"He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself." 1 Cor. xi, 29.

THIS is a terrific text to many minds. And it has, most undoubtedly, deterred many of the most honest and true hearts in the ranks of professed Christians from coming forward and connecting themselves with the church, and joining in the celebration of the Lord's supper. They have shrunk back from this rite, for which their souls have longed, and thirsted, and pined, lest they should be found eating and drinking unworthily. These feelings have originated in mistaken views of this text, and especially of the consequences involved in this unworthy eating and drinking. In this article, it will be my object to endeavor to remove this source of terror, by placing this subject in its true light. I would strip religion, and all its rites and institutions, of every thing that is terrific, and place it before men in all its mildness and benignity, as the child of God, that came from heaven, to comfort and bless the world. I would tear away from its

fair form all that is forbidding, and present it in so lovely and attractive a point of view that the souls of all men should be drawn after it, as the needle is attracted to the pole, and be as entirely subjected to its influences as that is to the magnetic forces. But in saying this let me not be

VOL. III.NO. VI.

21

misunderstood. In stripping religion of the terrific and forbidding, I would not divest it of one whit of its solemnity, or encourage a light and trifling state of feeling in regard to its profession, or in joining in its rites. Far be it from me to give countenance, or in any way to minister to such a spirit as this. I would ever have religion viewed as a serious and solemn affair,—one never to be thought or spoken lightly of, or treated with a rude and profane familiarity. And yet I would have nothing repulsive or forbidding about it. I would have it presented to men in all its solemn majesty, and yet as one of the best and most cheerful companions and friends, seeking under all the circumstances of life to promote their highest good, and increase their happiness in the highest and most enduring measure.

In considering the subject before us, there are two questions that claim our attention. First, what are we to understand by eating and drinking unworthily; or in what did that unworthiness consist? Was it in the manner of engaging in the rite, or in the character and condition of the individual? Second, what are we to understand by eating and drinking damnation?

Before proceeding to the consideration of these topics, I would call attention to one or two matters immediately connected with them. The first thing to which I would call attention as a matter of especial notice, is the fact that this offence is of an individual,-a personal character. The individual does not, as it would seem many persons imagine, if we may judge from their conduct, eat and drink damnation to the church with which he joins in this rite, or to the minister who officiates in its celebration, but to himself and himself alone. The church and the minister, unless personally guilty, or of sanctioning guilt, have no part or lot in this matter. It is the man alone who incurs the guilt and is held responsible in the case, except so far as he is countenanced in it. Another thing that claims our attention, and that will appear in the course of the discussion upon which we are about to enter is, that an individual possessing all the personal qualifications, so far as moral and religious character is concerned, may commit this sin just as well as any other persons. But to our subject.

1. In what did this unworthy participation consist?

The word dvasios, rendered unworthily in our text, means "in an improper manner, irreverently."** The word

* Robinson's Greek and English Lexicon of New Test., in avažios.

Saxolvor, rendered not discerning, means not discriminating, or distinguishing.* I will now quote the entire context, rendering these words as above explained. "Now in this that

I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also divisions among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together, therefore, into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. For in eating, every one taketh before his own supper; and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What! have ye not houses to eat and drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.

"For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread; and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat; this is my body, which is broken for you. This do in remembrance of me. After the same manner, also, he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This is the new testament in my blood; this do ye as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as oft as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come.

Wherefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many are asleep."

Such is the connection in which our text is found. From this it appears that the Corinthians had entirely misapprehended the nature of the Lord's supper. They seem to have regarded "it as a feast in honor of the Saviour on some such principles as they observed feasts in honor of idols, and they observed it in some such manner; and all that was supposed to make it unlike those festivals was, that it was in honor of Jesus rather than an idol, and was to be observed with some reference to his authority and name."

*Bloomfield in loco.

The man

ner in which they proceeded was this. Each one ate by himself, and ate that which he had himself brought.” In this way, "it had become a scene where every man ate by himself; and where the very idea that there was anything like a common celebration, or a celebration together, was abandoned." So that the poor, who were destitute of property, were exposed to public shame by the sumptuous fare with which the rich furnished themselves. Thus they made a distinction between the rich and poor, and by their arrangements wounded the feelings of the destitute. This the apostle regarded as peculiarly dishonorable in Christians, who are all equal and stand on one common level, whether they be high or low, bond or free, rich or poor.

From all the circumstances of the case, "there can be no doubt that the apostle meant to say, that they ate and drank to excess; and that their professed celebration of the Lord's supper was a mere revel."* And this it was which rendered their eating and drinking unworthy or irreverent. This is proved by the very next words that follow. "Not discerning the Lord's body." That is, not discriminating between the sacramental elements and symbols of the Lord's body from the food used at ordinary meals." This surely was to engage in this service in an irreverent and profane manner. Thus it will be seen that the sin of these Corinthians consisted entirely in the manner in which they observed this rite, not in any want of personal qualifications for its proper observance. No one need be but moderately acquainted with the genius of Christianity, and the great objects and purposes it has in view, to perceive that such a manner of observing its rites was directly calculated to defeat them. And not only so, but to produce directly opposite results. It is one of the great objects of our religion to secure a community of feeling among the members of society who receive it as the truth,-to produce a feeling of attachment and brotherhood, and thus induce an equality of feeling and unity of purpose and design.

Now every one must perceive, by a moment's reflection, that the manner in which these Corinthians engaged in the celebration of the Lord's supper not only tended to defeat all these ends, but were perfectly adapted to the production of directly opposite results. They were fitted to produce alienation of feeling, to divide them into factions, to wound

Barnes' Notes in loco.

† Bloomfield in loco.

the feelings of the poor, by making their poverty a matter of public notoriety and reproach, and thus laying the foundation of aristocratic distinctions, envy, and ultimately of open contentions and strife. No one need be told that such a state of things among the professed followers of the Lord Jesus is the farthest possible remove from what his religion contemplates. If its rites are so observed as to produce such results they are much worse than useless.

2. What are we to understand by eating and drinking damnation?

As Mr. Barnes justly observes, "This is evidently a figurative expression, meaning that by eating and drinking improperly he incurs condemnation; which is here expressed by eating and drinking condemnation itself. The word damnation, we now apply, in common language, exclusively to the future and final punishment of the wicked in hell. But the word here used does not of necessity refer to that; and according to our use of the word now, there is a harshness and severity in our translation which the Greek does not require, and which, probably, was not conveyed by the word damnation,' when the translation was made. . . . . It has, evidently, the sense of judgment here, and means that by their improper manner of observing this ordinance, they would expose themselves to the divine displeasure, and so to punishment. And it refers, I think, to the punishment or judgment which the apostle immediately specifies. It means a manifestation of the divine displeasure which might be evinced in this life, and which, in the case of the Corinthians, was manifested in the judgments which God had brought upon them.

The punishment which these Corinthians suffered for their irreverent observance of the Lord's supper is described in these words: "For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep." Most commentators think these words are to be understood literally, and in a physical sense. It is supposed that bodily disease and deathf were inflicted upon them for their impiety. Hence Mr. Barnes says, after giving it as his opinion that it means an especial judgment from God in bringing upon them bodily distempers,-" It may possibly have been the case that the intemperance and gluttony which prevailed on these occasions, was the direct cause of no small part of the bodily diseases which prevailed, and which in some cases terminated in death."

* Barnes' Notes in loco. † Macknight in loco. Barnes' Notes in loco. 22

VOL. III.NO. VI.