says:

"The churches of New England make only vital piety the terms of communion among them." (Rat. Dis. Introd.) John Owen says: "We will never deny the communion to any person whose duty it is to desire it." (Puritans and their Principles, 295.) Samuel Mather shows that all Christians ought to be admitted to any of Christ's churches. (Apology, 34, and elsewhere.) Dr. Watts, in his "Terms of Christian Communion," shows that the churches should, as a general rule, admit all who make a credible profession of religion, take heed not to make the door of admission larger or straiter than Christ made it, and that nothing be in their covenant but what is essential to common Christianity. The principle of assimilation, every man "to his own place," together with the strict maintenance of orthodoxy and piety in the pulpit, will be found as potent to produce all desirable uniformity of belief as any initiatory tests in mere theology. We say, then, in the golden words of Cotton Mather, let "the terms of communion run parallel with the terms of salvation."

Dr. George M. Boynton said on this subject:

That which constitutes a Congregational church is its covenant, in which its members, on the basis of common convictions as to truth and duty, and some unanimity of thought and purpose as to the best way of expressing that truth and discharging the duty, agree on certain modes of action.

It is customary for a Congregational church to adopt a creed, as an expression of the beliefs in which its members agree and as the basis of their common life. They may adopt some form of sound words prepared by others, or they may phrase a creed for themselves. There is no Congregational creed prepared or adopted by a general council which all churches in the fellowship must adopt. In the early days that generally assented to was the Westminister Confession as modified in the Savoy Confession (1658, adopted at Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1680) containing what seemed to be a comprehensive and fitting expression of their faith. Few Congregational churches, if any, retain that ancient symbol, and fewer still would be willing to adopt it now. It is properly regarded as an ancient battle-flag, under which, in their day, the fathers lived and fought valiantly, and which the sons should reverently place among the trophies of the past. It is the flag to which we should most of us have rallied in its time. It does not represent the issues of today. (George M. Boynton, "The Congregational Way," pp. 52, 3.)

The practice of the English Congregational churches is in full accord with our own in the matter of receiving all Christians into fellowship. On this point Dr. Dale, says, giving reasons why all Christians should be members of the Church, and why no Christian should be excluded, says,

(I.) Christ founded the Church for all that believe in Him. There is nothing in the account of the Church contained in the New Testament, there is nothing in the nature of the Church itself, to suggest that Christ required any other qualification for membership than faith in Himself. The Church is His society, not ours. It is a society for His brethren-for all His brethren; for His friendsfor all His friends. To impose conditions of church membership that exclude any of those who are the brethren and friends of Christ is to defeat the purpose for which He founded the Church.

(II.) Christ has made it the duty of all that believe in Him to enter the Church. By refusing to receive any of those who believe in Christ, a church prevents them from fulfilling an obligation which Christ has imposed upon them.

(III.) The blessings conferred by the church fellowship are meant for all that believe in Christ. If men are the friends of Christ, we do them a cruel wrong by refusing them a place as guests at His table. If they are the brethren of Christ, we inflict a grave injury on their spiritual life by refusing to receive them with brotherly affection and confidence. As the Gospel of Christ is intended for men of all races and all lands, and cannot be deliberately withheld from any man without guilt, the strength, the safety, the blessedness, and whatever other blessings come from membership of the Church are intended for all that have received the Gospel.

The polity of every church has its roots in its theology, in its conceptions of the relations between God and man, and of the nature of the Christian redemption. Congregationalism, in affirming that only those who have personal faith in Christ should be members of the Church of Christ, asserts in its polity the unique and infinite importance which is attributed to personal faith by the whole contents of the Christian Revelation. But, if any other qualification for church membership is demanded, the force of this testimony to the unique and infinite importance of personal faith in Christ is broken. Faith in Christ is the only condition of the remission of sins and of eternal salvation; this great truth is obscured if a church insists on anything besides faith in Christ as a condition of church membership.-Dales Manual of Congregational Principles, pp. 49-50.

