DISCOURSE VIII.
The Ordinance of the Lord’s Supper not a human invention, but a divine Institution.
MATTHEW xxvi. 26–31.
And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said take, eat, this is my body.—And he took the Cup and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, drink ye all of it. For this is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sin. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day, when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.—And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the Mount of Olives.
It affords peculiar satisfaction to the thinking mind, in attending any duty of Religion, to be well assured that it hath either a divine warrant, as thus saith the Lord, or is supported by the clear light of Reason. If we make that a duty which God hath not enjoined upon us, either taught us by the light of nature, or the light of Revelation, we are guilty of will-worship or superstition. In this case, it may justly be said to us, who hath required this at your hands: bring no more vain oblations. To worship God in a way not appointed in his word, or by rites and ceremonies not authorised by him is to presume to interfere with the kingly office of the Saviour. He is king in his Church, and alone had power to make laws and appoint ordinances of worship. It is an infallible mark of an apostate and antichristian Church to pretend to institute sacraments or ordain modes of worship. Our Lord, knowing the proneness of human nature to err, and to adopt modes of worship of their own, has left his people this needful warning and excellent advice. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. We reject, with abhorrence, all human inventions or commandments in things divine. We glory in being guided solely by plain scripture, and not by the opinions or decrees of any men—body of men, or venerable ecclesiastical councils, however wise, or learned, or pious. Superstition and impiety are two extremes, in Religion, which ought to be shunned with equal care. We are not to turn aside to the right hand or to the left. While we anxiously flee from superstition, we should tremble lest we run to the opposite extreme of irreligion. Excellent is the advice of the wise man on this head. Put away from thee a froward mouth, and perverse lips put far from thee. Let thine eyes look right on, and let thine eyelids look straight before thee. Ponder the path of thy feet, and let all thy ways be established. Turn not to the right hand nor to the left; remove thy foot from evil. The right-hand errors of superstition, and the left-hand errors of irreligion are to be avoided with the utmost solicitude.
As worshipping God in more ways than he has appointed, or in unauthorized ways is superstition; so neglecting the ways and ordinances of worship, which he hath most obviously appointed is irreligion. If we refuse, under any pretence whatever, to attend upon that, as duty, which he hath most expressly commanded, and which is altogether reasonable in itself, we are guilty of impiety, or despising his authority, breaking his laws, and rising up in rebellion against him; and of course shall be dealt with accordingly. For to retrench is no less criminal than to add. We are as strictly prohibited from taking away from, as adding to, the revealed will of God. The conscientious mind, therefore, would wish above all things to avoid both crimes, taking from or adding to, going beyond or stopping short of duty. To determine which crime of the two is most heinous, is perhaps beyond our abilities. It is enough for us to know that both are very aggravated Sins, and to be avoided with the utmost solicitude.
We should carefully and diligently worship and serve the Lord our Maker, just as he has commanded us, precisely, and not according to any traditions of men, decrees of councils, uninspired canons, or our own vain imaginations. Religious and Gospel-worship and ordinances should be kept, pure and entire, free from all human mixtures and inventions. These are the feelings and views which our Churches profess to entertain—to walk by—and to hold. If in any instances, or degree, we deviate from them, we do it mistakenly—and unintentionally; and therefore we trust, should this be the case, it will not be imputed to us, as a wilful aberration from the original purity and primitive glory of the Gospel. We profess, and wish to take Christ’s spiritual and heavenly Religion, just as he, and his Apostles have delivered it to us, in the sacred Volume.—And that we may all be fully and perfectly satisfied, that while remembering the bitter sufferings and agonies of our once crucified, but now risen Redeemer in the sacrament of his supper—in the elements of bread and wine, we are only acting in pious obedience to a plain, positive, and express command, as express as any one can be, of our glorious high Priest, the captain of our salvation.—It is proposed, in the sequel, to—
