Part 23
For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn; and, The labourer is worthy of his reward.'
1. He speaks of honour to be paid to them.
Now, honour was a due as well as tribute, which was exacted, Rom. xiii. 7; and it was due in justice.
2. He tells us that the labourer is worthy of his hire; every word which he useth expresseth matter ofjustice:
1. Labourer; this shews that to the work in justice the reward is to be proportioned, Rom. iv. 4.
2. The apostle expresseth a worthiness of his work, that it deserves a valaable consideration, that a labourer is worthy of his hire.
8. The apostle mentions hire, whereby he intends a covenanted reward, such as is setby mutual agreement; so wishes signifies.
4. The words are roi psobet abroi, of his hire, i.¢. which he in justice may call his.
8. This was also the first institution of Christ: Mat. x. 9, 10, ' Provide neither gold nor silver, nor brass in your purses, nor scrip for your journey; neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves; for the workman is worthy of bis meat.'
And to this institution of Christ the apostle plainly refers in Doth these fore-cited texts, 1 Cor. ix., 1 Tim. v.
From all this there flows these corollaries.
1, In the estimate of Christ in his institutions, there is a great difference between the daty of relieving the necessities of our poor brethren, and this duty of maintaining the ministers of the gospel.
For though the relief of the poor be an act of spiritual justice, into which, by spiritual obligations in relation to God and Christ, we are bound, yet the maintenance of ministers is farther due by the rales of all human common justice that are found among men ; so as rules of human justice exact it, and rules of human justice proportion it according to the desert and merit of the thing.
But the poor have not power to claim relief by sucha title, for their tenure is merely from the obligation which the gospel lays upon us. I find indeed a collection for the saints at Jerusalem to be called a debt, Rom. xv. 27; but it was a pecaliar case, for from this church of Jerusalem came the word of the gospel, and the blessings of spiritual things to the Romans and other Gentiles ; but this word did not eome so from Corinth, 2 Cor. xiv. 86, or any other church.
And again, all communication of benefits to the poor is matter of mere service to God, 2 Cor. ix. 12; nay, it is called acts of grace, 2 Cor. viii. 19.
Bat this : is not merely so, for it is both a gift and a sacrifice.
And then besides, the object of this communication to the poor is a certain condition of men, which wisdom must discern and judge of, and proportion euceours accordingly ; but the object of this act of ministers' maintenance is s settled calling and laboor of men, in rewarding which justice must be shewn.
The rule of measuring out collections for the poor is as God hath blessed men, 1 Cor. xvi. 2.
And that instance is only concerning such a collection ; but now in all cases and respects, as the labourer is worthy of his hire, so a minister deserves a dae subsistence.
2. If themaintenance of a minister is thus to be regulated by the common Oxur. IV.] THE CBUROBES OF CHRIST. rules of justice in use and custom, and which are found in like cases, then it is also to be rated according to these considerations to which a regard is had in all like callings.
1. It is to be considered that honour is due to ministers on account of the dignity of their office and work: 1 Tim. v. 17,
' Let the elders that rale well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in word and doctrine.'
2. The necessary charges of their office are to be considered, for by it they are bound to be charitable and hospitable unto others.
3. The hazard to which by their calling they are exposed, is to be had in consideration.
As it is a spiritual warfare, eo as soldiers who stand in the forefront of the battle are most open to wounds or death, so ministers in times of persecution are most obnoxious to danger.
4. The labour of their calling is considerable: it is inward especially, 1 Tim. v.17; it is the labour of the mind, which spends the best spirits and preys on the vitals, and therefore it is the greatest labour of all other.
6. Their education and breeding for this calling is long and expensive, and men's pensions in other places and callings are valued in tlre consideration of what is requisite to thom.
6. The more and greater benefits any culling brings, the more it is prized and valued.
If ministers bring in spiritual bleasings to you (as they do), it is but equal that they should partake in those carnal blessings which you enjoy.
We may . in justice plead all these considerations, and require as good and equal justice as is found to be distributed with respect to any other the like callings among men.
The rule ofjustice is not what the custom of men is to give to ministers, but it is to be taken from the measures of proportion which men observe in respect to other callings, which have the fore-mentioned resemblances to this
8. The party himself who is this sacred officer of Christ, hath « right and power to seta value on tho merits of his office, as well as the people who are the other party; in all like callings it is #0.
Therefore neither the deacon nor the people can oblige the minister to accept what proportion of allowance they please to set him; but he himself hath a right and power to plead for and claim a just, valuable stipend, and accordingly to rate what his office deserves.
It is not left therefore to the wisdom of either the deacons or the people to adjust the value of it.
Therefore the apostle in reference to this maketh use of the word éousia, which implies not only power, but authority.
He useth the word three or four times on this occasion, 1 Cor. ix. 4-6; and he expresseth a right, « title, and dominion which he had over them in this respect, 1 Cor. ix. 12; whereby it is plainly asserted that the people have not a power over the minister, to oblige him to take whatever they are pleased to give, but that he hath authority to claim what is justly due to his calling.
For not only apostles had this power here spoken of, ver. 12, but ordinary officers ; for his words are, 'If others be partakers of this power over you,' and by others he means ordivary ministers
; for the false apostles preached gratis, not requiring any consideration.
4. Unless there were something peculiar found in this calling of the ministry which is not to be found in any calling else, unlegs there were found some gospel duty obliging and requiring ministers to forego their right (which in justice is to be insisted on by them) and to give themselves up to the free
\ arbitrary discretion of the church and her deacons, or unless there were some certain proportion set by God under the New Testament as there was under the Old, a mutual covenant between minister and people is the best and most effectual course to adjust this affair.
This is evident from the instances of which the apostle makes use, 1 Cor. ix. 7.
Unto s labourer in a vineyard a set penny is due, Mat. xx. 2; soldiers also have their fixed pay.
The word used by the apostle, which is sparing, signifies @ soldier's stipend, ag THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox VII.
And when the apostle says, 1 Tim. v. 18, that the labourer is worthy of his hire, that which he is worthy of is called his hire.
The word j210b0¢ signifies merces pacta, a reward fixed by mutual agreement, and therefore they were not to stand to the courtesy of those who were to give it them.
Nor doth the apostle use this expression as a proverb only, but as a role which is to be observed.
What is said, James v. 4, of the hire of the labourers, hath respect to Deut. xxiv. 15.
The instance of shepherds also hath a regard to what was the usage in Laban's time, when great men had others under them to look after their flocks, and agreed to reward them for their labour by giving them some of the sheep which they kept, Gen. xxx. 81.
