Post by Admin on Jan 21, 2024 12:44:53 GMT -5
The Lord's Supper
"A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and
drinks of the cup" (1 Corinthians 11:28)
The words which form the tittle of this paper refer to the subject of
vast importance. That subject is the Lord's Supper.
Perhaps no part of the Christian religion is so thoroughly
misunderstood as the Lord's Supper. On no point have there been so
many disputes, strifes, and controversies for almost 1800 years. On
no point have mistakes done so much harm. The very ordinance
which was meant for our peace and profit has become the cause of
discord and the occasion of sin. These things ought not to be!
I make no excuse for including the Lord's Supper among the leading
points of "practical" Christianity. I firmly believe that ignorant views
or false doctrine about this ordinance lie at the root of some of the
present divisions of professing Christians. Some neglect it altogether;
some completely misunderstand it; some exalt it to a position it was
never meant to occupy, and turn it into an idol. If I can throw a little
light on it, and clear up the doubts in some minds, I will feel very
thankful. It is hopeless, I fear, to expect that the controversy about
the Lord's Supper will ever be finally closed until the Lord comes.
But it is not too much to hope that the fog and mystery and obscurity
with which it is surrounded in some minds, may be cleared away by
plain Bible truth.
In examining the Lord's Supper I will be content with asking four
practical questions, and offering answers to them.
I. Why was the Lord's Supper ordained?
II. Who ought to go to the Table and be communicants?
III. What may communicants expect from the Lord's Supper?
IV. Why do many so-called Christians (church-going unbelievers)
never go to the Lord's Table?
I think it will be impossible to handle these four questions fairly,
honestly, and impartially, without seeing the subject of this paper
more clearly, and getting some distinct and practical ideas about
some leading errors of our day. I say "practical" emphatically. My
chief aim in this volume is to promote practical Christianity.
I. In the first place, "why was the Lord's Supper ordained?"
It was ordained for the continual remembrance of the sacrifice of the
death of Christ, and of the benefits which we thereby receive. The
bread which in the Lord's Supper is broken, given, and eaten, is
meant to remind us of Christ's body given on the cross for our sins.
The wine which is poured out and received, is meant to remind us of
Christ's blood shed on the cross for our sins. He that eats that bread
and drinks that wine is reminded, in the most striking and forcible
manner, of the benefits Christ has obtained for his soul, and of the
death of Christ as the hinge and turning point on which all those
benefits depend.
Now, is the view here stated the doctrine of the New Testament? If it
is not, forever let it be rejected, cast aside, and refused by men. If it
is, let us never be ashamed to hold it close, profess our belief in it,
pin our faith on it, and steadfastly refuse to hold any other view, no
matter who teaches it. In subjects like this we must call no man
master. It matters little what great theologians and learned preachers
have thought fit to put forth about the Lord's Supper. If they teach
more than the Word of God contains they are not to be believed.
I take down my Bible and turn to the New Testament. There I find no
less than four separate accounts of the first appointment of the
Lord's Supper. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul, all four describe it:
all four agree in telling us what our Lord did on this memorable
occasion. Only two tell us the reason why our Lord commanded that
His disciples were to eat the bread and drink the cup. Paul and Luke
both record the remarkable words, "Do this in remembrance of me."
Paul adds his own inspired comment: "For whenever you eat this
bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he
comes." (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:25-26). When Scripture speaks
so clearly, why can't men be content with it? Why should we mystify
and confuse a subject which in the New Testament is so simple? The
"continual remembrance of Christ's death" was the one grand object
for which the Lord's Supper was ordained. He that goes further than
this is adding to God's Word, and does so to the great peril of his soul.
Now, is it reasonable to suppose that our Lord would appoint an
ordinance for so simple a purpose as "remembering His death?" It
most certainly is. Of all the facts in His earthly ministry none are
equal in importance to that of His death. It was the great settlement
for man's sin, which had been appointed in God's promise from the
foundation of the world. It was the great redemption of almighty
power, to which every sacrifice of animals, from the fall of man,
continually pointed. It was the grand end and purpose for which the
Messiah came into the world. It was the cornerstone and foundation
of all man's hopes of pardon and peace with God. In short, Christ
would have lived, and taught, and preached, and prophesied, and
performed miracles in vain, if He had not "crowned it all by dying for
our sins as our Substitute on the Cross!" His death was our life. His
death was the payment of our debt to God. Without His death we
would have been the most miserable of all creatures. No wonder that
an ordinance was specially appointed to remind us of our Savior's
death. It is the one thing which poor, weak, sinful man needs to be
continually reminded.
Does the New Testament authorize men to say that the Lord's Supper
was ordained to be a sacrifice, and that in it Christ's literal body and
blood are present under the forms of bread and wine? Most certainly
not! When the Lord Jesus said to the disciples, "This is my Body,"
and "this is my Blood," He clearly meant, "This bread in my hand is
an symbol of my Body, and this cup of wine in my hand contains a
symbol of my Blood." The disciples were accustomed to hear Him
use such language. They remembered His saying, "The field is the
world, and the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom. The
weeds are the sons of the evil one" (Matthew 13:38). It never entered
into their minds that He meant to say He was holding His own body
and His own blood in His hands, and literally giving them His literal
body and blood to eat and drink. Not one of the writers of the New
Testament ever speaks of the Lord's Supper as a sacrifice, or calls the
Lord's Table an altar, or even hints that a Christian minister is a
sacrificing priest. The universal doctrine of the New Testament is
that after the one offering of Christ there remains no more need of
sacrifice.
If any one believes that Paul's words to the Hebrews, "We have an
altar" (Hebrews 13:10), are a proof that the Lord's table is an altar, I
remind him "Christians have an altar where they partake. That altar
is Christ our Lord, who is Altar, Priest, and Sacrifice, all in One."
Throughout the Communion Service the one idea of the ordinance
continually pressed on our attention is that of a "remembrance" of
Christ's death. As to any presence of Christ's natural body and blood
under the forms of bread and wine, the clear answer is that "the
natural body and blood of Christ are in heaven, and not here." Those
Roman Catholics who delight in talking of the "altar," the "sacrifice,"
the "priest," and the "real presence" in the Lord's Supper, would do
well to remember that they are using language which is entirely nonBiblical.
The point before us is one of vast importance. Let us lay hold upon it
firmly, and never let it go. It is the very point on which our
Reformers had their sharpest controversy with the Roman Catholics,
and went to the stake, rather than give way. Sooner than admit that
the Lord's Supper was a sacrifice, they cheerfully laid down their
lives. To bring back the doctrine of the "real presence," and to turn
the communion into the Roman Catholic "mass," is to pour contempt
on our Martyrs, and to upset the first principles of the Protestant
Reformation. No, rather, it is to ignore the plain teaching of God's
Word, and do dishonor to the priestly office of our Lord Jesus Christ.
The Bible teaches expressly that the Lord's Supper was ordained to
be "a remembrance of Christ's body and blood," and not an offering.
The Bible teaches that Christ's substituted death on the cross was the
perfect sacrifice for sin, which never needs to be repeated. Let us
stand firm in these two great principles of the Christian faith. A clear
understanding of the intention of the Lord's Supper is one of the
soul's best safeguards against the delusions of false doctrine.
II. In the second place, let me try to show "who ought to receive the
Lord's Supper?" What kind of persons were meant to go to the Table
and receive the Lord's Supper?
I will first show who ought not to be partakers of this ordinance. The
ignorance which prevails on this, as well as on every part of the
subject, is vast, lamentable, and appalling. If I can contribute
anything that may throw light upon it, I will feel very thankful. The
principal giants whom John Bunyan describes, in "Pilgrim's
Progress," as dangerous to Christian pilgrims, were two, Pope and
Pagan. If the good old Puritan had foreseen the times we live in, he
would have said something about the giant Ignorance.