I. Consider the original and actual institution of the sacramental supper—
II. And—the nature of it, and who may rightfully attend upon it.
I. We are to consider the original and actual institution of the sacramental supper. It may not be improper or unuseful, just to notice here as we enter on this important subject, the names, by which this Ordinance of the New Testament dispensation, is commonly known. I now, in the entry, call this ordinance, an ordinance of the New Testament dispensation, because I hope to be able, in the subsequent reasonings, to prove it to be so, to every mind that has candour, and discernment, to see the force of arguments. It has been differently denominated, in the Christian Church, and by different communions of Christians. It has been called the holy Sacrament—the great Gospel feast—the Christian Passover—the holy supper—the Eucharist—the Communion—and the Lord’s supper. Among all these appellations, that by which it most commonly goes, among christians, is the Lord’s supper. In each of these names, there is a peculiar significance and propriety, as is justly observed in those numerous discourses, which have been published on this Gospel-ordinance. Pious and sensible tracts have been published by learned men and sound divines on the nature of this ordinance—the qualifications of the worthy recipients—the terms of admission to its blessed privileges—the due preparation for attending upon it—the graces to be exercised while attending it—the design of it—and the temper and conduct which become christians after rising from the holy table—as well as the danger and sin of an unworthy and irreverent approach to it.—There is, in holy scripture, most obviously, sufficient reason for these several names given to it. But we readily concede, the word sacrament is not in the New-Testament-writings. It signifies binding ourselves to the Lord by covenant-vows and promises. Whenever we participate of the sacrament of the supper, we solemnly covenant, engage, and promise visually to be the Lord’s; to believe his truths, to be faithful in his service, to perform the duties which he enjoins—and to take him for our only Saviour.—
It may also, once for all, be here remarked, that there are, among the various communions of christians, some circumstances relating to this Ordinance, which are not essential, but are left to the convenience, prudence, and situation of the followers of the Son of God. Such as the frequency with which it ought to be celebrated; the posture of the recipients;—the quantity of the Elements to be taken;—and several other less points, which indeed have caused much contention among pious christians, to the disgrace both of reason and religion. In all indifferent things, it is folly to contend. It is no where said how often the Lord’s Supper is to be solemnized—or whether in the morning or evening of the Sabbath-worship—or whether we shall sit—or stand—or kneel while we partake of the symbols of the body and blood of the Redeemer. These circumstances are perfectly immaterial. And how unhappy, that christians should ever interrupt the harmony of churches on account of them, or divide and separate from each other. But about what trifles, mere nothing, will men furiously quarrel! He who kneels at the holy table is as acceptable a worshipper, as he who sits or stands. God looks at the heart, and not at the outward appearance. A composed, decent, and respectful or reverential posture is becoming, and is required. And as often, as the body of the people, with whom we worship, deem it expedient to solemnize the holy ordinance of the supper, we should do it, even if our private opinions should happen to be different. All that Christian Churches are concerned about, is that their Communion-days or Sacramental seasons may not be too near each other, or too far distant, lest the good effects, which they are intended to accomplish, should be frustrated. These observations are made to reconcile unhappy differences in Churches—to prevent needless disputes—and to promote among all that love our Lord Jesus Christ, however distinguished by name or distant in place, union—love—charity—condescension—and mutual forbearance. I hope the glorious day will soon arrive when God’s people of the various denominations, will make the most of their union, and the least of their difference—and be in all essential things, of one mind, of one way: and will lay aside and be ashamed of their foolish attachment to, and intemperate zeal for mere circumstantial points, names, and forms. Happy are the persons or the church that can divest themselves of all party-views and prejudice—of all bigotry and narrow notions, and embrace all pious people, of whatever sect, in the arms of fraternal affection—loving those most, who appear to have most of the temper and holiness of the Gospel! Alas! what mischief to the best of all causes, that of Jesus of Nazareth, hath bigotry done in every age, and every land, where his name has been known!