And to this custom the apostle alludes when he says, ' Who feedeth a flock,'
From all this it necessarily follows that the minister's stipend is not to be left to arbitrary determinations; but as the minister and the church which calls him are joined together by a mutual covenant, so his stipend is to be settled by a like covenant, according to the dictates of nature's equallestrale.
By this way all complaints will be avoided, all things will be preserved in peace between all parties, whether people or officers, and the one will be tied to the other most fastly by their own cords. I shall now eramine what is pleaded for leaving the minister's maintenance unto the free and voluntary contribution of the people.
1. Any instances ont of the Old Testament to this purpose do not seem to be convincing.
What is moral indeed in them holds, and accordingly the apostle brings them, not to be measures of proportioning a maintenance for ministers in like manner, but he only refers to the moral justice of them ; that as the Levites lived wholly on the altar, so it was but just that ministers should live wholly on the gospel, i. e. that they should not live on their own charges, but on what they have for preaching the gospel, that they should not live on their own means, but upon that which comes in by the gospel, 1 Cor. ix. 18,14.
But the particle so doth not mean that they should live after the same way and manner, but only that there was justice and equity for one as well as the other.
And so our Lord Jesus Christ ordained, Mat. x. 9, 10, so that according to that common rule of justice, 'the labourer is worthy,' &c., Christ formed his institution with respect to tho ministry of the gospel.
They were indeed extraordinary disciples, and therefore what he says to them as such, Mat. x. 8, is not a rale of perpetual obligation, but he afterward alters this rule with respect to ordinary ministers, in saying that 'the workman is worthy of his meat,' Mat. x. 10; and he adds these further, Luke x. 7,8.
Thus as Christ in Mat. xviii. ordains the institution of a church, so here he ordains a rule for the maintenance of ministers.
But to answer any objections that may be brought from instances under the Old Testament, it is to be considered that there is not the same way now for the maintenance of the ministers of God as there was then, but there are many differences between one and the other.
1. The Levites then were a tribe set apart from their birth by God himself, and accordingly God says that he would be their portion, Num. xviii. 20.
All these dues therefore which the people paid to them were first paid to God, and he gave them to the Levites, so that they held them not by any law of human justice, but by tenure from God; for as these dues were paid to God,
80 he gave them unto them.
But maintenance is due im justice to ministers as they are labourers, by the same rule which Christ gives, that the labourer is worthy of his hire ; and yet too because ministers are an ordinance of God, and they serve to the worship of God ; therefore offerings made to them are sacrifices to God, and thus they are a gift also as well asadue.
But yet so as the first object to whom the due is paid is the minister, not God, though they communicate to him for God's sake, Gal. vi. 6; i.e. that you
; Cuap. IV.] THE OHURCHES OF CHRIST. may have an ordinance to serve to God's worship, be sure to maintain it ;and therefore this giving to a minister iscalled sowing to the spirit, when all other expenses are called sowing to the flesh, Gal. vi.8. 2. This chiefmaintenance of the Levites under the law was not left to the freedom of the givers, nor did God trust men to assign the proportions of their maintenance, but he did it himself, since he appointed not only free offerings but tithes.
There was @ portion set for them, aud a fifth part of every man's estate went one : way or other for the maintenance of the Levites.
To leave all therefore only to free offerings now, and to cut off set stipends or tithes, is to put us ministers into a worse condition than the Levites were.
And surely God hath not | bound us to these hard terms. What peculiar bond hath God laid upon us | more than upon men in any other callings, that we, who have both the faith of ordinary men, and the spirits and necessities of men, should yet depend merely on free-will offerings?
I am sure, as this answers not our type,80 neither doth it take in the rules of justice whereon a minister's maintenance is founded.
8. The minister's maintenance is not left to the wisdom of the deacon ; for the distribution of the free-will offerings of the people among the priests was by rules ofjustice, and according to equality of proportion, respect and measure being had to their labours, 2 Chron. xxxi. 16, 16.
And now then, to make us wholly to depend on the people's free-will offerings, and that the deacon should dispense them according to his wisdom, would be to make our condition worse than that of the Levites was then, who had treasurers that were faithful to their ehargo, Neh. xiii. 12,18.
4. It was necessary in those times that some should distribute the church's treasure, because the tithes that were needful for the services of the temple were brought into a common bank, and therefore it was necessary that some should be
' ordained to distribute it.
There was a necessity of doing it, and it was not left to discretion.
So here now in the times of the gospel the same ground holds etill, that so far as anything comes in by common collection for s particular use, the deacons ought accordingly to gather it for sucha use, and as the chureh's hands, to convey and distribute it.
This office, mentioned in that fore-cited text, was matter of needful order, not ef type or significancy only, as many things were in the ceremonial law, which, the reason of them ceasing, the use of them is abolished.
For (as Zepperus says) Ratio legis si cesset ipsa lex cessat, non secus atque animd expirante, homo moritur ; ratio ; enim anima legis esse dicitur: if the reason of the law ceaseth, the law iteelf ceaseth, as the soul expiring, thoman dies; forreason is said to be the soul of the law.
Nor doth any place or argument out of the New Testament evince anything contrary to my foregoing assertions.
There is mention indeed of sacrifices to God, Heb. xiii. 16 ; but yet it is a question whether ministers' maintenance be spoken of there, or if it is, it hath that name because it is a maintenance given to uphold God's worship.
And yet still it is given by way of human justice to the minister, who is the person which performs that worship.
It is not given first to the Lord, and then to the minister or church, but to the minister for the Lord's sake, and so it is an honouring God with our substance, and a sowing to the Spirit, and to spiritual ends
; for though it be given to God first, yet that is not inconsistent with its being given to the minister, but both may stand together, and it is still adebt in human justice to the person, the officer.
Paul calls it a gift, Philip. iv. 16,17.
But this doth not import that he had no power to claim it, or that it was not due to him, but he calls their offerings made to him a gift comparatively to the omission of other churches, who, owing the same duty, yet had not done it.
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox VII.
Or he ealls it a gift with respect to their free doing it; and I think the nature of the thing hath a mixture both of debt and of a gift; and as the way of saving us, in the gospel, is compounded both of mercy and justice, so this maintenance of a minister is an act ofjustice and free love too, yet so as that the free love.of the persons, both in the contribution and distribution of it, must come up to the rules ofjustice ; and we ourselves may claim it, and set the due rate and value on it, and fix its right proportion: 'Have we not power,' &c., il Cor. ix. 6-8, 2 Thes. iii. 8, 9.
