Part 2

Having thus explained what I mean, when I say, That none ought to be admitted to the Communion and Privileges of Members of the visible Church of Christ in complete Standing, but such as are in Profession and in the Eye of the Church's Christian Judgment godly or gracious Persons: I now proceed to observe some Things which may tend to evince the Truth of this Position. And here,

1. I begin with observing, I think it is both evident by the Word of God, and also granted on all Hands, that none ought to be admitted as Members of the visible Church of Christ but visible Saints and professing Saints, or visible and professing Christians. We find the Word Saint, when applied to Men, used two Ways in the New Testament: The Word in some Places is so used as to mean those that are real Saints, who are converted, and are truly gracious Persons; as 1 Corinthians 6:2. Do you not know that the Saints shall judge the World? Ephesians 1:18. The Riches of the Glory of his Inheritance in the Saints. Chapter 3:17, 18. That Christ may dwell in your Hearts by Faith, that you being rooted and grounded in Love, may be able to comprehend with all Saints, what is the Breadth etc. 2 Thessalonians 1:10. When he shall come to be glorified in his Saints, and admired in all them that believe. So Revelation 5:8. Chapter 8:4. And 11:18. And 13:10. And 14:12. And 19:8. In other Places the Word is used so as to have Respect not only to real Saints, but to such as were Saints in Visibility, Appearance, and Profession; and so were outwardly, as to what concerns their Acceptance among Men and their outward Treatment and Privileges, of the Company of Saints: So the Word is used in very many Places, which it is needless to mention, as every one acknowledges it.

In like Manner we find the Word Christian used two Ways: The Word is used to express the same Thing as a Righteous Man that shall be saved, 1 Peter 4:16, 17, 18. Elsewhere it is so used as to take in all that were Christians by Profession and outward Appearance; Acts 11:26. So there is a twofold Use of the Word Disciples in the New Testament. There were Disciples in Name, Profession and Appearance; and there were those whom Christ calls Disciples indeed, John 8:30, 31. The word is truly. The Expression plainly supposes this Distinction of true or real Disciples, and those who were the same in Pretense and Appearance. See also Luke 14:25, 26, 27 and John 15:8. The same Distinction is signified, in the New Testament, by those that live, being alive from the Dead, and risen with Christ, (2 Corinthians 4:11; Romans 6:11 and elsewhere) and those who have a Name to live, having only a Pretense and Appearance of Life. And the Distinction of the visible Church of Christ into these two, is plainly signified of the Growth of the good Ground, and that in the stony and thorny Ground, which had the same Appearance and Show with the other, until it came to wither away; and also by the two Sorts of Virgins, Matthew 25 who both had a Show, Profession and Visibility of the same Thing. By these Things and many others which might be observed, it appears that the Distinction of real Saints and visible and professing Saints is scriptural, and that the visible Church was made up of these two, and that none are according to Scripture admitted into the visible Church of Christ, but those who are visible and professing Saints or Christians. And it is the more needless to insist longer upon it, because it is not a Thing in Controversy; so far as my small Reading will inform me, it is owned by all Protestants. To be sure, the most eminent Divine in New England who has appeared to maintain the Lord's Supper to be properly a converting Ordinance, was very full in it: In his Appeal to the Learned, in the Title Page, and through the Treatise, he supposes that all who come to the Lord's Supper must be visible Saints, and sometimes speaks of them as professing Saints. Page 85, 86. And supposes that it is requisite in order to their being admitted to the Communion of the Lord's Table, that they make a personal public Profession of their Faith and Repentance to the just Satisfaction of the Church, Page 93, 94. In these Things the whole of the Position that I would prove is in Effect granted. If it be allowed (as it is allowed on all Sides) that none ought to be admitted to the Communion of the Christian visible Church, but visible and professing Saints or Christians, if these Words are used in any Propriety of Speech, or in any Agreement with Scripture Representations, the whole of that which I have laid down is either implied or will certainly follow.

As real Saints are the same with real Converts, or really gracious Persons, so visible Saints are the same with visible Converts, or those that are visibly converted and gracious Persons. Visibility is the same with Manifestation or Appearance to our View and Apprehension. And therefore to be visibly a gracious Person, is the same Thing as to be a truly gracious Person to our View, Apprehension or Esteem. The Distinction of real and visible does not only take Place with Regard to Saintship or Holiness, but with Regard to innumerable other Things. There is visible and real Truth, visible and real Honesty, visible and real Money, visible and real Gold, visible and real Diamonds etc. Visible and Real are Words that stand related one to another, as the Words real and seeming, or true and apparent. Some seem to speak of Visibility with Regard to Saintship or Holiness, as though it had no Reference to the Reality, or as though it were a distinct Reality by itself, as though by visible Saints were not meant those who to Appearance are real Saints or Disciples indeed, but properly a distinct Sort of Saints, which is an Absurdity. There is a Distinction between real Money and visible Money, because all that is esteemed Money and passes for Money is not real Money, but some is false and counterfeit. But yet by visible Money, is not meant that which is taken and passes for a different Sort of Money from true Money, but thereby is meant that which is esteemed and taken as real Money, or which has that Appearance that recommends to Men's Judgment and Acceptance as true Money; though Men may be deceived, and some of it may finally prove not to be so.

There are not properly two Sorts of Saints spoken of in Scripture: though the Word Saints may be said indeed to be used two Ways in Scripture, or used so as to reach two Sorts of Persons; yet the Word has not properly two Significations in the New Testament, any more than the Word Gold has two Significations among us: The Word Gold among us is so used as to extend to several Sorts of Substances; it is true, it extends to true Gold, and also to that which only appears to be Gold, and is reputed Gold, and by that Appearance or Visibility some Things that are not real Gold obtain the Name of Gold; but this is not properly through a Diversity in the Signification of the Word, but by a Diversity of the Application of it, through the Imperfection of our discerning. It does not follow that there are properly two Sorts of Saints, because there are some who are not real Saints, that yet being visible or seeming Saints do by the Show and Appearance they make obtain the Name of Saints, and are reputed Saints, and whom by the Rules of Scripture (which are accommodated to our imperfect State) we are directed to receive and treat as Saints; any more than it follows that there are two Sorts of honest Men, because some who are not truly honest Men, yet being so seemingly or visibly, do obtain the Name of honest Men, and ought to be treated by us as such. So there are not properly two distinct Churches of Christ, one the real, and another the visible; though they that are visibly or seemingly of the one only Church of Christ, are many more than they who are really of his Church; and so the visible or seeming Church is of larger Extent than the real.

Visibility is a relative Thing, and has Relation to an Eye that views or beholds. Visibility is the same as Appearance or Exhibition to the Eye; and to be a visible Saint is the same as to appear to be a real Saint in the Eye that beholds; not the Eye of God, but the Eye of Man. Real Saints or Converts are those that are so in the Eye of God; visible Saints or Converts are those who are so in the Eye of Man; not his bodily Eye, for thus no Man is a Saint any more in the Eye of a Man than he is in the Eye of a Beast; but the Eye of his Mind, which is his Judgment or Esteem. There is no more Visibility of Holiness in the brightest Professor to the Eye of our Bodies, without the Exercise of the Reason and Judgment of our Minds, than may be in a Machine. But nothing short of an apparent Probability, or a probable Exhibition, can amount to a Visibility to the Eye of Man's Reason or Judgment. The Eye which God has given to Man is the Eye of Reason; and the Eye of a Christian is Reason sanctified, regulated and enlightened by a Principle of Christian Love. But it implies a Contradiction to say, that That is visible to the Eye of Reason, which does not appear probable to Reason. And if there be a Man that is in this Sense a visible Saint, he is in the Eye of a rational Judgment a real Saint. To say a Man is visibly a Saint, but not visibly a real Saint, but only visibly a visible Saint, is a very absurd Way of speaking; it is as much as to say, He is to Appearance an appearing Saint; which is in Effect to say nothing, and to use Words without Signification. The Thing which must be visible and probable, in order to visible Saintship, must be Saintship itself, or real Grace and true Holiness; not Visibility of Saintship, not unregenerate Morality, not mere moral Sincerity. To pretend to or in any Respect to exhibit moral Sincerity, makes nothing visible beyond what is pretended to or exhibited: For a Man to have that visibly, which if he had it really, and have nothing more, would not make him a real Saint, is not to be visibly a Saint.

Mr. Stoddard, in his Appeal to the Learned, seems to express the very same Notion of Visibility, and that Visibility of Saintship which is requisite to Persons coming to the Lord's Supper, that I have here expressed. In Page 10 he makes a Distinction between being visibly circumcised in Heart, and being really so; evidently meaning by the latter saving Conversion; and he allows the former namely a Visibility of Heart-Circumcision, to be necessary to a coming to the Lord's Supper. So that according to Him, it is not a Visibility of moral Sincerity only, but a Visibility of Circumcision of Heart, or saving Conversion, that is a necessary Requisite to a Person's coming to the Lord's Table. And in what Manner this must be visible, he signifies elsewhere, when he allows, that it must be so to a Judgment of Charity; a Judgment of rational Charity. This he expressly allows over and over; as in Page 2, 3. Page 28. Page 33. Page 72. And 95. And an having Reason to look upon them as such, Page 28. And towards the Close of his Book, he declares himself steadfastly of the Mind, that it is requisite those be not admitted to the Lord's Supper, who do not make a personal and public Profession of their Faith and Repentance, to the just Satisfaction of the Church, Page 93, 94. But how he reconciled these Passages with the rest of his Treatise, I would modestly say, I must confess myself at a Loss. And particularly, I cannot see how they consist with what this venerable and ever honoured Author says, Page 16 in these Words; Indeed by the Rule that God has given for Admissions, if it be carefully attended, more Unconverted Persons will be admitted than Converted. I would humbly inquire, how those visible Qualifications can be the Ground of a rational Judgment, that a Person is circumcised in Heart, which nevertheless at the same Time, we are sensible are so far from being any probable Signs of it, that they are more frequently without it, than with it. The Appearance of that Thing surely cannot imply an appearing Probability of another Thing, which at the same Time we are sensible is most frequently, and so most probably, without that other Thing.

Indeed I can easily see, how that may seem visible, and appear probable to God's People by Reason of the imperfect and dark State they are in, and so may oblige their Charity, which yet is not real, and which would not appear at all probable to Angels, who stand in a clearer Light. And the different Degrees of Light, that God's Church stands in in different Ages, may make a Difference in this Respect. The Church under the New Testament being favored by God with a vastly greater Light in divine Things, than the Church under the Old Testament, that might make some Difference, as to the Kind of Profession of Religion that is requisite, under these different Dispensations, in order to a Visibility of Holiness; also a proper Visibility may fail in the greater Number in some extraordinary Case, and in exempt Circumstances. But how those Signs can be a Ground of a rational Judgment that a Thing is, which, at that very Time, and under that Degree of Light we then have, we are sensible do oftener fail than not, and this ordinarily, I own myself much at a Loss. Surely nothing but appearing Reason is the Ground of a rational Judgment. And indeed it is impossible in the Nature of Things, to form a Judgment, which at that very Time we think to be not only without but against Probability.

If it be said, that although Persons do not profess that wherein sanctifying Grace consists, yet seeing they profess to believe the Doctrines of the Gospel, which God is wont to make use of in order to Men's Sanctification, and are called the Doctrine which is according to Godliness; and since we see nothing in their Lives to make us determine, that they have not had a proper Effect on their Hearts, we are obliged in Charity to hope that they are real Saints, or gracious Persons, and to treat them accordingly, and so to receive them into the Christian Church, and to its special Ordinances.

I answer, This Objection does in Effect suppose and grant the very Thing mainly in Dispute: For it supposes, that a gracious Character is the Thing that ought to be looked at and aimed at in admitting Persons into the Communion of the Church; and so that it is needful to have this Charity for Persons, or such a favorable Notion of them, in order to our receiving them as properly qualified Members of the Society, and properly qualified Subjects of the special Privileges they are admitted to. Whereas the Doctrine taught is, that sanctifying Grace is not a necessary Qualification herefor, and that there is no need that the Person himself, or any other, should have any Imagination, that he is a Person so qualified; because we know, it is no Qualification requisite in itself; we know the Ordinance of the Lord's Supper is as proper for them that are not so qualified as for those that are; it being according to the Design of the Institution a converting Ordinance, and so an Ordinance as much intended for the Good of the Unconverted, as of the Converted; even as it is with the Preaching of the Gospel. Now if the Case be so, why is there any Talk about a charitable hoping they are converted, and so admitting them? What need of any charitable Hope of such a Qualification, in order to admitting them to an Ordinance that is as proper for those who are without this Qualification, as for those that have it? We need not have any charitable Hope of any such Qualification in order to admit a Person to hear the Word preached. What need have we to aim at any Thing beyond the proper Qualifications? And what Manner of Need of any charitable Opinion or Hope of any thing further? Some Sort of Belief, that Jesus is the Messiah, is a Qualification properly requisite to a coming to the Lord's Supper; and therefore it is necessary that we should have a charitable Hope, that those have such a Belief whom we admit; though it be not necessary that we should know it, it being what none can know of another. But as to Grace or Christian Piety, it clearly follows, on the Principles which I oppose, that if there be any Visibility of it, more or less, of any Sort, yet no Kind of Visibility or Appearance, whether more direct or indirect, whether to a greater or less Degree, no Charity or Hope of it, have any thing at all to do in the Affair of Admission to the Lord's Supper; for, according to Them, it is properly a converting Ordinance. What has any Visibility or Hope of a Person's being already in Health to admitting him into an Hospital for the Use of those Means that are the proper appointed Means for the healing of the Sick, and bringing them to Health? And therefore it is needless here to dispute about the Nature of Visibility; and all arguing concerning a Profession of Christian Doctrines, and an orderly Life being a sufficient Ground of public Charity, and an Obligation on the Church to treat them as Saints, are wholly impertinent and nothing to the Purpose. For on the Principles which I oppose, there is no Need of any Sort of Ground for treating them as Saints, in order to admitting them to the Lord's Supper, the very Design of which is to make them Saints, any more than there is Need of some Ground of treating a sick Man as being a Man in Health, in order to admitting him into a Hospital. Persons, by the Doctrine that I oppose, are not taught to offer themselves as Candidates for Church Communion under any such Notion, or with any such Pretence, as their being gracious Persons; and therefore surely when those that teach them, receive them to the Ordinance, they do not receive them under any such Notion, nor has any Notion, Appearance, Hope, or Thought of it, any Thing to do in the Case.

The Apostle speaks of the Members of the Christian Church, as those that made a Profession of Godliness. 2 Corinthians 9:13. They glorified God for your professed Subjection to the Gospel of Christ. 1 Timothy 2:10. In like Manner also that Women adorn themselves in modest Apparel,—not with costly Array; but, which becometh Women professing Godliness, with good Works. The Apostle is speaking of the Women that were Members of that great Church of Ephesus, which Timothy for the present had the Care of; and he speaks of them as supposing that they all professed Godliness. By the Allowance of all, Profession is one Thing belonging to the Visibility of Christianity or Holiness, that there is in the Members of the visible Church. Visible Holiness is an Appearance or Exhibition of Holiness, by those Things which are external, and so fall under our Notice and Observation. And these are two, namely Profession, and an outward Behavior, agreeable to that Profession. That Profession which belongs to visible Saintship, must be a Profession of Godliness, or real Saintship; for a Profession makes nothing visible, beyond what is professed. What is it, to be a Saint by Profession, but to be by Profession a true Saint? For to be by Profession a false Saint, is to be by Profession no Saint; and only to profess that, which if never so true, is nothing peculiar to a Saint, is not to be a professing Saint.

In order to a Man's being properly a professing Christian, he must profess the Religion of Jesus Christ: And he surely does not profess the Religion that was taught by Jesus Christ, if he leaves out of his Profession the most essential Things that belong to that Religion. That which is most essential in that Religion itself, the Profession of that is essential in a Profession of that Religion; for (as I have observed elsewhere) that which is most essential in a Thing, in order to its being truly denominated that Thing, the same is essentially necessary to be expressed or signified in any Exhibition or Declaration of that Thing, in order to its being truly denominated a Declaration or Exhibition of that Thing. If we take a more inconsiderable Part of Christ's Religion, and leave out the main and most essential, surely what we have cannot be properly called the Religion of Jesus Christ: so if we profess only a less important Part, and are silent about the most important and essential Part, it cannot be properly said that we profess the Religion of Jesus Christ. And therefore we cannot in any Propriety be said to profess the Christian or Christ's Religion, unless we profess those Things wherein consists Piety of Heart, which is vastly the most important and essential Part of that Religion that Christ came to teach and establish in the World, and is in Effect all; being that without which all the Rest that belongs to it, is nothing, and wholly in vain. But they who are admitted to the Lord's Supper, proceeding on the Principles of those who hold it to be a converting Ordinance, do in no Respect profess Christian Piety, neither in Whole nor in Part, neither explicitly nor implicitly, directly nor indirectly; and therefore are not professing Christians, or Saints by Profession. I mean, though they may be godly Persons, yet as they come to the Ordinance without professing Godliness, they cannot properly be called professing Saints.

Here it may be said, that although no explicit and formal Profession of those Things which belong to true Piety, be required of them; yet there are many Things they do, that are a virtual and implicit Profession of these Things: Such as their owning the Christian Covenant, their owning God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, to be their God; and by their visibly joining in the public Prayers and singing God's Praises, there is a Show and implicit Profession of supreme Respect to God and Love to him; by joining in the public Confessions, they make a Show of Repentance; by keeping Sabbaths and hearing the Word, they make a Show of a Spirit of Obedience; by offering to come to Sacraments, they make a Show of Love to Christ and a Dependence on his Sacrifice.

To this I answer; It is a great Mistake, if any one imagines, that all these external Performances are of the Nature of a Profession of any thing at all that belongs to saving Grace, as they are commonly used and understood: and to be sure none of them are so, according to the Doctrines that are taught and embraced, and the Customs that are established in such Churches as proceed on the Foot of the Principles forementioned. For what is professing, but exhibiting, uttering, or declaring, either by intelligible Words, or by other established Signs that are equivalent? But in such Churches, neither their publicly saying, that they avouch God the Father Son and Holy Ghost, to be their God, and that they give themselves up to Him, and promise to obey all his Commands, nor their coming to the Lord's Supper, or to any other Ordinances, are taken for Expressions or Signs of any thing belonging to the Essence of Christian Piety. But on the contrary, the public Doctrine, Principle and Custom in such Churches establishes a diverse Use of these Words and Signs. People are taught, that they may use them all, and not so much as make any Pretence to the least Degree of sanctifying Grace; and this is the established Custom: so they are used, and so they are understood. And therefore whatever some of these Words and Signs may in themselves most properly and naturally import or signify, they entirely cease to be Significations of any such Thing among People accustomed to understand and use them otherwise; and so cease to be of the Nature of a Profession of Christian Piety. There can be no such Thing among such a People, as either an explicit or implicit Profession of Godliness by any Thing which (by their established Doctrine and Custom) an unregenerate Man may and ought to say and perform, knowing himself to be so. For let the Words and Actions otherwise signify what they will, yet that People have in Effect agreed among themselves, that Persons who use them, need not intend them so, and that others need not understand them so. And hence they cease to be of the Nature of any Pretension to Grace. And surely it is an Absurdity to say, that Men openly and solemnly profess Grace, and yet do not so much as pretend to it. If a certain People should agree, and it should be an established Principle among them, that Men might and ought to use such and such Words to their Neighbors, which according to their proper Signification were a Profession of entire Love and devoted Friendship towards the Man they speak to, and yet not think that he has any Love in his Heart to him, yes, and know at the same Time that he had a reigning Enmity against him; and it was known that this was the established Principle of the People; would not these Words, whatever their proper Signification was, entirely cease to be any Profession or Testimony of Friendship to his Neighbor? To be sure, there could be no Visibility of it to the Eye of Reason.

Thus it is evident, that those who are admitted into the Church on the Principles that I oppose, are not professing Saints, nor visible Saints; because that Thing which alone is truly Saintship, is not what they profess, or make any Pretence to, or have any Visibility of, to the Eye of a Christian Judgment. Or if they in Fact be visible and professing Saints, yet, they are not admitted as such; no Profession of true Saintship, nor any Manner of Visibility of it, has any Thing to do in the Affair.

There is one Way to evade these Things, which has been taken by some, and that they plead: Although it be true, that the Scripture represents the Members of the visible Church of Christ as Professors of Godliness; and they are abundantly called by the Name of Saints in Scripture, undoubtedly because they were Saints by Profession, and in Visibility, and the Acceptance of others; yet this is not with any Reference to saving Holiness, but to quite another Sort of Saintship, namely moral Sincerity; and that this is the real Saintship, Discipleship, and Godliness, which is professed, and visible in them, and with Regard to which, as having an Appearance of it to the Eye of Reason, they have the Name of Saints, Disciples etc. in Scripture.

It must be noted, that in this Objection the Visibility is supposed to be of real Saintship, Discipleship, and Godliness, but only another Sort of real Godliness, than that which belongs to those who shall finally be owned by Christ as his People, at the Day of Judgment.

To which I answer, This is a mere Evasion; the only one, that ever I saw or heard of; and I think the only one possible. For it is certain, they are not Professors of sanctifying Grace, or true Saintship: The Principle proceeded on, being, that they need make no Pretence to that; nor has any Visibility of saving Holiness any Thing to do in the Affair. If then they have any Holiness at all, it must be of another Sort. And if this Evasion fails, the whole Matter in Debate must be given up. Therefore I desire that this Matter may be impartially considered and examined to the very Bottom; and that it may be thoroughly enquired, whether this Distinction of these two Sorts of real Christianity, Godliness, and Holiness, is a Distinction, that Christ in his Word is the Author of; or whether it be an human Invention of something which the New Testament knows nothing of, devised to serve and maintain an Hypothesis. And here I desire that the following Things may be observed.

1. According to this Hypothesis, the Words, Saints, Disciples, and Christians, are used four Ways in the New Testament, as applied to four Sorts of Persons. (1) To those that in Truth and Reality are the Heirs of eternal Life, and that shall judge the World, or have indeed that Saintship which is saving. (2) To those who profess this, and pretend to and make a fair Show of a supreme Regard to Christ, and to renounce the World for his Sake, but have not real Ground for these Pretences and Appearances. (3) To those who, although they have not saving Grace, yet have that other Sort of real Godliness or Saintship, namely moral Sincerity in Religion; and so are properly a Sort of real Saints, true Christians, sincerely godly Persons and Disciples indeed, though they have no saving Grace. And (4) To those who make a Profession and have a Visibility of this latter Sort of sincere Christianity, and are nominally such Kind of Saints, but are not so indeed. So that here are two Sorts of real Christians, and two Sorts of visible Christians; two Sorts of invisible and real Churches of Christ, and two Sorts of visible Churches. Now will any one that is well acquainted with the New Testament, say, there is in that the least Appearance or Shadow of such a four-fold Use of the Words, Saints, Disciples, etc.? It is manifest by what was observed before, that these Words are there used but two Ways; and that those of Mankind to whom these Names are applied, are there distinguished into but two Sorts, namely Those who have really a saving Interest in Christ, spiritual Conformity and Union to him, and those who have a Name for it, as having a Profession and Appearance of it. And this is further evident by various Representations, which we there find of the visible Church; as in the Company of Virgins that went forth to meet the Bridegroom, we find a Distinction of them into but two Sorts, namely The Wise that had both Lamps and Oil; and those who had Lamps indeed like the wise Virgins (therein having an external Show of the same Thing, namely Oil) but really had no Oil; signifying that they had the same Profession and outward Show of the same Sort of Religion, and entertained the same Hopes with the wise Virgins. So when the visible Church is represented by the Husbandman's Floor, we find a Distinction but of two Sorts, namely The Wheat and the Chaff. So again, when the Church is compared to the Husbandman's Field, we find a Distinction but of two Sorts, the Wheat and the Tares, which (Naturalists observe) show or appear exactly like the Wheat, till it comes to bring forth its Fruit; representing, that those who are only visible Christians, have a Visibility or Appearance of the Nature of that Wheat, which shall be gathered into Christ's Barn; and that Nature is saving Grace.

2. It is evident, that those who had the Name of Disciples in the Times of the New Testament, bore that Name with Reference to a Visibility and Pretence of the same Relation to Christ, which they had who should be finally owned as his. This is manifest by John 8:30, 31. As he spoke these Words, many believed on him. Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If you continue in my Word, then are you my Disciples indeed. (Compare Luke 14:25, 26, 27. and John 15:8.) The Phrase, Disciples indeed, is relative; and has Reference to a Visibility, Pretence, or Name, only, which it is set in Opposition to, and has a Reference to that Name and Visibility that those, who then bore the Name of Disciples, had; which makes it evident, that those who then bore the Name of Disciples, had a Visibility and Pretence of the same Discipleship Christ speaks of, which he calls true Discipleship, or Discipleship indeed: for true Discipleship is not properly set in Opposition to any Thing else but a Pretence to the same Thing, that is not true. The Phrase Gold indeed is in Reference and Opposition to something that has the Appearance of that same Metal, and not to an Appearance of Brass. If there were another Sort of real Discipleship in those Days, besides saving Discipleship, Persons might be Christ's Disciples indeed, or truly (as the Word in the Original is) without continuing in his Word, and without selling all that they had, and without hating Father and Mother and their own Lives, for his Sake. By this it appears, that those who bore the Name of Disciples in those Times were distinguished into but two Sorts, Disciples in Name or Visibility, and Disciples indeed; and that the Visibility and Profession of the former was of the Discipleship of the latter.

3. The same Thing is evident by 1 John 2:19. They went out from us, because they were not of us: If they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us. The Words naturally suggest and imply, that those professing Christians, who at last proved false, did, before they went out, seem to belong to the Society of the true Saints, or those endowed with persevering Grace and Holiness; They seemed to be of their Number, that is, They were so in Pretence and Visibility, and so were accepted in the Judgment of Charity.

4. The Name and Visibility, that nominal or visible Christians had in the Days of the New Testament, was of saving Christianity, and not of moral Sincerity; for they had a Name to live, though many of them were dead. Revelation 3:1. Now it is very plain what that is in Religion which is called by the Name of Life, all over the New Testament, namely saving Grace; and I do not know that any Thing else, of a religious Nature, is ever so called.

5. The Visibility, that visible Christians had of Saintship in the Apostles Days, was not of moral Sincerity, but gracious Sincerity, or saving Saintship: For they are spoken of as being visibly of the Number of those Saints who shall judge the World and judge Angels. 1 Corinthians 6:1, 2, 3. Dare any of you, having a Matter against another, go to Law before the Unjust, and not before the Saints? Do you not know, that the Saints shall judge the World? And if the World shall be judged BY YOU, are you unworthy to judge the smallest Matters? Know you not that WE shall judge Angels? These Things do manifestly imply, that if the Christian Corinthians were what they supposed they were, and what they professed to be, and what they were accepted to be, they were some of those Saints who at the Day of Judgment should judge Angels and Men.

6. That the visibility was not only of moral sincerity, but saving grace, is manifest, because the Apostle speaks of visible Christians as visible Members of Christ's Body, of his Flesh of his Bones, and one Spirit with him, and Temples of the Holy Ghost. Eph. 5:30, and 1 Cor. 6:16, 19. And the Apostle Peter speaks of visible Christians as those who were visibly such righteous persons as should be saved; and that are distinguished from the ungodly, and them that obey not the Gospel, who shall perish. 1 Pet. 4:16, 17, 18. Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God on this behalf. For the time is come that judgment must begin at the House of God; and if it first begin at US (us Christians, comprehending himself and those to whom he wrote, and all of that sort) what shall the end of them be that obey not the Gospel of God? And if the Righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the Ungodly and Sinner appear?

7. That the visibility was not merely of moral sincerity, but of that sort of saintship which the saints in Heaven have, is manifest by this, that they are often spoken of as visibly belonging to Heaven, and as of the Society of the Saints in Heaven. So the Apostle in his Epistle to the Ephesians speaks of them as visibly of the same Household or Family of God, a part of which is in Heaven. Chap. 2:19. Now therefore you are no more Strangers and Foreigners, but Fellow-Citizens with the Saints, and of the Household of God. Together with the next Chapter, Ver. 15. Of whom the whole Family in Heaven and Earth is named. Where the context and continuation of discourse demonstrates, that he is still speaking of the same Family or Household he had spoken of in the latter part of the preceding Chapter. So all visible Christians are spoken of as visibly the Children of the Church which is in Heaven. Gal. 4:26. Jerusalem which is above, is free, which is the Mother of us all. The same Apostle speaks of visible Christians as being visibly come to the Heavenly City, and having joined the glorious Company of Angels there, and as visibly belonging to the general Assembly and Church of the First-born, that are written in Heaven, and to the Spirits of just men made perfect, Heb. 12:22, 23. And elsewhere they are spoken of as being visibly of the number of those who have their Names written in the Book of Life, Rev. 3:5 and 22:19. They who truly have their names written in the Book of Life, are God's true Saints, that have saving grace: as is evident by Rev. 13:8. And all that dwell on the Earth, shall worship Him, whose Names are not written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World. And Chap. 20:12. And another Book was opened, which was the Book of Life. Ver. 15. And whosoever was not found written in the Book of Life, was cast into the Lake of Fire. We are told, in the conclusion of this Chapter, how they were disposed of whose names were not written in the Book of Life; and then the Prophet proceeds in the next Chapter to tell us how they were disposed whose names were found there written, namely that they were admitted into the New-Jerusalem, Ver. 27. And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination or maketh a lie; but they which are written in the Lamb's Book of Life. And yet in the next Chapter it is implied, that some who were not truly gracious persons, and some that should finally perish, were visibly of the number of those that had both a Part in the New-Jerusalem, and also their Names written in the Book of Life. Ver. 19. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the holy City.

8. That Baptism, by which the primitive Converts were admitted into the Church, was used as an exhibition and token of their being visibly regenerated, dead to sin, alive to God, having the old man crucified, being delivered from the reigning power of sin, being made free from sin, and become the servants of righteousness, those servants of God that have their fruit unto that holiness whose end is everlasting life; as is evident by Rom. 6 throughout. In the former part of the Chapter, he speaks of the Christian Romans, as dead to sin, being buried with Christ in Baptism having their old man crucified with Christ etc. He does not mean, only, that their Baptism laid them under special Obligations to these things, and was a mark and token of their engagement to be thus hereafter; but was designed as a mark, token and exhibition of their being visibly thus already. As is most manifest by the Apostle's prosecution of his argument in the following part of the Chapter. Ver. 14. For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under the law but under grace. Ver. 17, 18. God be thanked, you were the servants of sin, but you have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, you became the servants of righteousness. Ver. 22. But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, you have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

9. It is evident, that it is not only a visibility of moral sincerity in religion, which is the Scripture qualification of admission into the Christian Church, but a visibility of regeneration and renovation of heart, because it was foretold that God's People and the Ministers of his House in the days of the Messiah, should not admit into the Christian Church any that were not visibly circumcised in Heart. Ezek. 44:6-9. And you shall say to the Rebellious, even to the House of Israel, Thus says the Lord God, O you House of Israel, let it suffice you of all your abominations, in that you have brought into my Sanctuary strangers uncircumcised in Heart, and uncircumcised in Flesh, to be in my Sanctuary to pollute it, even my House, when you offer my Bread, the Fat and the Blood; and they have broken my Covenant, because of all your abominations: And you have not kept the charge of mine holy things, but you have set keepers of my charge in my Sanctuary for yourselves. Thus says the Lord, no Stranger uncircumcised in Heart, nor uncircumcised in Flesh, shall enter into my Sanctuary, of any stranger that is among the children of Israel.

The venerable Author of the Appeal to the Learned, says, Page 10. That this Scripture has no particular reference to the Lord's Supper. I answer, though I do not suppose it has merely a reference to that Ordinance, yet I think it manifest, that it has a reference to admitting persons into the Christian Church, and to external Church-Privileges. It might be easy to prove, that these nine last Chapters of Ezekiel must be a vision and prophecy of the state of things in the Church of God in the Messiah's days: But I suppose it will not be denied, it being a thing wherein Divines are so generally agreed. And I suppose, none will dispute but that by the House of God and his Sanctuary, which it is here foretold the uncircumcised in Heart should not be admitted into in the days of the Gospel, is meant the same House, Sanctuary, or Temple of God, that the Prophet had just before been speaking of, in the foregoing part of the same Chapter, and been describing throughout the four preceding Chapters. But we all know, that the New-Testament House of God is his Church. Heb. 3:3. For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, in as much as he who builded the House, hath more honor than the House. Ver. 6. But Christ as a Son over his own House, whose House are we, etc. 2 Tim. 2:20. In a great House there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and of earth, etc. 1 Tim. 3:15. That you may know how you ought to behave yourself in the House of God, which is the Church of the living God. Eph. 2:20, 21. And are built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; in whom all the building fitly framed together, groweth into an holy Temple in the Lord. 1 Cor. 3:9. You are God's Building. Ver. 16. Do you not know, that you are the Temple of God? 1 Pet. 2:5. You also as living stones are built up a spiritual House. Chap. 4:17. For the time is come, that judgment must begin at the House of God: And if it begin at us, what shall the end be etc? Heb. 10:21. And having an high Priest over the House of God. Ezekiel's Temple is doubtless the same that it is foretold the Messiah should build Zech. 6:12, 13. The Man whose Name is the Branch--He shall build the Temple of the Lord, even he shall build the Temple of the Lord--And what the Temple that Christ builds, is, the Apostle tells us, Heb. 3:3, 6. The Temple that Ezekiel in his vision was bid to observe the measures of, as it was measured with a Reed (Ezek. 40:3, 4.) we have reason to think, was the same the Apostle John in his vision was bid to measure with a Reed, Rev. 11:1. And when it is here foretold, that the uncircumcised in Heart should not enter into the Christian Sanctuary or Church, nor have communion in the offerings of God's Bread, of the Fat and Blood, that were made there, I think so much is at least implied, that they should not have communion in those Ordinances of the Christian Sanctuary, in which that Body and Blood of Christ were symbolically represented, which used of old to be symbolically represented by the fat and the blood. For the admission into the Christian Church here spoken of, is an admission into the visible, and not the mystical Church; For such an admission is spoken of as is made by the Officers of the Church. And I suppose, it will not be doubted, but that by Circumcision of Heart is meant the spiritual renewing of the heart; not any common virtues, which do not in the least change the nature, and mortify the corruption of the heart; as is held by all orthodox Divines, and as Mister Stoddard in particular abundantly insisted. However, if anybody disputes it, I desire that the Scripture may be allowed to speak for itself; for it very often speaks of Circumcision of Heart, and this every where, both in the Old Testament and New, manifestly signifies that great change of heart that was typified by the ceremony of Circumcision of the Flesh. The same which afterwards was signified by Baptism, namely Regeneration, or else the progress of that work in sanctification; as we read of the washing of Regeneration, etc. The Apostle tells us what was signified both by Circumcision and Baptism, Col. 2:11, 12; In whom also you are circumcised with the Circumcision made without hands, in putting off the sins of the flesh by the Circumcision of Christ, buried with him in Baptism; wherein also you are risen with him, through the faith of the operation of God. Where I would observe by the way, he speaks of all the members of the Church of Colosse as visibly circumcised with this Circumcision; agreeable to Ezekiel's Prophecy, that the members of the Christian Church shall visibly have this Circumcision. The Apostle speaks, in like manner, of the members of the Church of Philippi as spiritually circumcised (that is, in profession and visibility) and tells wherein this Circumcision appeared. Phil. 3:3. For we are the Circumcision, which worship God in the Spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. And in Rom. 2:28, 29. the Apostle speaks of this Christian Circumcision and Jewish Circumcision together, calling the former the Circumcision of the Heart. But he is not a Jew which is one outwardly, neither is that Circumcision which is outward in the FLESH; But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly, and Circumcision is that of THE HEART, in the Spirit, not in the Letter; whose Praise is not of Men, but of God. And whereas in this Prophecy of Ezekiel it is foretold, that none should enter into the Christian Sanctuary or Church, but such as are circumcised in Heart and circumcised in Flesh; thereby I suppose is intended, that none should be admitted but such as were visibly regenerated, and also baptized with outward Baptism.

By the Thing which have been observed, I think it abundantly evident, that the Saintship, Godliness and Holiness, of which, according to Scripture, professing Christians and visible Saints do make a Profession and have a Visibility, is not any Religion and Virtue that is the Result of common Grace, or moral Sincerity (as it is called) but saving Grace. Yet there are many other clear Evidences of the same Thing, which may in some Measure appear in all the following Part of this Discourse. Wherefore,

2. I come now to another Reason, why I answer the Question at first proposed, in the Negative, namely That it is a Duty which in an ordinary State of Things is required of all that are capable of it, to make an explicit open Profession of the true Religion, by owning God's Covenant; or, in other Words, professedly and verbally to unite themselves to God in his Covenant, by their own public Act.

Here I would (First) prove this Point; and then (Secondly) draw the Consequence, and show how this demonstrates the Thing in Debate.

First, I shall endeavour to establish this Point, namely That it is the Duty of God's People thus publicly to own the Covenant; and that it was not only a Duty in Israel of old, but is so in the Christian Church, and to the End of the World; and that it is a Duty required of adult Persons before they come to Sacraments. And this being a Point of great Consequence in this Controversy, but a Matter seldom handled (though it seems to be generally taken for granted) I shall be the more particular in the Consideration of it.

This not only seems to be in it self most consonant to Reason, and is a Duty generally allowed in New-England, but is evidently a great Institution of the Word of God, appointed as a very important Part of that public Religion by which God's People should give Honour to his Name. This Institution we have in Deuteronomy 6:13. You shall Fear the Lord your God, and serve Him, and shall SWEAR BY HIS NAME. It is repeated Chapter 10:20. You shall Fear the Lord your God, Him shall you serve, and to Him shall you cleave, and SWEAR BY HIS NAME. In both Places it might have been rendered; You shall swear in his Name, or into his Name. In the original, Bishmo, with the Prefix Beth which signifies in or into, as well as By. And whereas in the latter Place in our Translation it is said, to Him shall you cleave, and Swear by his Name. The Words are thus in the Hebrew, Ubho Thidhbák Ubhishmo Tisshàbhéang. The literal Translation of which is, [〈◊〉] shall you cleave [or unite] and into his Name shall you Swear. [〈◊〉] the same Prefix, Beth, before him, when it is said, You shall cleave to him, as before his Name, when it is said, You shall Swear by his Name. Swearing into God's Name, is a very emphatical and significant Way of expressing a Person's taking on himself, by his own solemn Profession, the Name of God, as one of his People; or by swearing to or covenanting with God, uniting himself by his own Act to the People that is called by his Name. The Figure of Speech is something like that by which Christians in the New-Testament are said to be Baptized [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] INTO THE NAME of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. So Christians are said to be baptized into Christ, Galatians 3:17. This Swearing by the Name, or into the Name of the Lord, is so often, and in such a Manner spoken of by the Prophets as a great Duty of God's solemn public Worship, as much as Praying or Sacrificing, that it would be unreasonable to understand it only, or chiefly, of occasionally taking an Oath before a Court of Judicature, which, it may be, one tenth Part of the People never had Occasion to do once in their Lives. If we well consider the Matter, we shall see abundant Reason to be satisfied, that the Thing intended in this Institution was publicly covenanting with God. Covenanting in Scripture is very often called by the Name of Swearing, and a Covenant is called an Oath. And particularly God's Covenant is called his Oath. Deuteronomy 29:12. That you Should enter into Covenant with the Lord your God, and into his Oath. Verse 14, Neither with you only do I make this Covenant and this Oath. 1 Chronicles 16:15, 16. Be you mindful always of his Covenant—Even of the Covenant which he made with Abraham, and his Oath unto Isaac— 2 Chronicles 15:12. And they entered into Covenant to seek the Lord God of their Fathers.— verse 14, 15. And they swore unto the Lord with a loud Voice. And all Judah rejoiced at the Oath. Swearing to the Lord, or Swearing in, or into the Name of the Lord, are equipollent Expressions in the Bible: the Prefixes Beth and Lamed are evidently used indifferently in this Case to signify the same Thing. Zephaniah 1:5. That swear by the Lord, and that swear by Malcham. The Word translated, to the Lord, is Laihovah, with the Prefix Lamed; but to Malcham is Bemalcham with the Prefix Beth, into Malcham. In 1 Kings 18:32. 'Tis said, Elijah built an Altar in the Name of the Lord; Beshem. Here the Prefix Beth is manifestly of the same Force with Lamed in 1 Kings 8:44. The House I have built for thy Name or to thy Name, Leshem.

