TEXT.--"For I have received of the Lord, that which also I delivered to you, That the Lord Jesus, the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you, this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also, He took the cup, when He had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood; this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till He come. Wherefore, whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body." (1Co 11:23-29.)

      The account of the Lord's supper, as contained in this text, was given to the apostle Paul by special revelation. His apostleship, and the whole gospel which he preached, he received, he says, not of man, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. Precisely in the same way also, he received the law of the ordinance of the Lord's supper, as contained in the words of our text. "I received," says he, "from the Lord that which I delivered to you; That the Lord Jesus, the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread," &c. Here we have plainly brought to view in a few words, (1) The Author of [371] this institution--the Lord Jesus. (2) The time of its appointment--the night in which he was betrayed; and, (3) The elements of the institution itself--bread and wine.

      Three out of the four evangelists, namely: Matthew, Mark and Luke, record substantially, the same history of this ordinance, which we find in the text. The principal differences in these general accounts of the Lord's supper is, that Paul's account is more explicit and complete than any of the rest. For this reason, we have taken his account of the ordinance as the foundation of our discourse upon this subject. And, in order to give the subject (as we have the two preceding ones) a full and ample illustration, in all its bearings, we propose to consider,

I. THE IMPORT AND NATURE OF THE ORDINANCE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.
II. THE LEADING DESIGN AND PURPOSES OF ITS INSTITUTION.
III. THE QUALIFICATIONS NECESSARY FOR A WORTHY OBSERVANCE OF IT.
IV. THE RIGHT AND DUTY OF CHRISTIANS TO PARTAKE OF THIS HOLY ORDINANCE.
V. THE BENEFITS RESULTING FROM A WORTHY CELEBRATION THEREOF. And,
VI. THE TERRIBLE GUILT AND CONDEMNATION OF THOSE WHO PROFANE THIS SACRED INSTITUTION.

      According to this order and arrangement, we shall briefly explain, [372]

I. THE IMPORT AND NATURE OF THE ORDINANCE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.

      Here two leading ideas will claim our attention, namely:

      1. THE IMPORT OR MEANING OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.
      2. ITS TRUE AND PROPER NATURE.

      1. WHAT IS THE IMPORT OR MEANING OF THE LORD'S SUPPER? It does not mean,

      1. A sacrament; that is, an oath of allegiance. This term ought to be rejected, because it is unscriptural, and because it involves the idea of swearing to the Lord. The Romans made their soldiers take an oath of fidelity to their generals. This military oath was called sacramentum. Christians, unlike the Roman soldiers, are voluntary, not oath-bound soldiers. It is not,

      2. A sacrifice; that is, no oblation of Christ's body and blood, as a renewed sacrifice for sin. There is nothing in this ordinance like a sacrificial service--a visible altar, with an oblation of sacrifice. Such a service is inconsistent with the declared end and design of the institution, and contrary to the oneness of Christ's sacrifice (Heb 7:27 10:10-12). It is not,

      3. A eucharist; that is, a giving of thanks. This, also, is a misnomer. But,

      4. By the Lord's supper is meant a symbolical and perpetual ordinance of the Christian religion, wherein, by eating bread and drinking wine, we show forth and commemorate the sufferings and death of Christ. It is called the Lord's supper, because it was instituted and administered at supper time in the night in which He was betrayed, and about the close of the passover supper. Supper was a chief meal among the ancients (1Co 11:20,28). It is also called the Lord's table [373] (1Co 10:21), the communion (1Co 10:16), and the breaking of bread (Ac 2:42). The next point to be considered, is,

      2. THE NATURE OF THIS ORDINANCE. The matter, or outward elements to be used in this ordinance, are bread and wine; and which are symbols of the body and blood of Christ. The first element and memorial in this institution is bread. The text says, "The Lord Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you," &c. [1Co 11:24].

