ATER BAPTISM 'ARD SUPPER INSTITI.'TliiNS M| IKW OF TV BY WILLIAM BLACKLEY, A.M., VICAR OF STANTON, ENGLAND. AND CHAPLAIN TO LORD HILL. INTRODUCTORY AY THOMAS KIM Hi W YORK: WILLIAM WOOD & ('OMTAXY WATER BAPTISM AND THE OUTWARD SUPPER NO INSTITUTIONS OF CHRIST. A REVIEW OF TWO ESSAYS BY WILLIAM BLACKLEY, A.M., LATE VICAR OF STANTON, ENGLAND, AND CHAPLAIN TO LORD HILL. INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. BY THOMAS KIMBER NEW YORK: WILLIAM WOOD & COMPANY, 1884. INTRODUCTORY. THE accompanying Review of William Blackley's Essays, on the so-called Ordinances of Water Baptism and the out- ward Supper, appeared in the columns of Friends' Review about four years ago ; and a small edition was also published at that time for special circulation. Their presentation of the whole subject seems to have been generally satisfactory, confirming the convictions of many earnest inquirers after the " truth as it is in Jesus"; and proving useful, under the Divine blessing, in dispelling the doubts of others in regard to these interesting and im- portant questions. It is with no thought of controversy with any of our fellow- professors of the Christian name, who may entertain different views of that truth from those here presented, that it has been thought best to republish these essays at this time. On every hand there seems to be a wide inquiry for the Scriptural arguments in favor of those spiritual doctrines of our Lord and Saviour's Baptism, and of His holy commu- nion with His redeemed followers, which have always been accepted and proclaimed by that branch of His church to which we belong. More especially amongst those who of latter time have been awakened through the instrumentality or under the influence of Friends, there are many who are longing for more definite information upon these distinguishing points of faith. It is not enough to tell such earnest inquirers that these are the " settled principles " of our Religious Organization, and that our Fathers lived and died in their full belief and enjoyment. Nor would it satisfy the honest-hearted seeker after truth to recommend him to rest his faith upon the convictions of our early Friends as a sufficient authority, or upon the belief of many thousands since their day, save so far as we can prove to him that their judgment was founded upon the supreme authority of the revealed word and truth of the Lord, as contained in His Holy Scriptures. To them therefore is the appeal made in these essays, and their authority alone is referred to and relied upon, as decisive of the questions under consideration. " Thus saith the Lord " is the only ipse dixit of any avail, in the consideration of Divine truth. If indeed we believed that our Saviour commissioned His disciples to baptize with water those who accepted His gospel and trusted in His name for salvation, or that He had established an outward ordinance to be perpetually observed in His church, in lieu of the Jewish Passover feast (fulfilled and abolished by His death), on which occasion bread was to be broken and wine drunk, in continued memorial of Him, then these are the very things we would long to do ; and to do them not only with unquestioning submission but in loving and joyful obedience to His commands. But if, after an earnest and prayerful study of His own declarations as to the spirituality of His kingdom, compar- ing Scripture with Scripture as He did, construing the text " // is written " by the context " if is written again" and after carefully examining those portions of the Sacred Record which are accepted as authority for such ritualistic practices, we were led to an entirely different interpretation of His meaning, then our duty would be simply to follow, in the light of His Holy Spirit, the truth which He had so clearly unfolded and to rejoice in the liberty wherewith that truth had made us free. It is because we have thus arrived at the assured convic- tion that, in this bright noonday of Christ's gospel, these outward types and ceremonies are no longer enjoined upon His people, and that it is His will that they should forever give place to the glorious realities which they were intended to foreshadow, that we have gladly accepted the spiritual bless- ings that have followed their fulfilment and dismissal, and have willingly seen all these shadows flee away in the ever- lasting light of the Lord. Such was the "new revelation of the good old gospel," as they called it, which our forefathers rejoiced in more than two centuries ago. Others had proclaimed those truths long before them, and have done so since their day. Many of the Confessors of the early Church, and of the Martyrs and Re- formers of its later history, have with greater or less clearness, looked far over these ritualistic ceremonies and hailed the arising of a bright truth beyond them all. John Bradford, for example, of Waltham College, Oxford, who suffered martyrdom about the middle of the sixteenth century, during the persecutions under the reign of Queen Mary, for his faithfulness to the " truth as it is in Jesus," boldly denied that Water Baptism formed any part of that truth. In a sermon entitled " One Baptism" he makes use of these words: " That God did send John to ' baptize with water,' is admitted ; but I deny that Christ ever did send any one to baptize with water. This is coming to the point ; here I stand, and challenge any man to show me when and where Christ ever commanded any one to baptize with water." William Dell, Master of Caius College, Cambridge, declared a century later that : " The Baptism of Christ is with the Spirit ; and is the only baptism of the New Testament. Its out- ward instrument is not material water, but the Word, as Christ shows when He says, ' Teach, baptizing ' ; showing that the teaching of the Word is the outward means of baptizing with the Spirit." Then again, a glance at the history of the Christian Church will show that the endless controversies about these so-called " Sacraments," have been productive of continual divisions in the Body of Christ, and even of grievous wars and persecutions among His professed followers in all ages ; and that they are bearing the bitter fruit of separation and estrangement among brethren, even in our own day. Christians, who seem able to unite on all the cardinal truths of the gospel and in most earnest efforts to spread the kingdom of their one Lord and Master over the earth, seem to become alienated from one another whenever these vexed questions are introduced. The Baptists, for example, deny the validity of the form of sprinkling, practised by the Presbyterian and Methodist Churches in Baptism; and, for the most part, they exclude from their communion supper all who have not submitted to the rite of immersion in water. The Episcopal Church rejects, as uncanonical and irregu- lar, the ritualistic ceremonies of each and all of these bodies, because not performed by an authorized priesthood ; while the Roman Catholics, far out-numbering them all, equally 7 condemn the Baptism and the Communion Supper of all the Protestant sects, as alike heretical and offensive ; and point to the "holy water," and to the " mass," as the only means of salvation. Surely if His own test of all divine authority and commis- sion be true of these ritualistic ceremonies, " By their fruits ye shall know them" then they could hardly have been or- dained by our loving Lord and Saviour, for the purpose of drawing together and building up His church, which they seem, in all ages, to have divided and confused ; evi- dently through some perpetual and universal misunderstand- ing of His teachings concerning them. Turning now to the argument in favor of these* Jewish rites, drawn from the observance of them by our Lord Him- self, it will be found that there is nothing in His example* in these respects, intended to encourage His followers in their adoption ; far less to impress upon them