By: Francis W. Emmons A Ruler in the Church at Noblesville, Indiana
All sciences have their first principles—first in importance, and first in prominence, as they present themselves for our consideration. These are to be first learned, and well understood, be- fore we can become proficients in any thing belonging to them which is secondary. The first principles of every science is its Alphabet: and in the alphabet, alpha is the beginning and omega is the end of it. There is a way—a right way—a best way of learning every thing that is to be learned, and of doing every thing that is to be done. So true, and so obviously true is this remark, that it has passed into a proverb—it is regarded as an axiom, or self-evident proposition, that “Order is Heaven’s First Law.” “God,” says the great Apostle to the Gentiles, “is a God of order and not of con- fusion.” And again: addressing a Christian congregation, he says,. ”Let every thing be done decently and in order.” To do decently, is one thing; and to do in order, is quite another. “Decently” expresses the manner of doing, as becoming; but “in order” embraces a certain arrangement of the things done, numbered first, second, third, etc.
The world was not made in a day, nor was every thing made at once. Before the Spirit of the Lord moved on the face of the waters, all was chaos, disorder and darkness: but when God said, “Let there be light, there was light: and God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness; and God called the light day, and the darkness he called night: and the evening and the morning were the first day.” The creation of light, and the separation of the light from the darkness, are recorded as the first work of God. And it was fit and proper, and most fit and proper, that light should be the first work.
Why? Because God first created it. It is enough for man to know God’s order of doing anything, to pronounce it right and best. But we answer again: From the nature of light, and from the relation of light to every eye.
As light material, in the first creation, preceded all the other works of God; so does light spiritual, or knowledge divine, stand first in the new, moral creation—in the reconciliation of man to his Maker. Hence, The Word, who stands at the head of this new creation, is testified of by the beloved disciple thus: “In Him was the life, and the life was the light of men; and the light shone in darkness, but the darkness received it not” The testimony proceeds: “A man, named John, was sent from God. This man came, as a witness, to testify concerning the light, that through him all might believe. He was not himself the light; but came to testify concerning the light. The true light was he, who, coming into the world, enlightens every man.” And again: The darkness is past, and the light which is true now shines. He that says he is in the light and hates his brother, is in darkness even until now. He that loves his brother, abides in the light; and there is no stumbling block to him.” And finally: “This is the message, which we have heard concerning him and declare to you; that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.”—So much to show some analogy be- tween light material and spiritual; and some reason to the considerate, why light stands first both in the first and in the second creations.
God is light Jesus Christ, our Lord, is the true light And every emanation from the Father and the Son is full of this divine nature. In the Sacred Oracles of Heaven—in the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets; the light, which is true, now shines. Out of, and away from, these oracles, all is darkness. Every other glimmering is but an ignis fatuus to lead us astray. Let us, there- fore, take heed to this testimony—to these oracles, as to “a light that shines in a dark place, till the day dawn, and the day star arise in our hearts.”
In primitive times, persons became Christians by believing and obeying the truth. Their faith originated in divine testimony, and that testimony in fact When there was no testimony —no faith; and when no faith, there was no obedience; and consequently, no Christianity. Then was the confession, which Peter made to the Lord Jesus—which the Lord himself made before Pontius Pilate—which the Ethiopian officer made to Philip the Evangelist; and which the apostle Paul calls a good confession; considered the only foundation for union, communion, and church membership—“Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God.” This believed with the heart, confessed with the mouth, and acted on by the whole man—body, soul, and spirit— made every confessor a Christian.
But now, multitudes called Christians, were converted by a dream, a song, a vision, or some strange impression upon their minds; the origin of which they know nothing, and can tell nothing. This dream, or song, or vision, or impression, produces an opinion that they are born again, and in the favor of God; and this opinion causes them to subscribe to some “creed” or confession of other opinions, alike unfounded in truth with that which is the first fruit of their conversion. ‘Hence, they associate together in churches and societies, under some sectarian name, as the people of God!
