Ii.—The Lord’S Supper.
CHAPTER V. SACRAMENTAL INSTRUCTION.1741
The Dispensation of the Sacraments must be considered one of the most important parts of our Ministry. For its efficient administration, however, we need sound and Scriptural apprehensions of their nature and uses, of the privileges and obligations connected with them, and of the medium by which their grace is received
SACRAMENTAL INSTRUCTION. 391
and applied. Our Homily well states their distinct character—‘In prayer we beg at God’s hands all such things as otherwise we cannot obtain. In the Sacraments he embraces, and offers himself to be embraced by us.’ 1742 In opening a fuller discussion, we refer to their primary object, which is to exhibit Christ in all the rich treasures of grace and salvation. For, ‘Christ being taken away,’—as Bishop Davenant admirably observes—‘there remains nothing in the Sacraments but an empty show.’ 1743 In this view, we can only acknowledge the full love of our God in these gracious ordinances—so fraught with encouragement to our faith, and so eminently conducive to our holiness. For while they bring our Great Redeemer vividly before our eyes, at the same time, they ‘serve as bonds of obedience to God, strict obligations to the mutual exercise of Christian charity, provocations to godliness, preservations from sin, memorials of the principal benefits of Christ.’ 1744 It is indeed a melancholy instance of the perverseness of the human mind, that these enriching blessings should, from their misuse or neglect, be so unfruitful to the church—that these ordinances—intended to cement the body of Christ in one fellowship 1745—should be a matter of ceaseless controversy and division. Hooker’s statement is beyond question, that ‘Sacraments are more diversely interpreted and disputed than any other part of religion.’ 1746
In order to arrive at some accurate view of the subject, we will expound the comprehensive definition of a Sacrament which our Church has given for the instruction of her younger members. She explains it to be an ‘outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given to us; ordained by Christ himself, as a means by which we receive that grace, and as a pledge to assure us of it.’ 1747
The Ordination of Christ himself—the Divine Head of the Church1748—is justly laid as the ground of this ordinance. Who besides Christ has the prerogative to ordain?—“Go ye, and teach all nations, baptizing them—do this in remembrance of me.” 1749 Here is his “image and superscription,” stamped broad and clear on the Sacraments of the Church. So sacred is their authority and entireness, that to add to their number, and to violate their integrity, is the high treason of altering the royal seat—it is the defilement of setting “up our threshold by God’s threshold, and our post by
392 VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY
God’s posts.” 1750 The Church rightly claims the liberty to prescribe the mode and circumstances of their celebration.1751 But she never places her own requisites on a Divine basis. She maintains the strictest regard to the spirit of the Apostolic rules,1752 and carefully preserves both the substance and the form of the elements, and the representation of the inestimable blessings which they shadow.
Our definition next proceeds to the more distinct description of a Sacrament, considering it as a sign—a means—and a seal—of grace.
It is obviously a sign—‘a sign of profession, and a mark of difference, by which men are discerned from others:’ 1753 it is ‘a mark of distinction, to separate God’s own from strangers.’ 1754 Thus the sign of circumcision1755 distinguished the Jews from the Heathen around them; and the Christian Sacraments are the open ‘badges of Christian men’s profession’ before the world.1756 Thus also their outward parts are the signs of their inward and spiritual grace 1757—‘visible signs of invisible grace.’ 1758 Indeed they may be called ‘the visible words,’ 1759 as representing to our eyes what the word speaks to our ears. ‘In the word, we have the promises of God. In the Sacraments we see them.’ 1760
Yet they are far from being empty signs, or naked representations. ‘It greatly offends—says our great writer—‘that some, when they labour to show the use of the holy Sacraments, assign to them no end but merely to teach the mind by other sources, that which the word teaches by hearing. For where the word of God may be heard—which teaches with much more expedition, and fuller explication, anything we have to learn—if all the benefit we reap by Sacraments is instruction, then those who always have an opportunity to use the better means for that purpose, will surely hold the lesser means in lesser estimation. There is undoubtedly some other, more excellent and heavenly, use of Sacraments.’ 1761
Our Church defines this ‘more excellent and heavenly use’ as a ‘means, by which we receive the grace given to us.’ They are ‘visible signs, expressly commanded in the New Testament,
