"Second Position: That it is not lawful to join in Prayer, or to receive the Sacrament, where a Stinted Liturgy is used.' Or, as we conceive your meaning to be in this, as in the former question, namely, where and when that Stinted Liturgy' is used!

"Ans. It seemeth, by this your Letter, the ground of this Position hath been the separation of divers from your assemblies, because of a 'Stinted Liturgy:' and we are not ignorant of the rigid separation of divers people who withdraw themselves from an able faithful ministry, as no ministry of Christ; and from their godly congregations, as no churches of Christ; because of some corruptions, from which, through want of light, not love of the truth, they are not thoroughly cleansed. Against which practice we have ever witnessed. . . Now, if the question be, of joining in Prayer with, and when that whole Liturgy is used; or, where that which is used, is read by an unable and un-godly Minister; we then see not, how it can be lawful to join in Prayer' in such cases: for, first, The Prayers of the Minister, are not his private prayers, but the Public Prayers of the whole Assembly, whose mouth he is to God. And when the prayers offered up by the Minister as a living, holy, and acceptable service to God, are not, through human frailty, but otherwise, for matter and manner corrupt, we see not what warrant any one hath to join with such Prayers: Mal. i. 13, 14, Secondly, When men join therein, with an insufficient Ministry, they do not only countenance them in their place and office whom the Lord hath rejected' from being his Priests, Hos. iv. 6; but also set up those idols and means of worship to edify themselves by, which God never appointed in his holy Word: Ezek. xi. 17 [xiv. 3.] But if the question be, of joining in some few select Prayers read by an able and painful Minister out of that book: as on the one side, we are very tender of imputing sin to the men that so join; so, on the other side, we are not without fear lest that such joining may be found to be ' unlawful:' unless it may appear that the Ministers with whom the people have communion in reading those Prayers, do neither give any scandal by reading of them, nor give unlawful honour to a thing abused to idolatry and superstition, nor do suffer themselves to be sinfully limited in the reading of them!" a

draw many to separation from the Sacrament, because ministered in a 'Stinted Liturgy: we cannot apprehend any just ground of this apology. The rent is wide, and some Brethren had their hands deep therein; which made us, at this present, to crave your judgments, and the reasons thereof, to make up the breach."

■ "Reply.—.. If we have not mistaken your judgment and practice both, you have borne witness against both that you call 'the rigid Separation' and this more moderate also. And we humbly wish the moderate do not degenerate unto the 'rigid' ere long. It is very strange, if they take not great encouragement upon your grounds! The truth of our ministry, churches, ordinances, and calling, is questioned; and where men will stay the Lord knoweth and what more common than that our Liturgy is unlawful because it is the device of man?' The author, or publisher at least, of a Letter against our Service Book ['A Letter lately published against Stinted Liturgies:' thus, in Ball's Friendly Trial,' p. 8, ut infra] beginneth with such like distinction. Against this Prayer Book,' saith he, divers have pleaded, in a different manner: First; Some arguments are proper to the Separatists; qua tales, namely, first, That it is offered in a False Church: secondly, By a False Minister: thirdly, In the behalf of the subjects of the

"Third and Fourth Positions: That the Children of godly and approved Christians are not to be baptized until their Parents be set Members of some Particular Congregation. That the Parents themselves, though of approved piety, are not to be received to the Lord's Supper, until they be admitted as set Members.'

"Ans. These two Positions may be maintained with one and the same defence: .. therefore, take notice, that we are not of their judgment who refuse all religious communion with such as are not Church-members; nor do we appropriate Communion, in this privilege of the Seals only to the Members of our own Churches, excluding all other Churches of Christ from the same, though they may be, through error or human frailty, defective in some matters of Order; provided that the liberty of our Churches be preserved, of receiving such satisfaction as is meet,-as well by letters of recommendation, or otherwise, if it be requisite, concerning those whom we admit unto fellowship in the Seals. For, as we account it our duty to keep 'the unity' of spirit inviolate with any in whom we discern any fruits of the Spirit,' Eph. iv. 3, so we hold ourselves bound to discharge this duty according to Order. Spiritual communion, in prayers, holy conferences, and other religious actions of like nature, we maintain with all godly persons, though they be not in church order: but church communion we hold only with Church Members; admitting to fellowship of the Seals the known and approved and orderly recommended Members of any true Church; but into fellowship of the Censures, admittance of Members, and choice of Officers, only the Members of that Particular Church