In the different creeds, or confessions of opinions, one fundamental opinion, expressed or understood, seems to be held in common by all; and that is, that “There is no rule or law for the exer- cises of public worship.”10 Mark now the effects of this! One sect meets semi-weekly on the first and fourth days of each week; its members considering both alike sacred, and no sacredness belonging to either, only while they are together. Their exercise? are a silent sitting together, for an hour or longer, when they arise, shake hands, and disperse— Another meets weekly, on the seventh day. Their exercises are singing, preaching, and praying— Another, of the same general name, meets weekly on the first day to attend to the same exercises: and others, again, where they have no settled minister, meet monthly, on the seventh and first days together—on the seventh to read the church covenant and attend do business; and on the first day to attend to preaching and eat the Lord’s supper— Another meets weekly on the first day, whose exercises are a round of ceremonies, an oration or sermon from a short text, two hymns and the reading of several prayers— Another meets every first day; and their exercises of worship are dancing till their strength fails—
10 See this opinion expressed, in the Preface to the Church of England’s Book of Common Prayer, first page: “It is a most invaluable part of that blessed liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free—that in his worship different forms and usages may, without offence, be allowed,” &c. —that
Another—But we have exhibited sufficient diversity: And all these—(and these are not a tithe of the different days, and different exercises, and order of exercises of professing Christians)—all these are right, and one as fit as another; if there be no rule or law, which designates a particular day, and particular exercises, and the order of exercises for that day’s observance: for, “when there is no law, there is no transgression.”11 But no one, in his right mind, can sanction all: and every one, if we mistake not, must feel the need of some rule or law to direct us on this subject.
What and where, then, is the rule or law? We answer: Such rule or law we have, in the precepts of the Apostles, and in the con- duct of the first Christians. That the Apostles are, by divine authority, our instructors, appears from the prayer of our Savior for them, and from his commission to them. In his prayer to the Father for them, he says: “I have given them thy word. I pray for them; and not for them only, but for those, who shall believe on me through their teaching; that all may be one”—And in his commission to them, he says: “Go disciple all the nations, immersing them,— teaching them to observe all the things which I have commanded you.” That we are to learn, and be governed also, by the conduct of the first Christians, appears from the fact, that what the Lord taught the apostles, and the apostles taught the first Christians; on many subjects, and particularly on this of public worship, can only be learned from their conduct And this further appears, from another consideration; that the first Christians not only enjoyed the personal instructions of the apostles, who had committed to them the word of the Lord; but larger measures, also, of the Holy Spirit’s influence, which guided them into all the truth: consequently, the primitive state of the Christian church was, certainly,
11 “The particular forms of divine worship, and the rites and ceremonies ap- pointed to be used therein, being things in their own nature indifferent and alterable,” &c, &c.
its most pure, holy, heavenly, happy and best state; by conforming to which we must be right, if right we can be.
Having shown, that the rule by which we are to be governed, as Christians, must be the precepts of the apostles and the con- duct of the first Christians; let us now apply this rule.
We ask then, on what day did the disciples meet for public worship?
The Sacred Testimony informs us, that our Lord having arisen from the dead on the first day of the week, several times afterwards met with his disciples on this day—that, subsequently, on the first day of the week the disciples came together to, break bread—and the apostle John speaks of being in the spirit on the Lord’s day.
Such is the testimony, and all the testimony, which designates a particular day for Christian public worship. And here, let it be observed,—In all this we have no commandment: we have no apostolic precept even; but we have the conduct of the first Chris- tians. ‘The testimony says, they met on the first day of the week; and it says not any where, that, as congregations, they met for worship on any other day. Hence, from the apostles’ time down to the present, the first day of the week has been generally regarded, and, according to our rule, properly regarded, to the Lord.
If, therefore, the conduct of the first Christians, in meeting on the first day of the week, because the Savior on this day arose from the dead, be reason sufficient to make it a rule for all Chris- tians ever since and now to meet on this day: certainly, the public exercises of worship of the first Christians, when met, and the order of those exercises, if they can be ascertained, must be of equal authority, in determining our exercises of public worship.
