their accomplishment shall be taken out of the way. That every thing in individuals or in governments-in business or in pleasure-in men's possessions or employments-which is opposed to the religion of Christ, shall be destroyed. And that the temporal prosperity of men has invariably made them sensual, and proud, and irreligious, would lead us to presume that a prelude to our recovery, would be the removal of this temptation; would be the taking away of our earthly dependencies, in order that we may put our trust in him; the breaking of our pitchers, that we may be led to the fountain.

The time has certainly arrived, when both the church and the world are watching with painful anxiety the signs of the times. "Men's hearts are failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth." May we not unhappily mistake the mind of the Spirit as revealed in the word, to which we should take heed as to a light shining in a dark place.

And while we see, in the agitations and corruption, internal feuds, and "distress of the nations," the tokens of revolution and decay, let us, like Abraham, look for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

ART. II.-Letters on the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper? By Samuel Bayard, Esq. a Ruling Elder in the Presbyterian Congregation at Princeton, New Jersey. Second edition. 18mo. pp. 219. W. S. Martien, Philadelphia.

It is now seventeen years since the first edition of this useful little work was published, and it now appears in a new dress, somewhat abridged, greatly corrected, and almost entirely freed from a few superficial blemishes which attracted notice in the original impression. Apart from the intrinsic importance of the subject, the volume derives peculiar interest from the fact that it comes from the pen of a layman, of a son of the Huguenots, and of " an old disciple;" for the venerable author is now in his seventy-third year. The cause of religion is greatly strengthened when it receives the public aid of men who have spent their lives in secular pursuits; as a striking example of which we need only name the Practical View of Mr. Wilberforce; with

whom, we may say in passing, the venerable author of the work before us was on terms of personal intimacy.

These Letters do not undertake to discuss the vexed questions concerning the Lord's Supper which have occupied controvertists. They are eminently practical, being intended chiefly to remove from the minds of timid and desponding converts, particularly young believers, those undue scruples, and that unscriptural trepidation, which have kept thousands from the Lord's Table. This is a good work, and has been performed in a manner altogether agreeable to what we suppose is the mind of the Spirit in the Scriptures. In connexion with this, the young communicant is in a perspicuous and interesting manner led into the knowledge of what this blessed ordinance signifies and communicates. There is in every page a character of gentleness and Christian benevolence, which renders it as fit to soothe the mind of the hesitating, as any similar manual with which we are acquainted. The author has gleaned from many rich fields, and spread before us the testimonies of a great number of the best theological writers, especially of French divines, whose works are not accessible to most readers. It is but just to add, that, as certain parts of the Letters, as they first appeared, were not approved by some judicious critics, these have been entirely omitted, with the exception of what relates to the unpardonable sin; on which subject the author holds an opinion which we do not feel called upon at present to review. In some minor points, in the exposition of particular passages, and in the estimate of authors cited, we cannot always agree with the venerable author.* At the same time, we believe no Christian professor, whether young or old, could read this book with a proper disposition of mind, without great edification, if not delight: and we think it might well take the place of several more unwieldy volumes which we have seen in the hands of young communicants.

The occasion thus afforded, allows us to subjoin some remarks upon a few points which are interesting chiefly to such as are called to administer the ordinance. To ministers of the gospel, this as well as other rites owes its due celebration, as well as its chief corruptions. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, as the most solemn rite of the Church, has not failed in any age to awaken a degree of awe

We can by no means subscribe, for example, to the statement which makes Dr. MacKnight one of the "ablest commentators on the epistles."

which does not attach itself to any other part of external worship; and, where superstition is avoided, there is every thing in such reverence to promote edification. Yet the tendency is strong, in all minds, to introduce human inventions, under the pretext of supplying what is deficient in the divine institution. As celebrated by the first Christians, this sacrament was exceedingly simple, bearing very much the appearance of a common meal. But for this, we can scarcely see how any room should have been given for the abuses of the Corinthian Church. The constant endeavour to make it more striking, despoiled it by degrees of almost every trait of its original. The bread became a divine sacrifice; the table was changed into an altar; the minister became a priest; and the cup was altogether withheld from the laity. Instead of a broken loaf, there was a vessel of wafers, and instead of sitting at a table of Christian fellowship, the communicants were made to kneel before the "breaden God."