God's People in Swearing to his Name, or into his Name, according to the Institution, solemnly professed two Things, namely Their Faith and Obedience. The former Part of this Profession of Religion was called saying, The Lord lives. Jeremiah 5:2. And though they say, The Lord lives, yet surely they Swear falsely. Verse 7. They have sworn by them that are no Gods: That is, They had openly professed Idol-Worship. Chapter 4:2. You shall Swear, The Lord lives, in Truth, in Judgment, and in Righteousness; and the Nations shall bless themselves in him, and in him shall they glory. (Compare this with Isaiah 45:23, 24, 25.) Jeremiah 44:26. Behold I have sworn by my great Name, says the Lord, that my Name shall no more be named in the Mouth of any Man of Judah in all the Land of Egypt, saying, the Lord lives. that is They shall never any more make any Profession of the true God, and of the true Religion, but shall be wholly given up to Heathenism. See also Jeremiah 12:16. and 16:14, 15. and 23:7, 8. Hosea 4:15. Amos 8:14. and 5:5.

These Words CHAI JEHOVAH, Jehovah lives, summarily comprehended a Profession of Faith in that All-sufficiency and Immutability of God, which is implied in the Name JEHOVAH, and which Attributes are very often signified in Scripture by God's being the LIVING GOD, as is very manifest from Joshua 3:10. 1 Samuel 17:26, 36. 2 Kings 19:4, 16. Daniel 6:26. Psalms 18:46. and innumerable other Places.

The other Thing professed in Swearing into the Lord was Obedience, called walking in the Name of the Lord. Micah 4:5. All People will walk every one in the Name of his God, and we will walk in the Name of the Lord our God for ever and ever. Still with the Prefix Beth. Beshem, as They were said to Swear Beshem, in the Name, or into the Name of the Lord.

This Institution, in Deuteronomy, of Swearing into the Name of the Lord, or visibly and explicitly uniting themselves to him in Covenant, was not prescribed as an extraordinary Duty, or a Duty to be performed on a Return from a general Apostasy, and some other extraordinary Occasions: But is evidently mentioned in the Institution as a Part of the public Worship of God to be performed by all God's people, properly belonging to the visible Worshippers of Jehovah; and so it is very often mentioned by the Prophets, as I observed before, and could largely demonstrate, if there were Occasion for it, and would not too much lengthen out this Discourse.

And this was not only an Institution belonging to Israel under the old Testament, but also to Gentile Converts, and Christians under the New Testament. Thus God declares concerning the Gentile Nations, Jeremiah 12:16. If they will diligently learn the Ways of my People, to SWEAR BY MY NAME, THE LORD LIVETH, as they taught my People to Swear by Baal: Then shall they be built in the midst of my People, that is They shall be added to my Church; or as the Apostle Paul expresses it, Ephesians 3:19-22. They shall be no more Strangers & Foreigners, but Fellow Citizens with the Saints, and of the Household of God, and be built upon the Foundation of Christ; In whom all the BUILDING, fitly framed together etc. In whom they also shall be BUILDED for an Habitation of God through the Spirit. So it is foretold, that the Way of public Covenanting should be the Way of the Gentiles joining themselves to the Church in the Days of the Gospel, Isaiah 44:3, 4, 5. I will pour Water upon him that is thirsty, and Floods upon the dry Ground; I will pour my Spirit upon thy Seed, and my Blessing upon thine Offspring, and they shall spring up as among the Grass, as Willows by the Water-Courses; one shall say, I am the Lord's, and another shall call himself by the Name of Jacob, and another shall SUBSCRIBE WITH HIS HAND unto the Lord—As subscribing an Instrument whereby they bound themselves to the Lord. This was Subscribing and Covenanting themselves into the Name of Israel, and Swearing into the Name of the Lord, in the Language of those forementioned Texts in Deuteronomy. So taking hold of God's Covenant, is foretold as the Way in which the Sons of the Stranger in the Days of the Gospel should be joined to God's Church, and brought into God's Sanctuary, and to have Communion in its Worship and Ordinances, in Isaiah 56:3, 6, 7. So in Isaiah 19:18. The future Conversion of the Gentiles in the Days of the Gospel, and their being brought to profess the true Religion is expressed by That, that they should SWEAR TO THE LORD OF HOSTS. In that Day shall five Cities in the Land of Egypt speak the Language of Canaan, and Swear to the Lord of Hosts. So in Jeremiah 23:5-8. It seems to be plainly foretold that after Christ is come and has wrought out his great Redemption, the same Way of publicly professing Faith in the All-sufficient and immutable God by Swearing, The Lord liveth, should be continued, which was instituted of old; but only with this Difference, that whereas formerly they Covenanted with God as their Redeemer out of Egypt, now they shall as it were forget that Work, and have a special Respect to a much greater Redemption. Behold, the Days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise up unto David a righteous Branch—Therefore they shall no more say, The Lord liveth which brought up the children of Israel out of the Land of Egypt; But, The Lord liveth which brought up and which led the Seed of the House of Israel out of the North Country etc. Another remarkable Place wherein it is plainly foretold that the like Method of professing Religion should be continued in the Days of the Gospel, which was instituted in Israel, by Swearing or public Covenanting, is that, Isaiah 45:22-25. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all ye Ends of the Earth; for I am God, and there is none else: I have sworn by my self, the Word is gone out of my Mouth in Righteousness, and shall not return, that unto me every Knee shall bow, EVERY TONGUE SHALL SWEAR: truly shall one say, In the Lord have I Righteousness and Strength: even to Him shall Men come:—In the Lord shall all the Seed of Israel be justified and shall glory. This Prophecy will have its last Fulfillment at the Day of Judgment; but it is plain, that the Thing most directly intended is the Conversion of the Gentile World to the Christian Religion. What is here called Swearing, the Apostle in citing this Place once and again calls Confessing; Romans 14:11. Every Tongue shall confess to God. Philippians 2:10. That every Tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. Which is the Word commonly used in the New Testament to signify making a public Profession of Religion. So Romans 10:9, 10. If thou shalt confess with thy Mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine Heart, that God hath raised him from the Dead, thou shalt be saved: For with the Heart Man believeth unto Righteousness, and with the Mouth Confession is made unto Salvation. Where a public Profession of Religion with the Mouth is evidently spoken of as a great Duty of all Christ's People, as well as believing in him; and ordinarily requisite to Salvation; not that it is necessary in the same Manner that Faith is, but in like Manner as Baptism is. Faith and verbal profession are jointly spoken of here as necessary to Salvation, in the same Manner as Faith and Baptism are, in Mark 16:16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. And I know no good Reason why we should not look on oral Profession and Covenanting with Christ, in those who are capable of it, as much of a stated Duty in the Christian Church, and an Institution universally pertaining to the Followers of Christ, as Baptism.

And if it be so, that explicit open Covenanting with God be a great Duty required of all, as has been represented; then it ought to be expected of Persons before they are admitted to the Privileges of the Adult in the Church of Christ. Surely it is proper, if this explicit Covenanting takes Place at all, that it should take Place before Persons come to those Ordinances wherein they by their own Act publicly confirm and seal this Covenant. This public Transaction of Covenanting, which God has appointed, ought to be or have an Existence before we publicly confirm and seal this Transaction. It was that by which the Israelites of old were introduced into the Communion of God's nominal or visible Church and holy City; as appears by Isaiah 48:1, 2. Hear ye this, O House of Jacob, which ARE CALLED BY THE NAME OF ISRAEL, and are come forth out of the Waters of Judah, WHICH SWEAR BY THE NAME OF THE LORD, and make mention of the God of Israel, but not in Truth nor in Righteousness: FOR THEY CALL THEMSELVES OF THE HOLY CITY, etc. When and after what Manner particularly the Israelites ordinarily performed this explicit Covenanting, I do not know that we can be certain. But as it was first done on Occasion of God's first Promulgating his Law or Covenant at Mount Sinai, and was done again on Occasion of a Repetition or renewed Promulgation of it on the Plains of Moab, and was done on Occasion of the public reading of the Law in Josiah's Time (2 Kings 23:3) and was done after the Return from the Captivity on Occasion of the public Reading of it at the Feast of Tabernacles (Nehemiah Chapter 8, 9 & 10); So it appears to me most likely, that it was done every seventh Year, when the Law or Covenant of God was, by divine Appointment, read in the Audience of all the People at the Feast of Tabernacles; at least done then by all who then heard the Law read the first Time, and who never had heard nor publicly owned the Covenant of God before. There are good Evidences that they never had Communion in those Ordinances which God had appointed as Seals of his Covenant, wherein they themselves were to be active, such as their Sacrifices etc. until they had done it. It is plainly implied in Psalm 50 that it was the Manner in Israel vocally to own God's Covenant, or to take it into their Mouths, before they sealed that Covenant in their Sacrifices See verse 16 taken with the preceding Part of the Psalm from verse 5. And that they did it before they partook of the Passover (which indeed was one of their Sacrifices) or entered into the Sanctuary for Communion in the Temple Worship, is confirmed by the Words of Hezekiah when he proclaimed a Passover, 2 Chronicles 30:8. Now be ye not stiff-necked as your Fathers were; But yield yourselves unto the Lord (in the Hebrew, give the Hand to the Lord) and enter into his Sanctuary which he hath sanctified for ever, and serve the Lord your God. To give the Hand, seems to be Hebrew Phrase for entering into Covenant, or obliging themselves by Covenant. Ezra 10:19. And they gave their Hands, that they would put away their Wives. And, as has been already observed, it was foretold that Christians should in this Way be admitted to Communion in the Privileges of the Church of Christ.

Having thus established the Premises of the Argument I intend, I now come,

Secondly, To that which I think must be the Consequence, namely That none ought to be admitted to the Privileges of adult Persons in the Church of Christ, but such as make a Profession of real Piety. For the Covenant, to be owned or professed, is God's Covenant, which he has revealed as the Method of our spiritual Union with him, and our Acceptance as the Objects of his eternal Favor; which is no other than the Covenant of Grace; at least it is so, without Dispute, in these Days of the Gospel. To own this Covenant, is to profess the Consent of our Hearts to it; and that is the Sum and Substance of true Piety. It is not only a professing the Assent of our Understandings, that we understand there is Such a Covenant, or that we understand we are obliged to comply with it; but it is to profess the Consent of our Wills, it is to manifest that we do comply with it. There is mutual Profession in this Affair, a Profession on Christ's Part, and a Profession on our Part; as it is in Marriage. And it is the same Sort of Profession that is made on both Sides, in this Respect, that each professes a Consent of Heart: Christ in his Word declares an entire Consent of Heart as to what he offers; and the visible Christian, in the Answer that he makes to it in his Christian Profession, declares a Consent and Compliance of Heart to his Proposal. Owning the Covenant is professing to make the Transaction of that Covenant our own. The Transaction of that Covenant is that of Espousals to Christ; on our Part, it is giving our Souls to Christ as his Spouse: There is no one Thing, that the Covenant of Grace is so often compared to in Scripture, as the Marriage-Covenant; and the visible Transaction, or mutual Profession there is between Christ and the visible Church, is abundantly compared to the mutual Profession there is in Marriage. In Marriage the Bride professes to yield to the Bridegroom's Suit, and to take him for her Husband, renouncing all others, and to give up herself to him to be entirely and forever possessed by him as his Wife. But he that professes this towards Christ, professes saving Faith. They that openly covenanted with God according to the Tenor of the Institution, Deuteronomy 10:20, they visibly united themselves to God in the Union of that Covenant: They professed on their Parts the Union of the Covenant of God, which was the Covenant of Grace. It is said in the Institution, Thou shalt cleave to the Lord and swear by his Name; or as the Words more literally are, Thou shalt unite into the Lord, and swear into his Name. So in Isaiah 56. It is called a joining themselves to the Lord. But the union, cleaving, or joining of that Covenant is saving Faith, the grand Condition of the Covenant of Christ, by which we are IN CHRIST: This is what brings us into the Lord. For a Person explicitly or professedly to enter into the Union or Relation of the Covenant of Grace with Christ, is the same as professedly to do that which on our Part is the uniting Act, and that is the Act of Faith. To profess the Covenant of Grace is to profess the Covenant, not as a Spectator, but as one immediately concerned in the Affair, as a Party in the Covenant professed; and this is to profess that in the Covenant which belongs to us as a Party, or to profess our Part in the Covenant; and that is the Soul's believing Acceptance of the Savior. Christ's Part is Salvation, our Part is a saving Faith in him; not a feigned, but unfeigned Faith; not a common, but special and saving Faith; no other Faith than this is the Condition of the Covenant of Grace.

I know the distinction that is made by some, between the internal and external Covenant; but I hope, the divines that make this distinction, would not be understood, that there are really and properly two Covenants of Grace; but only that those who profess the one only Covenant of Grace, are of two sorts; there are those who comply with it internally and really, and others who do so only externally, that is, in profession and visibility. But he that externally and visibly complies with the Covenant of Grace, appears and professes to do so really. There is also this distinction takes place concerning the Covenant of Grace; the one only Covenant of Grace is exhibited two ways, the one externally by the preaching of the Word, the other internally and spiritually by enlightening the mind rightly to understand the Word. But it is with the Covenant, as it is with the call of the Gospel: He that really complies with the external call, has the internal call; so he that truly complies with the external proposal of God's Covenant, as visible Christians profess to do, do indeed perform the inward condition of it. But the New Testament affords no more foundation for supposing two real and properly distinct Covenants of Grace, than it does to suppose two sorts of real Christians; the unscripturalness of which latter hypothesis I observed before.

When those persons who were baptized in infancy do properly own their baptismal Covenant, the meaning of it is, that they now being become capable to act for themselves, do professedly and explicitly make their parents' act, in giving them up to God, their own, by expressly giving themselves up to God. But this no person can do, without either being deceived, or dissembling and professing what he himself supposes to be a falsehood, unless he supposes that he in his Heart consents to be God's. A child of Christian parents never does that for himself which his parents did for him in infancy, until he gives himself wholly to God. But surely he does not do it, who not only keeps back a part, but the chief part, his heart and soul. He that keeps back his heart, does in effect keep back all; and therefore, if he be sensible of it, is guilty of solemn wilful mockery, if he at the same time solemnly and publicly professes that he gives himself up to God. If there are any words used by such, which in their proper signification imply that they give themselves up to God; and if these words, as they intend them to be understood, and as they are understood by those that hear them, according to their established use and custom among that people, do not imply, that they do it really, but do truly reserve or keep back the chief part; it ceases to be a profession of giving themselves up to God, and so ceases to be a professed covenanting with God, or owning God's Covenant; for the thing which they profess, belongs to no Covenant of God, in being; for God has revealed no such Covenant, nor has any such Covenant of God any existence, in which our transacting of the Covenant is a giving up ourselves to him with reserve, or holding back a part, especially holding back our souls, our chief part, and in effect our all. There is no Covenant of God at all, that has these for its terms; to be sure, this is not the Covenant of Grace. And therefore although such public and solemn professing may be a very unwarrantable and great abuse of words and taking God's name in vain, it is no professed covenanting with God.

One thing, as has been observed, that belonged to Israel's Swearing into the Name of the Lord, was saying, the Lord liveth; whereby they professed their faith in God's all-sufficiency, immutability and faithfulness. But if they really had such a faith, it was a saving grace. They who indeed trust in the all-sufficiency of God, he will surely be their all-sufficient portion; and they who trust in God's immutability and faithfulness, he surely will never leave nor forsake them. There were two ways of swearing, Jehovah liveth, that we read of in Scripture; one we read of Jeremiah 2:2. Thou shalt Swear, The Lord liveth, in Truth, in Judgment, and in Righteousness: And the other way is swearing falsely, which we read of in the next Chapter, verses 2 and 3. And though they say, The Lord liveth, yet surely they Swear falsely. (And certainly none ought to do this.) It follows, O Lord, are not thine Eyes upon the Truth? that is, God desires sincerity of heart in those that profess religion. Here a gracious sincerity is opposed to a false profession; for when it is said, O Lord, are not thine Eyes upon the Truth? The expression is parallel with those, Psalm 51:6. Behold thou desirest the Truth in the inward Parts. 1 Samuel 16:7. Man looketh on the outward Appearance, but the Lord looketh on the Heart. Psalm 11:7. His Countenance doth behold the Upright. But these texts speak of a gracious sincerity. Those spoken of Jeremiah 4:2, that swore, The Lord liveth, in Truth, in Judgment, and Righteousness, were gracious persons, who had a thorough conversion to God, as appears by the preceding verse, If thou wilt return, O Israel, Saith the Lord, return unto me. That is, Do not do as you or Judah was charged with doing in the foregoing Chapter, verse 10. Judah hath not turned unto me with her whole Heart, but feignedly. Do not do thus, but if thou wilt return, return unto me. And then it is added in the second verse, And thou shalt swear, the Lord liveth, in Truth etc., that is, Then your profession of religion will be worth regarding, you will be indeed what you pretend to be, you will be Israelites indeed, in whose profession is no guile. They who said, The Lord liveth, in Truth, in Judgment, and in Righteousness; They said, The Lord liveth, as David did, Psalm 18:46. The Lord liveth, and blessed be my Rock. And did as the Apostle says he did, 1 Timothy 4:10. We trust in the LIVING GOD, who is the Saviour of all Men, specially of those that believe. And as he would have Timothy exhort rich men to do, Chapter 6:17. That they trust not in uncertain Riches, but in the LIVING GOD. When the Apostle speaks of a profession, of our faith in Christ, as one duty which all Christians ought to perform as they seek salvation, it is the profession of a saving Faith that he speaks of; His words plainly imply it. If thou shalt confess with thy Mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine Heart that God hath raised him from the Dead, thou shalt be saved. The faith which was to be professed with the Mouth was the same which the Apostle speaks of as in the Heart, but that is saving faith. The latter is yet plainer in the following words; For with the Heart Man believeth unto Righteousness, and with the Mouth Confession is made unto Salvation. Believing unto righteousness, is saving faith; but it is evidently the same faith which is spoken of, as professed with the Mouth, in the next words in the same sentence. And that the Gentiles, in professing the Christian religion or swearing to Christ, should profess saving faith, is implied, Isaiah 45:23, 24. —Every Tongue shall swear; surely shall one say, In the Lord have I Righteousness and Strength. That is, should profess entirely to depend on Christ's righteousness and strength.

For persons merely to promise, that they will believe in Christ, or that they will hereafter comply with the conditions and duties of the Covenant of Grace, is not to own that Covenant. Such persons do not profess now to enter into the Covenant of Grace with Christ, or into the relation of that Covenant to Christ. All that they do at present, is only a speaking fair; They say, they will do it hereafter; they profess, that they will hereafter obey that command of God, to believe on the Name of his son Jesus Christ. But what is such a profession good for, and what credit is to be given to such promises of future Obedience; when at the same time they pretend no other at present than to live and continue in rebellion against those great commands which give no allowance or license for delay? They who do thus, instead of properly owning the Covenant, do rather for the present visibly reject it. It is not unusual, in some churches, where the doctrine I oppose has been established, for persons at the same time that they come into the church, and pretend to own the Covenant, freely to declare to their neighbors, they have no imagination that they have any true faith in Christ or love to him. Such persons instead of being professedly united to Christ, in the union of the Covenant of Grace, are rather visibly destitute of the love of Christ; and so, instead of being qualified for admission to the Lord's Supper, are rather exposed to that denunciation of the Apostle, 1 Corinthians 16:22. If any Man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.

That outward Covenanting, which is agreeable to Scripture-Institution, is not only a promising what is future (though that is not excluded) but a professing what is present, as it is in the marriage-covenant. (Though indeed it is true, that it was chiefly on account of the promise or vow that there is in the Covenant, that it is called Swearing.) For a woman to promise that she will hereafter renounce all other men for the sake of him who makes suit to her, and will in some future time accept of him for her husband, is not for her now to enter into the marriage covenant with him: She that does this with a man, professes now to accept of him, renouncing all others; though promises of hereafter behaving towards him as a wife, are also included in the transaction. It seems as though the primitive converts to Christianity, in the profession they made of religion, in order to their admission into the Christian church, and in their visibly entering into Covenant in order to the initiating seal of the Covenant in baptism, did not explicitly make any promises of any thing future, they only professed the present sentiments and habit of their minds, they professed that they believed in Christ, and so were admitted into the church by baptism; and yet undoubtedly they were, according to forementioned prophecies, admitted in the way of public covenanting, and as the Covenant-people of God they owned the Covenant, before the seal of the Covenant was applied. Their professing faith in Christ was visibly owning the Covenant of Grace, because faith in Christ was the grand condition of that Covenant. Indeed, if the faith which they professed in order to baptism, was only a historical or doctrinal faith (as some suppose) or any common faith, it would not have been any visible entering into the Covenant of Grace; for a common faith is not the condition of that Covenant; nor would there properly have been any Covenanting in the case. If we suppose, the faith they professed was the grace by which the soul is united to Christ, their profession was a covenanting in this respect also, that it implied an engagement of future obedience; for true faith in Christ includes in its nature an acceptance of him as our Lord and King, and devoting ourselves to his service: but a profession of historical faith implies no profession of accepting Christ as our King, nor engagement to submit to him as such.

When the Israelites publicly covenanted with God according to the Institution in Deuteronomy, they did not only promise something future, but professed something present; they avouched Jehovah to be their God, and also promised to keep his Commands. Thus it was in that solemn Covenant-Transaction between God and the People on the Plains of Moab; which is summarily described, Deuteronomy 26:17, 18. Thou hast avouched the Lord this Day to be thy God, and to walk in his Ways, and to keep his Statutes, and his Commandments, and his Judgments, and to hearken unto his Voice; and the Lord hath avouched thee this Day to be his peculiar People, as he hath promised thee, and that thou shouldst keep all his Commandments. The People in avouching God for their God, professed a compliance with the Terms of the Covenant of Grace; as the Covenant of Grace is summarily expressed in those Words, I will be thy God, and thou shalt be my People. They that avouch the Lord to be their God, do profess to accept of Jehovah as their God: and that is to accept him as the Object of their supreme Respect and Trust. For that which we choose as the Object of our highest Regard, that and that only do we take as our God. None therefore that value and love the World more than Jehovah, can without lying, or being deceived, avouch Jehovah to be their God: And none that do not trust in Christ, but trust more in their own Strength or Righteousness, can avouch Christ to be their Saviour. To avouch God to be our God, is to profess that he is our God by our own Act; that is, that we choose him to be our chief Good and last End, the supreme Object of our Esteem and Regard, that we devote ourselves to, and depend upon. And if we are sensible that we do not do this sincerely, we cannot profess that we actually do it; for he that does not do it sincerely, does not do it at all. There is no Room for the Distinction of a moral Sincerity and gracious Sincerity in this Case. A supreme Respect of Heart to God, or a supreme Love to him, which is Real, is but of one Sort. It would be absurd, to talk of a morally sincere supreme Love to God in those who really love Dirt and Dung more than him. Whoever does with any reality at all make God the Object of the supreme Regard of his Heart, that is certainly a gracious Person. And whoever does not make God the supreme Object of his Respect with a gracious Sincerity, certainly does not do it with any Sincerity. I fear, while leading People in many of our Congregations, who have no Thought of their having the least Spark of true Love to God in their Hearts, to say, publicly and solemnly, that They avouch God the Father, Son, and holy Ghost to be their God, and that They give themselves up to him, we have led them to say they know not what. To be sure, they are very obscure Expressions, if they mean any Thing that a carnal Man does, under the reigning Power of Sin and Enmity against God.

Here possibly it may be objected, that it is unreasonable to suppose any such Thing should be intended, in the Profession of the Congregation in the Wilderness, as a gracious Respect to GOD, that which is the Condition of God's Covenant, when we have Reason to think that so few of them were truly gracious. But I suppose, upon mature Consideration this will not appear at all unreasonable. 'Tis no more unreasonable to suppose this People to make a Profession of that Respect to God, which they had not in their Hearts now, than at other Times when we are informed they did so, as in Ezekiel 33:31. They come unto thee as the People cometh, and they sit before thee as my People [that is as though they were my Saints, as they profess to be] For with their Mouth they show much Love, but their Heart goeth after their Covetousness. So in the Apostles Time, that People professed that to be in their Hearts towards God, which was not there. The Apostle is speaking of them, when he says, Titus 1:16, They profess that they know God, but in Works they deny him. This was common among that People; God declares them to be an hypocritical Nation, Isaiah 10:6. And 'tis certain, this was the Case with them in the Wilderness; they there professed that Respect to God which they had not; as is evident by Psalms 78:36, 37. They did flatter him with their Mouth, and they lied unto him with their Tongue; For their Heart was not with him, neither were they steadfast in his Covenant. In owning the Covenant with God, they professed their Heart was right with him; as appears, because 'tis mentioned as an Evidence of their having lied or dealt falsely in their Profession, that their Heart was not right with him, and so proved not steadfast in God's Covenant, which they had owned. If their Heart had been right with God, they would have been truly pious Persons; which is a Demonstration, that what they professed, was true Piety. It also appears that if they had had such an Heart in them as they pretended to have, they would have been truly pious Persons, from Deuteronomy 5 where we have a Rehearsal of their Covenanting at Mount Sinai: Concerning this it is said, verses 28, 29. And the Lord heard the Voice of your Words, when ye spake unto me; and the Lord said unto me, They have well said all that they have spoken. O that there were such an Heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my Commandments always, that it might be well with them and with their Children forever. The People were mistaken about their Disposition and Preparation of Heart to go through the Business of God's Service, as the Man in the Parable, that undertook to build a Tower without counting the Cost. Nor need it seem at all incredible, that that Generation who covenanted at Mount Sinai, should, the greater Part of them, be deceived, and think their Hearts thoroughly disposed to give up themselves forever to God, if we consider how much they had strongly to move their Affections; the Wonders wrought in Egypt and at the Red Sea, where they were led through on dry Ground, and the Egyptians were so miraculously destroyed; whereby their Affections were greatly raised, and they sang God's Praises: And particularly what they now saw at Mount Sinai, of the astonishing Manifestations of God's Majesty there. Probably the greater Part of the Sinners among them were deceived with false Affections; and if there were others that were less affected and who were not deceived, 'tis not incredible that they, in those Circumstances, should wilfully dissemble in their Profession, and so in a more gross Sense flatter God with their Lips, and lie to him with their Tongues. And these Things are more credible concerning that Generation, being a Generation peculiarly left to Hardness and Blindness of Mind in divine Matters, and peculiarly noted in the Book of Psalms for Hypocrisy. And as to the Generation of their Children that owned the Covenant on the Plains of Moab, they not only in like Manner had very much to move their Affections, the awful Judgments of God they had seen on their Fathers, God having brought them through the Wilderness, and subdued Sihon King of the Amorites, and Og the King of Bashan before them, Moses' affecting Rehearsal of the whole Series of God's wonderful Dealings with them, together with his most pathetical Exhortations; but it was also a Time of great revival of Religion and powerful Influence of the Spirit of God, and that Generation was probably the most excellent Generation that ever was in Israel; to be sure, there is more Good and less Hurt spoken of them, than of any other Generation that we have any Account of in Scripture. A very great Part of them swore in Truth, in Judgment, and in Righteousness: And no wonder, that others at such a Time fell in, either deceiving, or being deceived, with common Affections; as is usual in Times of great Works of God for his Church, and of the Flourishing of Religion. In succeeding Generations, as the People grew more corrupt, I suppose, their Covenanting or Swearing into the Name of the Lord degenerated into a Matter of mere Form and Ceremony; even as subscribing religious Articles seems to have done with the Church of England; and as, 'tis to be feared, owning the Covenant, as 'tis called, has too much done in New England; it being visibly a prevailing Custom for Persons to neglect this, till they come to be married, and then to do it for their Credit's Sake, and that their Children may be baptized. And I suppose, there was commonly a great Laxness in Israel among the Priests who had the Conduct of this Affair: And there were many Things in the Nature of that comparatively carnal Dispensation, which negatively gave Occasion for such Things; that is, whereby it had by no Means had so great a Tendency to prevent suchlike Irregularities, though very wrong in themselves, as the more excellent Dispensation, introduced by Christ and his Apostles. And though these Things were testified against by the Prophets, before the Babylonish Captivity; yet God, who is only wise, did designedly in a great Measure wink at these, and many other great Irregularities in the Church, till the Time of Reformation should come, which the Messiah was to have the Honour of introducing. But of these Things I may perhaps have Occasion to say something more, when I come to answer the Objection concerning the Passover.

Now to return to the Argument from the Nature of covenanting with God, or owning God's Covenant: As to the Promises, which are herein, either explicitly or implicitly, made; the making these Promises implies a Profession of true Piety. For in the Covenant of Grace universal Obedience is engaged, Obedience to all the Commands of God; and the Performance of inward spiritual Duties is as much engaged in the Covenant of Grace, as external Duties; and in some Respects much more. Therefore he that visibly makes the Covenant of Grace his own, promises to perform those internal Duties, and to perform all Duties with a gracious Sincerity. We have no Warrant; in our Profession of God's Covenant, to divide the Duties of it, to take some and leave out others. Especially have we not Warrant to leave out those great Commands of believing with the Heart, of loving the Lord our God with all our Heart and with all our Soul, and our Neighbour as our selves. He that leaves out these, in Effect leaves out all; for these are the Sum of our whole Duty, and of all God's Commands. If we leave these out of our Profession, surely it is not the Covenant of Grace, which we profess. The Israelites when they covenanted with God at Mount Sinai, and said, when God had declared to them the ten Commandments, All that the Lord hath spoken will we do and be obedient; their Promise implied, that as they professed to know God, they would in Works not deny, but own and honour him, and would be careful to conform to those two great Commandments, which are the Sum of all the ten, and concerning which God said, These Words which I command thee this Day, shall be in thine Heart. Deuteronomy 6:7. So, when they covenanted on the Plains of Moab, they promised to keep and do God's Commands with all their Heart and with all their Soul, as is very evident by Deuteronomy 26:16, 17. So it was also when the People owned their Covenant in Asa's Time, 2 Chronicles 15:12. They entered into a Covenant to seek the Lord God of their Fathers with all their Heart and with all their Soul. We have also another remarkable Instance, 2 Kings 23:3 and 2 Chronicles 34:31.

Now he who is wholly under the Power of a carnal Mind, which is not subject to the Law of God, nor indeed can be, cannot promise these Things without either great Deceit, or the most manifest and palpable Absurdity. Promising supposes the Person to be conscious to himself, or persuaded of himself, that he has such an Heart in him; for his Lips pretend to declare his Heart. The Nature of a Promise implies Intention or Design: And proper real Intention implies Will, Disposition and Compliance of Heart. But no natural Man is properly willing to do these Duties, nor does his Heart comply with them: and to make natural Men believe otherwise, tends greatly to their Hurt. A natural Man may be willing, from Self-love and from sinister Views, to use Means and take Pains that he may obtain a Willingness or Disposition to these Duties: but that is a very different Thing from actually being Willing, or truly having a Disposition to them. So he may promise, that he will, from some Considerations or other, take great Pains to obtain such a Heart: But if he does so, this is not the Promise of the Covenant of Grace. Men may make many religious Promises to God, and many Promises some Way relating to the Covenant of Grace, that are not themselves the Promises of that Covenant; nor is there any Thing of the Nature of Covenanting in the Case, because although they should actually fulfill their Promises, God is not obliged by Promise to them. If a natural Man Promises to do all that it is possible for a natural Man to do in Religion, and fulfills his Promises, God is not obliged, by any Covenant that he has entered into with Man, to perform any Thing at all for him, respecting his saving Benefits. And therefore he that promises these Things only, enters into no Covenant with God; because the very Notion of entering into Covenant with any Being, is entering into a mutual Agreement, doing or engaging that which, if done, the other Party becomes engaged on his Part. The New-Testament informs us but of one Covenant, God enters into with Mankind through Christ, and that is the Covenant of Grace; in which God obliges himself to nothing in us that is exclusive of unfeigned Faith, and the spiritual Duties that attend it: Therefore if a natural Man makes never so many Vows, that he will perform all external Duties, and will pray for Help to do spiritual Duties, and for an Ability and Will to comply with the Covenant of Grace from such Principles as he has, he does not lay hold of God's Covenant, nor properly enter into any Covenant with God: For we have no Opportunity to covenant with God in any other Covenant, than that which he has revealed; he becomes a Covenant-Party in no other Covenant. It is true, every natural Man that lives under the Gospel, is obliged to comply with the Terms of the Covenant of Grace; and if he promises to do it, his Promise may increase his Obligation, although he flattered God with his Mouth and lied to him with his Tongue, as the Children of Israel did in promising. But it will not thence follow, that they ought knowingly to make a lying Promise, or that Ministers and Churches should countenance them in so doing.

Indeed there is no natural Man but what deceives himself, if he thinks he is truly willing to perform external Obedience to God, universally and perseveringly through the various Trials of Life that he may expect. And therefore in promising it, he is either very deceitful, or is like the foolish deceived Man that undertook to build when he had not wherewith to finish. And if it be known by the Church, before whom the promises to build and finish, that at the same Time he does not pretend to have an Heart to finish, his Promise is worthy of no Credit or Regard from them, and can make nothing visible to them but his Presumption.

A great Confirmation of what has been said under this Head of covenanting, is that Text, Psalm 50:16, But unto the Wicked God saith, What hast thou to do, to declare my Statutes, or that thou shouldest take my Covenant in thy Mouth? This Term, the Wicked, in the more general Use of it in Scripture, is applied in that Extent as to include all ungodly or graceless Persons, all that are under the reigning Power of Sin, and are the Objects of God's Anger, or exposed to his eternal Vengeance; as might easily be made to appear by a particular Enumeration of Texts all over the Bible. All such are in Scripture called Workers of Iniquity, The Children of the wicked one. Matthew 13:38. All such are said to be of the Devil, John 3:8. And to be the Children of the Devil, verse 10. The righteous and the wicked are in a multitude of Places in Scripture put in Opposition; and they are evidently opposed one to the other, and distinguished one from another in Scripture, as Saints and Sinners, holy and unholy, those that Fear God and those that Fear him not, those that love him and those that hate him. All Mankind are in Scripture divided by these Distinctions, and the Bible knows of no Neuters or third Sort. Indeed those who are really Wicked, may be visibly Righteous, Righteous in Profession and outward Appearance: But a Sort of Men who have no saving Grace, that yet are not really wicked Men, are a Sort of Men of human Invention, that the Scripture is entirely Ignorant of. It is reasonable, to suppose, that by wicked Men here in this Psalm is meant all that hate Instruction, and reject God's Word (verse 17) and not merely such wicked Men as are guilty of those particular Crimes mentioned, verses 17-20: Stealing, Adultery, Fraud and Backbiting. Although only some particular Ways of Wickedness are mentioned, yet we are not to understand that all others are excluded; yea the Words, in the Conclusion of the Paragraph, are expressly applied to all that forget God in such a Manner as to expose themselves to be torn in Pieces by God's Wrath in Hell, verse 22. Now consider this, ye that forget God, lest I tear you in Pieces, and there be none to deliver. We can no more justly argue, that because some gross Sins are here specified, that no Sinners are meant but such as live in those or other gross Sins, than we can argue from Revelation 22:14, 15: That none shall be shut out of Heaven but only those who have lived in the gross Sins there mentioned; Blessed are they that do his Commandments, that they may have right to the Tree of Life, and may enter in through the Gates into the City: For without are Dogs, and Sorcerers, and Murderers, and Idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie. Nothing is more common in Scripture, than in the Descriptions it gives, both of the godly and the ungodly, together with their general Character, to insert into the Description some particular excellent Practices of the one which Grace tends to, and some certain gross Sins of the other which there is a Foundation for in the reigning Corruption in their Hearts. So, Lying is mentioned as Part of the Character of all natural Men, Psalm 58:3, 4. (Who are there called wicked Men, as in Psalm 50.) The wicked are estranged, from the Womb; they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking Lies; Their Poison is like the Poison of a Serpent, etc. So it is said of the Wicked, Psalm 10:2, 3, 4, 7: His Mouth is full of Cursing and Bitterness. This the Apostle, Romans 3 cites as a Description of all natural Men. So it is said of the wicked, Psalm 140:3: They have sharpened their Tongues as a Serpent, Adder's Poison is under their Lips; which the same Apostle in the same Place also cites as what is said of all natural Men. The very same gross Sins which are here mentioned in the fiftieth Psalm, are from Time to Time inserted in Solomon's Descriptions of the wicked Man, as opposed to the Righteous, in the Book of Proverbs: particularly the Sins mentioned in the 19th verse of that Psalm, Thou givest thy Mouth to Evil, and thy Tongue frameth Deceit; are thus mentioned, as belonging to the Character of the wicked Man, Proverbs 12. The Thoughts of the Righteous are right; but the Counsels of the Wicked are Deceit. The Words of the Wicked are to lie in wait for Blood; but the Mouth of the Upright shall deliver them. Nevertheless it is plain, that the wise Man in this Book, in his Distinction of the Righteous and the Wicked, means the same as Godly and Ungodly. Only reading the two foregoing Chapters will be enough to satisfy any of this. Observe Chapter 10:3, 7, 16, 20, 21, 24, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32. Chapter 11:3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 30, 31. Besides innumerable other like Texts all over the Book. In Chapter 1:16 it is said of Sinners, Their Feet run to Evil, and make haste to shed Blood. This the Apostle in Romans 3:15 cites as belonging to the Description of all natural Men. So in the Description of the Wicked, Proverbs 4:14-19. It is said, that they sleep not unless they have done Mischief, that they drink the Wine of Violence, etc. and yet by the wicked there is meant the same with the graceless Man; as appears by the Antithesis, there made between him and the just or righteous whose Path is as the shining Light which shineth more and more to the perfect Day.

As a further Evidence that by the Wicked in this Psalm 50:16 is meant the same as the Ungodly or Graceless, it is to be observed, here is a pretty manifest Antithesis, or Opposition between the Wicked, and the Saints, that shall be gathered to Christ at the Day of Judgment, spoken of verse 5. There God speaking of his coming to Judgment, says Gather my SAINTS together, those that have made a COVENANT with me by Sacrifice: And then after showing the Insufficiency of the Sacrifices of Beasts, implying that That is a greater Sacrifice by which these Saints make a COVENANT with him, it is added, But to the Wicked [that are not in the Number of my Saints] God doth say, What hast thou to do, to take my COVENANT into thy Mouth? Approving of the Covenanting of the former, but disapproving the Covenanting of the latter. As to the gathering of God's Saints, there spoken, if we consider the foregoing and following Verses, it is evidently the same with that gathering of his Elect, when Christ comes in the Clouds of Heaven, which is spoken of, Matthew 24:30, 31. And with that gathering of the Righteous, as his Wheat, into his Barn, at the Day of Judgment, spoken of Matthew 13. And therefore there is as much Reason to suppose, that by the Wicked, which are opposed to them, is meant all graceless Persons, as there is so to understand the Doers of Iniquity, spoken of in that Matthew 13 as those that are opposed to the Righteous, which shall then shine forth as the Sun in the Kingdom of their Father, verse 43. —And there is one Thing more which still further confirms me in my Construction of Psalm 50:16. Which is, That the plain Reason here given against wicked Men's taking God's Covenant into their Mouths, holds good with Respect to all graceless Men, namely Because they do not comply with, but reject the very Covenant, which they with their Mouths profess to own and consent to, verse 17. Seeing thou hatest Instruction, and castest my Words behind thee: As much as to say, Thou rejectest and hast a reigning Enmity against my Statutes, which thou declarest and professest a Compliance with. And this is the Spirit and Practice of all who live in the Sin of Unbelief and Rejection of Christ; they live in a Way that is altogether inconsistent with the Covenant of Grace; for the Sum and substance of the Condition and Engagement of that Covenant is what every natural Man is under the reigning Power of Enmity against, and lives in Contradiction to. Therefore, I think, it follows, that they who know it is thus with them, have nothing to do to take God's Covenant into their Mouths; or in other Words, have no Warrant to do this, until it be otherwise with them.

3. The Nature of Things seems to afford no great Reason why the People of Christ should not openly profess a proper Respect to him in their Hearts, as well as a true Notion of him in their Heads, or a right Opinion of him in their Judgments.

I can conceive of Nothing reasonably to be supposed the Design or End of a public Profession of Religion, that don't as much require a Profession of Honour, Esteem and Friendship of Heart towards Christ, as an orthodox Opinion about him; or why the former should not be as much expected and required in order to a being admitted into the Company of his Friends and Followers, as the Latter: it can't be because the former in it self is not as important, and as much to be looked at, as the latter; seeing the very Essence of Religion itself consists in the former, and without it the latter is wholly vain, and makes us never the better; neither happier in our selves, nor more acceptable to God. One End of a public Profession of Religion is the giving public Honour to God; But surely the Profession of inward Esteem and a supreme Respect of Heart towards God is as agreeable to this Design, and more directly tending to it, that the declaring of right speculative Notions of him. We look upon it that our Friends do the more especially and directly put Honour upon us, when upon proper Occasions they stand ready not only to own the Truth of such and such Facts concerning us, but also to testify their high Esteem and cordial and entire Regard to us. When Persons only manifest their doctrinal Knowledge of Things of Religion, and express the assent of their Judgments, but at the same Time make no Pretence to any other than a being wholly destitute of all true Love to God, and a being under the Dominion of Enmity against him, their Profession is, in some Respects, very greatly to God's Dishonour: For they leave Reason for the Public greatly to suspect that they hold the Truth in Unrighteousness, and that they are some of those that have both seen and hated Christ and his Father, John 15. 24. Who of all Persons have the greatest Sin, and are most to God's Dishonour.

