An answer to W.R. his narration of the opinions and practises of the churches lately erected in Nevv-England.: Vindicating those Godly and orthodoxall churches, from more then an hundred imputations fathered on them and their church way, by the said W.R. in his booke. Wherein is plainely proved, 1. That the grounds of his narration are sandie and insufficient. 2. That the maner of his handling it, unloving and irregular. 3. That the matter of it, ful of grosse mistakes & divers contradictions. 4. That the quotations extremely wrested, and out of measure abused. 5. That his marginall notes impertinent and injurious. / By Thomas Welde, Pastour of the Church of Roxborough in Nevv-England. This is licensed and entred according to order.

Answer to CHAP. IIII.

HE saith, (Art. 1. 2. 6. 7.) That we account a publike vocall and expresse Covenant — to be the onely absolute necessary constituting forme of a true

Church, without which no true Church nor true members, but all 〈…〉〈…〉 concubine••.

* 1.1He utterly mistakes the subject of the question, for those Authors hee quotes, declare not what it is that makes a TRVE Church, but a ••V•••• congregationall Church, as it is refined according to the platforme of the Gospel: And to such a Church, (say they) is required an explicite Cove∣nant. And that they doe intend only such a Church, is plaine.

1. Because there are in the description of that Church they meane, such particulars (as himselfe layes it downe, Art. 6.) as can belong only to a pure Church, as, 1 That they walke in all the holy ordinances of God; 2 Accor∣ding to the will of God; 3 In one Congregation. All which (wee know) every Church (though true) doth not, (ergo.)

2. If wee hold that to every true Church this explicite Covenant is ne∣cessary, for the constituting of it, then we should denie the Churches of En (for in them is not such an explicite solemne publique Church Covenant) to bee true Churches: but that is farre from us, as Discourse of Covenant. p. 36. 37. 38. ergo.

3. The expresse words of Answer to 32. quest. 38. 39. (from which he quotes this 1 Article) (if consulted with) will tell you that a pure Church is the Church intended. Therefore it's cleare, when we make such a Cove∣nant (as W. R. expresseth) necessary, it is, to a Church, as it's compleated in all her integrals according to the perfection required in the Gospel, and not to the essence of every Church.

This one thing being cleared, what will now become of all his Marginal collections, exclamations, insultations on the 1. 3. 8. Art. Hee cryes out of our unheard of rigidnesse, as if we would touch the freehold of the Churches of England, and all the Churches in the world. But all his invectives are as ar∣rowes shot into the aire; for we hold no such thing as he exclaimes at.

[unspec II] We hold (saith he) That without this solemne expresse Covenant, no true Church or Church members, but all are harlots and concubines, Art. 1. (the quo∣tes Discourse of Covenant, page 14. 18, 19 20, 21, 24. to prove it.

[Answ.] From what wee last said this falls to the ground as false. I say further, (Blessed be our God) wee never were acquainted with such Dialect in out Churches there, we hope such sore censures are and shall be farre from us. And for the quotations hee makes for these words, (I marvaile his paper blushed not when he wrote it, because himselfe did not, for) let any man [unspec III] reade over the pages as wee have done, and see if one can bee found so much as savoring of such a thing.

[unspec IIII] He reports (Article 1.) that we hold that members are united to Christ by the Church Covenant.* 1.2

1. A Paradox we never knew before, or ever heard of in New-England; for wee professe freely wee know no meane or instrument of union to Christ, but faith in the Covenant of grace.

2. This is a device of his owne braine, for which we boldly againe chal∣lenge him as being a thing not possibly to be proved in any of our quoted writings in print, let him (if he be able) prove himselfe honest by making it good, or confesse his fault (as becomes a Christian;) we professe our hearts are justly grieved at this dealing, and the Spirit of Christ in heaven also is (we feare) made sad hereby.

3. In this also he contradicts his owne relation Art. 3. where he plainly saith, that many that be within the Church Covenant are not in the Covenant of Grace (and so not in Christ;) and yet here he saith, that by the Church Cove∣nant a man is united to Christ. So the Church Covenant doth unite us to Christ, and it doth not unite to Christ; how can both these be true? This is too frequent with him, to lay things that are contradictory to our charge; and not a word of proofe from the Authors, as any ground of it. This I lay on him as a further charge.