That there is an ancient gospel, the order of whose grand items has been recently restored to this generation; thousands of happy disciples can be found ready to testify—We say the order of its items. But for this order, it would not be the ancient gospel: but for this order being now understood and proclaimed, as in day’s of old, it would not convert men to Jesus Christ, more than the modern gospels of the different sects. Indeed, it is not in the items themselves alone; but it is in the items, conjointly with the divine order of their exhibition, that converting power is dis- played. Both the one and the other we find first recorded in the apostle Peter’s Pentecostian discourse, Acts ii. And here, too, if I mistake not, we find, in the narrative immediately following that discourse, The ancient order of things in the PUBLIC WORSHIP of THE CHRISTIAN CONGREGATIONS. It reads
IN GREEK,
ἦσαν δὲ προσκαρτερονῦτες τῇ διδαχῇ τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ τῇ κοινωνίᾳ, τῇ κλάσει τοῦ ἄρτου καὶ ταῖς προσευχαῖς.
COMMON TRANSLATION:
And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
NEW VERSION:
And they continued steadfast in the teaching, in the fellowship, in the breaking of the loaf and in the prayers of the apostles. I have given the Greek here, for all who can read Greek, and the two translations, which will be in the of most of the readers of this discourse; for the, purpose of a remark or two to come at the sense.
Every reader will be able to see, that the order of the words is better followed in the common, than in the new version,— τῶν ἀποστόλων, “of the apostles,” following directly τῇ διδαχῇ “the doctrine,” “the teaching;” and not ταῖς προσευχαῖς. “the prayers.” This is as it should be! for, though προσκαρτερονῦτες ἦσαν, “they continued steadfast in,” or, they unremittingly attended to ‘the fellowship,’ &c. as well as the teaching of the apostles; yet, in our judgment, “of the apostles” is to be construed only with “the teaching”: our reasons will appear in the sequel. We prefer the rendering, “unremittingly attended to,” as more clear, and in this place, a better English idiom for the sense: we prefer it on the authority of to being the sign in English of the dative case in Greek, which here occurs—in of the ablative; and of Acts vi. 4, where the same verb, προσευχαῖς occurs, followed by pzoswxh, “prayer,” in the dative case; and where it is rendered, in the common version, “give continually to,” and in the new version, “constantly attend to”—”we” (say the apostles) “will constantly attend to prayer.” Other similar instances might be given; but this is deemed sufficient. Every reader may also see, that the new version of our text has five more words in it than the common version; or, that one word, viz. the definite article, occurs six times in the new version of this passage, and only once in the old one. Here the new version is as it should be; as the article o[ in Greek, in the genitive or dative case, (tai?, tou?, or ton,) occurs before every substantive of this passage; requiring the, for its representative in English.
1. This last fact we put down as our first reason for considering this passage as expressing the exercises, and the order of exercis- es, in the public worship, of the first Christian congregations. “They continued steadfast in;” or “they unremittingly attended to”—not “the apostles’ doctrine,” simply; but “the teaching of the apostles;” and so of the rest Nothing could be expressed more definitely—nothing more emphatically.
