are living in the habitual practice of some sin, or in the habitual
neglect of some Christian duty. Their conscience tells them that so long
as they live in this state, and do not break off from their sins, they
are unfit to come to the Table of the Lord. Well: they are so far quite
right! I wish no man to be a communicant if he cannot give up his sins.
But I warn these people not to forget that if they are unfit for the
Lord's Supper they are unfit to die, and that if they die in their
present condition they will be lost eternally. The same sins which
disqualify them for the sacrament, most certainly disqualify them for
heaven. Do I want them to come to the Lord's Supper as they are?
Certainly not! But I do want them to repent and be converted, to cease
to do evil, and to break off from their sins. For ever let it be
remembered that the man unfit for the Lord's Supper is unfit to die.
(3) For another thing, some are not communicants because they fancy it
will add to their responsibility. They are not, as many, ignorant and
careless about religion. They even attend regularly on the means of
grace, and like the preaching of the Gospel. But they say they dread
coming forward and making a profession. They fear that they might
afterwards fall away, and bring scandal on the cause of Christianity.
They think it wisest to be on the safe side, and not commit themselves
at all. Such people would do well to remember that if they avoid
responsibility of one kind by not coming to the Lord's Table, they incur
responsibility of another kind, quite as grave, and quite as injurious
to the soul. They are responsible for open disobedience to a command of
Christ. They are shrinking from doing that which their Master
continually enjoins on His disciples,--from confessing Him before men.
No doubt it is a serious step to come forward and receive the sacrament.
It is a step that none should take lightly and without self-examination.
But it is _no less a serious step to walk away and refuse the
ordinance_, when we remember Who invites us to receive it, and for what
purpose it was appointed! I warn the people I am now dealing with to
take heed what they are doing. Let them not flatter themselves that it
can ever be a wise, a prudent, a safe line of conduct to neglect a plain
command of Christ. They may find at length, to their cost, that they
have only increased their guilt and forsaken their mercies.
(4) For another thing, some are not communicants because they fancy they
are not yet worthy. They wait and stand still, under the mistaken notion
that no one is qualified for the Lord's Supper unless he feels within
him something like perfection. They pitch their idea of a communicant so
high that they despair of attaining to it. Waiting for inward perfection
they live, and waiting for it too often they die. Now such persons would
do well to understand that they are completely mistaken in their
estimate of what "worthiness" really is. They are forgetting that the
Lord's Supper was not intended for unsinning angels, but for men and
women compassed with infirmity, dwelling in a world full of temptations,
and needing mercy and grace every day they live. A sense of our own
utter unworthiness is the best worthiness we can bring to the Communion
rail. A deep feeling of our own entire indebtedness to Christ for all we
have and hope for, is the best feeling we can bring with us. The people
I now have in view ought to consider seriously whether the ground they
have taken up is tenable, and whether they are not standing in their own
light. If they are waiting till they feel in themselves perfect hearts,
perfect motives, perfect feelings, perfect repentance, perfect love,
perfect faith, they will wait for ever. There never were such
communicants in any age,--certainly not in the days of our Lord and of
the Apostles,--there never will be as long as the world stands. Nay,
rather, the very thought that we feel literally worthy, is a symptom of
secret self-righteousness, and proves us unfit for communion in God's
sight. Sinners we are when we first come to the throne of
grace,--sinners we shall be till we die; converted changed, renewed,
sanctified, but sinners still. In short, no man is a really worthy
communicant who does not deeply feel that he is a "miserable sinner."