SACRAMENTAL INSTRUCTION. 393
to which is annexed the promise of free forgiveness of our sins, and of our holiness and joining in Christ.’ 1762 ‘Sacraments ordained by Christ are not only badges or tokens of Christian men’s profession, but effectual signs of grace and of God’s goodwill towards us, by which he works invisibly in us.’ 1763 This is in strict accordance with the Scripture testimony. In reference to one Sacrament—‘We are born of water and of the Spirit—buried with Christ by baptism unto death. Christ sanctifies and cleanses his Church with the washing of water. God has saved us by the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost. Baptism now saves us.’ 1764 In individual instances—the baptized Apostle was manifestly strengthened by the holy ordinance.1765
The baptized eunuch—also the jailor—“went on his way rejoicing.” 1766 If the references to the other Sacrament are not equally full, they are not less decided. “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?” 1767 Their brief history fully testifies how largely the Pentecostal converts were refreshed by this communion.1768 We cannot, therefore, doubt that the Scripture designates ‘these heavenly ceremonies’ 1769 as a means of rich and special grace. They exhibit the blessings of the Gospel to all. But to the faithful receiver, they convey to his very bosom the blessings which they exhibit.
We complete our exposition of the Sacrament by setting it out, not only as a means of grace, but a pledge to assure us if it. Thus “the sign of circumcision was a seal of the righteousness of the faith.” 1770 The corresponding Sacrament of baptism is also a seal of the remission of sin to the worthy recipient.1771 “This cup,” our Lord said at the sacred supper, “is my blood of the New Testament” ‘representing his blood as shed to make way for the new covenant, and to ratify it as valid for their benefit 1772—not making the covenant more valid in itself, but a ‘certain sure witnesses, strengthening and confirming our faith 1773 so as to apprehend and apply it. ‘God’s gift’—as Archbishop Sandys excellently remarks—
394 VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY
‘without sealing is sure, as he himself is all one without changing. Yet to bear with our infirmity, and to make us more secure of his promise, he added these outward signs and seals to his writing and his word, to establish our faith, and to certify to us that his promise is most certain.’ 1774
Thus far we have endeavoured to set out what, according to the definition of the Church and in strict harmony with Scripture, forms the sum and substance of a Sacrament. The statement of the Foreign Reformers, as embodied in their public confessions, or as they can be elicited from a careful study of their writings, seem to be marked with some variation; nor do the soundest of them, in the writer’s judgment, come up to the completeness of the Anglican exposition.1775
We next refer to the medium, by which sacramental grace is conveyed. Let it never be supposed that there is any innate grace in these holy ordinances. They are what they are, not by inherent efficacy, but by Divine institution. They are—as our Church most accurately defines them—means only, not sources of grace. The blessing is not in them. But it flows through them from the Great Fountain Head. Nor let this be thought to be a mere verbal distinction. To make them—as some appear to do—sources of grace, is to put them in the place of Christ. To acknowledge them as means, is to depend on Christ in them, to look for his grace imparted by them, to honour his appointment in their diligent use, and thus to ensure his gracious acceptance. We ascribe nothing to the instruments: all belongs to him who condescends to work by them. The statement of Bishop Ridley is eminently clear and evangelical—‘Every sacrament has grace
SACRAMENTAL INSTRUCTION. 395
annexed to it instrumentally. It does not have grace included in it; but to those that receive it well, it is turned to grace. In the same way, water in baptism has grace promised, and by that grace the Holy Spirit is given; it is not that grace is included in the water, but that grace comes by the water.’1776 The judicious Hooker writes to the same purpose—‘Sacraments really exhibit, but for anything we can gather out of what is written about them, they are not really, nor do they really contain in themselves that grace which, with them or by them, it pleases God to bestow.’ 1777
