NEGenWeb Project
Resource Center
Church

     THE Lord's Supper, like all the other important festivals or ordinances of the New Testament, has its precursor in the Old Testament. Our Lord came to fulfill all righteousness. Matt. iii. 1; xv. 17, 18. Hence, no institution of the Old Testament was overlooked in the institution of ordinances and sacraments in the New. The precursor of the Lord's Supper was that of the Passover. We find the record of its institution in the Book of Exodus xii. 21--28: "Then Moses called for all the elders of Israel, and said unto them, Draw out and take you a lamb according to your families and kill the Passover. And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that is in the basin; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning; for the Lord will pass through to smite the Egyptians; and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel

and on the two side posts, the Lord will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you. And ye shall observe this thing for an ordinance to thee, and to thy sons forever. And it shall come to pass when ye be come to the land which the Lord will give you according as he hath promised, that ye shall keep this service." In the Gospel by St. Matthew xxvi. 26-28, can be found the record of the institution of the Lord's Supper: "And as they were eating Jesus took bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it to his disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

     The more closely the reader will study these two passages, the more close and intricate the relation between them will appear. The more we study this subject the more we are impressed with the fact that the Old Testament in its very incipiency, with all its rites, services and ordinances, is but the beginning of an economy from which should issue a dispensation of real life and glory--a system which, after years of seclusion in the dusty vaults of antiquity, should burst forth into real vigor and

power. The Old Testament has been properly called "the mother of the New." That which had been "within the veil," so long under a system of symbols and forms, has at length come forth in a system of living and perceptible realities. These two dispensations, distinct in form, are yet so interlinked in their fundamental relations as to be inseparably united. The connecting link is the Lord Jesus, whom some have perhaps rightly adjudged to have been the angel who passed over the blood--sprinkled houses of Israel, and who gave the specific directions, and who truly and properly instituted the Passover, but who after centuries gave us the reality of this symbolical institution, viz.: the Lord's Supper. Van Oosterzee,* in noticing this thought, says: "The word of Moses and the prophets is in such wise taken up, fulfilled and completed by Jesus, that even that which is old receives, in his hands, an entirely new appearance, and that which is new appears to be properly only the ripened germ of the old. Even when he does not immediately adduce the word of prophecy, it is yet the clear mirror in which he sees reflected the image of himself and the kingdom of God." Such are the close and intricate relations between not

     *Theol., New Test., p 66.

only these dispensations but also between their institutions.

     From the record of the Passover and the Lord's Supper several marks of similarity will readily be observed.

     1. Both institutions are of divine origin--God instituted them both. The necessary preparations in each case were made at the hands of men. On the one hand Moses made all the preparations, killed the lamb, sprinkled the blood, etc., but the angel of God passed over in the darkness of the night, completed and honored the institution as divine; on the other, the disciples "made ready," but, likewise, in the silent watches of the night Christ, the son of God, to whom was committed all power both in heaven and in earth, instituted the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. Whether he who instituted the Lord's Supper, also in his pre-incarnate state instituted the Passover or not, in the former as in the latter institution, everything points to and clusters about the Lamb of God. He who cannot see Jesus in it all, looks as through a glass darkly. The former, though considered purely symbolical, was none the less divine, only that the people of that age were unprepared to behold the divine in it.

     2. Both are atoning institutions. The one is symbolically accepted as such; the other is really given as such. For in the one (Ex. xii. 23) we read; "And when he seeth the blood upon the lintels, and on the two side posts, the Lord will pass over the door and will not suffer the destroyer to come unto your houses to smite you." In the other (Matt. xxvi. 28) we read: "For this is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins." In each case a reconciliation or atonement (at-one-ment) is effected in the celebration of the institutions. Israel sprinkled the blood upon the lintels and side posts believing that God would recognize and accept it according to promise. We take the cup and by faith drink it as "the blood of the New Testament which is shed for the remission of sins;" and we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, not "ex opere perratum." But we receiving and acting according to God's word by faith, and God by the use of the means accounting it unto us for righteousness' sake.

