Origin of the First Seventh-day Baptist Church in America.
The readers of the Review will be interested in the following narrative showing how the first church in America which practiced the observance of the seventh day as the Sabbath of the fourth commandment came into existence. It was composed of seven members, five of whom withdrew from a church in Newport, R. I., which observed the first day of the week. The narrative is from the records of that first-day church, and hence cannot be considered as biased in favor of those who turned to the observance of the seventh day. We copy from the “Seventh-day Baptist Memorial,” Vol. 1, No. 1. The following narrative of the controversy in the First Baptist church in Newport, R. I., was taken from the records of that church, a short time since, by permission of Rev. S. Adlam, the present pastor. Though the records of that church, previous to 1700, were lost, yet Mr. John Comer, who was their pastor about one hundred and thirty years ago, took great pains to collect and preserve all authentic information relating to the previous acts of the church; and they are indebted to him for the preservation of this article, which must form an interesting part of the early Documentary History of the Seventh-day Baptists in America, as well as of that church on the records of which it is found. A brief and faithful relation of the difference between those of this church and those who withdrew their communion from it, with the causes and reasons of the same. The brethren and sisters were, William Hiscox, Roger Baster, Samuel Hubbard, Tacy Hubbard, Rachel Langworthy; each of whom left the church on the 7th day of December, 1671. Several of the church, viz., those above mentioned, having been in the practice of observing the seventh day as a Sabbath to the Lord for several years—Samuel Hubbard began the 1st of April, 1665; Roger Baster, the 15th April, 1666; Wm. Hiscox, 28th April, 1666; Rachel Langworthy, 15th January, 1666; Tacy Hubbard, March 11th, 1665—but still kept their places in the church till four persons, two of the brethren and two of the sisters, viz., Nicholas Wild and his wife, and John Salmon and his wife, the two former of which embraced the seventh-day in April, 1665, and the two latter, the 25th October, 1666, who observed it till the 14th January, 1668, i. e., Nicholas Wild and his wife, and then left it; and John Salmon and his wife, who left it February 20th, 1668; which occasioned a very great uneasiness in the other five, which remained steady in that principle; and yet because they both wrote and spoke against it, which so grieved them that they could not sit down at the table of the Lord with them, nor with the church because of them; judging they had sinned grievously, since they took it up (as was thought) solidly, but had laid it down rashly; which put those five on many serious thoughts, to consider the ground of their practice, and also what was their duty to do towards them; but finding themselves not as a church, having no power to deal with them as of themselves, without the help of the church, found themselves barred as to proceeding with them, as being but private brethren. So they concluded not to bring the case to the church to judge of the fact, viz., in turning from the observation of the seventh day, being contrary minded as to that; therefore those five sent to England (to a church in Bell Lane, July the 3d, 1669), though they had sent a letter before respecting themselves, dated the 6th October, 1665, which was the first they sent, to several churches in the observation of the seventh day, for advice; who, as soon as they could, sent it; but before it came it was a grief to the church to see them forbear sitting down at the table of the Lord, and it was a grief to those five also; which put them upon consideration further, that though those persons had done so civilly (as they conceived), whether that was sufficient ground to leave the church for their sakes that had offended them; the church having then given no offense, but only those four persons. Hereupon they came to that resolution, not to leave the church, as well as by the persuasion of Mr. Thomas Gould (the pastor of the church in Boston), who was then here; so they resolved to go on in fellowship as formerly they had done, and therefore signified to the church their unwillingness to leave them, and also told the church publicly, that they could not have comfortable communion with those four persons that had sinned (as they judged), as they could with the rest of the church. Nevertheless, though dissatisfied, yet they walked as comfortably as they could, though not so comfortably as they should, having still those persons before them which had given such offense to them. And thus, for several months, they walked, with little or no offense from the church; after which the leading or ministering brethren began to declare themselves concerning the ten precepts. Ex. 20. Mr. Tory, preaching from 2 Cor. 3, declared the law to be done away, and the law there intended was the ministration of death, and that only the ministration of the Spirit was now to be attended to, and that the Gentiles had never anything to do with it. After this, Mr. Luker and Mr. Clarke, undertaking