«3 
 CL 
 
 
 •<5r 
 
 
 cc 
 
 
 i? 
 
 
 _Q. 
 
 
 : « 
 
 
 o 
 — 
 
 
 «*^. 
 
 
 IE 
 
 I 
 
 r->» 
 
 ha 
 
 CL 
 
 
 • ^ 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 ^> 
 
 fc 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 j5 
 
 
 $ 
 
 1 
 
 
 fc 
 
 <u 
 
 
 o 
 
 C 
 
 
 w 
 
 O 
 
 bfl 
 
 rv 
 
 
 o 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 fc 
 
 £ 
 
 b>3 
 
 <* 
 
 M 
 
 <*j 
 
 ^ 
 
 *s& 
 
 « 
 
 CO 
 
 "& 
 
 
 ft 
 
 5 
 
 <§ 
 
 o 
 
 
 £ 
 
 Si 
 
 1 
 
 
 ■♦-' 
 
 c 
 
 a ■ 
 
 t» 
 
 0) 
 
 CL 
 
 
 
 S~01S 
 
THE 
 
 SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE 
 
 CONCERNING 
 
 THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2011 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/scripturedoctrinOOw 
 
THE 
 
 SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE 
 
 CONCERNING 
 
 THE SACRAMENTS 
 
 AND THE POINTS CONNECTED THEREWITH. 
 
 BY 
 
 EICHAED TYHATELY, D.D. 
 
 ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN. 
 
 LONDON: 
 JOHN W. PARKER AND SON, WEST STRAND. 
 
 1857. 
 
LONDON 
 
 OAVILL AND EDWARDS, PRINTERS, 
 
 OUANDOS STREET. 
 
^CE. 
 
 rFHIS Tract contains the substance, 
 in an abridged form, of two Charges, 
 treating, respectively, of the Sacraments of 
 Baptism and the Lord's Supper. Both 
 are, now, nearly, if not entirely, out of 
 print. And publications have appeared, 
 professedly in answer to what I have there 
 said, but containing utter misrepresenta- 
 tions of it, either from inattention, or from 
 sophistical design. I have thought it due 
 therefore to those who wish to know the 
 truth, to put it in their power to form a 
 fair judgment. 
 
 As it was not my design to bring for- 
 ward any novel views, but to set forth, as 
 plainly as possible, and to support by 
 Scripture-proofs, what I conceive to be the 
 teaching of our Church and of its most 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 approved Ministers, I have taken the 
 liberty of quoting largely from the Writ- 
 ings of some well-known Divines. Not 
 that our Church is — as a Church — respon- 
 sible for what is said by individual mem- 
 bers of it ; or that either it, or they, have 
 any claim to infallibility. But some 
 degree of deference is certainly due to the 
 judgments of those who are generally 
 regarded as pious and sound Divines ; 
 especially when treating of matters con- 
 cerning which there have been recent con- 
 troversies, when what they have said was 
 written long before those controversies had 
 arisen. Even those who may not agree 
 with them, and with me, will at least see 
 that there is no novelty in the doctrines 
 maintained. 
 
 And, in referring to our Formularies, I 
 have considered not only the deference due 
 to such men as our Eeformers, but also 
 the obligation lying on Ministers and 
 other members of the Church, to interpret 
 its words fairly, as long as they remain in 
 
PREFACE. Vll 
 
 connexion with it, and to abstain from 
 torturing its language into a non-natural 
 sense, at variance with the manifest and 
 known intention of the authors. And most 
 especially should those who the most 
 vehemently denounce persons of an oppo- 
 site party for this disingenuous procedure, 
 set an example themselves (which unhap- 
 pily many of them have not done) of fair- 
 ness of interpretation, and honest con- 
 formity to the decisions of the Church. 
 
 To Scripture, however, the ultimate 
 appeal must be made, as the only infallible 
 guide ; and I have endeavoured in this 
 Tract to put forward, as plainly as pos- 
 sible, what appears to me a most important 
 principle in the interpretation of Scripture : 
 namely, not to be satisfied with any sense 
 whatever that the words can be brought 
 to bear, but to seek for that in which they 
 were originally designed and believed to 
 be understood. 
 
 In interpreting the Sacred Writers, 
 generally, and not least in deciding whether 
 
Vlll PREFACE. 
 
 some passage is to be taken literally, 
 or figuratively, it is evidently of the 
 first importance to look to the meaning 
 which the expression appears to have con- 
 veyed, at the time, to the persons addressed. 
 This will not always be what might 
 appear to us, in a distant Age and Country, 
 the most obvious sense. But whatever 
 sense the words conveyed to the hearers, 
 we may fairly presume to be the true one, 
 unless some correction was furnished 
 (either immediately or afterwards) of any 
 mistake into which they might have 
 fallen. For we can hardly suppose that 
 the inspired Writers were not aware in 
 what sense they would be understood by 
 those they addressed, or that they would 
 knowingly leave them in error, at least 
 on any point of practical importance. 
 
 When, for instance, our Lord spoke of 
 Lazarus " sleeping," He was understood 
 at the moment to be speaking literally; 
 and He thereupon explained Himself. On 
 the other hand, when He spoke of his 
 
PREFACE. IX 
 
 own " death and resurrection/' the Disci- 
 ples thought He must be speaking figu- 
 ratively, because the literal fulfilment of 
 his words was utterly at variance with all 
 their expectations. But the event shortly 
 after removed their mistake. 
 
 Again, when Jesus spoke of " rebuilding 
 this Temple in three days," some may have 
 understood Him at the time to be speaking 
 of the literal Temple : but we find that 
 his Disciples, after the resurrection, had 
 learned the right meaning of his words. 
 
 So, also, the prophecy of his "coming 
 in his kingdom,'' before the end of the 
 existing generation, seems to have been 
 understood by many as relating to the 
 end of the World : and this belief seems 
 to be alluded to by the Apostle Paul, 
 in his second epistle to the Thessa- 
 lonians. But this misapprehension would 
 cure itself, by the mere circumstance of 
 men's seeing that the World did not come 
 to an end. 
 
 In all cases, then, we may consider that 
 
X PREFACE. 
 
 there is a strong presumption, where 
 nothing appears to the contrary, that 
 the sense in which a passage of Scripture, 
 relating to any important matter, was under- 
 stood at the time, is the true sense of it. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Part £ 
 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 § i. Verbal Controversy 3 
 
 2. Points of agreement between those at va- 
 
 riance in expression 9 
 
 3. Points of disagreement, not verbal ... 12 
 
 4. Archbishop Sumner's opinions on these 
 
 points 16 
 
 5. Probable origin of the rejection of the Sacra- 
 
 ments 21 
 
 6. Practice of the Apostles 31 
 
 7. How the Apostles must have been under- 
 
 stood by J ewish converts 35 
 
 8. Analogy of the Mosaic Law 40 
 
 9. Language of our Reformers 45 
 
 10. Confirmation, the sequel to one Sacrament 
 
 and the introduction to the other ... 54 
 Note. — Extracts from Bishop Ryder, Mr. Simeon, 
 
 and Archbishop Sumner 58 
 
 Part HE. 
 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 § 1. Deficient attendance at the Lord's Table . 71 
 
 2. SuperstitiousnotionsrespectingtheEucharist 73 
 
 3. Neglect by Protestants of a known duty . 79 
 
 4. Erroneous views respecting the Eucharist to 
 
 be met by appeal to Scripture . . . 8r 
 
Xll CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 § 5. Alleged miracle of transubstantiation, a 
 
 contrast to those recorded in Scripture . 85 
 
 6. Eight principle of interpretation of Scripture 87 
 
 7. Test of literal or figurative interpretation . 90 
 
 8. Errors concerning the Eucharist, not sprung 
 
 from erroneous interpretation of Scripture 92 
 
 9. Reaction in favour of blind acquiescence in 
 
 groundless claims 95 
 
 10. Ambiguity of the word " mystery" . . . 102 
 
 11. Sacrificial character of the Death of Christ, 
 
 indicated by the Eucharist 105 
 
 12. Attempts to explain away the doctrine of the 
 
 Atonement 108 
 
 13. Danger of rash attempts at explanation . .111 
 
 14. Faith shown by contented ignorance of 
 
 divine mysteries 115 
 
 15. Abraham's faith to be imitated . . . .118 
 
 16. Practical faith, in reference to the Eucharist 123 
 
 17. Natural and Positive Duties 125 
 
 18. Groundless scruples 128 
 
 19. Connexion of Confirmation with the Eucharist 133 
 
PAET I. 
 ON BAPTISM. 
 
ON BAPTISM. 
 
 § i. It is not my design to 
 enter on a full discussion of all c Ztrovery. 
 the questions that have so long 
 agitated the Church, on the subject of 
 Begeneration, and those connected with 
 that. But there is one circumstance per- 
 taining to them which it is most im- 
 portant to point out, and to insist on : 
 which is, that among many persons (I do 
 not say all) who are, in language, very 
 much opposed to each other on this 
 subject, the opposition is much greater 
 in appearance than in reality. They 
 are engaged, without being aware of 
 it, in a controversy chiefly, if not alto- 
 gether, verbal. 
 
 Now it must be regarded by all who 
 
 have anything of a genuine christian 
 
 spirit, as a most desirable object to obviate 
 
 as far as possible all unnecessary dissen- 
 
 b2 
 
4 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 sion among Christians, and to bring to a 
 mutual good understanding, as nearly as 
 can be done without compromise of truth, 
 all " who love the Lord Jesus Christ in 
 sincerity." 
 
 For, besides the immediate evils to 
 those who are themselves engaged in any 
 controversy, there is this additional danger 
 also to the christian People generally, that 
 many of them may be disposed to say 
 " Here are questions which are declared 
 by all to be of vital importance, yet on 
 which the most learned Divines are not 
 agreed. If men apparently pious, and of 
 far greater knowledge and ability than 
 ours, find so much difficulty in agreeing 
 as to the sense of Scripture on points 
 which they regard as of vital importance, 
 what is, to them, a difficulty must be to 
 us an impossibility; and Scripture can 
 therefore contain no Revelation, properly 
 so called; or at least no revelation to the 
 mass of mankind." And the result of 
 these reflections will often be, that some 
 will betake themselves to some supposed 
 infallible Church, or other guide, to whose 
 dictates they will implicitly resign them- 
 
 
ON BAPTISM. 5 
 
 selves; while others will be, by the same 
 course, led into infidelity.* They see that 
 there is no infallible, and universally 
 accessible, guide on earth ; and moreover, 
 that if there were, it could not possibly be 
 ascertained, by men incompetent (by sup- 
 position) to exercise their private judg- 
 ment, and who consequently could never 
 have any good reason for trusting their 
 judgment to decide rightly that most 
 difficult question, — who is the appointed 
 guide? and they consequently reject the 
 belief of any divine revelation all. 
 
 It is doubly important therefore to 
 point out — where this can be done with 
 truth — how far difficulties and disputes 
 may have been created, or aggravated, by 
 Theologians themselves ; either from their 
 seeking to explain more than God has 
 thought fit to reveal, f or from interpret- 
 ing Scripture according to the technical 
 phraseology of some theological school, or 
 from overlooking variations in the senses 
 
 * See Sermon on the Search after Infallibility, and 
 Lessons on Religious Worship, L. VI. 
 
 f See Sermon on the " Shepherds at Bethlehem/' and 
 also Lessons on Religious Worship, L. VII. 
 
C) U.N BAPTISM. 
 
 in which several words are employed, and 
 thus introducing undetected verbal con- 
 troversy, and consequent confusion of 
 thought. 
 
 The terms " regenerate" and " regenera- 
 tion" [or New-birth] are commonly em- 
 ployed (as I have remarked in a Work 
 which has been now for many years w r ell 
 known to the Public) in different senses 
 by different persons.* " Regeneration" 
 denotes, in the language of some, merely 
 that admission to christian privileges and 
 advantages which is the necessary pre- 
 liminary to a christian life. Others employ 
 the term to signify the condition into 
 which a man is brought by that use of 
 those advantages and privileges which 
 constitutes a decided christian character. 
 And " regenerate," accordingly, is applied 
 by those persons respectively, to condi- 
 tions as widely different as that of a new- 
 born infant, and that of a fully-formed 
 adult. 
 
 Without attempting to enter on a 
 minute discussion of all the modifications 
 
 * Logic, Appendix: Article, " Eegencration." 
 
ON BAPTISM. 7 
 
 of meaning that have ever been attached 
 to these words, we may at least recognize 
 the actual employment of them in the 
 two widely-different senses just mentioned. 
 And not only by different persons, but 
 sometimes even by the same, these words 
 (as well as several others) will be found to 
 be occasionally used with different signifi- 
 cations. Undesignedly, and unconsciously, 
 a person will sometimes, even at a short 
 interval, slide from one meaning to another, 
 of some of the expressions he is em- 
 ploying. 
 
 Now whatever may be the importance 
 of adhering to the most correct use of any 
 term, and whichever may be, in this case, 
 the more correct, it is surely the first 
 point — the first in order, and the first also 
 in importance — to perceive distinctly the 
 ambiguity that does actually exist, and to 
 keep clear of the many injurious misappre- 
 hensions which may arise from attri- 
 buting to those who use a term in one 
 sense, conclusions which depend on its 
 being taken in a different sense. 
 
 For example, a person may be exposed 
 to a groundless imputation of leading 
 
8 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 men into a vain and dangerous reliance on 
 baptismal privileges, and of teaching them 
 that all who have been duly baptized are 
 in a safe state ; when perhaps in fact he 
 may have never said or implied any such 
 thing, but may have merely been employ- 
 ing the word " regenerate" according 'to 
 what he regards as the most scriptural 
 usage ; and then, has had imputed to him 
 inferences which would have followed if he 
 had employed that word in quite another 
 sense. And perhaps it may turn out on 
 calm investigation, that such a person, 
 and some who had been at first dis- 
 posed very strongly to censure him, do 
 not in reality disagree to any considerable 
 extent, as to the substance of the doctrines 
 they maintain. 
 
 I have seen something like the above 
 imputation thrown out in a Work which 
 several years ago obtained considerable 
 popularity. It was professedly a descrip- 
 tion (veiled under a slight tale) of various 
 prevailing religious opinions and modes 
 of conduct : and some of the pictures 
 drawn were both striking and just. But 
 among others, a careless clergyman is 
 
ON BAPTISM. 9 
 
 introduced deprecating any anxiety felt 
 by any of his people as to their spiritual 
 state, and saying that " of course all 
 Christians will be saved ; and whoever is 
 baptized is a Christian." Now I feel 
 certain, from long experience and atten- 
 tive observation, that there is no ground 
 whatever for the imputation here conveyed. 
 I mean, that it is not true (as is evidently 
 designed to be implied) that there exists 
 any party, school, or class of men, among 
 our Clergy, — even the worst of them — - 
 who teach such a doctrine. Yet it is 
 probable that the representation was not 
 a designed calumny, but was merely an 
 "idle word," originating in a misconcep- 
 tion such as I have been alluding to, as 
 the result of a hasty and inconsiderate 
 interpretation of another's expressions, 
 and of rash inferences therefrom. 
 
 § 2 . Let any one then but Points of 
 
 . t t j i • • • aqreement 
 
 consider— and this is an m- { etweenthose 
 quiry well-becoming those who at variance 
 
 ill • i • 'i n i inexpression. 
 
 would cherish a spirit ol cnris- t 
 tian charity — how much there may be of 
 agreement, and that, on the most essential 
 b3 
 
10 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 practical points, between men who, at the 
 first glance might appear widely opposed, 
 and who perhaps are inclined to think 
 hardly of each other. 
 
 Two persons accustomed to employ, 
 respectively, the word " regeneration" in 
 the different senses just alluded to, may 
 agree in reverencing the Rite of Baptism, 
 and in administering it according to the 
 same rules: both may be also accustomed 
 to warn men against placing an indolent 
 confidence in Grospel-privileges, and to 
 teach them that to have been enrolled as 
 members of Christ's Church is an advan- 
 tage for the use of which we are respon- 
 sible, and which will but increase the 
 condemnation of such as do not " walk 
 worthy of their vocation." Both may 
 teach that (in the words of our 16th 
 Article) "after we have received the Holy 
 Grhost, we may depart from grace given 
 and fall into sin ; and by the grace of God 
 we may arise again, and amend our lives."* 
 
 * Some Divines of the present day (professedly of 
 our Cliureh) express doubts, nearly, if not completely, 
 amounting to a denial of the doctrine of this Article ; 
 teaching that sins committed after Baptism are either 
 
ON BAPTISM. 11 
 
 And they may agree in teaching that 
 " God desire th not the death of a sinner, 
 but rather that he should turn from his 
 wickedness and live ; and in exhorting 
 every one who does live a careless, an 
 irreligious, or a vicious life, to repent, and 
 seek divine mercy through Christ, and 
 strength to accomplish a thorough reforma- 
 tion : though, in many instances, to the 
 same sort of change which the one of 
 these instructors would call "regenera- 
 tion" or "new-birth," the other might 
 apply the terms " conversion," " revival," 
 "renewal," &c. Both might agree in 
 teaching that a holy life is the test of 
 
 totally unpardonable, or are to be atoned for by- 
 Penance. Should such views prevail, they may be 
 expected to lead first to a rejection of infant baptism, 
 and afterwards to the practice (not unfrequent in the 
 early Church) of deferring Baptism to the death-bed. 
 
 It would be thought by many a cruelty to place a 
 person without Ms own consent, and in unconscious 
 infancy, in a situation, so far, much more disadvan- 
 tageous than that of those brought up Pagans, that if 
 he did ever — suppose, at the age of fifteen, cr twenty- 
 fall into any sin, he must remain for the rest of his life 
 — perhaps for above half a century — deprived of all hope, 
 or at least of all confident hope, of restoration to the 
 divine favour ; shut out from all that cheering prospect 
 which, if his baptism in infancy had been omitted, 
 might have lain before him. 
 
12 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 effectual, profitable regeneration, and in 
 exhorting all men to lead sucli a life. On 
 this — the important practical point, — they 
 would not differ at all. 
 
 Now if this be so, it cannot but be 
 desirable that men should be at least 
 guarded against supposing themselves 
 (through the influence of the language 
 they employ) to be more at variance than 
 they really are. And it is accordingly a 
 point of christian duty, when any such 
 occasion arises, to point out the danger of 
 such an error, and thus to promote recon- 
 cilement, or at least mitigate hostility, 
 between those engaged in any controversy. 
 * 
 
 § 3. But though some are 
 disagree- liable to be engaged (in reference 
 ment not t these points) in a controversy 
 chiefly verbal, there are others, 
 as was above hinted, between whom an 
 apparently similar controversy will be 
 found to turn on a real opposition of 
 doctrine. 
 
 Those who hold that (1) of persons duly 
 admitted into the visible Church by bap- 
 tism, some are, by an absolute eternal 
 
ON BAPTISM. 13 
 
 divine decree, secured in all the benefits of 
 Christ's redemption, and others, totally 
 excluded therefrom by the same decree, 
 and moreover (2) that this is a truth set 
 forth in Scripture as an essential point of 
 faith;* these, and the parties opposed to 
 them, must, of course, differ, not in words 
 only, but in the matter of their teaching. 
 
