Articles Of The Faith And Order Of A Primitive Or Strict And Particular Baptist Church Of The Lord Jesus Christ, Based On The Declaration Of Faith And Practice Of John Gill, D. D., 1720<\/p>\n
We believe that the Lord\u2019s Supper is a symbolical repast, setting forth, by the breaking, taking, and eating of Bread, and the drinking from a Cap of the juice of the fruit of the vine, the method of our salvation through the death of our Lord; the ratification of the Covenant of Grace by the shedding of His blood; and our union and communion, both with Him and His people; and that it is to be observed till He comes again.<\/p>\n
——————————-<\/p>\n
Matt 26:26-28; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 1:10,16,17; 11:23-26<\/p>\n
Annotations:<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 1.\u2014The Lord\u2019s Supper is a \u201crepast\u201d\u2014not a meal intended to satisfy hunger and nourish our physical frames.<\/p>\n It is a symbolical repast, representing and recalling by certain prescribed objects and actions, Divine and gracious acts and facts, in which we are eternally interested.<\/p>\n We are, in the main, in accord with the majority of Nonconformists as to the manner in which it should be observed, and the truths it expresses. Some of our convictions may, however, be stated.<\/p>\n Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation disclaimed.<\/p>\n Note 2.\u2014We deny that it is a Sacrament, and generally necessary to salvation. Were this true, infants, and persons who never partook of it, must be eternally lost.[1]<\/sup><\/p>\n As no special order of Christians should be styled and considered Priests, we deny that the administration of the Lord\u2019s Supper is a sacerdotal or Priestly function, (page 137) or that men ordained to the ministerial office have authority or power to effect any change in the elements, or the bread and wine employed. These remain unaltered by their religious use. The bread is still bread, and the wine, wine; and no one is commissioned to effect a change in them.<\/p>\n We therefore repudiate the Popish doctrine of Tranaubstantiation\u2014namely, that when the Priest pronounces the words of consecration, the bread and wine really become the body and blood of Christ, which are actually imparted to all who partake of thorn, on the ground of the benediction of tho Priest, irrespectively of hit moral character, and apart from their Faith.<\/p>\n Thus the Church of Rome holds that the consecrated elements used in the Eucharist (or rather, the bread or wafer only\u2014the wine being reserved for Priests) are Divine, and should as such be worshipped. Hence the Pyx, or box containing the Host, or consecrated wafer, is held up in the sight of the congregation, who are required to kneel and do it homage, as to the Son of God.<\/p>\n This the Reformers hated. \u201cTransubstantiation (or the change of the substance of the Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot,\u201d they said,\u201cbe proved by Holy Writ: but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.\u201d (\u201cArticles of Religion,\u201d of the Church of England, No. xxviii.)<\/p>\n Luther perceived that Transubstantiation was an evil\u2014 lacking Scriptural authority, giving awful power to so-called Priests, solemnly perverting an Ordinance of Christ\u2019s, gravely deluding men, and leading to gross superstition, and even a dangerous form of idolatry. He, therefore, repudiated it, and taught the tenet commonly called, Impanation or Conaubstantiation.<\/p>\n In this he denied that the substance of the bread and wine were changed; but insisted that after consecration the body and blood of Christ were really but spiritually present, together with the material substance of the bread and wine. He assigned no virtue or grace to the consecrated elements as such, and regarded the recipient\u2019s personal Faith as essential to, and the instrumentality whereby, worshippers become partakers of inward and spiritual grace.<\/p>\n This is identical with the teaching of the Liturgy, which states that \u201cthe body of Christ is given, taken and eaten in the Supper, (but) only after an heavenly and spiritual manner,\u201d (Article xxviii.) in which sense it is \u201cverily and indeed taken and received by the faithful,\u201d or those that believe\u2014elsewhere styled \u201call that be religiously and devoutly disposed\u201d\u2014since \u201cthe mean,\u201d or instrument, by which the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith,\u201d (Article xxviii.)<\/p>\n To this we are also opposed; for Consubstantiation cannot be proved by Holy Writ. No text asserts that while the elements remain unaltered, with them or in them, in some unexplained way, the body and blood of Christ are mysteriously so conjoined as to be taken and received by those that believe.