2. We just have before, in this connexion, an account, and the first account on divine record, of the establishment of the first Christian congregation: consequently, here is the place, and the most proper place of any where in the sacred history, to give us full information of the exercises, and order of exercises of their public worship; provided it be at all necessary for us to be put in possession of it But, 3. It is absolutely necessary for us to be put in possession of it; in order to attend to the same things—in order to worship God in spirit and in truth. In spirit we might worship him—our whole souls might be engaged in devotion: but in truth we could not worship, without information of the exercises, and order of exercises, in the public worship of the first Christian congregations; for in truth is according to divine appointment; and we have al- ready, in our introductory remarks, shown; that we need, and must have, some rule or law to direct us on this subject 4. If Acts ii. 42, do not present the prominent exercises, and the order of exercises, in the public worship of the first Chris- tians; we are left without any full expression on this subject —no other passage does express them, in all the New Testament We might indeed, find one exercise, in one place, and another in an- other: we might then arrange all found according to our respective likings, and no two congregations attend to the same exercises, in the same order; but this would seriously infract our divinely established rule: consequently, Acts ii. 42. must present the prominent exercises, and the order in which they were observed, in public worship, by the disciples of the first Christian church. These reasons to my mind, are conclusive; and establish the position we have taken, beyond successful contradiction. From these, if we had no others, we would now proceed, most carefully and strictly, to enquire the meaning of each term—what, how much, and how little, is embraced by each: but we have other rea- sons to present first
88 | The Christian Preacher
Another reason is found in the exercises named. These must have been the public, and not private exercises of worship; be- cause, as they stand here connected, they are social exercises.
The breaking of the loaf, all acknowledge, is a social act; in which there is communion with the Lord and with his people. It cannot properly be attended to in secret, by one disciple alone — or, not so properly, as with others. It was given to the disciples for public and social observance. To the disciples when together our Lord said: “Take, eat, this is my body;” and, “as often as you eat it, you do show forth the Lord’s death till he come.” Now, if a brother or a sister were to eat bread and drink wine ever so many times alone, and in ever so devotional a manner, in private; there would be no showing forth of the Lord’s death. This can only be done in the public congregation. Again. “I speak as to wise men,” says the Apostle to the Corinthians, speaking to them on this su ject, “judge you, what I say. 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? Because there is one loaf; we the many, are one body; for we all participate of that one loaf.” The Apostle in this connection, speaks of the Corinthian brethren as having come together—“When ye come together in one place”—And we elsewhere read, that the disciples ‘met on the first day of the week to break bread? See Acts xx.
7. From which last passage it appears, that the disciples were ac- customed to meet together on the first day of the week; and that a prominent-item in the design, or object, of their meeting was to attend to the breaking of the loaf. But I need not multiply words to establish what is not disputed; viz. that the Lord’s supper is a social public exercise of worship; and not a private one. This being granted, and attending to the teaching of the Apostles, and the fellowship, and the prayers spoken of in this connection; must, also, be social and public exercises: for all stand together.
The breaking of the loaf is no more prominent, nor emphatically spoken, of than the other three. If, therefore, it be admitted, that the breaking of the loaf is to be attended to, on the first day of the
week, by the disciples of Christ when met together; there is no reason against, but every reason for the disciples, at the same time, to attend to the fellowship, the teaching of the Apostles, and the prayers.
Observe, the testimony says not, simply and indefinitely, ‘fellowship;” but “the fellowship:” nor, simply and indefinitely, ‘Apostles’ doctrine,’ nor ‘breaking of bread,’ nor prayers.’ I repeat this remark, wishing to fix attention upon it: for, there is more meaning in the definite article, than most readers are wont to imagine—more reason to sustain the doctrine of this discourse, than all will at first see in it The breaking of the loaf, here spoken of, the article shows, was not a common, every day’s occurrence; but a certain breaking of it, when the disciples were met together: and they were accustomed to meet together on the first day of the week. The same is also true of the other exercises, here spoken of in connection.
That the breaking of the loaf, in this place, does certainly mean the Lord’s supper, appears evident; because, 1st. No other breaking of bread is any where enjoined, in the New Testament, as a religious observance— 2nd. This breaking of the loaf, as before observed, is here pointed out, and distinguished from all others, by the definite article the—
3d. Another breaking of bread is spoken of in the following connection; and so spoken of, as to be clearly distinguished from it; see 46th verse: “And they continuing daily with one Accord, in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their food with gladness and singleness of heart” This passage is correctly rendered, “and breaking of bread,” there being, particle before it, as it stands in the original Greek.
This omission of the article, and the connection show, that this breaking of bread was a common, every day’s (“daily”) occurrence; as does the insertion of it in the 42nd verse show the breaking of the loaf there to be a public, social act of divine worship.