(a) It is not right to urge all professing Christians to go to the Lord's
Table. There is such a thing as fitness and preparedness for the
ordinance. It does not work like a medicine, independently of the
state of mind of those who receive it. The teaching of those who urge
all their congregation to come to the Lord's Table, as if the coming
must necessarily do every one good, is entirely without warrant of
Scripture. No, rather, it is a teaching which is calculated to do
immense harm to men's souls, and to turn the reception of the Lord's
Supper into a mere form. Ignorance can never be the mother of
acceptable worship, and an ignorant communicant who comes to the
Lord's Table without knowing why he comes, is altogether in the
wrong place. "A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the
bread and drinks of the cup."--"recognizing the body of the Lord,"--
that is to understand what the elements of bread and wine represent,
and why they are appointed, and what is the particular use of
remembering Christ's death--is an essential qualification of a true
communicant. God commands all people everywhere to repent and
believe the Gospel (Acts 17:30), but He does not in the same way, or
in the same manner, command everybody to come to the Lord's
Table. No: this thing is not to be taken lightly, or carelessly! It is a
solemn ordinance, and solemnly it ought to be used.
(b) But this is not all. Sinners living in open sin, and determined not
to give it up ought never to come to the Lord's Table. To do so is a
positive insult to Christ, and to pour contempt on His Gospel. It is
nonsense to profess we desire to remember Christ's death, while we
cling to the accursed thing which made it needful for Christ to die.
The mere fact that a man is continuing in sin is clear evidence that he
does not care for Christ, and feels no gratitude for the offer of
redemption.
The ignorant Roman Catholic who goes to the priest's confessional
and receives absolution, may think he is fit to go to the Roman
Catholic mass, and after mass may return to his sins. He never reads
the Bible, and knows no better! But the professing Christian who
habitually breaks any of God's commandments, and yet goes to the
Lord's Table, as if it would do him good and wipe away his sins, is
very guilty indeed. So long as he chooses to continue his wicked
habits he cannot receive the slightest benefit from the Lord's Table,
and is only adding sin to sin. To carry unrepented sin to the Lord's
Table, and there receive the bread and wine, knowing in our own
hearts that we and wickedness are yet friends, is one of the worst
things man can do, and one of the most hardening to the conscience.
If a man must have his sins, and can't give them up, let him by all
means stay away from the Lord's Supper. There is such a thing as
"eating and drinking in an unworthy manner" and to our own
"judgment." To no one do these words apply so thoroughly as to an
unrepentant sinner.
(c) But I am not done yet. Self-righteous people who think that they
will be saved by their own works, have no business to come to the
Lord's Table. Strange as it may sound at first, these persons are the
least qualified of all to receive the Lord's table. They may be
outwardly correct, moral and respectable in their lives, but so long as
they trust in their own goodness for salvation they are entirely in the
wrong place at the Lord's Supper. For what do we declare at the
Lord's Supper? We publicly profess that we have no goodness,
righteousness, or worthiness of our own, and that all our hope is in
Christ.
We publicly profess that we are guilty, sinful, corrupt, and naturally
deserve God's wrath and condemnation. We publicly profess that
Christ's merit and not our's, Christ's righteousness and not our's is
the only cause why we look for acceptance with God. Now what has a
self-righteous man to do with an ordinance like this? Clearly nothing
at all.
One thing at any rate, is very clear: a self-righteous man has no
business to receive the Lord's Supper. The Communion Service of the
Church bids all communicants declare that "they do not presume to
come to the Table trusting in their own righteousness, but in God's
numerous and great mercies." It tells them to say, "We are not
worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs under Your table," "the
memory of our sins is grievous to us; the burden of them is
intolerable." How many self-righteous professing Christians can ever
go to the Lord's Table and take these words into his mouth, is beyond
my understanding! It only shows that many professing Christians
use the "forms" of worship without taking the trouble to consider
what they mean.
The plain truth is that the Lord's Supper was not meant for dead
souls, but for living ones. The careless, the ignorant, the willfully
wicked, the selfrighteous, are no more fit to come to the Lord's Table than a dead
corpse is fit to sit down at a king's feast. To enjoy a spiritual feast we
must have a spiritual heart, and taste, and appetite. To suppose that
the Lord's Table can do any good to an unspiritual man, is as foolish
as to put bread and wine into the mouth of a dead person. The
careless, the ignorant, and the willfully wicked, so long as they
continue in that state, are utterly unfit to come to the Lord's Supper.
To urge them to partake is not to do them good but harm. The Lord's
Supper is not a converting or justifying ordinance. If a man goes to
the Table unconverted or unforgiven, he will be no better when he
comes away (actually worse due to the associated judgments for
coming unworthily).
But, after all, the ground having been cleared of error, the question
still remains to be answered--Who are the sort of persons who ought
to receive the Lord's Supper? I answer that by saying, people who
have "examined themselves to see whether they have truly repented
of their former sins, steadfastly purposing to lead a new life--have a
true faith in God's mercy through Christ, with a thankful
remembrance of His death--they are in love with all men." In a word,
I find that a worthy communicant is one who possesses three simple
marks and qualifications--repentance, faith, and love. Does a man
truly repent of sin and hate it? Does a man put his trust in Jesus
Christ as his only hope of salvation? Does a man live in love towards
others? He that can truly answer each of these questions, "I do," he is
a man that is Scripturally qualified for the Lord's Supper. Let him
come boldly. Let no barrier be put in his way. He comes up to the
Bible standard of communicants. He may draw near with confidence,
and feel assured that the great Master of the banquet is not
displeased.
Such a man's repentance may be very much imperfect. Never mind!
Is it real? Is he truly repentant? His faith in Christ may be very weak.
Never mind! Is it real? A penny is as much true currency as is a one
hundred dollar bill. His love may be very defective in quantity and
degree. Never mind! Is it genuine? The grand test of a man's
Christianity is not the quantity of holiness he has, but whether he has
any all.
The first twelve communicants, when Christ Himself gave the bread
and wine, were weak indeed--weak in knowledge, weak in faith, weak
in courage, weak in patience, weak in love! But eleven of them had
something about them which outweighed all defects: they were real,
genuine, sincere, and true.
Forever let this great principle be rooted in our minds--the only
worthy communicant is the man who has demonstrated repentance
toward God, faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ, and practical love
toward others. Are you that man? Then you may draw near to the
table, and take the ordinance to your comfort. Anything less than this
I dare not change in my standard of a communicant. I will never
encourage someone to receive the Lord's Supper who is careless,
ignorant, and self-righteous. I will never tell anyone to keep away till
he is perfect, and to wait till his heart is as unruffled as an angel's. I
will not do so, because I believe that neither my Master nor His
Apostles would have done so. Show me a man that really feels his
sins, really leans on Christ, really struggles to be holy, and I will
welcome him in My Master's name. He may feel weak, erring, empty,
feeble, doubting, wretched, and poor. But what does that matter?
Paul, I believe, would have received him as a right communicant, and
I will do likewise.
III. In the third place, let us consider "what benefit communicants
may expect to get by receiving the Lord's Supper."
This is a point of grave importance, and one on which many mistakes
abound. On no point, perhaps, connected with this ordinance are the
views of Christians so vague and indistinct and undefined.
One common idea among men is that "receiving the Lord's Supper
must do them some good." Why, they can't explain. What good, they
can't exactly say. But they have a loose general notion that it is the
right thing to be a communicant, and that somehow or other it is of
value to their souls! This is of course nothing better than ignorance.
It is unreasonable to suppose that such communicants can please
Christ, or receive any real benefit from what they do. If there is any
principle clearly laid down in the Bible about any act of religious
worship, it is this that it must be with understanding. The worshiper
must at least understand something about what he is doing. Mere
bodily worship, unaccompanied by mind or heart, is utterly
worthless. The man who eats the bread and drinks the wine, as a
mere matter of form, because it is the "right" thing to do, without any
clear idea of what it all means, derives no benefit. He might just as
well stay at home!
Another common idea among men is that, "taking the Lord' Supper
will help them get to heaven, and take away their sins." To this false
idea you may trace up the habit in some churches of going to the
Lord's Table once a year, in order, as an old farmer once said, "to
wipe off the year's sins." To this idea again, you may trace the too
common practice of sending for a minister in time of sickness, in
order to receive the ordinance before death. Yes, how many take
comfort about their relatives, after they have lived a most ungodly
life, for no better reason than this, that they took the Lord's Supper
when they were dying! Whether they repented and believed and had
new hearts, they neither seem to know or care. All they know is that
"they took the Lord's Supper before they died." My heart sinks within
me when I hear people resting on such evidence as this.
Ideas like these are sad proofs of the ignorance that fills the minds of
men about the Lord's Supper. They are ideas for which there is not
the slightest warrant in Scripture. The sooner they are cast aside and
given up, the better for the Church and the world.