     3. The objects of both institutions were similar. The Passover was to be first of all a memorial feast. It was ever after to remind them and their children how God passed over their houses and

spared their first born. "And it shall come to pass when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service? that ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the Lord's passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt when he smote the Egyptians and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshiped (sic)." Ex. xii. 26, 27. So Christ our "Passover" said (Luke xxii. 19), "This do in remembrance of me." As the Passover reminded Israel of the great love and mercy of God in passing over their houses, sparing their first born and delivering them from the misery and suffering of Egyptian bondage, so Christ would continually remind us of God's infinite love in the gift of his Son, of his suffering in our stead, and of his passing over our sins. As the blood of the lamb reminded Israel of the remission of their sins, and their consequent atonement, or "at-one-ment" with God, so Christ our Passover says, "For this is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins." For Christ's sake God literally closes his eyes upon and passes over the hearts in the forgiveness of their sins of those who properly partake of the Lord's Supper, as he did over the houses of those in Egypt who properly sprinkled

the blood upon their lintels. Hence Paul writes, (1 Cor. xi. 24-26): "This do in remembrance of me, for as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he cone."

     4. In each of these institutions preparation was necessary for a proper celebration. The preparations for the celebration of the Jewish Passover continued one week previous. Our Lord observed the same preparations, and then immediately merged the observance of the one into the institution of the other. Hence the propriety and importance of the service so generally observed and commonly known in the Lutheran Church as the "preparatory service"--a time set apart for preparation for the worthy celebration of the sacrament of the altar. The importance of these services is realized in proportion as we appreciate the meeting of the Lord in the celebration of his Supper. The high priest of the Old Testament made the most careful preparations by sacrifices and offerings before entering into the holy of holies--before entering into the immediate presence of the Lord. The people of Israel also spent a whole week in fasting and prayer before the celebration of only and purely a memorial institution. How fitting therefore that we should have at least one meeting for medita-

tion and prayer before presuming to come into the presence of the Lord, to eat of his broken body and to drink of his shed blood.

     But with these marks of similarity there is one feature in the Lord's Supper in which it is the fulfilment (sic) of all righteousness-- in which Christ passed from the symbolical to the real--a feature which makes the celebration of the Lord's Supper very precious to the Lutheran household of faith, viz.: the doctrine of The Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper. And it is a matter of some importance that we understand the doctrine of the Lord's Supper as the Lutheran Church believes it to be set forth in the New Testament. We quote here Luther's own statement of the real presence in the Lord's Supper (see Larger Cat., p. 164): "What then is the Sacrament of the Altar? It is the true body and blood of Christ our Lord, in and with bread and wine, commanded through the words of Christ, for us Christians to eat and drink. And as we have said concerning baptism, that it is not simple water, so we also say here, this Sacrament is bread and wine, but not mere bread and wine, as taken to the table on other occasions, but bread and wine comprehended in the word of God and connected with it.

It is the word, I say, that makes and distinguishes this Sacrament, so that it is not mere bread and wine, but is, and is called the body and blood of Christ."

     The following is a statement of it from the Augsburg Confession, Art. 10.

     "That the body and blood of Christ are truly present under the form of bread and wine, and are there communicated to those who eat and drink in the Lord's Supper."

     Dr. Krauth (Conservative Ref., page 599) amplifies this article thus: "1. That the true body and blood of Christ are the Sacramental objects. 2. That the Sacramental objects are truly present in the Lord's Supper. 3. That this true presence is under the form or species of bread and wine. 4. That present under this form or species they are communicated. 5. That thus communicated they are received by all communicants."

     By the true body we mean that body in which our Saviour was actually incarnate, as opposed to his mystical body, which is the Church. Eph. i. 22, 23; v. 23. Some minds have been confused also by the use of different adjectives descriptive of His body; such as "the natural body," and "the glorified body of Christ." While in fact Christ's true

body, his natural body, and his glorified body are one and the same body in identity. The only matter to be borne in mind is that the words true and natural refer to its essence, while the word glorified refers to its condition. The glorification of his body neither made it cease to be true nor natural. That is, it was no more an unreal, ideal or imaginary body after its glorification than before. It was identically the same body, but with a constant and plenary exercise of glorious properties. Hence the doctrine of the Lutheran Church that it was the true body which was given for us. For Christ as he instituted the Lord's Supper said; "This is my body which is given for you." "Therefore," says Dr. Krauth, "the sacramental object must be his true body. For neither his mystical body, nor the Holy Spirit dwelling in his body, nor a sign or symbol of his body, nor a memorial of his body, nor faith in his body, could have been given for us. Therefore the true body must have been given for us, and that only can be the sacramental object."