At the time of the Reformation, the return to the original model was different as to extent in different churches. Among all the Reformed, however, the principle was maintained, that as far as possible the simplicity of the divine prescription should be adhered to. Here there was room for some diversity of judgment, and accordingly we find that even among Calvinistic churches, there was never a perfect uniformity. Still it was only a difference in apprehending the scriptural example; for all agreed that no one had any right to add to what was prescribed. In the Scottish church, and so far as we learn, from the very beginning of the Reformation, the method has obtained of gathering around a table, and in successive companies, where all could not communicate at once. This was regarded as very important, and Mr. Baillie, one of the Scottish members of the Westminster Assembly, in his letter, speaks with much displeasure of the mode of celebration used by the Independents, who remained in their ordinary seats, while the elements were carried to them by the deacons. If any were disposed, however, to stickle for literal observance, it might be questioned whether the former were not as real a deviation as the latter; since it is as certain that in the first institution, all communicated at one and the same time, as that all communicated at one and the same table. In the Presbyterian churches of France, it should seem that communicants came to the table in succession, and the men and women separately. For, in the Acts

of the Synod of Lyons in 1563, it is recorded, that "a gentleman troubles the church, and wills that his wife come immediately after him unto the Lord's Table, before any of the men." It was a very serious question among the Huguenots, whether any but a minister should give the cup to the communicants; so great was their dread of innovation. Thus, we find the following opinion in the Acts of the Synod above mentioned:

"The brethren of Geneva being demanded, whether pastors at the Lord's Table should only distribute the bread and wine unto the people, do give this answer: That it were certainly best, if it might be conveniently done at all times; but it seems for the present impossible, and for the future wholly impracticable. For in case God should multiply the number of his people, of believers and churches, and there being so great a scarcity of pastors, we see no inconveniency in it, that deacons and elders, being the arms and hands of the pastor, after that he hath consecrated the sacramental elements, and distributed the bread and cup to them that are nearest to him, may come in to his relief and assistance, and distribute them also unto those who are more remote from him."

Yet four years afterwards, the Synod of Verteuil determined that none but ministers, if possible, shall give the cup." And the 12th chapter of the Discipline expressly declares: "The churches shall be informed, that it belongeth only to ministers to give the cup." Even after this, uniformity was not secured, as appears from the injunction of the Synod of St. Maixant, in 1609: “All pastors are enjoined to abstain from any new or private methods of their own, as of reading the words of institution, between the ordinary long prayer and that appointed particularly for this sacrament, which ought indeed to be read after; nor shall they, whilst reading the words of institution, uncover the bread and wine; nor shall they bring the people up in ranks unto the table, there to sit or stand, whereas they should cause the faithful to pass one after another up unto it; nor shall the exhortations or thanksgivings be made till that the elements have been distributed among the communicants of every table; nor shall the cup be given by the faithful one unto another, it being contrary to the express letter of a canon of our Discipline, which ordaineth pastors, if possible, or if they cannot, the elders to assist the pastor, tired by the multitude of communicants in populous churches,

to deliver it." And, in 1612, the Synod of Privas declared as follows: "This Assembly having maturely pondered whatever was said by both parties, doth confirm the sentence given by the national Synod of Maixant, which allowed elders and deacons, in case of necessity, to deliver the cup, but without speaking-founding this, their decree, upon the example and practice of our Lord Jesus, who only himself spake at his last supper, but yet permitted his apostles to distribute among themselves the bread and the cup." We give these statements, simply to shew the extreme jealousy with which the early Calvinists guarded the simplicity of this sacred rite.

The Scottish Presbyterians, and their descendants in America, have, as we cannot but think, fallen into a serious error, in adding to the length and the number of the services connected with the Lord's Supper. Not only is there an undue protraction of the exercises on the Sabbath, but it has been customary to set apart a day for fasting, in preparation for the ordinance, and a day of thanksgiving after it. Against these appendages, the late Dr. Mason wrote very ably; arguing that they have no warrant in the book of God; that they are contrary to the judgment of almost the whole Christian church; and that they are attended with great and serious evils.* He maintains, that they establish a term of religious communion which has no scriptural sanction; that they are almost impracticable, without the aid of other pastors; that they banish both the principle and practice of scriptural fasting and thanksgiving; and that they create a pernicious distinction between the sacraments. And he dwells particularly on the point, that the multiplicity of our week-day services is incompatible with such a frequency of communion as is our indispensable duty. "Had it not been for them," says Dr. Mason, "communions would have been much more frequent, both in the church of Scotland and the denominations which have sprung from it." We may add, that the argument has a wider application than to merely week-day services: all services which render the celebration of the Lord's Supper protracted or wearisome, and all instructions and ceremonies which invest it with an unscriptural mystery or awfulness, have a necessary tendency to infrequent communion. Instead of being an attractive and delightful ordinance, it thus becomes fearful and repulsive.

* Mason on Frequent Communion