1 Corinthians 11

1 Corinthians 11:2-16

self to reform some indecencies which had crept of Corinth; and particularly that of women h their head uncovered. 1 Cor. XI. 2—16.

1 CORINTHIANS XI. 2.

HAVE just now exhorted you, my brethren, to imitate me, as I endeavour to copy he example of our blessed Lord. And while am giving you such an exhortation, I ought to express my satisfaction in seeing many of you so ready to comply with it. I praise such if you therefore, that in all things you are mindful of me, and strenuously retain the charges I gave, as I committed [them] to you. But as to your inquiring concerning the manner in which women should deliver any thing in public, when they are by a Divine impulse called to do it; I would have you to know, in order to regulate your judgment and conduct aright, that Christ is the head of every man; so that every Christian should often recollect the relation in which he hath the honour to stand to him, as an engagement to observe the strictest decorum in his whole behaviour. And if the different sexes be compared, the head of the woman [is] the man; to whom therefore she ought to pay a reverent respect, as in the Lord. And the head of Christ [is] God: Christ, in his mediatorial character, acts in subordination to the Father, who rules by him, and hath constituted him Sovereign of all worlds, visible and invisible. And as the Father’s glory is interested in the administration of Christ, so is the glory of Christ in some measure interested in the conduct and behaviour of those men whose more immediate head he is; and I may add, of those women whose heads such men are.

Now, upon this principle, I may say, in reference to the usages which prevail at this time in your country; every man, praying or prophesying, in a public assembly, whether he give forth inspired psalms or hymns, or utter predictions, or common instruction; if he do it

Where women prophesied with their head

with [his] head covered, acting therein contrary to the received rules of decency among us, he in a degree, dishonours Christ his head, as behaving unworthy his relation to him. And on the other hand, every woman, praying or prophesying, under such inspiration as above, with [her] head unveiled, dishonoureth man, who is her head, by behaving in such a manner as is indecent in an assembly consisting of so many men as are usually present on these occasions: for I may say, that it is in this respect the same as if she were shaved: shaving her head is only taking off the natural covering, and exposing it bare; which is so shameful a thing, that you know it has often been inflicted as a proper kind of punishment, on women of the most abandoned character; and it is scandalous, that any thing like this should be used in your Christian assemblies; and this too, by persons pretending to extraordinary characters and assistances. I may therefore say, if a woman will not be veiled, let her even be shorn; but if it be apparently shameful for a woman to have her hair shorn, or shaved off, let her keep as far as possible from so disagreeable an appearance; and have her head covered with a proper veil, at the times, and in the circumstances of which we now speak. For a man indeed ought not to have [his] head covered as being the immediate image and glory of God: and made in his likeness as the first copy of its kind, before woman was created. It is decent therefore, that he should appear with the marks of that superiority which he indeed bears: but the woman should forbear it; and it is enough to say of her, that she is the glory of the man: to whom God hath done no inconsiderable honour,

a Every man praying, &c with his head covered, dishonoureth [his] head.] It was certainly, (as Dr. Whitby, and others, have proved,) the custom among the Greeks and Romans, as well as the Jews, to appear in worshipping assemblies with their head covered; and it is certain the Jewish priests wore a kind of turban, when ministering in the temple. But it seems, that the Corinthian men wore a veil, out of regard to Pharisaical traditions, and in imitation of the custom prevailing in the synagogues; which therefore the apostle disapproved. The women seem to have worn their hair dishevelled, when praying by Divine inspiration; (which seems to have been the only case in which they could regularly pray in public:) this made them resemble those pagan priestesses, who pretended to be actuated by their gods; the apostle therefore with great propriety discourses it.

is not agreeable to her state of inferiority:

as well as favour, in making so excellent and amiable a creature for his benefit and comfort. Yet still her state of subjection to him should be remembered, and it is very expedient she should appear in public with some tacit acknowledgment of it. For the man is not, in the first production of his nature, taken out of the woman; but as we read in the sacred history, (Gen. ii. 21—23,) the woman out of the man. Neither [was] the man created for the sake of the woman, to accommodate and assist her; but the woman for the sake of the man, that he might have an help meet for him, which before he found not in the whole creation. (Gen. ii. 20.) On this account therefore, as well as for the other reasons I have mentioned above, the woman ought to have upon [her] head a veil, as a token of her being under the power and subjection of the man: and so much the rather should she wear it in worshipping assemblies, because of the angels, who are especially present there, and before whom we ought to be exceedingly careful that nothing pass which may be indecent and irregular, and unlike that perfect order and profound humility with which they worship in the Divine presence.

