[Page]
[Page]

A DISQUISITION Concerning Ecclesiastical Councils

Proving, that not only Pastors, But Brethren delegated by the Chuch­es, have equally a Right to a deci­sive Vote in such Assemblies. To which is added, Proposals concern­ing Consociation of Churches. A­greed upon by a Synod, which Con­vened at Boston, in New-England.

With a Preface, containining a further Vindication of the Congregational Discipline.

By Increase Mather. D. D.

Prov. 11. 14. In the Multitude of Counsellors there is safety.
Acts 15. 23. They wrote Letters by them, after this manner, The Apostles, and Elders, and Brethren.
Jus ferendi in Concilijs ad Laicos potest Extendi, et plus aliquando, quam ad Mul­tos clericorum.Gersom. Citante Parker Ecclesiast. Lib. 3. Cap. 28. p. 387.
Judicium [in Concilijs] et quoad faculta­tem, et quoad Authoritatem, Convenire potest doctis qui non sunt Episcopi, Ames Bellarm. Encry. Tom. 2 Cap. 2. p. 18.

Boston, Printed for N. Boone, at the Sign of the Bible in Cornhill. 1716.

[Page i]

THE Preface.

THAT Controversies about Forms of Ecclesiastical Disci­pline, concern not the Essen­tials of Religion, but that G [...]d Men may be of various Sentiments about them; Salva Fide, et Carit [...]t [...], is readily acknowledged. Nevertheless, there ought to be a sin­gular Regard unto Truths of this Na­ture, by us in New-England, above what may be affirmed of Men in a­ny other Part of the World, since our Fathers were Persecuted out of their Native Land, and fain to fly into the Wilderness, for their Testi­mony thereunto: great were the Dif­ficulties and T [...]mptation [...], and Straits, which they for some time conflicted [Page ii] with, and all upon no other Account, but that so they might enjoy a pure Discipline and Church state, exactly conformable to the Mind of Christ, revealed in the Holy Scriptures. On which Account, for their Posterity to depart from what their Fathers have with so much Clearnes [...] of Scripture Light, taught and practised, and confirmed with so great Suffer­ings; must needs be a greater Sin and Provocation to the Eyes of his Glory, than may be said of any other People on the Face of the Earth.

Concerning Forms of Church-Govern­ment, besides those of the Congregatio­nal Way, there have been especially two Pretenders to a Divine Right, viz. [...]ose that plead for the Episcopal, and those that are for the Presbyterian Dis­cipline. In the famous Treaty at [...]x­bridge between eminent Divines of both Persuasions, after they had been for some time arguing the Matter, the M [...]r­quiss of Hertford spoke to this Effect; (a) My Lords, (said he) here is much said concerning Church Government in [Page iii] general; the Reverend Divines on the Kings Part affirm, that Episcopacy is Jure Divino; the Reverend Ministers on the other Part do affirm, that Pres­bytery is Jure Divino; for my part, I think that neither of them, nor any other Form is Jure Divino, and therefore de­sire we may hear no more about that Con­troversy. I could easily say as that Noble Lord did, as to the two conten­ding Parties, without concurring in his general Negative. I have been told, that the admirably Learned Dr. Prideux, (once Regius Professor in Ox­ford, and a great Ornament to that U­niversity) being asked what Form of Church-Government he thought was of Divine Institution, replied, that he supposed that no particular Form was Jure Divino; but if any were so, it was that which Congregational Men made a Profession of. The Protestant Churches in H [...]lvetia, have no Ecclesi­astical Discipline; but if any Members of (b) their Churches fall into Scan­dals, they turn them over to the Civil Magistrate to discipline them. But so [Page iv] much has been written by the Learn­ed Mr. Robert Parker, (c) to prove that there is a Form of Church-Go­vernment of Divine Institution, as I think cannot be answered, and the fa­mous Mr. George Gill [...]spy (d) has a­bundantly confuted Erastianisme.

It has been injurious to those of the Congregational Persuasion, that the Name of Bro [...]nists has been undeser­vedly imposed upon them, from whom they differ essentially. The Brownists make the Community to be Rulers; whereas those of the Congregational Discipline, although they believe that Priviledge, and in that respect Power belongs to the Fraternity, yet that Rule and Government is peculiar to the Presbytery; and that there can­not be a Valid Church Act without the Consent of the Brotherhood, nor with­out the Concurrence of the Eldership, [...]n an Organick Church. Brownists dis­own all Churches besides their own, renouncing all the Parish Churches in [Page v] England, and the Reformed Churches in other Nations also, as no true Chur­ches of Christ. It deserves a Remark, that Robert Brown, the Father of those called (e) Brownists, after he had maintained, that there was no Church in England, did himself become a Con­formist, and Parson of a Parish in Northamptonsshire, called A Church. Congregationalists are of another Spi­rit and Principle. They are the ge­nuine Posterity of the good Old Puri­tan Nonconformists. There was long since an admirable little Book, (little in bulk, but great in worth) Printed with that Title, Puritanismus Anglica­nus, which Dr. Ames has honoured with a Preface, whence he has been suppo­sed to be the Composer of it. But a Learned (f) Professor in the Univer­sity of Leyden, has informed us, that not Dr. Ames, but Mr. Bradshaw, an Eminent Nonconformist Minister, (whose Life has been written by Lear­ned Mr. Gataker, and published by Mr. Clark) was the Author of that Judici­ous [Page vi] Script. It is perfect Congregationa­lism. The Principles of those, who are for the Congregational Discipline, are such as these. 1. That a Particu­lar Church, as to the Matter of it, ought to consist of such as are in the Judgment of rational Charity, Saints, and faithful Brethren in Christ. Of such were the Churches planted by the Apostles. 2. That the Form of a Church, or that which does essentiate and disti [...]guish it from all other Socie­ties, is a Covenant or Agreement to walk together in the Observation of all the Ordinances of the Lord Jesus Christ; which Covenant, tho' only implicit, gives Being to a Church; nevertheless, that an explicit Covenant is most eligible. 3. That a Particular Church, has Power given to them from the Lord Christ, to Choose their own Officers, viz. Pastors, Teachers, Ru­ling-Elders, and Deacons. 4. The Es­sence of a Minister's Call to the Pasto­ral Office, is in a mutual Election. They are for the Imposition of the Hands of the Presbytery in Ordi­nation. Nevertheless, they look not on that as essential, but as adiaphorus. [Page vii] In which they agree with some Emi­nent Divines of the Presbyterian Judg­ment, particularly with Mr. Gillespy, (g) nay with the general Kirk As­sembly in Scotland, as whoever shall consult Mr. Calderwood, (h) will find it often asserted. 5. That a Particu­lar Church being furnished with El­ders, at least with a Teaching Elder, has full Power to exercise Discipline within it self, without depending on any other Superiour Jurisdiction. The famous Mr. Paul Baine (i) affirms, particular Churches are equal and in­dependent on one another. He is (so far as I understand) the first Writer by whom that Term has been used. It is very unreasonable, that for this, Congregational Men should be Nick▪ named Independents. A late Author, who is not of that Way, but a Confor­mist, (k) says, That in the Primitive­Times [Page viii] every Particular Church was In­dependent, h. e. that it had a suffici­ent Right and Power in it self to pu­nish all its Delinquents, without the Concurrence of other Churches. There is then no Reason why such as are for the Congregational Discipline, should be reproachfully called Independents. Our New-England Platform of Church Discipline dislikes that Name. Mr. Hooker (l) thinks it was from the Subtilty of Satan, to fix that Name upon those that professed the Truth; that so the Truth it self might be made nauseous and distastful▪ Mr. John Be­verley (m) complains of it. Those famous Apologists, Dr. Goodwin, Mr. Nye, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Burroughs, Mr. Bridge, (who have been esteemed Pil­lars amongst those of that Way,) pub­lickly and solemnly declared, That it was a Maxim to be ab [...]orred, that a single Society of Men, pretending to be endow'd with a Power from Christ, to [...]udge them of the same Body, should ar­rogate to themselves an Exemption from [Page ix] giving an Account, or being Censurable of any other, either Christian Magistrate, or Neighbour Churches. So for (say they) was our Judgment from that In­dependent Liberty, which has been im­puted to us. 6. As all Protestant Wri­ters of Note (Grotius only excepted) approve of the Necessity and Usefulness of Ecclesiastical Councils, so do those of the Congregational Discipline. It has ever been their declared Judgment, that when there is Want of either Light or Peace in a Particular Church, it is their Duty to ask for Council, with which Neighbour Churches ought to assist by sending their Elders, and other Messengers, to advise and help them in their Difficulties. And that in Momentous Matters of common Concernment, Particular Churches should proceed with the Concurrence of Neighbour Churches. So in the Ordination of a Pastor, much more in the deposing of one. Thus it has ever been in the Churches of New­England. And so it was in the more Primitive Times of Christianity, when the People had Chosen a Pastor, they desired Neighbour Pastors to Concur [Page x] in his Ordination. When (n) Alex­ander was Chosen a Bishop or Pastor at Jerusalem, it was with the Concur­rence of the Neighbours. Cyprian (o) says, that when Co [...]nelius was Ordain­ed, it was the Approbation of Sixteen Pastors. So when any Church had sufficient Cause to depose a Pastor, they would not do it without the Ad­vice of a Council. When Paulus Sa­mosetanus (p) was deposed for his Hae­retical Opinions, it was with the Con­currence of a Council, which met at Antioch, about that Affair. When Privatus the Bishop of Lambese (q) was deposed, it was with the Advice of many other Pastors.

