Chapter XX: Introduction (20)

[Sidenote: _Answ._] I _answer_ in the plain and express Words of Christ, I _am the _Bread_ of Life_, saith he; [123]_he that cometh to me shall never hunger; he that believeth in me shall never thirst_. And again, _For my Flesh is Meat indeed, and my Blood is Drink indeed_. So whosoever thou art that askest this Question, or readest these Lines, whether thou accountest thyself a Believer, or really feelest, by a certain and sad Experience, that thou art yet in the Unbelief, and findest that the outward Body and Flesh of Christ is so far from thee, that thou canst not reach it, nor feed upon it; yea, though thou hast often swallowed down and taken in that which the _Papists_ have persuaded thee to be the real Flesh and Blood of Christ, and hast believed it to be so, though all thy Senses told thee the Contrary; [Sidenote: _The _Lutherans_ and _Calvinists_ Opinions of the Flesh and Blood of Christ in the _Supper_ so called._] or (being a _Lutheran_) hast taken that Bread, in and with and under which the _Lutherans_ have assured thee that the Flesh and Blood of Christ is; or (being a _Calvinist_) hast partaken of that which the _Calvinists_ say (though a Figure only of the Body) gives them who take it a real Participation of the Body, Flesh, and Blood of Christ, though they never knew how nor what Way; I say, if for all this thou findest thy Soul yet barren, yea, hungry, and ready to starve, for want of something thou longest for; _know_ that that _Light_ which discovers thy Iniquity to thee, which shews thee thy Barrenness, thy Nakedness, thy Emptiness, is that _Body_ which thou must partake of, and feed upon: But that till by forsaking Iniquity thou turnest to it, comest unto it, receivest it, though thou mayest hunger after it, thou canst not be satisfied with it; [124]for it hath no _Communion with Darkness, nor canst thou drink of the Cup of the Lord, and the Cup of Devils: And be Partaker of the Lord’s Table, and the Table of Devils_, 1 Cor. x. 21. [Sidenote: _How the inward Man is nourished._] But as thou sufferest that small _Seed of Righteousness_ to arise in thee, and to be formed into a Birth, that new substantial Birth, which is brought forth in the Soul, supernaturally feeds upon and is nourished by this spiritual Body; yea, as this outward Birth lives not but as it draws in Breath by the outward elementary Air, so this new Birth lives not in the Soul, but as it draws in and breathes by that spiritual Air or Vehicle. And as the outward Birth cannot subsist without some outward Body to feed upon, some outward Flesh, and some outward Drink, so neither can this inward Birth, unless it be fed by this inward Flesh and Blood of Christ, which answers to it after the same Manner, by Way of Analogy. And this is most agreeable to the Doctrine of Christ concerning this Matter. For as without outward Food the natural Body hath not Life, so also saith Christ, [125]_Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his Blood, ye have no Life in you_. And as the outward Body, eating outward Food, lives thereby, so Christ saith, [126]That _he that eateth him shall live by him_. So it is this inward Participation of this _inward Man_, of this _inward_ and _spiritual Body_, by which Man is united to God, and has Fellowship and Communion with him. [127]_He that eateth my Flesh, and drinketh my Blood_, saith Christ, _dwelleth in me, and I in him_. This cannot be understood of outward eating of outward Bread; and as by this the Soul must have Fellowship with God, so also, so far as all the Saints are Partakers of this _one Body_ and _one Blood_, they come also to have a _joint Communion_. Hence the Apostle, 1 _Cor._ x. 17. in this Respect saith, That they [128]_being many, are one_ Bread, _and one_ Body; and to the Wise among the _Corinthians_ he saith, [Sidenote: _The true spiritual Supper of the Lord._] _The _Bread_ which we break is the Communion of the Body of Christ_. This is the _true_ and _spiritual Supper_ of the Lord, which Men come to partake of, by hearing the Voice of Christ, and opening the Door of their Hearts, and so letting him in in the Manner abovesaid, according to the plain Words of the Scripture, _Rev._ iii. 20. _Behold I stand at the Door and knock; if any Man hear my Voice, and open the Door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me_. So that the _Supper of the Lord_, and the _supping_ with the Lord, and partaking of his Flesh and Blood, is no Ways limited to the Ceremony of _breaking Bread_ and _drinking Wine_ at particular Times, but is truly and really enjoyed, as often as the Soul retires into the Light of the Lord, and feels and partakes of that heavenly Life by which the inward Man is nourished; which may be and is often witnessed by the Faithful at all Times, though more particularly when they are assembled together to wait upon the Lord.

[123] John 6. 35. _and_ 55.

[124] 1 Cor. 6. 14.

[125] John 6. 53.

[126] John 6. 57.

[127] John 6. 56.

[128] 1 Cor. 10. Verse 16.

