fully hold communion with such a Church: that notwithstanding such mistakes in a Church Christ holds communion with it: "and where Christ holds communion we are obliged to hold it: for it's there as with the soul in the body which leaves not the body for the head-ach, or a wound that is not mortal." He adds: "if that were true, we should hold no communion with any Church in the world: because it's more than probable, that no Church in its offices is so perfect as to be without error or mistake in them."
Nelson then meets an objection, which he puts in the following form: "If it be said why do we then forsake the communion of the Church of Rome?"
This objection is met so conclusively, and is so calculated to disprove the unreasonable charge of Popery, so flippantly alleged by some modern writers, that I shall quote his reply at length.
"1. I answer, that that Church is not to be held communion with, though its offices were pure, because of the doctrines and practices of it, which are corrupted in the vitals of them.
"2. The very offices do partake of the corruption, are vitally corrupted, as in respect of the object of worship, saints and images, or of the things prayed for, or the things acknowledged therein.
"3. They are so incorporated, that there is no communicating without them, the body of their service being made up of them.
"4. These are among them made necessary terms of communion: so should any of a contrary opinion hold communion with that Church in fact, as he is ipso facto an heretick, and stands excommunicated by their Maundy Thursday Bull, so, if discovered, would be prosecuted as such."[1]
- ↑ Marshall, App. No. IX.