to expound on the whole Epistle to the Galatians, made it their work to preach the non-observation of the law, day after day (we conclude not the law moral, but the law ceremonial); and as to the seventh-day Sabbaths, they asserted them beggarly elements and rudiments of the world; making little or no difference between ceremonial and moral; seemingly affirming that what was written on tables of stone was done away, as the old covenant with which the Gentiles had nothing to do, and that now we were to hearken to the law written in the fleshy tables of the heart, and not to talk so much of precepts written on a wall; and that the grace of God was sufficient without that, since now we were under the new covenant and the teachings thereof; and that we were undervaluing the Son to take precepts given from the servant. Thus, time after time, doctrines of this nature were delivered, to the great grief of those five, who still observed the seventh-day Sabbath. Hereupon, sometimes they proposed, for their satisfaction, to discourse on those things which had been delivered, after the meeting was over. But this grieved many of the church that they should propose anything public; but they were desired to go privately to the elders, and so to have their answers, which they complied with. But the elders maintained what they had publicly asserted, and those persons declared their sentiments, showing that the ten precepts were still as holy, just, good, and spiritual, as ever, and so a rule of life, though not a rule for life (freely acknowledging, as well as the church, that do and live was taken away from them, though do because we live still remained to them as their indispensable duty). And, as to the other duties, they received no other answer than what they frequently had, which answers were very hard to bear, as that they had left the Son and gone to the servant; this was the answer of some. Others said they were gone to Mount Sinai, among the briars and thorns there, and would bring in a yoke of bondage neither they nor their fathers were able to bear. Hereupon some said, by way of reply, “that they did not plead for any part of the ceremonial law, it being done away by Christ the substance, but for the moral law or ten precepts”; to which Mr. Tory answered, “that he had never read of any such law called the moral law in the Holy Scriptures, the word moral being no Scripture word, and not to be used”; and with some unpleasant words, said “that their tune was only the fourth precept.” To which they answered, “that the whole ten precepts were of equal force with them, and that they did not plead for one without the other.” And they, for several years, went on with the church in a halfish kind of fellowship. Mr. Clarke, in his exposition on the Galatians, ofttimes asserted the abolishing of the law, as the old covenant, with which the Gentiles had nothing to do, as being only given to the seed of Israel, therefore ought to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ had made us free; yea, he earnestly stood upon this subject the whole of his discourse, preaching against the law and the observers of it as being such as did undervalue the Son in taking precepts from the servant; and by the whole tenor of what was delivered, discovered them to be guilty of retaining very corrupt principles, and bringing heresies into the church. And in the afternoon, Mr. Luker preached on the words given on the Mount—said “they were done away as the elements of the world.” And when he ended, Mr. Samuel Hubbard desired to know of him, “whether all that was given on the mountain was done away as beggarly elements and rudiments of the world,” saying, “that the ten precepts were there given.” Mr. Luker replied, that “he had said no more than what the words had said, and that he knew no difference between it, but that all was alike there intended.” Mr. Hiscox then alleged that “the ten words were of a moral nature, and were established by Christ and his apostles in the New Testament; and, being so, they were to be owned and obeyed as part of the law of Christ.” To this Mr. Clarke answered, that “it is no new thing for the churches of Christ to have such among them as to bring in such things as these are”; and so in his sermons through the Epistle to the Galatians, he offered to consideration, as though these five had pleaded to bring in the whole law, without making suitable distinction between what was pleaded to by them, and what by the Galatians, to get life, &c.; upon which several of the church were much grieved, and said, “if they were in Bro. Hiscox’s stand, they must have concluded he had been the man intended in the sermon”; he only of that part being there at that time, it being the day on which the Lord’s supper was administered. After it was over, Mr. Hiscox, with a grieved heart, and with tears, stood up and said (being no longer able to contain) that “he desired leave to speak”; which, being granted, he desired Bro. Clarke to “declare in faithfulness, if he or any of those five were such persons as he had been hinting, both as to the church, or to the world, in his sermons, that he would with plainness declare it, and not take such methods from day to day, in the audience of the whole assembly, causing