« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
of York, and Mr. Robert Cutts, of Kittery, and some others, eleven in all, giving power and authority to any three of them, or more, to meet together, as other magistrates formerly used to do, and to hear and determine all causes, civil or criminal, and order all affairs of the said Province for the peace and safety thereof, according to the laws of England, as near as may be, and this to be done until his Majesty appoint another government: forbidding as well Gorges's Commissioners, as the Corporation of the Massachusetts, to exercise any further power of government there, by virtue of their pretended rights, till his Majesty's pleasure were further known. This was done in the June or July, in the year 1665."
After the settling of these things in this sort, in the Province of Maine, the Commissioners proceeded further eastward, where they reduced things to as good order as they could, taking care to prevent any quarrel betwixt the Indians in those parts, (who it seems in those times
gave some occasion of jealousy,) and the English, directing what course should be taken for redress, if any injury were offered on either side, before they should do any acts of hostility one against another. It had been well for those parts if these ways had been attended, which were by them prescribed, for then might much of the mischief have been prevented, which fell out in the years following; of which more is said in the following narrative, which hereunto may be annexed.
After things were thus ordered by those Commissioners, they returned back towards the Massachusetts, preparing two of them to ship themselves for England, Sir Robert Carr and Colonel Cartwright; but it seems one of them, viz. Sir Robert Carr, was arrested with a sickness as soon as ever he was landed in England, wbich in a few days put a period to his life, as well as his Commission, and called him to give an account thereof before an higher tribunal. The other, viz. Colonel Cartwright, had taken exact account of all the transactions that had passed here under his cognizance, but falling into the hands of the Dutch he hardly escaped with his life, losing all his papers and writings. From them, likewise, he met with pretty harsh and coarse usage, they putting a gag into
· See Maine Hist. Coll. 1. 109-16; Williamson's Maine, i. 411-25.-. • June 1, 1667, “ the next day after he came ashore,” says Morton.-H.
his mouth, which it is said,) he threatened to some in New England that pleased him not, in some of his administrations; and losing his writings no doubt was prevented of the exactness of his account of things here, upon his return, which depended now only upon the strength of his memory, whereby some trouble possibly also was saved, which might have fallen out, in reference to some of the Plantations in New England. And probably the war that immediately before broke out between the English and the Dutch, and was not yet ended, turned aside some other designs, which some had thought upon for the ordering those Plantations, which hath of late fallen under debate upon another occasion, of which the series of the history will call to speak more afterwards.
Things being left in this sort in the Plantations about Pascataqua, those of the Province of Maine remained in the state wherein they were left by those three Commissioners for two or three years; but for the Plantations on the south side of Pascataqua, viz. Portsmouth, Dover, and Exeter, some of their inhabitants, soon after they, i. e. the Commissioners, left the country, addressed themselves to the Massachusetts’ Court, for an opportunity to clear some aspersions cast on that government they were settled under before. Whereupon three or four gentlemen were sent by the General Court with Commission to act something for the settling the peace of those places; who, assembling the people of Portsmouth and Dover together, told them, that whereas some had petitioned against the Bay government, if any such grievance were mad known they would acquaint the Court, and so redress might be had. But instead of that, about thirty of the inhabitants of Dover, by a petition to the General Court, desired the continuance of their government over them. To the same purpose did about the like number of Portsmouth petition about October following, whereby they cleared themselves from having any hand in such petitions, as complained of their government as an usurpation. The like was done from some of Exeter.5 Some other petitions had been in like manner presented to the Commissioners from about the parts of Providence and
| Thomas Danforth, Eleazer Lusher, and John Leverett. See their Commission in Farmer's Belknap, pp. 437–8.-H. Oct. 9, 1665. Ibid. p. 61.-H. • Ibid. pp. 438-9.-H.
• The same month and day as those of Dover, Oct. 9, 1665. Ibid. 439.-H. 5 Ibid. p. 61.-H.
Warwick against the Massachusetts, as namely, by Samuel Gorton and his complices, wherein were many strange allegations, but very far from truth, a thing little minded by the said Gorton, to which reply was made by the Court to vindicate their proceedings."
This year the General Court of the Massachusetts voted to send a present, to the value of £500, for accommodation of his Majesty's navy, which was graciously accepted, as was said.
