is my body;" and of the wine, "This is my blood." These words admit but of two modes of interpretation-the literal, which conducts directly into all the absurdities and blasphemies of transubstantiation; and the figurative, which represents the bread and the wine, as emblems of the body and blood of the Redeemer; just in the same way as the rock which supplied the Israelites with water during their wanderings in the wilderness, is called Christ. The words plainly imply, that he who used them had a body and blood-was a possessor of human nature : and the elements, to a well-instructed Christian, naturally recall the grand fundamental doctrine of the incarnation. In silent, but expressive language, they proclaim, "The word was made flesh, and dwelt among men inasmuch as the children were partakers of flesh and blood, he also took part of the same. Great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh."

But in the Lord's Supper we not only have bread and wine, but broken bread and poured-out wine. Our Lord has unfolded the meaning of these emblems also: "This is my body broken, my blood shed; my body broken, my blood shed for you; my body broken, my blood shed for remission of sin unto many." The broken bread and the poured-out wine are, when thus explained, calculated to suggest to Christian minds, that the incarnate Saviour, after a life of suffering, died a violent death; that these sufferings and this death were vicarious and expiatory, undergone in the room of sinners, to obtain their salvation. It concentrates as it were the principal statements both of the prophets and the evangelists; and, with one glance of the eye, we see the wondrous plan of human redemption through the mediation of the incarnate only begotten. It tells us more touchingly than words could do, that "Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures; that he

was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities; that in him we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins; that he has given himself for us a sacrifice and an offering; and has thus brought us unto God."

But the doctrines of the incarnation and the atonement are not the only principles of Christian truth which are embodied in the Lord's Supper. Had their representation been its sole object, it might have been gained, by the minister's exhibiting bread and wine; and while he pointed to them, proclaiming, "This is Christ's body broken; this is Christ's blood shed for you." But this is not the Lord's Supper. In that ordinance, we have not only broken. bread and poured out wine; but the broken bread is eaten, and the poured-out wine is drank. This also is replete with spiritual meaning. From the passage above quoted, from one of our Lord's discourses, it is plain, that eating Christ's flesh and drinking Christ's blood, is significant of that interest in his sufferings and death, which, by the divine appointment, is connected with the belief of the truth respecting them: so that here we are furnished with an emblematical representation of that cardinal doctrine of Christianity, that "whosoever believeth in Christ Jesus shall not perish, but have everlasting life." As bread and wine, though in themselves most nutritious food, will not nourish us, unless we eat the one and drink the other, so the expiatory sufferings and death of the incarnate son of God, though of themselves adequate to the salvation of the greatest sinner, will not save us unless we believe.

But we have not yet exhausted the spiritual meaning of the emblems in the Lord's Supper. Had it been our Lord's object merely to embody, in an emblematical institution, the principles, "that the only begotten of God in human nature suffered and died in the room of sinners, to procure their salvation; and

that faith in these truths is at once absolutely neces sary and completely sufficient to secure to the sinner an interest in this salvation;" it is probable that the sacred rite would have been of such a nature as admitted of performance by a single individual. But this is not the case with the Lord's Supper. It is a social institution, and Christians must "come together to eat the Lord's Supper." Without any explicit revelation on the subject, knowing, as we do from other passages of Scripture, that a very intimate relation does subsist among all the true followers of Jesus Christ, we might perhaps have warrantably concluded that this mystical feast was intended emblematically to represent their holy fellowship. But it is our wish to say nothing in reference to the meaning of this ordinance but what we are distinctly taught in Scripture. Indeed, there is no necessity to have recourse to inference. The passage already quoted from the apostle Paul is most explicit. In partaking of the cup of blessing, there is a commun-ion, or mutual participation of the blood of Christ; in partaking of the broken bread, there is a communion, or mutual participation of the body of Christ and the consequence of this mutual participation is, that the partakers are all one body and one bread. The reality and the nature of that intimate relation which subsists among all Christ's genuine followers is there strikingly exhibited. They are holy society, bound together by their common faith in the grand leading truths of Christianity, embodied in this emblematical institution, and, by their common love to that Saviour who is in it, "evidently set forth, crucified and slain."

;

It is deeply to be regretted, that this part of the meaning of the Lord's Supper has been so much overlooked and forgotten, and that, "the symbol of our common Christianity" should have been almost universally converted into "the badge and criterion

of a party, a mark of discrimination applied to distinguish the nicer shades of difference among Christians."* It was not so from the beginning. The church of Christ was originally one body: the ordinance of the Lord's Supper is suited to such an order of things; and however perverted from its original purpose, though, instead of the common place of friendly meeting for all who believe the truth and love the Saviour, it has in many cases become "the line of demarcation, the impassable boundary which separates and disjoins them," still, in its obvious emblematical meaning, it sounds a retreat from the unnatural divisions which prevail among the genuine followers of the Saviour, by proclaiming, that they are indeed all "one in Christ Jesus."

There is just one other important principle of Christian truth which we consider as embodied in the Lord's Supper. The Lord's Supper is a positive institution. It is entirely founded on the authority of Jesus Christ, as Him to whom all power in heaven and earth belongs. It does not like what may be termed the moral part of our religion necessarily to arise out of the relations in which we stand to God as the God of salvation, and to Jesus Christ as the Redeemer of mankind, such as faith, confidence, and obedience. The sole obligation of this ordinance arises out of its appointment by Christ. It would have been our duty to have gratefully and devoutly remembered our Saviour's dying love, though no express command had been given us to that effect; but it would not have been our duty to have expressed this grateful and devout recollection by the eating bread and drinking wine, had not Jesus Christ said, "Do this in remembrance of me." The ordinance, then, embodies in it Christ's claims on the implicit obedience of his followers, and holds him forth as their Lawgiver as well as their Saviour.

* Hall.

Thus have we seen how replete with Christian truth is this emblematical institution. It forcibly presents to the Christian's mind these great fundamental principles of his religion, "that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, assumed human nature, and suffered and died in the room of sinners, to obtain their salvation; that all who believe God's testimony concerning this method of salvation, shall be saved; that all who are thus interested in this Christian salvation form a holy fellowship, bound together by the faith of the same truth, and reliance on the same Saviour; and that all who belong to this Christian fellowship are bound to submit implicitly to the Saviours authority, and to walk in all his ordinances and commandments blameless."

But the Lord's Supper contains in it an emblematical comfirmation, as well as an emblematical exhibition, of Christian doctrine. It presents to us not only the truth, but its evidence. The Lord's Supper involves in it satisfactory evidence of the truth of Christianity in general. It has been remarked, by one of the most ingenious defenders of Christianity,* that there can be no reasonable doubt of the reality of any event which is of such a nature as that men's senses can clearly and fully judge of it, which took place publicly, and in commemoration of which, public institutions were immediately appointed, and have continued to be observed with uninterrupted succession till the present time. The facts of our Lord's death and resurrection are facts to which these characters belong. They were events, of the reality of which, men, in the exercise of the senses common to the species, could clearly and fully judge-they took place publicly,-in the institutions of the Lord's Supper and the Lord's day, institutions more closely connected than seems generally to be apprehended by Christians in the present age, we have public ob

* Leslie.