But the principle design of the present discourse is to prove, from scripture, the reality of such an ordinance, as we call the sacrament of the supper. Is there, then, such an ordinance, in the Christian Church, to be observed by all the followers and disciples of our Lord, in every age and country? If there be not, we are, in our attendance upon it, justly chargeable with adopting human inventions and corruptions. Consequently are guilty of will-worship or superstition. We go beyond what is required of us. We cannot, of course, hope, upon reasonable grounds, for the divine acceptance and approbation. For God is never honored by, or pleased with our religious observances, however seemingly devout or pious we may be, when we presume to offer him, either what he hath not required of us by plain instructions of his own word, or made known to us by the dictates of reason: or when we offer it in the way, which he hath not required. We are to admit as articles of faith all that he hath enjoined, and only what he hath enjoined, and no more. In our practice, as professed christians, we are to do precisely as he hath commanded us. To believe as he tells us, and to do as he bids us, is the chief of religion. As professed followers of the Redeemer of the world, we are to walk in all the ordinances and commandments of the Lord blameless. On the subject of positive duties we are to be guided, in our inquiries, altogether by the revealed will of him, who appoints them.
Laying aside all prepossessions from education, tradition, or other sources, let us candidly and critically enquire, whether Jesus Christ did not, in the most positive and express manner, institute the sacrament of his supper, or a solemn commemoration of his passion and death by partaking of bread and wine set apart to be emblems of his body and blood. And it is not possible for any language to be plainer or easier to be comprehended, than the passage of scripture chosen for our present meditation. In it we have an account, concise, but full, of the original appointment. We have, in it, the history of the first Christian sacrament ever attended upon. The Jewish Passover is done away expressly, by him whom it typified, and who alone had authority to change or abrogate the whole Jewish system. He says, in so many words, that he abolishes it, and would never more attend it. He says, he sets up another and new ordinance, in its room, to be continued in his Gospel kingdom. He himself dispenses the Elements after consecrating them by prayer. His disciples partook of them. All the circumstances are minutely set down. Nay, he ordained, as king of Zion, as head over all things to his Church, that the commemoration of him, by material bread and wine, should be statedly observed to the end of the world, in his Church, for the important purposes of honouring him as a Saviour, and preserving warm in the heart, and perpetuating the memory of his sufferings, his dying love and rich grace. I will explain and illustrate this history of the institution of the Lord’s supper, in the following manner, and principally in the words of an approved expositor.
At the close of the paschal supper before the table was cleared, Jesus to show that he was thereby typified as the lamb of God who was to be sacrificed for us, took in his hand such bread as was in common use, and having set it apart for sacred service, by thanksgiving and prayer, he brake it and distributed it among his disciples, saying take eat; for I appoint this sacramental bread to be henceforth eaten as the memorial of my body’s being broken for your redemption by my sufferings and death; in like manner as the eating of the paschal Lamb was appointed to be a memorial for the preservation of Israel from the destroying angel, and of their deliverance out of Egypt.——After the same manner he likewise took the cup of such wine in his hand as they had at the paschal supper, and setting this apart by thanksgiving and prayer to sacramental use, delivered it to his disciples, saying to every one of them, drink of this: for I appoint this sacramental wine to be henceforth drunk by all my disciples as the representation and memorial of my blood’s being shed for the confirmation of the new covenant, and purchasing of all its blessings; and particularly for the forgiveness of the sins of vast multitudes, not of the Jews only, but of the Gentiles, also, even of all that by faith receive the atonement.——
But I tell you that from this time forward I have done with drinking the juice of the grape in commemoration of Israel’s deliverance, and will have that Ordinance continued no longer than till the things it typified shall be fulfilled by a more glorious redemption in the Gospel-kingdom, which will take place after my resurrection, and will call for a new use of wine in the commemorative Ordinance which I have now instituted.