Section I.

[p. 5]

A

DISQUISITION

ON THE

LORD’S SUPPER, &c.

――――――

SECT. I.

THE INSTITUTION, NATURE, AND USE OF THE LORD’S SUPPER.

---

THE Lord’s Supper has been thought to resemble the postcoenium held by the Jews at the close of the paschal feast. That it was designed, however, for greater and more noble purposes, is sufficiently evident both from the history and doctrine of its Institution, Nature, and Use.

THE INSTITUTION was peculiarly impressive. It ascertains the Supper to be not only an ordinance of the New Testament state, but one that ranks high in solemnity and importance. “On that night in which Jesus was betrayed, he took bread and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, saying, Take, eat; This is my body broken for you, this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, &c.” The mode of institution was practical; not by a simple commandment, as when God appointed the passover, or when Jesus himself commissioned the apostles to teach and baptize, but by an observance of the feast. This is the

[p. 6]

more remarkable, as we are informed, that during all the period of his ministry on earth, our Lord never dispensed the ordinance of Baptism. He had been declared by his fore-runner to be the person who should “baptize with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.” To prevent therefore his being placed on a level with him who baptized with water, to appropriate to himself the pre-indicated character, and support his claim to its distinguishing honours, Jesus abstained from baptizing. But though the spiritual verification of the Supper, as well as of baptism, be solely his prerogative, we find, that instead of delivering the form and substance of that ordinance to the apostles in a verbal mandate, as he did afterwards to Paul, he chose to observe it among them, and be first administrator himself. And may not the words, “Do this in remembrance of me,” be considered as also combining the precept of our Lord with the example he set? They are properly the words of institution, seemingly bearing on the whole ordinance, and with this view pronounced at the commencement of its celebration. The official character of the apostles was doubtless recognized in the mandate. They were then receiving of the Lord what they were afterwards, in the discharge of their office, to deliver to the church. The words prescribe at once the duty of Christians, and the future dispensation of the ordinance. ‘Let this sacred feast,’ as if Jesus had said, ‘the form and manner of which I am now begun to exhibit, be henceforth observed in the church, in all its parts, according to what respectively belongs to dispensation and reception.’

The practical and preceptive institution by which the Supper was singularly honoured, was also from the time and circumstances calculated to mark its

[p. 7]

SUCCESSION to the passover feast. Jesus and his company had just finished this feast: No sooner was it concluded in the usual manner, than he appointed the Supper. Taking the bread, (as he did afterwards the cup, to shew that a new entertainment to which both should belong, was to be kept) and blessing it for sacred use, he said, “Do this,”—this instead of what was wont to be done in the passover; let this be henceforth the sacred feast of my church. The words are emphatic, and natively suggest the substitution of the latter for the former. One reason why our Lord chose to appoint the Supper ere the preparatory state of things was expired, and though it could not then be kept in that “newness*” which belongs to the state for which it was intended, seems to have been, that by instituting it immediately after the observance of the passover, he might clearly indicate its nature as designed to succeed and supersede the ancient feast. The idea of substitution was disclosed and forcibly impressed on the mind, by his passing directly from the observance of the one ordinance to that of the other.—To the same purpose we remark the contrast of meaning and use expressly stated in the words of ordination: “Do this,” said Jesus, “in remembrance of me.” The Supper was to bear on that event as past, which the passover exhibited as future. They are thus ascertained to be correlate solemnities; as if our Lord had said, Instead of the prefiguring, a commemorative ordinance must henceforth be kept in the church. The idea of substitution is still more plainly brought forth in the declarations relative to his own concern in each of the feasts. Of

_____

* Matt. xxvi. 29.

[p. 8]

the passover he said, “I will not henceforth eat of it, till it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” This declaration he explained, on appointing the Supper. Then he told his disciples that what he meant would be accomplished by his “drinking of this fruit of the vine,” that used in the Supper, “new with them in his Father’s kingdom.” The first declaration evidently implied, that the sacramental eating which had hitherto obtained in the church, would be continued after his death. “I will not henceforth eat of it, till it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God,” that is, by the event to which as a prefiguring ordinance it referred, and which was one of the good things of the promise, properly pertaining to the kingdom of God,—his own passion. But the passover in being “fulfilled” by this event, behoved to cease—to be abolished. Our Lord therefore transferred the sacramental feasting which he had intimated would continue, to the Supper, and declared it was by this ordinance he would hold fellowship with his people “in his Father’s kingdom *.” To this substitution of the Supper for the ancient feast, the apostle Paul seems to refer in a well-known passage: “Christ our passover is sacrificed for us, therefore let us keep the feast, &c.” The feast of Christ sacrificed is the Lord’s Supper, and the notice of the passover suggests the character of the New Testament ordinance, as corresponding to that of the Old. It is the Christian pasque, as baptism is “the circumcision of Christ,” or the Christian circumcision †. Hence in allusion to the ancient ceremonial rites, a moral observance is enjoined: “Let us keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.”

_____

* Luke xxii. 16. compared with Matt. xxvi. 29.

† Col. ii. 11, 12.