 * These two points — (1) the existence of such decrees, 
 and (2) the teaching of them as an essential part of the 
 Gospel-revelation — are quite distinct, though often con- 
 founded together. Calvin, and many others, both 
 before and after his time, maintained both. And it is 
 utterly improper that any should be called, either by 
 themselves, or by others, " Calvinists," who dissent from 
 any part of what Calvin himself insisted on as a necessary 
 portion of his theory. " Many," says he, " as if wishing 
 to remove "odium from God, while they admit election, 
 yet deny rejprohation ; but in this they speak ignorantly 
 and childishly ; since election itself could not be main- 
 tained except as contrasted with reprobation. God is 
 said to set apart those whom he adopts as children, for 
 salvation. Those therefore whom He passes by, He 
 condemns ; and that, for no cause whatever, except that 
 He chuses to exclude them from the inheritance which 
 He predestinates for his children." And again, shortly 
 after, he says, " Whence comes it that so many nations, 
 with their infant children, should be sentenced irre- 
 mediably to eternal death, by the fall of Adam, except 
 that such was God's will?" * * * " The Decree is, I 
 confess, a horrible one," &c. — Calvin, Inst. L. iii. c. xxiii. 
 §7. 
 
11 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 Taking Regeneration to imply (as is 
 generally agreed) some kind and degree of 
 benefit — some spiritual gift, or at least 
 offer of a gift — they of course deny the 
 term " regenerate " to be at all applicable 
 to those Christians whom they consider as 
 excluded by the decree of Omnipotence 
 from all spiritual benefit whatever of .Bap- 
 tism. And the Visible Church, into which 
 members are through this Kite admitted, 
 they must regard as a community not pos- 
 sessing any spiritual endowments what- 
 ever ; these being, by divine decree, 
 reserved for certain individuals arbitrarily 
 selected from the rest. 
 
 Of those who maintain — or at least in 
 their teaching imply — the predestinarian 
 views now alluded to, a considerable por- 
 tion belong to the Sect which altogether 
 rejects Infant-baptism. And in this T 
 cannot but admit that they are perfectly 
 consistent. Regarding the Rite of Baptism 
 as " an outward and visible Sign of an 
 inward spiritual grace " they deem it not 
 allowable, I apprehend, to "put asunder 
 what God has joined together;" and 
 therefore confine the administration of this 
 
ON BAPTISM. 15 
 
 sign to those respecting whom there is 
 some presumption at least, of their being 
 admitted to a participation in the tiling 
 signified — the divine grace ; which grace, 
 they hold, is, by an eternal absolute decree, 
 bestowed on one portion of those profess- 
 ing Christianity, and denied to the rest. 
 And to which of the two classes any indi- 
 vidual infant belongs, there cannot possibly 
 be any ground for even the slightest con- 
 jecture. 
 
 In the case of an Adult they can have, it 
 is supposed, (just as in the case of the 
 other Sacrament, the Lord's Supper) — if 
 not a complete and certain knowledge 
 whether he belongs to the Class of the 
 Elect or the Non-elect, — at least some 
 indication from his professions and his 
 conduct ; indications which an infant, of 
 course, cannot afford. And they accord- 
 ingly consider, I apprehend, that Baptism 
 administered to infants cannot be a Sign 
 of Eegeneration, since. there cannot be even 
 any presumption of its being accompanied 
 by any spiritual advantage at all. 
 
 And certainly it must be admitted that 
 according at least to the ordinary use of 
 
1() ON BAPTISM. 
 
 language, a Sign of anything is understood 
 to be such, from its being regularly accom- 
 panied by that thing of which it is a sign, 
 or at least, by some reasonable presump- 
 tion of its presence. When, for instance, 
 we speak of a certain dress or badge being 
 a sign of a man's belonging to a certain 
 Begiment, or Order of Knighthood, or the 
 like, we understand that it is to be some- 
 thing peculiarly belonging to them, and 
 serving to distinguish them from others. 
 If a dress, or badge, were worn indif- 
 ferently by an indefinite number of per- 
 sons, some belonging to this Regiment or 
 Order, and some not, we should consider 
 that it had ceased to be a sign at all, hav- 
 ing no longer any signification. It is on 
 these grounds, I conceive, that many of 
 those who hold that doctrine of absolute 
 decrees I have been alluding to, adhere to, or 
 have joined, the communion of those calling 
 themselves, and commonly called, Baptists. 
 
 Archbishop $ 4. I n reference to the sub- 
 opmiZson J ect her e treated of, I take the 
 these points, liberty of extracting a passage 
 from a Work which has been for many 
 
ON BAPTISM. 17 
 
 years well known, and highly esteemed, 
 by the Public. 
 
 " Another practical evil of the doctrine 
 of special grace, is the necessity which it 
 implies of some test of God's favour, and 
 of the reconcilement of Christians to Him, 
 beyond and subsequent to the covenant 
 of baptism. St. Paul, it has been seen, 
 insists upon the necessity of regeneration: 
 he declares that ' the natural man receiveth 
 not the things of God, neither can know 
 them : he calls the heathen nations ' chil- 
 dren of wrath' and ' sinners of the Gen- 
 tiles : he speaks of the ' old man as being 
 corrupt according to the deceitful lusts :' 
 in short^he expresses, under a variety of 
 terms/" the assertion of our Saviour, that 
 ' except a man be born again, of water and 
 the Spirit, he cannot enter into the king- 
 dom of God.' John iii. 3. 
 
 " With equal clearness he intimates, 
 that the Christians he addresses were thus 
 regenerate : as having ' put of the old man 
 with its deeds ;' and having become the 
 ' temple of the Holy Ghost' and ' the 
 
 * Bom. ii. 6, &c. 
 
18 
 
 O.N BAPTISM. 
 
 members of Christ; 4 as having the ' spiritual 
 circumcision, and being hurled with Christ 
 in baptism; 1 Bom. vi. 3; Col. ii. 12; as 
 having ' received the spirit of adoption' 
 Bom. viii. 15 ; and as 'being washed, 
 sanctified, and justified, in the name of the 
 Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God/ 
 To the Galatians, ' bewitched,' as lie says 
 they were, ' that they should not obey 
 the truth,' he still writes, ' Ye are the 
 children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.' 
 For, as many of you as have been baptized 
 into Christ, have put on Christ. 1 Gal. iii. 26. 
 These addresses and exhortations are 
 founded on the principle that the disciples, 
 by their dedication to God in baptism, 
 bad been brought into a state of reconcile- 
 ment with Him, had been admitted to 
 privileges which the Apostle calls on 
 them to improve. On the authority of 
 this example, and of the undeniable prac- 
 tice of the first ages of Christianity, our 
 Church considers Baptism as conveying 
 regeneration, instructing us to pray, before 
 baptism, that the infant ' may be born 
 again, and made an heir of everlasting 
 salvation ;' and to return thanks, after 
 
ON BAPTISM. 19 
 
 baptism, ' that it hath pleased God to re- 
 generate the infant with his Holy Spirit, and 
 receive him for his own child b}^ adoption.' 
 " But, on the contrary, if there is a 
 distinction between special and common 
 grace, and none are regenerate but those 
 who receive special grace, and those only 
 receive it who are elect ; baptism is evi- 
 dently no sign of regeneration, since so 
 many after baptism live profane and unholy 
 lives, and perish in their sins. Therefore, 
 the preacher of special grace must, con- 
 sistently with his own principles, lead his 
 hearers to look for some new conversion, and 
 expect some sensible regeneration. This 
 brings him to use language in the highest 
 degree perplexing to an ordinary hearer. 
 To take an example from the same writer, 
 whose only fault is the inconsistency to 
 which he is reduced by his attachment to 
 the system of election : ' The best duties 
 of unregenerate men are no better in 
 God's account and acceptance, than abo- 
 mination. There is nothing that such 
 men do, in the whole course of their lives, 
 but at the last day it will be found in 
 God's register-book, among the catalogue 
 
20 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 of their sins. This man hath prayed so 
 often, and heard so often ; made so many 
 prayers, and heard so many sermons, and 
 done many good works ; but yet, all this 
 while, he was in an unconverted estate : 
 these, therefore, are set down in God's 
 day-book in black * and they are registered 
 among those sins that he must give an 
 account for : not for the substance of the 
 actions themselves, but because they come 
 from rotten principles, that defile the best 
 actions which he can perform.'* 
 
 " Suppose this language addressed now, 
 as it was originally, to a congregation 
 dedicated to Christ in baptism. What 
 would be the feelings of a plain under- 
 standing, or a timid conscience, unable to 
 unravel the windings of these secret 
 tilings, on learning that the sinfulness or 
 innocency of actions does not depend upon 
 their being permitted or forbidden in the 
 revealed law, but on the doer being in a 
 regenerate or unregenerate state at the 
 time when he performs them ? How is 
 this fact of regencracy, upon which no less 
 
 * Hopkins on the Neiv Birth. 
 
ON BAPTISM. 21 
 
 than eternity depends, to be discovered ? 
 The Apostle enumerates the works of the 
 flesh and the fruits of the Spirit ; but his 
 test is insufficient, for the two lists are 
 here mixed and confounded. The hearers 
 appeal to the Church, an authorized inter- 
 preter of Scripture. The Church acquaints 
 them, that they were themselves regene- 
 rated, and made the children of grace, by 
 the benefit of baptism ; while the preacher 
 evidently treats them as if it were pos- 
 sible they might be still unregenerate."* 
 
 § 5. It seems not unlikely 
 that the same cause which had J^inofthe 
 probably led to the rejection of rejection 
 infant baptism, contributed also °{ t e 
 
 r bacraments. 
 
 to the formation of that Sect 
 which rejects the Sacraments altogether. 
 At the time when that Sect arose, a very 
 large proportion of christian ministers, 
 while they were administering to infants 
 a Eite which they spoke of as a sign of 
 Regeneration, (or New-birth,) at the same 
 time taught — at least, were understood as 
 
 * Sumner's Apostolical Preaching. 
 
22 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 teaching — that there is no intelligible 
 connexion whatever between the sign and 
 the thing signified, nor any real benefit 
 attached to the Bite. The new-birth they 
 taught their people to hope for at some 
 future indefinite time. And they taught 
 them to believe, as a part of the christian 
 revelation, that, of infants brought to bap- 
 tism, an uncertain, indefinite number of 
 individuals — undisiinguishable at that time 
 from the rest — are, by the divine decree, 
 totally and finally excluded from all share 
 in the benefits of Christ's redemption. 
 
 Now, men accustomed to see and hear 
 all this, would be not unlikely to listen 
 with favour to those who declared — 
 professedly by divine inspiration — that 
 "water-baptism," as they call it, is an 
 empty and superstitious ceremony, origi- 
 nating in a misapprehension of our Lord's 
 meaning ; of which meaning they — gifted 
 with the same inspiration as his Apostles 
 — are commissioned to be interpreters. 
 
 And when one Sacrament had been thus 
 explained away, the rejection of the other 
 also, according to a similar kind of reason- 
 ing, would follow of course. 
 
ON BAPTISM. 23 
 
 And, after all, this rejection was but the 
 carrying ont of a principle of procedure 
 which had been long before sanctioned by 
 others. It had been long before decided 
 that, at the Eucharist, one of the appointed 
 symbols might safely be omitted, and that 
 the perfect spiritual participation by the 
 Communicants in the benefit of the Sacra- 
 ment is not thereby at all impaired. To 
 dispense with the other symbol also, and 
 likewise with the symbol of the other 
 Sacrament, and then to call this a spiritual 
 celebration of the Sacraments, was only 
 taking a step further in the same direction. 
 
 In truth, the abolition of the Sacraments, 
 by explaining away as figurative, words of 
 our Lord which were undoubtedly under- 
 stood by his hearers at the time literally ; 
 or, again, the literal interpretation of his 
 words, "this is my bod} r ," which must have 
 been understood at the time figuratively, 
 (for the Apostles could not have supposed 
 that at the Last Supper He was holding in 
 his hands his own literal body;) or the addi- 
 tion of fresh Sacraments not instituted by 
 Him or his Apostles : or a departure from 
 the mode He appointed of celebrating the 
 
~ I ON BAPTISM. 
 
 Eucharist, by the withholding of the cup, 
 — all these, and any other similar liberties 
 taken with Scripture, stand on the same 
 ground, and are equally justifiable, or 
 equally unjustifiable. If certain indivi- 
 duals, or Councils, or other Bodies of men, 
 are really inspired messengers from Heaven, 
 "moved by the Spirit " to declare with in- 
 fallible certainty the Will of the Lord, then 
 their words are to be received and obe}^ed 
 with the same deference as those of Peter 
 or Paul. And if they announce any change 
 in the divine dispensations, or give any 
 new interpretation of any part of Scrip- 
 ture, we are bound to acquiesce, even as 
 the Jews were required to do in that great 
 " mystery of the Gospel," the opening of 
 the Kingdom of Heaven to Gentiles. It is 
 God who speaks by their mouths ; and he 
 who has established any ordinance has 
 evidently the power to abrogate or alter it. 
 And when persons who make such a 
 claim (or admit it in their leaders) profess 
 to take Scripture for their guide, they 
 must be understood to mean that it is 
 their guide only in the sense attached to 
 it by the persons thus divinely com mis- 
 
ON BAPTISM. 25 
 
 sioned, and in those points only wherein 
 no additional or different revelation has 
 been made through these persons. When 
 there has, the later revelation, of course, 
 supersedes the earlier. 
 
 Nor does it make any real difference 
 whether something be added to the Bible, 
 claiming equal divine authority, or whether 
 merely an alleged infallible interpretation 
 be given of what is already written. For 
 an interpretation coming from any Church 
 or person divinely commissioned, and 
 speaking " as the Spirit moveth," and 
 thence authorized to declare (which is 
 exactly an equivalent expression) " thus 
 saith the Lord" is of the same authority 
 with Scripture itself, and must be impli- 
 citly received, however at variance with 
 the sense which any ordinary reader would, 
 of himself, attach to the words. And those 
 who completely surrender their own judg- 
 ment to any supposed infallible interpreter 
 are, in fact, taking him — not Scripture — 
 for their guide. 
 
 It is most important, — when the ex- 
 pression is used of " referring to Scripture 
 as the infallible standard/' and requiring 
 
20 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 assent to such points of faitli only as can 
 be thence proved, to settle clearly in the 
 outset, the important question " proved to 
 whom ?" If any man, or Body of men refer 
 us to Scripture, as the sole authoritative 
 standard, meaning that we are not to be 
 called on to believe anything as a neces- 
 sary point of faith, on their word, but only 
 on our oio7i conviction that it is scriptural, 
 then, t\\Qj place our faith on the basis, not 
 of human authority, but of divine. But if 
 they call on us, as a point of conscience, 
 to receive whatever is proved to their satis- 
 faction from Scripture, even though it may 
 appear to us unscriptural, then, instead of 
 releasing us from the usurped authority of 
 Man taking the place of God, they are 
 placing on us two burdens instead of one. 
 " You require us," we might reply, " to 
 believe, first, that whatever you teach is 
 true; and, secondly, besides this, to believe 
 also, that it is a truth contained in Scri/j- 
 ture ; and we are to take your word for 
 both!" 
 
 When, therefore, any such claim is set 
 up, we are authorized and bound to require 
 " the signs of an Apostle." One who 
 
ON BAPTISM. ."27 
 
 supports his opinions by argument, is at 
 least entitled to a hearing, however wide 
 those opinions may be from what are 
 generally held, But it is not so with 
 those who claim assent on the ground of 
 having received a revelation from the 
 infallible Spirit of God. Professed am- 
 bassadors from Heaven should be called 
 on to show their credentials — the mira- 
 culous powers which alone can prove their 
 inspiration — on pain of being convicted of 
 profane presumption in daring to " say, 
 thus saith the Lord, when the Lord hath 
 not spoken." 
 
 There are some persons, however, who 
 bewilder themselves and others, by con- 
 founding together the two senses of the 
 word inspiration. In one sense, every- 
 thing that is true, and that is good, in the 
 Christian, may be said to be from the 
 " inspiration of the Holy Spirit," which 
 we pray for to " cleanse the thoughts of 
 our hearts;"* since, "without Me," says 
 our Lord, " ye can do nothing." But this 
 inspiration is what can only be known by 
 
 Communion Service. 
 C ^ 
 
28 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 its fruits, to be judged of by comparing 
 our life and doctrine with Scripture. 
 
 When, on the other hand, we speak of 
 the Apostles as " inspired writers," w r e 
 understand by that, that they had received 
 a communication from Heaven of the in- 
 fallible truth of which they themselves and 
 all others could be assured. 
 
 It is probable, again, that many persons 
 deceive both others and themselves by 
 confusing together in their minds diffe- 
 rences of degree, and differences of amount; 
 and thence imagining (what a little calm 
 reflection must show to be impossible, and, 
 indeed, unintelligible) that there may be 
 different degrees of what is properly and 
 strictly termed inspiration : that is, the 
 miraculous influence under which we con- 
 ceive anything that we call " an inspired 
 Work" to have been written. The existence 
 or non-existence of this inspiration is a 
 question of fact ; and though there may 
 be different degrees of evidence for the ex- 
 istence of a fact, it is plain that one fact 
 cannot be, itself, more or less a fact than 
 another. 
 
 Inspiration may extend either to the 
 
ON BAPTISM. 29 
 
 very words uttered, or merely to the sub- 
 ject-matter of them, or merely to a certain 
 portion of the matter ; — to all, for instance, 
 that pertains to religious truth, so as to 
 afford a complete exemption from doc- 
 trinal error — though not, to matters of 
 Geography, Natural Philosophy, &c. But 
 in every case we understand that to what- 
 ever points the inspiration does extend, in 
 these it secures infallibility ; and infalli- 
 bility manifestly cannot admit of degrees. 
 
 When we are speaking of the instructive, 
 the eloquent, the entertaining, &c, we 
 may call one discourse tolerably well- 
 written, another rather better written, 
 and a third better still. Each of them is 
 what it is, in a different degree from the 
 others. But we could not with propriety 
 speak of one discourse as being " some- 
 what inspired," another, as " rather more 
 inspired," and again, another, as " a good 
 deal inspired." 
 
 If any one is distinctly commissioned 
 to deliver a message from Heaven, in any 
 one instance, with infallible proof to him- 
 self and to others, that it is such, he is as 
 truly inspired, and his revelation as much 
 
30 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 a revelation, as if lie had had revealed to 
 him a hundred times a greater quantity of 
 superhuman knowledge. That one mes- 
 sage is as much God's Word as any part 
 of Scripture. Even so Paul, who " spoke 
 with tongues more than all" the disciples 
 he was addressing,* had not more that 
 miraculous gift (though he had the gift 
 of more tongues) than any one of them 
 who had been supernaturally taught a 
 single foreign language. 
 
 If a man has ascertained, and can prove, 
 that he has had, either in words, or merely 
 in substance, a revelation (properly so- 
 called) of some doctrine, or again, an in- 
 fallible divine assurance of safety from 
 religious errors, he is to be listened to — 
 in reference to those points to which the in- 
 spiration extends — as speaking with divine 
 authority. But on the other hand, if he 
 has no infallible proofs to give of having 
 received a divine communication, then, 
 though most or all of what he says may 
 be, in fact, perfectly true, he has no right 
 to use such an expression as " thus saith 
 the Lord !" or "the Spirit moveth me to 
 * 1 Cor. xiv. 1 8. 
 
ON BAPTISM. 31 
 
 Scry so and so." He ought rather to say 
 — what a pious and humble preacher must 
 mean — I hope and trust that what I am 
 setting forth is sound and useful doctrine; 
 and so far as it is so, it must be the gift 
 of Him " from whom all good things do 
 proceed ;" but hoio far it is so, both you 
 and I must judge as well as we can, by a 
 careful reference to Holy Scripture, with 
 a full consciousness of our own fallibility. 
 
