MANY ideas are current on this subject, and that on the part of those I truly love and value, and used by others with different intent, which I think unfounded, and I now send you these few lines on the subject. It is insisted that the table is the table of the Lord. No one, of course, doubts it; or that He whose table it is, is the Lord, has peculiar claim to this title, this distinctive title. But while the heart joyfully owns this name, it is not, cannot be, the highest and happiest aspect of the Lord's supper; not that which especially belongs to Christians in it. Of course were Christ not the Lord, not only the table, but Christianity would be gone. But " Lord " is not the name in which Christians have communion there, and that is their precious part in it. Communion with the Lord, is an ill-sorted term.
The term Lord is used as to the table, where it is used in contrast with evil, or as a place of dignity and judgment. The table of the Lord, in contrast with the table of devils; the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils. Hence it is added, "Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy?. are we stronger than He?" Again as to judgment: " This is not to eat the Lord's supper: he shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord." " Hence if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged of the Lord." And so on.
But when the Apostle speaks of communion, he does not speak of the Lord. But "the cap 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?" And this is the more remarkable, because the moment he begins, in the same passage, to speak of authority, contrast with devils, and judgment of evil, he says always " the Lord "; but as to communion, not. 11