and particular Use of it, according to the Apostle, is _to shew forth
the Lord’s Death_, &c. But _to shew forth the Lord’s Death, and partake
of the Flesh and Blood of_ Christ, are different Things. He saith not,
_As often as ye eat this Bread, and drink this Cup, ye partake of the
Body and Blood of_ Christ; but, _ye shew forth the Lord’s Death_. So
I acknowledge, _That this Ceremony_, by those that practise it, hath
an _immediate Relation_ to the _outward Body_ and _Death of_ Christ
upon the _Cross_, as being properly a Memorial of it; but it doth not
thence follow that it hath any _inward_ or _immediate Relation to
Believers communicating or partaking of the spiritual Body and Blood
of _Christ_, or that spiritual Supper_ spoken of _Rev._ iii. 20. For
though, in a general Way, as every religious Action in some Respect
hath a common Relation to the spiritual Communion of the Saints with
God, so we shall not deny but this hath a Relation as others. Now for
his calling _the Cup the Cup of the Lord_, and saying, _They are guilty
of the Body and Blood of _Christ_, and eat their own [131]Damnation
in not discerning the Lord’s Body_, &c. I _answer_, That this infers
no more necessary Relation than any other religious Act, and amounts
to no more than this, That since the _Corinthians_ were in the Use of
this Ceremony, and so performed it as a religious Act, they ought to do
it worthily, or else they should bring Condemnation upon themselves.
Now this will not more infer the Thing so practised by them to be a
necessary-religious Act obligatory upon others, than when the Apostle
saith, _Rom._ xiv. 6. _He that regardeth the Day, regardeth it unto
the Lord_, it can be thence inferred that the Days that some esteemed
and observed did lay an Obligation upon others to do the same. But
yet, as he that esteemed a Day, and placed Conscience in keeping it,
was to _regard it to the Lord_, and so it was to him, in so far as he
dedicated it unto the Lord, the _Lord’s Day_, he was to do it worthily;
and if he did it unworthily, he would be guilty of the _Lord’s Day_,
and so keep it to his own Damnation; so also such as observe this
_Ceremony of Bread and Wine_, it is to them the _Bread of the Lord_,
and _the Cup of the Lord_, because they use it as a religious Act; and
forasmuch as their End therein is to _shew forth the Lord’s Death_, and
_remember his Body_ that was crucified for them, and his _Blood_ that
was shed for them, if, notwithstanding, they believe it is their Duty
to do it, and make it a Matter of Conscience to forbear, if they do
it without that due Preparation and Examination which every religious
Act ought to be performed in, then, instead of truly remembering the
Lord’s Death, and his Body and his Blood, they render themselves
guilty of it, as being in one Spirit with those that crucified him,
and shed his Blood, though pretending with Thanksgiving and Joy to
remember it. [Sidenote: _The _Pharisees_ guilty of the Blood of the
_Prophets.] Thus the _Scribes_ and _Pharisees_ of old, though in
Memory of the Prophets they garnished their Sepulchres, yet are said
by Christ to be _guilty of their Blood_. And that no more can be hence
inferred, appears from another Saying of the same Apostle, _Rom._ xiv.
23. _He that doubteth is damned if he eat_, &c. where he, speaking of
those that judged it unlawful to eat Flesh, _&c._ saith, _If they eat
doubting, they eat their own Damnation_. Now it is manifest from all
this, that either the doing or forbearing of this was to another, that
placed no Conscience in it, of no Moment. So I say, he that eateth that
which in his Conscience he is persuaded it is not lawful for him to
eat, doth eat his own _Damnation_; so he also that placeth Conscience
in eating Bread and Wine _as a religious Act_, if he do it unprepared,
and without that due respect wherein such Acts should be gone about,
he _eateth and drinketh his own Damnation, not discerning the Lord’s
Body_, i. e. not minding what he doth, to wit, _with a special Respect
to the Lord, and by Way of special Commemoration of the Death of
Christ._
[131] Or _Judgment_, as the Greek Word properly signifies.