 § 6. Our safest and most 
 
 • #v' 1 /7 of? OP fir 
 
 humbly pious course is, m any the Apost J les ^ 
 practical question, to endeavour 
 to ascertain, in the first instance, what was 
 the practice of the Apostles ; and to adhere 
 to that, whenever we find that the rules 
 or customs they sanctioned were not of a 
 merely local or temporary character, but 
 were equally suited to our own Age and 
 Country. And not only is respect due to 
 their practices, but these practices will 
 often throw light on their doctrine ; since 
 whatever belief, on any point, seems natu- 
 rally to be implied in what they were 
 accustomed to do, may be presumed to 
 have been their belief. And we ought 
 
82 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 surely rather to put ourselves under their 
 teaching, where it is to be had, than to 
 adopt and act upon the inferences drawn 
 from any theological theory of our own. 
 
 Now with respect to the question of 
 infant-baptism, though there is not in 
 Scripture any express injunction or pro- 
 hibition relating to it, any one who in- 
 quires with an unbiassed mind may arrive, 
 I think, at a complete moral certainty as 
 to what was the practice of the Apostles 
 and other primitive Christians. 
 
 For several years, we should remember, 
 they were all Jews. And even after the 
 Gentiles had begun to be engrafted into 
 the Church, the Gospel was still, in each 
 place, preached first in the Jewish Syna- 
 gogue ; and the greatest part of the most 
 eminent teachers were of that nation. 
 
 Now men brought up under the law, 
 would, of course, adhere to the principles of 
 that law, wherever these were not at vari- 
 ance with Christianity; and would be dis- 
 posed to view everything in the Gospel ac- 
 cording to the analogy of Judaism, except 
 when taught otherioise. And their inspired 
 instructors did teach them otherwise, when 
 
ON BAPTISM. 33 
 
 there was need. Whenever this disposi- 
 tion was carried to a faulty excess, — as in 
 the well-known instance (Acts xv.) of the 
 attempt to place Gentile-Christians under 
 the Levitical Law, — the error was, we 
 may be sure, as in that instance, promptly 
 corrected, and firmly resisted by the 
 Apostles. 
 
 Now Baptism having always been 
 clearly understood to be the initiatory rite 
 by which members were admitted into the 
 christian Church,'* it cannot, I think, be 
 doubted, by any unprejudiced inquirer, 
 that the early Christians must have been 
 prepared to observe the like rules in 
 admitting (by Baptism) members into the 
 christian Church, to those they had been 
 accustomed to, in reference to the Jewish. 
 If it had been the rule to admit Adults 
 only into the Mosaic Covenant — if infancy 
 had been a bar to any one's reception,—- 
 then, they would never have thought of 
 
 * Agreeably to our Lord's charge to his Apostles 
 (Matthew xxviii.), the exact rendering of which is "make 
 disciples of all nations" (i.e., enrol them as members of 
 the Church) " by baptizing them into the name," &c. 
 
 The marginal rendering of /Ma^retfcrare in our Bible 
 is preferable to that in the text. 
 
 See also Acts viii. 36, and x. 47. 
 
 c 3 
 
34 <)N BAPTISM. 
 
 baptizing children into the christian 
 Church, unless expressly com in muled to do 
 so. If — as is the fact — they had been 
 accustomed to enrol in the JeicisJi Church 
 their own infants, and proselytes of all 
 ages, then, they would, as a matter of 
 course, adhere to the same rule, in refer- 
 ence to the christian Church, unless ex- 
 pressly forbidden. And so strong and 
 universal must have been the disposition 
 to bring to Baptism the children of be- 
 lievers, that if this had not been allow- 
 able, we should undoubtedly have found 
 in the New Testament most distinct and 
 frequent notices of its prohibition. As 
 for distinct injunctions or recommenda- 
 tions, these could not have been at all 
 needed in favour of any practice about 
 which there had never been any hesita- 
 tion. 
 
 And as for the many scruples and 
 questions that have been raised relative 
 to infant-baptism, none of these would 
 be likely even to occur to their minds ; 
 because they had been familiar all their 
 lives with the admission into the Mosaic 
 Covenant of infants, incapable, at the time, 
 
ON BAPTISM. 35 
 
 of availing themselves of, or at all under- 
 standing, the benefits of that Covenant. 
 
 § 7. We have therefore, I Eow the 
 conceive, a complete moral Apostles 
 
 must hare 
 
 certainty that the earliest 
 Christians did practise infant- stood by 
 baptism, and that it received Jewlsh 
 
 . . Converts. 
 
 at least the tacit sanction and 
 approval of the Apostles ; whose prohibi- 
 tions of it we should not have failed to find 
 recorded, had it been at all objectionable. 
 But in this, and in several other points 
 also, difficulties, and sometimes serious 
 mistakes, are likely to arise from want of 
 sufficient care to view the Gospel through 
 the medium of the Law ; — to recollect, 
 that is, not only that the Mosaic Dispen- 
 sation itself was the forerunner and type of 
 the christian, which fulfilled and extended 
 it, but also that Christianity was first 
 preached by y and to, men who had been 
 brought up Jews ; and that accordingly 
 we must carefully consider, and steadily 
 keep in mind, what were the habits and 
 modes of thought, of Jews, of that Age 
 and Country, and in what way they would 
 
&6 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 be likely to understand and to act upon 
 the precepts and doctrines delivered to 
 them. For, the interpretations which 
 were the most obvious to them will be 
 often different from what may be the most 
 obvious to us of the present day. And 
 again, it will often happen that what 
 were to them the greatest difficulties 
 (as, for instance, the admission of the 
 Gentiles to be " fellow-heirs") will be, to 
 us, no difficulties at all. And whatever 
 meaning presented itself to their minds, 
 may be presumed to be the right one, 
 whenever they were not taught otherwise 
 by their inspired guides the Apostles, who 
 were at hand to correct any mistakes they 
 might fall into. 
 
 Thus, for instance, if we would inquire 
 what we are to understand by " Saints " 
 — " God's People " — and " the Elect " 
 [" chosen "] &c. our safest course is to look 
 to the sense in which an Israelite had been 
 accustomed to hear those words employed, 
 and to consider how he would be likely to 
 understand them, by analogy, in reference 
 to the Gospel-dispensation.* 
 
 * See Sermon on u Christian Saints." 
 
ON BAPTISM. 37 
 
 And so also, if we would understand 
 what was meant by the " baptizing of a 
 Household," which we read of in the New 
 Testament — whether it included, or not, 
 the infant-children of the believing parents, 
 — our guide should be the practice of the 
 Israelites in reference to any Gentile- 
 family, the Heads of which had renounced 
 idolatry, and desired to be admitted as 
 proselytes — as Israelites by adoption, — 
 into the number of God's Chosen People 
 under the Old Dispensation. " Let all 
 his males be circumcised, and then let 
 him draw near and eat the Passover," was 
 the direction of the Law under which they 
 acted. 
 
 And if an intelligent and well-disposed 
 Israelite had been asked, what benefit he 
 contemplated as accruing from enrolment 
 in the number of God's People, to an 
 infant, incapable of either obeying or dis- 
 obeying the Law, and of enjoying, or 
 understanding, the promised blessings of 
 the Covenant, he would probably have 
 replied, that the child — being dedicated 
 to the Lord by Jewish parents or guar- 
 dians, solemnly bound to instruct and 
 
38 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 bring him up as a Jew — might be ex- 
 pected, as soon as he should be able, and 
 as far as he should be able, to understand 
 these things, to become, gradually, an 
 observer of the Law, and a partaker of 
 its beneflts ; and that, then, he would 
 not obtain a new possession of something 
 which, before, was not his, but would 
 merely enter on the full enjoyment of a 
 benefit previously conferred on him. 
 
 The case, in short, would be viewed as 
 analogous to some which occur every day 
 in the ordinary business of life. In the 
 common language, for instance, of secular 
 business, a person is said to have received 
 — as a payment, or as a gift, — such and 
 such a sum of money ; even when no 
 money is actually handed to him, but only 
 a draft on some banker who is ready to 
 pay it as soon as presented. And we 
 speak of him as having received this sum, 
 although we know that he may possibly 
 not present the draft for several days or 
 weeks ; or may even, through gross negli- 
 gence, fail ever to present it at all. Or 
 again, take the case of an infant inheriting 
 an estate, or a title, or the " freedom" of 
 
ON BAPTISM. 39 
 
 some corporation. Though not capahle, 
 at the time, of profiting by, or under- 
 standing these advantages, he will subse- 
 quently become so ; and will then, if he 
 use them aright, not acquire any new 
 possession, but derive the suitable advan- 
 tages from those to which he was already 
 entitled. And even as the inheritor of a 
 fortune may, when he grows up, make 
 either a good or an ill use of his wealth, 
 so, any one, whether the child of an 
 Israelite by birth, or of a Proselyte ad- 
 mitted into the Jewish Church, might in 
 after-life, either avail himself rightly of 
 the privileges thus bestowed on him, or 
 convert them into a curse, by his neglect 
 or abuse of them. 
 
 And supposing this latter case — sup- 
 posing the son of some devout Proselyte 
 to have become an idolater, or in some 
 other way a transgressor of the Law — he 
 would, no doubt, have been admonished 
 (by a Prophet, or other pious Jew) not, to 
 become an Israelite — not, to seek admission 
 into the number of God's chosen People, 
 — but, to repent, and return to the Lord, 
 to reform his life, and to walk worthy of 
 
40 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 the privileges to which lie had been 
 admitted. 
 
 Now all this, an intelligent and pions 
 Jew who should have embraced the Gospel, 
 would naturally be inclined to apply, by 
 analogy, to the case of the Christian- 
 dispensation. 
 
 Analogy of $ 8 - And accordingly, one of 
 the Mosaic the most eminent of these — 
 the Apostle Paul himself — di- 
 rects the attention of his converts to such 
 an analogy : applying the very word 
 " baptized" to the Israelites on their deli- 
 verance from Egypt ; whom he speaks of 
 as being all " chosen" to be partakers of 
 special divine favours ; while yet, — as he 
 reminds the Corinthians (1 Cor. x.) — most* 
 of those very men " were overthrown in 
 the wilderness ;" not, according to any 
 eternal divine decree (at least he mentions 
 none) excluding them from the promised 
 blessings, but as a consequence of their 
 obstinate rebellions. It was because 
 " they thought scorn of that pleasant 
 land, and gave no credence unto his 
 
 * roiy TxKtioo'x.v. 
 
ON BAPTISM. 41 
 
 word," that the Lord " sware unto them 
 that they should not enter into his rest." 
 And all "these things" Paul tells the 
 Corinthians, " are written for the admoni- 
 tion" of Christians. 
 
 It is thus that (as was remarked above) 
 we may plainly learn from the practice of 
 the early Church what were the doctrines 
 taught in it. Having ascertained what the 
 early Christians were accustomed, under the 
 guidance of the Apostles, to do, in reference 
 to the administration of Baptism, we may 
 thence safely infer what was their belief on 
 the subject. 
 
 And here it is to be remarked, by the 
 way, that I have been representing a 
 pious and intelligent Israelite as speaking, 
 all along, of the case of children brought 
 forward for dedication to the Lord, by 
 pare?its or guardians designing to educate 
 them accordingly. He would surely never 
 imagine that any one could have a right 
 or a power, to admit into the Mosaic 
 Covenant a Gentile infant who was to be 
 brought up as a heathen. And, by parity 
 of reasoning, he would not, as a Christian, 
 regard as of any avail, or as a valid Bap- 
 
42 o.N BAPTISM. 
 
 iism at all, the performance of an outward 
 ceremony on an infant that is to be 
 brought up — as far as we know and be- 
 lieve — in entire ignorance of christian 
 duties and privileges. No one would be 
 regarded as sowing seed to any purpose, 
 — or indeed as, in correct language, sowing 
 it at all, who should purposely scatter corn 
 on the trodden way-side, with a full know- 
 ledge that it would be immediately " de- 
 voured by the fowls of the air," instead of 
 springing up, and producing, " first the 
 blade, then the ear, and afterwards the full 
 corn in the ear." 
 
 I mention this, because there are in- 
 stances recorded, of priests administering 
 by stealth (through mistaken pious charity) 
 what they regard as the right of chris- 
 tian Baptism, to the infants of savages, or 
 of Chinese or Hindu Idolaters. But in 
 our Church it is plain no such procedure is 
 recognized. Our Formularies all along 
 most plainly contemplate the case of a 
 child brought to Baptism by persons pledg- 
 ing themselves to its education as a Chris- 
 tian. In the narrative so earnestly dwelt 
 on in the baptismal Service, the children 
 
ON BAPTISM. 43 
 
 brought to our Lord for his blessing, must 
 evidently have been the children of believ- 
 ing parents.* And all the declarations 
 made in our Formularies — the hopes ex- 
 pressed — the Prayers — the Exhortations 
 — in short, everything that is said — must 
 evidently be understood as proceeding on 
 this supposition. 
 
 And accordingly, the very reason as- 
 signed in the Catechism for its being allow- 
 able to administer Baptism to infants, is, 
 that as there are certain indispensable 
 conditions oi the benefits promised to them, 
 so, the fulfilment of these conditions is 
 promised by them, through their Sureties. 
 
 As for the " remission of sins " at Bap- 
 tism, so frequently alluded to in our Ser- 
 vices, this, it is plain, cannot be under- 
 stood of actual sins, in the case of an infant, 
 which is not a moral agent at all, nor 
 capable of either transgressing or obeying 
 
 * See Luke xviii. 15. The right rendering of ra 
 Ppetyr) evidently is, in this passage, " their infants." 
 The article (which our Translators are apt to overlook 
 altogether) has often the sense of our possessive 
 pronoun. So it has also in French. " I have a pain 
 in my head" would be rendered "j'ai mal a la tete:" 
 the head. 
 
44 O.N BAPTISM. 
 
 God's laws, — of resisting, or of following 
 the suggestions of his Spirit. Nor again 
 can it mean an entire removal and aboli- 
 tion of the frail and sinful nature, — the 
 " pJironema sarkos " inherited by every 
 descendant of Adam ; since our 9th Article 
 expressly declares that this " remaineth 
 even in those that are regenerate. " But 
 it seems to denote that those duly baptized 
 are considered no longer as children of the 
 condemned and disinherited Adam — as no 
 longer aliens from God* — disqualified for 
 his service — and excluded from the offers 
 of the Gospel, but are received into the 
 number of God's adopted children, and 
 have the promise of forgiveness of sins, 
 and, as it were, the treasury thrown open 
 to them of divine grace, through which, if 
 they duly avail themselves of it, though not 
 otherwise — they will attain final salvation. 
 Those who seek to go as far as they can 
 
 * This is doubtless what is meant by the expression 
 " children of wrath," in the Catechism, and " deserving 
 God's wrath," in the Ninth Article. The Reformers 
 could not have meant the words " God's wrath" to be 
 understood in their literal sense; since they had laid it 
 down in the First Article that God is "without body, 
 parts, or passions." 
 
ON BAPTISM. 45 
 
 towards doing away all connexion of 
 spiritual benefit with Baptism, and reduc- 
 ing it to a mere sign of admission into a 
 community possessing no spiritual endow- 
 ments at all, sometimes appeal to the 
 case of Cornelius and his friends, on whom 
 " the Holy Ghost fell " before they were 
 baptized. But they seem to forget that 
 this was the miraculous gift of tongues, of 
 prop/iecg, &c, which never was, nor was 
 ever supposed to be, the " inward spiritual 
 grace " of Baptism. It was never con- 
 ferred at Baptism; [see Acts viii. 16,] 
 but was always bestowed, except in this 
 one case, (in which there was an obvious 
 reason for the exception,) through the lay- 
 ing on of hands of an Apostle [see Acts 
 xix. 6]. And accordingly the Bomans, 
 when Paul wrote to them [Bom. i. n], had 
 received no miraculous gifts, though they 
 were baptized Christians, and are reminded 
 by the Apostle that " if any man have not 
 the Spirit of Christ he is none of his." 
 
 § o. Such seems to be the T 
 
 y y m Language 
 
 most simple and unforced in- of our 
 terpretation of the language of Re f ormers - 
 
46 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 our Church in various passages of her 
 Formularies : as for instance in the Cate- 
 chism, where the Catechumen speaks of 
 " Baptism, wherein I was made a child of 
 God . . . and an inheritor of the Kingdom 
 of Heaven ;" and again, where it is said 
 that " being by nature born in sin . . . we 
 are hereby made the children of Grace." 
 
 Now this placing of a person in a diffe- 
 rent condition from that in which he was 
 originally born, may, not unaptly, be 
 designated (as it appears to be, by our 
 Eeformers) by the term " Regeneration" 
 or " New-birth."* 
 
 But no one can suppose that they re- 
 garded the sowing of seed, as the same 
 thing with the full maturity of the corn 
 for harvest, or as necessarily implying it. 
 To be born into the natural world, is not 
 the same thing as to be grown up : nor 
 can it be pronounced of every infant that 
 is born, that it mil, necessarily, grow up 
 into manly maturity. So, also, our Re- 
 formers never meant to teach that every 
 
 * The Ninth Article has, in the original Latin, the 
 word "renati" twice; translated, first, "regenerate," 
 and afterwards, "baptized." 
 
ON BAPTISM. 47 
 
 one who is baptized is sure of salvation, 
 independently of his "leading the rest of 
 his life according to this beginning ;" 
 [Baptismal Service ;] or again, that we can 
 be infallibly sure that he mil do so ; any 
 more than we can pronounce with certainty 
 (according to the analogy of a temporal 
 inheritance, above alluded to) that one 
 who has an estate bequeathed to him, will 
 claim his inheritance in proper form, and 
 will also make that right use of his wealth 
 on which depends its becoming a real 
 blessing to him. 
 
 The language used by our Eeformer?, 
 on this subject, as being, in their judg- 
 ment, the most in accordance with that 
 of Scripture, is certainly not exempt from 
 difficulties and dangers to the " unlearned 
 and unstable, who wrest even the Scriptures 
 to their own destruction." But to have 
 omitted all mention of "regeneration," 
 which is so often mentioned and alluded 
 to in Scripture, is what no one could think 
 of. And to have used (as some do) a dif- 
 ferent kind of language from that which 
 our Eeformers do use, would have been 
 to incur at least an equal danger, if not a 
 
48 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 still greater. If there be a danger of the 
 " unlearned and unstable" relying too 
 much on the efficacy of Baptism, surely 
 no candid and thoughtful person can 
 doubt that persons of a like character, if 
 taught that the " new birth" necessarily 
 implies infallible salvation, may be led, if 
 they believe themselves to have experienced 
 this new birth, into a careless confidence, 
 and may neglect to " work out their own 
 salvation with fear and trembling ;" espe- 
 cially if they hear a preacher say — and it 
 has been said from the pulpit — that "God's 
 people ought, indeed, to grieve much at 
 the sinfulness of the world, but never to 
 feel any alarm or uneasiness at any sins of 
 their own, because God leaves his own people 
 to fall into many grievous sins, on purpose 
 to humble them." 
 
 If any one sees no danger in .such 
 teaching as this, he must be beyond the 
 reach of argument.* 
 
 * On this subject I have subjoined, in a note at the 
 end of this part, some extracts from the writings of the 
 late Bishop llyder, of Mr. Simeon, and of Archbishop 
 Sumner. 
 
