  I  :  181,  182  ;  Orme, 
Memoirs  of  .  .  .  John  Owen,  in  Works  of  John  Owen,  London,  1826,  I  : 
172-183;  Price,  History  of  Protestant  Nonconformity  in  England,  London,  1838, 
II  :  619-623  ;  Hanbury,  Memorials,  III  :  515-548  ;  Fletcher,  History  of  .  .  . 
Independency  in  England,  London,  1862,  IV  :  177-179  ;  Schaff,  Creeds  of  Christen- 
dom, New  York,  1877,  I  :  829-833  ;  Masson,  Life  of  John  Milton,  London,  1859-80, 
V  :  343-345  ;  Dexter,  Congregationalism,  as  seen  in  its  Literature,  pp.  661-663  \ 
Stoughton,  History  of  Religion  in  England,  ed.  London,  1881,  II  :  488,  489.  Some 
points  of  interest  regarding  this  Declaration,  and  its  relations  to  the  New  England 
Churches,  may  be  found  in  Lawrence,  Our  Declaration  of  Faith  and  the  Confession, 
in  Congregational  Quarterly,  VIII  :  173-190. 

IT  was  the  desire  of  the  Puritans,  from  the  opening  of  the 
Long  Parliament,  that  there  should  be  a  general  council  of 
representatives  of  the  English  Church  to  consider  and  recom- 
mend such  changes  as  seemed  necessary,  in  the  opinion  of  a 
great  party  in  the  nation,  for  that  Church's  further  reformation. 
This  wish  found  expression  in  the  Grand  Remonstrance  ;  and 
bills  authorizing  such  an  assembly  were  enacted  in  June,  Octo- 
ber, and  December,  1642,  but  failed  for  lack  of  the  king's  assent.1 
But  the  increasing  danger  of  the  political  situation,  owing  to  the 
unexpected  strength  shown  by  the  king  after  the  outbreak  of  the 
civil  war,  induced  Parliament  to  call  the  desired  assembly  by  its 
own  unsupported  ordinance,  on  June  12,  1643, —  a  result  doubt- 
less hastened  by  the  knowledge  that  such  a  council  would  be 
acceptable  to  the  Scotch,  whose  military  aid  seemed  indispensa- 
ble. The  composition  of  this  celebrated  body  was  determined 
by  the  Parliamentary  call,  which  summoned  one  hundred  and 
forty-nine  persons2  by  name  to  a  share  in  its  proceedings;  and, 
in  spite  of  the  prohibition  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  by  the 
king,  sixty-nine  of  those   invited  gathered  on   the  opening  day, 


See  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  645-648. 
1  Really  150,  see  ante,  p.  136. 


342  THE   SAVOY    DECLARATION 

July  i,  1643.  Its  average  attendance  was  from  sixty  to  eighty. 
Of  the  membership  of  the  ecclesiastical  council  thus  constituted 
the  vast  majority  were,  of  course,  jure  divino  Presbyterians,  since 
Presbyterianism  was  not  only  the  form  of  church  polity  approved 
in  Scotland,  but  that  to  which  the  greater  portion  of  the  Puri- 
tans of  England  looked  with  hope  at  the  outbreak  of  the  civil 
war.  Parliament,  however,  intended  to  be  catholic  in  its  call, 
and  therefore  invited  certain  Episcopalians1  (though  scarce  any 
came),  a  few  Erastians,  like  the  scholars,  Selden,  Lightfoot,  and 
Coleman,  and,  what  attracts  our  chief  attention,  nearly  a  dozen 
Congregationalists, —  all,  even  the  Episcopalians  summoned,  being 
affiliated  more  or  less  closely  with  the  great  Puritan  party. 

Ten  or  eleven  Congregationalists,  or  Independents*  as  they 
were  more  usually  called,  could  have  no  decisive  influence  among 
so  many  Presbyterians,  and  of  this  number  only  about  five  could 
be  accounted  at  all  times  thorough-going  opponents  of  Presby- 
terian designs.  These  were  Thomas  Goodwin  and  Philip  Nye, 
the  most  powerful  debaters  on  the  Congregational  side,  William 
Bridge,  Jeremiah  Burroughes,  and  Sidrach  Simpson.  They  had 
all  suffered  persecution  under  Laud,  and  had  all  gone  to  Holland, 
where  they  had  ministered  to  English  congregations  at  Rotter- 
dam,3 and  Arnheim;4  and  had  returned  to  take  positions  of  influ- 
ence in  England  as  soon  as  the  tyranny  of  Laud  was  overthrown. 
With  them  were  associated  more  or  less  intimately  in  the  defense 
of  Independency  in  the  Assembly,  William  Carter  of  London, 
Joseph  Caryl  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  William  Green  of  Pentecomb, 
William  Greenhill  of  Stepney,  Peter  Sterry  of  London,  John  Bond 
of  the  Savoy,  London,  and  (possibly)  Anthony  Burgess  of  Sut- 
ton.5 But  though  few  in  numbers,  the  Congregationalists  in  the 
Assembly  were  the  peers  of  any  of  its  membership  in  power  of 
debate.      They    commanded    respect   much    beyond    that  due    to 


1  A  good  account  of  these  parties  is  given  by  Schaff,  Creeds  0/  Christendom,  I  :  734-747. 

2  On  the  use  of  this  name,   compare    Fletcher,   Hist.     .      .     .     0/  Independency,    London, 
1S62,  IV: 

3  liridge  and  Burroughes  as  pastor  and  teacher. 

tillie,  Letters  and  Journals,  ed.  Edinburgh,  1841-2,  II :  no ;  Fletcher, ///*/.  .  .  . 
Independency,  IV:  23,  24;  Schaff,  Creeds,  I  :  737.  Of  the  laymen  in  the  Assembly,  Lord  Say 
and  Sele,  Lord  Wharton,  and  Sir  Harry  Vane,  sided  with  the  Independents. 


CONGREGATIOXALISTS   AT   WESTMINSTER  343 

their  numerical  weight.1  Their  disagreement  with  the  Presby- 
terians was  not  on  points  of  doctrine  ;  the  struggle  between  the 
two  parties  so  unequally  matched  was  over  polity;  and,  later, 
over  the  degree  of  toleration  to  be  granted  to  the  minor  differ- 
ences of  religious  sects  as  well.2 

Yet,  while  there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  keenness  and  co- 
gency of  the  Congregational  champions  in  argument,  it  is  hardly 
conceivable  that  they  would  have  been  listened  to  and  answered 
with  such  patience  by  the  great  men  of  the  Presbyterian  ma- 
jority, had  it  not  early  become  evident  that  the  progress  of  the 
war  was  resulting  in  the  rapid  spread  of  Independency  in  Eng- 
land. It  was  the  consciousness  that  the  Congregational  debat- 
ers represented  a  party  of  unknown  but  increasing  power  in  Par- 
liament and  the  army  that  made  the  Presbyterian  leaders  bear 
with  their  arguments  and  objections.3  It  was  the  same  con- 
sciousness on  the  part  of  the  Congregational  members  that  made 
them  oppose  and  delay  the  Presbyterian  models  of  Church-gov- 
ernment, and,  as  early  as  January,  1644,  led  Goodwin,  Nye,  Bridge, 
Burroughes,  and  Simpson,  to  appeal  from  the  Assembly  to  the 
Parliament  which  created  it,  and  from  which  it  derived  all  its 
right  to  be.  This  appeal,  the  Apologcticall  Narration,'1  though 
claiming  to  be  nothing  more  than  a  request  that  the  government 
would  not  send  the  adherents  of  Congregationalism  into  a  second 
exile,6  was  really  an  attempt  to  transfer  the  solution  of  the  ques- 
tion between  Presbyterianism  and  Congregationalism  from  the 
Assembly  to  a  higher  tribunal,  —  the  opinion  of  Parliament  and 
of  the  nation.  As  such,  it  was  in  some  measure  successful.  Nine 
months  after  its  publication,  Cromwell,  fresh  from  his  victory  at 

1  The  work  of  the  Independents  in  the  Assembly  is  well  described  in  Masson,  Life  of  John 
Milton,  III.  passim.     See  also  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  656,  657. 

5  "  Moreover,  if  in  all  matters  of  Doctrine,  we  LCongregationalists]  were  not  as  Orthodoxe 
in  our  judgements  as  our  brethren  [the  Presbyterians]  themselves,  we  would  never  have  exposed 
our  selves  to  this  tryall  and  hazard  of  discovery  in  this  Assembly.  .  .  .  But  it  is  sufficiently 
known  that  in  all  points  of  doctrine  .  .  .  our  judgements  have  still  concurred  with  the  great- 
est part  of  our  brethren,  neither  do  we  know  wherein  we  have  dissented,"  Apologcticall  Nar- 
ration, pp.  28,  29.  Regarding  the  growth  of  a  spirit  of  toleration  among  the  Independents  in  the 
Assembly  see  Fletcher,  Hist.     .     .     .     Independency,  IV 129-74. 

3  Compare  Masson,  Milton,  III :  20-26. 

4  An  Apologcticall  Narration,  Hvmbly  Submitted  to  the  Honourable  Houses  of  Parlia- 
ment, London,  1643  (really  January,  1644,  see  on  date  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  p.  659.) 

6  Apol.  Narration,  pp.  30,  31. 


344  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

Marston  Moor,  and  well  known  to  be  a  Congregationalist  in  sym- 
pathy, induced  Parliament  so  far  to  recognize  the  rights  of  the 
Independents  as  to  refer  the  general  question  of  toleration  to  its 
most  important  committee,  that  of  the  "Two  Kingdoms."1 

But,  spite  of  all  they  could  do  in  debate,  the  weight  of  num- 
bers gave  the  victory  to  the  Presbyterians  in  the  Assembly  point 
by  point.  And  something  beside  numbers  favored  the  Presby- 
terians also.  They  were  ready  with  the  offer  of  a  definite  plan 
of  church  government.  The  Independents  were  not.  They  op' 
posed  the  Presbyterian  system  in  detail,  but  they  could  not  be 
induced  to  present  their  own  views  in  full  systematic  form.  The 
Assembly  justly  complained  of  this  unwillingness.2  But  the  rea- 
son of  it  is  not  far  to  seek.  The  power  behind  the  Congrega- 
tionalists  in  the  Assembly  was  the  constantly  growing  ascend- 
ency of  the  Independents  in  the  army.  These  army  Independents 
were  many  shades  of  opinion,3  and  for  their  diversities  of  view 
the  leaders,  like  Cromwell,  claimed  large  toleration.  To  come 
out  with  a  definite  statement  of  their  own  theories  was  to  ex- 
pose the  Congregationalists  in  the  Assembly  to  the  loss  of  a 
support  that  was  very  desirable,  for  though  many  were  willing 
to  unite  with  them  in  opposition  to  the  proposed  enforcement 
of  Presbyterian  uniformity,  the  diversity  of  opinion  among  the 
Independents  in  the  army  was  too  manifest  to  make  union  in 
anything  but  dissent  probable.     That  this  was  the  reason  of  the 


1  See  Masson,  Milton,  III  :  168, 169.    The  composition  of  the  committee  is  given,  Ibid.,  p.  41. 

2  See  A  Copy  0/ a  Remonstrance  lately  delivered  in  to  the  Assembly.  By  Thomas  Good- 
win, /ere in  :  Burroughs.  William  Grecnhill.  William  Bridge.  Philip  Nie.  Sidrach  Simson. 
and  II  'illiam  Carter.  Declaring  the  Grounds  and  Reasons  0/  their  declining  to  bring  into  the 
Assembly,  their  Modelt  of  Church-Government.  London  1645.  The  Assembly  answered  the 
same  year.  The  Answer  Of  the  Assembly  of  Divines  .  .  .  Unto  the  Reasons  given  in  to 
this  Assembly  by  the  Dissenting  Brethren  [etc.]  London  1645.  They  say:  "The  Assembly  hath 
still  great  and  just  cause  to  expect  a  report  from  these  Brethren  :  Those  of  their  way  having  pub- 
lished in  Print  that  these  Brethren  are  willing  to  do  it.  The  Assembly  having  Ordered  it,  the 
Brethren  having  held  the  Assembly  six  moneths  in  expectation  of  it.  .  .  .  Vpon  which  con- 
siderations we  think  .  .  .  that  they  have  some  other  cause  then  what  they  pretend  to,  and 
that  something  lies  behinde  the  curtain.  .  .  .  Possibly  they  cannot  agree  among  themselves 
(for  it  is  easier  to  agree  in  dissenting,  then  in  affirming)  or  possibly  if  they  seven  can  agree,  ret 
some  other  of  their  Brethren  in  the  City,  to  whom  it  may  be  the  Model  was  communicated,  did 
not  like  it  ;  or  if  so,  yet  possibly  the  Brethren  might  foresee,  that  if  this  Model  should  be  pub- 
lished, there  arc  some  who  at  present  are  a  strength  to  them,  and  expect  shelter  from  them,  may 
disgust  it,"  p.  24. 

8  Some  account  of  the  sects  in  the  army  may  be  found  in  Masson,  Milton,  III:  84-^1,  137-159. 


CONGREGATIONALISM    IN    POWER  345 

refusal  of  the  Congregationalists  to  formulate  their  views  in  the 
Assembly,  the  Presbyterians  not  obscurely  hinted.1  But  these 
Congregationalists  had  conceptions  definite  enough,  though  they 
did  not  deem  it  politic  to  define  them  in  their  own  words.  They 
published  and  circulated  with  approval  the  works  of  the  lead- 
ers of  New  England,  like  Cotton's  Xeyes,*  and.  Way  of  the  Churches, 
they  assiduously  propagated  Congregational  sentiments  and  op- 
posed Presbyterian  positions  ;  but  they  did  not  expose  themselves 
to  condemnation  in  the  Assembly,  and  the  loss  of  needed,  if 
somewhat  uncertain,'  supporters  without,  by  presenting  their  sys- 
tem in  concrete  and  elaborated  form. 

But  a  few  years  brought  great  changes.  The  rise  of  the 
army  to  the  real  control  in  England,  the  falling  away  of  the 
Scotch  and  their  defeat  in  the  second  civil  war,3  the  successive 
expulsions  of  the  Presbyterians  from  Parliament,4  the  execution 
of  the  king,  and  the  establishment  of  a  Commonwealth  under 
the  control  of  Cromwell,  removed  the  Congregationalists  from 
the  position  of  suppliants  for  Parliamentary  toleration  and  placed 
them  at  least  on  a  political  equality  with  the  Presbyterians  ; 
while  their  leaders  enjoyed  a  greater  degree  of  personal  favor 
with  Cromwell  and  the  heads  of  his  government  than  those  of 
any  other  religious  party.  They  were  Cromwell's  chaplains,6  and 
the  more  distinguished  Independents  received  educational  and 
ecclesiastical  livings  at  the  hands  of  the  government,  the  tenure 
of  which,  though  agreeable,  was  not  always  very  consistent  with 
Congregational  principles.6  Such  favor  from  the  State,  though 
it  did  not  make  Independency  the  State  religion,  placed  the  Con- 


1  Compare  p.  344,  note  2. 

2  It  bears  the  inscription  on  the  title  page,  "  Published  By  Tho.  Goodwin  and  Philip  Nye." 

3  Battle  of  Preston,  Aug.  18,  1648. 

4  The  dismissal  of  the  eleven  members,  1647, and  "Pride's  Purge,"  Dec.  6,  1648,  brought  Par- 
liament wholly  under  the  control  of  the  army. 

5  Of  Cromwell's  chaplains  Peter  Sterry  and  John  Howe  were  English  Congregationalists, 
while  Hugh  Peter  and  William  Hooke  had  had  ministerial  experience  in  New  England,  the  one 
at  Salem,  the  other  at  New  Haven.  William  Bridge  was  offered  the  chaplaincy  of  the  Council  of 
State  in  Nov.  1649  ;  but  declined. 

6  Thomas  Goodwin  became  Pres.  Magdalen  Coll.,  Oxford :  John  Owen  was  Dean  of 
Christ  Church  and  Vice-Chancellor  at  Oxford  ;  Philip  Nye,  Rector  of  St.  Bartholomew's,  Lon- 
don;  Joseph  Caryl,  Rector  of  St.  Mary's  Magnus.  To  accept  the  last  named  positions  implied, 
in  some  degree  at  least,  the  acknowledgment  of  a  National  Church  and  of  a  right  of  appointment 
other  than  the  will  of  the  congregation. 

23 


346  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

gregationalists  in  a  position  where  they  naturally  took  a  more 
conservative  attitude  than  when  they  were  simply  struggling  for 
a  right  to  live,  and  were  glad  to  accept  aid  from  whatever  source. 
Their  numbers  were  multiplying,  their  preachers  were  respected, 
it  seemed  in  every  way  desirable  that  they  should  now  define 
their  position  doctrinally  and  ecclesiastically.  Such  action  would 
bring  them  greater  union,  it  would  mark  their  separation  from 
the  various  sectaries  who  sheltered  themselves  under  the  Inde- 
pendent name,  and  it  was  now  open  to  none  of  the  dangers  which 
had  threatened  when  Presbyterianism  was  all-powerful.  The  lead- 
ing Congregationalists  determined  to  have  a  Confession  of  their 
own ;  they  would,  without  making  their  creed  a  test  to  which 
they  required  rigid  conformity,  bear  testimony  to  their  faith,  and 
enjoy  the  fraternal  communion  to  the  existence  of  which  no  pub- 
lic declarations  of  Congregational  ministers  and  churches  in  Eng- 
land had  heretofore  witnessed.1 

Thus  far  we  can  trace  the  probable  course  of  events  which 
led  to  the  gathering  at  the  Savoy,  but  unfortunately,  as  one  of 
the  most  learned  of  modern  English  Congregationalists  has  ob- 
served, "  very  much  obscurity  rests  "  on  the  preparations  for  that 
Assembly.2  It  seems  certain,  however,  that  the  motion  toward 
a  Synod  went  out  from  the  Independent  divines  in  Cromwell's 
neighborhood,  and  probably  took  the  form  of  a  petition.3  The 
Protector  was  naturally  reluctant  to  summon  a  meeting  which 
might  possibly  increase  that  friction  between  Presbyterians 
and  Congregationalists  which  was  the  most  threatening  feature 
of  the  political  situation,4  but  he  gave  his  consent  and  allowed 
the  proposed  Synod  to  have  the  countenance,  in  an  informal 
way,  of  his  government.  The  call  for  the  Assembly  did  not  run 
in  the  name  of  the  Commonwealth.  It  was  not  official  in  the 
same  sense  as  the  summons  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  by 
Parliament ;  but  the  letters  went  forth  from  Henry  Scobell,  clerk 


1  See  Preface  to  Savoy  Declaration,  pp.  iii,  iv,  xiii. 

2  Dr.  John  Stoughton.  History  0/ Religion  in  England,  II  :  488,  489. 

3  Such  is  the  view  of  Neal,  Echarcl,  Orme,  Stoughton,  Dexter,  Schaff,  Fletcher,  etc.  It  is 
probably  true,  though  it  would  be  grateful  if  documents  should  be  discovered  illuminating  this 
obscure  part  of  the  story. 

*  Neal,  Hist.  0/ the  Puritans,  ed.  New  York,  1844,  II :  178. 


ORIGIN   OF   THE    SYNOD  347 

of  the  Council  of  State,  and  were  recognized  by  their  recipients 

as  having  governmental  approval.     The  first  summons  was  for  a 

meeting  preparatory  to  the   Synod.      On   June   15,   1658,  Scobell 

wrote  to  the  ministers  of  London  and  vicinity  as  follows :' 

"Sir,  the  meeting  of  the  elders  of  the  congregationall  churches  in  &  about 
London,  is  appointed  at  Mr.  Griffith's2  on  Monday  next,  at  two  of  the  clocke  in  the 
afternoone,  where  you  are  desired  to  be  present.     I  am, 

Sir,  yours  to  love  &  serve  you  in  the  Lord, 

Hen.  Scobell." 
June  xv.  mdclviii. 

This  preliminary  meeting  took  place  on  the  day  appointed, 

June  21,  and  by  its  authorization  letters  were  sent  by  Mr.  Griffith, 

"  in  the  name     ...     of  the  congregationall  elders  in  &  about 

London,"3  to    leading    Congregational    ministers    in   the    several 

counties  where  such  churches  were  to  be  found,  asking  them  to 

notify    the    churches    in     their    respective    neighborhoods    to   be 

present   by   pastors  and   delegates   at  the    Savoy4  in  London  on 

Wednesday,   the    29th    of    September    following.      These    letters, 

which  were  sent  out   on  or  about  the  20th  of  August,5  are  not 

known  to  me  to  have  been  preserved,  but  the  replies,  returned 

not  to  Griffith  but  to  Scobell,  exist  to  the  number  of  fifteen.     An 

example  or  two  may  suffice  : 6 

"Sir,  Two  dayes  ago  I  received  a  letter  from  Mr.  Griffith,  giving  notice  of  a 
meeting  that  is  to  be  of  pastours  or  messengers  of  the  severall  congregationall 
churches  on  xxix  of  September  next  at  the  Savoy,  &  of  some  other  things.1  I  am 
therein  directed  to  signify  the  receipt  of  it  by  the  first  post  to  you  ;  which  is  the 
end  of  theis  few  lines  from, 

Sir,  your  humble  servant, 

Samuel  Basnet,  teacher  of  a  church  in  Coventry. 

1  Peck,  Desiderata  Curiosa,  London,  1779,  II  :  501. 

2  George  Griffith,  minister  at  the  Charter  House,  London,  1648-1661.  See  Wilson,  Hist. 
.     .     .     Dissenting  Churches  and.  Meeting  Houses  in  London,  London,  1808,  II  :  516-518. 

3  Reply  in  Peck,  Desiderata  Curiosa,  II  :  510. 

*  The  Savoy  Palace  was  erected  on  the  bank  of  the  Thames  by  Peter,  earl  of  Savoy  and 
Richmond,  in  1245.  It  passed  through  various  vicissitudes,  being  the  place  of  confinement  of 
Jnhn  II.  of  France,  when  a  prisoner,  1357-63  ;  John  of  Gaunt  later  made  it  his  palace.  It  had  been 
at  one  time  a  convent,  and  in  1505  was  made  a  hospital  by  Henry  VII.  In  Cromwell's  time  it 
sheltered  various  court  officers;  and  it  had  the  reputation  of  being  a  meeting  place  for  Dissenters, 
and  for  representatives  of  the  Continental  Protestant  churches. 

6  The  replies,  returned  immediately  on  the  receipt  of  the  letters,  are  dated,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  two  belated  epistles,  between  August  24  and  Sept.  4.  The  letter  to  William  Bridge  at  Yar- 
mouth was  dated  Aug.  20. 

6  Peck,  Desiderata  Curiosa,  II  :   508,  509. 

7  The  third  point  of  Griffith's  letter  related  to  "subscription " —see  Reply  of  Thomas 
Gilbert,  Peck,  II  :  509.     I  am  unable  to  say  what  was  intended. 


348  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

Theis  to  the  honourable  Henery  Scobell  esq  ;  clerk  of  his  hignes  privy  councill 
at  Whitehall,  present." 

"Worthy  Sir,  I  have  lately  received  a  letter  from  Mr.  Griffith,  in  name  of 
the  brethren  at  London,  whereby  I  am  desired  to  certify  you  of  the  receipt  thereof. 
This  is  then  only  to  let  you  understand,  that  on  the  xxvi.  of  August  I  received  his 
letters  dated  the  xx.  of  August.  And  I  shall  take  care  that  coppyes  of  the  letters  be 
sent  unto  all  the  churches  in  our  countye; '  continueing 

your  servant  in  the  gospel  of  Christ  Jesus, 
Yarmouth,  Aug.  xxviii.  William  Bridge." 

MDCLVIII. 

In  a  similar  way  William  Hughes  of  Marlborough  promised  to 
notify  the  churches  of  Wiltshire,  Bankes  Anderson  of  Boston  and 
Edward  Reyner  of  Lincoln  those  of  Lincolnshire,  Isaac  Loeffs  of 
Shenley  the  congregations  of  Hertfordshire,  Thomas  Gilbert  of 
Edgemond  those  of  Salop,  Samuel  Crossman  of  Sudbury  those  of 
Suffolk,  Anthony  Palmer  and  Carnfelms?]  Helme  of  Bourton-on- 
the-water  the  churches  of  Gloucestershire,  Thomas  Palmer  of 
Aston-upon-Trent  those  of  Derby  and  Nottinghamshire,  John 
Player  of  Canterbury  those  of  Kent,  while  Vavasor  Powell  under- 
took to  inform  the  churches  of  W'ales.  Most  of  the  answers, 
though  brief,  are  cordial,  one  or  two  are  apparently  guarded,  and 
one  slightly  suspicious  that  some  political  design  might  be  lurking 
behind  the  proposed  Synod,5  but,  speaking  in  general,  the  letters 
make  it  evident  that  the  response  of  the  ministers  as  a  whole  was 
hearty. 

Between  the  sending  of  the  summons  and  the  meeting  of  the 
Synod  a  momentous  event  occurred,  the  full  political  and  ecclesi- 
astical significance  of  which  was  not  at  once  apparent,  but  which 
was  to  render  futile  much  of  the  work  of  the  Synod.  The  great 
Protector  died,  September  3,  1658,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  feeble 
son,  Richard.  In  spite  of  this  untoward  event,  however,  the  Synod 
met  at  the  Savoy  at  the  time  appointed,  September  29,  having 
present  the  representatives  of  about  a  hundred  and  twenty 
churches.3     It  is  probable  that  the  majority  were  laymen,4  as  at 


1  Norfolk.  a  That  of  Thomas  Gilbert  of  Edgemond,  Peck,  II :  509. 

3  Increase  Mather,  who  was  in  England  during  the  session  of  the  Synod,  said,  writing  i:i 
1700  [Order  0/  the  Gospel,  p.  75):  "  Messengers  of  One  hundred  and  Twenty  Congregational 
Churches  in  England,  who  met  at  the  Savoy  in  London."  Orme,  Works  0/  John  Owen,  1  :  176, 
gives  the  total  membership  at  the  very  probable  figure  of  "about  two  hundred,"  and  Dr.  Dexter 
follows  him. 

*  Neal,  Puritans,  ed.  New  Vork,  1844,  II  :  178,  asserts  this. 


ORGANIZATION    OF    THE    SYNOD  349 

the  Massachusetts  Synod  of  1662;  but  the  leading  Congregational 
ministers  of  England  were  of  the  membership.  Who  its  modera- 
tors were  it  is  impossible  to  say,  but  Thomas  Goodwin,  John  Owen, 
and  Philip  Nye  '  were  all  prominent  in  its  proceedings,  and  were 
each  well  fitted  for  such  a  duty;  John  Howe,  the  Protector's  chap- 
lain, though  conspicuous,  was  probably  too  young  to  have  any  very 
important  part. 

The  opening  day  was  spent  in  discussion  as  to  the  course  of 
procedure,2  the  question  being,  as  reported  by  tradition  when  Neal 
wrote,  whether  they  should  amend  the  Westminster  Confession,  or 
draw  up  a  new  symbol  on  substantially  the  same  lines.3  The  latter 
plan  prevailed,  and  a  Committee  of  the  most  influential  divines 
that  Congregationalism  could  boast,  Thomas  Goodwin,  John  Owen, 
Philip  Nye,  William  Bridge,  Joseph  Caryl,  and  William  Greenhill, 
were  chosen  to  prepare  and  report  the  desired  confession.4  Every 
member  of  this  Committee  except  Owen  had  borne  his  share  in 
the  Westminster  Assembly.  At  the  same  time  George  Griffith  was 
elected  scribe  of  the  Synod.5  The  work  of  the  Committee,  so  far 
as  completed,  was  reported  each  morning  by  the  scribe  to  the 
whole  Assembly,6  and  discussed,  sometimes  in  speeches  of  consid- 
erable elaboration;7  but  so  little  was  there  of  novelty  in  the  result, 
that  the  Synod,  having  much  time  on  its  hands,  was  able  to  devote 
a  large  portion  of  its  hours  to  hearing  disputes  in  churches8  and  to 
the  more  devotional  exercises  of  fasting  and  prayer.9  Even  thus 
the  session  was  brief.  The  labors  of  the  Committee  were  unani- 
mously approved,10  and  the  Savoy  Synod  adjourned  on  Tuesday, 


1  Of  Nye,  Calamy  records,  he  "  was  a  principal  person  in  managing  the  meeting  of  the  con~ 
gregational  churches  at  the  Savoy"     Non-Conformist's  Memorial,  ed.  London,  1775,  I:  87. 

2  The  Preface  says,  p.  xi,  "  The  first  days  meeting,  in  which  we  considered  and  debated  what 
to  pitch  upon."  Neal  recorded,  Puritans,  II  :  178  :  "  They  opened  their  synod  with  a  day  of  fast- 
ing and  prayer."     There  is  no  necessary  conflict  between  the  two  statements. 

3  Neal,  Puritans,  II :  178.     Neal's  work  was  originally  published  in  1732-38. 

4  Ibid.  5  md.  6  Hid. 

7  "  Such  rare  elaborate  speeches  my  ears  never  heard  before,  nor  since.  All  along,  there  was 
a  most  sweet  harmony  of  both  hearts  and  judgments  amongst  them."  Rev.  James  Forbes,  a  mem- 
ber, quoted  by  Orme,  Works  0/  John  Owen,  1 :  181. 

B  Neal,  Ibid. 

9  "We  had  some  days  of  prayer  and  fasting,  kept  from  morning  till  night,"  James  Forbes, 
quoted  by  Orme. 

10  Calamy,  Account  0/  the  Ministers,  etc.,  ed.  London,  1713,  II :  444.  See  also  Preface  to 
the  Declaratioti  itself,  p.  xi. 


35©  THE    SAVOY    DECLARATION 

October  12,  1658,  after  a  session  of  twelve  working  days.1  Shortly 
after,  the  result  was  formally  presented  to  the  new  Protector, 
Richard  Cromwell,  by  Rev.  Thomas  Goodwin,  who  had  been  dele- 
gated for  that  work  by  the  Assembly.2 

The  Savoy  Synod  seem  to  have  been  almost  surprised  at  the 
unanimity  which  they  discovered  among  the  representatives  of  the 
churches,  a  unanimity  that  was  the  more  gratifying  since  these 
churches  had  never  had  any  previous  consultation;3  and  the  writer 
of  the  Preface  to  the  Declaration  was  convinced  that  such  unity 
must  be  the  direct  work  of  the  Spirit  of  God.4  Without  question- 
ing his  faith,  however,  it  is  easy  to  discover  causes  less  clearly 
supernatural.  There  was  very  little  that  was  original  in  the  work 
of  the  Synod.  The  Committee  which  prepared  the  result  had 
shared,  for  the  most  part,  in  the  deliberations  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly.  Like  the  Congregationalists  of  New  England,  they  had 
nothing  but  approval  for  most  of  the  doctrinal  work  of  that 
famous  body.  Some  sections  of  the  Westminster  Confession  they 
desired  to  omit;  but  even  here  their  task  had  largely  been  mapped 
out  for  them,  for  Parliament  in  approving  the  Westminster  result 
had  struck  out  those  sections  most  displeasing  to  the  Independ- 
ents.5 The  work  of  omission  was  thus  comparatively  easy;  the 
Committee  simply  did  more  largely  what  Parliament  had  begun. 
But  beside  these  omissions,  the  Savoy  divines  amended  the  phrase- 
ology of  many  passages,  in  general  without  important  alteration  of 
the  sense;  this  is  notably  the  case  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  (on  Re- 
pentance),  which   was   wholly   rewritten.       They   emphasized    the 


'  Compare  Preface,  p.  xi,  where  eleven  working  days  are  reckoned,  omitting  the  opening  day. 

2  See  Orme,  Works  of  John  O-.ven,  I  :  182,  183,  where  a  quotation  is  given  from  Goodwin's 
address  to  the  Protector.  Orme  quotes  from  a  Catalogue  0/  the  places  where  Richard  Cromwell 
was  proclaimed,  p.  25. 

3  Pre/ace,  p.  xiii. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  xii. 

5  The  Westminster  Confession  was  reported  to  Parliament  Dec.  4,  1646,  under  the  title  of 
Humble  Advice  0/  the  Assembly  0/  Divines.  But  the  Commons  moved  slowly.  On  April  22, 
1647,  they  asked  for  proof-texts,  which  the  Afsembly  furnished.  Still  they  were  not  satisfied.  The 
less  reluctant  General  Assembly  of  Scotland  adopted  the  Confession,  as  it  came  from  the  Assembly 
at  Westminster,  on  Aug.  27,  1647;  but  Parliament  still  debated,  and  finally,  on  June  20,  1648,  adopted 
the  Confession,  with  the  omission  of  Ch.  XX,  §  4  (relating  to  the  punishment  of  heresy, 
XXIV,  §§  4  (in  part),  5,  6  (on  divorce);  Ch.  XXX  entire  (on  church  censures);  and  Ch.  XXXI  en- 
tire (on  synods  and  councils).  At  the  same  time  Parliament  changed  the  title  to  A  rticles  0/ 
Christian  Religion.  The  fact  that  Scotland  adopted  the  original  form,  and  that  Presbyturianism 
soon  broke  down  in  England,  prevented  the  emendations  of  Parliament  from  acquiring  permanency. 


NATURE   OF   THE   DECLARATION  35  I 

vicarious  nature  of  Christ's  sacrifice  in  chapters  eight  and  eleven. 
They  defined  the  nature  of  the  law  given  to  Adam  in  chapter  nine- 
teen. They  asserted  the  rightfulness  of  toleration  in  non-essen- 
tials in  chapter  twenty-four.  They  omitted  the  declaration  that 
baptism  admits  to  the  visible  church  in  chapter  twenty-nine.  All 
these  changes  are  of  a  minor  nature.  More  important  is  the  addi- 
tion of  a  whole  chapter,  the  twentieth,  Of  the  Gospel,  and  of  the 
extent  of  the  Grace  thereof,  which  though  intensely  Calvinistic,  and 
in  no  way  antagonistic  to  the  Westminster  Confession,  is  neverthe- 
less a  pleasing  token  of  that  readiness,  always  characteristic  of 
Congregationalism,  to  hold  forth  the  more  gracious  aspects  of  the 
religion  of  Christ,  in  at  least  as  clear  a  light  as  the  sanctions  of 
law.  Yet  when  these  alterations  in  the  Confession  have  been 
summed  up,  the  impression  remains  that  all  that  was  really  essen- 
tial had  been  anticipated  in  the  omissions  made  by  Parliament. 
No  wonder  such  slight  emendations,  suggested  by  men  of  such 
influence,  found  ready  acceptance. 

The  really  original  work  of  the  Savoy  Synod  was  not  upon  the 
Confession,  but  is  contained  in  the  thirty  sections  relating  to 
church-order  appended  to  it.  Here  is  a  brief,  compact,  and  lucid 
presentation  of  the  main  features  of  Congregationalism:  —  the 
headship  of  Christ,  the  constitution  of  the  local  church  by  the 
union  of  believers,  its  complete  autonomy,  its  right  to  choose  and 
ordain  the  officers  appointed  by  Christ,  the  necessity  of  a  call  from 
a  church  to  confer  ministerial  standing,  the  consent  of  the 
brethren  as  essential  to  all  admissions  and  censures,  synods  or 
councils  for  advice  but  without  judicial  authority.  But  though 
these  principles  are  made  evident,  and  though  they  would  hardly 
have  been  so  fully  formulated  had  it  not  been  for  the  Cambridge 
Platform,  the  thirty  sections  adopted  at  the  Savoy  are  far  inferior 
as  a  working  manual  to  the  New  England  document.  They 
breathe  the  hazy  atmosphere  of  theoretic  and  non-consolidated 
Congregationalism,  resembling  in  this  respect  the  symbols  of  the 
closing  years  of  the  previous  century.  The  grand  outlines  of  the 
polity  are  rough-drawn,  but  the  detail  is  not  yet  sketched  in.  The 
men  who  drew  it  had  not  beheld  the  workings  of  Congregational- 


352  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

ism  as  an  exclusive  or  even  predominant  polity.1  Had  they  done 
so  they  would  have  attempted  to  answer  some  of  the  practical 
questions  which  such  an  experience  would  have  raised.  There  is 
also  not  the  slightest  hint  in  the  document  that  the  divines  at  the 
Savoy  felt  any  interest  in  those  questions  regarding  baptism  and 
church  membership  by  which  contemporary  New  England  was 
being  turmoiled. 

As  presented  to  the  public,  the  result  of  the  Savoy  Assembly 
was  preceded,  it  cannot  be  said  fortified,  by  a  long,  dreary  Preface, 
alleged  to  have  been  written  by  John  Owen.2  If  that  able  man 
really  wrote  it,  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  he  did,  it  is  certainly 
one  of  the  weakest  productions  that  ever  came  from  his  pen.3  Its 
chief  merit,  aside  from  the  few  facts  which  it  contains  as  to  the 
course  of  events  in  the  Synod,  is  its  spirit  of  tolerance  toward 
Christians  of  differing  beliefs,  —  a  tolerance  as  creditable  as  it  was 
unusual  in  that  age.4 

The  Savoy  Synod  and  its  Declaration  faded  quickly  from 
men's  minds  in  the  turmoils  of  Richard  Cromwell's  protectorate 
and  the  ruin  which  overtook  Independents  and  Presbyterians  alike 
at  the  Restoration.  It  excited  no  controversy,  save  a  bitter  de- 
nunciation from  Richard  Baxter,  who  looked  upon  it  as  a  menace 
to  the  union  of  Presbyterians  and  Independents  which  he  desired 
to  effect;5  and  a  criticism,  at  a  later  period,  upon  its  orthodoxy 
and  consistency  by  Peter  du  Moulin,  an  Anglican  minister  of  French 


l  A  number  of  those  who  sat  in  the  Assembly  at  the  Savoy  must  have  been  in  New  England, 
but  none  such  were  of  the  committee  to  whom  the  formulation  of  the  result  was  entrusted. 

9  Orme,  Works  of  John  Owen,  I:  177,  Owen  is  too  well  known  to  need  any  extended 
notice.  He  was  born  in  1616,  graduated  at  Oxford  1!,A,  in  1632  and  M.A.  in  1635,  entered  holy 
orders,  but  believed  that  he  experienced  conversion  some  time  after  through  a  chance  sermon.  He 
became  identified  with  the  Presbyterian  wing  of  Puritanism,  but  was  turned  to  Congregationalism 
by  Cotton's  Keyes,  which  he  first  read  with  the  intention  of  refuting.  In  1651  he  was  made  dean  of 
Christ  Church  Coll,,  Oxford,  he  sat  in  Parliament  as  representative  of  the  University,  in  1654  he 
became  one  of  the  "Trycrs"  for  ministerial  fitness.  The  returned  Presbyterian  Parliament  put 
him  out  of  office  at  Oxford  in  March,  1665,  In  1663  he  was  invited  to  fill  the  place  of  Norton  as 
teacher  of  the  Boston,  Mass,,  church,  but  declined,  thinking  himsolf  more  needed  in  England.  He 
24,  1683,  The  best  account  of  him  is  that  by  Orme,  ll'oris  0/  John  Owen,  London, 
1826,  Vol.  I,,  where  a  full  list  of  his  numerous  writings  will  be  found, 

8  1  H-xter,  Cong,  as  seen,  styles  it :  "  over  long  and  not  over  strong." 

4  See  Pre/aee,  pp.  iii,  iv,  viii-x. 

5  For  the  ungenerous  criticisms  passed  by  Baxter  on  the  Declaration  and  its  framers,  see  his 
autobiography,  Mr.  Richard  Baxter's  Narrative  0/  tin-  Most  Memorable  Passages  0/  his  Life 
and  Times,  Sylvester's  ed.,  London,  1696,  Pt,  I:  pp.  103,  104,  Compare  Neal,  Puritans,  ed.  New 
York,  1844,  II:  179,  180, 


FATE   OF   THE    DECLARATION  353 

birth,  who  had  misunderstood  its  teachings  or  obtained  an  erroneous 
copy  of  its  Declaration.  To  the  latter  critic  Owen  replied  with 
some  asperity.1  In  England  the  course  of  events  buried  the  Savoy 
Declaration  in  such  oblivion  that  when  Neal  wrote,  three-quarters 
of  a  century  after  its  publication,  he  could  affirm  that  even  the 
Independents  of  his  day  had  largely  laid  it  aside  for  the  more 
familiar  works  of  the  Westminster  Assembly.2  Had  the  Savoy 
Declaration  never  gone  beyond  the  shores  of  the  land  of  its  birth 
it  would  have  been  one  of  the  most  ephemeral  of  symbols;  but  its 
lasting  use  was  to  be  in  New  England.  Adopted  by  a  Massachu- 
setts Synod  at  Boston  in  1680  with  a  few  immaterial  modifications, 
and  similarly  accepted  for  Connecticut  at  Saybrook  in  1708,  its 
doctrinal  confession  long  continued  a  recognized  standard  for  the 
Congregational  churches  of  America.  They  have  never  formally 
set  it  aside,  and  though  in  Congregational  polity  a  general  creed 
has  binding  authority  only  in  so  far  as  local  churches  accept  it, 
this  Savoy  Confession,  as  slightly  changed  in  1680,  was  declared 
by  the  Council  of  1865 — an  assembly  representative  of  the  whole 
body  of  the  Congregational  churches  of  the  United  States  —  to 
embody  substantially  the  faith  to  which  those  churches  are 
pledged.3  In  its  Saybrook  form  it  was  established  by  law  as  the 
recognized  doctrinal  standard  of  the  churches  of  Connecticut,  and 
so  continued  till  1784.  The  appended  sections  regarding  church 
order  were  never  ratified  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic;  in  New  Eng- 
land the  ampler  Platform  adopted  at  Cambridge  in  1648  rendered 
them  superfluous,  and  it  was,  therefore,  only  the  Savoy  Synod's 
amended  form  of  the  Westminster  Confession  that  survived  the 
downfall  of  the  English  Commonwealth. 


1  The  reply  of  Owen  to  Du  Moulin  gives  us  our  knowledge  of  this  controversy.  It  may  be 
found  in  Orme's  Memoir,  Works  of  John  Owen,  I:  365-368.  Though  undated,  a  reference  to 
Owen's  Doctrine  0/  Justification  shows  that  the  letter  must  be  later  than  1677. 

2  Neal,  Puritans,  II:   17S. 

3  Burial  Hill  Declaration,  on  later  page  of  this  work  :  "  We,  Elders  and  Messengers  of  the 
Congregational  churches  of  the  United  States  in  National  Council  assembled,  ...  do  now  de- 
clare our  adherence  to  the  faith  and  order  of  the  apostolic  and  primitive  churches  held  by  our 
fathers,  and  substantially  as  embodied  in  the  confessions  and  platforms  which  our  Synods  of  1648  and 
1680  set  forth  or  reaffirmed." 


THE   SAVOY    DECLARATION 

A  |  DECLARATION  |  of  the  |  FAITH  and  ORDER  | 
Owned  and  practised  in  the  |  Congregational  Churches 

I    ix   I    ENGLAND;   |    Agreed   upon  and  consented  unto    |   By 
their   |    ELDERS    and    MESSENGERS   |  IN  |  Their   Meeting    at 

the  SAVOY,   October   12.    1658.  |  |  |  LONDON:  \ 

Printed  by  John  Field,  and  are  to  be  sold  by  |  John  Allen  at  the 
Sun  Rising  in  Pauls  |  Church-yard,  1658. 

[ii  blank] 
[Hi] 

A 

PREFACE. 

COnfcssion  of  the  Faith  that  is  in  us,  when  justly  called  for,  is  so  indispen- 
sable a  due  all  owe  to  the  Glory  of  the  Soveraign  GOD,  that  it  is  ranked 
among  the  Duties  of  the  first  Commandment,  such  as  Prayer  is  ;  and  there- 
fore by  Paul  yoaked  with  Faith  it  self,  as  necessary  to  salvation:  With  the  heart 
man  believeth  unto  righteousness,  and  with  mouth  confession  is  made  unto  sal- 
vation. Our  Lord  Christ  himself,  when  he  was  accused  of  his  Doctrine,  consid- 
ered simply  as  a  matter  of  fact  by  preaching,  refused  to  answer;  because,  as  such, 
it  lay  upon  evidence,  and  matter  of  testimony  of  others;  unto  whom  therefore  he 
refers  himself:  But  when  both  the  High  Priest  and  Pilate  expostulate  his  Faith, 
and  what  he  held  himself  to  be  ;  he  without  any  demur  at  all,  cheerfully  makes 
declaration,  That  he  was  the  Son  of  COD  ;  so  to  the  High  Priest :  And  that  he 
was  a  King,  and  born  to  be  a  King  ;  thus  to  Pilate  ;  though  upon  the  uttering  of 
it  his  life  lay  at  the  stake  :  Which  holy  profession  of  his  is  celebrated  for  our 
example,  I   Tim.  6.  13. 

Confessions,  when   made  by   a  company  of  professors   of  Christianity  joyntly 
meeting  to  that  end,   the  most   genuine  and   natural   use  of  such    Confessions  is, 
That  under  the  same  form  of  words,  they  express  the  substance  of  the  same  com- 
mon salvation,  or  unity  of  their  faith  ;  whereby  speaking  the  same  thin 
shew  themselves  perfectly  joyned  in  [iv]  the  same  minde,  and  in  the       <  l-(,r-  '•' 
same  judgement. 

And  accordingly  such  a  transaction  is  to  be  looked  upon  but  as  a  meet  or  fit 
medium  or  means  whereby  to  express  that  their  common  faith  and  salvation,  and 


i;:al  these  references  are  on  the  margin. 

(354) 


PREFACE  TO  THE  DECLARATION  355 

no  way  to  be  made  use  of  as  an  imposition  upon  any  ;  Whatever  is  of  force  or 
constraint  in  matters  of  this  nature  causeth  them  to  degenerate  from  the  name  and 
nature  of  Confessions,  and  turns  them  from  being  Confessions  of  Faith,  into  exac- 
tions and  impositions  of  Faith. 

And  such  common   Confessions  of  the  Orthodox  Faith,  made  in   simplicity  of 
heart  by  any  such   Body  of  Christians,  with  concord  among  themselves,   ought  to 
be  entertained  by   all  others   that    love   the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus, 
with  an  answerable  rejoycing  :    I7or  if  the  unanimous  opinions  and       Acts  15. 
assertions    but   in   some   few    points  of   Religion,   and   that  when   by 
two    Churches,   namely,   that   of  Jerusalem,  and  the  Messengers  of  Antioch   met, 
assisted  by  some  of  the  Apostles,   were  by  the  Believers  of  those   times  received 
with   so  much  joy,   (as   it  is   said,    They  refoyced  for  the  consolation)  much   more 
this  is  to  be  done,  when  the  whole  substance  of  Faith,  and  form  of  wholesome  words 
shall  be  declared  by  the   Messengers  of  a  multitude  of  Churches,  though  wanting 
those  advantages  of  counsel  and  authority  of  the  Apostles,  which  that  Assembly  had. 
Which  acceptation  is  then  more  specially  due,  when  these  shall  (to  choose) 
utter  and  declare  their  Faith,  in  the  same  substance  for  matter,  yea,  words,  for  the 
most  part,  that  other  Churches  and  Assemblies,  reputed  the  most  Orthodox,  have 
done  before  them :    For  upon   such    a  correspondency,    all  may    see    that   actually 
accomplished,  which  the  Apostle  did  but  exhort  unto,  and  pray  for, 
in    those   two  more   eminent    Churches   of    the   Corinthians  and    the       6  °™' 15' 
Romans  ;  [v]  (and  so  in  them  for  all  the  Christians  of  his  time)  that 
both  Jew  and   Gentile,  that  is,  men  of  different  perswasions,  (as  they  were)  might 
glorife  GOD  with  one  minde  ami  with  one  mouth.     And  truly,  the  very  turning 
of  the  Gentiles  to  the  owning  of  the  same  Faith,  in  the  substance  of  it,  with  the 
Christian  Jew  (though  differing  in  greater  points  then  we  do  from  our  brethren) 
is  presently  after  dignified  by  the  Apostle  with  this  stile,  That  it  is  the  Confession 
of  Jesus  Christ  himself;  not  as  the  Object  onely,  but  as  the  Author 
and    Maker  thereof :    /  will  confess  to    thee  (saith    Christ  to    God)       v.  9. 
among  the  Gentiles.     So  that  in  all  such  accords,  Christ  is  the  great 
and  first  Confessor  ;  and  we,  and  all  our  Faith  uttered  by  us,  are  but  the  Epistles, 
(as  Paul)  and   Confessions  (as  Isaiah  there)  of  their  Lord  and  ours  ;   He,  but  ex- 
pressing what  is  written  in  his  heart,  through  their  hearts  and  mouthes,  to  the  glory 
of  God  the  Father  :    And   shall  not   we  all   rejoyce  herein,  when  as  Christ  himself 
is  said  to  do  it  upon  this  occasion :  as  it  there  also  follows,  /  will  sing  unto  thy 
Name. 

Further,  as  the  soundness  and  wholsomness  of  the  matter  gives  the  vigor  and 
life  to  such  Confessions,  so  the  inward  frceness,  'willingness  and  readiness  of  the 
spirits  of  the  Confessors  do  contribute  the  beauty  and  loveliness  thereunto  :  as  it  is 
in  Prayer  to  God,  so  in  Confessions  made  to  men.  If  two  or  three  met,  do  agree, 
it  renders  both,  to  either  the  more  acceptable.  The  Spirit  of  Christ  is  in  himself 
too  free,  great  and  generous  a  Spirit,  to  suffer  himself  to  be  used  by  any  humane 
arm,  to  whip  men  into  belief  ;  he  drives  not,  but  gently  leads  into  all  truth,  and 
perswades  men  to  dwell  in  the  tents  of  like  precious  Faith  ;  which  would  lose  of 
its  preciousness  and  value,  if  that  sparkle  of  freeness  shone  not  in  it :  The  char- 
acter of  his  people  is  to  be  a  willing  people  in  the  day  of  his  [vi]  power,  (not 
Mans)//;  the  levities  of  holiness,  which  are  the  Assemblings  of  the  Saints:  one 
glory  of  which  Assemblings  in  that  first  Church,  is  said  to  have  been,  They  met 
with  one  accord ;  which  is  there  in  that  Psalm  prophesied  of,  in  the  instance  of 
that  first  Church,  for  all  oHier  that  should  succeed. 


356  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

And  as  this  great  Spirit  is  in  himself  free,  when,  and  how  far,  and  in  whom 
to  work,  so  where  and  when  he  doth  work,  he  carrieth  it  with  the  same  freedom, 
and  is  said  to  be  a  free  Spirit,  as  he  both  is,  and  works  in  us  :  And  where  this 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  is,  there  is  Liberty. 

Now,  as  to  this  Confession  of  ours,  besides,  that  a  conspicuous  conjunction 
of  the  particulars  mentioned,  hath  appeared  therein:  There  are  also  four  remark- 
able Attendants  thereon,  which  added,  might  perhaps  in  the  eyes  of  sober  and 
indifferent  spirits,  give  the  whole  of  this  Transaction  a  room  and  rank  amongst 
other  many  good  and  memorable  things  of  this  age  ;  at  least  all  set  together,  do 
cast  as  clear  a  gleam  and  manifestation  of  Gods  Power  and  Presence,  as  hath 
appeared  in  any  such  kinde  of  Confessions,  made  by  so  numerous  a  company  these 
later  years. 

The  first,  is  the  Temper,  (or  distemper  rather)  of  the  times,  during  which, 
these  Churches  have  been  gathering,  and  which  they  have  run  through.  All  do 
(out  of  a  general  sense)  complain  that  the  times  have  been  perillous,  or  difficult 
times ;  (as  the  Apostle  foretold)  and  that  in  respect  to  danger  from  seducing  spirits, 
more  perillous  then  the  hottest  seasons  of  Persecution.  We  have  sailed  through 
an  .Estuation,  Fluxes  and  Refluxes  of  great  varieties  of  Spirits,  Doctrines,  Opin- 
ions and  Occurrences  ;  and  especially  in  the  matter  of  Opinions,  which  have  been 
accompanied  [vii]  in  their  several  seasons,  with  powerful  perswasions  and  tempta- 
tions, to  seduce  those  of  our  way.  It  is  known  men  have  taken  the  freedom  (not- 
withstanding what  Authority  hath  interposed  to  the  contrary)  to  vent  and  vend 
their  own  vain  and  accursed  imaginations,  contrary  to  the  great  and  fixed  Truths 
of  the  Gospel,  insomuch,  as  take  the  whole  round  and  circle  of  delusions,  the 
Devil  hath  in  this  small  time,  ran,  it  will  be  found,  that  every  truth,  of  greater 
or  lesser  weight,  hath  by  one  or  other  hand,  at  one  time  or  another,  been  ques- 
tioned and  called  to  the  Bar  amongst  Us,  yea,  and  impleaded,  under  the  pretext 
(which  hath  some  degree  of  Justice  in  it)  that  all  should  not  be  bound  up  to  the 
Traditions  of  former  times,  nor  take  Religion  upon  trust. 

Whence  it  hath  come  to  pass,  that  many  of  the  soundest  Professors  were 
put  upon  a  new  search  and  disquisition  of  such  truths,  as  they  had  taken  for 
granted,  and  yet  had  lived  upon  the  comfort  of :  to  the  end  they  might  be  able 
to  convince  others,  and  establish  their  own  hearts  against  that  darkness  and  unbe- 
lief, that  is  ready  to  close  with  error,  or  at  least  to  doubt  of  the  truth,  when  error 
is  speciously  presented.  And  hereupon  we  do  professedly  account  it  one  of  the 
greatest  advantages  gained  out  of  the  temptations  of  these  times  ;  yea  the  honor  of 
the  Saints  and  Ministers  of  these  Nations,  That  after  they  had  sweetly  been  exer- 
cised in,  and  had  improved  practical  and  experimental  Truths,  this  should  be  their 
further  lot,  to  examine  and  discuss,  and  indeed,  anew  to  learn  over  every  Doctrinal 
'Truth,  both  out  of  the  Scriptures,  and  also  with  a  fresh  taste  thereof  in  their 
own  hearts  ;  which  is  no  other  then  what  the  Apostle  exhorts  to,  Try  all  things, 
holdfast  that  which  is  good.  Conversion  unto  God  at  first,  what  is  it  else  [viii] 
then  a  savory  and  affectionate  application,  and  the  bringing  home  to  the  heart 
with  spiritual  light  and  life,  all  truths  that  are  necessary  to  salvation,  together  with 
oilier  lesser  truths?  all  which  we  had  afore  conversion  taken  in  but  notionally  from 
common  education  and  tradition. 

Now  that  after  this  first  gust  those  who  have  bin  thus  converted  should  be 
put  upon  a  new  probation  and  search  out  of  the  Scriptures,  not  onely  of  all  princi- 


PREFACE   TO   THE   DECLARATION  357 

pies  explicitely  ingredients  to  Conversion  ;  (unto  which  the  Apostle  re- 

ferreth  the  Galatians  when  they  had  diverted  from  them)  but  of  all      This  perswa- 

other  superstructures  as  well  as  fundamentals  ;  and  together  therewith,      not   of    him 

anew   to   experiment   the  power    and   sweetness  of  all   these   in   their      ^at    calleth 

own  souls  :  What  is  this  but   tryed  Faith  indeed  ?  and  equivalent  to  Gal.  5.  8. 

a   new  conversion    unto    the  truth?      An    Anchor   that    is   proved   to 

be  sure  and  stedfast,  that  will  certainly  hold  in  all  contrary  storms :  This  was  the 

eminent  seal  and  commendation  which  those  holy  Apostles  that  lived  and  wrote 

last  ;  Peter,  John  and  Jute  ;  in  their  Epistles  did   set  and  give  to   the   Christians 

of  the  latter  part  of  those  primitive  times.     And  besides,  it  is  clear  and  evident 

by  all  the  other  Epistles,  from  first  to  last,  that  it  cost  the  Apostles 

as   much,   and   far  more   care   and    pains   to   preserve  them   they  had 

converted,  in  the  truth,  then  they  had  taken  to  turn  them  thereunto     J  Pet-  '•  5- 

at  first :  And  it   is   in    it  self   as  great   a   work   and    instance  of  the 

power  of  God,  that  keeps,  yea,  guards  us  through  faith  unto  salvation. 

Secondly,  let  this  be  added,  (or  superadded  rather)  to  give  full  weight  and 
measure,  even  to  running  over),  that  we  have  all  along  this  season,  held  forth 
(though  quarreled  with  for  it  by  our  brethren)  this  great  principle  of  these  times. 
That  amongst  all  Christian  States  and  Churches,  there  [ix]  ought  to  be  vouchsafed 
a  forbearance  and  mutual  indulgence  unto  Saints  of  all  pcrswasions ,  that  keep 
unto,  and  hold  fast  the  necessary  foundations  of  faith  and  holiness,  in  all  other 
matters  extrafundamental,  whether  of  Faith  or  Order. 

This  to  have  been  our  constant  principle,  we  are  not  ashamed  to  confess  to 
the  whole  Christian  world.  Wherein  yet  we  desire  we  may  be  understood,  not  as 
if  in  the  abstract  we  stood  indifferent  to  falsehood  or  truth,  or  were  careless  whether 
faith  or  error,  in  any  Truths  but  fundamental,  did  obtain  or  not,  so  we  had  our 
liberty  in  our  petty  and  smaller  differences :  or  as  if  to  make  sure  of  that,  we  had 
cut  out  this  wide  cloak  for  it :  No,  we  profess  that  the  whole,  and  every  particle  of 
that  Faith  delivered  to  the  Saints,  (the  substance  of  which  we  have  according  to 
our  light  here  professed)  is,  as  to  the  propagation  and  furtherance  of  it  by  all 
Gospel-means,  as  precious  to  us  as  our  lives  ;  or  what  can  be  supposed  dear  to 
us ;  and  in  our  sphere  we  have  endeavored  to  promote  them  accordingly  :  But 
yet  withall,  we  have  and  do  contend,  (and  if  we  had  all  the  power  which  any,  or 
all  of  our  brethren  of  differing  opinions  have  desired  to  have  over  us,  or  others, 
we  should  freely  grant  it  unto  them  all)  we  have  and  do  contend  for  this,  That  in 
the  concrete,  the  persons  of  all  such  gracious  Saints,  they  and  their  errors,  as  they 
are  in  them,  when  they  are  but  such  errors  as  do  and  may  stand  with  communion 
with  Christ,  though  they  should  not  repent  of  them,  as  not  being  convinced  of  them 
to  the  end  of  their  days  ;  that  those,  with  their  errors  (that  are  purely  spiritual, 
and  intrench  and  overthrow  not  civil  societies),  as  concrete  with  their  persons, 
should  for  Christs  sake  be  born  withall  by  all  Christians  in  the  world  ;  and  they 
notwithstanding  be  permitted  to  enjoy  all  Ordinances  and  spiritual  Priviledges 
according  to  their  light,  as  [x]  freely  as  any  other  of  their  brethren  that  pretend 
to  the  greatest  Orthodoxity  ;  as  having  as  equal,  and  as  fair  a  right  in  and  unto 
Christ,  and  all  the  holy  things  of  Christ,  that  any  other  can  challenge  to  themselves. 

And  this  doth  afford  a  full  and  invincible  testimony  on  our  behalf,  in  that 
whiles  we  have  so  earnestly  contended  for  this  just  liberty  of  Saints  in  all  the 
Churches  of  Christ,  we  our  selves  have  had  no  need  of  it :  that  is  as  to  the  matter 
of  the  profession  of  Faith  which  we  have  maintained  together  with  others  :  and  of 


358  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

this,  this  subsequent  Confession  of  Faith  gives  sufficient  evidence.  So  as  we  have 
the  confidence  in  Christ,  to  utter  in  the  words  of  those  two  great  Apostles,  That 
we  have  stood  fast  in  the  liberty  wherewith  Christ  hath  made  us  free  (in  the  be- 
half of  others,  rather  then  our  selves)  and  having  been  free,  have  not  made  use 
of  out  [our]  liberty  for  a  cloak  of  error  or  maliciousness  in  our  selves  :  And  yet, 
loe,  whereas  from  the  beginning  of  the  rearing  of  these  Churches,  that  of  the 
Apostle  hath  been  (by  some)  prophecyed  of  us,  and  applyed  to  us,  That  whiles 
we  promised  (unto  others)  liberty,  we  our  selves  would  become  servants  of  corrup- 
tion, and  be  brought  in  bondage  to  all  sorts  of  fancies  and  imaginations  ;  yet  the 
whole  world  may  now  see  after  the  experience  of  many  years  ran  through  (and  it 
is  manifest  by  this  Confession)  that  the  great  and  gracious  God  hath  not  onely 
kept  us  in  that  common  unity  of  the  Faith  and  Knowledge  of  the  Son  of  God, 
which  the  whole  Community  of  Saints  have  and  shall  in  their  generations  come 
unto,  but  also  in  the  same  Truths,  both  small  and  great,  that  are  built  thereupon, 
that  any  other  of  the  best  and  more  pure  Reformed  Churches  in  their  best  times 
(which  were  their  first  times)  have  arrived  unto  :  This  Confession  withall  holding 
forth  a  professed  opposition  unto  the  common  errors  and  heresies  of  these  times. 

[xi]  These    two   considerations   have    been   taken    from    the   seasons   we   have 
gone  through. 

Thirdly,  let  the  space  of  time  it  self,  or  days,  wherein  from  first  to  last  the 
whole  of  this  Confession  was  framed  and  consented  to  by  the  whole  of  us,  be  duly 
considered  by  sober  and  ingenuous  spirits  :  the  whole  of  days  in  which  we  had 
meetings  about  it,  (set  aside  the  two  Lords  days,  and  the  first  days  meeting,  in 
which  we  considered  and  debated  what  to  pitch  upon)  were  but  eleven  days,  part 
of  which  also  was  spent  by  some  of  us  in  prayer,  others  in  consulting;  and  in  the 
end  all  agreeing.  We  mention  this  small  circumstance  but  to  this  end,  (which  still 
adds  unto  the  former)  That  it  gives  demonstration,  not  of  our  freeness  and  will- 
ingness onely,  but  of  our  readiness  and  preparedness  unto  so  great  a  work;  which 
otherwise,  and  in  other  Assemblies,  hath  ordinarily  taken  up  long  and  great  de- 
bates, as  in  such  a  variety  of  matters  of  such  concernment,  may  well  be  supposed 
to  fall  out.  And  this  is  no  other  then  what  the  Apostle  Peter  exhorts 
unto,  Be  ready  a/ways  to  give  an  answer  to  every  man  that  asketh  '  Pet-  3. 
you  a  reason  or  account  of  the  hope  that  is  in  you.  The  Apostle 
Paul  saith  of  the  spiritual  Truths  of  the  Gospel,  That  God  hath 
prepared  them  for  those  that  love  him.  The  inward  and  innate  8  Cor.  2. 
constitution  of  the  new  creature  being  in  it  self  such  as  is  suted  to 
all  those  Truths,  as  congenial  thereunto :  But  although  there  be  this  mutual 
adaptness  between  these  two,  yet  such  is  the  mixture  of  ignorance,  darkness  and 
unbelief,  carnal  reason,  preoccupation  of  judgement,  interest  of  parties,  wanton- 
ness in  opinion,  proud  adhering  to  our  own  perswasions,  and  perverse  oppositions 
and  aversness  to  agree  with  others,  and  a  multitude  of  such  like  distempers  com- 
mon  to  believing  man  :  All  which  are  not  onely  mixed  with,  but  at  times,  (especially 
in  [xii]  such  times  as  have  passed  over  our  heads)  are  ready  to  overcloud  our  judge- 
ments, and  do  cause  our  eyes  to  be  double,  and  sometimes  prevail  as  well  as 
lusts,  and  do  byass  our  wills  and  affections  :  And  such  is  their  mixture,  that 
although  there  may  be  existent  an  habitual  preparedness  in  mens  spirits,  yet  not 
always  a  present  readiness  [is]  to  be  found,  specially  not  in  such  a  various  multi- 
tude of  men,  to  make  a  solemn  and  deliberate  profession  of  all  truths,  it  being 
as  great  a  work  to  finde  the  spirits  of  the  just  (perhaps  the  best)  of  Saints,  ready 
for  every  truth,  as  to  be  prepared  for  every  good  work. 


PREFACE   TO   THE   DECLARATION  359 

It  is  therefore  to  be  looked  at  as  a  great  and  special  work  of  the  holy  Ghost, 
that  so  numerous  a  company  of  Ministers,  and  other  principal  brethren,  should 
so  readily,  speedily  and  joyntly  give  up  themselves  unto  such  a  whole  Body  of 
Truths  that  are  after  godliness. 

This  argues   they  had  not  their  faith  to  seek  ;  but,  as  it  said  of  Ezra,  that 
they  were  ready  Scribes,  and  (as  Christ)  instructed  unto  the  kingdom   of  heaven, 
being  as  the  good  hous holders  of    so  many  families  of  Christ,   /'ringing  forth  of 
their  store  and  treasury  New  and  Old.     It  shews  these   truths  had  been  familiar 
to  them,  and  they  acquainted  with  them,  as  with  their  daily  food  and  provision, 
(as  Christs  allusion  there  insinuates)  in  a  word,  that  so  they  had  preached,  and  that 
so  their  people  had  believed,  as  the  Apostle  speaks  upon  one  like  particular  occa- 
sion.    And  the  Apostle  Paul  considers  (in  cases  of  this  nature)  the  suddenness  or 
length  of  the  time,  either  one  way  or  the  other;  whether  it  were  in  mens  forsaking 
or  learning  of   the    truth.      Thus    the    suddenness   in   the    Galatians 
case    in    leaving    the    truth,    he    makes    a   wonder    of  it  :     /  marvel       Gal.  i.  6. 
that   you  are  SO  SOOX  (that  is,  in  so   short  a  time)  removed  from 
the  true  Gospel  unto  another.     Again  on  the  contrary,  in  the  Hebrews 
he  aggravates  their  back-  [xiii]  wardness,   That  -when  for  the  time  you       Heb.  5- 
ought  to  be  Teachers,  you  had  need  that  one  teach  you  the  very  first 
principles  of  the  Oracles  of  God.     The  Parable  contrary  to  both  these 
having  fallen  out  in  this  transaction,  may  have  some  ingredient  and  weight  with 
ingenuous   spirits   in   its  kinde,  according   to   the  proportion  is  put  upon  either  of 
these  forementioned  in  their  adverse  kinde,  and  obtain  the  like  special  observation. 

This  accord  of  ours  hath  fallen  out  without  having  held  any  correspondency 
together,  or  prepared  consultation,  by  which  we  might  come  to  be  advised  of 
one  anothers  mindes.  We  alledge  not  this  as  a  matter  of  commendation  in  us  ; 
no,  we  acknowledge  it  to  have  been  a  great  neglect  :  And  accordingly  one  of 
the  first  proposals  for  union  amongst  us  was,  That  there  might  be  a  constant 
correspondence  held  among  the  Churches  for  counsel  and  mutual  edification,  so 
for  time  to  come  to  prevent  the  like  omission. 

We  confess  that  from  the  first,  every,  or  at  least  the  generality  of  our  Churches, 
have  been  in  a  maner  like  so  many  Ships  (though  holding  forth  the  same  general 
colours)  lancht  singly,  and  sailing  apart  and  alone  in  the  vast  Ocean  of  these 
tumultuating  times,  and  they  exposed  to  every  wind  of  Doctrine,  under  no  other 
conduct  then  the  Word  and  Spirit,  and  their  particular  Elders  and  principal 
Brethren,  without  Associations  among  our  selves,  or  so  much  as  holding  out  com- 
mon lights  to  others,  whereby  to  know  where  we  were. 

But  yet  whitest  we  thus  confess  to  our  own  shame  this  neglect,  let  all  ac- 
knowledge, that  God  hath  ordered  it  for  his  high  and  greater  glory,  in  that  his 
singular  care  and  power  should  have  so  watcht  over  each  of  these,  as  that  all 
should  be  found  to  have  steered  their  course  by  the  same  [xiv]  Chart,  and  to 
have  been  bound  for  one  and  the  same  Port,  and  that  upon  this  general  search 
now  made,  that  the  same  holy  and  blessed  Truths  of  all  sorts,  which  are  currant 
and  warrantable  amongst  all  the  other  Churches  of  Christ  in  the  world,  should  be 
found  to  be  our  Lading. 

The  whole,  and  every  of  these  things  when  put  together,  do  cause  us  (what- 
ever men  of  prejudiced  and  opposite  spirits  may  finde  out  to  slight  them)  with 
a  holy  admiration,  to  say,  That  this  is  no  other  then  the  Lords  doing  ;  and  which 
we  with  thanksgiving  do  take  from  his  hand  as  a  special  token  upon  us  for  good,  and 


360  THE   SAVoV   DECLARATION 

doth  shew  that  Cod  is  faithful  and  upright  towards  those  that  are  planted  in  his 
In  use  :     And  that  as  the  Faith  was  but  once  for  all,  and  intentionally  first  delivered 
unto  the  Saints  ;  so  the  Saints,  when  not  abiding  scattered,  but  gathered  under  their 
respective  Pastors  according  to  Gods  heart  into  an  house,  and  Churches  unto  the  liv- 
ing God,  such  together  are,  as  Paul  forespake  it,  the  most  steady  and  firm  pillar  and 
seat  of  Truth  that  God  hath  any  where  appointed  to  himself  on  earth,  where  his 
truth  is  best  conserved,  and  publiquely  held  forth;  there  being  in  such  Assemblies 
weekly  a  rich  dwelling  of  the  Word  amongst  them,  that  is,  a  daily  open  house  kept 
by  the  means  of  those  good  Housholders,  their  Teachers  and  other  Instructers  re- 
spectively appropriated  to  them,  whom  Christ  in  the  vertue  of  his  Ascension,  con- 
tinues to  give  as  gifts  to  his  people,  himself  dwelling  amongst  them  ;  to  the  end  that 
by  this,  as  the  most  sure  standing  permanent  means,  the  Saints  might  be  perfected, 
till  7ve  all  (even  all    the  Saints  in  present  and  future  ages)  do  come  by  this  constant 
and  daily  Ordinance  of  his  unto  the  unity  of  the  Faith  and  Knowledge 
of  the  [xv]  Son  of  God  unto  a  perfect  man,  unto  the  measure  of  the       Eph.  4.  12. 
stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ  (which  though  growing  on  by  parts 
and  piecemeal,  will  yet  appear  compleat,  when  that  great  and  general  Assembly  shall 
be  gathered,  then  when  this  world  is  ended,  and  these  dispensations  have  had  their 
fulness  and  period)  and  so  that  from  henceforth  (such  a  provision  being 
made  for  us)  toe  be  no  more  children  tossed  to  and  fro,  and  carried       «4- 
about  with  every  wind  of  Doctrine. 

And  finally,   this  doth  give  a  fresh  and  recent  demonstration,   that  the  great 
Apostle   and    High-priest  of  our  profession  is  indeed   ascended  into 
heaven,  and  continues  there  with  power  and  care,  faithful  as  a  son       Heb.  3.  6. 
over  his  own  house,  whose  house  are  we,  if  7ie  hold  fast  the  confidence 
ami  the  rejoycing  of  the  hope  firm  unto  the  end :  and  shewes  that  he  will,  as  he  hath 
promised,  be  with  his  own  Institutions  to  the  end  of  the  world. 

It  is  true,  that  many  sad  miscarriages,  divisions,  breaches,  fallings  off  from  holy 
Ordinances  of  God,  have  along  this  time  of  tentation,  (especially  in  the  beginning  of 
it)  been  found  in  some  of  our  Churches  ;  and  no  wonder,  if  what  hath  been  said  be 
fully  considered:  Many  reasons  might  further  be  given  hereof,  that  would  be  a  suf- 
ficient Apology,  without  the  help  of  a  retortion  upon  other  Churches  (that  promised 
themselves  peace)  how  that  more  destroying  ruptures  have  befallen  them,  and  that  in 
a  wider  sphere  and  compass  ;  which  though  it  should  not  justifie  us,  yet  may  serve  to 
stop  others  mouthes. 

Let  Pome  glory  of  the  peace  in,  and  obedience  of  her  children,  against  the  Re- 
formed Churches  for  their  divisions  that  [xvi]  [oc]curred  (especially  in  the  first  rear- 
ing of  them)  whilest  we  all  know  the  causes  of  their  dull  and  stupid  peace  to  have 
been  carnal  interests,  worldly  correspondencies,  and  coalitions  strengthened  by  grati- 
fications of  all  sorts  of  men  by  that  Religion,  the  principles  of  blinde  Devotion, 
Traditional  Faith,  Ecclesiastical  Tyranny,  by  which  she  keeps  her  children  in  bond- 
age to  this  day.  We  are  also  certain,  that  the  very  same  prejudice  that  from  hence 
they  would  cast  upon  the  Reformed  (if  they  were  just)  do  lye  as  fully  against  those 
pure  Churches  raised  up  by  the  Apostles  themselves  in  those  first  times  :  for  as  we 
have  heard  of  their  patience,  sufferings,  consolations,  and  the  transcending  gifts 
poured  out,  and  graces  shining  in  them,  so  -we  have  heard  complaints 
of  their  divisions  too,  of  the  forsakings  of  their  Assemblies,  as  the  Heb.  10.  22. 
custom  or  mancr  of  SOME  was  (which  later  were  in  that  respect 
f clones  de  se,  and  needed  no  other  delivering  up  to  Satan  as  their  punishment,  then 


PREFACE    TO    THE    DECLARATION  361 

what  they  executed  upon  themselves.)  We  read  of  the  ship-wrack  also  of  Faith  and 
a  good  Conscience',  and  overthrowings  of  the  faith  of  SOME  ;  and  still  but  of  some, 
not  all,  nor  the  most :  which  is  one  piece  of  an  Apologie  the  Apostle  again  and 
again  inserts  to  future  ages,  and  through  mercy  we  have  the  same  to  make. 

And  truly  we  take  the  confidence  professedly  to  say,  that  these  tentations  com- 
mon to  the  purest  Churches  of  Saints  separated  from  the  mixture  of  the  world, 
though  they  grieve  us  (for  who  is  offended,  and  we  burn  not?)  yet  they  do  not  at  all 
stumble  us,  as  to  the  truth  of  our  way,  had  they  been  many  more  :  We  say  it  again, 
these  stumble  us  no  more  (as  to  that  point)  then  it  doth  offend  us  against  the  power 
of  Religion  it  self,  to  have  seen,  and  to  see  daily  in  particular  persons  called  out  and 
separated  from  the  world  [xvii]  by  an  effectual  work  of  conversion,  that  they  for  a 
while  do  suffer  under  disquietments,  vexations,  turmoils,  unsettlements  of  spirit, 
that  they  are  tossed  with  tempests  and  horrid  tentations,  such  as  they  had  not  in 
their  former  estate,  whilst  they  walked  according  to  the  course  of  this  world:  For 
Peter  hath  sufficiently  instructed  us  whose  business  it  is  to  raise  such  storms,  even 
the  Devil's  ;  and  also  whose  designe  it  is,  that  after  they  have  suffered  a  while, 
thereby  they  shall  be  setled,  perfected,  stablishcd,  that  have  so  suffered,  even  the 
God'  of  all  Grace.  And  look  what  course  of  dispensation  God  holds  to  Saints  per- 
sonally, he  doth  the  like  to  bodies  of  Saints  in  Churches,  and  the  Devil  the  same  for 
his  part  too  :  And  that  consolatory  Maxim  of  the  Apostle,  God  shall  tread  down 
Satan  under  your  feet  shortly,  which  Paul  uttereth  concerning  the  Church  of  Rome. 
shews  how  both  God  and  Satan  have  this  very  hand  therein  ;  for  he  speaks  that  very 
thing  in  reference  unto  their  divisions,  as  the  coherence  clearly  manifests ;  and  so 
you  have  both  designs  exprest  at  once. 

Yea,  we  are  not  a  little  induced  to  think,  that  the  divisions,  breaches,  cVc.  of 
those  primitive  Churches  would  not  have  been  so  frequent  among  the  people  them- 
selves, and  not  the  Elders  onely,  had  not  the  freedom,  liberties  and  rights  of  the 
Members  (the  Brethren,  we  mean)  been  stated  and  exercised  in  those  Churches,  the 
same  which  we  maintain  and  contend  for  to  be  in  ours. 

Yea  (which  perhaps  may  seem  more  strange  to  many)  had  not  those  Churches 
been  constituted  of  Members  inlightned  further  then  with  notional  and  traditional 
knowledge,  by  a  new  and  more  powerful  light  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  wherein  they  had 
been  made  partakers  of  the  holy  Ghost,  and  the  heavenly  gift,  and  their  hearts  had 
tasted  the  good  Word  of  [xviii]  God,  and  the  Powers  of  the  world  to  come,  and  of 
such  Members  at  lowest,  there  had  not  fallen  out  those  kindes  of  divisions  among 
them. 

For  experience  hath  shewn,  that  the  most  common  sort  of  meer  Doctrinal  Pro- 
fessors (such  as  the  most  are  now  a  days)  whose  highest  elevation  is  but  freedo?n 
from  moral  scandal  joyned  with  devotion  to  Christ  through  meer  education,  such  as 
in  many  Turks  is  found  towards  Mahomet,  that  these  finding  and  feeling  themselves 
not  much  concerned  in  the  active  part  of  Religion,  so  they  may  have  the  honor 
(especially  upon  a  Reformation  of  a  new  Refinement)  that  themselves  are  approved 
Members,  admitted  to  the  Lords  Supper,  and  their  children  to  the  Ordinance  of 
Baptism  ;  they  regard  not  other  matters  (as  Gallio  did  not)  but  do  easily  and  readily 
give  up  themselves  unto  their  Guides,  being  like  dead  fishes  carried  with  the  common 
stream  ;  whereas  those  that  have  a  further  renewed  light  by  a  work  of  the  holy 
Ghost,  whether  saving  or  temporary,  are  upon  the  quite  contrary  grounds  apt  to  be 
busie  about,  and  inquisitive  into,  what  they  are  to  receive  and  practise,  or  wherein 
their  consciences  are  professedly  concerned  and  involved  :  And  thereupon  they  take 
24 


362  THE   SAVOY    DECLARATION 

the  freedom  to  examine  and  try  the  spirits,  whether  of  Cod  or  no  :  And  from  hence 
are  more  apt  to  dissatisfaction,  and  from  thence  to  run  into  division,  and  many  of 
such  proving  to  be  inlightned  but  with  a  temporary,  not  saving  Faith  (who  have 
such  a  work  of  the  Spirit  upon  them,  and  profession  in  them,  as  will  and  doth  ap- 
prove it  self  to  the  judgement  of  Saints,  and  ought  to  be  so  judged,  until  they  be 
otherwise  discovered)  who  at  long  run,  prove  hypocrites  through  indulgence  unto 
lusts,  and  then  out  of  their  lusts  persist  [xix]  to  hold  up  these  divisions  unto  breach 
of,  or  departings  from  Churches,  and  the  Ordinances  of  God,  and  Cod  is  even  with 
them  for  it,  they  waxing  worse  and  worse,  deceiving  and  being  deceived  ;  and  even 
many  of  those  that  are  sincere,  through  a  mixture  of  darkness  and  erroneousness  in 
their  judgements,  are  for  a  season  apt  out  of  conscience  to  he  led  away  with  the  error 
of  others,  which  lie  in  wait  to  deceive. 

Insomuch  as  the  Apostle  upon  the  example  of  those  first  times,  foreseeing  also 
the  like  events  in  following  generations  upon  the  like  causes,  hath  been  bold  to  set 
this  down  as  a  ruled  Case,  that  likewise  in  other  Churches  so  constituted  and  de  facto 
empriviledged  as  that  of  the  Church  of  Corinth  was  (which  single  Church,  in  the 
sacred  Records  about  it,  is  the  compleatest  Mirror  of  Church-Constitution,  Order 
and  Government,  and  events  thereupon  ensuing,  of  any  one  Church  whatever  that 
we  have  story  of)  his  Maxim  is,  There  must  be  a/so  divisions  amongst  you  ;  he  setly 
inserts  an  [ALSO]*  in  the  case,  as  that  which  had  been  in  his  own  observation,  and 
that  which  would  be  hrl  t6  wo\u  the  fate  of  other  Churches  like  thereunto,  so prophe- 
sieth  he  :  And  he  speaks  this  as  peremtorily  as  he  doth  elsewhere  in  that  other, 
We  must  through  many  tribulations  enter  into  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  :  Yea,  and 
that  all  that  will  live  godly  in  Christ  Jesus,  shall  suffer  persecution  :  There  is  a 
\MUST~\  upon  both  alike,  and  we  bless  God,  that  we  have  run  through  both,  and 
do  say,  and  we  say  no  more  ;    That  as  it  was  then,  so  is  it  now,  in  both  respects. 

However,  such  hath  been  the  powerful  hand  of  Gods  Providence  in  these,  which 
have  been  the  worst  of  our  Tryals,  That  out  of  an  approved  experience  and  observa- 
tion [xx]  of  the  issue,  we  are  able  to  adde  that  other  part  of  the  Apostles  Prediction, 
That  therefore  such  rents  must  be,  that  they  which  arc  approved  may  be  made  mani- 
fest among  you  ;  which  holy  issue  God  (as  having  aimed  at  it  therein)  doth  fre- 
quently and  certainly  bring  about  in  Churches,  as  he  doth  bring  upon  them  that 
other  fate  of  division.  Let  them  therefore  look  unto  it,  that  are  the  Authors  of  such 
disturbances,  as  the  Apostle  warneth,  Cal.  5.  10.  The  experiment  is  this.  That  we 
have  seen,  and  do  daily  see,  that  multitudes  of  holy  and  precious  souls,  and  (in  the 
holy  Ghosts  word)  approved  Saints,  have  been,  and  are  the  more  rooted  and 
grounded  by  means  of  these  shakings,  and  do  continue  to  cleave  the  faster  to  Christ, 
and  the  purity  of  his  Ordinances,  and  value  them  the  more  by  this  cost  God  hath  put 
them  to  for  the  enjoying  of  them,  who  having  been  planted  in  the  House  of  the  Lord, 
have  flourished  in  the  Courts  of  our  God,  in  these  evil  times,  to  shew  that  the  Lord 
is  upright.  And  this  experimented  event  from  out  of  such  divisions,  hath  more  con- 
firmed us,  and  is  a  lowder  Apologie  for  us,  then  all  that  our  opposites  are  able  from 
our  breaches  to  alleadge  to  prejudice  us. 

We  will  add  a  few  words  for  conclusion,  and  give  a  more  particular  account  of 
this  our  DECLARA  TIOX.     In  drawing  up  this  Confession  of  Faith, 
we  have  had  before  us  the  Articles  of  Religion"  approved  and  passed       June  20, 
by  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  after  advice  had  with  an  Assembly  of       ,648. 
Divines,  called  together  by  them  for  that  purpose.     To  which  Confes- 


[       ]  in  original.  inte,  p.  350. 


PREFACE    TO    THE    DECLARATION  363 

sion,  for  the  substance  of  it,  we  fully  assent,  as  do  our  Brethren  of  New-England? 
and  the  Churches  also  of  Scotland?  as  each  in  their  general  Synods  have  testified. 

[xxi]  A  few  things  we  have  added  for  obviating  some  erroneous  opinions,  that 
have  been  more  broadly  and  boldly  here  of  late  maintained  by  the  Asserters,  then  in 
former  times  ;  and  made  some  other  additions  and  alterations  in  method,  here  and 
there,  and  some  clearer  explanations,  as  we  found  occasion. 

We  have  endeavored  throughout,  to  hold  to  such  Truths  in  this  our  Confession, 
as  are  more  properly  termed  matters  of  Faith  ;  and  what  is  of  Church-order,  we 
dispose  in  certain  Propositions  by  it  self.  To  this  course  we  are  led  by  the  Example 
of  the  Honorable  Houses  of  Parliament,  observing  what  was  established,  and  what 
omitted  by  them  in  that  Confession  the  Assembly  presented  to  them.  Who  thought 
it  not  convenient  to  have  matters  of  Discipline  and  Church-Government  put  into  a 
Confession  of  Faith,  especially  such  particulars  thereof,  as  then  were,  and  still  are 
controverted  and  under  dispute  by  men  Orthodox  and  sound  in  Faith.  The  30"' 
tap.  therefore  of  that  Confession,  as  it  was  presented  to  them  by  the  Assembly, 
which  is  of  Church-Censures,  their  Use,  Kindts,  and  in  whom  placed :  As  also  cap. 
31.  of  Synods  and  Councels,  by  whom  to  be  called,  of  what  force  in  their  decrees  and 
determinations.  And  the  4lU  paragr.  of  the  20th  cap.  which  determines  what  opin- 
ions and  practises  disturb  the  peace  of  the  Church,  and  how  such  disturbers  ought  to 
be  proceeded  against  by  the  Censures  of  the  Church,  and  punished  by  the  Civil 
Magistrate.  Also  a  great  part  of  the  2411'  cap.  of  Marriage  and  Divorce.  These 
were  such  doubtful  assertions,  and  so  unsutable  to  a  Confession  of  Faith,  as  the 
Honorable  Houses  in  their  great  Wisdom  thought  fit  to  lay  them  aside  :  There  being 
nothing  that  tends  more  to  heighten  dissentings  among  Brethren,  [xxii]  then  to  de- 
termine and  adopt  the  matter  of  their  difference,  under  so  high  a  title,  as  to  be  an 
Article  of  our  Faith  :  So  that  there  are  two  whole  Chapters,  and  some  Paragraphs 
in  other  Chapters  in  their  Confession,  that  we  have  upon  this  account  omitted  ;  and 
the  rather  do  we  give  this  notice,  because  that  Copy  of  the  Parliaments, 
followed  by  us,  is  in  few  mens  hands  ;  the  other  as  it  came  from  the  Aug.  1647 
Assembly,  being  approved  of  in  Scotland,  was  printed  and  hastened 
[i]nto  the  world  before  the  Parliament  had  declared  their  Resolutions  about  it ; 
which  was  not  till  June  20.  1648.  and  yet  hath  been,  and  continueth  to  be  the  Copy 
(ordinarily)  onely  sold,  printed  and  reprinted  for  these  eleven  years. 

After  the  19th  cap.  of  the  Law,  we  have  added  a  cap.  of  the  Gospel,  it  being  a 
Title  that  may  not  well  be  omitted  in  a  Confession  of  Faith  :  In  which  Chapter, 
what  is  dispersed,  and  by  intimation  in  the  Assemblies  Confession  with  some  little 
addition,  is  here  brought  together,  and  more  fully  under  one  head. 

That  there  are  not  Scriptures  annexed  as  in  some  Confessions3 
(though  in  divers  others  it's  otherwise)  we  give  the  same  account  as  did       Session  786. 
the  Reverend Assembly in  the  same  case:  which  was  this;    The  Con- 
fession being  large,  and  so  framed,  as  to  meet  with   the  common   errors,  if  the 
Scriptures  should  have  been  alleadged  with  any  clearness,  and  by  shewing  where  the 
strength  of  the  proof  lieth,  it  would  have  required  a  volume. 

We  say  further,  it  being  our  utmost  end  in  this  (as  it  is  indeed  of  a  Confession) 


1  See  ante,  p.  195.  2  Ibid.,  p.  350. 

3  This  absence  of  proof  texts  was  remedied,  as  far  as  Connecticut  was  concerned,  by  the  Say- 
brook  Synod  in  1708.  Parliament  compelled  the  Westminster  Assembly  to  add  them;  see  ante, 
p.  350. 


364  THE    SAVOY    DECLARATION 

humbly  to  give  an  account  what  we  hold  and  assert  in  these  matters ;  that  others, 
especially  the  Churches  of  Christ  may  judge  of  us  accordingly,  [xxiii]  This  we 
aimed  at,  and  not  so  much  to  instruct  others,  or  convince  gainsayers.  These  are 
the  proper  works  of  other  institutions  of  Christ,  and  are  to  be  done  in  the  strength 
of  express  Scripture.     A  Confession  is  an  Ordinance  of  another  nature. 

What  we  have  laid  down  and  asserted  about  CHURCHES  and  their  Govern- 
ment, we  humbly  conceive  to  be  the  Order  which  Christ  himself  hath  appointed  to 
be  observed,  we  have  endeavored  to  follow  Scripture-light ;  and  those  also  that  went 
before  us  according  to  that  Rule,  desirous  of  nearest  uniformity  with  reforming 
Churches,  as  with  our  Brethren  in  New-England,  so  with  others,  that  differ  from 
them  and  us. 

The  Models  and  Platforms  of  this  subject  laid  down  by  learned  men,  and  prac- 
tised by  Churches,  are  various  :  We  do  not  judge  it  brotherly,  or  grateful,  to  insist 
upon  comparisons  as  some  have  done  ;  but  this  experience  teacheth,  That  the  variety, 
and  possibly  the  disputes  and  emulations  arising  thence,  have  much  strengthened,  if 
not  fixed,  this  unhapy  perswasion  in  the  mindes  of  some  learned  and  good  men, 
namely,  That  there  is  no  settled  Order  laid  down  in  Scripture;  but  it's  left  to  the 
prudence  of  the  Christian  Magistrate,  to  compose  or  make  choice  of  such  a  Form  as 
is  most  sutable  and  consistent  with  their  Civil  Government.  Where  this  opinion  is 
entertained  in  the  perswasion  of  Governors,  there,  Churches  asserting  their  Power 
and  Order  to  be  Jure  divino,  and  the  appointment  of  Jesus  Christ,  can  have  no  better 
nor  more  honorable  entertainment,  then  a  Toleration  or  Permission. 

Vet  herein  there  is  this  remarkable  advantage  to  all  [xxiv]  parties  that  differ, 
about  what  in  Government  is  of  Christs  appointment ;  in  that  such  Magistrates  have 
a  far  greater  latitude  in  conscience,  to  tolerate  and  permit  the  several  forms  of  each 
so  bound  up  in  their  perswasion,  then  they  have  to  submit  unto  what  the  Magistrate 
shall  impose:  And  thereupon  the  Magistrate  exercising  an  indulgency  and  forbear- 
ance, with  protection  and  encouragement  to  the  people  of  God,  so  differing  from 
him,  and  amongst  themselves:  Doth  therein  discharge  as  great  a  faithfulness  to 
Christ,  and  love  to  his  people,  as  can  any  way  be  supposed  and  expected  from  any 
Christian  Magistrate,  of  what  perswasion  soever  he  is.  And  where  this  clemency 
from  Governors  is  shewed  to  any  sort  of  persons  or  Churches  of  Christ  upon  such  a 
principle,  it  will  in  equity  produce  this  just  effect,  That  all  that  so  differ  from  him, 
and  amongst  themselves,  standing  in  equal  and  alike  difference  from  the  principle  of 
such  a  Magistrate,  he  is  equally  free  to  give  a  like  liberty  to  them,  one  as  well  as 
the  other. 

This  faithfulness  in  our  Governors  we  do  with  thankfulness  to  God  acknowledge, 
and  to  their  everlasting  honor,  which  appeared  much  in  the  late  Reformation.  The 
Ilierarehie,  Common-prayer-book,  and  all  other  things  grievous  to  Gods  people, 
being  removed,  they  made  choice  of  an  Assembly  of  learned  men,  to  advise  whe*t 
( rovernment  and  Order  is  meet  to  be  established  in  the  room  of  these  things  ;  and 
because  it  was  known  there  were  different  opinions  (as  always  hath  been  among  Godly 
men)  about  forms  of  Church-Government,  there  was  by  the  Ordinance  first  sent  forth 
to  call  an  Assembly,  not  onely  a  choice  made  of  persons  of  several  perswasions  to  sit 
as  Members  there,  but  liberty  given,  to  a  lesser  number,  if  [xxv]  dissenting,  to  report 
their  Judgements  and  Reasons,  as  well  and  as  freely  as  the  major  part. 


turned  upside  down. 


PREFACE   TO   THE   DECLARATION  365 

Hereupon  the  Honorable  House  of  Commons  (an  Indulgence  we  hope  will  never 
be  forgotten)  finding  by  papers  received  from  them,  that  the  Members  of  the  Assem- 
bly were  not  like  to  compose  differences  amongst  themselves,  so  as  to  joyn  in  the 
same  Rule  for  Church-Government,  did  Order  further  as  followeth  :    ^bat  a  COlll* 

mittee  of  Xorbs  ano  Commons,  &c  bo  take  into  consideration  tbe 
differences  of  tbe  ©pinions  in  tbe  Bssemblg  of  Divines  in  point  of 
Cburcb=6overnment,  anb  to  enoeavor  a  union  if  it  be  possible ;  ano 
in  case  tbat  cannot  be  bone,  to  enbeavor  tbe  finoing  out  some  wag, 
bow  far  tenoer  consciences,  wbo  cannot  in  all  tbings  submit  to  tbe 
same  TRule  wbicb  sball  be  cstablisbeo,  mag  be  born  vvitb  according 
to  tbe  TCaoro,  anb  as  mag  stanb  witb  tbe  publique  peace. 

By  all  which  it  is  evident  the  Parliament  purposed  not  to  establish  the  Rule  of 
Church-Government  with  such  vigor,  as  might  not  permit  and  bear  with  a  practise 
different  from  what  they  had  established  :  In  persons  and  Churches  of  different  prin- 
ciples, if  occasion  were.  And  this  Christian  clemency  and  indulgence  in  our  Gover- 
nors, hath  been  the  foundation  of  that  Freedom  and  Liberty,  in  the  managing  of 
Church-affairs,  which  our  Brethren,  as  well  as  WE,  that  differ  from  them,  do  now, 
and  have  many  years  enjoyed. 

The  Honorable  Houses  by  several  Ordinances  of  Parliament  after  much  consul- 
tation, having  settled  Rules  [xxvi]  for  Church-Government,  and  such  an 
Ecclesiastical  Order  as  they  judged  would  best  joynt  with  the  Laws  and       Ordinance 
Government  of  the  Kingdom,  did  publish  them,  requiring  the  practise       of  March  14. 
hereof  throughout  the  Nation  ;   and  in  particular,  by  the  Ministers  of       1645. 
the  Province  of  London.     But  (upon  the  former  reason,   or   the  like 
charitable  consideration)  these  Rules  were  not  imposed  by  .them  under  any  PEN- 
ALTY or  rigorous  inforcement,  though  freqnently  urged  thereunto  by  some. 

Our  reverend  Brethren  of  the  Province  of  London,  having  considered  of  these 
Ordinances,  and  the  Church-Government  laid  down  in  them,  declared  their  opinions 
to  be,    That  there  is  not  a  com  pleat  rule  in   those    Ordinances ;    also, 
that  there  are  many  necessary   things  not  yet  established,   and  some       Considera- 
things   wherein   their  consciences  are  not  so  fully  satisfied.     These       tions  and 
Brethren  in  the  same  paper,  have  published  also  their  joynt  Resolution       Cautions 
to  practise  in  all  things  according  to  the  rule  of  the   Word,  and  accord-        from  Sion 
ing  to  these  Ordinances,  so  far  as  they  conceive  them  correspond  to  it.       Coll.  June 
and  in  so  doing  they  trust  they  shall  not  grieve  the  spirit  of  the  truly        ig.  I046. 
godly,  nor  give  any  just  occasion  to  them  that  are  contrary  minded,  to 
blame  their  proceedings. 

We  humbly  conceive  (that  WE  being  dissatisfied  in  these  things  as  our  Brethren) 
the  like  liberty  was  intended  by  the  honorable  Houses,  and  may  be  taken  by  us  of 
the  Congregational  -oay  (without  blame  or  grief  to  the  spirits  of  those  Brethren  at 
least)  to  resolve,  or  rather  to  continue  in  the  same  resolution  and  practise  in  these 
matters,  which  indeed  were  our  practises  in  times  of  greatest  opposition,  and  before 
this  reformation  was  begun. 

And  as  our  Brethren,  the  Ministers  of  London,  drew  up  and  published  their 
opinions  and  apprehensions  about  [xxvii]  Church-Government  into  an  intire  System  ; 
so  we  now  give  the  like  publique  account  of  our  consciences,  and  the  rules  by  which 
we  have  constantly  practised  hitherto  ;  which  we  have  here  drawn  up,  and  do  pre- 
sent. Whereby  it  will  appear  how  much,  or  how  little  we  differ  in  these  things  from 
our  Presbyterian  Brethren. 


366  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

And  we  trust  there  is  no  just  cause  why  any  man,  either  for  our  differing  from 
the  present  settlement,  it  being  out  of  conscience,  and  not  out  of  contempt,  or  our 
differences  one  from  another,  being  not  wilful,  should  charge  either  of  us  with  that 
odious  reproach  of    Schism.     And  indeed,  if  not  for  our   differing   from   the  State- 
settlement,  much  less  because  we  differ  from  our  Brethren,  our  differ- 
ences being  in  some  lesser  things,  and  circumstances,  onely,  as  them-        Jus  divinum 
selves  acknowledge.     And  let  it  be  further  considered,  that  we  have       Minist.  pub. 
not  broken  from  them  or  their  Order  by  these  differences  (but  rather       by  the  Pro- 
they   from   us)  and  in  that  respect  we  less  deserve  their  censure  ;  our       Vost  of  Lon- 
practise  being  no  other  then  what  it  was  in  our  breaking  from  Episco-       don  in  the 
pacy,  and  long  before  Presbytery,  or  any  such  form  as  now  they  are  in,        Preface, 
was  taken  up  by  them  ;  and  we  will  not  say  how  probable  it  is  that  the 
yoke  of  Episcopacy  had  been  upon  our  neck  to  this  day,  if  some  such  way  (as 
formerly,  and  now  is,  and  hath  been  termed  Schism)  had  not  with  much  suffering  bin 
then  practised  &  since  continued  in. 

For  Novelty,  wherewith  we  are  likewise  both  charged  by  the  enemies  of  both, 
it  is  true,  in  respect  of  the  publique  and  open  profession,  either  of  Presbytery  or 
Independency,  this  Nation  hath   been  a  stranger  to  each  way,  it's  possible  ever  since 
it  hath  been  Christian  ;  though  for  our  selves  we  are  able  to  trace  the  footsteps  of  an 
Independent  Congregational  Way  in  the  ancientest  customs  of  [xxviii]  the  Churches, 
as  also  in  the  writings  of  our  soundest   Protestant   Divines,  and  (that 
which   we  are   much  satisfied  in)  a  full  concurrence  throughout  in  all       Puritanis. 
the    substantial    parts    of    Church-Governments,    with    our    Reverend       Ang.  by  Dr. 
Brethren  the  old  Puritan  non-Conformists,  who  being  instant  in  prayer        Aims  near 
and   much   sufferings,  prevailed  with  the  Lord,  and  we  reap  with  joy,       5o  years 
what  they  sowed  in  tears.     Our  Brethren  also  that  are  for  Presbyterial       since,1  asthe 
sul  ordinations,  profess  what  is  of  weight  against  Novelty  for  their  way.        opinions   of 
Whitehead,    Gilbe,    Fox,    Dearing,    Greenham,    Cartvvright,    Venner,    Fulk.    Whitaker,    Rainold, 
Perkins,  &c. 

And  now  therefore  seeing  the  Lord,  in  whose  hand  is  the  heart  of  Princes,  hath 
put  into  the  hearts  of  our  Governors  to  tolerate  and  permit  (as  they  have  done  many 
years)  persons  of  each  perswasion,  to  enjoy  their  consciences,  though  neither  come  up 
to  the  Rule  established  by  Authority  :  And  that  which  is  more,  to  give  us  both  pro- 
tection, and  the  same  encouragement  that  the  most  devoted  Conformists  in  those 
former  superstitious  times  enjoyed,  yea,  and  by  a  publique  Law  to  establish  this 
Liberty  for  time  to  come  ;  and  yet  further,  in  the  midst  of  our  fears,  to  set  over  us  a 
Prince  that  owns  this  Establishment,  and  cordially  resolves  to  secure  our  churches  in 
the  enjoyment  of  these  Liberties,  if  we  abuse  them  not  to  the  disturbance  of  the 
Civil  Peace. 

This  should  be  a  very  great  engagement  upon  the  hearts  of  all,  though  of  differ- 
ent perswasions,  to  endeavor  our  utmost,  joyntly  to  promove  the  honor  and  prosperity 
of  such  a  Government  and  Governors  by  whatsoever  means,  which  in  our  Callings  as 
Ministers  of  the  Gospel,  and  as  Churches  of  Jesus  Christ  the  Prince  of  peace,  we  are 
any  way  able  to  ;  as  also  to  be  peaceably  disposed  one  [xxix]  towards  another,  and 
with  mutual  toleration  to  love  as  brethren,  notwithstanding  such  differences,  reinem- 
bring,  as  it's  very  equal  we  should,  the  differences  that  are  between  Presbyterians 
and  Independents,  being  differences  between  fellow-servants,  and  neither  of  them 
having  authority  given  from  God  or  man,  to  impose  their  opinions,  one  more  then 

1  I.  e..  Bradshaw's  Puritanismus  Anglicanus,  Frankfurt,  1610  ;  a  collection  of  the  opinions 
of  leading  Puritans,  with  a  Preface  by  William  Ames,  the  celebrated  Puritan  divine. 


THE    CONFESSION    OF   FAITH  367 

the  other.  That  our  Governors  after  so  solemn  an  establishment,  should  thus  bear 
with  us  both,  in  our  greater  differences  from  their  Rule,  and  after  this,  for  any  of  us 
to  take  a  fellow-servant  by  the  throat,  upon  the  account  of  a  lesser  reckoning,  and 
nothing  due  to  him  upon  it :  is  to  forget,  at  least  not  to  exercise,  that  compassion 
and  tenderness  we  have  found,  where  we  had  less  ground  to  challenge  or  expect  it. 

Our  Prayer  unto  God  is,  That  whereto  we  have  already  attained,  we  all  may 
walk  by  the  same  rule,  and  that  wherein  we  are  otherwise  minded,  God  would  reveal 
it  to  us  in  his  due  time. 

[xxx]     Books  sold  by  John  Allen  at  the  Sun  Rising  in  Pauls  Church-yard. 

[list  of  15  volumes]. 

A 

DECLARATION 

OF  THE 

FAITH  and  ORDER 

Owned  and  practised  in  the 

CONGREGATIONAL  CHURCHES 

IN 

ENGLAND. 

CHAR    I.1 
Of  the  holy  Scripture. 

ALthough  the  Light  of  Nature,  and  the  Works  of  Creation  and 
Providence,  do  so  far  manifest  the  Goodness,  Wisdom  and 
Power  of  God,  as  to  leave  men  unexcusable;  yet  are  they  not  suf- 
ficient to  give  that  knowledge  of  God  and  of  his  Will,  which  is 
necessary  unto  salvation:  Therefore  it  pleased  the  Lord  at  sundry 
times,  and  in  divers  maners  to  reveal  himself,  and  to  declare  that 
his  Will  unto  his  Church;  and  afterwards  for  the  better  preserving 
and  propagating  of  the  truth,  and  for  the  more  sure  establishment 
and  comfort  of  the  Church  against  the  corruption  of  the  flesh,  and 
the  malice  of  Satan  [2]  and  of  the  world,  to  commit  the  same 
wholly  unto  writing:  which  maketh  the  holy  Scripture  to  be  most 
necessary;  those  former  ways  of  Gods  revealing  his  Will  unto  his 
people,  being  now  ceased. 

II.  Under  the  name  of  holy  Scripture,  or  the  Word  of  God 
written,  are  now  contained  all  the  Books  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament;  which  are  these: 


1  In  presenting  the  text  of  the  Confession  of  Faith,  I  have  printed  such  portions  as  were  taken 
from  the  Westminster  Confession  in  Roman;  the  parts  added  at  the  Savoy  are  in  black  faced  type. 
I  have  also  given  in  notes  all  parts  omitted  from  the  Westminster  Confession,  following  the  text 
printed  by  Dr.  Schaff  in  his  Creeds  of  Christendom,  III:  600-673.  The  few  changes  from  the 
Savoy  made  by  the  Massachusetts  Synod  of  1680  are  also  indicated,  so  that  this  text  will  serve  as  a 
representative  of  that  Confession  also.  The  Saybrook  Confession  is  identical  with  that  of  1680, 
save  that  it  adds  proof  texts  to  each  section. 


368  THE    SAVOY    DECLARATION 

Of  the  Old  Testament. 
Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy,  Joshua, 
Judges,  Ruth,  1  Samuel,  2  Samuel,  1  Kings,  2  Kings,  1  Chronicles, 
2  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Esther,  Job,  Psalms,  Proverbs, 
Ecclesiastes,  The  Song  of  Songs,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Lamentations, 
Ezekiel,  Daniel,  Hosea,  Joel,  Amos,  Obadiah,  Jonah,  Micah, 
Nahum,  Habakkuk,  Zephaniah,  Haggai,  Zechariah,  Malachi. 

Of  the  New   Testament. 

Matthew,1  Mark,  Luke,  John,  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  Pauls 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  1  Corinthians,  2  Corinthians,  Galatians, 
Ephesians,  Philippians,  Colossians,  1  Thessalonians,  2  Thessalon- 
ians,  1  To  Timothy,  2  To  Timothy,  To  Titus,  To  Philemon,  The 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  The  Epistle  of  James,  The  first  and 
second  Epistles  of  Peter,  The  first,  second  and  third  Epistles  of 
John,  the  Epistle  of  Jude,  The  Revelation. 

[3]  All  which  are  given  by  the  inspiration  of  God  to  be  the 
Rule  of  Faith  and  Life. 

III.  The  Books  commonly  called  Apocrypha,  not  being  of 
Divine  inspiration,  are  no  part  of  the  Canon  of  the  Scripture;  and 
therefore  are  of  no  authority  in  the  Church  of  God,  nor  to  be  any 
otherwise  approved  or  made  use  of,  then  other  humane  writings. 

IV.  The  authority  of  the  holy  Scripture,  for  which  it  ought  to 
be  believed  and  obeyed,  dependeth  not  upon  the  Testimony  of  any 
man  or  Church;  but  wholly  upon  God  (who  is  Truth  it  self)  the 
Author  thereof;  and  therefore  it  is  to  be  received,  because  it  is  the 
Word  of  God. 

V.  We  may  be  moved  and  induced  by  the  Testimony  of  the 
Church,  to  an  high  and  reverent  esteem  of  the  holy  Scripture. 
And  the  heavenliness  of  the  Matter,  the  efficacy  of  the  Doctrine, 
the  majesty  of  the  Style,  the  consent  of  all  the  parts,  the  scope  of 
the  whole,  (which  is,  to  give  all  glory  to  God)  the  full  discovery  it 
makes  of  the  onely  way  of  Mans  Salvation,  the  many  other  incom- 
parable excellencies,  and  the  intire  perfection  thereof,  are  Augu- 
ments  whereby  it  doth  abundantly  evidence  it  self  to  be  the  Word 
of  God;  Yet  notwithstanding,  our  full  perswasion  and  assurance 
of  the  infallible  Truth  and  Divine  Authority  thereof,  is  from  the 
inward  work  of  the  holy  Spirit,  bearing  witness  by  and  with  the 
Word  in  our  hearts. 

[  1 1  VI.  The  whole  Counsel  of  God  concerning  all  things 
necessary  for  his  own  Glory,  mans  Salvation,  Faith  and  Life,  is 
either  expresly  set  down  in  Scripture,  or  by  good  and  necessary  con- 

1  West,  prefaces:    The  Gospels  according  to. 


THE    CONFESSION   OF   FAITH  369 

sequence  may  be  deduced  from  Scripture;  unto  which  nothing  at 
any  time  is  to  be  added,  whether  by  new  Revelations  of  the  Spirit, 
or  Traditions  of  men.  Nevertheless  we  acknowledge  the  inward 
illumination  of  the  Spirit  of  God  to  be  necessary  for  the  saving 
understanding  of  such  things  as  are  revealed  in  the  Word:  And 
that  there  are  some  circumstances  concerning  the  Worship  of  God 
and  Government  of  the  Church,  common  to  humane  actions  and 
Societies,  which  are  to  be  ordered  by  the  Light  of  Nature  and 
Christian  prudence,  according  to  the  general  Rules  of  the  Word, 
which  are  always  to  be  observed. 

VII.  All  things  in  Scripture  are  not  alike  plain  in  themselves, 
nor  alike  clear  unto  all:  yet  those  things  which  are  necessary  to  be 
known,  believed  and  observed  for  Salvation,  are  so  clearly  pro- 
pounded and  opened  in  some  place  of  Scripture  or  other,  that  not 
onely  the  learned,  but  the  unlearned,  in  a  due  use  of  the  ordinary 
means,  may  attain  unto  a  sufficient  understanding  of  them. 

VIII.  The  Old  Testament  in  Hebrew  (which  was  the  Native 
Language  of  the  people  of  God  of  old)  and  the  New  Testament 
in  Greek  (which  at  the  time  of  writing  of  it  was  most  generally 
known  to  the  Nations)  being  immediately  inspired  by  God,  and  by 
his  singular  care  and  providence  [5]  kept  pure  in  all  Ages,  are 
therefore  Authentical;  so  as  in  all  Controversies  of  Religion  the 
Church  is  finally  to  appeal  unto  them.  But  because  these  Original 
Tongues  are  not  known  to  all  the  people  of  God,  who  have  right 
unto  and  interest  in  the  Scriptures,  and  are  commanded  in  the  fear 
of  God  to  read  and  search  them;  therefore  they  are  to  be  trans- 
lated into  the  vulgar  language  of  every  Nation  unto  which  they 
come,  that  the  Word  of  God  dwelling  plentifully  in  all,  they  may 
worship  him  in  an  acceptable  maner,  and  through  patience  and 
comfort  of  the  Scriptures  may  have  hope. 

IX.  The  infallible  Rule  of  Interpretation  of  Scripture,  is  the 
Scripture  it  self  ;  And  therefore  when  there  is  a  question  about  the 
true  and  full  sense  of  any  Scripture  (which  is  not  manifold,  but 
one)  it  must  be  searched  and  known  by  other  places,  that  speak 
more  clearly. 

X.  The  Supreme  Judge  by  which  all  controversies  of  Religion 
are  to  be  determined,  and  all  Decrees  of  Councels,  Opinions  of 
ancient  Writers,  Doctrines  of  men  and  private  Spirits,  are  to  be  ex- 
amined, and  in  whose  Sentence  we  are  to  rest,  can  be  no  other,  but 
the2  holy  Scripture  delivered  by  the  Spirit;  into  which 
Scripture  so  delivered,  our  Faith  is  finally  resolved. 

1  West,  adds  :  the.  2  West,  reads  :  but  the  Holy  Spirit  speaking  in  the  Scripture. 


3/0  THE   SAVOY    DECLARATION 

[6]  CHAP.    II. 

Of  God  and  of  the  holy    Trinity. 

THere  is  but  one  onely  living  and  true  God  ;  who  is  infinite  in 
Being  and  Perfection,  a  most  pure  Spirit,  invisible,  without 
body,  parts,  or  passions,  immutable,  immense,  eternal,  incompre- 
hensible, almighty,  most  wise,  most  holy,  most  free,  most  absolute, 
working  all  things  according  to  the  Counsel  of  his  own  immutable 
and  most  righteous  Will,  for  his  own  Glory,  most  loving,  gracious, 
merciful,  long-suffering,  abundant  in  goodness  and  truth,  forgiving 
iniquity,  transgression  and  sin,  the  rewarder  of  them  that  diligently 
seek  him  ;  and  withal  most  just  and  terrible  in  his  Judgements, 
hating  all  sin,  and  who  will  by  no  means  clear  the  guilty. 

II.  God  hath  all  Life,  Glory,  Goodness,  Blessedness,  in,  and 
of  himself;  and  is  alone,  in,  and  unto  himself,  All-insufficient,  not ' 
standing  in  need  of  any  Creatures,  which  he  hath  made,  nor  de- 
riving any  glory  from  them,  but  onely  manifesting  his  own  glory 
in,  by,  unto,  and  upon  them:  He  is  the  alone  Fountain2  of  all 
Being,  of  whom,  through  whom,  and  to  whom  are  all  things  ;  and 
hath  most  Soveraign  dominion  over  them,  to  do  by  them,  for  them, 
or  upon  them,  whatsoever  himself  pleaseth  :  In  his  sight  all  things 
are  open  and  manifest,  his  Knowledge  is  infinite,  infallible,  and  in- 
dependent upon  the  creature,  so  as  nothing  is  to  him  contingent 
or  uncertain  :  He  is  most  holy  in  all  his  Counsels,  in  all  his  AVorks, 
and  in  all  his  Commands.  [  7  ]  To  him  is  due  from  Angels  and 
Men,  and  every  other  Creature,  whatsoever  Worship,  Service  or 
Obedience,  as  Creatures,  they  owe  unto  the  Creator,  and 
whatever  he  is  further  pleased  to  require  of  them.3 

III.  In  the  Unity  of  the  God-head  there  be  three  Persons,  of 
one  Substance,  Power  and  Eternity,  God  the  Father,  God  the  Son, 
and  God  the  holy  Ghost  :  The  Father  is  of  none,  neither  begotten, 
nor  proceeding  ;  The  Son  is  eternally  begotten  of  the  Father  ; 
The  holy  Ghost  eternally  proceeding  from  the  Father  and  the  Son. 
Which  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity  is  the  foundation  of  all  our 
Communion  with  God,  and  comfortable  Dependence  upon 
him.4 

CHAP.    III. 
Of  Gods   Eternal  Decree. 

GOd  from  all  eternity  did  by  the  most  wise  and  holy  Counsel  of 
his    own  Will,  freely  and   unchangeably   ordain  whatsoever 

1  Saybrook  reads  nor.  -  West,  reads:  foundation.  3  Simple  additii  n.  '  Ibid. 


THE   CONFESSION    OF   FAITH  3/1 

comes  to  pass  :  Yet  so,  as  thereby  neither  is  God  the  Author  of 
sin,  nor  is  violence  offered  to  the  will  of  the  Creatures,  nor  is  the 
liberty  or  contingency  of  second  causes  taken  away,  but  rather  es- 
tablished. 

II.  Although  God  knows  whatsoever  may  or  can  come  to 
pass  upon  all  supposed  Conditions,  yet  hath  he  not  decreed  any 
thing,  because  he  foresaw  it  as  future,  or  as  that  which  would 
come  to  pass  upon  such  Conditions. 

[8]  III.  By  the  Decree  of  God  for  the  manifestation  of  his 
Glory,  some  Men  and  Angels  are  predestinated  unto  everlasting 
Life,  and  others  fore-ordained  to  everlasting  Death. 

IV.  These  Angels  and  Men  thus  predestinated,  and  fore-or- 
dained, are  particularly  and  unchangeably  designed,  and  their 
number  is  so  certain  and  definite,  that  it  cannot  be  either  increased 
or  diminished. 

V.  Those  of  mankinde  that  are  predestinated  unto  Life,  God, 
before  the  foundation  of  the  world  was  laid,  according  to  his 
eternal  and  immutable  purpose,  and  the  secret  counsel  and  good 
pleasure  of  his  Will,  hath  chosen  in  Christ  unto  everlasting  Glory, 
out  of  his  meer  free  Grace  and  Love,  without  any  fore-sight  of 
Faith  or  good  Works,  or  perseverance  in  either  of  them  or  any 
other  thing  in  the  Creature,  as  Conditions  or  Causes  moving  him 
thereunto,  and  all  to  the  praise  of  his  glorious  Grace. 

VI.  As  God  hath  appointed  the  Elect  unto  Glory,  so  hath  he 
by  the  eternal  and  most  free  purpose  of  his  Will  fore-ordained  all 
the  means  thereunto:  Wherefore  they  who  are  elected,  being  fain 
in  Adam,  are  redeemed  by  Christ,  are  effectually  called  unto  Faith 
in  Christ  by  his  spirit  working  in  due  season,  are  justified,  adopted, 
sanctified,  and  kept  by  his  power,  through  Faith,  unto  salvation. 
Neither  are  any  other  redeemed  by  Christ,  or1  effectually  [9] 
called,  justified,  adopted,  sanctified  and  saved,  but  the  Elect  onely. 

VII.  The  rest  of  mankinde  God  was  pleased,  according  to  the 
unsearchable  Counsel  of  his  own  Will,  whereby  he  extendeth  or 
withholdeth  mercy,  as  he  pleaseth,  for  the  glory  of  his  soveraign 
power  over  his  Creatures,  to  pass  by  and  to  ordain  them  to  dis- 
honor2 and  wrath  for  their  sin,  to  the  praise  of  his  glorious  Justice. 

VIII.  The  Doctrine  of  this  high  mystery  of  Predestination  is 
to  be  handled  with  special  prudence  and  care,  that  men  attending 
the   will   of   God    revealed   in   his   Word,   and    yielding  obedience 

'  Added  to  West. 

2  The  reader  will  observe  that  this  English  work  of  the  XVII.  Century  employs  the  so-called 
American  spelling  uniformly  in  such  words  as  honor  and  the  like. 


372  THE   SAVOY    DECLARATION 

thereunto,  may  from  the  certainty  of  their  effectual  Vocation,  be 
assured  of  their  eternal  Election.  So  shall  this  Doctrine  afford 
matter  of  praise,  reverence  and  admiration  of  God,  and  of  humility, 
diligence,  and  abundant  consolation  to  all  that  sincerely  obey  the 
Gospel. 

CHAP.  IV. 
Of   Creation. 

IT  pleased  God  the  Father,  Son  and  holy  Ghost,  for  the 
manifestation  of  the  glory  of  his  eternal  Power,  Wisdom  and 
Goodness,  in  the  beginning,  to  create  or  make  out '  of  nothing  the 
World,  and  all  things  therein,  whether  visible  or  invisible,  in  the 
space  of  six  days,  and  all  very  good. 

