and Will of Christ in all matters necessary to Faith and Salvation Let us therefore bring them under a strict examination St. Matthew gives this account of the whole matter As they were eating Jesus took Bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it to the Disciples and said Take eat this is my Body And he took the Cup and gave Thanks and gave it to them saying Drink ye all of it For this is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the Remission of Sins But I say unto you I will not Drink henceforth of this Fruit of the Vine until that day when I Drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdom And when they had Sung an Hymn they went out into the Mount of Olives Much to the same purpose is the account which St. Mark gives of this matter And as they did eat Jesus took Bread and blessed and brake it and gave to them and said Take eat this is my Body And he took the Cup and when he had given Thanks he gave it to them and they all Drank of it And he said unto them This is my Bloud of the New Testament which is shed for many Verily I say unto you I will Drink no more of the Fruit of the Vine until that day that I Drink it new in the Kingdom of God And when they had Sung a Hymn they went out into the Mount of Olives And this is the sum of what Saint Mark delivers concerning the Lord's Supper Saint Luke with very little variation thus describes the matter And he took Bread and gave Thanks and brake it and gave unto them saying This is my Body which is given for you this do in Remembrance of me Likewise also the Cup after Supper saying This Cup is the New Testament in my Bloud which is shed for you This Evangelist indeed makes mention of another Cup which our Lord took and after he had blessed it he said to his Disciples Take this and divide it among your selves and withal told them that he would not Drink of the Fruit of the Vine until the Kingdom of God should come which Cup plainly refers to the Passover as will appear to any one who will consult and compare the 15 16 17 and 18. Verse of the fore-mentioned Chapter and is supposed to be that Cup wherewith the Jews were wont to begin the Paschal Feast which they Blessed or Consecrated in this Form of words Blessed be God who Created the Fruit of the Vine And whereas our Lord saith he will Drink no more of the Fruit of the Vine his meaning is that he would never Celebrate the Feast of the Passover with them any more after that time but their next Festival Meeting should be in Heaven and this is very consistent with our Lord 's Drinking another Cup after this which he Consecrated to another use and signification in the Sacrament Ver. 20. And this is all the light this Divine Writer affords us concerning the outward Rites and Ceremones which our Lord used himself at the Institution of the Sacrament and established for the use of all Christians in all succeeding Ages As for St. John he makes no mention at all of the Institution of this Holy Feast by our Lord. All that can be collected from his Writings relates to the Passover or according to the Learned Dr. Lightfoot to what past between Christ and his Disciples at a common and ordinary meal in Bethany and that for this reason among many others judiciously urged by him because the Disciples thought when our Lord had said to him Ver. 27. That thou doest do quickly that he had given order to Judas who kept the bag to buy those things that they had need of against the Feast viz. the Passover and therefore all those passages and that discourse related by St. John in the foregoing Verses of that Chapter were transacted at an ordinary and common Supper And indeed this seems to be the great end and design which St. John proposed to himself in writing his Gospel and which throughout he constantly pursues viz. To add out of his own Knowledge several remarkable passages especially such as tend to demonstrate the Divinity of our Saviour as had been omitted by the other Evangelists in their History of the Birth Life Actions and Sufferings of our Blessed Saviour There is another passage in St. John's Gospel which in the Judgment of many Learned Divines both Ancient and Modern hath respect to the Lord's Supper though not at that time instituted when those mysterious words were uttered by our Saviour Except ye Eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and Drink his Blood ye have no life in you Whoso Eateth my Flesh and Drinketh my Blood hath Eternal Life and I will raise him up at the last day For my Flesh is meat indeed and my Blood is drink indeed He that Eateth my Flesh and Drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him Now all that can be inferr'd from these words as they relate to this Holy Feast is onely thus much that it 's highly necessary for all Christians who have an opportunity to do it to partake of the Lord's Supper as they would partake in the merits of his Sacrifice and the Efficacy of his Death and his Sufferings and that none but such as do receive the tokens and signs of his Body broken and Blood shed for their Sins shall be owned and rewarded by him as his Friends These are all the places that we meet with in the