     By his true blood we mean that blood which was the actual life--the vitality and strength of his human body--that "precious blood" wherewith we are bought. We believe that it was his true

blood which was shed for us for the remission of sins. For Christ said, "This is my blood of the new testament which is shed for the remission of sins.'' In these words Christ did not say, this is the efficacy of my blood, nor the Holy Spirit uniting us with his blood, nor yet that it was a sign or symbol of His blood, but simply and plainly, "This is my blood." Hence from the plain and very simple language of him who instituted the Sacrament of the Altar we believe in the real presence of the true body and blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper.

     We do not believe, however,

     1. That this presence consists of any essential change of the elements of bread and wine into the body, flesh, blood, soul and divinity of our Lord, as that of the Romish doctrine of transubstantiation. We do not believe that there is any conversion or transformation of the whole substance of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. But we believe that the bread remains bread, and the wine remains wine, entirely unchanged in their properties and accidents; that is in every thing which constitutes them what they really are. Our Lord does not say, "Take, eat, this is my transformed body, or "this is my transformed blood."
      7

But simply ''this is my body,'' ''this is my blood." Hence the bread in the Lord's Supper continues to be real bread, and the wine real wine; but both are the means by which the body and blood of Christ are conveyed to us. Hence Paul in 1 Cor. x. 16, speaks of the visible elements in the holy sacrament as "bread and wine." "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?".

     2. We do not mean that the presence of the body and blood of Christ consists in any local or physical inclusion in the bread and wine, or a commingling of them into one mass, such as belong to natural bodies. We do not believe in any physical or local presence whatever. The bread does not coalesce with the body, and the wine with the blood, into one substance. There is no assumption of the elements into the humanity of Christ. Theologically this doctrine is called "impanation," or consubstantiation, a doctrine which the Lutheran church has always and stoutly rejected, though unjustly charged with holding it. In the institution Christ did not say, Take, eat, in this bread is included my body, or in this cup is included my blood. No, he did not say that. And although

with the bread and wine the body and blood of Christ are communicated to us, we must not conceive the gross idea that the body and blood of Christ are locally enclosed in the elements.

     3. We do not mean that in the Lord's Supper we partake of his body and blood by a gross, carnal or natural eating and drinking. Evidently our Lord, when he said, "Take, eat, this is my body,  *  *  *  and, this is my blood," did not wish to be understood in a natural, carnal sense, as if his disciples gathered around the table were really to attack his living, natural body, or to drink his natural blood, then coursing through his veins. No, not that.

     4. We do not believe that the presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper consists in a mere figurative representation; that is, that the bread only represents or signifies his body, and that the wine only represents or signifies his blood. We cannot accept this as scriptural, from several considerations:

     (1) This idea is opposed by the demands of all those types of the Old Testament which contemplate Christ as the Paschal Lamb, who is to be presented in that nature in which he was slain, not after the shadowy mode of the old dispensation, but after the true mode of the new--in the New

Testament Paschal. It is through his human nature that Christ is our Paschal Lamb sacrificed; and therefore it must be through his human nature that Christ our Paschal Lamb is eaten. If it was not through his divinity, separate from his humanity, that he was sacrificed upon the cross, it cannot be that through his divine nature, separate from his humanity, he is given to us at his table.

     (2) This idea is opposed by the demands of the type of the Old Testament sacrifices, which were not only to be offered to God, but to be partaken of by the priests and offerers. That body and blood which were offered to the Father, and by him accepted, must also be partaken of by those for whom they were offered, and the partaking must be a true one, as the offering itself was true. But in order to be a true partaking there must be a true presence.

     (3.) This idea is opposed by a proper translation of the original words of the institution. Our Lord did not say, This represents my body, but in the plainest and most simple language possible said 'This is my body," and "This is my blood." Nor does the Greek copulative "eimi" by any proper translation mean to "represent," "signify" or ''is a symbol of.'' We base this declara-

tion, (1) on the fact that no translation, ancient or modern, with any pretension to character, has so rendered the word. No one of scholarship has ever dared to insert into the text of his translation ''this signifies," " represents,'' or "is a symbol of my body." But if "eimi" means any or all of these, why have not some of our scholars--our lexicographers--given the public the benefit of their knowledge of this little word? The fact is, it simply means what it has always been translated--simply "is.'' (2) that no impartial dictionary of the Greek language, whether general or New Testament assigns any such meaning to the original "eimi." (3) That no standard dictionary of the English language assigns such a meaning to the English copulative ''is'' or "to be.'' But it simply means what it says. Hence the doctrine of the Lutheran Church, that the true body and blood of Christ are really present in the Lord's Supper, not in any such sense as above named, but in a supernatural and incomprehensible way.