——And when at the close they had sung an hymn or song of praise suited to the occasion, Christ knowing that the time of his being betrayed was just coming on, would not stay to be apprehended in the house, lest he should bring the Master of it, into trouble, nor in Jerusalem, lest he should occasion public tumults and outrages, but retired with his disciples to the Mount of Olives. Here is a minute and circumstantial account given us by the Evangelist Matthew, of the abrogation of the Jewish ordinance of the Passover, and the institution of the Christian Ordinance of the Lord’s supper. It is a plain and particular account, as much so, as can well be conceived. And of all the four Evangelists, it is often observed, Matthew is the most circumstantial and particular in giving us the memoirs of our blessed Lord’s life, discourses and conduct. St. Mark and St. Luke rehearse to us, in the same words, as nearly as may be, the original institution of the ordinance of the Supper, and the abolition of the paschal Supper, and of the continuance of the former in the room of the latter. The Evangelist Mark’s account is this. And as they did eat Jesus took bread and blessed and break it and gave to them and said, take eat this is my body.—And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said unto them this is the blood of the new Testament which is shed for many. Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the Vine until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God. And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the Mount of Olives. St. Luke’s account is of an exactly similar tenor, though the order be a little different. Saying with desire have I desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer. For I say unto you I will not any more, eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And he took the cup and gave thanks and said, Take this and divide it among yourselves. For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the Vine until the kingdom of God shall come. And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it and gave unto them saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying this cup is the new Testament in my blood which is shed for you. No words can be more particular. All the three Evangelists exactly agree in their account. There is indeed a wonderful harmony in this, as in all their other accounts of the birth, life, doctrines, institutions, sufferings, and death of the son of God. They vary so much as is a full proof that they did not transcribe from each other—or pen their Gospels by previous concert:—and they harmonize so completely as to satisfy all candid minds, that they gave a true, and not a false or fictitious history. All these three Evangelists tell us that Jesus Christ, directly and expressly, abolished the ordinance of the Passover. And that he also in the Gospel-kingdom, or his Church, would have bread and wine used as an ordinance commemorative of his broken body and shed blood. He was very formal, as well as solemn and particular in this. He told his disciples what the bread was a sign or symbol of—his body broken: and what the cup was the sign or emblem of—his blood shed for the remission of sin.—All reasonable people will agree that his disciples, who were present and heard him, and partook of the consecrated bread and wine, understood him perfectly. But how did they understand him? If they did not comprehend his meaning, it was because he did not utter himself intelligibly, or they had not common capacities to take up his meaning.—How they understood him, their conduct explains to all who have eyes to see, and ears to hear. Did they ever more after this attend the paschal Ordinance, which had been so dear to the Jewish Church, from the day of its institution?—Did they not on the first day of the week, the Lord’s day, attend public worship, and solemnize the Lord’s Supper? They did. What did they do this for, if their Lord and Master had not ordered them to do it? Dared they, of their own accord, undertake to appoint an ordinance of worship? Their actions speak louder than words can do. In the Acts of the Apostles, we are told xx. Chapter—7. that the disciples and believers solemnized the ordinance of the Lord’s supper—on the Lord’s-day—the day of his resurrection, the first day of the week. And upon the first day of the week when the disciples came together to break bread Paul, preached unto them. This could not be common breaking of bread. No person, in his senses, can imagine the Apostles went about from house to house to do this. It could be no other, therefore, than the sacramental breaking of bread. It was on the first day of the week—the Christian Sabbath, or Lord’s day. They met for public worship. Paul preached to them. They had likewise public prayers. They assembled as we do, and as the Christian world ever since have done, on the Christian Sabbath to preach, to pray, and to solemnize the holy Ordinance of the Supper.—A still more minute account is given us of the various parts of pubic worship observed in the Apostolic days—ii. Chapter—41 and 42 verses—They gladly received the word, and were baptized, and continued steadfast in the Apostle’s doctrine and fellowship—and in breaking of bread and in prayers. They were steadfast. They gladly received the word—took a pleasure in hearing it—in being where it was preached. The ordinance of water-baptism was administered to them. The ordinance of the Lord’s Supper was celebrated and prayers were attended. They—that is, all the professed believers in Jesus Christ continued steadfast in the Apostle’s doctrine and fellowship.——It is then a fact incontrovertible, that in the primitive days of Christianity, the disciples all attended the divine ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s supper—public worship and prayers, on the first day of the week.
