ordinance of the additions that nurture legality, and flatter pride; let it be as plain as the Bible made it, and as often as a believer needs it: ⟨let⟩ there be nothing to render it impressive, but its subject, or alluring, but its spirituality; and mark the consequence. The former zealot will cool. Novelty, decency, example, may secure his compliance for a while; but it will be strange if his impatience do not at last get the ascendancy. Without affection to Jesus Christ, he will tire of his Supper. Without a principle of spiritual life, he will count spiritual worship intolerable; the more spiritual, the more intolerable; and the holy communion, the most intolerable of all. His soul will loathe the heavenly manna, and by degrees he will drop off.[1]— ‘Are there not many now,’ says Mr. Randal, ‘who bear the fatigue of waiting on a yearly Sacrament, for different reasons, who would tire of an habitual continuing in what they have no relish for, or a church tire of them?’[2]
The late of Mr. Brown of Haddington, accounts, in the following rational manner, for the original deviation from the primitive frequency and simplicity of the Lord’s Supper.— When the church began to share the smiles and support of the Emperor, and his court, multitudes, influenced by carnal motives, thronged into it, and they were easily admitted, though indeed many of them were far from being visible saints. These carnal and court Christians disliked being from week to week employed in self examination, and other preparatory work, or living under the impression of so frequent and solemn approaching to God. They also disliked the simplicity of this, as well as other gospel ordinances, and were mightily fond that the Christian