 When one party in the Church censure severely, and 
 not unreasonably, another party, for explaining away, 
 
ON BAPTISM. 49 
 
 The expression, in our Catechism, of 
 " an inheritor of the Kingdom of Heaven" 
 seems to be used in reference to the 
 tendency, and the suitable result, of an 
 admission into the Church of Christ. And 
 such a kind of language is often employed 
 by all Writers : and not least, by the 
 Apostles. When, for instance, the Apostle 
 John says that " whatsoever is born of 
 God, overcometh the World, and that 
 every one who is born of God, doth not 
 commit sin," it cannot be supposed that 
 he meant to attribute to Christians moral 
 perfection, and impeccability ; when, on the 
 contrary, he exhorts them to " confess 
 their sins." Far was it from his design, 
 to teach that one who did but feel con- 
 vinced of having experienced the new- 
 birth, might safely remit his exertions, 
 and relax his vigilance against sin, and 
 
 to suit their own views, the plain words of one portion 
 of our Formularies, while they themselves put a no less 
 forced construction, for their own purposes, on another 
 portion, and incur, for so doing, an equally strong, and 
 equally just censure from their opponents, it seems but 
 too plain that neither party really disapprove of such a 
 procedure on account of its intrinsic unfairness, but 
 merely when it makes against themselves. 
 1) 
 
50 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 " count himself to have apprehended" and 
 to be thenceforward sure of divine ac- 
 ceptance, and of everlasting life, without 
 " taking heed lest he fall." On the con- 
 trary, he was writing — as is well known — 
 in opposition to those Gnostics of his day, 
 who were grossly Antinomian, and who, 
 while they professed to " have no sin" in 
 God's sight, and to be sure of salvation 
 through their supposed "knowing the 
 Gospel" (Gnosis), lived a life of flagrant 
 immorality. 
 
 In contradiction to these monstrous 
 tenets, he declares that every one who has 
 a well-grounded " hope in Christ, purifietli 
 himself, even as He is pure:" — that a sinful 
 life is inconsistent with the character of the 
 " sons of God ;" — that the tendency, in 
 short, and suitable result of being " born of 
 God," is opposed to the commission of sin. 
 
 And indeed, in all subjects, it is a very 
 common mode of speaking, to attribute to 
 any person or thing, some quality, which, 
 though not an invariable, is a suitable, or 
 natural, attribute, and may reasonably be 
 looked for therein. 
 
 In this way, many words have come to 
 
ON BAPTISM. 51 
 
 vary gradually from their original signi- 
 fication. For instance, to " cure," in its 
 etymological sense, (from " curare") signi- 
 fies to take care of a patient, and to ad- 
 minister medicines. In its present use, it 
 implies the successful administration. 
 
 So also it is with the word* which, 
 in the language of the New Testament 
 Writers, signifies not to tend, but to heal; 
 and is so rendered in our version, though 
 the other is well known to be the original 
 meaning of it. 
 
 In like manner we often, figuratively, 
 deny some title to an object that is wanting 
 in those qualities which ought to belong 
 to it, or which 'that title suggests as a 
 natural and consistent accompaniment, 
 and what may fairly be expected. Thus, 
 for instance, in speaking of some act of 
 excessive baseness or depravity, it is not 
 uncommon to say " one who could be 
 guilty of this, is not a man :" meaning, of 
 course, that such conduct is unworthy of 
 the manly character ; — inconsistent with 
 what may be fairly expected from a man, 
 as such ; and more suitable to the brutish 
 
 * 6(paneiu>. 
 
 i) 2 
 
OZ ON BAPTISM. 
 
 nature.* But so far are we from under- 
 standing that any one who acts thus un- 
 worthily, is not, strictly and literally, a 
 man, that on the contrary, this is the very 
 ground of our censure. We condemn a 
 man who acts the part of a brute, precisely 
 because he is a man — a Being from whom 
 something better might have been looked 
 for — and not one of the brute- creation. 
 
 Again, any one might say of a garden 
 that was greatly neglected, and over-run 
 with wild plants, "this is not a garden" 
 or "it does not deserve the name of a 
 garden ;" though it is precisely because it 
 is, literally, a garden, that we speak thus 
 contemptuously of it : since, in an uncul- 
 tivated spot, the sight of a luxuriant wild 
 vegetation does not offend the eye. 
 
 It is in a similar mode of speaking that 
 Paul declares, that " he is not a Jew who 
 is one outwardly : neither is that circum- 
 cision which is outward in the flesh ; but 
 he is a Jew who is one inwardly ; and cir- 
 
 * " I dare do all that may become a man; 
 Who dares do more, is none." — Macbeth. 
 Some remarks on this kind of language, in reference 
 to another subject, will be found in the treatise on 
 Rhetoric, Part III. chapter iii. § 3. 
 
ON BAPTISM. 53 
 
 cumcision is of the heart," &c.,* meaning, 
 as, no donbt, every one must have under- 
 stood him, that one who is not in his heart, 
 and his conduct, a servant of the Lord, is 
 wanting in what ought to characterize the 
 Lord's People, — is inconsistent with his 
 profession, and an unworthy member of the 
 Jewish Church ; — one who will derive no 
 benefit, but the contrary, from the privi- 
 leges to which he has been admitted as a 
 Jew. For, it is because such a one is, 
 literally, a Jew, that he will incur a heavier 
 penalty than an unenlightened Heathen. 
 
 He might equally well have said — and 
 doubtless would have been ready to say — 
 according to the same kind of figure — that 
 he is not a " baptized " Christian — he is 
 not " regenerate " — who is so outwardly 
 alone, and has nothing of the christian 
 character within. And indeed the Apostle 
 Peter actually does employ similar lan- 
 guage in speaking of Baptism, (which, he 
 says, " saveth us") when he says that it is 
 " not the putting away the filth of the 
 flesh," (t. e. the outward application of 
 water) "but the answer of a good con- 
 
 * Rom. ii. 28. 
 
54 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 science towards God ;" not meaning that 
 a person deficient in this has not been, 
 literally, and in the strict and proper sense 
 of the word, baptized at all, and needs to 
 have that rite administered to him ; but 
 that he is wanting in that which is the 
 proper and beneficial result of an admission 
 into the christian Church. 
 
 And corresponding forms of expression 
 are very common, on various subjects; and 
 seldom give rise to any error, or confusion 
 of thought, or obscurity, except in those 
 cases (religious discussions are among the 
 principal) in which men under the influ- 
 ence of some strong prejudice, exercise 
 their ingenuity in seeking for anything 
 that may serve as an argument, and in 
 interpreting words according to the letter 
 and against the spirit, for the sake of sup- 
 porting some favourite theory. 
 
 _ „ . § 10. Once more then I would 
 
 Lonfirmation ' . . 
 
 the sequel invite attention to the lmpor- 
 to one tance of examining carefully, in 
 
 Sacrament, ... . 
 
 and the anv controversy that may arise, 
 
 introduction how far it may turn on differ- 
 
 to the other. , i 
 
 ences m the expressions em- 
 
ON BAPTISM. 55 
 
 ployed. Let any two persons, whose views 
 appear at the first glance, widely at vari- 
 ance, be prevailed on to depart, for a time 
 at least, from the strict technical language 
 of a theological School, and to state, in as 
 many different forms as possible, what is the 
 practical advice they would give to each 
 Christian, under various circumstances : 
 and it will often come out, that one whom 
 his neighbour had perhaps been at first 
 disposed to condemn as abandoning some 
 fundamental truths of Christianity, has, in 
 fact, merely avoided the particular terms 
 in which the other has been accustomed to 
 express them ; and the difference between 
 the parties is not such, either in degree or 
 in kind, as had been supposed. 
 
 In guarding however against verbal con- 
 troversies mistaken for real* I would not 
 be understood as thinking little of the im- 
 portance of careful accuracy of language. 
 Indeed, the very circumstance that inat- 
 tention to this may lead to serious mistakes 
 as to our meaning, would alone be suffi- 
 cient to show how needful it is to be careful 
 as to our mode of expression. 
 
 * See Logic, Verbal Questions. 
 
56 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 And here it may be remarked, that the 
 Clergy have an especial opportunity, and 
 an especial call, for giving early, and full, 
 and systematic instruction on all the points 
 here touched on, in their discharge of that 
 most important branch of their duty, the 
 preparing of children for the solemn Ordi- 
 nance of Confirmation. The course of 
 that preparation affords them a most 
 fitting occasion for explaining to them the 
 character of the Sacraments according to 
 the views of our Church ; which evidently 
 designs to make Confirmation, not a dis- 
 tinct Sacrament, but a connecting link 
 between the two ; — a kind of supplement 
 and completion to the one, and an intro- 
 duction to the other. And this sacred 
 rite has the advantage, when duly ad- 
 ministered to persons properly prepared, 
 of obviating every reasonable objection to 
 the practice of Infant-Baptism, and thus 
 justifying, and exhibiting as an harmonious 
 whole, the system of Church-ordinances 
 established by our Reformers. 
 
 All persons accordingly ought to receive 
 the holy Communion of the Lord's Supper 
 on the very first opportunity after being 
 
ON BAPTISM. 57 
 
 confirmed. Our Church directs that " no 
 one shall be admitted to the Communion 
 except one who has been confirmed, or 
 is ready and desirous to be confirmed ;" 
 and again, that " all persons" (that is, of 
 course, all who are not too young or too 
 ignorant for Confirmation) " shall receive 
 the Communion at least three times a 
 }^ear." From this it is plain that though 
 such as have not been confirmed, may, if 
 they are prepared and willing to do so, 
 attend without any scruple, the Sacrament 
 of the Lord's Supper ; on the other hand, 
 no one, who has been confirmed, ought to 
 delay receiving that Sacrament. The 
 Catechism also, designed for the instruc- 
 tion of children before Confirmation, proves 
 the same thing: since it contains an ex- 
 planation of the two Sacraments. 
 
 Some persons entertain a groundless 
 notion, that a child, who is fit for Con- 
 firmation, may yet be too young to receive 
 the Communion : and many, it is to be 
 feared, for this and for other reasons, go 
 on from Sunday to Sunday, and from year 
 to year, putting off this duty, in expecta- 
 tion of becoming more fit for it ; when it 
 d 3 
 
58 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 is likely that they are becoming every day 
 less fit, and are falling into a careless and 
 irreligious state of mind. 
 
 But if you will consider the matter 
 carefully, you will see that our Church is 
 quite right in determining that all, who 
 have been confirmed, should receive the 
 Lord's Supper without delay. For all of 
 them, it is to be hoped, understand and 
 rightly reflect on the one Sacrament — that 
 of Baptism ; if they do not, the ceremony 
 of Confirmation is a mere empty mockery: 
 and if they do, they are capable of suffi- 
 ciently understanding and valuing the 
 other Sacrament also : and in that case, 
 they ought not to delay receiving it. 
 
 Note to p. 18. 
 
 " I would wish," remarks Bp. Ryder, 
 " generally to restrict the term (regenera- 
 tion) to the baptismal privileges; and 
 considering them as comprehending not 
 only an external admission into the visible 
 Church, not only a covenanted title to the 
 pardon and grace of the Gospel, but even a 
 degree of spiritual aid vouchsafed, and ready 
 
ON BAPTISM. 59 
 
 to offer itself to our acceptance or rejection 
 at the dawn of reason. I would recommend 
 a reference to these privileges in onr dis- 
 courses, as talents which the hearer should 
 have so improved as to bear interest ; as 
 seed which should have sprung up and 
 produced fruit. 
 
 " But at the same time I would solemnly 
 protest against that most serious error 
 (which has arisen probably from exalting 
 too highly the just view of baptismal 
 regeneration) of contemplating all the 
 members of a baptized congregation as 
 converted, — as having, all, once known the 
 truth, and entered upon the right path, 
 though some may have wandered from it, 
 and others may have made little progress, 
 — as not therefore requiring (what all by 
 nature, and most it is to be feared through 
 defective principle and practice, require) 
 that c transformation by the renewing of 
 the mind ;' — that ' putting oif the old man, 
 and putting on the new man/ which is so 
 emphatically enjoined by St. Paul to his 
 baptized Romans and Ephesians." — Ex- 
 tract from Bishop Ryder's {of Lichfield) 
 Primary Charge to his Clergy. 
 
GO ON BAPTISM. 
 
 " In the baptismal Service," says the 
 late Mr. Simeon, " toe thank God for having 
 regenerated the baptized infant by his Holy 
 Spirit. Now from hence it appears that, 
 in the opinion of our Reformers, regeneration 
 a ltd remission of sins did accompany baptism. 
 But in what sense did they hold this 
 sentiment ? Did they maintain that there 
 was no need for the seed then sown in the 
 heart of the baptized persons to grow up 
 and to bring forth fruit ; or that he could 
 be saved in any other way than by a pro- 
 gressive renovation of his soul after the 
 divine image? Had they asserted any 
 such doctrine as that, it would have been 
 impossible for any enlightened person to 
 concur with them. But nothing can be 
 conceived more repugnant to their senti- 
 ments than such an idea as this : so far 
 from harbouring such a thought, they 
 have, and that too in this very prayer, 
 taught us to look to Grod for that total 
 change both of heart and life which, long 
 since their days, has begun to be expressed 
 by the term ' regeneration.' After thank- 
 ing God for regenerating the infant by his 
 Holy Spirit, we are taught to pray ' that 
 
ON BAPTISM. 61 
 
 he being dead unto sin, and living unto 
 righteousness, may crucify the old man, 
 and utterly abolish the whole body of sin ;' 
 and then, declaring the total change to be 
 the necessary mean of his obtaining 
 salvation, we add, ' so that finally, with 
 the residue of thy holy Church, he may be 
 an inheritor of thine everlasting kingdom.' 
 Is there (I would ask) any person that 
 can require more than this? Or does 
 Grod in his word require more? There 
 are two things to be noticed in reference 
 to this subject, the term ' regeneration' 
 and the thing. The term occurs but twice 
 in the Scriptures : in one place it refers to 
 baptism, and is distinguished from the 
 renewing of the Holy Ghost, winch, how- 
 ever, is represented as attendant on it ; and 
 in the other place it has a totally distinct 
 meaning unconnected with the subject. 
 Now the term they use as the Scripture 
 uses it, and the thing they require as 
 strongly as any person can require it. 
 They do not give us any reason to imagine 
 that an adult person can be saved without 
 experiencing all that modem divines [ Ultra- 
 Pro testa id divines] have included in the 
 
02 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 term ' regeneration :' on tlie contrary, they 
 do both there and in the liturgy insist 
 upon a radical change of both heart and 
 life. Here, then, the only question is, not 
 1 Whether a baptized person can be saved 
 by that ordinance without sanctification,' 
 but whether God does always accompany 
 the sign with the thing signified ? Here 
 is certainly room for difference of opinion, 
 but it cannot be positively decided in the 
 negative, because we cannot know, or even 
 judge, respecting it, in any case whatever, 
 except by the fruits that follow; and, 
 therefore, in all fairness, it may be con- 
 sidered only as a doubtful point ; and if 
 he appeal, as he ought to do, to the holy 
 Scripture, they certainly do in a very 
 remarkable way accord with the expressions 
 in our liturgy. St. Paul says, 'By one 
 Spirit we are all baptized into one body, 
 whether we be Jews or Gentiles — whether 
 we be bond or free — and have been all 
 made to drink into one Spirit/ And this 
 he says of all the visible members of 
 Christ's body, (i Cor. xii. 13, 27.) Again, 
 speaking of the whole nation of Israel, 
 infants, as well as adults, he says, ' they 
 
ON BAPTISM. 63 
 
 were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud 
 and in the sea, and did all eat the same 
 spiritual meat, and did all drink the same 
 spiritual drink ; for they drank of that 
 spiritual rock that followed them, and 
 that rock teas Christ' (i Cor. x. i, 4.) Yet, 
 behold, in the very next verse he tells us 
 that, ' with many of them God was dis- 
 pleased,, and overthrew them in the wilder- 
 ness/ In another place he speaks yet 
 more strongly still : ' As many of you 
 (says he) as are baptized into Christ have 
 put on Christ.' Here we see what is 
 meant by the expression, ' baptized into 
 Christ ;' it is precisely the same expression 
 as that before mentioned of the Israelites 
 being ' baptized unto Moses ;' the pre- 
 position, ug, is used in both places ; it 
 includes all that had been initiated into 
 his religion by the rite of baptism ; and 
 of them, universally, does the Apostle say, 
 1 They have put on Christ.' Now, I ask, 
 have not the persons who scruple the use 
 of that prayer in the baptismal service 
 equal reason to scruple the use of these 
 different expressions ? 
 
 " Again, St. Peter says, 4 Eepent and 
 
04 ON BAPTISM. 
 
 be baptized every one of you for the remis- 
 sion of sins! (Acts ii. 38, 39.) And in 
 another place, ' Baptism dotli now save 
 us.' (1 Pet. iii. 21.) And speaking else- 
 where of baptized persons who were un- 
 fruitful in the knowledge of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, he says, ' lie hath forgotten 
 that he was purged from his old sins! (2 Pet. 
 i. 9.) Does not this very strongly counte- 
 nance the IDEA WHICH OUR REFORMERS EN- 
 TERTAINED, THAT THE REMISSION OF OUR 
 SINS, AND THE REGENERATION OF OUR SOULS, 
 IS ATTENDANT ON THE BAPTISMAL RITE? 
 
 Perhaps it will be said that the inspired 
 writers spake of persons who had been 
 baptized at an adult age. But if they 
 did so in some places, they certainly did 
 not in others ; and where they did not, 
 they must be understood as comprehend- 
 ing all, whether infants or adults ; and 
 therefore the language of our liturgy, 
 which is not a whit stronger than theirs, 
 may be both subscribed and used without 
 any just occasion of offence. 
 
 "Let me then speak the truth before 
 God : though I am no Arminian, I do 
 think the refinements of Calvin have done 
 
ON BAPTISM. 65 
 
 great harm in the Church : they have driven 
 multitudes from the plain and popular icay 
 of speaking used by the inspired writers, 
 and have made them unreasonably and 
 unscripturally squeamish in their modes 
 of expression; and I conceive that the 
 less addicted any person is to systematic 
 accuracy, the more he will accord with 
 the inspired writers, and the more he will 
 approve the views of our Reformers. I do 
 not mean, however, to say that a slight 
 alteration in two or three instances would 
 not be an improvement, since it would 
 take off a burthen from many minds, and 
 supersede the necessity of laboured expla- 
 nations ; but I do mean to say that there 
 is no such objection to these expressions 
 as to deter any conscientious person from 
 giving his unfeigned assent and consent 
 to the liturgy altogether, or from using 
 the particular expressions which we have 
 been endeavouring to explain." — Simeons 
 Works, vol. ii. p. 259. 
 