To put the matter beyond all doubt, we will see what St. Paul’s view of it was. He was the chief of the Apostles. An immediate revelation was given to him, and he was a wonderful and most successful instrument of spreading the glory of the Gospel—and by whom also a very considerable part of the New Testament was penned.—In his first Letter to the Church at Corinth, he gives us a very particular account of the original institution of the ordinance of the Lord’s supper—and expressly informs us that it is to be perpetuated in the christian Church till the end of the world—that is all christians are by it, to show forth the death of Christ till he come—come to judge the world, and to render to every man according to his deeds.—xi. Chapter—23–27—For I have received of the Lord, that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread: and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also, he took the cup when he had supped, saying this cup is the new Testament in my blood: this do ye as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come. That this is not common daily eating and drinking to support life—to satisfy hunger and thirst is evident to every person, who makes use of his reason in things of religion. Could the Apostle speak as he does, if he meant no more than our common meals? If he meant only common eating and drinking, must he not be insane to speak as he does? Is common eating and drinking a remembrance of Christ’s sufferings and death? If we eat and drink, at our common meals, without a pious and thankful heart, are we guilty of the body and blood of the Lord? Is our common eating and drinking, if not done in a holy manner, eating and drinking damnation to ourselves—not discerning the Lord’s body? Are we to wait, in partaking common nourishment, till we have examined ourselves? But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. The Apostle severely reproves the converts at Corinth for an unworthy, disorderly partaking of the Lord’s Supper, when they assembled for that purpose. He calls the ordinance, the Lord’s Supper. When ye come together into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s Supper. What the Lord’s Supper is, we know as well as we know the meaning of any word ever used: as well as we know what the Lord’s prayer means. The Lord’s Supper is not every meal or any partaking of any food, but a Supper that is particularly so—eminently so. If I were to call every prayer the Lord’s prayer—and every meal I made—or food I received, the Lord’s Supper, I should justly be looked upon, either as a wilful perverter of scripture, or insane.——
Further, the Apostle calls the ordinance now under consideration—the Communion—and partaking of it—setting at the Table of the Lord, the cup—the cup of the Lord. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ. The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ. 1. Cor. x. 16. Again, verse 21. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils; ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and the table of devils. We may also observe, that the abolition of the Jewish passover, and institution of the ordinance of the holy Sacrament of bread and wine, in the room of it, is plainly intimated, when the Apostle calls Christ our Passover sacrificed for us—and directs us to keep the feast, alluding to the paschal feast, in a sincere manner. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. It is most easy and natural to understand this, of the Gospel-feast of the sacramental supper—and that this comes in the room, of the Jewish passover. This is the way in which it is generally and justly understood. Christians, in general, and all denominations, have from this and other very plain passages of scripture, been of the opinion, that the Lord’s Supper as a holy ordinance succeeds the ordinance of the Passover. There were two stated or fixed ordinances in the Jewish church, Circumcision and the Passover. There are two, in the Christian church, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The latter, no doubt, came in place of the former. At least this hath been the common belief; and it will not be given up with out very solid reasons.—None, generally satisfactory, have ever yet been alledged, and it is presumed never will.——To evade the force of the above reasonings and plain scripture, it has been said, all that is contained in scripture relative to the sacramental supper, is only allegory—mere metaphor—and that the Apostle John speaks of a spiritual supper in the soul. That he describes the regeneration of the soul, by Christ’s coming into it, and the sweet pleasures of internal religion, by his supping in the soul, in the following words, is granted.—And the language being highly figurative and metaphorical, is just and beautiful is also allowed. Behold I stand at the door and knock; if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come into him, and sup with him and he with me. The spiritual supping of Christ in the regenerated soul, or his imparting to it, divine consolations, no more proves that there is no ordinance of the Lord’s Supper, to be a standing ordinance in the Church, to the end of the world, than the first verse in the book of Genesis proves it. It doth not refer to it, so much as in the remotest degree. Before a person can bring himself to believe in such a strange perversion of scripture, he must have resolved that he will understand nothing, according to what is in truth. What will not man do, to get clear of plain truth! How will he twist and pervert the plainest words!——
