communication to the apostle of the Gentiles, took no notice of any such misapprehension; which he certainly would have done, had it existed.

But, in support of the assumption, it has been said, that no command is implied in the phrase, as oft as ye drink it, and therefore no obedience could be expected. There seems to me to be no force in this argument, whatever. If the observance of the rite was meant to be entirely optional, the phrase would have been, "This do ye, if ever ye should drink it," or something to the same effect. But the other mode of expression, "as oft as ye drink it," plainly implies a confident expectation that they would perform the rite, and that frequently.

Another objection which has been advanced is, that as much reason exists for observing the washing of one another's feet, as an instituted rite of our religion, as for partaking of bread and wine. It is urged that the action of Jesus, in washing his disciples' feet, as recorded in the thirteenth chapter of John, was accompanied with as remarkable circumstances, and as strong injunctions, as those which attended his celebration of the Paschal Supper; that each step of the transaction is as carefully particularized, such as his laying by his garments, girding himself with a towel, pouring out the water, washing their feet, and wiping them; and that the injunction, "If I, your lord and master, have washed feet, ye ought also to wash one another's feet," is as forcible as that conveyed in the words, "Do this in remembrance of me.

your

99*

* These objections are chiefly made by the Quakers. See the thirteenth Proposition of Barclay's Apology.

Now, if this were all true, what would the objection, in its utmost force and extent, prove? That we were wrong in repeating one of the ceremonies? Not so; but that we came short of our duty in not repeating the other. It would not prove that we observed a form, which was not a commanded rite of our religion, but that we omitted the observance of one, which was so.

An examination of this argument, however, with the circumstances on which it is founded, will show it to be destitute of importance. There is nothing in the course of the transaction in question, which would lead the reader to suppose, that our Saviour expected his disciples to wash one another's feet, as a stated and ritual practice. Neither is there any positive command connected with the action. "After he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done unto you? Ye call me Master and Lord, and ye say well; for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you. Verily, verily, I say unto you, the servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him." The meaning of this is obvious enough. The whole occurrence, especially when it is taken in connexion with the words of Jesus, has the air of a symbolical action, performed to inculcate and impress an important practical duty. It was the intention of our Saviour to recommend to his disciples the virtues of mutual kindness, respect, forbearance, and humility. He did this most effectually, by performing for them an office, which was usually the task of a menial; and by

enforcing on their minds the striking consideration, that if he, their lord and master, exhibited such a proof of condescension, they ought surely to follow his example toward their equals, and exercise the same gentle and lowly temper in their intercourse with each other. His example, in this respect, was no authority for a religious ceremony, simply because he did not teach his disciples so to regard it. He performed the action, not for the purpose of commanding its repetition, but of taking occasion to explain its moral design; not to institute a rite, but to inculcate a Christian temper and duty. "Do this in remembrance of me," is a positive command to perform an action, which, in itself, would indicate no particular moral disposition. "Ye also ought to wash one another's feet," is the recommendation of an action, which, like many others of a similar nature, would be a proof of an amiable temper, and a good heart.

There remains a consideration, which will easily decide the question, if there should still any question exist on the subject. We have not the least hint, that the primitive Christians ever observed such a rite as that of washing one another's feet. If they had failed in their duty in this respect, it is most reasonable to suppose, that in the instructions given by our Saviour to St. Paul, he would, while sanctioning the observance of one rite, have explained his intentions with regard to the other.

As the objections which have been stated, therefore, appear to have no force, the arguments for the authority of the Lord's Supper remain unaffected.

Unreasonableness of excessive worldly Anxiety.

THERE is hardly any practical error to which we are more exposed from the circumstances of our present condition, than a spirit of undue solicitude in regard to future trials. We know that we live in a world, which is often darkened by clouds, and agitated by tempests of affliction; and our past experience has told us that we, as well as others, must look for a share in human calamity. Hence it is, that we too naturally yield to a distrustful and anxious concern for the future; and to the trials which we actually receive from the hand of Providence, we add innumerable others of our own creation. We are not indeed required to shut our eyes on the calamities which threaten us, or to suppose any confidence which we can repose in the care and goodness of our heavenly Father, can for a moment, supersede the necessity of our own exertions; on the contrary, it is our duty to exercise a prudent foresight, and to endeavour by all proper means to avert the evils which we apprehend. But after all, our duty, our happiness require, that we should not be unduly solicitous about the result. After using all the means which Providence has put within our power, we are submissively to leave the event with God.

that

One consideration which shows the folly of excessive anxiety concerning the future is, that every day has trials enough of its own. Whatever may be our condition in life, it is perfectly vain to think of avoiding trials; and it is not improbable that they are distributed among mankind with much more equality than is often imagined. You are a poor man, and look perhaps

with an envious eye on the condition of your rich neighbour, who, you are ready to imagine, moves in a circle so much above you, that he breathes only the atmosphere of peace and joy. But it is not improbable, if you could know the whole of the case, that you might think it a hard bargain, on your part, to exchange your situation, with all its inconveniences, for his, with all its splendour. Perhaps the world may see the worst of your case; but in his, amidst all the pomp and show of wealth, there may be concealed a worm, a canker corroding at the heart, which makes even his riches a burden to him. But however this may be, it is certain that no situation in life can exempt us from trials; and not only so, but these trials recur frequently, and are interwoven with the experience of every day. Perhaps there is not a day of your life in which every thing moves onward exactly as you could wish; some disappointment, or cross, or change of circumstances occurs, so trifling, or so common, it may be, that you do not remember it, which is calculated to wound, or irritate, or disturb your feelings. Now then, as each day brings with it its own peculiar trials, it is unwise to increase them by anticipating others which are future. Every day has enough of its own, as many as we shall be like to bear, either with patience or profit.

Another reason why this excessive anxiety should not be indulged is, that it prevents us from profiting, either by the afflictions which we suffer, or those which we anticipate. The design of every afflictive dispensation is to do us good, to impress us more deeply with a sense of our dependence, and to advance our preparation for heaven. But in order to the accomplishment of this benevolent purpose, it is necessary that