[10]  II.  After  God  had  made  all  other  creatures,  he  created 
Man,  male  and  female,  with  reasonable  and  immortal  Souls, 
endued  with  knowledge,  righteousness  and  true  holiness,  after 
his  own  Image,  having  the  Law  of  God  written  in  their  hearts, 
and  power  to  fulfil  it;  and  yet  under  a  possibility  of  transgressing, 
being  left  to  the  liberty  of  their  own  Will,  which  was  subject  unto 
change.  Besides  this  Law  written  in  their  hearts,  they  received 
a  command  not  to  eat  of  the  Tree  of  the  Knowledge  of  good  and 
evil  ;  which  whiles  they  kept,  they  were  happy  in  their  communion 
with  God,  and  had  dominion  over  the  Creatures. 

CHAP.  V. 
Of  Providence. 

GOd  the  great  Creator  of  all  things,  doth  uphold,  direct, 
dispose  and  govern  all  creatures,  actions  and  things  from 
the  greatest  even  to"  the  least  by  his  most  wise  and  holy  Provi- 
dence, according  unto3  his  infallible  fore-knowledge,  and  the  free 
and  immutable  counsel  of  his  own  Will,  to  the  praise  of  the  glory 
of  his  Wisdom,  Power,  Justice,  Goodness  and  Mercy. 

II.  Although  in  relation  to  the  fore-knowledge  and  decree 
of  God,  the  first  Cause,  all  things  come  to  pass  immutably  and 
infallibly;  yet  by  the  same  Providence  he  ordercth  [  1 1  ]  them  to 
fall  out,  according  to  the  nature  of  second  Causes,  either  neces- 
sarily, freely,  or  contingently. 

III.  God  in  his  ordinary  Providence  maketh  use  of  Means, 
yet  is  free  to  work  without,  above,  and  against  them  at  his 
pleasure. 


THE    CONFESSION    OF    FAITH  373 

IV.  The  almighty  Power,  unsearchable  Wisdom,  and  infinite 
Goodness  of  God,  so  far  manifest  themselves  in  his  Providence, 
in1  that  his  determinate  Counsel2  extendeth  it  self  even  to  the 
first  Fall,  and  all  other  sins  of  Angels  and  Men  (and  that  not  by  a 
bare  permission)  which  also  he  most  wisely  and  powerfully 
boundeth,  and  otherwise  ordereth  and  governeth3  in  a  manifold 
Dispensation  to  his  own  most4  holy  ends;  yet  so,  as  the  sinfulness 
thereof  proceedeth  onely  from  the  Creature,  and  not  from  God,  who 
being  most  holy  and  righteous,  neither  is,  nor  can  be  the  author  or 
approver  of  sin. 

V.  The  most  wise,  righteous  and  gracious  God  doth  often- 
times leave  for  a  season  his  own  children  to  manifold  temptations, 
and  the  corruption  of  their  own  hearts,  to  chastise  them  for  their 
former  sins,  or  to  discover  unto  them  the  hidden  strength  of 
corruption,  and  deceitfulness  of  their  hearts,  that  they  may  be 
humbled;  and  to  raise  them  to  a  more  close  and  constant  depend- 
ence for  their  support  upon  6  himself,  and  to  make  them  more 
watchful  against  all  future  occasions  of  sin,  and  for  sundry  other 
just  and  holy  ends. 

[12]  VI.  As  for  those  wicked  and  ungodly  men,  whom  God 
as  a  righteous  Judge,  for  former  sins,  doth  blinde  and  harden, 
from  them  he  not  onely  withholdeth  his  grace,  whereby  they  might 
have  been  inlightened  in  their  understandings,  and  wrought  upon 
in  their  hearts;  but  sometimes  also  withdraweth  the  gifts  which 
they  had,  and  exposeth  them  to  such  objects,  as  their  corruption 
makes  occasions  of  sin;  and  withal  gives  them  over  to  their  own 
lusts,  the  temptations  of  the  world,  and  the  power  of  Satan; 
whereby  it  comes  to  pass  that  they  harden  themselves,  even  under 
those  means  which  God  useth  for  the  softning  of  others.6 

VII.  As  the  Providence  of  God  doth  in  general  reach  to  all 
Creatures,  so  after  a  most  special  maner  it  taketh  care  of  his 
Church,  and  disposeth  all  things  to  the  good  thereof. 

CHAP.  VI. 

Of  the  fall  of  Man,  of  Sin,  and  of  the  Punishment  thereof. 

God   having  made   a   Covenant   of  Works    and   Life, 

thereupon,  with  our  first  parents  and  all   their  posterity  in 

them,  they    being   seduced   by  the    subtilty  and    temptation    of 

1  West,  omits  in.  2  West,  reads  it. 

3  West,  reads,  but  such  as  hath  joined  with  it  a  most  wise  and  powerful  bounding,  and 
otherwise  ordering  and  governing  of  them  in  a%  etc.  4  Added  to  West. 

5  West,  reads  un<o.  8  The  Saybrook  reads  them,  a  change  of  some  importance. 


374  TI1E   SAVOY    DECLARATION 

Satan   did   wilfully  transgress  the  Law  of  their  Creation, 
and  break  the  Covenant  in  eating  the  forbidden  fruit.1 

[13]  II.  By  this  sin  they,  and  we  in  them,2  fell  from3 
original  righteousness  and  communion  with  God,  and  so  became 
dead  in  sin,  and  wholly  defiled  in  all  the  faculties  and  parts  of 
soul  and  body. 

III.  They  being  the  Root,  and  by  God's  appointment 
standing  in  the  room  and  stead4  of  all  mankinde,  the  guilt 
of  this  sin  was  imputed,  and 6  corrupted  nature  conveyed  to  all 
their  posterity  descending  from  them  by  ordinary  generation. 

IV.  From  this  Original  corruption,  whereby  we  are  utterly 
indisposed,  disabled  and  made  opposite  to  all  good,  and  wholly 
enclined  to  all  evil,  do  proceed  all  Actual  transgressions. 

V.  This  Corruption  of  nature  during  this  life,  doth  remain 
in  those  that  are  regenerated  ;  and  although  it  be  through  Christ 
pardoned  and  mortified,  yet  both  it  self  and  all  the  motions 
thereof  are  truely  and  properly  sin. 

VI.  Every  sin,  both  original  and  actual,  being  a  transgres- 
sion of  the  righteous  Law  of  God,  and  contrary  thereunto,  doth 
in  its  own  nature  bring  guilt  upon  the  sinner,  whereby  he  is 
bound  over  to  the  wrath  of  God,  and  curse  of  the  Law,  and  so 
made  subject  to  death,  with  all  miseries,  spiritual,  temporal  and 
eternal. 


[14]  CHAP.  VII. 

Of  God's  Covenant  with  Man. 

THe  distance  between  God  and  the  Creature  is  so  great,  that 
although  reasonable  creatures  do  owe  obedience  unto  him 
as  their  Creator,  yet  they  could  never  have  attained  the  re- 
ward of  life,6  but  by  some  voluntary  condecension  on  Gods  part, 
which  he  hath  been  pleased  to  express  by  way  of  Covenant. 

II.  The  first  Covenant  made  with  man,  was  a  Covenant  of 
Works,  wherein  life  was  promised  to  Adam,  and  in  him  to  his 
posterity,  upon  condition  of  perfect  and  personal  obedience. 

III.  Man  by  his  fall   having  made  himself  uncapable  of  life 


1  This  paragraph  in  the  Westminster  reads:  "Our  first  parents,  being  seduced  by  the 
subtilty  and  temptation  of  Satan,  sinned  in  eating  the  forbidden  fruit.  This  their  sin  God  was 
pleased,  according  to  his  wise  and  holy  counsel,  to  permit,  having  purposed  to  order  it  to  his  own 
£lory." 

3  A  simple  addition.     Nothing  is  omitted  from  the  West 

3  West,  inserts  their.         *  A  simple  addition.         5  West,  inserts,  the  same  death  in  sin  and. 

•  West,  reads,  never  have  any  fruition  0/ him  as  their  blessedness  and  reward  but,  etc 


THE   CONFESSION    OF   FAITH  375 

by  that  Covenant,  the  Lord  was  pleased  to  make  a  second,  com- 
monly called  the  Covenant  of  Grace  ;  wherein  he  freely  offereth 
unto  sinners  life  and  salvation  by  Jesus  Christ,  requiring  of  them 
faith  in  him  that  they  may  be  saved,  and  promising  to  give  unto 
all  those  that  are  ordained  unto  life,  his  holy  Spirit,  to  make  them 
willing  and  able  to  believe. 

IV.  This  Covenant  of  Grace  is  frequently  set  forth  in  the 
Scripture  by  the  name  of  a  Testament,  in  reference  to  the  death 
of  Jesus  Christ  the  Testator,  and  to  the  everlasting  Inheritance, 
with  all  things  belonging  to  it,  therein  bequeathed. 

[15]  V.  Although1  this  Covenant  hath  been  differently 
and  variously  administred  in  respect  of  Ordinances  and 
Institutions  in  the  time  of  the  Law,  and  since  the  coming  of 
Christ  in  the  flesh  ;  yet  for  the  substance  and  efficacy  of  it, 
to  all  its  spiritual  and  saving  ends,  it  is  one  and  the  same ; 
upon  the  account  of  which  various  dispensations,  it  is  called 
the  Old  and  New  Testament. 


CHAP.  VIII. 
Of  Christ  the  Mediator. 

IT  pleased  God,  it  his  eternal  purpose,  to  chuse  and  ordain 
the  Lord  Jesus  his  onely  begotten  Son,  according  to  a 
Covenant  made  between  them  both,2  to  be  the  Mediator  be- 
tween God  and  Man  ;  the  Prophet,  Priest,  and  King,  the  Head 
and  Savior3  of  his  Church,  the  Heir  of  all  things,  and  Judge  of 
the  World  ;  unto  whom  he  did  from  all  eternity  give  a  people  to 
be  his  seed,  and  to  be  by  him  in  time  redeemed,  called,  justified, 
sanctified,  and  glorified. 


1  Here  is  a  large  variation  from  the  West.,  possibly  because  a  special  chapter  was  to  be  added 
on  the  Gospel.     The  West,  is  as  follows,  in  two  sections: 

"V.  This  covenant  was  differently  administered  in  the  time  of  the  law,  and  in  the  time  of 
the  gospel :  under  the  law  it  was  administered  by  promises,  prophecies,  sacrifices,  circumcision,  the 
paschal  lamb,  and  other  types  and  ordinances,  delivered  to  the  people  of  the  Jews,  all  fore-signify- 
ing Christ  to  come,  which  were  for  that  time  sufficient  and  efficacious,  through  the  operation  of  the 
Spirit,  to  instruct  and  build  up  the  elect  in  faith  in  the  promised  Messiah,  by  whom  they  had  full 
remission  of  sins,  and  eternal  salvation  ;  and  is  called  the  Old  Testament. 

VI.  Under  the  gospel,  when  Christ  the  substance  was  exhibited,  the  ordinances  in  which 
this  covenant  is  dispensed  are  the  preaching  of  the  word  and  the  administration  of  the  sacra- 
ments of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  ;  which,  though  fewer  in  number,  and  administered  with 
more  simplicity  and  less  outward  glory,  yet  in  them  it  is  held  forth  in  more  fullness,  evidence,  and 
spiritual  efficacy,  to  all  nations,  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  ;  and  is  called  the  New  Testament.  There 
are  not,  therefore,  two  covenants  of  grace  differing  in  substance,  but  one  and  the  same  under  vari- 
ous dispensations." 

5  Simple  insertion,  nothing  omitted. 

»  See  ante,  p.  371,  note  2. 


376  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

II.  The  Son  of  God,  the  second  Person  in  the  Trinity,  be- 
ing very  and  eternal  God  of  one  substance,  and  equal  with  the 
Father,  did,  when  the  fulness  of  time  was  come,  take  upon  him 
Mans  nature,  with  all  the  essential  properties  and  common  infirm- 
ities thereof,  yet  without  sin,  being  conceived  by  the  power  of  the 
holy  Ghost,  in  the  womb  of  the  Virgin  Mary  of  her  substance  : 
So  that  two  whole  per-  [16]  feet  and  distinct  natures,  the  Godhead 
and  the  Manhood,  were  inseparably  joyned  together  in  one  Per- 
son, without  conversion,  composition,  or  confusion  ;  which  Person 
is  very  God  and  very  Man,  yet  one  Christ,  the  onely  Mediator 
between  God  and  Man. 

III.  The  Lord  Jesus  in  his  Humane  nature,  thus  united  to 
the  Divine  in  the  Person  of  the  Son,'  was  sanctified  and 
anointed  with  the  holy  Spirit  above  measure,  having  in  him  all 
the  treasures  of  Wisdom  and  Knowledge,  in  whom  it  pleased  the 
Father  that  all  fulness  should  dwell,  to  the  end  that  being  holy, 
harmless,  undefiled,  and  full  of  Grace  and  Truth,  he  might  be 
throughly  furnished  to  execute  the  Office  of  a  Mediator  and 
Surety  ;  which  Office  he  took  not  unto  himself,  but  was  there- 
unto called  by  his  Father,  who  also2  put  all  Power  and  Judgement 
into  his  hand,  and  gave  him  Commandment  to  execute  the  same 

IV.  This  office  the  Lord  Jesus  did  most  willingly  undertake; 
which  that  he  might  discharge,  he  was  made  under  the  Law,  and 
did  perfectly  fulfil  it,  and  underwent  the  punishment  due  to 
us,  which  we  should  have  born  and  suffered,  being  made 
sin  and  a  curse  for  US,3  enduring4  most  grievous  torments  im- 
mediately from  God  in  his  soul,  and  most  painful  sufferings  in  his 
body,  was  crucified,  and  died,  was  buried,  and  remained  under  the 
power  of  death,  yet  saw  no  corruption,  on  the  third  day  he  arose 
from  the  dead  with  the  same  Body  in  which  he  suffered,  with  which 
also  he  ascended  into  Heaven,  and  there  sitteth  at  the  right  hand 
of  his  Father,  making  intercession,  and  shall  return  to  judge  Men 
and  Angels  at  the  end  of  the  world. 

[17]  V.  The  Lord  Jesus  by  his  perfect  obedience  and  sacri- 
fice of  himself,  which  he  through  the  eternal  Spirit,  once  offered  up 
unto  God,  hath  fully  satisfied  the  Justice  of  God,6  and  purchased 
not  onely  reconciliation,  but  an  everlasting  inheritance  in  the 
Kingdom  of  heaven,  for  all  those  whom  the  Father  hath  given 
unto  him. 


Simple  addition,  no  omission.  2  Not  in  West. 

1  Simple  addition  to  West.  <  West,  reads  endured. 

■  West,  reads  hit  Father. 


THE    CONFESSION    OF   FAITH  377 

VI.  Although  the  work  of  Redemption  was  not  actually 
wrought  by  Christ,  till  after  his  Incarnation;  yet  the  vertue,  efficacy 
and  benefits  thereof  were  communicated  to1  the  Elect  in  all  ages, 
successively  from  the  beginning  of  the  world,  in  and  by  those 
Promises,  Types  and  Sacrifices  wherein  he  was  revealed  and  signi- 
fied to  be  the  seed  of  the  Woman,  which  should  bruise  the  Serpents 
head,  and  the  Lamb  slain  from  the  beginning  of  the  world,  being 
yesterday  and  to  day  the  same,  and  for  ever. 

VII.  Christ  in  the  work  of  Mediation  acteth  according  to 
both  Natures,  by  each  Nature  doing  that  which  is  proper  to2  it 
self;  yet  by  reason  of  the  unity  of  the  Person,  that  which  is  proper 
to  one  Nature,  is  sometimes  in  Scripture  attributed  to  the  Person 
denominated  by  the  other  Nature. 

VIII.  To  all  those  for  whom  Christ  hath  purchased  Redemp- 
tion, he  doth  certainly  and  effectually  apply  and  communicate  the 
same,  making  intercession  for  them,  and  revealing  unto  them  in 
and  by  the  Word,  the  mysteries  of  salva-  [18]  tion,  effectually  per- 
swading  them  by  his  Spirit  to  believe  and  obey,  and  governing 
their  hearts  by  his  Word  and  Spirit,  overcoming  all  their  enemies 
by  his  almighty  Power  and  Wisdom,  and  in  such  maner  and  ways  as 
are  most  consonant  to  his  wonderful  and  unsearchable  dispensation. 

CHAP.  IX. 
Of  Free-will. 

GOd  hath  endued  the  Will  of  man  with  that  natural  liberty 
and  power  of  acting  upon  choice,3  that  it4  is  neither 
forced,  nor  by  any  absolute  necessity  of  Nature  determined  to  do5 
good  or  evil. 

II.  Man  in  his  state  of  Innocency  had  freedom  and  power  to 
will  and  to  do  that  which  was6  good  and  well  pleasing  to  God;  but 
yet  mutably,  so  that  he  might  fall  from  it. 

III.  Man  by  his  fall  into  a  state  of  sin,  hath  wholly  lost  all 
ability  of  will  to  any  spiritual  good  accompanying  salvation;  so  as 
a  natural  man  being  altogether  averse  from  that  good,  and  dead  in 
sin,  is  not  able  by  his  own  strength  to  convert  himself,  or  to  pre- 
pare himself  thereunto. 

IV.  When  God  converts  a  sinner,  and  translates  him  into  the 
state  of  grace,  he  freeth  him  from  his  natural  bondage  under  sin, 
and  by  his  grace  alone  inables  him  freely  to  will  [19]  and  to  do 


1  West,  reads  unto.  2  Saybrook  reads  in. 

3  Simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West.  *  Ibid. 

«  West,  reads  is. 
25 


3/8  THE    SAVOY    DECLARATION 

that  which  is  spiritually  good;  yet  so,  as  that  by  reason  of  his 
remaining  corruption,  he  doth  not  perfectly  nor  onely  will  that 
which  is  good,  but  doth  also  will  that  which  is  evil. 

V.  The  will  of  man  is  made  perfectly  and  immutably  free  to 
good  alone  in  the  state  of  Glory  onely. 

CHAT\  X. 
Of  Effectual  Calling. 

A  LI  those  whom  God  hath  predestinated  unto  life,  and  those 
onely,  he  is  pleased  in  his  appointed  and  accepted  time 
effectually  to  call  by  his  Word  and  Spirit,  out  of  that  state  of  sin 
and  death  in  which  they  are  by  nature,  to  grace  and  salvation  by 
Jesus  Christ,  inlightning  their  mind.es  spiritually  and  savingly  to 
understand  the  things  of  God,  taking  away  their  heart  of  stone, 
and  giving  unto  them  an  heart  of  flesh,  renewing  their  wills,  and 
by  his  almighty  power  determining  them  to  that  which  is  good,  and 
effectually  drawing  them  to  Jesus  Christ;  yet  so,  as  they  come 
most  freely,  being  made  willing  by  his  grace. 

II.  This  effectual  Call  is  of  Gods  free  and  special  grace  alone, 
not  from  any  thing  at  all  foreseen  in  man,  who  is  altogether  passive 
therein,  untill  being  quickned  and  renewed  by  the  holy  Spirit  he 
is  thereby  enabled  to  answer  this  Call,  and  to  embrace  the  grace 
offered  and  conveyed  in  it. 

[20]  III.  Elect  Infants  dying  in  Infancy,  are  regenerated 
and  saved  by  Christ,'  who  worketh  when,  and  where,  and  how  he 
pleaseth:  so  also  are  all  other  elect  persons  who  are  uncapable  of 
being  outwardly  called  by  the  Ministery  of  the  Word. 

IV.  Others  not  elected,  although  they  may  be  called  by  the 
Ministry  of  the  Word,  and  may  have  some  common  operations  of 
the  Spirit,  yet  not  being  effectually  drawn  by  the  Father, 
they  neither  do  nor  can2  come  unto  Christ,  and  therefore  can- 
not be  saved;  much  less  can  men  not  professing  the  Christian 
Religion,  be  saved  in  any  other  way  whatsoever,  be  they  never  so 
diligent  to  frame  their  lives  according  to  the  Light  of  Nature,  and 
the  Law  of  that  Religion  they  do  profess:  And  to  assert  and 
maintain  that  they  may,  is  very  pernicious,  and  to  be  detested. 


T 


CHAP.    XI. 
Of  Justification. 

Hose  whom  God  effectually  calleth,  he  also  freely  justifieth, 
not  by  infusing  righteousness  into  them,  but  by  pardoning 


1  West,  adds,  through  the  Spirit.         2  West,  reads,  yet  they  never  truly  come  unto  Christ. 


THE   CONFESSION   OF   FAITH  379 

their  sins,  and  by  accounting  and  accepting  their  person  as  right- 
eous, not  for  anything  wrought  in  them,  or  done  by  them,  but  for 
Christs  sake  alone;  nor  by  imputing  Faith  it  self,  the  act  of 
believing,  or  any  other  Evangelical  obedience  to  them,  as  their 
righteousness,  but  by  imputing  Christs  active  obedience  unto1 
the  whole  Law,  and  [21]  passive  obedience  in  his  death 
for  their  whole  and  sole  righteousness,2  they  receiving  and 
resting  on  him  and  his  righteousness  by  Faith;  which  Faith  they 
have  not  of  themselves,  it  is  the  gift  of  God. 

II.  Faith  thus  receiving  and  resting  on  Christ,  and  his  right- 
eousness, is  the  alone  instrument  of  justification;  yet  it  is  not 
alone  in  the  person  justified,  but  is  ever  accompanied  with  all  other 
saving  graces,  and  is  no  dead  Faith,  but  worketh  by  Love. 

III.  Christ  by  his  Obedience  and  Death  did  fully  discharge 
the  Debt  of  all  those  that  are3  justified,  and  did  by  the  sacrifice 
of  himself,  in  the  blood  of  his  Cross,  undergoing  in  their 
Stead  the  penalty  due  unto  them4  make  a  proper,  real,  and 
full  satisfaction  to  Gods6  Justice  in  their  behalf:  Yet  in  as  much 
as  he  was  given  by  the  Father  for  them,  and  his  Obedience  and 
Satisfaction  accepted  in  their  stead,  and  both  freely,  not  for  any 
thing  in  them,  their  justification  is  onely  of  free  grace,  that  both 
the  exact  justice  and  rich  grace  of  God  might  be  glorified  in  the 
justification  of  sinners. 

IV.  God  did  from  all  eternity  decree  to  justifie  all  the  Elect, 
and  Christ  did  in  the  fulness  of  time  dye  for  their  sins,  and  rise 
again  for  their  justification:  Nevertheless,  they  are  not  justified 
personally,"  until  the  holy  Spirit  doth  in  due  time  actually  apply 
Christ  unto  them. 

[22]  V.  God  doth  continue  to  forgive  the  sins  of  those  that 
are  justified;  and  although  they  can  never  fall  from  the  state 
of  justification,  yet  they  may  by  their  sins  fall  under  Gods  fatherly 
displeasure:  and  in  that  condition  they  have  not  usually7  the 
light  of  his  Countenance  restored  unto  them,  until  they  humble 
themselves,  confess  their  sins,  beg  pardon,  and  renew  their  faith 
and  repentance. 

VI.  The  justification  of  Believers  under  the  old  Testament, 
was  in  all  these  respects  one  and  the  same  with  the  justification  of 
Believers  under  the  new  Testament. 


nd  satisfaction  of  Christ  unto  then, 
,  nothing  is  omitted  from  We 


1  Saybrook  reads  to. 

2  West,  reads,  but  by  imputing  the  o 

ediencc  a 

receiving,  etc. 

3  West,  adds,  thus. 

4  A  simpl 

5  West,  reads,  his  Father  s. 

e  Not  in  ^ 

7  West,  reads,  and  not  have  the  light, 

etc. 

380  THE    SAVOY    DECLARATION 

CHAP.    XII. 
Of   Adoption. 

A  LI  those  that  are  justified,  God  vouchsafeth  in'  and  for  his 
onely  Son  Jesus  Christ  to  make  partakers  of  the  grace  of 
Adoption,  by  which  they  are  taken  into  the  number,  and  enjoy  the 
liberties  and  priviledges  of  the  Children  of  God,  have  his  Name 
put  upon  them,  receive  the  Spirit  of  Adoption,  have  access  to  the 
Throne  of  Grace  with  boldness,  are  enabled  to  cry  Abba  Father, 
are  pitied,  protected,  provided  for,  and  chastened  by  him  as  by  a 
father,  yet  never  cast  off,  but  sealed  to  the  day  of  Redemption, 
and  inherit  the  promises  as  Heirs  of  everlasting  Salvation. 

[23]  CHAP.  XIII. 

Of  Solidification. 

THey  that  are  united  to  Christ,  effectually  called  and  regen- 
erated, having  a  new  heart  and  a  new  spirit  created  in  them, 
through  the  vertue  of  Christs  death  and  resurrection,  are  also 
further  sanctified  really  and  personally  through  the  same  ver- 
tue,' by  his  Word  and  Spirit  dwelling  in  them;  the  dominion  of 
the  whole  body  of  sin  is  destroyed,  and  the  several  lusts  thereof 
are  more  and  more  weakned,  and  mortified,  and  they  more  and 
more  quickned,  and  strengthned  in  all  saving  graces,  to  the  prac- 
tice of  all  true  holiness,  without  which  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord. 

II.  This  Sanctification  is  throughout  in  the  whole  man,  yet 
imperfect  in  this  life,  there  abideth3  still  some  remnants  of  cor- 
ruption in  every  part,  whence  ariseth  a  continual  and  irreconcile- 
able  war,  the  flesh  lusting  against  the  spirit,  and  the  spirit  against 
the  flesh. 

III.  In  which  war,  although  the  remaining  corruption  for  a 
time  may  much  prevail,  yet  through  the  continual  supply  of 
strength  from  the  sanctifying  Spirit  of  Christ,  the  regenerate  part 
doth  overcome,  and  so  the  Saints  grow  in  grace,  perfecting  holi- 
ness in  the  fear  of  God. 


1  Paybrook  omits  in. 

-  This  passage  is  somewhat  altered  from  the  Westminster,  which  reads,  "They  who  are 
effectually  called  and  regenerated,  having  a  new  heart  and  a  new  spirit  created  in  them,  are  further 
sanctified,  really  and  personally,  through  the  virtue  of  Christ's  death  and  resurrection,  by  his 
Word  and  Spirit,"  etc.  The  Confession  of  1680,  as  usual,  follows  the  Savoy,  save  in  the  first  line : 
"  They  that  are  effectually  called"  etc.,  ;'.  e.,  almost  a  restoration  of  the  Westminster  reading. 

3  1680  reads,  abide. 


THE    CONFESSION    OF   FAITH  381 

[24]  CHAP.  XIV. 

Of  saving  Faith. 

THe  grace  of  Faith,  whereby  the  Elect  are  inabled  to  believe 
to  the  saving  of  their  souls,  is  the  work  of  the  Spirit  of 
Christ  in  their  hearts,  and  is  ordinarily  wrought  by  the  Ministery 
of  the  Word  ;  by  which  also,  and  by  the  administration  of  the 
Seals,  Prayer,  and  other  means,1  it  is  increased  and  strength- 
ened. 

II.  By  this  Faith  a  Christian  believeth  to  be  true  whatsoever 
is  revealed  in  the  Word,  for  the  Authority  of  God  himself  speaking 
therein,  and  acteth  differently  upon  that  which  each  particular 
passage  thereof  containeth,  yielding  obedience  to  the  commands, 
trembling  at  the  threatnings,  and  embracing  the  promises  of  God 
for  this  life,  and  that  which  is  to  come.  But  the  principal  acts  of 
saving  Faith  are,  accepting,  receiving,  and  resting  upon  Christ 
alone,  for  justification,  sanctification,  and  eternal  life,  by  vertue  of 
the  covenant  of  Grace. 

III.  This  Faith,  although  it  be  different  in  degrees,  and 
may  be  weak  or  strong,  yet  it  is  in  the  least  degree  of  it 
different  in  the  kind  or  nature  of  it  (as  is  all  other  saving 
grace)  from  the  faith  and  common  grace  of  temporary  be- 
lievers; and  therefore,  though  it  may  be  many  times  assailed 
and  weakened,"  yet  it  gets  the  victory,  growing  up  in  many  to  the 
attainment  of  a  full  assurance  through  Christ,  who  is  both  the 
author  and  finisher  of  our  Faith. 

[25]  CHAP.  XV. 

Of  Repentance  unto  life  and  salvation.3 

SUch  of  the  Elect  as  are  converted  at  riper  years,  hav- 
ing sometime  lived  in  the  state  of  nature,  and  therein 
served  divers  lusts  and  pleasures,  God  in  their  effectual 
calling  giveth  them  Repentance  unto  life. 


1  This  passage  in  the  West,  reads,  administration  of  the  sacraments  and  prayer,  it  is, 

3  Here  the  Savoy  has  considerable  additional  matter.  The  West,  reads,  "  This  faith  is  dif- 
ferent in  degrees,  weak  or  strong ;  may  be  often  and  many  ways  assailed  and  weakened,  but  gets 
tlie  victory;"  etc. 

3  This  chapter  is  wholly  rewritten  and  rearranged.     In  the  Westminster  it  reads, 
"  Of  Repentance   Unto  Life. 

Repentance  unto  life  is  an  evangelical  grace,  the  doctrine  whereof  is  to  be  preached  by  every 
minister  of  the  gospel,  as  well  as  that  of  faith  in  Christ. 

II.  By  it  a  sinner,  out  of  the  sight  and  sense,  not  only  of  the  danger,  but  also  of  the  filthi- 
ness  and  odiousness  of  his  sins,  as  contrary  to  the  holy  nature  and  righteous  law  of  God,  and  upon 
the  apprehension  of  his  mercy  in  Christ  to  such  as  are  penitent,  so  grieves  for,  and  hates  his  sins,  as 


382  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

II.  Whereas  there  is  none  that  doth  good,  and  sin- 
neth  not,  and  the  best  of  men  may  through  the  power  and 
deceitfulness  of  their  corruptions  dwelling  in  them,  with 
the  prevalency  of  temptation,  fall  ihto  great  sins  and 
provocations;  God  hath  in  the  covenant  of  Grace  merci- 
fully provided,  that  Believers  so  sinning  and  falling,  be 
renewed  through  repentance  unto  Salvation. 

III.  This  saving  Repentance  is  an  Evangelical  Grace,1 
whereby  a  person  being  by  the  holy  Ghost  made  sensible 
of  the  manifold  evils  of  his  sin,  doth  by  Faith  in  Christ 
humble  himself  for  it  with  godly  sorrow,  detestation  of  it, 
and  self-abhorrency,  praying  for  pardon  and  strength  of 
Grace,  with  a  purpose,  and  endeavor  by  supplies  of  the 
Spirit,  to  walk  before  God  unto  all  well-pleasing  in  all 
things. 

IV.  As  Repentance  is  to  be  continued  through  the 
whole  course  of  our  lives,  upon  the  account  of  the  body  of 
death,  and  the  motions  thereof;  so  it  is  every  mans  duty  to 
repent  of  his  particular  known  sins  particularly.2 

[26]  V.  Such  is  the  provision  which  God  hath  made 
through  Christ  in  the  covenant  of  Grace,  for  the  preser- 
vation of  Believers  unto  salvation,  that  although  there  is 
no  sin  so  small,  but  it  deserves  damnation;  yet  there  is  no  sin  so 
great,  that  it  shall3  bring  damnation  on  them"  who  truly  repent;5 
which  makes  the  constant  preaching  of  Repentance 
necessary. 


to  turn  from  them  all  unto  God,  purposing  and  endeavoring  to  walk  with  him,  in  all  the  ways  of 
his  commandments. 

I I I.  Although  repentance  be  not  to  be  rested  in  as  any  satisfaction  for  sin,  or  any  cause  of 
the  pardon  thereof,  which  is  the  act  of  Cod's  free  grace  in  Christ ;  yet  is  it  of  such  necessity  to  all 
sinners,  that  none  may  expect  pardon  without  it. 

IV.  As  there  is  no  sin  so  small  but  it  deserves  damnation  ;  so  there  is  no  sin  so  great,  that  it 
can  bring  damnation  upon  those  who  truly  repent. 

V.  Men  ought  not  to  content  themselves  with  a  general  repentance,  but  it  is  every  man's 
duty  to  endeavour  to  repent  of  his  particular  sins,  particularly. 

VI.  As  every  man  is  bound  to  make  private  confession  of  his  sins  to  God,  praying  for  the 
pardon  thereof,  upon  which,  and  the  forsaking  of  them,  he  shall  find  mercy:  so  he  that  scanda- 
lizeth  his  brother,  or  the  Church  of  Christ,  ought  to  be  willing,  by  a  private  or  public  confession 
and  sorrow  for  his  sin,  to  declare  his  repentance  to  those  that  are  offended  ;  who  are  thereupon  to 
be  reconciled  to  him,  and  in  love  to  receive  him." 

1  Compare  note  above,  section  I. 

•  Compare  note  above,  section  V. 
3  West,  reads  can. 

*  Ibid.,  upon  those. 

5  Compare  note  above,  section  IV. 


THE   CONFESSION   OF   FAITH  383 

CHAP.  XVI. 
Of  good   Works, 

GOod  works  are  onely  such  as  God  hath  commanded  in  his  holy 
Word,  and  not  such  as  without  the  warrant  thereof  are  de- 
vised by  men  out  of  blinde  zeal,  or  upon  any  pretence  of  good  in- 
tentions. ' 

II.  These  good  Works  done  in  obedience  to  Gods  command- 
ments, are  the  fruits  and  evidences  of  a  true  and  lively  Faith,  and 
by  them  Believers  manifest  their  thankfulness,  strengthen  their  as- 
surance, edifie  their  Brethren,  adorn  the  profession  of  the  Gospel, 
stop  the  mouthes  of  the  adversaries,  and  glorifie  God,  whose  work- 
manship they  are,  created  in  Christ  Jesus  thereunto,  that  having 
their  fruit  unto  holiness,  they  may  have  the  end  eternal  life. 

[27]  III.  Their  ability  to  do  good  works  is  not  at  all  of 
themselves,  but  wholly  from  the  Spirit  of  Christ  :  And  that  they 
may  be  enabled  thereunto,  besides  the  graces  they  have  already 
received,  there  is  required  an  actual  influence  of  the  same  holy 
Spirit  to  work  in  them  to  will  and  to  do,  of  his  good  pleasure  ;  yet 
are  they  not  hereupon  to  grow  negligent,  as  if  they  were  not  bound 
to  perform  any  duty,  unless  upon  a  special  motion  of  the  Spirit, 
but  they  ought  to  be  diligent  in  stirring  up  the  grace  of  God  that 
is  in  them. 

IV.  They  who  in  their  obedience  attain  to  the  greatest  height 
which  is  possible  in  this  life,  are  so  far  from  being  able  to  superer- 
ogate,  and  to  do  more  then  God  requires,  as  that  they  fall  short  of 
much,  which  in  duty  they  are  bound  to  do. 

V.  We  cannot  by  our  best  works  merit  pardon  of  sin,  or 
eternal  life  at  the  hand  of  God,  by  reason  of  the  great  dispropor- 
tion that  is  between  them,  and  the  glory  to  come  ;  and  the  infinite 
distance  that  is  between  us,  and  God,  whom  by  them  we  can 
neither  profit,  nor  satisfie  for  the  debt  of  our  former  sins  ;  but 
when  we  have  done  all  we  can,  we  have  done  but  our  duty,  and 
are  unprofitable  servants :  and  because  as  they  are  good,  they 
proceed  from  his  Spirit,  and  as  they  are  wrought  by  us,  they  are 
defiled  and  mixed  with  so  much  weakness  and  imperfection,  that 
they  cannot  endure   the  severity  of  Gods  judgement.  3 

[28]  AT.  Yet  notwithstanding,  the  persons  of  Believers 
being  accepted  through  Christ,  their  good  works  also  are  accepted 
in    him,  not   as   though  they  were  in  this  life  wholly  unblameable 


West,  reads,  intention. 
1  Saybrook  reads,  judgii 


3§4  THE    SAVOY    DECLARATION 

and  unreproveable  in  Gods  sight,  but  that  he  looking  upon  them 
in  his  son  is  pleased  to  accept  and  reward  that  which  is  sincere,  al- 
though accompanied  with  many  weaknesses  and  imperfections. 

VII.  Works  done  by  unregenerate  men,  although  for  the  mat- 
ter of  them  they  may  be  things  which  God  commands,  and  of  good 
use  both  to  themselves  and  to  '  others  :  yet  because  they  proceed 
not  from  a  heart  purified  by  Faith,  nor  are  done  in  a  right  maner, 
according  to  the  Word,  nor  to  a  right  end,  the  glory  of  God  ;  they 
are  therefore  sinful,  and  cannot  please  God,  nor  make  a  man  meet 
to  receive  grace  from  God  ;  and  yet  their  neglect  of  them  is  more 
sinful,  and  displeasing  unto  God. 

CHAP.   XVII. 
Of  the  Perseverance  of  the    Saints. 

THey  whom  God  hath  accepted  in  his  beloved,  effectually  called 
and  sanctified  by  his  Spirit,  can  neither  totally  nor  finally  fall 
away  from  the  state  of  grace,  but  shall  certainly  persevere  therein 
to  the  end,  and  be  eternally  saved. 

[29]  II.  This  Perseverance  of  the  Saints  depends  not  upon 
their  own  free-will,  but  upon  the  immutability  of  the  Decree  of 
Election,2  from  the  free  and  unchangeable  love  of  God  the  Father, 
upon  the  efficacy  of  the  merit  and  intercession  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  union  with  him,  the  oath  of  God,a  the  abiding  of  his1 
Spirit,  and  of  5  the  seed  of  God  within  them,  and  the  nature  of  the 
Covenant  of  Grace,  from  all  which  ariseth  also  the  certainty  and 
infallibility  thereof. 

III.  And  though"  they  may  through  the  temptation  of 
Satan,  and  of  the  world,  the  prevalency  of  corruption  remaining  in 
them,  and  the  neglect  of  the  means  of  their  preservation,  fall  into 
grievous  sins,  and  for  a  time  continue  therein,  whereby  they  incur 
Gods  displeasure  and  grieve  his  holy  Spirit,  come  to  have 
their  graces  and  comforts  impaired,7  have  their  hearts 
hardned,  and  their  consciences  wounded,  hurt  and  scandal- 
ize others,  and  bring  temporal  judgements  Upon  themselves; 
yet  they  are  and  shall  be  kept  by  the  power  of  God  through 
faith  unto  salvation.' 

1  Not  in  West.  5  West.  adds,  f/oiuing: 

8  A  simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West.       <  West,  reads,  the. 

5  1680 omits  of.  6  Ibid.,  Xcvertheless. 

'  West,  reads,  come  to  be  deprived  of  some  measure  0/  their  graces  and  comforts. 

6  An  addition,  West,  ends  with  themselves.  > 


THE   CONFESSION   OF   FAITH  385 

CHAP.  XVIII. 
Of  the  Assurance   of   Grace  and  Salvation. 

ALthough  temporary  believers '  and  other  unregenerate 
men  may  vainly  deceive  themselves  with  false  hopes,  and 
carnal  presumptions  of  being  in  the  favor  of  God,  and  state  2  of 
salvation,  which  hope  of  theirs  shall  perish  ;  yet  [30]  such  as 
truely  believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  love  him  in  sincerity,  en- 
deavoring to  walk  in  all  good  conscience  before  him,  may  in  this  life 
be  certainly  assured  that  they  are  in  the  3  state  of  Grace,  and  may 
rejoyce  in  the  hope  of  the  glory  of  God,  which  hope  shall  never 
make  them  ashamed. 

II.  This 4  certainty  is  not  a  bare  conjectural  and  probable 
perswasion,  grounded  upon  a  fallible  hope,  but  an  infallible  assur- 
ance of  faith,  founded  on  the  blood  and  righteousness  of 
Christ,  revealed  in  the  Gospel,  and  also  upon  the  inward  evi- 
dence of  those  graces  unto  which  promises  are  made,  and  on  the 
immediate  witness  of  the  Spirit,  testifying  our  Adoption, 
and  as  a  fruit  thereof,  leaving  the  heart  more  humble 
and  holy. 

III.  This  infallible  Assurance  doth  not  so  belong  to  the 
essence  of  Faith,  but  that  a  true  believer  may  wait  long,  and  con- 
flict with  many  difficulties  before  he  be  partaker  of  it ;  yet  being 
inabled  by  the  Spirit  to  know  the  things  which  are  freely  given 
him  of  God,  he  may  without  extraordinary  revelation  in  the  right 
use  of  ordinary  means  attain  thereunto:  And  therefore  it  is  the 
duty  of  every  one  to  give  all  diligence  to  make  his  5  calling  and 
election  sure,  that  thereby  his  heart  may  be  inlarged  in  peace  and 
joy  in  the  holy  Ghost,  in  love  and  thankfulness  to  God,  and  in 
strength  and  chearfulness  in  the  duties  of  obedience,  the  proper 
fruits  of  this  assurance;  so  far  is  it  from  inclining  men  to  loos- 
ness. 

[31]  IV.  True  believers  may  have  the  assurance  of  their 
salvation  divers  ways  shaken,  diminished  and  intermitted,  as  by 
negligence  in  preserving  of  it,  by  falling  into  some  special  sin, 
which  woundeth  the  conscience,  and  grieveth  the  Spirit,  by  some 


1  West,  reads,  hypocrites.  =  Ibid.,  estate.  s  Ibid.,  a. 

4  This  paragraph  is  rewritten.  In  the  West,  it  reads,  "  This  certainty  is  not  a  bare  conjectural 
and  probable  persuasion,  grounded  upon  a  fallible  hope ;  but  an  infallible  assurance  of  faith, 
founded  upon  the  divine  truth  of  the  promises  of  salvation,  the  inward  evidence  of  those  graces 
unto  which  these  promises  are  made,  the  testimony  of  the  Spirit  of  adoption  witnessing  with  our 
spirits  that  we  are  the  children  of  God  :  which  Spirit  is  the  earnest  of  our  inheritance,  whereby  we 
are  sealed  to  the  day  of  redemption." 

6  Saybrook  reads  their. 


386  THE   SAVOY    DECLARATION 

sudden  or  vehement  temptation,  by  Gods  withdrawing  the  light  of 
his  countenance,1  suffering  even  such  as  fear  him  to  walk  in  dark- 
ness, and  to  have  no  light;  yet  are  they  neither*  utterly  destitute 
of  that  seed  of  God,  and  life  of  Faith,  that  love  of  Christ  and  the 
Brethren,  that  sincerity  of  heart  and  conscience  of  duty,  out  of 
which  by  the  operation  of  the  Spirit  this  assurance  may  in  due  time 
be  revived,  and  by  the  which  in  the  mean  time  they  are  supported 
from  utter  despair. 

CHAP.  XIX. 
Of  the  Law  of  God. 

GOd  gave  to  Adam  a  Law  of  universal  obedience  written 
in  his  heart,  and  a  particular  precept  of  not  eating 
the  Fruit  of  the  Tree  of  Knowledge  of  good  and  evil,3  as  a 

Covenant  of  Works,  by  which  he  bound  him  and  all  his  posterity  to 
personal,  entire,  exact  and  perpetual  obedience,  promised  life  upon 
the  fulfilling,  and  threatned  death  upon  the  breach  of  it,  and  in- 
dued him  with  power  and  ability  to  keep  it. 

II.  This  Law  so  written  in  the  heart,  continued  to  be  a 
per-[32]fect  Rule  of  righteousness  after  the  fall  of  man,4  and 
was  delivered  by  God  upon5  mount  Sinai  in  ten  Commandments, 
and  written  in  two  Tables;  the  four  first  Commandments  contain- 
ing our  duty  towards  God,  and  the  other  six  our  duty  to  man. 

III.  Beside  this  Law  commonly  called  Moral,  God  was 
pleased  to  give  to  the  people  of  Israel"  Ceremonial  Laws,  contain- 
ing several  Typical  Ordinances,  partly  of  Worship,'  prefiguring 
Christ,  his  Graces,  Actions,  Sufferings  and  Benefits,  and  partly 
holding  forth  divers  Instructions  of  Moral  Duties:  All  which  Cere- 
monial Laws  being  appointed  onely  to  the  time  of  Reforma- 
tion, are  by  Jesus  Christ  the  true  Messiah  and  onely  Law- 
giver, who  was  furnished  with  power  from  the  Father  for 
that  end,  abrogated  and  taken  away." 

IV.  To  them  also0  he  gave  sundry  Judicial  Laws,  which  ex- 
pired together  with  the  State  of  that  people,  not  obliging  any  now 


'  West,  adds  and.  2  West,  reads  never. 

3  A  simple  addition,  nothing  is  omitted  from  West. 

4  In  the  West,  this  reads,  "  This  law,  after  his  fall,  continued  to  be  a  perfect  rule  of  righteous- 
and  as  such,  was  delivered  by  God,"  etc. 

6  i68o  and  Saybrook  read,  on. 

*  West.,  i63o,  and  Saybrook  add,  as  a  church  under  age. 

7  Saybrook  reads,  Worshiping. 

B  West,  reads.  All  which  ceremonial  laws  arc  now  abrogated  under  the  New    Testament. 
o  West,  adds,  as  a  body  politic. 


THE   CONFESSION    OF   FAITH  387 

by  vertue  of  that  institution,  their  general  equity  onely  being 
still  of  moral  use.1 

V.  The  Moral  Law  doth  for  ever  binde  all,  as  well  justified 
persons  as  others,  to  the  obedience  thereof;  and  that  not  onely  in 
regard  of  the  matter  contained  in  it,  but  also  in  respect  of  the 
Authority  of  God  the  Creator,  who  gave  it:  neither  doth  Christ  in 
the  Gospel  any  way  dissolve,  but  much  strengthen  this  obligation. 

[33]  VI.  Although  true  Believers  be  not  under  the  Law,  as  a 
Covenant  of  Works,  to  be  thereby  justified  or  condemned;  yet  it 
is  of  great  use  to  them  as  well  as  to  others,  in  that,  as  a  rule  of  life, 
informing  them  of  the  Will  of  God,  and  their  duty,  it  directs  and 
bindes  them  to  walk  accordingly,  discovering  also  the  sinful  pollu- 
tions of  their  nature,  hearts  and  lives,  so  as  examining  them- 
selves thereby,  they  may  come  to  further  conviction  of  humiliation 
for,  and  hatred  against  sin,  together  with  a  clearer  sight  of  the 
need  they  have  of  Christ,  and  the  perfection  of  his  obedience.  It 
is  likewise  of  use  to  the  regenerate,  to  restrain  their  corruptions, 
in  that  it  forbids  sin,  and  the  threatnings  of  it  serve  to  shew  what 
even  their  sins  deserve,  and  what  afflictions  in  this  life  they  may 
expect  for  them,  although  freed  from  the  curse  thereof  threatned 
in  the  Law.  The  promises  of  it  in  like  maner  shew  them  Gods 
approbation  of  obedience,  and  what  blessings  they  may  expect 
upon  the  performance  thereof,  although  not  as  due  to  them  by  the 
Law,  as  a  Covenant  of  Works;  so  as  a  mans  doing  good,  and  re- 
fraining from  evil,  because  the  Law  incourageth  to  the  one,  and 
deterreth  from  the  other,  is  no  evidence  of  his  being  under  the 
Law,  and  not  under  Grace. 

VII.  Neither  are  the  forementioned  uses  of  the  Law  contrary 
to  the  grace  of  the  Gospel,  but  do  sweetly  comply  with  it,  the 
Spirit  of  Christ  subduing  and  inabling  the  will  of  man  to  do  that 
freely  and  chearfully,  which  the  will  of  God  revealed  in  the  Law 
required2  to  be  done. 

[34]  CHAP.  XX.3 

Of  the  Gospel,  and  of  the  extent  of 
the  Grace4  thereof. 

He  Covenant  of  Works  being  broken  by  sin,  and  made 
unprofitable  unto  life,  God  was  pleased  to  give  unto 


T 


1  West,  reads,  not  obliging  any  other,  now,  further  than  the  general  equity  thereof  may 

2  West,  reads,  requireth. 

3  This  whole  chapter  is  an  addition  of  the  Savoy  to  the  Westminster. 

4  Saybrook  reads,  Graces. 


388  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

the  Elect  the  promise  of  Christ,  the  seed  of  the  woman, 
as  the  means  of  calling  them,  and  begetting  in  them  Faith 
and  Repentence:  In  this  promise  the  Gospel,  as  to  the 
substance  of  it,  was  revealed,  and  was  therein  effectual 
for  the  conversion  and  salvation  of  sinners. 

II.  This  promise  of  Christ,  and  salvation  by  him,  is 
revealed  onely  in  and  by  the  Word  of  God;  neither  do 
the  works  of  Creation  or  Providence,  with  the  Light  of 
Nature,  make  discovery  of  Christ,  or  of  Grace  by  him,  so 
much  as  in  a  general  or  obscure  way;  much  less  that 
men  destitute  of  the  revelation  of  him  by  the  Promise  or 
Gospel,  should  be  enabled  thereby  to  attain  saving  Faith 
or  Repentance. 

III.  The  revelation  of  the  Gospel  unto  sinners,  made 
in  divers  times,  and  by  sundry  parts,  with  the  addition  of 
Promises  and  Precepts  for  the  obedience  required  therein, 
as  to  the  Nations  and  persons  to  whom  it  is  granted, 
is  meerly  of  the  Soveraign  will  and  good  pleasure  of 
God,  not  being  annexed  by  vertue  of  any  promise  to  the 
due  im-[35]  provement  of  mens  natural  abilities,  by  vertue 
of  common  light  received  without  it,  which  none  ever  did 
make  or  can  so  do:  And  therefore  in  all  ages  the  Preach- 
ing of  the  Gospel  hath  been  granted  unto  persons  and 
nations,  as  to  the  extent  or  straitning  of  it,  in  great 
variety,  according  to  the  counsel  of  the  will  of  God. 

IV.  Although  the  Gospel  be  the  onely  outward  means 
of  revealing  Christ  and  saving  Grace,  and  is  as  such 
abundantly  sufficient  thereunto ;  yet  that  men  who  are 
dead  in  trespasses,  may  be  born  again,  quickned  or 
regenerated,  there  is  moreover  necessary  an  effectual, 
irresistible  work  of  the  holy  Ghost  upon  the  whole  soul, 
for  the  producing  in  them  a  new  spiritual  life,  without 
which  no  other  means  are  sufficient  for  their  conversion 
unto  God. 

CHAP.   XXI.1 
Of  Christian  Liberty,  and  Liberty  of  Conscience. 

THe  Liberty  which  Christ  hath  purchased  for  Believers  under 
the  Gospel,  consists  in  their  freedom  from  the  guilt  of  sin, 
the  condemning  wrath  of  God,  the  rigor  and  curse  of  the3  Law, 


>  This   is  chapter  XX.  in  the  Westminster,   from  this  point  onward  the  numbering  of  the 
chapters  in  the  West,  and  Savoy  is  not  identical. 
s  West,  reads,  the  curse  of  the  moral  law. 


THE    CONFESSION    OF    FAITH  389 

and  in  their  being  delivered  from  this  present  evil  world,  bondage 
to  Satan,  and  dominion  of  sin,  from  the  evil  of  afflictions,  the 
fear  and'  sting  of  death,  the  victory  of  the  grave,  and  everlasting 
damnation;  as  also  in  their  free  access  to  God,  and  their  yielding 
obedience  unto  him,  not  out  of  slavish  fear,  but  a  childe-like  [36] 
love  and  willing  minde:  All  which  were  common  also  to  Believers 
under  the  Law,  for  the  substance  of  them;2  but  under  the 
New  Testament  the  liberty  of  Christians  is  further  inlarged  in 
their  freedom  from  the  yoak  of  the  Ceremonial  Law,  the  whole 
Legal  administration  of  the  Covenant  of  Grace,3  to  which 
the  Jewish  Church  was  subjected,  and  in  greater  boldness  of  access 
to  the  throne  of  Grace,  and  in  fuller  communications  of  the  free 
Spirit  of  God,  then  Believers  under  the  Law  did  ordinarily 
partake  of. 

II.  God  alone  is  Lord  of  the  Conscience,  and  hath  left  it  free 
from  the  Doctrines  and  Commandments  of  men,  which  are  in  any 
thing  contrary  to  his  Word,  or  not  contained  in  it ; 4  so  that  to 
believe  such  Doctrines,  or  to  obey  such  Commands  out  of  con- 
science, is  to  betray  true  Liberty  of  Conscience  ;  and  the  requiring 
of  an  implicit  faith,  and  an  absolute  and  blinde  obedience,  is  to 
destroy  Liberty  of  Conscience,  and  Reason  also. 

III.  They  who  upon  pretence  of  Christian  Liberty  do  practise 
any  sin,  or  cherish  any  lust,  as  they  do  thereby  pervert  the 
main  designe  of  the  Grace  of  the  Gospel  to  their  own 
destruction ;  so  they  wholly  6  destroy  the  end  of  Christian 
Liberty,  which  is,  that  being  delivered  out  of  the  hands  of  our 
enemies,  we  might  serve  the  Lord  without  fear,  in  holiness  and 
righteousness  before  him  all  the  days  of  our  life.6 


1  Simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West. 

2  Ibid.  3  Ibid. 

*  West,  reads,  or  beside  it  in  matters  of  faith  or  worship. 

5  Ibid.,  lusty  do  thereby  destroy,  etc. 

6  The  West,  has  this  fourth  paragraph  which  the  Savoy,  following  the  example  of  Parlia- 
ment, omitted, 

"  IV.  And  because  the  power  which  God  hath  ordained,  and  the  liberty  which  Christ  hath 
purchased,  are  not  intended  by  God  to  destroy,  but  mutually  to  uphold  and  preserve  one  another  ; 
they  who,  upon  pretence  of  Christian  liberty,  shall  oppose  any  lawful  power,  or  the  lawful  exercise 
of  it,  whether  it  be  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  resist  the  ordinance  of  God.  And  for  their  publishing  of 
such  opinions,  or  maintaining  of  such  practices,  as  are  contrary  to  the  light  of  nature,  or  to  the 
known  principles  of  Christianity,  whether  concerning  faith,  worship,  or  conversation;  or  to  the 
power  of  godliness  ;  or  such  erroneous  opinions  or  practices,  as,  either  in  their  own  nature,  or  in  the 
manner  of  publishing  or  maintaining  them,  are  destructive  to  the  external  peace  and  order  which 
Christ  hath  established  in  the  church  ;  they  may  lawfully  be  called  to  account,  and  proceeded 
against  by  the  censures  of  the  church,  [and  by  the  power  of  the  Civil  Magistrate]."  The  clause 
enclosed  in  brackets  has  been  omitted  by  modern  American  Presbyterians. 


390  THE   SAVOY    DECLARATION 

[37]  CHAP.  XXII.' 

Of  religious  Worship,  and  the  Sabbath-day. 

THe  light  of  Nature  sheweth  that  there  is  a  God,  who  hath 
Lordship  and  Sovereignty  over  all,  is  just,2  good,  and  doth 
good  unto  all,  and  is  therefore  to  be  feared,  loved,  praised,  called 
upon,  trusted  in,  and  served  with  all  the  heart,  and  all  the  soul, 
and  with  all  the  might:  But  the  acceptable  way  of  worshipping 
the  true  God  is  instituted  by  himself,  and  so  limited  by3  his  own 
revealed  will,  that  he  may  not  be  worshipped  according  to  the 
imaginations  and  devices  of  men,  or  the  suggestions  of  Satan, 
under  any  visible  representations,  or  any  other  way  not  prescribed 
in  the  holy  Scripture. 

II.  Religious  Worship  is  to  be  given  to  God  the  Father,  Son, 
and  holy  Ghost,  and  to  him  alone;  not  to  Angels,  Saints,  or  any 
other  Creatures;4  and  since  the  Fall,  not  without  a  Mediator,  nor 
in  the  mediation  of  any  other  but  of  Christ  alone. 

III.  Prayer  with  thanksgiving,  being  one  special  part  of 
natural5  worship,  is  by  God  required  of  all  men;  butr  that  it  may 
be  accepted,  it  is  to  be  made  in  the  name  of  the  Son  by  the  help 
of  his  Spirit,  according  to  his  will,  with  understanding,  reverence, 
humility,  fervency,  faith,  love,  and  perseverance;  and  when  with 
Others7  in  a  known  tongue. 

[38]  IV.  Prayer  is  to  be  made  for  things  lawful,  and  for 
all  sorts  of  men  living,  or  that  shall  live  hereafter,  but  not  for  the 
dead,  nor  for  those  of  whom  it  may  be  known  that  they  have 
sinned  the  sin  unto  death. 

V.  The"  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  Preaching,  and  hearing 
the  word  of  God,  singing  of  Psalms,  as  also  the  administration  of 
Baptism  and  the  Lords  Supper,  are  all  parts  of  religious 
Worship  of  God,  to  be  performed  in  obedience  unto  God  with 
understanding,  faith,  reverence,  and  godly  fear  :  Solemn  Humil- 
iations, with  Fastings  and  Thanksgiving  upon  special  occasions, 


1  West,  chapter  XXI.         2  Simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West.         3  West  reads,  to. 

*  West,  reads,  creature.         5  West,  reads,  religious.  '   West  reads,  and. 

7  West,  reads,  and  if  -■ival  in  a  known  tongue. 

s  This  section  is  re-written.     The  West,  reads, 

"V.  The  reading  of  the  Scriptures  with  godly  fear;  the  sound  preaching;  and  conscionable 
hearing  of  the  Word,  in  obedience  unto  God  with  understanding,  faith,  and  reverence  ;  singing  of 
psalms  with  grace  in  the  heart  ;  as,  also,  the  due  administration  and  worthy  receiving  of  the  sacra- 
ments instituted  by  Christ  ;  are  all  parts  of  the  ordinary  religious  worship  of  God  :  besides  religious 
oaths,  vows,  solemn  fastings,  and  thanksgivings  upon  several  *  occasions  :  which  are,  in  their  sev- 
eral times  and  seasons,  to  be  used  in  an  holy  and  religious  manner." 

*  The  American  Presbyterians  have  adopted  the  Savoy  emendation,  special. 


THE    CONFESSION    OF    FAITH  39I 

are   in   their  several   times  and  seasons  to  be  used  in  a  holy  and 
religious  maner. 

VI.  Neither  Prayer  nor  any  other  part  of  religious  Wor- 
ship, is  now  under  the  Gospel  either  tyed  unto,  or  made 
more  acceptable  by  any  place,  in  which  it  is  performed,  or 
towards  which  it  is  directed  ;  but  God  is  to  be  worshipped 
every  where  in  spirit  and  in1  truth,  as  in  private  families 
daily,  and  in  secret  each  one  by  himself,  so  more  solemnly  in  the 
publique  assemblies,  which  are  not  carelesly  nor2  wilfully  to  be 
neglected,  or  forsaken,  when  God  by  his  Word  or  Providence 
calleth  thereunto. 

VII.  As  it  is  of  the  law  of  Nature,  that  in  general  a3  pro- 
portion of  time  by  Gods  appointment4  be  set  apart  for  the 
worship  of  God;  so  by6  his  Word  in6  a  positive,  moral,  and  per- 
[39]  petual  commandment,  binding  all  men  in  all  ages,  he  hath 
particularly  appointed  one  day  in  seaven  for  a  Sabbath  to  be  kept 
holy  unto  him,  which  from  the  beginning  of  the  world  to  the 
resurrection  of  Christ,  was  the  last  day  of  the  week,  and  from  the 
resurrection  of  Christ  was  changed  into  the  first  day  of  the  week, 
which  in  Scripture  is  called  the  Lords  day,  and  is  to  be  continued 
to  the  end  of  the  World  as  the  Christian  Sabbath,  the  observa- 
tion of  the  last  day  of  the  week  being  abolished.7 

VIII.  This  Sabbath  is  then  kept  holy  unto  the  Lord,  when 
men  after  a  due  preparing  of  their  hearts,  and  ordering8  their 
common  affairs  beforehand,  do  not  onely  observe  an  holy  rest  all 
the  day  from  their  own  works,  words,  and  thoughts  about  their 
worldly  imployments  and  recreations,  but  also  are  taken  up  the 
whole  time  in  the  publique  and  private  exercises  of  his  Worship, 
and  in  the  duties  of  Necessity  and  Mercy. 

CHAP.  XXIII.9 
Of  lawful  Oatlis  and  Vows. 

A  Lawful    Oath   is  a  part  of   religious  Worship,  wherein10  the 
person  swearing  in  truth,  righteousness  and  judgement," 
solemnly  calleth  God  to  witness  what  he  asserteth  or  promiseth, 

1  This  addition  of  the  Savoy  is  also  accepted  by  American  Presbyterians. 

2  West,  reads,  or.  3  West,  adds,  due. 
*  A  simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West.       6  West,  reads,  in. 

6  Ibid.,  by.  ■  An  addition.  West,  ends  with  Sabbath. 

»  West,  inserts  of.  >  West,  chapter  XXII. 

10  West,  reads  wherein,  upon  just  occasion,  the  person,  etc. 

11  A  simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West. 


3Q2  THE   SAVOY    DECLARATION 

and  to  judge  him  according  to   the  truth  or  falshood  of  what  he 
sweareth. 

[40]  II.  The  name  of  God  onely  is  that  by  which  men 
ought  to  swear,  and  therein  it  is  to  be  .used  with  all  holy  fear 
and  reverence :  Therefore  to  swear  vainly,  or  rashly,  by  that  glori- 
ous or1  dreadful  name,  or  to  swear  at  all  by  any  other  thing,  is 
sinful  and  to  be  abhorred  ;  yet  as  in  matters  of  weight  and  mo- 
ment an  Oath  is  warranted  by  the  Word  of  God  under  the  new 
Testament,  as  well  as  under  the  Old  ;  so  a  lawful  Oath,  being  im- 
posed by  lawful  authority  in  such  matters,  ought  to  be  taken. 

III.  AVhosoever  taketh  an  Oath  warranted  by  the  Word  of 
God,2  ought  duly  to  consider  the  weightiness  of  so  solemn  an  act, 
and  therein  to  avouch  nothing  but  what  he  is  fully  perswaded  is 
the  truth  :  neither  may  any  man  binde  himself  by  Oath  to  any 
thing,  but  what  is  good  and  just,  and  what  he  believeth  so  to  be, 
and  what  he  is  able  and  resolved  to  perform.  Yet  it  is  a  sin  to 
refuse  an  Oath  touching  any  thing  that  is  good  and  just,  being 
lawfully3  imposed  by  Authority. 

IV.  An  Oath  is  to  be  taken  in  the  plain  and  common  sense  of 
the  words,  without  equivocation  or  mental  reservation  :  It  cannot 
oblige  to  sin,  but  in  any  thing  not  sinful,  being  taken  it  bindes 
to  performance,  although  to  a  mans  own  hurt  ;  nor  is  it  to  be 
violated,  although  made  to  Hereticks  or  Infidels. 

[41]  V.  A  Vow,  which  is  not  to  be  made  to  any  Crea- 
ture, but  God  alone,4  is  of  the  like  nature  with  a  promissory 
Oath,  and  ought  to  be  made  with  the  like  religious  care,  and  to 
be  performed  with  the  like  faithfulness.5 

VI.  Popish  monastical  Vows  of  perpetual  single  life,  pro- 
fessed poverty,  and  regular  obedience,  are  so  far  from  being  de- 
grees of  higher  perfection,  that  they  are  superstitious  and  sinful 
snares,  in  which  no  Christian  may  intangle  himself. 


'  West,  reads,  and.  2  A  simple  addition  to  West. 

3  West,  reads,  being  imposed  by  la~vful  authority. 

*  A  simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West.  The  words  are  taken  from  West.,  section 
VI,  see  note  below. 

5  Between  section  V.  and  VI.  the  Savoy  omits  one  whole  section  and  part  of  a  second  from 
the  Westminster.     They  read  as  follows, 

"  VI.  It  is  not  to  be  made  to  any  creature,  but  to  God  alone  :  and  that  it  may  be  accepted, 
it  is  to  be  made  voluntarily,  out  of  faith  and  conscience  of  duty,  in  way  of  thankfulness  for  mercy 
received,  or  for  the  obtaining  of  what  we  want,  whereby  we  more  strictly  bind  ourselves  to  neces- 
sary duties,  or  to  other  things,  so  far  and  so  long  as  they  may  fitly  conduce  thereunto. 

VII.  No  man  may  vow  to  do  any  thing  forbidden  in  the  Word  of  God,  or  what  would  hin- 
der any  duty  therein  commanded,  or  which  is  not  in  his  own  power,  and  for  the  performance 
whereof  he  hath  no  promise  or  ability  from  God.  In  which  respects,  popish  monastical  vows  of 
perpetual  single  life,  professed  poverty,  and  regular  obedience,  are  so  far  from  being  degrees  of 
higher  perfection,  that  they  are  superstitious  and  sinful  snares,  in  which  no  Christian  may  entangle 


THE    CONFESSION    OF    FAITH  393 

CHAP.    XXIV.1 
Of  the    Civil   Magistrate. 

GOd  the  supreme  Lord  and  King  of  all  the  world,  hath 
ordained  civil  Magistrates  to  be  under  him,  over  the  people 
for  his  own  glory  and  the  publique  good;  and  to  this  end  hath 
armed  them  with  the  power  of  the  sword,  for  the  defence  and  in- 
couragement  of  them  that  do2  good,  and  for  the  punishment  of 
evil  doers. 

II.  It  is  lawful  for  Christians  to  accept  and  execute  the 
Office  of  a.  Magistrate,  when  called  thereunto:  in  the  management3 
whereof,  as  they  ought  specially  to  maintain4  Justice  and  Peace, 
according  to  the  wholsome  Laws  of  each  Commonwealth;  so  for 
that  end  they  may  lawfully  now  [42]  under  the  new  Testament 
wage 'war  upon  just  and  necessary  occasion. 

III.  Although"  the  Magistrate  is  bound  to  incourage, 
promote,  and  protect  the  professor  and  profession  of  the 
Gospel,  and  to  manage  and  order  civil  administrations  in 
a  due  subserviency  to  the  interest  of  Christ  in  the  world, 
and  to  that  end  to  take  care  that  men  of  corrupt  mindes 
and  conversations  do  not  licentiously  publish  and  divulge 
Blasphemy  and  Errors  in  their  own  nature,  subverting 
the  faith,  and  inevitably  destroying  the  souls  of  them  that 
receive  them :  Yet  in  such  differences  about  the  Doc- 
trines of  the  Gospel,  or  ways  of  the  worship  of  God,  as 
may  befall  men  exercising  a  good  conscience,  manifest- 
ing it  in  their  conversation,  and  holding  the  foundation, 
not  disturbing  others  in  their  ways  or  worship  that  differ 
from  them  ;  there  is  no  warrant  for  the  Magistrate  under 
the  Gospel  to  abridge  them  of  their  liberty. 


1  West,  chapter  XXIII.  2  West,  reads,  are. 

3  Ibid.,  7nanaging.  4  West,  adds,  piety. 

5  This  section  has  been  more  revised  than  any  other  in  the  Westminster  confession,  and  is  the 
only  variation  of  moment  between  the  Confessions  of  1680  and  of  Saybrook,  and  the  Savoy.  The 
section  omitted  from  the  West,  by  the  Savoy  is  as  follows : 

"  III.  The  civil  magistrate  may  not  assume  to  himself  the  administration  of  the  Word  and 
Sacraments,  or  the  power  of  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven:  yet  he  hath  authority,  and  it  is 
his  duty  to  take  order,  that  unity  and  peace  be  preserved  in  the  Church,  that  the  truth  of  God  be 
kept  pure  and  entire,  that  all  blasphemies  and  heresies  be  suppressed,  all  corruptions  and  abuses  in 
worship  and  discipline  prevented  or  reformed,  and  all  the  ordfnances  of  God  duly  settled,  admin- 
istered, and  observed.  For  the  better  effecting  whereof  he  hath  power  to  call  synods,  to  be  present 
at  them,  and  to  provide  that  whatsoever  is  transacted  in  them  be  according  to  the  mind  of  God." 

The  new  section  adopted  at  the  Savoy  did  not  however  commend  itself  to  the  Massachusetts 
divines  at  Boston  in  1680  or  their  followers  at  Saybrook  in  1708.  They  rejected  the  greater  part  of  the 
Savoy  section  and  adopted  in  its  stead  the  following,  based  in  part  on  the  IVth  section  of  chapter 
XXI.  (West.  ch.  XX.)  rejected  from  the  West,  by  the  Savoy;  see  ante,  p.  389,  note  6. 

"  III.  They  who  upon  pretense  of  Christian  liberty  shall  oppose  any  lawful  power,  or  the 
26 


394  THE    SAVOY    DECLARATION 

IV.  It  is  the  duty  of  people  to  pray  for  Magistrates,  to  honor 
their  persons,  to  pay  them  Tribute  and  other  dues,  to  obey  their 
lawful  commands,  and  to  be  subject  to  their  Authority  for  con- 
science sake.  Infidelity,  or  difference  in  Religion,  doth  not  make 
void  the  Magistrates  just  and  legal  Authority,  nor  free  the 
people  from  theiir1  obedience  to  him:  from  which  ecclesiastical 
persons  are  not  exempted,  much  less  hath  the  Pope  any  power  or 
jurisdiction  over  them  in  their  dominions,  or  over  any  of  their 
people,  and  least  of  all  to  deprive  them  of  their  dominions 
or  lives,  if  he  shall  judge  them  to  be  Hereticks,  or  upon  any  other 
pretence  whatsoever. 

[43]  CHAP.   XXY.- 

Of  Marriage* 

MArriage  is  to  be  between  one  man  and  one  woman:  neither 
is  it  lawful  for  any  man  to  have  more  then  one  wife,  nor 
for  any  woman  to  have  more  then  one  husband  at  the  same  time. 

II.  Marriage  was  ordained  for  the  mutual  help  of  husband 
and  wife,  for  the  increase  of  mankinde  with  a  legitimate  issue,  and 
of  the  Church  with  an  holy  seed,  and  for  preventing  of4  unclean- 
ness. 

III.  It  is  lawful  for  all  sorts  of  people  to  marry,  who  are  able 


lawful  exercises  of  it,  resist  the  Ordinance  of  God,  and  for  their  publishing  of  such  opinions,  or 
maintaining  of  such  practices  as  are  contrary  to  the  Light  of  Nature,  or  to  the  known  Principles  of 
Christianity,  whether  concerning  faith,  worship,  or  conversation,  or  to  the  power  of  godliness,  or 
such  erronious  opinions  or  practices,  as  either  in  their  own  nature,  or  in  the  manner  of  publishing 
or  maintaining  them,  are  destructive  to  the  external  peace  and  order  which  Christ  hath  estab- 
lished in  the  Church,  they  may  lawfully  be  called  to  account,  and  proceeded  against  by  the  censures 
of  the  Church,  and  by  the  power  of  the  civil  .Magistrate;  yet  in  such  differences  about  the  Doctrines 
of  the  Gospel,' or  waves  of  the  worship  of  God,  as  may  befal  men  exercising  a  good  conscience, 
manifesting  it  in  their  conversation,  and  holding  the  foundation,  and  duely  observing  the  Rules  of 
peace  and  order,  there  is  no  warrant  for  the  Magistrate  to  abridge  them  of  their  liberty." 

American  Presbyterians  have  made  a  further  revision,  changing  the  West.   Conf.,  in  !788,  as 
follows,  .  , 

••  III  Civil  magistrates  may  not  assume  to  themselves  the  administration  of  the  W  ord  and 
Sacraments;  or  the"  power  of  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  or,  in  the  least,  interfere  in 
matters  of  faith  Yet  as  nursing  fathers,  it  is  the  duty  of  civil  magistrates  to  protect  the  Church  of 
our  common  Lord,  without  giving  the  preference  to  any  denomination  of  Christians  above  the  rest, 
in  such  a  manner  that  all  ecclesiastical  persons  whatever  shall  enjoy  the  full,  free,  and  unquestioned 
liberty  of  discharging  every  part  of  their  sacred  functions,  without  violence  or  danger.  And,  as 
Jesus  Christ  hath  appointed  a  regular  government  and  discipline  in  his  Church,  no  law- of  any  com- 
monwealth should  interfere  with,  let,  or  hinder,  the  due  exercise  thereof,  among  the  voluntary 
members  of  any  denomination  of  Christians,  according  to  their  own  profession  and  belie  .  It  ,s  the 
duty  of  civil  magistrates  to  protect  the  person  and  good  name  of  all  their  people,  in  such  an  effect- 
ual manner  as  that  no  person  be  suffered,  either  upon  pretence  of  religion  or  infidelity,  to  offer  any 
indignity,  violence,  abuse,  or  injury  to  any  other  person  whatsoever:  and  to  take  order,  that  all 
religious  and  ecclesiastical  assemblies  be  held  without  molestation  or  disturbance. 
2  West.,  chapter  XXIV. 


i  Misprint. 

3  West.  adds,  and  Divorce.  *  Saybrook  omits  of. 


THE    CONFESSION    OF    FAITH  395 

-with  judgement  to  give  their  consent.  Yet  it  is  the  duty  of  Chris- 
tians to  marry1  in  the  Lord,  and  therefore  such  as  profess  the  true 
Reformed  religion,  should  not  marry  with  Infidels,  Papists,  or 
other  Idolaters:  neither  should  such  as  are  godly,  be  unequally 
yoaked  by  marrying  with  such  as  are2  wicked  in  their  life,  or 
maintain  damnable  Heresie.5 

IV.  Marriage  ought  not  to  be  within  the  degrees  of  consan- 
guinity or  affinity  forbidden  in  the  Word;  nor  can  such  incestuous 
Marriages  ever  be  made  lawful  by  any  law  of  man,  or  consent  of 
parties,  so  as  those  persons  may  live  together  as  man  and  wife.4 

[44]        1  CHAP.  XXVI.5 

Of  the  Church. 

THe  Catholique  or  Universal  Church,  which  is  invisible,  consists 
of  the  whole  number  of  the  Elect,  that  have  been,  are,  or 
shall  be  gathered  into  one  under  Christ,  the  Head  thereof,  and  is6 
the  Spouse,  the  Body,  the  fulness  of  him  that  filleth  all7  in  all. 

II.  The8  whole  body  of  men  throughout  the  world, 
professing  the  faith  of  the  Gospel  and  obedience  unto  God 
by  Christ  according  unto  it,  not  destroying  their  own  pro- 


1  West,  adds,  only.  2  West,  adds,  notoriously.  3  West,  reads,  heresies. 

4  At  this  point  the  Savoy,  following  the  example  of  Parliament,  makes  a  large  omission  from 
the  Westminster.  The  latter  reads  as  follows,  from  the  point  where  the  Savoy  concludes :  "The 
man  may  not  marry  any  of  his  wife's  kindred  nearer  in  blood  than  he  may  of  his  own,  nor  the 
woman  of  her  husband's  kindred  nearer  in  blood  than  of  her  own. 

V.  Adultery  or  fornication,  committed  after  a  contract,  being  detected  before  marriage, 
giveth  just  occasion  to  the  innocent  party  to  dissolve  that  contract.  In  the  case  of  adultery  after 
marriage,  it  is  lawful  for  the  innocent  party  to  sue  out  a  divorce,  and  after  the  divorce  to  marry 
another,  as  if  the  offending  party  were  dead. 

VI.  Although  the  corruption  of  man  be  such  as  is  apt  to  study  arguments,  unduly  to  put 
asunder  those  whom  God  hath  joined  together  in  marriage  ;  yet  nothing  but  adultery,  or  such  wil- 
ful desertion  as  can  no  way  be  remedied  by  the  Church  or  civil  magistrate,  is  cause  sufficient  of 
dissolving  the  bond  of  marriage  ;  wherein  a  public  and  orderly  course  of  proceeding  is  to  be  ob- 
served ;  and  the  persons  concerned  in  it,  not  left  to  their  own  wills  and  discretion  in  their  own 
case." 

5  West.,  chapter  XXV.  6  Saybrook  omits  is.  *  Ibid,  adds  and. 

8  The  remaining  sections  of  this  chapter  have  been  much  changed  in  the  Savoy.  In  the 
West,  section  II.  reads: 

"  II.  The  visible  Church,  which  is  also  catholic  or  universal  under  the  gospel,  (not  confined 
to  one  nation  as  before  under  the  law)  consists  of  all  those,  throughout  the  world,  that  profess  the 
true  religion,  and  of  their  children  ;  and  is  the  kingdom  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  house 
and  family  of  God,  out  of  which  there  is  no  ordinary  possibility  of  salvation." 

The  III.  and  IV.  sections  of  the  West,  are  wholly  omitted  from  the  Savoy,  they  are  : 

"III.  Unto  this  catholic  visible  Church,  Christ  hath  given  the  ministry,  oracles,  and  ordi- 
nances of  God,  for  the  gathering  and  perfecting  of  the  saints,  in  this  life,  to  the  end  of  the  world: 
and  doth  by  his  own  presence  and  Spirit,  according  to  his  promise,  make  them  effectual  thereunto. 

IV.  This  catholic  Church  hath  been  sometimes  more,  sometimes  less,  visible.  And  particu- 
lar churches,  which  are  members  thereof,  are  more  or  less  pure,  according  as  the  doctrine  of  the 
gospel  is  taught  and  embraced,  ordinances  administered,  and  public  worship  performed  more  or  less 
purely  in  them." 


396  THE   SAVOY    DECLARATION 

fession  by  any  Errors  everting  the  foundation,  or  unholi- 
ness  of  conversation,1  are,  and  may  be  called  the  visible 
Catholique  Church  of  Christ,  although  as  such  it  is  not 
intrusted  with  the  administration  of  any  Ordinances,  or 
have  any  officers  to  rule  or  govern  in,  or  over  the  whole 
Body.2 

III.  The3  purest  Churches  under  heaven  are  subject  both  to 
mixture  and  error,  and  some  have  so  degenerated  as  to  become  no 
Churches  of  Christ,  but  Synagogues  of  Satan:  Nevertheless  Christ 
always  hath  had,  and  ever  shall  have  a  visible  Kingdom 
in  this  world,  to  the  end  thereof,  of  such  as  believe  in  him, 
and  make  profession  of  his  name.1 

IV.  There5  is  no  other  Head  of  the  Church  but  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ;  nor  can  the  Pope  of  Rome  in  any  sense  be  [45] 
Head  thereof;  but  it  is  that  Antichrist,  that  man  of  sin,  and  son  of 
perdition,  that  exalteth  himself  in  the  Church  against  Christ,  and 
all  that  is  called  God,  whom  the  Lord  shall  destroy  with  the 
brightness  of  his  coming.8 

V.  As 7  the  Lord  in  his  care  and  love  towards  his 
Church,  hath  in  his  infinite  wise  providence  exercised  it 
with  great  variety  in  all  ages,  for  the  good  of  them  that 
love  him,  and  his  own  Glory:  so  according  to  his  prom- 
ise, we  expect  that  in  the  later  days,  Antichrist  being 
destroyed,  the  Jews  called,  and  the  adversaries  of  the 
Kingdom  of  his  dear  Son  broken,  the  Churches  of  Christ 
being  inlarged,  and  edified  through  a  free  and  plentiful 
communication  of  light  and  grace,  shall  enjoy  in  this  world 
a  more  quiet,  peaceable  and  glorious  condition  then  they 
have  enjoyed. 

CHAP.  XXVII. s 
Of  the  Communion  of  Saints. 

ALL  Saints  that  are  united  to  Jesus  Christ  their  Head,  by  his 
Spirit  and9  Faith,  although  they  are  not  made  thereby 
one  person  with  him,10  have  fellowship11  in  his  Graces,  Sufferings, 
Death,  Resurrection  and  Glory:  and  being  united  to  one  another 


'  The  Confessions  of  1680  and  Saybrook  add,  theyand  their  children  with  them,—  doubtless 
influenced  by  the  Half-Way  Covenant. 

2  I  bid.  read,  "  although  as  such  it  is  not  intrusted  with  any  Officers  to  rule  or  govern  over  the 
whole  body." 

»    This  is  section  V.  of  the  West. 

*  The  West,  closes  thus:  "Nevertheless,  there  shall  be  always  a  Church  on  earth  to 
worship  God  according  to  his  will."  6  This  is  section  VI.  of  the  West. 

6  A  simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West.     »  This  has  no  corresponding  section  in  West. 

*  West,  chapter  XXVI.  »  West,  adds,  by. 

10  A  simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West.  "  West.  adds,  with  him. 


THE    CONFESSION    OF    FAITH  397 

in  love,  they  have  communion  in  each  others  gifts  and  graces,  and 
are  obliged  to  the  performance  of  such  duties,  publique  and  pri- 
vate, as  do  conduce  to  their  mutual  good,  both  in  the  inward  and 
outward  Man. 

[46]  II.  All1  Saints  are  bound  to  maintain  an  holy  fellowship 
and  communion  in  the  Worship  of  God,  and  in  performing  such 
other  spiritual  services  as  tend  to  their  mutual  edification;  as  also 
in  relieving  each  other  in  outward  things,  according  to  their  several 
abilities  and  necessities:  which  communion,  though  especially  to 
be  exercised  by  them  in  the  relations  wherein  they  stand, 
whether  in  Families  or  Churches,  yet2  as  God  offereth  oppor- 
tunity, is  to  be  extended  unto  all  those  who  in  every  place  call 
upon  the  Name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.3 

CHAP.  XXVIII.4 
Of  the  Sacraments. 

SAcraments  are  holy  Signs  and  Seals  of  the  Covenant  of  Grace, 
immediately  instituted  by  Christ,5  to  represent  him  6  and  his 
benefits,  and  to  confirm  our  interest  in  him,7  and  solemnly  to  en- 
gage us8  to  the   service  of  God  in  Christ,  according  to  his  Word. 

II.  There  is  in  every  Sacrament  a  spiritual  relation,  or  sacra- 
mental union  between  the  signe  and  the  thing  signified;  whence  it 
comes  to  pass  that  the  names  and9  effects  of  the  one  are  attributed 
to  the  other. 

III.  The  grace  which  is  exhibited  in  or  by  the  Sacraments 
rightly  used,  is  not  conferred  by  any  power  in  them,  neither  [47] 
doth  the  efficacy  of  a  Sacrament  depend  upon  the  piety  or  inten- 
tion of  him  that  doth  administer  it,  but  upon  the  work  of  the 
Spirit,  and  the  word  of  Institution,  which  contains  together  with  a 
Precept  authorizing  the  use  thereof,  a  Promise  of  benefit  to  worthy 
receivers. 

IV.  There  be  onely  two  Sacraments  ordained  by  Christ  our 
Lord  in  the  Gospel,  that  is  to  say,  Baptism  and  the  Lords  10  Supper; 

1  West,  reads,  Saints,  by  profession,  are  bound,  etc. 

-  Simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West. 

3  At  this  point  the  Savoy  rejected  the  following  section  of  the  West.:  "  III.  This  communion 
•which  the  saints  have  with  Christ,  doth  not  make  them  in  anywise  partakers  of  the  substance  of  his 
Godhead,  or  to  be  equal  with  Christ  in  any  respect :  either  of  which  to  affirm  is  impious  and  blas- 
phemous. Nor  doth  their  communion  one  with  another,  as  saints,  take  away  or  infringe  the  title  or 
propriety  which  each  man  hath  in  his  goods  and  possessions." 

*  West,  chapter  XXVII.  6  West,  reads,  God.  «  Ibid.,  Christ. 

7  West,  adds,  as  also  to  put  a  visible  difference  between  those  that  belong  unto  the  Church 
and  the  rest  of  the  world. 

8  West,  reads,  them.        9  West,  adds,  the.        I0  West,  reads,  Supper  of  the  Lord. 


39§  THE    SAVOY   DECLARATION 

neither  of  which  may  be  dispensed  by  any  but  a  Minister  of  the 
Word  lawfully  called.' 

V.  The  Sacraments  of  the  Old  Testament,  in  regard  of  the 
spiritual  things  thereby  signified  and  exhibited,  were  for  substance 
the  same  with  those  of  the  New. 

CHAP.  XXIX.5 
Of  Baptism. 

BAptism  is  a  Sacrament  of  the  New  Testament,  ordained  by 
Jesus  Christ 3  to  be  unto  the  party  baptized  4  a  signe  and  seal 
of  the  Covenant  of  Grace,  of  his  ingrafting  into  Christ,  of  regenera- 
tion, of  remission  of  sins,  and  of  his  giving  up  unto  God  through 
Jesus  Christ  to  walk  in  newness  of  life;  which  Ordinance6  is  by 
Christs  own  appointment  to  be  continued  in  his  Church  until  the 
end  of  the  world. 

II.  The  outward  Element  to  be  used  in  this  Ordinance,0  is 
[48]  Water,  wherewith  the  party  is  to  be  baptized  in  the  name  of 
the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  holy  Ghost,  by  a  Minister  of 
the  Gospel  lawfully  called.7 

III.  Dipping  of  the  person  into  the  water  is  not  necessary, 
but  Baptism  is  rightly  administred  by  pouring  or  sprinkling  water 
upon  the  person. 

IV.  Not  onely  those  that  do  actually  profess  faith  in,  and 
obedience  unto  Christ,  but  also  the  Infants  of  one  or  both  believing 
parents  are  to  be  baptized,  and  those  onely.8 

V.  Although  it  be  a  great  sin  to  contemn  or  neglect  this  Ordi- 
nance, yet  grace  and  salvation  are  not  so  inseparably  annexed  unto 
it,  as  that  no  person  can  be  regenerated  or  saved  without  it;  or 
that  all  that  are  baptized,  are  undoubtedly  regenerated. 

VI.  The  efficacy  of  Baptism  is  not  tied  to  that  moment  of 
time  wherein  it  is  administred,  yet  notwithstanding,  by  the  right 
use  of  this  Ordinance,  the  grace  promised  is  not  onely  offered,  but 
really  exhibited  and  conferred  by  the  holy  Ghost  to  such  (whether 
of  age  or  infants)  as  that  grace  belongeth  unto,  according  to  the 
counsel  of  Gods  own  Will  in  his  appointed  time. 

VII.  Baptism  9  is  but  once  to  be  administred  to  any  person. 


1  West,  reads,  ordained.  2  West,  chapter  XXVIII. 

3  West,  adds,  not  only  for  the  solemn  admission   0/  the  party   baptized  into  the  visible 
Church,  hut  also  to  be,  etc. 

*  West,  reads,  unto  him  a  sign.  6  Ibid.,  sacrament.  •  Ibid. 

7  West,  adds,  thereunto ;   and  1680  and  Saybrook  have  the  addition. 
s  A  simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West. 
»  West,  reads,  The  sacrament  0/  baptism. 


THE    CONFESSION    OF    FAITH  399 

[4g]  CHAP.  XXX.1 

Of  the  Lords  Supper. 

OUr  Lord  Jesus  in  the  night  wherein  he  was  betrayed,  insti- 
tuted the  Sacrament  of  his  Body  and  Blood,  called  the  Lords 
Supper,  to  be  observed  in  his  Churches2  unto  3  the  end  of  the  world, 
for  the  perpetual  remembrance,  and  shewing  forth4  of  the  Sacri- 
fice of  himself  in  his  death,  the  sealing  of6  all  benefits  thereof  unto 
true  believers,  their  spiritual  nourishment,  and  growth  in  him,  their 
further  ingagement  in  and  to  all  duties  which  they  owe  unto  him, 
and  to  be  a  bond  and  pledge  of  their  communion  with  him,  and 
with  each  other.6 

II.  In  this  Sacrament  Christ  is  not  offered  up  to  his  Father, 
nor  any  real  Sacrifice  made  at  all  for  remission  of  sin  7  of  the  quick 
or  dead,  but  onely  a  memorial8  of  that  one  offering  up  of  himself 
by  himself  upon  the  Cross  once  for  all,  and  a  spiritual  Oblation  of 
all  possible  praise  unto  God  for  the  same;  so  that  the  Popish  Sac- 
rifice of  the  Mass  (as  they  call  it)  is  most  abominable,9  injurious  to 
Christs  own10  onely  Sacrifice,  the  alone  propitiation  for  all  the  sins 
of  the  Elect. 

III.  The  Lord  Jesus  hath  in  this  Ordinance  appointed  his 
Ministers"  to  pray  and  bless  the  Elements  of  Bread  and  Wine,  and 
thereby  to  set  them  apart  from  a  common  to  an  holy  use,  and  to 
take  and  break  the  Bread,  to  take  the  Cup,  and  (they  communicating 
also  themselves)  to  give  [50]  both  to  the  Communicants,  but  to 
none  who  are  not  then  present  in  the  Congregation. 

IV.  Private  Masses,  or  receiving  the  Sacrament  by  a  Priest, 
or  any  other  alone,  as  likewise  the  denial  of  the  Cup  to  the  people, 
worshiping  the  Elements,  the  lifting  them  up,  or  carrying  them 
about  for  adoration,  and  the  reserving  them  for  any  pretended 
religious  use,  are  contrary  to  the  nature  of  this  Sacrament,  and  to 
the  Institution  of  Christ. 

V.  The  outward  Elements  in  this  Sacrament  duely  set  apart 
to  the  uses  ordained  by  Christ,  have  such  relation  to  him  Crucified, 
as  that  truely,  yet  Sacramentally  onely,  they  are  sometimes  called 
by  the  name  of  the  things  they  represent,  to  wit,  the  Body  and 


I  West,  chapter  XXIX.  2  West,  reads,  church.  3  1680  reads,  to. 
4  A  simple  addition,  nothing  omitted  from  West.             6  Ibid. 

6  West,  adds,  as  members  of  his  mystical  body. 

7  West,  sins,      s  West,  reads,  commemoration.      »  Ibid.,  abominably.       10  West,  reads,  one. 

II  West,  adds,  "appointed  his  ministers  to  declare  his  word  of  institution  to  the  people,  to 
pray"  etc.  This  phrase,  rejected  in  the  Savoy,  is  restored  in  the  confessions  of  1680  and  Saybrook, 
the  latter  however  reading  (possibly  erroneously)  instruction  instead  of  institution. 


400  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

Blood  of  Christ;  albeit  in  substance  and  nature  they  still  remain 
truly  and  onely  Bread  and  Wine  as  they  were  before. 

VI.  That  Doctrine  which  maintains  a  change  of  the  sub- 
stance of  Bread  and  Wine  into  the  substance  of  Christs  Body  and 
Blood  (commonly  called  Transubstantiation)  by  consecration  of  a 
Priest,  or  by  any  other  way,  is  repugnant  not  to  Scripture  alone, 
but  even  to  common  sense  and  reason,  overthroweth  the  nature  of 
the  Sacrament,  and  hath  been,  and  is  the  cause  of  manifold  Super- 
stitions, yea  of  gross  Idolatries. 

VII.  Worthy  Receivers  outwardly  partaking  of  the  visible 
[51]  Elements  in  this  Sacrament,  do  then  also  inwardly  by  Faith, 
really  and  indeed,  yet  not  carnally  and  corporally,  but  spiritually, 
receive  and  feed  upon  Christ  crucified,  and  all  benefits  of  his 
death;  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  being  then  not  corporally  or 
carnally  in,  with,  or  under  the  Bread  or '  Wine  ;  yet  as  really,  but 
spiritually  present  to  the  Faith  of  Believers  in  that  Ordinance,  as 
the  Elements  themselves  are  to  their  outward  senses. 

VIII.  All"  ignorant  and  ungodly  persons,  as  they  are  unfit  to 
enjoy  communion  with  Christ,  so  are  they  unworthy  of  the  Lords 
Table,  and  cannot  without  great  sin  against  him,  whilest  they  re- 
main such,  partake  of  these  holy  Mysteries,  or  be  admitted  there- 
unto; yea  whosoever  shall  receive  unworthily,  are  guilty  of  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  the  Lord,  eating  and  drinking  Judgement3  to 
themselves. 

chap.  xxxi.s 

Of  the  state  of  Man  *  after  Death,  and  of  the  Resurrection 

of  the  Dead. 

THe  Bodies  of  men  after  death  return  to  dust,  and  see  corrup- 
tion, but  their  souls  (which  neither  die  nor  sleep)  having  an 
immortal  subsistence,  immediately  return  to  God  who  gave  them, 
the  souls  of  the  righteous  being  then  made  perfect  in  holiness,  are 
received  into  the  highest  Heavens,  where  they  behold  the  face  of 

1  West,  reads,  and. 

2  Though  this  section  is  in  substantial  agreement  with  the  corresponding  section  in  the  West., 
it  has  been  rewritten.     The  West,  reads  thus: 

"VIII.  Although  ignorant  and  wicked  men  receive  the  outward  elements  in  this  sacrament, 
yet  they  receive  not  the  thing  signified  thereby  ;  but  by  their  unworthy  coming  thereunto  arc  guilty 
of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  to  their  own  damnation.  Wherefore  all  ignorant  and  ungodly 
pers  ins,  as  they  are  unfit  to  enjoy  communion  with  him,  so  are  they  unworthy  of  the  Lord's  table, 
and  cannot,  without  great  sin  against  Christ,  while  they  remain  such,  partake  of  these  holy  mys- 
teries, or  be  admitted  thereunto." 

3  West,  uses  the  word  damnation. 

*  West,  reads,  men.  but  the  American  revisers  have  adopted  man. 

0  This  is  chapter  XXXII.  in  the  West.  Between  the  previous  chapter  and  this  occurs  one  of 
the  most  important  omissions  in  the  Savoy.     Following  the  example  set  by  Parliament,  the  Savoy, 


THE    CONFESSION    OF    FAITH  4OI 

God  in  light  and  glory,  waiting  for  the  full  redemption  of  their 
bodies:  And  [52]  the  souls  of  the  wicked  are  cast  into  Hell,  where 
they  remain  in  torment1  and  utter  darkness,  reserved  to  the 
Judgement  of  the  great  day:  Besides  these  two  places  for2  souls 
separated  from  their  bodies,  the  Scripture  acknowledgeth  none. 

II.     At  the  last  day  such  as  are  found  alive  shall  not  die,  but 
be  changed,  and  all  the  dead  shall  be  raised  up  with  the  self-same 


and  its  followers  at  Hoston  in  1680  and  at  Saybrook  in  1708,  reject  two  whole  chapters  of  the  West- 
minster, XXX.  and  XXXI.     The  omitted  chapters  are  as  follows: 

"  Chapter  XXX. 
Of  Church  Censures. 
■    The  Lord  Jesus,  as  king  and  head  of  his  Church,  hath  therein  appointed  a  government  in 
the  hand  of  Church  officers,  distinct  from  the  civil  magistrate. 

II.  To  these  officers  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  are  committed,  by  virtue  whereof 
they  have  power  respectively  to  retain  and  remit  sins,  to  shut  that  kingdom  against  the  impenitent, 
both  by  the  Word  and  censures;  and  to  open  it  unto  penitent  sinners,  by  the  ministry  of  the  gospel, 
and  by  absolution  from  censures,  as  occasion  shall  require. 

III.  Church  censures  are  necessary  for  the  reclaiming  and  gaining  of  offending  brethren; 
for  deterring  of  others  from  the  like  offences  ;  for  purging  out  of  that  leaven  which  might  infect 
the  whole  lump  ;  for  vindicating  the  honour  of  Christ,  and  the  holy  profession  of  the  gospel ;  and 
for  preventing  the  wrath  of  God,  which  might  justly  fall  upon  the  Church,  if  they  should  suffer 
his  covenant,  and  the  seals  thereof,  to  be  profaned  by  notorious  and  obstinate  offenders. 

IV.  For  the  better  attaining  of  these  ends,  the  officers  of  the  Church  are  to  proceed  by  ad- 
monition, suspension  from  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  for  a  season,  and  by  excommunica. 
tion  from  the  Church,  according  to  the  nature  of  the  crime,  and  demerit  of  the  person. 

Chapter  XXXI. 
Of  Synods  and  Councils. 
For  the  better  government  and   further  edification  of  the  Church,  there  ought  to  be  such 
assemblies  as  are  commonly  called  synods  or  councils. 

II.  As  magistrates  may  lawfully  call  a  synod  of  ministers  and  other  fit  persons  to  consult 
and  advise  with  about  matters  of  religion  ;  so,  if  magistrates  be  open  enemies  to  the  Church,  the 
ministers  of  Christ,  of  themselves,  by  virtue  of  their  office,  or  they,  with  other  fit  persons,  upon 
delegation  from  their  churches,  may  meet  together  in  such  assemblies. 

III.  It  belongeth  to  synods  and  councils,  ministerially,  to  determine  controversies  of  faith, 
and  cases  of  conscience  ;  to  set  down  rules  and  directions  for  the  better  ordering  of  the  public  wor- 
ship of  God,  and  government  of  his  Church  ;  to  receive  complaints  in  cases  of  maladn 
and  authoritatively  to  determine  the  same:  which  decrees  and  determinations 
Word  of  God,  are  to  be  received  with  reverence  and  submission,  not  only  for  their  agreement  with 
the  Word,  but  also  for  the  power  whereby  they  are  made,  as  being  an  ordinance  of  God,  appointed 
thereunto  in  his  Word. 

IV.  All  synods  or  councils  since  the  apostles'  times,  whether  general  or  particular,  may  err, 
and  many  have  erred  ;  therefore  they  are  not  to  be  made  the  rule  of  faith  or  practice,  but  to  be 
used  as  a  help  in  both. 

V.  Synods. and  councils  are  to  handle  or  conclude  nothing,  but  that  which  is  ecclesiastical: 
and  are  not  to  intermeddle  with  civil  affairs  which  concern  the  commonwealth,  unless  by  way  of 
humble  petition  in  cases  extraordinary  ;  or  by  way  of  advice  for  satisfaction  of  conscience,  if  they 
be  thereunto  required  by  the  civil  magistrate." 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  American  Presbyterians  have  felt  the  need  of  revising  chapter 
XXXI.  of  the  Westminster  Confession  just  given,  and  therefore,  in  1788,  added  the  following  clauses 
to  section  I. :  "  And  it  belongeth  to  the  overseers  and  other  rulers  of  the  particular  churches,  by 
virtue  of  their  office,  and  the  power  which  Christ  hath  given  them  for  edification,  and  not  for  de- 
struction, to  appoint  such  assemblies  ;  and  to  convene  together  in  them,  as  often  as  they  shall  judge 
it  expedient  for  the  good  of  the  Church." 

At  the  same  time  they  wholly  rejected  section  II.  of  the  same  chapter. 

1  West,  reads,  torments.  2  1680  reads  of. 


402  THE   SAVOY   DECLARATION 

bodies,  and  none  other,  although  with  different  qualities,  which 
shall  be  united  again  to  their  souls  for  ever. 

III.  The  bodies  of  the  unjust  shall  by  the  Power  of  Christ 
be  raised  to  dishonor;  the  bodies  of  the  just  by  his  Spirit  unto 
honor,  and  be  made  conformable  to  his  own  glorious  Body. 

CHAP.  XXXII.' 
Of  the  last  Judgement. 

GOd  hath  appointed  a  day  wherein  he  will  judge  the  World  in 
righteousness  by  Jesus  Christ,  to  whom  all  Power  and 
Judgement  is  given  of  the  Father;  in  which  day  not  onely  the 
Apostate  Angels  shall  be  judged,  but  likewise  all  persons  that 
have  lived  upon  earth,  shall  appear  before  the  Tribunal  of  Christ, 
to  give  an  account  of  their  thoughts,  words  and  deeds,  and  to  re- 
ceive according  to  what  they  have  done  in  the  body,  whether  good 
or  evil. 

[53]  II.  The  end  of  Gods  appointing  this  day,  is  for  the 
manifestation  of  the  Glory  of  his  Mercy  in  the  eternal  salvation  of 
the  Elect,  and  of  his  Justice  in  the  damnation  of  the  Reprobate, 
who  are  wicked  and  disobedient:  for  then  shall  the  righteous  go 
into  everlasting  Life,  and  receive  that  fulness  of  joy  and  glory, 
with  everlasting  reward2  in  the  presence  of  the  Lord;  but  the 
wicked  who  know  not  God,  and  obey  not  the  Gospel  of  Jesus 
Christ,  shall  be  cast  into  eternal  torments,  and  be  punished  with 
everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and  from 
the  glory  of  his  Power. 

III.  As  Christ  would  have  us  to  be  certainly  perswaded  that 
there  shall  be  a3  Judgement,  both  to  deter  all  men  from  sin,  and 
for  the  greater  consolation  of  the  godly  in  their  adversity;  so  will 
he  have  that  day  unknown  to  men,  that  they  may  shake  off  all 
carnal  security,  and  be  always  watchful,  because  they  know  not  at 
what  hour  the  Lord  will  come,  and  may  be  ever  prepared  to  say, 
Come  Lord  Jesus,  come  quickly.     Amen. 

[Page  54  (unnumbered)  is  blank  in  the  two  earliest  editions.     In  the  third  edition  it 
an  advertisement.! 


West,  chapter  XXXIII,  and  last. 

West,  reads,  fullness  0/  joy  and  refreshing  which  shall  come  from  the  presence,  etc. 

West,  adds,  day  of. 


THE   PLATFORM   OF    POLITY  403 


[55]  Of  the 

INSTITUTION 

of 
CHURCHES, 

And  the 

ORDER 

Appointed  in  them  by 
JESUS  CHRIST.1 

BY  the  appointment  of  the  Father  all  Power  for  the  Calling, 
Institution,  Order,  or  Government  of  the  Church,  is  invested 
in  a  Supreme  and  Soveraign  maner  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  as 
King  and  Head  thereof. 

II.  In  the  execution  of  this  Power  wherewith  he  is  so  en- 
trusted, the  Lord  Jesus  calleth  out  of  the  World  unto  Communion 
with  himself,  those  that  are  given  unto  him  by  his  Father,  that 
they  may  walk  before  him  in  all  the  ways  of  Obedience,  which  he 
prescribeth  to  them  in  his  Word. 

[56]  III.  Those  thus  called  (through  the  Ministery  of  the 
Word  by  his  Spirit)  he  commandeth  to  walk  together  in  particular 
Societies  or  Churches,  for  their  mutual  edification,  and  the  due 
performance  of  that  publique  Worship,  which  he  requireth  of  them 
in  this  world. 

IV.  To  each  of  these  Churches  thus  gathered,  according 
unto  his  minde  declared  in  his  Word,  he  hath  given  all  that  Power 
and  Authority,  which  is  any  way  needfull  for  their  carrying  on 
that  Order  in  Worship  and  Discipline,  which  he  hath  instituted  for 
them  to  observe  with  Commands  and  Rules,  for  the  due  and  right 
exerting  and  executing  of  that  Power. 

V.  These  particular  Churches  thus  appointed  by  the  Author- 
ity of  Christ,  and  intrusted  with  power  from  him  for  the  ends  be- 
fore expressed,  are  each  of  them  as  unto  those  ends,  the  seat  of 


1  This  Platform  of  Church  Polity,  the  most  original  of  the  work  at  the  Savoy,  was  never 
adopted  by  American  Congregationalists,  their  principles  being  better  set  forth  in  the  Cambridge 
Platform. 


404  THE    SAVOY   DECLARATION 

that  Power  which  he  is  pleased  to  communicate  to  his  Saints  or 
Snbjects1  in  this  world,  so  that  as  such  they  receive  it  immediately 
from  himself. 

VI.  Besides  these  particular  Churches,  there  is  not  instituted 
by  Christ  any  Church  more  extensive  or  Catholique  entrusted  with 
power  for  the  administration  of  his  Ordinances,  or  the  execution 
of  any  authority  in  his  name. 

[57]  VII.  A  particular  Church  gathered  and  compleated  ac- 
cording to  the  minde  of  Christ,  consists  of  Officers  and  Members: 
The  Lord  Christ  having  given  to  his  called  ones  (united  according 
to  his  appointment  in  Church-order)  Liberty  and  Power  to  choose 
Persons  fitted  by  the  holy  Ghost  for  that  purpose,  to  be  over  them, 
and  to  minister  to  them  in  the  Lord. 

VIII.  The  Members  of  these  Churches  are  Saints  by  Calling, 
visibly  manifesting  and  evidencing  (in  and  by  their  profession  and 
walking)  their  obedience  unto  that  Call  of  Christ,  who  being  fur- 
ther known  to  each  other  by  their  confession  of  the  Faith  wrought  in 
them  by  the  power  of  God,  declared  by  themselves  or  otherwise 
manifested,  do  willingly  consent  to  walk  together  according  to  the 
appointment  of  Christ,  giving  up  themselves  to  the  Lord,  and  to 
one  another  by  the  will  of  God  in  professed  subjection  to  the 
Ordinances  of  the  Gospel. 

IX.  The  Officers  appointed  by  Christ  to  be  chosen  and  set 
apart  by  the  Church  so  called,  and  gathered  for  the  peculiar  ad- 
ministration of  Ordinances,  and  execution  of  Power  or  Duty  which 
he  intrusts  them  with,  or  calls  them  to,  to  be  continued  to  the  end 
of  the  world,  are  Pastors,  Teachers,  Elders,  and  Deacons. 

X.  Churches  thus  gathered  and  assembling  for  the  Worship 
of  God,  are  thereby  visible  and  publique,  and  their  As-[58]semblies 
(in  what  place  soever  they  are,  according  as  they  have  liberty  or 
opportunity)  are  therefore  Church  or  Publique  Assemblies. 

XI.  The  way  appointed  by  Christ  for  the  calling  of  any  per- 
son, fitted  and  gifted  by  the  holy  Ghost,  unto  the  Office  of  Pastor, 
Teacher  or  Elder  in  a  Church,  is,  that  he  be  chosen  thereunto  by 
the  common  suffrage  of  the  Church  it  self,  and  solemnly  set  apart 
by  Fasting  and  Prayer,  with  Imposition  of  Hands  of  the  Eldership 
of  that  Church,  if  there  be  any  before  constituted  therein:  And  of 
a  Deacon,  that  he  be  chosen  by  the  like  suffrage,  and  set  apart  by 
Prayer,  and  the  like  Imposition  of  Hands. 

XII.  The  Essence  of  this  Call  of  a  Pastor,  Teacher  or  Elder 
unto  Office,  consists  in  the  Election  of  the  Church,  together  with 


THE   PLATFORM    OF    POLITY  405 

his  acceptation  of  it,  and  separation  by  Fasting  and  Prayer  :  And 
those  who  are  so  chosen,  though  not  set  apart  by  Imposition  of 
Hands,  are  rightly  constituted  Ministers  of  Jesus  Christ,  in  whose 
Name  and  Authority  they  exercise  the  Ministery  to  them  so  com- 
mitted. The  Calling  of  Deacons  consisteth  in  the  like  Election 
and  acceptation,  with  separation  by  Prayer. 

XIII.  Although  it  be  incumbent  on  the  Pastors  and  Teachers 
of  the  Churches  to  be  instant  in  Preaching  the  Word,  by  way  of 
Office;  yet  the  work  of  Preaching  the  Word  is  not  so  peculiarly 
confined  to  them,  but  that  others  also  gifted  and  fitted  by  the  holy 
Ghost  for  it,  and  approved  (being  by  [63] '  lawful  ways  and  means 
in  the  Providence  of  God  called  thereunto)  may  publiquely,  ordi- 
narily and  constantly  perform  it:  so  that  they  give  themselves  up 
thereunto. 

XIV.  However,  they  who  are  ingaged  in  the  work  of  Pub- 
lique  Preaching,  and  enjoy  the  Publique  Maintenance  upon  that 
account,  are  not  thereby  obliged  to  dispense  the  Seals  to  any  other 
then  such  as  (being  Saints  by  Calling,  and  gathered  according  to 
the  Order  of  the  Gospel)  they  stand  related  to,  as  Pastors  or 
Teachers;  yet  ought  they  not  to  neglect  others  living  within  their 
Parochial  Bounds,  but  besides  their  constant  publique  Preaching 
to  them,  they  ought  to  enquire  after  their  profiting  by  the  Word, 
instructing  them  in,  and  pressing  upon  them  (whether  young  or 
old)  the  great  Doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  even  personally  and  par- 
ticularly, so  far  as  their  strength  and  time  will  admit. 

XV.  Ordination  alone  without  the  Election  or  precedent 
consent  of  the  Church,  by  those  who  formerly  have  been  Ordained 
by  vertue  of  that  Power  they  have  received  by  their  Ordination, 
doth  not  constitute  any  person  a  Church-Officer,  or  communicate 
Office-power  unto  him. 

XVI.  A  Church  furnished  with  Officers  (according  to  the 
minde  of  Christ)  hath  full  power  to  administer  all  his  Ordinances; 
and  where  there  is  want  of  any  one  or  more  Officers  required,  that 
Officer,  or  those  which  are  in  the  Church,  may  administer  all  the 
Ordinances  proper  to  their  particular  Duty  and  Offices;  but  where 
there  are  no  teach-[6o]ing  Officers,  none  may  administer  the  Seals, 
nor  can  the  Church  authorize  any  so  to  do. 

XVII.  In  the  carrying  on  of  Church-administrations,  no  per- 
son ought  to  be  added  to  the  Church,  but  by  the  consent  of  the 
Church  it  self;  that  so  love  (without  dissimulation)  may  be  pre- 
served between  all  the  Members  thereof. 


Misprint  for  [59]. 


406  THE   SAVOY    DECLARATION 

XVIII.  Whereas  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  hath  appointed  and 
instituted  as  a  means  of  Edification,  that  those  who  walk  not  ac- 
cording to  the  Rules  and  Laws  appointed  by  him  (in  respect  of 
Faith  and  Life,  so  that  just  offence  doth  arise  to  the  Church 
thereby)  be  censured  in  his  Name  and  Authority:  Every  Church 
hath  Power  in  it  self  to  exercise  and  execute  all  those  Censures 
appointed  by  him  in  the  way  and  Order  prescribed  in  the  Gospel. 

XIX.  The  Censures  so  appointed  by  Christ,  are  Admonition 
and  Excommunication:  and  whereas  some  offences  are  or  may  be 
known  onely  to  some,  it  is  appointed  by  Christ,  that  those  to  whom 
they  are  so  known,  do  first  admonish  the  offender  in  private:  in 
publique  offences  where  any  sin,  before  all ;  or  in  case  of  non- 
amendment  upon  private  admonition,  the  offence  being  related  to 
the  Church,  and  the  offender  not  manifesting  his  repentance,  he  is 
to  be  duely  admonished  in  the  Name  of  Christ  by  the  whole  Church, 
by  the  Ministery  of  the  Elders  of  the  Church;  and  if  this  Censure 
prevail  not  for  his  repentance,  then  he  is  to  be  cast  out  by  Excom- 
munication with  the  consent  of  the  Church. 

[61]  XX.  As  all  Believers  are  bound  to  joyn  themselves  to 
particular  Churches,  when  and  where  they  have  opportunity  so  to 
do,  so  none  are  to  be  admitted  unto  the  Priviledges  of  the 
Churches,  who  do  not  submit  themselves  to  the  Rule  of  Christ  in 
the  Censures  for  the  Government  of  them. 

XXI.  This  being  the  way  prescribed  by  Christ  in  case  of 
offence,  no  Church-members  upon  any  offences  taken  by  them, 
having  performed  their  duty  required  of  them  in  this  matter, 
ought  to  disturb  any  Church-order,  or  absent  themselves  from  the 
publique  Assemblies,  or  the  Administration  of  any  Ordinances 
upon  that  pretence,  but  to  wait  upon  Christ  in  the  further  pro- 
ceeding of  the  Church. 

XXII.  The  Power  of  Censures  being  seated  by  Christ  in  a 
particular  Church,  is  to  be  exercised  onely  towards  particular 
Members  of  each  Church  respectively  as  such;  and  there  is  no 
power  given  by  him  unto  any  Synods  or  Ecclesiastical  Assemblies 
to  Excommunicate,  or  by  their  publique  Edicts  to  threaten  Ex- 
communication, or  other  Church-censures  against  Churches,  .Mag- 
istrates, or  their  people  upon  any  account,  no  man  being  obnoxious 
to  that  Censure,  but  upon  his  personal  miscarriage,  as  a  Member 
of  a  particular  Church. 

XXIII.  Although  the  Church  is  a  Society  of  men,  assembling 
[62]  for  the  celebration  of  the  Ordinances  according  to  the  ap- 
pointment of  Christ,  yet  every  Society  assembling  for  that  end  or 


THE   PLATFORM    OF   POLITY  407 

purpose,  upon  the  account  of  cohabitation  within  any  civil  Pre- 
cincts and  Bounds,  is  not  thereby  constituted  a  Church,  seeing 
there  may  be  wanting  among  them,  what  is  essentially  required 
thereunto;  and  therefore  a  Believer  living  with  others  in  such  a 
Precinct,  may  joyn  himself  with  any  Church  for  his  edification. 

XXIV.  For  the  avoiding  of  Differences  that  may  otherwise 
arise,  for  the  greater  Solemnity  in  the  Celebration  of  the  Ordi- 
nances of  Christ,  and  the  opening  a  way  for  the  larger  usefulness 
of  the  Gifts  and  Graces  of  the  holy  Ghost;  Saints  living  in  one 
City  or  Town,  or  within  such  distances  as  that  they  may  con- 
veniently assemble  for  divine  Worship,  ought  rather  to  joyn  in  one 
Church  for  their  mutual  strengthning  and  edification,  then  to  set 
up  many  distinct  Societies. 

XXV.  As  all  Churches  and  all  the  Members  of  them  are 
bound  to  pray  continually  for  the  good  or  prosperity  of  all  the 
Churches  of  Christ  in  all  places,  and  upon  all  occasions  to  further 
it;  (Every  one  within  the  bounds  of  their  Places  and  Callings,  in 
the  exercise  of  their  Gifts  and  Graces)  So  the  Churches  them- 
selves (when  planted  by  the  providence  of  God,  so  as  they  may 
have  oppertunity  and  advantage  for  it)  ought  to  hold  communion 
amongst  themselves  for  their  peace,  increase  of  love,  and  mutual 
edification. 

[63]  XXVI.  In  Cases  of  Difficulties  or  Differences,  either  in 
point  of  Doctrine  or  in  Administrations,  wherein  either  the 
Churches  in  general  are  concerned,  or  any  one  Church  in  their 
Peace,  Union,  and  Edification,  or  any  Member  or  Members  of  any 
Church  are  injured  in,  or  by  any  proceeding  in  Censures,  not 
agreeable  to  Truth  and  Order :  it  is  according  to  the  minde  of 
Christ,  that  many  Churches  holding  communion  together,  do  by 
their  Messengers  meet  in  a  Synod  or  Councel,  to  consider  and  give 
their  advice  in,  or  about  that  matter  in  difference,  to  be  reported 
to  all  the  Churches  concerned;  Howbeit  these  Synods  so  assem- 
bled are  not  entrusted  with  any  Church-Power,  properly  so  called, 
or  with  any  Jurisdiction  over  the  Churches  themselves,  to  exercise 
any  Censures,  either  over  any  Churches  or  Persons,  or  to  impose 
their  determinations  on  the  Churches  or  Officers. 

XXVII.  Besides  these  occasional  Synods  or  Councels,  there 
are  not  instituted  by  Christ  any  stated  Synods  in  a  fixed  Combina- 
tion of  Churches,  or  their  Officers  in  lesser  or  greater  Assemblies; 
nor  are  there  any  Synods  appointed  by  Christ  in  a  way  of  Subordi- 
nation to  one  another. 

XXVIII.  Persons  that  are  joyned  in  Church-fellowship,  ought 
not  lightly  or  without  just  cause  to  withdraw  themselves  from  the 


408  THE    SAVOY   DECLARATION 

communion  of  the  Church  whereunto  they  are  so  joyned:  Never- 
theless, where  any  person  cannot  continue  in  any  Church  without 
his  sin,  either  for  want  of  the  Administration  of  any  Ordinances 
instituted  by  Christ,  or  by  his  be-[64]ing  deprived  of  his  due  Privi- 
ledges,  or  compelled  to  any  thing  in  practice  not  warranted  by  the 
Word,  or  in  case  of  Persecution,  or  upon  the  account  of  conven- 
iency  of  habitation;  he  consulting  with  the  Church,  or  the  Officer 
or  Officers  thereof,  may  peaceably  depart  from  the  communion  of 
the  Church,  wherewith  he  hath  so  walked,  to  joyn  himself  with 
some  other  Church,  where  he  may  enjoy  the  Ordinances  in  the 
purity  of  the  same,  for  his  edification  and  consolation. 

XXIX.  Such  reforming  Churches  as  consist  of  Persons  sound 
in  the  Faith  and  of  Conversation  becoming  the  Gospel,  ought  not 
to  refuse  the  communion  of  each  other,  so  far  as  may  consist  with 
their  own  Principles  respectively,  though  they  walk  not  in  all 
things  according  to  the  same  Rules  of  Church-Order. 

XXX.  Churches  gathered  and  walking  according  to  the 
minde  of  Christ,  judging  other  Churches  (though  less  pure)  to  be 
true  Churches,  may  receive  unto  occasional  communion  with  them, 
such  Members  of  those  Churches  as  are  credibly  testified  to  be. 
godly,  and  to  live  without  offence. 

FINIS. 


XIII 

THE   "REFORMING   SYNOD"   OF    1679  AND    1680, 
AND    ITS   CONFESSION    OF   FAITH 

Editions  and  Reprints 

A.     The  Result  of  1679 

I.  [Increase  Mather]  The  Necessity  of  Reformation  With  the  Expedients 
thereunto,  asserted.  Boston ;  Printed  by  John  Foster  In  the  Year  i6"jg.  40  pp. 
vi,   I5-1 

II.  Cotton  Mather,  Magnolia,  London,  1702,  ed.  Hartford,  1853-5,  II :  320- 
331  (without  the  Preface). 

III.  The  Results  of  Three  Synods,  etc.     Boston,  1725,  pp.  94-118. 

B.     The  Confession  of  1680 

I.  A  Confession  of  Faith  Owned  and  consented  unto  by  the  Elders  and  Mes- 
sengers of  the  Churches  Assembled  at  Boston  in  New-Englfind,  May  12.  1680. 
Being  the  second  Session  of  that  Synod,  etc.  Boston  ;  Printed  by  John  Foster- 
16S0.     8°  5ix3i  inches,  pp.  vi,  65,  with  Cambridge  Platform. 