(5) In the last place, some object to be communicants because they see
others coming to the Lord's Table who are not worthy, and not in a right
state of mind. Because others eat and drink unworthily, they refuse to
eat and drink at all. Of all the grounds taken up by non-communicants to
justify their own neglect of Christ's ordinance, I must plainly say, I
know none which seems to me so foolish, so weak, so unreasonable, and so
unscriptural as this. It is as good as saying that we will never receive
the Lord's Supper at all! When shall we ever find a body of communicants
on earth of which all the members are converted?--It is setting up
ourselves in the most unhealthy attitude of judging others. "Who art
thou that judgest another?" "What is that to thee? Follow thou Me."--It
is depriving ourselves of a great privilege merely because others
profane it and make a bad use of it.--It is pretending to be wiser than
our Master Himself. If the words of St. Luke mean anything, Judas
Iscariot was present at the first Communion, and received the bread and
wine among others.--It is taking up ground for which there is no warrant
in Scripture. St. Paul rebukes the Corinthians sharply for the
irreverent behaviour of some of the communicants; but I cannot find him
giving a single hint that when some came to the Table unworthily, others
ought to draw back or stay away. Let me advise the non-communicants I
have now in view to beware of being wise above that which was written.
Let them study the parable of the Wheat and Tares, and mark how both
were to "grow together till the harvest." (Matt. xiii. 30.) Perfect
Churches, perfect congregations, perfect bodies of communicants, are
all unattainable in this world of confusion and sin. Let us covet the
best gifts, and do all we can to check sin in others; but let us not
starve our own selves because others are ignorant sinners, and turn
their meat into poison. If others are foolish enough to eat and drink
unworthily, let us not turn our backs on Christ's ordinance, and refuse
to eat and drink at all.
Such are the five common excuses why myriads in the present day, though
professing themselves Christians, never come to the Lord's Supper. One
common remark may be made about them: there is not a single reason among
the five which deserves to be called "good," and which does not condemn
the man who gives it. I challenge any one to deny this. I have said
repeatedly that I want no one to be a communicant who is not properly
qualified. But I ask those who stay away never to forget that the very
reasons they assign for their conduct are their condemnation. I tell
them that they stand convicted before God of either being very ignorant
of what a communicant is, and what the Lord's Supper is; or else of
being persons who are not living rightly, and are unfit to die. In
short, to say, I am a non-communicant, is as good as saying one of three
things:--"I am living in sin, and cannot come;--I know Christ commands
me, but I will not obey Him;--I am an ignorant man, and do not
understand what the Lord's Supper means."
I know not in what state of mind this book may find the reader of this
paper, or what his opinions may be about the Lord's Supper. But I will
conclude the whole subject by offering to all some warnings, which I
venture to think are peculiarly required by the times.
(1) In the first place, _do not neglect_ the Lord's Supper. The man who
coolly and deliberately refuses to use an ordinance which the Lord Jesus
Christ appointed for his profit, may be very sure that his soul is in a
very wrong state. There is a judgment yet to come; there is an account
to be rendered of all our conduct on earth. How any one can look forward
to that day, and expect to meet Christ with comfort and in peace, if he
has refused all his life to meet Christ in His own ordinance, is a thing
that I cannot understand. Does this come home to you? Mind what you are
doing.
(2) In the second place, _do not receive the Lord's Supper carelessly_,
irreverently, and as a matter of form. The man who walks up to the
Communion rail, and eats the bread and drinks the wine, while his heart
is far away, is committing a great sin, and robbing himself of a great
blessing. In this, as in every other means of grace, everything depends
on the state of mind in which the ordinance is used. He that draws near
without repentance, faith, and love, and with a heart full of sin and
the world, will certainly be nothing better, but rather worse. Does this
come home to you? Mind what you are about.
(3) In the third place, _do not make an idol_ of the Lord's Supper. The
man who tells you that it is the first, foremost, chief, and principal
ordinance in Christianity, is telling you that which he will find it
hard to prove. In the great majority of the books of the New Testament
the Lord's Supper is not even named. In the letter to Timothy and Titus,
about a minister's duties, the subject is not even mentioned. To repent
and be converted, to believe and be holy, to be born again and have
grace in our hearts,--all these things are of far more importance than
to be a communicant. Without them we cannot be saved. Without the Lord's
Supper we can. The penitent thief was not a communicant, and Judas
Iscariot was! Are you tempted to make the Lord's Supper override and
overshadow everything in Christianity, and place it above prayer and
preaching? Take care. Mind what you are about.
