"when the churches in New England believed, there was clear Scripture proof for the practice we plead for; par ticularly that Scripture, Psal. xl. 10; I have not hidden thy righteousness from the great congregation; and that Psal. lxvi. 16; Come and hear all ye, that fear God, and I will declare what he has done for my soul. And that Scripture, 1st Pet. iii. 15; Be ready always to give an answer to every man, that asks you a reason of the hope, that is in you, does by just consequence intimate as much as we assert."-See also the Platform, chap. xii.

(2) And, in the second place, the practice is in agreement with what was done in primitive times. When it was first introduced and insisted on by the Congregationalists, it was even then no new thing, as some seemed to suppose. Justin Martyr, who lived an hundred and fifty years after Christ, says, in his Second Apology for the Christians, That they examined such as were admitted to their communion, whether they were able to conform themselves in all things to the word and will of God. The language of Cyprian, in his third Epistle, is, Mihi labor est persuadere fratribus ut recipiendis consentiant, vix plebi persuadeo, ut tales patiantur admitti; qui nec cum vera pœnitentia venerant; as much as to say, he found it difficult to persuade the brethren of the churches to consent to the admission of persons to their com

to the government and discipline of the churches, he wrote a work, entitled, The First Principles of New England, a Discourse concerning the subject of Baptism and the communion of Churches, printed in 1675; Renewal of Covenant, the duty of Decaying and Distressed Churches, printed in 1677; A Dissertation wherein the Strange Doctrine of Mr. Stoddard is refuted, 1708; A Disquisition concerning Ecclesiastical Councils, 1716; A Testimony to the Order of the Churches, 1720. He was a member of the Synod of 1679, and drew up the Result of that Synod and the Preface to it,

munion, provided they had any suspicion of their offering themselves without true repentance.

(3) And, furthermore, this practice, so clearly sanctioned by the Scriptures and the primitive churches is obviously agreeable to reason. It is necessary in accordance with clear and admitted principles, that the churches should be composed of persons of a particular charac ter; and the question is, How is this character to be ascertained? Certainly the only way is, by means of some examination or trial. The method of this trial may sightly vary at times, according to circumstances: but as the religious character of the church members is an indispensable point, and as this result cannot be otherwise secured, it follows, that the trial, in some form or other, must be had. And a statement or narration of personal religious experience, made in the presence of the whole church, upon which all the members can act, is one of the most obvious and effectual, and we may add, in general, one of the most unexceptionable means, which can be resorted to, as subordinate to such trial.

§ 54. Examination of persons coming from other churches.

It has been made a question, Whether a person, coming from another Congregational church, which is in regular standing, ought to be subjected to a formal examination by the church, to which he comes recommended? It has been thought by some, that the insisting on such an examination would imply a distrust of the distant church, and would necessarily be attended with unpleasant consequences. All, that can be said on this point, seems to be this. The church, to whom the individual is recommended, retains the right of examination; even of the strictest examination, if it see fit to exercise it. The pos session of the right is so essential to its purity, that it can

not be safely given up; nor have we any reason to suppose, that it even has been.

Still it is not necessary, that this right should always be enforced. If the character of the individual be well understood, or if the character of the church, from which he comes, be fully known, it is not considered inconsistent with Congregational principles, to admit him without a formal examination; especially as such a course naturally tends to promote confidence and harmony. But if there be doubts in respect to either, it is the duty of the church, to which the testimonials or letters of recommendation are sent, to exercise great caution, and to make such inquiries as shall at least secure itself from danger.

This seems to be essentially the doctrine of the Cambridge Platform, Chap. xii. § 6, viz. That each church possesses the right of instituting an examination under the circumstances mentioned, but that the exercise of this right may depend upon their discretion.-Its language is as follows; "This profession of faith and repentance, as it must be made by such at their admission, that were never in church society before; so nothing hindereth, but the same may also be performed by such as have formerly been members of some other church, Matt. iii. 5, 6; Gal. ii. 4; first Tim. v. 24. And the church, to which they now join themselves as members, may lawfully require the same. Those three thousand, Acts 2d, which made their confession, were members of the church of the Jews before; so were those, that were baptized by John," &c.

§ 55. Of admissions in connection with the right of voting.

Whether the applicant shall be admitted or not, after having undergone such examination as was requisite, will depend upon the choice or opinion of the church, as expressed by a vote. It is true, they have no right to re

fuse admission to any sincere follower of Christ, who does not hesitate to assent to the Confession and Covenant of the church; but they have a right to judge, according to the evidence before them and by the aid of the word of God, whether he be such a follower or not. And their judgment or opinion on this point seems to be what is chiefly expressed by the vote given.

By the practice of the churches, and for various obvious reasons, the opinion, expressed by the majority of votes, is considered to be the opinion of the whole.* Perhaps the decisions of the majority may sometimes be wrong; but it seems to be clearly necessary to admit, and abide by the principle, that the majority shall rule in all cases of a merely advisory, prudential, or disciplinary nature; otherwise there would often be great indecision and confusion. All the members of a church have an equal right to express and defend their opinions and to vote, excepting females, who do neither. The practice of the churches, in excluding females from debating and voting, is founded on Scripture, (1st Cor. xiv. 33, 34, 1st

In the ECCLESIASTICA METHERMENEUTICA or Church Cases Cleared, which was published in 1652, by Mr. D. N. Homes of Mary-Staynings, London, we find the subject of Voting taken up. and considered at Question xi. The writer earnestly objects to church affairs being determined by the majority merely. He as serts, that the majority will sometimes be ignorant or prejudiced, and still they have the power to govern the minority, who are more enlightened, and are perhaps very nearly equal in numbers. Some churches of Christ, he reminds us, both primitive and modern, never passed a vote, except the voters were unanimous on the question. And this seems to be his view of the proper method of proceeding, viz, that all must think alike before coming to a decision. But on this plan the same difficulty which he refers to, exists, and in greater force; since an ignorant and prejudiced minority, and that too of even one person, may justly be said in many cases, not only to perplex, but to govern all the rest.

Tim.ii.11,) and on its expediency and propriety, although they are at times able to exert indirectly, by means of opinions given in a private and informal manner, a salutary influence. The vote of a minister counts no more than that of a private member; and frequently, in consequence of being moderator of church meetings for business, he does not vote at all, except the members be equally divided. But this practice, which seems naturally to result from his situation, would not justify him in withholding his opinion or his vote, if it were desirable that it should be given; especially in any matter of impor

tance.

§ 56. Propounding and the concluding ceremony at admitting.

The church, having voted to admit a person or persons, they are PROPOUNDED; that is, their names are mentioned in the presence of the whole congregation on the Sabbath; and generally two or three weeks before the time of admission. The object of this is, to give any, who choose, an opportunity to make objections; a practice, which both tends to the satisfaction of the people at large, and also to the purity of the church itself. When the day of admission arrives, which is generally some Communion Sabbath, the Confession of Faith, (see 35,) is read to the persons propounded, and in presence of the whole congregation. If any of the persons, who have now assented to the Confession, have never been baptized, this solemn ceremony next takes place. The Church covenant is then read, to which they all in like manner give some visible sign of assent. The pastor then, (without any renewal of vote on the part of the church, which was once customary, though not at present generally practised,) says to the persons concerned. the following words or words to this effect;