<\/p>\n The dogma also depends on the alleged supremacy and power of the officiating Minister, who acts at the Communion in the character and capacity of a Priest. Without ordination to this office, he could not, according to the Prayer Book, \u201cdispense\u201d this \u201choly Sacrament.\u201d He, in every act which concerns the Eucharist, as such, is styled the Priest, the word occurring twenty-four times in the service. He places the bread and wine upon the table. He invites the people to \u201cdraw near with faith.\u201d He pronounces the Absolution. He offers \u201cthe Prayer of Consecration.\u201d He takes the paten (or plate) and breaks and lays his hand upon all the bread. He takes the cup, and lays his hand upon \u201cevery vessel in which there is wine to be oonseorated.\u201d He delivers the bread and wine into the hands of the people, all meekly kneeling. All this is unscriptural and sacerdotal, not only in sentiment but in act; and as such to be repudiated.[3]<\/sup><\/p>\n The Lord\u2019s Supper\u2014a Commemoration.<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 3.\u2014While denying Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation, we as Evangelical Dissenters, believe in the main with Ulric Zuingle, the Swiss Reformer, (1484\u20141531) that the Divine intention in the Lord\u2019s Supper is not Communication but Commemoration; in other words, that no special blessing is conveyed to those who partake of it, either through any efficacy possessed by the actual elements when consecrated, or by some peculiar form of grace connected with them; but that it is designed to recall to remembrance, for our soul\u2019s profit, what its symbols and ritual suggest. This forms the burden of many of our favourite hymns.[4]<\/sup><\/p>\n Figurative Language.<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 4.\u2014When each word in a sentence occurs in its ordinary sense, we say that it is to be understood literally, as \u201cMoses kept the flock of Jethro.\u201d Ex. 3:1. \u201cThe mother of Jesus was there.\u201d John 2:1. \u201cJoseph went to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus.\u201d Matt 27:58.<\/p>\n A writer who wishes to explain the property of a thing, or the manner of an action, often does so by means of a direct comparison, introduced by the words \u201cas\u201d or \u201clike,\u201d or the comparative degree followed by \u201cthan.\u201d This mode of expression is called a Simile: from simxlis, \u201clike,\u201d because it expresses resemblance between one object or action and another. Examples: \u201cThey sank as lead in the mighty waters.\u201d Ex. 15:10. \u201cAs one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you.\u201d Isa. 64:13. \u201cWe were like them that dream.\u201d Psa. 76:1. \u201cThey were swifter than eagles, they wero stronger than lions.\u201d 2 Sam. 1:23. \u201cThe kingdom of heaven is like,\u201d Matt. 13:31, etc. \u201cHe that wavereth (doubteth, R.V.) is like a wave (the surge, R.V.) of the sea.\u201d James 1:6.<\/p>\n Very frequently, however, the words, \u201cas\u201d and \u201clike,\u201d are omitted; as the resemblance, though implied, is not stated. In this case the figure of speech called Metaphor is employed, and the phrase or sentence is not understood literally, but in a figurative sense. Examples.\u2014\u201cUnto Thee will I cry, O Lord, my rock,\u201d Psa. 28:1. \u201cBehold, O God our shield,\u201d Psa. 84:9. \u201cOur God is a consuming fire,\u201d Heb. 12:29. \u201cYe are the salt of the earth,\u201d Matt. 5:13. \u201c[John] was a burning and a shining light [the lamp that burneth and shineth, R.V.l\u2019\u2019 John 5:35. \u201cI am the light of the world,\u201d\u2014\u201cthe door\u201d\u2014\u201cthe good shepherd,\u201d John 9:5; 10:9,14. \u201cWe, being many, are one [loaf of] bread,\u201d 1 Cor. 10:17. \u201cThis is my body,\u201d\u2014\u201cThis cup is the new covenant,\u201d 1 Cor. 11:24,25.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cThis Is My Body\u201c: This Cup is the New Covenant.<\/p>\n Note 5.\u2014\u201cThis is My Body.\u201d On these words the figment of Transubstantiation is based. Popish divines interpret them literally, while Protestants understand them figuratively. These, though their interpretations may differ as to details, are agreed that the expression is a Metaphor, and simply expresses that there is a resemblance between the loaf and the Lord\u2019s body.<\/p>\n \u201cThis cup is the new Covenant,\u201d (R.V.) This also is a Metaphor. The cup symbolises the new Covenant. The material cup is not a Covenant, nor is it transmuted into one. It is an outward and visible emblem or sign of the blood by which the new Covenant was ratified or confirmed.[5]<\/sup><\/p>\n A Repast Symbolising the Plan of Salvation.