Power on [her] head] Mr. Locke acknowledges with a modesty which does him much honour, that he did not understand this text; and many seem to have darkened it, by their attempts to explain it. But the chief difficulty does not lie in the word power; which must, to be sure, be understood of a veil, which married women wore on their head, as a token of subjection to their husband; (see Gen. xxiv. 65;) and Mr. Godwin, (Moses and Aaron, p. 236,) supposes the veil was in Hebrew called רדיר, (Radid,) from a root, רדיר. (Radad,) which signified subjection; so that the veil was, as it were, the habit by which a woman shewed she considered herself in subjection; and Chardin observes, that the married women in Persia wear a peculiar habit to the very same purpose. Chard. Pers. Vol. II. p. 187. It is much more difficult to ascertain the meaning of that clause, because of the angels. It seems neither reasonable, nor decent, to explain this of young ministers; as if they were in peculiar danger of being

insnared by the beauty of women; and it is more grossly absurd still to suppose with Tertullian, (de Vet. Virg § 7,) that there was any room to apprehend it could be a snare to celestial spirits; (which mistake seemed to be grounded on the wild interpretation of Gen. vi. 2, so generally received among the fathers.) Dr. Whitby understands it of evil angels, and thinks it refers to the punishment which Eve incurred, (Gen. iii. 16,) for hearkening to the suggestions of Satan. A late ingenious writer by αγγεω, understands spies; who he supposes came into Christian assemblies to make ill natured remarks, and so would be glad to blaze abroad any indecencies they might observe there. (See Mr Gough’s Diss in loc.) I have not room to canvass all these; but only add in support of the sense, which, as least exceptionable, I have followed, that the presence of angels in religious assemblies is favoured by Eccles. v. 1, 6, and the figures of Cherubim in the tabernacle and temple.

Nor is it consistent with natural decency

I have treated the matter with a plainness and freedom becoming my character: nevertheless, let not any hints which I have dropped of the superior dignity of the man be abused, to render him haughty and tyrannical: for it is evident, that the man [is] not without the woman, nor the woman without the man, in the Lord. You know that the existence and comfort of either sex has a dependence upon the other; which the genius of the Christian religion requires us to consider, and to behave in a manner correspondent to it. For as the woman [was] at first taken from the rib of the man, whom he ought therefore to love as a part of himself, and she to revere him, as under God the source of her being; so also, in the ordinary course of the Divine production, the man [is] by the woman; born, nourished, and in the tenderest years of life educated by her; a circumstance that ought to be ever most tenderly remembered, as a spring of grateful affection and regard. But let me add, that whether in the first creation, or the successive production of human creatures, all things [are] of God; whose constitution ought therefore humbly and obediently to be revered, and all the duties of relative life performed, as for his sake, and to his glory.

But with respect to the particular circumstance I was speaking of, I may leave you to judge of yourselves, whether it be, according to the usages generally prevailing among us, decent for a woman to pray to God with that masculine and confident air which she must have when her head is uncovered: Or rather, doth not the sight immediately shock us, previous to any reasonings upon it in our own mind? So that nature itself seems to teach you, that on the one hand, for a man to have long hair solicitously adjusted and artfully adorned, is such a mark of an effeminate character, as is, on the whole, a disgrace to him; Whereas, on the other hand, if a woman hath long hair spread over her shoulders, it is rather a glory to her; for her

Judge whether it be decent, &c.] The when they came into a woman, excepting the heathen as we find in Homer cases, used to a car in their veils, cient writers.

ctions on decency in Divine worship, c.

hair was given her instead of a veil, in the first constitution of her nature, and before the arts of dress were invented or needed.