§. VI. Having now sufficiently shewn what the true Communion of the
Body and Blood of Christ is, how it is partaken of, and how it has
no necessary Relation to that Ceremony of Bread and Wine used by
Christ with his Disciples; [Sidenote: II. _Whether this Ceremony be a
necessary Part of the New Covenant, and Obligatory._] it is fit now
to consider the _Nature_ and _Constitution_ of that _Ceremony_ (for
as to the _proper Use_ of it, we have had Occasion to speak before)
whether it be a _standing Ordinance_ in the Church of Christ obligatory
upon all, or indeed whether it be any necessary Part of the Worship of
the _New Covenant Dispensation_, or hath any better or more binding
Foundation than several other Ceremonies appointed and practised about
the same Time, which the most of our Opposers acknowledge to be ceased,
and now no Ways binding upon Christians. We find this Ceremony only
mentioned in Scripture in four Places, to wit, _Matthew_, _Mark_,
and _Luke_, and by _Paul_ to the _Corinthians_. If any would infer
any Thing from the Frequency of the mentioning of it, that will add
nothing; for it being a Matter of Fact, is therefore mentioned by
the Evangelists; and there are other Things less memorable as often,
yea, oftener mentioned. _Matthew_ and _Mark_ give only an Account of
the Matter of Fact, without any Precept to do so afterwards; simply
declaring, [132]That Jesus at that Time did desire them to _eat of the
Bread, and drink of the Cup_; to which _Luke_ adds these Words, _This
do in Remembrance of me_. If we consider this Action of Christ with his
Apostles, there will appear nothing singular in it, for a Foundation
to such a strange _Superstructure_, as many in their airy Imaginations
have sought to build upon it; for both _Matthew_ and _Mark_ express it
as an Act done by him as he was eating. [Sidenote: _The breaking of
Bread was no singular Thing, but a Custom among the Jews._] _Matthew_
saith, _And as they were eating_; and _Mark_, _And as they did eat,
Jesus took Bread_, &c. Now this Act was no singular Thing, neither
any solemn Institution of a _Gospel Ordinance_; because it was a
constant Custom among the _Jews_, [Sidenote: P. Riccius.] as _Paulus
Riccius_ observes at Length in his _Celestial Agriculture_, that when
they did eat the Passover, the Master of the Family did take Bread,
and bless it, and breaking it, gave of it to the rest; and likewise
taking Wine, did the same; so that there can nothing further appear
in this, than that Jesus Christ, _who fulfilled all Righteousness_,
and also observed the _Jewish Feasts and Customs_, used this also
among his Disciples only, that as in most other Things he laboured to
draw their Minds to a further Thing, so in the Use of this he takes
Occasion to put them in Mind of his Death and Sufferings, which were
shortly to be; which he did the oftener inculcate unto them, for that
they were averse from believing it. [Sidenote: What it is _to do this
in Remembrance of Christ._] And as for that Expression of _Luke_, _Do
this in Remembrance of me_, it will amount to no more than this, that
being the last Time that Christ did eat with his Disciples, he desired
them, that in their eating and drinking they might have Regard to him,
and by the Remembering of that Opportunity, be the more stirred up to
follow him diligently through Sufferings and Death, _&c._ But what Man
of Reason, laying aside the Prejudice of Education, and the Influence
of Tradition, will say, That this Account of the _Matter of Fact_
given by _Matthew_ and _Mark_, or this Expression of _Luke_, to _Do
that in Remembrance of him_, will amount to these Consequences, which
the Generality of Christians have sought to draw from it; as calling
it, _Augustissimum Eucharistiæ Sacramentum_; _venerabile Altaris
Sacramentum_; _the principal Seal of the Covenant of Grace, by which
all the Benefits of Christ’s Death are sealed to Believers_; and such
like Things? But to give a further Evidence, how these Consequences
have not any Bottom from the Practice of that Ceremony, nor from the
Words following, _Do this_, &c. let us consider another of the like
Nature, as it is at Length expressed by _John_, Chap. xiii. 3, 4.
