The Reviler Rebuked, Treatise · Part 1 · Head 13
(13. Head of their Scripture-contradiction.) Concerning the Lords Supper.
Section 39.
I Had noted out of a Pamphlet (as it fell out) of R. F. what a title of diſhonor he gives to the Lords Supper, no better then a Carnal invention; as ſtrong a contradiction to 1 Cor. 11. 23. as his reaſon is weak, becauſe he wanted that aſſurance which he expected at the Participation of that ordinance; whereupon, he takes me up with his old reviling language, * I charge thee in that to be a groſs The viſible outward Lords ſupper no carnal invention.lyar, I ſaid that your imagination was a carnal invention, but the Lords Supper I own.
Rep. What Lords Supper doth he own? that in the heart onelyonly, for he owneth what he witneſſeth; and what doth he witneſs? it followeth in his book, and witneſs that he is come in to ſup with me, Rev. 3. 20. Rep. But at that Supper I never heard, or read before, of one drunk with the opinion, That the commemoration of the Lords death (by breaking and eating of bleſſed Bread and drinking of bleſſed Wine▪ i. e. bread and wine ſet apart by prayer and thankſgiving, as he appointed) was mans imagination, and a carnal invention. It is matter of Faith (and not imagination) to me (as to many thouſands) and as with my heart I believe, ſo with my mouth and Pen I make this confeſſion, that, That Lords Supper which Paul ſpeaks of, 1 Cor. 10. 16. and 11. 20. and which chap. 10. 21. he calls the Lords Table, was and is ſomething beſides the inward myſtical communion with Chriſt, Rev. 3. 20. even the viſible ſign and ſeal of that Communion, and of other effects of his death; and if this be proved and found to be none of mine nor mans imagination, it will appear to all men who is the groſs lyar, and that R. F. hath called that Lords Supper, or the ordinance of bread and wine, inſtituted by Chriſt, (in the night wherein he was betrayed) a carnal invention. But he goes on, And the bread which we break it is the Communion of the body of Chriſt, and the cup which we drink, it is the Communion of the blood of Chriſt; and as Paul ſaid, ſo ſay I, Let thoſe that are ſpiritual judge what is ſaid.
Rep. Agreed, in Pauls ſenſe, not in the apprehenſion of R. F. but where hath Paul theſe words? Let thoſe that are Spiritual judge, &c. It is true, the ſpiritual man judgeth of colors, white and black, truth and error, grace and corruption, ſomething he can judge of all ſpiritual things, which a natural man cannot; But it is the wiſe man, which the Apoſtle appealeth to, in that place, which R. F. ſhot at, at rovers, 1 Cor. 10. 15. I ſpeak as to wiſe men, judge ye what I ſay▪ If any man think himſelf to be a Prophet, or ſpiritual, and be not wiſe, he may think, as R. F. that the words ver. 16. are meant of bread broken onelyonly in the heart, and of the cup drunk in the heart, &c. but no wiſe man, that ever yet I met with, nor any truly ſpiritual, have ſo thought, or will ſo judge; excluding outward bread, and the viſible Cup, from being the ſign, and pledge of inward communion in and with the body and blood of the Lord, as R. F. *Page 20. Bread and wine the outward matter of the Lords Supper.doth.
Thou canſt not prove that Paul broke outward bread and drunk outward wine, with the Corinthians, nor the maner how.
Rep. The truth doth not reſt upon my proof, nor needs there any more but the reading of the words, 1 Cor. 11. 23, 24, 25. which I ſhall tranſcribe at large, for the memorial of the inſtitution, as the bleſſed Apoſtle hath left it to the Saints. "For I received of the Lord that which alſo I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jeſus, the ſame night in which he was betrayed, took bread: and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and ſaid, Take, eat, this is my body which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the ſame maner alſo he took the cup, when he had ſupped, ſaying, This cup is the New Teſtament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. What proof lies in theſe words, which R. F. calls for, I ſhall demonſtrate, in this argumentative way,
What the Lord Jeſus brake, and drank with his diſciples, and after what maner; that Paul brake, and drank with the Corinthians, and after that maner:
But the Lord Jeſus brake material, or outward bread, and drank material, or outward wine, with his DiſciplesMat. 26. 26, 27 Mark 14 22, 23, 24. (having firſt bleſſed the bread, and given thanks diſtinctly at the taking of the cup) and then gave it to them, to be uſed in remembrance of him:
Therefore, Paul brake material, or outward bread, and drank material, or outward wine, with the Corinthians, after the maner that the Lord brake, and drank, and gave it to his Diſciples, to be uſed in remembrance of him.
