Quest. CLXVIII., CLXIX., CLXX.
QUEST. CLXVIII. What is the Lord’s Supper?
ANSW. The Lord’s supper is a sacrament of the New Testament, wherein by giving and receiving bread and wine, according to the appointment of Jesus Christ, his death is shewed forth; and they that worthily communicate, feed upon his body and blood, to their spiritual nourishment and growth in grace, have their union and communion with him confirmed, testify and renew their thankfulness, and engagement to God, and their mutual love and fellowship each with other, as members of the same mystical body.
QUEST. CLXIX. How hath Christ appointed bread and wine to be given and received in the sacrament of the Lord’s supper?
ANSW. Christ hath appointed the ministers of his word, in the administration of this sacrament of the Lord’s supper, to set apart the bread and wine from common use, by the word of institution, thanksgiving, and prayer, to take and break the bread, and to give both the bread, and the wine to the communicants, who are, by the same appointment, to take, and eat the bread, and to drink the wine, in thankful remembrance, that the body of Christ was broken and given, and his blood shed for them.
QUEST. CLXX. How do they that worthily communicate in the Lord’s supper, feed upon the body and blood of Christ therein?
ANSW. As the body and blood of Christ are not corporally or carnally present in, with, or under the bread and wine in the Lord’s supper, and yet are spiritually present to the faith of the receiver, no less truly and really than the elements themselves are to their outward senses; so they that worthily communicate in the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, do therein feed upon the body and blood of Christ, not after a corporal, or carnal, but in a spiritual manner, yet truly and really, while by faith they receive and apply unto themselves Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death.
There are several things contained in these answers, viz.
I. The general description of this ordinance, as it is called a sacrament of the New Testament; in which we shall be led to speak concerning the person by whom it was instituted in common with other ordinances; and that is our Lord Jesus Christ.
II. We shall consider the persons by whom it is to be administered, namely, the ministers, or pastors of particular churches; inasmuch as it is an ordinance given only to those who are in church-communion.
III. We have an account of the matter thereof, or the outward elements, to wit, bread and wine.
IV. We shall consider the ministers act, antecedent to the church’s partaking of this ordinance, in setting apart the elements from a common to a sacred use; which is to be done by the word and prayer, joined with thanksgiving.
V. We have an account of the actions, both of the minister and people; the one breaks the bread, and pours out the wine. In order to their being distributed among those who are to receive them; the other, to wit, the communicants, partake of them, and join with him in eating the bread, and drinking the wine.
VI. We are to consider what is signified hereby, namely, the body and blood of Christ; which are not supposed to be corporally and carnally, but spiritually present to the faith of the receivers, upon which account they may be said to feed upon the body and blood of Christ, and apply the benefits of his death to themselves.
VII. We have an account of the persons who hope to enjoy these privileges, and partake of the Lord’s supper in a right manner; these are said worthily to communicate; as also the ends which they ought to have in view, namely, their spiritual nourishment, and growth in grace, their enjoying communion with Christ; and that love that they are obliged to express to each other, as members of the same mystical body.
I. It is an ordinance of the New Testament, instituted by our Saviour. That it is an ordinance, is evident, in that it is founded on a divine command; as appears from the words of institution, in Matt. xxvi. 26, 27. Take eat, this is my body; and he took the cup, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it, &c. And this is also intimated by the apostle, when, speaking particularly concerning it, as also the manner in which it is to be performed, he says, I have received of the Lord, that which also I delivered unto you, 1 Cor. xi. 23. Moreover, there is a blessing annexed to our partaking of it in a right manner; which may plainly be inferred from the apostle’s distinguishing those who receive it worthily, from others that receive it unworthily, or in an unbecoming manner; of whom the former are said to come together for the better, the latter for the worse, ver. 17. and to partake of the Lord’s supper for the better, is to partake of it for our spiritual advantage, which supposes, that there are some blessings annexed to it, which render it not only a duty, but an ordinance, or means of grace. And, that it is a gospel-ordinance of the New Testament, appears from the time of its being instituted by our Saviour, as well as the end and design thereof. It is particularly intimated, that Christ instituted this ordinance immediately before his last sufferings, as a memorial of his dying love. Thus the apostle says, The same night in which he was betrayed, he took bread, ver. 23. And that it was designed to continue as a standing ordinance in the church throughout all ages, appears from what he farther adds, As often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death, till he come, ver. 26.