Thus to give to the maintenance of a minister is a mixed duty, for the apostle gives the rales and urgeth the grounds and reasons both of common justice and also of love.
Heurgeth the gospel consideration, thatit is a sacrifice to God, and a sowing to the Spirit, Heb. xiii. 16, Phftip. iv. 17, £6.
And go he calls it likewises sowing to the Spirit, Gal. vi. 6-8.
And yet likewise he asserts a power to claim it as a due, 2 Thes. iii. 8,9.
He urgeth both arguments, that if gospel considerations did not move them, the plain reasons.of common justice might prevail, that they might consider the just right and claim that ministers have to it, and might be influenced thereby.
'+ Have I not power ?' &c., says he.
He urgeth he duty upon them from the rules of common justice.
We are called by men, and if we are not justly dealt with by them, we have power to leave them. he apostle's case was otherwise, who was called by God, and so was to trust:God for means of livelihood, and to work with his hands, and on all aceounts whatever to preach the gospel, 1 Cor. ix. 16.
2. The contribution of maintenance to -a minister is left free, and it is fit it should be so, 1, that it may be an exercise of grace in 'the people, and an offering of sacrifice to God. And such a freedom agrees with the genius of the ' gospel, and is suited to the nature of its services, which requires a willing. people.
2. This act is left to the freedom ofthe people, that they may have an opportunity of.exercising their love, to the increase of the grace of love in them. Whilstthe:minister enlargeth their hearts, they stretch their purses for him.
8. Hereby ministers avoid the reproach of preaching for lucre ; hereby the callingofthe:ministry becomes more honourable in the eyes ofmen, when they see that it is not mercenary, and that a minister hath not set fees as ethers have. he performance of this act is left to the liberality of the people, that they might have an opportunity of sowing more plentifallyto the Spirit, Gal. vi., even as men, when they would have more, they use to leave it to the liberty of the giver.
6. It is free, that the duty might come under.# move transcendent rule than that of mere justice, though still the act is to be regulated by justice.
Thus, that children should maintain their patents when poor, is a duty which nature and justice requires, and the relief and supplies should be in proportion to their abilities
; yet justice ordinarily sete not the rate and proportion, because the duty is also farther an act of piety, and so left to the good mature and disposition of the person, 1 Tim. v. 4,7.
In this duty you are yet to have a distinct view of justice in your eye.
You must pay it in a just proportion, not only to the necessities of your officers, but suitably to the dignity of their place, and the greatness of their labour.
Though you ape free in communicating it, yet a law of common justice must ran along in the distribution ; for if # be.due by rules of justice, the proportion in distribution is to be regulated by justice, for the proportion is just as well as the thing. As the maintenance is due to the minister,60 you ought to give so much or so much, as by rales of justice his office and work are valuable, so that what you should give, as to the proportion of it, is not left to your wisdom, or the discretion of your spirits, but must go by & just rule.
A double maintenance therefore is due to elders that labour in the word, on account of the honour of their place, as the priests had more than the Cuaar. IV.] THE OHURCHES OF CHRIST.
Levites, and the proportion still must be with respect to the labour, Gal. vi. 6.
He speaks of proportioning out what they gave to teacher as well as pastor, and to one teacher as well as to anothor, by a rule ofjustice.
Thus, though Paul leas needed maintenance than Peter, who was married, and the apostle could and did earn his living, yet, he says, he had as much power to exact the same stipend in justice that Peter had, 1 Cor. ix. 4, 5.
Paul's meaning is, not that he would marry, on purpose to shew that he had the power to put the church to more charges ; but his intent is to shew that, though single and unmarried, he had power to require what might maintain a wife, for he had the same right to the thing as Peter had.
And suppose Paul could live without it, yet his right and claim to it was not lessened thereby, for ' no soldier goes to war at his own charges.'
His design, then, was not to tell them of his being in a single condition, but to urge to them the dignity of his place, and to lay before them the merits of it, and to remind them of the good which he had done them, and what he had deserved at their hands, and to draw up an account of his labours, as a thing in justice, which they ought to respect in proportioning a maintenance accordingly;and to convinee them, that if they did it for other ordinary officers, they ought rather to do it for him: 1 Cor. ix. 11, 12, 'If others have this power,' &.
So that he measures it by justice ; and though he had no wife, and so had not the same urgent necessities of a family as others had, yet he had a power to require the maintenance that was due to his office and work, and might exact the same which others did, whatever his condition was, 1 Cor. ix. 6.
So that it is not only the necessities of the minister's condition that is the rule by which his maintenance is to be measured and proportioned, but the rale of justice takes place here also as a rule of proportion, and it is to be considered what his office and labour deserves.
The measure of the maintenance is not therefore to be varied by men's necessities.
No; the maintenance of the minister is not thus to be determined by the wisdom of the people, but they are to be regulated bya rule of justice in this case, and the calling, the work, and the benefit are to be considered by them, as these things are considered in all callings else.
Let us take but the instance which the apostle gives, 1 Cor. ix. 7; what soldier ever was there, though he had 8 great estate, who would not require his pay, and when he ventures his life for the public good, expect to live upon the public charge ?
And the apostle tells us it is but just that ministers should live of the gospel, 1 Cor. ix. 14.
They may, if they please, generously remit and forego their right, as Paul did, and perhaps, in some cases, it may be their duty to do it ; but this, their right, is no more subjected to any man's discretion to determine concerning it, than their estate in the world, whether personal or real, is. .For after that rate, a minister who hath worldly means might be obliged to give more than other men, and yet, besides, to labour for nothing ; but yet still, a minister may, upon evangelical ground and reasons, forego his right, as Paul did.
Now, the proper way and means of raising a due and competent maintenance for a minister is next to be considered, and I shall deliver my thoughts about it in a few words.
1. There ought to be set means of a competent maintenance established by mutual covenant and agreement, that the pastor and the people may be mutually engaged.
And this will take place in a way ofjustice.
2. There ought, likewise, to be an enlargement of his maintenance by freewill offerings.
This isa natural way, and since the apostle urgeth this duty, both from reasons of nature and justice, 1 Cor. ix. 7-12, why should not both of them be observed ?
Both these ways of maintenance were appointed for the Levites, who, as they had cities for their settled inheritance, and |
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox VII.
| fixed tithes, so they had free-will offerings from the people. And indeed, these two methods joined together are advantageous to both parties, for as the first secures a certainty of maintenance for the minister, so the other makes him to have a dependence on the love and affections of the people ; and as by the one provision is made that the minister may have no causeto
| complain, so by the other opportunity is given to the people of exercising their graces, and of shewing their love and thankfulness.
