§. VIII.
How then? Have we not Reason, not finding the Nature of this Practice, to be obligatory upon us, more than those others which our Adversaries have laid aside, to avoid this Confusion; since those that use it can never agree, neither concerning the Nature, Efficacy, nor Manner of doing it? And this proceeds, because they take it not plainly, as it lies in the Scripture; but have so much intermixed their own Inventions. For would they take it as it lies, it would import no more, than that Jesus Christ at that Time did thereby signify unto them, that his Body and Blood was to be offered for them; and desired them, That whensoever they did eat or drink, they might do it in Remembrance of him, or with a Regard to him, whose Blood was shed for them. Now that the Primitive Church, gathered immediately after his Ascension, did so understand it, doth appear from their Use and Practice, if we admit those Places of the Acts, where breaking of Bread is spoken of, to have Relation hereto; By breaking of Bread they had all Things in common, remembering the Lord.which as our Adversaries do, so we shall willingly agree to: As First, Acts ii. 42. And they continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship, and in breaking of Bread, &c. This cannot be understood of any other than of their ordinary eating; for as nothing else appears from the Text, so the Context makes it plain; for they had all Things in common: And therefore it is said, Ver. 46. And they continuing daily with one Accord in the Temple, and breaking Bread from House to House, did eat their Meat with Gladness and Singleness of Heart. Those who will not wilfully close their Eyes, may see here, that the breaking being joined with their eating, shews, that nothing else is here expressed, but that having all Things in common, and so continuing together, they also did break their Bread, and eat their Meat together: In doing whereof, I cannot doubt but they remembered the Lord; to follow whom they had, with so much Zeal and Resignation, betaken themselves. This is further manifest from Acts vi. 2. for the Apostles, having the Care and Distribution of that Money, which the Believers, having sold their Possessions, gave unto them, and finding themselves overcharged with that Burthen, appointed Deacons for that Business, that they might give themselves continually to Prayer, and to the Ministry of the Word; not leaving that, to serve Tables. Deacons appointed for serving Tables.This cannot be meant of any sacramental Eating, or religious Acts of Worship; seeing our Adversaries make the Distributing of that the proper Act of Ministers, not of Deacons: And yet there can be no Reason alleged, That that breaking of Bread, which they are said to have continued in, and to have done from House to House, was other than those Tables which the Apostles served; but here gave over, as finding themselves overcharged with it. Now as the Increase of the Disciples did incapacitate the Apostles any more to manage this; so it would seem their further Increase, and dispersing in divers Places, hindered the Continuance of that Practice of having Things in common: But notwithstanding, so far at least to remember or continue that ancient Community, they did at certain Times come together, and break Bread together. At Troas the Supper deferred till Midnight.Hence it is said, Acts xx. 7. on Paul’s coming to Troas, That upon the fist Day of the Week, when the Disciples came together to break Bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the Morrow, and continued his Speech until Midnight. Here is no Mention made of any sacramental Eating; but only that Paul took Occasion from their being together to preach unto them. And it seems it was a Supper they intended (not a Morning-bit of Bread, and Sup of Wine) else it is not very probable that Paul would from the Morning have preached until Midnight. But the 11th Verse puts the Matter out of Dispute, which is thus: When he therefore was come up again, and had broken Bread, and eaten, and talked a long While, even till Break of Day, so he departed. This shews, That the breaking of Bread was deferred till that Time; for these Words [and when he had broken Bread, and eaten] do shew, That it had a Relation to the breaking of Bread before-mentioned, and that that was the Time he did it. Secondly, These Words joined together [and when he had broken Bread, and eaten, and talked] shew, it was no religious Act of Worship, but only an Eating for bodily Refreshment, They only did eat for refreshing the Body.for which the Christians used to meet together some Time; and doing it in God’s Fear, and Singleness of Heart, doth notwithstanding difference it from the Eating or Feasting of profane Persons. By some called a Love-feast.And this by some is called a Love-feast, or a being together, not merely