I am at a Loss, how that Visibility of Saintship, which the honoured Author of the Appeal to the Learned, supposes to be all that is required in order to Admission to the Lord's Supper, can be much to God's Honour, namely Such a Visibility as leaves Reason to believe, that the greater Part of those who have it, are Enemies to God in their Hearts, and inwardly the Servants of Sin. Such a Visibility of Religion as this, seems rather to increase a Visibility of Wickedness in the World, and so of God's Dishonour, than any Thing else; that is it makes more Wickedness visible to the Eye of an human Judgment, and gives Men Reason to think, there is more Wickedness in the World, than otherwise would be visible to them: Because we have Reason to think, that those who live in a Rejection of Christ, under the Light of the Gospel, and the Knowledge and common Belief of its Doctrine, have vastly greater Sin and Guilt than other Men. And that venerable Divine himself did abundantly teach this.

Christ came into the World to engage in a War with God's Enemies, Sin and Satan; and a great War there is maintained between them; which War is concerning us; and the Contest is, who shall have the Possession of OUR HEARTS. Now it is reasonable, under these Circumstances, that we should declare on whose Side we are, whether on Christ's Side, or on the Side of his Enemies. If we would be admitted among Christ's Friends and Followers, it is reasonable, that we should profess we are on the Lord's Side, and that we yield OUR HEARTS (which the Contest is about) to him, and not to his Rivals. And this seems plainly to be the Design and Nature of a public Profession of Christ. If this Profession is not made, no Profession is made, that is worth regarding, or worth the making, in such a Case as this is, and to any such Purpose as a being admitted among his visible Friends. There is no other being on Christ's Side, in this Case, but a being so with an undivided Heart, preferring him to all his Rivals, and renouncing them all for his Sake. The Case admits of no Neutrality, or Lukewarmness, or a middle Sort of Persons with a moral Sincerity, or such a common Faith as is consistent with loving Sin and the World better than Christ. He that is not with me (says Christ) is against me. And therefore none do profess to be on Christ's Side, but they who profess to renounce his Rivals. For those who would be called Christians, to profess no higher Regard to Christ than what will admit of a superior Regard to the World, is more absurd than if a Woman pretending to marry a Man, and take him for her Husband, should profess to take him in some Sort, but yet not pretend to take him in such a Manner as is inconsistent with her allowing other Men a fuller Possession of her, and greater Intimacy with her, than she allows him. The Nature of the Case, as it stands between us and Jesus Christ, is such that an open solemn Profession of being entirely for him, and giving him the Possession of our Hearts, renouncing all Competitors, is more requisite in this Case, than a like Profession in any other Case. The Profession of an intermediate Sort of State of our Mind, is very disagreeable to the Nature of Christ's Errand, Work, and Kingdom in the World, and all that belongs to the Designs and Ends of his administrations; and for Ministers and Churches openly to establish such a Kind of Profession of Christ as a Part of his public Service, which don't imply a Pretence of any more than Lukewarmness, is (I fear) to make a mere Sham of a solemn public Profession of Christianity, and seems to be wholly without Warrant from the Word of God, and greatly to God's Dishonour.

It can't be justly here pretended, as a Reason why the Opinion concerning Doctrines should be professed, and not Friendship or Respect of Heart, that the former is more easily discerned and known by us, than the latter. For though it be true, that Men may be at a Loss concerning the latter, yet it is as true they may be so concerning the former too. They may be at a Loss in many Cases concerning the Fulness of the Determination of their own Inclination and Choice; and so they may concerning the Fulness of the Determination of their Judgment. I know of nothing in human Nature that hinders the Acts of Men's Wills being properly subject to their own Consciousness, any more than the Acts, of their Judgment; nor of any Reason to suppose that Men mayn't discern their own Consent, as well as their Assent. The Scripture plainly supposes gracious Dispositions and Acts to be Things properly under the Eye of Conscience. 2 Corinthians 13. 5. Know ye not your own selves? John 21. 15. Simon Son of Jonas, do you love me? and many other Places. Nor is the Nature of Godliness less made known, than the true Doctrines of Religion. Piety of Heart, in the more essential Things belonging to it, is as clearly revealed, as the Doctrines concerning the Nature of God, the Person of the Messiah, and the Method of his Redemption.

4. We find in Scripture, that all those of God's professing People or visible Saints who are not truly pious, are represented as Counterfeits, as having Guile, Disguise, and a false Appearance, as making false Pretences, and as being Deceitful and Hypocrites. Thus Christ says of Nathanael, John 1. 47. Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no Guile; that is, a truly gracious Person: implying, that those of God's professing People, who are not gracious, are guileful, and deceitful in their Profession. So Sinners in Zion, or in God's visible Church, are called Hypocrites, Isaiah 33. 14. The Sinners in Zion are afraid, Fearfulness has surprised the Hypocrites. Isaiah 11. 17. Every one is an Hypocrite and an Evil-Doer. So they are called lying Children, Isaiah 30. 9. and Chapter 59. 13. and are represented as Lying in pretending to be of the Temple or Church of God. Jeremiah 7. 2, 4. Hear the Word of the Lord, all you of Judah that enter in at these Gates to worship the Lord,—Trust you not in lying Words, saying, The Temple of the Lord, The Temple of the Lord, The Temple of the Lord are these. They are spoken of as falsely calling themselves of the holy City, Isaiah 48. 1, 2. They are called Silver-Dross, and Reprobate or refuse Silver (Ezekiel 22. 18. Jeremiah 4. 30.) which glistens and shows like true Silver, but has not its inward Worth. So they are compared to adulterated Wine, Isaiah 1, 22. and to Trees full of Leaves, bidding fair for Fruitfulness, Matthew 21. 19. Clouds that look as if they were full of Rain, yet bring nothing but Wind, Jude 12. Wells without Water, that do but cheat the thirsty Traveller, 2 Peter 2. 13. A deceitful Bow, that appears good, but fails the Archer, Psalm 78. 57. Hosea 7. 16. Mr. Stoddard, in his Appeal to the learned, from Time to Time supposes all visible Saints who are not truly pious, to be Hypocrites, as in Page 15, 17, and 18.

Now what Ground or Reason can there be thus to represent those as visible Saints, or Members of God's visible Church, who are not truly pious, if the Profession of such don't imply any Pretence to true Piety: and when they never made a Pretence to any Thing more than common Grace, or moral sincerity, which many of them truly have, and therefore are not at all Hypocritical or deceitful in their Pretences, and are as much without Guile in what they make a Profession of, as Nathanael was? The Psalmist speaking of sincere Piety, calls it the Truth in the inward Parts. Psalm 51. Behold, thou desirest the Truth in the inward Parts. It is called Truth with Reference to some Declaration or Profession made by God's visible People: But on the Hypothesis which I oppose, common Grace is as properly the Truth in the inward Parts, in this Respect, as saving Grace. God says concerning Israel, Deuteronomy 32. 5. Their Spot is not the Spot of his Children. God here speaks of himself as it were disappointed: The Words have Reference to some Profession they had made: For why should this Remark be made after this Manner, that there were Spots appeared upon them, shrewd Marks that they were not his Children, if they never pretended to be his Children, and never were accepted under any such Notion to any of the Privileges of his People?

God is pleased to represent himself in his Word as though he trusted the Profession of his visible People, and as disappointed when they did not approve themselves as his faithful, steadfast and thorough Friends. Isaiah 63:8, 9, 10. For he said, surely they are my People, Children that will not lie. So he was their Saviour: In all their affliction he was afflicted. But they rebelled and vexed his holy Spirit; therefore he was turned to be their Enemy. The same is represented in many other Places. I suppose that God speaks after this Manner, because he in his present external Dealings with his visible People, does not act in the Capacity of the Searcher of Hearts, but accommodates himself to their Nature, and the present State and Circumstances of his Church, and speaks to them and treats them after the Manner of Men, and deals with them in their own Way. But supposing the Case to be even thus, there would be no Ground for such Representations if there were no Profession of true Godliness. When God is represented as trusting that Men will be his faithful Friends, we must understand that he trusts to their Pretences. But how improperly would the Matter be so represented, if there were no Pretences to trust to, no Pretences of any real thorough Friendship? However there may be a Profession of some common Affection that is morally Sincere, yet there is no Pretence of loving him more than, yea not so much as his Enemies. What Reason to trust that they will be faithful to God as their Master, when the Religion they profess amounts to no more than serving two Masters? What Reason to trust that they will be stable in their Ways, when they do not pretend to be of a single Heart, and all know that the double-minded Persons used to be unstable in all their Ways? Those who only profess moral Sincerity or common Grace, do not pretend to love God above the World. And such Grace is that God and Man know is liable to pass away as the early Dew and the Morning Cloud. If what Men profess amounts to nothing beyond Lukewarmness, it is not to be expected, that they will be faithful to the Death. If Men do not pretend to have any Oil in their Vessels, what Cause can there be to trust that their Lamps will not go out? If they do not pretend to have any Root in them, what Cause is there for any Disappointment when they wither away?

When God in the forementioned Place Isaiah 63 represents himself as trusting Israel's Profession, and saying, Surely they are my People, Children that will not lie; It cannot be understood, as if he trusted that they were his People in that Sense, in which the ten Tribes were called God's People after they had given up themselves to Idolatry for two or three Hundred Years together without once repenting: But surely they are my sincere Saints and Children, as they profess to be, Israelites indeed, without Guile; for surely they would not do so evil a Thing as to make a lying Profession. This seems to be the plain Import of the Words: It therefore shows that the Profession they made was of real vital Godliness.

V. The eight first Verses of the 56th Chapter of Isaiah, I think, afford good Evidence, that such Qualifications are requisite in order to a due coming to the Privileges of a visible Church-State, as I have insisted on. In the four preceding Chapters we have a Prophecy of Gospel-Times, the blessed State of Things which the Messiah should introduce. The Prophecy of the same Times is continued in the former Part of this Chapter. Here we have a Prophecy of the abolishing of the ceremonial Law, which was a Wall of Separation, that kept two Sorts of Persons, namely, Eunuchs and Gentiles, out from the Ordinances of the Church or Congregation of the Lord (for the Words Congregation and Church are the same) the Place of whose Meeting was in God's House, within God's Walls, (Verse 5) and on God's holy Mountain, verse 7. That in the Ceremonial Law, which especially kept out the Gentiles, was the Law of Circumcision; and the Law that the Eunuch shall not enter into the Congregation or Church of the Lord, we have in Deuteronomy 23:1. Now here it is foretold that in the Days when God's Salvation shall be come, and his Righteousness revealed, by the coming of the Messiah, this Wall of Separation should be broken down, this Ceremonial Law removed out of the Way (But still taking Care to note, that the Law of the Sabbath shall be continued, as not being one of those ceremonial Observances which shall be abolished) and then it is declared what is the great Qualification, which should be looked at in those blessed Days, when these external ceremonial Qualifications of Circumcision and Soundness of Body should no more be insisted on, namely, Piety of Heart and Practice, Joining themselves to the Lord, loving the Name of the Lord, to be his Servants, choosing the Things that please him, and so forth, verse 3, and so forth. Neither let the Son of the Stranger that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak, saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me from his People; neither let the Eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry Tree; For thus saith the Lord unto the Eunuchs that keep my Sabbaths, and choose the Things that please me, and take hold of my Covenant, even unto them will I give in my House, and within my Walls, a Place, and a Name better than of Sons and of Daughters; I will give unto them an Everlasting Name, that shall not be cut off. Also the Sons of the Stranger that join themselves to the Lord, to serve him, and to love the Name of the Lord, to be his Servants, every one that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my Covenant: Even them will I bring to my holy Mountain, and make them joyful in my House of Prayer; their Burnt-Offerings and their Sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine Altar: For mine House shall be called an House of Prayer for all People. The Lord God which gathered the Outcasts of Israel, saith, Yet will I gather others to him besides those that are gathered unto him.

VI. The Representations which CHRIST makes of his visible Church, from Time to Time, in his Discourses and Parables, make the Thing manifest which I have laid down.

As particularly the Representation which Christ makes in the latter End of Matthew 7 of the final Issue of Things with Respect of the different Sorts of Members of his visible Church: Those that only say, Lord, Lord, and those who do the Will of his Father which is in Heaven; those who build their House upon a Rock, and those who build upon the Sand. They are all (of both Kinds) evidently such as have pretended to an high Honour and Regard to Christ, have claimed an Interest in him, and accordingly hoped to be finally acknowledged and received as some of his. Those visible Christians who are not true Christians, for the present cry Lord, Lord; that is, are forward to profess Respect, and claim Relation to him; and will be greatly disappointed hereafter in not being owned by him. They shall then come and cry Lord, Lord. This Compellation, Lord, is commonly given to Jesus Christ in the New-Testament, as signifying the special Relation which Christ stood in to his Disciples, rather than his universal Dominion. They shall then come and earnestly claim Relation, as it is represented of Israel of old, in the Day of their Distress and God's awful Judgments upon them, Hosea 8:2. Israel shall cry unto me, My God, we know thee. To know does not here intend speculative Knowledge, but knowing as one knows his own, has a peculiar Respect to, and owns and has an Interest in. These false Disciples shall not only claim Interest in Christ, but shall plead and bring Arguments to confirm their Claim; Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy Name, and in thy Name have cast out Devils, and in thy Name have done many wonderful Works? It is evidently the Language of those that are dreadfully disappointed. Then (says Christ) I will profess unto them, I never knew you; Depart from me, ye that work Iniquity. As if to say, 'Though they profess a Relation to me, I will profess none to them; though they plead that they know me, and have an Interest in me, I will declare to them that I never owned them as any of mine; and will bid them depart from me as those that I will never own, nor have any Thing to do with in such a Relation as they claim. Thus all the Hopes they had lived in of being hereafter received and owned by Christ, as in the Number of his Friends and Favourites, are dashed in Pieces. This is further illustrated by what follows in the Comparison of the Wise Man who built his House on a Rock; representing those professed Disciples who build their Hope of an Interest in him on a sure Foundation, whose House shall stand in the trying Day, and the Foolish Man who built his House on the Sand; representing those professed Disciples or Hearers of his Word, who build their Opinion and Hope of an Interest in him on a false Foundation, whose House in the great Time of Trial shall have a dreadful Fall, their vain Hope shall issue in dismal Disappointment and Confusion.

On the whole, it is manifest that all visible Christians or Saints, all Christ's professing Disciples or Hearers that profess him to be their Lord, according to the Scripture-Notion of professing Christ, are such profess a saving Interest in him and Relation to him, and live in the Hope of being hereafter owned as those that are so interested and related. By those that hear Christ's Sayings, in this Place, are not meant merely Auditors of the Word preached; for there are many such who make no Pretence to an Interest in Christ, and have no such Hope or Opinion built on any Foundation at all: but those who profess to hearken to, believe and yield Submission to the Word of Christ. This is confirmed by the Manner in which the Matter is expressed in Luke 6. Whosoever comes to me, and hears my sayings, and does them, I will show you to whom he is like: that is, Whosoever visibly comes to me, and is one of my professed Disciples, and so forth.

This Matter is confirmed by that parallel Representation that Christ gives us in Luke 13:25-29 of his final Disposal of the two different Sorts of Persons that are in the Kingdom or Church of God; namely those who shall be allowed in his Church or Kingdom when it comes to its State of Glory, and those who, though they have visibly been in it, shall be thrust out of it. It is represented of the latter, that they shall then come and claim Relation and Interest, and cry, Lord, Lord, open to us; and Christ shall answer, and say, I know you not whence you are. As much as to say "Why do you claim Relation and Acquaintance with me? You are Strangers to me, I do not own you." Then (it is said) They shall begin to say, We have eaten and drank in thy Presence, and thou hast taught in our Streets. As much as to say, "This is a strange Thing, that thou dost not own us! We are exceedingly surprised, that thou shouldst account us as Strangers that have no Part in thee, when we have eaten and drank in thy Presence, and so forth." And when he shall finally insist upon it, that he does not own them and will have nothing to do with them as his, then there shall be weeping and gnashing of Teeth; then they shall be filled with dismal Disappointment, Confusion and Despair, when they shall see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the Prophets in the Kingdom of God, with whom they expected to dwell forever there, and they themselves thrust out. By this it is evident, that those visible Members of the Kingdom of God, that hereafter shall be cast out of it, are such as look upon themselves now interested in Christ and the eternal Blessings of his Kingdom, and make that Profession.

The same is manifest by the Parable of the ten Virgins, Matthew 25. In the first Verse it is said, The Kingdom of Heaven [that is the Church of Christ] is likened unto Ten Virgins. The two Sorts of Virgins evidently represent the two Sorts of Members of the visible Church of Christ; the Wise, those who are true Christians; and the Foolish, those who are apparent, but not true Christians. The foolish Virgins were to all Appearance the Children of the Bride-Chamber; they were such as to Appearance had accepted of the Invitation to the Wedding, which represents the Invitations of the Gospel, wherein the Bridegroom and Bride say, Come; they herein had testified the same Respect to the Bridegroom and Bride, that the Wise had: the Parable naturally leads us to suppose, that they were to Appearance every Way of the same Society with the Wise, pretended to be the same Sort of Persons, in like Manner interested in the Bridegroom, and that they were received by the Wise under such a Notion; they made a Profession of the very same Kind of Honour and Regard to the Bridegroom in going forth to meet him with their Lamps, as his Friends to show him Respect, and had the same Hope of enjoying the Privileges and Entertainments of the Wedding. There was a difference with Respect to Oil in their Vessels, but there was no difference with Respect to their Lamps. One Thing intended by their Lamps, as I suppose is agreed by all, is their Profession. This is the same in both; and in both it is a Profession of Grace, as a Lamp (from its known End and Use) is a Manifestation or show of Oil. Another Thing signified by the Blaze of their Lamps seems to be the Light of Hope: Their Lamps signify in general the Appearance of Grace or Godliness, including both the Appearance of it to the View or Judgment of others, and also to their own View, and the Judgment they entertain of themselves: Their Lamps shone, not only on the Eyes of others, but also in their own Eyes. This is confirmed, because on the hearing the Midnight-Cry, they find their Lamps are gone out; which seems most naturally to represent this to us, that however Hypocrites may maintain their Hopes while they live, and while their Judge is at a Distance, yet when they come to be alarmed by the Sound of the last Trumpet, their Hopes will immediately expire and vanish away, and very often fail them in the sensible Approaches of Death. Where is the Hope of the Hypocrite, when God takes away his Soul? But until the Midnight-Cry the foolish Virgins seem to entertain the same Hopes with the Wise; when they first went forth with the wise Virgins, their Lamps shone in their own Eyes and in the Eyes of others, in like Manner with the Lamps of the wise Virgins. —So that by this Parable it also appears, that all visible Members of the Christian Church or Kingdom of Heaven are those that profess to be gracious Persons, as looking on themselves, and seeming, or at least pretending to be such.

And that true Piety is what Persons ought to look at in themselves as the Qualification that is a proper Ground for them to proceed upon, in coming into the visible Church of Christ and taking the Privileges of its Members, I think, is evident also from the Parable of the Marriage, which the King made for his Son, Matthew 22. Particularly the 11th and 12th Verses, And when the King came in to see the Guests, he saw there a Man which had not on a Wedding-Garment: And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having a Wedding-Garment? And he was Speechless. —Mr. Stoddard says (Appeal, Page 4, 5) Here is a Representation of the Day of Judgment; and such Persons as come for Salvation without a Wedding-Garment shall be rejected in that Day. So that here being nothing said about the Lord's Supper, all arguing from this Scripture falls to the Ground. Upon which I take Leave to observe, that the King's coming in to see the Guests, means Christ's visiting his professing Church at the Day of Judgment, I make no Doubt: But that the Guests coming into the King's House means Persons coming for Salvation at the Day of Judgment, I am not convinced. If it may properly be represented, that any Reprobates will come for Salvation at the Day of Judgment, they will not do so before the King appears; But Christ will appear first, and then they will come and cry to him for Salvation. Whereas, in this Parable, the Guests are represented as gathered together in the King's House before the King appears, and the King as coming in and finding them there; where they had entered while the Day of Grace lasted, while the Door was kept open, and Invitations given forth; and not like those who come for Salvation at the Day of Judgment, Luke 13:25, who came after the Door is shut, and stand without, knocking at the Door. I think, it is apparent beyond all Contradiction, that by the Guests coming into the King's House at the Invitation of the Servants, is intended Jews and Gentiles coming into the Christian Church, at the Preaching of Christ's Apostles and others, making Profession of Godliness and expecting to partake of the eternal Marriage-Supper. I showed before, that that which is called the House of God in the New Testament, is his Church. Here in this Parable the King first sends forth his Servants to call them that were bidden and they would not come; and they having repeatedly rejected the Invitation and evil entreated the Servants, the King sent forth his Armies and burnt up their City; representing the Jews being first invited, and rejecting the Invitations of the Gospel, and persecuting Christ's Ministers, and so provoking God to give up Jerusalem and the Nation to Destruction. Then the King sends forth his Servants into the high Ways, to call in all Sorts; upon which many flocked into the King's House; hereby most plainly representing the Preaching the Gospel to the Gentiles, and their flocking into the Christian Church. This gathering of the Gentiles into the King's House, is BEFORE the Day of Judgment, and the Man without the Wedding-Garment among them. It fitly represents the Resorting that should be to the Christian Church, during the Day of Grace, through all Ages; but by no Means signifies Men's coming for Salvation after the Day of Grace is at an End, at Christ's appearing in the Clouds of Heaven. Let this Parable be compared with that parallel Place, Luke 14:16–24. The Company gathered to the Marriage in this Parable, plainly represents the same Thing with the Company of Virgins gathered to the Marriage in the other Parable, Matthew 25, namely the Company of visible Saints, or the Company belonging to the visible Kingdom of Heaven; and therefore both Parables are introduced alike with these Words, The Kingdom of Heaven is like unto etc. As to the Man's being cast out of the King's House when the King comes in to see his Guests, it is agreeable to other Representations made of false Christians being thrust out of God's Kingdom at the Day of Judgment; the Servant's not abiding in the House for ever, though the Son abideth ever: God's taking away their Part out of the holy City, and blotting their Names out of the Book of Life, etc.

Mr. Stoddard says, "This Person that had not a Wedding-Garment, was a Reprobate; but every one that partakes of the Lord's Supper without Grace is not a Reprobate." I answer, all that will be found in the King's House without Grace when the King comes in to see the Guests, are doubtless Reprobates.

If it be questioned, whether by the Wedding-Garment be meant true Piety, or whether hereby is not intended moral Sincerity, let the Scripture interpret itself; which elsewhere tells us plainly what the Wedding-Garment is at the Marriage of the Son of God: Revelation 19:7, 8. The Marriage of the Lamb is come, and his Wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine Linen, clean and white; for the fine Linen is the Righteousness of Saints. None, I suppose, will say, this Righteousness that is so pure, is the common Grace of lukewarm Professors, and those that go about to serve God and Mammon. The same Wedding-Garment we have Account of in Psalm 45:13, 14. The King's Daughter is all glorious within, her Clothing is of wrought Gold: she shall be brought in unto the King in Raiment of Needle work. But we need go nowhere else but to the Parable itself; that alone determines the Matter. The Wedding-Garment spoken of as that without which Professors will be excluded from among God's People at the Day of Judgment, is not moral Sincerity, or common Grace, but special saving Grace. If common Grace were the Wedding-Garment intended, not only would the King cast out those that he found without a Wedding-Garment, but also many with a Wedding-Garment: for all such as shall be found then with no better Garment than moral Sincerity, will be bound Hand and Foot, and cast into outer Darkness; such a Wedding-Garment as this will not save them. So that true Piety, unfeigned Faith, or the Righteousness of Christ which is upon every one that believeth, is doubtless the Wedding-Garment intended. But if a Person has good and proper Ground to proceed on in coming into the King's House, that knows he is without this Wedding-Garment, why should the King upbraid him, saying, How camest thou in hither, not having a Wedding-Garment? And why should he be Speechless, when asked such a Question? Would he not have had a good Answer to make? Namely "Thou thyself hast given me Leave to come in hither, without a Wedding-Garment." Or this, "Thy own Word is my Warrant; which invited such as had only common Grace or moral Sincerity, to come in."

7. If we consider what took Place, in Fact, in the Manner and Circumstances of the Admission of Members into the primitive Christian Church, and the Profession they made in order to their Admission, as we have these Things recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, it will further confirm the Point I have endeavoured to prove.

We have an Account from Time to Time, concerning these, of their first being awakened by the Preaching of the Apostles and other Ministers, and earnestly enquiring what they should do to be saved; and of their being directed to repent and believe on the Lord Jesus, as the Way to have their Sins blotted out, and to be saved; and then, upon their professing that they did believe, of their being baptized and admitted into the Christian Church. Now can any reasonably imagine, that these primitive Converts, when they made that Profession in order to their Admission, had any such Distinction in View as that which some now make, of two Sorts of real Christianity, two Sorts of sincere Faith and Repentance, one with a moral and another with a gracious Sincerity? Or that the Apostles, who discipled them and baptized them, had instructed them in any such Distinction? The History informs us of their teaching them but one Faith and Repentance; Believing in Christ that they might be saved, and Repentance for the Remission of Sins: and it would be unreasonable, to suppose, that a Thought of any lower or other Kind entered into the Heads of these Converts, when immediately upon their receiving such Instructions they professed Faith and Repentance; or that those who admitted them understood them as meaning any lower or other Kind in what they professed.

Let us particularly consider what we are informed concerning those Multitudes, whose Admission we have an Account of in Acts. We are told concerning the 3000 first Converts, how that they were greatly awakened by the Preaching of the Apostles, pricked in their Hearts, made sensible of their Guilt and Misery; and said to Peter, and the rest of the Apostles, Men and Brethren, what shall we do? that is What shall we do to be saved, and that our Sins may be remitted? Upon which they directed them what they should do, namely Repent, and be baptized, in the Name of the Lord Jesus, for the Remission of Sins. They are here directed into the Way of Salvation, namely Faith and Repentance, with a proper Profession of these. Then, we are told, that they which gladly received the Word, were baptized: that is, They which appeared gladly to receive the Word, or manifested and professed a cordial and cheerful Compliance with the Calls of the Word, with the Directions which the Apostles had given them. The Manifestation was doubtless by some Profession, and the Profession was of that Repentance for the Remission of Sins, and that Faith in Christ, which the Apostles had directed them to, in answer to their Enquiry, What they should do to be saved: I can see no Ground to suppose they thought of any lower or other Kind. And it is evident by what follows, that these now looked upon it that they had complied with these Directions, and so were at Peace with God: Their Business now is to rejoice and praise God from Day to Day; They continued steadfastly in the Apostle's Doctrine and Fellowship—Continuing daily with one Accord in the Temple, and breaking Bread from House to House, they did eat their Meat with Gladness and Singleness of Heart, praising God. The Account of them now is not as Persons under Awakenings, weary and heavy laden Sinners, under Sense of Guilt and Wrath, pricked in their Hearts, as before; but Persons whose Sorrow was turned into Joy, looking on themselves as now in a good Estate. And in the last Verse it is said, "The Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved; in the original it is The saved, which was a common Appellation given to Christians, or to all Members of the visible Christian Church. It is as much as to say, the Converted, or the Regenerate. Being Converted is in Scripture called a being Saved, because it is so in Effect; They were passed from Death to Life, John 5:24. Titus 1:4. According to his Mercy he SAVED us, by the washing of REGENERATION, and renewing of the Holy Ghost. 2 Timothy 1:9. Who hath SAVED us, and called us with an holy Calling. Not that all who were added to the visible Church were indeed regenerated, but they were so in Profession and Repute, and therefore were so in Name. 1 Corinthians 1:18. The preaching of the Cross is to them that perish, Foolishness; but unto us [that is us Christians] which are SAVED it is the Power of God. So those that from Time to Time were added to the primitive Church, were all called The saved. Before, while under Awakenings, they used to inquire of their Teachers, what they should do to be saved; and the Directions that used to be given them, were to Repent and believe in Christ; and before they were admitted into the Church, they professed that they did so: and thenceforward, having visibly complied with the Terms proposed, they were called THE SAVED; it being supposed, that they now had obtained what they enquired after when they asked what they should do to be saved. Accordingly we find that after that, from Time to Time, Christ's Ministers treated them no more as miserable perishing Sinners, but as true Converts; not setting before them their Sin and Misery to awaken them, and to convince them of the Necessity of a Saviour, exhorting them to fly from the Wrath to come, and seek Conversion to God; but exhorting them to hold fast the Profession of their Faith, to continue in the Grace of God, and persevere in Holiness; endeavouring by all Means to confirm, and strengthen them in Grace. Thus when a great Number believed and turned to the Lord at Antioch, Barnabas was sent to them; who when he came, and had seen the Grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them all, that with Purpose of Heart they should cleave to the Lord. Acts 11:23. See also Acts 13:43, 14:22, 15:32, 41, and 20:32. And when the Apostles heard of the Conversion of the Gentiles to the Christian Faith, visible by their Profession when they joined themselves to the Christian Church, they in Charity supposed and believed that God had given them saving Repentance, and an Heart-purifying Faith. Acts 11:18. When they heard these Things, they held their Peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also granted unto the Gentiles REPENTANCE unto LIFE. Chapter 15:9. And put no Difference between us and them, PURIFYING their HEARTS by FAITH.

If any should here object, that when such Multitudes were converted from Judaism and Heathenism, and received into the Christian Church in so short a Season, it was impossible there should be Time for each one to say so much in his public Profession, as to be any credible Exhibition of true Godliness to the Church: I answer, This Objection will soon vanish, if we particularly consider how the Case was with those primitive Converts, and how they were dealt with by their Teachers. It was apparently the Manner of the first Preachers of the Gospel, when their Hearers were awakened and brought in good Earnest to enquire what they should do to be saved, then particularly to instruct them in the Way of Salvation, and explain to them what Qualifications must be in them, or what they must do in order to their being saved, agreeable to Christ's Direction. Mark 16:15-16. This we find was the Method they took with the 3000 in the second Chapter of Acts, verses 37-40. And it seems, they were particular and full in it: They said much more to them than the Words recorded. It is said verse 40. With many other Words did Peter testify and exhort. And this we find to be the Course Paul and Silas took with the Jailer, Chapter 16. Who also gave more large and full Instructions than are rehearsed in the History. And when they had thus instructed them, they doubtless saw to it, either by themselves or some others who assisted them, that their Instructions were understood by them, before they proceeded to baptize them (for I suppose, none with whom I have to do in this Controversy, will maintain, from the Apostle's Example, that we ought not to insist on a good Degree of doctrinal Knowledge in the Way and Terms of Salvation, as requisite to the Admission of Members into the Church) And after they were satisfied that they well understood these Things, it took up no great Time to make a Profession of them, or to declare that they did or found in themselves those Things they had been told of as necessary to their Salvation. Be sure, after they had been well informed what saving Faith and Repentance were, it took up no more Time to profess that Faith and Repentance, than any other. In this Case not only the Converts Words, but the Words of the Preacher, which they consented to, and in Effect made their own, are to be taken into their Profession. For Persons that are known to be of an honest Character, and manifestly qualified with good doctrinal Knowledge of the Nature of true Godliness, in the more essential Things which belong to it, solemnly to profess they have or do those Things, is to make as credible a Profession of Godliness as I insist upon. And we may also well suppose, that more Words were uttered by the Professors, and with other Circumstances to render them credible, than are Recorded in that very brief summary History, which we have of the primitive Church in the Acts of the Apostles; and also we may yet suppose one Thing further, namely that in that extraordinary State of Things so particular a Profession was not requisite in order to the Church's Satisfaction, either of Doctrines assented to, or of the Consent and Disposition of the Heart, as may be expedient in a more ordinary State of Things; for various Reasons that might be given, would it not too much lengthen out this Discourse.

One Thing which makes it very evident, that the inspired Ministers of the primitive Christian Church looked upon saving Faith as the proper Matter of the Profession requisite in Order to Admission into the Church, is the Story of Philip and the Eunuch in Acts 8. For when the Eunuch desires to be baptized, Philip makes answer, verse 37. If you believe with all your Heart, you may. Which Words, certainly imply, that believing with all his Heart was requisite in Order to his coming to this Ordinance properly and in a due Manner. I cannot conceive what should move Philip to utter these Words, or what he should aim at in them, if he at the same Time supposed, that the Eunuch had no manner of Need to look at any such Qualification in himself, or at all to inquire whether he had such a Faith, or no, in Order to determine whether he might present himself as the Subject of Baptism; many that are without it, being as properly qualified for this, as they that have it.

It is said by some, that Philip intended nothing more by believing with all his Heart, than that he believed that Doctrine, That Jesus Christ was the Son of God, with a moral Sincerity of Persuasion. But here again I desire, the Scripture may be allowed to be its own Interpreter. The Scripture very much abounds with such Phrases as this, with all the Heart, or with the whole Heart, in speaking of religious Matters. And the manifest Intent of them is to signify a gracious Simplicity and godly Sincerity. Thus 1 Samuel 12:20. Turn not aside from following the Lord, but serve the Lord with all your Hearts. So verse 24. Only fear the Lord, and serve him in Truth, with all your Heart. 1 Kings 8:23. Who keepest Covenant and Mercy with thy Servants, that walk before thee with all their Heart. Chapter 14:8. My Servant David, who kept my Commandments, and who followed me with all his Heart. 2 Kings 10:31. But Jehu took no Heed to walk in the Law of the Lord God of Israel with all his Heart. 2 Chronicles 22:9. Jehoshaphat sought the Lord with all his Heart. Chapter 31:20-21. Hezekiah wrought that which was good and right, and Truth before the Lord his God; and in every Work that he began in the Service of the House of God, and in the Law, and in the Commandments, to seek his God, he did it with all his Heart. Psalm 9:1. I will praise thee, O Lord, with my whole Heart. Psalm 86:12. I will praise thee, O Lord my God, with all my Heart, and will glorify thy Name. Psalm 111:1. I will praise thee, O Lord, with my whole Heart, in the Assembly of the Upright. and 119:2. Blessed are they that keep his Testimonies, and that seek him with the whole Heart. verse 10. With my whole Heart have I sought thee. verse 34. Give me Understanding, and I shall keep thy Law, yea, I shall observe it with my whole Heart. verse 69. The proud have forged a lie against me, but I will keep thy Precepts with my whole Heart. Jeremiah 24:7. And I will give them an Heart to know me—for they shall return unto me with their whole Heart. Joel 2:12, 13. Turn you even unto me with all your Heart,—and rend your Heart, and not your Garments. And we have the like Phrases in innumerable other Places. And I suppose that not so much as one Place can be produced, wherein there is the least Evidence or Appearance of their being used to signify any Thing but a gracious Sincerity. And indeed it must be a very improper Use of Language, to speak of those as performing Acts of Religion with all their Hearts, whose Heart the Scriptures do abundantly represent as under the reigning Power of Sin and Unbelief, and as those that do not give God their Hearts, but give them to other Things; as those who go about to serve two Masters, and as those who indeed draw near to God with their Lips, but have at the same Time their Hearts far from him, and running more after other Things; and who have not a single Eye, nor single Heart. The Word Believe, in the New Testament answers to the Word Trust in the Old; and therefore the Phrase used by Philip, of believing with all the Heart, is parallel to that in Proverbs 3 "Trust in the Lord with all thine Heart." And Believing with the Heart is a Phrase used in the New-Testament to signify saving Faith. Romans 10:9, 10. If you shall believe in your Heart, that God hath raised him from the dead, you shall be saved; for with the Heart Men believe unto Righteousness. The same is signified by obeying the Form of Doctrine from the Heart, Romans 6:17, 18. But God be thanked, that you were the Servants of Sin, but you have obeyed from the Heart that Form of Doctrine which was delivered you; being then made free from Sin, you became the Servants of Righteousness. Here it is manifest, that saving Faith is intended by obeying the Form of Doctrine from the Heart. And the same is signified as if it had been said, you have believed with the Heart the Form of Doctrine. But Philip uses a yet stronger Expression, he does not only say, if you believe with the Heart, or from the Heart, but with ALL your Heart. And besides, for any to suppose, that those same Persons which the Scriptures represent in some Places as under the Power of an evil Heart of Unbelief; and as double-minded with Regard to their Faith (James 1:6, 7, 8) and as those who though they believe for a While, yet have their Hearts like a Rock, in which Faith has no Root, (Luke 8). And yet that this same Sort of Persons are in other Scripture, spoken of as believing with all their Heart; I say, for any to suppose this, would be to make the Sound or Voice of God's Word not very harmonious and consonant to itself. And one Thing more I would observe on this Head, there is good Reason to suppose, that Philip, while he sat in the Chariot with the Eunuch, and (as we are told) preached unto him Jesus, had showed to him the Way of Salvation, had opened to him the Way of getting an Interest in Christ, or obtaining Salvation by him, namely believing in him, agreeable to Christ's own Direction, Mark 16:15, 16. And agreeable to what we find to be the Manner of the first Preachers of the Gospel: And therefore now when after this Discourse he puts it to the Eunuch, whether he believed with all his Heart; it is natural to suppose, that he meant whether he found his Heart acquiescing in the Gospel-Way of Salvation, or whether he sincerely exercised that Belief in Christ which he had been inculcating; and it would be natural for the Eunuch so to understand him.

Here if it be objected, that the Eunuch's Answer and the Profession he hereupon made (wherein he speaks nothing of his Heart, but barely says) I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, shows that he understood no more by the Enquiry, than whether he gave his Assent to that Doctrine: To this I answer; we must take this Confession of the Eunuch's together with Philip's Words, which they were a Reply to, and expound the one by the other. Nor is there any Reason but to understand it in the same Sense in which we find the Words of the like Confession elsewhere in the New-Testament, and as the Words of such a Confession were wont to be used in those Days; as particularly the Words of Peter's Confession, Matthew 16:16. And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art Christ the Son of the living God: Which was a Profession of saving Faith, as appears by what Christ says upon it. And we read, 1 Corinthians 12:3. No Man can say, that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost. Not but that a Man might make a Profession in these Words without the Holy Ghost, but he could not do it heartily, or WITH ALL HIS HEART. So 1 John 4:15. Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. That is, Whoever makes this Christian Confession (this Profession which all Christians were wont to make) cordially, or with his whole Heart, God dwells in him, and so forth. But it was thus that the Eunuch was put upon making this Confession.

8. It is apparent by the Epistles of the Apostles to the primitive Christian Churches, their Manner of addressing and treating them throughout all those Epistles, and what they say to them and of them, that all those Churches were constituted of Members so qualified as has been represented, having such a Visibility of Godliness as has been insisted on; those who were reputed to be real Saints, were taken into the Church under a Notion of their being truly pious Persons, made that Profession, and had this Hope of themselves; and no natural or graceless Men were admitted designedly, but unawares, and beside the Aim of the primitive Churches and Ministers, and was done unawares; and that such as remained in good standing, and free from an offensive Behaviour, continued to have the Reputation and Esteem of real Saints, with the Apostles, and one with another.

