*

general custom to allude, in his actions and expressions, to what passed before his eyes, or presented itself to his observation; who can doubt, when we see, in the very form of celebration, all the marks of a sacrificial Supper, but that the Divine Institutor intended it should bear the same relation to his Sacrifice on the Cross, which the Paschal-Supper, then celebrating, bore to the oblation of the Paschal-Lamb; that is, be of the nature of a feast after a sacrifice. For if this was not his purpose, and that no more was intended than a general memorial, or remembrance of a dead benefactor, why was this instant of time preferred to all other throughout the course of his minis-" try, any of which had been equally commodious?

This reasoning receives additional strength even from what hath been sup posed to invalidate it, namely, the concluding words of the institution" Do this in remembrance of me." For though these words, considered alone, might signify no more than the remembrance of our obligation to him in general; yet when preceded

E 4

ceded by this is my body-this is my blood"-they necessarily imply the remembrance of his death and passion for us, in particular. And could there be a feast after the sacrifice, in which that sacrifice was not commemorated?

It is true, the injunction of doing it in remembrance, implies, that the celebration was to be continually repeated; which was not the case of feasts after the sacrifice; on which, as we say, this holy Rite was modelled. But this was a necessary difference; for the great Sacrifice itself, of which this feast was a Type, differed in the same manner from all other sacrifices. The Jewish and Pagan oblations had, or were supposed to have, only a passing and temporary virtue. The Sacrifice on the Cross is of perpetual efficacy; and will continue to operate till the consummation of all things. It seemed fit, therefore, that the operating virtue of this Sacrifice should be perpetually set before us, in a constant celebration of the feast upon it.

We have now seen what may be natu rally, and indeed, what must be reasonably inferred of Christ's purpose in the

Last

Last Supper, from the history of its institution.

Let us try next what we can collect of St. Paul's sense, in this matter, who hath occasionally spoken at large concerning it. And here we shall find, that this very sort of feast, which the words of the institution tacitly allude to, St. Paul, in order to shew the Specific Nature of the Rite, expressly draws a comparison from; and at the same time, in order to shew the efficacy of it, informs us of the end and purpose of those feasts upon the Sacrifice.

It is, in that place of his First Epistle to the Corinthians, where he reproves the proselytes to Christianity for the idolatrous practice of eating with the Gentiles, of things offered to Idols, in their feasts upon the sacrifice. His words are these-" I

86

66

speak as to wise men; judge ye what I

say. The cup of blessing which 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 ?-For we being many

66

66

66

are one bread and one body: for we

are all partakers of that one bread. "Behold Israel after the flesh: are not "they which eat of the sacrifices partakers "of the Altar? What say I then? That "an idol is any thing, or that which is “offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? "But I say, that the things which the "Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to de

66

vils, and not to God: and I would not "that ye should have fellowship with

devils; ye cannot drink the cup of the "Lord, and the cup of devils; ye can"not be partakers of the Lord's Table, "and of the table of devils."

The Apostle professeth, in this place, to write to these Corinthians under their assumed character of wise men. And though perhaps he may use the term a little ironically, and in reproof of the divisions, before objected to them; yet the logical inference drawn from an appeal to such a character, holds not the less for the sarcasm in which it is conveyed. My meaning is, that we may fairly conclude the reasoning to be such as wise

men

men would not disdain to consider; and so regularly conducted, as wise men would best comprehend. In a word, pursued with that science and precision which leaves no room for a loose, popular, and inaccurate interpretation. In the first place, therefore, we may collect, that the Cup of Blessing is not simply a general commemoration of a deceased benefactor, but a commemoration of Christ's Death and Passion: "It is the communion of the blood of Christ ;" an expression, as will be seen hereafter, of the utmost elegance, to imply a feast upon the Sacrifice. But the inference the Apostle draws from it, puts his meaning beyond all doubt→ "For we being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of that one bread." He says the partaking of one bread, makes the receivers, of many, to become one body. A just inference, if this Rite be of the nature of a feast upon the sacrifice; for then, the communion of the Body and Blood of Christ unites the receivers into one body, by an equal distribution of one common benefit: But if it be only a general commemoration of a deceased