Bishop Ridley—let it be observed—limits the promise of grace in the sacrament to those that receive it well. And indeed, while our Church clearly insists on the unworthy administration as no bar,1778 she clearly sets out a worthy reception as an indispensable means to the blessing. ‘The sacraments were ordained, that we should duly use them. And only in those who worthily receive it, will the sacraments have a wholesome effect and operation. But those that receive them unworthily, purchase damnation for themselves, as St. Paul says.’ 1779 To presume that they would work alike, whether properly used or profaned, is indeed the essence of Romish superstition. This contravenes the Divine rule expressly given to preserve the purity of worship—“Those that honour me I will honour, and those that despise me shall be lightly esteemed.” 1780 ‘The real presence of Christ’s most precious body and blood’—as Hooker most accurately states—‘is not therefore to be sought in the Sacrament, but in the worthy receiver of the Sacrament—in the heart and soul of him that receives it.’ 1781
Our Church justly points out faith as the principle of a worthy reception, and the only medium through which the blessing is applied. To those alone, who ‘rightly, worthily, and with faith receive it,’ our Church conceives the ordinance to be a real and spiritual participation.1782 This is in strict harmony with Scripture. If we are “buried with Christ in baptism,” we “are risen with him from this burial through the faith of the operation of God.”1783 The “baptism that now saves us,” is expressly stated to be—“not the putting away of the filth of the flesh,” which is the mere external ceremony—“but the answer of a good conscience toward God”—the act and profession of faith.1784 The unworthy partaking of the
396 VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY
holy supper is “not discerning the Lord’s body.” 1785 The due reception therefore must be in the exercise of that intelligent faith which discerns the great end, substance, and blessing of the ordinance.
Indeed we can only bless God for the singular wisdom which guided the general statements of our Reformers on this important subject. They took up their position in the true mean between Rationalism and Romanism. They expounded high and glowing views of sacramental grace. But they avoided the Patristic and Romish error, by grounding it on the promise of the covenant, and linking it with the instrumental agency of faith. We need only refer to the Baptismal services, where the prayers are little more than the promises taken hold of by faith, and where the exhortations encourage an undoubting confidence, grounded upon the manifested work and love of the Saviour. We are aware indeed, that statements have been produced from their writings, on the side of exaggerated views of the Sacraments. But we are persuaded that a careful comparison will show these statements as connected with the grand principles of the Gospel, and with a more precise limitation than is often given to them. Nor must it be forgotten that they are applied to the whole ordinance—not to the bare external ceremony—reminding us (with our Homily) ‘that faith is a necessary instrument in all these holy ceremonies, for, as St. Paul says, “without faith it is impossible to please God.”‘1786 Indeed to insist on the efficacy of the Sacraments without this necessary mean, is ‘basely to bind ourselves to the elements and the creatures’ 1787—to make the ordinances a matter of idolatrous dependence rather than of warranted scriptural use—as if the Sacrament itself gave and did everything by its innate grace.
It seems necessary, in order to complete our view of this part of our Ministry, to refer as briefly as possible to some principal errors on the right hand and on the left. That there should be errors—diversified and important errors—connected with so much difference of judgment and corruption of heart, is no marvel. The ordinances themselves are holy. Yet man’s perverseness makes
SACRAMENTAL INSTRUCTION. 397
them an occasion for sin and fearful provocation, even in the profession of a sound faith.1788 Who does not need the warning—“Let him that thinks he stands take heed lest he fall”? 1789
Archbishop Leighton admirably remarks on the two extremes of Sacramental error—‘First, those that ascribe too much to Sacraments, as if they wrought by a natural inherent virtue, and carried grace in them inseparably. Secondly, those who ascribe too little to them—making them only signs and badges of our profession.’ 1790
We have already referred to the first of these errors of excess. We would briefly take note of others that are not less momentous—such as making the Sacraments the casual ground of our justification, which the Apostle distinctly states to be subverting the foundations of the Gospel 1791—connecting the grace inseparably with the sign is repugnant to the testimony of Scripture 1792—of the Church 1793 and of fact—making these ordinances the exclusive means of grace, when the Scripture sets forth the preaching of the word as the grand instrument of salvation 1794—insisting on them as absolutely—and not as our Church does—only ‘generally necessary’ 1795—to salvation. These are errors of no small magnitude; they change the character, obscure the glory, and paralyse the influence of the Gospel of the grace of God. They are characteristic of “another Gospel,” 1796 and not worthy of the name.
