An humble inquiry into the rules of the Word of God, concerning the qualifications…

In fine, even those who appear Advocates for a Latitude in Admissions to the Communion, I observe, generally in the Course of the Argument offer such Distinctions or make such Concessions, as seem by fair Consequence a giving up the Point, at least as stated in the present Question. For they usually distinguish between a Right in foro Dei and in foro Ecclesiae; accordingly treat these as two different Questions, Who ought to come? and Who ought to be admitted? considering the latter as an Ecclesiastical Case, and here they assert a Latitude; but the former, as a Case of Conscience, of private Reference only, and here they grant a Limitation. How large soever their Principles, while taking the Case in it's Ecclesiastical View, yet I have met with very few Divines, that taking it as a private Case of Conscience, have gone Mr. STODDARD's Length, in asserting, that some unsanctified Men have Right before God to the Lord's Supper, and may come with a good Conscience, yea, ought to come, notwithstanding they know themselves at the same Time to be in a natural Condition. This he declare in his Doctrine of instituted Churches, and confirms in his Sermon & Appeal. But then he has made some Concessions, which seem to be subversive of his Opinion. For he expressly allows, that the Sacrament by Institution supposes Communicants to be visible Saints; and this Title of visible Saints he assigns to such as have a visible Union to Christ, such as are in the Judgment of rational Charity Believers, such as carry themselves so that there is Reason to look upon them to be Saints. Now, taking the Case as a private Case of Conscience (in which Light only Mr. STODDARD professes to have designed to consider it in his Sermon, and not at all as an Ecclesiastical Case) I think, this Visibility of Saintship immediately respects the Proponent for the Lord's Table, & must be referred to his own private Judgment of himself. But then, how can there be a Visibility of Saintship in the Eye of the Man's own Conscience, when at the ⟨p. 8⟩same Time he knows himself to be in a natural Condition! Or how can a Man come to the Lord's Table with a good Conscience, as having Right before God, while he cannot form so much as a Judgment of rational Charity for himself;

In fine, even those who appear Advocates for a Latitude in Admissions to the Communion, I observe, generally in the Course of the Argument offer such Distinctions or make such Concessions, as seem by fair Consequence a giving up the Point, at least as stated in the present Question. For they usually distinguish between a Right in foro Dei and in foro Ecclesiae; accordingly treat these as two different Questions, Who ought to come? and Who ought to be admitted? considering the latter as an Ecclesiastical Case, and here they assert a Latitude; but the former, as a Case of Conscience, of private Reference only, and here they grant a Limitation. How large soever their Principles, while taking the Case in it's Ecclesiastical View, yet I have met with very few Divines, that taking it as a private Case of Conscience, have gone Mr. STODDARD's Length, in asserting, that some unsanctified Men have Right before God to the Lord's Supper, and may come with a good Conscience, yea, ought to come, notwithstanding they know themselves at the same Time to be in a natural Condition. This he declare in his Doctrine of instituted Churches, and confirms in his Sermon & Appeal. But then he has made some Concessions, which seem to be subversive of his Opinion. For he expresly allows, that the Sacrament by Institution supposes Communicants to be visible Saints; and this Title of visible Saints he assigns to such as have a visible Union to Christ, such as are in the Judgment of rational Charity Believerss, such as carry themselves so that there is Reason to look upon them to be Saints. Now, taking the Case as a private Case of Conscience (in which Light only Mr. STODDARD professes to have disign'd to consider it in his Sermon, and not at all as an Ecclesiastical Case) I think, this Visibility of Saintship immediately respects the Proponant for the Lord's Table, & must be refer'd to his own private Judgment of himself. But then, how can there be a Visibility of Saintship in the Eye of the Man's own Conscience, when at the