The Major, or firſt propoſition, is undeniable, elſe Paul had been unfaithful, to teach and practiſe among the Corinthians, and to write it over, to them and us for imitation; but Paul obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful, 1 Cor. 7. 25. The Minor, or ſecond propoſition, is as true as the firſt, for Chriſt took of the Bread upon the table (the reſerve of it, after the Paſſover Supper) and bleſſed that, brake that, gave that to be eaten; and he took of the Cup upon the table, and gave thanks (afreſh) and gave it to them, ſaying, Drink ye all of it: For this is (i. e. this is a ſign, pledge, memorial, ſeal, or aſſurance of) my Blood of the New Teſtament, which is ſhed for you, as Luke hath it, Chap. 22. ver. 20. and for many (as Matthew and Mark record it *Mat. 26. 28, 29 Mark 22. 24, 25.) for the remiſſion of ſins: which Cup put (by a Metonymie of the Subject for the Adjunct, i. e. the thing containing, put for the thing or outward matter contained in it, i. e.) for the Wine in the Cup, he calleth the fruit of the vine, as it was in its own nature and ſubſtance; it muſt of neceſſity follow, that Paul following his Maſters inſtitution at the heels, or to a hair, (as even now was cleared) the bread that he brake, and the wine that he drank, (and ordered for the future to them and all the Churches to be broken and drunk, 1 Cor. 11. 26.) was the fruit of ſeed-corn, material outward bread; and the fruit of the vine, material outward wine: which becauſe R. F. in another piece of his, had ſaid was carnal, I added for explication, and to diſcover how he contradicted 1 Cor. 10. 16. that albeit the bread and wine (which we uſe according to the Lords precept, and Pauls practice) in the Lords Supper, are in their nature and ſubſtance very bread and wine, yet they are Spiritual in the inſtitution, end, and uſe, during our corporal eating and drinking of them, at that Supper of the Lord.
The word which I uſed in the Concrete [Spiritual] he turns to the Abſtract [Spirit] and thus clamors me; *Therefore it is thy reaſon is ſo weak, that ſaith, The bread which you break, although it be bread in the nature and ſubſtance, yet it is Spirit in the inſtitution, &c. What blaſphemy is this, to ſay that the Spirit is in the bread, which is natural in the ſubſtance? Here is a Papiſtical trick indeed, Oh horrible deluſion!
Rep. 1. I brought not 1 Cor. 10. 16. or any reaſon from thence, to prove the bread to be material and outward, (though I could, as above I have from the 11. Chap.) but to ſhew it was not carnal in R. F. his ſenſe, ſet in oppoſition to the ſpiritual inſtitution, end, and uſe: For that which is appointed by Chriſt to be uſed for ſignification and aſſurance of many a ſouls intereſt in, and communion of his natural body and blood, broken, and ſhed upon the Croſs, that is not meer carnal bread and drink: But the bread and wine is after Chriſts inſtitution to be ſo uſed, as Paul admoniſheth the Corinthians, and not to be abuſed and profaned, i. e. uſed in a common maner, as if it were but ordinary bread and wine, and had no ſpecial ſignification, and end ſtampt upon it. That natural body and blood of Chriſt (which we remember in the Supper, as broken and ſhed at his Paſſion) was and is a true natural body, (then on earth, now in heaven) and yet it was and is ſpiritual food; his fleſh, meat indeed, his blood, drink indeed; there is no ſweeter, no better; there's none to that: So the bread and wine, is truly bread, materially wine, and yet withal, in the Lords Supper it is Chriſts body, and it is his blood; How? ſignificatively; a ſpiritual memorial of Chriſts death, and a pledge of what Chriſt is (to us that believe in him) dying for us.