The contrary to this is maintained by some modern enthusiasts, who deny it to be an ordinance, as they also do baptism; concluding that no ceremony, or significant sign, is consistent with the gospel-dispensation. And as for what the apostle says concerning our shewing forth the Lord’s death till he come, they suppose, that hereby is meant, till he comes by the effusion of the Spirit; and therefore, if it was an ordinance at first, it ceased to be so when the Spirit was poured forth on the church, in the beginning of the gospel-dispensation. To this it may be replied,
1. That ceremonial institutions are not inconsistent with the gospel-dispensation, inasmuch as they may not be designed to signify some benefits to be procured by Christ, as they did, which were instituted under the ceremonial law; but they may be considered as rememorative signs of the work of redemption, which has been brought to perfection by him.
2. When the apostle, in the scripture but now mentioned, says, that we shew the Lord’s death till he come, it cannot be meant concerning his coming in the plentiful effusion of the Spirit; inasmuch as this privilege was conferred on the church in the apostle’s days, at the same time, when he speaks of their shewing forth his death. Therefore, doubtless, he intends thereby Christ’s second coming, when this, and all other ordinances, which are now observed in the church, as adapted to the present imperfect state thereof, shall cease; we must therefore conclude from hence, that it was designed to be continued in the church in all ages, as it is at this day.
II. We are to consider the persons by whom this ordinance is to be administered; and these are only such as are lawfully called, and set apart to the pastoral office, whose work is to feed the church, not only by the preaching of the word, but by the administration of the sacraments, which are ordinances for their faith, in which they are said to receive, and spiritually feed upon Christ and his benefits; upon which account God promises to give his people pastors according to his own heart, who should feed them with knowledge and understanding, Jer. iii. 15. Now that none but these are appointed to administer this ordinance, is evident in that they, who partake of it, are said to have communion with him, and with one another therein, for their mutual edification and spiritual advantage; therefore it doth not belong to mankind in general, but the church in particular. And, to prevent confusion therein, Christ has appointed one, or more proper officers in his churches, to whom the management of this work is committed; who are called hereunto, by the providence of God, and the consent and desire of the church, to whom they are to minister.
III. We are now to consider the matter, or the outward elements to be used in the Lord’s supper; and these are bread and wine. Thus it is said, Jesus took bread, Matt. xxvi. 26. and he also took the cup; which, by a metonymy, is put for the wine: For, our Saviour referring to this action, speaks of his drinking the fruit of the vine, ver. 29. As for the bread that is to be used in this ordinance, there was a very warm debate between the Latin and Greek church concerning it; the former, as the Papists do at this day, concluding it absolutely necessary, that it should be unleavened bread, inasmuch as that kind of bread was used by our Lord, when he first instituted it, which was at the time of the passover, when no leaven was to be found in their houses. And they make it also a significant sign of the sincerity and truth with which the Lord’s supper ought to be eaten; for which, they refer to what the apostle says, in 1 Cor. v. 8. Let as keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. But this seems only to be an allusion to the use of unleavened bread in the passover; which, it may be, might have a typical reference to that sincerity and truth with which all the ordinances of God are to be engaged in; but it does not sufficiently appear that he intends hereby that the bread used in the Lord’s supper should be of this kind, or, that it was designed to signify the frame of spirit with which this ordinance is to be celebrated.