There were Numbers indeed in these Churches, who after their Admission fell into an offensive Behaviour; some of which the Apostles in their Epistles speak doubtfully of; others that had behaved themselves very scandalously, they speak of in Language that seems to suppose them to be wicked Men. The Apostle Paul, in his Epistles to the Corinthians, oftentimes speaks of some among them that had embraced heretical Opinions, and had behaved themselves in a very disorderly and schismatical Manner, whom he represents as exposed to Censure, and to whom he threatens Excommunication; and upon Occasion of so many Offences of this Kind appearing among them that for a while had been thought well of, he puts them all upon examining themselves, whether they were indeed in the Faith, and whether Christ was truly in them, as they and others had supposed, 2 Corinthians 13. And the same Apostle speaks of great Numbers among the Galatians, who had made a high Profession, and were such as he had thought well of when they were first admitted into the Church, but since had given him Cause to doubt of their State, by giving Heed to Seducers that denied the great Gospel-Doctrine of Justification by Faith alone: Yet notwithstanding, the Apostle speaks of them in such Language as shows Surprise and Disappointment, and implies that he had looked upon them as true Christians, and hoped that his Labours among them had had a saving Effect upon them. Galatians 1:6. I marvel, that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the Grace of Christ, unto another Gospel. Chapter 4:11. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you Labour in vain. and verse 20. I desire to be present with you now, and change my Voice; for I stand in Doubt of you. As much as to say, I have heretofore addressed you with the Voice of Love and Charity, as supposing you the dear Children of God; but now I begin to think of speaking to you in other Language. In the same Chapter, to show them what little Reason he had had to expect that they would come to this, he puts them in Mind of the great Profession they had made, and the extraordinary Appearances there had formerly been in them of fervent Piety. verse 15. Where is the Blessedness you spake of? For I bear you Record, that if it had been possible, you would have plucked out your own Eyes, and have given them unto me. The Apostle James, in his Epistle, speaks of scandalous Persons among the twelve Tribes that were scattered abroad; some that were Men of unbridled Tongues; some that seem to have been a Kind of Antinomians in their Principles, and of a very bitter and violent Spirit, that reproached, condemned, and cursed their Brethren, and raised Wars and Fightings among professing Christians, and were also very unclean in their Practice, Adulterers and Adulteresses, Chapter 4:4. And in the fifth Chapter of his Epistle, he seems to speak to the unbelieving Jews, who persecuted the Christians, verse 6. And the Apostles are also often speaking of some that had once been admitted into the Church, crept in unawares, who had apostatized from Christianity, and finally proved notoriously wicked Men. But otherwise, and as to such Members of the visible Church as continued in the same good Standing and Visibility of Christianity, wherein they were admitted, it is evident by the Epistles of the Apostles, they were all in the Eye of a Christian Judgment truly pious or gracious Persons. And here I desire the following Things may be particularly observed.

The Apostles continually in their Epistles speak to them and of them as supposing and judging them to be gracious persons. Thus the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Church of the Romans, Chapter 1, 7, speaks of the members of that Church as beloved of God. In Chapter 6, 17, 18, etcetera, he thanks God, that they had obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which had been delivered them, and were made free from sin, and become the servants of righteousness, etcetera. The Apostle in giving thanks to God for this, must not only have a kind of negative charity for them, as not knowing but that they were gracious persons, and so charitably hoping (as we say) that it was so; but he seems to have formed a positive judgment that they were such: his thanksgiving must at least be founded on rational probability; since it would be but mocking of God, to give Him thanks for bestowing a mercy which at the same time he did not see reason positively to believe was bestowed. In Chapter 7, 4, 5, 6, the Apostle speaks of them as those that once were in the flesh, and were under the law, but now delivered from the law, and dead to it. In Chapter 8, 15 and following verses, he tells them, they had received the Spirit of adoption, and speaks of them as having the witness of the Spirit that they were the children of God, heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ. And the whole of his discourse to the end of the chapter implies, that he esteemed them truly gracious persons. In Chapter 9, 23, 24, he speaks of the Christian Romans, together with all other Christians, both Jews and Gentiles, as vessels of mercy. In Chapter 14, 6, 7, 8, speaking of the difference, that then was among professing Christians, in point of regard to ceremonial institutions of the law, he speaks of both parties as acting from a gracious principle, and as those that lived to the Lord, and should die unto the Lord. He that regards the day, regards it unto the Lord, etcetera. For none of us lives to himself, and no man [that is, none of us] dies to himself; for whether we live, we live unto the Lord, or whether we die, we die unto the Lord; whether we live therefore or die, we are the Lord's. In Chapter 15, 14, he says, 'I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye are full of goodness.' His being thus persuaded implies a positive judgment of charity. And the same Apostle in his first Epistle to the Corinthians directs it to the Church at Corinth, that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call on the name of the Lord Jesus; that is, to all visible Christians through the world, or all the members of Christ's visible Church everywhere. And continuing his speech of these, Chapter 1, 8, he speaks of them as those that God would confirm to the end, that they may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ; plainly speaking of them all as persons, in Christian esteem, savingly converted. In the next verse, he speaks of the faithfulness of God as engaged thus to preserve them to salvation, having called them to the fellowship of His Son. And in the 30th verse he speaks of them as having a saving interest in Christ; 'Of Him are ye in Christ Jesus; who of God is made unto us, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption.' In Chapter 3, 21, 22, 23, he says to the members of the Church of Corinth, 'All things are yours, whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present or things to come; all are yours, and ye are Christ's.' In Chapter 4, 15, he tells them, he had begotten them through the Gospel. In Chapter 6, 1, 2, 3, he speaks of them as those who shall judge the world, and shall judge angels. And in verse 11, he says to them, 'Ye are washed, ye are sanctified, ye are justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of God.' And in Chapter 15, 49 to the end, he speaks of them as having an interest, with him and other Christians, in the happiness and glory of the resurrection of the just. And in his second Epistle, Chapter 1, 7, he says to them, 'Our hope of you is steadfast; knowing that as you are partakers of the sufferings, so shall ye be also of the consolation.' This steadfast hope implies a positive judgment. We must here understand the Apostle to speak of such members of the Church of Corinth, as had not visibly backslidden, as they whom he elsewhere speaks doubtfully of. Again, in the 14th and 15th verses, he speaks of a confidence which he had, that they should be his rejoicing in the day of the Lord Jesus. In all reason we must conclude, there was a visibility of grace, carrying with it an apparent probability in the eyes of the Apostle, which was the ground of this his confidence. Such an apparent probability, and his confidence as built upon it, are both expressed in Chapter 3, 3, 4: Ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ, ministered by us; written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in the fleshly tables of the heart; and such trust have we through Christ to God-ward. And in verse 18, the Apostle speaks of them, with himself and other Christians, as all with open face beholding, as in a glass, the glory of the Lord, and being changed into the same image from glory to glory. And in the Epistle to the Churches of Galatia, Chapter 4, 26, the Apostle speaks of visible Christians as visibly belonging to Heaven, the Jerusalem which is above. And verse 28, 29, represents them to be the children of the promise, as Isaac was; and born after the Spirit. In the 6th verse of the same chapter he says to the Christian Galatians, 'Because ye are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.' And in Chapter 6, 1, he speaks of those of them that had not fallen into scandal, as spiritual persons. In his Epistle to that great Church of Ephesus, at the beginning, he blesses God on behalf of the members of that Church, as being together with himself and all the faithful in Christ Jesus, chosen in Him before the foundation of the world, to be holy and without blame before Him in love, being predestinated to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, wherein God had made them accepted in the Beloved; in Whom they had redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins. In Chapter 1, 13, 14, he thus writes to them: 'In Whom ye also trusted—in Whom after ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession.' And in Chapter 2, at the beginning: 'You has He quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins.' With much more, showing that they were, in a charitable esteem, regenerated persons and heirs of salvation. So in the Epistle to the members of the Church of Philippi, the Apostle saluting them in the beginning of it, tells them that he thanks God upon every remembrance of them, for their fellowship in the Gospel; being CONFIDENT of this very thing, that He which had begun a good work in them, would perform it until the day of Christ: even (says he) as it is meet for me to think this of you all. If it was meet for him to think this of them, and to be confident of it, he had at least some appearing rational probability to found his judgment and confidence upon; for surely it is not meet for reasonable creatures to think at random, and be confident without reason. In verse 25, 26, he speaks of his confidence that he should come to them for their furtherance and joy of faith, that their rejoicing might be more abundant in Christ Jesus. Which words certainly suppose that they were persons who had already received Christ and comfort in Him; had already obtained faith and joy in Christ, and only needed to have it increased. In the Epistle to the members of the Church of Colosse, the Apostle saluting them in the beginning of the Epistle, gives thanks for their faith in Christ Jesus, and love to all saints, and the hope laid up for them in Heaven; and speaks of the Gospel's bringing forth fruit in them, since the day they knew the grace of God in truth; that is, since the day of their saving conversion. In Chapter 1, 8, he speaks of "their love in the Spirit." Verse 12, 13, 14, he speaks of them as made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light; as being delivered from the power of darkness, and translated into the kingdom of God's dear Son; as having redemption through Christ's blood, and the forgiveness of sins. In Chapter 3, at the beginning, he speaks of them as risen with Christ; as being dead [that is, to the law, to sin, and the world] as having their life hid with Christ in God; and being such as, when Christ their life should appear, should appear with Him in glory. In verse 7, he speaks of them as having once walked and lived in lusts, but having now put off the old man with his deeds, and put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of Him that created him. In the first Epistle to the members of the Church of Thessalonica, in words annexed to his salutation, Chapter 1, he declares what kind of visibility there was of their election of God, in the appearance there had been of true and saving conversion, and their consequent holy life, verse 3-7. And in the beginning of the second Epistle he speaks of their faith and love greatly increasing; and in verse 7, expresses his confidence of meeting them in eternal rest, when the Lord Jesus Christ should be revealed from Heaven with His mighty angels. And in Chapter 2, 13, he gives thanks to God, that from the beginning He had chosen them to salvation. In the Epistle to the Christian Hebrews, though the Apostle speaks of some that once belonged to their churches, but had apostatized and proved themselves hypocrites; yet concerning the rest that remained in good standing, he says, Chapter 6, 9: I am persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation. (Where we may again note, his being thus persuaded evidently implies a positive judgment.) And in Chapter 12, 22, etcetera, he speaks of them as visibly belonging to the glorious society of Heaven. And in Chapter 13, 5, 6, he speaks of them as those who may boldly say, The Lord is my helper. The Apostle James, writing to the Christians of the twelve tribes which were scattered abroad, speaks of them as regenerated persons (meaning, as I observed before, those which were in good standing), Chapter 1, 18: Of His own will begot He us by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of first fruits of His creatures. The Apostle Peter writing to the Jewish Christians, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia (large countries, and therefore they must in the whole be supposed to be a great multitude of people) to all these the Apostle in the inscription or direction of his first Epistle, gives the title of Elect, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience, and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. And in the verse next following, speaks of them as regenerated or begotten again to a lively hope, to an inheritance incorruptible, etcetera. And as kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation. And says to them in verse 8, 9: 'Whom (namely Christ) having not seen, ye love; in Whom though now ye see Him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory; receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.' And in verse 18, to the end, the Apostle speaks of them as redeemed from their vain conversation, by the precious blood of Christ, and as having purified their souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit, being born again of incorruptible seed, etcetera. And in the former part of Chapter 2, he speaks of them as living stones, coming to Christ, and on Him built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ, and as those that believe, to whom Christ is precious, as a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people, called out of darkness into marvelous light. The Church at Babylon occasionally mentioned in Chapter 5, 13, is said to be elected together with them. And in his second Epistle (which appears by Chapter 3, 1, to be written to the same persons) the inscription is, To them which have obtained like precious faith with us, that is, with the Apostles and servants of Christ. And in the third chapter, he tells them, both his Epistles were designed to stir up their PURE minds. In the first Epistle of John, written (for ought appears) to professing Christians in general, Chapter 2, 12, etcetera, the Apostle tells them, he writes to them because their sins were forgiven, because they had known Him that was from the beginning, because they had overcome the wicked one, etcetera. In verse 20, 21, he tells them, they have an unction from the Holy One, and know all things; and that he did not write to them because they had not known the truth, but because they had known it, etcetera. And in verse 27, he says, 'The anointing which ye have received of Him, abides in you, and ye need not that any man should teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it has taught you, ye shall abide in Him.' And in the beginning of the third chapter, he addresses them as those who were the sons of God, who when He should appear should be like Him, because they should see Him as He is. In Chapter 4, 4, he says, 'Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome etcetera.' The Apostle Jude, in his general Epistle, speaks much of apostates and their wickedness; but to other professing Christians that had not fallen away, he says verse 20, 21: 'But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost, keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, unto eternal life': plainly supposing, that they had professed faith with love to God our Saviour, and were by the Apostle considered as His friends and lovers. Many other passages to the like purpose might be observed in the Epistles, but these may suffice.

Now how unaccountable would these Things be, if the Case was, that the Members of the primitive Christian Churches were not admitted into them under any such Notion as their being really godly Persons and Heirs of eternal Life, nor with any Respect to such a Character appearing on them; and that they themselves joined to these Churches without any such Pretence, as having no such Opinion of themselves!

But it is particularly evident that they had such an Opinion of themselves, as well as the Apostles of them, by many Things the Apostles say in their Epistles. Thus, in Romans 8 verses 15, 16, the Apostle speaks of them as having received the Spirit of Adoption, the Spirit of God bearing Witness with their Spirits, that they were the Children of God. And Chapter 5 verse 2: Of their rejoicing in Hope of the Glory of God. In 1 Corinthians 1 verse 7, He speaks of them as waiting for the coming of the Lord Jesus. In Chapter 15 verse 17, the Apostle says to the Members of the Church of Corinth, If Christ be not raised, your Faith is vain, ye are yet in your Sins: Plainly supposing, that they hoped their Sins were forgiven. In Philippians 1 verses 25, 26, The Apostle speaks of his coming to Philippi to increase their Joy of Faith, and that their rejoicing in Christ might be more abundant: Implying (as was observed before) that they had received Comfort already, in some Degree as supposing themselves to have a saving Interest in Christ. In 1 Thessalonians 1 verse 10, He speaks of the Members of the Church of Thessalonica as waiting for Christ from Heaven, as one who had delivered them from the Wrath to come. In Hebrews 6 verses 9, 19, He speaks of the Christian Hebrews as having that Hope which was an Anchor to their Souls. The Apostle Peter, First Epistle 1 verses 3, 6, 8, 9, speaks of the visible Christians he wrote to, as being begotten to a living Hope of an Inheritance incorruptible, etcetera, Wherein they greatly rejoiced, etcetera. And even the Members of the Church of Laodicea, the very worst of all the seven Churches of Asia, yet looked upon themselves as truly gracious Persons, and made that Profession; They said, they were rich, and increased in Goods, and know not that they were wretched and miserable, etcetera. Revelation 3 verse 17.

It is also evident, that the Members of these primitive Churches and this Judgment one of another, and of the Members of the visible Church of Christ in general. In 1 Thessalonians 4 verse 13 etcetera, the Apostle exhorts the Christian Thessalonians, in Mourning for their deceased Friends who were visible Christians, not to sorrow as the hopeless Heathen were wont to do for their departed Friends; and that upon this Consideration, that they had Reason to expect to meet them again in glorious Circumstances at the Day of Judgment, never to part more. The Ground of Comfort concerning their dead Friends, which the Apostle here speaks of, is evidently something more than such an Hope as it may be supposed we ought to have of all that profess Christian Doctrines and are not Scandalous in Life, whom we must forbear to censure, because we don't know but they are true Saints. The Members of the Church of Sardis, next to Laodicea, the worst of the seven Churches of Asia, yet had a Name that they lived; though Christ, who speaks to these seven Churches from Heaven in the Character of the Searcher of Hearts, (see Revelation 2 verse 23) explicitly tells them, that they were dead; perhaps all in a dead Frame, and the most in a dead State.

These Things evidently show, how all the Christian Churches through the World were constituted in those Days; and what Sort of Holiness or Saintship it was, that all visible Christians in good Standing had a Visibility and Profession of, in that Apostolic Age; and also what Sort of Visibility of this they had, namely not only that which gave them Right to a Kind of Negative Charity, or freedom from Censure, but that which might justly induce a positive Judgment in their Favour. The Churches that these Epistles were written to, were all the principal Churches in the World; some of them very large, as the Churches of Corinth and Ephesus; some of the Epistles were directed to all the Churches through large Countries where the Gospel had had great Success, as the Epistle to the Galatians. The Epistle to the Hebrews was written to all the Jewish Christians in the Land of Canaan, in Distinction from the Jews that lived in other Countries, who were called Hellenists or Grecians, because they generally spoke the Greek Tongue. The Epistles of Peter were written to all the Christian Jews through many Countries, Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia; where were great Numbers of Jews beyond any other Gentile Countries. The Epistle of James was directed to all Christian Jews, scattered abroad through the whole World. The Epistles of John and Jude, for ought appears in those Epistles, were directed to all visible Christians through the whole World. And the Apostle Paul directs the first Epistle to the Corinthians, not only to the Members of that Church, but to all professing Christians through the Face of the Earth. 1 Corinthians 1 verse 2 and Chapter 14 verse 33. Speaking of the Churches in general, he calls them all Churches of the Saints. And by what Christ says to the Churches of Sardis and Laodicea in the Apocalypse, of whom more Evil is said than of any Christian Churches spoken of in the New Testament, It appears that even the Members of those Churches looked on themselves as in a State of Salvation, and had such a Name with others.

Here possibly some may object, and say, It will not follow from the Apostles speaking to and of the Members of the primitive Church after the Manner which has been observed, as though they supposed them to be gracious Persons, that therefore a Profession and Appearance of this was looked upon in those Days as a requisite Qualification for Admission into the visible Church; because another Reason may be given for it, namely Such was the extraordinary State of Things at that Day, that it so came to pass, that the greater Part of those converted from Heathenism and Judaism to Christianity, were hopefully gracious Persons, by Reason of its being a Day of such large Communications of divine Grace, and such great and unavoidable Sufferings of Professors, etcetera. And the Apostles knowing those Facts, might properly speak to and of the Churches as if they were Societies of truly gracious Persons, because there was just Ground, on such Accounts, to think the greater Part of them to be so; although no Profession or Visibility of this was requisite in their Members by the Constitution of those Churches, and the Door of Admission was as open for others as for such.

But it will appear, this cannot be a Satisfactory nor true Account of the Matter, if we consider the following Things.

(1.) The Apostles in the very Superscription or Direction of their Letters to these Churches, and in their Salutations at the Beginning of their Epistles, Speak of them as gracious Persons. For Instance, The Apostle Peter in the Direction of his first Letter to all professing Jewish Christians through many Countries, says thus, To the strangers scattered through Pontus etcetera, Elect, according to the Foreknowledge of God the Father, through Sanctification of the Spirit unto Obedience, and sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus Christ. And in directing his second Epistle to the same Persons, he says thus, Simon Peter a Servant and an Apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious Faith with us, etcetera. And the Apostle Paul directs his Epistle to the Romans thus, To them that be at Rome, beloved of God. So he directs his first Epistle to the Corinthians thus, Unto the Church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are Sanctified in Christ Jesus. In what Sense he means Sanctified, his following Words show, verses 4, 7, 8, 9. The same was before observed of Words annexed to the Apostle's Salutations in the Beginning of several of the Epistles. This shows, that the Apostles extend this Character as far as they do the Epistles themselves. Which surely would be very improper, and not agreeable to Truth, if the Apostles at the same Time knew very well that such a Character did not belong to Members of Churches, as such, and that they were not received into those Churches with any Regard to such Character, or upon the Account of any Right they had to be esteemed such Manner of Persons. In the Superscription of Letters to Societies of Men, we are wont to give them that Title or Denomination which properly belongs to them as Members of such a Body. Thus, if one should write to the Royal Society in London, or the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris, it would be proper and natural to give them the Title of Learned; for whether every one of the Members truly deserve the Epithet, or not, yet the Title is agreeable to their Profession, and what is known to be aimed at and is professedly insisted on in the Admission of Members. But if one should write to the House of Commons, or to the East-India-Company, and in his Superscription give them the Title of Learned, this would be very improper and ill judged; because that Character don't belong to their Profession as Members of that Body, and Learning is not a Qualification looked at or insisted on in their Admission of Members; Nor would it excuse the Impropriety, though the Writer might from his special Acquaintance know it to be Fact, that the greater Part of them were Men of Learning. If one Man should once happen thus to inscribe a Letter to them, it would be something strange; but more strange, if he should do it from Time to Time, or if it should appear by various Instances to be a Custom so to direct Letters to such Societies; as it seems to be the Manner of the Apostles, in their Epistles to Christian Churches, to address them under Titles which imply a Profession and Visibility of true Holiness.

(2.) The Apostle John in his general Epistle does very plainly manifest, that all whom he wrote to were supposed to have true Grace, in as much as he declares this the Qualification he has Respect to in writing to them, and lets them know he writes to them for that Reason, because they are supposed to be Persons of the Character of such as have known God, over come the wicked One, and have had their Sins forgiven them. 1 John 2 verses 12, 13, 14, 21.

(3.) The Apostles, when speaking of such as they write to, namely visible Christians, as a Society, and representing what belongs to such a Kind or Sort of Society as the visible Church is, they speak of it as visibly (that is in Profession and Reputation) a Society of gracious Persons. So the Apostle Peter speaks of them as a spiritual House, an holy and royal Priesthood, an holy Nation, a peculiar People, a chosen or elect Generation, called out of Darkness into marvellous Light. 1 Peter 2. The Apostle Paul also speaks of them as the Family of God. Ephesians 2 verse 19. And in the next Chapter he explains himself to mean that Family a Part of which is in Heaven, that is They were by Profession and in Visibility a Part of that heavenly and divine Family.

(4.) The Apostle Paul speaks expressly, and from Time to Time, of the Members of the Churches he wrote to, as all of them in Esteem and Visibility truly gracious Persons. Philippians 1 verse 6. Being confident of this very Thing, that he which has begun a good Work in you will perform it until the Day of the Lord Jesus Christ: Even as it is meet for me to think this of YOU ALL (that is, all singly taken, not collectively, according to the Distinction before observed). So Galatians 4 verse 26. "Jerusalem which is above, which is the Mother of us ALL." Romans 6. AS MANY OF US as have been baptized into Christ, have been baptized into his Death. Here he speaks of all that have been baptized; and in the Continuation of the Discourse, explaining what is here said, he speaks of their being dead to Sin; no longer under the Law, but under Grace; having obeyed the Form of Doctrine from the Heart, being made free from Sin and become the Servants of Righteousness, etcetera. Romans 14 verses 7, 8. NONE OF US liveth to himself, and NO MAN "dieth to himself" (taken together with the Context). 2 Corinthians 3 verse 18. "We ALL with open Face beholding as in a Glass, etcetera." and Galatians 3 "Ye are ALL the Children of God by Faith."

5. It is evident, that even in those Churches where the greater Part of the Members were not true Saints, as in those degenerate Churches of Sardis and Laodicea, which we may suppose were become very lax in their Admissions and Discipline; yet they looked upon themselves as truly gracious Persons, and had with others the Reputation of such.

(6.) If we should suppose, that by Reason of the extraordinary State of Things in that Day, the Apostles had Reason to think the bigger Part of the Members of Churches to be true Christians, yet unless Profession and Appearance of true Christianity was their proper Qualification and the Ground of their Admission, and unless it was supposed that all of them esteemed themselves true Christians, it is altogether unaccountable that the Apostles in their Epistles to them never make any express particular Distinction between those different Sorts of Members. If the Churches were made up of Persons who the Apostles knew looked on themselves in so exceeding different a State, some the Children of God, and others the Children of the Devil, some the high Favourites of Heaven and Heirs of eternal Glory, others the Children of Wrath, being under Condemnation to eternal Death, and every Moment in Danger of dropping into Hell: I say, if this was the Case, why do the Apostles make no Distinction in what they say to them or of them, in their Manner of addressing them, in the Things they set before them, and in the Counsels, Reproofs and Warnings they gave them? Why do the Apostles in their Epistles never apply themselves or direct their Speech to the unconverted Members of the Churches, in particular, in a Manner tending to awaken them and make them sensible of the miserable Condition they were in, and press them to seek the converting Grace of God? 'Tis to be considered, that the Apostle Paul was very particularly acquainted with the Circumstances of most of those Churches he wrote to; for he had been among them, was their spiritual Father, had been the Instrument of gathering and founding those Churches, and they had received all their Instructions and Directions relating to Christianity and their Soul-Concerns from him; nor can it be questioned but that many of them had opened the Case of their Souls to him. And if he was sensible, that there was a Number among them that made no Pretensions to being in a regenerate State, and that he and others had no Reason to judge them to be in such a State, he knew that the Sin of such who lived in the Rejection of a Saviour, even in the very House of God, in the midst of Gospel-light, and in Violation of the most sacred Vows, was peculiarly aggravated, and their Guilt and State peculiarly dreadful. Why should he therefore never particularly and distinctly point his Addresses to such, applying himself to them in much Compassion to their Souls, and putting them in mind of their awful Circumstances? But instead of this, continually lumping all together, and indifferently addressing the whole Body, as if they were all in happy Circumstances, expressing his Charity for them all, and congratulating them all in their glorious and eternal Privileges; and instead of speaking to them in such a Manner as should have a Tendency to alarm them with a Sense of Danger, on the contrary, calling on all without Distinction, from Time to Time, to rejoice? Philippians 3:1. Finally, my Brethren, rejoyce in the Lord. So 2 Corinthians 13:11. Finally, Brethren, be of good Comfort. Philippians 4:4. Rejoyce in the Lord alway, and again I say, Rejoyce. The Matter is insisted upon as though Rejoicing were a Duty especially proper for them, and what they had the highest Reason for. The Apostle not only did not preach Terror to those whom he wrote to, but is careful to guard them against Fears of God's Wrath; as in 1 Thessalonians 5 at the Beginning, when the Apostle there observes how that Christ will come on ungodly Men as a Thief in the Night, and when they shall say Peace and Safety, then sudden Destruction shall come upon them, as Travail on a Woman with Child, and they shall not escape; he immediately uses Caution, that the Members of the Church of Thessalonica should not take this to themselves, and be terrified, as though they were in Danger; and says in the next Words, But ye, Brethren, are not in Darkness, that that Day should overtake you as a Thief; ye are ALL the Children of Light, and the Children of the Day. And says in the 9th, 10th, and 11th Verses, For God hath not appointed us to Wrath, but to obtain Salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ; who died for us that whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him. Wherefore Comfort yourselves together, and edify one another; even as also ye do. And verse 16 he says, Rejoyce evermore. How diverse is this Way of treating Churches, from the Method in which faithful Ministers are wont to deal with their Congregations, wherein are many that make no Pretence to true Piety, and from the Way in which Mr. Stoddard was wont to deal with his Congregation! And how would he have undoubtedly judged such a Way of treating them the most direct Course in the World eternally to undo them? And shall we determine that the Apostle Paul was one of those Prophets who daubed with untempered Mortar, and sewed Pillows under all Arm-Holes, and healed the Hurt of immortal Souls slightly, crying Peace, 'Peace, when there was no Peace. —These Things make it most evident, that the primitive Churches were not constituted as those modern Churches where Persons knowing and owning themselves unregenerate, are admitted, on Principle.

If it be here objected, that the Apostle sometimes exhorts those that he writes to, to put off the Old-Man, and put on the New-Man, and to be renewed in the Spirit of their Minds, etcetera as exhorting them to seek Conversion. I answer, that the meaning is manifestly but this, That they should mortify the Remains of Corruption or the Old Man, and turn more and more from Sin to God. Thus he exhorts the Ephesians to be renewed, etcetera Ephesians 4:22, 23. whom yet he had before in the same Epistle abundantly represented as savingly renewed already; as has been before observed. And the like might be shown of other Instances.

(7.) It is a clear Evidence, not only that it happened the greater Part of the Members of the primitive Churches were to Appearance true Christians; but that they were taken in under that Notion, and because there appeared in them Grounds of such an Estimation of them; and when any happened to be admitted that were otherwise, it was beside their Aim; In as much as when others were admitted, they are represented as brought or crept in unawares. Thus the Matter is represented by the Apostles. Jude verse 4. There are certain Men crept in unawares,—ungodly Men, turning the Grace of God into Lasciviousness. Galatians 2:4. False Brethren, unawares brought in. If it be said, these here spoken of were openly scandalous Persons and Heretics: I answer, they were not openly scandalous when they were first brought in; nor is there any Reason to think they were Heretics when admitted, though afterwards they turned Apostates. Mr. Stoddard says, it don't follow that all Hypocrites crept in unawares because some did. (Appeal, Page 17.) To which I would humbly say, it must be certainly true with Respect to all Hypocrites who were admitted, either that the Church which admitted them was aware they were such, or else was not. If there were some of whom the Church was aware, that they were Hypocrites, at the Time when they were taken in, then the Church in admitting them did not follow the Rule that Mr. Stoddard often declares himself to suppose ought to be followed in admitting Members, namely to admit none but what in a Judgment of rational Charity are true Christians. (Appeal Page 2, 3, 10, 28, 33, 67, 73, 93, 94,) But that not only Heretics and designing Dissemblers crept in unawares, but that all false Brethren, all Church-Members not truly gracious, did so, appears by such being represented as Bastards in a Family, who are false Children and false Heirs, brought into it unawares, and imposed upon the Disposers of those Privileges by Stealth. Hebrews 12:8. If, ye are without Chastisement, whereof all are Partakers, then are ye Bastards, and not Sons.

Thus it is abundantly manifest, from the Apostolical Writings, how the visible Church of Christ through the whole World was at first constituted and ordered, under the Direction of the Apostles themselves, who Regulated it according to the Infallible Guidance of the Spirit of their great Lord and Master. And doubtless, as the Christian Church was constituted then, so it ought to be constituted now. What better Rule have we for our ecclesiastical Regulations in other Respects, than what was done in the primitive Churches, under the Apostles own Direction; as particularly the standing Officers of the Church, Presbyters and Deacons, the Method of Introducing Ministers in their Ordination, etcetera? In this Matter that I have insisted on, I think the Scripture is abundantly more full, than in those other Things.

9. Another Evidence, that such as are taken into the Church, ought to be in the Eye of a Christian Judgment truly gracious or pious Persons, is his, that the Scripture represents the visible Church of Christ, as a Society having its several Members united by the Bond of christian brotherly Love.

Besides that general Benevolence or Charity which the Saints have to Mankind, and which they exercise towards both the Evil and the Good in common, there is a peculiar and very distinguishing Kind of Affection, that every true Christian experiences towards those whom he looks upon as truly gracious Persons; whereby the Soul, at least at Times, is very sensibly and sweetly knit to such Persons, and there is an ineffable Oneness of Heart with them; whereby, to use the Scripture Phrase (Acts 4:32.) They are of one Heart and one Soul: Which holy Affection is exercised towards others on Account of the spiritual Image of God in them, their supposed Relation to God as his Children, and to Christ as his Members, and to them as their spiritual Brethren in Christ. This sacred Affection is a very good and distinguishing Note of true Grace, much spoken of as such, in Scripture, under the Name of The love of the Brethren, or brotherly Love; and is called by Christ, The receiving a righteous Man, in the Name of a righteous Man, and receiving one of Christ's little Ones in the Name of a Disciple, or because he belongs to Christ, (Matthew 10:41, 42. Mark 9:41.) And a loving one another as Christ has loved them (John 13:34. and 15:13, 14, 15.) having a peculiar Image of that Oneness which is between Christ himself and his Saints. (Compare John 17:20th to the End.)

This Love the Apostles are often directing Christians to exercise towards Fellow-Members of the visible Church; as in Romans 12:10. Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly Love. The Words are much more emphatical in the Original, and do more livelily represent that peculiar Endearment that there is between gracious Persons, or those that look on one another as such; The Expressions properly signifies, cleaving one to another with brotherly natural strong Endearment. With the like Emphasis and Energy does the Apostle Peter express himself, Epistle 1:22. Seeing ye have purified your Souls in obeying the Truth through the Spirit, unto unfeigned Love of the Brethren See that ye love one another with a pure Heart fervently. Again, Chapter 3:8. Finally, be ye all of one Mind, having Compassion one of another; love as Brethren; be pitiful, be courteous. The Words in the Greek are much more significant, elegant, and forcible; The same peculiar Endearment the Apostle has doubtless Respect to in Chapter 4. Above all Things have fervent Charity among yourselves. The Apostle Paul in his Epistles, from Time to Time, speaks of the visible Saints whom he writes to, as being united one to another with this Affection, and considers it as a Note of their Piety. Colossians 1:4. We heard of your Faith in Christ Jesus, and of the LOVE which ye have to all Saints. 1 Thessalonians 4:9. As touching BROTHERLY-LOVE, ye need not that I write unto you; for ye yourselves are taught of God to love one another. So, Philemon 5. Hearing of thy Love, and Faith which thou hast towards the Lord Jesus Christ, and towards all Saints. And this is what he exhorts to, Hebrews 13:1. Let BROTHERLY-LOVE Continue. 1 Thessalonians 5:26. Greet all the Brethren with an holy Kiss. Compare 1 Corinthians 16:20. 2 Corinthians 13:12. and 1 Peter 5:14.

This [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] or Love to the Brethren, is that Virtue which the Apostle John so much insists on in his first Epistle, as one of the most distinguishing Characteristics of true Grace, and a peculiar Evidence that God dwelleth in us and we in God. By which must needs be understood a Love to Saints as Saints, or on Account of the spiritual Image of God supposed to be in them, and their spiritual Relation to God; according as it has always been understood by orthodox Divines. There is no reasonable Doubt can be made, but that the Apostle John in this Epistle has Respect to the same Sort of Love, which Christ prescribed to his Disciples, in that which he called by Way of Eminency HIS COMMANDMENT, and HIS NEW COMMANDMENT, which he gave as a great Mark of their being truly his Disciples, as this same Apostle gives an Account in his Gospel; and to which he plainly refers, when speaking of the Love of the Brethren in his Epistle, Chapter 2. 7, 8. and 3. 23. But that Love, which Christ speaks of in his new Commandment, is spoken of as between those that CHRIST loves, or is supposed to love; and which has his Love to them for its Ground and Pattern. And if this [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] this Love of the Brethren, so much spoken by Christ, and by the Apostles Paul and John, be not that peculiar Affection which gracious Persons or true Saints have one to another, which is so great a Part and so remarkable an Exercise of true Grace, where is it spoken of, at all, in the New Testament?

We see how often the Apostles exhort visible Christians to exercise this Affection to all other Members of the visible Church of Christ, and how often they speak of the Members of the visible Church as actually thus united, in Places already mentioned. In 2 Corinthians 9. 14. the Apostle speaks of the Members of other Churches loving the Members of the Church of Corinth, with this peculiar Endearment and Oneness of Heart, for the Grace of God in them. And by their Prayer for you, which long after you, for the exceeding Grace of God in you. The Word, translated long after, is [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; which properly signifies to love with an exceeding and dear Love. And this is represented as the Bond, that unites all the Members of the visible Church; Acts 4. 32. And the Multitude of them that believed were of one Heart and one Soul. This is the same Thing which elsewhere is called being of one Mind: 1 Peter 3. 8. Finally, be ye all of one Mind. And being of the same Mind: 1 Corinthians 1. 10. "That ye be perfectly joined together in the same Mind." And being of the same Mind, Philippians 4. 2. I beseech Euodies, and beseech Syntiche, that they be OF THE SAME MIND in the Lord. And being like-minded (the Word is the same in the Greek) Romans 15. 5, 6. Now the God of Patience and Consolation grant you to be LIKE-MINDED one towards another; that ye may with one Mind, and one Mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: There is Reason to think, that it is this Oneness of Mind, or being of one Heart and Soul, is meant by that Charity which the Apostle calls the Bond of Perfectness, Colossians 3. 14. And represents as the Bond of Union between all the Members of the Body, in Ephesians 4. 15, 16. But speaking the Truth in LOVE, may grow up into him in all Things, which is the Head, even Christ; from whom the whole Body FITLY JOINED TOGETHER, AND COMPACTED by that which every Joint supplieth, according to the effectual Working in the Measure of every Part, maketh Increase of the Body unto the edifying itself in LOVE.

Herein seems much to consist the Nature of Scandal in the Members of a Church, namely Such an Offence as is a Wound and Interruption to this kind of Affection, being a Stumbling-Block to a Christian Judgment, in Regard of its Esteem of the Offender as a real Christian, and what much lessens the visibility of his Christian Character. And therefore when Scandal is removed by visible Repentance, the Church is directed to confirm their Love to the Offender, 2 Corinthians 2. 8.

Now this intimate Affection towards others as Brethren in Christ and Fellow-Members of him, must have some Apprehension of the Understanding, some Judgment of the Mind, for its Foundation. To say, that we must thus love others as visible Members of Christ, if any Thing else be meant, than that we must love them because they are visibly, or as they appear to our Judgment, real Members of Christ, is in Effect to say, that we must thus love them without any Foundation at all. In order to a real and fervent Affection to another, on Account of some Amiableness of Qualification or Relation, the Mind must first judge there is that Amiableness in the Object. The Affections of the Mind are not so at Command that we can make them strongly to go forth to an Object as having such Loveliness, when at the same Time we do not positively judge any such Thing concerning them, but only hope it may be so, because we see no sufficient Reason to determine the contrary. There must be a positive Dictate of the Understanding, and some Degree of Satisfaction of the Judgment, to be a Ground of that Oneness of Heart and Soul, which is agreeable to Scripture-Representations of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] or brotherly Love. And a Supposition only of that moral Sincerity and Virtue, or common Grace, which some insist upon, though it may be a sufficient Ground of neighbourly and civil Affection, cannot be a sufficient Ground of this intimate Affection to them as Brethren in the Family of a heavenly Father, this fervent Love to them in the Bowels of Jesus Christ; that implying nothing in it inconsistent with being Gospel Sinners and domestic Enemies in the House of God; which Christians know are the most hateful Enemies to Christ, of all the Enemies that he has.

It is a Thing well agreeing with the Wisdom of Christ, and that peculiar Favour he has manifested to his Saints, and with his Dealings with them in many other Respects, to suppose, he has made Provision in his Institutions, that they might have the Comfort of uniting, with such as their Hearts are united with in that holy intimate Affection which has been spoken of, in some special religious Exercises and Duties of Worship, and visible Intercourse with their Redeemer, joining with those concerning whom they can have some Satisfaction of Mind that they are cordially united with them in adoring and expressing their Love to their common Lord and Saviour, that they may with one Mind, with one Heart, and one Soul, as well as with one Mouth, glorify him; as in the forementioned Romans 15. 5, 6. compared with Acts 4. 32. This seems to be what this heavenly Affection naturally inclines to. And how eminently fit and proper for this Purpose is the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, the Christian Church's great Feast of Love; wherein Christ's People sit together as Brethren in the Family of God, at their Father's Table, to feast on the Love of their Redeemer, commemorating his Sufferings for them, and his dying Love to them, and sealing their Love to him and one another? It is hardly credible, that Christ has so ordered Things at that there are no instituted social Acts of Worship, wherein his Saints are to manifest their Respect to him, but such as wherein they ordinarily are obliged (if the Rule for Admissions be carefully attended) to join with a Society of Fellow-Worshippers, concerning whom they have no Reason to think but that the bigger Part of them are Unconverted (and are more provoking Enemies to that Lord they love and adore, than most of the Very Heathen) which Mister Stoddard supposes to be the Case with the Members of the visible Church. Appeal page 16.

10. It is necessary, that those who partake of the Lord's Supper, should judge themselves truly and cordially to accept of CHRIST, as their only Saviour and chief Good; for this is what the Actions, which Communicants perform at the Lord's Table, are a solemn Profession of.

There is in the Lord's Supper a mutual solemn Profession of the two Parties transacting the Covenant of Grace, and visibly united in that Covenant; the Lord Christ by his Minister, on the one Hand, and the Communicants (who are professing Believers) on the other. The Administrator of the Ordinance acts in the Quality of Christ's Minister, acts in his Name, as representing him; and stands in the Place where Christ himself stood at the first Administration of this Sacrament, and in the original Institution of the Ordinance. Christ, by the Speeches and Actions of the Minister, makes a solemn Profession of his Part in the Covenant of Grace: He exhibits the Sacrifice of his Body broken and his Blood shed; and in the Minister's offering the Sacramental Bread and Wine to the Communicants, Christ presents himself to the believing Communicants, as their Propitiation and Bread of Life; and by these outward Signs confirms and seals his sincere Engagements to be their Saviour and Food, and to impart to them all the Benefits of his Propitiation and Salvation. And they in receiving what is offered, and eating and drinking the Symbols of Christ's Body and Blood, also profess their Part in the Covenant of Grace: They profess to embrace the Promises and lay hold of the Hope set before them, to receive the Atonement, to receive Christ as their spiritual Food, and to feed upon him in their Hearts by Faith. Indeed what is professed on both Sides is the Heart: For Christ, in offering himself, professes the Willingness of his Heart to be theirs who truly receive him; and the Communicants, on their Part, profess the Willingness of their Hearts to receive him, which they declare by significant Actions. They profess to take Christ as their spiritual Food, and Bread of Life. To accept of Christ as our Bread of Life, is to accept of him as our Saviour and Portion; as Food is both the Means preserving Life, and is also the Refreshment and Comfort of Life. The Signification of the word Manna, that great Type of this Bread of Life, is a Portion. That which God offers to us as our Food, he offers as our Portion; and that which we accept as our Food, we accept as our Portions. Thus the Lord's Supper is plainly a mutual Renovation, Confirmation, and Seal of the Covenant of Grace: Both the covenanting Parties profess their Consent to their respective Parts in the Covenant, and each affixes his Seal to his Profession. And there is in this Ordinance the very same Thing acted over in Profession and sensible Signs, which is spiritually transacted between Christ and his Spouse in the Covenant that unites them. Here we have from Time to Time the glorious Bridegroom exhibiting himself with his great Love that is stronger than Death, appearing clothed in Robes of Grace, and engaging himself, with all his Glory and Love, and its infinite Benefits, to be theirs, who receive him: And here we have his Spouse accepting this Bridegroom, choosing him for her Friend, her only Saviour and Portion, and relying on him for all his Benefits. And thus the Covenant-Transaction of this spiritual Marriage is confirmed and sealed, from Time to Time. The Actions of the Communicants at the Lord's Table have as expressive and significant a Language, as the most solemn Words. When a Person in this Ordinance takes and eats and drinks those Things which represent Christ, the plain Meaning and implicit Profession of these his Actions, is this, I take this crucified Jesus as my Saviour, my sweetest Food, my chief Portion, and the Life of my Soul, consenting to acquiesce in him as such, and to hunger and thirst after him only, renouncing all other Saviours, and all other Portions, for his Sake. The Actions, thus interpreted, are a proper Renovation and Ratification of the Covenant of Grace; and no otherwise. And those that take, and eat and drink the Sacramental Elements at the Lord's Table with any other Meaning, I fear, know not what they do.