Let us settle it firmly in our minds that the Lord's Supper was not
given to be a means either of justification or of conversion. It was
never meant to give grace where there is no grace already, or to
provide pardon when pardon is not already enjoyed. It cannot
possibly provide what is lacking with the absence of repentance to
God, and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ. It is an ordinance for
the penitent, not for the impenitent, for the believing, not for the
unbelieving, for the converted, not for the unconverted. The
unconverted man, who fancies that be can find a "shortcut" to
heaven by taking the Lord's Supper, without treading the well-worn
steps of repentance and faith, will find to his cost one day, that he is
totally deceived. The Lord's Supper was meant to increase and help
the grace that a man has, but not to impart the grace that he does not
have. It was certainly never intended to make our peace with God, to
justify, or to convert.
The simplest statement of the benefit which a truehearted
communicant may expect to receive from the Lord's Supper, is the
strengthening and refreshing of our souls--clearer views of Christ
and His atonement, clearer views of all the offices which Christ, fills
as our Mediator and Advocate, clearer views of the complete
redemption Christ has obtained for us by His substituted death on
the cross, clearer views of our full and perfect acceptance in Christ
before God, fresh reasons for deep repentance for sin, fresh reasons
for lively faith--these are among the leading returns which a believer
may confidently expect to get from his attendance at the Lord's
Table. He that eats the bread and drinks the wine in a right spirit,
will find himself drawn into closer communion with Christ, and will
feel to know Him more, and understand Him better.
(a) Right reception of the Lord's Supper has a "humbling" effect on
the soul. The sight of the bread and wine as emblems of Christ's body
and blood, reminds us how sinful sin must be, if nothing less than
the death of God's own Son could make satisfaction for it, or redeem
us from its guilt. Never should we be so "clothed with humility," as
when we receive the Lord's Supper.
(b) Right reception of the Lord's Supper has a "cheering" effect on
the soul. The sight of the bread broken, and the wine poured out,
reminds us how full, perfect, and complete is our salvation. Those
vivid emblems remind us what an enormous price has been paid for
our redemption. They press on us the mighty truth, that believing on
Christ, we have nothing to fear, because a sufficient payment has
been made for our debt. The "precious blood of Christ" answers every
charge that can be brought against us. God can be "just and the one
who justifies those who have faith in Jesus" (Romans 3:26).
(c) Right reception of the Lord's Supper has a "sanctifying" effect on
the soul. The bread and wine remind us how great is our debt of
gratitude to our Lord, and how thoroughly we are bound to live for
Him who died for our sins. They seem to say to us, "Remember what
Christ has done for you, and ask yourself whether there is anything
too great to do for Him."
(d) Right reception of the Lord's Supper into hearts, has a restraining
effect on the soul. Every time a believer receives the bread and the
wine he is reminded what a serious thing it is to be a Christian, and
what an obligation is laid on him to lead a consistent life. Bought
with such a price as that bread and wine call to his recollection,
ought he not to glorify Christ in body and spirit, which are His? The
man that goes regularly and intelligently to the Lord's Table finds it
increasingly hard to yield to sin and conform to the world.
Such is a brief account of the benefits which a right hearted
communicant may expect to receive from the Lord's Supper. In
eating that bread and drinking that cup, such a man will have his
repentance deepened, his faith increased, his knowledge enlarged,
his habit of holy living strengthened. He will realize more of the "real
presence" of Christ in his heart. Eating, that bread by faith, he will
feel closer communion with the body of Christ. Drinking that wine by
faith, he will feel closer communion with the blood of Christ. He will
see more clearly what Christ is to him, and what he is to Christ. He
will understand more thoroughly what it is to be "one with Christ,
and Christ one with him." He will feel the roots of his soul's spiritual
life watered, and the work of grace in his heart established, built up,
and carried forward. All these things may seem and sound like
foolishness to a natural man, but to a true Christian these things are
light, and health, and life, and peace. No wonder that a true Christian
finds the Lord's Supper a source of blessing!
Remember, I do not pretend to say that all Christians experience the
full blessing of the Lord's Supper, which I have just attempted to
describe. Nor do I say that the same believer will always find his soul
in the same spiritual frame, and always receive the same amount of
benefit from the ordinance. But I boldly say this: you will rarely find
a true believer who will not say that he believes the Lord's Supper is
one of his best helps and highest privileges. He will tell you that if he
were deprived of the Lord's Supper on a regular basis he would find
the loss of it a great detriment to his soul. There are some things of
which we never know the value of till they are taken from us. So I
believe it is with the Lord's Supper. The weakest and humblest of
God's children gets a blessing from this ordinance, to an extent of
which he is not aware.
IV. In the last place, I have to consider "why it is that so many socalled Christians (false believers) never come to the Lord's Supper."
It is a simple matter of fact, that myriads of persons who call
themselves Christians never come to the Table of the Lord. They
would not endure to be told that they deny the faith, and are not in
communion with Christ. When they worship, they attend a place of
Christian worship; when they hear religious teaching, it is the
teaching of Christianity; when they are married, they use a Christian
service. Yet all this time they never come to the Lord's Supper! They
often live on in this state of mind for many years, and to all
appearance are not ashamed. They often die in this condition
without ever having received the ordinance, and yet profess to feel
hope at the last, and their friends express a hope about them. And
yet they live and die in open disobedience to a plain command of
Christ! These are simple facts. Let any one look around him, and
deny them if he can.
Now why is this? What explanation can we give? Our Lord Jesus
Christ's last injunctions to His disciples are clear, plain, and
unmistakable. He says to all, "Eat, drink: do this in remembrance of
Me." Did He leave it to our discretion whether we would obey His
injunction or not? Did He mean that it was not significant whether
His disciples did or did not keep up the ordinance He had just
established? Certainly not. The very idea is absurd, and one certainly
never dreamed of in apostolic times. Paul evidently takes it for
granted that every Christian would go to the Lord's Table when it was
available. A class of Christian worshipers who never came to the
Table, was a class whose existence was unknown to him. What, then,
are we to say of that number which fail to receive the Lord's Supper,
unabashed, unhumbled, not afraid, not the least ashamed? Why is it?
How is it? What does it all mean? Let us look these questions fairly in
the face, and endeavor to give an answer to them.
(1) For one thing, many fail to go to the Table because they are
utterly careless and thoughtless about religion, and ignorant of very
first principles of Christianity.
They go to church, as a matter of form, but they neither know, nor
care anything about what is done at church! The faith of Christ has
no place either in their hearts, or heads, or consciences, or wills, or
understandings. It is a mere affair of "words and names," about
which they know no more than Festus or Gallio. There were very few
such false Christians in Paul's times, if indeed there were any. There
are far too many in these last days of the world. They are the deadweight of the Churches, and the scandal of Christianity. What such
people need is light, knowledge, grace, a renewed conscience, a
changed heart. In their present state they have no part of Christ; and
dying in this state they are thrown into hell. Do I wish them to come
to the Lord's Supper? Certainly not, till they are converted. No one
can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born again.
(2) For another thing, many false Christians do not receive the Lord's
Supper because they know they are living in the habitual practice of
some sin, or in the neglect of some Christian duty.
Their conscience tells them so long as they live in this state, and do
not turn away from their sins, they are unfit to come to the Table of
the Lord. Well: they are so far quite right! I wish no man to be a
communicant if he cannot give up his sins. But I warn these people
not to forget that if they are unfit for the Lord's Supper in that
condition they will be lost eternally. The same sins which disqualify
them for the ordinance, most certainly disqualify them for heaven.
Do I want them to come to the Lord's Supper as they are? Certainly
not! But I do want them to repent and be converted, to cease to do
evil, and to break off from their sins. Forever let it be remembered
that the man unfit for the Lord's Supper is unfit to die.
(3) For another thing, some are not communicant because they fancy
it will add to their responsibility.
They are not, as many, ignorant and careless about religion. They
even attend church regularly and listen to the preaching of the
gospel. But they say they dread coming to the Lord's Table and
making a confession and a profession. They fear that they might
afterwards fall away, and bring scandal on the cause of Christianity.