Thus the matter appears to me, when I reflect upon the original, and the present state of things, and what seems from that to be the voice of nature. But if any one appears to be contentious, and will dispute this, upon his own different views of what is naturally decent, I shall not controvert it farther; but content myself with saying, that we have here no such custom, for women to appear with their head uncovered; neither do I know of its prevailing in any of the other churches of God, whether planted by me, or any of my brethren. I think therefore that it ought to be avoided, as a singularity which may appear like affectation, and give offence, even if it be not judged a natural indecorum. And thus I leave the affair to your consideration; and promise myself, you will give me no farther cause of complaint on this head.

IMPROVEMENT.

LET Christians frequently remember the honourable relation in which they stand to Christ as their Head; and as beyond all dispute, he is, under his mediatorial character, most willingly and joyfully subject to God, let us learn to imitate him in that cheerful and entire subjection, out of love and reverence to him, guarding against whatever is unbecoming, lest he be dishonoured thereby.

By the passage before us, we see the force of custom, for determining, in many respects, what is decent, and what is otherwise. Let us maintain a proper regard to this: lest even our good should be, through our imprudence, evil spoken of, and all our infirmities magnified into crimes. Let us often recollect the original dignity of our nature, by which we are the image and glory of God: that, so far as by sin and folly this honour is lost, we may endeavour to regain it; and where it is not, may think and act more suitably to so high a relation.

When in any act of Divine worship, we have the honour to approach the blessed God, let us reverence his awful presence,

d Nor any of the other churches.] Mons. but the former clause, we have no such custom, will not admit this. The argument “The churches do not use to contend with me, but to submit to my decisions;” strong.

The apostle considers their abuse of the Lord’s supper;

and even that of his holy angels, who attend the assemblies of xxi. the saints. We pray, that the will of God may be done upon earth, as it is done in heaven: let us be careful to worship God in such a manner, that these celestial spirits, who ever appear before him with sacred awe, may not be offended at the rudeness and folly of sinful mortals; whom they may well wonder to see admitted, in their best estate, to this Divine privilege which they have forfeited by repeated provocations.

verse 11, 12 As for what St. Paul observes of the mutual dependence which the sexes have on each other, let it dispose them to mutual candour and respect; avoiding the cruel tyranny, or the vain affectation, which often arms them, on either side, with ungenerous reflections. And as all things are of God, let it be our concern, that all things be to him; that all things be faithfully employed for his glory; and whatever comforts we receive in relative life, which are indeed many and important, let us adore the wisdom of the Divine constitution in the original formation of our nature, and the secret influence and conduct of his Providence, in the regulation of our respective circumstances and affairs.

1 Corinthians 11:17

The apostle, in order to reform several scandalous abuses of the Lord’s supper, which had crept into the church of Corinth, leads back their views to the original institution of the solemn ordinance, and infers from thence the danger of profaning it. 1 Cor. XI. 17, to the end.

1 CORINTHIANS XI. 17.

xxii. 1 Cor. xi. 17 THUS you have my free sentiments of the manner in which women, even when most singularly honoured by God, should appear in your religious assemblies. But while I am giving [you] these instructions, I do not, and cannot, praise [you,] as I would, on several accounts; and particularly on this, that when you come together in these assemblies, and on the most solemn occasions, there are such irregularities, and sometimes such indecencies among you, that your meeting is not for the better, but for the worse, as you lose more in religion one way than you gain another. For, before I mention any other instance of this, I must observe, in the first place, that when ye come

1 Cor. XI. 17.

NOW in this that I declare unto you, I praise you not, that you come together not for the better, but for the worse.