II.  At  Boston  in  1699  in  English  and  Indian,  with  Cambridge  Platform? 

III.  In  the  Magnolia,  London,  1702,  V:  5-19,  ed.  Hartford,  1853-5,  II : 
1S2-207. 

IV.  At  Boston  in  1725. 3 

V.  At  Boston  in  1750. 4 

VI.  At  Boston  in  1757,  with  Cambridge  Platform* 

VII.  In  The  Original  Constitution,  Order  and  Faith  of  the  New  England 
Churches,  etc.  Boston,  1812,  with  the  Cambridge  Platform  (ed.  1808),  and  the 
Propositions  of  1662. 

VIII.  In  The  Cambridge  and  Saybrook  Platforms  of  Church  Discipline,  with 
the  Confession  of  Faith  .  .  .  adopted  in  ibSo ;  and  the  Heads  of  Agreement 
.     .     .     in  i6qo.     Boston:   T.  R.  Marvin,  1829,  pp.  69-113. 

IX.  In  T.  C.  Upham,  Ratio  Discipline,  Portland,  1829,  pp.  253-302. 

X.  In  the  Manual of  the  Old  South  Church,  Boston,  Mass.,  ed.  Boston,  1841, 
pp.  13-66.6 


1  Full  title  in  reprint  at  the  close  of  this  chapter. 

2  Catalogue  of  Collection  of  Mr.  Brayton  Ives,  New  York,  1891,  No.  145 ;  Prince  Library, 
No.  24.23. 

3  Brinley  Sale  Cat.,  No.  7492.  4  Prince,  No.  14.60.  5  Brinley,  No.  7493. 

6  Given  as  the  "  Confession  of  Faith  ...  of  the  Old  South  Church,"  but  Mr.  H.  A.  Hillr 
in  his  admirable  History  of  that  Church,  has  pointed  out  (1 :  235,  and  II :  555)  that  it  probably  was 
never  adopted  by  formal  vote  of  the  church.  The  consent  of  the  minister  to  this  confession  at  his 
settlement  over  the  Old  South  was  taken  from  the  installation  of  Rev.  Alexander  Cumming  in  1761 
to  that  of  Dr.  J.  M.  Manning  in  1857.  At  the  settlement  of  Rev.  G.  A.  Gordon,  the  present  pastor, 
in  1884,  it  was  omitted. 


27 


(409) 


410  THE    REFORMING    SYNOD,    1679,    1 680 

XI.  In  Report*  on  Congregationalism,  including  a  Manual  of  Church  Disci- 
pline, together  with  /lie  Cambridge  Platform  .  .  .  and  the  Confession  of  Faith, 
adopted  in  16S0.     Boston,  1846,  pp.  87-128. 

XII.  In  the  Manual  of  the  Old  South  Church,  Boston,  Mass.,  ed.  Boston, 
1S55. 

XIII.  In  The  Cambridge  Platform  .  .  .  and  the  Confession  .  .  .  16S0, 
to  which  is  prefixed  a  Platform  of  Ecclesiastical  Government,  by  Nath.  Emmons. 
Boston,  1855. 

Sources 

Records  of  .  .  .  Massachusetts  Bay,  Boston,  1853-4,  V :  215,  216,  244, 
2S7. 

Peter  Thatcher.  MS.  Diary  (some  extracts  are  printed  by  Falfrey  and  1 1  ill  in 
the  passages  cited  under  Literature  below). 

Literati/re 

Hubbard,  General  History  of  New  England,'1  ed.  Boston,  1848,  pp.  621-624. 
Cotton  Mather,  Magnalia,  ed.  Hartford,  1853-5,  H :  179-181,  316-320,  331-338- 
Neal,  History  of  New  England,7-  London,  1720,  II:  409-411.  Cotton  Mather, 
Parcntator.  Memoirs  of  Remarkables  in  the  Life  and  the  Death  of  the  Ever- 
Memorable  Dr.  Increase  Mather,  Boston,  1724,  pp.  81-87.  Hutchinson,  History 
of  the  Colony  of  Massachusetts  Bay,  ed.  London,  1765,  I:  324.  Emerson,  His- 
torical Sketch  of  the  First  Church  in  Boston,  Boston,  1812,  pp.  127-129.  Wisner, 
History  of  the  Old  South  Church  in  Boston,  Boston,  1 830,  pp.  15,  16.  Palfrey, 
History  of  New  England,  III:  330-332.  Lawrence,  Our  Declaration  of  L-'aith 
and  the  Confession,  in  Cong.  Quarterly,  VIII  :  173-190  passim  (Apl.,  1866).  Dex- 
ter, Congregationalism ,  as  seen  in  its  Literature,  pp.  476-485.  Doyle,  English  in 
America  ;  Puritan  Colonies,  London,  1887,  II:  272.  H.  A.  Hill,  History  of  the 
Old  South  Church,  Boston,  1S90,  I:  231-235. 

AS  has  been  pointed  out  in  enumerating  the  causes  which  led 
to  the  Half-Way  Covenant,  the  passing  away  of  the  found- 
ers of  New  England  brought  forward  a  generation  which, 
though  in  the  main  moral,  had  not  that  intensity  of  religious  ex- 
perience which  characterized  its  predecessor.     While  it  was  true,  as 
Cotton  Mather  affirmed  in  writing  of  this  period,  that' — 

"New-England  was  not  become  so  degenerate  a  Country,  but  that  there  was 
yet  Preserved  in  it,  far  more  of  Serious  Religion,  as  well  as  of  Blameless  Morality, 
than  was  Proportionably  to  be  seen  in  any  Country  upon  the  face  of  the  Earth"; 

the  declaration  of  Thomas  Prince  is  also  well  founded,  that6 — 

"a  little  after  1660,  there  began  to  appear  a  Decay  :  And  this  increased  to  1670, 

when  it  grew  very  visible  and  threatening,  and  was  generally  complained  of  and  be- 


1  By  a  committee  of  which  Dr.  Leonard  Woods  was  chairman. 

5  Hubbard  was  probably  a  member  of  the  Synod,  but  his  report  is  remarkably  barren,  and  is 
largely  made  up  from  the  Prefaces  of  the  Results. 

3  Chiefly  from  Mather.  *  Parentator,  p.  £2. 

6  Christian  History,  Boston,  1743,  I  :  94. 


A   DECADE    OF   DISASTER  4II 

wailed  bitterly  by  the  Pious  among  them  :  And  yet  much  more  to  1680,  when  but 
few  of  the  first  Generation  remained." 

The  number  of  additions  to  the  full  communion  of  the  churches 
was  small;  while  records  of  church  discipline  show  that  serious 
misconduct  was  by  no  means  rare.  Under  such  circumstances  it 
is  no  wonder  that  the  minds  of  faithful  ministers  were  filled  with 
concern. 

The  sense  of  alarm  regarding  the  state  of  New  England  en- 
gendered by  the  decline  of  visible  piety,  was  greatly  intensified  by 
a  series  of  disastrous  events  which  seemed  to  the  men  of  that  age 
divine  judgments.  The  first  fifty  years  of  New  England  history 
were  of  unusual  prosperity.  With  the  exception  of  the  short, 
sharp  struggle  with  the  Pequots  in  1637,  no  war  disturbed  the 
borders  of  the  land.  During  the  Puritan  ascendency  in  England 
the  home  government  had  been  friendly,  and  even  the  restoration 
of  the  Stuarts  had  brought  no  serious  political  disaster.  In  spite 
of  the  "Navigation  Acts,"1  the  trade  of  New  England  nourished 
and  brought  considerable  wealth  and  increasing  luxury  to  its 
ports.  But  this  course  of  prosperity  was  rudely  interrupted  at  the 
close  of  the  third  quarter  of  the  seventeenth  century.  The  In- 
dians, who  had  been  at  peace  with  the  white  settlers  for  nearly 
forty  years,  and  who  had  been  well  treated  by  the  Puritans,  broke 
out  in  warfare;  and  from  June  20,  1675,  to  the  death  of  Philip, 
August  12,  1676,  threatened  the  existence  of  the  colonies.  This 
struggle,  known  from  the  chief  Indian  leader  as  Philip's  war,2  re- 
sulted in  the  elimination  of  the  Indian  problem  from  the  category 
of  questions  vital  to  New  England  life;  but  at  a  terrible  cost.  Of 
the  eighty  or  ninety  towns  to  be  found  in  Plymouth  and  Massa- 
chusetts colonies  in  1675,  ten  or  twelve  were  utterly  destroyed,3 
while  forty  more  were  partially  burned.  Nor  was  the  loss  of  prop- 
erty the  most  serious  result  of  the  contest.     Between  five  and  six 

1  These  acts,  the  first  of  which  was  passed  under  the  Commonwealth,  Oct.  9,  1651,  and  which 
were  strengthened  in  1660,  in  their  extreme  form  forbade  the  importation  of  goods  into  the  colonies 
except  in  English  vessels,  and  the  export  of  their  chief  products  except  to  English  ports.  They 
were  long  more  honored  in  the  breach  than  the  observance. 

2  This  war,  which  forms  the  political  background  of  the  Reforming  Synod,  is  well  described 
by  Palfrey,  History  0/  .Ve~.ii  England,  III :  132-230 ;  and  John  Fiske,  Beginnings  0/  New  Eng- 
land, pp.  199-241 

3  These  figures  are  from  Palfrey,  III:  215. 


412  THE    REFORMING   SYNOD,    1679,    1680 

hundred  young  and  middle-aged  men  —  a  tenth  of  all  of  military  age 
in  the  colonies  —  lost  their  lives;  and  to  these  victims  must  be  added 
the  scores  of  women  and  children  who  perished  by  the  tomahawk  or 
died  amid  the  torments  of  the  stake.  An  experience  so  ghastly 
and  so  universal  might  well  seem  to  the  ministry  of  that  day  a 
special  outpouring  of  the  wrath  of  God. 

And,  beyond  the  great  disaster  of  the  Indian  war,  the  opening 
of  the  last  quarter  of  the  century  was  a  period  of  losses  unexam- 
pled in  the  history  of  the  colonies.  On  November  27,  1676,  the 
North  Church  in  Boston  and  more  than  forty  houses  adjacent 
were  burned.'  Three  years  later,  August  7-8,  1679,  a  yet  more 
destructive  conflagration  swept  away  nearly  all  the  business  por- 
tion of  the  town.2  Shipwreck  also  brought  more  than  customary 
losses  to  the  merchants  of  the  colonies,  while  pestilences,3  espe- 
cially the  dreaded  small-pox,  caused  great  mortality.  And,  as  if 
to  fill  the  cup  of  misfortune,  the  liberties  of  the  colonies,  especially 
of  Massachusetts,  were  threatened4  at  this  crisis  of  war  and  im- 
poverishment, by  the  hostility  of  the  Stuart  government,  which  was 
making  its  hand  heavy,  and  was  to  bring  about,  a  little  later,  the 
tyranny  of  Dudley  and  Andros,  itself  the  culmination  of  a  series  of 
acts  of  oppression,  of  which  not  the  least  exasperating  to  the  min- 
istry of  New  England  were  the  efforts  of  English  agents,  begun 
with  vigor  in  January,  1679,  to  introduce  Episcopacy  into  the  Puri- 
tan commonwealths.5 

It  was  under  these  circumstances  of  disaster  and,  as  was  be- 
lieved, of  judgment,  that  Increase  Mather,"  the  most  prominent 


1  See  Increase  Mather,  Returning  unto  God    .    .    .    a  Sermon,  etc.     Boston,  1680,  Preface. 

2  Peter  Thacher's  diary  in  Hill,  History  0/ the  Old  South  Church,  I  :  230,  231  ;  Hubbard 
says,  General  History,  p.  649,  "the  burning  of  Boston  .  .  .  hath  half  ruined  the  whole  Colony, 
as  well  as  the  town." 

3  Increase  Mather,  Returning  unto  God,  Preface. 

4  See  Palfrey,  III  :  273  et  seqq. 

5  Palfrey,  III:  324. 

*  Increase  Mather  is  too  familiar  to  need  extended  notice.  Born  June  21,  1639,  youngest  son 
of  Richard  Mather  of  Dorchester,  he  graduated  at  Harvard  in  1656,  and  went  the  next  year  to 
England,  where  he  was  well  received  and  given  opportunities  for  preaching.  Soon  after  the  Resto- 
ration he  returned  to  New  England,  and  after  preaching  for  the  Second  Church,  Boston,  from  Sep- 
tember,  1661,  he  was  ordained  its  minister,  May  27,  1664.  From  that  time  to  his  death  he  was  a 
part  of  all  that  was  done  in  New  England.  He  became  President  of  Harvard  in  June,  1685,  and 
held  the  office  till  1701 ;  he  took  prominent  part  in  defense  of  the  colonial  liberties,  and  served  as 
agent  for  Massachusetts  in  England  from  1688  to  i6}2,  obtaining  the  new  Massachusetts  charter 


THE   FIRST   STEPS   TOWARD    THE    SYNOD  413 

minister  of  the  second  generation  in  New  England,  and  pastor  of 
the  Second  Church  in  Boston,  aroused  his  brethren  in  the  ministry 
to  appeal  to  the  Massachusetts  General  Court  for  the  calling  of  a 
Synod.1  The  conception  of  such  an  assembly  was  one  which  might 
naturally  have  arisen  in  his  mind,  but  the  immediate  suggestion 
may  have  come  to  Mather  from  a  letter  of  Rev.  Thomas  Jollie,  of 
Pendlton-nigh-Clitherow,  in  Lancashire,  Eng.,  in  which  that  Puri- 
tan divine  recommended,  under  date  of  January  18,  1678,  the 
summons  of  a  Synod  'as  the  best  means  for  securing  the  spiritual 
improvement  of  New  England.2  Whatever  the  influence  of  Jollie 
may  have  been,  Mather  succeeded  in  obtaining  the  signatures  of 
eighteen  of  the  more  prominent  of  his  ministerial  brethren  to  his 
petition  to  the  Court.  First  of  the  signers  in  the  order  in  which 
the  names  were  appended  to  the  paper,  was  the  venerable  John 
Eliot  of  Roxbury,  then  came  the  name  of  Increase  Mather,  and 
next  that  of  Samuel  Torrey  of  Weymouth,  Moses  Fiske  of  Brain- 
tree  followed,  and  then  Josiah  Flynt  of  Dorchester.  The  other 
signers,  in  their  order,  were  Thomas  Clark  of  Chelmsford,  James 
Sherman  of  Sudbury,  Joseph  Whiting  of  Lynn,  Samuel  Cheever  of 
Marblehead,  Samuel  Phillips  of  Rowley,  Solomon  Stoddard  of 
Northampton,  Samuel  Whiting,  Sen.,  of  Lynn,  Thomas  Cobbett 
of  Ipswich,  Edward  Bulkeley  of  Concord,  John  Sherman  of  Water- 
town,  John  Higginson  of  Salem,  John  Hale  of  Beverly,  Samuel 
Wrhiting,  Jr.,  of  Billerica,  and  John  Wilson  of  Medfield. 

The   document   to   which   these   autographs    are    appended   is 


from  William  and  Mary.  His  later  life  was  specially*  fruitful  in  writings  for  the  press.  He  died 
Aug.  23,  1723.  Increase  Mather  was  essentially  a  conservative.  As  such  his  influence  was  directed 
toward  the  maintenance  of  that  supremacy  of  the  religious  element  in  civil  affairs  which  marked 
the  founders  of  New  England.  As  such  he  opposed  changes  in  the  practices  of  the  churches,  his 
ideal  being,  apparently,  the  state  in  which  they  were  about  the  time  of  the  Synod  of  1662.  His  con- 
servative attitude  brought  him  much  opposition,  but  no  man  in  New  England  equaled  him  in  in- 
fluence in  his  lifetime.  As  a  writer,  his  voluminousness  is  only  exceeded,  among  the  New  England 
ministry,  by  his  son,  Cotton  Mather.  The  sources  of  information  regarding  him  are  many,  but  they 
are  best  epitomized  in  Sibley,  Graduates  0/  Harvard,  I:  410-470,  where  a  list  of  biographical 
authorities  will  be  found,  together  with  as  complete  a  catalogue  of  his  writings  as  it  is  probably 
possible  to  make. 

1  "  Upon  a  motion  of  Mr.  Mather  in  Conjunction  with  others  excited  by  him  for  it,  the 
General  Court  called  upon  the  Churches  to  send  their  Delegates  for  a  Synod."  Cotton  Mather, 
Parentator,  p.  84.  Doubtless  this  petition  was  prepared  at  the  annual  Ministerial  Convention,  of 
which  some  account  may  be  found  in  chapter  XV  of  this  volume. 

-  The  letter  is  dated  18th  of  nth  m  :  167I,  and  reads :  "  The  advice  I  humbly  offer  for  your 
awakning  to  duty  in  the  reforming  of  your  manifest  evills  and  for  preventing  of  threatning  ruin 
is,  that  a  Synod  bee  gathered  to  that  purpose."     4  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  VIII :  320. 


414  TnE   REFORMING   SYNOD,    1 679,    16S0 

apparently  in  the  handwriting  of  Increase  Mather;1  and  as  its 
length  is  considerable  and  much  of  its  matter  is  reproduced  in 
substance  in  the  Result  of  the  Synod  of  1679,  a  brief  extract  will 
suffice  to  indicate  its  quality.  The  petition  first  recounts  with 
gratitude  the  inquiries  into  the  evils  of  the  times  made  by  the 
General  Court  in  October,  1675,  in  the  stress  of  the  Indian  war, 
and  the  revisal  and  publication  of  laws  undertaken  by  the  Court 
with  a  view  to  the  betterment  of  the  country;  but  the  signers  feel 
constrained  to  be  — 

"humbly  bold,  in  the  fear  of  God,  to  declare  unto  the  Honoured  Court,  as  unto  ye 
Representative  of  this  people,  as  it  followeth  — 

I.  That  according  to  our  best  discerning,  those  Reforming  Laws  (so  called,  wee 
fear,  by  many  with  slighting)  have  been,  &  are  still  likely  to  be  ineffectual  unto  any 
part  of  the  general  work  of  Reformation  proposed.  ...  2.  That  according  to 
our  best  discerning,  those  Sins  which  are  by  Law  entituled  provoking  Evils,  and 
which  give  that  wofull  Title  to  those  Reforming  Laws,  are  in  most,  (especially  most 
populous)  places  as  general,  as  powerfull,  as  Incorrigible  &  Incurable,  &,  wee  fear, 
more  Judicial  then  they  were  before.2  ...  3.  That  according  to  our  best 
descernin^;-  Gods  anger  is  not  yett  turned  away,  but  his  hand  is  stretched  out  still. 
.  Thus  wee  declare  in  the  fear  of  God,  not  so  much  to  inform  (much  less  to 
reflect  upon)  yourselves,  as  to  discharge  our  publick  Trust,  &  to  deliver  our  own 
Soulcs.  And  withal,  that  wee  may  from  hence  take  occasion  humbly  to  propose 
unto  this  Homed  Court. 

j.  Whether  Civil  Authority  as  it  is  vested  in  all  persons  of  publick  place  & 
Trust,  in  every  order  more  vigorously  exerted,  by  a  zealous  prosecution  of  Laws 
against  sin,  to  effect,  would  not  give  Life  unto  those  Laws,  is:  motion  unto  the  work 
of  Reformation.  ...  2.  Forasmuch  as  wee  cannot  but  acknowledge  ourselves 
to  be  very  defective  in  or  place  and  work,  Whether  Churches  &  Elders  ought  not  to 
bee  moved,  encouraged  and  assisted  unto  that  which  God  calls  for,  &  expects  from 
them  in  the  work  of  Reformation.  .  .  .  Wee  find  in  Scripture  that  the  Religions 
Reforming  Magistrate  did  ever  stirr  up,  and  strengthen  the  churches  &  ministry  unto 
the  work  of  God  in  Apostatizing  Times.  ...  3.  Whether  a  Convention  of  the 
Churches  by  their  Elders  &  messengers  bee  not  extraordinarily  necessary  at  this 
Time,  as  a  most  general  means  unto  the  attainment  of  these  great  ends  proposed  ;  >.V 
whether  therefore  God  doth  not  now  call  the  Churches  thereunto.  .  .  .  Manx- 
things  appear  unto  us,  necessary  in  such  an  Assembly,  which  cannot  bee  orderly  & 
effectually  wrought  otherwise  —  as 

i.  That  there  bee  a  more  full  enquiry  made  into  the  Causes  &  State  of  Gods 
Controversy  with  us.  .  .  .  2.  That  these  Churches,  &  this  Ministry  (which,  re- 
specting the  persons  of  whom  they  are  now  Constituted  are  mostly  other  Churches, 
<S:  another  ministry)  having  never  yett  in  this  present  Age,  made  any  publick  Confes- 


1  The  petition  has  never  been  published.  It  may  be  found  in  the  Massachusetts  Archives. 
Vol.  X:  197. 

-  Here  follows  a  brief  enumeration  of  most  of  those  evils  described  in  the  Result  of  the  Synod 
of  1679. 


PETITION    TO   THE    LEGISLATURE  415 

sion  or  profession  of  the  faith  &  order  of  the  Gospel,  It  may  now  seem  very  necessary 
for  us  so  to  do,  at  least  by  owning  <S:  asserting  ye  same  faith  and  order  of  the  Gospel 
in  which  these  Churches  were  at  first  established,  and  of  which  or  Fathers  witnessed 
a  good  Confession  in  such  an  Assembly  at  Cambridge,  in  ye  year  164S,  and  afterward 
left  upon  Record  unto  us  in  ye  platform  of  Discipline,  &  other  writings.  And  the 
rather  wee  Judge  it  necessary  at  this  time,  Because  wee  fear  thac  these  Churches  are, 
&  will  be  much  endangered  both  by  Ignorance  &  error,  as  also  that  both  Churches  & 
Elders  may  have  a  more  right  &  full  understanding  one  of  another,  that  wee  may  bee 
the  better  prepared  to  hold  fast  our  profession,  &  to  stand  fast  together  in  an  hour 
of  Temptation,  as  also  that  wee  may  clear  our  selves  of  the  suspicion  &  scandal  of 
defection.  3.  That  the  Churches  may  have  opportunity  for  to  labour  (at  least)  to 
find  out,  and  fix  upon  the  right  means  and  method  of  practice  as  to  things  which 
have  been  already  clearly  &  firmly  stated  from  the  word  of  God,  that  so  the  Churches 
may  Concurr,  and  assist  one  another  therein,  in  a  way  of  publick  order,  peace,  union, 
&:  communion  ;  more  especially  in  that  wherein  wee  are  by  practice  to  discharge  our- 
selves faithfully  in  all  duty  unto  the  Children  of  the  Covenant,  which  is  a  principal 
part  of  the  neglect  and  defect  of  which  wee  are  the  more  sadly  sensible.  .  .  . 
Unto  all  wee  add,  the  consideration  of  the  presence  of  Christ  with,  &  ye  blessing  and 
success  which  hee  hath  given  unto  y"  former  Labours  &  Endeavours  of  the  Churches 
in  this  way  of  his  appointment. 

Much  Honored  .  .  .  wee  have  made  this  plain  Address  unto  you,  because 
wee  have  observed  that  all  former  Essayes  unto  Reformation  have  failed,  &  our  hope 
thereof  been  frustrated  ;  If  therefore,  there  bee  yett  any  hope  in  Israel  concerning 
this  matter,  wee  beleeve  it  will  not  bee  attained  untill  Magistracy,  Ministry,  Churches 
&  people  rise  up  together,  in  their  proper  places  &  order,  unto  the  work." 

This  petition  was  presented  to  the  Massachusetts  General 
Court  at  the  session  of  May  28,  1679,  and  received  immediate  and 
favorable  response.  Possibly  the  undercurrent  of  criticism  which 
flowed  beneath  the  surface  of  the  stream  of  the  New  England  the- 
ocracy may  have  been  more  obvious  to  the  legislators  than  the 
guarded  words  of  the  petitioners  implied.  Something  more  than  a 
mere  renewal  of  assent  to  the  Cambridge  Platform,  a  revisal  of 
some  of  its  sections,  would  have,  apparently,  found  favor  with  the 
Legislature.  But  the  main  request  of  the  petitioners  was  granted, 
and  the  Synod  ordered  in  the  following  vote:1 

"  In  ansr  to  a  motion  made  by  some  of  the  reuerend  elders,  that  there  might  be 
a  convening  of  the  elders  &  messengers  of  the  churches  in  forme  of  a  synod,  for  the 
reuisall  of  the  platforme  of  discipljne  agreed  vpon  by  the  churches,  1647,  and  what 
else  may  appeare  necessary  for  the  preventing  schishmes,  heresies,  prophaness,  &  the 
establishment  of  the  churches  in  one  faith  &  order  of  the  gospell,  this  Court  doe 
approoue  of  the  sajd  motion,  &  order  their  assembling  for  the  ends  aforesajd  on  the 
second  Wednesday  in  September2  next,  at  Boston;   and  the  secretary  is  required 


Mass.  Bay,  V:  215,  216.  2  Sept. 


416  THE   REFORMING   SYNOD,    1679,    1680 

seasonably  to  give  notice  hereof  to  the  seuerall  churches.  It  is  further  ordered,  that 
the  charges  of  this  meeting  shall  be  borne  by  the  churches  respectively.1 

Qiuesti  i.2  What  are  the  euills  that  haue  provoked  the  Lord  to  bring  his  judg- 
ments on  New  England  ? 

2  Quasst.     What  is  to  be  donn  that  so  those  evills  may  be  reformed." 

In  due  course  of  time  the  colonial  secretary,  Edward  Rawson, 

sent  a  certified  copy  of  this  vote  to  the  ministers  of  the  various 

churches  under  the  Massachusetts  jurisdiction,  accompanied  by  a 

note  curiously  illustrative  of  the  dependence  of  the  churches  on 

state  authority.     There  was  no  longer,  as  in  1646,3  a  suggestion  of 

unwillingness  on  the  part  of  any  of  the  legislators  to  command  the 

churches.      The  note  to  the  minister  of  the  Old  South  Church, 

Boston,  is  as  follows: 4 

"  These  fore  the  Rever'd  Mr.  Saml  Willard,  Teacher  to  the  3d  Church  in  Boston 
To  be  communicated  to  the  Church. 

Rev'nd.  Sir.  These  are  only  to  inform  yourself  and  church  of  the  underwritten 
Generall  Court's  Answer  and  order,  not  doubting  of  your  and  their  obedience  and 
complyance  therewith  at  the  time,  remayning 

Your  friend  and  servant 
Boston  nth  July  1679  Edw.  Rawson  Secty" 

The  order  accompanying  this  note  seems  on  the  whole  to  have 

met  with  the  favor  of  the  churches,  though   it   is  interesting  to 

observe  that  the  First  Church,  Boston,  which  had  been  so  reluctant 

to  take  part   in   the  Cambridge  Synod  in   1646,°  now   gave  but  a 

grudging  and  guarded  obedience  to  the  call  of  the  Court.     Possibly 

the  hesitation  of  this  venerable  body  in  this  instance  was  due  to  a 

fear  that  the  Synod  would  propose  some  unpalatable  solution  of  its 

ten-years  dispute  with  the  seceding  Old  South,  rather  than  to  a  zeal 

for  the  more  abstract  principles  of  churchly  independence  of  civil 

control."     The  majority  of  the  churches  felt   no  scruples,  and  a 


1  This  was  done.  Peter  Thacher,  one  of  the  messengers  of  the  Old  South,  Boston,  recorded 
in  his  diary:  "6.  Octo.  79.  The  deacons  of  our  Church  came  and  brought  race  five  pound  for 
preaching  and  being  a  Messenger  from  the  Church  to  the  Synode,"  H.  A.  Hill,  Hist.  Old  South, 
I  :  234.  The  Dorchester  church  chose  two  messengers  "&  y«  deacons  weer  desiered  to  take  Care 
for  their  entertainment  at  Boston  on  y»  Church  ace1."     Rec.  First  C/i.,  Dorchester,  p.  83. 

2  These  questions,  though  thus  recorded,  seem  no  part  of  the  vote  of  the  Court.  They  are 
appended  to  the  letter  sent  by  Sec.  Rawson  to  the  Old  South,  as  "  Questions  given  in."  Probably 
they  were  handed  in  to  the  legislature  by  the  petitioners  after  the  granting  of  the  petition. 

3  See  ante,  p.  167.  4  H.  A.  Hill,  Hist.  Old  South,  I  :  232.         •  See  ante,  pp.  171-174. 

•  This  suggestion  is  made  by  -Mr.  Hill,  Hist.  Old  South,  1 :  233.  The  First  Church  voted, 
Aug.  5,  1679,  to  be  represented  in  the  Synod,  but  added:  "Tho  wee  doe  not  see  light  for  the  calling 
of  a  Synod  att  this  time,  yett  there  being  one  called  :  that  what  good  theare  is  or  may  bee  motioned 
may  bee  encouraged  and  evill  prevented  by  our  Testimony,  wee  are  willing  to  send  our  Messengers 


THE   SYNOD  S    FIRST    SESSION  417 

general  fast  was  held  throughout  the  colony  to  supplicate  the  divine 
blessing  on  the  coming  Assembly.1 

The  events  of  the  first  session  of  this  Synod  have  been  pre- 
served in  the  graphic  and  contemporary  record  of  Rev.  Peter 
Thacher,2  soon  to  be  settled  at  Milton,  Mass.,  but  who,  as  a  son  of 
the  lately  deceased  pastor  of  the  Old  South  Church  in  Boston  and 
a  member  of  that  body,  represented  that  church  as  a  delegate  in 
the  Synod.3     His  journal  records: 4 

"  io-  Sept:  79-  y!  day  ye  Synod  began  £  Cobbet  &  5  Eliot5  were 
Chouse  Moderatours  &:  \vn  yy  had  taken  ye  names  of  ye  severall 
Chhs,  wc  sent  &  y"  names  of  y5  y'6  yy  found  several  Churches  had 
only  sent  Elders  &:  not  brethren  with  ym  where  upon  ye  Question 
was  whether  Elders  of  Chhs  Ex  Officio  were  not  members  &  it  was 
asserted  y'  ye  matter  of  a  Synod  were  Eld"  &  brethren7  where  upon 
it  was  agreed  on  y'  Letters  in  ye  Synods  name  Should  be  Sent  to  ye 
Churches  y'  had  not  done  it 8  to  request  yl  yy  would  doe  it.  In  ye 
afternoon  ye  Plateforme  of  Church  Discipline9  was  read  &  £  Shear- 
man &  £Oakes  10  being  Chouse  Moderators  ye  Synod  was  adjurned 
till  Eight  a  Clock  ye  next  morning. 

ii"  Sept-  79-  ye  Synod  determined  noe  Vote  should  passe  till 
yy  had  answer  from  ye  Churches;  where  upon  ye  first  question  about 
ye  provoking  Evills  was  discoussd  It  was  Lecture  at  first  Chh 
Boston  ^  Russell  preached  it."  after  Lecture  ye  govern'  came  into 
ye  Synod.12 

12-  Sept-  79-  ye  Second  question  was  discussd  what  was  ye 
remidyes  to  remove  gods  Judgem15  &  a  Committee  Chouse  to  Con- 
sider of  ym  &  what  was  said  concerning  ym  in  ye  Synod  &  to  bring 
ye  result  unto  ye  Synod,     alsoe  a  fast  to  be  yc  next  twesday  was 


to  it :  Tho  whatever  is  theire  determined,  wee  looke  upon  and  judge  to  bee  no  further  binding  to  us 
than  the  light  of  Gods  word  is  thereby  cleared  to  our  Consciences."     Ibid. 

1  C.  Mather,  Magnalia,  II :  318  ;  Parenlator,  p.  84. 

2  His  biography  is  given  by  Sibley,  Crad.  of  Harvard,  II :  370-379. 

3  Hill,  Old  South  Ch.,  1 :  234. 

4  I  owe  this  valuable  record,  now  for  the  first  time  published  in  full,  to  the  great  kindness  of 
Hon.  Peter  Thacher  of  Boston.  Portions  have  been  printed  by  Palfrey,  Hist.  X.  E.,  Ill :  330,  331; 
and  Hill,  Old  South  Ch..  1 :  234. 

5  Rev.  Messrs.  Thomas  Cobbett  of  Ipswich,  now  71  years  of  age,  and  "  Apostle  "  John  Eliot  of 
Roxbury,  now  75.  From  the  choice  of  other  moderators  speedily  thereafter  it  would  appear  that  this 
election  was  a  tribute  to  age  and  distinction  ;  the  real  burden  of  presiding  over  the  discussion  falling 
on  younger  shoulders. 

6  Perhaps  we  should  interpret  thus:  names  of  those  that  {represented  the  Churches.']  they 
found,  etc. 

7  For  further  particulars  regarding  this  important  assertion  of  Congregational  principles  see 
Preface  to  the  Result,  pp.  424,  425  of  this  volume  ;  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  II :  318  ;  Increase  Mather, 
Order  of  the  Gospel,  p.  83. 

8  I.  e.,  Churches  that  had  not  elected  delegates.  9  The  Cambridge  Platform. 

10  Rev.  Messrs.  John  Sherman  of  Watertown,  aged  66 ;  and  Urian  Oakes  of  Cambridge,  at 
this  time  acting  president  of  Harvard  College,  aged  47. 

"  Rev.  John  Russell,  once  a  minister  at  Wethersfield,  Conn.;  but  since  the  founding  of  Had- 
ley,  Mass.,  in  1659,  pastor  of  the  church  there. 

12  Simon  Bradstreet. 


4Ig  THE   REFORMING   SYNOD,    1679,    1680 

anoointed  &  I  Cobbet  &  £  Mather1  where2  to  preach  &  whome  y* 
n  oderatours  "should  call  forth  were  to  pray.  £  Oakes,  I  Russell,  4 
Mather,  i  Torry,3  4  Moody/  Cap'.  Richards  Cap',  fisher  &  Deacon 
Tilson  where  Chouse  for  ye  Committee. 

Y«  Synod  was  adjourned  till  Twesday  Eight  a  Clock  was  to  be 

a  faSi6-  Sepf  79-  Y"  was  a  fast  *  in  f  Synod  1  Higginson'  began 
&  prayed,  y-  £  Cobbet  preached  Isa"  6y  T  =  Buckley  prayed.  ,n 
y  afternoon  Old  J  Eliot  prayed  ^  Mather  preached  99-  pr  6"  y 
1  Cobbet  went  to  prayer  who  was  Exceedingly  in  larged  y-was 
much  of  -od  appeared  in  him.  I  desire  to  blesse  god  for  ys  day 
my   heart  was   much   drawen    forth    y«  day  &    in    family  prayer 

afterr7aSdepf  79-  in  T  naming  y  Synod  considered  of  £  returne 
made  by  y-  Chhs  sent  to*  none  of  W  refused  to  send  only  Newberry 
where  upon  y>  were  received  as  members  ot  y  Synod,  after  y  y 
plateforme  was  read  &  approved  for  y  «**. tnee  by  aUna= 
vote.9  yn  ye  Committee's  returne10  was  read  over  eV  some  debate 

UP°ni8*  Sepf  79-  t  Synod  was  upon  y-  first  question.  Lecture 
first  Chh?  Nat  Collins11  preached  \f  are  not  humbled  unto  y 
day12lu  after  Lecture  y  sins  of  oppression  was  in  debate  & .  soe  5 
Whellock"  declared  f  y-  was  a  cry  of  injustice  in  y«  magistrates*. 
ministers  were  not  rated  15  W  Occasioned  a  very  warme  discourse 
"odder  -charged  y  Deputy  »  with  saying  what  was  not  true  &  y 
Deputy  Govern'"  told  him  he  deserved  to  be  Laid  by  y  heals  &c. 

6  See  C.  Mather,  A««/a/»r,  p.  85.  ■  John  H.gginson  of  Salem. 

I  J^SatSih.  *e  Cal*^™   is  given  in  the  Preface  to  the 


,  the  Committee  appointed  Sept. 


,  consider  evils  and  their  remedies.    The  result  was 
ase  Mather,  Partner,  p.  85 ;    and  was  read  to  the  Synod  and  discussed  para- 

— B5SS«2^^-S£2^  -*-  ■  —  -  — 

colony   must  have  been  a  visitor  rather  than  a  member  of  the  Synod. 

..  is  [  ]  in  original. 

M  Thi'sTal  "Rev."  Ralph  Wheelock,  the  »  father  of  Medway."     He  had  preached  in  Eng- 

1  his  was      Ke  and  a  loca]  istrate  at  nedham  ;  and 

,and  and  -nthts  country.     He  »as  ™  ° f    be  e     y        schoolmastcr,  and  town  representative  .0  the 

a  founder  of  Medway.     There  he  served  as  stiec  ,  hj        ,       ;  ,e  of  u  Rev." 

Genera,  Court.     He  was  now  about  „  ~J*£*™Z  ££  Lre  than  forty  years  of 

shows  the  strength  of  usage  even  ,n  the  fee ^un*  ,  ^  ^  of 

/<""'»»■  16  Solomon  Stoddard  of  Northampton. 

1,  I.  e/,  Wheelock,  who  had  been  "deputy  "  from  Medway  in  the  General  Court. 
18  Thomas  Danforth. 


THE   SYNOD  S    FIRST    SESSION  419 

after  we  broke  up  ye  deputy  &  severall  others  went  home  with 
I  Stodder  &  ye  Deputy  asked  forgivenesse  of  him  &  told  him  hee 
freely  forgave  him,  but  ~  Stodder  was  high. 

19-  Sept-  79-  Ye  Deputy  owned  his  being  in  to  great  a  heat  & 
desired  ye  Lord  to  forgive  &c:  &  ^  Stodder  did  something  tho  very 
little  by  a  Deputy.  Ys  day  yy  discoursed  ye  remidyes  &  debated  at 
ye  End  of  Each  Paragraph;  yer  was  much  debate  about  persons 
being  admitted  to  full  Communion  &  ^  Stodder  ye  Minister  offered 
to  dispute  against  it  &:  brought  one  arguem'.  £  Mather  was 
Respondent1  ^  Oakes  Moderaf  but  after  some  time  ye  rest  of  his 
arguem13.  were  deferred  &  at  present  It  was  Eased.  ys  Evening 
what  was  drawen  up  by  ye  comittee2  &  corrected  by  ye  Synod  in 
answer  to  both  questions  was  Unanimously  uoted.  &  an  answer  to 
ye  Governrs  two  questions,  alsoe  a  Committee  was  Chouse  [i  Oakes 
I  Torry  |  all  in,3  £  Willard,4  £  Mather,  Cap*.  Richards5  -  Stodder 
Cap'.  Fisher6]  to  present  what  ye  Synod  hath  done  [after  yy  had 
prefaced  it1]  to  ye  Gen".  Court  in  Octo-  in  order  to  have  ye  Chhs 
&c.  &  ye  Ministers  ^  Higginson  &  |  Flint8  being  added  were 
voted  to  draw  up  a  Confession  of  faith  against  ye  next  Weensday 
before  ye  Generall  Court  of  Election  next,  ye  Committee  was  alsoe 
desired  if  ye  Court  approved  of  it  to  writte  to  ye  Chhs  of  ye  Vnited 
Colonyes  &  informe  if  yy  pleased  to  send  y"  Elders  &  messengers 
it  would  be  very  gratefull.9  after  ys  a  psalme  being  Sung  i  Cobbet 
concluded  with  prayer." 

The  committee  thus  appointed  presented  the  Result,  known 
as  the  Necessity  of  Reformation,  to  the  Court  at  its  session  October 
15,  1679,  on  which  occasion  Increase  Mather  "Preached  a  very 
Potent  Sermon,  on  the  Danger  of  not  being  Reformed  by  these 
Things" j10  and  the  Court  voted:11 

"  This  Court,  hauing  pervsed  the  result  of  the  late  synod  of  Septemb,  1679,  doe 
judge  it  meete  to  comend  the  same  to  the  serious  consideration  of  all  the  churches 
and  people  in  this  jurisdiction,  hereby  enjoyning  and  requiring  all  persons  in  their 
seuerall  capacitjes  concerned  to  a  carefull  and  diligent  reformation  of  all  those  pro- 
voking evills  mentioned  therein,  according  to  the  true  intent  thereof,  that  so  the 


1  See  Stoddard's  own  account  of  this  discussion,  p.  280  of  this  volume.  The  point  is  No.  III. 
of  the  proposed  remedies  for  the  evils  of  the  time  (p.  433).  Thacher  has  reversed  the  real  position  of 
Stoddard  and  Mather  unless  his  "dispute  against  it"  refers  to  the  report  of  the  Committee  under 
discussion  rather  than  to  the  phrase  "  persons  being  admitted  to  full  communion."  Stoddard  was 
arguing  in  favor  of  his  well  known  views. 

2  I.  e.,  the  Committee  of  Sept.  12.  s  James  Allen  of  the  Boston  First  Church. 
*  Samuel  Willard  of  the  Boston  Third,  or  Old  South,  Church. 

5  I  suppose  this  is  John  Richards,  a  member  of  the  Boston  Second  Church. 

6  Daniel  Fisher,  a  member  of  the  Dedham  Church,  prominent  in  colonial  politics. 

7  The  preface,  as  well  as  the  result,  was  the  work  of  Increase  Mather,  Parentator,  p.  87. 

8  Josiah  Flynt,  Richard  Mather's  successor  in  the  pastorate  of  the  Dorchester  Church. 

9  This  suggestion  came  to  nothing.  10  Parentator,  p.  85. 
"  Records    .    .    .     Mass.  Bay,  V :  244. 


420  THE    REFORMING   SYNOD,    1679,    1680 

anger  and  displeasure  of  God,  which  hath  binn  many  wayes  manifested,  maybe 
averted  from  this  poore  people,  and  his  favour  and  blessing  obteyned,  as  in  former 
tjmes ;  and  for  this  end  hath  ordered  the  same  to  be  printed." 

At  the  same  time  the  Court  appointed  a  committee  "  to  consider 
our  lawes  already  made,  that  may  neede  emendation,  or  may  not 
so  clearly  be  warranted  from  the  word  of  God";1  criticisms  hav- 
ing been  passed  by  the  Synod. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  work  of  the  Synod  was  bene- 
ficial. Churches  were  stirred  up  to  renewed  activity.  Covenants 
were  solemnly  ratified.  The  young  people  were  urged  with  some 
success,  in  many  places,  to  undertake  the  Christian  life.2  But  the 
political  situation  of  the  years  after  the  Synod  was  such  that  any 
permanent  good  was  difficult  of  accomplishment.  The  financial 
distress  consequent  upon  Philip's  war,  the  tyranny  of  Andros,  the 
loss  of  the  charter  of  Massachusetts,  and  quarrels  with  the  French, 
made  the  closing  years  of  the  seventeenth  century  a  period  of 
gloom.  The  dissipations  of  military  life  and  the  engrossing  prob- 
lems of  politics  alike  diminished  men's  interest  in  religion.  The 
Synod  was  a  palliative  rather  than  a  cure. 

Though  the  Synod  had  made  no  revision  of  the  Cambridge 
Platform,  as  the  Court  had  thought  possible,  and  though  the  con- 
servative party,  at  least,  rejoiced  in  the  vote  by  which  the  Platform 
was  ratified,3  the  Synod  had  appointed  an  able  committee  to  draw 
up  a  Confession  of  Faith  and  report  it  to  a  second  session  of  the 
body.  That  committee  had  no  very  arduous  task.  New  England 
had  no  general  Confession,  but  the  Cambridge  Synod  had  ratified 
the  doctrinal  parts  of  the  Westminster  Confession  "  for  the  sub- 
stance thereof";  and  the  work  of  the  Congregationalists  at  the 


•  md. 

2  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  II :  331-333.  The  Second  Church  in  Boston,  for  example,  renewed 
its  covenant  March  17,  1680;  and  the  Third  June  29.  Sermons  of  peculiar  solemnity  delivered  on 
those  occasions  by  Increase  Mather  and  Samuel  Willard  were  printed.  How  the  improvement  of 
the  Dorchester  church  was  sought  is  told  thus:  "  26  2  85  .  .  .  yc  same  day  ther  was  read  y» 
Conclusion  of  y«  Senod  formerly  agreed  on  as  y«  p'voking  sines  y*  we  stood  guilty  off  &  to  be  Hum- 
bled for  The  3  3  85  was  read  a  pap  from  y*  governor  &  Councell  to  excit  y«  Elders  &  minester  to 
take  Care  of  their  flocks  by  goeing  from  hous  to  hous  &  see  how  >••  people  p'fitting  by  y«  word  & 
that  instructing  y">  youth  may  goe  forward  at  y«  same  time  >••  Elder  p' posed  y<  tow  of  yc  tithing 
mens  Squadrons  at  a  time  appointed  should  come  together  to  some  place  for  y*  end  from  8  to  16 
ycers  of  age  to  be  Catechized  &  from  16  to  24  ye  yong  p'sons  should  come  together  to  be  discoursed 
with  all  ye  maids  by  themselves  &  y  men  by  themselves."     See.  First  C/i.  Dorchester,  p.  93. 

8  See  preface  to  Result,  p.  425  of  this  volume. 


THE   SYNOD  S   SECOND   SESSION  42 1 

Savoy  was  well  known.  The  two  leading  members  of  the  com- 
mittee, Mather  and  Oakes,  had  been  in  England  while  the  Savoy- 
Synod  was  in  session  and  were  well  acquainted  with  its  foremost 
men.  It  was  natural,  therefore,  that  the  committee  should  recom- 
mend the  adoption  of  the  Savoy  Confession,  in  practically  un- 
changed form,1  as  the  creed  of  the  Massachusetts  churches.  Pur- 
suant to  its  order  on  adjournment,  the  Synod  met  for  its  second 
session  at  Boston  on  May  12,  1680.  In  the  absence  of  definite 
knowledge  we  may  conjecture  that  the  result  was  so  far  a  fore- 
gone conclusion  that  the  attendance  was  less  than  in  September, 
1679.  Certainly  Peter  Thacher  was  not  there,  and  we  miss  h;s 
guidance  as  to  the  events.  Cotton  Mather  recorded  in  his 
Parentator : 2 

"  On  May.  12.  16S0.  The  Synod  had  a  Second  Session  at  Boston  ;  When  Our 
Confession  of  Faith  was  agreed  upon.  Though  there  were  many  Elder,  and  some 
Famous,  Persons  in  that  Venerable  Assembly,  yet  Mr.  Mather6  was  chosen  their 
Moderator.  He  was  then  111,  under  the  Approaches  &  Beginnings  of  a  Fever  ;  but 
so  Intense  was  he  on  the  Business  to  be  done,  that  he  forgot  his  Illness  ;  and  he  kept 
them  so  close  to  their  Business,  that  in  Two  Days  they  dispatch'd  it :  and  he  also 
Composed  the  Prccface  to  the  Confession." 

That  Preface  declares  that  the  Savoy  Confession,  slightly 
modified,  "  was  twice  publickly  read,  examined  and  approved  of  "4 
by  the  Synod;  and  that,  as  at  Cambridge  in  1648,  desire  to  avoid 
any  imputation  of  heresy  from  the  Puritan  party  in  England  led 
the  Synod  to  prefer  the  formulas  of  well-known  English  assemblies 
to  an  expression  of  faith  in  its  own  language.  The  fact  was 
that,  however  individual  New  England  might  be  in  church  polity, 
no  doctrinal  peculiarities  had  been  as  yet  developed  on  this  side 
of  the  Atlantic.  No  doctrinal  discussions  of  consequence  had 
taken  place.  The  New  England  churches  still  stood,  as  a  body, 
with  uncriticising  loyalty  on  the  basis  of  the  Puritan  theology  of 
England  as  it  had  been  in  the  first  half  of  the  seventeenth 
century. 

The  Confession,  like  the  Result  of  the  first  session  of  the 
Synod,  was  duly  reported  to  the  Massachusetts  General  Court,  and 
on  June  n,  1680,  that  body  voted  as  follows:6 


The  only  alteration  of  any  moment  is  in  Chap,  xxiv,  sec.  iii.     See  p.  393  of  this  volume. 

Page  87.     See  also  Magnalia,  II :   180.  3  Increase  Mather. 

See  p.  439  of  this  volume.  6  Records     .     .     .     Mass.  Bay,  V :  287. 


422  THE    REFORMING    SYNOD,    1679,    1680 

"This  Court,  hauing  taken  into  serious  consideration  the  requests  which  hath 
been  presented  by  seuerall  of  the  reund  elders,  in  the  name  of  the  late  synod,  doe 
approove  thereof,  and  accordingly  order  the  confession  of  faith  agreed  vpon  at  their 
second  session,  and  the  platforme  of  discipline,  consented  vnto  by  the  synod  at  Cam- 
bridge, anno  1648,  to  be  printed  for  the  bennefit  of  these  churches  in  present  and 
after  times." 

Though  heartily  sympathizing  with  the  statement  of  doctrine, 
the  Court  wisely  refrained  from  commanding  its  use  by  the 
churches.  Accepted  as  a  fair  expression  of  the  belief  of  New 
England,  it  was  reaffirmed  and  declared  the  faith  of  the  colony  of 
Connecticut  at  Saybrook  in  1708.  But  it  was  never  intended  to  be  a 
substitute  for  the  local  creeds  of  individual  churches.  It  was 
itself  used  as  a  local  creed  by  at  least  two  churches,  the  Old 
South  of  Boston1  and  the  First  Church  of  Cambridge,"  and  such 
use  illustrates  rather  than  disproves  the  freedom  of  the  New  Eng- 
land churches  to  formulate  their  faith  each  in  its  own  way.  That 
freedom  enables  a  modern  Congregationalist  to  view  with  pleasure 
the  creed  of  1680  as  a  noble  testimony  to  the  faith  of  our  churches 
at  that  day,  and  a  historic  monument  of  which  they  have  no 
reason  to  be  ashamed;  while  he  substitutes  for  its  phraseology,  if 
he  chooses,  what  he  may  deem  an  expression  of  Scripture  truth 
better  adapted  to  the  needs  of  the  age  in  which  he  lives.  He  can 
admire  the  stately  fabric  of  this  seventeenth  century  Puritan  creed 
as  he  admires  the  great  cathedrals  of  the  middle  ages,  without 
questioning  at  every  turn  how  much  of  tinkering  and  repairing 
with  modern,  and  it  may  be  incongruous,  architecture  is  desirable 
to  fit  it  for  present  use. 


'  See  H.  A.  Hill,  Hist.  Old  South,  1 :  234,  235  ;  II :  555.     See  ante,  p.  409. 
3  See  A.  McKenzie,  Lectures  on  the  History  0/  the  First  Church  in  Cambridge,  Boston, 
1873,  P-  z67- 


THE    RESULT   OF    1679,    1680  423 


THE  SYNOD'S  WORK 

A.    THE    RESULT    OF    1679 

The1  necessity  |  of  |  REFORMATION  |  With  the  Expe- 
dients subservient  |  thereunto,  asserted ;  |  in  Answer  to  two  | 
QUESTIONS  I  I.  What  are  the  Evils  that  have  provoked  the  Lord 
to  bring  his  Judg-  |  ments  on  New- England?  |  II.  What  is  to  be  done 
that  so  those  Evils  may  be  Reformed?  \  Agreed  upon  by  the  \  elders 
and  messengers  I   of  the  Churches  assembled  in  the  |   SYNOD  |  At 

Boston  in  New-England,  |  Sept.  10.  1679.  |  |  Mai.  3.  7.  Even 

from  the  dayes  of  your  Fathers  yee  are  gone  away  from  mine  Ordi- 

|  nances,  and  have  not  kept  them;  Return  unto  me  and  I  will  re- 
turn unto  you,  |  saith  the  Lord  of  Host:  but  ye  said,  Wherein  shall 
we  return?  |  Rev.  2.  4,  5.  Nevertheless  I  have  somewhat  against 
thee,  because  thou  hast  left  thy  |  first  love.  Remember  there- 
fore from  whence  thou  art  fallen,  and  Repent,  and  doe  thy  first 
works;  or  else  I  will  come  unto  thee  quickly  and  will  remove  |  thy 
Candlestick  out  of  his  place,  except  thou  Repent.  |  |  boston  ; 

I  Printed  by  John  Foster.     In  the  Year,  1679. 

[ii  blank] 
[iii] 

TO  THE  MUCH  HONOURED 

General  Court 

Of  the  Massachuscts   Colony  now  sitting  at  Boston 
in  NEW-ENGLAND 

Right  Worshipful,   Worshipful,  and  much  honoured  in  our  Lord Jesus  ! 

THe  Wayes  of  God  towards  this  his  People,  have  in  many  respects  been  like 
unto  his  dealings  with  Israel  of  old :  It  was  a  great  and  high  undertaking  of 
our  Fathers,  when  they  ventured  themselves  and  their  little  ones  upon  the 
rude  waves  of  the  vast  Ocean,  that  so  they  might  follow  the  Lord  into  this  Land ; 
a  parallel  instance  not  to  be  given,  except  that  of  our  Father  Abraham  from  Vr  of 
the  Chaldees,  or  that  of  his  Seed  from  the  land  of  Egypt ;  the  Lord  alone  did  lead 
them  and  there  was  no  strange  God  with  them.  In  the  wilderness  have  we  dwelt  in 
safety  alone,  being  made  the  subjects  of  most  peculiar  mercies  and  priviledges.  The 
good  will  of  him  that  dwelt  in  the  bush  hath  been  upon  the  head  of  those  that  were 
separated  from  their  Brethren  :  and  the  Lord  hath  (by  turning  a  Wilderness  into  a 
fruitful  land)  brought  us  into  a  wealthy  place  ;  he  hath  planted  a  Vine,  having  cast 
out  the  Heathen,  prepared  Room  for  it,  and  caused  it  to  take  deep  rooting,  and  to 


1  On  a  fly-leaf,  facing  this  title,  is  the  approving  vote  of  the  Mass.  Gen.  Court  of  Oct. 
1679  {ante,  p.  415),  attested  by  Edward  Rawson,  Secretary. 


424  THE    REFORMING    SYNOD,    1679,    1680 

fill  the  land,  which  hath  sent  out  its  boughs  unto  the  Sea.  and  its  branches  to  the 
River.  If  we  ask  of  the  dayes  that  are  past,  and  look  from  the  one  side  of  heaven 
to  the  other,  where  can  we  find  the  like  to  this  great  thing  which  the  Lord  hath 
done?  His  planting  these  heavens,  and  laying  the  foundations  of  this  earth,  is  (if 
any  thing  be)  to  be  reckoned  amongst  the  wonderful  works  of  God  which  this  age 
hath  seen.  If  we  look  abroad  over  the  face  of  the  whole  earth,  where  shall  we  see  a 
place  or  people  brought  to  such  perfection  and  considerableness,  in  so  short  a  time? 
Our  adversaryes  themselves  being  judges,  it  hath  not  been  so  with  any  of  the  outgo, 
ings  of  the  Nations.  We  must  then  ascribe  all  these  things,  as  unto  the  grace  and 
abundant  goodness  of  the  Lord  our  God,  so  to  his  owning  a  religious  design  and  in- 
terest ;  such  was  Ncw-Englands  in  its  primitive  constitution.  Our  Fathers  neither 
sought  for,  nor  thought  of  great  things  for  themselves,  but  did  seek  first  the  King- 
dome  of  God,  and  his  righteousness,  and  all  these  things  were  added  to  them. 
They  came  not  into  the  wilderness  to  see  a  man  cloathed  in  soft  raiment.  But  that 
we  have  in  too  many  respects,  been  forgetting  the  Errand  upon  which  the  Lord  sent 
us  hither  ;  all  the  world  is  witness  :  [iv]  And  therefore  we  may  not  wonder  that  God 
hath  changed  the  tenour  of  his  Dispensations  towards  us,  turning  to  doe  us  hurt,  and 
consuming  us  after  that  he  hath  done  us  good.  If  we  had  continued  to  be  as  once 
we  were,  the  Lord  would  have  continued  to  doe  for  us,  as  once  he  did.  This  not- 
withstanding, we  must  not  deny  or  disown  what  of  God  is  remaining  amongst  us. 
There  is  cause  to  fear  that  the  same  evils  for  which  the  Lord  is  contending  with  us, 
are  to  be  found  in  other  Reformed  Churches,  and  perhaps  in  an  higher  degree,  then 
as  yet  with  us ;  considering  that  these  Churches  doe  still  (through  the  grace  of  Christ) 
own  both  the  faith  and  order  of  the  Gospel,  that  was  professed  in  the  dayes  of  our 
Fathers :  and  there  are  a  number  of  precious  souls  (a  few  names  that  have  not  defiled 
their  garments  with  the  sins  of  the  times)  we  hope  in  every  Congregation  :  only  the 
present  Generation  in  New-England,  as  to  the  body  of  it,  in  respect  of  the  practice 
and  power  of  Godliness,  is  far  short  of  those  whom  God  saw  meet  to  improve  in  lay- 
ing the  foundations  of  his  Temple  here  .■  and  our  iniquityes  admit  of  sadder  aggrava- 
tions then  can  be  said  of  others,  because  we  sin  against  greater  light,  and  means, 
and  mercies  then  ever  People  (all  circumstances  considered)  have  done ;  and  there- 
fore the  Lord  is  righteous  in  all  the  evil  that  hath  befallen  us.  And  it  is  high  time 
for  us  to  be  earnest,  as  to  an  impartial  Scrutiny  concerning  the  causes  of  his  holy 
displeasure  against  us,  together  with  the  proper  Remedyes  or  Scripture  expedients, 
for  Reformation,  that  so  the  Lord,  who  hath  said,  Return  unto  me,  and  I  will  return 
unto  you,  may  be  at  peace  with  us.  Essayes  respecting  this  matter  have  not  been 
altogether  wanting,  but  hitherto  successless  in  a  great  degree.  Wherefore,  it  hath 
pleased  God  so  to  dispose,  as  that  your  selves,  who  are  the  Honoured  General  Court 
of  this  Colony,  have  called  upon  all  the  Churches  therein,  to  send  their  Elders  and 
Messengers,  that  they  might  meet  in  form  of  a  Synod,  in  order  to  a  most  serious 
enquiry,  into  the  questions  here  propounded  and  answered.  We  cannot  but  hope 
this  motion  was  of  God,  since  (after  the  Prayers  of  his  People  have  been  solemnly 
and  abundantly  poured  out  before  him  that  it  might  be  so)  evident  Tokens  of  the 
Lords  gracious  presence  in  and  with  that  Reverend  Assembly,  have  been  taken  notice 
of ;  especially  in  that  he  was  pleased  so  to  enlighten  the  minds,  and  encline  the 
hearts  of  his  Servants,  (the  Messengers  and  Representatives  of  the  Churches)  as  that 
there  was  an  unanimity  in  their  Votes  and  Determinations,  and  that  not  only  with 
reference  to  the  Answers  unto  those  Questions,  but  other  things  then  discussed  and 
concluded  on.      There  was  at  first  some  agitation  about  the  matter  of  a  Regular 


PREFACE   TO   THE    RESULT   OF    1679  425 

Synod,  by  reason  that  some  of  the  Churches  (notwithstanding  their  Elders  desiring 
them  to  send  other  Messengers  also)  sent  their  Elders  alone.  That  which  is  ex- 
pressed in  the  Platform  of  Discipline,  concerning  this  particular,  was  assented  unto, 
viz.  that  not  only  Elders,  but  other  Messengers  ought  to  be  delegated  by  the 
Churches,  and  so  to  have  their  Suffrages  in  such  Assemblyes.  A  Principle  which 
doth  agree  with  the  Primitive  Pattern,  Act.  15.  23.  And  with  the  practice  of  the 
Churches  in  the  ages  next  following  the  Apostles,  as  is  evident  from  the  writings  of 
Cyprian,  and  others  of  the  Ancients.  And  the  interest  of  the  People  in  such  Con- 
ventions is  strongly  asserted  and  evinced  by  our  J  ml,  Whitaker,  Parker,  and  others 
against  Papists  and  Prelates,  who  maintain  that  Laicks  (as  they  call  them)  are  not  fit 
matter  for  a  Synod.  This  Debate  being  issued,  it  was  put  to  Vote,  whether  the 
Assembly  did  approve  of  The  Platform  of  Church  Discipline  ;  &  both  Elders  & 
Brethren  did  unanimously  lift  up  their  hands  in  the  affirmative,  not  one  appearing 
[v]  when  the  Vote  was  propounded  in  the  Negative,  but  it  joyntly  passed  in  these 
words, 

"A  Synod  of  the  Churches  in  the  Colony  of  the  Massachusets,  being  called  by 
"the  honoured  General  Court  to  convene  at  Boston,  the  10.  of  Sept.  1679.  having 
"  read  and  considered  the  Platform  of  Church  Discipline,  agreed  upon  by  the  Synod 
"assembled  at  Cambridge,  Anno  1648.  doe  unanimously  approve  of  the  said  Flat- 
"  form,  for  the  substance  of  it,  desiring  that  the  Churches  may  continue  stedfast  in 
"the  order  of  the  Gospel,  according  to  what  is  therein  declared  from  the  Word  of 
"God.H 

Now  blessed  be  the  God  of  our  Fathers,  that  hath  enclined  our  hearts  to  own 
that  Cause  and  those  Truths,  which  they  did  with  so  much  industry  and  faithfulness 
gather  from  the  Scriptures,  and  on  the  account  whereof  they  were  sometimes  Confes- 
sors, and  Sufferers,  being  Exiles  in  this  Wilderness,  where  the  Lord  was  pleased  to 
shew  them  the  Pattern  of  his  House,  and  all  the  forms  thereof ;  and  we  know  not 
what  Temptations  (for  there  is  an  hour  of  Temptation  coming  upon  all  the  world) 
we  may  yet  meet  with  ;  wherefore,  the  obtaining  of  the  Vote  mentioned  (had  there 
been  nothing  else  done)  was  well  worth  our  coming  together.  But  besides  that, 
several  dayes  were  spent,  in  discoursing  upon  the  Questions  herewith  presented  ; 
when  every  Member  of  the  Synod  had  full  liberty  to  express  himself:  after  which, 
some  were  chosen,  to  draw  up  what  did  appear  to  be  the  mind  of  the  Assembly,  and 
the  mind  of  Christ,  in  whose  name  we  came  together,  and  considered  of  this  matter. 
The  Return  made  by  those  who  had  been  appointed  unto  that  Service,  was  read  once 
and  again,  each  Paragraph  being  duely  and  distinctly  weighed  in  the  ballance  of  the 
Sanctuary,  and  then,  upon  mature  deliberation,  the  whole  unanimously  voted,  as  to 
the  substance,  end,  and  scope  thereof.  The  things  here  insisted  on,  have  (at  least 
many  of  them)  been  oftentimes  mentioned  and  inculcated  by  those  whom  the  Lord 
hath  set  as  Watchmen  to  the  house  of  Israel,  though  alas  /  not  with  that  success  which 
their  Souls  have  desired.  It  is  not  a  small  matter,  nor  ought  it  to  seem  little  in  our 
eyes,  that  the  Churches  have  in  this  way  confessed  and  declared  the  Truth,  which 
coming  from  a  Synod  as  their  joint  concurring  Testimony,  will  carry  more  Authority 
with  it,  then  if  one  man  only,  or  many  in  their  single  capacityes,  should  speak  the 
same  things.  And  undoubtedly,  the  issue  of  this  undertaking  will  be  most  signal, 
either  as  to  mercy,  or  misery.  If  New-England  remember  whence  she  is  fallen,  and 
doe  the  first  works,  there  is  reason  to  hope  that  it  shall  be  better  with  us  then  at  our 
beginnings.  But  if  this,  after  all  other  means  in  and  by  which  the  Lord  hath  been 
striving  to  reclaim  us,  shall  be  despised,  or  become  ineffectual,  we  may  dread  what  is 


426  THE    REFORMING    SYNOD,    1679,    1680 

like  to  follow.  It  is  a  solemn  thought,  that  the  Jewish  Church  had  (as  the  Churches 
in  New-England  have  this  day)  an  opportunity  to  Reform  (if  they  would)  in  Josiah's 
time,  but  because  they  had  no  heart  unto  it,  the  Lord  quickly  removed  them  out  of 
his  sight.  What  God  out  of  his  Soveraignty  may  doe  for  us,  no  man  can  say,  but 
according  to  his  wonted  dispensations,  we  are  a  perishing  People,  if  now  we  Reform 
■  not. 

Now  the  Lord  help  you  his  Servants,  under  whose  influence,  and  by  whose  en- 
couragement, this  Synod  hath  convened,  to  promote  this  matter,  both  by  your 
Recommendation  of  these  Conclusions  unto  the  Churches,  for  their  consideration 
and  acceptance  in  the  Lord,  and  otherwise  according  to  your  respective  Relations  and 
Capacities :  and  the  Lord  strengthen  your  hearts  and  hands  therein  ;  for  much  doth 
depend  upon  your  Courage,  Prudence,  Zeal  and  Activity.  We  doe  [vi]  not  read  in  the 
Scriptures,  nor  in  History,  of  any  notable  general  Reformation  amongst  a  People, 
except  the  Magistrate  did  help  forward  the  work.  Haggai's  and  Zachary's  Sermons, 
would  never  have  built  the  Temple,  if  Zerubbabel  and  Shealtiel  (godly  Magistrates) 
had  not  improved  their  authority  for  that  end.  Luther,  Cih'i/i,  Zuingluis,  and 
other  Reformers,  would  have  laboured  in  vain,  had  not  the  Princes  and  Senators 
amongst  whom  they  lived,  promoted  the  interest  of  Reformation.  Nor  was  it  ever 
known,  that  the  civil  Authority  in  any  place,  did  their  utmost  towards  the  suppres- 
sion of  growing  Evils,  but  there  was  (at  least  wise  for  the  present)  some  good  effect 
thereof.  These  things  are  therefore  commended  to  your  most  serious  Consideration  ; 
It  is  (under  God)  by  you  that  we  enjoy  great  quietness.  The  good  Lord  continue 
the  present  Government,  and  Governours,  under  whose  shadow  (as  sometimes  the 
Remnant  of  Judah  under  Gedaliah)  we  have  sat  with  great  delight ;  and  grant  that 
every  one  (both  Leaders  and  People)  in  their  proper  place  and  order,  may  up  and  be 
doing,  and  that  the  Lord  our  God  may  be  with  us,  as  he  was  with  our  Lathers. 

Now  be  strong,  O  Zerubbabel,  be  strong,  O  Joshuah,  and  be  strong  all  ye  peo- 
ple of  the  land,  saith  the  Lord,  and  work,  for  I  am  with  you  ;  according  to  the  word 
that  I  covenanted  with  you,  when  ye  came  out  of  Egypt ;  so  my  Spirit  remaineth 
amongst  you  ;  Fear  ye  not. 

[1]  QUEST.    I. 

WHat  are  the  Evils  that  have  provoked  the  Lord  to  bring  his 
Judgements  on  New-England  ? 

Answ.  That  sometimes  God  hath  had,  and  pleaded  a  Con- 
troversy with  his  People,  is  clear  from  the  Scripture,  Hos.  4.  1. 
and  12.  2.  Mic  6.  1,  2.  Where  God  doth  plainly  and  fully  pro- 
pose, state  and  plead  his  Controversy,  in  all  the  parts  and  Causes 
of  it,  wherein  he  doth  Justine  himself,  by  the  Declaration  of  his 
own  infinite  Mercy,  Grace,  Goodness,  Justice,  Righteousness, 
Truth  and  Faithfulness  in  all  his  proceedings  with  them  ;  And 
judge  his  People,  charging  them  with  all  those  provoking  Evils 
which  had  been  the  causes  of  that  Controversy,  and  that  with  the 
most  high,  and  heavy  aggravation  of  their  Sins,  and  exaggeration 
of  the  guilt  and  punishment,  whence  he  should  have  been  most  just, 
in  pleading  out  his  Controversy  with  them,  unto  the  utrno^  ex- 
tremity of  Justice  and  Judgement. 

That  God  hath  a  Controversy  with  his  New-England  People  is 
undeniable,   the   Lord   having    written    his    displeasure    in   dismai 


THE     RESULT    OF    1679  42? 

Characters  against  us.  Though  Personal  Affictions  doe  oftentimes 
come  only  or  chiefly  for  Probation,  yet  as  to  publick  Judgements 
it  is  not  wont  to  be  so;  especially  when  by  a  continued  Series  of 
Providence,  the  Lord  doth  appear  and  plead  against  his  People.  2 
Sam.  21.  1.  As  with  us  it  hath  been  from  year  to  year.  Would 
the  Lord  have  whetted  his  glitterring  Sword,  and  his  hand  have 
taken  hold  on  Judgement  ?  Would  he  have  sent  such  a  mortal 
Contagion  like  a  Beesom  of  Destruction  in  the  midst  of  us  ? 
Would  he  have  said,  Sword  !  goe  through  the  Land,  and  cut  off 
man  and  Beast?  [2]  Or  would  he  have  kindled  such  devouring 
Fires,  and  made  such  fearfull  Desolations  in  the  Earth,  if  he  had 
not  been  angry  ?  It  is  not  for  nothing  that  the  merciful  God,  who 
doth  not  willingly  afflict  nor  grieve  the  Children  of  men,  hath  done 
all  these  things  unto  us;  yea  and  sometimes  with  a  Cloud  hath 
covered  himself,  that  our  Prayer  should  not  pass  through.  And 
although  tis  possible  that  the  Lord  may  Contend  with  us  partly  on 
account  of  secret  unobserved  Sins,  Josh.  7.  11,  12.  2  King.  17.  9. 
Psal.  90.  8.  In  which  respect,  a  deep  and  most  serious  enquiry  into 
the  Caus-es  of  his  Controversy  ought  to  be  attended.  Nevertheless, 
it  is  sadly  evident  that  there  are  visible,  manifest  Evils,  which 
without  doubt  the  Lord  is  provoked  by.     For, 

/.  There  is  a  great  and  visible  decay  of  the  power  of  Godli- 
ness amongst  many  Professors  in  these  Churches.  It  may  be 
feared,  that  there  is  in  too  many  spiritual  and  heart  Apostacy  from 
God,  whence  Communion  with  him  in  the  wayes  of  his  Worship, 
especially  in  Secret,  is  much  neglected,  and  whereby  men  cease  to 
know  and  fear,  and  love  and  trust  in  him;  but  take  up  their  con- 
tentment and  satisfaction  in  something  else.  This  was  the  ground 
and  bottom  of  the  Lords  Controversy  with  his  People  of  old.  Psal. 
78.  8,  37.  &  81.  11.  Jer.  2.  5,  11,  13.  And  with  his  People  under 
the  New  Testament  also.  Rev.  2.  4,  5. 

II.  The  Pride  that  doth  abound  in  New-England  testifies 
against  us.  Hos.  5.  5.  Ezek.  7.  10.  Both  spiritual  Pride,  Zeph. 
3.  11.  Whence  two  great  Evils  and  Provocations  have  proceeded 
and  prevailed  amongst  us. 

1.  A  refusing  to  be  subject  to  Order  according  to  divine 
appointment,  Numb.  16.  3.      1  Pet.  5.  5. 

2.  Contention.  Prov.  13.  10.  An  evil  that  is  most  eminently 
against  the  solemn  Charge  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  Joh.  13.  34,  35.  And 
that  for  which  God  hath  by  severe  Judgements  punished  his  People, 
both  in  former  and  latter  Ages.  This  Malady  hath  been  very  gen- 
eral in  the  Country  ;  we  have  therefore  cause  to  fear  that  the 
Wolves  which  God  in  his  holy  Providence  hath  let  loose  upon  us, 
have  been  sent  to  chastise  his  Sheep  for  their  dividings  and  stray- 
ings  one  from  another;  and  that  the  Warrs  and  Fightings,  which 
have  proceeded  from  the  Lust  of  Pride  in  special,  have  been 
punished  with  the  Sword,  Jam.  4.  1.     Job.  19.  29. 

Yea,  and  Pride  in  respect  to  Apparel  hath  greatly  abounded. 
[3]  Servants,  and  the  poorer  sort  of  People  are  notoriously  guiltv 
in   the  matter,  who  (too  generally)  goe  above  their  estates   and 


428  THE    REFORMING   SYNOD,    1679,    1680 

degrees,  thereby  transgressing  the  Laws  both  of  God  and  man, 
Math.  11.  8.  Yea,  it  is  a  Sin  that  even  the  light  of  nature,  and 
Laws  of  civil  Nations  have  condemned.  1  Cor.  11,  14.  Also, 
many,  not  of  the  meaner  sort,  have  offended  God  by  strange 
Apparel,  not  becoming  serious  Christians,  especially  in  these  dayes 
of  affliction  and  misery,  wherein  the  Lord  calls  upon  men  to  put 
off  their  Ornaments,  Exod.  33.  5.  Jer  4.  30.  A  Sin  which  brings 
Wrath  upon  the  greatest  that  shall  be  found  guilty  of  it,  Zeph.  1.  8. 
with  Jer.  52.  13.  Particularly,  the  Lord  hath  threatned  to  visit 
with  Sword  and  Sickness,  and  with  loathsome  diseases  for  this  very 
Sin.     Isa  3.  16. 

III.  Inasmuch  as  it  was  in  a  more  peculiar  manner  with 
respect  to  the  second  Commandment,  that  our  Fathers  did  follow 
the  Lord  into  this  wilderness,  whilst  it  was  a  land  not  sown,  we 
may  fear  that  the  breaches  of  that  Commandment  are  some  part 
of  the  Lords  Controversy  with  New-England.  Church  Fellowship, 
and  other  divine  Institutions  are  greatly  neglected.  Many  of  the 
Rising  Generation  are  not  mindfull  of  that  which  their  Baptism 
doth  engage  them  unto,  viz.  to  use  utmost  endeavours  that  they 
may  be  fit  for,  and  so  partake  in,  all  the  holy  Ordinances  of  the 
Lord  Jesus.  Mat.  28.  20.  There  are  too  many  that  with  profane 
Esau  slight  spiritual  priviledges.  Nor  is  there  so  much  of  Disci- 
pline, extended  towards  the  Children  of  the  Covenant,  as  we  are 
generally  agreed  ought  to  be  done.  On  the  other  hand,  humane 
Inventions,  and  Will-worship  have  been  set  up  even  in  Jerusalem. 
Men  have  set  up  their  Thresholds  by  Gods  Threshold,  and  their 
Posts  by  his  Post.  Quakers  are  false  Worshippers:  and  such 
Anabaptists  as  have  risen  up  amongst  us,  in  opposition  to  the 
Churches  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  receiving  into  their  Society  those 
that  have  been  for  scandal  delivered  unto  Satan,  yea,  and  im- 
proving those  as  Administrators  of  holy  Things,  who  have  been  (as 
doth  appear)  Justly  under  Church  Censures,  do  no  better  then  set 
up  an  Altar  against  the  Lords  Altar.  Wherefore  it  must  needs 
be  provoking  to  God,  if  these  things  be  not  duly  and  fully  testified 
against,  by  every  one  in  their  several  Capacityes  respectively. 
Josh.  22.  19.  2  King.  23.  13.    Ezek.  43.  8.     Psal.  99.  8.     Hos.  11.  6. 

IIII.  The  Holy  and  glorious  Name  of  God  hath  been  polluted 
and  profaned  amongst  us,  More  especially. 

[4]  1.  ByOathes,and  Imprecations  in  ordinary  Discourse;  Yea, 
and  it  is  too  common  a  thing  for  men  in  a  more  solemn  way  to 
Swear  unnecessary  Oaths;  whenas  it  is  a  breach  of  the  third  Com- 
mandment, so  to  use  the  blessed  Name  of  God.  And  many  (if  not 
the  most)  of  those  that  swear,  consider  not  the  Rule  of  an  Oath. 
Jer.  4.  2.  So  that  we  may  justly  fear  that  because  of  swearing  the 
Land  mourns,  Jer.  23.  10. 

2.  There  is  great  profaness,  in  respect  of  irreverent  behaviour 
in  the  solemn  Worship  of  God.  It  is  a  frequent  thing  for  men 
(though  not  necessitated  thereunto  by  any  infirmity)  to  sit  in 
prayer  time,  and  some  with  their  heads  almost  covered,  and  to  give 
way  to  their  own  sloth  and  sleepiness,  when  they  should  be  serv- 


THE    RESULT   OF    1679  429 

ing  God  with  attention  and  intention,  under  the  solemn  dispensa- 
tion of  his  Ordinances.  We  read  but  of  one  man  in  the  Scripture 
that  slept  at  a  Sermon,  and  that  sin  hath  like  to  have  cost  him  his 
life,  Act.  20.  9. 

V.  There  is  much  Sabbath-breaking;  Since  there  are  multi- 
tudes that  do  profanely  absent  themselves  or  theirs  from  the 
publick  worship  of  God,  on  his  Holy  day,  especially  in  the  most 
populous  places  the  Land;  and  many  under  pretence  of  differing 
apprehensions  about  the  beginning  of  the  Sabbath,  do  not  keep  a 
seventh  part  of  Time  Holy  unto  the  Lord,  as  the  fourth  Command- 
ment requireth,  Walking  abroad,  and  Travelling,  (not  meerly  on 
the  account  of  worshipping  God  in  the  solemn  assemblyes  or  his 
people,  or  to  attend  works  of  necessity  or  mercy)  being  a  common 
practice  on  the  Sabbath  day,  which  is  contrary  unto  that  Rest  en- 
joyned  by  the  Commandment.  Yea,  some  that  attend  their 
particular  servile  callings  and  employments  after  the  Sabbath  is 
begun,  or  before  it  is  ended.  Worldly,  unsuitable  discourses  are 
very  common  upon  the  Lords  day,  contrary  to  the  Scripture  which 
requireth  that  men  should  not  on  Holy  Times  find  their  own  pleas- 
ure, nor  speak  their  own  words,  Isai  58.  13.  Many  that  do  not  take 
care  so  to  dispatch  their  worldly  businesses,  that  they  may  be  free 
&  fit  for  the  dutyes  of  the  Sabbath,  and  that  do  (if  not  wholly  neg- 
lect) after  a  careless,  heartless  manner  perform  the  dutyes  that 
concern  the  sanctification  of  the  Sabbath.  This  brings  wrath, 
Fires  and  other  Judgements  upon  a  professing  People,  Neh.  3.  17, 
18      Jer.  17.  27. 

VI.  As  to  what  concerns  Familyes  and  the  Government 
thereof,  [5]  there  is  much  amiss.  There  are  many  Familyes  that 
doe  not  pray  to  God  constantly  morning  and  evening,  and  many 
more  wherein  the  Scriptures  are  not  daily  read,  that  so  the  word 
of  Christ  might  dwell  richly  with  them.  Some  (and  too  many) 
Houses  that  are  full  of  Ignorance  and  Profaness,  and  these  not 
duely  inspected;  for  which  cause  Wrath  may  come  upon  others 
round  about  them,  as  well  as  upon  themselves.  Josh.  22.  20.  Jer. 
5.  7.  &  10.  25.  And  many  Housholders  who  profess  Religion,  doe 
not  cause  all  that  are  within  their  gates  to  become  subject  unto 
good  order  as  ought  to  be.  Ex.  20  10.  Nay,  children  &  Servants 
that  are  not  kept  in  due  subjection;  their  Masters,  and  Parents 
especially,  being  sinfully  indulgent  towards  them.  This  is  a  sin 
which  brings  great  Judgements,  as  we  see  in  Eli's  and  David's 
Family.  In  this  respect,  Christians  in  this  Land,  have  become  too 
like  unto  the  Indians,  and  then  we  need  not  wonder  if  the  Lord 
hath  afflicted  us  by  them.  Sometimes  a  Sin  is  discerned  by  the  In- 
strument that  Providence  doth  punish  with.  Most  of  the  Evils  that 
abound  amongst  us,  proceed  from  defects  as  to  Family  Government. 

VII  Inordinate  Passions.  Sinful  Heats  and  Hatreds,  and 
that  amongst  Church  Members  themselves,  who  abound  with  evil 
Surmisings,  uncharitable  and  unrighteous  Censures,  Back-bitings, 
hearing  and  telling  Tales,  few  that  remember  and  duely  observe 


430  THE    REFORMING    SYNOD,    1 679,    1680 

the  Rule,  with  an  angry  countenance  to  drive  away  the  Tale- 
bearer: Reproachful]  and  reviling  Expressions,  sometimes  to  or  of 
one  another.  Hence  Law  suits  are  frequent,  Brother  going  to  Law 
with  Brother,  and  provoking  and  abusing  one  another  in  publick 
Courts  of  Judicature,  to  the  Scandal  of  their  holy  Profession,  Isa. 
58.  4.  1  Cor  6  6,  7.  And  in  managing  the  Discipline  of  Christ, 
some  (and  too  many)  are  acted  by  their  Passions  &  Prejudices 
more  then  by  a  spirit  of  Love  &  Faithfulness  towards  their  Brothers 
Soul,  which  things  are,  as  against  the  Law  of  Christ,  so  dreadfull 
violations  of  the  Church  Covenant,  made  in  the  presence  of  God. 

VIII.  There  is  much  Intemperance.  The  heathenish  and 
Idolatrous  practice  of  Health-drinking  is  too  frequent.  That 
shamefull  iniquity  of  sinfull  Drinking  is  become  too  general  a 
Provocation.  Dayes  of  Training,  and  other  publick  Solemnityes, 
have  been  abused  in  this  respect:  And  not  only  English  but  Indians 
have  been  debauched,  by  those  that  call  themselves  Christians,  who 
have  put  their  [6]  bottles  to  them,  and  made  them  drunk  also. 
This  is  a  crying  Sin,  and  the  more  aggravated  in  that  the  first 
Planters  of  this  Colony  did  (as  is  in  the  Patent  expressed)  come 
into  this  Land  with  a  design  to  Convert  the  Heathen  unto  Christ, 
but  if  instead  of  that,  they  be  taught  Wickedness,  which  before 
they  were  never  guilty  of,  the  Lord  may  well  punish  us  by  them. 
Moreover,  the  Sword,  Sickness,  Poverty,  and  almost  all  the  Judge- 
ments which  have  been  upon  New-England,  are  mentioned  in  the 
Scripture  as  the  woeful  fruit  of  That  Si/i.  Isa.  5.  n,  12.  6*  28.  1, 
2.  e>  56.  9,  12.  Prov.  23.  21,  29  30.  6°  21.  17.  Hos.  7.  5.  &  2.  8  9. 
There  are  more  Temptations  and  occasions  unto  Tliat  Sin,  pub- 
lickly  allowed  of,  then  any  necessity  doth  require;  the  proper  end 
of  Taverns,  &c.  being  for  the  entertainment  of  Strangers,  which  if 
they  were  improved  to  that  end  only,  a  far  less  number  would 
suffice:  But  it  is  a  common  practice  for  Town-dwellers,  yea  and 
Church-members,  to  frequent  publick  Houses,  and  there  to  misspend 
precious  Time,  unto  the  dishonour  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  scandal- 
izing of  others,  who  are  by  such  examples  induced  to  sin  against 
God.  In  which  respect,  for  Church-members  to  be  unnecessarily 
in  such  Houses,  is  sinfull,  scandalous,  and  provoking  to  God.  1 
Cor.  8.  9  10.     Rom.  14  21.     Math.  17.  27.  &  18.  7. 

And  there  are  other  hainous  breaches  of  the  seventh  Command- 
ment. Temptations  thereunto  are  become  too  common,  viz.  such 
as  immodest  Apparel,  Prov.  7.  10  Laying  out  of  hair,  Borders, 
naked  Necks  and  Arms,  or,  which  is  more  abominable,  naked 
Breasts,  and  mixed  Dancings,  light  behaviour  and  expressions, 
sinful  Company-keeping  with  light  and  vain  persons,  unlawful! 
Gaming,  an  abundance  of  Idleness,  which  brought  ruinating  Judge- 
ment upon  Sodom,  and  much  more  upon  Jerusalem.  Ezek.  16.  49. 
and  doth  sorely  threaten  New-England,  unless  effectual  Remedyes 
be  throughly  and  timously  applyed. 

IX.  There  is  much  want  of  Truth  amongst  men.  Promise- 
breaking  is  a  common  sin,  for  which  New-England  doth  hear  ill 
abroad  in  the  world.     And  the  Lord  hath  threatned  for  that  trans- 


THE    RESULT   OF    1679  43 1 

gression  to  give  his  People  into  the  hands  of  their  Enemies,  and 
that  their  dead  bodyes  should  be  for  meat  unto  the  Fowls  of  heaven, 
and  to  the  Beasts  of  the  earth;  which  Judgements  have  been  veri- 
fied upon  us,  Jer.  34.  18,  20.  And  false  Reports  have  been  too 
common,  yea,  walking  with  slanders  and  Reproaches,  and  that 
sometimes  against  the  most  faithfull  and  eminent  Servants  of  God. 
The  Lord  is  not  [7]  wont  to  suffer  such  Iniquity  to  pass  unpunished. 
Jer.  9.  4,  5.     Numb.  16.  41. 

X.  Inordinate  affection  to  the  world.  Idolatry  is  a  God  pro- 
voking, Judgement-procuring  sin.  And  Covetousness  is  Idolatry. 
Eph.  5.  5.  There  hath  been  in  many  professors  an  insatiable  de- 
sire after  Land,  and  worldly  Accommodations,  yea,  so  as  to  forsake 
Churches  and  Ordinances,  and  to  live  like  Heathen,  only  that  so 
they  might  have  Elbow-room  enough  in  the  world.  Farms  and 
merchandising  have  been  preferred  before  the  things  of  God.  In 
this  respect,  the  Interest  of  New-England  seemeth  to  be  changed. 
We  differ  from  other  out-goings  of  our  Nation,  in  that  it  was  not 
any  worldly  consideration  that  brought  our  Fathers  into  this  wil- 
derness, but  Religion,  even  that  so  they  might  build  a  Sanctuary 
unto  the  Lords  Name;  Whenas  now,  Religion  is  made  subservient 
unto  worldly  Interests.  Such  iniquity  causeth  War  to  be  in  the 
Gates,  and  Cityes  to  be  burnt  up.  Judg.  8.  5.  Math.  22.  5,  7. 
Wherefore,  we  cannot  but  solemnly  bear  witness  against  that  prac- 
tice of  setling  Plantations  without  any  Ministry  amongst  them, 
which  is  to  prefer  the  world  before  the  Gospel.  When  Lot  did 
forsake  the  Land  of  Canaan,  and  the  Church  which  was  in  Abra- 
hams Family,  that  so  he  might  have  better  worldly  Accommodations 
in  Sodom,  God  fired  him  out  of  all,  and  he  was  constrained  to 
leave  his  goodly  pastures,  which  his  heart  (though  otherwise  a 
good  man)  was  too  much  set  upon.  Moreover,  that  many  are 
under  the  prevailing  power  of  the  sin  of  worldliness  is  evident, 

1.  From  that  oppression  which  the  Land  groaneth  under. 
There  are  some  Traders,  who  sell  their  goods  at  excessive  Rates, 
Day-Labourers  and  Mechanicks  are  unreasonable  in  their  demands; 
Yea,  there  have  been  those  that  have  dealt  deceitfully  and  oppres- 
sively towards  the  Heathen  amongst  whom  we  live,  whereby  they 
have  been  scandalized  and  prejudiced  against  the  Name  of  Christ. 
The  Scripture  doth  frequently  threaten  Judgments  for  the  sin  of 
oppression,  and  in  special  the  oppressing  Sword  cometh  as  a  just  pun- 
ishment for  that  evil.     Ezek.  7.  11.  and  22.  15.     Prov.  28.  8.     Isai. 

5-  7- 

2.  It  is  also  evident,  that  men  are  under  the  prevailing  power 
of  a  worldly  Spirit,  by  their  strait-handedness,  as  to  publick  con- 
cernments. God  by  a  continued  series  of  providence,  for  many 
years  one  after  another,  hath  been  blasting  the  fruits  of  the  Earth, 
in  a  great  measure;  and  this  year  more  abundantly;  Now  if  we 
search  the  [8]  Scriptures,  we  shall  find,  that  when  the  Lord  hath 
been  provoked  to  destroy  the  fruits  of  the  Earth,  either  by  noxious 
Creatures,  or  by  his  own  immediate  hand  in  blastings  or  droughts, 
or  excessive  Rains,  (all  which  judgments  we  have  experience  of)  it 
hath  been  mostly  for  this  sin  of  strait-handedness  with  reference 


432  THE    REFORMING   SYNOD,    l6jg,    l68o 

unto  publick  and  pious  concerns,  Hag.  1.  9.  Mai.  3.  8,  9,  11.  As 
when  peoples  hearts  and  hands  are  enlarged  upon  these  Accounts, 
God  hath  promised,  (and  is  wont  in  his  faithful  providence  to  do 
accordingly)  to  bless  with  outward  plenty  and  prosperity,  Prov.  3. 
9,  10.  Mai.  3.  10  1  Cor.  9.  6,  8,  10.  2  Chron.  31.  10.  So  on  the 
other  hand,  when  men  withold  more  then  is  meet,  the  Lord  sends 
impoverishing  judgments  upon  them,  Prov.  11.  24. 

XI.  There  hath  been  opposition  unto  the  work  of  Reforma- 
tion. Although  the  Lord  hath  been  calling  upon  us,  not  only  by 
the  voice  of  his  Servants,  but  by  awfull  judgments,  that  we  should 
return  unto  him,  who  hath  been  smiting  us;  and  notwithstanding 
all  the  good  Laws  that  are  established  for  the  suppression  of  grow- 
ing evils,  yet  men  will  not  return  every  one  from  his  evil  way. 
There  hath  been  great  incorrigibleness  under  lesser  judgments; 
Sin  and  sinners  have  many  Advocates.  They  that  have  been  zeal- 
ous in  bearing  witness  against  the  sins  of  the  Times,  have  been 
reproached,  and  other  wayes  discouraged;  which  argueth  an  heart 
unwilling  to  Reform.  Hence  the  Lords  Controversy  is  not  yet 
done,  but  his  hand  is  stretched  out  still,  Lev.  26.  23,  24.     Isai.  12,  13. 

XII  A  publick  Spirit  is  greatly  wanting  in  the  most  of  men. 
Few  that  are  of  Nehemiah's  Spirit,  Neh.  5.  15.  All  seek  their  own, 
not  the  things  that  are  Jesus  Christs;  Serving  themselves  upon 
Christ,  and  his  holy  Ordinances.  Matters  appertaining  to  the 
Kingdome  of  God,  are  either  not  at  all  regarded,  or  not  in  the  first 
place.  Hence  Schools  of  learning  and  other  publick  concerns  are 
in  a  languishing  state.  Hence  also  are  unreasonable  complaints 
and  murmurings  because  of  publick  charges,  which  is  a  great  sin; 
and  a  private  self-seeking  Spirit,  is  one  of  those  evils  that  renders 
the  last  Times  perilous,  2  Tim.  3:   1. 

XIII.  There  are  sins  against  the  Gospel,  whereby  the  Lord 
hath  been  provoked.  Christ  is  not  prized  and  embraced  in  all  his 
Offices  and  Ordinances  as  ought  to  be.  Manna  hath  been  loathed, 
the  pleasant  Land  despised,  Psal.  106.  24,  Though  the  Gospel 
and  Co-[9]venant  of  grace  call  upon  men  to  repent,  yet  there  are 
multitudes  that  refuse  to  Repent,  when  the  Lord  doth  vouch  safe 
them  time  and  means.  No  sins  provoke  the  Lord  more  then  Im- 
penitency  &  unbelief  Jer.  8.  6.  Zech.  7.  11,  12,  13.  Heb.  3.  17,  18. 
Rev.  2.  21,  22.  There  is  great  unfruitfulness  under  the  means  of 
grace,  and  that  brings  the  most  desolating  Judgements,  Isai.  5.  4,  5. 
Math.  3.  10.  and  21.  43. 

Finally;  there  are  several  considerations,  which  seem  to  evi- 
dence, that  the  Evils  mentioned  are  the  matters  of  the  Lords 
Controversy 

1.  In  that  (though  not  as  to  all)  as  to  most  of  them  they  are 
sins  which  many  are  guilty  of, 

2.  Sins  which  have  been  acknowledged  before  the  Lord  on 
dayes  of  Humiliation  appointed  by  Authority,  and  yet  not  Re- 
formed. 

3.  Many  of  them  not  punished  (and  some  of  them  not  pun- 
ishable) by  men,  therefore  the  Lord  himself  doth  punish  for  them. 


vv 


THE    RESULT    OF    1 679  433 

QUEST.    II. 
Hat  is  to  be  done   that  so  these  Evils  may  be  Reformed. 


Aiisw.  I.  It  would  tend  much  to  promote  the  Interest  of 
Reformation,  if  all  that  are  in  place  above  others,  do  as  to  them- 
selves and  Familyes,  become  every  way  exemplary.  Moses  being 
to  Reform  others  began  with  what  concerned  himself  and  his. 
People  are  apt  to  follow  the  example  of  those  that  are  above  them. 
2  Chron.  12.  1.  Gal.  2.  14.  If  then,  there  be  a  divided  heart,  or 
any  other  of  the  Sins  of  the  times,  found  in  any  degree  among 
those  (or  any  of  them)  that  are  Leaders,  either  as  to  Civil  or 
Ecclesiastical  Order,  Reformation  there  would  have  a  great  and 
happy  influence  upon  many. 

77".  Inasmuch  as  the  present  standing  Generation  (both  as  to 
Leaders  and  People)  is  for  the  greater  part  another  Generation 
then  [10]  what  was  in  New-England  fourty  years  agoe,  for  us  to 
declare  our  adherence  unto  the  Faith  and  order  of  the  Gospel,  ac- 
cording to  what  is  from  the  Scripture  expressed  in  the  Platform  of 
Discipline,  may  be  likewise  a  good  means  both  to  recover  those 
that  have  erred  from  the  Truth,  and  to  prevent  Apostacy  for  the 
Future. 

III.  It  is  requisite  that  persons  be  not  admitted  unto  Com- 
munion in  the  Lords  Supper  without  making  a  personal  and  pub- 
lick  profession  of  their  Faith  and  Repentance,  either  orally,  or  in 
some  other  way,  so  as  shall  be  to  the  just  satisfaction  of  the 
Church ;  and  that  therefore  both  Elders  and  Churches  be  duely 
watchfull  and  circumspect  in  this  matter.  1  Cor.  n.  28,  29.  Act. 
2.  41,  42.     Ezek.  44.  7,  8,  9. 

IIII.  In  order  to  Reformation,  it  is  necessary  that  the  Dis- 
cipline of  Christ  in  the  power  of  it  should  be  upheld  in  the 
Churches.  It  is  evident  from  Christs  Epistles  to  the  Churches  in 
the  lesser  Asia,  that  the  evils  and  degeneracy  then  prevailing 
among  Christians,  proceeded  chiefly  from  the  neglect  of  Disci- 
pline. It  is  a  known  and  true  observation,  that  remissness  in  the 
exercise  of  Discipline,  was  attended  with  corruption  of  manners, 
and  that  did  provoke  the  Lord  to  give  men  up  to  strong  delusions 
in  matters  of  Faith.  Discipline  is  Christs  Ordinance,  both  for  the 
prevention  of  Apostacy  in  Churches  and  to  recover  them  when 
collapsed.  And  these  New  English  Churches,  are  under  peculiar 
engagements  to  be  faithfull  unto  Christ,  and  unto  his  Truth  in  this 
matter,  by  virtue  of  the  Church  Covenant,  as  also  in  that  the  man- 
agement of  Discipline  according  to  the  Scriptures,  was  the  special 
design  of  our  Fathers  in  coming  into  this  wilderness.  The  degen- 
eracy of  the  Rising  Generation  (so  much  complained  of)  is  in  a 
great  measure  to  be  attributed  unto  neglects  of  this  nature.  If  all 
Church  duty  in  these  respects,  were  faithfully  and  diligently  at- 
tended, not  only  towards  Parents,  but  also  towards  the  Children  of 


434 


THE    REFORMING    SYNOD,    1679,    1680 


the  Church,  according  to  the  Rules  of  Christ,  we  may  hope  that 
the  sunk  and  dying  interest  of  Religion,  will  be  revived,  and  a 
world  of  sin  prevented  for  the  future;  and  that  Disputes  respect- 
ing the  Subject  of  Baptism,  would  be  comfortably  issued. 

V.  It  is  requisite  that  utmost  endeavours  should  be  used,  in 
order  unto  a  full  supply  of  Officers  in  the  Churches,  according  to 
Christs  Institution.  The  defect  of  these  Churches  on  this  account 
is  very  lamentable,  there  being  in  most  of  the  Churches  only  one 
Teaching  Officer,  for  the  burden  of  the  whole  Congregation  to  lye 
upon.  The  Lord  Christ  would  not  have  instituted  Pastors,  Teach- 
ers, Ruling  Elders  (nor  the  Apostles  have  ordained  Elders  in  every 
Church)  Act.  [11]  14.  23.  Tit.  1.  5.)  if  he  had  not  seen  there  was 
need  of  them  for  the  good  of  his  People;  and  therefore  for  men  to 
think  they  can  do  well  enough  without  them,  is  both  to  break  the 
second  Commandment,  and  to  reflect  upon  the  wisdome  of  Christ, 
as  if  he  did  appoint  unnecessary  Officers  in  his  Church.  Experi- 
ence hath  evinced,  that  personal  instruction  and  Discipline,  hath 
been  an  happy  means  to  Reform  degenerated  Congregations;  yea, 
and  owned  by  the  Lord  for  the  conversion  of  many  Souls:  but 
where  there  are  great  Congregations,  it  is  impossible  for  one  man, 
besides  his  labours  in  publick,  fully  to  attend  these  other  things  of 
great  importance;  and  necessary  to  be  done  in  order  to  an  effect- 
ual Reformation  of  Familyes  and  Congregations. 

VI.  It  is  incumbent  on  the  Magistrate,  to  take  care  that 
these  Officers  have  due  encouragement,  and  maintenance  afforded 
to  them.  It  is  high  injustice  and  oppression,  yea,  a  Sin  that  cryes 
in  the  Lords  ears  for  judgement,  when  wages  is  witheld  from  faith- 
full  and  diligent  Labourers.  Jam.  5.  4.  And  if  it  be  so  to  those 
that  labour  about  carnal  things,  much  more  as  to  those  that  labour 
day  &  night  about  the  spiritual  and  eternal  welfare  of  Souls,  1  Cor. 
9.  11,  13,  14.  And  the  Scripture  is  express  that  not  only  Members 
of  Churches,  but  all  that  are  taught  in  the  word,  are  bound  to 
communicate  to  him  that  Teacheth,  and  that  in  all  good  things. 
Gal.  6.  6.  Luk.  10  7.  1  Tim.  5.  17,  18.  If  therefore  People  be 
unwilling  to  doe  what  justice  and  reason  calls  for,  the  Magistrate 
is  to  see  them  doe  their  duty  in  this  matter.  Wherefore,  Magis- 
trates, and  that  in  Scriptures  referring  to  the  dayes  of  the  New 
Testament,  are  said  to  be  the  Churches  nursing  Fathers.  Isa.  49 
23  For  that  it  concerns  them  to  take  care  that  the  Churches  bi 
fed  with  the  bread  and  water  of  Life.  The  Magistrate  is  to  be  a 
keeper  of  both  Tables,  which  as  a  Magistrate  he  cannot  be,  if  he 
doe  not  promove  the  interest  of  Religion,  by  all  those  means  which 
are  of  the  Lords  appointment.  And  we  find  in  Scriptun 
when  the  Lords  Ministers  have  been  forced  to  neglect  the  House 
of  Cod,  and  goe  every  one  into  the  field  (as  too  much  of  that  hath 
been  amongst  us)  because  the  People  did  not  allow  them  that 
maintenance  which  was  necessary,  the  Magistrate  did  look  upon 
himself  as  concerned  to  effect  a  Reformation.     Neh.  13.  10. 

VII.     Due  care  and  faithfulness  with  respect  unto  the  1  -tal>- 
lishment  and  execution  of  wholsome  Laws,  would  very  much  pro- 


THE    RESULT   OF    1679  435 

mote  the  interest  of  Reformation.  If  there  be  no  Laws  established 
in  the  Common-wealth,  but  what  there  is  Scripture  warrant  for, 
and  those  [12]  Laws  so  worded,  as  that  they  may  not  become  a 
snare  unto  any  that  are  bound  to  animadvert  upon  the  Violators 
of  them,  and  that  then  they  be  impartially  executed;  Profaneness, 
Heresy,  Schism,  Disorders  in  Familyes,  Towns,  Churches  would  be 
happily  prevented  and  Reformed.  In  special  it  is  necessary,  that 
those  Laws  for  Reformation  of  provoking  evils,  enacted  and  emit- 
ted by  the  General  Court  in  the  day  of  our  Calamity,  should  be 
duely  considered,  lest  we  become  guilty  of  dissembling  and  dally- 
ing with  the  Almighty,  and  thereby  Sin  and  Wrath  be  augmented 
upon  us:  in  particular,  those  Laws  which  respect  the  Regulation  of 
Houses  for  publick  entertainment,  that  the  number  of  such  Llouses 
doe  not  exceed  what  is  necessary,  nor  any  so  entrusted  but  per- 
sons of  known  approved  piety  and  Fidelity,  and  that  Inhabitants 
be  prohibited  drinking  in  such  Houses,  and  those  that  shall  with- 
out License  from  Authority  sell  any  sort  of  strong  drink,  be  ex- 
emplarily  punished.  And  if  withal,  inferiour  Officers,  Constables 
and  Tithing  men,  be  chosen  constantly  of  the  ablest  and  most  pru- 
dent in  the  place,  Authorized  and  Sworn  to  a  faithful  discharge  of 
their  respective  Trusts,  and  duely  encouraged  in  their  just  inform- 
ations against  any  that  shall  transgress  the  Laws  so  established, 
we  may  hope  that  much  of  that  prophaneness  which  doth  threaten 
the  ruine  of  the  uprising  Generation  will  be  prevented. 

VIII.  Solemn  and  explicit  Renewal  of  the  Covenant  is  a 
Scripture  Expedient  for  Reformation.  We  seldome  read  of  any 
solemn  Reformation  but  it  was  accomplished  in  this  way,  as  the 
Scripture  doth  abundantly  declare  and  testify.  And  as  the  Judge- 
ments which  befel  the  Lords  people  of  old  are  recorded  for  our 
Admonition,  1.  Cor.  10.  n.  So  the  Course  which  they  did  (accord- 
ing to  God)  observe  in  order  to  Reformation  and  averting  those 
Judgements,  is  recorded  for  our  imitation;  And  this  was  an  Ex- 
plicit Renovation  of  Covenant.  And  that  the  Lord  doth  call  us  to 
this  work,  these  considerations  seem  to  evince.  1.  If  Implicit  Re- 
newal of  Covenant  be  an  expedient  for  Reformation,  and  to  divert 
impending  wrath  and  Judgement,  then  much  more  an  Explicit 
Renewal  is  so.  But  the  first  of  these  is  Indubitable.  In  prayer, 
and  more  especially  on  dayes  of  solemn  Humiliation  before  the 
Lord,  there  is  an  Implicit  Renewal  of  Covenant,  and  yet  the  very 
dictates  of  natural  Conscience  put  men  upon  such  dutyes,  when 
they  are  apprehensive  of  a  day  of  wrath,  approaching.  If  we  may 
not  Renew  our  Covenants  with  God,  for  fear  lest  men  should  not 
be  true  and  faithful  in  doing  what  they  promise,  then  we  must  not 
observe  dayes  of  Fasting  and  Prayer;  which  none  will  say. 

[13]  2.  When  the  Church  was  overrun  with  Idolatry  and  Super- 
stition, those  whom  the  Lord  raised  up  as  Reformers,  put  them 
upon  solemn  Renewal  of  Covenant.  So  Asa,  Jehojadah,  Hezekiah, 
Josiah.  By  a  parity  of  Reason,  when  Churches  are  overgrown  with 
worldiness  (which  is  spiritual  Idolatry)  and  other  corruptions,  the 
same  course  may  and  should  be  observed  in  order  to  Reforma- 
tion.   Nay,  3.  We  find  in  Scripture,  that  when  corruption  in  manners 


436  THE    REFORMING   SYNOD,    1679,    1680 

(though  not  in  Worship)  hath  prevailed  in  the  Church,  Renova- 
tion of  Covenant  hath  been  the  expedient,  whereby  Reformation 
hath  been  attempted,  and  in  some  measure  attained.  The  Jews 
have  dreaded  the  sin  of  Idolatry  ever  since  the  Babylonian  Cap- 
tivity, Joh.  8.  41.  But  in  Ezra's  and  Nehemiah's  time,  too  much 
sensuality  and  Sabbath  breaking,  Oppression,  Strait-handedness 
respecting  the  publick  Worship  of  God  (the  very  same  sins  that  are 
found  with  us)  were  common,  prevailing  iniquityes.  Therefore  did 
those  Reformers  put  them  upon  Renewing  their  Covenant,  and 
solemnly  to  promise  God  that  they  would  endeavour  not  to  offend 
by  those  Evils  as  formerly,  Ezra.  10.  3.  Neh.  5.  12,  13.  and  10. per 
totum,  and  13.  15.  4.  The  things  which  are  mentioned  in  the 
Scripture  as  grounds  of  Renewing  Covenant,  are  applicable  unto 
us,  e.  g.  The  averting  of  divine  wrath  is  expressed  as  a  sufficient 
Reason  for  attendance  unto  this  duty.  2  Chron.  29.  10.  Ezra  10 
14.  Again,  being  circumstanced  with  difficulties  and  distresses  is 
mentioned  as  the  ground  of  Explicit  Renovation  of  Covenant. 
Neh.  9.  38.  Hence  the  Lords  Servants,  when  so  circumstanced, 
have  been  wont  to  make  solemn  vows  (and  that  is  an  express  Cov- 
enanting) Gen.  28.  20,  21.  Judg.  11.  30.  Numb.  21.  1,  2.  Nrnv 
that  Clouds  of  wrath  are  hanging  over  these  Churches,  every  one 
seeth;  And  that  we  are  circumstanced  with  some  distressing  diffi- 
cultyes  is  sufficiently  known.  This  consideration  alone,  might  be 
enough  to  put  us  upon  more  solemn  engagements  unto  the  Lord  our 
God.  5.  Men  are  hereby  brought  under  a  stronger  obligation,  unto 
better  obedience.  There  is  an  Awe  of  God  upon  the  Consciences 
of  men  when  so  obliged.  As  it  is  in  respect  of  Oaths,  they  that 
have  any  Conscience  in  them,  when  under  such  Bonds,  are  afraid 
to  violate  them.  Some  that  are  but  Legalists  and  Hypocrites,  yet 
solemn  Covenants  with  God,  have  such  an  Awe  upon  Conscience, 
as  to  enforce  them  unto  an  outward  Reformation,  and  that  doth 
divert  temporal  Judgements.  And  they  that  are  sincere,  will 
thereby  be  engaged  unto  a  more  close  and'  holy  walking  before  the 
Lord,  and  so  become  more  eminently  blessings  unto  the  Societyes 
and  places  whereto  they  [14]  do  belong.  6.  This  is  the  way  to 
prevent,  (and  therefore  also  to  recover  out  of)  Apostasy.  In  this 
respect,  although  there  were  no  visible  degeneracy  amongst  us,  yet 
this  Renovation  of  Covenant,  might  be  of  singular  advantage. 
There  was  no  publick  Idolatry  (nor  other  Transgression)  allowed 
of  in  the  dayes  of  Joshua.  Judg.  2.  7.  Josh.  23.  8.  yet  did  Joshua 
perswade  the  children  of  Israel,  to  renew  their  Covenant;  doubt- 
less, that  so  he  might  thereby  restrain  them  from  future  Idolatry 
and  Apostasy.  Josh.  24.  25.  Lastly,  The  Churches  which  have 
lately  and  solemnly  attended  this  Scripture  expedient,  for  Reforma- 
tion, have  experienced  the  presence  of  God  with  them,  signally 
owning  them  therein;  How  much  more  might  a  blessing  be  ex- 
pected, should  there  be  a  general  concurrence  in  this  matter? 

/A".  In  Renewing  Covenant,  it  is  needful  that  the  sins  of 
the  Times  should  be  engaged  against,  and  Reformation  thereof  (in 
the  name  and  by  the  help  of  Christ)  promised  before  the  Lord, 
Ezra  10.  3.     Neh.  5.  12,  13.  and  Chap.  10. 


THE     RESULT   OF    1679  437 

X.  It  seems  to  be  most  conducive  unto  Edification  and 
Reformation,  that  in  Renewing  Covenant,  such  things  as  are  clear 
and  indisputable  be  expressed,  that  so  all  the  Churches  may  agree 
in  Covenanting  to  promote  the  Interest  of  holiness,  and  close 
walking  with  God. 

XI.  As  an  expedient  for  Reformation,  it  is  good  that 
effectual  care  should  be  taken,  respecting  Schools  of  Learning. 
The  interest  of  Religion  and  good  Literature  have  been  wont  to 
rise  and  fall  together.  We  read  in  the  Scripture  of  Masters  and 
Scholars,  and  of  Schools  and  Colledges.  1  Chron.  25.  8.  Mai.  2. 
12.  Act.  19.  9.  and  22.  3.  And  the  most  eminent  Reformers 
amongst  the  Lords  People  of  old,  thought  it  their  concern  to  erect 
and  uphold  them.  Was  not  Samuel  (that  great  Reformer)  Presi- 
dent of  the  Colledge  at  Najoth,  1  Sam.  19.  18,  19.  and  is  thought 
to  be  one  of  the  first  Founders  of  Colledges.  Did  not  Elijah  and 
Elisha,  restore  the  Schools  erected  in  the  Land  of  Israel  ?  And 
Josiah  (another  great  Reformer)  showed  respect  to  the  Colledge 
at  Jerusalem.  2  King.  22.  14.  Ecclesiastical  Story  informs,  that 
great  care  was  taken  by  the  Apostles,  and  their  immediate  Suc- 
cessors, for  the  setling  of  Schools  in  all  places,  where  the  Gospel 
had  been  preached,  that  so  the  interest  of  Religion  might  be  pre- 
served, and  the  Truth  propagated  to  succeeding  Generations.  It 
is  mentioned  as  one  of  the  greatest  mercyes  that  ever  God 
bestowed  upon  his  People  Israel,  that  he  raised  up  of  their  Sons  for 
Prophets,  Amos  2.  11.  which  hath  respect  to  their  education  in 
Schools  [15]  of  Learning.  And  we  have  all  cause  to  bless  God 
that  put  it  into  the  hearts  of  our  Fathers  to  take  care  concerning 
this  matter.  For  these  Churches  had  been  in  a  state  most  deplora- 
ble, if  the  Lord  had  not  blessed  the  Colledge,1  so  as  from  thence 
to  supply  most  of  the  Churches,  as  at  this  day.  When  New-Eng- 
land was  poor,  and  we  were  but  few  in  number  Comparatively,  there 
was  a  Spirit  to  encourage  Learning  and  the  Colledge  was  full  of 
Students,  whom  God  hath  made  blessings,  not  only  in  this,  but  in 
other  Lands;  but  it  is  deeply  to  be  lamented,  that  now,  when  we 
are  become  many,  and  more  able  then  at  the  beginnings,  that 
Society  and  other  inferior  Schools  are  in  such  a  low  and  languish- 
ing State.  Wherefore  as  we  desire  that  Reformation  and  Religion 
should  flourish,  it  concerns  us  to  endeavour,  that  both  the  Colledge, 
and  all  other  Schools  of  Learning  in  every  place,  be  duely  inspected 
and  encouraged. 

XII.  Inasmuch  as  a  thorough  and  heart  Reformation  is  nec- 
essary, in  order  to  obtaining  peace  with  God,  Jer.  3.  10.  and  all 
outward  means  will  be  ineffectual  unto  that  end,  except  the  Lord 
pour  down  his  Spirit  from  on  High,  it  doth  therefore  concern  us  to 
cry  mightily  unto  God,  both  in  ordinary  and  extraordinary  manner, 
that  he  would  be  pleased  to  rain  down  Righteousness  upon  us, 
Isai.  32.  15.     Hos.  10.  12.     Ezek.  39.  29.     Luk.  11.  13.     Amen  ! 


FINIS. 


438  THE    REFORMING    SYNOD,    1679,    1680 

B.     THE    CONFESSION    OF     1680 

A1  I  CONFESSION  |  of  |  FAITH  |  Owned  and  consented 
unto  by  the  \  Elders  and  Messengers  |  of  the  Churches  |  Assembled 
ax  Boston  in  New-England,  \  May  12.  1680.  |  Being  the  second  Session 

of  that  I  SYNOD.    I    I    I    Eph.   4-  5-  "  "  "   One  Faith. 

I  Col.  2.  5.  Joying  and  beholding  your  Order,  and  the  \  stedfastness  of 
your  Faith  in  Christ.  |  |  BOSTON;  |  Printed  by  John  Foster. 

1680. 
[ii  blank] 
[iii] 

A  Preface. 

THE  Lord  fesus  Christ  witnessed  a  good  Confession,  at  the  time  when  he  said, 
To  this  end  was  I  born,  and  for  this  cause  came  I  into  the  World,  that  I 
should  hear  witness  unto  the  Truth  ;  and  he  taketh  notice  of  it,  to  the  praise 
and  high  commendation  of  the  Church  in  Tergamus,  that  they  held  fast  his  name, 
and  had  not  denied  his  Faith.  Nor  are  they  worthy  of  the  name  of  Christians,  who 
though  the  Lord  by  his  Providence  call  them  publickly  to  own  the  Truth  they  have 
professed,  shall  nevertheless  refuse  to  declare  what  they  believe,  as  to  those  great  and 
fundamental  Principles  in  the  Doctrine  of  Christ,  the  knowledge  whereof  is  neces- 
sary unto  Salvation.  We  find  how  ready  the  Apostle  was  to  make  A  Confession 
of  his  Faith;  though  for  that  hopes  sake  he  was  accused,  and  put  in  chains.  And 
the  Martyrs  of  Jesus,  -oho  have  laid  down  their  lives  in  bearing  -witness  to  the 
truth,  against  the  Infidelity,  Idolatry,  Heresy,  Apostasie  of  the  world,  when  Pagan, 
Ariau,  or  overspread  with  Popish  darkness:  ha-[\v]viug  their  feet  shod  with  the 
preparation  of  the  Gospel  of  peace,  were  free  and  forward  in  their  Testimony,  con- 
fessing the  Truth,  yea  scaling  it  with  their  blood.  With  the  heart  man  believeth 
unto  Righteousness,  and  with  the  mouth  Confession  is  made  unto  Salvation.  Tom. 
10.  10.  Nor  is  there  a  greater  evidence  of  being  in  a  state  of  salvation,  then  such 
a  Confession,  if  made  in  times  or  places  where  men  are  exposed  to  utmost  suffering 
upon  that  account.  I  Joh.  4.  15-  And  if  Confession  of  Faith  be,  in  some  eases,  of 
such  importance  and  necessity,  as  hath  been  expressed;  it  must  needs  be  in  it  self  a 
-work  pleasing  in  the  sight  of  Cod,  for  his  Servants  to  declare  unto  the  world,  what 
those  Principles  of  Truth  are,  which  they  have  received,  and  arc  {by  the  help  of 
Christ)  purposed  to  live  and  dye  in  the  s/edfast  Profession  of.  Some  of  the  lords 
Worthyes  have  been  of  renown  among  his  People  in  this  respect  ;  especially  Irena:us 
and  Athanasius  of  old,  and  of  latter  limes  Beza,  all  whose  (not  to  mention  others) 
Confessions,  with  the  advantage  which  the  Church  of  God  hath  received  thereby,  are 
famously  known.  And  it  must  needs  (end  much  to  the  honour  of  the  dear  and 
blessed  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  in  case  many  Churches  do  joyn  together  in  their 
Testimony.  How  signally  the  Lord  hath  owned  the  Confession  of  the  four  general 
Synods  or  Councils  for  the  suppression  of  the  Heresyes  of  those  times,  needs  not  to 
be  said,  since  no  man  can  be  ignorant  thereof,  that  hath  made  it  his  [v]  concern  to  he 
acquainted  with  things  of  this  nature.  The  Confession  of  the  Bohemians,  of  the 
Waldenses,  and  of  the  Reformed  Protestant  Churches  abroad  (which  also,  to  shew 


1  On  a  fly-leaf,  facing  this  title,  is  a  copy  of  the  approval  of  the  Court  (ante,  p.  422),  signed 
by  its  Secretary,  Edward  Rawson. 


PREFACE   TO    CONFESSION   OF    1O80 


439 

the 


what  Harmony  in  respect  of  Doctrine  there  is  among  all  sincere  Professors  of  the 
Truth,  have  been  published  in  one  Volume)  all  these  have  been  of  singular  use   not 

only  to  those  that  lived  in  the  Ages  when  these  Declarations  were  emitted,  but  'unto 

Posterity,  yea  unto  this  day. 