It hath also been alledged, that our divine Lord, directed his disciples to wash one another’s feet as a token of humility—John xiii.—from the 4th to 15th verse. There is no word, in this whole transaction, that can possibly denote that washing of the feet was to be a standing ordinance in the New Testament-dispensation.—Most plainly doth Christ tell them, that what he had done was only an example of humility, or significant way to teach them this important Virtue. It was an outward action calculated to impress their minds with a sense of the duty of being meek—humble—condescending—and forbearing. So they understood it—for they never practised it as an ordinance. We have a right to say they did not, because, we are no where told of their observing it as a divine ordinance. So Christians have, in general, understood it.—One very small handful of pretended followers of Christ have understood it differently—and observed it as a Christian rite. But admitting it to be an ordinance to be observed in Christ’s Church, it doth not disprove the other ordinances.——Upon the whole, we may as well deny any duty as the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper. We may with as good reason affirm that all the scripture is mystery, and none of it capable of being understood, as to affirm that what it says relative to the institution of the Lord’s Supper as a standing ordinance to be continued in his Church to the end of the world, his second coming to judgment, is only mere metaphor—allegory, or figurative language.—But it is one thing to show malice against God’s special ordinances, and another to disprove them. All who reject, despise, and deny them, cannot, with any consistency, pretend to receive the word of God, as the only rule of faith and practice.
Having reviewed the scripture account of the Institution of the Lord’s Supper, as a standing ordinance, in the Christian Church, to be continued to the end of the world.—We shall, as was proposed, examine
II. Very briefly into its nature, and enquire who may rightly attend upon it.—God is infinitely wise, in all that he requires of us, as duty. He never did require, or enjoin upon man what was inconsistent with his wisdom or goodness, or when complied with, would be of no benefit to him. The ordinances of the gospel are spiritual in their meaning, and highly subservient to the purposes of fervent piety.—And the ordinance of the Supper, is an ordinance wherein by giving and receiving sensible signs, we show forth the death of Christ till he come to judge the world at the last day. By visible signs, it represents to us the body and blood of the Saviour. The material emblems, the bread and wine, convey to us, or signify spiritual things; and are designed to impress the mind, with the liveliest ideas of the dreadful sufferings of the son of God, of his blood shed, and body broken for us, by the aid of our external senses, our eyes and taste.—By these Elements, as they are termed, we behold him crucified afresh:—as groaning on Calvary:—as expiring on the Cross:—as rising from the dead:—as bursting asunder the cords of death:—as ascending up into heaven:—as sitting at the right hand of God:—as an all-willing and all-powerful Saviour. Our eyes see it, in the sensible signs. May our hearts realize it! The duty of remembering our Redeemer, in the memorials of his dying love, is most reasonable. We consist of body and soul, and in this ordinance, the apprehensions and devotions of the latter, are aided by the senses of the former. This is treating human nature as being what it is. Had we no body, or were we unembodied spirits this ordinance would be absurd.——
It may be here pertinently added, God has had his sacramental institutions in every age of the world—even, before the fall of man. In a state of innocence, before the Apostacy, the tree of life was the Sacrament, or standing sign by which Adam was to be confirmed, if he had maintained his integrity.—The Rain-bow, a natural phænomenon, was expressly appointed by God, as a sacramental sign, by which his covenant with Noah was ratified, and in which he promised that the world should not, a second time, perish with water.—In the Jewish dispensation, the Passover and circumcision were two noted sacramental institutions, by which God’s covenant of grace, was confirmed.—And in the last, best, and most perfect dispensation of all, the Gospel, are two most plain and important Sacraments, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.