[p. 9]

The Supper is the ONLY SACRED FEAST of the Christian church. There were, besides the passover, two other feasts of solemn convocation under the Mosaic economy. But to neither of these could any correspondent ordinance be expected in the New Testament state. The reason is obvious. They did not, like the passover, typify Christ in some particular view of his character and work, so that ordinances bearing on the verification in the fulness of time, and thus answering to them, could be appointed. They presented scenes figurative of the New Testament state itself, the one of what should take place at its commencement, the other of its general and permanent nature. Pentecost was properly the feast of first fruits, and, as some think, commemorative also of the legislation from Sinai. Its grand references received their fulfilment in the effusion of the Holy Ghost after the ascension of Christ, when the law went forth from Mount Zion, and the first fruits of the Christian church were collected and presented to the Lord from among various nations *. The Scenophegia, or feast of tabernacles, was the feast of ingathering. It was a scene of liberty and joy, though at the same time the exhibition of a transient sojourning state. Then the Israelites having completed the labours of the season, enjoyed a sacred vacation, and free from care spent seven days in holy festivity, under the shade of booths formed of the branches of palm-trees and other trees of the forest. They “rejoiced before the Lord.” But though the rural tents in which they lodged, and their manner of observing the feast, proclaimed their state of rest in the promised land, they seemed to resume the sojourning life of their fathers in the desert, where the joy of harvest was unknown. In its grand

_____

* Acts ii.

[p. 10]

reference to “the good things to come,” this sacred season prefigured the general nature of the New Testament age,—as an age of spiritual liberty and joy, yet an age in which the state of final perfection is not attained *. The new dispensation has realized to the church freedom from labour and the yoke of bondage, the liberty and joy of the Holy Ghost, all that was comprehended in the predicted spiritual rest; but it is, like the ancient solemnity, only a feast of tabernacles, recalling to mind the state of the tribes ere they entered the promised land. The region of consummate rest is yet a “land afar off.” “I am a stranger with thee,” said David, “and a sojourner, as all my fathers were.” And still amid all our privilege we are but “strangers and pilgrims” on the earth.

The passover bare no such general reference to the New Testament state of the church. We find indeed the whole gospel-dispensation represented under the idea of a feast, Isa. xxv. 6, 7. of a feast in which God rejoices over returning sinners, and makes ample provision for them, Luke xv. 11—32. and of a marriage supper, the marriage supper of a king, a splendid entertainment, Psal. xlv. Prov. ix. 1—5. Matt. xxii. 1—14. By the same figure, glorious periods of that dispensation are also described,—its commencement, when the Jews were rejected, Luke xiv. 15—24. its acmé of splendour and prosperity in this world, when the Jews shall be converted, Rev. xix. 7—9. and its consummation, Matt. xxv. But though in some of these passages there be an allusion to a feast on a sacrifice, particularly Luke xv. 23—32. which admits an easy explanation from John vi. 47—56, yet in none of them is there any allusion to the passover

_____

* See Zech. xiv. 16, 18.

[p. 11]

feast, as neither is there any specific reference to the ordinance of the Supper. We may view that ordinance as an abridged exhibition of the gospel-dispensation, and thus with great propriety accommodate to it what is said in general of a feast, or of the marriage-supper of the King. There is not however the slightest intimation, that the passover presented an emblematic delineation of the New Testament age. It was, from its peculiar nature and references, of the three annual solemnities, the only sacramental feast, and corresponding to it there is but one sacred feast in the Christian church, the Lord’s Supper.

If the Supper was appointed instead of the passover, as the correspondent ordinance in the present economy, then, mutatis mutandis, its nature and use, or the purposes it was intended to serve, must be the same with those of the ancient sacrament; and this, from the plain indications of substitution, must have been understood to be the case by the apostles, unless something to the contrary had been specified by Jesus. If the one was a figure, the other is a memorial; if the former was a sign of something to come, the latter is the Witness of its realization; if as a figure and sign the one behoved to be an eminent mean of spiritual nutrition, equally and much more must the other be so, as a memorial and witness; subserving this practical purpose, each, in its respective age, presents itself as the medium of communion between Christ and believers; and both were accordingly intended to display and promote the fellowship of church members in privilege and profession.

BUT abstracting from farther reference to the passover feast, let us take a short survey of the ordinance of the Supper. It will be found that the enumera-

[p. 12]

tion just made exhibits its nature, and comprizes the grand ends for which it was appointed.

This ordinance is a MEMORIAL of the death of Christ—“This do, in remembrance of me.” It was not properly in remembrance of his life and suffering lot, the period of which had nearly elapsed, our Lord required the observance; nor was it to recal and cherish the memory of that pleasing fellowship his disciples had enjoyed with him in the days of his flesh. The institution of the ordinance on the eve of his passion, was evidently intended to shew them the certainty of his death, and disclose to their view, something of its nature, design, and blessed consequences. Nothing could prevent it, nor were they to wish its prevention. He placed it before them as if already past, and taught them that so far from being a melancholy event, according to their apprehensions, it would be the source of joy and comfort in all succeeding ages. The symbols are those of his broken body and shed blood; the sacramental acts bear upon them as such.—Than the death of Jesus the Lord of glory, there is no event more worthy of being held in everlasting remembrance. It may well be perpetuated in memorial for the conviction and humiliation of the world. It was the murder of the Just One, a most astonishing instance of human depravity. Here we perceive how the heart is naturally disposed to act towards the most exalted virtue, and to what lengths prejudice even against the clearest light may proceed. Nor is the abject character to be devolved entirely on the Jews, among whom its manifestation was allowed to break forth: In the ordinance of the Supper every man may “look on him whom he has pierced and mourn.” The death of Jesus may well be perpetuated in memorial, as also a most asto-

