(5.) It would be adviseable for such to contract an intimacy, and frequently converse with experienced Christians, who know the depths of Satan, and the deceitfulness of the heart of man, and the methods of divine grace in restoring comforts to those who are, at present, destitute of them, agreeably to what they themselves have experienced in the like case, 2 Cor. i. 4. (6.) They ought, as a farther means for the strengthening of their faith, and establishing their comforts, to wait on God in the ordinance of the Lord's supper, hoping for Christ's presence therein; in which many have found that they have been enlivened, quickened, and comforted, while others, through the neglect hereof, have had their doubts and fears increased. And this leads us to consider,

II. What is contained in the latter of the answers we are explaining, which is applicable to those who desire to come to the Lord's supper, but are to be kept from it. Here it is taken for granted, that all are not to be admitted to this ordinance, though it may be, they make a general profession of the christian faith, and are not willing that any should question their right to it. These are described in this answer,

1. As being ignorant of the great doctrines of the gospel, and, consequently, unacquainted with Christ, whom they never truly applied themselves to, nor received by faith; and therefore they cannot improve this ordinance aright, or have communion with Christ therein.

2. They are to be excluded from the Lord's supper, who are scandalous or immoral in their practice, whatever pretensions they make to the character of christians: These are described by the apostle, as persons who profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable and disobedient and unto every good work reprobate, Tit. i. 16. Such ought not to have communion with those whom the apostle describes as called to be saints, Rom. i. 7. nor can they partake of this ordinance aright, since they are not apprized of the end and design thereof, nor are they able, as the apostle expresses it, to discern the Lord's body, 1 Cor. ix. 27. for, it they are strangers to themselves, how can they apply the benefits of Christ's redemption to their own case? and, if they neglect the preparatory duty of self-examination, so that they do not know their own wants, how can they go to Christ in this ordinance for a supply thereof? or, if they do not desire the spiritual blessings of the covenant of grace, what right can they have to make use of the seals thereof? and if they are openly and visibly of another family, under the dominion of the powers of darkness, what right have they to the privileges which Christ has purchased for those who are members of his family, and spiritually united to him?

Object. 1. To what has been said concerning those that are to be excluded from this ordinance, it is objected, that it appears, that both good and bad have a right to it, from what our Saviour says in the parable of the wheat and the tares, in Mat. xiii. 29. both which are said to grow together until the harvest, when the reapers will be sent to gather first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them, and the wheat into the barn: So that hypocrites, and sincere christians, are to continue together in the same church, and, consequently to partake of the same ordinances.

Answ. To this it may be replied; this is not the sense of the parable; for our Saviour explains it otherwise, when he says in ver. 38. The field is the world: the good seed are the children of the kingdom, but the tares are the children of the wicked one. And from hence we may infer, that good and bad men are, through the forbearance of God, suffered to live together in the world; but it gives no countenance to this supposition, that the wicked ought to be joined with the godly as members of the same church: Not but that hypocrites may, and often do intrude themselves into the churches of Christ; yet since this is not known to them, they are not to blame for it, the heart of man being known to God alone; and the judgment that we are to pass concerning those who are admitted into church-fellowship, or to the Lord's supper in par ticular, is to be founded on that credible profession which they make; in which, though it be possible for them to deceive others, yet the guilt and ill consequence thereof, will only affect themselves.

Object. 2. It is further objected, that Judas was at the Lord's supper when it was first instituted by our Saviour, though he knew him to be an hypocrite and a traitor, and that he would speedily execute what he had designed against his life; and if so, then all ought to be admitted to this ordinance. And the reason that is generally assigned why he was there at that time, is, because it is said, in Luke xxii. 14. When the hour was come, he sat down, and his twelve apostles with him; and afterwards we read, in ver. 19. that he took bread and brake it, &c. and also the cup after supper, &c. ver. 20. and then it is said, in ver. 21. Behold the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. This is supposed, by some, to have been spoken by Christ when they were eating the Lord's supper; from whence it may be concluded that Judas was there.

Answ. But to this it may be replied that it seems much more probable that he was not there when the Lord's supper was administered though he joined with Christ and the other apostles in cating the passover; for we must consider,

(1.) That the passover and the Lord's supper were celebrated, one immediately after the other, at the same table, or sitting; therefore the hand of Judas might be with Christ on the table, in the former, though not in the latter: So that, though these words, the hand of him that betrayeth me, is with me on the table, are inserted after the account of both these ordinances being concluded; yet we have ground to suppose, they were spoken while they were eating the passover, when Judas was

present.

(2.) It appears yet more probable that he was not present at the Lord's supper, from the account which John gives of this matter, in chap. xiii. 21. wherein our Saviour tells them, that one of them should betray him: and, in ver. 26. he discovers that he meant Judas, by giving him the sop; and in ver. 30. it is said, that having received the sop, he went immediately out. Now it is certain there was no sop in the Lord's supper, as there was in the passover, inasmuch as there was no flesh therein: Therefore Judas went out when they were eating the passover, before they began to partake of the Lord's supper; being, as we may reasonably suppose, in a rage that his hypocrisy should be detected, and he marked out as a traitor, who was, before this, reckoned as good a man as any of them: Therefore we have not sufficient ground from hence to conclude, that wicked men ought to be admitted to partake of the Lord's supper.