But if those of the Congregational Discipline are so well affected to Coun­cils, what then is the Difference be­tween a Presbyterian and Congregatio­nal Man? Truly, a moderate Presby­terian and a [...]olid Congregational Man differ so little, as that 'tis Pity they [Page xi] should differ at all. My Dearest Bro­ther Samuel Mather (whose Succes­sor I am here in Boston, he having been the first that preached the Gos­pel to that Church unto which I have been related for more than fif­ty years, and [...]ter his Removal from New-England, became the Pastor of a Congregational Church in Dublin, where also he was succeeeded by a­nother Brother, the well known Na­thaniel Mather) wrote an [...]enicum, in which he makes it evident, that the Difference among the Brethren of those two Persuasions, is inconsiderable. A principal is, that Presbyte [...]ia [...] sup­pose that Synods have a Juridical Pow­er, that they have Authority to Cen­sure Erring Churches, and if obsti­nate, to deliver them to Satan. But those of the Congregational Persuasi­on, think, that such Authority belongs only to a Particular Church, and that Synods cannot proceed any further than to a Sentence of Non communion. Surely, notwithstanding this Difference, they may be United Brethren. And blessed be God, that in London they are so. I can reflect on it with Joy, that [Page xii] when Providence ordered my Sojourn­ing among them four years, I was not wanting to do my Part towards that Union Mr. Rutherford declared, that if those of the Congregational Way, would come up to Mr. Cotton, in his Keys of the Kingdom, he would meet them half way: The truth is, there is a greater agreement in many things be­tween the Presbyterians in Scotland, and the Congregational Men in New-England, than with them and some o­thers that go under the Name of Pres­byterians. Particularly, in that they do not make the Essence of a Ministers Call to be in that Rite of Imposition of Hands, but in the Election of the Peo­ple, and in that their Ruling Elders are Chosen for term of Life. Also in Scotland they greatly approve of Read­ing the Scriptures in Publick Congre­gations, but not of a silent Reading, without any Exposition. They gene­rally say with their famous Didoclavi­ [...]s, (alias Calderwood) Non probo lecti­onem [...]ine interpretatione; and with Au­stin, who says, [...] Legitur si silebitur, [...]uare [...] non exponitur. Nor do their Ministers use to Conclude their [Page xiii] Prayers with the Lord's Prayer, as many other Presbyterians, as well as Episcopalians commonly do. But for Ministers to pretend to a Negative Voice in Synods, or for Councils to take upon them to determine what El­ders or Messengers a Church shall sub­mit unto, without the Choice of the Church concerned; or for Ministers to pretend to be Members of a Counci [...] without any Mission from their Chur­ches, nay, altho' the Church declares that they will not send them; is Prela­tical, and essentially differing not only from Congregational, but from Pres­byterian Principles. And now that I am going out of the World, I could not die in Peace, if I did not discharge my Conscience in bearing Witness a­gainst such Innovations, and Invasions on the Rights, and Liberties belonging to Particular Congregations of Christ.

Notwithstanding, the Churches of New-England were Planted a Noble Vine, wholly a right Seed, if now there is a visible Degeneracy or Declen­sion as to the Power of Godliness, and so as to Discipline, it is not to be won­dred at. Primitive Purity has rarely [Page xiv] continued for more than one Genera­tion. The famous Historian (r) (who has by some been called the Father of Ecclesiastical Historians) has recorded a Saying of Hegesippus, that while the A­postles were living, the Church remained a Virgin; but when they were removed by Death, 'twas soon corrupted. How clear is it in the Scripture, that in the Apostle's Days, there were more Pas­tors or Bishops than one in a Particu­lar Congregational Church. Acts 14. 23. So in the Church at Ephesus. Acts 20. 17, 28. And in the Church at Phi­lippi. Ch. 1. 1. And in the Church at Thessalonica. 1 Thes. 5. 12. And in the Church at Coloss. there was Epaphras, Archippus, and Philemon. Clemens Ro­manus (the same that is mentioned, Phil. 4. 3. when there had been a scan­dalous Schism in the Church at Corinth, one or two chief Brethren having drawn a great Party with them, so as that they rashly and unjustly deposed their Officers; he wrote a very grave Epistle to that Church, in which he speaks of more Elders or Bishops (for [Page xv] with him an Elder and a Bishop are the same) that were among them. This Epistle of Clement to the Church at Corinth, is supposed to be written four­ty years after the Apostle Paul's Epis­tle to them. But in the next Age to the Apostles, no more than one Pastor or Bishop might be in one Church. This we see in the Epistles of Ignatius, in the Age next following the Apo­stles. And in the Age after that, Cyprian (t) says, Unus in Ecclesia Sacerdos. Tertullian said as much be­fore him. When Austin (u) was grown old, and under Infirmities of Age, his Church desired that Eradius might be his Assistant in the Episco­pal Office, but Austin would not con­sent to his Ordination, although his Church did earnestly desire it. He objected, that for two Bishops to be at once in the same Church, was contrary to a Decree of the Nicene Council. Valerius the Bishop of Hippo desired, that Austin might be a joynt [Page xvi] Bishop with him. There was great Difficulty in obtaining his Ordinati­on under the same Pretence, that there might not be above one Bishop, or Pastor in the same Church. Thus not are men, [...]ea, and Councils, to make Decrees that Christ never made. And many other Corruptions imme­di [...]tely after the Apostolical Times, c [...]ept into the Church. Particularly, the Observ [...]nce of Easter, with what but C [...]tentions whether it should be ex [...]ly fourteen Dayes after the [...], (after the Jewish Mode) or [...]n the Lord's-Day after. Where­as [...] Ecclesiastical Historian Socrates [...] owns the Truth, that there [...] no Precept for the Observation of that time is holy, either on the one of those days, or on the other. Which is 4lso confirmed by Ir [...]n [...]s. Likewise Exorci [...]ing▪ Signing with the C [...]oss in Baptism, Unctio [...] after Bap­tism, and the giving Milk and Honey, were early Superstitions, corrupting [...] Puri [...]y of Divine Institutions.

