Study Reformed

29.1. Of the Lord’s Supper

Our Lord Jesus, in the night wherein He was betrayed, instituted the sacrament of His body and blood, called the Lord’s Supper, to be observed in His Church, unto the end of the world, for the perpetual remembrance of the sacrifice of Himself in His death; the sealing all benefits thereof unto true believers, their spiritual nourishment and growth in Him, their further engagement in and to all duties which they owe unto Him; and to be a bond and pledge of their communion with Him, and with each other, as members of His mystical body.

Proof texts

1 Cor. 11:23, 24, 25, 26 — [23] For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, [24] and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” [25] In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” [26] For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
1 Cor. 10:16, 17, 21 — [16] The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? [17] Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. [21] You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.
1 Cor. 12:13 — [13] For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body — Jews or Greeks, slaves or free — and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

For discussion

The Assembly cited 1 Cor. 11:23, 24, 25, 26 in support of this answer. Read it in context — how does it bear on what is claimed here?
3 passages are cited here. Which does the most work, and is anything claimed that the proofs do not obviously carry?
WSC Q96 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?
WLC Q168 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?

Read alongside

WSC Q96 · WLC Q168 · WLC Q170 · WLC Q149 · WSC Q88 · BC 8.1 · BC 8.2 · BC 8.3 · HC Q65 · 1689 28.1 · SD 28.1 · IAR 7.1 · SC60 6.1 · SC60 6.2 · SC60 6.3 · SC60 6.4 · SC60 6.5 · SHC 6.1 · SHC 6.2 · IAR 8.1 · SC60 7.1 · SC60 7.2 · SC60 7.3 · SHC 7.1 · SHC 7.2 · SHC 7.3

Leader's notes

A Commentary on the Confession of Faith (A.A. Hodge): This Section teaches us — (a.) Of the time in which, and the person by whom, the Lord's Sapper was instituted. (6.) Of its perpetual obligation, (c.) Of its design and effect. 1st. Of the fact that it was instituted by our Lord in person on the night in which he was betrayed there can be no doubt. The fact is explicitly declared by three of the evangelists (Matt. xxvi. 26, 29; Mark xiv. 22-25; Luke xxii. 19, 20) and by Paul (1 Cor. xi. 23, 25), and it remains to this day a monument of the truth of the gospel history with which it is associated. 2d. That it was designed to be observed perpetually to the end of…

An Exposition of the Confession of Faith (Robert Shaw): In these sections certain dangerous errors and superstitious practices of the Church of Home are condemned ; and we have placed all these sections together, that we may include the leading error, called transubstantiation, which has given rise to the absurd doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass, and the various other tenets and practices here rejected. I. The Church of Rome holds that the words, " This is my body," and, " This is my blood," are to be understood in their most literal sense; and that the priest, by pronouncing these words, with a good intention, changes the substance of the bread and wine into the real body and blood of Jesus Christ; which change is known by…

29.2. Of the Lord’s Supper

In this sacrament, Christ is not offered up to His Father; nor any real sacrifice made at all for remission of sins of the quick or dead; but only a commemoration of that one offering up of Himself, by Himself, upon the cross, once for all: and a spiritual oblation of all possible praise unto God for the same: so that the Popish sacrifice of the mass (as they call it) is most abominably injurious to Christ’s one, only sacrifice, the alone propitiation for all the sins of His elect.

Proof texts

Heb. 9:22, 25, 26, 28 — [22] Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. [25] Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, [26] for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. [28] so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
1 Cor. 11:24, 25, 26 — [24] and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” [25] In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” [26] For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
Matt. 26:26, 27 — [26] Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” [27] And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you,
Heb. 7:23, 24, 27 — [23] The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office, [24] but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. [27] He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.
Heb. 10:11, 12, 14, 18 — [11] And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. [12] But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, [14] For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. [18] Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.

For discussion

The Assembly cited Heb. 9:22, 25, 26, 28 in support of this answer. Read it in context — how does it bear on what is claimed here?
5 passages are cited here. Which does the most work, and is anything claimed that the proofs do not obviously carry?
WSC Q96 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?
WLC Q168 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?