In all these instances, the wisdom, goodness, condescension and grace of the Supreme Being are remarkably manifested. He considers what we are, weak and frail Creatures. He treats us as being what we are, imperfect Creatures; and hath, in the sacraments, appointed outward signs to assist us in conceiving rightly of divine things, and to move and affect the heart.
2dly. The nature of the ordinance of the supper is a commemoration of the sufferings of a dying Redeemer. This is sufficiently proved by the very words of the blessed Jesus in the original institution and distribution of the Elements. This do in remembrance of me. He, as our passover, is sacrificed for us. We are then to remember him, principally, as dying for us:—as bearing our sins in his own body on the tree:—as our propitiatory sacrifice:—as our righteousness. This needs no other proof, than the very words used in the distribution of the outward signs. This is my body which is broken for you:—broken with an inconceivable weight and variety of sufferings.—So again, This Cup is the new Testament in my blood which is shed for you: shed for you—a ratification of the new covenant, which is the meaning of the word Testament here.—Who can hear the divine Jesus—who can see him holding out life and glory, in these appointed signs, saying eat, O friends, and drink ye all of it, without being melted into love, gratitude, and a cordial compliance!—The sacramental supper, then, is a memorial of his dying love, bleeding piety, and wonderful grace.—By it, as the Apostle expresses himself, we show his death till he come—till he come to visit our guilty world as the final judge. As a dying friend he gives us this memorial of his love. He knew that we, in this wicked world, and amid its concerns and temptations, should be apt to forget him in the riches of his grace and bitterness of his death. Accordingly that the manner of his death, and magnitude and variety of his sufferings might never be effaced from the mind, the same night in which he was betrayed, he instituted this precious Ordinance, and bid all his followers, to remember him in it, with all the weight of his divine authority, and affection of ardent friendship.——And can we forget thee, O suffering Immanuel! Whom should we remember, if we forget thee!—Can our cold hearts be unmoved at those things, which thou didst undergo for us!—Can any pretend to be thy disciples, deceiving mortals, and still exert themselves to persuade others not to remember thee, in thy dying command!
3dly, The sacramental supper is a Communion-Ordinance. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread and one body, for we are all partakers of that one bread. This ordinance from these words is often called, by way of eminence, the Communion; and it has been celebrated ever since the days of Christ, as a standing ordinance, in every Country, where the Gospel hath been enjoyed by all denominations of Christians, except some deniers of all outward ordinances. Serious and enlightened Christians have always highly valued it. They have always loved it. They always deemed it a blessed privilege to remember their dear, departed Lord in his own appointed emblems. And while attending upon this great Christian solemnity, the Communion-Table, we commune with one another—with our Father who is in heaven—and with the Redeemer of a fallen world.—As brethren we sit at the same table, commemorate the same suffering Lord, participate in the same rich provision. This shows our union in all essential doctrines, our charity; that in the things of God and Religion we have one heart, one Lord, one hope, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, and that we acknowledge one another as fellow-Christians. We stand, as it were, at the foot of the Cross, beholding the awful sufferings of our Lord, and professedly rest all our hope on his merits and precious blood, our hope of pardon, hope of peace, hope of acceptance with a holy God, and hope of eternal blessedness in heaven.—We also commune, by the divine spirit, with God himself. A spiritual intercourse, at the Sacred Gospel-Passover, is maintained between him and his pious people. He communicates, by the influence of his holy spirit, his love to them; and they pour out their hearts, desires, and prayers before him, and to him. He draws near to them, in mercy, and in the tokens of his favour. They draw near to him in duty. Hence he is said to dwell in them. He smiles upon them through the Son of his love. He owns them in the covenant of grace. He pities them in all their sorrows. He comforts them with his own consolations. He establishes them in the truth and right way. They are, in fine, seated at his own table—a Father’s board, upon the best provision.—What a high privilege! What a sublime felicity!—
