QUERY I. WHat is the true notion of the Ʋni­versal Church as visible?

The Universal Church as Visible, is that Body, Company, or Society of People throughout the whole World, which consists of all such as are Visi­bly Joyned or Ʋnited to God in Christ as Head, by a Religious Bond. And that which doth distinguish them from all other People in the World, is that Relation they bear to God different from that in which all other People stand related to Him. And this Re­lation is a Religious relation, by which they are brought nearer to God than all other People are. All other Peo­ple are related as humane Creatures to God as their Creator and Governour; but these are related to him by ano­ther kind of Bond & Obligation, such as is Spiritual and of a Religious Nature, of which I am to say more afterward.

And then as this Relation is Exter­nal and Visible, so that by which this Relation is effected and wrought, is something Visible also, which is the rea­son why the relation it self is said to be Visible.

Now the Persons thus Visibly Re­lated to God in Christ, are not all Religiously Related to Him alike. Some of them are Related and United to him Internally and Invisibly by an Invisible Bond of Union over and be­sides their Visible Relation to him, by that which is visible: When as all the rest are Related to him only Exter­nally; or if in any respect Internally also, yet not so, or by such a relation as will entitle them to the internal and best sort of priviledges of Gods Peo­ple, such as Justification, Reconcilia­tion, Pardon and Eternal life.

But yet this difference does not make this body of People which are externally one, by a Relation to God common to the whole, to become two Universal Churches: For all which Essentially belongs to the being of the [Page 5]Universal Church, is not limited and restrained to that part of it, which in respect of its internal and invisible state does differ from, and excel the other; for the External Relation to God, without which the Universal Church does not exist, is common to the worser part of it as well as the better, by reason whereof, they can­not be two Churches, and are but one.

One part of the Visible Church dif­fers from another indeed in respect of Internal and Invisible State before God; this is plain from the Scripture: But then it is as plain from thence, that as touching their External and Visible state, they are one, and that the same external priviledges belong to the one as to the other; of which more afterward.

We have not indeed the words Vi­sible and Invisible used in Scripture, in reference to the two different states of men in one and the same Church; but yet we have those different states of them sufficiently revealed in Scrip­ture, [Page 6]which we mean by those words. I need not instance in Scriptures of this nature, because they are suffici­ently and commonly known, and I shall have further occasion to mention them afterward.

QUERY II. WHat is it which prepares or quali­fies persons for that Relation to God in Christ, which makes them Visible Members of his Church?

There is something previous to that, by which the Relation in men to God is wrought, which makes them Visi­ble Members of his Church, and which does capacitate them for it: and that is their being Externally call­ed by God to be of the true Reli­gion: Persons lare first to become Disciples, before they be received into the Church by Baptism; and their be­coming Disciples, and their being called, is the same thing. This is the [Page 7]foundation in which that Relation is laid, and upon which that which does effect it, is built. And People are thus called, either

1. When they are Converted from a false Religion to own and profess the true: And thus the Pagans were call­ed by the Preaching of the Apostles, when they were brought to be Dis­ciples: Or,

2. When Almighty God causes them to be Born, and to be Educated in the true Religion, as those are who are born of Parents externally in Covenant with God. Thus the Jewish People from Abrahams time down­ward, were called to be Gods People, and to profess the true Religion. And accordingly they were stiled Gods called ones by the Prophet Isa. 48.12. Hearken to me, O Jacob, and Israel my called. And how were they called? Abraham indeed he was called extraor­dinarily, by God who appeared to him when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, Act. 7.2. But his Posterity were called by being Born [Page 8]to, and educated in the same Reli­gion which he himself was of; and so were his Childrens Children from Generation to Generation.

And thus has it been in calling Per­sons to be of the Christian Religion. At the first erection of the Church as Christian, men were extraordinarily called by the Preaching and Miracles of the Apostles and others; they were called and converted from the Pagan and Jewish Religion, to own the Christian Religion. But since the times of first planting the Gospel up and down in the World, Gods ordi­nary and common method of calling men to the profession of the Christian Religion has been by their Christian Parents educating them in it. And indeed their being born of Parents in an especial Relation to God, is in it self a Providential Call which qualifies them for the priviledge of being so re­lated also. For upon that account they are both in the Old Testament and the Now, stiled a holy Seed, that is, a Seed separated from the Infidel [Page 9]World to God: And by this the Fe­males of the Jews became Church-Members, and by this were their Males qualifi'd to enter into Covenant with God by Circumcision, at eight days old. But of these things further mention will be made in the process of our Inquiries.

QUERY III. WHat may that be by which People are made Visible Church-Members?

That by which People are consti­tuted compleatly Visible Church-Members, is a mutual Covenanting be­tween God and them, between Christ and his Visible Members. In which Covenant, God on his part, promiseth to be their God in Christ, to pardon them, and to confer eternal life on them, upon condition they take him only for their God, and Christ Jesus for their Lord and Saviour, by be­lieving in him, and obeying him. And [Page 10]men on their part Covenant to per­form the Condition of Gods Covenant in taking him for their God, and Christ for their Lord and Saviour, by be­lieving in him, and obeying him. Those words, I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a People, contain the substance of the Covenant of Sal­vation, both on Gods part, and mans part, Heb. 8.10. The mutual Cove­nant between God and his Israel of old is thus described: Thou hast a­vouched this day the Lord to be thy God, and to walk in his ways, and to keep his Statutes, and his Command­ments and his judgments and to hearken to his Voice And the Lord hath a­vouched thee this day to be his peculiar People, as he hath promised thee, and that thou shouldest keep all his Command­ments, Deut. 26 17, 18.

This mutual Covenanting is the Copulative, or Bond by which the con­junction is made between the Head and his Members, Christ and his Body the Church: For the nature of it, is to Ʋnite the Parties Covenanting, and [Page 11]to convey a mutual interest in each o­ther. I entred into Covenant with thee, and thou becamest mine, saith God, Ezek. 16.8. And this tying or knit­ting together by Covenant, is called the Bond of the Covenant, Ezek. 20.37. I might multiply places, to shew, that mens being joyned to the Lord in the common notion of Scripture, is by Covenanting with him to be his Peo­ple. Thus Jer. 50.5. Come let us joyn our selves to the Lord in a perpetual Covenant, never to be forgotten. Also Isa. 56.6. The Sons of the Stranger, that joyn themselves to the Lord, to serve him, to love the name of the Lord, and to be his Servants, every one that taketh hold of my Covenant, &c.

That this Union is thus made by Contract and Covenant between God and men, we may the rather believe, and the more easily conceive, because the Holy Scripture delights to resem­ble and illustrate the Union between God and his People, Christ and his Church, by the Union that is be­tween Men and their Wives, which [Page 12]is an Union by mutual Contract and Covenanting, the one to take the Woman for his Wife, the other to take the man for her Husband, with promise to deport themselves towards each other, according to the nature of the mutual relation between them, Ephes. 5.28. Isa. 54.5. Jer. 31.31. Hos. 2.19. And those who were Stran­gers to the Covenants of promise, were said to be without God, and without Christ; that is not related to him, nor he to them, as his Church and Peo­ple, Ephes. 2.12.

And here let it be observed and re­membred once for all, that the same thing which Unites men to Christ, Unites them to those also who are al­ready one with him by Covenant. Union with the Head, is the Reason of Union with all those Members which make the body of that head; like as a man by becoming a Cove­nant Servant to a Master, becomes a Member of that Family, and a Fellow­servant to all the rest of the Servants of that Master.

QUERY IV. HOw and when is the Covenant be­tween God and men entred into, by which People are externally Ʋnited to Christ, and visibly made Members of his Church?

This Covenanting is transacted when People are Baptized. For Baptism is a Sacred Rite instituted by Christ, by which the Covenant we speak of, is solemnly entred into.

As for Almighty God, he has pre­vented men on his part, in Cove­nanting with them, and stands open­ly declared in his Word, to be a God to all those, to pardon and save them, whoever they be, that shall become a People unto him, by believing in him, and serving him: And not only so, but he has also Authorized his Mini­sters to transact with men in his Name, according to that declaration, by bring­ing them into Covenant with him by [Page 14]Baptism, and thereby to receive them into his Church: For to that end are the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven delivered to them, viz. to open the door, and to let such into the Church; and this they do as Stewards of God's House.

Now whenever men take hold on this Covenant of God, and openly and publickly Covenant with him to become a People unto him, and to perform the condition of his Cove­nant with them, in order to the ob­taining the benefits promised on his part, then and by that means is their visible Relation to God, to Christ, and to his Church, constituted and made. And all this a being visibly Baptized in his Name, doth imply.

For this I conceive is the meaning of their being Baptized into the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, Mat. 28.19. Not only that they are Baptized in their name, as that signi­fies its being done by their Authority, but also into their name, as that sig­nifies their being brought into a special [Page 15]Relation to them as then God, whom they Covenant to worship and serve. And therefore from thenceforth they are called by that name into which they are Baptized; like as a Wife is called by the name of her Husband, from that very moment in which the Marriage-Covenant is compleated, Isa. 4.1.

Hence it is that S. Paul saith, That as many as have been Baptized into Christ, have put on Christ, Gal. 3.27. For by that they put on his Name, and put on their Relation to him. For this Visible Membership we speak of, is nothing else but a Visible Relation to Christ the Head of Christians, and to all those that are visily related to him. By Baptism they are planted into Christ, Rom. 6. which is another me­taphor by which our External Union with Christ by Baptism is signified. And by it they are Baptized into one body, 1 Cor. 12.13.

Those words of St. Peter shew like­wise that there was a Covenanting with God in Baptism, when he says, [Page 16] The like figure whereunto Baptism doth now save us, not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good Conscience towards God, by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Pet. 3.21. I find that which is here trans­lated, The answer of a good Conscience, is rendred by others, the promise or stipulation of a good Conscience, and by some the question or questioning of a good Conscience. Now if the Greek will bear or countenance these several readings, Answer, Stipulation, Questi­oning, yet the matter may be thus well accommodated. The Answer of a good Conscience here spoken of, was an answer to somewhat proposed, or put questionwise to be resolved, or answered to by them, who were to be Baptized; and that the Answer to it, was of the nature of a Promise, Sti­pulation or Covenant, in reference to God. As when it was proposed, or put questionwise to the party to be Baptized, whether he did believe Je­sus Christ to be the Son of God, and Saviour of the World? and whether [Page 17]he would reform his sinful life, and in hope of Salvation by Jesus Christ, henceforth live unto God according to his teaching in the Gospel: The answer to this was assertory and pro­missory Covenant-wise made, viz. that he did so believe, and that through Gods assistance he would so reform, and so live; to the performance whereof he bound himself by being Baptized in his name.

Now when such a promissory answer as this proceeded from such a frame of mind as did produce, or would produce effects sutable to such an an­swer or undertaking, it might very well be called the answer of a good Conscience towards God. And St. Peter might well say, as here we sup­pose he does, That the entrance into the Church by Baptism, when accom­panied with this answer of a good Conscience, would as certainly be Salvation to them through the Resur­rection of Jesus Christ, as ever Noah & his Families enterance into the Ark, was the means of their escaping perish­ing [Page 18]by water, that being the figure to which St. Peter here likens Baptism.

And this way and method of bringing Persons into the Visible Church as Institutive, by Covenan­ting with God in Baptism, does but answer to what was done in Abra­hams days and after, for the gather­ing God a Visible Church out of the World; for that was done by Cir­cumcision then, which is done by Baptism now. For it was the Sacred Rite of entering Persons into Cove­nant with God, to take God for their God, and to be his People, and for that reason it is called the Covenant of Circumcision, by St. Stephen, Act. 7. And it was the badge by which they were marked and differenced from o­thers as belonging to God by Cove­nant, and is therefore said to be the token of the Covenant between God and them, Gen. 17.11. And just so is Baptism now, which is come in the room of Circumcision.

We see then how excellently the Old and New Testament agree in this [Page 19]point: That ever since God has had a Visible Church on Earth by Institu­tion, he has made the way and means of becoming Members of it to be a Covenanting with him by an initiating Ordinance.

QUERY V. HOW can Infants become Visible Church-Members by Covenanting with God, since they seem naturally un­capable of doing such a thing while In­fants?

This Inquiry seems necessary in this place upon occasion of the resolution of the former Query. That the In­fants of the Circumcised were to be engaged to God Covenant-wise by being Circumcised, is past dispute. But then there will another question arise, and that is, whether they were so by their own act and deed, or by the act and deed of their Parents?

We cannot say that they were in their own Persons active in Covenan­ting with God; and that therefore it must needs be by the act and deed of their Parents, that they were by Cir­cumcision engaged to God Covenant­wise. But then yet a further question will arise, and that is, whether those Infants were obliged by their Parents entering them into Covenant by Cir­cumcising them, before they were in a capacity of consenting to it?

And the Answer is, that there can be no doubt but that they were, sup­posing they were obliged at all, which none deny but they were. The Chil­dren were obliged by what their Pa­rents did in their Minority on their behalf, with a purpose to oblige them, supposing the thing lawful. This was a thing commonly understood a­mong the Jews, and taken for granted, and as it appears, was so accounted by God also. I will give some in­stances of both.

1. The Jews did so esteem it, and that appears by what they did to ob­lige [Page 21]their Seed after them to observe the days of Purim. Esther 9.27. The Jews ordained and took upon them, and upon their Seed, and upon all such as joyned themselves unto them, so as it should not fail that they would keep these two days according to their writing, and according to their appointed time every year: and that these days should be re­membred and kept throughout every Ge­neration, every Family, every Pro­vince, and every City, and that these days of Purim should not fail from a­mong the Jews, nor the remembrance of them perish from their Seed. So again, 1 Sam. 20.42. And Jonathan said to David, Go in peace, for as much as we have sworn both of us in the Name of the Lord, saying, The Lord be between me and thee, and between my Seed and thy Seed for ever.

2. Almighty God did account and hold the Children obliged by what their Parents did, or had done on their behalf, with an intent to oblige them. For proof of this, I will in­stance in several cases.

First, the Lord did hold the Chil­dren and Posterity of the Jews to be obliged by that Covenant which their Fore-fathers had made with the Gi­beonites in the days of Joshua. For there was three years of Famine sent by God in the days of David, for that Saul and his House had slain the Gi­beonites, contrary to the Covenant which their Fore-fathers had made with them, tho it was several hun­dreds of years before, 2 Sam. 21.1.

Secondly, The whole Congrega­tion of Israel, Men, Women, and their little ones entred into Covenant with God, by his appointment, in the Land of Moab, Deut. 29.10, 11, 12, 13. Ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God—your little Ones and your Wives—that thou shouldest enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God. And it must be by the act of their Parents since, or some in their stead, that their little Ones did so, by obliging them as much as in them lay, to ob­serve and keep that Covenant when they should come to years of discre­tion [Page 23]to understand it. For it is not easie to understand how the lit­tle Ones that were but Infants, could otherwise enter into Covenant with God. And if not, then we see from this instance likewise, that God did account the little Children obliged by what their Parents did on their be­half with an intent to oblige them. Which is yet farther confirmed from what is said in the 14. and 15. verses, in these words. Neither with you on­ly do I make this Covenant, and this Oath; but with him that standeth here with us this day before the Lord our God, and also with him that is not here with us this day; meaning their Po­sterity yet to come, as is generally understood. For it seems that God did intend to oblige the Posterity to come, to take him for their God, by bringing their Fore-fathers into Co­venant with him. Hence it is that the Jews defection to Idolatry is ag­gravated thus; They rejected his Sta­tutes and his Covenant which he made with their Fathers, 2 King. 17.15. [Page 24]And in this 29. of Deut. 25. Then shall men say, because they have forsaken the Covenant of the Lord God of their Fa­thers, which he made with them when he brought them forth out of the Land of Aegypt, &c. How could that have aggravated their crime, in not ob­serving the Covenant consented to by their Fore-fathers, unless they their Posterity had been obliged by their Fore-fathers consenting to it?

Thirdly, God calls those Children of Idolatrous Jews, his Children, whom they Sacrificed to their Idols, and says, they were born unto him, Ezek. 16.20, 21. & 23.37. And up­on what account were they so, but by being the Children of Parents in Covenant with God, tho now they had violated it, and by being farther brought into Covenant with God by their Parents Circumcising them? It seems that Covenant which had ob­liged the Parents to be Gods, obliged those that were born of them to be so likewise, and much more were they thus obliged, when their Parents had [Page 25]brought them into Covenant with God by Circumcising them. Tho such Parents had forfeited their Co­venant-interest in God, yet they had not by that, by which they did so, made void Gods Covenant-right to them and their Children, but that they were still under an Obligation to him to be his. Upon which account it is, as it is probable, that God is called the God of some men, when yet they have been very bad, as we may see, 1 King. 15.3. 2 King. 16.2. 2 Chron. 28.5. & 36.5.12.

Fourthly, It was the Parents that Circumcised their Children of eight days old, and not the Children them­selves; and yet these Children were as firmly obliged by it, when grown to be men, as if they had then Cir­cumcised themselves. I testifie again to every man that is Circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole Law, saith St. Paul, Gal. 5.3.

And if they were obliged by what their Parents did in Circumcising them, to perform the duty on their [Page 26]part, whenever they were capable of it; we may well conceive that by what their Parents did in entring them into Covenant by Circumcising them, they were invested with the be­nefit promised on Gods part, until they devested themselves of it by their actual and wilful transgressing the Covenant, in not becoming a Peo­ple unto God, in correspondence to his Promise of being a God unto them.

And the truth is according to Scripture account, little Children, which were devoted to the Service of God by their Parents, and designed to be trained up to it, were by a fa­vourable construction reputed to be doers of that Service while but little Children, which they could not actu­ally perform until they were past their Child-hood. This is plain and express in one case, and by purity of reason, must be allowed in other un­der like circumstances. The Chil­dren of the Koathites, of a month old, were said to keep the charge of the [Page 27]Sanctuary, because they were design­ed and devoted for it by their Pa­rents then, tho they could not actu­ally perform that Service until they attained unto more years, Numb. 3.27, 28. These are the Families of the Koathites, in the number of all the Males from a month old and upwards, were eight thousand and six hundred, keeping the charge of the Sanctuary. And the contrary practice of Parents was accompanied with a contrary e­vent in their Children: If they did not devote their Children to the Ser­vice of God by Circumcising them when they should, their Children were reputed breakers of the Cove­nant, whereas their Parents properly were so, by neglecting to fulfil the terms of it on their Childrens behalf. The Ʋncircumcised Man-child, whose flesh of his fore-skin is not Circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his People; he hath broken my Covenant, Gen. 17.14.

And thus were the little Children of Proselytes also made parties in [Page 28]Gods Covenant by their Fathers taking hold of it, and by entering their Male-Children with themselves into it by Circumcision, Exod. 12.48.

Nor is it at all unreasonable that the Children should be obliged by what their Parents did to that end in their Minority, so long as it was in nothing but what the Children ought then to have obliged themselves to, if they had been capable to have done so, and which in duty they ought to oblige themselves to, when come to years of discretion, if their Pa­rents had not done it for them before. Parents, as Parents, have so great an Interest and Propriety in their Chil­dren, and so great Authority over them, and Power of disposing of them, that what they oblige them to by their act and deed, will, and com­mand, in their Minority, they ought in duty to observe and do; if the things be not unreasonable in them­selves, nor countermanded by God, as having a greater Interest in them, [Page 29]and Authority over them than their Parents had. This is so reasonable, as that we see God himself approves of it, and has founded his own Insti­tution upon it, of obliging little Chil­dren by Covenanting with him by the act and deed of their Parents. If a man by his Will and Testament, ob­lige his Son and Heir to any thing which is fair and reasonable, it is a dishonourable thing among men for such a Child to esteem himself not ob­liged thereby to do it. If it be but a mans Covenant or Testament, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth it, saith S. Paul, Gal. 3.15.

And thus we see how little Chil­dren become obliged in Covenant with God, and visible Members of his Church, by the act and deed of their Parents on their behalf, both before the Law of Moses and under it.

Let us now consider whether the little Children of Christians under the New Testament, be not brought into Covenant with God, and made Members of the visible Church by [Page 30]the act and deed of their Parents, as well, and as much as others had been in times of the Old Testament.

It cannot be denied but that Chri­stian-Parents have as great a Proprie­ty in, and as much Authority over their Children now, as ever Parents had under the Law: And if so, they must needs be in the same capacity of obliging their little Children by their act and deed on their behalf, in any thing that is for their benefit, as they were. Nor is it less the duty of Chil­dren now to be obliged by what their Parents do in their Minority on their behalf for their benefit, than it was then. Honour thy Father and thy Mo­ther, is of as much force to Children now, as ever it was in Old Testament times. These things are clearly seen by the light of nature. And now we deny not but that it is as much the duty of Parents now, to seek the good of their Children, by doing that for them in their Minority, which tends to their benefit, as ever it was heretofore.

All things being supposed it must be granted, that Parents are in as good a capacity to oblige their little Children to God in Covenant now, by what they may do on their behalf in their Minority, as ever Parents were heretofore. They may dedi­cate and devote them to God and his Service by Baptism now, as well as Parents could by Circumcision here­tofore. And Baptism does as much oblige the Baptized in Covenant with God now, as ever Circumcision did the Circumcised heretofore. And it is now as much the benefit of Persons to be obliged in Covenant with God in their Infancy by Baptism, as ever it was for others formerly by Circum­cision.

Now as touching that Warrant or Authority which Christians have to oblige their Infant Children by Bap­tizing them, to become parties in Gods Covenant, and to perform the terms and condition of it on their part, as they grow up into a capacity of be­ing active therein, I shall compare [Page 32]what of this kind Christians have, with what Abraham and his Seed, and others had for their obliging their Children to be a People unto God by Circumcising them. Abraham and his Seed had an express command for it, but the Gentiles, which were not of Abrahams natural Seed, had only a favourable allowance and grant, that in case any of them had a mind to joyn themselves to the Jewish Church, and to have communion with them in the way of worship prescribed them, Exod. 12 48. that then in order to this attainment, the Father, or Man himself was to be Cir­cumcised, and all his Males. But o­therwise, as Circumcision was not enjoyned the Gentiles, so we do not find that any Prophet or other, were sent abroad among them, to draw them into the Jewish Church; only we read indeed that the Pha­risees compassed Sea and Land to make one Proselyte, but its probable it was but from among other Jews, to make him of their Sect, to strengthen their party.

But when the Visible Church was to become Christian, our Saviour commissionated his Apostles to go into all the World, and to disciple all Na­tions, and Baptize them. Now if this commissioning extended to the Bap­tizing the little Children of Christian Parents, as well as the Christian Pa­rents themselves; then here is War­rant and Authority enough for such Parents to engage their Children by Baptizing them in Covenant with God, and to oblige them to perform the terms of it when they shall be ca­pable of endeavouring to do so.

And that this Commission of our Saviour did extend to the Autho­rizing the Apostles to Baptize such little Children, I have endeavoured to make out in another discourse which I shall not here repeat, but re­fer the Reader to it. [Address from p. 29. to p. 80.] The substance of what is there said, is reducible to these two heads.

1. To shew what reason the A­postles had to understand the words [Page 34]of their Commission to Baptize in this Latitude.

2. What reason we have to be­lieve that they did understand the words of their Commission in this ex­tensive sense, and that they did pra­ctice accordingly.

Unto what I have said there, I shall here add one very considerable reason to induce us to believe that the Apostles did Baptize the little Chil­dren of Christians, taken from the unanimous agreement of all Christians in all parts of the World, in the pra­ctice of Baptizing Infants in the purer times of the Church, and before the defection into Popery. Now there are some things which render it mo­rally impossible, that there should be such an unanimous agreement in such a practice, unless they had it from the Apostles, or others sent by them, in their first planting of Christianity in those places.

The Apostles went into all the World to Preach the Gospel, and were our Saviours Witnesses unto the [Page 35]uttermost parts of the earth, according to his Commission. Their sound went into all the Earth, Rom. 10. Col. 1.6.23. and their words unto the ends of the World: The Gospel was Preached to every Creature under Hea­ven, as St. Paul saith. There are some things which make it morally impossible that there should be such an universal agreement as aforesaid in all places, upon any other account, or for any other reason than their first receiving this practice of Bap­tizing Infants, from the Apostles, in their first planting of Christianity there. As

1. The vast distance of one place from another, where the Christians lived, made it morally impossible they should come into this usage by combination, or imitation of one a­nother.

2. The diversity of their Languages made it impossible that this sameness of practice should grow out of any mutual correspondence, or intelli­gence held by them.

3. If these things had not made it impossible, and if it could be sup­posed that the Christians in all parts, notwithstanding their distance of place, and diversity of Language, might have held such correspondence as by agreement to have introduced such a practice as they had not from the Apostles, but had been imposed upon them at first by some Innovators; yet it is morally impossible it should steal into all Churches, and every where, without some known opposition from some good men or other, if it had not been Apostolical.

We cannot with any reason think that all Christians both in office, and out of office in the Church, would have suffered such an Innovation as this (if it had been an Innovation) without such considerable opposition as would have been taken notice of by some Author or other, who lived in or near such time in which it had been first brought into the Church.

Since then no man is able to assign the beginning of this practice short of [Page 37]the Apostles times: And since the whole world of Christians were a­greed in it, in the purest times of the Church, for ought appears to the contrary: And since all Christians, how much soever they have differed in other things, have yet all along a­greed in this, as much as they have in the observation of the Lords day, a very few only excepted, and those chiefly, or rather only, as have ap­peared since Luthers days, or the be­ginning of the Reformation: And since the Apostles practice recorded in Scripture of their Baptizing whole Housholds, gives us ground to be­lieve they practised the same in all places where they have been, and that their doing so, was the reason and ground of the universal practice of Baptizing Infants in all Churches first planted by them, and in those succeeding them: I say all these things considered, there re­mains little reason for any impar­tial man to doubt, but that the Apostles did practise Infant Baptism [Page 38]in pursuance of their Commission.

QUERY VI. WHether in the Baptizing of Chil­dren, that method of proceeding be not most proper, by which the Children are most directly made to enter into Co­venant with God by their Parents?

The reason of this Query arises out of the matters discussed in the two former. For if that Union and Re­lation between God and men, by which they become Members of his Visible Church, is made by entering into Covenant with him, to be his People, as he with them to be their God: And if little Children are ob­liged in Covenant with God, by what their Parents do in causing them to be Baptized with intent thereby so to oblige them; then I propose it to be considered, whether it will not thence follow that it is most proper to demand of the Parents, whether [Page 39]in bringing their Children to be Bap­tized, they do not intend thereby to dedicate them to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and to engage them as much as in them lies, to be Gods faithful Servants, and to believe and live according to the Doctrine and Precepts of our Lord Jesus Christ? or somewhat to that effect. And whe­ther likewise such Answers from the Parents should not be expected, as are most suitable to such demands?

And further, it would be consi­dered, Whether Infants can be so well, or so directly and properly ob­liged to God in Covenanting with him in Baptism, by what Sponsors, which are not their Parents, then do to oblige them, as they may by what their Parents themselves may do to that end.

And the reason of this proposal or question is this: If the Childrens be­ing obliged to do that when they come to Age, which Parents obliged them to in their Baptism, does depend upon their Parents properly in them, [Page 40]and authority over them, as is sup­posed it does from what has been for­merly argued; then they cannot be so properly obliged by what other Sponsors do in their behalf at their Baptism, which have no such pro­perty in them, or authority over them.

It is true indeed, Parents are not wholly unconcerned in entering their Children into Covenant with God by Baptism, when yet Sponsors act in the Parents stead: For it is the Parents that cause their Children to be Bap­tized, and what the Sponsors act, is by the Parents procurement; and up­on these accounts it is interpretative­ly their act: But yet Parents imme­diately, and in their own persons act­ing the part of entering their Chil­dren into Covenant, seems more pro­per and better to answer the nature of the things. Sponsors may be more useful in case Parents of Children to be Baptized are dead, as possibly it might be the case of some Children, whose Parents were Martyr'd in the [Page 41]Primitive times, from which perhaps that usage in the Church took its first rise. There are other cases in which Sponsors or Pro-parents may be use­ful and necessary, but hardly so as to exclude Parents from their proper work.

But I speak of these things with submission to those of better judg­ment and more authority, having only offered them to consideration.

QUERY VII. FOr what reason is Church-Member­ship said to be Invisible as well as Visible in some, and yet but only as Visi­ble in others? And from whence does this difference arise?

This difference proceeds from the difference there is between Visible and Invisible Christianity, and from the different Union between Christ the Head, and his Members which is caused thereby.

By invisible Christianity, I mean those inward acts and affections of soul, by which men abhor that which is evil, and cleave to that which is good, which are wrought by a serious assent of the mind unto the truth of the doctrine and great motives of the Gospel, by which they are convinced of the necessity of repentance and holy living, in order to their escaping everlasting misery, and becoming e­ternally happy.

By visible Christianity, I mean ex­ternal and visible acts of Religion, in reference both to God and men; such as is the profession of the God that made the World, to be the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent, to be his Son, and the rest of the Articles of the Christian Faith, and such other acts as consist in an external performance of the external acts of worship due to this God and Saviour, and in acts of Justice and Charity towards men, and in sobrie­ty of behaviour in reference to a mans self.

Now by the internal and invisible Christianity forementioned, in con­junction with that which is external, the Covenant entred into in Baptism, is so performed, that by it a man is internally and invisibly united to Christ, and consequently to all those who are invisibly one with him. But visible Christianity alone, is but an external performance of the Cove­nant entred into in Baptism; and this amounts to no more than an ex­ternal and visible Union with Christ, and with his Church as visible. By this much then we may understand wherein the difference between vi­sible and invisible Church member­ship lies, and from whence it doth a­rise.

Now that the internal Christianity which consists in an internal change in the faculties of the soul, to wit, in their apprehension, inclination, mo­tions and operations in reference to their various objects of good and e­vil, does produce or obtain an inter­nal and invisible Union of men with [Page 44]the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ, will appear if we consider these things.

1. This internal Renovation of soul contains in it an Union with God by adhesion; for by it a man doth with his heart and soul, and out of judgment and choice, cleave unto the Lord: which in the sence of Scrip­ture is a being joyned to him. He that is joyned, or he that cleaveth unto the Lord, is one spirit; for it is rendred by both words, 1 Cor. 6.17. And for a man firmly and resolvedly to adhere and stick to the Lord, and to the interest of his honour and glory in the world, in worshipping, loving, and obeying him, and in placing his affiance in him, as his only God and Saviour, come what will (which is his cleaving to him) is such a moral Ʋnion with God, as the nature of man is capable of.

2. This internal Renovation work­eth an invisible Union with God, by a participation of the divine nature, as the Apostle phraseth it, 2 Pet. 1.4. [Page 45]By which participation, men are morally united to God. For they are thereby renewed to the Image of God, in Knowledge, Righteousness, and Holiness, and so are made one Spirit, or one in spirit with Him, ac­cording to that of the Apostle in 1 Cor. 6.17. He that is joyned to the Lord is one spirit, or of one spirit. For so far as such an one is partaker of the Divine nature by Renovation, he judgeth of good and evil, as God judgeth, and loves and hates, and designs the same things that he doth.

3. By this Renovation of the Inner man, men come to have the same Spi­rit of God, and of Christ, to reside and dwell in them, by which their Ʋnion with the Father and the Son, is compleated. The holy Spirit first prepares them as living Temples, or an Habitation for himself to dwell in, by renewing them in a less degree, and then comes and takes up his a­bode, and dwells in them, by affording them a more constant, and more plen­tiful [Page 46]influence and assistance. And the same Spirit dwelling both in Christ and in them, the Ʋnion be­tween them becomes more intimous and more entire. Hereby we know that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit, 1 John 4.13. As the Union of all the mem­bers of a natural body is not made so much by their contiguity or close joyning, as by being all animated by one and the same spirit which is in all the parts; so it is in the Union of the Head and Members of the Mystical Body, Christ and the Church, and e­very particular Member of it; for they are united by the quickening power and influence of the same Spirit which abides both in the head and all the members.

By what hath been said touching the Invisible Ʋnion between Christ and his Church as Invisible, it will be easie to discern whence and for what reason it is that many who are really Members of the Church as Vi­ble, are yet no more but such, and not [Page 47]at all of the Church as Invisible. And it is for want of such an inward change of the mind and will, and all the af­fections of the soul, in reference to sin and duty, good and evil, as is made by a vigorous assent of the mind to the great truths of the Gospel, and the mighty motives of it, and by a se­rious and frequent consideration of them, and how a mans own self is concerned in them in point of happi­ness or misery, according as he yields up himself to be governed by them, or refuses to do so.

