QUESTION II.
A second inquiry is, Whether the persons before mentioned and described may lawfully, and in a consistency luith, or without a re- nunciation of, their former principles and practice, go to and receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper in the 2^arish churches, under their present constitution and administration?
ANSWER.
It appears that they may not, or cannot so do ; for, — 1. Their so doing would be an ecclesiastical incorp)oration in the church tvherein they do partake; for a voluntary conjunction in the highest act of communion with any church, according to its order
246 AN ANSWER UNTO TWO QUESTIONS.
and institution, warranted by its own authority, is an express in- corporation with it, whereby a man is constituted a formal member of it unto all ends and purposes of privilege, right, and duty. The church-state is owned hereby, its authority submitted unto in its right and exercise ; nor is it otherwise interpreted of them unto whom they so join themselves. But this is a virtual, yea, an express re- nunciation of their own present church-state in any other society, and necessitates a relinquishment of their former practice.
It will be said that " a member of one particular church may par- take of the sacrament of the Lord's supper in another, without in- corporating or becoming a stated member of that church wherein he doth so partake."'
It is answered, that he may do so by virtue of that communion which is between the church whereof he is a member and that church wherein he doth so partake; for he is admitted unto that participation by virtue of that communion, and not on his ov/n per- sonal account. If it be otherwise, where any one is received unto the participation of this ordinance, there he is admitted unto entire membership, and is engaged unto all the duties thereunto belonging.
And thus is it in this case ; for those unto Avhom they join them- selves herein, if but occasionally, do, — (1.) Own no church-state in this nation but their own; (2.) Admit of none unto this sacrament by virtue of their communion with any other church, or any churches not of their own constitution ; nor, (3.) Will administer it unto any but those whom they claim to be their own, as living in their pa- rishes, in opposition unto any other church-state whatever.
Wherefore, it is impossible that any man should be a member of one church and communicate in this ordinance with another which condemns that whereof he is [a member] as schismatical, and re- ceiveth him as one belonging unto itself only, but he doth profess- edly renounce the communion of that church wherein he was, and is by them that receive him esteemed so to do. And no reserves of a contrary judgment or resolution in his own mind will relieve any man, in conscience or reputation, against the testimony of his practical profession.
2. They do hereby profess a spiritual incorporation with those or that church wherein they do so communicate, — namely, that they are "one bread and one body" with them, that they all " drink into one Spirit," 1 Cor. x. 17, xii. 13. How the}' can do this in those places where they judge the generality of them to be profane and ignorant, without sinning against their own light, is not to be understood.
It is said that " no persons, in this or any other ordinance of divine worship, are polluted or made guilty by the sins of others with whom they do communicate." It is answered, that this is not at present
AN ANSWER UNTO TWO QUESTIONS. 247
inquired into. That which such persons are charged with is their own sin only, in making a profession of spiritual incorporation, or becoming of one body, one bread Avith them, and of drinking into the same Spirit with them, when they do not esteem them so to be, in the exercise of love without dissimulation. The neglect also of other express duties, which we owe unto those who stand in that union with us, will necessarily follow hereon- Neither do such per- sons as so communicate intend to take on themselves an obligation unto all those duties which are required of them towards those with whom they profess themselves to be one spiritual body; which is an open prevarication against Scripture rule.
3. They would hereby not only justify the whole service of the liturgy, hut the ceremonies also enjoined to be used in the adminis- tration of the sacrament ; for the rule of the church wherewith they join is that whereby they are to be judged. Any abatement that may be made of them in practice is on both sides an unwarrantable self-deceiving, inconsistent with Christian ingenuity and sincerity. But hereby they do not only condemn all other present dissenters, but all those also of former days and ages, ministers and others, who suffered under deprivation, imprisonment, and banishment, in their testimony against them.
If they shall say they do not approve what is practised by others, though they join in the same worship and duties of it with them, I say this is contrary to the language of their profession, unto Scrip- ture rule, Rom. xiv. 22, and is indefensible in the sight of God and good men, and unworthy of that plain, open, bold sincerity which the gospel requireth in the professors of it.