Read alongside

WSC Q96 · WLC Q168 · WLC Q169 · WLC Q149 · WSC Q88 · BC 8.1 · BC 8.2 · BC 8.3 · HC Q65 · 1689 28.1 · SD 28.1 · IAR 7.1 · SC60 6.1 · SC60 6.2 · SC60 6.3 · SC60 6.4 · SC60 6.5 · SHC 6.1 · SHC 6.2 · IAR 8.1 · SC60 7.1 · SC60 7.2 · SC60 7.3 · SHC 7.1 · SHC 7.2 · SHC 7.3

Leader's notes

A Commentary on the Confession of Faith (A.A. Hodge): These Sections teach the Reformed doctrine as to the relation which in the Lord's Supper subsists between the sign and the grace signified — that is, as to the nature of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, and the sense in which, consequently, the worthy recipient is said to feed upon the body and blood of the Lord. This Reformed doctrine may be stated as follows : 1st. The bread and wine — always remaining mere bread and wine, without change — represent, by the divine appointment, the flesh and blood of the Redeemer offered as a sacrifice for sin. The relation between the bread and wine and the body and blood is purely moral or representative. 2d. The…

An Exposition of the Confession of Faith (Robert Shaw): In these sections certain dangerous errors and superstitious practices of the Church of Home are condemned ; and we have placed all these sections together, that we may include the leading error, called transubstantiation, which has given rise to the absurd doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass, and the various other tenets and practices here rejected. I. The Church of Rome holds that the words, " This is my body," and, " This is my blood," are to be understood in their most literal sense; and that the priest, by pronouncing these words, with a good intention, changes the substance of the bread and wine into the real body and blood of Jesus Christ; which change is known by…

29.3. Of the Lord’s Supper

The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed His ministers to declare His word of institution to the people; to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine, and thereby to set them apart from a common to a holy use; and to take and break the bread, to take the cup, and (they communicating also themselves) to give both to the communicants; but to none who are not then present in the congregation.

Proof texts

Matt. 26:26, 27, 28 & Mark 14:22, 23, 24 and Luke 22:19, 20 with 1 Cor. 11:23, 24, 25, 26
Acts. 20:7 — [7] On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight.
1 Cor. 11:20 — [20] When you come together, it is not the Lord's supper that you eat.

For discussion

The Assembly cited Matt. 26:26, 27, 28 & Mark 14:22, 23, 24 and Luke 22:19, 20 with 1 Cor. 11:23, 24, 25, 26 in support of this answer. Read it in context — how does it bear on what is claimed here?
3 passages are cited here. Which does the most work, and is anything claimed that the proofs do not obviously carry?
WSC Q96 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?
WSC Q97 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?

Read alongside

WSC Q96 · WSC Q97 · WLC Q169 · WLC Q170 · WLC Q149 · WSC Q88 · BC 8.1 · BC 8.2 · BC 8.3 · HC Q65 · 1689 28.1 · SD 28.1 · IAR 7.1 · SC60 6.1 · SC60 6.2 · SC60 6.3 · SC60 6.4 · SC60 6.5 · SHC 6.1 · SHC 6.2 · IAR 8.1 · SC60 7.1 · SC60 7.2 · SC60 7.3 · SHC 7.1 · SHC 7.2 · SHC 7.3

Leader's notes

A Commentary on the Confession of Faith (A.A. Hodge): These Sections teach the Reformed doctrine as to the relation which in the Lord's Supper subsists between the sign and the grace signified — that is, as to the nature of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, and the sense in which, consequently, the worthy recipient is said to feed upon the body and blood of the Lord. This Reformed doctrine may be stated as follows : 1st. The bread and wine — always remaining mere bread and wine, without change — represent, by the divine appointment, the flesh and blood of the Redeemer offered as a sacrifice for sin. The relation between the bread and wine and the body and blood is purely moral or representative. 2d. The…

An Exposition of the Confession of Faith (Robert Shaw): In these sections certain dangerous errors and superstitious practices of the Church of Home are condemned ; and we have placed all these sections together, that we may include the leading error, called transubstantiation, which has given rise to the absurd doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass, and the various other tenets and practices here rejected. I. The Church of Rome holds that the words, " This is my body," and, " This is my blood," are to be understood in their most literal sense; and that the priest, by pronouncing these words, with a good intention, changes the substance of the bread and wine into the real body and blood of Jesus Christ; which change is known by…

29.4. Of the Lord’s Supper

Private masses, or receiving this sacrament by a priest or any other alone; as likewise, the denial of the cup to the people, worshipping the elements, the lifting them up or carrying them about for adoration, and the reserving them for any pretended religious use; are all contrary to the nature of this sacrament, and to the institution of Christ.