He reports Art. 2. That we hold, that joyning our selves in all holy fellowship, [unspec IIII] cannot knit a man as a member of a Church. And quotes Dis. of Cov. pag. 21. for his proofe.

1. The Authour hath not one word to beare him out.

2. We wonder what the man meanes to affirmes this; [Answ.] for [joyning ones selfe in holy fellowship] (he knowes) is our usuall and frequent description of the Church Covenant, when wee speake most punctually to it,* 1.3 and doe commonly for that end, cite Jer. 50.5. Act. 9.26.

3. That very Authour, and page, he cites to prove, we hold, that joyning our selves in holy fellowship cannot knit a man as a member in Covenant; speakes directly the contrary, in these words. When joyning, (saith the Authour) is used for a mans taking on him voluntarily a new relation, (as in this case hee doth) there it alwaies implies a Covenant.

In Art. 3. and 4. he would make as though we our selves speak contrary [unspec V] to our selves, in the one place (he saith) we hold our Church Covenant to be distinct from the Covenant of Grace: in the other place, That it is not distinct, but as a part from the whole. But we must digest grosser things then this in his narrations: consult with his Author, and you shall see nothing to countenance him; yea he quotes the same Authors for both.

In Art. 7. He tells us, We hold our Church Covenant must be v••call: but [unspec VI] proves it not by any one testimony, wee can reade, and its contrary (wee are sure) to our constant practise that admits members into the Church by a Covenant agreed to by their silence only: and as it is contrary to our practise, so to our writing in the discourse of the Covenant, which ex∣pressly saith, that silent consent is sufficient, and there proves it by Gen. 17.7. and Deut. 29.10.

Whereas hee had reported before of our rigorous exacting of our Cove∣nant, [unspec VII] and how it must be vocall, and expresse, or it would not serve our turne, nay,

no Churches at all without this explicit Covenant, &c. Now in Art. 8. he puls downe all he hath built, and tells us that we hold that a bare consent and a∣greement to be members will serve; And that mens implicit intentions to doe such a thing may suffice.

* 1.4Hee grosly falsifies his Authour brought to prove this minsing of the Covenant, Discourse of Covenant. p. 21. 22. where is not one word that way, and (which much aggravates) he still quotes the very same Author, and p. for our minsing of the Covenant, that he did (in Art 1.) for our ri∣gorous exacting of it.

2. He slandereth us, to make the world beleeve we run contrary waies, sometimes by over rigorous exacting the Covenant: sometimes againe, that (af∣ter all our rigour) we bring it so low, almost to nothing: whereas in all our wri∣tings (I professe it solemnly) there is no shew at all of any such differing practise.

3. Hence also, the ground being rotten, his Marginall construction falls on his owne head.

* 1.54. Hee doth not only abuse his Authour and us, but himselfe also, who said in Cap. 1. Art. 2. That New-England Churches walke in the same way without any materiall difference; and yet this is the third time he hath taxed us for grosly differing from our selves: How can these things be? See how many grosse faulterings in one poore article, what are in all his book?

[unspec VIII] He sets downe two of the formes of the Church Covenants which any savory and gratious spirit viewing over, and surveighing the godly sim∣plicity of them, cannot (one would! thinke) but approve and relish: yet see this mans spirit (so prejudiced against us and all things wee doe,) that he cannot choose, but (without reason) finde fault with divers innocent passages therein; As 1 That wee promise willingly and meekely to submit to Christian Discipline without murmuring.

2. That we willingly will doe nothing to the offence of the Church, but bee wil∣ling to take advice for our selves and ours, as occasion shall be presented.

3. That we will not be forward in the congregation to shew our owne parts and gifts in speaking or scrupling nor discover the failings of our brethren.

* 1.6Now what spirit (but W. R.) would startle, scoffe, and quarrell (as hee doth in his marginalls.) pag. 17. 18. 19. at such plaine-hearted and found expressions as these, being all clearely grounded on Scripture?

He is angry with us also, that we mention not (in our Covenants) more par∣ticular sinnes and duties then we doe, and yet is offended that wee mention a∣ny at all; how shall we please him?