2. This man R. F. coyneth phraſes, and then fathers them upon me; [The Spirit in the inſtitution] and [the Spirit is in the bread] and would make the world believe he were as ignorant of Popery, as of true Proteſtant Doctrine. The Doctrine I held forth (according to Scripture) was, and is in profeſſed oppoſition to all Papiſticall tricks and devices, touching the Lords Supper. I ſaid, the bread, as the wine, was ſo, and is ſo, in its nature and ſubſtance, but ſpiritual in the inſtitution, end, and uſe: And I adde, neither Chriſts Inſtitution, nor the Miniſters Bleſſing, doth tranſubſtantiate them, or turn them into the natural body and blood of Chriſt, as the Papiſts imagine, after their conſecration. They do not ſay, that I know, the Spirit is in the bread, nor did I ever ſo expreſs my ſelf in preaching at Edinburgh (or elſewhere) and what I wrote there *page 20.is to be ſeen and read of all men; yet more then this, of confuſed ſtuff, would R. F. (in his return to the Agreement of 42. Miniſters *Contradiction of the Quakers (ſo called) p. 16.) make the world believe, he can produce under my hand (and the hands of other Preachers in that City.) Had his miſtake* See page 18. with the marginal not. been onelyonly in a letter of my name, to put (e) for (a) it were a very venial offence; but to refer (as he doth) to my whole name (except that letter) is a moſt impudent forgery.) But to return to the Pontificians, this they hold;Popiſh Tranſubſtantiation a blinde dotage. The body of Chriſt is corporally under the ſhew of bread, and the blood of Chriſt is ſubſtantially under the colour of wine; (as if the accidents or qualities of roundneſs, redneſs, or whiteneſs, could be without the ſubject and ſubſtance of thoſe creatures; and as if Chriſts natural body and blood, for ſubſtance, could be there, and neither be ſeen, felt, nor taſted; and as if Chriſt had laid down the qualities of a true natural body, and were in moe places then one at once, with many ſuch blinde dotages) this is to make a very carnal Supper of it indeed. Hence it is that (they maintaining (in words onelyonly, and with fire and faggot, not by any Scripture rightly underſtood, nor ſound Argument from thence) the real, corporal, carnal preſence of Chriſt) we proteſt againſt them, as Antichriſtian: And ſo muſt we enter a proteſtation againſt R. F. and men of his way, to be yet more myſteriouſly Babyloniſh. For the groſſer Papiſts ſpeak broadly, and make a nullity of the Lords Supper, by their feigned Tranſubſtantiation and carnal-corporal preſence; but theſe ſpeak ſubtilly, and nullifie it, by transforming of the Inſtitution, and ſpreading the Lords Table with another cloth (as it were, and as will more appear anon) while we hold up the Ordinance, according to Goſpel-primitive ſimplicity, and do maintain (upon ſufficient Scripture-grounds) both the outward and inward matter, and form of the Lords Supper, with the ſpiritualneſs of the Inſtitution, and the truly-ſpiritual preſence of Chriſt, with his own ordained ſigns; who, in relation to them, and to his own promiſe, and his peoples faith, is there (as at Baptiſm, Matth. 28. 19, 20. Lo, I am with you, &c.) by his Spirit, to quicken, confirm, and ſeal up our communion with himſelf, as crucified for us. HenceThe benefit of the Lords Supper. it is, that the Churches of Chriſt, and every true believer, active in his faith, have found it, and do ſtill experience it to be a faith-ſtrengthning, conſcience-refreſhing, ſoul-comforting, love-increaſing, ſin-mortifying, ſalvation-aſſuring Ordinance; although they have not always a like ſenſe of his preſence. But to caſt off this Ordinance, and call it a carnal invention, as R. F. hath done, for want of expected aſſurance at the participation of it, is a raſh fruit of unbelief, and proud impatience; and to call us Deceivers *Page 20.for keeping to the Inſtitution (which remaineth firm in it ſelf, while it proves ineffectual to many an unworthy communicant) is to hide himſelf, in his ſelf-deceivings: Finally, to cry out, Oh horrible deluſion! is to caſt a miſt before others eyes, that they may not ſee where the jugling and the jugler lie cloſe together.
For what ſaith he further? The Kingdom of God conſiſts not in meat and drink, but in righteouſneſs, peace, and joy in the holy Ghoſt; and in that Kingdom, wheat-bread, and red wine is not the ſouls food, but the precious blood of Chriſt.
Rep. 1. Where the Apoſtle ſpeaks of the choice things, wherein the Kingdom of God conſiſts, viz. righteouſneſs, &c. Rom. 14. 17. he is not treating of bread and wine atRom 14. 17. vindicated. the Lords Table, but of meats and drinks, which Jews and Gentiles made a difference about, ver. 2. One believeth he may eat all things, another that is weak, eateth herbs. He was the ſtronger Chriſtian who found his liberty to eat of all things, i. e. all creatures appointed for natural and bodily food: He was the weaker, who confined himſelf to ſome particulars, as onelyonly lawful, viz. Herbs, &c. This Scripture, of the Apoſtles preferring righteouſneſs, &c. before meats and drinks, is impertinently and ſinfully alledged, to contradict the obſervation of the Lords Supper, wherein he will be remembred by the uſe of natural bread and wine, till his ſecond coming. 1 Cor. 11. 26. As oft as ye eat of this bread,1 Cor. 11. 26▪ cleared. and drink of this cup (for natural ſubſtance, the ſame with other bread and wine; but for ſignification and aſſurance, different) ye do ſhew (by ſuch a uſe and participation) the Lords death till he come. That clauſe [till he come] and others, of his coming, are uſual in the New Teſtament, to denote his ſecond and glorious coming, viſibly in our nature. If I will that he tarry till I come, &c. John 21. 22. So ſhall alſo the coming of the Son of man be, Mat. 24. 37, 39. Even ſo, come Lord Jeſus, the voice of the Bride, and of John, echoing to Chriſts Surely I come quickly, Rev. 22. 20.