Gospel let us now see what is delivered in the Acts and other Writings of the Apostles and Divinely-inspired Authors Among all their Writings there is but one place which gives any account of the History of the Sacrament and Institution of it and that is in the 1 Epist. to the Corinthians Chap. 11. where St. Paul declares that what he delivered to them he received by immediate Revelation from Christ himself viz. That the Lord Jesus the same night in 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 he took the Cup when he had Supped saying This Cup is the New Testament in my Bloud this do as oft as ye Drink it in Remembrance of me For as often as ye eat this Bread and Drink this Cup ye do shew or shew ye the Lord's Death till he come There are several other places wherein the Holy Sacrament is mentioned and described by several Names and Titles sutable to the nature and ends of it which for brevity sake I omit and desire the Reader to consult at his leisure and I would not put him to that trouble if they did contain any thing that made against Kneeling
or that lookt like a command for the use of any other Gesture Let us now look back a little upon the places forementioned and see what our Lord hath ordained and appointed to be of perpetual use in his Church The Apostles and Disciples of our Lord at the Institution of the Sacrament were the Representatives of the whole Church and are to be considered under a double capacity Either as Governours and Ministers entrusted by Christ with the Power of dispensing and administring the Sacrament or as ordinary and lay Communicants If we consider them as Governours and Stewards of the Mysteries their Duty to which they are obliged by the express command of their Lord is to take the Bread into their Hands to bless and consecrate it to that mysterious and Divine use to which he designed it to break it to give it to the Communicants as he gave it them And so in like manner to Take the Cup to bless it to give it to their fellow-Christians That which they were obliged to do by the command of our Lord considered as private Men and in common with all believers was to take and receive the Consecrated Elements of Bread and Wine to eat and Drink and to do all this in Commemoration of his wonderful Love in giving his Body to be broken and his Blood to be shed for the Sins of the World And what the least Syllable or Shadow of a Command is there here in all this History for the use of any Gesture in the Act of Receiving Since then the Holy Scripture is altogether silent as to this matter its silence is a full and clear demonstration that Kneeling is not repugnant to any express Command of our Lord because no Gesture was ever Commanded at all And this hath been ingenuously Confessed in writing by a great Enemy to Kneeling and a great Advocate for Sitting That the Gesture of Sitting is but a matter of Circumstance and not expresly Commanded But the Scotch Ministers Assembled at Perth affirm that when our Lord at the Institution Commanded his Disciple to do this he did by those words Command them to use that Gesture which he used at that time as well as to Take Eat Drink c. The Force of their Argument lies in this if it have any force at all Our Saviour Sate at the Passover as the Scriptures plainly inform us and it is to be supposed he continued in the same posture when he instituted and Administred the Sacrament which was at the close of the Passover therefore Do this relates to and includes the Gesture amongst other things But this is a miserable shift which tends to Sink rather than Support their Cause For first If our Lord did Sit when he Administred the Sacrament which we will suppose at present yet there is no reason in the World to incline us to think that he intended by those words Do this to oblige us to observe his Gesture onely and not several other Circumstances which he observed at the same time Since Christ hath not restrained and interpreted these words Do this so that they should onely respect Sitting as he did why should we not think our selves obliged to do all that he did at the same time as well as this For example If these words may be interpreted thus Do this that is Sit as Christ did why not thus also Do this that is celebrate the Sacrament in an upper Room in a private House late at night or the Evening after a full Supper in the Company of 11 or 12 at most and they onely Men with their Heads Covered according to the custom of those Countries and with unleavened Bread There lyeth as great an Obligation upon all Christians to observe all these Circumstances in Imitation of our Lord by vertue of these words Do this as there doth to Sit. So that this Argument violently recoils upon those that urge it and proves a great deal more than they are willing to have it It concludes strongly against their own Practices and the liberty they take in omitting some things and pressing the necessary observance of others upon a reason which equally obliges to all But I desire our Dissenting Brethren who may be of the same Perswasion with these Scotch-men to take this further consideration along with them which I think will turn the