The Actions at the Lord's Supper thus implying in their Nature and Signification, a renewing and confirming of the Covenant, there is a declarative explicit Covenanting supposed to precede it; which is the Profession of Religion, before spoken of, that qualifies a Person for Admission to the Lord's Supper. And there doubtless is, or ought to be, as much explicitly professed in Words, as is implicitly professed in these Actions; for by these significant Actions, the Communicant sets his Seal but to his Profession. The established Signs in the Lord's Supper are fully equivalent to Words; they are a renewing and reiterating the same Thing which was done before; only with this Difference, that now it is done by speaking Signs, whereas before it was by speaking Sounds. Our taking the Bread and Wine is as much a professing to accept of Christ, at least as a Woman's taking a Ring of the Bridegroom in her Marriage is a Profession and Seal of her taking him for her Husband. The Sacramental Elements in the Lord's Supper do represent Christ as a Party in Covenant, as truly as a Proxy represents a Prince to a foreign Lady in her Marriage; and our taking those Elements is as truly a professing to accept of Christ, as in the other Case the Lady's taking the Proxy is her professing to accept the Prince as her Husband. Or the Matter may more fitly be represented by this Similitude: It is as if a Prince should send an Ambassador to a Woman in a foreign Land, proposing Marriage, and by his Ambassador should send her his Picture, and should desire her to manifest her Acceptance of his Suit, not only by professing her Acceptance in Words to his Ambassador, but in Token of her Sincerity openly to take or accept that Picture, and so Seal her Profession, by thus representing the Matter over again by a symbolical Action.

To suppose, Persons ought thus solemnly to profess that which at the same Time they don't at all imagine they experience in themselves, and don't really pretend to, is a very great Absurdity. For a Man Sacramentally to make such a Profession of Religion, proceeding avowedly on the Foot of such Doctrine, is to profess that which he doesn't profess; his Actions being no established Signs of the Thing supposed to be professed, nor carrying in them the least Pretension to it. And therefore doing thus can be no Man's Duty; unless it be Men's Duty to make a solemn Profession of that which in Truth they make no Profession of. The Lord's Supper is most evidently a professing Ordinance; and the Communicant's Profession must be such as is adjusted to the Nature and Design of the Ordinance; which nothing short of Faith in the Blood of Christ will answer, even Faith unfeigned, which works by Love. A Profession therefore exclusive of this, is essentially defective, and quite unsuitable to the Character of a Communicant.

11. When the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 11:28. Let a Man examine himself, and so let him eat—It seems to be much the most reasonable to understand it of trying himself with regard to the Truth of his Christianity, or Reality of his Grace; the same which the same Apostle directs the same Corinthians to, in his other Epistle, 2 Corinthians 13:5. where the same Word is used in the Original. The Greek Word ([Greek Word]) will not allow of what some have supposed to be the Apostle's Meaning, namely that a Man should consider and enquire into his Circumstances, and the Necessities of his Case, that he may know what are the Wants he should go to the Lord's Table for a Supply of. The Word properly signifies proving or trying a Thing with Respect to its Quality and Goodness, or in order to determine whether it be true and of the right Sort. And so the Word is always used in the New Testament; unless that sometimes it is used as it were metonymically, and in such Places is variously translated, either discerning, or allowing, approving, liking, etcetera these being the Effects of Trial. Nor is the Word used more frequently in the New Testament for any Sort of Trial whatever, than for the Trial of professors with Regard to their Grace or Piety. The Word (as Doctor Ames, in his Catechaseos Sciagraphia, and Mister Willard in his Body of Divinity, observe) is borrowed from Goldsmiths, properly signifying the Trial they make of their Silver and Gold, whether it be Genuine or Counterfeit: And with a manifest Allusion to this original Application of the Word, is often used in the New Testament for a trying the Piety of Professors. It is used with this View in all the following Texts. 1 Peter 1:7. That the TRIAL of your Faith, being much more precious than of Gold that perisheth, though it be TRIED by Fire, might be found unto praise, etcetera. 1 Corinthians 3:13. The Fire shall TRY every Man's Work of what Sort it is. James 1:3. The TRYING of your Faith works Patience. 1 Thessalonians 2:4. God who TRIES our Hearts. The same Word is used in 2 Corinthians 8:8. To PROVE the Sincerity of your Love. So, Galatians 6:3, 4. If any Man thinks himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself: But let every Man PROVE his own Work. —In all these Places there is the same Word in the Greek with that in the Text now under Consideration.

When the Apostle directs professing Christians to try themselves, using this Word indefinitely, as properly signifying the examining or proving a Thing whether it be Genuine, or Counterfeit, the most natural Construction of his Advice is, that they should try themselves with Respect to their spiritual State and religious Profession, whether they are Disciples indeed, real and genuine Christians, or whether they are not false and hypocritical Professors. As if a Man should bring a Piece of Metal that had the Color of Gold, with the Impress of the King's Coin, to a Goldsmith, and desire him to try that Money, without adding any Words to limit his Meaning, would not the Goldsmith naturally understand, that he was to try whether it was true Gold, or true Money, yes or no?

But here it is said by some, that the Context of the Passage under Debate (1 Corinthians 11:28) does plainly limit the meaning of the Word in that Place; the Apostle there speaking of those Things that had appeared among the Communicants at Corinth, which were of a scandalous Nature, so doubtless unfitting them for the Lord's Supper; and therefore when the Apostle directs them to examine or prove themselves, it is but just, to suppose his meaning to be, that they should try whether they are not disqualified by Scandal. —To this I answer, though the Apostle's putting the Corinthians upon trying themselves, was on Occasion of the mentioning some scandalous Practices found among them, yet this is by no Means any Argument of its being only his Meaning, that they should try themselves whether they were scandalous Persons; and not, that they should try whether they were true genuine Christians. The very Nature of Scandal (as was observed before) is, that which tends to obscure the Visibility of the Piety of Professors, and wound others Charity towards them, by bringing the Reality of their Grace into Doubt; and therefore what could be more natural, than for the Apostle, when mentioning such Scandals among the Corinthians, to put them upon trying the State of their Souls, and proving their Sincerity! This is certainly the Case in this Apostle's directing the same Persons to prove themselves, 2 Corinthians 13:5 using the same Word there, which he uses here, and giving his Direction on the like Occasion. For in the second Epistle (as well as in the first) his putting them on examining and proving themselves, was on Occasion of his mentioning some Scandals found among them; as is plain from the foregoing Context. And yet there it is expressly said, that the Thing concerning which he directs them to prove themselves, is, whether they be in the Faith, and whether Christ is in them. Nor is there any Thing more in the preceding Context of one Place, than in that of the other, obliging or leading us to understand the Apostle to intend only a trying whether they were Scandalous, and not whether they were sincere Christians.

And as to the Words following in the next Verse; For he that eats and drinks unworthily, eats and drinks Judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's Body: These Words, by no Means, make it evident (as some hold) that what the Apostle would have them examine themselves about, is, whether they have doctrinal Knowledge, sufficient to understand, that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament signify the Body and Blood of Christ: But on the contrary, to interpret the Apostle in this Sense only, is unreasonable, upon several Accounts. (1) None can so much as go about such an Examination, without first knowing, that the Lord's Body and Blood is signified by these Elements. For merely a Man's putting this Question to himself, Do I understand that this Bread and this Wine signify the Body and Blood of Christ? supposes him already to know it from a previous Information; and therefore to exhort Persons to go about such an Examination, would be absurd. And then (2) It is incredible, that there should be any such gross Ignorance appearing in a Number of the Communicants in the Corinthian Church, if we consider what the Scripture informs us concerning that Church: As particularly, if we consider what an able and thorough Instructor and spiritual Father they had had, even the Apostle Paul, who founded that Church, brought them out of their heathenish Darkness, and initiated them in the Christian Religion, and had instructed them in the Nature and Ends of Gospel Ordinances, and continued at Corinth, constantly laboring in the Word and Doctrine for a long while together, no less than a Year and six Months; and, as we may well suppose, administering the Lord's Supper among them every Lord's Day. For the Apostle speaks of it as the Manner of that Church to communicate at the Lord's Table with such Frequency, 1 Corinthians 16:2. And the Corinthian Church at that Day when the Apostle wrote this Epistle, was a Church noted for excelling in doctrinal Knowledge; as is evident by Chapter 1:5, 6, 7. and several other Passages in the Epistle. Besides, the Communicants were expressly told at every Communion, every Week, when the Bread and Wine were delivered to them in the Administration, that that Bread signified the Body, and that Wine signified the Blood of Christ. And then besides, (3) The Apostle by his Argument in Chapter 10:16. supposes the Corinthians doctrinally acquainted with this Subject already. It therefore appears to me much more reasonable, to apprehend the Case to be thus; The offensive Behavior of the Communicants at Corinth gave the Apostle Reason to suspect, that some of them came to the Lord's Table without a proper Impression and true Sense of the great and glorious Things there signified; having no habitual Hunger or Relish for the spiritual Food there represented, no inward vital and experimental Taste of that Flesh of the Son of Man, which is Meat indeed. The Word translated discerning, signifies to discriminate or distinguish. The Taste is the proper Sense whereby to discern or distinguish Food. Job 34:3. And it is a spiritual Sense or Taste which is that whereby we discern or distinguish spiritual Food. Hebrews 5:14.—Those who by Reason of Use, have their Senses exercised to discern both Good and Evil. etcetera. A Word of the same Root with that rendered discerning, in 1 Corinthians 11:29. He that has no habitual Appetite to and Relish of that spiritual Food, which is represented and offered at the Lord's Table; he that has no spiritual Taste, wherewith to perceive any Thing more at the Lord's Supper, than in common Food; or that has no higher View, than with a little seeming Devotion to eat Bread, as it were in the Way of an Ordinance, but without regarding in his Heart the spiritual Meaning and End of it, and without being at all suitably affected with the dying Love of Christ therein commemorated; such a one may most truly and properly be said not to discern the Lord's Body. When therefore the Apostle exhorts to Self-Examination as a Preparative for the Sacramental Supper, he may well be understood to put Professors upon inquiring whether they have such a Principle of Faith, by Means whereof they are habitually in a Capacity and Disposition of Mind to discern the Lord's Body practically and spiritually (as well as speculatively and notionally) in their communicating at the Lord's Table: Which is what none can do who have but common Grace, or a Faith short of that which is justifying and saving. It is only a living Faith that capacitates Men to discern the Lord's Body in the Sacrament with that spiritual Sensation or spiritual Taste, which is suitable to the Nature and Design of the Ordinance, and which the Apostle seems principally to intend.

Having explained what I mean when I say that no one should be admitted to the communion and privileges of full membership in the visible church of Christ except those who, by their profession and in the eyes of the church's Christian judgment, are godly or gracious persons, I now move on to present some points that may help prove the truth of this position. And here:

1. I begin by observing that I think it is both evident from the Word of God and also granted by everyone that no one should be admitted as members of the visible church of Christ except visible saints and professing saints, or visible and professing Christians. We find the word saint, when applied to people, used in two ways in the New Testament. In some places the word refers to those who are real saints -- who are converted and are truly gracious persons -- as in 1 Corinthians 6:2: Do you not know that the saints shall judge the world? Ephesians 1:18: The riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints. Ephesians 3:17-18: That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith, that you being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, etc. 2 Thessalonians 1:10: When He shall come to be glorified in His saints, and admired in all those who believe. Also Revelation 5:8. Revelation 8:4. And Revelation 11:18. And Revelation 13:10. And Revelation 14:12. And Revelation 19:8. In other places, the word is used to refer not only to real saints but also to those who were saints in visibility, appearance, and profession -- and so were outwardly, in terms of their acceptance among people and their outward treatment and privileges, part of the company of saints. The word is used this way in very many places, which there is no need to list, since everyone acknowledges it.

Similarly, we find the word Christian used in two ways. The word is used to express the same thing as a righteous person who shall be saved, in 1 Peter 4:16-18. Elsewhere it is used to include all who were Christians by profession and outward appearance, as in Acts 11:26. There is also a twofold use of the word disciples in the New Testament. There were disciples in name, profession, and appearance, and there were those whom Christ calls disciples indeed in John 8:30-31. The word means truly. The expression clearly assumes this distinction between true or real disciples and those who were the same only in pretense and appearance. See also Luke 14:25-27 and John 15:8. The same distinction is expressed in the New Testament by those who live, being alive from the dead and risen with Christ (2 Corinthians 4:11; Romans 6:11, and elsewhere), and those who have a name to live, having only a pretense and appearance of life. The distinction within the visible church of Christ between these two groups is clearly represented by the crop of the good ground versus that in the stony and thorny ground, which had the same appearance and show as the other until it withered away. It is also represented by the two groups of virgins in Matthew 25, who both had a show, profession, and visibility of the same thing. From these and many other things that could be noted, it is clear that the distinction between real saints and visible and professing saints is scriptural, that the visible church was made up of both, and that no one is admitted into the visible church of Christ according to Scripture except those who are visible and professing saints or Christians. There is all the less need to dwell on this point because it is not in dispute. As far as my limited reading informs me, it is acknowledged by all Protestants. Certainly, the most prominent theologian in New England who maintained that the Lord's Supper is properly a converting ordinance was very clear about this. In his Appeal to the Learned, in the title page and throughout the treatise, he assumes that all who come to the Lord's Supper must be visible saints, and sometimes refers to them as professing saints, on pages 85-86. He also assumes that it is necessary, in order for them to be admitted to communion at the Lord's Table, that they make a personal, public profession of their faith and repentance to the just satisfaction of the church, on pages 93-94. In these statements, the whole of the position I want to prove is essentially granted. If it is allowed -- as it is allowed on all sides -- that no one should be admitted to communion in the Christian visible church except visible and professing saints or Christians, and if these words are used with any proper meaning or any agreement with the way Scripture presents things, then everything I have set forth is either implied or will certainly follow.

Just as real saints are the same as real converts or truly gracious persons, so visible saints are the same as visible converts or those who are visibly converted and gracious persons. Visibility is the same as manifestation or appearance to our view and understanding. Therefore, to be visibly a gracious person is the same as being a truly gracious person to our view, understanding, or estimation. The distinction between real and visible applies not only to sainthood or holiness but to countless other things. There is visible and real truth, visible and real honesty, visible and real money, visible and real gold, visible and real diamonds, and so on. Visible and real are words that relate to one another like the words real and seeming, or true and apparent. Some people seem to speak of visibility regarding sainthood or holiness as though it had no reference to reality, or as though it were a separate reality in itself -- as if by visible saints they did not mean those who appear to be real saints or disciples indeed, but rather a properly distinct kind of saints. This is absurd. There is a distinction between real money and visible money, because not everything that is regarded as money and passes for money is real money -- some is false and counterfeit. But by visible money, we do not mean something taken and passed as a different kind of money from true money. Rather, we mean that which is regarded and accepted as real money, or which has the appearance that commends it to people's judgment and acceptance as true money -- even though people may be deceived, and some of it may ultimately prove not to be genuine.

There are not properly two kinds of saints spoken of in Scripture. Although the word saints may be said to be used in two ways, or to apply to two kinds of persons, the word does not properly have two meanings in the New Testament -- any more than the word gold has two meanings among us. The word gold among us applies to several kinds of substances. It is true that it extends to real gold and also to what merely appears to be gold and is accepted as gold. By that appearance or visibility, some things that are not real gold receive the name of gold. But this is not properly because the word has different meanings; rather, it is because the word is applied differently due to the imperfection of our ability to distinguish. It does not follow that there are properly two kinds of saints just because some who are not real saints, yet being visible or seeming saints, obtain the name of saints by the appearance they present and are accepted as saints. According to the rules of Scripture -- which are adapted to our imperfect condition -- we are directed to receive and treat such people as saints. This no more proves two kinds of saints than it proves two kinds of honest men just because some who are not truly honest, yet appearing to be so, receive the name of honest men and should be treated as such by us. Similarly, there are not properly two distinct churches of Christ, one real and another visible. But those who are visibly or seemingly part of the one only church of Christ are many more than those who are really part of His church. So the visible or seeming church is larger in extent than the real one.

Visibility is a relative thing and has a relationship to the eye that views or observes. Visibility is the same as appearance or presentation to the eye. To be a visible saint is the same as appearing to be a real saint in the eye that looks -- not the eye of God, but the eye of man. Real saints or converts are those who are so in the eye of God. Visible saints or converts are those who are so in the eye of man -- not his physical eye, for in that sense no person is a saint any more in the eye of a man than in the eye of an animal -- but the eye of his mind, which is his judgment or estimation. There is no more visibility of holiness in the most outstanding professor of faith to our physical eyes, without exercising the reason and judgment of our minds, than there would be in a machine. But nothing short of an apparent probability, or a probable presentation, can amount to visibility in the eye of human reason or judgment. The eye God has given to man is the eye of reason, and the eye of a Christian is reason sanctified, regulated, and enlightened by a principle of Christian love. But it is a contradiction to say that something is visible to the eye of reason when it does not appear probable to reason. And if there is a person who is a visible saint in this sense, he is in the eye of rational judgment a real saint. To say a person is visibly a saint but not visibly a real saint -- only visibly a visible saint -- is a very absurd way of speaking. It amounts to saying he apparently appears to be a saint, which in effect says nothing and uses words without meaning. The thing that must be visible and probable in order to achieve visible sainthood must be sainthood itself, or real grace and true holiness -- not visibility of sainthood, not unregenerate morality, not mere moral sincerity. To claim or in any way display moral sincerity makes nothing visible beyond what is claimed or displayed. For a person to visibly have something that, even if truly possessed with nothing more, would not make him a real saint -- that is not to be visibly a saint.

Mr. Stoddard, in his Appeal to the Learned, seems to express the very same understanding of visibility, and of the visibility of sainthood required for persons coming to the Lord's Supper, that I have expressed here. On page 10 he makes a distinction between being visibly circumcised in heart and being really so, clearly meaning by the latter saving conversion. He allows the former -- namely, a visibility of heart-circumcision -- to be necessary for coming to the Lord's Supper. So according to him, it is not a visibility of moral sincerity alone, but a visibility of circumcision of heart, or saving conversion, that is a necessary requirement for a person coming to the Lord's Table. And how this must be visible, he indicates elsewhere when he says it must be so to a judgment of charity -- a judgment of rational charity. He expressly affirms this repeatedly, on pages 2-3, page 28, page 33, page 72, and page 95. He also speaks of having reason to look upon them as such, on page 28. And toward the close of his book, he declares himself firmly of the view that those who do not make a personal and public profession of their faith and repentance to the just satisfaction of the church should not be admitted to the Lord's Supper, on pages 93-94. But how he reconciled these statements with the rest of his treatise, I would modestly say, I must confess myself at a loss. In particular, I cannot see how they are consistent with what this respected and ever-honored author says on page 16 in these words: Indeed by the rule that God has given for admissions, if it be carefully followed, more unconverted persons will be admitted than converted. I would humbly ask: how can those visible qualifications be the basis of a rational judgment that a person is circumcised in heart, when at the same time we are aware that these qualifications are so far from being probable signs of it that they are more frequently found without it than with it? The appearance of one thing surely cannot imply an apparent probability of another thing when at the same time we are aware that the first thing is most frequently, and therefore most probably, found without the second.

I can easily see how something might seem visible and appear probable to God's people because of the imperfect and dim condition they are in, and so may rightly claim their charity, even though it is not real -- and even though it would not appear probable at all to angels who stand in a clearer light. The different degrees of light that God's church has in different ages may make a difference in this respect. The church under the New Testament, being favored by God with vastly greater light in divine things than the church under the Old Testament, might make some difference in the kind of profession of religion required under these different dispensations in order to achieve a visibility of holiness. Also, a proper visibility may fail in the majority of cases in some extraordinary situation and exceptional circumstances. But how those signs can be the basis of a rational judgment that something is the case when, at that very time and under the degree of light we then have, we are aware that those signs more often fail than not, and this routinely -- that is something I confess myself much at a loss to understand. Surely nothing but apparent reason is the basis of a rational judgment. And indeed it is impossible, by the very nature of things, to form a judgment that we ourselves at that very time consider to be not only without but against probability.

It may be argued that although persons do not profess those things that make up sanctifying grace, yet since they profess belief in the doctrines of the Gospel -- which God typically uses to bring about people's sanctification and which are called the doctrine that leads to godliness -- and since we see nothing in their lives to make us conclude that these doctrines have not had their proper effect on their hearts, we are obligated in charity to hope that they are real saints or gracious persons and to treat them accordingly. And so we should receive them into the Christian church and admit them to its special ordinances.

I answer: this objection actually assumes and grants the very thing mainly in dispute. For it assumes that a gracious character is what should be looked for and aimed at in admitting persons to church communion. It assumes that we need to have this charity toward people, or such a favorable view of them, in order to receive them as properly qualified members of the body and properly qualified recipients of the special privileges they are admitted to. But the doctrine I am opposing teaches that sanctifying grace is not a necessary qualification for this, and that there is no need for the person himself or anyone else to have any idea that he possesses this qualification. This is because, according to that view, we know it is not a required qualification in itself. We know the ordinance of the Lord's Supper is just as appropriate for those who do not have this qualification as for those who do, since by the design of its institution it is a converting ordinance. As such, it is an ordinance intended for the good of the unconverted just as much as for the converted -- just as it is with the preaching of the Gospel. Now if this is the case, why is there any talk about charitably hoping they are converted and then admitting them? What need is there for any charitable hope of such a qualification in order to admit them to an ordinance that is just as appropriate for those without this qualification as for those who have it? We do not need any charitable hope of such a qualification in order to allow a person to hear the Word preached. What need do we have to aim at anything beyond the proper qualifications? And what need is there for any charitable opinion or hope of anything further? Some sort of belief that Jesus is the Messiah is a qualification properly required for coming to the Lord's Supper. Therefore it is necessary that we should have a charitable hope that those we admit hold such a belief -- though it is not necessary that we should know it, since that is something no one can know about another person. But as for grace or Christian piety, it clearly follows from the principles I am opposing that even if there is any visibility of it -- more or less, of any kind -- no kind of visibility or appearance, whether more direct or indirect, whether to a greater or lesser degree, and no charity or hope of it, has anything at all to do with the matter of admission to the Lord's Supper. For according to those principles, it is properly a converting ordinance. What does any visibility or hope that a person is already healthy have to do with admitting him to a hospital for the use of the proper appointed means for healing the sick and restoring them to health? Therefore it is pointless to dispute here about the nature of visibility. All arguments about a profession of Christian doctrines and an orderly life being sufficient grounds for public charity and an obligation on the church to treat them as saints are entirely irrelevant and beside the point. For on the principles I am opposing, there is no need for any kind of grounds for treating them as saints in order to admit them to the Lord's Supper -- the very purpose of which is to make them saints -- any more than there is need for some grounds for treating a sick person as healthy in order to admit him to a hospital. According to the doctrine I oppose, persons are not taught to offer themselves as candidates for church communion under any such idea, or with any such claim, as being gracious persons. Therefore surely when those who teach them receive them to the ordinance, they do not receive them under any such idea, nor does any notion, appearance, hope, or thought of it have anything to do with the matter.

The apostle speaks of the members of the Christian church as those who made a profession of godliness. 2 Corinthians 9:13: They glorified God for your professed subjection to the Gospel of Christ. 1 Timothy 2:10: In like manner also that women adorn themselves in modest apparel -- not with costly array; but, which becomes women professing godliness, with good works. The apostle is speaking of the women who were members of the great church of Ephesus, which Timothy was currently overseeing. He speaks of them as though they all professed godliness. Everyone agrees that profession is one element of the visibility of Christianity or holiness that exists in the members of the visible church. Visible holiness is an appearance or display of holiness through things that are external and therefore fall under our notice and observation. These external things are two: namely, profession and outward behavior consistent with that profession. The profession that belongs to visible sainthood must be a profession of godliness, or real sainthood, because a profession makes nothing visible beyond what is professed. What is it to be a saint by profession except to profess being a true saint? To profess being a false saint is to profess being no saint at all. And to profess only something that, even if completely true, is nothing distinctive to a saint is not to be a professing saint.

In order for a person to be properly a professing Christian, he must profess the religion of Jesus Christ. He surely does not profess the religion taught by Jesus Christ if he leaves out of his profession the most essential elements of that religion. Whatever is most essential to a thing in order for it to be truly called that thing -- that same element must be essentially expressed or communicated in any presentation or declaration of that thing in order for it to be truly called a presentation or declaration of that thing. If we take a less important part of Christ's religion and leave out the main and most essential part, what we have surely cannot properly be called the religion of Jesus Christ. So if we profess only a less important part and remain silent about the most important and essential part, it cannot properly be said that we profess the religion of Jesus Christ. Therefore we cannot properly be said to profess the Christian religion unless we profess those things that constitute piety of heart, which is by far the most important and essential part of the religion that Christ came to teach and establish in the world. It is in effect the whole of it, since without it all the rest that belongs to that religion is nothing and entirely in vain. But those who are admitted to the Lord's Supper on the principles of those who consider it a converting ordinance do not in any way profess Christian piety -- neither in whole nor in part, neither explicitly nor implicitly, neither directly nor indirectly. Therefore they are not professing Christians, or saints by profession. I mean that although they may be godly persons, yet since they come to the ordinance without professing godliness, they cannot properly be called professing saints.

Here it may be said that although no explicit and formal profession of those things that belong to true piety is required of them, there are many things they do that amount to a virtual and implicit profession of these things. For example, their affirming the Christian covenant, their acknowledging God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as their God -- and by visibly joining in public prayers and singing God's praises, there is a show and implicit profession of supreme respect for God and love for Him. By joining in public confessions, they make a show of repentance. By keeping the Sabbath and hearing the Word, they make a show of a spirit of obedience. By presenting themselves for the sacraments, they make a show of love for Christ and dependence on His sacrifice.

I answer: it is a great mistake if anyone imagines that all these external activities amount to a profession of anything at all that belongs to saving grace, as they are commonly used and understood. None of them are so, especially not according to the doctrines taught and embraced and the customs established in churches that operate on the principles I mentioned. For what is professing but presenting, speaking, or declaring something, either through intelligible words or through other established signs that serve the same purpose? But in such churches, neither their publicly saying that they acknowledge God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as their God, that they give themselves up to Him, and that they promise to obey all His commands, nor their coming to the Lord's Supper or any other ordinance, are taken as expressions or signs of anything belonging to the essence of Christian piety. On the contrary, the public doctrine, principle, and custom in such churches establishes a different use of these words and signs. People are taught that they may use all of these words and signs without even claiming to have the least degree of sanctifying grace. This is the established custom: this is how they are used, and this is how they are understood. Therefore, whatever some of these words and signs may in themselves most properly and naturally convey or signify, they entirely cease to signify any such thing among people accustomed to understanding and using them otherwise. They cease to function as a profession of Christian piety. There can be no such thing among such a people as either an explicit or implicit profession of godliness through anything that, by their established doctrine and custom, an unregenerate person may and ought to say and do while knowing himself to be unregenerate. For whatever the words and actions might otherwise signify, the people have in effect agreed among themselves that those who use them need not intend them that way, and that others need not understand them that way. As a result, they cease to function as any claim to grace. And surely it is absurd to say that people openly and solemnly profess grace and yet do not even claim to have it. If a group of people agreed, and it became an established principle among them, that people could and should use certain words to their neighbors -- words that by their proper meaning were a profession of complete love and devoted friendship toward the person addressed -- and yet not think that the speaker has any love in his heart for him, and even know at the same time that the speaker had a ruling hostility against him -- and if this was known to be the established principle of the people -- would not these words, whatever their proper meaning, entirely cease to be any profession or evidence of friendship toward that neighbor? Surely there could be no visibility of it to the eye of reason.

It is therefore evident that those who are admitted to the church on the principles I oppose are not professing saints or visible saints. The thing that alone is truly sainthood is not what they profess or make any claim to, nor does it have any visibility to the eye of Christian judgment. Or if they do in fact happen to be visible and professing saints, they are at least not admitted as such. No profession of true sainthood, nor any kind of visibility of it, has anything to do with the matter.

There is one way to avoid these conclusions that some have taken and argued for. They say: although it is true that Scripture describes the members of the visible church of Christ as professors of godliness, and they are abundantly called saints in Scripture -- undoubtedly because they were saints by profession, visibility, and the acceptance of others -- this does not refer to saving holiness but to a completely different kind of sainthood, namely moral sincerity. They claim that this is the real sainthood, discipleship, and godliness that is professed and visible in them, and that it is with regard to this -- as having an appearance of it to the eye of reason -- that they are called saints, disciples, and so on in Scripture.

It must be noted that in this objection, the visibility is assumed to be of real sainthood, discipleship, and godliness -- only a different kind of real godliness than that which belongs to those who will finally be acknowledged by Christ as His people at the Day of Judgment.

I answer: this is a mere evasion -- the only one I have ever seen or heard of, and I believe the only one possible. For it is certain they are not professors of sanctifying grace or true sainthood. The principle they operate on is that they need make no claim to that, nor does any visibility of saving holiness have anything to do with the matter. If then they have any holiness at all, it must be of a different kind. And if this evasion fails, the entire matter in debate must be conceded. Therefore I want this matter to be impartially considered and examined to the very bottom. Let it be thoroughly investigated whether this distinction between two kinds of real Christianity, godliness, and holiness is a distinction that Christ teaches in His Word, or whether it is a human invention of something the New Testament knows nothing about, devised to support and maintain a theory. And here I ask that the following things be observed.

1. According to this theory, the words saints, disciples, and Christians are used four ways in the New Testament, as applied to four kinds of persons. (1) Those who in truth and reality are the heirs of eternal life and who shall judge the world -- those who truly possess saving sainthood. (2) Those who profess this, who claim and present an outward show of supreme regard for Christ and of renouncing the world for His sake, but who have no real basis for these claims and appearances. (3) Those who, although they do not have saving grace, still have that other kind of real godliness or sainthood, namely moral sincerity in religion. These would be properly a kind of real saints, true Christians, sincerely godly persons, and disciples indeed, even though they have no saving grace. And (4) those who make a profession and have a visibility of this latter kind of sincere Christianity and are nominally this type of saint, but are not so in reality. So we would have two kinds of real Christians and two kinds of visible Christians -- two kinds of invisible and real churches of Christ, and two kinds of visible churches. Now will anyone who is well acquainted with the New Testament say there is the least appearance or hint of such a fourfold use of the words saints, disciples, and so on? It is clear from what I observed before that these words are used in only two ways in the New Testament, and that the people to whom these names are applied are distinguished into only two groups: those who really have a saving interest in Christ, with spiritual conformity and union to Him, and those who have only a name for it, possessing a profession and appearance of it. This is further confirmed by various depictions of the visible church that we find in Scripture. In the company of virgins who went out to meet the bridegroom, we find only two groups distinguished: the wise, who had both lamps and oil, and those who had lamps like the wise virgins -- thus having an outward show of the same thing, namely oil -- but actually had no oil. This signifies that they had the same profession and outward show of the same kind of religion and held the same hopes as the wise virgins. So when the visible church is represented by the farmer's threshing floor, we find only two groups distinguished: the wheat and the chaff. Likewise, when the church is compared to the farmer's field, we find only two groups: the wheat and the tares. Naturalists observe that tares look exactly like wheat until it comes time to produce fruit. This represents the fact that those who are only visible Christians have a visibility or appearance of the nature of that wheat that will be gathered into Christ's barn -- and that nature is saving grace.

2. It is evident that those who bore the name of disciples in New Testament times had that name with reference to a visibility and claim of the same relationship to Christ that belongs to those who will be finally acknowledged as His. This is clear from John 8:30-31: As He spoke these words, many believed in Him. Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed in Him, "If you continue in My word, then you are My disciples indeed." (Compare Luke 14:25-27 and John 15:8.) The phrase disciples indeed is relative. It refers to and stands in contrast with a mere visibility, claim, or name. It refers to the name and visibility that those who then bore the name of disciples had. This makes it clear that those who bore the name of disciples had a visibility and claim of the same discipleship Christ speaks of, which He calls true discipleship or discipleship indeed. For true discipleship is not properly set in contrast with anything except a pretense of the same thing that is not true. The phrase gold indeed refers to and contrasts with something that has the appearance of the same metal, not an appearance of brass. If there were another kind of real discipleship in those days besides saving discipleship, people could be Christ's disciples indeed or truly (as the original word reads) without continuing in His word, without selling all they had, and without hating father and mother and their own lives for His sake. From this it is clear that those who bore the name of disciples in those times were distinguished into only two groups: disciples in name or visibility, and disciples indeed. The visibility and profession of the former was of the discipleship of the latter.

3. The same point is confirmed by 1 John 2:19: They went out from us, because they were not of us. If they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us. These words naturally suggest and imply that those professing Christians who ultimately proved false did, before they went out, appear to belong to the company of true saints -- those endowed with persevering grace and holiness. They appeared to be of their number; that is, they were so in claim and visibility, and were accepted as such in the judgment of charity.

4. The name and visibility that nominal or visible Christians had in the days of the New Testament was of saving Christianity, not of moral sincerity. For they had a name to live, though many of them were dead. Revelation 3:1. Now it is very plain what that thing is in religion called by the name of life throughout the New Testament, namely saving grace. I do not know of anything else of a religious nature that is ever called by that name.

5. The visibility that visible Christians had of sainthood in the apostles' days was not of moral sincerity but of gracious sincerity, or saving sainthood. For they are spoken of as being visibly of the number of those saints who shall judge the world and judge angels. 1 Corinthians 6:1-3: Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? Do you not know that we will judge angels? These things clearly imply that if the Christian Corinthians were what they supposed themselves to be, what they professed to be, and what they were accepted as being, they were some of those saints who at the Day of Judgment would judge angels and men.

6. The visibility was not only of moral sincerity but of saving grace. This is clear because the apostle speaks of visible Christians as visible members of Christ's body, of His flesh and of His bones, and one spirit with Him, and temples of the Holy Spirit. Ephesians 5:30 and 1 Corinthians 6:16, 19. And the apostle Peter speaks of visible Christians as those who were visibly the kind of righteous persons who would be saved -- distinguished from the ungodly and those who do not obey the Gospel, who shall perish. 1 Peter 4:16-18: Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this matter. For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it first begins with us (us Christians, including himself and those he wrote to, and all of that kind) what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the Gospel of God? And if the righteous is scarcely saved, where will the ungodly and sinner appear?

7. The visibility was not merely of moral sincerity but of the kind of sainthood that the saints in heaven have. This is clear because they are often spoken of as visibly belonging to heaven and as part of the society of the saints in heaven. So the apostle in his epistle to the Ephesians speaks of them as visibly part of the same household or family of God, part of which is in heaven. Ephesians 2:19: So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household. Together with Ephesians 3:15: From whom every family in heaven and on earth derives its name. The context and flow of the argument show that he is still speaking of the same family or household he spoke of at the end of the preceding chapter. Likewise, all visible Christians are spoken of as visibly the children of the church that is in heaven. Galatians 4:26: But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother. The same apostle speaks of visible Christians as having visibly come to the heavenly city and having joined the glorious company of angels there, and as visibly belonging to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect. Hebrews 12:22-23. Elsewhere they are spoken of as being visibly among those who have their names written in the Book of Life. Revelation 3:5 and 22:19. Those who truly have their names written in the Book of Life are God's true saints who have saving grace, as is evident from Revelation 13:8: All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the Book of Life of the Lamb who has been slain. And Revelation 20:12: And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. Revelation 20:15: And if anyone's name was not found written in the Book of Life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. We are told at the conclusion of this chapter what happened to those whose names were not written in the Book of Life. Then the prophet proceeds in the next chapter to tell us what happened to those whose names were found written there -- namely, they were admitted into the New Jerusalem. Revelation 21:27: And nothing unclean, and no one who practices abomination and lying, shall ever come into it, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life. And yet in the next chapter it is implied that some who were not truly gracious persons, and some who would finally perish, were visibly among those who had both a place in the New Jerusalem and their names written in the Book of Life. Revelation 22:19: And if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the Book of Life and from the holy city.

8. Baptism, by which the early converts were admitted into the church, was used as a display and sign of their being visibly regenerated, dead to sin, alive to God, having the old self crucified, delivered from the ruling power of sin, made free from sin, and having become servants of righteousness -- those servants of God whose fruit leads to that holiness whose end is everlasting life. This is evident from Romans 6 throughout. In the earlier part of the chapter, he speaks of the Christian Romans as dead to sin, being buried with Christ in baptism, having their old self crucified with Christ, and so on. He does not mean only that their baptism placed them under special obligations to these things and was a mark and sign of their commitment to become this way in the future. Rather, it was designed as a mark, sign, and display of their being visibly this way already. This is most clearly shown by the apostle's development of his argument in the rest of the chapter. Romans 6:14: For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace. Romans 6:17-18: But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed. And having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. Romans 6:22: But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life.

9. It is evident that the Scripture qualification for admission to the Christian church is not merely a visibility of moral sincerity in religion but a visibility of regeneration and renewal of heart. This is because it was prophesied that God's people and the ministers of His house in the days of the Messiah should not admit anyone into the Christian church who was not visibly circumcised in heart. Ezekiel 44:6-9: And you shall say to the rebellious, even to the house of Israel, "Thus says the Lord God, O house of Israel, let all your abominations be enough for you, in that you have brought into My sanctuary foreigners uncircumcised in heart and uncircumcised in flesh, to be in My sanctuary to profane it, even My house, when you offer My bread, the fat and the blood; and they have broken My covenant because of all your abominations. And you have not kept charge of My holy things yourselves, but you have set foreigners to keep charge of My sanctuary for you." "Thus says the Lord God, no foreigner uncircumcised in heart or uncircumcised in flesh shall enter My sanctuary, of any foreigner who is among the sons of Israel."

