101. Grace At Meals.
Grace At Meals.
“Grace,” or, as it is otherwise called, “Blessing at Meals,” is a short prayer, either before or after partaking of food, in which the Divine blessing is sought and gratitude expressed for the supply of our bodily wants. In New England, and perhaps elsewhere, it was long the custom to invoke a blessing prior to partaking of food, and to return thanks immediately after; and this practice continues in many families to the present time; although, within a few years, it has been the practice of some to combine the two in one service. And while no valid objection exists to two services in families which prefer this mode, no evidence exists that such was the practice either of Christ or of the primitive church. The old Hebrews, however, according to Lewis (Antiquities of the Hebrew Republic, vol. ii: p. 451), began their meals with the benediction at the cup: “Blessed be the Lord our God, King of the world, who has created the fruit of the vine;” and then the cup was passed to the several guests. Next followed the blessing of the bread, which the master held in his hand, saying: “Blessed be the Lord our God, King of the world, who has produced bread out of the earth.” It was an established rule, that none of the company should touch any thing till he, who broke the bread, had first tasted it. The distribution of the bread appears to have been practiced in the time of Christ and his apostles. On the occasion of feeding the five thousand, Christ having sought the divine blessing, or, as the original signifies, (Matthew 14:19,) having given thanks, and so Mark expresses it, (Mark 8:6,) he brake, and gave to his disciples, and they to the multitude. This was the more easily done, as, according to Kuinoel, the Jewish loaves, like all the Oriental ones, were thin and brittle. In like manner, Paul, during his eventful voyage into Italy, insisting upon the sailors and soldiers, after a long season of fasting, taking meat, which term was indiscriminately used, as was also bread, for all kinds of food: “Took bread, and gave thanks to God in the presence of them all,” most of whom were heathen; and yet, before whom, the apostle would honor God; “and when he had broken it, he began to eat,” etc. Even as early as the prophet Samuel, (1 Samuel 9:23,) it appears that the master of the feast distributed to every one their portion, or ordered what should be set before them. From Deuteronomy 8:10 :—“When thou hast eaten, and art full, then shalt thou bless the Lord thy God for the good land which he hath given thee”—Oriental writers have contended that to give thanks after a meal was a Levitical injunction and positive command. But nothing more, perhaps, was intended than to inculcate a grateful spirit on the part of the Hebrews when they should come into actual possession of the land whither they were bound—a land in which they were to “eat bread without scantiness”—“a land of wheat, and barley, and vines, and pomegranates.” The posture of the body during grace cannot be considered material, if it be but respectful. It has varied in different periods of the world, and among different nations. The original posture of the Hebrews in eating and drinking was sitting; but the Bible seems not to determine their posture in those cases where grace was offered. They either spread something on the ground, and sat upon it, or they sat at table. “And Jacob said unto his father, I am Esau thy first born; I have done according to thy word: arise, I pray thee, sit and eat of my venison.Genesis 27:19. In the time of Moses this posture prevailed. On the occasion of Aaron’s making a molten calf, it is recorded, (Exodus 32:6,) “And they rose up early,” etc.; “and the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.” In the time of Saul, the same practice existed. “And David said unto Jonathan, Behold, tomorrow is the new-moon, and I should not fail to sit with the ling at meat. 1. Sam. 20: 5. Artaxerxes Longimanus and his queen also took their meals sitting, as we learn from Nehemiah, Nehemiah 2:6. But no intimation is given in the above instances, that the blessing of God was invoked. In those elder times, as now, persons were seated according to rank or equality. Thus, Abner sat by Saul’s side; and David had his peculiar situation allotted him, which is styled his scat or his place. The posture at meals was afterward changed; for, as men became effeminate, they consulted their ease, and lay or reclined at their meals. This custom prevailed in the time of Christ. In the case of his feeding the five thousand, he seems to have stood while he blessed the loaves; the people were sitting. In the celebration of the supper, as was common with the Jews at other meals, Jesus and his disciples reclined; the upper part of the body leaning on the left elbow, the lower part stretched at length, and so lying that the head of one naturally reclined on the bosom of another. This explains John 13:23. “Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples whom Jesus loved.” With us, standing was formerly the common posture during grace; and, in many families, it is so still. The guests surround the table, while the father or master of the family invokes the blessing of God: and when the repast is finished, the company rise, and thanks are returned in a similar manner. The more modern practice is for the guests to seat themselves at the table, when a blessing is invoked and thanks expressed during one and the same service. In some families, after the guests are seated, silence is observed for a brief space, while the guests say grace, each one for himself. One service seems to be the scriptural mode. And this, it must be conceded, is the more commendable practice in those families, where the guests are necessarily irregular. As to the manner in which grace should be performed, Dr. Watts observes: “We ought to have a due regard to the occasion and the persons present; the neglect of which has been attended with indecencies and indiscretions. Some have used themselves to mutter a few words with so low a voice, as though by some secret charm they were to consecrate the food alone, and there was no need of the rest to join with them in the petition. Some perform the service with so slight and familiar an air, as though they had no sense of the great God to whom they speak. Others affect a most unnatural solemnity, and change their natural voice for a tone awkward and disgusting.”
