The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1901-11-13
Afternoon Session

The afternoon session was called to
order at Las o'clock. Rev. J. F. Gaylord
and Rev. ]. Addison Seibert were re-
ceived as members Of the association
The name of Rev. A. Heustler of Clin-
ton was proposed for membership to be
voted on at the next meeting In Feb
ruary.
The paper of the afternoon was by
Rev. DR.. Alexander Lewis on How
Shall We Extend the Invitation to the
Eucharist?'
He considered first the history of the
sacrament of the Lords Supper, de-
scribing its institution, administration
and symbolism as he understood the
teachings of the Scriptures He took
the ground that the requisites for par
| ticipation in the Lords Supper as de-
| fined in the Scriptures are four-re-
generation. baptism, church member
ship and upright life.
He read a number Of forms of invita-
tions to the Lords Supper used by
prominent clergymen. They differed
widely in phraseology and only one
made definite statement of the neces-
sity of church membership.
DR.. Lewis asked If the openness Of
the Lords Supper might not be a
reason for the growing neglect of this
sacrament. DR.. Lewis gave at the
close a form which he considered de-
sirable, and which embodied his four
requisites.
The discussion which followed was
not very brisk at first. The subject
was one upon which the ministers evil
IDENTIFY did not care to speak on off
hand. DR.. Scott said he used diff
|ferent form from that suggested by DR..
evils. There was a good deal to be
said on the question but he thought he
would not say it. DR. Martin Of Phil
adelphia said he was in the same con-
dition.
Most of the ministers contented them
selves with stating the form Of invi-
tation used by them.
Rev. Inman L.Willcox said he thought
that on such a great question. we
ought to consider what Christ's own
attitude would have been. Christ would
in his opinion, have offered broad
invitation.
Rev. A. w. Hitchcock said he was
glad DR.. Lewis had reached an assur-
ance on the question. He was still on
the fence. He said he was inclined
more and more to liberal Invitation.
Rev. E. w. Phillips said he did not
believe a liberal invitation lessened the
force Of the sacrament. He thought a
more pertinent criticism would be that
the churches are so anxious to get
members into the church that they take
them before the people appreciate the
significance Of the sacrament. He
said that II an unordained man should
take upon himself to administer the
Lords supper, to men, unbaptized and
not church members, he would hardly
feel like criticizing.
Rev. o. c. Bailey preferred very
broad invitation to "all who love the
Lord Jesus Christ"
Rev A. G.. Todd thought there was
tendency to slight the Lords supper.
The opinion of the majority Of the
ministers present seemed to be that
responsibility Of partaking in this sac
rament should be left to the individual
conscience. and that the invitation
should not be prohibitive.
Dr. Lewis in reply said that his
views on the subject had almost dta-
metrically changed during the 10 years
of his ministry. and that IL had been
his experience that had caused the
change. He said that he used to bap-
tie any child presented to him. He
found that in some cases the sacrament
meant nothing TO the parents. Now,
he said. i baptize no children unless
one OF the parents is a church MEM
Der"
He defended the position Of his pa
nor He condemned the custom OF
giving opportunity 10 go out before
communion as heathenish.
Rev. o. c. Bailey asked DR.. Lewis
whether he thought Judas, present at
the Last Supper. Dr.-Lew1s replied
that he did not think Judas was pres
ent.
Rev. Inman L. Wilcox reported from
Andover Theological Seminary to the
graduating exercises OF which he was