 " In the case of infant baptism," says 
 Archbishop Sumner, " there are evidently 
 no similar means of ascertaining the actual 
 disposition. The benefit received is strictly 
 
6() ON BAPTISM. 
 
 gratuitous, or 'of free grace/ It is pro- 
 mised, however, to faith and obedience, 
 presupposed in the recipient, and pledged 
 in his name by the sponsors : whence it 
 follows that the blessing attached to the 
 sacrament must fail, if the conditions fail 
 in those who are capable of performing 
 them : and that the faith and obedience 
 must become actual and personal in those 
 who arrive at mature age. It has not 
 altered the nature of Christianity, that its 
 external privileges are become national. 
 Whoever, therefore, professes the hope of 
 the Gospel, must individually embrace the 
 doctrine of the Gospel : must consent as 
 sincerely as the earliest converts, to refer 
 whatever he does in word or deed to the 
 glory of God : with the primitive humility 
 of the Apostles must renounce all con- 
 fidence in his own strength, and must 
 look for salvation through Christ's death, 
 with as much personal gratitude as if 
 Christ had suffered for him alone. Though 
 in many cases it may be impossible, as 
 was formerly acknowledged, for those 
 who have been placed in covenant with 
 God by baptism, to state at what time 
 
ON BAPTISM. 67 
 
 and by what process the truths of the 
 Grospel became an active principle in the 
 mind, still it is undeniable that in all who 
 attain the age of reason they must become 
 so, or the covenant is made void : and it 
 is a definite and intelligible question 
 whether they have actually taken this 
 hold, or no. How the tree was nourished 
 and invigorated, and enabled to sustain 
 the inclement seasons which opposed its 
 early growth and strength, we may in 
 vain inquire; but whether it bears fruit 
 or not, and whether that fruit gives evi- 
 dence of a sound stock, any one may 
 examine either as to himself or others. 
 Is the heart possessed of a sincere convic- 
 tion of its own sinfulness, and need of a 
 Saviour : does it manifest its dependence 
 on the Holy Spirit by an habitual inter- 
 course with Grod through prayer : does it 
 feel a practical sense of the great business 
 of this life as a probation, and preparation 
 for eternity? These are infallible cha- 
 racters of faith : and though they will be 
 found in different degrees in different 
 individuals, no one should be satisfied 
 with himself, and no one should suffer his 
 
CS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 congregation to be satisfied, till he can 
 trace these characters in the heart. 
 
 " But if such a frame of mind is indis- 
 pensable to a Christian's reasonable hope, 
 it is evident that a preacher can in no 
 wise take it for granted that it exists in 
 his hearers as the necessary and certain 
 consequence of baptism ; but must require 
 of all who have the privilege of baptism, 
 that they strive to attain it ; that, being 
 regenerate in condition, they be also renewed 
 in nature : and constantly examine them- 
 selves whether they have this proof within 
 them, that they are born of the Spirit as 
 well as of toater, and can make the ' answer 
 of a good conscience towards God/" — 
 Sumner s Apostolical PreacJiing, ch. vii. 
 
PART II. 
 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 6 i. There can hardly be _ . 
 
 i i -i . /ii • j- i deficient 
 
 any truly devout Christian, and Attendance 
 who is, accordingly, an ha- a * ^ e Zord's 
 bitual attendant at the Lord's 
 Supper, who has not observed, with great 
 sorrow, that a large proportion — frequently 
 a great majority — of a congregation, with- 
 draw from the celebration of that solemn 
 ordinance ; and that, of these, though 
 some are occasional communicants (on one 
 or two of the greatest Festivals of our 
 Church), many are altogether strangers to 
 the duty ; and regard it, if they regard it 
 at all as a duty for themselves, as some- 
 thing to be reserved for the death-bed, and 
 to stand in the place of the (so-called) 
 sacrament of Extreme Unction of the 
 Church of Rome. Habitually to com- 
 municate is what they have no notion of 
 as a duty, to Christians as such, but only 
 to persons who undertake to lead a life of 
 
72 ON the lord's supper. 
 
 a certain pre-eminent holiness, and pretend 
 to a kind of Saintship beyond* and quite 
 distinct from what is suitable for Chris- 
 tians generally. 
 
 Accordingly, an intelligent stranger 
 coming among us from some distant 
 heathen land, and judging from his own 
 observations and inquiries, as to the cha- 
 racter of our religion (I mean, even that 
 of our Church ; putting out of account all 
 other Denominations), would be likely to 
 conclude that Christianity is not one 
 religion, but two ; designed for two diffe- 
 rent classes of persons, communicants and 
 non-communicants; both, servants, indeed, 
 of the same Master, but having, by his 
 authority, different kinds of religious 
 observances allotted to them respectively. 
 
 When ministers seek to form some 
 calculation as to the effect of their exhorta- 
 tions, the Communion-table often furnishes 
 something of a test, though only on the 
 negative side. For though we cannot 
 venture to assume that all who attend it 
 are induced to do so by our persuasions, 
 or that all of them are in a proper frame 
 of mind, on the other hand, every one 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 73 
 
 who withdraws is a manifest instance of 
 our failure. 
 
 I am not speaking of persons altogether 
 irreligious, or who are neglectful of any 
 acknowledged christian duties. Some 
 such, indeed, we must always expect to 
 meet with. But I am speaking of those 
 whose neglect of the particular duty in 
 question arises from some kind of misap- 
 prehension as to its character. 
 
 § 2. Anions the causes which n 
 
 ° Superstitious 
 
 have led to the neglect of the Notions re- 
 Ordinance of the Lord's Supper meeting the 
 
 1 . , , Eucharist. 
 
 by many, and probably m one 
 christian Sect, to the absolute rejection of 
 it, must be reckoned, I cannot doubt, the 
 superstitions that have prevailed on the 
 subject. For, every kind of superstition, 
 besides the intrinsic evil of it, has a ten- 
 dency to cast discredit on any doctrine or 
 institution that has been abused by an 
 admixture of human devices. The " wall 
 daubed with untempered mortar," which 
 has been built up by presumptuous Man, 
 has a tendency to bring down in its fall 
 the original and sound parts of the build- 
 
 E 
 
74 on the lord's supper. 
 
 ing. And thus the superstitious adora- 
 tion of the elements of bread and wine — 
 not to mention that it has exposed to con- 
 temptuous rejection the religion itself of 
 which it was represented as a part — led, I 
 apprehend, by a natural reaction, to the 
 entire exclusion of the Sacrament itself, 
 which had been thus abused, from the list 
 of christian Ordinances. The paradoxical 
 and revolting character of the doctrine of 
 Tran substantiation, and the superstitions 
 resulting from it, was doubtless one prin- 
 cipal cause of that rejection of the Eucha- 
 rist just alluded to. Not that the members 
 themselves of the society in question, 
 acknowledge this, or are likely to be them- 
 selves aware of it. But no one who has 
 observed how apt one extreme is to lead 
 to an opposite extreme, can deem such a 
 conjecture unreasonable.* 
 
 * It will probably astonish some of my readers to 
 hear that our Lord's words at the Last Supper have 
 actually been explained away to mean merely that He 
 was pointing out the typical character of the sacrifice 
 of the Passover ! 
 
 To say nothing of the declaration (1 Cor. xi. 23) of 
 the Apostle Paul, who had received a direct revelation 
 and instructions on the subject from the Lord Jesus, — 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 75 
 
 Of course the same divine authority 
 which instituted the Sacraments, may 
 modify or annul them. And accordingly 
 if any one declares that they are no longer 
 to be literally celebrated, professing to be 
 " moved by the Spirit" to say so (which 
 is precisely equivalent to the expression of 
 the ancient Prophets, " thus saith the 
 Lord"), he is to be obeyed, provided he 
 gives the requisite proof of his divine com- 
 mission by the display of those sensible 
 miracles which were "the signs of an 
 Apostle." We are at liberty, indeed, to 
 support by arguments our belief (however 
 different it may be from that of the 
 generality) as to the meaning of some 
 passage of Scripture : but he who claims 
 assent on the ground of having received 
 a divine communication, is bound to give 
 miraculous proofs of this. And in the 
 absence of any such proofs, such a pre- 
 tender and his followers, must be (as was 
 
 it is plain that if the interpretation alluded to had been 
 the true one, the words "take eat" &c, would have 
 been accompanied by the giving his disciples not the 
 bread, but the flesh of the lamb, which was properly 
 the Passover. 
 
 e2 
 
76 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 remarked above, in Part I.) accounted 
 guilty of a most daring presumption. 
 
 Some of these persons have alleged that 
 there is no need of miracles to confirm 
 their doctrines : since these are what were 
 taught by the Apostles, who did establish 
 their claim by miraculous proofs. But 
 this holds good only with respect to 
 doctrines admitted by all Christians. 
 When any interpretation is taught wherein 
 Christians are not agreed, and is declared 
 to be established by a direct divine revela- 
 tion, miraculous proof is needed of the 
 truth of that interpretation. Thus, no 
 fresh miraculous sign was required to 
 convince the Jews of the divine authority 
 of their prophetical writings ; but when 
 these were interpreted to denote the ad- 
 mission of "the Grentiles to be fellow- 
 heirs," which the Jews did not acknow- 
 ledge, then a miraculous proof was needed, 
 and was accordingly given (Acts xi.), of this 
 interpretation. But to assume without 
 any proofs from reason, that a certain 
 doctrine, contrary to what is generally 
 received, is that of the Apostles, and 
 thence to infer that the claims to inspira* 
 
ON THE LOIID'S SUPPER. 17 
 
 tion of those who teach it are to be 
 admitted without requiring any miracu- 
 lous proofs of such inspiration, is a most 
 palpable begging of the question. 
 
 Besides the various doctrines, however, 
 maintained by those of other Communions, 
 there have arisen, of late years (among 
 ourselves), persons teaching strange mys- 
 tical notions respecting the Eucharist, 
 such as can hardly be distinguished from 
 the theory of Tran substantiation, and 
 which have probably contributed to lead 
 several of themselves and of their admirers 
 to take the consistent step of openly join- 
 ing the Church of Rome. Theories have 
 been maintained by some professed mem- 
 bers of our Church, that are in manifest 
 contradiction to the express words of our 
 Article ; an Article which they explain 
 away in a " non-natural sense," in such a 
 manner, that anything might thus be 
 made out of anything. 
 
 It has been maintained that the decla- 
 ration that no change of the substance of 
 bread and wine takes place, is to be inter- 
 preted to mean that a change of the 
 Substance does take place, the Accidents 
 
7^ on Tin: lord's SI PPER. 
 
 only remaining unchanged; which is no- 
 toriously the very doctrine our Reformers 
 were opposing. 
 
 It would be well if airy such writer and 
 his admirers would consider what might 
 be the result of taking similar liberties 
 with its own expressions; which might, 
 without any greater violence, be made to 
 signify that he had no belief at all in 
 Christianity as a divine revelation. 
 
 We have been told that " The wicked 
 and such as be void of a lively faith, when 
 they do carnally and visibly press with 
 their teeth the sacramental bread," are 
 really partakers (though to their own con- 
 demnation) of the body of Christ : that 
 body which our Church declares "is in 
 Heaven, and not here." And a strong 
 presumption is thus created in favour of a 
 Church which, consistently with this doc- 
 trine, teaches the sacrifice of the Mass, and 
 calls the Communion-table an Altar (an 
 expression which, unfortunately, many 
 Protestants have inadvertently adopted), 
 and inculcates the adoration of the Host — 
 the victim supposed to be offered up on 
 that Altar. And those who have accord- 
 
ON THE LORD S SUPPER. 79 
 
 ingly gone over to that Church — mistaken 
 as we believe them to be — show at least a 
 higher moral principle than those who 
 practise or who approve the system of 
 covertly holding and teaching doctrines 
 utterly opposed to those of the Church 
 they profess to adhere to. 
 
 § 3. Some Protestants, how- „ 
 
 . Neglect by 
 
 ever, we meet with who con- Protestants 
 gratulate themselves on their °f a ***** 
 exemption from Romish error, 
 in this and in other points, but who need 
 to be reminded that they are themselves 
 guilty of a worse fault than what they 
 censure in their brethren; from many 
 of whom they might take an example to 
 their own profit. For we find but too 
 many Protestants (as was observed just 
 above) withdrawing from the Lord's Table, 
 in disregard of his plain injunction ; while 
 Roman Catholics do perform what they 
 conceive to be a duty, though under what 
 we hold to be erroneous notions concern- 
 ing it. 
 
 And yet, there is much more reason for 
 them to shrink from it under that kind of 
 
80 on the lord's supper. 
 
 mysterious dread which so often keeps 
 back Protestants. For, what we have to 
 trust to, is the divine commands and pro- 
 mises, together with that faith and devo- 
 tion of our own, of which we can judge 
 from our own consciousness. But the 
 Romanist has to rely, in addition, on the 
 inward intention of the Priest. If he be 
 a secret infidel, not intending, nor believ- 
 ing it possible, to convert the bread into 
 the Lord's body, and inwardly regarding 
 the whole Service with disdainful mockery 
 — (and this is what, we know, hundreds 
 of Priests in France declared of them- 
 selves, at the time of the first Revolution) 
 — the whole Sacrament is nullified. 
 
 It is true however that this doctrine of 
 " intention " is not brought prominently 
 forward and pressed on the attention of 
 the Roman Catholic laity. On the con- 
 trary, many of these will be found, on 
 inquiry, even ignorant that their Church 
 has any such doctrine, and ready to deny 
 it ; though it is a doctrine which the 
 Council of Trent puts forth with an 
 Anathema. 
 
 It should be added that even if the 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. SI 
 
 officiating minister be himself sincere, the 
 same nullity is incurred if there be an 
 absence of the requisite " intention " in the 
 priest who baptised him, or in the bishop 
 who ordained him, or in those who bap- 
 tised and ordained and consecrated that 
 bishop, &c. — in short, if there be a flaw in 
 any one of the innumerable links of that 
 enormous chain on which the validity of a 
 Sacrament is made to depend : so that no 
 Eomanist can have a reasonable certainty 
 that he is not adoring a morsel of common 
 bread. Yet many of them perform, never- 
 theless, what they sincerely believe to be 
 their duty, while many a Protestant omits 
 what he acknowledges to be his. 
 
 § 4. As for those semi-Eo- 
 
 . , ., . , Erroneous 
 
 mish theories (as they may be yi eics re- 
 called) just adverted to, I shall specting the 
 
 ... . . . , Eucharist to 
 
 not attempt any particular exa- he met i y 
 urination of them, as they are appeal to, 
 so mystically obscure that it k c? * u 
 may be well doubted whether even the 
 framers of them attach, themselves, any 
 distinct meaning to their own language ; 
 and it cannot be doubted that, to plain 
 E 3 
 
82 on the lord's supper. 
 
 ordinary Christians, they must be alto- 
 gether unintelligible. But I would remark, 
 in reference to the doctrine of Transub- 
 stantiation itself, and to any others closely 
 approaching it, that it is not advisable to 
 resort (as some eminent Divines have 
 done) to metaphysical arguments respect- 
 ing the properties of Matter, or to appeals 
 to the bodily senses, or to allegations of 
 the abstract impossibility of such a miracle 
 as is in this case pretended. At least, 
 any considerations of this kind should 
 hold a secondary and very subordinate 
 place ; and the primary and principal 
 appeal should be made to the plain decla- 
 rations of Scripture in their most natural 
 sense. 
 
 Such was the procedure of our Ee- 
 formers, who, in the twenty-eighth Article, 
 instead of entering on any subtle disqui- 
 sitions, declare that the doctrine of Tran- 
 substantiation " cannot be proved by Holy 
 Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words 
 of Scripture. " 
 
 If we are fully convinced that the Scrip- 
 tures contain a divine revelation, we are 
 required to receive whatever they dis- 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 83 
 
 tinctly assure us of, however little we 
 may be able to understand its possibility. 
 But then, if it be something extremely 
 paradoxical, we may fairly expect to have 
 — if it is to be an Article of Faith — a 
 more distinct and unmistakeable declara- 
 tion of it in Scripture than if it had 
 been something antecedently probable, 
 and in harmony with the rest of what is 
 revealed. 
 
 Now, to the present case this principle 
 will apply. It is, indeed, not correct to 
 say (though it is very commonly said) that 
 the alleged miracle of Transubstantiation 
 contradicts the senses. For, all that is 
 testified by the senses is, the attributes [the 
 accidents] of any material object — the ap- 
 pearance, for instance, and smell, and 
 taste, of bread; and all these attributes 
 the advocates of Transubstantiation admit 
 to remain unchanged. Our belief that 
 that which has these attributes is the sub- 
 stance of bread, is an inference which we 
 draw from the testimony of our senses ; 
 but however correct the inference may 
 be, it is not the very thing which the 
 senses themselves testify, but a conclu- 
 
8-4 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 sion deduced from the perception of 
 those qualities which the senses do present 
 to us. 
 
 To state the matter in the briefest 
 form : the procedure of Protestants, and, in 
 all other cases, of Roman Catholics also, 
 is this : Whatever has all the accidents 
 of bread, is the substance, bread ; this 
 that is before us has those accidents ; there- 
 fore it is the substance, bread. Now, 
 of the two premises from which this infer- 
 ence is drawn, it is the minor only that 
 the senses attest ; and it is the other pre- 
 miss that the Romanist denies. But he 
 draws a like inference with ours from the 
 testimony of his senses in all other cases ; 
 though he maintains, in this one case, not 
 that our senses deceive us, but that there 
 is a change of the substance of bread into 
 that of a human body, while all the acci- 
 dents (as they are called) of which — and 
 of which alone — the senses take cogni- 
 zance, remain unchanged. And if asked 
 how this can be, and how a body can be at 
 once, and entire, in thousands of places at 
 once, he replies by a reference to the divine 
 omnipotence. 
 
ON the lord's supper. 85 
 
 § 5. But it is admitted that 
 
 n 11 . ■ t i Aliened Mi- 
 
 all this is extremely paradoxi- racl J eqf - Tran _ 
 cal,and that the alleged miracle substantia- 
 is a complete contrast to the l0n > ac ° n ~ 
 
 i trast to tltose 
 
 acknowledged miracles of Jesus recorded in 
 and his Apostles, which were ****** 
 appeals to the senses ; signs (as they were 
 usually called) of a divine mission ; proofs 
 as a foundation for faith ; not matters of 
 faith to be received in consequence of our 
 being already believers in the Religion 
 taught. The miracles that are recorded 
 in Scripture cannot even be reckoned im- 
 probable ; for, great as is, no doubt, the 
 abstract improbability of any miracle, 
 considered simply in itself, it is plain that 
 (as is well observed by Origen) the pro- 
 pagation of Christianity by the sole force 
 of miraculous claims, supposing them 
 unfounded — the overthrow of the religions 
 of the whole civilized world by a handful 
 of Jewish peasants and fishermen, desti- 
 tute of all superhuman powers — would be 
 far more improbable than all the miracles 
 narrated in Scripture. Even if we had, 
 therefore, less full and distinct statements 
 in Scripture of the miracles of Jesus and 
 
SG ON THE LORD'S SUPPER, 
 
 his Apostles than we have, there would 
 have been a strong presumption that these 
 men could not have done what they did 
 but by the display of miraculous signs. 
 
 But as for the alleged miracle of Trail- 
 substantiation, it is but reasonable that 
 we should at least require a very strong 
 and clear declaration of it in the inspired 
 Writings. And here it may be worth 
 while to remark by the way, that it is 
 not only paradoxical, but at variance even 
 with the very description given of it by 
 those who maintain it. For if jou ask 
 any one of them to state what was, for 
 instance, the first miraculous sign dis- 
 played by Moses, he will say it was the 
 change of the Eod into a Serpent ; that 
 which had the form, colour, motion, and, 
 in short, all the " accidents" of a serpent, 
 being in reality Moses's rod ; and he will 
 say, not that the serpent was changed into 
 a rod, but, on the contrary, that the rod 
 was changed into a serpent. In like 
 manner, therefore, if that which has the 
 appearance and all " accidents" of bread, 
 be, in reality, a human body, he should say, 
 not that bread is converted into the body, 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 87 
 
 but that the body has become bread. And if 
 he say, that that which was originally bread 
 is changed into the Lord's body, he must 
 yet say, also, that that body is, imme- 
 diately after, re-converted into bread. 
 