I am aware that it may be asked, in reference to “the teaching of the Apostles.” Is not all christian conduct—an attending to it? Have not the Apostles taught us how to conduct at all times; and by observing their instructions, do we not attend to the teaching of the Apostles everyday? For instance; Is not prayer a duty, for every day’s observance? “Pray without ceasing: in every thing give thanks. … Pray with and for one another,” says Apostolic precept As prayer is enjoined, both as a public and private duty; do we not attend to “the teaching of the Apostles,” whenever we pray—whether the act be by ourselves alone; or, be social with others? Most certainly we as much as we attend to it, in obeying any of their general instructions. There is a sense, in which we attend to the teaching of the Apostles, whenever we pray: but that such is not its meaning here—that it is not so broad—is most obvious. To make this appear, it is only necessary to observe that the teaching of the Apostles is here named in connection with prayers, was the breaking of the loaf, and with the fellowship; and so distinguished from them. “The disciples,” it is said, “unremittingly attended to the teaching of the Apostles, and to the fellow- ship, and to the breaking of the loaf, and to the prayers:” conse- quently, neither praying, nor attending to either of the’ other exercises, spoken of in connection, can. be attending to the teaching of the Apostles, in the sense of this passage. Every common sense man, who has any correct knowledge of the import and force of language, must perceive this. If praying or the attending to any other duty, but one different, definite one, were attending to the teaching of the Apostles; then is the sacred historian, Luke, made to say, in effect: “They unremittingly attended to the teaching of; the Apostles, and to the teaching of the Apostles;” for the fellowship, and the breaking of the loaf, are as much enjoined by the Apostles, and are consequently, as much the teaching of the Apostles, as is the prayers.
Trusting that the fallacy of extending, thus wide and indefinite, the limits of the meaning of the first great exercise, spoken of in our text, Is sufficiently exposed; we proceed to offer.
6. Another reason; which is found in the restricted, and yet sufficiently general and definite, meaning of the sentence. “They unremittingly attended to the teaching of the Apostles.” As this sentence, in Acts ii. 42. expresses not any undefined act, enjoined by the Apostles: but one definite act, spoken of in connection with, and so distinguished from, three other acts, alike definite and enjoined; it follows necessarily, that its meaning here must be the act of hearing—mainly, the act of hearing the instructions of the Apostles, whether oral or written.—We say, whether oral or writ- ten; for we are not informed, whether the Apostles first wrote their discourses, as I have done; and then read them to the disciples, as I am now doing; or, whether they usually, taught; without notes, extempore. One thing however, must not be forgotten, that if the Apostles’ had not sometimes used pen, ink, and paper—or parchment; —if by this means, their teaching had not been transmitted to us; we could never have learned it? and, consequently could never have become Christians. So much are we in- debted for the writings of the Apostles.—But, whether the Apostles first wrote their discourses, or usually taught extempore; alters not the case before us in regard to the observance of the disciples: for the teaching of the Apostles was the same thing, not at all effected by the manner of its being communicated. It is true that the congregation, of whom the record under consideration was made, enjoyed the personal labors of the Apostles. They heard the living word from their living lips. But who will say, that the Church at Thessalonica, for instance, to whom Paul wrote, and at the close of one of his letters says, I charge you by the Lord, that this Epistle be read to all the holy brethren;” in reading and hearing it read, when met together did not attend to the teaching of this Apostle? And who will say, that it is not attending to the teaching of the Apostles,—to remark and hear remarks upon it, in preachings, teachings, and exhortations, inculcating the truth as it is in Jesus—to teach and admonish one another, also, by psalms and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with gratitude in our hearts to the Lord?—This therefore, appears to be the meaning of the first grand item, or exercise of public worship,— to read and hear read—to call and lend attention to the sacred writings of the Apostles of Jesus Christ; and in this way did primitive christians, and in this way may modern Christians, attend to the teaching of the Apostles. Does the question now occur, How often did the first disciples, and how often consequently, should all the disciples of Christ, attend to the teaching of the Apostles? The text answers, “unremittingly.” Another passage of scripture, which has been al- ready before adduced in this discourse, answers, “On the first day of the week,” I refer to Acts xx. 7. “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached to them.” Putting both answers together, we understand, that the teaching of the Apostles by the former, when met for worship, never was, and by the latter never should be, omitted or neglected. Here let it be observed, that in Acts xx. 7, also, we have the teaching of the Apostles in connection with the breaking of bread; and we have it, in the same order, that it is spoken of in Acts ii. 42. —first, the teaching of the Apostles. Paul preached to the disciples at Troas, before he broke the loaf with them. So reads the testimony, beginning at the 7th and ending with the 11th verse; and there is none for a different order,—all suppositions to the contrary notwithstanding. As Luke had before, in the 7th verse, mentioned, that a prominent object of this meeting of the disciples was “to break bread;” nothing could be more natural than his testimony in the 11th verse, to show that they did not omit it, though Paul preached to them, and preached to so great length.