Yet we must not forget to guard against errors of defect, which work in every way to the deterioration of our Ministry. Bishop Hoadley’s Sacramental views were consistent with the heretical school to which he unhappily belonged. We should, however, deeply regret to mark any tendencies to his Rationalistic Theory connected with a sounder creed. Those symbols, which are employed to represent and to convey such inestimable blessings, are far beyond naked signs. They claim our reverence, and they should exercise our faith. Animated as they are with life, let us honour them as a means by which our gracious God ‘not only quickens, but also strengthens and confirms our faith in him.’1797 Unbelief is no less dishonourable to God, and paralyzing to his work, than formal superstition.1798 If the Sacraments are means of grace, should we not be looking for grace through them? And may their barrenness not be too often explained thus:—“You have not, because you ask not?’ 1799 To call to mind the rich and free promises
398 VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY
sealed to us here—to lay hold of them by faith—to consider the seals as the earnests of the blessings to be applied in God’s best time—this would establish a confidence fraught with life and energy, bringing hope and joy to our Christian profession. ‘Where they are not either through contempt unreceived, or received with contempt, we are not to doubt that they really give what they promise, and they are what they signify. For we do not take baptism or the eucharist as bare resemblances or memorials of things that are absent, nor do we take them as naked signs and testimonies, merely assuring us of grace that was received before; but they are (indeed and in verity) effectual means by which God, when we take the Sacraments, delivers into our hands that grace which is available unto eternal life, and which the sacraments represent or signify.’ 1800
The great importance of this subject, as a component part of the Christian Ministry, has appeared to the Writer to demand this extended discussion on the general question of the Sacraments. We now proceed to refer to the specific character, privileges, and obligations connected with each of them separately.
I.—BAPTISM.
“What do you mean by this service”—might be asked of us by many who bring their children to baptism only as an ecclesiastical rite—the custom of the place—and the ordinary mode of giving them their name. Baptismal instruction is therefore—as Bishop Burnet reminds us1801—most important. Our people need, for the most part, very full and clear expositions of the nature of this Sacrament, in the three-fold definition which our Church has given—as a sign—a seal—and a means—of grace. As a sign, it marks our original guilt and impurity—and our cleansing by the blood of Christ, and by the regenerating influence of his Spirit. As a means—it encourages the prayer of faith for the communication of his favour and grace. As a seal of the covenant of grace, by which we are mutually engaged to God, and God is engaged to us—it assures our faith of the manifested favour of God toward His believing people and their seed.
That there should be any controversy as to the subjects of Baptism, is a matter of some marvel. There was none in the Apostolic or in the Primitive Church. The circumcision of infants, and the substantial identity of circumcision with baptism 1802—the
BAPTISM, 399
covenant promises of God extending to the believer’s seed 1803—the clear encouragement of the Saviour in admitting children into his kingdom 1804—the unfettered baptismal commission extending to “all nations,” 1805 and to infants, therefore, as a corporate part of nations—the Apostolic records of the baptism of whole households,1806 done in conformity with this command —the acknowledged practice of the early Christians—these particulars combine to strengthen and confirm the declaration of our Church, that ‘the baptism of young children is ...to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the institution of Christ.1807 If we are called on for a plain command [to do it], we are ready to adduce it.1808 God charged his people, under the strictest penalty, to bring their children into covenant with himself1809—and to do that by the seal of the Gospel.1810 Therefore, until the repeal of the statute, and the sentence of their exclusion is produced, we will thankfully hold to the judgment of Bishop Hall—‘children are the blessing of parents; and baptism is the blessing of children and parents.’ 1811
The Divine institution of this Sacrament of admission sufficiently attests to its spiritual character. Its privileges are therefore in accord with this character—an investiture with all the blessings of the Christian covenant.1812 The grace connected with this ordinance is “a death to sin, and a new birth to righteousness” 1813—it is a real, not a relative change.