[...] troubled that I should differ [...] many of the present Mini­ [...]r, in New-England, or rather that [Page xvii] they differ from me. For I fully con­curr with our Platform of Church-Dis­cipline, believing that it is (as in the Title Page is expressed) gathered out of the Word of God. I wish all the Ministers in New England could say the same. I likewise concurr with the two Synods Convened at Boston, both that in 1662, and that in 1679. That Vindication of the Order of the Gospel, which I wrote Sixteen Years since, had the Approbation of the two most Ancient Ministers then Li­ving among us, viz. the Reverend Mr. Higginson, and Mr. Hubbard, who when they were just leaving the World, were pleased to give a greater Charac­ter of that Book, than any thing of mine deserved, and to commend it to the Perusal and Acceptance of the Churches. The Ministers of the First Generation, who were the First Plan­ters of Churches in this Part of the World, are all of them gathered to their Fathers. So are many of the Second Generation. I am now the Eldest in this Province. It may in re­spect of my Age (being in my Seventy Eighth Year) become me to give a [Page xviii] Word of Advice to Younger Ministers, especially considering, that I have been in a peculiar Respect, a Father to many of them, viz. in that they were under my Inspection at the College, when for many years, I presided over that Society.

Children, that which I would say to you, is, that considering your Fathers came into this Wilderness, purely on the Account of Ecclesiastical Discipline, and that in Matters relating to Church Order and Government, they might practise all, and nothing more, than what there is Scripture-War­ [...]ant for; and that so they might assert the Authority of the Second Commandment, and fully observe it; therefore do you Labour to be well Studied in that Subject. And let me advise you to obtain (if possibly you can) the Books written by Mr. (w) Cotton, Mr. (x) Hooker, Mr. (y) Norton, on those Controversies, also [Page xix] what has been published by Dr. Good­win, Dr Owen, and by that Man of incomparable Reading and Learning, the Venerable (z) Robert Parker.

In the subsequent Disquisition, the Reader will not find any thing of Sa­tyr, or indecent Reflection on the Brethren, whose Notions are not the same with mine. I have endeavou­red to confirm what I assert with Scripture, and with Arguments, and the Authority of Eminent Divines, both Ancient and Modern. Aged Pareus, when he had finished his Catechism, said, (as old Simeon did) Lord, now lettest thou thy Ser­vant depart in Peace. Methinks, I can heartily say so too. Having done this Service for the Churches in New-England, I am apt to think, that I have now finished my Tes­timony, and that my Work in this World is done.

In those Regions of Light and Love, which are Above, there is [Page xx] more Knowledge gained in one Day, than can be attained unto in an whole Age by Reading, and hard Study, whilst on Earth. There do I long to be. The Lord hasten my being among the Spirits of Just Men made Perfect. Amen! Even so, Come Lord Jesus, Come quickly.

Increase Mather.
Boston, October 30. 1716.
[Page 1]

A DISQUISITION Concerning Ecclesiastical Councils.

AN Ecclesiastical Council, or Synod, is a Conventi­on of duly qualified Per­sons, called to Consult, and judge about Affairs, in which Churches, one or more are concerned. There have been great Disputes on that Question, Who has Power to Convoke a Synod? Whether it belongs to Magistrates, or to Pastors. I shall not insist upon that Enquiry, only say, that if we keep to Scripture, Churches have this Power Belonging to them. There have likewise been some who have de­cried all Ecclesiastical Councils as useless, [Page 2] nay, pernicious; and as having always done hurt to the Interest of Religion. Nazianzen's (a) Expressions Con­cerning this, are famously known. Bel­larmine Charges Luther with being of that Opinion, but he wrongs him. If Luther was against all Councils, why does Bellarmine complain of his being President of a Council, Convened at Wittenberg, in the Year 1536. in which there were (as he says) Three Hun­dred Pastors. I know not of one Pro­testant Writer of any Fame, that dis­likes all Synods, Grotius only Excepted: It cannot be denied, but that the great­est part of Ecclesiastical Convocations, have done more against the Truth then for it, as any man that Consults Al­sted's Chronology of Councils, will ea­sily perceive. But this has proceeded not from the nature of Councils, but from the faultiness of the Persons, of whom they were Co [...]stituted. The greatest part of Magistrates, and of Miniisters, and of Professed Christians have been Erroneous and Vicious. This [Page 3] ought not to prejudice Men against Magistracy, and Ministry, and Chris­tianity. The same is to be affirmed of Synods, of which also there have been more than a few that have been blessed for the Suppression of Errors, and Establishment of the Churches in the Truth. Several Particular and Provincial Synods have given a faith­ful Testimony against Errors, both in Judgment and Practice. Writers in­form us, that (c) The first Ecclesias­tical Council, after that held at Jeru­salem, was in the year 180. in which the Heresy of Montan [...]s, and his Fol­lowers was Condemn'd. There was a Synod in Arabia. A. D. 240. In which Origen was the President. This Synod Condemned Soul-sleepers. Th [...]t in Arabia, A. D. 260. did good S [...] ­vice for the Churches, in Refuti [...] and Condemning the Haere [...]ies of Paul of Samosata, and the Paulinites, as they were Called. And the four Oe­cuminical Councils (altho' as Calvin, and many others have observed( we cannot say that any one of them was [Page 4] altogether free from Error in some les­ser points, were blessed for the Sup­pressing of the Haere [...]ies, which did in­fest the Church in those Ages. The Nicene Synod, in which there were 318 Bishops, or Pastors, besides a nume­rous Company of Elders, and others whom the Emperour himself, the great Constantine honoured with his Presence, Condemned the Heresy of Arius. This has been Esteemed the most Celebrious Synod that ever was in the World. 2. The first General Council at Con­stantinople, in which there were an hundred and fifty Pastors, Condemned the Heresy of Macedonius. 3. In the great Ephesine Synod, there were two hundred Pastors, in which the Heresy of Nestorius, who maintained that Christ is two Persons, was Condemn­ed. This Synod Convened, A. D. 431. In this very City of Ephesus, there was another Synod, though not a general one) held but nineteen years after the first; in which an Heretica [...] Error on the other Extream was Esta­blished, and several Members of the Synod Compelled by Tortures to Sub­scribe the Decrees of the Majority. In [Page 5] so short a time have Synods in the same place, greatly varied from one another. 4. In the General Synod at Chalcedon, A. D. 451. there was 630 Pastors, be­sides Presbyters and Laymen, as they are called: This Synod was of great use in Confuting and Condemning the Heresy of Entyches, who held that there was but one Nature belonging to our Saviour Christ; it appears by these mentioned, that notwithstanding Coun­cils are not infallible, nevertheless, they have been very helpful to discover the Truth, and settle the Churches in the profession of it. They are necessary, tho' not absolutely to the Being, yet to the Well-being of Churches. I have said nothing of the Synods which have been among the Reformed, in these lat­ter Ages, in France and Holland, and in other Countries, by some of which the Interest of the true Religion has been a great gainer. It has been Ob­jected by some, Where have we an In­stitution for Synods? We answer, that the Light of Nature directs unto it: Plus vident Oculi, quam Oculus. Ma­ny Eyes see more than one. The Scripture says, Where no Counsel is the [Page 6] People fall, but in the multitude of Coun­sellors there is safety. Prov. 11. 14. And therefore they that are wise, will in their difficulties ask for Counsel. 2 Sam. 20. 18. They were w [...]nt to speak in old time, saying, they shall surely ask Counsel at Abel; and so they ended the Matter. Moreover, we have Scripture Example for a Synod. The Church in Antioch, and that at Jerusalem, under the Con­duct of the Apostles, Convened in or­der to Consulting on a Question, which was of common Concernment to them. Dr. Owen (d) therefore rightly observes, That Synods are Consecrated to the use of the Church in all Ages, by the Example of the Apostles, in their guidance of the first Churches of Je [...]s and Gentiles, which had the force of a Divine Institution, as being by them under the Conduct of the Holy Spirit.

These things being premised, I pro­ceed to what I have principally design­ed in this Disquisition. There are two Problems relating to Ecclesiastical Coun­cil [...], which I▪ have been desired to Ex­dress my Thoughts and Judgment con­cerning [Page 7] them. One of the Questi­ons is,

Whether no Acts of Councils are to be received as Concluding and Decisive, for which there is not the Concurrence of the Major part of the Pastors therein Con­cerned?