<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 6.\u2014A Symbol is an object, unimportant in itself; but owing its interest and influence to what is past, distant, in\u00ad visible, or difficult of apprehension, with which the mind naturally and involuntarily associates it.[6]<\/sup><\/p>\n A Symbolical Act is one that has distinct relation to a Symbol as such. In the Lord\u2019s Supper the bread and wine (if it should be wine)[7]<\/sup> are symbols; and taking and eating the bread, and drinking (of the contents of) the cup are symbolical aotions.<\/p>\n The ordinance is a repast, in which the worshippors eat and drink. Among the Orientals, doing this had a far higher import than with, ourselves, and expressed friendship and fellowship. No Arab will injure a man, or suffer him to be harmed by others, if he has partaken of his hospitality. Friendship is sealed by the act.<\/p>\n The Elements at the Lord\u2019s Supper are Symbols, as they consist of food and drink, which being essential to physical life, naturally suggest Christ as the strength and sustenance of spiritual life. His \u201cflesh is meat indeed,\u201d is truly food, and His \u201cblood is drink indeed,\u201d is truly drink; that is, food and drink in the highest sense. John 6:48-58 do not, refer to the Lord’s supper, as what is therein recorded was spoken some time before the institution of the great Christian Feast\u2014but the truths they teach are those which this suggests and enforces.<\/p>\n The propriety of regarding the elements as Symbols thus appears in the nature ot the bread and wine themselves. They are not merely arbitrary signs, but fraught with suggestive\u00ad ness to the thoughtful and spiritual.<\/p>\n Bread, though unique in its life-sustaining value, is a universal food, essential to prince and peasant alike. It is wheat, grown in ordinary soil, and fostered by the common forces of Nature\u2014light, air, and rain. To fit it for human use, it must be bruised, (ground) and subjected to the action of fire\u2014the constant emblem of Divine wrath. In the Communion it must first be broken for the benefit of those that are to partake of it.<\/p>\n The truths taught are obvious. Bread is \u201cthe staff of life.\u201d Christ is essential to all heaven-born men, (John 6:53.) \u201cThe Word was made flesh,\u201d assuming by incarnation (though in sinless form, page 22) our common humanity\u2014being made \u201cin all things like unto His brethren,\u201d and taking the \u201csame\u201d \u201cflesh and blood\u201d as those of all God\u2019s children. (Heb. 4:15.) He became our Saviour, not by His incarnation only, but by suffering and death (Heb. 5:8,9) meekly borne under the wrath of God (Isa. 53:7,10.) This He did, not for the world, but for the elect \u201cyou,\u201d (1 Cor. 11:24) who then represented those who constitute God\u2019s family.<\/p>\n The Cup, considered in connection with its contents, is symbolical of that precious blood by which, not only was the New Covenant ratified, but which was \u201cshed for many\u201d unto [namely, with the purpose and intention of] the remission of [their] sins,\u201d[8]<\/sup> R.V. Pages 49-52.<\/p>\n The Symbolism of the wine, as such, is also obvious and striking. The grapes must be crushed ere their juice can be obtained. So, through Christ\u2019s broken heart, blessing comes to us. Wine not only quenches thirst, but is invigorating, especially to \u201cthose that are ready to perish.\u201d (Prov. 31:6.) So Christ is not only like water to the thirsty, but is the highest, sweetest joy to those that have communion with Him.<\/p>\n Supper, the Rest-Meal.<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 7.\u2014The meals of the Orientals, both ancient and modern, may be compared to our dinner and supper. (Luke 14:12,) though the former might better be styled \u201cbreakfast,\u201d as it is a light meal, taken early. The latter, the principal, is substantial, and is taken after the heat and labour of the day.<\/p>\n See the original. Aristao, \u201cI take an early meal,\u201d or \u201cbreak my fast.\u201d Luke 11:37, R.V., margin. John 21:12-15, R.V. The Ariston, was \u201can early meal\u201d or \u201cbreak\u00ad fast.\u201d Luke 14:12.\u2014\u201cdinner\u201d conveying an inaccurate idea. Deipnon, \u201csupper,\u201d was the chief or evening meal.<\/p>\n Thus the Symbolism of the Lord\u2019s Supper is suggestive. Rest of soul is a present blessing of the Gospel, Matt. 11:28-30; Heb. 4:3. Our legal strivings and penal apprehen\u00ad sions are at an end. To this the Lord\u2019s Supper\u2014the holy Rest-meal of true Christians\u2014bears silent but expressive testimony.<\/p>\n Taking the Lord\u2019s Supper\u2014a Symbolical Act.<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 8.