§. IV. But what Confusion the Professors of Christianity have run into concerning this Matter, is more than obvious; who, as in most other Things they have done, for want of a true spiritual Understanding, have sought to tie this _Supper_ of the Lord to that Ceremony used by Christ before his Death, of _breaking Bread_ and _drinking Wine_ with his Disciples. [Sidenote: _Man is not tied to the Ceremony of _breaking Bread_ and _drinking Wine_ which Christ did use with his Disciples, this only was a Shadow._] And though they for the most Part agree generally in this, yet how do they contend and debate one against another! How strangely are they pinched, pained, and straitened to make the spiritual Mystery agree to that Ceremony! And what monstrous and wild Opinions and Conceptions have they invented, to inclose or affix the Body of Christ to their _Bread_ and _Wine_? From which Opinion not only the greatest, and fiercest, and most hurtful Contests, both among the Professors of Christianity in general, and among _Protestants_ in particular, have arisen; [Sidenote: _What makes the Christian Religion hateful to the _Jews_, _Turks_, and _Heathens.] but also such Absurdities, irrational and blasphemous Consequences have ensued, as make the Christian Religion odious and hateful to _Jews_, _Turks_, and _Heathens_. The Professors of Christianity do chiefly divide in this Matter into three Opinions.

[Sidenote: _The _Papists_ Faith of Christ’s Flesh._] The _First_ is of those that say, _The Substance of the Bread is transubstantiated into the very Substance of that same Body, Flesh, and Blood of_ Christ, _which was born of the Virgin_ Mary, _and crucified by the_ Jews; so that after the _Words of Consecration_, as they call them, _it is no more Bread, but the Body of_ Christ.

[Sidenote: _The _Lutherans_ Faith._] The _Second_ is of such who say, _The Substance of the Bread remains, but that also that Body is in, and with, and under the Bread_; so that _both the Substance of Bread, and of the Body, Flesh, and Blood of _Christ_, is there also_.

[Sidenote: _The _Calvinists_ Faith._] The _Third_ is of those, that, denying both these, do affirm, _That the Body of _Christ_ is not there corporally or substantially, but yet that it is really and sacramentally received by the Faithful in the Use of Bread and Wine_; but how or what Way it is there, _they know not, nor can they tell; only we must believe it is there, yet so that it is only properly in Heaven_.

It is not my Design to enter into a Refutation of these several Opinions; for each of their Authors and Assertors have sufficiently refuted one another, and are all of them no less strong both from Scripture and Reason in refuting each their contrary Parties Opinion, than they are weak in establishing their own. For I often have seriously observed, in reading their respective Writings, and so it may be have others, that all of them do notably, in so far as they refute the contrary Opinions; but that they are mightily pained, when they come to confirm and plead for their own. Hence I necessarily must conclude, that none of them had attained to the Truth and Substance of this _Mystery_. Let us see if _Calvin_,[129] after he had refuted the two former Opinions, be more successful in what he affirms and asserts for the Truth of his Opinion, who, after he hath much laboured in overturning and refuting the two former Opinions, plainly confesseth, that he knows not what to affirm instead of them. [Sidenote: J. Calvin_’s faith of Christ’s Flesh and Blood uncertain._] For after he has spoken much, and at last concluded, _That the Body of Christ is there, and that the Saints must needs partake thereof_, at last he lands in these Words, _Sect. 32_. “But if it be asked me how it is? I shall not be ashamed to confess, that it is a Secret too high for me to comprehend in my Spirit, or explain in Words.” Here he deals very ingenuously; and yet who would have thought that such a Man would have been brought to this Streight in the Confirming of his Opinion? considering that a little before, in the same Chapter, _Sect. 15._ he accuseth the School-men among the _Papists_, and I confess truly, [Sidenote: _The like the _Papists.] _In that they neither understand nor explain to others how Christ is in the Eucharist_, which shortly after he confesseth himself he cannot do. If then the School-men among the _Papists_ do neither understand nor yet explain to others their Doctrine in this Matter, nor _Calvin_ can comprehend it in his Spirit, which I judge is as much as not to understand it, nor express it in Words, and then surely he cannot explain it to others, then no Certainty is to be had from either of them. There have been great Endeavours used for Reconcilement in this Matter, both betwixt _Papists_ and _Lutherans_, _Lutherans_ and _Calvinists_, yea, and _Calvinists_ and _Papists_, but all to no Purpose; and many Forms and Manners of Expressions drawn up, to which all might yield; which in the End proved in vain, seeing every one understood them, and interpreted them in their own Way; and so they did thereby but equivocate and deceive one another. The Reason of all this Contention is, because they had not a clear Understanding of the _Mystery_, and were doting about _Shadows_ and _Externals_. For both the Ground and Matter of their _Contest_ lies in Things extrinsick from, and unnecessary to, the main Matter. [Sidenote: _Satan busies People in _outward Signs_, _Shadows_, and _Forms_, whilst they neglect the _Substance.] And this hath been often the Policy of _Satan_, to busy People, and amuse them with outward Signs, Shadows, and Forms, making them contend about that, while in the mean Time the _Substance_ is neglected; yea, and in contending for these Shadows he stirs them up to the Practice of Malice, Heat, Revenge, and other Vices, by which he establisheth his Kingdom of Darkness among them, and ruins the Life of Christianity. For there have been more Animosities and Heats about this one Particular, and more Bloodshed and Contention, than about any other. [Sidenote: _What hath been hurtful to the_ Reformation.] And surely they are little acquainted with the State of _Protestant Affairs_, who know not that their Contentions about this have been more hurtful to the _Reformation_ than all the Opposition they met with from their common Adversaries. [Sidenote: _Two _Errors_ the Ground of the Contention about the _Supper.] Now all those uncertain and absurd Opinions, and the Contentions therefrom arising, have proceeded from their all agreeing in two general Errors concerning this Thing; which being denied and receded from, as they are by us, there would be an easy Way made for _Reconciliation_, and we should all meet in one spiritual and true Understanding of this _Mystery_: And as the Contentions, so would also the Absurdities which follow from all the three fore-mentioned Opinions, cease and fall to the Ground.