I do not deny but that such who are Members of the Church, but only as it is Visible, may yet in some sort really assent unto the truth of what the Gospel reveals, touching Christ, his being the Son of God, and Sa­viour of Sinners; yea, touching the necessity of Repentance, in order to the obtaining the pardon of Sin and Eternal Life by his sufferings. I doubt not but that these may in some sort believe, and undissemblingly pro­fess to believe otherwise concerning [Page 48]the Christian doctrine, than profess'd Infidels do, tho not so seriously and effectually as the truly Regenerate. We cannot say they properly dissem­ble, whom they profess to believe the Christian doctrine, or Articles of the Christian faith: We cannot say their words are knowingly contrary to the sentiment of their minds and thoughts in such a profession. We see by ex­perience that some Sea-faring men o­therwise vicious in their lives, yet when taken Captive by Infidels, will endure any hardship, rather than be drawn to say they do not believe the Christian doctrine; which is a good evidence that they do in some sence really believe it, tho perhaps not so effectually as the truly Regenerate do. There were many in our Saviours days, of whom the Scripture says that they did believe in Christ, whose faith yet was not powerful enough to Regenerate them. And such was Simon Magus also; and such were those who as St. James supposed had faith, and yet not justified by it, it [Page 49]Being alone, and but a dead faith; and such faith is the faith, as may just­ly be feared of many at this day, who are Christians by profession, and of the Visible Church.

Nay farther, I do not deny but that this faith of theirs in conjunction with some external motives, may pro­duce a form of Godliness, so that they may do most of the external acts of Religion which Regenerate men do. They may enter into Covenant with God in Baptism, and worship him only, and in the name of Christ: They may openly own the Articles of the Christian faith, and with zeal dis­pute for them. They may frequent the Ordinances of publick worship; such as Prayer, hearing the Word, and the Lords Supper, and may observe the Lords day. They may be free from gross and scandalous sins, do ma­ny acts of justice in their dealing with men, and give Alms also. They may be thus outwardly Righteous and ex­ternally Religious, and yet be unre­newed as touching the inward man. [Page 50]They may for all this be full of Envy, Malice, Hatred, and Revengeful thoughts, of Emulation, Wrath, and Pride; of Ambition, Covetousness, and Inordinate affection; which are sins of that sort which the Apostle calls works of the flesh, and such as exclude men out of the Kingdom of Heaven. And while they remain thus unrenew'd in their minds and wills; what ever faith or repentings they may otherwise have, or what­ever their outward performances may be, yet they fall short of being of the Invisible Church, for want of that in­ward renovation that invisibly unites men to Christ.

But yet tho this external Christia­nity fore-mentioned will not make men Members of the Church Invisible, yet it will evidence and declare them to be of the Church as visible, and continue them in it. For it is in some sort (tho but partial indeed) an ex­ternal performance of the Covenant of Baptism, by which they had their first enterance into the Visible Church, [Page 51]and by which their external relation to God in a religious sence, was first constituted. It is in respect of exter­nal Christianity, that such are said to be in Christ, who yet are but unfruit­ful branches (John 15.) devoid of that fruit which is called the fruit of the spirit, which consists of those in­ternal qualifications described in Gal. 5.22, 23. And their being in Christ, signifies an external Ʋnion between them, which is made by external Christianity. And in such an exter­nal respect, the whole multitude of the Children of Israel, who did not violate the bond of the Covenant be­tween God and them, by running into Idolatry, were said to cleave unto the Lord, which is another word which signifies their being Joyned or Uni­ted to him; which can be under­stood but of an external Union by external Religion, in reference to ma­ny of them at least. Thus in Deut. 4.3, 4. it is said, All the men that follow­ed Baal-peor, the Lord thy God hath destroy'd them from among you: but ye [Page 52]that did cleave unto the Lord your God, are alive every one of you this day. Where we see their continuing to worship the God of Israel in the use of his Ordinances, without follow­ing Baal-peor as some others did, is called their cleaving unto God. And by that they continued their relation unto God uninterrupted. But of this I shall have occasion to say more in the next inquiry.

Thus we see that it is visible Chri­stianity that makes men to be of the Visible Church, and Invisible Chri­stianity which makes them to be of the Church as Invisible. Those that have visible Christianity, are thereby differenced from the Infidel and Ido­latrous World on the one hand, and by their having no more, they are differenced from the Invisible Church on the other, and thereby set in a middle state between both, and that is in the Visible Church.

QUERY VIII. WHether men are no otherwise Mem­bers of the Church as Visible, than as they are Reputed Members of the Church as Invisible?

Those of the Congregational way, whether called Independents, or Ana­baptists, have been wont strongly to adhere to the Negative of this questi­on, That men are not otherwise Mem­bers of the Church as Visible, than as they are reputed of the Church as Invisi­ble. And it is upon the authority of this Hypothesis, that they refuse to ad­mit any to Church-Communion, but such in whom in their judgment, are found evidences or signs of Invisible Church-Membership or saving Grace: That none but such have right to Communion in the instituted Ordinances of worship: [Page 54]That particular Churches are Constituted or to be Constituted only of such.

But others do think that these do make the Visible Church much nar­rower than the Scriptures do: and do hold that all that are visibly in Co­venant with God, are thereby joyn­ed in Relation to him, and are made Members of his Visible Church, as well those which have no saving grace as those that have. Our business then for the present will be to consult the Scriptures in this case.

Before God had a Church in the World by Institution, mans visible re­lation to God was known by their worshipping of him only, whether they had any other signs of saving grace or no, and tho they were in no visible Covenant with him. They were known to whom they did be­long, by whom they worshipped: Every man walked in the name of his God, as the Prophet speaks, Mica. 4.5. and those that worshipped a strange God, were the Children of a strange God, (Mal. 2.11.) as those that wor­shipped [Page 55]the true God, were counted his Children. Natural Religion, e­specially in point of worship, was then the measure of judging mens vi­sible relation to God.

But when Almighty God was pleased to set on foot, and begin the gathering him a Visible Church out of the rest of the World in a way of di­vine Institution, he laid the founda­tion of it in his transaction with A­braham, by instituting and ordaining two things.

1. That as God by Covenant en­gaged to Abraham to be his God, and the God of his Seed, so Abraham and his Seed must engage to God by Co­venant to be his Servants, and a Peo­ple unto him.

2. That this Covenant should be entred into by Abraham and his Seed, by observing such a Sacred Rite as God instituted and appointed for that purpose, and that was Circum­cision. And this was continued for this use, until the Messias came and instituted Baptism, another Sacred [Page 56]Rite for the same end. Now in Gods thus founding his Visible Church, there was no such thing as the ap­pointing saving Grace in the judg­ment of charity, to be the condition of mens admission into his Church by Circumcision: But the Lord abso­lutely commanded that Abraham and his Male Seed after him, and all Born in the House, or bought with their money, should be Circumcised with­out any limitation or condition in re­ference to the appearance of saving Grace. By which it is evident that God did not design to have no others of his Visible Church than such as had saving Grace.

Now the Posterity of Abraham, when they came out of Egypt, were by virtue of their Covenanting with God, all of them bad as well as good, visibly related to God as his People; and so his as no other people were. And I hope we may safely say, that God himself accounted them to be, what Moses and others by divine inspiration said they were. And if so, then we [Page 57]may say, that Almighty God did ac­count them all bad as well as good (tho not in the most emphatical sence) to be his chosen elected and a­dopted People (Deut. 4.37. Rom. 9.4.) his Called, (Isa. 48.12.) a People near unto him (Psal. 148.14.) his Saints his holy People, (Deut. 7.6. & 33.3. Psal. 50.5.) his Children (Deut. 14.1.) a special and peculiar People unto himself, (Deut. 7.6. & 14.2.) his Inheritance, (Deut. 9.29.) his Por­tion, (Deut. 32.9.) his peculiar Trea­sure, Psal. 135.4.

All these Titles and Appellations given them by God, or by man in­spired by God in giving them, do with as much plainness as words can express, shew, that God himself own­ed them for his People, his Children, and related to him in such a sence as other People not in Covenant with him, were not.

Now that they were not thus called or accounted for any such reason as because they had saving grace, or be­cause they were reputed to be of the [Page 58]Church as Invisible, will appear with full evidence. For the same inspired Man Moses, at the same time, and in the same Book, in and by which God owned them for his People under many of the foresaid appellations, did from God charge them with such and so much guilt, as no man can with a­ny colour of reason say was consistent with an Invisible Church-state.

Thus in Deut. 9. Thou art a stiff­necked People, vers. 6. From the day thou didst depart out of the Land of E­gypt, even until ye came unto this place, ye have been rebellious against the Lord, vers. 7. They have corrupted them­selves, they have quickly turned aside, vers. 12. I have seen this People, and behold it is a stiff-necked People. vers. 13. You have been Rebellious against the Lord from the day that I knew you, vers. 24. I know thy rebellion and thy stiff neck, chap. 31.27. They have cor­rupted themselves, their spot is not the spot of his Children, they are a perverse and crooked generation, chap. 32.5. When the Lord saw it, he abhorred them, [Page 59]because of the provoking of his Sons, and of his Daughters, vers. 19. A fro­ward Generation, Children in whom is no faith, vers. 20. They are a Nation void of Counsel, neither is there any un­derstanding in them, vers. 28.

These things are charged on them generally and in the gross. And con­sidering some other passages, there is great cause to fuspect that much the major part of them at least were thus guilty. For in Numb. 14.2. its faid, That all the Children of Israel murmur­ed against Moses, and against Aaron; and the whole Congregation said. Would God we had died in the Land of Egypt, or would God we had died in the Wil­derness. And vers. 10. All the Congre­gation bade stone them with stones. And vers. 33. Your Children shall wander in the Wilderness forty years, and bear your Whoredoms, until your Carcases be wasted in the Wilderness. And vers. 35. I will surely do it to all this evil Congre­gation that are gathered together against me. And vers. 29. Your Carcases shall fall in this Wilderness; and all that are [Page 60]numbred of you, according to your whole number, from twenty years old and up­ward, which have murmured against me.

All these things considered, they will not suffer us with any plausible pretence to say, or to think that God owned this People in the bulk of them, as his Visible Church, for any such reason, as because they seem­ed to be Invisibly related to him by special grace. And if not, then it must be upon some, or all of these ac­counts following, unless any other more likely can be thought of, which I am not able to foresee, nor to suspect.

1. They were in some sort holy and separated unto God, as they were Born of Parents who were in Covenant with him. Upon which account they were called a holy Seed, Ezra 9.2. Now the holiness of persons always signifies some such special relation to God, which is not common to all persons as such. Almighty God has another kind of right to the Chil­dren [Page 61]of such as are his by Covenant, than he has to the Children of those that are not, as indeed he is in some sort more a God to such Children, than he is to the Children of others. God has a Right to all Children, and is related to them, and they to him, as he is their Creator, and they his Creatures. But he has a more special right to the Children of them that are in Covenant with him, tho such Parents have taken Covenant with God. And thus the Children of those Jews which were offered in Sacrifice by the Parents unto their I­dols, were claimed by God as his Children, and as Born to him, Ezek. 16.20. Thou hast taken thy Sons and thy Daughters whom thou hast born un­to me, and these thou hast sacrificed to them to be destroy'd. vers. 21. Thou hast slain my Children to cause them to pass through the fire, chap. 23.37. They caused the Sons whom they bare unto me, to pass for them through the fire. Tho these wicked Parents had forfeited their right to the benefits of the Co­venant [Page 62]in Gods part, through their defection from him to Idolatry, yet they had not thereby made void his right to them, and to their Children which he had by their having entred into Covenant with him to be his, and therefore he calls them his Chil­dren, and says they were born unto him. And it was in this respect in all likelihood, that St. Paul called those Children holy that had one believing Parent, tho the other were an unbe­liever, 1 Cor. 7.14. The Children be­came related to God in some fort as his (for that's the meaning of their being holy) by the Parents having devoted themselves to God by Cove­nant. How else could the Females among the Jews be related to God as his, when they were not Circum­cised? By which yet the Males be­came Gods by right of Covenant, and so his, as that their Children became his, and to be related to him in an in­feriour degree by right of birth. And in this sence those words of St. Paul may be understood when he says, If [Page 63]the root be holy, so are the branches, Rom. 11.16. And thus Jews by na­ture (or by birth) are opposed to Sinners of the Gentiles, as Saints are opposed to Sinners, Gal. 2.15.

And we shall find that Almighty God did not only claim a right to the natural Seed of Jewish Parents, by virtue of their being in Covenant with him, but also a right to those Strangers of which they were abso­lute owners, whether they were born in the house, or bought with money, both Fathers and their Children: and accordingly he commanded them to be mark'd for his, and to be brought into Covenant with him by Circum­cising all the Males both Fathers and Children, Gen. 17.12, 13, 23. And thus again, when any other Strangers did voluntarily joyn themselves to the Lord to be his Servants in a way of Proselytism; the Lord by virtue of the Fathers doing so, laid claim to their Children, and required them to be brought into Covenant with him by their Males being Circumcised.

And thus we see why the whole body of the Jewish Nation might be all called Gods holy People, and yet not upon account of inherent sanctifi­cation.

By the way then, all these things considered, we may observe one rea­son why (as we may well conceive) the Apostles in their times Baptized the Housholds of Christian Parents when they Baptized the Parents them­selves. For the Children of Christian Parents became holy unto God with a Relative holiness, by their Parents being his by Covenant, as well as the Children by Jewish and Proselyted Parents had been in times before, as I shewed before from those words, Else were your Children unclean, but now are they holy, 1 Cor. 7.14. And they being so, I cannot apprehend a­ny reason why they should not be as capable of being brought into Cove­nant with God by Baptism, as ever the Children of Jews, Proselytes, and of the Bond-men of the Jews, had been by Circumcision. And until [Page 65]there can be a good reason assigned for the contrary, it is but reasonable to believe that the Apostles in Bap­tizing Housholds, did Baptize little Children. For such Children being born of Parents in Covenant with God, were qualified for being entred into Covenant themselves: because they were thereby called by God to profess the true Religion, supposing they should live to be instructed by their Parents; who always teach their Children to be of the same Re­ligion which they profess themselves. And this was under the Old Testa­ment, and has been under the New, Gods ordinary way of calling men to profess the true Religion, as I have formerly shew'd.

2. Another reason why the whole body of the Jews were called Gods Children, his Saints, or holy People, might be, because they were such by Covenant, in an external considera­tion; that is, they had Covenanted with God to be such; and by that they were also separated from other [Page 66]People that were not called by his Name.

3. Because of a partial performance of Covenant on their part. For they worshipped the true God, and him only as yet (except in the case of the golden Calf) who therefore was called the God of Israel, when al­most all the world besides worship­ped Idols. They also worshipped him with a worship of his own ap­pointment; the matter of their wor­ship consisted of Gods own instituted Ordinances, when the worship of all the rest of the world, in a manner, consisted of Superstitious and Idola­trous inventions. And by these they were a People separated to God, and differenced from the rest of the world: and thus far they glorified the God of Israel, when the rest of the world generally dishonoured him by false worship, both in the object and sub­ject of it.

That which they were chiefly wanting in, was Morality, a true love to God, confidence in him, and sub­mission [Page 67]to him; and in justice and charity towards men, and humility, temperance, and sobriety in respect of themselves.

Notwithstanding which, God did not put this People of his out of his special protection, by delivering them into the hands of Spoilers, as in the days of the Judges, until they so grosly broke Covenant with him, as to serve other Gods. And when the Lord did at last put them away from him, as it were, and cast them out of his sight by sending them into Captivity, the ten Tribes into Assyria, and the two into Babylon, yet this did not befall them, until they had forsaken the Covenant they had made with God, and that in the highest, in worshipping other Gods, and in observing the Statutes of the Heathen. Tho their immoralities were otherwise very great, yet God did not give this Peo­ple a Bill of Divorce, until they had horribly corrupted themselves with spiritual Whoredome in point of worship. See how their being cast [Page 68]off by God is charged in special upon this kind of breach of Covenant, Deut. 29.25. & 31, 20. 2 King. 17.15, 16, 35, 38. Jer. 22.9. Ezek. 16.59. and other places. All which does intimate that Almighty God owned them for his People externally, so long as they owned him only for their God, according to their Cove­nant with him, tho otherwise they had great guilt upon them.

This still confirms what was said before; that tho the immoralities of this People, for the generality of them, were such in other respects, as that all that they had done in Cove­nanting, and in a partial performance of Covenant, could not give them the reputation of being Members of the Invisible Church, yet their Cove­nant with God, and partial perfor­mances of it, in worshipping him only with a worship of his own appoint­ment, did denominate them in an ex­ternal and visible respect to be his People, and so his, as the rest of the world were not.

By the way then, if those of this Church under the Old Testament were stiled Saints, a holy People, and the like, upon other accounts, and in other respects than their being re­ally and inherently holy, as I have shewed they were, by inspired men, then it cannot be concluded but that the People of the Churches in the New Testament were so likewise, when the Apostles in their Epistles to them, stiled them Saints, the Sanctified in Christ Jesus, and the like. For the same Epithetes and Appellations signifie but the same thing in the Old Testament as in the New. In both they signifie a People separated from the Pagan unbelieving world, unto God, among whom some were more so, and some less, some by external Covenant and profession, and some by that and much more, to wit, by the Renovation of the whole inner man.

I the rather note this as I pass a­long, because those of the Congre­gational way, lay so great a stress as [Page 70]they do upon St. Pauls stiling the Churches to whom he wrote, Saints, for the proving as they would have it, that none but such as are savingly sanctified are Church-matter, or to be admitted as Church-Members, ex­cept when it is done through mistake of them that admit them.

Having taken a brief survey how things stand related, touching Visible Church-Membership under the Old Testament; I shall now proceed to enquire how matters stand declared touching the same under the New. And our inquiry must be whether persons adult, are by no other means Visible Church-Members, unless they are reputatively Members of the Church as Invisible. Or whether they do not become truly Members of the Visible Church in Scripture ac­count by their voluntary Covenan­ting by Baptism with God the Fa­ther, Son, and Holy Ghost, tho it should be supposed that there is not enough in them to denominate them Members of the Church as Invisible.

The question is not whether it does not become those who admit men into the Church by Baptism and the Baptismal Covenant, to think the best of them who are so admitted, and to hope they do it with a sin­cere mind, when they therein give up themselves to God. But whether their due admission thereto does de­pend upon such a judgment in those that admit them? Or whether such Persons may be refused, and not suf­fered to Covenant with God in Bap­tism, and thereby to enter into the Church, tho they offer themselves thereto and desire it, in case those whose office and place it is to admit men thereto, should be unsatisfied touching the truth of their saving Conversion or Regeneration?

Or thus, the question is not whe­ther it be not the duty of every man that enters into Covenant with God in Baptism, to do it with a sincere mind, and with all his heart: But whether this be required by way of condition, without which it is neither [Page 72]lawful for the person himself to Co­venant with God, nor for others to suffer him to do it, if they suspect he will do it with such a frame of mind, as is short of Regeneration.

Nor is the question whether a man might not be refused admission into the Church, in case there were cause to suspect him to have an evil design in desiring it, to betray the Christians to their Enemies; upon ac­count of which suspicion its proba­ble the Disciples refused Saul's joyn­ing with them after his Conversion, tho he desired it, until they had re­ceived better satisfaction concerning him. But the question is whether such as have only some general and in distinct belief that Christ is the Son of God, and Saviour of the world by his death; and that the way of Chri­stianity is the way of Salvation, and do desire admission into the Christian Church to be further instructed in that way; and in order thereto are willing to enter into Covenant with God, and to be Baptized: I say the [Page 73]question is, whether such may be suffe­red to Covenant with God, and enter into the Church by Baptism, supposing them as yet to have no thorow saving work of Conversion wrought in them, but only so much as may be hoped is preparatory and dispository thereto, but yet have something, tho not all, which is necessary to it, and whose profession is serious and sincere so far as it goes, as that is opposed to dissembling knowingly.

And to prove that they may, and that the lawfulness of such Covenan­ting by Baptism, does not depend upon their being savingly Regene­rate: and that our Saviour himself owns Unregenerate men received in­to the Visible Church by such Cove­nanting in Baptism, to be as well Members of it, as the Regenerate, I shall offer several things.

1. And I shall lay down this first as a foundation to build upon in this proof, viz. That it is not a thing un­lawful in it self, for some such as are not of the Church as Invisible by rege­nerating [Page 74]Grace, to enter into Cove­nant with God to be his People; nor is such a qualification enjoyned as a necessary condition of doing so.

When all the Males at Age in A­brahams House were commanded to enter into Covenant with God by Circumcision: And when his Seed after him were required to cause all the Male-strangers bought with their money to do the like: And when the Proselytes from among the Gen­tiles were required to Circumcise themselves and all their Males, and thereby to enter into Covenant with God: I say in all this there was no such thing as their being Circumcised in heart, enjoyned as a condition of their so entring into Covenant by Circumcision. The Lord also com­manded Joshua to Circumcise all the Hebrew Males that in the space of forty years had been born in the Wilder­ness, which was an entering them in­to Covenant with God, and this without any condition of such quali­fication as would have made them of the Church as Invisible.

Nay, Almighty God at another time commanded all Israel, Men, Wo­men, and Children, and the Stran­gers in their Camp, to enter into Co­venant with him, and into his Oath, Deut. 29.10, 11, 12. This command was absolute and peremptory also, and without condition. The Lord did not in this, nor in any of the other instances require men to enter into Covenant with him only upon this condition, that they did already tru­ly fear him, and sincerely love him, or otherwise to forbear: No, but he required this Covenanting with him, to this end, that they might truly fear and love him, and cleave to him only; as a means to such an end.

No man will say that Almighty God did fore-know when he com­manded all those fore-mentioned to enter into Covenant with him, that in doing it, they would all of them be qualified with such regenerating Grace, and spiritual Life, as all those are, who are of the Church as Invi­sible; which yet they must say or [Page 76]suppose, if they will say, that the law­fulness of Covenanting with God does depend upon their being Rege­nerate when they do it; unless they will say, that God commanded such of them as were not so qualified, to do a thing which in its own nature was sinful and unlawful, which I presume none will dare to say.

By all which, it appears with full evidence, as I apprehend, that it is not unlawful for some such as are not of the Church as invisible, to enter into Covenant with God to be his People: And that the lawfulness of such Covenanting does not depend upon mens being qualified with Re­generating Grace. And if so, then the lawfulness of mens being admit­ted into the Visible Church by Cove­nanting with God by Baptism, does not depend upon their being reputed Members of the Church as Invisible, or such as are Regenerate.

2. My next reason or argument I draw from our Saviours Commission to his Apostles, directing them, who [Page 77]or what manner of Persons they should Baptize, and by Baptism re­ceive into his Visible Church, viz. such as were made Disciples. The words of the Commission run thus, Go ye therefore teach all Nations, Bap­tizing them, &c. Or Disciple all Na­tions, or make Disciples in all Na­tions, so others render it. The A­postles then according to their Com­mission, were to Baptize all those who first were made Disciples, and by the Baptismal Covenant to enter them into the Church.

Mens being made Disciples then was the rule given by our Saviour, by which the Apostles were to govern themselves, touching who and what manner of Persons they were to re­ceive into the Church by Baptism. And those were Disciples, who did attend upon the teaching of Christian Tea­chers with a desire to learn their do­ctrine, whether they had attained to Regeneration thereby or no. And such the Apostles had in Commission to Baptize. From this Commission of Christ then I argue thus.

If our Lord Jesus commanded his Apostles to Baptize all that were Dis­ciples, and thereby to bring them in­to the Church (as he did) then he commanded or authorised more to be brought into the Visible Church by the Baptismal Covenant, than were truly Regenerate. For men might be Disciples in an inferior sence, and were so, who yet were not Regene­rate. Such Disciples had our Savi­our himself. Such were those, who upon the sight of his Miracles believed on him, with whom yet he would not trust himself, because he knew what was in them. John 2.23, 24. And such were those, John 6.66. of whom it is said, From that time many of his Disciples went back, and walked no more with him. And such an Unrege­rate Disciple was Judas. And such perhaps were Ananias and Sapphira, and such was Simon Magus, and ma­ny other unprofitable branches, that by Baptism had been planted into Christ the true Vine.

And that our Saviour by Com­missionating the Apostles to Baptize Disciples, intended no less but that they should Baptize all such as were made or became Disciples as such, whether Regenerate or not; and that they could understand his Com­mission no otherwise, our Saviours own practice and example will infer it. For tho he knew all men, and what was in them, and had declared in their hearing, that some of his Dis­ciples did not righty believe (John 6.64.) yet did not reject those as no Disciples, whom he knew to be Un­regenerate, so long as they followed him as Disciples, but caused them to be Baptized as well as those he knew to be better, as those words imply, John 4.1, 2. When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and Baptized more Disciples than John; tho Jesus himself Baptized not, but his Disciples, &c. These words imply both, that he caused as many to be Baptized as were made Disciples, and that there were great [Page 80]numbers famed to be so made and Baptized. And yet so far, as ap­pears there were but few of them that firmly cleaved to our Saviour till the last: For we read of but about an hundred and twenty Men and Wo­men that appeared as his avowed Dis­ciples after our Saviours Resurrection, till the day of Pentecost. Act. 1.

From all which, we may observe these two things.

1. That it was not disagreeable to our Saviours mind, that more should enter into Covenant with God by Baptism, and thereby be brought in­to the Visible Church, than were tru­ly Regenerate: which is a further confirmation of our former argu­ment.

2. That if the Apostles had known (as our Saviour did) those Disciples that offered themselves to Baptism, being Unregenerate, to be so; yet that would not have made it unlaw­ful to admit them to Baptism, and in­to the Church, no more than what our Saviour caused to be done in like case, did.

All this shews, that men were received by the Apostles into the Church, upon other terms than the reputation of their being of the Church as Invisible, before they were so received.

3. My next Argument to prove that they were, and that our Saviour would have his Apostles to under­stand that they were to be received upon larger terms, I gather from our Saviours instructing his Apostles so thorowly, and so frequently as he did, that his Church would consist of bad as well as good: which is also an argument that he did account such to be a part and Members of his Visible Church. Which we cannot think he would have done without cautioning them to look to it, and to take heed of letting such into his Church; much less would he, on the contrary, have bid them compel men to come in, that his House might be full, if he had de­signed that the Apostles should keep all out of the Church, but such of whose effectual conversion to God they were well satisfied.

Our Saviour by many Parables did thorowly inform his Apostles, that his Church would consist of a mix­ture of bad as well as good, of foolish as well as wise. Thus he told them, that the Kingdom of Heaven should be likened unto ten Virgins, whereof five Wise and five Foolish, Mat. 25.1, 2. By the Kingdom of Heaven our Savi­our in his Parables, and so in this, means the Kingdom of the Messias here on Earth, which is his Visible Church, in which he Reigns and Rules by his Gospel, as the Law of that Kingdom. And those are the People or Subjects of this Kingdom, who own him for their King, and his Gospel for the Law of his Kingdom. And the different effects which this Gospel was to have in the lives and behaviour of such as should receive it, was accordingly foretold by our Saviour, and resembled by various Parables, as it is here by the Wise and Foolish Virgins.

Thus we have it again in another Parable concerning the Marriage of a [Page 83]Kings Son, to which both good & bad were invited, and did come, and the Wedding was furnished with such guests, Mat. 22.

The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares that sprang up amongst it: The Parable of the Draw-net, that being cast into the Sea, gathered of every kind, bad as well as good, are of the same import. And so is the Parable of the Sower and his Seed: Wherein four sorts of Hearers or Pro­fessors of the Gospel are resembled by four sorts of ground, into which the Seed fell, of which there is but one thorowly good, Mat. 13.

Add unto this, that our Saviour did not only fore-tell his Apostles by these Parables, what different success the Preaching of the Gospel would meet with, even among those that would receive it, and how his Church would be filled with many bad as well as good; but also told them plainly, without a Parable, That many would be called, and yet but sew chosen, Mat. 20.16.

Wherefore, and for what reason (may we conceive) did our Saviour thus instruct his Disciples, touching what the state and condition of his Church would be, which should be gathered by the Preaching of the Gospel? but that they might not be disappointed in their expectations, nor be offended when afterwards they should find it to consist of such a mix­ture; or ever expect (tho they should observe his rules for the purg­ing his Church) to find it otherwise, until the end of the world, the time appointed for a total gathering out of his Kingdom, all things that offend, and them which do iniquity.

And that the Apostles did not un­derstand otherwise by our Saviours Parables and Doctrine, but that the worser as well as the better Christians were of this Kingdom of Heaven, the Visible Church, their Epistles to such Churches, in which there was such a mixture, shew; for they counted them, and treated them as Christian Brethren; in so much as St. Paul [Page 85]would not have such as deserved Church-censure, and in some sort were under it, to be counted as Ene­mies, but admonished as Brethren, 2 Thes. 3.14, 15.

The Apostles then being thus tho­rowly instructed by our Saviour a­fore-hand, touching the constitution of his Church of bad as well as good; it is no ways likely that they would receive none into the Church, but un­der the notion of such as were truly Regenerate.

4. There are some circumstances relating to the Apostles receiving Persons into the Visible Church by Baptism, which render it incredible that they did not so receive any, but upon the reputation and esteem they had of being of the Church as In­visible.

First, one thing was the doctrine by which they most prevailed with men to become Disciples. Which doctrine was the Preaching that pardon of sin, and the happiness of Eternal Life are to be had by Christs suffering for Sin­ners, [Page 86]if they believe in him, and the Preaching to the People, that this Jesus rose from the Dead after his. E­nemies had put him to death, and con­firming the truth of what they said by astonishing miracles. It's true, they did together with this, Preach the necessity of Repentance also: But the glad tidings of Pardon and Salvation by a Saviour so extraordinarily con­firmed as it was, being new, and ne­ver heard of before, especially among the Gentiles, and being so hugely comfortable as it was, did so strongly affect the People, as made them in­stontly turn Disciples, and to promise, no doubt, a reformation of life, with an intent to perform, while they were thus filled with joy. But many of them after this transport of affection and newness of joy was over, tho they held fast the comfortable part of their profession of faith in Christ, and in his Death, yet proved partial and defective in reforming their lives, which rendred the work of Regene­ration in them very doubtful at least, or rather worse than so.

And the Apostles were fore-warn­ed and pre-instructed by our Savi­our, that upon their Preaching the joyful news which the Gospel brings, many would be so taken with it, as readily and joyfully to become Disci­ples, and turn Christian in profession, who yet would afterwards, when times of tryal came, either Apostotize and fall off, or foully faulter in re­taining that profession, by carnal shifts to secure themselves from Per­secution. For our Saviour had told them this, by opening to them who or what manner of hearers he meant by those resembled in the Parable to the stony ground on which the Seed fell; and said they were such, as when they heard the word, would immediately receive it with gladness, but afterwards in time of temptation, would be of­fended, as not having root in them­selves, Mar. 4.16.

All which considered, it was no ways probable that the Apostles re­ceived all they Baptized under the notion of Persons already truly Rege­nerate, [Page 88]but as Disciples only, accor­ding to the tenour of their Com­mission.

Secondly, another circumstance is the great hast the Apostles made to Baptize Persons when once they had prevailed with them to consent to it. The same day of Pentecost they Preach­ed to those mentioned, Act. 2. they Baptized about three thousand of them. And so Philip Baptized the Eunuch presently upon the Road, af­ter once Preaching to him. And the Jaylor and all his were Baptized straight-way, and in the same hour of the night in which Paul and Silas first Preached to them, Act. 16.33. I think there can no instance be given of their delaying so much as four and twenty hours to Baptize any after they were willing to be Baptized.

This is another thing which ren­ders it very incredible, that the A­postles Baptized none but upon ac­count of their being esteemed Rege­nerate, or that they did Baptize Per­sons ordinarily by any other rule than [Page 89]that contained in the letter of their Commission, which was to Baptize those that were Disciples, as such. If they had thought it necessary to Bap­tize none but whom they could pru­dently esteem to be of the Invisible Church, they would in all likelihood have suspended the Baptizing of ma­ny at least, until they had had some tryal of the constancy of their reso­lution, and experience of their re­formation. And so much the rather, because it is hard to make any good judgment of mens sincerity by what they do on a sudden under some transport of affection, and before they have had some time in cooler thoughts to deliberate upon what they engage to do.

Thirdly, their refusing none that were willing to be Baptized, argues that they did not think none were to be Baptized before they were Rege­nerate, or did seem to be so. They refused none (so far as appears) that were willing to be Baptized, and to come into the Church, how notori­ously [Page 90]bad soever they had been be­fore. Simon Magus is a famous in­stance of this nature. And some were admitted into the Church by Bap­tism, before they had quite lost off their Idolatrous worship. For some with conscience of the Idol unto this hour, eat it as a thing offered to an I­dol, and their conscience being weak, is defiled, saith St. Paul, concerning some in the Church of Corinth, whom he afterwards admonisheth to flee from Idolatry, 1 Cor. 8.7. & 10.14.

Now if a judgment of mens being truly Regenerate had been the rule by which the Apostles and others had governed themselves in Baptizing of men, suspicion would hardly have suffered Philip to have Baptized such an one as Simon the Sorcerer without some considerable tryal of him. And considering what discerning men the Apostles were, it is very strange that they should discern none of those un­fit to be Baptized whom yet they did Baptize, that were very bad before they were Baptized, and proved to [Page 91]be so still shortly after: I say this would seem strange, in case nothing less had qualified them for Baptism, than a reputation of their being Re­generate.