* 1.7He tells us againe, that the former of these Covenants is us fit for wedding as the constitution of a visible Church.

[unspec X] And then flies from New-England to some particular Persons here, who

being Ministers of Churches there (saith he) yet accept of settled imployments, even charge of soules here, and how can they watch over their Church?

I know but two Ministers of the Churches there, [Answ.] that are in England at this time, and how far both those are from setled imployment, much more from taking livings (as these words [charge of soules] imply) God, their owne consciences, and the people (to whom they at present preach) can testifie (little to the comfort and credit of any that thus slaunder them, I advise him to reflect upon his words, and see if there be not somthing in them to be repented of, and recalled.

But how can such (so far distant) watch over their Church; and é contrà. [Object.]

That hand of Providence, that, upon weighty causes, and with their [Answ.] peoples consent, first led them hither, and upon like necessary grounds (beyond expectation) still detains them here, takes them off at present from performing that duty of watchfulnesse over their people,* 1.8 as in like manner it doth to other Persons, that are absent from their Families and Churches by long sea-voyages, warres, &c.

And yet note, that W. R. is the more blamable in these carpings at the Covenants mentioned, because he is convinced in his conscience (as his own words are, Pag. 17.)

1. That all things in those two formes of the Covenant (in a faire constructi∣on) [are very good.]

2. That if any other interpretation be made of any thing therein, it is no better then [an harsh constuction.] It is not without a speciall finger of God, that himselfe should first commend, the matter of the Cove∣nants; to be very good; and blame any other construction that should be made of it, as harsh. And yet should imediately, in his very next words, fall upon such harsh constructions in sundry particulars, as he hath done.

He reports in Art. 11. as strange and grosse an untruth (to call it by the fairest terme) and that without any ground at all: i. e. That we hold [that this our Church Covenant (as it is distinguished from the covenant of Grace) is that Covenant which is sealed by the Sacraments, and for the sealing and ratify∣ing of which the Sacraments were principally ordained of God.]

I stand amazed at this report, wherein these 4. things lie plaine, [Ans.] which he must prove, we hold.

1. That our Church-Covenant is that covenant which is sealed by both Sacraments.

2. That this Church Covenant, (thus distinguished from the covenant of Grace) is sealed by the Sacraments.

3. That the sealing of this Church Covenant was the end of Gods or∣daining the Sacraments.

4. The principall end. W. R. Now prove all these, else you will prove your selfe unfaithfull.

All his proofe we can see is Ans. to 9. Pos. p. 63. 66. I'le relate the ve∣ry words, that he may have nothing to alleadge. [Baptisme (saith the Au∣thor) serves to seale to our Justification, as circumcision did; yet not that alone, but also the whole covenant (i. e. of Grace) with all the priviledges, as Adoption, Act. 2.38. and sanctification, Gal. 3.26.27. Tit. 3.5. fellowship with Christ, Tit. 3.5. The salvation of our Soules, Mat. 20.23. and the resurrection of our Bo∣dies, 1 Pet. 3.21. and not only the covenant of Grace, which is common to all be∣leevers, but Church covenant also, which is peculiar to confederates, according to 1 Cor. 2.15.29.]

Now here is not said, that the Church Covenant is [the thing] sealed, much lesse the principall end of this ordaining the Sacraments, least of all that the Church Covenant (as distinguished from the covenant of Grace) is the principall end of the Sacraments; but all that is said, is this, that though Justification and the whole Covenant of Grace be the principall things sealed in their circumcision, and our Baptism, yet all the priviledges of the covenant of Grace, and the Church covenant also are not without their share and benefit in the Sacrament. How far this expression comes short of his assertion, let others judge.

Now see his marginal note upon this Art. [Here is (saith this commen∣ter) a peece or two of such Divinitie, as I never read, but Ʋno absurdo dato mille sequuntur I could resort, Here is such an absurd foysting in of untruths as I never hardly read in Heathen or Christ••an writers: and having taken libertie in a few things at first now they come in by troopes. As he hath had ve∣ry ill successe hitherto all the chapter through, let us see if he will speed a∣ny better at the last close.

