Qualifications for Communion in Vol I of the Works - Edwards - I - Prefaces, Part I

Required readingInquiry Concerning Qualifications for Communion in Vol I of the Works by Jonathan Edwards (Available from Amazon or free here) - Read the Prefaces and Part I.

My summary.

Today we begin a new work that examines who is qualified for the Lord's table.

In the Author's Preface, Edwards outlines the background to his treatise, including his reluctance to publish it considering his ministerial predecessor and grandfather opposed his view.

The other two Prefaces are commendations from American and Scottish brethren.

Then in Part I Edwards gives the question to be answered by the work: 'Whether, according to the rules of Christ, any 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?'

The rest of Part I is concerned with defining terms used in the stated question.

What grabbed me

I liked how Edwards quoted Stoddard's own words to prove his point that we should not hold to doctrine simply because of other men: 'It may possibly be a fault (says Mr. Stoddard) to depart from the ways of our fathers: but it may also be a virtue, and an eminent act of obedience, to depart from them in some things. Men are wont to make a great noise, that we are bringing in innovations, and depart from the old way: but it is beyond me, to find out wherein the iniquity does lie. We may see cause to alter some practices of our fathers, without despising them, without priding ourselves in out wisdom, without apostacy, without abusing the advantages God has given us, without a spirit of compliance with corrupt men, without inclination to superstition, without making disturbance in the church of God: and there is no reason, that it should be turned as a reproach upon us. Surely it is commendable for us to examine the practices of our fathers; we have no sufficient reason to take practices upon trust from them. Let them have as high a character as belongs to them; yet we may not look upon their principles as oracles. Nathan himself missed it in his conjecture about building the house of God. He that believes principles because they affirm them, makes idols of them. And it would be no humility, but baseness of spirit, for us to judge ourselves incapable to examine the principles that have been handed down to us. If we be by any means fit to open the mysteries of the gospel, we are capable to judge of these matters: and it would ill become us, so to indulge ourselves in case, as to neglect the examination of received principles. If the practices of our fathers in any particulars were mistaken, it is fit they should be rejected; if they be not, they will bear examination. If we be forbidden to examine their practice, that will cut off all hopes of reformation.'

Our predecessors are not oracles and shouldn't be treated as such.

'Next week's reading

Read Section I of Part II.

Now it's your turn
Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.