GRACE

of God, who hath raised him from the dead,"* still signifying, that baptism imports our interest in the resurrection of Christ, and its consequences. It was called by the ancients, the earnest of good things to come, and the type of the future resurrection. May not this be the meaning of that passage in the fifteenth chapter of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, concerning which there has been such a diversity of opinion? "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not? why are they then baptized for the dead ?" Some of the Fathers understood the expression ve Twv vɛxpwv, to mean to be baptized into the hope of the resurrection of the dead; or, what amounts to the same thing, to submit to baptism that they might fill up the places of those who had died, thus declaring their belief that they had not perished, but were alive in a better world, and their hope that, through Jesus Christ, to whom they dedicated themselves in baptism, they also should be raised again to enjoy the same glorious recompense. According to this view of the passage, a resurrection to life is one of the blessings signified and sealed by this institution. It assures us of a triumph over death and the grave, through the redeeming blood of Christ, with which we are sprinkled; and of admission into heaven, for which we are qualified by the washing of regeneration. It is the seal of God impressed upon the members of his family, to distinguish them from the heirs of perdition. Like the blood of the paschal lamb on the houses of the Israelites, it is a pledge of the safety of believers on that awful day, when sinners shall rise to shame and everlasting contempt, and, were it possible, would hide themselves again in the grave from the wrath of the Judge.

Let us inquire what are the obligations of baptism, or what are the duties incumbent upon those to whom it has been administered.

66

We have already remarked, that it is a federal rite, in which God promises to bestow upon men the blessings of the covenant of grace, and they come under an engagement to obey the law of the covenant. When an Israelite was circumcised, he was bound to keep the whole law, "for circumcision," says Paul, verily profiteth if thou keep the law; but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision." Baptism is of the same import, and ratifies our subjection to the authority of Christ, whose disciples we profess to be, and into the communion of whose church we are admitted. The commission to baptize all nations was connected with an injunction "to teach them to observe all things whatsoever he had commanded them." To this federal transaction Peter alludes, when he says, that "baptism doth now save us, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,”συνειδήσεως αγαθής επερωτημα. Επερωτημα signifies an interro gation, and likewise an answer to an interrogation, and refers in the present case to the questions proposed to the candidates for baptism, of which we have a specimen in the words of Philip to the eunuch of Ethiopia, "If thou believest with all thine heart thou mayest.' When an adult person could answer this question and others of a similar nature with a good conscience, baptism was to him an assurance of salvation. He had entered with an upright heart into the service of Christ, and should certainly receive the promised recompense.

First, Baptism implies an engagement to believe all the truths which Christ has revealed. It imports, as we have seen, a profession of our faith in the Trinity, a doctrine which, when, viewed in its connexions and consequences, is found to involve all the other doctrines of Christianity. Being recognized as the disciples of Jesus, we publicly own him as our teacher, and place ourselves under his care, to receive his instructions without murmuring or disputing. Full confidence must be placed in his wisdom as infallible, and • Col. ii. 12, † 1 Cor. xv. 29. + Rom, ii. 25. § 1 Pet. iii. 21,

obedience must be yielded to his authority without hesitation. The baptized ought to believe without demanding any other evidence but his testimony; to embrace every doctrine which he delivers, although its truth be not manifest to reason, nor deducible from its principles. The man who makes his own understanding the measure of his creed, who admits into it only what he deems plain and perspicuous articles, and rejects such as are mysterious, disregards the command which came from the excellent glory, and retracts the submission which he pledged in his baptism. In the early ages of the church, when converts from Judaism and Heathenism sought admission into it, the candidates for baptism were previously instructed in the principles of the Christian religion, and were required to make a public profession of their faith. Certain questions were proposed, to which satisfactory answers were expected. The formulary was different in different places; but the subject was the same, and is contained in the creed, which goes under the name of the Apostles, although it was not composed by them. It is a summary of what was considered to be the doctrine of the Apostles, and of the faith which the members of the church were bound to profess and maintain.

Secondly, Baptism implies an engagement to observe the ordinances of Christ. When we enter into a new society, we pledge ourselves to conform to its laws and usages. When a Heathen was baptized, he renounced polytheism and idolatry, and bound himself henceforth to worship the living and true God, through his Son the only Mediator. When a Jew was baptized, he renounced the altar, the priesthood, and the obligations of the law, that he might offer spiritual sacrifices, in the name and through the intercession of the High Priest of our profession. As Christ is the Supreme Lord of the church, it belongs to him only to appoint religious ordinances; and consequently, the engagement of which we are speaking, extends no farther than his will as expressed in the Scriptures; it imposes no obligation upon us to observe any of the inventions of men in religion. Baptism does not introduce us into the particular society of Christians by whose ministers it is dispensed, but into the Catholic church; and the duties arising from it are exclusively those which are incumbent upon all the followers of Christ, without any reference to the peculiarities of a party. We are not baptized into the observance of the rites and ceremonies, or into the belief of the erroneous dogmas of the church in which we happen to be born. Baptism is our dedication to Christ; and its design is fulfilled, when, adhering closely to his institutions, we worship the Father in Spirit and in truth.

