preffive of the principles upon which the Author's fcheme is founded, and of the conclufions, refpecting the Lord's Supper, that refult from them. At the end of the treatise is an appendix, confifting of fix differtations on different points relative to the general fubject, and tending to obviate fome objections which might be offered, and to fupport and illuftrate the principles and reasonings contained in the treatife itself. To the whole are fubjoined notes on particular paffages, both in the treatise and in the appendix. We fhall give our Readers fome extracts from each, that they may be able to form a judgment both of the general scheme of the work, and of the manner in which it is executed. The treatife, as we have obferved, confifts of a series of propofitions regularly numbered, from which we select the following:

II. The true defign of every religious rite muft depend entirely upon the intention of the inftitutor himself with regard to it.

III. The intention of the inftitutor of any religious rite, and confequently the nature and defign of the rite itfelf, must be learnt * from the declarations of the inftitutor, confidered jointly with all fuch circumstances as he must be fupposed to have regarded at the time of the inftitution; and from the declarations of fuch other perfons, if any fuch there are, as he has properly authorized to declare his intentions relating to it ;-and from these authorities only.

. IV. If neither the words of the inftitution of any rite, nor the circumstances in which it was inftituted, nor the declarations of thofe who alone are duly qualified to declare its defign, contain or imply a promife of any peculiar rewards attending the performance of it; or a threatening of any peculiar punishments attending the omiffion of it; the rewards, or punishments, attending the performance or omiffion of fuch rite, can be no other than the good or evil arifing from obedience or disobedience to any exprefs command of the inftitutor; and the good or evil naturally refulting from the due performance or omiflion of the actions themfelves in which the rite confifts.'

Such are the principles on which this judicious divine has founded his scheme; principles which, we imagine, no fober and confiderate mind will be difpofed to deny. The conclufions which he draws from them refpecting the nature and defign of the Lord's Supper, are, in our opinion, equally just and incontrovertible. But this must be left to the judgment of the Reader.

VII. The defign of the Lord's Supper must be learnt from the words of Jefus himself at the inftitution, confidered jointly with the circumftances attending it; and the declarations of the Apostles relating to it, and from no other authorities whatsoever.

VIII. The hiftory of the inftitution of the Lord's Supper is delivered by the Apoftles in the following paffages, and in them only, viz. Matth. xxvi. 26, &c. Mark xiv. 22, &c. Luke xxii. 19, &c. Paul, 1 Cor. xi. 23, &c.'

Here our Author recites the paffages at length.

* Read learned, here and elsewhere,

XI. From thefe accounts given us by the Apofiles of what Jefus faid and did in inftituting this rite, it evidently appears,

ift, That Jefus commanded the Apoftles to obferve a practice of breaking and eating bread, and drinking wîne together, in remembrance of him.

2dly, It appears from the relations of the Apoftles, that Jefus commanded them to do this, not as a mere general remembrance of himfelf; but that they fhould eat the bread, as a memorial of his body, broken or given for them; and the wine, as a memorial of his blood fhed for them; and confequently, both together as memorials of bis death; and further, of his fuffering death for many, that is for all, for remiffion of fins.

3dly, It appears, that the words and actions of our Lord, in inflituting this rite, confidered in themfelves, do neither exprefs, nor imply any thing more as contained in this rite, than what has now been explained.

4thly, More particularly it appears, that the words and actions of Jefus on this occafion, confidered in themselves, do not contain or imply, either a promife of any fpecial reward, that thould attend the performance of this rite, or a threatening of any special punishment that should attend the omiffion of it, or any thing more than a plain description of the rite itself, and a pofitive command to celebrate it.

XII. The Lord's Supper was not inftituted by Jefus for the obfervation of the Apostles alone, but was enjoined by him for a ftanding rite of his religion, to be perpetually celebrated by all who should ever profefs themfelves his difciples.'

In this place Dr. Bell has introduced an ingenious, ftrong, and conclufive argument, in proof of the authority and perpetuity of this Chriftian rite; but which, we think, according to his general plan, fhould rather have made a part of the Appendix. For the particulars of his reasoning we must refer our Readers to the work itself.

• XIII. All the benefits we are warranted in expecting from the due performance of any rite inftituted by Jefus, to which no special benefits have been pofitively annexed, can be no other than these :

.

ift, That approbation of God which an intentional compliance with his will muft certainly procure.

2dly, And, whatever additional ftrength our principles and habits of virtue may naturally acquire by the celebration of any religious rite, owing to the virtuous tendency of the rite itself.