Yet experience and observation too plainly prove that its privilege
400 VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY
and grace are not necessarily and in all cases connected with the external administration of the sacrament. Surely we can only expect the blessing where God is honoured in the proper use of the ordinance, and where the ends for which he appointed it are duly regarded. The design is that the child of Abraham—the only true member of the Church—may here plead and make good his children’s interest, jointly with his own, in the favour and grace of God. It is not merely a dedicatory 1814—but it is chiefly a covenanting service 1815—pleading and embracing for his child the promises of grace. Therefore, in affixing the seal of God’s own covenant in his appointed ordinance, we give thanks, as duty bound, for the child’s interest in this large expanse of mercy. For whether the grace is granted at the moment, or at some future period—as confirmed to our faith by God’s own seal—in both cases, it is a just ground for present confidence, and therefore of grateful acknowledgment.
In reply to the difficulty which meets us here, arising from the indiscrimination of baptism, we reply that we are Ministers by Divine appointment in a mixed Church.1816 Yet we can only administer spiritual ordinances in a spiritual frame. To conceive of acceptable ordinances for hypocrites and unbelievers is an anomaly—To accommodate the service of the Church to the temperament of “the mixed multitude,” would be to rob the true Christian of his warranted and enlarged confidence in “the promises of God” applied “by us,” 1817—and to approach God with a worship that could not be pleasing to him.1818 Therefore, if the ordinance is profaned, as doubtless it is most fearfully profaned—then on whom does the responsibility lie? Not on us, who—as the Ministers of Christ—can only administer ordinances suited to his own spiritual Church and Service. It lies on those who make his spiritual service a mockery. Doubtless it is the duty of unbelievers—now, just as it was under the old dispensation—to present their children to God in solemn worship and professed covenanting.1819 But it is their sin that they perform this bound duty in an ungodly and unacceptable manner.
In conformity, therefore, with the general character of acceptable worship, our Baptismal service is framed—not, as some would have it, on the principle of charity, but on the principle of faith. The ordinance is “the seal of the righteousness of faith” 1820—“that is, of God’s way of acceptance pleaded and applied by faith. Therefore, the seal only confirms the promise in the exercise of faith.
BAPTISM. 401
In the case of the adult, personal faith is the indispensable requisite. In the case of the infant, faith exercised on its behalf, just as that faith which was honoured in similar cases of helplessness1821—will be equally encouraged here.1822 The child thus “brought to Christ” will be counted as if he “came to him” as a welcome subject of his heavenly kingdom.1823
Hence it is obvious that a doubting spirit, or positive unbelief, substitutes uncertainty and suspicion in the place of the appropriate act and thanksgiving of faith. And can this be honourable to God? Does it not, of itself, and according to the rule of his kingdom,1824 nullify the desired blessing? So far as “faith is made void, the promise is made of no effect.” 1825 On the other hand, a Christian brings his child to the font for the sign and seal of spiritual regeneration, in the assurance of his joint interest in the promises of the covenant. The sponsor, at the same time, in dependence on the promises, engages in the name of the child to renounce the service of his enemies, ‘to believe in God, and to serve him,’ and joins in prayer for the confirmation of those privileges to the child. Such a sight exhibits a clear and animating warrant of faith that is most honourable to the sacred ordinance. God honours his own name—his sovereignty in the gift of faith—and his faithfulness in the acceptance of his own gift.