 §6. All this surely requires, BightPrin . 
 as I have said, very clear and tiple of 'inter- 
 strong scriptural authority to %*??» °f 
 
 . . x J scripture. 
 
 establish it. But when we ask 
 for this, we are referred to such a pas- 
 sage as — " This is my body ;" which is 
 parallel to many others that every one 
 understands figuratively; as when our 
 Lord is called a Lamb, a Vine, a Shepherd, 
 and a Door ; and when He says, in ex- 
 plaining his Parables, " The seed is the 
 Word of God " " The Eeapers are the 
 Angels ;' and the like. Thoroughly 
 familiar as the Disciples must have been 
 with such figurative expressions, it cannot 
 be doubted that they must have so under- 
 stood Him when He presented to them 
 " bread, saying, this is my body." 
 
 If indeed He had not in person instituted 
 the Eite, but his Apostles, after his de- 
 parture, had, under the guidance of the 
 
8S ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 Holy Spirit, introduced it, using the words, 
 " This is the Lord's body," there might 
 have been perhaps some little danger — 
 though but very little, even so — that some 
 disciples might have supposed a miracu- 
 lous though invisible change of substance 
 to be meant. But, as if on purpose to 
 guard against this, He Himself began the 
 celebration of the rite ; knowing, as He 
 must have known, that the Apostles could 
 not have thought that He was holding 
 his own literal body in his own hands, 
 and giving it to them, but would feel sure 
 that He was speaking of a representation 
 — a symbol — of his body. And to most 
 of them — probably to all — would occur 
 what they had heard from Himself just 
 before, " The flesh proflteth nothing ; it 
 is the Spirit that giveth life ;" implying 
 — what is of itself evidently reasonable — 
 that the real literal flesh of the human 
 body of the Son of Man, even if it could 
 literally be received by our bodily organs, 
 could not, of itself, and merely as flesh, have 
 any spiritual efficacy as regards the soul. 
 
 And accordingly, the bread and wine at 
 the Lord's Supper must be regarded (as I 
 
on the lord's SUPPER. 89 
 
 have elsewhere remarked) as not only a 
 Sign, but a sign of a Sign ; being a Sign 
 of his Body and Blood, which are a Sign 
 of " the Spirit which quickeneth." 
 
 It seems inconceivable, then, that any 
 one of common sense can really doubt that 
 the Apostles understood their Master to 
 be speaking at the last Supper, of the 
 bread and wine as symbols of his body 
 broken, and his blood shed, for them. 
 And we may surely presume that, if this 
 their belief had been erroneous, they would 
 have received afterwards, on so important 
 a point, a correction of their mistake, and 
 whatever instruction was needed. 
 
 Now, we know from their own writings 
 that they not only received no such cor- 
 rection, but continued in their original 
 belief; since we find Paul, for instance, 
 speaking to the Corinthians of " the bread 
 that. we break;" besides frequent incidental 
 allusions, in the Book of Acts, to the 
 " breaking of bread" as a well-known and 
 established christian Ordinance. 
 
 There can be no doubt then, surelv, in 
 any rational mind, that the Apostles did 
 understand literally and not figuratively, 
 
00 on the lord's supper. 
 
 our Lord's injunction, " Do this in re- 
 membrance of Me," as what was to be 
 obeyed (as they did obey it) by a real 
 literal partaking of the bread and wine ; 
 and that they did understand figuratively 
 and not literally, his words, " This is my 
 body." 
 
 Testof literal $ 7-^ow, the safest test to 
 or figurative apply in any case of possible 
 I ^ Freta ' doubt as to the right sense of 
 anything said by our Lord or 
 his Apostles, is, to look to the sense (when 
 we can ascertain it) in which their hearers 
 understood them. And we may fairly 
 presume that, if any mistake were made 
 by those hearers as to the meaning of what 
 was said on some essential point, that 
 mistake would be rectified, and the right 
 explanation given, either immediately or 
 afterwards. 
 
 Thus, when the disciples understood 
 Jesus to be speaking literally of the 
 "leaven" of bread, He at once explained 
 to them his real meaning. When He 
 spoke of his resurrection, and they " under- 
 stood not," but supposed Him to be speak- 
 
on the lord's supper. 91 
 
 ing figuratively, and "reasoned among 
 themselves" what this could mean, his 
 actual resurrection afforded them an ex- 
 planation. And their belief that the 
 benefits of the Gospel were to be confined 
 to Jews by nature, and those Gentiles who 
 should conform to the Mosaic Law, was a 
 mistake corrected by an express revelation 
 to Peter. 
 
 Now, in the present case, no correction 
 was made of the sense in which the Dis- 
 ciples must certainly have understood our 
 Lord's words. And every attentive student 
 of Scripture will remember how earnestly, 
 in the Epistle to the Hebrews, the oneness 
 of Christ's sacrifice is contrasted with 
 the continually-repeated sacrifices of the 
 Levitical Law; plainly showing that the 
 Eucharist was understood to be, not a 
 fresh sacrifice, but a feast of the one suffi- 
 cient sacrifice made " once for all," and 
 that the breaking of his body, and the 
 shedding of his blood, is commemorated, 
 but not repeated. 
 
 " This man after He had offered one 
 sacrifice for ever (uq to Sir/i'c/ctc) then sat 
 down on the right hand of God ; . . . for 
 
i):2 on the lord's supper. 
 
 by one sacrifice He liath perfected for ever 
 (hq to SuivsKEt;) them that are partakers of 
 sanctification."* And as for our Lord's 
 expression, " my flesh is meat indeed" 
 (aXvOtog), (which is followed in our Church 
 Catechism, which says that his body and 
 blood " are verily and indeed received b} r 
 the faithful,") the Apostles must have 
 understood Him as when He said " I am 
 the true vine" — a\r)Qivog — which denoted 
 not his being a vine in the literal sense, 
 but in the highest and most important 
 sense ; even as Paul says that " that is not 
 circumcision which is outward in the flesh," 
 (which, literati//, it clearly is,) but that 
 " circumcision is of the heart ;" i.e., in the 
 noblest and best sense. 
 
 § 8. Among the errors, there- 
 cerning the f° re — an( l doubtless there are 
 
 Eucharist, many and great ones — which 
 
 not sprunq , . r 
 
 from erro- have arisen irom an erroneous 
 
 neous Inter- interpretation of Scripture, this 
 
 ^Hpture is > * think, not to be reckoned. 
 
 It must have arisen from hu- 
 
 * Not Tjyiao-fxevovs, " them that are sanctified," in the 
 past tense, but ayi<i(ofj.€vovs, in the present. 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 93 
 
 man teaching, by pastors, and to a people, 
 little acquainted with Scripture, and 
 paying little regard to it. And accord- 
 ingly the doctrine does not appear to 
 have existed for the first thousand years 
 and more. But when introduced, and 
 prevailing, Scripture was afterwards 
 wrested into a sense that might seem to 
 support it. 
 
 And this will always be readily ac- 
 quiesced in, if done by a Church, which is 
 believed to be the divinely-appointed, 
 infallible guide in all religious matters. 
 It is but lost labour to prove to a man's 
 own judgment that a certain interpreta- 
 tion of Scripture is forced and unnatural, 
 as long as he is fully convinced that he 
 ought implicitly to submit his own judg- 
 ment to that of his Church. He will 
 acknowledge that there is a mysterious 
 difficulty, which it is his duty to disregard ; 
 but no valid objection. 
 
 There are to be found — and probably 
 always will be — persons of such a disposi- 
 tion as to be glad to allow others to think 
 for them, and to relieve them of the re- 
 sponsibility of forming judgments for 
 
94 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 themselves. Among Protestants, one 
 may sometimes find the leaders of parties 
 assuming (while they disclaim, in words, 
 all claim to infallibility) the right of de- 
 ciding for their followers ; who cut short 
 all discussion by at once denouncing all 
 who do not agree with that Party, as " not 
 knowing the Grospel," and who take for 
 granted that whatever views on any point 
 are adopted by their Party, are to be re- 
 ceived as the undoubted decisions of the 
 Holy Spirit; putting, in reality, though 
 not in words, a (supposed) infallible Party, 
 for an infallible Church. 
 
 But it is a remarkable fact, that of the 
 persons who have even gone over to such 
 a Church, a large proportion are of a cha- 
 racter the very opposite to that from which 
 most would have anticipated such a result 
 They are persons not distinguished by 
 extreme self-distrust, or a tendency to 
 excessive and unreasonable deference and 
 submissiveness, and a readiness on slight 
 grounds to acquiesce in what is said ; but 
 in all respects the very opposite of all 
 this : arrogant, self-confident, wilful, in- 
 docile, disdainful of any one who opposes 
 
on the lord's supper. 95 
 
 their views, highly sceptical, and inclined 
 to demand stronger proof of anything they 
 are called on to believe than the case 
 admits of, or than a reasonable man would 
 require. Yet such persons are found 
 yielding to one of the worst-supported 
 claims that ever was set up, and assenting 
 to a long list of most paradoxical proposi- 
 tions, every one of which has a vast mass 
 of evidence against it, and hardly anything 
 that can be called an argument in its 
 favour. 
 
 § 9. The case seems to be, Beacthn in 
 that a re-action takes place in favour of 
 
 j n 1 1 • j • i • j blind acqui- 
 
 a mind 01 this description : and ? 
 
 l ■ escence in 
 
 the individual rushes with a groundless 
 vehemence that is quite cha- c mms ' 
 racteristic, from one extreme to the oppo- 
 site. He is weary of inquiring, discussing, 
 investigating, answering objections, arid 
 forming a judgment on a multitude of 
 separate points, and so resolves to cut 
 short at once all this disquieting fatigue, 
 by accepting implicitly the decisions on all 
 points, of an authority which demands 
 submission, not on the ground of a con- 
 
9G ON the lord's supper. 
 
 viction of the understanding, hut as an 
 act of the Will; commanding us to stirle 
 douhts, and shun inquiry, and set evidence 
 at defiance. 
 
 Such is almost the very language of one 
 of the converts in question: — "Don't 
 stand at the door arguing, hut enter the 
 great home of the soul — enter, and adore. 
 .... Faith ever begins with a venture, and 
 is rewarded w T ith sight. . . . Such a person 
 is under no duty to wait for clearer light. 
 He will not have — he cannot expect — 
 clearer light before conversion. Certainty 
 in its highest sense is the reward of those 
 who by an act of the Will, embrace the 
 Truth, when Nature like a coward shrinks. 
 You must make a venture. Faith is a 
 Venture, before a man is a Catholic, and a 
 grace after it."* 
 
 Such a man is like one who, being the 
 proprietor of some great manufacturing, 
 or commercial, or agricultural concern, 
 becomes weary of looking after a multi- 
 tude of details in the various departments 
 of the business, and watching the various 
 persons employed in it ; and thereupon 
 
 * Loss and Gain. 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 97 
 
 resolves to throw the whole superintendence 
 into the hands of an agent, provided with 
 an ample Power-of-Attorney, and en- 
 trusted with unlimited control throughout. 
 This may be a very wise course, supposing 
 the agent fixed on to be one whom there 
 are good grounds for thus trusting, as 
 thoroughly well qualified both in point of 
 skill and of integrity. But nothing can 
 be a more monstrous absurdity, supposing 
 him fixed on at random, on no grounds 
 but his own boastful and unsupported 
 pretensious, and merely because the pro- 
 prietor resolved that he would fully trust 
 some one, and only one. He has indeed 
 thus cleared himself of a multitude of re- 
 sponsibilities, but at the risk of a universal 
 and total ruin. And the convert who 
 proceeds in an analogous manner has 
 exchanged a number of questions on this, 
 that, and the other point, for one, which,' 
 however, comprehends in it all the rest 
 together, and presents a great difficulty, 
 besides, of itself. For he who has adopted 
 a multitude of errors in the lump, on the 
 authority of a guide whom he has no 
 reason to trust, is responsible for all and 
 
93 on the lord's SUPPER. 
 
 each of those errors, and for that of chusing, 
 by a mere act of Will, such a guide, in 
 addition. 
 
 A man who adopts this course is likely 
 to obtain ultimately little or nothing of 
 that tranquillity of mind which he had 
 hoped for, and for which he had paid so 
 dear. In proportion as he is intelligent 
 and thoughtful, he will be haunted with 
 the suspicion, " Is there not a lie in my 
 right hand? Was I justified in shutting 
 the eyes God gave me, and giving myself 
 up to be led by a blind guide ? Is not 
 the well-compacted fabric of my faith built 
 on a foundation of sand?" And the more 
 he resolves to turn away his thoughts 
 from evidence, and to banish doubts, the 
 more he will feel that there are doubts 
 unresolved ; and that evidence is against 
 him. A firm determination of the WiU to 
 believe, he will find to be far different from 
 a real firm belief. And he will probably 
 end — where some, it is likely, have begun 
 — in securing that alone which alone does 
 lie within the reach of Will, a vehement 
 protestation of belief, and inculcation of it 
 on others, with a full conviction indeed of 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 99 
 
 the usefulness of his religion, as a means 
 of influencing the vulgar, and satisfying 
 their craviug for some devotional exercise, 
 but with little or no conviction of its truth. 
 If such a person avows that he has main- 
 tained what he does not inwardly think, 
 because it was " necessary for his position" 
 he may well expect to be believed in that 
 avowal, if in nothing else. And we may 
 feel some suspicion that some of his dis- 
 ciples, who do not make that avowal, may 
 be inwardly of the same mind. 
 
 Such a state of mind is likely to be 
 fostered — perhaps generated — by some 
 writers of no small popularity in the 
 present day. One of them, deriding and 
 censuring all appeals to evidences of the 
 truth of Christianity, urges men to embrace 
 it merely from " feeling the want of it." 
 He himself at one time embraced So- 
 cinianism, and at another Grerman Tran- 
 scendentalism, from such feelings of want. 
 And the " want" of a deliverer from the 
 Eoman yoke led the Jews of old to reject 
 the true Christ, and to follow false pre- 
 tenders. 
 
 Again, a reviewer of the life of Gibbon 
 
100 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 attributes the historian's infidelity to his 
 study of the evidences of Christianity. 
 And he would have people taught that 
 the truth of the Gospel was never denied 
 by any one ! 
 
 Another reviewer (of the life of Baxter, 
 in the Edinburgh,) tells us — with marvel- 
 lous ignorance, or trust in the reader's 
 ignorance — that "the Apostles denounced 
 unbelief as sin" — not, as is the fact, because 
 they offered " many infallible proofs," but 
 without any proof at all. And he assures 
 us that inquiry into the Evidences of 
 Christianity is likely to lead to disbelief 
 of it. 
 
 That an avowed infidel should say this, 
 is nothing strange ; but it is truly wonder- 
 ful that writers apparently zealous in the 
 cause of Christianity should not perceive 
 that they are defeating their own object, 
 and that a declaration from a professed 
 believer that examination of evidence is 
 likely to end in rejection of Christianity, 
 does more to produce infidelity than the 
 most ingenious objections of all the pro- 
 fessed unbelievers that exist. 
 
 Many, however, of these persons have 
 
OX THE LORD'S SUPPER. 101 
 
 not sufficiently considered, and are not 
 fully aware, that belief (as well as the 
 passions and feelings) is not directly, but 
 only indirectly, under the control of the 
 "Will. It may seem strange to speak of a 
 person's not knowing what it is that he 
 really believes and feels. But it is a point 
 on which men are often mistaken. They 
 often say — without any design to deceive 
 — that they are very glad of this and very 
 sorry for that, when they really feel no 
 joy or sorrow, but think they ought so to 
 feel, and resolve that they will, and then 
 fancy that they do. But in reality, to 
 resolve, or to exhort another, to feel admi- 
 ration, or contempt, or pity, or love, &c, 
 is as idle as to attempt to add a cubit to 
 one's stature. To make any one feel pity, 
 for instance, we must proceed indirectly, 
 by putting forward and dwelling on the 
 circumstances which tend to excite pity. 
 And so with the rest of the feelings. And 
 it is the same with belief. Men may 
 indeed be brought to believe something 
 on very insufficient grounds : as, for in- 
 stance, by being vehemently assured of it 
 by some one for whom they have an unde- 
 
102 on Tiiii lord's supper. 
 
 served deference. But some reason — good 
 or bad — every one must have for his belief, 
 over and above a mere will to believe. To 
 convince yourself, or another, of anything, 
 you should, in fairness, proceed, not by 
 resolutions and exhortations, but by putting 
 forward good reasons which may produce 
 conviction. And such was the procedure 
 of the Sacred writers. When they called 
 on men to believe, they put before them 
 sufficient evidence to warrant belief, and 
 urged them to listen to that evidence. 
 " The works that I do," said Jesus, " in 
 my Father's name, they bear witness of 
 me. 
 
 Amhigrutyof & ">• Sucli expressions as 
 the word " sacred mystery," " awfully 
 « Mystery." mjsteri ous," and the like, are 
 often very successfully employed to stifle 
 inquiry where inquiry might be danger- 
 ous, and to deter people from examining 
 carefully what it is that they are called on 
 to assent to, and whether the Scriptures 
 do really teach it, or rather contradict it. 
 And the word " Mystery," when erro- 
 neously or indistinctly understood, has 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 103 
 
 contributed, no doubt, both to cherish 
 superstitions in some, and to create ground- 
 less terror in others. It was employed by 
 our Eeformers — agreeably to a use of the 
 word which is frequent in the New Testa- 
 ment — to denote a symbol, emblem, or 
 representation, of one thing by another. 
 And they used it interchangeably with the 
 words " sign" and " sacrament," as may 
 be seen — for instance, in the Twenty- 
 ninth Article. In the Epistle to the 
 Ephesians the Apostle Paul speaks of 
 marriage as an emblem,* representing the 
 union of Christ with his Church. And in 
 like manner, in one of the post-communion 
 prayers we speak of those " who have duly 
 received these holy mysteries" — viz., the 
 bread and wine. So also in the baptismal 
 service, we speak of water " sanctified to 
 the mystical (i.e., figurative or symbolical) 
 washing away of sin." 
 
 But the ordinary colloquial use of the 
 word " mystery " suggests the idea of 
 something obscure and unintelligible ; 
 and thus the way is prepared for an inde- 
 
 * Mvarrjfjiov; in the Vulgate, " Sacrainentum." 
 
iOi ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 finite amount of superstition, and, among 
 others, for superstitious dread and aver- 
 sion. 
 
 On the one hand, in any matter which a 
 man conceives to be quite unintelligible — 
 or unintelligible to Aim — many a one will 
 be disposed to believe and do whatever is 
 solemnly and vehemently urged upon him 
 by his spiritual guides, without presuming 
 to inquire whether there is any ground for 
 such faith and practice. And, on the other 
 hand, anything unintelligibly mysterious, 
 and at the same time connected with 
 something of danger, many a one will be 
 inclined to shrink from with a kind of 
 undefined dread, and not only to avert his 
 thoughts from the subject, but practically 
 to withdraw from having anything to do 
 with it ; even as a traveller in some 
 unknown region would dread to pass 
 through a forest which he suspected to 
 abound with beasts of prey and venomous 
 serpents. 
 