'XIV. All the evils we are warranted in apprehending from the omiffion of any rite inftituted by Jefus, to the omiffion of which no fpecial evils have been pofitively annexed, can be no other than thefe:

1ft, That difapprobation of God, which an intentional disobedience to his will muft certainly produce.

'2dly, And the lofs of whatever additional ftrength our principles and habits of virtue might naturally acquire by the celebration of any parti'cular religious rite, owing to the virtuous tendency of the rite itself.

XV. Since neither the words nor the actions of Jefus, in inftituting the Lord's Supper, do in themselves contain or imply a promife of any fpecial benefits to reward the celebration of this rite, or a threatening of any special evils to punish the omiffion of it, it must be granted, that there neither are, nor can be, any other benefits at

Gg 2

tending

tending the performance, nor any other evils attending the omiffion of it, than thofe juft described in propofitions XIII. and XIV. unlefs it fhall be found, either that fome circumstances yet unnoticed accompanied the inftitution of it, which will give fome peculiar meaning to the words and actions of our Lord in the inftitution; or that the Apostles, in their writings, have communicated to us fome particulars of its nature and effects, which neither the words or actions of Jefus in the inftitution itself, nor the circumftances attending it imply.’ The only peculiar circumftance, according to Dr. Bell, attending the inftitution of the rite in queftion, was, 'That the fupper at which it was inftituted was not a mere common meal, but the pafchal fupper and the only paffages in the writings of the Apoftles, from which any intelligence may be collected, respecting the nature and defign of the Lord's Supper, are, 1 Cor. xi. 1. and I Cor. xi. 20-34. But from neither of these can any thing be justly inferred inconfiftent with the account already given of this Christian rite. In the fequel of his difcourfe, this ingenious and judicious Writer proceeds to confider and illuftrate, upon the principles already advanced, the apparent intention of Jefus in appointing fuch a memorial of his death; what is neceffary to the due celebration of it, and the beneficial confequences arifing from a ferious and devout obfervance of it; and to guard his readers against some fuperftitious notions and enthufiaftical expectations which arife from mistaken ideas of the nature and defign of the Lord's Supper. After which he fums up the whole in the following

X. 14.

'CONCLUSION. If the principles above laid down are true, and the confequences drawn from them juft, it follows,

That the Lord's Supper is a rite of the fimpleft and plainest nature, perfectly intelligible to every capacity.

That it is nothing more than what the words of the inftitution fully exprefs, a religious commemoration of the fufferings and death of Chrift, and the general purpose for which he died;-which it is the abfolute duty of every one who believes in him to celebrate, because he himself enjoined it; and which requires nothing more for its worthy celebration, than that intentional obedience, and ferious difpofition of mind, which deliberate reflection upon the particulars commemorated in it will naturally produce.

That as the performance of it is not attended with any other benefits than those we ourselves take care to make it productive of, by its religious influence on our principles and practice, fo nothing but our own want of ferioufnefs and good intention in performing it can poffibly make it productive of any danger or evil.

That as its primary object is the commemoration of the fufferings of our Lord in accomplishing the adopted plan of our redemption, we ought always to be difpofed to affift at it, with the fame readiness, the fame thankfulness, and the fame ease and fatisfaction of mind, with which we offer up our thanksgivings to God in our conftant acts of worship.

And, in fine, that though it is left to our own difcretion how often to celebrate it, nothing can fo well manifeft our proper ideas

of,

of, and attention to it, as an habitual performance of it, whenever. an opportunity is purpofely afforded us; while an habitual omiflion of it, when fet before us, muft unavoidably convict us, either of ignorance of its univerfal and perpetual obligation; fome mifconception of its nature and effects; or an intentional disobedience to a pofitive Chriftian duty.-The injunction of our Lord is always a reafon for performing it; and, if rightly understood, there cannot be any good reafon for avoiding it; confiftent with those principles which habitually influence the conduct of a man of virtue, and upon which whoever profeffes himself a Chriftian would be underflood to act.'