Lastly, Baptism implies an engagement to obey the commandments of Christ. In the primitive church the candidate was solemnly asked, "Dost thou renounce the devil, and his pomp and his service, and dost thou join thyself to Christ?" and upon his returning an affirmative answer to these questions, baptism was administered to him. After having reminded Christians of their baptism, as expressive of communion with Christ in his death and resurrection, Paul addresses the following exhortations to them: "Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof: neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin; but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God."* As the ear of the Hebrew servant who loved his master was bored, to denote that he was to remain in his house during life, so, by the command of Christ, water is sprinkled or poured upon us, to signify that we are dedicated to his service for ever.

Baptism, like circumcision, is administered but once; not, as Papists main

Rom, vi. 11-13.

tain, because it impresses an indelible character upon the soul, or a mystical quality by which the baptized are fitted for the service of God, conformed to Christ, and distinguished from others; but because regeneration, of which it is significant, is not repeated, and the obligations under which it places us can never be disannulled.

Although children are insensible of the transaction, and can therefore at the time derive no moral benefit from it, yet reflection upon it at a subsequent period may be productive of the happiest effects. To a mind seriously disposed, it must be an affecting consideration, that almost as soon as we entered upon life, we were received into the church of the living God, placed under the dispensation of grace, and consecrated to our Creator and Redeemer. The situation is evidently calculated to awaken sentiments of gratitude, and to call forth our most fervent wishes and diligent endeavours, that the merciful intention of Heaven with respect to us may be accomplished. If a young person attend to the circumstances in which he is placed, he will feel that he is not at liberty to choose his own manner of life, to dispose of himself according to his own pleasure; but is under engagements which it will be his interest to fulfil, and which he cannot violate without great guilt and inexpressible danger.

The baptism of children is calculated to produce the best effects upon parents. It places their children in a new relation to them, and presents them under a new aspect. Parents are now their spiritual guardians, appointed to superintend their eternal as well as their temporal interests. Their children are a sacred deposit, and are not so much theirs as the Lord's, for whose service it is their chief business to prepare them. Their own concern in the solemn transaction, is a powerful appeal to their consciences, and calls for their active endeavours to accomplish the design with which they presented them to be baptized. Some disapprove of exacting any vow or promise from parents, and administer the ordinance with a simple declaration of their duty. It is not a matter of much moment whether they come under a verbal engagement or not, because the law of God previously binds them, and their appearance is a recognition of their obligations. In the act of giving their children to the Lord. they virtually promise to educate them for his service, and to make their souls, still more than their bodies, the objects of solicitude.

LECTURE XC.

ON THE

SACRAMENT OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.

Institution and Primitive Simplicity of the Rite.-Its Gradual Corruption.-Transubstantiation. Meaning of the Words of Institution.-Its Contrariety to the Language of Scripture, to Reason, and to Common Sense.--Pascal's Defence of it Examined.

OUR Lord, having eaten the passover with his disciples the evening on which he was betrayed, instituted the sacred supper, to be a memorial of his sufferings, a sign of his presence with the church, and a seal of the new covenant which he was to confirm the next day with his blood. An account of it is given by the Evangelists; but that which I shall lay before you, as the most

distinct and complete, is found in one of the Epistles of Paul, to whom it had been communicated by our Saviour himself. "I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus, the same night on 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. For as oft as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come."*

It is evident from the words of institution, that it was intended to be a perpetual ordinance. Accordingly we learn from the Scriptures that it was observed in the Apostolical church; and we know that from those days down to the present time, it has been celebrated by his professed disciples without interruption. In the primitive church, the original institution was retained in its simplicity, as we see from the second apology of Justin Martyr, who wrote early in the second century. No ceremonies were added to render it more sacred and venerable in the eyes of the people; no false notions were entertained of its design; no mystery was supposed to be concealed under the symbols and the prescribed actions; the words of Christ were understood according to the meaning which common sense would put upon them, and the ordinance was regarded as a memorial of his passion, and a means of strengthening the faith and increasing the love of his followers. That Father, indeed, informs us, that they did not receive the bread ὡς κοινον αρτον and the cup, ὡς κοινον πομα, "as common bread and wine;" but it is plain that he did not consider them as sacred in consequence of any change which they had undergone in their nature, but solely on account of the purpose to which they were applied, and their sacramental relation to our Saviour. That he looked upon them, although not common, as still bread and wine, appears from his calling them expressly "nourishment," by which our flesh and blood are nourished through their conversion into our substance.