     But while we cannot fully comprehend and explain how this is, can we not, in the province of faith, lay hold of the great truth, and by it, without the course of philosophical reasoning, accept our Lord's simple statement: "This is my

body;" "This is my blood." However, a simple illustration from God's word may aid in simplifying and impressing the idea somewhat. According to the Gospel by St. John (xv. 1-5) our Lord gave us the parable of the ville and the branches, which we will use as a practical illustration in this case. The vine planted in the ground, and communicating from it to the branches, represents Christ the only begotten of the Father, sent forth from him. The branches in living connection or communion with the vine, represent all believers by faith engrafted into Christ Jesus, the Vine, and in living connection or communion with him. But now all things are in their proper relations and condition for the life in the ground to be absorbed through the tiny pores of the roots and conveyed through the vine to the branches. The operation begins, the life flows; we see the buds, then the leaves, the blossoms, and the ripened fruit. Does any one question the real presence, in species and essence, of the vine in the branches? And can any one fully comprehend, and will he attempt a clear and simple explanation of just how it all comes about? And as the vine becomes the medium of communication, are its visible parts in any wise changed into something else? In our

conception of the process of communication of life from the ground to the branches, must we think of transubstantiation, or consubstantiation? O, no! "Folly! folly!'' would cry our natural philosophers! And yet, that which is communicated is the body--it is the very essence which composes and constitutes that body--the body of vine and branches. Precisely so with Christ in the Holy Sacrament of the Altar. We can no more fully comprehend and explain how he is communicated to us through the medium--the bread and the wine--than we can the process in the case of the vine and the branches. But does any one question the reality in the process in the vine because he cannot fully comprehend and explain it all? Why then raise the question about the real presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper? Why not take him at his word when he says: "Take, eat, this is my body;  "  *  *   "this is my blood." If we cannot fully comprehend, why not believe? Shall we be guilty of limiting our faith to the bounds of our reason? God forbid

     Another important subject for the consideration of our readers are the Benefits to the Communicants in the celebration of the Sacrament of the Altar. These I fear are too often underestimated, and

consequently very improperly appreciated by most communicants. True, these benefits vary with the faith exercised by the communicants in the reception of the elements. Some eat and drink unto the fulness (sic) of the blessings in Christ Jesus; others to their condemnation: "Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.  *  *  *  For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself; not discerning the Lord's body." 1 Cor. xi. 29, 30. But to be sure in speaking of the "benefits" to participants in the Sacrament of the Altar we address ourselves to true believers--worthy communicants only. To them eternity alone can reveal the full measure of these benefits.

     Moreover, let us not forget that we are speaking of the benefits derived by a belief in the real presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper. While we may not be able to comprehend fully the thoughts of this very difficult point, we hope at least to make clear a few thoughts which lie more nearly to the surface. We must bear in mind, however, that not the visible, but the invisible things are real. Hence we cannot look into this with the carnal mind, but alone through a living faith en-

lightened by God's Word and Spirit. The importance of the doctrine of the real presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper, in order to obtain the benefits which the Lord would have us receive in this holy feast, will be, in a measure at least, comprehended from the following illustration: "Suppose some one should present you with a picture of a great personage--one whom you esteem very highly. It would no doubt awaken in you the deepest gratitude of your heart. And as you viewed that picture certain lasting impressions would be made. But now that this same personage should be brought into your presence, and instead of viewing a representative of the man, you. could now see the real man and converse with him, what a different impression it would make upon your mind. How the same joy and gratitude would be intensified." Just so in the Lord's Supper. Eating the bread and drinking the wine at the Lord's table as a representative or symbolical presence of the body and blood of Christ will, indeed, make a certain impression upon the mind, but with little, if any more, benefit than that derived from the ordinary means of grace. But when we come fully believing the words of Christ: ''This is my body''--'' this is my

blood"--believing that as we come to his table we come into his real presence, and are there permitted to commune with him (1 Cor. x. x6), what a different impression it will make! How our gratitude and joy will intensify! How the benefits--the blessings--will multiply and enlarge! And only he who truly believes in the real presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper can and does truly commune with Christ in the celebration of this Holy Sacrament. We cannot commune with a symbol. But to receive the full measure of the blessings of this Holy Sacrament we must come believing that we truly commune with Christ our Lord.