the obligation of such ceremonials, as Christian ordinances. He came, as He declared, " not to destroy the law or the * Abbe Fleury, in reciting the customs of the Jews, as affirmed by their celebrated historian, Maimonides, adds these interesting thoughts . " It will, I doubt not, be a pleasure to the reader to trace out the origin of Christian Baptism ; and of the ancient ceremonies which the church observed in it. For they are all borrowed from the Jews; Jesus Christ and His apostles not having thought fit to abolish them, or to substi- tute new ones in their room." He then describes the Jewish reception of converts. "The second ceremony was Baptism; which must be performed in the presence of three Jews of distinction." " At the time of the performance of it the Proselyte declares his abhorrence of his past life; and that it was neither ambition nor avarice, but a sincere love of the law of Moses, which pre- vailed on him to be baptized. He promised at the same time to lead a holy life; to worship the true God, and to keep His commandments.' " And hence," continues the Abbe, "the Christian Church botrowed those ceremonies that she makes use of, for it is manifest that the insti- tution of baptism and the discipline of the Primitive Church in regard to it, have relation to those of the Jews." " Manners of Ancient Israel , ites." Fleury. 8 prophets, but to fulfil them." And when John the Baptist was sent, " baptizing with water for this very cause that the Son of God should be made manifest to Israel" (John i. 31-34), the Lord Jesus presented Himself to the last of the Prophets concerning Him, that this ceremonial of the law might also be at once interpreted and "fulfilled," before the usher- ing in of His own more spiritual dispensation. No marvel that the faithful Ambassador shrank from such a perform- ance on his King, as an immersion in the waters of the Jor- dan, to which great multitudes of the publicans and sinners were gladly submitting in order to repentance. " / have need to be baptized of Thee, and earnest Thou to me?" (Matt, iii. 14-15.) " Suffer it now" meekly replied his holy Lord, "for thus itbecometh us, to fulfil all righteousness " (all legal righteousness literally). " Then he suffered it." Having thus " fulfilled the law," in this respect also, not indeed through any instrumentality of the Jewish priesthood, but by the hands of His own anointed Forerunner, who tes- tified to the people that while he himself " baptized 'with water" this One would "baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire" our Lord proceeded to preach the glad tidings of the immediate coming of His spiritual kingdom.* It is wonderful to observe, under how many figures He endeavored to unfold His meaning. To the Master in Israel, " Verily I say unto thee, except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John iii. 5.) * One of the most learned of living Biblical commentators, Professor "Westcott, thus confirms this statement : "The work of the Baptist included the crowning rite of the Old Covenant." . . . " It was fitting alike for him, as the faithful Prophet of the Advent, and for Christ, as the Subject to the Law " (italics West- cott's), "to fulfil every rite sanctioned by God the perfect righteous- ness of the Jewish Covenant." " And thus, at this point of their contact, the form of the New was shaped by the rules of the Old ; and the gift of the Spirit for Christ's work on earth was connected with a legal ob- servance." [Westcott's "Introduction to the Study of the Gospels," p. 316-317-] To the woman at the well of Samaria : " Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again. But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him, shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him, shall be in him a well of water, springing up into everlasting life." (John iv. 13, 14.) On the "last great day of the feast," more than a year before He was offered up, He stood and cried saying, " If any man thirst, let him come unto Me and drink." . . . "This He spoke of the Spirit, which they that believe on Him should receive." (John vii. 37, 39-) "Verily I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. " Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. " He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him." " As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father, so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me." (John vi. 53-57.) With these, and many other such illustrations, our Lord sought to impress upon His followers the spirituality of His gospel dispensation. At last came the parting lesson, the fulfilment of the ceremonial of the last Passover feast with His disciples ; in which he explained to them, as fully as they were able to bear it, that He was the " Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" whom this solemn festival was intended to com- memorate ; that it was not, in reality, the sprinkled blood of the lambs of old, upon the doorposts of the Israelites, that had turned away the destroying angel from their homes ; but His own precious blood, offered in covenant, according to the Eternal purpose of the Father before the world was ; and now about to be shed, in fulfilment of that ever-lasting covenant, as an atonement for the sins of the whole world. " Take, eat, this is my body," that was broken for you. " This is my blood of the new covenant, that was shed for many for the remission of their sins." " Having dwelt so fully, in the Review appended, upon 10 the details of this memorable occasion, I would only refer the reader to the following pages for the scriptural narratives that are on record, of all that transpired at that last supper of our Lord. May the remembrance of His dying love be ever present with us all ; and as He " stands at the door of our hearts and knocks," may we gladly " hear his voice and open the door," that He may " come in and sup with us and we with Him." (Rev. Hi. 20.) And so, dwelling even here in His holy and unbroken com- munion, may He grant to us all who love His appearing, that we shall gather at the last around His marriage supper table above, clothed in the wedding garment of His righteous- ness, to drink forever with Him of the new wine of His kingdom. THOMAS KIMBER. RICHMOND HILL, L. I., N. Y.. Fourth Month, 1884. REVIEW OF WILLIAM BUCKLEY'S ESSAYS, ENTITLED " WATER BAPTISM AND THE OUTWARD SUP- PER, NO INSTITUTIONS OF CHRIST," It is especially interesting to a member of the Society of Friends, to notice that the great truths of Christian Baptism and of the Holy Communion of our Lord and Saviour with His redeemed followers, are claiming the attention of influ- ential members and ministers of other Christian denomina- tions ; and that some of their ablest and most earnest think- ers seem to be awakening to the conviction of the entire spirituality of these essential doctrines of the Gospel, as not necessarily connected with any outward observance or ritual whatsoever. There have been many evidences of this growing convic- tion of latter time. Very recently, the utterances of Dean Stanley, of Westminster, have awakened attention and in- terest ; not only in that influential branch of the Church of Christ which he represented, but throughout the Christian community, in which he was well known ; and they are be- lieved to be the expression of many thoughtful minds on both sides of the Atlantic. 