« PreviousContinue »
VERSION AUTHORISED BY THE ENGLISH
MAT. XXVI. 26-28.
MAR. XIV. 22-24.
And as they were eating, Je- And as they did eat, Jesus sus took bread and blessed it, took bread, and blessed, and and brake it, and gave it to brake it, and gave to them, the disciples, and said,--Take and said ; Take, eat, TAIS 18 eat; THIS IS MY BODY. And MY BODY. And he took the he took the cup, and gave cup, and, when he had given thanks, and gave it to them thanks, he gave it to them; saying ; Drink ye all of it; and they all drank of it. And
he said unto them, THIS IS NEW TESTAMENT, which is MY BLOOD OF THE NEW TESTAshed for many for the remis- MENT, which is shed for sion of sin.
FOR THIS IS MY BLOOD OF THE
LUKE XXII. 19, 20.
1 COR. XI. 23-25. And he took bread, and gave (Jesus) took bread ; and when thanks, and brake it, and gave he had given thanks, he brake unto them, saying, THIS IS MY it, and said; Take, eat; BODY,
which is given for you ; THIS IS MY BODY, which is this do in remembrance of broken for you; this do in reme. Likewise, also, the cup membrance of me. After the after supper, saying; THIS CUP same manner, also, he took
when he had supped, BLOOD, which is shed for you. saying; THIS CUP IS THE NEW
TESTAMENT IN MY BLOOD; this do ye as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me.
18 THE NEW TESTAMENT IN MY
LECTURE THE FIFTH.
STATEMENT OF THE PROOF OF THE REAL PRESENCE FROM THE
WORDS OF INSTITUTION, MATT. XXVI. 26-29; MARK XIV. 2225; LUKE XXII. 19, 20; 1 Cor. xi. 23-26-STRONG DOGMATICAL GROUND OF THIS ARGUMENT FROM THE DECISION OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT-ONUS PROBANDI THROWN UPON PROTESTANTS, WHO ARE OBLIGED TO DEMONSTRATE TWO THINGS: 1. THAT THESE WORDS MAY BE TAKEN FIGURATIVELY ; 2. TAAT WE ARE OBLIGED SO TO TAKE THEM.-EXAMINATION OF THE FIRST POINT.
We have seen, at some length, the Blessed Eucharist promised in the sixth chapter of St. John; and the terms of this promise demonstrated the Catholic doctrine of the Real Presence; we must now examine the history of its institution, and discover whether the same doctrine be there taught.
You are aware that the history of this institution is given by the three first Evangelists and by St. Paul in his first Epistle to the Corinthians. The differences in their narrations are so slight, that a very few remarks will suffice to note them. From the harmony which I have laid before you, you at once perceive that the two first Evangelists agree
not only in substance, but almost in every word. The only difference consists in St. Mark's insertion of the parenthetic phrase in the 23d verse," and they all drank of it," and in his using a participal form in the narrative. On the other hand, St. Luke and St. Paul agree in a no less remarkable manner, in some slight variations from the other two. First, they both mention the circumstance of the institution being after supper; the reason of which seems to be clearly, to distinguish the sacramental cup from the legal one which Christ divided among his apostles (Luke v. 17), of which he had said he would no more drink. Secondly, both add to the words of consecration of the bread an important clause; St. Luke having " This is my body, (rò imigija, dodójesvov,) which is given for you,” and St. Paul, adding το υπέρ υμών κλώμενον, « which is broken for you." Thirdly, both agree in subjoining a clause commanding the commemorative repetition of the rite. St. Paul alone repeats this clause after both the forms of consecration. Fourthly, they both give the words of institution for the cup in the peculiar form, “ This chalice is the New Testament in my blood.”
It is manifest that these varieties do not effect the substance of the narrative. Two of the writers give additional circumstances, and thus complete the history. But it is no less manifest that the expressions recorded by the two classes, in relating the consecration of the cup, must be considered
quite synonymous; so that “This cup is the New Covenant in my blood," is equivalent to “this is my blood." I will now cite you the words of St. Matthew ; any of these trifling differences which our adversaries may consider opposed to our interpretation, will be examined as objections.
“ And while they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke, and gave to his disciples, and said : Take ye and eat; This is my BODY. And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying : Drink ye all of this; for THIS IS MY BLOOD of the New Testament, which shall be shed for many for the remission of sins.”Matt. xxvi. 26-28.
Before entering on the examination of these important words, I think it right to make a few remarks upon the higher dogmatical ground on which we now stand. I have not the slightest shadow of doubt upon my mind, that the latter portion of the sixth chapter of St. John refers to the Eucharist, and demonstrates the Real Presence; but for the proof drawn from the words of institution, we have a higher authority than any hermeneutical reasoning can supply,--the positive decree of the Council of Trent, which expressly defined that they prove the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the adorable Sacrament.* But regarding the promise in St. John, the holy Synod observed its usual caution, which proves how far
• Sess. xiii. cap. 1.