Proof texts

1 Cor. 10:16 — [16] The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?
Mark 14:23 — [23] And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it.
1 Cor. 11:25, 26, 27, 28, 29 — [25] In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” [26] For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. [27] Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. [28] Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. [29] For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.
Matt. 15:9 — [9] in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’”

For discussion

The Assembly cited 1 Cor. 10:16 in support of this answer. Read it in context — how does it bear on what is claimed here?
4 passages are cited here. Which does the most work, and is anything claimed that the proofs do not obviously carry?
WSC Q97 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?
WLC Q170 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?

Read alongside

WSC Q97 · WLC Q170 · WLC Q149 · WSC Q88 · BC 8.1 · BC 8.2 · BC 8.3 · HC Q65 · 1689 28.1 · SD 28.1 · IAR 7.1 · SC60 6.1 · SC60 6.2 · SC60 6.3 · SC60 6.4 · SC60 6.5 · SHC 6.1 · SHC 6.2 · IAR 8.1 · SC60 7.1 · SC60 7.2 · SC60 7.3 · SHC 7.1 · SHC 7.2 · SHC 7.3

Leader's notes

A Commentary on the Confession of Faith (A.A. Hodge): These Sections teach the Reformed doctrine as to the relation which in the Lord's Supper subsists between the sign and the grace signified — that is, as to the nature of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, and the sense in which, consequently, the worthy recipient is said to feed upon the body and blood of the Lord. This Reformed doctrine may be stated as follows : 1st. The bread and wine — always remaining mere bread and wine, without change — represent, by the divine appointment, the flesh and blood of the Redeemer offered as a sacrifice for sin. The relation between the bread and wine and the body and blood is purely moral or representative. 2d. The…

An Exposition of the Confession of Faith (Robert Shaw): In these sections certain dangerous errors and superstitious practices of the Church of Home are condemned ; and we have placed all these sections together, that we may include the leading error, called transubstantiation, which has given rise to the absurd doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass, and the various other tenets and practices here rejected. I. The Church of Rome holds that the words, " This is my body," and, " This is my blood," are to be understood in their most literal sense; and that the priest, by pronouncing these words, with a good intention, changes the substance of the bread and wine into the real body and blood of Jesus Christ; which change is known by…

29.5. Of the Lord’s Supper

The outward elements in this sacrament, duly set apart to the uses ordained by Christ, have such relation to Him crucified, as that, truly, yet sacramentally only, they are sometimes called by the name of the things they represent, to wit, the body and blood of Christ; albeit in substance and nature they still remain truly and only bread and wine, as they were before.

Proof texts

Matt. 26:26, 27, 28 — [26] Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” [27] And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, [28] for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
1 Cor. 11:26, 27, 28 — [26] For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. [27] Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. [28] Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
Matt. 26:29 — [29] I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.”

For discussion

The Assembly cited Matt. 26:26, 27, 28 in support of this answer. Read it in context — how does it bear on what is claimed here?
3 passages are cited here. Which does the most work, and is anything claimed that the proofs do not obviously carry?
WSC Q97 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?
WLC Q171 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?

Read alongside

WSC Q97 · WLC Q171 · WLC Q149 · WSC Q88 · BC 8.1 · BC 8.2 · BC 8.3 · HC Q65 · 1689 28.1 · SD 28.1 · IAR 7.1 · SC60 6.1 · SC60 6.2 · SC60 6.3 · SC60 6.4 · SC60 6.5 · SHC 6.1 · SHC 6.2 · IAR 8.1 · SC60 7.1 · SC60 7.2 · SC60 7.3 · SHC 7.1 · SHC 7.2 · SHC 7.3

Leader's notes

A Commentary on the Confession of Faith (A.A. Hodge): These Sections teach the Reformed doctrine as to the relation which in the Lord's Supper subsists between the sign and the grace signified — that is, as to the nature of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, and the sense in which, consequently, the worthy recipient is said to feed upon the body and blood of the Lord. This Reformed doctrine may be stated as follows : 1st. The bread and wine — always remaining mere bread and wine, without change — represent, by the divine appointment, the flesh and blood of the Redeemer offered as a sacrifice for sin. The relation between the bread and wine and the body and blood is purely moral or representative. 2d. The…