\u2014On page 185 Symbolic Actions are defined. That our partaking of the Communion is such is clear from 1 Cor. 11:26, \u201cFor as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye proclaim the Lord\u2019s death till He come,\u201d R.V. The Lord\u2019s Supper is thus an acted discourse\u2014a silent sermon.<\/p>\n Our posture is significant. We neither kneel to implore mercy, nor stand as if hoping to obtain it. At the institution of the Lord\u2019s Supper both the Master and His disciples reclined. We, therefore, sit, as those to whom toil is over, and who con\u00ad sciously and joyously \u201creceive the end of our faith, even the salvation of our souls.\u201d 1 Pet. 1:9. We rest in His finished work. How appropriate is this to the guests at the Lord\u2019s Best-meal![9]<\/sup><\/p>\n Every act is significant. \u201cTaking,\u201d points to Faith\u2019s reception of Jesus Chnst as her own Saviour. (Col. 2:6.) \u201cEating\u201d indicates the benefits flowing from the breaking of His body\u2014 pardon, peace, and joy\u2014of which we as really partake, as we masticate the bread. \u201cDrinking,\u201d (as all are to)\u2014to our delight in the blood by which He has ratified the Covenant of redemption and grace, and conveyed its blessings to us. While apostates \u201ccount the blood of the covenant an unholy (or better, \u201ca common\u201d) thing,\u201d (Heb. 10:29); to us (as we here declare) it is incomparable in its preciousness.<\/p>\n Thus, by all our acts combined, we proclaim His death, and make known our belief that He will come again. The Lord\u2019s Supper is His \u201cForget ME not.\u201d Our response is:\u2014\u201cAccording to Thy gracious word, in meek humility, This will I do, my dying Lord, I will remember Thee.\u201d<\/p>\n Fellowship and Communion.<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 9.\u2014The subject of Fellowship with God is discussed in the Author\u2019s Manual, page 279.<\/p>\n Here it suffices to observe that the terms \u201cfellowship\u201d and \u201ccommunion\u201d represent but one word, koindnia, in the Greek Testament. It means joint possession; common ownership; the participation by many in one object, or privilege\u2014all concerned having their due share. In 1 Cor. 10:16 (twice); 2 Cor. 6:14, and 13:14,[10]<\/sup> it is translated \u201ccommunion.\u201d In Acts 2:42; 1 Cor. 1:9; 2 Cor. 8:4; Gal. 2:9; Eph. 3:9; Phil. 1:5; 2:1, and 3:10; 1 John 1:3 (twice,) 6, 7, it is rendered \u201cfellow\u00adship.\u201d As employed by inspired writers, it stands for either an objective reality or for a subjective realisation; or for a fact, and the knowledge and enjoyment of it.<\/p>\n God has originated gracious facts in which His people have an equal right and a common share. (Psa. 149:9.) This common share would be expressed by koindnia, in its objective sense, in which it appears in Phil. 1:5: \u201cYour fellowship in (the blessings of) the Gospel.\u201d This accorded with Divine and sovereign arrangement, and was a gracious fact, independently of their cognisance or faith.<\/p>\n The apprehension and appreciation of these facts by us, in common with others similarly favoured, would also be expressed by koindnia, but in its subjective sense. Phil. 3:10: \u201cThat I may know tho fellowship (participation, Alford,) of His sufferings,\u201d\u2014namely that I may have gracious sympathy with Him who suffered for me.<\/p>\n Judging from the usage of approved writers on theology, koindnia should be rendered \u201cfellowship,\u201d when employed in an objective sense, and \u201ccommunion,\u201d when occurring in a subjective one.<\/p>\n It sets forth our Union and Communion with Him.<\/p>\n Note 10.\u2014As a fact, we have Fellowship with Christ, and hence are called His fellows, (Psa. 45:7.) It is a Fellowship of relationship, for His God and Father is also ours. (John 20:17; Heb. 2:11,12.) A Fellowship of nature, He having assumed ours, (Heb. 2:14) in which He suffered, and in which He exists in glory. A Fellowship in His acquired possessions, (Rom. 8:17; 1 Cor. 3:21.) A Fellowship in His atoning work, for all believers have an equal interest in His cross, (2 Cor. 5:14,15.) A Fellowship in His covenant engagements as the Surety and Saviour of His people. And a Fellowship or joint participation in the benefits which flow from His present offices as our ever-living Priest, Advocate, and Shepherd.<\/p>\n Our Fellowship with Christ in these facts is sot forth at His Table. We are not asked to admire the Unitarian\u2019s Christ, the perfect Man, the great Exemplar, the Model Teacher, the supreme Witness for God (though we honour Him in all these characters); but as the Lord who was crucified, (1 Cor. 11:24,26), who, by dying for us, and ever living and pleading for us, has emancipated us, and so dignified us as to invite us to sup with Him. (Rev. 3:20.)