Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

or tacit dispensation from frequent communicating, if we happen to imagine, that frequency will leffen our reverence? Difobedience to Chrift is no part of the refpect we owe to the Lord's table. To obey is better than facrifice. Our Lord did not fay, honour the facrament, or dread it, or admire it, or adore it, but partake of it. We are not therefore at liberty to fubftitute any other mark of refpect to this ordinance, in room of partaking of it. How fingularly unfortunate is the command, Do this in remembrance of me, to be difobeyed from too much regard?"

(2.) Conjecture is lighter than experience. Let us then fee, whether the objection is verified or difproved by matter of fact. And here on the one fide, the hiftory of the primitive church, for more than three hundred years, proves, that conftancy and reverence happily confpired together to God's glory and his churches benefit. But on the other hand, when fucceeding ages attempted, by leffening the frequency to increase the reverence, the confequence was, that, by degrees, the very being of the ordinance was in danger of being loft, and a multitude of the moft terrible mifchiefs, and particularly a general decay of the power of godlinefs, overspread the chriftian world. Was there not more religion in Scotland, at the reformation and covenanting periods, when communions were more frequent? Since that ordinance began to be feldomer difpenfed amongst us, has religion been a gainer? Does not the gospel thrive as well, and are not communions as much honoured with the Redeemer's prefence in New-England (where, in fome places, the communion is dispensed once every month, and

in all at least once in the two months) as it does with us?-As to the church of England, I can prove from the writings of fome of their divines, that tho' they abfurdly enough read the communion service almost every fabbath and holiday, yet that, in moft parish churches, it is only dif penfed thrice a year, and even then the communicants few. Nay, as I remarked in the preceeding fection, fo early as the time of Cartwright and Calderwood, infrequency in communicating was objected to the church of England. So that whatever contempt may be poured on the Lord's table by any in that church, will never prove the objection well grounded.

(3.) Does not the Bible fpeak ftrongly on the folemnity of prayer, and the danger of rafhnefs in fpeaking to God? And does it not tell us, that the word when heard unworthily is a favour of death unto death? Shall we then pray feldom, and hear the word feldom, that we may do it with the greater folemnity; and fo not expose ourselves to the danger of praying unworthily, and hearing unworthily? Would not this way of reasoning be fallacious, if applied to prayer, and hearing the word? And is it not equally fo, when applied to the facrament? The godly will not quit their reverence to the Lord's table upon any the greatest frequency, as appears by their uniting frequency and reverence in other religious institutions. And the fhew of reverence the ungodly bring to it, is not worth the preserving: and much lefs is it worth the purchafing at fo dear a rate, as the depriving faints of this ordi

nance.

O 2

(4.) Prayer,

(4.) Prayer, hearing the word, &c. are not Jefs ufeful by reafon of their frequency. Thofe who abound in them moft, find moft benefit in them. The fame may be faid of meditation, felf-examination, and other religious exercises. Why then should it be fuppofed, that rareness in remembering Chrift's death in the facrament, fhould add to the effect of that ordinance?— Novelty, it must be owned, adds a force to every thing. Fulnefs brings cheapnefs on the very bread of life: yet who would infer from this, that it ought to be withheld till famine inhanfe the price? Or that we ought to be feldom in preaching the great and heart-affecting truths of the gofpel, left by oftener infifting on them, they fhould affect lefs?

Í fhall conclude this head with the words of Mr. Charnock (c), " To be frequent in commu"nicating is agreeable to the nature of the or"dinance, and neceffary for the wants of a "chriftian. By too much fafting we often lofe 66 our ftomachs. Too much deferring does more "hurt than frequent communicating. The of"tener we carefully and believingly communi

cate, the more difpofed we fhall be for it. If "it be worthily received, it increaseth our re"verence of God, and affection to him. And "that is the beft reverence of God which own"eth his authority. Chrift's death is to be every "day fixed in our thoughts; and to help our "weaknefs, there fhould be a frequent repre"fentation of it to our fenfes, in such a way as "Chrift has inftituted, not as men may prefcribe."

(c) Charnock, ubi fupra, and p. 747.0

§ 4. IV. But it will ftill be urged, "That partaking of the Lord's Supper is the nearest "approach we can make on earth to the great

and dreadful God, and therefore requires fuch "awe and reverence, and fuch degrees of fo"lemn preparation, as would be utterly impof"fible, were that ordinance frequently dif"pensed."

grant many pious and excellent divines have faid this and a great deal more. But where does the Scripture fay fo? To the law, and to the teftimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is becaufe, in fo far, there is no light in them.

We ought never to approach God in any ordinance without a reverent, penitent, humble frame, and a heart broken for fin. But it would be a ftrange inference, that therefore there ought to be a fast-day, with three fermons, and a preparation day, with two fermons, before every time the facrament is difpenfed. Thefe difpofitions are neceffary in every approach to God in other ordinances, and therefore if public fafts and preparations are neceffary before the facrament, they are neceffary before them alfo. We seem to have made a diftinction in this matter, beyond what we have warrant for in the word of God, as if this ordinance were placed at a greater diftance from others, than it really is.

The vaft preparations the people of the Jews were obliged to make before the promulgation of the law, are urged in fupport of this notion (d). And from the mifapplication of such paffages of fcripture, many of the best of Chrifti

(d) See Exod. xix, xx. chap.

0 3

ans

ans approach their reconciled God and father with a lavish awe, like that of the Ifraelites, when approaching the mount that burned with fire; or that of Peter, when he faid to our Lord, Depart from me, for I am a finful man. They fit down at the table of the Lord, with as great tertor as the high priest entered the holieft of all on the day of atonement, when, for the very leaft accidental mifcarriage or inadvertency, during his fhort ftay there, he was in danger of being ftruck dead. Doubtlefs the seldom difpenfing this ordinance has led many of the lefs judicious into fuch melancholy fuperftitious apprehenfions, and raised fuch terrors in their mind, that they could not attend upon God in this intitution without diftraction, and thus were deprived of much of the comfort and benefit, which otherwife they would have reaped from it. Such I would intreat to confider the differences of the legal and evangelical difpenfation, and of the fpirit of bondage flowing from the one, and the fpirit of adoption which fuits the other, as reprefented to us, Rom. viii. 15. Gal. iv. 25, 26. Heb. iv. 16. x. 19,-22. and xii. 18-24.

And here I cannot but take occafion to remark, that the day of atonement was the only anniverfary day of fafting, humiliation, and confeffion of fins which God enjoined the Ifraelites. All their other annual holidays, except thefe which they themselves appointed, after their return from the Babylonish captivity, were days of joy and thanksgiving (e). If then the Jews had more thanksgivings than fafts, why fhould not the Chriftians? Is not our caufe of joy greater?

(e) Univerfal hiftory, vol. III. Octavo edition, p. 44.

« AnteriorContinua »