4. If the delay be so long as either maketh the return improbable, or as necessitated the church to have another statedly in the pastor's place, where they can have but one, and so the people by taking another, consent (though with grief) to quit their relation and title to the former, there the relation is at an end.
5. It is a delusory formality of some, that call themselves members of a separated (or other) church, from which they most ordinarily and statedly live at an utter distance, and yet take themselves to be no members of the church where they live, and usually join with: and all because they covenanted with one and not with the other.
Quest. LXVI. _If a man be injuriously suspended or excommunicated by the pastor or people, which way shall he have remedy?_
_Ans._ As is aforesaid in case of mal-administration; 1. By admonishing the pastor or those that wrong him. 2. By consulting neighbour pastors, that they may admonish him. 3. By the help of rulers, where such are, and the church's good forbids it not. 4. In case of extremity, by removing to a church that will not so injure you. And what needs there any more, save patience?
Quest. LXVII. _Doth presence always make us guilty of the errors or faults of the pastor in God's worship, or of the church? Or in what cases are we guilty?_
_Answ._ 1. If it always made us guilty, no man could join with any pastor or church in the world, without being a wilful sinner. Because no man worshippeth God without sin, in matter or manner, omission or commission.
2. If it never made us guilty, it would be lawful to join with Mahometans and bread-worshippers, &c.
3. Therefore the following decision of the question, In what cases it is a duty or a sin to separate, doth decide this case also. For when separation is no duty, but a sin, there our presence in the worship is no sin; but when separation is a duty, there our presence is a sin.
4. Especially in these two cases our presence is a sin: 1. When the very assembly and worship is so bad as God will not accept, but judgeth the substance of it for a sin. 2. In case we ourselves be put upon any sin in communion, or as a previous condition of our communion (as to make some false profession, or to declare our consent to other men's sin, or to commit corporal, visible, reputative idolatry, or the like). But the pastor and church shall answer for their own faults, and not we, when we have cause to be present, and make them not ours by any sinful action of our own.
Quest. LXVIII. _Is it lawful to communicate in the sacrament with wicked men?_
_Answ._ The answer may be gathered from what is said before.
1. If they be so wicked for number, and flagitiousness, and notoriety, as that it is our duty to forsake the church, then to communicate with them is a sin. Therefore the after-resolution of the just causes of separation must be perused. As if a church were so far defiled with heresy, or open impiety, that it were justified by the major vote, and bore down faith and godliness, and the society were become uncapable of the ends of church association and communion: in this and other cases it must be deserted.
2. If we do not perform our own duty to remove unlawful communions, (whether it be by admonition of the offender or pastor, or whatever is proved really our duty,) the omission of that duty is our sin.
3. But if we sin not by omitting our own duty, it will be no sin of ours to communicate with the church, where scandalous sinners or heretics are permitted. The pastor's and delinquent's sins are not ours.
4. Yea, if we do not omit our own duty in order to the remedy, that will justify us in denying communion with the church while wicked men are there. But it will rather aggravate our sin, to omit one duty first, and thence fetch occasion to omit another.
Quest. LXIX. _Have all the members of the church right to the Lord's table? And is suspension lawful?_
Of this see the defence of the synod's propositions in New England. I answer,
1. You must distinguish between a fundamental right of state, and an immediate right of present possession; or if you will, between a right duly to receive the sacrament, and a right to immediate reception simply considered.
2. You must distinguish between a questioned, controverted right, and an unquestioned right; and so you must conclude as followeth.
(1.) Every church member (at least adult) as such, hath the fundamental right of stated relation, or a right duly to receive the sacrament; that is, to receive it understandingly and seriously at those seasons when by the pastors it is administered.
(2.) But if upon faults or accusations, this right be duly questioned in the church, it is become a controverted right; and the possession or admission may, by the bishops or pastors of the church, be suspended, if they see cause, while it is under trial, till a just decision.