kingdom of Antichrist! These are properly theirs; being the grounds whereupon they make a total Separation from all the Churches in this Land, as no Churches of Christ. [The reader will not be misled by the use of the plural 'churches,' in this connexion; as all the parish churches comprise but one Church.] These I approve not, yet note them that ye may see upon what different grounds the same Position is maintained by several persons; and that ye may be delivered from the prejudice which hinders many from receiving those truths, because they fear the reproach of Brownism.' Secondly; There are other grounds which are common to all that plead for the purity of Christ's Ordinances, and which do not necessarily infer such Separation; but only serve to show the unlawfulness of that practice, and of our continuing therein.' . . The grounds' on which that author builds, which, he saith, are common to all that plead for the purity of God's Ordinances,' are one and the same with the 'grounds' of the Separatists: shafts taken out of the same quiver, and peculiar to them; some few Brethren only excepted, who, of late, have looked towards that opinion. See how affection will transport! . The Book, we speak of the Liturgy, so far as it is sound and good,-by your confession is no Idolothite: neither was it taken out of the Mass-book, in such sense as you object; but rather, the Mass and other idolatrous Prayers were added to it, for Popery is as a scab or leprosy cleaving to the Church; and many truths belonging to the Church, as her proper legacy, were stolen, and heaped together in that den. And why the true man may not challenge his goods wherever he finds them; or the thief plead title to the true man's goods by prescription; we know not... [This argument would seem to tend to deprive even the Church of England of her exclusive hold upon the appropriated remains of antiquity.] We have heard that you hold fellowship with professed 'rigid' Separatists, without any acknowledgement of their error, and receive them as members, or communicate with them in the privileges of the Church, though you profess you approve not their opinion or practice; and if, in godly wisdom, you can see 'grounds' to join with them, we marvel you should be so timorous in this particular!".

..

whereof they and we, any of us, stand Members. These things being premised, the Considerations whereupon our judgment and practice are swayed for administration of the Seals only to such as are in Order of a true visible Church, are these that follow.a

"First Consideration: The Seals. . are given to the Church as a privilege peculiar thereto, in ordinary dispensation. Indeed, the Preaching of the Word is not so, being an Ordinance given not only for the edifying of the Church already gathered; but, also, for the gathering of men to the Churches, that yet are without... And because there is now no universal visible Church on earth, where the Seals are dispensed; there being no place, nor time, nor officers, nor ordinances, appointed, in the New Testament, by Christ the Lord, for any such Assemblies as the Jews had under Moses: it remains, that the Christian Churches whereunto these privileges were given, are Congregational; consisting only of so many as may and do meet together ordinarily in one place.. Hence it is, that we read so much in the New Testament of the Churches,' in the plural number. . . To wind up all, seeing the Churches, in the Gospel, are Congregational, and that Baptism and the Lord's Supper, being Church privileges, belong only to the Churches,' it will follow that as city privileges belong only to citizens and their children, so Baptism and the Lord's Supper, being Church privileges, belong only to the Members of Particular Churches, and their seed and that seeing sigillum sequitur donum, to apply them to others, what is it, but to abuse them?..

"Secondly; Consider the ordinary Administration of the Seals is limited to the Ministry, and the Ministry to a Particular Church; therefore, the Seals must necessarily be proper to the Church and the Members thereof. That the Administration of the Seals is limited to their Ministry, is evident from the first institution, Matt. xxviii. 19, where God hath joined to preach,-namely, by office,—and to baptize, together; therefore we may not separate them. For howsoever, any

man may, by the appointment of the lord and master of the family, signify his mind and deliver his message from him to the family; yet the dispensing of a fit portion of food to every one of the household, is a

"Reply... Whether this be to keep the bond of the Spirit 'inviolate,' namely, to exclude from the Sacrament true visible Believers, or, known recommended Christians formerly Members of 'visible' Churches among us, and their children, because they are not Members, as you speak, 'in Church Order?' And, whether God alloweth to put this difference between Church-members of your societies and other visible Believers walking in holiness, though not admitted Members of any society according to your Church Order,' as to receive the one, though Members of another society, unto the Seals, and to debar the other and their children? These are the things to be considered in these present Positions.".. b"Reply... The distinct Churches, mentioned in the New Testament, it is not certain that they were congregational societies, 'consisting only of so many as might and did meet together ordinarily in one place, at one time, for the public worship of God and their own edification.' And if this were granted, it would not carry the weight that was laid upon it.". . [It is not possible, how desirable soever, that room can be afforded for even a quarter of the matter which ten pages quarto, supply upon this consideration alone: nothing but impossibility precludes, therefore, the insertion of what should otherwise appear here. From what is given, the manner of the Replier may be judged of. This intimation will serve for subsequent omissions.]

branch of the steward's office. Indeed the keys' are given to the whole Church, yet the exercise and dispensation of them, in this as well as in other particulars, is concredited to the Ministers, who are called to be okovóμoi μvsníwv Oɛou' 1 Cor. iv. 1. And no Churchoffice can be orderly performed by any but one that is called thereunto; nor will God vouchsafe his presence and blessing,-whereupon all spiritual efficacy depends,-in an ordinance dispensed, but when it is dispensed by those whom he hath ordained and appointed thereunto. That the Ministry is limited to the Church, appears as from evident texts of Scripture,-Acts xiv. 23; Col. iv. 17; 1 Pet. v. 2; Acts xx. 28, -so, also, upon this ground, The office is founded in the relation between the Church and the Officer; wherefore, take away the relation and the office, and the work ceaseth: for where he hath not power he may not do an act of power; and he hath no power where he hath not a relation by office. Herein the proportion holdeth between an officer of a Town-corporation and of a Church, that as the power of the former is only within his own corporation, so the power of the latter is confined to his own congregation."