[p. 13]

nishing part of the divine economy. It was a strange dispensation, seemingly unaccountable till explained, and even then most wonderful, something into which the angels desire to look;—“the just suffered for the unjust,” God’s eternal Son for guilty men! Yet here was the crowning display of divine wisdom; for to say nothing of the covenant-arrangements, it was then God in his moral government made the wrath of man most illustriously to praise him, and accomplished by the ragings of the people the chief of his ways. The more we contemplate the death of Jesus, the more clearly will the propriety of its being selected for memorial in the church rise to our view. It was not only a most wonderful event, considering the person, what he endured, and the state in which he suffered; it was also a most blissful event for the sons of men, one in which the love of heaven attained its highest glorification, and an event most honourable to the Judge of all. But the true reasons of selection are found in its nature and design. It was the atonement,—that special part of our Lord’s execution of the work entrusted to him, which consummated at once his obedience and satisfaction. In this view it was the center to which all the types and figures of the law, with the long train of predictions, “had tended and verged for so many generations.” By it in this view, Jesus himself was consecrated to his glorious administration; his resurrection, his ascension, the effusion of the Spirit, and the whole state of privilege pertaining to the kingdom of heaven, are its blessed consequences and effects. It founded a dispensation of the new covenant properly suited to the nature and spirit of that gracious constitution, a dispensation in which the claimant voice of law and justice are not to be heard. If therefore it was not ex-

[p. 14]

pedient that many and diverse commemorative ordinances should occupy the Christian system of worship, the death of Jesus, the most important and extensively influential of all events in the history of salvation, was wisely fixed upon for the grand subject of memorial.

This first and more simple view of the Supper leads to consider it farther, as intended to be a PUBLIC SIGN or WITNESS, that the atonement is made, and all the consequent state of privilege attained. The ancient symbolical system represented good things to come. Its ordinances, by the common relation they had to the law and the promise, pointed out both what was required in order to salvation, and what would be performed in the fulness of time. But they were also “figures for the time then present,” parables of the age, or public signs that accomplishment had not yet taken place, that it was certain, but future, and, while they continued, a subject of hope *. The or-

_____

* There were in the ancient system of worship, some things strikingly expressive of the nature of the period during which it existed, and of the state of privilege then in the church. Thus the apostle Paul fixes on the veil which divided the tabernacle into two parts, and concealed from view the mysteries of the holiest, or rather the first part of the tabernacle thus separated, as, παραβολὴ εἰς τὸν καιρὸν τὸν ἐνεστηκότα, a parable of the time, or in reference to the time that then was, Heb. ix. 9. A parable is designed to convey some truth or moral by expressive imagery. Parables are therefore modes of instruction calculated to disclose and bear home on the mind with peculiar force, the subjects on which they are employed. While the key is a wanting, the parable must be dark. Attendant circumstances may furnish the key, but usually meditation and research are necessary to attain it. When found, the parable instantly becomes a clear and striking exhibition of the intended truth or moral. The existence of the veil and its effect during the former economy was a general sign of the age, indicating that the way to the holiest was not then actually opened, or that the true atonement had not taken place,

[p. 15]

dinance of the Supper by its symbols represents what has been done, exhibits the broken body and shed blood of Jesus. It is on this very ground a sign or witness, attesting in the church and to the world, the accomplishment of all that was claimed by the law, and foretold by the promise. “There are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree in one *.” The blood and the water which issued from the side of Jesus, were the incontestible proofs of his death: They shewed that the cavity of the heart had been pierced, that his heart itself had been reached by the spear; no suspicion of his having merely fainted through the severity of his sufferings could remain. Some undeniable proof of the fact was expedient, as in his death he anticipated the expiration of those who were crucified with him. The reality of his death was of the utmost consequence, and the evangelist accordingly gives a solemn assurance in regard to the proof: “One of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith there came thereout blood and water; and he that saw it bare record, and his record is true, and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe †.” The water and the blood which formed the plenary evidence of the death of Jesus, and thus of the fulfilment of all that the waters of le-

_____

[Footnote continued from p. 14:] nor in consequence of it a full disclosure of the mystery of redemption elevating the church to a glorious state of spiritual privilege. It was a sign, however, of a parabolical nature, somewhat obscure. The Lord’s Supper is also, by its very existence in the church, a sign of the state now attained. But it cannot properly be styled a parable of the age, as that species of sign was rather suited to the ancient dispensation; it is therefore denominated a witness, an ordinance that gives clear and explicit testimony.

* 1 John v. 8.

† John xix. 34, 35.

[p. 16]

gal purification and the blood of sacrifices had pre-denoted, are afterwards, and with great propriety, employed by the evangelist as mystical terms for Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Was the mingled fluid that followed the thrust of the spear an attestation or sign of the death of Jesus, of the period when men might “look on him as pierced,” of the day when the fountain was “opened for sin and uncleanness *?” the same is the import and use of these ordinances. They are two of the witnesses by which God proclaims that we have now received the atonement. “This is the record,” the sum of their testimony, a testimony which they not only publicly declare like the gospel, but are eminently calculated to bring home to the mind and conscience, “that God hath given to us eternal life, and that life in his Son.” He that believeth “hath the witness,” the record or testimony, “in himself †.”

It natively follows that the Supper is an ORDINANCE OF SALVATION. We are not to view it simply as a monument established by God in memory of a certain event, or in attestation of a fact. So far as it serves this purpose, it must be, from the very nature of what it commemorates and testifies, an ordinance of salvation to sinners. Let them be merely spectators, it is declarative of something in which they are deeply interested. Did not the ordinances of the law, in being public signs of what God had promised, exhibit to the worshippers the grand subjects of faith and hope? They disclosed the arrangements and substance of a covenant of grace. By these signs the gospel was preached to the children of Israel. The ceremonial system was a method

_____

* John xix. 37. Zech. xii. 10, xiii. 1.