12 There have appeared, in England, two pamphlets, from the pen of "William Blackley, late Vicar of Stanton and Chaplain to Lord Hill" which seem to deserve more than a passing notice. One is entitled " Water Baptism, neither instituted by Christ, nor practised by the Apostles " j the other, " The Two Sacraments, so-called, no Institutions of Christ'' The authority to which their author solely appeals is indi- cated by the texts printed on the title page : " Search the Scriptures." " To the Law and to the Testimony" In the preface, we read : " The following observations are submitted to Members and Ministers of Christian Churches, in the hope, and with the sincere desire, that they may be helpful to the right un- derstanding of the subjects referred to." Sharing this earnest desire, I have thought that they might be especially helpful at this time to any " ministers or members " of our own branch of the Church of our Lord and Saviour who may have become unsettled, in any de- gree, as to the spirituality of His gospel and His worship in these important respects. He goes on to say, in the preface : " In treating of the subject brought forward, it will be seen that the water baptism of John has not been referred to further than as temporary ; as introductory to the Chris- tian system, but as forming no part of it. Commencing among the Jews as it did, it appears to have been carried on among them, in a greater or less degree, till, and only till, the gospel was formally proclaimed to the Gentiles. . . . Every instance of baptism which we read of taking place by a servant of the Lord after that glorious event was by or in connection with St. Paul ; and the author thinks there can be no doubt that the baptism which he administered was the same baptism which the twelve were sent to ad- minister, which was not a baptism of water " 13 He adds : " People generally take it for granted that when the word baptize occurs, water is always involved ; but this is a mistake. Witness the following instances, where a baptism, without water, is spoken of, and that be- fore the day of Pentecost. ' He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.' ' I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how am I straitened till it be accomplished.' 'Can ye be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with ? ' ' With the baptism that I am baptized withal, shall ye be baptized.' " These passages show that baptism might and did take place without the use of water." "After the day of Pentecost, a reference is frequently made to a baptism without water. And such is the case with reference to the ' one baptism] the only one baptism spoken of in Eph. iv. 5 (" One Lord, one faith, one baptism "), involving a state which all have to be the subjects of who become God's accepted and adopted children, and which was attained, and which is still attained, by faith only." " The expressions used in connection with this, that it was a 'resurrection from the dead and from eternal condemna- tion ; ' that in it persons were ' buried with Christ unto death ; ' that on persons* washing themselves, that is, wash- ing by faith, in the fountain opened for sin and for un- cleanness, they become ' sanctified and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the spirit of our God, were after- wards unfortunately applied to the rite of water baptism, with which they had nothing to do.' " He adds : " In what * The expression, " Ye are washed, Ye are sanctified, " etc. (ist Cor. vi. li), should he rendered, " Ye washed yourselves ;" so the redeemed in Heaven " -washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." The fountain is open, and we may all obey the command, " -wash you, make you clean" " in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." 14 way and when this was first done we cannot say. All docu- mants are lost which could throw light upon it. There can be no question, however, that it commenced very early. Indeed, St. Peter seems to intimate that it took place in Apostolic times, by stating, as he does, that Baptism, the ' Baptism that saved,' was ' not a putting aw ay of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God,' that it was not a ritual baptism, but a spiritual one, not an out- ward baptism, but an inward one. In whatever way, how- ever, it was introduced, we learn from Tertullian, that it was early opposed, and have also proof from Scripture, as the author thinks, that it was not instituted by Christ." [See preface, pp. vii., viii.] I have given these copious extracts from the Introduction to this English clergyman's treatise, because it seems to me, under all the circumstances, one of the most remarkable publications that have yet appeared upon this important sub- ject, and because the Scriptural evidence in their support that follows throughout the next sixty pages seems to sus- tain the fearless and positive assertions of the preface, which have been quoted. The reader will bear in mind that it is not from the pages of Fox, or Penn, or Barclay, musty perhaps with the neg- lect of years, though heavy with the weight of two centuries of undisputed authority, that I am quoting ; nor from the graceful essays of Joseph John Gurney ; nor from the close logical argument, almost amounting to a mathematical demonstration, of Enoch Lewis, on the true nature of Scriptural baptism. Valued as all these treatises are, and conclusive as we hold them to be, on the subject under consideration, yet such outside testimony as this pamphlet, from the pen of a Minister of the Established Church of England, all of whose proclivities and preconceived opinions must have inclined him to a different conclusion, is especially valuable ; sup- ported as it is by critical examinations of the original text of Holy Scripture and the collation of various passages therefrom, bearing on the subject under consideration. It comes, too, just at this time with a peculiar interest and with a corroborative power, that no authorized exposi- tions of the " faith of the gospel," as held by the Society of Friends, could possibly exert. With all the collateral views that the writer gives expres- sion to, or even with all the processes of thought which have led him to the clear truth which he arrives at and pro- claims at last, our readers may not entirely agree, nor is it at all needful that they should. Enough remains of purely Scriptural demonstration, link by link slowly connected, step by step carefully taken, at first to render tenable, and finally to establish, his position and to rivet the chain of evidence by which it is firmly upheld and surrounded. Whether therefore he is correct or not, in believing that after Peter's baptism of the household of Cornelius, followed by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the Gentiles, none of the Apostles ever baptized with water, although Philip the Evangelist and others not possessing the Apos- tolic commission and power of "laying on of hands" may have done so, cannot be certainly proved, and the question is not material to the conclusion he arrives at. He clearly shows that the hold which the Jewish ritual possessed on the hearts of that people was so strong that, for years after their conversion, " many thousands " (literally, many tens of thousands) still held zealously to the forms of the law, although accepting the provisions of the gospel, by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; quoting the well-known words of the Apostle James and the Elders at Jerusalem to Paul, who had been narrating to them the wonderful works the Lord had wrought among the Gentiles, and over which they re- joiced. Acts xxi. 20. This was about A.D. 60, or more than a quarter of a century after the baptism of the Holy Spirit had fallen on the as- sembled Church, on the day of Pentecost. Hence it is clear i6 that the Lord permitted the gradual " increase " of the spiritual, and the "decrease" of the ritual worship and usage, rather than to compel any sudden disruption of old association and practice in matters of detail a gradual change which John the Baptist had foreshadowed when he declared : " He " (who ' baptizeth with the Holy Ghost and with fire") "must increase; but I" (who 'baptize with water ') " must decrease" He shows also that baptism by water had no saving virtue by the examples of Simon the sorcerer, and the penitent thief on the cross ; " that the latter had a work of grace wrought in