The reasons for my opinion, that Judas did not partake of the Lord's Supper, are,

First, that the language of recognition which was used by the Saviour could not apply to Judas, for Judas was in disposition, in character, and in relationship, a devil; he was, in practice, a thief and a traitor; and, in destiny, he was a son of perdition. All of which are very different from being a Christian. The language then, I say, of recognition used by the Saviour on that occasion, could not include Judas, nor could the command connected therewith apply to Judas, " This is my body which is given for you. This do in remembrance of me. This cup is the new testament in my blood which is shed for you." Luke xxii. 19, 20.

He laid down his life for the sheep; and Judas is not once called by any one name that indicates that he ever was a sheep, or that he ever had a particle of grace in his heart. He was an apostle nominally, but practically he was a thief and a traitor, and was not of the "you" to whom the Lord said, "This is my body which is given for you." But it may here be said that Judas was not only an apostle nominally but also a Christian nominally; and that as he was a Christian professedly, the Saviour did, on the ground of that profession, in the words, "This is my body which is given for you," include Judas. This may appear at first sight rather feasible, but it makes the Saviour do that which was utterly impossible for him to do. It makes the God of truth utter a falsehood-seeing it is not true that his blood was shed for Judas. Judas was not one of the "all," for whom the Surety died. Judas was not one of that world whom God had loved, or he could not have been a son of perdition; for the love of God is everlasting, a there is no separation from it, Jeremiah xxxi. 3 Romans viii. 39. Had Judas ever had a place in this love, he never, no never, could have been separated therefrom. Had he ever been joint-heir with Christ he never could have been an heir of perdition.

This cup is my blood in the New Teatament which is shed for you." These words thus uttered, no exception being made, but spoken as including all who were present at the time, and as it would not have been true to say to Judas this is shed for you, and as it was impossible for the Saviour to speak falsely, these words are to me one argument against Judas partaking of the Lord's Supper.

The second reason for my opinion that Judas did not partake of the Lord's Supper is, that he could not partake of it worthily.

Whatsoever is not of faith is sin. Could Judas partake of it in holy living faith?

6

discern the Lord's body as bearing the sins of his people, as saving his people from their sins? Could Judas, or did Judas, examine himself as to whether his heart was right with God? Did not the thirty pieces of silver, more than anything else, occupy his thoughts, his desires and affections? Does not he, who shall eat of this bread and drink of this cup, unworthily, eat and drink to himself condemnation, not discerning the Lord's body? and if, as the 109th Psalm shews, the prayer of Judas was to become sin, would not his eating and drinking unworthily be sin also? Could his so doing be acceptable to God? In what possible way could it be acceptable to God? Not as an act of either faith in, or love to, God, for his heart (as the hearts of numbers of professors are) was bound up in his covetousness, and if he did partake of the Lord's Supper, then the Lord himself must have ministered the same to him. Is not this to make the Saviour participate in and sanction an act which, in the sight of God, was nothing but sin. Is it right? Is it reverential? Is it scriptural to make the Saviour a participator in an act of sin and hypocrisy of the deepest hue?

Judas was not a real Christian, but still a Jew in heart. The Saviour granted him his right as a Jew, even to the closing course of the Passover Supper, the sop.

He was not incapable of partaking of the Passover as a reflective ordinance-that is, as an ordinance that looked back to their deliverance from Egypt; so that while at the Passover Supper he acted with the greatest hypocrisy towards the Saviour, yet as a Jew in heart he might be sincere in the temporal meaning of the Passover Supper. But the Lord's Supper has no temporal meaning, but a spiritual meaning; and Judas was not a spiritual man but a carnal man, and they that are in the flesh cannot please God. There is, therefore, a difference between the Passover Supper and the Lord's Supper.

If Judas partook of the Lord's Supper, he must have partaken of it unworthily. Can we connect the Holy One with that which is not acceptable to God?

The question perhaps may be asked, "Did the disciples partake of the Lord's Supper worthily, seeing they had but very little discernment of the Lord's body as an offering for sin ?" The answer to this is very simple, and is this: that whatever deficiency there was in understanding, yet they were real believers in Jesus, and their love to him was sincere; and they already had a spiritual and truthful disposition; not any one of which qualities was possessed by Judas. Wherever this heavenly disposition is given, the truth as it is opened up, is sure in the love thereof, to be received by such. They may make many mistakes, and take for a time free-will and low Calvinism for truth, but they will never feel satisfied, or be at rest, until the everlasting covenant, sealed by a Mediator's blood, be thrown open to them, and they brought into the bond thereof; the elements and first principles of which were in the hearts of the disciples when they partook of the Lord's Supper: therefore, they did not partake thereof unworthily. The

10

Lord knew what they were in heart; but we cannot know until, with the mouth, confession is made unto salvation; therefore they cannot be Scripturally received to the Lord's table, until after the Lord has received them; at least, as far as pastor, and deacons, and church can judge; for all have a right to judge in this matter. No pastor or deacons have any right to impose persons upon the church without the church's judgment and consent. They which are spiritual are to judge all things; and are all to share the responsibility of receiving persons into church fellowship; and a matter truly solemn it is, unless we can prove it to be a light thing for any one to eat and drink damnation to himself.