How enlivening and practical is the constraint of this Sacrament! The child, in his first dawning intelligence, finds ‘his name put into the gospel grant’1826—he is therefore a dedicated child—taken out of the evil world, and pledged to the service of God. To encourage his faithfulness, he feels himself surrounded with the special guardianship of a covenant-keeping God, introduced into his family, commended to the prayer and sympathies of every member of the household, brought under the blessing of all the means of grace—especially under the teaching of “the Holy Scriptures which are able to make him wise unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” 1827 But he must not sleep insensible of his obligations. His responsibilities have now commenced. ‘The sign of the cross’ on his forehead will never be effaced from the eye of God: nor will the day of his Baptismal consecration be blotted out of his book. In the obligations and privileges of the covenant into which he has entered, are contained all the quickening motives for personal devotedness. And therefore his unfaithfulness will not be judged as the heathen, who “did not know his Lord’s will,” but as “the servant,
402 VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY
who knew his Lord’s will, yet did not according to his will, and shall be beaten with many stripes.” 1828
The office of Sponsors—though in the letter of it, this is a human ordinance—yet in the spirit of it, it seems an essential appendage. Baptism is not merely an office of dedication, but of covenanting with God. Therefore, if the infant is a party in the contract, then he must appear by his Surety, who may represent in his own person, the child’s fidelity to his engagements. Hence, the canons require communicants for this office, as the accredited pledge of sincerity. Nor is this Christian standard less necessary as respects the child. We must here “know no man after the flesh”—there is no consideration of convenience, relationship, or worldly advantage. The one principle of our choice is—‘Who will be most helpful in training the child for God?’The difficulty of obtaining satisfactory Sponsors may often delay baptism, sometimes even remove the children wholly from us. Yet the very difficulty often brings conviction of an unchristian life, which makes Christian interference uncongenial and nugatory.1829 We would, however, invite our communicants to step in, where necessary, for this office of love, diligence, sympathy, prayer and helpfulness. We would explain the difficulties which hinder their engagement in this sacred proxy—as if it involved them in the wilful responsibility of the child; or this misconception being removed—as if it were only an empty and fruitless vow. We must not expect the ordinances of the church to change. It is much more important to maintain their due tone and dignity by a Scriptural discipline, than to draw a promiscuous multitude within our external pale, at the expense of all the sacredness of the sacraments, and to the serious injury of religion.
We must remind Parents and Sponsors that the dedication of a child to God, though AN acceptable service, is a most solemn and responsible service. How awful is the profanation of “offering the blind for sacrifice!” 1830 Let them understand what they do—binding themselves
403
and their children to the service of God—and why they do it—in conformity to the appointment of God, and to the terms of the covenant, which is the ground of this Baptismal dedication. Let them know that by this sacred act they profess their personal consecration to his service (for who can give his child freely and sincerely, unless he had “first given himself to the Lord?”) and give their pledge, that their children shall be the Lord’s for ever—trained for his service and glory. Let them be reminded of the great honour of this most responsible trust, and of the fearful guilt of neglecting it. Where it is practicable, no sponsors or parents should present themselves at the font without previous Ministerial instruction;1831 that they may, under the Lord’s blessing, attend this ordinance with a penitent, upright, believing, and thankful spirit—presenting a “holy, and acceptable,” as well as a “reasonable service.”
Nor should we forget to inculcate the proper use of the baptismal engagements. Much use may be made of them as a restraint from sin 1832—an excitement to duty—a support to faith—and an encouragement to prayer; while the remembrance of the investiture of privileges may animate them to press for real participation, as living members of a living Head—in spiritual communion with a spiritual church.1833
II.—THE LORD’S SUPPER.
Our course of instruction naturally passes from the initial sacrament to that which marks the complete privilege of Church membership—the one marking the commencement, the other the support of, the spiritual life.
This sacrament connects itself with the great doctrines of the Gospel. Man as a sinner was condemned under the everlasting curse of the broken law. God accepts the vicarious death of
404 VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY
his own Son as his surety. The great Sufferer himself, on the eve of his death, appointed this ordinance as a perpetual memorial of his acceptable sacrifice, and as a seal of the covenanted blessings which it obtained for his Church.
