ART.

course of our Saviour's, to make it reasonable to believe that XXVIII. the words of the institution 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 strict 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 besides the history of the institution concerning the sacrament is to be found, he calls it five times bread, and never once the 1 Cor. x. body of Christ. In one place he calls it the 'communion of the body, as the cup is the communion of the blood of Christ.' Which is rather a saying, that it is in some sort, and after a manner, the body and the blood of Christ, than that it is so strictly speaking.

16.

If this sacrament had been that mysterious and unconceivable thing which it has been since believed to be, we cannot imagine but that the books of the New Testament, the Acts of the Apostles, and their Epistles, should have contained fuller explanations of it, and larger instructions

about it.

There is enough indeed said in them to support the plain and natural sense that we give to this institution; and because no more is said, and the design of it is plainly declared to be to remember Christ's death, and to shew it forth till he come,' we reckon that by this natural simplicity, in which this matter is delivered to us, we are very much confirmed in that plain and easy signification, which we put upon our Saviour's words. Plain things need not be insisted on: but if the most sublime and wonderful thing in the world seems to be delivered in words that yet are capable of a lower and plainer sense, then unless there is a concurrence of other circumstances, to force us to that higher meaning of them, we ought not to go into it; for simple things prove themselves: 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 institution thus, that as he was to give his body to be broken' and his 'blood to be shed for our sins,' so he intended that this his death and suffering should be still commemorated by all such as look for remission of sins' by it, not only in their thoughts and devotions, but in a visible representation: which he appointed should be done in symbols, that should be both very plain and simple, and yet very expressive of that which he intended should be remembered by them.

Bread is the plainest food that the body of man can receive, and wine was the common nourishing liquor of that country; so he made choice of these materials, and in them appointed a representation and remembrance to be made of his body

H

broken, and of his blood shed; that is, of his death and suffer- ART. ings till his second coming: and he obliged his followers to XXVIIL repeat this frequently. In the doing of it according to his institution, they profess the belief of his death, for the remission of their sins, and that they look for his second coming. This does also import, that as bread and wine are the simplest of bodily nourishments, so his death is that which restores the souls of those that do believe in him: as bread and wine convey a vital nourishment to the body, so the sacrifice of his death conveys somewhat to the soul that is vital, that fortifies and exalts it. And as water in baptism is a natural emblem of the purity of the Christian religion, bread and wine in the eucharist are the emblems of somewhat that is derived to us, that raises our faculties, and fortifies all our powers.

6

St. Paul does very plainly tell us, that unworthy receivers,' 1 Cor. xi. that did neither examine nor discern themselves, nor yet dis- 27, 29. cern the Lord's body, were guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, and did eat and drink their own damnation:' that is, such as do receive it without truly believing the Christian religion, without a grateful acknowledgment of Christ's death and sufferings, without feeling that they are walking suitably to this religion that they profess, and without that decency and charity, which becomes so holy an action; but that receive the bread and wine only as bare bodily nourishments, without considering that Christ has instituted them to be the memorials of his death; such persons are guilty of the body and blood of Christ: 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 shame; when they are so faulty as the Corinthians were, in observing this holy institution with so little reverence, and with such scandalous disorders, as those were for which he reproached them.

Of such as did thus profane this institution, he says further, that they do eat and drink their own damnation, or judgment; that is, punishment: for the word rendered damnation signifies sometimes only temporary punishments.

17.

So it is said, that judgment (the word is the same) must 1 Pet. iv. begin at the house of God:' God had sent such judgments upon the Corinthians for those disorderly practices of theirs, that some had fallen sick, and others had died, perhaps by reason of their drinking to excess in those feasts: but as God's judgments had come upon them; so the words that follow shew that these judgments were only chastisements, in order to the delivering them from the condemnation under which the world lies. It being said, that when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.' Therefore though God may very justly and even in great mercy punish men who profane this

ART. holy ordinance; yet it is an unreasonable terror, and conXXVIII. trary to the nature of the gospel covenant, to carry this so far, as to think that it is an unpardonable sin; which is punished with eternal damnation.

We have now seen 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 gospel, that it not only holds a proportion with his justice, but rejoiceth over it,' we may well conclude that the good effects upon the worthy receiving of it are equal if not superior 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 answered in the effects, that the thing signified by them has upon the soul.

In explaining this there is some diversity: some teach that this memorial of the death of Christ, when seriously and devoutly gone about, when it animates our faith, increases our repentance, and inflames our love and zeal, and so unites us to God and to our brethren; that, I say, when these follow it, which it naturally excites in all holy and good minds, then they draw down the returns of prayer, and a further 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 sacramental: and therefore they think that the eucharist is a federal act, in which as on the one hand we renew our baptismal covenant with God, so on the other hand we receive in the sacrament a visible consignation, as in a tradition by a symbol or pledge, of the blessings of the new covenant, which they think is somewhat superadded to those returns of our prayers, or of other inward acts.

This they think answers the nourishment which the body receives from the symbols of bread and wine; and stands in opposition 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 some judgment upon themselves. 1 Cor. x. This they also found on these words of St. Paul, 'The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? the bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?'

