Brethren, or rich Neighbours? A Feast of this Nature, at that Juncture, was a virtual Declaration, by Way of Contraft to the Jews, that the Disciples and Subjects of the true Meffiah were all Favourites alike; and that there was no Difference to be put between Man and Man on account of their outward Circumstances, and bodily Perfections or Blemifhes. The Jews had long been accustomed to think, that God was a Refpecter of Perfons: This Method was intended to fhew, that he was not. And though fuch a Method, as here related, feems ftrange to us, yet it was a very common Thing among the Antients, and is continued among the Eastern Nations to this Day, to exprefs their Sentiments by fymbolical Actions. A Scene, a Gesture, a Representation, &c. was a filent Lecture, well understood, and equally expreffive with the moft fignificant Language.

One Inftance of this Nature there is recorded in the Gofpel, which has fo great an Affinity with the Cafe before us, that I appre

to be invited to our Tables RATHER than the Rich &c. Now if fo, it must follow, that this is fuch a Peculiarity in the Chriftian Morals, as is not to be defended upon the Principles of found Reafon; and nevertheless ought to be the more carefully observed by all Chriftians, becaufe it is a Peculiarity; and yet is in Fact never practifed by any For none invite the poorest and most miferable Objects RATHER than others to dine in Perfon with them. What a Triumph would this be to the Caufe of Infidelity! and how juftly might Mr. C. have exulted, were this the Cafe.

hend

hend the mentioning of it will both corroborate and illuftrate the general Argument. It is the Ceremony of washing the Disciples Feet. Now washing the Feet, it is well known, was a Circumstance peculiarly relative to the Cultom the Climate, and the Habit of that Country. And it was looked upon as a piece of Civility in the Master of the Houfe to give Orders, that his Guefts fhould be fo treated: But the Act itself was performed only by menial Servants. Shall we therefore enquire, how came it to pass that our Lord chofe to do it in Perfon? This will foon appear, if we confult the xiii of St. John, and compare it with the xxii of St Luke 24 verse where we shall find, that the TIME when this Circumftance happened, was just before the Feast of the Paffover; and the OcCASION of it was, on Account of the Dispute among the Disciples, which of them fhould be accounted the greateft. At fuch a time therefore, and on fuch an Occafion our Lord rifeth from Supper and laid afide his Garments, and took a Towel and girded himself: After that he poureth Water into a Bafon, and began to wash the Difciples Feet, and to wipe them with the Towel wherewith he was girded. So after he had washed their Feet, and had taken his Garments, and was fet down again, be faid unto them, Know ye what I bave done to you? Do you know the Moral of this Action? ye who have just C

been

been difputing, who fhould be accounted the Greatest, do ye confider the Meaning and Intention of this Emblematical Reprefentation? ye call me Mafter and Lord: And ye fay well; for fo I am. If I then your Lord and Mafter have washed your Feet, ye ought alfo to wash one anothers Feet. If I give this Example in order to explain the Nature of the Religion I teach; ye ought to conform to it; and to endeavour to do all mutual good Offices one for another instead of difputing which should be accounted the Greateft. For the Servant is not greater than his Lord: Neither be that is fent, greater than him that fent him. Thus did the true Meffiab explain the Nature of his Kingdom to his Difciples juft before the Feaft of the Paffover. And he taught them the fame Lession, which he had before inculcated to the Pharifees, when he faw how Ambitious they were of having the chief Seats at the Feast of the Dedication. Both these Inftances of worldly Ambition proceeding from the fame falfe Principle of a Temporal Meffiah.

But to return: this Injunction of our Lord probably gave rife to the Inftitution of the Agapa, or Love-Feafts, in the primitive Church; which were continued as long, as it was particularly neceflary to counter-act the above falfe Notion of the Jews. Nay, in one Senfe, the bleffed Sacrament itself is a perpetual Memento of this Nature.

For as

that

that is the only Religious Feaft now in ufe among us, whereby we diftinguish ourselves as Subjects of the Meffiah, therefore Perfons of all Ranks and degrees, are invited to partake of it, the Poor, the Maimed, the Lame, and the Blind, as well as others. And when the Symbols are delivered to each Perfon, particular care is taken by the Words of the Inftitution, especially as practised by the Church of England, to inculcate the Important Doctrine, that God is no Refpecter of Perfons, and that every worthy Receiver is equally acceptable to the Meffiab. The Body of our Lord Jefus Chrift which was given for THEE, preferve THY Body &c.

Such effectual care therefore having been taken to guard against entertaining any derogatory Notions of God, as if he was a Refpecter of Perfons; the grand Question now is, whether Chriftians at this Day, are bound to conform to the very Letter of the Injunction in Feafts and Entertainments, fuch as theirs, which are merely of a Civil or a Social Nature? As to the Meaning and Intention of the Precept, we as readily allow, and as ftrongly infift upon the neceffity of inculcating it frequently and fervently, as Mr. Chubb, or any Man living can poffibly do. I repeat it therefore again, Merely as Chriflians, we are all Equals, all the Favourites of God thro Chrift Fefus, who fhed as much Blood for the Beggar

C 2

Beggar as the Prince: And therefore we shall be finally rewarded, not according to our Titles and Stations either in Church or State, not according to our Bodily Blemishes or Perfections; But according to our inward and Spiritual Virtues, and the Improvements we respectively fhall have made under the Advantages we poffefs in the Gospel Difpenfation. This is what we ftrenuously infift upon; and therefore cannot be charged with fwerving from the true Spirit and Intention of the Precept. We further add, that Charity and Benevolence towards the Poor, Condefcenfion and Affability towards our Inferiors are Duties ftrictly enjoyned in the Gospel, and indifpenfably neceffary to our Acceptance with God. Nor do we scruple to affirm, that Persons ought to take the Greatest Care left they spend too much of their Time and Subftance upon their Pleasures and Entertainments, which should have been imployed im much better uses, and left they exceed the Bounds of Moderation and Sobriety on these Occafions. All this we both allow, and inculcate as fome of the moft Effential Parts of our Religion. But it by no Means appears, that it is still a neceffary Branch of our Chriftian Duty to invite the Poor, the Maimed, the Lame and the Blind to dine in Perfon at the Table with the Rich, the Sound, and Healthy: Much less, that it is a Crime in us to invite thofe of the

fame