the people to imagine they pleaded for circumcision and the whole law.” To which Mr. Clarke replied, that “it came by course, and that he did not pitch on the subject on any such purpose as he conceived.” Then said Mr. Hiscox, “So doth common prayer; must it therefore be read, right or wrong? ‘The preacher sought out acceptable words.’” At this time, also, a sister uttered these words, with much concern, “that it is a sad thing, that in such a time as this, when the hand of God is stretched out over us by taking away many by death, that instead of calling sinners to repentance, the whole time, for many days together, was spent in preaching against one another, as if that were the great work of the day,” with many more words of the same import. Many more of the church were grieved to see that, though they did not strive to propagate their judgment, but for peace sake were quiet, yet that would not satisfy, but that the elders must be preaching down the whole law of God in general, and the seventh-day Sabbath in particular. Hereupon Mr. Hiscox desired some to beseech the elders to forbear such kind of preaching, or else they should be put upon that work which they were loth to travel in, viz., to leave the church, if they could not find quietness within. Hereupon, for a few weeks, there was a forbearance; so that they went on in church fellowship and communion with them at the table of the Lord, though many times some of the church would say to them, “that if they were of their minds as to the seventh-day Sabbath, they could not have communed with them that did oppose it”; to which seeming reflection they answered, “that they were loth to separate if they could be quiet.” And thus for some years they walked. But after a while Mr. Holmes (who for some time had left the church), returned to his place; upon which he manifested his trouble with and for those five who observed the seventh day; and preaching from those words of our Saviour: “Wo to the world because of offenses; it must needs be that offenses must come, but wo to them by whom they do come; it were better that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that one of these little ones that believe in me should be offended”; and in his sermon he said that “those offenses are not only in the world, but in the churches, and, to be plain, they are such offenses as these, viz., for persons to leave Christ and are going to Moses in the observation of days, seasons, and such like”; repeating often in the presence of those who observed the seventh day, though to his own knowledge they both publicly and privately declared their judgments on this head. When Mr. Holmes had finished, Mr. Clarke handled the same words to the profit and satisfaction of the auditory; which troubled Mr. Holmes, so18that he went out, and came in no more that forenoon; and by that means the persons grieved with what he delivered, were hindered from discoursing with him, as they intended, because they were much grieved at the application of his sermon from them words. But in the afternoon, when meeting was finished, Mr. Hiscox desired liberty to speak a few words, and said, “My question is to you, Bro. Holmes, to desire you to declare who it is of this church that have left Christ and gone to Moses in the observation of days, and times, and seasons, and such like.” To which Mr. Holmes replied, that “he had been faithful in the discharge of his duty, and if the word did reach you, and your conscience doth accuse you, do you make the application.” To which Mr. Hiscox replied, “If that be all the answer you’ll give, ’tis no matter, but ’tis well known who you intended; but through grace we have not left our Lord Jesus Christ, but can in some measure say, through rich grace, that God hath made him unto us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption.” And further added, “Let it be taken notice of, by all, this day, that the only difference between you and us is, we plead for the ten commandments to be a rule of good living, and to be obeyed in gospel times; you deny them, and say they were never given to be a rule to the Gentiles before or after faith; and, whereas you say we observe days, and years, and seasons, we deny your assertion, for we only observe the seventh-day Sabbath of the Lord our God; as for other sabbaths, new moons, and holy days, we disown them, believing them to be done away by Christ, the substance, having nailed them to his cross as shadows of good things to come; but the seventh day we find differing from, and was to commemorate a good thing past, i. e., the creation of the world.” And after many more words of this nature, Mr. Tory said, “It is more suitable to talk of these things another time.” To which Mr. Hiscox replied, “Who are they which began first, you or us?” He said further, that “if there had been no objection that day fortnight the church brake bread, it would have been well, but they were forced to go away, though to their great grief of heart, to see how things were like to go with them.” The next fifth-day, the church called in Mr. Hiscox to give an account why he did not sit down with them at the table of the Lord; to which he answered, that “it is not unknown to you, that I and the rest of us have not broke bread