There  have  been  some  who  have  reflected  upon  these  New-English  Churches  for 
defect  in  this  matter,  as  if  our  Principles  were  unknown;  wheras  it  is  well 


our 
Nor 


■j  -  ■  •»"/•"    «.■<-/(.'   uuKiwwn;    w/ieras  it  is  well 

•n,  that  as  to  matters  of  Doctrine  we  agree  with  other  Reformed  Churches  ■ 
was  it  that,  hut  what  concerns  Worship  and  Discipline,  that  caused  our  Father, 
to  come  into  this  wilderness,  whiles  it  was  a  land  not  sown,  that  so  they  might  have 
liberty  to  practice  accordingly.  And  it  is  a  ground  of  holy  rejoycing  before  the 
Lord,  that  now  there  is  no  advantage  left  for  those  that  may  be  disafected  towards 
us,  to  object  any  thing  of  that  nature  against  us.  Tor  it  hath  pleased  the  only  win- 
Cod  so  to  dispose  m  his  Providence,  as  that  the  Elders  and  Messengers  of  the 
Churches  m  the  Colony  of  the  Massachusets  in  New-England,  did,  by  the  Call  and 
Encouragement  of  the  honoured  General  Court,  meet  together  Sept  10  1679  This 
Synod  at  their  second  Session,  which  was  May  12.  1680.  consulted  and  considered  of 
a  Lv.j  Confession  oj  Faith.  That  which  was  consented  unto  by  the  Elder,  and  Wes 
seugers  of  the  Congregational  Churches  in  England,  who  met  at  the  Savoy  {being 
for  the  most  part,  some  small  variations  excepted,  the  same  with  that  which  was 
agreed  upon  first  by  the  Assembly  at  Westminster,  &  was  approved  of  by  the  Synod 
at  Cambridge  in  New-England,  Anno  1648.  as  also  by  a  general  Assembly  in  Scot- 
land) was  twice  public kly  read,  examined  and  approved  of:  that  little' variation 
winch  we  have  made  from  the  one,  in  compliance  with  the  other  may  be  urn  by  those 
who  please  to  compare  them.  But  we  have  {for  the  mam)  chosen  to  express  our 
selves  in  the  words  of  those  Reverend  Assembles,  that  so  we  might  not  only  with 
one  heart,  but  with  one  month  glorifie  God,  and  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 

As  to  what  concerns  Church-Government,  we  refer  to  the  Platform  of  Disci 
phne  agreed  upon  by  the  Messengers  of  these  Churches  Anno  1648.  &>  solemnly 
owned  &>  confirmed  by  the  late  Synod. 

What  hours  of  Temptation  may  overtake  these  Churches,  is  not  for  us  to  say 
Only  the  Lord  doth  many  times  so  order  things,  that  when  his  People  have  made  a  rood 
Confess^,  they  shall  be  put  upon  the  trial  one  way  or  other,  to  see  whether  they  have 
{or  who  among  them  hath  not)  been  sincere  in  what  they  have  done  The  Lord 
grant  that  the  loins  of  our  minds  may  be  so  girt  about  with  Truth,  that  we  may  be 
able  to  withstand  in  the  evil  day,  and  having  done  all,  to  stand. 


\A  A 

CONFESSION 

OF 

FAITH. 


[This  Confession  fills  pages  i  to  65  of  the  little  book  and  is 
so  nearly  identical  with  the  doctrinal  part  of  that  adopted  at  the 
Savoy  Synod  in  1658  that  I  have  ventured  to  omit  the  text  here 
and  to  refer  the  reader  to  pages  367  to  402  of  this  volume,  where 
the  Savoy  Confession  may  be  found,  and  where  the  few  variations 
of  this  Confession  from  its  prototype  are  indicated  in  the  notes] 


XIV 

THE  HEADS  OF  AGREEMENT  OF  1691 

Editions  and  Reprints 

I.  Heads  of  Agreement  Assented  to  by  the  United  Ministers  in  and  about 
London:  Formerly  called  Presbyterian  and  Congregational,  London,  i6qi.  40  pp. 
[vi],  16.  > 

II.  Cotton  Mather,  Blessed  Unions  .  .  .  a  Discourse  Which  makes  Divers 
Offers,  for  those  Unions ;  Together  with  A  Copy  of  those  Articles,  where-upon  a 
most  Happy  Union,  has  been  lately  made  between  those  two  Eminent  Parties  in 
England,  which  have  now  Changed  the  Names  of  Presbyterians,  and  Congregationals, 
for  that  of  United  Brethren,  Boston,  1692,  12°  pp.  x,  86,  12. 

III.  Cotton  Mather,  Magnolia,  London,  1702,  Book  V:  59-61  ;  ed.  Hartford, 
1S53— 5,  II :   273-276. 

IV.  At  New  London  in  1710,  in  connection  with  the  Result  of  the  Saybrook 
Synod,  and  in  the  subsequent  editions  of  that  Result.2 

V.  Xeal,  LListory  of  New  England,  London,  1720,  II  :  656-663. 

VI.  Bogue  &  Bennett,  LListory  of  Dissenters,  London,  1808-12;  ed.  1S33,  I: 
382-386. 

VII.  In  The  Discipline  Practised  in  the  Churches  of  New  England,  Whit- 
church, Salop,  England,  1823. 

VIII.  In  The  Cambridge  and  Saybrook  Platforms  .  .  .  with  the  Confes- 
sion of  .  .  .  16S0  ;  and  the  LLcads  of  Agreement  assented  to  by  the  Presbyte- 
rians and  Congregationa/ists  in  England  in  ibqo.  Boston,  T.  R.  Marvin,  1829, 
pp.  125-132. 

IX.  T.  C.  Upham,  Ratio  Disciplince,  Portland,  1829,  pp.  303-311. 

X.  In  Congregational  Order.  The  Ancient  Platforms  of  the  Congregational 
Churches  of  New  England  .  .  .  Published  by  direction  of  the  General  Asso- 
ciation of  Connecticut,  Middletown,  1843,  pp.  25 1-263. 3 


Matthew  Mead,  Two  Slicks  made  one,  or  the  Excellence  of  Unity.  Being  a 
Sermon  Preached  by  the  Appointment  of  the  Ministers  of  the  Congregational  and 
Presbyterian  Perswasion,  at  their  Llappy  Union.  On  the  sixth  day  of  April,  l6g/* 
London,  1691. 

A  Brief  History  of  Presbytery  and  Independency,  from  their  first  original  to 
this  Time  .  .  .  With  some  remarks  on  the  late  Heads  of  Agreement*  etc., 
London,  1691. 


1  Full  title  in  reprint  at  close  of  this  chapter.        2  See  next  chapter. 

3  Dr.  Dexter  notes  other  editions  of  Congregational  Order,  as  Hartford  [1842]  and  1845. 
■'  Unfortunately  about  all  the  historical  value  of  this  sermon  is  in  its  title.     The  preacher 
gave  abundant  exhortation,  but  no  facts. 

6  Anonymous,  contains  little  of  value. 

(440) 


ENGLISH   CONGREGATIONALISM   AND    PRESBYTERIANISM  441 

Free  Thoughts  occasioned  by  the  Heads  of  Agreement,1  etc.,  London,  1691. 

A  History  of  the  Union  between  the  Presbyterian  and  Congregational  Minis- 
ters in  and  about  London,  and  the  Causes  of  the  Breach  of  it?  London,  2nd  ed., 
169S. 

Literature 

Cotton  Mather,  Blessed  Unions,  etc.3  C.  Mather,  Magnalia,  London,  1702, 
ed.  Hartford,  1853-5,  II:  272.  Neal,  History  of  New  England,  London,  1720, 
II  :  411.  C.  Mather,  Parentator.  Memoirs  of  Remarkables  in  the  Life  and  the 
Death  of  the  Ever-Memorable  Dr.  Lncrease  Mather,  Boston,  1724,  pp.  147,  148. 
Bogue  &  Bennett,  History  of  Dissenters,  London,  1808-12  ;  ed.  1833,  1 :  381. 
Bacon,  Discourse,  in  Cont.  Eccles.  History  of  Connecticut,  New  Haven,  1861,  pp. 
35-37.  Fletcher,  History  of  Independency,  London,  1862,  IV:  266-268.  J.  Wad- 
dington,  Congregational  History,  1567-1700,  London,  1874,  pp.  675-677.  Dexter, 
Congregationalism,  as  seen  in  its  Literature,  p.  489.  Stoughton,  History  of  Relig- 
ion in  England,  London,  1881,  V:  293-299. 

THE  Westminster  Assembly  and  the  later  history  of  Parlia- 
ment during  the  struggle  with  Charles  I.  showed  clearly  the 
radical  difference  in  view  between  Presbyterians  and  Con- 
gregationalists.  Alike  in  doctrine,  in  their  hatred  of  prelacy,  and 
in  their  conceptions  of  the  proper  forms  of  worship,  and  largely 
accordant  in  their  views  as  to  the  nature  of  the  ministry  and  its 
functions,  their  great  point  of  divergence  was  in  regard  to  the  ex- 
istence or  non-existence  of  a  national  church.  To  such  an  institu- 
tion the  Presbyterians  clung.  In  their  estimation  the  local  con- 
gregation was  to  be  a  part  of  a  reformed  church  of  England, 
responsible  to  a  series  of  church  courts  which  should  knit  together 
the  whole.  In  the  Congregational  view,  on  the  other  hand,  no 
such  thing  as  a  national  church  existed.  There  should  be 
churches,  each  independent  in  its  local  concerns,  each  bound  to 
its  neighbors  by  links  of  fellowship  and  advice  (though  on  this 
point  English  Congregationalism  never  arrived  at  any  such  clear- 
ness of  conception  as  was  attained  in  New  England);  but  over 
these  churches  the  Congregationalist  would  place  no  ecclesiastical 
body,  self-constituted  or  representative  of  the  churches  as  a  whole, 
whose  behests  could  bind  the  action  of  the  smallest  local  congre- 


1  Anonymous,  I  have  not  seen  this  tract. 

2  An  exceedingly  well-informed  account  of  the  rupture  of  the  Union,  written  by  an  anony- 
mous Congregationalist. 

3  See  No.  II.  under  Texts.     It  contains  little  of  value  beyond  a  dedication  to  Matthew  Mead, 
John  Howe,  and  Increase  Mather,  as  the  authors  of  the  Union. 

29 


442  THE   HEADS   OF   AGREEMENT 

gation.  Here,  then,  was  a  radical  and,  as  experience  proved, 
irreconcilable  difference  of  conception. 

But  though  the  great  body  of  Presbyterians  and  Congrega- 
tionalists  walked  in  divided  paths,  there  were  not  wanting  a 
number  of  attempts  at  union  under  the  Commonwealth.  Such  a 
union  was  effected,  on  principles  which  reflect  credit  on  the  Chris- 
tian charity  of  the  two  parties,  in  the  far  northwestern  counties  of 
Cumberland  and  Westmoreland  in  1656. '  At  about  the  same  time 
similar  associations  came  into  being  in  Worcestershire,  Devonshire, 
Essex,  Dorset,  Wiltshire,  Hampshire,  Yorkshire,  and  Lancashire.1 
But  though  these  bodies  had  some  partial  success  in  fusing  to- 
gether the  rival  parties  in  these  various  districts  of  England,  the 
populous  region  immediately  about  London  saw  no  real  union  be- 
tween them  under  the  Commonwealth. 

With  the  Restoration  the  whole  situation  was  changed.  The 
repressive  acts  of  the  government  bore  on  Congregationalists  and 
Presbyterians  with  impartial  severity.  The  Act  of  Uniformity  of 
16623  drove  some  2,000  Puritan  ministers  from  their  livings  in  the 
Church  of  England.  The  same  year  saw,  for  the  first  time  since 
the  Reformation,  the  prescription  of  episcopal  ordination  as  a 
necessity  for  all  who  held  benefices  in  the  English  Church.  The 
Conventicle  Act  of  1664  rendered  public  worship,  save  in  accordance 
with  the  rites  of  the  Establishment,  almost  impossible;4  while 
the  Five  Mile  Act  of  1665*  made  it  very  difficult  for  a  Puritan 
minister  to  earn  a  living.  Under  such  hardships  the  differences 
between    Presbyterians   and    Congregationalists   became  less  and 


1  The  Agreement  of  the  Associated  Ministers  and  Churches  of  the  Counties  of  Cumber- 
land, and  VVestmerland  .  .  .  London  .  .  .  1656.  Some  extracts  from  this  valuable  tract, 
illustrative  of  the  earlier  union  efforts  between  Congregationalists  and  Presbyterians,  will  be  given 
at  the  close  of  this  introduction. 

2  See  the  Brief  History  0/  Presbytery  and  Independency,  London,  1691,  p.  27  ;  and  Briggs, 
American  Presbyterianism,  New  Vork,  1885,  pp.  77,  78. 

3  Passed  May  iq.  1662,  went  into  force  August  24.  There  was  an  excuse  for  such  an  act  in 
the  removals  made  by  the  Parliament  and  Commonwealth  ;  but  the  cost  to  the  Church  of  England 
itself  was  appalling.  Compare  the  remarks  of  J.  R.  Greene,  History  0/  the  English  People,  III : 
346,  347- 

4  May  7,  1664.  This  law  forbade  any  religious  meeting  of  more  than  five  persons  outside  of 
one  family,  save  in  conformity  with  the  Establishment,  the  penalty  being  transportation  on  con- 
viction by  a  justice  of  the  peace  and  without  jury  trial,  on  the  third  offense. 

6  Oct.  30,  1665.  It  forbade  any  non-conformist  minister,  who  would  not  swear  never  to  at- 
tempt any  alteration  in  Church  or  State,  to  come  within  five  miles  of  a  corporate  town  or  Parliament 
borough,  or  to  teach  school  anywhere. 


UNION    EFFORTS     IN    ENGLAND  443 

less.  The  national  church,  for  which  Presbyterians  had  longed, 
was  evidently  a  dream  impossible  of  realization.  The  persistent 
efforts  of  many  of  their  leaders  for  some  kind  of  a  compromise 
which  would  give  them  a  place  in  a  more  comprehensive  Establish- 
ment were  without  result.  It  was  evident  that,  hunted  as  they 
were,  the  most  strenuous  Presbyterians  were  in  a  position  practi- 
cally similar  to  that  of  the  Congregationalists.  They  could  main- 
tain little  more  than  isolated  congregations,  fortunate  if  able  to 
secure  advice  and  fellowship  from  other  bodies  similarly  situated, 
but  unable  effectively  to  operate  any  elaborate  system  of  church 
courts  or  ecclesiastical  assemblies.  So  it  came  about  that,  under 
the  pressure  of  persecution,  the  remnants  of  the  two  bodies  drew 
closer  together;  and  after  the  first  relief  from  their  burdens  came 
in  the  Declaration  of  Indulgence  of  1673,  by  which  Charles  II. 
wished  to  favor  his  Catholic  friends  and  obtain  some  degree  of 
popularity  with  the  Non-conformists,  the  leaders  of  the  Congrega- 
tionalists and  Presbyterians  in  the  vicinity  of  London  strove  earn- 
estly for  a  union.  Renewed  persecution  in  1682  ended  their 
attempts  for  the  time.1 

With  the  success  of  the  Revolution  of  1688,  effected  by  the 
joint  action  of  Churchmen  and  Non-conformists,  and  the  conse- 
quent passage  of  the  Toleration  Act  in  1689,2  the  right  of  Dissen- 
ters to  exist  and  to  worship  was  legally  recognized,  though  under 
somewhat  onerous  conditions;  but  neither  Congregationalists  nor 
Presbyterians  could  look  for  any  wide  extended  acceptance  of 
their  polities.  All  the  circumstances  of  their  situations  counseled 
the  union  of  bodies  so  similar  in  beliefs  and  practical  administra- 
tion. Much  of  that  which  had  seemed  important  under  the  Com- 
monwealth and  which  had  divided  the  two  parties,  was  now  clearly 
a  matter  of  theoretic  desirability  rather  than  practically  attainable. 
Accordingly,  not    long  after   the   passage   of    the   Toleration   Act 


1  "Some  Ministers  several  Years  ago,  [were  stirred  up]  to  attempt  something  towards  the 
Healing  of  the  Differences  between  the  Brethren  of  the  Presbyterian  and  Congregational  Per- 
suasion, in  Matters  of  Discipline,  but  before  they  ceuld  bring  their  laudable  Enterprize  to  any 
Ripeness,  a  stop  was  put  to  their  Pious  and  Peaceable  Undertaking,  by  the  Persecution  raised 
against  them  in  the  Year  1682."  Hist,  of  the  Union  between  Presb.  and  Cong.  Ministers,  etc. 
London,  1698,  p.  1. 

3  May  24,  1689. 


444  THE    MEADS    OF   AGREEMENT 

representatives  of  the  Presbyterian  and  Congregational  ministers 
in  the  vicinity  of  London  began  to  negotiate  regarding  an  agree- 
ment.1 The  movement  was  throughout,  it  would  appear,  purely 
ministerial,  and  one  in  which  the  churches,  as  distinguished  from 
their  pastors,  had  no  share." 

On  the  Congregational  side  the  leading  representative  was 
Matthew  Mead,3  the  pastor  of  a  large  church  at  Stepney,  then  a 
suburb  of  London.  As  a  pronounced  and  earnest  Non-conformist 
he  had  suffered  persecution  under  Charles  II.  and  James  II.,  and, 
while  in  no  sense  a  theologian  or  an  orator  of  the  first  rank,  was  a 
worthy  and  honored  representative  of  the  Congregational  body. 

On  the  side  of  the  Presbyterians  the  chief  leader  was  John 
Howe,4  famous  for  at  least  thirty-five  years  previous  as  the  most 
eloquent  of  English  preachers,  and  chaplain  under  Oliver  and 
Richard  Cromwell.  Howe  had  been  at  that  time  a  Congregationalist, 
but  his  kindly  sympathy  not  only  for  Presbyterians  but  for  the 
then  proscribed  clergymen  of  the  abolished  Establishment  made 
him  many  friends  among  Episcopalians,  and  brought  at  the  Restora- 
tion offers  of  profitable  and  distinguished  preferment  in  the  revived 
Church  of  England.  But  his  conscience  would  not  allow  him  to 
accept  any  of  them,  under  the  conditions  of  the  repressive  acts  of 
the  opening  years  of  Charles  II.,  and  he  was  consequently  the 
object  of  much  persecution.  On  the  first  opportunity  he  had 
returned  to  London,  and  at  the  accession  of  William  III.  was  looked 
upon  as  the  foremost  Dissenter  in  England.  Howe's  Non-conform- 
ity, though  conscientious  and  self-sacrificing,  was  broad.  He  hoped 
with  increasing  earnestness,  as  time  went  on,  that  an  adjustment 
might  be  reached  by  which  he  and  like-minded  men  might  be 
admitted  to  a  place  in  a  modified  Established  Church.6     Nor  did 


1  "  When  all  true  Englishmen  were  freed  from  the  dismal  Fearsof  the  return  of  Popery  .  .  . 
the  Endeavours  for  a  nearer  Coalition  between  the  Presbyterian  and  Congregational  Brethren 
were  Reviv'd  ;  Select  Persons  were  Deputed  by  both  sides  to  treat  upon  Terms  of  Union,  and  their 
Debates  issued  in  the  Heads  of  Agreement."     Hist,  of  the  Union,  etc.,  p.  2. 

-  Compare  Bacon,  Discourse  in  Cont.  Eccles.  Hist.  Conn.,  p.  36. 

3  Died  Oct.  16,  1699,  aged  70.  He  had  assisted  Rev.  William  Greenhill,  had  been  pastoral 
Great  Brickhill,  Bucks,  till  compelled  to  go  to  Holland  on  account  of  supposed  connection  with  the 
"  Rye-House  Plot."    On  returning  he  became  one  of  the  leading  preachers  in  the  vicinity  of  London. 

4  Among  the  many  sources  of  information  regarding  Howe,  I  may  distinguish  the  Diet.  0/ 
National  Biography '.XXVI II :  85-8S.  He  was  now  pastor  of  the  Presbyterian  church  in  Silver 
Street,  London. 

6  Compare  Stoughton,  Hist.  Religion  in  England,  V,  310,  311.  ' 


THE    UNION    OF    169O,    1691  445 

this  hope  seem  wholly  vain.  Some  of  the  more  liberal  of  the  pre- 
lates of  the  Church  of  England  believed  it  feasible;  one  or  two 
actually  entered  into  correspondence  with  Howe  regarding  it. 
King  William  was  known  to  be  favorable  to  such  an  extension  of 
the  borders  of  the  Established  Church.  Among  the  Dissenters 
these  views  of  Howe  found  general  sympathy  in  Presbyterian  quar- 
ters, while  the  Congregationalists,  disbelieving  as  they  did  in  the 
desirability  of  a  national  church,  almost  unanimously  rejected  them. 
So  it  came  about  that,  under  his  desire  for  an  honorable  union  with 
the  Church  of  England,  Howe  drifted  from  association  with  the 
Congregationalists,  and,  without  apparently  any  radical  change  of 
view  on  the  subject  of  church  polity,  was  numbered  with  the 
Presbyterians. 

The  strongest  influence,  however,  in  the  accomplishment  of 
the  Union  seems  to  have  been  that  of  Increase  Mather,1  then  serv- 
ing as  the  agent  of  the  Massachusetts  Colony  in  England. 

It  seems  not  improbable  that  the  first  motion  toward  the  Union 
came  from  the  desires  of  the  newly  emancipated  Puritans  to  per- 
petuate an  educated  ministry.  At  all  events  the  first  fruits  of  the 
new  spirit  of  brotherliness  appeared  in  the  establishment,  on  July 
1,  1690,  by  benevolent  Puritans,  of  a  Fund  to  aid  feeble  churches 
and  to  educate  candidates  for  the  pastoral  office.  For  the  further- 
ance of  this  enterprise  the  donors  invited  many  of  the  ministers 
about  London  to  advise  with  them,  and  they,  accepting  the  call, 
appointed  seven  Presbyterian  pastors,  among  them  John  Howe,  and 
seven  Congregational  ministers,  including  Matthew  Mead,  as  Trus- 
tees of  the  new  General  Fund.2     The  union  in  benevolence  thus 


1  Compare  C.  Mather,  Blessed  Unions,  (1692)  p.  [iii]  ;  Magnalia,  II :  272  ;  Parentator,  pp. 
147,  148.  The  latter  says:  "There  was  an  Happy  UNION  accomplished  between  those  Two  Relig- 
ious Parties,  which  go  under  the  Names  of  Presbyterian  and  Congregational  .  .  .  Dr.  A  nnes- 
tey  and  Mr.  Vincent  and  others,  often  Declared,  That  this  Union  would  never  have  been  Effected, 
if  Mr.  Mather  had  not  been  among  them  ;  and  they  often  therefore  Blessed  GOD,  for  bringing  him 
to  England,  and  keeping  him  there.  He  had  Thanks  from  the  Country,  as  well  as  the  City  on 
that  Account :  And  among  the  rest,  a  General  Assembly  of  Ministers  in  Devon,  sent  up  to  London 
this  Instrument. 

'Junif  23.  1691.  Agreed.  That  the  Reverend  Mr.  John  Flavel,  Moderator  of  this  Assembly 
send  unto  the  Reverend  Mr.  Matthew  Mead,  Mr.  John  How,  and  Mr.  Increase  Mather,  and  give 
Them,  and  such  Others  as  have  been  Eminently  Instrumental  in  Promoting  the  Union,  the  Thanks 
of  this  Assembly,  for  the  great  Pains  they  have  taken  therein.'  " 

2  Extracts  from  the  documents  and  the  names  of  the  Trustees  will  be  found  in  Briggs,  Amer- 
ican Presbyterianism,  Appendix,  pp.  lvi-lix. 


446  THE    HEADS   OF   AGREEMENT 

begun  had  doubtless  a  powerful  effect  in  paving  the  way  for  fellow- 
ship in  all  church  relationship. 

Under  the  guidance  of  Mead,  Howe,  and  Mather,  the  negotia- 
tions for  full  fellowship  between  the  two  parties  made  more  rapid 
and  favorable  progress  than  at  any  earlier  time  in  their  history. 
Agreement  was  reached  with  substantial  unanimity;1  and,  on  April 
6,  1691,  the  Union  was  formally  declared  at  a  joint  meeting  of  the 
ministers  of  both  parties  settled  in  the  vicinity  of  London,  and 
celebrated  by  a  sermon  from  Matthew  Mead.''  The  movement 
thus  begun  at  London  spread  rapidly  to  the  country.  Rev.  John 
Flavel  journeyed  to  Exeter  with  the  express  purpose  of  introducing 
the  Union  into  Devonshire  and  Cornwall,  and  died  just  as  he  had 
accomplisned  his  task.3  Similar  associations  were  formed  in 
Hampshire,  Norfolk,  Nottinghamshire,  and  the  West  Riding  of 
Yorkshire.4  For  a  time  Presbyterian  and  Congregational  ministers 
in  England  seemed  really  one  body. 

The  document  on  which  the  Union  was  based,  like  similar  com- 
promises generally,  minimizes  as  far  as  possible  the  distinguishing 
features  of  both  systems.  In  a  true  sense  it  is  open  to  the  keen 
criticism  of  one  of  its  contemporary  Congregational  opponents, 
that:  5 

"  it  was  no  more  than  a  Verbal  Composition,  or  a  number  of  Articles  industriously 
and  designedly  framed  with  gTeat  Ambiguity,  that  Persons  retaining  their  different 
Sentiments  about  the  same  Things,  might  yet  seem  to  Unite." 

Part  of  this  vagueness  is  doubtless  due  to  the  fact  that  the 

Heads  of  Agreement  did  not  represent  the  theories  of  the  signers 

regarding  church  government  in  their  entirety.     The  agreement 

was  not  intended  to  be  a  complete  treatise  on  ecclesiastical  polity, 

but  simply  a  treaty  in  accordance  with  which  two  bodies  of  men  of 

somewhat  divergent  views  might  work  together  in  harmony.     But 

in  so  far  as  the  document  is  positive,  it  leans  in  the  direction  of 

Congregationalism.     It  is,  as  Dr.  Bacon  affirmed,  "  in  fact,  though 


1  "  The  Congregational  Brethren  who  refused  to  come  into  the  Union  were  but  few,  and  ; 
o  be  no  more  then  three."     Hist.  0/  the  Union,  etc.,  p.  5. 

2  Tivo  Sticks  made  one,  etc.     See  ante,  p.  440. 

3  Palmer's  abridgement  of  Calamy,  Nonconformist's  Memorial,  London,  1775,  I  :  355. 

4  Stoughton,  Hist.  0/  Religion  in  England,  V:  294,  295. 
6  Hist,  of  the  Union,  etc.,  p.  3. 


THE    "  HEADS       CONGREGATIONAL  447 

not  in  name,  a  Congregational  platform,"1 — and  one  fairly  ac- 
cordant with  the  Cambridge  Platform.  That  this  was  the  case 
>was  natural.  Of  the  three  men  most  instrumental  in  its  composi- 
tion, two  were  Congregationalists,  while  the  third,  though  at  the 
time  affiliated  with  the  Presbyterians,  was  a  Congregationalist  by 
early  training,  and  had  joined  his  new  associates  more  from  approval 
of  their  general  attitude  toward  possible  union  with  the  Church  of 
England  than  from  preference  for  the  more  permanent  features  of 
Presbyterianism.  Then,  too,  the  Heads  of  Agreement  could  not 
but  recognize  the  existence  of  some  divergence  of  views  even  in 
the  Union,  and  the  toleration  of  such  divergence  of  necessity  signi- 
fied that  some  degree  of  liberty  of  judgment  and  action  —  that  is 
to  say,  some  measure  of  Congregational  self-government  —  was 
allowed  to  the  congregations  whose  ministers  composed  the  asso- 
ciation.'2 The  Heads  of  Agreement  contain  no  implication  that 
church  courts,  synods,  or  general  assemblies  are  desirable.  It  is 
indeed  clearly  affirmed  that  in  cases  affecting  the  welfare  of  the 
churches,  advice  is  to  be  sought  of  the  ministers  of  other  churches. 
To  be  thoroughly  Congregational,  it  should  have  included  the 
brethren  of  other  churches  as  well  as  their  ministers.  But  the 
judgment  thus  invoked  is  no  judicial  sentence;  it  is  no  further 
binding  than  the  results  of  a  New  England  council.3  Churches  are 
defined,  in  a  sense  quite  acceptable  to  Congregationalists,  as  "  par- 
ticular Societies  of  Visible  Saints  "  (or  as  we  should  now  say,  pro- 
fessedly regenerate  persons,)  "  who  under  Christ  their  Head,  are 
statedly  joined  together  for  ordinary  Communion  with  one  another, 
in  all  the  Ordinances  of  Christ."4  And,  furthermore,  it  is  affirmed 
that  these  churches  enjoy  their  right  to  the  ordinances  "  upon  their 
mutual  declared  consent  and  agreement  to  walk  together  therein 
according  to  Gospel  Rule  " 6 — an  agreement  which  is  a  true  covenant, 
though  it  may  vary  in  "  expliciteness."  These  churches  have, 
severally,  the  "  Right  to  chuse  their  own  Officers  "  and  to  administer 
their  own  affairs;6  and  in  such  administration  the  consent  at  least 


1  Conlr.  Eccles.  Hist.  Conn.,  p.  36.  2  Compare 

a  Heads  of  Agreement,  §  VI.  *  Ibid.,  %  '. 

6  Ibid.,  §  1 :  4.  6  Ibid.,  %  ] 


44§  THE    HEADS    OF   AGREEMENT 

of  the  brethren  is  to  be  obtained.1  No  church  is  subordinate  to 
any  other  and  no  "  Officer,  or  Officers,  shall  exercise  any  Power,  or 
have  any  Superiority  over  any  other  Church,  or  their  Officers."3  In 
calling  a  pastor  churches  are,  ordinarily,  to  consult  the  neighboring 
ministers,  and  these  ministers  are,  usually,  to  unite  with  the  preach- 
ing officers  of  the  church  (in  case  such  exist)  in  the  candidate's 
ordination.3  A  wise  provision  declared  that  those  who  proposed  to 
enter  the  Gospel  ministry  ought  to  be  examined  as  to  their  "  Gifts 
and  fitness  "  by  able  pastors  of  churches." 

The  leading  features  of  the  Heads  of  Agreement  are  thus 
essentially  Congregational.  They  differ,  indeed,  on  some  points 
from  the  usages  of  the  founders  of  New  England,  but  save  in  their 
silence  respecting  the  presence  of  representatives  of  the  brethren 
in  councils,  they  fairly  set  forth  the  practices  of  the  third  genera- 
tion on  New  England  soil;  and,  as  such,  partly  justify  the  extrava- 
gant statement  of  Cotton  Mather,  that  "  'tis  not  possible  .  .  . 
to  give  a  truer  description  of  our  [New  England]  '  ecclesiastical 
constitution.'"5  Even  the  uncertainty  of  the  Heads  of  Agreement 
regarding  the  Ruling  Eldership  not  unfairly  represents  the  state 
of  the  New  England  mind  at  the  close  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

It  is  as  a  document  of  importance  in  New  England  church 
history,  rather  than  in  the  story  of  English  Congregationalism, 
that  the  Heads  of  Agreement  have  special  value.  Prepared,  like 
the  Savoy  Confession,  by  Englishmen  for  English  use  (if  we  except 
the  agency  of  Increase  Mather),  like  that  symbol,  they  have  been 
chiefly  employed  in  New  England. 

That  they  were  so  used  was  the  natural  result  of  the  instru- 
mentality of  the  one  American,  Increase  Mather,  who  had  a  share 
in  the  formation  of  the  Union.  His  son  Cotton,  on  receipt  of  a 
copy,  at  once  preached  on  them  to  his  Boston  congregation,  and 
the  two  laudatory  sermons  which  he  then  delivered,  together  with 
the  text  of  the  Heads  of  Agreement,  were  printed  and  circulated 
about  New  England  in  1692."     When,  ten  years  later,  the  greatest 


1  Ibid.,%  I:  7;  III:  3.  *  Ibid.,  %  IV:  2. 

3  Ibid.,%  II.  4  Ibid..  8  II:  7. 

5  Magnalia,  II  :  272.  e  Blessed  i'nions. 


THEIR   USE    IN   NEW    ENGLAND  449 

historical  work  that  the  first  century  of  American  Christianity  pro- 
duced, the  Magnolia,  was  given  to  the  world,  the  Heads  of  Agree- 
ment were  given  an  honored  place  side  by  side  with  the  New  Eng- 
land symbols  and  declared  to  be  the  best  possible  exposition  of 
existent  Congregationalism.  The  Mathers  seem  to  have  been 
proud  of  their  work  and  to  have  furthered  the  knowledge  of  it  and 
esteem  for  it  as  far  as  possible.  So  it  came  about  that  when  the 
Saybrook  Synod  met  in  1708  to  frame  an  ecclesiastical  constitu- 
tion for  Connecticut,  the  Heads  of  Agreement  were  widely  known 
in  New  England,  and  must  have  been  thought  by  many  to  be  the 
most  modern  and  popular  presentation  of  Congregationalism. 
They  served  well  to  set  forth  the  principles  which  the  Saybrook 
Synod  wished  to  enunciate,  and  though  incomplete  without  the 
addition  of  the  fifteen  Articles  establishing  Connecticut's  peculiar 
consociational  and  associational  system,  the  Heads  of  Agreement 
sweetened  those  Articles,  softened  their  interpretation,  and  made 
them  palatable  to  many  who  would  otherwise  have  refused  them. 
Approved  with  the  rest  of  the  Saybrook  result  by  the  General 
Court  of  the  colony  in  October,  1708/  they  continued  a  part  of  the 
legal  basis  of  the  Connecticut  churches  till  1784,  when  the  Say- 
brook system  was  quietly  omitted  from  the  statutes.2  But  they 
remain  as  one  of  the  factors  which  have  shaped  Connecticut 
Congregationalism. 

The  fate  of  this  document  in  the  land  of  its  origin  was  curi- 
ously unlike  that  which  characterized  it  in  America.  In  England 
the  Heads  of  Agreement  proved  ephemeral  enough.  Like  the 
Savoy  Confession  they  were  soon  forgotten  ;  but  for  a  different 
reason.  The  Union  of  which  they  were  to  be  the  foundation  fell 
apart  in  the  first  strain  of  theologic  controversy,  and  before  the 
decade  which  saw  their  birth  had  closed  Presbyterians  and  Con- 
gregationalists  in  the  vicinity  of  London  were  as  far  apart  as  ever. 
The  circumstances  of  this  melancholy  breach  were  closely  con- 
nected with  a  doctrinal  contest  which  convulsed  all  the  Non-con- 
formist bodies  of  England,  and  even  involved  some  representatives 

1  Conn.  Records,  V.,  87. 

2  Dr.  L.  Bacon,  in  Contr.  Eccles.  Hist.  Conn.,  p.  62. 


450  THE   HEADS   OF   AGREEMENT 

of  the  Establishment.1  Dr.  Tobias  Crisp  had  been  an  eminent 
clergyman  under  Charles  I.,  and  had  long  served  as  rector  of 
Brinkworth,  Wiltshire.  His  theory  of  imputation  was  so  strenuous 
as  to  lead,  so  his  opponents  thought,  to  Antinomian  results.  He 
held,  it  would  appear,  that  our  Lord  so  took  upon  himself  human 
sin  as  to  become  personally  as  sinful  as  man,  and,  on  the  other 
hand,  all  who  believe  so  receive  Christ's  righteousness  here  as  to 
become  as  holy  as  Christ.  Crisp  died  in  1643,  and  the  arguments 
which  were  to  prove  the  bombshell  in  the  united  camp  of  Presby- 
terians and  Congregationalists  remained  for  nearly  fifty  years  for 
the  most  part  unpublished.  But  just  about  the  time  of  the  Union 
they  were  brought  to  light  by  Crisp's  son,  and  printed  with  a  note 
signed  by  several  prominent  Non-conformist  ministers  attesting 
the  genuineness  of  the  manuscript.2  The  views  of  Dr.  Crisp  were 
so  extreme  that  the  work  was  at  once  answered  by  Dr.  Daniel 
Williams,3  one  of  the  chief  Presbyterians  of  London,  a  preacher  of 
power,  a  moderate  Calvinist,  and  the  founder  of  the  great  Non-con- 
formist library,  which  is  now  one  of  the  treasure-houses  of  the 
history   of   Puritanism.      Imitating    the    example    of    the   younger 


1  Some  general  facts  of  value  regarding  the  Crispian  dispute  may  be  found  in  Stoughton, 
History  of  Religion  in  England,  V:  296-300.  Its  connection  with  the  Union  between  Presby- 
terians and  Congregationalists  is  given  in  the  anonymous  History  0/  the  Union  .  .  .  And  The 
Causes  of  The  Breach  of  it,  to  which  frequent  reference  has  been  made.  While  the  immediate 
cause  of  the  rupture  of  the  Union  was  the  Crispian  dispute,  there  were  evidences  of  friction  from 
the  first  between  Presbyterians  and  Congregationalists.  Many  leading  Presbyterians  at  the  time, 
and  notably  John  Howe,  hoped  for  some  readjustment  of  the  Establishment  by  which  a  portion  at 
least  (jf  the  Dissenters  could  be  comprehended.  The  Congregationalists  did  not  generally  favor  the 
idea.  The  author  of  the  Hist,  of  the  Union  says  (pp.  3-5):  "  They  [Congregationalists]  could  not 
but  observe  how  some  of  the  Prime  Promoters  of  this  Union  were  such  as  in  the  time  of  Persecution 
had  by  their  Compliance  deserted  the  Cause  of  the  Non-co7iformists  [Howe  had  submitted  to  the 
Five  .Mile  Act  in  1665]  .  .  .  The  Chief  Leaders  in  the  Union  begin  now  to  speak  freely  of  this 
Business,  and  declare  to  this  Purpose  :  That  it  was  the  intendment  of  the  I  'nion  to  comprehend 
and  include  such  as  were  for  Sacramental  Communion  with  the  Church  of  England.  This  is 
that  which  is  disallowed  generally  by  the  Congregational  Brethren.  .  .  .  They  took  Notice 
how  some  Aspiring  Tempers  of  the  Presbyterian  Party  begin  to  drive  at  Jurisdiction  over  other 
Chui\hes.  .  .  .  They  perceiv'd  that  there  was  a  Design  to  discountenance  the  Congregational 
Churches  up  and  down  the  Nation.  They  thought  the  Instances  of  Sandwich  and  Marlborough 
amounted  to  a  Presumptive  Evidence  of  this."  On  the  other  hand,  the  Presbyterians  were  offended 
that  the  Congregationalists  held  separate  meetings  "  in  Reference  to  things  belonging  to  Congrega- 
tional Churches,  which  were  not  proper  and  adviseable  to  be  debated  in  Conjunction  with  the 
Presbyterian  Ministers."     (Ibid.,  p.  6.) 

2  I  have  not  seen  this  book,  but  I  suppose  it  to  be  Christ  Made  Sin,  London,  1691. 

3  In  Gospel  Truth  Stated  and  1 'indicated,  London,  1692.  This  celebrated  divine  at  his 
death.  Jan.  16.  1716,  left  part  of  a  considerable  property  to  maintain  his  library  for  public  use. 
This  became  the  nucleus  of  the  library  once  known,  from  its  street  location  in  London,  as  the 
"  Red-Cross  Library,"  but  now  removed  to  Grafton  street  and  bearing  the  name  of  its  founder. 


BREACH    OF   THE   UNION  45 1 

Crisp,  Williams  procured  the  commendatory  signatures  of  sixteen 
of  the  most  prominent  Presbyterian  ministers  of  the  day,  a  num- 
ber which  was  increased  on  the  publication  of  a  second  edition  of 
his  work  to  forty-nine,  thus  including  more  than  half  the  Presby- 
terians in  the  Union.1  The  Congregationalists  seem  to  have  been 
no  more  pleased  with  the  supposed  Antinomianism  of  Dr.  Crisp 
than  the  Presbyterians;  but  Dr.  Williams  was  one  of  the  Presby- 
terians who  had  seemed  to  them  most  filled,  as  the  historian  of 
the  quarrel  puts  it,  with  "  a  prejudiced  Spirit  against  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  Congregational  Churches,  and  the  Order  wherein  they 
walk."2  Anything  from  his  pen  must  of  course  be  suspicious,  and 
as  the  Congregationalists  read  his  reply  to  Crisp  it  appeared  to 
them  that  Williams  had  fallen  into  errors  no  less  serious  than 
those  he  refuted,  had  voided  the  atonement  of  significance,  and 
had  attacked  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  Protestantism  gen- 
erally. Thus  it  came  about  that,  while  a  majority  of  the  Presby- 
terians in  the  new  Union  supported  Williams,  a  considerable  num- 
ber of  Congregationalists  opposed,  and  six  of  the  latter  joined  in 
a  "Paper  of  Exceptions"3  which  Rev.  Isaac  Chauncy4  of  London 


1  "  The  Congregational  Brethren  were  offended  at  several  Managements  in  the  Union,  but 
never  Deserted  it  till  that  happened  which  fore'd  them  at  last  to  leave  it.  //  was  this:  Mr. 
Daniel  Williams  Published  a  Book  against  Dr.  Crisp's  Opinions,  and  with  the  Confutation  of  the 
Doctor's  Opinions,  he  did  interweave  several  Notions  of  his  own,  which  have  been  reckoned  con- 
trary to  the  Received  and  Approved  Doctrine  of  the  Reformed  Churches.  .  .  .  This  Book 
could  not  but  give  offence  .  .  .  yet  it  would  have  been  pass'd  by  ...  if  it  had  not  been 
for  the  Attestation  given  to  it  by  several  Presbyterian  Ministers  of  the  Greatest  Figure.  .  .  . 
There  were  Sixteen  concerned  in  the  First  Testimonial,  and  ...  in  the  Re-Printing  of  the 
Book  the  List  of  Names  was  increased  from  Sixteen  to  Forty  Nine  of  the  Union,  which  was  by  far 
the  Majority  of  the  Presbyterian  Party,  that  were  in  it.  It  occasioned  much  grief  of  Heart  to  the 
Congregational  Brethren."     Hist,  of  the  Union,  etc.,  pp.  6,  7. 

2  Hist,  of  the  Union,  p.  3. 

3  They  were  Rev.  Messrs.  George  Griffith,  Thomas  Cole,  Nathanael  Mather,  Isaac  Chauncy, 
Robert  Trail,  and  Richard  Taylor.  The  whole  of  the  brief  paper  may  be  found  in  Chauncy's 
Neomianism  Unmask' d:  or,  the  Ancient  Gospel  Pleaded,  Against  the  Other,  called  a  New 
Law  or  Gospel,  London,  1692-3,  Part  III,  pp.  96,  97.  The  exceptions  are  wholly  doctrinal,  and  are 
chiefly  as  follows:  "2.  Under  a  colour  of  opposing  some  old  Antinomian  Errors  ...  he 
LDaniel  Williams]  falls  in  with  them  in  their  main  Principle  of  vacating  the  Sanction  of  the  moral 
Law.  ...  3.  That  to  supply  the  room  of  the  moral  Law,  vacated  by  him,  he  turns  the  Gospel 
into  a  new  Law,  in  keeping  of  which  we  shall  be  justified  for  the  sake  of  Christ's  Righteousness, 
whereby  he  boldly  strikes  both  at  Law  and  Gospel,  .  .  .  making  Qualifications  and  Acts  of 
ours,  a  disposing,  subordinate  Righteousness,  whereby  we  become  capable  of  being  justified  by 
Christ's  Righteousness.  ...  5.  He  teacheth,  That  the  Righteousness  of  Christ  is  imputed  only 
as  to  Effects,  with  a  Purchase  of  a  conditional  Grant,  r'/z.  this  Proposition.  He  that  believeth  shall 
be  saved    .     .     .     Contrary  to  the  Doctrine  of  Imputation  and  Redemption." 

4  Eldest  son  of  Pres.  Charles  Chauncy  of  Harvard,  born  in  1632,  graduated  at  Harvard  in 
1651  and  went  to  England,  where  he  resided  till  his  death,  Feb.  28,  1712.     At  this  time  he  was  ruin- 


452  THE   HEADS   OF   AGREEMENT 

laid  before  the  meeting  of  the  United  Ministers,  October  17,  1692, 
and  accompanied  by  a  heated  speech  in  which  he  gave  "  the  Rea- 
sons why  he  look'd  upon  the  Union  to  be  broken,  and  Perverted 
from  its  right  End,  and  therefore  would  be  no  longer  a  Member  of 
it."1  The  Union  as  a  whole  was  not  as  hot-headed  as  Mr.  Chauncy; 
and  as  a  means  of  re-establishing  peace,  appointed  a  non-partisan 
committee  of  five  or  six  of  their  number  who  had  never  subscribed 
Williams's  publication3  to  meet  with  "  Five  of  the  Noted  Subscribers 
to  it,"3  and  with  the  five  protesting  signers  of  the  "Paper  of  Ex- 
ceptions "  who  still  remained  members  of  the  Union  after  Chauncy's 
withdrawal.  But,  as  is  frequent  in  such  cases,  "  Many  Meetings 
were  held  to  little  or  no  purpose,"4  and  negotiations  dragged  on 
till  December,  1694,  when  "The  Objectors  were  now  Convinced, 
That  they  had  Complain'd  of  Mr.  Williams's  Errors,  to  Men  who 
would  give  them  no  Reason  to  think  they  were  Impartial,  and 
from  this  time  [the]  Congregational  Brethren  grew  weary  of  the 
Meeting  of  the  Ministers  at  Little  St.  He/lens,  [the  meeting-place 
of  the  Union,]  and  did  in  a  manner  wholly  withdraw  from  it."5 
At  about  the  same  time  the  Presbyterian  and  Congregational  trus- 
tees of  the  General  Fund  fell  apart  into  separate  boards."  One 
more  fruitless  effort  for  adjustment  was  made  in  March,  1696;'  but 
the  breach  in  the  London  Union  of  Congregationalists  and  Pres- 
byterians was  irreparable.  How  far  the  country  associations  which 
had  been  formed  on  the  basis  of  the  Heads  of  Agreement  were 
affected  is  difficult  to  say,  but  the  object  for  which  the  Heads  of 
Agreement  were  framed,  viz.:  the  Union  of  Presbyterians  and  Con- 
gregationalists in  and  about  London,  had  utterly  failed. 


ister  of  a  church  in  London  ;  and  then,  or  a  little  later,  divinity  tutor  in  the  Dissenter's  Academy  in 
London.  An  account  of  him  and  a  list  of  his  writings  is  given  in  Sibley,  Crad.  of  Harvard,  1  : 
302-307. 

1  Hist,  of  the  Union,  pp.  7,  8. 

»  Ibid.,  p.  12.  They  were  Rev.  Messrs.  Matthew  Mead,  Sam.  Annestey,  Edward  Veale 
John  James,  and  Stephen  Lobb.  "  Mr.  [Matthew]  Barker  was  also  appointed  to  be  one,  but  seldom 
met  with  them." 

3  Ibid.  Rev.  Messrs.  John  Howe,  Geo.  Hammond,  Vincent  Alsop,  Richard  Mayo,  and  Sam. 
Slater. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  13.  b  Ibid.,  p.  16. 

15  See  Briggs,  American  Presbyterianism,  Appendix,  p.  lviii.  The  last  joint  meeting  re 
corded  was  June  26,  1693 ;  the  first  separate  meeting  of  the  Presbyterians  was  Feb.  5,  i6p,s. 

1  Hist.  0/  the  Union,  etc.,  pp.  23-25. 


THE   AGREEMENT   OF    1656  453 


UNION    EFFORTS,    1656,   1691 

A.   Extracts  from  the  Agreement  of  1656 

The  I  Agreement  \  of  the  \  Associated  Ministers  6°  Churches  |  of 
the  I  Counties  \  of  |  Cumberland,  |  And  |  VVestmcrland ' :  |  .  .  London 
1656. 

[3]  .  .  .  In  order  to  the  carrying  on  of  this  great  work  [of 
union],  wee  lay  down  and  assent  unto  these  general  rules,  as  the 
Basis  and  Foundation  which  must  support  and  bear  up  our  follow- 
ing Agreement. 

1  T^Hat  in  the  exercise  of  Discipline,  it  is  not  onely  the  most 
1  safe  course,  but  also  most  conducing  to  brotherly  union 
and  satisfaction,  That  particular  Churches  carry  on  as  much  of 
their  work  with  joynt  and  mutual  assistance,  as  they  can  with  con- 
veniency  and  edification,  and  as  little  as  may  be  in  their  actings,  to 
stand  distinctly  by  themselves,  and  apart  from  each  other. 

2.  That  in  matters  of  Church  Discipline,  those  things  which 
belong  onely  ad  melius  esse  f  (f  Things  not  essential),  ought  to  be 
laid  aside,  both  in  respect  of  publication  and  practice,  rather  then 
that  the  Churches  peace  should  be  hindered. 

3.  That  where  different  principles  lead  to  the  same  practice, 
wee  may  joyn  together  in  that  practice,  reserving  to  each  of  us  our 
own  principles. 

4.  That  when  we  can  neither  agree  in  principle,  nor  in  prac- 
tice, we  are  to  bear  with  one  another's  differences,  that  are  of  a 
less  and  disputable  nature,  without  making  them  a  ground  of 
division  amongt  us. 

[4]  Yet  notwithstanding,1  we  do  not  hereby  binde  up  our 
selves  from  endeavouring  to  inform  one  another  in  those  things 
wherein  we  differ,  so  that  it  be  done  with  a  spirit  of  love  and  meek- 
ness, and  with  resolutions  to  continue  our  brotherly  amity  and 
association,  though  in  those  particulars  our  differences  should  re- 
main uncomposed. 

Upon  these  grounds  we  agree  as  followeth. 

[They  then  promise  to  preach  faithfully,  catechise,  reprove  prevalent  sins,  ask 
the  consent  of  their  people  to  a  brief  confession  of  faith  and  covenant  (the  two  docu- 
ments are  given,  and  are  similar  to  those  used  in  New  England),  insist  on  "unblame- 
able  conversation  "  and  acquaintance  with  the  main  doctrines  of  religion  from  all  who 
come  to  the  Supper,  yet  they] 

[16]  agree,  not  to  press  a  declaration  of  the  time  and  manner 
of  the  work  of  grace  upon  the  people,  as  a  necessary  proof  of  their 
actual  present  right  to  the  Lords  Supper,  nor  to  exclude  persons 
meerly  for  want  of  that,  yet  will  we  accept  it,  if  any  will  be  pleased 
to  offer  it  freely     .     .      .      [17]  When  a  Minister  is  to  be  ordained 


Misprinted  wnotithstanding. 


454  THE   HEADS   OF  AGREEMENT 

unto  a  congregation,  we  agree,  That  godly  and  able  mini-[i8]  sters 
of  neighbor  congregations,  be  called  to  be  employed  in  the  exam- 
ination and  trial  of  the  fitness  of  the  party  to  be  set  apart  to  that 
weighty  Office,  and  in  the  act  of  Ordination. 

Though  we  differ  about  the  first  subject  of  the  power  of  the 
Keys,'  yet  forasmuch  as  we  all  agree,  That  the  affairs  of  the  Church 
are  to  be  managed  by  the  Officers  thereof,  therefore  we  conclude 
that  the  examination  and  determination  of  things  in  cases  of  ad- 
mission and  rejections,  and  other  church  acts,  shall  be  permitted 
by  the  Officers;  yet  so  that  the  people  have  notice  of  what  they 
resolve  and  conclude  upon,  in  matters  of  moment,  that  in  case  any 
thing  be  done  against  which  the  people  may  (upon  probable  grounds 
at  least)  object  from  the  word  of  God,  it  may  either  be  forborne, 
or  their  satisfaction  endeavoured.     .     .     . 

[19]  Albeit  we  differ  as  to  the  power  of  associated  churches 
over  particular  congregations;  yet,  we  agree  that  it  is  not  only 
lawful  and  useful,  but  in  many  cases  necessary,  that  several 
churches  should  hold  communion  and  correspondency  together; 
and  to  that  end  we  resolve  to  associate  our  selves,  &  to  keep 
frequent  meetings  for  mutual  advice  and  help,  as  occasion  shall 
require. 

We  take  our  selves  and  our  churches  bound  to  follow  what- 
soever advice,  direction  or  reproof,  (being  agreeable  to  the  word) 
any  of  us  shall  receive  from  the  Brethren  in  association  with  us.    .    . 

[20]  For  the  better  carrying  on  of  our  intended  association, 
we  resolve  to  observe  these  following  rules. 

1.  We  judge  it  convenient  to  divide  our  selves  into  three  asso- 
ciations, (viz.)  at  Carii/e,  at  Penrith,  and  Cockermouth,  and  shall 
meet  once  a  Moneth,  or  more  or  less,  as  occasion  shall  require,  and 
the  major  part  of  the  association  shall  think  fit.     .     .     . 

2.  At  these  meetings  we  shall  hear  and  determine  things  of 
common  concernment,  endeavour  to  resolve  doubts,  compose  dif- 
ferences, consider  the  justness  &  weight  of  the  grounds  and  reasons 
of  Ministers  removals  from  any  place,  when  such  cases  shall  fall 
out,  consult  and  advise  about  spe-[2i]  cial  emmergencies  that  may 
happen  to  our  Ministry  or  congregations  in  particular. 

[They  also   agree   that    the   three  associations    are    "sometimes    to   meet   all 

together."] 


of  authority  in  church  administr 


THE   PREFACE    TO   THE    HEADS  455 


B.    The  Heads  of  Agreement,  1691 

Heads  of  Agreement  |  Assented  to  by  the  |  TUnfteo  /HMnfSters  | 
In  and  about  London:  |  Formerly  called  |  PRESBYTERIAN 
I  and  I  CONGREGATIONAL.  | |  Xiceneeo  anD  En* 

trc£>  accorDtng  to  ©rocr.  |  |  LONDON:  |  Printed  by  R.  R.  for 

ttbo.  CocfeerUl,  at  the  Three  Legs,  |  and  Jobn  ©unton  at  the  Raven, 
in  the  |  Poultrey.     MDCXCI. 

[ii  blank]  the 

[iii]  Preface  to  the  Reader. 

Endeavours  for  an  Agreement  among  Christians,  will  be  grievous  to 
none  who  desire  the  flourishing  State  of  Christianity  it  self. 
The  Success  of  these  Attempts  among  us,  must  be  ascribed  to  a 
Presence  of  God  so  signal,  as  not  to  be  concealed  ;  and  seems  a  hopeful 
Pledg  of  further  Blessings. 

The  favour  of  our  Rulers  in  the  present  Established  Liberty,  we 
most  thankfully  acknowlcdg  ;  and  to  Them  we  are  studious  to  approve 
our  selves  in  the  whole  of  this  Affair.  Therefore  we  Declare  against 
intermedling  with  the  National  Church-Form :  Imposing  these  Terms 
of  Agreement  on  others,  is  disclaimed :  All  pretence  to  Coercive  Power, 
is  as  unsuitable  to  our  Principles,  as  to  our  Circumstances :  Excom- 
munication it  self,  in  our  respective  Churches,  being  no  other  [iv]  than 
a  declaring  such  scandalous  Members  as  are  irreclaimable,  to  be  incapa- 
ble of  Communion  with  us  in  things  peculiar  to  Visible  Believers :  And 
in  all,  7oe  expresly  determine  our  purpose,  to  the  maintaining  of  Har- 
mony and  Love  among  our  selves,  and  preventing  the  inconveniences 
which  humane  weakness  may  expose  to  in  our  use  of  this  Liberty. 

The  general  concurrence  of  Ministers  and  People  in  this  City,  and 
the  great  disposition  thereto  in  other  places,  persuade  us,  this  happy  Work 
is  undertaken  in  a  season  designed  for  such  Divine  influence,  as  will 
overcome  all  impediments  to  Peace,  and  convince  of  that  Agreement 
which  has  been  always  among  us  in  a  good  degree,  tho  neither  to  our 
selves  nor  others  so  evident,  as  hereby  it  is  now  acknowledged. 

Need  there  any  Arguments  to  recommend  this  Union  ?  Ls  not  this 
what  zee  all  have  prayed  for,  and  Providence  by  the  directest  indications 
hath  been  long  calling  and  disposing  us  to?  can  either  Zeal  for  God,  or 
prudent  [v]  regards  to  our  selves  remissly  suggest  it,  seeing  the  Blessings 
thereof  are  so  important,  and  "when  it's  become  in  so  many  respects  even 
absolutely  necessary  ;  especially  as  it  may  conduce  to  the  preservation  of  the 
Protestant  Religion,  and  the  Kingdoms  Weal ;  a  subserviency  whereto, 


456  THE   HEADS   OF   AGREEMENT 

shall  always  govern  our  United  Abilities,  with  the  same  disposition  to  a 
concurence  with  all  others  who  are  duly  concerned  for  those  National 
Blessings. 

As  these  considerations  render  this  Agre.  ment  desirable,  so  they 
equally  urge  a  watchful  care  against  all  attempts  of  Satan  to  dissolve 
it,  or  frustrate  the  good  effects  thereof  so  manifestly  destructive  to  his 
Kingdom.  Therefore  it's  incumbent  on  us,  to  forbear  condemning  and 
disputing  those  different  sentiments  and  practices  we  have  cxprcsly 
allowed  for :  To  reduce  all  distinguishing  Names,  to  that  of  United 
Brethren:  To  admit  no  uncharitable  jealousies,  or  censorious  speeches; 
much  less  any  debates  whether  Party  seems  most  favour-\\\\cd  by  this 
Agreement.  Such  carnal  regards  are  of  small  moment  with  us,  who 
herein  have  used  7vords  less  accurate,  that  neither  side  might  in  their 
various  conceptions  about  lesser  matters  be  contradicted,  when  in  all  sub- 
stantial we  are  fully  of  one  mind ;  and  from  this  time  hope  more  per- 
fectly to  rejoice  in  the  Honour,  Gifts,  and  Success  of  each  other,  as  our 
common  good. 

That  we  as  United,  may  contribute  our  utmost  to  the  great  concern- 
ments of  our  Redeemer,  it's  mutually  resolved,  we  will  assist  each  other 
with  our  Labours,  and  meet  and  consult,  without  the  least  shadow  of 
separate  or  distinct  Parties  : '  Whence  we  joyfully  expect  great  Improve- 
ments in  Light  and  Love,  through  the  more  abundant  supplies  of  the 
Spirit;  being  well  assured  we  herein  serve  that  Prince  of  Peace,  of 
the  increase  of  whose  Government  and  Peace,  there  shall  be  no 
end. 

This  Agreement  is  already  assented  to  by  above  Fourscore  Ministers,  and  the 
Preface  approved  of. 


(0 

HEADS  of  AGREEMENT 

Assented  to  by  the 
United   Ministers,  &c. 

The  following  Heads  of  AGREEMENT  have  been  Resolved 
upon,  by  the  United  Ministers  in  and  about  London,  formerly  called 
Presbyterian  and  Congregational;  not  as  a  Measure  for  any  National 


1  In  spite  of  this  positive  statement  and  the  declaration  below  that  the  Preface  was  "ap- 
proved of,"  the  Congregationalists,  at  least,  seem  to  have  intended  to  preserve  their  separate  identity 
even  under  the  Union  ;  a  point  on  which,  as  they  were  much  the  smaller  party,  they  were  more 
sensitive  than  the  Presbyterians.  The  author  of  the  History  of  the  Union,  etc.,  says  (p.  6):  "  The 
Congregational  Brethren  were  troubled  [by  some  actions  of  the  Presbyterians],  yet  bearing  with 
Patience  what  they  could  not  redress,  they  kept  their  Station,  and  albeit  they  had  some  Meetings 
among  themselves  in  Reference  to  things  belonging  to  Congregational  Churches,  which  were  not 
proper  and  adviseable  to  be  debated  in  Conjunction  with  the  Presbyterian  Ministers,  yet  they  did 
not  in  the  least  judge  themselves  hereby  to  be  guilty  of  making  any  Infractions  upon  the  Union, 
because  the  Congregational  Brethren  do  to  this  Day  aver,  That  they  never  consented  to  the  Pre- 
face that  is  set  before  the  Heads  of  Agreement,  as  any  part  of  the  Articles  of  the  Union." 


TEXT  OF   THE   HEADS  457 

Constitution,  but  for  the  Preservation  of  Order  in  our  Congregations, 
that  cannot  come  up  to  the  Common  Rule  by  Law  Established. 

I.  Of  Churches  and  Church-Members. 
i.HTE  Acknowledge  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  have  One  Catho- 
W  lick  Church,  or  Kingdom,  comprehending  all  that  are 
united  to  Him,  whether  in  Heaven  or  Earth.  And  do  conceive  the 
[2]  whole  multitude  of  visible  Believers,  and  their  Infant-Seed  (com- 
monly called  the  Catholick  Visible  Church)  to  belong  to  Christ's 
Spiritual  Kingdom  in  this  world:  But  for  the  notion  of  a  Catholick 
Visible  Church  here,  as  it  signifies  its  having  been  collected  into 
any  formed  Society,  under  a  Visible  human '  Head  on  Earth, 
whether  one  Person  singly,  or  many  collectively,  We,  with  the  rest 
of  Protestants,  unanimously  disclaim  it.2 

2.  We  agree,  That  particular  Societies  of  Visible  Saints,  who 
under  Christ  their  Head,  are  statedly  joined  together  for  ordinary 
Communion  with  one  another,  in  all  the  Ordinances  of  Christ,  are 
particular  Churches,  and  are  to  be  owned  by  each  other,  as  Insti- 
tuted Churches  of  Christ,  tho  differing  in  apprehensions  and  practice 
in  some  lesser  things. 

3.  That  none  shall  be  admitted  as  Members,  in  order  to  Com- 
munion in  all  [3]  the  special  Ordinances  of  the  Gospel,  but  such 
persons  as  are  knowing  and  sound  in  the  fundamental  Doctrines* 
of  the  Christian  Religion,  without  Scandal  in  their  Lives;  and  to  a 
Judgment  regulated  by  the  Word  of  God,  are  persons  of  visible 
Godliness4  and  Honesty;  credibly  professing  cordial  subjection  to 
Jesus  Christ. 

4.  A  competent  Number  of  such  visible  Saints,  (as  before 
described)  do  become  the  capable  Subjects  of  stated  Communion 
in  all  the  special  Ordinances  of  Christ,  upon  their  mutual  declared 
consent  and  agreement  to  walk  together  therein  according  to  Gospel 
Rule.  In  which  declaration,  different  degrees  of  Expliciteness,  shall 
no  way  hinder  such  Churches  from  owning  each  other,  as  Lnstituted 
Churches. 

5.  Tho  Parochial  Bounds  be  not  of  Divine  Right,  yet  for  com- 
mon Edification,  the  Members  of  a  particular  Church  [4]  ought  (as 
much  as  conveniently  may  be)  to  live  near  one  another. 

6.  That  each  particular  Church  hath  Right  to  chuse5  their  own 
Officers;  and  being  furnished  with  such  as  are  duly  qualified  and 


Saybrook  reads  common. 
'■  The  Saybrook  Synod  added  proof-texts  to  each  paragraph  of  the  Heads  of  Agreement,  as 

to  the  Confession   of  1680. 

1  Saybrook  reads  Doctrine.  *  Saybrook  reads  Holiness.  5  Saybrook  reads  use. 

30 


458  THE   HEADS   OF   AGREEMENT 

ordained  according  to  the  Gospel  Rule,  hath  Authority  from  Christ 
for  exercising  Government,  and  of  enjoying  all  the  Ordinances  of 
Worship  within  it  self. 

7.  In  the  Administration  of  Church  Power,  it  belongs  to  the 
Pastors  and  other  Elders  of  every  particular  Church  (if  such  there 
be)1  to  Rule  and  Govern  :  and  to  the  Brotherhood  to  Consent,  accord- 
ing to  the  Rule  of  the  Gospel. 

8.  That  all  Professors  as  before  described,  are  bound  in  duty, 
as  they  have  opportunity,  to  join  themselves  as  fixed  Members  of 
some  particular  Church;  their  thus  joining,  being  part  of  their 
professed  subjection  to  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  [5]  and  an  instituted 
means  of  their  Establishment  and  Edification;  whereby  they  are 
under  the  Pastoral  Care,  and  in  case  of  scandalous  or  offensive  walk- 
ing, may  be  Authoritatively  Admonished  or  Censured  for  their 
recovery,  and 2  for  vindication  of  the  Truth,  and  the  Church 
professing  it. 

9.  That  a  visible  Professor  thus  joined  to  a  particular  Church, 
ought  to  continue  stedfastly  with  the  said  Church;  and  not  forsake 
the  Ministry  and  Ordinances  there  dispensed,  without  an  orderly 
seeking  a  recommendation  unto  another  Church.  Which  ought  to 
be  given,  when  the  case  of  the  person  apparently  requires  it. 

II.  Of  the  Ministry. 

1.  We  agree,  That  the  Ministerial  Office  is  instituted  by  Jesus 
Christ,  for  the  Gathering,  Guiding,  Edifying,  and  Governing  of  his 
Church  ;  and  to  continue  to  the  end  of  the  world. 

[6]  2.  They  who  are  called  to  this  Office,  ought  to  be  endued 
with  competent  Learning,  and  Ministerial  Gifts,  as  also  with  the 
Grace  of  God,  sound  in  Judgment,  not  Novices  in  the  Faith  and 
Knowledg  of  the  Gospel;  without  scandal,  of  holy  Conversation, 
and  such  as  devote  themselves  to  the  Work  and  Service  thereof. 

3.  That  ordinarily  none  shall  be  Ordained  to  the  work  of  this 
Ministry,  but  such  as  are  called  and  chosen  thereunto  by  a  particular 
Church. 

4.  That  in  so  great  and  weighty  a  matter  as  the  calling  and 
chusing  a  Pastor,  we  judg  it  ordinarily  requisite,  That  every  such 
Church  consult  and  advise  with  the  Pastors  of  Neighbouring 
Congregations. 

5.  That  after  such  Advice  the  Person  consulted  about,  being 
chosen    by  the  Brotherhood  of   that    particular  Church  over  [7J 


1  Saybrook  omits  (  )  signs. 


TEXT   OF  THE   HEADS  459 

which  he  is  to  be  set,  and  he  accepting,  be  duly  ordained,  and  set 
apart  to  his  Office  over  them;  wherein  'tis  ordinarily  requisite, 
That  the  Pastors  of  Neighbouring  Congregations  concur  with  the 
Preaching-Elder,  or  Elders,  if  such  there  be. 

6.  That  whereas  such  Ordination  is  only  intended  for  such  as 
never  before  had  been  ordained  to  the  Ministerial  Office  ;  If  any 
judge,  that  in  the  case  also  of  the  removal  of  one  formerly 
Ordained,  to  a  new  Station  or  Pastoral  Charge,  there  ought  to  be 
a  like  Solemn  recommending  him  and  his  Labours  to  the  Grace  and 
Blessing  of  God ;  no  different  Sentiments  or  Practice  herein,  shall 
be  any  occasion  of  Contention  or  Preach  of  Communion  among  us. 

7.  It  is  expedient,  that  they  who  enter  on  the  work  of  Preach- 
ing the  Gospel,  be  not  only  qualified  for1  Communion  of  Saints;  but 
also  that,  except  in  cases  extraordinary,  they  give  proof  of  their 
Gifts  and  fitness  [8]  for  the  said  work,  unto  the  Pastors  of  Churches, 
of  known  abilities  to  discern  and  judge  of  their  qualifications  ;  That 
they  may  be  sent  forth  with  Solemn  Approbation  and  Prayer ;  which 
we  judge  needful,  that  no  doubt  may  remain  concerning  their  being 
Called  to2  the  work;  and  for  preventing  (as  much  as  in  us  lieth) 
Ignorant  and  rash  Intruders. 

III.  Of  Censures. 

1.  As  it  cannot  be  avoided,  but  that  in  the  Purest  Churches 
on  Earth,  there  will  sometimes  Offences  and  Scandals  arise  by 
reason  of  Hypocrisie  and  prevailing  corruption  ;  so  Christ  hath  made 
it  the  Duty  of  every  Church,  to  reform  it  self  by  Spiritual  Reme- 
dies, appointed  by  him  to  be  applied  in  all  such  cases ;  viz.  Admoni- 
tion, and  Excommunication. 

2.  Admonition,  being  the  rebuking  of  an  Offending  Member  in 
order  to  convicti-[9]on,  is  in  case  of  private  offences  to  be  performed 
according  to  the  Rule  in  Mat.  18.  v.  15,  16,  17.  and  in  case  of  Pub- 
lick  offences,  openly  before  the  Church,  as  the  Honour  of  the  Gospel, 
and  nature  of  the  Scandal  shall  require  ;  And  if  either  of  the  Admo- 
nitions take  place  for  the  recovery  of  the  fallen  Person,  all  further 
proceedings  in  a  way  of  censure,  are  thereon  to  cease,  and  satisfac- 
tion to  be  declared  accordingly. 

3.  When  all  due  means  are  used,  according  to  the  Order  of  the 
Gospel,  for  the  restoring  an  offending  and  scandalous  Brother  ;  and 
he  notwithstanding  remains  Impenitent,  the  Censure  of  Excommu- 
nication is  to  be  proceeded  unto ;  Wherein  the  Pastor  and  other 


1  Say  brook  inserts  the.  2  Say  brook  reads  unto. 


46o  THE   HEADS   OF  AGREEMENT 

Elders  (if  there  be  such)  are  to  lead,  and  go  before  the  Church ; 
and  the  Brotherhood  to  give  their  consent,  in  a  way  of  obedience 
unto  Christ,  and  unto'  the  Elders,  as  over  them  in  the  Lord. 

4.  It  may  sometimes  come  to  pass,  [10J  that  a  Church-Member, 
not  otherwise  Scandalous,  may  sinfully  withdraw,  and  divide  him- 
self from  the  Communion  of  the  Church  to  which  he  belongeth:  In 
which  case,  when  all  due  means  for  the  reducing  him,  prove  ineffect- 
ual, he  having  thereby  cut  himself  off  from  that  Churches  Commun- 
ion ;  the  Church  may  justly  esteem  and  declare  it  self  discharged 
of  any  further  inspection  over  him. 

IV.     Of  Communion  of  Churches. 

1.  We  Agree,  that  Particular  Churches  ought  not  to  walk  so 
distinct  and  separate  from  each  other,  as  not  to  have  care  and 
tenderness  towards  one  another.  But  their  Pastors  ought  to  have 
frequent  meetings  together,  that  by  mutual  Advice,  Support,  En- 
couragement, and  Brotherly  intercourse,  they  may  strengthen  the 
hearts  and  hands  of  each  other  in  the  -ways  of  the  Lord. 

[n]  2.  That  none  of  our  particular  Churches  shall  be  subordi- 
nate to  one  another;  each  being  endued  with  equality  of  Power 
from  Jesus  Christ.  And  that  none  of  the  said  particular  Churches, 
their  Officer,  or  Officers,  shall  exercise  any  Power,  or  have  any 
Superiority  over  any  other  Church,  or  their  Officers. 

3.  That  known  Members  of  particular  Churches,  constituted 
as  aforesaid,  may  have  occasional  Communion  with  one  another  in 
the  Ordinances  of  the  Gospel,  viz.  the  Word,  Prayer,  Sacraments, 
Singing*  Psalms,  dispensed  according  to  the  mind  of  Christ:  Un- 
less that  Church,  with  which  they  desire  Communion,  hath  any 
just  exception  against  them. 

4.  That  we  ought  not  to  admit  any  one  to  be  a  Member  of 
our  respective  Congregations,  that  hath  joined  himself  to  another, 
without  endeavours  of  mutual  Satisfaction  of  the  Congregations3 
concerned. 

[12]  5.  That  one  Church  ought  not  to  blame  the  Proceedings 
of  another,  until  it  hath  heard  what  that  Church  charged,  its  Elders, 
or  Messengers,  can  say  in  vindication  of  themselves  from  any 
charge  of  irregular  or  injurious  Proceedings. 

6.  That  we  are  most  willing  and  ready  to  give  an  account  of 
our  Church  Proceedings  to  each  other,  when  desired;  for  prevent- 
ing or  removing  any  offences  that  may  arise  among  us.  Likewise 
we  shall  be  ready  to  give  the  right  hand  of  fellowship,  and  walk 
together  according  to  the  Gospel  Rules  of  Communion  of  Churches. 

1  Saybrook  reads  to.  3  Saybrook  inserts  of.  s  Saybrook  reads  Congregation. 


TEXT   OF   THE   HEADS  46 1 

V.     Of  Deacons  and  Ruling  Elders. 

We  agree,  The  Office  of  a  Deacon  is  of  Divine  Appointment, 
and  that  it  belongs  to  their  Office  to  receive,  lay  out,  and  distribute 
the  Churches  Stock  to  its  proper  uses,  by  the  direction  of  the  Pastor, 
and  Brethren  if  need  be.  And  [13]  whereas  divers  are  of  opinion, 
That  there  is  also  the  Office  of  Ruling  Elders,  who  labour  not  in 
word  and  doctrine;  and  others  think  otherwise;  We  agree,  That 
this  difference  make  no  breach  among  us. 

VI.     Of  Occasional  Meetings'  of  Ministers,  &c. 

1.  We  agree,  That  in  order  to  concord,  and  in  any  other  weighty 
and  difficult  cases,  it  is  needful,  and  according  to  the  mind  of 
Christ,  that  the  Ministers  of2  several  Churches  be  consulted  and 
advised  with  about  such  matters. 

2.  That  such  Meetings  may  consist  of  smaller  or  greater  Num- 
bers, as  the  matter  shall  require. 

3.  That  particular  Churches,  their  respective  Elders,  and  Mem- 
bers, ought  to  have  a  reverential  regard  to  their  judgment  so 
given,  and  not  dissent  therefrom,  without  apparent  grounds  from 
the  word  of  God. 

M 

VII.     Of  our  Demeanour  tmvards  the  Civil  Magistrate. 

1.  We  do  reckon  our  selves  obliged  continually  to  pray  for 
God's  Protection,  Guidance,  and  Blessing  upon  the  Rulers  set  over 
us. 

2.  That  we  ought  to  yield  unto  them  not  only  subjection  in  tin- 
Lord,  but  support,  according  to  our  station  and  abilities. 

3.  That  if  at  any  time  it  shall  be  their  pleasure  to  call  together* 
any  Number  of  us,  or  require  any3  account  of  our  Affairs,  and  the 
state  of  our  Congregations,  we  shall  most  readily  express  all  dutiful 
regard  to  them  herein. 

VIII.     Of  a  Confession  of  Faith. 

As  to  what  appertains  to  soundness  of  Judgment  in  matters  of 
Faith,  we  esteem  it  sufficient,  That  a  Church  acknowledge  the 
Scriptures  to  be  the  word  of  God,  the  perfect  and  only  Rule  of  Faith 
a?id  [15]  Practice;  and  own  either  the  Doctrinal  part  of  those 
commonly  called  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  or  the  Con- 

1  Saybrook  reads  meeting.  »  Saybrook  inserts  the.  3  Saybrook  reads  an. 


462  THE    HEADS   OF   AGREEMENT 

fession,  or  Catechisms,  Shorter  or  Larger,  compiled  by  the  Assembly 
at  Westminster,  or  the  Confession  agreed  on  at  the  Savoy,  to  be 
agreeable  to  the  said  Rule. 

IX.     Of  our  Duty  and  Deportment  towards  them  that  are  not  in 
Communion  with  us. 

1.  We  judge  it  our  duty  to  bear  a  Christian  Respect  to  all 
Christians,  according  to  their  several  Ranks  and  Stations,  that  are 
not  of  our  Persuasion  or  Communion. 

2.  As  for  such  as  may  be  ignorant  of  the  Principles  of  the 
Christian  Religion,  or  of  vicious  conversation,  we  shall  in  our  respect- 
ive Places,  as  they  give  us  opportunity,  endeavour  to  explain  to  them 
the  Doctri?ie  of  Life  and  Salvation,  and  to  our  uttermost1  persuade 
them  to  be  reconciled  to  God. 

[16]  3.  That  such  who  appear  to  have  the  Essential  Requisites 
to  Church-Communion,  we  shall  willingly  receive  them  in  the  Lord, 
not  troubling  them  with  Disputes  about  lesser  matters. 

As  we  Assent  to  the  forementioned  Heads  of  Agreement;  So  we 
Unanimously  Resolve,  as  the  Lord  shall  enable  us,  to  Practice  accord- 
ing to  them. 

FINIS. 

'  Saybrook  reads  utmost. 


XV 

THE    PROPOSALS   OF    1705,   AND   THE   SAYBROOK 
PLATFORM    OF    1708 

A.     Proposals  of  1705 
a.  Full  Text  and  Signatures 

I.  Question  and  Proposals  :  What  Further  Steps  are  to  be  taken,  that  the 
Councils  may  have  due  Constitution  and  Efficacy,  etc.      12°  [1705].1 

II.  In  Minutes  of  the  Proceedings  of  the  General  Association  of  Massachu- 
setts Proper  for  1814,  pp.  5-9  (from  a  manuscript  left  by  Cotton  Mather);  reprinted 
therefrom  in  the  Panoplist,  X  :  322-324. 

6.  The  Signatures  Omitted 

III.  In  Wise,  The  Churches  Quarrel  Espoused;  or,  a  Reply  in  Safyre,  to  cer- 
tain Proposals  made,  in  Answer  to  this  Question  :  What  further  Steps,  etc.,  Boston, 
1710;  again  in  new  editions  of  the  same  work  in  1715,  twice  in  1772,  and  in  i860, 
all  at  Boston. 

Literature 

John  Wise,  The  Churches  Quarrel  Espoused  (as  above),  Boston,  1710,  etc. 
Wise,  Vindication  of  the  Government  of  New  England  Churches,  etc.,  Boston, 
1717  ;  again  twice  in  1772,  and  in  i860,  all  at  Boston.2  Cotton  Mather,  Ratio  Dis- 
cipline?, Boston,  1726,  pp.  176-185.  J.  S.  Clark,  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Cong. 
Churches  in  Mass.,  Boston,  1858,  pp.  115-121.  Clark,  Introductory  Notice  to  i860 
edition  of  Wise's  works.  M.  C.  Tyler,  History  of  American  Literature,  New  York, 
1879,  II:  105-110.  Dexter,  Congregationalism,  as  seen,  etc.,  New  York,  1880,  pp. 
491-502.  H.  A.  Hill,  History  of  the  Old  South  Church,  Boston,  1890,  1 :  331-334. 
A.  P.  Marvin,  Life  and  Times  of  Cotton  Mather,  Boston.  [1892],  pp.  313,  314. 

The  Attempted  Revival  of  the  Proposals  in  18 14 
Minutes  of  the  Proceedings  of  the  General  Association  of  Massachusetts  Proper, 
for  1814-16;  reprinted  also  in  the  Panoplist,  Boston,  X:  316-328;  XI:  357-379; 
XII:  369.  Articles  in  Panoplist,  XI:  507-518,  537-545;  XII:  489-495.  The- 
ophilus  [Samuel  Spring],  Essay  on  the  Discipline  of  Christ's  House ;  containing 
Remarks  on  the  "  Plan  of  Ecclesiastical  Order,"  which  the  General  Association  has 
presented  for  Publick  Consideration,  Newburyport,  1816.  [John  Lowell],  Inquiry 
into  the  Right  to  change  the  Ecclesiastical  Constitution  of  the  Congregational 
Churches  of  Massachusetts,  Boston,  1816.  Clark,  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Congre- 
gational Churches  in  Massachusetts,  pp.  252-254.  Dexter,  Congregationalism,  as 
seen,  etc.,  pp.  512,  513.  H.  A.  Hill,  History  of  the  Old  South  Church,  II:  381, 
382. 

1  I  have  never  seen  this  pamphlet ;  but  it  is  clearly  the  original  of  the  copy  given  by  Wise. 

2  A  re-statement  of  Congregational  principles,  called  forth  by  the  discussion  aroused  by  the 
Proposals,  rather  than  a  direct  reply  to  them. 


(463) 


464       THE   PROPOSALS   AND   THE   SAYBROOK    PLATFORM 

B.     The  Saybrook  Platform 
Text  and  Editions 

The  Full  Result.  I.  a.  A  Confession  of  Faith,  Owned  and  Consented  to 
by  the  Elders  and  Messengers  Of  the  Churches  in  the  Colony  of  Connecticut,  in 
New-England,  Assembled  by  Delegation  at  Say-Brook  September  qt/i.  1708.  New- 
London,  1 710.  b.  The  Heads  of  Agreement,  Assented  to  by  the  United  Ministers 
formerly  called  Presbyterian  and  Congregational.  And  also  Articles  for  the  Ad- 
ministration of  Church  Discipline  Unanimously  Agreed  upon  and  consented  to  by 
the  Elders  and  Messengers  of  the  Churches  in  the  Colony  of  Connecticut  in  New- 
England,  Assembled  by  Delegation  at  Say-Brook,  September  qth.  1708.  New  Lon- 
don, 1710.     8°  pp.  ii,  116. 

II.  Same  titles.  New  London,  1760. 

III.  Same  titles,  Bridgeport,  1810. 

IV.  Hartford,  1831. 

V.  Same  titles,  Hartford,  1838. 

VI.  In  Congregational  Order,  Middletown,  1843,  pp.  153-286. ' 

The  Articles  only.  I.  Trumbull,  History  of  Connecticut,  ed.  Hartford, 
1797,  pp.  510-513,  ed.  New  Haven,  1818,  1 :  483-486  ;  2.  The  Cambridge  and  Say- 
brook  Platforms  of  Church  Discipline,  with  the  Confession  of  Faith  of  .  .  . 
16S0 ;  and  the  Heads  of  Agreement  .  .  .  Illustrated  with  Historical  Prefaces 
and  notes,  Boston,  1829,  pp.  115-123;  3.  Upham,  Patio  Disciplines,  Portland,  1829, 
pp.  311-316;  4.  Elliott,  The  .Yew  England  History,  New  York,  1857,  II:  119- 
124;  5.  Walker,  History  of  the  First  Church  in  Hartford,  Hartford,  1884,  pp. 
452-455- 
Sources 

I.   Records  of  the  Colony  of  Connecticut,  V:   (Hartford,  1870),  pp.  51,  52,  87, 
97,  98,  192,  193,  423,  449;  XI:   333,  565,  566;    2.   Trumbull,   History  of  Connec- 
ticut, ed.  Hartford,  1797,  pp.  508-514;  ed.  New  Haven,  1S1S,  I:  481-487. 
The  Varying  County  Interpretations 

a.  New  Haven,  Jonathan  Todd,  A  Faithful  Narrative  Of  the  Proceedin 
the  First  Society  and  Church  in  Wallingford,  in  their  Calling,  and  Settling  The 
Rev,  Mr.  James  Dana,  etc.  New  Haven,  1759,  PP-  33_37-  Congregational  Order, 
Middletown,  1S43,  pp.  284-286.  //.  Fairfield,  Orcutt,  History  of  the  Old  Town  of 
Stratford  and  the  City  of  Bridgeport,  [New  Haven],  1886,  I  :  312,  313.  /jo'h  An- 
niversary of  the  Fairjield  County  Consociation,  Bridgeport,  18S6,  pp.  32-34. 

Literature 

T.  Clap,  Brief  History  and  Vindication  of  the  Doctrines  Received  and  Estab- 
lished in  the  Churches  of  New  England,  New  Haven,  1755,  passim.  E.  Stiles, 
A  Discourse  on  the  Christian  Union,  Boston,  1761,  passim.  [T.  Fitch],  An 
Explanation  of  Say-Brook  Platform,  Hartford,  1765.  N.  Hobart,  An  Attempt  to 
illustrate  and  Confirm  The  Ecclesiastical  Constitution  of  the  Consociated  Churches 
.  .  .  Occasioned  by  a  late  Explanation  of  the  Saybrook  Platform,  New  Haven, 
1765.  T.  Clap,  The  Annals  or  History  of  Yale-College,  New  Haven,  1766,  pp.  12, 
13.  Trumbull,  History  of  Connecticut,  ed.  Hartford,  1797,  pp.  504-515,  ed.  New 
Haven,  1S18,  I:  47S-4SS.     T.  Dwight,  Travels,  New  Haven,  1S22,  IV:  423-435- 


Dr.  Dexter  gives  other  editions  of  1842  and  1845. 


SPIRITUAL   DECLINE  465 

L.  Bacon,  Historical  Discourses,  New  Haven,  1839,  pp.  189-192.  D.  D.  Field,  in 
Congregational  Order,  Middletown,  1843,  pp.  11-72.  L.  Bacon,  in  Contributions 
to  Eccles.  Hist.  Conn.,  New  Haven,  1861,  pp.  31-62.  Palfrey,  History  of  New 
England,  IV:  369-371.  G.  L.Walker,  History  of  the  First  Church,  Hartford, 
1884,  pp.  263-268.     A.  Johnston,  Connecticut,  Boston,  1S87,  pp.  230-235. 

Part   I 
THE    PROPOSALS    OF    1705 

THOUGH  the  Reforming  Synod  doubtless  had  some  effect  in 
bettering  the  religious  condition  of  New  England,  the  re- 
sults were  not  what  its  promoters  had  hoped.  The  closing 
years  of  the  seventeenth  century  were  times  of  trial  for  New  Eng- 
land; the  loss  of  the  Massachusetts  charter,  the  tyranny  of  Andros, 
the  vain  efforts  to  secure  a  renewal  of  the  ancient  privileges  of  the 
leading  colony,  as  well  as  the  disastrous  outcome  of  the  two 
attempts  to  capture  Quebec,  and  the  demoralizing  struggles  with 
the  Indians,  together  with  the  grim  tragedy  of  the  witchcraft  de- 
lusion, all  combined  to  make  the  political  and  commercial  outlook 
of  the  colonies  gloomy  and  to  render  a  high  degree  of  spiritual  life 
difficult  of  maintenance  in  the  churches.  If  the  second  generation 
on  New  England  soil  had  shown  a  decided  declension  from  the 
fervent  zeal  of  the  founders,  the  third  generation  was  even  less 
moved  by  the  early  ideals.  The  founders  had  borne  part  in  a 
movement  which  had  embraced  a  nation.  They  had  been  the 
leaders  in  an  attempt  to  establish  in  a  new  England  the  principles 
of  worship  and  church-government  which  were  believed  in  and 
struggled  for  by  a  great  party  at  home.  For  a  time,  the  rulers  of 
England  had  looked  with  favor  on  their  enterprise  and  had  sought 
counsel  of  their  experience.  But  all  this  was  changed.  New  Eng- 
land was  no  longer  the  vanguard  of  the  great  Puritan  cause  of  the 
mother-land.  That  party  in  England  had  spent  its  force.  New 
England  had  become  of  necessity  provincial,  when  the  triumph  of 
Episcopacy  in  old  England  had  made  her  cease  to  be  a  factor  of 
consequence  in  the  religious  life  of  that  land,  for  the  bond  between 
the  home  land  and  the  new  settlements  across  the  sea  had  been 
religious  far  more  than  political  or  commercial.  And  in  the  strug- 
gles and  disasters  of  the  latter  half  of  the  seventeenth  century  the 


466   THE  PROPOSALS  ANT)  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

New  Englander  had  become  narrower  in  thought  and  in  sympathy 
than  his  father  had  been.  If  he  had  grown  more  tolerant  toward 
variations  in  religion,  it  was  the  result  of  increasing  religious  in- 
differentism,  itself  the  natural  consequence  of  reaction  from  the 
high-wrought  experiences  of  the  first  generation.  It  was  with 
pathetic,  almost  exaggerated,  consciousness  of  their  own  compara- 
tive feebleness  that  the  ecclesiastical  writers  of  the  second  and 
third  generations  looked  back  to  the  giants  of  the  early  days;1  for 
the  New  England  of  1700  was  meaner,  narrower,  in  every  way  less 
inspired  with  the  sense  of  a  mission  to  accomplish  and  an  ideal  to 
uphold,  than  the  New  England  of  1650. 

To  the  majority  of  the  ministers  of  the  time  the  outlook 
seemed  full  of  peril.  The  recent  political  changes,  and  even  more 
the  passing  away  of  the  older  generation,  had  greatly  lessened  the 
influence  of  the  ministry  on  legislation  and  the  conduct  of  govern- 
ment. The  restiveness  which  had  all  along  been  more  or  less  felt 
under  the  rule  of  the  clerical  element  had  gathered  strength.  In 
Boston  foreign  influence  had  established  Episcopacy,2  and  though 
Episcopacy  was  distinctly  an  exotic  on  Massachusetts  soil,  there 
were  an  increasing  number  of  persons  throughout  the  churches 
who  desired  more  or  less  modification  of  the  prevalent  strictness 
in  regard  to  admissions  and  of  the  almost  universal  restriction  of  the 
choice  of  ministers  to  members  in  full  communion.  These  two 
tendencies  were  brought  most  sharply  into  contrast  at  Boston, 
then,  as  now,  the  intellectual  center  of  the  commonwealth.  The 
conservative  party  embraced  most  of  the  older  and  more  promin- 
ent ministers  of  the  colony.  Its  leader  was  unquestionably  Increase 
Mather,  teacher  of  the  Second  Church  in  Boston,  and  since  1685 
president  of  Harvard,  who,  though  far  from  universally  popular, 
had  been  for  thirty  years  the  most  influential  minister  in  New 
England.     With   him  may  be  reckoned,  since  they  were    one   in 


1  See  e.  g.  John  Higginson  and  William  Hubbard,  Testimony  to  the  Order  0/  the  Gospel, 
Boston,  1701.  This  is  doubtless  the  fond  recollection  of  two  old  men;  but  their  tone  of  veneration 
is  to  be  heard  in  many  of  the  New  Englanders  of  more  youthful  years  at  the  close  of  the  eighteenth 
century. 

5  On  the  origins  of  Episcopacy  in  Boston  see  Rev.  Henry  W.  Foote,  Memorial  Hist.  0/  Bos- 
ton, I  :  191-216.  Efforts  looking  toward  the  establishment  of  Episcopal  worship  were  made  in  1679. 
In  1686  services  were  begun. 


THE    NEW    ENGLAND     CONSERVATIVES  467 

sympathy  and  aim,  his  son  Cotton  Mather,1  from  1685  his  colleague 
in  the  pastorate  of  the  Boston  Church.  To  the  same  party,  also, 
belonged  such  ministers  as  James  Allen  of  the  Boston  First  Church, 
John  Higginson  and  Nicholas  Noyes  of  Salem,  William  Hubbard 
of  Ipswich,  Samuel  Cheever  of  Marblehead,  and  Joseph  Gerrish  of 
Wenham.  To  these  men  the  true  method  of  bettering  the  relig- 
ious state  of  New  England  seemed  to  lie  in  a  return  to  the  princi- 
ples of  the  founders  as  illustrated  in  the  Cambridge  Platform;  and 
such  an  enforcement  of  discipline  within  the  local  church  and  ex- 
ercise of  watch  over  the  churches  by  councils  representative  of 
the  whole  fellowship  of  a  colony  or  district  as  would  prevent  the 
incoming  of  looser  fashions  and  preserve  uniformity  of  discipline 
and  procedure.  All  this  implied  an  increase  in  ministerial  and 
synodical  authority,  —  an  increase  the  more  difficult  to  obtain  at  a 
time  when  the  political  and  spiritual  tide  in  Massachusetts  ran 
strongly  in  the  other  direction. 

The  desires  of  this  conservative  party  found  chief  expression 
in  the  two  classes  of  meetings  in  which  the  ministers  of  that  day 
gathered  for  conference,  the  Ministers'  Convention  and  the  District 
Associations.  Though  the  general  nature  and  the  methods  of  each 
of  these  two  classes  of  meetings  in  Massachusetts  is  clear,  their 
origin  is  somewhat  obscure.  There  is  every  reason  to  believe,  how- 
ever, that  the  Ministers'  Convention  can  trace  its  source,  in  germ 
at  least,  to  the  beginning  of  the  colony;  while  the  local  Associa- 
tions, at  least  as  continuously  existing  bodies,  are  of  a  much  later 
date.2 

It  had  been  the  custom  from  the  earliest  days  of  New  England 
for  the  ministers  to  gather  at  the  meetings  of  the  General  Court,3 
especially  at  the  Court  of  Election   in   May.      Their  advice  was 


1  By  far  the  best  picture  of  Cotton  Mather  is  contained  in  Prof.  Barrett  Wendell's  Cotton 
Mather,  New  York  [1891]. 

2  Valuable,  though  by  no  means  exhaustive,  articles  on  the  history  of  these  bodies  are  those 
by  A.  H.  Quint  in  Cong.  Quart.,  II :  203-212  ;  V  :  293-304  ;  and  S.  J.  Spalding,  Ibid.,  VI :  161-175; 
also  in  Cont.  Eccles.  Hist.  Essex  Co. ,  Mass. ,  pp.  8-56. 

3  Hints  of  such  meetings  are  scattered  through  Winthrop's  Journal,  see  e.  g.  1 :  157,  363  ;  II : 
3,  76.  The  statement  of  Lechford  is  direct ;  Plain  Dealing,  Trumbull's  reprint,  p.  62.  Whether 
the  ministers  met  at  first  as  an  organized  body  is  perhaps  doubtful.  The  Hist.  Sketch  0/ the  Con- 
vention of  the  Cong.  Ministers  in  Mass.,  Cambridge,  1821,  p.  5,  says  that  the  "  presumptive  evi- 
dence" is  "  that  there  was  no  organized  Convention  before  the  year  1680." 


468   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

frequently  taken  by  that  body  while  Massachusetts  was  adminis- 
tered in  accordance  with  the  first  charter,  and  though  by  the  close 
of  the  seventeenth  century  the  ministry  was  no  longer  the  political 
factor  that  it  had  been,  these  meetings  were  continued,  and  were 
occasions  of  considerable  ceremony.  Cotton  Mather  speaks  of  the 
custom  in  his  Magnalia  as  existing  "  in  each  colony  "  ; '  and  in  the 
Ratio  Disciplina  enters  into  quite  a  description  of  this  annual  Min- 
isterial Convention,  as  it  was  early  in  the  eighteenth  century.  He 
thus  pictures  the  Assembly: 2 

' '  The  Churches  of  A~cu<-England  .  .  .  have  no  Provincial  Synods  .  .  .  The 
Thing  among  them  that  is  the  nearest  thereunto,  is  a  General  Convention  of  Minis- 
ters, (which  perhaps  are  not  above  half)  3  belonging  to  the  Province,  at  the  time  of 
the  Anniversary  Solemnity,  when  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Province  meets,  on 
the  last  Wednesday  in  the  Month  of  May,  to  elect  their  Counsellors  for  the  Year 
ensuing.  Then  the  Ministers,  chusing  a  Moderator,  do  propose  Matters  of  pub- 
lic Importance,  referring  to  the  Interest  of  Religion  in  the  Churches  ;  and  tho'  they 
assume  no  Decisive  Power,  yet  the  Advice  which  they  give  to  the  People  of  GOD,  has 
proved  of  great  Use  unto  the  Country. 

There  is  now  taken  up  the  Custom,  for  (Concio  ad  Clerum,)  a  Sermon  to  be 
Preached  unto  the  Convention  of  Ministers,  on  the  day  after  the  Election,  by  one  of 
their  Number,  chosen  to  it  by  their  Votes,  at  their  Meeting  in  the  preceedinjj  Year. 

At  this  Convention,  Ever)-  Pastor  that  meets  with  singular  Difficulties,  lias 
Opportunity  to  bring  them  under  Consideration.  But  the  Question  most  usually  now 
considered,  is  of  this  Importance  ;  What  may  be  further  proposed,  for  the  preserv- 
ing and  promoting  of  true  PIETY  in  the  Land? 

Excellent  Things  have  been  here  Concerted  and  Concluded,  for,  The  Propaga- 
tion of  Religion  ;  and  Collections  produced  for  that  Purpose  in  all  the  Churches. 

And  Motions  have  been  hence  made  unto  the  General  Assembly  for  such  Acts 
and  Laws  as  the  Morals  of  the  People  have  called  for. 

[4  The  Governour  of  the  Province,  and  such  Councellors  as  dwell  in  the  City  of 
Boston,  together  with  the  Representatives  of  the  Town,  &  the  Speaker  of  their  House  ; 
are  invited  also  to  dine  with  the  Ministers,  at  the  Table,  which  the  Deacons  of  the 
united  Churches  in  Boston  provide  for  them,  the  Day  after  the  Election    .    .    .    ]." 

This    Ministerial    Convention,   so    well    described    by    Cotton 

Mather,  was  far  from  being  a  Synod,  but  it  discussed  questions  of 

great  moment,5  and  its  advice  was  much  respected.      It  might  be 


1  Ed.,  18s3-S.II:  271. 

»  Pp.  176,  177. 

3  /.  e.,  not  more  than  half  the  ministers  of  the  province  were  usually  in  attendance. 

4  The  brackets  are  Mather's. 

5  /'.  g.,  in  1697  the  body  protested  against  "  tendencies  which  there  are  amongst  us  towards 
Deviations  from  the  good  Order  wherein  our  Churches  have  .  .  .  been  happily  established."  In 
1698  they  decided,  by  avote  lacking  but  one  of  unanimity  (Stoddard  ?),  that  "  the  Church  Covenant  as 
Commonly  practised  in  the  Churches  of  New-England  "  is  Scriptural.  Increase  Mather,  Order  of 
the  Gospel,  Boston,  1700,  pp.  8,  9,  39. 


.MINISTERIAL    GATHERINGS  469 

made  the  instrument  of  a  more  centralized  church  government;  or 
if  not  itself  the  head  of  a  more  consolidated  ecclesiastical  system, 
might  recommend  such  a  union  to  the  churches. 

Beside  this  Ministerial   Convention,  there  were  at  the  opening 
of  the  eighteenth  century,  five  district  Associations  in  Massachu- 
setts,1 all  tracing  their  immediate  origin  to  the  Association  meeting 
at  Cambridge,  which  had  been  founded  in  October,  1690,  and  in- 
cluded most  of  the  ministers  in  the  vicinity  of  Boston.     There  had 
been  Ministerial  Meetings,  similar  to  the  later  Associations,  in  the 
early  days  of  the  colony.      Winthrop  records,  in  November,  1633, 
that  "The  ministers  in  the  bay  and  Sagus  did  meet,  once  a  fort- 
night, at  one  of  their  houses  by  course,  where  some  question  of 
moment  was  debated;""    and  that   Skelton  of  Salem  and  Roger 
Williams  "  took  some  exception  against  it,  as  fearing  it  might  grow- 
in   time    to   a   presbytery,"- a   fear  which   the  governor   did   not 
share,   for   the   ministers   "were   all   clear   in   that   point,  that   no 
church  or  person  can  have  power  over  another  church;  neither  did 
they  in  their  meetings  exercise  any  such  jurisdiction."     This  little 
association   doubtless   included  all   of  the   few  ministers  then   in 
Massachusetts  who  were  able  or  willing  to  belong  to  it.     Lechford, 
writing  in  1641,  found  the  same  meeting  and  the  same  anti-Presby- 
terian fears  ;3    and  the  Body  of  Liberties,  adopted  in  December  of 
that  year,  had  expressly  granted  ministers  "  free  libertie  to  meete 
monthly,  quarterly,  or  otherwise,  in  convenient  numbers  and  places;  " 
but  these  meetings  were  to  be  "onely  by  way  of  brotherly  confer- 
ence and   consultations."1     The   Ministers'  Assembly  which    the 
Presbyterian    ways    of    Rev.    Messrs.    Parker    and    Noyes    called 
together   at    Cambridge   in   x643   declared   "that  Consociation   of 
churches,   in    way   of   more   general   meetings,   yearly;    and    more 
privately,  monthly,  or  quarterly;  as  consultative  Synods;  are  very 

It  illusJ!e!  tnatKreS  ^  tH"  P:°POSalS  °f  I7°5  Sh°W  the  existence  of  five  Associations  at  that  date 
leal  ae0  knethe  ^V^  ?«**,  however,  that  the  careful  artic.e  written  by  Dr.  Quint  30 

periodTr,  er    hann°nemf  "'T"  *  ^  ^  ^  **  ^  "»  U"abIe  t0  *«  ^  *"  to'a 

penoa  earlier  than  nearly  2o  years  subsequent  to  1705. 

2  Winthrop,  ed.  1853,  I  :  ,39.     Sagus  is  Lynn. 

m^S^ss^S^  reprint- p' 37- Dr- Trumbuu  has  ii,ustrated  ^  ~- - 


'  I6id-<  notes  P-  38;  3  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Sac.,  VIII : 


234.  235- 


470       THE    PROPOSALS   AND   THE    SAYBROOK    PLATFORM 

comfortable,  and  necessary  for  the  peace  and  good  of  the 
churches."  ' 

But,  for  reasons  not  now  very  easy  to  discover,  unless  it  be  for 
fear  of  Presbyterian  tendencies,  these  early  meetings  seem  to  have 
fallen  into  complete  disuse.  Rev.  Thomas  Shepard  of  Charles- 
town,  in  his  election  sermon  of  1672,'  declared  that  he  remembered 
such  gatherings  in  his  childhood,  and  there  were  "  hundreds  yet 
living"  who  could  "remember  the  ministers  meetings  in  the  several 
towns  by  course,  at  Cambridge,  Boston,  Charlestown,  Roxbury, 
&c."  And  the  much  later  satire  of  John  Wise,  The  Churches  Quar- 
rel Espoused,  confirms  the  testimony  of  Shepard  that  they  were  dis- 
used by  the  close  of  the  third  quarter  of  the  seventeenth  century. 
"  About  Thirty  years  ago,  more  or  less,"  he  says  (writing  about 
1 7 10),  "there  was  no  appearance  of  the  Associations  of  Pastors  in 
these  Colonies,  and  in  some  Parts  and  Places,  there  is  none  yet."  3 

The  permanent  reestablishment  of  Ministers'  Associations 
came  about  through  English  example.  On  September  7,  1655, 
such  a  body  had  been  formed  at  Bodmin,  in  Cornwall.4  Its  meet- 
ings were  not  probably  of  long  continuance;  by  the  summer  of 
1659,  the  journal  had  closed.  But  the  book  of  its  Records 
passed  into  the  possession  of  one  of  its  members,  Rev.  Charles 
Morton;  and  Morton  came  to  New  England  in  1686,  and  became 
speedily  the  pastor  at  Charlestown.  A  man  of  much  influence  in 
the  colony,  it  is  probable  that  it  was  his  endeavors  which  resulted 
in  the  organization  of  the  first  permanent  district  Association  in 
Massachusetts,  on  October  13,  1690.  This  body  embraced  most  of 
the  ministers  in  the  vicinity  of  Boston,  and  was  often  called  by 
that  name,5  though  its  meetings,  at  least  during  the  early  part  of 
its  history,  were  "at  the  College  in  Cambridge,  on  a  Monday  at 


1  Ibid.,  Hanbury,  Memorials,  II:  343. 

2  Eye  Sah-c,  or  a  Watchword  from  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  unto  His  Churches,  p.  29; 
quoted  by  Quint,  Cong.  Quart.,  II  :  204. 

3  Second  ed.,  1715,  p.  79. 

4  The  record  book  of  this  body,  containing  a  list  of  the  members  of  the  Bodmin  Association, 
and  also  the  members  and  doings  of  the  Cambridge,  Mass.,  Association  from  1690  to  1704,  is  in  the 
possession  of  the  Mass.  Hist.  Society.  It  is  described  and  the  names  of  members  given  by  A.  H. 
Quint,  Cong.  Quarterly,  II:  204-207. 

6  It  is  so  called  in  the  signatures  to  the  Proposals,  of  1703.  Its  meeting  place  was  eventually 
Boston,  but  its  records  from  1704  to  1753  are  lost.     See  Cong.  Quart.,  V:  294. 


DISTRICT    ASSOCIATIONS  471 

nine  or  ten  of  the  clock  in  the  morning,  once  in  six  weeks,  or 
oftener." '  Its  pledge  of  union  and  its  rules  were  based  on  those 
of  the  Bodmin  body.  The  example  thus  set  was  followed  by  the 
organization  of  similar  bodies,  in  Essex  County,  about  Weymouth, 
about  Sherborne,  and  in  Bristol  County,  during  the  last  decade  of 
the  seventeenth  and  first  three  or  four  years  of  the  eighteenth 
centuries.2 

These  organizations  felt  their  purpose  to  be  deliberative,  as 
well  as  social.     That  at  Cambridge  had  for  its  aim:3 

"  I.     To  debate  any  matter  referring  to  ourselves. 

2.  To  hear  and  consider  any  cases  that  shall  be  proposed  unto  us,  from 
churches  or  private  persons. 

3.  To  answer  any  letters  directed  unto  us,  from  any  other  associations  or 
persons. 

4.  To  discourse  of  any  question  proposed  at  the  former  meeting." 

Under  these  rules  the  body  set  itself,  led,  it  may  well  be  be- 
lieved, by  the  Mathers,  to  a  general  overhauling  and  strengthening 
of  Congregational  usage.4  The  most  conspicuous  of  these  attempts 
to  put  a  stricter  interpretation  on  current  Congregationalism  are 
perhaps  the  following:5 

' '  Synods,  duly  composed  of  messengers  chosen  by  them  whom  they  are  to  rep- 
resent, and  proceeding  with  a  due  regard  unto  the  will  of  God  in  his  word,  are  to  be 


1  Its  rules  are  given  in  full  in  the  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5,  II :  271,  272. 

2  Indications  of  the  existence  of  another  association,  in  Essex  Co.  (Salem  it  is  called  in  the 
signatures  of  1705),  may  be  found  in  the  records  of  the  Cambridge  body  as  early  as  Nov.,  1691. 
Cong.  Quart.,  II:  208.  When  the  next  association  further  north  than  Salem,  that  at  Bradford, 
was  organized  in  1719,  its  formula  of  union  was  the  same  as  that  of  Bodmin  and  Cambridge.  As 
the  Bradford  association  probably  sprang  from  that  at  Salem,  it  indicates  a  common  origin  for  all. 
The  Cambridge  records  as  early  as  1692  imply  the  existence  of  at  least  three  associations.  Dr. 
Quint  conjectured  that  the  third  was  Plymouth.  But  Plymouth  does  not  appear  in  the  list  of 
signers  of  1705,  where  we  find  instead,  Weymouth,  Sherborne,  and  Bristol. 

3  Magnalia,  II:  272,  Rule  vi. 

4  Cotton  Mather  gives  the  texts  of  a  long  series  of  conclusions  of  this  body,  the  Matherine 
origin  of  most  of  which  seems  evident  from  their  style,  Mtlgnalra,  II:  230-269.  An  enumeration 
of  the  main  subjects  treated  shows  the  scope  of  the  discussions:  1.  Right  of  a  minister  to  officiate 
in  a  church  not  his  own  ;  2.  Ruling  elders  ;  3.  Powers  of  councils  ;  4.  Powers  of  ministers  in  their 
churches  ;  5.  Visitation  of  the  sick  in  epidemics  ;  6.  When  a  minister  may  leave  his  people  ;  7.  Mar- 
riage with  the  sister  of  a  deceased  wife:  8.  Discipline  of  the  baptized  children  of  the  church;  9. 
Just  divorce;  10.  Ordination;  n.  Who  choses  a  minister;  12.  Resignation  of  Ministry;  13.  In- 
quiries by  pastors  into  scandals  ;  14.  Secrets  confided  to  ministers  ;  15.  Duty  toward  withdrawers 
from  communion  ;  16.  Usury ;  17.  Special  days  of  religious  observance  ;  18.  Eating  blood  and 
things  strangled  ;  19.  Use  01"  ceremonies  in  God's  worship  ;  20.  Cards,  dice,  etc.  ;  21.  Respect  due 
to  public  places  of  worship;  22.  Drinking  of  healths;  23.  Instrumental  music  in  the  worship  of 
God  ;  24.  Administration  of  baptism  by  the  unordained  ;  25.  Marriage  of  Cousin-Germans;  26.  Re- 
lation of  church-discipline  to  civil  conviction.     Other  topics  may  be  found  in  the  MS.  records. 

5  Both  Magnalia,  II :  248.  It  is  hardly  needful  to  point  out  that  by  "synod"  is  signified 
what  is  now  known  as  a  "  council." 


4/2        THE    PROPOSALS   AND   T11K    SAYBROOK    TLATFORM 

reverenced,  as  determining  the  mind  of  the  Holy  Spirit  concerning  things  necessary 
to  be  'received  and  practised,'  in  order  to  the  edification  of  the  churches  therein 
represented." 

"  Synods  being  of  apostolic  example,  recommend1  as  a  necessary  ordinance,  it  is 
but  reasonable  that  their  judgment  be  acknowledged  as  decisive,  the  affairs  for 
which  they  are  ordained  ;  and  to  deny  them  the  power  of  such  a  judgment,  is  to 
render  a  necessary  ordinance  'of  none  effect.'" 

In  these  votes  we  see  evidently  the  conservative  feeling  that 
individual  churches  and  ministers  should  be  repressed  and  limited 
by  the  decisive  power  of  councils  in  their  possible  departures  from 
the  general  opinion  of  their  associates.  It  was  this  feeling  which 
found  its  sharpest  expression  in  Massachusetts  history  in  the  Pro- 
posals of  1705. 

But  there  were  not  wanting  those,  especially  among  the 
younger  ministry,  and  even  in  the  Cambridge  Association  itself,  to 
whom  a  return  to  the  ideals  of  early  New  England  was  distasteful, 
and  who  looked  upon  the  proposed  strengthening  of  the  ecclesias- 
tical machinery  as  a  menace  to  liberty  of  thought  and  action.  The 
leaders  of  this  party  were  four  youngerly  men  of  position;  two  of 
them  being  John  Leverett2  and  William  Brattle,3  graduates  of  Har- 
vard in  1680,  who  had  become  tutors  in  the  College  in  1685,  the 
year  which  saw  the  beginning  of  Increase  Mather's  presidency,  and 
who  had  taken  practical  charge  of  the  college  during  Mather's  long 
absence  in  England  as  agent  for  the  colony.  Leverett  was  des- 
tined to  be  Mather's  second  successor  at  the  head  of  the  college, 
holding  that  office  from  1707  to  his  death  in  1724;  while  Brattle,  in 
1696,  became  pastor  of  the  Cambridge  church.  With  these  two 
men  were  associated  Thomas  Brattle,4  brother  of  the  Cambridge 
pastor,  and  from  1693  to  1713  treasurer  of  Harvard;  and  Ebenezer 
Pemberton,5  a  graduate  of  Harvard  in  1691  and  a  tutor  in  that  in- 
stitution, who,  from  August  28,  1700,  to  his  death,  in  February, 
1717,  was  colleague  pastor  of  the  Third,  or  Old  South  Church,  in 
Boston.  Occupying  a  position  between  the  Mathers  and  the  inno- 
vators, and  not  without  sympathy  for  the  latter,  was  Samuel  Wil- 

1  Recommended  ? 

'-'  Fi  ir  his  biography,  see  Sibley,  G militates  of  Harvard,  III :  180-198.     3  Ibid.,  pp.  200-207. 

*  Ibid.,  II:48g  Brattle  graduated  in  1676. 

5  See  H.  A.  Hill.  History  ,./  the  Old  South  Church,  \.,J>assim. 


THE    NEW    ENGLAND    LIBERALS  473 

lard,1  a  man  considerably  older  than  either  of  the  four  just  enu- 
merated, the  teacher  of  the  Old  South  Church  in  Boston  from 
1678  to  1707,  the  vice-president  of  Harvard  from  1699  to  1707,  and 
from  the  practical  deposition  of  Increase  Mather  in  1701  in 'fact, 
though  not  in  name,  the  president  of  the  college. 

The  alterations  sought  by  these  men  were  not  numerous,  and 
to  the  modern  student  of  their  stories  do  not  seem  startling.  Yet 
they  are  very  significant  as  a  step  further  away  from  the  older 
New  England  Congregationalism  and  from  the  restraining  hand  of 
a  stronger  ecclesiastical  government,  just  at  the  time  when  the 
Mathers  and  their  friends  were  trying  to  restore  something  of  the 
waning  power  of  the  clergy  in  political  affairs  and  to  revive  the 
discipline  of  the  churches.  The  work  of  the  innovators  was  in 
two  principal  directions,  the  founding  of  a  new  church,  sympathetic 
with  their  beliefs,  in  Boston;  and  the  exclusion  of  the  Mathers 
from  the  control  of  Harvard.  Probably  the  personal  element  of 
opposition  to  these  eminent  conservatives  was  as  prominent  a 
motive  in  the  controversy  as  any. 

The  changes  desired  by  the  innovators  centered  about  the 
mode  of  admission  to  full  communion.  The  older  New  England 
custom,  still  almost  universally  prevalent,  required,  at  least  in  the 
case  of  those  who  were  not  baptized  children  of  the  church,  a 
public  relation  of  religious  experience.  In  most  churches  such 
declarations,  either  oral  or  written,  were  expected  from  all.  This 
requirement  was  felt  by  many  to  be  a  burden,  especially  as  the 
prevailing  type  of  piety  was  not  ardent  or  emotional.  The  South 
Church  in  Boston  had  gone  so  far  in  1678  as  to  allow  those  who  so 
wished  to  present  their  "relations"  to  the  ministers  rather  than  to 
the  church.2  Then,  too,  the  feeling  had  been  growing  in  some  quar- 
ters that  all,  or  at  least  all  baptized  male  adults,  who  contributed 
to  the  minister's  support  should  have  a  voice  in  his  selection,  and 
the  choice  should  not  be  confined,  as  was  the  usage,  to  members 
in  full  communion.3    A  third  change  desired  by  some,  and  notably, 


1  Ibid.:  and  Sibley,  Grad.  of  Harvard,  II:  i3-,6. 

2  Hill,  Hist.  Old  Sou//,, 


-  The  rule  was  not  without  exceptions.     In  1672  the  non-communicants  at  Salem  had  shared 

:::::cpX;i a^r;x?v=  r ham  in  i68s- Robbi-  **■ "  «••  b—  **  - 


4/4       THE    PROPOSALS   AND   THE   SAYBROOK    PLATFORM 

it  is  probable,  by  Thomas  Brattle,  on  whom  Episcopal  forms  had 
made  an  impression,1  was  what  would  now  be  called  an  "enrich- 
ment "  of  the  service.  The  early  Puritans,  in  their  revulsion  from 
all  set  forms,  had  disused  the  Lord's  prayer,  and  usually  read  the 
Scriptures  in  public  worship  only  to  expound  them  verse  by  verse.3 
Reading  without  comment  was  "dumb  reading,"3  and  was  thought 
to  savor  of  the  prayer-book.  The  innovators  desired  that  some 
portion  of  the  Scripture,  chosen  by  the  minister,  should  be  read  at 
every  service,  and  they  saw  advantages  in  the  devotional  reading 
of  passages  without  explanation  and  in  the  repetition  of  the  Lord's 
prayer.  A  fourth  alteration  desired  was  an  extension  of  the  right 
to  baptism,  so  that  not  only  children  of  those  in  the  covenant  of 
the  churches,  but  any  children  presented  by  any  professing  Chris- 
tian who  would  stand  sponsor  for  their  religious  training  should 
receive  the  ordinance.4 

These  were  the  looser  positions  held  by  the  innovators,  though 
not  at  first,  it  would  appear,  in  an  aggressively  controversial  man- 
ner; but  to  the  Mathers  and  the  rest  of  the  conservative  party 


1  See  Sibley,  Graduates  of  Harvard,  II:  491. 

2  While  the  use  of  the  Lord's  prayer  was  not  wholly  disapproved  by  the  conservatives  of  the 
age  of  which  we  treat,  the  rarity  of  their  employment  of  it  may  be  judged  by  a  story  told  by  In- 
crease Mather,  Order  0/  the  Gospel,  Boston,  1700,  p.  118:  "Mr.  Jeremiah  Burroughs  .  .  . 
[a  Congregational  member  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  died  1646]  once  when  he  preached  his 
Expository  Lectures  was  prevented  from  coming  to  the  Assembly  exactly  at  the  Hour  appointed. 
If  he  should  at  that  time  have  inlarged  in  Prayer  as  he  usually  did,  the  Auditors  would  have  been 
detained  longer  then  they  expected.  Nor  was  he  willing  to  begin  his  Exposition  without  any 
Prayer  at  all,  he  therefore  began  it  with  only  Praying  in  the  words  of  the  Lords  Prayer.  This  re- 
port I  believe ;  for  my  most  Dear  and  Honoured  Friend  Dr.  II  'illiam  Bates,  late  Pastor  of  a  Church 
in  Hackney  near  London  .  .  .  assured  that  he  was  then  present  and  an  Ear  Witness  of  what 
I  have  now  related." 

As  regards  reading  the  Scriptures,  see  Cotton  Mather,  Ratio  Disciplina;  pp.  63-68.  By  the 
time  he  wrote  the  practice  had  become  not  uncommon ;  yet  in  June,  1765,  the  General  Association 
of  Connecticut  felt  constrained  to  call  on  the  local  Associations  of  the  Colony  to  promote  the 
"making  the  Public  reading  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures  a  part  of  the  Public  worship  in  our  churches"; 
and  as  late  as  1810,  the  Litchfield  South  Consociation  passed  votes  favoring  the  practice.  See 
Walker,  Hist.  First  Church  in  Hartford,  p.  224. 

3  I.  Mather,  Order  of  the  Gospel,  p.  47. 

4  This  practice,  not  unlike  that  of  god-parents  of  the  English  Church,  became  widely  prevalent 
in  the  eighteenth  century.  Numerous  illustrations  might  be  cited  from  the  Records  of  the  First 
Church,  Hartford.  There  the  first  entry  is  of  Sept.  4,  1709.  But  the  ground  of  the  concession 
seems  to  have  been  usually  servitude  or  pupilage  in  the  family  of  those  who  stood  sponsors.  Thus. 
"Aug.  23,  1730.  Deacon  Sheldon  offered  three  negroe  children  born  in  his  house  to  Bapti 
publick  engaged  to  take  care  they  should  be  brought  up  in  the  christian  faith.     They  were  named 

( "ufTy  :  A:  Susanna  "  ;  or,  "  Sept.  8.  1717.  Elisabeth  Vibert,  servant  to  Aaron  Cooke,  who 
publickly  engaged  to  bring  her  up  in  the  Christian  faith."  But  sometimes  the  relationship  is  not 
so  apparent,  e.  £■.,  "  Octob.  9.  1715.  Joseph,  a  child  offered  to  baptism  by  Homer  Howard,  he  pub- 
lickly engaging  to  bring  it  up  in  the  Christian  faith." 