On the other hand, the Greek church thought that the bread ought to be leavened, according to our common practice at this day, it being the same that was used at other times. And this seems most eligible, as it puts a just difference between the bread used in the passover, which was a part of the ceremonial law, and a gospel-institution, that is distinct from it. But, I think, there is no need to debate either side of the question with too much warmth, it being a matter of no great importance. As for the wine that is to be used in this ordinance, it is a necessary part thereof; and therefore the Papists are guilty of sacrilege in withholding the cup from the common people[97].
IV. We are now to consider what the minister is to do, antecedent to the church’s partaking of the Lord’s supper: He is to set apart the outward elements of bread and wine from a common, to this particular holy use. Upon which account it may be said to be sanctified by the word of God and prayer, 1 Tim. iv. 5. The words of institution contain an intimation that these elements are to be used in this ordinance, by Christ’s appointment; without which, no significant sign could be used in any religious matters. And, as for prayer, this is agreeable to Christ’s practice; for, he took bread and blessed it, or prayed for a blessing on it; and as the apostle expresses it; this was accompanied with thanksgiving, as he says; When he had given thanks he brake it, Matt. xxvi. 26. 1 Cor. xi. 24. which is agreeable to the nature and design of the ordinance, as herein we pray for the best of blessings, and express our thankfulness to him for the benefits of Christ’s redemption.
Here I cannot but observe how the Papists pervert this ordinance in the manner of consecrating the bread, which the priest does only by repeating these words in Latin; This is my body; and from thence they take occasion to advance the absurd doctrine of transubstantiation; and suppose, that, by these words pronounced, the bread is changed into the body and blood of Christ; which they assert, contrary to all sense and reason, as well as the end and design of the ordinance; and from hence it will follow, that man has a power to make the body and blood of Christ; and another consequence thereof, will be, that the human nature of Christ is omnipresent, which is inconsistent with a finite nature, and those properties that belong to it as such; from whence it is to be concluded, that it is no where else but in heaven; and it involves in it the greatest contradiction to suppose that it is bread, and having all the qualities thereof; and yet our senses must be so far imposed on, as that we must believe that it is not so, but Christ’s body. It also supposes, that Christ has as many bodies as there are wafers in the world; which is a monstrous absurdity. It likewise confounds the sign with the thing signified, and is very opposite to the sense of those words of scripture, This is my body; which implies no more, than that the bread, which is the same in itself, after the words of consecration, as it was before, is an external symbol of Christ’s body, that is, of the sufferings which he endured therein for his people.
V. We are now to consider the actions both of the minister and the church, when engaged in this ordinance, viz. breaking, distributing, eating the bread, pouring forth, and drinking the wine, for the ends appointed by Christ, in instituting this ordinance. Whether our Saviour gave the bread and wine to every one of the disciples in particular, is not sufficiently determined by the words of institution: For, though Matthew and Mark say, He gave the bread and the cup to the disciples, Matt. xxvi. 26, 27. and Mark xiv. 22, 23. Yet Luke speaking either concerning the cup used in the passover, or that in the Lord’s supper, represents our Saviour as saying to his disciples, Take this and divide it among yourselves, Luke xxii. 17. which seems to intimate that he distributed it to one or more of them, to be conveyed to the rest, that they might divide it among themselves; which is agreeable to the practice of several of the reformed churches in our day, and seems most expedient in case the number of the communicants is very great, and the elements cannot be so conveniently given by the pastor into the hand of every one.
Here I may observe how the Papists pervert this part of the Lord’s supper; inasmuch as they will not permit the common people to touch the bread with their hands, lest they should defile it; but the priest puts it into their mouths; for which purpose it is made up into small, round wafers; and the people are ordered to take great care that they do not use their teeth in chewing it; for that would be, as it were, a crucifying Christ afresh, as offering a kind of violence to what they call his body. But these things are so very absurd and unscriptural, that they confute themselves. And their consecrating a wafer to be reserved in a case prepared for that purpose, and set upon the altar in the church, to be worshipped by all that come near it, savours of gross superstition and idolatry.