† 1 John v. 10, 11.

[p. 17]

of conveying heavenly instruction, as by letters and diagrams, adapted to the state of minority. And doubtless those ordinances of the New Testament in which symbols are still employed, may serve a similar purpose, even to spectators. They publicly announce something to the world; they proclaim, by their very existence, truths and facts universally interesting, and the testimony of these two witnesses is no other than that which is verbally declared and elucidated in the preaching of the gospel. But,

The Lord’s Supper, like baptism, is a PECULIAR ORDINANCE OF SALVATION. Now that the church is able, without the intervention of elements or rudimental sketches, to bear the simple and plenary declaration of the gospel, why should ordinances in which symbols are employed still be retained? Some special purpose must have been in view, beyond what the preaching of the word could accomplish. We find accordingly that the Supper is not a sign for bare contemplation. The observance of it lies in dispensing and receiving. The worshippers are to be brought under this sign as directly as under baptism. They must approach the table of the Lord. Seated there, the whole import of the ordinance is made to terminate upon them; the symbols are put into the hand of every communicant, and these symbols are attended to each with the declarations they are designed to apply in the most particular form,—“This is my body broken for you; this is my blood shed for the remission of sins.” There is here an appropriate exhibition of Christ, ratifying the gospel deed of gift, and calculated to produce the highest assurance.

Hence one character by which the Supper is discriminated from the ordinary dispensation of grace:

[p. 18]

it is in its very nature and form A SEAL OF GOD’S COVENANT WITH THE CHURCH. Considering the covenant of grace as an eternal transaction between the Father and the Son, the sealing or ratification of it behoved to lie in the death of Jesus, the consummation of his obedience and satisfaction. But this covenant never appertained exclusively to Jesus. It was a divine constitution for the behoof of sinners, in which he was considered as a public head, the person on whom the fulfilment of the requisite conditions devolved, that the blessed privileges therein purposed and promised might be attained and enjoyed by us. It is a covenant, therefore, that admits of being sealed to our faith. And it is most impressively sealed by an ordinance which puts into our hands the symbols of that death that hath opened our access to every privilege, and secured the enjoyment; an ordinance which while it communicates these symbols for individual reception, attests by them, that the body of Jesus was broken for us, his blood shed for the remission of our sins. What is this but to testify, to bear witness with the most particular application, that all the requisite conditions were fulfilled for us, and in our name? Through the fulfilment of these the covenant terminates on man; it receives an establishment with the church, and this in the ordinance of the Supper is carried home to the faith of every communicant—the covenant is sealed to him.

During the first period of the revelation of this covenant, the fulfilment of its conditions had not taken place, and was but the subject of promise. The revelation or dispensation in the church behoved therefore to correspond to this state of things, that is, to be at once a revelation by the law of what was demanded in order to the enjoyment of spiritual privi-

[p. 19]

lege, and by the promise of what would be accomplished. Accordingly the antient economy formed through the conjunction of the law and the promise, a disclosure of the covenant, according to the state in which it then was, as subsisting between the Father and the Son. The Mosaic system taken in any other light was indeed a re-exhibition of the covenant of works, and thus could make nothing perfect; but, considered as declarative of the transfer of that covenant to the promised seed in the eternal purpose, it was a disclosure of God’s gracious will, sufficient for the comfort and salvation of the fathers. The sealing ordinances of that system were designed to confirm to their faith this disclosure, and to produce the strongest assurance, that the promised events on which their eternal felicity depended, would be accomplished.—The manner of the first dispensation was such, that Jesus himself could with the greatest propriety be brought under it, in our nature. Though engaged to the Father as a divine person, he was also to be brought under the covenant as a descendent of Abraham according to the flesh*. He behoved at once to be made under the law, and to become the object of the promise as God-man, in order to an immediate fulfilment of his eternal engagement. The public character he sustained, discriminating him from the other descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, necessarily occasioned a peculiar bearing of the covenant-revelation upon him. To the Head and Surety, the passover accordingly would seal the necessity of his performing the requisite conditions, the certainty of his own sufferings and death, and the consequent realization on him in our nature of all the promised blessings.

_____

* Gal. iii. 13—17. iv. 4, 5.

[p. 20]

By the fulfilment of what had been prescribed to the Head and Surety, the covenant came to be established with the church in that state and form according to which it properly pertains to the children of men. It never had or could have any termination on them, any direction to them, but under the idea of a ratified covenant, one the conditions of which were fulfilled by a substitute. In plain terms, there could be no dispensation of its blessings, but on the ground of the perfect obedience and satisfaction of Christ, either actually accomplished, or accounted as good as done. Of old that obedience and satisfaction were accounted as good as done, the promise exhibiting the conditional part as with Christ, proclaimed their certainty, and the seals of the promise realized them to the faith of the worshipper. But now the long expected decease has been accomplished without the gates of Jerusalem, and it has dedicated the covenant to the church. “Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and Judah.” What is the making of the covenant with the church, but just its revelation? By this, God carries it into effect. There is no mutual transaction, stipulations, and re-stipulations, in this “making” of the covenant; it consists simply in declaration,—“I will be your God, and ye shall be my people.” What is the making of the new covenant, but its revelation after the form and manner in which it properly pertains to us, as wholly a covenant of grace? There was more in the first economy; the voice of the law was heard, there was an exhibition of what behoved to be done—of the requisite conditions. All this the death of Jesus hath cancelled. Consummating his obedience, it hath substantiated every legal claim, and the covenant now rises to view

