་

APPENDIX.

Being a LETTER to the AUTHOR, in anfwer to his request of information concerning the opinion of Proteftant divines and churches in general, of the Prefbyterians in Scotland and Diffenters in England in particular, refpecting FIVE QUESTIONS that relate to this controversy.

REV. AND DEAR SIR,

If you look into Mr. BAXTER's controverfial writings

against Mr. BLAKE, you will meet with fuch accounts of principles and facts, as I think may reasonably give an inquirer much fatisfaction as to the common judgment of Proteftant churches and divines in the points you mention. I particularly refer you to his FIVE DISPUTATIONS of Right to Sacraments, and the true Nature of Vifible Chriflianity; where all or the moft of your queries are confidered and anfwered, with a multitude of teftimonies produced in favour of fentiments contrary to thofe of your excellent predeceffor, the late Mr. STOD DARD. I have not faid this from any difpofition to

ex

cufe myself from the labour of making fome further inquiry, if it be thought needful. And as it may fhew my willingness to gratify your defire, I will now fay fomething on your queflions diftinctly, but with as much brevity as I can.

QUEST. I. What is the general opinion refpecting that SELF-EXAMINATION required in 1 Cor. xi. 28. Whether communicants are not here directed to examine themselves concerning the truth of grace, or their real godliness?

ANSW. This conftruction of the text, as far as I have had opportunity to inquire, appears to me very generally received; if I may judge by what many celebrated expofitors have faid, on the place, and by what many famous divines have written in treatifes of preparation for the Lord's fupper, befides what is contained in public confeffions, catechisms, directories, &c.-I think Dr. REYNOLDS, in his Meditations on the Lord's Supper, has fummarily expreffed the common judgment of Calvinifts in thefe ftrong lines of his: "The facrament is but a feal "of the covenant; and the covenant effentially includes "conditions; and the condition on our part is faith. No "faith, no covenant; no covenant, no feal; no feal, no "facrament. The matter then of this trial (fays he) "must be that vital qualification, which predifpofeth a man for receiving of thefe holy mysteries; and that is "faith."

However, I may venture to be confident, that Mr. STODDARD'S glofs on the text, who tells us in his controverted fermon, "The meaning is, that a man must come folemnly to that ordinance, examining what NEED "he has of it," is quite foreign from the current sense of Calvinift writers: And though he makes a different comment in his Appeal to the Learned, faying, " The ex“amination called for is, whether they understood the na"ture of the ordinance, that fo they may folemnly confider

what they have to do when they wait upon God in it," neither can I find any appearance of a general consent of the learned and orthodox to this new glofs, at least as exhibiting the full meaning of the text. I might eafily confront it with numerous authorities: But the Pala tine Catechifm, and that of the Westminster Affembly, with the common explanations and catechizings upon them, may be appealed to as inftar omnium. And I fhall only add here, if it be allowed a juft expectation that the candidate for the communion examine himself about the Jame things at leaft as the paftor, to whom he applies for admiffion, ought to make the fubject of his examination, then it is worth while to hear the opinion of those un

named minifters in New England (among whom the late Dr. COLMAN, I have reafon to think, was the principal hand), that anfwered Dr. MATHER'S Order of the Gospel (anno 1700), who, in the Poftfcript to their REVIEW, thus exprefs themselves: "We highly approve-that the pro"ponant for the Lord's table be examined of his baptif"mal vow; his fenfe of fpiritual wants, finfulness, and "wretchedness; his hope, faith, experiences, refolutions through the grace of God." This, I think, is fomething beyond Mr. STODDARD.

QUEST. II. Whether it be the general opinion of those aforefaid, that fome who know themfelves to be unregene rate, and under the reigning power of fin, ought notwithflanding, in fuch a ftate, to come to the Lord's table?

ANSW. I am aware, Sir, though you have feen fit to take no notice of it to me, that Mr. STODDARD (in his Doctrine of Inflituted Churches) is peremptory in the affirmative; but I have met with no author among Calvinifts, at home or abroad, confenting with him, unless it be Mr. Blake, and fome that were for a promifcuous admiffion, with little or no limitation. If divines in general, of the Calvinift character, were for fuch a latitude as Mr. Stoddard's, what can we suppose to be the reafon, that in treating on the Lord's fupper, they fo conftantly confider it as one of the rights of the church, belonging to the truly faithful alone, exclufively of all others? Why do we hear them declaring, It is certain that the right of external fellowship refides in the faithful only: And as to the reft, they are in that communion only by accident, and it is alfo only by accident that they are fuffered there but being what they are, they have not any part in the rights of that fociety properly belonging to them? If they thought the facrament inftituted for converfion, why do we never find them recommending it as a converting ordinance, and urging perfons to come to it with that view, who know themselves to be in an unconverted ftate? If they thought that any fuch have a right before God, and may come to it with a good confcience, why do we find them

;

fo folemnly warning all that are truly convinced of their remaining yet in a natural ftate, to refrain coming to the Lord's table in their unbelief and impenitence; as if they judged it a finful and dangerous thing for them to come under fuch circumftances? I know Mr. STODDARD, in his Appeal, difputes the fact: But it has occurred to me in abundance of inftances, while reviewing my authors on this occafion.

Among the foreign Proteftants in Germany, France, &c. I fhall name but two out of many inftances before me. The Heidelburg or Palatine Catechifm, which had the folemn approbation of the Synod of Dort, and was especially praised by the divines of Great Britain; which has been in a manner univerfally received and taught, formerly in Scotland, and ftill all over Holland, and by reafon of its excellency has been translated into no less than thirteen several languages; this is moft exprefs in claiming the Lord's fupper for a special privilege of fuch as have true faith and repentance; and forbidding it to hypocrites, as well as fcandalous perfons, declaring that none fuch ought to come. See the eighty-first and other questions and anfwers, with URSIN's Latin Explications, and DE WITTE'S English Catechizings thereon. Here, Sir, indeed you have the judgment of a multitude in one.- Another celebrated book is CLAUDE'S Hiftorical Defence of the Reformation; in which I meet with repeated declarations of the fame fentiments, perfectly on the negative fide of the question in hand; but, I think, too many and too long to be here transcribed. The language of fome of them I have juft now had occafion to make use of.

.

As for the Church of Scotland, I find they have adopted the Weftminster Confeffion, Catechifms, and Directory, which debar all ignorant and ungodly perfons from the Lord's table, and require every one to examine himself, not only as to his knowledge, but also his faith, repentance, love, new obedience, &c.-In their Books of Difcipline, I obferve fundry paffages that appropriate the facrament to the truly penitent and faithful, as the only