The Affirmative I can in no wise Concur with. I may suppose, that I have as much reason to know what has been the practice of these Churches, as most Men now alive; having been (however unworthy) in the Teach­ing Office among them for more than two and fifty years; (which so far as I understand, no other Minister now in New-England has) and assisting in ma­ny Councils of the Churches, in which I never knew but that the Concurrence of the Major part of the Delegates was Decisive: Nor was it ever declared, that one half of the Pastors in Synods should have a Negative on the whole Council; nor Asserted, That [...]tors have a greater Authority than [...] Elders, which is implied in the Question under Consideration. Shall we [...] ▪ that if there should be a Council. [...] [...] ­sisting of ten Pastors▪ and ten [...] [Page 8] [...], [...] [...]enty Brethren, that if [...] of [...] perhaps Uns [...]udied, [...]experienced Young Men did not [...], not [...]ithstanding the other five [...], Men of the greatest Learning [...], and all the ten Ruling [...], and the twenty Brethren fully [...], yet that the Act of the [...] shall be no Act at all, because [...] five Young Pastors did not Ap­prove of it; But this also is implied in the Question. My further Reason for Non-concurrence therewith are these.

1. In the Synod at Jerusalem (the first and only Council of Churches mentioned in the Scripture) The Pas­to [...] there did not Assume to them­selves a Negative over the other Mes­sengers; therefore neither ought it to be so now. It is clear, that not only [...], but Brethren acted in that Council; and that Brethren, and not Pastors only should be sent to Synods, it acknowledged by us all. It has been disputed between Protestants and Pa­pists, whether the Brethren, or Pastors only have a definitive Suffrage in Sy­nods. Papists are for Pastors only, and [Page 9] so are our Prelatical Writers; one of them lately giveth it for the definition of a Synod, That it is an Assembly of the Hierarchical Order in Consult for the Conduct of the Churches. But our most Eminent Protestant Divines maintain, that Ruling Elders and Brethren have equally a definitive Voice with the o­ther; and this they prove, because it was so in the Synod at Jerusalem, they argue strongly; Why was the Cause brought to the Brethren, and not to the Pastors only if they had not power to judge and to determine concerning the Question before them? The De­crees of that Synod were sent to the Churches in the name of the Brethren, as well as of the Apostles and Elders. Acts 15. 22. It pleased the Apostles and Elders, with the whole Church to send Chosen Men; and ver. 23. They wrote Letters by them after this manner; The Apostles, and Elders, and Brethren, send greeting; and ver. 25. It seemed good to us, viz. Brethren as well as El­ders; and ver. 28. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay no greater burden then these necessary things. The Council at Basil would not admit of [Page 10] the Pope's Superiority over the whole Council, as if the Council could not make a Valid Act, if the Pretended Pa­stor over all the Churches did not Con­cur; and they reasoned thus, (as I find our Protestant Divines have done) that word Edoxe, which is translated, it pleased, or it seemed good to us (which word is used three times by the Synod at Jerusalem) being spoken not of Pa­stors only, but of others also; it does evidently import, that those others, viz. the Brethren in the Assembly had a Power of Judgment and Determina­tion in the Question under debate. They in whose Names the Synodal De­crees were sent to the Churches, had undoubtedly a suffrage, and the right of a definitive Sentence in them. But this was done in the name of the Bre­thren, as well as of the Pastors. Now then, if the major Part of all those who have in common the power of a defi­nitive Sentence Concurr, the Act of the Council is Valid, and ought to be decisive. It has been objected, that in Acts 1 [...] ▪ 4. 'tis said, that the Synodal Decrees were ordained by the Apostles and Elders, without any mention of [Page 11] the Brethren, therefore it may seem that the Brethren had not a Vote therein. To this both Dr. Whitaker, and our Learned Parker (e) Reply, that by a Synechdoche (very usual in the Scripture) the Apostles and Elders, being a chief part of the Assembly, are put for the whole, the Brethren being included, and are expresly mentioned in the former Chapter. It is past doubt that the Question was brought to the Multitude, Acts 15. 12, 13. (Gr. Plethas unde Plebs) and they had their part in disputing and discussing the Question then to be decided. Dr. Ow­en (f) speaks the truth, when he says, that it is not necessary that Pastors on­ly should be delegated by the Church­es, but may have others joyned with them; and had so, until Prelatick U­surpation overturned their Liberties; therefore there were others besides Paul and Barnabas sent from Antioch to Jerusalem, and the Brethren of the Church (says the Doctor) whatever is impudently pretended to the contrary, [Page 12] Concurred in the Decree and Deter­mination there made. I suppose there are no Ministers in New-England, ex­cepting a Conformist or two, but what is in this, of Dr. Owen's Judg­ment; yet there are some in the World will be ready to say, Dr. Owen was indeed a Man of great Learning, but he was an Independent, and wrote like himself; But Dr. Whitaker Lived before the Name of Presbyterian and Independent was heard of; yet he speaks in an higher strain than the other Doctor has done. This Doctor (g) speaking of the Synod at Jeru­salem, has these words, In hoc concilio quivis Laicus et Presbyter definitivum suffragium habuit, non minus quam Pe­trus▪ In this Council (says he) E­very Laick and Presbyter had a defini­tive Suffrage no less than Peter. This was Dr. Whitaker's Judgment; a Man of whom it was said, that he was the Oracle of the University, and the Miracle of the World.