 But by the word " mystery," as applied 
 to the sacraments, our Reformers (as I 
 have said) understood a symbolical repre- 
 sentation. Concerning the efficacy, indeed, 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 105 
 
 of our Lord's death for Man's redemption, 
 they do not — as is, unhappily, the practice 
 of some — attempt to give explanations 
 beyond what the Scripture-writers have 
 revealed to us. But far as that mystery 
 surpasses — as the most modest and wisest 
 men perceive — the reach of human under- 
 standing, the early disciples, when once 
 assured on sufficient authority that the 
 death of Jesus was a sacrifice, could have 
 found nothing difficult or strange in the 
 idea of a feast on a sacrifice ; since, both 
 in the Jewish and in the heathen sacri- 
 fices, they had been accustomed to see 
 the worshippers partake of the victim. 
 And to this custom, as a well-known 
 one, Paul alludes, in writing to the Corin- 
 thians. 
 
 § ii. And it is worth observ- Sacrificial 
 ing, that, besides the many character of 
 
 v ,• , T t i the death of 
 
 distinct and express declara- Christ indi- 
 tions of the Sacred writers of cated by the 
 the sacrificial character of Eucha ™ L 
 Christ's death, the very institution of the 
 Eucharist was itself sufficient to impress 
 this on men's minds ; considering who and 
 i 3 
 
] 00 OX THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 what the persons were to whom these de- 
 clarations were made. If He had been 
 merely a martyr — the greatest of all mar- 
 tyrs — to the cause of divine truth, it would 
 indeed have been natural that his death 
 should have been in some way solemnly 
 commemorated by the Church j and per- 
 haps by some symbolical commemoration 
 of the death itself; but not, by the eating 
 and drinking of the symbols of his body 
 and blood. As is well remarked by Bishop 
 Hinds, in one of his works, not only is 
 the bread broken, and the wine poured out 
 (which might have sufficiently represented 
 the wounding of his body, and the shed- 
 ding of his blood), but both are partaken 
 of by those who celebrate the rite. And 
 this would be an unmeaning and utterly 
 absurd kind of ceremonial in celebrating 
 a mere martyrdom, such as that of 
 Stephen, for instance, or of any other 
 martyr, however eminent. Even if we 
 had not, therefore, such numerous allu- 
 sions as we find in Scripture, to " Christ 
 our Passover as sacrificed for us," and 
 entering " into the most holy place with 
 his own blood, " as a sacrificing priest as 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUITER. 107 
 
 well as a victim, — even if we had much 
 fewer of such statements and allusions 
 than there are — still, the Sacrament of the 
 Lord's Supper, early and generally estab- 
 lished as we know it was, would be a deci- 
 sive proof that the early Christians must 
 have understood, from the very character 
 of that ordinance itself, that our Lord's 
 death was not a mere martyrdom, but a 
 true sacrifice, similar to — though far sur- 
 passing — the expiatory sacrifices which 
 they had been familiar with under the 
 Law, and which we find so often referred 
 to as types of the offering of Christ. 
 
 The passages in which such reference is 
 made, and in which the sacrificial character 
 of that death is strongly set forth, are so 
 numerous, and so well known, that it 
 would be superfluous to cite or even to 
 refer to them. We are not called on to 
 receive this doctrine, remote as it is from 
 all the anticipations of human reason, and 
 beyond our powers of explanation, on the 
 strength of two or three slight and oblique 
 hints, capable of equally well bearing 
 either that or some other signification ; 
 but the statements of the doctrine, and 
 
108 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 allusions to it, in Scripture, are — as might 
 fairly have been expected — numerous, and 
 distinct, and full. 
 
 § 12. But attempts have 
 
 Attempts to i i r l • l 
 
 crplainavay been made fr0m tlHie t0 time > 
 
 the doctrine and are still being made, to 
 
 of the Atone- kin all these passa g e s as 
 
 figures of speech. And this is 
 one of my reasons for now adverting to 
 the subject. What then, it may be asked, 
 is the test by which we are to decide what 
 expressions are to be understood literally, 
 and what, figuratively ? 
 
 The adherents of a supposed infallible 
 Church represent an implicit deference to 
 the decisions of such a Church as the only 
 safeguard against all conceivable wanton- 
 ness of interpretation ; against an inde- 
 finite amount of error, from understanding 
 figuratively what is meant to be taken 
 literally, and literally what is not literally 
 meant, according to each man's private 
 judgment, as his own fancy may dictate. 
 And certainly if we could have proof of 
 the existence of any such infallible 
 authority on earth, and also a clear indi- 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 109 
 
 cation where it is lodged, to this guide we 
 should be bound to resort as a safeguard 
 against erroneous interpretations. But in 
 the absence of any such proof, an implicit 
 deference to the interpretations of some 
 earthly guide would be only substituting 
 one man's caprice for another's. 
 
 We have, however, in most cases, a 
 very safe guide, by looking to the sense 
 in which the hearers of our Lord and his 
 Apostles, understood them. For, as has 
 been already remarked, we may fairly 
 presume that this must have been, in any 
 matter of vital importance, the true sense 
 of what was said, unless a mistake was 
 pointed out and corrected. Thus, as was 
 observed just now, if the Apostles had 
 been mistaken in supposing — as they un- 
 doubtedly did — that what Jesus was hold- 
 ing in his hands and distributing to them, 
 was not his own literal body, but a sym- 
 bolical representation of it, their mistake 
 would have been corrected. Again, our 
 Lord's expression " Son of God," as applied 
 to Himself, is one which might indeed 
 conceivably have borne the meaning of 
 his being merely a highly-favoured pro- 
 
110 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 phet. But we know that his judges did 
 understand Him as claiming a divine 
 character ; and if this had been a mistake 
 of theirs, we may be sure He would have 
 corrected it; else He would have been 
 bearing false witness concerning Himself. 
 So also, if all the early Christians had 
 been mistaken in their interpretation of 
 anything that was said concerning our 
 Lord's death, this their error would surely 
 have been removed, and a different expla- 
 nation given. Now, what they did under- 
 stand, there can be no rational doubt. 
 The idea of redemption by a sacrifice, 
 however inexplicable, was one with which 
 they were perfectly familiar; and they 
 could never have thought, unless expressly 
 assured of it, that the real literal sacrifices 
 of the Levitical Law were types, not of 
 any real sacrifice, but of a figure of speech ; 
 — that " the shadow of good things to 
 come," which that Law contained, was 
 much more substantial than that which it 
 represented. Nor could they (to revert 
 to a former remark), familiar as they were 
 with the idea of a feast upon a sacrifice, 
 have thought that a mere martyrdom was 
 
ON the lord's supper. Ill 
 
 to be celebrated by eating and drinking 
 the symbols of the martyr's body and 
 blood. The very same test, therefore — 
 the appeal to what must have been under- 
 stood at the time, — serves to guard us 
 against the opposite errors, of understand- 
 ing figurative expressions literally, and of 
 explaining away as a figure what was 
 meant to be literally understood. 
 
 § 13. As for the latter of 
 
 these errors, I have no doubt rash attempts 
 
 that the attempts of some ***&**" 
 
 , . r Hon. 
 
 persons to interpret as mere 
 
 metaphor all the declarations of Scripture 
 concerning Christ's offering of Himself, 
 have been greatly encouraged, and pro- 
 bably in many instances caused, by un- 
 wise and presumptuous endeavours to 
 explain what Scripture has left unex- 
 plained, and to confirm what is there 
 revealed to us, by reconciling it with 
 theories of man's devising. For, when 
 objections which at least appear to some 
 to be unanswerable, are brought against 
 any such theory, it is too late to resort to 
 the plea that divine mysteries are beyond 
 
112 on the lord's supper. 
 
 the reach of our understanding, and that 
 we must not venture to try them by the 
 standard of human reason. Every one 
 who brings forward a theory of his own, 
 does in fact appeal to the tribunal of 
 human reason, and binds himself to make 
 his explanation intelligible and satisfac- 
 tory. And when he fails to do this, the 
 result will too often be that the doctrine 
 itself which he seeks to elucidate and 
 support by his explanations, will be sup- 
 posed by many to be dependent on these, 
 and will be rejected along with the un- 
 tenable theory. 
 
 It is our wiser and safer course, there- 
 fore, as well as the more modest and 
 humble, to confine ourselves, in these 
 matters, to the express declarations of the 
 inspired writers, and to warn men against 
 listening to any one who ventures to go 
 beyond these — who presents us with 
 " developments" (as they are sometimes 
 called) that are to fill up the omissions of 
 Scripture, and who is thus in reality 
 setting himself up as knowing more of 
 the divine mysteries than was revealed to 
 the Apostles ; or at least more than they 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 113 
 
 were commissioned to reveal to us. An 
 humble, unlearned Christian, of ordinary 
 common sense, may understand that he is 
 guilty of no arrogance in rejecting any 
 such teacher, however learned and inge- 
 nious, and that he is bound to do so. 
 
 None more learned or more ingenious 
 are the generality of men likely to meet 
 with than Bishop Butler, who thus ex- 
 presses himself on this subject : " Christ 
 offered Himself a propitiatory sacrifice, 
 and made atonement for the sins of the 
 
 world And this sacrifice was, in 
 
 the highest degree, and with the most 
 extensive influence, of that efficacy for 
 obtaining pardon of sin, which the heathens 
 may be supposed to have thought their 
 sacrifices, and which the Jewish sacrifices 
 were, in some degree, and with regard to 
 some persons. How, and in what particular 
 ivay, it had this efficacy, there are not 
 wanting persons who have endeavoured to 
 explain; but I do not find that Scripture 
 has explained it." . . . . Again, " Some 
 have endeavoured to explain the efficacy 
 of what Christ has done and suffered for 
 us, beyond what Scripture has authorized ; 
 
Ill- ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 others, probably became they could not 
 explain it, have been for taking it a wag, 
 and confining his office of Redeemer of 
 the world, to his instruction, example, 
 and government of the Church ; whereas 
 the doctrine of the Gospel appears to be, 
 not only that he taught the efficacy of 
 repentance, but rendered it of the efficacy 
 it is, by what He did and suffered for 
 us ... . And it is our wisdom thank- 
 fully to accept the benefit, by performing 
 the conditions on which it is offered, on 
 our part, without disputing how it was 
 procured, on his." 
 
 Such is the sober statement of that 
 truly great theologian, in his Analogy* 
 He was one who sought to know no less, 
 and was content to know no more, of divine 
 mysteries inscrutable to Man's Reason, 
 than the inspired writers tell us ; and he 
 guarded against the error of those pre- 
 sumptuous speculators, who, when the 
 illumination from Heaven — the rays of 
 Revelation — fail to shed such full light as 
 they wish for, on the Gospel dispensation, 
 
 * Part II., c. 5. 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 115 
 
 are for bringing to the dial-plate the lamp 
 of human philosophy. 
 
 And it is important that it should be 
 clearly perceived, how much allied are the 
 two opposite errors alluded to by Bishop 
 Butler. It is a similar want of humble 
 faith that leads one party to reject what 
 they find it impossible to explain, and the 
 other, to resolve to find an explanation of 
 what they admit. 
 
 § 14. These latter, even if FaitJl shmcn 
 their explanations were really °y contented 
 
 . . P . ,n i ignorance of 
 
 as satisfactory as, to themselves, divine myste , 
 they may appear, and if they ries. 
 did possess some knowledge beyond that 
 of the Apostles — or beyond, at least, 
 what the Apostles have imparted to us 
 — yet could not, on that ground, claim 
 the virtue of faith. For faith, it is plain, 
 is to be measured rather by our ignorance 
 than by our knowledge. Some knowledge, 
 indeed, there must be, as a foundation for 
 any intelligent faith to rest on ; but the 
 province of the faith itself, distinct from 
 the basis on which it is built, must be 
 that which we do not clearly understand. 
 
116 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 For, " faith is the evidence of things not 
 seen." There would be no exercise of faith 
 in assenting to truths which are plainly 
 demonstrated to our Reason, or in obey- 
 ing commands whose reasonableness was 
 clearly perceived. Faith — as distinguished 
 from blind credulity — is shown, in taking 
 the word of another whom we have good 
 reason to rely on, for something which we 
 do not clearly see or fully understand. 
 Any one who in a dark night, at sea, 
 believes, on the Pilot's word, that the ship 
 is approaching the haven, shows more 
 faith in that Pilot than others who fancy 
 that they see the land before them. He 
 may be convinced that they are deceiving 
 themselves, and are gazing on a fog-bank, 
 which they mistake for land ; but, at any 
 rate, they cannot claim superior or equal 
 faith to his. 
 
 We cannot, perhaps, better illustrate 
 this truth — which, evident as it is, is 
 often overlooked — than by referring to 
 the trial made of Abraham, whose pre- 
 eminently-confident trust in God is so 
 strongly dwelt on in Scripture. His trial 
 was quite different (and this is some- 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 117 
 
 times strangely overlooked) from what 
 a similar command would have been to 
 another man — to Noah, for instance, or 
 to Moses — because, as is remarked in the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews, the command was 
 seemingly at variance with the promise 
 he had received, that " in Isaac shall thy 
 seed be called ;" but " he trusted that 
 God was able to restore him even from 
 the dead;" and his faith and obedience 
 were rewarded by the blessing pronounced; 
 on which occasion doubtless it was, when 
 he did receive his son from the dead in a 
 figure [parabole] that lie " saw the day of 
 Jesus, and was glad/' But if he had 
 known beforehand how the transaction 
 was to end, there would have been no trial 
 of his faith, and no pre-eminent virtue in 
 his obedience. He had the knowledge, 
 indeed, on which his faith was based — 
 the knowledge that he had received a 
 promise, and also a command which ap- 
 peared to nullify that promise ; but how 
 the two were to be reconciled, he was left 
 ignorant till the trial was completed ; and 
 it was in his firm trust in the promise, 
 and ready compliance with the command, 
 
118 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 while in that ignorance, that the virtue 
 of his faith consisted. 
 
 Abraham's \ *5- Such > then— we may 
 
 faith to be plainly see, — is the example 
 
 imitated. j^ Qut by g cripture f or Qur 
 
 imitation, of the faith of Abraham. . If 
 Abraham, instead of prompt and trustful 
 compliance with the command, had set 
 himself to devise interpretations of it, or 
 demanded an explanation, he would have 
 bewildered himself in presumptuous con- 
 jectures, and have forfeited the blessing. 
 He had received a promise, and also a 
 command seemingly at variance there- 
 with, from One whom he had good reason 
 fully to trust ; and he saw that it was his 
 part not to raise questions about a divine 
 command, but to obey it. Even thus, a 
 dutiful and affectionate child of a wise 
 and kind parent will say, "My father 
 tells me to do so and so, and his will is 
 reason enough for me. Doubtless there 
 are good reasons, though unknown to 
 me, for his command ; and these he may 
 perhaps hereafter explain to me ; but, in 
 the mean time, it is my duty to obey." 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 119 
 
 Such a child, we should observe, does 
 not presume to pronounce that his father 
 has no reason for his command, except 
 that such is his pleasure ; which would be 
 to attribute to him caprice. On the con- 
 trary, he doubts not that there is good 
 reason, both for giving the command, and 
 for withholding the explanation of it. 
 That such is the father's will, would be no 
 good reason, to the father, for giving the 
 command, but is a sufficient reason, to the 
 child, for obeying it. For the child, there- 
 fore, to insist on it that his father had no 
 reasons, except his own will, for what he 
 does, because he has not seen fit to make 
 those reasons known, would be, not hu- 
 mility, but the height of rash presumption.* 
 
 * " Those," says Calvin (and the same language is to 
 be found in the writings of many of his followers, and 
 of Augustine's) " whom God passes by. He condemns ; 
 and that, for no cause whatever, except that He chuses 
 to exclude them from the inheritance" ["neque alia de 
 causa nisi quod illos vriT excludere."] 
 
 This is called by such writers setting forth the divine 
 "sovereignty;" and yet there is not even any earthly 
 sovereign who would not feel himself insulted by having 
 it said or insinuated, that, when he announces, " our 
 will and pleasure is" so and so, he had, himself, no 
 reason at all for the command issued, except that such 
 was his will and pleasure. 
 
120 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 And we ought, no less, to trust, as no doubt 
 Abraham did, that the Most High has 
 good reasons, even when not revealed to us, 
 for all His dealings with mankind. 
 
 Why, and how, it was necessary that 
 the innocent blood should be shed for 
 Man's redemption, we know no more — at 
 least, from what the Scriptures tell us — 
 than Abraham did, why he was commanded 
 to offer up his son. And if we are asked 
 how we know that this sacrifice was 
 necessary, we should answer, because the 
 Scriptures assure us that it did take place. 
 It must, therefore, have been necessary, 
 under the actual circumstances. We have 
 no right to frame any metaphysical theories 
 to prove that this necessity would have 
 existed under any other, quite different, or 
 even opposite circumstances. The actual 
 state of things was, we know, that the 
 majority of the Jewish nation refused to 
 receive Jesus as the Christ; it being 
 plainly the divine decree that they should 
 not be compelled to receive Him against 
 their will, by external force. And they 
 thereupon condemned Him to death. We 
 have no right to maintain that his death 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 121 
 
 icould have been necessary under the op- 
 posite supposition of a universal acceptance 
 of his claims. On the contrary, we are 
 expressly told by the inspired writers, " I 
 wot that through ignorance ye did it; as 
 did also your Rulers." (Acts iii.) "Because 
 they knew Him not, nor yet the voices of 
 the prophets, they have fulfilled them in 
 condemning Him." " For if the princes 
 of this world had known the wisdom of 
 God, they would not have crucified the 
 Lord of Glory." (i Cor. ii.) 
 
 "It may be needful," (says Bishop 
 Butler, in a note,) " to mention, that seve- 
 ral questions which have been brought 
 into the subject before us, and determined, 
 are not in the least entered into here; 
 questions which have been, I fear, rashly 
 determined, and perhaps with equal rash- 
 ness, contrary ways. For instance, Whether 
 God could have saved the world by other 
 means than the death of Christ, consis- 
 tently with the general laws of his govern- 
 ment ? And had not Christ come into 
 the world, what would have been the 
 future condition of the better sort of 
 men . . . . ? The meaning of the first of 
 
 G 
 
122 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 these questions is greatly ambiguous ; and 
 neither of them can be answered, without 
 going upon that infinitely absurd position, 
 that we know the whole of the case. 
 And perhaps the very inquiry, What 
 would have followed if God had not do7ie 
 as He has? may have in it some impro- 
 priety."* 
 
 Christ's Ministers, then, are bound to 
 warn his people against mistaking for a 
 pre-eminent faith what is rather a defi- 
 ciency of faith, and, for humility, what 
 is in reality presumptuous rashness ; and 
 against being misled either by those 
 who frame theories to explain what 
 Scripture has left unexplained, or by 
 those who, finding such theories un- 
 tenable, reject what Scripture does assure 
 us of.f 
 
 * Anal., b. ii. c. 5. 
 t But seek not tjiou to understand 
 The deep and curious lore 
 With which full many a reckless hand 
 Has gloss'd these pages o'er. 
 
 "Wait till He shall Himself disclose 
 Things now beyond thy reach; 
 
 But listen not, my child, to those 
 Who the Lord's secrets teach; 
 
123 
 
 § 1 6. And the same really _> . , 
 
 , . Practical 
 
 humble, unhesitating, submis- Faith,inre- 
 sive, and practical faith which ference to the 
 
 , _ • .1 Eucharist. 
 
 we are required to nave in the 
 atoning Sacrifice of the Son of God, the 
 same is called for in reference to that 
 Feast on his sacrifice which we celebrate 
 in the Eucharist ; the Ordinance which, as 
 was just now observed, is not only a com- 
 memoration of his death, but also a strong 
 confirmation of its sacrificial character. 
 The numerous and distinct declarations, 
 indeed, to that effect, of the Sacred 
 Writers, would alone afford sufficient 
 grounds for the conviction of the under- 
 standing ; but it has seemed good to divine 
 Wisdom that we should not be left to 
 search out passages of Scripture, and on 
 these alone lay down the doctrine as a 
 well-established Article of our Creed, but 
 that we should moreover be continually 
 reminded of it by the often-repeated cele- 
 
 Who teach thee more than He has taught, 
 
 Tell more than He revealed, 
 Preach tidings which He never brought, 
 
 And read what He left sealed. 
 