For first of all, when ye come to-

which they regarded as a common meal;

gether in the church, together in the church, though it is so evident, sect. hear that there be that nothing but reverence to God, and love to xxii. ivisions among you, each other, should reign on such occasions; I 1 Cor. d I partly believe hear that there are schisms. or uncharitable and 1 Cor.

angry divisions and disputes among you, and I do, in some respect, and with regard to some of you, believe it: For in the course of things, it is to be expected, that there must be even heresies among you: contentions will arise to such a height, that separations will ensue. The warmth of some tempers evidently leads to this; and Providence may probably permit it, that they who are of the most approved characters, may be made manifest among you, by the steadiness and candour of their conduct.

It is particularly grievous to me, to be forced to complain of your irregular behaviour, while celebrating that most excellent and endearing ordinance of the eucharist: but I am compelled to do it; and therefore I tell you plainly, that when you come together in such a manner as you do, into one place, under pretence of attending this grand solemnity, it is not eating the Lord’s supper: it does not deserve

a Come together in the church.] Some have urged this as an instance in which church signifies a building for public worship; and have urged also the 22d verse in the same view; but both may be interpreted of the assembly, as the paraphrase shews.

b There must be even heresies.] It seems evident from hence, that heresy is spoken of as something worse than the schism mentioned above; but whether it be an evil entirely of a different kind, or only of a higher degree, is not so clear from this passage. I think, for reasons not here to be enumerated, that the word myos signifies a sect of people separated from others, and forming what we call a distinct denomination; whereas there may be schism without separation, if people assembling together have uncharitable contentions with each other; which was the case of these schismatical Corinthians.

c It is not eating the Lord’s supper.] The Corinthians seem to have been guilty of two great faults in the matter here referred to, which St. Paul, in the following discourse, labours to reform; The one, that they confounded the Lord’s supper with the common meals they made together; from whence the love, easts were

afterwards derived;) thinking it sufficient, (as the Qualers now do,) if they mingled some thoughts of Christ’s death, with this common use of bread and wine; The other, that they used such a rapacious behaviour at these feasts, and treated one another so rudely and unkindly, as on their own principles would have been very indecent. This latter circumstance is finely illustrated in a passage from Xenophon, (Memor. lib. 3, cap. xiv. § i.) in which he observes, that Socrates was much offended with the Athenians for their conduct at their common suppers, as some prepared delicately for themselves, while others were but slenderly provided for. That worthy man endeavoured to shame them out of this low taste, by offering his provisions to all the company. Mr. Grove hath with great propriety mentioned a passage from Socrates, the ecclesiastical historian, (lib. v. cap. 23,) in which he speaks of some Egyptians living near Alexandria, who partook of the sacrament in a very peculiar manner, (as it seems much after the Corinthian fashion,) introducing it with a jovial feast, in which they regaled themselves with all kinds of food. See Grove on the Sacrament, 108.

And ate and drank to excess.

to be called by that name. Instead of regarding it in a holy and religious view, you confound it with a common meal; and do not indeed behave in the manner that decency would require if it were no more than a common meal: for though you sit down at what, even in that case, ought to be a social and friendly table, yet each has his particular mess, and without offering a share of it, in an obliging manner to the rest, *every one in eating, greedily taketh before [the other] his own supper,*ᵈ both the food and liquor which he hath provided; and so while one poor brother, for want of suitable provisions, *is hungry, another eats and drinks to excess,*ᵉ which would in all circumstances be a scandal to a Christian, and especially to a religious assembly, as this certainly ought to be.

What a reproach is this to your common profession! Give me leave to ask you, have you not houses to eat and to drink in on common occasions, that you must come to the place of public worship, thus to entertain yourselves there, which is certainly in all views very ill judged? Or do you despise the church of God, which you must greatly offend by such a conduct as this; and at the same time shame those that have not provisions and accommodations of their own, and might hope at your common meals to be relieved? What shall I say to you on this occasion? Shall I praise you in this [respect?] I wish I could fairly and honourably do it; but at present, I praise [you] not; I must rather blame you, and exhort you to amend what is so grossly amiss.