2. When Pastors of Churches Con­vene in Synods, it is not their Pas­toral [Page 13] Office, but the Churches dele­gation, which gives them a right to be there. It was once disputed, whe­ther the Bishops have not a Negative on the House of Lords, so that there can be no Valid Act of Parliament without their Concurrence. Mr. Ba­shaw, (a Learned Lawyer) proved they had not; because they did not Sit there by virtue of their Office, but of the Baronies which belonged to them. If then Pastors do not Sit in Council as Officers, but as Messen­gers deputed by their Churches, they may not Claim a Negative. They would have no right to be in this or that Synod, if their Churches did not send them. True it is, when a Coun­cil is Called for, the Churches ought to send their Pastors, for they should be, and often are, most able to Judge in Ecclesiastical Affairs. The words in our Platform are these: Because none are, or should be more fit to know the State of the Churches, nor to ad­vise of ways for the good thereof, than Elders; therefore it is fit in the Choice of Messengers for such Assemblies, they have special respect to such. Never­theless, [Page 14] they do not Sit there as Pas­tors, Officers, Rulers. Dr. Owen speaks Judiciously, and like himself in saving, That no Persons by virtue of any Office meerly, have right to be Members of Ecclesiastical Synods as such; neither is there either Example or Reason to give colour to any such pretence: Officers of the Church ought to be Present in them▪ but meerly as such, it belongs not to them. They who say, this is pure Independent Doctrine, discover their own ignorance; for Bu [...]linger, Hyperius, Dane [...], Voeti­us, Vedeli [...]s, and Zeperus, who were no Independents, have said as much as this amounts unto, which I have in another Discourse taken notice of. And hence it does not follow, that if Elders have a Negative Voice in their Particular Churches, which our Plat­form of Discipline gives them; Chap. 10 Sect. 11. that they have so in Coun­cils, because in their Particular Chur­ches they are Rulers, to whom Obe­dience is due. Heb. 13. 17. But in Sy­nods they have no power of Rule. A Pastor when Sitting in Council, acts as a Church Messenger, and not as a Church Officer; the Church does not [Page 15] give more power to one of their Messengers, than to another, a Pres­byter, a Deacon, a Brother Sitting in the Synod is a Publick Person and Representative of the Church, as well as the Pastor. When a City sends to the Convention of the Nation a Se­natour, and another who is not Vest­ed with any Civil Authority, to be their Representatives, their Power in the Great Council of the Nation is Equal; tho' when they are in their own City, one has a greater Rule and Authority than the other. Qui (says our famous Parker, p. 391 and Dr. Whitaker) Ab Ecclesijs parit [...]r de­legantur, Par [...]s esse debent. Why should there not be a Parity in the Power, when there is a Parity in the Delegation? there is great Reason for it, Considering that some Brethren who are sent to Councils, are as a­ble, and it may be, far more able to give Light concerning the Question to be discussed, than any Pastor there. In the famous Nicene Synod, the Great [...] was not then a Pastor, (Bishops have appropriated that name to themselves.) But a Deacon in the [Page 16] Church of Alexandria. But what Pas­tor (of which there were more than 300 in that Council) did so much [...]ervice for the Truth, in opposition to the Arian Heresy, as Athanasius did? who notwithstanding his being but a Deacon, was a great part of that As­sembly. In the Synod at Dort, almost an Hundred years since, some of the Seniors (as they call their Ruling El­ders) did as Voetius (who was a Member of that Synod) testifies more Service for the Truth against the Ar­minian Remonstrants, than some of their Pastors did. We have seen in several of our own Churches, Brethren of far greater Learning and Abilities, than their Pastors. And since the power of [...] only Consultative, what good reason can there be given, why such should not have an Equal Vote with a­ny other? [...] [...]ut maj [...]ra in Laici [...] [...], [...]ur non ad [...]iberentur in [...] Eccle [...]iastic [...]? says Bullinger; (h) If Laicks have Equal, or it may be, greater Gifts than Bishops, why should not their Votes in Synods be of [Page 17] Equal Authority with others? It is past doubt, (as we shall further shew) that in the Ancient Councils there were Brethren as well as Pastors, and that the Decision of the Que [...]on was brought before them also, which im­plies an Equality of Power in their Suffrages. It has been objected, that this Principle will make way for Igno­rant Mechanicks to Carry it in Synods against their Learned Pastors. The Jesuit Saunders raveth at the Centuria­tors, because they affirmed, (and most truly) that in the Primitive Church­es, others besides Clergy-Men were Members in Synods: He says, that none but Mad-men will believe that Mechanicks should Sit in Council with Bishops, about Ecclesiastical Affairs. But why not? As for the name of Mecha­nicks, altho' it is Contemptible with us, it is not so in all Nations. It was not so among the Jews. The most Learned Rabbi's have not thought them­selves dishonoured by Learning (i) a Trade. In their Writings we read of Rabbi Jose, a Skinner; Rabbi John a [Page 18] Shoe-maker; Rabbi Jude a Baker, Rab­bi Meir a Scrivener. And we know that the Apostle Paul, notwithstanding his being a great Scholar, had learned to be a Tent-maker; and Aquila, a man mighty in the Scriptures, was of the same Craft. Acts 18. 3. It was fre­quent among the Ministers of Bohemia, to be well skilled in some Mechanical Operations. It is not then enough to Unqualify a Man for a Synod, that he is a Mechanick; Nor are any Mini­sters among us (altho' Prelatists are) of that Opinion: Nor have I written this, as if I thought Every Brother in a Church, were fit to be Chosen a Mem­ber of a Council. Churches ought to be careful in that matter. If they send Ignorant and Unqualified Persons to be their Delegates, the fault is in the Church that does so, and not in the Principle, that has been maintained. The Judicious Author of a little Book, with the Title of, Puritanismus Angli­canus, affirms, that it is not disparage­ment to a Church, if some who Exer­cise Mechanick Arts, are Chosen Ru­ling Elders therein, provided they are Men of Understanding, and of Exem­plary [Page 19] Piety. Then why may not such be Delegates of Churches. I shall fur­ther add, that there are Mechanicks, who altho' they do not Excel in that which is called Humane Learning, they are well Verst and Learned in the Scriptures, spending much time in Con­sulting those Oracles of God, and be­ing Men of great Piety, and Excellent Natural Accomplishments, they may be very Useful in Synods Ecclesiastical Historians, give a Remarkable Account of what happened in the Nicene Synod. A Pious Old Man, who was no Clergy­Man, nor Exercised in Philosophical Notions, by his plain discourse did more towards the Conviction of an Hereti­cal Philosopher, than all the Learned Bishops in the Council could do.

3. Popery came in at this door, of Pastors assuming more to themselves than belongs to them, and the Frater­nities readiness to part with what was theirs. The Famous Author of the History of the Council of Trent, not­withstanding his being a Papist, has Asserted as much as this comes to. Pastors did not at first pretend unto a sole Authority, nor yet unto a Negative [Page 20] in Synods, from the Beginning it was not so; nor yet in the days of Cypri­an (k) (who flourished A. D. 250.) Presbyters, Deacons, and other Peo­ple were in his Synod; and yet four­ty years before him Origen (l) com­plained of Episcopal Encroachments then beginning. In a Synod which Con­ [...]ned at Rome, by which Novatus was Condemned, there were many Presbyters and Deacons. That Elders and Brethren, as well as Pastors, had in those days their Interest in Eccle­s [...]stical Councils, is so manifest, that a late Episcopalian cannot deny it; for in the year 270. there was a Sy­nod Convened at Antioch, to Com­pose the Troubles there raised by their Bishop Paul; In this Synod were seventy two Bishops or Pastors. Af­ter they had Condemned the Here­tick Paul, for his Immorality, as well as Heterodoxy, they gave an account of their proceedings in a Synodical Letter, directed to the then Bishop of [Page 21] Rome, and to others (m) which Let­ter was written not only in the Name of the Bishops, but also of the Presbyters, Deacons and Laity, says Mr. Echard. And in some of the General Councils, there were not only Pastors, but El­ders and Laymen too (as they call them) who had their Suffrage in them. So it was in the Nicene Synod: Vitus and Vincentius, who were not Pastors but Elders of the Church then in Rome, signed the Acts of that Council; and in that of Chalcedon there were many Laicks. I know Papists and Pre­lates deny this, but the Testimony of Socrates and Euse [...]ius, and others, have sufficiently proved it. Notwithstand­ing the Mystery of Iniquity began to work betimes; It was a considerable time before Bishops did Monopolize all Synodal Power. The Usurpation came in gradually, until at last none but Bishops, who called themselves Pastors, were thought worthy to be Members Constituent of Ecclesiastical Councils, and of these there were sometimes [Page 22] more than a good many. Bellarmin [...] tells of a Council, (which he will have to be his tenth (n) General one) in which there were no less than a thou­sand Bishops. I mention not these things to reflect on any, only Consi­dering that Good and Faithful Pastors in the more Primitive Times, did un­awares give a step toward Popery; we should be watchful against any thing that may have the least Aspect that way. The Pastors in the Coun­cil at Nice (o) giving the precedency to the Bishop of Rome, was a fatal thing. Before that was done, the Church of Rome ( [...]aith AEneas Sylvi­us) had but little Respect.