his heart, and became thereby the subject of the ' baptism that saves ,' though not the subject of water baptism, while Simon, although having been baptized with water, was still ' in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity ; ' ' that " Simon had no vital union with Christ, though the sub- ject of water baptism, while the penitent thief on the cross was in Christ, and delivered from condemnation, although the subject of no water baptism." He says : " Wherever baptism is spoken of as vital, as life- giving, as involving spiritual power, it always has reference to a work of grace in the heart, as produced by the Spirit of God, independent of any rite or outward act." Again : " To put on the Lord Jesus Christ (according to Gal. iii., 27), was to be ' baptized into Christ' . . . And as there is but ' one baptism 1 in the Christian system [Eph. iv. 5] which is not a baptism with water, the baptism spoken of by St. Paul, namely, l into Christ,' must be the ' one baptism,' the only bap- tism, the "baptism that saves' " (pp. 26, 27). Several pages of the pamphlet are devoted to an interest- ing and unanswerable exposition of the Scriptural meaning of the word water, as applied to our salvation, that it is purely figurative ; and that every beautiful simile made use of "the fountain," the "washing of water by the Word," "being born of water and of the Spirit," the "sprinkling clean water upon us that we may be clean," the " washing us " that we may be " whiter than snow " all point to the blessed effi- cacy of the Word (or Gospel) of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the cleansing power of His precious blood, applied by His Holy Spirit. The pamphlet on baptism closes with a summary of twenty- six propositions which the author considers he has proved on Scripture authority. I give a few of them, in conclusion of this article, reserving a review of his essay on the true spiritual nature of the communion of the body and blood of our Lord and Saviour for another paper. He affirms as established : ist. "That the two passages, Matt, xxviii. 10-20, and Mark xvi. 16, are no authority for, and contain no reference to the rite of witer baptism, which now prevails in Christen- dom." "Go ye therefore and make disciples of all the nations; baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you : and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." [R.V. Matt, xxviii. 20.] "And he said unto them Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to the whole creation. He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved : he that believeth not, shall be condemned." [R.V. Mark xvi. 16.] 2d. "That not one of the four Gospels, nor any one of the Epistles of any of the Apostles, contains any reference to the institution of Water Baptism, as a rite for observance in the Christian Churches." 7th. " That St. Peter seems to repudiate the idea of water baptism containing any virtue, by stating that the ' baptism that saved' was ' not the putting-away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God. ' ' loth. "That St. Paul, by showing that there is only 'one baptism' in the Christian system, and also that there is a baptism of a spiritual or inward nature, repudiates the ex- istence of water baptism as an institution of Christ." i8 2ist. " That the twelve Apostles themselves were the sub- ject of no water baptism, but that of John; which shows that Water Biptism was not required in the Christian system.' zjd. " That the religion of the Lord Jesus is a spiritual reality, independent of any rite or outward ceremony; justi- fication or acceptance with God, being attained by the ex- ercise of faith in Christ ; and faith, where it is justifying or saving, is of the operation of God, working by love, and puri- fying the heart; proving the truthfulness of the teaching of the Lord Jesus, that 'the Father seeketh those to worship Him who worship Him in Spirit and in Truth.' " I have thought that a brief Review of this remarkable treatise might prove of use to some souls : and humbly ask the Lord's blessing on its careful perusal. T. K. 1880. "THE OUTWARD SUPPER NO INSTITUTION OF CHRIST." In regard to the institution by our blessed Redeemer, of such an outward ordinance as the so-called Lord's Supper, to be observed thereafter in His church by His command, Wm. Blackley is equally clear and emphatic in the entire denial of any Scriptural warrant for such a dogma ; reject- ing altogether the obligation of its customary observance, or of the doctrine itself, save in its true spiritual significance. His argument on this subject affords a strong confirmation of the soundness and the accuracy of the spiritul interpreta- tion which our Fathers placed upon the teachings of the Divine Records, on this most interesting and important subject the true and living communion of our Lord and Saviour with His Church and people. It commences, as did the treatise on baptism, by showing that, primarily, the commission of our Lord and Saviour was understood by His Apostles to be to " preach the gospel " to the Jews, " beginning at Jerusalem" and afterwards the full scope of His world-wide and gracious purpose of salvation was unfolded to them, and gradually comprehended by them ; that these glad tidings were also to be proclaimed " to all nations," when the " fulness of the Gentiles should come in." Accordingly we find (Acts iii. 25, 26), Peter and John de- claring, in the porch of the temple at Jerusalem, " Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers." ..." Unto you, first, God, having raised up His Son Jesus, sent Him to bless you ; in turning away every one of you from his iniquities." Wm. Blackley does not think that this delay in preaching the gospel to the Gentiles arose from any failure of the apos- tles to comply with the requisitions of the Holy Spirit, poured out on them so abundantly on the day of Pentecost ; and Who undoubtedly unfolded to them the will of their Lord and Master in this respect ; but that it was a part of the Divine economy which we may not question, and was especially in accordance with the prophecies of Holy Scrip- ture. When the clear purposes of the Lord, in this respect, had been accomplished, and the Scripture had been fulfilled, then the kingdom of heaven was opened in all its fulness, as he believes, to the Gentiles ; at the time of the conversion of the household of Cornelius, and the formal acceptance of this, to them, wonderful truth, by the Apostles and brethren that were in Jerusalem. (See Acts x. and xi.) In the mean time, and even for years after that event, Jew- ish observances were allowed, as memorials, in the church; only the full and clear recognition was insisted on, that the types and shadows of the law were all fulfilled in the Lord Jesus Christ, to Whom they had pointed ; and in honor of Whom alone, they were still permitted to be retained in their worship. Among these the most prominent was the PASSOVER SUP- PER, hitherto eaten in commemoration of the passing over, by the destroying Angel, of the houses of the Israelites on whose doorposts and lintels was sprinkled the blood of the slain lamb. But from the date of the actual offering up of the " Lamb of God," who had been slain in covenant " from the foundation of the world," this feast was to be kept by the believing Jews " in remembrance of Him;" of His broken body, and of His precious blood shed for the remission of their sins. Our author believes that this toleration was permitted in that wise and gentle ordering, which sought less the sudden uprooting of cherished institutions than their gradual change; 21 provided their immediate adaptation to the Christian system was recognized and enforced. On the destruction of Jerusalem, however, when by the annihilation of the temple and consequently of its worship a new era was to commence in the history of the Church, all these ceremonials and ritualistic