These circumstances considered, together with the plain rule the Apo­stles had in their Commission, whom to Baptize, to wit, Disciples as such; it is more than probable that they go­verned themselves by that rule, and Baptized those they did Baptize un­der the notion of Disciples, or such as were learning to be Christians, without tying themselves to a judg­ment that they were already Rege­nerate.

5. Our blessed Saviour who does not judge according to outward ap­pearance, but according to his cer­tain knowledge of things, does ac­count such to be of his Visible Church, whom yet he knows to be none of the Invisible. This I gather from his own words, John 15.2. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit, he taketh away. By which, he supposeth, and [Page 92]plainly intimates, that there would be many such branches in him, by be­ing in his Visible Church, which yet being unfruitful, and to be taken a­way, are therefore not of the Invisi­ble. For by their being in him, is doubtless meant of their being exter­nally and visibly united to him as members of his body, the Church as Visible. And how can we conceive them to be united to him so as to be said to be in him, but by Covenanting with him in Baptism? For by that they are brought into him: Baptized into Christ, as St. Paul speaks, Gal. 3.27. and planted in him by Baptism, Rom. 6.5.

And upon the same account, and for the same reason for which our Sa­viour judgeth and accounteth men to be in him, to be of his Visible Church, we may, we must so account them likewise. The Scripture knoweth no other being in Christ, but by be­ing united and related to him, either by external Covenanting with him, or by internal Renovation. In this [Page 93]latter sence, such unfruitful branches as our Saviour speaks of in the Text aforesaid, are not in him: and there­fore it must be understood in the for­mer sence, unless any third sence of mens being in Christ can be found out in Scripture, which I never yet heard of.

6. Our blessed Saviour in the Pri­mitive times owned such to be of his Visible Church as were not of the Invisible, by pouring out upon them miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost. That there were such gifts poured out upon such men as tho they did believe, yet not to the saving of the soul, is evident by our Saviours own words, Mat. 7.22. Many will say un­to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not Prophesied in thy name, and in thy name have cast out Devils, and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I ne­ver knew you. Depart from me ye that work iniquity. And the Author to the Hebrews plainly supposes that such as were partakers of the Holy Ghost, [Page 94]might be so bad as quite to fall away from the Christian profession, Heb. 6.4, 5, 6.

And that our Saviour by pouring out such gifts upon such men, did own them as related to him, and as Members of his Visible Church, will appear when we consider that the promise of these was made to such as should believe and only to such, Mark 16.17. These signs shall follow those that believe: In my name shall they cast out Devils, they shall speak with new tongues. By conferring up­on such Believers, whose faith did not operate to Regeneration, he set his Seal upon them as mark'd for his in a visible relation. For the pouring out of miraculous gifts of the Spirit, is called the sealing of the Spirit. Af­ter ye believed, ye were sealed with the holy spirit of promise, Ephe. 1.13.

There was a two-fold seal of the Spi­rit; the one by inward sanctification, or renewing men to the Image of God. Of this St. Paul seems to speak, 2 Cor. 1.22. Who hath sealed us, and [Page 95]given the earnest of the spirit in our hearts. This Sealing belongs to the Invisible state of the Church. But then there was a sealing of the spirit which belonged then to the visible state of the Church, by which, a vi­sible mark or seal was set upon them, and by which God owned them as related to him as Members of his Vi­sible Church, and that was the con­ferring upon them some extraordi­nary or miraculous gifts. And this was common to those that had but common grace, and were unregene­rate, as well as to them that had spe­cial, as appears by the 7th. of Mat. and 6th. of Heb. fore-mentioned. These extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost seem to be confined to the Vi­sible Church, 1 Cor. 12.28. God hath set in the Church, Apostles, Prophets and Teachers, then Miracles, gifts of Heal­ing, diversities of Tongues; by which, those that had them bestowed up­on them, were known to be of the Church, and to be owned by God to be so.

The conferring miraculous gifts upon such men as yet shall be re­jected by Christ at last, as workers of iniquity, argues these things. First, that they were Believers in Christ in a sence, because they wrought their Miracles in his Name, and by virtue of Faith in his Name: And because our Saviour had said that such signs as they shew'd should follow them that be­lieve, Mark 16.17. Secondly, that they professed the Christian doctrine: for that miraculous power was conferred upon them for the confirmation of the doctrine they professed and Preached. The Lord working with them, and confirming the Word with signs following, vers. 20. Besides, our Saviour brings them in pleading that they had Prophesied in his Name. Thirdly, they being Believers, Pro­fessors and Preachers of the Christi­an doctrine, it argues that they had been Baptized, and by Baptism made Members of the Visible Church, and that our Saviour did own them for such, by conferring on them such ex­traordinary [Page 96]gifts which he did not be­stow upon Unbelievers.

7. I might add in the last place, that our Saviour owns some bad men to be related to him as his Servants. Hence it is that he calls them Servants, tho slothful Servants, Mat. 25, 26. unprofitable Servants, vers. 30. evil Ser­vants, Mat. 24.48. wicked Servants, chap. 18.32. The title of Servants is given to such as these, because they are of the Houshold of the great Lord and Master; that is, Members of his Visible Church, which is his House. And St. Paul saith, in a great House (and so in the Church he means) there are not only Vessels of gold, and of sil­ver, but also of wood and of earth, and some to honour, and some to dishonour, 2 Tim. 2.20. And our Saviour hath said, that many shall come from the East and West, and shall sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the Kingdom of Heaven; but the Children of the Kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness, Mat. 8.11, 12.

Having seen what evidence the ho­ly Scriptures do afford to prove that God, that Christ himself does own others to be part of his Visible Church, than such as are of the Church as invisible, I shall now proceed to take into consideration such Texts of Scripture as in the apprehension of some seem most to favour the contra­ry opinion.

I will begin with 1 Pet. 3.21. The like figure whereunto Baptism doth also now save us, not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good Conscience towards God, by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Whence it is argued, that those who were re­ceived into the Church by Baptism, were always supposed such as had the answer of a good Conscience towards God, the inward qualification which answers the outward figure or sign in Baptism, Death unto sin, and a Re­surrection unto a new life.

But the answer to this is very easie. The Apostle in these words was shewing what is necessary in the par­ties [Page 99]Baptized, besides their Baptism, to make their Baptism available to their salvation; but not what is ne­cessary by way of condition to their being Baptized: this Text meddles not with that, so far as appears by a­ny clause or circumstance in it. And is much of the same nature, and much like to that of St. Paul, Rom. 2.28, 29. where he saith, That is not Circum­cision which is outward in the flesh, but that which is of the heart and in the spirit. By which, he does not mean that Circumcision which was but out­ward in the flesh, served to no other ends, but to signifie Heart-circumcisi­on: for it did engage the Circumcised in Covenant with God, and initiate them, and give them entrance into the Church, and made them parta­kers of the Oracles and Ordinances of God there, as he shews in the follow­ing words in the next Chapter: But his meaning was, that Circumcision in the flesh alone, without Circumcision of the heart, would not avail to any mans having acceptance with God.

So here, that Baptism which con­sists in outward washing only, the putting away the filth of the flesh, will not save, will not avail to salva­tion without the answer of a good Conscience towards God. But then it does not follow, but that it may a­vail as well as Circumcision in the Letter did, to bring men into the Vi­sible Church, and to procure them the benefit of the outward privi­ledges of it.

Another Text is, John 3.5. Except a man be born of Water, and of the Spi­rit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. Some that are of the opinion which I am opposing, by the King­dom of God here, understand the Church, as well Visible as Invisible, and then infer, that none can enter in­to the Church without being born of the Spirit as well as of Water.

But the answer to this is very easie. For if by Kingdom of God here, we understand either the Church as Invisible, or the Kingdom of glory, it is granted that men cannot enter in­to [Page 101]to the Kingdom of God except they be born of the Spirit. But then this does not at all oppose what I have been proving, viz. That Men may be, and many really are Members of the Visible Church, and that in Gods ac­count, who yet are none of the Invi­sible Church by being born of the Spi­rit, or internally Regenerated.

And that by Kingdom of God here, cannot be meant the Visible Church, is evident, because many have entered into it, who yet have not been born of the Spirit, as I have, as I think, abundantly proved, against all reasonable contradictions. Our Saviour we see speaks here of a being born of Water, and of a being born of the Spirit, which are two distinct things. And there are many that have been born of Water, and thereby entered into the Visible Church, that have never been born of the Spirit. And there are many also that have entered into the Visible Church by being born of Water, who have been born of the Spirit, but not till afterwards, [Page 102]not till some time after they have been in the Visible Church. We must suppose this, or else say there is no possibility of effectual conversion in the Visible Church; which is a thing so absurd to imagine, and so much against all experience, as that no man, I think, has the heart to as­sert it, which yet must be asserted if the other be denied.

It is further alledged from those words, Tit. 3.5. According to his mer­cy he saved us by the washing of Regene­ration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost. I say it is hence alledged, that since Baptism is called the washing of Re­generation, that therefore those who are admitted to Baptism, must be sup­posed to be Regenerated before or in Baptism.

Answer. This follows not, since Baptism may be called the washing of Regeneration for another reason, and in another respect more probable, and that is, because men by Covenant are engaged to become new men, and to lead new lives. And it is from this [Page 103]engagement by Baptism that St. Paul so often exhorts and persuades Chri­stians to mortification and a new life, as we see he does, Rom 6.2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Col. 2.12. & 3.1, 2. As John the Baptist Baptized the People unto Re­pentance, Mat. 3. [...]. So they are Bap­tized unto Regeneration; that is, they are thereby brought under a solemn engagement to repent, and so to be Regenerate. And in this respect Baptism is properly enough called the Laver of Regeneration. Not that Baptism does inwardly Regenerate by the act done or suffered to be done, tho it does engage to it; but it is the work of the Holy Ghost as the principal agent, and therefore is here called the Renewing of the Ho­ly Ghost.

And its evident that the washing of Regeneration, and the Renewing of the Holy Ghost are here mentioned as two different things, as they are in their own nature. Altho the Chri­stians here spoken of, were said to be saved according to Gods mercy by [Page 104]both, yet it no ways follows that this end could not be attained, unless they were renewed by the Holy Ghost at the same instant in which they were Baptized, for the one might succeed the other in point of time, as often it hath done. And if so, there can no necessity be inferred from hence of not admitting men to the one, but upon supposition of their being already qualified with the o­ther.

It is true, men by Baptism it self are brought into a new state externally; they are brought into a new relation to God, to Christ, and to the Church his body, and to new enjoyments al­so in the Church. And it is to be noted our Saviour calls Baptism, a be­ing born of Water, as a birth distinct from that of being born of the Spirit. Our Saviour in that discourse of his with Nicodemus about Baptism, and being born again, seems to allude to the Jews custom of receiving Prose­lytes by Baptism as well as by Circum­cision, who did reckon they were [Page 105]thereby born again as it were, and brought into a new state of life, as is well known by the tenour of the writings of the Jewish Doctors. And altho by being born of Water, men may be said to be born of the Spirit in one sence, for they are Baptized into the Name of the Holy Ghost, as well as into the Name of the Father and the Son: and by one spirit we are all Baptized into one body, as the Apo­stle faith, 1 Cor. 12.13. Yet in a higher and more emphatical sence, all that are born of the Spirit, are not so born when they are Baptized, but most of them afterwards, as the ex­perience of the Church doth abun­dantly manifest.

Again, another Scripture is Act. 2.38. Repent and be Baptized every one of you, in the Name of the Lord Jesus, for the remission of sins. Now it may be some will argue hence, that since Baptism is enjoyned in order to the obtaining of remission of sins: and since Baptism alone without Repen­tance here required with it, will not [Page 106]avail for the obtaining such remission, that therefore a being Baptized for the remission of sins, always supposes Repentance in him that is Baptized.

Answer. The most that can be in­ferred hence, is, that Baptism as well as Repentance, and Repentance as well as Baptism are directed to, and enjoyned in order to the obtaining Remission of sins; but not that such Repentance as is available to this end, is enjoyned as the condition of being Baptized, and by that to be received into the Church. Tho I deny not, but that in the adult a profession of sorrow for sin past, and a promise of amendment for time to come, was al­ways required before Baptism, but sorrow for sin alone, avails not to the obtaining of remission of sin, and what the promise of amendment for the future would prove, was uncer­tain to those who received Persons into the Church by Baptism. The Apostles, we may well suppose, re­ceived such raw Disciples to Baptism, as those were to whom this counsel [Page 107]was here given, upon like terms that John the Baptist received the multi­tudes that flock'd to him for Baptism; and they were Baptized, confessing their sins: They confessed themselves such sinners as needed amendment, and professed sorrow for what was past; and by receiving Baptism, engaged themselves to amend for time to come, and accordingly he is said to Baptize them unto Repentance, Mat. 3.11. But very many of them fell short afterwards of performing their engagement, John 5.35. Baptism and Repentance as saving are not insepa­rable in point of time, in reference to the obtaining Remission of sin. If a man do effectually repent, tho it be not till long after he is Baptized, yet his Baptism and Repentance will be effectual for the obtaining Remission of sins. And if so, then such Repen­tance as is saving, is not of necessity before Baptism, to the obtaining of Remission of sins.

But the truth is, if we will infer a­ny thing from the Text under consi­deration, [Page 108]in reference to our present enquiry, it may be that which is so far from proving mens Visible Church-Membership to depend upon the cre­dibility and reputation of their being of the Church as Invisible, as that it will much rather prove the direct con­trary, viz. That the credibility of mens being of the Church as Invisible, depends upon their being of the Church as Visible. For it tends to prove that men living under the Go­spel (and others I meddle not with in this matter) cannot approve them­selves to be Members of the Invisible Church, until they are first made Members of the Visible by Baptism. For we see men are as well to be Bap­tized for the Remission of sin, as to repent to obtain it: As the promise of being saved is elsewhere made unto a being Baptized, as well as it is to be­lieving (He that believeth and is Bap­tized shall be saved, Mark 16.16.) And if so, then a man cannot be concluded to be in a pardoned state, that through his own default is not Baptized, by [Page 109]which he should be made of the Visi­ble Church: and if he cannot be concluded to be in a pardoned state without this, then he cannot be duly reputed to be in the Invisible Church­state, because there are none in that Church-state but what are pardon­ed.

If any should alledge the words of St. Paul, If any man be in Christ, he is a new Creature, (2 Cor. 5.17.) and infer that none are by Baptism, or o­therwise in Christ, but what are new Creatures, the answer to them is this:

If by any mans being in Christ, be understood of such a being in him as is saving, then he is indeed a new Creature, and truly Regenerate. But then that is such a being in Christ as is not visible to men, and therefore does not belong to our present inqui­ry. But if you read the words accor­ding to the Margent, If any man be in Christ, let him be a new Creature, then this Text does not infer, that if men be in Christ they are new Crea­tures, [Page 110]but that they ought to be so, according to their Covenant-ingage­ment, when they were planted into him by Baptism, Act. 2.37. It is like­wise urged to prove that a true saving faith, such as makes men Members of the Church as Invisible, is requi­ed as necessary to qualifie them for Baptism and Visible Church-Member­ship. For when the Eunuch said to Philip, Here is Water, what doth hin­der me to be Baptized? Philip said un­to him, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou maiest, And he answered and said. I believe that Christ is the Son of God. Here Philip seems to make a believing with all the heart, to be the condition of admitting the Eunuch to Baptism; and what less can a believing with all the heart be, than a true saving faith?

To which I answer thus: That the Apostles and Evangelists, such as Philip was, did indeed suppose and expect a faith in Christ, in all adult Persons whom they Baptized into him, is not to be doubted. Nor is [Page 111]is it to be doubted, but that they press'd and persuaded them to be very hearty and serious in their under­taking the Christian profession when they Baptized them into it; and so did Philip here. But yet we see that for all that, Philip Baptized this Eunuch upon his bare professing that he believed Jesus Christ to be the Son of God; tho he did not say that he believed with all his heart. And up­on like terms we may suppose he had Baptized Simon Magus a little before, vers. 13. concerning whom the Scrip­ture tells us, not only that he said he believed, as it does here of the Eu­nuch, but that he did indeed believe. Then Simon himself also believed, saith the Text. And so did those mention­ed, John 2.23. and so did those who were likened to the Stony ground; for they believed for a time, but after fell away, Luk. [...].13. And many a­mong the chief Rulers also believed on Christ, who yet would not confess him, John 12.42. So that when men are said to believe in Christ, it does not [Page 112]always and necessarily imply a saving faith, or a new birth, or an Invisible Church-state. Men might and did believe in Christ before they were Baptized, who yet we cannot say were Regenerate by their believing, or in the Invisible Church-state; as Simon Magus for instance: And yet such believing, or professing to be­lieve, qualified them for Baptism.

And when Philip here required of the Eunuch a believing with all his heart, in order to his being Baptized; we cannot reasonably think that he meant more thereby (if he proposed it as a condition of his being Baptized) then that he should be serious and real in it, in opposition to dissembling. For that was as much as we can rea­sonably think the Eunuch was then capable of knowing concerning him­self, and therefore no more could be expected from him.

But then such a believing with all the heart, could be no argument from which it could be concluded that therefore either he, or any other in [Page 113]his or lower circumstances that did so believe, were therefore savingly Re­generate. For it may very rationally be presumed that all generally, who in the first times of the Gospel, made profession of faith in Christ, in order to their being Baptized, tho many of them Unregenerate, yet did really believe in Christ more or less. For what reason is it imaginable that they should dissemble when they profess'd faith in Christ, as the Son of God, in order to their being Baptized and re­ceived into the Church, when yet as the times were then, they could have no worldly advantage in prospect, as a motive for them to dissemble, and to profess and say they did believe what they knew they did not be­lieve?

And that such a believing as is real, and not dissembled, may be said to be a believing with all the heart, tho it proceed not from, nor is accompa­nied with a principle of regeneration or sincerity in a moral sence, will be yet rendred the more credible, if we [Page 114]consider what the Scripture says in a case not much unlike this under con­sideration. It is said of all Juda, and Berjamin, and of the Strangers out of Ephraim, Manasseth, and Simeon, that they entered into Covenant with an Oath, to seek the Lord God of their Fathers, with all their heart, and with all their soul, 2 Chron. 15.12. And it's said again at the 15th. vers. That all Juda rejoyced at the Oath; for they had sworn with all their heart. Now this Covenant and Oath entred into, was to engage them to worship the true God only, in opposition to their worshipping of strange Gods, in which many of them had been tardy, till Asa the King set upon this work of Reformation, as we may see, chap. 14.3.

And when it's said that all Juda did thus Covenant and Swear with all then heart to seek the Lord God of their Fathers, it can in reason import no more in recerence to many of them, than to signifie that they did not dissemble in doing it, but that [Page 115]there was really the consent of their minds concurring with their verbal engagement by Covenant and Oath. For no considering man will think that this Covenanting by all the men of Juda, without limitation or ex­ception, could proceed from an in­ward principle of Regenerate or Spiritual life in reference to all or them; and yet they are all said to do it, and with all their heart. And if not, then the Covenanting with sll the heart of such of them as had no principle of spiritual life, must be un­derstood of their doing it really, and without dissembling the matter.

I alledge all this to show, that men may do things with all their heart in Religion, when yet what they so do, does not proceed from any principle of Regeneration, or a divine life. And if they may, then we cannot conclude, that tho Philip should be understood to require a believing with all the heart, as a conditional qualification for Baptism, that there­fore he required such a faith, as by [Page 116]which a man must necessarily be Re­generate before he may duly desire Baptism.

And the truth is, it is not to be i­magined that such raw Disciples as were generally Baptized, and of such short standing as to be Baptized the same day, and sometimes near the same hour, in which they were first instructed in the Christian doctrin, could be able to know before they were Baptized, that they did indeed savingly believe; and if not, it could not be reasonable to require the knowledge of such a thing concern­ing themselves, as a condition of their desiring or requiring Baptism.

Men may easily know their own minds, whether they do believe Jesus Christ to be the Son of God or no, and so may be able to profess without dis­simulation, that they do believe that he is, when they do indeed believe so. But because many that did in those times, and do in these believe in Jesus Christ as sent of God, and as the Son of God, who yet were not [Page 117]then, nor are now truly renew'd by it in heart and life, therefore no man can ordinarily satisfie himself touch­ing the soundness and savingness of his faith, but by some competent time of trial and experience of the life and power of it, by its effects in purify­ing the heart and life, and overcom­ing the world, and working by love. We understand by St. James and o­ther Writers of the holy Scriptures, that there were many, who knowing that they did believe, yet unduly promised themselves justification and salvation from such their believing, when yet it was not accompanied with such works of a good and holy life, as by which faith is made perfect. And many such there are, as is justly to be feared, now in our days. These men deceived themselves, they de­ceived their own hearts, as St. James expresseth it: but not in thinking they did believe, for they knew they did, but in persuading themselves that their faith was sufficient to salva­tion, when yet it was but a dead and [Page 118]barren saith, not producing the fruits of a truly Christian temper and con­versation.

Now it was upon the believing Je­sus Christ to be the Son of God, or the Messiah, or he by whom alone sal­vation is to be had, and an undissem­bled profession of this belief, that qua­lifies men for Baptism, however it proved afterwards as to the efficacy of in operation. And this real un­dissembled belief, was that, I doubt not which Philip required of the Eu­nuch, when he said. If thou believest with all thine heart thou maist be Bap­tized. And the Eunuchs answer, up­on which he was Baptized by Philip, does intimate so much, when he on­ly said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And more than this I conceive, cannot be duly inferred from those words of Philip to the Eu­nuch, for the reasons I have already given.

These are the principal Texts made use of to countenance the opinion which I have in this Inquiry opposed. [Page 119]There are objections or pleas drawn from some other, which are well an­swered by Mr. Thomas Lamb, as some of these I have insisted on also are, in his fresh suit against Independency.

And thus upon our Inquiry we have found as I conceive, that o­thers are of the Visible Church in Scripture account, and so in Gods ac­count, by whose inspiration the Scrip­tures were written, than those which are of the Church as Invisible, or them that seem to be so. For Almigh­ty God, as has been shown, account­eth and owneth such to be his People in distinction from the rest of the world, that have entered into Cove­nant with him, tho otherwise they or many of them, are far from seem­ing to be of the Church as Invisible. And if God esteem of them as such, then so must his Servants likewise: and if the Scripture account them such, it will become us to do so too, who profess to make the holy Scrip­tures the rule of our judgment.

After that, upon our Inquiry we have found things thus; Let not any man now say, that by this doctrine we confound the Kingdom of the De­vil with the Kingdom of God. For this would but reflect after an un­seemly manner upon the wisdom of God for thus numbering bad men as well as good to be of his Visible Church, as externally related to him, and as worshippers of him. Secret Hypocrites belong to the Kingdom of the Devil, as well as those that are more visibly such; and yet none de­ny but that many such are in the Vi­sible Church, nor do they count this a confounding Gods Kingdom with the Devils.

There is no doubt but that the Devil has his Visible and Invisible Kingdom as well as God has his. But those Hypocrites, whether secret or more open, which are of the Visible Church, tho they are in a sence of the Kingdom of the Devil, yet must be reckoned to be not of his Visible, but of his Invisible Kingdom. So [Page 121]that the Hypothesis I seek to esta­blish, does not at all tend to confound Gods visible Kingdom, and the De­vils visible Kingdom one with ano­ther, much less their Invisible King­doms.

For those are not in Scripture rec­koned to be of the Visible Kingdom of the Devil, who professedly worship the true God, and him only, and Je­sus Christ as his Son and only Media­tor, tho otherwise bad: But such as worship Idols, other gods, and other mediators, in doing of which, they do in effect worship the Devil, who is the founder of such worship.

Those Kingdoms or Nations are in Scripture counted of the Devils King­dom or Dominion, in which his Wor­ship and Ordinances (Idol-worship, and the Rites of that worship) are established by publick Authority, as the Religion of those Nations. As on the contrary, those Nations or Kingdoms are counted Gods King­doms, in which the Word and Wor­ship of God are by publick Authority [Page 122]owned and established as the Religi­on of those Nations. Thus when Idol worship was put down, and cast out of the several Territories of the Roman Empire by the first Christian Emperors, and the Christian Religi­on established by publick Authority, as the Religion of those Nations, then the Devil was said to be cast down, and the Kingdom of God, and the power of his Christ, to be come, Rev. 12.9, 10. And again, The Kingdoms of this world are said to become the King­doms of the Lord and of his Christ: When idol-worship which is Devil­lish worship, is rejected by the Au­thority of those Kingdoms, Revel. 11.15. Not that there shall be no Hypo­crites or Carnal Professors of Chri­stianity in these Kingdoms, when they are thus become the Kingdoms of the Lord, and of his Christ: But tho there be, [...] as the true Chri­stian doctrine and worship is owned and established by the Government or ruling power of those Kingdoms; and so long as the generality of the [Page 123]Inhabitants are for the same doctrine and worship in opposition to Idola­trous and Antichristian doctrine and worship, they are accounted to be­long to Gods Visible Kingdom in the world, and not the Devils, however many of those Inhabitants may be­long to the Invisible Kingdom of the Devil. And thus those are called the Children of Gods Kingdom by our Saviour, who yet at last shall be cast out into outer darkness, Mat. 8.12. But of this more afterwards.

QUERY IX. WHether God hath granted any right to Church-priviledges, to those who are only of the Church as Visible, but not as Invisible?

That such have right to them be­fore men, unless they are justly de­prived of them by Church-censures, those will grant who yet deny that [Page 124]they have any right to them by Gods allowance. But our present enquiry is, whether they have any right by Gods allowance? And if that be true, which we now suppose we found to be so in our former enquiry, viz. that God himself doth own very many such to be of the Church as Vi­sible, which yet are not at all of it as Invisible; then it will be but reason­able to conclude from thence, that he does allow them a share in the exter­nal and temporary priviledges of that relation, except in those cases where­in he himself hath made an exception: For otherwise God by conferring on them the priviledge of Relation to himself and his Church, has conferred upon them a right to the priviledges of that relation, so far as the relation it self extends. For the relation and the priviledges of the relation go to­gether, except in case of forfeiture by miscarriage. The union of parts does of it self infer right to communion with them in things common to the whole,

The right of those in the Visible Church, to Visible Church-privi­ledges, does arise I conceive from that Covenanting between God and them in Baptism, by which they en­gaged themselves to be his People, as God on the other hand had engaged himself to be their God on that con­dition.

Now for ought that appears from the Scriptures to the contrary, so far as they perform Covenant with God, in being a People unto him, so far he owns them to be his People; and so far as he does so, he allows them the priviledge of his People, which is a share in his houshold fare, and in the provisions for his Family, which are his Word and Ordinances. If they worship no other God, and hold the Head Christ Jesus in point of doctrine and worship, and own his doctrine and precepts as the rule of faith and life, and worship God in his Ordi­nances, and have the form of godli­ness, tho otherwise destitute of the power of it; yet as they are thus far [Page 126]a People unto God, so God so far owns them as a People unto him, se­parated unto him from the Idolatrous and Infidel world, and accordingly allows them an interest and share in the external priviledges of his People, of which communion in his Word and Ordinances is the chief. Only where God himself hath put a bar to this en­joyment, there the Visible Church ought to do so too, as in those cases wherein deprivation by Church-cen­sures is enjoyned. Right to the pri­viledges of the Church, comes in by mens relation to it as parts or mem­bers of it: and so long as the relati­on continues, so long a right to the external priviledges continues, except in the case before excepted. Those that are related to the Church, both as Visible and Invisible, have a right from God to Church priviledges both external, internal, and eternal: but those who are related to the Church only externally as it is Visible, have right only to the external priviledges of it.

Thus far we have argued from the nature and reason of the subject un­der consideration. Come we now to enquire what the usage of the Church has been as to point of [...] in this matter, as we have it recorded in Scripture. And as for the Old Testament Church, the whole Na­tion of the Jews that entred into Covenant with God to be his People, were allowed their part and share in the Ordinances of publick worship, and not only so, but were comman­ [...] [...] them, save in some ex­ [...] [...] as while they were un­ [...] [...] legal uncleanness, and in th [...]e particular cases of guilt, for which they were to be deprived of their lives as well as communion, and to be cut off from among the People. Three times in the year were all their Males to appear before the Lord to keep three solemn Feasts appointed: and yet I think no body will imagine them to be all without exception of the Church as Invisible.

And when any Strangers from a­mong the Gentiles had a mind to turn Proselytes to the Jews Religion, all that was required of them, to make them capable of communion in the Passover, was but to Circumcise all their Males, by which they entred into Covenant with God, Exod. 12.48.

And since it was thus in the old Testament Church, it is not to be imagined that the terms of external communion should be more rigorous and severe in the new, since our Sa­viours yoke is casie, and his burden light, in comparison of that among the Jews, which was a yoke as St. Peter speaks, which neither they nor their Fathers were able to bear. All the same adult Persons which were received into the Church by Baptism, were admitted to communion of the Church in the Ordinances of worship. Thus it was in the first Christian Church, which was a pattern to all that followed, Act. 2.41, 42. When the three thou­sand were added to the Church by [Page 129]Baptism; They continued in the Apo­stles Doctrine, and in breaking of bread and prayer, Acts 2.42

And St. Paul saith, By one spirit we are all baptized into one body whether Jews or Gentiles, bond or free, and have been all made to drink into one spirit. The same all we see were made to drink into one spirit, which were bap­tized into one body, 1 Cor. 12.13. By drinking into one spirit, is meant Communion in the Lords Supper, ac­cording to the sense of all Interpreters that I have met with. Again, he had said thus, Chap. 10.17. We being many, are one bread and one body, for we are all partakers of one bread. Here again the same all that made one body, were partakers of one bread. So that the extent of the Communion of the parts, equallized the union of the whole.

Nor indeed is there any one in­stance in Scripture that I can find, of any one person that has been refused Communion with a Christian Church when he has desired it, who has been [Page 130]before received into the Church by Baptism, except such as have been un­der Censure of the Church for some Capital Offence. And such indeed are to be excluded (until brought to re­pentance) by the Ecclesiastical Go­vernment under which they live. And St. Paul has given direction in what manner of Cases, and for what man­ner of Offences men are to be procee­ded against by Church Censure grea­ter or lesser, after due admonition otherwise used. But now (saith he) I have written unto you, not to keep com­pany, if any man that is called a brother be a Fornicator, or Covetous, or an Ido­later, or a Railer, or a Drunkard, or an Extortioner, with such an one, no not to eat, 1 Cor. 5.11. For these and such like Crimes, a Church may, and ought in her governing capacity, to deny her Communion with persons guilty of them, after due admonition. And accordingly our Church has ordered publick admonition frequently to be made in these words with many other. If any of you be a blasphemer [Page 131]of God, a hinderer or slanderer of his Word, an Adulterer, or be in malice, or envy, or in any other grievous crime; Repent you of your sins, or else come not to that holy Table, lest after the taking of that holy Sacrament, the Devil enter into you, as he did into Judas, and fill you full of all iniquities, and bring you to destruction both of body and soul. And further, If any that desire to com­municate be an open and notorious evil Liver, or have done any wrong to his Neighbour, by word or deed, so that the Congregation be thereby offended; the Curate having knowledge thereof, shall call him and advertise him, that in any wise he presume not to come to the Lords Table until he hath openly declared him­self to have truly repented and amended his former naughty life, that the Con­gregation may thereby be satisfied, which before were offended. The same order shall the Curate use with those betwixt whom he perceiveth malice and hatred to reign, not suffering them to be parta­kers of the Lords Table, until he know them to be reconciled.

I know there are several things wont to be alledged against admit­ting such to the Lords Supper who have not saving Grace; as,

1. That such will but increase their sin, and further their Damna­tion by partaking of it, so long as they are unregenerate. To which it may be Answered, (1.) That such would no less sin by neglecting to Obey Christs Command, Do this in remembrance of me, and in neglect­ing to prepare themselves for it, than they do when they come to this Sup­per of our Lord unprepared, but ra­ther indeed more. For by not com­ing they make themselves guilty of a double Disobedience; the one in not doing what Christ has Com­manded to be done in remembrance of him; the other in not preparing to do it after a right manner, where­as by coming unprepared, they make themselves guilty but of one of them. (2.) For the same reason Men should not Pray while unregenerate, as not come to the Sacrament while they are [Page 133]so. For they are required to do both the one and the other in a right man­ner, as well as to do them at all. But yet no judicious Man will say, that all unregenerate Men ought to restrain Prayer before God, or to be restrained from it. For it is possible, and to be hoped, that their Praying may have that good effect upon them as to make them better: And the same may be said of such mens com­ing to the Sacrament. (3.) Though the Scripture directs that by Church-Censure Men should be debarr'd from the Sacrament for open Acts of Scan­dal, yet I know not where it directs to keep them from it for want of sa­ving Grace, so long as not guilty of such Scandal.

2. Obj. It is again Objected, that this Ordinance is appointed for the Confirmation of the Converted, but not for the Conversion of the uncon­verted.