for a long time, but have gone about with a troubled heart, considering those four persons that have left the Sabbath, and also the opposition that I, together with the rest, have met with, from those who deny the ten precepts to be a rule to the Gentiles, either before or after faith; but further, my trouble is much heightened by Bro. Holmes’ preaching, for if we be such persons as that better a millstone were hanged about our necks, &c.; it is not likely the Lord should smell a sweet savor in our fellowship together, unless there were an endeared heart union.” To which Mr. Clarke answered, “Bro. Holmes did not name you, or any others, but spoke in a general way.” Mr. Hiscox replied, “Who is it could be intended? Surely not the wicked world, for they meddle not with any law; neither could he intend you who deny the law to be a rule to the Gentiles.” To which Mr. Holmes said, “To be plain, I did intend Bro. Hiscox, and such as he is.” Then Mr. Hiscox answered, “You have done well to own the truth, for none that heard you could judge you intended any other.” Mr. Hiscox proceeded and said, “If it be as Bro. Holmes hath said, that we have no more conscience than dogs, it ain’t likely that our fellowship should be any way to your comfort and God’s glory.” Mr. Holmes replied, “Who did say so?” Mr. Hiscox answered, “You said so at Bro. Slocum’s house.” To which Mr. Holmes said, “Take notice of this, brethren”; and said further, “I must be plain, for I do judge that you have not conscience toward God in the matter of the Sabbath; for if you had, you could not have walked with the church as you have done.” Mr. Luker, with grief, said that the wringing of the nose causes blood. Several of the church were troubled at the words which passed. At length Mr. Clarke said, “Bro. Hiscox, consider it seriously, how thou wilt be able to give an account to the Lord for the neglect of that appointment.” To which Mr. Hiscox answered, “It is written that, as many grains make one loaf, so should the saints be one in the Lord; but oneness of heart is not in us, as is too evident; and how can two walk together except they are agreed? It is plain that we are not agreed in weighty matters.” Then Mr. Clarke proceeded further, and said, “That is not sufficient; for what fault can you find in the Lord, or what fault in his ordinances?” Mr. Hiscox replied, “My Lord knows that his ordinances are as dear to me as ever; and it is my great trouble, that I can’t come at them as I should; yea, I will now say, What fault is there in the Lord, or what fault in his Sabbath, or law, that it, and them that profess it, should be so obnoxious, as is plain they are.” The day on which this discourse was, Mr. Samuel Hubbard and his wife were there, and the church had discourse with them, and it was concluded upon by the church, to call the church together the next fifth-day; at which time they in general came, according to appointment, to the end that those that did not break bread should render their reasons for it. And being thus met, the brethren were called upon to speak; some of whom were backward, and sent forward Mr. Hiscox, who would have spoken, but Mr. Tory prevented two or three times, saying, It is your wisdom to be silent, lest you should draw others to say as you say, as the grounds of their withdrawing their communion were taken in writing. Mr. Hubbard was called to speak, but refused, desiring Mr. Hiscox might speak for all at once; “for,” said he, “our grounds are all one, and it is the quickest way.” Mr. Tory would not admit it to be so. Then Tacy Hubbard gave in the grounds, which are these: 1. The apostasy of those four persons. 2. That speech of Bro. Holmes, “Wo to the world because of offenses,” in which discourse he said offenses are such as arise from brethren of the church, such as deny Christ and have turned to Moses, in observing days, times, and years, &c., and that it were better that a millstone were hanged about the neck of such, and they to be cast into the sea. 3. The dismal laying aside the ten precepts, together with the leading brethren denying of them at the meeting. Only these grounds were taken, and nothing further done, by reason of the death of Mr. Joseph Tory, Jr., except a little to remove the doubts of Mr. Joseph Clarke, who was called forth to give his grounds, who manifested his willingness so to do, either at that or any other time. Then Mr. John Clarke asked Mr. Tory whether he had his notes about him; who replied, “No; but Bro. Hiscox’s grounds are principally two, viz., the apostasy of those four, and Bro. Holmes’ preaching.” Then Mr. Hiscox said, “There is a third ground—the leading brethren of the church denying the ten precepts.” To which Mr. Tory replied, “It ain’t so; that is an addition of the adversary.” Mr. Hiscox answered, that “though the matter might not be spoken in so few words, yet,” said he, “your conscience doth know that your denying the ten precepts to be a rule to Gentiles, before or after faith, hath been a great trouble, and is so still.” Hereupon Mr. Tory undertook to prove that the ten precepts were given only to the Jews, and that the Gentiles have nothing to do with them; instancing the 5th chap. Deut., concerning God’s making his covenant with Israel. Then Mr. Hiscox