They think it wisest to be on the safe side, and not commit
themselves at all. Such people would do well to remember that if they
avoid responsibility of one kind by not coming to the Lord's Table,
they incur responsibility of another kind, quite as grave, and quite as
injurious to the soul. They are responsible for open disobedience to a
command from of Christ. They are shrinking from doing that which
their Master continually commands His disciples--confessing Him
before men. No doubt it is a serious step to come to the Lord's Table
and receive the bread and the wine. It is a step that none should take
lightly and without selfexamination. But it is "no less a serious step to walk away and refuse
the ordinance," when we remember Who invites us to receive it, and
for what purpose it was appointed! I warn the people I am now
dealing with to be careful what they are doing. Let them not flatter
themselves that it can ever be a wise, a prudent, a safe line of conduct
to neglect a plain command of Christ. They may find at length, to
their cost, that they have only increased their guilt and forsaken their
mercies.
(4) For another thing, some false Christians stay away from the
Lord's Supper because they believe they are not yet worthy.
They wait and stand still, under the mistaken notion that no one is
qualified for the Lord's Supper unless he feels within him something
like perfection. They pitch their idea of a communicant so high that
they despair of attaining to it. Waiting for inward perfection they
live, and waiting for it they die. Now such persons would do well to
understand that they are completely mistaken in their estimate of
what "worthiness" really is. They are forgetting that the Lord's
Supper was not intended for unsinning angels, but for men and
women subject to weakness, living in a world full of temptations, and
needing mercy and grace every day they live.
A sense of our own utter unworthiness is the best worthiness that we
can bring to the Lord's Table. A deep feeling of our own entire
indebtedness to Christ for all we have and hope for, is the best feeling
we can bring, with us. The people I now have in view ought to
consider seriously whether the ground they have taken up is
defensible, and whether they are not standing in their own light. If
they are waiting till they feel in themselves perfect hearts, perfect
motives, perfect feelings, perfect, repentance, perfect love, perfect
faith, they will wait forever. There never were such communicants in
any age--certainly not in the days of our Lord and of the Apostles--
there never will be as long as the world stands. No, rather, the very
thought that we feel literally worthy, is a symptom of secret selfrighteousness, and proves us unfit for the Lord's Table in God's sight.
Sinners we are when we first come to the throne of grace--sinners we
will be till we die; converted, changed, renewed, sanctified, but
sinners still (though not like before--sin is not the pattern of a
believer's new life). In short, no man is really worthy to receive the
Lord's Supper who does not deeply feel that he is a "miserable
sinner."
(5) In the last place, some object going to the Lord's Table because
they see others partaking who are not worthy, and not in a right state
of mind.
Because others eat and drink unworthily, they refuse to eat and drink
at all. Of all the reasons taken up by those refusing to come to the
Lord's Supper to justify their own neglect of Christ's ordinance, I
must plainly say, I know none which seems to me so foolish, so weak,
so unreasonable, and so unscriptural as this. It is as good as saying
that we will never receive the Lord's Supper at all! When will we ever
find a body of communicants on earth of which all the members are
converted and living perfect lives? It is setting up ourselves in the
most unhealthy attitude of judging others. "Who are you that you
judge another person?" "What is that to you? You must follow me"
(John 21:22). It is depriving ourselves of a great privilege because
others profane it and make a bad use of it. It is pretending to be
wiser than our Master Himself. It is taking up ground for which there
is no warrant in Scripture. Paul rebukes the Corinthians sharply for
the irreverent behavior of some of the communicants; but I cannot
find him giving a single hint that when some came to the Table
unworthily, others ought to draw back or stay away. Let me advise
the non-communicants I have now in view to beware of being wise
above that which was written. Let them study the parable of the
Wheat and Tares, and mark how both were to "grow together until
the harvest" (Matthew 13:30).
Perfect Churches, perfect congregations, perfect bodies of
communicants, are all unattainable in this world of confusion and
sin. Let us covet the best gifts, and do all we can to check sin in
others; but let us not starve our ownselves because others are
ignorant sinners, and turn their food into poison. If others are foolish
enough to eat and drink unworthily, let us not turn our backs on
Christ's ordinance, and refuse to eat and drink at all.
Such are the five common excuses why myriads in the present day,
though professing themselves Christians (but they are not), never
come to the Lord's Supper. One common remark may be made about
them: there is not a single reason among the five which deserves to
be called "good," and which does not condemn the man who gives it.
I challenge anyone to deny this. I have said repeatedly that I want no
one to come to the Lord's Table who is not properly qualified. But I
ask those who stay away never to forget that the very reasons they
assign for their conduct are their condemnation. I tell them that they
stand convicted before God of either being very ignorant of what a
communicant is, and what the Lord's Supper is; or else of being
persons who are not living right, and are unfit to die. In short, to say,
I am a noncommunicant, is as good as saying one of three things--I am living in
sin, and cannot come--I know Christ commands me, but I will not
obey Him--I am an ignorant man, and do not understand what the
Lord's Supper means."
I know not in what state of mind this book may find the reader of this
paper, or what his opinions may be about the Lord's Supper. But I
will conclude the whole subject by offering to all some warnings,
which I venture to think are highly required by the times.
(1) In the first place, "do not neglect" the Lord's Supper.
The man who coolly and deliberately refuses to use an ordinance
which the Lord Jesus Christ appointed for his profit, may be very
sure that his soul is in a very wrong state. There is a judgment to
come; there is, an account to be rendered of all our conduct on earth.
How any one can look forward to that day, and expect to meet Christ
with comfort and in peace, if he has refused all his life to commune
with Christ at His Table, is a thing that I cannot understand. Does
this hit home to you? Be careful what you are doing.
(2) In the second place, "do not receive the Lord's Supper carelessly,"
irreverently, and as a matter of form.
The man who goes to the Lord's Table, and eats the bread and drinks
the wine, while his heart is far away, is committing a great sin, and
robbing himself of a great blessing. In this, as in every other means
of grace, every thing depends on the state of mind in which the
ordinance is used. He that draws near without repentance, faith, and
love, and with a heart full of sin and the world, will certainly be
nothing better, but rather worse. Does this hit home to you? Be
careful what you are doing.
(3) In the third place, "do not make an idol" of the Lord's Supper.
The man who tells you that it is the first, foremost, chief, and
principal precept in Christianity, is telling you that which he will find
it hard to prove. In the great majority of the books of the New
Testament the Lord's Supper is not even named. In the letter to
Timothy and Titus, about a minister's duties, the subject is not even
mentioned. To repent and be converted, to believe and be holy, to be
born again and have grace in our hearts--all these things are of far
more importance than to be a communicant. Without them we
cannot be saved. Without the Lord's Supper we can. Are you tempted
to make the Lord's Supper override and overshadow everything in
Christianity, and place it above prayer and preaching? Be careful.
Pay attention what you are doing.
(4) In the fourth place, "do not use the Lord's Supper irregularly."
Never be absent when the Lord's Supper is administered. Make every
effort to be in attendance. Regular habits are essential to the
maintenance of the health of our bodies. Regular use of the Lord's
Supper is essential to the well-being of our souls. The man who finds
it a burden to attend on every occasion when the Lord's Table is
spread, may well doubt whether all is right within him, and whether
he is ready for the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. If Thomas had not
been absent when the Lord appeared the first time to the assembled
disciples, he would not have said the foolish things he did. Absence
made him miss a blessing. Does this hit home to you? Be careful
what you are doing.
(5) In the fifth place, "do not do anything to bring discredit" on your
profession as a communicant.
The man who after attending the Lord's Table runs into sin, does
more harm perhaps than any sinner. He is a walking sermon on
behalf of the devil. He gives opportunity to the enemies of the Lord
to blaspheme. He helps to keep people away from Christ. Lying,
drinking, adulterous, dishonest, passionate communicants are the
helpers of the devil, and the worst enemies of the Gospel. Does this
hit home to you? Be careful what you are doing.
(6) In the last place, "do not despair" and be cast down, if with all
your desires you do not feel that you get a lot of good from the Lord's
Supper.
Very likely you are expecting too much. Very likely you are a poor
judge of your own state. Your soul's roots may be strengthening and
growing, while you think you are not growing. Very likely you are
forgetting that earth is not heaven, and that here we walk by sight
and not by faith, and must expect nothing perfect. Lay these things to
heart. Do not think harsh things about yourself without cause.
To every reader into whose hands this paper may fall, I commend the
whole subject of it as deserving of serious and solemn consideration.
I am nothing, better than a poor or fallible man myself. But if I have
made up my mind on any point it is this--that there is no truth which
demands such plain speaking, as truth about the Lord's Supper.