Whether the sacrament of the Lord's supper oughtto be administered on every .
Acts ii, 42, 'And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine andfellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers,' compared with chap. xx. 7,
' And upon thefirst day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow, and continued his speech until midnight.'
I will now but open the words so far as to give a hint to that point which I mean to discourse of out of them; which is this, whether the Lord's supper be to be administered every Lord's day, for which these places use to be alleged.
When Christ ascended, he bid his disciples teach those whom they converted to do whatsoever they commanded them, Mat. xxviii. 20
Now this book of the Acts records what practices the apostles taught the churches, andinto what formsthey set them. And therefore, whatwe find the churches to have practised, u: ordinary grounds, that we take for a command of Christ.
Therefore TS thispreface on purpose made to this book, Acts i. 2, how that after his resurrection Christ had given commandments to his apostles, on purpose to credit the practices or acts of these apostles, as the title is, as conformed to these commandments.
And in this 42d verse of chapter ii. you have the solemn standing worship, which the first church continued in, as a pattern to all that should follow.
Which standing worship consists of four ordinances, which are together reckoned up nowhere but here, as all church officers nowhere but Rom. xii.: as, 1, apostles' doctrine; 2, fellowship ; 8, breaking of bread; and, 4, prayers.
That by apostles' doctrine is meant preaching, all do agree; and that by prayers are meant the public prayers, which, 1 Tim. ii., the apostles gives order for, not occasional, but standing, is not questioned; but only what is meant by xonovic, (translated fellowship) and brealing of bread is in question.
For the clearing of this, '
1. It is certain that all the practices mentioned here are ordinances, for three of them being so, it had been heterogeneal to mention a fourth thing with them, which was not so; and, 2, they are ordinances of a sort, that is, of which for their continual practice there is like reason ; for it is said, they all continued in them.
Now for a more particular explication of these two words.
1. The word xowavia, fellowship, refers not to apostles more than xAdcers rod derov, breaking of bread, doth, and therefore it is ill translated, apostles' fellowship. I find the sacrament called xo:a»ia, communion, 1 Cor. x. 16; and distribution to poor brethren is called xomavia also, or communication;
| 80 some render it, 2 Cor. ix. 18, dwAérars rijg xocewviag, liberality in com- | municating.
Cuap. V.] THE OHURCHES OF CHRIST.
2. We find giving to the poor, called breaking of bread to the hungry, Isa. lviii.
And the sacrament also is so called: 1 Cor. x. 16, 'The bread . we break,' &.
Now, what must determine which is which?
Surely the manner of the use of the phrase.
Now, though the Lord's supper be called communion, yet it is, cum hoc adjecto, still with this addition ' of the body of Christ' to distinguish it.
But I find xowavia, when only and alone used, as here you seo it is, to be still put for distribution, and for that alone; thus, in three' places, as 2 Cor. ix. 18, 'For your liberal distribution unto them ;' Rom. xv. 26, xosvonriay re worjoacias,
'to make a certain contribui tion ;' and Heb. xiii. 16, 'To communicate, forget not.' On the other side, I find breaking of bread, when simply and barely so expressed, put for the sacrament, 1 Cor. x. 16, but never used for giving to the poor, bat cum adjecto, with an addition, as, break thy bread to the hungry. Hence, therefore, xowavie, here translated fellowship, is certainly to be understood of distribution, and so to be translated.
And this fitly explains all, for then breaking of bread is the sacrament of the Lord's supper ; and if phrases must determine it, the Syriac interpreter thus translates it the Lord's supper, and he best knew the use of the phrases.
And so you have all the four standing ordinances in the church enumerated together, and no more, whereas else you j must want one, as not mentioned.
Obj. But the phrase, breaking of bread, as simply spoken, is used for common eating together.
Ans. It is true, but it is not so here; for that eating is not a churchordinance, and all the rest here are; and where the phrase, breaking of bread, simply taken, is used, it is not used for distribution to the poor; and, therefore, even that breaking of bread which is mentioned (ver. 46) cannot be so understood of distributing bread to the poor.
And if it be further said, that their love-feasts are there meant, and so here in this verse, and so it may be taken still in distinction from breaking of bread to the poor; the answer is, .
1. That their love-feasts were for poor and rich together, and taken up : and used as common signs of Christian love, and therefore so called; and not in order or respect to the poor only or chiefly.
2. Their love-feasts were no church ordinance, and ao not reckoned up here among church ordinances.
Christians might privately feast, and providentially, as they met, eat together, as a sign of love, as in the primitive times they often did ; but not in the way of an ordinance, or a standing ordinance, as the breaking of bread here certainly is. When they came to make an ordinance of their love-feasts, the apostle rejects them: 1 Cor. xi. 22,
* Have you not houses to eat and drink in ?' And ver. 23, 'I have received no such thing ;' and, ver. 84, he infers, 'If any man hunger, let him eat at home.'
And, ver. 83, he calls the Lord's supper eating together:
' When you come together to eat, tarry one for another,'
He speaks of it as the only eating that was to be in a churchas a church ordinance; and so excludes common eating to slack hunger from being an ordinance, bidding them in the next verse to do it at home.
And therefore says he, 1 Cor. x. 16, "The bread which we break, is it not the body of Christ?' which is spoken by way of eminency and singularity, rv dgrov, as being that bread, and only that, which we break as a church ; as, in like manner, he had, in the 1ith chapter, called the Lord's supper eating together, namely as they were a church.
And therefore here, Acts ii., there is also an article put, breaking rou derou, of that bread; so 1 Cor. xi. 26.
Now then, come to Acts xx. 7 5 the breaking of bread there is used in the same sense, namely, of the sacrament also.
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox VII.
1. Not of alms; that is never called breaking of bread, but with distinction, to the hungry, &e.
2. Not of common eating; for that not being an ordinance, no mesting on the Lord's day could be denominated from that; on which day all church meetings are for ordinances only, as principally to hear the word.
And to have said, the disciples met to break bread, meaning common bread, is all one as for us to say, the church meets to salute and see each other, when principally we meet to hear the word, &c.
Now, then, breaking of bread being not here to be understood of alms, nor of ordinary eating, it must needs be meant of the sacrament; seeing there is no other breaking of bread, especially as an ordinance of a church assembly, spoken of in Scripture.
And, 8, this is there spoken, to shew what their custom was to do continually, ex more; and therefore it is all one as if he had said, they met every Lord's day., For, 1. It is spoken of as a ground of Paul's stay seven days, that he might preach to them, as knowing that they would meet on the Lord's day for this
\ occasion, as they were wont.