THE    MATHERS   OPPOSE    INNOVATION  4/5 

they  seemed  to  call  for  vigorous  opposition.  Nor  were  the 
Mathers  wrong  in  their  estimate  of  the  danger  to  the  old  order  of 
things  which  these  novelties  threatened.  Accordingly,  when  Cot- 
ton Mather  published  his  Life  of  .  .  .  Jonathan  MitcJicP  in 
1697,  Increase  Mather  took  occasion  in  a  prefatory  "  Epistle  Dedi- 
catory," addressed  "To  the  Church  at  Cambridge  in  New-England, 
and  to  the  Students  of  the  Colledge  there,"  to  set  forth  Mitchell's 
view  of  the  necessity  of  "relations"  preparatory  to  admission  to 
church-membership,  and  to  make  pointed  exhortations  to  the 
church,  the  tutors,  and  the  students  to  be  true  to  Mitchell's 
theories,  in  a  way  that  must  have  seemed  dictatorial,  and  was 
doubtless  exasperating,  to  the  innovators. 

The  "  Epistle  Dedicatory "  was  dated  May  7,  1697,  and  in 
August  of  the  same  year  the  Mathers  took  occasion  to  attack 
another  of  the  projects  dear  to  the  Brattles  and  their  friends. 
Doubtless  at  the  suggestion  of  its  pastors,  the  Second  Boston 
Church  sent  a  letter  of  admonition  to  the  Church  in  Charlestown, 
"  for  betraying  the  liberties  of  the  churches,  in  their  late  putting 
into  the  hands  of  the  whole  inhabitants  the  choice  of  a  minister."  a 

These  two  actions,  showing  clearly  the  spirit  of  the  conserva- 
tive party  and  the  determination  of  the  Mathers  to  enforce  their 
views,  seem  to  have  inclined  the  innovators  to  take  decided  action. 
There  were  now  three  Congregational  churches  in  Boston;  two,  the 
First  and  Second,  strongly  conservative,  and  the  other  more  divided 
in  feeling,  but  possessing  prominent  conservatives  like  Lieut. -Gov. 
Stoughton,  Waitstill  Winthrop,  and  Judge  Sewall  among  its  mem- 
bership. None  would  therefore  represent  the  innovators'  views, 
and  they  determined  to  found  a  fourth3  church. 

The  movement  to  this  end  seems  to  have  taken  shape  late  in 


1  Cotton  Mather  reprinted  the  whole  tract,  with  the  preface,  in  the  Magnalia,  ed.  1853-5, 
II:  66-113. 

3  Robbins,  History  of  the  Second  Church  in  Boston,  p.  42. 

3  For  the  founding  of  Brattle  Church,  see  Lothrop,  History  of  the  Church  in  Brattle 
Street,  Boston,  1851  ;  Quincy,  History  of  Harvard  University,  ed.  Boston,  i860,  I:  127-144,  4S6, 
487,  502  ;  Robbins,  History  of  the  Second  Church  in  Boston,  pp.  40-44  ;  Palfrey,  Hist.  X.  E.,  IV  : 
189-191  ;  A.  McKenzie  in  Memorial  History  of  Boston,  II :  204-211  ;  Sibley,  Graduates  of  Har- 
vard, biographies  of  the  Brattle  and  Leverett  ;  Brooks  Adams,  Emancipation  of  Massachusetts, 
Boston,  1887,  pp.  237-254;  H.  A.  Hill,  Hist,  Old  South  Church,  I:  308-313.  Wendell,  Cotton 
Mather,  passim. 


476       THE    PROPOSALS   AND   THE   SAYBROOK   PLATFORM 

1697  ;  and  in  January,  1698,  Thomas  Brattle  transferred  to  a  body 
of  associates,  of  which  he  was  a  leader,  the  site  for  the  new  meet- 
ing-house on  what  was  then  called  Brattle's  Close.1     Here  a  plain, 
unpainted  building  was   at  once  erected.2     The  thoughts  of   the 
associates  turned  toward  Benjamin  Colman  as  their  future  minister. 
This  able  and  remarkable  man  had  graduated  at  Harvard  in  1692, 
and   had   therefore   been   under   the   instruction   of   Leverett  and 
William  Brattle.     He  was,  moreover,  the  intimate  friend  of  Ebene- 
zer  Pemberton  and  shared  his  innovating  sentiments.    Colman  was 
in  England  at  the  time  the  erection  of  the  new  meeting-house  was 
begun;  and  thither  urgent  letters  were  sent  to  him  in   May,  1699, 
by  Leverett,  William   Brattle,  Simon  Bradstreet,3  and  Pemberton, 
reinforcing  a  formal  call  signed  by  Thomas  Brattle  and  four  others, 
in  the  name  of  the  associates.4     The  call  was  accepted,  and  as  his 
reception  by  the  three  existing  Boston  churches  was  not  likely  to 
be  favorable,  by  advice  of  his    Boston  friends,  Colman  procured 
ordination  at  the  hands  of  the  London  Presbytery,  August  4,  1699. 
On  November  first,  Colman  was  in  Boston,  a  full-fledged  minister 
according  to  Presbyterian  ideas,  but  no  clergyman  in  the  view  of 
stricter  Congregationalists;  and  on  November  17th,  the  associates 
put  forth  a  Manifesto,"  declaring  their  firm  adherence  to  the  doc- 
trinal standards  of  the  churches,  as  set  forth  in  the  Westminster 
Confession,  and  their  desire  for  fellowship  with  other  churches; 
but  asserting  all  the  principles  which  we  have  seen  cherished  by 
the  innovators,  except  that  regarding  the  use  of  the  Lord's  prayer.6 
The  publication  of  this  declaration  was  followed,  on  December  12th, 


•  Sibley,  Grad.  of  Harvard,  II  :  491.  492- 

a  Described  in. Memorial  Hist.  Boston,  II:  207.  

s  Bradstreet  was  minister  at  Charleston,  the  man  whose  elecuon  as  colleague  with  Moiton 
by  the  votes  of  the  whole  community  had  called  out  the  protests  of  the  Boston  Second  Church 

«  An  illustration  of  the  prominence  to  be  given  by  the  church  whtch  was  soon  to  be  organued 
to  the  element  which  had  heretofore  been  debarred  from  a  share  in  church  government  may  be  seen  m 
h  f"  T hat  Thomas  Brattle  was  only  a  half-way  member  of  the  Third  Church  when  he ^thus  acts 
as  chairman  of  this  body  which  thus  calls  a  minister.     The  call  is  in  Lothrop,  Ihst.  Brattle  CI,, 

PP"  45""*4The  Church  was  hence  long  nicknamed  the  -  Manifesto  Church."     The  text  may  be  found 

in  Lothrop,  Hist.  Brattle  St.  CI,,  pp.  *o-26  ;  and  a  good  abstract  ^"'Z 

1 T  •  ,ofi      Its  authorship  is  uncertain,  but  has  been  usually  attributed  to  Colman. 

11  •  1  T      ,  h  the  usTof  the  Lord's  prayer  is  not  mentioned  in  the  »  Manifesto^  trad.,0, n-J 

that  it  was  used  from  the  beginning  in  the  services  of  Brattle  Church.     Lothrop,  H,st.  Brattle 

Church,  p.  51. 


BRATTLE    CHURCH  477 

by  the  organization  of  a  church  of  fourteen  members,  without  aid 
of  council  or  countenance  from  other  churches. 

All  this  was  thoroughly  at  variance  with   the  older  New  Eng- 
land theory  and  practice;  to  the  Mathers  it  seemed  the  dawning  of 
a  "day  of  temptation  begun  upon   the  town  and  land,"  brought 
about  by  "  a  company  of  headstrong  men  in  the  town,  the  chief  of 
whom  are  full  of  malignity  to  the  holy  ways  of  our  churches,"  who 
"have  published,  under  the  title  of  a  Manifesto,  certain  articles 
that  utterly  subvert  our  churches."  '      When,  therefore,  the  new 
church,  in  accordance  with  a  vote  passed  on   the  day  of  its  organ- 
ization, made  overtures  looking  toward  fellowship  with  the  other 
Boston  churches,  Increase  Mather  and  James  Allen,  representing 
the  Second  and   First  churches,  replied,  under  date  of  December 
28th,  that  they  could  not  join  in  the  proposed  fast  unless  the  in- 
novators   would    give  "the  satisfaction  which    the  law  of   Christ 
requires    for   your    [their]    disorderly   proceedings."2      Two  days 
later  the  eminent  conservative  ministers  of  Salem,  John  Higginson 
and  Nicholas  Noyes,  addressed  an  earnest  letter  of  reproof  to  the 
new  church.3     But  the  pastor  of  the  Third  Boston  Church,  Samuel 
Willard,  and  some  of  the  members  of  his  church,  even  conservative 
laymen  like  Stoughton  and    Sewall,  strove  for  peace.      A  partial 
reconciliation  was  effected,  so  that  on  January  31,   1700,  all  the 
Boston  Congregational  ministers  united  with  Mr.  Colman  and  his 
congregation  in  the  religious  exercises  appropriate  to  a  fast,  and 
thus  gave  them  the  desired  recognition.4 

But  though  both  the  Mathers  took  part  in  this  fraternal  ser- 
vice, the  victorious  innovators  were  a  sore  grievance  to  them;  and 
therefore  in  March,5  i7oo,  Increase  Mather  published  what  is  one 
of  the  most  interesting,  but  at  the  same  time  controversial,  tracts 

1  C. Mather's  Journal,  in  Quincy,  History  of  Harvard  University,  ed.  Boston,  l86o,  1 :  486, 
487;  Brooks  Adams,  Emancipation  of  Mass.,  pp.  245-247. 

2  Adams,  Ibid.,  pp.  247,  248;   Lothrop,  Hist.  Brattle  St.  Church,  po    =c    rfi 

3  Lothrop,  Ibid.,  pp.  28-37. 

„.,  4SewaI1Siv«  some  account  of  the  negotiations  and  the  services  of  the  fast.  s  Coll  Mass 
H,st.  Sac.    VI :  2,  3.     For  Cotton  Mather's  statement  see  Quincy,  Hist.  Harvard,  if  48 

but  C  Mat"  drd  "  \  T  I7°°\  T'r  M"n0rial  HhL  °/Bosto^  " !  **  interPrets  th-  -  Jan- 
tat  C.  Mather  s  Journal  shows  that  the  pnnting  of  an  "  antidote,"  doubtless  the  Order  was  jus 
suspended  at  the  finishing  of  the  first  sheet  when  the  reconciliation  was  effected  in  January 
Quincy,  Ibid.  J 


4/8   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

of  Congregational  history,  his  Order  of  the  Gospel.1  This  little 
work,  while  it  called  no  man  by  name,  distinctly  attacked  the  whole 
recent  movement  and  its  leaders. 

"If,"  said  Mather,  "we  Espouse  such  principles  as  these,  Namely,  That 
Churches  are  not  to  Enquire  into  the  Regeneration  of  those  whom  they  admit  unto 
their  Communion.  That  Admission  to  Sacraments  is  to  be  left  wholly  to  the  pru- 
dence and  Conscience  of  the  Minister.  That  Explicit  Covenanting  with  Cod  and 
with  the  Church  is  needless.  That  Persons  not  Qualified  for  Communion  in  special 
Ordinances  shall  Elect  Pastors  of  Churches.  That  all  Professed  Christians  have 
right  to  Baptism.  That  Brethren  are  to  have  no  voice  in  Ecclesiastical  Councils. 
That  the  Essence  of  a  Ministers  call  is  not  in  the  Election  of  the  People,  but  in  the 
Ceremony  of  Imposing  hands.  That  Persons  may  be  Established  in  the  Pastoral 
Ojfice  without  the  Approbation  of  Neighbouring  Churches  or  Elders  ;  We  then  give 
away  the  whole  Congregational  cause  at  once,  and  a  great  part  of  the  Presbyterian 
Discipline  also."2 

The  various  proposed  innovations  were  opposed  in  detail;  and 
the  recent  action  by  which  the  Brattle  Church  had  organized  and 
provided  itself  with  a  minister  without  the  advice  of  neighboring 
churches  was  severely  condemned  in  principle.  Mather  found 
Colman's  foreign  ordination  particularly  abhorrent.  "  To  say,"  he 
remarked,  "  that  a  Wandring  Lcvite  who  has  no  Flock  is  a  Pastor, 
is  as  good  sense  as  to  say,  that  he  that  has  no  Children  is  a  Father." 3 
Nor  did  Mather's  innovating  subordinates  at  the  College  escape 
censure ;  he  exhorted :  "  Let  the  Churches  Pray  for  the  Colledge  partic- 
ularly, that  God  may  ever  Bless  that  Society  with  faithful  Tutors 
that  will  be  true  to  Christs  Interest  and  theirs,  and  not  Hanker 
after  new  and  loose  wayes."4 

To  this  little  book  an  anonymous  reply  was  issued  in  the  same 
year,  entitled  Gospel  Order  Revived,  and  conjecturally  the  joint 
product  of  Rev.  Messrs.  Benjamin  Colman,  Simon  Bradstreet,  and 
John  Woodbridge,6  perhaps  also  of  William  Brattle."  The  answer 
was  personal  and  not  very  reverential;  it  distinctly  charged  In- 
crease Mather  with  showing  one  spirit  in  London  and  another  in 


1  Printed  at  Boston  and  reprinted  the  same  year  in  London. 

3  Order  of  the  Gospel,  p.  8.  Some  of  these  views  were  those  already  entertained  by  Rev. 
Solomon  Stoddard  of  Northampton,  Mass.,  which  were  to  be  given  to  the  world  the  same  year  in 
his  Doctrine  of  Instituted  Churches  ;  a  work  probably  called  out  by  the  Order. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  102.  4  Ibid.,  pp.  ii,  12. 

5  So  Sibley,  Grad.  of  Harvard,  1 :  455.  It  has  sometimes  been  attributed  to  Stoddard,  but 
with  no  certainty,  and  also  credited  to  Solomon  Southwick,  see  Nation,  LV  :  415. 

8  Adams,  Emancipation  0/ Mass.,  p.  250. 


CONSEQUENT    DISPUTES  479 

Boston,  and  it  laughed  at  some  of  his  criticisms  of  uncommenting 
reading  as  if  they  were  a  valuation  of  Mather's  own  comments 
above  the  word  of  God.  Yet  the  expression  which  perhaps  most 
stirred  the  Mathers  was  in  the  advertisement  prefaced  to  the  work, 
which  declared  that  "  the  Press  in  Boston  is  so  much  under  the  aw 
of  the  Reverend  Author,  whom  we  answer,  and  his  Friends,  that 
we  could  not  obtain  of  the  Printer  there  to  print  the  following 
Sheets."1  The  extent  to  which  this  allegation  was  true  caused  not 
a  little  discussion;2  and  the  work  was  answered,  in  1701,  by  a 
pretty  personal  pamphlet,  not  improbably  written  by  Cotton 
Mather,  and  certainly  prefaced  by  his  father.3  But  though  Increase 
Mather  denounced  the  writer  of  Gospel  Order  Revived,  whom  he 
supposed  to  be  Colman,  as  "of  a  very  unsanctified  temper  and 
spirit,"  and  affirmed  that  Thomas  Brattle  had  done  as  "a  moral 
heathen  would  not  have  done,"  the  Brattle  Church  grew  and  flour- 
ished. The  conservative  party  were  the  defeated  party;  and  it  is 
not  to  be  wondered  that  those  who  loved  the  New  England  of  the 
fathers  felt  alarmed  at  the  outlook. 

Their  alarm  was  the  greater  because  the  conservative  party  in 
Boston  had  employed  other  means  to  check  the  growth  of  the  in- 
novating movement  beside  the  publication  of  pamphlets.  On  May 
30,  1700,  about  three  months  after  the  issue  of  Increase  Mather's 
Order  of  the  Gospel,  the  Ministerial  Convention  brought  together 
its  annual  assemblage  of  the  pastors  of  the  province  at  Boston.4 
And,  under  Mather's  lead,5  they  passed  the  following  vote,  designed 
to  prevent  the  establishment  of  a  second  Brattle  Church:6 

"To  prevent  the  great  mischief  to  the  Evangelical  Interests,  that  may  arise 
from  the  unadvised  proceedings  of  People  to  gather  Churches  in  the  Neighbourhood, 


1  Leaf  before  title.     The  work  was  printed  in  New  York,  though  no  place  is  given  on  the  title. 

2  See  Thomas,  Hist.  Printing  in  America,  II :  346  ;  Palfrey,  Hist.  N.  E.,  IV  :  igi.  The 
statement  seems  only  partially  true. 

3  A  Collection  of  Some  0/  the  Many  Offe7tsive  Matters,  Contained  in  a  Pamphlet,  en- 
tituled,  The  Order  0/  the  Gospel  Revived,  Boston,  1701. 

*  Our  knowledge  of  this  meeting  of  the  Convention  and  its  vote  is  due  to  Increase  Mather, 
Disquisition  Concerning  Ecclesiastical  Councils,  Boston,  1716,  p.  38 ;  [Reprinted  in  Cong. 
Quarterly,  XII  :  365,  366.1 

5  Mather  says,  Ibid.,  "  This  was  the  Vote  which  passed  at  the  mentioned  Convention.  When 
also  he  that  writes  these  Lines,  was  desired  to  Address  the  Churches  accordingly.  What  has 
hitherto  retarded,  I  need  not  mention." 

6  See  note  4  above. 


480   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

it  is  provided,  that  the  Result  of  the  Synod,  in  1662,  relating  to  the  Consociation  of 
Churches  '  may  be  Republished,  with  an  Address  to  the  Churches,  Intimating  our 
desires  (and  so  far  as  we  are  Concerned  our  purposes)  to  see  that  Advice  carefully 
attended,  and  the  irregular  Proceedings  of  any  People  hereafter  contrary  to  that 
Advice,  not  Encouraged." 

It  needed  something  more  than  the  republication  of  the  hasty 
votes  of  bygone  Synods  to  stay  the  tendencies  of  the  time. 

Of  course  matters  could  not  stop  here.  Increase  Mather  was 
president  of  Harvard  College,  but  that  institution  had,  as  we  have 
seen,  come  largely  under  the  control  of  the  innovators.  The 
college  was  in  a  precarious  state.2  Left  without  a  charter  by  the 
revocation  of  the  charter  of  the  colony  under  which  the  corpora- 
tion had  been  created,  vain  attempts  were  made  to  procure  new- 
incorporation  in  1692,  1696,  1697,  1699,  and  1700;  attempts  in  which 
the  Mathers  tried  to  maintain  the  interests  of  the  conservative 
party,  but  which  all  came  to  naught  through  causes  ultimately 
traceable  to  the  determination  of  the  English  government  that 
nothing  should  be  done  unfavorable  to  Episcopacy.  But  Increase 
Mather,  though  president,  refused  to  reside  at  Cambridge.  His 
ministry  over  the  largest  congregation  in  Boston  was  a  point  of 
vantage  which  he  would  not  lightly  resign.  His  services  to  the 
colony  and  to  the  college  were  of  the  highest  value,3  but  the  fact 
of  his  non-residence  caused  annoyance.  In  February,  1693,  the 
lower  House  of  the  General  Court  had  passed  a  vote  that  the 
"President  shall  be  Resident  at  ye  Colledge."4  In  June,  1695,  this 
vote  was  repeated,5  and  in  December,  1698,  the  request  was  en- 
forced by  the  offer  of  a  considerable  increase  in  salary."  In  July, 
1700,  the  Court  in  more  positive  language  than  before  insisted  that 
Mather  should  go  to  Cambridge,  and  so  peremptory  was  the  demand 
that  for  a  few  weeks  the  president  resided  at  the  college.7     But  he 


1  See  ante,  pp.  337-339-     Mather  republished  it  on  pp.  40-47,  of  his  Disquisition. 

2  The  relations  of  the  Mathers  to  the  college  is  very  unsympathetically  told  by  Quincy  in  his 
valuable  History  0/  Harvard  College,  ed.  i860,  1 :    57-126.     This  is  still  the  fullest  treatment  of 
the  subject.      See  also   Robbins,  Hist.   Second  Ch.,    Boston,  pp.  44~°4  ;  Palfrey,  Hist.  X.  J  ..  I\ 
192-196;  Sibley,  Grad.  of  Harvard,  I:    423-430;    Brooks  Adams,   Emancipation  of  Mass.,   pp. 
261-285;  H.  A.  Hill,  Hist,  Old  South  Church,  I:  319-323;  Wendell,  Cotton  Mather,  passim. 

3  Even  Quincy  admits  this.     Compare  the  discriminating  remarks  of  Robbins,  Hist.  Second 
Church,  pp.  44-47.  52~54- 

*  Sibley,  Grad.  of  Harvard,  I  :  425.  6  Ibid.,  425,  426. 

«  Ibid.,  426.  7  Ibid.,  427. 


THE  MATHERS  AND  HARVARD  48 1 

longed  for  Boston,  his  health  at  Cambridge  was  not  good,  and  by 
October  17,  1700,  he  was  once  more  away  from  the  college.  And 
now  Mather's  many  opponents  whom  politics,  the  prominence  of 
his  son  in  the  witchcraft  trials,1  and  especially  the  late  Brattle 
Church  quarrel,  had  stirred  up  against  him,  saw  the  opportunity  to 
remove  his  influence  either  from  Boston  or  Cambridge.  Mather 
was  alarmed,  and  in  April,  May,  and  June,  1701,  actually  resided  at 
Cambridge.  But  again  his  homesickness  for  Boston  overcame  him, 
and  the  danger  of  resigning  his  church  for  a  precarious  post  at  the 
head  of  an  unchartered  college,  harrassed  as  he  was  by  constant 
attacks,  impressed  him;  and,  therefore,  on  June  30,  1701,  he  wrote 
to  Lieut.  Governor  Stoughton  a  letter  for  presentation  to  the  Gen- 
eral Court  in  which  he  announced  his  return  to  Boston,  and  ex- 
pressed his  "  desire  that  the  General  Court  would  as  soon  as  may 
be,  think  of  another  Praesident  for  the  Colledge."  a  This  letter  he 
followed  up  by  a  personal  meeting  with  the  legislature  on  August 
1st,  at  which  he  declared  his  willingness  to  resume  charge  of  the 
college  on  the  old  basis  of  non-residence.3  The  president  had 
underrated  the  strength  of  the  opposition.  He  felt  with  reason 
that  his  claims  to  the  gratitude  of  the  colony  were  considerable 
and  he  apparently  believed  that  he  could  induce  the  legislature  to 
abandon  the  obnoxious  requirement  rather  than  dispense  with  his 
services.  That  body,  however,  took  a  different  view.  It  sum- 
moned Vice-President  Samuel  Willard  of  the  Third  Boston  Church 
to  take  charge  of  the  college  and  to  reside  at  Cambridge.4  But 
Willard  felt  the  same  unwillingness  to  leave  his  church  that  Mather 
had  experienced.  He  delayed  the  decision  of  the  question.  And, 
therefore,  on  September  5,  1701,  Mather's  friends  renewed  the 
proposition  that  the  presidency  should  once  more  be  offered  to  him. 
The  lower  House  passed  the  resolution;5  its  membership  was 
largely  from  the  country,  and  was  at  once  conservative  religiously, 


Calef's  More  Wonders  of  the  Invisible   World,  London,  1700,  reached  Boston  just  at  this 
Nov.,  1700.     Calef  had  been  aided  in  its  composition  by  the  Brattles  and  it  undoubtedly 
hurt  the  Mathers  at  a  critical  moment.     Compare  Wendell,  Cotton  Mather,  p.  150. 

2  Letter  in  Quincy,  Hist.  Harvard  Univ.,  I  :  501,  502  ;  see  also  Sibley,  1 :  428. 

3  Sibley,  Ibid.  4  Ibid. 

5  Quincy,  Hist.   Harvard   Univ.,   I:    115,   116;   where   quotations  are  given   from   Court 
Records. 


482   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

and  not  so  ambitious  politically  as  to  have  felt  slighted,  as  did 
some  of  the  upper  House,  at  the  appointments  made  by  the  Eng- 
lish government  on  Mather's  suggestion  when  the  new  charter  had 
been  granted  in  1691.  But  the  Council  or  upper  House,  composed 
largely  of  residents  in  Boston  and  its  vicinity,  to  some  extent 
sympathetic  with  the  religious  movement  of  the  Brattles  and  even 
more  filled  with  political  grudges  against  Increase  Mather,  which 
his  domineering  disposition  had  done  much  to  foster  and  little  to 
heal,  sent  a  committee  to  Willard  to  ascertain  on  what  terms  he 
would  take  the  administration  of  the  college.  He  replied  that  he 
was  willing  to  visit  Cambridge  "  once  or  twice  every  Week  .  .  . 
And  Performe  the  Service  used  to  be  done  by  former  Presidents."  ' 
This  put  him  on  exactly  the  same  footing  as  Mather;  but  how  fully 
the  feeling  of  the  upper  House  had  turned  against  the  old  presi- 
dent is  shown  in  the  action  of  that  body  after  hearing  the  report 
of  its  committee.  On  September  6th,  it  negatived  the  proposition 
of  the  lower  House  that  the  presidency  be  offered  to  Mather,  and 
took  Willard  on  his  own  terms.2  In  this  latter  action  the  lower 
House  concurred.  A  show  of  consistency  was  maintained  in  that 
Willard  continued  to  wear  the  title  of  vice-president,  while  the 
presidency  remained  nominally  vacant;  but  the  defeat  of  the 
Mathers  was  none  the  less  obvious,  and  their  defeat  was  that  of 
the  whole  conservative  party.  It  left  a  feeling  of  bitterness  as 
long  as  Increase  and  Cotton  Mather  lived,3  for  the  struggle  had 
been  a  serious  and  honest  attempt  to  preserve  the  college  from 
what  they  deemed  essential  spiritual  harm,  as  well  as  a  contest  into 


1  Sibley,  1 :  429. 

1  Ibid.,  I:  429;  II:  22;  Quincy,  Hist.  Harvard  Univ.,  I:  115,  "6;  Hill,  Old  South 
Church,  I  :  322,  323, 

a  See  Sewall's  diary,  5  Mass.  Hist.  Coll.,  VI:  43-45  \  C.  Mather,  Parcntator,  p.  173.  On 
the  death  of  Vice-President  Willard  in  1707,  the  Mathers  hoped  that  one  or  the  other  of  them  would 
be  elected,  but  the  office  fell  to  their  old  opponent,  John  Leverett,  "  He  had  eight  votes,  Dr.  In- 
crease Mather  three,  Mr.  Cotton  Mather,  one,  and  Mr.  Brattle  of  Cambridge,  one."  (Sewall,  Ibid., 
196).  Leverett  died  in  1724,  the  year  after  the  death  of  Increase  Mather,  and  Cotton  Mather  again 
hoped  for  election,  and  hoped  for  it  too  quite  as  much  that  he  might  advance  the  conservative  cause 
as  for  personal  aggrandizement.  But  he  was  disappointed.  The  choice  fell  on  Rev.  Joseph  Sewall, 
on  Rev.  Benjamin  Colman,  who  both  declined  ;  and,  finally,  on  Rev.  Benjamin  Wadsworth,  who 
accepted.  The  second  of  these  choices  was  exasperating  enough  to  Mather,  and  he  exclaimed  in  his 
diarv,  "  The  corporation  of  our  Miserable  Colledge  do  again  .  .  .  treat  me  with  their  accustomed 
Judgment  and  Malignity."  (See  for  this  and  other  quotations,  Wendell,  Cotton  Mather,  pp.  292-4.) 
But  as  far  as  any  control  of  the  college  by  the  Mathers  was  concerned  the  action  of  1701  was  final. 


STEPS    LEADING   TO   THE    PROPOSALS  483 

which  more  selfish  motives  entered;  and  the  defeat  seemed  not 
only  a  great  personal  slight  but  the  ruin  of  the  cause  which  the 
father  and  son  believed  to  be  that  of  the  Gospel. 

Conscious  thus  of  failure  in  resisting  the  tide  of  innovation 
in  the  town  of  Boston  and  in  the  college,  the  conservative  party 
would  not  give  up  the  struggle  without  further  effort  to  buttress 
the  ancient  Congregational  system.  They  felt  that  the  churches 
and  ministers  might  be  banded  together  for  mutual  assistance  in  a 
more  effective  way  than  they  had  been.  And  such  is  often  the 
curious  effect  of  the  lapse  of  a  little  time,  or  the  attainment  of  a 
fixed  position  in  a  community,  in  modifying  ecclesiastical  struggles, 
that  we  find  some  men  once  prominent  among  the  Brattle  Church 
innovators  now  supporting  associational  movements  which  had  for 
their  design  the  prevention  of  similar  organizations  in  the  future. 
Indeed  there  is  abundant  evidence  that  Benjamin  Colman  himself 
was  not  long  in  ranging  himself  among  the  more  conservative 
forces  in  the  Massachusetts  colony.' 

The  steps  which  led  to  this  consociational  movement  are 
obscure,  but  as  far  as  the  writer  can  ascertain  the  initiation  was  in 
the  Minister's  Convention  of  June  1,  1704.  That  body  issued  the 
following  circular  letter  to  the  churches  : 2 

Boston,  1.  d.  IV.  m.  1704. 
To  Serve  the  Great  Intentions  of  Religion,  which  is  lamentably  decaying  in  the 
Country  ;   It  is  proposed, 

I.  That  the  Pastors  of  the  Churches  do  personally  Discourse  with  the  Young 
People  in  their  Flocks,  and  with  all  possible  Prudence  and  Goodness  endeavour  to 
Win  their  Consent  unto  the  Covenant  of  Grace,  in  all  the  Glorious  Articles  of  it 

II.  That  unto  this  Purpose,  the  Pastors  do  take  up  that  Laborious,  but  engag- 
ing Practice,  of  making  their  Personal  Visits  unto  all  the  Families  that  belono-  unto 
their  Congregations.  B 

III.  That  the  Pastors  in  this  Way  of  Proceeding,  bring  on  their  People  as  far 
as  they  can,  publickly,  and  solemnly  to  Recognize  the  Covenant  of  GOD  and  come 
into  such  a  Degree  of  the  Church-State,  as  they  shall  be  willing  to  take  their  Station 
in :  But  not  to  leave  off,  till  they  shall  be  qualified  for,  and  perswaded  to  Com- 
munion with  the  Church  in  all  special  Ordinances. 

'See  his  signature  to  the  following  document.     By  I735  he  was  of  the  opinion,  that  »  The 
LonsoctaUon  of  Churches  is  the  very  Soul  and  Life  of  the  Congregational  Scheme    .    .     .    without 
mst  be  Independent,  and  with  which  all  the  Good  of  Presbyte 


Dexter.  Cong,  as  seen^Z  ^esfyte^anis.n  is  attainable." 

X:       '  TT  '"  °'  Mather'  ^^  Disdplin^  pP-  **>  '« !  and-  with  the  s.gnatures,  in  Panelist, 


484   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

IV.  That  for  such  as  have  submitted  unto  the  Government  of  CHRIST  in  any 
of  His  Churches,  no  Pastors  of  any  other  Churches,  any  way  go  to  shelter  them 
under  their  Wing,  from  the  Discipline  of  those,  from  whom  they  have  not  been 
fairly  recommended. 

V.  That  they  who  have  not  actually  Recognized  their  Subjection  to  the  Disci- 
pline of  CHRIST  in  His  Church,  yet  should,  either  upon  their  obstinate  Refusal  of 
such  a  Subjection,  or  their  falling  into  other  Scandals,  be  faithfully  treated  with 
proper  Admonitions  :  About  the  Method  and  Manner  of  managing  which  Admoni- 
tions, the  Pastors  with  their  several  Churches,  will  be  left  unto  the  Exercise  of  their 
own  Discretion. 

VI.  It  is  desired  and  intended,  if  the  Lord  please,  That  at  the  General  Conven- 
tion of  the  Ministers,  there  may  be  given  in  by  each  of  the  Pastors  present,  An 
Account  of  their  Progress  and  Success  in  that  holy  Undertaking,  which  has  been 
proposed  :  That  so,  the  Lord  may  have  the  Glory  of  His  Grace,  and  the  Condition 
of  Religion  ma)-  be  better  known  and  served  among  us. 

VII.  As  a  Subserviency  to  those  Good  and  Great  Intentions,  it  is  proposed, 
That  the  Associations  of  the  Ministers  in  the  several  Parts  of  [the]  Country  may  be 
strengthened  ;  And  the  several  Associations  may  by  Letters  hold  more  free  Commu- 
nications with  one  another.1 

Voted  and  unanimously  consented  unto. 
Present, 

Samuel  Willard,  Moderator.  John  Fox,11 

Ebenezer  Pemberton,  Rowland  Cotton,12 

Benjamin  Colman,  Jonathan  Pierpont,13 

John  Hancock,2  Jonathan  Sparhawk,14 

Thomas  Blowe, — ?3  Joseph  Belcher,15 

Cotton  Mather,  John  Clark,16 

Grindal  Rawson,4  Benjamin  Wadsworth,11 

Nehemiah  Walter,5  Joseph  Gerrish,18 

Thomas  Barnard,6  Peter  Thatcher,1' 

James  Allen,'  James  Sherman,20 

Samuel  Torrey,8  Jonathan  Russel,21 

Moses  Fiske,9  Thomas  Bridge,58 

Joseph  Green,10  John  Danforth."23 

This  earnest  and  practical  vote  was  reinforced  by  a  circular 
letter  sent  out  by  the  Cambridge  Association  in  November,  1704, 
—  that  body  serving  not  only  as  the  agent  by  whom  the  resolutions 
of  the  Minister's  Convention  were  presented  to  the  churches,  but 

1  Here  ends  the  copy  in  the  Ratio  Discipline. 

2  Lexington.  3  /.  c,  Thomas  Blowers  of  Beverly.  *  Mendon. 

5  Roxbury.  *  Andover.  '  Boston  First  Church.     >  Weymouth. 

•  Braintree.  10  Salem  Village,  now  Danvers.  "  Woburn. 

12  Sandwich.  ^Reading.  '«  Bristol.     The  name  should  be  John. 

15  Dedham.  »  Exeter,  N.  H.  "  Boston  First  Church. 

i-Wenham.  '» Milton.  2°  Sudbury.  21  Barnstable. 

22  Without  charge,  soon  to  be  settled  as  one  of  the  ministers  of  the  Boston  First  Church. 

23  Dorchester. 


ORIGIN    OF   THE    PROPOSALS  485 

adding  exhortations  even   more   favorable   to   a   strengthening  of 
ecclesiastical  government:1 

"Cambridge  November  6.  1704 
Dear  Brethren, 

The  Ministers  \v°  sometimes  meet  at  Cambridge  have  though:  it  proper  to  enter- 
tain you  wth  certain  proposalis  agreed  awhile  ago,  by  a  much  greater  convention  of 
Ministers  at  Boston. 

The  copy  of  y8  proposalis  here  inclosed  will  sufficiently  give  you  to  understand 
y8  intentions  of  them.  And  we  have  all  possible  reason  to  believe  your  good  affec- 
tions for  such  intentions. 

But  that  the  Pastours  of  our  Churches  may  more  comfortably  enjoy  y8  assistance 
of  one  another,  wc  doubtless  y?  all  find  more  than  a  little  needfull  for  ym  under  ye 
difficulty  wc  in  their  ministry  y>'  often  meet  withall,  you  are  very  sensible  how  usefull 
their  well-formed  associations  may  be  unto  ym.  The  most  early  times  of  New-Eng- 
land propounded  and  practised  y'n. 

Our  Churches  did  betimes  feel  y6  benefit  of  ym:  and  it  is  to  be  hoped,  y*  where 
such  associations  have  been  already  formed,  y?  will  be  lively  maintained,  &  preserved, 
&  faithfully  carried  on.  And  where  y>'  are  not  yet  formed,  y6  Lord  will  stir  up  his 
servants  to  consider  w*  to  do,  y'  y?  may  not  incur  ye  inconveniencies  of  him  y'  is 
alone. 

But  there  is  one  thing  more,  wc  has  been  greatly  desired,  &  never  yet  so  fully 
attained.  It  is,  Thatye  severall  associations  of  Ministers  may  uphold  some  commun- 
ion &  correspondence  wlh  one  another,  &  y'  y?  would  freely  comunicate  unto  each 
other  by  letters,  w'ever  y?  may  apprehend  a  watchful  regard  unto  ye  great  interests 
of  Religion  among  us  may  call  to  be  considered. 

It  is  with  a  speciall  respect  unto  y5  design  yl  ye  ministers  of  y8  Association  some- 
times meeting  at  Cambridge,  do  now  make  y8  essay;  &  having  laid  these  things  before 
you,  do  heartily  recoiiiend  you  &  all  your  studies  to  serve  him,  unto  y"  blessing  of  y8 
Lord. 

They  do  it  by  y"  hand  of 
Syrs  yors 

Sam11  Willard,  modertr. 
To  y8  Reverend 

to  be  comunicated." 

The  next  step  in  the  movement  is  obscure,  owing  to  the  loss 
of  the  records  of  the  Cambridge-Boston  Association  and  the  Minis- 
ter's Convention  at  this  point.  When  the  veil  is  once  more  lifted 
it  is  nearly  a  year  later,  Sept.  1  r,  1705,  when  nine  delegates,  represent- 
ing the  five  Associations  of  Boston,  Weymouth,  Salem,  Sherborne, 
and  Bristol,  met  at  Boston,2  and  two  days  later,  agreed  upon  the 

1  From  the  manuscript  records  of  the  Cambridge  Association. 

2  The  Dorchester  church  records  note:  "Sept.  n.  1705.  A  meeting  of  ye  Delegates  of  y» 
Associations  at  Boston."     p.  127. 


486   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

Proposals  of  1705.1  Exactly  how  this  committee  was  appointed  is 
not  stated,  but  that  it  was  no  chance  coming  together  is  shown  by 
its  declaration  that  it  met  "according  to  former  agreement."  If 
conjecture  may  be  allowed  a  place,  it  seems  probable  that  the 
resolutions  of  the  Ministers'  Convention  of  1704,  and  the  commen- 
datory letter  by  which  they  were  accompanied,  awakened  a  response 
which  seemed  to  warrant  further  action.  This  action  may  well 
have  taken  the  form  of  a  vote  at  the  Ministers'  Convention  of 
May,  1705,2  favoring  a  further  extension  of  associational  powers, 
and  naming  a  place  and  time  at  which  representatives  of  the  Asso- 
ciations should  come  together  and  draw  up  the  desired  scheme. 

However  this  may  have  been,  the  fact  is  certain  that  on  Sep- 
tember 13,  1705,  the  following  Proposals  were  approved  by  a  com- 
mittee representing,  for  aught  that  we  know  to  the  contrary,  all 
the  Associations  then  existing  in  Massachusetts. 


THE    PROPOSALS    OF    1705 

Question  and  Proposals. 
Question. 

WHat3  further  Steps  are  to  be  taken,  that  the*  Councils  may  have* 
due  Constitution  and  Efficacy  in  supporting,  preserving  and 
well  ordering  the  Interest  °  of  the  Churches  in  the  Country  I 


1  The  date  and  place  and  signatures  are  given  in  the  copy  of  the  Proposals  printed  in  the 
Panoplist.  X  :  323.  In  the  copy  prefixed  by  John  Wise  to  his  Churches  Quarrel  Espoused  the 
names  are  intentionally  suppressed,  and  the  phrase  "  Delegates  of  the  Associations  reads  '  Associa- 
tion," implying  that  the  committee  represented  one  association  instead  of  five.  The  Dorchester  records 
give  the  following :  "Sept.  13.  .  .  .  The  Same  Day,  The  Delegates  or  Representatives  of  the 
ministers  of  y«  Associations  in  y«  Province  —  y«  came  to  Boston,  agreed  Sundry  Things  about  Stated 
Councills,  to  be  comunicated  to  y  Churches  (&  Pastors)."     p.  127. 

2  I  know  little  regarding  the  events  of  this  meeeting.  The  date  was  May  31st ;  and 
Sewall  speaks  of  dining  with  the  ministers,  in  company  with  the  governor  and  other  magistrates,  at 
Mr.  Willard's  house  (5  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.,  VI  :  132).  But  I  think  we  can  go  a  little  farther. 
The  "Question"  which  the  "Proposals"  answer  was  clearly  not  propounded  by  the  Committee 
that  drafted  the  Proposals.  By  what  body  was  it  so  probably  submitted  to  them  as  by  the  Minis- 
ters' Convention  ?  This  origin  of  the  "  Question  "  in  the  Convention  of  1705  seems  doubly  probable 
in  view  of  the  prompt  ratification  of  the  "  Proposals"  which  answered  it  by  the  Conventi.. 

3  I  follow  the  text  given  by  Wise,  Churrhes  Quarrel,  ed.  17:5  (the  earliest  accessible  to  me), 
pp.  1-4,  as  more  nearly  representing  that  actually  laid  before  the  churches  than  the  text  in  the 
Panoplist. 

1  Panoplist  omits  the.  6  Ibid,  inserts  their.  «  Ibid,  interests. 


TEXT  OF   THE    PROPOSALS  487 

1st  Part,  It  was  Proposed, 

1st,  That  the  Ministers  of  the  Country  form  themselves  into 
Associations,  that  may  meet  at  proper  times  to  Consider  such 
things  as  may  properly  lie  '  before  them,  Relating  to  their  own 
faithfulness  towards  2  each  other,  and  the  common  Interest 3  of  the 
Churches;  and  that  each  of  those4  Associations  have  a  Moderator 
for  a  certain  time,  who  shall  continue  till  another  be  Chosen,  who 
may  call  them  together  upon  Emergencies. 
In  these  Associations, 

zdly?  That  Questions  and  Cases  of  importance,  either  pro- 
vided by  themselves,  or  by  others  presented  unto  them,  should  be 
upon  due  deliberation  Answered. 

2,dly,  That  Advice  be  taken  by  the  Associated  Pastors  from 
time  to  time,  e're  they  Proceed  to  any  action  6  in  their  Particular 
Churches,  which '  be  likely  to  produce  any  imbroilments.  That 
the  Associated  Pastors  do  Carefully  and  Lovingly  treat  each  other 
with  that  watchfulness  which  may  be  of  Universal  Advantage;  and 
that  if  any  Minister  be  accused  to  the  Association  whereto  he 
belongs,  of  Scandal  or  Heresie,  the  matter  shall  be  there  8  examined, 
and  if  the  Associated  Ministers  find  just  accusation9  for  it,  they 
shall  direct  to  I0  the  Calling  of  a  Council,  by  whom  such  an  Offendor 
is  to  be  proceeded  against. 

\thly,  That  the  Candidates  of  the  Ministry  undergo  a  due 
Tryal  by  some  one  or  other  of  the  Associations,  concerning  their 
Qualifications  for  the  Evangelical  Ministry;  and  that  no  particular 
Pastor  or  Congregation  Imploy  any  one  in  Occasional  Preaching, 
who  has  not  been  Recommended  by  a  Testimonial  under  the  Hands 
of  some  Association." 

St/ify,  That  they  should  together  be  consulted  by  Bereaved 
Churches,  to  Recommend  to  them  such  Persons  as  may  be  fit  to  be 
imployed  amongst 12  them  for  present  Supply,  from  whom  they  may 
in  due  time  proceed  to  chuse  a  Pastor. 

6t/i/y,  That  hereunto  may  be  referred  the  Direction  of  Pro- 
ceeding13 in  any  of  their  particular  Churches,  about  the  Convening 
of  Councils  that  shall  be  thought  necessary,  for  the  Welfare  of  the 
Churches. 


I  Ibid.  lay.  2  Ibid,  toward.  3  Ibid,  interests.  4  Ibid,  these.  6  Ibid,  inserts,  It  is  expected. 
6  Ibid,  aetions.  7  Ibid,  inserts,  may.  e  Ibid.  thus.         9  Ibid,  occasion.  10  Ibid,  omits  to. 

II  This  most  important  section,  embodying  the  principles  of  ministerial  licensure  which  have 
since  prevailed  in  New  England,  was  probably  drawn  in  substance  from  the  Heads  of  Agreement, 
II:  7  (See  p.  459,  ante).  Heretofore  each  church  had  "licensed"  whom  it  would  —  the  action  of 
a  local  church  in  voting  to  hear  any  man  being  his  warrant  to  preach.  The  importance  of  the  change 
here  proposed  is  attested  by  its  permanence. 

12  PanoDlist,  among.  13  Ibid,  proceedings. 


488       THE   PROPOSALS  AND   THE   SAYBROOK   PLATFORM 

JtAfy,  That  the  several  Associations  in  the  Country,  maintain 
a  due  Correspondence  with  one  another,  that  so  the  state  of  Religion 
may  be  better  known  and  secured  '  in  all  the  Churches,  and  partic- 
ularly it  is  thought  necessary  to  the  well-being  of  these  Churches, 
that  all  the  Associations  of2  the  Country  meet  together  by  their 
Respective  Delegates  once  in  a  year.3 

8/7//)-,  And  finally,  That  Ministers  Disposed4  to  Associate,  en- 
deavour in  the  most  efficacious  manner  they  can,  to  Prevail  with 
such  Ministers  as  unreasonably  neglect  such  Meetings  with  their 
Brethren  in  their  proper  Associations,  that  they  would  not  expose 
themselves  to  the  Inconveniencies  that  such  Neglects  cannot  but 
be  attended  withal. 

Second  Part,  It  is  Proposed, 

\st.  That  these  Associated  Pastors,  with  a  proper  Number  of 
Delegates  from  their  several  Churches,  be  formed  into  a  standing 
or  stated  Council,  which  shall  Consult,  Advise  and  Determine  all 
Affairs  that  shall  be  proper  matter  for  the  Consideration  of  an 
Ecclesiastical  Council  within  their  respective  Limits,  except 
always,  the  Cases  are  such  as  the  Associated  Pastors  6  judge  more 
convenient  to  fall  under  the  Cognizance  of  some  other  Council. 

2dh\  That  to  this  end  these  Associated  Pastors,  with  their 
Respective  Churches,  shall  Consociate  and  Combine  according  to 
what  has  been  by  the  Synods  of  these  Churches  recommended,  that 
they  act  as  Consociated  Churches  in  all  holy  Watchfulness  and 
Helpfulness  towards  each  other;  and  that  each  Church  choose  and 
depute  one  or  more  to  Attend  their  Pastor,0  as  Members  of  the 
Council  in  their  Stated  Sessions,  or  occasionally,  as  Emergencies 
shall  call  for. 

2,dly,  That  these  Messengers  from  the  several  Consociated 
Churches  shall  be  chosen  once  a  year  at  the  least. 

4/7//r,  It  is  propounded,  as  that  which  from  our  beginning  has 
been  Recommended,  that  the  Churches  thus  Consociated  for  these 
purposes,  have  a  stated  time  to  meet  in  their  Council,  and  once  in 
a  year  seems  little  enough,  that  they  may  Inquire  into  the  Condi- 
tion of  the  Churches,  and  Advise  such  things  as  may  be  for  the7 
Advantage  of  our  holy  Religion.  But  the  more  particular  time  is 
best  left  to  the  Determination  of  each  respective  Association. 

Stlily,  That  the  Associations 8  shall  Direct  when  there  is 
Occasion  for  this  Council  to  Convene,  on  any  Emergency,  and  shall 


Ibid,  served.  2  Ibid.  in. 

Ibid,  adds,  to  concert  matters  of  common  concern  to  all  the  churches. 

Ibid,  adds  thus.  b  Ibid,  adds  may.  '  Ibid.  Pastors.  '  Ibid,  adds 

Ibid.  Association. 


TEXT  OF  THE   PROPOSALS  489 

direct  whether  the  whole,  or  only  a  certain  Number  of  these  Con- 
sociated  Pastors  and  Churches  shall  Convene  on  such  Occasions. 

6tkly,  It  appears  agreeable  to  the  present  Condition  of  our 
Churches,  and  from  our  beginnings  acknowledged,  That  no  Act  of ' 
the  Councils  are  to  be  reckoned  2  as  Concluded  and  decisive,  for 
which  there  has  not  been  the  Concurrence  of  the  Major  part  of  the 
Pastors  therein  concerned. 

7////1',  The  Determinations  of  the  Councils  thus  Provided,  for 
the  necessities  of  the  Churches,  are  to  be  looked  upon  as  final  and 
decisive,  except  agrieved  Churches  and  Pastors,3  have  weighty 
Reasons  to  the  contrary,  in  which  Cases  there  should  be  Provision 
for  a  further  hearing;  and  it  seems  proper  that  the  Council  Con- 
vened on  this  occasion,  should  consist  of  such  Pastors4  as  may  be 
more  for  number  than  the  former,  and5  they  should  be  such,  as 
shall  be  directed  to,  and  convened  for  this  purpose  by  the  Minis- 
ters of  an6  Association,  near  to  that  whereto  these  of  the  former 
Council  belonged,  unto  which  the  agrieved  should  according  apply 
themselves,  and  in  this  way  expect  a  final  Issue. 

8t/i/y,  If  a  particular  Church  will  not  be  Reclaimed  by  Council 
from  such  gross  Disorders  as  plainly  hurt  the  common  Interest7 
of  Christianity,  and  are  not  meer  tolerable  differences  in  Opinion,  but 
are  plain  Sins  against  the  Command  &  Kingdom  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  the  Council  is  to  declare  that  Church  no  longer  fit  for  Com- 
munion with  the  Churches  of  the  Faithful;  and  the  Churches  rep- 
resented in  the  Council,  are  to  Approve,  Confirm  and  Ratine  the 
Sentence,  and  with-draw  from  the  Communion  of  the  Church  that 
would  not  be  healed:  Nevertheless,  if  any  Members  of  the  dis- 
orderly Church,  do  not  Justine  their  Disorders,  but  suitably  testifie 
against  them,  these  are  still  to  be  received  to  the  wonted  Com- 
munion by8  the  Churches;  and  if  after9  due  waiting,  the  Church 
be  not  recovered,  they  may  upon  [Advice]10  be  actually  taken  in  as 
Members  of  some  other  Church  in  the  Vicinity. 

These  Proposals  were  "  Assented  to  by  the  Delegates  of  the 
Association,12  meet  according  to  former  Agreement,  at  B, ,3  Sep- 
tember 13th.  1705.  To  be  Commended  to  the  several  Associated 
Ministers  li  in  the  several  parts  of  the  Country,  to  be  duly  Con- 
sidered, that  so,  what  may  be  judged  for  the  Service  of  our  Great 
Lord,  and  his  Holy  Churches,  may  be  further  Proceeded  in." 

1  Ibid.  Acts  in.  2  Ibid,  received.  3  Ibid,  or  persons. 

4  Ibid,  adds  and  Churches,  a  more  probable  reading. 

6  Ibid,  adds  that.  6  Ibid.  any.  '  Ibid,  interests.  8  Ibid.  of.  9  Ibid,  adds  all. 

10  Ibid,  reads  (upon  fit  advice),  evidently  a  better  reading.  "  Ibid.  are. 

,a  Ibid.  Associations,  a  better  reading.  13  Ibid.  Boston. 

14  Ibid.  Associations  and  Ministers,  a  better  reading. 
32 


4gO   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

[Thus  far  both  texts  agree  ;  but  here  the  Mathcr-Panoplist  text  adds  the  signa- 
tures and  endorsement  as  follows.] 

"  Samuel  Willard,  Mod.    ) 
Cotton  Mather,  V  Boston? 

Ebenezer  Pemberton.1  ) 
Samuel  Torrv,3    / 
John  Danforth,*  f  **""* 
Samuel  Cheever,6  ) 
Joseph  Gerrish,"    )     a  em' 
Grindal  Rawson,'  Sherburne. 
Samuel  Danforth"  for  Bristol  Association. 
Further  approved  and  confirmed,  and  a  resolution  to  pursue, 
with  the  Divine  assistance,  in  all  suitable  methods,  the  intention 
of  the  said  proposals:  —  By  a  General  Convention  of  the  Ministers 
at  Boston;  sod.  3W.9  1706. 

Attested  by 

Samuel  Willard,  Mod." 

[Instead  of  the  signatures  and  endorsement,  the  Wise  text  ends  thus.] 
"At  an  Association-Meeting,  the  fore-going  Proposals  were  Read 
and  Assented  to,  &c.     Present,10 
Nov.  5.  1705." 


There  is  nothing  necessarily  inconsistent  between  the  two. 
It  is  evident  that  the  resolutions  were  approved  by  the  committee 
of  the  five  Associations  on  September  13,  1705.  What  Wise  used 
would  appear  to  be  a  circular  letter  to  the  churches;  and,  from  its 
concluding  clause,  a  circular  sent  out  with  the  added  endorsement 
of  an  Association.  Unfortunately  Wise's  refusal  to  give  the  names 
of  the  members  present  makes  it  impossible  to  say  which  the  As- 
sociation was,  but  in  view  of  the  importance  of  the  Cambridge- 
Boston  body,  and  its  agency  in  1704  in  sending  and  recommending 
the  action  of  the  Ministers'  Convention  of  that  year  to  the 
churches,  it  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  that  was  the  body  which 


1  Pemberton  was  now  associated  with  Willard  in  the  ministry  of  the  Third  Boston  Church. 

2  /.  e.y  in  the  name  of  the  Boston  Association,  identical  with  the  Cambridge  body. 
»  Weymouth.  «  Dorchester.  6  Marblehead.  e  Wenham. 

'  Mendon.  *  Taunton.  "  May  30. 

•»  Wise  declares.  "  where  the  Place  was,  or  the  Persons  who  were  present  in  this  Randezvouze, 
shall  never  be  told  by  me,  unless  it  be  Extorted  by  the  Rack."     Churches  Quarrel,  ed.  1715,  p.  115. 


WHY   DID   THEY    PARTLY    FAIL?  49 1 

approved  the  resolutions  on  November  5.1  The  formal  approval 
by  the  Ministers'  Convention  followed  on  May  30,  1706. 

Doubtless  the  influence  of  the  Mathers  had  much  to  do  with 
these  proceedings,  though  their  hand  does  not  conspicuously  ap- 
pear.2 But  in  view  of  the  agency  of  five  Associations  in  their 
composition,  and  the  approval  of  the  Proposals  by  the  body  repre- 
sentative of  all  the  Massachusetts  ministers,  it  is  hardly  just  to 
affirm  with  Prof.  Tyler  that  "  the  document  was  understood  to 
have  been  the  work  of  the  two  Mathers,  backed  by  a  coterie  of 
clerical  admirers,"3  nor  have  Drs.  J.  S.  Clark4  or  H.  M.  Dexter5 
spoken  with  their  accustomed  accuracy  in  representing  the  Propos- 
als as  the  device  of  Cambridge-Boston  Association  alone.  They 
represented  a  wide-spread  feeling  in  favor  of  stricter  church  gov- 
ernment, a  feeling  which  such  liberal  sympathizers  as  Ebenezer 
Pemberton  and  Benjamin  Colman  shared.  So  far  from  being  the 
work  of  a  faction,  it  would  be  hard  to  show  what  elements  of  then 
existent  Boston  Congregationalism  were  unrepresented  in  their 
production. 

If,  then,  a  large  portion  of  the  ministers  of  Massachusetts 
desired  the  establishment  of  stricter  church  government,  why  did 
these  propositions  fail  to  produce  greater  results?  The  first  por- 
tion, relating  to  the  formation  of  ministerial  associations,  was 
largely  put  in  practice;  the  second  part,  with  its  recommendation 
of  standing  councils,  remained  a  dead  letter.  Probably  the  reasons 
have  been  as  well  stated  by  Cotton  Mather  as  by  any  one.  Speak- 
ing of  the  first  part,  he  says:6 

"  These  Proposals  have  not  yet  been  in  all  regards  universally  complied  withal. 
Nevertheless,  the  Country  is  full  of  Associations,  formed  by  the  Pastors  in  their  several 
Vicinities,  for  the  Prosecution  of  Evangelical  Purposes." 


1  Little  weight  can  be  laid  on  the  point,  but  it  is  interesting  to  note  that  Nov.  5,  1705.  was  a 
Monday,  the  regular  meeting  day  of  the  Cambridge  Association. 

2  It  has  doubtless  been  observed  that  the  name  of  Increase  Mather  is  seen  in  none  of  the 
lists  of  signers,  as  far  as  known. 

3  Hist.  0/ American  Literature,  II :  ic6.  Prof.  Tyler  falls  into  the  further  error  of  saying 
that  it  was  issued  without  any  signature  attached. 

4  Sketch  0/  the  Cong.  Churches  in  Mass.,  p.  115. 

5  Congregationalism,  as  seen  in  its  Literature,  491-494.  Dr.  Dexter's  treatment  of  the 
whole  matter  is  unsatisfactory,  and  chronologically  reversed,  in  that  he  discusses  the  Saybrook 
Platform  before  the  Proposals.  References  a  few  pages  on  show  that  he  was  acquainted  with  the 
Panoplist  text,  but  he  could  not  have  had  it  in  mind  while  writing  this  passage  ;  nor  does  he  seem 
to  have  noticed  the  signatures  or  the  approval  by  Convention.  6  Ratio,  p.  181. 


492        THE    PROPOSALS   AND   THE    SAYBROOK    PLATFORM 
And  after  outlining  the  scheme  of  standing  councils,  he  adds:1 

"  Such  Proposals  as  these  found  in  one  of  the  New-English  Colonies'  a  more 
general  Reception  (and  even  a  Countenance  from  the  Civil  Government)  than  in  the 
Rest.  In  the  other,3  there  were  some  very  considerable  Persons  among  the  Minis- 
ters, as  well  as  of  the  Brethren,  who  thought  the  Liberties  of  particular  Churches 
to  be  in  danger  of  being  too  much  limited and  infringed 'in  them.  And  in  a  Defer- 
ence to  these  Good  Men,  the  Proposals  were  never  prosecuted,  beyond  the  Pounds 
of  mcer  Proposals.  .  .  .  There  was  indeed  a  Satyr,  Printed  against  these  writ. 
ten  Proposals,  and  against  the  Servants  of  GOD  that  made  them.  Nevertheless, 
those  PolloTvers  of  the  Lamb,  remembring  the  Maxim  of,  Not  Answering,  used  the 
Conduct  which  the  University  of  Helmstadt  lately  prescribed  under  some  Abuses  put 
upon  them;  Visum  est  non  alio  Remedio  quam  gencroso  Silentio  ct pio  Contemptu, 
utendum  nobis  esse." 

Mather's  reference  is  of  course  to  the  brilliant  attack  on  these 
Proposals  put  forth  in  1710  by  Rev.  John  Wise  of  what  is  now 
Essex,  Mass.,  but  was  then  known  as  Chebacco  parish  in  Ipswich, 
under  the  title  of  The  Churches  Quarrel  Espoused,  etc.;  and  which 
Wise  followed  in  1 7 1 7  by  a  powerful  exposition  of  what  he  believed 
to  be  the  system  set  forth  in  the  Cambridge  Platform,  the  Vindica- 
tion of  the  Government  of  New  England  Churches.  The  vigor  and 
cogency  of  these  tracts  has  been  justly  praised.4  They  are  cer- 
tainly the  most  able  exposition  of  the  democratic  principles  which 
modern  Congregationalism  has  come  to  claim  as  its  own  that  the 
eighteenth  century  produced.  Yet,  without  abating  the  respect 
due  to  Wise  for  his  work,  or  minimizing  the  influence  which  his 
books  exercised  on  political  thought  when  republished  on  the  eve 
of  the  revolutionary  war,  it  may  justly  be  questioned  whether  their 
effect  in  bringing  to  naught  the  Proposals  in  Massachusetts  has 
not  been  rated  higher  than  it  should.6  Wise's  satire  was  not  pub- 
lished till  four  years  after  the  ratification  of  the  Proposals  by  the 
Massachusetts  Convention,  and  not  till  two  years  after  Connecticut 
had  inaugurated  a  similar  system.  Some  influence  other  than  the 
Churches  Quarrel  Espoused  must  have  hindered,  or  the  scheme 
would  have  come  into  practice  long  before  that  tract  was  given  to 
the  world.     Mather  clearly  indicates  another  reason  than  the  work 


1  Ibid.,  pp.  184,  185.  2  Connecticut.  3  Massachusetts 

4  See  Clark,  Hist.  Sketch  Cong.  Chs.  in  Mass.,  pp.  115-121  ;  Tyler,  Hist.  American  Litera- 
ture. II  :  104-116;  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  pp.  493-502. 
6  E.  g,  by  the  writers  cited  in  the  previous  note. 


NO   LEGISLATIVE    SUPPORT  493 

of  Wise.  The  Proposals  in  Massachusetts  were  opposed  by  "  some 
very  considerable  Persons,"  both  lay  and  clerical;  and,  what  is 
even  more  important,  they  were  not  supported  by  the  legislature, 
as  the  similar  propositions  were  in  Connecticut.  Here,  then,  was 
the  real  point  of  break-down.  As  will  be  shown,  the  Saybrook 
Articles  met  with  plentiful  opposition,  but  they  had  the  power  of 
the  General  Court  behind  them,  and  were  therefore  put  into  prac- 
tice. In  Massachusetts,  on  the  other  hand,  the  civil  authorities 
stood  aloof,  and  without  legislative  support  it  was  impossible  to 
introduce  the  stricter  system  in  either  colony.  Nothing  could 
have  been  more  diverse  than  the  legislative  situation  in  the  two 
colonies.  Probably  the  General  Court  of  Connecticut  was  never 
in  a  state  more  favorable  to  the  enactment  of  an  ecclesiastical 
constitution  than  in  1708.  It  was  still  under  its  semi-independent 
charter,  able  to  choose  its  own  upper  House  and  governor.  That 
governor  was  a  minister,  Gurdon  Saltonstall,  warmly  attached  to 
the  church  system  of  the  colony,  popular  alike  with  his  ministerial 
associates  and  with  the  legislature,  and  a  believer  in  the  desira- 
bility of  a  stricter  organization  of  the  churches.  The  Connecticut 
Court  had  long  been  accustomed  to  interfere  in  the  affairs  of  the 
churches;  such  interference  was  not  unpopular  with  as  represent- 
ative men  as  the  trustees  of  Yale  College.1 

The  situation  of  the  Massachusetts  General  Court  was  far 
different.  That  body  had  received  an  entirely  new  constitution  in 
1692,  and  one  that  practically  ended  the  old-time  clerical  influence. 
The  lower  House  was  still  chosen  by  the  people;  but  the  upper 
House,  though  nominated  by  the  General  Court,  was  subject  to 
the  veto  power  of  the  governor,  a  veto  freely  exercised;2  and  the 
governor  was  of  royal  appointment,  with  authority  to  reject  all 
bills  distasteful  to  him.  The  governor  at  this  time  was  the  noto- 
rious Joseph  Dudley,  no  friend  to  the  Congregational  churches  of 
Massachusetts,  whose  religious  position  may  be  judged  by  a  letter 
to  the  Lords  of  Trade  in  England,  of  July,  1704,  in  which  he  com- 


1  See  their  proposition  of  1703  requesting  the  ministers  to  unite  in  an  appeal  to  the  General 
Court  to  approve  a  confession  of  faith,  in  the  next  section  of  this  chapter  (p.  498). 

2  In  1703  Dudley  rejected  5  nominations,  in  1704,  2,  and  in  1706,  2.    Palfrey,  IV :  253,  254,  291, 
299. 


494       TIIE    PROPOSALS   AND   THE   SAYBROOK   PLATFORM 

plains  that  the  Court  used  its  right  of  nomination  to  the  upper 
House  "  to  affront  every  loyal  and  good  man  that  loves  the  Church 
of  England  and  dependence  on  her  Majesty's  government";1  and 
who,  while  not  wholly  cutting  loose  from  the  Roxbury  Congrega- 
tional church  of  which  he  was  a  member,  worshiped  much  in  the 
Boston  Episcopal  chapel,  and  signed  a  petition  to  the  archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  in  1703,  in  which  he  and  his  associates  are  styled 
"  the  members  of  the  Church  at  Boston."2  The  upper  House,  too, 
which  in  Connecticut  we  shall  see  readily  passed  the  Saybrook  bill, 
was  not  likely  in  Massachusetts  to  be  so  compliant  with  the  wishes 
of  the  ministers.  Its  membership  was  largely  from  Boston  and 
the  immediate  vicinity,  and  there  was  already  growing  up  in  the 
commercial  and  governmental  center  of  Massachusetts  a  class 
more  influenced  by  trade  and  crown  appointments  than  desire  to 
maintain  the  discipline  of  the  churches  of  the  colony  or  the  old 
spirit  of  political  independence.  The  Proposals  of  1705  could  not, 
in  any  reasonable  probability,  have  passed  the  Massachusetts  legis- 
lature; and  failing  of  legislative  support  there  was  enough  opposi- 
tion both  in  that  colony  and  Connecticut  to  prevent  the  establish- 
ment of  any  similar  system.  That  the  ecclesiastical  development 
of  Massachusetts  and  Connecticut  in  the  last  century  ran  in  di- 
vergent paths  was  due,  in  no  small  degree,  to  the  differing  character 
of  their  respective  governors  and  General  Courts. 


The  Proposals,  which  thus  came  to  naught  as  far  as  Massa- 
chusetts was  concerned,  had  a  posthumous  fame  for  a  brief  period 
at  the  beginning  of  the  Unitarian  controversy  more  than  a  hundred 
years  later.  Though  printed  as  late  as  1772,3  they  had  been  for- 
gotten; and  when  discovered  in  manuscript  by  Prof.  William  Jenks 
and  communicated  to  the  General  Association  of  Massacliusctts 
Proper*  at  its  meeting  at  Dorchester  in  June,  1814,6  they  were 
thought  by  some  to  be  exactly  suited  to  the  distracted  state  of  the 

1  Hid.,  p.  292.  2  Ibid.,  pp.  297,  298.  »  In  Wise's  works,  see  ante,  p.  463. 

4  /.  *.,  exclusive  of  Maine.     It  is  the  present  "General  Association." 
6  For  the  literature  of  this  discussion,  see   ante,  p.  463. 


the  proposals  in  1814  495 

churches  then  existing,  and  were  accordingly  referred  to  a  com- 
mittee for  further  report.  That  report  was  made  at  the  Associa- 
tion's meeting  at  Royalston  in  June,  1815,  by  Rev.  Dr.  Jedidiah 
Morse  of  Charlestown,  and  after  giving  such  facts  regarding  the 
Proposals  as  were  accessible  to  the  committee,  declared  that  the 
propositions  were  "  in  various  respects  such,  that  in  their  [the 
committee's]  opinion  congregational  ministers  cannot  consistently 
recommend  or  approve  them."1  The  committee  then  proposed  a 
plan  of  its  own  for  stricter  church  government,  which  after  lying 
over  a  year,  was  given  a  timid  vote  of  approval  that  amounted 
practically  to  a  burial.  All  efforts  to  strengthen  the  ecclesiastical 
government  of  Massachusetts  had  failed. 


Part  II 
THE    SAYBROOK   PLATFORM    OF   1708 

While  the  events  just  considered  were  in  progress  in  Massa- 
chusetts, a  similar  movement,  to  some  extent  induced  by  the  pro- 
ceedings in  the  older  colony,  was  in  progress  in  Connecticut.  The 
Half-Way  controversy  had  resulted  in  1669  in  the  toleration  of 
some  divergence  in  ecclesiastical  usage  "  vntill  better  light  in  an 
orderly  way  doth  appeare";2  but  the  same  differences  of  opinion 
which  had  been  shown  in  the  questions  propounded  by  the  General 
Court  in  1666 3  continued,  and  the  low  state  of  religion  which 
marked  the  closing  years  of  the  seventeenth  century  led  to  much 
discipline  and  not  a  little  quarrel  in  the  churches.4  The  feeling 
was  widespread  throughout  the  colony,  and  the  adjacent  parts  of 
Massachusetts,5  that  some  strengthening  of  church-government 
was  desirable,  for  the  same  reasons  that  it  was  sought  in  the 
vicinity  of  Boston. 

The  movement  which  led  to  the  Saybrook  Synod  in  Connec- 
ticut ran  parallel  to  and  was  in  considerable  degree  conducted  by 

1  I'auoplist,  XI ;  360.  2  See  ante,  p.  277. 

3  Conn.  Records,  II  :  54,  55  ;  and  ante,  p.  274. 

*  Compare  Trumbull,  Connecticut,  ed.  1818,  1 :  480. 

5  See  Stoddard's  views,  for  instance,  Instituted  Churches,  p.  28. 


496   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

men  who  were  engaged  in  founding  Yale  College,  and  these  men 
were  in  turn  affiliated  in  some  measure  with  those  in  eastern  Mas- 
sachusetts who  were  seeking  a  stricter  church  government.  The 
connection  between  the  founding  of  Yale  College  and  the  party 
about  Boston  who  were  opposed  to  the  liberalizing  of  Harvard  and 
the  rejection  of  the  influence  of  the  Mathers  has  been  pressed  too 
far  by  President  Quincy,1  and  it  has  been  clearly  shown  that  the 
desire  of  the  ministers  of  Connecticut,  long  cherished  especially  in 
the  coast  towns  of  the  old  New  Haven  colony,  that  they  might 
have  "a  nearer  and  less  expensive  seat  of  learning,"2  amply  ac- 
counts for  the  establishment  of  the  Connecticut  college.  It  had 
its  birth  independently  of  Boston  ecclesiastical  quarrels.  But 
while  thus  moved  by  Connecticut  rather  than  Massachusetts  in- 
terests, the  men  who  founded  Yale  College  in  1701  were  in  active 
sympathy  with  the  conservative  party  in  Boston.  Evidence  of 
this  cordiality  of  feeling  is  ample.  The  earliest  document  in  the 
archives  of  the  college  is  a  beautifully  written  "  Scheme  for  a 
College  "  endorsed  in  Cotton  Mather's  handwriting,3  and  though 
its  proposals  were  not  adopted,  it  manifests  that  active  interest 
which  Cotton  Mather  always  felt  in  the  institution,  and  which  led 
him,  in  17 18,  to  secure  the  benefactions  from  Elihu  Yale  which 
carried  the  college  through  its  severest  struggles  and  led  to 
the  bestowal  upon  it,  at  Mather's  suggestion,  of  the  name  "Yale."* 
A  second  fact  shows  that  this  interest  was  not  one-sided.  On 
August  7,  1 701,  "the  first  fixed  date"5  in  the  history  of  Yale  Col- 


1  Quincy,  History  of  Harvard  University,  ed.  1840,  1 :  197-200,  says  :  "  The  projectors  of 
it  [Yale]  were  aware  of  the  advantage  which  would  result  to  their  seminary,  should  it  be  made  satis- 
factory to  the  predominant  religious  party  in  Massachusetts.  .  .  .  They  took  their  measures  accord- 
ingly." But  Kingsley,  in  his  review  of  Quincy's  work  (Biblical  Repository,  July,  Oct.,  1841,  Jan., 
1842),  has  made  it  plain  that  the  impulse  did  not  go  out  from  Massachusetts.  It  may  be  queried, 
however,  whether  in  his  zeal  to  answer  Quincy,  Kingsley  did  not  minimize  the  real  sympathy  which 
existed  between  the  conservatives  at  Boston  and  the  founders  in  Connecticut.  See  also  Woolsey, 
Hist.  Discourse  .  .  .  be/ore  .  .  .  Yale  College  .  .  .  /JO  years  after  the  founding. 
New  Haven,  1850,  with  a  very  valuable  appendix  of  documents;  Prof.  F.  B.  Dexter,  Founding  of 
Yale  College,  Papers  of  New  Haven  Hist.  See.,  Ill  :  1-31  ;  Prof.  S.  E.  Baldwin,  Eccles.  Consti- 
tution of  Yale  College,  Ibid.,  Ill  :  405-410. 

2  Prof.  Dexter,  as  cited,  p.  3.     See  also  Woolsey,  Discourse,  p.  7. 

3  Certainly  older  than  Sept.,  1701.  See  Prof.  Dexter,  as  cited,  p.  4.  The  document  is  pro- 
fessedly anonymous.  Text  in  Woolsey,  Discourse,  pp.  83-S6.  It  was  addressed  to  Rev.  Messrs. 
Noycs,  Buckingham,  and  Pierpont. 

*  Letters  in  Quincy,  Hist.  Harvard  Univ..  I:  524-527. 
»  Prof.  Dexter,  as  cited,  p.  5.     The  letter  is  lost. 


YALE   COLLEGE   FOUNDED  497 

lege,  the  ministers  most  concerned  in  its  founding,  Israel  Chauncy 
of  Stratford,  Thomas  Buckingham  of  Saybrook,  Abraham  Pierson 
of  Killingworth,  James  Pierpont  of  New  Haven,  and  Gurdon  Sal- 
tonstall  of  New  London,  wrote  to  Isaac  Addington,  secretary  of 
Massachusetts  colony,  and  to  his  friend,  Judge  Samuel  Sewall, 
both  men  of  strong  conservative  sympathies  in  religion,  asking  for 
the  draft  of  a  charter  for  the  proposed  college.  To  this  request 
Addington  and  Sewall  responded,  furnishing  the  desired  paper, 
and  accompanying  it  by  a  letter  dated  October  6,  1701,  in  which 
they  say: ' 

"  We  should  be  very  glad  to  hear  of  nourishing  schools  and  a  College  at  Connec- 
ticut, and  it  would  be  some  relief  to  us  against  the  sorrow  we  have  conceived  for  the 
decay  of  them  in  this  [Massachusetts]  province." 

The  draft  of  the  charter  was  indeed  seriously  modified  by  its 
recipients,  and  the  clauses  by  which  Addington  and  Sewall  would 
have  secured  orthodoxy  by  the  prescription  of  certain  text-books 
were  stricken  out  in  the  charter  granted  to  the  college  by  the  Con- 
necticut General  Court;2  but  these  communications  show  to  whom 
in  Massachusetts  the  founders  of  Yale  turned  for  sympathy.  Nor 
is  this  all.  In  the  period  between  the  application  for  a  form  of  a 
charter  and  its  receipt,  Increase  Mather  wrote,  by  reason  of  the 
request  of  an  unnamed  Connecticut  minister,  setting  forth  some 
suggestions  for  the  organization  of  the  college,  and  declaring  that 
he  had  also  written  on  the  same  subject  to  Rev.  Thomas  Bucking- 
ham of  Saybrook.3  These  letters  are  sufficient  to  show  the  degree 
of  cordiality  and  ready  communication  existing  between  the  lead- 
ing Connecticut  ministers  and  the  conservative  party  about  Boston. 

Yale  College  having  been  organized  with  four  of  the  five  min- 
isters who  wrote  to  Addington  and  Sewall  as  its  trustees,4  and  with 
them  Rev.  Messrs.  James  Noyes  of  Stonington,  Samuel  Mather  of 


1  Letter  in  Woolsey,  Discourse,  pp.  91,  92  ;  their  draft,  Ibid.,  pp.  92-94. 

2  The  Charter  of  Vale  College  is  dated  "  Octr  9:  1701,"  the  day  of  the  assembly  of  the  Gen- 
eral Court.  It  was  probably  enacted  the  16th.  See  Prof.  Dexter,  Biog.  Sketches  0/  the  Graduates 
0/  Yale,  pp.  2-5,  where  the  full  text  is  given.  Addington  and  Sewall  had  proposed  that  the  West- 
minster Confession  and  Ames's  Medulla  Theologize,  should  be  required  studies.  The  founders  seem 
to  have  had  no  objection  to  their  use,  but  preferred  to  put  the  prescription  in  the  by-laws  rather 
than  the  charter.     See  Laws  of  1726  (probably  much  older)  in  Prof.  Dexter's  Biog.  Sketches,  p.  349. 

3  Letter  dated  "  Boston,  Sept.  15,  1701,"  in  Woolsey,  Discourse,  pp.  86,  87. 

4  Gurdon  Saltonstall,  then  of  New  London,  was  not  included. 


498   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

Windsor,  Samuel  Andrew  of  Milford,  Timothy  Woodbridge  of 
Hartford,  Noadiah  Russell  of  Middletovvn,  and  Joseph  Webb  of 
Fairfield,  its  trustee  meetings  became  altogether  the  most  repre- 
sentative ecclesiastical  gatherings  in  the  colony.  The  assembled 
ministers  soon  discussed  other  matters  than  college  business.  As 
a  result,  at  their  meeting  at  Guilford  in  1703  they  sent  forth  the 
following  circular  letter,  to  sound  the  churches  as  to  the  desirability 
of  a  united  confession  of  faith,  the  first  step,  as  far  as  can  be  ascer- 
tained, toward  the  Saybrook  Synod. 

"  Att  a  meeting  of  Sundry  Elders 
held  at  Guilford  mar  :   17.  170J. 

It  being  an  hopefull  expedient  for  securing  y*  truths  of  our  Religion,  both  to 
our  people,  &  their  &  our  Posterity,  &  that  \ve  may  wlh  ye  divine  Blessing  tend  to  our 
preservation  from  heresie,  &  Apostasie,  w'in  we  have  ye  Godly  examples  of  our 
Christian  Brethren  in  other  parts,  &  Provinces  ;  yrfore  we  canot  but  earnestly  desire 
&  intreat,  y'  our  Brethren  in  y°  Ministry  of  ye  Gospel  wlbin  this  Colony  would  as  we 
have  done  well  peruse  ye  assemblies  Confession  of  Faith,  as  also  y'  made  by  y"  Synod 
held  at  Boston  may  12.  ibSo  &  manifest  in  convenient  season  yr  concurrence  wth  us 
in  addressing  our  Religious  Government,  as  soon  as  we  may  be  prepared,  y'  they 
would  please  to  recommend  to  our  people  &  yr  posterity  ye  following  Confession  of 
Faith,  viz,  y'  agreed  upon  by  y"  Reverd.  assembly  at  Westminster,  as  it  is  comprised 
in  &  Represented  by  ye  Confession  made  by  ye  Synod  in  Boston  May  12.  1680.  & 
printed  by  y1  Governm1.  &  we  request  youd  signifye  yr  minds  to  ye  Revd.  Mr.  Buck- 
ingham in  Say=Brook,  Mr  Woodbridge  in  Hartford,  Mr  Davenport  in  Stratford, 
&  mr.  Andrew,  or  Pierpont  in  Milford  or  N  =  Haven,  yt  so  from  you  we  may  under- 
stand how  far  yr  is  a  generall  concurrence  in  ye  p'mises.1 

Abrah  :  Pierson 
Tho  :  Buckingham 
T  :  Woodbridge 
James  Pierp[on]t 
Noadiah  Russel 
Sam1  Russel  2 
Tho:   Ruggles."' 

What  response  this  appeal  elicited  cannot  be  affirmed  with 
definiteness.  But  it  shows  clearly  the  drift  of  thought  among  the 
leading  ministers  of  Connecticut,   though    the  absence  of  record 


1  From  the  manuscript  in  the  archives  of  Yale  University.  Clap,  Annals  .  .  .  of  Vale 
College,  New  Haven,  1766,  p.  12,  represented  this  as  a  proposition  for  a  general  synod  of  all  Connec- 
ticut churches,  and  Trumbull  (Connecticut,  1  :  478),  who  follows  him,  copies  his  declaration  that 
there  were  county  meetings  in  consequence,  which  prepared  the  way  immediately  for  the  Saybroot 
synod  by  adopting  the  Westminster  confession  and  drawing  up  rules  for  church  discipline  ;  but  both 
are  unwarranted  inferences  from  the  paper  here  given. 

'  Of  Bradford,  Conn.,  elected  trustee  of  Yale  in  1701  after  the  granting  of  the  charter. 

3  The  minister  at  Guilford  at  whose  house  the  meeting  was  held.     He  was  not  a  trustee. 


STEPS   TOWARD   A   SYNOD  499 

makes  it  impossible  to  say  what  steps  were  next  taken.  It  is  not 
till  five  years  later  that  we  again  find  light.  Meanwhile  the 
attempts  of  the  ecclesiastical  leaders  of  Massachusetts  to  establish 
standing  councils  had  borne  fruit  in  1705  and  1706,  and  cannot 
have  been  unfamiliar  to  their  friends  in  Connecticut.1  The 
thought  of  the  ministers  of  Connecticut  turned  toward  something 
more  than  the  approval  of  a  confession  of  faith,  they  would  now 
couple  with  it  the  establishment  of  a  system  of  stricter  government 
like  that  attempted  in  Massachusetts.  And,  in  December,  1707, 
an  event  well-nigh  without  a  parallel  in  American  history  occurred; 
a  leading  minister  of  the  colony,  .Gurdon  Saltonstall  of  New  Lon- 
don, was  called  directly  from  the  pulpit  to  the  governor's  chair, — ■ 
a  post  which  he  continued  to  fill  till  his  death  in  1724.  Saltonstall 
had  experienced  in  his  own  pastorate  the  evils  of  a  church  quarrel,2 
and  on  his  election  to  the  governorship  it  would  appear  that  the 
movement  for  stricter  government  went  more  rapidly  forward.3 
Sometime  between  May  13  and  22,  1708,  the  following  bill  was  in- 
troduced into  and  passed  the  upper  House,  of  which  the  governor 
was  then  a  member.  In  its  original  form  it  called,  apparently,  only  for 
assemblages  of  ministers;4  but  somewhere  in  its  passage,  either  in 
the  upper  House,  or  more  probably  among  the  representatives  of 
the  towns  who  passed  it  on  May  24th,5  the  statute  was  amended 
so  as  to  summon  the  brethren  of  the  churches  as  well  as  their 
pastors,  and  thus  render  the  bodies  for  which  it  called  truly  synods:6 

"  This  Assembly,  from  their  own  observation  and  from  the  complaint  of  many 
others,  being  made  sensible  of  the  defects  of  the  discipline  of  the  churches  of  this 
government,  arising  from  the  want  of  a  more  explicite  asserting  the  rules  given  for 
that  end  in  the  holy  scriptures,  from  which  would  arise  a  firm  establishment  amongst 
ourselves,  a  good  and  regular  issue  in  cases  subject  to  ecclesiastical  discipline,  glory 
to  Christ  our  head,  and  edification  to  his  members,  hath  seen  fit  to  ordein  and 
require,  and  it  is  by  authoritie  of  the  same  ordeined  and  required,  that  the  ministers 


1  No  further  proof  is  needed  than  that  the  Saybrook  Articles  are  taken  to  some  extent  ver- 
bally from  the  Proposals  of  1705. 

2  Caulkins,  Hist.  0/  New  London,  1852,  p.  377. 

3  Stiles,  Discourse  on  the  Christian  Union,  Boston,  1761,  p.  69,  is  doubtless  correct  in  the 
Siatement  that  the  endorsement  of  the  Connecticut  legislature  to  the  proposition  for  the  Saybrook 
synod  was  procured  "very  much  through  the  influences  of  the  honorable  Gurdon  Saltonstall,  Esq.; 
Governor  of  the  colony." 

4  Bacon,  Discourse  in  Cont.  Ecctes.  Hist.  Conn.,  p.  33,  shows  that  the  clause  calling  for  the 
messengers  of  the  churches  was  interlined  in  the  original  bill  at  some  time  during  its  passage. 

6  Ibid.,  p.  32.  6  Conn.  Records,  V  :  51. 


500   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

of  the  churches  in  the  several  counties  of  this  government  shall  meet  together  at  their 
respective  countie  towns,  with  such  messengers  as  the  churches  to  which  they  belong 
shall  see  cause  to  send  with  them  ■  on  the  last  Monday  in  June  next,2  there  to  con- 
sider and  agree  upon  those  methods  and  rules  for  the  management  of  ecclesiastical 
discipline  which  by  them  shall  be  judged  agreeable  and  comformable  to  the  word  of 
God,  and  shall  at  the  same  meeting  appoint  two  or  more  of  their  number  to  be  their 
delegates,  who  shall  all  meet  together  at  Saybrook,  at  the  next  Commencement  to  be 
held  there,  when  they  shall  compare  the  results  of  the  ministers  of  the  several 
counties,3  and  out  of  and  from  them  to  draw  a  form  of  ecclesiastical  discipline  which 
by  two  or  more  persons  delegated  by  them  shall  be  offered  to  this  Court  at  their  ses- 
sions at  Newhaven  in  October  next,  to  be  considered  of  and  confirmed  by  them,  and 
that  the  expence  of  the  above  mentioned  meetings  be  defrayed  out  of  the  publick 
treasury  of  this  Colonic" 

Pursuant  to  this  order,  the  representatives  of  the  churches  of 
each  county  met,  though  no  records  of  their  doings  have  survived.' 
By  these  councils,  ministers  and  delegates  were  chosen  to  be 
present  at  the  anniversary  of  the  infant  college,  and  naturally  con- 
venience, together  with  the  prominence  of  the  men  involved, 
brought  it  about  that  eight  of  the  twelve  ministers  thus  selected  to 
represent  the  Connecticut  churches  were  trustees  of  the  college.-' 
The  ministerial  element  Was  in  the  decided  predominance.  The 
messengers  from  New  London  County  to  the  Saybrook  Synod  were 
two,  while  Hartford  and  Fairfield  Counties  sent  one  each,  and  New 
Haven  was  represented  by  no  laymen.  Doubtless  other  brethren 
were  appointed  who  did  not  appear  at  the  meeting.  But  there  is 
no  reason  to  hold  that  the  body  which  gathered  at  Saybrook  Sept. 
9,  1708,  was  not  fairly  able  to  voice  the  sentiments  of  the  Con- 
necticut churches  as  a  whole.8 

Of  the  course  of  discussion  we  know  nothing;  but  its  results 
are  evident.     The  Synod  recommended  that  the  Savoy  Confession. 


1  See  p.  499,  note  4. 

2  June  28,  1708. 

a  This  clause  also  suggests  tha<  the  invitation  of  representatives  of  the  brethren  was  an 
afterthought. 

4  The  Preface  to  the  Articles  says,  "  These  several  Councils  having  met  and  drawn  up  som< 
Rules  of  Church  Government  did  by  their  Delegates  meet  and  Constitute  one  General  Assembly," 
etc.,  ed.  1710,  p.  96.  The  meeting  at  New  London  was  ordered  to  choose  a  minister  for  Lebanon, 
and  that  at   Fairfield  one  for  Stratford,  by  the  paternal  legislature.      Conn.  Records,  V  :  54. 

6  Compare  Ur.  G.  L.  Walker,  Hist.  First  Ch.  Hart/orti,  p.  265. 

0  Dr.  Bacon,  Cont.  Eccles.  Hist.  Conn.,  pp.  38,  39,  is  inclined  to  dispute  this,  but  without 
very  adequate  ground. 


MEETING  OF   THE    SYNOD  501 

as  adopted  by  the  Massachusetts  Synod  of  1680/  should  be  the 
doctrinal  basis  of  the  Connecticut  churches.  This  action  was 
simply  the  carrying  out  of  the  suggestion  which  many  of  the  same 
ministers  had  already  made  in  1703.3  To  formulate  rules  for 
church  government  was  not  so  easy,  however,  and  here  the  result, 
though  unanimous,  must  be  regarded  as  a  partial  compromise.3 
The  Synod  adopted  the  Heads  of  Agreement*  which  had  been 
widely  circulated  in  New  England  and  lauded  by  the  Mathers  as 
the  best  exposition  of  Congregationalism.  This  constitution 
formed  the  more  liberal  side  of  the  Saybrook  result,  the  side 
appealed  to  in  later  times  by  those  who  wished  to  minimize  its  strict- 
ness.6 But  to  affirm  them  alone  would  not  have  given  the  stricter 
government  which  the  legislature  desired.  The  Synod,  therefore, 
compared  the  various  drafts  prepared  by  the  county  councils,6 
and  adopted  that  presented  by  the  New  Haven  delegates,  though 
with  modifications  suggested  by  the  more  Presbyterianly  inclined 
representatives  of  Hartford.7  The  result  was  the  fifteen  Articles 
for  the  Administration  of  Church  Discipline.  To  all  the  documents, 
Confession,  Heads  of  Agreement,  and  Articles,  the  Synod  appended 
proof  texts.  Fortunately  a  very  early  copy  of  its  minutes  has 
been  preserved  and  is  as  follows:* 


1  See  ante,  pp.  367-402.  -  See  ante,  p.  40S. 

3  Noah  Hobart  of  Fairfield  wrote,  Attempt  to  Illustrate  .  .  .  The  Eccles.  Constitution 
0/  the  Consociated  Chs.  .  .  .  of  Conn.,  New  Haven,  1765,  p.  8:  "a  man  must  be  a  perfect 
Stranger  to  the  Principles  and  Temper  of  that  Time,  who  is  capable  of  supposing  that  either  of 
these  Parts  of  our  Constitution  [the  Heads  of  Agreement  and  Articles],  taken  singly  or  without  its 
Connection  with  the  other,  would  have  been  unanimously  agreed  upon  and  consented  to  by  that 
body  of  men." 

4  See  ante,  pp.  456-462. 

5  E.  g.  [Thomas  Fitch]  An  Explanation  0/  Say-Brook  Platform,  Hartford,  1765,  pp.  3,  4: 
"  If  there  be  any  expressions  of  one  of  those  parts  of  the  constitution,  which  seem  to  be  inconsistent 
with  some  expressions  in  the  other,  in  that  case,  the  articles  of  discipline  are  to  be  so  explained  and 
understood,  as  to  comport  and  agree  with  the  heads  of  agreement,  and  not  vice  versa." 

6  Preface  to  ed.  1710,  p.  96. 

7  Rev.  Chauncey  Whittelsey  of  New  Haven  wrote  of  Rev.  (and  later  Pres.)  Ezra  Stiles,  Mch. 
4,  1761,  "  Mr.  Noyes  [pastor  at  New  Haven  1716-1761]  has  told  me  that  he  understood,  that  the 
Draught  of  New-Haven  County,  (which  was  chiefly  made  by  Mr.  Pierpont  [pastor  at  New  Haven 
1684-1714])  was  mainly  preferred  ;  but  some  Clauses  put  into  it,  in  Conformity  to  Mr.  Woodbridge 
of  Hartford  and  some  others,  who  were  inclined  to  the  Presbyteryan  Side."  MS.  Coll.  of  Yale 
University.     See  also  Stiles,  Christian  Union,  p.  70. 

8  MS.  Records  of  Hartford  North  Association.  This,  or  a  similar,  copy  was  followed  by 
Trumbull,  Connecticut,  1 :  482-486. 


502       THE   PROPOSALS   AND   THE   SAYBROOK    PLATFORM 


THE    SAYBROOK    MEETING    AND   ARTICLES 


"At  a  Meeting  of  the  Delegates  from  the  Councills  of  the 
Several  Countys  of  Connecticutt  Colony  In  N:  England  In  America 
at  Saybrook  Sep.  9"1  1708. 


Present 
From    the    Councill    of    Hartfd 
County 

I  Timothy  Woodbridge' 

Reud 


Noadiah  Russell2 


Stephen  Mix3 
Messengr  Jn°  Haynes  Esq'4 
From  the  Councill  of  Fairfeild 

County 
The  j  Charles  Chauncey5 
Revd  (  Jn°  Davenport" 
Messen'  Deacon  Sam"  Hoit7 
From  the  Council  of  N:  London 

County: 

{James  Noyes8 
Tho'  Buckingham9 
Moses  Noyes10 
Jn°  Woodward" 
n  (  Robert  Chapman'2 


Messenr 


(  Deacon  Wm  Parker13 


The 
Revd 


The 
Revd 


Present 
From     the     Councill     of 
Haven  County: 

Sam11  Andrew14 
James  Pierpont16 
Sam"  Russell" 
James  Noyes 

& 
Thos    Buck- 
ingham 
{Stephen  Mix 
and 
Jn°    Wood- 
ward 

In  complyance  w,h  an  ordr  of 
the  Gen"  Assembly  May  13  1708 
After  Humble  Addresses  to  the 
Throne  of  Grace  for  the  Divine 
presence  assistance  and  Bless- 
ing upon   us,  having  our  Eyes 


New 


Being 
Chosen 
Modera- 
tors. 

Being 
Chosen 
Scribes. 


upon  the  word  of  God  and  the  Constitution  of  our  Chhs  for  the 
advancment  of  Gods  Glory  and  the  further  order  and  edification 
of  our  Chhs, 

We  agree  that  the  Confession  of  faith  owned  &  Consented 
unto  by  the  Elders  and  Messengers  of  the  Chhs  assembled  at  Bos- 
ton In  New  England  May  12  1680  being  the  Second  Session  of 
that  Synod  be  Recoinended  to  the  Honble  the  Gen"  Assembly  of 
this  Colony  at  the  next  Session  for  their  Publick  testimony  thereto 
as  the  faith  of  the  Chhs  of  this  Colony. 

Wee  agree  also  that  the  Heads  of  Agreement  assented  to  by 


1  Hartford  First  Church,  trustee  of  Vale. 
3  Wethersfield.  4  Of  Hartford. 

•  Stamford.  '  Of  Stamford. 

•  Saybrook,  trustee.  10  Lyme,  trustee. 

12  Of  Saybrook.  13  Also  of  Saybrook. 

15  New  Hav 


2  Middletown.  trustee. 
6  Stratfield.  now  Bridgeport. 
f  Stonington,  trustee. 
11  Norwich. 

M  Milford,  trustee. 


iford, 


THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM  503 

the  vnited  Ministers  formerly  Called  Presbyterian  &  Congrega- 
tionall  be  observed  by  the  Chhs  throout  this  Colony. 

And  for  the  Better  Regulation  of  the  Administration  of  Chh. 
Discipline  In  Relation  to  all  Cases  Ecclesiasticall  both  In  Particu- 
lar Chhs  and  In  Councills  to  the  full  Determining  and  Executing 
of  the  Rules  in  all  such  Cases 

It  is  agreed 

Impr.  That  the  Elder  or  Eld"  of  a  particular  Chh  w,h  the 
Consent  of  the  Brethren  of  the  Same  have  power  and  ought  to 
exercise  Chh  Discipline  according  to  the  Rule  of  Gods  word  in 
Relation  to  all  Scandals  that  fall  out  wthin  the  same.  And  it  may 
be  meet  in  all  Cases  of  Difficulty  for  the  Respective  Past"  of  Par- 
ticular Chhs  to  take  advice  of  the  Eld"  of  the  Chhs  In  the  Neigh- 
bourhood before  they  proceed  to  Censure  in  such  Cases.1 

2.  That  the  Chhs  wch  are  Neighbouring  each  to  other  shall 
consociate  for  the  mutuall  affording  to  each  other  such  assistance 
as  may  be  requisite  upon  all  occasions  ecclesiasticall:2  And  that 
the  particular  Past"  &  Chhs  within  the  Respective  Countys  in  this 
Government  shall  be  one  Consociation  (or  more  if  they  judge 
meet)  for  the  end  aforesd. 

3.  That  all  Cases  of  Scandall  that  fall  out  w<hin  the  Circuit  of 
any  of  the  aforesd  Consociations  shall  be  bro't  to  a  council  of  the 
Eld"  and  also  Messeng"  of  the  Chhs  w,hin  the  sd  Circuit,  i :  e.  ye  Chhs 
of  one  Consociation  if  they  see  cause  to  send  Messeng"  when  their 
[there]  shall  be  need  of  a  Council  for  the  Determination  of  them. 

4.  That  according  to  the  comon  practice  of  our  Chhs  nothing 
shall  be  Deemed  an  act  or  judgment  of  any  Council  which  hath 
not  the  Majr  part  of  the  Eld"  present  concurring  and  such  a  num- 
ber of  the  Messeng"  present  as  make  the  Majority  of  the  Council: 
provided  that  if  any  Chh  shall  not  see  Cause  to  send  any  Messeng1, 
to  the  Council  or  the  persons  chosen  by  them  shall  not  attend; 
neither  of  these  shall  be  any  obstruction  to  the  proceedings  of  the 
Council  or  Invalidate  any  of  their  acts  3 


1  Compare  Proposal  of  1705,  Pt.  1,  sec.  3,  ante,  p.  487. 

2  The  compilers  of  Congregational  Order  (1843,  p.  268)  thus  explain  the  scope  of  this  phrase : 
"usage  includes  Ordinations,  Installations,  and  dismissions  of  Pastors;  examinations  of  candidates 
for  ordination  or  installation,  in  respect  to  their  soundness  in  the  faith  and  their  qualifications  for 
the  work  of  the  ministry  ;  occasions  in  which  advice  is  regularly  asked  by  the  churches  or  individual 
members  ;  the  hearing  of  appeals  from  the  decisions  of  a  consociated  chufch  ;  hearing  and  deter- 
mining cases  of  discipline  or  difficulty  submitted  to  the  consociation  previous  to  trial ;  trial  of  pastors 
accused  of  scandal  or  heresy  on  complaint  or  call  of  the  association  ;  and  in  general,  —  deliberations 
and  advice  concerning  matters  of  common  interest  to  the  churches." 

3  Compare  Proposals  of  1705,  pt.  2,  sec.  6  Congregational  Order  observes:  u  In  respect  to 
this  article  there  is  a  diversity  of  usage.  Most  of  the  consociations  have  for  many  years  voted  by  a 
joint  ballot  \_i.  t'.,  elders  and  messengers  together],  and  a  majority  of  the  whole  forms  the  decision.1' 


504   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

5.  That  when  any  case  is  orderly  bro't  before  any  Council  of 
the  Chhs  it  shall  there  be  heard  and  Determined  which  (vnless 
utterly  removed  from  thence)  shall  be  a  finall  Issue,'  and  all  parties 
therein  Concerned  shall  sit  down  &  be  Determined  theirby;  And 
the  Councill  so  hearing  and  Giving  the  Result  or  finall  Issue  in  the 
sd  Case  as  aforesd  shall  see  their  Determinations  or  judgment  duly 
Executed  and  attended  in  such  way  or  manner  as  shall  in  their 
judgm*  be  most  suitable  &  agreeable  to  the  word  of  God. 

6.  That  if  any  Past*  and  Chh  doth  obstinately  lefuse  a  due 
attendance  and  Conformity  to  the  Determination  of  the  Council 
that  has  Cognizance  of  the  Case  &:  Determines  it  as  above,  after 
due  patience  used  they  shall  be  Reputed  guilty  of  Scandalous  Con- 
tempt &  dealt  wth  as  the  Rule  of  Gods  word  In  such  Case  doth 
provide,  &  the  Sentence  of  Non-Comunion  shall  be  Declared  ag' 
such  Past'  &  Chh,  and  the  Chhs  are  to  approve  of  the  sd  Sencence 
by  w'hdrawing  from  the  Coinunion  of  the  Past'  &  Chh  which  so  re- 
fuseth  to  be  healed.5 

7.  That  in  Case  any  Difficultys  shall  arise  in  any  of  the  Chhs 
in  this  Colony  which  cannot  be  Issued  wftout  Considerable  Disquiet, 
that  Chh  in  wch  they  arise  or  that  Minist*  or  member  aggreived  with 
them  shall  apply  themselves  to  ye  Council  of  the  Consociated  Chhs 
of  the  Circuit  to  which  the  sd  Chh  belongs,  who  if  they  see  Cause 
shall  thereon  convene  hear  and  determine  such  Cases  of  Difficulty 
unless  the  matter  brot  before  ym  shall  be  judged  so  great  in  the 
nature  of  it,  or  so  doubtfull  in  the  Isue  or  of  such  Generall  Concern 
that  ye  sd  Council  shall  judge  best  that  it  be  refered  to  a  fuller 
Council  consisting  of  the  Chhs  of  the  other  Consociation  within  the 
same  County  (or  of  the  next  adjoyning  Consociation  of  another 
County  if  their  be  not  two  Consociations  in  the  County  where  the 
difficulty  ariseth)  who  together  with  themselves  shall  hear  judge, 
determine  and  finally  Issue  such  Case  according  to  the  word  of  God.' 

8.  That  a  particular  Chh  in  wch  any  difficulty  doth  arise  may 
if  they  see  cause  call  a  Council  of  the  Consociated  Chhs  of  the 
Circuit  to  which  the  sd  Chh  belongs  before  y7  proceed  to  Sentence 
yrin,  but  their  [there]  is  not  the  same  Liberty  to  an  offending 
brother  to  call  the  sd  Council  before  the  Chh  to  wch  he  belongs  pro- 
ceed to  excomunication  in  the  sd  Case  unless  w,h  the  Consent  of 
the  Chh. 

9.  That  all  the  Chhs  of  the  Respective  Consociations  shall 


1  Compare  Proposals,  pt.  2,  sec.  7,  ante,  p.  489. 

2  Compare  Proposals,  pt.  2.  sec.  S.     Hid. 
J  Compare  Proposals,  pt.  2,  sec.  7.     Ibid. 


THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM  50$ 

Choose  if  they  see  cause  one  or  Two  members  of  each  Chh  to 
represent  them  in  the  Councils  of  the  sd  Chhs  as  occasion  may  call 
for  them,  who  shall  stand  in  that  capacity  till  new  be  Chosen  for 
the  same  service  unless  any  Chh  shall  Incline  to  Choose  their  mes- 
seng"  anew  upon  the  Convening  of  such  Councils.1 

10.  That  the  Minist*  or  Minist™  of  the  County  Towns,  and 
where  their  are  no  ministrs  in  such  Town  the  Two  next  Minist"  to 
the  sd  Town  shall  as  soon  as  Conveniently  may  be  appoint  a  time 
&  place  for  the  meeting  of  the  Elders  and  Messeng"  of  the  Chhs  in 
the  sd  County  In  order  to  yr  forming  themselves  into  one  or  more 
Consociations  and  notify  the  sd  Time  &  place  to  the  Eld"  and 
Chhs  of  that  County,  who  shall  attend  at  the  same,  the  Eld"  In  their 
own  persons  and  ye  Chhs  by  their  Messeng"  if  they  see  cause  to 
send  them,  which  Elders  and  Messeng"  so  assembled  In  Councells 
as  allso  any  other  Councill  hereby  allowed  off  [of]  shall  have  power 
to  adjourn  ymselves  as  need  shall  be  for  the  space  of  one  year  after 
the  Begining  or  first  Session  of  the  sd  Councill  and  no  longer,  and 
that  Minist*  who  was  chosen  at  the  last  Session  of  any  Councill  to 
be  moderat'  shall  with  the  advice  &  consent  of  Two  more  Eldrs  (or 
In  case  of  the  Moderat"  death  any  Two  Eld"  of  the  same  Conso- 
ciation) call  another  Councill  w,bin  the  Circuit  wn  they  shall  judge 
their  is  need  thereof,  and  all  Councills  may  prescribe  Rules  as  Occa- 
sion may  require  &  whatsoever  they  shall  judge  needfull  within  their 
Circuit  for  the  well  performing  and  orderly  Managing  the  severall 
acts  to  be  attended  by  them,  or  Matters  that  come  under  their 
cognizance.2 

11.  That  if  any  person  or  persons  orderly  Complained  off  [of] 
to  a  Councill  or  that  are  witnesses  to  such  Complaints  have  [having] 
regular  Notification  to  appear  shall  refuse  or  neglect  so  to  do  in  the 
Place  and  at  the  time  specifyed  in  the  warning  given,  except  yy  or  he 
give  some  Satisfying  reason  thereof  to  the  sd  Councill,  they  shall 
be  judged  guilty  of  Scandalous  contempt.3 

12.  That  the  teaching  Eld"  of  Each  County  shall  be  one 
Association  (or  more  if  they  see  cause)  which  Association  or  Asso- 
ciations shall  assemble  twice  a  year  at  Least  at  such  time  and  place 
as  they  shall  appoint  to  Consult  the  Dutys  of  their  office  &:  the 
Comon  Interest  of  the  Chhs,  who  shall  consider  &  resolve  Questions 
&  Cases  of    Importance  which    shall   be  offered   by  any  amoung 


1  Compare  Proposals,  pt.  2,  sec.  2;   ante,  p.  488.     Congregational  Order,  p.  276,  remarks: 
4  the  general  usage  is  to  appoint  delegates  for  a  single  council  only." 

1  Contrast  this  method  of  calling  with  that  of  the  Proposals,  pt.  2,  sec.  5 ;  ante,  p.  488. 
3  This  article  has  of  course  no  c<*  nterpart  in  the  less  elaborately  worked  out  Proposals. 


506       THE  PROPOSALS  AND   THE   SAYBROOK   PLATFORM 

y^selves  or  others,1  who  shall  have  power  of  examining  &  Rccom- 
ending  the  Candidates  of  the  Ministry  to  the  work  thereof.3 

13.  That  the  sd  Associated  Eld™  shall  take  notice  of  any 
amoung  ymselves  that  may  be  accused  of  Scandall  or  Heresy  unto 
or  Cognizable  by  them,  examine  the  matters  &  if  they  find  just 
occasion  shall  direct  to  the  calling  of  the  councill  where  such 
offend™  shall  be  duly  proceeded  against.3 

14.  That  the  Associated  Past™  shall  also  be  consulted  by 
Bereaved  Chhs  belonging  to  their  Association  &  recoliiend  to  such 
Chhs  such  persons  as  may  be  fit  to  be  called  &  settled  in  the  Work  of 
the  Gospell  Ministry  amoung  them,4  and  if  such  bereaved  Chhs  shall 
not  seasonably  call  &  settle  a  minist'  amoung  them  the  s'1  associated 
Pastrs  shall  Lay  the  State  of  such  bereaved  Chh  before  the  Gen" 
Assembly6  of  this  Colony  that  they  may  take  such  order  concern- 
ing them  as  shall  be  found  necessary  for  yr  peace  &  edification. 

15.  That  it  be  recolilended  as  expedient  that  all  the  Associa- 
tions of  this  Colony  do  meet  in  the  Gen"  Association  by  their 
respective  Delegates  one  or  more  out  of  each  Association  once  a 
year/'  the  first  meeting  to  be  at  Hartford  at  the  time  of  the  Gen" 
Election  next  ensuing  the  Date  hereof  and  so  annually  in  all  the 
Countys  successively  at  such  Time  and  Place  as  yy  the  sd  Delegates 
shall  in  their  Annuall  Meetings  appoint. 

The  above  written  Draught  voted  and  agree  by  ye  Councill 

ab0ve  as  Attest  -j    S*gcn  Mix    \  Scribes" 

f  Jn°  ^\  oodward  ) 

This  report,  so  important  for  the  ecclesiastical  history  of 
Connecticut,  was  immediately  laid  before  the  General  Court  at  its 


1  Compare  Proposals,  pt.  1,  sec.  1  and  2  ;  ante,  p.  487. 

2  Compare  Proposals,  pt.  1,  sec.  4.      The  still  existing  system  of  ministerial  licensure,  recom- 
mended  in  the  Heads  0/ Agreement  (ante,  p.  458-9)  was  thus  established  in  Mass.  and  Conn. 

3  Taken  to  a  large  extent  verbally  from  the  Proposals,  pt.  1,  sec.  3,  ante,  p.  487.  The  Conn. 
General  Association  in  1822  put  an  explanatory  interpretation  on  this  article,  of  which  this  is  the 
chief  clause  :  "  the  13th  article  is  decisive,  that  it  is  the  duty  of  an  Association  to  receive  an  accusa- 
tion against  a  pastor  belonging  to  it,  and  to  make  provision  for  his  trial  before  the  Consociation  ; 
and  your  committee  arc  convinced,  that  the  Platform  does  not  warrant  a  Consociation  to  n 
accusation  against  a  pastor,  unless  it  come  through  the  hands  of  the  Association,  of  which  he  is  a 
member."  Upham,  Ratio  Discipline?,  p.  316.  Congregational  Order,  p.  2S1,  remarks:  "  Happily 
for  the  reputation  and  usefulness  of  the  ministry  in  Connecticut,  precedents  for  settling  this  inquiry 
are  rare." 

*  Taken  with  some  modification  of  expression  from  the  Proposals,  pt.  r,  sec.  5  ;  ante,  487. 

6  /.  c,  the  Conn,  legislature.  The  contemporary  records  are  full  of  instances  of  legislative 
interference  in  parish  affairs.  Congregational  Order,  p.  2^2,  observes:  "  until  the  last  thirty  years, 
1    is]  the  churches     .     .     .     were  accustomed  t  issociated  pastors  and  to  em- 

ploy candidates  recommended  by  them." 

6  To  a  large  extent  verbally  from  the  Proposals,  pt.  1,  sec.  7,  ante,  p.  4SS. 

7  May  12,  170;.     This  was  the  first  General  Association  to  come  into  being  and  the  body  has 
ever  since  been  maintained. 


RECEPTION   OF  THE    PLATFORM  507 

October  session  at  New  Haven  and  approved  by  the  following  vote, 

enacting  it  into  the  law  of  the  colony:1 

"The  Reverend  Ministers  delegates  from  the  elders  and  messengers  of  the 
churches  in  this  government,  met  at  Saybrook,  September  gth,  1708,  having  pre- 
sented to  this  Assembly  a  Confession  of  Faith,  Heads  of  Agreement,  and  Regulations 
in  the  Administration  of  Church  Discipline,  as  unanimously  agreed  and  consented  to 
by  the  elders  and  messengers  of  all  the  churches  in  this  government  :  This  Assembly  do 
declare  their  great  approbation  of  such  a  happy  agreement,  and  do  ordain  that  all 
the  churches  within  this  government  that  are  or  shall  be  thus  united  in  doctrine,  wor- 
ship, and  discipline,  be,  and  for  the  future  shall  be  owned  and  acknowledged  estab- 
lished by  law  Provided  always,  that  nothing  herein  shall  be  intended  and  construed 
to  hinder  or  prevent  any  society  or  church  that  is  or  shall  be  allowed  by  the  laws  of 
this  government,  who  soberly  differ  or  dissent  from  the  united  churches  hereby  estab- 
lished, from  exercising  worship  and  discipline  in  their  own  way,  according  to  their 
consciences."  2 

The  Court  followed  this  act  of  approval  at  its  next  session, 
May,  1709,  by  an  order3  that  the  first  meeting  of  the  General  Asso- 
ciation, then  in  session  at  Hartford  should  "revise  and  prepare  for 
the  press"  the  various  symbols  adopted  at  Saybrook,  and  that  they 
should  forthwith  be  printed.  As  a  result,  the  little  volume  was  issued 
in  1710  from  the  press  which  Gov.  Saltonstall  had  caused  to  be  estab- 
lished at  New  London,  and  has  the  distinction  of  being  the  first  book 
published  in  Connecticut.  The  edition  of  2,000,  paid  for  by  the 
Colony,  was  distributed  in  17 14,  by  the  order  of  the  Government.4 
Once  more,  in  1760,  it  was  put  forth  at  colonial  charges  in  an  edition 
of  the  same  size  and  placed  in  each  town  in  the  colony.5 

The  system  thus  inaugurated  was  received  with  varving 
approval  by  the  churches.  Even  in  the  Synod  itself,  though  the 
vote  was  unanimous,  the  views  of  the  members  as  to  the  extent 
of  the  new  constitution  were  divided.6  But  the  chief  opportunity 
for  expression  of  opinion  was  in  the  meetings  of  the  pastors  and 
churches  of  the  respective  counties  called  in  the  spring  of  1709  to 
put  the  new  system  into  practice  by  the  establishment  of  associa- 


1  Conn.  Records,  V  :  87. 

2  This  clause  was  the  further  ratification  of  a  toleration  act,  based  on  the  English  toleration 
act  of  1689,  which  the  Conn,  legislature  had  passed  in  May,  1708,  at  the  same  session  which  issued 
the  call  for  the  Saybrook  Synod.  This  act  granted  freedom  of  worship  to  dissenters  on  the  same 
terms  as  in  England, —  requiring  the  payment  of  their  taxes  for  the  support  of  the  established  order. 
Conn.  Records,  V  :  50.  3  Ibid.,  V    97,  98. 

4  The  votes  and  orders  are  in  Conn.  Records,  V  -.  192,  423,  449. 

6  See  Conn.  Sec,  XI :  333,  565.  I  give  the  date  of  the  second  edition,  the  votes  are  of  1759 
and  61.  The  copies  were  ordered  "  distributed  to  the  several  towns  in  this  Colony  according  to 
their  publick  lists."  6  Compare  ante,  p.  501  ;  Trumbull,  Conn.,  1 :  487. 


508       THE   PROPOSALS  AND   THE   SAYBROOK   PLATFORM 

tions  and  consociations.  The  churches  of  Hartford  County  were 
the  first  to  act.  On  February  i  and  2,  1709,  the  representatives  of 
eleven  of  the  fourteen  or  fifteen  churches  then  in  the  county, —  ten 
ministers  and  twelve  laymen, —  met  at  Hartford  and  organized  two 
Consociations;  and  the  same  ministers  formed  themselves,  on  Feb- 
ruary 2d,  into  two  Associations,  coextensive  with  the  Consociations. 
According  to  the  vote  of  this  county  council:1 

"  The  Chhs  of  Hartford  [3],'  Windsor  [2]  Farmington  &  Symsbury  shall  be  of 
one  Consociation  and  the  Chhs  of  Weathersfield,  Middletown  Waterbury 3  Glassen- 
bury  Haddam,  Windham  and  Colchester  shall  be  of  the  other  Consociation  in  the 
County  of  Hartford." 

The  scribe  of  this  council,  Stephen  Mix,  had  been  scribe  also 
of  the  Saybrook  Synod,  and  two  of  the  three  other  Saybrook  dele- 
gates were  present ;  and  the  new  ecclesiastical  system  seems  to 
have  met  with  general  approval,  at  least  no  amendment  or  modifi- 
cation is  suggested  in  the  minutes. 

No  other  county  than  Hartford  formed  more  than  one  Conso- 
ciation at  this  time.  In  New  London  County,  later  the  scene  of 
much  opposition  by  individual  churches  to  the  Saybrook  system,  a 
Consociation  was  formed  on  March  2,  1709,  by  a  council  of  five 
ministers  and  eight  laymen,  from  seven  churches.'  Here  appar- 
ently, as  in  Hartford  County,  the  result  of  the  Synod  was  accepted 
without  modification.  But  both  in  Hartford  and  New  London 
Counties  there  were  individual  churches  really,  if  not  openly,  out 
of  sympathy  with  the  new  system.  At  East  Windsor  the  church 
never  approved  of  it,  though  for  a  time  silent  under  it,  and  the 
result  was  a  quarrel  which  embittered  the  later  pastorate  of 
Timothy  Edwards.5  At  Norwich,  where  John  Woodward,  one  of 
the  scribes  of  the  Synod,  was  pastor,  the  introduction  of  the  sys- 
tem was  the  cause  of  a  bitter  dispute  which  eventually  cost  Wood- 
ward his  pulpit  and  led  his  church  wholly  to  renounce  the  Saybrook 
Platform.6 


1  From  the  MS.  records  of  the  Hartford  North  Association. 

2  East  Hartford  had  not  been  set  off  as  a  separate  town. 

3  Simsbury.  Middletown,  and  Waterbury  were  the  churches   unrepresented  in  this  council. 
Hartford  County  had  then  a  much  larger  territorial  extent  than  at  present. 

*  Quoted  from  the  records  of  New  London  Association  in  Cong.  Order,  pp.  41,  42. 
5  See  Stiles,  A  ucient  Windsor,  pp.  240-246. 

•  See  Caulkins,  History  of  Norwich,  pp.  284-288. 


THE    FAIRFIELD     INTERPRETATION 


509 


If  Hartford  and  New  London  Counties,  as  a  whole,  accepted 
the  Saybrook  system  as  it  came  from  the  Synod,  New  Haven 
found  it  too  strict  and  Fairfield  esteemed  it  too  liberal.  The 
latter  acted  in  a  council  at  Stratfield,  now  Bridgeport,  on  March 
16  and  17,  1709. 

At  a  Consociation  or  meeting  of  the  Elders 
and  Messengers  of  the  County  of  Fairfield 
at  Stratfield  March  16,  1705. 
The  Revd.  Mr.  John  Davenport2  chosen  Moderator 

The  Revd.  Mr.  Charles  Chauncey  Scribe.2 
After  Solemn  Seeking  of  God  for  divine 
guidance,  direction  and  blessings  the  Coun- 
cil convened. 

The  Acts  of  ^  Council  at  Saybrook,  Sep- 
tember 9,  1708  were  read  the  first  time  as 


"Sigillum1 
Consociationis 
Fairfieldensis 


Webb 


Present  from  ye 
Chh  of  Fairfield 
The  Rev*  Mr.  Joseph 
Messenge" 
Deacon  John  Thomson 
Mr.  Samuel  Cobbet. 
From  y"  Chh  of  Stratford. 
Messenge" 
Joseph  Curtiss  Esqr. 
Mr.  Samuel  Sherman. 
From  ye  Chh  of  Stratfield. 
The  Revd.  Mr.  Charles  Chauncey 
Messenger. 
Lieut.  James  Bennet. 
From  y°  Chh  of  Stamford. 
The  Revd.  Mr.  Jno.  Davenport. 
Messengers. 
Deacon  Sam"  Hoit2 
Mr.  Jos.  Bishop 
From  ye  Chh  of  Danbury. 
The  Revd.  Mr.  Seth  Shove. 
Messengers. 
Lieut.  James  Beebee 
Mr.  James  Benedict. 
From  ye  Chh  of  Norwalk. 
The  Revd  Mi 

Messenger 

Deacon  Zerubbabel  Hoit. 

From  y  Chh  of  Woodbury. 

The  Revd.  Mr.  Anthony  Stoddard. 

Messengers. 

Deacon  John  Sherman 

Deacon  Matthew  Mitchell 


■j   also  the  general  Assembly's  approbation  and 
!   sanction  thereof,  October  170S. 

Voted  in  Council  to  adjourn  till  S  of  ye 
J   clock  in  ye  morning. 

The  Consociation  being  met  according  to 
I  adjournment,  after  prayer  made  it  was  agreed 
Imps.     That  all  the  Chhs.  in  ye  County 
J   of  Fairfield  be  one  Consociation. 

