Since then the figure of eating and drinking was used ART. among the Jews, for receiving and imbibing a doctrine; XXVIII. it was no wonder if our Saviour pursued it in a difcourfe, in which there are feveral hints given to fhew us that it ought to be fo understood.

It is further obfervable, that our Saviour did frequently follow that common way of inftruction among the Eastern nations, by figures, that to us would feem ftrong and bold. These were much used in those parts, to excite the attention of the hearers; and they are not always to be feverely expounded according to the full extent that the words will bear. The parable of the unjuft judge, of the unjust steward, of the ten virgins, of plucking out the right eye, and cutting off the right hand or foot, and several others, might be inftanced. Our Saviour in these confidered the genius of those to whom he spoke: fo that these figures must be restrained only to that particular, for which he meant them; and must not be stretched to every thing to which the words may be carried. We find our Saviour compares himself to a great many things; to a vine, a door, and a way and therefore when the scope of a difcourse does plainly run in a figure, we are not to go and defcant on every word of it; much less may any pretend to say, that fome parts of it are to be understood literally, and fome parts figuratively.

For inftance, if that chapter of St. John is to be underftood literally, then Chrift's flesh and blood must be the nourishment of our bodies, fo as to be meat indeed; and that we fhall never hunger any more, and never die after we have eat of it. If therefore all do confess that those expreffions are to be understood figuratively, then we have the fame reason to conclude that the whole is a figure; for it is as reasonable for us to make all of it a figure, as it is for them to make those parts of it a figure, which they cannot conveniently expound in a literal fenfe. From all which it is abundantly clear that nothing can be drawn from that difcourfe of our Saviour's, to make it reasonable to believe that the words of the inftitution of this Sacrament ought to be literally understood: on the contrary, our Saviour himself calls the wine, after those words had been used by him, the fruit of the vine, which is as ftrict a form of speech as can well be imagined, to make us understand that the nature of the wine was not altered: and when St. Paul treats of it in those two chapters, in which all that is left us befides the hiftory of the institution concerning the Sacrament is to be found, he

E e 4

calls

ART. calls it five times bread, and never once the body of Chrift. XXVIII. In one place he calls it the communion of the body, as the cup is the communion of the blood of Chrift. Which is rather a faying, that it is in fome fort, and after a manner, the body and the blood of Christ, than that it is so ftri&ly fpeaking.

I Cor. x. 16.

If this Sacrament had been that myfterious and unconceivable thing which it has been fince believed to be, we cannot imagine, but that the books of the New Teftament, the Acts of the Apostles, and their Epiftles, should have contained fuller explanations of it, and larger inftruc

tions about it.

There is enough indeed said in them to fupport the plain and natural fenfe, that we give to this inftitution; and because no more is faid, and the defign of it is plainly declared to be to remember Chrift's death, and to shew it forth till he come, we reckon that by this natural fimplicity, in which this matter is delivered to us, we are very much confirmed in that plain and easy fignification, which we put upon our Saviour's words. Plain things need not be infifted on: but if the most fublime and wonderful thing in the world feems to be delivered in words that yet are capable of a lower and plainer fenfe, then unless there is a concurrence of other circumftances, to force us to that higher meaning of them, we ought not to go into it; for fimple things prove themfelves: whereas the more extraordinary that any thing is, it requires a fulness and evidence in the proof, proportioned to the uneasiness of conceiving or believing it.

We do therefore understand our Saviour's inftitution thus, that as he was to give his body to be broken and his blood to be fhed for our fins, fo he intended that this his death and fuffering fhould be ftill commemorated by all fuch as look for remiffion of fins by it, not only in their thoughts and devotions, but in a visible reprefentation: which he appointed fhould be done in fymbols, that fhould be both very plain and fimple, and yet very expreffive of that which he intended fhould be remembered by them.

Bread is the plaineft food that the body of man can receive, and wine was the common nourishing liquor of that country; fo he made choice of thefe materials, and in them appointed a representation and remembrance to be made of his body broken, and of his blood fhed; that is, of his death and fufferings till his fecond coming: and he obliged his followers to repeat this frequently. In the doing

of

of it according to his inftitution, they profefs the belief of ART. his death, for the remiffion of their fins, and that they XXVIII. look for his fecond coming.

This does alfo import, that as bread and wine are the fimpleft of bodily nourishments, fo his death is that which reftores the fouls of thofe that do believe in him: as bread and wine convey a vital nourishment to the body, fo the facrifice of his death conveys fomewhat to the foul that is vital, that fortifies and exalts it. And as water in Baptifm is a natural emblem of the purity of the Christian religion, bread and wine in the Eucharift are the emblems of fomewhat that is derived to us, that raifes our faculties, and fortifies all our powers.

St. Paul does very plainly tell us, that unworthy re- 1 Cor. xi. ceivers, that did neither examine nor difcern themselves, 27, 29. nor yet difcern the Lord's body, were guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, and did eat and drink their own damnation: that is, fuch as do receive it without truly believing the Christian religion, without a grateful acknowledgment of Chrift's death and fufferings, without feeling that they are walking fuitably to this religion that they profefs, and without that decency and charity, which becomes fo holy an action; but that receive the bread and wine only as bare bodily nourishments, without confidering that Christ has inttituted them to be the memorials of his death; fuch perfons are guilty of the body and blood of Chrift: that is, they are guilty either of a profanation of the Sacrament of his body and blood, or they do in a manner crucify him again, and put him to an open fhame; when they are fo faulty as the Corinthians were, in obferving this holy inftitution with fo little reverence, and with fuch fcandalous diforders, as thofe were for which he reproached them.