[129] Inst. Lib. 4. Cap. 17.

The _First_ of these _Errors_ is, In making the Communion or Participation of the Body, Flesh, and Blood of Christ to relate to that outward Body, Vessel, or Temple, that was born of the Virgin _Mary_, and walked and suffered in _Judea_; whereas it should relate to the Spiritual Body, Flesh, and Blood of Christ, even that _heavenly_ and _celestial Light_ and _Life_, which was the Food and Nourishment of the Regenerate in all Ages, as we have already proved.

The _Second Error_ is, In tying this Participation of the Body and Blood of Christ to that Ceremony used by him with his Disciples in the Breaking of Bread, _&c._ as if it had only a Relation thereto, or were only enjoyed in the Use of that Ceremony, which it neither hath nor is. For this is that Bread which Christ in his Prayer teaches to call for, terming it [Greek: ton arton ton epiousion: τον αρτον τον επιουσιον], i. e. the _Super-substantial Bread_, as the Greek hath it, and which the Soul partakes of, without any Relation or necessary Respect to this Ceremony, as shall be hereafter proved more at Length.

These _two Errors_ being thus laid aside, and the Contentions arising therefrom buried, all are agreed in the main Positions, _viz._ _First_, [Sidenote: Believers Souls _do really feed upon the Flesh and Blood of_ Christ.] That the _Body, Flesh, and Blood of Christ is necessary for the nourishing of the Soul_. _Secondly_, That the _Souls of Believers do really and truly partake and feed upon the Body, Flesh, and Blood of Christ_. But while Men are not content with the Spirituality of this _Mystery_, going in their own Wills, and according to their own Inventions, to strain and wrest the Scriptures to tie this spiritual Communion of the Flesh and Blood of Christ to outward Bread and Wine, and such like carnal Ordinances, no Wonder if by their carnal Apprehensions they run into Confusion. But because it hath been generally supposed that the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ had some special Relation to the Ceremony of _breaking Bread_, I shall first refute that Opinion, and then proceed to consider the Nature and Use of that _Ceremony_, and whether it be now _necessary_ to continue; answering the Reasons and Objections of such as plead its Continuance as a necessary and standing Ordinance of Jesus Christ.

§. V. [Sidenote: I.] _First_, It must be understood that I speak of a necessary and peculiar Relation otherwise than in a general Respect: For inasmuch as our Communion with Christ is and ought to be our greatest and chiefest Work, we ought to do all other Things with a Respect to God, and our Fellowship with him; [Sidenote: _That the Communion of the _Body_ and _Blood_ of _Christ_ has no special Relation to the Ceremony of _breaking Bread_, neither by Nature nor Precept._] but a special and necessary Respect or Relation is such as where the two Things are so tied and united together, either _of their own Nature_, or _by the Command of God_, that the one cannot be enjoyed, or at least is not, except very extraordinarily, without the other. Thus _Salvation_ hath a necessary Respect to _Holiness_, because _without Holiness no Man shall see God_; and the _Eating of the Flesh and Blood of_ Christ hath a necessary Respect to our having Life, because if we _eat not his Flesh, and drink not his Blood_, we cannot have _Life_; and our _feeling of God’s Presence_ hath a necessary Respect to our being found meeting in his Name by divine Precept, because he has promised, _Where two or three are met together in his Name, he will be in the Midst of them_. In like Manner our receiving _Benefits_ and _Blessings from God_ has a necessary Respect to our _Prayer_, because if _we ask_, he hath promised _we shall receive_. Now the Communion or Participation of the _Flesh and Blood of Christ_ hath no such necessary Relation to the _breaking of Bread_ and _drinking of Wine_; for if it had any such necessary Relation, it would either be from the _Nature of the Thing_, or from some _divine Precept_; but we shall shew it is from neither: Therefore, _&c._

_First_, It is not from the _Nature of it_; because to partake of the Flesh and Blood of Christ is a spiritual Exercise, and all confess that it is by the Soul and Spirit that we become real Partakers of it, as it is the Soul, and not the Body, that is nourished by it. But to eat Bread and drink Wine is a natural Act, which in itself adds nothing to the Soul, neither has any Thing that is spiritual in it; because the most carnal Man that is can as fully, as perfectly, and as wholly eat Bread and drink Wine as the most spiritual. _Secondly_, Their Relation is not _by Nature_, else they would infer one another; but all acknowledge that many eat of the Bread and drink of the Wine, even that which they say is _consecrate_ and _transubstantiate into the very Body of Christ_, who notwithstanding have not Life eternal, have not Christ dwelling in them, nor do live by him, as all do who truly partake of the Flesh and Blood of Christ without the Use of this Ceremony, as all the _Patriarchs_ and _Prophets_ did before this Ordinance, as they account it, was instituted. [Sidenote: _The Patriarchs and Prophets, without this Ceremony’s Use, were true Partakers of Christ’s Flesh and Blood._] Neither was there any Thing under the Law that had any direct or necessary Relation hereunto; though to partake of the Flesh and Blood of Christ in all Ages was indispensably necessary to Salvation. [Sidenote: _The Paschal _Lamb_ its End._] For as for the _Paschal Lamb_, the whole End of it is signified particularly, _Exod._ xiii. 8, 9. to wit, _That the_ Jews _might thereby be kept in Remembrance of their Deliverance out of_ Egypt.