2. It being customaryto meet on that day for other ordinances, as preaching the word, &o. (for so it was in primitive times), he would rather have mentioned that for which Paul knew they were of necessity to meet, than what was used but one Lord's day extraordinarily
; if this had not been ss customary an ordinance on that day practised as any other.
8. This is written and mentioned, though but in an hint, to skew their practice, and so the apostles' institution ; for they taught them to do whatever Christ commanded. And thiswe see they did on that day, and no other.
The question which I shall discuss and handle upon occasion of these words is this, Whether every Lord's day the sacrament of the Lord's supper
+ is to be administered ?
My method shall be, f MsTo prove by reason, that there is somewhere an institution for it to be found.
2. Further to inquire into these scriptures, and see whether they do not hold it forth.
But, first, let us see what may be done by reason, in the point.
Before I come to those assertions which I would by reason establish, I will, for explication's sake, premise something about the differing rules and ways that God hath ordered about the determining such circumstances of his worship as this is; the consideration whereof will be useful to this and other like points.
It is agreed upon by all here, that no such circumstance is to be determined by the mere will of any man or men, and that God hath left no circumstance of worship so to be determined, especially not any so conducible to edification as this must needs be, How often the Lord's supper is to be administered.
And, therefore, the prescriptions and laws of church governors, from will and authority, or of a whole church, in determining such circumstances, we reject; as that for which the word gives no commissién or allowance, namely, not in such a manner to command a determination.
And in that sense only it is that we say, no circumstance of an ordinance is left unto man; that is, not to men's wills, or the authority of others.
+ Hence it is, that for all such circumstances we do inquire into other rales, either prescribed in the word, or the light of nature and right reason fom the word; and we find two sorts of rales given us to determine em by.
Crap. V.] THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST.
1. A direct word of institution, or example, which we are obliged to follow, as in the Old Testament, to sacrifice twice a-day.
This circumstance was an institution.
So for us to pray twice a-day, I conceive an institution ; and this circumstance is set by God himself.
Now all such rulesdo properly belong to the second commandment, wherein God took upon him to give us rules, by way of institution, which are by men unalterable.
2. The second sort of rules to determine circumstances of the times, &., of an ordinance, ave such as depend merely upon occasions and other circumstances, according as the various conditions of churches and the-oustoms of places do require; which therefore, for the particularity of them, are undetermined by God, and left tothe wisdom of every church to determine them, as occasions shall alter or vary; yet still, not by their mere: will, but by other more general rules given in the word, or the light of nature, to order such cireumstances, in all that variety of oceasions that shall happen and fall out.
As, for example, that this congregation should meet in the daytime, is more for the good and benefit of it, tham to meet in the night; which yet, for the primitive Christians, in regard of the circumstance of persecu- \ tion, might be more convenient (as haply that meeting, Acts xx. 6-8, when
Panl preached so late, as he continued his speech until midnight), was (as some think) in that respect.
Now the Scripture hath not determined the nightof the Sabbath for public assemblies, or the day-time, peremptorily; because, according to: variety of circumstances, churches might meet on either, as their wisdom should judge best; yetso as their wisdom is to be guided by some general rale of nature, os of the word, in determining this; such as is that rale, 1 Cor. xiv. 26, ' Let all be done for edification ;" that is, let all be'done with such circumstances, as with which the ordinances being accompanied, shall serve best to edify the church.
Now, as our case stands, the day-time seems best for our edification by the ordinances, because our spirits are more fresh in the day than in the night; but to them whose meeting in the day costs them their lives, and the loss of ordimances, and all, and though the night was in other respects inconvenient, yet, better then than not (at) all, or than in the day, wherein to have often met would have been for destruction, not for edification.
So now for us, as to what hoar of the day we should meet.
About nine o'clock is the best time, considering the time of preparation before, and the weakness of many, and the due times of repast and meals to come after; and that the church should not meet in the afternoon presently after meals, is the best also for edification, to prevent dulness, or hurt by indigestion,
Now to these hours. (as circumstances stand with us) we are determined, not by an invariable institution, but by @ general rale, ' Let all be done for the most edifying ;' which falls out with us to be these individual hours, which haply to an individual chureh would not; and so the determining it to this hour is not wholly human, for men are bound to determine by rales; yet not wholly or merely divine (as particularly pointing them out, as by an institution other circumstances are), but divine in respect of a general rale, and also human in respect of the particular application ; man's wisdom being left to consider these circumstances, and go to apply these rules.
Now all such rales about such circumstances do belong to the third commandment, which merely takes order for the manner of worship, and the inward and outward circumstances of it; that all be done (in respect of such circumstances) for the best advantage, so that God's name be not taken in THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox VII. vain, in the least degree.
To give an instance or two in the same kind, one in an occasional ordinance, and another in a continued :
1. For the time of administration of circumcision, under the old law, which was an occasional ordinance, there were two rules given by institution:
1.) How oft it wasto beadministered;but once, and never to be reiterated.
2.) There was the fixing also of a particular day whereon it was to be | administered, namely, the eighth day.
But now, | (8.) If the query were made, on what hour of the eighth day ? that was left to rules of the third commandment, which prescribe what was most convenient in respect of outward circumstances.
It was left to such rules as the third commandment prescraes, and left to wisdom to apply.
So for preaching the word, which is a continual ordinance, the circumstance of time was fixed by institution, that it should be used every Sabbath day, Acts xv. 26.
But how much, or how often en that day? That the particular occasion was to decide, as there were more or fewer men of gifts to speak and prophesy, or as the need of the hearers variously required.
Now that you may yet farther understand with what difference these two commands proceed, in the differing rules which they give, about such circumstances of time, I will, by way of further explication, give you it, in these two particulars.
1. Concerning aH such rules which come under the second head, and \ appertain to the third command, take this general rale for certain, about them, to the end you may discern them from institutions which belong to the second command (I speak not now of such circumstances as the light of nature dictates, which also belong to this third.command), the rule is this:
That only such circumstances of the times .of worship which would necessarily vary through new and differing occasions, or various and several sorts of outward circumstances which men's conditions are cast into, and so were necessarily (as occasion should fall out) te be left to churehes by wisdom, and consideration of such circumstances te determine, that these, and these only, are left to be determined by those general rules belonging to the third command.
Thus, 1, the time of all occasional ordinances is (for aught I know) left unto men to determine by those general rules.