2.  That  ye  Pastors  met  in  our  Consocia- 
tion have  power  with  ye  Consent  of  the  Mes- 
sengers of  our  Chhs.  chosen  and  attending, 
Authoritatively  Judicially  and  Decisively  to 
determine  ecclesiastically  affairs  brot  to  their 
"J  Cognizance  according  to  the  Word  of  God 
J  and  that  our  Pastors  with  the  concurrence 
and  consent  of  the  Messengers  of  our  Chhes 
to  be  chosen  and  that  shall  attend  upon  all 
future  occasions,  have  like  Authoritative, 
1   Judicial  and  Decisive  power  of  Determina- 


-  — —  — - -'-v-  p"«ci   <ji   jjeLermma- 

Stephen  Buckingham.  (  tion  of  affairs  ecclesiastical,  and  that  in  fur- 
j  ther  and  fuller  meetings  of  two  Consociations 
J  together  compliant  with  ye  conclusions  of  y° 
sd  Councill  at  Saybrook,  there  is  the  like 
Authoritative,  Judiciall  and  Decisive  power 
of  Determination  of  Ecclesiastical  affairs 
I  according  to  y*  word  of  God. 
J  3-  That  by  Elder  or  Elders  of  a  particu- 
lar Chh  in  said  Saybrook  conclusions  mentioned  in  Paragraph  y«  first  is  understood 
only  in  ye  teaching  Elder  or  teaching  Elders.3 

Ch„r  h  Thp  "fSinal  f  tHiS  d°CUment  is  Preserved  in  the  records  of  the  Stratfield  church  (First 

field  County  Consociations,  Bridgeport,  1886,  pp.  32-34.  '    J 

*  The  entire  Fairfield  County  delegation  at  Saybrook.  3  /.  ,.,  ministers  on]y 


5IO   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

4.  That  in  yc  6th  Paragraph  of  sd  conclusions  we  do  not  hold  ourselves  obliged 
in  our  practice  to  use  y6  phrase  of  ye  sentence  of  Xon  Communion  but  in  y*  stead 
thereof  to  use  ye  phrase  of  ye  sentence  of  Excommunication  which  may  in  our  judg- 
ment be  formally  applied  in  ye  Cases  expressed  in  said  Paragraph. 

The  Councill  adjourned  till  half  an  hour  past  two  oclock  in  ye  afternoon. 

5.  That  to  ye  orderly  begining  of  a  case  before  a  Councill  of  our  Chhes.  y° 
aggrieved  member  shall  make  application  unto  y"  moderator  of  the  Councill  or  Con- 
sociation for  y*  time  being  or  in  case  of  y*  moderator's  death  to  ye  free'  Senr  Pastor 
of  ye  Consociation  who  upon  his  desire  shall  receive  attested  copies  of  ye  Chhs  pro- 
ceedings with  y"  aggrieved  member  from  their  minister  and  ye  sd.  Moderator  with 
the  two  free  senr.  Pastors  of  y*  Circuit  or  in  ye  Case  premised  of  y"  death  of  ye  Mod- 
erator y"  sd  2  senr.  pastors  of  y*  circuit  being  satisfied  there  is  sufficient  cause  shall 
warn  ye  convening  of  the  Consociation. 

6.  That  a  Copy  of  a  Warning  to  appear  before  ye  Councill  the  time  and  place 
being  notified  being  read  in  the  hearing  or  left  in  ye  house  of  the  ordinary  abode  of 
a  scandalous  member  or  witness  concerning  the  case  depending  before  two  members 
of  the  designation  of  the  Scribe5  for  y'  time  being  and  signed  by  the  sd  Scribe  be 
adjudged  a  regular  notification. 

7.  That  a  copy  of  a  Warning  to  appear  before  ye  Pastor  or  Chh.  ye  place  and  time 
notified  being  read  in  ye  hearing  or  left  in  the  ordinary  abode  of  an  offending  member 
or  witness  needfull  in  the  case  before  two  members  appointed  by  the  pastor  and 
signed  by  him  shall  be  a  fair  notification  ye  neglect  whereof  unless  upon  sufficient 
reason  shall  be  reputed  a  scandalous  contempt  in  our  respective  Chhes. 

8.  That  all  persons  that  are  known  to  be  Baptized  shall  in  y*  places  where 
they  dwell  be  subject  to  y"  Censures  of  admonition  and  excommunication  in  case  of 
scandall  committed  and  obstinately  persisted  in. 

9.  That  the  Moderator  and  Scribe  now  chosen  be  accounted  to  stand  in  ye 
same  respective  capacities  for  ye  time  being  untill  a  new  regular  choice  be  made,  and 
so  for  the  future. 

10.  That  ye  Judgment  of  ye  Consociation  or  Councill  be  executed  by  any  Pastor 
appointed  thereto  by  y*  Councill  when  ye  Pastor  that  hath  already  dealt  in  y'  case 
hath  not  a  freedome  of  conscience  to  execute  ye  same. 

The  above  Acts  and  Conclusions  of  the  present  Consociation  unanimously  Voted 
March  17,  1703. 

Signed  Charles  Chauncey,  Scribe. 
The  above  and  foregoing  is  a  true  Copy  of  the  Originall  Compared. 

pr.  Samuel  Cooke.3 

This  was  an  interpretation  not  far  removed  from  Presbyteri- 
anism.  The  strong  judicial  flavor  of  the  Saybrook  Articles  was 
increased  till  the  Fairfield  interpretation  made  the  Consociation 
fully  a  church  court.4     The  sentence  of  non-communion  was  not 


'/.<•.,  not  concerned  in  the  dispute. 

-  As  I  take  it,  a  comma  should  be  inserted  after  "depending"  ;  and  the  meaning  is  that  this 
reading  or  leaving  the  notification  is  to  be  in  the  presence  of  two  witnesses  named  by  the  scribe 
issuing  the  summons.     So  in  the  next  section. 

3  Chauncey's  successor  in  the  Stratfield  pastorate,  1715-1747. 

*  Article  2  of  Fairfield  Interpretation.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  in  1S46  the  Fairfield  West 
Consociation,  a  direct  representative  of  the  body  with  which  we  have  to  do,  voted,  "  As  concerns 
the  relations  of  Consociation  to  consociated  churches,  and  its  power  over  them,  it  disclaims,  and 


THE   NEW    HAVEN    INTERPRETATION  50 

severe  enough  to  be  the  penalty  of  a  delinquent  church,- the 
churches  of  Fairfield  would  change  that  to  the  un-Congregational 
extreme  of  excommunication,  as  if  they  had  full  right  to  cast  an 
erring  church  out  of  the  fold  of  Christ.'  At  the  same  time  the 
method  of  calling  the  Consociation,  notifying  the  accused  and 
witnesses,  and  executing  judgments  rendered,  was  far  more 
minutely  laid  down  than  in  the  Saybrook  Platform  and  given  a 
more  judicial  tone.2 

But  while  Fairfield  County  thus  emphasized,  by  the  unanimous 
vote  of  the  representatives  of  its  churches,  the  stricter  interpreta- 
tion of  the  meaning  of  the  work  at  Saybrook,  the  churches  of  New 
Haven  County  moved  in  the  other  direction.  The  churches  of 
that  county  were  the  last  to  act,  delaying  their  ratification  till 
April  13,  1709.  The  story  of  their  meeting  was  told  in  1759  by 
Rev.  Jonathan  Todd,  in  a  controversial  pamphlet,3  and  is  as 
follows: 

"The  Rev'd  Mr.  Pierpont  the  Minister  of  New-Haven,  accordingly/  appointed 
a  Meeting  of  the  Elders  and  Messengers  of  the  County  of  New-Haven  at  Branford 
the :13th  of  April,  1709,  for  that  Purpose-  and  notified  the  Time  and  Place,  to  the 
Elders  and  Churches  of  the  County.  Most  of  the  Elders  and  Churches  by  their 
Messengers,  attended,  tho'  with  particular  Instructions  (as  I  was  informed  by  One 
who  was  very  active  in  bringing  about  such  a  Consociation  of  the  Churches)  to  take 
Care  to  secure  their  congregational  Privileges.  When  they  came  together,  many  of 
the  Messengers  of  the  Churches,  had  some  Doubts,  whether  their  congregational 
Liberties  were  sufficiently  guarded,  in  some  of  the  Articles.  The  Rev'd  Mr  Andrew 
and  Mr.  Pierpont  interpreted  these  Articles  to  their  Satisfaction  :  They  insisted  that 
the  Sense  of  those  Articles,  or  Clauses  of  Articles,  that  they  were  in  greatest  Doubt 
about,  should  be  written  and  fixed,  to  prevent  a  different  interpretation  hereafter 
This  was  agreed  to,  (as  I  was  informed,  by  One  who  was  acquainted  with  the  Doings 
of  the  Council  at  Say-Brook,  and  of  this  at  Branford)  and  then  the  Council  came 
into  the  following  Resolve  and  Covenant,  viz. 

[of]  Favrfeld  p.  2,     Th.s  certainly  .mplies  a  good  deal  of  modification  of  view,  and  a  good  deal 
of  forgetting  of  h.story  also,  in  the  lapse  of  i37  years. 

•  Ibid.,  Art.  4.  2  md    Ans   5]  ^       iQ 

A  Faithful  Narrative,  0/  Proceedings  of  the  First  Society  and  Church  in  Wallin* 
ford  tu  their  catling  and  settling  the  Re,.  J.  Dana.  New  Haven,  I75o,  £Z£  ut3 
haps  needless  to  observe  that  the  writer  favored  a  loose  construction  o  the  An  cles'  He  "as 
pastor  at  East  Guilford,  now  Madison,  ,733-9,      He  could  easily  have  enjoyed  perso"a,c 

qua.mance  of  several  of  the  New  Haven  County  ministers  active  in  I7oo.     Part  of  this  docu^en 
is  pruned  in  Cong.  Order,  pp.  284-286.  document 

speaking  '"  '"  aCC°rdanCC  Whh  Ar,ide  X"  °f  the  Sa>b™k  PI«form,  of  which  Todd  has  just  been 
s  /.  e.,  organizing  a  consociation. 


512   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

'At  a  Council  of  the  Elders  and  Messengers  of  the  Churches  of  New-Haven, 
Mil  ford,  Br  a  n ford,  Derby  and  East-Guilford?  in  the  County  of  New-Haven,  con- 
vened at  Braiiford,  April  13,  1709,  After  Invocation  on  the  Lord,  for  his  gracious 
Presence  and  Conduct,  the  Rev'd  Samuel  Andrew  and  James  Pierpont,  were 
chosen  Moderators. 
The  Rev'd  S.  Andrew-    "I  Messengers  present. 

/.  Pierpont?  \  J.  Punderson       )  ,,  ,.        ,,  _.        , 

S.  Russcl*  ElderS  A .  Bradly,  f  *  ^  *  ">*«»»  Church' 

/.  Mom,1  Present.       D  Buckingltavi  ) 

J.  Hart1-         J  S.  Eels 

J.  Rose     )  From  Branford  Church, 
P.  Tyler  ) 

J.  Nichols,  from  Derby  Church, 
N.  Bradly,  from  East-Cuilford  Church. 

"  Ordered,  and  voted,  that  a  Record  be  made  of  all  Votes  and  Determinations 
that  shall  be  made  by  this  Council. 

"Whereas  Communion  of  Saints,  is  an  appointed  and  sanctified  Means  of 
Christian  Edification  ;  and  Communion  of  Churches,  a  principal  Means  for  the 
Preservation  of  Peace,  Order,  Establishment,  and  Consolation  of  the  Churches  ;  consid- 
ering also,  (notwithstanding  the  wise  and  pious  Care  of  our  Rev'd  Lathers,  the 
Founders  of  these  Churches,  to  assert  the  Duty  of  such  Communion,  by  giving  the 
Right  Hand  of  Fellowship  to  said  Churches)  that  thro'  the  Corruption  of  the  Times, 
the  too  great  Slackness,  and  Inadvertency  of  our  own  Hearts  ;  our  several  Churches 
have  of  late  been  over  remiss,  in  making  due  Use  of  said  Means  :  Therefore  humbling 
ourselves  before  GOD  for,  and  begging  his  Forgiveness  thro  JESUS  CHRIST, 
for  past  Omissions  ;  We  now,  whose  Names  are  here  specified,  for  ourselves,  and 
in  Behalf  of  the  several  Churches  from  whence  we  arc  come,  according  to  the 
Method  agreed  on  by  the  Council  of  all  the  Churches 7  in  this  Colony,  met  at  Say- 
Brook,  Sept.  9.  1708,  do  (until  we  shall  otherwise  agree)  form  ourselves  into  one 
Consociation  ;  and  thro'  the  strength  of  CHRIST  (-without  whom  we  can  do  nothing) 
promise  for  the  Future,  we  will  better  mutually  watch  over  each  other,  and  be  ready 
at  all  Times,  according  to  the  Rule  of  God's  Word,  to  be  helpful  to  each  other,  in 
the  Service  and  Work  of  the  Kingdom  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  as  we 
may  have  Opportunity  for  the  same,  and  be  called  thereunto,  according  to  the  said 
Method  and  Rule,  agreed  on  at  said  Council  at  Say-Brook. 

"  Some  Members  desiring  the  Council's  Sense  of  several  Articles  in  the  written  ■ 
Method  of  managing  Discipline,  as  it  was  agreed  on  by  the  Council  at  Say-Brook, 
Sept.  9.  1708. 


1  The  New  Haven  County  churches  not  represented  were  Guilford  and  Wallingford.     There 
is  reason  to  believe  that  the  Wallingford  pastor,  at  least,  was  detained  by  bodily  infirmity. 
a  Samuel  Andrew  of  Milford,  member  of  Saybrook  Synod. 
3  James  Pierpont  of  New  Haven,  also  at  Saybrook. 
*  Samuel  Russell  of  Branford,  the  third  member  of  the  delegation  at  Saybrook. 

5  Joseph  Moss  of  Derby. 

6  John  Hart  of  East  Guilford,  now  Madison. 

7  Dr.  Bacon  deemed  the  representation  of  the  General  Court,  that  the  Saybrook  Synod  spoke 
the  voice  of  the  Connecticut  churches  as  a  whole,  very  cool  and  audacious.—  Cunt.  Eccles.  Hist. 
Conn.,  p.  3S.  But  this  New  Haven  County  council  evidently  looked  upon  the  Saybrook  body  as 
universally  representative. 

8  This  was  literally  true, —  the  Saybrook  platform  was  not  printed  till  1710. 


THE  NEW    HAVEN    INTERPRETATION  513 

'  Voted  as  follows, 

'  1.  As  to  the  first  Art}  we  conclude,  If  the  Majority  of  the  Brethren  don't 
consent,  the  Elders  can't  proceed  to  ad  :  If  the  Elders  can't  consent,  the  Fraternity 
can  t  proceed ;   in  which  Case,  it  is  proper  to  seek  Council. 

'  2.  The  second  Art.  we  understand  to  be  an  Explanation,  or  revival  of  the  Duty 
engaged  by  our  Churches,  when  they  give  the  right  Hand  of  Fellowship. 

'3.  By  all  Cases  of  Scandal  in  Art.  third,  we  suppose  such  Cases  as  need  a 
Council  for  their  Determination. 

'4.  A  major  Part  of  the  Elders  we  suppose  necessary:  As  in  a  particular 
Church,  the  Brethren  can't  act  without  the  Elders,  so  in  a  Council,  the  Messengers 
may  not  make  an  act  of  Council,  without  the  Elders,  or  the  major  Part  of  them. 

'  5.  Shall  see  their  Determination,  &c.  i.  e.  shall  by  themselves,  or  some  of  their 
Number,  deputed  thereunto,  observe  whether  the  Council  of  GOD,  sought  in  this 
Way,  may  be  complied  with  or  refused. 

'  6.  Contempt  of  Council,  sought  of  Gon,  or  offer'd  in  a  Way  of  God,  must  be 
scandalous,  or  a  just  Offence,  and  to  be  dealt  in  :  And  that  Clause,  viz,  The  Churches 
are  to  approve  of  said  Sentence,  &c.  We  understand  as  the  Platform  expresseth 
it,  viz.  The  Churches  being  informed  of  the  Council's  Judgment,  and  the  Churches 
approving  said  Sentence,  then  the  Non-Communion  to  be  declared}  Without  Appro- 
bation of  Churches,   There  can't  be  a  Non-Communion  of  said  Churches. 

'  7.  The  7th  Article  provides  only  for  joining  two  Councils,  in  weighty,  difficult 
and  dangerous  Cases. 

'  8.  Churches  may  call  a  Council  before  they  proceed  to  censure,  but  without  their 
Allowance,  no   PARTICULAR    Person  shall  have  a  Council  before  Excommunication. 

'  9.  That  as  no  Members  of  a  Council  can  remain  such,  for  longer  than  one 
Year  ;  so  the  Council  [Churches?]  may  choose  new  Messengers  for  every  Council,  if 
they  see  Cause. 

'  10.  The  10th  Article  directs  to  the  calling  the  first  Council,  and  adjourning 
the  same,  not  beyond  a  Year,  and  how  a  further  Council  may  afterwards  be  called. 

'11.  The  nth  Artie,  shews  how  Persons  concern' d  may  be  obliged  to  attend  with 
their  Cases  and  Evidence,  on  a  Council. 

'  12.  The  12th  Artie,  is  the  Revival  of  our  former  Ministers'  Meetings,  for  the 
Ends  and  good  Services  formerly  aim'd  at  ;  wherein  our  People  did  rejoice  for  a 
Season,  and  hope  yet  will. 

'  13.   The  13th  Art.  shews,  hew  a  Minister  offending,  may  be  proceeded  against, 
'til  by  the  Council  of  that  Consociation,  he  be  reclaim' d,  or  removed  from  his  Office. 
A  true  Copy  of  the  Acts  of  Council, 

Test.  Joseph  Moss,  Scribe. 

A  true  Copy,  from  the  Record  of  the  Association  of  New-Haven  County, 

examined  by  Thomas  A'uggles* 
Keeper  of  the  Association's  Book  of  Records." 

With  these  modifications,  the  Saybrook  system  went  into  gen- 
eral operation  throughout  the  Colony.     It  had  the  hearty  support 


1  To  see  the  full  minimizing  force  of  these  resolutions  they  should  be  compared,  article  by 
article,  with  the  Saybrook  Platform,  ante,  pp.  503-506. 

2  Compare  Cambridge  Platform,  ch.  XV,  sec.  2,  par.  3  ;  ante,  pp.  230-231.    Contrast  also  with 
Fairfield  interpretation,  sec.  4,  ante,  p.  510. 

3  This  was  doubtless  Thomas  Ruggles,  Jr.,  pastor  at  Guilford  when  Todd  published  this 
document. 


514   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

of  the  colonial  government  and  of  the  majority  of  the  ministry. 
Its  chief  trial  came  when  the  "Great  Awakening"  of  1740-41  pro- 
duced radical  diversities  of  view  as  to  methods  of  Christian  evan- 
gelization in  many  of  the  churches.  In  the  separations'  and 
divisions  which  followed,  especially  in  Eastern  Connecticut,  the 
system  operated  in  favor  of  the  conservatives.  In  general,  it  pro- 
duced a  feeling  of  sympathy  with  the  Presbyterianism  of  the  Middle 
Colonies,  rather  than  with  the  more  independent  Congregationalism 
of  Massachusetts,  which  led  to  many  cooperant  efforts  in  endeavors 
to  resist  Episcopacy  and  evangelize  the  newer  settlements  to  the 
westward  during  the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  the 
beginning  of  our  own.2  This  feeling  of  kinship  to  Presbyterianism 
rather  than  to  pure  Congregationalism  had  frequent  and  curious 
illustration.  As  late  as  Feb.  5,  1799,  the  Hartford  North  Associa- 
tion united  in  the  following  astounding  declaration:3 

"  This  Association  gives  information  to  all  whom  it  may  concern,  that  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  Churches  in  the  State  of  Connecticut,  founded  on  the  common  usage, 
and  the  confession  of  faith,  heads  of  agreement,  and  articles  of  church  discipline, 
adopted  at  the  earliest  period  of  the  Settlement  of  this  State,-1  is  not  Congregational, 
but  contains  the  essentials  of  the  church  of  Scotland,  or  Presbyterian  Church  in 
America,  particularly  as  it  gives  a  decisive  power  to  Ecclesiastical  Councils ;  and  a 
Consociation  consisting  of  Ministers  and  Messengers  or  a  lay  representation  from  the 
churches  is  possessed  of  substantially  the  same  authority  as  a  Presbytery.  The 
judgements,  decisions  and  censures  in  our  Churches  and  in  the  Presbyterian  are 
mutually  deemed  valid.  The  Churches,  therefore,  of  Connecticut  at  large  and  in  our 
districts  in  particular,  are  not  now  and  never  were  from  the  earliest  period  of  our  set- 
tlement. Congregational  Churches,  according  to  the  ideas  and  forms  of  Church  order 
contained  in  the  book  of  discipline  called  the  Cambridge  Platform  ;  there  are,  how- 
ever, Scattered  over  the  State,  perhaps  ten  or  twelve  Churches  which  are  properly 
called  Congregational,5  agreeable  to  the  rules  of  Church  discipline  in  the  book  above 
mentioned.  Sometimes  indeed  the  associated  churches  of  Connecticut  are  loosely 
and  vaguely,  tho  improperly,  termed  Congregational." 

But  even  before  the  adoption  of  this  declaration  the  Saybrook 


'  The  Separatists  arc  treated  in  the  New  Engiander',  XI :  195  ;  in  Cout.  EccUs.  Hist.  Conn., 
pp.  253-9;  and,  ucst  of  all,  by  Miss  Larned,  Hist.  Windham  County,  Conn.,  Worcester,  1874,  I: 
393-485- 

2  Some  instances  will  be  given  in  the  next  chapter. 

a  Records;— also  quoted  in  G.  L  Walker,  Hist.  First  Ch.,  Hartford,  pp.  358,  359.  It  was 
agreed  upon  by  fifteen  ministers  of  the  County. 

.  *  This  affirmation,  and  several  which  follow,  are  the  more  remarkable  perversions  of  history  in 

view  of  the  publication  at  Hartford,  two  years  before  this  declaration,  of  the  first  volume  of  Trum- 
ecticut. 

s  /.  <•.,  churches  which  rejected  the  Saybrook  system. 


LATER    HISTORY  5  1 5 

system  had  ceased  to  have  the  special  sanction  of  the  law.  The 
revision  of  the  statutes  which  followed  the  Revolution,  in  1784, 
silently  repealed  the  legal  authority  of  the  Saybrook  establishment 
by  omitting  all  reference  to  it;  though  it  still  required  all  inhabit- 
ants of  a  parish,  who  were  not  declared  supporters  of  some  other 
form  of  worship,  to  contribute  to  the  maintenance  of  the  Congre- 
gational ministry.  In  the  political  upheaval  of  18 18,  when  the 
present  constitution  of  Connecticut  was  adopted,  this  remaining 
shred  of  the  old  ecclesiastical  establishment  was  swept  away,  and 
all  special  privileges  denied  to  the  Congregational  body.  Since 
that  time  all  religious  associations  in  Connecticut  have  been  purely 
voluntary. 

But  the  consociational  system  in  Connecticut  long  survived  its 
legal  disestablishment.  Always  subject  to  a  variety  of  construc- 
tions of  greater  or  less  strictness,  it  yet  had  such  a  hold  upon  the 
churches  that  as  late  as  1841  all  but  15  of  the  246  churches  then 
existing  in  Connecticut  were  consociated.1  Yet  consociationism 
had  for  years  been  relaxing  the  closeness  of  its  hold,  and  during 
the  two  decades  from  1850  to  1870  the  process  of  disintegration 
went  rapidly  on.  The  purging  out  of  the  leaven  of  Presbyterianism 
through  the  reviving  sense  of  the  integrity  and  sufficiency  of  Con- 
gregationalism under  the  teachings  of  eminent  men,  of  whom  Dr. 
Bacon  of  New  Haven  may  serve  as  an  example,  had  much  to  do 
with  this  result.  Much,  too,  was  due  to  the  influence  of  widespread 
doctrinal  discussions,  and  much  also  to  the  multiplication  of  new 
churches  in  the  rapidly  growing  towns.  The  freer  union  of  "  Confer- 
ences " 2  has  taken  the  place  of  the  old  Consociations  in  almost  every 
portion  of  Connecticut.  Yet  Consociations  still  survive.  There 
are  still  bodies  known  as  the  Consociations  of  Fairfield  East,  and 
West,  Litchfield  South,  and  New  Haven  East,  and  they  still  report 
a  membership  of  71  out  of  306  churches  of  the  Congregational 
order  in  the  state;3  but  in  practical  administration  these  unions  now 

1  Congregational  Order,  p.  52. 

2  In  Connecticut  a  "  Conference  "  is  in  no  sense  a  council  and  has  no  judicial  powers  whatever. 
It  is  a  body  for  friendly  discussion,  for  mutual  assistance  in  Christian  work,  and  it  chooses  repre- 
sentatives to  state  and  national  conferences  and  councils.  It  does  not  pass  upon  ministerial  fitness 
or  settle  church  quarrels. 

3  Minutes  0/  Conn.  General  Conference,  1892. 


5l6        THE   PROPOSALS   AND    THE    SAYBROOK   PLATFORM 

differ  little  from  Conferences.  As  a  system  of  strong  ecclesiastical 
government  the  structure  erected  by  the  Saybrook  Synod  is  now 
a  thing  of  the  past.  Great  diversity  of  view  as  to  the  usefulness 
of  some  of  its  provisions  still  obtains.  But  there  can  be  no  ques- 
tion that  it  has  essentially  modified  the  Congregationalism  of 
America  from  what  it  would  have  been  without  the  example  of 
Connecticut.  Connecticut  set  the  pattern  for  those  annual  meet- 
ings of  the  churches  of  each  state  which  have  become  a  feature  of 
our  polity;  nor  is  it  too  much  to  affirm  that  the  example  of  mutual 
helpfulness  given  by  the  Consociations  of  Connecticut,  though  not 
followed  elsewhere  to  the  extent  of  establishing  standing  councils, 
has  been  chiefly  instrumental  in  forming  the  Conferences  in  which 
the  churches  of  counties  and  other  local  divisions  are  almost 
everywhere  affiliated.  The  familiar  local  ministerial  Association 
was  not  indeed  original  to  Connecticut.  It  took  deep  root  in  Mas- 
sachusetts soil.  But  in  the  popularization  of  that  institution,  and 
in  making  it,  as  it  still  is  in  large  sections  of  our  land,  the  agent  in 
ministerial  licensure,  the  influence  of  Connecticut  has  been  decisive. 
The  results  of  the  Saybrook  system  are  not  the  property  of  one 
colony  alone  but  of  all  our  American  Congregational  heritage.' 


Compare  the  judicious  remarks  of  Dr.  Bacon,  Cont.  Eccles.  Hist.  Conn.,  pp.  68-70. 


PREFACE   TO    THE    CONFESSION  $iy 


The  Saybrook  Result 

A  |  CONFESSION  |  of  j  FAITH  |  Owned  and  Consented  to 
by  the  |  Elders  and  Messengers  |  Of  the  churches  |  In  the  Colony 
of  CONNECTICUT  in  |  NEW-ENGLAND,  |  Assembled  by  Delega- 
tion   at    Say-Brook  \  September   glh.    1708.  |  |   Eph.  4    5.      One 

Faith.  I  Col.  2.  5.     Joying  and  beholding  your  \  Order  and  the  stead- 
fastness of  your  I  Faith  in  Christ.  |  |  New-London  in  N.  E.  | 

Printed  by  Thomas  Short,  |  1710. 

[n  blank] 
[1] 

A  Preface. 

AMong  the  Memorable  Providences  relating  to  our  English  ATation  in  the  last 
Century,  must  be  acknowledged  the  setling  of  English  Colonics  in  the  Amer- 
ican parts  of  the  World ;  Among  all  which  this  hath  been  Peculiar  unto  and 
to  the  distinguishing  Glory  of  that  Tract  called  New-England,  that  the  Colonies 
there  were  Originally  formed,  not  for  the  advantage  of  Trade  and  a  Worldly  Interest  : 
But  upon  the  most  noble  Foundation,  even  of  Religion,  and  the  liberty  of  their 
Consciences,  with  respect  unto  the  Ordinances  of  the  Gospel  Administred  in  the 
Purity  and  Power  of  them ;  an  happiness  then  not  to  be  enjoyed  in  their  Native  Soil. 
We  joyfully  Congratulate  the  Religious  Liberty  of  our  Brethren  in  the  late 
Auspicious  Reign  of  K.  William,  and  Q.  Mary,  of  Blessed  Memory,  &  in  the  present 
Glorious  Reign,  and  from  the  bottom  of  our  Hearts  bless  the  Lord  whose  Prerogative 
it  is  to  reserve  the  Times  and  Seasons  in  his  own  hand,  who  also  hath  Inspired  the 
Pious  Mind  of  Her  most  Sacred  Majesty,1  whose  Reign  we  constantly  [2]  and  un- 
feignedly  Pray,  may  be  long  and  Glorious,  with  Royal  Resolutions,  Inviolably  to 
maintain  the  Toleration. 

Dens  enim  -  -  hac    Otia  fecit. 

Undoubtedly  if  the  same  had  been  the  Liberty  of  those  Times,  our  Fathers 
would  have  been  far  from  Exchanging  a  most  pleasant  Land  (duke  solum  patriae)  for 
a  vast  and  howling  Wilderness  ;  Since  for  the  enjoyment  of  so  desirable  Liberty  a 
considerable  number  of  Learned,  Worthy  and  Pious  Persons  were  by  a  Divine  Im- 
pulse and  Extraordinary  concurrence  of  Dispositions  engaged  to  adventure  their  Lives 
Families  and  Estates  upon  the  vast  Ocean,2  following  the  lord  into  a  Wilderness,  a 
Land  then  not  sown  :  Wherein  Innumerable  difficulties  staring  them  in  the  Face  were 
outbid  by  Heroick  Resolution,  Magnanimity  &  confidence  in  the  Lord  alone.  30ur 
Fathers  trusted  in  the  Lord  and  were  delivered,  they  trusted  in  him  and  were  not 
confounded.  It  was  their  care  to  be  with  the  Lord,  and  their  indulgence,4  That  the 
Lord  was  with  them,  to  a  Wonder  preserving  supporting  protecting  and  animating 
them  ;  dispatching  and  destroying  the  Pagan  Natives  by  extraordinary  Sickness  and 
Mortality,  that  there  might  il>e  room  for  his  People  to  serve  the  Lord  our  God  in. 


Queen  Anne.  2  Jer.  2.  2.  3  Psal. 

2  Chron.  15.  2.  6  Psal.  80.  8,  9. 


5  I S   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM 

It  was  the  Glory  of  our  Fa-[3]thers,  that  they  heartily  professed  the  only  Rule  of 
their  Religion  from  the  very  first  to  be  the  Holy  Scripture,  according  whereunto,  so 
far  as  they  were  perswaded  upon  diligent  Inquiry,  Solicitous  search,  and  faithful 
Prayer  conformed  was  their  Faith,  their  Worship  together  with  the  whole  Adminis- 
tration of  the  House  of  Christ,  and  their  manners,  allowance  being  given  to  humane 
Failures  and  Imperfections. 

That  which  they  were  most  Solicitous  about,  and  wherein  their  Liberty  had  been 
restrained,  respected  the  'Worship  of  God  and  the  Government  of  the  Church  of 
Christ  according  to  his  own  appointment,  their  Faith  and  Profession  of  Religion  be- 
ing the  same,  which  was  generally  received  in  all  the  Reformed  Churches  of  Europe, 
and  in  Substance  the  Assemblies  Confession,  as  shall  be  shown  anon. 

It  cannot  be  denied,  that  the  Usage  of  the  Christian  Church  whose  Faith  wholly 
rested  upon  the  word  of  God  respecting  Confessions  of  Faith  is  very  Ancient  and  that 
which  is  universally  acknowledged  to  be  most  so,  and  of  Universal  acceptance  and 
consent  is  commonly  called  the  Apostles  Creed,  a  Symbol  sign  or  Badge  of  the  Chris- 
tian Religion,  called  the  Apostles,  not  because  they  composed  it,  for  then  it  must 
have  been  received  into  the  Canon  of  the  Holy  Bible,  but  because  the  mat-[4]ter  of  it 
agreeth  with  the  Doctrine  &  is  taken  out  of  the  Writings  of  the  Apostles.  Conse- 
quent hereunto,  as  the  necessity  of  the  Church  for  the  Correcting  Condemning  & 
Suppressing  of  Heresy  &  Error  required,  have  been  emitted  Ancient  and  Famous 
Confessions  of  Faith  composed  and  agreed  upon  by  Oecumenical  Councils,  c.  g.  Of 
Nice  against  Arritis,  of  Constantinople  against  Maeedonitis,  of  Ephesu  against  Xcs- 
torius,  of  Chalccdon  against  Eutyches.  And  when  the  Light  of  Reformation  broke 
forth  to  the  dispersing  of  Popish  darkness,  the  Reformed  Nations  agreed  upon  Con- 
fessions of  Faith,  famous  in  the  World  and  of  especial  service  to  theirs  and  standing 
Ages.  And  among  those  of  latter  times  Published  in  our  Nation  most  worthy  of 
Repute  and  Acceptance  we  take  to  be  the  Confession  of  Faith,  Composed  by  the  Rev- 
erend Assembly  of  Divines  Convened  at  Westminster,  with  that  of  the  Savoy,  in  the 
substance  and  in  expressions  for  the  most  part  the  same :  the  former1  professedly 
assented  &  attested  to,  by  the  Fathers  of  our  Country  by  Unanimous  Vote  of  the 
Synod  of  Elders  and  Messengers  of  the  Churches  met  at  Cambridge  the  last  of  the 
bill.  Month  164S.  The  latter  owned  and  consented  to  by  the  Elders  and  Messengers 
of  the  Churches  Assembled  at  Boston.  May  12th.  16S0.  The  same  we  doubt  not  to 
profess  to  have  been  the  constant  Faith  of  the  [5]  Churches  in  this  Colony  from  the 
first  Foundation  of  them.  And  that  it  may  appear  to  the  Christian  World,  that  our 
Churches  do  not  maintain  differing  Opinions  in  the  Doctrine  of  Religion,  nor  are 
desirous  for  any  reason  to  conceal  the  Faith  we  are  perswaded  of :  The  Elders  and 
Messengers  of  the  Churches  in  this  Colony  of  Connecticut  in  Next)  England,  by  ver- 
tue  of  the  Appointment  and  Encouragement  of  the  Honourable  the  General  Assembly, 
Convened  by  Delegation  at  Say  Brook,  Sept  9I/1.  1 70S.  Unanimously  agreed,  that 
the  Confession  of  Faith  owned  and  Consented  unto  by  the  Elders  and  Messengers  of 
the  Churches  Assembled  at  Boston  in  New-England  May  \2th.  1680.  Being  the 
second  Session  of  that  Synod,  be  Recommended  to  the  Honourable  the  General 
Assembly  of  this  Colony  at  their  next  Session,  for  their  Publick  Testimony  thereto, 
as  the  Faith  of  the  Churches  of  this  Colony,  which  Confession  together  with  the 
Heads  of  Union  and  Articles  for  the  Administration  of  Church  Government  herewith 
emitted  were  Presented  unto  and  approved  and  established  by  the  said  General  As- 
sembly at  New-Haven  on  the  \\th.  of  October  1708. 


1  See  the  Preface  to  the  Platform  of  Church  Discipline,  ante,  p.  193. 


PREFACE    TO    THE   CONFESSION  519 

This  Confession  of  Faith  we  offer  as  our  firm  Terswasion  well  and  fully  grounded 
upon  the  Holy  Scripture,  and  Commend  the  same  unto  all  and  particularly  to  the 
people  of  our  Colony  to  be  examined  accepted  and  constantly  maintained.  We  do 
not  assume  to  our-[6]selves,  that  any  thing  be  taken  upon  trust  from  us,  but  com- 
mend to  our  people  these  following  Counsels. 

I.  That  You  be  immoveably  and  unchangeably  agreed  in  the  only  sufficient,  and 
invariable  Rule  of  Religion,  which  is  the  Holy  Scripture  the  fixed  Canon,1  uncapa- 
ble  of  addition  or  diminution.  You  ought  to  account  nothing  ancient,  that  will  not 
stand  by  this  Rule,"  nor  any  thing  new  that  will.  Do  not  hold  your  selves  bound  to 
Unscriptural  Rites  in  Religion,  wherein  Custom  it  self  doth  many  times  misguid. 
Relieve  it  to  be  the  honour  of  Religion  to  resign  and  captivate  our  Wisdom  and  Faith 
to  Divine  Revelation.3 

II.  That  You  be  determined  by  this  Rule  in  the  whole  of  Religion.  That 
Your  Faith  be  right  and  Divine,  the  Word  of  God  must  be  the  foundation  of  it, 

and  the  Authority  of  the  Word  the  reason  of  it*  You  may  believe  the  most  Im- 
portant Articles  of  Faith,  with  no  more  than  an  Humane  Faith  ;  And  this  is  evermore 
the  cause,  when  the  Principle  Faith  is  resolved  into,  is  any  other  than  the  holy  Scrip- 
ture. For  an  Orthodox  Christian  to  resolve  his  Faith,  into  Education  Instruction 
and  the  perswasion  of  others  is  not  an  higher  reason,  than  a  Papist,  Mahometan,  or 
Pagan  can  produce  for  his  Religion. 

[7]  Pay  also  unto  God  the  Worship,  that  will  bear  the  Tryal  of  and  receive 
Establishment  by  this  Rule.  Have  always  in  Readiness  a  Divine  Warrant  for  all  the 
Worship  you  Perform  to  God.  Believe  that  Worship  is  accepted  and  that  only, 
which  is  directed  unto,  and  Commanded,  and  hath  the  promise  of  a  Plessing  from 
the  Word  of  God.  Believe  that  Worship  not  Divinely  Commanded  is  in  vain,6  nor 
will  answer  the  Necessities  and  Expectations  of  a  Christian,  and  is  a  Worshipping, 
you  know  not  what.6  Believe  in  all  Divine  Worship,  it  is  not  enough  that  this  or 
that  Act  of  Worship  is  not  forbidden  in  the  Word  of  God  ;  If  it  be  not  Commanded, 
and  you  perform  it,  You  may  fear,  You  will  be  found  Guilty  and  exposed  to  Divine 
Displeasure.7  Nadab  and  Abihu  paid  dear  for  Offering  in  Divine  Worship  that 
which  the  Lord  Commanded  them  not.  It  is  an  honour  done  unto  Christ,  when  you 
account  that  only  Decent  Orderly  and  Convenient  in  his  House,  which  depends  upon 
the  Institution  and  appointment  of  himself,  who  is  the  only  Head  and  Law-giver  of 
his  Church. 

III.  That  you  be  well  grounded  in  the  firm  Truths  of  Religion.  We  have 
willingly  taken  pains  to  add  the  Holy  Scriptures,  whereon  every  point  of  Faith  con- 
tained in  this  Confessi-[8]on  doth  depend,  and  is  born  up  by,  and  commend  the  same 
to  your  diligent  perusal,  that  You  be  established  in  the  truth  and  your  Faith  rest 
upon  its  proper  Basis,  the  Word  of  God.8  Follow  the  Example  of  the  Noble 
Bereans,  Search  the  Scriptures,  Grow  in  Grace  and  the  knowledge  of  Christ,  be  not 
Children  in  Understanding,  but  Men.  Labour  for  a  sound  confirmed  Knowledge  of 
these  Points  in  the  Evidence  of  them.  See  that  they  be  deeply  rooted  in  your  Minds 
and  Hearts,  that  so  You  be  not  an  easie  prey  to  such  as  lie  in  wait  to  deceive.9 
For  the  want  hereof  to  be  condoled  is  the  Unhappiness  of  many  ever  learning  and 
never  coming  to  the  knowledge  of,  the  Truth.'0 

6.  16.     Mat.  19.  8.     Jer.  44.  17. 

.  10.  26. 

22.  '  Leu.  10.  1,  2. 


1  Isa.  8.  20.     Rev.  21.  iS,  19. 

2  Jer. 

3  Mat.  11:  27.     1  Joh.  5.  9. 

<  Luk. 

5  Mat.  15.  9.                          6  Joh.  4.  22. 

Jer.  7. 

8  Acts  17.  10,  11.     Joh.  5.  39.     2  Pet.  3 

18.     1 

»  Eph.  4.  13,  ,4. 

10  2  Tii 

520   THE  PROPOSALS  AND  THE  SAVBROOK  PLATFORM 

IV.  That  having  applyed  the  Rule  of  Holy  Scripture  to  all  the  Articles  of  this 
Confession,  and  found  the  same  upon  Tryal  the  Unchangable  and  Eternal  truths  of 
God:'  Vou  remember  and  hold  them  fact  [fas/1.  Contend  earnestly  for  them  as 
the  Faith  once  delivered  to  the  Saints.  Value  them  as  Vour  great  Charter,  the  In- 
strument of  Vour  Salvation,  the  Evidence  of  your  not  failing  of  the  Grace  of  God, 
and  receiving  a  Crown  that  fadeth  not  away.2  Maintain  them,  and  every  of  them 
all  your  dayes  with  undanted  Resolution  against  all  opposition,  whatever  the  event 
be,  and  the  same  transmit  safe  and  pure  [9]  to  Posterity :  Having  bought  the  Truth, 
on  no  hand  sell  it.  Believe3  the  Truth  will  make  you  free  :  Faithful  is  he  that 
hath  promised  :   So  shall  none  lake  away  your  Crown. 

Finally,  Do  not  think  it  enough  that  your  Faith  and  Order  be  according  to  the 
Word  of  God,  but  live  accordingly. *  It  is  not  enough  to  believe  well,  Vou  run 
your  selves  into  the  greatest  hazzard  unless  you  be  careful  to  live  well,  and  that  this 
be,5  All  your  Life  and  Conversation  must  be  agreeable  to  the  Rule  of  Gods  Word 
This  is  the  Rule  of  a  Christian  Conversation  and  Practical  Reformation  6  Rest  not 
in  the  form  of  Godliness,  denying  the  power  of  it.  Stir  up  an  holy  Zeal,  Strengthen 
the  things  that  remain  that  are  ready  to  die,  Be  not  carried  away  with  the  Corrup- 
tions Temptations  and  evil  Examples  of  the  Times,  but  be  blameless  fir"  without  Re- 
buke, the  Sons  of  God  in  a  froward  Generation.  7  They  shall  walk  with  me  in 
white,  for  they  are  worthy. 

Remember  ye  our  Brethren  in  this  Colony ;  That  we  are  a  part  of  that  Body, 
8  for  which  the  Providence  of  God  hath  wrought  Wonders  and  are  obliged  by  and 
Accountable  for  all  the  Mercies  dispensed  from  the  beginning  of  our  Fathers  settling 
this  Country  until  now.  There  he  spake  with  us?  That  the  practical  piety  [10] 
and  serious  Religion  of  our  progenitors  is  exemplary  and  for  our  Imitation,10  and 
will  reflect  confounding  shame  on  us,  if  we  prove  Degenerate.  The  Lord  grant  that 
the  noble  design  of  our  Fathers  in  coming  to  this  Land,  may  not  be  forgotten  by  us, 
nor  by  our  Children  after  us,  even  the  Interest  of  Religion,  which  we  can  never  Ex- 
change for  a  Temporal  Interest  without  the  Fowlest  Degeneracy  and  most  Inexcus- 
able Defection."  To  Conclude  the  Solemn  Rebukes  of  Providence  from  time  to 
time  in  a  series  of  Judgments,  and  in  particular,  the  General  drought  in  the  Summer 
past,  together  with  the  grievous  Disapointment  of  our  Military  Undertaking,  the 
Distresses  Sickness  and  Mortality  of  our  Camp  cannot  successfully  be  Improved  but 
by  a  self  humbling  Consideration  of  our  Ways  and  a  thorough  Repentance  of  all 
that  is  amiss :  12  So  will  the  God  of  our  Fathers  be  our  God,  and  he  will  be  a 
Wall  of  Fire  round  about  us  and  the  Glory  in  the  midst  of  us  in  this  present  and  all 
succeeding  Generations.     AM  EX. 

[Pp.  11-90  contains  the  Confession  of  Faith,  identical  with 
that  adopted  at  Boston  in  1680,  and  slightly  modified  from  the 
Savoy  Declaration  of  1658.  The  full  text  and  variations  will  be 
found  anle,  pp.  367-402  of  this  work.  The  Saybrook  divines  added 
proof  texts  to  each  article.] 

1  Rev.  3.  3.     Jude  3.  2  1  Cor.  15.  18.     1  Cor.  16.  13.     Psal.  78.  5. 

3  Jon.  23.  23.     Joh,  8  32     Heb.  10  13.     Rev.  3.  11.  «  Tit  2.  11,  12. 

6  Gal.  6.  16,  Mic.  6.  8.  8  2  Tim  3  15.      Rev.  3  19.     Rev.  3  2.     Phil.  2.  15. 

'  Rev.  3.  4.  «  Hos.  xii.  2,  3.  9  Hosea  xii  4.  10  2  Tim.  1.  5.     Job  8.  8. 

»  2.  17.     Jer.  2.  21.  ,s  Isa.  26.  9.     Gen.  43.  23.     Zach.  2.  5. 


PREFACE    TO   THE   ARTICLES  521 

[p.  91]  THE  I  Heads  of  Agreement,  |  Assented  to  by  the 
United  Ministers,  |  formerly  called  PRESBYTERIAN  |  and 
CONGREGATIONAL.  |  And  also  |  Articles  |  ffor  tbe  SDmin* 
istratfon  |  of  |  CHURCH  DISCIPLINE  |  Unanimously  |  Agreed 
upon  and  consented  to  by  the  |  ELDERS  and  MESSENGERS 
of  I  the  Churches  in  the  Colony  of  |  CONNECTICUT  in  New- 
England  I  Assembled  by  Delegation  at  Say-Brook  \  September  gt/i. 

1708.  I  I  Phil.  3.  5.     Let  us  therefore,  as  many  as  be  per-  \  feet, 

be  thus  minded;  and  If  in  any  thing  ye  \  be  othenvise  minded,  God 
shall  reveal  even  \  this  unto  you.  \  Eph.  4  3.     Endeavouring  to  keep  the 

Unity  of  I   the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  Peace.   |  |    New  London 

Printed  by  Thomas  Short,  1710 

[92  blank] 
[93] 

The  PREFACE. 

THere  is  no  Constitution  on  Earth  hath  ever  been  established  on  such  sure  founda- 
tions, nor  so  fully  provided  for  its  subsistance  as  the  Church  of  God.    //  being 
built  on  the  Prophets  and  Apostles ;  Jesus  Christ  himself  being  the  chief  Cor- 
ner  Stone.     Hence  therefore  it  hath  from  its  holy  hill,  beheld  the  Ruines  of  the 
greatest  States  and  most  flourishing  Empires,  having  continued  in  safety   free  from 
the  fatal  Accidences  of  Time,  and  triumphed  not  only  over  the  Rage  of  men    but 
also  the  repeated  Insults  of  the  gates  of  Hell.     And  tho'  it  hath  been  often  straitned 
as  to  its  extent,  and  lessened  as  to  its  number,  yet  hath  remained  firm  on  its  own 
Basis  :    yea,  when  most  reduced,  it  hath  forever  made  good  that  Motto,   Depressa 
Resurgo  ;  and  so  it  shall  continue  to  the  end  of  the  World  :    But  to  the  shame  of  its 
Offenders,  the  Church  hath  suffered  most  from  the  Wounds,  which  she  hath  received 
in  the  house  of  her  Friends,  from  those  Wolves,  that  have  come  to  Her  in  Sheeps 
Cloathing.     Damnable  Errors  and  Heresies  have  arisen  from  within  her,  whereby 
she  hath  sometimes  been  cast  into  horrible  shades  of  Darkness,  as  Rev.  9.  2      When 
the  bottomless  pit  ?aas  opened,  the  smoke  ascending  darkned  the  Sun  and  Air      Yet 
[94]  when  thus  grievously  Blackned,  a  Comeliness  remained  still.     Otherwhiles  She 
is  seen  bleeding  with  the  Wounds  of  Schism  and  Contention,  Offensive  and  hurtful  to 
Her  Sacred  Head  and  Members  for  the  Undivided  head  rejoyceth  in  an   Undivided 
Body  His  undefiled  is  but  one  Cant.  6.  9.     As  She  becomes  divided,  She  becomes 
defiled  :  And  hereby  also  the  mutual  Offices  of  the  respective  Members  of  this  Un- 
defiled one  are  Interrupted  to  the  prejudice  of  the  Whole.     Whence  follow  great  dis 
orders,  as  when  the  Eye  will  not  see  for  the  Hand  nor  the  Head  take  care  of  the 
Feet,  nor  our  Union  to  Christ  be  acknowledged  a  sufficient  bond  to  establish  a  rela 
tion  between  Members  in  particular  1    Cor.  12.  27.     Gods  Providence  forever  bears 
the  upper  hand  in  these  Events,  who  suffers  the  corrupt  Minds  of  Men  to  run  into 
Errors  and  Divisions,  that  the  approved  may  be  made  manifest  1  Cor  11    i9     Such 
.11  minded  Persons  being  threatned  with  a  Wo,  that  are  the  Authors  or  Promoters  of 
such  Offences.      The   Atheist  endeavours  to  overthrow  the  whole  Constitution  of 
Religion  :    The  Deist  to  take  away  all  that  part  of  it,  that  promiseth  sinners  any 
safety  from  the  Wrath  to  come,  and  retain  no  more  than  what  is  enough  to  condemn 


522       THE    PROPOSALS   AND    THE   SAYBROOK    PLATFORM 

Aim,  and  to  take  away  all  excuse  for  his  disobedience  Rom.  I.  20.  The  Church  of 
Christ  hath  also  been  a  great  sufferer  from  the  Immoralities  and  disorderly  walking 
of  those  that  are  related  to  Her,  whose  Leaven  hath  sometimes  hazarded  the  whole 
lump  i  Cor  5.  6.  Whose  un-[c)5]seemly  Practises  have  given  advantage  to  Enemies 
to  speak  evil  of  the  Ways  of  Cod,  and  to  question  the  Truth  of  our  holy  Religion  iV 
the  sincerity  of  the  Professors  thereof.  These  must  be  acknowledged  to  be  Spots  and 
Blemishes  2.  Pel.  2.  13.  The  Wisdom  of  our  Law  giver  King  and  Judge,  who 
alone  hath  the  Original  sovereignty  of  giving  being  to,  and  laying  the  Foundations 
of  the  Church,  and  whose  only  is  the  Legislative  power  therein,  hath  given  such 
ample  Rights  cV  Priviledges  to  the  Church  and  such  Excellent  Rules  for  its  Govern- 
ment,  as  are  Inviting  to  Strangers,  like  a  City  set  on  a  /fill,  Mat.  5.  14.  And  hath 
lodged  the  Executive  power  in  approved  hands,  that  those  who  love  the  Church  may 
be  in  peace,  and  Her  Enemies  may  find  Her  Terrible  as  an  Army  with  Banners, 
and  that  She  might  yield  seasonable  edification  to  those  that  walk  Regularly  within 
Her  limits,  and  be  able  to  Discharge  Her  self  of  Impenitent  and  Incorrigible  Offend- 
ers Many  of  the  forementioned  mischiefs  have  to  our  sorrow  afflicted  the  Churches 
within  this  Covernment,  and  by  degrees  we  have  fallen  under  much  decay.  Where- 
upon our  difficulties  have  been  of  a  long  time  trouble  some,  for  the  healing  of  our 
Wounds,  a  more  Explicate  asserting  the  Rules  of  Covernment  sufficiently  provided 
in  the  Holy  Word  hath  been  thought  highly  expedient  Wherefore, 

The  Honourable,  the  Ceneral  Assembly  of  this  Colony  out  of  a  Tender  regard 
to  the  [96]  welfare  of  the  Churches  within  the  limits  of  their  Government,  were  pleased 
to  appoint  the  several  Elders  of  each  County  with  Messengers  from  their  Churches 
to  meet  in  Council,  in  which  they  should  endeavour  to  agree  in  some  General  Rules 
Conformable  to  the  Word  of  God  for  a  method  of  Discipline  to  be  practised  in  our 
Churches  These  several  Councils  having  met  &  drawn  up  some  Rules  of  Church 
Government  did  by  their  Delegates  meet  and  Constitute  one  General  Assembly  of  the 
Churches  of  this  Colony  at  Say  Brook,  Sept.  9///.  1708.  Who  after  a  full  Consent  and 
Agreement  unto  the  Confession  of  Faith  Assented  unto  by  the  Synod  of  Boston  ; 
Did  being  Studious  of  keeping  the  Unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  Bond  of  peace,  Eph  4. 
2.  Agree  that  the  Heads  of  Agreement  Assented  to  by  the  United  Brethren  formerly 
called  Presbyterian  and  Congregational,  in  England,  be  observed  by  the  Churches 
throughout  this  Colony,  which  are  herewith  Published,  and  after  Consideration  of 
the  several  draughts  of  the  County  Councils,  did  with  a  Christian  Condescention,  and 
Fraternal  Amicableness  Unanimously  Agree  to  the  Articles  for  the  Administration  of 
Church  Discipline  now  offered  to  Publick  View,  all  which  being  presented,  were 
allowed  of  and  Established  by  the  General  Assembly  of  this  Colony,  as  by  their  Acts 
appears  for  the  better  satisfaction  of  our  People,  we  have  undertaken  a  task,  accept- 
able we  trust  unto  many,  [97]  tho'  it  escape  not  the  Exceptions  of  some,  in  subjoyn- 
ing  Scriptures  for  Confirmation  of  the  Heads  of  Agreement,  which  we  have  not  seen 
added  thereunto.  The  aforesaid  Articles  consist  in  Two  Heads,  The  one  holding 
forth  the  power  of  particular  Churches  in  the  Management  of  Discipline  confirmed 
by  Scriptures  annexed. 

The  other,  serves  to  preserve  promote  or  recover  the  Peace  and  Edification  of 
the  Churches  by  the  Means  of  a  Consociation  of  the  Elders,  and  Churches  or  of  an 
Association  of  Elders  :  Both  which  we  are  agreed  have  Countenance  from  the  Scrip- 
tures and  the  Propositions  in  Answer  to  the  Second  Question  given  by  the  Synod  met 
at  Boston  1662'     In  both  which  having  respect  to  the  Divine  Precepts  of  Fraternal 


PP.  337-339- 


PREFACE   TO    THE    ARTICLES  523 

Union,  and  that  Principle  universally  acknowledged.  Quod  tangit  o?nnes  debet  tractari 
abomnibus.  The  Scriptures  are  added  for  the  Illustration  of  the  substance  of  the 
abovementioned  Articles,  yet  with  an  Apprehension,  that  there  may  be  alterations 
made  and  further  Condescentions  Agreed  upon,  which  shall  afterwards  appear  nec- 
essary for  the  Order  and  Edification  of  our  Churches. 

As  we  have  laboured  in  this  affair  to  approve  our  selves  unto  God,  so  we  are 
cheerful  with  humble  Prayer  for  his  Blessing  to  recommend  the  Heads  of  Agreement 
with  the  subsequent  Articles  unto  the  acceptance  and  [98J  observation  of  our  People, 
hoping  till  it  please  the  Lord  to  send  forth  further  light  and  truth  in  these  more 
Controversal  Matters,  this  Method  may  be  a  blessed  means  of  our  better  Unanimity 
&  success  in  our  Lords  Work  for  the  Gathering  and  Edifying  of  the  Body  of  Christ, 
for  which  we  bespeak  the  concuring  Prayers  of  all  that  fear  the  LORD. 

[Pp.  99-116  contain  the  "  Heads  of  Agreement"  (full  text  ante, 
pp.  456-462);  and  the  "Articles"  {ante,  pp.  503-506).  To  each 
section  of  both  these  documents  the  Saybrook  divines  added  proof 
texts.] 


XVI 

THE  PLAN  OF  UNION,  1801 

Editions  and  Reprints1 

I.  Minutes  of  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  etc.,  178Q 
to  1820.     Philadelphia,  [1847,]  pp.  224,  225  (1801). 

II.  Proceedings  of  the  General  Association  of  Connecticut,  1S01,  pp.  4,  5. 

III.  Connecticut  Evangelical  Magazine,  II:    116. 

IV.  Zebulon  Crocker,  Catastrophe  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  in  1837,  in- 
cluding a  full  view  of  the  recent  Theological  Controversies  in  New  England,  New- 
Haven,  183S.  pp.  11-14. 

V.  William  S.  Kennedy,  The  Plan  of  Union:  or  a  History  of  the  Presby- 
terian and  Congregational  Churches  of  the  Western  Reserve ;  with  Biographical 
Sketches  of  the  early  Missionaries,  Hudson,  Ohio,  1856,  pp.  150,  151. 

VI.  Congregational  Quarterly,  V  ;    133,  134. 

Literature 

Minutes  of  Presbyterian  General  Assembly,  and  the  Proceedings  of  the  General 
Association  of  Connecticut,  for  1800,  1S01,  1835,  1837,  etc.  Zebulon  Crocker,  as 
above  cited.  Proceedings  of  the  General  Convention  of  Cong.  Ministers  and  Dele- 
gates .  .  .  at  Albany  .  .  .  October,  /8j2,  New  Vork,  1S52.  .\  , 
lander,  XI  :  72-<)2.  7'he  Plan  of  Union  of  1801,  etc.,  and  Reasons  why  it  should 
be  abandoned,  etc.,  New  Vork,  1852.  W.  S.  Kennedy,  as  above  cited.  James  H. 
Dill,  John  D.  Pierce,  Henry  Cowles,  John  C.  Hart,  articles  on  Congregationalism 
in  New  Vork,  Ohio,  and  Michigan,  Congregational  Quarterly,  I  :  151-158  ;  II  :  190- 
197;  V:  132-142,248-254.  E.  II.  Gillett,  History  of  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
Philadelphia,  [1S64,]  passim.  C.  Cutler,  History  of  Western  Reserve  College,  Cleve- 
land, 1876.  Fairchild,  Oberlin  :  the  Colony  and  the  College,  1883.  Punchard,  His- 
tory of  Congregationalism, \ .  passim.  A.  II.  Ross,  Union  Efforts  between  Congre- 
gationalists  and  Presbyterians  :  Results  and  Lessons,  Port  Huron,  1889.  Papers 
of  the  Ohio  Society  of  Church  History,  Vol.  I. 

THE  eighteenth  century  was  not  favorable  for  Congregational 
creed-making.      The  failure  of  the  movement  for  stricter 
church  government   in    Massachusetts   and    its   success  in 
Connecticut   put   the   two   leading  colonies    of    New   England    on 
somewhat  divergent  paths.     The  loss  of  ministerial  influence  over 
the  civil  authorities  of  the  larger  colony  had  been  real  for  a  gen- 

1  Neither  the  editions  nor  the  literature  can  claim  to  be  exhaustive.  For  some  of  the  refer- 
ences I  am  indebted  to  Prof.  F.  H.  Foster  of  Pacific  Seminary. 

(524) 


CONGREGATIONALISM    DECENTRALIZED  525 

eration,  but  was  clearly  manifest  when  the  Massachusetts  govern- 
ment failed  to  call  a  synod  in  1725 ;'  and  this  tendency  to  separate 
the  interests  of  church  and  state  increased  throughout  New  Eng- 
land all  through  the  century.     It  was  no  longer  possible  to  call  a 
general  assembly  of  the  churches  of  New  England  as  a  whole,  or 
of  a  province,  in  the  old  way,  by  government  authority.     And  if 
the  way  of  the  founders  of  New  England  was  no  longer  feasible, 
the  modern  method  of  voluntary  union  was  not  yet  possible.     The 
whole  political  tendency  of  the  century  was  toward  the  emphasis 
of  local  independence,  and  the  growth  of  the  democratic  element 
in  church  and   state  was  essentially  decentralizing.     This  inclina- 
tion away  from  external  bonds  of  union  was  increased  by  the  sharp 
division  of  sentiment  which  manifested  itself  in  many  parts  of  New 
England  between  the  supporters  of  the  revival  measures  of  the 
leaders   of   the   "Great  Awakening"   of   1740-41,   and    those   who 
looked  upon  religious  excitement  as  perilous.     That  remarkable 
movement  led  to  the  rise  of  a  new  school  of  theology,  — that  of 
Edwards  and  his  pupils,  — and  as  a  consequence  theologic  differ- 
ences first  become  a  factor  of  division  among  the  churches.     All 
these   tendencies,  coupled   with   the   low  state   of  religion   which 
marked  most  of  the  century,  made  any  general  synods  or  councils, 
such  as  the   seventeenth   century  had  seen,   impossible;  and  pro- 
duced a  general  indifference  to  what  would  now  be  called  "denom- 
inational interests  "as  distinguished  from  the  concerns  of  the  local 
church. 

Meanwhile  in  Connecticut  the  working  of  the  Saybrook  sys- 
tem was  such  as  to  increase  the  sympathy  of  the  churches  for  the 
Presbyterians  of  the  Middle  Provinces  and  diminish  their  intimacy 
of  relationship  with  their  brethren  of  Massachusetts.  A  wide- 
spread fear  of  establishment  of  Episcopacy  in  the  colonies  led, 
just  before  the  revolutionary  war,  to  the  establishment  of  an 
annual  joint  convention  of  representatives  of  the  Synod  of  New 

>  The  petition  to  the  General  Court,  signed  by  Cotton  Mather  in  the  name  of  the  Ministers- 
Convention,  is  in   Hutchinson,  Hist.  Mass.,  ed.  1767    II-  322    im      The  nr,™,.  tr  j 

Ei,0Tt?r  rh  off  consideration  ;f  ^^~  ^Z££^^ 

England,  and  the  English  government  disapproved.     See  also  Palfrey,  IV :  454-4-6. 


526  THE    PLAN    OF   UNION 

York  and  Philadelphia  and  the  Associations  of  Connecticut.'  This 
body  met  from  1766  to  1775,  and  corresponded  with  Dissenters  in 
England,  collected  the  ecclesiastical  legislation  of  the  colonies, 
tried  to  ascertain  the  religious  preferences  of  their  inhabitants, 
and  sought  the  union  of  the  non-prelatical  churches  in  opposition 
to  encroachment. 

The  effect  of  these  joint  meetings  and  of  the  ecclesiastical 
constitution  of  Connecticut  was  seen  in  the  declaration  of  unity  in 
all  essentials  with  Presbyterianism  adopted  by  the  Hartford  North 
Association  in  1799,2  and  is  curiously  illustrated  by  a  vote  of  no 
less  representative  a  body  than  the  Connecticut  General  Associa- 
tion, in  1805,  appointing  a  committee  to  "  publish  a  new  and  elegant 
edition  of  the  ecclesiastical  constitution  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
in  Connecticut,"3  meaning  thereby  the  Saybrook  Platform.  Under 
such  circumstances  it  is  no  wonder  that,  in  the  eyes  of  many,  the 
differences  between  Congregationalism  and  Presbyterianism  seemed 
peculiarities  of  geographical  location  rather  than  fundamental  dis- 
tinctions in  polity. 

It  was  when  the  Presbyterians  of  the  Middle  States  and  the 
Congregationalists  of  Connecticut  felt  themselves  so  much  one, 
that  a  home-missionary  problem  of  hitherto  unknown  importance 
arose,  affecting  both  bodies,  and  seeming  to  make  cooperation 
doubly  desirable.  Even  before  the  revolutionary  struggle  the 
sons  of  Connecticut  had  begun  to  emigrate  to  what  is  now  Ver- 
mont and  central  New  York.  That  contest  interrupted  the 
exodus,  but  after  the  war  was  over  the  outpouring  began  again  in 
increased  volume.  By  the  close  of  the  last  century,  emigration 
from  Connecticut  was  extensive,  and  at  the  dawn  of  the  present 
century  was  pouring  into  the  region  of  northern  Ohio,  which  Con- 


'  The  Minutes  of  this  Convention  were  published  in  1843  bv  Rev-  David  D.  Field,  under  the 
auspices  of  the  Conn.  General  Association,  Minutes  of  the  Convention  0/  Delegates  from  the 
Synod  0/  X.  Y.  ami  Phil*.,  an,/  from  the  Associations  0/  Conn.,  etc.  Hartford.  The  propo- 
sition came  from  the  Presbyterian  body,  to  the  General  Association  of  Conn.  It  was  heartily  ac- 
cepted  and  a  "  Plan  of  Union  "  drawn  up  wherein  those  to  be  united  in  Convention  are  described  as 
"  Pastors  of  the  Congregational,  Consociated,  and  Presbyterian  Churches  in  North  America."  All 
jurisdiction  over  the  churches  is  disclaimed.  It  was  also  decided  to  ask  the  ministers  of  Mass.,  New 
Hampshire,  and  Rhode  Island  to  send  delegates;  but  the  ministers  of  those  provinces,  though 
maintaining  correspondence  with  the  Convention,  preferred  not  to  be  represented  in  its  deliberations. 
Ibid.,  pp.  5,  6,  10,  n,  18. 

3  Ante,  p.  514.  3  Minutes  Conn.  Gen.  Assoc.,  1805,  p.  5. 


MISSIONARY     EFFORTS  527 

necticut  had  reserved  in  settlement  of  its  claims  to  western  terri- 
tory.1 In  Vermont  the  immigration  was  of  almost  pure  New 
England  origin,  and  here  New  England  religious  institutions  soon 
took  root;  but  in  New  York  and  Ohio  the  settlers  from  Connecti- 
cut encountered  other  new-comers  from  Pennsylvania  and  colonies 
even  further  southward,  who  had  been  trained  in  Presbyterianism. 
The  Connecticut  churches  were  early  awake  to  their  obliga- 
tions to  their  sons  and  daughters  of  the  dispersion.  At  its  meeting 
"in  Mansfield  in  June,  1774,  the  Connecticut  General  Association 
voted: a 

"This  association  taking  into  Consideration  the  State  of  y*  Settlements  now 
forming  in  the  Wilderness  to  the  Westward  &  North-westward  of  us,  who  are  mostly 
destitute  of  a  preached  Gospel,  many  of  which  are  of  our  Brethren  Emigrants  from 
this  Colony,  think  it  advisable  that  an  attempt  should  be  made  to  send  missionaries 
among  them,  and  for  obtaining  a  Support  for  such  Missionaries  would  recommend 
it  to  the  several  Ministers  in  this  Colony  to  promote  a  Subscription  among  their  peo- 
ple for  this  purpose." 

This  appeal  met  with  encouraging  response  and  two  pastors3 
were  directed  to  be  sent  out  on  a  tour  of  "  5  or  6  months  "  in  1775. 
The  revolutionary  war  prevented  the  carrying  out  of  the  plan  as 
proposed.4  But  a  considerable  sum  was  collected,5  and  in  1780 
the  Association  asked  two  pastors  to  act  as  missionaries  in  Ver- 
mont.6 In  1788  and  1791  the  subject  was  further  discussed,  and 
in  1792  a  missionary  was  appointed  and  legislative  permission 
sought  for  the  raising  of  funds.7  The  next  year  eight  missionaries 
were  named,  all  settled  pastors,  who  were  to  go  on  tours  of  four 
months  each  and  receive  as  compensation  four  and  a  half  dollars 
weekly  and  an  allowance  of  four  dollars  a  week  to  supply  their 
vacant  pulpits.8  The  same  number,  but  for  the  most  part  new 
men,  were  sent  out  in  1794/'  The  movement  was  now  fully  launched. 
And  now  in  1798,  after  having  sounded  the  local  Associations  of 
the  State  on  the  subject  through  a  committee  appointed  in  1797,10 

1  The  story  of  the  settlement  of  Northern  Ohio  is  well  told  in  Hinsdale,  Old  Northwest, 
New  York,  iSSS.  A  clearer  picture  of  the  conditions  of  life  in  these  settlements  in  1800  is  the  auto- 
biographic sketch  of  Rev.  Joseph  Badger,  the  first  Congregational  missionary  to  the  Reserve,  in 
Am.  Quarterly  Register,  XIII:  317-328  (Feb.,  1841).  The  Diary  0/  Thomas  Rabbins,  D.D., 
Boston,  18S6,  also  is  valuable  as  illustrating  early  missionary  life. 

2  Records  0/  the  General  Association,  1738-1799,  Hartford,  1888,  p.  76.  See  also  Cont. 
Eccles.  Hist.  Conn.,  pp.  163,  164. 

3  Records,  pp.  79,  80.  *  Ibid.,  pp.  85,  86.  s  Ibid.,  p.  ico. 

6  Ibid.,  p.  107.     '  Ibid.,  pp.  125,  141,  142.     8  Ibid.,  p.  14S.     9  Ibid.,  p.  154.     '0  Ibid.,  p.  173. 


528  THE   PLAN   OF   UNION 

the  General  Association  of  Connecticut  organized  itself  as  a  .Mis- 
sionary Society,  the  first  Congregational  missionary  society  in 
America,  having  as  its  object,  "to  christianize  the  Heathen  in 
North  America,  and  to  support  and  promote  Christian  Knowledge 
in  the  new  settlements  within  the  United  States."1  In  1800  the 
Connecticut  Evangelical  Magazine  was  established,  designed  to 
spread  a  knowledge  of  missions,  as  well  as  to  be  a  medium  of  dis- 
cussion and  a  repository  of  Christian  biography,  and  its  profits, 
which  were  considerable,4  were  turned  over  to  the  "  Missionary 
Society  of  Connecticut."  In  1802  that  society  was  chartered  by 
the  State.  The  good  example  of  Connecticut  led  to  the  formation 
of  a  missionary  association  in  Massachusetts  in  1799.3 

Meanwhile  the  relations  between  the  Congregationalists  of 
Connecticut  and  the  Presbyterian  General  Assembly  were  becom- 
ing very  friendly.  In  1790  the  General  Association  voted  that  a 
further  degree  of  union  with  the  Presbyterians  was  desirable,  and 
a  committee  of  correspondence  was  appointed  to  secure  this 
result.4  The  General  Assembly  was  more  than  willing;5  in  1791  a 
joint  committee  representing  it  and  the  Connecticut  Association 
met  at  New  Haven  and  provided  for  united  representation."  The 
doings  of  these  commissioners  were  approved  by  the  Association 
and  the  Assembly  in  1792  ;  and  three  representatives  of  the  Con- 
necticut churches  were  sent  to  the  General  Assembly.7  The  next  year 
three  Presbyterian  delegates  took  their  seats  in  the  General 
Association,  and  on  the  request  of  the  Presbyterians  in  1794  it  was 
agreed  by  both  sides  that  the  representatives  of  each  body  should 
have  full  right  to  vote  in  the  meetings  of  the  other."  And  not 
only  did  they  exercise  this  privilege,  but  plans  for  Presbyterian 
denominational  growth,  like  the  establishment  of  a  seminary  in 
Kentucky,0    were   referred    to,  and   approved   by,  the   Connecticut 


1  The  Constitution  may  be  found  Ibid.,  pp.  177-180.     See  also  Conn.  Evang.  Mag.,  I  :   13. 

2  The  profits  of  the  first  year  were  reported  at  51,759.60.     Ibid.,  II :  80. 

3  See  Evang.  Mag..  I  :   352-356. 

4  Records  of  the  Gen.  Association,  1738-1799,  p.  133. 

6  See  Minutes  0/ the  Gen.  Assembly,  1791,  pp.  29,  33. 

•  The  minutes  of  the  meeting  of  this  joint  committee  are  given  in  the  AY, .  0/ tin-  Gen.  Asso- 
ciation, pp.  189-191.     They  agreed  that  representatives  should  not  vote. 

7  Association  Records,  p.  142.     Minutes  of  the  Gen.  Assembly,  pp.  52,  64. 

8  Association  Kee.,  p.  154;  Gen.  Assembly,  p.  80. 

•  Association  Rec.,  p.  160. 


STEPS   TOWARD    THE    UNION  529 

Association.  From  this  degree  of  cooperation  to  union  in  mis- 
sionary enterprise  was  but  a  step.  Presbyterian  and  Congrega- 
tional missionaries  were  working  in  the  same  fields  and  were  in 
constant  contact.  Accordingly,  in  1800,  the  question  of  a  perma- 
nent adjustment  of  the  relations  of  the  two  polities  on  missionary 
ground  was  raised  in  the  Connecticut  General  Association.1  There 
is  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  originator  of  the  discussion  was 
the  younger  Jonathan  Edwards,  long  the  pastor  of  the  Second 
Church  in  New  Haven,  but  now  president  of  Union  College  and  a 
delegate  from  the  General  Assembly  to  the  Connecticut  body.2 
His  residence  in  a  section  of  the  state  of  New  York  then  rapidly 
filling  with  settlers  had  familiarized  him  with  the  questions  in- 
volved, while  his  relations  to  both  denominations  were  such  as  to 
give  him  little  preference  for  the  polity  of  either.  The  Associa- 
tion considered  the  matter  favorably  and  appointed  Edwards  on  a 
committee,  associating  with  him  Rev.  Dr.  Nathan  Williams  of 
Tolland,  Rev.  Nathan  Strong  of  Hartford,3  and  Rev.  Jonathan 
Freeman,4  a  Presbyterian  delegate  like  Edwards  representing  the 
General  Assembly,  giving  them  instructions  "  to  prepare  a  report 
on  that  subject."     This  they  did,  and  the  next  day5 — 

"  The  following  report  of  the  Committee  on  the  friendly  intercourse  of  Mission- 
aries was  read,  considered,  and  approved. 

"The  Revd  Messr»  John  Smalley,6  Levi  Hart,7  and  Samuel  Blatchford8  are 
hereby  appointed  a  Committee  of  this  General  Association,  to  confer  with  a  com- 
mittee to  be  appointed  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  if  they 
see  fit  to  appoint  such  Committee,  to  consider  the  measures  proper  to  be  adopted 
both  by  this  Association  and  said  Assembly,  to  prevent  alienation,  to  promote  har- 
mony and  to  establish,  as  far  as  possible,  an  uniform  system  of  Church  government, 
between  those  habitants  of  the  new  Settlements,  who  are  attached  to  the  Presby- 
terian form  of  church  Government,  and  those  who  are  attached  to  the  congregational 
form  :  and  to  make  report  to  this  Association.  Any  two  of  the  said  committee  are 
hereby  empowered  to  act. 


1  MS.  Records  of  1S00,  p.  iB.     The  meeting  was  at  Norfolk. 

2  Jonathan  Edwards  was  born  at  Northampton,  Mass.,  in  1745;  graduated  at  Princeton  in 
1765  ;  pastor  at  New  Haven,  1769-1795,  pastor  at  Colebrook,  Conn.,  1796-1790. ;  president  of  Union 
College,  Schenectady,  N.  V.,  to  his  death  in  Aug.  1,  1801.  In  gifts  and  experiences  he  was  curiously 
like  his  father.  Edwards's  name  heads  the  list  in  the  record,  but  Williams  seems  to  have  been 
chairman  of  the  committee. 

3  Williams  and  Strong  were  trustees  of  the  Conn.  Miss.  Society. 

4  Of  the  Presbytery  of  Hudson,  churches  of  Hopewell  and  Deer  Park. 

s  MS.  Records  0/  General  Association,  j8oo.     See  also  Minutes  0/  General  Assembly,  p.  212. 
•  New  Britain.  1  Griswold. 

8  Bridgeport.  These  three  were  the  regular  delegates  to  the  next  meeting  of  the  General 
Assembly. 


530  THE    PLAN    OF    UNION 

"  Resolved  that  a  copy  of  the  foregoing  paragraph  be  transmitted  to  the  said 
Gen.  Assembly,  and  that  they  be  respectfully  requested  by  the  Moderator  of  this  (1. 
Association  to  concurr  in  the  measure  now  proposed." 

At  the  same  time  the  Association  requested  the  trustees  of 
the  Connecticut  Missionary  Society  to  direct  their  missionaries  to 
promote  friendly  intercourse  with  the  Presbyterians  in  their  fields. 

Having  thus  the  support  of  the  Connecticut  churches,  the  pro- 
position for  agreement  came  before  the  General  Assembly  in  May, 
1S01.     That  body  was  favorably  inclined  and  voted  as  follows:1 

"  The  Rev.  Drs.  Edwards,5  McKnight,3  and  Woodhull,4  the  Rev.  Mr.  Blatch- 
ford,5  and  Mr.  Ilutton,6  were  appointed  a  committee,  to  consider  and  digest  a  plan 
of  government  for  the  churches  in  the  new  settlements  agreeably  to  the  proposal  of 
the  General  Association  of  Connecticut,  and  report  the  same  as  soon  as  convenient." 

Two  days  later7  their  report  was   "taken  up  and  considered, 

and   after   mature   deliberation   on    the   same,   approved  "   by   the 

General   Assembly.     This  report,  the   celebrated  Plan  of  Union, 

reads  thus:  ° 

PLAN  OF  UNION. 

"  Regulations  adopted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Pres- 
byterian Church  in  America,  and  by,  the  General  Association  of 
the  State  of  Connecticut,  (provided  said  Association  agree  to 
them,)  with  a  view  to  prevent  alienation,  and  to  promote  union 
and  harmony  in  those  new  settlements  which  are  composed  of 
inhabitants  from  these  bodies. 

i.  It  is  strictly  enjoined  on  all  their  missionaries  to  the 
new  settlements,  to  endeavour,  by  all  proper  means,  to  promote 
mutual  forbearance,  and  a  spirit  of  accommodation  between  those 
inhabitants  of  the  new  settlements  who  hold  the  Presbyterian, 
and  those  who  hold  the  Congregational  form  of  church  govern- 
ment. 

2.  If  in  the  new  settlements  any  church  of  the  Congrega- 
tional order  shall  settle  a  minister  of  the  Presbyterian  order,  that 
church  may,  if  they  choose,  still  conduct  their  discipline  according 
to  Congregational  principles,  settling  their  difficulties  among  them- 
selves, or  by  a  council  mutually  agreed  upon  for  that  purpose.     But 


1  Gen.  Assembly,  Minutes  of  1801,  pp.  212,  221. 

2  Jonathan  Edwards,  whom  we  have  before  met  in  Connecticut.        3  Of  New  York  city. 

*  Of  Freehold,  N.  J.  6  Delegate  from  Conn.  Geo.  Association. 

"  A  layman,  a  ruling  elder  of  the  Albany  Presbytery  and  an  associate  of  Edwards. 
"  They  reported  the  day  after  appointment  but  the  business  was  laid  over.     Gen.  Assembly 
Minutes,  p.  222. 

*  Text  from  Ibid. ,  pp.  224,  225. 


TEXT   OF    THE    "PLAN  53 1 

if  any  difficulty  shall  exist  between  the  minister  and  the  church, 
or  any  member  of  it,  it  shall  be  referred  to  the  Presbytery  to 
which  the  minister  shall  belong,  provided  both  parties  agree  to 
it ;  if  not,  to  a  council  consisting  of  an  equal  number  of  Presby- 
terians and  Congregationalists,  agreed  upon  by  both  parties. 

3.  If  a  Presbyterian  church  shall  settle  a  minister  of  Con- 
gregational principles,  that  church  may  still  conduct  their  disci- 
pline according  to  Presbyterian  principles,  excepting  that  if  a 
difficulty  arise  between  him  and  his  church,  or  any  member  of  it, 
the  cause  shall  be  tried  by  the  Association  to  which  the  said 
minister  shall  belong,  provided  both  parties  agree  to  it  ;  otherwise 
by  a  council,  one-half  Congregationalists  and  the  other  Presby- 
terians, mutually  agreed  upon  by  the  parties. 

4.  If  any  congregation  consist  partly  of  those  who  hold  the 
Congregational  form  of  discipline,  and  partly  of  those  who  hold 
the  Presbyterian  form,  we  recommend  to  both  parties  that  this  be 
no  obstruction  to  their  uniting  in  one  church  and  settling  a  min- 
ister ;  and  that  in  this  case  the  church  choose  a  standing  commit- 
tee from  the  communicants  of  said  church,  whose  business  it  shall 
be  to  call  to  account  every  member  of  the  church  who  shall  conduct 
himself  inconsistently  with  the  laws  of  Christianity,  and  to  give 
judgment  on  such  conduct.  That  if  the  person  condemned  by 
their  judgment  be  a  Presbyterian,  he  shall  have  liberty  to  appeal  to 
the  Presbytery  ;  if  he  be  a  Congregationalist,  he  shall  have  liberty 
to  appeal  to  the  body  of  the  male  communicants  of  the  church. 
In  the  former  case,  the  determination  of  the  Presbytery  shall  be 
final,  unless  the  church  shall  consent  to  a  farther  appeal  to  the 
Synod,  or  to  the  General  Assembly  ;  and  in  the  latter  case,  if  the 
party  condemned  shall  wish  for  a  trial  by  a  mutual  council,  the 
cause  shall  be  referred  to  such  a  council.  And  provided  the  said 
standing  committee  of  any  church  shall  depute  one  of  themselves 
to  attend  the  Presbytery,  he  may  have  the  same  right  to  sit  and 
act  in  the  Presbytery  as  a  ruling  elder  of  the  Presbyterian  church. 

On  motion, 

Resolved,  That  an  attested  copy  of  the  above  plan  be  made  by 
the  Stated  Clerk,  and  put  into  the  hands  of  the  delegates  from  this 
Assembly  to  the  General  Association,  to  be  by  them  laid  before 
that  body,  for  their  consideration  ;  and  that  if  it  should  be  ap- 
proved by  them,  it  go  into  immediate  operation." 


532  THE   PLAN    OF    UNION 

The  Plan  of  Union,  thus  approved  by  the  Presbyterian  legisla- 
tive body,  was  duly  laid  before  the  Connecticut  General  Association 
at  its  meeting  in  Litchfield,  June  16,  1801,  by  the  three  Presby- 
terian delegates,  Rev.  Dr.  John  McKnight,  of  the  committee 
which  prepared  it,  Rev.  Archibald  Alexander,1  and  Rev.  John  B. 
Linn,2  and  promptly  ratified  without  alteration.3 

This  agreement  was  entered  into  with  perfect  good  faith  and 
with  entire  cordiality  on  both  sides.  It  was  intended  to  affect 
only  the  missionary  churches  on  the  frontier  of  civilization,  and 
the  framers  seem  to  have  had  little  thought  that  those  churches 
would  ever  grow  to  be  a  great  factor  in  American  Christian  life, 
and  that  what  was  well  enough  as  an  expedient  in  raw  communities 
would  have  a  different  aspect  when  these  wilderness  plantations 
grew  populous. 

The  Plan  of  Union  was  probably  as  fair  an  arrangement  as 
could  have  been  devised.  If  some  of  its  features  were  non-Con- 
gregational, like  the  "  standing  committee  "  court  of  discipline  in 
a  mixed  church,  others  were  non-Presbyterian,  as,  for  instance,  the 
granting  of  the  rights  of  a  ruling  elder  in  a  Presbytery  to  a  church 
delegate.  It  provided  that  when  church  and  pastor  were  in  dis- 
agreement the  case  should  be  tried  according  to  the  system  which 
the  minister  represented,  if  both  parties  agreed  thereto;  if  not, 
then  by  a  mutual  council  equally  drawn  from  the  adherents  to 
either  polity.  To  churches  and  church  members  the  rights  of 
their  respective  systems  were  reserved. 

But  in  actual  practice  the  Plan  produced  Presbyterian  churches 
in  a  large  proportion  of  the  instances  in  which  it  was  applied  to 
pure  Congregational  material.  Estimates  are  of  course  some- 
what conjectural,  but  a  contemporary  observer  of  the  early  work- 
ings of  the  Plan  judged  that  by  1828  it  had  added  "more  than  six 
hundred  "  to  the  Presbyterian  churches  in  New  York  and  Pennsyl- 
vania, and  the  states  and  territories  lying  west  of  them;'  and  a 
careful  student  of  recent  date  has  affirmed  that  "the  Plan  of  Union 
transformed   over  two  thousand  churches,   which  were  in  origin 


1  Afterward  the  distinguished  professor  at  Princeton,  at  this  time  of  Virginia. 
a  Pastor  First  Presb.  Ch.,  Philadelphia.  3  Minutes  of  Gen,  Associatio 

*  Z.  Crocker,  Catastrophe  of  the  Presbyterian  Ch.,  p.  44. 


WORKING    OF    THE   "PLAN  533 

and  usages  Congregational,  into  Presbyterian  churches."1  As  a 
speaker  at  the  Albany  Convention  of  1852  declared,  "they  have 
milked  our  Congregational  cows,  but  have  made  nothing  but 
Presbyterian  butter  and  cheese."2  But  it  would  be  unjust  to 
blame  the  Presbyterians  for  this  state  of  affairs.  The  fault  was 
chiefly  Congregational.  The  feeling  was  widespread  in  New  Eng- 
land that  Congregationalism  could  not  thrive  in  new  communities, 
that  a  " stronger  government"  was  desirable  for  frontier  towns.3 
Connecticut  consociationism  had  fostered  distrust  in  regard  to  the 
Congregationalism  of  the  rest  of  New  England,  and  a  large  pro- 
portion of  the  emigrants  were  from  Connecticut.  Men  of  Con- 
gregational training  were  prepared  to  look  upon  Presbyterianism 
as  possessed  of  much  that  was  attractive.  On  the  other  hand,  if 
the  denominational  consciousness  of  Congregationalism  was  weak 
that  of  Presbyterianism  was  awake  and  considerably  assertive.4 

But  two  circumstances  in  particular  worked  to  bring  about  the 
superior  success  of  Presbyterianism,  especially  in  Ohio,  and  to  a 
considerable  extent  elsewhere.  The  first  was  that  Congregational 
ministers  largely  became  members  of  Presbyteries.  That  this  was 
the  fact  was  due  in  part  to  Congregational  apathy,  in  part  to 
geographical  considerations.  The  Plan  of  Union  had  contemplated 
the  founding  of  Associations  as  well  as  Presbyteries  on  missionary 
soil.5  But  the  Presbyteries  of  Pennsylvania  were  friendly  and 
close  at  hand.  That  of  Beaver  spread  its  protection  over  the 
whole  of  the  Western  Reserve  when  the  settlements  began,  minis- 
ters were  few,  and  of  those  few  a  large  proportion  were  Presby- 
terians in  the  pay  of  the  Connecticut  Society,  the  scantiness  of  the 
salaries  rendering  it  harder  to  get  men  from  New  England  than 
from  Pennsylvania.  Fellowship  seemed  worth  more  than  form,  and  it 
was  natural  that  ministers  of  Congregational  views  should  prefer 
to  join  an  existing  Presbytery  rather  than  organize  a  feeble  Asso- 
ciation.    When  numbers  increased  an  effort  was  made  to  organize 


1  The  late  Rev.  Dr.  A.  H.  Ross,  Union   Efforts  between   Cong,  and  Presb.  :    Results  and 
Lessons.     Port  Huron,  1889,  p.  7. 

2  Rev.  Edward  A.  Lawrence,  then  of  Marblehead,  Proceedings  of  the  Gen.  Convention  held 
at  Albany,  etc.,  p.  71. 

3  Dr.  Heman  Humphrey  of  Pittsfield,  at  Albany  Convention.     Speech,  Ibid.,  p.  70. 

4  Compare  speech  of  Rev.  Asa  Turner  of  Denmark,  Iowa,  at  Albany  Convention,  Ibid.,  pp. 
71-73  ;  see  also  Cong.  Quart.,  V :  137.  s  p[an  0y  Union,  sec.  3. 


534  THE    PLAN   OF    UNION 

Associations  in  1812-14,  but  it  was  defeated  by  the  vigorous 
resistance  of  one  or  two  determined  Presbyterians  and  the  good- 
natured  lukewarmness  of  Congregationalists.1  '  It  was  not  till  1834 
that  a  "  Congregational  Union "  was  founded  in  the  Western 
Reserve,  and  not  till  1836  that  an  Association  was  organized,  and 
something  of  this  experience  was  that  of  most  of  the  territories 
in  which  the  Plan  of  Union  was  put  in  operation.  Now  it  was 
but  natural  that  what  ministers  thought  good  for  themselves  they 
thought  good  for  the  churches.  They  joined  the  Presbyteries, 
their  churches  naturally  followed  in  many  instances,  for  to  remain 
Congregational  was  to  lack  fellowship. 

Closely  connected  with  this  cause  for  Presbyterian  ascendency 
was  a  second.  A  church  once  joined  to  a  Presbytery  could  not 
readily  relinquish  the  connection.     As  Dr.  Ross  has  expressed  it:J 

"the  Plan  provided  no  way  for  the  withdrawal  of  a  Congregational  church  from  a 
Presbytery.  ...  On  Congregational  principles  a  church  may  by  majority  vote 
carry  itself  and  its  property  into  a  willing  Presbytery;  but  on  Presbyterian  principles 
no  church  can  withdraw  from  an  unwilling  Presbytery  by  majority  vote." 

Add  to  these  two  considerations  the  fact  that  western  Congre- 
gationalism, when  it  dared  to  show  an  independent  spirit,  was 
viewed  by  many  in  New  England,  especially  after  the  rise  of  Ober- 
lin  with  its  Arminianly  inclined  type  of  theology,  as  infected  with 
doctrinal  novelties  from  which  churches  more  under  Presbyterian 
control  were  supposedly  exempt,3  and  it  is  no  wonder  that  for 
years  the  Congregationalists  of  New  England  beheld  the  steady 
swelling  of  the  ranks  of  Presbyterianism  through  their  westward 
migrating  sons  and  daughters. 

But  though  the  Plan  of  Union  thus  added  to  the  number  cf 
Presbyterian  churches,  it  by  no  means  satisfied  all  Presbyterians. 
The  decade  of  1830  to  1840  was  one  of  much  theologic  discussion 


1  Tht;  Presbyterian  champion  was  Rev.  Thomas  Ban- ;  see  on  this  matter  Cowles,  Ohio  Congrega- 
tional^ Cong.  Quart.,  V:  137-139;  Hart,  Cong,  in  Ohio,  Ibid.,  V:  248-253;  Punchard,  Congrega- 
tionalism, V  :  198-216. 

2  Union  Efforts  between  Cong,  and Presb.  :  Results  and  Lessens,  p.  3.     Other  reasons  for 
dissatisfaction  with  the  workings  of  the  Plan  0/  Union  are  given  by  Dr.  Ross  and  by  Pro! 
(Cong.  Quart.,  V:  134-136).      Its  results  in  Western    New   Vork  are  described  by   Rev.  J.  C.  Oil!. 
Cong.  Quart.,  I:  151-158;  in  Michigan  by  J.  D.  Pierce,  Ibid.,  II:    190-197.     See  also  Punchard, 
V-.fassim. 

3  This  unjust  suspicion  of  the  western  churches  was  wide-spread.  Compare  New  Englander, 
XI  :  75-78  ;  Cong.  Quart.,  II :  196  ;  and  especially  the  debates  and  resolutions  of  the  Albany  Con- 
vention of  1S52,  when  it  was  a  prime  subject  of  discussion.  Proceedings,  pp.  13,  14,  53-63. 


DISSATISFACTION    WITH   THE   "PLAN  535 

in  New  England  and  the  Presbyterian  field.  The  stricter  Presby- 
terians had  long  looked  upon  many  of  the  representatives  of  New 
England  "  new  divinity  "  as  of  questionable  orthodoxy,  and  this 
feeling  had  been  intensified  when  the  teachings  of  Prof.  Nathaniel 
W.  Taylor  at  New  Haven  began  to  cause  serious  division  in  Con- 
necticut Congregationalism  and  led  to  the  founding,  in  1834,  of  a 
conservative  theological  seminary  at  East  Windsor,  Conn.  The 
points  in  dispute  related  chiefly  to  the  nature  and  purpose  of  sin, 
and  the  extent  of  human  inability  to  turn  to  God;  and  discussion 
in  New  England  between  the  supporters  and  opponents  of  "  New 
Haven  theology  "  waxed  exceedingly  bitter.1 

While  these  disputes  excited  New  England,  similar  doctrinal 
questions  agitated  the  Presbyterian  church,  and  New  England  dis- 
cussions were  transplanted  to  that  part  of  the  Presbyterian  body 
which  had  been  largely  drawn  from  New  England,  — ■  the  portion 
formed  under  the  Plan  of  Union.  To  the  more  conservative  Pres- 
byterians, Rev.  Drs.  Lyman  Beecher  of  Cincinnati  and  Albert 
Barnes  of  Philadelphia,  seemed  heretical;  while  the  churches  of 
New  York  and  Ohio  largely  looked  upon  them  as  champions.  The 
trials  of  these  distinguished  men  on  charges  of  doctrinal  unsound- 
ness increased  the  bitterness  between  the  "  Old  School  "  and  "  New 
School"  factions;2  and,  to  the  heated  thought  of  the  conserva- 
tives, New  England  seemed  the  source  of  false  doctrine  and  the 
churches  formed  under  the  Plan  of  Union  peculiarly  exposed  to 
error  owing  to  their  lack  of  a  full  Presbyterian  constitution.  The 
"  Old  School  "  party,  desirous  of  cutting  loose  from  what  they 
believed  a  dangerous  connection  with  Congregationalists,  exalted 
denominational  enterprises  and  discountenanced  the  further  use  of 
union  channels  of  missionary  agency,  like  the  American  Board  of 
Foreign  Missions  and  the  American  Home  Missionary  Society;  the 
"New  School"  favored  these  common  societies.     Feeling  grew; 


1  An  excellent  summary  of  Dr.  Taylor's  views  is  that  given  by  Prof.  Fisher,  Schaff-Herzog 
Cyclopedia,  III :  2306.  A  good  idea  of  the  spirit  in  which  the  discussion  was  carried  on  may  be 
gained  from  Zebulon  Crocker,  Catastrophe  of  the  Presb.  C/i.  in  /Sj7,  including  a  full  view  of 
the  recent  Theological  Controversies  in  New  England,  New  Haven,  1838.  Crocker  gives  an  ex- 
tended bibliography  of  the  Taylor-Tyler  controversy. 

2  For  these  trials  and  the  general  story  of  the  abolition  of  the  Plan  of  Union  and  the  division 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  see  Gillett,  Hist,  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  Philadelphia  [1864], 
II:  4«-552 


536  THE   PLAN   OF   UNION 

in  1834  a  memorial,  drawn  up  by  conservatives  in  the  vicinity  of 
Cincinnati,  denounced  the  Plan  of  Union  to  the  General  Assembly 
and  charged  the  Synods  formed  in  accordance  with  its  provisions  with 
dangerous  laxness  in  their  administration  and  with  the  toleration 
of  false  doctrine.1  The  Assembly,  however,  did  not  hear  the 
prayer  of  the  memorialists.  But  the  conservatives  persisted,  and 
called  a  convention  of  "  Old  School  "  sympathizers  to  meet  at 
Pittsburg  in  the  spring  of  1S35.2  It  was  largely  attended3  and 
denounced  the  Plan  of  Union  once  more.  In  the  Assembly  of 
1S35,  which  followed  this  convention,  the  "Old  School  "  party  was 
in  the  majority,  and  favored  a  discontinuance  of  the  Plan  of  Union, 
going  so  far  as  to  vote: 4 

"that  our  brethren  of  the  General  Association  of  Connecticut,  be,  and  they  hereby 
are,  respectfully  requested  to  consent  that  said  Plan  shall  be,  from  and  after  the  next 
meeting  of  that  Association,  declared  to  be  annulled." 

Curiously,  this  vote  was  never  presented  to  the  Connecticut 
body. 

But  in  1836  the  "Old  School"  sympathizers  were  unable  to 
control  the  Assembly,  and  their  attempt  to  condemn  Albert  Barnes 
and  the  "  New  School  "  teaching  failed.5  Of  course  nothing 
adverse  to  the  Plan  of  Union  was  done.  Alarmed  at  their  defeat, 
the  "  Old  School  "  party  now  once  more  gathered  a  preliminary 
convention,  in  the  spring  of  1837,  at  Philadelphia  ;  this  body 
addressed  a  memorial  to  the  Assembly  about  to  be  convened, 
repeating  the  charges  of  doctrinal  unsoundness,  insisting  on  the 
abrogation  of  the  Plan  of  Union,  and  demanding  that  every  Pres- 
bytery not  fully  Presbyterian  in  its  organization  be  cut  off  from 
the  church.0  And  when  the  Assembly  met  on  May  18,  1837,  it  was 
found  that,  as  in  the  body  of  1835,  the  majority  was  on  the  "Old 
School "  side.  Having  the  upper  hand  once  more  the  conservatives 
now  pushed  their  cause.  The  memorial  of  the  convention  of  1837 
was  promptly  taken  up,7  and  on  May  2 2d,  the  following  report  was 
adopted: 6 


Ibid.,  463-485-  2  Ibid.,  488-491. 

"41  Presbyteries  and  13  minorities  of  Presbyteries  were  represented."     Ibid.,  490. 

1.     Crocker,  Catastrophe,  p.  36. 
Gen.  Assent.  Minutes,  of  1S36,  pp.  268-271.        «  Gillett,  Hist.  Presb.  Cfc,  II :  497-499. 
Minutes  of  1837,  p.  418.  a  Ibid.,  pp.  4»9>  42°- 


ABROGATED   BY   PRESBYTERIANS  537 

"  In  regard  to  the  relation  existing  between  the  Presbyterian  and  Congregational 
Churches,  the  committee  recommend  the  adoption  of  the  following  resolutions  : 

"  1.  That  between  these  two  branches  of  the  American  Church,  there  ought, 
in  the  judgment  of  this  Assembly,  to  be  maintained  sentiments  of  mutual  respect  and 
esteem,  and  for  that  purpose  no  reasonable  efforts  should  be  omitted  to  preserve  a 
perfectly  good  understanding  between  these  branches  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 

"  2.  That  it  is  expedient  to  continue  the  plan  of  friendly  intercourse,  between 
this  Church  and  the  Congregational  Churches  of  New  England,  as  it  now  exists." 

So  far  all  was  plain  sailing;  the  real  meaning  of  the  report  was 
in  the  third  resolution,  and  on  that  heated  debate  ensued.  It  was 
not  till  the  next  afternoon  that  the  test  came;  by  a  vote  of  129 
to  123  it  was  ordered  that  the  question  be  put,1  and  by  143 
votes  to  no  it  was  declared:2 

"  3.  But  as  the  '  Tlan  of  Union '  adopted  for  the  new  settlements,  in  1S01,  was 
originally  an  unconstitutional  act  on  the  part  of  that  Assembly  —  these  important 
standing  rules  having  never  been  submitted  to  the  Presbyteries  —  and  as  they  were 
totally  destitute  of  authority  as  proceeding  from  the  General  Association  of  Connecti- 
cut, which  is  invested  with  no  power  to  legislate  in  such  cases,  and  especially  to 
enact  laws  to  regulate  churches  not  within  her  limits  ;  and  as  much  confusion  and 
irregularity  have  arisen  from  this  unnatural  and  unconstitutional  system  of  union, 
therefore,  it  is  resolved,  that  the  Act  of  the  Assembly  of  1S01,  entitled  a  '  Plan  of 
Union,'  be,  and  the  same  is  hereby  abrogated." 

The  "Old  School"  party  having  thus  begun,  its  other  projects 
were  soon  brought  to  vote.  The  Synod  of  the  Western  Reserve 
was  declared  no  part  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  since  formed 
under  the  Plan  of  Union.3  For  the  same  alleged  reasons  the  Synods 
of  Utica,  Geneva,  and  Genesee  were  next  excluded;  the  operations 
of  the  American  Home  Missionary  Society,  and  the  American  Edu- 
cation Society  were  declared  "  exceedingly  injurious  to  the  peace 
and  purity  of  the  Presbyterian  Church;"  a  list  of  doctrinal  errors 
was  condemned;  and  the  Philadelphia  Presbytery,  to  which  Albert 
Barnes  belonged,  ordered  dissolved.  Of  course  there  could  be  but 
one  outcome.  The  Presbyterian  Church  was  rent  in  sunder;  and 
the  next  year,  1838,  saw  two  bodies,  each  claiming  to  be  the  General 
Assembly.  Of  these,  the  "Old  School"  body  held  to  the  acts  of 
1837,  while  the  "New  School"  still  maintained  the  Plan  of  Union 
and  cooperated  in  missionary  enterprise  with  the  Congregationalists. 
The  action  of  the  Assembly  came  to  the  ears  of  the  Connecti- 


Ibid.,  p.  421.  2  /2/y; 

The  facts  in  this  paragraph  may  be  found  in  the  Minutes  of  1837,  passim 
35 


538  THE   PLAN   OF   UNION 

cut  General  Association  at  its  meeting  in  New  Milford  in  June, 
1837,  though  for  the  first  time  in  years  no  Presbyterian  delegates 
were  present.  But  no  very  positive  action  was  taken.  A  com- 
mittee was  appointed  to  consider  the  matter,  but  its  report  was 
referred  to  the  next  Association  meeting,  "not  intending  by  this 
postponement  to  imply  consent  to  the  abrogation  of  the  Plan  of 
Union."  '  But  the  trustees  of  the  Connecticut  Missionary  Society 
presented  a  report  to  the  Association  which  was  really  pusillanimous:2 

"  The  '  Plan  of  Union  '  between  the  General  Association  of  Connecticut,  and  the 
General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church, —  under  which  so  much  good  has  been 
accomplished,  and  so  many  churches  constituted  by  the  Missionaries  of  our  Society, 
was  dissolved  at  the  late  meeting  of  the  General  Assembly.  The  Synod  of  the 
Western  Reserve  has  also  been  declared  not  to  be  a  portion  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church.  What  course  the  Synod  will  take,  in  consequence  of  this  measure,  the 
Directors  are  not  informed  ;  but  as  their  exclusion  was  chiefly  owing  to  their  want  of 
a  complete  Presbyterian  organization,  and  not  to  error  in  doctrine,  we  may  still  con- 
gratulate the  Society  that  its  labors  in  this  section  of  our  country  have  not  been  in 
vain  ;  and  it  may  continue  its  benefactions  to  these  churches,  as  constituting  an  in- 
teresting part  of  the  body  of  Christ." 

The  next  General  Association,  that  of  1838,  voted  "that  with 
respect  to  the  Plan  of  Union,  all  action  of  this  Body  be  for  the 
present  suspended."3     And  so  the  matter  rested. 

But  while  these  events  were  in  progress,  Congregationalism 
was  at  last  beginning  to  wake  up  to  a  degree  of  denominational 
self-recognition.  Men  began  to  feel  that  it  had  an  independent 
mission  outside  of  New  England.  Its  western  churches  were 
demonstrating  their  right  to  be.  Signs  of  this  quickening  sense 
of  its  own  value  appeared  in  the  organization  of  State  Associations 
on  what  had  been  fields  of  missionary  effort  under  the  Pla?i  of 
Union.  Such  an  organization  was  effected  in  New  York  in  1834, 
the  Western  Reserve  followed  in  1836,  then  came  Iowa  in  1840, 
Michigan  in  1842,  Illinois  in  1844,  all  of  Ohio  in  1852,  and  Indiana 
in  1858.  Western  Congregationalism  felt  that  it  deserved  recogni- 
tion rather  than  distrust,  and  the  spirit  of  the  denomination  at 
last  began  to  stir  in  the  long  apathetic  frame.  On  October  5, 
1852,  there  gathered  at  Albany,  New  York,  the  first  meeting  of  a 
synodical  character,  representative  of  Congregationalism  as  a 
whole,  which  had  assembled  since  the  Cambridge  body  of  1646-8. 


Proceedings  of  Gen.  Association,  1837,  pp.  5,  q.        2  Ibid.,  p.  13.        s  Ibid.,  1838,  p.  8. 


THE   ALBANY    CONVENTION,    1852  539 

This  "Convention,"1  as  it  styled  itself,  came  together  on  the  call 
of  the  General  Association  of  New  York,  which  had  invited  all 
Congregational  churches  in  the  United  States  to  send  pastors  and 
delegates.  The  response  had  been  hearty,  and  the  body  numbered 
four  hundred  and  sixty-three,  from  seventeen  States,  and  includ- 
ing in  its  membership  the  leaders  of  the  denomination.  Its  busi- 
ness, as  announced  by  its  Business  Committee,  of  which  Rev.  Dr. 
Leonard  Bacon  of  New  Haven  was  chairman,  was  to  discuss:" 

"  1.  The  construction  and  practical  operation  of  the  '  Plan  of  Union  between 
Presbyterians  and  Congregationalists,'  agreed  upon  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  and  the  General  Association  of  Connecticut,  in  1801. 

2.  The  building  of  Church  Edifices  at  the  West. 

3.  The  system  and  operations  of  the  American  Home  Missionary  Society. 

4.  The  intercourse  between  the  Congregationalists  of  New  England  and  those 
of  other  States. 

5.  The  local  work  and  responsibility  of  a  Congregational  Church. 

6.  The  bringing  forward  of  Candidates  for  the  Ministry. 

7.  The  re-publication  of  the  Works  of  our  standard  Theological  writers." 

The  first  item,  that  relating  to  the  Plan  of  Union,  was  referred 
to  a  committee  of  ten,  "  two  from  New  England,  and  one  from 
each  of  the  other  States  represented,"3  and  after  a  full  debate,4 
the  following  report  was  unanimously  adopted:6 

"  Whereas,  the  Plan  of  Union  formed  in  1801,  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  and  the  General  Association  of  Connecticut,  is  understood  to 
have  been  repudiated  by  the  said  Assembly  before  the  schism  in  that  body  of  1838, 
though  this  year  acknowledged  as  still  in  force  by  the  General  Assembly  which  met 
last  at  Washington,  D.  C.;6  and 

Whereas,  many  of  our  Presbyterian  brethren,  though  adhering  to  this  Plan  in. 
some  of  its  provisions,  do  not,  it  is  believed,  maintain  it  in  its  integrity  ;  especially 
in  virtually  requiring  Congregational  Ministers  settled  over  Presbyterian  Churches, 
and  Congregational  Churches  having  Presbyterian  Ministers,  to  be  connected  with 
Presbyteries ;  and 

Whereas,  whatever  mutual  advantage  has  formerly  resulted  from  this  Plan  to- 
the  two  denominations,  and  whatever  might  yet  result  from  it  if  acted  upon  impar- 
tially, its  operation  is  now  unfavorable  to  the  spread  and  permanence  of  the  Congre- 
gational polity,  and  even  to  the  real  harmony  of  these  Christian  communities : — 


1  For  the  doings  of  this  body  see  Proceedings  of  the  General  Convention  of  Cong.  Minis- 
ters and  Delegates  in  the  United  States,  held  at  Albany,  N.  Y.,  on  thejth,  6th,  yth,  and  St h 
of  Oct.,  iSj2.  New  York,  1852.  Compare  also  New  Englander,  XI:  72-92;  and  Dexter,  Cong. 
as  seen,  p.  515. 

2  Proceedings,  etc.,  pp.  it,  13. 

»  Ibid.,  pp.  12,  14.  Oregon  and  the  District  of  Columbia,  probably  as  not  concerned,  were 
not  represented  on  the  committee. 

4  A  full  report  of  the  debate  is  given  Ibid.,  pp.  69-76. 

6  Ibid.,  pp.  19,  20.  •  I.  e.,  the  "  New  School"  Assembly. 


54^  THE  PLAN  OF  ONION 

Resolved,  1st.  That  in  the  judgment  of  this  Convention  it  is  not  deemed  ex- 
pedient that  new  Congregational  Churches,  or  Churches  heretofore  independent, 
become  connected  with  Presbyteries. 

2d.  That  in  the  evident  disuse  of  the  said  Plan,  according  to  its  original  de- 
sign, we  deem  it  important,  and  for  the  purposes  of  union  sufficient,  that  Congrega- 
tionalists  and  Presbyterians  exercise  toward  each  other  that  spirit  of  love  which  the 
Gospel  requires,  and  which  their  common  faith  is  fitted  to  cherish  ;  that  they  accord 
to  each  other  the  right  of  pre-occupancy,  where  but  one  Church  can  be  maintained  ; 
and  that,  in  the  formation  of  such  a  Church,  its  ecclesiastical  character  and  relations 
be  determined  by  a  majority  of  its  members. 

3d.  That  in  respect  to  those  Congregational  Churches  which  are  now  connected 
with  Presbyteries,  —  either  on  the  above-mentioned  Plan,  or  on  those  of  1S0S  and 
1813,1  between  Congregational  and  Presbjterian  bodies  in  the  State  of  New  York, — 
while  we  would  not  have  them  violently  sever  their  existing  relations,  we  counsel 
them  to  maintain  vigilantly  the  Congregational  privileges  which  have  been  guaranteed 
them  by  the  Plans  above  mentioned,  and  to  see  to  it  that  while  they  remain  con- 
nected with  Presbyteries,  the  true  intent  of  those  original  arrangements  be  impartially 
carried  out." 

The  Convention  also  passed  resolutions  discountenancing 
charges  of  doctrinal  unsoundness  and  disorder  in  practice  vaguely 
made  against  the  western  churches,  and  urging  a  more  intimate 
acquaintance  between  east  and  west.2  Its  great  work  of  practical 
value  in  denominational  extension  was  its  call  for  §50,000  (which 
proved  $61,891  when  the  response  had  been  made  to  the  appeal3) 
for  the  erection  of  church-edifices  in  Ohio,  Michigan,  Wisconsin, 
Iowa,  Illinois,  Missouri,  Indiana,  and  Minnesota.4  From  the  meet- 
ing of  the  Albany  Convention  there  has  been  growing  sympathy 
between  all  branches  of  Congregationalism,  east  and  west,  and  a 
growing  self-respect  and  confidence  in  its  own  right  to  be. 

The  Plan  of  Union  was  now  no  more.  Only  the  "  New  School " 
body  regarded  it  as  of  any  value,  and  they  were  pretty  much  con- 
vinced of  its  uselessness.  As  denominational  consciousness  grew 
on  either  side,  churches  formed  under  it  sought  their  own  affinities. 
It  had  proved  itself  essentially  a  failure.  Formed  by  good  men, 
with  the  best  of  intentions,  it  did  not  and  could  not  secure  the 
harmony  between  the  two  systems  that  was  desired.  It  was  sure 
to  lead  to  misunderstandings.      The  churches  planted  under  its 


1  Some  hints  regarding  these  local  modifications  of  the  Plan  of  Union  may  be  found  in 
Gillett,  Hist.  Frcsb.  Ch.,  II  :   107,  112-114;  and  Punchard,  V:  56-59. 

3  Proceedings,  etc.,  pp.  13,  14. 

'  Reports  0/  the  Sec.  and  Treas.  0/  the  Central  Com.  appointed  by  the  Albany  Cong. 
Convention  for  disbursing  the  Fifty  Thousand  Dollar  Building  Fund,  New  York,  1856,  p.  6. 

4  Proceedings,  etc.,  pp.  16-18,  22-24. 


THE   "  PLAN  '     A    FAILURE  541 

rules  were  in  an  anomalous  position,  neither  Congregational  nor 
Presbyterian.  On  the  whole  it  must  be  said,  that  efficient  as  the 
Plan  of  Union  seemed  at  the  time  of  its  formation  in  gathering 
together  the  feeble  benevolences  of  the  churches  and  in  giving 
the  Gospel  message  to  remote  settlements,  it  would  have  been 
better  had  it  never  been  made. 


XVII 

THE   ENGLISH   DECLARATION  OF   1833 

Editions  and  Reprints 

I.  Minutes  of  the  Congregational  Union  of  England  and  Wales  for  1833, 
pp.  23-2S.  The  Declaration  was  issued  in  a  large  edition  separately  as  a  tract  by 
the  Union,  and  since  1S58  has  been  annually  published  in  the  English  Congrega- 
tional Year-Book. 

II.  In  Schaff,  Creeds  of  Christendom,  New  York,  1877,  III :   730-734. 

III.  In  Waddington,  Congregational  History,  IV  (1 800-1 850):   653-656. 

Sources 

Documents  Connected  -with  the  Formation  and  Early  Proceedings  of  tlie  Congre- 
gational Union  of  England  and  Wales,  Reprinted  [London],  1839. 

Congregational  Magazine,  London,  1 831,  2,  3,  passim. 

Literature 

Schaff,  Creeds  of  Christendom,  I:  833-835.  Dexter,  Cong,  as  seen,  etc.,  pp. 
674.  °75-     Stoughton,  Religion  in  England  from  1800  to  /Sjo,  London,  1884,  II : 


THE  attempted  union  of  the  Presbyterians  and  Congregation- 
alists  of  England  into  a  single  body,  after  the  Toleration 
Act  of  1689  had  freed  Non-conformists  from  their  worst 
legal  disabilities,  has  been  described  in  an  earlier  chapter,  and  the 
failure  of  this  association  has  been  pointed  out.1  The  immediate 
effect  of  the  release  of  the  Non-conformists  from  active  persecution 
was  not  the  growth  which  might  have  been  expected.  The  old 
Puritan  flame  had  burned  low,  the  closing  years  of  the  seventeenth 
and  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  centuries  were  seasons  of 
spiritual  deadness  in  England  as  well  as  America,  and  a  cold  intel- 
lectuality in  the  pulpit  took  the  place,  to  a  large  degree,  of  the 
Puritan  earnestness.  From  17 17  onward,  discussions  regarding  the 
Trinity  rent  the  Presbyterian  churches,  which  constituted  the 
most  numerous  of  the  Dissenting  bodies  at  the  beginning  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  and  so  swept  the  churches  of  that  order  away 


>  A  nte,  pp.  44«-452- 

(542) 


CONGREGATIONALISM    REVIVED  543 

from  their  ancient  faith  that  by  the  year  1750  they  were  prevail- 
ingly Arian,  and  by  1800  Unitarian.1  These  errors  scarcely  touched 
the  Congregational  body;  and,  as  a  consequence,  as  the  last  cen- 
tury wore  on,  Congregationalism  increased  and  Presbyterianism 
decreased  until  the  former  became  the  more  influential  in  English 
religious  life.2  But,  in  spite  of  such  conspicuous  lights  in  its  min- 
istry as  Isaac  Watts  and  Philip  Doddridge,  the  Congregational 
denomination  did  not  really  flourish;  associational  meetings  were 
largely  neglected,3  congregations  dwindled,  and  other  evidences  of 
decline  were  apparent,  until  the  great  Wesleyan  revival  awoke  new 
life  in  all  Non-conformist  circles.  None  of  the  older  bodies  of  Dis- 
senters felt  and  profited  by  that  movement  more  than  the  Congre- 
gationalists,  and  to  the  evangelical  impulse  thus  received  the 
modern  growth  of  English  Congregationalism  is  largely  due. 

This  new  life  brought  with  it  desire  for  extension  and  for 
further  fellowship  in  religious  work.  As  a  consequence,  Associa- 
tions were  revived  where  they  had  fallen  into  decay,  new  ones 
were  formed,4  and  the  last  few  years  of  the  eighteenth  century 
saw  the  beginnings  of  a  missionary  activity  at  home  and  abroad 
which  continued  in  increasing  power  into  the  present  century. 
The  denomination  grew  in  consciousness  of  its  real  unity.  By 
1806  the  London  Board,  which  had  administered  Congregational 
funds  since  the  breach  of  the  old  Union  based  on  the  Heads  of 
Agreement?  proposed  a  General  Union  of  the  churches  of  our  order 
in  England,  but  the  time  was  not  yet  quite  ready.6  In  Scotland 
matters  moved  more  rapidly,  probably  because  the  Congregational 


1  Arianism  was  popularized  in  England  by  William  Whiston  (1667-1752)  Prof,  at  Cambridge. 
Traces  of  Arian  sentiments  may  be  found  in  Milton,  Locke,  and  earlier  writers.  Whiston's  most 
influential  book,  Primitive  Christianity  Revived,  was  published  in  1711.  These  views  were  em- 
braced by  Joseph  Hallet  and  James  Pierce,  Presbyterian  ministers  at  Exeter,  as  early  as  1717,  and 
though  strenuously  opposed,  widely  permeated  the  Presbyterian  body.  See  Bogue  &  Bennett,  Hist, 
of  Dissenters,  ed.  London,  1833,  II :  165-197  ;  and  Stoughton,  Religion  in  England  from  1S00  to 
1S50,  London,  1884,  1 :  205-229. 

2  Stoughton,  Religion  in  Eng.  under  Q.  Anne  and  the  Georges,  London,  1878,  II:  247. 

3  Compare  Bogue  &  Bennett,  Ibid.,  II :  282. 

4  Ibid.,  II :  565.  By  1808  the  authors  were  able  to  say  that  there  was  "scarcely  a  county" 
in  southern  England  in  which  Associations  were  not  vigorously  at  work.  Stoughton  states  that  the 
first  of  the  modern  Cong.  Associations  of  ministers  and  churches  was  that  formed  in  Devonshire  in 
1785  ;  and  the  second  in  Kent  in  1792  ;  Religion  in  England  under  Q.  A  nne  and  the  Georges,  II . 
272.     Probably  some  had  never  died  out. 

6  Ante,  p.  452.  6  Stoughton,  Religion  in  Eng.,  iSoo-lSjO,  II :   104. 


544  THE   ENGLISH   DECLARATION   OF    1833 

churches  were  much  fewer  in  number ;  and  a  meeting  at  Edin- 
burgh, in  November,  1812,  resolved  on  a  Union  for  that  country, — 
the  first  annual  meeting  of  the  organization  being  held  on  May 
6,  1813.1 

But,  as  the  third  decade  of  the  present  century  drew  to  a  close, 
the  political  and  ecclesiastical  condition  of  England  made  a  con- 
solidation of  denominational  interests  seem  increasingly  desirable. 
The  industrial  changes,  the  agitation  which  resulted  in  the  aboli- 
tion of  Test  and  Corporation  Acts  in  1828  and  in  Catholic  emanci- 
pation in  1829,  and  the  movement  for  the  revision  of  the  constitu- 
tion which  produced  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832,  all  profoundly  stirred 
English  society.  The  Congregationalists,  in  common  with  other 
Dissenters,  were  now  no  longer  subject  to  galling  political  disabili- 
ties, their  position  was  materially  improved  and  they  might  well 
look  for  rapid  growth  ;  but  these  changes  had  aroused  the  con- 
servative spirit  of  the  Church  of  England  also,  and  Congregation- 
alists might  expect  increased  opposition. 