8. 13, 14, 15. [Sidenote: _Christ’s washing of Feet, and its Manner
related._] _Jesus riseth from Supper, and laid aside his Garments, and
took a Towel, and girded himself: After that, he poureth Water into a
Bason, and began to wash the Disciples’ Feet; and to wipe them with the
Towel wherewith he was girded: _Peter_ said unto him, Thou shalt never
wash my Feet; _Jesus_ answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no
Part with me. So after he had washed their Feet,--he said, Know ye what
I have done to you? If I then your Lord and Master have washed your
Feet, ye also ought to wash one another’s Feet: For I have given you
an Example, that ye should do as I have done to you._ As to which, let
it be observed, that _John_ relates this Passage to have been done at
the same Time with the other of _breaking Bread_; [Sidenote: _Compared
with the _breaking_ of _Bread.] both being done the Night of the
_Passover_, after Supper. If we regard the Narration of this, and the
Circumstances attending it, it was done with far more Solemnity, and
prescribed far more punctually and particularly than the former. It
is said only, _As he was eating, he took Bread_; so that this would
seem to be but an _occasional Business_: But here _he rose up_, _he
laid by his Garments_, _he girded himself_, _he poured out the Water_,
_he washed their Feet_, _he wiped them with a Towel_: He did this to
all of them; which are Circumstances surely far more observable than
those noted in the other. The _former_ was a Practice common among the
_Jews_, used by all Masters of Families upon that Occasion; but _this_,
as to the Manner, and Person acting it, _to wit_, for the Master to
rise up, and wash the Feet of his Servants and Disciples, was more
singular and observable. In the breaking of _Bread_, and giving of
Wine, it is not pleaded by our Adversaries, nor yet mentioned in the
Text, that he particularly put them into the Hands of all; but breaking
it, and blessing it, gave it the nearest, and so they from Hand to
Hand: But here it is mentioned, that he washed not the Feet of one or
two, but of many. He saith not in the _former_, _That if they do not
eat of that Bread, and drink of that Wine, they shall be prejudiced by
it_; but here he saith expresly to _Peter_, That _if he wash him not,
he hath no Part with him_; which being spoken upon _Peter_’s refusing
to let him wash his Feet, would seem to import no less, than not the
Continuance only, but even the Necessity of this _Ceremony_. In the
former he saith, as it were passingly, _Do this in Remembrance of me_;
but here he sitteth down again, he desires them to consider what he
hath done, tells them positively, [Sidenote: _The washing one another’s
Feet was left as an Example._] _That as he hath done to them, so ought
they to do to one another_: And yet again, he redoubles that Precept,
by telling them, _He has given them an Example, that they should do
so likewise_. If we respect the Nature of the Thing, it hath as much
in it as either _Baptism_ or the _breaking of Bread_; seeing it is an
outward Element of a cleansing Nature, applied to the outward Man, by
the Command and the Example of Christ, to signify an inward Purifying.
I would willingly propose this seriously to Men, who will be pleased
to make use of that Reason and Understanding that God hath given them,
and not be imposed upon, nor abused by the Custom or Tradition of
others; _Whether this Ceremony, if we respect either the Time that it
was appointed in, or the Circumstances wherewith it was performed, or
the Command enjoining the Use of it, hath not as much to recommend it
for a standing Ordinance of the Gospel, as either _Water-baptism_, or
_Bread_ and _Wine_, or any other of that Kind?_ I wonder then what
Reason the _Papists_ can give, Why they have not numbered it among
their _Sacraments_, except merely _Voluntas Ecclesiæ & Traditio Patrum_.