to feed their Bellies, or for outward Ends; but to take thence Occasion to eat and drink together, in the Dread and Presence of the Lord, as his People; which Custom we shall not condemn. But let it be observed, That in all the Acts there is no other nor further Mention of this Matter. But if that Ceremony had been some solemn Sacrifice, as some will have it, or such a special Sacrament as others plead it to be; it is strange that that History, which in many less Things gives a particular Account of the Christians Behaviour, should have been so silent in the Matter: Only we find, That they used sometimes to meet together to break Bread, and eat. The Christians began by Degrees to depart from the Primitive Purity.Now as the early Christians began by Degrees to depart from that primitive Purity and Simplicity, so did they also to accumulate superstitious Traditions, and vitiate the innocent Practices of their Predecessors, by the Intermixing either of Jewish or Heathenish Rites; and likewise in the Use of this, Abuses began very early to creep in among Christians, so that it was needful for the Apostle Paul to reform them, and reprove them for it, as he doth at large, 1 Cor. xi. from Ver. 17. to the End: 1 Cor. 11. 17.Which Place we shall particularly examine, because our Adversaries lay the chief Stress of their Matter upon it; Concerning the Supper of the Lord (so called) explained.and we shall see whether it will infer any more than we have above granted. First, Because they were apt to use that Practice in a superstitious Mind beyond the true Use of it, so as to make of it some mystical Supper of the Lord, he tells them, Ver. 20. That their coming together into one Place, is not to eat the Lord’s Supper; he saith not, This is not the right Manner to eat; but, This is NOT to eat the Lord’s Supper; because the Supper of the Lord is spiritual, and a Mystery. Secondly, He blames them, in that they came together for the Worse, and not for the Better; the Reason he gives of this is, Ver. 21. For in Eating every one hath taken before his own Supper; and one is hungry, and another is drunken. Why the Custom of Supping in common was used among Christians.Here it is plain that the Apostle condemns them in that (because this Custom of Supping in General was used among Christians to increase their Love, and as a Memorial of Christ’s Supping with the Disciples) they had so vitiated it, as to eat it apart, and to come full, who had Abundance; and hungry, who had little at Home; whereby the very Use and End of this Practice was lost and perverted: And therefore he blames them, that they did not either eat this in Common at Home, or reserve their Eating till they came all together to the publick Assembly. This appears plainly by the following Ver. 22. Have ye not Houses to eat and drink in? Or despise ye the Church of God, and shame them that have not? Where he blames them for their irregular Practice herein, in that they despised to eat orderly, or reserve their Eating to the publick Assembly; and so shaming such, as not having Houses, nor Fulness at Home, came to partake of the common Table; who, being hungry, thereby were shamed, when they observed others come thither full and drunken. Those that without Prejudice will look to the Place, will see this must have been the Case among the Corinthians: For supposing the Use of this to have been then, as now used either by Papists, Lutherans, or Calvinists, it is hard making Sense of the Apostle’s Words, or indeed to conceive what was the Abuse the Corinthians committed in this Thing. Having thus observed what the Apostle said above, The Rise of that Custom.because this Custom of Eating and Drinking together some Time had its Rise from Christ’s Act with the Apostles the Night he was betrayed; therefore the Apostle proceeds, Ver. 23. to give them an Account of that: For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same Night in which he was betrayed, took Bread, &c. Those that understand the Difference betwixt a Narration of a Thing, and a Command, cannot but see, if they will, That there is no Command in this Place, but only an Account of Matter of Fact; he saith not, I received of the Lord, that as he took Bread, so I should command it to you to do so likewise; there is nothing like this in the Place: Yea, on the contrary, Ver. 25. where he repeats Christ’s imperative Words to his Apostles, he placeth them so as they import no Command; This do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in Remembrance of me: And then he adds, For as often as ye eat this Bread, and drink this Cup, ye do shew the Lord’s Death till he come: That [As often] imports no Command of this Supper.But these Words [As often] import no more a Command, than to say, As often as thou goest to Rome, see the Capitol, will infer a Command to me to go thither.