2. Although wheat-bread and red wine be not ſouls food alone and by themſelves, yet ſtampt with the Lords Inſtitution, his word of promiſe, This is my body, This is my blood, with his word of command, Do this, &c. and this done in faith accordingly; in and by them, Chriſt doth feed our ſouls. If the ſacred ſigns of the Old Teſtament had this ſignificancy and excellency, that in reſpect of what was repreſented by them, they are called ſpiritual meat, and ſpiritual drink, 1 Cor. 10. 3, 4. (Manna was appointed to feed the faith of the Fathers, and Water out of the rock, to refreſh their ſoul-faith) ſurely, the bleſſed ſigns of the New Teſtament come not ſhort of ſuch ſpiritual ſignificancy and excellency, which they have not from themſelves, but from Chriſt the inſtitutor and ordainer of them; who will, and doth make them ſouls food, inſtrumentally; becauſe he thereby, and therewith gives forth himſelf, to be their aſſured food and nouriſhment:
But ſaith R. F. *Page 20.for a cloſe, He is my meat, and drink, and food for my ſoul to feed on, and for ſuch as are in him, John 6. who is the bread of life.
Rep. But how, he doth not tell us, onelyonly he ſaith it is ſo; and I wiſh it be ſo, and that he doth not feed upon aſhes, nor that a deceived heart doth lead him aſide, nor that a lye be found in his right hand; I'm ſure it is in his tongue, or pen, who ſhall ſay or write, Chriſt feeds not ſouls, by wheat-bread, and red wine.
1. It is a true expoſition of John 6. which we hold up againſt the Papiſts, that all along that Chapter, Chriſt ſpeaks not of the Sacrament, called the Lords Supper (conſiſting of ſign, and thing ſignified, outward and inward matter) but onelyonly of his natural fleſh and blood, given and ſhed for all that eat and drink him ſpiritually, or by faith; which daily they may, and ought to do▪ Believe, and thou haſt eaten, as was Auguſtines counſel and encouragement of old, to the Chriſtians in his time.
2. It is a proud and diſdainful practice, altogether to reject the uſe of wheat-bread and red wine, or any fruit of the vine, frequently, as a help to memory, faith, love, and all the graces of the inner man; eſpecially, by freſh remembrance of Chriſts death, in the application of the ſigns, to be ſtrengthned in believing our intereſt and propriety in him, that we may feed the more ſtrongly upon him, and live chearfully by faith, every day and hour. By this time, me thinks, I hear James Nayler crying out of diviſions about the form *Love to the loſt, pag. 43.(of the Lords Supper) which the worlds Teachers and Profeſſors, are all out of, and have loſt, and the power alſo; and then ſpreading his new cloth (that I hinted at before) as ſome wet napkin over a Corpſe, ſo he, over his new Communion Table, and then ſets on his new-transformed Supper, and what's that? Hear if you can, and read, without their trembling, but in true fear, take notice of his horrible deluſion. For the ſake (ſaith he *Pag… 45.) of ſuch who are loſt in this thing, and troubled in minde concerning it; what I have James Naylers tranſmutation of the Lords Supper.received of the Lord, that I ſhall declare unto you, which all ſhall witneſs to, who come to partake thereof, as the truth is in Jeſus Chriſt. If you intend to ſup with the Lord, or ſhew the Lords death till he come, let your eating and drinking, ſo oft as you do it, be in remembrance of him, and in his fear, that at death you may witneſs to the luſt and exceſs, &c. If this man were not loſt himſelf, could he write thus wildely, falſly, impudently, or miniſter ſuch a miſerable comfort to a troubled minde? Why, where, will the poor loſt ſimple ſoul ſay, is the fallacy, wildeneſs, impudence? The fallacy in this, that by eating and drinking, as oft as you do it, he meaneth, your ordinary meals, of Breakfaſt, Dinner, or Supper; for ſo he expreſſeth it, Page 43. This was to be done at all ſeaſons when they eat and drank. The wildeneſs in this, For the ſake of ſuch as are loſt, and that at death you may witneſs to the luſt and exceſs. The impudence in this, that he ſaith, He received it of the Lord; and to avoid exceſs, and of becoming reprobates in the faith, it was *Page 44.that the Lord Jeſus commanded his Diſciples, in eating and drinking, to ſhew forth his death till he came. And this was that the Apoſtles received of the Lord, and ſo practiſed, till he was come to them; and then *Page 46.they continued it for their ſakes who were weak in the faith, to whom he was not yet appeared. WhatHis colourable Reaſons diſ-colou…ed. colour, will the loſt ſimple ſoul ſay, hath he for all this? He hath ſomething ſurely to ſet forth his new diſh?