<\/p>\n The Lord\u2019s Supper, however, does more than witness to these facts. It should bring us, in a special way, into living and loving Communion with Himself. The memory of His betrayal should quicken holy fear lest we should prove false to Him. The broken bread portrays His broken body, and the thought melts the heart. The world diverts our thoughts from Him; this brings our truant spirits back to Him. The whole simple ritual tends to minister to Communion with Him in His sufferings; to impart a tender, contrite and grateful sense of His sorrows. His personal feelings in relation to His cross and passion must, in their fulness, be unknown to any. Favoured saints, however, share them in measure as they sympathise with Him.<\/p>\n \u201cA faithful friend of grief partakes; but union can be none,\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Betwixt a heart like melting wax and hearts as hard as stone;\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Betwixt a Head diffusing blood and members sound and whole;\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Betwixt an agonising God and an unfeeling soul.\u201d<\/p>\n The Lord\u2019s Supper symbolises Church Fellowship.<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 11.\u2014As a fact, all Christians have Fellowship with each other, all having joint and equal participation, through Christ, in the blessings of the New Covenant. This is especially true of the members of the same Church.<\/p>\n We have the same Father, (John 20:17); the same Saviour, (1 Cor. 1:2); the same Divine Comforter. We are members of one \u201cBody,\u201d and one \u201cfamily,\u201d (Eph. 1:22,23, and 3:15.) As all the members of the human frame have their own functions, and are essential to its welfare, so all Christians have their allotted spheres of service, (1 Cor. 12:12-27.)<\/p>\n These facts the Lord\u2019s Supper recalls to the spiritual mind. We gather at the family table. We partake of the same food. The act of eating together is significant, (page 185.) The world is full of social distinctions. The rich are esteemed for their wealth; the learned, for their knowledge; the influential, for their power. Here \u201cthe rich and poor meet together.\u201d We assemble as brethren, Matt. 23:8,9. All should be honoured and loved alike.<\/p>\n Seldom, alas, is this Fellowship realised in actual Communion. We talk, sing, and pray about it; but how few feel it, yet how desirable that we should! John never refers to the \u201cbreaking of bread,\u201d but 1 John 1:3,7, expresses this aspect of its holy influence. \u201cOur desire is that ye also may have Communion (or conscious fellowship) with us; and truly our fellowship rises to living communion with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.\u201d If we say that we have (conscious fellowship or) communion with Him, and (live in sin or) walk in the darkness, we lie, and do not (practise) the truth: but if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we enjoy Communion one with another, etc.\u2014that mutual interchange of thought and feeling to which John desired they might attain.[11]<\/sup> To aid this \u201cconsummation\u201d so \u201cdevoutly to be wished\u201d is one purpose which the Lord\u2019s Supper is designed to effect.<\/p>\n In social life persons are invited to eat together, that friend\u00ad ship may be formed or increased. So Christ invites us to His Supper that our Fellowship with each other may be grasped, and living and loving Communion realised.<\/p>\n The sin of the Corinthians consisted not only in making the holy season an occasion of revelry, but of overlooking the equality in Christ of all that were present. In their pride and ostentation, the rich put the poor to shame, by bringing their own costly provisions with them; aud commencing to eat before their humbler brethren were present. (1 Cor. 11:20,21,22, R.V.) It was not possible that the Lord’s Supper could be truly taken in this way.<\/p>\n All, therefore, are to partake of the Cup. \u201cDrink ye all of it,\u201d (Matt. 26:27.) This does not mean (as ordinary Bibles have led some to suppose) that its whole contents are to be there and then drunk; but that, since all that love and are loyal to Christ, have an interest in His covenant love, all present, whatever their light or experience, are to share in what the Cup contains.<\/p>\n The Lord\u2019s Supper\u2014an Experience.<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 12.\u2014Peculiar blessing often attends the \u201cbreaking of bread.\u201d This all Christians admit, and many long-loved hymns attest. Christians, however, differ as to its cause\u2014whether it arises solely from the nature of the servioe and the unique character of the Assembly; or proceeds from some special form of grace inseparable from the bread and the wine, and their reception by those who thus wait on the Lord.