Is he now a Christian who can be deaf to such an address? Who can coldly comply with, or flatly refuse, such an invitation? Who hath baseness enough to say within himself, or brutality enough even to say to others, I do not intend to communicate more than once or twice a year; perhaps I shall not prevail on myself to do it so often. It is true, when I do attend this duty, I lay out but a small portion of two or three days in preparing for it; yet this gives so painful an interruption to the pursuits my heart is engaged in, that I cannot think of going about this business, either more frequently or more warmly.' Now compare this with the address of our blessed Saviour, that you may suppose it, as is really the case, returned by way of answer to that address; and then tell us whether you can conceive human nature, or any thing short of the diabolical, capable of a more detestable, or a more infernal, degree of ingratitude. Were the man absolutely an Atheist, he could never think of coming to the Lord's table at all. What then (in the name of wonder), is he? Is he a Christian? Does he hope for salvation through the death of Christ? Good God! How then can he answer his Saviour in such a manner? Or with what enormous impudence can he hope, that attendance, so cold, so forced, so seldom paid, can pass on the searcher of hearts for gratitude, for gratitude under the weight of such infinite obligations? But why do I thus lash this wretch? The ungrateful cannot be obliged, cannot be served, cannot be saved.

Beside these reasons for frequent communion, arising from the nature of the institution itself, there is another of no less force and better qualified to shew how often we ought to communicate, drawn from the practice of the apostolic age, and of that which followed for some hundreds of years. The apostles, who were guided immediately by the Spirit of God, could not have been mistaken in a thing of this consequence; nor could the primitive fathers, who pursued the example of the apostles. Now St. Luke informs us, it was the custom of the disciples to come together on the first day of the week to break bread, which is the expression he uses to signify the celebration of the Lord's supper. From whence it appears, they performed this solemnity once a week. Nay, it seems, they did it much of

tener; for we find, they continued daily in the temple, and also broke bread from house to house;' from which it is natural to conclude, that, as often as any number of them met at one another's houses, which was almost every day, they constantly went to prayers, and celebrated this sacrament. This holy practice had not ceased in St. Cyprian's time; for he says, we daily receive the eucharist, as the food which nourishes us to salvation;' nay, we find it still alive as far down as the days of St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, and St. Augustin, in the western churches; and, as to the eastern churches, whose piety began sooner to cool, St. Basil says, they communicated four times a week, and oftener, if the festival of any martyr called them together.

Their practice also instructs us in another point of great moment, relating to this awful institution; namely, that they not only denied communion to all open offenders, as we see by the instance of the incestuous person among the Corinthians, but also threatened all such with excommunication, as came to the public place of worship, and did not stay to receive the Lord's supper, as we see by the apostolic canons, and the synod of Antioch. If any man in health should but once absent himself from this solemnity on the Lord's day, he was regarded by all the Christians of his acquaintance as an infamous person, whose secret sins had cut him off from the body of Christ. Such were the customs in relation to this sacred and solemn ordinance, that arose from the immediate directions of the Holy Spirit.

Let us now ask ourselves, whether we think this sacrament is a different thing in these days from what it was in the purer ages of the church? Whether we stand in less need of the grace communicated by it, than the primitive Christians did? Whether our acknowledgments are not as often due, as theirs, for the death of Christ? Or whether it can be rationally supposed, that our practice comes nearer to the design of our blessed Saviour, than that which flowed from the immediate dictates of his Holy Spirit? The right answers to these questions will condemn the usage, in this behalf, of every church now on earth. In what an unworthy light must the present professors of Christianity stand, when so few can be found among the largest and best congregations, who are willing to communicate once a month;

when the second class, far more numerous than this, content themselves with receiving once or twice a year; and when the remainder, which makes a greater body, than both the other put together, are hardly ever prevailed on to receive at all? Hath this the air of gratitude, of piety, of Christianity? No, the true Christian, and the constant communicant, ever were, and still are, but one and the same thing.