[p. 21]

a free testament to men, is made over to the church according to what it really is in relation to all our concern with it, “the New Testament in the blood” of Jesus. Of this the Supper, even in the light of a memorial and public sign, is a seal. It bears witness that the covenant is ratified, and every condition now implemented by the Surety. And it is properly Christ’s seal; an ordinance appended by him to the testamentary disposition made in his death, and thus designed to ascertain, through all ages, the state in which the covenant has been placed by that event. “This cup is the New Testament in my blood.” But what is the state referred to? No other, we have already observed, than that in which the covenant properly terminates on us. It could not be made with us, as it was with Christ, in the way of involving the law and proposing conditions; and it is not so made, because in our name he fulfilled the conditions, and removed the law. Our concern is solely with its blessings and privileges. The sum of these is announced in the declaration, “I am your God, and ye are my people;” or as it is also said, to intimate the permanent security of the privilege, “I will be your God, and ye shall be my people, my sons and daughters, saith the Lord.” This is the gospel-testimony by which the covenant is made with us. We have nothing to do, but to believe the record, and the proclamation of it is all that making of the covenant, that faith will ever find to embrace*. The

_____

* It may be objected, that according to this view, the covenant will be made with all gospel hearers. But the fact is admitted. “The promise,” said Peter, “is to you and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” By baptism all who pertain to the church are declaratively brought under the promise. We are not to look for some inexplicable making

[p. 22]

ordinance of the Supper brings home with the most particular application what is proclaimed to all in the gospel, and by affording the highest assurance of interest in that death which ratified the covenant, or

_____

[Footnote continued.] of the covenant with the soul different from that which obtains in the gospel-dispensation. Misled by an idea of this kind, there are many, it is to be feared, who consider Christ and his benefits as merely offered in the gospel, and imagine there must be something more to constitute him God’s gift to them. There is no doubt a difference between the gift made, and the gift accepted, the latter is true only in the case of believers, but the former may be affirmed of the whole gospel-dispensation. The acceptance lies in the belief of God’s testimony, and in this testimony Jesus is actually “made of God unto us, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption.” He is given for a covenant of the people, “I will make with you, or put to you, an everlasting covenant, even the sure mercies of David,” τὰ ὅσια, the obsequies, the funeral honours of David; these are all the blessed fruits and consequences of his death, as one delivered for our offences, and raised for our justification. See Acts xiii. 32—38. The covenant is made with all in the gospel; and to realize it to any soul, it is only necessary for the Spirit of grace to disclose the truths proclaimed in their divine light and evidence.—Should it be said, if the covenant be made with all in the gospel, how can we account for the truth of God’s testimony, “I am your God,” while many finally perish from under the dispensation of grace? The answer is not, that the truth of it depends upon faith; it is true in itself. One view of the testimony is, that God, on the ground of what Christ has done, has nothing to require of any individual in order to salvation. This is gospel, glad tidings of relief to a distressed conscience, and it is a truth independent of faith. Such is the sufficiency of what Christ hath done, that were all men to be saved, nothing more could be demanded. Then it is to be observed, that what Christ hath done is ever proclaimed in connection with the testimony, that nothing can be demanded of us by the law and justice of God. The truth of that declaration, and of the Lord’s being our God, depends upon the death of Jesus, and the sufficiency of this death will ever justify the general proclamation of these truths, which is indeed to us the only conceivable plan for carrying into effect the design of that event in regard to its particular destination. In fine, as God has a right ever to be believed when he speaks, so he considers himself as always speaking to

[p. 23]

converted it into a free testament, and on which the fulfilment of every promise depends, proves a seal of that covenant to the faith of every communicant. If Jesus by his death secured for himself, in his public character, the promised good, he secured it for us. That he did so, the gospel declares, and the dispensation of his body and blood by sensible signs, gives a personal direction to the declaration, confirming it to every recipient, and testifying so as to exclude every fearful surmise, that to him God’s promises are yea and amen. “This is the New Testament in my blood.”

The Supper is thus, farther, an eminent mean of SPIRITUAL NUTRITION. In Scriptural figure, the food of the soul, is whatever can render it genuinely happy. Nothing of this kind is to be found in the world of nature, since man became a fallen creature. We must look to God’s covenant of salvation; here, in the sure mercies of David, all that the soul can desire is contained. Must we be replaced in the favour of God which only is life? must the conscience be relieved and satisfied? must the mind be restored to the pleasing, the felicitating contemplation of the di-

_____

[Footnote continued.] faith, in the gospel. He never speaks in any gracious declaration, under the idea of not being believed, and yet the declaration remaining true, or being realized in the case of the unbeliever. No; in addressing sinners, he deals with unbelief to subdue it, but he does so in the way of speaking to faith, and for the production of faith. In the declaration, “I am your God in Christ, or on the ground of what Christ hath done,” which is the sum of the gospel, he speaks as one who expects to be believed, as one proclaiming a truth, the proper subject of faith. Faith consequently does not make the declaration a truth, but finds or discerns it to be so, while unbelief puts away the grace, the gift and the covenant of God from the person, making or accounting God a liar.