Firſt, He thinketh *Page 43.this Lords Supper was done and inſtituted by Chriſt, as they ſate at meat, and did eat, Mat. 26. 26. Mark 14. 22. But muſt it therefore be confounded with every ones common ordinary meal? That Supper which he inſtituted a new, was, if Luke 22. 20. be conſulted, after the Paſchal Supper: and Paul ſaith, 1 Cor. 11. 25. after he, the Lord had ſupped, yea, after he had riſen at the end of the Paſchal Supper, John 13. 2. he took a towel, waſht his Diſciples feet, ſate down again, ver. 12. and had given the dipped ſop to the Traitor, who upon the receiving of it, went immediately out, ver. 30. and came in no more. But now Chriſt and his choſen ones are alone, they not having removed the Table; the Lord enters his Sermon, John 13. latter end, with Chap. 14. 15, 16. and having taken bread and then the cup, he either prayed that in Chap. 17. or (after his diſtinct conſecrating words of bleſſing, and thankſgiving; and his giving, and their taking of the bread and wine) at the end of the whole action; for John 18. 1. compared with Mat. 26. 30. the prayer (after the Sermon) ended, and the *foreign.Hymn ſung by them all, they go forth, over the Brook Kedron, into a Garden in Gethſemane, near to the Mount of Olives. It appeareth by what is ſaid, it was a diſtinct Supper from the reſt, attended with ſolemn Speeches, Prayers, and Praiſes in proſe, and in a Song. If all the Quakers drink in James Naylers Doctrine, they will then take up Prayer, and Thanks at meals, which many have laid down, they will be frequent in ſinging Hymns; even as oft as they eat and drink, it muſt be done, if they will believe what he ſaith the lord hath revealed unto him. But ſome will be wiſer, I hope, then ſome other, and hear reaſon, as it divinely lyeth in the Scripture. The Scripture calleth the inſtituted bread and wine, this bread, and this cup, and this cup of the Lord, 1 Cor. 11. 26, 27. And this bread it calls Chriſts body; and this cup, the cup of the new Teſtament; and the wine, Chriſts blood. Will J. N. or any of his friends be ſo profane, as to call every piece of bread he eateth, and every draught of drink, with ſuch an Emphaſis, and ſuch a title? Will he make no meals of any thing but of bread and drink? or, will he have all his own, and Believers drink, to be of the fruit of the vine? Thus the Scripture deſcribeth the Lords Supper to conſiſt, for the outward matter, of bread and wine (as I have before proved for R. F. his conviction.) The Scripture, neither from Chriſts mouth, nor Pauls pen, ſaith, As oft as ye eat and drink, it is the Lords Supper; but as oft as ye do this, eat of this bread, drink of this cup, ye do ſhew the Lords death till he come. What boldneſs is it to make that temporary, and of ſhort continuance, which the Apoſtle ſaith is to be held up till he cometh! 1 Cor. 11. 26. And ſuch a coming he ſpeaks of there, as in other of his Epiſtles, but eſpecially, conſult, 1 Theſſ. 5. 2. 2 Theſſ. 2. 1, 2.