4. The Affirmative does not agree with the Doctrine of the most Refor­med Churches at this day, Whether Presbyterian or Congregational; If it had been thus Expressed, no Act of the Council shall be decisive without the major part of the Elders, it had been [Page 23] (tho' not justifyable) yet less Excep­tionable. But as it is now Expressed, it makes Ruling Elders, as well as Bre­thren in Councils to signifie very Lit­tle. When the Scripture informs us that the Synodal Decrees of the Coun­cil at Jerusalem were Consented to by the Elders; our incomparable Parker observes, that Ruling, as well as Teach­ing Elders were Comprehended under that Expression. A Ruling Elder has not that Doctrinal Authority, which a Pastor has; nevertheless his Ruling Authority is Equal with the Pastors; and when as Delegates they Sit in Sy­nods, may have an Equal Power. Hence Sutliff, (a Prelatick Protestant) com­plains that the Synods of the Reformed Churches send two Ruling Elders for one Pastor, and so ( says he ) the major part Carries it against their Pastors. Un­der the Reforming Parliament in En­gland, there was a Presbyterian Pro­vincial Synod, settled at London (p) Consisting of twelve Ministers, and twen­ty four Lay-Elders, (as they were cal­led) [Page 24] Acts to be Valid which pass by the Major part. Sir B. Whitlock, in his Memorials, p. 23. informs us, that in the year 1638. It was Determined in Scotland, that every Parish should send a Lay-man, whom they called a Ruling Elder, to their National Synod, which should have Equal Power with the Minister. The Reverend Mr. Walter Stuart, in his Collections concerning the Discipline and Government of the Church in Scotland, informs us, that their General Assembly Consists of Pas­tors and Ruling Elders; and that in the beginning of the Reformation, the Number of Pastors were but the fourth part of the Assembly. Their Ruling Elders are not Ordained with Imposi­tion of Hands. He says, that the As­sembly is Null where no Ruling Elders are Commissionated. He takes notice, that by the directions of the English Parliament, August 19. 1545▪ it is pro­vided, that there be in all Assemblies a Ruling Elder, and one Minister. In the Ecclesiastical Discipline of the Re­formed Churches in F [...]ance, 'tis decla­red, that in their Provincial Synods, the Pastor shall bring one or two El­ders [Page 25] with him; and that if he Comes alone, he shall not be regarded; that the President in the Synod shall gather the Votes of every Particular, and de­clare the Major part; and that Elders deputed by the Churches, shall have their Votes as the Pastors. v. Chap. 8. p. 26, 27. So that in a Presbyterian Sy­nod, an Act may be valid, altho' the major part of the Pastors do not Con­cur; nay, tho' not one Pastor does Concur in the Passing of it. Was not the National Kirk Assembly in Scotland lately Over-ruled by the Ruling Elders therein. As for Congregationalists they Concur with Mr. Parker, Dr. Whitaker, Dr. Voet, and Dr. Owen; that the Pow­er which the Pastors have in Synods, is not meerly from their Office, but from the Mission they receive from their Churches; and consequently that there is a parity in the Power: And with this agrees our Platform of Church Discipline, which makes the next Effi­cient Cause of Synods to be the Missive Power of the Churches, and speaks of the Churches sending their Elders and other Messengers; which supposes that Elders in Synods are Considered as [Page 26] Messengers, and not as Officers; and that Synods may not Exercise any Church Authority, which, if they Sat there un­der the notion of being Vested with Office-Power might be done. And that this was formerly the Judgment of Ministers in New-England, we may Conclude from M. Hooker's Survey of Church-Discipline, which had the Ap­probation of the Pastors then at New-Haven, Guilford, Milford, Stratford, Fairfield, and many others. Now Mr. Hooker (q) asserts, That in Synods all have Equal Power, because equally Sent and Chosen; and that none act there as Officers, i. e. tho' they [...]e Office [...]s in their own Congregations, they are not so here, but as Called. Here is no Act of an Officer, because the formal rea­son of his being a Member of the Sy­nod, is the Chusing and Sending. And therefore they that are no Officers if so Chosen, have a right to Vote; and therefore they that are Officers, if not Sent, have no right of Voting. Those Acts which proceed in Common from Men without, as well as in Office, those [Page 27] cannot be Acts of Men in Office, when as all Acts of the Synod are performed by all the Members of the Synod, by Brethren, as well as Elders. Thus speaks our Renowned Hooker. Nor do his Sentiments differ from Polan [...]s † who maintains, that all who are delegated from the Churches, has a Decisive Vote, and that Masters of Schools, and others, who are not Pastors, may be Elected. The Tri­pa [...]t History testifies, that there were Laicks in the Ni [...]ene Council.

It has been Objected, that Mr.Cot­ton maintains, (r) that in the Synod of Jerusalem, the [...] of the De­crees lay chiefly, if not only, in the Apostles and Elders. Some I hear have laid great weight upon this. I shall a little Consider it. 1. Why should we be, Additti in verba ul [...]u [...] Jurarc Magistri? Why should we Call any Man Master? Mat 23. 12. The Schol-men will now and then say of their admired Master, Peter Lombard, Hi [...] [...] tenetu [...] ▪ [Page 28] Here we must Crave Leave to Dissent from our Master. So if Mr. Cotton has happened to drop a Notion, which does not well Suit with Congregational Principles, which we take to be accor­ding to the Scripture, we are not bound to write after him. If the O­pinion of Men were to decide the Question, there is as much reason to submit to Dr. Ames as to any Man; who says, that others besides Pastors may have Authority in Ecclesiastical Councils, which is contrary to saying Pastors only have Authority. 2. Let his words be taken in a right sense, and I shall say as my Venerable Fa­ther Cotton does. But there is an Ambiguity in the word Authority. Sometimes it is taken for a Power of Rule and Jurisdiction. A Negative Voice implies no less. No Conventi­ons are said to have Authority in a strict sense, or a Power to impose their Acts on others, but such as have a Ju­ridical Power. This cannot be Mr. Cotton's Meaning. For all Congregatio­nalists (of whom he was not the least) deny that Synods have any such Pow­er. This we see in the Order of the [Page 29] Congregational Churches (s) Publish­ed in 16 [...]8. Our New-England Plat­form declares, that a Synod cannot Exercise any Act of Authority. The Presidential Synod, Acts 15. (they say) did not. The Scripture ( [...]aith my Learned Tutor, Mr. Norton) (t) does neither Expressly, nor by just Conse­quence mention Synodal Authority. When the Power of Synods is called Au­thority, the Expression is improper, their Power is only Decisive, not Authorita­tive, i. e. Juridical. This he insists on, and proves by Arguments not easy to be answered. Which is also done by Dr. Goodwin (u) and by my Father. (w) In the Private Colloquies a­mong the Churches in France, they allow Elders and Deacons to propose their Opinions; but (say they) the Decision of the Doctrine, is principally reserved to the Pastors, and to Doctors in Divinity. It is rational, that it should be so, others being not ordina­rily [Page 30] capable to Judge in abstruse Con­troversy. There is a doctrinal Authori­ty belonging to Pastors. 1 Tim 5. 17. I suppose Mr. Cotton intended no more than this, that if the Brethren in the Council at Jerusalem had Concurred in their Advice, if all the Elders and Apostles had not Coucurred with th [...]m, their Decrees would have had little or no Authority. And who will say o­therwise? Mr. Norton in his Cate­chism, has this Question, What is the Power of a Council? Answ. To declare the Truth, not to Exercise Authority▪ Nevertheless, in his Answer to Apoll [...] ­ny, p, 118. He proves that the Sen­tence of a Council is to be Decisive.

3. The words in the Question very much differ from Mr. Cotton's Asserti­tion. For he mentions Elders, when as the Question speaks of Pastors only, which has a Prelatick Aspect. He al­lows as much Authority to Ruling El­ders in Synods, as to Pastors, which the Question as Expressed does not do, but is Exclusive as to their having a Negative on the Acts of the Council.

4. Mr. Cotton speaks of Ap [...]stolical Authority. The Power of the Apo­stles [Page 31] was greater than ordinary Pastors may pretend unto.

I have now done with the First Pro­blem. There is another Question, which I am also desired to Express my Thoughts concerning it, viz. Whether if an agrieved P [...]rson is not satisfied with the Decision of [...] former Council, there shall be another Con [...]ened, which shall Consist of such Pastors [...] shall be directed to by the Ministers of an Association▪ near to that whereto those of the former Council belonged, which the agrieved should accordingly apply themselves to, and in this way expect a final Issue? Here also I must Enter my vehement Dissent: For,

1 Churches or Persons, whose Case calls for a Council, ought no [...] to have their Liberties Infringed, but they may, and ought to address themselves to such as from whom they may Ex­pect the Clearest Light in the [...]ifficul­ties before them. Why did the Church in A [...]tioch go to the Church at Jerusalem for Co [...]ncil, but because they had reason to think that there was the greatest Light. There were [...]ndoubtedly many other Churche [...] nea­rer [Page 32] to them than that at Jerusalem; for the Synod did not meet there be­fore the Year of Christ 49, which was sixteen or seventeen years after our Lord's Ascension. Within that time Christianity had wonderfully Increased. The Disciples were called Christians six years before that. Paul was Convert­ed fourteen years before that, and had (as well as other Apostles) settled many Churches in Syria, which were not so remote from Antioch as Jerusa­lem was; why then would they [...] far as Jerusalem? but because they knew the most able Counsellours in Church Affairs resided there, some of the Apostles especially, and those par­ticularly who seemed to be Pillars, viz. Peter, James, and J [...]hn. It is supposed that no other Apostles, besides these were present in the Synod at Jerusa­lem.