But farther, since not to receive this holy sacrament is excommunication, let us ask ourselves, whether it is worse to be excommunicated by the church, which may be mistaken in its censures; or by the deadness of our own hearts, and the clamorous guilt of our consciences, where there is not the same room for an erroneous sentence? Whosoever refuses to receive, be the excuses he makes what they will, is certainly self-condemned of ingratitude towards his Saviour, or of infidelity, or of some secret enormities unreformed, or of rancour in regard to his neighbour; perhaps of all; and therefore self-excommunicated. As to his receiving once or twice a year, or, it may be, but once in several years, it can only serve to rise in judgment against his infamous neglect at other times; for why should not the same reasons that brought him once to the Lord's table, bring him on all other occasions when it is spread for him? If he can receive at a great festival, why not at another time? Do his acknowledgments depend on the calendar? Is he only annually a Christian? Or are the fits of his devotion periodical, like those of an old ague? A covenant, so seldom remembered, can by no means preserve the peace between God and his soul. Accounts, so seldom examined and cleared, must lie in the utmost confusion, and swell, in time, beyond a possibility of being settled or balanced. So long a fast from spiritual food must starve the vital principle in the soul, and, in all probability, reduce it to an incapacity of being revived.

Such are the reasons, to which many more might be added, for frequency of communion. But I cannot conclude, nor dismiss the subject of this sacrament, without a remark, that, if I mistake not, does more honour both to the institution itself, and the wisdom of its author, than any other, and may serve at the same time briefly to remind you of all that hath been said.

Although the sacrament of the Lord's supper hath its own peculiar ends, such as the commemoration of Christ's death, communion with the head and members of the church, ratification of the covenant, participation of grace, and the like; yet none of these is the ultimate end of this institution, which, like all other parts of our religion, pursues, through its own immediate ends, the grand, the common end of Christianity, to wit, the glory of God in the salvation of souls. And this it does in a way altogether worthy of that infinite wisdom, to which it owes its appointment; for while, on the one side, it is no less than death to the soul to neglect it, on the other, it is damnation to receive it unworthily, that is, without faith, reformation of manners, and charity both towards God and man.

Thus

it fences our way to happiness on each hand; and, inasmuch as it is continually to be attended, keeps the articles of our covenant, the death of Christ, the necessity of a good life, the mercies and judgments of God, heaven, hell, and, in a word, every principle, every motive, of Christianity, always strongly in view. Besides this, it maintains a constant intercourse between God, and the soul of each regular communicant, by the grace, mercy, and peace, which God confers on it; and by the self-examination, vigilance, and devotion, which the worthy receiver, without intermission, exercises in order to a right attendance on this important solemnity. Considered in this light, it abridges and braces on the conscience all the means of salvation; it concentres all the instruments, ends, and purposes, of Almighty God towards man, contained in our holy religion. Considered in any lower light, in that particularly, wherein a late writer hath endeavoured to represent it, to the eye of common sense it dwindles into an empty ceremony, as little capable of doing honour to the wisdom of its author, as of promoting the piety and virtue of mankind.

Let us therefore, to conclude, give a close attention to this most useful and awful institution; let us constantly attend it, and on all occasions, with deep and ardent devotions, apply it to the blessed purposes, for which it was ordained; ever carefully recollecting, that we cannot neglect it, without danger of death to our souls; nor unworthily receive it, without danger of damnation.

And may its blessed founder be graciously pleased to assist our endeavours herein with his Holy Spirit, and to accept of them, for the sake of those merits, on which our hopes of eternal peace and life are grounded. Now, to the ever-blessed and glorious Trinity, be all might, majesty, dignity, and dominion, from henceforward for evermore. Amen.

DISCOURSE XXIII.

THE REWARD ANNEXED TO THE CHRISTIAN
COVENANT.

Set

COLOSS. III. 2.

your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. WHEN We consider how infinitely different the things above, and the things on earth, here spoken of, are; how sensible and gross the one, how spiritual and pure the other; it may seem a little surprising, that the same affections should be capable of a relish for both; or rather, as we have them from the fleshly part of our nature, that they should have any inclination at all to objects purely spiritual. But we find they really have, when such objects are proposed to the understanding, as infinitely better than the proper objects of sense, and recommended through that to our affections under the shadow and figure of such sensible enjoyments, as impart to the soul the most pure and exalted kind of pleasure. Our Maker, having intended us for a progress through both worlds, hath fitted us to either. In this respect, as well as in the make and carriage of our bodies, although our feet are placed on earth, our heads are erected towards the heavens.

Whether, however, our chief attention ought to look upward, or downward, reason is to determine, according to the lights and prospects afforded it from either quarter. God intended we should be moved by our affections, but guided by our understandings. Yet the affections, though blind, will not always suffer themselves to be led. The judgment