Answer. I grant indeed that this Sacrament is not appointed for mens first Conversion to Christianity, or for [Page 134]unbaptized Persons: But yet it may be very useful together with other means, to carry on the work of Con­version from common Grace to spe­cial: And yet such is the Conver­sion generally which is wrought in such as are Educated in the Christian Religion. The use of this Sacra­ment in conjunction with Christian Doctrine, may very well contribute its share in carrying on this progres­sive change in Men by improving common Grace into special. The Preaching of the Cross is to us who are saved, the Power of God to Sal­vation, saith St. Paul, 1 Cor. 1.18. And Christ as Crucified, is by the Lords Supper Preached to the seeing of the Eye, as well as by Word and Doctrine he is Preached to the hear­ing of the Ear: And the Eye affecteth the Heart, as the Prophet speaks, as well as the Ear: And therefore the one may help on the work of Con­version from common Grace to spe­cial, as well as the other. And in all likelyhood it often does so, as we [Page 135]have reason to think when we see Men who as may be seared have no more than common Grace, upon oc­casion of their going to the Sacra­ment, to become more serious both before and after, than usually they are at other times. And if such would but frequent it often, it might well be hoped that it would work a great alteration in them, by making them often more serious and considerate about the things of their Souls. And indeed what is more likely to beget a love to our Blessed Saviour, than such a lively representation of his wonderful love in dying for us, as is made in the Celebration of that Sa­crament?

3. Obj. The giving this Sacrament to such as by a saving Faith are not in Covenant with God, is but like setting a Seal unto a blank. To which it is answered,

First, That this Sacrament is not a Seal of Mans Faith, but of Gods Covenant; and the Seal that is set to that, is not set to a Blank. The Lords [Page 136]Supper is not a Seal to assure such as receive it, that they have Faith, but to assure them of Gods Faithfulness in his Covenant, and to work in them a confidence in that. Circumcision, which was a Seal of the Covenant, was not set to a blank when applyed to Children before they had Faith.

Secondly, though this Sacrament be indeed a Seal of Gods Covenant directly, yet it must be acknowledg­ed that the end and design of its be­ing so, is to help Mens Faith in Gods Faithfulness and Goodness in refe­rence to what he has promised in his Covenant. But then though this be so, yet the giving this Sacrament to such who have but common Faith, cannot be said to be like setting a Seal to a blank; because a common Faith, such as unregenerate Men may have, is more than no Faith at all, and yet it is the having no Faith at all, which can only answer to the set­ting a Seal to a blank in this case. For a common Faith may be improved until it become special, as I have [Page 137]shewed; and upon that account this Sacrament being a Sacrament for Mens improvement in Faith and Love, may as well belong to them who have but common Faith as to those whose Faith is special and saving. And indeed what is more likely to make a Faith which is but dull and unactive, as a common Faith is, to become lively and vigorous, than that which with great Advantage is to this end, represented to the Mind in this Sacrament? as I said before.

Thirdly, I might add, that the Covenant made in Baptism, is Re­cognized and renewed in the use of the Lords Supper; and this doubtless may be done by such as have but com­mon Faith, as well as by those who have that which is special and saving.

4. Obj. The saying of St. Paul in 1 Cor. 11.28. Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that Bread, and drink of that Cup, is al­ledged against mens being admitted or presuming to come to the Lords Supper who have not saving Grace, [Page 138]though otherwise free from Scanda­lous Offences. They suppose Saving Grace, Repentance, Faith, and Love, to be the Matter about which the Apostle would have Men to examine themselves, as necessary to qualifie them for Lawful Communion in that Sacrament.

Now that for Men to examine themselves whether they have saving Grace or no, is very necessary for their Preparation for coming to the Sacrament, is granted; because there­by they will the better come to know the state of their own Souls, and what it is that hinders their assurance of ha­ving such Grace, and the necessity of removing it, and their need of such a Saviour as he is whose Love they are to commemorate in that Sacra­ment. And God forbid that I should in the least encourage any to neglect the best Preparation they can make for so concerning a business as the ap­proaching to the Table of the Lord is. And except by examination they can find in themselves some knowledge [Page 139]and belief that Christ Jesus is the Saviour of Sinners, by dying for them, and of the Nature and End of this Sacrament in general; I do not understand how they should re­ceive any benefit by coming to it.

But to conclude from this saying of the Apostle, that Men are to for­bear coming to the Table of the Lord, until by self-examination they can satisfie themselves that they have sa­ving Grace, I think to be more than ever the Apostle intended in those words. For such satisfaction and as­surance is hardly attainable while Christians are but weak and unexpe­rienced, though known to God to be sincere. And for this cause it seems to be more than is fit to be imposed upon Men as a condition of their com­ing to the Lords Supper.

But by the reason which St. Paul gives in verse 29. why he would have Men to examine themselves before they eat of that Bread, and drink of that Cup, it appears that the thing in special and in particular concerning [Page 140]which he would have them examine themselves, was about their Capa­city of discerning the Lords Body in doing it. For he tells them that if they did not discern the Lords Body in eating that Bread, &c. they would eat and drink unworthily, and like­wise Judgment to themselves.

For our better understanding the scope and meaning of St. Paul in this his Discourse touching unworthy Communicating at the Lords Table, we will enquire alittle, what he means by eating and drinking unwor­thily; what by not discerning the Lords Body; and what by being guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord.

1. The unworthy eating of that Bread, and drinking that Cup of the Lord, of which the Apostle speaks, signifies the receiving those Sacred Symbols of Christs Body and Blood, with a frame of Mind incongruous and unsuitable to the nature of that Feast, and to a participation of it: Or it is a receiving those Consecrated [Page 141]Elements with such an unsuitable Mind as makes Men uncapable of re­ceiving that benefit which our Lord designed to be received by the use of that Ordinance.

2. Not to discern the Lords Body in eating that Bread, and drinking that Cup, is, not to understand the Nature of that Ordinance, nor our Lords design in it; nor to be suta­bly affected with the Spiritual Na­ture and meaning of it.

First, it is not to understand the Nature and End of that Ordinance. As when Men do not understand that the breaking the Lords Body upon the Cross, and the shedding of his Blood as an Expiatory Sacrifice for the sin of the World, is signified, re­presented, and commemorated by the breaking of Bread, and pouring out of Wine in that Sacrament. And when they do not understand or discern that this Ordinance was appointed by our Blessed Saviour, for a perpetual Commemoration of his transcendent Love in dying for us.

Now, if no more than this should be meant by not discerning the Lords Body, Men of common Illumination in the things of the Gospel, and by a common Faith concerning them, may undoubtedly escape being guilty of this unworthiness in eating that Bread, and drinking that Cup. For it will not be denyed but that many unregenerate Men may in this sense discern the Lords Body more clearly, and more distinctly, than many of the Regenerate themselves can.

And if, Secondly, by not discern­ing the Lords Body should be also meant (as I suppose it is) the unsu­tableness of Mens Affection to the Spiritual Nature of the things repre­sented by eating that Bread, and drinking that Cup; yet Men by com­mon Grace may in some measure discern the Lords Body, by having some degree of Affection sutable to the Spiritual Nature and Design of that Ordinance. In the sense now under consideration, Men do not dis­cern the Lords Body in receiving this [Page 143]Sacrament, when they are no more Affected with Love and Gratitude to our Blessed Saviour for his great Love in dying for us, than as if there had never been any such thing suffered by him, and for such an end as the Re­demption of the World.

But now Men who have but In­itial Faith and common Grace, may eat that Bread, and drink that Cup of the Lord with a much more suta­ble frame of Mind and Affection, than this comes to. For they may at such a time, and upon such an Oc­casion, have some sense of Christs Love upon their Minds in dying for them, and some hope of being saved by his Death; and for that reason they may have some degree of Love and Affection to him stirring in them, even such as may draw some grate­ful acknowledgment of his Love from them, and some present purposes of Living more to him, such as may cause them to sin less, until that sense is worn off. When our Saviour saith, He that loveth Father or Mother more [Page 144]than me, is not worthy of me, Mat. 10.37. He supposeth some may Love him to a degree, who yet love some­what else more, and thereby make themselves unworthy of the Salva­tion which is by him.

Now, such a sense of Christs Love as this which Men but of common Grace may have at their coming to the Sacrament, has a very fair ten­dency in it towards such a sense and such Love which is saving indeed, and is in a very near Capacity of be­ing so improved as to become such, and doubtless is so in many a one. For which cause such should be en­couraged to frequent this Sacrament as often as they have Opportunity, with the best Preparation they can make.

3. To be guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord, (as all they are, who eat that Bread, and drink that Cup unworthily, ver. 27.) can sig­nifie no less, and it may be no more, than a being guilty of a Profaning of his Body and Blood by using and [Page 145]receiving the Sacred Symbols and Signs thereof, with a frame of Mind altogether unsutable to what is sig­nified and represented thereby. And this Men are guilty of when they are no otherwise affected at the Com­memoration of the Death of Christ in the Sacrament, than as if his Death had been the Death but of a common Man, nor are no more Af­fected with the things represented by that Sacrament in the eating that Bread; and drinking that Cup, than as if they were but at a common Meal. They are thus guilty, when they are stupid, sottish, and irreve­rent at that Action, and void of an affecting sense of the wonderful Love of our Saviour in laying down his Life for us; even then when they make use of that Ordinance which was purposely instituted to perpetu­ate and preserve a lively sense of it in Christians to the end of the World.

This Profaning the Body and Blood of the Lord thus, is, as we may easily perceive, a sin of the same Nature with that of not dis­cerning the Lords Body in eating that Bread, and drinking that Cup, and is resolved into it, as all unwor­thy receiving that Sacrament is, as it should seem by St. Paul's words; when he assigns the not discerning the Lords Body, as the reason why Men at any time eat that Bread and drink that Cup unworthily, in the 29. ver.

But now Men by common Illu­mination and Faith, are very capa­ble of discerning a great difference between the Person and Death of Christ, and the Reason and End of his Death, and the Person and Death of other Men; and between the reason of eating and drinking at the Lords Table, and their eating and drinking at other Tables; and of being otherwise Affected with these things than with common things.

Considering then that the unwor­thy eating of that Bread, and drink­ing that Cup, of which the Apostle speaks, consists in such an unsutable frame of Mind in doing so, as by reason of which Men do not discern the Lords Body, but Profane it and the facred Signs and Symbols of it: And considering likewise that the Apostle makes the danger of thus eating that Bread, and drinking that Cup unworthily, the reason of his Exhorting them to examine them­selves before they come to that Sup­per; it is easie to understand what the Apostle would have them exa­mine themselves about in Order to their Communicating at the Table of the Lord. And it is about these things especially as I conceive, viz. whether they understand the Nature of that Ordinance, and for what end our Lord did Institute it. And whether they are like to find them­selves Affected with a sense of that great Love of Christ in dying for them, which is Represented and [Page 148]Commemorated in that Sacrament: And whether they do not judge him most worthy of their Love and Thanks for such Love of his to them: And whether they do not judge it fit and reasonable that they should live unto him, who dyed for them: And whether and how far they do endeavour to do so.

And St. Paul had a little before his Exhorting them to examine them­selves, represented to them the Na­ture and End of that Ordinance ac­cording to its first Institution, to the end they might examine them­selves by it, whether they had ap­prehensions sutable to it, and that they might the better know how to govern and demean themselves in the use of it.

Now, if after all this, we should look into those outward Acts of un­worthiness, for which St. Paul greatly blames those of this Church, telling them that their Communica­ting [Page 149]in that manner, was not to eat the Lords Supper, and for which, and for not discerning the Lords Body, he says, that many were weak and sickly among them, and many dead, we shall find that Men but of com­mon Grace may easily avoid being guilty of like abuses.

The first Abuse of this kind the Apostle takes Notice of, was their Schismaticalness in the use of this Or­dinance, by which they defeated in a manner one great end of it. In Chap. 11. ver. 17. he charges their coming together in their Church-Assemblies, to be not for the better, but for the worse. And this he did upon this account, because when they came together in the Church, there were Divisions among them, ver. 18. And in ver. 20. he told them, That this was not to eat the Lords Supper, to Communicate so dividedly as it seems they did. For in ver. 21. he saith, every one taketh before other his own Supper. By which [Page 150]words considered with their relation to the Context, several Authors have understood the Schismatical Practice of the several Parties into which that Church was divided, in Communicating apart one from ano­ther. For although they came to­gether in one place to do it, yet so, as that one Party made an end of their Communicating before ano­ther had begun theirs. I will instance in such Authors for this against which the Dissenters can have least Ex­ception. Cartwright, upon the place in his Confutation of the Rhemists Translation of the New Testament, delivers his sense thus. There was a double Abuse among them: One in their Love Feasts, &c. while that which should have served for the knitting the knot of Love, was used to cut the Cord thereof, in that every one as him­self listed, made choice of such as he would have to sit at Table with him, the other either not tarried for, or thrust out when they came, especially the Root. The other Abuse pulled in [Page 151]by the former, was, for that those which were Companions at one Table in the Common Feast, Communicated also in the Sacred with the same Se­paration and severalty. Dr. Mayor saith thus: It seems this good Order was perverted among the Corinthi­ans, one Company being of one Sect coming before another, and receiving the Lords Supper and this their own Supper, in a most scandalous manner departed; and then came another Company doing likewise. Mr. Sam. Cradock, in his Apostolical History, pag. 72. delivers his sense thus: In those their Feasts of Charity, at the end whereof the Lords Supper was Celebrated, they did not now observe the true Church Communion; but every one, that is, every Faction or Divi­sion being come to the place of the Assembly, did presently sit down to eat what they brought in company of their own Party, not minding or re­garding others; whereupon this Holy Feast was neither Celebrated at the same time by all, nor in Holy Con­cord, [Page 152]contrary to the true Ʋnion of Christians signified thereby. Unto which I might add the Dutch An­notators upon the place. Own Sup­per, that is, a Supper which is not held in Common of the whole Church, as the Lords Supper must be held, but which is held privately by some alone. Every one, that is, every one that held with them. And St. Paul's words in ver. 33, 34. seem strongly to back the Interpretation and sense of these Authors. His words are these; Wherefore my Brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one, for another, that ye come not together to condem­nation. Now, unless one Party had Feasted and Communicated together before another, there would have been no occasion for this Admoni­tion, of tarrying one for another; unless we could suppose that the In­dividuals did eat their own Supper and the Lords Supper singly and apart from all the rest; which is no ways likely, so long as they had those of their own Party to Associate them­selves [Page 153]with: That phrase of their coming together to eat, shews they did not eat singly and apart.

This Sacrament by tending to a­waken the sense of Christs love to all his members, one as well as ano­ther, by dying for them all, tends to Unite and Knit them all one to ano­ther in mutual love, as co-partners together in the same benefits by his death, and to render them all dear one to another, because they were so to him when he gave himself for them all, 1 Cor. 10.17. To use this Sacrament therefore as an Instru­ment of division as they did, was to pervert the end and use of it, and to Act contradictiously to the good and benefit which our Saviour de­signed his People by it.

Considering then that their com­municating thus dividedly, was that which made their coming together to be, not for the better but for the worse, ver. 17.18. and to be a coming to­gether [Page 154]for condemnation, ver. 33, 34. it highly concerns those amongst us who divide themselves in their Sacramental communion from their Brethren, thorowly to review and examin the reasons and grounds up­on which they do it, lest their coming together should be found before God, to be a coming toge­ther, not for the better, but for the worse, and a coming together to con­demnation.

This Factious communicating of these Corinthians, the Apostle we see did insist on more than on any other, their Sacramental abuses re­peating this, and concluding with a particular caution, and admonition against it; which is more than he did concerning any other of them.

And yet this Schismatical com­municating was such as Christians by vertue of common grace may easily avoid the like, as every one will grant.

The other abuses at their Feasts of Charity, and at the Sacrament, were their neglecting and despising their poor Brethren, and suffering them to hunger, when at the same time they made themselves guilty of intemperance and excess; one is hungry, another is drunk, despise ye the Church of God, and shame them which have not? These also were such unworthy Acts, as Christi­ans by common grace may easily keep themselves from being guilty of the like.

Now all these outward Acts of unworthiness proceeded from their not rightly discerning the Lords Body, as we may well conceive, either as not understanding the na­ture of the Ordinance, or as not being duly affected with what was repre­sented and commemorated by it. And therefore for remedy for time to come, he puts them upon examining themselves, concerning the appre­hensions, the sense and affection, [Page 156]which Christians ought to have touching those things when they go to the Table of the Lord. I shall not proceed to shew how each of these external Acts of unworthy communicating proceeded from their not discerning the Lords Body, which yet might easily be done.

Upon the whole matter I think we may conclude, that if men by exami­nation find themselves in a capacity and disposition, to answer our Lords end, in this his institution, by eat­ing and drinking at his Table in a grateful remembrance of him, that then they are not altogether un­fit and unworthy to be Communicants of it. For men receive the Sacra­ment worthily or unworthily, ac­cording as they do or do not thereby answer the end and design of it, in remembring our blessed Saviour.

QUERY X. WHy, and for what reason may it be conceived, does Al­mighty God own and allow others to be of the Church as Visible, than only such as are of the Church as Invisible.

There are several things offer them­selves to our consideration which seem to render it fit, and reasonable, and well-becoming the wisdom and goodness of God that it should be so, and such as render it highly useful and beneficial unto men. As,

1. Because it tends more abundant­ly to increase the number of Invisible Church Members, than it would if none should be admitted into the Vi­sible Church, until they were of the Invisible, or worthily reputed to be so. That it has this tendency, needs [Page 158]no better proof than the Experience the Church of God has had of the hap­py effect of this way and method of converting men, above what has been produced in the other way. Experi­ence has made it manifest, that abun­dant more thorow and sound conver­sions in men have been made in the Visible Church than out of it, and after they have been baptized, than before. More in the Church of God have been made good, and that by means of their being in it, than have been made so before they were admit­ted into it. How rarely have any tho­row and sound conversions been wrought in men while out of the Church since Miracles ceased? How seldom do we see or hear of any Jews, or profest Infidels become really holy and good men, tho they live among Christians and where they have the opportunity of hearing the Gospel if they had any mind to it? When as, thanks be to God, we have known or heard of multitudes of Conversions of this nature that have been wrought [Page 159]in men after they have been in the Church.

If the Apostles in their time did by vertue of their Ministry convert many so as of bad to make them really holy and good, before they were received into the Church: Yet as their Calling was extraordinary, so was their Mi­nistry by which those Conversions were wrought; their Mission and Do­ctrine being attested to come from heaven by multitudes of miraculous operations, and marvelous gifts. And therefore those Conversions which were wrought by such extraordinary means, must be looked upon as extra­ordinary Conversions: And to argue from things extraordinarily done, to a necessity of having the like done in ordinary cases, and under ordinary means, is so absurd, and such a piece of unreasonableness, as those we call Seekers are guilty of, who can find, as they think no true Churches extant or visible, because not called by men qualified with like extraordinary gifts as those, or many of those in the [Page 160]Apostles days were, by whom Church­es were then gathered, And indeed, had not the means by which the Apo­stles converted those whom they did convert, been extraordinary, it would have been in a manner impossible for them to have succeeded in their under­taking as they did, considering that they were to convert them from other Religions in which they had been edu­cated and brought up, and which they had received from their Fathers and Fore-fathers, unto a new Religi­on, the Christian Religion, which was so greatly different from theirs as it was; especially from that of Paga­nism, from which most of their Con­versions probably were made.

But when the Apostles had in this extraordinary way gathered our Sa­viour a Church all over the known World, and settled particular Church­es, it was not necessary, as the Event shews, that this extraordinary way of converting men should be continu­ed. For when by this extraordinary means of converting men way was [Page 177]made for converting them in an ordi­nary way, then that which was extra­traordinary ceased: Like as the giving the Israelites Manna from heaven cea­sed when they came into Canaan, and had opportunity of being supplied with food in an ordinary way. And from that time forward there have been but few Conversions made in those without the Church, but most of those that have been made in bring­ing men to the power of godliness, have been made upon those within the Visible Church.

For tho God is pleased, I doubt not, to plant true saving grace in some in their early days by the benefit of god­ly Education: yet there are very ma­ny others, who having been received into the Church by Baptism in their Infancy, have little or nothing more than a form of godliness (if so much) found in them when grown up. But among these there are many who in time are brought on, or converted to the Power of Godliness by means of their being in the Church, and under [Page 178]those Ordinances of God there ad­ministred, by which he is wont to work saving grace in men. This is Gods ordinary way of Conversion, since that which was extraordinary ceased: And ever since that time, al­most all the Conversions that have been made in men to a saving Christi­an faith, and to a faithful practice and the Power of Christianity, have been made upon persons baptized and with­in the Church.

And altho the Conversion of men to Christianity by the Ministry of the Apostles was extraordinary, because wrought in an extraordinary way, and by extraordinary means, as I have shewed: yet we have great reason to think that those Conversions, or many of them that proved effectual at last, were but only beginnings, and preparatory to a second and thorow Conversion of them while they were yet without the visible Church, and were carried quite through, and made effectual after they were brought into the Church by Baptism.

And the manner of the Apostles writing to the Christians after they had been in the Church for some time, seems to intimate that the Apostles themselves had no other apprehensi­ons of those Conversions, or many of them. For we find them earnestly per­swading those Christians to put away such practices, the retaining of which could not well consist with a thorow and sound conversion: Which argues, that at least many of them had not yet put them off, tho they had been for some time in the Church. Thus Col, 3.8, 9. But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth. Lie not one to another, seeing ye have put off the old man with his deeds: That is, they had engaged to do so in Baptism. See the like again, Ephes. 5.3. And 1 Pet. 2.1. Where­fore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings; as new-born babes desire the sincere milk of the Word, that ye may grow thereby. 1 Cor. 6.15. Know ye [Page 180]not that your bodies are the members of Christ? Shall I then take the mem­bers of Christ, and make them the mem­bers of an Harlot? God forbid. What, know ye not that he that is joyned to an harlot; is one body? Chap. 10.21, 22. Ye cannot drink the Cup of the Lord, and the Cup of devils: Ye cannot be par­takers of the Lords Table, and of the Ta­ble of Devils? Do we provoke the Lord to jealousie? Are we stronger than he? Chap. 15.33, 34. Be not deceived; evil communications corrupt good man­ners. Awake to righteousness and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame. 2 Cor. 6.16, 17. What agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols? For ye are the Temple of the living God. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you, Chap. 12.20, 21. For I fear lest when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, [Page 181]strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swel­lings, tumults: and lest when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not re­pented of the uncleaness, and fornica­tion, and lasciviousness which they have committed. Phil. 2.22. All seek their own, and not the things of Jesus Christ.

So by the general Epistle which St. James wrote, not to any particu­lar Church, but to the twelve Tribes scattered abroad, it appears that he was very jealous and suspicious that the faith which very many of the Christians had, was but a dead and unavailable faith, and such as would neither justifie nor save them: because it was but a barren and unfruitful faith, such as did neither purifie the heart, nor reform the life, being hea­rers of the Word, and not doers. For for all their knowledge and their faith, it seems by the tenour of his writing, that their lusts remained still lusty and strong, that warred in their mem­bers: The love of pleasure, their [Page 182]unworthy compliances to keep friend­ship with the World, pride, envy, and grudging one against another, strife, and contention, and uncharitable judg­ing and condemning one another, and provoking one another with their unruly Tongues, and cursing and swearing, and such like distempers it seems did abound among them. And St. James by this Epistle to them en­deavours their thorow Conversion; and encourageth the sincere among them to endeavour it likewise, saying, If any see his brother err, and one con­vert him: Let him know that he which converteth a sinner from the error of his way, shall save a soul from death, and cover a multitude of sins. And when we likewise find that there were but a few names in Sardis but what had defiled their Garments, having indeed a name to live, but were dead; and nothing which our Saviour could commend in all the Church of Lao­dicea: I say, when we find this, and consider all these things, and more of like nature in the Apostles Writings, [Page 183]we have great reason to think that many of those whom the Apostles baptized, were not thorowly conver­ted till after they were brought into the Church, and yet many such were so after.

And indeed I do not know what other reason can be given why the Apostles made such haste as they did to baptize persons after they had once gained their consent to turn Christi­ans, without staying for any farther trial, but that they thought their thorow Conversion was more likely to be effected within the Church than without. It is one thing to be con­verted from a false Religion to a bare or notitional belief of the true, and another thing to be converted from that to a right practical belief of it. There were some who did believe in the former sense through the power of conviction, and could do no other­wise, who yet had no mind to become obedient to the Rules and Precepts of the Gospel in all things. Such were those Joh. 2.23. and those Joh. 12.42, 43. [Page 184]and such was Simon Magus, and such were those, of whom St. James speaks, that had but a dead faith: And thus it is with many that are of the Visible Church in these days, who have no other faith for some time, and yet afterward are converted to a lively practical belief of the Christian Reli­gion. And it is probable, that the faith of most of the Apostles Converts went little or nothing farther than to a general belief of the truth of the Apostles Doctrine until after they were baptized; they having so little time of learning before as generally they had, but were carried on further to a more particular distinct and practical belief by after-teaching when they were in the Church. And this is not disagreeable to what I have formerly noted from the words of our Saviours Commission to his Apostles touching a double teaching; the one to make men become Disciples, which went before Baptism, the other to direct them how to live as Christians, which followed after it, Mat. 28.19, 20.

But however, whatever thorow and effectual Conversions the Apostles might in an extraordinary way effect in men while they were without the Church for the first founding of the Christian Church; yet we are sure that since that extraordinary way of Con­version has been discontinued, abun­dantly more have been converted by their being in the Church, and by ad­vantage of the means of conversion which they have there enjoyed, than have been among those without the Church. And this is the first reason assigned why others should be admit­ted into the Visible Church than such as are of the Invisible, or than are reputed to be so before such ad­mission.

2. Another reason why we may conceive Almighty God allows many others to be of the Visible Church than are of the Invisible, is, because so to do is more useful for the propa­gating and spreading of the Christian Religion in the World, than the li­miting and restraining the Visible [Page 186]Church only to those who are of the Invisible also, can be. For it cannot be denied but that such gifts, and such common grace as will not be sufficient unto a mans own Salvation, may yet be very useful for the maintaining and defending the Christian Doctrine against Adversaries, and for the in­structing others in it, and for the per­suading them to believe it, and to live according to it. Which was the rea­son, I suppose, why St. Paul said, that he rejoyced, and would rejoyce that Christ was preached, tho it were but insincerely by some, as well as for being preached in truth by others, Phil. 1.18. For the more men of Parts, and Learn­ing, and of Interest among men the Christian Religion and sound Doctrine has to assert and defend it, and the more there are of others to abet and encourage them in it, (though many of them shall be supposed to be mainly influenced therein by motives of secu­lar honour and interest) the more cre­dit in general, and the more reputa­tion it will have in the World, and [Page 187]the further it will spread. As we see on the contrary, the more Popery has had men of parts, and learning, and of interest otherwise to promote and pro­pagate it, the more and the farther it hath spread and prevailed in the World: And the same is true of other Errors and Heresies, as that of Ari­anism when time was. There is no que­stion, but the more good men are backt in their promulging sound and saving Doctrine by men of great interest in the World, that agree with them in Doctrine and substance of Worship (tho they should not in all respects be so hearty and sincere as the other are,) the more Christian Religion gains among men.

And if all such as these should be made enemies to the Church by being denied to be of it, the Churches power of propagating the Christian Religion would quickly be thereby exceedingly weakened, and the pro­pagation thereof greatly obstructed. We have not now Miracles, the extra­ordinary means by which Christianity [Page 188]was at first propagated; without which it is not probable the unbe­lieving and blind world would have been reconciled to it upon account of its own intrinsick excellency and good­ness. And therefore there is now the more need of the help of all Christi­ans to propagate the Christian Religi­on: Not only of such as are of the Invisible Church, and Visible likewise, but also of those who are but only of the Visible. The success in propa­gating the Christian Religion, does not wholly depend upon the moral goodness of the Instrruments by whom it is done, but so much upon its own goodness, that if that be but sufficiently discovered, tho but by men defective in their Morals, it is yet able to commend it self very much unto the choice of men. If they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my people to hear my words, then they should have turned them from their evil ways, saith God concerning the false Prophets, Jer. 23.22.

It is no small matter upon this ac­count [Page 189]to be born within the Pale of the Visible Church of Christian Pa­rents, and to be educated in the Chri­stian Religion, though by Parents too much strangers to the power of it. And of Zion it shall be said, this and that man was born in her, The Lord shall, count when he writeth up the people, that this man was born there, Psal. 87.5, 6. How many worthy Children has the Church had, and of great use in it, who yet have been born of Parents of but small account for Religion, So that such mens being of the Church, is of great use for the propagating of truly religious men, and by them the Christian Religion. But if such men as these had been deprived of Chureh edu­cation by their Parents being deprived of Membership in the Visible Church, the Church in all probability would have been deprived of such useful Mem­bers as these prove to be for the propa­gating of the true Christian Religion.

3. Another reason may be, because to take others into the Visible Church than such as are, or are credibly reputed [Page 190]to be of the Invisible, tends much more to the security of the Invisible Church in the world than the ex­cluding all such would do. For were it not for those of the Church as Vi­sible over and besides such as are of it as Invisible, those which are of the Church as Invisible would be in much more danger than now they are, of being devoured by those numerous enemies which they have in the world. Christs Flock is but a little flock comparative­ly; and there are but few that find the narrow way that leads to life, as he hath told us. And so he hath told us also in the Parable of the Sower, that of four sorts of hearers of the Gospel, there is but one that brings forth fruit: And in another place, that among the many that are called, there are but few chosen.

Now then, if when with the help of those of the Visible Church which are not of the Invisible, (which yet according to the Scriptures seem to be far the greater number) those of the Invisible Church have enough to do [Page 191]to subsist in the world without being rooted out of it by the Enemies of Christianity, as we see they have, what can we think would become of them but ruine without a standing Miracle to secure them, if those who are but only of the Visible Church were made Enemies also to those of the Invisible, as doubtless they would if they should all be rejected by them as none of Christs Church on earth? How unable would they be to defend themselves against the Popish Party in the world, if they were not assisted by those who are but of the Church as Visible? Or how unable would they be to defend themselves against all those that are Enemies to Christi­anity both name and thing, if the bulk and body of men, which are Christians only in outward Form and Profession, did not stand as a screen between them and those enemies?

Our Saviour hath declared that the Wheat would be in great danger of being rooted up if the Tares should for the present be gathered out of it; [Page 192]and for that reason would have both to grow together till the harvest, Mat. 13. Our Saviour did not intend hereby (no more do I by what I have said) to put a bar against purging the Church of Capital Offenders by Discipline, and therefore by Tares its probable he meant carnal Gospellers that yet are not obnoxious to Excommunication, such as the thorny-ground hearers, in whom the Cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of Riches, and Plea­fures of this Life, choak the Word which they have received, and which they profess, so that it brings forth in them no fruit to perfection.

But before I proceed any farther I must remove an Objection, which otherwise lies against the use which I here make of this Parable of our Sa­viour. And the Objection is this; That this Parable makes nothing against gathering the bad from among the good in the Church, but from among the good in the World; Not that they should both grow together in the Church till Harvest, but in the [Page 193]World. And to strengthen this they alledge our Saviours interpretation of this Parable, where he says, that the Field where the Tares and the Wheat grow together, is the World, Mat. 13.38.

And this indeed at first sight seems to be a very considerable Objection. But if we consider the matter well, I think it may appear otherwise. The Field indeed in which the Seed was sown, and the Gospel first prea­ched, was the World, according to our Saviours Commission to his Apostles; Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel, Mar. 16.15. But then those that received this Seed of the Gospel, so as to make profession of adhering to it, were presently baptized and re­ceived into the Church. Now it was among these that the Tares sprang up, many of them proving bad Christians. So that the Seed was first sown in the World as in a common field: But yet the Tares sprang up in that part of the world which was now become the Visible Church, and an enclosed [Page 194]Garden. And therefore when the time of the Harvest shall come when these Tares must be separated from the Wheat, our Saviour says, They shall be gathered out of the Kingdom of the Son of Man, Ver. 41. where they were permitted to grow till this Harvest. And what is this Kingdom of the Son of Man, but his Visible Church? The History of the Event of the Apostles Preaching, does plainly lay open the meaning of this Parable, and that of the Draw-net, and other like Parables, in that the Visible Church which they gathered out of the world, consisted of bad as well as good.

And this Parable in particular shews further that these Tares were not to be gathered out of the Church, for this very reason, Lest while ye gather up the Tares, saith he, ye root up also the Wheat with them. So that it seems that the Tares growing with the Wheat is in some respect matter of security to the Wheat, and that the Wheat would be in more danger by the Tares being gathered from among [Page 195]it, than by their growing together with it: in more danger of bein rooted up, or rooted out. And this seems fully to justifie and make good that reason I am now upon, why all unregenerate Christians should not be denied a place and being in the Visible Church.

If it shall be hear said, that the Church in the Primitive times, when but few in number, did yet subsist, yea, and abundantly increase too, tho they had no humane or worldly Power to defend them, and when al­most the whole world both of Jews and Gentiles were against them: And why may it not as well do so now, tho none that are not of the Invisible Church should be any defence unto it.