[p. 24]

vine perfections, moral character, and ways of God? must the affections be furnished with objects of worthy and lasting gratification? All that is requisite for thus rendering happy is comprized in the covenant of grace. Its exhibition in the gospel, is accordingly “a feast of fat things, of wines on the lees well refined.” And the ordinance of the Supper, by sealing this covenant, must be an eminent mean of spiritual nutrition. There is no grace it is not calculated to strengthen and improve. Faith, it has a tendency to raise to the fullest assurance, and the vigorous exercise of faith is influential on all the fruits of the spirit. As a seal of the covenant, it applies to the soul the death of Jesus, the grand summary of spiritual entertainment. His death is in its very nature the source of that felicity which lies in deliverance from wrath, and from the terrors of an evil conscience, as it is also by its meritorious efficacy the source of that felicity which lies in the enjoyment of heavenly privilege. Hence said Jesus, “My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.” The form of the ordinance corresponds to its use as the grand mean of spiritual nutrition. It is a feast, in which Christ and his benefits are set forth by the chief articles of food, while the personal application is denoted by eating and drinking.

Farther, according to these views, it must be AN ORDINANCE OF COMMUNION. It affords a display of that union between Christ and believers whence all communion proceeds, and on which it depends. “He that eateth me,” said Jesus, “even he shall live by me.” There is in this ordinance a representation of Christ crucified, as our spiritual food, and of that eating of his flesh by which, as the symbols are taken into the body and incorporated with it, he

[p. 25]

dwells in the soul.—We may remark resulting from this union a two-fold fellowship between Christ and believers,—a fellowship of common interest, and a fellowship of mutual intercourse. They who have a common interest in the same property are said to be in a state of fellowship. This idea of fellowship is precisely that conveyed by the Greek word rendered communion, in treating of the Supper, 1 Cor. x. 16. As obtaining between Christ and believers, it is a communion discerned only by faith, “the evidence of things not seen.” It is however real and most intimate; yet a fellowship which at the same time recognizes his character and pre-eminence in being their covenant-head. They have fellowship with him in his death, according to its nature and value. It is his, and it is theirs; but standing for all his righteousness, it is his as their great representative, theirs by imputation, or in the divine reckoning and account proclaimed by the gospel. They have fellowship with him too in the fruits of his death,—access to God, the enjoyment of the Spirit, and all the blessings of grace. But his is the access of their great High Priest into the immediate presence of the Father, and in a public capacity; theirs the access of spiritual priests in a private and personal respect. The promise of the Spirit he hath inherited without measure; they receive from him according to their measure. Though the unction be one, the oil of gladness was poured on him as the head, and only descends from him on his fellows. In him also it pleased the Father that all the fulness of blessing should dwell, his people receive grace for grace, but still only as members of his mystical body. Of this fellowship announced in the gospel, the Supper is a sign and seal,—an ordinance by which it is visibly displayed, realized to faith, carried

[p. 26]

home to the mind in the most impressive manner, so as to afford and often produce the utmost assurance, “This is my body,” but it is my body “broken for you.” And “this is the New Testament in my blood,” with all its blessings, the fruits of my death.—On the same ground the Supper is eminently adapted for realizing that communion of mutual intercourse which ever obtains between Jesus and his friends. Their fellowship of common interest with him can never be affected by their conduct, it pertains to their state before God, and though the truth and comfort of it may be more vividly, or in a more sensible manner, brought home to their faith, it is unalterably the same in itself. But the latter species of fellowship pertains to their exercise and experience. There may be times when it seems to be suspended, and there are seasons when Jesus “sees them again,” “and causes their hearts to rejoice.” There is no season, however, in which it can be said wholly to cease. The security given to every individual whose heart is opened to receive Jesus, is this, “I will come in and sup with him and he with me. I and my Father will come unto him, and abide with him;”—a permanent gracious intercourse, however it may seem to wax and wane, to languish and revive, shall obtain. Now of all ordinances, the Supper, from the very relation it bears to the first kind of fellowship, is the most calculated to promote this divine and blissful communion. Then it is in its very form, an entertainment. Here Jesus holds a feast with his professed friends; and feasts among men are expressly designed to afford an opportunity for the pleasures of mutual or social intercourse. To the Supper the honour of realizing this kind of communion in an eminent degree, seems to be appropriated by Jesus. It

[p. 27]

is the ordinance in which he hath promised to “drink of the fruit of the vine new with them, in his Father’s kingdom.” Here accordingly there is giving and receiving, and an alternate giving and receiving;—an intercourse of this kind, not merely in regard to the symbols with all their spiritual import, which are given by Jesus, and received by the communicant, but also in regard to the persons of believers presented as living sacrifices, and in regard to their worship, their obedience, their future services in the cause of their Lord and Saviour,—all which are given on their part, by the very nature of their profession in this solemnity, usually also in actual dedication, and as given, are accepted of him. Here too, in prayer, in praise, in the secret breathings of their souls, in the very act of communicating, while the language of their faith is respondent to his declarations in the ordinance, they commune with him; while he, on the other hand, communes with them by the words of institution, or by the operation of his Spirit calling to remembrance. As if on the mount of his glory they talk with him of his accomplished decease; he again, as if from Pisgah, often displays before them the scenes of everlasting felicity to which it hath opened access, points out the beauties, and seems to expatiate on the pleasures of the promised land. They sing in the heights of Zion, and are replenished with the goodness of the Lord. Here they find him not ashamed to own them as friends,—ready to sympathize with their souls. Under the signs of his presence, they pour out their hearts to him with the utmost confidence, and in a full assurance of redress to all their wrongs, satisfaction to all their holy desires. They find in this ordinance at once what emboldens to such exercise, and what furnishes present solace,

[p. 28]

restoration, and genuine felicity. The fruit of the vine is to them as “the best wine which goeth down sweetly, causing the lips of them that are asleep to speak,” or rendering eloquent even the otherwise timid and languid. It is wine for those of a sorrowful spirit, cheering their souls; wine that nourisheth the frame, and maketh the heart to rejoice,—a cup of salvation.