(4) In the fourth place, _do not use the Lord's Supper irregularly_.
Never be absent when this ordinance is administered. Make every
sacrifice to be in your place. Regular habits are essential to the
maintenance of the health of our bodies. Regular use of every means of
grace is essential to the prosperity of our souls. The man who finds it
a weariness to attend on every occasion when the Lord's Table is spread,
may well doubt whether all is right within him, and whether he is ready
for the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. If Thomas had not been absent when
the Lord appeared the first time to the assembled disciples, he would
not have said the foolish things he did. Absence made him miss a
blessing. Does this come home to you? Mind what you are about.
(5) In the fifth place, _do not do anything to bring discredit_ on your
profession as a communicant. The man who after attending the Lord's
Table runs into sin, does more harm perhaps than any sinner. He is a
walking sermon on behalf of the devil. He gives occasion to the enemies
of the Lord to blaspheme. He helps to keep people away from Christ.
Lying, drinking, adulterous, dishonest, passionate communicants are the
helpers of the devil, and the worst enemies of the Gospel. Does this
come home to you? Mind what you are about.
(6) In the last place, _do not despond_ and be cast down, if with all
your desires you do not feel to get great good from the Lord's Supper.
Very likely you are expecting too much. Very likely you are a poor judge
of your own state. Your soul's roots may be strengthening and growing,
while you think you are not getting on. Very likely you are forgetting
that earth is not heaven, and that here we walk by sight and not by
faith, and must expect nothing perfect. Lay these things to heart. Do
not write bitter things against yourself without cause.
To every reader into whose hands this paper may fall, I commend the
whole subject of it as deserving of serious and solemn consideration. I
am nothing better than a poor fallible man myself. But if I have made
up my mind on any point it is this,--that there is no truth which
demands such plain speaking as truth about the Lord's Supper.
* * * * *
NOTE
I ask the special attention of my readers to the following
extracts from the last Charge of the late Dr. Longley,
Archbishop of Canterbury.
The office held by the Archbishop, the remarkable gentleness
and mildness of his character, the fact that this Charge
contains his last sentiments, and that it was not made public
till after his death,--all this appears to me to invest these
extracts about the Lord's Supper with peculiar interest.
"It is far from my intention to impute to all those who have
taken the ill-advised step of adopting the Sacrificial
Vestments (in administering the Lord's Supper) any sympathy
with Roman error; but I am constrained to avow that there are
plain indications in some of the publications which have been
issued as manifestoes of the opinions of that section of our
Church, that some of its professed members, yea, even of her
ministers, think themselves at liberty to hold the doctrines of
the Church of Rome in relation to the Sacrifice of the Mass,
and yet retain their position within the pale of the Anglican
Church with the avowed purpose of eliminating from its
formularies every trace of the Reformation, as regards its
protest against Romish error. The language they hold with
respect to it is entirely incompatible with loyalty to the
Church to which they profess to belong. They call it 'a
Communion deeply tainted with Protestant heresy:' 'Our duty,'
they say, 'is the expulsion of the evil, not flight from it.'
It is no want of charity, therefore, to declare that they
remain with us in order that they may substitute the Mass for
the Communion; the obvious aim of our Reformers having been to
substitute the Communion for the Mass. Doubtless the Church of
England admits of considerable latitude in the views that may
be taken of that most mysterious of all mysteries, the
Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. And so long as those solemn
words of its original institution, 'This is my Body,' 'This is
my Blood,' shall remain in the sentence of consecration (and
they never can be erased from it), so long will there be
varieties of interpretation of these words, all of which may be
consistent with a true allegiance to our Church, provided these
three conditions be observed:--
"1. That they be not construed to signify that the Natural Body
of Christ is present in the Sacrament:
"2. Nor to admit of any adoration either of the Sacramental
bread and wine there bodily received, or of any corporal
presence of Christ's Natural Body and Blood:
"3. Nor to justify the belief that the Body and Blood are again
offered as a satisfaction for sin; seeing that the offering of
Christ once made was a perfect redemption, propitiation, and
satisfaction for the sins of the whole world, original and
actual.
