quenting it. And indeed it is ftrange, that even the name of St. Auguftin could make fuch a notion blindly followed. However we must obferve, as some excufe for that worthy Father, that the question propofed to him was, Shall a man communicate every day? But had the queftion been, Is communicating once or thrice a year fuffcient? he, no doubt, would have anfwered, No; and recommended weekly communions, as Gen"nadius did, in the clofe of the fame century, tho' he would give no decifion as to daily communions (s). I might add, it is plain, from Socrates' and Sozomenes' church hiftories (†), that weekly communions were grey kept up till the year Jenerally 450. Socrates, however, tells us of two exceptions. "Whereas, fays he, all churches through the world, on the Sabbath day, in every revolution of the week, celebrate the myfteries, they “of Alexandria, and they of Rome, on a certain, antient tradition, have refufed to do it." Probably the church of Rome was principal, that of Alexandria only acceffory, in this peculiarity: For Alexandria drawing confiderable fums of 'money from Rome, for the corn with which the furnished that city, might the easier be led to imitate the Roman cuftoms: However others too foon followed their pattern. We fee then to what we owe the neglect of weekly communions, even to the pretended traditions of the church of Rome.

At length communicating weekly, or monthly, begins to appear burdenfome. The greateft part received the facrament only three

(s) Gennadius inter Auguft. op. tom. viii. app. p. 78. (t) Socratis, lib. v. cap. 21. & Sozo

Ed. Bened.

men. lib. vii. cap. 19.

This oc

times a year, and fome not so often. cafioned the council of Agde or Agatha in Languedoc, met in the year 506, to decree, that none should be efteemed good Christians who did not communicate at least at the three great festivals, Chrifimas, Eafter, and Whitsunday (u); and accordingly, from that time forward, thofe of the church of Rome efteemed themfelves, in fo far good enough Chriftians, if they communicated thrice a year, and that it was prefumption to receive oftener (v). But in the Greek church, which was more distant from the fountain of corruption, it was ufual to communicate weekly, even fo low as the feventh century; and fuch as neglected three Weeks together were excommunicated (w). And in the eighth Century, Bede gave it as his opinion, that daily communions would be highly falutary to Chriftians *. But that opinion not being very confiftent with the docrine of tranfubftantiation, which now began to be broached in the church, met with but small regard; fo that in a fhort time it became the general practice to communicate only once a year, at Easter; and this the council of Trent seem to account fufficient (x).

It was then the church of Rome which introduced feldom communicating; for which, as for all their Innovations, they pretended an antient Tradition; and by which they alledged mens reverence for that ordinance would be heightened: And indeed so it was, till Veneration gradually in

(u) Concil Agath. ad Egbert, p. 311. *Vide Let. v.

Can. xviii.

(w) Theodor. (x) Concil. Trid.

N 4

(v) Bedae, ep. Penitent. p. 46. Seff. 13. Can. 9.

creafing

creafing, at length produced Adoration, and the blafphemous abfurdity of a Wafer God. A ftriking inftance how dangerous it is for Chriftians to pretend to fecure reverence to the inftitutions of their Lord, by methods different from those which he himfelf has appointed; and that it is our only fafety to adhere to the plan delivered us in the writings and practice of those who were under the infallible guidance of the Spirit, without turning afide to the right-hand or to the left. If we do otherwife, how prudent foever our measures may feem, and however pious our intentions may really be, we have in fo far rejected the word of the Lord; and what wifdom can there be in us?

$4. The reader may poffibly now expect an account what has been the practice of the pureft reformed churches in this matter: But my fmall acquaintance with books, which can throw light on this inquiry, permits me to fay but little on

this head.

In Bohemia the holy fupper is ufually celebrated four times a year. They difpenfe it oftener when the need of the faithful requires it; but thus often they enjoin it to be difpenfed for the fake of uniformity (y).

A national fynod of the Proteftants in France, met at Charinton 1644, give it as their judgment, "That though the Lord's Supper is dif"pensed in their church only four times a year, greater frequency would be defirable, the re

66

verence requifite at the Lord's Table being "preferved, that fo Saints might increase in faith,

(y) Account of the church order and discipline in the unity of the brethren of Bohemia, chap. iii. § 4.

"through

"through frequent partaking of the facrament, "as the primitive church did (z)."

The Lutherans have a communion every Sunday and Holiday throughout the year (a). And though the number of communicants is often but fmall (b), yet it is usual among them to communicate three or four times a year (c).

The church of England enjoins, that " in "every parish church and chapel, where facra"ments are to be administered within this realm, "the holy communion fhall be ministered by the "parfon, vicar, or minifter, fo often, and at "fuch times, as every parishioner may commu"nicate at least thrice in the year (d)." It is well known, that many of the clergy in that church have recommended, and that many of the well-difpofed among their laity practise, a much greater frequency. This has given occafion to fome, to afperfe the Synod of Glafgow's overture, as paving the way to Epifcopacy. But is it not abundantly confiftent with the most rigid Prefbyterian principles, to take a leffon from our fifter church, where her practice approaches nearer the Scripture ftandard than ours? Is her obferving an inftitution of Chrift any reason for our neglecting it? The pureft church on earth may learn fomething from churches lefs pure. whatever fome do, I fhall never esteem it a mark of purity, to say to others, Stand by, come not near me, for I am holier than thou. The more we have

And

(z) La Difcipline des Eglifes Reformes de France, cap. xii. § 14. (a) Johnson's unbloody Sacrifice, Part ii. p. 151. (b) Calvoer de tit. ecl. t. i. p. 758. (c) Buddei Inft. Theol. Dogm. lib. v. cap. 1. § 19. (d) Canon xxi. of the Province of Canterbury.

of true religion, the more will we have of a humble, teachable difpofition, and a willingness to be inftructed, even by our weaker brethren. I with 1 Cor. xii. 21. & feq. were more confidered. Progrefs in reformation can never be expected, when the beft things are rejected that other churches practise, under pretence of guarding against their corruptions. I cannot but obferve, that Cartwright (e) and Calderwood (f) charged the church of England with too feldom communicating. So different was the opinion of thefe great and good men, from that which now prevails. And I am well informed, that a great part of thofe who were ejected for non-conformity in Charles II's time, difpenfed the facrament monthly. I have now in my cuftody, manufcript Memoirs of a private Chriftian, who lived in the time of the civil wars in England, who, I find, received the facrament, with great profit, the firft Lord's Day of every month, at the meeting where Mr. Afh, a member of the Weftminfter affembly, and Mr. Robrough, one of their fcribes, were minifters: And that if any incident prevented the difpenfing the facrament the firft Sabbath of the month, it was done, if poffible, the Sabbath next following (g).

The churches in New England have no times univerfally ftated for their celebration of the Eucharift. Some have it once in four weeks, fome in fix, fome in eight: Some the firft Lord's Day in every Kalendar month, and fome the last. And

(e) Cartwright's Reply to Whitgift, p. 117.

(f) Calderwood's Altare Damafcenum. (g) The manufcript is intitled, The Growth of a Chriftian, and was lent me by Mr. William Hog, merchant in Edinburgh,

the