this system, eating and drinking unworthily has a further sense than enters into the Socinian system, and it becomes the duty of every Christian to examine himself, not only with regard to his knowledge, but also with regard to his general conduct, before he eats of that bread and drinks of that cup. It becomes also the duty of those who have the inspection of Christian societies, to exclude from this ordidance persons, of whom there is every reason to believe that they are strangers to the sentiments which it presupposes, and without which none are prepared for holding that communion with Jesus which it implies.

This fourth system may, with proper judgment and discretion, be rendered in a high degree subservient to the moral improvement of Christians; but there is much danger of its being abused. The notion of a communion with Christ in this particular ordinance, more intimate than at any other time, may foster a spirit of fanaticism, unless the nature and the fruits of that communion are carefully explained. The humble and contrite may be overwhelmed with religious melancholy, when the state of their minds does not correspond to the descriptions which are sometimes given of that communion. Presumptuous sinners may be confirmed in the practice of wickedness by feeling an occasional glow of affection; or, on the other hand, a general neglect of an ordinance, which all are commanded to observe, may be, and in some parts of Scotland is, the consequence of holding forth notions of the danger and guilt of communicating unworthily, more rigorous than are clearly warranted by Scripture.*

I have now delineated the four capital systems of opinion, to which the few passages in Scripture that mention the Lord's supper have given occasion. I leave to your private study a critical examination of the several passages, and a particular discussion of the various arguments, by which each system has been supported. In prosecuting this study, you will find that the passage in 1 Cor. x. has suggested the idea of a feast after a sacrifice, as the true explication of the Lord's supper. The idea was first illustrated by Cudworth, in a particular dissertation, printed at the end of that edition of his Intellectual System, which the learned Mosheim, a Lutheran divine, published in Latin, and has enriched with the most valuable notes. The idea was adopted by the ingenious Warburton, and applied by him, in one of his sermons, in a treatise on the Lord's supper, and in a supplemental volume of the Divine Legation of Moses, as an effectual answer to both the Popish and the Socinian systems. When you examine what Cudworth, Mosheim, Warburton, Hoadley, and Bell have written, you will probably think that this idea, like many others which learned and ingenious men lay hold of, has been pushed too far; that, although there are points of resemblance between the Lord's supper, and those feasts which, both amongst heathens and Jews, followed after sacrifices, yet the resemblance is too vague, and fails in too many respects to furnish the ground, either of a clear exposition of the nature of the ordinance, or of any solid argument in opposition to those who have mistaken its nature.

* Hill's Theological Institutes, Part. iii. 2.

In the fourth system the church of England and we perfectly agree, as may be seen by comparing Articles xxviii. and xxix. with our standards. With regard to the differences between us, as to the times, the places, and the manner of receiving the Lord's supper, they are too insignificant, I do not say to be discussed, but to be mentioned here; "for the kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." One circumstance only may appear to be important. The nature of the ordinance, as well as the words of Paul," As often as ye eat this bread," implies this difference between the two sacraments, that while baptism is not to be repeated, the Lord's supper is to be received frequently. But as the spiritual religion of Jesus has, in no instance, given a precise directory for the outward conduct, the frequency of celebrating it is left to be regulated by the prudence of Christian societies. The early Christians were accustomed to partake of the Lord's supper, every time that they assembled for public worship. It is certainly fit that Christians should not assemble for that purpose, without remembering the great event which is characteristical of their religion. But as that event may be brought to their remembrance by prayer, by reading the Scriptures, by the discourses delivered when they assemble, and by the sacrament of baptism, it does not appear essential, that the particular and solemn method of showing the Lord's death, which he has appointed, should form a part of their stated worship. In latter times, the Lord's supper is celebrated by some churches, at the return of stated festivals throughout the year; by others, without any fixed time, according to circumstances, either oftener in the year, or, in imitation of the Jewish passover, only once. There are advantages attending all the modes, which it is difficult precisely to estimate; for if the impressions connected with this ordinance are oftener excited in one mode, it may be expected that they will be deeper and more lasting in another. Very worthy people have differed as to the obligation of communicating frequently, and consequently as to the distance of time at which such opportunities should be afforded to large societies of Christians. But at whatever time the Lord's supper is administered, all who hold the fourth system agree in thinking themselves warranted, by these words of our Lord," this cup is the new covenant in my blood," to represent this ordinance as the appointed method, in which Christians renew their covenant with God. For while they engage, at a time when every sentiment of piety and gratitude may be supposed to be strong and warm in their breasts, that they will fulfil their part of their covenant, they behold in the actions which they perform a striking representation of that event, by which the covenant was confirmed; and they receive, in the grace and strength then conveyed to their souls, a seal of that forgiveness of sins, which, through the blood of the covenant, is granted to all that repent, and a pledge of the future blessings promised to those who are "faithful unto death."

Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. Cudworth with Mosheim's Notes. Warburton. Hoadley Bell. Bagot.

CHAPTER VIII.

CONDITION OF MEN AFTER DEATH.

THE concluding topic of the ordinary system of theology is entitled De novissimis, i. e. De resurrectione, extremo judicio, eterná morte, eternâ vitâ. It comprehends various questions respecting the condition of men after death. It might appear strange if I were to omit the mention of this topic: and yet I do not think any particular discussion of it necessary in this place. For all the questions generally arranged under this topic are included in former parts of the course, or turn upon principles that belong to other sciences, or are of such a nature as not to admit of any solution. The great doctrine which theology clearly teaches, with regard to the future condition of men, is this, that by the righteousness of Jesus Christ there is conveyed, to all who repent and believe, a right to eternal life.* This is the only point which it is of importance for us distinctly to understand; for if God is to give eternal life to his servants through Jesus Christ, there can be no doubt that it will be a happy life, although the present state of our faculties may not admit of our forming an adequate conception of the nature of its felicity. The various images, which are used in Scripture, may indeed be employed with great propriety by persons of correct taste, and of a sober and chastised judgment, in filling up such a picture of a future state, as may minister to the consolation and improvement of Christians. But this is rather a subject of popular discourse than of theological discussion; because the data are not sufficient to establish, beyond doubt, any one position concerning the particulars that constitute the happiness of a future state, as the only position that can be seriously maintained by those who receive the Scripture accounts.

Besides questions concerning the nature of the happiness of heaven, there have also arisen questions concerning the state of the soul, in the interval between death and the general resurrection. But these questions belong to pneumatology. For if we believe, with Dr. Priestley, that the soul is not a substance distinct from the body, we must believe with him that the whole of the human machine is at rest after death, till it be restored to its functions at the last day; but if we are convinced of the immateriality of the soul, we shall not think the soul so entirely dependent in all its operations upon its present companion, but that it may exist and act in an unembodied state. And if once we are satisfied that a state of separate existence is possible, we shall

Book iv. ch.4.

easily attach credit to the interpretation commonly given of the various expressions in Scripture, which seem to intimate that the souls of good men are admitted to the presence of God immediately after death, although we soon find that a bound is set to our speculations, concerning the nature of this intermediate state. The subject is handled by Burnet, De Statu Mortuorum et Resurgentium; and it has of late been rendered an object of attention by the bold speculations of Dr. Priestley, and by an opinion which Law has expressed very fully in the Appendix to Considerations on the Theory of Religion, and which many English divines have not scrupled to avow; that immortality was not the condition of man's nature, but an additional privilege conferred through Jesus Christ, and that the Christian revelation of an immortality lays the chief, if not the whole, stress upon a resurrection.

One branch of the opinions that have been held concerning an intermediate state is the popish doctrine of purgatory, a doctrine which appears, upon the slightest inspection of the texts that have been adduced in support of it, to derive no evidence from Scripture; which originated in the error of the church of Rome in assigning to personal suffering a place in the justification of a sinner; and which is completely overturned by the doctrine of justification by faith, and by the general strain of Scripture, which represents this life as a state of probation upon our conduct during which our everlasting condition depends.

The certainty of a general resurrection is included in that right to eternal life, which enters into the nature of the Gospel remedy. But it has been asked, with regard to the resurrection, whether the same bodies rise. In giving the answer, we are obliged to resort to the principles of physiology, and soon find ourselves entangled in a dispute about words, upon this abstruse and undefinable question in metaphysics; what is the principle of identity in a substance undergoing such perpetual changes as the human body? A question has also been agitated, with regard to the eternity of hell torments. That view of the benevolence of the divine administration, and of the final efficacy of that benevolence, which seems to be implied in the opinion that hell torments are not eternal, naturally creates a prejudice in favour of it. But in speaking of the extent of the Gospel remedy, I stated the extreme caution with which we ought to speculate upon subjects so infinitely removed beyond the sphere of our observation; and the only thing which I have now to add is, that the Scriptures, by applying the very same expression to the happiness of the righteous, and the punishment of the wicked, seem to teach us that both are of equal duration.

Burnet.-Priestley.-Law.-Horsley.-Confession of Faith.-Marckii Medulla.-Calvin's Institutes. Secker's Lectures on the Catechism, and Five Sermons against Popery.

4 U