An Exposition of the Confession of Faith (Robert Shaw): In these sections certain dangerous errors and superstitious practices of the Church of Home are condemned ; and we have placed all these sections together, that we may include the leading error, called transubstantiation, which has given rise to the absurd doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass, and the various other tenets and practices here rejected. I. The Church of Rome holds that the words, " This is my body," and, " This is my blood," are to be understood in their most literal sense; and that the priest, by pronouncing these words, with a good intention, changes the substance of the bread and wine into the real body and blood of Jesus Christ; which change is known by…

29.6. Of the Lord’s Supper

That doctrine which maintains a change of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of Christ’s body and blood (commonly called transubstantiation) by consecration of a priest, or by any other way, is repugnant, not to Scripture alone, but even to common sense and reason; overthroweth the nature of the sacrament, and hath been, and is the cause of manifold superstitions; yea, of gross idolatries.

Proof texts

Acts 3:21 with 1 Cor. 11:24, 25, 26
Luke 24:6, 39 — [6] He is not here, but has risen. Remember how he told you, while he was still in Galilee, [39] See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.”

For discussion

The Assembly cited Acts 3:21 with 1 Cor. 11:24, 25, 26 in support of this answer. Read it in context — how does it bear on what is claimed here?
2 passages are cited here. Which does the most work, and is anything claimed that the proofs do not obviously carry?
WSC Q97 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?
WLC Q172 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?

Read alongside

WSC Q97 · WLC Q172 · WLC Q173 · WLC Q174 · WLC Q149 · WSC Q88 · BC 8.1 · BC 8.2 · BC 8.3 · HC Q65 · 1689 28.1 · SD 28.1 · IAR 7.1 · SC60 6.1 · SC60 6.2 · SC60 6.3 · SC60 6.4 · SC60 6.5 · SHC 6.1 · SHC 6.2 · IAR 8.1 · SC60 7.1 · SC60 7.2 · SC60 7.3 · SHC 7.1 · SHC 7.2 · SHC 7.3

Leader's notes

A Commentary on the Confession of Faith (A.A. Hodge): These Sections teach the Reformed doctrine as to the relation which in the Lord's Supper subsists between the sign and the grace signified — that is, as to the nature of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, and the sense in which, consequently, the worthy recipient is said to feed upon the body and blood of the Lord. This Reformed doctrine may be stated as follows : 1st. The bread and wine — always remaining mere bread and wine, without change — represent, by the divine appointment, the flesh and blood of the Redeemer offered as a sacrifice for sin. The relation between the bread and wine and the body and blood is purely moral or representative. 2d. The…

An Exposition of the Confession of Faith (Robert Shaw): In these sections certain dangerous errors and superstitious practices of the Church of Home are condemned ; and we have placed all these sections together, that we may include the leading error, called transubstantiation, which has given rise to the absurd doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass, and the various other tenets and practices here rejected. I. The Church of Rome holds that the words, " This is my body," and, " This is my blood," are to be understood in their most literal sense; and that the priest, by pronouncing these words, with a good intention, changes the substance of the bread and wine into the real body and blood of Jesus Christ; which change is known by…

29.7. Of the Lord’s Supper

Worthy receivers outwardly partaking of the visible elements in this sacrament, do then also, inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually, receive and feed upon Christ crucified, and all benefits of His death: the body and blood of Christ being then, not corporally or carnally, in, with, or under the bread and wine; yet, as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.

Proof texts

1 Cor. 11:28 — [28] Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
1 Cor. 10:16 — [16] The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?

For discussion

The Assembly cited 1 Cor. 11:28 in support of this answer. Read it in context — how does it bear on what is claimed here?
2 passages are cited here. Which does the most work, and is anything claimed that the proofs do not obviously carry?
WSC Q96 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?
WSC Q97 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?