Scales and make deep impressions upon tender Consciences and oblige them to observe most of the other Circumstances which they omit rather than this of Sitting which they so earnestly press and contend for All those forementioned Circumstances except the two Last which too are generally allowed among Learned Men on all sides are expresly mentioned in the Gospel and were without dispute observed by Christ at the Institution of the Sacrament But the particular Gesture used by him at that time is not expresly mentioned and what it was is very disputable and dubious as I shall evince by and by under the second Query How then can any Man think himself obliged in Conscience by the force of these words Do this to do what Christ is no where expresly said to do and not obliged to do what the Scripture affirms he really did Why that which is dark and dubious should be made an infallible Rule of Conscience and that which is plainly and evidently set down in Scripture should have no force nor be esteemed any Rule at all These are Questions I confess beyond my capacity and surpassing my skill to resolve It 's clear from St. Paul in the forecited place that those words of our Lord Do this do respect onely the Bread and Wine which signify the Body and Bloud of Christ and those other actions there specified by him which are essential to the right and due celebration of that Holy Feast For when it 's said Do this in Remembrance of me and This do ye as oft as ye Drink it in Remembrance of me and As oft as ye Eat this Bread and Drink this Cup ye do shew the Lords Death till he come it 's plain that Do this must be restrained to the Sacramental Actions there mentioned and not extended to the Gesture of which the Apostle speaks not a word Our Lord Instituted the Sacrament in Remembrance of his Death and Passion and not in Remembrance of his Gesture in Administring it And consequently Do this is a general Command obliging us onely to such particular Actions and Rites as he had Instituted and made necessary to be used in order to this great end viz. to signify and represent his Death and that Bloudy Sacrifice which he offered to his Father on the Cross for us miserable Sinners Upon the whole matter I think we may certainly conclude that there is not a tittle of a Command in the whole New Testament to oblige us to receive the Lords Supper in any particular Posture and if any be so scrupulous after all as not to receive it
Gospel are Phrases of alike Import it Scripture so in like manner to follow Christ is all one with following the Gospel-Rule or doing as Christ did in obedience to his Commands The Sum of all is this An Example may help to Interpret a Law but of it self it is no Law Against a Rule no Example is a Competent Warrant and if the Example be according to the Rule it 's not the Example but the Rule that is the Measure of our Actions 3. The bare Example of Christ is no Warrant for us to go by because he was an extraordinary Person and did many things which we cannot and many which we must not do He Fasted 40 Days and 40 Nights and spent whole Nights in Prayer he wrought many Miracles to prove the Truth of his Doctrine and his Divine Authority by that he was the Messias the Son of God and Saviour of Mankind he was a Prophetical Priest by which Office he was obliged to teach us the whole mind of God in all things necessary to Faith and Salvation and to offer up himself as a propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins of the World Nothing we should quickly experiment would be more Vain and Foolish than attempts of an Imitation in some things And nothing more Wicked than to think and believe we may and ought to follow his example in others To dye to Sin and Crucify the Flesh with its Affections and Lusts is a good way as the Scripture Teaches and Warrants of Imitating our Lords Death in a Spiritual Sense So to Die rather than deny the Faith and Dishonour our Saviour is great and Praiseworthy but to Die for Sin either our own or other Men's to propose a Meritorious Death to our Selves and by way of expiation is a Sin of so deep a Stain that the Blood of Christ will not Wash out For this in effect is Trampling upon and Vilifying of the Precious Blood of our Saviour and to detract from the Virtue and Merits of his Sacrifice and thereby render it weak and insufficient to save us Blindly therefore to follow the Example of Christ is a certain way to run into Error and Mischief We must then of necessity if we would follow him safely seek out for a plain Rule in the Word of God or guide our Selves by the Dictates of Reason and Prudence and either way is a sufficent Demonstration that a bare Example is not to be trusted to Those who urge the example of Christ for Sitting were somewhat ware of this namely that his example and those of his Apostles are not to be Imitated by us in all things and therefore they lay down this for their Maxim and Guide We are bound to Imitate Christ and the commendable example of his Apostles in all things wherein it is not evident they had special reasons moving them thereunto which do not concern us But I would willingly be informed how we shall be