In this light the elements were received for several ages after the days of Justin Martyr, as is manifest from many passages which have been quoted from the Fathers, and which show, that they considered them as still bread and wine, and as having acquired the names of the body and blood of the Lord only in consequence of his appointment, and their sanctification by the offices of the ministers of religion. In process of time highly figurative language began to be used, which, if literally understood, imported a corporeal presence of Christ; and such modes of expression were employed to excite the greater reverence for the institution, and it may be, in some cases, to display the eloquence of the speaker or writer. A notion was adopted by some, and brought forward in the controversy with the Eutychians, that there was a union between Christ and the elements, similar to that between the divine and human nature in his person. Now, although this notion supposed the elements to remain unchanged, to be bread and wine after as well as before consecration, as the human nature retains its essence and properties notwithstanding its personal subsistence in the divine; yet, it manifestly prepared the way, in connexion with the rhetorical language mentioned above, for the idea of a real transmutation which was afterwards broached. Ignorance was fast spreading over the Eastern, and particularly the Western church. Men without learning, and with only a form of religion, were the fit subjects of delusion, and would receive with little hesitation the most absurd and incredible opinions, if they were recommended by an air of mystery, and enjoined by the authority of priests.

It was in the ninth century that a real change of the substance of the elements in the Lord's Supper, was first openly and explicitly maintained. The author 1 Cor. xi. 23-26,

VOL. II.-50.

of this heresy was Pascasius Radbert, abbot of Corbey in France, who, in a treatise concerning the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, taught " that after the consecration of the bread and wine, nothing remained of these symbols but the outward figure, under which the body and blood of Christ were really and locally present; and that the body of Christ thus present in the eucharist, was the same body which was born of the virgin, suffered on the cross, and was raised from the dead."* This novel opinion met with powerful opposition from many distinguished persons of the age. In particular, by the command of the emperor Charles the Bold, Johannes Scotus, and Ratramn or Bertram, composed treatises with a view to state the true doctrine of the eucharist. The work of Scotus has perished; but that of Ratramn is preserved, and gives the same view of the subject which is adopted by the Protestant churches. But the monstrous notion of Radbert accorded with the love of mystery, which has so powerful an influence upon a great part of mankind; and it was so well calculated to increase veneration for the clergy, and to consolidate their dominion over the people, that although clearly refuted, it would not be easily abandoned by those whose interest it was to maintain it. Revolting as it is to common sense, as well as contrary to the faith of the church in the preceding ages, it obtained powerful patronage, was gradually diffused among the nations of the west, and was finally established as an article of faith in the Church of Rome, under the name of Transubstantiation. It received its final sanction from the Council of Trent, which enacted the two following decrees. “If any man shall deny that in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, there are contained truly, really, and substantially the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ; and therefore a whole Christ; and shall say that they are only in it as in a sign, or by a figure, or virtually; let him be accursed." Again, "If any man shall say that in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, there remains the substance of the bread and wine, together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and shall deny the wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and the whole substance of the wine into the blood, the species of bread and wine only remaining, which conversion the catholic church most fitly calls Transubstantiation; let him be accursed."

The doctrine of transubstantiation, which was at first rudely exhibited, required time, and labour, and ingenuity, to mould it into its present form. In order to explain it more distinctly, let me request your attention to the following particulars.

First, The Church of Rome teaches that the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ is not a sign or figure, as is the case in other sacraments, and particularly in baptism, in which water represents the influences of the Holy Ghost; but that the true body and blood of Christ are really and substantially present. Communicants receive not the sign, but the thing signified, for here they are identified.

Secondly, Whereas the eye sees nothing but bread and wine, Papists farther teach, that the substance of the elements is annihilated, and only the species remain. There is merely an appearance of bread and wine. The accidents, namely, the colour, the taste, the smell, the shape, are miraculously retained, while that which supported them is taken away. Our senses assure us that bread and wine are before us; but faith tells us that these are the incarnate Redeemer himself. We have accidents without a substance.

Thirdly, The Church of Rome teaches another mystery with respect to the corporeal presence of Christ. It has been always understood to be an essential property of body to be extended, as it consists of parts placed beyond parts, * Mosheim, Cent. ix. chap. iii. §. 19. +Lib. de Corpore, 224, 284, et passim.

Concil. Trid. Sess. 13. de Euchar, cap. viii. can. 1, 2.