And that my admonitions and exhortations may come with the greater weight, let me lead back your thoughts to the original institution of this profaned and affronted ordinance; which if

ᵈ His own supper.] This monstrous, and to us unaccountable circumstance, is cleared up by what is said above of the cial suppers used among the Greeks: to which each brought his own provisions, which were not always made so common to the whole company as decency and friendship might have required.

ᵉ Drinks to excess.] The word μυθωτι, has this signification in a great latitude; but one would hope, that though the Jews and heathens were often intoxicated in their religious festivals, these Christians, imprudent and irregular as they were, did not carry their excesses so far; and therefore I chose to soften the version. Compare Vol. I. . 119, note k.

To reform this, he reminds them of the original institution: 305

you reflect upon, I am sure you must be heartily grieved at the indignities you have offered it, and will be engaged to resolve you will never repeat them. Now I am able to speak of this matter with great certainty and exactness: for my knowledge of it did not depend upon any human tradition whatsoever; but I received by special revelation from the Lord⁶ Jesus Christ himself, that which I also delivered to you, in my former preaching on this subject, in which, as in all things else, I have been careful most exactly to adhere to my original instructions. And you know the substance of it was this, That the Lord Jesus Christ, the very [same] night in which he was betrayed, and amidst all those serious thoughts which his own nearly approaching sufferings might suggest, after he had finished the paschal supper, took bread, some of the remainder of those unleavened cakes with which that solemn feast is celebrated; And having, in a most reverent manner, given thanks to God, the great Author of all temporal and spiritual blessings, and looked up to him for his blessing upon it, for the purposes to which it was going to be appropriated, he brake [it] into several pieces, and distributing it to his disciples who were present, said, Take this bread, and eat it with due reverence and regard; for this is the solemn representation of my body which is just going to be broken, by the most bitter pains and agonies, for you and your salvation; this therefore do in all the succeeding ages of my church, as a commemoration of me;⁸ that the memory of my painful

⁶ I received by special revelation, &c.] his epistle seems to have been written before any of the Gospels; and it seems to be intimated, Gal. i. 17, &c. that when he wrote it, he had seen none of the apostles. It is very remarkable, that the institution of this ordinance should make a part of that immediate revelation with which Christ honoured him; and it affords a strong argument for the perpetuity of it in the church. For had others of the apostles, (as Barclay presumes to insinuate,) mistaken what passed at the last passover, and founded the observation of the eucharist on that mistake, surely Christ would rather have corrected this error in his new

revelation to St. Paul, than have administered such an occasion of confirming Christians in it. For some notes which might have been inserted here, see Vol. II. sect. 172.

⁸ This do, &c.] Because the word ποιον signifies, in some few instances, to sacrifice, Dr. Bret would render it, sacrifice this: whence he infers, that the eucharist is a sacrifice. And a learned prelate in the council of Trent, pleaded, with much the like judgment, that when Christ uttered these words before the cup, he ordained them priests; whereas he gave them the bread as laicks. See Father Paul’s Hist. o the Council of Trent, p. 510.

VOL. 4.

The design of which was to shew the Lord’s

death may be kept up in the world, and your hearts, and those of all my faithful followers, he properly affected with the review of it. In like manner also [he took] the cup: which, you well remember, was after he had supped; so that it was by no means a part of that meal they had been making, but something quite distinct from it: and he likewise distributed that to them as he had done the bread; saying, This cup is the solemn seal and memorial of the new covenant, which is established in my blood, by which all its invaluable blessings are derived to you. This likewise do, as often as ye drink [it] in commemoration of me, and in order to maintain the memory of my bleeding, dying love, in the church and the world. You therefore, as often as ye eat h this bread, and drink this cup, i do indeed perform a very solemn and important action; for, according to his own interpretation and institution, you shew forth, and as it were proclaim, the Lord’s death, in its most affecting circumstances; which the church must throughout all ages continue to do, until he come k to close the present scene of things, and to receive all his faithful servants to a place, where, for ever dwelling with him, they will no more need these memorials of an absent Saviour. So that you see, by a farther consequence, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink l [this] cup of the Lord, unworthily,

h Therefore, as often as ye eat, &c.] It is plain, that γαg, must here have the force of an illative particle; as it also has, Luke xx. 38.

