As to our position on the Lord's Supper, it is not perfectly clear to every one that we are wholly free from criticism. We have taught, and do teach, that baptism, preceded by faith and repentance, is in order to the remission of alien sins. Hence, those who have not been baptized are not among the Scripturally saved. To them our inconsistency is seen at a glance, in that we know that the Lord's Supper was given to the children of God, and yet we open it to those who have not been baptized and therefore who are not the children of God. By close reading, we find that Judas was at the institution of the Lord's Supper, and was not separated from the rest, though Jesus knew from the beginning that he was a devil. Luke's Gospel leaves him in the company till after the Supper, and there is nothing contrary to that thought in any one of the others. It was not at that feast that Jesus said to him, "Whatsoever thou doest, do quickly." Well, if Judas was not refused the communion by the Lord, we may not drive away men and women who are earnestly desiring to serve the Lord, and are as earnest and honest as we are in the matter. Further, the fact of their being saved is not, and never has been, a question on which we have felt authorized to pronounce. We have the authority to preach faith, repentance and baptism for the remission of alien sins. But, on the negative side of the question, we have nothing to say. Further, have felt that they have a right to pray or engage in any other service, if they are honestly seeking the Lord to do his will. Mistaken as we

D. R. DUNGAN.

think they are, respecting their duty to be buried with Christ in baptism, we do not feel that this mistake is a sufficient reason for fencing them away from any service in which they desire to worship God. Hence we invite the children of God to this service and leave the people to examine themselves on the subject of their relation to the Father.

      That the Lord's Supper should have a particular interest to us is natural, because of the importance we have assigned to the requirements of the New Testament. We have understood the teaching of Paul on the authority under which we are to be developed into the characters approved of God to be the [453] teaching of the new covenant. We learn that the law was the tutor under which the Jews were prepared for the great Teacher, that they might be justified by faith; but since that the faith came, they were no longer under the tutor. We do not feel, therefore, that we are to keep a Sabbath, any more than that we are to observe any other of the services of the law. The place of the Sabbath was not taken by the first day of the week, so much as it is a new institution entirely; differing in form, in reasons for its observance, in the manner of worship on that day, so that it is wholly a new appointment in the worship of God. Hence we have not kept the Lord's Day under the feeling of a "thou shalt." We find that Christ rose from the dead on that day; that he met with the disciples in that evening, and also one week later. That it was the purpose of the disciples, who had the teaching of the inspired apostles, to meet on every first day of the week to break bread, and if it was the proper thing to be done by them at that time, we reason that it will be right for disciples yet. Not because God has said, "Thou shalt meet together on every first day of the week to break bread," but because they who had the advantage of the teaching of inspired apostles did it. If they did it, it must have been suggested by their teachers; and if the apostles would suggest it to the people of that day, they would do the same for the people now living; and if they would do so for the people now living, we should observe their instructions. If it is the Lord's Day, then it is not our day for work, merchandise, or any other pursuit, but the day should be kept in honor of the Christ. One of the things to be observed on that day was the Lord's Supper, hence we will be doing that which will please the Lord by observing the day as did the very early Christians.

      The frequency of the Lord's Supper has been, and still is, objected to by many good people. They think it makes it too common. And yet no one thinks that of viewing a picture of a loved friend or relative. Those who pray often do not thereby lose their reverence for the worship. Those who attend church twice on each recurring Lord's Day do not lose their reverence for the house of God on that account. Indeed, the very opposite of that is the case. Any service, neglected, comes to be lightly esteemed. Neglecting the assembling on the first day of the week will remove religious interest. Paul urged the saints not to neglect the public gatherings for worship. It was dangerous to spiritual health then and yet.

      From 1 Cor. 10:16, 17, 21; 11:23-30; 16:1, 2; Acts 20:7, it is quite clear that the first church met together on every first day of the week for worship, and that one part of the service was the communion. For three hundred years this continued, and the church, under most adverse conditions and terrible persecutions, became strong in the Lord and in the power of his might. But when that simple service was changed for the more formal and impressive arrangements of human invention, the spirituality of the church gave way.

      We have not been able to improve on the teaching and appointments of the Lord. Nadab and Abihu thought that the strange fire, which the Lord had not commanded, might be more attractive and impressive than the appointments of Jehovah, but their splendid performance has never been regarded as a success. Though the men who have assumed to interpose human genius for the wisdom of God have not met with the summary treatment of the elder sons of Aaron, changing from God's pleasure is not accompanied with the evidences of the divine approval. At any rate, we have felt it better to accept of the order of things left us by the apostles of our Lord.

      To the leaders of this Restoration movement the loaf and cup furnished a beautiful symbol of God's gift to men by which he might be just and the justifier of him that believes in Jesus. Those who have seen nothing of a redemptive character in the death of Christ, have found but little in the symbols of the body and blood of our Lord given for men. Those who do not believe in the remission of sins, but regard the removal of the consequences of human error as a turning away from sin, and the evils of life being removed as the result of a better course of living, feel little interest in symbols, which represent nothing in their theological [454] views. To them it is no more than a mere form, to be observed because required by the church. But the pioneers of this movement believed that Christ made an expiatory sacrifice by the acceptance of which the world is to be saved; that his offering was the fountain opened up in the house of David for sin and uncleanness. This view has been held in common with almost the whole number of Protestant believers.

      To those who have never studied its deep significance, it is a mere form, a mere ceremony to be observed or neglected at will, and of value only as it may impress those who behold or partake of it. With us it has been a real communion with the body and blood of our Lord. It is not a picture of the Master's form or face, but of his heart in its love for us, manifested by enduring the cross, despising its shame, and taking his blood into the Holy of Holies in the heavens, and obtaining eternal redemption for us (Heb. 9:12). It has therefore been our delight to gather together on the first day of the week to break bread, and so keep in view the love and grace which provided the way of redemption in Christ, the Son of God.

      The leaders in this movement, to return to the teaching and practice approved by Christ and his apostles, felt that it was not their province to decide on the form or purpose of this institution. They searched to know what the Saviour and the apostles said on the subject, and what the churches did under the eye and sanction of the ministers plenipotentiary in the kingdom of Christ. Many have thought that such a course was not necessary nor wise. But we have felt safe in this following of the inspired servants of God.

      Its working has been well. In the absence of preaching, many churches have met regularly for years to sing and pray and commune with the Lord and one another in the Lord's Supper. During the Civil War but few of the churches were rent asunder, being held together by this holy service of the Lord's Supper. The same bond will hold against any other strain.

[CCR 453-455]