Secondly, You will finde him ſuggeſting to the loſt bewildred ſoul, *Love to the loſt, pag. 43.That the Church at Jeruſalem did continue in the Apoſtles doctrine, &c. and breaking bread from houſe to houſe, did eat their meat with gladneſs, &c. What then? If their breaking bread, and eating meat be confounded, that in ver. 42. with that in ver. 46. here was confuſion in the Churches greateſt purity, which J. N. denieth. If bread and wine was diſtinctly uſed (after the Lords inſtitution) and apart from their civil repaſts and meals; then he hath nothing makes for his transfigured Supper, from this Scripture: But ver. 42. ſpeaks of Church-ordinances by themſelves,Acts 2. 42. 46. cleared. and ver. 46. of Family-repaſt, as diſtinct from the other; and the latter words explain but the former, their breaking bread domatim, or at home, is ſaid to be eating meat, which was not the Lords Supper. J. Nayler reads it, daily breaking bread from houſe to houſe, but 'tis not ſo read, or to be read (though 'tis a truth to be ſuppoſed they did daily take their ordinary repaſts, more then once a day) but, they continuing daily with one accord in the Temple, &c. There is nothing of certain ground for daily uſe of the Lords Supper, but Acts 20. 7. will ſhew us the primitive practiſe of aſſembling every firſt day of the week, for that breaking of bread at the Lords Table; and ſo Tremelius out of the Syriack, hath it, 1 Cor. 11. 20. When ye come togetherIn die Domini noſtri. on our Lords day, ye do not eat and drink, as is meet. And if it be read after the Greek, as we read it, When ye come together into one place, &c. it ſheweth the eating and drinking of the Lords Supper was, and ſhould be (by the Churches reſpectively, as that at Corinth for one) in ſome one place together; and civil ordinary meals ſhould be (as they were at Jeruſalem at firſt) in their own houſes, 1 Cor. 11. 34.
Thirdly, ſaith J. N. *pag as aboveIn their eating and drinking, at all ſeaſons, they were to do it to the Lord, and therein to have communion with his Body, and his Blood; and for that end were to keep themſelves pure from all pollution. It is a truth, nor they, nor we are to ſin in any action, but whether we eat or drink, &c. do all to the Lord and his glory: we are not to feed without fear, we are to keep from all exceſs, do all in a mortified way, think and ſpeak of Chriſt at dinner and ſupper, but this muſt not nullifie or make void the peculiar Ordinance of the Lords Supper, but rather we muſt frequently obſerve it, as a ſolemn help to purity and mortification, influential into our whole converſation. Communion with Chriſt, and his Body and Blood, is to be perpetually held up in all our actions, natural, civil and ſacred, by faith and the communion of his Spirit; but the communion with him, in the uſe of the memorative ſigns of his body and his blood (viz. bread and wine) ſolemnly ſet apart by his ſpecial appointment, for that end, is yet an advancing work, diſtinct by it ſelf from other actions of ordinary communion.
Fourthly, J. Nayler in the place aforeſaid preſumeth, when the Chriſtians were to eat with Gentiles-unbelieving, they were to partake of the Table of the Lord, as is plain, 1 Cor. 10. which is neither plain nor true, underſtood of the ſame time, place and company, as this man holds it forth: for their eating with the Infidels was at beſt (when there was no meat offered to idols, or no knowledge of it, no ſcruple made about it) but a civil correſpondence: and there was more then Bread and Wine (the onelyonly outward materials at the Lords Table) even whatſoever was ſold in the ſhambles, ver. 25. Beſides, the place and company, where and with whom they did eat and drink at the Lords Table, was in ſome one Meeting-houſe or other (as the houſe of Gaius, Rom. 16. 23. for one) where the whole Church, and onelyonly the Church did participate. It is to no purpoſe what he ſaith afterwards, *Page 44.Whether they eat or drank, they were to do it to the Lord, as at his Table; for every like is not the ſame: and although different actions meet in the ſame general ultimate end, yet there are ſpecial ſubordinate ends to each of them.
Fifthly he addes, There is no other thing can keep from feeding in the luſt, and eating to the luſt, but to eat in remembrance of Chriſts death til he come, &c. And I ſubjoyn, It is not our eating every day in fear and moderation (as it ought to be) that will mortifie a luſt, but onelyonly give a check of reſtraint: Bodily exerciſe of faſting profiteth little that way. Acting of faith upon Chriſts death every day will do much, as well out of meals, as at them; yea, he that doth not remember Chriſt at his plowing, and ſowing, when he lieth down, when he riſeth up, goeth out, or cometh in; or at other times, as at break-faſt, dinner or ſupper, will go near to forget him then: But that we may never forget him, and his death, and his power and love to take away our ſin, he hath left us his ſolemn ſacred Supper, as an inſtituted means of a Remembrance of him, to be uſed as oft as with conveniency we can meet at his Table.