The extraordinary occasion —the last visit of an Apostle—justified the length of his sermon. Nor does it at all affect the nature of the Lord’s supper, that it should be attended to early on Mon- day Morning;”according to our denomination of time;—as it was not instituted, and first observed, on the Lord’s day; but on Thurs- day opening. Nor does it affect the conclusion, that the first day of the week was the day for its usual observance.—We have taken for granted, that the first “breaking of bread,” spoken of in Acts XX was the Lord’s supper, presuming but few will question it; and yet, in this place, there is no article in Greek, before ἄρτος; as we have none before “bread,” in English: nor was it necessary here, though very important in Acts ii. 42. The article being also omitted in the 11th verse, we have every reason for concluding; that the “breaking of bread,” for which the disciples met, mentioned in the 7th verse, was the very same to which they here at- tended.
“But nothing is here said of the fellowship; nor of the prayers!” True; shall we hence infer, that the fellowship and the prayers were not attended to, by the disciples at Troas? Certainly. By the same rule, and with the same propriety, might we exclude all but baptism from being connected with our salvation, by the passage in Peter, which says, “the like figure whereunto even baptism doth now save us;” or, we might exclude baptism, by the scriptures, “we are saved by faith”—“we are saved by grace” “we are saved by hope.”
Here, then, let it be observed, once for all; that the same authority—Apostolic precept, and the example of primitive christians; and the same reasons,—the nature and fitness of things; enjoin on all disciples; on all congregations, the orderly attendance on all the great exercises of the Lord’s house, viz. the teaching of the Apostles, the fellowship, the breaking of the loaf, and the prayers, on every Lord’s day; that enjoin any one of them—of the observance of the Lord’s day itself. Apostolic precept, and the conduct of the first Christians, so far as we have them recorded in the New Testament; do not authorize attendance to one of these exercises, to the neglect of another, or others. If we can meet on every first day of the week, we can attend to all of them: If we cannot meet, we are excused from all, as here enjoined.
Having, now, offered six reasons to sustain the sentiment which was announced at the beginning of this discourse, viz. ‘that Acts ii. 42. expresses the great exercises, and the order of exercises, of public worship, in the first Christian congregations;’ this sentiment, in our judgment, is sustained: and more than this.
Pursuing our investigations thus far, we have ascertained and settled, I trust, the true meaning of the sentence, “they unremittingly attended to the teaching of the Apostles;” and, also, what is meant by “the breaking of the loaf.” The teaching of the Apostles, here spoken of, we have found to mean nothing more nor less than their oral or written instructions: “the breaking of the loaf,” but another name for the Lord’s supper; and “unremittingly attending to” these things, to mean the constant observance of them—as constant as the return of the Lord’s day, and the weekly meeting of the disciples.—But— ‘What is THE FELLOWSHIP?’ — This is an important question; which merits more said upon it, than our present limits afford. But we purpose, the Lord willing, to answer it, presenting all the data on which our answer is founded; and in connection, to present the taro of the fellowship, and answer at length, the objections, which we have heard urged against them, in another discourse. For the present, however, let our answer be inferred from Rom. xv. 26.; where the same original word occurs, as occurs in Acts ii. 42. which in the latter is rendered contribution and should be so rendered in the former. “But now I go to Jerusalem, ministering to the saints, for Macedonia and Achaia have been pleased to make some contribution, [some fellowship,] for the poor of the saints who are in Jerusalem.”