This memorial eminently illustrates the spiritual character of the ordinance. To use the beautiful language of Bishop Ridley, ‘The remembrance which is thus ordained—as the author of it is Christ, both God and man—so by the Almighty power of God, it far surpasses all kinds of remembrances that any other man is able to make, either of himself, or of any other thing. For whoever receives this holy sacrament thus ordained in remembrance of Christ, he receives with it either death or life.’1834 Cherishing this spiritual remembrance, we shall be preserved from the snare—‘lest the memory of it become a sacrifice; lest the communion become a private eating; lest the two parts become only one—and instead of a heavenly refection, a gross carnal feeding.’ 1835
The distinctness and singular value of this ordinance is that it appears to combine much of the real blessing of the other means. If preaching is to represent Christ crucified, then to “do this in remembrance of him” is to “display his death till he comes.” 1836 ‘Thus also (as Dean Comber justly remarks), ‘that which is more compendiously expressed in the conclusion of our prayers through Jesus Christ our Lord—is more fully and more vigorously set out in this most holy sacrament, in which we intercede on earth in imitation of, and in conjunction with, the great intercession of our High Priest in heaven—pleading here in the virtue and merits of the same sacrifice, which he does there for us.’ 1837
The sacramental table is therefore equally precious and honourable as a command to be obeyed, and a privilege to be enjoyed. It is an exercise of faith—a remembrance of love—a covenant of dedication. Here our Divine Master’s real and spiritual presence is specially granted. ‘His body and blood are truly and indeed taken and received by the faithful.’ And in this participation their souls are strengthened and refreshed, and their acceptance is visibly sealed and established.1838 Here also we enjoy fellowship with the Lord’s people as members of the same body, and partakers of the same privilege.1839 The sacramental graces (repentance and faith, hungering and thirsting for Christ, thanksgiving and brotherly love 1840)
THE LORD’S SUPPER 405
are excited by the contemplation of the Great Author of the ordinance in the wondrous act of his dying love.
We insist on these graces as qualifications for communion, and the profession of them is an intelligent and credible (though not always satisfactory) profession of faith. We can warn hypocrites, but we cannot exclude them. Only the king’s eye can infallibly see the unwelcome guest, and he will not fail to put him to shame.1841 Our duty is to set out the awful guilt of this profanation,1842 connected as it often is—not only with utter ignorance and hardness—but with a formal or self-righteous customary attendance, and with the neglect of the exercise of these graces: graces which alone can realize an acceptable or profitable use of the ordinance.
Generally speaking—our instruction should be directed by Philip Henry’s admirable rule— ‘to so manage it, that the weak may not be discouraged, and yet, that the ordinance might not be profaned;’ 1843 neither raising the standard too high for the humble, contrite, or even scrupulous; nor lowering it to the generality of a formal profession; using only the alluring compulsion of evangelical motive.1844
Our instruction must obviously vary according to the character of the recipient. To the ignorant—the spiritual character and the solemn obligations of the ordinance; the hypocrisy of joining in the deep-toned abasement and elevated exercises of our mode of administration; and most of all, the awful condemnation of unworthy participation—are subjects of direct and awakening conviction. For how affecting is the consideration that the “table” of the Lord (to accommodate the prophetic curse) will “become a snare before them, and that which should have been for their welfare, will become a trap!” 1845 To those who wish to commence their attendance in this unsatisfactory state, we should strongly recommend delay, with much self-enquiry and earnest prayer for Christian sincerity and Divine illumination. Many persons in a state of conviction regard this ordinance as an end—rather than as a means to an end—they put it in the place of Christ, instead of using it as a means of coming to Christ. They have a strong impulse to come to the ordinance, but without any intelligent perception of its meaning. They must be taught that the sacrament is not life, but food to support life; food which nourishes the living,
406 VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY
but cannot quicken the dead. Christ—not the ordinance—is life. Faith in him—not in the means—will ensure acceptance. To the sincere, but scrupulous, we must show that there is the sin of unbelief as well as of presumption—sin in refusing to come, as well as in coming unworthily—the guilt of disobedience to the dying command of our best and dearest friend—the neglect of the privilege of a heavenly feast, of an open confession of the cross, and of brotherly communion with the followers of Christ. The early stage of awakened tenderness and concern needs special instruction and encouragement. The weakest disciple has an equal right to this ordinance with the most established. Perfect assurance is not required; rather the lack of it is supposed. The seal is given in confirmation of what was a matter of doubt before. Let the solemnity of the ordinance enforce preparation, and let its simplicity encourage faith; and so let him come with humility and reverence; and who can doubt his acceptance? 1846
The Sacrificial character and efficacy of this Ordinance—though supported by some names of note, have in the writer’s judgment no warrant from Scripture, which often calls the death of Christ a sacrifice—nowhere is it called the memorial of his death.1847 Indeed the contrast drawn between the one offering of Calvary, and the continual remembrance and offering of the Jewish sacrifices, seems clearly to contravene this view.1848 The studied substitution of the table for the altar in the Sacramental service shows the judgment of our Reformers; and though they have retained the name of Priest, yet it is evidently in reference to its etymological derivation (Presbyter) which has no connection with the sacrificial institution. Her language is in perfect accordance with the original command 1849—‘a perpetual memory of his most precious death.’ It is this memorial and representation of the sacrifice that constitutes its profitable use as a means in the exercise of faith, and in receiving its inestimable blessings. We commemorate (as Waterland justly observes) the grand sacrifice, but we do not reiterate it—no, not so much as under symbols. ‘The whole substance of our Sacrifice, which is frequented by the Church in the Lord’s Supper, consists in prayer, praise, and thanksgiving, and in remembering and
THE LORD’S SUPPER 407
displaying that Sacrifice offered up on the altar of the cross.’ 1850 Any other view is a retrograde movement to the bondage of Judaism.