I answer, that there is no doubt but that they might subsist in the world, continue and increase as well as they did, provided they had but the same extraordinary means to back and abet them, and to increase their numbers, as those Primitive Christians had: I mean those miraculous Powers which then procured the Christians great re­putation [Page 196]among the People, and which did still attract and draw in more to their Party than were diminished by the Persecution which was raised against them by the higher Powers which were then Infidel. For by reason of those mira­culous wonders which were done by the Apostles and others in those times, the multitude of People were so asto­nished and affected, that they favoured them so far as that the Rulers were put under some awe. For we read that for the reason aforesaid, great grace or fa­vour was upon them all, to wit, all the Christians, Acts 4.33. And Chap. 5.13. its said, that the people magni­fied them. So that the Rulers when they had otherwise a mind to it, found not how to punish them because of the people, for all men glorified God for that which was done, Chap. 4.21. And in Chap. 5.26. its said of the Captain and Officers that were sent to bring the Apostles before the Council, that they brought them without violence, because they feared the people lest they should have been stoned. And by reason [Page 197]of the credit they obtained among the people both to themselves and their way by the numerous Miracles they wrought; believers were the more ad­ded to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women notwithstanding all the op­position which was made against them by the Rulers, Chap. 5.14. And that wonderful increase of Believers which was made from among the Heathen also, was attributed by St. Paul unto those Signs and Wonders that were wrought for the proof and confirma­tion of the Christian Way, I will not dare, saith he, to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me to make the Gentiles obedient by word and deed, through mighty Signs and Wonders by the Spirit of God, Rom. 15.18, 19.

But if the small number of sincere Christians that are in the world, had no other means to preserve themselves and to increase their number but the goodness of their Cause, and their own Innocency, and were not counte­nanced and protected by Christian [Page 198]States and Governours, and by a multitude more of the same Professi­on with themselves than are of like sincerity in that Profession; they would be in great danger of being in a man­ner extirpated out of the world by the Insidel and Antichristian Parties in it. When the Papal defection be­fel the Church within the Roman Em­pire, the greatest part perhaps of the then Visible Church in that part of the world, fell off from the Orthodox and sincere, and became their Enemies in time. The consequence of which was the exterminating and rooting out of that part of the world, in a great measure, the Orthodox and sincere Christians. Which is a great instance to shew how it would fare with those of the Invisible Church, if they were deserted by those Christians which are not of it, or if those were rejected as no fellow-members of the Visible Church, and thereby made their Enemies.

4. Another reason is taken from the danger in another respect of [Page 199]reckoning none of the Church as Vi­sible, but upon the reputation of their being of the Church as Invisible: For to admit men upon no other terms into the Visible Church, nor to its Communion, but upon the reputati­on, and under the Notion of their be­ing already of the Church as Invi­sible, tends greatly to betray many Souls into a dangerous snare of self-deceiving. For, if this rule of ad­mission should be observed, many mi­stakes would be committed either through fallibility or partiality of judg­ment in them that admit them; and so, many would be received into the Visible Church, or to the Communi­on of it as Members of the Invisible, which yet are not of it. And if so, then all those which are thus received under the approbation of the Visible Church as Members of the Invisible, will be thereby strengthened in their self-flattery and good opinion they have of themselves touching their good and safe condition, when there is no such matter. And when they [Page 200]find the good opinion they have of themselves thus strengthened by the publick judgment of the Church con­curring with them therein, they will be under the greater temptation, and in so much the greater danger of rest­ing securely in that unsafe condition, to the great hazard of their Souls. We know, or have abundant reason to suspect, that many that have but a Form of Godliness, are Laodicean like, less apt to suspect the goodness of their own condition before God, than they that are truly sincere: How much less will they suspect it, and how much more will they be confirmed in the good opinion of themselves, tho false, when they have the publick judgment of the Church to back them in it, and that after inspection has been made into their lives, and signs of their Conversion approved of? As the manner is of those that go that way.

Of this danger, and of this great inconvenience, some of the New Eng­land Divines grew sensible after they [Page 201]had made trial of that way a great while. For in their answer to Mr. Da­venports Apologetical Preface, pa. 43, 44. they express themselves in these words: Indeed, when men confound these two, and do the Visible Church Interest unto such conditions and qualifications as are reputed enough to Salvation, this may tend to harden men, and to make them conceit, that if once they be but got into the Church they are sure of hea­ven, when as alas it may be they are far from it.

But now there is no such danger does arise from mens being owned Vi­sible Church Members from their professing to believe the Christian Re­ligion, and from their Covenanting to endeavour to live according to it. Such Profession and such Covenanting does indeed give ground of hope to the Church, that such will not be so regardless of their own Salvation as not to be willing to learn their duty, and to endeavour to do it that they may be saved. But yet such hope of the Church concerning their good [Page 202]performance for the future, does not minister any occasion of confidence in such men that they have already per­formed what is necessary to their Sal­vation, as a receiving them into the Church, and unto Communion, as having in the publick judgment of the Church already performed it, would do. This act of the Church in recei­ving them into Communion in her ex­ternal priviledges in hope of their im­proving them to the saving of their Souls, gives them no ground of con­fidence of the safety and goodness of their condition thereby, further than they are careful to make their Calling and Election sure by using all diligence in improving the opportunity and means of doing so by their being in the Church.

Men are too prone to lay too great a stress upon their being received into the Visible Church and Communion, tho the Church hath past no judg­ment thereby of their being of the Invisible Church: how much more would they do so in case it had. [Page 203]St. Paul was sensible, I doubt not, how prone many Christians are to lay too much stress meerly upon their being of the Church, and partakers in the external Communion thereof; For which cause he cautioned the Christi­ans against flattering themselves with an opinion of their safe condition upon that account, and laboured to possess them with a sense of the danger they were in for all that, if they should rest therein without growing better and better thereby, 1 Cor. 10. I would not, saith he, that ye should be ignorant, bre­thren, how that all our Fathers were baptized unto Moses in the Cloud, and in the Sea, and did all eat the same spiritual meat, and drink the same spi­ritual drink; and yet with many of them God was not well pleased, but overthrew them in the Wilderness. And he told them that these things were our ex­amples, to the intent that we should not lust after evil things as they lusted. Then enumerated their miscarriages, and what befel them thereupon: and further told them, that these things [Page 204]hapned to them for Examples or Types to us, and were written for our admonition upon whom the ends of the world are come. Thereby giving them to understand, that tho they were baptized and received into the Church, and did participate of the same spiritual meat and drink in the Sacrament with the best in the Church; yet if they did not take warning by the miscarriages of those that had been of the Church, and of the Com­munion of it as well as they, to avoid the like, they might perish as well as the other did, for all their Communion in the Church.

5. Another reason against refusing all such Communion in the Visible Church who are not judged to be of the Church as Invisible, is taken from the danger of such a practice in another respect, and that is the danger of mistaking the good for bad, and of refusing the sincere Christians under the Notion of Carnal and Unregene­rate. There is so little visible diffe­rence between what many of the [Page 205]same persons were a little before they had saving grace, and what they are when they have it only in the lowest degree; that men would be in great danger of mistaking if they should make a judgment of their spiritual state under such Circumstances. And the difficulty of not mistaking in this case will be still increased, when that very little of true grace which is in some men, is greatly obscured by the courseness of their natural temper and disposition. Besides the prejudice which some good men have against others upon account of some difference in Opinion, will not suffer them to discern true grace in some of them in whom it is, and perhaps in some good degree too. This Age hath furnished us with too many instances of this nature. The like may be said in re­spect of the narrowness of spirit, and severity of many, by reason of which many of those in whom God himself finds saving grace, would be refused Communion with the Church for want of it, if that opinion should generally [Page 206]obtain, that none should be admitted into the Visible Church, ar to its Communion, but upon the reputa­tion of their being of the Church as Invisible.

Some do understand the danger of rooting up the Wheat if the Tares should be gathered from among it to lie in the danger of mistaking the Wheat for the Tares, if the one should be attempted to be gathered from the other. And if this should be the rea­son why our Saviour would have them both to grow together till the Harvest, it would be pat to what I have said on this reason. But if it be not (as I am apt to think it is not) yet then it so much the more confirms that to be our Savious meaning which I have suggested elsewhere; for I do not know any third sense pretended to among Interpreters. But indeed there is danger in both respects: and there­fore I know no inconvenience if we understand the Parable in reference to both.

Now it is not hard to conceive how bad a thing it would be if such as have true grace, should be refused admit­tance into the Visible Church, or to its Communion, only because it is so little that men cannot discern it to be so. For such a discouragement may be enough to set them back again, to quench the smoaking flax, and to ex­pose them to the loss of that very little grace in its beginning which they have: A thing point blank against that ad­monition and caution of our Saviour, Mat. 18.10. Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones.

QUERY XI. WHat is it that makes the difference between the Ʋniversal Church as Visible, and particular Churches? And what makes the difference between one particular Church and another?

The Query being double, I shall answer to that first which is first, and [Page 208]do say, the Universal Church differs from a particular Church in two re­spects.

1. The Universal Church differs from a particular, as the whole differs from a part, and a particular Church differs from the Universal, as a part differs from the whole. For other­wise they are materially the same, on­ly with this difference, the one con­tains all Visible Church matter, and the other but a part of it. There is nothing necessary to qualifie the mat­ter of which a particular Church doth consist, than what made all the Mem­bers of it Members of the Universal Church, unless it be what belongs to the Officers of it as such.

2. If by a particular Church we un­derstand one single Congregation, then a particular Church differs from the Universal as those of which it does consist do assemble together in one place for Publick Worship, which the Universal Church cannot do now, tho in the beginning of its existence possi­bly it might. But if by a particular [Page 209]Church we understand so many single worshipping Congregations as are uni­ted under one and the same Church Government and Governours in a Ci­ty, Province, or Kingdom; Then a particular Church in this sense is differenced from the Church Univer­sal by this Ecclesiastical Polity under which it is otherwise united than the Universal Church, as such, is or can be. And such a particular Church we sup­pose the Church in Jerusalem, in Co­rinth, and in other great Cities to have been, the Scripture so accounting them, when yet each of them consi­sted of more single worshipping Assem­blies than one, as may well be presu­med on several accounts, not here to be mentioned.

There is another thing which the Congregationalists make essential to the being of a particular Church (for they make it the Form or formal cause of it) which would be another diffe­rence between the Universal Church and a particular, if their Opinion and Assertion were admitted concerning it, [Page 210]and that is that Church Covenant or mutual engagement to walk together in the way and order of the Gospel. And by this each one of their single Con­gregations distinguisheth it self from all other. And they account this so necessary, as to make it a condition of Communion without which they will not admit persons otherwise well approved of by themselves to Sacra­mental Communion, that is, unless they are under this engagement to them or some other Sister Church of the same kind.

But this is so much the worse, be­cause it is done and required under the Notion of Divine appointment, when God has appointed no such thing. Which is such a piece of su­perstition as the enjoyning the use of the Ceremonies of the Church of England is free from, so long as they are not enjoyned as things of divine appointment, but only as of an in­different nature, and therefore there is no such reason to scruple them as there is to scruple this practice upon those terms.

There are two Texts of Scripture upon which more especially and prin­cipally they ground this opinion and practice of theirs; which I shall a little enquire into. The one is 2 Cor. 8.5. which Dr. O. to this end quotes more than once in his late Book; the words are these: And this they did, not as we hoped, but first gave their own selves to the Lord, and unto us by the will of God. The Ʋs, here in the Text, are St. Paul and Timotheus, from whom this Epistle came, Chap. 1.1. And if so, how could the Churches of Mace­donia's giving themselves to St. Paul and Timothy, possibly signifie their mutual Covenanting one with another among themselves? And is it not as strange also that they should give themselves to Paul and Timothy in order to the Constituting themselves Churches, when as that giving them­selves to Paul and Timothy, here spo­ken of, was done then when they were already Churches, as the whole Context from ver. 1. doth shew. And if their giving themselves to Paul and [Page 212] Timothy was one of those things which they did, more than Paul and Timo­thy hoped for, then such a confedera­tion is not likely to be meant by it as was essentially necessary to their ex­istence as Churches; this certainly would not have been more than they hoped for, if it had been their duty, and of so great a necessity. This is enough to shew how impertinently this Scripture is alledged. But the whole Context shews that the things St. Paul here speaks of, were quite of another nature, and that is the liberality of the Churches of Macedonia towards the relief of the Christians of Jerusa­lem, and their zeal in being otherwise serviceable to so good a work, where­in they did indeed exceed the expecta­tion of Paul and Timothy. For their Poverty to which they were brought by sustering for the Gospel was so deep, that St. Paul it seems scarce thought it fit to receive any thing of them, and it was upon their earnest intreaty that he did; and yet they did not only thus give above their ability, but [Page 213]besides their giving up themselves to God as ready to suffer further for him if called to it, they gave up themselves to St. Paul & Timothy also to assist them in that charitable work they had in hand, by their further endeavours to promote it among others. For they intreated Paul and Timothy earnestly, to take up­on them the fellowship of ministring to the Saints, the managing of that affair, and procured them to send Titus to Co­rinth to promote the same business as appears by ver. 6.

This Scripture though so great a stranger to this opinion as you see, yet is that which so far as ever I could perceive, is chiefly depended upon in this cause. They bring in also, as favouring their notion and practice, the saying of St. Peter to the Christi­ans; ye also as lively stones are built up a spiritual house an holy Priest­hood, &c. 1 Pet. 2.5. And they do, it seems, suppose that these living stones being so laid together as to to make a spiritual house, is done by their Confederation and Covenant, as [Page 214]the Cement by which the Christians were united and combined in one par­ticular Church, fitly framed together, as the phrase is, Ephes. 2.

But St. Peter is not here speaking to any one particular Church as such, when he says ye are built up a spiri­tual house, but to the strangers scattered abroad throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bethynia, as appears Chap. 1.1. And no one surely can think that these Christians thus scattered, and at this distance, could become one particular Church by such a mutual Confederation as these hold necessary for the forming a particular Church. And if not, it must be by vertue of somewhat else than such a particular Church Cove­nant as these dissenting Brethren thought to find here, by which Chri­stians in so many distant parts of the world, as aforesaid, were built up one spiritual house. And that doubtless must be the same thing by which all Christians in the world become one spiritual house of God; for so they [Page 215]are. For when Christ is said to be High Priest over the house of God, Heb. 10.21. And to be faithful as a Sen over his own house, Heb. 3.6. House in these places cannot signifie less than the Universal Christian Church, who are called the houshold of faith. And how do all these Christians be­come the house of God, but by being joyned and devoted to him by the Bap­tismal Covenant, and thereby to one another, among whom he dwells and is Worshipped as in his holy Temple: For by this they all become one body, which is but another Metaphor under which to express the same thing, Ephes. 2.21, 22. 1 Cor. 12.13.

It is the same thing which makes persons Members of the Church Uni­versal, that qualifies them for parti­cular Church Membership; and that is the Baptismal Covenant. And to make any other Covenant besides this so necessary to qualifie men for par­ticular Church Membership and Com­munion, as to make this of Gods own appointment insufficient for that [Page 216]end, is a great impeachment of it, and contains in it such consequences as the Abetters of it would be ashamed to countenance if they were aware of it. For so long as it is asserted to be of divine appointment; the formal cause of a particular Church, and essential to its being, and is made the Condition of Communion when God has no where appointed or required it: so long it may be charged with these evils.

1. With a teaching for Doctrine the Commandments of men, a piece of vain Worship condemned by our Saviour, Mat. 15.9. which is the same thing with adding to Gods Word, or a saying he saith, when he hath not said it.

2. It is in some sort and in part a making void the Command or Insti­tution of God, that men might esta­blish their own Tradition. For where­as the Baptismal Covenant qualifies men for particular Church Member­ship by bringing them into the Uni­versal Church, this Opinion denies [Page 217]the Baptismal Covenant to be suffici­ent to this end, and sets up this other confederating in its room.

3. It contains in it the Unchurching of all those Gospel Churches that are, or ever have been in the world, that have not been thus united by Church Covenanting. For to say this is the Form of a particular Church, or the formal cause of it, is in effect to say, that none are really Churches with­out it; for Matter and Form are essen­tial to the being of Churches as well as they are of other things. Now to Unchurch all Churches that have not been thus confederate, is a great thing indeed, if we consider how few years it is since such Covenanting was heard of in any Christian Church in the world, and by how inconsiderable a number of Congregations it has been used since it has been heard of. These things considered, it is matter of a very venturous and daring nature.

As for the other part of our Enquiry, touching that which makes the diffe­rence between one particular Church [Page 218]and another, we may conceive of it thus.

1. It consists partly in that which does distinguish one Town from ano­ther, or one great Neighbourhood from another, and that is the bounds of Habitation. And this distinction is as well convenient, yea, necessary for Ecclesiastical Order, and peaceable Government, as it is for Civil, and does as well accommodate the ends of the one as of the other. and without this, a peaceable and orderly Govern­ment in the whole Church would be impracticable, even as it would be in an Universal Empire: And thus the Churches planted by the Apostles, are differenced and distinguished one from another; that at Rome from that at Corinth, and that at Ephesus from that at Philippi; yea, that at Cenchrea from that at Corinth, which yet bordered up­on Corinth, and so of the rest. And indeed that difference which is made between Church and Church by Vici­nity of Neighbourhood and Cohabita­tion, does best answer the ends of [Page 219]particular Church Association, such as is assembling together for Publick Worship, and mutual assistances in all Christian offices of Brotherly love and friendship. But this alone does not constitute Christians dwelling toge­ther in the same place, a particular Christian Church, tho by their being of the Church Universal, they are as fit matter qualified for it. But

2. That which does constitute such to be a particular Church, as that sig­nifies a company of Christians in Local Communion in Divine Worship, consisting in the participation of Gospel Ordinances, is the placing over them one or more Church-Officers, to minister to them therein. By which Officers, as well as by the place where they dwell, and where they assemble for Worship, they are distinguished from other like Churches under the Conduct of other Church-Officers of the same kind. For by such their joynt Local Communion in the Wor­ship administred by their spiritual Guide or Pastor, they are united with [Page 220]him and among themselves, as one Worshipping Congregation; by which Union also they are distinguished from other particular Churches, as other particular Churches in like manner are from them.

Those of the Independent Church-way do indeed hold particular Churches, as such, to be Antecedent to any Church-Officers over them. Which is the reason which Dr. Owen in his Inquiry concerning Churches, does al­ledge to prove the Power of the Keys to be given to the Church. And to prove particular Churches to be Antecedent to Church Officers, he quotes Acts 14.23. where it is said of Paul and Barnabas; And when they had ordained them Elders in every Church, &c. As for this proof of his Assertion, I shall consider it by and by; but shall first examine and try what is in the Assertion it self, which I am inclined to think will be found full of mistake, and that the contrary will be found true, viz. that the Evan­gelical Ministry is, and always has [Page 221]been Antecedent to the existence of Christian Churches, and indeed an instrumental cause of their being. And this is true, not only of particu­lar Churches, but also of the Univer­sal Church as Christian, which yet in order of nature is Antecedent to par­ticular Churches. The gathering of Christ a Christian Church in the world at first, was the effect of the Apostolical Ministry and the Ministry of their assistants. The Church is built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Christ being the chief corner stone, Eph. 2.20. and the Foun­dation is Antecedent to the Super­structure. All the additions that have been since made to the Visible Church. have been by the Ministerial Office, by letting all the particular Mem­bers of that addition into it by Bap­tism.

And when men are ordained Mi­nisters of the Gospel, they are not ordained Ministers of this or that particular Church, but Ministers of Christ to the Church in general, [Page 222] Let no man glory in men; for all things are yours; whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, all are yours, and ye are Christs, 1 Cor. 3.21, 22. Paul, Apollos, and Cephas were theirs in common with others, not theirs appropriately. And their being sent or called to be Mini­sters to this ot that particular Church, is but the application of their gene­ral capacity to particular use and exer­cise, to wit, that of Ministration to such a people in particular. And this Ministerial Power they bring with them to the Church or People among whom they are placed, but do not receive it from them: And it is by virtue of their Ministry and Ministra­tion that a particular Body of peo­ple can act or perform any Publick Acts of Communion peculiar to a Church as such. And therefore as they cannot act as a Church without such a Ministry, so neither can they properly be a Church without it. The first thing St. Paul mentions, Ephes. 4.11.12. for which our Saviour Christ gave Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, [Page 223]Pastors and Teachers, was for the per­fecting of the Saints, or for the joyn­ing them together, or for the making them up, or for the compacting or knit­ting them together: For thus variously is that word rendred by Expositors; but all to the same sense. For it is for the knitting them and holding them together as one body in their several Publick Assemblies for Worship and Edification. And indeed a Church is so called from several Christians assem­bling together for Publick Worship, their Union wherein is made by their joynt concurrence with their Spiritual Pastor in his Ministration; for which end and purpose such Officers are gi­ven and appointed by Christ, as the words of St. Paul now alledged shew.

And now as for the Text alledged by the Doctor, in which Paul and Bar­nabas are said to have ordained Elders in every Church, Acts 14.23. this does not prove the Churches there spoken of to be such Antecedently to any Ministerial Act or Power by which they became such. For they had [Page 224]been made Churches in some sort by the planting of Paul and Barnabas, who also as Church Officers ministred to them while they were among them: For this ordaining Elders in every Church by Paul and Barnabas, was done in their return to the places where they had preached the Gospel, and made Disciples before; and they returned to them to confirm them, and to ordain Elders among them, as ap­pears by the two precedent verses compared with the Text it self. Be­sides, St. Luke did not write this Hi­story till after the Apostles had thus ordained Elders in the Churches men­tioned by him, so that they were in­deed Churches then when he wrote those words, and it was proper for him to stile them so, tho it should be supposed they had been none before they had Elders ordained in them. So that this Text can be no proof of that for which the Doctor doth alledge it.

QUERY XII. WHether from the reason of the extent and Latitude of Visible Church-Membership and Communion which has been discoursed of, the great usefulness of a National settlement or Constitution for the publick exercise of the Worship of God in all parts of a Nation professing Christianity, may not fairly be inferred and concluded?

Now the reason why Visible Church-Membership & Communion are better in respect of their due extensiveness, than they would be if the terms and conditions of enjoying those Privi­ledges were limited and restrained to the same terms which the enjoyment of Invisible Church Membership and Communion are, is this, viz. because these Priviledges under such an extent and latitude, tend more to the pro­pagation of the Christian Religion, and the increase of the number of those [Page 226]who shall be saved, than they would or could do if they were limitted and restrained to the same terms and con­ditions of enjoyment as Invisible Church Membership and Communion are. This hath been shew'd in our tenth Inquiry.

And it is for the same reason that it is better that the exercise of Gods Pub­lick Worship should be set up in all parts of a Nation professing Christi­anity by a National Authority; and that all such Professors should be thereby obliged to frequent it, than it is to leave all such to their own liberty to promote and frequent it, or to forbear and neglect to do so, as the way called Independency does. For the National way tends more to pro­pagate and promote the knowledge and practice of Christian Religion, and the Salvation of Souls, than the Congregational way does, and there­fore must needs be abundantly better. That it does so, is too appa­rent to be denied by any that have but common reason when these [Page 227]things following are but duly con­sidered.

1. Better provision is made by a publick establishment for the instructi­on of such a Nation in the way of Sal­vation, than can reasonably be expected without it. Unless provision were made by publick Authority for the main­tenance of a Gospel Ministry in all parts of a Nation, there would cer­tainly be a greater want of a publick Ministry in many places of it, than by reason of such a publick provision there is. Would people, think we, of themselves in all places of a Nation provide a better maintainance for the Ministry of the Gospel among them, if left wholly to themselves, than there is made by publick Authority? If they would, how comes it to pass that those places are generally worst sup­plied with Ministers where the Pub­lick has made least provision for their maintainance? And generally where there is the greatest failure in this, there is the least face of Religion, and greatest hazard of mens Souls. [Page 228] Where there is no Vision the people perish, saith Solomon, Prov. 29.18. And the people are destroyed for lack of knowledge, saith the Prophet, Hos. 4.6.

2. If the people should be all left to themselves to chuse what Ministers they please without any publick ap­probation and allowance of some ap­pointed by publick Authority to judg of their fitness, many would be in danger of chusing men of erronious Principles, and such as would corrupt the minds of men. The consequence of which would be great opposition and contention between the Orthodox and the Erronious, and making of Parties, and endless strife, to the de­struction of Peace and Charity, and to the hurt of mens souls thereby, and to the great dishonour of our Religi­on, and to the hinderance of its good effects upon the minds and lives of men.

3. Altho the Publick Worship should be set up in all places of a Christian Nation, yet if men should [Page 229]be under no Obligation by Law to attend it, it would doubtless be much more neglected by many, than when there is. But the more men are brought to attend the means by which God works Grace in them, tho it be but by virtue of the Law they are brought to it, yet the more hope and probability there is of their being savingly wrought upon.

4. If whosoever shall pretend him­self qualified for it, should have liber­ty to gather a Congregation, it would be the leaving open a door of oppor­tunity to Seducers to subvert mens Souls, and to fill a Nation with varie­ty of Sects, and the mischievous effects of them. And yet so it would be if there were no publick Govern­ment in the Church to restrain men: And to this day we feel the very sad effects of so great a liberty sometime indulged.

Thus we see for what reason true Re­ligion should be promoted by National Authority. And as to matter of fact it is sufficiently known, that those [Page 230]who have had the Supream Power in all Nations have been wont always to promote by their Authority that which they have thought to be the true Religion whether it hath been true or false: And whence comes this but from the light and Law of Na­ture, which directs men to use the Power and Interest they have to fur­ther the Worshipping of the God whom they serve. And indeed Chri­stians of all pesuasions are willing enough to have the Civil Power to exert it self in furthering their own way of Worshipping God: The People of New England, who once were as much for Liberty of Conscience as any, yet soon found it convenient to in­corporate the Civil Power with the Ecclesiastick for the defence and pro­pagation of their Religion.

Now as the great usefulness of a Na­tional establishment for the purposes aforesaid, does sufficiently appear from the reason and nature of the thing it self, and has the light and law of Na­ture on its side; so it is not destitute [Page 231]of countenance from supernatural Re­velation.

1. When Almighty God said to Abraham, Thou shalt be a Father of many Nations, a Father of many Na­tions have I made thee, Gen. 17. He declared his intention of Reforming the world by degrees from Idolatry and false Worship in a National way, if we may judg what he intended to do afterwards, by the first instance he gave of his performance herein; and if we may judg of the true meaning of this as of other Divine Predictions, by the after Events which answer them in point of fact; which yet is the best and most approved way of under­standing Predictions, when such events take place.

Almighty God made Abraham first a Father of a Nation which issued out of his own Loyns. For when his Po­sterity, who by Circumcision Cove­nanted to take Abrahams God only for their God, grew very numerous in Egypt, God brought them out thence that they might worship him [Page 232]openly and publickly in a National way. And by this means, and by his visible owning them for his people by extraordinary favours shew'd them, he designed to make himself more known to the rest of the world, to be the only true God, and to be so acknowledged.

Now in that Abraham was promised to be the Father of many Nations, it was not so much for that God in­tended that many Nations should de­scend out of his Loyns by natural ge­neration, as that many Nations in time should, after his example, come to acknowledge and worship him only for their God as the only true God. For so St. Paul understood this pro­mise of God to Abraham, when he makes Abraham, in respect of his be­lieving in the true God, to be the Fa­ther of all Nations that should be of the same belief, as well those of the Ʋncircumcision as that which was of the Circumcision, as it is written, saith he, I have made thee a Father of many Nations, Rom. 4.16, 17. And it was [Page 233]in this spiritual or religious respect and sense that St. Paul had before in this Chapter asserted Abraham to be the Father of all that shall believe in the true God as he did, in all Nations, as well those who were never Circum­cised, as those that were, Ver. 11, 12. And thus God made Abraham a blessing to the World as he promised he would, and a Father of Nations, not only for that the Messias was to be born of one descended from him; for so he was born of one that descended from Abrahams Predecessors and Successors, as well as from Abraham: But he was a blessing to the World, and the Fa­ther of Nations by being made by God the Head, the beginning and great ex­ample of reforming the World from Misbelief and Idolatry, and other con­sequent evils, so as his Progenitors were not. To encourage which work in the world, God invested Abraham, that led the way herein, with the ho­nour of being counted the Father of Nations, and a publick blessing to the world, both in himself and in his Seed.

2. That God did design farther to carry on the reformation of the world from Misbelief and Idolatry in a Na­tional way, and in that way to bring the world by degrees to the Worship of the true God only, appears by other Predictictons of the Prophets, such as that, Isa. 55.5. Behold thou shalt call a Nation that thou knowst not, and Nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee. Chap. 52.15. He shall sprinkle many Nations, the Kings shall shut their mouths at him, Chap. 49.23. Kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their Queens thy nursing mothers. Zech. 8.22. Many people and strong Nations shall come to seek the Lord of Hosts. Chap. 2.11. Many Nations shall be joyned to the Lord in that day, and shall be my people. The formal nature of mens Visible Church-Membership consists in their being visibly joyned to the Lord, as I have shewed; and therefore when many Nations are Nationally joyned to the Lord, they may well be counted Nationally his people, or Churches.

And Nations are then Nationally joyned to the Lord, when Nations do incorporate the Christian Religion with their Civil Government, and make it part of the National Govern­ment, as the Ecclesiastical Polity of the Jews together with the Judicial Law of that Commonwealth was. And by this means the Christian Re­ligion becomes commodiously and with more certainty to be transmit­ted to future Generations in a Na­tion, as well as practised for the time being by that which is existent; just as the Jews Religion was. For he esta­blished a testimony in Jacob, and ap­pointed a Law in Israel, which he com­manded our Fathers that they should make them known to their Children: That the Generation to come might know them, even the Children which should be born: who should arise and declare them to their Children, Psal. 78.5, 6.

Those Prophesies fore-mentioned concerning Nations being joyned to the Lord, referring to times under [Page 236]the New Testament, the event of them, as we shall see, will shew that they foretold Christian Nations their being joyned to the Lord Nationally, or in the course of National Govern­ment. And the nature of Events which answer to divine Predictions, are, I think, the best and most ap­proved Expositions of those Prophe­sies when they are fulfilled, and the best measure which can be taken for the understanding of them.

Two things then would be enquired into touching the Events we speak of.

1. What, and which they are which we may reasonably pitch upon for those Events.

2. How we may be assured from some Scriptures of the New Testa­ment, that those Events of Providence which we shall pitch upon, are indeed of that sort and kind which the Pro­phesies we speak of point us to.

I. For the first of these, we have very great reason to believe that those National Reformations from Paganism [Page 237]and Judaism, and those National Re­formations from Popery which have been made in the world since the Chri­stian Religion was first set on foot, and which shall yet farther be made, are those very Events, or the chiefest part of them, which the Prophesies, before specified, point us to. We cannot say that any Reformation of either kind has been National, un­till it has been back'd by National Au­thority. Its true, there have been great multitudes of men during the standing of the Roman Empire as Pagan, that were recovered from Judaism and Paganism to Christianity; and there were many famous Churches of such: But I think no one Nation, as such, could be said to be joyned to the Lord in all that time, tho out of many Kindreds, Tongues, and Nations, there were many, very many both men and women that were. But Nations then became Nationally the Lords when the Christians in them were owned as such, and required to behave themselves as such by the Supreme Authority and [Page 238]ruling powers of those Nations; tho there might possibly be many in those Nations at the same time, which yet did not so much as pretend them­selves to be Christians.

2. But let us inquire in the second place what assurance we have from any of the holy Writings of the New Testament, that those National Re­formations from Paganism and Popery that have been made in New Testa­ment times, and which shall further be made in other Nations, are those Events of Providence which the Pro­phesies, touching National conversions, point at. And to this end let us ob­serve.

First, That at what time the Su­preme Power of the Roman Empire fell into Christian hands, and was im­ployed for the destruction and root­ing out Pagan Idolatry, and for the setting up and establishing the Publick Worship of Almighty God and his Son Jesus Christ, throughout its Domi­nions: Then it was that this King­dom or Dominion became Gods [Page 239]Kingdom in Scripture account. For to this great turn of Affairs in the judgment of the most approved Inter­preters of the Revelations does that joyful acclamations refer which we have set down in Chap. 12.10. Now is come Salvation, and Strength, and the Kingdom of our God, and the Power of his Christ, At which time also, the great Dragon, called the Devil and Sa­tan, was cast out, and his Angels with him, ver. 9. that is, those Rulers su­preme and subordinate, who had till then done his work in promoting the Interest of the Kingdom of darkness by supporting Idolatry, and perse­cuting Christians; as it was said, The Devil shall cast some of you into prison, Rev. 2.10.

