Discourse II.1
“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?” — 1 Cor. x. 16.
There is, in the ordinance of the Lord’s supper, an especial and peculiar communion with Christ, in his body and blood, to be obtained. One reason why we so little value the ordinance, and profit so little by it, may be, because we understand so little of the nature of that special communion with Christ which we have therein.
We have this special communion upon the account of the special object that faith is exercised upon in this ordinance, and the special acts that it puts forth in reference to that or those objects: for the acts follow the special nature of their objects, Now, —
1. The special object of faith, as acted in this ordinance, is not the object of faith, as faith; that is, the most general object of it, which is the divine veracity: “He that hath received his testimony, hath set to his seal that God is true,” John iii. 33. The divine veracity, or the truth of God, that is the formal object of faith, as faith; and makes our faith to be divine faith. But now this is not the special object of faith in this ordinance, but something that doth suppose that.
2. The special object of faith, as justifying, is not the special object of faith in this ordinance. The special object of faith, as justifying, is the promise, and Christ in the promise, in general, as “the Saviour of sinners:” so when the apostle called men “to repent and believe,” he tells them, “The promise is unto you,” Acts ii. 39. And I suppose I need not insist upon the proof of this, that the promise, and Christ in the promise as Saviour and Redeemer, is the object of faith, as it is justifying. But this also is supposed in the actings of faith in this ordinance; which is peculiar, and gives us peculiar communion with Christ. Therefore, —
3. The special and peculiar object of faith, the immediate object of it in this ordinance, in its largest extent is, —
(1.) The human nature of Christ, as the subject wherein mediation and redemption was wrought. Christ is considered to come as a sacrifice; that is laid down as the foundation of it, Ps. xl. 6; Heb. x. 5, “A body hast thou prepared me;” which is synecdochically taken for the whole human nature. Faith, when it would lead itself unto the sacrifice of Christ, which is here represented, doth in an especial manner consider the human nature of Christ; that God prepared him a body for that end. This we are to have peculiar regard unto when we come to the administration or participation of this ordinance. For that end we now celebrate it. Nay, —
(2.) Faith goes farther, and doth not consider merely the human nature of Christ, but considers it as distinguished into its integral parts, — into body and blood; both which have a price, value, and virtue given unto them by their union with his human soul: for both the body of Christ and the blood of Christ, upon which the work of our redemption is put in Scripture, have their value and worth from their relation unto his soul; as soul and body, making the human nature, had its value and worth from its relation unto the Son of God: otherwise, he saith of his body, “Handle it, it is but flesh and bones.” But where the body of Christ is mentioned, and the blood of Christ is mentioned, there is a distribution of the human nature into its integral parts, each part, retaining its relation to his soul; and from thence is its value and excellency. This is the second peculiar in the object of faith in this ordinance.
(3.) There is more than this: they are not only considered as distinguished, but as separate also; — the blood separate from the body, the body left without the blood. This truth our apostle, in this chapter and the next, doth most signally insist upon; namely, the distinct parts of this ordinance, — one to represent the body, and the other to represent the blood, — that faith may consider them as separate.
The Papists, we know, do sacrilegiously take away the cup from the people; they will give them the bread, but they will not give them the cup: and as it always falls out that one error must be covered with another, or else it will keep no man dry under it, they have invented the doctrine of concomitance, — that there is a concomitance; that is, whole Christ is in every kind, — in the bread, and in the wine, — the one doth accompany the other: which is directly to overthrow the ordinance upon another account, — as it is to represent Christ’s body and blood as separated one from the other. Our Lord Jesus blessed the bread and the cup, and said, “This is my body;” [“This is my blood;”] — which cannot be spoken distinctly, unless supposed to be separate.