said, “The stock of Israel was the church under the dispensation; and so were the people God made a covenant with and committed his oracles unto; but yet it was then the duty of the world to be proselytized and joined to the then church, as much as it is now to believe and be baptized. I don’t plead for their law as it stood with old obligation to do and live; nor the Levitical priesthood; but as they are the law of Christ, established by himself and his apostles, as in Rom. 3, Matt. 5, Rom. 2, James 2, John 3, &c.” To all which a reply was made, that those scriptures in the Romans, or any other that this day hath been offered, prove nothing to the purpose. Then Mr. Tory further proceeded and said, that “they have no more relation to the ten words than to circumcision, and all the rest of the law, and those brethren that took them so, applied them wrong, for they were the old covenant, and so done away; so that the Gentiles had nothing to do with them, neither were they ever blamed for the breach of them in the holy Scriptures.” Then said Mr. Hiscox, “No! For what was God angry with the nations and drove them out? Was it not for the breach of God’s law, as idolatry, adultery, and many other such like sins? Therefore he calls his people not to do after their manners.” To which Mr. Tory said, “Not for the non-observation of the ten commandments, for you endeavor to bring in a yoke of bondage, which neither you nor your fathers were able to bear.” Then replied Mr. Hiscox, “Is God’s commandments become a yoke of bondage to you? Through mercy, they are not so to me, but are to be delighted in after the inner man.” Then said Mr. Hubbard and his wife, “They are no yoke of bondage to us, but are a good and spiritual law.” After much debate, Mr. Tory was discoursing with Mr. Hiscox with warmth, to whom Mr. H. said, “What! do you think to juggle me out of my conscience?” Upon which Mr. Tory replied, “If I am become a juggler, then it is time for me to leave off this matter.” Then said Mr. H., “Pray, Bro. Tory, don’t be offended at it, for they were not suitable words, and I am troubled that I said so to you, but I pray pass them by”; and he did so. After more debate, and Mr. H. remained steady in that principle, Mr. Tory directed his speech to him, saying, “Do you take notice of this, that though the church hath endeavored to remove your scruples, yet you remain obstinate?” and lifting up his hand toward him, he said, “You stand upon your peril.” Then Mr. Hiscox answered, “Pray, Bro. Tory, don’t threaten so; you may do what you please; your threatening words don’t affright me.” At this day Mr. Clarke intimated that he did not deny the law; to whom Mr. H. applied himself, saying, “Pray, Bro. Clarke, speak plainly to things, and don’t go round about the matter, and leave us in the dark all the while.” To which Mr. Clarke said, “I can’t speak more plain than I have done.” Then Mr. Tory replied, “Good Bro. Clarke, speak plain, and say they are done away.” Upon which Mr. Clarke said, “I may as well deny God to be God” (answering to some part of Mr. Tory’s speech), at which Mr. Tory was grieved. The next meeting Bro. Debill was called to give the reason of his not sitting down at the table of the Lord; to which he answered, “that he could not sit down with them who keep the seventh day, fearing they have left Christ.” Upon which Mr. Tory said (by laying it some to the consciences of those persons), “How sad a thing is it, that you should be the cause to turn a brother out of his way and to stumble.” To which Mr. H. answered, “It is a sad thing that an old disciple of Christ should be offended at his brethren for their keeping God’s commandments, and it is a sad thing, and offensive to good men in other colonies, to hear that the elders of this church should deny the ten words to be a rule in gospel times; it is a stink in their nostrils.” With too much commotion of spirit, Mr. Luker said, “If there be any stink, you it is that have made it.” “No,” said Mr. Hiscox, “’tis you, the leaders of the congregation being yea and nay in this matter, that is of so bad a savor.” At the meeting, after it was broken up, there was much discourse, and sometimes too hot words on both sides: Mr. H. discoursing with Mr. Wilds (one of them that laid down the observation of the seventh day), about his denying of the law; to whom he replied, “Who denies it?” Upon which Mr. Tory said, “I do.” To which Mr. Wild said, “What! deny them?” And he answered, “Yes, and that with open face, and I do affirm that the ten words were never written in any Gentile’s heart.” Then Mr. Hiscox said, “Seeing you are not agreed in it, I shall leave you to debate the matter among yourselves.” The next meeting was spent in endeavoring to remove Mr. Hiscox’s grounds, and there was much reasoning concerning the elders denying the ten words to be any rule to the Gentiles; they then endeavoring to show that they were never commanded to keep any part of the law; to which those who were in the observation of the seventh day replied, “that under the former dispensation there was a church and a world as there is now; and as it is the duty of the world now to repent and believe in the gospel, so it was the duty of the world to be proselytized and joined to