CHAP. LXVII.2 Ecclesiastical Affairs in New England, from the
to 1666. In the beginning of this lustre some questions were raised amongst the churches and people of the Massachusetts; one was about the extent of Baptism, viz. whether the children of some parents might not be admitted to Baptism, though they themselves were never yet admitted to full communion with the church, at the Lord's table ; about which case the country was strangely divided. The other was about the extent of communion, that ought to be between particular churches that are seated together, and live under the same civil government. For the discussing of both these questions the General Court of the Massachusetts, in their second session in the year 1661, did order and desire, that the churches within their jurisdiction would send their elders and messengers of the said churches, to meet at Boston the next spring, to determine those practical points of difference about church discipline. The elders and messengers of the said churches did assemble accordingly, in the year 1662, and delivered their determination to the Court, who ordered the result of the said Synod to be forthwith printed, and commended the practice thereof to all the churches in their jurisdiction. An answer of the ministers, and other messengers of the churches, assem
bled at Boston, in the year 1662, to the questions propounded to them by order of the General Court.
Question 1. Who are the subjects of Baptism? 1 The Commissioners drew up a narrative of their proceedings in New England, which is printed in Hutchinson's Coll. Papers, pp. 412-25.-H.
: LXVI in the MS.-H.
Answer. The answer may be given in the following propositions.
1. They that, according to Scripture, are members of the visible church are the subjects of Baptism.
2. The members of the visible church, according to Scripture, are confederate visible believers in particular churches, and their infant seed, i. e. children in minority, whose next parents are one or both in covenant.
3. The infant seed of confederate visible believers are members of the same church with their parents, and, when grown up, are personally under the watch, discipline, and government of that church.
4. Those adult persons are not therefore to be admitted to full communion, merely because they are and continue members, without such further qualifications as the Word of God requireth thereunto.
5. Such church members, who are admitted in minority, understanding the doctrine of faith, and publicly professing their assent thereunto, not scandalous in life, and solemnly owning the covenant before the church, wherein they give up themselves and their children to the Lord, and subject themselves to the government of Christ in the church, their children are to be baptized.
6. Such church members, who, either by death or some other extraordinary Providence, have been inevitably hindered from public acting as aforesaid, yet have given the church cause in judgment of charity to look at them as so qualified, and such as, had they been called thereunto, would have so acted, their children are to be baptized.
7. The members of orthodox churches, being sound in the faith, and not scandalous in life, and presenting due testimony thereof, these occasionally coming from one church to another, may have their children baptized in the church whither they come, by virtue of communion of churches; but if they remove their habitation, they ought orderly to covenant and subject themselves to the government of Christ in the church, where they settle their abode, and so their children to be baptized;
it being the churches' duty to receive such unto communion, so far as they are regularly fit for the same.
Qu. 2. Whether, according to the word of God, there ought to be a consociation of churches, and what should be the manner of it?
Ans. 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 itself, reg. ularly to administer all the ordinances of Christ, and is not under any other ecclesiastical jurisdiction whatsover; for to such a church Christ hath given the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, that what they bind or loose on earth, shall be bound or loosed in Heaven. Matt. xvi. 19, &c. Matt. xviii.. 17, 18. Acts xiv. 23.
Acts xiv. 23. Tit. i. 5. Matt. xxviii. 19, 20. Acts vi. 4. 1 Cor. iv. 1, and v. 4, 12. Acts xx. 28. 1 Tim. v. 17, and iii. 5.
Hence it follows, that 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 upon all just occasions.
2. The churches of Christ do stand in a sisterly relation each to other, Cant. viii. 8, being united in the same faith and order, Eph. iv. 5, Col. ii. 5, to walk by the same rule, Phil. iii. 16, in the exercise of the same ordinances for the same ends, Eph. iv. 11, 12, 13, 1 Cor. xvi. 1, under one and the same political head, the Lord Jesus Christ, Eph. i. 22, 23, Eph. iv. 5, Rev. ii. 1, which union infers a conmunion suitable thereunto.
3. Communion of churches is the faithful improvement of the gists of Christ, bestowed upon them for his service and glory, and their mutual good and edification, according to capacity and opportunity, i. e. to seek and accept of help one from another, by prayer, counsel, and advice, &c.
4. Consociation of Churches is their mutual and solemn agreement to exercise communion in such acts as