[unspec XI] He saith Art. 12. Infants that were admitted Members by the covenant of their Parents, are not yet permitted to receive the Lords Supper, when they are come to yeeres, untill, 1. They have run through all the foresaid course of publike, & private examination, 2. Profession of their faith, 3. Declaration of the manner of their confession. 4. Personall, vocall, and expresse entering into the same cove∣nant as others of yeers have done before them, and as if they never had beene made Members before.

And for this practise he cites only Ans. to 32. q. p. 20. 21.

How he deales herein, see that place. If there be not more in his pro∣mises, then are in his proofe. All that the Author saith is this, That there ought to be a renewing of their covenant, or a new profession of their interest in the covenant, and walking according to it; and professeth modestly too, these are but their present thoughts not settled determinatively, for want of occasion to bring it into practise, yet he brings him in, as speaking conclusively; and with a lumber of additions, deviations, alterations of his own putting in, for where is now his running through all the foresaid courses of private and publike examination (he mentions) where is his declaraition of the manner of

their conversion? Where is his personall, vocall and expresse entering intr the same covenant, as if they had never beene received Members before? Whose words are all these? Nay, the Author expresly tells us, that children are entered in∣to Church covenant already, and doe but renew their covenant, and he saith they must enter in afresh, as if they had never yet beene received at all.

This we must tell him, is not faire dealing, and what will now become of his marginall note upon the Article so mistaken?

Many other collections (besides what we have answered to already) he makes in his marginall notes on this chapter, by way of objection against us, which deserve a little answering: as,

In his margent to Article 2. A strange yet bold assertion (saith he▪) [unspec I] spoken—without good show of reason: but what is this bold assertion? That Job and Melchisedec were no Members of the visible Church.

I intreat the Reader to see if his Authors quoted for these words, [Answ.] will beare him out in these [bold] accusations of us or no: All that Ans. to 34 37. saith is this. We make no question of the salvation of Job and his friends, yet it is a great question whether they were of any visible Church or no, (and gives his reason) seeing the visible Church in those times seemed to be appropriated to the posterity of Abraham, &c. of whose line it cannot easily be proved that all these men did come. And all the other cited Author (Cns. to 9. Pos. 66.) saith, is this. We no where read (there is this reason) that Milchisedec, Job and his four friends were circumcised, neither doe we believe they were: Now see whether 1. we say and conclude, that these holy men were in no Church, 2. if we boldly assert it, 3. without good shew of reason, 4. if there needs a margi∣nall confutation.

He saith, that Baptisme, though it doth not really admit infants into the visi∣ble [unspec II] Church, yet formally it doth, &c.

He speakes besides the point, for the question is, not 1. [Answer.] What doth for∣mally and in the ceremony, but really, admit Members: 2. not Infants but men of yeers: 3. not into the visible Church, but a particular congregation; so he might have spared this labour, which makes nothing for him, or a∣gainst us.

To his long Margent to the 3. Article, wherein he grants a covenant in [unspec III] a four-fold sense, but denies and inveys against the strictnesse of our Church covenant, I should have answered, but because he builds all upon a grosse mistake (which was answered already in Article 1.) i. e. that we make this vocall and expresse covenant necessarily for that constituting of a true Church, and say that all societies are whores and Concubines without it (a speech abhorted of us) I passe it by, and tell him that what he builds upon such rotten foundations, will ruere mole suâ.

He makes foure false suppositions, and then drawes sundry conclusions [unspec IIII] of his own from them, and so fights with his own shadow, pag. 15. 16.

As first that we hold the Church Covenant is the Covenant of grace.

2. That in our Church Covenant we hold it necessary and a thing essentiall to the Covenant, to make repetition of the whole covenant of grace.

3. That our covenanting to performe duties to our owne Church hinders our communion with, and care of all other Churches: Which things being nothing so, but meere mistakes, all his collections from them vanish in the aire.

4. That some men doe enter into this Covenant, and yet are unsatisfied, that it is a way of God, and so cannot safely engage themselves by this covenant. Which also (being a meere fancie of his owne) I passe by.

[unspec V] The next is as strange as weake, p. 17 i. e. That if we have a set fo•••••• of a Church-covenant imposed upon all that enter into the Church,* 1.9 and this read in a booke, why may we not as well have a set forme of Prayer and leiturgie to be read in Churches?