_Secondly_, It hath not Relation by _divine Precept_; for if it had, it would be mentioned in that which our Adversaries account the Institution of it, or else in the Practice of it by the Saints recorded in Scripture; but so it is not. For as to the _Institution_, or rather _Narration_, of Christ’s Practice in this Matter, we have it recorded by the Evangelists _Matthew_, _Mark_, and _Luke_.[130] In the first two there is only an Account of the Matter of Fact, to wit, _That _Christ_ brake Bread, and gave it to his Disciples to eat, saying, This is my Body; and blessing the Cup, he gave it them to drink, saying, This is my Blood_; but nothing of any Desire to them to do it. In the last, after the _Bread_ (but before the _Blessing_, or giving them the _Wine_) he bids them _do it in Remembrance of him_. [Sidenote: _The _Institution_ of the _Supper_, or Narration of _Christ’s Practice_ therein._] What we are to think of this Practice of Christ shall be spoken of hereafter. But what necessary Relation hath all this to the Believers partaking of the Flesh and Blood of Christ? The End of this for which they were to do it, if at all, is to _remember_ Christ; which the Apostle yet more particularly expresses, 1 _Cor._ xi. 26. _to shew forth the Lord’s Death_; but to _remember the Lord_, or _declare his Death_, which are the special and particular Ends annexed to the Use of this Ceremony, is not at all to partake of the Flesh and Blood of Christ; neither have they any more necessary Relation to it than any other two different spiritual Duties. For though they that partake of the _Flesh and Blood of_ Christ cannot but remember him, yet the Lord and his Death may be remembered, as none can deny, where his Flesh and Blood is not truly partaken of. So that since the very particular and express End of this Ceremony may be witnessed, to wit, the Remembrance of the Lord’s Death, and yet the Flesh and Blood of Christ not partaken of, it cannot have had any necessary Relation to it, else the Partaking thereof would have been the End of it, and could not have been attained without this Participation. But on the contrary, we may well infer hence, that since the positive End of this Ceremony is not the Partaking of the Flesh and Blood of Christ, and that whoever partakes of the Flesh and Blood of Christ cannot but remember him, that therefore such need not this Ceremony to put them in Remembrance of him.

[130] Matt. 26. 17. Mark 14. 22. Luke 22. 19.

[Sidenote: Object.] But if it be said, _That _Jesus Christ_ calls the Bread here his _Body_, and the Wine his _Blood_, therefore he seems to have had a special Relation to his Disciples partaking of his Flesh and Blood in the Use of this Thing_;

[Sidenote: _Answ._] I _answer_, His calling the Bread his _Body_, and the Wine his _Blood_, would yet infer no such Thing; though it is not denied but that Jesus Christ, in all Things he did, yea, and from the Use of all natural Things, took Occasion to raise the Minds of his Disciples and Hearers to Spirituals. [Sidenote: _The Woman of_ Samaria, John 4. 14.] Hence from the Woman of _Samaria_ her drawing _Water_, he took Occasion to tell her of that _living Water_, which _whoso drinketh of shall never thirst_; which indeed is all one with his _Blood_ here spoken of; [Sidenote: _The _Well_, the _Loaves_, the _Bread_ and _Wine_, Christ takes Occasion from, to shew the _inward Feeling.] yet it will not follow that _that Well_ or _Water_ had any necessary Relation to the _living Water_, or the _living Water_ to it, _&c._ So Christ takes Occasion, from the _Jews_ following him for the _Loaves_, to tell them of this _spiritual Bread_ and _Flesh_ of his Body, which was more necessary for them to feed upon; it will not therefore follow that their following him for the _Loaves_ had any necessary Relation thereunto. So also Christ here, being at Supper with his Disciples, takes Occasion, from the _Bread_ and _Wine_ which was before them, to signify unto them, That as that _Bread_ which he brake unto them, and that _Wine_ which he blessed and gave unto them, did contribute to the Preserving and Nourishing of their Bodies, so was he also to give his _Body_ and shed his _Blood_ for the _Salvation_ of their _Souls_. And therefore the very End proposed in this Ceremony to those that observe it is, to be a _Memorial of his Death_.

But if it be said, _That the Apostle, _1 Cor. x. 16._ calls the Bread which he brake the Communion of the Body of Christ, and the Cup the Communion of his Blood_;