 Bp. Hinds's Poems. 
 
1.24 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 bration of a Rite which clearly implies 
 the doctrine, and forcibly impresses it on 
 the mind. 
 
 And as with respect to the doctrine 
 itself, so also as to the Ordinance, which 
 is a Seal and a Monument of it, men have 
 fallen into corresponding faults. While 
 some have presumed — as was observed at 
 the beginning — to frame theories not war- 
 ranted by Scripture, others have been led, 
 partly from that very cause, to reject or 
 very much to neglect the Ordinance itself. 
 Fanciful speculations respecting the nature 
 of Substance and Accidents tend naturally 
 to cast a discredit, in the minds of the 
 rash and unthinking, on a divine Institu- 
 tion, which has been thus deformed by an 
 admixture of human devices; just as rash 
 attempts at explanation of revealed mys- 
 teries that are quite beyond human reason, 
 have led to the rejection, along with the 
 human theories, of the doctrines them- 
 selves which are revealed. Anything 
 quite alien from all notions of natural 
 Reason, it is allowable to regard so far 
 with distrust, as to require that it should 
 be fully established by a sufficient Scrip- 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 125 
 
 ture-proof ; and if not so established, we 
 do well to reject it. But if it does appear 
 to be plainly declared in Scripture, it then 
 becomes a reasonable and suitable trial of 
 our faith. Eeason itself would pronounce 
 that there must be much in the counsels 
 of the Most High that is beyond the 
 reach of Eeason ; and that positive com- 
 maods respecting things originally indiffe- 
 rent, must justly claim obedience when 
 coming from lawful authority. For if we 
 are to believe merely what we can fully 
 understand and explain, and to do merely 
 what appears to natural conscience to be 
 a duty, independently of any command, 
 this would be to make the word of our 
 divine Master go for nothing. 
 
 § 17. But it is remarkable Natural and 
 that we may sometimes find Positive 
 even the very same persons Buties ' 
 objecting to what Scripture reveals or 
 enjoins, unless they can see reason for it 
 independent of Scripture, and yet expect- 
 ing to find in Scripture what is not con- 
 tained in it — exact precepts for every point 
 of moral conduct. 
 
 g2 
 
126 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 One may sometimes find persons plead- 
 ing, when they wish to evade some moral 
 [i.e., natural] duty, that there is no injunc- 
 tion as to this or that in the Bible ; — that 
 so and so is nowhere forbidden in Scrip- 
 ture ; as if we had no Moral Faculty, and 
 were to expect in Scripture a distinct and 
 complete enumeration of things to be 
 done and avoided, instead of the general 
 precept, " Whatsoever things are pure, 
 whatsoever things are lovely, and honest, 
 and of good report, to think on those 
 things."* 
 
 And then, again, some, and perhaps the 
 very same persons, when positive precepts 
 are in question, will ask what efficacy 
 there can be in a sprinkling with water, 
 or in partaking of bread and wine. Why, 
 if these did possess any such natural effi- 
 cacy as we know our ordinary food has for 
 sustaining the natural life, there would 
 be no trial of our obedient faith in doing 
 what the Lord commands, simply on the 
 ground of that command. If the water of 
 
 * See Lessons on Morals, L. ii. ; and also A Charge 
 (1854) on Christian Moral Instruction. 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 127 
 
 the pool of Siloam had been some medi- 
 cinal spring that had the natural virtue to 
 cure blindness, the blind man would have 
 given no proof of faith in using it. But 
 if, because there was no such virtue, he had 
 refused to do what he was told — or if, like 
 Naaman the Syrian, he had claimed a 
 preference for some other waters — he 
 would have remained blind. 
 
 But with respect to this point — I mean 
 the distinction between what are called 
 moral [i.e., natural] duties, and positive 
 duties, — things commanded because they 
 are right, and things right because com- 
 manded, — there exists in many minds a 
 strange confusion of thought. Any one 
 who makes inquiries on the subject, for 
 the first time, of those around him, will 
 be surprised to find the extent to which 
 this confusion prevails, even among persons 
 not uneducated, nor, generally, deficient 
 in intelligence.* And if we take occasion 
 
 * The well-known " Assembly of Divines" at "West- 
 minster were men whom even those who are far from 
 accepting their dogmas, would not consider as destitute 
 of intelligence or of learning. Yet on this point they 
 seem to have been utterly abroad. 
 
12S ON THE LORD'S SUPPER". 
 
 from time to time to put before our people 
 such explanations as may guard them 
 against these indistinct and confused 
 notions on the subject, our labour will not 
 have been superfluous or ill-applied. 
 
 Groundless $ 18. Far the greatest num- 
 Scruple*. ^er, nowe ver, are kept back 
 from the Lord's Table by a kind of mis- 
 directed reverential feeling of dread lest 
 they should be " unworthy" partakers ; as 
 supposing that the ordinance is designed 
 for those only who have attained to a 
 certain perfection in holiness beyond what 
 is required of Christians generally. But 
 they should be reminded, that the un- 
 worthiness which the Apostle, and which 
 our Eeformers refer to, is a careless and 
 irreverent partaking; a fault which in 
 former times appears to have been preva- 
 lent ; while in our own, a far different and 
 rather opposite kind of error is the one 
 most to be guarded against. It will not 
 be difficult to explain to any one who is 
 really influenced by conscientious scruples, 
 that, though it is true there would be 
 sinful profanation in coming to the Lord's 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 129 
 
 Table thoughtlessly, and without any 
 sincere devotion, the same may be said of 
 all divine worship, and of the receiving of 
 religious instruction, and of the perusal of 
 the Scriptures. All these are duties, and 
 so is the receiving of the Lord's Supper: 
 and all these duties men ought to practise, 
 voluntarily, sincerely, and heartily. We 
 ought to be far from wishing to compel 
 any one (supposing that were in our 
 power) either to attend the Lord's Table, 
 or to read the Bible, or to do any of these 
 things, against his will ; or from urging 
 him to go through the outward acts when 
 his heart did not accompany them. But 
 we should exhort men to pray and strive 
 for those real sincere feelings of devotion 
 which alone can make those acts well- 
 pleasing to God. 
 
 And in confirmation of anything we 
 ourselves may urge, when seeking to allay 
 groundless scruples, we have the advantage 
 of being able to direct the attention of our 
 hearers to the written words of the Com- 
 munion Service itself, which disclaims all 
 trust in our own righteousness — all meri- 
 torious "worthiness to gather up the 
 
130 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 crumbs of the Lord's Table." And we 
 should remiud them also of the words of 
 the Catechism respecting what is required 
 of those who partake of this Sacrament. 
 It can be easily explained to any one who 
 is sincerely well disposed, that it is not 
 the communicant alone, but every Christian 
 who would hope for God's favour, that is 
 required to " examine himself whether he 
 repent him truly of his former sins, stead- 
 fastly purposing to lead a new life, and to 
 have a lively faith in God's mercy through 
 Christ, with a thankful remembrance of 
 his death ; and to be in charity with all 
 men." Preparation for the Lord's Table, 
 therefore, he can easily be brought to 
 perceive, is the same as preparation for 
 the whole christian life, and for a christian 
 death, and for a joyful resurrection. The 
 communicant, consequently, does not take 
 on himself any new obligation that did 
 not lie on him before. He will, indeed, 
 be the more likely to lead a christian life, 
 from his availing himself of the appointed 
 means of grace ; but the obligation to lead 
 such a life is absolute and complete 
 already. And it would be a manifest 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 131 
 
 absurdity to imagine that a happy immor- 
 tality could be attained on some different 
 and easier terms by those who withdraw 
 from the Lord's Table ; that a refusal to 
 comply with one of his commandments 
 would exempt men from obedience to the 
 rest of them. Any one, therefore, who 
 deems himself not good enough to receive 
 this Sacrament, and accordingly absents 
 himself, waiting till he shall become better 
 prepared, is acting as the prodigal son in 
 the parable would have done, if, instead of 
 arising at once to go to his father, he had 
 waited till he should be in a more pros- 
 perous condition ; when it was his father 
 only that could supply food and raiment 
 to the destitute returning outcast. 
 
 All this being what hardly any one 
 would deliberately deny, it is found 
 accordingly that most of the non-commu- 
 nicants have a design to communicate at 
 some future time, before their death. And 
 they seem to suppose that he who shall 
 have done this, will have sufficiently com- 
 plied with our Lord's injunction. We find 
 many a one, accordingly, who needs to be 
 earnestly and repeatedly reminded that 
 
132 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 every time lie refuses the invitation to par- 
 take of the Lord's Supper, he is commit- 
 ting a fresh sin — a distinct act of disobe- 
 dience to his divine Master. And, there- 
 fore, instead of preparing himself to be a 
 more " meet partaker " of the heavenly 
 feast, he is habitually alienating himself 
 more and more from his Saviour, by thus 
 resisting, time after time, his repeated 
 calls. 
 
 Others again, and not a few, we meet 
 with, who do present themselves at the 
 Lord's Table on some solemn occasions of 
 rare recurrence, and who consider this as 
 absolutely preferable to an habitual and 
 frequent attendance, from finding that 
 their devotional feelings are more strongly 
 excited by a celebration that takes place at 
 long intervals. But they should be re- 
 minded that (though this is undoubt- 
 edly true) if they were to act on such 
 a consideration throughout, they would 
 discontinue daily prayer, and habitual 
 attendance on all public worship; since 
 these would certainly more strongly affect 
 the feelings if they were of very rare 
 occurrence. But the object to be aimed 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 133 
 
 at is, not an occasional, fervid, and pro- 
 bably transitory emotion, but an habitual, 
 effectual, and lasting influence on the 
 whole character, and daily life ; — not a 
 passing gleam of enthusiasm, but a steady 
 daylight that shall enlighten our path and 
 guide our steps. 
 
 § iQ. Such errors as I have ^ 
 
 y Connexion of 
 
 adverted to we are often the Confirmation 
 best able to combat in private wtth the ^ u ' 
 conversations, adapted to the 
 peculiar habits of thought and tone of 
 feeling of each individual. And of all the 
 occasions for doing this, none can be more 
 suitable than that of preparing young per- 
 sons for the Eite of Confirmation. For, 
 the earlier any erroneous notions are coun- 
 teracted, the less is the danger of their 
 leading to an inveterate practical habit. 
 It is of great importance, therefore, that 
 those confirmed should have the earliest 
 possible opportunity of attending at the 
 Lord's Table, and should be earnestly 
 pressed to avail themselves of it at once. 
 And this will tend to correct the mistake 
 (above noticed), which is sometimes to be 
 
134 ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 
 
 met with even in religions parents, of 
 imagining that a yonng person may be 
 mint, in point of religious knowledge or 
 of feeling, for receiving the Eucharist, and 
 yet fit to be presented for Confirmation. 
 It may easily be explained to them that, 
 as this is manifestly a groundless notion, 
 at variance with all reason, so it is no less 
 at variance with the decisions of our 
 Church. That all the members of the 
 Church should be Communicants, is not 
 only in many places implied, but is ex- 
 pressly laid clown in a Eubric. And the 
 only limitation given of this word "all " is, 
 where it is enacted that those only shall 
 come to the holy Table who have " been 
 confirmed, or are ready and desirous to be 
 confirmed ;" which plainly implies that at 
 least all who have been confirmed are 
 bound to attend that Table. This should 
 be carefully impressed on the minds of 
 the people. And, universally, we should 
 use all the means in our power for remov- 
 ing every obstacle, of whatever kind, to 
 that full and frequent attendance at the 
 Lord's Table which our Reformers, in con- 
 formity witli apostolic usage, manifestly 
 
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 135 
 
 designed.* The great length of the entire 
 Church-Service, when the Eucharist is 
 administered, probably tends to foster the 
 notion, that our Reformers — since they 
 could not have designed anything physi- 
 cally impossible — could not have meant 
 that all the parishioners should be regular 
 communicants. In some populous parishes 
 accordingly there is, several times in a 
 year, an early celebration, at which the 
 Communion-Service alone is used. And 
 this, besides other advantages, tends to do 
 away that notion just alluded to. 
 
 We may cherish a hope then — a hope 
 in some degree fortified by experience — 
 that by sedulously availing ourselves of 
 such occasions as I have been adverting 
 to, we may at least somewhat diminish 
 that great and crying evil, the open prac- 
 tical neglect by a large proportion of our 
 congregations, of an acknowledged duty : 
 an evil which the truly pious must have 
 often contemplated both with grief for the 
 individuals, and with shame on account of 
 
 * On another point connected with the same subject, 
 there are some remarks in Bishop Copleston's Remains. 
 
130 ON THE LORD's SUPPER. 
 
 the scandal it brings on our Church. At 
 any rate, let no exertions be wanting on 
 our part to set before our people 4 what 
 their duty is, " whether they will hear or 
 whether they will forbear; so that we, at 
 least, may not be chargeable with neglect- 
 ing our own duty, and may be " pure from 
 the blood of all men." 
 
 THE END. 
 
NEW AND CHEAPER EDITIONS, 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 JOHN W. PARKER AND SON, WEST STRAND. 
 
 History of the Inductive Sciences. By Dr. Whewell. 
 Three Volumes, Crown 8vo. 24s. 
 
 A System of Logic. By J. S. Mill. Two Vols. 25s. 
 Dighy Grand. By G. J. Whyte Melville. One 
 
 Volume, 5s. 
 
 Hypatia. By the Rev. C. Kingsley. One Volume. 6s. 
 
 The Heir of Redely ffe. 6s. 
 
 Heartsease. By the same Author. 6s. 
 
 The Little Duke. By the same Author. Is. 6d. 
 
 Yeast : a Problem. By the Rev. C. Kingsley. 5s. 
 
 The Saint's Tragedy. By the same Author. 2s. 
 
 Friends in Council. Two Volumes, 9s. 
 
 Companions of My Solitude. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Gazpacho ; or, Summer Months in Spain. By W. G. 
 Clark, M.A. 5s. 
 
 Charicles : Illustrations of the Private Life of the Greeks. 
 By Professor Becker. 10s. 6d. 
 
 History of Birds. By E. Stanley, D.D v Bishop of 
 
 Norwich. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Domesticated Animals. By Mary Roberts. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Wild Animals. By Mary Roberts. 2s. 6d. 
 
 The Philosophy of Living. By Herbert Mayo. 5s. 
 
"New and Cheaper Editions, 
 
 The Earth and Man. By Professor Guyot. With 
 
 Notes and Index. 2s. 
 
 Elements of Logic. By R. Whately, D.D., Archbishop 
 
 of Dublin. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Elements of Rhetoric. By R. Whately, D.D., Arch- 
 bishop of Dublin. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Elements of Morality. By Dr. Whewell, Master of 
 
 Trinity College, Cambridge. Two Volumes, 15s. 
 
 Life of Lord Harris, By the Right Hon. S. R. 
 
 Lushington. 6s. 6d. 
 
 Life of James Davies. By Sir T. Phillips. 2s. 6d. 
 Three Weeks in Palestine and Lebanon. 2s. 
 
 First Sundays at Church. By the Rev. J. E. Riddle. 
 2s. 6d. 
 
 Lectures on Astronomy. By H. Moseley, M.A., F.R.S. 
 
 3s. 6d. 
 
 Bacon's Essays. With References and Notes. By 
 T. Markby, M.A. Is. 6d. 
 
 Bacon's Advancement of Learning. With References 
 and Notes. By T. Markby, M.A. 2s. 
 
 History of the Church of England. By T. V. Shout, 
 D.D., Bishop of St. Asaph. 10a. 6d. 
 
 History of the Christian Church. By Dr. Burton. 5s. 
 
 The Anglo-Saxon Church. By the Rev. H. Soames. 
 7s. 6d. 
 
 History of Mohammedanism. By Dr. W. C. Taylor. 4s. 
 
 Student's Manual of Ancient History. By Dr. W. C. 
 Taylor. 6s. 
 
 Student's Manual of Modem History. By Dr. W. C. 
 Taylor. 6s. 
 
 Popular Physiology. By Dr. Perceval Lord. 5s. 
 
Published by John W. Parker and Son. 
 
 The World of Waters. By Miss R. M. Zornlin. 4s. 6d. 
 Family History of England. By G. R. Gleig, M.A. 
 
 Three Volumes. 10s. 6d. 
 
 Tales and Stories from History. By Agnes Strick- 
 land. 5s. 
 
 Conversations of a Father with his Children. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Chemistry of the Four Ancient Elements. By T. Grif- 
 fiths. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Practical Geodesy. By Butler Williams. 8s. 6d. 
 
 The Crusaders. By T. Keightley. 7s. 
 
 The Young Lady's Friend. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Woman's Mission. 2s. 
 
 Little Bracken Burners. By Lady Callcott. Is. 6d. 
 
 Ethel Lea. A Tale. By Anna King. Is. 6d. 
 
 Deaf and Dumb Boy. By Rev. W. Fletcher. Is. 6d. 
 
 Reverses ; or, Memoirs of the Fairfax Family. 3s. 
 
 Twenty -five Village Sermons. By the Rev. C. Kingsley. 
 2s. 6d. 
 
 Exposition of the Thirty -nine Articles. By Harold 
 
 Browne, M. A., Norrisian Professor of Divinity, Cambridge. 16s. 
 
 The Catechises Manual. By S. Hinds, D.D., Bishop 
 
 of Norwich. 4s. 6d. 
 
 The Early Christians. By W. Pridden, M.A. 2s. 6d. 
 
 College Lectures on Christian Antiquities. By W. Bates, 
 B.D. 6s. 6d. 
 
 Commentary on the Book of the Acts of the Apostles. By 
 W. G. Humphry.. B.D. 5s. 
 
New and Cheaper Editions. 
 
 Bible Narrative. By Miss R. M. Zornlin. 5s. 
 
 Bible Biography. By E. Earr. 4s. 
 
 Bible Maps. By W. Hughes. 5s. 
 
 Outlines of Sacred History. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Outlines of the History of the British Church. Is. 
 
 Alcestis of Euripides. With Notes by J. H. Monk, 
 
 D.D., Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Mutter's Dissertations on the Eumenides of JBschylus. 
 
 6s. 6d. 
 
 Demosthenes : Select Private Orations. With Notes 
 by C. T. Penrose, M.A. 4s. 
 
 Epistles of Cicero and Pliny. With Notes. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Jacobs' First Greek Reader. With Notes. 4s. 
 
 Natural Philosophy for Beginners. 2s. 
 
 Treatise on the Differential and Integral Calculus. By 
 Professor Hall, of King's College. 8s. 6d. 
 
 Elements of Algebra. By Professor Hall. 5s. 
 
 Practical Introduction to English Composition. Edited 
 by J. Edwards, M.A. 2s. 
 
 Headings in Poetry. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Readings in English Prose Literature. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Readings in Biography. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Readings in Science. 3s. 6d. 
 
 London : JOHN W. PARKER AND SON, West Strand. 
 

 
 
 ■