But the Supper is not only an ordinance of communion between Christ and believers, it is also an ordinance of communion among the members of his body. Let us consider them, first, as saints. In having fellowship with the Father and his Son, they “have fellowship one with another,” and while they all drink into one spirit, the communion of the Holy Ghost pervades their conjunct exercise. Believers have a common interest in the same atonement, and they are heirs of the same inheritance made over in testamentary disposition by the death of Jesus. This fellowship is visibly displayed, is declared and sealed in the Supper; for here they are all partakers of one bread the symbol of Christ’s body broken for each, and they all drink of one cup, the symbol of their portion, the New Testament in his blood*. Let us again, secondly, consider them as church members, pertaining to the visible body of Christ. They are all in this view brought under the same dispensation of the covenant, and the ordinance of the Supper at once proclaims and seals their communion in privilege and profession. Such was the use of the passover to Israel of old. And to the same use of the New Testament feast the apostle refers when he styles it, “The communion of the body and blood of the Lord,

_____

* This idea of a cup frequently occurs, Psal. xi. 6. xvi. 5.

[p. 29]

“For,” says he, “we being many are one body, and one bread, for we are all partakers of that one bread”*. But this use of the Supper as it is of a general nature, and intimately connected with the mode of external observance, will fall afterwards to be more particularly considered. It leads us at present, in pursuing our view of the ordinance,

To pass from its own import and references, as an institution from God to the church, to the import and peculiar nature of the SERVICE performed on our part. Of this we have a summary account by the apostle, 1 Cor. xi. 26. “As often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.” The distinguishing feature of observance on the part of communicants lies in SHEWING THE LORD’S DEATH. In this there is much included beyond what obtains in the acts of praise and prayer, and still more beyond the amount of their profession in hearing the word. “Ye do shew,”—the term used by the apostle properly means, ye announce, declare, or publicly proclaim the Lord’s death†. Communicants are admitted in this ordinance, without transgressing their stations in the church, to preach the death of Christ,—to do by their conduct, what ministers are employed in doing by the discharge of their office, or rather what the ordinance itself does as a sign and witness. By their observance, the import and use of the Supper considered in this light is fulfilled, or carried into effect.—First, They implement the design of the ordinance, in publicly announcing the death of Christ, and dis-

_____

* 1 Cor. x. 16, 17.

† Acts xvii. 23. “whom ye ignorantly worship, him declare I (καταγγέλλω, the same word) unto you.” Signifies to preach, 1 Cor. ix. 14. Acts xv. 36. xiii. 5. &c.

[p. 30]

playing it before men. To the unconverted, to the profane, to infidels of every description, they hold up this death as a past event, as the only ground on which men may expect to be saved and enjoy the privileges of the kingdom of heaven; declaring at the same time their reliance upon it, and full persuasion of the truth. The men of the world may behold at the table of the Lord the society of the faithful all testifying to them for their instruction and admonition, nay, testifying against their indifference, unbelief, and hardness of heart, as Noah in building the ark is said to have “condemned the world of ungodly.” Here “wisdom is justified of her children.”—Secondly, To angels also, they announce and exhibit the death of Jesus, the ground of the restoration of sinners to the favour of God, and thus to the fellowship of these blessed spirits*. Those things into which the angels still desire to look, bowing down, in the true sanctuary, over the mercy-seat to contemplate the mysteries of propitiation, are here shewn in all their blissful effects to the admiring view of the heavenly host, who, as the service goes on in the church, raise anew the song, “Glory to God in the highest, peace on earth, good will to the children of men.” Here in an eminent manner, “to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places, is made known, by the church, the manifold wisdom of God†.”—Thirdly, To their brethren in the Lord, to one another, communicants shew the death of Christ, according to the purport of the exhibition made in the ordinance, as the ground of their fellowship one with another in divine privilege and blessed prospects.—But, Fourthly, To God the Judge of all, they shew

_____

* Eph. i. 9, 10. Heb. xii. 22.

† 1 Pet. i. 12. Eph. iii. 10.

[p. 31]

the death of Christ for the same ends, or in exact correspondence to the design for which it is exhibited in the ordinance to them. In all our service we have to do with God as the Judge of all. It is a character of which he cannot be divested. As the Judge of all, he condemns, and as the Judge of all he justifies the ungodly. There is no change of the character he sustains, but only of the light in which we stand before him; and this change, our being reconciled to God, is through the death of Jesus. In every approach to him, therefore, a respect must be had to this death as the only way of comfortable access, that by which we find the glorious high throne established in justice and judgment, a throne of grace unto us*. We may not suppose it was only on Sinai he revealed himself as the Judge of all. Though we are not come, in the gospel-dispensation, to the Mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, we are come “to God the Judge of all, and to the Mediator of the new covenant†.” It is the character in which he presides over the whole economy of redemption. Now in the ordinance of the Supper there is a solemn exhibition made of the death of mediation to our faith, and by the observance of this ordinance it is shewn to God, for the same purpose for which it is exhibited to us.—We may add, that in being shewn to the Judge of all, as the reconciliation, the ground of pardon, of access into his favour and into that state of privilege which lies in the varied enjoyment of this favour, it is also shewn forth before

_____

* Psal. lxxxix. 14. Jer. xxx. 21. Dan. vii. 13, 14. Rev. v. Jer. xvii. 12. Heb. iv. 15, 16.

† Heb. xii. 18—24.

