service itself is more than once called a memorial in the Old Testament, as before noted.

5. In the ancient paschal feast, the master of the house was wont to take cup after cup (to the number of four,) into his hands, consecrating them one after another by a short thanksgiving; after which each consecrated cup was called a cup of blessing. It is judged by the learned in Jewish antiquities", that the third or fourth cup (Buxtorf is positive for the fourth) was what our Lord was pleased to sanctify, by taking it into his hand, and giving thanks over it. It is doubted what the words after supper mean; whether in the close of the paschal supper, as some think, or after they had eaten bread, as others construe: but the difference is not of moment, and so I

b

pass on.

6. At the institution of the passover it was said, "The blood "shall be to you for a token upon the houses where you are; " and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague "shall not be upon you 2," &c. The blood was the token of the covenant in that behalf, between God and his people; as circumcision before had been a token a also of a like covenant, and called covenant as well as token. In the institution of the Communion, our Lord says, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood "which is shed for you, for many, for the remission of sins." The cup is here by a figure put for wine; and covenant, according to ancient Scripture phrase, is put for token of a covenant; and wine, representative of Christ's blood, answers to the blood of the Passover, typical of the same blood of Christ and the

" Pfaffius de Oblat. Euch. p. 173. Buxtorf. in Lexic. Talmud. p. 614, 616. Dissert. vi. p. 300. Lightfoot on Matt. xxvi. 27, p. 259. Bucherus, p. 380-384. Zornius Opusc. Sacr. tom. ii. p. 14, &c. Hooper on Lent, part ii. cap. 3. p. 173.

Lightfoot, p. 259, 260.

7 Tò μetà deiπvñoaι [1 Cor. xi. 25.] non vertendum est, post cœnam communem, qualis nunquam fuit, sed remote post cœnam paschalem: vel, quod vero similius est, proxime et immediate post esum panis consecrati; cui expositioni respondet recensio historica Luc. xxii. 20. σaúτws Kaì TÒ TOTηpiov μetà tò deinvñσai, postquam comederant, scil. panem consecratum, quam versionem sequuntur Arabs et Persa. Sic Græcis δείπνον quidem ἰδίως canam, sed παχυλώς et καταχρηστικῶς sape cibum et quodvis epulum conno

VOL. IV.

tat; qua notione Hesiodus dixit deîπVOν Toleiv, comedere, cibum sumere, &c. Bucher. p. 362.

z Exod. xii. 13. a Gen. xvii. II. b Gen. xvii. 10. This is my covenant, &c. and v. 13. my covenant shall be in your flesh, &c.

c Deus speciali mandato sacrificia et primitias offerendas ordinavit, maxime effusionem sanguinis, ut ab initio homines haberent unde effusionis per Christum tacite recordari possent. Dan. ix. 24. Heb. ix. et x. Rom. iii. Præter cæteras oblationes Deo factas, commemorabilia sunt sacrificia in festo expiationum.-Tum quoque sacrificium agni paschalis, et quotidiani, seu jugis sacrificii, attendi debet. igitur ad ritus et oblationes alludit Christus cum ait, Τοῦτο γάρ ἐστι τὸ αἷμα μου τὸ τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης, τὸ περὶ πολλῶν ἐκχυνόμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν

K k

Hos

remission of sins here, answers to the passing over there, and preserving from plague. These short hints may suffice at present, just to intimate the analogy between the Jewish Passover and the Christian Eucharist in the several particulars of moment here mentioned.

7. At the paschal feast there was an annunciation, or declarationd of the great things which God had done for that people : in like manner, one design of the Eucharist is to make a declaration of the mercies of God in Christ, to "shew the Lord's "death till he come."

e

8. Lastly, at the close of the paschal supper, they were wont to sing an hymn of praise: and the like was observed in the close of the institution of the Christian Eucharist; as is recorded in the Gospels.

The many resembling circumstances, real and verbal, which I have here briefly enumerated, do abundantly shew that this holy Eucharist was in a great measure copied from the paschal feast, and was intended to supply its place, only heightening the design, and improving the application. The use of the observation may appear afterwards, when we come to consider more minutely either the general intent or the particular parts of this Christian

service.

CHAP. III.

Of the Commemoration or Remembrance of Christ in the

Holy Communion.