The Appendix is divided into fix Parts or Numbers. In No. I. Dr. Bell confiders the refemblance between the Lord's Supper and the Jewish Pafchal Supper, and the confequences that may be deduced from that refemblance. No. II. is a critical inquiry into the meaning of St. Paul in what he has advanced relating to the Lord's Supper in 1 Epift. Cor. ch. x. ver. 14. to ch. xi. ver. 1. and a judicious paraphrase of the whole paffage. No. III. contains an explanation of that paffage in the following chapter, in which the Apostle reproves the Corinthians for the impropriety and indecency of their behaviour when affembled to celebrate the Lord's Supper: viz. ch. xi. ver. 20-32. In No. IV. our Author confiders another paffage in the fame Epiftle, ch. v. ver. 7, 8. and proves, that fo far is it from communicating any new intelligence respecting the nature or design of the rite in queftion, that in fact the Lord's Supper is not fo much as alluded to in it. In No. V. Dr. Bell diftinctly replies to Dr. Cudworth's argument, founded on what St. Paul has faid relating to the Lord's Supper, 1 Cor.. x. 14, &c. to evince that it is, A Feast upon Sacrifice: And in No. VI. fets himself to prove in general, that upon the obvious fundamental principles of the Chriftian religion, the Lord's Supper cannot have the fame refpect to the Chriftian facrifice, meaning thereby the death of Chrift, which the Jewish and the Gentile feafts had to their facrifices. Upon this last point, we cannot but think, that his reasoning would have been more clear and conclufive, if he had not embarraffed himself with the ideas of atonement and merits, or had obferved that the death of Chrift is termed a facrifice merely by way of allusion, in the fame manner as thanksgiving, faith, repentance, and in general a conduct agreeable to the Chriftian profeffion, are termed facrifices.

As a fpecimen of our Author's critical abilities, we fhall prefent our Readers with the following extract from No. II. in which he has with great judgment corrected an incidental miftake of Bishop Hoadly, and other writers on this subject, as well as of the generality of commentators.

Gg 3

• Remark

Remark 2. The next words in the original whofe, meaning has been made matter of difpute, and upon the fuppofed meaning of which all the notions which have ever been embraced of fomething myfterious in the nature of the Lord's Supper have been chiefly, if not entirely founded; are-Kowwwx in ver. 16.; and Kowvwvos in ver. 18 and 20.; and μετέχειν in ver. 17, 21, and 30.

Κοινωνία-κοινωνος-κοινωνεω

ift, Signifies merely the connection, participation, partnership, agreement, &c. of one perfon or thing with, in, or of, another perfon or thing; without any reference whatever to the joint participation, &c. of more than one in the fame thing.

As 2 Cor. vi. 14. viii. 23. Ephef. iii. 9. Philipp. ii. 1. iii. 10. I Tim. v. 22. Philem. 17. And I Pet. v. 1. 2 John 11. And this is exactly the manner in which it is used in the very passage in question, 1 Cor. x. 16.

6

2dly, Where feveral perfons or things are spoken of as partaking of any thing, this word itself does not exprefs collectively the joint participation of all; but fimply the diftinct participation of each: that is, in other words, it expreffes the mere participation itself, and nothing more.'

As Rom. xv. 27. 1 Cor. i. 9. 2 Cor. i. 7. xiii. 13. Gal. ii. 9. Heb. ii. 14. x. 33. 1 Pet. iv. 13. 2 Pet. i. 4. 1 John i. And fo it is ufed likewife in

3, 6, 7. Matt. xxiii. 30. Luke v. 10. the paffage before us, 1 Cor. x. 18, 20.

' 3dly, When St. Paul would exprefs, in this word itself, the idea of the joint partaking, &c. of more than one in any perfon or thing, he diftinguishes his meaning by prefixing to it the particle-ou.

As Rom. xi. 17. 1 Cor. ix. 23. Ephef. v. 11. Philipp. i. 7. iv. 14. And fo John, Rev. xviii. 4

6 μετέχειν μετοχος μετοχη

ift, Signifies merely one perfon's or thing's partaking of, agreeing with, &c. another perfon or thing; without any reference whatever to the joint partaking, &c. of more than one in the fame thing: As I Cor. ix. 10, x. 30. 2 Cor. vi. 14. Heb. ii. 14.

4

< 2dly, When feveral perfons or things are fpoken of, as partaking, &c. of any thing, this word itself does not exprefs collectively the joint partaking of all, but fimply the diftinct partaking, agreement, &c. of each, with the thing fpoken of: that is, it fignifies the parti cipation itself, and nothing more.

As 1 Cor. ix. 12. Heb. iii. 1. 14. vi. 4. xii. 8. And in the paffage before us, i Cor, x. 17. 21.

3dly, When St. Paul would exprefs, in this word itself, the idea of the joint partaking, joint agreeing, &c. of feveral together in any perfon or thing, he diftinguishes his meaning by prefixing to it the particle-ouv.

• As Ephef. iii. 6. v. 7. .

*The word nowvava fometimes fignifies benevolent affiftance, or charitable contribution towards thofe who ftand in need of it. As Rom. xii. 13. xv. 26. 2 Cor. viii. 4. ix. 1. 13. Gal. vi, 6. Philipp. i. 5. iv. 15. Heb. xiii, 16. And fo Acts ii. 42. But with this application of it we have here no concern, and when used, in this fenfe it is eafily diftinguished.

་་་་