that the indigence of the Deity was by that means supplied, but likewise for the honour of the Sacrifice itself. For it is not easy to imagine, how any creature can be disposed of in a more honourable manner, than by being consumed in an act of the most solemn devotion, as the Eucharistical symbols are by the institution of CHRIST JESUS. The Jewish Sacrifices were in part to be reduced to ashes, and the remainder to be eaten in such a place and by such persons, and with such circumstances as God had appointed; but it does not appear, that they who ate them were obliged, during that action, to employ their minds in the service of GOD; only in the Passover they were to call to mind their deliverance from the Egyptian bondage: but on the other side, the manducation of the Christian Sacrifice is to be performed, as the most solemn and religious action, that private Christians ever do in their own persons. For the oblation, and consecration, have been showed to be the acts of the Priest, in which the people are only accessories. . . .

That the receiving of the bread and wine in the Communion, is the consumption of a Sacrifice; or that the Eucharist is a feast upon a Sacrifice, has been asserted by several learned men in the last, and by some in this age: ... and so, it seems, Christians feast upon something that is a Sacrifice, but not offered. . . .

And this brings me to reflect on the singular and honourable mark of distinction, by which God has dignified the Christian people, above and beyond his old peculium, the Jews; and that is, that whereas the Christian Church has but one Sacrifice, instead of that multitude and variety of Sacrifices under the law, and whereas the Jewish laity were not permitted to eat of any other Sacrifices but the peace-offerings, the rest being wholly burnt in the fire, or reserved to be eaten by the Priests and their families; on the other side, now under the Gospel, our one Sacrifice is wholly to be consumed by Priest, Clergy, and people jointly : and this I take to be a most signal mark of favour to the Christian laity, that they are admitted to a participation of the Sacrifice equally with the Priests themselves.

And it is very evident that our SAVIOUR did intend the Eucharist to be not only a Sacrifice, but a feast upon a Sacrifice; and,

therefore, when He was before-hand showing to His disciples the nature of His sacramental flesh, He calls it "the bread of God," John vi. 33; for, as Dr. Whitby justly observes, "The oblations made to God are styled in the Old Testament the bread of God,' Levit. xxi. 6. 8. 22. and accordingly CHRIST Styles His piacular victim by the same name." And I must add, that nothing but what had been sacrificed is ever in Scripture called "the bread of GOD;" and therefore, when our SAVIOUR gives this character of what we receive in the Sacrament, that it is the "bread of GOD," we may safely from thence infer, that it was by Him designed as a feast on a Sacrifice. And when, in the narrative of the institution, He says, "Take, eat, this is my Body given," i. e. sacrificed" for you," He does not more plainly say, that the Body which He reached out to them, was now made an oblation for them, than He says that they were to eat of it as such. In the tenth chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, St. Paul draws a parallel between the heathen feasts upon the Sacrifices, and the Christian Eucharist, or between "drinking the cup of the LORD, and the cup of devils" being "partakers of the LORD's table," or altar, "and the table," or altar," of devils," ver. 21. So that in all the most observable contexts which treat of this Sacrament, it is represented to us as a Sacrifice consumed by manducation.

The true and full notion of the Eucharist is, that it is a religious feast upon bread and wine, that have first been offered in Sacrifice to ALMIGHTY GOD, and are become the mysterious Body and Blood of CHRIST. The Papists, both in their notions and practice, represent it more like a bare Sacrifice, than as a feast on a Sacrifice; for the generality of their masses are nothing else but a mere offering of the Sacrament to GOD, in their superstitious manner, without any distribution of the holy symbols to the people. Others endeavour to have it thought nothing more than a religious feast. These are two faulty extremes. The truth is, that the holy Eucharist, according to the institution of CHRIST and the judgment of the ancient Church, is a feast upon a Sacrifice. That it is a Sacrifice, I have already showed; that it is a feast, I need not take any pains in proving, since it is the universal opinion of all Protestants. The truth is, this Sacrament has

so long been discoursed of, and used as a feast only, that too many think these two notions contrary to each other, and imagine, that if it be a feast, it cannot be a Sacrifice; therefore, I shall here make it my business to show, that these two notions are not only fairly consistent, but that, in truth, sacrificing and religious feasting are things which God hath in all ages joined together, and that, therefore, they ought by no means to be put asunder.