But the third and last reason I shall now assign for my opinion, that Judas did not partake of the Lord's Supper, is, that he was not there when the bread of blessing, and cup of blessing, were given to the disciples.

I must here beg of my reader to remember, that I am giving merely my opinion that Judas did not partake of the Lord's Supper; therefore, when I say he was not there when the Lord's Supper was instituted, I am saying this as my opinion; though I do at the same time confess that my opinion is, in my own mind, very little, if any, short of certainty.

It is beyond all doubt, that Judas left the Lord and the disciples, before they all left the house in which were the Passover Supper and the Lord's Supper. We see (John xiii. 30), that Judas went out at the beginning of the discourse recorded from the 13th to the 17th chapters of John; so that the discourse continued after Judas left, from the 31st verse of the 13th chapter, to the end of the 17th chapter; and then they sang a hymn after this, giving Judas time to get his thirty pieces of silver.

Now, if it could be proved that the Lord's Supper was not given until after Judas had left the company, there would then be an end to all doubt upon the matter; but in the absence of direct proof, we must be guided by the most evident probabilities.

Now, in the first place, it is clear that the Lord's Supper was not given until after the Passover Supper. The Passover Supper, (as we see from John xiii. 2), was ended-before Judas left the company; and there was yet the Lord's Supper to come, of which Supper John does not speak; he goes no farther than the supplement to the Passover Supper-the sop; making it his business rather to shew what the Lord said, than what he did. As John does not mention the Lord's Supper, but only the Passover Supper, there is nothing either impossible or improbable in the opinion, that the Lord's Supper was not given until after Judas left the company, as we know he did leave some time before the Saviour's discourse was ended. Matthew and Mark appear to me to bear out the opinion that Judas did not partake of the Lord's Supper In Matt. xxvi., we find that when the Lord said that one of you shall betray me, Judas, among the rest, said, "Master, is it I?" Judas knew, at the same time, (verses 14 and 15), that he had already covenanted for thirty pieces of silver, yet said, "Master, is it I?"

and the Lord answered him, (verse 25th), "Thou hast said," Here the account by Matthew, of Judas at the Passover, ends-a full stop is made.

Matthew begins the account of the Lord's Supper, with a new paragraph; so that Judas is seen nor heard no more amongst them. Now, after this answer to Judas; after this quick, this abrupt departure of Judas-so abrupt that the disciples thought he was gone to give something to the poor-now, then, it was after this, that the Lord's Supper was ministered to the disciples. Here is not the least proof whatever that Judas was there when the Lord's Supper was ministered; but every probability that he was not there.

Mark xiv. will bear out the same view of this matter: "The Son of Man indeed goeth, as it is written of him; but woe unto that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed: good were it for that man if he had never been born." Here ends, with Mark, the account of Judas at the Passover. Now, it is after this, that the Lord's Supper is spoken of; and Mark, like Matthew, begins the account of the Lord's Supper by a new paragraph. Here, then, again, is no evidence that Judas partook of the Lord's Supper; but on the contrary, he is dismissed before the Supper is given; at least, such is my opinion.

The only difficulty in this part, is the manner in which Luke gives his account of the Lord's Supper; but here the difficulty is not real, but only apparent. But let us test the point.

Luke xxii., makes the hand of Judas to be with the Lord on the table, after the Lord's Supper was ministered. Now, it is clear, that when Judas left, he did not, like Noah's faithful dove, return again to the table, but rather, like the raven, went after his carnal and carrion-like covetousness. Yet Luke, after speaking of the Lord's Supper, speaks of Judas being there.

Now, how are we to reconcile this with Matthew and Mark, who first dismiss Judas, and then give the Supper afterwards-while Luke gives the Supper first, and dismisses Judas afterwards? There is but one way; and that is a very easy way, in which the different testimonies may be reconciled, and be perfectly harmonious one with the other.

Matthew and Mark follow the circumstances in the order in which they took place; Luke does not do this; Luke gives the Passover, and the Passover cup: "And he took the cup (verse 17) and gave thanks; and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves." Now, this was the Passover cup. He then passes on to the Lord's Supper: (verses 19th and 20th)" This cup" this New Testament cup "this cup is the New Testament in my blood which is shed for you." Was Judas one of this "you?" I trow not.

Now, after Luke had thus given an account of the Passover and the Lord's Supper, he then goes back, to bring up an account of the circumstances that occurred at the Passover; thus dividing his subject, as it were, into two parts: First, the Passover, and the Lord's Supper; and then, secondly, the circumstances that occurred on the occasion; and, like a good workman, he finishes one part of his subject

12

Proud nature's a THIEF of an impudent face, That aims to rob God of his glory and grace, To whom all our homage is due:

Ye watchmen in Zion who're faithful and bold, Hunt out the base robber from every fold, And be to Emanuel true.