“It is the custom of some,” he adds—and the remark will apply to not a few at the present day—“to hurry over a sentence or two, and they have done, before the company are half prepared to lift a thought to heaven. Others, again, make a long prayer; and, among a multitude of other petitions, do not utter one that relates to the table before them. The general rules of prudence, together with the due observations of the customs of the place where we live, would correct all these disorders, and teach us that a few sentences, suited to the occasion, spoken in an audible and proper voice, are sufficient for this purpose, especially if any strangers are present.”
There are probably few professors of religion, at the head of families, who neglect grace at meals. Among non-professors the practice is confined to a few; while a multitude never seem to think of Him who spreads their table and fills their cup. For the benefit of such—if such should read these pages —a brief view of their obligations, in this respect, are subjoined:
1. The practice is scriptural.
There does not appear to be exactly positive precept for grace at meals in the Scriptures; yet, they abound with examples, of the pious in all ages, and such suggestions and exhortations, as clearly to indicate the will of God in reference to it. The practice of Samuel—of Christ—of Saul, have already been noticed. Jewish writers agree that the custom among the Jews was universal; and Wetstein affirms that it was not neglected by the heathen themselves. They often made, as every scholar knows, libations to their gods before their meals, as an acknowledgment of their indebtedness to them for their daily food. “He, therefore,” says President Dwight, who, in a Christian country, neglects to praise God for his food, cannot, with propriety, be called a heathen. He may, with more propriety, be styled an animal. Nay, in some respects, he degrades himself below the brutes; for the ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib; but he doth not know nor even consider.” The New Testament abounds in facts and in exhortations in relation to this practice. Say the historians of the proceedings of the day of Pentecost, Acts 2:42 :—“And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in breaking of bread, and in prayers.” Some writers apply his to the celebration of the Eucharist. But, as they had all things common, “breaking of bread,” says Mr. Barnes, “would rather seem to refer to their participation of their ordinary meals.” The practice is referred to by Paul (Romans 14:6) as though it were common, and had his approbation. To the Corinthian church the apostle writes, (1 Corinthians 10:31): “Whether, therefore, ye eat or drink, do all to the glory of God.” But when we receive our food, how can we glorify God before men, unless by asking his blessing upon it, and rendering to him our praise for the liberal provision which he daily makes for our support. Again, to the Colossians, (Colossians 3:17,) he writes: “Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father by him;” and to Timothy he says, in his strong, characteristic language, that every thing designed by God for food is to be received, when eaten, with thanksgiving: “for,” says the apostle, “it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.” Such, in the absence of positive injunction, are the ample proofs of this important duty, and such are the exhortations which Scripture gives us for our seeking for the divine blessing upon our daily food.
2. The practice is most reasonable.
God works by second causes; and complicated is the machinery by which he loads our tables with his providential bounties. Nevertheless, these bounties are as truly of his providing as was the bread which was rained from heaven for the children of Israel. Men may forget this truth, or they may disregard it, and affect, as some infidel philosophers have done, to believe that God takes little interest in this world, or in the race that inhabit it. But, under the light of divine revelation, men know better; and were they honest and willing to “render unto God the things which are God’s,” they would feel it to be both a duty and a privilege to acknowledge the hand that feeds them. Who imparts to his needy neighbor, or to the wandering mendicant, and does not expect some expression of gratitude in return? What would they think, who never pause themselves to express thanks to God, and perhaps deny his just claims to their gratitude for the food that sustains them— should the beggar, whom they have fed, on rising from his repast, say: “Sir, I have eaten bountifully at your table, but I feel under no obligations to you, and, therefore, will riot even take the trouble to thank you?” Who ever knew a beggar guilty of such incivility and ingratitude? But who, on the other hand, has not known hundreds of partakers of God’s bounties for months and years, who, apparently, never thought it their duty to express their gratitude to Him? They eat—drink—enjoy—but as to any recognition of their dependence upon a higher power, they are, seemingly, as stupid as the stalled ox. But why this marked indifference?—this positive ingratitude? Is the Infinite God, then, under obligation to load your table with his bounties? Is it for you to revel in his providential mercies—to enjoy, with keen relish, provisions gathered from the four quarters of the globe—and you manifest no gratitude? Must his winds waft ships freighted with the delicacies of other climes? Must he, at your bidding, send down the rains of heaven to germinate your wheat and your corn, and to ripen your harvests?