And there is no rale given | for them under the gospel, but this, when an occasion calls for them, that is, | their season, and that individual time which is the fittest in all circumstances
| for the ordinance to be administered in.
Thus, when to have a baptism, and to fix the time, it is not now, as in the old law, fixed to the eighth day, ' which was in a type, but is left to the church to determine; only, it is not to be deferred longer than circumstances do in wisdom require.
Thus, in | admonition and excommunication, what the fittest season is doth depend on | circumstances, and the church is to judge.
| 2. This also is the rule, for set ordinances themselves, so far as they are occasional, and setting aside their necessary fixed station. The word preached is a set ordinance instituted for every Lord's-day; yet, if the queation be, how much, how long, or how often in the day, or how often on the week besides; no rale can determine it, but as occasion and need of the hearers require and call for, and their vacancy will permit; so that such times for any ordinances do only come under those general rules, which are capable of new and fresh occasions, that shall call for them and make them seasonable at one time more than another, and are not capable of a set rale.
I add unto this, this other distinction also, for explication:
| That whereas regula generalissima, the most general rale and command : belonging to the third commandment, about the ordering such various cir- | Cuar. V.] THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST. cumstances, is that famous apostolical canon, 1 Cor. xiv. 26, ' Let all things be done to edifying ;' and whereas those other rales whereby God hath, by an institution, fixed set times for worship, in the second or the fourth command, are said to be for edification also, yet, between that edification which flows from God's institution of a circumstance, and that which follows upon & prudent ordering outward circumstances, there is an answerable broad difference.
The edification which follows upon God's institution of a cireumstance, is such as is through God's appointment intrinsecally conjunct with, and inseparable from, the ordinance itself, and immediately accompanying it, from which we are to expect a special blessing, together with the blessing of the ordinance ; and so it affords such a kind of edification as the ordinance itself does, in its measure, being as directly sanctified to edify, as the ordinance itself.
But that edification which follows upon the right ordering of outward circumstances, which are left to men to determine by those general rules, is but an edification extrinsecal to the ordinance, and but secondary and subserving to it; these cireumstances being so to be ordered, that the ordinance may give forth that edification which God hath appointed it unto,
' with the most advantage in all outward respects; and this is that edification which the apostle means, when he says, ' Let all be done to edifying.'
Henee, by the way of corollary, I would have it considered, whether this circumstance, to administer the supper every Lord's-day, be a circumstance of that nature and rank, that if there be not a warrant from practice and institution by God for it, yet any church may at all appoint, or determine it for a standing rule, for edification's sake.
The reason of my query herein is this: because this is a circumstance which, for the administration of other ordinances, God once made an institution of; and therefore for the church to determine or appoint their circumstances for this ordinance without an institation, were to make an image of those institutions of God.
That God made an institution of this cireuamstance in other ordinances, is evident in the sacrifices every Sabbath day, and in reading and preaching the law (Acts xv.) every Sdbbath day, and, under the gospel, in the laying up for the necessities of the saints the first dayof the week, 1 Cor. xvi. 2. But now to make an image or the likeness of God's institution, is that which is forbidden in the second command; and the prohibition of it is indeed the full scope, and speaks the utmost extent of that command, and holds true in all institutions, from the greatest to the least.
We may not make sacraments like to his, nor days like to his (which was Jeroboam's sin, 1 Kings xii. 82), nor temple like his, which the Samaritans did, nor set our posts by his (Ezek. xiii. 8), nor make the like oil that he ordained for Aaron.
And as it holds in greater, so in lesser, institutions of circumstances as well, for they differ but in degrees, and when God hath once stamped his institution on a thing, about his worship, man is not to stamp his, for it were false coinage, which is against God's prerogative, as it is unlawful to coin farthings as well as shillings ; 20 electively to make circumstances in worship every way like to those which God doth, or hath made, as well as to make institutions like to his greater ordinances.
Anything, an institution once set upon it, is for ever after, royal, and not to be imitated selectively in worship, by man, or by his institation.
We are not, I say, to institute anything formally like to God's institution, nor for the same holy end, for which God instituted any circumstance ; and therefore we must not appeint any ceremonies to teach, or signify, or to put us in mind of our duty, because God ordained the phylacteries, that they might remember the commandments to do them, Num. xv. 89, 40.
So, therefore, if God once ordained this circumstance in other ordinances for edification's sake, for the church to appoint the same circamTHE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox VII. stance for this ordinance for edification's sake, is to make the same image formally which God once made.
Ans. This being a circumstance upon which an institution is passed for edification's sake in other ordingnces, it is thereby made incapable of being subjected to the rules of the third command, which gives general rules to men to order mere outward circumstances.
Now to subject it to such rales, were to debase it.
It is of an higher rank, and thereby made free (as I may 80 speak) of the rules by which men determine; God only, by institution of his own, can now meddle with it.
As a nobleman is of an higher rank, and 80 not subject to imprisonment for debts, &c., except Ly a warrant from the king himeelf.
Obj. But you will object, and say, To have a sacrament (being # good and holy ordinance of God in itself) administered every Lord's day is more for edification; for the oftener the more edifying.
Ans. 1. If the ground of this opinion be, that because the oftener an ordinance is administered the more may be the edification, I answer, There may be a deceit in that; for there maybe an often, whieh may be too much.
So in private prayer one may pray too often in respect of other occasions.
Bat the goodness of this circumstance, how often, depends upen a due season, which either an institution designs, or special circumstances and occasions, which indeed, if they fall out to be every Lord's day, then I yield; but to do it setly, electively, and as a standing rule, that I question, so as the edification that must answer to this so often receiving must either be from an institution or special circumstance and oecasion leading to it and calling for it, which, varying (as they use to do), eannot infallibly be fixed to every Lord's day as best.
However, 2. That edification which would arise from such outward circumstances and occasions, to make most and best for the edification of the church, to have it every Lord's day, is but circumstantial edification, and not such an edification as flows from and accompanies this circumstance when it is an institution. And go it is an edification that comes in upon this ground, that because the ordinance is good, therefore the oftener administered the more edification.
8. If this circumstance, to have this ordinance every Lord's day, kad been an institution of God for more edifieation's sake, he best knowing how often
\ any ordinance would be most edifying that way, would have appointed it himself if it would be more for edificationin such a respect, for he takes as much care for the edification of his ehurch in one ordinance as in another, else he should have been defective in his care in some things, or have took unnecessary care in others.
Obj. 2. But it may fall out in respeet of mere outward circumstances and | occasions, that some church should have the sacrament every Lord's day.