It  was  under  these  circumstances  that  a  two-fold  movement 
was  begun  looking  toward  the  strengthening  of  denominational 
fellowship.  The  first  of  these  efforts  resulted,  largely  through  the 
instrumentality  of  Rev.  John  Blackburn  of  Pentonville,  and  of  Mr. 
Joshua  Wilson  of  London,  in  securing  the  lease  of  a  building  in 
Blomfield  Street,  Finsbury  Circus,  London,  as  denominational  head- 
quarters from  1830  onward.2  The  second  effort  brought  about  the 
Union.  That  Union  was  advocated  by  Mr.  Blackburn  through  the 
Congregational  Magazine*  and  was  also  independently  urged  by  the 
Dorset  Association  through  correspondence  with  other  County 
Associations,  begun  in  1829.4  As  a  result  of  this  agitation,  a  Pro- 
visional Committee  of  twelve  laymen  and  twelve  ministers  inter- 
ested in  the  plan  met  at  London  June  7,  1830;5  and  by  direction 
of  this  Committee  a  letter  was  sent  out  on  January  24,  1831,0  to 

1  The  Union  was  suggested  by  a  deacon  of  the  church  at  Musselburg,  William  Tait,  in  Sept., 
1S12  ;  the  idea  was  taken  up  by  the  Association  at  Dalkeith,  and  a  general  meeting  to  favor  the 
project  held  at  Edinburgh,  Nov.  4,  1S12,  in  Thistle  St.  Chapel.  See  Waddington,  Cong.  Hist.,  IV: 
233.  234- 

2  Waddington,  Ibid..  IV:  351-353;  Stoughton,  Religion  in  Eng.,  1S00-1S50.  II:  102-104. 

3  Waddington,  Ibid..  IV:  348-362.  *  Ibid.  6  Ibid..  359. 

6  Proceedings  and  letter  in  Doc.  Connected  with  the  Formation  .  .  .  0/  the  Cong.  Union, 
Reprint,  pp.  5-7. 


FORMATION   OF   THE    UNION  545 

all  County  Associations  asking  them  to  send  delegates  to  a  general 
meeting  at  London  in  the  following  May. 

In  accordance  with  this  invitation  such  an  assembly  came 
together  on  May  10  and  13,  with  an  attendance  of  82  ministers 
and  19  laymen.  Here  it  was  found  that  of  the  various  Associa- 
tions of  England  which  had  responded  twenty  favored  the  Union, 
while  two  hesitated.1  Under  these  encouraging  circumstances  the 
meeting  proceeded  to  form  a  constitution  for  the  proposed  body, 
expressing  its  advisory  and  non-judicial  character;  and  to  appoint 
a  committee  to  complete  the  organization.  By  this  committee  the 
matter  was  once  more  presented  to  the  churches,  —  this  time  in 
definite  form,  —  and,  in  accordance  with  a  vote  of  the  convention  of 

1831,  a    new    meeting    was    held    at    London  on    May  8    and    11, 

1832.  It  now  appeared  that  twenty-six  Associations  of  the  thirty- 
four  in  England  had  approved  the  plan,  while  eight  hesitated  or 
failed  to  take  action.2  The  meeting  therefore,  May  8,  1832,  voted 
that  "the  Union  be  now  formed";3  and  it  has  continued  in  in- 
creasing usefulness  to  this  day. 

It  was  at  the  same  session  at  which  this  Union  was  organized 

that4— 

"the  Rev.  J.  A.  James5  then  introduced  a  paper,  containing  a  Declaration  of  the 
principles  of  faith  and  order  of  the  Congregational  Body,  drawn  up  by  an  individual 
at  the  request  of  several  brethren  in  town  and  country." 

The  "  individual  "  here  referred  to  was  Mr.  James's  neighbor, 
Rev.  George  Redford  of  Worcester,6  to  whose  pen  the  Declaration 
was  due.  The  meeting  listened  to  it  with  attention;  but,  believ- 
ing any  discussion  of  it  to  be  premature  before  it  had  been  laid 
before  the  churches,  it  voted  unanimously,  on  May  11,  to  ask  the 
approval  of  the  Associations  both  as  to  the  expediency  and  the 


'  ibid.,  p.  9.  2  Minutes  of  /S32,  Reprint,  p.  15.  3  Ibid.,  p.  18.  <  Ibid.,  p.  20. 

6  Of  Birmingham. 

6  Rev.  George  Redford  was  born  in  London  Sept.  27,  1785.  He  studied  at  Hoxton  and  Glas- 
gow, was  settled  at  Uxbridge  for  14  years,  and  became  prominent  in  denominational  circles  as  one 
of  the  editors  of  the  Cong.  Magazine.  From  1826  onward,  till  ill-health  compelled  his  retirement, 
he  was  settled  at  Worcester.  He  died  May  20,  i860.  He  received  the  degree  of  LL.D.  from  Glas- 
gow, and  that  of  D.D.  from  Amherst  (Mass.).  See  Cong.  Year-Book,  /St}/,  London,  1861,  pp.  230- 
233.  Regarding  the  authorship  of  the  Declaration  that  sketch  says  that  a  few  emendations  were 
made  by  Mr.  James,  "but  substantially,  and  almost  verbally,  it  was  Dr.  Redford's  own  composi- 


546  THE    ENGLISH    DECLARATION    OF    1833 

form  of  the  proposed  Declaration.'  In  accordance  with  this  vote 
it  was  transmitted  to  the  churches,  accompanied  by  a  letter  signed 
by  the  secretary  of  the  Union,  Joseph  Turnbull,  under  date  of 
June  4,  1832,  —  a  letter  which  so  well  sets  forth  the  purpose  of  the 
Declaration  that  a  quotation  is  interesting.2 

"  It  was  felt  that  such  a  document  was  but  little  required  for  our  own  informa- 
tion, and  must  necessarily  be  an  imperfect  statement  of  the  sentiments  held  by  us. 
.  .  .  Still  it  was  concluded  that,  for  the  information  of  others,  not  of  our  de- 
nomination, it  was  essentially  requisite,  at  the  present  time.  ...  It  was  stated 
by  several  brethren,  that  they  were  persuaded  a  very  large  proportion  of  our  country- 
men take  us  to  be  either  SOCINIANS  or  METHODISTS.  .  .  .  Had  not  the 
Declaration  of  our  fathers,  at  a  meeting  in  the  Savoy  in  the  year  1658, 3  become 
scarce,  and  almost  obsolete,  it  might  have  been  referred  to  .  .  .  but,  consider- 
ing that  Declaration,  though  most  orthodox,  as  too  wordy  and  too  much  extended  for 
our  purpose,  we  were  glad  to  receive  the  summary  before  us,  as  much  more  compend- 
ious, and  more  appropriate  to  the  present  need." 

Evidently  the  churches  thought  well  of  the  document  thus 
submitted  to  them,  at  least  for  the  use  specified  in  this  letter,  for 
their  representatives,  in  the  meeting  of  the  Union  on  May  7,  1833, 
expressed  their  satisfaction  at  the  reception  with  which  it  had  met 
and  voted  that  it  be  referred  to  a  committee4  for  some  slight 
verbal  revision,5  and  then  e 

"accepted  as  the  Declaration  of  the  Congregational  Body,  with  the  distinct  under- 
standing, that  it  is  not  intended  as  a  test  or  creed  for  subscription." 

On  the  further  report  of  the  revision  committee,  May  10,  1833, 
the  Declaration  was  unanimously  approved.7  It  was  at  once  issued 
as  a  tract,  and  the  Union  was  informed  in  1834  that  nearly  20,000 
copies  had  already  been  circulated.8 

The  Declaration  is  a  sweet-spirited  statement  of  which  the 
English  churches  have  no  cause  to  be  ashamed.  In  doctrine  it  is 
Calvinistic  and  distinctly  Evangelical.  Its  departures  from  the 
earlier  creeds  of  Puritanism  are  not  essential.  In  regard  to  church 
polity  it  asserts  a  jure  divino  Congregationalism  with  much  posi- 
tiveness.     Dr.  Stoughton,  writing  in  1884,  affirmed  it  as  his  opinion 

1  Minutes  0/1832,  Reprint,  pp.  20,  21.         2  Ibid.,  pp.  29,  30. 
3  Ante,  pp.  ^67-408.  '  Minutes  0/  1833,  p.  22. 

6  The  text  of  the  original  draft  may  be  found  in  Minutes  0/  /S32,  pp.  23-28.  It  differs 
very  slightly  from  the  form  finally  adopted. 

•  Minutes  0/  1S33,  p.  22.  7  Ibid.,  p.  28.  6  Minutes  0/  7834,  p.  4. 


ADOPTION    OF   THE   DECLARATION  547 

that  "  no  member  of  the  denomination  who  has  reached  an  ad- 
vanced age  can  deny  that  these  articles  set  forth  the  current  belief 
of  fifty  years  ago."1  He  also  stated  that  "the  declaration 
created  little  discussion."2  But  when  asked,  about  1876,  by  Prof. 
Schaff,  to  express  the  present  attitude  of  Congregationalists  in 
England  toward  the  Declaration,  Dr.  Stoughton  inclined  to  the 
opinion  that,  partly  on  grounds  of  doctrine,  but  even  more  because 
such  statements  are  now  deemed  unwise  interferences  with  Chris- 
tian liberty,  the  Declaration  if  newly  presented  would  not  now  be 
adopted  by  the  Union.3  No  man  was  better  able  to  form  a  judg- 
ment on  this  point  than  Dr.  Stoughton.  But  whether  he  was  right 
or  wrong,  the  Declaration  is  still  given  an  honored  place  in  each 
issue  of  the  Year-Book  of  the  Congregational  Union  of  England 
and  Wales. 


>  Religion  in  Eng.,  /Sbo-zSjo,  II :  109. 

3  Schafi,  Creeds  0/  Christendom,  1 :  833-835 


548  THE   ENGLISH   DECLARATION    OF    1833 


THE    ENGLISH    DECLARATION. 

"  The1  Congregational  Churches  in  England  and  Wales,  fre- 
quently called  Independents,  hold  the  following  Doctrines,  as  of 
Divine  authority,  and  as  the  foundation  of  christian  faith  and 
practice. 

They  are  also  formed  and  governed  according  to  the  princi- 
ples hereinafter  stated. 

PRELIMINARY   NOTES. 

1.  It  is  not  designed,  in  the  following  summary,  to  do  more  than  to  state  the 
leading  doctrines  of  faith  and  order  maintained  by  Congregational  Churches  in 
general. 

2.  It  is  not  proposed  to  offer  any  proofs,  reasons,  or  argu-[2^\ments,  in  sup- 
port of  the  doctrines  herein  stated,  but  simply  to  declare  what  the  denomination 
believes  to  be  taught  by  the  pen  of  inspiration. 

3.  It  is  not  intended  to  present  a  scholastic  or  critical  confession  of  faith,  but 
merely  such  a  statement  as  any  intelligent  member  of  the  body  might  offer,  as  con- 
taining its  leading  principles. 

4.  It  is  not  intended  that  the  following  statement  should  be  put  forth  with  any 
authority,  or  as  a  standard  to  which  assent  should  be  required. 

5.  Disallowing  the  utility  of  Creeds  and  Articles  of  religion  as  a  bond  of  union, 
and  protesting  against  subscription  to  any  human  formularies,  as  a  term  of  com- 
munion, Congregationalists  are  yet  willing  to  declare,  for  general  information,  what 
is  commonly  believed  among  them  ;  reserving  to  every  one  the  most  perfect  liberty 
of  conscience. 

6.  Upon  some  minor  points  of  doctrine  and  practice,  they,  differing  among 
themselves,  allow  to  each  other  the  right  to  form  an  unbiassed  judgment  of  the  word 
of  God. 

7.  They  wish  it  to  be  observed,  that,  notwithstanding  their  jealousy  of  sub- 
scription to  Creeds  and  Articles,  and  their  disapproval  of  the  imposition  of  any 
human  standard,  whether  of  faith  or  discipline,  they  are  far  more  agreed  in  their 
doctrines  and  practices  than  any  church  which  enjoins  subscription,  and  enforces  a 
human  standard  of  orthodoxy  ;  and  they  believe  that  there  is  no  minister  and  no 
church  among  them  that  would  deny  the  substance  of  any  one  of  the  following  doc- 
trines of  religion  ;  though  each  might  prefer  to  state  his  sentiments  in  his  own  way. 

PRINCIPLES    OF    RELIGION. 
I.     The  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  received  by  the 
Jews,  and  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  as  received  by  the 

1  From  the  Reprint  of  Minutes  of  1833,  pp.  23-28. 


TEXT   OF    THE    DECLARATION  549 

Primitive  Christians  from  the  Evangelists  and  Apostles,  Congrega- 
tional Churches  believe  to  be  divinely  inspired,  and  of  supreme 
authority.  These  writings,  in  the  languages  in  which  they  were 
originally  composed,  are  to  be  consulted,  by  the  aids  of  sound 
criticism,  as  a  final  appeal  in  all  controversies  ;  but  the  common 
version  they  consider  to  be  adequate  to  the  ordinary  purposes  of 
Christian  instruction  and  edification. 

II.  They  believe  in  one  God,  essentially  wise,  holy,  just,  and 
good  ;  eternal,  infinite,  and  immutable,  in  all  natural  and  moral 
perfections  ;  the  Creator,  Supporter,  and  Governor  of  all  beings, 
and  of  all  things. 

III.  They  believe  that  God  is  revealed  in  the  Scriptures,  as 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  that  to  each  are 
[25]  attributed  the  same  divine  properties  and  perfections.  The 
doctrine  of  the  Divine  existence,  as  above  stated,  they  cordially 
believe  without  attempting  fully  to  explain. 

IV.  They  believe  that  man  was  created  after  the  divine 
image,  sinless,  and  in  his  kind  perfect. 

V.  They  believe  that  the  first  man  disobeyed  the  divine 
command,  fell  from  his  state  of  innocence  and  purity,  and  involved 
all  his  posterity  in  the  consequences  of  that  fall. 

VI.  They  believe  that  therefore  all  mankind  are  born  in  sin, 
and  that  a  fatal  inclination  to  moral  evil,  utterly  incurable  by 
human  means,  is  inherent  in  every  descendant  of  Adam. 

VII.  They  believe  that  God  having,  before  the  foundation  of 
the  world,  designed  to  redeem  fallen  man,  made  disclosures  of  his 
mercy,  which  were  the  grounds  of  faith  and  hope  from  the  earliest 
ages. 

VIII.  They  believe  that  God  revealed  more  fully  to  Abra- 
ham the  covenant  of  his  grace  ;  and,  having  promised  that  from 
his  descendants  should  arise  the  Deliverer  and  Redeemer  of  man- 
kind, set  that  Patriarch  and  his  posterity  apart,  as  a  race  specially 
favored  and  separated  to  his  service  ;  a  peculiar  church,  formed 
and  carefully  preserved,  under  the  divine  sanction  and  government, 
until  the  birth  of  the  promised  Messiah. 

IX.  They  believe  that,  in  the  fulness  of  the  time,  the  Son  of 
God  was  manifested  in  the  flesh,  being  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
but  conceived  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  ;  and  that  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  was  both  the  Son  of  man  and  the  Son  of  God,  partak- 
ing fully  and  truly  of  human  nature,  though  without  sin,  equal 
with  the  Father,  and  "the  express  image  of  his  person." 

X.  They  believe  that  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  revealed, 


550  THE   ENGLISH    DECLARATION    OF    1 833 

either  personally  in  his  own  ministry,  or  by  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the 
ministry  of  his  apostles,  the  whole  mind  of  God  for  our  salvation  ; 
and  that  by  his  obedience  to  the  divine  law  while  he  lived,  and  by 
his  sufferings  unto  death,  he  meritoriously  "obtained  eternal 
redemption  for  us  ;  "  having  thereby  vindicated  and  illustrated 
divine  justice,  "  magnified  the  law,"  and  "brought  in  everlasting 
righteousness." 

XI.  They  believe  that,  after  his  death  and  resurrection,  he 
ascended  up  into  heaven,  where,  as  the  Mediator,  he  "ever  liveth  " 
to  rule  over  all,  and  to  "  make  intercession  for  them  that  come 
unto  God  by  him." 

XII.  They  believe  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  given  in  conse- 
quence of  Christ's  mediation,  to  quicken  and  renew  the  hearts  of 
men  ;  and  that  his  influence  is  indispensably  necessary  to  bring  a 
sinner  to  true  repentance,  to  produce  saving  faith,  to  regenerate 
the  heart,  and  to  perfect  our  sanctification. 

XIII.  They  believe  that  we  are  justified  through  faith  in 
Christ  ;  as  "  the  Lord  our  righteousness,"  and  not  "  by  the  works 
of  the  Law." 

[26]  XIV.  They  believe  that  all  who  will  be  saved  were  the 
objects  of  God's  eternal  and  electing  love,  and  were  given  by  an 
act  of  divine  sovereignty  to  the  Son  of  God  ;  which  in  no  way 
interferes  with  the  system  of  means,  nor  with  the  grounds  of 
human  responsibility,  being  wholly  unrevealed  as  to  its  objects, 
and  therefore  incapable  of  becoming  a  rule  of  human  duty. 

XV.  They  believe  that  the  Scriptures  teach  the  final  per- 
severance of  all  true  believers  to  a  state  of  eternal  blessedness; 
which  they  are  appointed  to  obtain  through  constant  faith  in 
Christ,  and  uniform  obedience  to  his  commands. 

XVI.  They  believe  that  a  holy  life  will  be  the  necessary 
effect  of  a  true  faith,  and  that  good  works  are  the  certain  fruits  of 
a  vital  union  to  Christ. 

XVII.  They  believe  that  the  sanctification  of  true  Christians, 
or  their  growth  in  the  graces  of  the  Spirit,  and  meetness  for  heaven, 
is  gradually  carried  on  through  the  whole  period,  during  which  it 
pleases  God  to  continue  them  in  the  present  life;  and  that,  at  death, 
their  souls,  perfectly  freed  from  all  remains  of  evil,  are  immediately 
received  into  the  presence  of  Christ. 

XVIII.  They  believe  in  the  perpetual  obligation  of  Baptism, 
and  the  Lord's  Supper:  the  former  to  be  administered  to  all  con- 
verts to  Christianity  and  their  children,  by  the  application  of 
water  to  the  subject,,  "  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son 


TEXT  OF    THE   DECLARATION  551 

and  of  the  Holy  Ghost;"  and  the  latter  to  be  celebrated  by- 
Christian  churches  as  a  token  of  faith  in  the  Saviour,  and  of 
brotherly  love. 

XIX.  They  believe  that  Christ  will  finally  come  to  judge  the 
whole  human  race  according  to  their  works;  that  the  bodies  of  the 
dead  will  be  raised  again;  and  that  as  the  Supreme  Judge,  he  will 
divide  the  righteous  from  the  wicked,  will  receive  the  righteous 
into  "life  everlasting,"  but  send  away  the  wicked  into  "  everlasting 
punishment." 

XX.  They  believe  that  Jesus  Christ  directed  his  followers  to 
live  together  in  christian  fellowship,  and  to  maintain  the  com- 
munion of  saints;  and  that,  for  this  purpose,  they  are  jointly  to 
observe  all  divine  ordinances,  and  maintain  that  church-order  and 
discipline  which  is  either  expressly  enjoined  by  inspired  institution, 
or  sanctioned  by  the  undoubted  example  of  the  apostles  and  of 
apostolic  churches. 

PRINCIPLES  OF  CHURCH-ORDER  AND  DISCIPLINE. 

I.  The  Congregational  Churches  hold  it  to  be  the  will  of  Christ  that  true 
believers  should  voluntarily  assemble  together  to  observe  religious  ordinances,  to 
promote  mutual  edification  and  holiness,  to  perpetuate  and  propagate  the  gospel  in 
the  world,  [27]  and  to  advance  the  glory  and  worship  of  God,  through  Jesus  Christ ; 
and  that  each  Society  of  believers,  having  these  objects  in  view  in  its  formation,  is 
properly  a  christian  church. 

II.  They  believe  that  the  New  Testament  contains,  either  in  the  form  of  ex- 
press statute,  or  in  the  example  and  practice  of  apostles  and  apostolic  churches,  all 
the  articles  of  faith  necessary  to  be  believed,  and  all  the  principles  of  order  and  disci- 
pline requisite  for  constituting  and  governing  christian  societies  ;  and  that  human 
traditions,  fathers  and  councils,  canons  and  creeds,  possess  no  authority  over  the 
faith  and  practice  of  Christians. 

III.  They  acknowledge  Christ  as  the  only  Head  of  the  church,  and  the  officers 
of  each  church,  under  him,  as  ordained  to  administer  his  laws  impartially  to  all  ;  and 
their  only  appeal,  in  all  questions  touching  their  religious  faith  and  practice,  is  to  the 
Sacred  Scriptures. 

IV.  They  believe  that  the  New  Testament  authorizes  every  christian  church  to 
elect  its  own  officers,  to  manage  all  its  own  affairs,  and  to  stand  independent  of,  and 
irresponsible  to,  all  authority,  saving  that  only  of  the  supreme  and  divine  Head  of  the 
church,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

V.  They  believe  that  the  only  officers  placed  by  the  apostles  over  individual 
churches,  are  the  bishops  or  pastors,  and  the  deacons  ;  the  number  of  these  being 
dependent  upon  the  numbers  of  the  church  ;  and  that  to  these,  as  the  officers  of  the 
church,  is  committed  respectively  the  administration  of  its  spiritual  and  temporal  con- 
cerns ;  —  subject,  however,  to  the  approbation  of  the  church. 

VI.  They  believe  that  no  persons  should  be  received  as  members  of  christian 
churches,  but  such  as  make  a  credible  profession  of  Christianity,  are  living  accord- 
ing to  its  precepts,  and  attest  a  willingness  to  be  subject  to  its  discipline  ;  and  that 


552  THE   ENGLISH   DECLARATION   OF    1833 

none  should  be  excluded  from  the  fellowship  of  the  church,  but  such  as  deny  the 
faith  of  Christ,  violate  his  laws,  or  refuse  to  submit  themselves  to  the  discipline  which 
the  word  of  God  enforces. 

VII.  The  power  of  admission  into  any  christian  Church,  and  rejection  from  it, 
they  believe  to  be  vested  in  the  church  itself,  and  to  be  exercised  only  through  the 
medium  of  its  own  officers. 

VIII.  They  believe  that  christian  churches  should  statedly  meet  for  the  cele- 
bration of  public  worship,  for  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  for  the 
sanctification  of  the  first  day  of  the  week. 

IX.  They  believe  that  the  power  of  a  christian  church  is  purely  spiritual,  and 
should  in  no  way  be  corrupted  by  union  with  temporal  or  civil  power. 

X.  They  believe  that  it  is  the  duty  of  christian  churches  to  hold  communion 
with  each  other,  to  entertain  an  enlarged  affection  for  each  other,  as  members  of  the 
same  body,  and  to  co-ope-  [28]  rate  for  the  promotion  of  the  christian  cause  ;  but  that 
no  church,  nor  union  of  churches,  has  any  right  or  power  to  interfere  with  the  faith 
or  discipline  of  any  other  church,  further  than  to  separate  from  such  as,  in  faith  or 
practice,  depart  from  the  gospel  of  Christ. 

XL  They  believe  that  it  is  the  privilege  and  duty  of  every  church  to  call  forth 
such  of  its  members  as  may  appear  to  be  qualified,  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  sustain  the 
office  of  the  ministry :  and  that  christian  churches  unitedly  ought  to  consider  the 
maintenance  of  the  christian  ministry,  in  an  adequate  degree  of  learning,  as  one  of 
its  especial  cares ;  that  the  cause  of  the  gospel  may  be  both  honourably  sustained, 
and  constantly  promoted. 

XII.  They  believe  that  church  officers,  whether  bishops  or  deacons,  should  be 
chosen  by  the  free  voice  of  the  church,  but  that  their  dedication  to  the  duties  of  their 
office  should  take  place  with  special  prayer,  and  by  solemn  designation,  to  which 
most  of  the  churches  add  the  imposition  of  hands  by  those  already  in  office. 

XIII.  They  believe  that  the  fellowship  of  every  christian  church  should  be  so 
liberal  as  to  admit  to  communion  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  all  whose  faith  and  godliness 
are,  on  the  whole,  undoubted,  though  conscienciously  differing  in  points  of  minor 
importance  ;  and  that  this  outward  sign  of  fraternity  in  Christ  should  be  co-extensive 
with  the  fraternity  itself,  though  without  involving  any  compliances  which  conscience 
would  deem  to  be  sinful." 


XVIII 

THE  "BURIAL  HILL"  DECLARATION  OF  FAITH; 
AND  THE  STATEMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES  OF 
POLITY,    1865 

Editions'  and  Reprints 

A.    The  Declaration 

I.  Debates  and  Proceedings  of  the  National  Council  of  Congregational 
Churches,  Held  at  Boston,  Mass.,  June  14-24,  1865,  Boston,  1866,  pp.  401-403. 
[Not  wholly  accurate.] 

II.  Congregational  Quarterly,  X  :  377,  378  [accurate]. 

III.  Ecclesiastical  Polity.  The  Government  and  Communion  Practised  by  the 
Congregational  Churches  in  the  United  States,  Boston,  1872  [1879],  pp.  77-80. 

IV.  Schaff,  Creeds  of  Christendom,  New  York,  1877,  III :  734-736. 

V.  Congrcgationalist,  June  I,  1893. 

B.     The  Principles 

I.  Debates  and  Proceedings,  etc.,  pp.  463,  464. 

II.  Dexter,  Congregationalism     .     .     .     as  seen  in  its  Literature,  p.  517. 

Literature 

The  Debates  and  Proceedings,  above  cited,  give  the  reports  and  discussions 
leading  to  the  Declaration  and  Statement  in  full. 

THE  Albany  Convention  of  1852  clearly  manifested  the  real 
unity  of  Congregationalism,  east  and  west,  and  the  aban- 
donment of  the  Plan  of  Union  gave  impetus  to  the  growing 
consciousness  of  the  denomination.  As  a  consequence,  a  stronger 
desire  began  to  be  felt  for  some  outward  manifestation  of  Congre- 
gational brotherhood.  This  dawning  sense  of  the  continental  mis- 
sion of  Congregationalism  was  strengthened  by  the  war  of  the 
rebellion,  —  a  crisis  in  which  national  spirit  in  all  its  forms  was 
aroused  and  in  which  the  Congregational  churches,  unlike  the 
Presbyterians,  found  themselves  substantially  united  in  support  of 
the  triumphant  cause.  Accordingly,  when  the  failure  of  the  rebel- 
lion became  probable,  and  it  was  evident  to  far-sighted  observers 
that  the  South  and  Southwest  would  be  unbarred  to  Congregation- 
alism as  never  before,  and  that  a  new  epoch  in  national  history 

1  Owing  to  the  accessible  character  of  the  literature,  I  have  given  only  the  most  important. 
The  religious,  and  to  some  extent  the  secular,  newspapers  of  the  period  contain  references. 

36  (553) 


554  THE    SYMBOLS   OF    1865 

had  opened,1  movements  began  having  for  their  aim  the  gathering 
of  a  representative  Convention  wherein  the  churches  might  delib- 
erate as  to  the  best  methods  of  improving  the  opportunities  of  the 
hour. 

The  motion  looking  toward  the  Council  began  with  the  "Con- 
vention of  the  Congregational  Churches  of  the  Northwest."  This 
organization,  representative  of  the  churches  of  Michigan,  Illinois, 
Indiana,  Wisconsin,  Iowa,  Missouri,  and  Minnesota,  and  having  for 
its  main  purpose  the  choice  of  trustees  of  Chicago  Theological 
Seminary,  was  induced  by  Rev.  Dr.  T.  M.  Post  of  St.  Louis,  to 
vote,  at  its  meeting  at  Chicago,  April  27,  1864,  in  view  of  the  re- 
sults of  the  war:2 

"  That  the  crisis  demands  general  consultation,  cooperation,  and  concert  among 
our  churches,  and  to  these  ends,  requires  extensive  correspondence  among  our  eccle- 
siastical associations,  or  the  assembling  of  a  National  Congregational  Convention." 

This  proposal  was  presented  to  the  Illinois  General  Associa- 
tion at  its  meeting  at  Quincy,  May  27,  1864,  and  was  received  with 
hearty  approval.3  The  Association  voted  to  overture  the  other 
Congregational  state  bodies  to  unite  in  promoting  a  "National 
Convention,"  and  recommended  that  the  body  meet  at  Springfield, 
Mass.,  or  Albany,  N.  Y.,  on  Sept.  6,  1864;  and  that  its  membership 
be,  like  that  of  the  Albany  Convention  of  1852,  the  pastor  and  a 
delegate  from  every  Congregational  church  that  should  choose  to 
send.  The  proposition  thus  addressed  to  the  Congregationalists 
of  the  country  was  favorably  received,  and  during  the  summer  and 
autumn  of  18644  the  plan  of  a  National  Convention  was  ratified  by 
the  state  organizations  of  Indiana,  Michigan,  Iowa,  Ohio,  Rhode 
Island,  Maine,  Connecticut,  Vermont,  Massachusetts,  New  York, 
and  Minnesota,  in  the  order  named.  New  Hampshire  disapproved, 
though  at  least  one  prominent  local  association  of  that  state 
favored  the  proposal.  Each  of  the  approving  state  conventions 
empowered  a  committee  to  join  in  perfecting  arrangements  for  the 
National  Convention,  and  on  Nov.  16,  1864,  at  the  invitation  of 
the  trustees  of  the  American  Congregational  Union,6  the  various 


1  See  Debates  and  Proceedings  of  the  National  Council    .     .     .     /S6j,  p.  i. 

-  The  full  vote  is  given  Ibid.,  pp.  1,  2.     See  also  Minutes  0/  Convention,  etc.,  p.  16. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  2.  *  Ibid.,  p.  3.  6  /fife 


GATHERING    OF   THE   COUNCIL  555 

committees  met  in  the  Broadway  Tabernacle  Church,  New  York, 
and  organized  a  preliminary  conference. 

By  this  conference  the  proposed  assembly  was  styled  a  "  Na- 
tional Council,"1  and  its  membership  was  determined  to  be  repre- 
sentatives, both  clerical  and  lay,  chosen  by  the  churches  gathered 
in  their  local  conferences  or  associations,  in  the  proportion  of  two 
for  each  ten  churches,  or  major  fraction  thereof,  joined  in  such 
local  body.  Boston  was  proposed  as  the  place  of  meeting,  and  the 
date  of  assembly  fixed  for  the  second  Wednesday  in  June,  1865. 2 
A  variety  of  topics  for  discussion  by  the  National  Council  were 
also  determined  upon  by  the  preliminary  conference,  of  which 
those  of  most  concern  here  are  the  fifth  and  sixth,3  "the  expedi- 
ency of  issuing  a  statement  of  Congregational  church  polity,"  and 
"  the  expediency  of  setting  forth  a  declaration  of  the  Christian 
faith,  as  held  in  common  by  the  Congregational  churches."  The 
conference  appointed  a  committee  to  report  to  the  Council  on 
each  of  these  topics ;  that  charged  with  the  question  of  polity 
being  composed  of  Rev.  Dr.  Leonard  Bacon,4  Rev.  A.  H.  Quint,6 
and  Rev.  Dr.  H.  M.  Storrs;6  and  that  having  to  do  with  the  decla- 
ration of  faith  embracing  Rev.  Dr.  J.  P.  Thompson,'  Rev.  Prof.  G. 
P.  Fisher,8  and  Rev.  Prof.  E.  A.  Lawrence.9  The  preliminary  con- 
ference then  issued  a  call10  to  the  churches  to  elect  representatives 
to  the  proposed  Council,  and  adjourned,  having  done  all  that  could 
be  expected  in  preparing  the  way  for  the  great  denominational 
assembly.11 

Pursuant  to  this  summons,  the  National  Council  gathered  in 
the  Old  South  Meeting-house,  Boston,  on  June  14,  1865,  with  a 
membership13  of  five  hundred  and  two  delegates,  sixteen  represent- 
atives of  Congregational  bodies  in  foreign  lands,  and  fourteen 
persons  whose  connection  with  the  Council  was  honorary.     The 


'  Ibid.,  p.  8.  »  Ibid.,  June  14.  3  Ibid.,  p.  7-  <  Of  New  Haven,  Conn. 

6  Then  of  New  Bedford,  Mass.  «  Then  of  Cincinnati,  O. 

7  New  York  city.  8  Vale  Divinity  School. 

9  Theological  Institute  of  Conn.,  then  at  East  Windsor  Hill,  Conn.,  now  Hartford  Theologi- 
cal Seminary.  10  In  full,  Ibid.,  pp.  12-16. 

11  The  call  was  signed  by  representatives  of  State  bodies  in  every  case  except  that  of  New 
Hampshire,  a  committee  of  the  Hopkinton  Association  signed  as  representing  part  of  the  N.  H. 
Churches.  12  The  names  are  given  in  full,  Ibid.,  pp.  19-25. 


556  THE   SYMBOLS   OF    1865 

permanent  moderator  of  the  body  was  Gov.  William  A.  Bucking- 
ham of  Connecticut,  assisted  by  Rev.  Dr.  J.  P.  Thompson  and 
Hon.  C.  G.  Hammond;1  and  its  scribes  were  Rev.  H.  M.  Dexter,2 
Dea.  Samuel  Holmes,3  and  Rev.  Messrs.  Philo  R.  Hurd,4  M.  K. 
Whittlesey,"  and  E.  P.  Marvin.'  So  far  its  officers  were  similar  to 
those  of  the  Synods  of  the  seventeenth  century,  but  a  power  in 
directing  the  discussions  appeared  in  the  National  Council  un- 
known to  the  earlier  bodies,  in  name  at  least,  though  its  equivalent 
was  doubtless  to  be  found  in  them  also, —  the  "Business  Com- 
mittee." This  influential  committee,  chosen  by  the  Council,  con- 
sisted of  Rev.  A.  H.  Quint,  Rev.  Drs.  Samuel  Wolcott,7  and  Benja- 
min Labaree,8  and  Deacons  Philo  Carpenter"  and  S.  F.  Drury.1* 
This  committee  was  charged  with  preparing  "  a  docket  for  the  use 
of  the  moderator,"  and  save  "  by  special  vote  of  the  Council,  no 
business  "  was  to  be  "introduced  which  has  not  .  .  .  passed 
through  the  hands  of  the  committee.""  Its  guidance  was  felt 
throughout  the  session. 

It  was  on  the  third  day  of  the  session,  June  16,  that  the  com- 
mittee on  the  Declaration  of  Faith  made,  through  its  chairman,  a 
report,  of  which  these  are  the  essential  portions:12 

"  The  committee  appointed  by  the  preliminary  conference  to  prepare  a  Declara- 
tion of  Faith,  to  be  submitted  to  the  Council,  respectfully  report :  — 

That,  in  the  light  of  the  discussions  of  that  conference  upon  the  expediency  of 
such  a  Declaration,  and  also  of  the  general  principles  of  our  polity,  they  could  not 
regard  it  as  their  function  to  prepare  a  Confession  of  Faith  to  be  imposed  by  act  of 
this,  or  of  any  other  body,  upon  the  churches  of  the  Congregational  order.  '  It  was 
the  glory  of  our  fathers,  that  they  heartily  professed  the  only  rule  of  their  religion, 
from  the  very  first,  to  be  the  Holy  Scriptures;'13  and  particular  churches  have 
always  exercised  their  liberty  in  '  confessions  drawn  up  in  their  own  forms  '  u  .  .  . 
■\Yhatever  the  diversities  of  metaphysical  theology  apparent  in  these  various  confes- 
sions, they  yet,  with  singular  unanimity,  identify  the  faith  of  the  Congregational 
churches  with  the  body  of  Christian  doctrine  known  as  Calvinistic  ;  and  hence  such 
Confessions  as  that  of  the  Westminster  divines,  and  that  of  the  Savoy  Synod,  have 
been  accredited  among  these  churches  as  general  symbols  of  faith. 


1  Chicago.  3  Then  of  Boston.  s  New  York  city. 

«  Romeo,  Mich.  5  Ottawa,  111.  «  Medford,  Mass. 

»  Cleveland,  O.  8  Middlebury,  Yt.  »  Chicago.  >»  Olivet,  Mich. 

"  "  Rules  of  Order"  of  the  Council,  Debates  and  Proceedings,  p.  57. 

13  In  full,  Ibid.,  pp.  95-98.     It  would  appear  to  have  been  prepared  largely  by  Prof.  Lawrence, 
Ibid.,  p.  347. 

13  Preface  of  Saybrook  Platform,  ante,  p.  518. 
•*  Magnolia,  ed.  1853-5,  II:  181. 


REPORT  ON  PROPOSED  DECLARATION         557 

It  has  not  appeared  to  the  committee  expedient  to  recommend  that  this  Council 
should  disturb  this  '  variety  in  unity' — as  Cotton  Mather  happily  describes  it  —  by  an 
attempted  uniformity  of  statement  in  a  Confession  formulating  each  doctrine  in  more 
recent  terms  of  metaphysical  theology.  It  seemed  better  to  characterize,  in  a  com- 
prehensive way,  the  doctrines  held  in  common  by  our  churches,  than  thus  to  individ- 
ualize each  in  a  theological  formula. 

With  these  views,  as  the  result  of  prolonged  and  careful  deliberation,  the  com- 
mittee unanimously  recommend  that  the  Council  should  declare,  by  reference  to 
historical  and  venerable  symbols,  the  faith  as  it  has  been  maintained  among  the  Con- 
gregational churches  from  the  beginning  ;  and  also  that  it  should  set  forth  a  testimony 
on  behalf  of  these  churches,  for  the  Word  of  Truth  now  assailed  by  multiform  and 
dangerous  errors  ;  and,  for  this  end,  they  respectfully  submit  the  following 

RECITAL   AND    DECLARATION. 

When  the  churches  of  New  England  assembled  in  a  general  synod  at  Cambridge, 
in  1648,  they  declared  their  assent,  "for  the  substance  thereof,"  to  the  Westminster 
Confession  of  Faith.  When,  again,  these  churches  convened  in  a  general  synod '  at 
Boston,  in  1680,  they  declared  their  approval  (with  slight  verbal  alterations)  of  the 
doctrinal  symbol  adopted  by  a  synod  of  the  Congregational  churches  in  England,  at 
London,  in  1658,  and  known  as  the  "  Savoy  Confession,"  which  in  doctrine  is  almost 
identical  with  that  of  the  Westminster  Assembly.  And  yet  again,  when  the  churches 
in  Connecticut  met  in  council  at  Saybrook,  in  1708,  they  'owned  and  consented  to' 
the  Savoy  Confession  as  adopted  at  Boston,  and  offered  this  as  a  public  symbol  of 
their  faith. 

Thus,  from  the  beginning  of  their  history,  the  Congregational  churches  in  the 
United  States  have  been  allied  in  doctrine  with  the  Reformed  churches  of  Europe, 
and  especially  of  Great  Britain.  The  eighth  article  of  the  "  Heads  of  Agreement," 
established  by  the  Congregational  and  Presbyterian  ministers  in  England  in  1692, 2 
and  adopted  at  Saybrook  in  1708,  defines  this  position  in  these  words  :  3  '  As  to  what 
appertains  to  soundness  of  judgment  in  matters  of  faith,  we  esteem  it  sufficient  that  a 
church  acknowledge  the  Scriptures  to  be  the  Word  of  God,  the  perfect  and  only  rule 
of  faith  and  practice,  and  own  either  the  doctrinal  parts  of  those  commonly  called  the 
Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  or  the  Confession  or  Catechisms,  shorter  or  larger, 
compiled  by  the  Assembly  at  Westminster,  or  the  Confession  agreed  on  at  the  Savoy, 
to  be  agreeable  to  the  said  rule.' 

And  now,  when  after  the  lapse  of  two  centuries,  these  churches  are  again  con- 
vened in  a  General  Council  at  their  primitive  and  historical  home,  it  is  enough  for 
the  first  of  those  ends  enumerated  by  the  synod  at  Cambridge, —  to  wit,  '  the  main- 
tenance of  the  faith  entire,  within  itself,' — that  this  Council,  referring  to  those 
ancient  symbols  as  embodying,  for  substance  of  doctrine,  the  constant  faith  of  the 
churches  here  represented,  declares  its  adherence  to  the  same,  as  being  '  well  and 
fully  grounded  upon  the  Holy  Scriptures,'4  which  is  '  the  only  sufficient  and  invaria- 
ble rule  of  religion.'  5 

But  having  in  view,  also,  the  second  end  of  a  public  confession  enumerated  by 
the  Cambridge  Synod, —  to  wit,  'the  holding  forth  of  unity  and  harmony  both 
amongst  and  with  other  churches,'6  —  we  desire  to  promote  a  closer  fellowship  of  all 


'  The  reader  need  hardly  be  reminded  that  the  Synod  of  1680  was  not  gem 
Massachusetts  body. 

»  Should  be  1691.  3  See  ante,  pp.  461,  462. 

4  Saybrook  Preface,  ante,  p.  519.  5  Ibid.  6  Ante,  p.  194. 


558  THE   SYMBOLS   OF    1865 

Christian  denominations  in  the  faith  and  work  of  the  gospel,  especially  against  popu- 
lar and  destructive  forms  of  unbelief,  which  assail  the  foundations  of  all  religion, 
both  natural  and  revealed  ;  which  know  no  God  but  nature  ;  no  Depravity  but  physi- 
cal malformation,  immaturity  of  powers,  or  some  incident  of  outward  condition  ;  no 
Providence  but  the  working  of  material  causes  and  of  statistical  laws  ;  no  Revelation 
but  that  of  consciousness  ;  no  Redemption  but  the  elimination  of  evil  by  a  natural 
sequence  of  suffering  ;  no  Regeneration  but  the  natural  evolution  of  a  higher  type  of 
existence  ;  no  Retribution  but  the  necessary  consequences  of  physical  and  psychologi- 
cal laws. 

As  a  testimony,  in  common  with  all  Christian  believers,  against  these  and  kindred 
errors,  we  deem  it  important  to  make  a  more  specific  declaration  of  the  following 
truths:  — 

There  is  one  personal  God,  who  created  all  things  ;  who  controls  the  physical 
universe,  the  laws  whereof  he  has  established  ;  and  who,  holding  all  events  within 
his  knowledge,  rules  over  men  by  his  wise  and  good  providence  and  by  his  perfect 
moral  law. 

God,  whose  being,  perfections,  and  government  are  partially  made  known  to  us 
through  the  testimony  of  his  works  and  of  conscience,  has  made  a  further  revelation 
of  himself  in  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, — a  revelation  attested 
at  the  first  by  supernatural  signs,  and  confirmed  through  all  ages  since  by  its  moral 
effects  upon  the  individual  soul,  and  upon  human  society  ;  a  revelation  authoritative 
and  final.  In  this  revelation,  God  has  declared  himself  to  be  the  Father,  the  Son, 
and  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  he  has  manifested  his  love  for  the  world  through  the  incar- 
nation of  the  Eternal  Word  for  man's  redemption,  in  the  sinless  life,  the  expiatory 
sufferings  and  death,  and  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ,  our  Lord  and  Saviour,  and 
also  in  the  mission  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Comforter,  for  the  regeneration  and  saricti- 
hcation  of  the  souls  of  men. 

The  Scriptures,  confirming  the  testimony  of  conscience  and  of  history,  declare 
that  mankind  are  universally  sinners,  and  are  under  the  righteous  condemnation  of 
the  law  of  God  ;  that  from  this  state  there  is  no  deliverance,  save  through  '  repent- 
ance toward  God,  and  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  ; '  and  that  there  is  a  day 
appointed  in  which  God  will  raise  the  dead,  and  will  judge  the  world,  and  in  which 
the  issues  of  his  moral  government  over  men  shall  be  made  manifest  in  the  awards  of 
eternal  life  and  eternal  death,  according  to  the  deeds  done  in  the  body. 

Joseph  P.  Thompson, 
Edward  A.  Lawrence, 
George  P.  Fisher." 

This  report,  after  a  little  discussion  as  to  whether  the  issuance 

of  a  Declaration  of  Faith  was  contemplated  by  the  bodies  whose 

overtures  originated    the  call  of   the  Council,  was    referred  to  a 

special  committee,  consisting  of  Rev.  John  O.  Fiske,1  Prof.  D.  J. 

Noyes,3  Rev.  Drs.  Nahum  Gale,3  Joseph  Eldridge,4  and  Leonard 

Swain,5  Dr.  A.  G.  Bristol,6  Rev.  J.  C.  Hart,7  Dea.  S.  S.  Barnard," 

and  Rev.  G.  S.  F.  Savage,"  "  with  instructions  to  consider  the  pro- 


'  Hath,  Me.  2  Dartmouth  Coll.  '  Lee,  Mass.  *  Norfolk,  Conn. 

6  Providence,  R.  I.     •  Rochester,  N.  V.  »  Kent,  O.  '  Detroit,  Mich. 

11  Chicago. 


THE    MATTER    DISCUSSED  559 

priety  of  submitting  to  the  Council  a  declaration  of  the  common 
faith  of  our  churches,  and  if  thought  advisable,  to  report  such 
declaration." '  To  the  committee  thus  charged,  Profs.  Samuel 
Harris,2  E.  A.  Park,3  E.  A.  Lawrence,4  Noah  Porter,5  J.  H.  Fair- 
child,'3  and  Joseph  Haven,7  were  a  little  later  added,  doubtless 
with  a  desire  thus  to  have  the  wisdom  of  as  large  a  number  of 
technically  trained  theologians  as  possible. 

This  new  committee,  on  June  21,  made  a  somewhat  longer 
report  than  that  of  its  predecessor,8  employing  in  part  the  same 
language,  but  making  considerably  more  elaborate  statements  in 
regard  to  several  doctrines,  especially  that  of  the  church,  and  in- 
troducing the  following  affirmation  as  its  third  paragraph  : ,J 

"  In  conformity  therefore,  with  the  usage  of  previous  councils,  we,  the  elders  and 
messengers  of  the  Congregational  churches  in  the  United  States,  do  now  profess  our 
adherence  to  the  above-named  Westminster  and  Savoy  Confessions  for  '  substance  of 
doctrine.'  We  thus  declare  our  acceptance  of  the  system  of  truths  which  is  com- 
monly known  among  us  as  Calvinism,  and  which  is  distinguished  from  other  systems 
by  so  exalting  the  sovereignty  of  God  as  to  '  establish  '  rather  than  take  away  the 
'  liberty  '  or  free-agency  of  man,  and  by  so  exhibiting  the  entire  character  of  God  as 
to  show  most  clearly  '  the  exceeding  sinfulness  of  sin.'" 

On  the  reading  of  this  report  by  the  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee, Rev.  John  O.  Fiske,  its  adoption  was  moved  by  Rev.  Dr. 
Samuel  Wolcott;10  whereupon  Rev.  Uriah  Balkam,"  a  clerical 
neighbor  of  the  chairman,  at  once  proposed  to  amend  by  substi- 
tuting the  report  of  the  previous  committee.  A  sharply  contested 
debate  now  ensued,12  having  to  do  at  first  with  the  relative  merits 
of  the  two  reports,  but  resolving  itself  speedily  into  the  approval 
or  disapproval  of  the  paragraph  quoted  from  the  report  of  the 
second  committee  declaring  the  faith  of  Congregationalists  to  be 
Calvinism. 

The  first  to  speak  was  Rev.  Dr.  Thompson,  chairman  of  the 
first  committee,  who  now  urged  the  adoption  of  the  report  of  its 
successor.      Rev.    Dr.   Wolcott    followed    in    similar    strain.      Mr. 

'!  Debates  and  Proceedings,  pp.  ioo,  134. 

2  Bangor  Sem.        3  Andover  Sem.        4  East  Windsor  Hill,  now  Hartford  Sem.       5  Yale. 
6  Oberlin.  7  Chicago  Sem.  8  In  full,  Debates  and  Proceedings,  pp.  344-347. 

9  Paragraphs  1  and  2  are  identical  with  the  corresponding  portions  of  the  previous  report. 

10  Cleveland,  O.  »  Lewiston,  Me.  "  In  full,  Ibid.,  pp.  347-357. 


560  THE    SYMBOLS   OF    1 865 

Balkam  of  course  supported  his  amendment;  but  Rev.  Dr.  Bacon1 
and  Profs.  Porter  and  Lawrence  argued  in  favor  of  the  second 
report.  At  this  point  Mr.  Balkam,  seeing  that  the  sentiment  of 
the  council  favored  the  declaration  prepared  by  the  second  com- 
mittee, withdrew  his  amendment.  But  no  sooner  had  he  done  so 
than  the  debate  was  brought  to  a  focus  by  a  new  amendment, 
offered  by  Rev.  Dr.  Joshua  Leavitt,5  proposing  "to  strike  out  from 
the  third  paragraph  the  words  '  which  is  commonly  known  among 
us  as  Calvinism,'  etc."  The  mover  declared  himself  a  Calvinist, 
but  was  confident  that  the  use  of  any  party  name  was  liable  to 
cause  much  misunderstanding  as  to  the  real  position  of  the  denom- 
ination. His  opposition  to  the  paragraph  was  supported  by  Rev. 
Drs.  W.  W.  Patton,3  and  S.  W.  S.  Dutton,4  while  Rev.  Dr.  J.  M. 
Sturtevant 5  desired  the  preparation  of  a  modern  confession  of 
faith,  in  language  of  the  present,  and  without  reference  to  previous 
formulas.  On  the  other  hand,  Prof.  Park  deprecated  the  amend- 
ment, and  affirmed: 6 

"We  are  Calvinists,  mainly,  essentially,  in  all  the  essentials  of  our  faith  :  and 
the  man  who,  having  pursued  a  three  years'  course  of  study, —  having  studied  the 
Bible  in  the  original  languages, —  is  not  a  Calvinist,  is  not  a  respectable  man.  .  .  . 
I  should  be  utterly  and  perfectly  ashamed  to  have  this  amendment  pass." 

The  views  of  Prof.  Park  were  evidently  those  of  a  majority  of 
the  Council,  and  the  amendment  was  declared  rejected  without  a 
count  of  votes.  Fruitless  motions  were  now  made  by  those  opposed 
to  the  disputed  section  to  lay  the  report  upon  the  table,  to  adjourn, 
and  to  postpone  further  consideration  till  the  next  session;  but 
finally  the  growing  lateness  of  the  hour  led  to  an  adjournment 
before  a  vote  was  reached.  It  so  happened  that,  in  accordance 
with  a  plan  settled  upon  four  days  before,  the  Council  agreed  to 
meet  the  next  morning  not  in  Boston,  but  on  Burial  Hill  in  Ply- 
mouth, to  which  historic  spot  it  was  drawn  by  memories  of  the  Con- 
gregationalists  of  that  Scrooby-Leyden  company  whose  ashes  have 
rested  there  since  the  fatal  winter  of  their  first  landing  on  Ameri- 
can shores.   A  reunion  on  so  memorable  a  spot,  under  circumstances 

'  New  Haven,  Conn.  -  New  York  city.  3  Chicago. 

*  New  Haven,  Conn.  *  Jacksonville,  111.  •  Ibid.,  p.  357. 


THE   COUNCIL   ON    BURIAL   HILL  561 

so  provocative  of  generous  sentiment,  seemed  to  some  of  the  cooler 
leaders  of  the  Council  an  opportunity  to  secure  the  united  declara- 
tion of  faith  which  the  previous  day's  session  had  failed  to  bring. 
It  was  clear  that,  if  pushed  to  a  vote,  the  report  of  the  second 
committee  with  its  Calvinistic  paragraph  would  command  the 
suffrages  of  a  large  proportion  of  the  Council;  it  was  plain  also 
that  its  adoption  would  displease  many,  who  without  being  exclu- 
sively or  even  generally  Arminian  in  their  sentiments  deprecated 
any  party  shibboleth.  And,  therefore,  a  few  prominent  members, 
of  whom  Rev.  A.  H.  Quint,  chairman  of  the  Business  Committee, 
was  leader,  determined  to  present  to  the  Council,  at  its  session  on 
Burial  Hill,  a  new  Declaration,  embodying  the  main  points  of  the 
former  reports,  but  avoiding  the  objectionable  phrases.  Such  a 
draft  was  prepared,  and  so  great  was  the  pressure  of  business 
during  the  hours  between  the  adjournment  and  the  meeting  at 
Plymouth,  that  the  last  sentences  of  the  proposed  formula  were 
written  by  Mr.  Quint,  with  a  hat  as  his  tablet,  on  the  train  as  it 
rolled  Plymouth-ward.  Arrived  on  Burial  Hill,  the  Council  assem- 
bled in  regular  form,  on  the  morning  of  June  22d;  and  Mr.  Quint, 
in  the  name  of  its  Business  Committee,  presented  what  has  since 
been  known  as  the  "Burial  Hill  Declaration."1  At  the  conclusion 
of  its  reading,  Rev.  Dr.  Bacon  moved  its  adoption,  and  its  refer- 
ence, together  with  the  report  of  the  second  committee  which  had 
caused  the  debate  of  the  day  before,  to  a  new  committee  for  per- 
fection. Rev.  George  Allen2  raised  his  voice  in  protest  against 
the  document  as  "sectarian."  Dea.  Charles  Stoddard3  supported 
the  views  of  Dr.  Bacon,  and  Prof.  Porter  came  to  the  aid  of  the 
same  cause,  though  deprecating  the  presentation  of  a  symbol  under 
circumstances  making  debate  almost  impossible,  and  conditioning 
his  approval  on  the  insertion  of  a  paragraph  from  the  report  of  the 
second  committee  asserting  the  adaptability  of  Congregationalism 
to  promote  church  unity  and  discountenancing  ecclesiastical  sub- 
division in  small  communities.    The  addition  was  promptly  accepted 


'  I  do  not  give  the  form  read  on  Burial  Hill  here  because  it  differs  but  slightly  from  the  Dec- 
laration as  finally  adopted,  and  which  will  be  found  a  little  later.  The  full  text  is  in  Debates  and 
Proceedings*  pp.  361-363. 

2  Worcester,  Mass.  3  Boston,  Mass. 


562  THE    SYMBOLS   OF    1 865 

by  Mr.  Quint,  who  now  urged  that  only  the  paper  presented  on 
Burial  Hill  be  approved  by  the  Council,  and  that  the  committee  of 
revision  be  empowered  to  do  no  more  than  make  merely  verbal 
alterations,  not  affecting  the  sense.  These  conditions  were 
accepted  by  Dr.  Bacon,  and  on  a  vote  the  declaration  was  adopted 
with  but  two  dissenting  voices. 

The  Declaration  thus  accepted  at  Plymouth  was  submitted  for 
revision  to  a  committee  appointed  the  next  day,  after  the  return 
of  the  Council  to  Boston,  and  composed  of  Prof.  William  A.  Stearns,' 
Rev.  Dr.  W.  W.  Patton,2  and  Rev.  Julius  A.  Reed;3  but  their  action 
had  been  expressly  limited,  and  their  changes  were  few  and  unim- 
portant.4 After  a  few  hours'  deliberation  the  revisers  reported  the 
completed  form  to  the  Council,  and  the  Declaration  was  adopted 
by  a  rising  vote,  without  opposition,  —  June  23,  1865.  In  its  final 
foim  it  is  as  follows:5 


BURIAL    HILL    DECLARATION. 

"  Standing  by  the  rock  where  the  Pilgrims  set  foot  upon  these 
shores,  upon  the  spot  where  they  worshipped  God,  and  among  the  graves 
of  the  early  generations,  we,  Elders  and  Messengers  of  the  Congrega- 
tional churches  of  the  United  States  in  National  Council  assembled, — 
like  them  acknowledging  no  rule  of  faith  but  the  word  of  God,  —  do 
now  declare*  our  adherence  to  the  faith  and  order  of  the  apostolic  and 
primitive  churches1  held  by  our  fathers,  and  substantially  as"  embodied 
in  the  confessions  and  platforms  which  our  Synods  of  1648  and  1680 
set  forth  or  reaffirmed.  We  declare  that  the  experience  of  the  nearly 
two  and  a  half  centuries  which  have  elapsed  since  the  memorable  day 
when  our  sires  founded  here  a  Christian  Commonwealth,  with  all  the 
development  of  new  forms  of  error  since  their  times,  has  only  deepened 
our  confidence  in  the  faith  and  polity  of  these  fathers.  We  bless  God* 
for  the  inheritance  of  these  doctrines.10     We  invoke  the  help  of 


1  Amherst  College.  "  Chicago.  3  Davenport,  Iowa. 

*  In  full,  Debates  and  Proceedings,  p.  421.  They  will  be  indicated  in  the  notes  to  the 
Declaration. 

5  From  Cong.  Quart.,  X:  377.  That  which  is  taken  from  the  report  of  the  second  commit- 
tee is  here  printed  in  Roman,  the  Burial  Hill  additions  in  Italics.  The  "  Calvinistic  "  clause  is  of 
course  omitted.  Considerable  rearrangement  in  order  was  made  in  the  portions  taken  from  the 
report. 

6  Before  revision,  "  reiterate."  '  Ibid,  inserts  "as." 
8  Ibid.,  reads  "as  substantially."                  »  Ibid.,  "  the  God  of  our  Fathers." 
10  Ibid,  adds,  "which  have  been  transmitted  to  US,  their  children." 


TEXT    OF   THE   DECLARATION  563 

the  Divine  Redeemer,  that,  through  the  presence  of  the  promised 
Comforter,  He  will  enable  us  to  transmit  them  in  purity  to  our 
children. 

In  the  times  that  are  before  us  as  a  nation,  times  at  once  of 
duty  and  of  danger,  we  rest  all  our  hope  in  the  gospel  of  the  Son 
of  God.  It  was  the  grand  peculiarity  of  our  Puritan  Fathers,  that 
they  held  this  gospel,  not  merely  as  the  ground  of  their  personal 
salvation,  but  as  declaring  the  worth  of  man  by  the  incarnation 
and  sacrifice  of  the  Son  of  God;  and  therefore  applied  its  princi- 
ples to  elevate  society,  to  regulate  education,  to  civilize  humanity, 
to  purify  law,  to  reform  the  Church  and  the  State,  and1  to  assert 
and  defend  liberty;  in  short,  to  mould  and  redeem,  by  its  all-trans- 
forming energy,  everything  that  belongs  to  man  in  his  individual 
and  social  relations. 

It  was  the  faith  of  our  fathers  that  gave  us  this  free  land  in 
which  we  dwell.  It  is  by  this  faith  only  that  we  can  transmit  to 
our  children  a  free  and  happy,  because  a  Christian,  commonwealth. 

We2  hold  it  to  be  a  distinctive  excellence  of  our  Congrega- 
tional system,  that  it  exalts  that  which  is  more,  above  that  which 
is  less,  important,  and  by  the  simplicity  of  its  organization,  facili- 
tates, in  communities  where  the  population  is  limited,  the  union  of 
all  true  believers  in  one  Christian  church;  and  that  the  division  of 
such  communities  into  several  weak  and  jealous  societies,  holding 
the  same  common  faith,  is  a  sin  against  the  unity  of  the  body  of 
Christ,  and  at  once  the  shame  and  the  scandal  of  Christendom. 

We  rejoice  that,  through  the  influence  of  our  free  system  of 
apostolic  order,  we  can  hold  fellowship  with  all  who  acknowledge 
Christ;  and  act  efficiently  in  the  work  of  restoring  unity  to  the 
divided  Church,  and  of  bringing  back  harmony  and  peace  among 
all  '  who  love  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity.' 

Thus3  recognizing  the  unity  of  the  Church  of  Christ  in  all  the 
world,  and  knowing  that  we  are  but  one  branch  of  Christ's  people, 
while  adhering  to  our  own  peculiar  faith  and  order,  we  extend  to  all 
believers  the  hand  of  Christian  fellowship,  upon  the  basis  of  those  great 
fundamental  truths  in  which  all  Christians  should*  agree.  With  them 
we  confess  our  faith  in  God,  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  the  only  living  and  true  God;  in  Jesus  Christ,  the  incarnate 
Word,  who  is  exalted  to  be  our  Redeemer  and  King;  and  in  the 
Holy  Comforter,  who  is  present  in  the  Church  to  regenerate  and 
sanctify  the  soul. 

1  Ibid,  omits  "and." 

2  This  is  the  paragraph  inserted  on  Burial  Hill  at  the  request  of  Prof.  Porter. 

3  Before  revision,  "But."  *  Ibid.,  "may." 


564  THE   SYMBOLS   OF    1 865 

With  the  whole  Church,  we  confess  the  common  sinfulness 
and  ruin  of  our  race,  and  acknowledge  that  it  is  only  through  the 
work  accomplished  by  the  life  and  expiatory  death  of  Christ  that 
believers  in  him1  are  justified  before  God,5  receive  the  remission  of 
sins,  and  through  the  presence  and  grace  of  the  Holy  Comforter' 
are  delivered  from  the  power  of  sin,  and '  perfected  in  holiness. 

We  believe  also  in  the5  organized  and  visible  Church,  in  the 
ministry  of  the  Word,  in  the  sacraments  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's 
Supper,  in  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  and  in  the  final  judgment, 
the  issues  of  which  are  eternal  life  and  everlasting  punishment. 

We  receive  these  truths  on  the  testimony  of  God,  given" 
through  prophets  and  apostles,  and  in  the  life,  the  miracles, 
the  death,  the  resurrection,  of  his  Son,  our  Divine  Redeemer,  —  a 
testimony  preserved  for  the  Church  in  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments,  which  were  composed  by  holy  men  as  they 
were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 

Affirming  now  our  belief  that  those  who  thus  hold  '  one  faith, 
one  Lord,  one  baptism,'  together  constitute  the  one  Catholic 
Church,  the  several  households  of  which,  though  called  by  differ- 
ent names,  are  the  one  body  of  Christ;  and  that  these  members  of 
his  body  are  sacredly  bound  to  keep  '  the  unity  of  the  spirit  in  the 
bond  of  peace,'  we  dec/art-  that  we  will  cooperate  with  all  who  hold 
these  truths.  With  them  we  will  carry  the  gospel  into  every  part  of 
this  land,  and  with  them  we  will  go  into  all  the  world,  and  ' preach  the 
gospel  to  every  creature.'  May  He  to  whom  'all  power  is  given  in 
heaven  and  earth  '  fulfil  the  promise  which  is  all  our  hope:  '  Lo,  I  am 
with  you  alway,  even  to  the  end  of  the  world.'     Amen." 


Thus  came  into  being  the  only  Declaration  of  Faith  which  a 
body  representative  of  American  Congregationalism  as  a  whole 
had  approved  since  1648,  —  a  distinction  which  it  still  retains.' 
As  compared  with  the  Puritan  symbols  of  two  centuries  before,  it 
shows  great  advance  in  simplicity  and  catholicity.  If  it  has  little 
of  their  strength  and  definiteness,  it  has  little  of  their  narrowness 
and    omniscience.      It    distinctly    recognizes    the    Congregational 

1  Ibid.,  "  that  7«  are." 

a  Ibid,  adds,  "and."  3  Ibid,  reads,  "  Comforter  alone  that  we  hope  to  be  delivered.'' 

*  Ibid,  adds,  "to  be."  6  Ibid.,  "an." 

*  Ibid,  adds,  "originally." 

'  The  "Oberlin  Declaration,"  which  forms  the  subject  of  the  next  chapter,  is  hardly  suffi- 
ciently creed-like  to  rob  this  Declaration  of  this  distinction. 


CHARACTER   OF  THE   DECLARATION  565 

body  as  but  one  of  the  Christian  household.  It  has  the  merit  of 
reasonable  brevity.  But  it  is  also  marked  by  the  flavor  of  time 
and  place,  and  by  a  certain  exuberance  of  expression,  natural  per- 
haps to  the  sentiments  of  the  hour,  but  hardly  consonant  with  the 
judicial  precision  usually  looked  for  in  a  statement  of  intellectual 
conviction.  The  historic  feeling  which  prompted  the  recognition 
of  the  Platform  of  1648  and  the  Confession  of  1680  as  standards  of 
Congregationalism  was  true;  but  the  general  phraseology  of  the 
Declaration  leaves  the  question  of  the  relation  to  present  Congre- 
gational belief  of  the  statements  of  those  symbols  regarding  par- 
ticular doctrines  little  clearer  than  before.  The  reaffirmation  may 
mean  much  or  little.  The  doctrines  that  the  Declaration  specifi- 
cally enumerates  form  but  an  outline,  and  are  presented  in  the 
most  general  language.  In  a  statement  of  broad  principles,  rather 
than  specific  beliefs,  issued  on  a  historic  occasion  as  a  memorial 
rather  than  as  a  formula  for  permanent  local  use,  these  charac- 
teristics are  not  necessarily  demerits;  but  they  have  operated  to 
prevent  the  adoption  of  the  Burial  Hill  Declaration  as  the  creed 
of  individual  churches,  and  have  made  it  to  be  comparatively  little 
known  and  little  used. 


While  these  debates  regarding  the  Confession  of  Faith  had 
been  in  progress,  a  very  similar  discussion  had  taken  place  in  the 
Council  with  reference  to  Church  Polity.  It  will  be  remembered 
that  the  preliminary  conference  had  appointed  Rev.  Dr.  Bacon, 
Rev.  A.  H.  Quint,  and  Rev.  Dr.  H.  M.  Storrs  a  committee1  to 
report  to  the  Council  on  "  the  expediency  of  issuing  a  statement  of 
Congregational  church  polity."  Of  that  committee,  Dr.  Storrs 
was  unable  to  fulfil  his  appointment  ;  but  the  chairman  prepared, 
with  the  concurrence  of  his  remaining  colleague,  an  elaborate  and 
very  extensive  platform  of  church  polity,2  modeled  in  size, 
language,  and  arrangement  on  the  Cambridge  Platform,  but  in- 
tended to  present  the  actual,  contemporary  usages  of  the  denomi- 
nation.    To  this  was  appended  a  briefer  epitome  of  Congregational 


In  full,  Debates  and  Proceedings^ 


566  THE   SYMBOLS   OF    1 865 

principles,  not  unadapted  for  use  in  church  manuals.  This  report 
was  presented  to  the  Council  on  June  16,  and  fills  twenty-seven 
large  pages  of  rather  fine  print.  As  in  the  case  of  the  report  of 
the  first  committee  on  the  Declaration,  the  Council  immediately 
referred  the  document  to  a  new  special  committee,  embracing  Rev. 
J.  P.  Culliver,1  Prof.  Samuel  Harris,2  Rev.  Nelson  Bishop,3  Prof.  E. 
A.  Park,  Rev.  J.  G.  Davis,4  Rev.  Dr.  Joshua  Leavitt,5  Prof.  S.  C. 
Bartlett,6  Rev.  Messrs.  Jesse  Guernsey7  and  Charles  C.  Salter,8 
Judge  Lester  Taylor,9  Rev.  Messrs.  James  S.  Hoyt10  and  J.  D. 
Liggett;"  to  whom  the  Council  afterwards  added  Rev.  E.  F. 
Burr.12  This  large  body  deliberated  till  June  23,  and  did  not 
present  its  conclusions  till  after  the  adoption  of  the  Declaration. 
Then  it  was  found  that  the  opinions  were  not  unanimous.  The 
chairman  and  ten  others  of  the  committee  joined  in  a  paper'3  in 
which  they  expressed  general  approval  of  the  report,  but  held  that 
it  was  impossible  for  the  Council  to  perfect  it  in  the  brief  session 
yet  remaining  ;  and  that  even  were  it  possible  so  to  perfect  the 
platform  and  epitome,  false  impressions  of  imposition  by  synodical 
power  might  arise  were  they  issued  by  the  authority  of  the  Council. 
The  majority  therefore  recommended  that  the  Council  approve  the 
statement  of  polity  in  a  general  way,  but  refer  it  to  a  special 
committee  of  twenty-five  to  be  revised  in  a  number  of  specified 
particulars,  and  such  other  ways,  not  inconsistent  with  its  funda- 
mental principles,  as  should  seem  best ;  and  that  it  should  be 
issued  by  the  committee  of  revision  over  the  signatures  of  its 
members.  Such  were  the  suggestions  of  the  majority  ;  but  one 
member,  Rev.  Dr.  Leavitt,  presented  a  minority  statement,14  in 
which  he  recommended  that  the  platform  and  epitome  of  polity  be 
published  without  approval  as  an  interesting  addition  to  our 
denominational  literature  ;  and  that  instead  of  setting  forth  a 
minute  and  technical  treatise  on  church  government,  the  Council 
simply  declare  a  few  principles  of  church  polity  of  the  most  general 


1  Norwich,  Conn.  2  Bangor,  Me.  3  Windsor,  Vt. 

4  Amherst,  N.  H.  s  New  York  city.  e  Chicago. 

7  Dubuque,  Iowa.  '  .Minneapolis,  Minn.  •  Claridon,  O. 

l«  Port  Huron,  Mich.  »  Leavenworth,  Kan.  >2  Lyme,  Conn. 

13  Debates  ami  Proceedings,  pp.  417-430.  M  Ibid.,  pp.  430-437. 


THE    STATEMENT   OF    POLITY  567 

character,    avoiding   all    denominational    coloring,    and    declaring 
willingness  to  unite  with  all  churches  owned  of  Christ.1 

These  two  conflicting  recommendations  naturally  led  to 
debate.2  Rev.  Mr.  Gulliver  supported  his  position,  and  Rev.  Dr. 
'  Leavitt  his.  Rev.  Dr.  Zachary  Eddy3  moved  the  adoption  of  the 
suggestions  of  the  majority.  Rev.  Mr.  Quint  defended  the  original 
report  from  some  of  the  criticisms  of  both  wings  of  the  second 
committee  and  opposed  the  appointment  of  a  revising  body  of 
unwieldy  numbers.  Prof.  Bartlett  replied  and  defended  the  views 
of  the  majority  of  the  second  committee.  Prof.  Park  followed  in 
the  same  strain.  Dr.  Bacon  then  began  an  elaborate  historical 
argument,  setting  forth  with  much  power  the  desirability  of  a 
statement  of  polity,  an  argument  interrupted  by  the  arrival  of  the 
hour  of  adjournment  but  resumed  at  the  next  morning  session. 
At  that  session  Rev.  Mr.  Gulliver  moved  as  an  amendment  that 
the  original  committee  be  added  to  the  revisers,  and  Rev.  Dr. 
Edward  Beecher4  supported  the  appointment  of  the  proposed 
revision  committee  and  expounded  at  length  his  views  of  the 
proper  content  of  a  work  on  Congregational  polity.  Prof.  Law- 
rence heartily  approved  of  Mr.  Gulliver's  amendment.  At  this 
point  Rev.  Dr.  Joseph  Eldridge,5  moved  by  some  expressions  of 
Mr.  Gulliver,  the  chairman  of  the  second  committee,  in  the  current 
issue  of  the  New  York  Independent  derogatory  of  Connecticut 
consociationism,  entered  on  a  personal  reply  and  a  eulogy  of  that 
system.  This  was  somewhat  irrelevant  to  the  purpose  of .  the 
debate,  and  Prof.  Park  now  proposed,  as  an  amendment  to  Mr. 
Gulliver's  amendment,  the  following  resolution,  which  forms  the 
only  statement  of  Congregational  polity  adopted  by  the  Council  :6 

STATEMENT    OF    CONGREGATIONAL   PRINCIPLES. 

"Resolved,  That  this  Council  recognizes  as  distinctive  of  the 
Congregational  polity  — 

First,  The  principle  that  the  local  or  Congregational  church 
derives  its  power  and  authority  directly  from  Christ,  and  is  not 

1  His  principles  are  Ibid.,  pp.  436,  437.  As  far  as  any  character  can  be  ascribed  to  their  very 
general  statements  they  seem  pure  Independency. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  437-464.  3  Northampton,  Mass.  4  Galesburg,  111. 
6  Norfolk,  Conn.                              ■  Debates  and  Proceedings,  pp.  463,  464. 


568  THE    SYMBOLS    OF    1 865 

subject  to  any  ecclesiastical  government  exterior  or  superior  to 
itself. 

Second,  That  every  local  or  Congregational  church  is  bound 
to  observe  the  duties  of  mutual  respect  and  charity  which  are 
included  in  the  communion  of  churches  one  with  another  ;  and 
that  every  church  which  refuses  to  give  an  account  of  its  proceed- 
ings, when  kindly  and  orderly  desired  to  do  so  by  neighboring 
churches,  violates  the  law  of  Christ. 

Third,  That  the  ministry  of  the  gospel  by  members  of  the 
churches  who  have  been  duly  called  and  set  apart  to  that  work 
implies  in  itself  no  power  of  government,  and  that  ministers  of  the 
gospel  not  elected  to  office  in  any  church  are  not  a  hierarchy,  nor 
are  they  invested  with  any  official  power  in  or  over  the  churches." 


This  admirable  epitome  of  the  principles  of  modern  Congre- 
gationalism was  unanimously  approved,  and  the  report  of  the 
majority  of  the  second  committee,  as  amended  by  Mr.  Gulliver, 
was  duly  adopted.  Between  such  an  affirmation  of  the  most 
general  facts  of  Congregationalism  and  the  seventeenth  century 
platforms  a  comparison  is  difficult  ;  but  one  difference  is  clear. 
The  positions  of  the  first  and  second  articles  are  unchanged,  the 
latter  half  of  the  third  would  have  met  the  approval  of  the  fathers 
at  Cambridge,  but  a  Mather  or  a  Cotton  would  have  looked  with 
astonishment  on  the  statement  that  the  duly  established  ministry 
implies  "  no  power  of  government."  Yet  in  this  the  Statement 
reflects  the  position  of  present  Congregationalism,  that  in  matters 
of  government  the  minister  is  at  most  but  the  moderator  of  the 
deliberations  of  the  membership.  The  development  of  Congrega- 
tionalism has  carried  its  polity  to  its  logical  outcome  in  pure 
democracy,  and  this  fact  here  finds  definite  expression. 

The  Council  fulfilled  its  vote  and  appointed  the  revision  com- 
mittee, to  consider  the  platform  and  epitome  of  Dr.  Bacon  and 
Mr.  Quint,  as  follows:1  Rev.  Dr.  Bacon,  Rev.  Mr.  Quint,  Rev. 
Dr.  H.  M.  Storrs,  Prof.  Park,  Prof.  Harris,  Prof.  Bartlett,  Prof. 
Fisher,   Prof.   Fairchild,2  Rev.   J.   P.  Gulliver,   Rev.  Dr.  Benjamin 


THE   "BOSTON    PLATFORM"  569 

Labaree,  Pres.  Mark  Hopkins,1  Rev.  William  Barrows,3  Rev.  Dr.  J. 
M.  Sturtevant,  Rev.  Dr.  T.  M.  Post,3  Rev.  Dr.  Edward  Beecher, 
Rev.  Dr.  William  Salter,4  Rev.  J.  S.  Hoyt,  Rev.  David  Burt,5  Rev. 
Dr.  J.  P.  Thompson,  Hon.  Woodbury  Davis,6  Hon.  Henry  Stock- 
bridge,7  Hon.  J.  H.  Brockway,8  Rev.  N.  A.  Hyde,9  Rev.  Dr.  Leonard 
Swain,  Rev.  Richard  Cordley,"1  Asahel  Finch,  Esq.,11  Warren  Currier, 
Esq.,1*  and,  by  special  vote,  Rev.  Dr.  Rufus  Anderson.13  This  com- 
mittee did  its  work  with  much  care,  thoroughly  digesting  the 
forms  presented  to  the  Council,  and  published  its  result  in  1872, 
with  the  approving  signatures  of  its  twenty-six  surviving  mem- 
bers.14 It  is  a  valuable  statement,  the  product  of  much  thought, 
and  deserving  of  great  respect.  But  owing  perhaps  to  the  willing- 
ness of  our  churches  to  be  a  law  unto  themselves,  and  the  distaste 
of  the  present  age  for  minute  prescriptions  and  elaborate  defini- 
tions, this  document,  sometimes  known  as  the  "  Boston  Platform," 
has  never  been  widely  known  and  has  latterly  been  well-nigh  for- 
gotten. It  has  hardly  merited  this  fate,  but  the  days  of  elaborate 
platforms,  like  that  of  Cambridge,  are  as  fully  past  as  those  of 
lengthy  confessions. 


1  Williams  Coll.  2  Reading,  Mass.  3  St.  Louis,  Mo.  *  Burlington,  la. 

*  Winona,  Minn.  6  Portland,  Me.  »  Baltimore,  Md. 

8  Ellington,  Conn.  "  Indianapolis,  Ind.  10  Lawrence,  Kan. 

"  Milwaukee,  Wis.  »»  St.  Louis,  Mo.  "  Sec.  A.  B.  C  F.  M. 

14  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  The  Government  and  Communion  Practised  by  the  Congrega- 
tional Churches  in  the  United  States  of  America,  Which  were  Represented  by  Elders  and 
Messengers  in  a  National  Council  at  Boston,  A.  £>.  jS&j,  Boston,  1872,  2d  ed.  1879. 


XIX 

THE   CONSTITUTION   OF   THE    NATIONAL   COUN- 
CIL AND  "OBERLIN    DECLARATION",  1871 

Text 

Minutes  of  the  National  Council  of  the  Congregational  Churches  of  the 
United  States  of  America,  at  the  First  Session,  Held  in  Oberlin,  Ohio,  November 
13-21,  187 1,  pp.  29-32,  63-67  ;  in  the  Minutes  of  subsequent  sessions  of  the  Coun- 
cil ;  in  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  The  Government  and  Communion  Practised  by  tlie 
Congregational  Churches,  etc.,  Boston,  1872  [1879],  pp.  81-86  [without  the  "Decla- 
ration on  the  Unity  of  the  Church  "]. 

THE  success  of  the  Council  of  1865  in  fostering  a  spirit  of 
unity  and  a  sense  of  a  common  mission  among  Congrega- 
tionalists  was  conspicuous.  While  the  body  was  without 
legislative  authority,  as  becomes  a  Congregational  synod,  the  rep- 
resentative character  of  its  membership  and  the  moderation  and 
wisdom  of  its  actions,  only  a  small  part  of  which  have  been  had  in 
review,  gave  it  a  wide  influence.  It  was  felt  that  so  potent  a  pos- 
sible factor  in  denominational  life  should  not  be  occasional,  but 
permanent  and  regularly  recurring.  While  a  few  ministers,  and 
some  of  them  of  eminent  fame  in  the  denomination,  feared  a  possible 
loss  of  independence  to  the  churches,  the  majority  were  ready  to 
welcome  an  established  Council.  These  views  found  expression 
in  a  manner  well  described  in  the  note  introductory  to  the  Minutes 
of  the  Oberlin  Council:1 

"  On  the  approach  of  the  two  hundred  and  fiftieth  anniversary  of  the  landing  of 
the  Pilgrims,  the  Church  of  the  Pilgrimage,  at  Plymouth,  Mass.,  invited  the  churches 
to  meet  by  delegates  at  New  York,  to  consider  the  appropriateness  of  particular  ac- 
tion in  celebrating  this  fifth  jubilee.  Such  a  meeting  was  held  March  2,  1870 ;  and 
it  appointed  a  general  committee  for  its  purposes,  consisting  of  Hon.  Edward  S. 
Tobey,  Rev.  William  W.  Patton,  D.D.,  Rev.  Henry  M.  Dexter,  D.D.,  Samuel 
Holmes,  A.  S.  Barnes,  Rev.  Ray  Palmer,  D.D.,  and  Rev.  Alonzo  II.  Quint,  D.D.; 
of  which  the  first  named  was  chairman,  Rev.  Dr.  Dexter,  secretary,  and  Mr.  Holmes, 
treasurer. 

1  Pp.  7,  8. 

(570) 


THE    NATIONAL   COUNCIL  5/1 

Among  the  acts  of  this  committee  was  the  calling  of  a  Pilgrim  Memorial  Con- 
vention, which  met  at  Chicago,  111.,  April  27,  1S70,  open  to  delegates  from  all  the 
churches  in  the  United  States. 

Of  that  convention,   B.  W.  Tompkins,  of  Connecticut,  was  Moderator ;  Hon. 

E.  D.  Holton,  of  Wisconsin,  Rev.  Samuel  Wolcott,  D.D.,  of  Ohio,  and  Rev.  George 

F.  Magoun,  of  Iowa,  Vice-Moderators ;  Rev.  Henry  C.  Abernethy,  of  Illinois,  Rev. 
Philo  R.  Hurd,  U.D.,  of  Michigan,  and  Rev.  L.  Smith  Hobart,  of  New  York,  Sec- 
retaries; and  Rev.  William  W.  Patton,  D.D.,  of  Illinois,  Dr.  Samuel  Holmes,  of 
New  York,  Hon.  C.  J.  Walker,  of  Michigan,  James  L.  Kearnie,  of  Missouri,  and 
Rev.  Rowland  B.  Howard,  of  Illinois,  Business  Committee. 

Among  the  resolutions  adopted  by  that  large  convention  were  the  following : 

Resolved,  That  this  Pilgrim  Memorial  Convention  recommend 
to  the  Congregational  State  Conferences  and  Associations,  and  to 
other  local  bodies,  to  unite  in  measures  for  instituting  on  the  prin- 
ciple of  fellowship,  excluding  ecclesiastical  authority,  a  permanent 
National  Conference. 

The  General  Conference  of  Ohio  was  the  first  to  propose  definite  action.  That 
Conference  appointed  a  committee  (Rev.  A.  Hastings  Ross1  being  made  chairman) 
to  correspond  with  the  other  State  organizations  and  propose  a  convention  to  mature 
the  plan.  The  several  State  organizations  approved  of  the  proposed  National  organ- 
ization, and  appointed  committees.  The  General  Association  of  New  York  proposed 
that  a  meeting  of  these  committees  be  held  in  Boston,  December  21,  1870,  and  its 
committee  (Rev.  L.  Smith  Hobart,2  chairman),  issued  circulars  to  that  effect.  The 
Committee  of  the  General  Association  of  Massachusetts  adopted  the  proposal,  and 
issued  invitations  accordingly." 

Thus  the  steps  leading  to  the  permanent  National  Council 
were  similar  to  those  which  had  brought  about  the  Council  of 
1865.  In  accordance  with  this  invitation,  committees  representing 
the  state  organizations  of  Maine,  New  Hampshire,  Massachusetts, 
Rhode  Island,  Connecticut,  New  York,  New  Jersey,  Ohio,  Michi- 
gan, Minnesota,  and  Wisconsin,  met  in  Boston  at  the  time  sug- 
gested,3 and  formed  a  convention  with  Rev.  Dr.  E.  B.  Webb4  as 
moderator,  Hon.  A.  C.  Barstow5  as  assistant  moderator,  Pres.  Wil- 
liam E.  Merriman6  as  scribe,  and  Hon.  H.  S.  McCall7  as  assistant 
scribe.     This  body  unanimously  — 

"Resolved,  That  it  is  expedient,  and  appears  clearly  to  be  the  voice  of  the 
churches,  that  a  National  Council  of  the  Congregational  Churches  of  the  United 
States  be  organized  " ; 

and  invited  the  churches  to  meet  by  delegates  appointed  in  pro- 


Then  of  Springfield,  O.  2  New  York  city. 

For  their  doings  in  full,  see  Minutes  of  Oberlin  Council,  pp.  9-12. 

Boston.  5  Providence,  R.  I.  6  Ripon,  Wis.  7  New  York. 


5/2  THE    OBERLIN    DECLARATION 

portion  substantially  like  the  representation  in  the  Council  of  1865, 
at  such  time  and  place  as  a  preliminary  committee  appointed  by 
the  convention  should  designate.  It  also  suggested  the  outline  of 
a  constitution  to  be  presented  to  the  Council  that  was  to  be,  and 
entrusted  its  preparation,  as  well  as  the  call  of  the  Council,  to  the 
following  persons,  —  Rev.  Dr.  A.  H.  Quint,1  Pres.  W.  E.  Merriman, 
Prof.  S.  C.  Bartlett,2  Dea.  Samuel  Holmes,3  Maj.  Gen.  O.  O.  How- 
ard,4 Rev.  Dr.  W.  I.  Buddington,5  and  Hon.  A.  C.  Barstow.6 

Pursuant  to  the  call  of  this  preliminary  committee,  the  desired 
Council  met  at  Oberlin,  Ohio,  November  15,  187 1,  with  an  attend- 
ance of  276  delegates  from  twenty-five  states  and  territories,  and 
fourteen  honorary  and  corresponding  members.  After  effecting  a 
temporary  organization,  with  Hon.  Erastus  D.  Holton'  as  modera- 
tor, and  Dea.  Samuel  Holmes  as  scribe,  the  Council  received  the 
report  on  the  proposed  constitution  and  considered  it,  paragraph 
by  paragraph,  at  five  sessions.  The  section  relating  to  faith8  was 
referred  to  a  special  committee, —  Prof.  S.  C.  Bartlett,  Hon.  Elisha 
Carpenter,9  Hon.  C.  J.  Walker,10  Rev.  Drs.  I.  E.  Dwinell"  and  D. 
T.  Fiske13;  and  various  slight  modifications  of  the  document  were 
suggested  and  adopted.  A  debate  and  two  ballots  resulted  in  the 
choice  of  "  Council "  as  the  designation  of  the  body.  But  no 
serious  alterations  were  made  in  the  draft,  and  on  Nov.  17,  the 
following  agreement  was  unanimously  adopted: 


"THE    CONSTITUTION. 

The  Congregational  churches  of  the  United  States,  by  elders 
and  messengers  assembled,  do  now  associate  themselves  in  Na- 
tional Council: 

To  express  and  foster  their  substantial  unity  in  doctrine, 
polity,  and  work;  and 

To  consult  upon  the  common  interests  of  all  the  churches, 
their  duties  in  the  work  of  evangelization,  the  united  development 
of  their  resources,  and  their  relations  to  all  parts  of  the  kingdom 
of  Christ. 


1  New  Bedford,  Mass.         '  Chicago  Sem.  3  Montclair,  N.  J.  and  New  York  city. 

*  Washington,  D.  C.            '  Brooklyn,  N.  Y.  •  Providence,  R.  I.      '  Milwaukee,  Wis. 

*  Paragraph  4.                •  Hartford,  Conn.  10  Detroit,  Mich.           "  Sacramento,  Cat 
15  Xewburyport,  Mass. 


TEXT   OF  THE   CONSTITUTION  573 

They  agree  in  belief  that  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  the  sufficient 
and  only  infallible  rule  of  religious  faith  and  practice;  their  inter- 
pretation thereof  being  in  substantial  accordance  with  the  great 
doctrines  of  the  Christian  faith,  commonly  called  evangelical,  held 
in  our  churches  from  the  early  times,  and  sufficiently  set  forth  by 
former  General  Councils.1 

They  agree  in  the  belief  that  the  right  of  government  resides 
in  local  churches,  or  congregations  of  believers,  who  are  responsi- 
ble directly  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  One  Head  of  the  church 
universal  and  of  all  particular  churches;  but  that  all  churches, 
being  in  communion  one  with  another  as  parts  of  Christ's  catholic 
church,  have  mutual  duties  subsisting  in  the  obligations  of  fellow- 
ship. 

The  churches,  therefore,  while  establishing  this  National  Coun- 
cil for  the  furtherance  of  the  common  interests  and  work  of  all 
the  churches,  do  maintain  the  Scriptural  and  inalienable  right  of 
each  church  to  self-government  and  administration;  and  this  Na- 
tional Council  shall  never  exercise  legislative  or  judicial  authority, 
nor  consent  to  act  as  a  council  of  reference. 

And  for  the  convenience  of  orderly  consultation,  they  establish 
the  following  Rules:  — 

1.  Sessions. —  The  churches  will  meet  in  National  Council 
every  third  year.  They  shall  also  be  convened  in  special  session 
whenever  any  five  of  the  general  State  organizations  shall  so  request. 

II.  Representation. —  The  churches  shall  be  represented,  at 
each  session,  by  delegates,  either  ministers  or  laymen,  appointed 
in  number  and  manner  as  follows:  — 

i.  The  churches,  assembled  in  their  local  organizations, 
appoint  one  delegate  for  every  ten  churches  in  their  respective 
organizations,  and  one  for  a  fraction  of  ten  greater  than  one-half, 
it  being  understood  that  whenever  the  churches  of  any  State  are 
directly  united  in  a  general  organization,  they  may,  at  their  option, 
appoint  the  delegates  in  such  body,  instead  of  in  local  organiza- 
tions, but  in  the  above  ratio  of  churches  so  united. 

2.  In  addition  to  the  above,  the  churches  united  in  State  or- 
ganization appoint  by  such  body  one  delegate,  and  one  for  each 
ten  thousand  communicants  in  their  fellowship,  and  one  for  a 
major  fraction  thereof: — 

3.  It  being  recommended  that  the  number  of  delegates  be,  in 
all  cases,  divided  between  ministers  and  laymen,  as  nearly  equally 
as  is  practicable. 

1  This  clause,  from  the  word  "  practice  "  onward,  was  substituted  for  a  direct  reference  to  the 
Burial  Hill  Declaration  by  the  special  committee,  to  whom  this  paragraph  was  referred. 


5/4  THE   ORERLIN   DECLARATION 

4.  Such  Congregational  general  societies  for  Christian  work, 
and  the  faculties  of  such  theological  seminaries,  as  may  be  recog- 
nized by  this  Council,  may  be  represented  by  one  delegate  each, 
such  representatives  having  the  right  of  discussion  only. 

III.  Officers. —  1.  At  the  beginning  of  every  stated  or  special 
session,  there  shall  be  chosen  by  ballot,  from  those  present  as 
members,  a  moderator,  and  one  or  more  assistant  moderators,  to 
preside  over  its  deliberations. 

2.  At  each  triennial  session,  there  shall  be  chosen  by  ballot  a 
secretary,  a  registrar,  and  a  treasurer,  to  serve  from  the  close  of 
such  session  to  the  close  of  the  next  triennial  session. 

3.  The  secretary  shall  receive  communications  for  the  Coun- 
cil, conduct  correspondence,  and  collect  such  facts,  and  superintend 
such  publications,  as  may  from  time  to  time  be  ordered. 

4.  The  registrar  shall  make  and  preserve  the  records  of  the 
proceedings  of  the  Council;  and  for  his  aid,  one  or  more  assistants 
shall  be  chosen  at  each  session,  to  serve  during  such  session. 

5.  The  treasurer  shall  do  the  work  ordinarily  belonging  to 
such  office. 

6.  At  each  triennial  session,  there  shall  be  chosen  a  pro- 
visional committee,  who  shall  make  needful  arrangements  for  the 
next  triennial  session,  and  for  any  session  called  during  the  interval. 

7.  Committees  shall  be  appointed,  and  in  such  manner,  as 
may  from  time  to  time  be  ordered. 

8.  Any  member  of  a  church  in  fellowship  may  be  chosen  to 
the  office  of  secretary,  registrar,  or  treasurer;  and  such  officers  as 
are  not  delegates  shall  have  all  the  privileges  of  members,  except 
that  of  voting. 

IV.  By-Laws} — The  Council  may  make  and  alter  By-laws  at 
any  triennial  session. 

V.  Amendments. —  This  constitution  shall  not  be  altered  or 
amended,  except  at  a  triennial  session,  and  by  a  two-thirds  vote, 
notice  thereof  having  been  given  at  a  previous  triennial  session,  or 
the  proposed  alteration  having  been  requested  by  some  general 
State  organization  of  churches,  and  published  with  the  notification 
of  the  session." 


The  work  on  the  constitution  was  completed  on  the  afternoon 
of  November  17.  On  the  evening  before,  the  Council  had  listened 
to  a  paper  by  Rev.  Dr.  William  I.  Buddington2  on  the  Unity  of  the 


the  by-laws  as  of  temporary  importance.  2  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 


TEXT   OF   THE   DECLARATION  575 

Church.  That  paper  was  referred,  on  the  morning  after  its  pre- 
sentation, to  a  committee  composed  of  Rev.  Dr.  Leonard  Bacon, 
Rev.  Dr.  Truman  M.  Post,1  and  Charles  B.  Lines,  Esq.;3  and  on 
November  18  these  brethren  reported,  and  the  Council  adopted, 
a  declaration  which  the  Council  "ordered  to  be  put  on  record  in 
close  proximity  to  the  constitution,"  3  and  which  has  ever  since 
been  regarded  as  part  of  the  basis  of  the  body.     It  runs  thus: 4 


"DECLARATION  ON   THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

The  members  of  the  National  Council,  representing  the  Congre- 
gational churches  of  the  United  States,  avail  themselves  of  this 
opportunity  to  renew  their  previous  declarations  of  faith  in  the 
unity  of  the  church  of  God. 

While  affirming  the  liberty  of  our  churches,  as  taught  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  inherited  by  us  from  our  fathers,  and  from 
martyrs  and  confessors  of  foregoing  ages,  we  adhere  to  this  liberty 
all  the  more  as  affording  the  ground  and  hope  of  a  more  visible 
unity  in  time  to  come.  We  desire  and  purpose  to  cooperate  with 
all  the  churches  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

In  the  expression  of  the  same  catholic  sentiments  solemnly 
avowed  by  the  Council  of  1865,  on  the  Burial  Hill  at  Plymouth,  we 
wish,  at  this  new  epoch  of  our  history,  to  remove,  so  far  as  in  us 
lies,  all  causes  of  suspicion  and  alienation,  and  to  promote  the 
growing  unity  of  council  and  of  effort  among  the  followers  of  Christ. 
To  us,  as  to  our  brethren,  '  There  is  one  body  and  one  spirit,  even 
as  we  are  called  in  one  hope  of  our  calling.' 

As  little  as  did  our  fathers  in  their  days,  do  we  in  ours,  make 
a  pretension  to  be  the  only  churches  of  Christ.  We  find  ourselves 
consulting  and  acting  together  under  the  distinctive  name  of  Con- 
gregationalists,  because,  in  the  present  condition  of  our  common 
Christianity,  we  have  felt  ourselves  called  to  ascertain  and  do  our 
own  appropriate  part  of  the  work  of  Christ's  church  among  men. 

We  especially  desire,  in  prosecuting  the  common  work  of 
evangelizing  our  own  land  and  the  world,  to  observe  the  common 
and  sacred  law,  that  in  the  wide  field  of  the  world's  evangelization, 
we  do  our  work  in  friendly  cooperation  with  all  those  who  love  and 
serve  our  common  Lord. 

1  St.  Louis,  Mo.  2  Waubaunsee,  Kan. 

3  Minutes  of  Oberlin  Council,  p.  36.  *  Ibid.,  pp.  31,  32,  65,  66. 


576  THE   OBERLIN   DECLARATION 

We  believe  in  '  the  holy  catholic  church.'  It  is  our  prayer  and 
endeavor,  that  the  unity  of  the  church  may  be  more  and  more 
apparent,  and  that  the  prayer  of  our  Lord  for  his  disciples  may  be 
speedily  and  completely  answered,  and  all  be  one;  that  by  conse- 
quence of  this  Christian  unity  in  love,  the  world  may  believe  in 
Christ  as  sent  of  the  Father  to  save  the  world." 


The  National  Council,  thus  established,  has  more  than  vindi- 
cated its  right  to  be.  Though  subject  to  protest  during  its  early 
years  from  the  churches  of  New  Jersey  '  and  New  York  2  as  a  possi- 
ble menace  to  Congregational  independence,  it  has  always  had  the 
support  of  a  vast  majority  of  the  Congregational  body,  and  has 
already  substantially  outlived  criticism.  It  has  unified  the  statistics 
of  the  denomination,  it  has  relieved  friction  between  the  benevolent 
societies  of  our  body,  it  has  been  largely  instrumental  in  making 
some  of  them  truly  representative  of  the  churches,  and  will  doubt- 
less eventually  bring  all  into  directly  responsible  connection,  and 
above  all  it  has  fostered  the  spirit  of  denominational  unity  and 
fellowship,  which  the  Congregationalism  of  the  first  half  of  this 
century  so  largely  lacked,  and  which  is  essential  to  all  permanent 
growth. 

Its  statements  of  faith,  adopted  at  Oberlin,  are  valuable  as 
illustrating  the  catholicity  of  spirit  which  has  accompanied  this 
growth  of  denominational  consciousness.  In  matters  of  doctrine 
the  constitution  is  more  important  for  what  it  does  not  affirm  than 
for  that  which  it  declares.  Though  nowhere  expressly  stated,  the 
understanding  at  Oberlin  at  its  adoption,  and  the  interpretation 
since  usually  put  upon  it,  is  that  it  holds  out  the  olive  branch  of 
denominational  fellowship  to  brethren  of  Arminian  sympathies,  and 
is  but  a  further  illustration  of  that  desire  not  to  limit  Congrega- 
tional brotherhood  to  those  who  hold  exclusively  the  system  known 
as  "Calvinism,"  which  was  already  manifest  in  the  Council  of  1865. 


»  The  General  Association  of  this  state  protested  in  1877  and  1880  against 
the   National   Council  as  a  regularly  recurrent  body,   meeting  to  give  advice  in   denominational 
matters.     Minutes  of  Council  of  1877,  pp.  19,  22,  37,  38  ;  of  1880,  pp.  15,  16,  26,  27,  186- 191. 

2  The  General  Association  requested  in  1880  that  the  Council  refrain  from  expressing  opinions 
by  votes,  and  the  Hudson  River  Association  asked  the  same  year  that  the  functions  of  the  Council 
be  more  clearly  defined.     See  references  in  previous  note. 


XX 

THE  "COMMISSION"  CREED  OF  1883 
Text 

The  Congregationalist  for  March  6,  1884,  and  other  contemporary  religious 
papers;  Huntington,  Outlines  of  Congregational  History,  Boston,  1885,  pp.  189- 
194  ;  Boardman,  Congregationalism,  Chicago  [1889],  pp.  62,  63. 

Literature 

The  Minutes  of  the  National  Council  of  1880 ;  Religious  newspapers  contem- 
porary with  its  publication. 

THE  doctrinal  expressions  put  forth  by  the  Councils  of  1865 
and  1 87 1  were  the  first  united  confessions  which  American 
Congregationalism  had  produced  for  more  than  two  hundred 
years.  But  they  were  far  from  universally  satisfactory.  Their 
language  was  too  general,  and  they  were  not  adapted  to  form  the 
creed-expressions  of  local  churches,  newly  founded  or  desiring  to 
modify  their  creeds.  It  was,  moreover,  a  question  in  many  minds 
how  far  the  allusions  of  the  Burial  Hill  Confession  to  the  symbols 
of  1648  and  1680  implied  that  those  venerable  documents  were 
authoritative  standards  of  modern  Congregationalism.  On  a  strict 
construction  of  that  Declaration  it  certainly  appeared  that  the 
Council  at  Plymouth  reaffirmed  the  doctrinal  statements  of  those 
ancient  formulas  with  substantial  fullness ;  but  it  might  well  be 
that  this  reference  to  the  productions  of  these  seventeenth  century 
synods  was,  as  Dr.  Bacon  styled  it,  merely  a  "rhetorical  discourse.""1 
So  strongly  was  the  desire  felt  for  a  simple  declaration,  in  modern 
language,  that  the  Oberlin  Council  of  187 1  put  on  record  its  judg- 
ment that  there  had2  — 

"come  up,  from  all  quarters,  earnest  calls  for  some  brief  manual  of  doctrine  and 
polity  for  use  in  the  families  and  Sunday-schools  of  our  churches"; 

and,  hearing  that  a  manual  was  in  "  preparation  by  the  Congrega- 
tional Publishing  Society,"  the  assembly  at  Oberlin  appointed  a 

1  Independent,  Oct.  14,  1880.  2  Minutes  of  National  Council,  1871,  p.  41. 

(577) 


578  THE   CREED    OF    1883 

committee  of  five  to  whom  it  could  be  submitted  for  approval.' 
The  publication  of  the  so-called  "Boston  Platform,"  in  1872,  by 
the  committee  appointed  by  the  Council  of  1865,  made  the  com- 
mittee of  the  Council  of  187 1  feel  discharged  of  any  further  duty 
in  the  matter.'  But  the  lack  of  such  an  outline  of  doctrine  was 
increasingly  felt,  and  led,  in  1879,  to  the  appointment  by  the  Con- 
gregational Association  of  Ohio  of  a  committee,  of  which  Rev. 
James  Brand3  was  chairman,  to  consider  what  might  be  done  to 
supply  the  want.  At  its  suggestion  the  Ohio  Association,  at  its 
meeting  in  Wellington  in  May,  1880,  adopted  an  elaborate  memo- 
rial, addressed  to  the  National  Council,  setting  forth  the  deficien- 
cies of  the  previous  declarations,  and  the  inexpediency  of  reaffirm- 
ing the  seventeenth  century  creeds,  and  asking  the  Council  to  take 
into  consideration,  in  such  way  as  should  seem  best  to  it,  the  de- 
sirability of  a  "  formula  that  shall  not  be  mainly  a  reaffirmation  of 
former  confessions,  but  that  shall  state  in  precise  terms  in  our 
living  tongue  the  doctrines  which  we  hold  to-day."4  This  memo- 
rial was  seconded  by  similar  appeals  from  the  General  Conference 
of  Minnesota,5  and  the  Central  South  Conference  of  Tennessee;" 
and  the  three  memorials  were  duly  laid  before  the  National  Coun- 
cil on  November  11,  1880,  at  its  session  in  St.  Louis,  Mo.'  There 
they  were  reinforced  by  an  able  and  convincing  historical  and 
argumentative  paper  by  Prof.  Hiram  Mead.8  The  Council  referred 
this  paper  and  the  memorials  to  a  committee  consisting  of  Rev. 
Dr.  A.  L.  Chapin,9  Rev  C.  D.  Barrows,10  Rev.  Dr.  S.  R.  Dennen," 
Rev.  Dr.  N.  A.  Hyde,12  Rev.  F.  P.  Woodbury,13  Dea.  D.  C.  Bell,14 
and  J.  E.  Sargent,  Esq.15  This  committee  sympathized  with  the 
memorialists,  and  at  its  recommendation,1"  the  Council,  on  Nov. 
15,  adopted  the  following  resolutions:17 

"Resolved,  (1)  That  the  paper  on  creeds'8  be  printed,  and  receive  the  thoughtful 
consideration  of  the  churches. 


'  Ibid.,  p.  46.  '  Minutes  of  1874,  p.  32. 

8  Oberlin,  O.     See  Minutes  of  1880,  p.  133.  4  In  full,  Hid.,  pp.  133-138. 

6  Ibid.,  pp.  139,  140.  •  Ibid.,  pp.  138,  139.  »  Ibid.,  p.  13. 

•  Ibid.,  pp.  144-173.     Of  the  Theo.  Sem.,  Oberlin,  O.  •  Beloit,  Wis. 

><>  Lowell,  Mass.  "  New  Haven,  Conn.  "  Indianapolis,  Ind. 

»  Rockford,  111.  »«  Minneapolis,  Minn.  16  Concord,  N.  H. 

'•  Its  report  in  full,  Ibid.,  pp.  198,  199.  "  Ibid.,  pp.  24,  25. 

»  Prof.  Mead's. 


THE   CREED-COMMISSION  579 

Resolved,  (2)  That  a  committee  of  seven  be  appointed,  who  shall,  as  soon  as 
practicable  after  the  adjournment  of  the  Council,  select  from  among  the  members  of 
our  churches,  in  different  parts  of  our  land,  twenty-five  men  of  piety  and  ability,  well 
versed  in  the  truths  of  the  Bible,  and  representing  different  shades  of  thought  among 
us,  who  may  be  willing  to  confer  and  act  together  as  a  commission  to  prepare,  in  the 
form  of  a  creed  or  catechism,  or  both,  a  simple,  clear,  and  comprehensive  exposition 
of  the  truths  of  the  glorious  gospel  of  the  blessed  God,  for  the  instruction  and  edifi- 
cation of  our  churches. 

Resolved,  (3)  That  the  committee  of  seven  take  pains  to  secure  the  willing  co-op- 
eration of  the  men  selected  ;  that  the  commission  be  left,  without  specific  instructions 
from  this  body,  to  adopt  their  own  methods  of  proceeding,  and  to  take  time  as  they 
may  find  necessary  to  perfect  their  work ;  and  that  the  result  of  their  labors,  when 
complete,  be  reported  —  not  to  this  Council,  but  to  the  churches  and  to  the  world 
through  the  public  press  —  to  carry  such  weight  of  authority  as  the  character  of  the 
commission  and  the  intrinsic  merit  of  their  exposition  of  truth  may  command." 

In  accordance  with  this  vote,  the  Council  appointed  the  same 
committee  to  whose  recommendation  the  resolutions  were  due  to 
select  the  twenty-five  commissioners;1  and,  as  a  result  of  their 
choice,  the  following  ministers  and  teachers,  designed  to  be  widely 
representative  of  Congregationalism,  geographically  and  theologi- 
cally, were  selected  to  prepare  the  desired  creed,"  —  Pres.  Julius  H. 
Seelye,3  Prof.  Charles  M.  Mead,4  Rev.  Dr.  Henry  M.  Dexter,5  Rev. 
Dr.  Edmund  K.  Alden,6  Rev.  Dr.  Alexander  McKenzie,7  Rev.  Dr. 
James  G.  Johnson,8  Prof.  George  P.  Fisher,9  Rev.  Dr.  George  Leon 
Walker,1"  Prof.  William  S.  Karr,"  Prof.  George  T.  Ladd,12  Rev.  Dr. 
Samuel  P.  Leeds,13  Rev.  Dr.  David  B.  Coe,14  Rev.  Dr.  William  M. 
Taylor,'5  Rev.  Dr.  Lyman  Abbott,16  Rev.  Dr.  Augustus  F.  Beard,17 
Pres.  William  W.  Patton,1"  Pres.  James  H.  Fairchild,'9  Pres.  Israel  W. 
Andrews,20  Rev.  Dr.  Zachary  Eddy,21  Prof.  James  T.  Hyde,"  Rev.  Dr. 
Edward  P.  Goodwin,23  Rev.  Dr.  Alden  B.  Robbins,24  Rev.  Dr.  Constans 
L.  Goodell,"  Rev.  Dr.  Richard  Cordley,28  and  Prof.  George  Mooar.27 

After  much  deliberation  and  correspondence,  and  much  labor 
in  sub-committees  and  as  a  whole,  the  Commission,  on  Dec.  19, 
1883,  put  forth  its  creed,  as  follows: S9 


1  Ibid.,  p.  24.  2  Minutes  of  1883,  p.  23.  s  Pres.  Amherst  College. 

*  Andover  Sem.  6  Editor  Congregationalist.  e  Sec'y  A.  B.  C.  F.  M. 

7  Cambridge,  Mass.  8  Rutland,  Vt.  •  Yale  Sem. 

1°  Hartford,  Conn.  "  Hartford  Theo.  Sem.  «  Bowdoin  Coll.,  Me.,  then  Yale. 

13  Hanover,  N.  H.  «  Sec.  A.  H.  M.  S.  •»  New  York  city. 

"  Editor   Christian  Union.  "  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

lfl  Pres.  Howard  Univ.         »  Pres.  Oberlin  Coll.  20  Marietta  Coll.,  O. 

"i  Detroit,  Mich.  "  Chicago  Sem.  23  Chicago,  111. 

24  Muscatine,  la.  25  St.  Louis,  Mo.  »«  Emporia,  Kan. 

27  Pacific  Sem.  28  From  copy  sent  to  members  of  the  committee  for  signature. 


580  THE   CREED   OF    1 883 


"STATEMENT   OF    DOCTRINE: 

I.  We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  of 
heaven  and  earth,  and  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible; 

And  in  Jesus  Christ,  His  only  Son,  our  Lord,  who  is  of  one 
substance  with  the  Father;  by  whom  all  things  were  made; 

And  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Lord  and  Giver  of  life,  who  is  sent 
from  the  Father  and  Son,  and  who  together  with  the  Father  and 
Son  is  worshiped  and  glorified. 

II.  We  believe  that  the  providence  of  God,  by  which  he  exe- 
cutes his  eternal  purposes  in  the  government  of  the  world,  is  in 
and  over  all  events;  yet  so  that  the  freedom  and  responsibility  of 
man  are  not  impaired,  and  sin  is  the  act  of  the  creature  alone. 

III.  We  believe  that  man  was  made  in  the  image  of  God,  that 
he  might  know,  love,  and  obey  God,  and  enjoy  him  forever;  that 
our  first  parents  by  disobedience  fell  under  the  righteous  condemna- 
tion of  God;  and  that  all  men  are  so  alienated  from  God  that  there 
is  no  salvation  from  the  guilt  and  power  of  sin  except  through 
God's  redeeming  grace. 

IV.  We  believe  that  God  would  have  all  men  return  to  him; 
that  to  this  end  he  has  made  himself  known,  not  only  through  the 
works  of  nature,  the  course  of  his  providence,  and  the  consciences 
of  men,  but  also  through  supernatural  revelations  made  especially  to 
a  chosen  people,  and  above  all,  when  the  fullness  of  time  was  come, 
through  Jesus  Christ  his  Son. 

V.  We  believe  that  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments are  the  records  of  God's  revelation  of  himself  in  the  work  of 
redemption;  that  they  were  written  by  men  under  the  special  guid- 
ance of  the  Holy  Spirit;  that  they  are  able  to  make  wise  unto 
salvation;  and  that  they  constitute  the  authoritative  standard  by 
which  religious  teaching  and  human  conduct  are  to  be  regulated 
and  judged. 

VI.  We  believe  that  the  love  of  God  to  sinful  men  has  found 
its  highest  expression  in  the  redemptive  work  of  his  Son;  who 
became  man,  uniting  his  divine  nature  with  our  human  nature  in 
one  person;  who  was  tempted  like  other  men,  yet  without  sin;  who 
by  his  humiliation,  his  holy  obedience,  his  sufferings,  his  death  on 
the  cross,  and  his  resurrection,  became  a  perfect  Redeemer;  whose 
sacrifice  of  himself  for  the  sins  of  the  world  declares  the  righteous- 
ness of  God,  and  is  the  sole  and  sufficient  ground  of  forgiveness 
and  of  reconciliation  with  him. 


TEXT    OF    THE    CREED  58I 

VII.  We  believe  that  Jesus  Christ,  after  he  had  risen  from 
the  dead,  ascended  into  heaven,  where,  as  the  one  mediator 
between  God  and  man,  he  carries  forward  his  work  of  saving  men; 
that  he  sends  the  Holy  Spirit  to  convict  them  of  sin,  and  to  lead 
them  to  repentance  and  faith;  and  that  those  who  through  renew- 
ing grace  turn  to  righteousness,  and  trust  in  Jesus  Christ  as  their 
Redeemer,  receive  for  his  sake  the  forgiveness  of  their  sins,  and 
are  made  the  children  of  God. 

VIII.  We  believe  that  those  who  are  thus  regenerated  and 
justified,  grow  in  sanctified  character  through  fellowship  with 
Christ,  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  obedience  to  the 
truth;  that  a  holy  life  is  the  fruit  and  evidence  of  saving  faith; 
and  that  the  believer's  hope  of  continuance  in  such  a  life  is  in  the 
preserving  grace  of  God. 

IX.  We  believe  that  Jesus  Christ  came  to  establish  among 
men  the  kingdom  of  God,  the  reign  of  truth  and  love,  righteous- 
ness and  peace;  that  to  Jesus  Christ,  the  Head  of  his  kingdom, 
Christians  are  directly  responsible  in  faith  and  conduct;  and  that 
to  him  all  have  immediate  access  without  mediatorial  or  priestly 
intervention. 

X.  We  believe  that  the  Church  of  Christ,  invisible  and 
spiritual,  comprises  all  true  believers,  whose  duty  it  is  to  associate 
themselves  in  churches,  for  the  maintenance  of  worship,  for  the 
promotion  of  spiritual  growth  and  fellowship,  and  for  the  conver- 
sion of  men;  that  these  churches,  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  and  in  fellowship  with  one  another,  may  determine  — 
each  for  itself  —  their  organization,  statements  of  belief,  and  forms 
of  worship,  may  appoint  and  set  apart  their  own  ministers,  and 
should  co-operate  in  the  work  which  Christ  has  committed  to  them 
for  the  furtherance  of  the  gospel  throughout  the  world. 

XI.  We  believe  in  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  Day,  as  a 
day  of  holy  rest  and  worship;  in  the  ministry  of  the  word;  and  in 
the  two  sacraments,  which  Christ  has  appointed  for  his  church: 
Baptism,  to  be  administered  to  believers  and  their  children,  as  a 
sign  of  cleansing  from  sin,  of  union  to  Christ,  and  of  the  imparta- 
tion  of  the  Holy  Spirit;  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  as  a  symbol  of  his 
atoning  death,  a  seal  of  its  efficacy,  and  a  means  whereby  he  con- 
firms and  strengthens  the  spiritual  union  and  communion  of  be- 
lievers with  himself. 

XII.  We  believe  in  the  ultimate  prevalence  of  the  kingdom 
of  Christ  over  all  the  earth;  in  the  glorious  appearing  of  the  great 
God  and  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ;  in  the  resurrection  of  the  dead; 


582  THE   CREED   OF    1883 

and  in  a  final  judgment,  the  issues  of  which  are  everlasting  punish- 
ment and  everlasting  life."1 


To  this  creed  were  appended  the  signatures  of  twenty-two  of 
the  twenty-five  commissioners.  Three  of  the  twenty-five,  Rev.  Dr. 
E.  K.  Alden,  Prof.  W.  S.  Karr,  and  Rev.  Dr.  E.  P.  Goodwin,  declined 
to  sign  the  document,  the  two  former  as  failing  adequately  to  rep- 
resent their  views  in  various  particulars,  and  the  latter  assigning 
as  his  reason  inability  to  be  present  at  the  meetings  of  the  com- 
mission. But  probably  the  creed  was  agreed  upon  with  as  great  a 
degree  of  unanimity  as  any  statement  of  faith  in  modern  language, 
and  of  a  definite  character,  would  be  in  the  present  age  by  an  equal 
number  of  representatives  of  any  of  the  Protestant  communions  of 
America.  It  has  had,  and  still  has,  its  critics;  but  its  reception 
has  justified  the  appointment  of  the  commission,  and  it  is  increas- 
ingly referred  to  as  a  standard  of  doctrine  by  ministerial  and 
missionary  candidates.  The  free  system  of  Congregationalism 
allows  every  church  to  formulate  its  own  creed;  but  this  confes- 
sion is  coming  more  and  more  to  be  employed  as  a  local  statement 
of  faith,  especially  by  newly  formed  churches.  Its  merits  are  ob- 
vious. It  is  simple,  clear,  and  modern.  It  represents  a  fair  con- 
sensus of  the  actual  present  faith  of  the  Congregational  churches. 
Though  imposed  by  no  authority,  and  accepted  only  in  so  far  as  it 
is  its  own  commendation,  it  gives  the  Congregational  body  what 
no  other  considerable  denomination  of  Christians  in  America  pos- 
sesses,—  a  widely  recognized  creed,  written  in  the  language  and 
expressing  the  thought  of  living  men.  As  such  it  is  vindicating 
its  usefulness  more  and  more. 


The  long  story  of  the  development  of  Congregational  plat- 
forms and  confessions  has  thus  been  passed  in  review.  It  is  a 
history  of  strength  and  of  weakness,  of  apprehensions   of  divine 

•  A  form  for  admission  of  members  to  the  church  was  prepared,  somewhat  hastily,  by  the 
Commission.  It  has  never  given  general  satisfaction,  and  the  National  Council  of  1889  appointed  a 
committee  to  revise  it.     .Minutes,  pp.  33,  43.     Their  report  has  not  yet  been  made. 


TRAITS   OF    CONGREGATIONALISM  583 

truth  and  of  occasional  mistake.  The  history  of  the  intermingling 
forces  of  the  human  and  the  divine  in  the  unfolding  of  the  King- 
dom of  God  on  earth  must  ever  be  so.  But  the  story  has  been 
told  to  little  purpose  if  two  essential  features  of  Congregational 
life  have  not  appeared,  —  those  of  unity  and  growth.  The  fathers 
of  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries,  applying  the  Reforma- 
tion principle  of  the  authority  of  the  Word  of  God  to  polity  as 
well  as  to  doctrine,  sketched  out  the  essential  features  of  a  Con- 
gregational church  as  they  believed  it  to  be  divinely  appointed. 
In  common  with  their  Puritan  brethren  they  formulated  the  doc- 
trinal system  of  the  Gospel  as  they  read  it  in  the  same  divine 
record.  On  the  basis  of  their  two-fold  work  Congregationalism 
still  stands.  The  essential  features  of  the  church  as  it  appeared 
to  them  are  the  distinctive  characteristics  of  a  Congregational  church 
to-day.  The  great  truths  which  they  maintained  constitute,  in  their 
broad  outline,  the  doctrinal  basis  of  modern  Congregationalism. 
But  the  Congregational  body  of  to-day  is  no  mere  residuum 
of  sixteenth  century  discussions.  If  the  main  lines  of  its  doctrine 
and  polity  were  then  laid  down,  it  has  made  progress  along  them 
all.  The  fathers  recognized  the  right  of  the  brethren  to  a  share 
in  church-government,  though  they  limited  this  right  by  the  large 
prerogatives  of  ministerial  office;  modern  Congregationalism  has 
seen  the  wisdom  of  their  trust  and  has  removed  their  barriers,  so 
that  now  its  system  is  a  pure  democracy.  The  fathers  believed 
that  the  churches  should  have  upon  them  the  restraining  hand  of 
the  civil  magistrate;  modern  Congregationalism  has  learned  that 
in  brotherly  admonition  rather  than  in  legal  coercion  the  truer 
remedy  for  churchly  evils  is  to  be  found.  To  the  civil  govern- 
ment the  fathers  looked  for  the  call  of  a  general  assembly  of  the 
churches;  modern  Congregationalism  has  found  that  in  voluntary 
association  is  to  be  obtained  the  benefits  that  they  sought,  without 
the  dangers  of  their  method.  And  it  has  also  discovered  that  a 
far  greater  range  of  Christian  activities  than  the  fathers  dreamed 
of,  in  home  and  foreign  missions,  in  the  training  of  Christian  min- 
isters, in  charitable  work  for  the  needy  in  body  and  spirit,  can  be 


584  THE   CREED    OF    1 883 

carried  on  by  the  associated  effort  of  Congregational  churches, 
without  forfeiting  the  self-government  of  the  local  congregation 
which  the  fathers  justly  prized. 