And who may rightfully attend upon, and enjoy this divine Ordinance? The answer is, all Christ’s disciples. His professed followers who believe in him, and obey his precepts. All are bound to honor the God of ordinances. He alone can make them profitable and savingly beneficial. Without him, they will be inefficacious.—And to have a right to approach them, we must profess the religion of the Gospel, must admit all its essential doctrines. And behave and conduct accordingly. Do this in remembrance of me is the absolute command. And we are to remember a dying Redeemer, as his friends, as his followers. All, therefore, who have a disposition to live a life and piety and Virtue, to perform the duties thereof, and to walk in the fear of the Lord all their days, may, and ought to approach the holy ordinances of the Gospel.—
In the review of what hath been offered, we infer the indispensible duty of partaking in divine Ordinances. It is as much our duty, as professed Christians, to remember the sufferings of the Lord Jesus Christ to atone for sin, in his own appointed way, as it is to practice the moral virtues of compassion, honesty, or truth. A positive duty is absolutely binding. When it is made known to us, we may not neglect it any more than a moral duty: though moral duties may be more important, and be not to give place to positive: for God will have mercy and not sacrifice. If both, as both are obligatory, cannot be complied with, under certain given circumstances, the moral claims the precedency. All, therefore, are obligated to prepare themselves to wait on God, and to honor him in his own institutions. None can excuse themselves. And what is required on their part hath now been concisely stated.
Again, from our subject we see how exactly we follow Christ in the way, in which we attend upon the Sacramental Supper. We profess to follow him altogether, and to make nothing essential, which he doth not make essential. Every communicant is left to his own opinion and free liberty to stand, or sit, or kneel, as he conceives is the will of his divine Lord. As our professed aim is to honor God, and Jesus Christ, we endeavour to make the revealed will of our Lord, in this Ordinance, our rule. Did he set apart the sacramental bread by prayer, so do we. Did he do the same as to the Cup, so do we. Did he close all by an hymn of praise, so do we. We close the solemnity by a well adapted religious song of praise to God and the Saviour.—
We infer, further, from what hath been said, how painful to the real lover of Virtue and piety it is to reflect that this divine Ordinance, upon which we have been discoursing, should be so much disregarded, as it is, among those who call themselves Christians. Some profane it. Some deprecate and speak evil of it, and of all divine institutions even the christian Sabbath and Christian worship. Some cast off prayer, and maliciously and impiously reproach all christian duty. In this Country, it is with difficulty, that many who, in the judgement of Charity, are Christians, can be persuaded to honor God in his special ordinances. How melancholy the idea!—But what is of all the most affecting is, that there should be so many open enemies to that very Redeemer, who died on purpose to save man, lost man! For he came to seek and save that which was lost. His sceptical scoffers, will not have him to reign over them. Such should remember the observation of the wise man respecting the Deity’s treatment of scorners. Surely he scorneth the scorners: but he giveth grace unto the lowly.—Those who deny Jesus Christ in his word, in his worship, and in his ordinances, and will not have him to save them from sin and misery, will never have any salvation at all. If ye believe not, says our Lord, that I am he, the promised Messiah, ye shall die in your sins.
To conclude all—In the above discourse, I have endeavoured to plead the honor of the only Saviour in his holy ordinance:—I have enquired what saith the scripture, not what men have said, or Councils decreed. If in any thing I have misapprehended, or misrepresented divine truth, I hope it may be forgiven me by a gracious God; and that all my sins may be washed out, as to their guilt, in the precious blood of that Jesus, whose Religion I solemnly believe to be divine, and on whom I am entirely willing, after the most deliberate examination of his celestial pretensions, to risk my eternal felicity.