Page images
PDF
EPUB

felf-examination can of itself give any man a qualification for the Lord's Supper; it is propofed as the means of knowing whether he be duly qualified or not. If hereupon he find that he is, by difcovering in himfelf the effential marks of a true Chriftian, he is warranted to eat of this bread and drink of this cup; but, if not, he is as ftrongly forbidden to do it as he could have been in a direct prohibition. It is as if it had been faid, "Since there is danger of receiving unworthily, let no man receive without having firft examined himfelf whether he be duly qualified, i. e. whether he be a true Chriftian, and proved himself to be one, or approved himself to his own confcience as fuch."

If it should be objected against this fenfe of the paffage," that there appears to be no propriety in the Apoftle's addreffing fuch an exhortation to thefe Corinthians, who are fuppofed to have been good men :” I anfwer, the exhortation (as I before obferved) was not particularly addreffed to them to whom the reproof had been given, but is a general advice founded on what had been faid on unworthy receiving in general. Or if it fhould be thought most natural to confider the advice as addressed to these very perfons among others, it may be allowed (very confiftently with what has been advanced concerning their piety in general, and the impoffibility of fixing the charge of impiety upon any individuals) that the Apoftle might have fome fecret fufpicion, that in fo diforderly a church there might be fome, whofe hearts were not right with God, and who had not thofe fpiritual views in attending this ordinance which the nature of it requires; the want of which might probably be, in a great meafure, the firft occafion of their irregularities.

Thus, Sir, I have attempted to fhew, that those Diffenters who maintain that a mere belief of the gofpel and a freedom from fcandalous vices, are not the

only

only qualifications for the Lord's Supper, have greater foundation both in reafon and fcripture for their opinion than you have reprefented. Whether you had (as you tell us p. 29.) "read to us every thing that relates to this question in the New Tef tament," or whether you have properly interpreted those you have produced, let our readers now judge,

I am, SIR,

Your's, &c.

xx

[74]

LETTER VII.

Rev. SIR,

[ocr errors]

FTER having confidered what are the neceffary qualifications for receiving the Lord's Supper, it is natural to enquire, (as I now propose doing) who are the proper judges of them? Is every man the fole judge for himself in this cafe, and are all perfons at full liberty to come to this ordinance, who choose to do fo, whatsoever their views, or their characters may be? Or has a Chriftian church a right to be fatisfied whether those that offer themselves to communion be duly qualified, and to exclude those who appear not to be fo? I cannot conceive why a fociety of Chriftians, fhould be fuppofed to differ from all other focieties, in a particular of effential importance to their honour, their liberty, their profperity, and even to their very being: for fuch most certainly is the power of determining who are, and who are not fit to be members, and of excluding fuch as they deem unworthy. A church of Chrift is a fociety of perfons who truly believe in and obey him, and who ftatedly meet together at the fame place, to partake of his fupper, as a token of their relation and subjection to him, as well as with a view to their mutual edification. Now if any one joins himfelf to fuch a fociety, who does not believe in Chrift, or who is not obedi

ent

ent to his commands, he is not properly a member of the church, being utterly difqualified by the laws of Chrift; and if the true members of it are obliged to admit all that offer themselves; in a courfe of time, if there fhould be any fecular motive, of honour or profit, the majority of fuch a fociety might be mere nominal Chriftians, or even profane perfons, if not infidels. And when this fhould once be the cafe, the righteous would foon utterly ceafe from among them' that which bore the name of a church of Chrift would effentially differ from it; the ordinances of religion would be profaned, and most likely would foon cease to be administered. It is not fufficient to fay, "Every Every man must answer for himself before God with refpect to his views in coming to the Lord's table," for it is not merely a perfonal concern. It is entering into an important connexion with others. It is profeffing to become members of a fociety faid to be a chofen generation, an

holy nation, a peculiar people,' laid under fpecial obligations to an holy exemplary converfation in the world; all of whom therefore must be greatly interested in the temper and deportment of the reft, fince fo intimate a connexion with wicked men might not only bring a reproach upon themselves and the religion of Chrift, but fuch perfons might have a very unhappy influence in the church, and greatly prevent its edification. It is fit therefore that a power fhould be lodged fomewhere of judging concerning the qualifications of candidates for communion, and of rejecting thofe that appear to be deftitute of them. But with whom could this be fo properly intrufted, as with the members of the church themfelves, whether they choose to exercise it themselves, or to commit into the hands of their paftor, or any felect number of their body. Such a power, one would think the common principles of liberty would fufficiently vindicate in a church, and even require. As they claim

no

no right to force any into communion, it feems un reasonable that any fhould force themselves. It is true, bodies of Chriftians, any more than individuals,

are not their own.' The fupper of which they partake is the Lord's Supper. So that they are to make no new terms of admiffion to it, but acknowledge thofe as fufficient which Chrift has made. But it is by no means inconfiftent with a due acknowledgement of him as the head over all things to the

church,' to judge whether thofe that would be received as members of that church, be qualified according to his own laws, and to exclude fuch as are

not.

On the contrary, if he has given them this power, it is part of their duty to him to exercise it. Such a power appears to me, in theory, fo reafonable, that it might be naturally expected he would have given it them; and from the New Teftament records it is abundantly evident he has.

Christian churches are not only represented as voluntary focieties, and the members of them confidered as perfons united in the strongest ties, but also as having fome kind of authority over each other. Hence they are exhorted to fubmit themselves one to another. And fuch paffages as the following strongly imply, that the primitive churches confidered them felves as having a right to judge of the qualifications of fuch as offered themselves to their communion, and to refuse those that appeared not duly qualified. Receive ye one another as Chrift alfo hath received us. I commend unto you Phebe our fifter, ⚫ that ye receive her as becometh faints.' § But this authority of the church with refpect to its own members is more fully expreffed in thofe paffages which relate to excommunication, the principal of which I had occafion to quote at length in a former letter. ‡ Now by the fame authority that a church may reject any from their fociety, after they have been received, they may, furely, refufe to admit any as

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Eph. v. 21. + Rom. xv. 7. § xvi. 1, 2.

mem

↑ See p. 53.

« PreviousContinue »