But was not Gods Kingdom come into the Empire till now that the Go­vernment was made Christian by the Emperour being a Christian? Were there not many great and famous Christian Churches within the Empire while the Government of it was Pa­gan in respect of Worship? Why, yes [Page 240]there was. Why then was not the Kingdom of God and the Power of his Christ said to be come till the Go­vernment in the hands of Constantine the Emperour became Christian? Why should this Song, Now is come salva­tion, and strength, and the Kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ, be applied to this great turn of Affairs in the Empire, rather than to that when the Preaching of the Gospel was first set on foot in it, and many Christian Con­gregations erected? There can no other reason hereof be given. I con­ceive, but that all the while the Go­vernment of the Empire, in reference to Religion, was engaged for the up­holding of the Visible Kingdom of the Devil, so far, and in this respect it might be said to be his Kingdom, to be sure it could not be said to be Gods so far as it was imployed against him. But when the Government of it be­came Christian, and engaged it self in throwing down the Kingdom of dark­ness, the Worship of false Gods, and in setting up and establishing the [Page 241]Publick Worship of the true God, and the Christian Religion; then and from that time in this Scripture account, that Kingdom or Empire became the King­dom of God and of his Christ, tho ma­ny of the Inhabitants of it continued still for a time at least, Idolaters as to their profession and private practice.

So that when, and so long as the Government of the Empire in its con­stitution in reference to Religion con­tinued idolatrous, so long the Empire it self was not owned for Gods Kingdom, tho there were many Christian Churches in it: but when once the Government of it became Christian, it was then owned for Gods Kingdom, tho many of the In­habitants of it were no Christians. From whence it follows, & may naturally be inferred, that in Scripture Notion King­doms are said to be Gods Kingdoms up­on the account of a National Reformati­on from Idolatry and false worship, when ever it is made by the publick Government and authority of such Nations.

But now after this Reformation [Page 242]from Paganism by the Imperial Au­thority and Power, in process of time therecame a falling away in the Em­pire from the purity of Christian Wor­ship, unto a Worship of a mixt nature, made up partly of a Worship given to the true God, and partly of a Worship given unto Creatures which is due only unto God; which was done by the pre­vailing of the Papal Apostacy. And the ten Kings mentioned Rev. 17. into whose hands the Empire became divided, gave their power and strength unto the Beast for the support of this impure Worship and Pagan-like Superstition.

But after this had been done and con­tinued in for several hundreds of years, several of those Kingdoms and Princi­palities, which had before given their power and strength unto the Beast, fell off, and reassumed that power and strength, and then devoted it to the ser­vice of God in reforming their Do­minions from Popery, and in restoring the Publick Worship of God throughout their Dominions without any Idolatrous mixture. Upon which great turn of Af­fairs, [Page 243]those great voices in heaven follow­ed, saying, The Kingdoms of this world are become the Kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ, Rev. 11.15. For this joyful ac­clamation is here brought in upon oc­casion of the Resurrection and Exal­tation of the Witnesses in this Chap­ter spoken of, and of the fall of a tenth part of the City spiritually cal­led Sodom and Egypt. By which we understand that the fall of part of the Papal Power and Jurisdiction, and the rise and exaltation of the Witnesses, were contemporary; and that this great alteration and change in several Nati­ons, made those Nations which were but Kingdoms of this world before, to become the Kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ.

Now there are these two reasons to induce us to believe that this Resur­rection of the Witnesses, and the fall of a tenth part of the City, refer unto the great Reformation from Popery, which was made many years since in several Kingdoms and Principalities in Christendom, and consequently that [Page 244]the acclamation aforesaid (the King­doms of this world, are become the Kingdoms of the Lord and of his Christ) refer unto the same time and thing.

1. Because we have no where so great, so notable, and remarkable an alteration as that Reformation made in Christendom, foretold and particu­larly pointed at in this Book of Pro­phesies, if it were not in this. And yet it seems incredible that so great and famous an alteration of Affairs in the Popish State, and in the con­dition of the Church as that Reforma­tion made, should not in special be pointed at somewhere in this Book of Prophesies. This reason the Reve­rend Dr. More hath surnished me with in his Appendage annexed to his Ex­position of Daniels Prophesies, p. 291. With whose Exposition, of what I here alledge out of Rev. 11. I am abun­dantly satisfied as I find it in the foresaid Appendage, and in his Book entituled, The Revelation of St. John unveiled.

2. The matters which sell out and were transacted in and by that Refor­maton, did exactly answer to that which was foretold by that Prophesie touching the Resurrection of the Wit­nesses, and the fall of the Popish power and interest in a considerable part of the Popes Jurisdiction. For then there was a Political Resurrecti­on of that sort of men who had been Politically slain, and a long time dead, for crying down Popery. And this was done when such were put into publick imployment in all Reformed Nations. And at the same time on the other hand, there was a Political slaughter of thousands of men, when all those that had been in Office and holy Orders in their Church, were put down in all those Nations that then became reformed. And this reason methinks should convince any unprejudiced man, that our first hap­py National Reformation from Po­pery in several Nations, was the fulfil­ling of that Prophesie touching the Re­surrection of the Witnesses we speak

And if it were, then I cannot see how any can deny but that those voices in heaven which presently fol­lowed thereupon, did declare that those Nations which while Popish, were but Kingdoms of this World, yet by their National reformation from Popery they became the Kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ.

But if the Prophesie concerning the Resurrection of the Witnesses should re­fer unto another time and turn, and not to that of the first National Reformati­on from Popery, yet that saying, The Kingdoms of this world are become the Kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ, upon the occasion there foregoing, will no less serve to prove that Nations by their National Reformation from Popery, became the Kingdoms of God, than it would in case that Pro­phesie had referred unto the first Na­tional Reformation from Popery. For the Resurrection of the Witnesses, the Earthquake, the fall of a tenth part of the City, and Political slaugh­ter of seven thousand of names of men, [Page 247]must needs import a great alteration of Affairs and National Reformation, wheresoever and whensoever they fall out, be it sooner or later; because up­on it we see some of those Nations which were but Kingdoms of the world before, do then become the Kingdoms of God. And if Nations of the world indefinitely, become the Kingdoms of God by being reformed from Popery or Paganism, so as to make the right Christian Doctrine and Worship, the Religion of those Na­tions by National Authority; then the same is true of all Nations which are so reformed at any time, and con­sequently of those which led the way, and have been first in such Reforma­tion. And thus our proof appears every way pregnant.

To conclude this matter then; when we find that in all times and places in point of fact, that as fast as the Sovereign and Supreme Power in each Nation has fallen into Orthodox Christian hands, so fast those Nations have become reformed from Paganism [Page 248]or Popery by the Governing Power of those Nations: And when we find again that by such Reformations, those Nations have become Gods Kingdoms as contradistinguished from the King­doms of this world; great reason we have to believe these to be the very and true Events, and the fulfilling of such ancient Predictions of the Pro­phets, as those which foretold that ma­ny Nations should be joyned to the Lord, and be his People.

It is true, it was a great while after Christianity began, before it became National by National Authority, as it was long after Abraham and his Poste­rity became the People of God by the Covenant of Circumcision, be­fore they and their Religion became National: And as the one was in bon­dage four hundred years under the Egyptian Tyranny, so were the Chri­stians three hundred years under the Tyranny of the Pagan Roman Empe­rours, before they and their Religion became National by National Autho­thority. But as the Christian Religion [Page 249]and Worship as reformed, has since the Reformation been carried on principal­ly in a National way, so I doubt not but that it will be carried on farther, and more Nations come to be re­formed from Popery, Infidelity, and Paganism, until at last that ancient Pro­phesie of the Angel by Daniel comes to be fulfilled, which tells us, That the Kingdom, and Dominion, and the greatness of the Kingdom under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the Saints of the most High, whose Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom, and all Domi­nions (or Rulers as it is in the Margin) shall serve and obey him, Dan. 7.27. And that also in Psal. 72, 11. All Kings shall fall down before him; all Nations shall serve him.

And now from what hath been re­presented to us in the foresaid Prophe­sie of St. John, Rev. 11. we may briefly observe these two or three things.

1. That notwithstanding any lesser defects in Doctrine, Worship, or Go­vernment Ecclesiastical, in any of the [Page 250]National Reformations from Popery which have been made, yet after and because such Reformation has been made, those Nations are in Scripture account esteemed the Kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ, as opposed to the Kingdoms of this world. Which seems to me to fall somewhat hard up­on such as separate from the publick Worship of God established in such Nations by National Authority, in a way of National Reformation; and on those more especially who separate from that Worship for that very rea­son, because enjoyned by National Authority. It likewise falls hard upon them also who disesteem, or less esteem a National Ministry, because it is Na­tional, or made such according to a National establishment. These seem to be of one mind, and Almighty God of another, when he esteems Nations to be joyned to him, and to be his People by that, for which they separate.

Their pretence that in the Apostles times, and for three hundred years [Page 251]after, the Affairs of the Church were carried on only in a free Congrega­tional way in greater or lesser volun­tary Associations, and therefore they ought to be so now, seems very in­considerable. Because what was done in that kind then, was done by way of necessity, because they had not opportunity of a better. Not but that they long'd for, and pray'd for such Kings as would use their Autho­rity and Power for the propagation and furtherance of the Christian Re­ligion, as well as for the defence of it, and the Professors of it. And they esteemed it no small favour from God, when at last they obtained it in Con­stantine, a Christian Cesar, who used that Power of his for the establishing the Christian Religion and Worship of the only true God, and for the orde­ring and regulating many things re­lating to the more commodious and orderly carrying on the ministration of the Gospel and the Worship of God. And therefore the people of God then existent in the Empire, are [Page 252]brought in by the Spirit of Prophesie, expressing themselves thus upon that occasion: Now is come salvation, and strength, and the Kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ, as I shew'd before, Rev. 12.10.

2. It may be justly questioned, whether it be worth the while for men to dispute against the being of a Na­tional Church in New Testament times, considering that in the New Testament, Nations reformed from Paganism and Popery, are stiled Gods Kingdoms: And considering likewise, that the Scripture stiles the same peo­ple, and in the same respect, some­times the Kingdom of God, and some­times his Church. And therefore it should seem no more improper to call a Christian Nation a Church of God, than it is to call it a Kingdom of God, which yet the Scripture stiles so.

3. It may be observed yet farther, That the Kingdoms or Nations which have been reformed from Popery, were before such reformation was [Page 253]made, but Kingdoms of this world, not­withstanding much of what pertains to the Christian Religion, was then owned and professed in them. The Spi­rit of God by whom the book of Reve­lations was indited, we see stiles them so in their unreformed state: The King­doms of this world are become, &c. Yet they then in their unreformed state, Worshipped the true God, and his Son Christ Jesus: They owned the holy Scriptures for the Word of God, and used the same Creeds which the Reformed Churches themselves use; and yet we see they are in that state stiled by the Spirit of God, but King­doms of this world, when as under their reformed state, they are said to be the Kingdoms of God and of his Christ.

Like as Almighty God for the like reason esteemed the Nation of the Jews, who had been his own Church and People, but as Ethiopians unto him, Amos 9.7. and told them by another Prophet, Ye are not my people, and I will not be your God, Hos. 1.10. [Page 254]For tho they had his Ordinances among them, and boasted of their Temple-Worship, crying, The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord are these; yet at the same time they burnt Incense unto Baal, and walked after other Gods, Jer. 7. they divided their Worship between the true God and Baal, and did swear by the Lord and by Mal­cham, Zeph. 1.5. And upon this ac­count it was that God said of them by his Prophet, they are unto me as a speckled bird, of a Religion of several colours, Jer. 12.9. For this spiritual Whoredom especially it was, that Al­mighty God who had once espoused that people to himself, gave them a Bill of Divorce at last, brake up house, turned them out of doors, and sent them out of his Land, untill they should repent and reform. And if we compare these things with the spiritual whoredom wherewith Mystical Babi­lon is charged, and for which, with other heinous crimes, she is threat­ned in this Book of Revelations, it will [Page 255]not be at all hard to conceive why Nations while Popish, are stiled and esteemed but Kingdoms of this world.

And this, if there were no other, is argument enough to prevail with all such as would not be disowned by God, to be none, or to become none of their Communion, who are thus disowned by him.

And thus we have seen how both from the light and law of Nature, the reason of the thing, and from divine Revelation also, the great expediency at least of the publick exercise of Gods Worship in the way of National esta­blishment, is warranted, and approved of.

This then may be a caution to men, who live in any such reformed Nation as we have discoursed of, and as ours is, to take heed of acting in matters Ecclesiastical, or pertaining to Church Communion, as if they lived in a Po­pish or Pagan Nation, by disowning and by separating from the National way of Worship, lest thereby they [Page 256]discountenance and disparage what God approves of, and disown that for which God owns such a Nation for his Kingdom. It is true, the Primi­tive Christians, who lived in, Pagan Countries, and those since which have lived in Popish, have been necessitated in duty to be separate in their Chri­stian Communion from their National Worship, as much as they were obli­ged not to be Idolaters. But there is a great difference between false Wor­ship, and defects in that which is true. The best Church Constitution, and the best Church Administration, which have men not divinely inspired for the ordering of them, are liable to humane defects. And if humane defects even in Gods Worship, were not to be en­dured for the sake of Communion in the Worship it self, there could no such thing as Church Communion be en­joyed among Christians, because we cannot say there is any in this im­perfect state in which we are, without defects.

But then the question will be what defects are to be indured in Gods Worship, rather than Communion in it should be forsaken? and what are intolerable, and for the sake of which Communion in the Worship is to be declined?

And here it seems to me impossible warrantably to determine any defects intolerable which do not alter the na­ture of the Worship, and make it be­come false Worship; that do not de­stroy or defeat the ends for which true Worship serves. Who is he that will undertake to determine for what de­fects, which are consistent with Gods true Worship, Communion in that Worship is to be declined?

But then the next question will be, How we shall know what Worship is true, and what is false? And so what Worship it is that Communion in it is to be declined, and what not?

Now that's false Worship which is given to a wrong Object, or to that which is not God. And that again is [Page 258]false Worship, tho given to God the right Object, when that which is not true matter of Worship, is given to him as matter of Worship.

But how shall we know when Wor­ship is false in respect of the matter? Worship is then false in respect of the matter, when that is performed to God as required by him, which is not so. For so we are taught, Mat. 15.9. In vain do they worship me, teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of men. That's a vain or false Worship, when humane Ordinances are imposed, and observed as the Commands of God; and this is the adding to his Word also, which is forbidden, Deut. 4.2.

But then there is a great difference between these and the use of things in or about Gods Worship which are not of the Essence of it, nor used un­der the Notion of being commanded by God, but professedly used as things indifferent in their own nature, and only as matters of Humane Prudence; and for this reason cannot justly be charged to be false Worship.

There is a great difference likewise between the Essence of Worship, and the Accidents of it, between the mat­ter and substance of it, and the cir­cumstances of external administration. There is not the liberty of varying in the one as there is in the other. As for instance, we are not left at like liberty in the choice of the Object, and matter of Prayer and Thanks­giving, as we are in the external man­ner of address, nor limited by express­ness of Rule in the one, as we are in the other. We are expresly com­manded to pray to God in the name of Christ, and have express direction for all the substantial parts or matter of Prayer, as Confession, Supplicati­on, Petition, Thanksgiving, and In­tercession; but whether in a set Form, or without, whether with the use of a Book, or without, whether in one or more Prayers at a time, or whe­ther kneeling or standing, is not de­termined; but in these we are left at liberty to use or chuse as Circum­stances shall direct or require. And [Page 260]the like may be said concerning other parts of Gods Worship, Baptism, and the Lords Supper. The Ordinances themselves are particularly command­ed, but so are not several Circum­stances relating to the external admi­nistration of them, but are left to the Prudence of Church Guides and Go­vernours under general Rules. And altho one way of external administra­tion of Worship may be better than another, and that may be chosen as best by such as have power of chusing, which yet is not best in it self; yet so long as it does not alter the nature of the Worship it self, nor defeat the ends and uses to which an external administration serves, it can by no means be duly esteemed to be false Worship. The worst that can be said of such an administration of Worship which is not simply unlawful in it self, but only inferiour in goodness unto the best, is only this, That it is inexpedient, when a better might have been had, if they had thought so by whom the choice was made.

Now suppose then, that when the happy Work of National Reformation from Popery was laid and begun by the great Instruments of it, (whose memory is blessed, and name precious to good men.) Suppose, I say, they may possibly have been mistaken in the betterness of some things in the external manner and form of admini­stration of Publick Worship; yet so long as such things do not amount unto any false Worship, but are only Imperfections in the true, the questi­on will be, Whether it be prudent and becoming good men in this case to seek amendment of those supposed defects, in any other way than in the same National course of proceeding by which the Reformation was first wrought. And the reason is,

1. Because God hath owned this way of Reformation by declaring Na­tions upon account of it to be his Kingdoms, which we cannot say he hath done upon account of any Refor­mation wrought in them any other way without this.

2. Because when such a Reforma­tion is attempted in a Nation already reformed, in opposition to the Refor­mation established by Law, it cannot reasonably be expected, but that more hurt will be done thereby, than good obtained, as we have found by sad experience in this Nation. For by this means a Nation comes to be di­vided against it self, Party against Party, to the engendering disaffection, envying, and strife, and where these are, there is (as St. James hath told us) confusion, and every evil work. And by this means there is a very sensible decay and loss of that where­in the very life and spirit of Religion in men lies. But the Reformation in the external part of Worship, which is sought after in this extraordinary way, is in things but of such a na­ture, as wherein the life and spirit of Religion in men is little concerned one way or other, either as to loss or gain. And therefore to chuse to seek this sort of Reformation in such a way, as by which the loss was likely to be [Page 263]far greater than the gain, and has since proved to be so, is a thing doubtless which cannot become the wisdom of good men.

Now that the Reformation in the external part of Worship which is pursued in the extraordinary and un­due way we speak of, is in things but of such a nature as wherein the spirit and life of Religion in men is little concerned one way or other, as to loss or gain, appears by this, viz. Because there have been, and are very many, who have lived under the use of that external Mode of Worship without any such Reformation of it as is contended for, in whom the spi­rit and life of Religion has been found as much (as may well be pre­sumed) as in any other who have used any other Mode of Worship different from it. Not that I am against mens seeking that which they apprehend to be best in these matters, provided it be in the National way, and in such a manner as that more hurt be not done by the way and manner of [Page 264]seeking it, than good can be acquired in their way of obtaining it by sepa­ration.

3. It is becoming rhe wisdom of good men to seek the amendment they desire, by complying as far as they can with what is already established; because by so doing, and by seasona­ble and humble application to the Le­gislative Powers of the Nation, they may in all reason sooner obtain what is reasonable and meet to be granted, than by separating from it, and setting up another way in opposition to it. And the reason is, because the one is apt to beget a good opinion of them, and of the innocency and goodness of their intention in what they desire and seek: Whereas the other tends to exasperate and provoke, and to be­get an ill opinion of them, and a jea­lousie of their designs, in the minds of those from whom they expect ease and relief in what is mattet of grie­vance to them: And that which does that, is no good way of obtaining from them. Solomon's wise advice is, [Page 265] If the Spirit of the Ruler rise up against thee, leave not thy place; for yielding pacifieth great offences. Eccles. 10.4.

QUERY XIII. WHerein may Catholick Church Com­munion consist? And how, and by what means is it best preserved?

To clear our way in this Inquiry it will be convenient to take notice of the difference that is between the Ʋnion of the Catholick Church, and the Communion of it. The Union of the Catholick Church consists in the same Relation which all the Members of that one Body bear to Christ the Head of it, and to one another as fellow-members: But the Communi­on of this spiritual Corporation con­sists in a mutual performance of those Christian Duties and Offices to which they are engaged by virtue of that relation. By that Relation in which [Page 266]their Union consists they come to have a greater interest in one another than they had before their incorpo­ration into that body; and by it they come under new duties to one ano­ther to which they were not obliged before; But their Communion con­sists much in a mutual discharge of those duties towards one another, and in an improvement of that interest for the benefit of one another, and the good of the whole by their mu­tual intercourse in spiritual affairs. The Union of the whole, which is made by one Baptism, or the Bap­tismal Covenant, respects the being of the Church: But Catholick Commu­nion respects its well-being by its in­crease in wisdom, goodness, and com­fort.

There is indeed a Catholick Church Ʋnity by Communion as well as there is another which comes by Re­lation; but this Unity of Communion slows from that which is made by a Relation common to the whole.

Having thus briefly considered how Catholick Communion differs from Catholick Union, I shall now proceed to shew a little more particularly wherein or in what Catholick Commu­munion doth consist. And we may best know what it is, and wherein it doth consist by the account we have of it as practised in the Catholick Church when it first be­came Christian. And this account we have in these words, Acts 2.42. And they continued stedfastly in the Apostles doctrine, and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. By which description we see it consisted in their consent and agreement in three things, Faith, Worship, Fellowship.

1. In their agreeing in the same Faith; they continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine; that is, in the belief of it, in attendance to it, and practice of it. From the same faith, being common to all Christians, it is called, the common faith, Tit. 1.4. the one faith, Eph. 4.5. and their agreement in it, is stiled, Ʋnity in the faith, Eph. 4.13.

2. In their agreement in the same Worship; breaking of bread and prayers. This Catholick Church in its beginning is said to have continued with one accord in Prayer and Suppli­cation, Acts 1.14. And on the day of Penticost they were all with one accord in one place, when the Holy Ghost was poured out upon them. And when their number so increased that they could not all perform this Publick Worship together in one place, but in several distinct Assemblies, called particular Churches, yet their agree­ment in the same Worship, made their Communion in it but one Commu­nion, tho performed in several Assem­blies.

For altho these Assemblies be never so far distant from one another, yet so long as they all agree in the same Worship, the distance of place can no more hinder their Communion from being one, than their being baptized in several distant places, can hinder the Relation to one another contracted thereby, from being one, when it is [Page 269]common to all the Members. We account all those to be of the Commu­nion of the Church of Rome at the same time, and in the same acts in which they hold their Local Commu­munion in several distant Nations, so long as they all agree in the same cor­rupt Worship. And there is the same reason for the Unity of the Commu­nion in Worship of all Orthodox Assemblies in all Nations. So that I take this for an unquestionable truth, That it is mens agreement in the same Principles of Communion, be they good or bad, that makes their Com­munion but one, tho the particular acts of it are performed by them in many thousand distant places.

And now it is by the Union of Re­lation by the Baptismal Covenant, and the Unity of Communion by agreement in the Principles of the Worship wherein they have Commu­nion, that all Orthodox Christians make one great House or Temple of God in the world, in which he is open­ly worshipped, and publickly ac­knowledged [Page 270]to be what he is, the one only true God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in opposition to all false Gods, Ephes. 2.21. In whom all the building fitly framed together, groweth unto an holy Temple in the Lord. This is that house which is called Christs own house, Heb. 3.6. and that House of God over which Christ is said to be High Priest, Heb. 10.21. And par­ticular Churches in reference to this one house, are but as several Apart­ments in it, which all together make up one great house of God.

And in this house of his God dwells, and therein manifesteth himself to his People after a more special manner than he does to the world; 2 Cor. 6.16. Ye are the Temple of the living God, as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them, and will be their God, and they shall be my people. Here Almighty God meets with them, and communes with them, and receives their addresses; and here he entertains them with the fatness of his house, the Ordinances of the Gospel, and the [Page 271]benign influences and comfortable presence of his Spirit in the use of them. In this way the whole Church in their several Assemblies have Com­munion with their Head Christ Jesus, and one with another, by partaking in common of the spiritual benefits communicated by the Lord, and in assisting in common in the Worship, Adoration, and Thanksgiving which the Church renders him for the glory and transcendent perfections of his nature and being, and returns him for all the blessings and benefits they receive from him.

And the more all Christians are agreed in their worshipping of God, and in their Communion with him, the more they honour him, and the more they please him, and make themselves the more capable of re­ceiving all good things from him in the greater abundance. If the agree­ment but of two of them touching any thing they shall ask, hath his promise of granting it, (Mat. 18.19.) what might not be expected from him if [Page 272]the whole Church were of one heart and one soul, as they were at the first in matters of their Commu­nion.

3. Catholick Communion consi­steth also in the mutual assistances which Christians give to, and receive one from another, couched in that one word Fellowship in the description of Catholick Communion, Acts 2.42. And they continued stedfastly in the Apo­stles Doctrine, and Fellowship, &c. The same word which in our Version is here translated Fellowship, is by the Dutch in their Version translated Com­munion. And according to Dr. Ham­mond it signifies both to communicate, and to participate, to distribute, and to receive.

So that according to the nature of Christian Communion, every Mem­ber of the whole Church is or ought to be useful and serviceable to the whole Community of Christians in general, and to every Christian in particular, so far as they can, in the place and rank in which the Provi­dence [Page 273]of God hath set them. The which if duly observed by all as it ought to be, the same persons that thus communicate and contribute assi­stance to others, would be receiving back again from the whole, and from every Member in particular, the like succour service and assistance as oppor­tunity serves, as they themselves had contributed to them: As a Christian is to serve every fellow-Christian, so according to the same Law every one is to serve him. This is that the Apostle means when he says, By love serve one another, Gal. 5.13. And this giving and receiving assistance, the same Apostle calls communicating with him, Phil. 4.15.

If this Catholick Communion were but duly maintained among all Chri­stians, how like a heaven upon earth would the Catholick Church be? And how happy would they be even now for the present that are of it? And how would the Inhabitants of the world that are not of it, then flow into it? And yet for Christians thus [Page 274]to exchange Offices of love with one another, is nothing more than what we are all obliged to by the Royal Law of Love; Thou shalt love thy Neighbour as thy self. For if I am hereby bound to love every Neigh­bour as my self, so is every Neigh­bout obliged by it to love me as they love themselves. And how delightful a commerce would this be, if the Chri­stian Church were but so happy as to hit on it!

The particular duties and offices of love in which this part of Christian Communion does consist, are such as these; the instructing and exhorting one another, the watching over and admonishing one another, the streng­thening the feeble minded, the visiting and comforting the afflicted, the re­lieving one anothers wants, the bea­ring on anothers burdens, the having the same care one for another, and the like. Together with these we may reckon the yielding and allowing to every one the liberty of sharing in the common priviledge of enjoying [Page 275]Communion in Gospel-Ordinances and Worship, so long as they have not made themselves uncapable of it by drawing on themselves deservedly the Censures of the Church, nor are otherwise naturally uncapable of the end and use for which those Ordi­nances, or any of them were ordained, as little Children seem to be in refe­rence to the Lords Supper.

THus much briefly touching the nature of Catholick Commu­munion: Come we now to enquire how, and by what means it may best be preserved. There are two Bonds which the Scripture mentions, by which Christians are bound and knit together in one Communion, the bond of Charity, and the bond of Peace.

1, The bond of Charity: Above all these things put on Charity which is the bond of perfectness, Col. 3.14. Charity is a bond which knits and unites mens [Page 276]hearts together, and makes them one in affection, (knit together in love, as as it is exprest Col. 2.2.) and while they be so, it can hardly be but that they will be one in Communion. This was that which made the Catholick Church in its beginning to be all of one heart and one soul, as it is said the multitude of them that believed were, Acts 4.32. And that was the reason doubtless why they continued stedfastly in their Communion in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellow­ship, and in breaking of bread and prayer.

Charity we see is called the bond of perfectness: for the Church is in a kind of perfect state in her Commu­nion, so long as the Parts and Members of it are knit together in one Commu­nion by love; made perfect in one, as our Saviour expresseth it, Joh. 17.23. And the Union in Communion which is made by love, is Union in its per­fection, nothing unites Christians so entirely and firmly as love does. If Christians love one another in the [Page 277]truth, and for the truth sake which dwelleth in them, as St. John speaks, this Love and Union by Love will last; there will be no failure in the oneness of Communion, until there be first a failure in love.

Charity must needs unite and knit Christians together in one Commu­nion, because it is the Principle from which the particular acts of Christian Fellowship, fore-mentioned, do spring: a great part of the acts of Christian Com­munion, are nothing else but offices of brotherly love, and by these Christi­ans take fast hold one of another. Charity in its own nature is commu­nicative of the good it has, and the good it can do, and by that it does attract and draw others to a nearer conjunction with those in whom it dwells. Charity is the Arms of the Christians inner man by which they imbrace one another, though ab­sent.

Love is of a winning nature, it gains upon others that stand at a distance: If a Principle of love be in the heart, [Page 278]it will season a mans speech, and ena­ble him to speak the truth in love, according to St. Pauls direction. And the truth spoken in love will sooner reconcile, than the strongest Arguments when mixt with bitterness of Spirit. A tongue of love is Solomons tongue of health, it will heal wounds, when another tongue does but make them. And therefore with great reason did St. Paul call upon the Church of Co­rinth to do all their things with Cha­rity, and spent a whole Chapter upon them to persuade them to it, as an effectual means to cure the divisi­ons into which they were unhappily fallen.

Again, Charity covereth a multitude of sins, (1 Pet. 4.8.) and by that means among other it keeps Christians from flying asunder, and dividing in their Communion, which many times takes its first rise from very small mat­ters, when they meet with an evil mind that will aggravate and make the worst of things, and seek out mat­ter to make the breach wider. But [Page 279]Charity is not apt to spie faults, or to pick quarrels, nor to aggravate and make the worst of things, nor to har­bour jealousies or evil surmises, out of which breaches are wont to grow: but it will over-look mens weakness, mistakes, and inadvertencies, as be­lieving they do not proceed from an evil mind. And if any thing be amiss, love will take notice of all the extenu­ating circumstances in the case much rather than those which tend to aggra­vate a matter. Charity thinketh not evil, is not easily provoked, beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things; and by these means charitable men have hold of others, and keep them from flying out, unless of very bad minds and ill tempers.

The truth is, Charity is that to Catholick Communion, which the Soul is to the natural body, the life and spirit of it that preserves it in a healthful condition; but so far as Charity is wanting in Communion, so far that Communion is sickly [Page 280]and languishing, and void of its true spirit and life.

2. The other Bond by which Chri­stians are bound up together in one Catholick Communion, is the bond of peace, Ephes. 4.3. Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. So that we see Peace is the bond by which the Unity of the Spi­rit is kept. Now this Ʋnity of the Spirit is that oneness of mind and one­ness of practice which holy men in­spired by the Spirit have taught all Christians to observe, in reference to Faith, Worship, and Love: that is, that they should be all of one and the same Faith, use the same Worship, and have the same love to one ano­ther; which are the same things in which the Communion of the Catho­lick Church from the beginning of it did consist, as I have already shewed. When St. Paul beseecheth the Chri­stians in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ that they would all speak the same thing, and that there might be no divisions among them, but that they [Page 281]would be perfectly joyned together in the same mind, and in the same judgment, he doth not say in reference to what, 1 Cor. 1.10. But it is to be supposed that they readily understood his Ex­hortation to refer to these great Arti­cles of Christianity. The like we have in Phil. 2.1, 2. save that love is there particularly instanced in: If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies; fulfil ye my joy, that ye be like minded, having the same love, be­ing of one accord, of one mind.

The Unity of the Spirit then is the Unity of Christians in those things in which they have Communion, or their Unity in Communion; and this is we see to be kept or preserved by the bond of peace. Now this peace con­sisteth chiefly in Christians avoiding differences among themselves as much as in them lies. But if differences do arise, then this peace consisteth in such gentleness, moderation, and calmness of behaviour in Christians one towards [Page 282]another, as by reason whereof their Christian Converse is not interrupted, nor their Communion disturbed, their differences notwithstanding. It is true indeed, in this imperfect state, it can­not be but that there will be diffe­rence of opinion among Christians about lesser things not essential to Communion, especially concerning such circumstantial matters as are left undetermined in Scripture, except only by general rule. For considering that more Christians are weake than those that are strong, and less spiritual both in point of knowledge, and in the graces of Humility, Meekness, and Charity, and more unmortified in self-will, and self-conceit, it cannot be otherwise but that there will be differences among Christians. But yet if the greater, the wiser and the better sort of Christians do not slight and despise those that differ from them through weakness of judgment, or prejudice of education, nor violently oppose them, but patiently bear with them, and wisely insinuate to them by [Page 283]degrees those things which may help them, and by condescension become all things to them for their good so far as innocently they can, peace may ve­ry well be preserved among them which otherwise differ in many things. Not but that offences will come when the best men have done the best they can to prevent it; for this will fall out so long as there are those among Chri­stians whose Lusts and Passions are unmortified. But I am shewing how the Unity of the Spirit may be kept in the bond of peace among them that differ in mind and opinion about circumstantial matters, and that they may converse very lovingly together, where unmortified Lusts and Passions do not prevail, notwithstanding such difference. The wise and good carri­age of good men towards those that differ, will have a great influence upon them, if not presently to recon­cile them in opinion, yet to charm them into a peaceable demea­nour, if they be not men of ill tem­per.

God himself makes allowances unto men that differ conscienciously about lesser things, and not out of affectation, though they err in judgment, so long as their error proceeds not from a cor­rupt will or pride of mind, Rom. 14. and good men so far as they are par­takers of a divine nature, will do so too. And such differences are very consistent with Catholick Communi­on in peace and love. So that it is not so much mens differing in opinion about circumstantial matters in Reli­gion that breaks Peace, destroys Cha­rity, and disturbs the Communion of the Church, but mens unruly Lusts and Passions of pride, envy, and ill will, which take the advantage thence to vent themselves against one another in irregular practices. From whence come wars and brawlings among you? Come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Jam. 4.1.