16.

St. Paul considers the bread which was offered by the people as an emblem of their unity, that as there was one loaf, so they were one body; and that they were all partakers of that one loaf: from hence it is inferred, that since the word rendered communion signifies a communication in fellowship, or partnership, that therefore the meaning of it is, that in the sacrament there is a distribution made in that symbolical action of the death of Christ, and of the benefits and effects

6

ART.

XXVIII.

of it. The communion of the Holy Ghost' is a common sharing in the effusion of the Spirit; the same is meant by that, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit;' that is, if we 2 Cor. xiii. do all partake of the same Spirit, we are said to have a fel- 14. lowship in the sufferings of Christ,' in which every one must Phil. ii. 1. take his share. The communication,' or fellowship, of the Phil.iii. 10. Eph. iii. 9. mystery of the gospel,' was its being shared equally among both Jews and Gentiles; and the fellowship in which the first converts to Christianity lived, was their liberal distribution to one another, they holding all things in common. In these and some other places it is certain, that communion signifies somewhat that is more real and effectual, than merely men's owning themselves to be joined together in a society; which it is true it does also often signify: and therefore they conclude, that as in bargains or covenants, the ancient method of them before writings were invented was the mutual delivering of some pledges, which were the symbols of that faith, which was so plighted, instead of which the sealing and delivering of writings is now used among us; so our Saviour instituted this in compliance with our frailty, to give us an outward and sensible pledge of his entering into covenant with us, of which the bread and wine are constituted the symbols.

6

Others think, that by the communion of the body and blood of Christ can only be meant the joint owning of Christ 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 shew the Corinthians how detestable a thing it was for a Christian to join in the idols' feasts; that it was to be a partaker with devils:' so they think that the fellowship or communion of Christians in the sacrament must be of the same nature with the fellowship of devils' in acts of idolatry which consisted only in their associating themselves with those that worshipped idols; for that upon the matter was the worshipping of devils: and this seems to be confirmed by that which is said of the Jews, that they who 18, 20. did eat of the sacrifices were partakers of the altar;' which it seems can signify no more but that they professed that religion of which the altar was the chief instrument; the sacrifices being offered there.

6

To all this it may be replied, that it is reasonable enough to believe, that according to the power which God suffered the Devil to exercise over the idolatrous world, there might be some enchantment in the sacrifices offered to idols, and that the Devil might have some power over those that did partake of them: and in order to this, St. Paul removed an objection that might have been made, that there could be no harm in their joining to the idol feasts; for an idol was nothing;' and so that which was offered to an idol could contract no defilement from the idol, it being nothing. Now if the meaning of their being partakers with devils' imports only

1 Cor. x.

ART. their joining themselves in acts of fellowship with idolaters, XXVIII. then the sin of this would have easily appeared, without such

1 Cor.x.18.

a reinforcing of the matter; for though an idol was nothing, yet it was still a great sin to join in the acts that were meant to be the worship of this nothing; this was a dishonouring of God, and a debasing of man. But St. Paul seems to carry the argument further; that how true soever it was that the idol was nothing, that is, a dead and lifeless thing, that had no virtue nor operation, and that by consequence could derive nothing to the sacrifice that was offered to it; yet since those idols were the instruments by which the Devil kept the world in subjection to him, all such as did partake in their sacrifices might come under the effects of that magic, that might be exerted about their temples or sacrifices: by which the credit of idolatry was much kept up.

And though every Christian had a sure defence against the powers of darkness, as long as he continued true to his religion, yet if he went out of that protection into the empire of the Devil, and joined in the acts that were as a homage to him, he then fell within the reach of the Devil, and might justly fear his being brought into a partnership of those magical possessions or temptations that might be suffered to fall upon such Christians, as should associate themselves in so detestable a service.

In the same sense it was also said, ' that all the Israelites who did eat of the sacrifices were partakers of the altar:' that is, that all of them who joined in the acts of that religion, such as the offering their peace-offerings, for of those of that kind they might only eat, all these were partakers of the altar;" that is, of all the blessings of their religion, of all the expiations, the burnt-offerings and sin-offerings, that were offered on the altar, for the sins of the whole congregation for that as a great stock went in a common dividend among such as observed the precepts of that law, and joined in the acts of worship prescribed by it: thus it appears that such as joined in the acts of idolatry became partakers of all that influence that devils might have over those sacrifices; and all that continued in the observances of the Mosaical law, had thereby a partnership in the expiations of the altar: so likewise all Christians who receive this sacrament worthily, have by their so doing a share in that which is represented by it, the death of Christ, and the expiation and other benefits that follow it.

This seemed necessary to be fully explained: for this matter, how plain soever in itself, has been made very dark, by the ways in which some have pretended to open it. With this I conclude all that belongs to the first part of the Article, and that which was first to be explained of our doctrine concerning the sacrament: by which we assert a real presence of the body and blood of Christ: but not of his body as it is now glorified in heaven, but of his body as it was broken on the cross, when