So,  too,  in  doctrine.  The  fathers  stood  on  the  common  basis 
of  Puritanic  Calvinism;  modern  Congregationalism  is  simpler,  less 
scholastic  in  its  faith,  more  catholic  in  its  sympathies.  If  it  is 
less  confident  than  were  the  fathers  that  it  understands  all  the 
secrets  of  the  divine  counsel,  it  is  more  conscious  of  its  duties 
toward  a  suffering  and  sinning  world.  The  Gospel  it  presents  is 
essentially  the  same  that  the  fathers  set  forth  as  the  basis  of 
their  faith,  but  it  holds  that  Gospel  to  be  intended  for  all  men  and 
to  be  wide  enough  in  its  provisions  of  redemption  for  the  needs  of 
the  whole  human  race. 

As  has  been  the  past,  so,  under  the  good  hand  of  God,  we 
may  expect  the  future  to  be.  Congregationalism  can  no  more  rest 
in  its  present  status  than  in  that  of  the  Cambridge  Platform.  It 
will  preserve  its  historic  continuity,  its  roots  will  run  back  deep 
into  the  past,  but  it  will,  we  may  believe,  deepen  in  knowledge  and 
broaden  in  sympathy  till  it  comes  to  the  full  measure  of  the  pat- 
tern in  accordance  with  which  the  Master  designed  his  church  on 
earth  to  be  fashioned. 


INDEX 


ABBOTT,  George,  archbishop,  op- 
poses granting  of  charter  for  settle- 
ment in  America  to  London  ch.,  86. 

Abbott,  Rev.  Lyman,  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 579. 

Abernethy,  Rev.  H.  C,  571. 

Act,  Conventicle,  442;  Corporation, 
abolished,  544;  Five  Mile,  442;  Nav- 
igation, 411  ;  Test,  abolished,  544; 
Toleration,  443  ;  of  Uniformity,  442. 

Addington,  Isaac,  497. 

Adoption,  doctrine  of,  Savoy  Declara- 
tion, 3S0. 

Agreement,  Heads  of  (see  Heads  of 
Agreement). 

Ainsworth,  Henry,  biog.  sketch,  43  ; 
chosen  teacher  of  London- Amster- 
dam ch. ,  43 ;  share  in  Confession  of 
1596,  43,  44;  translates  it  into  Latin, 
4S;  in  London  with  Separatist  peti- 
tions, 1603,  76. 

Albany  Convention,  call  and  work,  53S— 
540;  abrogation  of  Plan  of  Union, 
539,  540,  553- 

Alden,  Rev.  E.  K.,  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 579;  dissents  from  result,  582. 

Alexander,  Rev.  Archibald,  532. 

Allegiance,  Oath  of,  Leyden  ch.  willing 
to  take,  91. 

Allen,  Capt.  Bozoun,  dispute  over  his 
election  at  Hingham,   1645,  160-163. 

Allen,  Rev.  George,  protests  against 
Burial  Hill  Declaration,  561. 

Allen,  Rev.  James,  on  committee  of  Sy- 
nod, 1679,  419;  a  conservative,  467; 
opposes  Brattle  ch.,  477;  circular  let- 
ter, 4S4. 

Allen,  Thomas,  publishes  report  to 
Camb.  Synod  on  power  of  magistrates, 
175- 

Allen,  Rev.  Thomas,  of  Charlestown, 
views  on  baptism,  251. 

Allen,  William,  founds  Douai  Seminary, 
79- 

Allerton,  Isaac,  of  Plymouth,  127. 

Allin,  Rev.  John,  of  Dedham.  advice  to 
Mass.  Court,  177;  sermon  at  Camb. 
Synod,  183;  Half-way  Covenant  views, 
249;  called  to  Assembly  of  1657,  258; 


at  Synod  of  1662,  265,  269;  defends 
its  result,  269. 

Allin,  Rev.  Thomas,  135. 

Ames,  Rev.  William,  associated  with 
Hooker,  140;  works  cited,  366;  works 
studied  at  Yale,  497;   (see  also  no.) 

Amsterdam,  London  ch.  emigrates  to, 
42;  Confession  issued  there  in  1596 
and  1598,43-48;  "Points  of  Differ- 
ence," 1603,  76;  Scrooby  ch.  at,  83. 

Anabaptists,  why  so  called,  2;  originate 
in  Switzerland,  2;  Persecuted,  2;  at- 
tempt fully  to  carry  out  reformation 
principles,  2,  3;  in  Holland,  3-7  ; 
their  views,  3,  4;  their  confession, 
4-6;  in  England,  6,  7  ;  protected  by 
William  of  Orange,  6;  possible  influ- 
ence on  early  Congregationalism  in 
England,  7,  10;  15-17. 

Anderson,  Rev.  Bankes,  Savoy  Synod, 
348. 

Anderson,  Rev.  Rufus,  569. 

Andrew,  Rev.  Samuel,  trustee  of  Yale, 
498;  at  Saybrook  Synod,  502;  recep- 
tion of  Platform  in  New  Haven 
County,  51 1-5 13. 

Andrews,  Dr.  Chas.  M.,  views  on  set- 
tlement of  Conn.,  157,  158. 

Andrews,  Pres.  I.  W.,  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 579. 

Annestey,  Rev.  Sam.,  445,  452. 

Antinomian  dispute  and  synod,  1637, 
literature,  133. 

"  Apologeticail  Narration,"  by  Cong,  in 
West.  Assembly,  137,  343. 

Arminianism,  in  eighteenth  century 
N.  E.,  284;  at  Oberlin  Council, 
576. 

Articles,  the  Seven.  See  Seven  Articles. 
Thirty-nine,  sufficient  doctrinal  ex- 
pression for  Cong.,  462. 

Aspinwall,  Wm.,  deacon  at  Boston,  129. 

Assembly,  Ministers  of  1643,  recom- 
mends Minister's  Meetings,  469. 

Assembly,  Ministerial,  of  1657,  origin 
and  call,  257,  258;  objections  of  New 
Haven,  259-261  ;  membership,  258, 
259  ;  meeting  and  work,  261,  262;  ex- 
tracts from  result,  288-300. 


(585) 


586  [N 

Assembly,  Presbyterian.  See  Presby- 
terian  General 'Assembly. 

Assembly.  Westminster,  See  Westmin- 
ster Assembly. 

Associations,  Ministerial,  recommended 
in  Heads  of  Agreement,  461;  their 
early  history  in  Mass.,  467,  469; 
abandoned,  470;  revived,  470;  the 
Cambridge-Boston  Association,  470- 
472;  other  early  Associations,  471; 
their  strengthening  sought,  4S3,  4-4; 
meeting  of  delegates,  Boston,  1705, 
485;  in  Proposals  of  1705,  4S7;  in 
Saybrook  Platform,  501,  502;  estab- 
lished, 507. 

Associations,  General,  established,  506 
53S. 

Association,  Hartford  North,  vote  of 
x799.  514.  526. 

Assurance,  doctrine  of,  3S5. 

DACON,     Rev.     Leonard,    influence, 
*-*   515;    at    Albany    Convention,    539; 
chairman    prelim,     com.    on     Polity, 
lS65.    555  ;    in   debate   on    Decl.    of 
Faith,    560,    561,    562;     criticism    of 
Decl.,    577;    report   on    Polity,    56=;; 
in    debate    on   polity,   567;    chairman 
of   large   com.    on   a    Platform,   568; 
Oberlin  Declaration,  1S71,  575;  quo- 
ted, 446,  447. 
Balkam,  Rev.  Uriah,  in  debate  on  Dec- 
laration of  1865,  559,  560. 
Ball,  Rev.  John,  reply  to  Davenport,  135. 
Ballot,  written,  first  use,  103. 
Bancroft,  Rich.,  archbishop,  sermon  at 

Paul's  Cross,  15S9,  78,  98. 
Baptism  (see  also  Half- Way  Covenant), 
to  whom  administered,  Browne's  views, 
20;  administered  to  infants  of  ch. 
members,  Conf.  of  1596,  70;  "  Points 
of  Difference,"  1603,  So;  one  parent 
must  be  a  ch.  memb.,  Leyden  ch., 
1618,  91;  only  children  of  ch.  memb., 
Hooker's  Principles,  145;  serious 
grievances  regarding  baptism,  165; 
lead  to  Cambridge  Synod.  167-171; 
differing  practices  in'X.  E.,  call  of 
Cambridge  Synod,  169;  settlement  of 
question  put  off  at  Synod,  181;  bap- 
tism .lues  not  admit  to  ch.,  it  belongs 
to  ch.  members,  246;  doctrine  of, 
Savoy  Declaration,  398  ;  extension 
of,  desired  by  Brattle  Ch.  founders, 
474:  doctrine'of,  English  Decl.,  550; 
Creed  of  1SS3.  581. 
Baptised  children,  advantages  of,  Camb. 

Platform,  224. 
Baptists,  principles  practiced  in  X.  E., 

1646.  169;   fear  of,  249. 
Barnard.  Dea.  S.   3 
Barnes,  Rev.  Albert,  trial,  535-537. 


Barnes,  A.  S.,  570. 
Barnet,  Rev.  Samuel,  letter,  347. 
Barrowe,  Henry,  biog.  sketch,  29;  con- 
nection with  confession  of  1589,  29; 
peculiarities   of    his    views,    31,    32  ; 
martyrdom,  30,  49,  52. 
Barrowism,  how  differing  from  Brown- 
ism,  32;  early  X.  E.  Cong.  Barrowist 
rather  than  Brownist,  135;  Cambridge 
Platform.    185. 
Barrows,  Rev.  C.  D.,  steps  toward  the 

Creed  of  1883,  573,  579. 
Barrows,  Rev.  William,  569. 
Barstow,   Hon.  A.  C,  preparations  for 

Xational  Council,  571,  572. 
Bartlett,    Prof.   S.    (/.,  com.    on    Polity, 
Council  of  1865,  566;  in  debate,  567'; 
com.    on   a   Platform,    568;     Oberlin 
Council,  572. 
Baxter,  Richard,  criticises  Savoy  Decla- 
ration, 352. 
Beard,  Rev.  A.  F.,  on  creed-commission, 

5  79- 
Beckwith,  Rev.  George,  advocates  Stod- 

dardeanism,  2S2,  286. 
Beecher,  Rev.  Edward,  567,  569. 
Beecher,  Rev.   Lyman,  trial,  535. 
Bell,  Dea.  D.  C,  steps  leading  to  Creed 

of  16S3,  57S,  579. 
Bellamy,  Rev.  Joseph,  of  Bethlem,  biog. 
note,    285  ;    opposes    the    Half-Way 
Covenant,  2S6. 
Bible.     See  Scriptures. 
Billet,  Arthur,  28. 
Bilson,  Thomas,  bishop,  urges  jure  1I1- 

vino  Episcopacy,  78,  98. 
Bishop,  Rev.  Xel'son,  5O6. 
Blackburn,  Rev.    fohn,  ^44. 
Blakeman,  Rev.  Adam,  approves  Hook- 
er's   Principles,    148;    opposes    Half- 
Way  Covenant,  272. 
Blatchford,  Rev.  Samuel,  Plan  of  Union, 

529,  530. 
Blinman,  Rev.  Rich.,  of  Xew  London, 

sent  to  Assembly  of  1657,  259. 
Bond,    Rev.  John,'  Cong,   in  West.  As- 
sembly, 342. 
Boston,  Assembly  of  1657  (see  Assem- 
bly) Ministerial. 
Boston    Church,   strongly    Puritan,   99; 
becomes    acquainted    with    Plymouth 
practices,      126,     127;       organization 
effected,    12S,    129;    persuaded    with 
difficulty  to  join  in  Cambridge  Synod, 
171-174;    its  members  in  legislature 
disapprove    the    Platform,    187 
advice  regarding   Baptism,   251,  255; 
guarded  approval  of  Synod  of  1679, 
416. 
Boston  Council  of  1865  (see  also  Burial 
Hill    Declaration,   and    Statement   of 
Principles),  steps  leading  to,  553-555; 


537 


preliminary  committees  on  Decl.  of 
Faith  and  Statement  of  Polity,  555; 
meeting  and  officers  of  Council,  555, 
556  ;  discussions  leading  to  Burial 
Hill  Declaration,  556-565;  text  of 
Decl.,  562-564;  discussions  leading 
to  Statement  of  Polity,  565-56S;  text 
of  Statement,  567;  a  large  com.  on  a 
Platform  appointed,  568,  569;  its 
work,  569. 

Boston  fires,  1676,  1679,  412- 

Boston  Platform,  569,  578. 

Boston  Synod,  of  1662  (see  Synod  of 
1662). 

Boston,  Winthrop's  company  arrives, 
125,  129- 

Bradford,  Gov.  William,  Mayflower 
compact,  88;  Gott's  letter  to  him,  103; 
at  Salem,  105;  letter  of  Winslow  and 
Fuller  to,  126;  defeats  Vassall's  peti- 
tion, 164;  at  Cambridge  Synod,  1S2. 

Bradstreet,  Gov.  Simon,  Synod  of  1679, 
417. 

Bradstreet,  Rev.  Simon,  Brattle  Church 
quarrel,  476,  478. 

Braintree  church,  consulted  regarding 
the  Half- Way  Covenant,  255. 

Brand,  Rev.  James,  steps  toward  the 
Creed  of  1883,  57S. 

Brattle  Church,  Boston,  story  of,  472- 
477- 

Brattle,  Thomas,  liberal  views,  472  ; 
changes  desired,  474  ;  founding  of 
Brattle  Ch.,  476;  denounced  by  the 
Mathers,  479. 

Brattle,  Rev.  William,  liberal  views,  472; 
Brattle  Ch.,  476,  478. 

Brewster,  William,  biog.  note,  84 ; 
Scrooby  ch.  meets  in  his  house,  83; 
chosen  ruling  elder,  84  ;  partially 
Erastian,  86,  90,  91;  part  of  Leyden 
ch.  emigrates  to  Plymouth  under  his 
lead,  87;  letter  to,  126;  views  on  in- 
fant-membership, 246. 

Bridge,  Rev.  William,  quoted,  310;  in 
Westminster  Assembly,  137,  342  ; 
the  "  Apol.  Nar.",  343;  "  Remon- 
strance," 344;  declines  chaplaincy  of 
Council  of  State,  345;  letter  to,  347; 
letter  of,  34S;  at  Savoy  Synod,  349.    # 

Bright,  Rev.  Francis,  sent  as  minister 
to  Salem,  102. 

Bristol,  A.  G.,  538. 

Brockway,  Hon.  J.  H.,  569. 

Browne,  Rev.  Edmund,  invited  to  a 
"Synod"  at  Hartford,  1666,  273. 

Browne,  Robert,  biog.  sketch,  8;  birth 
and  education,  8;  under  Puritan  influ- 
ences, S;  progress  from  Puritanism  to 
Congregationalism,  9;  reasons  for  the 
change,  9,  10,  12;  organizes  a  church, 
10;  emigrates  with  church  to  Middel- 


burg,  11;  his  publications,  11;  his 
break-down,  12  ;  theory  of  relations 
of  church  and  state,  12,  13;  his  sys- 
tem, 13-15;  how  far  due  to  Anabap- 
tist influence,  15-17;  his  originality, 
17;  a  democrat  in  church  and  state, 
14,  15;  selections  from  his  writings, 
18-27. 

Brovvnism,  more  democratic  than  Bar- 
rowism,  14,  15,  32. 

Buck,  Daniel,  116. 

Buckingham,  Rev.  Stephen,  509. 

Buckingham,  Rev.  Thos.,  foundation  of 
Vale,  497  ;  creed  proposition,  4gS  ; 
moderator  of  Saybrook  Synod,  502. 

Buckingham,  Gov.  W.  A.,  moderator 
Council  of  1865,  556. 

Buddington,  Rev.  W.  I.,  at  Oberlin 
Council,  572;  paper  on  Unity  of  the 
Church,  574. 

Bulkeley,  Rev.  Edward,  petition  for 
Synod,  1679,413;  duties  at  Synod, 418. 

Bulkeley,  Rev.  Peter,  at  Synod  of  1637, 
133;  Assembly  of  1657,  258. 

Bulkley,  Rev.  Gershom.of  Wethersfield, 
favors  "  Assembly"  of  1667,  276;  ap- 
pointed by  Conn.  Court  to  settle  Half- 
Way  quarrel,  276. 

Burgess,  Rev.  Anthony,  Cong,  in  West. 
Assembly,  342. 

Burghley,  Lord,  aids  Browne,  8,  12. 

Burial,  ministers  not  to  bury,  "Points 
of  Difference,"  1603,  79;  early  N.  E. 
usage,  79. 

Burial  Hill  Declaration,  text,  562-564; 
literature,  553;  steps  leading  to  Coun- 
cil of  1865,  553-555;  preliminary  com. 
on.  555  1  report  of  com.,  556— 55S ; 
new  com.  appointed,  558,  559;  its  re- 
port and  "Calvinism"  clause,  559; 
debate,  559,  560;  the  Council  at  Burial 
Hill,  560,  561;  Mr.  Quint  presents  a 
modified  Declaration,  561;  the  Burial 
Hill  Declaration  adopted,  562  ;  char- 
acter, 564,  565;  limitations,  565,  577. 

Burr,  Rev.  E.  F.,  566. 

Burrage,  Henry  S.,  paper  on  the  Ana- 
baptists, 2,  4. 

Burroughes,  Rev.  Jeremiah,  Cong,  in 
West.  Assembly,  137,  342-344;  quo- 
ted at  Boston,  172  ;  use  of  Lord's 
Prayer,  474. 

Burt,  Rev.  David,  569. 

Burton,  Thomas,  attempts  to  alter  ch. 
and  state  in  Mass.,  164-1S1. 

/"*ALVIN,    views   on   church    polity, 

Cambridge,  Hooker's  company  settle  at, 
150;   emigration   from,    152. 

Cambridge,  Ministerial  Convention  at, 
1643,  138;  Convention  of  1645,   141. 


588 


Cambridge,  Ministerial  Association,  470- 
472  ;  sends  out  Convention  letter  of 
1704,  4S4,  485  ;  sends  out  Proposals 
of  1705,  490. 

Cambridge  Platform,  text,  193-237  ; 
editions,  157,  158  ;  literature,  158, 
159;  members  appointed  to  draft 
tentative  platforms,  175;  the  Platform 
adopted,  184;  its  preface,  184,  185; 
its  character,  185,  186;  points  of  criti- 
cism, 188  ;  approved  by  Synod  of 
1679,  418,  425. 

Cambridge  Synod,  causes  leading  to; 
Presbyterian  dominance  in  Eng., 
159;  unrest  in  ch.  and  state  in  N.  E. 
160;  at  Ilingham,  160-163;  Yassall's 
efforts  for  toleration,  163,  164  ;  at- 
tempts of  Child  and  his  friends,  164- 

166,  168,  171,  176-181  ;  serious 
grievances  regarding  baptism  and  ch. 
membership,  165 ;  these  difficulties 
lead  to  call  of  Synod  by  Mass.  Court, 

167,  168  ;  text  of  call,  168-171  ;  pur- 
pose of  Court,  171  ;  churches  of  other 
colonies  summoned,  170;  expenses, 
how  met,  170  ;  four  churches  unrep- 
resented, 171 ;  reluctance  of  Boston 
church,  its  reasons,  171,  172  ;  scruples 
overcome,  172-174  ;  first  session  of 
Synod,  1646,  173  ;  churches  in  possi- 
ble attendance,  174;  report  on  powers 
of  magistrates,  175  ;  appointments  to 
draft  a  Platform,  175  ;  first  session 
adjourns,  175  ;  downfall  of  Presby- 
terianism  in  Eng.,  relieves  most  press- 
ing questions,  1 75-1 8 1  ;  effect  on 
work  of  Synod,  1S1  ;  brief  second  ses- 
sion, 1647,  attendance,  sermon,  ad- 
journment, 182  ;  directed  by  Mass. 
Court  to  prepare  Confession  of  Faith, 
182,  183  ;  the  creed  commission,  183  ; 
final  session,  183-185  ;  Allin  preaches 
and  Tompson  kills  a  snake,  1S3,  184  ; 
Platform  adopted,  184  ;  its  Preface, 
184,  185  ;  doctrinal  parts  of  West. 
Confession  adopted,  185,  194,  195  ; 
adjournment,    185  ;  results,   185-188. 

Campbell,  Douglas,  claims  for  Dutch 
Anabaptist  influence  on  early  Cong., 
7.  15-17- 

Canons,  issued  against  Puritans  and 
Separatists  by  Convocation  of  Canter- 
bury, 1603,  76,  77. 

Cape  Ann,  settled,  100. 

Carpenter,  Hon.  Elisha,  572. 

Carpenter,  Dea.  Philo,  556. 

Carter,  Rev.  William,  Cong,  in  West. 
Assembly,  137,  342. 

Cartwright,  Thomas,  Puritan  influence 
at  Cambridge,  8  ;  quoted,  56. 

Carver,  John,  deacon,  agent  of  Leyden 
ch.  in  London,  85. 


Caryl,  Rev.  Joseph,  Cong,  in  West. 
Assembly,  342  ;  beneficed  under  Com- 
monwealth, 345  ;  at  Savoy  Synod,  349. 

Chamberlain,  Hon.  Mellen,  153. 

Chapin,  Rev.  A.  L.,  steps  toward  the 
Creed  of  1883,  578,  579. 

Chapman,  Robert,  502. 

Charles  II.,  orders  Mass.  to  allow  the 
use  of  the  Prayer  Book,  271  ;  sends 
Commissioners  to  New  England,  271. 

Charlestown  church,  covenant  of  1632, 
116;  organized,  130. 

Chauncy,  Pres.  Charles,  biog.  note,  266; 
opposes  Half- Way  Covenant  views  at 
Camb.  Synod,  181,  253  ;  at  Assembly 
of  1657,  258  ;  leader  of  opposition  to 
majority  in  and  after  Synod  of  1662, 
265-269  ;    inconsistent  position,   26S. 

Chauncy,  Rev.  Charles,  of  Strattield,  at 
Saybrook  Synod,  502  ;  reception  of 
Platform,  509,  510. 

Chauncy,  Rev.  Charles,  of  Boston,  ad- 
vocates Stoddardeanism,  282. 

Chauncy,  Rev.  Isaac,  instrumental  in 
collapse  of  Union  based  on  Heads  of 
Agreement,  451,  452. 

Chauncy,  Rev.  Israel,  foundation  of  Vale, 
497- 

Cheever,  Rev.  Samuel,  petition  for 
Synod,  1679,  413  ;  conservative,  407  ; 
signs  Proposals  of  1705,  490. 

Child,  Dr.  Robt.,  attempt  to  alter  state 
and  ch.  in  Mass.,  164-166,  [68,  171. 
176-181,  247  ;  his  petition,  164,  165  ; 
real  grievances,  165  ;  threatens  appeal 
to  Parliament,  165  ;  Court  lays  petition 
on  table,  166;  further  steps,  176; 
arrested  and  fined,  178  ;  in  England, 
179  ;  completely  defeated,  1S1. 

Children,  Baptized,  under  what  church- 
discipline,  293,  294. 

Christ,  Headship  of,  Browne's  views,  13, 
14,  20,  21;  Conf.  of  1589,  38; 
Cambridge  Platform,  217  ;  Savoy  Dec- 
laration, 403;  English  Decl.,  551; 
Prin.  of  1865,  567;  Creed  of  1883, 
53i. 

Person    and    work    of,     Conf.    of 
1596,  61-63  ;  Salem  Direction,  1665, 

%  120;  Windsor  creed,  155;  Savoy* 
Decl.,  375-377  ;  English  Decl.,  1833, 
549.  55°  ;  Burial  Hill  Decl.,  563,  564; 
Creed  of  1883,  580,  581. 

Church,  autonomous,  Conf.  of  1596,  66  ; 
"  Points  of  Differences,"  78  ;  I  looker's 
principles,  144;  Windsor  creed,  155; 
Cambridge  Platform,  204-20.-  ;  Savoj 
Decl.,  403,  404;  Heads  of  Agree- 
ment, 447,  457,  458;  English  Decl., 
551,  552;  Principles  of  1865,  568; 
Creed  of  1883,  581. 

Based  on  Covenant  (see  Covenant). 


5§9 


Communion  of  (see  Communion  of 
Chhs.). 

Discipline  of  (see  Discipline). 
Jacob's  definition  of,  78. 
Membership  of,  theories  of  Prot.  re- 
formers, 3  ;  of  Puritans,  3  ;  the  Ana- 
baptist, 3-5  ;  Browne  asserts  regener- 
ate membership,  13,  IS  ;  also  liarrowe 
and  the  London  ch.,  33  ;  Conf.  of 
1596,  64,  71  ;  "  Points  of  Difference," 
7S  ;  doctrinal  tests  in  early  N.  E., 
106,  107,  165  ;  "relations,"  107,473, 
47S  ;  votes  of  ch.  necessary  in  admis- 
sion, 13S  ;  "visible  saints"  only  fit 
members,  143  ;  serious  grievances  re- 
garding membership  lead  to  call  of 
Cambridge  Synod,  165,  167-171,  177; 
views  of  Camb.  Platform,  205-207, 
221-224;  twofold  theory  of  early  X. 
E.  regarding  membership  gives  rise  to 
Half-Way  Covenant,  246,  347  (see 
Half-Way  Covenant);  viewsof  Assem- 
bly of  1657,  29S,  299  ;  Savoy  Decl., 
404;  Heads  of  Agreement,  457  ;  Eng- 
lish Decl.,  1833,  551,  552;  Creed  of 
1883,  581. 

Officers  of,  choice  and  duties, 
among  Anabaptists,  5  ;  Browne's 
views,  13,  14,25;  Conf.  of  1589,  34-38; 
Cong,  of  1596,  65,  66,  69,  70;  "Points 
of  Difference,"  78,  79;  Cambridge 
Platform,  210-220  ;  Savoy  Decl.,  404; 
English  Decl.,  1833,  551  ;  Creed  of 
1883,  581  ;  not  essential  to  existence  of 
ch.,  143  ;  power  in  early  N.  E.,  135. 
Powers  of,  Cambridge  Platform, 
217-220. 

Church  of  England,  why  criticised  by 
early  Cong.,  12,  13,  45-47-  50-58,  67- 
69,  77-80  ;  salvation  within  it  held 
doubtful,  69  ;  how  reformable,  13,  69- 
71,  138  ;  Separatists  desire  civil  autho- 
rities to  end  it,  47,  69,  71,  80  ;  Eras- 
tian  under  Elizabeth,  77  ;  growth  in 
it  of  jure  divino  Episcopal  theories, 
78,  98  ;  doctrinal  Articles  of  approved 
by  Cong.,  89,  462. 

Churches,  list  of  those  in  N.  E.  in  1646, 
174- 

Civil  Officers,  see  Magistrates. 

Clap,  Capt.  Roger,  account  of  origin  of 
Dorchester-Windsor  ch.,  149,  150. 

Clapham,  Henoch,  works  quoted,  28. 

Clark,  Rev.  J.  S.,  491. 

Clark,  Rev.  Thomas,  petition  for  Synod, 
1679,  413. 

Clyfton,  Richard,  minister  of  the  Scrooby 
ch.,  S3;  remains  at  Amsterdam,  83,  84. 

Cobbett,  Rev.  Thomas,  256  ;  appointed 
to  prepare  creed,  183  ;  Assembly  of 
1657,  258  ;  labors  at  Synod  of  1679, 
413,  417,  418. 


Coddington,  William,  126. 

Coe,  Rev.  D.  B.,  on  creed-commission, 

579- 

Coleman,  Rev.  Thomas,  Erastian  in 
West.  Assembly,  342. 

Collins,  Rev.  Nath.,  Middletown, 
preaches,  Synod  of  1679,  418. 

Colman,  Rev.  Benj.,  call  to  Brattle  Ch., 
476,  477  ;  controversy  with  the 
Mathers,  478,  479  ;  declines  pres.  of 
Harvard,  482  ;  becomes  a  conservative, 
4S3  ;  circular  letter,  484. 

Commission  Creed  of  1S83,  text,  580- 
582  ;  steps  leading  to,  577-579  ;  the 
Commission,  579;  character,  582. 

Commissioners  for  Plantations,  order  for 
toleration,  172  ;  receive  Gorton's  Com- 
plaint, 176,  179  ;  change  of  face,  180, 
181. 

Commissioners,  royal,  sent  to  X.  E., 
1664,  271. 

Commissioners  of  the  United  Colonies, 
vote  regarding  future  call  of  Synods, 
275- 

Communion  of  Churches,  early  N.  E. 
opinions,  310,  311  ;  Cambridge  Plat- 
form, 229-233  ;  discussed  and  recom- 
mended at  Synod  of  1662,  264,  268, 
337-339;  Savoy  Decl.,  408;  Heads 
of  Agreement,  460;  English  Deck, 
l833,  552  ;  Principles  of  1865,  568  ; 
Oberlin  Deck,  575. 

Conant,  Roger,  Puritan  founder  of  Salem, 
100. 

Concord,  church  unrepresented  at  Cam- 
bridge Synod,  171. 

Conferences,  regular  meetings  recom- 
mended by  Convention  of  1643,  138  ; 
modern  nature  of,  515. 

Confession  of  1589,  text,  33-40;  author- 
ship, 29;  character,  30-32. 

Confession  of  1596,  text,  49-74  ;  com- 
position and  authors,  43,  44;  spirit  of 
preface,  44;  character  of  the  confes- 
sion, 44-4S  ;  translation  into  Latin, 
48;  sent  to  James  I.  at  his  acces- 
sion,   1603,   76. 

Confession  of  1680,  text  (Savoy  Con- 
fession), 367-402;  preface,  438,  439; 
causes  leading  to,  410-420  ;  when 
and  how  adopted,  421;  how  used,  409, 
422;  recommended  in  Conn.,  1703, 
498;  adopted,  1708,  500,  502,  518; 
approved  in  Burial  Hill  Deck,  562, 
565,  577- 

Confessions  of  Faith,  in  church  admis- 
sions, Camb.  Platform,  223;  object  of, 
354- 

Congregationalism,  a  logical  outcome  of 
the  Reformation,  1;  origin  often  placed 
in  1567,  7,  8;  possible  relationship  to 
Anabaptist      movements,     7,     15-17  ; 


590 


jure  divino  at  first,  33,  35,  61,  65; 
church  organized  at  Norwich,  1580, 
10;  spread  of  Cong,  to  London  and 
other  towns,  29,  49;  simplicity  of 
early  covenants,  106,  116;  severe  doc- 
trinal tests,  106,  107;  errors  lead  to 
more  elaborate  statements,  107-115; 
N.  E.  Congregationalism  chiefly  Pur- 
itan, but  moulded  in  polity  by  Sepa- 
ratist Plymouth,  102,  103,  126-131, 
134;  English  Puritans  suspicious,  134, 
135;  N.  E.  Cong,  defended  by  Daven- 
port and  Mather,  134,  135;  N.  E. 
Cong.  Barrowist,  135,  136;  not  Pres- 
byterian, 136;  Ministerial  Convention, 
Cambridge,  1643,  disapproves  of 
Presb.,  137-139;  Cong,  criticised  by 
Rutherford  and  other  Presbyterians, 
139;  defended  by  Hooker,  140-142; 
Hooker's  exposition,  142-148;  an  ad- 
vance, 142  ;  Cong,  not  universally 
popular  in  early  N.  E.,  137-139.  T59~ 
166;  points  criticised,  165;  N.  E. 
Cong,  in  becoming  dominant  neces- 
sarily becomes  conservative,  166,  167; 
Cambridge  Platform  a  jure  divino 
system,  203;  many  features  discussed 
in   Connecticut,    1667,   274. 

Why  unwilling  to  present  a  definite 
form  at  West.  Assembly,  344;  powerful 
under  the  Commonwealth,  345;  differed 
radically  from  Presb.  on  question  of 
state  ch.,  441. 

Decentralized  in  XVIII  Cent.,  525; 
English  Cong,  in  XVIII  Cent.,  542- 
544  ;  Council  of  1865  essentially 
Calvinist,  560,  561;  merits  of  Cong., 
Burial  Hill  Decl.,  563  !  Princi- 
ples of  1865,  567;  Cong,  pure  democ- 
racy, 568,  583;  welcomes Arminianism, 
1 87 1,  576;  conclusions  from  Cong. 
history,  582-584. 

Congregational  martyrs,  see  Martyrs. 

Congregation  Union,  of  England  and 
Wales,  formed,  544,  545;  adopts  Dec- 
laration, 545,  546  ;  of  Scotland, 
founded,  543,  544. 

Congregationalists,  beneficed  under 
the  Commonwealth,  345. 

Connecticut,  unrest  in  Mass.  leads  to 
settlement  of,  151,  152;  did  first  set- 
tlers go  as  organized  towns?  152,  153; 
Conn,  always  individual,   153. 

Connecticut  Court,  petitioned  for  larger 
baptism,  action  thereon,  257  ;  over- 
tures Mass.  Court,  258,  288;  sends 
ministers  to  Assembly  of  1657, 
259  ;  lays  result  of  Assembly 
before  the  churches,  262  ;  limits 
the  franchise,  1657,  263  ;  petitioned 
by  Pitkin  and  others  for  larger  church 
privileges,  1664,  271,  272;  favors  large 


Half- Way  practice,  272  ;  calls  a 
"Synod"  for  1667,  273;  questions 
proposed  for  solution,  274;  changes 
title  to  "Assembly";  asks  Mass. 
Court  to  call  a  Council  of  all  the  col- 
onies, 276;  appoints  a  committee  to 
compromise  the  Half- Way  dispute, 
276  ;  the  dispute  ended,  277  ;  the 
Hartford  church  allowed  to  divide, 
277;  calls  Saybrook  Synod,  499,  500; 
approves  the  Platform,  507,  578  ; 
toleration  to  dissenters,  507. 

Connecticut  Evangelical  Magazine,  528. 

Connecticut  Ceneral  Association  estab- 
lished, 505  ;  Presb.  feeling,  526  ; 
missionary     enterprises     undertaken, 

527  ;    Conn.    Miss.    Soc.    established, 

528  ;  interchange  of  represen- 
tatives with  Presb.  Genl.  Assembly, 
528;  cooperation  with  Presb.  in  miss, 
enterprises,   529-538. 

Connecticut  Missionary  Society,  estab- 
lished, 528;  relations  to  Plan  of  Union, 
530;  report  on  abrogation  of  Plan,  538. 

Conscience,  liberty  of,  what  was  meant 
by,  1646,  190;  in  Savoy  Decl.,  388. 

Consociation  (see  also  Conference,  and 
Communion  of  Chhs.),  word  not 
originally  technical,  138,  142,  147; 
planned  for  Mass.,  Proposals  of  1705, 
4SS,  489;  established  in  Conn.,  503- 
505,  508,  509,  512;  still  existing,  515. 

Convention,  Albany  (see  Albany  Con- 
vention). 

Annual  Ministerial,  in  Mass.,  his- 
tory, 467-469;  vote  aimed  at  Brattle 
ch.,  479;  circular  letter,  483,  484;  ap- 
proves Proposals  of  1 705,  490,  491. 

Ministerial,    of     1643,    cause    and 
labors,  137-139;  not  a  Synod,  137. 
Ministerial,  of  1645,  141. 
Ministerial,  of  1657,  257-261,  28S- 
300. 

Of  Cong.  Churches  of  Northwest, 
554- 

Cooke,  Rev.  Parsons,  158. 

Cooke,  Rev.  Samuel,  510. 

Cooley,  Rev.  Timothy,  158. 

Coppin,  John,  Cong,  martyr,  II,  52. 

Cordley,  Rev.  Richard,  569,  579. 

Cotton,  Rev.  John,  biog.  note,  184;  or- 
dination at  Boston,  130;  moderator  at 
Cambridge,  1643,  138;  offered  election 
to  West.  Assembly,  137;  his  "  W  ay  of 
the  Churches,"  and  "  Keyes,"  139, 
140;  urges  Boston  ch.  to  share  in 
Camb.  Synod,  173;  appointed  '  by 
Cambridge  Synod  to  draught  Platform, 
175  ;  writes  the  preface,  184,  1S5  ; 
appointed  to  prepare  a  creed,  183; 
views  on  Baptism  and  Half- Way 
Covenant,    250-254,     305,     306;    on 


59i 


communion  of  chs.,  310;  catechism, 
113;  statement  regarding  Mather's 
"XXXII  Quest.," '135. 

Councils  (see  Synod). 

Standing  (see  Consociation). 
Boston,  1S65  (see   Boston  Council). 
National  (see  National  Council). 

Covenant,  basis  of  church,  Browne's 
views,  1S-20;  "  Points  of  Difference, " 
78 ;  Jacob's  views,  7S;  Hooker's  views, 
143;  Windsor  creed,  155;  Cambridge 
Platform,  207-209;  Heads  of  Agree- 
ment, 457  ;  early  X.  E.  covenants 
simple,  106,  116;  renewal  enjoined, 
Synod  of  1679,  435;  Texts  of,  London 
ch.,  116;  Scrooby  ch.,  83;  Salem  ch., 
116-11S,  121;  Jacob's  ch.,  116;  Bos- 
ton ch.,  131;  Charlestown  ch.,  116; 
Hartford  ch.,  121;  Windsor  ch.,  156. 
Half-Way  (see  Half- Way  Covenant). 
Scotch,  adopted  by  Pari.,  130. 

Covenant,  divine,  doctrine  of,  Savoy 
Declaration,  374,  375;  English  Decl., 
549- 

Cradock,  Matthew,  first  gov.  of  Mass. 
Company,  124. 

Creation,  doctrine  of,  Savoy  Decl.,  372  ; 
Eng.  Decl.,  549;  Creed  of  1883,  580. 

Creed,  the  Commission,  see  Commission 
Creed  of  18S3. 

Creed-commission,  appointed  by  Mass. 
Court,  1647,  183;  of  1883,  579. 

Crisp,  Rev.  Tobias,  commotion  caused 
by  his  writings,  450-452. 

Crocker,  Rev.  Zebulon,  quoted,  532. 

Cromwell,  Oliver,  in  sympathy  with 
Cong.,  137,  343-345;  consents  to  sum- 
mons of  Savoy  Synod,  346  ;  other 
references,  180,  444;  death,  348. 

Cromwell,  Richard,  348,   350,  352,  444. 

Crossman,  Rev.  Sam.,  Savoy  Synod,  348. 

Cullick,  John,  the  Half- Way  Covenant, 
257. 

Cumberland  and  Westmoreland,  Union 
agreement  in,  442;  text,  453,  454. 

Cumming,  Rev.  Alex.,  Boston,  409. 

Currier,  Warren,  569. 

Cushman,  Robt.,  agent  of  Leyden  ch. 
in  London,  85. 

DAND,  John,  attempts  to  alter  ch. 
and  state  in  Mass.,  164-181. 

Danforth,  Rev.  John,  circular  letter  of 
1704,  484;  signs  Proposals  of  1705, 
490. 

Davenport,  Rev.  John,  of  New  Haven, 
answers  "Nine  Positions,"  134;  de- 
clines election  to  West.  Assembly,  137, 
159;  views  on  Baptism,  250;  leads 
New  Haven  in  opposition  to  Assem- 
bly of  1657,  259-261  ;  reports  state  of 
Conn,   chs.,   262;    writes  against  ma- 


jority of  Synod  of  1662,  267,  269  ;  in- 
fluence on  Hugh  Peter,  no  ;  approves 
Hooker's  Principles,  148. 

Davenport,  Rev.  John,  of  Stratford, 
creed  proposition,  1703,  498  ;  at  Say- 
brook  Synod,  502;  reception  of  Plat- 
form, 509. 

Davis,  Rev.  J.  G.,  566. 

Davis,  Hon.  Woodbury,  569. 

Davison,  Wm.,  patron  of  Brewster,  84. 

Deacons,  character  and  duties,  Browne's 
views,  22;  Conf.  of  1589,  36,  37; 
chosen  by  each  church,  "  Points  of 
Difference,"  78  ;  life  office  in  Leyden- 
Plymouth  ch.,  91  ;  duties  of  office, 
Camb.  Platform,  213  ;  concerned  with 
minister's  maintenance,  221  ;  Savoy- 
Declaration,  404,  405  ;  Heads  of 
Agreement,  461;   English  Decl.,  551. 

Declaration,  Savoy  (see  Savoy  Synod). 
Oberlin  (see  Oberlin  Declaration). 
English,  of  1833  (see  English  Decla- 
ration). 

Decrees,  divine,  doctrine  stated  in  Conf. 
of  1596,  59,  60  ;  in  Savoy  Declaration, 
370-372;  English  Decl.,  550;  Creed 
of  1883,  580. 

Dedham  church,  consulted  regarding  the 
Half- Way  Covenant,  255. 

Degrees,  Theological,  denounced,  80. 

Deists,  521. 

Dennen,  Rev.  S.  R.,  steps  leading  to 
Creed  of  1883,  578,  579. 

Dennis,  Wm.,  Cong,  martyr,  52. 

Devotion,  Rev.  Ebenezer,  Scotland, 
Conn.,  advocates  Stoddardeanism,  282. 

Dexter,  Rev.  H.  M.,  scribe  of  Council 
of  1865,  556;  preparations  for  Na- 
tional Council,  570  ;  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 18S0.  579  ;  investigations  regard- 
ing Browne,  8 ;  denies  Browne's  in- 
debtedness to  Anabaptists,  15-17; 
views  on  Salem  symbols,  97  ;  views  on 
Proposals  of  1705,  491  ;  theory  of 
ministerial  standing  similar  to  that  of 
Hooker,  143. 

Discipline,  how  administered,  Conf.  of 
1589,  38-40  ;  lodged  in  the  whole  con- 
gregation, Conf.  of  1596,  66  ;  "  Points 
of  Difference,"  1603,  79,  80;  votes  of 
church  necessary.  Convention  of  1643, 
138  ;  lodged  in  the  church,  Hooker's 
principles,  144,  145  ;  how  adminis- 
tered, Camb.  Platform,  219,  220,  227- 
229;  Savoy  Deck,  406,  407;  Heads 
of  Agreement,  459;  English  Dec!., 
1833.  551,  552. 

Doctrinal  tests,  see  Church-membership. 

Doddridge,  Rev.  Philip,  543. 

Dorchester  (Eng.)  Fishing  Company, 
100. 

Dorchester  (Mass.),   settled,    125,    150 ; 


592  IN] 

Church,  organized,  125,  149;  minis- 
ters of,  125,  149,  150;  part  goes  to 
Windsor,  Conn.,  152,  153;  case  of 
baptism  of  grandchild,  250;  discus- 
sion of  Half-Way  Covenant,  255  ;  ref- 
ormation sought  after  Synod  of  1679, 
420. 

Drury,  Dea.  S.  F.,  556. 

Dudley,  ( lov.  Joseph,  character,  493,  494. 

Dudley,  Gov.  Thomas,  124;  biog.  note, 
128.. 

"  Due  right  of  Presbyteries,"  by  S. 
Rutherford,  139,  140;  answered  by 
Hooker,  140-142. 

Dunster,  l'res.  Henry,  Baptist  views,  169. 

Dutch  emigrants  in  England,  6,  7. 

Dutton,  Rev.  S.  W.  S.,  at  Council  of 
1865,  560. 

Dwinell,  Rev.  I.  E.,  572. 

EAMES,  Lieut.  Anthony,  military  quar- 
rel at  Ilingham,  1645,  1G0-163. 

Eaton,  Gov.  Theophilus,  letter  opposing 
Assembly  of  1657,  260. 

Eddy,  Rev.  Zachary,  567,  579. 

Edwards,  Rev.  Jonathan,  biog.  note,  283; 
practices  Stoddardeanism,  283  ;  theo- 
logic  views  lead  him  to  oppose  Half- 
Way  ( lovenant,  283-285  (see  also  525). 

Edwards,  Rev.  Jona.,  Jr.,  biog.  note, 
529;  influence  in  forming  Plan  of 
Union,  529,  530. 

Edwards,  Rev.  '1  imothy,  508. 

Elders,  Ruling,  character,  appointment, 
and  duties,  Browne's  view  of,  22  ; 
Conf.  of  1589,  36,  37  ;  chosen  by  each 
ch.,  "  Points  of  Difference,"  1603,  78; 
life  office  in  Leyden-PIymouth  ch.,91 ; 
must  be  able  to  teach,  91 ;  duties  of 
the  office,  Camb.  Platform,  212,  213; 
why  early  abandoned,  212;  Savoy 
Declaration,  404;  doubtful  about, 
Heads  of  Agreement,  44S,  460. 

Eldi  idge,  Rev.  Jos.,  on  creed  committee, 
Council  of  1865,  558;  in  debate  on 
Polity,  567. 

Election,  doctrine  of  (see  Decrees). 

Eliot,  Rev.  John,  teaches  school  with 
Hooker,  140;  sermon  before  Cam- 
bridge Synod,  182;  Half-Way  Cove- 
nant views,  254  ;  at  Synod  of  1679, 
413,  417,  418. 

Eliot,  Rev.  Joseph  of  Guilford,  appoint- 
ed by  Conn.  Court  to  consider  Half- 
Way  dispute,  276,  277. 

Elizabeth,  Anabaptist  persecution  under, 
2;  circulation  of  Browne's  books  for- 
bidden, J 1. 

Emerson,  Rev.  Win.,  of  Boston,  123. 

Emerson,  R.  W.,  123. 

Emigration  from  England  to  New  Eng- 
land, extent,  132. 


Emmons,  Rev.  Nathaniel,  of  Franklin, 
opposes  Half-Way  Covenant,  287. 

Endicott,  John,  settles  at  Salem,  1628, 
101;  induced  by  Fuller  to  look  with 
favor  on  the  Plymouth  polity,  102, 
103;  appoints  day  for  choice  ol 
ministers,  103,  104;  aids  Fuller  in 
commending  Plymouth  polity  to  Win- 
throp's  company,  126. 

English  Declaration  of  1833,  text,  54S- 
552;  literature,  542;  steps  leading  to. 
542-545  ;  written  by  Geo.  Redlord, 
545;  adopted  by  Cong.  Union,  545. 
546;  explanatory  letter,  546;  how  far 
now  representative,  547. 

Episcopacy,  efforts  to  introduce  into 
Mass.,  412. 

CAIRCH1LD,   Prof.  J.   H.,  on  creed 

1       com.,  Council   of   1865,  559;  com. 
on  Platform,  568  ;  creed  com 
579- 

1- airfield  County,  Conn.,  interpretation 
of  Saybrook  Platform,  509,  5 10. 

Faith,  doctrine  of,  Savoy  Declaration, 
381;   English  Deck,  550. 

Fall,  doctrine  of,  Savoy  Declaration,  373, 
374;  English  Deck,  549;  Creed  of 
1883,  580. 

Felt,  Rev.  J.  B.,  views  regarding  the 
Salem  symbols,  95,  96. 

Finch,  Asahel,  569. 

Finnin,  Rev.  (dies,  290. 

Fisher,  Capt.  Daniel,  in  Synod  of  1679, 
418,  419. 

Fisher,  Prof.  G.  P.,  prelim,  com.  on 
Deck  of  Faith,  1865,  555-558;  com. 
on  a  Platform,  568;  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 1880. 

Fiske,  Rev.  D.  T.,  at  Oberlin  Council, 
572. 

Fiske,  Rev.  John,  and  Salem  records,  93. 

Fiske,  Rev.  John  O.,  chairman  second 
com.  on  Deck  of  Faith,  1865,  558; 
report,  559. 

Fiske,  Rev.  Moses,  petition  for  Synod, 
1679,  413. 

Fitch,  Rev.  James,  of  Saybrook  and 
Norwich,  approves  Hooker's  Princi- 
ples, 148;  appointed  by  Conn.  Court 
to  settle  Half-Way  dispute,  276,  277. 

Fit/.,  Richard,  church  at  London,  1567,  7. 

Flavel,  Rev.  John,   instrumental  in  pro- 
moting  Union  on   basis   of    I  I 
Agreement,  445,  44O. 

Flynt,  Rev.  Josiah,  petition  for  Synod. 
1679,  413;  on  creed  commit* 

Forbes,  Rev.  fames,  at  Savoy  Synod. 
349- 

Fowle,  Thos.,  attempts  to  alter  ch.  and 
state  in  Mass.,  164-181. 

Foxcroft,  Rev.    Thos.,  of  Boston,  123. 


593 


Franchise,  scanty  bestowal  in  Mass.  and 
Plymouth,  165. 

Freeman,  Rev.  Jona. ,  529. 

Free-Will,  doctrine  of,  Savoy  Declara- 
tion, 377,  378;  creed  of  1883,  580. 

Fuller,  Dr.  Samuel,  dea.  of  Plym.  ch., 
at  Salem,  101;  brings  knowledge  of 
Plymouth  ch.  practices,  101,  102;  in- 
strumental in  making  N.  E.  polity 
Separatist,  102,  126,  127;  ministers  to 
Winthrop's  company,  126;  consulted 
regarding  its  spiritual  necessities,  127; 
letters  to  Bradford,  126,  128;  reports 
Warham's  views  on  ch.  membership, 
150. 

Future  state,  doctrine  of,  Savoy  Decla- 
ration, 400-402;  English  Decl.,  551; 
Creed  of  1883,  582. 

GAGER,  William,  deacon  at  Boston, 
129. 

Gainsborough,  ch.  organized  1602,  82; 
divides,  1606,  83;  part  goes  to  Am- 
sterdam with  Smyth,  83. 

Gale,  Rev.  Nahum,  558. 

Gerrish,  Rev.  Jos.,  conservative,  467; 
circular  letter,  1704,  484;  signs  Pro- 
posals of  1705,  490. 

Gerrits,  Lubbert,  Anabaptist  confession, 
4-6. 

Gifford,  Rev.  George,  Puritan  opponent 
of  Cong.,  54,  57. 

Gilbert,  Rev.  Thos. ,  Savoy  Synod,  348. 

Glover,  Rev.  Pelatiah,  invited  to  a  "  Sy- 
nod "  at  Hartford,  273. 

God,  nature  of,  defined  in  Conf.  of  1596, 
59;  Salem  "Direction,"  1665,  120; 
Savov  Decl.,  370;  English  Deck,  549; 
Burial  Hill  Deck,  563;  Creed  of  1883, 
580. 

Goodell,  Rev.  C.  L.,  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 579. 

Goodwin,  Rev.  E.  P.,  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 579;   does   not  sign   result,  582. 

Goodwin,  Rev.  Thomas,  quoted,  172, 
310;  in  Westminster  Assembly,  137, 
342;  the  "Apok  Nar.,"  343;  "Re- 
monstrance," 344;  pres.  Magdalen 
Coll.,  345;  at  Savoy  Synod,  349;  pre- 
sents "  Declaration  "  to  Richard  Crom- 
well, 350. 

Goodwin.  William,  ruling-elder  at  Hart- 
ford, 141,  257;  removes  to  Hadley,  262. 

Gordon,  Rev.  G.  A.,  of  Boston,  409. 

Gorges,  Sir  Ferd.,  settlements  and  rights 
in  Mass.,  99,  101. 

Gorton,  Samuel,  dispute  with  Mass.  au- 
thorities, 175,  176,  179,  181. 

Gott,  Charles,  letter  to  Bradford  describ- 
ing choice  and  ordination  of  ministers 
at  Salem,  103,  104. 


Green,  Rev.  Jacob,  of  Hanover,  opposes 
Half-Way  Covenant,  286. 

Green,  Samuel,  printer  of  Camb.  Plat- 
form, 193. 

Green,  Rev.  William,  Cong,  in  West. 
Assembly,  342. 

Greene,  John,  contest  with  Mass.  author- 
ities, 175-181. 

Greenham,  Rev.  Richard,  Puritan  friend 
and  teacher  of  Browne,  9. 

Greenhill,  Rev.  William,  Cong,  in  West. 
Assembly,  137,  342;  at  Savoy  Synod, 

349- 

Greenwood,  John,  biog.  note,  30;  con- 
nection with  the  confession  of  1589, 
29;  teacher  of  London  ch.,  29;  mar- 
tyrdom, 30,  41,  49,  52. 

Griffith,  Rev.  Geo.,  summons  of  Savoy 
Synod,  347;  scribe  of  Savoy  Synod, 
349;  in  discussion  between  Presb.  and 
Cong.,  451. 

Guernsey,  Rev.  Jesse,  566. 

Gulliver,  Rev.  J.  P.,  chairman  com.  on 
Polity,  Council  of  1865,  566;  in  de- 
bate, 567;  com.  on  a  Platform,  568. 

HADLEY,  Mass.,  settled,  262. 
Hale,  Rev.  John,  petition  for  Sy- 
nod, 1679,  413. 
Half- Way  Covenant,  general  discussion 
of,  238-339;  literature  of  controversy, 
238-244;  extracts  from  Result  of  1657, 
288-300  ;  Result  of  1662,  301-339  ; 
question  religious,  not  political,  244, 
245,  256;  grew  out  of  state  of  N.  E. 
society  and  inconsistent  theories  of  ch 
membership,  244-247;  severe  experi 
ential  tests  natural  to  first  N.  E.  gen- 
eration, 245 ;  unnatural  to  second,  247, 
yet  second  generation  ch.  members, 
246;  what  should  be  done  with  their 
children,  two  possible  radical  solutions, 
247-249;  the  out-come  a  compromise, 
249,  250;  why  evil,  250.  Progress  of 
thought,  views  of  N.  E.  divines,  250- 
254>  y?>S-'i~K>\  baptism  of  grandchil- 
dren, 250,  251;  a  main  question  at  the 
Cambridge  Synod,  but  left  unsolved, 
168-171,  181,  252;  ministers  more 
favorable  than  laymen,  254;  agitated 
as  a  practical  issue  at  Salem,  Dorches- 
ter, and  Ipswich,  255,  256;  first  prac- 
ticed at  Ipswich,  256;  debated  in  Con- 
necticut, 256-259;  movement  did  not 
begin  in  Hartford,  256,  257;  petitions 
to  Legislature  and  action  thereon,  257; 
call  of  a  Ministerial  Assembly  by  Mass. 
Court,  258;  action  of  several  colonies, 
259-261;  meeting  and  work  (1657), 
261;  extracts  from  result,  288-300; 
Windsor  church  begins  practice,  262; 


594 


INDEX 


Trumbull's  error,  262.  Question  still 
unsettled,  262,  263;  Mass.  Court  calls 
a  Synod,  263,  264;  sessions  and  work, 
265-26S;  Half-Way  view  adopted, 267, 
26S;  division  of  sentiment  in  Mass., 
270;  continued  agitation  in  Conn., 
270-277;  Court  favors  Half-Way  prac- 
tice, 272;  protests  and  divisions,  272, 
273;  Conn.  Court  tries  to  secure  peace, 
273-27S;  dispute  ends  in  toleration, 
277,  278.  Later  history  of  usage,  278- 
287;  lowering  of  Half- Way  ideals  and 
cheapening  of  ordinance,  278,  279, 
(see  also  Stoddardeanism);  the  "  Great 
Awakening  "  introduces  a  type  of  the- 
ology inconsistent  with  Half- Way  prin- 
ciples, 284;  Edwards  and  his  followers 
effect  its  downfall,  284-287;  its  last 
trace,  287;  form  at  Hartford  ch.,  121. 

Hammond,  C.  G.,  556. 

Hampton  Court  conference,  76. 

Hanford,  Rev.  Thomas,  of  Norwalk,  op- 
poses Half- Way  Covenant,  272. 

Harris,  Prof.  Samuel,  559,  566,  568. 

Harrison,  Robt.  .associated  with  Browne, 
10,  11. 

Hart,  Rev.  John,  512. 

Hart,  Rev.  J.  C,  558. 

Hart,  Rev.  Levi,  529. 

Hartford,  unrest  of  Hooker's  company 
at  Newtown  (Cambridge),  151;  settle- 
ment of  Hartford,  152;  Dutch  claims, 
152;  attempted  "Synod''  at,  1667, 
273-276. 

Hartford  First  Church,  company  settles 
at  Mt.  Wollaston,  150;  then  at  New- 
town (Cambridge),  150;  Hooker  and 
Stone,  pastor  and  teacher,  150;  John 
Haynes,  chief  layman,  151;  unrest  at 
Newtown,  causes,  151;  transferred  to 
Hartford,  152,  153;  quarrel  in  Stone's 
day  (1653-9)  n°t  due  to  Half-Way 
Covenant,  256,  257;  begins  Half-Way 
practice,  262,  turmoiled  on  baptismal 
question,  272,  273;  permitted  by  Leg- 
islature to  divide,  277;  form  of'  Half- 
Way  Covenant,  1696,  121. 

Hartford  Second  Church,  formed,  277. 

Harvard  College,  relations  of  the  Math- 
ers to,  480-483. 

Haven,  Prof.  Joseph,  559. 

Hayden,  Dea.  Jabez  IL,  baptized  under 
Half- Way  Covenant,  287. 

Haynes,  John,  gov.  of  Mass.,  151;  most 
prominent  layman  in  company  which 
settled  Hartford,  151. 

Haynes,  John,  the  younger,  at  Saybrook 
Synod,  1708,  502. 

Haynes,  Rev.  Joseph,  champions  Half- 
way Covenant  at  Hartford,  272; 
favors  "  Assembly"  of  1667,  276. 

Heads  of  Agreement,  text,  455-462;  lit- 


erature, 440,  441;  union  efforts  under 
the  Commonwealth,  442;  renewed  at- 
tempts after  Restoration,  443;  leaders 
in  union,  444-446;  educational  fund 
established,  445;  Union  formed,  446; 
spread  in  England,  446. 

The  "Heads"  essentially  Congre- 
gational, 446-44S;  C.  Mather  declares 
them  an  adequate  New  England  sym- 
bol, 448;  adopted  in  Conn.  1708,  441. 
501-503;  their  disuse  and  collapse  of 
the  Union  in  England,  449-452. 

Helme,  Rev.  Cam.,  Savoy  Synod,  348. 

Helpers,  church-officers, '"  Points  of 
Difference,"  79  (see  Deacons). 

Hemmenway,  Rev.  Moses,  of  Wells, 
advocates  Stoddardeanism,  2S2,  2S7. 

Higginson,  Rev.  Francis,  biog.  note, 
102;  sent  as  minister  to  Salem,  102; 
not  a  Separatist,  98;  chosen  teacher, 
103,  104;  views  on  infant-member- 
ship, 246;  death,  108. 

Higginson,  Rev.  John,  biog.  sketch, 
112;  settlement  at  Salem,  112;  anti- 
Quaker  declaration,  113;  advocates 
1  lall-Way  Covenant,  113;  his  "  1  )irec- 
tion,"  of  1665,  114;  approves  Hook- 
er's Principles,  148;  at  Synod  of  1662, 
265;  at  Synod  of  1679,  4r3.  4'S,  419; 
a  conservative,  467;  opposes  the  Brat- 
tles, 477. 

Hingham,  quarrel  over  military  election 
at,  1645,  160-163;  church  unrepre- 
sented in  Camb.  Synod,  171. 

Hobart,  Rev.  L.  S.,'571. 

Hobart,  Rev.  Noah,  quoted,  501. 

Hobart,  Rev.  Peter,  of  Hingham,  Presb 
views,  160;  the  Hingham  dispute,  160- 
163;  his  criticisms  of  the  government, 
162;  fined,  162. 

Iloit,  Dea.  Samuel,  502,  509. 

Holden,  Randall,  contest  with  Mass.  au- 
thorities, 175-181. 

Holmes,  Dea.  Samuel,  scribe  of  Council 
of  1865,  556;  preparations  for  per- 
manent National  Council,  570-572. 

Holton,  Hon.  E.  1).,  571. 

Hooke,  Rev.  William,  New  Haven,  ap- 
proves Hooker's  Principles,  148;  Crom- 
well's chaplain,  345. 

Hooker,  Richard,  views  regarding  Epis- 
copacy, 78. 

Hooker,  Rev.  Samuel,  brings  the  Conn. 
"Assembly"  of  1667  to  an  end,  275. 

Hooker,  Rev.  Thomas,  biog.  note,  140; 
influence  on  John  Higginson,  102, 
112;  on  Hugh  Peter,  1 10;  at  New- 
town (Cambridge),  150;  his  church, 
151;  emigration  to  Hartford,  152;  de- 
clines an  election  to  West.  A 
137,  140,  159;  moderator  of  Synod  of 
1637,  133;  of  Ministerial  Convention 


595 


of  1643,  13S;  reply  to  Rutherford  (the 
"Survey"),  140-142;  extracts  from, 
143-148;  his  Congregationalism,  142- 
148;  not  a  Consociationist,  142,  147; 
views  on  ministerial  standing,  142;  on 
Baptism,  250,  251;  quoted  by  writers 
of  preface  to  Result  of  Synod  of  1662, 
307,  310;  a  democrat,  151;  death,  182. 

Hopkins,  Pres.  Mark,  569. 

Howard,  Gen.  O.  O.,  Oberlin  Council, 
572. 

Howard,  Rev.  R.  L.,  571. 

Howe,  Rev.  John,  Cromwell's  chaplain, 
345;  his  type  of  Dissent,  444;  instru- 
mental in  effecting  Union  on  basis  of 
Heads  of  Agreement,  444,  446,  452. 

Hoyt,  Rev.  James  S. ,  566,  569. 

Hubbard,  Rev.  William,  conservative 
position,  467. 

Hughes,  Rev.  Wm.,  Savoy  Synod,  348. 

Humphrey,  Rev.  Heman,  158. 

Hurd,  Rev.  Philo  R.,  556,  571. 

Hutchinson,  Mrs.  Anne,  the  "Antino- 
mian"  dispute,  108,  133;  banished, 
134- 

Hyde,  Prof.  J.  T.,on  creed-commission, 
579- 

Hyde,  Rev.  N.  A.,  on  "Boston  Plat- 
form "  committee,  569;  steps  leading 
to  Creed  of  1883,  578,  579. 

INTEMPERANCE,     lamented      and 

I     remedies  proposed,   Synod  of  1679, 

43o,  435- 
Ipswich  church,  first  to  practice  Half- 
Way  Covenant,  256. 


JACOB,  Henry,  definition  of  a  church, 
78;  covenant  of  his  ch. ,  116. 

James  I.,  Anabaptist  persecution  under, 
2;  hopes  at  his  accession,  75-77;  op- 
poses request  of  Leyden  ch.  for  a 
charter,  86;  gives  slight  verbal  encour- 
agement, 87. 

James,  Rev.  J.  A.,  English  Declaration 
of  1833,  545. 

Johnson,  Francis,  biog.  sketch,  41;  pas- 
tor London  ch. ,  29,  41 ;  imprisonment, 
42;  share  in  the  Confession  of  1596, 
43,44;  share  in  "Points  of  Differ- 
ence," 1603,  76. 

Johnson,  Isaac,  biog.  note,  128;  instru- 
mental in  forming  Boston  ch.,  126- 
128. 

Johnson,  Rev.  J.  G.,  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 579. 

Johnston,  Prof.  Alexander,  views  on  set- 
tlement of  Conn.,  153;  in  error  re- 
garding Half- Way  Covenant,  256. 

Jollie,  Rev.  Thomas,  possible  suggestion 
of  Synod  of  1679,  4J3- 


Jones,  Rev.  John,  of  Fairfield,  approves 
Hooker's  Principles,  148. 

Junius,  Prof.  Francis,  of  Leyden,  41. 

Justification,  doctrine  of,  Savoy  Decla- 
ration, 378,  379;  Creed  of  1883,  581. 

KARR,  Prof.  W.  S. ,  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 579;  dissents  from  result,  582. 
Kearnie,  James  L.,  571. 
Keller,  Ludwig,  theory  regarding  origin 

of  Anabaptists,  2. 
"  Reyes  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,"  by 
Cotton,  140. 

LABAREE,  Rev.  Benjamin,  Business 
Com.  Council  of  1865,  556;  Com. 
on  Platform,  569. 
Ladd,  Prof.  G.  T.,  on  creed-commission, 

579- 

Lathrop,  Rev.  Joseph,  West  Springfield, 
advocates  Stoddardeanism,  282,  287. 

Laud,  Wm. ,  archbishop,  effect  of  his 
elevation  on  Puritans,  98. 

Law  and  Gospel,  doctrines  of,  Savoy 
Declaration,  386-388. 

Lawrence,  Prof.  E.  A.,  prelim,  com.  on 
Decl.  of  Faith,  1865,  555;  report,  556- 
558;  its  author,  556;  on  new  com., 
559;  in  debate,  560. 

Leavitt,  Rev.  Joshua,  in  debate  on  Decl. 
of  1865,  560;  minority  report  on  Pol- 
ity, 566,  567. 

Leeds,  Rev.  S.  P.,  on  creed-commission, 
579- 

Letters  of  Recommendation,  used  in 
transfer  of  membership,  Conf.  of  1596, 
45.  71- 

Leverett,  Pres.  John,  Liberal  views,  472; 
founding  of  Brattle  Ch.,  476;  pres.  of 
Harvard,  482. 

Leverett,  Thomas,  ruling  elder  at  Bos- 
ton, 173;  advice  regarding  baptism  of 
grandchildren,  251. 

Leyden,  Scrooby  ch.  at,  83-87;  unrest 
there,  85;  emigration,  87.  (See  also 
Scrooby.) 

Liberties,  Body  of,  1641,  172. 

License  to  Preach,  see  Ministerial  Licen- 
sure. 

Liggett,  Rev.  James  D.,  566. 

Lightfoot,  Rev.  John,  Erastian  inWrest. 
Assembly,  342. 

Lines,  Charles  B.,  Oberlin  Declaration, 
575- 

Linn,  Rev.  John  B.,  532. 

Loeffs,  Rev.  Isaac,  Savoy  Synod,  348. 

London  Church,  first  traces  of  Cong,  in 
London,  7,  29;  complete  organization 
of  church,  1592,  29;  probable  cove- 
nant, 116;  its  Confession  of  1589,  33- 
40;  by  whom  written,  29;  character 
of   Confession,   30-32 ;    arrest    of    its 


596 


member,  1593,42;  emigration  to  Hol- 
land, 42;  in  Amsterdam,  43;  its  Con- 
fession of  1596,  49-74;  by  whom  writ- 
ten, 43,  44;  character  and  value,  44- 
48;  "  Points  of  Difference,"  1603,77- 
80;  occasion  of  this  document,  75-77; 
turmoiled  by  Smyth  and  his  Gains- 
borough flock,  83. 

Luther,  views  on  church  polity,  2. 

Lyford,  Rev.  John,  100. 

MAGISTRATES  (see  also  Conn,  and 
Mass.  Courts),  authority  over 
churches  denied  by  Anabaptists,  4-6; 
rejected  by  Browne,  12,  13;  affirmed 
by  Harrison,  13;  asserted  in  Conf.  of 
1596,  69;  Separatists  generally  desire 
them  to  do  away  with  Ch.  of  England 
as  false,  47,  71,  80;  but  have  no  au- 
thority to  prevent  right  worship,  72; 
Salem  church  pledges  due  obedience, 
118;  have  power  to  call  Synods,  167, 
168,  170;  powers  discussed  and  defined 
at  Cambridge  Synod,  175,  189-193, 
234-237;  duty  to  care  for  ministerial 
maintenance,  221  ;  changed  views 
shown  in  Heads  of  Agreement,  461; 
and  in  English  Declaration,  1S33,  552. 

Magoun,  Pres.  G.  F. ,  571. 

Manning,  Rev.  J.  M.,  Boston,  409. 

Marriage,  ministers  not  to  perform  mar- 
riage, "Points  of  Difference,"  79; 
early  N.  E.  usage,  79;  doctrine  of, 
Savoy  Declaration,  394. 

Martyrs,  Cong.,  names  of  those  executed 
or  who  died  for  their  faith  in  conse- 
quence of  imprisonment,  52. 

Marvin,  Rev.  E.  P.,  556. 

Massachusetts  Company,  chartered,  101, 
124;  colonists  sent  to  Salem,  101,  102; 
rapid  growth,  124,  125;  government 
transferred  to  N.  E.,  124. 

Massachusetts  Court,  provides  minister- 
ial support,  129;  banishes  Williams, 
no;  calls  first  N.  E.  Synod,  133; 
banishes  Anne  Hutchinson  and  Wheel- 
wright, 134;  Hooker's  company  at 
Cambridge  ask  to  go  to  Conn.,  151; 
composition,  162;  the  Hingham  dis- 
pute, 160-163;  resists  criticisms  of  its 
authority  and  appeals  made  to  Eng- 
land, 162  ;  calls  Cambridge  Synod, 
167-171;  deputies  have  scruples,  167, 
168;  purpose  of  call,  171,  244;  in  de- 
fence of  prerogatives  threatened  by 
Gorton  and  Child,  175-1S1;  local  in- 
dependence asserted,  177,  178;  relig- 
ious usages  defended,  177;  political 
changes  in  Eng.,  1647-S,  aid  Court, 
1  So;  Court  appoints  a  commission  to 
prepare  a  creed  for  adoption  by  Camb. 
Synod,  183;    action  regarding  Camb. 


Platform,  1S6-1S8  ;  calls  Ministerial 
Assembly  of  1657,  258;  calls  Synod 
of  1662,  263,  264;  orders  its  result 
printed,  269;  vote  regarding  use  of 
the  Prayer-Book,  271;  declines  to  call 
a  Council  on  request  of  Conn.,  1667, 
276;  requested  by  ministers  to  call  a 
Synod,  1679,  413;  orders  Synod,  415, 
416;  commends  result,  419,  420;  or- 
ders the  Confession  of  1680  printed, 
421,  422;  fails  to  call  a  Synod,  1725, 
525. 

Mather,  Rev.  Cotton,  conservative  posi- 
tion, 467;  relations  to  Harvard,  4S2; 
circular  letter  of  1704,  484;  signs  Pro- 
posals of  1705,  490;  explanation  of 
their  failure,  491,  492;  interest  in  Vale, 
496;  declaration  of  doctrinal  position 
of  N.  E.,  106;  statement  of  terms  of 
Baptism  in  his  day,  279,  283;  testi- 
mony as  to  religious  state  of  X.  E. 
about  1680,  410;  praise  of  Heads  of 
Agreement,  448;  account  of  Minister- 
ial Convention,  468. 

Mather,  Rev.  Eleazer,  at  Synod  of  1662, 
265  ;  opposes  Half-Way  views,  266, 
267. 

Mather,  Rev.  Increase,  biog.  note,  412; 
opposes  Half-Way  views  at  Synod  of 
1662,  265-269;  later  their  chief  advo- 
cate, 266,  270;  procures  summons  of 
Synod  of  1679,  412-414;  preaches  be- 
fore it,  41S;  on  its  creed  com.,  419; 
opposes  Stoddard's  views  here  and 
later,  281,  282,  419;  prepares  result  of 
Synod,  419;  sermons,  419,  420;  mod- 
erator of  Synod,  16S0,  421  ;  writes 
preface  to  its  Confession,  421;  share 
in  Union  on  basis  of  Heads  of  Agree- 
ment, 445-44S;  conservative  leader  of 
N.  E.,  466;  opposes  the  Brattles,  475; 
his  Order  of  the  Gospel,  477,  478;  ex- 
cluded from  control  of  Harvard,  480- 
483;  interest  in  Yale,  497;  statement 
concerning  Richard  Mather's  XXXII 
Quest.,  135;  story  of  use  of  Lord's 
Prayer,  474. 

Mather,  Rev.  Moses,  Darien,  advocates 
Stoddardeanism,  243,  282,  286;  change 
of  view,  243. 

Mather,  Xathanael,  biog.  note,  288 ; 
publishes  result  of  Assembly  of  1657, 
261,  288.     (See  also  451.) 

Mather,  Rev.  Richard,  biog.  note,  1-4: 
sole  author  of  "Answer  to  XXXII 
Quest.,"  135,  136,  140,  289;  answer 
to  Herle,  140;  declares  Ministerial 
Convention  of  1643  non-synodical, 
137;  chosen  by  Cambridge  Synod  to 
draft  Platform,  175;  his  form  adopted, 
with  mollifications,  184,  224;  on  creed- 
corn.,    183;     answers    criticisms    on 


597 


Camb.  Platform,  187;  views  on  Bap- 
tism and  Half-Way  Covenant,  246, 
250-254;  proposed  to  insert  Half-Way 
Covenant  in  Camb.  Platform,  224;  at 
Ministerial  Assembly  of  1657,  258; 
drafts  its  result,  261 ;  favors  Half-Way 
view  at  Synod  of  1662,  265,  266;  re- 
ports result  to  Mass.  Court,  268;  de- 
fends it,  269;  his  death-bed  exhorta- 
tion, 270. 

Mather,  Rev.  Samuel,  trustee  of  Yale, 
497- 

Maverick,  Rev.  John,  biog.  note,  150, 
chosen  teacher  of  Dorchester  ch.,  125, 
149,  150;  character,  150. 

Maverick,  Samuel,  attempts  to  alter  ch. 
and  state  in  Mass.,  1 64-1  Si. 

Mayflower  Compact,  1620,  text,  92  ; 
origin  and   character,   Si,   82,  87-89. 

Mayo,  Rev.  John,  of  Boston,  at  Synod 
of  1662,  265  ;  opposes  Half-YVay 
views,  266. 

McCall,  Hon.  H.  S.,  571. 

McKenzie,  Rev.  Alex.,  on  creed-com- 
mission, 579. 

McKnight,  Rev.  John,  530,  532. 

Mead,  Prof.  C.  M.,  on  creed-commis- 
sion,  579. 

Mead,  Prof.  Hiram,  steps  towards  the 
Creed  of  1883,  57S. 

Mead,  Rev.  Matthew,  biog.  note,  444; 
instrumental  in  effecting  Union  on 
basis  of  Heads  of  Agreement,  444, 
446;  sermon  on  Union,  440,  446;  on 
committee,  452. 

Mennonites,  see  Anabaptists. 

Merriman,  Pres.  W.  E.,  preparations 
for  National  Council,  571,  572. 

Middelburg,  Browne's  Norwich  ch. 
emigrates  to,  11. 

Millenary  Petition,  75,  76. 

Ministers,  see  Church-officers,  Pastor, 
and  Teacher. 

Ministerial  Conventions,  Annual,  1643, 
1645,  etc.  see  Convention. 

Election,  shared  by  non-church 
members,  274,  473. 

Licensure,  Heads  of  Agreement, 
459;  Proposals  of  1705,  487;  Say- 
brook  Platform,  506,  516. 

Maintenance,  to  be  voluntary,  79; 
at  Boston  and  Watertown,  129;  how 
best  determined,  Camb.  Platform,  220, 
221. 

Standing,  ministers  only  when 
connected  with  a  church,  142,  143, 
145,  217. 

Mitchell,  Rev.  Jonathan,  biog.  note, 
266;  Assembly  of  1657,  258;  leader 
of  majority  at  Synod  of  1662,  265, 
266;  probable  author  of  preface  to  its 
"Propositions,"   301;    defends  result 


and  gains  Increase  Mather,  269,  270; 

invited    to  a   "Synod"  at   Hartford, 

273- 
Mix,  Rev.  Stephen,  scribe  at  Saybrook 

Synod,  502  ;  establishment  of  system 

in  Hartford  Co.,  508. 
Mooar,  Prof.  Geo. ,  on  creed-commission, 

579- 
Moody,  Rev.  Joshua,  in  Synod  of  1679, 

41S. 
Morse,  Rev.  Jedidiah,  495. 
Morton,  Rev.  Charles,  revives  Ministers' 

Meetings  in  N.  E.,  470. 
Morton,  Thomas,  99. 
Moss,  Rev.  Joseph,  512,  513. 
Moulin,  Peter  du,  criticises  Savoy  Dec- 
laration, 352. 
Moxon,  Rev.  Geo.,  Springfield, approves 

Hooker's  principles,  148. 

NATIONAL  Council,  formation  of, 
570-572  ;  constitution,  572-574; 
Declaration  at  Oberlin,  575,  576; 
criticisms  and  value,  576  ;  a  creed 
desired,  577,  578;  creed-commission 
appointed,  1S80,   579. 

National  Council  of  1865,  see  Boston 
Council  of  1S65. 

Naumkeag,  see  Salem. 

Navigation  Acts,  411. 

Newark,  N.  J.,  emigration  to,  273. 

Newbury,  Presbyterianism  in,  137,  160. 

New  Haven  County,  Conn.,  interpreta- 
tion of  Saybrook  Platform,  51 1-5 13. 

New  Haven  Court,  opposes  Assembly  of 
1657,  259-261. 

Norris,  Rev.  Edward,  pastor  at  Salem, 
in;  at  Cambridge  Synod,  183;  called 
to  Assembly  of  1657,  258;  death,  112. 

Norton,  Rev.  John,  sermon  before  Bos- 
ton ch.,  1646,  173;  on  creed  commit- 
tee, 183;  Half-Way  Covenant  views, 
253;  called  to  Assembly  of  1657,  258; 
at  Synod  of  1662,  265,  267;  brings 
letter  from  English  government  order- 
ing freedom  of  worship,  270,  271. 

Norwich,  Eng. ,  Cong,  church  organized 
1580,  10;  part  emigrates  to  Holland, 
11;  part  remains,  11,  28,  29. 

Nowell,  Increase,  ruling  elder  at  Boston, 
124,  129. 

Noyes,  Prof.  D.  J.,  558. 

Noyes,  Rev.  James,  of  Newbury,  Pres- 
byterian inclinations,  137,  160;  Minis- 
terial Convention  to  consider  his  case, 
1643,  137-139. 

Noyes,  Rev.  James,  of  Stonington, 
trustee  of  Yale,  497;  moderator  of 
Saybrook  Synod,  502. 

Noyes,  Rev.  Moses,  at  Saybrook  Synod, 
502. 

Noyes,     Rev.     Nicholas,     conservative 


598 


position,  467;  opposes  Brattle  ch., 
477- 
Nye,  Rev.  Philip,  Cong,  in  West.  As- 
sembly, 137,  342;  the  "  Apologetical 
Narration,"  343;  the  "Remon- 
strance," 344;  beneficed  under  Com- 
monwealth, 345;  at  Savoy  Synod,  349; 
see  also,  172,  310. 

OAKES,  Rev.  Urian,  moderator  of 
Synod  of  1679,  417;  other  duties, 
418;  on  creed  committee,  419. 

Oaths,  attitude  of  Anabaptists  regard- 
ing, 4,  6;  of  Browne,  24;  of  Savoy 
Declaration,  391. 

Oberlin  Declaration,  text,  575,  576;  oc- 
casion, 570-572,  574;  nature,  576. 

Old  South  ch.,  Boston,  use  made  of 
Confession  of  1680,  409,  422. 

Oliver,  Thomas,  ruling-elder  at  Boston, 
173  ;  advice  regarding  baptism  of 
grandchildren,  251. 

Ordination,  an  installation  based  on 
previous  election,  Hooker's  Principles, 
145;  Cambridge  Platform,  215-217; 
Savoy  Declaration,  405. 

Owen,  Rev.  John,  biog.  note,  352; 
appointments  under  Commonwealth, 
345;  at  Savoy  Synod,  349;  probable 
author  of  Savoy  preface,  352;  replies 
to  critics,  352. 

PALMER,  Rev.  Anthony,  Savoy  Sy- 
nod, 348. 

Palmer,  Rev.  Thomas,  Savoy  Synod,  348. 

Palmer,  Rev.  Ray,  570. 

Parish  system,  274. 

Park,  Prof.  E.  A.,  on  second  creed  com. 
of  Council  of  1S65,  559;  his  affirma- 
tion of  Calvinism,  560;  on  com.  on 
Polity,  566;  introduces  the  Statement 
of  Polity,  567;  on  com.  on  Platform, 
568. 

Parker,  Rev.  Thomas,  of  Newbury, 
Presbyterian  inclinations,  137,  160; 
consequent  Ministerial  Convention, 
1643,  137-139;  at  Synod  of  1662, 
265-267. 

Parker,  Dea.  William,  502. 

Partridge,  Rev.  Ralph,  of  Duxbury, 
drafts  Platform  for  Cambridge  Synod 
(not  adopted),  175,  1S4;  Half- Way 
Covenant  views,  253. 

Pastor,  character  and  duties,  Browne's 
views,  22;  Confession  of  1589,  35,  36; 
"Points  of  Difference,"  7S  ;  how 
chosen  at  Salem,  103,  104;  office  de- 
fined, Cambridge  Platform,  211  ; 
Savoy  Decl.,  404,  405;  Heads  of 
Agreement,  45S.  459;  English  Deck, 
l833.  55  1 ;   Principles  of  1S65,  56S. 


Patton,  Rev.  W.  W.,  at  Council  of  1865, 
560,  562;  preparation  for  National 
Council,  570,  571;  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 579. 

Pemberton,  Rev.  Ebenezer,  liberal  views, 
472;  Brattle  ch.,  476;  circular  letter, 
484;  signs  Proposals  of  1705,  490. 

Penry,  John,  Cong,  martyr,  52. 

Perseverance,  doctrine  of,  Savoy  Declar- 
ation, 384;  English  Deck,  550. 

Peter,  Rev.  Hugh,  biog.  sketch,  no; 
prosperity  of  Salem  ch.  under  his 
ministry,  in;  end  of  ministry,  in; 
publishes  X.  E.  treatises  on  Polity, 
134;  chaplain,  345. 

Philip,  Indian  chief,  411. 

Philip's  war,  411,  412. 

Phillips,  Rev.  Geo.,  of  Watertown, 
maintenance,  129;  views  on  Episcopal 
ordination,  99;  on  church-member- 
ship, 251,  252;  on  the  status  of  chil- 
dren of  members,  307. 

Phillips,  Rev.  Samuel,  petition  for  Sy- 
nod, 1679,  413. 

Pierpont,  Rev.  James,  foundation  of 
Yale,  497;  creed  proposition,  49S;  at 
Saybrook  Synod,  502;  drafts  Plat- 
form, 501;  reception  in  New  Haven 
County,  5 1 1-5 1 3. 

Pierson,  Rev.  Abraham,  of  Branford, 
opposition  to  Half-Way  Covenant, 
273. 

Pierson,  Rev.  Abraham,  of  Killing- 
worth,  foundation  of  Vale,  497  ; 
proposition  for  a  creed,  498. 

Pitkin,  William,  petitions  Conn.  Court 
for  enlarged  church  rights,  271. 

Plan  of  Union,  text,  530,  531  ;  litera- 
ture, 524;  circumstances  leading  to, 
524-530;  formed,  529,  530,  532  ; 
workings,  532-534;  Presbyterian  dis- 
satisfaction, 534,  535;  repudiated  by 
"Old  School,"  536,  537;  abrogated 
by  Albany  Convention,  539,  540  ; 
value,  541. 

Platform,  Boston,  569. 

Player,  Rev.  John,  Savoy  Synod,  348. 

Plymouth  Council,  grants  charter  for 
Puritan  settlement  in  N.  E.  (Mass.), 
1628,  101. 

Plymouth,  England,  Dorchester- Wind- 
sor ch.  organized  at,  125,  149. 

Plymouth,  Mass.,  pilgrim  ch.  (see  Scroo- 
by) ;  influence  in  determining  polity 
of  X.  E.,  102,  103,  126-131;  Nas- 
sau's petition  to  court  for  toleration, 
1645,  164. 

"  Points  of  Difference,"  text,  77-80; 
origin,  75~77- 

Porter,  Pres.  Xoah,  on  creed  commit- 
tee, Council  of  1S65,  559;  in  debate, 
560,  561. 


599 


Post,  Rev.  T.  M.,  influence  in  bringing 
about  Boston  Council,  554;  com.  on 
Platform,    569;    Oberlin   Declaration, 

1S71,  575- 

Powell,  Rev.  Vavasor,  Savoy  Synod, 
343. 

Prayer,  Lords,  how  viewed  by  early 
Cong.,  Conf.  of  1596,  73,  74;  "Points 
of  Difference,"  80;  Mather's  account 
of  its  use,  474. 

Prayer,  Book  of  common,  opposed,  54, 
80  ;  freedom  to  use  enjoined  by 
Charles  II,  271. 

Presbyterianism,  popular  with  English 
Puritans,  136  ;  dominant  during  the 
early  part  of  struggle  with  Chas.  I, 
136,  139;  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
136  ;  Presbyterianism  at  Newbury, 
Mass.,  137;  Ministerial  Convention 
at  Cambridge,  1643,  137-139;  Presb. 
criticism  of  N.  E.  polity,  139;  Pres- 
byterianism not  in  N.  T.,  Hooker's 
Principles,  144;  supported  as  a  means 
to  overthrow  N.  E.  institutions,  163- 
165;  downfall  of  Presbyterian  domi- 
nance in  Eng.,  1647-8,  1S0;  views 
N.  E.  chs.  as  of  doubtful  orthodoxy, 
I85,  195,  196;  how  far  tolerated  in 
N.  E.,  191. 

Saybrook  Platform  inclines  Conn. 
chs.  to  think  well  of  Presb.,  514,  515; 
joint  convention,  525,  526;  joint  rep- 
resentation, 528;  Plan  of  Union, 
53°>  531:  workings,  532-534;  dissat- 
isfaction, 534,  535  ;  Presb.  divisions, 
535-533. 

English  Presbyterianism  becomes 
largely  Unitarian,  542,  543. 

Presbyterian  General  Assembly,  joint 
representation  with  Conn.  Assn., 
528  ;  adopts  Plan  of  Union,  530; 
"Old  School"  and  "New  School" 
divisions,  535-538;  Plan  of  Union 
repudiated  by  "Old  School,"  536, 
537- 

Presbyterians,  attempts  at  union  with 
Cong,  (see  Heads  of  Agreement,  and 
Plan  of  Union). 

Prince,  Rev.  Thomas,  Boston,  testi- 
mony as  to  religious  condition  of  N. 
E.  about  1680,  410. 

Proposals  of  1705,  text,  486-490;  litera- 
ture, 463;  general  religious  decline 
leads  to  a  strengthening  of  eccles. 
machinery,  466-472;  the  N.  E.  Lib- 
erals, 472;  alterations  desired,  473, 
474;  opposed  by  the  Mathers,  475; 
Brattle  Ch.  founded,  475-477;  conse- 
quent disputes,  477-4S3;  circular  let- 
ter of  1704  to  churches,  483,  484;  re- 
inforced by  Cambridge  Assn.,  4S4, 
485  ;    meeting  of   delegates  in   1705 


draws  up  Proposals,  485,  486;  how 
signed,  490;  approved  and  sent  out 
by  Cambridge  Assn.,  and  Convention, 
490,  491;  attacked  by  Wise,  492,  493; 
why  a  partial  failure,  490-494;  their 
revival  in  1814  and  final  burial,  494, 
495- 

Providence,  doctrine  of,  Savov  Deck, 
372,  373;  Creed  of  1883,  580. 

Prudden,  Rev.  Peter,  of  Milford,  ap- 
proves Hooker's  Principles,  148  ; 
Half- Way  Covenant  views,  254,  308. 

Pulsifer,  David,  93. 

Punchard,  Geo. ,  views  regarding  the 
Salem  symbols,  95. 

Puritans,  would  reform  rather  than  sepa- 
rate from  Ch.  of  Eng.,  8,  10,  13, 
Separatist  criticisms  of,  56,  57;  dis- 
tinguished from  Separatists,  97  ; 
growth  of  Puritan  opposition  to  Ch. 
of  Eng.,  97,  98;  feeling  of  leading 
Puritans  toward  Ch.  of  Eng.,  98,  99  ; 
what  they  desired  in  settling  Mass., 
98  ;  Boston  ch.  strongly  Puritan,  99  ; 
really  at  one  with  Separatists  in  most 
things  on  N.  E.  soil,  103;  English 
Puritans  alarmed  at  Separatism  of  N. 
E.  chs.,  134;  letters  of  inquiry,  the 
"  Nine  Positions,"  and  "Thirty-two 
Questions,"  134,  135. 

Pynchon,  William,  124. 

QUAKERS,  first  appearance  at  Sa- 
lem, in;  character,  112;  anti- 
Quaker  declaration  at  Salem,  113  ; 
condemned  by  Synod  of  1679,  428. 

Quincy,  Pres.  Josiah,  statements  regard- 
ing foundation  of  Vale,  496. 

Quint,  Rev.  A.  H.,  prelim,  com.  on 
Polity,  1865,555;  chairman  Bus. Com. 
Council  of  1865,  556;  presents  a 
modified  Declaration  of  Faith  on 
Burial  Hill,  561,  562;  report  on  Poli- 
ty. 505.  500;  in  debate,  567;  com. 
on  a  Platform,  568;  preparations  for 
National  Council,  1870,  570,  572. 

RATHBAND,  William,  cited  regard- 
ing Salem  symbols,  94,  96. 
Rawson,  Edward,  sec'y  of  Mass.,  sends 

out  call  for  Assembly  of  1657,  258; 

sends  order  for  Synod  of  1679,  416; 

other  references,  423,  428. 
Rawson,  Rev.  Grindal,  circular  letter  of 

1704,  4S4;  signs  Proposals  of    1705, 

490. 
Recommendation,  letters  of,  Cambridge 

Platform,  226. 
Redford,  Rev.  George,  biog.  note,  545; 

author    of     English    Declaration    of 

1S33.  545- 
Reed,  Rev.  Julius  A.,  562. 


6oo 


Reforming  Synod,  1679,  text  of  result, 
423-437;  literature,  409,  410;  causes 
leading  to  the  Synod,  410-412;  ap- 
peal to  Legislature,  413,  414;  extracts 
from  petition,  414,  415;  Legislature 
orders  the  Synod,  415,  416;  Peter 
Thacher's  account  of,  417-419;  creed 
committee  appointed,  419;  result  laid 
before  court,  419,  420;  effect  of  Sy- 
nod, 420,  465. 

Relations,  in  church-admission,  107  ; 
doctrine  of  Cambridge  Platform,  223; 
opposed  by  the  Brattles,  473;  defend- 
ed by  the  Mathers,  475. 

Relievers  (see  Widows). 

Repentance,  doctrine  of,  Savoy  Decla- 
ration, 381,  382;  Creed  of  1883,  581. 

Reyner,  Rev.  Edward,  Savoy  Synod, 
34S. 

Richards,  Capt.  John,  in  Synod  of  1679, 
418,  419. 

Ries,  Hans  de,  Anabaptist  Confession, 
4-6. 

Robbins,  Rev.  A.  B.,  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 579. 

Robbins,  Rev.  Chandler,  of  Plymouth, 
opposes  Half- Way  covenant,  286. 

Robinson,  John,  biographical  note,  84; 
in  Cong,  work  near  Gainsborough, 
1604,  83;  minister  of  Scrooby  ch.,  83; 
goes  to  Amsterdam  and  Leyden,  1608, 
1609,  83;  pastor,  84;  type  of  Separat- 
ism, 85;  willing  to  accept  partially 
Erastian  theories,  86,  90,  91;  remains 
at  Leyden  after  emigration  of  part  of 
ch.  to  Plymouth,  87;  advice  to  emi- 
grants, 88 ;  works  answered  by  Ruther- 
ford, 140. 

Rogers,  Rev.  Ezekiel,  of  Rowley,  ser- 
mon before  Camb.  Synod,  182;  called 
to  Assembly  of  1657,  258. 

Rogers,  Rev.  Nathaniel,  of  Ipswich,  ap- 
pointed to  prepare  a  creed,  183;  Half- 
Way  Covenant  views,  256,  309. 

Ross,  Rev.  A.  H.,  preparations  for  a 
National  Council,  1870,  571;  quoted, 
532.  534- 

Roxbury  church,  consulted  regarding 
Half-Way  Covenant,  255. 

Ruggles,  Rev.  Thomas,  creed  proposi- 
tion, 49S;  at  Saybrook  Synod,  502. 

Ruggles,  Rev.  Thomas,  Jr.,  513. 

Ruling  Elders,  see  Elders,  Ruling. 

Russell,  Rev.  John,  of  Wethersfield, 
sent  to  Assembly  of  1657,  259;  re- 
moves to  Hadley,  262;  at  Synod  of 
1679,  417,  4i8. 

Russell,  Rev.  Noadiah,  trustee  of  \ale, 
49S;  creed  proposition,  498;  at  Say- 
brook  Synod,  502. 

Russell,  Rev.  Samuel,  creed  proposition, 


498;  reception  of  Saybrook  Platform 
in  New  Haven  County,  512. 
Rutherford,  Prof.  Samuel,  biog.  note, 
139;  mistaken  as  to  Convention  of 
1643,  137;  his  "Due  Right  of  Pres- 
byteries," 139,  140  ;  answered  by 
Hooker,  140-142. 

SABBATH,  observance,  Browne's 
views,  24;  doctrine  of,  Savoy  Deck, 
391;  English  Deck,  552;  Creed  of 
1883,  581;  breaking  of,  lamented  by 
Synod  of  1679,  429. 

Salem,  settlement  a  Puritan  enterprise, 
99;  movement  begun  in  fishing  trade, 
99,  100;  settled,  100;  Endicott  arrives, 
101;  main  body  of  settlers  arrive  with 
ministers,  101,  102;  ministers  elected 
and  ordained,  103,  104;  when  was  the 
church  formed?  104,  105;  Bradford 
probably  extends  right  hand  of  fellow- 
ship, 105;  Williams's  stormy  pastorate, 
108-110;  prosperity  under  Peter,  m; 
appearance  of  Quakers,  in;  ministry 
of  John  Higginson,  112-115;  church 
consulted  by  Winthrop,  126,  127  ; 
church  reluctant  to  join  in  Cambridge 
Synod,  171,  174;  its  adoption  of  the 
Half-Way  Covenant,  255  ;  its  action 
regarding  the  Synod  of  1662,  264,  267. 
Creed  development  at  Salem,  text  of 
Covenant  of  1629,  116;  text  of  Cove- 
nant of  1636,  116-118;  text  of  anti- 
Quaker  article,  1660-1,  118;  text  of 
the  Direction,  1665,  1 19-122;  litera- 
ture of  these  documents,  95,  96;  brev- 
ity of  original  covenant,  106,  107; 
doctrinal  tests,  106,  107;  errors  lead 
to  more  elaborate  statements,  108 ; 
Covenant  of  1629  renewed  and  en- 
larged, 1636,  111;  anti-Quaker  clause 
added,  1660-1,  113;  the  "Direction" 
of  1665,  114;  representative  of  the 
doctrinal  position  of  the  ch.,  but  not 
formally  adopted  by  it,  114,  115;  a 
new  covenant  in  1680,  115. 

Salter,  Rev.  Charles  C,  566. 

Salter,  Rev.  William,  569. 

Saltonstall,  Gov.  Gurdon,  instrumental 
in  securing  Saybrook  system,  493, 
499,  507;  founding  of  Yale,  497. 

Saltonstall,  Sir  Richard,  124,  129. 

Sanctification,  doctrine  of.  Savoy  Decla- 
ration,  380;  English  Deck,  550;  Creed 
of  1883,  581. 

Sargent,  J.  E.,  steps  leading  to  the  Creed 
of  1883,  578,  579- 

Savage,  Rev.  G.  S.  F.,  558. 

Savoy  1  >eclaration  (see  Savoy  Synod). 

Savoy  Palace,  347. 

Savoy  Synod,  text  of  Declaration,  354- 


6oi 


40S;  literature,  340,341;  causes  lead- 
ing to  it,  341-345.  356-35s:  Cong. 
unwilling  to  present  plan  of  ch.  gov- 
ernment in  Westm'tr  Assembly,  344; 
Commonwealth  makes  Cong,  powerful 
in  Eng. ,  345;  need  felt  of  defining 
their  position,  346;  the  Synod  sum- 
moned, 346,  347;  meeting  and  attend- 
ance, 34S,  349;  character  of  its  work, 
35°.  353,  362-364 ;  omissions  from 
West.  Confession,  350,  351,  363;  its 
only  original  work,  351;  the  pre  lace, 
352;  brief  use  of  Declaration  in  Eng- 
land, 352,  353;  critics,  352;  more  last- 
ing in  New  England,  353;  quoted  in 
the  Salem  "  Direction,"  119;  Confes- 
sion approved,  462. 

Saybrook  Platform,  text,  503-506;  pref- 
aces, 517-523;  literature,  464,  465; 
the  problem  which  it  answered  recog- 
nized by  1667,  275;  movement  lead- 
ing to  Synod,  495-499;  creed  propo- 
sition, 1703,  49S;  Synod  called,  499, 
500;  its  meeting  and  work,  500,  501, 
522;  result  approved  by  Conn.  Court, 
507;  printed,  507;  varying  reception 
in  Conn.,  507-513;  effects,  514-516, 
525- 

Say  and  Sele,  Lord,  Cong,  in  West.  As- 
sembly, 342. 

Schyn,  Hermann,  History  of  the  Men- 
nonites,  4. 

Scobell,  Henry,  clerk  of  Council  of 
State,  issues  preliminary  summons  for 
Savoy  Synod,  346,  347. 

Scriptures,  authoritative  source  of  polity, 
as  well  as  doctrine,  iS,  33-35,  61,  64, 
65,  77,  So,  120;  Cambridge  Platform, 
203;  nature  and  content  defined,  Sa- 
voy Deck,  367-369;  source  of  polity, 
Ibid.,  403;  Saybrook  preface,  519, 
520;  English  Deck,  54S,  551;  Burial 
Hill  Deck,  562;  constitution  of  Na- 
tional Council,  573 ;  Creed  of  1883, 
580 ;  customs  regarding  Scripture- 
reading  in  public  worship,  474. 

Scrooby,  origin  of  the  church,  82,  83; 
meets  in  house  of  Brewster,  83;  its 
possible  covenant,  S3;  chooses  Robin- 
son and  Clyfton  ministers,  83  ;  emi- 
grates to  Amsterdam  and  Leyden, 
1607-9,  83 ;  unrest  at  Leyden,  85  ; 
type  of  Separatism,  85;  character  of 
the  "Seven  Articles,"  86;  of  the 
"Notes  of  Explanation,"  87;  nego- 
tiations for  emigration,  85-S7  ;  will- 
ing to  take  oaths  of  Allegiance  and 
Supremacy,  91:  at  Cape  Cod,  87,  88; 
reasons  for  the  "  Mayflower  Compact," 
S8,  89;  text,  92;  sources  and  literature 
of  Scrooby- Leyden-I'lymouth  ch.,  89. 
39 


Seelye,  Pres.  J.  H.,  on  creed-commis- 
sion, 1S83,  579. 

Selden,  Rev.  John,  Erastian  in  West. 
Assembly,  342. 

Separatists,  distinguished  from  Puritans, 
9,  10,  13,  56,  57,  97;  Scrooby  ch.  less 
Separatist  than  London  ch.,  85;  Sepa- 
ratism becomes  the  polity  of  Puritan 
Mass.,   102,  103,  126-131. 

Seven  Articles,  1617,  text,  89,  90;  notes 
of  explanation,  90,  91  ;  origin  and 
character,  81-87. 

Sewall,  Rev.  Joseph,  482. 

Sewall,  Judge  Samuel,  conservative,  475; 
Vale  College,  497. 

Shepard,  Rev.  Thomas,  of  Cambridge, 
defence  of  Davenport's  reply  to 
"Nine  Positions,"  135;  appointed  to 
prepare  a  creed,  183;  Half- Way  Cove- 
nant views,  253,  308  ;  testimony  re- 
garding ministers'  meetings,  470. 

Shepard,  Rev.  Thomas  (1844),  158. 

Sherman,  Rev.  James,  petition  for  Sy- 
nod, 1679,  413. 

Sherman,  Rev.  John,  of  Watertown, 
called  to  Assembly  of  1657,  258;  in- 
vited to  a  "  Synod  "  at  Hartford,  273; 
relations  to  Synod  of  1679,  4X3.  4X7- 

Shove,  Rev.  Seth,  509. 

Simons,  Menno,  and  the  Mennonites, 
3-7- 

Simpson,  Rev.  Sidrach,  Cong,  in  West. 
Assembly,  137,  342;  the  "Apologeti- 
cal  Narration,"  343;  the  "Remon- 
strance," 344;  quoted,  310. 

Skelton,  Rev.  Samuel,  biog.  note,  102; 
sent  as  minister  to  Salem,  102;  chosen 
pastor,  103,  104;  discourages  Minis- 
ters' Meetings,  469;  death,  108. 

Smalley,  Rev.  John,  529. 

S.nith,  Rev.  Henry,  of  Wethersfield, 
approves  Hooker's  Principles,  148 ; 
Half-Way  Covenant  views,  252. 

Smith,  John,  attempts  to  alter  ch.  and 
state  in  Mass.,  164-181. 

Smith,  Rev.  Ralph,  emigrates  to  Salem, 
102;  settles  as  minister  in  Plymouth, 
102;  letter  of  Winslow  and  Fuller  to, 
126. 

Smyth,  John,  organizes  ch.  at  Gains- 
borough, 1602,  82  ;  goes  to  Amster- 
dam, 1606,  83 ;  connection  with  the 
Amsterdam  Anabaptists,  4 ;  Confes- 
sion prepared  for  him,  4-6. 

Snell,  Rev.  Thomas,  158. 

Some,  Robt.,  Dr.,  Puritan  opponent  of 
Cong.,  54. 

Statement  of  Principles,  1865,  text,  567, 
568;  literature,  553;  steps  leading  to 
the  Council  of  1865,  553-555;  prelim- 
inary com.  on   Polity,   555,  565  ;    its 


602 


report,  565,  566;  referred  to  a  new- 
corn.,  566;  divided  reports,  566;  de- 
bate, 566-56S ;  Prof.  Park  presents 
Statement,  567;  text,  567,  568;  large 
com.  appointed  to  draw  up  a  Platform, 
568,  569;  its  work,  569. 

Stearns,  Prof.  W.  A.,  revises  Decl.  of 
1865,  562. 

Sterry,  Rev.  Peter,  Cong,  in  West.  As- 
sembly, 342;  one  of  Cromwell's  chap- 
lains, 345. 

Stiles,  Pres.  Ezra,  estimates  regarding 
X.  E.  population,  132. 

Stockbridge,  Hon.  Henry,  569. 

Stoddard,  Rev.  Anthony,  509. 

Stoddard,  Dea.  Charles,  561. 

Stoddard,  Rev.  Solomon,  biog.  note, 
280;  petition  for  Synod  of  1679,  413; 
controversy  with  Wheelock  at  the  Sy- 
nod, 418,  419;  on  its  creed-commit- 
tee, 419;  advocates  his  views  on 
admission  to  the  Supper  at  the  Synod, 
280,  419  ;  defends  these  views  in 
writings,  281,  282  ;  spread  of  his 
theories,  282. 

Stoddardeanism,  origin,  279,  280;  Stod- 
dard not  originator  but  chief  advocate, 
280-283;  spread  of  these  views,  282. 

Stone,  Rev.  Samuel,  associated  in  min- 
istry with  Hooker  at  Cambridge  and 
Hartford,  140,  150,  152;  at  second 
session  of  Camb.  Synod,  182;  Half- 
Way  Covenant  views,  252-254;  sent 
to  Assembly  of  1657,  259;  reports  its 
doings  to  the  Conn.  Court,  262;  quar- 
rel in  the  Hartford  church  under  him 
largely  personal,  256,  257. 

Storrs,  Rev.  H.  M.,  prelim,  com.  on 
Polity,  1865,  555,  565;  com.  on  a  Plat- 
form, 568. 

Storrs,  Rev.  R.  S.,  158. 

Stoughton,  Rev.  John,  statements  re- 
garding   Declaration   of    1833,    546, 

547- 

Stratford  church,  divided  over  Half-Y\  ay 
Covenant,  273. 

Strong,  Rev.  Cyprian,  of  Portland, 
Conn.,  opposes  Half-Way  Covenant, 
287. 

Strong,  Rev.  Nathan,  529. 

Sturtevant,  Rev.  J.  M..  debate  at  Coun- 
cil of  1865,  560;  com.  on  Platform, 
569. 

Supper,  Lord's,  Browne  s  views,  23; 
Confession  of  1596,  70;  "Points  of 
Difference,"  80;  Savoy  Declaration, 
399;  English  Declaration,  550;  Creed 
of  1883,  581. 

Supremacy,  Oath  of,  Leyden  ch.  willing 
to  take,  91. 

"  Survey  of  the  Summe  of  Church-Dis- 


cipline," by  Hooker,  141-148;  War- 
ham  preaches  on,  154. 
Swain,  Rev.  Leonard,  558,  569. 
Symmes,  Rev.  Zechariah,  called  to  As- 
sembly of  1657,  258;  at  Synod  of 
1662,  265;  reports  result  to  Mass. 
Court,  269. 
Synods,  Browne's  definition  of,  and  its 
value,  14,  17,  21;  recognized  in  Conf. 
of  1596,  45,  71;  first  Synod  in  N,  1  . . 
133 ;  Ministerial  Convention  of 
1643,  falsely  called  a  Synod,  137, 
138;  recommended  by  Convention  of 
1643,  138;  Hooker's  theory  of  Coun- 
cils, 142,  147,  148;  warrant  and  power 
of  Synods,  191,  192;  how  called,  192, 
193  ;  doctrine  set  forth  in  Camb. 
Platform,  233,  234;  in  Savoy  Deck, 
407;  by  Synod  of  1662,  337~339- 

"  Antinomian,"  133. 

Boston,    1662  (see  Synod  of    1602, 
below). 

Cambridge  (see  Cambridge  Synod). 

Hartford,    attempted,     1667,    273- 
276. 

National  Council  of  1865  (see  Bos- 
ton Council). 

Reforming,    1679    (see    Reforming 
Synod). 

Saybrook  (see  Saybrook  Platform). 

National  Council,  permanent  (see 
National  Council). 
Synod  of  1662,  occasion  and  call,  263, 
264 ;  problems  laid  before  it,  264 ; 
its  sessions,  265-268  ;  members 
present,  265;  parties,  266;  the  Half- 
Way  View  adopted,  267,  26S;  incon- 
sistency of  its  opponents,  268;  votes 
on  fellowship  between  churches,  26S; 
text  of  result,  301-339. 

'TALCOTT,  John,  the  Half- Way  Cov- 
1      enant,  257. 
Taylor,  fudge  Lester,  566. 
Taylor,  Prof.  Nath.  W.,  of  New  Haven, 

his  theology,  535. 

Taylor,  Rev.  Wm.  M.,  on  creed-com- 
mission, 579. 

Teacher,  character,  appointment,  and 
duties,  Browne's  views,  22;  Conf.  ol 
15S9,  35,  37;  "  Points  of  Difference," 
78;  how  chosen  at  Salem,  103.  104; 
office  defined,  Camb.  Platform,  211; 
Sav  >v  Deck,  404,  405. 

Thacher,  Rev.  Peter,  represents  Old 
South  ch.,  Boston,  in  Synod.  167.), 
416;  diary,  417-419;  circular  letter 
of  1704,  484. 

Thacher,  Rev.  Thomas,  called  to  Assem- 
bly of  1657,  25S. 

Thacker,  Elias,  Cong,  martyr,   II,   52. 


603 


"  Thirty-two  Questions,"  sent  to  N.  E., 
and  answered  by  Richard  Mather,  135. 

Thompson,  Rev.  j.  P.,  chairman  prelim. 
com.  on  Decl.  of  Faith,  1865,  555; 
asst.  moderator  of  Council,  556;  re- 
port on  Declaration,  556-55S  ;  in 
debate,   559;  com.   on    Platform,  569. 

Thomson,  Dea.  John,  509. 

Tilson,  Deacon,  in   Synod  of  1679,  418. 

Tobey,  Hon.  E.  S.,  570. 

Todd,  Rev.  Jonathan,  511,  513. 

Tompkins,  B.  W.,  571. 

Tompson,  Rev.  William,  of  Braintree, 
reply  to  Herle,  140;  kills  a  snake  at 
final  session  of  Camb.  Synod,  183, 
184. 

Torrey,  Rev.  Samuel,  petition  for  Sy- 
nod, 1679,  413;  on  creed  committee 
of  Synod,  419;  other  duties,  418;  cir- 
cular letter  of  1704,  4S4;  signs  Pro- 
posals of  1 705 ,  490. 

Trumbull,  Dr.  J.  H.,  149. 

Turnbull,  Joseph,  sec'y  English  Cong. 
Union,  546. 

Turner,  Robert,  innkeeper  at  Boston, 
258. 

Tyler,  Prof.  M.  C,  491. 

UNIONS,  Cong,  in  England  and  Scot- 
land, see  Cong.  Union. 
Union,  Plan  of,  see  Plan  of  Union. 
Unitarianism,    was    it    the    fruit  of  the 

Half- Way  Covenant  ?  282,  284. 
Upham,  Chas.  W.,  views  regarding  the 
Salem  symbols,  95. 

VANE,  Henry,  "  Antimonian "  dis- 
pute, 133;  in  West.  Assembly,  342. 

Vassall,  Samuel,  brother  of  Wm.,  one 
of  Commissioners  for  Plantations, 
172,  179. 

Vassall,  William,  efforts  to  alter  ch.  and 
state  in  N.  E.,  163,  164;  appeal  for 
toleration  in  religion  rejected  by  Ply- 
mouth court,  164;  petition  designed 
for  Parliament,  164. 

Virginia  Company,  negotiations  of  Ley- 
den  ch.  with,  85-88. 

Voting  in  church-affairs,  those  in  Half- 
Way  Covenant  not  to  vote,  256,  295, 
312;  327,  328. 

WADSWORTH,     Rev.    Benjamin, 
circular  letter,  484;  president  of 
Harvard,  4S4. 
Wakeman,    Rev.    Samuel,    of   Fairfield, 
appointed  by  Com.  Court  to  consider 
the  Half-Way  dispute,  276,  277. 
Walker,  Hon.  C.  J.,  571,  572. 
Walker,  Rev.  Geo.  Leon,  on  creed-com- 
mission, 579. 


Ward,  Rev.  Nathaniel,  of  Ipswich,  share 
in  "  Body  of  Liberties,"  172. 

Warham,  Rev.  John,  biog.  note,  150; 
chosen  pastor  of  Dorchester-Windsor 
ch.  in  England,  125,  149  ;  views  on 
ch.  membership,  150;  emigration  to 
Conn.,  152;  at  Cambridge  Synod, 
1647,  154;  relation  to  Windsor  creed, 
154;  approves  Hooker's  Principles, 
148;  Half- Way  Covenant  views,  253; 
at  Assembly  of  1657,  259  ;  brings 
Conn.  "  Assembly"  of  1667  to  an  end, 
275- 

Watertown,  church  organized,  127,  128. 

Watts,  Rev.  Isaac,  543. 

"Way  of  the  Churches,"  by  Cotton, 
published  without  author's  consent, 
and  answered  by  Rutherford,  139,  140. 

Webb,  Rev.  E.  B.,  preparations  for 
National  Council,  571. 

Webb,  Rev.  Joseph,  trustee  of  Yale, 
498;  reception  of  Saybrook  Platform, 
509- 

Webster,  Gov.  John,  the  Half-Way 
Covenant,  257  ;  removes  to  Hadley, 
262. 

Welles,  Deputy-Gov.  Thomas,  the  Half- 
Way  Covenant,  257. 

West,  Rev.  Stephen,  of  Stockbridge, 
opposes  Half- Way  Covenant,  287. 

Westminster  Assembly,  parties  in  it  and 
its  work,  136,  137,  159,  341,  342;  re- 
lations of  Cong,  and  Presbyt.  in  it, 
342-345;  Cong,  unwilling  to  present 
a  plan  of  ch.  government  to  it,  344. 

Westminster  Confession,  secrecy  ob- 
served regarding,  182;  approved  in 
Scotland,  182;  modified  and  approved 
in  England,  182,  350;  doctrinal  parts 
approved  ' '  for  substance  "  by  Cam- 
bridge Synod,  185,  194,  195;  also  ap- 
proved, Heads  of  Agreement,  462. 

Wethersfield,  settlement  begun  in  1634, 
151. 

Wharton,  Lord,  Cong,  in  West.  Assem- 
bly, 342. 

Wheelock,  Ralph,  biog.  note,  418  ; 
charges  at  Synod  of  1679,  4*8,  419. 

Wheelwright,  Rev.  John,  "Antinomian" 
dispute,  133;  banished,  134. 

Whiston,    Prof.   William,    Arian  views, 

,543- 

'White,  Hon.  D.  A.,  views  regarding 
the  Salem  symbols,  95,  96. 

White,  Rev.  John,  efforts  to  establish 
Puritan  settlements  in  N.  E.,  100, 
101,  125,  149. 

Whitfield,  Rev.  Henry,  pastor  at  Guil- 
ford, 112;  approves  Hooker's  Princi- 
ples, 148. 

Whitgift,  John,  archbishop,  opposition 


604 


to  Puritans,  S ;  not  a  jure  divine 
Episcopalian,  77. 

Whiting,  Rev.  John,  opposes  Half- Way 
Covenant  at  Hartford,  273,  275;  car- 
ries letter  from  Conn.  Court  to  Mass. 
Court,  276. 

Whiting,  Rev.  Joseph,  petition  for  Sy- 
nod, 1679,  413. 

Whiting,  Rev.  Samuel,  of  Lynn,  called 
to  Assembly  of  1657,  258;  possibly 
moderator  of  Synod  of  1662,  265; 
petition  for  Synod  of  1679,  413. 

Whiting,  Rev.  Samuel,  Jr.,  of  Billerica, 
petition  for  Synod,  1679,  413. 

Whittelsey,  Rev.  Chauncy,  501. 

Whittlesey,  Rev.  M.  K.,  556. 

Widows,  church  officers,  Browne's  views, 
22;  Conf.  of  15S9,  36-38;  Cambridge 
Platform,   241. 

Willard,  Rev.  Samuel,  of  Boston,  con- 
nection with  Synod  of  1679,  416,  419, 
420;  ecclesiastical  sympathies,  472, 
473;  in  charge  of  Harvard,  481,  482; 
circular  letter  to  the  churches,  1704, 
484;  signs  letter  of  Camb.  Associa- 
tion, 4S5;  Convention  of  1705  at  his 
house,  486;  attestation  to  Proposals 
of  1705,  490. 

Williams,  Rev.  Daniel,  share  in  rup- 
ture of  Union  on  basis  of  Heads  of 
Agreement,  450-452. 

Williams,  Rev.  Nathan,  529. 

Williams,  Rev.  Roger,  refuses  to  minis- 
ter to  Boston  ch.  because  unseparated, 
99;  his  pastorate  at  Salem  and  quar- 
rel with  the  Mass.  government,  108- 
110;  discourages  Ministers'  Meetings, 
469. 

Williams,  Rev.  Solomon,  Lebanon,  ad- 
vocates Stoddardeanism,  282;  replies 
to  Edwards,  285. 

Wilson,  Rev.  John,  biog.  note,  128  ; 
one  of  founders  of  Boston  ch.,  12S; 
chosen  teacher,  129;  view  of  ch.  as  to 
his  Episcopal  ordination,  99;  mainte- 
nance, 129;  urges  ch.  to  share  in 
Cambridge  Synod,  173;  share  in  Sy- 
nod of  1662,  265,  268. 

Wilson.  Rev.  John,  Medfield,  petition 
for  Synod,  1679,  413. 

Wilson,  Joshua,  Cong,  headquarters, 
London,  544. 

Wincob,  John,  S7. 

Windsor,  settled,  152. 

Windsor  Church,  company  organized  in 
West-of-England,  1629-30,  147;  in- 
fluence of  Rev.  John  White,  125,  147; 
formation  of    church,  and    choice    of 


ministers  at  Plymouth,  En-.,  149; 
settles  at  Dorchester,  150;  emigration 
to  Conn.,  152,  153;  its  creed,  153- 
156;  begins  Half-W ay  Covenant  prac- 
tice, 165S,  262. 

Windsor  Creed,  1647,  text,  154-156; 
circumstances  of  adoption,  153,  154; 
character,  154. 

Winslow,    Edward,   letter  to  Bradford, 
126;     consulted    regarding    state    of 
Winthrop's  company,  127;    successful 
mission  as  agent  of  colonies 
land,  1646,  176-181. 

Winthrep,  John,  biog.  note,  125;  gov- 
ernor of  Mass.  company,  125;  settles 
in  N.  E.,  125;  consults  Salem  ch.,  in 
view  of  mortality  at  Charlestown,  126, 
127;  feelings  toward  Ch.  of  England, 
99;  part  in  Hingham  quarrel,  1O45. 
161  ;  debate  on  representation  in 
Camb.  Synod,  172,  173. 

Winthrop,  Waitstill,  475. 

Wise,  Rev.  John,  testimony  regarding 
Ministers'  Meetings,  470;  opposition 
to  Proposals  of   I  705,  490-494. 

Wolcott,  Rev.  Samuel,  Bus.  Com.  Coun- 
cil of  1865,  556;  in  debate  on  creed, 
559;  preparations  for  National  Coun- 
cil, 1870,  571. 

Wolstenholme,  Sir  John,  87. 

Woodbridge,  Rev.  John,  47S. 

Woodbridge,  Rev.  Timothy,  trustee  of 
Yale,  49S;  creed  proposition,  49S;  at 
Saybrook  Synod,  502  ;  modified 
draft  of  riatform,  501. 

Woodbury,  Conn.,  settled,  273. 

Woodbury,  Rev.  F.  P.,  steps  leading  to 
Creed  of  1883.  578,  579. 

Woodhull,  Rev.  John,  530. 

Woods,  Rev.  Leonard,  158,  410. 

Woodward,  Rev.  John,  scribe  of  Say- 
brook  Synod,  502;  difficulties,  50S. 

Worcester,  Rev.  S.  M.,  theories  regard- 
ing creed-development  at  Salem,  95. 
96. 

Y\orks,  good,  doctrine  of,  Savoy  Decla- 
ration," 383,  3S4;  English  Decl.,  550. 

Worship,  theory  of,  Savoy  Declaration, 
390. 

YALE,    David,    attempts   to  alter  ch. 
and  state  in  Mass.,  164-181. 
Vale,  Elihu,  496. 

Yale  College,  foundation  of,  496,  497; 
influence  of  its  trustee-meetings,  498. 

"7WINGLI,   views  on    church    polity, 


t 


H   , 


H 


I  *4 


"•  ^'