Tho Christians then may differ in opinion in some lesser things, yet so long as they agree in the substance of [Page 285]Faith and Worship; and so long as they manage themselves in their diffe­rences so as that peace is not broken by any irregular or troublesome be­haviour, their Communion in Faith, Worship, and Fellowship, or mutual love, cannot suffer much by such dif­ferences. For Peace and Charity sup­port each other, and propagate each other. And the Apostle does very well therefore couple them together in his Exhortation, Col. 3.14, 15. Above all these things put on Charity, which is the bond of perfectness; and let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which ye are called in one body. The Peace here meant, to which Christi­ans are called by being united in one body, is peaceable living one with another.

3. Besides the bond of Charity, and the bond of Peace, there is a third thing very necessary to the Unity and peaceable Communion in the Church, and that is prudent and moderate Go­vernment. The peace and purity of the Church are two great ends of the [Page 286]Government in it, both which con­duce very much to the comfortable Communion of the Church, and to the Christians Unanimity in it. In re­ference to which, Moderation is very necessary in respect of the external manner and circumstances of Wor­ship; as namely, that the terms of Communion therein be made as easie as will well consist with publick edi­fication and comely order. For when they are so, men will have no tole­rable pretense upon account of consci­ence to refuse Communion with the Church therein. But otherwise some out of scruple of Conscience and others from a worse Principle, will be apt to take occasion to disturb the peace of the Church with disputes, and by deserting the Communion of it.

And then moderation and prudence are necessary to the same end in the exercise of Discipline in the Church, by making a difference in correcting open and notorious scandals, and lesser disorders. For else if both be [Page 287]punished alike when they are not alike criminal; or if lesser disorders shall be strictly looked after, and severely punished, and greater connived at, it will tend to lessen the Government in mens reverence and esteem, and so weaken the fense of the Churches peace, and render Communion with her less desirable by such as will take themselves to be unequally dealt with by her.

But as good Government in the Church is necessary to its Peace, and to Unity in its Communion, so is obedi­ence to such Government, without which Government loseth its end.

But when the Government and ex­ercise of it is equal and as easie as will consist with the due ends of it, then if yet for all that men will be troublesom and disobedient under it, they will be left without excuse in the eyes of so­ber men, if fitting course be taken to restrain them from disturbing the peace of the Church; for otherwise if this be not granted, Government in the Church would signifie little.

THus much concerning our In­quiry touching the nature of Catholick Communion, and the means of preserving it. But before I pro­ceed to an Inquiry into the nature of Schism. I think it not amiss to enquire for what reason the Unity of Catho­lick Communion is necessary, and why we should endeavour that as much as may be it should be kept en­tire, and all of a piece, and without Fracture. And the only reason which I shall insist on is this; because its be­ing such, and so kept and maintained, tends greatly to the growth and in­crease of the Church both in respect of the number of its Members, and bigness of its Body, and also in re­spect of its healthful state, and its growing up to a greater stature in all virtue and goodness.

1. It tends to the increase of the body of Christians in the number of its Members. For next to the mira­culous [Page 289]operations of the Holy Ghost in the Apostles and Primitive Belie­vers, the peaceable and charitable de­meanour among Christians, and good agreement among themselves if it were generally found in them, would attract and draw men to the liking and love of the Religion which they profess, for the sake of the lovely effects it produceth in them. Men can hardly think otherwise than well of that Religion by which they find men are made more peaceable and loving, and more ready to all good offices to one another, and to all men than others are, or than they themselves were be­fore they engaged heartily and serious­ly in it.

And that the concord and good agreement of all Christians in one Ca­tholick Communion has so happy a tendency, as I have said, to draw others to the belief & love of that same Religion, appears by the reason why, and for which our blessed Saviour so earnestly desired and prayed for the Union and Agreement of all Christians [Page 290]in the things their Religien taught them, to wit, because the world would thereby be brought to believe that he the Author of it, had been sent of God, Joh. 17.20, 21. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be one, as thou Father art in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us, that the world may be­lieve that thou hast sent me. And its most apparent that the contrary to this has had its contrary effect. For where have any such numerous additi­ons to the Catholick Church been found from among the Pagan world, since the great divisions which have risen and been kept on foot in the Christian world, as those which were made for some hundreds of years to­gether in the Primitive times while Catholick Communion was preserved in the Church without any conside­rable interruption? Nay, have not the unreasonable divisions and fierce con­tentions which have broken out in the Reformed Churches since the Refor­mation, [Page 291]and in our own nation espe­cially, been a temptation to many to turn Atheists or Scepticks?

The holy Scriptures in many places seem to foretel a more general flowing of the Nations of the world into the Church, than ever yet has been accom­plished: But we cannot reasonably expect this should be brought to pass by means of the Christian Churches in being, until by humility, peace­ableness, and charity, and good agree­ment among themselves, and other virtues, they make a better represen­tation of the excellency of the Reli­gion which they profess, than they do at this day. When God Almighty turns to the people a pure Language, then it may be expected they will call upon him, and serve him with one consent, as the Prophet speaks, Zeph. 3.9, Not while they treat one another with im­pure and corrupt Language which smels of wrath and disdain, of envy, spight, and contempt; Not while by words they do all they can to dis­grace one another, but by speaking [Page 292]the truth in love, and with meekness of wisdom.

2. The good agreement of Christi­ans in one Catholick Communion, tends greatly to the increase of the Church in respect of its spiritual health­ful state, and its growing up to a grea­ter stature in all virtue and goodness. For where peace and good agreement is in the several offices of Christian Brotherhood, there love is, which is the bond of perfectness which holds them fast together. And love is a ra­dical grace, out of which other graces grow, in so much that love is made the Summary of all Christian duties towards one another: Love is said to be the fulfilling of the Law, Rom. 13.8.10. Charity edifieth, saith St. Paul, 1 Cor. 8.1. It tends to edifie and build up the subject in which it dwels, and to make him more like God who is love; and it tends to edifie the object on which it is set, and on which it exerciseth it self; it tends to build up both the one and the other in grace and goodness.

And there is this further reason why a peaceable agreement in one Catholick Communion tends to in­crease the Church in her spiritual riches, viz. because the holy Spirit of God delights to dwell where peace and love dwell, and there to dispence and communicate his treasures by which the souls of men are enriched; but without his supplies, influences, and operations, there is no thriving in grace and real goodness. He that dwels in love, God dwels in him, 1 Joh. 4.16. And where God takes up his special residence, he will adorn those living Temples with plenty of spiri­tual ornaments, and those shall be sure to be made partakers of his best sort of gifts, such as the world cannot re­ceive. Be of one mind, live in peace, and the God of love and peace shall be with you, saith St. Paul, 2 Cor. 13.11. While the Catholick Church is of one mind in the great things of Christian Religion, and being so, do live in peace, and not unpeaceably contend, fall out and divide about lesser things, [Page 294]such as for which God perhaps doth neither esteem or disesteem men, he who is the God of love and peace will be with them to bless them with his presence, with spiritual blessings espe­cially. And as the presence of the soul in the body enlivens it with na­tural life, by virtue whereof the seve­ral Members perform their several fun­ctions proper to each of them respe­ctively, even so the presence of the holy Spirit in the body of Christ the Church does animate it with spiritual life, and does so influence and actuate the several Members of it, as that by virtue thereof they all perform their several Christian offices proper to each for the common good of the whole.

But then this vital power of acting spiritually, is conveyed by the Spirit to each of the Members as they are in Ʋnion and communion with the whole, and so as one Member is made a Channel of this conveyance to ano­ther, and each enabled to contribute its part to the common good of the [Page 295]whole. Thus Col. 2.19. where St. Paul, mentioning the Head of the Church, saith, from which all the body by joynts and bonds having nourishment ministred and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. This spiritual nou­rishment of the body, flows from Christ the Head we see, as having obtained it by his Mediation; but then it is the great Office-work of the holy Spirit to apply the benesits ob­tained by Christ, to the several mem­bers of his body by working and in­creasing grace and comfort in them. He shall glorifie me, for he shall receive of mine, and shew it unto you, saith our Saviour, speaking of the Holy Ghost, Joh. 16.14. And this conveyance of nourishment from the Head to the Members by the Holy Spirit, is made by the union of the parts as knit toge­ther by joynts and bands, by which Union one member is made a Channel of conveyance of nourishment to ano­ther: and in this way the whole bo­dy increaseth with the increase of God. This being so, a disunion of the parts [Page 296]or members must needs obstruct this spiritual nourishment, and hinder the growth of the body. To the same effect is that parallel place, Ephes. 4.15, 16. Speaking the truth in love may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: from whom the whole body fitly joyned together, and compacted by that which every joynt sup­plieth, according to the effectual working of the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body, unto the edifying of it self in love. This increase of the body to the edifying it self in love, is made we see both by the parts of the body being joyned together, and also by that which every joynt supplyeth being so compacted.

Thus we see how the increase of the Church in spiritual strength de­pends upon Gods special presence and assistance, and how the enjoyment of that presence depends upon the peaceable agreement and mutual love of the parts of which the Church doth consist. And if so, then un­peaceableness, discord and strife, con­tention [Page 297]and dividing into Parties in the Church, must necessarily tend to deprive her of that special presence and divine assistance of the holy Spi­rit, without which Christians cannot thrive and increase in true goodness, and for want of which they will ra­ther decline and go backward. Tho the God of peace and of love will be with his People while they are so of one mind in the Essentials of Christi­anity, as upon that account to live in peace and Christian Communion one with another, notwithstanding their differing in some lesser things, which will always be found in the best estate of the Church which can be expected here on earth; yet there is no reason to expect he will be so with them when they do not so live in peace, tho they should otherwise be of one mind in the fundamental Doctrines of Christianity, and all the substantial parts of Worship.

The holy Spirit may indeed di­spense gifts of Knowledge, and Ut­terance, and the like, which are [Page 298]common to bad men as well as good; such as these he may bestow upon Christians even while they are in dis­order and unpeaceable division: But as for those fruits of the Spirit which constitute men truly good, such as love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentle­ness, goodness, and meekness, (Gal. 5.22.) the having of these and mens being of an unpeaceable temper, and in a state of discord and division, are I fear inconsistent; for these are con­trary one to another. Tho St. Paul acknowledged those of the Church of Corinth to be enriched with all utte­rance and all knowledge, Chap. 1, 5. yet in Chap. 3.1. he tells them that he could not speak unto them as unto spiri­tual, but as unto carnal, even as to babes in Christ; and for this reason, as it follows in ver. 3. because there was among them envying, strife, and division. Ye are yet carnal, saith he, for where­as there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men; that is, as other men which were no Christians. They [Page 299]might indeed know and believe, and talk otherwise and better than those that were out of the Church, but their walking and living was but as theirs, while envying, strife, and division was found with them. For these are of those works of the flesh of which St. Paul saith, that those which do such things, shall not inherit the Kingdom of God, Gal. 5.20, 21.

And if Christians would but ex­amine and judge of themselves by these Scripture measures, it would make them on all hands, one side as well as another, to be as much afraid to do any thing to disturb the peace of the Church, or to be guilty of en­vying, strife, and division in it, as they would be to find themselves but in a carnal state, and of being shut out of the Kingdom of heaven.

And as for those who are guilty of these things in these sad times, where­in envying strife and division do abound, it is hugely necessary that as they love their own souls, they would without delay repent, and get out of [Page 300]such a state, and not flatter and de­ceive themselves with an opinion of their good and safe condition upon account of their being otherwise Orthodox and Religious, so long as they indulge themselves in such a state.

QUERY XIV. What is the nature of Schism?

From what hath been discoursed touching the nature of Catholick Com­munion, and the means of preserving it, we may be able to make a judg­ment of the nature of Schism, what it is, and who are guilty of it. For if Catholick Communion stands in the Unity of the Spirit, or Christians Unity in their Communion in the Do­ctrine of Faith in things necessary to Salvation, and in the substance of Worship; and in their fellowship or mutual love, as I have shew'd it [Page 301]does; then their being divided in these, or any one of these, or in any lesser things, if the Ʋnity of their Com­munion be thereby destroyed, that un­doubtedly is Schism. When any thing which before was but one, comes to be divided, it ceaseth to be one any longer, unless there be a re-union; and thus it is in reference to Church Communion.

Altho Christians do agree in the Christian Faith, and in the substance of Worship also, yet if upon account of any lesser things they be so divided as that Christian Fellowship or Bro­therly love be thereby destroyed, their Ʋnity of Communion is thereby de­stroyed also. I do not say that all their Communion in those things wherein they are agreed is destroyed by uncharitable division, but this I say that the Ʋnity of their Communion is thereby destroyed. For Brotherly love is an essential part of Cotholick Com­munion, so that if that be destroyed by any division, tho but about lesser matters, the Ʋnity of the Communion [Page 302]is destroyed, and the guilt of Schism contracted, yea, and their Commu­nion it self in Faith and Worship, where­in they are agreed, is greatly damni­fied also.

For their Communion in Faith and Worship is rendred unacceptable to God, and unprofitable to themselves for want of Communion in Brotherly love: though I had all Faith and have not Charity, I am nothing. And for Worship: If thou bringest thy gift to the Altar, and rememberest that thy Brother hath ought against thee; leave there thy gift before the Altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy bro­ther, and then come and offer thy gift; Shewing how little God regardeth de­votional Communion in Worship when void of true Charity.

The Schism we enquire after then, lies in division in the Church, as that is opposite to, and destructive of Christian Ʋnity in Faith, or in Wor­ship, or in Love, And all Church di­vision tends more or less to the de­struction of Christian Unity in these [Page 303]in whole or in part. That it lies in di­vision, appears in that it receives its name from that; for the word Schism signifies division or a rent. And the Translators of our English Bible, when they have put the word division in the line reading, they have put Schism in the Margin, 1 Cor, 10.10. and 11.18. and when Schism in the line, division in the Margin. 1 Cor. 12.25. and this they have done to explain the one by the other.

Since then Schism consists in Church division, it follows, that by how much the greater the division is at any time, by so much the greater is the Schism; and the less the one is, the less is the other also. We must therefore di­stinguish of Schism. There are several sorts or degrees of Division, and so of Schism, which are sometimes found among Christians.

I. A different persuasion in Christi­ans touching some things indifferent in their own nature, some holding them unlawful, others lawful, some accounting them necessary, when [Page 304]others are otherwise persuaded. This difference fell out between the be­lieving Jews and the believing Gen­tiles touching some meats, the obser­vation of days, and the use of Cir­cumcision. And a difference much like to this, in some respects, has fallen our among some Christians in our days, and in our Nation. Now a difference of this nature, tho it be in some sort a division, yet it is capable of being so managed, as that the effects of sinful Schism shall scarcely at all follow upon it. As thus;

First, if those who are scrupulous, and yet under a mistake, shall be mo­dest and humble in their dissenting, and desirous to be as little troublesom and offensive to their Brethren from whom they differ as possibly they can, and as tender of disturbing the peace of the Church as their case will per­mit, and ready to hear and imparti­ally to consider any thing offered by their brethren to remove their scruples, and reconcile them in judg­ment.

Secondly, if they be not averse to comply with their Brethren in all things so far as they can, and to hold Communion with them so far as they have attained and are agreed, ac­cording to the Apostles Exhortation in that case, when he says, Neverthe­less whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing, Phil. 3.16. For these words were used in reference to those Christians mentioned in the Verse be­fore, of whom he had said, If in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you. And indeed this compliance is necessary in all like cases to prevent Schism, upon a double account.

1. Otherwise, such do not what they can to preserve Peace, and prevent Schism, and so must be guilty of it if it follow for want of such compliance. That to do thus is their undoubted duty, is clear from that of the Apostle, Rom. 12.18. If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men; how much more with fellow [Page 306]Christians. If Christian compliance than be the way to live peaceably with Christian Brethren then it fol­lows, that if they do not com­ply as much as in them lies, and as far as they can when the preserving of peace requires it, they do not what they ought to do, and if Schism or a breach of peace follows, they must needs be accessary to it, and guilty of it.

2. Because if they do not comply so far as they can,, they give occasi­on of suspicion that their non-com­pliance in that wherein their differing from their Brethren professedly lies, proceeds not so much from scruple of conscience as from some worse Princi­ple, such as, humour self will, a spirit of opposition and contradiction, or a per­sonal prejudice against the men from whom they differ, or the like. For it will be thought that if Conscience to God were the only reason why they differ with their Brethren in any thing; that then Conscience would engage them to go along with their [Page 307]Brethren in that wherein they do not differ, and to be tender and scrupu­lous of making the difference or breach between them wider than needs must, and of multiplying occasion of offence causelesly. Men cannot be confident when they see such men are not ten­der of Conscience in the one, that they are so in the other, but will be apt to suspect that their differing proceeds chiefly from some worse cause, tho the parties themselves perhaps are not aware of it, but think it proceeds from the goodness of their Consci­ence, when there is no such matter. And when this occasion of suspicion is given by not complying in what they can, the natural effect of it will be to weaken mens esteem of them, and affection to them, and to prepare the way to farther difference. Where­as a compliance, as far as possibly they can, would maintain a good opinion of them in mens minds, pro­cure them fair quarter from them that differ from them, prevent the differenee from growing up into a [Page 308]direct Schism, and prepare the way to reconciliation.

For when it does indeed appear by complying as far as they can, and by other truly Christian behaviour of persons that through error of judg­ment differ from their Brethren in other things, that that difference proceeds purely from Conscience tho erronious, and not from a worse Principle, their case is truly pitiable, and calls for tenderness towards them from them that differ from them; and to treat them accordingly, is certainly the way to gain upon them, and to make them the more capable of re­ceiving information and satisfaction in their scruples. Whereas when they are otherwise treated with severity, it tends to spoil their good temper, and to exasperate them, and to make them out of disgust to them who have so dealt with them, to unite into Parties, and make head against them, to the imbroiling the Church in grievous Schism.

2. There is another and worse Di­vision or Schism than meer difference in judgment and practice in some les­ser things, and that division lies more in Christians unchristian managing their differences than in the difference that is in their opinion and practice when it is but about some things wherein the good or hurt of men would be little concerned, if they could be separated from their effects. And this division lies in the immode­rate manner of contending for that wherein Christians differ. As thus; when they do not content themselves with offering their arguments fairly and peaceably for that wherein they differ, but fall out with their Brethren for not submitting to, but opposing them both in their arguments and practice, as when they set them at naught, and censure them as insincere, as not truly lovers of truth, but that they are byassed by some undue interest, of honour, reputation, or gain, or humour, or self-will, and that these prevail with them more than [Page 310]truth. Now such things as these, are of a provoking nature, and lay a temptation upon their Brethrens Pas­sions, and tend directly to alienate affections, and minister to unpeace­able contendings, and are a direct breach of peace. Tho men have truth on their side, yet they may be Schismatical in labouring to propagate, or to defend that truth, when they go farther in doing so than speaking the truth in love, I mean in way of Controversie. Tho those that differ from them may possibly be moved with undue motives to oppose them, and the reasons for what they hold; yet because whether they be so or no, is a matter of which they are not competent Judges, it lying out of their reach, and belonging only to the Judgment of God, who only is the searcher of hearts, therefore what­ever they may fear or suspect, yet they should forbear either to pro­nounce or insinuate any such hard things against their Brethren, by which they become Judges of evil [Page 311]thoughts. Which if they do not, they stir up strife, and violate peace by causing unquietness and disorder in the Church, and destroy Charity, weaken, yea, wound the very Spi­rit of the Churches Communion, which without doubt is Schism, tho it should never proceed to actual separation.

This mingling of mens Passions and unchristian Censures and insinuations with their Arguments, hinders the due operation of their Arguments up­on their Antagonists minds, tho they should have truth on their side; For the wrath of man worketh not the righ­teousness of God, but hinders it, Jam. 1.20. Whereas tho men do differ, yet so long as they propose and reply one to another no otherwise than as sup­posing both sides to be only in the search of truth, they may live loving­ly and peaceably together, and enjoy Edifying and comfortable Communion one with onother, their difference in Judgment notwithstanding.

3. There is a division, and conse­quently a Schism in the Church of a higher nature than the former, and that is when the persons that divide, or cause division in the Church, un­necessarily gather into a Party, and do after a sort unite and combine themselves together, the more pub­lickly and avowedly to maintain and carry on the Cause they have espoused in opposition to their Brethren, and industriously labour to increase their number as hoping thereby in time to be able to bring their opposites to sub­mit to them, and to give up their Cause. Now if the thing or things they after this manner contend for, should be unprofitable for the Church in case they should obtain, or of so little use or benefit, as that it could never reasonably be expected that it should countervail the hurt that is or will be done to the Church, to the Communion of the Church, to the Cause of Religion in the world, and to the Souls of men in general, by being obtained in such a way, it would [Page 313]be a most grievous Schism thus to di­vide and imbroil the Church upon so mean an account.

A Division or Schism of this nature is termed Faction, which is a siding or making of Parties in the Church. And of this nature in some sort was the Schism in the Church of Corinth: For their Divisions were factious Divi­sions, for they proceeded to making of Parties. Their Crime in this, charged upon them by St. Paul, is termed Divisions in our Bibles, but the word is Faction in the Margin, 1 Cor. 3.3. And part of the works of the flesh rendred Seditions in our Tran­slation, is Divisions or Factions in the Margin, Gal. 5.20. This sort of Di­vision which is accompanied with Faction, or making of Parties, is more than is found in some Divisions which yet are sinful.

Now when a Schism grows up to this height, to a combined strength, it is much worse than while it was acted only by a few apart, and in a more private way, and less taken [Page 314]notice of; because then there is more of contempt in it, and more are cor­rupted by it, and the peace of the Community more disturbed; and be­cause usually by endeavours of in­creasing the Party, much more evil is perpetrated by slanders, naughty insinuations and suggestions against those they divide from, and combine against, than was found in the nature of the division at first, or in the nature of the error on which the division first began.

This factious division is likewise aggravated further when it partakes of the nature of Sedition: And we see in the fore-cited place, (Gal. 5.) the same word signifies Division, Faction, and Sedition. Now Sedition, I conceive, is a division accompanied with a com­bination of men against the Government either of Church or State under which the Providence of God hath set them: It is their acting things contrary to that Government, farther than the necessity of not sinning against God does oblige them, to the disturbing [Page 315]of the publick peace thereby: or it may be so perhaps by seeking to alter any thing amiss or inconvenient in the Government, in an undue way; that is, by acting out of their sphere, or the place or rank in which the providence of God hath set them; their going beyond their bounds in it, or their doing more to accomplish it, than the Law or Government under which they are, allows them. For otherwise it is not seditious (I con­ceive) for men to endeavour to get any thing amiss in the Government to be altered in a regular way; that is, in such a way as the Government or pub­lick Constitution allows.

I need not say how much the two bonds, the one of Peace, the other of Charity, is broken by this sort of Di­vision which is accompanied either with Faction or Sedition, nor how great the Schism is that is made there­by: But this is certain that a Division of this kind cannot be without much envying and strife; and where these are, there is confusion, and every [Page 316]evil work, as St. James hath told us, Chap. 3.16.

4. Another sort of division in the Church, is that which is made by an unjust Separation of one part of the Catholick Church from another in the business of their Communion in their solemn Worship: And this is a division of a very high nature in­deed, especially when it is accompa­nied with the third sort of Division before insisted on. For if such a Di­vision be unjustly made, it is point blank contrary to the Unity of the Spirit; that is, contrary to the Unity of Communion among Christians which was taught and practised by men inspi­red by the Spirit, in reference both to solemn Worship, and Christian Fellow­ship, as has been formerly explained. By such a Division the Churches peace is broken with a high hand, great of­fence being thereby taken at others, and cause of offence given to them, and a wide gap opened for debate, strife, contention, and confusion to enter in, to a dreadful destruction of Charity, [Page 317]the spirit and life of Christianity, without which Faith it self is dead, and all other religious performances little available.

It concerns us greatly therefore, and some men more especially, very di­ligently to inquire, how far the Divi­sions and Separations that do abound in our days, and in this Nation, are unjustly or justly made. To do which I do not know a more compendious way than to enquire into the nature of our National Constitution about Gods publick Worship, and the power of giving being to it, and how far we are obliged to observe it.

That such National Constitutions as have been made in several Nati­ons for reformation from Popery, and for the establishing of the Reformed Religion and Worship in the room of it, since the beginning of the Refor­mation, has been so far approved of by God, as that he does reckon and esteem those Nations his Kingdoms upon that account, I have found, as I conceive, in our twelfth Inquiry. [Page 318]Which with what else is there pro­duced and argued for the usefulness of such National Constitutions, I take to be ground sufficient to authorize a National authority in such an under­taking.

Now when ever the forming of such National Constitution is under­taken by them to whom it does be­long, they must needs find, that tho the Essentials and substance of all di­vine Worship is expresly and particu­larly set down in Scripture, yet there are several Circumstances and Acci­dents of Worship which pertain to the external administration of the sub­stance, which are not otherwise de­termined in Scripture than by general Rules; as that Edification, Order, and Decency be always observed in the choice of such things as are not par­ticularly determined and set down in Scripture. Such are those I instanced in in another of our Inquiries con­cerning Prayer: tho all the substantial parts of it are determined in Scripture, yet we are no where limited to pray [Page 319]with a set Form, nor without one, to use or not to use Book-prayer, to kneel or to stand in Praying, nor directed whether in the Publick Worship there shall be several distinct and short Prayers used for several things, or whether all Prayer, matter fit for a publick Assembly, shall be comprised in one or more longer Prayers. And the like may be said touching several external Circumstances that are to be used in all other parts of Publick Worship.

This being the case, it will necessa­rily fall under the consideration of those who are imployed in the form­ing a publick Constitution for Wor­ship, which of these will tend most to the Peace, Unity, and Edisication of the Church, and to Decency and Order; whether to leave all aside termined Circumstances of Worship to every ones choice, who are to administer the holy things, or in these things to chuse for them, and to determine by an Ecclesiastical Consti­tution what shall be observed.

Suppose we then that upon serious consideration and consultation they come to be fully persuaded in their own minds, that to leave all, both Mi­nisters and People, to their own choice in such undetermined Circumstances in Gods Publick Worship, would tend to great Division, Disorder, and Con­fusion, as it did in the late times of general Liberty, and that then we should have one opposing another in their different ways, and making of Parties one against another, to endless branglements, and to the eating out the heart and life of true Religion: And suppose also that upon such consi­derations as these they come to a re­solution to determine all undetermined Circumstances of Publick Worship by the use of a Liturgy, except only what is to be performed in the Pulpit, as that which tends most in their Judg­ment, to Peace, Unity, Edification, Order, and Decency.

And when they have gone thus far in general, they will necessarily be led to proceed in the next place to [Page 321]the choice of particular Circumstances of administration of the several parts of Publick Worship. In which it is to be presumed they govern them­selves according to the best of their understanding by those general Rules which direct all things to be done for Edification, Order, and Decency,

And when they have done so, and brought things to the best issue they could, yet considering that all men, and the best of men are fallible, it is not unlikely but that they may be mistaken in some things, and that such and such a Circumstance or Mode of administration of Worship would have better and more fully agreed with the general Rules, than those they have made choice of. But yet if their fai­lings and and mistakes therein do not extend to the corrupting of Gods Worship in the Essence or substance of it, but only to the ordering of some less useful Circumstances to be ob­served in the external manner of per­formance of that Worship, there will be no just cause of separating from [Page 322]Communion in it upon that ac­count.

For those who separate from Com­munion in the Worship which is every Lords day performed in our Parochial Assemblies according to our Liturgy, are obliged to prove one of these two things against it, if they would justi­fie their separation from it. Either first, that the Worship is corrupt in the Essence or substance of it; or second­ly, that the faults or defects in the External manner of performance of it are such as do fall short of, and defeat the end for which an external way and manner of performing Publick Worship should serve and is ap­pointed.

If they would prove such Worship corrupt in the Essence or substance of it, they must prove that it is so either in the object of Worship, or in the subject matter of it, for in those two the Essence or substance of Worship doth consist. To prove it corrupt in refe­rence to the object of Worship, they must prove that the Worship is di­rected [Page 323]to some Creature as well as to the only true God, or by some Mediator other than Christ Jesus. But this they will not pretend to do.

If they would prove it corrupt in respect of the subject matter of it, they must prove that the Prayers which are made, or the matters for which Praise is given to Almighty God, are not Prayer matter, or Thanksgiving mat­ter, or that some other part of Wor­ship is used as of Divine Institution which is not such. But now none of these things can be proved against the Liturgy. For no other things are therein prayed for, or thanks given to God for, but such as the Dissenters themselves do, may or ought to pray for or praise God for, nor any thing else observed as an Ordinance of God, but what they themselves do own to be of Divine Institution, such as Bap­tism and the Lords Supper. So that the whole of the Worship is pure and un­corrupt in respect of the Essence of it.

2. If then they will prove any thing to purpose, they must prove that the faults and defects in the ex­ternal manner of performing the said Worship, are such as cause it to fall short of, and do defeat the end and use for which an external administration of Publick Worship serves and is ap­pointed.

Now the end and use of the best external Mode of Worship, is edifica­tion; that is, it serves to convey the object and subject matter of Wor­ship to the mind of the Worship­pers, to the end they may be sutably affected.

And this end of Worship is de­feated when the Worship is perform­ed in a Language which the People do not understand, or in such words and phrases as are insignificant of, or un­sutable to the parts of Worship to which they are applied. But neither of these things can be charged upon the Worship performed according to the Liturgy. For the Worship is per­formed in a Language understood by [Page 325]all the People, and in words and phrases competently significant and expressive of, and sutable to the na­ture of the subject matter of the Wor­ship in its several parts, and so is agree­able to the general Rule for admini­stration of Publick Worship, which the Apostle terms to be uttering by the tongue, words easie to be understood, 1 Cor. 14. By it the minds of men may be guided and conducted from one part of Worship to another, and be affected according to the different nature of the several parts of which the whole Worship doth consist; which is the proper end and use of an external Form of administration of Publick Worship.

Object. But perhaps it will be said, that the Worship performed according to the Liturgy does not so adequate­ly and fully agree with the rule and end of the external administration of Worship in some respects, as it might have been made to do, or as some other does.

To which I answer, That the que­stion is not whether the external manner of Worship according to the Liturgy be the best or no in all re­spects; But suppose it should not, and suppose that some external Circum­stances ordered by it should be, or make it to be less useful than it might have been, or than some others are; yet so long as they do but make it less useful to the end for which it serves, but do not defeat it, nor are de­structive of it, nor of the Worship it self, but that it remains competently useful to its proper end, tho com­paratively but in an inferiour degree. Suppose, I say, that all this should be granted for Argument sake, and we should proceed with them upon their own terms, yet this would be no suf­ficient cause of refusing Communion with the Church in the Ordinances of God thus administred.

1. For first, if it were, it could scarcely be lawful to hold Communion with any particular Church in the whole world: because it is not likely [Page 327]but that more or less of such Circum­stances of Worship as are less useful, are used in all Churches in the World. For considering the fallibility of all men, and their knowing but in part at best, I think it would be no breach of Charity to suppose, that there is no Church Constitution for Wor­ship in all the world, nor perhaps any one way of external administrati­on of holy things humanely per­formed, but what is accompanied with Circumstantial defects more or less, such, I mean, as are less useful than others that might be made use of, were it not for mens imperfecti­on that have the making or managing of them. So that the Notion or Opi­nion that Circumstantial defects in the external manner of Worship is a just ground of separation from it, is de­structive of Catholick Communion it self.

2. None account themselves guil­ty of or defiled by the defects that are in the manner of a Ministers praying in the Pulpit, so long as the [Page 328]matter is good: and there is the same reason in reference to Circumstantial defects in Prayers made by the Litur­gy. We can hardly say that any pub­lick Prayer is so free from all defects, but either in respect of the Method, or manner of expressing the matter, it might possibly be better done than usually it is done even by good men. And therefore it is a very unreasonable thing to make Circumstantial defects in the manner of praying, a ground of separation from Communion in Prayer.

3. If it were lawful to separate from Communion in Worship, only because less usefully administred; then tho there should be no Liturgy in the case, yet where one Minister does but excel another in his Ministration, it would be lawful to separate from that Congregation where the Wor­ship or other Ministration is less use­fully performed, and in a manner in­feriour to what is done by another in another place. But no man will be so absurd as to say this may be practised, [Page 329]for if it might, there would be no end of separation, but a door would be opened to all confusion, and People must be separating as often as they conceive they have found one Minister of a Congregation to excel another in the manner of his Ministration. And if Separation may not be practised upon this account, then it cannot be duly practised for that reason that the manner of Worship performed accord­ing to the Liturgy, is less useful and less edifying than that which is or may be done after another manner.