We may farther observe, that they deny the people the cup in this ordinance, but not the priests; for what reason, it is hard to determine. And, they mix the wine with water; which, though it does not seem to be agreeable to Christ’s institution, yet it was often practised by the ancient church, from whence they took it; and their making this a sacramental sign of Christ’s divine and human nature, united together in one person, is much more unwarrantable; nor can I approve of what others suppose, viz. that it signifies the blood and water that came out of his side when he was pierced on the cross. And, I can hardly think some Protestants altogether free from the charge of superstition, when they so tenaciously adhere to the use of red wine, as bearing some small resemblance to the colour of Christ’s blood; for which reason others chuse to bear their testimony against this ungrounded opinion, by the using of white wine, without supposing that any thing is signified by it more than by red; and others chuse to use one sort at one time, and another at another, to signify that this is an indifferent matter; and these, I think, are most in the right.
Moreover, the practice of the Papists, and some others, in receiving the Lord’s supper fasting, to the end that the consecrated bread may not be mixed with undigested food, is not only unwarrantable, but superstitious, as well as contrary to what we read concerning our Saviour and his apostles partaking of the Lord’s supper in the first institution thereof, immediately after having eaten the passover, and to what the apostle suggests, when he reproves the church at Corinth, for eating and drinking to excess immediately before they partook of the Lord’s supper; upon which occasion he advises them to eat and drink (though with moderation) in their own houses, 1 Cor. xi. 21, 22.
Again, the administring the Lord’s supper privately, as the Papists and others do, to sick people, seems to be contrary to the design of its being a church-ordinance; and when, to give countenance to this practice, it is styled, as by the former of these, a viaticum, or means to convey the soul, if it should soon after depart out of the body, to heaven, they are much more remote from our Saviour’s design in instituting this ordinance; neither do they rightly understand the sense of the scripture, from whence they infer the necessity thereof, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you, John vi. 53. when they apply it to this purpose.
There is another thing that must not be wholly passed over, viz. the various gestures used in receiving the Lord’s supper. The Papists not only receive it kneeling; but, they allege, that they ought to do so, as being obliged to adore the body and blood of Christ, which, as they absurdly suppose, is really present, inasmuch as the bread is transubstantiated, or turned into it. And the Lutherans, with equal absurdity assert, that the body of Christ, is really, though invisibly, present in the bread; which is what they call consubstantiation. Some other Protestants, indeed, plead for the receiving it kneeling, as supposing Christ to be spiritually, though not corporally, present therein; and therefore they do not worship the bread and wine, but our Saviour; which, they suppose, they ought to do with this becoming reverence.
What I would take leave to say, in answer to this, is, that we humbly hope and trust, that Christ, according to his promise, is present with his people in all his ordinances; yet, it is not supposed that we are obliged to engage in every one of them kneeling. But that which determines the faith and practice of all other reformed churches, who do not use this gesture in the Lord’s supper, is, because it is contrary to the example of our Saviour and his apostles, when it was first celebrated; which ought to be a rule to the churches in all succeeding ages.
If it be said, that this is a gesture most agreeable to prayer, or, at least, that sitting is not so. To this it may be replied, that it is not an ordinance principally or only designed for prayer; for, whatever prayers we put up to God therein, are short, ejaculatory, and mixed with other meditations, which may be performed with an awful reverence of the divine majesty, such as we ought to have in other acts of religious worship, though we do not use that gesture of kneeling. And besides, we think ourselves obliged to receive the Lord’s supper sitting, that being a table gesture in use among us, in like manner as that which our Saviour and his apostles used, was among the eastern nations.