Of fuch as did thus profane this inftitution, he says farther, that they do eat and drink their own damnation, or judgment; that is, punishment; for the word rendered damnation fignifics fometimes only temporary punish

ments.

So it is faid, that judgment (the word is the fame) must Pet. iv. begin at the houfe of God: God had fent fuch judgments 17. upon the Corinthians for thofe diforderly practices of theirs, that fome had fallen fick, and others had died, perhaps by reafon of their drinking to excefs in those feafts: but as God's judgments had come upon them; fo the words that follow fhew that thefe judgments were only chaftisements, in order to the delivering them from the condemnation, under which the world lies. It being faid,

that

ART. that when we are judged, we are chaftened of the Lord, that XXVIII. we should not be condemned with the world. Therefore

I Cor. xi.

32.

though God may very juftly and even in great mercy punith men who profane this holy ordinance; yet it is an unreasonable terror, and contrary to the nature of the Gospel covenant, to carry this fo far, as to think that it is an unpardonable fin; which is punished with eternal damnation.

We have now feen the ill effects of unworthy receiving, and from hence according to that gradation, that is to be observed in the mercy of God in the Gofpel, that it not only holds a proportion with his juftice, but rejoiceth over it, we may well conclude that the good effects upon the worthy receiving of it are equal if not fuperior to the bad effects upon the unworthy receiving of it: and that the nourishment which the types, the bread and the wine, give the body, are anfwered in the effects, that the thing fignified by them has upon the foul.

In explaining this there is fome diverfity: fome teach that this memorial of the death of Chrift, when seriously and devoutly gone about, when it animates our faith, increases our repentance, and inflames our love and zeal, and fo unites us to God and to our brethren; that, I fay, when these follow it, which it naturally excites in all holy and good minds, then they draw down the returns of prayer, and a farther increase of grace in us; according to the nature and promises of the New Covenant: and in this they put the virtue and efficacy of this Sacrament.

But others think that all this belongs only to the inward acts of the mind, and is not facramental: and therefore they think that the Eucharift is a federal act, in which as on the one hand we renew our baptifmal covenant with God, fo on the other hand we receive in the Sacrament a vifible confignation, as in a tradition by a fymbol or pledge, of the bleffings of the New Covenant, which they think is fomewhat fuperadded to thofe returns of our prayers, or of other inward acts.

This they think anfwers the nourishment which the body receives from the fymbols of bread and wine; and ftands in oppofition to that of the unworthy receivers being guilty of the body and blood of the Lord; and their eating and drinking that which will bring fome judgment upon themselves. This they also found on these words of St. Paul, The cup of bleffing that we blefs, is it not the communion of the blood of Chrift? the bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Chrift?

St. Paul confiders the bread which was offered by the people

Phil. ii. 1.

people as an emblem of their unity, that as there was ART. one loaf, fo they were one body; and that they were all XXVIII. partakers of that one loaf: from hence it is inferred, that fince the word rendered communion, fignifies a communication in fellowship, or partnership, that therefore the meaning of it is, that in the Sacrament there is a diftribution made in that fymbolical action of the death of Chrift, and of the benefits and effects of it. The communion of the 2 Cor xiii. Holy Ghoft, is a common fharing in the effufion of the laft verfe. Spirit: the fame is meant by that, if there is any fellow- Eph. iii. 9. Ship of the Spirit; that is, if we do all partake of the fame Phil. iii. Spirit, we are faid to have a fellowship in the fufferings of 10. Chrift, in which every one must take his fhare. The communication, or fellowship, of the mystery of the Gospel, was its being fhared equally among both Jews and Gentiles; and the fellowship in which the first converts to Chriftianity lived, was their liberal diftribution to one another, they holding all things in common. In thefe and fome other places it is certain, that communion fignifies somewhat that is more real and effectual, than merely men's owning themselves to be joined together in a fociety; which it is true it does alfo often fignify: and therefore they conclude, that as in bargains or covenants, the ancient method of them before writings were invented was the mutual delivering of fome pledges, which were the fymbols of that faith, which was fo plighted, inftead of which the fealing and delivering of writings is now used among us; fo our Saviour inftituted this in compliance with our frailty, to give us an outward and fenfible pledge of his entering into covenant with us, of which the bread and wine are constituted the symbols.

Others think, that by the communion of the body and blood of Christ can only be meant, the joint owning of Chrift and of his death, in the receiving the Sacrament; and that no communication nor partnership can be inferred from it: because St. Paul brings it in to fhew the Corinthians, how deteftable a thing it was for a Christian to join in the idols' feafts; that it was to be a partaker with Devils: fo they think that the fellowship or communion of Chriftians in the Sacrament must be of the same nature with the fellowship of Devils in acts of idolatry: which confifted only in their affociating themfelves with those that worshipped idols; for that upon the matter was the worshipping of Devils: and this feems to be confirmed by that which is faid of the Jews, that they who did eat of the 1 Cor. x, facrifices were partakers of the altar; which it feems can 18, 20. fignify no more but that they profeffed that religion of