SINCE the end or design of any thing is always considered as first in view, antecedent in natural order to the performance, so the rules of just method require, that in treating of this Sacrament we should begin with some account of the proximate end and design of it; namely, the commemoration or remembrance of Christ, "This do in remembrance of mef;" and particularly of his death and passion, "shew the Lord's death till he come 5." I call it the proximate or immediate end, because the ultimate end of all is the happiness of man, or, what is coincident therewith, the glory of God. Our blessed Lord seeks not his own glory, but the good of his creatures, in all that he appoints them

ἁμαρτιῶν. Observant præterea viri docti vinum rufum, quale in illis regionibus crescebat, ac in primis in cœna paschali bibebatur, egregiam nobis sanguinis memoriam relinquere. Bucher. Antiq. Evan. p. 389.

See Lightfoot, vol. ii. p. 778.

Pfaffius, p. 181.

e See Lightfoot, vol. ii. p. 258, 260. Pfaffius, p. 181.

f Luke xxii. 19. 1 Cor. xi. 24, 25. Τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν.

6 Ι Cor. xi. 26. Τον θάνατον τοῦ

κυρίου καταγγελλετε ἄχρις οὗ ἂν ἔλθῃ·

to do. He is not capable of receiving advantage, or any real addition to his own glory, by any of our commemorations or services: but all these things are graciously appointed for our present and future benefit; and we may be confident that Christ, the Captain of our salvation, would prescribe nothing in a particular manner, which does not as particularly contribute to that end. Some Divines, of a refined and elevated way of thinking, will not allow that God can have any end but himself, in any thing that he does, because he can have no higher: but then they do not mean that God proposes to himself any increase of happiness or of essential glory, to which nothing can be added; but that, as he is naturally benevolent, and as he takes delight in his own being and attributes, (the most worthy of his love,) so he delights in the exercise of his goodness, and chooses it as worthy of himself, and, in this sense, acts only for himself. In such a sense as this, our blessed Lord may be said to have acted for himself, or for his own glory, in what he did for mankind: but it can in no sense be allowed, that he receives any advantage by what we say or do; and therefore the ultimate end (so considered) of our commemorations or services is the benefit accruing from thence to ourselves: what they are we shall see in due time and place. This being premised for clearer conception, or to prevent mistakes, I now proceed.

The commemoration of our Lord's dying for us includes two things; the consideration of him as Lord, and as dying; one expressing his personal dignity, the other expressing his meritorious sufferings relative to us. The first of the two may suffice for the present: the second may be reserved for a distinct chapter.

I here take for my ground the words of our Lord; "This do "in remembrance of me." The Greek words εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμŋow may bear three several renderings (or four). 1. In remembrance of me. 2. In commemoration of me. 3. For a memorial of me, or, for my memorial. They differ not much in sense, but yet as they do differ, they may deserve a distinct consideration. The second includes the first; and the third includes both the former, not vice versa : so they rise, as it were, in sense, and are so many distinct gradations, as shall be shewn presently.

I. I begin with the first and lowest, this do" in remembrance "of me." The Socinians, (some of them at least,) not content with supposing this remembrance or commemoration to be one

considerable end or part of this Sacrament, make it to be the only end or use of ith; yea and sometimes go so far as to say, that it constitutes the very nature or essence of this holy rite: for they interpret the words, "this is my body," so as to mean, this action, this eating and drinking, is the memorial of Christ's body broken', &c. Which is overdoing, and neglecting to distinguish between the thing itself, and the end or design of it; between what is done, and for what purpose it is done. We eat bread and we drink wine in the Sacrament, the symbols of Christ's body and blood; and we do so for this reason, among others, that Christ may be remembered, and the merits of his passion celebrated. But this I hint by the way only, and pass on to what I design. Remembrance of Christ is undoubtedly a principal end of this Sacrament. It is not declared by the institution itself, in what view, or under what capacity we are here to remember him; but that must be learned from other places of Scripture, which declare who and what he is: for certainly we are to remember him in such a light as the Old and New Testament have represented him in. This appears to be an allowed principle on all hands: for none think themselves obliged to stop in the bare words of the institution, without carrying their inquiries further into the whole compass of Scripture, when they see proper. The Socinians themselves will not scruple to allow that Christ may or ought to be remembered in the Sacrament as Lord, in their sense, or as Master, or Saviour, or Head, or Judge, though there is not a word of Lord, or Master, or Saviour, or Head, or Judge, in the bare form of the institution as delivered by Christ but those names or titles are to be fetched from other places of Scripture. Therefore, I say, it is allowed by all parties, that we ought to remember Christ, in the holy Communion, according to what he is, by the Scripture account of him. This foundation being laid, I go on to the superstructure: and for the more distinct conception of what this remembrance implies or contains, I shall take leave to proceed by several steps or degrees.