I do most willingly subscribe unto it; but do deny that this is understood of the outward Bread, neither can it be evinced, but the contrary is manifest from the Context: For the Apostle in this Chapter speaks not one Word of that Ceremony; for having in the Beginning of it shewn them how the _Jews_ of old were made Partakers of the _spiritual Food_ and _Water_, which was Christ, and how several of them, through _Disobedience_ and _Idolatry_, fell from that good Condition, he exhorts them, by the Example of those _Jews_ whom God destroyed of old, to flee those Evils; shewing them that they, to wit, the _Corinthians_, are likewise Partakers of the _Body and Blood_ of Christ; of which Communion they would rob themselves if they did Evil, because _they could not drink of the Cup of the Lord and the Cup of Devils, and partake of the Lord’s Table and the Table of Devils_, Ver. 21. which shews that he understands not here the using of outward Bread and Wine; because those that do drink the _Cup of Devils_, and eat of the _Table of Devils_, yea, the wickedest of Men, may partake of the outward Bread and outward Wine. [Sidenote: _The wickedest may take the outward Bread and Wine._] For there the Apostle calls the Bread _one_, Ver. 17. and he saith, _We being many, are one Bread, and one Body; for we are all Partakers of that one Bread_. Now if the Bread be _one_, it cannot be the _outward_, or the _inward_ would be excluded; whereas it cannot be denied but that it is the Partaking of the _inward Bread_, and not the _outward_, that makes the Saints truly _one Body_ and _one Bread_. And whereas they say, That the _one Bread_ here comprehendeth both the _outward_ and _inward_, by Virtue of the _sacramental Union_; [Sidenote: _The _sacramental Union_ pretended, a _Figment.] that indeed is to affirm, but not to prove. As for that _Figment_ of a _sacramental Union_, I find not such a Thing in all the _Scripture_, especially in the _New Testament_; nor is there any Thing can give a Rise for such a Thing in this Chapter, where the Apostle, as is above observed, is not at all treating of that _Ceremony_, but only, from the Excellency of that Privilege which the _Corinthians_ had, as believing Christians, _to partake of the Flesh and Blood_ of Christ, dehorts them from _Idolatry_, and partaking of the Sacrifices offered to _Idols_, so as thereby to offend or hurt their weak Brethren.

[Sidenote: Object.] But that which they most of all _cry out_ for in this Matter, and are always _urging_, is from 1 _Cor._ xi. where the Apostle is particularly treating of this Matter, and therefore, from some Words here, they have the greatest Appearance of Truth for their Assertion, as Ver. 27. where he calls the _Cup_ the _Cup of the Lord_; and saith, _That they who eat of it and drink it unworthily, are guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord_; and Ver. 29. _Eat and drink their own Damnation_; intimating hence, that this hath an immediate or necessary Relation to the Body, Flesh, and Blood of Christ.

[Sidenote: _Answ._] Though this at first View may catch the Unwary Reader, yet being well considered, it doth no Ways evince the Matter in Controversy. As for the _Corinthians_ being in the Use of this Ceremony, why they were so, and how that obliges not Christians now to the same, shall be spoken of hereafter: It suffices at this Time to consider that they were in the Use of it. _Secondly_, That in the Use of it they were guilty of and committed divers Abuses. _Thirdly_, That the Apostle here is giving them Directions how they may do it aright, in shewing them the right and proper Use and End of it.

These Things being premised, let it be observed, That the very express and particular Use of it, according to the Apostle, is _to shew forth the Lord’s Death_, &c. But _to shew forth the Lord’s Death, and partake of the Flesh and Blood of_ Christ, are different Things. He saith not, _As often as ye eat this Bread, and drink this Cup, ye partake of the Body and Blood of_ Christ; but, _ye shew forth the Lord’s Death_. So I acknowledge, _That this Ceremony_, by those that practise it, hath an _immediate Relation_ to the _outward Body_ and _Death of_ Christ upon the _Cross_, as being properly a Memorial of it; but it doth not thence follow that it hath any _inward_ or _immediate Relation to Believers communicating or partaking of the spiritual Body and Blood of _Christ_, or that spiritual Supper_ spoken of _Rev._ iii. 20. For though, in a general Way, as every religious Action in some Respect hath a common Relation to the spiritual Communion of the Saints with God, so we shall not deny but this hath a Relation as others. Now for his calling _the Cup the Cup of the Lord_, and saying, _They are guilty of the Body and Blood of _Christ_, and eat their own [131]Damnation in not discerning the Lord’s Body_, &c. I _answer_, That this infers no more necessary Relation than any other religious Act, and amounts to no more than this, That since the _Corinthians_ were in the Use of this Ceremony, and so performed it as a religious Act, they ought to do it worthily, or else they should bring Condemnation upon themselves. Now this will not more infer the Thing so practised by them to be a necessary-religious Act obligatory upon others, than when the Apostle saith, _Rom._ xiv. 6. _He that regardeth the Day, regardeth it unto the Lord_, it can be thence inferred that the Days that some esteemed and observed did lay an Obligation upon others to do the same. But yet, as he that esteemed a Day, and placed Conscience in keeping it, was to _regard it to the Lord_, and so it was to him, in so far as he dedicated it unto the Lord, the _Lord’s Day_, he was to do it worthily; and if he did it unworthily, he would be guilty of the _Lord’s Day_, and so keep it to his own Damnation; so also such as observe this _Ceremony of Bread and Wine_, it is to them the _Bread of the Lord_, and _the Cup of the Lord_, because they use it as a religious Act; and forasmuch as their End therein is to _shew forth the Lord’s Death_, and _remember his Body_ that was crucified for them, and his _Blood_ that was shed for them, if, notwithstanding, they believe it is their Duty to do it, and make it a Matter of Conscience to forbear, if they do it without that due Preparation and Examination which every religious Act ought to be performed in, then, instead of truly remembering the Lord’s Death, and his Body and his Blood, they render themselves guilty of it, as being in one Spirit with those that crucified him, and shed his Blood, though pretending with Thanksgiving and Joy to remember it. [Sidenote: _The _Pharisees_ guilty of the Blood of the _Prophets.] Thus the _Scribes_ and _Pharisees_ of old, though in Memory of the Prophets they garnished their Sepulchres, yet are said by Christ to be _guilty of their Blood_. And that no more can be hence inferred, appears from another Saying of the same Apostle, _Rom._ xiv. 23. _He that doubteth is damned if he eat_, &c. where he, speaking of those that judged it unlawful to eat Flesh, _&c._ saith, _If they eat doubting, they eat their own Damnation_. Now it is manifest from all this, that either the doing or forbearing of this was to another, that placed no Conscience in it, of no Moment. So I say, he that eateth that which in his Conscience he is persuaded it is not lawful for him to eat, doth eat his own _Damnation_; so he also that placeth Conscience in eating Bread and Wine _as a religious Act_, if he do it unprepared, and without that due respect wherein such Acts should be gone about, he _eateth and drinketh his own Damnation, not discerning the Lord’s Body_, i. e. not minding what he doth, to wit, _with a special Respect to the Lord, and by Way of special Commemoration of the Death of Christ._

