II. The second sort of resembling circumstances concerns the particular forms and phrases made use of in the institution-1. In the paschal supper, the master of the house took bread, and gave thanks to God, who had provided it for the sustenance of man. Our Lord copied this circumstance precisely in the institution of the eucharist 2. It was also a custom for the master of the house to break the bread, either before or after the benediction offered to God;-that our Lord copied this custom, every reader knows-3. The master of the house distributed this broken bread, for it does not appear that the family were permitted to take it themselves; so our Lord, after having broken the bread, gave it to the disciples, saying, Take, eat, &c-4. In the paschal feast the master was accustomed to take a cup of wine, and pronounce a benediction to God, or thanksgiving over it, after which it was termed the cup of blessing; to this circumstance St. Paul particularly alludes, when he says, The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? 1 Cor. x, 165. At the institution of the passover, it was said, The blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where you are; and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, &c, Exod. xii, 13. The blood was a token or sign of the covenant, or agreement, then made between God and them, and ratified partly by pouring out the blood of the paschal lamb, and partly by feeding on the flesh of this sacrifice. In the institution of the eucharist, our Lord says, This сир is the new covenant in my blood, which is shed for you and for many, for the remission of sins. The cup, here, is put for wine; and covenant is put for the token or sign of the covenant. The wine as representing Christ's blood, answers to the blood of the passover, which was typical of the blood of our Lord; and the remission of sins here, answers to the passing over there and preserving from death-6. At the paschal feast, there was a declaration of the great things which God had done for that people ;

and our Lord makes use of the eucharist to declare and point out the great mercy of God in our redemption; for it shows forth the Lord's death, (and, consequently, all the benefits to be derived from it,) till he himself shall come to judge the world-7. At the paschal solemnity, they were accustomed to sing a hymn of praise to God, (see before, p. 32,) and this part of their conduct our Lord and his disciples exactly copied-And when they had sung a hymn, they departed, &c.

The many resembling circumstances, real and verbal, abundantly show, that this holy eucharist was in a great measure, copied from the paschal feust, and was intended to supply its place, only heightening the design, and improving the application. See Dr. WATERLAND'S Review of the Doctrine of the Eucharist, p. 64, &c.

Having now proved that the paschal lamb was a sacrifice, and seen that it prefigured the atonement made by Christ our passover; and that in his death, and the circumstances attending it, the whole typical reference of that solemnity was not only verified but fulfilled and having also seen that it was in reference to the great atonement typified by the passover, and also that it was in the place of that ancient ordinance, that our Lord instituted the holy sacrament of his last supper; I shall now, more particularly,

II. Consider this divine institution, and the manner of celebrating it.

To do this in the most effectual manner, I think it necessary to set down the text of three evangelists, who have transmitted the whole account, collated with that part of St. Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians, which speaks of the same subject, and which, he assures us, he received by divine revelation. It may seem strange that although John chap. xiii, v, 1-38, mentions all the circumstances preceding the holy supper, and, from chap. xiv, 1-36, the circumstances which succeeded the breaking of the bread, and in chapters xv, xvi, and xvii, the

discourse which followed the administration of the cup; yet he takes no notice of the divine institution at all. This is generally accounted for on his knowledge of what the other three evangelists had written; and on his conviction, that their relation was true, and needed no additional confirmation, as the matter was amply established by the conjoint testimony of three such respectable witnesses.

From the preceding harmonized view of this important transaction, as decribed by three EVANGELISTS and one APOSTLE, we see the first institution, nature, and design of what has been since called THE LORD'S SUPPER. Το every circumstance, as set down here, and the mode of expression by which such circumstances are described, we should pay the deepest attention.

1. As they were eating, Matt. xxvi, 26, either an ordinary supper or the paschal lamb, as some think: see the introduction.

1. Jesus took bread.-Of what kind? Unleavened bread, certainly, because there was no other kind to be had in all Judea at this time; for this was the first day of unleavened bread, v, 17, i. e. the 14th of the month Nisan, when the Jews, according to the command of God, Exod. xii, 15, 20, xxiii, 15, and xxxiv, 25, were to purge away all leaven from their houses; for he who sacrificed the passover, having leaven in his dwelling, was considered to be such a transgressor of the divine law as could no longer be tolerated among the people of God; and, therefore, was to be cut off from the congregation of Israel. Leo, of Modena, who has written a very sensible treatise on the Customs of the Jews, observes, "That so strictly do some of the Jews observe the precept concerning the removal of all leaven from their houses, during the celebration of the paschal solemnity, that they either provide vessels entirely new for baking, or else have a set for the purpose, which are dedicated solely to the service of the passover, and never brought out on any other occasion."

To this divinely instituted custom of removing all lea

ven previous to the paschal solemnity, St. Paul evidently alludes, 1 Cor. v, 6, 7, 8, Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ, our Passover, is sacrificed for us; therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the UNLEAVENED BREAD of sincerity and truth.

Now, if any respect should be paid to the primitive institution, in the celebration of this divine ordinance, then unleavened, unyeasted bread should be used. In every sign or type, the thing signifying or pointing out that which is beyond itself, should either have certain properties, or be accompanied with certain circumstances, as expressive as possible of the thing signified. Bread, simply considered in itself, may be an emblem apt enough of the body of our Lord Jesus, which was given for us; but the design of God was evidently that it should not only point out this, but also the disposition required in those who should celebrate both the antetype and the type; and this the apostle explains to be sincerity and truth, the reverse of malice and wickedness. The very taste of the bread was instructive: it pointed out to every communicant, that he who came to the table of God with malice or ill will against any soul of man, or with wickedness, a profligate or sinful life, might expect to eat and drink judgment to himself, as not discerning that the Lord's body was sacrificed for this very purpose, that all sin might be destroyed; and that sincerity, sλxpivaa, such purity as the clearest light can discern no stain in, might be diffused through the whole soul; and, that truth, the law of righteousness and true holiness, might regulate and guide all the actions of life. Had the bread used on these occasions been of the common kind, it would have been perfectly unfit, or improper to have communicated these uncommon significations; and, as it was seldom used, its rare occurrence would make the emblematical representation