ters, and to have given them such advice as their peculiar situation required," was a great friend to the meeting and consociation of ministers and churches, as a grand mean of promoting purity, union and brotherly affection, among ministers and churches. During his life, the ministers in the vicinity of Hartford, had frequent meetings at his house, and about a week before his death, he observed with great earnestness; We must agree upon constant meetings of ministers, and settle the consociation of churches, or else we are undone,"* Other wise and good men felt very much as he did about consociation, and a year after his death, an effort was made to provide for it, or for some thing approixmating towards it, under the phrase "Communion of Churches," in the Cambridge Platform, as may be seen by looking into the fifteenth and sixteenth chapters. But whatever truths those chapters contain, it was found sufficient provision was not made for securing the blessings desired. The Massachusetts synod which met in 1662, fourteen years after, acknowledged "that some few particulars, referring to the continuation and combination of churches, needed yet a more explicit stating and reducing unto practice." The expression "combination of churches," respects the passages in the Platform about the "communion of churches," and they endeavored to remedy the defect *Trumbull, Vol.. I. p. 479,

in what they advanced on consociation, in answer to the question, "Whether, according to the word of God, there ought to be a Consociation of Churches, and what should be the manner of it?" This question they answered with great brevity; "partly," as they say, "because so much is already said thereabout in the aforesaid Platform of Discipline; and partly by reason of great straits of tine. "* Although what they presented was the joint conclusion of the synod; yet, occupied almost wholly with the question about baptism, they left the subject in an imperfect state. The consociation was not made a fixed, definite body; though expected ordinarily to consist of the representatives of churches "planted in a convenient vicinity, yet liberty was reserved for others to be used without offence." Churches might meet in consociation from the vicinity or from a distance, in larger or smaller numbers; and there was nothing to prevent one consociation from sitting after another upon the same case. There was no suitable nor direct provision for the relief of aggrieved individuals; nor indeed for convening the members of the body. The churches of Connecticut realized these defects both before and after the session of this synod. The difficulty in the first church in Hartford, growing out of a controversy between the pastor and ruling elder, afflicted them exceedingly, and in

* Preface to Cam. Platform, p. 5. Boston Edition.

fact, all the churches in New England.* Other difficulties, arising in different churches, afflicted them also. The Legislature were so annoyed by these, that in 1668, "they conceived the design of uniting the churches of Connecticut in some general plan of church government and discipline, by which they might walk, notwithstanding their different sentiments in points of less importance." With this view an act passed, authorizing four distinguished clergymen in different parts of the colony, viz. the Reverend Messrs. James Fitch of Norwich, Gershom Buckley of Wethersfield, Joseph Elliot of Guilford, and Samuel Wakeman of Fairfield, "to meet at Saybrook, and devise a way in which this desirable purpose might be effected. This appears to have been," Trumbull remarks, "the first step towards forming a religious constitution," and though he does not inform us what those clergymen did, yet he adds, "From this time it became more and more a general object of desire and pursuit,—though many years elapsed before the work could be accomplished."t The occurrence of new difficulties from time to time, showed that it was necessary something should be done. "For the want of a more general and energetic government,” the same writer observes, many churches ran

66

into confusion: councils were not sufficient to relieve the aggrieved and restore peace.

As

*Trumbull, Vol. I. p. 297. Savage's Winthrop, Vol. I. p. 142. + Trumbull, Vol. I. p. 461.

there was no general rule for the calling of councils, council was called against council, and opposite results were given upon the same cases to the reproach of councils and the wounding of religion. Aggrieved churches and brethren were discouraged, as in this way their case seemed to be without remedy. There was no such thing in this way, as bringing their difficulties to a final issue." The substance of all this appears from the act of the Legislature appointing those conventions in 1708, in the different counties then in Connecticut, whose delegates formed the Saybrook Platform. "This assembly, from their own observation, and the complaint of many others, being made sensible of the defects of the discipline of the churches of this government, arising from the want of a more explicit asserting of the rules given for that end in the Holy Scriptures, from which would arise a permanent establishment among ourselves, a good and regular issue in cases subject to ecclesiastical discipline, glory to Christ our head, and edification to his members; hath seen fit to ordain and require, and it is by the authority of the same, ordained and required, that the ministers of the several counties in this government, shall meet together at their respective county towns, with such messengers as the churches to which they belong shall see cause to send with them, on

* Trumbull, Vol. I. p. 480.

the last Monday in June next; there to consider and agree upon those methods and rules for the management of ecclesiastical discipline, which by them shall be adjudged agreeable to the word of God, and shall at the same meeting appoint two or more of their number to be their delegates, who shall all meet together at Saybrook, at the next commencement to be held there, where they shall compare the results of the meetings of the several counties, and out and from them, draw a form of ecclesiastical discipline.'

Agreeably to this order, the ministers and messengers of the churches met and drafted four models of church discipline, and appointed delegates to the convention at Saybrook. The delegates met and adopted the Confession of Faith which has been spoken of, and the Heads of Agreement, and Articles for the Administration of Discipline.

The Heads of Agreement were not drafted in the conventions, though they may have been the subject of consideration for they were previously circulated in the country, "and in general were highly approved." They were drawn up and assented to by the ministers in England, formerly called Presbyterian and Congregational, and were probably adopted by the delegates at Saybrook for the sake of effecting greater union and harmony among

*Trumbull, Vol. I. p. 481, 2. † Ibid, p. 481.