The respected author of the Appeal to the Learned says on page 10: That this Scripture has no particular reference to the Lord's Supper. I answer: although I do not believe this passage refers merely to that ordinance, I do think it clearly refers to admitting persons into the Christian church and to external church privileges. It would be easy to prove that these last nine chapters of Ezekiel must be a vision and prophecy of the state of things in the church of God in the Messiah's days. But I assume this will not be denied, since theologians so generally agree on it. And I assume no one will dispute that the house of God and His sanctuary, into which it is foretold the uncircumcised in heart should not be admitted in the days of the Gospel, is the same house, sanctuary, or temple of God that the prophet had been speaking about in the earlier part of the same chapter and had been describing throughout the four preceding chapters. But we all know that the New Testament house of God is His church. Hebrews 3:3: For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, since he who built the house has more honor than the house. Hebrews 3:6: But Christ was faithful as a Son over His own house, whose house we are, etc. 2 Timothy 2:20: In a large house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and of earth, etc. 1 Timothy 3:15: That you may know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God. Ephesians 2:20-21: Having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord. 1 Corinthians 3:9: You are God's building. 1 Corinthians 3:16: Do you not know that you are a temple of God? 1 Peter 2:5: You also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house. 1 Peter 4:17: For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be, etc.? Hebrews 10:21: And having a great priest over the house of God. Ezekiel's temple is undoubtedly the same one the Messiah was prophesied to build. Zechariah 6:12-13: The man whose name is the Branch -- He will build the temple of the Lord; even He will build the temple of the Lord. And what the temple that Christ builds is, the apostle tells us in Hebrews 3:3, 6. The temple that Ezekiel in his vision was told to observe the measurements of, as it was measured with a reed (Ezekiel 40:3-4), we have reason to think was the same one the apostle John in his vision was told to measure with a reed in Revelation 11:1. And when it is prophesied here that the uncircumcised in heart should not enter the Christian sanctuary or church, nor have communion in the offerings of God's bread, the fat and the blood made there, I think at least this much is implied: that they should not have communion in those ordinances of the Christian sanctuary in which the body and blood of Christ were symbolically represented -- the same things that used to be symbolically represented by the fat and the blood. For the admission into the Christian church spoken of here is an admission into the visible church, not the mystical church, since the admission described is one carried out by the officers of the church. And I assume no one will doubt that circumcision of heart means the spiritual renewal of the heart -- not any common virtues that do not in the least change the nature or put to death the corruption of the heart. This is held by all orthodox theologians, and Mr. Stoddard in particular insisted on it at length. However, if anyone disputes this, I ask that Scripture be allowed to speak for itself. For it very often speaks of circumcision of heart, and everywhere -- in both the Old Testament and the New -- this clearly refers to that great change of heart that was symbolized by the ceremony of circumcision of the flesh. This is the same thing that was later symbolized by baptism, namely regeneration, or else the progress of that work in sanctification -- as we read of the washing of regeneration, etc. The apostle tells us what was symbolized by both circumcision and baptism in Colossians 2:11-12: "In Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God." I would note in passing that he speaks of all the members of the church of Colosse as visibly circumcised with this circumcision -- consistent with Ezekiel's prophecy that the members of the Christian church shall visibly have this circumcision. The apostle speaks in the same way of the members of the church of Philippi as being spiritually circumcised (that is, in profession and visibility) and tells what this circumcision looked like. Philippians 3:3: For we are the circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh. And in Romans 2:28-29, the apostle speaks of this Christian circumcision and Jewish circumcision together, calling the former the circumcision of the heart. For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh; But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God. And where this prophecy of Ezekiel foretells that no one should enter the Christian sanctuary or church unless they are circumcised in heart and circumcised in flesh, I believe this means that no one should be admitted unless they were visibly regenerated and also baptized with outward baptism.

From everything I have observed, I think it is abundantly clear that the sainthood, godliness, and holiness that, according to Scripture, professing Christians and visible saints profess and display is not any religion and virtue resulting from common grace or moral sincerity (as it is called) but saving grace. Yet there are many other clear evidences of this same point, which will to some extent appear throughout the rest of this discourse. Therefore:

2. I now come to another reason why I answer the original question in the negative: it is a duty that, in the ordinary course of things, is required of all who are capable of it, to make an explicit, open profession of the true religion by affirming God's covenant. In other words, they must publicly and verbally unite themselves to God in His covenant by their own public act.

Here I will (first) prove this point and then (second) draw out the implications and show how this demonstrates the matter in question.

First, I will work to establish this point: that it is the duty of God's people to publicly affirm the covenant in this way. This was not only a duty in Israel of old but is also a duty in the Christian church and will remain so to the end of the world. It is a duty required of adult persons before they come to the sacraments. Since this is a point of great importance in this controversy, yet a matter seldom discussed (though it seems to be generally taken for granted), I will be more detailed in my consideration of it.

This not only appears in itself to be most consistent with reason and is a duty generally acknowledged in New England, but is clearly a major institution of the Word of God, appointed as a very important part of the public worship by which God's people should honor His name. This institution is found in Deuteronomy 6:13: You shall fear the Lord your God and serve Him, and shall swear by His name. It is repeated in Deuteronomy 10:20: You shall fear the Lord your God; you shall serve Him and cling to Him, and you shall swear by His name. In both places it could have been translated: You shall swear in His name, or into His name. In the original Hebrew, Bishmo, with the prefix Beth, which means in or into as well as by. And in the latter passage, where our translation says to Him you shall cling, and swear by His name, the Hebrew words are Ubho Thidhbak Ubhishmo Tisshabheanq. The literal translation is: To Him shall you cling (or unite) and into His name shall you swear. The same prefix, Beth, appears before Him when it says you shall cling to Him as before His name when it says you shall swear by His name. Swearing into God's name is a very emphatic and meaningful way of expressing a person's taking upon himself, by his own solemn profession, the name of God as one of His people -- or by swearing to or covenanting with God, uniting himself by his own act to the people that are called by His name. This figure of speech is similar to the one by which Christians in the New Testament are said to be baptized into the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. So Christians are said to be baptized into Christ in Galatians 3:17. This swearing by the name, or into the name of the Lord, is spoken of so often and in such a way by the prophets as a great duty of God's solemn public worship -- as much as praying or sacrificing -- that it would be unreasonable to understand it as referring only or mainly to occasionally taking an oath before a court of law, something that perhaps one-tenth of the people never had occasion to do in their entire lives. If we carefully consider the matter, we will find ample reason to be satisfied that what this institution intended was publicly covenanting with God. Covenanting in Scripture is very often called swearing, and a covenant is called an oath. In particular, God's covenant is called His oath. Deuteronomy 29:12: That you may enter into the covenant with the Lord your God, and into His oath. Deuteronomy 29:14: Not with you alone do I make this covenant and this oath. 1 Chronicles 16:15-16: Remember His covenant forever -- the covenant which He made with Abraham, and His oath to Isaac. 2 Chronicles 15:12: And they entered into the covenant to seek the Lord God of their fathers. 2 Chronicles 15:14-15: And they swore to the Lord with a loud voice. And all Judah rejoiced over the oath. Swearing to the Lord and swearing in or into the name of the Lord are equivalent expressions in the Bible. The prefixes Beth and Lamed are clearly used interchangeably in this case to mean the same thing. Zephaniah 1:5: Those who swear to the Lord, and yet swear by Malcham. The word translated to the Lord is Laihovah with the prefix Lamed, but by Malcham is Bemalcham with the prefix Beth, into Malcham. In 1 Kings 18:32: It says Elijah built an altar in the name of the Lord; Beshem. Here the prefix Beth clearly carries the same force as Lamed in 1 Kings 8:44: "The house I have built for Your name or to Your name, Leshem."

God's people, in swearing to His name or into His name according to the institution, solemnly professed two things: their faith and their obedience. The first part of this profession of religion was called saying, "The Lord lives." Jeremiah 5:2: And though they say, "The Lord lives," surely they swear falsely. Jeremiah 5:7: They have sworn by those who are not gods. That is, they had openly professed idol worship. Jeremiah 4:2: And you will swear, "As the Lord lives," in truth, in justice, and in righteousness; then the nations will bless themselves in Him, and in Him they will glory. (Compare this with Isaiah 45:23-25.) Jeremiah 44:26: Behold, I have sworn by My great name, says the Lord, that My name shall no longer be invoked by any man of Judah in all the land of Egypt, saying, "As the Lord lives." That is, they shall never again make any profession of the true God and the true religion, but shall be entirely given over to paganism. See also Jeremiah 12:16 and 16:14-15 and 23:7-8. Hosea 4:15. Amos 8:14 and 5:5.

These words CHAI JEHOVAH -- "Jehovah lives" -- briefly expressed a profession of faith in the all-sufficiency and unchangeableness of God, which is implied in the name JEHOVAH. These attributes are very often represented in Scripture by God being the LIVING GOD, as is very clear from Joshua 3:10, 1 Samuel 17:26, 36, 2 Kings 19:4, 16, Daniel 6:26, Psalms 18:46, and countless other places.

The other thing professed in swearing into the Lord was obedience, called walking in the name of the Lord. Micah 4:5: All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but we will walk in the name of the Lord our God forever and ever. Again with the prefix Beth. Beshem, just as they were said to swear Beshem, in the name or into the name of the Lord.

This institution in Deuteronomy of swearing into the name of the Lord -- or visibly and explicitly uniting oneself to Him in covenant -- was not prescribed as an extraordinary duty or a duty to be performed only on special occasions such as a return from a general falling away. Rather, it is clearly presented in the institution as a part of the public worship of God that properly belongs to all of God's visible worshipers. The prophets mention it very often in this way, as I noted earlier and could demonstrate at length if there were need for it and if doing so would not make this discourse too long.

And this was not only an institution belonging to Israel under the Old Testament, but also to Gentile converts and Christians under the New Testament. God declares concerning the Gentile nations in Jeremiah 12:16: If they will diligently learn the ways of My people, to swear by My name, "The Lord lives," as they taught My people to swear by Baal, then they will be built up in the midst of My people. That is, they will be added to My church -- or as the apostle Paul puts it in Ephesians 2:19-22: They are no longer strangers and foreigners, but are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of the household of God, and have been built on the foundation of Christ; in whom the whole building, being fitted together, etc. In whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit. Likewise it is prophesied that public covenanting would be the way the Gentiles would join the church in the days of the Gospel. Isaiah 44:3-5: I will pour out water on the thirsty land, and streams on the dry ground; I will pour out My Spirit on your offspring, and My blessing on your descendants; and they will spring up among the grass like willows by the streams of water. One will say, "I am the Lord's," and another will call on the name of Jacob, and another will write on his hand, "Belonging to the Lord" -- as though subscribing a document by which they bound themselves to the Lord. This was subscribing and covenanting themselves into the name of Israel and swearing into the name of the Lord in the language of the Deuteronomy texts mentioned earlier. Likewise, taking hold of God's covenant is prophesied as the way the sons of the foreigner in the days of the Gospel would be joined to God's church and brought into God's sanctuary to share in its worship and ordinances, in Isaiah 56:3, 6-7. So in Isaiah 19:18: The future conversion of the Gentiles in the days of the Gospel and their coming to profess the true religion is expressed by saying they would swear to the Lord of Hosts. In that day five cities in the land of Egypt will be speaking the language of Canaan and swearing allegiance to the Lord of Hosts. And in Jeremiah 23:5-8: It appears to be clearly prophesied that after Christ has come and accomplished His great redemption, the same way of publicly professing faith in the all-sufficient and unchangeable God by swearing, "The Lord lives," should continue, which was established of old -- but with this difference: whereas formerly they covenanted with God as their Redeemer out of Egypt, now they would in effect forget that event and focus on a far greater redemption. "Behold, the days are coming," declares the Lord, "when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch -- Therefore they will no longer say, 'As the Lord lives, who brought up the sons of Israel from the land of Egypt,' but, 'As the Lord lives, who brought up and led back the descendants of the household of Israel from the north country,'" etc. Another remarkable passage that clearly prophesies the continuation of this same practice of professing religion through swearing or public covenanting in the days of the Gospel, as it was instituted in Israel, is Isaiah 45:22-25: "Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other. I have sworn by Myself, the word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness and will not turn back, that to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance. They will say of Me, 'Only in the Lord are righteousness and strength.' Men will come to Him -- In the Lord all the offspring of Israel will be justified and will glory." This prophecy will have its ultimate fulfillment at the Day of Judgment, but it is plain that the thing most directly intended is the conversion of the Gentile world to the Christian religion. What is here called swearing, the apostle, in quoting this passage on two occasions, calls confessing. Romans 14:11: Every tongue shall confess to God. Philippians 2:10: That every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. This is the word commonly used in the New Testament for making a public profession of religion. So in Romans 10:9-10: If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. Here a public profession of religion with the mouth is clearly spoken of as a great duty of all Christ's people, as much as believing in Him, and ordinarily necessary for salvation -- not that it is necessary in the same way that faith is, but in the same way that baptism is. Faith and verbal profession are spoken of together here as necessary for salvation in the same way as faith and baptism in Mark 16:16: He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved. And I know of no good reason why we should not regard oral profession and covenanting with Christ, for those who are capable of it, as just as much a regular duty in the Christian church and an institution universally belonging to the followers of Christ as baptism.

And if it is true that explicit, open covenanting with God is a great duty required of all, as I have argued, then it should be expected of persons before they are admitted to the privileges of adult members in the church of Christ. Surely it is appropriate, if this explicit covenanting takes place at all, that it should take place before persons come to those ordinances in which they by their own act publicly confirm and seal this covenant. This public act of covenanting, which God has appointed, should exist before we publicly confirm and seal it. It was the means by which the Israelites of old were introduced into the communion of God's nominal or visible church and holy city, as appears from Isaiah 48:1-2: Hear this, O house of Jacob, you who are called by the name of Israel and have come forth from the loins of Judah, who swear by the name of the Lord and invoke the God of Israel, but not in truth or in righteousness; for they call themselves after the holy city, etc. When and in exactly what manner the Israelites ordinarily performed this explicit covenanting, I do not think we can be certain. But since it was first done when God first proclaimed His law or covenant at Mount Sinai, and was done again when it was repeated and reproclaimed on the plains of Moab, and was done when the law was publicly read in Josiah's time (2 Kings 23:3), and was done after the return from captivity when it was publicly read at the Feast of Tabernacles (Nehemiah chapters 8, 9, and 10) -- it seems most likely to me that it was done every seventh year, when the law or covenant of God was, by divine appointment, read in the hearing of all the people at the Feast of Tabernacles. At least it was done then by all who heard the law read for the first time and had never before publicly affirmed the covenant of God. There is good evidence that they never participated in the ordinances God had appointed as seals of His covenant -- those in which they themselves were to be active, such as their sacrifices -- until they had done this. It is clearly implied in Psalm 50 that it was the custom in Israel to verbally affirm God's covenant, or to take it into their mouths, before they sealed that covenant in their sacrifices. See verse 16 taken together with the earlier part of the Psalm from verse 5. And that they did this before they partook of the Passover (which was indeed one of their sacrifices) or entered the sanctuary for communion in the temple worship is confirmed by the words of Hezekiah when he proclaimed a Passover, in 2 Chronicles 30:8: "Do not be stiff-necked as your fathers were, but yield yourselves to the Lord (in the Hebrew, give the hand to the Lord) and enter His sanctuary which He has consecrated forever, and serve the Lord your God." To give the hand seems to be a Hebrew phrase for entering into covenant or obligating oneself by covenant. Ezra 10:19: And they gave their hands in pledge that they would put away their wives. And, as I have already noted, it was prophesied that Christians would be admitted to communion in the privileges of the church of Christ in this same way.

Having established the premises of the argument I intend, I now proceed:

Second, I come to what I believe must be the consequence, namely: no one should be admitted to the privileges of adult members in the church of Christ except those who make a profession of real piety. For the covenant to be affirmed or professed is God's covenant, which He has revealed as the means of our spiritual union with Him and our acceptance as the objects of His eternal favor. This is none other than the covenant of grace -- at least it is so, without dispute, in these days of the Gospel. To affirm this covenant is to profess the consent of our hearts to it, and that is the sum and substance of true piety. This is not merely professing the agreement of our understanding -- that we understand such a covenant exists, or that we understand we are obligated to comply with it. Rather, it is professing the consent of our wills. It is declaring that we do comply with it. There is a mutual profession in this matter -- a profession on Christ's part and a profession on our part, just as there is in marriage. And it is the same kind of profession on both sides, in this respect: each professes a consent of heart. Christ in His Word declares a complete consent of heart regarding what He offers. The visible Christian, in the response he makes through his Christian profession, declares a consent and compliance of heart to Christ's proposal. Affirming the covenant is professing to make the transaction of that covenant our own. The transaction of that covenant is one of betrothal to Christ. On our part, it is giving our souls to Christ as His bride. There is nothing in Scripture to which the covenant of grace is more often compared than the marriage covenant. And the visible transaction, or mutual profession, between Christ and the visible church is abundantly compared to the mutual profession in marriage. In marriage, the bride professes to accept the bridegroom's proposal and take him as her husband, renouncing all others, and to give herself to him to be entirely and forever his wife. But anyone who professes this toward Christ professes saving faith. Those who openly covenanted with God according to the terms of the institution in Deuteronomy 10:20 visibly united themselves to God in the union of that covenant. They professed on their part the union of the covenant of God, which was the covenant of grace. It is said in the institution, "You shall cling to the Lord and swear by His name," or more literally, "You shall unite into the Lord and swear into His name." So in Isaiah 56 it is called a joining themselves to the Lord. But the union, clinging, or joining of that covenant is saving faith -- the great condition of the covenant of Christ, by which we are in Christ. This is what brings us into the Lord. For a person explicitly or by profession to enter into the union or relationship of the covenant of grace with Christ is the same as professedly performing the act that on our part is the uniting act, which is the act of faith. To profess the covenant of grace is to profess the covenant not as an observer, but as one directly involved in the matter -- as a party in the covenant professed. This is to profess what in the covenant belongs to us as a party, or to profess our part in the covenant. And that is the soul's believing acceptance of the Savior. Christ's part is salvation; our part is saving faith in Him -- not a pretended but a genuine faith, not a common but a special and saving faith. No other faith than this is the condition of the covenant of grace.

I am aware of the distinction that some make between the internal and external covenant. But I hope the theologians who make this distinction would not be understood as saying there are really and properly two covenants of grace. They mean only that those who profess the one covenant of grace are of two kinds: those who comply with it internally and truly, and others who do so only externally -- that is, in profession and visibility. But anyone who externally and visibly complies with the covenant of grace appears and professes to do so truly. There is also this distinction regarding the covenant of grace: the one covenant of grace is presented in two ways -- one externally through the preaching of the Word, the other internally and spiritually through enlightening the mind to rightly understand the Word. But it is with the covenant as it is with the call of the Gospel. The person who truly complies with the external call has the internal call. So the person who truly complies with the external proposal of God's covenant, as visible Christians profess to do, does indeed fulfill the inward condition of it. But the New Testament gives no more basis for supposing two real and properly distinct covenants of grace than it does for supposing two kinds of real Christians -- the unscripturalness of which latter theory I pointed out earlier.

When persons who were baptized in infancy properly affirm their baptismal covenant, they mean that, now being capable of acting for themselves, they explicitly and professionally make their parents' act of giving them up to God their own, by expressly giving themselves up to God. But no person can do this without either being deceived or lying and professing what he himself considers to be false, unless he believes that in his heart he consents to be God's. A child of Christian parents never does for himself what his parents did for him in infancy until he gives himself wholly to God. But surely he does not do this if he not only holds back a part, but the chief part: his heart and soul. Anyone who holds back his heart effectively holds back everything. Therefore, if he is aware of it, he is guilty of solemn, deliberate mockery if he at the same time solemnly and publicly professes that he gives himself up to God. If there are any words used by such people that by their proper meaning imply that they give themselves up to God, and if these words -- as they intend them to be understood and as they are understood by those who hear them, according to their established use and custom among that people -- do not imply that they do it truly but actually involve reserving or holding back the chief part, then it ceases to be a profession of giving themselves up to God. It therefore ceases to be a professed covenanting with God or affirming God's covenant. For what they profess belongs to no covenant of God in existence. God has revealed no such covenant, and no such covenant of God exists, in which our part of the covenant transaction is giving ourselves up to Him with reservations -- holding back a part, especially holding back our souls, our chief part, and in effect our all. There is no covenant of God at all that has these for its terms. This is certainly not the covenant of grace. Therefore, although such public and solemn professing may be a very unjustifiable and serious misuse of words and taking God's name in vain, it is not a professed covenanting with God.

One thing, as I have already noted, that belonged to Israel's swearing into the name of the Lord was saying, "The Lord lives," by which they professed their faith in God's all-sufficiency, unchangeableness, and faithfulness. But if they truly had such a faith, it was a saving grace. Those who genuinely trust in the all-sufficiency of God will surely find Him to be their all-sufficient portion. Those who trust in God's unchangeableness and faithfulness will surely never be left or forsaken by Him. There were two ways of swearing "Jehovah lives" that we read about in Scripture. One we read of in Jeremiah 4:2: "You will swear, 'As the Lord lives,' in truth, in justice, and in righteousness." And the other way is swearing falsely, which we read of in the next chapter, Jeremiah 5:2-3: "And though they say, 'As the Lord lives,' surely they swear falsely." (And certainly no one ought to do this.) It follows: "O Lord, do not Your eyes look for truth?" That is, God desires sincerity of heart in those who profess religion. Here gracious sincerity is contrasted with a false profession. For when it says, "O Lord, do not Your eyes look for truth?" the expression parallels these passages -- Psalm 51:6: "Behold, You desire truth in the innermost being." 1 Samuel 16:7: "Man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart." Psalm 11:7: "His eyes behold the upright." But these texts speak of gracious sincerity. Those spoken of in Jeremiah 4:2, who swore, "As the Lord lives," in truth, in justice, and in righteousness, were gracious persons who had undergone a thorough conversion to God, as the preceding verse shows: "If you will return, O Israel," declares the Lord, "return to Me." That is, do not do as you or Judah was charged with doing in the preceding chapter, verse 10: Judah did not return to Me with all her heart, but in pretense. Do not do this, but "if you will return, return to Me." And then in the second verse it is added: "And you will swear, 'As the Lord lives,' in truth," etc. That is, then your profession of religion will be worth regarding. You will truly be what you claim to be -- Israelites indeed, in whose profession there is no deception. Those who said, "The Lord lives," in truth, in justice, and in righteousness -- they said, "The Lord lives" as David did in Psalm 18:46: "The Lord lives, and blessed be my Rock." And they did as the apostle says he did in 1 Timothy 4:10: "We have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers." And as he would have Timothy urge rich men to do, in 1 Timothy 6:17: "Instruct them not to fix their hope on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly supplies us with all things to enjoy." When the apostle speaks of a profession of our faith in Christ as one duty that all Christians ought to perform as they seek salvation, it is the profession of a saving faith that he speaks of. His words plainly imply this: "If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved." The faith to be professed with the mouth was the same as what the apostle describes as in the heart, and that is saving faith. This is even plainer in the following words: "For with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation." Believing resulting in righteousness is saving faith. But it is clearly the same faith spoken of as professed with the mouth in the next words of the same sentence. And that the Gentiles, in professing the Christian religion or swearing allegiance to Christ, should profess saving faith is implied in Isaiah 45:23-24: "Every tongue will swear allegiance. They will say of Me, 'Only in the Lord are righteousness and strength.'" That is, they should profess their entire dependence on Christ's righteousness and strength.

For persons merely to promise that they will believe in Christ, or that they will at some future time comply with the conditions and duties of the covenant of grace, is not to affirm that covenant. Such persons do not profess to presently enter into the covenant of grace with Christ, or into the relationship of that covenant with Christ. All they do at present is merely speak fair words. They say they will do it later. They profess that they will at some point in the future obey God's command to believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ. But what good is such a profession, and what credit should be given to such promises of future obedience, when at the same time they claim nothing more at present than to live and continue in rebellion against those great commands -- commands that give no permission or allowance for delay? Those who do this, instead of properly affirming the covenant, are actually visibly rejecting it for the present. It is not unusual in some churches where the doctrine I oppose has been established, for persons at the very time they join the church and claim to affirm the covenant to freely tell their neighbors that they have no thought of having any true faith in Christ or love for Him. Such persons, instead of being professedly united to Christ in the union of the covenant of grace, are rather visibly lacking in love for Christ. So instead of being qualified for admission to the Lord's Supper, they are rather exposed to the apostle's declaration in 1 Corinthians 16:22: If anyone does not love the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed. Maranatha.

The outward covenanting that agrees with the institution of Scripture is not only a promise of something future (though that is not excluded) but a profession of something present, just as it is in the marriage covenant. (Though it is true that it was chiefly on account of the promise or vow contained in the covenant that it is called swearing.) For a woman to promise that she will at some future time renounce all other men for the sake of the one who proposes to her, and that she will someday accept him as her husband, is not for her to enter into the marriage covenant with him now. The woman who does enter into marriage with a man professes to accept him now, renouncing all others -- though promises of future behavior toward him as a wife are also included in the transaction. It seems as though the early converts to Christianity, in the profession they made of religion in order to be admitted to the Christian church, and in their visibly entering into covenant in order to receive the initiating seal of the covenant in baptism, did not explicitly make any promises about the future. They only professed the present convictions and disposition of their minds. They professed that they believed in Christ and were thus admitted into the church by baptism. And yet undoubtedly they were, according to the prophecies I mentioned, admitted by way of public covenanting. As the covenant people of God, they affirmed the covenant before the seal of the covenant was applied. Their profession of faith in Christ was a visible affirmation of the covenant of grace, because faith in Christ was the great condition of that covenant. Indeed, if the faith they professed in order to receive baptism was only a historical or doctrinal faith (as some suppose), or any common faith, it would not have been any visible entering into the covenant of grace. For a common faith is not the condition of that covenant, nor would there properly have been any covenanting in the matter. If we suppose the faith they professed was the grace by which the soul is united to Christ, their profession was a covenanting in this further respect: it implied a commitment to future obedience. For true faith in Christ includes in its nature an acceptance of Him as our Lord and King and a devotion of ourselves to His service. But a profession of merely historical faith implies no profession of accepting Christ as our King and no commitment to submit to Him as such.

When the Israelites publicly covenanted with God according to the institution in Deuteronomy, they did not only promise something future but professed something present. They declared Jehovah to be their God and also promised to keep His commands. This was the pattern in that solemn covenant transaction between God and the people on the plains of Moab, which is summarized in Deuteronomy 26:17-18: "You have today declared the Lord to be your God, and that you would walk in His ways and keep His statutes, His commandments, and His ordinances, and listen to His voice. The Lord has today declared you to be His people, a treasured possession, as He promised you, and that you should keep all His commandments." The people, in declaring God to be their God, professed their compliance with the terms of the covenant of grace -- as the covenant of grace is summarized in these words: "I will be your God, and you shall be My people." Those who declare the Lord to be their God profess to accept Jehovah as their God, which is to accept Him as the object of their highest regard and trust. For whatever we choose as the object of our highest regard -- that alone do we take as our God. Therefore no one who values and loves the world more than Jehovah can, without lying or being deceived, declare Jehovah to be their God. And no one who does not trust in Christ but trusts more in their own strength or righteousness can declare Christ to be their Savior. To declare God to be our God is to profess that He is our God by our own act -- that is, that we choose Him as our chief good and ultimate purpose, the supreme object of our esteem and regard, the one we devote ourselves to and depend upon. And if we are aware that we do not do this sincerely, we cannot profess that we actually do it. For the person who does not do it sincerely does not do it at all. There is no room for a distinction between moral sincerity and gracious sincerity in this case. A supreme regard of the heart for God, or a supreme love for Him that is real, is of only one kind. It would be absurd to speak of a morally sincere supreme love for God in those who actually love worthless things more than Him. Whoever does with any reality at all make God the object of the supreme regard of his heart is certainly a gracious person. And whoever does not make God the supreme object of his regard with a gracious sincerity certainly does not do it with any sincerity. I fear that by leading people in many of our congregations -- people who have no thought of having the least spark of true love for God in their hearts -- to publicly and solemnly say that they declare God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to be their God and that they give themselves up to Him, we have led them to say things they do not understand. These are certainly very unclear expressions if they mean anything that an unregenerate person does while under the ruling power of sin and hostility toward God.

Here it may be objected that it is unreasonable to suppose any such thing was intended in the profession of the congregation in the wilderness as a gracious respect for God -- which is the condition of God's covenant -- when we have reason to think so few of them were truly gracious. But I believe, upon careful consideration, this will not appear unreasonable at all. It is no more unreasonable to suppose this people made a profession of respect for God that they did not have in their hearts than it is at other times when we are told they did the same thing, as in Ezekiel 33:31: "They come to you as the people come, and they sit before you as My people (that is, as though they were My saints, as they profess to be), for they hear your words, but they do not do them; with their mouth they show much love, but their heart goes after their greed." So in the apostles' time, that people professed that their hearts held something toward God that was not actually there. The apostle is speaking of them when he says in Titus 1:16: "They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny Him." This was common among that people. God declares them to be a hypocritical nation in Isaiah 10:6. And it is certain this was the case with them in the wilderness. They professed a respect for God that they did not have, as is evident from Psalm 78:36-37: "They deceived Him with their mouth, and lied to Him with their tongue; for their heart was not steadfast toward Him, nor were they faithful in His covenant." In affirming the covenant with God, they professed that their heart was right with Him. This is clear because the evidence offered of their having lied or dealt falsely in their profession was that their heart was not right with Him, and so they proved unfaithful to God's covenant, which they had affirmed. If their heart had been right with God, they would have been truly devout persons -- which demonstrates that what they professed was true piety. It also appears that if they had possessed the kind of heart they claimed to have, they would have been truly devout persons. This is clear from Deuteronomy 5, where we have an account of their covenanting at Mount Sinai. Concerning this, verses 28-29 say: "The Lord heard the words which you spoke to me, and the Lord said to me, 'They have done well in all that they have spoken.'" "Oh, that they had such a heart in them, that they would fear Me and keep all My commandments always, that it may be well with them and with their sons forever!'" The people were mistaken about the disposition and readiness of their hearts to carry through the work of God's service, like the man in the parable who undertook to build a tower without counting the cost. Nor should it seem incredible that the generation who covenanted at Mount Sinai should, for the most part, be deceived into thinking their hearts were thoroughly disposed to give themselves forever to God, if we consider how many things strongly stirred their emotions. There were the wonders performed in Egypt and at the Red Sea, where they were led through on dry ground and the Egyptians were so miraculously destroyed. These events greatly stirred their emotions, and they sang God's praises. And there was especially what they now witnessed at Mount Sinai -- the astonishing displays of God's majesty. Probably the majority of the sinners among them were deceived by false emotions. And if there were others who were less affected and who were not deceived, it is not incredible that they, in those circumstances, would deliberately lie in their profession and so in a more blatant way deceive God with their lips and lie to Him with their tongues. These things are all the more believable about that generation, since it was a generation especially given over to hardness and blindness of mind in divine matters and especially noted in the book of Psalms for hypocrisy. As for the generation of their children who affirmed the covenant on the plains of Moab, they similarly had much to stir their emotions: the terrible judgments of God they had seen on their fathers, God having brought them through the wilderness and having defeated Sihon king of the Amorites and Og the king of Bashan before them, and Moses' moving rehearsal of the whole series of God's wonderful dealings with them along with his most passionate appeals. But it was also a time of great revival of religion and powerful influence of the Spirit of God. That generation was probably the most excellent generation that ever existed in Israel. There is certainly more good and less bad spoken of them than of any other generation we have any account of in Scripture. A very large part of them swore in truth, in justice, and in righteousness. And it is no wonder that others at such a time went along with it, either deceiving or being deceived by common emotions -- as is usual in times of great works of God for His church and of the flourishing of religion. In succeeding generations, as the people grew more corrupt, I suppose their covenanting or swearing into the name of the Lord degenerated into a mere formality and ceremony -- just as subscribing to religious articles seems to have done in the Church of England, and as, I fear, affirming the covenant (as it is called) has too much become in New England. It is clearly a prevailing custom for people to neglect this until they are about to get married and then to do it for the sake of their reputation and so that their children may be baptized. And I suppose there was commonly a great laxness in Israel among the priests who oversaw this matter. There were many things in the nature of that comparatively worldly dispensation that indirectly allowed for such things -- meaning that it was by no means as effective at preventing such irregularities (though they were very wrong in themselves) as the more excellent dispensation introduced by Christ and His apostles. And though these things were spoken against by the prophets before the Babylonian captivity, God, who alone is wise, deliberately overlooked these and many other great irregularities in the church to a large degree, until the time of reformation should come, which the Messiah was to have the honor of introducing. But I may perhaps have occasion to say more about these things when I come to answer the objection concerning the Passover.

Now to return to the argument from the nature of covenanting with God, or affirming God's covenant: as to the promises that are either explicitly or implicitly made in this act, making these promises implies a profession of true piety. For in the covenant of grace, universal obedience is pledged -- obedience to all the commands of God. The performance of inward spiritual duties is engaged in the covenant of grace just as much as external duties, and in some respects much more. Therefore the person who visibly makes the covenant of grace his own promises to perform those internal duties and to perform all duties with a gracious sincerity. We have no warrant in our profession of God's covenant to divide the duties of it -- to take some and leave out others. Especially we have no warrant to leave out those great commands of believing with the heart, of loving the Lord our God with all our heart and with all our soul, and our neighbor as ourselves. Anyone who leaves these out effectively leaves out all, for these are the summary of our whole duty and of all God's commands. If we leave these out of our profession, what we profess is surely not the covenant of grace. The Israelites, when they covenanted with God at Mount Sinai and said after God declared the Ten Commandments to them, "All that the Lord has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient" -- their promise implied that, as they professed to know God, they would in their actions not deny but acknowledge and honor Him and would be careful to keep those two great commandments that summarize all ten, the commandments concerning which God said, "These words which I am commanding you today shall be on your heart." Deuteronomy 6:7. Likewise, when they covenanted on the plains of Moab, they promised to keep and obey God's commands with all their heart and with all their soul, as is very clear from Deuteronomy 26:16-17. The same was true when the people affirmed their covenant in Asa's time, in 2 Chronicles 15:12: "And they entered into the covenant to seek the Lord God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul." We have another remarkable example in 2 Kings 23:3 and 2 Chronicles 34:31.

Now a person who is entirely under the power of a carnal mind, which is not subject to the law of God, and indeed cannot be, cannot promise these things without either great deception or the most obvious and blatant absurdity. Promising assumes that the person is aware of or persuaded about himself that he has such a heart in him, for his lips claim to declare his heart. The nature of a promise implies intention or purpose. And proper, real intention implies will, disposition, and compliance of heart. But no unregenerate person is properly willing to perform these duties, nor does his heart comply with them. Leading unregenerate people to believe otherwise tends greatly to their harm. An unregenerate person may be willing, out of self-interest and self-serving motives, to use means and take pains so that he might gain a willingness or disposition toward these duties. But that is a very different thing from actually being willing or truly having a disposition toward them. So he may promise that he will, for one reason or another, take great pains to obtain such a heart. But if he does so, this is not the promise of the covenant of grace. People may make many religious promises to God and many promises that in some way relate to the covenant of grace, yet these are not the promises of that covenant. There is nothing of the nature of covenanting in such cases, because even if they actually fulfilled their promises, God is not obligated by any promise to them. If an unregenerate person promises to do everything it is possible for an unregenerate person to do in religion, and he fulfills his promises, God is not obligated by any covenant He has made with man to do anything at all for him regarding His saving benefits. Therefore anyone who promises only these things enters into no covenant with God. For the very idea of entering into a covenant with any being is entering into a mutual agreement -- doing or pledging something that, if done, obliges the other party on his part. The New Testament tells us of only one covenant God enters into with mankind through Christ, and that is the covenant of grace. In that covenant, God obligates Himself to nothing apart from genuine faith and the spiritual duties that accompany it. Therefore, if an unregenerate person makes ever so many vows that he will perform all external duties, will pray for help to do spiritual duties, and will strive to comply with the covenant of grace from whatever resources he has -- he does not lay hold of God's covenant or properly enter into any covenant with God. For we have no opportunity to covenant with God in any covenant other than the one He has revealed; He becomes a covenant party in no other covenant. It is true that every unregenerate person living under the Gospel is obligated to comply with the terms of the covenant of grace. And if he promises to do so, his promise may increase his obligation, even though he deceived God with his mouth and lied to Him with his tongue, as the children of Israel did in their promising. But it does not follow that they should knowingly make a lying promise, or that ministers and churches should encourage them in doing so.

Indeed, there is no unregenerate person who is not deceiving himself if he thinks he is truly willing to practice external obedience to God universally and persistently through the various trials of life that he can expect. Therefore in promising it, he is either very deceptive or is like the foolish, deceived man who undertook to build when he did not have the resources to finish. And if the church knows -- before whom he promises to build and finish -- that at the same time he does not even claim to have the heart to finish, his promise is worthy of no credit or regard from them and can make nothing visible to them except his presumption.

A strong confirmation of what I have said about covenanting is Psalm 50:16: "But to the wicked God says, 'What right have you to declare My statutes, or to take My covenant in your mouth?'" The term the wicked, in its more general use in Scripture, is applied broadly enough to include all ungodly or graceless persons -- all who are under the ruling power of sin and are objects of God's anger, or exposed to His eternal judgment. This could easily be shown by listing texts throughout the entire Bible. All such people are called in Scripture workers of iniquity and the children of the wicked one. Matthew 13:38. All such are said to be of the devil in 1 John 3:8. And to be children of the devil in 1 John 3:10. The righteous and the wicked are contrasted in a great many places in Scripture. They are clearly set in opposition to one another and distinguished from each other as saints and sinners, holy and unholy, those who fear God and those who do not fear Him, those who love Him and those who hate Him. All of humanity is divided in Scripture by these distinctions, and the Bible recognizes no neutrals or third category. Indeed, those who are truly wicked may be visibly righteous -- righteous in profession and outward appearance. But a category of people who have no saving grace yet are not truly wicked is a human invention that Scripture knows nothing about. It is reasonable to suppose that wicked men in Psalm 50 means all who hate instruction and reject God's Word (verse 17), not merely those guilty of the particular crimes mentioned in verses 17-20: stealing, adultery, fraud, and slander. Although only some particular forms of wickedness are mentioned, we should not understand this to mean all others are excluded. Indeed, the words at the conclusion of the passage are expressly applied to all who forget God in such a way as to expose themselves to being torn in pieces by God's wrath in hell, verse 22: "Now consider this, you who forget God, or I will tear you in pieces, and there will be none to deliver." We can no more justly argue that because some gross sins are specified here, no sinners are meant except those who practice those or other gross sins, than we can argue from Revelation 22:14-15 that no one will be shut out of heaven except those who have lived in the gross sins mentioned there: "Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter by the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying." Nothing is more common in Scripture than for its descriptions of both the godly and the ungodly to include, alongside their general character, some particular excellent practices of the one that grace leads to, and some specific gross sins of the other for which there is a basis in the ruling corruption of their hearts. So lying is mentioned as part of the character of all unregenerate people in Psalm 58:3-4 (who are there called wicked men, as in Psalm 50): "The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies; their venom is like the venom of a serpent," etc. So it is said of the wicked in Psalm 10:2-4, 7: "His mouth is full of curses and deceit and oppression." The apostle in Romans 3 cites this as a description of all unregenerate people. So it is said of the wicked in Psalm 140:3: "They sharpen their tongues as a serpent; poison of a viper is under their lips." The same apostle in the same place also cites this as what is said of all unregenerate people. The very same gross sins mentioned here in Psalm 50 are repeatedly included in Solomon's descriptions of the wicked man as opposed to the righteous in the book of Proverbs -- particularly the sins mentioned in verse 19 of that Psalm, "You give your mouth to evil, and your tongue frames deceit." These are mentioned as belonging to the character of the wicked man in Proverbs 12: "The thoughts of the righteous are just, but the counsels of the wicked are deceitful." "The words of the wicked lie in wait for blood, but the mouth of the upright delivers them." Nevertheless it is clear that the wise man in this book, in his distinction between the righteous and the wicked, means the same as godly and ungodly. Simply reading the two preceding chapters will be enough to satisfy anyone of this. See Proverbs 10:3, 7, 16, 20, 21, 24, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32. Proverbs 11:3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 30, 31. Besides countless other similar texts throughout the book. In Proverbs 1:16 it is said of sinners: "Their feet run to evil and they hasten to shed blood." The apostle in Romans 3:15 cites this as part of the description of all unregenerate people. So in the description of the wicked in Proverbs 4:14-19, it is said that "they cannot sleep unless they do evil," that "they drink the wine of violence," etc. Yet by the wicked there is meant the same as the graceless person, as is clear from the contrast made there between him and the just or righteous, whose path is like the light of dawn, that shines brighter and brighter until the full day.

As further evidence that the wicked in Psalm 50:16 means the same as the ungodly or graceless, observe that there is a fairly clear contrast or opposition here between the wicked and the saints who will be gathered to Christ at the Day of Judgment, spoken of in verse 5. There, God speaking of His coming to judgment says: "Gather My saints together, those who have made a covenant with Me by sacrifice." Then, after showing the insufficiency of animal sacrifices -- implying that the greater sacrifice by which these saints make a covenant with Him is something else -- it is added: "But to the wicked (who are not among My saints), God says, 'What right have you to take My covenant into your mouth?'" He approves of the covenanting of the former but disapproves of the covenanting of the latter. As for the gathering of God's saints spoken of there, if we consider the preceding and following verses, it is clearly the same as the gathering of His elect when Christ comes in the clouds of heaven, spoken of in Matthew 24:30-31. And the same as the gathering of the righteous, as His wheat into His barn, at the Day of Judgment, spoken of in Matthew 13. Therefore there is as much reason to suppose that the wicked who are contrasted with them refers to all graceless persons as there is to understand the evildoers spoken of in Matthew 13, who are contrasted with the righteous who will then shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father (verse 43), in the same way. There is one more thing that further confirms my interpretation of Psalm 50:16. It is this: the plain reason given here against wicked people taking God's covenant into their mouths holds true for all graceless people -- namely, that they do not comply with but reject the very covenant that they profess with their mouths to affirm and consent to. Verse 17: "For you hate discipline, and you cast My words behind you." This is as much as to say: you reject and have a ruling hostility against My statutes, which you declare and profess to comply with. And this is the spirit and practice of all who live in the sin of unbelief and rejection of Christ. They live in a way that is entirely inconsistent with the covenant of grace. For the sum and substance of the condition and obligation of that covenant is what every unregenerate person is under the ruling power of hostility against and lives in contradiction to. Therefore, I believe it follows that those who know this is their condition have nothing to do with taking God's covenant into their mouths -- or in other words, have no warrant to do this until their condition changes.