It is also important to view this sacrament in conformity with the true spirit of the dispensation as—Augustine well reminds us—to ‘venerate these ordinances, not with carnal bondage, but with spiritual liberty.’ 1851 To invest the holy table, as some appear to do, with a cloud of awful mystery, is to make it as if we were living under “the covenant that engenders bondage.” 1852 To the contrary, we have not come to the dark gloom of the Mount that burned with fire, frightening the heart even of the holy mediator. We have come to the Mount of light and love—to the joy of communion with our God. Instead of being barred—as of old—from approaching near, we “have boldness to enter into the holiest.” 1853 Let us deeply cherish the godly reverence in his service—remembering that “even our God is a consuming fire.” 1854 But never let us forget that the holy ordinance is a means of acceptance to a rejoicing heart. And if under the dispensation of shadows, much more we, under the sunshine of the joyous gospel should “go to the altar of God, to God our exceeding joy.’ 1855 To cloud our sunshine is to cramp our privilege, and to palsy our strength.
It is also most important to connect this sacrament with all its high practical obligations—both to our Divine Master, and to his church—to our Lord—as the public profession of his name 1856—as the soldier’s oath of fidelity and devotedness—to his Church, as uniting us in holy brotherhood 1857—one with the body, ready to join in every helpful exercise of love, in all the offices of spiritual relationship 1858—meeting in “his banquetting house,” with “the banner of love over us,” 1859—the spirit of this union shedding all its radiance over our daily profession.
Much profitable use may be made of the ordinance previous to express and immediate invitation. Under an early impression, it presents the most full and simple view of the blessed atonement. The palpable exhibition of the sufferings of the Lord is well calculated to deepen spiritual sensibilities, to lead the young Christian to contemplate a positive obligation, to count the cost of the consequent engagements, and to anticipate the enjoyment of its attendant privileges. Sacramental meetings preparatory to the ordinance, form a most interesting Ministry to the Church.
408 VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY
The familiar exposition of the institution, or of subjects connected with it,1860 makes these meetings especially valuable for Catechumens, as a medium for conveying intelligent as well as tender impressions, and thus removing much perplexing hindrance to “the discerning of the Lord’s body.” Individual instruction is also of great service in restoring the sacrament to its high dignity among Christian ordinances, and thus of instrumentally “adding to the Church such as should be saved.”1861
The more deeply we consider the Sacramental Ministry, the stronger our conviction of its great moment on our whole work. A full, free, and Scriptural exposition is greatly conducive to the fruitfulness and establishment of our people. But if we divest our system of its pure simplicity—it loses its Christian character and its solid usefulness. It ministers to self-righteousness, not to self-abasement—“to bodily exercise”—not to evangelical godliness. It exalts ordinances—not Christ; the Church—not his glorious Head. There can be no life in our Ministrations, if Christ is not the Sun of our system. The dim cloudy glimpse of light which we catch through the reflection of the Church is but a feeble compensation for the loss of the invigorating glow of his direct rays. Let us honour our Divine Saviour fully, and he will honour us largely.