"These are the limits which our Church imposes upon the liberty
of interpretation of the words of our blessed Lord.
"The use of these sacrificial vestments is in the minds of many
intimately connected with the idea that an essential element in
the Holy Communion is the offering to God a Sacrifice of the
Body and Blood of Christ, which abide with the elements in a
mysterious manner after the act of Consecration. The minister
wears the vestments at that time as a sacrificing priest.
According to this view it would seem that the most important
part of this Holy Sacrament is what we offer to God, not what
we receive from Him.
"This view is not recognised by the Church of England in her
formularies. The general definition in the XXVth Article states
that Sacraments are 'certain sure witnesses and effectual signs
of grace, by the which [God] doth work invisibly in us;' and it
is said specifically of the Lord's Supper (Art. XXVIII.), that
it 'is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ's death:
insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith,
receive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking of
the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a
partaking of the Blood of Christ.' The idea of the Sacrifice of
that Body and Blood finds no place in either of these strict
definitions. The Catechism speaks the same language when it
defines a Sacrament to be 'an outward and visible sign of an
inward and spiritual grace given unto us.' Nor will an
examination of the Office of the Holy Communion itself give any
countenance to the idea in question. The only distinct oblation
or offering mentioned in that Office is previous to the
Consecration of the elements, in the Prayer for the Church
Militant, and therefore cannot be an offering or sacrifice of
the Body and Blood of Christ; and the only sacrifice which we
are spoken of as making, is the offering of 'ourselves, our
souls and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and lively
sacrifice.'[3] Our Church seems most studiously to have avoided
any expression which could countenance the notion of a
perpetual Sacrifice of Christ, while on the other hand it
speaks of Christ's death upon the cross as 'His own oblation of
Himself once offered as a full, perfect, and sufficient
sacrifice for the sins of the whole world.' No room is left for
the repetition of that sacrifice, or for the admission of any
other sacrifice for sin."
* * * * *
3: See Proctor on the Common Prayer, p. 320.
"The Romish notion of a true, real, and substantial Sacrifice of the
Body and Blood of Christ, as it is called in the Council of Trent,
entailed the use of the term _altar_. But this term appears nowhere in
the Book of Common Prayer, and was no doubt omitted lest any countenance
should be given to the sacrificial view. The notion, therefore, of
making in the material elements a perpetual offering of the Body and
Blood of Christ, is as foreign to the spirit and the letter of our
Service as I hold it to be to the doctrine of the early Fathers, as well
as of the leading divines of our Church. This latter point also I shall
endeavour to establish hereafter.
"Meanwhile it cannot be denied, on the other hand, that the doctrine of
the Real Presence is, in one sense, the doctrine of the Church of
England. She asserts that the Body and Blood of Christ are 'verily and
indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper.' And she
asserts equally that such presence is not material or corporal; but that
Christ's Body 'is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after a
heavenly and spiritual manner.' (Art. XXVIII.) Christ's presence is
effectual for all those intents and purposes for which His Body was
broken, and His Blood shed. As to a presence elsewhere than in the heart
of the believer, the Church of England is silent, and the words of
Hooker therefore represent her views: 'The real presence of Christ's
most blessed Body and Blood is not to be sought in the Sacrament, but in
the worthy receiver of the Sacrament.'"
VII
CHARITY
"_Now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the
greatest of these is charity._"--1 Cor. xiii. 13.
Charity is rightly called "the Queen of Christian graces." "The end of
the commandment," says St. Paul, "is charity." (1 Tim. i. 5.) It is a
grace which all people profess to admire. It seems a plain practical
thing which everybody can understand. It is none of "those troublesome
doctrinal points" about which Christians are disagreed. Thousands, I
suspect, would not be ashamed to tell you that they knew nothing about
justification or regeneration, about the work of Christ or the Holy
Spirit. But nobody, I believe, would like to say that he knew nothing
about "charity!" If men possess nothing else in religion, they always
flatter themselves that they possess "charity."