Let not J. Nayler or any man upbraid us with eating and drinking in a Self-ſolemnity, once a monethmonth, or three times a year. The ſuperſtitious obſervation of times (by man ſet up) is laid down, I think, by all the Godly in the three Nations, as to that buſineſs. None have impoſitions upon them for once a monethmonth. Were hearts and purſes large enough in all the Churches, they might meet every firſt day of the week (our Chriſtian Sabbath-day, a day that the Lord hath made for ſolemn conventions and exultations, Pſal. 118. 24) at the Lords Table. Let him look to the idols in his own heart, and beware of impoſing upon others his New-model, or putting off his Gibeonitiſh old clouted ſhooes, and mouldy bread, I mean his pieces of old Familiſm: For what ſhall we make of that paſſage? *Love to the Loſt. pag 45.[It muſt needs be ſo (viz. to ſpend upon their luſts) with ſuch as do not diſcern his body in their eatings, who is the Body of all creatures] but a chip of the old block, H. N. the old father of the pretended Family of Love, his Doctrine; to incorporate Gods Eſſence into the creatures, and the creatures into his? For, ſaid he, In the beginning one God, and one man, had in all one order, being and nature: And, God was all that the man was, and the man was all that God was: Accordingly ſaith J. N. He is the Body of all creatures, and filleth all things in heaven and in earth; but by them that are in the luſt, Chriſt is not diſcerned preſent, who is the fulneſs and vertue of every creature. Here is, it may be, an Ubiquitarian myſtery, Chriſts glorified Body, deified, and to be diſcerned every where in every creature. But will the loſt ſoul be carried away with this winde of doctrine, ſo diverſe and eſtranging from, and contrary to the bleſſed Apoſtles intention? 1 Cor. 11. 29. where, by not1 Cor. 11. 29. vind…cated & cleared. diſcerning the Lords Body, he holdeth forth their ſin, who confound their own meals with the Lords Supper: whereas 'tis the duty of all the Churches, and every Communicant, to diſtinguiſh both notionally and practically between that Bread and Wine inſtituted and ſet apart for ſpecial, ſacred, ſpiritual uſe, and common ordinary food, uſed for civil repaſt and corporal nouriſhment. The Bread at the Lords Table, is to be diſcerned as a pledge, ſign and memorial of the Lord Chriſt his natural body once broken and crucified: The Wine is to be diſcerned as the ſign, pledge and memorial of his natural blood ſhed in the garden, and upon the croſs; And the relation which Chriſt hath unto his appointed ſigns, together with myſtical union, and ſpecial ſpiritual preſence, promiſed and given to the true partaker of the ſigns, is to be diſcerned alſo; all which James Nayler is ignorant of (or wilfully ſhuts his eyes) with his fellow-creature R. F. who threw off the ordinance becauſe he wanted the aſſurance that he expected. But how to reconcile theſe two mens writings about the Lords Supper, I was at a loſs (while the one ſaith, Wheat bread and red wine is not ſouls food (as before) and the other dictateth, The Lords Supper was to be at all ſeaſons when they eat and drank: one would have the Supper to be altogether within; the other would have it to be at all times when men eat with moderation, and without exceſs; it is well if they underſtand themſelves) until I compared their other words, viz. of R. F. The Lord is come in to ſup with me, with James Naylers, God's Son the fulneſs and virtue of every creature, which all know, who come to his Supper, where the Father and the Son are come in, and ſup with the creature: And hereby (as by other of their expreſſions) it appeareth they do, both of them, caſt off the external viſible ordinance of the uſe of particular bread and wine, at ſome times, for the ends appointed; and reſolve it into an imaginary transformed communion of God in and with every creature; which, ſo it ſpeaks like H. N. the old branded Familiſt, they care not how unlike the Holy Scripture they write, as one ſaid long ſince of his firſt followers.
Section 40.
THat they may with the fairer ſhew make void the Lords inſtitution, at his Table; they have deviſed falſe Interpretations of that place in 1 Cor. 11. 26. one of which2 Cor. 11. 26. vandicated. I diſcovered in this Section; to which R. F. anſwereth nothing, although I had it out of one of his Pamphlets, viz. of ſhewing the Lords death till he came to his diſciples after his reſurrection; which to mention onelyonly carrieth confutation in the forehead: J. Nayler notwithſtanding its groſneſs, favors this ſenſe, and addes another. Firſt, he gratifies R. F. in his ſenſe, by reading or writing it in the Praeter tenſe *Love to the loſt. page 43.: They were to do it in remembrance of him, ſhewing his death till he came. Now Pauls words are plainly reſpecting the time to come; till he come, i. e. till the very inſtant hour of his coming; for the * Adverb of time notes duration, havingforeign. another Adverb and Particle added to it, which imply a drawing out of the time; that ſhould the Lord ſtay never ſo long ere he comes, the Supper is to be continued till that coming of his, which I hinted in the former Section, was his coming the ſecond time (as it is called Heb. 9. 18.) in that humane nature which at his firſt coming he aſſumed into the unity of his perſon: The word for [he come] uſed by Paul, is the ſame, and in the ſame ſubjunctive Mood, as in Luke foreign.9. 26. when he ſhall come in his own glory, and in his Fathers, &c. ſo it might be read in Paul, as our Latine *Beza.Tranſlation hath it, uſquequo venerit, and Tremelius out of the Syriack, uſque ad adventum ejus, even till his very appearance in the clouds: For that meaning muſt ſtand, whatſoever.