l Eat this bread, &c.] It is no wonder, a text in which this element is so plainly called bread after consecration, should be urged against the Popish doctrine of transubstantiation. And it signifies little for them to plead, that the scripture sometimes calls things changed, by the name of the thing out of which they were made, (as Adam is called dust, Gen. iii. 19; Aaron’s serpent, a rod, Exod. vii. 19;) or calls them according to their sensible appearance, (Josh. v. 13; Mark xvi. 5;) for these instances rather turn against them, by proving, that where the literal interpretation is evidently absurd, we must have recourse to the figurative.

k Until he come.] Nothing can be more unreasonable, than to refer this, (as the

Quakers do,) to the time when Christ should come, by his spiritual illumination on their minds, to take them off from carnal ordinances; for, not to insist upon it, that we have at least as much need of the Lord’s supper as the primitive Christians had, (not having so many advantages as they, to keep up the memory of Christ in our minds, to quicken us to holiness, and to unite us in love,) it is evident, the grand coming of Christ by the Spirit was when it was poured out on the day of penitence; an event, which had happened many years before the date of this epistle.

l Eat, or drink.] So it is in the original, π πιν; nor could our translators surely be under any temptation to render it, eat and drink, to elude the argument drawn from hence for communion in one kind only; since, as that excellent French preacher, Mons. Superville observes, (Serm. Vol. IV.

unworthily, is guilty of Christ’s body and blood.

that is, in an irreverent manner, without a due regard to him, and to the great original purpose of its appointment, shall be counted guilty of profaning, and affronting in some measure, that which is intended to represent the body and blood of the Lord; and consequently the affront does evidently rebound to our Lord himself, who was pleased with infinite condescension, for our sakes, to assume human flesh, and to suffer in it.

Let none therefore come to the ordinance in a rash and irreverent manner; but let a man examine himself as to his knowledge of its intent, and his desire to comply with its great design; and so let him eat of the sacramental bread, and drink of the cup which is used with it. *For he that eateth and drinketh in an irreverent, profane, and unworthy manner,*ᵐ must certainly displease and provoke God; so that it may truly be said, that he *eateth and drinketh judgment to himself:*ⁿ he takes the readiest way to bring down the judgments of God upon him, not distinguishing the Lord’s body, nor making that proper difference which he ought to make between that and common food.

And accordingly many of you have actually brought such judgments upon yourselves; and I must plainly tell you, it is upon this account, and to manifest the Divine displeasure against you for such shameful irregularities, that God hath sent distempers among you, so that many

p. 245,) it might as well prove, that the cup may be received without the bread, as the bread without the cup. So that it is surprising assurance in a late Popish writer, to plead from hence, that communion in one kind only was the practice of the Corinthian church. See Mod. Controv. p. 100.

ᵐ In an unworthy manner.] To receive to purposes of faction, or intemperance, was receiving very unworthily; but the sense of that phrase must extend to every manner of receiving contrary to the nature and design of the ordinance; and consequently, to the case of doing it merely in a secular view; which I heartily pray, that all concerned in it may seriously consider.

ⁿ Judgment to himself.] I think it the

most unhappy mistake in all our versions of the Bible, that the word κυμα, is he rendered damnation. It has raised dread in tender minds, which has greatly obstructed the comfort and edification they might have received from this ordinance. The apostle afterwards says, we are judged, (that is, as he afterwards explains it, we are corrected,) that we may not be condemned; which plainly shews the judgments spoken of might be fatherly chastisements. This sin, as sin, does indeed expose us to condemnation, should God be extreme to mark it, as an irreverent behaviour under any other ordinance does; but it is superstition to set this at so vast a distance from all the rest, as many do.