[132] Matt. 26. 26. Mark 14. 22. Luke 22. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 23. _&c._
[Sidenote: Object.] But if they say, _That it is used among them, in
that the _Pope_, and some other Persons among them, used to do it once
a Year to some poor People_;
[Sidenote: _Answ._] I would willingly know what Reason they have why
this should not be extended to all, as well as that of the _Eucharist_
(as they term it) or whence it appears from the Text, that [_Do this in
Remembrance of me_] should be interpreted that the _Bread_ and _Wine_
were every Day to be taken by all _Priests_, or the _Bread_ every Day,
or every Week, by the _People_; and that that other Command of Christ,
_Ye ought to do as I have done to you_, &c. is only to be understood of
the _Pope_, or some other Persons, to be done only to a few, and that
once a Year? Surely there can be no other Reason for this Difference
assigned from the Text. [Sidenote: _The _Protestants_ use not the
_washing of Feet.] And as to _Protestants_, who use not this Ceremony
at all, if they will but open their Eyes, they may see how that by
Custom and Tradition they are abused in this Matter, as were their
Fathers in divers _Popish_ Traditions. For if we look into the plain
Scripture, what can be thence inferred to urge the one, which may not
be likewise pleaded for the other; or for laying aside the one, which
may not be likewise said against the Continuance of the other? If
they say, _That the former, of washing the Feet, was only a Ceremony_;
what have they, whence they can shew, that this _breaking of Bread_
is more? If they say, _That the former was only a Sign of Humility
and Purifying_; what have they to prove that this was more? If they
say, _That one was only for a Time, and was no Evangelical Ordinance_;
what hath this to make it such, that the other wanted? Surely there
is no Way of Reason to evade this; neither can any Thing be alleged,
that the one should cease, and not the other; or the one continue,
and not the other; but the mere Opinion of the Affirmers, which by
Custom, Education and Tradition, hath begotten in the Hearts of People
a greater Reverence for, and Esteem of the one than the other; which
if it had fallen out to be as much recommended to us by Tradition,
would no Doubt have been as tenaciously pleaded for, as having no less
Foundation in Scripture. But since the former, to wit, _The washing
of one another’s Feet_, is justly laid aside, as not binding upon
_Christians_; so ought also the other for the same Reason.
§. VII. [Sidenote: _The _breaking_ of _Bread_ not used now in the
same Manner as Christ did._] But it is strange that those who are so
clamorous for this _Ceremony_, and stick so much to it, take Liberty to
dispense with the Manner or Method that Christ did it in; since none
that ever I could hear of, except some _Baptists_ who now do it, use it
in the same Way that he did: Christ did it at _Supper_, while they were
eating; but the Generality of _Protestants_ do it in the _Morning_ only
by itself. What Rule walk they by in this Change?
[Sidenote: Object.] If it be said, _These are but Circumstances,
and not the Matter; and if the Matter be kept to, the Alteration of
Circumstances is but of small Moment_;
[Sidenote: _Answ._] What if it should be said the Whole is but a
_Circumstance_, which fell out at that Time when Christ eat the
_Passover_? For if we have Regard to that which alone can be pleaded
for an Institution, _viz._ these Words, _Do this in Remembrance of me_;
it doth as properly relate to the Manner as Matter. For what may or can
they evince in Reason, that these Words, _Do this_, only signify _eat
Bread_, and _drink Wine_, but it is no Matter _when ye eat_, or _how
ye eat it_; and not as _ye have seen me eat it at Supper with you, who
take Bread, and break it, and give it you; and take the Cup, and bless
it, and give it you; so do ye likewise_? And seeing Christ makes no
Distinction in those Words, _Do this_, it cannot be judged in Reason
but to relate to the Whole; which if it do, all those that at present
use this Ceremony among _Christians_, have not yet obeyed this Precept,
nor fulfilled this Institution, for all their Clamours concerning it.