We know not the laws of divine worship given to the ancients before the law of Moses. . . . . Yet it is certain, that "Jacob offered sacrifice upon the mount, and called his brethren to eat bread, and they did eat bread." "Eating bread," is a phrase used in Scripture for feasting; and here it is evident, that Jacob made a feast to his relation of the cattle which he had offered in sacrifice. Jethro was no Israelite, and therefore the sacrifices offered by him may safely be affirmed to have been in all respects agreeable to the primitive laws of divine worship, and of him we are informed, that he "took a burnt-offering and sacrifices for GOD, and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, and ate bread with him before GOD." And that this was the practice of the Israelites long before the giving of the Law, appears sufficiently from this, that Moses and Aaron, in their address to Pharaoh, use these two phrases, of "holding a feast to God," and "sacrificing to the LORD," as expressing the very same sense. (Exod. v. 1. 3.)

Though feasting upon Sacrifice was more ancient than the Law, yet it pleased God to give more particular rules and precise directions, concerning the distribution and eating of the things offered at the altar, in the Books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, than had been ever given before. The sin-offering, and trespass-offering, the first-born, and the meat-offerings, were divided between GoD and the priests; in the peace-offerings only the priests had their share; the burntofferings were wholly consumed in the fire, so that neither the priests nor people had any portion reserved for them. But then it is observed by them, who are best versed in the Jewish learning, that burnt-offerings were usually attended with peace-offer

....

ings, only some except such burnt-offerings as were offered for the whole congregation. . . . . We may therefore safely conclude that the generality of Sacrifices among the Jews were accompanied with a feast. And their very language speaks this, for the same word an, signifies both feast and Sacrifice.

And what comes nearer to our purpose still, is this, that the Passover, which was the most solemn Sacrifice among the Jews, and which God gave in charge to that people before the Law or even the Ten Commandments, was to be wholly eaten ; and this was a Sacrifice which, as it was a special type of the Eucharist, so it exactly agreed with it in this particular, namely, that God took no portion to Himself, nor assigned any precise share to the priest, but it became wholly a feast to the owners, whether priests or laymen. vol. ii. pp. 17-19.

It will be very proper to consider the practice of the Gentiles, as well as of the Jews, under this head: for He who is the GOD of both, may reasonably be presumed to have had a regard to the notions and ancient usages of the former, as well as of the latter, in the whole frame of the Gospel dispensation. And the Scripture affords us sufficient proof, that the heathen, even in the age of Moses, did make feasts on their Sacrifices.— p. 21.

Upon the whole, it is evident, that a Sacrifice and a religious feast are very near akin to each other; or rather, they are but two parts of the same worship, which, both among Jews and Gentiles, used to go hand in hand together. . . . . I do not say, that there never was any religious feast made upon meats and drinks, which had not been first offered to GOD in Sacrifice; and I may safely affirm, that the most solemn religious feasts were always of this sort; such were the Passover, and the two other annual feasts of weeks and tabernacles, among the Jews. And, therefore, if the Eucharist be not a feast of a very inferior rank, and in its nature entirely different from the most solemn religious feasts of former ages, it must be confessed to be a Sacrifice too. pp. 25, 6.

The Eucharist agrees in the main with the most solemn Sacrifices of the ancients, in the ends for which it is offered.

The ends or designs of men in sacrificing, have always been the same in all ages and nations; these are of two sorts, viz. First, particular. Secondly, general.

I. There are particular ends and designs, which men have always proposed to themselves in offering every Sacrifice; these ends are various, but may be reduced to these following heads: 1. One particular end of Sacrifice, is to render prayers or petitions for some special mercy, more effectual.

2. Another end, is to express a grateful sense of some mercies or favours received.

3. A third end, is the expiating the guilt of sin, or obtaining pardon.

II. The general end of Sacrifice is,

1. To acknowledge the power and dominion of that God to whom it is offered.

2. To render Him gracious and favourable to the worshippers. 3. To preserve covenant and communion with Him.-p. 30. And it is evident that all these ends are served by the Sacrifice of the Eucharist; and

1. All the particular ends of Sacrifice. For, 1st, and 2dly, All prayers and praises for special mercies are most properly offered to GoD in, and by the Eucharist; because the Eucharist is the peculiar worship of the Christian Church, as will appear in the next chapter; and the primitive Christians practised it as such, and therefore used it in order to procure any singular blessing from GOD: as for instance, when a Bishop, or Priest was ordained, or when any of them, or of the faithful died, or were married, the Eucharist was offered to GOD in hopes of obtaining proper blessings and mercies on the persons concerned. The Eucharist was most probably that "ministry” in which "the prophets at Antioch" were engaged, when "the Spirit said unto them, Separate me Paul and Barnabas," and when they laid hands on these two eminent ministers of CHRIST. St. Paul exhorts, "that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and EUCHARIST" should "be made for kings and all that were in authority." It can scarce be thought reasonable, that St. Paul should charge Christians to give thanks for such prodigies of