3. The nature of things seems to provide no strong reason why the people of Christ should not openly profess a proper respect for Him in their hearts as well as a correct understanding of Him in their minds, or a right opinion of Him in their judgment.

I can think of nothing that could reasonably be considered the purpose or goal of a public profession of religion that does not equally require a profession of honor, esteem, and friendship of heart toward Christ, as much as an orthodox opinion about Him. I cannot see why the former should not be expected and required for admission into the company of His friends and followers just as much as the latter. It cannot be because the former is not in itself as important or as much to be considered as the latter, since the very essence of religion itself consists in the former. Without it, the latter is entirely useless and makes us no better -- neither happier in ourselves nor more acceptable to God. One purpose of a public profession of religion is giving public honor to God. But surely professing inward esteem and a supreme respect of heart toward God is as fitting for this purpose and more directly tends toward it than declaring correct theoretical views about Him. We consider it especially and directly honoring when our friends, on appropriate occasions, stand ready not only to acknowledge the truth of certain facts about us but also to testify to their high esteem and wholehearted and complete regard for us. When people merely display their doctrinal knowledge of religious matters and express the agreement of their minds, but at the same time make no claim to anything other than being entirely lacking in all true love for God and being under the dominion of hostility toward Him, their profession is in some ways very greatly to God's dishonor. For they leave the public with strong reason to suspect that they hold the truth in unrighteousness and that they are some of those who have both seen and hated both Christ and His Father (John 15:24), who of all people have the greatest sin and bring the most dishonor to God.

I am at a loss to see how the visibility of sainthood that the honored author of the Appeal to the Learned considers sufficient for admission to the Lord's Supper can bring much honor to God -- namely, a visibility that leaves reason to believe the majority of those who have it are enemies of God in their hearts and inwardly servants of sin. Such a visibility of religion seems more likely to increase the visibility of wickedness in the world, and thus of God's dishonor, than anything else. That is, it makes more wickedness visible to the eye of human judgment and gives people reason to think there is more wickedness in the world than would otherwise be apparent to them. This is because we have reason to think that those who live in rejection of Christ under the light of the Gospel and with knowledge and common belief of its doctrine have vastly greater sin and guilt than other people. And that respected theologian himself taught this very thing at length.

Christ came into the world to wage a war against God's enemies, sin and Satan. A great war rages between them, and this war concerns us -- the contest is over who will have possession of our hearts. Now it is reasonable, under these circumstances, that we should declare whose side we are on -- whether we are on Christ's side or on the side of His enemies. If we want to be admitted among Christ's friends and followers, it is reasonable that we should profess we are on the Lord's side and that we yield our hearts (which the contest is about) to Him, not to His rivals. And this seems clearly to be the purpose and nature of a public profession of Christ. If this profession is not made, no profession is made that is worth regarding or worth making in a case like this, and certainly not for such a purpose as being admitted among His visible friends. There is no other way of being on Christ's side in this case than being so with an undivided heart -- preferring Him above all His rivals and renouncing them all for His sake. The situation allows for no neutrality, no lukewarmness, and no middle category of persons with merely a moral sincerity or a common faith that is compatible with loving sin and the world more than Christ. "He who is not with Me" (says Christ) "is against Me." Therefore no one professes to be on Christ's side except those who profess to renounce His rivals. For those who would be called Christians to profess no higher regard for Christ than what allows for a greater regard for the world is more absurd than if a woman pretending to marry a man and take him as her husband should profess to take him in some sense, but not claim to take him in a way that is incompatible with allowing other men a fuller possession of her and greater intimacy with her than she allows him. The nature of the case, as it stands between us and Jesus Christ, is such that an open, solemn profession of being entirely for Him and giving Him the possession of our hearts, renouncing all competitors, is more essential here than a similar profession in any other case. The profession of some in-between state of mind is very inconsistent with the nature of Christ's mission, work, and kingdom in the world and everything that belongs to the purposes and goals of His administration. For ministers and churches to openly establish such a kind of profession of Christ as part of His public service -- one that does not even claim anything more than lukewarmness -- is, I fear, to make a mockery of a solemn public profession of Christianity. It seems to be entirely without warrant from the Word of God and greatly to God's dishonor.

It cannot fairly be argued here, as a reason why doctrinal opinion should be professed but not friendship or respect of heart, that the former is more easily recognized and known by us than the latter. For though it is true that people may be uncertain about the latter, it is equally true that they may be uncertain about the former. They may be uncertain in many cases about the full extent of their inclination and choice, and they may equally be uncertain about the full extent of their judgment. I know of nothing in human nature that prevents the acts of people's wills from being properly subject to their own awareness any more than the acts of their judgment, nor any reason to suppose that people cannot recognize their own consent as well as their assent. Scripture clearly assumes that gracious dispositions and acts are things properly under the eye of conscience. 2 Corinthians 13:5: "Do you not recognize this about yourselves?" John 21:15: "Simon, son of Jonas, do you love Me?" And many other passages. Nor is the nature of godliness less clearly revealed than the true doctrines of religion. Piety of heart, in its most essential elements, is as clearly revealed as the doctrines concerning the nature of God, the person of the Messiah, and the method of His redemption.

4. We find in Scripture that all of God's professing people or visible saints who are not truly devout are described as counterfeits -- as having deceit, disguise, and a false appearance, as making false claims, and as being deceptive and hypocrites. Thus Christ says of Nathanael in John 1:47: "Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no deceit." That is, a truly gracious person. This implies that those of God's professing people who are not gracious are deceitful in their profession. So sinners in Zion, or in God's visible church, are called hypocrites in Isaiah 33:14: "Sinners in Zion are terrified; trembling has seized the hypocrites." Isaiah 9:17: "For every one of them is a hypocrite and an evildoer." So they are called lying children in Isaiah 30:9 and Isaiah 59:13, and are described as lying in claiming to belong to the temple or church of God. Jeremiah 7:2, 4: "Hear the word of the Lord, all you of Judah who enter by these gates to worship the Lord -- Do not trust in deceptive words, saying, 'The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord are these.'" They are spoken of as falsely calling themselves part of the holy city in Isaiah 48:1-2. They are called silver dross and rejected or worthless silver (Ezekiel 22:18; Jeremiah 6:30), which glitters and looks like genuine silver but lacks its true value. So they are compared to watered-down wine in Isaiah 1:22, and to trees full of leaves that look promising for fruit in Matthew 21:19. Clouds that appear full of rain yet bring nothing but wind in Jude 12. Wells without water that disappoint the thirsty traveler in 2 Peter 2:13. A treacherous bow that looks good but fails the archer in Psalm 78:57 and Hosea 7:16. Mr. Stoddard, in his Appeal to the Learned, repeatedly assumes that all visible saints who are not truly devout are hypocrites, as on pages 15, 17, and 18.

Now what basis or reason can there be for describing those who are not truly devout as visible saints or members of God's visible church, if their profession does not imply any claim to true piety? What if they never claimed anything more than common grace or moral sincerity, which many of them actually possess? In that case they are not at all hypocritical or deceptive in their claims, and they are just as without guile in what they profess as Nathanael was. The psalmist, speaking of sincere piety, calls it the truth in the inward parts. Psalm 51: "Behold, You desire truth in the inward parts." It is called truth with reference to some declaration or profession made by God's visible people. But on the theory I oppose, common grace is just as properly the truth in the inward parts, in this regard, as saving grace. God says concerning Israel in Deuteronomy 32:5: "Their blemish is not the blemish of His children." God here speaks as though He were disappointed. The words refer to some profession they had made. For why would this observation be made in this way -- that blemishes appeared on them, telltale signs that they were not His children -- if they had never claimed to be His children and were never accepted under any such idea for any of the privileges of His people?

God is pleased to present Himself in His Word as though He trusted the profession of His visible people and was disappointed when they did not prove to be His faithful, steadfast, and thorough friends. Isaiah 63:8-10: "For He said, 'Surely, they are My people, children who will not deal falsely.'" "So He became their Savior. In all their affliction He was afflicted." "But they rebelled and grieved His Holy Spirit; therefore He turned Himself to become their enemy." The same is described in many other places. I suppose God speaks in this way because in His present outward dealings with His visible people, He does not act in the capacity of the searcher of hearts. Instead, He accommodates Himself to their nature and the present state and circumstances of His church. He speaks to them and treats them in a human way, dealing with them on their own terms. But even supposing this to be the case, there would be no basis for such descriptions if there were no profession of true godliness. When God is described as trusting that people will be His faithful friends, we must understand that He trusts their claims. But how inappropriate would it be to portray the matter this way if there were no claims to trust, no claims of any real and thorough friendship? Even if there is a profession of some common affection that is morally sincere, there is still no claim of loving Him more than -- indeed, not even as much as -- His enemies love Him. What reason is there to trust that they will be faithful to God as their Master, when the religion they profess amounts to nothing more than serving two masters? What reason is there to trust they will be stable in their ways, when they do not even claim to be single-hearted, and everyone knows that double-minded people are unstable in all their ways? Those who profess only moral sincerity or common grace do not claim to love God above the world. And such grace is the kind that both God and people know is likely to pass away like the morning dew and the early cloud. If what people profess amounts to nothing beyond lukewarmness, they cannot be expected to be faithful unto death. If they do not even claim to have any oil in their vessels, what reason is there to trust that their lamps will not go out? If they do not claim to have any root in them, what reason is there for any disappointment when they wither away?

When God in the passage from Isaiah 63 just mentioned represents Himself as trusting Israel's profession and saying, "Surely they are My people, children who will not deal falsely," it cannot be understood as though He trusted that they were His people in the same sense as the ten tribes were called God's people even after they had given themselves over to idolatry for two or three hundred years straight without once repenting. Rather, the meaning is: "Surely they are My sincere saints and children," as they profess to be -- Israelites indeed, without guile. For surely they would not do anything so wicked as to make a lying profession. This seems to be the plain meaning of the words. It therefore shows that the profession they made was of real, vital godliness.

5. The first eight verses of Isaiah chapter 56, I believe, provide good evidence that the qualifications I have insisted on are required for properly coming to the privileges of visible church membership. In the four preceding chapters we have a prophecy of Gospel times -- the blessed state of things that the Messiah would introduce. The prophecy of the same times continues in the first part of this chapter. Here we have a prophecy of the abolishing of the ceremonial law, which was a wall of separation that kept two groups of people out from the ordinances of the church or congregation of the Lord (for the words congregation and church are the same): namely, eunuchs and Gentiles. The place of their meeting was in God's house, within God's walls (verse 5) and on God's holy mountain (verse 7). The part of the ceremonial law that especially excluded the Gentiles was the law of circumcision. And the law that the eunuch shall not enter into the congregation or church of the Lord is found in Deuteronomy 23:1. Now here it is prophesied that in the days when God's salvation shall come and His righteousness be revealed through the coming of the Messiah, this wall of separation would be broken down and this ceremonial law removed (though carefully noting that the law of the Sabbath would continue, since it is not one of those ceremonial observances to be abolished). Then it declares what the great qualification would be in those blessed days when these external ceremonial requirements of circumcision and physical soundness would no longer be enforced -- namely, piety of heart and practice, joining themselves to the Lord, loving the name of the Lord, being His servants, choosing the things that please Him, and so on (verse 3 and following). "Let not the son of the foreigner who has joined himself to the Lord say, 'The Lord will surely separate me from His people.' Nor let the eunuch say, 'Behold, I am a dry tree.' For thus says the Lord, 'To the eunuchs who keep My sabbaths and choose what pleases Me and hold fast My covenant, to them I will give in My house and within My walls a memorial and a name better than that of sons and daughters. I will give them an everlasting name which will not be cut off.'" "Also the foreigners who join themselves to the Lord, to minister to Him, and to love the name of the Lord, to be His servants, every one who keeps from profaning the sabbath and holds fast My covenant; even those I will bring to My holy mountain and make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be acceptable on My altar; for My house will be called a house of prayer for all the peoples." "The Lord God, who gathers the outcasts of Israel, declares, 'Yet others I will gather to them, besides those already gathered.'"

6. The descriptions that Christ gives of His visible church from time to time in His discourses and parables make the point I have laid down very clear.

Consider particularly the description Christ gives at the end of Matthew 7 of the final outcome for the different kinds of members of His visible church: those who only say "Lord, Lord" and those who do the will of His Father who is in heaven; those who build their house on a rock and those who build on the sand. They are all (of both kinds) clearly people who have claimed a high honor and regard for Christ, have claimed an interest in Him, and have accordingly hoped to be finally acknowledged and received as some of His own. Those visible Christians who are not true Christians presently cry "Lord, Lord" -- that is, they are eager to profess respect and claim a relationship with Him, and will be greatly disappointed in the future when He does not acknowledge them. They will then come and cry, "Lord, Lord." This title Lord is commonly given to Jesus Christ in the New Testament to signify the special relationship Christ had to His disciples, rather than His universal dominion. They will then come and earnestly claim a relationship, just as Israel of old did in the day of their distress and God's terrible judgments on them. Hosea 8:2: Israel shall cry to Me, "My God, we know You." To know here does not mean theoretical knowledge, but knowing in the way one knows his own -- having a special regard for, acknowledging, and having an interest in someone. These false disciples will not only claim an interest in Christ, but will plead and present arguments to support their claim: "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?" This is clearly the language of those who are terribly disappointed. "Then" (says Christ) "I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.'" As if to say: Though they profess a relationship with Me, I will profess none with them. Though they plead that they know Me and have an interest in Me, I will declare to them that I never acknowledged them as any of Mine and will tell them to depart from Me as those I will never own or have anything to do with in the relationship they claim. Thus all the hopes they had lived with of being received and owned by Christ as among His friends and favorites are shattered. This is further illustrated by what follows in the comparison of the wise man who built his house on a rock -- representing those professed disciples who build their hope of an interest in Him on a sure foundation, whose house will stand in the day of testing -- and the foolish man who built his house on the sand -- representing those professed disciples or hearers of His Word who build their belief and hope of an interest in Him on a false foundation, whose house in the great time of trial will suffer a terrible fall. Their empty hope will end in terrible disappointment and confusion.

On the whole, it is clear that all visible Christians or saints -- all Christ's professing disciples or hearers who profess Him to be their Lord, according to the scriptural understanding of professing Christ -- are those who profess a saving interest in Him and relationship with Him, and live in the hope of being one day acknowledged as having such an interest and relationship. By those who hear Christ's sayings in this passage, I do not mean merely listeners of the Word preached. For there are many such who make no claim to an interest in Christ and have no such hope or belief built on any foundation at all. Rather, I mean those who profess to listen to, believe, and submit to the Word of Christ. This is confirmed by the way the matter is expressed in Luke 6: "Everyone who comes to Me and hears My words and acts on them, I will show you whom he is like" -- that is, whoever visibly comes to Me and is one of My professed disciples, and so on.

This is confirmed by the parallel description Christ gives in Luke 13:25-29 of His final disposal of the two different kinds of people who are in the kingdom or church of God -- those who will be allowed in His church or kingdom when it reaches its state of glory, and those who, though they have visibly been in it, will be thrust out of it. The latter are described as coming then to claim relationship and interest, crying, "Lord, Lord, open up for us." Christ shall answer and say, "I do not know where you are from." As if to say: "Why do you claim a relationship and acquaintance with Me? You are strangers to Me; I do not acknowledge you." "Then" (it says) "they will begin to say, 'We ate and drank in Your presence, and You taught in our streets.'" As if to say: "This is a strange thing, that You do not acknowledge us! We are extremely surprised that You would consider us strangers who have no part in You, when we ate and drank in Your presence," and so on. And when He finally insists that He does not acknowledge them and will have nothing to do with them as His own, "then there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." They will be filled with terrible disappointment, confusion, and despair when they see Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God -- with whom they expected to dwell forever -- and they themselves thrust out. From this it is clear that the visible members of the kingdom of God who will one day be cast out are those who presently consider themselves interested in Christ and the eternal blessings of His kingdom and make that profession.

The same is shown by the parable of the ten virgins in Matthew 25. In the first verse it says, "The kingdom of heaven (that is, the church of Christ) will be comparable to ten virgins." The two kinds of virgins clearly represent the two kinds of members of the visible church of Christ: the wise, who are true Christians, and the foolish, who are apparent but not true Christians. The foolish virgins were to all appearances the guests of the bridegroom. They appeared to have accepted the invitation to the wedding, which represents the invitations of the Gospel, in which the bridegroom and bride say, "Come." In this they had shown the same respect to the bridegroom and bride as the wise had. The parable naturally leads us to suppose that they were in appearance part of the same company as the wise in every way, claimed to be the same kind of people, were similarly interested in the bridegroom, and were accepted by the wise under this understanding. They made a profession of the very same kind of honor and regard for the bridegroom by going out to meet him with their lamps, as his friends to show him respect, and they had the same hope of enjoying the privileges and celebrations of the wedding. There was a difference regarding oil in their vessels, but there was no difference regarding their lamps. One thing represented by their lamps, as I believe everyone agrees, is their profession. This profession is the same in both groups, and in both it is a profession of grace, just as a lamp (from its known purpose and use) is a display or show of oil. Another thing signified by the blaze of their lamps seems to be the light of hope. Their lamps represent in general the appearance of grace or godliness, including both the appearance of it to the view or judgment of others and also their own view and the judgment they form about themselves. Their lamps shone not only in the eyes of others but also in their own eyes. This is confirmed because when they hear the midnight cry, they find their lamps have gone out. This seems most naturally to represent that however hypocrites may maintain their hopes while they live and while their Judge is far away, when they come to be alarmed by the sound of the last trumpet, their hopes will immediately expire and vanish. Very often these hopes fail them when death visibly approaches. "Where is the hope of the hypocrite when God takes away his soul?" But until the midnight cry, the foolish virgins seem to hold the same hopes as the wise. When they first went out with the wise virgins, their lamps shone in their own eyes and in the eyes of others in the same way as the lamps of the wise virgins. So this parable also shows that all visible members of the Christian church or kingdom of heaven are those who profess to be gracious persons -- viewing themselves as such, and appearing or at least claiming to be such.

And that true piety is what persons ought to look at in themselves as the qualification that provides a proper basis for them to proceed on in coming into the visible church of Christ and receiving the privileges of its members, I think, is also evident from the parable of the wedding feast that the king made for his son in Matthew 22. Particularly verses 11-12: "But when the king came in to look over the dinner guests, he saw a man there who was not dressed in wedding clothes; and he said to him, 'Friend, how did you come in here without wedding clothes?'" "And the man was speechless." Mr. Stoddard says (Appeal, pages 4-5): Here is a representation of the Day of Judgment, and any persons who come for salvation without a wedding garment will be rejected on that day. Since nothing is said about the Lord's Supper, all argument from this Scripture falls to the ground. To which I observe: that the king's coming in to see the guests represents Christ visiting His professing church at the Day of Judgment, I have no doubt. But I am not convinced that the guests coming into the king's house represents people coming for salvation at the Day of Judgment. If it can properly be said that any of the lost will come for salvation at the Day of Judgment, they will not do so before the King appears. Christ will appear first, and then they will come and cry to Him for salvation. But in this parable, the guests are described as gathered together in the king's house before the king appears. The king comes in and finds them already there, having entered while the day of grace lasted, while the door was kept open and invitations were being given. They are not like those who come for salvation at the Day of Judgment in Luke 13:25, who come after the door is shut and stand outside knocking. I think it is beyond all contradiction that the guests coming into the king's house at the invitation of the servants represents Jews and Gentiles coming into the Christian church through the preaching of Christ's apostles and others, making a profession of godliness and expecting to share in the eternal marriage supper. I showed earlier that what is called the house of God in the New Testament is His church. In this parable, the king first sends out his servants to call those who had been invited, and they would not come. After they repeatedly rejected the invitation and mistreated the servants, the king sent out his armies and burned their city -- representing the Jews being first invited, rejecting the invitations of the Gospel, persecuting Christ's ministers, and so provoking God to give up Jerusalem and the nation to destruction. Then the king sends his servants out into the highways to call in all kinds of people, and many flocked into the king's house. This most clearly represents the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles and their flocking into the Christian church. This gathering of the Gentiles into the king's house takes place before the Day of Judgment, and the man without the wedding garment is among them. It fittingly represents the coming into the Christian church that would happen during the day of grace through all ages, but it by no means signifies people coming for salvation after the day of grace has ended, at Christ's appearing in the clouds of heaven. Let this parable be compared with the parallel passage in Luke 14:16-24. The company gathered to the wedding in this parable clearly represents the same thing as the company of virgins gathered to the wedding in the other parable of Matthew 25 -- namely, the company of visible saints, or the company belonging to the visible kingdom of heaven. Therefore both parables are introduced alike with the words, "The kingdom of heaven is like," etc. As for the man being cast out of the king's house when the king comes in to see his guests, this is consistent with other descriptions of false Christians being thrust out of God's kingdom at the Day of Judgment -- the servant not remaining in the house forever, though the son remains forever; God taking away their share from the holy city and blotting their names out of the Book of Life, etc.

Mr. Stoddard says: "This person who did not have a wedding garment was a reprobate. But not everyone who partakes of the Lord's Supper without grace is a reprobate." I answer: all who will be found in the king's house without grace when the king comes in to see the guests are undoubtedly reprobates.

If it is questioned whether the wedding garment represents true piety or whether it might mean moral sincerity, let Scripture interpret itself. It tells us plainly elsewhere what the wedding garment is at the marriage of the Son of God. Revelation 19:7-8: "The marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready." "It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints." No one, I think, would say that this righteousness, which is so pure, is the common grace of lukewarm professors who try to serve both God and mammon. The same wedding garment is described in Psalm 45:13-14: "The King's daughter is all glorious within; her clothing is interwoven with gold. She will be led to the King in embroidered work." But we need look no further than the parable itself, for it alone settles the matter. The wedding garment spoken of as that without which professors will be excluded from among God's people at the Day of Judgment is not moral sincerity or common grace, but special saving grace. If common grace were the intended wedding garment, the King would not only cast out those found without a wedding garment but also many with one. For all who are found then with no better garment than moral sincerity will be bound hand and foot and cast into outer darkness. Such a wedding garment will not save them. So true piety, genuine faith, or the righteousness of Christ that is upon everyone who believes, is undoubtedly the wedding garment intended. But if a person has good and proper grounds to proceed in coming into the king's house while knowing he is without this wedding garment, why should the king rebuke him, saying, "How did you get in here without wedding clothes?" And why should he be speechless when asked such a question? Would he not have had a good answer to give? Namely: "You Yourself gave me permission to come in here without a wedding garment." Or this: "Your own Word is my warrant, which invited those who had only common grace or moral sincerity to come in."

7. If we consider what actually took place in the manner and circumstances of admitting members into the early Christian church and the profession they made in order to be admitted, as recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, this will further confirm the point I have tried to prove.

We read account after account of people first being awakened by the preaching of the apostles and other ministers and earnestly asking what they should do to be saved. They were directed to repent and believe on the Lord Jesus as the way to have their sins blotted out and to be saved. Then, upon their professing that they did believe, they were baptized and admitted into the Christian church. Now can anyone reasonably imagine that these early converts, when they made their profession in order to be admitted, had in view any such distinction as some now make between two kinds of real Christianity, two kinds of sincere faith and repentance -- one with a moral and another with a gracious sincerity? Or that the apostles who taught and baptized them had instructed them in any such distinction? The historical record tells us of their teaching them only one faith and repentance: believing in Christ so that they might be saved and repentance for the forgiveness of sins. It would be unreasonable to suppose that any thought of a lower or different kind entered the minds of these converts when, immediately upon receiving such instruction, they professed faith and repentance. Nor is it reasonable to suppose that those who admitted them understood them as meaning any lower or different kind in what they professed.

Let us particularly consider what we are told about the large numbers whose admission is recorded in Acts. We are told about the 3,000 first converts: how they were greatly awakened by the preaching of the apostles, pierced to the heart, made aware of their guilt and misery, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brothers, what shall we do?" That is: what shall we do to be saved and that our sins may be forgiven? The apostles then directed them what to do: "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins." They are directed here into the way of salvation -- namely, faith and repentance, with a proper profession of these. Then, we are told, "those who had received his word were baptized" -- that is, those who appeared to gladly receive the word, or who demonstrated and professed a heartfelt and joyful compliance with the calls of the Word and the directions the apostles had given them. This demonstration was undoubtedly through some profession, and the profession was of that repentance for the forgiveness of sins and that faith in Christ which the apostles had directed them to in answer to their question about what they should do to be saved. I can see no reason to suppose they had anything lower or different in mind. And it is evident from what follows that these people now considered that they had complied with these directions and were therefore at peace with God. Their daily activity is to rejoice and praise God. "They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship -- day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart, praising God." The description of them now is not of persons under conviction, weary and heavy-laden sinners conscious of guilt and wrath, pierced in their hearts as before, but of people whose sorrow had turned to joy, seeing themselves as now in a good state. And in the last verse it says, "The Lord was adding to the church daily those who were being saved." In the original Greek it says the saved, which was a common name given to Christians, or to all members of the visible Christian church. It is the same as saying the converted or the regenerated. Being converted is called in Scripture being saved because it effectively is so. They had passed out of death into life (John 5:24). Titus 3:5: "He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit." 2 Timothy 1:9: "Who has saved us and called us with a holy calling." Not that all who were added to the visible church were truly regenerated, but they were so in profession and reputation, and therefore were so in name. 1 Corinthians 1:18: "For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us (that is, us Christians) who are being saved it is the power of God." So those who were added to the early church from time to time were all called the saved. Previously, while under conviction, they used to ask their teachers what they should do to be saved. The directions typically given were to repent and believe in Christ. Before they were admitted to the church, they professed that they did so. From then on, having visibly complied with the terms proposed, they were called the saved -- it being assumed that they had now obtained what they were asking about when they inquired what they should do to be saved. Accordingly we find that from that point on, Christ's ministers treated them no longer as miserable, perishing sinners. Instead of setting before them their sin and misery to awaken them and convince them of their need for a Savior, or urging them to flee from the wrath to come and seek conversion to God, they treated them as true converts. They urged them to hold fast the profession of their faith, to continue in the grace of God, and to persevere in holiness, working by all means to confirm and strengthen them in grace. So when a great number believed and turned to the Lord at Antioch, Barnabas was sent to them. When he arrived and had seen the grace of God, he was glad and encouraged them all to remain true to the Lord with resolute hearts. Acts 11:23. See also Acts 13:43, 14:22, 15:32, 41, and 20:32. And when the apostles heard of the conversion of the Gentiles to the Christian faith -- visible through their profession when they joined the Christian church -- they charitably assumed and believed that God had given them saving repentance and a heart-purifying faith. Acts 11:18: "When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, 'Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life.'" Acts 15:9: "And He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith."

If anyone objects that when such large numbers were converted from Judaism and paganism and received into the Christian church in so short a time, it was impossible for each person to say enough in a public profession to provide any credible display of true godliness to the church -- I answer: this objection will quickly vanish if we carefully consider the circumstances of those early converts and how their teachers dealt with them. It was apparently the practice of the first preachers of the Gospel, when their hearers were awakened and began earnestly asking what they should do to be saved, to then give them specific instruction in the way of salvation. They would explain what qualifications they needed to have, or what they must do in order to be saved, in keeping with Christ's direction. Mark 16:15-16. We find this was the method they used with the 3,000 in Acts chapter 2, verses 37-40. And it seems they were thorough and detailed about it. They said much more to them than what is recorded. It says in verse 40: "And with many other words Peter solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them." We find this was also the approach Paul and Silas took with the jailer in chapter 16. They also gave more extensive and detailed instruction than what is recorded in the narrative. And when they had finished instructing them, they undoubtedly made sure, either personally or through assistants, that their instruction was understood before proceeding to baptize them. (For I assume no one I am dealing with in this controversy will argue, from the apostles' example, that we should not require a good degree of doctrinal knowledge about the way and terms of salvation as necessary for admitting members into the church.) And after they were satisfied that the converts thoroughly understood these things, it did not take much time to make a profession of them -- or to declare that they possessed or found in themselves those things they had been told were necessary for their salvation. Certainly, after they had been well informed about what saving faith and repentance were, it took no more time to profess that faith and repentance than any other kind. In this case, not only the converts' words but the words of the preacher -- which they consented to and in effect made their own -- are to be included in their profession. For persons who are known to be of honest character and who clearly possess good doctrinal knowledge of the nature of true godliness in its more essential aspects, to solemnly profess that they have or practice those things -- this is as credible a profession of godliness as I am calling for. We may also reasonably suppose that more words were spoken by the professors, and with other circumstances that made them credible, than are recorded in the very brief summary history of the early church in the Acts of the Apostles. And we may further suppose that in those extraordinary circumstances, as detailed a profession was not required for the church's satisfaction -- either of doctrines agreed to or of the consent and disposition of the heart -- as may be appropriate in more ordinary times. There are various reasons for this that I could give, but doing so would make this discourse too long.

One thing that makes it very clear that the inspired ministers of the early Christian church regarded saving faith as the proper substance of the profession required for admission into the church is the story of Philip and the eunuch in Acts 8. For when the eunuch asks to be baptized, Philip answers in verse 37: "If you believe with all your heart, you may." These words certainly imply that believing with all his heart was required for coming to this ordinance properly and in a fitting manner. I cannot imagine what would have prompted Philip to say these words, or what he was aiming at in them, if he at the same time thought that the eunuch had no need whatsoever to look for any such qualification in himself, or to inquire at all whether he had such a faith, in order to determine whether he could present himself as a proper candidate for baptism -- if many without it were just as properly qualified for this as those who had it.

Some say that Philip intended nothing more by believing with all his heart than that he believed the doctrine that Jesus Christ was the Son of God with a morally sincere conviction. But here again I ask that Scripture be allowed to be its own interpreter. Scripture is filled with phrases like with all the heart or with the whole heart when speaking of religious matters. And their clear intent is to signify a gracious simplicity and godly sincerity. For example, 1 Samuel 12:20: "Do not turn aside from following the Lord, but serve the Lord with all your heart." And verse 24: "Only fear the Lord, and serve Him in truth with all your heart." 1 Kings 8:23: "You who keep covenant and lovingkindness for Your servants who walk before You with all their heart." 1 Kings 14:8: "My servant David, who kept My commandments and who followed Me with all his heart." 2 Kings 10:31: "But Jehu was not careful to walk in the law of the Lord, the God of Israel, with all his heart." 2 Chronicles 22:9: Jehoshaphat sought the Lord with all his heart. 2 Chronicles 31:20-21: Hezekiah did what was good, right, and true before the Lord his God. In everything that he began in the service of the house of God, in the law and in the commandments, seeking his God, he did it with all his heart. Psalm 9:1: "I will give thanks to the Lord with my whole heart." Psalm 86:12: "I will praise You, O Lord my God, with all my heart, and will glorify Your name." Psalm 111:1: "I will give thanks to the Lord with my whole heart, in the company of the upright." Psalm 119:2: "How blessed are those who observe His testimonies, who seek Him with all their heart." Psalm 119:10: "With all my heart I have sought You." Psalm 119:34: "Give me understanding, that I may observe Your law and keep it with all my heart." Psalm 119:69: "The arrogant have forged a lie against me; with all my heart I will observe Your precepts." Jeremiah 24:7: "I will give them a heart to know Me -- for they will return to Me with their whole heart." Joel 2:12-13: "Return to Me with all your heart -- and rend your heart and not your garments." And we have similar phrases in countless other places. I believe not a single passage can be produced where there is the slightest evidence or appearance of these phrases being used to signify anything other than a gracious sincerity. And indeed it must be a very improper use of language to speak of people as performing religious acts with all their hearts when Scripture abundantly describes their hearts as under the ruling power of sin and unbelief, as people who do not give God their hearts but give them to other things, as those who try to serve two masters, as those who indeed draw near to God with their lips but whose hearts are at the same time far from Him and running after other things, and who do not have a single eye or single heart. The word believe in the New Testament corresponds to the word trust in the Old. Therefore Philip's phrase, believing with all the heart, parallels the one in Proverbs 3: "Trust in the Lord with all your heart." And believing with the heart is a phrase used in the New Testament to signify saving faith. Romans 10:9-10: "If you believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness." The same is signified by obeying from the heart that form of teaching in Romans 6:17-18: "But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed; and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness." Here it is clear that saving faith is what is meant by obeying the form of teaching from the heart. And it means the same as if it had said, you have believed with the heart the form of teaching. But Philip uses an even stronger expression. He does not merely say, if you believe with the heart or from the heart, but with all your heart. Furthermore, to suppose that the very same people whom Scripture describes in some places as under the power of an evil heart of unbelief, as double-minded in their faith (James 1:6-8), and as those who though they believe for a while yet have hearts like a rock in which faith has no root (Luke 8) -- to suppose that these same people are described in other Scriptures as believing with all their hearts -- would make the voice of God's Word sound very discordant and inconsistent with itself. One more thing I would observe on this point. There is good reason to think that Philip, while riding in the chariot with the eunuch and (as we are told) preaching Jesus to him, had shown him the way of salvation and explained to him how to gain an interest in Christ or obtain salvation through Him -- namely, believing in Him -- in keeping with Christ's own direction in Mark 16:15-16. This also fits what we find to be the practice of the first preachers of the Gospel. Therefore when, after this conversation, Philip asks the eunuch whether he believed with all his heart, it is natural to suppose he was asking whether the eunuch found his heart accepting the Gospel way of salvation, or whether he sincerely exercised that belief in Christ which Philip had been teaching him. And it would be natural for the eunuch to understand him that way.

Here if it is objected that the eunuch's answer and his profession (in which he says nothing about his heart but merely says, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God") show that he understood the question as asking nothing more than whether he gave his assent to that doctrine -- I answer: we must take the eunuch's confession together with Philip's words, to which they were a reply, and interpret each in light of the other. And there is no reason not to understand it in the same sense as the words of similar confessions elsewhere in the New Testament and as such words of confession were customarily used in those days -- particularly the words of Peter's confession in Matthew 16:16: Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." This was a profession of saving faith, as is clear from what Christ says in response. And we read in 1 Corinthians 12:3: "No one can say, 'Jesus is Lord,' except by the Holy Spirit." Not that a person could not say these words without the Holy Spirit, but he could not say them sincerely, or with all his heart. So 1 John 4:15: "Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God." That is, whoever makes this Christian confession (this profession that all Christians customarily made) sincerely, or with his whole heart, God dwells in him, and so on. But it was in this way that the eunuch was prompted to make this confession.

8. It is clear from the epistles of the apostles to the early Christian churches -- their manner of addressing and treating them throughout all those epistles, and what they say to them and about them -- that all those churches were made up of members with such qualifications as I have described, having the kind of visibility of godliness I have insisted on. Those who were considered to be real saints were received into the church under the understanding that they were truly devout persons. They made that profession and held this hope about themselves. No unregenerate or graceless persons were admitted deliberately, but only unknowingly and contrary to the aim of the early churches and ministers -- it happened without their knowledge. And those who remained in good standing, free from offensive behavior, continued to have the reputation and esteem of real saints, both with the apostles and with one another.

There were certainly numbers in these churches who, after their admission, fell into offensive behavior. The apostles speak doubtfully about some of them in their epistles. Others who had behaved very scandalously they speak of in language that seems to consider them wicked people. The apostle Paul, in his epistles to the Corinthians, repeatedly speaks of some among them who had embraced heretical opinions and had behaved in a very disorderly and divisive manner. He describes them as deserving of censure and threatens them with excommunication. And because so many offenses of this kind had appeared among those who had for a time been well thought of, he puts them all to the test of examining themselves about whether they were truly in the faith and whether Christ was truly in them, as they and others had assumed (2 Corinthians 13). The same apostle speaks of great numbers among the Galatians who had made a high profession and whom he had thought well of when they were first admitted into the church, but who had since given him reason to doubt their spiritual condition by following deceivers who denied the great Gospel doctrine of justification by faith alone. Yet the apostle speaks of them in language that shows surprise and disappointment, implying that he had regarded them as true Christians and hoped that his work among them had had a saving effect on them. Galatians 1:6: "I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel." Galatians 4:11: "I fear for you, that perhaps I have labored over you in vain." And verse 20: "I could wish to be present with you now and to change my tone, for I am perplexed about you." As if to say: I have until now spoken to you with a voice of love and charity, as supposing you to be dear children of God, but now I am beginning to think of speaking to you differently. In the same chapter, to show them how little reason he had had to expect this outcome, he reminds them of the great profession they had made and the extraordinary appearances of fervent piety that had formerly been in them. Galatians 4:15: "Where then is that sense of blessing you had?" "For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked out your eyes and given them to me." The apostle James, in his epistle, speaks of scandalous persons among the twelve tribes scattered abroad -- some with unbridled tongues, some who seem to have been a kind of antinomians in their beliefs and of a very bitter and violent spirit, who reproached, condemned, and cursed their brothers, raised wars and conflicts among professing Christians, and were also very immoral in their conduct -- adulterers and adulteresses (James 4:4). And in the fifth chapter of his epistle, he seems to address the unbelieving Jews who persecuted the Christians (verse 6). The apostles also often speak of some who had once been admitted into the church but crept in unnoticed, who had abandoned Christianity and ultimately proved to be notoriously wicked people. But otherwise, and regarding those members of the visible church who continued in the same good standing and visibility of Christianity in which they were admitted, it is clear from the apostles' epistles that they were all, in the eyes of Christian judgment, truly devout or gracious persons. And here I ask that the following things be carefully observed.

