went on increasing from generation to generation ; and the Half- way Covenant, as it was opprobriously called, came to be ap- proved by the general practice of the Congregational churches of New England." 1 Such, also, it is believed, although on some- what different principles, was the general practice of the Presby- terian Church in this country until within a comparatively recent period of its history.
The Puritan Doctrine on this Subject.
The Puritans, in the restricted sense of that word, held, (1.) That the Church consists of the regenerate. (2.) That a par- ticular church consists of a number of true believers united to- gether by mutual covenant. (3.) That no one should be admit- ted to church-membership who did not give credible evidence of being a true child of God. (4.) They understood by credible evidence, not such as may be believed, but such as constrains belief. (5.) All such persons, and no others, were admitted to the Lord's Supper. They, therefore, constituted the Church, and to them exclusively belonged the privileges of church-member- ship, and consequently to them was confined the right of present- ing their children for baptism. All other professors of the true religion, however correct in their deportment, were denied that privilege.
These principles, when introduced by the Brownists in Eng- land, were opposed by the great body of Protestants in Great Britain and upon the Continent. They were brought to this country by the disciples of Robinson, and controlled the New England churches for many years. They were gradually relaxed when the theory above stated gained the ascendancy, which it retained until President Edwards published his " Essay," to which we have referred, which gradually changed the opinions and prac- tice of the Congregational churches throughout the land, and to a great extent those of Presbyterians also.
President Edwards, however, lays down one proposition, and devotes his whole treatise to proving another. The proposition which he undertakes to establish is, that none " ought to be ad- mitted to the communion and privileges of members of the visible Church of Christ in complete standing, but such as are in profes- sion, and in the eye of the Church's Christian judgment, godly or gracious persons." 2 What he proposes to prove, therefore, is that those only who, in the judgment of the Church, are godly
i Palfrey, p. 103. * Works, edit. New York, 1868, vol. i. p. 89.
570 PART III. Ch. XX.— THE MEANS OF GRACE.
or gracious persons are to be admitted to the sacraments. All his arguments, however, ten in number, are directed to prove that those who come to the Christian sacraments profess to be Chris- tians. These propositions are very different. Many who assent to the latter, reject the former. The one has reference to the qualifications for church-membership in the sight of God ; the other concerns the legitimate power of the Church in receiving or rejecting those who apply for access to the ordinances which Christ has appointed as means of grace for the people. Edwards had far higher notions of Church power in this matter, than those entertained by the great body of Protestants. The reason why President Edwards confounded the propositions above men- tioned, was, that those against whom he wrote did not deny the prerogative of the Church to sit in judgment on those who ap- plied for Church privileges ; that, with them, was not the matter in dispute. The question concerned the divinely appointed qual- ifications for membership in the Christian Church. Did Christ intend and ordain that those only whom the Church judged to be truly regenerated should be admitted ; or did He design the sacraments, as Stoddard contended, for the unconverted ; they, as well as preaching, being appointed as means of conversion. This being, then, the only matter of debate, to it Edwards nat- urally confined his attention.
Edwards is very explicit in his statement of the prerogative and duty of the Church in acting as a judge of the real char- acter of those who profess to be Christians. He says: "By Christian judgment I intend something further than a kind of mere negative charity, implying that we forbear to censure and condemn a man, because we do not know but that he may be godly, and therefore forbear to proceed on the foot of such a censure or judgment in our treatment of him: as we would kindly entertain a stranger, not knowing but in so doing we entertain an angel or precious saint of God. But I mean a posi- tive judgment, founded on some positive appearance, or visibility, some outward manifestations that ordinarily render the thing probable. There is a difference between suspending our judg- ment, or forbearing to condemn, or having some hope that possi- bly the thing may be so, and so hoping the best ; and a positive judgment in favour of a person." a
Edwards is careful not to make any detail of religious experi- ence the ground upon which the Church was to rest its judgment.
1 Works, edit. New York, 1868, vol. i. pp. 91, 92.