On the prayers, last mentioned in this passage, but little is deemed necessary, in this place, to be said: for the definition of prayer, all are supposed to know. Prayer being the offering up to the Father of mercies the desires of our hearts; prayers, consequently, mean the presenting of more than one petition. As we have prayers in the plural, and not prayer, for the concluding exercise of public worship; it appears, that it is designed, equally with those going before, for the whole congregation. The bishops are not to do all the praying; no more than to them is committed all the dispensation of the Apostles’ doctrine. There is no question, but they are to lead in all the exercises; and preside, from the beginning to the end: but, under their presidency, all the brethren, who have gifts for public edification, should exercise them in preaching, teaching and exhortation-all, that can sing, should teach and admonish one another, by psalms and hymns and spiritual songs; and all, who have the gift of prayer, should pray: and every exercise in its own order. “There is an order,” said an eminent Reformer,—the one who now, by universal suffrage, stands foremost in the restoration of primitive Christianity—“there is an order, which is comely, apposite, or congruous with the genius of the religion;” and this was said “in reference to the position of the bodies of the worshipers, —the hour of the day in which certain things are to be one; and whether one action shall always be performed first, another al- ways second, and another always third,” &c. “and concerning which,” he continues, “some things are said by the Apostles; and perhaps, even in some respects, these things may be determined with certainty, as respects the practice of the first congregations of disciples.” But it is not these things— it is, “that there are certain social acts of christian worship, all of which are to be at- tended to in the Christian assembly, and each of which is essential to the perfection of the whole, as every member of the human body is essential to the perfect man.” This is what he means by the phrase, “order of Christian worship.” Here is where we differ.12 The acts of worship, or the particular exercises, with me, is one thing; and the order, in which they are observed, is another.
We agree, however, I am happy to say, in what are the social acts.
We agree, that these are the teaching of the Apostles, the fellow- ship, the breaking of the loaf, and the prayers. And, I am happy further to say, that we agree in our exposition of these exercises.
His exposition is my exposition in this discourse.
In reference to the order, in which these exercises are to be attended to, in the Christian congregation: my order is the order of Luke, the sacred historian,—the natural order,—the order in which he speaks of them in his narrative. In speaking of the gospel, which Peter preached; all the teachers of the current reformation contend for the order of its items, as given by Luke.
Why not, also, for his order of exercises in public worship? I am aware that, to some persons of some acquirements, to sustain this order, it would have been more definite and satisfactory if the sacred historian before the substantives of Acts ii. 42, had sup- plied the numerals, first, second, third and fourth: but if I mistake
12 The reader, with me, will be at a loss to discern the difference after reading a few paragraphs more. Ed.
Volume I, Number 4 | 97
not, to the well taught, intelligent teachers of the word of favor, not so—to them it is as definite as it stands.13 We say, every exercise in its own proper order.
From the creation of the world, one day in seven appears to have been set apart, and to have been generally observed for religious worship. How fit and proper, that the Christian’s day should be the first day of the week! On this day was the work of redemption finished; our Lord burst the bars of the enemy, and rose a victorious conqueror over death, hades, and the grave. On this day our Lord ceased from his works and rested, as God, the Father, rested on the seventh day, after the works of the first creation.
How fit and proper, therefore, we repeat it, that Christians should observe to the Lord, as a day of worship, the first day of the week!
But how observe it?