"A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and
drinks of the cup" (1 Corinthians 11:28)
The words which form the tittle of this paper refer to the subject of
vast importance. That subject is the Lord's Supper.
Perhaps no part of the Christian religion is so thoroughly
misunderstood as the Lord's Supper. On no point have there been so
many disputes, strifes, and controversies for almost 1800 years. On
no point have mistakes done so much harm. The very ordinance
which was meant for our peace and profit has become the cause of
discord and the occasion of sin. These things ought not to be!
I make no excuse for including the Lord's Supper among the leading
points of "practical" Christianity. I firmly believe that ignorant views
or false doctrine about this ordinance lie at the root of some of the
present divisions of professing Christians. Some neglect it altogether;
some completely misunderstand it; some exalt it to a position it was
never meant to occupy, and turn it into an idol. If I can throw a little
light on it, and clear up the doubts in some minds, I will feel very
thankful. It is hopeless, I fear, to expect that the controversy about
the Lord's Supper will ever be finally closed until the Lord comes.
But it is not too much to hope that the fog and mystery and obscurity
with which it is surrounded in some minds, may be cleared away by
plain Bible truth.
In examining the Lord's Supper I will be content with asking four
practical questions, and offering answers to them.
I. Why was the Lord's Supper ordained?
II. Who ought to go to the Table and be communicants?
III. What may communicants expect from the Lord's Supper?
IV. Why do many so-called Christians (church-going unbelievers)
never go to the Lord's Table?
I think it will be impossible to handle these four questions fairly,
honestly, and impartially, without seeing the subject of this paper
more clearly, and getting some distinct and practical ideas about
some leading errors of our day. I say "practical" emphatically. My
chief aim in this volume is to promote practical Christianity.
I. In the first place, "why was the Lord's Supper ordained?"
It was ordained for the continual remembrance of the sacrifice of the
death of Christ, and of the benefits which we thereby receive. The
bread which in the Lord's Supper is broken, given, and eaten, is
meant to remind us of Christ's body given on the cross for our sins.
The wine which is poured out and received, is meant to remind us of
Christ's blood shed on the cross for our sins. He that eats that bread
and drinks that wine is reminded, in the most striking and forcible
manner, of the benefits Christ has obtained for his soul, and of the
death of Christ as the hinge and turning point on which all those
benefits depend.
Now, is the view here stated the doctrine of the New Testament? If it
is not, forever let it be rejected, cast aside, and refused by men. If it
is, let us never be ashamed to hold it close, profess our belief in it,
pin our faith on it, and steadfastly refuse to hold any other view, no
matter who teaches it. In subjects like this we must call no man
master. It matters little what great theologians and learned preachers
have thought fit to put forth about the Lord's Supper. If they teach
more than the Word of God contains they are not to be believed.
I take down my Bible and turn to the New Testament. There I find no
less than four separate accounts of the first appointment of the
Lord's Supper. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul, all four describe it:
all four agree in telling us what our Lord did on this memorable
occasion. Only two tell us the reason why our Lord commanded that
His disciples were to eat the bread and drink the cup. Paul and Luke
both record the remarkable words, "Do this in remembrance of me."
Paul adds his own inspired comment: "For whenever you eat this
bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he
comes." (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:25-26). When Scripture speaks
so clearly, why can't men be content with it? Why should we mystify
and confuse a subject which in the New Testament is so simple? The
"continual remembrance of Christ's death" was the one grand object
for which the Lord's Supper was ordained. He that goes further than
this is adding to God's Word, and does so to the great peril of his soul.
Now, is it reasonable to suppose that our Lord would appoint an
ordinance for so simple a purpose as "remembering His death?" It
most certainly is. Of all the facts in His earthly ministry none are
equal in importance to that of His death. It was the great settlement
for man's sin, which had been appointed in God's promise from the
foundation of the world. It was the great redemption of almighty
power, to which every sacrifice of animals, from the fall of man,
continually pointed. It was the grand end and purpose for which the
Messiah came into the world. It was the cornerstone and foundation
of all man's hopes of pardon and peace with God. In short, Christ
would have lived, and taught, and preached, and prophesied, and
performed miracles in vain, if He had not "crowned it all by dying for
our sins as our Substitute on the Cross!" His death was our life. His
death was the payment of our debt to God. Without His death we
would have been the most miserable of all creatures. No wonder that
an ordinance was specially appointed to remind us of our Savior's
death. It is the one thing which poor, weak, sinful man needs to be
continually reminded.
Does the New Testament authorize men to say that the Lord's Supper
was ordained to be a sacrifice, and that in it Christ's literal body and
blood are present under the forms of bread and wine? Most certainly
not! When the Lord Jesus said to the disciples, "This is my Body,"
and "this is my Blood," He clearly meant, "This bread in my hand is
an symbol of my Body, and this cup of wine in my hand contains a
symbol of my Blood." The disciples were accustomed to hear Him
use such language. They remembered His saying, "The field is the
world, and the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom. The
weeds are the sons of the evil one" (Matthew 13:38). It never entered
into their minds that He meant to say He was holding His own body
and His own blood in His hands, and literally giving them His literal
body and blood to eat and drink. Not one of the writers of the New
Testament ever speaks of the Lord's Supper as a sacrifice, or calls the
Lord's Table an altar, or even hints that a Christian minister is a
sacrificing priest. The universal doctrine of the New Testament is
that after the one offering of Christ there remains no more need of
sacrifice.
If any one believes that Paul's words to the Hebrews, "We have an
altar" (Hebrews 13:10), are a proof that the Lord's table is an altar, I
remind him "Christians have an altar where they partake. That altar
is Christ our Lord, who is Altar, Priest, and Sacrifice, all in One."
Throughout the Communion Service the one idea of the ordinance
continually pressed on our attention is that of a "remembrance" of
Christ's death. As to any presence of Christ's natural body and blood
under the forms of bread and wine, the clear answer is that "the
natural body and blood of Christ are in heaven, and not here." Those
Roman Catholics who delight in talking of the "altar," the "sacrifice,"
the "priest," and the "real presence" in the Lord's Supper, would do
well to remember that they are using language which is entirely nonBiblical.
The point before us is one of vast importance. Let us lay hold upon it
firmly, and never let it go. It is the very point on which our
Reformers had their sharpest controversy with the Roman Catholics,
and went to the stake, rather than give way. Sooner than admit that
the Lord's Supper was a sacrifice, they cheerfully laid down their
lives. To bring back the doctrine of the "real presence," and to turn
the communion into the Roman Catholic "mass," is to pour contempt
on our Martyrs, and to upset the first principles of the Protestant
Reformation. No, rather, it is to ignore the plain teaching of God's
Word, and do dishonor to the priestly office of our Lord Jesus Christ.
The Bible teaches expressly that the Lord's Supper was ordained to
be "a remembrance of Christ's body and blood," and not an offering.
The Bible teaches that Christ's substituted death on the cross was the
perfect sacrifice for sin, which never needs to be repeated. Let us
stand firm in these two great principles of the Christian faith. A clear
understanding of the intention of the Lord's Supper is one of the
soul's best safeguards against the delusions of false doctrine.
II. In the second place, let me try to show "who ought to receive the
Lord's Supper?" What kind of persons were meant to go to the Table
and receive the Lord's Supper?
I will first show who ought not to be partakers of this ordinance. The
ignorance which prevails on this, as well as on every part of the
subject, is vast, lamentable, and appalling. If I can contribute
anything that may throw light upon it, I will feel very thankful. The
principal giants whom John Bunyan describes, in "Pilgrim's
Progress," as dangerous to Christian pilgrims, were two, Pope and
Pagan. If the good old Puritan had foreseen the times we live in, he
would have said something about the giant Ignorance.
(a) It is not right to urge all professing Christians to go to the Lord's
Table. There is such a thing as fitness and preparedness for the
ordinance. It does not work like a medicine, independently of the
state of mind of those who receive it. The teaching of those who urge
all their congregation to come to the Lord's Table, as if the coming
must necessarily do every one good, is entirely without warrant of
Scripture. No, rather, it is a teaching which is calculated to do
immense harm to men's souls, and to turn the reception of the Lord's
Supper into a mere form. Ignorance can never be the mother of
acceptable worship, and an ignorant communicant who comes to the
Lord's Table without knowing why he comes, is altogether in the
wrong place. "A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the
bread and drinks of the cup."--"recognizing the body of the Lord,"--
that is to understand what the elements of bread and wine represent,
and why they are appointed, and what is the particular use of
remembering Christ's death--is an essential qualification of a true
communicant. God commands all people everywhere to repent and
believe the Gospel (Acts 17:30), but He does not in the same way, or
in the same manner, command everybody to come to the Lord's
Table. No: this thing is not to be taken lightly, or carelessly! It is a
solemn ordinance, and solemnly it ought to be used.