Ah, dependent child of the dust! you may not thus hope to direct your Maker; nor may you be dumb while your rational appetite is gratified by food of God’s providing. Should he cease to care for you for one short month, what would become of that body which you cherish with so great care? One hail storm could prostrate your finest wheat harvest. One night of frost cut off and destroy your luxuriant fields of corn. Look at Ireland and her famished thousands, and tell me, is man not dependent upon God? In that ill-fated country, the cry of starvation is heard on every side, and the loud wail of thousands of haggard, emaciated forms—still breathing, and yet dying—is borne upon every breeze to this land of plenty. Spread such a table in some Irish cabin as you eat at, and would the delighted throng gathering round be dumb in the praises of God for such relief? And, yet, your are as truly in the hands of God as they are—as dependent, and under as solemn obligations to be grateful to your Divine Benefactor. In short, there is not a service on earth more reasonable than Grace at meals. Nor do we see how the father of a rising family can discharge his conscience while neglecting it, and while setting an example of such utter ingratitude as that neglect implies. Let such mark it and remember it: if God will not hold him guiltless who taketh his name in vain, surely, he will not hold him guiltless that is for ever dumb in his praises.
3. The practice conduces to order, morality, and religion. The children of that family in which devotional exercises are daily observed, and we include grace at meals, are more likely to put their dependence upon God, and to be grateful to Him, than are the children of that family in which no such services are observed. The former have before them the example of a father, which they are likely to follow. As he feels, so will they be likely to feel; and, as he expresses himself, so they will express themselves. They will not forget, when they shall have left the parental board, the thanks poured out there. At least, such services strongly tend to render children decent, respectful, and courteous. The family are assembled at the same time; they take their seats at the table in order; they are quiet. The conversation which follows the blessing, is apt to be more rational, and more instructive.
Some object to leading in family prayer, that they have no time; but grace at meals will occupy but a few seconds. Others object to prayer on the ground of inability. But what parent is so deficient in courage as to be unable, in a sentence or two, to implore the blessing of God?
Such services sometimes exercise an influence of a most salutary and lasting kind. Irenaeus somewhere relates the effect of “asking a blessing,” which deserves a place in this connection, and which may serve as a hint to Christians that their example is seldom without observation.
He, with a party of friends, was on a visit to Niagara Falls. As they arrived late in the evening, they had a private supper; and, being by themselves, a blessing was asked before they partook of it. There were two or three servants in waiting, among whom was one by the name of Morrison. “During our stay of three days,” says Irenaeus, “we were struck with the unusual attention which Morrison manifested to our wants; not only doing his duty, but, apparently, taking extra pains to please us, whenever it was in his power. Just before we left, Morrison stepped up to me, as I was walking alone, and, making an apology for his boldness, expressed his desire to have some conversation on the subject of religion. Upon being assured that I was glad to speak with him, he told me that the Savior was dear to him, and that he was always glad to see gentlemen in the house who loved religion. He then said somewhat as follows: ‘I don’t know what it is exactly, but it’s love, I know it is; for ever since you asked a blessing at the table the other night, I have felt my heart kind a going out to you and your friends, and I couldn’t bear to have you go away without telling you how I felt.’
“In answer to my inquiries, he gave an account of his conversion, and I gave him words of encouragement, which he received with apparent joy; and at parting. I shook hands with him as with a new-found friend.
“Here was man, of a darker skin than mine, surrounded by a score of thoughtless, perhaps profane, companions, deprived, by his constant duties in the house, of the enjoyment of religious privileges; and, yet, with a soul washed in the blood of Jesus, and longing for sympathy with some other soul that had been cleansed in the same fountain. He observes a stranger, at the table which he serves, acknowledging with gratitude the Giver of the bounties before him, aril he marks the stranger at once as a Christian, a friend, a brother; and he goes to him with confidence to lay open his heart.”
Let the Christian learn from this incident that he is often watched when he little suspects it; and may accomplish much good by a faithful and punctilious attention to the duties of his profession.