4, It is not the external manner of Worship, but the essential matter that is the Rule of Christians agreement in one Catholick Communion in Wor­ship throughout the world. In the one they are strictly bound up by par­ticular determination; in the other they are left more at large to govern themselves to the best of their understanding by general Rules. And the different Circumstances under which Christians are in seve­ral Nations, will necessitate them [Page 330]to use some difference in practice even while they govern themselves by the same general Rules. Do all things to edi­fying; Let the peace of God rule in your hearts to which ye are called in one body, are two general Rules; and Christians are to have respect to the one as well as the other in ordering their practice: The same Circumstances of Worship will not tend both to edification and to peace also, at one time and in one place, which will do so at another. These Rules touching Edification and Peace would lead a man to do other­wise in his Communion in Publick Worship with the Churches in France, in Geneva, in Holland, if he should sojourn in these places, than he does while he is here in England, and ob­serves the usages of this National Church: For it would not tend to peace and edification for such an one to make a disturbance by labouring to set on foot among them all the same Circumstances of Worship he had been accustomed to here because he likes them better. And the same is true [Page 331]of such as come from those forein Churches to sojourn here, or in any other Reformed Church. The right way of maintaining true Catholick Communion, is to refuse Communion with no Church in any Country that is Orthodox in the Faith, and in the Essence of Worship, and is not Schis­matical, notwithstanding any diffe­rence there may be in the degrees of usefulness in the external manner of Worship, between one Church and another, so long as they are all useful to their end in some good measure, and agreeable to general Rules in that case. I cannot take him for a right Catho­lick Christian that can have no Com­munion with any Church where he comes but where the external Mode of Worship agrees with that which he most affects. When I am at Rome I fast on Saturdays, when I am here (at Milan) I do not, said St. Ambrose to St. Austin.

5. One external Mode of Worship is not therefore useless because another is more useful: For a greater degree [Page 332]of usefulness herein does not exclude a less, but only excel it. The gesture of Kneeling in Prayer is better and more sutable to the nature of the du­ty than that of standing; yet that does not make it unlawful to pray stand­ing; One Version of the Psalms is more useful to its end than another; yet that does not make it unlawful to joyn with those who use that which is less useful. Nay, I will say more than this; That Mode of Worship which is best under some Circum­stances, is not so under others: As when it cannot be used without cau­sing such a division in the Church as will produce most pernicious effects in reference to the Church it self, and to Religion. Upon which account the Dissenters ought to esteem it bet­ter to joyn in the Worship performed by the Liturgy, than in that performed in their Assemblies under the ill Cir­cumstances which do attend it, tho they esteem theirs to be better abstra­ctedly considered.

6. If a less degree of usefulness in the external manner of Worship should be allowed to be a sufficient ground of Separation from Communion in it where it is used, our Church divisions would be irrepairable and beyond all remedy in whose hands soever the ordering the external Circumstances and manner of Worship may fall, be they the Dissenters themselves, or any other. For when they shall have done the best they can therein, there will be others who will find out some Circumstantial defects in it that will in their judgment (and perhaps according to truth too) render it less useful than it was capable of being made. There is such a difference in the thoughts and apprehensions of wise and good men themselves, and much more in those that are weaker, that it is impossible unless they were all divinely inspired, that they should all agree to a Cir­cumstance in such a thing as the ex­ternal manner of Worship, but that some will think this, and others will think that might have been better done than it is.

There is a necessity therefore, un­less we resolve to perpetuate division and separation, to take up with the best external way and manner of Pub­lick Worship we can obtain from the wisdom of the Nation, so long as it is competently useful to its end, and not to divide and separate upon ac­count of our esteeming it less useful than we desire. For otherwise it is not to be expected that the best wis­dom that is to be found in the Nation should ever be able to find out any way or means of curing our Church divisions, and to put an end to our unchristian-like separations? And to give liberty for every one to do that which he esteemeth best, is farthest of all from working such a Rule.

Object. But it may be it will be said, and indeed is alledged by some, That since every man is to worship and serve God in the best manner he can, it follows, that therefore if there be one way of Publick Worship, which he esteems better than another, he is to make use of that when he has [Page 335]opportunity of doing so. And by this those that do esteem the external manner of Worship used in separate Assemblies to be better than that per­formed by the Liturgy in Parochial Congregations, do labour to defend their separation.

To this several things are to be said.

1. In ordering the Mode or man­ner of Publick Worship, respect is to be had, not to what is most accepta­ble to one sort of men only, but to what is useful and profitable for the whole Community, as well those who are of a lower capacity as those of a higher, as well those who desire a Liturgy, as those that do not, and to what is most likely to preserve peace among them. And when the Govern­ment to this end hath ordered that part of the Publick Worship shall be performed by the Liturgy, and has allowed a liberty of performing part of it without by Pulpit Prayer; pro­vision is thereby made to accommo­date both the one and the other in [Page 336]the external manner of Worship. And Christian ingenuity and Charity which seeketh not her own, will teach men to be content that others should be ac­commodated as well as themselves in things wherein they may, rather than to make a division in the Church be­cause all things are not ordered just as they would have them. And of this truly Christian strain was St. Paul, which made him say, I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own pro­fit, but the profit of many that they may be saved, 1 Cor. 10.33. And that it has been the judgment of the Church from Age to Age, that it is best for the Church, all things considered, that the Publick Worship, at least in part, should be performed by a Liturgy, ap­pears by their having ordered that so it should be. And this ought to weigh much with humble and modest men, remembring what St. Paul hath said in another case to shew what esteem ought to be had of the Usages and Customs of the Churches of God: If any man seem contentious, we have no [Page 337]Such Custom, neither the Churches of God, 1 Cor. 11.16.

2. To satisfie, yea, to convince such as are under a prejudice against worship­ping God by the use of our English Liturgy, that there is no such diffe­rence as they fancy between the wor­shipping God according to that, in conjunction with Pulpit Worship, and that way of Worship which they so much prefer before it, I shall offer this to their consideration, viz. That there have as worthy men for Piety and Learning, both Conformists and Non-conformists, as perhaps ever Eng­land bred, lived and died in Commu­nion in that Whorship which has been performed by our English Liturgy, from the beginning of the Reforma­tion downward. And we may well conclude that their Souls would never have prospered and flourished so as no mens more, if there had been any such difference as some men imagine between the way of their Communion and that of others. Men do not ga­ther Grapes of thorns, nor Figs of [Page 338]thistles. That the souls of many prosper no better under it, proceeds not from the nature of the provision for them, but from their own gross neglect both of it, and of themselves, who doubtless would be such as they are, whatever the manner of Worship is in the places where they live.

3. If we have, in the place where the providence of God hath set us, means of worshipping God publickly, competently useful and sufficient to the ends of such Worship, tho it should in some respects be inferiour to some other; yet if we can have no better without breaking Order, and running into confusion, nor without breaking one Commandment to ob­serve another, nor without making our selves guilty of an unlawful separation, and all the dreadful consequences of it, we may be said to worship God in the best manner we can, tho we con­tent our selves with this, provided we be not wanting to improve it the best we can to its end. And the rea­son is, because we then perform the [Page 339]best Worship we can that will consist with edification, Publick Order, and the peace of the Church: and a Worship wherein all these concur, does best answer to general Rules for the manner of Publick Worship, taken together.

4. For men to separate from Paro­chial Communion in the Worship per­formed according to the Liturgy, to the end God may be worshipped by them after a better manner in separate Assemblies, is to do evil that good may come of it; unless they can prove a necessity so to separate or to sin. For that to separate without such a necessi­ty is to do evil, is a Protestant Maxim assented to on all hands among them. And that they are un­der no such necessity as to sin if they do not so separate, I have shewed be­fore, by shewing that the said Wor­ship is neither corrupt in the essence of it, nor is the external manner of performance of it deficient as to its end and use; one of which must be proved against it, before sepa­ration [Page 340]from it can be justified.

5. By such a separation as that we speak of, men really do much more disservice to God and the great con­cerns of Religion and the Souls of men, than they can with any colour of reason pretend that by worshipping God without the Liturgy, they ho­nour him or Religion, or advantage the Souls of men. The effects of such a Separation are very visible which do too naturally flow from it; such as the destruction of Peace, Charity, and Humility, the engendering of Envy, Hatred, Strife, and Contention, to the great reproach of Religion, and disho­nour of Almighty God, and the hurt of mens Souls, But how these great evils can be pretended to be counter-ballanced by their Worship being per­formed without the Liturgy, I under­stand not; but do take it to be a mat­ter past doubt, that the benefit which those that separate get by their Com­munion without a Liturgy over and above what they might have gained by Communion where that is used, [Page 341]will never equal the hurt they draw upon themselves and others, and the wrong they do to Religion by their separation: And if not, then when ever the account comes to be made up, and their loss to be compared with their gain, they will be found exceeding great losers by their separation, not­withstanding all the advantages they promised themselves by it.

Thus far to shew that there is no just cause of separating from Commu­nion in the Worship performed by the Liturgy every Lords day. As for the gesture of kneeling in the act of re­ceiving the Lords Supper; so much hath been written to prove it no sin, and so little that looks like an Argu­ment to prove the contrary, that if men of understanding would but lay aside prejudice, and impartially com­pare and consider what hath been said on both sides, I cannot think that after this, any could be long without satis­faction touching the lawfulness of com­plying with publick Order in that matter; especially considering how [Page 342]much is declared at the end of the Office for administration of the Lords Supper in the Liturgy, to clear that gesture in that action from all suspici­on of Bread-worship, more than in the Liturgy in use in the old Non-conformists days when they scrupled it.

But if any after they have done thus shall not for all that be satisfied, yet that can be no more an Argument to them than it was to the old Non-conformists, why they should not hold Communion in the rest of the Lords-day Worship as they did; and not only so, but pressed it also on others as their duty to do so, and zealously inveyed against separation from it as a great evil, as their Writings do abundantly shew. And that for such to hold Communion with their Bre­thren so far as they can, is plain mat­ter of duty, I have shewed before. And in case they should thus hold Communion in the other parts of Worship, they need no more to live without the use of the Lords Supper [Page 343]than the old Non-conformists did, since I doubt not but they know how to be therein accommodated as well as they did, and as they were.

And so for Baptism, in case they cannot be active in the use of the Cross after it, yet they may be pas­sive, in as much as it is not used as any sign of Gods conveying grace as Sacraments are, but only as a token of duty; nor as any Rite in Baptism neither, but only in receiving the Persons baptized into the Church af­ter they are baptized, and seems to be no more ground of scruple, than laying the hand upon, and kissing the Book in swearing is, which is a piece of Divine Worship, which none scruple but Quakers.

There are others who frame to themselves other reasons of separation from Parochial Communion in Wor­ship besides its being performed by the Liturgy, as namely, because those Congregations are not as they pretend, constituted of visible Saints, nor by a Church Covenant. Who these are [Page 344]is well known, for whose sakes seve­ral of my former Inquiries are made: in which there are such things pro­duced from the holy Scriptures as may, I suppose, be sufficient to satisfie their reason if not their prejudice touching their mistake in these opi­nions.

As for their exceptions against the Government of the Church by Bishops as Diocesan, how they would make Communion with the particular Con­gregations under their Jurisdiction un­lawful upon that account, I understand not; unless they think the Ministers of those Congregations by whom the Ordinances are administred, to be no true Ministers, because Episcopally ordained, and not by Presbyters. And if this should be their scruple, they may easily receive satisfaction by con­sidering that Diocesan Bishops were Presbyters. before they were Bishops, and therefore must needs remain so after. For they were not devested of any Ministerial power or authority by being made Bishops, but only [Page 345]invested with a superaddition of au­thority and power they had not be­fore. So that they who are or­dained by them, are ordained by a Presbyterial authority and more. And with this the old Nonconformists sa­tisfied themselves touching the validi­ty of their Ministerial authority re­ceived by Ordination from the Bishops that then were.

Some again dislike Parochial Com­munion, because the Civil Power is so much concerned as it is in Ecclesiasti­cal affairs relating to it one way or other, and for that all such things are not left wholly to the ordering of Ecclesiastical Rulers, as they were in the Apostles times, and long after.

But there is not the same reason why they should be so left now, as there was why they were so then. The reason why they were wholly left then to the ordering of an Eccle­siastical Power, was, because there was no Civil Powers as Christian then in being, so that they could not [Page 346]promote Christianity better, any other way. But it is not so now: for it is shewed in our last former In­quiry but one, that the affairs of the Gospel and the Salvation of men in a Christian Kingdom or State, may better be provided for, and promoted by a national Constitution, than they can be without it. And that there­fore things of this nature are not to be ordered as if we were still in a Pagan Kingdom when we are not.

For where the reason of things is altered, it is but reasonable and fit that there should be a sutable alterati­on in the things themselves. Thus the gesture of standing with Loyns girt and a Staff in the hand, appoin­ted to be used in eating the Passover at the first Institution of it, for that it was then to be eaten in haste, was afterwards altered to another gesture by the Church, when that Circum­stance of eating in haste ceased; and our Saviour himself did eat it in that posture to which the Church had changed it, which is a consideration [Page 347]of very great weight in reference to this and some other cases. And the Obligation of the Ceremonial Law ceased upon the same ground when the substance was come which had been prefigured by Ceremonial Rites. And the like might be observed touch­ing the discontinuance and disuse of anointing the sick, washing Disciples feet, and the kiss of Charity, and some other things which were obliging until the reason of the Obligation ceased.

But altho the Civil Power doth con­cern it self by a National Constitution to order and direct in things apper­taining to the Church, for the pro­moting of Religion, and the Salvati­on of men, yet it does not this with­out the advice and assistance of those that are Officers, and bear rule in the Church. And when the Civil Powers have gone as far as they think fit in ordering and directing by Ec­clesiastical advice and assistance, yet they do not act any thing themselves peculiar to the Ministry of the Church, [Page 348]but leave all such things wholly to them who are invested with Ministe­rial authority; reserving only to them­selves a power os restraining such men from an undue exercise of their Office tending to publick distur­bance.

And thus I have endeavoured to satisfie the Dissenters, that there is no sufficient reason or cause for them to separate from the Publick Worship of our Parochial Assembles, and that their pretences for their doing so when narrowly looked into, are found to have nothing of substance in them sufficient to bear them out in it, And if I am not mistaken in my Al­legations and reasonings, I cannot discern how their separation can possi­bly be defended from being an un­lawful Schism. And if it be, I am sure they have upon many accounts great reason to desist from engaging farther in it.

QUERY XV. SƲpposing things touching visible Church-Membership and Communion to be as they have been represented in our former Inquiries; yet how do they tend to lessen our Church Divi­sions?

The answer to which is, That if the matters of our Inquiry be as they have been represented, then they tend to lessen our Church-divisions, by removing and taking away the very foundation on which they and our Church-separations are in great part at least built. For I do not know any one of the different Parties among the Protestant Dissenters (except those called Presbyterian) who do not found their separation from our Parish Churches (at least principally) upon this supposition that they are not con­stituted according to the order of the Gospel. And why not according to [Page 350]the Order of the Gospel, but because as they say they are not constituted ol Gospel matter, that is not of visi­ble Saints, but of such as for a great part of them at least, were never du­ly reputed to be regenerate, or to be of the Invisible Church, and their meaning is (as I collect both from their Writings and Converse) That they were not at first, nor since con­stituted of such particular members only as at the time of such their Con­stitution, had a probable appearance of Regeneration, but of all baptized persons, however they proved good or bad, and without any other proba­tion or discrimination.

Now if those things be true which have been endeavoured to be proved to be so in the management of the for­mer Enquiries; Then this ground on which they build their separation, is altogether unsound, and such as has no firmness or substance in it, but is only imaginary. For our Parish Congre­gations are constituted of persons vi­sibly in Covenant with God the Father, [Page 351]Son, and Holy Ghost, by being bap­tized in their name, and thereby en­gaged to be theirs, to worship and serve the Father by the Son through the assistance of the Spirit. And of such, and no other, were the Churches planted by the Apostles, constituted: And this Covenanting was then, and so is now, the visible formal difference be­tween those of the Visible Church and those of the world: All under this Character and Badge, and none but they, were of the Visible Church; and therefore it must needs be the Constitutive form of that Relation, Vi­sible Church-membership, All that have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ, and are visibly Christians, and of Christs Church. How ancient and how long before Christs appea­rance in the world in our nature, this way of constituting Visible Church-members has been by such a Rite as God appointed, I have shewed be­fore.

And if this visible Covenanting with God by Baptism be that by [Page 352]which persons become Members of the Visible Church, then a proba­ble appearance of Regeneration, or a reputation of being of the Church as invisible cannot be it that makes them visible Church Members, tho it does qualifie them for it, unless this pro­bable appearance of Regeneration, and Covenanting with God by Baptism, be one and the same thing: And if they be, then those of which our Parish Churches are constituted, have a pro­bable appearance of Regeneration, or of being of the Invisible Church, and then they are constituted of matter according to those Dissenters own mind: And if so, then we may well hope they will no longer separate from them, as if they were not Constitu­tuted of qualified matter. So that things are brought at last to this issue, That these Dissenters must either overthrow this Plea against the reason and ground of their Separation, and prove that visible Covenanting with God by Baptism is not that by which Visible Church-membership is made, [Page 353]or else it will certainly overthrow this Plea of theirs for their Separation. And if they will so much as attempt to overthrow this Plea against them; they must row all the way against the stream and strong tide of the Scrip­tures, and against the stream of Anti­quity, and the sense of the ancient Church from the Apostles times down­wards, who always esteemed Baptism the door of entrance into the Visible Church; and consequently that all such as had pass'd through Baptism, were within the Church.

And as it is more agreable to Scrip­ture, so it is much more reasonable to say, that men cannot seem to be of the Church as Invisible, without be­ing first of the Church as Visible, than it is to say their being of the Church as Visible, proceeds from their seem­ing to be of the Church as Invisible. For as touching mens enterance into the Church by Baptism, our Saviour hath said, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God, Joh. 3.5. [Page 354]And Baptism is injoyned in order to the obtaining Remission of sin and Sal­vation, which are Priviledges of the Church as Invisible, Acts 2.38. and 22.16. Mar. 16.16. So that accord­ing to these Scriptures, mens being and seeming to be of the Church as Invisible, and their sharing in the Pri­viledges of it, seems ordinarily to de­pend upon their being of the Visible Church by Baptism.

Now one would think a Notion so preposterous as this opposed appears to be, should be very unfit to make a foundation to build Churches upon, or to justifie a separation from those which have a substantial foundation, the Scriptures I mean.

But if mens seeming in the appre­hension of others to be of the Church as Invisible, did not depend upon their being of the Church Visible, yet such seeming could be no proper or fit Rule by which to judg, determine, and conclude who are, and who are not of the Visible Church. And the reason is, because it is Arbitrarious [Page 355]and uncertain: for mens being or not being acknowledged to be of the Visi­ble Church, would depend upon the uncertainty of mens opinions and affections: and those would seem in some mens apprehensions to be of the Church Invisible, which to others would seem otherwise: And then those would be owned by some to be of the Visible Church, which would be denied to be so by others. Of the truth of all which this present Age hath furnished us with plentiful ex­perience: And if this should be the Rule observed through the whole Christian world, it would be the rea­dy way to make Parties and Sidings, unchristian oppositions, and unchari­table censurings among Christians, in all parts of the world, as it has done here in this Nation.

Whereas to be visibly in Covenant with God by Baptism, is a certain, fixed, a common, open and publick Rule, by which to judg who are of the Visible Church, so long as they continue to own themselves under the obligation [Page 356]of that Covenant; and have neither so far violated it as to give Divine Wor­ship to other Objects than their God, nor incurr'd to themselves Excommu­nication by Heresie, or other scanda­lous living. And this Rule gives no occa­sion of division in the Church as the other does, but tends to bind and hold the several Members together in the uni­ty of the Spirit and bond of peace: To which purpose St. Paul urgeth it upon the Christians, motive-wise, Eph. 4.

All these things considered, one would wonder how men of Learning and Piety should ever be betrayed in­to such Notions and Principles, and to lay so mighty a stress on them as they have done, when yet they have no more colour from Scripture or reason than ever yet they have been able to produce for their defence.

But to make the best of it I can, we will suppose it was the appearance of a more thorow Reformation, and more pure Communion, which in their apprehension was to be obtained by these new Methods, that first [Page 357]drew them into this way. Reforma­tion and pure Communion, are things which sound mighty well in good mens ears, and which they can easily believe to be well pleasing unto God. And as there is an appearance of grea­ter strictness in that way than in that of more general Communion, so it was easie for them hereupon to think there was more purity in it also; which has been the prevailing reason which has carried multitudes into Quakerism, And when such an opinion has once seated it self in mens minds, they quickly grow confident that nothing in Scripture can be against it: and then they can easily fancy that every slight appearance and sound of words in Scripture is for them, upon which they can but put such a gloss as shall favour them, though it be no­thing to their purpose when impartial­ly scann'd.

And had their opinions and practice which I have opposed, and wherein they differ from all other good men, been matter of purity indeed, I should not [Page 358]have made One to find fault with them. But if this their Way be disagreeable to Gods pure Word, (which is the Rule by which we must judg of what is pure, and what is impure) and if it run counter to our Lords Method laid down in the Scripture of ordering the affairs of his Church, in very ma­terial points, then it will be found an impure practice, a sinful mixture, and a corruption to be purged out of the Church: And yet such it is, if I have not misrepresented that Method of our Lord in the general tenour of my In­quiries. And indeed, if I have not ta­ken wrong measures, and unless very much mistaken, their Communion in their state of Separation, if taken al­together, and the terms on which it is held, must needs be far more impure than the Parochial Communion they have withdrawn from.

There are extreams on both hands, as well on the right hand as on the left: and there is a proneness in men to run into the one by flying from the other. And good men, especially in matters [Page 359]of publick Reformation, are through mistaken zeal more in danger of run­ning into an extreme on the right hand than into one on the left, and in flying from Babylon, to run beyond Jerusalem. And there is a danger of doing much hurt in the Church by over-doing as well as there is by under­doing, and both extremes are carefully to be avoided.

The New England Ministers in their Answer to Mr. Davenport, formerly mentioned, do say; We may be very injurious to Christ as well as the Souls of men, by too much straitening and narrowing the bounds of his Kingdom or Visible Church here on earth. Cer­tainly enlargement, so it be a regular enlargement, is a very desirable thing. In Church Reformation it is an observa­ble truth (saith Pareus on the Parable of the Tares) that they which are for too much straitness do more hurt than profit the Church. So much they, p. 45. Thus the mistaken zeal of the Dona­tists and Novatians of old, for a purer Church, and purer Communion, as [Page 360]was thought or pretended put them upon separating from other Orthodox Christians, which proved an inlet to the most unchristian practices ima­ginable, for the carrying on their un­dertaken Reformation, and destructive of the peace of the Church in the highest, and lamentably scandalous to the Christian Religion; in the Doctrinal part whereof notwithstand­ing they were for the most part all agreed, as we are now, and differ mostly about Disciplinary Points as they did then.

Such a strictness in Church Refor­mation as does so narrow and lessen the Visible Church, as to endeavour to reduce it to the size of the Invisible, is many ways hurtful, as I have shew­ed in my Reasons for the contrary. It tends to hinder and lessen the great work of thorow and sound Conver­sion in the Church: It tends to hin­der the spreading and propagating of the Christian Religion: It tends to harden men in an unsafe condition: It tends to deprive good men of [Page 361]Communion with the Church, un­der the Notion of bad: It tends to ruine the Church as to its existence in the world: And lastly, it tends to beget and foment divisions, conten­tions, feuds, envyings, strifes, and undue censurings among Christians, and so to cast the Church into a sick­ly state, and such as threatens her spiritual life: Besides, the encourage­ment and advantage which is there­by given to our common Enemies to plot and attempt against us. And thus over-doing, is indeed un­doing.

And lest any should be offended at a discourse against over-much strict­ness. It ought to be considered that there is a great difference between a mans being strict towards himself, and in reference to his own practice, and his being strict and severe towards others in depriving them of the out­ward Priviledges of Christian Pro­fessors. A man cannot well be too strict in keeping a narrow watch over his own heart, words, and ways, [Page 362]in governing his Appetites, Thoughts and Passions, Tongue and Actions. Nor does this kind of strictness de­pend upon such a purity of Commu­nicants or Communion in which no Carnal Christians have any share: But it depends upon, or rather it con­sists in a due attention of mens minds to their own duty, and to the oppor­tunities of receiving good by the Or­dinances of God.

The rest of the Guests in the Para­ble were not the worse, nor did fare the worse, for that there was one among them that had not on the Wedding Garment. The ordinances of God do not the less avail good men that with a due frame of mind wait upon God in them, tho unregenerate men participate with them there­in.

And when by the Censures of the Church, Capital Offenders, and noto­rious scandalous Persons are deprived of Communion with the Church, it is not for that reason as if the Ordi­nances of God were the less useful [Page 363]to the good by such mens sharing in them: But it is to bring such Persons to shame, and by that means to re­pentance, and to free the Church from that dishonour which otherwise would stick upon it for tolerating such scan­dalous persons among them: And partly also for admonition to others, and to prevent the tainting of such as are less wary by their ill example and familiar converse. But otherwise bad mens sharing in external Communion with the Church, is no ways likely to hinder the growth of good men in grace, or their profiting by the Or­dinances of God there administred. To the pure all things are pure: Bad men cannot in the least pollute the Ordinances of God to the good by their participating with them in them.

And therefore if God would have such as are not obnoxious to Excom­munication for Capital Crimes, tho not Regenerate, to be continued in the Church, being once received into it by Baptism, to the end they might [Page 364]be under the influence of his Ordi­nances for their Conversion: I say, if God would have it thus in order to their Conversion; no good man should envy or grudge them this bene­fit of enjoying the means of such Con­version. And they especially should not who have themselves been Con­verted and Regenerated in the same way of general Communion, and by the means therein afforded; which yet has been the case, I doubt not, of such as have been leading men in modelling this new Church way, as it has been of many others. For their Congre­gations at the first, and long after, consisted scarcely of any other than what had been drawn out of the Pa­rochial Congregations where they had been Converted, if they were indeed Converted, as they supposed them to be, before their incorporating and associating in their new way. And if they had continued in the same way wherein they were by Gods blessing upon the means of Grace they there­in enjoyed, made such as they then [Page 365]were, they might without doubt have attained to as much growth in all Chri­stian Virtues as ever they did after­wards, and, I think, much more, pro­vided they had but diligently and care­fully improved the same means and opportunities by which they had acquired what they had then attained to.

For the Word and Ordinances of the Gospel which are the means of increase of Grace as well as of the beginning of it, are the same, and will produce the same effects in those who with a good frame of mind attend upon God in them, as well when unregenerate men share in them as when they do not. And therefore neither the holy Prophets, or other holy men of greatest Piety under the Old Testament, nor our Saviour or his Apostles, or any other holy men in the Primitive times of Chri­stianity, did ever decline the Publick Worship, or the use of Gods Ordi­nances in such Assemblies where bad men, as well as good, had Communion [Page 366]in them. Such a mixture of bad with good cannot hinder good men from any growth in Grace by those Ordinances, if they have but a due care to make the best improvement of them they can. And therefore there can be no need of separating and new associating in re­ference to mens own growth in Grace, tho we should suppose it possible they could be sure it were simply lawful. Which makes such separation on the one had, and associating on the other, the more inexcusable, when it causes so much hurt to the Church in general, and such obstruction to the success of the Gospel in the world, as hath been shewn it does, and would do more if it should more generally pre­vail.

The few names in the Church of Sardis did not defile their Garments by communicating with the greater number of those that had: Nor did they thereby deprive themselves of the benefit which Christ designed them by his Ordinances, either by having their minds discomposed by [Page 367]such a mixture of Communicants, or otherwise: For if they had, we can­not think that our Saviour, who walked in the midst of his golden Candle­sticks, searching the reins and the hearts to give to every one according to their works, would have applauded them as he did, with promise of great reward, saying, They shall walk with me in white, for they are worthy, Rev, 3.4.

And now for a Conclusion, That no man may take offence at the Dis­course in these Papers, nor at me for the sake of it, I must inform those that are most likely to do so, of two things:

First, That if I had discerned that what is herein pleaded had had no better foundation than some few ob­scure Texts of Scripture of dubious and uncertain Interpretation, I should not thus far have engaged in it as I have done. But if it shall appear to others, as it does to me, that I have the general stream of the Scriptures on my side herein, both of the Old Testament and of the New, both [Page 368]as to matter of Doctrine, and matter of Fact; I hope I shall be excused for making this Essay for the satisfaction of those that most need it.

Secondly, That I take the scope and design of the whole of the Dis­course in these Papers, to be perfectly agreeable to Christian Charity, as tending to no mans hurt, but to the general good of all sorts, else I should not have been satisfied in it. For I know not how to think any thing Orthodox in Divinity, which is against Charity. Now if the extent of Visible Church-Membership and Communion pleaded for, tends more to the Conversion of such of them as are unregenerate, and not otherwise obnoxious to Excommunication, than the excluding such from both would do, then what I plead for is great Charity to them.

And this extent of Visible Church-Membership and Communion, tends to propagate and spread the Christian Religion among those that are yet without the Church more than the [Page 369]narrower way can do, as has been shewn, and therefore its matter of Charity to them also.

And in that this more general way of Visible Church-Membership and Communion is not pleaded to the de­nying the usefulness of Excommuni­cation in reference to Capital Offen­ders, but the contrary, that's matter of Charity to them also: Because by that they may be brought to shame, and so unto Repentance, when they see all sober Christians ashamed to own them, or to be numbred with them, as being a disgrace to the Reli­gion they profess. And I am so far from being less for the exercise of Church-Discipline upon the proper Objects of it, than our Dissenting Friends are, That I think it a piece of great uncharitableness towards gross Sinners, when it is neglected by them to whom the exercise of it does belong. Only I would have the Scripture Rules observed in the exer­cise of it, and not use such severity as to exclude all such from Church-Communion [Page 370]as may be suspected to be unregenerate, when yet not guil­ty of any Heresie, scandalous Crimes, or gross ignorance: For men may give occasion of suspicion of their un­regeneracy by such sinful neglects of doing good, as yet may be no just ground of Excommunication.

Neither is this more extensive way of Visible Church-Membership and Communion, hurtful to those that are good, but gives them opportunity of doing the more good; and therefore is no matter of uncharitableness unto them neither. For this will not hinder them from being as good as they have a mind to be, if nothing else do. They may be as strict as they will in refe­rence to themselves: And they will not be at the less, but the more liberty to converse with the best men for their own improvement in wisdom and goodness.

And then it will be beneficial to them by putting them into a capacity and giving them an opportunity of doing more good than otherwise they could. For while good men do not [Page 371]separate themselves from formal Pro­fessors of the same Religion, nor ex­clude them from Communion with them in the means of Grace; they the better preserve their own esteem among them, and the esteem of that wherein they excel them; and they will be the more ready to hearken to them in their advice and counsel, and in their admonition or reproof, and the sooner be brought to imitate their Virtues. Whereas a contrary carriage produces contrary effects. For separation from Neighbours as no Members of a truly Christian Church when yet they are so, breeds more or less estrangedness between them, and that begets prejudices against them, and jealousies and suspicions concern­ing them as men wanting in true Chri­stian Charity and Humility, which will make them the less valued, and their good Counsels and Exhortations the less regarded, and their good ex­ample in what is worthy imitation, the less taking with, and the less gaining upon such men.

A Discourse likewise which evinceth a more extensive Visible Church-Membership and Communion to be approved of by God than these Dis­senting Brethren will allow, must needs be matter of Charity to them­selves more especially. For it tends to rescue and deliver them from such error as makes them injurious to the Church of God, and the affairs of the Gospel in the World. And what good man is there that would not be glad to be delivered from such apprehensions as made him troublesom even to good men themselves without any cause! And from such opinions as have kind­led a fire of contention and discord in the Church, destructive of that Chri­stian Charity without which all we do in Religion will signifie nothing. It is certainly a great grief to all good men that there should be any bar in the way to keep them at any undue distance from one another, and consequently it must be very grateful to them when ever it is removed.

This more general way of Visible Church-Membership and Communi­on, being then more useful and be­neficial to all sorts of men than the other is, and truly hurtful to none: I say, it being a way and Method so ful of Charity in the nature of it, and so agreeable to Moral Principles of wisdom and goodness as it appears to be, would commend it self to right reason, and to that natural light that is in men, if it should not have had that evidence from supernatural Revelation to back and authorize it which it has. The consideration of which, as it was a great motive to me to engage in the defence of it, so I hope it will plead my excuse in every good mans Conscience for this under­taking. For indeed, I that do cer­tainly know my own mind, do know that I have more love and true respect for the Persons whose Opinions I have herein opposed, than to wish or do any thing that tends to their hurt.

And now methinks I might rea­sonably promise this to my self, that such as love Truth for truth sake, and are of the number of those that will buy the truth, but not sell it at any rate whatsoever, should not be unwilling to lay aside all prejudice and self interest, and to consider impar­tially a thing of this nature by what hand soever it be prepared; and yet that is all that I desire from them for whose sakes this Discourse was composed.