<\/p>\n 1. Those who, with Zuingle, page 185, regard the Lord\u2019s Supper as a Memorial, and believe that its great object is Commemoration, not Communication, (page 183.) explain the fact on psychological grounds,[12]<\/sup> or on the recognised laws and prin\u00adciples which, regulate the passions and actions of the human mind. Cowper was stirred to deep feeling by his mother\u2019s picture, many years after her death. Objects, once belonging to deceased children, have moved their parents to tears. A withered flower, a marked passage in a book, a lock of hair; often bring the past vividly back. So the emblems of our Lord\u2019s body and blood have a subtle power to call Him, whom our soul loveth, to mind.<\/p>\n Again, when long-sundered friends meet, hearts grow tender as memory reviews the past, and Love joys in re-union. So Christians must rejoice in the company of their \u201cbest friends and kindred\u201d at this solemn Assembly.<\/p>\n The interest and value of a Memorial necessarily depend upon what it commemorates. This, though only a Memorial, is associated with objects and actions which heaven-born men hold most sacred and dear, and hence possesses unparallelod power, with the Spirit\u2019s blessing, to stimulate the soul to trust, assurance, and ecstacy.<\/p>\n The promised presence of the Master whon and where \u201ctwo or three are gathered together in His name,\u201d and the assurance that \u201cin keeping His commandments there is great reward, (Matt. 18:20; Psa. 19:11) likewise ensure His special sanction and smile.<\/p>\n 2. Others,[13]<\/sup> though repudiating the priesthood of Christian ministers, and denying Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation, explain the blessing attending the Lord\u2019s Supper, by the alleged fact that \u201cin it\u201d \u201cChrist communicates to the Church whatever is represented by the bread and the wine.\u201d\u2014Dale\u2019s Manual, page 142.<\/p>\n They thus hark back to the \u201cWestminster Assembly\u2019s Confession,\u201d (1647) and the \u201cDeclaration of Faith and Order issued by the Savoy Conference of Congregational Elders and Messengers,\u201d (1658.)<\/p>\n \u201cWorthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements of this Sacrament, do then also inwardly by Faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually, receive and feed upon Christ crucified, and all the benefits of His death; the Body and Blood of Christ being then, not carnally or corporally in, with or under the bread and wine, (in denial of Consubstantiation,) yet as really but spiritually present to the Faith of believers, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses in this Ordinance,\u201d Confession of Faith, xxix. 7. The Savoy Declaration, and the Baptist Confession of Faith, Article 30, are almost verbally the same.<\/p>\n The proof-text relied on by Dr. Dale is 1 Cor. 10:16, \u201cThe cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of [or participation in] the Body of Christ: the bread which we break, is it not a communion of [or participation in] the Body of Christ?\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cSo, when Christ gives us bread, and says, \u2018This is My Body,\u2019 it is not a mere dramatic ceremony, deriving all its worth from its \u2018didactic\u2019 meaning, or its \u2018impressive\u2019 power. His Body is actually given.\u201d<\/p>\n If this is true, Christ\u2019s flesh and blood are communicated to, and partaken by, His people at His Table, in a way, or to an extent in which they are not and cannot be, elsewhere. There is an indivisible connection between the elements and what they signify, and partaking of the former is essential to participating in the latter; while the physical act, if performed in Faith, secures this peculiar form of grace and blessing. Thus our Brethren account for the ecstacy experienced by believers at the Ordinance.<\/p>\n To this we object, that religious emotion of the most joyous character is often experienced by Christians apart from the Lord\u2019s Supper.<\/p>\n If it were true, Christians who have not the opportunity to attend the Holy Supper, would be debarred from the fulness of joy which John desired for his brethren, Paul enjoined on the Philippians, and the Master referred to in His intercessory prayer (1 John 1:4; 1 Thess. 5:16; John 17:13.)<\/p>\n It makes a high Spiritual privilege depend on an act of ritual. It dangerously resembles Sacramentalism\u2014any approach to which should be earnestly resisted. It convicts those who deny the Lord\u2019s Supper to any consistent Believer, of spiritual unkindness of a most serious character.<\/p>\n The View of Strict Baptists.