While in the world, Christians, like other men, have to labor, and attend to secular concerns: and these concerns necessarily, engross more or less of their thoughts, their tendency is to exclude from the mind the great matters of another world. What, then, is the first thing that reason, that common sense, dictate to be done; when the disciples meet together, on the first day of the week? The first thing, certainly is, to inquire after, and listen to, the Lord’s will—It is to attend to the teaching of the Apostles. No other great exercise can supply the place of this. But in attending to this, we exclude not an introductory prayer; nor psalms,
13 Should I, however, mistake in this conclusion; and any intelligent teacher, after considering well this passage of scripture, and all our reasons for the doc- trine deduced, offered in this discourse, think differently— think it not sufficient- ly sustained; we have other reasons in store: and they shall be forthcoming, on the following conditions: That he write and have published a discourse, with his objections prefaced or appended, taking for his text, Acts ii. 38, or some other passage of the New Testament; the object of which shall be to prove, that in Heaven’s order faith precedes reformation; reformation immersion; immersion remission of sins; remission of sins, the Holy Spirit; and the Holy Spirit, eternal life. This done and I pledge myself to him, and to the public, by the same reasons, or by as many and as good reasons, as he sustains this; I will, in an essay reviewing him. sustain that; or, as a logician, die in the attempt.—“Sapienii verbum sat.” F. W. S.
98 | The Christian Preacher
hymns, and spiritual songs— these are deluded. We are com-manded to pray always; prayer, should, therefore, accompany all that we do. And singing, too, is an exercise of worship, which is never out of place. It is, therefore, most fit and proper, that, as leading to, and introducing the teaching of the Apostles,—the pure and unadulterated milk and meat of the word of God, on which Christians are to feed—that we should sing and pray. Very well.
Having learned the Lord’s will—having had our pure minds stirred up, by way of remembrance of some interesting practiced teaching; what next?
The next thing, manifestly, is to do something—Yes, to do something! The fellowship, therefore, comes next in order; in which all from the eldest to the youngest, from the richest to the poorest, may have the privilege of showing the interest they feel, by contributing of their substance, as the Lord has prospered them, for the advancement of the Redeemer’s kingdom. Now the congregation may sing too; and continue to sing, while each puts in his or her free will offering to the Lord; and having done this, gives the hand—the right hand of fellowship to the brethren and sisters, with whom associated. “To all we freely give our hand, Who love the Lord in every land; For all are one in Christ our head, To whom be endless honors paid.”
What next?—
Now, are we prepared to receive, with gladness and gratitude, the memorials of the Savior’s love; and show forth his death. By this time, the other exercises having been engaged in with all Our hearts; we are prepared to distinguish the Lord’s body and blood: and to every Christian, the institution of the Supper is now a feast of fat things, indeed—of fat things full of marrow—of wine on the less well refined.—And shall the disciples sing now?—Yes,
“Sing on your heavenly way, You ramsom’d sinners, sing”—
* * * *
“My willing soul would stay In such a frame as this, And sit and sing herself away To everlasting bliss.” The exercises are now more than half done—the time of dis- persion is at hand: each is soon to retire from the Lord’s house to his own; and for another week to mingle with the busy world—to his farm—his work-shop—or his merchandise. What so suitable now, for a concluding exercise, as a season of social prayer—a little season of praying with and for one another! Lord lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. While in the world, keep us unspotted from its vices. May we ever keep our end in view; and live like strangers and pilgrims on the earth, and never dishonor our holy calling.
How beautiful! how perfectly comely, apposite and congruous to the genius of our holy religion, these exercises, and the order of them, for the public worship of Christians!
Here we might expatiate largely; But we have already extended our discourse, beyond what was at first intended. Without any review, therefore, or any recapitulation of what has been said; believing that we have used sufficient plainness of speech, not to be misunderstood by those, who have given that attention which the importance of the subject demands, we leave it with you.
May the Lord graciously grant us a mind to apprehend, and a heart to practice, the way of truth, as it is in Jesus; and to his name be praise forever and ever. Amen.