74 A treatise, on the Obligation of the profeffors of Christianity to celebrate the LORD'S SUPPER; with an Answer to the principal excufes for neglecting it. HA AVING in the foregoing treatise explained the nature and defign of the Lord's fupper; because, notwithstanding the apparent excellency and obligation of this inftitution of our Saviour, too many, by profeffion Chriftians, indulge themselves in the neglect of it, I fhall diftinctly confider the obligation lying upon the difciples of Chrift to communicate in the facrament of the Lord's fupper, and fome of the principal reafons which hinder the most from complying with this obligation. That you may clearly apprehend the obligation lying upon the difciples of Christ to communicate in the facrament of the Lord's fupper, I would offer the following confiderations to your ferious and most impartial thoughts. 1. Confider the expreffnefs of the command. Can any words be more plain and direct than thofe which we meet with, in the account given of this institution by the Evangelift Luke,This do in remembrance of me (a)? There might have been a little more room to question, whether this was not a temporary command, a command to con(a) Luke xxii. 19. : tinue in force only while the Apostles lived, there being none prefent but the Apostles when this facrament was inftituted, if the very reafon or ground of the command did not fhew the contrary. The bread and wine in the facrament fignify the body and blood of Chrift; his body broken, and his blood fhed for the remiffion of fins and unless any one will fay, that we have not the fame concern in the death of Chrift, and the atonement for fin made by it, as the firft Chriftians, the argument from hence will, I think, be unanfwerable, That the facrifice of Chrift being intended alike for the benefit of all ages, and the covenant of grace thereby confirmed extending to all, the inftitution of the fupper,, which was defigned to lead the thoughts and meditations of Chriftians to this facrifice, must equally regard all; especially if we add the words juft mentioned, that the Apostles were to do this in remembrance of Chrift; i. e. after he was gone from them, they were to repeat this action, in order to keep up the remembrance of him in the world, and to preferve it fresh in themfelves. It is evident at firft fight, that the celebrating his memory among his difciples, is in general hereby intended. And is not the confequence vifible, that if the followers of Chrift, in all ages of the world, are bound to honour the memory of their Saviour, and as much need the affiftance of an outward rite to this purpose, as Chrift's immediate difciples did, then this precept must include the one as well as the other? G 2 other yea more especially thofe who came after; fince they must be more in danger of forgetting their Master, than his first disciples were, who perfonally knew him, or converfed with thofe that did, and were continually talking about the wonders of his life and death, and refurrection and afcenfion, which were then fresh transactions? They might better, fure, difpenfe with an ordinance dedicated to the memory of Christ, who never almost fuffered him to be out of their minds and mouths, than following ages; to whom therefore this command appears to belong, from the very reafon of it fubjoined, viz. that it was to be in remembrance of Christ. And that there might not be the least reafonable doubt left about the perpetuity of this ordinance, the Apoftle Paul tells the Corinthians, (and in them the Chriftians of fucceeding times), that as often as they ate this bread, and drank this cup, they did fhew the Lord's death till he came (b);-an expreffion which would have been exceeding improper, if the inftitution was to have an end fo foon after it began. How could the disciples of Christ be faid to fhew or represent his death in this ordinance till his coming, if those only of the first age were to fhew it forth after this manner? Do not the words manifeftly imply, that as Chrift would always have a church upon earth, fo it would be the duty of the members of it, one generation after another, to commemorate the death of their (b) Cor. xi. 26. Mafter, Mafter, till he should appear the fecond time, and receive them to himself, when there would be no occafion to do it? The command there*fore I apprehend, as taking in all ages, is undeniable; and confequently the obligation upon all to obferve it: for I hope there are none fo abfurd, as, while they profefs to believe the truth of the gofpel, to deny their being bound by the commands of it. If the gofpel be true, then every precept it contains is from God, has the ftamp of his authority, and is the refult of his infinite wifdom. And if fo, what other meaning can voluntary disobedience to any command bear but this, that the disobedient perfon regards not the authority of the most high God, and queftions the wifdom of his precepts ? For had he that awe of the divine authority, and that perfuafion of the divine wisdom, in any command or inftitution, which fhould, and does poffefs every pious breaft, he would not knowingly and wilfully refufe his compliance with any one injunction of the gofpel. And indeed he might as confiftently with-hold his obedience from one command as another, and from all, as do it avowedly from any one, according to the reafoning of the Apoftle James, that he who keepeth the whole law, and offends in one point, (i. e. voluntarily and habitually), is guilty of all (c); guilty of prefumptuously difowning that authority which fupports all the reft. This is the language of wilfully neglecting any command of God; (c) Jam, ii. 10. G 3 which which holds of the Lord's fupper, as well as of other commands of the gofpel. Wilful difobedience here, as in all other cafes, admits of no excufe, amounting to a practical denial of the authority and wifdom of God in his laws. It nearly concerns the abfenters from the Lord's table, to take this matter into their moft ferious confideration. Are they perfectly negligent and thoughtlefs about receiving the Lord's fupper? Do they go on, one year after another, without troubling themfelves about it; never inquiring whether it be or be not a command of the gospel, and whether it does or does not reach them; and even putting the thought from them when they have a fufpicion it does? Have they no folicitude at all upon their fpirits to approve themselves unto God, by walking in all his commandments blamelefs; defirous to know their duty in its whole extent, and to practife every part of it? For certain, if this be not wilful disobedience, it is a very near approach to it, and carries in it a great share of the fame guilt. Nor can it, I think, be fuppofed of any fincere Christian, that he should pay fo little refpect to the commands of the gofpel as this. Every fuch perfon must be under a real concern to know his duty in every inftance, (particularly with regard to his communicating in the Lord's fupper), and to dif charge it when known. But though he takes fome care, yet it may be not all that he ought, to clear up the matter to himself, and to difengage himself from all hindrances, that he |