J. Nayler *Love to the Loſt. pag. 46., ſecondly, addes to the former Fiction; viz. That Chriſt charging his diſciples to wait for his coming, at Jeruſalem, the promiſe of the Father, of which he had told them before his death, which they were to ſhew ſo often as they broke bread, till he came, and after he was come to the Apoſtles, they continued it for their ſakes which were weak in the faith, to whom he was not yet appeared. Where, by the coming of Chriſt, he would have his loſt Souls underſtand his coming in the Spirit onelyonly: and not minde what Paul ſaith of the after-continuance of the Lords Supper, till his viſible glorious appearance: onelyonly if he hath appeared in the Spirit, it is enough, the Lord is come, they are now perfect, and may caſt off Gods inſtituted Forms of Worſhip, in the former figure, onelyonly for others ſake, they may keep them up; but then, poor ſouls, what will follow? You that are not yet arrived at their perfection, muſt hold fellowſhip with them that may forget Chriſts death (for they eat and drink no longer in remembrance of him) and put dooms-day out of their thoughts, and then the ſenſuality charged by James Nayler upon others, ſeizeth upon themſelves. But againſt this poyſon let me give you a few Antidotes.
1. No Believer is without the Spirit, and the Lords comingAntidotes. in Spirit, as it came at firſt to the Apoſtles, before Chriſts death, and to the Corinthians by Pauls miniſtery, at their firſt converſion, 1 Cor. 2. 4. and to the Theſſalonians, 1 Theſſ. 1. 5.
2. There are none that have the greateſt meaſures of the Spirit, in a ſanctified way, but have need of more, Phil. 3. 12.
3. The Apoſtles continued the Lords Supper (after the pourings out of the Spirit, Acts 2. 1.) for their own uſe and benefit; for 'tis ſaid, Acts 2. 42. The converts continued in the Apoſtles doctrine and fellowſhip, and breaking of bread, and prayers: not that the Apoſtles continued it for their ſakes onelyonly who were weak in the faith. The ſtrongeſt Believer walks but by faith here, and not by ſight, 2 Cor. 5. 7. and will have need of ſuch wheat-bread and red-wine, as a bait in his walk and journey: And although the Apoſtles had gifts extraordinary Acts 2. 1, &c. conferred upon them, their Sanctification was not then perfected. Peter, one moſt forward, ſlipt and ſtumbled now and then, Acts 10. 14, 15. Gal. 2. 12, 13, 14. Barnabas, a good man, and full of the Holy Ghoſt and of faith, Acts 11. 24. yet fell into ſharp contention with Paul, ſtumbled on the blinde ſide, in ſiding with Mark his ſiſters ſon, Col. 4. 10. Acts 15. 37, &c. and halted with Peter, Gal. 2. to inſtance in no more.
3. The comings and manifeſtations of the Lord in his Spirit, may be loſt in a great degree by the Saints, as the experiences of David, Pſal. 51. 11, 12. Heman, Pſal. 88. 11. 15. and others are upon Record in Scripture. Famous is that of Mr. Robert Glover Martyr, who two or three days before his death, was lumpiſh and deſolate of all ſpiritual Conſolation, till going to the Stake, the Lord reſtored his Joys, and then he cryed out to his friend Mr. Bernher, Auſtine, he is come, he is come. Chriſt is free to come, or go, and withdraw as he pleaſeth, both as to the in-comes of joy, and of power alſo: and look to it, O ye loſt ſouls, who truſt to theſe deceivers, that truſt to their preſent manifeſtations, were they never ſo true, their hearts deceive them, and their doctrines deceive you; if onelyonly you keep to ordinances, and that of the Lords Supper, till you have got a little comfort, and then bid farewell to all. Great is the pride and unthankfulneſs of ſuch, who, after they have been enlightned, and have taſted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the holy Ghoſt, and have taſted of the good word of God (the ſweetneſs of the promiſes) and the powers of of the world to come, do fall off from the means, and ordinances; a great forerunner it is to the unpardonable ſin, to wilful, malitious Apoſtaſie, which if it be totall, will be final and irrecoverable. Heb. 6. 4, 5, 6. &c.