h Et hæc quidem quam explicuimus, mortis Christi annuntiatio proprius est, atque unicus Coenæ Dominicæ finis &c. Volkel. de Can. Dom. p. 687. i Hæc actio frangendi et comedendi panem, est corpus, hoc est commemoratio Christi corporis pro nobis fracti. Smalc. cont. Frantz. p. 315.

Corpus Christi et sanguinem Christi

pro memoriali signo corporis Christi fracti, et sanguinis fusi sumimus: commemorationem autem, istius sacri ritus finem usumque esse dicimus. Schlichting.contr. Meisn. p. 761. Ritus istius naturam in panis fractione et esu, et e poculo potu, perque hæc in mortis Christi repræsentatione quadam, sitam esse dicimus. Ibid. p. 785, 786.

1. It is not sufficient to remember Christ merely as a very great and good man, a wise instructor, and an admirable teacher, while he lived, received up into celestial bliss and glory when he died for all this comes vastly short of what sacred Writ declares of him; and is indeed no more (if so much) than what the Pagans themselves, the Platonists, particularly of the second and third centuries, were ready to admit. For, being struck with the fame of his undoubted miracles, and with the inimitable force of his admirable precepts, holy life, and exemplary death, they could not but revere and honour his memory; neither could they refuse to assign him a place among their chief sages or deities. And all the plea they had left for not receiving Christianity was, that his disciples (as was pretended) had revolted, or degenerated, and had not duly observed the wholesome instructions of their high leader'. Those Pagan philosophers therefore, as I said, remembered Christ, in as high a view as this article amounts to: a Christian remembrance must go a great deal higher.

2. It is not sufficient to remember Christ merely as an eminent prophet, or one of the chief prophets, an ambassador from heaven, and one that received his Gospel from above, wrought miracles, lived a good life, was deified after death, and will come again to judge mankind: for all this the Mahometans themselves (or some sects amongst them) can freely own, and they pay a suitable regard to his memory on that scorem. It is all vastly below. what the Scriptures plainly testify of him, and therefore does not amount to à Christian remembrance of him.

3. Neither yet is it sufficient to remember Christ as our Head, Lord, and Master, to whom we owe such regard as disciples do to their leader or founder: for all this is no more than what the Jews justly ascribed to Moses, who was but the servant of

* See this particularly proved in a very learned and curious dissertation, written by Laurence Mosheim, and lately inserted, with improvements, into his Latin translation of Cudworth, vol. ii. Confer. Euseb. lib. vii. cap. 18. Christum, Servatorem nostrum, virum magnum, divinum, et sapientissimum fuisse non inficiabantur, qui egregia et divina plane docuisset, cumque a Judæis injustissimo supplicio necatus fuisset, in cœlum ad Deos commeasset. Moshem. ibid. p. 23. Hence perhaps it was, that the Emperor Alex. Severus, (of the third century,) along with the images of Apollonius and Orpheus, had others of Abraham and Jesus Christ,

receiving them as deities. Lamprid. Vit. Severi.

1 Descivisse scilicet a sanctissimi præceptoris sui scitis Christianos Platonici criminabantur- -atque castam et sanam ejus disciplinam variis erroribus inquinasse.- -1. Quod divinis Christum honoribus afficerent; nec enim a suis id postulasse Christum. 2. Quod Deos negligerent, et eorum cultum extinctum vellent; Christum enim ipsum a Diis haud alienum fuisse. Moshem. ibid. p. 24.

m See Reland. de Religione Mohammedica, p. 25, 33, 34, 44, 45, 212, 224. David Millius, Dissert. x. de Mohammedismo, p. 344, 345, 346.