Proud intellect LIES, and says, "'Tis with ease
A man can repent and believe when he please,
May do it, or let it alone;

Man is a free agent, and so may refuse
The good or the evil which ever he choose,

To will and to do is his own.'

This pride of the heart's an IMPOSTOR, at best, To offer salvation it never possessed,

(Provided I will but comply

With certain conditions on easiest terms)
Inflating the minds of poor ignorant worms
With pride till they perish and die.

And pride is a traitor to Jesus my Lord,
Rebels at his sovereignty, counsel, and word,
(Whose pleasure is going on still);
Defying his power with impious strain,
And cries, "I'll not have this Jesus to reign,
Nor shall I submit to his will."

Proud nature, a TYRANT, once ruled over me,
But now from its bondage my spirit is free,
For Jesus hath triumphed above: [day,
Made willing to own him my King from this
I bow to his sceptre, and yield to its sway-
The rebel is vanquished by LOVE!

CORNELIUS SLIM. Maidstone, November 13, 1853.

A CLEAN BIRD IN AN UNCLEAN CAGE.

A SON of poor old Adam I,

And sure I am I soon must die-
Drop to earth, and lose my breath-
A lifeless captive, led by death.
Father, corruption; dirt, my brother;
The worm my sister and my mother.
A worm-my mother-crawled to earth,
To me, a filthy worm, gave birth.
Father, mother, sister, brother,
All corruption altogether;
And I corrupt among the rest:

How can I through them now be blessed?
'Tis all pollution here; I find
No rest for the immortal mind:
Yea, look without, or look within,
'Tis all pollution, death and sin.
Go where I will, I feel unbless'd;
I cannot find a perfect rest;
I've sought it oft, but never found
True blessings on this cursed ground;
And while I write, I feel I'm dying,
And to my Lord I would be crying,
"O hear me ! save me! Lord, I pray,
From sin in this vile mortal clay.'
I can't refine it, nor control;
It sticks, pollutes, and daubs my soul;
Sometimes it makes my soul quite sick;
'Tis satan's bird-lime-it will stick.
My soul, the bird, sometimes would fly;
Then kicking, sprawling, here I lie :
Where is the man that can engage
To loose my wings, and clean my cage?
I'm in a filthy cage, I know;
Peep out sometimes, yet fear to go,

To find those sweet, immortal things
I feel afraid to trust my wings.
My cage now ricketty and slim,
The windows growing rather dim;
The bottom is not very good,

The worm is working in the wood.

I think my cage has caught the rot;
But, be it so, or be it not,

It's growing now of little worth,
And soon must fall to dust and earth.
This cage of flesh, and blood, and bones,
Must fall to earth among cold stones;
Dissolve, and rot, ('tis all pollution),
Until the day of restitution.

Once in the flesh my Partner died;
Not for himself, 'twas for his bride;
And when he yielded up his breath,
I was baptis'd into his death,
And by his Spirit rose again,
And in his blood wash'd from my sin,
Pure as the mountain virgin snow:
Home to the pure world I shall go.
'Twas in an earthen vessel done;
Done in our flesh, by God our Son,
With hyssop, scarlet, cedar wood:
The scarlet represents his blood.
My quicken'd soul, baptis'd in blood,
Rose from the sacred scarlet flood.
When freed from this vile cage of clay,
I to my Love shall soar away.
But I'm still in this cage of clay,
And in it I my time must stay:
Sometimes I try a little tune;
Again my note is chang'd quite soon;
Then, faint and tired, I hang the wing,
Can neither skip, nor chirp, nor sing;
Under my wing I tuck my head,
And wait for some few crumbs of bread.
I live by bits and crumbs, free given,
Some very sweet-they taste of heaven.
Among "good seed," good grain and crumbs,
Sometimes a piece of sugar comes;
This makes the little bird, (poor thing),
Begin to whistle, chirp and sing;
Freed from the cage, this bird will go
Up to the hill where spices grow.
This loathsome cage of filth and sin,
Where I a captive long have been,
The angel, Death, shall ope' the door,
A captive I shall be no more.
Then sin shall no more clog my wing;
High on the hill of love I'll sing;
Through groves immortal I shall fly,
And never, never, never die.

A WATCHMAN ON THE WALLS.
Leicester, Dec. 4th, 1853.

Tried believer! the dealings of a covenant God with you are not judicial but parental. They flow from your Father's loving heart. That cloud, threatening though it appears, wraps yet in its dark folds no curse; but it embosoms a Parent's blessing. It comes freighted with a mercy from on high. It comes conveying the tidings of love and peace. And when it speaks it will be but the echo of your Father's heart, unfolding to you its hidden and deathless love. Thus, not upon the elect church, will these fast-coming judgments fall, as upon the ungodly world.-Silver Trumpet.