* 1.10The Narratour shewes still a good minde to set formes, it is the third time he hath been harping on this string.

First, for Overtures and shewes in members, then for set and standing rules (or formes) in admissions, now for set formes of prayer, and that in Churches, are to be read also in a booke. He was hard driven for arguments, else he would never have produced this as a ground for set formes of prayer in Churches. For (he might know) there is a large breadth of difference betwixt a Cove∣nant and a prayer. For 1 the one is presented to God himselfe only. The other to man also.

2. The severall Articles and all branches of the one had neede bee cer∣tainely knowne and agreed on beforehand, that they may punctually and deliberately know what the particulars are they engage themselves to God in; no such ground for our Petitions in prayer.

3. The one had neede to bee written for remembrance, lest we should forget, (in tract of time) what the severall branches were we bound our selves unto, according to Jer. 50.5. [A perpetuall Covenant not to bee forgotten.] I know no such ground for our Petitions in Prayer, nay it is impossible to doe it.

4. Set formes of prayer are a stinting of the Spirit, who hath promised to enlarge our spirits, by helping our infirmities in prayer, as well in mat∣ter as manner, in What, as well as How to Pray. Rom. 8.26. Wee know no such promise for extemporary assistance in the matter and forme of a Covenant.

5. Reading prayer in a booke hinders the affection (which is one prin∣cipall thing in prayer,) but our maine worke, whiles the Covenant (which we take) is rehearsing, is attention, judgment, consideration, all which are not hindred, but much furthered and helped by distinct reading of it.

6. By reading of a set forme of prayer in the Church, the Ministers gifts (which Christ hath given him for that end. Eph. 4.8.11.) are obscured, and

in great degree buryed, and the presenting to God the several and continu∣all necessities of the congregation extreamely hindred and restrained: Neither of which are done by a set forme of a Covenant agreed unto, and read at the taking of it.

7. We have expresse warrant in Scripture for a forme of words and writing of a Covenant, (w^ch is the very thing we are blamed for) see (Neh. 9.38. And because of all this we make a sure Covenant, and write it & seale to it. And Nehem. 10.29. to the end of the chap. there are set downe the ex∣presse Articles, forme and words of the Covenant that was written and subscribed and sealed by them. Let him shew us the like warrant in the word for a Liturgie or set forme of booke prayer for a congregation. I much wonder that a grave learned man, (especiall in such reforming times as these should so farre forget himselfe as to make such parallels, and talke still of Liturgies.

He saith 1. in this Marginall, that the Church imposeth that set forme of Covenant (invented by one or more) upon all the Members of that Church.

Hee reports in the 9. Article (to which this Marginall belongs,) That [unspec VI] the Covenant is ever in one and the same forme of words, as well as matter, in the same Church.

Both which are great mistakes. 1 To the former, [Answ.] though the forming of the Covenant be the worke of some one or two at first, for how can it otherwise be? yet it is never imposed on any, but all that are to enter into Covenant have full liberty to consider and consult about the matter, or forme of it, or give reasons for addition or alteration of any thing in it. So that the forme of it, as well as the matter, is by his owne act or consent at least; and after all, if hee hath not light and ground, he is (in no case) forced to it. If this be so, he should not have called it an imposing of the co∣venant upon the members.

2. The other is mistaken likewise. For any Church hath and taketh liberty as they shall see just cause (if there be a defect or error in the matter or forme of their Covenant made at first) to alter it, and renew it before the Lord, and bind not themselves to continue in any oversight, because they once fell into it: and some Churches have so done.

But w•• may here see what a taske W. R. hath undertaken to make Nar∣ratives of Church-courses in such places, where himselfe never came, but rests upon uncertaine and various relations; This is one reason why he so often stumbles in the darke, and rusheth upon so many foule mistakes in every Chapter. I hope it will instruct him for future times. Semel in∣sanivimus omnes.

Notes

• * 1.1

  ••sw.
• * 1.2

  ☞
• * 1.3

  ☞
• * 1.4

  ••sw. 1.
• * 1.5

  ☞
• * 1.6

  ☞
• * 1.7

  ☞
• * 1.8

  ☜
• * 1.9

  ☞
• * 1.10

  ••sw.