[Sidenote: Object.] If it be said, _That the Time and Manner of
doing it by Christ was but accidentally, as being after the _Jewish
Passover_, which was at Supper_;
[Sidenote: _Answ_.] Besides that it may be answered, and easily proved,
_That the Whole was accidental_, as being the _Practice of a Jewish
Ceremony_, as is above observed; [Sidenote: _The_ breaking _of_ Bread
_was a Jewish Ceremony_.] may it not the same Way be urged, That the
_drinking of Wine is accidental_, as being the natural Product of that
Country; and so be pleaded, That in those Countries where Wine doth
not grow, as in our Nation of _Scotland_, we may make use of _Beer_
or _Ale_ in the Use of this Ceremony; or _Bread made of other Grain_
than that which Christ used? And yet would not our Adversaries judge
this an Abuse, and not right Performing of this _Sacrament_? Yea, have
not Scruples of this Kind occasioned no little Contention among the
Professors of _Christianity_? [Sidenote: _Contests between the _Greek_
and _Latin Churches_, concerning the _leavened_ and _unleavened Bread_
in the _Supper.] What great Contest and Strife hath been betwixt the
_Greek_ and _Latin_ Churches concerning the _Bread_? While the one
will have it _unleavened_, reckoning, because the _Jews_ made use of
_unleavened Bread_ in the _Passover_, that it was such Kind of _Bread_
that Christ did break to his Disciples; the other _leavened_: Therefore
the _Lutherans_ make use of _unleavened Bread_, the _Calvinists_
of _leavened_. [Sidenote: Farellus.] And this Contest was so hot,
when the Reformation was beginning at _Geneva_, that _Calvin_ and
_Farellus_ were forced to fly for it. But do not _Protestants_, by
these Uncertainties, open a Door to _Papists_ for their excluding the
People from the _Cup_? Will not [_Do this_] infer positively, That they
should do it _in the same Manner, and at the same Time_, as Christ did
it; as well as that they should use the _Cup_, and not the _Bread
only_? Or what Reason have they to dispense with the one, more than
the _Papists_ have to do with the other? Oh! What strange Absurdities
and Inconveniencies have _Christians_ brought upon themselves, by
superstitiously adhering to this Ceremony! Out of which Difficulties it
is impossible for them to extricate themselves, but by laying it aside,
as they have done others of the like Nature. [Sidenote: _The _Clergy_
taking Bread do bless, and give it: The _Laity_ must take and eat, not
bless it._] For besides what is above-mentioned, I would gladly know
how from the Words they can be certainly resolved that these Words [_Do
this_] must be understood to the Clergy, _Take, bless, and break this
Bread, and give it to others_; but to the Laity only, _Take and eat_,
but do not _bless_, &c.
[Sidenote: Object.] If it be said, _That the Clergy only were present_;
[Sidenote: _Answ._] Then will not that open a Door for the _Popish
Argument_ against the _Administration of the Cup to the People_? Or
may not another from thence as easily infer, _That the Clergy only
ought to partake of this Ceremony_; because they were the Apostles only
then present, to whom it was said, _Do this_? But if this [_Do this_]
be extended to all, how comes it all have not Liberty to obey it, in
both _blessing_, _breaking_, and _distributing_, as well as _taking_
and _eating_? [Sidenote: _Hot Contests about the Manner of taking
it, and to whom to give it_.] Besides all these, even the _Calvinist
Protestants_ of _Great Britain_ could never yet accord among themselves
about the _Manner of taking it_, whether _sitting_, _standing_, or
_kneeling_; whether it should be given to the _Sick_, and those that
are _ready to die_, or not? Which Controversies, though they may be
esteemed of small Moment, yet have greatly contributed, with other
Things, to be the Occasion, not only of _much Contention_, but also
of _Bloodshed_ and _Devastation_; so that in this last Respect the
_Prelatick Calvinists_ have termed the _Presbyterians_ schismatical
and pertinacious; and they them again superstitious, idolatrous, and
papistical. Who then, that will open their Eyes, but may see that the
Devil hath flirted up this Contention and Zeal, to busy Men about
Things of _small Moment_, that _greater Matters_ may be neglected,
while he keeps them in such ado about this Ceremony; though they lay
aside others of the like Nature, as _positively commanded_, and as
_punctually practised_; and from the Observation of which half so many
Difficulties will not follow?