The apostles continually speak to and about the members of these churches as though they supposed and judged them to be gracious persons. For example, the apostle Paul in his epistle to the church of the Romans, in Romans 1:7, speaks of the members of that church as beloved of God. In Romans 6:17-18 and following, he thanks God that they had obeyed from the heart that form of teaching to which they were committed, had been made free from sin, and had become servants of righteousness, etc. The apostle, in giving thanks to God for this, must have had more than a kind of negative charity toward them -- more than simply not knowing whether they were gracious persons and so charitably hoping (as we say) that it was so. He seems to have formed a positive judgment that they were such. His thanksgiving must at least have been founded on rational probability, since it would be mockery of God to give Him thanks for bestowing a mercy that he did not see reason to positively believe was bestowed. In Romans 7:4-6, the apostle speaks of them as those who once were in the flesh and were under the law, but are now delivered from the law and dead to it. In Romans 8:15 and the following verses, he tells them they had received the Spirit of adoption and speaks of them as having the witness of the Spirit that they were children of God, heirs of God, and fellow heirs with Christ. And everything he says through the end of the chapter implies that he considered them truly gracious persons. In Romans 9:23-24, he speaks of the Christian Romans, together with all other Christians, both Jews and Gentiles, as vessels of mercy. In Romans 14:6-8, speaking of the difference that existed among professing Christians regarding ceremonial institutions of the law, he speaks of both parties as acting from a gracious principle, as those who lived to the Lord and would die to the Lord. "He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord," etc. "For not one of us lives for himself, and not one (that is, not one of us) dies for himself; for if we live, we live for the Lord, or if we die, we die for the Lord; therefore whether we live or die, we are the Lord's." In Romans 15:14, he says, "I myself also am convinced that you yourselves are full of goodness." His being thus convinced implies a positive judgment of charity. And the same apostle directs his first epistle to the Corinthians to the church at Corinth that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ -- that is, to all visible Christians throughout the world, or all members of Christ's visible church everywhere. Continuing to speak of them in 1 Corinthians 1:8, he speaks of them as those whom God would confirm to the end, blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ -- plainly speaking of them all as persons who, in Christian esteem, were savingly converted. In the next verse, he speaks of the faithfulness of God as pledged to preserve them to salvation, having called them into fellowship with His Son. And in verse 30 he speaks of them as having a saving interest in Christ: "But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption." In 1 Corinthians 3:21-23, he says to the members of the church of Corinth: "All things belong to you, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or things present or things to come; all things belong to you, and you belong to Christ." In 1 Corinthians 4:15, he tells them he had fathered them through the Gospel. In 1 Corinthians 6:1-3, he speaks of them as those who will judge the world and will judge angels. And in verse 11, he says to them, "You were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God." And in 1 Corinthians 15:49 to the end, he speaks of them as sharing, with him and other Christians, in the happiness and glory of the resurrection of the righteous. And in his second epistle, 2 Corinthians 1:7, he says to them, "Our hope for you is firmly grounded, knowing that as you are sharers of our sufferings, so also you are sharers of our comfort." This firm hope implies a positive judgment. We must understand the apostle here as speaking of those members of the church of Corinth who had not visibly backslidden, unlike those he elsewhere speaks doubtfully about. Again, in verses 14-15, he speaks of a confidence he had that they would be his reason for boasting in the day of the Lord Jesus. In all reason we must conclude that there was a visibility of grace, carrying with it an apparent probability in the apostle's eyes, which was the basis of this confidence. Both the apparent probability and his confidence based on it are expressed in 2 Corinthians 3:3-4: "You are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts. Such confidence we have through Christ toward God." And in verse 18, the apostle speaks of them along with himself and other Christians as "all with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, being transformed into the same image from glory to glory." And in his epistle to the churches of Galatia, Galatians 4:26, the apostle speaks of visible Christians as visibly belonging to heaven, the Jerusalem that is above. And in verses 28-29, he describes them as children of the promise, as Isaac was, and born according to the Spirit. In verse 6 of the same chapter, he says to the Christian Galatians: "Because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, 'Abba! Father!'" And in Galatians 6:1, he speaks of those who had not fallen into scandal as spiritual persons. In his epistle to the great church of Ephesus, at the beginning, he blesses God on behalf of the members of that church as being, together with himself and all the faithful in Christ Jesus, chosen in Him before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before Him in love, predestined to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on them in the Beloved. In Him they had redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins. In Ephesians 1:13-14, he writes to them: "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth -- having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession." And in Ephesians 2, at the beginning: "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins -- He made you alive." Much more could be cited showing that they were, in charitable estimation, regenerated persons and heirs of salvation. Likewise in his epistle to the members of the church of Philippi, the apostle in his opening greeting tells them that he thanks God upon every remembrance of them for their fellowship in the Gospel, being confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in them would perfect it until the day of Christ. He adds, "It is only right for me to feel this way about you all." If it was right for him to think this of them and to be confident of it, he had at least some apparent rational probability on which to base his judgment and confidence. For surely it is not right for reasonable people to think at random and be confident without reason. In Philippians 1:25-26, he speaks of his confidence that he would come to them for their progress and joy of faith, so that their proud confidence in Christ Jesus might overflow. These words certainly presume that they were persons who had already received Christ and comfort in Him -- who had already obtained faith and joy in Christ and only needed to have it increased. In his epistle to the members of the church of Colosse, the apostle in his opening greeting gives thanks for their faith in Christ Jesus and love for all the saints and the hope stored up for them in heaven. He speaks of the Gospel bearing fruit among them since the day they came to know the grace of God in truth -- that is, since the day of their saving conversion. In Colossians 1:8, he speaks of "their love in the Spirit." In Colossians 1:12-14, he speaks of them as qualified to share in the inheritance of the saints in light, as delivered from the domain of darkness and transferred to the kingdom of His beloved Son, as having redemption and the forgiveness of sins. In Colossians 3, at the beginning, he speaks of them as risen with Christ, as dead (that is, to the law, to sin, and the world), as having their life hidden with Christ in God, and as being such that when Christ their life is revealed, they too will be revealed with Him in glory. In Colossians 3:7 and following, he speaks of them as having once walked and lived in sinful desires, but having now laid aside the old self with its evil practices and put on the new self, which is being renewed to a true knowledge according to the image of the One who created it. In his first epistle to the members of the church of Thessalonica, in the words following his greeting in chapter 1, he declares what kind of visibility there was of their election by God -- visible in the appearance of true and saving conversion and their resulting holy life, verses 3-7. And at the beginning of his second epistle, he speaks of their faith and love greatly increasing. In verse 7, he expresses his confidence of meeting them in eternal rest when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels. And in 2 Thessalonians 2:13, he gives thanks to God that from the beginning He had chosen them for salvation. In his epistle to the Christian Hebrews, though the apostle speaks of some who had once belonged to their churches but had fallen away and proved themselves hypocrites, yet concerning the rest who remained in good standing he says in Hebrews 6:9: "But, beloved, we are convinced of better things concerning you, and things that accompany salvation." (Note again: his being thus convinced clearly implies a positive judgment.) And in Hebrews 12:22 and following, he speaks of them as visibly belonging to the glorious company of heaven. And in Hebrews 13:5-6, he speaks of them as those who may boldly say, "The Lord is my helper." The apostle James, writing to the Christians of the twelve tribes scattered abroad, speaks of them as regenerated persons (meaning, as I noted before, those in good standing), in James 1:18: "In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we would be a kind of first fruits among His creatures." The apostle Peter, writing to the Jewish Christians scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia (large regions, so they must in total have been a great multitude of people) -- to all of these the apostle in the opening of his first epistle gives the title of elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood. And in the next verse, he speaks of them as born again to a living hope, to an inheritance imperishable, etc. And as protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed. And he says to them in 1 Peter 1:8-9: "And though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, obtaining as the outcome of your faith the salvation of your souls." And in verses 18 through the end of the chapter, the apostle speaks of them as redeemed from their futile way of life by the precious blood of Christ, as having purified their souls in obedience to the truth through the Spirit, and as born again of imperishable seed, etc. And in the early part of 1 Peter chapter 2, he speaks of them as living stones coming to Christ and being built up as a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ -- as those who believe, to whom Christ is precious, as a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, called out of darkness into His marvelous light. The church at Babylon, mentioned in passing in 1 Peter 5:13, is said to be chosen together with them. And in his second epistle (which 2 Peter 3:1 shows was written to the same persons), the opening is addressed: "To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours," that is, the same as the apostles' and servants of Christ. And in the third chapter, he tells them that both his epistles were designed to stir up their pure minds. In the first epistle of John, written (as far as we can tell) to professing Christians in general, 1 John 2:12 and following, the apostle tells them he writes to them because their sins have been forgiven, because they have known Him who has been from the beginning, because they have overcome the evil one, etc. In 1 John 2:20-21, he tells them they have an anointing from the Holy One and know all things. He says he wrote to them not because they did not know the truth but because they did know it, etc. And in verse 27, he says, "The anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him." And at the beginning of the third chapter, he addresses them as those who are the children of God, who when He appears will be like Him, because they will see Him as He is. In 1 John 4:4, he says, "You are from God, little children, and have overcome," etc. The apostle Jude in his general epistle speaks much about apostates and their wickedness. But to other professing Christians who had not fallen away, he says in verses 20-21: "But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life." He plainly assumes they had professed faith with love for God our Savior and were regarded by the apostle as His friends and lovers. Many other passages to the same effect could be noted from the epistles, but these are sufficient.

Now how unaccountable would all of this be if the situation were that members of the early Christian churches were not admitted under any understanding that they were truly godly people and heirs of eternal life, and not with any regard to such a character appearing in them -- and that they themselves joined these churches without any such claim, having no such opinion of themselves!

But it is particularly evident that they did have such an opinion of themselves, as well as the apostles having it of them, from many things the apostles say in their epistles. In Romans 8:15-16, the apostle speaks of them as having received the Spirit of adoption, the Spirit of God bearing witness with their spirits that they were the children of God. And in Romans 5:2: of their rejoicing in hope of the glory of God. In 1 Corinthians 1:7, he speaks of them as eagerly awaiting the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. In 1 Corinthians 15:17, the apostle says to the members of the church of Corinth: "If Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins." He clearly assumes they hoped their sins were forgiven. In Philippians 1:25-26, the apostle speaks of his coming to Philippi to increase their joy of faith and that their confident rejoicing in Christ might overflow. This implies (as I noted before) that they had already received some comfort as a result of believing themselves to have a saving interest in Christ. In 1 Thessalonians 1:10, he speaks of the members of the church of Thessalonica as waiting for His Son from heaven, as one who rescues us from the wrath to come. In Hebrews 6:9, 19, he speaks of the Christian Hebrews as having that hope which is an anchor of the soul. The apostle Peter, in 1 Peter 1:3, 6, 8-9, speaks of the visible Christians he wrote to as being born again to a living hope, to an inheritance that is imperishable, etc., in which they greatly rejoice, etc. And even the members of the church of Laodicea, the very worst of all the seven churches of Asia, regarded themselves as truly gracious persons and made that profession. They said they were rich and had become wealthy and had need of nothing, not knowing that they were wretched and miserable, etc. Revelation 3:17.

It is also evident that the members of these early churches held this judgment about one another and about the members of the visible church of Christ in general. In 1 Thessalonians 4:13 and following, the apostle urges the Christian Thessalonians, in mourning for their deceased friends who were visible Christians, not to grieve as the hopeless pagans were accustomed to do for their departed friends. His reason is that they had cause to expect to meet them again in glorious circumstances at the Day of Judgment, never to be separated again. The basis of comfort concerning their dead friends that the apostle speaks of here is clearly something more than the kind of hope we might be expected to have for all who profess Christian doctrines and are not scandalous in life, whom we must refrain from judging because we do not know that they are not true saints. The members of the church of Sardis, which after Laodicea was the worst of the seven churches of Asia, yet had a reputation of being alive. But Christ, who speaks to these seven churches from heaven in the capacity of the searcher of hearts (see Revelation 2:23), explicitly tells them that they were dead -- perhaps all in a spiritually dead condition, and most in a spiritually dead state.

These things clearly show how all the Christian churches throughout the world were constituted in those days, what kind of holiness or sainthood all visible Christians in good standing had a visibility and profession of in that apostolic age, and also what kind of visibility they had. It was not merely a visibility that gave them a right to a kind of negative charity or freedom from censure, but one that could rightly lead to a positive judgment in their favor. The churches these epistles were written to were all the principal churches in the world. Some of them were very large, such as the churches of Corinth and Ephesus. Some of the epistles were directed to all the churches throughout large regions where the Gospel had had great success, such as the epistle to the Galatians. The epistle to the Hebrews was written to all the Jewish Christians in the land of Canaan, as distinct from the Jews who lived in other countries and were called Hellenists or Greeks because they generally spoke the Greek language. The epistles of Peter were written to all the Christian Jews throughout many regions: Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, where there were greater numbers of Jews than in any other Gentile lands. The epistle of James was directed to all Christian Jews scattered throughout the whole world. The epistles of John and Jude, as far as appears from those epistles, were directed to all visible Christians throughout the whole world. And the apostle Paul directs his first epistle to the Corinthians not only to the members of that church but to all professing Christians across the face of the earth. 1 Corinthians 1:2 and 1 Corinthians 14:33. Speaking of the churches in general, he calls them all churches of the saints. And from what Christ says to the churches of Sardis and Laodicea in the book of Revelation -- about whom more negative things are said than about any other Christian churches mentioned in the New Testament -- it is clear that even the members of those churches considered themselves in a state of salvation and had such a reputation with others.

Here some may object and say: it does not follow from the apostles' speaking to and about the members of the early church in this way -- as though they considered them gracious persons -- that a profession and appearance of this was regarded in those days as a required qualification for admission to the visible church. Another reason can be given for it, namely: the extraordinary state of affairs at that time happened to make it so that the majority of those converted from paganism and Judaism to Christianity were hopefully gracious persons. This was because it was a time of such large outpourings of divine grace and such great and unavoidable sufferings for believers, etc. And the apostles, knowing these facts, might properly have spoken to and about the churches as if they were societies of truly gracious persons, because there was good reason, on such grounds, to think the majority of them were so. This would be true even if no profession or visibility of grace was required of their members by the constitution of those churches and the door of admission was as open for others as for such.

But this explanation cannot be a satisfactory or true account of the matter, if we consider the following things.

(1.) The apostles, in the very superscriptions or directions of their letters to these churches, and in their salutations at the beginning of their epistles, speak of them as gracious persons. For example, the apostle Peter, in the direction of his first letter to all professing Jewish Christians throughout many countries, writes: To the strangers scattered through Pontus, and so on, elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood. And in directing his second epistle to the same people, he writes: Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, and so on. The apostle Paul directs his epistle to the Romans like this: To those who are in Rome, beloved of God. He directs his first epistle to the Corinthians like this: To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus. What he means by sanctified is shown by his following words in verses 4, 7, 8, and 9. The same thing was previously observed about words attached to the apostle's salutations at the beginning of several of the epistles. This shows that the apostles extend this character as far as they extend the epistles themselves. This would surely be very improper and not consistent with truth if the apostles knew very well that such a character did not belong to church members as such, and that they were not received into those churches with any regard to such a character or based on any right to be considered such persons. In the superscriptions of letters to societies of people, we normally give them the title or designation that properly belongs to them as members of that body. For example, if someone were to write to the Royal Society in London or the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris, it would be proper and natural to give them the title of Learned. Whether every one of the members truly deserves the label or not, the title fits their profession and is known to be aimed at and formally required in the admission of members. But if someone were to write to the House of Commons or to the East India Company and in his superscription give them the title of Learned, this would be very improper and poorly judged. That character does not belong to their profession as members of that body, and learning is not a qualification considered or required in their admission of members. Nor would it excuse the impropriety even if the writer happened to know from personal acquaintance that the majority of them were men of learning. If one person were to inscribe a letter to them this way once, it would be somewhat strange. But it would be even stranger if he did it repeatedly, or if it appeared from various instances to be a custom to address letters to such societies this way. Yet it seems to be the regular practice of the apostles, in their epistles to Christian churches, to address them with titles that imply a profession and visible evidence of true holiness.

(2.) The apostle John, in his general epistle, very plainly shows that all those he wrote to were supposed to have true grace. He declares this is the qualification he has in view when writing to them, and lets them know he writes to them for that reason -- because they are supposed to be people who have known God, overcome the evil one, and have had their sins forgiven. 1 John 2:12-14, 21.

(3.) When the apostles speak of those they write to -- namely, visible Christians -- as a society, and describe what belongs to the kind of society the visible church is, they speak of it as visibly (that is, in profession and reputation) a society of gracious persons. So the apostle Peter speaks of them as a spiritual house, a holy and royal priesthood, a holy nation, a special people, a chosen or elect generation, called out of darkness into His marvelous light. 1 Peter 2. The apostle Paul also speaks of them as the family of God. Ephesians 2:19. And in the next chapter, he explains himself to mean that family of which a part is in heaven -- that is, they were by profession and in visible appearance a part of that heavenly and divine family.

(4.) The apostle Paul speaks expressly and repeatedly of the members of the churches he wrote to as all of them being, in esteem and visible appearance, truly gracious persons. Philippians 1:6. Being confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus -- even as it is right for me to think this of you all (that is, all taken individually, not collectively, according to the distinction noted before). So Galatians 4:26. Jerusalem which is above, which is the mother of us all. Romans 6. As many of us as have been baptized into Christ have been baptized into His death. Here he speaks of all who have been baptized. And in the continuation of this discussion, explaining what is said here, he speaks of their being dead to sin, no longer under the law but under grace, having obeyed the form of teaching from the heart, being made free from sin and becoming servants of righteousness, and so on. Romans 14:7-8. None of us lives for himself, and no one (that is, none of us) dies for himself (taken together with the context). 2 Corinthians 3:18. We all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror, and so on. And Galatians 3: You are all children of God through faith.

(5.) It is evident that even in those churches where the greater part of the members were not true saints -- such as those degenerate churches of Sardis and Laodicea, which we may suppose had become very lax in their admissions and discipline -- yet they considered themselves to be truly gracious persons, and had that reputation with others.

(6.) Even if we suppose that the extraordinary circumstances of that day gave the apostles reason to think the majority of church members were true Christians, still -- unless a profession and appearance of true Christianity was their proper qualification and the ground of their admission, and unless it was understood that all of them regarded themselves as true Christians -- it is entirely inexplicable that the apostles in their epistles never make any express distinction between these different kinds of members. If the churches were made up of people whom the apostles knew held radically different views of their own spiritual condition -- some seeing themselves as children of God, others as children of the devil; some as the high favorites of heaven and heirs of eternal glory, others as children of wrath under condemnation to eternal death and every moment in danger of dropping into hell -- then why do the apostles make no distinction in what they say to them or about them, in their manner of addressing them, in the things they set before them, and in the counsels, reproofs, and warnings they give them? Why do the apostles in their epistles never address their words specifically to the unconverted members of the churches, in a manner designed to awaken them and make them aware of the miserable condition they were in, and urge them to seek the converting grace of God? Consider that the apostle Paul was very personally acquainted with the circumstances of most of the churches he wrote to. He had been among them, was their spiritual father, had been the instrument of gathering and founding those churches, and they had received all their instruction and direction about Christianity and the concerns of their souls from him. We can be sure that many of them had opened the state of their souls to him. If he was aware that there were a number among them who made no claim to being in a regenerate state, and that he and others had no reason to judge them to be in such a state, then he knew that the sin of such people -- living in the rejection of a Savior, in the very house of God, in the midst of Gospel light, and in violation of the most sacred vows -- was especially aggravated, and their guilt and condition especially dreadful. Why then would he never specifically and distinctly direct his words to such people, addressing them with deep compassion for their souls and reminding them of their terrible circumstances? Instead, he continually groups everyone together, addressing the whole body without distinction as if they were all in happy circumstances, expressing his love toward them all and congratulating them all on their glorious and eternal privileges. Instead of speaking to them in a way that would tend to alarm them with a sense of danger, he calls on all of them without distinction, time and again, to rejoice. Philippians 3:1: Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. So 2 Corinthians 13:11: Finally, brethren, be of good comfort. Philippians 4:4: Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice! He insists on this as though rejoicing were a duty especially fitting for them, and something they had the highest reason for. The apostle not only did not preach terror to those he wrote to, but is careful to guard them against fears of God's wrath. For instance, in 1 Thessalonians 5 at the beginning, when the apostle observes how Christ will come upon ungodly people as a thief in the night, and when they say, 'Peace and safety!' then sudden destruction will come upon them like labor pains upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape -- he immediately takes care that the members of the church of Thessalonica should not apply this to themselves and be terrified, as though they were in danger. He says in the very next words: But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day would overtake you like a thief; you are all children of light and children of the day. And he says in verses 9-11: For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him. Therefore encourage one another and build up one another, just as you also are doing. And in verse 16 he says: Rejoice always. How different is this way of treating churches from the method faithful ministers typically use with their congregations, where many make no claim to true piety! And how different from the way Mr. Stoddard was accustomed to dealing with his congregation! He would undoubtedly have judged such a way of treating them as the surest course in the world to eternally ruin them. And shall we conclude that the apostle Paul was one of those prophets who plastered over with whitewash, and sewed pillows under all arms, and healed the wound of immortal souls carelessly, crying, 'Peace, peace,' when there was no peace? These things make it abundantly clear that the early churches were not organized the way those modern churches are where persons who know and acknowledge themselves to be unregenerate are admitted on principle.

If it is objected here that the apostle sometimes urges those he writes to, to put off the old self and put on the new self and to be renewed in the spirit of their minds, and so on -- as though he were urging them to seek conversion -- I answer that the meaning is clearly this: they should put to death the remaining corruption or the old self, and turn more and more from sin to God. He urges the Ephesians to be renewed, and so on, in Ephesians 4:22-23 -- yet he had previously in the same epistle abundantly described them as already savingly renewed, as was observed before. The same could be shown regarding other similar instances.

(7.) It is clear evidence -- not only that the majority of members of the early churches happened to appear to be true Christians, but that they were admitted with that understanding and because there appeared in them grounds for such an estimation -- and when anyone who was otherwise happened to be admitted, it was contrary to the intent. This is clear because when such others were admitted, they are described as brought or crept in unnoticed. This is how the apostles describe the matter. Jude 4: For certain people have crept in unnoticed -- ungodly people, turning the grace of God into sensuality. Galatians 2:4: False brethren secretly brought in. If it is said that those spoken of here were openly scandalous persons and heretics, I answer: they were not openly scandalous when they were first brought in, nor is there any reason to think they were heretics when admitted, even though they later became apostates. Mr. Stoddard says it does not follow that all hypocrites crept in unnoticed just because some did. (Appeal, page 17.) To which I would humbly say: it must certainly be true of all hypocrites who were admitted that the church which admitted them was either aware they were hypocrites or was not. If there were some whom the church knew to be hypocrites at the time they were taken in, then the church in admitting them was not following the rule that Mr. Stoddard himself often declares should be followed in admitting members -- namely, to admit none except those who in a judgment of rational charity are true Christians. (Appeal, pages 2, 3, 10, 28, 33, 67, 73, 93, 94.) But that not only heretics and deliberate deceivers crept in unnoticed, but that all false brethren -- all church members who were not truly gracious -- did so, is clear from the fact that such people are described as illegitimate children in a family, who are false children and false heirs, brought into it unnoticed and imposed on those who manage those privileges by stealth. Hebrews 12:8: But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate children and not sons.

It is abundantly clear from the apostolic writings how the visible church of Christ throughout the whole world was first organized and ordered, under the direction of the apostles themselves, who regulated it according to the infallible guidance of the Spirit of their great Lord and Master. And as the Christian church was organized then, so it ought to be organized now. What better rule do we have for our church governance in other matters than what was practiced in the early churches under the apostles' own direction -- such as the standing officers of the church (presbyters and deacons), the method of installing ministers through ordination, and so on? In this matter I have been discussing, I believe Scripture is far more detailed than in those other matters.

9. Another piece of evidence that those admitted to the church should be, in the eyes of Christian judgment, truly gracious or godly people is this: Scripture portrays the visible church of Christ as a society whose members are united by the bond of Christian brotherly love.

Beyond the general goodwill or love that the saints have toward all people, which they show equally to both the evil and the good, there is a special and very distinctive kind of affection that every true Christian experiences toward those he considers truly gracious persons. Through this affection, the soul is at times very deeply and sweetly bound to such people, and there is an indescribable oneness of heart with them. To use the Scripture phrase (Acts 4:32), they are of one heart and one soul. This holy affection is directed toward others because of the spiritual image of God seen in them, their supposed relationship to God as His children and to Christ as His members, and to the saints as their spiritual brothers in Christ. This sacred affection is an excellent and distinctive mark of true grace, frequently discussed as such in Scripture under the name of the love of the brethren or brotherly love. Christ calls it receiving a righteous man in the name of a righteous man, and receiving one of Christ's little ones in the name of a disciple, or because he belongs to Christ (Matthew 10:41-42; Mark 9:41). It is also described as loving one another as Christ has loved them (John 13:34; 15:13-15), having a special reflection of that oneness which exists between Christ Himself and His saints. (Compare John 17:20 to the end.)

This love is what the apostles are often directing Christians to exercise toward fellow members of the visible church. As in Romans 12:10: Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. The words are much more emphatic in the original Greek and more vividly convey the special endearment that exists between gracious persons, or those who regard one another as such. The expression properly means clinging to one another with a brotherly, natural, strong endearment. The apostle Peter expresses himself with similar emphasis and force in 1 Peter 1:22: Since you have in obedience to the truth purified your souls for a sincere love of the brethren, fervently love one another from the heart. Again, 1 Peter 3:8: To sum up, all of you be harmonious, sympathetic, brotherly, kindhearted, and humble in spirit. The words in the Greek are much more vivid, elegant, and forceful. The same special endearment is doubtless what the apostle has in mind in 1 Peter 4:8: Above all, keep fervent in your love for one another. The apostle Paul, in his epistles, repeatedly speaks of the visible saints he writes to as being united to one another with this affection, and considers it a mark of their godliness. Colossians 1:4: We heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and of the love which you have for all the saints. 1 Thessalonians 4:9: Now as to the love of the brethren, you have no need for anyone to write to you, for you yourselves are taught by God to love one another. So Philemon 5: Hearing of your love and of the faith which you have toward the Lord Jesus and toward all the saints. And this is what he urges in Hebrews 13:1: Let brotherly love continue. 1 Thessalonians 5:26: Greet all the brethren with a holy kiss. Compare 1 Corinthians 16:20; 2 Corinthians 13:12; and 1 Peter 5:14.

This love of the brethren is the virtue that the apostle John so strongly emphasizes in his first epistle as one of the most distinctive marks of true grace, and a special evidence that God dwells in us and we in God. By this he must mean a love for saints as saints, or on account of the spiritual image of God believed to be in them and their spiritual relationship to God -- as orthodox theologians have always understood it. There can be no reasonable doubt that the apostle John in this epistle is referring to the same kind of love that Christ prescribed to His disciples, the love He called by way of distinction His commandment and His new commandment, which He gave as a great mark of their being truly His disciples -- as this same apostle records in his Gospel. John plainly refers to this love when speaking of the love of the brethren in his epistle, in 1 John 2:7-8 and 3:23. But the love that Christ speaks of in His new commandment is spoken of as being between those whom Christ loves or is supposed to love. His love for them is the foundation and pattern of this love. And if this love of the brethren, so much discussed by Christ and by the apostles Paul and John, is not the special affection that gracious persons or true saints have for one another -- which is so great a part and so remarkable an exercise of true grace -- then where is it spoken of at all in the New Testament?

We have seen how often the apostles urge visible Christians to exercise this affection toward all other members of the visible church of Christ, and how often they speak of the members of the visible church as actually united in this way, in the passages already mentioned. In 2 Corinthians 9:14, the apostle speaks of the members of other churches loving the members of the church of Corinth with this special endearment and oneness of heart, because of the grace of God in them: And by their prayer on your behalf, they long for you because of the surpassing grace of God in you. The word translated long for properly means to love with an exceeding and dear love. And this is presented as the bond that unites all the members of the visible church. Acts 4:32: And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and one soul. This is the same thing that is elsewhere called being of one mind. 1 Peter 3:8: To sum up, all of you be harmonious. And being of the same mind. 1 Corinthians 1:10: That you be made complete in the same mind. And being of the same mind. Philippians 4:2: I urge Euodia and I urge Syntyche to live in harmony in the Lord. And being like-minded (the word is the same in the Greek). Romans 15:5-6: Now may the God who gives perseverance and encouragement grant you to be of the same mind with one another, so that with one accord and one voice you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. There is reason to think that it is this oneness of mind, or being of one heart and soul, that is meant by the love that the apostle calls the bond of perfection in Colossians 3:14. And he presents it as the bond of union between all the members of the body in Ephesians 4:15-16: But speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love.

This seems to be very much the nature of scandal among church members -- namely, an offense that wounds and interrupts this kind of affection, being a stumbling block to Christian judgment in its regard for the offender as a real Christian, and something that greatly diminishes the visible evidence of his Christian character. This is why, when scandal is removed through visible repentance, the church is directed to confirm their love for the offender. 2 Corinthians 2:8.

Now this intimate affection toward others as brethren in Christ and fellow members of Him must have some understanding or judgment of the mind as its foundation. To say that we must love others as visible members of Christ -- if that means anything other than that we must love them because they visibly appear, or as they appear to our judgment, to be real members of Christ -- is in effect to say that we must love them with no foundation at all. In order to have a real and fervent affection toward another person based on some admirable quality or relationship, the mind must first judge that the object actually has that admirable quality. Our affections are not so much under our control that we can make them go out strongly toward someone as having a certain loveliness when at the same time we do not positively judge any such thing about them, but only hope it may be the case because we see no sufficient reason to conclude otherwise. There must be a positive judgment of the understanding, some degree of satisfaction in the mind, to serve as a foundation for that oneness of heart and soul that fits with Scripture's descriptions of brotherly love. A mere assumption of moral sincerity and virtue or common grace -- which some insist upon -- may be a sufficient foundation for neighborly and civil affection. But it cannot be a sufficient foundation for this intimate affection toward them as brethren in the family of a heavenly Father, this fervent love for them in the heart of Jesus Christ. Such a supposition implies nothing inconsistent with being Gospel sinners and domestic enemies in the house of God -- and Christians know these are the most hateful enemies to Christ of all the enemies He has.

It fits well with the wisdom of Christ, and with the special favor He has shown to His saints and His dealings with them in many other respects, to suppose that He has made provision in His institutions for them to have the comfort of uniting with those their hearts are united with in that holy, intimate affection we have been discussing. He has provided for them to share in certain special religious exercises and duties of worship, and in visible interaction with their Redeemer, joining with those about whom they can have some confidence that they are cordially united with them in adoring and expressing their love to their common Lord and Savior. In this way they may with one mind, one heart, and one soul, as well as with one mouth, glorify Him -- as in the previously mentioned Romans 15:5-6, compared with Acts 4:32. This seems to be what this heavenly affection naturally leads to. And how eminently fitting and proper for this purpose is the sacrament of the Lord's Supper -- the Christian church's great feast of love! In it, Christ's people sit together as brethren in the family of God, at their Father's table, to feast on the love of their Redeemer. They commemorate His sufferings for them and His dying love toward them, and they seal their love to Him and to one another. It is hard to believe that Christ has arranged things so that there are no instituted corporate acts of worship in which His saints can show their devotion to Him -- except those in which they are ordinarily obliged (if the rule for admissions is carefully followed) to join with a body of fellow worshippers about whom they have no reason to think anything other than that the majority of them are unconverted (and are more provoking enemies to the Lord they love and adore than most of the very heathen). Yet this is what Mr. Stoddard supposes to be the case with the members of the visible church. Appeal, page 16.

10. It is necessary that those who partake of the Lord's Supper should judge themselves to truly and sincerely accept Christ as their only Savior and chief good. This is because the actions communicants perform at the Lord's table are a solemn profession of exactly that.

In the Lord's Supper there is a mutual solemn profession made by the two parties entering into the covenant of grace and visibly united in that covenant: the Lord Christ through His minister on the one hand, and the communicants (who are professing believers) on the other. The one who administers the ordinance acts in the role of Christ's minister, acts in His name as representing Him, and stands in the place where Christ Himself stood at the first administration of this sacrament and in the original institution of the ordinance. Christ, through the words and actions of the minister, makes a solemn profession of His part in the covenant of grace. He presents the sacrifice of His body broken and His blood shed. In the minister's offering of the sacramental bread and wine to the communicants, Christ presents Himself to the believing communicants as their propitiation and bread of life. Through these outward signs He confirms and seals His sincere promises to be their Savior and food, and to give them all the benefits of His propitiation and salvation. The communicants, in receiving what is offered and eating and drinking the symbols of Christ's body and blood, also profess their part in the covenant of grace. They profess to embrace the promises and lay hold of the hope set before them, to receive the atonement, to receive Christ as their spiritual food, and to feed on Him in their hearts by faith. Indeed, what is professed on both sides is the heart. Christ, in offering Himself, professes the willingness of His heart to belong to those who truly receive Him. The communicants, for their part, profess the willingness of their hearts to receive Him, which they declare through meaningful actions. They profess to accept Christ as their spiritual food and bread of life. To accept Christ as our bread of life is to accept Him as our Savior and portion. Food is both the means of preserving life and the refreshment and comfort of life. The meaning of the word manna -- that great foreshadowing of this bread of life -- is a portion. What God offers to us as our food, He offers as our portion. And what we accept as our food, we accept as our portion. The Lord's Supper is therefore plainly a mutual renewal, confirmation, and seal of the covenant of grace. Both covenant parties profess their consent to their respective parts in the covenant, and each affixes his seal to his profession. In this ordinance, the very same thing is acted out in profession and visible signs that is spiritually carried out between Christ and His bride in the covenant that unites them. Here we have the glorious Bridegroom again and again presenting Himself with His great love that is stronger than death, appearing clothed in robes of grace, and pledging Himself with all His glory and love and its infinite benefits to those who receive Him. And here we have His bride accepting this Bridegroom, choosing Him as her beloved, her only Savior and portion, and relying on Him for all His benefits. And so the covenant transaction of this spiritual marriage is confirmed and sealed again and again. The actions of the communicants at the Lord's table speak as expressively and meaningfully as the most solemn words. When a person in this ordinance takes and eats and drinks the things that represent Christ, the plain meaning and implied profession of these actions is this: I take this crucified Jesus as my Savior, my sweetest food, my chief portion, and the life of my soul, consenting to find my satisfaction in Him as such, and to hunger and thirst after Him alone, renouncing all other saviors and all other portions for His sake. The actions, understood this way, are a proper renewal and ratification of the covenant of grace -- and not otherwise. And those who take, eat, and drink the sacramental elements at the Lord's table with any other meaning, I fear, do not know what they are doing.

Since the actions at the Lord's Supper by their very nature and meaning imply a renewing and confirming of the covenant, there is an explicit, verbal covenant assumed to precede it -- which is the profession of faith spoken of earlier that qualifies a person for admission to the Lord's Supper. There should surely be as much explicitly professed in words as is implicitly professed in these actions. For through these meaningful actions, the communicant sets his seal on his profession. The established signs in the Lord's Supper are fully equivalent to words. They are a renewal and repetition of the same thing that was done before -- only with this difference: now it is done through speaking signs, whereas before it was done through spoken words. Our taking the bread and wine is as much a profession of accepting Christ as a woman's taking a ring from the bridegroom at her wedding is a profession and seal of her accepting him as her husband. The sacramental elements in the Lord's Supper represent Christ as a party in the covenant just as truly as a proxy represents a prince to a foreign lady in her marriage. And our taking those elements is as truly a profession of accepting Christ as, in the other case, the lady's accepting the proxy is her profession of accepting the prince as her husband. Or the matter may be illustrated more fittingly this way: Imagine a prince sending an ambassador to a woman in a foreign land with a marriage proposal, and through his ambassador sending her his portrait. He asks her to show her acceptance of his proposal not only by expressing it in words to his ambassador, but also as a sign of her sincerity to openly accept the portrait and thus seal her profession by acting out the matter again through a symbolic action.

To suppose that people should solemnly profess something they do not at all believe they experience in themselves, and do not actually claim to have, is a very great absurdity. For someone to sacramentally make such a profession of faith while proceeding openly on the basis of such a doctrine is to profess what he does not profess. His actions are not established signs of the thing supposed to be professed, nor do they carry the slightest claim to it. Therefore doing this cannot be anyone's duty -- unless it is people's duty to make a solemn profession of that which they in fact make no profession of. The Lord's Supper is most clearly a professing ordinance. The communicant's profession must be suited to the nature and purpose of the ordinance, and nothing less than faith in the blood of Christ will meet that standard -- specifically, sincere faith that works through love. A profession that falls short of this is fundamentally defective and entirely unsuitable to the character of a communicant.

11. When the apostle says in 1 Corinthians 11:28, Let a man examine himself, and in so doing let him eat -- it seems far more reasonable to understand this as testing himself regarding the truth of his Christianity or the reality of his grace. This is the same thing the same apostle directs the same Corinthians to do in his other epistle, 2 Corinthians 13:5, where the same Greek word is used. The Greek word will not support what some have supposed to be the apostle's meaning -- namely, that a person should consider and inquire into his circumstances and the needs of his case, so that he may know what he should go to the Lord's table to receive. The word properly means proving or testing a thing with regard to its quality and genuineness, or in order to determine whether it is true and of the right kind. This is how the word is always used in the New Testament -- except that sometimes it is used in a related sense and in such places is variously translated as discerning, approving, accepting, and so on, these being the results of testing. Nor is this word used more frequently in the New Testament for any kind of testing than for the testing of professing Christians with regard to their grace or godliness. The word (as Dr. Ames in his Catechaseos Sciagraphia and Mr. Willard in his Body of Divinity observe) is borrowed from goldsmiths and properly means the test they perform on silver and gold to determine whether it is genuine or counterfeit. With a clear allusion to this original use of the word, it is often employed in the New Testament for testing the godliness of professing Christians. It is used with this meaning in all the following texts. 1 Peter 1:7: So that the proof of your faith, being more precious than gold which is perishable, even though tested by fire, may be found to result in praise, and so on. 1 Corinthians 3:13: The fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. James 1:3: The testing of your faith produces endurance. 1 Thessalonians 2:4: God, who examines our hearts. The same word is used in 2 Corinthians 8:8: To prove the sincerity of your love. So also Galatians 6:3-4: For if anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself. But each one must examine his own work. In all these passages, the same Greek word appears as in the text now under consideration.

When the apostle directs professing Christians to test themselves -- using this word that essentially means examining or proving something to see whether it is genuine or counterfeit -- the most natural interpretation of his advice is that they should test themselves regarding their spiritual condition and religious profession: whether they are disciples indeed, real and genuine Christians, or whether they are false and hypocritical professors. It is as if a man brought a piece of metal with the color of gold and the stamp of the king's coin to a goldsmith and asked him to test that money, without adding any words to limit his meaning. Would not the goldsmith naturally understand that he was to test whether it was true gold or true money, or not?

But some say here that the context of the passage under discussion (1 Corinthians 11:28) clearly limits the meaning of the word in that place. The apostle there speaks of things that had appeared among the communicants at Corinth that were scandalous in nature and therefore surely unfitting for the Lord's Supper. So when the apostle tells them to examine or test themselves, it is only fair to suppose he means they should test whether they are disqualified by scandal. To this I answer: although the apostle's urging the Corinthians to test themselves was prompted by mentioning some scandalous practices found among them, this is by no means an argument that his only meaning was for them to test whether they were scandalous people, rather than to test whether they were true, genuine Christians. The very nature of scandal (as was observed before) is that which tends to obscure the visible evidence of a professor's godliness and wound others' charitable opinion of them by casting doubt on the reality of their grace. What could be more natural, then, than for the apostle -- when mentioning such scandals among the Corinthians -- to urge them to test the state of their souls and prove their sincerity! This is certainly the case in the apostle's directing the same people to test themselves in 2 Corinthians 13:5, using the same word there that he uses here and giving this direction on a similar occasion. For in the second epistle (just as in the first), his urging them to examine and test themselves was prompted by mentioning some scandals found among them, as is clear from the preceding context. And yet there he explicitly says the thing they are to test themselves about is whether they are in the faith and whether Christ is in them. Nor is there anything more in the preceding context of one passage than in the other that compels us to understand the apostle as meaning only a test of whether they were scandalous, rather than whether they were sincere Christians.

As for the words that follow in the next verse -- For he who eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's body -- these words by no means prove (as some claim) that what the apostle wants them to examine themselves about is whether they have enough doctrinal knowledge to understand that the bread and wine in the sacrament signify the body and blood of Christ. On the contrary, interpreting the apostle this way is unreasonable for several reasons. (1) No one can even begin such an examination without already knowing that the Lord's body and blood are signified by these elements. For the mere act of asking oneself, "Do I understand that this bread and wine signify the body and blood of Christ?" assumes he already knows it from prior instruction. Therefore, urging people to conduct such an examination would be absurd. (2) It is unbelievable that there would be such gross ignorance among a number of the communicants in the Corinthian church, if we consider what Scripture tells us about that church. Think about the able and thorough instructor and spiritual father they had -- the apostle Paul himself -- who founded that church, brought them out of their pagan darkness, introduced them to the Christian faith, instructed them in the nature and purposes of Gospel ordinances, and stayed at Corinth continually laboring in the word and doctrine for no less than a year and six months. We may well suppose he administered the Lord's Supper among them every Lord's Day. For the apostle speaks of it as the practice of that church to commune at the Lord's table with such frequency. 1 Corinthians 16:2. And the Corinthian church at the time the apostle wrote this epistle was known for excelling in doctrinal knowledge, as is evident from 1 Corinthians 1:5-7 and several other passages in the epistle. Besides, the communicants were explicitly told at every communion, every week, when the bread and wine were given to them in the administration, that the bread signified the body and the wine signified the blood of Christ. And then (3) the apostle, by his argument in 1 Corinthians 10:16, assumes the Corinthians are already doctrinally acquainted with this subject. It therefore seems much more reasonable to me to understand the situation this way: The offensive behavior of the communicants at Corinth gave the apostle reason to suspect that some of them came to the Lord's table without a proper impression and true sense of the great and glorious things signified there. They had no habitual hunger or appetite for the spiritual food represented there, no inward, vital, experiential taste of the flesh of the Son of Man which is true food. The word translated discerning means to distinguish or discriminate. Taste is the sense by which we properly discern or distinguish food. Job 34:3. And it is a spiritual sense or taste by which we discern or distinguish spiritual food. Hebrews 5:14: Those who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil, and so on. A word from the same root as the one rendered discerning in 1 Corinthians 11:29. A person who has no habitual appetite for or relish of the spiritual food represented and offered at the Lord's table -- who has no spiritual taste to perceive anything more at the Lord's Supper than in ordinary food -- or who has no higher purpose than to eat bread with a little surface devotion in the manner of an ordinance, without truly considering in his heart the spiritual meaning and purpose of it, and without being at all suitably moved by the dying love of Christ commemorated there -- such a person may most truly and properly be said not to discern the Lord's body. When the apostle urges self-examination as a preparation for the sacramental supper, he may well be understood as telling professors to inquire whether they have a principle of faith by which they are habitually able and disposed to discern the Lord's body in a practical and spiritual way (not just speculatively and theoretically) in their communion at the Lord's table. No one can do this who has only common grace, or a faith that falls short of justifying and saving faith. It is only a living faith that enables people to discern the Lord's body in the sacrament with that spiritual perception or spiritual taste suited to the nature and purpose of the ordinance, and which the apostle seems primarily to have in mind.