[p. 32]

every accuser, before the law, the conscience, the grand adversary Satan, and the powers of darkness.

All this shewing of the death of Jesus implies GLORIATION. It is in the finished work of our common Saviour that believers have “whereof to glory before God;” in this also they exult together as the foundation and medium of their spiritual fellowship, and of all the angelic communion with which they are honoured in the kingdom of God; of this they profess they are not ashamed before men. To observe the Supper is publicly, in the most solemn manner, and in a direct avowal of the grand subject of offence, to glory in the cross of Christ. Communicants by the sacred acts of participation profess their faith in the doctrine of the cross, and proclaim it “the power of God, and the wisdom of God for salvation.”

In fine, the shewing of the death of Jesus, as inclusive of what has been stated, is a CELEBRATION of that event. The Supper has been justly styled the eucharist or thanksgiving ordinance. It lays claim to this designation, not only on account of the solemn thanksgiving with which it commences, but on account of its very nature, and particularly on account of that shewing the Lord’s death which is the amount of observance on the part of communicants. This last is the most solemn and practical profession of gratitude we can possibly make in the church below. It concentrates in a few acts the whole of our improvement of Jesus to the glory of God, and these acts visibly performed, so as to attest before all the world the honourable light in which we regard the work of our Saviour. The ordinance itself is a monument established by God in honour of the death of Jesus, as that event in which, beyond all the works of crea-

[p. 33]

tion, he hath “rested and been refreshed,” or in which all his perfections have attained their highest manifestation. Communicants acquiesce in the design God had in view, and follow it out by entering into his rest, shewing back to him and before men that death which he, with divine complacency, exhibits to them.—But this shewing is also a triumphant exercise. The death of Jesus hath founded his glorious administration. Having spoiled principalities and powers on his cross, the Father hath given him a name above every name, and committed all power in heaven and earth into his hand. Of this committal we have an emblematic disclosure in the fourth and fifth chapters of the Revelation of John: In the fourth, a vision of the throne of the Father to whom, as sustaining the majesty of Deity, the supreme power in the management of providence and grace primarily belongs; in the fifth, a vision of the bestowment of this power on Jesus, under the idea of a sealed book given to be opened by him. His fitness with respect to ability, and his right by the covenant-promise (which in its reference to royalty, had been restricted first to Judah, and afterwards to the house of David), are proclaimed in his titles, “The Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root and the Offspring of David.” But his worthiness and immediate claim are traced to his death. He appeared to John, “as a Lamb that had been slain.” And on the delivery of the book, the song is raised, “Thou art worthy to take the book and to open the seals thereof, for thou wast slain and hast redeemed us to God.” Similar is the celebration of the death of Jesus in the Supper. There that illustrious event is triumphantly shewed forth, “till he come again;” that is, till all the comings which pertain to his administration, shall

[p. 34]

terminate in his second and glorious appearance. Communicants, by the observance of this ordinance, stand forth to public view, ranged under the standard of the cross, the armies of heaven who follow the Lamb in his vesture of blood. They shew his death to the confusion not only of personal enemies, but of the public foes of his kingdom; and thus feasting in the very “presence of their enemies,” celebrate that death as the permanent ground of victorious administration, and an event in which they anticipate the triumph of final success.

The Supper is, lastly, AN ORDINANCE OF VOWING. If the solemn profession of communicants be such as we have stated, it necessarily involves an engagement to be the Lord’s. There is in their conduct a new surrender of themselves, a new avowal of his cause in the world, and a dedication of all that they are and possess to its support. An obligation is thus, as really as in baptism, brought on the conscience, whether it be recognized or not. But this is not all, if vowing be implied in our profession of faith and obedience, we ought to realize that profession by actually engaging in the exercise. The Lord’s table is indeed on many accounts a most proper place, and the time of communicating a most fit opportunity for making express vows to God. The believer can scarcely avoid it. Here he has the most lively view of his infinite debt to the grace and love of the eternal Three. He feels himself unable to make any suitable return. He is at a loss to express the gratitude with which his heart is warmed. “What shall I render for all thy benefits? Truly, O Lord, I am thy servant.” Here he has the most clear view of his redemption,—sees that a price was paid for him,—that he is redeemed to God. ‘I am not my own, then, I am bought with

[p. 35]

‘a price; thou hast the best claim to me; I will endeavour, as I am bound, to glorify thee in my body and spirit which are thine.’ Beholding here the glorious liberty into which he is brought, he yields himself to his deliverer, and, like the servant who allowed his ear to be bored to the door post, vows eternal service to him. A feast, as a token of reconciliation, is an opportunity for mutual assurances and engagements. When a superior, in particular, feasts with his subjects, and especially with pardoned rebels, it is a season in which he expects they will assure him of their attachment and regard. Feasts upon sacrifices were of old in various countries, occasions of solemn engagement. Well, Christ at his table gives his people the tokens and pledges of his love, and shall they not in their turn give him similar assurances? ‘Yes, Lord,’ the communicant will say, ‘constrained by this love, I am thine, everlastingly thine, and these sacred pledges of thy love shall be the tests of my fidelity, and witnesses against me if I ever abandon thy service, or renounce thy cause in the world.’—Such vows imply a renovation of all former engagements. And we may not suppose the exercise foreign to the New Testament state, while vowing is determined by the law to be a moral duty, and while such predictions as these remain to be fulfilled, “One shall say, I am the Lord’s, another shall call himself by the name of Jacob;”—the heathen shall know the Lord in that day,—they shall “vow a vow and perform it*.”

_____

* Isa. xliv. 5. xix. 21.