the then church of God.” This was by most of the elders denied, by affirming that God made not the covenant with the Gentiles; and therefore no sin in them, though they walked contrary to it. And others of the church said, “they did not think the Gentiles would ever be blamed for the breach of the ten words.” Upon which they said, and endeavored to produce scriptures to prove, “all under sin, and all have gone out of the way, and that whatsoever the law saith it saith to them that are under the law, that all the world might become guilty before God; and that they owned that by the deeds of the law none should be justified, yet by the law is the knowledge of sin, both to Jews and Gentiles.” Then Mr. Tory replied, “It is a sad thing that we should thus abuse the Scriptures.” To which Mr. Hiscox said, “I never met with any that did understand them otherwise, but yourselves.” So by this time there was too much heat of spirit. Hereupon, Mr. Holmes told the brethren, that “he judged they were beside the work,” saying, “he thought they should put Bro. Hiscox on it to prove his seventh-day practice, or else to fall under.” Upon which Mr. Hiscox said, “Bro. Holmes, you are not right there; you stand to slip your neck out of the collar so; for the ground of our difference is, that you and others deny God’s law.” To which Mr. Holmes replied, with much concern, “You are deluded, and ought to be made sensible of it.” Then Mr. Hiscox answered, “You have said more than this before now, as that we have denied Christ, and had not conscience toward God in these matters.” Upon which Mr. Holmes said, “I again say, I do judge you have and still do deny Christ, and that you have not conscience in it, for if you had, you could not have walked with us till now, but must have done otherwise, for had I been of your judgment, I must have stoned you all to death before now.” Mr. Hiscox replied, “The more wicked you would have been for your pains, for God requires no such thing of us or you.” Mr. Tory said, “that he judged that when the church had endeavored to convince them, if they remained refractory, then the church should wait awhile, and after that to declare such to be none of them.” “What!” said Mr. Hiscox, “must we be forced to walk by your legs, and see by your eyes? You may do what you please in that matter.” At that meeting, as well as at most others, they were blamed for not taking advice of the leading brethren before they stepped forward. Mr. Clarke often told Mr. Hiscox “that he stole into the practice.” To which those who were in the practice of the seventh day said, “What need is there of us to come to you, since we know your judgment well enough, and that for a long time; and since the matter hath been debated in the church before all, we might wait long enough before we could have had leave given us to do that which you would not do yourselves; and though we do own the church, and the officers that God hath set there, yet God hath sometimes made known part of his will to weak ones, that others might not glory”; and by applying themselves to Mr. Tory, said “that notwithstanding that he was an elder, yet he was not perfect in his knowledge, but might stand in need of the measure of the church.” At that meeting, everything appeared dark, as though there was no likelihood of accommodation to be one church. Hereupon Mr. Hiscox desired to propose something to the church, which was, that since there was an apparent difference between them, and if they could not go on as formerly, he, in behalf of the rest, desired the church seriously to consider whether it would not be more for the glory of God, and both their comforts, to let them have their liberty to walk by themselves, as they were persuaded, and so to maintain as much love as possible, seeing there is no likelihood of their agreeing. Many, being weary of the contest, said, “It is time to set one against the other.” To which Mr. Tory replied, “I will never yield to it as long as I live; and Mr.19Holmes backed the expression, “Nor I neither.” Upon which Mr. Clarke said, “What rule have you for this matter?” Mr. Hiscox answered, “To do to others as we would they should do to us; would not you have had the same liberty at Seekonk, and elsewhere, when you differed from other churches that you had walked with?” Upon which it was answered, “That scripture was too short, for that had relation to outward things.” Mr. Hiscox—“There is that word, ‘How can two walk together except they are agreed?’