     At the institution of this sacrament Christ said (Matt. xxvi. 28), "For this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." Here ''remission of sins," is the special blessing mentioned. This is indeed the most important, as it is the foundation of all other special blessings. For it is written (Heb. ix. 22), "Without the shedding of blood is no remission." Not indeed in the sense that there can be no remission of sin without having first participated at the Lord's table, but that God, having sealed his everlasting covenant to all true believers with Christ's blood, upon all who honor him in

the celebration of the seal of that covenant he will confer the special blessings of that seal. On a former occasion (Matt. xx. 28), our Lord had said, "even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." This is indeed a significant passage on the particular thought before us. We, too often think of the remission of sin only as such without connecting with it any inherent blessings. But the Greek word "lutron" here used comprehends both the price paid for sin, and the condition secured. All true believers have experienced the blessings of this condition--joy and peace unspeakable, increased faith and light. Hence we need not tarry to develop this thought, but note soul nourishment as another important benefit in the Lord's Supper. Luther, in speaking of the benefits of the sacrament, calls it "food for the soul which nourishes and strengthens the new man." Another has put it thus: "By baptism we are regenerated and renewed; by the Lord's Supper we are fed and nourished unto eternal life. In baptism faith is kindled by the Holy Spirit; in the use of the Supper it is increased, confirmed and sealed. By baptism we are grafted into Christ; by the salutary use of the Lord's Supper we receive a

spiritual increase in this relation. By baptism we are received into the divine covenant; by the use of the Eucharist we are preserved in it."

     Just how this soul nourishment is communicated to us we may not be able to explain to the satisfaction of all, nor is it necessary to spend any time in philosophizing upon the subject. But let a simple illustration from nature suffice: The vine through its tiny roots absorbs certain acids and gases, which we call life, from the ground, and when assimilated to its own nature, communicates them to the branches. As a consequence these branches send forth the little twigs, thence the foliage and the buds, and at length we see the cluster of luscious fruit. How was it done? Who cares? All that concerns us is that there was life, nourishment and fruit.. So our soul nourishment comes through Christ the Vine--the body--unto all who truly believe and obey his word, "Take, eat, this is my body,"  * *  "drink ye all of it, for this is my blood of the New Testament." "Do this in remembrance of me." Ah, yes,

"Here at thy table, Lord, we meet
To feed on food divine:
Thy body is the bread we eat,
Thy precious blood the wine."

     But we can note but one more of the many benefits which might be mentioned, afforded to the worthy participant of the Sacrament of the Altar.

     An assimilation of ours to the divine nature of Christ.

     "Like begets like" is a universal law of nature. "'Do, men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" Even so Christ has emphasized the importance of the new birth: "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he can not see the kingdom of God." (John 3.) And when Nicodemus failed to comprehend the thought, Jesus followed with an explanatory answer, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he can not enter into the kingdom of God." In short, he must be born of the Spirit, and partake of the things of the Spirit before he can enter into his domain or bear any of his fruit. For, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh," and will bear the fruit of the flesh; and that which is born of the spirit is spirit" and will bring forth the fruit of the spirit. "For he that soweth to his flesh, shall of the flesh reap corruption, but he that soweth to the spirit shall of the spirit reap life everlasting." Gal. vi. 8.

     But the law of assimilation is as universal in fact and as absolute in its results as the law of generation. By pouring cold water into hot, or vice versa, a medium temperature is secured. How? By the process of assimilation. Food is taken into the stomach, after a time is converted into blood, and as this goes coursing from the heart to every member of the body, nutrition and strength is conveyed. How is it done? By the process of assimilation. By this same process the desired effect of leaven is secured in the dough. Precisely so with the work of Christ in our hearts, with only this difference: That according to the natural law the body which receives the elements assimilates them to itself; while according to the law of the Spirit the body which receives the elements, the gifts of God--the body and blood of Christ--his grace and Spirit, by faith, is assimilated unto the nature of their giver. Whosoever therefore receives by faith the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar accedes to an assimilation of his own to the divine nature.