A few plain thoughts about charity may not be without use. There are
false notions abroad about it which require to be dispelled. There are
mistakes about it which require to be rectified. In my admiration of
charity I yield to none. But I am bold to say that in many minds the
whole subject seems completely misunderstood.
I. Let me show, firstly, _the place the Bible gives to charity_.
II. Let me show, secondly, _what the charity of the Bible really
is_.
III. Let me show, thirdly, _whence true charity comes_.
IV. Let me show, lastly, _why charity is "the greatest" of the
graces_.
I ask the best attention of my readers to the subject. My heart's desire
and prayer to God is, that the growth of charity may be promoted in this
sin-burdened world. In nothing does the fallen condition of man show
itself so strongly as in the scarcity of Christian charity. There is
little faith on earth, little hope, little knowledge of Divine things.
But nothing, after all, is so scarce as real charity.
I. Let me show _the place which the Bible gives to charity_.
I begin with this point in order to establish the immense practical
importance of my subject. I do not forget that there are many
high-flying Christians in this present day, who almost refuse to look at
anything _practical_ in Christianity. They can talk of nothing but two
or three favourite doctrines. Now I want to remind my readers that the
Bible contains much about practice as well as about doctrine, and that
one thing to which it attaches great weight is "charity."
I turn to the New Testament, and ask men to observe what it says about
charity. In all religious inquiries there is nothing like letting the
Scripture speak for itself. There is no surer way of finding out truth
than the old way of turning to plain texts. Texts were our Lord's
weapons, both in answering Satan, and in arguing with the Jews. Texts
are the guides we must never be ashamed to refer to in the present
day.--"What saith the Scripture? What is written? How readest thou?"
Let us hear what St. Paul says to the Corinthians: "Though I speak with
the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as
sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of
prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I
have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity,
I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and
though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth
me nothing." (1 Cor. xiii. 1--3.)
Let us hear what St. Paul says to the Colossians: "Above all these
things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness." (Col. iii.
14.)
Let us hear what St. Paul says to Timothy: "The end of the commandment
is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith
unfeigned." (1 Tim. i. 5.)
Let us hear what St. Peter says: "Above all things have fervent charity
among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins." (1
Peter iv. 8.)
Let us hear what our Lord Jesus Christ Himself says about that love,
which is only another name for charity.[4] "A new commandment give I
unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also
love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples,
if ye have love one to another." (John xiii. 34, 35.) Above all, let us
read our Lord's account of the last judgment, and mark that want of love
will condemn millions. (Matt. xxv. 41, 42.)
4: In the Greek language one and the same word only is used for
"love" and "charity." In our English version our translators have
sometimes rendered this word one way and sometimes another.
Let us hear what St. Paul says to the Romans: "Owe no man anything, but
to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law."
(Rom. xiii. 8.)
Let us hear what St. Paul says to the Ephesians: "Walk in love, as
Christ also hath loved us." (Eph. v. 2.)
Let us hear what St. John says: "Beloved, let us love one another: for
love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth
God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love." (1 John iv.
7, 8.)
I shall make no comment upon these texts. I think it better to place
them before my readers in their naked simplicity, and to let them speak
for themselves. If any one is disposed to think the subject of this
paper a matter of light importance, I will only ask him to look at these
texts, and to think again. He that would take down "charity" from the
high and holy place which it occupies in the Bible, and treat it as a
matter of secondary moment, must settle his account with God's Word. I
certainly shall not waste time in arguing with him.
To my own mind the evidence of these texts appears clear, plain, and
incontrovertible. They show the immense importance of charity, as one of
the "things that accompany salvation." They prove that it has a right to
demand the serious attention of all who call themselves Christians, and
that those who despise the subject are only exposing their own ignorance
of Scripture.
II. Let me show, secondly, _what the charity of the Bible really is_.
I think it of great importance to have clear views on this point. It is
precisely here that mistakes about charity begin. Thousands delude
themselves with the idea that they have "charity," when they have not,
from downright ignorance of Scripture. Their charity is not the charity
described in the Bible.