ever able to know when they acted upon special reasons and what they were that we may know our Duty if a bare Example without any Rule obliges us And if we guide our selves by Scripture or Reason in this matter then they are the measures of the Example Besides if we are not to Imitate them in such things which they were moved to do upon special reasons which did not concern us then we are obliged to Imitate their examples in such things as they did upon general and common reasons which concern us as well as them or we are not obliged at all by any Example and if so then those reasons are our Rule to which we are to reduce their Examples Without we find some general or common Reason we have no Warrant according to their own Principle to follow their Examples and when such Reasons do appear then it 's not the example alone that obliges us but Reason that approves the Example To bring their own Rule to the case in Hand How do they know but our Lord was moved to Sit at the Sacrament by Special reasons drawn from that Time and Place from the Feast of the Passover to which that Gesture was peculiar How do they know but that our Lord might have used another Gesture if the Sacrament had been Instituted apart from the Passover The necessity of the time made the Jews Eat the Passover after one fashion in Egypt which afterward ceasing gave occasion to alter it in Canaan and how do we know but that our Lord complyed with the present necessity and that his Example if he did Sit was onely temporary and not designed for a Standing Law perpetually obliging to a like practice If Christ acted upon special reasons then we are not obliged by their own Rule and if he did not let them produce the reasons if they can which make this Example of Christ of general and perpetual use and to oblige all Christians to follow it When ever they do this I am sure they will expose their own Principle which they have built so much upon to the Scorn and Contempt of the World which is this That the bare example of Christ and good Men in Scripture are a compleat Rule and Sufficient Warrant for our Actions in such things as we have no Precept or Prohibition for in the Word of God That a Christians Duty in a great measure flows purely from Examples Recorded in the Word of God and not from the express Laws of God which he hath revealed to us 4. It 's absurd to talk of Christs Example apart from all Law and Rule and to make that alone a Principle of Duty distinct from the precepts of the Gospel because Christ himself all the while the World enjoyed the benefit of his example governed his actions by a Law For if we consider him as a Man like unto us in all things Sin onely excepted he was Born under the obligation of the Moral and Natural Law as a Jew under the Mosaick Law as the Messias sent of God into the World to compass the great Work of our Redemption which he had freely undertaken he still acted by Divine appointment and was under the Gospel-Law He came to fulfil all Righteousness and to teach us the whole Mind and Will of God and Exemplify to us what he taught and delivered That which made that bitter and deadly Cup which ended his Days relish with him was this consideration that it was a Cup given him by his Father and the Drinking it was agreeable to his will and it was the comfort and support of his Soul a little before his Death that he had finished the Work that his Father had given him He frequently professed in his life-time that he did as his Father gave him Commandment and that it was his great business and delight to do the will of his Father and many such expressions he used which may be consulted at leisure If therefore we onely look to his
Drink Frequently to Carve and Drink to one another It is further necessary and convenient that at such Feasts the Guests should be well attended with Servants and Waiters who are not allowed to Sit down at the Table with those who are Invited It 's agreeable that the Guests should if they please help themselves and their Friends where they like And yet these and many other things of this Nature though very sutable to and commonly practised at our Ordinary Feasts are not allowed of nor practised by nor urged as necessary to be observed at the Sacrament by our Dissenting Brethren But why they should plead for and urge the necessity of a Common Table-Gesture as being agreeable to the Nature of a Feast or a Banquet and at the same time think there lyes no necessity at all upon them to observe other Formalities equally agreeable to the Nature of Civil Feasts and warranted by custom as much as Sitting is the great knot of the Question and that which puzzles me I confess to unty 2. They observe several Modes and Circumstances at the Sacrament which are not agreeable to the Nature of a Feast or Supper nor to the customary way of Feasting among us For example The Sacrament say they is a Feast a Supper and requires a Feast a Supper-Gesture and then too say I it requires a Supper-time It is called in Scripture the Lord's Supper and it was Instituted the same night in which he was betrayed and it 's clear that our Lord Administred it at Even and that late at the close