(b) But this is not all. Sinners living in open sin, and determined not
to give it up ought never to come to the Lord's Table. To do so is a
positive insult to Christ, and to pour contempt on His Gospel. It is
nonsense to profess we desire to remember Christ's death, while we
cling to the accursed thing which made it needful for Christ to die.
The mere fact that a man is continuing in sin is clear evidence that he
does not care for Christ, and feels no gratitude for the offer of
redemption.
The ignorant Roman Catholic who goes to the priest's confessional
and receives absolution, may think he is fit to go to the Roman
Catholic mass, and after mass may return to his sins. He never reads
the Bible, and knows no better! But the professing Christian who
habitually breaks any of God's commandments, and yet goes to the
Lord's Table, as if it would do him good and wipe away his sins, is
very guilty indeed. So long as he chooses to continue his wicked
habits he cannot receive the slightest benefit from the Lord's Table,
and is only adding sin to sin. To carry unrepented sin to the Lord's
Table, and there receive the bread and wine, knowing in our own
hearts that we and wickedness are yet friends, is one of the worst
things man can do, and one of the most hardening to the conscience.
If a man must have his sins, and can't give them up, let him by all
means stay away from the Lord's Supper. There is such a thing as
"eating and drinking in an unworthy manner" and to our own
"judgment." To no one do these words apply so thoroughly as to an
unrepentant sinner.
(c) But I am not done yet. Self-righteous people who think that they
will be saved by their own works, have no business to come to the
Lord's Table. Strange as it may sound at first, these persons are the
least qualified of all to receive the Lord's table. They may be
outwardly correct, moral and respectable in their lives, but so long as
they trust in their own goodness for salvation they are entirely in the
wrong place at the Lord's Supper. For what do we declare at the
Lord's Supper? We publicly profess that we have no goodness,
righteousness, or worthiness of our own, and that all our hope is in
Christ.
We publicly profess that we are guilty, sinful, corrupt, and naturally
deserve God's wrath and condemnation. We publicly profess that
Christ's merit and not our's, Christ's righteousness and not our's is
the only cause why we look for acceptance with God. Now what has a
self-righteous man to do with an ordinance like this? Clearly nothing
at all.
One thing at any rate, is very clear: a self-righteous man has no
business to receive the Lord's Supper. The Communion Service of the
Church bids all communicants declare that "they do not presume to
come to the Table trusting in their own righteousness, but in God's
numerous and great mercies." It tells them to say, "We are not
worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs under Your table," "the
memory of our sins is grievous to us; the burden of them is
intolerable." How many self-righteous professing Christians can ever
go to the Lord's Table and take these words into his mouth, is beyond
my understanding! It only shows that many professing Christians
use the "forms" of worship without taking the trouble to consider
what they mean.
The plain truth is that the Lord's Supper was not meant for dead
souls, but for living ones. The careless, the ignorant, the willfully
wicked, the selfrighteous, are no more fit to come to the Lord's Table than a dead
corpse is fit to sit down at a king's feast. To enjoy a spiritual feast we
must have a spiritual heart, and taste, and appetite. To suppose that
the Lord's Table can do any good to an unspiritual man, is as foolish
as to put bread and wine into the mouth of a dead person. The
careless, the ignorant, and the willfully wicked, so long as they
continue in that state, are utterly unfit to come to the Lord's Supper.
To urge them to partake is not to do them good but harm. The Lord's
Supper is not a converting or justifying ordinance. If a man goes to
the Table unconverted or unforgiven, he will be no better when he
comes away (actually worse due to the associated judgments for
coming unworthily).
But, after all, the ground having been cleared of error, the question
still remains to be answered--Who are the sort of persons who ought
to receive the Lord's Supper? I answer that by saying, people who
have "examined themselves to see whether they have truly repented
of their former sins, steadfastly purposing to lead a new life--have a
true faith in God's mercy through Christ, with a thankful
remembrance of His death--they are in love with all men." In a word,
I find that a worthy communicant is one who possesses three simple
marks and qualifications--repentance, faith, and love. Does a man
truly repent of sin and hate it? Does a man put his trust in Jesus
Christ as his only hope of salvation? Does a man live in love towards
others? He that can truly answer each of these questions, "I do," he is
a man that is Scripturally qualified for the Lord's Supper. Let him
come boldly. Let no barrier be put in his way. He comes up to the
Bible standard of communicants. He may draw near with confidence,
and feel assured that the great Master of the banquet is not
displeased.
Such a man's repentance may be very much imperfect. Never mind!
Is it real? Is he truly repentant? His faith in Christ may be very weak.
Never mind! Is it real? A penny is as much true currency as is a one
hundred dollar bill. His love may be very defective in quantity and
degree. Never mind! Is it genuine? The grand test of a man's
Christianity is not the quantity of holiness he has, but whether he has
any all.
The first twelve communicants, when Christ Himself gave the bread
and wine, were weak indeed--weak in knowledge, weak in faith, weak
in courage, weak in patience, weak in love! But eleven of them had
something about them which outweighed all defects: they were real,
genuine, sincere, and true.
Forever let this great principle be rooted in our minds--the only
worthy communicant is the man who has demonstrated repentance
toward God, faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ, and practical love
toward others. Are you that man? Then you may draw near to the
table, and take the ordinance to your comfort. Anything less than this
I dare not change in my standard of a communicant. I will never
encourage someone to receive the Lord's Supper who is careless,
ignorant, and self-righteous. I will never tell anyone to keep away till
he is perfect, and to wait till his heart is as unruffled as an angel's. I
will not do so, because I believe that neither my Master nor His
Apostles would have done so. Show me a man that really feels his
sins, really leans on Christ, really struggles to be holy, and I will
welcome him in My Master's name. He may feel weak, erring, empty,
feeble, doubting, wretched, and poor. But what does that matter?
Paul, I believe, would have received him as a right communicant, and
I will do likewise.
III. In the third place, let us consider "what benefit communicants
may expect to get by receiving the Lord's Supper."
This is a point of grave importance, and one on which many mistakes
abound. On no point, perhaps, connected with this ordinance are the
views of Christians so vague and indistinct and undefined.
One common idea among men is that "receiving the Lord's Supper
must do them some good." Why, they can't explain. What good, they
can't exactly say. But they have a loose general notion that it is the
right thing to be a communicant, and that somehow or other it is of
value to their souls! This is of course nothing better than ignorance.
It is unreasonable to suppose that such communicants can please
Christ, or receive any real benefit from what they do. If there is any
principle clearly laid down in the Bible about any act of religious
worship, it is this that it must be with understanding. The worshiper
must at least understand something about what he is doing. Mere
bodily worship, unaccompanied by mind or heart, is utterly
worthless. The man who eats the bread and drinks the wine, as a
mere matter of form, because it is the "right" thing to do, without any
clear idea of what it all means, derives no benefit. He might just as
well stay at home!
Another common idea among men is that, "taking the Lord' Supper
will help them get to heaven, and take away their sins." To this false
idea you may trace up the habit in some churches of going to the
Lord's Table once a year, in order, as an old farmer once said, "to
wipe off the year's sins." To this idea again, you may trace the too
common practice of sending for a minister in time of sickness, in
order to receive the ordinance before death. Yes, how many take
comfort about their relatives, after they have lived a most ungodly
life, for no better reason than this, that they took the Lord's Supper
when they were dying! Whether they repented and believed and had
new hearts, they neither seem to know or care. All they know is that
"they took the Lord's Supper before they died." My heart sinks within
me when I hear people resting on such evidence as this.
Ideas like these are sad proofs of the ignorance that fills the minds of
men about the Lord's Supper. They are ideas for which there is not
the slightest warrant in Scripture. The sooner they are cast aside and
given up, the better for the Church and the world.