—we differ in matters of great weight, though you make light of them; there is that saying also, ‘As many grains of wheat make one bread, so should the saints be one in heart’; and it is plain we ain’t so, for some can’t sit down at the table of the Lord because of us. Bro. Deuel and Mr. Mann and others say we have left Christ and gone to Moses, because we plead the morality of the ten words; others say we undervalue Christ by taking precepts from Moses.” After this debate, it was by some proposed, that though they did plead for the law, and the church did esteem it an error, whether it is such an error as to exclude a brother for it. Hereupon Bro. Wild made answer, that “they should be tender of conscience, if they walked orderly, according to Christ’s last will and testament after his resurrection.” Mr. Hiscox answered, “Not the commands of Christ before his death? Ain’t they as binding as those after?” To which Mr. Tory replied, “Are they so to you?” Mr. Hiscox answered, “The commands of my Lord are equal to me, whether before or after his death.” Hereupon Mr. Tory replied, “I am sorry for your ignorance.” After many things of this nature, and being weary of the contest, those five Sabbatarians met together to consider what they may with safety do, and answer a good conscience; whether to go on with the church as heretofore, or to declare their dissent from them, as such as did speak evil of the law; and, that since they had given them the reason of not sitting down at the table of the Lord with them, they were the more earnestly called forth in preaching against the observation of the law than before; and, instead of finding out some middle way to ease things, every affair was drove to the last extremity, by showing the law to be the first covenant, and the seventh-day Sabbath to be a sign of the covenant, and done away; and though not in express words, they were often called delinquents, yet in words implying the same; and that the church had given the first cause of grief to them. Being unwilling to separate from them, if they could be easy, after seeking the Lord, they five concluded to withdraw, since there was no hope of peace in the church while they remained. Hereupon, they chose Mr. Hiscox to be their mouth and declare this. The next meeting, the four elders were there, though not so many others as at some other times. Mr. Clarke having sought the Lord by prayer, then Mr. Holmes informed the church that “he had something that day with weight on his heart to declare unto them; and that is,” said he, “1st. Bro. Hiscox’s slandering the leading brethren in saying they deny the law. 2d. His charging those four persons as apostates, saying, in his judgment, the church ought to make Bro. Hiscox see his evil in charging them so highly, or else that the church ought to look at them as such, and declare against them. 3d. It is reported that Bro. Hiscox did work one first day till meeting time, and then came and stood up in the church to speak and pray. 4th. That he hath broke bread on the seventh day of the week. 5th. That in so doing he hath held communion with such as were not owned by the church.” These five things Mr. Holmes declared to have been matter of great grief to him; and hereupon called for the help of the church to deal with Mr. Hiscox for them as great evils, though he never told him of these things in the prescribed order. Hereupon Mr. Hiscox said, “If you have done, Bro. Holmes, I shall give you answers to these things, for I am glad that I have now a time to speak to them, for I have heard that you, or some others, have spoke of such things abroad, though not to me. And as to the first, that I have slan- dered the leading brethren in saying they have denied the law or ten words to be a rule to us Gentiles, either before or after faith, I have so said, and do say so still, and if Bro. Holmes, or any other, do deny it, their last sin would be as bad as the first; having done it publicly and privately, should you deny it, ’t would only be adding sin to sin. As to the second charge, for my calling those four persons apostates, we can look on them no better; for what is apostasy but the denial of that which persons once professed to be the mind and will of God, in a back way? Would you not count us such, if we should deny water baptism, and turn our backs upon it, and plead for the baptism of the Spirit only, as too many do at this day?” To which Mr. Tory replied, “that if apostasy meant to deny that which persons once professed, then that most of his church are apostates.” Mr. Hiscox replied, “Look you to that; if you have done anything in the name of the Lord, and have forsook it, then you have need to repent of it. As to the third thing Bro. Holmes said, it is grossly false; for I never in all my life came from my work to speak and pray in the church but once, and that was many years ago, and that was upon a more than ordinary occasion, when Bro. Clarke was sick”; and further said, “I cannot but wonder at you, Bro. Holmes, of whom I heard, before I saw your face, ‘that you could as freely wear a yard of cloth on a first day, before meeting, as at any other time.’” To which Mr. Holmes replied, “Did you ever see me do it?” “No,” said Mr. Hiscox, “but I have seen you come to meeting on a first day with your leather apron on, as if you had come from your work, which made me think it might be true: especially hearing you oft-times say you ‘knew no Sabbath but Christ.’” By the time he had so far proceeded, there was so much disorder in the meeting, that the other things were not spoke to. Upon which Mr. Hiscox desired to offer some scriptures to prove that it was lawful to set precepts of holiness from the Old Testament, as that of Peter, “Be ye holy; because it is written, Be ye holy, for I am holy,” and some other places. Hereupon Mr. Clarke said, “You undervalue the Son to take precepts from the servant.” Mr. Tory then said to the church, “that he thought they had spent time enough with Mr. Hiscox,” &c. All these left the church, Dec. 7, 1671.