Reflections on the ordinance of the Lord’s supper,

of you [are] now weak and sick, and some considerable numbers of your society are fallen asleep, in death. Survivors therefore ought to lay the matter seriously to heart, and set about an immediate reformation. For if we would judge ourselves, with a due severity and impartiality, we should not surely be so severely judged, and animadverted upon by God. But when we are thus judged, it is not in a displeasure wholly inexorable, but with kind designs of paternal goodness; and we are corrected of the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the impenitent world, and consigned over to final and everlasting destruction.

Therefore, my brethren, in one word, when ye come together to eat in those feasts which frequently precede the administration of this ordinance among you, wait decently and respectfully one for another, till the whole assembly be convened. And if any one be so hungry, that he cannot conveniently stay till that time, let him eat at his own house, or at least take a kind of antepast, that may prevent any inconvenience arising from a little necessary delay; that you may not come together to your condemnation, and in such a manner, as to provoke the judgment of God against you. It may suffice to have said thus much, for the present, on this subject; and what remains farther to be adjusted, I will regulate when I come to Corinth; which if Providence answer my hopes, and succeed my schemes, will be in a little time.

IMPROVEMENT.

WHAT just matter of thankfulness to our blessed Redeemer, does that account of the institution of the sacred supper afford verse us, which St. Paul assures us he received immediately from him. 23 Let us often reflect that it was in that very night in which he was

° Judge ourselves.] Διεχονιον, verse 29, signifies to distinguish; here διεχονιον signifies, examining that we may distinguish, and judge of our own character and fitness for the sacrament. Mr. Locke justly observes, that he is little attentive to St Paul’s writings, who has not observed, that he often repeats a word he had used before, though in a verse something different from the preceding. ° Let him eat at his own house.] M Amyraut and Mr. Cradock, (Apost Hist. p 174,) understand this, as a prohibition of love feasts; but I think it evident from antiquity, they were retained in the church long after; though dubious whether they prevailed so soon.

and the temper with which it should be attended.

betrayed, that his thoughts so compassionately wrought for our comfort and happiness; when it might have been imagined, that his mind would be entirely possessed with his personal concerns, with the doleful scene of his approaching sufferings. We learn from this account, the perpetuity, as well as the great leading design, of the ordinance. We shew forth the Lord’s death, and we shew it forth till he come. If we do indeed desire to preserve the memory of Christ’s dying love in the world; if we desire to maintain it in our own souls; let us attend this blessed institution; endeavouring by the lively exercise of faith and love, to discern, and in a spiritual sense, to feed upon, the Lord’s body. Nor let any humble and upright soul be discouraged, by these threatenings of judgment, to the profane sinners who offered such gross affronts to this holy solemnity; affronts, which none of us are in any danger of repeating. These scandalous excesses, when they pretended to be worshipping God on this great occasion, might justly provoke the eyes of his holiness, might awaken the arm of his indignation. Yet even these sinners were chastised, that they might not be finally and for ever condemned.

Let not any then be terrified, as if every soul that approached the ordinance without due preparation, must by necessary consequence, seal its own damnation. Thus to attend the table of the Lord is indeed a sin; but, blessed be God, not a sin too great to be forgiven. Let those therefore, who, though they feel in their hearts a reverential love to Christ, yet have hitherto refrained from attending this feast of love, be engaged to come; to come with due preparation, and self examination, as to their repentance and faith, their love and obedience; then may they, with the most hearty welcome from the great Lord of the feast, eat of this bread, and drink of this cup; receiving it as the memorial of Christ’s body broken, and of his blood shed for the remission of our sins. Through that blood alone, let us seek this invaluable blessing, without which indeed, nothing can be a solid and lasting blessing to us: and let us, on every occasion, treat our brethren with a tenderness and respect becoming those who have considered ourselves and them, as redeemed by that precious blood, and indebted to it for the hopes of everlasting salvation.

In a word, let us never rest in the external rites or exercises of worship, how decently and regularly soever performed; but look to our inward temper, and to the conduct of our minds, if we desire to maintain their peace, and that our coming together should be for the better, and not for the worse.

The apostle treats of the scripture gifts;