[131] Or _Judgment_, as the Greek Word properly signifies.

§. VI. Having now sufficiently shewn what the true Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ is, how it is partaken of, and how it has no necessary Relation to that Ceremony of Bread and Wine used by Christ with his Disciples; [Sidenote: II. _Whether this Ceremony be a necessary Part of the New Covenant, and Obligatory._] it is fit now to consider the _Nature_ and _Constitution_ of that _Ceremony_ (for as to the _proper Use_ of it, we have had Occasion to speak before) whether it be a _standing Ordinance_ in the Church of Christ obligatory upon all, or indeed whether it be any necessary Part of the Worship of the _New Covenant Dispensation_, or hath any better or more binding Foundation than several other Ceremonies appointed and practised about the same Time, which the most of our Opposers acknowledge to be ceased, and now no Ways binding upon Christians. We find this Ceremony only mentioned in Scripture in four Places, to wit, _Matthew_, _Mark_, and _Luke_, and by _Paul_ to the _Corinthians_. If any would infer any Thing from the Frequency of the mentioning of it, that will add nothing; for it being a Matter of Fact, is therefore mentioned by the Evangelists; and there are other Things less memorable as often, yea, oftener mentioned. _Matthew_ and _Mark_ give only an Account of the Matter of Fact, without any Precept to do so afterwards; simply declaring, [132]That Jesus at that Time did desire them to _eat of the Bread, and drink of the Cup_; to which _Luke_ adds these Words, _This do in Remembrance of me_. If we consider this Action of Christ with his Apostles, there will appear nothing singular in it, for a Foundation to such a strange _Superstructure_, as many in their airy Imaginations have sought to build upon it; for both _Matthew_ and _Mark_ express it as an Act done by him as he was eating. [Sidenote: _The breaking of Bread was no singular Thing, but a Custom among the Jews._] _Matthew_ saith, _And as they were eating_; and _Mark_, _And as they did eat, Jesus took Bread_, &c. Now this Act was no singular Thing, neither any solemn Institution of a _Gospel Ordinance_; because it was a constant Custom among the _Jews_, [Sidenote: P. Riccius.] as _Paulus Riccius_ observes at Length in his _Celestial Agriculture_, that when they did eat the Passover, the Master of the Family did take Bread, and bless it, and breaking it, gave of it to the rest; and likewise taking Wine, did the same; so that there can nothing further appear in this, than that Jesus Christ, _who fulfilled all Righteousness_, and also observed the _Jewish Feasts and Customs_, used this also among his Disciples only, that as in most other Things he laboured to draw their Minds to a further Thing, so in the Use of this he takes Occasion to put them in Mind of his Death and Sufferings, which were shortly to be; which he did the oftener inculcate unto them, for that they were averse from believing it. [Sidenote: What it is _to do this in Remembrance of Christ._] And as for that Expression of _Luke_, _Do this in Remembrance of me_, it will amount to no more than this, that being the last Time that Christ did eat with his Disciples, he desired them, that in their eating and drinking they might have Regard to him, and by the Remembering of that Opportunity, be the more stirred up to follow him diligently through Sufferings and Death, _&c._ But what Man of Reason, laying aside the Prejudice of Education, and the Influence of Tradition, will say, That this Account of the _Matter of Fact_ given by _Matthew_ and _Mark_, or this Expression of _Luke_, to _Do that in Remembrance of him_, will amount to these Consequences, which the Generality of Christians have sought to draw from it; as calling it, _Augustissimum Eucharistiæ Sacramentum_; _venerabile Altaris Sacramentum_; _the principal Seal of the Covenant of Grace, by which all the Benefits of Christ’s Death are sealed to Believers_; and such like Things? But to give a further Evidence, how these Consequences have not any Bottom from the Practice of that Ceremony, nor from the Words following, _Do this_, &c. let us consider another of the like Nature, as it is at Length expressed by _John_, Chap. xiii. 3, 4. 8. 13, 14, 15. [Sidenote: _Christ’s washing of Feet, and its Manner related._] _Jesus riseth from Supper, and laid aside his Garments, and took a Towel, and girded himself: After that, he poureth Water into a Bason, and began to wash the Disciples’ Feet; and to wipe them with the Towel wherewith he was girded: _Peter_ said unto him, Thou shalt never wash my Feet; _Jesus_ answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no Part with me. So after he had washed their Feet,--he said, Know ye what I have done to you? If I then your Lord and Master have washed your Feet, ye also ought to wash one another’s Feet: For I have given you an Example, that ye should do as I have done to you._ As to which, let it be observed, that _John_ relates this Passage to have been done at the same Time with the other of _breaking Bread_; [Sidenote: _Compared with the _breaking_ of _Bread.] both being done the Night of the _Passover_, after Supper. If we regard the Narration of this, and the Circumstances attending it, it was done with far more Solemnity, and prescribed far more punctually and particularly than the former. It is said only, _As he was eating, he took Bread_; so that this would seem to be but an _occasional Business_: But here _he rose up_, _he laid by his Garments_, _he girded himself_, _he poured out the Water_, _he washed their Feet_, _he wiped them with a Towel_: He did this to all of them; which are Circumstances surely far more observable than those noted in the other. The _former_ was a Practice common among the _Jews_, used by all Masters of Families upon that Occasion; but _this_, as to the Manner, and Person acting it, _to wit_, for the Master to rise up, and wash the Feet of his Servants and Disciples, was more singular and observable. In the breaking of _Bread_, and giving of Wine, it is not pleaded by our Adversaries, nor yet mentioned in the Text, that he particularly put them into the Hands of all; but breaking it, and blessing it, gave it the nearest, and so they from Hand to Hand: But here it is mentioned, that he washed not the Feet of one or two, but of many. He saith not in the _former_, _That if they do not eat of that Bread, and drink of that Wine, they shall be prejudiced by it_; but here he saith expresly to _Peter_, That _if he wash him not, he hath no Part with him_; which being spoken upon _Peter_’s refusing to let him wash his Feet, would seem to import no less, than not the Continuance only, but even the Necessity of this _Ceremony_. In the former he saith, as it were passingly, _Do this in Remembrance of me_; but here he sitteth down again, he desires them to consider what he hath done, tells them positively, [Sidenote: _The washing one another’s Feet was left as an Example._] _That as he hath done to them, so ought they to do to one another_: And yet again, he redoubles that Precept, by telling them, _He has given them an Example, that they should do so likewise_. If we respect the Nature of the Thing, it hath as much in it as either _Baptism_ or the _breaking of Bread_; seeing it is an outward Element of a cleansing Nature, applied to the outward Man, by the Command and the Example of Christ, to signify an inward Purifying. I would willingly propose this seriously to Men, who will be pleased to make use of that Reason and Understanding that God hath given them, and not be imposed upon, nor abused by the Custom or Tradition of others; _Whether this Ceremony, if we respect either the Time that it was appointed in, or the Circumstances wherewith it was performed, or the Command enjoining the Use of it, hath not as much to recommend it for a standing Ordinance of the Gospel, as either _Water-baptism_, or _Bread_ and _Wine_, or any other of that Kind?_ I wonder then what Reason the _Papists_ can give, Why they have not numbered it among their _Sacraments_, except merely _Voluntas Ecclesiæ & Traditio Patrum_.