     Of the transforming or assimilating power of Christ we need not speak at length, therefore, as the principle is familiar to all. Suffice it to say, however, that the law of assimilation is nowhere more

conspicuous than in the work of Christ. Hence our Lord's prayer for his disciples, (John xvii: 22, 23). "That they may be one, even as we are one, I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one." How was this prayer answered? Plainly by the process of assimilation--"their lives were hid with Christ in God." And as food is hid in the stomach, then assimilated to the body, so theirs, hid with Christ in God, were assimilated to the divine nature. Hence it is also written (Gal. ii: 20), ''I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I; but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God." As Christ lived in Paul, so he lives in every true believer; and as Paul realized the assimilating power of Christ--transforming and changing his own nature, his mind, will, energies and all, to that of Christ--so in the life of every child of God. And as the Lord's Supper has been instituted as one of but two sacraments, it has become one of the special means for. the assimilation of ours to the divine nature. We eat and drink the body and blood of Christ in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper by faith, and find our passions subdued, and our love increased, our strength is renewed and our experience enriched, our repen-

tance is deepened and our faith enlarged, our besetting sins are weakened and our hopes brightened. Thus eating and drinking in this holy feast whenever an opportunity is offered, our natures will become more and more assimilated to that of the divine--we will become more and more "conformed to the image of his Son" (Rom. viii: 29), and the mind which was in Christ Jesus will become more perfect in us, and the life which we now live in the flesh will be one of faith in the Son of God--our life will be "hid with Christ in God."

     For whom was the Lord's Supper instituted, and for whom is the Lord's table now spread, is a question which demands but a brief consideration.

     The little company to whom the body and blood of Christ was first administered was composed of the apostles, whom Christ had chosen to accompany him during his earthly ministry. They were poor and unlearned men, who loved Christ, but were weak alike in faith and knowledge. They knew but litle (sic) of the full meaning of their Master's sayings and doings. They knew but little of the frailty of their own hearts. They thought they were ready to die with Jesus, and yet that very night they all forsook him and fled. All this our Lord knew perfectly well. And yet he did not

deny them the privilege of the Lord's Supper. The lesson is patent to all--The Lord's table is spread for the Lord's people. The qualifications for a worthy participation in the Lord's Supper are not necessarily much knowledge, great strength of grace, and a rich experience in the divine life. These are indeed desirable qualifications. But a communicant may know but little, and be as a child in spiritual strength, but cannot on that account be excluded from the Lord's table. The vital question for consideration is, are you keenly sensible of your sins? do you really love Christ? have you publicly professed your faith in him? been baptized, and resolved to serve him? If so, then, dear reader, you are entitled to the privileges of this holy sacrament, and no one can justly gainsay your rights. We are indeed to guard the Lord's table carefully against unworthy communicants. Indeed, no graceless person ought to presume to come to the Lord's Supper. But on the other hand we are to take heed that we do not reject those whom Christ has not rejected.

     With a few serious personal inquiries as to your conduct in respect to this holy Sacrament we leave the subject of this chapter. Are you prompt and regular participants whenever an opportunity is
     8

offered, or do you turn away from it? If the latter, how can your conduct be justified? You cannot say that it is not a necessary ordinance. For to say this is to pour contempt upon Christ himself; and declare our disobedience to his command, "Do this in remembrance of me." It will not do to say that you feel unworthy to come to the Lord's table. To say this is to declare that you are unfit to die, and unprepared to meet God. This is indeed a precarious condition for a professed child of God to occupy. Preparation for the one will prepare for the other. These are solemn considerations which every non--communicant should ponder well.

     Dear reader are you an habitual communicant? If so, in what frame of mind do you come? Do you draw near intelligently, humbly and in true faith? Do you really feel your depravity and need of Christ? Do you come really desiring soul nourishment and thereby, with the use of the other stated means of grace, to fit you for a daily walk with God? Happy indeed is that one who can, with a conscience void of offense toward God, give an affirmative answer to these questions. To all such God will surely give a place at the marriage supper in his kingdom.

© 2003 for the NEGenWeb Project by Pam Rietsch, Ted & Carole Miller.