Dr. A. Hastings Ross has been quoted as favoring creed tests for admission of members and ministers. What he held was that, "The church creed should be read at communion seasons, but members should be admitted on their assent to a simpler form." His words on this subject may be given in full:

"Every member on joining the church publicly assents to a creed; and every pastor in accepting the call to any church makes its creed a part of his covenant and contract with the said church, which he can not honorably break by preaching

another doctrine. Every church and minister on joining an association either expressly or impliedly assents to a creed and covenant, both of the district body and of the state and national bodies. In this way any doctrinal unsoundness in church or minister is likely to be detected. There is no slighting of creeds. Our general confessions, it is true, are mere declarations, to which no formal assent is required; for assent to church creeds, associational bases, and inquiry by committee or council are sufficient to secure soundness in the faith. The Congregational churches of England are less rigid than those in America in this regard of doctrinal tests.

"The creedal tests of admission to church membership should not, however, go beyond the Scriptural requirement of "repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 20: 21). Whom the Lord receives in regeneration his churches are to receive (Rom. 14: 1-5). The creed and covenant for admission should be constructed on this principle; and hence no elaborate articles of faith or rigid examination should stand as tests of admission. There should be, therefore, a form of admission to membership separate from the creed of the church, and much more simple, that children and the weakest believer may enter the nurturing home of the saints and be trained in the church up to the doctrinal perfection of its creed. The church creed should be read at communion seasons, but members should be admitted on their assent to a simpler form. This position was taken in the Ohio Manual in 1874, and in the creed and confession of faith prepared by the commission of the National Council, and issued in 1883. Our churches, in placing an elaborate creed as the condition of church membership, depart from their principles and early practice."-The Church-Kingdom, pp. 347, 8.

VI. A SYMPOSIUM ON CHURCH MEMBERSHIP

Congregational church law is essentially a law of usage. No one man and no one group of men determines what is and what is not good regular Congregationalism. In order that this work may represent as thoroughly as possible not only the views and experiences of its author, but also the opinions and practices of our churches and ministers generally, I have asked ministers of our leading churches in different parts of the country to contribute to a symposium concerning creeds and church membership. These ministers were asked to state in their own language either the custom of their respective churches with reference to creed subscription, or their own judgment of the place, if any, which it ought to occupy in receiving members into a Congregational church. In particular they were asked to say whether in their judgment and in the practice of their several churches, a local church should consider itself at liberty to refuse membership to any Christian man even if he could not conscientiously accept its confession of faith. I give herewith the answers, as I have received them.

CREEDS VITAL TO FAITH

A creed is the reasoned and rational explication of the Christian faith and experience of an individual or a church. I cannot conceive of either a creedless individual or a creedless church, unless it be one which is either unthinking or irrational. The more vital the faith, the more comprehensive and profound the experience, the more long and strong will be the creed, provided always the man does not cease to think.

If he thinks, and if his Christian faith and life be ever growing, he must explicate the results of that faith and experience in such fashion as not to stultify his reason.

The early church made a distinction, a very valid and helpful distinction, between a confession of faith and a rule of faith. The latter is what is commonly called a creed, as the great creeds of the Christian ages, or as most of the creeds in use in our individual Congregational churches. They have been such creeds as have been defined above. They have changed from generation to generation, from body to body, as indeed they must if they are to be the utterance of a living faith and experience. Each individual Christian will have its own. Each individual church will have its own. In the case of the church it should be framed to represent the beliefs of the church as a whole, so that any member of the church when asked what his church believes could point at once to the creed of the church, adopted by the church, modified from time to time, if need be, by the church, on the whole believed in by the church as a whole. As for the name for such a church creed I prefer the title a standard, rather than a rule, of faith. A rule most commonly signifies that up to which a thing or person must come or be rejected; a standard most commonly signifies that towards which a person strives, though suffering no ill results if he never attains it. As a practical pastor I did not rest easy till my church had such a standard. Should I return to the pastorate, I should not rest content till the church under my leadership had such a standard. It would be a part of my duty to attempt to lead them to see its rationality and reasonableness. It, however, should be no part of my duty to turn it into a rule of faith, to compel every member of the church to accept it or else to leave the church; or to require its acceptance by any person, whatever his age, intellectual ability or Christian experience, before being admitted to the church. This last least of all.