observances were to cease. He quotes in support of this explanation Dr. Mac- knight, Dr. Doddridge, Adam Clark, and other learned and pious Bible commentators. With still greater authority, the words of James, and of the other Elders of Jerusalem, are referred to addressed (A.D. 60) to the Apostle Paul (Acts xxi. 20): " Thou sefst, brother, how many thousands (tens of thousands literally, myriads), of the Jews there are who believe, and they are all zealous of the law," to prove the wide toleration among the Jewish Chris- tians of many legal observances and ceremonies, even at that late day. Yet we have already seen (Acts xv. 23-29) that these same Apostles and Elders, seven years before, had enjoined in no doubtful terms, that none of these things should be laid upon the Gentile converts : proving that outward cere- monies formed no part of the gospel dispensation. Coming now to the various narratives by the four Evan- gelists of the last Passover Supper, which the Lord Jesus ate with His disciples " on the night in which He was be- trayed," Wm. Blackley reminds us that "Only two were present on that occasion" of which they each give some description in detail ; and that these two alone were qualified to declare, as eye witnesses, what then actually took place, the Apostles Matthew and John ; and that " neither of these make any allusion whatever to such an ordinance having been then insti- tuted for observance by Christ 's followers in after times" " Surely," he says, " if Christ had instituted any new ordi- nance, these two Apostles, who were present on the occasion, would have stated it, and stated it so clearly and distinctly as to leave no cause for doubt upon the subject. But so far 22 from that being the case, it evidently appears, from both of these Evangelists, that nothing of the kind occurred." " In reference to John, we find him stating nothing beyond the usual Passover being kept by Jesus and His disciples j a plain proof, as I think, that he knew of nothing ocurring, which had reference to any new institution." " All that he says, in connection with what took place, is the following" : (See John xi. 55; xiii. 1-30.) The reader will see, on reference to Chapter xiii., that verses i to 17 relate solely to the washing of the disciples' feet, and the injunction of their Lord and Master to wash one another's feet. " For I have given you," said He, "an example, that as I have done to you, ye also should do :" an emphatic injunction, which however nearly all Protestant Christians agree in construing spiritually only. Then follow (verses 17 to 31) the separation of Judas from the other Apostles by the clear designation of their Lord, that this was the one who was about to betray Him; afterwards He foretold also the approaching denial by Peter." In the following chapters of John's Gospel are given those loving conversations with His disciples, which have com- forted the hearts of so many believers since that day ; and have brought them indeed into sweet and holy communion with their dying Lord. Little was spoken of Himself, or of the agony He was about to endure in the garden of Gethsemane that very night, when with the weight of the world's sins upon Him, He would fall upon His face and cry out, " Oh my Father, if it be possible let this cup pass from me nevertheless not my will, but Thine be done." He knew, even at that mo- ment of His supreme devotion, that the thoughts of His disciples were chiefly as to who, after His departure, should be the greatest ; that before morning they would all forsake Him and fly ; yet all His thoughts were of their sorrow and for their comfort ; " having loved His own which were in 23 the world, He loved them to the end." He told them not to let their hearts be troubled ; He was going to prepare mansions for them, and would come again and receive them to Himself; and in the mean while He would send another Comforter, even the Spirit of Truth, who would abide with them forever, and would unfold all things to them as they were able to bear them, and would lead them into all truth. Then came that wonderful prayer for them, and " for all those who should believe on Him through their word." I think that no true believer in the Lord Jesus, who has been redeemed by His precious blood, and for whom He prayed on that memorable night, can ever read from the fourteenth to the seventeenth chapters of that Gospel, without feeling renewedly a sweet and holy fellowship with Him in His sufferings ; and an overwhelming sense of gratitude for His wondrous love. To return to W. Blackley's argument: " If Jesus had instituted any new ordinance to be kept by His followers in all after times, it was clearly incumbent on John to have stated it, since his not stating it would leave the people for whom he wrote imperfectly instructed, in what they were to attend to, especially as he professed to write for their instruction, and states (John xx. 31) that what he wrote was written .that persons might ' believe that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, and that, believing they might have life through His name.' Not a word occurs in John's gospel about any new ordinances being then insti- tuted by Christ. Nothing is stated in connection with any new institution to be kept by His followers " (pp. 13 to 21). Referring now to the account of the last Passover Supper as given by Matthew, W. B. shows that "We shall find in it no reference to any new ordinance instituted on that oc- casion by Christ." He gives in detail Matthew's narrative (Chapter xxvi. i, 2, and 17-30), as follows : " And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples, Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified. . . . 24 Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand ; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them ; and they made ready the passover. Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve. And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I ? And he answered and said, He that dip- peth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me. The Son of man goeth as it is written of him : but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed ! it had been good for that man if he had not been born. Then Judas, which betrayed him, answered and said, Master is it I ? He said unto him, Thou hast said. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread and blessed it, and brake it, and gave zVto the disciples, and said, Take, eat ; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it : For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink hence- forth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom. And when they had sung a hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives." W. B. shows that on this occasion the Lord Jesus blessed not the bread, but God, gave thanks more literally, and thus there is no authority for consecrating the wafer. He also clearly proves that the phrase rendered " This is my body" merely signifies " This represents my body ; that the Greek verb (esti) is continually so used ; notably in Matt, xiii. 37, 38, where it occurs in this sense six times in these two verses: "the field is (represents) the world," "the good seed are the children of the kingdom," " the tares are the children of the wicked one," " the harvest is the end of the world." So also in its variations, " that rock was Christ," represented Christ (i Cor. x. 4), etc., etc. How completely this simple explanation, which any one may verify, disposes of all the controversies and schisms in the Christian church in past ages on this weary dogma of the " real presence" 25 Then how plain is the whole intent of our blessed Re- deemer in thus partaking of this last supper with His disci- ples. He had eaten the passover feast again and again with them, in obedience to the Jewish law, and in commemora- tion of the great deliverance in Egypt centuries before. And