      1. Bread, then, is one of the external elements to be used in this ordinance. But is it material what kind of bread is used, whether it be leavened or unleavened bread? Our Saviour no doubt used unleavened bread, as no other was in use at the passover feasts. But the disciples in Troas, and those at other places, doubtless used leavened bread, which was used for the ordinary purposes of life. Hence the kind of bread to be used, is immaterial to the validity of the ordinance. Again,

      2. Wine is another outward element appointed to be used in this ordinance. But is it material what kind of wine is used? Must it be red or white, mixed or unmixed, fermented or unfermented wine? Red wine, or "the pure blood of the grape," as it is called (De 32:14), was the wine chiefly used in Palestine. But as it is not specified what kind of wine our Saviour and His apostles used, therefore it seems to be a matter of indifference what kind of wine is made use of. It is, however, absolutely necessary to the validity of this holy ordinance that both bread and wine, the divinely appointed elements, be given to every communicant. [374] The eating of bread and drinking of wine Christ has connected, and therefore they ought never to be separated. The papists and others, who withhold the cup, and administer round wafers only in this ordinance, do greatly err.

      The bread and wine in the Lord's supper are not changed into the real body and blood of Christ, as some teach. Neither are the real materials of His body and blood incorporated with, in, and under the bread and wine in this ordinance, as others hold and teach. There is no doctrine of transubstantiation, or of consubstantiation taught by Christ and His apostles {g}.

      The words, "This is my body," and, "This is my blood," are to be understood in a figurative and not in a literal sense. To understand them literally is contrary to reason, and is contradicted by the evidence of our senses. It is also contrary to the nature of Christ's body, and contrary to the nature and design of the ordinance. Bread and wine, the elements in this institution, are only emblems and memorials of the broken body and shed blood of Christ.

      The verbs is, are, to be, among the Jews, were used to mean, signify or represent. Hence, ears of corn, and kine are said to be years of plenty and famine (Ge 41:26,27). The ten horns in Daniel are said to be [375] ten kings (Da 7:24). The good seed are said to be the children of the kingdom (Mt 13:38). Christ also is said to be a Vine, and His disciple to be the branches (Joh 15:1). The seven stars and the seven candlesticks are said to be the seven angels and the seven churches (Re 1:20). From these considerations it is evident that the aforesaid phrases are to be taken in a figurative sense and not in a literal. Analogy is a correct law of interpretation.

      The consecration, or setting apart of the elements of bread and wine, by solemn and appropriate prayer, before they are distributed, is altogether proper and scriptural. The Lord Jesus, it is said, took bread and blessed it, that is, consecrated it. In other words, He set it apart from a common to a sacred use, by a suitable and solemn prayer. His example in this consecrating act may rightfully be followed by all His ministers. But then, let it be remembered, that the consecrating service does not change the elements, as some teach, but simply devotes, or appropriates them to their intended use.

      The properly authorized administrators of the Lord's supper are the regularly accredited ministers of the gospel, assisted by other officials in the Church. To administer the word and ordinances of religion, is the principal work of the Christian ministry.

      The proper time of celebrating this ordinance, is in the evening, it being the regular and suitable time for supper, and the time of its institution. The morning is no suitable time for a supper. In the afternoon, also, the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, Christ our Passover was slain for us. [376]

      The frequency of observing the Lord's supper, or how often, it ought to be kept, cannot be determined from the Scriptures. Some advocate weekly, some monthly, some quarterly, and some yearly celebrations of it. Judging from the nature and design of the ordinance, and from the expression, "As oft as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup" [1Co 11:24,25], which by a metonymy, is put for the wine, we may justly conclude that it ought to be kept quarterly at least, if not oftener.

      As to the posture in which this ordinance should be observed--whether in a kneeling, standing, or sitting posture--ministers and churches differ in their opinions. In our judgment, the sitting table posture is the most befitting, was the most in vogue among the first Christians, and is decidedly the most scriptural.

      We shall now proceed to consider,

II. THE LEADING DESIGN AND PURPOSES OF ITS INSTITUTION.

      {g} TRANSUBSTANTIATION.--A change of the bread and wine in the Lord's supper, into the real material body and blood of Christ. This tenet is held by the Roman Catholics.
      CONSUBSTANTIATION.--A union of the real body and blood of Christ with the elements of the supper: so that both substances are blended together, and compose a compound substance. This was the doctrine of Luther and his followers. Both dogmas are unscriptural.

[DPS 371-377]