these enquiries may be made of fuch as are best acquainted with the perfons defiring communion, and likewise of thofe perfons themselves. You fay, you no where find fuch authority committed to

any minifter or congegration." Pray, Sir, tell us, where you find that which you claim. We have juft as exprefs an authority for examining whether the perfons who defire admiffion to the Lord's Supper, give credible evidence of their being real Chriftians, as you have for enquiring whether they are free from fcandalous vices. The truth is, there is no express authority, in either of thefe cafes, committed to any Chriftian church, for fuch examination; nor was there occafion for it: it naturally follows from the nature of the ordinance, and from that general authority, which, we have feen, churches. have over their members, fo as to exclude thofe that appear unworthy. How muft they know whether those that offer to join their fociety, ought to be received or not, unless they enquire? A right to refuse any, neceffarily fuppofes a right to enquire of all the extent of this authority must be determined by the neceffary qualifications for church communion. If it fhould appear from fcripture, that all those who make a profeffion of Chriftianity, who believe that Chrift is a teacher fent from God, and who are free from fcandalous vices, have a right to the Lord's Supper, but only fuch; and that, if any others have gained admittance, they ought to be excluded; it naturally follows, that a church has a right to enquire, Whether those who defire to become members of it, are thus qualified, and no further. But if (as I have endeavoured to prove) none have a right to admiffion but fuch as give credible evidence that they are real Chriftians, then every church has authority, upon your own principles, to examine whether thofe that defire admiffion, appear to be real Chriftians or not, and

GA

ΤΟ

to enquire both into their lives, and into their faith. If, in any other fociety, an established law required that none fhould be admitted into it but perfons of fuch and fuch qualifications, though no authority was exprefly given to the members of it, to examine the candidates, with refpect to them, would fuch examination be deemed an impofition? Why it fhould, then, in the present case, I am at a loss to conceive.

But let it be further obferved, as this right of enquiry feems reasonable in itself, and follows from the nature of the Lord's Supper, and the general authority of a church over its members, fo it seems to be confirmed by fome accounts we find in fcripture, of the conduct of the primitive churches. It was ufual for them, even to fend letters of commendation of their members to other churches, when they had occafion to defire fellowship with them, which implies, that they were strict in enquiring into the characters of those who came to the Lord's Table. See Acts xviii,27. Rom. xvi. 1, 2 Cor. iii. 1. And, to recur to the cafe of Saul, and the church at Jerufalem, before mentioned, as the difciples there were all afraid of him, when he offered to join himfelf to them, we are told, Barnabas took him and brought him to the apoftles, and declared unto them, how he had feen the Lord in the way, &c.' Another remarkable inftance to my prefent purpose is, the profeffion which was demanded, previous to the admiffion of any to baptifm, which is the rite of initiation into the fellowship of the church; which inftance ferves to prove, as I propofed doing, that a church may not only enquire concerning the lives of those that defire admiffion, but alfo into their faith; and likewife that they may make their enquiry, not only of other perfons, acquainted with them, but allo of the candidates themselves. I fhall

.

therefore

therefore take fome more particular notice of this fact by and by.

You have been pleafed to affert, (p. 30.) that "a previous declaration of a man's being a Chriftian is by no means neceffary [to his attending the "Lord's fupper]. This action is, itself, the de"claration, and a more fignificant and folemn one "than any other."

That is to fay, a perfon's actual coming to the Lord's table is the declaration of his fitness for it. Upon this principle, all perfons whatsoever, who attend this rite, are (or at least we must suppose they are) duly qualified for it, though we have no proof but this, that they are not fcandalous finners, or even infidels; nay, though we have abfolute evidence of their being fuch! And further; according to your affertion, when any apply for admiffion into the church, though there be ftrong reafon to fufpect that they are grofly ignorant, or even vicious, and that they are actuated by the bafeft of principles, neither the minister nor the church have a right to demand any declaration with refpect either to their knowledge, their faith, or their practice: for if " no previous declaration, with refpect to either, be neceffary," certainly no enquiry can be vindicable. You have indeed exprefly afferted it is not. "Men

66

66

are directed to examine themfelves, (fay you) but "the minifter is not directed to examine them, and

we must not go beyond our commiffion." Let us only apply your way of reafoning to any other fimilar cafe, and you muft, I fhould think, fee the weakness of it, not only here, but in fome other parts of our debate. Suppoíe a number of Britons, refiding for a time in a foreign country, for any particular purpose, had formed themfelves into a fociety, and had obtained a charter from the government there, by which they were entitled to certain privileges peculiar to themfelves, and fuch others of their

countrymen as might fettle there. Suppose further, that a certain periodical feast was appointed, at which all the members of the faid fociety fhould be required to attend, with a particular view to preferve their diftinction from the natives of the place; to commemorate the favour and indulgence of the Prince that had granted them their immunities; to testify their fubjection to his government, and their conformity to the laws of their charter; as well as their regards to each other. Now fuppofing any new fettlers proposed to join this fociety, with a view to enjoy certain emoluments, let me afk any impartial perfon, what evidence it might reasonably be expected they fhould give, or the fociety demand, of their being true Britons? Would it be thought a violation of the law of kindnefs, or an undue ufurpation in the members of that fociety, or an infringement of the liberty of others, to examine them concerning their pretenfions of being fubjects of the British empire; though their charter had not expressly enjoined fuch an enquiry, but only in general terms excluded all others? Or would their coming to the British feaft be judged "the declaration," and fuch an one as to fuperfede any other? Attending the faid feftival would indeed be a fufficient proof (to the members of the fociety, and to others) what perfons were acknowledged as British fubjects, if none but fuch were known to be admitted; but it were abfurd to confider this attendance as what gave them a right to be fo acknowledged; fince, if all had a liberty to attend," without any previous declaration of their

right," then perfons of other nations might and would do it from motives of intereft, and thus the diftinction between Englishmen and others would be utterly loft. The application of this to the cafe in point is easy. Attending the Lord's fupper is a declaration of a man's Chriftianity; and I will allow you, "the most fignificant and folemn one he can

"make"

make," and his being admitted to it is a proof of his being acknowledged by the church of Chrift as a true Christian; but it does not follow from hence, that no "previous declaration is neceffary:" this rather makes it neceffary. No one ought to declare, in this way, that he is a Christian, nor to be acknowledged as fuch by others, unless he really be one. Now a previous profeffion is the proper proof that he is a Christian, and that he has a right to that ordinance, in which he makes the declaration of it publick, and is also acknowledged by the church as fuch. And indeed, without fuppofing fome fuch previous declaration as you object to, and the right of a church to enquire concerning the faith and practice of candidates for the Lord's Supper, that ordinance would cease to be what you fay it is, the declaration of a man's Christianity; because then, those that were not Christians might partake of it, and doubtless would, in many cafes, which you cannot be at a lofs to fuppofe, wherein their fecular intereft might be moted, but their confciences must be shamefully prostituted, and the credit of religion would griev ously suffer.

pro

But you will probably object," that the means proposed is infufficient to answer the end, as it is impoffible to know the hearts of men, and after the strictest care in examining perfons before their admiffion into the church, many hypocrites will get into it." I answer, it is readily allowed to be impoffible always to detect hypocrify, and to keep cunning and evil-defigning men out of the church. But though fome will intrude notwithstanding the ftricteft guard, that is no reafon why all should have free admiffion without enquiry. Though fome, well skilled in the art of deception, might pafs the trial, others would quickly difcover themfelves; and efpecially the grofsly ignorant; who, when afked concerning their views of Chriftianity and of the Lord's Supper,