Let us settle it firmly in our minds that the Lord's Supper was not
given to be a means either of justification or of conversion. It was
never meant to give grace where there is no grace already, or to
provide pardon when pardon is not already enjoyed. It cannot
possibly provide what is lacking with the absence of repentance to
God, and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ. It is an ordinance for
the penitent, not for the impenitent, for the believing, not for the
unbelieving, for the converted, not for the unconverted. The
unconverted man, who fancies that be can find a "shortcut" to
heaven by taking the Lord's Supper, without treading the well-worn
steps of repentance and faith, will find to his cost one day, that he is
totally deceived. The Lord's Supper was meant to increase and help
the grace that a man has, but not to impart the grace that he does not
have. It was certainly never intended to make our peace with God, to
justify, or to convert.
The simplest statement of the benefit which a truehearted
communicant may expect to receive from the Lord's Supper, is the
strengthening and refreshing of our souls--clearer views of Christ
and His atonement, clearer views of all the offices which Christ, fills
as our Mediator and Advocate, clearer views of the complete
redemption Christ has obtained for us by His substituted death on
the cross, clearer views of our full and perfect acceptance in Christ
before God, fresh reasons for deep repentance for sin, fresh reasons
for lively faith--these are among the leading returns which a believer
may confidently expect to get from his attendance at the Lord's
Table. He that eats the bread and drinks the wine in a right spirit,
will find himself drawn into closer communion with Christ, and will
feel to know Him more, and understand Him better.
(a) Right reception of the Lord's Supper has a "humbling" effect on
the soul. The sight of the bread and wine as emblems of Christ's body
and blood, reminds us how sinful sin must be, if nothing less than
the death of God's own Son could make satisfaction for it, or redeem
us from its guilt. Never should we be so "clothed with humility," as
when we receive the Lord's Supper.
(b) Right reception of the Lord's Supper has a "cheering" effect on
the soul. The sight of the bread broken, and the wine poured out,
reminds us how full, perfect, and complete is our salvation. Those
vivid emblems remind us what an enormous price has been paid for
our redemption. They press on us the mighty truth, that believing on
Christ, we have nothing to fear, because a sufficient payment has
been made for our debt. The "precious blood of Christ" answers every
charge that can be brought against us. God can be "just and the one
who justifies those who have faith in Jesus" (Romans 3:26).
(c) Right reception of the Lord's Supper has a "sanctifying" effect on
the soul. The bread and wine remind us how great is our debt of
gratitude to our Lord, and how thoroughly we are bound to live for
Him who died for our sins. They seem to say to us, "Remember what
Christ has done for you, and ask yourself whether there is anything
too great to do for Him."
(d) Right reception of the Lord's Supper into hearts, has a restraining
effect on the soul. Every time a believer receives the bread and the
wine he is reminded what a serious thing it is to be a Christian, and
what an obligation is laid on him to lead a consistent life. Bought
with such a price as that bread and wine call to his recollection,
ought he not to glorify Christ in body and spirit, which are His? The
man that goes regularly and intelligently to the Lord's Table finds it
increasingly hard to yield to sin and conform to the world.
Such is a brief account of the benefits which a right hearted
communicant may expect to receive from the Lord's Supper. In
eating that bread and drinking that cup, such a man will have his
repentance deepened, his faith increased, his knowledge enlarged,
his habit of holy living strengthened. He will realize more of the "real
presence" of Christ in his heart. Eating, that bread by faith, he will
feel closer communion with the body of Christ. Drinking that wine by
faith, he will feel closer communion with the blood of Christ. He will
see more clearly what Christ is to him, and what he is to Christ. He
will understand more thoroughly what it is to be "one with Christ,
and Christ one with him." He will feel the roots of his soul's spiritual
life watered, and the work of grace in his heart established, built up,
and carried forward. All these things may seem and sound like
foolishness to a natural man, but to a true Christian these things are
light, and health, and life, and peace. No wonder that a true Christian
finds the Lord's Supper a source of blessing!
Remember, I do not pretend to say that all Christians experience the
full blessing of the Lord's Supper, which I have just attempted to
describe. Nor do I say that the same believer will always find his soul
in the same spiritual frame, and always receive the same amount of
benefit from the ordinance. But I boldly say this: you will rarely find
a true believer who will not say that he believes the Lord's Supper is
one of his best helps and highest privileges. He will tell you that if he
were deprived of the Lord's Supper on a regular basis he would find
the loss of it a great detriment to his soul. There are some things of
which we never know the value of till they are taken from us. So I
believe it is with the Lord's Supper. The weakest and humblest of
God's children gets a blessing from this ordinance, to an extent of
which he is not aware.
IV. In the last place, I have to consider "why it is that so many socalled Christians (false believers) never come to the Lord's Supper."
It is a simple matter of fact, that myriads of persons who call
themselves Christians never come to the Table of the Lord. They
would not endure to be told that they deny the faith, and are not in
communion with Christ. When they worship, they attend a place of
Christian worship; when they hear religious teaching, it is the
teaching of Christianity; when they are married, they use a Christian
service. Yet all this time they never come to the Lord's Supper! They
often live on in this state of mind for many years, and to all
appearance are not ashamed. They often die in this condition
without ever having received the ordinance, and yet profess to feel
hope at the last, and their friends express a hope about them. And
yet they live and die in open disobedience to a plain command of
Christ! These are simple facts. Let any one look around him, and
deny them if he can.
Now why is this? What explanation can we give? Our Lord Jesus
Christ's last injunctions to His disciples are clear, plain, and
unmistakable. He says to all, "Eat, drink: do this in remembrance of
Me." Did He leave it to our discretion whether we would obey His
injunction or not? Did He mean that it was not significant whether
His disciples did or did not keep up the ordinance He had just
established? Certainly not. The very idea is absurd, and one certainly
never dreamed of in apostolic times. Paul evidently takes it for
granted that every Christian would go to the Lord's Table when it was
available. A class of Christian worshipers who never came to the
Table, was a class whose existence was unknown to him. What, then,
are we to say of that number which fail to receive the Lord's Supper,
unabashed, unhumbled, not afraid, not the least ashamed? Why is it?
How is it? What does it all mean? Let us look these questions fairly in
the face, and endeavor to give an answer to them.
(1) For one thing, many fail to go to the Table because they are
utterly careless and thoughtless about religion, and ignorant of very
first principles of Christianity.
They go to church, as a matter of form, but they neither know, nor
care anything about what is done at church! The faith of Christ has
no place either in their hearts, or heads, or consciences, or wills, or
understandings. It is a mere affair of "words and names," about
which they know no more than Festus or Gallio. There were very few
such false Christians in Paul's times, if indeed there were any. There
are far too many in these last days of the world. They are the deadweight of the Churches, and the scandal of Christianity. What such
people need is light, knowledge, grace, a renewed conscience, a
changed heart. In their present state they have no part of Christ; and
dying in this state they are thrown into hell. Do I wish them to come
to the Lord's Supper? Certainly not, till they are converted. No one
can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born again.
(2) For another thing, many false Christians do not receive the Lord's
Supper because they know they are living in the habitual practice of
some sin, or in the neglect of some Christian duty.
Their conscience tells them so long as they live in this state, and do
not turn away from their sins, they are unfit to come to the Table of
the Lord. Well: they are so far quite right! I wish no man to be a
communicant if he cannot give up his sins. But I warn these people
not to forget that if they are unfit for the Lord's Supper in that
condition they will be lost eternally. The same sins which disqualify
them for the ordinance, most certainly disqualify them for heaven.
Do I want them to come to the Lord's Supper as they are? Certainly
not! But I do want them to repent and be converted, to cease to do
evil, and to break off from their sins. Forever let it be remembered
that the man unfit for the Lord's Supper is unfit to die.
(3) For another thing, some are not communicant because they fancy
it will add to their responsibility.
They are not, as many, ignorant and careless about religion. They
even attend church regularly and listen to the preaching of the
gospel. But they say they dread coming to the Lord's Table and
making a confession and a profession. They fear that they might
afterwards fall away, and bring scandal on the cause of Christianity.