now it was fitting that he should explain to them the full meaning of this solemn ceremony; that He was the Paschal Lamb, and that this broken bread represented His body, and the flowing wine His blood. Wm. Blackley says : "Was it not natural for Him to refer to Himself as being the Antitype of the broken cake and of the wine ; pointing out, as those things did, the great atoning sacrifice which He was about to make for human transgression, and which the slain lamb, and broken bread, and poured-out wine fore- shadowed, and referred to in His words, ' This represents my body ;' and again when He said, ' This represents my blood of the new covenant, which is being shed for remis- sion of sins.' " Here, then, in Matthew's statement of what occurred at the passover, as well as in that of John (the only two out of the four Evangelists who were present with Christ on the occasion, and they Apostles), we see no trace of the institu- tion of any new ordinance to be kept by Christ's followers in all future time.'' The narrative of Mark is next taken up, and shown to be almost identical with that of Matthew, and to give no information whatever of any new institution on the Lord's part. Here is the whole record of that occasion, by this Evangelist. (Chap. xiv. 12-26.) " And the first day of unleavened bread.'when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare, that thou mayest eat the passover ? And he sendeth forth two of his disciples, and saith unto them, Go ye into the city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water : follow him. And wheresoever he shall go in, say ye to the good man of the house, The Master saith, Where is the guest-chamber, where I shall eat the passover with my dis- 26 ciples ? And he will show you a large upper room furnished and pre- pared : there make ready for us. And his disciples went forth, and came into the city, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover. And in the evening he cometh with the twelve. And as they sat and did eat, Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, One of you which eateth with me shall betray me. And they began to be sor- rowful, and to say unto him one by one, Is it I ? and another said, Is it I ? And he answered and said unto them, It is one of the twelve, that dippeth with me in the dish. The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him : but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is be- trayed ! good were it for that man if he had never been born. And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat ; this is my body. And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them : and they all drank of it. And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God. And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the Mount of Olives." What adds to the interest and the value of this record is the fact that the Gospel by Mark is undoubtedly the testi- mony of the Apostle Peter, who was also present at this passover supper, and the omission of all notice of any new ordinance in the Church in Mark's narrative is, therefore, especially important.* Our author proceeds: " Thus we have three out of the four Evangelists referring to no new institution of breaking bread and drinking wine for the followers of Christ to be the subjects of, either an- nually, quarterly, monthly, weekly, late at night, or early in the morning. If Jesus had instituted any new ordinance, it is only reasonable to suppose that it would have been * Dr. William Smith says: "Ancient writers, with one consent, make this evangelist the interpreter of the Apostle Peter." (Papias, Irenaus, Tertullian.} So the " Speaker's Commentary, p. 309. West- cott, in his "Introduction to the Study of the Gospels" says: "Papias was himself a direct hearer of John, and on his authority, declares, "Mark having become Peter's interpreter, wrote accurately all that he re~ numbered" " For he took heed to one thing to omit none of the facts that he heard, and to make no false statement of them ." T. K. 27 specifically and clearly stated not only by Matthew and John, but by Mark also ; but as neither of them mentions it, the legitimate and fair conclusion is that He instituted no new ordinance." " The only remaining Gospel narrative of the Last Supper is by the Evangelist Luke, who was not present on the occa- sion, but was generally believed to have drawn his informa- tion chiefly from the Apostle Paul,* between whose state- ment, in the Epistle to the Corinthians, and that contained in Luke's Gospel, there is a remarkable coincidence; and as marked a divergence from all the other accounts of what took place upon that occasion." The narrative of Luke is as follows (Chap. xxii. 7-23): Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the * " Luke the follower of Paul" says Irenseus, " set down in a book the gospel which he (Paul) used to preach." Tertullian -speaks of Paul as the " illuminator of Luke" and says, " the summary (digestum) of Luke was generally assigned to Paul." So also Origen and Jerome. Westcott's Introduction, p. 185. Dr. William Smith gives the above quotation from Irenaeus, and adds that " both Eusebius and Jerome mention the opinion that when St. Paul used the words according to my gospel, it is to the work of Luke that he refers." Dr. Smith wisely adds, " Although St. Paul's words refer, in all probability, to no written gospel at all, but to the substance of his own inspired preaching, yet it is important as showing how strong was the opinion, in ancient times, that Paul was in some way connected with the writing of the third gospel." Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. II., p. 152. The Speaker's Commentary calls attention to the " word used by Luke i. 2 ' delivered,' and its correlative word ' received' (i Cor. xi. 23; xv. l), as of frequent use in the New Testament, to express the handing on of the great truths of evangelical history which are regarded as a sacred deposit, to be transmitted from generation to generation." Also that while Luke states that the other narratives were delivered by "eye-wit- nesses and ministers of the word," he only claims for himself to have "had perfect understanding" of them; or more literally, to have " traced out the whole history from the beginning." New Testament, Vol. I., p. 310. T. K. 28 passover, that we may eat. And they said unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare? And he said unto them, Behold, when ye are entered into the city, there shall a man meet you, bearing a pitcher of water; fol- low him into the house where he entereth in. And ye shall say unto the goodman of the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guest- chamber, where 1 shall eat the passover with my disciples? And he shall show you a large upper room furnished; there make ready. And they went, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover. And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer. For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves. For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying. This is my body which is given for you; this do in remem- brance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined; but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed ! And they began to inquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing. William Blackley gives Luke's narrative in parallel columns with the statements of Matthew and Mark, and shows that the principal difference between them consists in the omis- sion of the words "take, eat" which are mentioned by the other two Evangelists as having been uttered by our Lord on handing the bread to His disciples; and instead thereof He is represented by Luke as having said, " Do this in re- membrance of me." [These word's in Luke's Gospel are now considered by some of the best scholars to have been added since the date of earliest manuscripts. Dr. Davidson (Halle), in the " Introduction to his English translation of Von Tischendorf's New Testament," has these remarkable words : " Perhaps Von Tischendorf might have carried the limitation of ancient testimony farther in some cases; as in Luke xxii. 19, 20 : ' This is my body [which is given for you; this do in remembrance of me. Like- wise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the New Testament in my blood, which is shed for you']; where the words bracketed are hardly original." (London Ed., pf. xiii.) The ancient manuscript " Codex Bezae "omits these words altogether. Clark and Goodwin, of Oxford, in their " Notes on the literal reading of the New Testament," say, "Some versions substitute for this passage verses 17 and 18, which they omit above. Tregelles thinks that such may perhaps be the hue reading." If these views be correct, then the only shadow of Divine Authority for a continuance of this observance disappears from all the Gospel narratives. T. K.] In handing the cup also, the words, " Drink ye all of it, given by Matthew and Mark, are omitted by Luke, although the injunction is not repeated as it is in i Corinthians xi., " Do this, as oft as ye drink of if, in remembrance of me." P P- 3 l ~3 6 - Just at this point it is important to consider the fact to which W. B. calls attention in another place (p. 43), that the Greek verb (poieite) rendered "do" in the passage " This do " and which is supposed thus to constitute an ab- solute command of our Lord, is also rendered " keep " in re- gard to this very Passover Supper which He was eating with His disciples. In the narrative of Matthew (Chapter xxvi. 1 8) our blessed Saviour is represented as sending to the owner of the house in which they were assembled this mes- sage, " My time is at hand. I will keep (poio] the Passover at thy house with my disciples." The same verb is ren- dered " observe " as where the complaint was made against Paul and Silas before the Roman authorities at Philippi, that they " preached customs not lawful to observe." (Acts xvi. 21.) More than once also this Greek verb is translated " fulfil " in the New Testament. By putting the word keep or observe in the place of the word " do" as rendered in our transla- tion, the meaning becomes entirely clear and simple, especi- ally when considered in connection with the declared purpose of our Lord to " keep this Passover " with His disciples that night. " Keep this," He says, " in remembrance of me." Ye have kept it hitherto in commemoration of the paschal 30 lamb. I am the " Lamb of God." I am the " Passover sacrificed for you." " This is (represents) my body that is broken for you; this my blood that was shed for you.'' William Blackley says : " From Luke then we learn no more, ... as to any new ordinance being appointed by Christ for His after disciples to be the subjects of, and that for- ever, than we do from Matthew, Mark and John." ..." In concluding our notice of Luke's statements, it should not be forgotten that Luke wrote his Gospel (as he himself de- clares), to inform those for whom he wrote, " what Jesus did and taught until the day in which he was taken up." (Acts i. 2.) "Wherefore, if Jesus instituted a new ordinance, and Luke did not inform them of it (as he clearly did not), he did not do what he professed; or if he did so faithfully do, then Jesus instituted no new ordinance, since Luke states nothing that authorizes the statement that He did." (P. 38). Our author proceeds: " Having thus gone through the four gospels, with a view of finding out whether there is, in them, any authority for the ordinance called the Lord's Supper, as an institution to be observed by all Christ's disciples forever, and finding in them nothing that substantiates anything as the founda- tion of such an ordinance, we may further remark, that out of twenty-one Apostolic Epistles to different churches and persons, besides the Revelation of St. John, no mention is made in them of anything like such an ordinance, but that which has been supposed to refer to it in one Epistle, namely, that of St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians. Surely if any such ordinance had been instituted, it would have been referred to in every one of these Epistles, and have been pressed upon the attention and observance of all those to whom these Epistles were written. In no one of them, however, is there even a seeming allusion to any such ordi- nance having been instituted, as that which Christ's follow- ers had to observe, but in the fancied instance that I have referred to. o-e-v , "This surely is a fact sufficiently significant to lead Us to infer that no such ordinance was ever instituted, as well as to account for the four Evangelists omitting any clear and positive evidence in respect to such an ordinance. And with this remark, and after having examined the four Gos- pels, as they have been supposed to refer to it, and finding in them, as I have stated, nothing that substantiates the idea of any new ordinance having been instituted by Christ, we now proceed to consider the statement of St. Paul in his first Epistle to the Corinthians (Chap, xi.)." It would be impossible, within the limits of this essay, to follow the complete and exhaustive analysis which William Blackley gives in detail of this portion of Paul's Epistle to the Corinthian Church. It is mainly founded on historical and Scriptural truth, and would prove very inter- esting, and, I think, generally satisfactory to the thought- ful reader, especially to the Bible student who can follow the original Greek text, quoted on all the most delicate points. He calls attention, in the first place, to the fact that Paul alludes to what occurred at the Passover feast, then to the conduct of the Corinthian believers in their observances in memorial of it, and thirdly, a recognition of what he saw would take place for a time in such memorial observance, and the apostle's directions to them concerning it. He shows that Paul states our Lord to have used the words at- tributed to Him in the narrative of Luke, and the correct- ness of which he does not call in question :* " Take, eat ; * Joseph John Gurney, in a note to his treatise " On the Disuse of all Typical Rites in the Worship of God" (p. 150, London edition), says of this passage, I Cor. xi. 23d : " For I have received of the Lord : " " That commentators are by no means unanimous in the opinion that an immediate revelation is here intended will be sufficiently evinced by the following short abstract, given in " Pool's Synopsis " of the remarks made on this passage by certain eminent critics, and particularly by Beza ; viz. : " It may be doubted whether the Apostle learned these things 3 2 this is my body, which is broken for you : this do in remem- brance of me," with the further words on taking the cup : " Do this as often as ye may drink of it (osake an pinete), in remembrance of me." For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till He come." W. B. thinks this expression implies that the Passover Supper would be kept by the believing Jews until the de- struction of the temple thirty-seven years afterward, and the dispersion of the Jews from Jerusalem. He shows that in various places this tremendous judg- ment on the Jewish people was spoken of by our Lord Him- self as "the coming of the Son of Man in his kingdom " (Matthew xvi. 28) ; as the "coming of the kingdom of God with power " (Mark ix. i); and as " seeing the kingdom of God" (Luke ix. 27) ; which "coming " was to be within the lifetime of some standing by Him when He spoke. He quotes, in further confirmation of this view, the mediately, from those who were eye-witnesses and ear-witnesses, on the narration of the other Apostles ; or immediately, by revelation. He learned them of the Lord ; that is, as proceeding from the Lord ; the in- formation being given to him by Ananias, or the other disciples, or else of the