Object. 3. For christians to exclude any from the Lord's supper, would argue a great deal of pride, or vain-glorious boasting, and it is, as it were, to say to them who are excluded, "Stand off, for we are holier than you."

Answ. 1. A believer may with thankfulness, acknowledge the distinguishing grace of God vouchsafed to him, and not to others; and, at the same time, bless him, that he has given him a right to the privilege of his house, which all are not admitted to partake of, without doing this in a boasting way; he may say with the apostle in 1 Cor. xv. 10. By the grace of God I am what I am; and yet at the same time, deal faithfully with those who are destitute of this grace; he may bless God for the right which he hopes he has to this ordinance, and yet it is not his duty to admit them to it who have no right.

2. It is one thing not to admit persons who are unqualified to this ordinance, and another thing to despise them upon this account. Our business is not to reproach them, but to treat them with meekness; if peradventure God may give them repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth, that hereby they may appear to have a right to it.

Object. 4. If wicked men are to be excluded from one ordinance which Christ has instituted in his church, they may, for Von. IV.

L. 1

the same reason be excluded from all; and so they may as well be debarred the privilege of hearing the word, and joining with the church in public prayer.

Answ. There is not the same reason for excluding wicked men from hearing the word, or joining in prayer with the church, as there is for refusing to admit them to partake of the Lord's supper. For prayer, and preaching the word, are God's appointed means for the working the grace of faith, instructing the ignorant, awakening the stupid and secure sinner, and putting him on complying with that method of salvation which God has prescribed in the gospel, and embracing Christ as offered therein: Whereas, on the other hand, the Lord's supper is an ordinance which supposes the soul to have, before this, received Christ by faith; and therefore he is therein to feed upon him, and to take comfort from what he has done and suffered for him, as conducive to the farther mortification of indwelling sin; which supposes that he has had, before this, some experience of the grace of God in truth. Thus concerning the exclusion of ignorant or immoral persons, as being not qualified for the Lord's supper.

And here we may farther observe, that they who bring these and such-like objections, with a design to open the door of the church so wide, that all may be received into it, and partake of those ordinances by which it is more particularly distinguished from the world, are very ready, in defence of their own cause, to charge others with being too severe in their censures, and refusing to admit any into church-communion, unless they can tell the very time in which they were converted, and the means by which this work was begun, and carried on; and this they are obliged to do in so public a manner, as that many are denied the privilege of partaking of this ordinance, for a mere circumstance; which is an extreme as much to be avoided as the receiving unqualified persons to the Lord's supper.

But it may be replied to this, that since this charge is rather the result of surmize than founded on sufficient evidence, it deserves to have less notice taken of it: However, this I would say in answer to it, that I never knew it to be the practice of any church of Christ, to exclude persons from its communion, because they knew not the time or means of their conversion; which may be sometimes occasioned by their having been favored with the blessing of a religious education and restraining grace from their childhood, so that they have not run those lengths in sin which others have done; and therefore the change which is wrought in conversion, especially as to what concerns the time and manner thereof, is less discernible. Sometimes the work has been begun with a less degree of

the terrors of conscience, under a sense of the guilt of sin, and the condemning sentence of the law, than others have experienced: These have been drawn with the cords of love, and the grace of God has descended upon them insensibly, like the dew upon the grass; and therefore all that can be perceived by them, or that is to be required of them as a necessary qualification for their being admitted to the ordinances and privileges which belong to believers, is their discovering those fruits of faith which are discernable in the conversation of such as have experienced the grace of God in truth.

As to the other part of the charge, in which some churches are pretended to insist on such terms of communion as are merely circumstantial, so as to refuse to receive any that cannot comply with them: This is to be answered by those who appear to be liable to it. All that I shall therefore add under this head, is, that since a visible profession of faith in Christ is to be made, as necessary to constitute a visible church, and the conversation of those who make it, ought to be apparently agreeable thereunto: And inasmuch as none are obliged to make any thing known to the church, that contains the least appearance of dishonour or reflection on their character in the world; but are only required to testify and give a proof of their steady adherence to Christ, and their desire to embrace him in all his offices, as well as worship him in all his ordinances; this cannot justly be reckoned an unnecessary circumstance or making that a term of communion which Christ has not made, and thereby excluding those who have a right to the Lord's supper.

And now we have considered the terms of communion, and the qualifications for it, as well as the spiritual privileges that are to be expected by those who have a right to it. I cannot but observe, how this is abused, and practically disowned, by those who engage in this ordinance merely as a qualification for a civil employment. A person may certainly be a good member of a commonwealth, and very fit to be entrusted with the administration of the civil affairs thereof, who has little or nothing to say concerning his experiences of the grace of God. To assert, that a right to a civil employment is founded on the same qualifications that give a person a right to partake of the Lord's supper, would be to advance, not only that which is indefensible, but what would be almost universally denied, unless it could be proved, that all might partake of it, the con trary to which, we have endeavoured to maintain.

Moreover, when Christ instituted this ordinance, his people were in no expectation of bearing any part in the civil government; therefore this was most remote from the first intent and design thereof: And we often find that this is a temptation te