As for the reformed Gallican churches, they receive it for the most part, standing; which, being a medium between both extremes, they suppose to be most eligible. But this not being a table-gesture, nor, in that respect, conformed to that which was used by our Saviour and his apostles, I cannot think it warrantable. Nevertheless, when the gesture of standing or sitting is made a significant sign as some do the former, of our being servants, ready to obey the will of Christ our great Lord and Master; or, as others explain it, as signifying our being travellers to the heavenly country; and the latter, viz. sitting, of our familiarity, or communion with Christ. These are rather the result of human invention, than founded on a divine institution, since we have not the least account in scripture, of these things being signified thereby. This leads us to consider,
VI. The thing signified in this ordinance, and in what respect Christ is said to be present therein, together with the benefits expected from him, as we are said to feed upon him by faith for our spiritual nourishment and growth in grace. I cannot but think that the general design hereof, is not much unlike to that which was ordained under the ceremonial law, in which, after the sacrifice was offered, part of it was reserved to be eaten in the holy place, Lev. vi. 16. which was a significant feast upon a sacrifice. In like manner, the Lord’s supper, which comes in the room of the passover, is ordained to be a feast on Christ’s sacrifice; so the apostle styles it, when he says, Christ, our passover, is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, &c. 1 Cor. v. 7, 8. The fiducial application of Christ, and the benefits of his death, is the principal thing to be considered in this gospel-festival. However, there are some cautions necessary to be observed with respect to the things signified therein, as what may be useful to us that our faith may be exercised in a right manner. Therefore let it be considered,
1. That though the Lord’s supper was instituted in commemoration of Christ’s love, expressed in his death, which was the last and most bitter part of his sufferings for our redemption. Yet he did not design hereby to exclude his other sufferings in life; nor, indeed, his whole course of obedience from his incarnation to his death; since it is very evident that the death of Christ is often considered in scripture, by a synecdoche, as denoting the whole course of obedience, both active and passive, which is the matter of our justification; and therefore is to be the object on which our faith is to be conversant in the Lord’s supper, as well as his sufferings in, or immediately before his death.
2. When Christ’s sufferings upon the cross are said to be signified by the bread and wine; we are not to conclude that these sufferings are to be so distinctly or separately considered, as that the bread broken, is designed to signify the pains that he endured upon the cross, when his body was as it were broken, its tendons, nerves, and fibres snapped asunder, and his joints dislocated, by being stretched thereon; and the wine poured forth, to signify the shedding his blood when his hands and feet were pierced with the nails, and his side with the spear, as some suppose; since all these things are to be made the subjects of our affectionate meditation in every part of this ordinance, while we are taken up with the contemplation of his last sufferings. And this seems to give countenance to the practice of many of the reformed churches, in consecrating and distributing the bread and wine together; though it is true, many think, on the other hand, that the elements are to be separately consecrated, as well as distributed, it being most agreeable to what is said concerning Christ’s blessing the bread, and giving it to his disciples, and afterwards taking the cup, and giving it to them, Matt. xxvi. 26, 27. However, if this be allowed of, it is not necessary for us to infer from hence, that each of these elements are designed to signify some distinct parts of Christ’s sufferings on the cross, but only that the ordinance is to be still continued, the whole including in it two external and visible signs to be used, each of which signify the means whereby he procured our redemption; and, indeed, when the wine is poured forth, and set apart for another part of this ordinance, we are not so much to enter on a new subject in our meditation, though the sign be different from that of the bread, as to proceed in thinking on, and improving the love of Christ, in his humbling himself, and becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, Phil. ii. 8. and all this is signified by this sign, as well as the other, neither of which are adapted to this end, otherwise than by divine appointment.
3. We must take heed that we do not make more significant signs in the bread and wine than Christ has done; as some suppose, that almost every ingredient or action used in making them, is to be applied to signify some things that he has done or suffered for our redemption. It is a very great liberty that some take in expatiating on this subject, and applying it to this ordinance. We have a specimen hereof contained in an hymn, composed to be sung as a thanksgiving after the receiving the Lord’s supper[98]; in which the corn, as first living and growing, and afterwards cut down, and by threshing, separated from the husk, and then ground in the mill, and baked in the oven, are all made significant signs of the sufferings and torments which our Saviour endured. And the corn being united in one loaf, is made a sign of the union between Christ and his church. In like manner the grapes being gathered, pressed, and made into wine, is supposed to signify our spiritual joy, arising from Christ’s shedding his blood. And, as many grapes make one vine, so believers should be united by faith and love. What lengths is it possible for the wit and fancy of men to run, when they have a fruitful invention, and are disposed to make significant signs, and apply them to this ordinance without a divine warrant!
