pofe, that the members of the church of Rome, though they are brought up and live continually in grofs idolatry, and innumerable errors and fuperftitions that tend utterly to make void the gospel of Christ, still are in the vifible church of Chrift: Yet, I fuppofe, no orthodox divines would hold thefe to be properly and regularly qualified for the Lord's fupper. It was therefore requifite, in the question before us, that a diftinction should be made between members of the visible church in general, and members in complete ftanding.

It was also requifite, that fuch a diftinction fhould be made in the question, to avoid lengthening out this difcourfe exceedingly, with needlefs queftions and debates concerning the state of baptized infants; that is needlefs as to my prefent purpose. Though I have no doubts about the doctrine of infant-baptifm; yet God's manner of dealing with fuch infants as are regularly dedicated to him in baptifm, is a matter liable to great difputes and many controverfies, and would require a large differtation by itself to clear it up; which, as it would extend this discourse beyond all bounds, fo it appears not neceffary in order to a clear determination of the prefent queftion. The revelation of God's word is much plainer and more exprefs concerning adult perfons, that act for themselves in religious matters, than concerning infants. The Scriptures were written for the fake of adult perfons, or thofe that are capable of knowing what is written: It is to fuch the Apoftles fpeak in their Epiftles, and to fuch only does God fpeak throughout his word: And the Scriptures efpecially speak for the fake of those, and about thofe to whom they speak. And therefore if the word of God affords us light enough concerning thofe fpoken of in the queftion, as I have ftated it, clearly to determine the matter with respect to them, we need not wait till we fee all doubts and controverfies about baptized infants cleared and settled, before we pafs a judgment with refpect to the point in hand. The denominations, characters, and defcriptions, which we find given in Scripture to vifible Chriftians,

and to the visible church, are principally with an eye to the church of Chrift in its adult ftate and proper ftanding. If any one was about to defcribe that kind of birds called Doves, it would be most proper to defcribe grown doves, and not young ones in the egg or neft, without wings or feathers: So if any one fhould defcribe a palmtree or olive-tree by their vifible form and appearance, it would be prefumed that they described those of these kinds of trees in their mature and proper state; and not as just peeping from the ground, or as thunder-ftruck or blown down. And therefore I would here give notice, once for all, that when in the ensuing difcourfe I ufe fuch-like phrafes as vifible faints, members of the vifible church, &c. I, for the moft part, mean perfons that are adult and in good standing.

The queftion is not, whether Chrift has made converting grace or piety itself the condition or rule of his people's admitting any to the privileges of members in full communion with them: There is no one qualification of mind what foever, that Chrift has properly made. the term of this; not fo much as a common belief that Jefus is the Meffiah, or a belief of the being of a God. It is the credible profeffion and vifibility of these things, that is the church's rule in this cafe. Chriftian piety or godlinefs may be a qualification requifite to communion in the Christian facraments, juft in the fame manner as a belief that Jefus is the Meffiah, and the Scriptures the word of God, are requifite qualifications, and in the fame manner as fome kind of repentance is a qualification requifite in one that has been fufpended for being grofsly fcandalous, in order to his coming again to the Lord's fupper; and yet godlinefs itself not be properly the rule of the church's proceeding, in like manner as fuch a belief and repentance, as I have mentioned, are not their rule. It is a vifibility to the eye of a Chriftian judgment, that is the rule of the church's proceeding in each of thefe cafes.

There are two diftinctions must be here obferved. As, 1. We muft diftinguish between fuch qualifications as

are requifite to give a person a right to ecclefiaftical privileges in foro ecclefia, or a right to be admitted by the church to thofe privileges, and thofe qualifications that are a proper and good foundation for a man's own conduct in coming and offering himself as a candidate for immediate admiffion to thefe privileges: There is a difference between thefe. Thus, for instance, a profeflion of the belief of a future ftate and of revealed religion, and fome other things that are internal and out of fight, and a vifibility of thefe things to the eye of a Chriftian judgment, is all, relating to these things, that is requifite to give a man a right in foro ecclefia, or before the church; but it is the real exiftence of these things, that is what lays a proper and good foundation for his making this profeffion, and fo demanding thefe privileges. None will fuppofe, that he has good and proper ground for fuch a conduct, who does not believe another world, nor believe the Bible to be the word of God. And then,