Object.But whereas they urge the last Words, Ye shew forth the Lord’s Death till he come; insinuating, That this imports a necessary Continuance of that Ceremony, until Christ come at the End of the World to Judgment;
Answ.I answer, They take two of the chief Parts of the Controversy here for granted, without Proof. First, That [as often] imports a Command; the contrary whereof is shewn; neither will they ever be able to prove it. Christ’s outward and inward Coming.Secondly, That this Coming is to be understood of Christ’s last outward Coming, and not of his inward and spiritual, that remains to be proved: Whereas the Apostle might well understand it of his inward Coming and Appearance, which perhaps some of those carnal Corinthians, that used to come drunken together, had not yet known; and others, being weak among them, and inclinable to dote upon Externals, this might have been indulged to them for a Season, and even used by them who knew Christ’s Appearance in Spirit (as other Things were, of which we shall speak hereafter) especially by the Apostle, who became weak to the Weak, and all to All, that he might save some. To remember Christ’s Death till he come to arise in the Heart.Now those weak and carnal Corinthians might be permitted the Use of this, to shew forth, or remember Christ’s Death, till he came to arise in them; for though such need those outward Things to put them in Mind of Christ’s Death, yet those who are dead with Christ, and not only dead with Christ, but buried, and also arisen with him, need not such Signs to remember him: And to such therefore the Apostle saith, Col. iii. 1. If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those Things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right Hand of God: But Bread and Wine are not those Things that are above, but are Things of the Earth. But that this whole Matter was a mere Act of Indulgence and Condescension of the Apostle Paul to the weak and carnal Corinthians, appears yet more by the Syriack[133] Copy, which Ver. 17. in his entering upon this Matter, hath it thus; In that concerning which I am about to command you (or instruct you) I commend you not, because ye have not gone forward, but are descended unto that which is less, or of less Consequence: Clearly importing, That the Apostle was grieved that such was their Condition, that he was forced to give them Instructions concerning those outward Things; and doting upon which, they shewed they were not gone forward in the Life of Christianity, but rather sticking in beggarly Elements. And therefore Ver. 20. the same Version hath it thus, When then ye meet together, ye do not do it, as it is just ye should do in the Day of the Lord, ye eat and drink it: Therefore shewing to them, That to meet together to eat and drink outward Bread and Wine, was not the Labour and Work of that Day of the Lord. But since our Adversaries are so zealous for this Ceremony, because used by the Church of Corinth (though with how little Ground is already shewn) how come they to pass over far more positive Commands of the Apostles, as Matters of no Moment? As First, Acts xv. 29. where the Apostles peremptorily command the Gentiles, To abstain from Things strangled.as that which was the Mind of the Holy Ghost, To abstain from Things strangled, and from Blood: And James v. 14. The Anointing with Oil.where it is expresly commanded, That the Sick be anointed with Oil in the Name of the Lord.
[133] And likewise the other Oriental Versions, as the Arabick and Æthiopick, have it the same Way.
Object.If they say, Those were only temporary Things, but not to continue;
Answ.What have they more to shew for this; there being no express Repeal of them?
Object.If they say, The Repeal is implied, because the Apostle saith, We ought not to be judged in Meats and Drinks;
Answ.I admit the Answer: But how can it be prevented from militating the same Way against the other Practice? Surely not at all: Nor can there be any Thing urged for the one more than for the other, but Custom and Tradition.
Object.As for that of James, they say, There followed a Miracle upon it, to wit, The Recovery of the Sick; but this being ceased, so should the Ceremony.
Answ.Though this might many Ways be answered, to wit, That Prayer then might as well be forborn, to which also the Saving of the Sick is there ascribed; yet I shall accept of it, because I judge indeed that Ceremony is ceased; A Ceremony ought to cease, its Virtue failing.only methinks, since our Adversaries, and that rightly, think a Ceremony ought to cease where the Virtue fails, they ought by the same Rule to forbear the laying on of Hands, Thus laying on of Hands.in Imitation of the Apostles, since the Gift of the Holy Ghost doth not follow upon it.