On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    ordinance of no authority , and of no t ^ al or intelligible ulSIi % < ^ i > lr V

    The wgvments for this purpose ap ^ pear to me among the weakest which it has -ever been my .-ffortiitoe to encounter ; and they involve wbatcannot be called by any other name than t hatof a blunders . ?

    We are told , that hythis bread and tfoVcup , our Saviour referred to : a par « ticular time of blessing the cup $ a custom familiar to the Jews , and which they : still retainy that the very term of * thei Lord ' s Supper ? shews how widely Christian ^ ' hav e departed from the institution of Jesus ; for that this

    bread and wine are actually taken in the middle of the day , or near it j and the drift of the argument is , ^ that since v ^ e havjg not this custom of blessing a particular cup at meals , and since we do not commemorate our Lord ' s body at supper tirn £ , we do n $ t : in fact possess his institution at all ! It would

    be about as much in point to say , that the Jews \ tfore beards , and that as they were bearded who first assisted at this commemoration , Christians who have smooth chins , are mere pretenders to the character of communicants in the

    original institution . : - There is , it . seems , no longer any common meal to give occasion for these blessings ; and it , is , ; therefore , become no longer a faoiily rite , but a congregational service . W hy , Sir , it had so become in the days of Paul ,

    who , in his first epistle to the Corinthians , xi . @ $ , reprehending the excels which took place at the Lord ' s Supper , not in 9 > f ( tmil y 9 but in & society , asks , ** What ! have ye not houses to eat and to drink in ? " And he proceeds to

    explain that this is not a meal , but a solemn and significant conversion of a social custom into a religious rite : " As often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup , ye do shew the Lord ' s death till he come , " It was not the

    form , or manner * or 4 . he time of doing this , 1 presume , that gave its character or its value to the institution ; btyt it wae the object of this simple ordinance , and the all u sion couched under the act . The family meal siaggea ^ d this mode

    of commemoration by tht : natural emblems which it offered , { pf the ftf $ - si ^ itain iug doctrines pf ChTiBt t an

    Untitled Article

    ceased to be such merely , when it was ordained as a significant rite ; and why this rite , therefore , sKould be stil ] *; onnected with a meal at all , or why it should not take place equally well at

    sun-nse , or at noon , as at the supper hour , and still retain the character and spirit of its first institution , " shewing ' forth the Lord ' s death till he come /' I profess myself , totally at a loss to comprehend . It might as well be insisted that we should use the same

    wine , the same quality of bread , the same sized cap \ or that the institu * lion is no longer the sam e * But the writer has another notable reason , in addition to the monstrous innovation on . the time of supper , , 'tp prove that the celebration of the rite

    appointed by Jesus to his disciples , and renewed to JPauL by special revelation , ( but from which the objector seems to think the liberty with which Christ Jias made him free , completely

    absolves him , ) is no longer practicable * The churches are , it appears , in a state of confusion respecting it : some partake of the memorial sitting , others kneeling or adoring . But as this state of confusion is not seen to arise

    in piny single church , as some do not sit in one part of the building , while others are kneeling in artother , I am at a loss to see what Jhe sifitte of coiifusion has to do with the introduction of the rife intp , th ^ service , or why every congregation may not

    commemorate the Lord ' a body in its own manner , an $ yet eac $ i > with broad daylight to boot , have a fair right to be regarded as celebrating the Lord ' s Supper . Qf course I except the massidolaters , and the political Sacramentarians . Whjat the state of confusion ;

    or the diversity of persons , offers in support of doing awayjwith . th < e rite altogether , or what is equivalent , regarding it as a matter of indifference , I c \ o npts perceive . Th < e same inference might be drawn of the us ^ lessness of Christianity itself , which , y pt , independent of traditionary errors , and

    corruptions , continues to e 3 ce ) rt its vital spirit ami ; praq ^ ical ; ppwer . If : the writer sees nothing but coi ^ fusiciii in Jthe various modes of celebrating the rite of the communion , tjie 9 ppfti , sipii is , per ^ haps in his own perception . If some be wrongs it does \ yq % i follow that ^ 0 ^ w *^> i 0 m t * i Jpi » ilft Jtepe ^ J ^ * f the tradiUonf of mw ^^ bjw ? b he m $ »

    Untitled Article

    ^ - x " ¦ ^ ¦ ¦ 238 Arguments 171 famitr of tke Lord ' s Supper . -

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), April 2, 1818, page 238, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2475/page/14/