<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 13.\u2014The books of the Articles of the Faith of numerous Strict and Particular Baptist Churches (in the writer\u2019s possession) when examined, attest that our view of the Lord\u2019s Supper is practically identical with the first, given above, neither stating that grace is conveyed by means of the bread and the wine.<\/p>\n One of the clearest of these asserts that, \u201cWe believe that the Lord’s Supper is a Gospel Ordinance, instituted by Christ, to be kept up in His churches till His second coming\u2014as a remembrance and representation of His body broken, and His blood shed for the remission of sin\u2014together with our Communion with Him, and our Fellowship with each other.\u201d<\/p>\n This accords with Scripture and spiritual experience, and accounts for the rich pleasure the sacred Feast imparts.<\/p>\n Its Practical Influence.<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 14.\u2014In 1 Cor. 10:20,21, the Apostle insists that the Lord\u2019s Table should not only be regarded as a source of joy at the time, but should lead to holiness and unworldliness. On the ground that the Corinthians had sat around it, Paul insists that joining with heathens in their acts of worship would be a solecism and a sin of the most solemn character. In verse 21, read \u201cthe Cup\u201d and \u201cthe Table of Demons.\u201d[14]<\/sup><\/p>\n Unworthy Receiving<\/strong><\/p>\n Note 15.\u2014Privilege and responsibility go together, and the latter is often connected with peril. It is dangerous to approach the Lord\u2019s Table in a thoughtless and undevout spirit. For which see 1 Cor. 11:27,34.<\/p>\n \u201cWherefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.\u201d \u201cWherefore,\u201d since the body and blood of Christ are symbolised by the bread and wine, and our partaking of these signifies our personal relation to Him, as saved sinners through His death: \u201cWhosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily referring, not to the character of the Communicants, or the unworthiness which they may feel and deplore, but to the unseemly way in which the elements may be received\u2014for instance, in a porfunctory manner, in forgetfulness of Jesus and His love, and with the heart fondly clinging to the Christ-hating world,\u2014\u201cshall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord\u201d\u2014will, by his callous and apathetic unmindfulness of the Master, and the death which he should now proclaim with a sorrowful yet grateful heart, be guilty of profaning the holy emblems, and sharing, in measure at least, the sin of those who crucified that body and shed that blood.<\/p>\n But let a [each] man examine [prove] himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. Worthy partaking is here contrasted with unworthy. Let each person examine, prove or test himself\u2014enquire into the reality of his conversion, recall his recent experience, and review his conduct. This may make him sick of self, but it will endear his Master. Observe, it is not said, \u201clet him test himself and stop away;\u201d but humbled and heart-broken though he may be, \u201cso,\u201d\u2014in that suitable frame of mind\u2014\u201clet him eat.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cFor he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation [judgment] to himself, not discerning the Lord\u2019s body.\u201d Unworthy communicating is further explained. Some of the Corinthians had sunk so low in their religious life, so dim and defiled had their spiritual sight become, that they failed to discern or discriminate between common food at an ordinary meal, and the bread which, by the Lord\u2019s appointment, symbolised His body, and should therefore be taken and eaten with reverence and godly fear. Their sin was grave, and would incur, not eternal damnation, but Divine and parental judgment, as in 1 Pet. 4:17.<\/p>\n \u201cFor this oause, many among you are weak and sickly, and many [not a few] sleep.\u201d \u201cFor this cause\u201d\u2014unworthy eating, specially that mentioned in verses 21, 22\u2014\u201cmany\u201d among you are in feeble health, some absolutely sick, while, not a few\u2014in number more than the others mentioned\u2014 have died.<\/p>\n \u201cFor if we judged [discerned\u2014the word is the same as in verse 29] ourselves, we should not be judged: but when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.