Lord by revelation. In the lattet case, however, he would not have said apo, \WL(. para, according to the usage of Greek authors in general, of the writers of the New Testament in particular, and more especially of Paul himself." " J- J- G. goes on to say : "Other commentators understand the passage in a still more general sense, as implying only that the matters which Paul communicated to the Corinthians, respecting the Lord's Supper, were no invention of his own, but rested on Divine authority. So Camero and Calvin. " Rosenmiiller, one of the most able and impartial of modern Biblical critics, expresses a clear judgment that no direct revelation was here alluded to by the Apostle." [Vide Schol. in N. T. in loc.] Canon Cook, of Exeter, in a note to Luke i. 2, on the word de- livered, says: "The original verb, and its correlative, received (i Cor. xi. 23, and xv. i) are of continual use.in the New Testament, to express the handing-on of the great truths of ecclesiastical history, which are re- garded as a sacred deposit, to be transmitted from generation to genera tion." [" Speaker's Commentary," vol. vii., p. 309.] T. K. 33 Words of the Lord Jesus to His disciples (Matt. x. 23), " Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of Man be come" He gives the appeal of the disciples (Matt. xxiv. 3), " Tell us when shall these things be, and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the age" (literally), and the answer of our Lord, showing clearly that there was to be a " coming " before that genera- tion should have passed away, when " all these things should be fulfilled," the signs whereof He gave them in great detail (4th to 24th verses). He reminds us of the re- ply of our Lord after His resurrection to Peter's question about John : " If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee, follow thou me ; " and that this disciple witnessed before his death the destruction of Jerusalem, and of all the ritual of the temple of which " not one stone was left upon another," the annihilation of the Jews as a nation, and their dispersion over the face of the earth.* This " coming of the Lord," in judgment to the Jews, and in the final over- throw of their temple worship, around which, till then, some show of Divine authority might have seemed to rest, W. B. and many other Bible scholars, believe to have been the period ordained for the termination of every vestige of their ritual ceremonies, and for the establishment of the universal kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ; till which time they were permitted, // they all clearly pointed to Him in their observance. In common with our Early Friends, and with the au- * Cannon Farrar, in his "Life of Christ" speaking of our Lord's answer to Peter in regard to his beloved disciple, John " If I will that he tarry till I come " thus interprets its fulfilment : ' ' The man- ner of John's death we do not know, but we know that he outlived all his brother disciples, and that he survived that terrible overthrow of his nation, which since it rendered impossible a strict obedience to the in- stitutions of the Old Covenant, and opened throughout the world an unimpeded path for the establishment of the New Commandment, and the Kingdom not of earth, was, in a sense, more true than any other event in human history, a second coming of the Lord." P. 462. u thorized exponents of the " faith of the gospel," as pro- claimed by them, we may all unite in the interpretation of a temporary permission of Jewish rites and ceremonies (thus modified so as to acknowledge their fulfilment in the Lord Jesus Christ) until the establishment more fully of His spiritual kingdom, without being over-careful to desig- nate the precise time at which that toleration was intended to cease. Enough for us to feel assured, as our Fathers declared, that the time has fully come now ; " the day has certainly dawned ;" and that they are " seeking the living among the dead," who are still raking over the ashes of the past, or wandering among the gravestones of buried rites, and ful- filled types, and abrogated ceremonies, for the glorious spiritual light and life and power of the gospel of our risen and ascended Lord and Redeemer. We are living in the brightest noon-day of that gospel. " Opon Thou our eyes," that we may rejoice and be glad in it, and "may behold wondrous things out of Thy law, Oh Lord." William Blackley proceeds: " And this coming of our Lord (Matt, xxiv.) I conceive to be the event referred to by Paul, under the expression (ist Cor. xi. 26), " till He come," or more literally, " till He may come (achris ou an elthe), implying, as I think, that the Passover would be kept till the Jewish nation would be dis- persed from Palestine . . . and that when the Corinthian believers kept the feast they called the Lord's Supper, in memorial of that Passover, during the same period they were to publish and " show forth " as the believing Jews in Jerusalem would do at the Passover kept there the Lord's death ; that the body and blood of Christ had been given and shed for them, as an atoning sacrifice for procur- ing the remission of the sins of all who believe in Him." (Pp. 44-55-) It appears, by the narrative of the Acts of the Apostles 35 (Chap, xviii. 2, 4, 7, 8, 17, 24, 26, xix., i), that many of the Corinthian believers, to whom this Epistle were addressed, were Jews; and doubtless, in the continued observance of the Passover feast, at the time he wrote. But there were also a large number of Gentile converts ; and these seem to have everywhere engrafted on the Christian system some of their Heathen customs ; only directing them, as best they could, to the honor of the Lord Jesus, in whose name they had be- lieved. Among these customs, with a slight change of name, was doubtless, the agape, or love feast ; and we find from the early Christian writers that although this was, at first, a dif- ferent ceremonial from the "Eucharist" yet it soon became mingled with it, and finally merged into it. Chrysostom tells us that: "After the early community of goods had ceased, the richer members brought to the church, contributions of food and drink, of which, after the conclusion of the services and the celebration of the Eucharist, all partook together ; by this means, helping to promote the principle of love among Christians." Pliny says : " The Christians meet and exchange sacra- mental pledges against all sorts of immorality ; after which they separate, and meet again to partake together in an entertainment." Gradually, these practices became more frequent, and in times of persecution, when hard pressed by their enemies, they would meet in secret places, in the galleries and crypts of the catacombs, or " in dens and caves of the earth," and solemnly yet joyfully break bread together, in loving remem- brance of their Lord and Saviour, who had given His life for them, and for whose dear sake they were ready to lay down their lives also ; a pledge, which one by one, many of them were called upon to redeem. William Blackley holds the same view which Robert Bar- clay takes, in his masterly argument on the true communion 36 of the " body and blood of Christ," that Paul most justly reproved those who came up to these feasts merely to gratify their sensual appetites, and while some were left " hungry," others were "drunken" with excess; and he solemnly showed them the sacredness of the origin of this custom, and warned them that they would " eat and drink to their own condemnation," if they profaned it, urging them " so oft as they did this, to do it in remembrance of the Lord Jesus." Indeed, the Apostle gives in another place a general injunc- tion to all Christians, that " whether they ate or drank, or whatever they did, they should do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, and to the glory of God." W. B. concludes thus: " We think, then, we may say, that what is called The Lor