[132] Matt. 26. 26. Mark 14. 22. Luke 22. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 23. _&c._

[Sidenote: Object.] But if they say, _That it is used among them, in that the _Pope_, and some other Persons among them, used to do it once a Year to some poor People_;

[Sidenote: _Answ._] I would willingly know what Reason they have why this should not be extended to all, as well as that of the _Eucharist_ (as they term it) or whence it appears from the Text, that [_Do this in Remembrance of me_] should be interpreted that the _Bread_ and _Wine_ were every Day to be taken by all _Priests_, or the _Bread_ every Day, or every Week, by the _People_; and that that other Command of Christ, _Ye ought to do as I have done to you_, &c. is only to be understood of the _Pope_, or some other Persons, to be done only to a few, and that once a Year? Surely there can be no other Reason for this Difference assigned from the Text. [Sidenote: _The _Protestants_ use not the _washing of Feet.] And as to _Protestants_, who use not this Ceremony at all, if they will but open their Eyes, they may see how that by Custom and Tradition they are abused in this Matter, as were their Fathers in divers _Popish_ Traditions. For if we look into the plain Scripture, what can be thence inferred to urge the one, which may not be likewise pleaded for the other; or for laying aside the one, which may not be likewise said against the Continuance of the other? If they say, _That the former, of washing the Feet, was only a Ceremony_; what have they, whence they can shew, that this _breaking of Bread_ is more? If they say, _That the former was only a Sign of Humility and Purifying_; what have they to prove that this was more? If they say, _That one was only for a Time, and was no Evangelical Ordinance_; what hath this to make it such, that the other wanted? Surely there is no Way of Reason to evade this; neither can any Thing be alleged, that the one should cease, and not the other; or the one continue, and not the other; but the mere Opinion of the Affirmers, which by Custom, Education and Tradition, hath begotten in the Hearts of People a greater Reverence for, and Esteem of the one than the other; which if it had fallen out to be as much recommended to us by Tradition, would no Doubt have been as tenaciously pleaded for, as having no less Foundation in Scripture. But since the former, to wit, _The washing of one another’s Feet_, is justly laid aside, as not binding upon _Christians_; so ought also the other for the same Reason.

§. VII. [Sidenote: _The _breaking_ of _Bread_ not used now in the same Manner as Christ did._] But it is strange that those who are so clamorous for this _Ceremony_, and stick so much to it, take Liberty to dispense with the Manner or Method that Christ did it in; since none that ever I could hear of, except some _Baptists_ who now do it, use it in the same Way that he did: Christ did it at _Supper_, while they were eating; but the Generality of _Protestants_ do it in the _Morning_ only by itself. What Rule walk they by in this Change?

