VII.
Whether, upon a supposal, that it cannot be proved from the Scriptures, that any unbaptized, or unduly baptized person, was ever admitted into Church-communion by Christians in the Apo∣stles days, or that any duly baptized person held communion with a Church, the greatest part of whose members he deemed either unbaptized, or unduly Baptized, is such a defect of proof suffici∣ent to justifie a withdrawing of communion by a person, who conceiveth himself duly baptized, from such a Church, the genera∣lity of whose members he supposeth are either not baptized, or unduly Baptized; considering that very many things may be mat∣ter of duty, and necessary to be done, which are not warranted for so much as lawful, by any example in the Scriptures of like action in all circumstances? It is the duty of Churches, and of every member respectively, to admit their women-members to the Lords Table; yet cannot this practice be warranted by any ex∣ample recorded in the Scriptures. Yea in case at the time of this Sacramental Administration in a Church, all the men-members should occasionally be absent, except only the Administrator, and (it may be) a Deacon or two, and only the women-members pre∣sent, there is little question to be made, but that the Administra∣tion ought to proceed notwithstanding, and the elements be admini∣stred unto this female Congregation, though there be no example of such an Administration as this in the Scriptures. There is no ex∣ample in Scripture of any person worshiping the Holy Ghost: yet it is a great duty lying upon Christians to worship him. When David, and the men with him, entred into the House of God, and did eat the shew-bread a 1.1, he had no Scripture-example to justifie his action; no more had the Disciples to justifie theirs, when they plucked the ears of Corn as they passed through the Fields on a Sabbath day: yet were both these actions lawful, and (to a degree) necessary. The reading of the Scriptures translated out of the