Read alongside

WSC Q96 · WSC Q97 · WLC Q174 · WLC Q175 · WLC Q149 · WSC Q88 · BC 8.1 · BC 8.2 · BC 8.3 · HC Q65 · 1689 28.1 · SD 28.1 · IAR 7.1 · SC60 6.1 · SC60 6.2 · SC60 6.3 · SC60 6.4 · SC60 6.5 · SHC 6.1 · SHC 6.2 · IAR 8.1 · SC60 7.1 · SC60 7.2 · SC60 7.3 · SHC 7.1 · SHC 7.2 · SHC 7.3

Leader's notes

A Commentary on the Confession of Faith (A.A. Hodge): These Sections teach the Reformed doctrine as to the relation which in the Lord's Supper subsists between the sign and the grace signified — that is, as to the nature of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, and the sense in which, consequently, the worthy recipient is said to feed upon the body and blood of the Lord. This Reformed doctrine may be stated as follows : 1st. The bread and wine — always remaining mere bread and wine, without change — represent, by the divine appointment, the flesh and blood of the Redeemer offered as a sacrifice for sin. The relation between the bread and wine and the body and blood is purely moral or representative. 2d. The…

An Exposition of the Confession of Faith (Robert Shaw): In the preceding sections we have a strong condemnation of the Popish doctrine respecting the sacrament of the Lord's supper, and hei'e we have an explicit condemnation of the Lutheran doctrine. The Lutherans hold, that although the bread and wine are not changed into the body and blood of Christ, yet that his real body and blood are received by the communicants along with the symbols. This is called consubstantiation, to signify that the substance of the body and blood of Christ is present in, with, or under the substance of the elements. " This opinion, although free from some of the absurdities of transubstantiation, appears to us to labour under so many palpable difficulties, that we are disposed to…

29.8. Of the Lord’s Supper

Although ignorant and wicked men receive the outward elements in this sacrament: yet they receive not the thing signified thereby, but by their unworthy coming thereunto are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord to their own damnation. Wherefore, all ignorant and ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy communion with Him, so are they unworthy of the Lord’s table; and cannot, without great sin against Christ while they remain such, partake of these holy mysteries, or be admitted thereunto.

Proof texts

1 Cor. 11:27, 28, 29 — [27] Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. [28] Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. [29] For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.
2 Cor. 6:14, 15, 16 — [14] Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? [15] What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? [16] What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, “I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
1 Cor. 5:6, 7, 13 — [6] Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? [7] Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. [13] God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
2 Thess. 3:6, 14, 15 — [6] Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. [14] If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. [15] Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.
Matt. 7:6 — [6] “Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.

For discussion

The Assembly cited 1 Cor. 11:27, 28, 29 in support of this answer. Read it in context — how does it bear on what is claimed here?
5 passages are cited here. Which does the most work, and is anything claimed that the proofs do not obviously carry?
WSC Q97 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?
WLC Q175 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?

Read alongside

WSC Q97 · WLC Q175 · WLC Q177 · WLC Q149 · WSC Q88 · BC 8.1 · BC 8.2 · BC 8.3 · HC Q65 · 1689 28.1 · SD 28.1 · IAR 7.1 · SC60 6.1 · SC60 6.2 · SC60 6.3 · SC60 6.4 · SC60 6.5 · SHC 6.1 · SHC 6.2 · IAR 8.1 · SC60 7.1 · SC60 7.2 · SC60 7.3 · SHC 7.1 · SHC 7.2 · SHC 7.3

Leader's notes

A Commentary on the Confession of Faith (A.A. Hodge): These Sections teach the Reformed doctrine as to the relation which in the Lord's Supper subsists between the sign and the grace signified — that is, as to the nature of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, and the sense in which, consequently, the worthy recipient is said to feed upon the body and blood of the Lord. This Reformed doctrine may be stated as follows : 1st. The bread and wine — always remaining mere bread and wine, without change — represent, by the divine appointment, the flesh and blood of the Redeemer offered as a sacrifice for sin. The relation between the bread and wine and the body and blood is purely moral or representative. 2d. The…

An Exposition of the Confession of Faith (Robert Shaw): In the preceding sections we have a strong condemnation of the Popish doctrine respecting the sacrament of the Lord's supper, and hei'e we have an explicit condemnation of the Lutheran doctrine. The Lutherans hold, that although the bread and wine are not changed into the body and blood of Christ, yet that his real body and blood are received by the communicants along with the symbols. This is called consubstantiation, to signify that the substance of the body and blood of Christ is present in, with, or under the substance of the elements. " This opinion, although free from some of the absurdities of transubstantiation, appears to us to labour under so many palpable difficulties, that we are disposed to…