sent of the brethren admitted; but those who failed to exhibit good evidence of piety, were rejected. III. The church, in the primitive age, was a religious society, or a voluntary association of persons for religious purposes. Its members were united by some agreement or covenant, expressed or implied, that they would regard the instructions and precepts of Christ, and observe the ordinances of his religion. They "first gave their own selves to the Lord, and to one another by the will of God." Hence the primitive church is spoken of, as a body, a building, a household, a commonwealth-terms implying a definite and most intimate union. Tertullian describes the church in his day, as "a body united for the conscientious performance of religious duties, by an agreement in discipline, and a covenant of hope."* The primitive churches, constituted in this way, had all the powers and rights pertaining to other voluntary associations. They had the power of deliberating, and acting upon any subject that might properly come before them. They had the power of admitting and excluding members. They had the power of choosing their own officers; and this power they exercised even in the presence of the apostles. (Acts i. 23. vi. 3-5.) They also had the power, and they exercised it, of holding and managing their own property. The apostle, speaking of widows, says, "If any who believe, have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged;"-a form of expression which implies that the church had funds, which it disposed of at discretion. (1 Tim. v. 16.) The church at Jerusalem, was, early, in the possession of property to a considerable amount. It held the property of all its members. For "as many among them, as were possessors of lands, or houses, sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet." The church had the possession and control of this property; and not even a heathen government would interfere to take it from them. We now pass to a consideration of the Congregational churches of Massachusetts, which were intended to be formed after the model of the apostles. On these we remark, I. There have been churches in Massachusetts, distinct from towns, parishes, or any other mere civil incorporations, from the first settlement of the country.-The early existence of Congregational churches in Massachusetts is not denied; but it is pretended, on no less authority than that of the Supreme Judges of the Commonwealth, that, at the first, "there was no very familiar distinction between the church, and the whole assembly of Christians in the town." Almost, if not quite all, the adult inhabitants were church members;" and there was "little practical distinction be * Apol. ad Gen. cap. xxxix. tween church and congregation, or parish, or society, for several years after our ancestors came here.* In reply to this, let it be observed, there is no evidence that nearly all the first settlers of this country were members of the church. Doubtless, people were then more generally members than they now are, or perhaps have been, at any period since. But all were not members, and, in some places, not even a majority were such. The company who commenced the Massachusetts settlement, consisted of three hundred and fifty persons. From these, the first church in the colony was gathered, after their landing, in Salem, and numbered only thirty communicants;-leaving three hundred and twenty who were not of the church.† The church in Boston commenced with but four members. The church in Newtown, (now Cambridge) consisted at the first, of only eight members. Thomas Lichford, "a discontented attorney," who visited this country in 1637, and returned much dissatisfied with his reception and treatment, says, "Most of the persons at New England are not admitted of their church, and therefore are not freemen."§ Doubtless some allowance is to be made in receiving the testimony of this man; but in 1646, the number of those not connected with the churches in Massachusetts and Plymouth was so great, that they petitioned the courts of both colonies, and afterwards the British Parliament, praying, as they say, in behalf of " thousands," that the disabilities under which they labored, might be removed. The testimonies here cited are sufficient to shew, that there were many in Massachusetts from the first, who were not connected with the churches. But supposing this were not the case-supposing all, or nearly all the early settlers were members of the church; how does this prove that they did not distinguish between church and town, or between their ecclesiastical and civil capabilities and rights. For a church and a town are entirely distinct bodies—as distinct almost as heaven and earth-even though they may include precisely the same individuals. They are distinct in their nature and constitution. The one is a civil body; the other an ecclesiastical body. The one is formed for the better enjoying of civil privileges and rights; the other, for the better performing of religious duties. The one looks directly to the affairs of this world; the other, to things pertaining to the life to come. This radical distinction between their civil and ecclesiastical state was well understood by our pious ancestors. Their charter constituted them "a body corporate and politic;" their covenant with God and with one another, constituted such of them as consented to it, an ecclesiastical community. The one they derived from their temporal * Mass. Term Reports, V. XVI. pp. 498, 514. + Neal, V. II. pp. 229, 230. Morton's Memorial, p. 160. || Winthrop, V. I. PP, 26, 451. sovereign; the other from the King of heaven. When they assembled in town meeting, they acted in their civil capacity; but when in church meeting, in an ecclesiastical capacity. Their civil officers, governors, assistants, &c. were not chosen in a meeting of the church; nor were their church officers chosen in a meeting of the town. Their colonial laws were not church regulations; nor were their church regulations the laws of the land. To be sure, owing to their strictly and fervently religious character, our ancestors were wont to carry religion, more or less, into all their business and concerns. They endeavored to act every where under its influence, and with a view to its interests. Still, they understood the distinction between church and state, and they maintained it broad and palpable. If any doubt this, let them read the seventeenth chapter of the Cambridge Platform, in which the different powers of the church and of the magistrate are perhaps as clearly defined, as they have ever been since. In opposition to the doctrine, that, in the early settlement of Massachusetts, there was no practical distinction between church and town, but all who inhabited within the same parochial limits, and assembled for worship in the same place, were regarded as members of the same church, we have the most decisive testimony, from ecclesiastical writers of that age. NORTON, who emigrated in 1635, and was settled first at Ipswich, and afterwards at Boston.