I answer, 1, That then it is not an image of God's institution; for if occasions call for an ordinance every Lord's day (as suppose a baptism to be
| administered), yet still because this is not made a set standing rule, whether there be occasion or no (which is the obligation of a set institution), therefore such a providence that an ordinance should come to be administered, is not an image of God's institution, which ia only when in a standing way men 80 appoint it.
| 2. That rule, depending upon varying eireumstances, can be made and kept | but from Lord's day to Lord's day, but we cannot make a standing rule and canon of it.
This assertion or consideration past would have this circumstance in the administration of an ordinance every Lord's day to be such as is not determinable by human prudence or appointment.
But I come unto | Cuar. V.] THE CHUROHES OF OBRIST.
| two other assertions (which I more mainly intend) which do concern this | ordinance and the question more nearly.
| 1. The first assertion is, that the nature and sort and kind of this ordinance of the Lord's supper is such as there must of necessity be an institution, either expressly or by necessary consequence, settled by God, and left for the time of its administration.
The second assertion is, that according to the way and prescriptions of the New Testament, that time can be no other than every Lord's day.
1. The first of these two I shall prove in general, that there is and must ' be an institution for the time of its administration, and then I shall prove that time to be every Lord's day.
I begin with the first, that for the time of the administration of this ordinance of the Lord's supper, namely, how often it should be, there must necessarily be an institution somewhere in Scripture left and to be found, or one at least that may be drawn from Seripture by good consequence (for it is an ordinance of that nature and sort as that, reason tells us, there must be an institution left and found in Scripture about some set time for its administering).
This I would evince by such reason, as if there were as yet no scriptures that we knew of to be found for it and to fix our thoughts, yet they might set us all awork to find out one.
Now, this assertion I prove by these three main propositions laid together :— 1. That there are and ever were two sorts, and but two sorts, of ordinances appointed by God in the church, and,they are either continual or oceasional.
This proposition contains two things in it :
1.) That there are ordinances both occasional and continual.
2.) That there are and ever were but these two sorts.
(1.) I prove that there are two such kind of ordinances. I will here first explain the terms.
{1.] By occasional ordinances I mean such as, though they are in themselves to continue for ever in the church upon continual oceasions, yet in respect of their use they depend upon a partieular occasion in providence to call for the practice of them.
Some ordinances were ordained for a single occasion extraordinary, as the extraordinary sacrament of manna in the wilderness, and the cloud, and the baptizing in the sea, &., mentioned
1 Cor. x. 11; but such occasional ordinances I mean not, but only such as are for their use in the church, or their essence in the church, continual, yet still the particular precise time when they shall be administered is occasional.
Thus in pailosophy we distinguish of essence and existence, and say of several kinds or species of creatures, that their essence is always in rerum natura.
So roses (and many other fruits and plants) being a sort or kind of creatures, that have a station and rank among the number of others that help to the making up of the world's perfection, we in that respect say, the essence of a rose always is, nature having ordained such a creature always to belong unto the world, to make up the perfection of it, but yet so as we say, that the existence or individual putting forth of such flowers is but in some one special season of the . year, and not always.
Thus in like manner some ordinances always belong unto a chureh, as parts of its perfections and privileges, and so the institution of them is for ever and for all times ; and yet their use and existence is merely oecasional, even as providence shall put them forth and call them to stand up in their season.
Such was circumcision of old, which, though it was an ordinance for ever, and so continual in the easence and being of it, yet the use thereof was to be but as children were born, which made the existence merely occasional. So offering personal sacrifices, or perTHE GOVERNMENT OP [Boox VI. forming a vow, were as occasion fell out, as upon occasion of uncleanness,
And so baptism is now, the useof which depends upon new oceasions; 80 likewise are excommunication and admonition, which are church censures ; and go likewise admission of members; all which are to be used but as fit matter in providence comes to be presented.
[2.] When I say occasional, the meaning is not that they are ordained for occasions negative or permissive (as I may so call them), that is, when the occasions of the church will permit, and so a fit spare time falls out for an ordinance; but when in this distinction and opposition to continual ordinances we use the word occasional, the meaning is intended of suchas have a positive, peculiar, and special occasion directly and properly calling for them ; which occasion is affirmative: as when a child is born in the charch, this is an affirmative occasion for baptism, and the like.
Now, having explained what occasional ordinances are, I come to explain that other sort of ordinances, which are continual.
Such, were the public sacrifices of the temple, which were called a continual sacrifice (Jer. xxziii. 18 and Ezek. xlvi. 14), because offered morning and evening in a set and standing course, not at all waiting upon occasions.
And it is not only said there to be a perpetual ordinance, that is, which was to last and endure in the church (and such even occasional ordinances may be styled), but it is
_ besides called a continual ordinance, because appointed to be every morning a by a set ordinance of course ; so vers. 14 and 16, it is said to be 'every morning for a continual burnt-offering.' So prayer now is a continual ordinance;
' pray continually,' which is not meant of continual occasions, but that a continual course of prayer, or a set course every day (I do not say at set hours) is of God's institution, as Paul says, 2 Tim. i. 8, that he ' served God from his forefathers,' that is, according to the manner of the godly of old, who,
\ answerablyto the continual sacrifice in the temple, offered up, wherever they were, either in private or in their families, the sacrifice of prayer twice a day, and were bound to do so, else the practice had not been general nor binding unto Paul.
But, says he to Timothy, 'I have thee in remembrance in my prayers day and night,' that is, twice a day, every morning and evening.
Thus also the very entering into the holy of holies once a year, because it was of course and setly, is said to be done continually, Heb. x.1.
And so the passover, though but once a year, yet because of set course it may be called continual, Thus all church ordinances which are of set course inthe church, and depend not upon occasions, may be called continual ordinances, though
'not every week day to be administered.
Such public prayer is by all confessed to be, and such I take the word preached to be also. And so this distinction of ordinances, occasional and continual, if it be not in terminis, in the same terms set forth in the Scripture, as to both the parts of it, yet for the one part it is; for the term continual is expressed in the places before cited, and that in opposition to occasional; for there being two sorts of sacrifices, some ordained by institution to be at set times, others as occasion
. of sin and uncleanness fell out, those which were set were called continual, in a way of distinction from that other (as also those four ordinances here, in this Acts ii. 42), and so must have another branch to answer to them, which is this of occasional.
However, if the Scripture useth not the very terms, yet the distinction ariseth from the thing itself, namely, from the different use and end of ordinances, which are necessarily such; only I add this caution, that solemn set ordinances, though by divine appointment confined to a time, may yet occasionally be commanded at other times besides; and then upon all such occasions they become occasional for that time.
