Supper precludes the possibility of such a violation of its solemnity. Only let us "discern the Lord's body," remember what we are about, distinguish the bread and wine of which we there partake, from other bread and wine, impressing upon our minds a just idea of the sacred nature of the rite, that it is the sacrifice of Christ's death which we thereby commemorate, that it is the body broken upon the cross, and the blood poured forth for human sin, which is represented under the elements of bread and wine,—and with this discerning it is impossible that we then should fall into the sin of the Corinthians.*

III. The third erroneous opinion in regard to the Eucharist may be thus expressed: "It was an institution adapted for apostolic

* The reader should also notice, as strengthening the arguments above urged, that the word used by the apostle is unworthily, not unworthy. In no case can we be worthy to have communion in the blood of Jesus, but we all may avoid the sin of communicating in an unworthy manner. I am borne out in this view of the subject, by bishop Beveridge, who thus speaks of the passage in question: "He doth not say, 'he that being unworthy, (for so all men are,) but he that doeth it unworthily, in an unworthy, irreverent, or indecent manner, not becoming so holy an institution, shall receive damnation, (or rather as the word signifies,) judgment against himself.' And then, to shew what kind of unworthy receiving he here means, he adds, 'not discerning the Lord's body;' that is, making no difference between that and common food, but eating the bread, and drinking the cup, after the same manner as they do their ordinary drink."-Beveridge's Church Catechism explained.

P

times. Christ's command was only to his immediate followers, and I do not consider that the obligation extends in any way to the present day." Now this is immediately refuted on two convincing convincing grounds; first, common sense; secondly, scripture. The apostles, personally, had no such particular necessity for an institution to remember Christ's death. Would it be possible that a follower of Jesus Christ, within one generation after that dreadful death which was encountered on the cross for the sake of man, should forget that death; would the words of heavenly warning, the prophetic admonition, "Behold we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and scribes, and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him, and the third day he shall rise again," would these words, and others of similar import, so solemnly delivered, and so shortly after fulfilled in the dying scene of Calvary, be likely to be forgotten? would the scourging of the officer, the spitting of the profane Jew, the mocking of the Scribes and Pharisees, the gall mingled with myrrh, the vinegar, the hyssop, the dying words, "Eli, Eli, lama sabacthani," and the last out-pouring of the spirit, "It is finished:" these very circumstances all prophetically announced hun

dreds of years before, and now fulfilled in their very presence; the sacrifice for sin wrought and perfected, the redemption of man achieved, the salvation of the faithful secured. Would, I say, these great and glorious things, great and glorious past all expression, need a memorial in the hearts of them who were present, and were eye-witnesses of the things that were done, and who were gifted by the miraculous powers of the Holy Ghost to bear testimony of them to others? surely no. But when year after year should roll away, and when the memory of a dying Saviour should grow faint as a tradition, should be lost and perverted in the handing down from father to son, then would this holy Eucharist, on the the same principle as the memory of the Jewish exode in the passover, be retained as a sure token of the truth of our incarnate God, as a sure remembrance of him who ransomed the world from a worse bondage than that of the Israelites, and wrought a far more glorious exode than that from Egypt. The memorial would be "for us and for our children for ever," not for the apostles, but it must begin with the apostles, otherwise it could never be handed down securely to us; the first step in the transmission must be the most sure, in order that all the subsequent ones might rest upon unquestionable authority.

But, further, what saith the scripture on this head? St. Paul declares the institution of the sacrament, first, generally. He declares it is of immediate and special revelation to himself. He says: "For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take eat this is my body which is broken for you; this do in remembrance of me." After the same manner, also, he took the cup, when he had supped, saying: "This cup is the new testament in my blood; this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." Here, indeed, is a general annunciation, differing in no material manner from the words of the evangelists: but then he adds these remarkable words: "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come :" marking out most distinctly, as distinctly as human words can make out anything, that this memorial is to continue through all ages, and all time, until that day when the Lord shall come to judge the world in righteousness: and thus it is that we, to whom eighteen hundred years have passed since the death of our Redeemer, do now shew forth his death, and we must continue to shew forth his death, we and our children afterwards, "until he come;" until, whether as

quick, we shall go forth to meet him in the air, or, as dead, shall stand before the seat of judgment, to await the recompence of our deeds done in the flesh.

Let Christians, therefore, remember, dwell upon this remarkable fact that through all the circumstances of the church, through persecutions, through fire and sword, through famine and death, as well also in prosperity, and earthly glory, and earthly dominion, this memorial has as yet continued - however it may have been perverted in one age; however it may have lost its original simplicity in another age; however the majority of mankind have, by their negligence or their wilfulness, omitted its performance in all ages-still has there ever been a faithful few to shew forth Christ's death.

We have often had occasion to censure the Roman Catholic custom of solitary masses, but this good may be allowed to belong to them that they did, in some way, keep alive that remembrance which the rest of the world passed by. Though in the heap of rubbish that was thrown up indiscriminately on all hands, the true fire of religion was obscured, still the spark, the vital spark, continued alive, which afterwards penetrated through all difficulties, and burst forth into a flame, which kindled full brightly. How know we but that the origin of solitary masses may