4. When we meditate on Christ’s sufferings, our faith is not to rest in, or principally be fixed on the grievousness of them, as Dr. Goodwin observes[99]; so that we should only endeavour hereby to have our hearts moved to a relenting, and compassion expressed towards him, and indignation against the Jews that crucified him, together with an admiring of his noble and heroical love herein; so that if persons can get their hearts thus affected, they judge and account this to be grace; whereas, it is no more than what the like tragical story of some great and noble personage (full of heroical virtues and ingenuity; yet inhumanly and ungratefully used) doth ordinarily work in ingenuous spirits, who read or hear of it; which, when it reacheth no higher, it is so far from being faith, that it is but a carnal and fleshly devotion; and Christ himself, at his suffering, found fault with, as not being spiritual, when he says, Daughters of Jerusalem weep not for me, but for yourselves and for your children, Luke xxiii. 28. that is, not so much for this, when you see me thus unworthily handled by those for whom I die, as for yourselves.
Moreover, he farther adds, that it was not the malice of the Jews, the falseness of Judas, the fearfulness of Pilate, the iniquity of the times he fell into, that wrought our Saviour’s death; God the Father had an higher design herein: And this our faith is constantly to be conversant about, considering it as the result of an eternal agreement between the Father and the Son, and of that covenant which he came into the world to fulfil; and his being made sin for us, to take away our sins by the atonement which he made hereby. And, besides this, we may add, that the highest and most affecting consideration in Christ’s sufferings, ought to contain in it the idea of his being a divine person, which is the only thing that argued them sufficient to answer the great ends designed thereby, as it rendered them of infinite value; and it was upon this account that his condescension expressed herein, might truly be said to be infinite. These things, I say, we are principally to rest in, when we meditate on Christ’s sufferings in this ordinance; though the other, which are exceedingly moving and affecting in their kind, are not to be passed over; since the Holy Ghost has, for this end, given a particular account thereof in the gospels, not barely as an historical relation of what was done to him, but as a convincing evidence of the greatness of his love to us.
Thus concerning Christ’s death, shewed forth or signified in this ordinance. We are farther, under this head, to consider how he is present, and they who engage in it aright feed on his body and blood by faith. We are not to suppose that Christ is present in a corporal way, so that we should be said to partake of his body in a literal sense; but he being a divine person, and consequently omnipresent; and having promised his presence with his church in all ages, and places, when met together in his name; in this respect he is present with them, in like manner as he is in other ordinances, to supply their wants, hear their prayers, and strengthen them against corruption and temptation, and remove their guilt by the application of his blood, which is presented as an object for their contemplation in a more peculiar manner in this ordinance.
As for our feeding on, or being nourished by the body and blood of Christ, these are metaphorical expressions, taken from, and adapted to the nature and quality of the bread and wine by which it is signified; but that which we are to understand hereby, is, our graces being farther strengthened and established, and we enabled to exercise them with greater vigour and delight; and this derived from Christ, and particularly founded on his death. And, when we are said to feed upon him, in order hereunto, it denotes the application of what he has done and suffered, to ourselves; and, in order hereunto, we are to bring our sins, with all the guilt that attends them, as it were, to the foot of the cross of Christ, confess and humble our souls for them before him, and by faith plead the virtue of his death, in order to our obtaining forgiveness, and, at the same time, renew our dedication to him, while hoping and praying for the blessings and privileges of the covenant of grace, which were purchased by him.
Moreover, there is another thing signified in this ordinance, as a farther end for which it was instituted, namely, in that we are to have communion with one another, and thereby express our mutual love, as members of Christ’s mystical body, who have the same end in view, and make use of the same means, viz. Christ crucified, as we attend on the same ordinance in which this is set forth, and having the same common necessities, infir