as it were metonymically, and in such places is variously tanslated, either discerning, or allowing, approving, liking, &c. 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 Dr. Ames in his Catecheseos Sciagraphia, and Mr. 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 Pet. i. 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," &c. 1 Cor. iii. 13. "The fire shall TRY every man's James i. 3. “The TRYING of your

work of what sort it is." faith worketh patience." our hearts."

1 Thess. ii. 4. " God who TRIETH The same word is used in 2 Cor. viii. 8. " To PROVE the sincerity of your love." So, Gal. vi. 3, 4. " If any man thinketh himself, to be something when he is nothing, he deceiveth 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, yea or no?

But here it is said by some, that the context of the passage under debate (1 Cor. xi. 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 unfiting 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 wheth er they be 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 Cor. xiii. 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 eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judg

ment 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 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 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 Cor. xvi. 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 chap. i. 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 argu ment chap. x. 16, supposes the Corinthians doctrinally acVOL. I. 21

quainted 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 for 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. xxxiv. 3. And it is a spiritual sense or taste which is that whereby we discern or distinguish spiritual food. Heb. v. 14. "Those who by reason of use, have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil;” pos dianpio, &c. A word of the same root with that rendered discerning, in 1 Cor. xi. 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 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 selfexamination 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 gust, which is suitable to the nature and design of the ordinance, and which the apostle seems principally to intend.

PART THIRD.

Objections Answered.

OBJECTION I.

THE scripture calls the members of the visible church by the name of disciples, scholars, or learners; and that suggests to us this notion of the visible church, that it is the school of Christ, into which persons are admitted in order to their learning of Christ, and coming to spiritual attainments, in the use of the means of teaching, discipline, and training up, established in the school. Now if this be a right notion of the visible church, then reason shews that no other qualifications are necessary in order to a being members of this school, then such a faith and disposition of mind as are requisite to persons putting themselves under Christ as their Master and Teacher, and subjecting themselves to the orders of the school. But a common faith and moral sincerity are sufficient for this. Therefore the scripture leads us to suppose the visible church to be properly constituted of those who have these qualifications, though they have not saving faith and true piety.

ANSWER. I own, the scripture calls the members of the visible church by the name of disciples. But I deny it therefore follows that the church which they are members of, is duly and properly constituted of those who have not true piety. Because if this consequence was good, then it would equally follow, that not only the visible, but also the invisible or mystical church is properly constituted of those who have not unfeigned faith and true piety. For the members of the mystical church, as such, and to denote the special character of such, are called disciples; in Luke xiv. 26, 27, 33, and in John viii. 31, and xiii. 35, and xv. 8. This shews, that in the argument I am answering, there is no connexion between the premises and the conclusion. For the force of the objection consists in this, that the members of the visible church are