-" The form of a church is constituted, not by cohabitation, or by meeting in the same place for public worship; because Turks, and Papists, and heretics may inhabit the parish, and meet in the same place of worship; not by a profession without a covenant; not by baptism;-therefore by covenant."* HOOKER, who emigrated in 1633, and was settled first at Newtown, and afterwards in Connecticut.-" Parish precincts, or the abode and dwelling within the bounds and liberties of such a place, cannot give a man a right, or make him matter fit for a visible church. If parish precincts should have a right to church fellowship, then Atheists, Papists, Turks, and profane ones, who are enemies to the truth and church, yea, men of strange nations and language, who neither know, nor be able to do, the duties of church members, should be fit matter for a church, because they have abode in such places."+ DAVENPORT, who emigrated in 1637, and was settled first at New Haven, and afterwards at Boston." This is not sufficient to make one a visible member of this or that church, that he is joined to it in hearty affection, or in a neighborhood of habitation, or in an ordinary hearing of the word preached among them."‡ * Responsio, p. 22. + Survey of Chih. Discipline, pp. 13, 14. Power of Cong. Churches, p. 28. CAMBRIDGE PLATFORM, adopted in 1648. That which constitutes a church is "not cohabitation. Atheists and Infidels may dwell together with believers."* Farther evidence will be adduced in support of the point here under consideration, by shewing, II. That the Congregational churches of Massachusetts consisted, at the first, of such, and only such, as made an open profession of their faith, and entered into a solemn covenant with God and with one another, to obey the precepts, and observe the ordinances of the Christian religion. In this way were constituted the Independent or Congregational churches of England and Holland, from which those of Massachusetts originated. The church of the celebrated Mr. Robinson of Leyden, was formed in the North of England, in 1602. The members "entered into covenant to walk with God, and one with another, in the enjoyment of his ordinances, according to the primitive pattern in the word of God."+-The first proper Congregational church in England was formed by a Mr. Jacob, a disciple and particular friend of Robinson, in 1616. The members, standing together, joined hands, and solemnly covenanted with each other, in the presence of Almighty God."-"It was a practice of the Independents," says the editor of Neal, "at the first formation of their churches, to sign an agreement or covenant, which they entered on their church books." That this was the way in which the churches of Massachusetts were originally constituted, we offer the following decisive testimony. COTTON, who emigrated in 1633, and was settled in Boston."The church of God is a mystical body, whereof Christ is the head, and the members are saints, called out of the world, and united together by holy covenant. Such, and such only, are lawfully received as members, who do, before the Lord and his people, profess their repentance and faith in Christ, and subjection to him in his ordinances."|| NORTON. "A particular church is a meeting of the faithful, united by a visible covenant, for maintaining the faith and ordinances of the Gospel." DAVENPORT. "It is the will and appointment of Christ our Lord, that his churches, under the New Testament, be constituted by the public and mutual covenanting of the saints with one anothand with the Lord."T er, CAMBRIDGE PLATFORM. "A Congregational church, is, by the institution of Christ, a part of the visible church militant, consisting of a company of saints by calling, united into one body by a Chap. iv. | Cotton on Holiness, p. 1. Responsio, p. 22. † Morton's Memorial, p. 17. holy covenant, for the public worship of God, and the mutual edification of one another in the fellowship of the Gospel.”* DR. INCREASE MATHER, Son of Richard Mather, who emigra ted in 1635. "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. The form of a church is a covenant, or agreement to walk together in the observation of all the ordinances of the Lord Jesus Christ."+ If farther evidence were necessary, as to the manner in which the first Congregational churches in Massachusetts were constituted, we might cite hundreds of church covenants, to which all who became members expressed their assent. The following is from the covenant of the oldest church in the colony, drawn up by Mr. Higginson the teacher, in 1629, and literally subscribed by all the members. "We covenant with our Lord, and one with another. We bind ourselves, in the presence of God, to walk together in all his ways, according as he is pleased to reveal himself to us in his blessed word of truth. We avouch the Lord to be our God, and ourselves to be his people, in the truth and simplicity of our spirits." original church of "In the name of our will, and divine The following is from the covenant of the Christ in Boston, organized Aug. 27, 1630. Lord Jesus Christ, and in obedience to his holy ordinance-we, whose names are underwritten, desiring to unite in one congregation or church, under the Lord Jesus Christ our Head, in such sort as becometh all those whom he hath redeemed, and sanctified to himself, do hereby, solemnly and religiously, as in his most holy presence, promise and bind ourselves to walk in all our ways according to the rule of the Gospel, and in all sincere conformity to his holy ordinances." The church at Watertown was organized July 30, 1630, when "forty men subscribed a church covenant."|| In 1635, a church was formed at Newtown, in place of the one which had previously removed, with Mr. Hooker, to Connecticut; when "such as were to join made confession of their faith, and declared what work of grace the Lord had wrought in them. Then the covenant was read, and they all gave a solemn assent to it."¶ We might proceed with evidence of this sort, but we must think it unnecessary. It cannot and will not be disputed, that the original churches of Massachusetts consisted of such only, as made a credible profession of their faith, and entered into a solemn covenant, to obey the precepts and observe the ordinances of the Christian religion.-Between churches constituted in this way, and * Chap. ii. + Disquisition concerning Councils, p. 6. p. 230. Emerson's History, p. 11. |