They think it wisest to be on the safe side, and not commit
themselves at all. Such people would do well to remember that if they
avoid responsibility of one kind by not coming to the Lord's Table,
they incur responsibility of another kind, quite as grave, and quite as
injurious to the soul. They are responsible for open disobedience to a
command from of Christ. They are shrinking from doing that which
their Master continually commands His disciples--confessing Him
before men. No doubt it is a serious step to come to the Lord's Table
and receive the bread and the wine. It is a step that none should take
lightly and without selfexamination. But it is "no less a serious step to walk away and refuse
the ordinance," when we remember Who invites us to receive it, and
for what purpose it was appointed! I warn the people I am now
dealing with to be careful what they are doing. Let them not flatter
themselves that it can ever be a wise, a prudent, a safe line of conduct
to neglect a plain command of Christ. They may find at length, to
their cost, that they have only increased their guilt and forsaken their
mercies.
(4) For another thing, some false Christians stay away from the
Lord's Supper because they believe they are not yet worthy.
They wait and stand still, under the mistaken notion that no one is
qualified for the Lord's Supper unless he feels within him something
like perfection. They pitch their idea of a communicant so high that
they despair of attaining to it. Waiting for inward perfection they
live, and waiting for it they die. Now such persons would do well to
understand that they are completely mistaken in their estimate of
what "worthiness" really is. They are forgetting that the Lord's
Supper was not intended for unsinning angels, but for men and
women subject to weakness, living in a world full of temptations, and
needing mercy and grace every day they live.
A sense of our own utter unworthiness is the best worthiness that we
can bring to the Lord's Table. A deep feeling of our own entire
indebtedness to Christ for all we have and hope for, is the best feeling
we can bring, with us. The people I now have in view ought to
consider seriously whether the ground they have taken up is
defensible, and whether they are not standing in their own light. If
they are waiting till they feel in themselves perfect hearts, perfect
motives, perfect feelings, perfect, repentance, perfect love, perfect
faith, they will wait forever. There never were such communicants in
any age--certainly not in the days of our Lord and of the Apostles--
there never will be as long as the world stands. No, rather, the very
thought that we feel literally worthy, is a symptom of secret selfrighteousness, and proves us unfit for the Lord's Table in God's sight.
Sinners we are when we first come to the throne of grace--sinners we
will be till we die; converted, changed, renewed, sanctified, but
sinners still (though not like before--sin is not the pattern of a
believer's new life). In short, no man is really worthy to receive the
Lord's Supper who does not deeply feel that he is a "miserable
sinner."
(5) In the last place, some object going to the Lord's Table because
they see others partaking who are not worthy, and not in a right state
of mind.
Because others eat and drink unworthily, they refuse to eat and drink
at all. Of all the reasons taken up by those refusing to come to the
Lord's Supper to justify their own neglect of Christ's ordinance, I
must plainly say, I know none which seems to me so foolish, so weak,
so unreasonable, and so unscriptural as this. It is as good as saying
that we will never receive the Lord's Supper at all! When will we ever
find a body of communicants on earth of which all the members are
converted and living perfect lives? It is setting up ourselves in the
most unhealthy attitude of judging others. "Who are you that you
judge another person?" "What is that to you? You must follow me"
(John 21:22). It is depriving ourselves of a great privilege because
others profane it and make a bad use of it. It is pretending to be
wiser than our Master Himself. It is taking up ground for which there
is no warrant in Scripture. Paul rebukes the Corinthians sharply for
the irreverent behavior of some of the communicants; but I cannot
find him giving a single hint that when some came to the Table
unworthily, others ought to draw back or stay away. Let me advise
the non-communicants I have now in view to beware of being wise
above that which was written. Let them study the parable of the
Wheat and Tares, and mark how both were to "grow together until
the harvest" (Matthew 13:30).
Perfect Churches, perfect congregations, perfect bodies of
communicants, are all unattainable in this world of confusion and
sin. Let us covet the best gifts, and do all we can to check sin in
others; but let us not starve our ownselves because others are
ignorant sinners, and turn their food into poison. If others are foolish
enough to eat and drink unworthily, let us not turn our backs on
Christ's ordinance, and refuse to eat and drink at all.
Such are the five common excuses why myriads in the present day,
though professing themselves Christians (but they are not), never
come to the Lord's Supper. One common remark may be made about
them: there is not a single reason among the five which deserves to
be called "good," and which does not condemn the man who gives it.
I challenge anyone to deny this. I have said repeatedly that I want no
one to come to the Lord's Table who is not properly qualified. But I
ask those who stay away never to forget that the very reasons they
assign for their conduct are their condemnation. I tell them that they
stand convicted before God of either being very ignorant of what a
communicant is, and what the Lord's Supper is; or else of being
persons who are not living right, and are unfit to die. In short, to say,
I am a noncommunicant, is as good as saying one of three things--I am living in
sin, and cannot come--I know Christ commands me, but I will not
obey Him--I am an ignorant man, and do not understand what the
Lord's Supper means."
I know not in what state of mind this book may find the reader of this
paper, or what his opinions may be about the Lord's Supper. But I
will conclude the whole subject by offering to all some warnings,
which I venture to think are highly required by the times.
(1) In the first place, "do not neglect" the Lord's Supper.
The man who coolly and deliberately refuses to use an ordinance
which the Lord Jesus Christ appointed for his profit, may be very
sure that his soul is in a very wrong state. There is a judgment to
come; there is, an account to be rendered of all our conduct on earth.
How any one can look forward to that day, and expect to meet Christ
with comfort and in peace, if he has refused all his life to commune
with Christ at His Table, is a thing that I cannot understand. Does
this hit home to you? Be careful what you are doing.
(2) In the second place, "do not receive the Lord's Supper carelessly,"
irreverently, and as a matter of form.
The man who goes to the Lord's Table, and eats the bread and drinks
the wine, while his heart is far away, is committing a great sin, and
robbing himself of a great blessing. In this, as in every other means
of grace, every thing depends on the state of mind in which the
ordinance is used. He that draws near without repentance, faith, and
love, and with a heart full of sin and the world, will certainly be
nothing better, but rather worse. Does this hit home to you? Be
careful what you are doing.
(3) In the third place, "do not make an idol" of the Lord's Supper.
The man who tells you that it is the first, foremost, chief, and
principal precept in Christianity, is telling you that which he will find
it hard to prove. In the great majority of the books of the New
Testament the Lord's Supper is not even named. In the letter to
Timothy and Titus, about a minister's duties, the subject is not even
mentioned. To repent and be converted, to believe and be holy, to be
born again and have grace in our hearts--all these things are of far
more importance than to be a communicant. Without them we
cannot be saved. Without the Lord's Supper we can. Are you tempted
to make the Lord's Supper override and overshadow everything in
Christianity, and place it above prayer and preaching? Be careful.
Pay attention what you are doing.
(4) In the fourth place, "do not use the Lord's Supper irregularly."
Never be absent when the Lord's Supper is administered. Make every
effort to be in attendance. Regular habits are essential to the
maintenance of the health of our bodies. Regular use of the Lord's
Supper is essential to the well-being of our souls. The man who finds
it a burden to attend on every occasion when the Lord's Table is
spread, may well doubt whether all is right within him, and whether
he is ready for the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. If Thomas had not
been absent when the Lord appeared the first time to the assembled
disciples, he would not have said the foolish things he did. Absence
made him miss a blessing. Does this hit home to you? Be careful
what you are doing.
(5) In the fifth place, "do not do anything to bring discredit" on your
profession as a communicant.
The man who after attending the Lord's Table runs into sin, does
more harm perhaps than any sinner. He is a walking sermon on
behalf of the devil. He gives opportunity to the enemies of the Lord
to blaspheme. He helps to keep people away from Christ. Lying,
drinking, adulterous, dishonest, passionate communicants are the
helpers of the devil, and the worst enemies of the Gospel. Does this
hit home to you? Be careful what you are doing.
(6) In the last place, "do not despair" and be cast down, if with all
your desires you do not feel that you get a lot of good from the Lord's
Supper.
Very likely you are expecting too much. Very likely you are a poor
judge of your own state. Your soul's roots may be strengthening and
growing, while you think you are not growing. Very likely you are
forgetting that earth is not heaven, and that here we walk by sight
and not by faith, and must expect nothing perfect. Lay these things to
heart. Do not think harsh things about yourself without cause.
To every reader into whose hands this paper may fall, I commend the
whole subject of it as deserving of serious and solemn consideration.
I am nothing, better than a poor or fallible man myself. But if I have
made up my mind on any point it is this--that there is no truth which
demands such plain speaking, as truth about the Lord's Supper.