2. We muft diftinguish between that which nextly brings an obligation on a man's confcience to feek admiffion to a Chriftian ordinance, and that which is a good foundation for the dictate of an enlightened wellinformed confcience, and fo is properly a folid foundation of a right in him to act thus. Certainly this diftinction does really take place among mankind in innumerable cafes. The dictates of mens confciences are what do bring them under a next or moft immediate obligation to act: But it is that which is a good foundation for such a dictate of an enlightened confcience, that alone is folid foundation of a right in him fo to act. A believing the doctrine of the Trinity with all the heart, in fome fenfe (let us suppose a moral fenfe) is one thing requifite in order to a perfon's having a folid foundation of a right in him to go and demand baptifm in the name of the Trinity: But his beft judgment or dictate of his confcience, concerning his believing this doctrine with this fincerity, or with all his heart, may be fufficient to bring an obligation on his confcience. Again, when a delinquent has been convicted of fcandal, it is repent

ance in fome refpect fincere (fuppofe a moral fincerity) that is the proper foundation of a right in him to offer himfelf for forgiveness and restoration: But it is the dictate of his confcience or his best judgment concerning his fincerity, that is the thing which immediately obliges him to offer himself. It is repentance itself, that is the proper qualification fundamental of his right, and what he cannot have a proper right without; for though he may be deceived, and think he has real repentance when he has not, yet he has not properly a right to be deceived; and perhaps deceit in fuch cafes is always owing to fomething blameable, or the influence of fome corrupt principle: But yet his beft judgment brings him under obligation. In the fame manner, and no otherwife, I fuppofe that Chriftian grace itself is a qualification requifite in order to a proper folid ground of a right in a perfon to come to the Chriftian facraments. But of this I may fay fomething more when I come to answer objections.

When I fpeak, in the queftion, of a being godly or gracious in the eye of a Christian judgment, by Chriftian judgment I intend fomething further than a kind of mere negative charity, implying that we forbear to cenfure and condemn a man, because we do not know but that he may be godly, and therefore forbear to proceed on the foot of fuch a cenfure or judgment in our treatment of him: As we would kindly entertain a ftranger, not knowing but in fo doing we entertain an angel or precious faint of God. But I mean a pofitive judgment, founded on fome pofitive appearance, or vifibility, fome outward manifeftations that ordinarily render the thing probable. There is a difference between fufpending our judgment, or forbearing to condemn, or having fome hope that poffibly the thing may be fo, and fo hoping the best; and a positive judgment in favour of a perfon. For an having fome hope, only implies that a man is not in utter defpair of a thing, though his prevailing opinion may be otherwise, or he may suspend his opinion. Though we cannot know a man believes that Jefus is

the Meffiah, yet we expect fome pofitive manifeftation or vifibility of it, to be a ground of our charitable judgment: So I fuppofe the cafe is here.

WHEN I speak of CHRISTIAN judgment, I mean a judgment wherein men do properly exercife reafon, and have their reafon under the due influence of love and other Christian principles; which do not blind reason, but regulate its exercifes; being not contrary to reason, though they be very contrary to cenforioufnefs or unreasonable nicenefs and rigidness.

I say in the eye of the CHURCH'S Chriftian judgment, becaufe it is properly a vifibility to the eye of the public charity, and not of a private judgment, that gives a perfon a right to be received as a vifible faint by the public. If any are known to be perfons of an honeft character, and appear to be of good understanding in the doctrines of Christianity, and particularly thofe doctrines that teach the grand condition of falvation, and the nature of true faving religion, and publicly and feriously profefs the great and main things wherein the effence of true religion or godlinefs confifts, and their converfation is agreeable; this juftly recommends them to the good opinion of the public, whatever fufpicions and fears any particular perfon, either the minifter, or fome other, may entertain, from what he in particular has obferved, perhaps from the manner of his expreffing himfelf in giving an account of his experiences, or an obfcurity in the order and method of his experiences, &c. The minister, in receiving him to the communion of the church, is to act as a public officer, and in behalf of the public fociety, and not merely for himfelf, and therefore is to be governed, in acting, by a proper vifibility of godlinefs in the eye of the public.

It is not my defign, in holding the negative of the foregoing question, to affirm, that all who are regularly admitted as members of the visible church in complete ftanding, ought to be believed to be godly or gracious perfons, when taken collectively, or confidered in the