2. Altho ordinarily it is most pro­per, yet nevertheless, it is not always necessary no [...] proper for those who need Counsel, to address themselves to such as are nearest to them. Antioch was about 260 miles distant from Jeru­salem; and yet for the reason before­mentioned, [Page 33] with other Considerations, they passed by many Churches which were nearer to them, and went to Je­rusalem. It is possible, that the near­est Churches may be prejudiced, or pre-ingaged, and therefore not so pro­per to be Concerned in a Council, as some others more remote. Our Sy­nod in 62 recommends a special refe­rence to Churches, which are by Pro­vidence in a convenient Vicinity, but ('tis said) with Liberty reserved to make use of others as the nature of the Case, or the advantage of opportunity may lead thereunto.

3. It belongs not to Ministers Autho­ritatively to direct or to impose upon any agrieved Persons, to whom or to what Churches they shall address them­selves for Counsel. Especially 'tis im­proper for such Ministers as have al­ready been Concerned to nominate a future Council, who will be like to nominate such as they apprehend will Confirm what they themselves have done.

4. We have lately seen a miserably divided Church at Hull, very happily re­stored to Peace, by the blessing of God [Page 34] the Endeavours of a Council from Neighbour Churches; which would not have been obtained, if the Method proposed in this Question had been fol­lowed.

Thus have I impartially declared my Judgment on the Controverted Ques­tions. Whether the Arguments which satisfie me, will satisfie others, I must Leave with the Divine Providence: Some I believe will on Second Thoughts Change their Sentiments. I come now to that which was the main thing In­ducing me to this Disquisition. I would not by what I have written be misun­derstood, as if I were disaffected to the Consociation of Churches, in order to the preservation of the Faith and Or­der of the Gospel professed by them. I know no man that has appeared in this Cause more than I have done. For as to the Consociation of Churches, a­greeing among themselves, that no new Churches shall be owne [...] by them, or Pastor Ordained or Deposed, or the like matters of Common Concernment done without the approbation of Neigh­bouring Pastors and Churches: I have more than once declared publickly my [Page 35] Judgment concerning it, as that which is not only lawful, but absolutely ne­cessary for the Establishment of these Churches. The Light of natural rea­son, as well as Scripture, teaches Chur­ches in Common with other Societies, to Associate and Combine for their Common Safety. This was practised among the Churches, in the Primitive Times of Christianity; and it is so in most of the Reformed Churches in Eu­rope at this day. Some who are not Christians, have seen a necessity of Consociating, to uphold the false Re­ligion professed by them. To say nothing of many Modern Instances, A late Learned (x) Writer informs us, that some Ages since, there hap­pened a great Contention among the Jewish Synagogues then in France, car­ried on by three Rabbins of Note a­mong them, who were on that ac­count Cast out of their Synagogues, but others admitting them; what had been done proved insignificant, until they came to a Consociation, the Issue whereof was, that the Beginners of [Page 36] the Schism were made uncapable of giving them any further Trouble. Now if the Children of this World shall be so wise in their Generation, as to Concur and Consent for the Upholding Superstition; Why should not the Churches of Christ (having the Countenance of his Word in their doing of it) with one Consent main­tain the Faith and Order of the Gos­pel? Mr. Cotton would sometimes be­wail the deficiency of the Churches in New-England in this particular; and he did with great solemnity Re­commend the Consideration of it to Mr. Mitchel (the famous Pastor of the Church in Cambridge) when he gave him the Right-hand of Fellow­ship at his Ordination. And not long before he went to be among the Spi­rits of Just Men made Perfect, He drew up, Propositions concerning the Consociation and Communion of Church­es, t [...]ndred to the Elders and Brethren of the Churches, for their Consideration and acceptance according to God. Which Propositions falling into my Hands, I Published them to the World above fourty years ago. The want of a [Page 37] Church-Government has been objected to us, when as we have one gath [...]red out of the Word of God, by those Emi­nent Servants of his, who planted Churches in New-England. What else is our Platform of Church-Discipline? Our only want is an agreement to pra­ctice what has been our Profession; which neglect will in time endanger the Overturning our Church-Govern­ment, and our Churches too, and it may be introduce another Church-Go­vernment, not gathered out of the Word of God. In the Synod which met at Boston, in the year 1662. altho' there was not an Universal Concurrence in the Answer to the First Question, Con­cerning the Subjects of Baptism. In an­swer to the second question about the Consociation of Churches, there was a marvellous Unanimity; not one El­der, nor so much as two Brethren in all that Reverend Assembly dissenting, which I am the better able to testify, in that I was of that Synod; which very few Men now Living were. Not one other that I know of. Such an Unanimity, [...]eems to be of God, and the Consideration of it should be of [Page 38] weight with the Churches. The Pas­tors in this Province, did at a General Convention of them at Boston, May 30▪ 1700. Pass the following Vote, To prevent the great mischief to the Evan­gelical Interests, that may arise from the unadvised proceedings of People to gather Churches in the Neighbourhood, it is provided, that the Result of the Synod, in 1662. relating to the Conso [...]iation of Churches may be Republished, with an Address to the Churches, Intimating our desires (and so far as we are Concerned our purposes) to see that Advice care­fully attended, and the irregular Pro­ceedings of any People hereafter contrary to that Advice▪ not Encouraged. This was the Vote which passed at the mention­ed Convention. When also he that writes these Lines, was desired to Ad­dress the Churches accordingly. What has hitherto retarded, I need not men­tion. I am now taking my Leave of the World, and of these Churches; having been in a Publick Capacity, Serving Christ and them (after a poor weak manner) for more than five a­bove a Jubilee of Years. I have been often thinking with my self, what I [Page 39] should Leave with the Lord's People in this Land as my Last Legacy. I have Considered, that the Churches have now greater Cause than former­ly to be Concerned by Ecclesiastical and Scriptural Methods to preserve the Faith and Order of the Gospel, which has been delivered to them. A due attendance to what is from the Scripture declared in the Synod mentioned, with respect to the Com­munion and Consociation of Church­es, will, by the Blessing of our Lord Jesus Christ, be a good means to prevent Degeneracy, and to Establish them in that holy Faith and Order of the Gospel, which has been profes­sed and practised among them; and by which the Religious People in New­England, have been distinguished from other People. I have therefore Caused those Synodal Conclusions, to be Republish­ed herewith, and recommend the consi­deration of them, and an agreement to practise according to what is there de­termined, with a steadfast adherence to the Pla [...]form of Discipline, as my Dy­ing Farewel to the Churches in New-En­gland. So will New-England remain New-England.

[Page 40]The Synods Propositions concerning the Con [...]ociation of Churches, are here annexed.

Quest. WHether according to the Word of God, there ought to be a Consociation of Churches, and what should be the manner of it?

Answer. The Answer may be briefly given in the Propositions fol­lowing.

1. Every Church or Particular Con­gregation of Visible Saints in Gospel Or­der, being furnished with a Presbytery, at least with a Teaching Elder, and walking together in Truth and Peace, hath received from the Lord Jesus, full Pow­er and Authority Ecclesiastical within it self, regularly to Administer all the Ordinances of Christ; and is not under any other Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction whatsoever.