\u201d The \u201cif\u201d here denotes supposition or hypothesis\u2014not a condition. Self-examination is not a meritorious act, affecting the present or future conduct of God. As a fact, the Christian who im\u00ad partially tries to estimate his life and conduct by God\u2019s Word, and regulates his actions accordingly, avoids solemn Parental judgment. But lest the Corinthians should over-press this teaching, for their relief and comfort, the Apostle adds, \u201cWhen we are judged,\u201d and wince under the heavy blows of our Father\u2019s hand, He is not treating us penalty. \u201cWhom He loveth He chasteneth,\u201d and the pain and sorrow He inflicts are a sign and an assurance that we shall not be consigned to Hell on the last day, as men of the world will be.<\/p>\n The remainder of the passage calls for no comment.<\/p>\n ——————————-<\/p>\n[1] \u201cA Saerament is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace, given unto us…as a means whereby we reoeive the same, and a pledge to assure us thereof.\u201d\u2014 Church Catechism. \u201cGenerally necessary to salvation,\u201d does not mean \u201cin most instances,\u201d but in all cases, without restriction or limitation, page 152.<\/p>\n[2] Impanation (im, \u201c in,\u201d and panis \u201c bread,\u201d was the favourite term of Luther and his followers, to describe their view that \u201cthe body and blood of Christ are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lord\u2019s Supper.\u201d<\/p>\n[3] Administering the Lord\u2019s Supper, as most Dissenters phrase it, is neither the act of a Priest nor of a Pastor as suck, but the fraternal act of a brother towards his brethren. No thought of an officiating Minister is found in tho New Testament. Christ has not delegated His high position as Lord of the feast to any. The disciples came together to break bread,\u201d Acts. 20:7,8. The cup that we bless\u2014the bread that we break.\u201d 1 Cor. 10:16.<\/p>\n[4] D. Sedgwick, the hymnologist, complained that Dr. Watts\u2019s hymn, \u201cHow condescending and how kind,\u201d prepared for the Lord\u2019s Supper, was altered by some early Editor to suit the taste of Arminians, and that verse 5 should road:\u2014\u201cWell lets remembers Calvary, nor lets His saints forget.\u201d<\/p>\n[5] See pages 25 to 32 and Note, pages 26 and 27.<\/p>\n[6] A Symbol differs from a Type, the latter being a prophetical emblem\u2014a figure of what is to come.<\/p>\n[7] \u201cIf it should be wine.\u201d The New Testament in no place calls the liquid contained in the cup, \u201cwine.\u201d Matthew and Mark both style it \u201cthis,\u201d or \u201cthe fruit of the vine,\u201d (Matt 26:29; Mark 14:25)\u2014while Luke and Paul simply speak of the cup, without specifying its contents, whether fermented grape-juice or not, though the word, oinos, \u201cwine,\u201d was in common use. Both Abstainers and Non-abstainers are, therefore, at liberty to carry out their convictions, provided that they do not make the question a cause of discussion and dissension, and so destroy the unity, peace, and concord of the church. (Rom. 16:17,18; 1 Cor. 2:10; 11:18, etc.)<\/p>\n[8] Thus both Baptism and the Lord\u2019s Supper attest to the Forgiveness of sins. The former, however, refers to the full and free pardon granted to sinners when they first believe:\u2014<\/p>\n \u201cThe sinner that truly believes,\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n And trusts in his crucified God,<\/p>\n His justification receives,<\/p>\n Redemption in full through His blood.\u201d<\/p>\n The latter reminds us of God\u2019s continuous acts of pardon. (1 John 1:9.)<\/p>\n \u201c\u2019Tis He, my soul, that sent His Son<\/p>\n To die for crimes which thou hast done;\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n He owns the ransom, and forgives<\/p>\n The hourly follies of our lives.\u201d<\/p>\n[9] The Established Church in requiring her Communicants to rise and kneel before the Communion rails, not only acts unscripturally, but destroys much of the designed beauty of the symbolism.<\/p>\n[10] \u201cFellowship\u201d here stands for metoche, participation. In Eph. 3:9, read \u201cdispensation,\u201d or \u201cstewardship,\u201d (R.V.)<\/p>\n[11] So Alford\u2014though some regard it as meaning communion between our souls and the Saviour.<\/p>\n[12] Our authority for these statements is a Sermon, \u201cThe Lord\u2019s Supper, a Commemoration,\u201d by J. Guinness Sogers, B.A., D.D. Christian World Pulpit, No. 1409. Nov. 2nd, 1898.<\/p>\n[13] Prominent among whom was E.W. Dale, LL.D., from whose Manual of Congregational Principles, (pages 148, 157,) and Ecclesia, First Series; Article on The Doctrine of the Beal Presence and of the Lord\u2019s Supper\u2014much of the above is taken.<\/p>\n[14] Many think that the term Demons stood for the disembodied spirits of men who had died in sin, and were at that very time doomed and damned. None who partake of the Lord\u2019s Supper should attend spiritualistic seances. This is giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines (toachings) of Demons,\u201d (1 Tim. 4:1), a sin specially predicted of the last days.<\/p>\n