of the Paschal Feast Now the Nature of a Supper according to Common use and acception requires the Evening or Night as the proper and peculiar season for it and yet our Dissenting Brethren make no scruple of Communicating at Noon It 's not agreeable to the Nature of a Feast that one of the Guests and the Principal one too should fill out the Wine and break the Bread and distribute it to the rest of the Society but this the Dissenters generally allow of and practice at the Holy Communion It 's not agreeable to the Nature of a Feast to Sit from the Table dispersed up and down the Room In all publick Feasts there are several Tables provided when one is not big enough to receive the Guests and yet the Dissenters generally receive in their Pews scattered up and down the Church and think one Table is sufficient though not capable of receiving the twentieth part of the Communicants in some large Parishes and numerous Assemblies And where they are few in number that they may come up to and Sit at the Table they generally are against it especially the Presbyterians and think they are not obliged to observe that formality though constantly practised at Common and Civil Entertainments It 's by no means agreeable to the nature of a Feast to be Sorrowful To Mourn and Grieve at a Feast is as Indecent and Unsutable as to Laugh at a Funeral But sure our Dissenting Brethren will not say that to come to the Sacrament with a Penitent and a broken Spirit to come with a hearty Sorrow for all our Sins which caused much Pain and Torment to our Dearest and Greatest Friend our ever-Blessed Redeemer To reflect upon the Agonies of his Soul in the Garden the Bitterness of his deadly Cup the Torture he endured on the Cross with a deep Sympathy and Trouble for the occasion they will not surely I say affirm that such a disposition of Heart and Mind is improper and unsutable to the Nature of this Holy Feast which we Solemnize in Commemoration of his Death for our sakes I make no doubt but all Pious Dissenters bring along with them to the Sacrament such a temper but this they ought not to do if their Rule hold good viz. That at this Feast we ought to be guided by the Rules of Common Table-Fellowship 2. The Nature of the Lord's Supper doth not necessarily require a Common Table-Gesture because it 's not of the same Nature with Common and Ordinary Feasts It is very ill Logick as well as ill Divinity to argue from Natural and Civil things to Spiritual to conclude that because they agree in their names they are of the same Nature For example When any Man who hath led a loose sensual wicked Life is awakened and excited by the Grace of God to consider and take up to mind Heavenly things and to breath after God and Christ and Eternity to alter his mind and his manners and lead quite another Life from what he did before this Person is in Scripture-Phrase said to be Regenerate and Born again But if we would go about to judge of the true Nature of Regeneration and the new Birth purely by the Correspondency it holds with the Natural Birth and argue from the Natural to the Spiritual we should Entertain very gross and silly Conceptions of Regeneration and greatly mistake the Nature of it How ridiculous would it be to prescribe the same Rules to be observed by a New Convert or a New-Born Babe in a Spiritual Sense in Order to his Spiritual nourishment and growth in Grace as are prescribed and practised towards Infants and New-Born Babes in a Natural Sense for the maintenance and preservation of their Natural Life and Strength as that they should be Swathed and enter into a Milk-Dyet And yet this is every way as reasonable as to prescribe Sitting as necessary to the worthy Receiving of the Sacrament which is a Spiritual Feast because it 's agreeable to the Nature of Civil Feasts Or which amounts to the same thing because it 's called a Feast therefore it 's of the same Nature with Ordinary and Common Feasts and Consequently such a Gesture and Behaviour as is necessary and requisit to these is also requisit and necessary to the Lord's Supper 3. The Nature of the Lord's Supper considered as a Feast doth not necessarily require and oblige us to use a Common Tale-Gesture in order to right and worthy Receiving because in the Judgement and Practice of numerous Dissenters it may be worthily Received Standing Thus the Presbyterians and all their Writers who have engaged against Kneeling do not condemn Standing as Sinful and Unlawful nor esteem such as use it unworthy Receivers on that account and yet Standing is no Common Table-Gesture If any should yet urge the necessity of Sitting as the onely agreeable Gesture to the Nature of the Sacrament considered as a Feast and that to use any other Gesture would Prophane the Ordinance I offer this to be considered as a good Answer That the Passover was called a Feast by God himself who Instituted it and yet he Commanded the Children of Israel to Celebrate it in Egypt after this manner with their Loyns Girt their Shoes on their Feet and their Staff in their Hands All Signs of hast indeed but no Feast or Table-Gestures either among the Jews or the Egyptians To say that God enjoyned