"Consideration the Third: Circumcision and the Passover were to be administered only to the Members of the Church: ergo, Baptism and the Lord's Supper are so to be administered also. The consequence is made good by the parity of these ordinances. For, if the argument hold strong, for the proof of Pædobaptism, which is taken from the circumcision of infants; why may we not as well infer a necessity of Church-membership to Baptism, from the necessity of it to Circumcision? And, that Circumcision was peculiar to the Members of the Church, may appear, in that persons circumcised, and only they, might eat the Passover, Exod. xii. 48; and they only might enter into the Temple, Ezek. xliv. 7; which were the privileges of Church-members. . . Circumcision was not administered to all that were under the Covenant of Grace, which all Believers were; but only such of them as joined themselves to the Church; at first, in Abrahain's family: whereunto Baptism doth so far answer, that the Apostle counteth these expressly equivalent to be circumcised' in Christ, with circumcision made with hands; and to be buried' with Christ in baptism,'

"Reply.- . . The first institution' of Baptism is not contained in that passage, Matt. xxviii. 19, but confirmed. That God will not vouchsafe his presence and blessing' to an ordinance, but when it is dispensed by those whom he hath ordained and appointed thereunto,' must be warily understood, or it may occasion errors and distractions not a few! .. Feed the flock of God,' saith Peter; but he speaks of all those dispersed Churches to whom he writes, which he calls a chosen generation, a royal priesthood,' 'a peculiar people,' 1 Pet. ii. 9 and in some respect of reason, under which we may apprehend them one 'flock, but not really as combined under the same pastor, or meeting in one place.".. [The Replier had overlooked, that Baptism was then "first" instituted to be performed, "In the Name, &c." He is singularly infelicitous in his comment; which may help to make what we are constrained to omit, the less regretted. Who, on looking at the passages he has adduced, can agree in his interpretation of Peter's words? Chap. v. verse 1, of the First Epistle, contains the words τοὺς ἐν ὑμῖν . and verse 2, τὸ ἐν ὑμῖν. Here Peter has certainly descended from generals to particulars, which limitation is strengthened in verse 3, by the words τῶν κλήρων.]

Col. ii. 11, 12. Indeed, in some things, they differ, as only the males were circumcised; whereas, with us, females are also baptized: the reason is, because God hath limited circumcision to the males; but under the Gospel that difference is taken away. Again; circumcision was administered in the private family; but baptism only in the public assemblies of the Church: the reason of this difference is because they were bound to circumcise the males on the eighth day;' but that could not stand with going to the Temple, which was too far off, for the purpose, to bring every child thither from all parts of Judea: .. nor had they always opportunity of a solemn convention in the Synagogue on every eighth day,' when some child or other might be to be circumcised. But there is no precise day set down for Baptism, nor are opportunities of public assemblies so remote, where Churches are kept in a Congregational frame, but that every first day of the week,' Acts xx. 7, Baptism may be administered if it be required. Again: for the aforesaid reason, Circumcision required not a peculiar Minister, for ought we find in Scripture; but it is not so in Baptism; as was showed in the Second Commandment.' " But no good reason can be given why, in this, they should not both agree, namely, That they are both to be dispensed only to Members of the visible Church: as it hath been proved, in the First Consideration.'"

"Consideration the Fourth: They that are not capable of the Church Censures, are not capable of the Church Privileges: but they that are not within Church Covenant are not capable of Church Censures; ergo, the Proposition is evident. The assumption may be proved, 1 Cor. v. 12. Now to be without,' is not only the case of heathen and excommunicants, but of some Believers also, who, though by internal union with Christ they are within the Covenant of Grace, yet being not joined externally to the visible Body of Christ-a Particular Church, are, in regard of visible Church-communion, said to be 'without.' To this purpose is this text alleged by other divines also." ["As Dr. Aines, Conscience; with the Power and Cases thereof.' Bk. iv. ch. xxiv. q. 1, a. 5," where, That a Believer is bound "to join himself to some certain Particular Church ?" He answers, "Yes, . . in respect of our profession; because otherwise it cannot be avoided but that those signs will hardly be discerned whereby Believers are distinguished from Unbelievers: 1 Cor. v. 12."]

"Consideration the Fifth: We may add hereunto, . . the evil and

* “Reply.—. . Baptism is not tied to 'the first day of the week;' and the Jews might gather an assembly on the eighth day' as occasion required; and it might be appropriate to the Priests and Levites, though done in private. But in whatsoever they agree or differ, we must look to the institution, and neither stretch it wider nor draw it narrower than the Lord hath made it. . . We must affirm nothing but what God hath taught us; and as he hath taught us!" [The Replier travels out of the bounds, here, as elsewhere, to combat the arguments of the New Englanders, through animadversions on the arguments of other individuals; and so here, p. 40, John Davenport is the party really aimed at, though he had not gone to settle in New England till the year 1637, the same year in which the Letter from "Old England" is dated, and this controversy was thus begun.]

b"Reply... In phrase of Scripture, 'heretics' themselves are 'within' the Church; 1 John ii. 19; 1 Cor. xi. 19."