[Sidenote: Object.] If it be said, _These are but Circumstances, and not the Matter; and if the Matter be kept to, the Alteration of Circumstances is but of small Moment_;

[Sidenote: _Answ._] What if it should be said the Whole is but a _Circumstance_, which fell out at that Time when Christ eat the _Passover_? For if we have Regard to that which alone can be pleaded for an Institution, _viz._ these Words, _Do this in Remembrance of me_; it doth as properly relate to the Manner as Matter. For what may or can they evince in Reason, that these Words, _Do this_, only signify _eat Bread_, and _drink Wine_, but it is no Matter _when ye eat_, or _how ye eat it_; and not as _ye have seen me eat it at Supper with you, who take Bread, and break it, and give it you; and take the Cup, and bless it, and give it you; so do ye likewise_? And seeing Christ makes no Distinction in those Words, _Do this_, it cannot be judged in Reason but to relate to the Whole; which if it do, all those that at present use this Ceremony among _Christians_, have not yet obeyed this Precept, nor fulfilled this Institution, for all their Clamours concerning it.

[Sidenote: Object.] If it be said, _That the Time and Manner of doing it by Christ was but accidentally, as being after the _Jewish Passover_, which was at Supper_;

[Sidenote: _Answ_.] Besides that it may be answered, and easily proved, _That the Whole was accidental_, as being the _Practice of a Jewish Ceremony_, as is above observed; [Sidenote: _The_ breaking _of_ Bread _was a Jewish Ceremony_.] may it not the same Way be urged, That the _drinking of Wine is accidental_, as being the natural Product of that Country; and so be pleaded, That in those Countries where Wine doth not grow, as in our Nation of _Scotland_, we may make use of _Beer_ or _Ale_ in the Use of this Ceremony; or _Bread made of other Grain_ than that which Christ used? And yet would not our Adversaries judge this an Abuse, and not right Performing of this _Sacrament_? Yea, have not Scruples of this Kind occasioned no little Contention among the Professors of _Christianity_? [Sidenote: _Contests between the _Greek_ and _Latin Churches_, concerning the _leavened_ and _unleavened Bread_ in the _Supper.] What great Contest and Strife hath been betwixt the _Greek_ and _Latin_ Churches concerning the _Bread_? While the one will have it _unleavened_, reckoning, because the _Jews_ made use of _unleavened Bread_ in the _Passover_, that it was such Kind of _Bread_ that Christ did break to his Disciples; the other _leavened_: Therefore the _Lutherans_ make use of _unleavened Bread_, the _Calvinists_ of _leavened_. [Sidenote: Farellus.] And this Contest was so hot, when the Reformation was beginning at _Geneva_, that _Calvin_ and _Farellus_ were forced to fly for it. But do not _Protestants_, by these Uncertainties, open a Door to _Papists_ for their excluding the People from the _Cup_? Will not [_Do this_] infer positively, That they should do it _in the same Manner, and at the same Time_, as Christ did it; as well as that they should use the _Cup_, and not the _Bread only_? Or what Reason have they to dispense with the one, more than the _Papists_ have to do with the other? Oh! What strange Absurdities and Inconveniencies have _Christians_ brought upon themselves, by superstitiously adhering to this Ceremony! Out of which Difficulties it is impossible for them to extricate themselves, but by laying it aside, as they have done others of the like Nature. [Sidenote: _The _Clergy_ taking Bread do bless, and give it: The _Laity_ must take and eat, not bless it._] For besides what is above-mentioned, I would gladly know how from the Words they can be certainly resolved that these Words [_Do this_] must be understood to the Clergy, _Take, bless, and break this Bread, and give it to others_; but to the Laity only, _Take and eat_, but do not _bless_, &c.

[Sidenote: Object.] If it be said, _That the Clergy only were present_;

[Sidenote: _Answ._] Then will not that open a Door for the _Popish Argument_ against the _Administration of the Cup to the People_? Or may not another from thence as easily infer, _That the Clergy only ought to partake of this Ceremony_; because they were the Apostles only then present, to whom it was said, _Do this_? But if this [_Do this_] be extended to all, how comes it all have not Liberty to obey it, in both _blessing_, _breaking_, and _distributing_, as well as _taking_ and _eating_? [Sidenote: _Hot Contests about the Manner of taking it, and to whom to give it_.] Besides all these, even the _Calvinist Protestants_ of _Great Britain_ could never yet accord among themselves about the _Manner of taking it_, whether _sitting_, _standing_, or _kneeling_; whether it should be given to the _Sick_, and those that are _ready to die_, or not? Which Controversies, though they may be esteemed of small Moment, yet have greatly contributed, with other Things, to be the Occasion, not only of _much Contention_, but also of _Bloodshed_ and _Devastation_; so that in this last Respect the _Prelatick Calvinists_ have termed the _Presbyterians_ schismatical and pertinacious; and they them again superstitious, idolatrous, and papistical. Who then, that will open their Eyes, but may see that the Devil hath flirted up this Contention and Zeal, to busy Men about Things of _small Moment_, that _greater Matters_ may be neglected, while he keeps them in such ado about this Ceremony; though they lay aside others of the like Nature, as _positively commanded_, and as _punctually practised_; and from the Observation of which half so many Difficulties will not follow?