For to such a Church Christ hath given the Keyes of the Kingdom of Hea­ven, that what they bind o [...] loose on [...], [Page 41] shall be bound or loosed in Heaven, Mat. 16. 19. and 18. 17, 18. Elders are Ordained in every Church. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5. and are therein Authorized Officially to Administer in the Word, Prayer, Sacraments & Censures, Mat. 28. 19, 20. Acts 6. 4. 1 Cor. 4. 1, 5. 4. 12. Ac [...]s 20. 29. 1 Tim. 5. 17. and 3, 5. The reproving of the Church of [...]orinth, and of the Asian Churches severally, imports they had Power, each of them within themselves, to reform the Abuses that were amongst them. 1 Cor. 5. Rev▪ 2. 14, 20. Hence it follows, Consociation of Churches is not to hinder the Exercise of this Power, but by Counsel from the Word of God, to direct and strength­en the same on all Occasions.

2. The Churches of Christ do stand in a Sisterly Relation to each other­ Cant. 8. 8. Being united in the same Faith and Order, Eph. 4. 5. Col. 2. 5. To walk by the same Rule, Phil. 3. 16. In the Exercise of the same Ordinan [...]s for the same End, Eph. 4. 11, 12, 13. [Page 42] 1 Cor. 16. 1. Under one and the same Political Head, the Lord Jesus Christ, Eph.1.22,23▪ and 4,5. Rev. 2.1. which Union Infers a Communion suitable thereunto.

3. The Communion of Churches is the faithful improvoment of the Gifts of Christ bestowed upon them, for his Ser­vice and Glory, and their mutual Good and Edification, according to Capacity and Opportunity, 1 Pet▪ 4. 10, 11. 1 Cor. 12. 4. 7. & 10. 24: 1 Cor. 3. 21, 22. Cant. 8. 9. Rom. 1. 15. Gal. 6. 10.

4. Acts of Communion of Churches are such as these.

1. Hearty Care and Prayer one for another. 2▪ Cor. 11. 28. Cant. 8. 8. Rom. 1. 9. Col. 1. 9. Eph. 6. 18.

2. To afford Relief by Communi­cation of their Gifts in Temporal or Spiritual Necessities, Rom. 15. 26, 27. Acts 11. 22,29. 2 Cor. 8. 1, 4, 14.

3. To maintain Unity and Peace, by giving account one to another of their Publick Actions, when it is or­derly desired. Acts 11. 2,3,4,—1.8 [Page 43] Josh. 22. 13, 21, 30. 1 Cor. 10. 32. and to strengthen one another in their regular Administrations, as in special by a Concurrent Testimony against Persons justly Censured. Acts 15. 41. & 16,4,5. 2 Tim. 4.15▪3▪ Thes. 3.14.

4. To seek and accept help from, and give help unto each other.

1. In Case of Divisions and Con­tentions, where the peace of any Church is disturbed. Acts 15. 2.

2. In matters of more than ordi­nary Importance, [Prov. 24.6. & 15.22] as Ordination, Translation, and Deposition of Elders, and such like, 2 Tim. 5.22

3. In doubtful and difficul Ques­tions and Controversies, Doctrinal or Practical, that may arise, Ac [...]s 15. 2, 6.

4. For the rectifying of Male-ad­ministrations, and healing of Errors and Scandals, that are unhealed a­mongst themselves, 3 John v. 9, 10. 2 Cor. 2. 6,—11. 1 Cor. 15. Rev. 2. [Page 44] 14, 15, 16. 2 Cor. 12. 20, 21. and 13 2. Churches now have need of help in like Cases, as well as Churches then. Christ's Care is still for whole Churches, as well as for Particular Persons; and Apostles being now Ceased, there remains the duty of Brotherly Love, and mutual Care and Helpfulness incumbent on Chur­ches, especially Elders for that End.

5 In Love and Faithfulness, to take notice of the troubles, difficul­ties, Errors and Scandals of another Church, and to administer help, (when the Case manifestly calls for it) tho' they should so neglect their own good and duty, as not to seek it. Exod. 23. 4, 5. Prov. 24. 11, 12.

6. To Admonish one another, when there is need and cause for it; and and after due means with patience used, to withdraw from a Church or Peccant Party therein, obstinately persisting in Error or Scandal; as in the Platform and Discipline (Chap. 15. Sect. 2. Partic. 3. is more at large [Page 45] declared. Gal. 2. 11, 14. 2 Thes. 3. 3. 6. Rom. 16. 17.

5. Con [...]ociation of Churches is their Mutual and Solemn Agreement to Exercise Communion in such Acts as aforesaid among themselves, with special reference to those Churches, which by Providence are planted in a Convenient Vicinity, tho' with li­berty reserved without Offence, to make use of others, as the nature of the Case, or the advantage of Oppor­tunity may lead thereunto.

6. Communion of Churches in this Country having so good oppor­tunity for it, it is meet to be Com­mended to them, as their duty thus to Consociate. For,

1. Communion of Churches be­ing commanded, and Consociation being but an Agreement to practise it, this must needs be a duty also. Psal. 119. 106. Neh. 10. 28, 29.

2. Paul an Apostle sought with much labour the Conference, Concur­rence and Right-hand of Fellowship of [Page 46] other Apostles: and Ordinary Chur­ches and Elders have not less need each of other, to prevent their run­ning in vain, Gal. 2. 2, 6, 9.

3. Those General Scripture Rules touching the need and use of Counsel, and help in weighty Cases, concern all Societies and Polities, Ecclesiastical as well as Civil. Prov. 11. 14. & 15. 22▪ & 20. 18. & 24▪ 6. Eccl.4. 9, 10, 12.

4. The Pattern in Acts. 15, holds forth a Warrant for Councils, which may be greater or less as the mat­ter shall require.

5 Concurrence and Communion of Churches in Gospel Times, is not obscurely▪ held forth in Isa. 29. 23, 24, 25▪ Zeph. 3. 9. 1 Cor. 11▪ 16 & 14. 32, 36

6 There has constantly been in these Churches a profession of Com­munion, in giving the Right-hand of Fellowship at the Gathering of Chur­ches, & Ordination of Elders, which importeth a Con [...]ociation, and obli­geth to the practice thereof; with­out which we should want also an Ex­pedient [Page 47] and sufficient Cure for Emer­gent Church Difficulties and Diff [...] ­rences, with the want whereof our way is charged, but unjustly, if this part of the Doctrine were duly prac­tised

7, The manner of the Churches Agree­ment herein, or Entring into this Conse­cration, may be by each Churches' open Consenting to the things here declared, in answer to the second Question, as also to whatis said thereabout in Chap. 15. & 16. Of the Platform of Disci­pline, with reference to other Churches in this Colony and Country, as in Prop. 5th [...] before Expressed.

8. The manner of Exercising and prac­tising that Communion, which this Con­sent or Agreement specially tendeth unto, may be, by making use occasionally of El­ders or able Brethren of other Churches, or by the more solemn Meetings of both Elders and Messengers in less or greater Councils, as the Matter shall require.

THE END

ERRATA.

IN the Preface p.10. line 6. read with the p. 3. l. 20 f. Arabia, r. Antioch. p. 13. [...] ▪ 8. f. Bashaw, r. Bagshaw. p. 18 l. 8. f. of r. in p. 10 r. Occupations. p. 24. l. 23. r. 1645.

[Page]

Advertisement.

THere is now in the Press, and will speedily be Published, a Book, Entituled, An Alarm to Unconverted Sinners. In a Serious Treatise: Shewing, 1. What Conversion is not, and correcting some Mistakes about it. 2. What Conversi­on is, & wherein it con [...]i [...]teth. 3. The Necessity of Conversion. 4. The Marks of the Unconverted▪ 5. The Mi [...]eries of the Unconvert [...] ▪ 6. Di­rections for Conversion. 7. Motives to Conversion. Whereunto are an­nexed divers Practical Cases of Consci­ence Judiciously Resolved. By Joseph Alleine, late Minister of the Gospel at Taunton in Somersetshire.

Printed for, and Sold by Nicholas Boone, at the Sign of the BIBLE in Cornhill.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.