Thus, though the sacrifices public were a set ordinance, yet sacrifice was an | Cuap. V.) THE OHUROHES OFOHRIST. occasional ordinance also; for whena man had personally sinned, he was to bring an offering to the priest, &.
And so is the word preached, and prayer now, which though set of course on the Lord's day, yet as occasion is, they may be used on the week days also.
And this is hinted to prevent a mistake, lest upon this doctrine any should think the obligation to administer this ordinance on the Lord's dayto be exclusive, as if upon no other day besides the church may have this sacrament or the word.
For this celebration of the sacrament on the Lord's day is so to be understood, as that it may likewise be administered upon any day besides, though that day
' be the more proper season of it, and no day to be chosen rather than it.
The gospel's privilege is in this more large than that of the law; some ordinances then they could not have, but upon certain set times; and times were
80 appointed, as all times besides were excluded.
The passover could not be at other times eaten (but only in cage of uncleanness or a journey), bat at that eet time appointed, the fourteenth day of the first month.
So likewise circumcision was by institution confined to the eighth day; and they might not do it before, nor defer it till after, that precise time. And so many other solemn ordinances are appropriated to their solemn feasts.
But it is not so now under the gospel, when, though God hath appointed a special time for public worship, yet any worship may be performed at any time; and as in every place we may lift up pure hands, and celebrate church assemblies, so at any time. As tho word is to be preached ' in season and out of season,' so the sacrament may be administered in season and out of season.
The primitive churches are therefore supposed, in that first church of the Jews (whose very calling, for a while at first, was onlyto hold forth all ordinances of the gospel), to have met (as for.the place) xar' olxoy, at home, that is, in . private houses, for it is spoken in distinction from their meetings in the temple.
So for the time of their meetings, xaé' juigay every day, Acts ii. 46; and so to have celebrated this sacrament every day, even as, Acts v. 41, they are said to preach every day in the temple.
This being premised and proved, I now come to prove the other part of the proposition in hand, that there are but these two kinds of ordinances in the church, occasional and continual.
This I might prove by an enumeration of all ordinances in the Old Testament, which may all be reduced to these two heads.
For as for vows and free-will offerings (which seem most free in man's liberty), they were occasional; and such as, when a just occasion fell out, that called for them, they were not to be omitted, nor yet were they made and offered but when a just occasion invited them.
And, indeed, it were a wonder if there should be a middle kind of vagous ordinances, which were indefinitely instituted, and at random; not fixed in the main ground of their institution, upon proper occasions, or to set times by institution designed under the New Testament.
Let any man instance in any other such,'and it were strange this ordinance should be such alone.
Indeed, reason tells us, that there is not and cannot be any such middle ordinance; for if there be, the main ground of its institution must be, to serve a vacancy from all other oecasions of human business and ordinances, and to be used whenever such a vacancy should happen
; that is (as I explained in my distinction), that they would be instituted for negative occasions, as not being affixed to any set time of course, as continual ordinances are, nor to serve a special occasion, that calls for it one day more than another; but for such a time it must be, when there is an opportune vacancy or empty space of time that may fall out free from all other occasions, and all other ordinances, both which in this supposition are to be served first.
Now, I instance in this, as & supposed middle between the two other; for I cannot see how the wit of THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox VIL. man can invent any other.
I grant, indeed, that such vacancies of time may fall out, and also, that those ordinances which God hath already, by a primary intent, instituted for set times, and by rale affixed to them, he hath, as an overplus, and an additional edification of his church, commanded to be used at all such times of vacancy from human occasions and refreshments.
For example, he hath appointed the preaching of the word a set ordinance for every Lord's day (as was said), and so it is a continual ordinance of course; he hath also appointed this word to be dispensed and preached upon all special affirmative occasions that should require it, as a word in season to the weary, &c.
And these being the main foundations and grounds of its institution, he hath enlarged the use of it unto all such negative occasions, when all other occasions will permit, and there happens a vacant time to hear sermons preached, and when no special occasion or time instituted doth require it.
But this was but a secondary enlarged ground of this ordinance, for which alone it should never have been instituted, nor any else.
This (as I take it) may be the most probable meaning of. that text, 'preach the word in season ;' either instituted by God, as the Lord's day, or occasional, as special need requires; and not only so, but 'out of season,' in a mere vacancy.
Now, to prove that there is no such ordinance instituted merely for negative occasions, or vacancy from other hindrances, I urge these inconveniences and reasons against it.
1. Such an ordinance would depend for its being and existence upon too many uncertainties.
But now, as a father would not venture any child to an utter uncertain breeding, so neither can I believe that God hath done so by any of his ordinances.
Now see the several uncertainties in this case.
(1.) There is not an absolute necessity that such an ordinance should ever be administered at all; for it might be supposed never to come to have any turn or vacancy spare from all other occasions for it to be administered in, for it is not of absolute certainty that there should be such a vacancy, or at least not often; as this ordinance of the sacrament (if this should be said to be such) is commanded to be administered.
(2.) Besides this, if such times should fall out, yet the celebration of the ordinance would depend too much upon man's arbitrament, and that for its only existence and being; which must be at such times, not only when a whole church shall have no impediments by reason of other occasions, but when they shall judge so, and call upon one another for it;and how apt our nature is to find out impediments, or at least in such cases to forget the ordinances, God well knew.
And this our obnoriousness to forget our duty makes it yet more uncertain; for how apt is such an ordinance to he forgotten, which hath no positive occasion to call for it, nor any fixed instituted time to say to us, now it ought to be administered.
It is one reason, and it is a good one, which our divines give, why it was necessary that the Lord's day should be fixed by God to a certain day, even to the seventh, and with a memento in the command; because, if it had been left to men to judge when their vacancy would have permitted it, the public worship of God would soon have fallen to the ground.
And by the like reason any particular ordinance would have been easily forgotten and discontinued, as many have been that yet were fixed, as the feast of tabernacles was, Nehem. viii. 17, from Joshua's time till Nehemiah's.
You may make an observation, how great the neglective forgetfulness of man would be of any such ordinance, by the difference which was put in the administration of this ordinance, and the observation of the Lord's day (which are the ordinances we have last instanced in) by the papists, who alone bore the face of .
| Cuar. V.} THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST. the church many hundred years.
As for the Lord's day, because they ' thonght the institution thereof every week to be apostolical (being sounder in the point than many of our divines), therefore they have transmitted the observation of it every week, down unto our times.