mission from the Father'. Now the union of Christ with his heavenly Father is not imaginary, his mission is not figurative. These assurances, therefore, of eternal wisdom-these solemn asseverations made at the moment, when the Jews clearly apprehended his meaning-these repeated and direct confirmations of that meaning, when a mistake might with so much facility be corrected-the comparisons here introduced, all tending to produce the same conviction, unquestionably demonstrate the intention of our Redeemer to give us his body and blood under the sacramental forms.

Other accompanying circumstances no less clearly lead the mind to the same conviction. Many of the disciples, on hearing the same doctrine, declared it to be a hard saying, and asked, who can hear it2? and from that time went back, and walked no more with him3. Those persons were therefore shocked and filled with horror at a proposition so new, so unprecedented, and so apparently revolting to human nature. Now in the supposition that our Redeemer had designed to bestow a spiritual banquet only, to the utter exclusion of his sacred presence,-what could have excited such horror, as to occasion the departure of these disciples? Positively nothing. Their conduct, therefore, coupled with the ac

'St. John, v. 57.

21bid. 60.

3

• Ibid. 66.

companying observation of our Redeemer, places the matter beyond the reach of controversy. For let the reader attend to this most important declaration: When Jesus knew that his disciples murmured at it, he said to them, doth this offend you? What and if you shall see the Son of man ascend where he was before? Here our divine Saviour evidently refers to the institution of a mystery, which was to appear unprecedented, and to excite a greater share of astonishment after his ascension than before that event; and can this be the figurative supper of the Protestant, which presents nothing hard to human nature, nothing impervious to human reason? Is it not directly and unquestionably the Catholic doctrine which Christ here establishes, and which was to exhibit increased difficulties after his ascension, when his sacred body was to be in a glorified state in heaven, whilst it was to be in a sacramental state on millions of altars on earth. It appears then that the objections of the Prɔtestant, and those of the Jew and the Capharnaite to the words of our Redeemer, are precisely the same; but that the belief of the Catholic is conformable to the declaration of the apostles, who admitted a doctrine, however elevated above sense and reason, because it was proposed by him who had the words of eternal life1.

1 St. John, vi. 68.

I am fully aware that it is objected by Protestants, that all the extraordinary assurances of Christ, contained in this chapter, are softened down and explained away by these words', It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak are spirit and truth. But this part of the address of our Redeemer is in perfect unison with his preceding declarations; for according to the known idiom of the sacred oracles, by the flesh we are frequently to understand a gross and carnal apprehension of things; by the spirit, a more refined and spiritual meaning. The Capharnaites supposed, in their gross acceptation of the doctrine, that the body of Christ was to be divided and distributed to his followers like meat in the market; our Redeemer corrects this erroneous impression, and points to a spiritual and sacramental state of existence, in which surely he could place his sacred body, as well as the bodies of his elect, at the general resurrection. When St. Paul says of each of the bodies of the saints, It is sown a natural body-it is raised a spiritual body; does the Protestant suppose that these, bodies will cease to exist because they will become spiritualized? and are the words of our Redeemer, importing a real presence in the holy sacrament, to be questioned, because he is there

St. John, v. 63.

2 1 Cor. xv.

44.

in a spiritual and sacramental form? If he can impart to our natural bodies spiritual qualities, what prevents him from adorning his own with similar endowments, and presenting it to us in the manner which here he so clearly promises? Hence the illustrious and eloquent St. John Chrysostom, writing on this very passage, has these memorable words: "When Christ spoke these words, the flesh profiteth nothing, he said them, not of his flesh-far, very far, otherwise ; but he alluded to those who conceived what he delivered in a carnal sense. What is it to apprehend a thing in a carnal manner?

To look

at the object before you, and to carry your view no farther. This is the method of viewing things carnally. But it is our duty not to confine our view to the external appearance of things, but to see with the eyes of our souls all the mysteries there contained. This is the method of viewing things spiritually. He that eateth not his flesh, and drinketh not his blood, hath not life in him; how, therefore, doth the flesh profit nothing, without which it is impossible to possess life? You see that the words, the flesh profiteth nothing, were not spoken of his flesh, but only of a carnal apprehension of his words1."

The process of this inquiry leads me to the ever memorable words of the institution of this St. Chrysos. Hom. in Joan. ad. cap. vi. Hom. xlvii. p. 750, tom. ii. edit. Savil.

F

adorable sacrament'. It must be acknowledged by every candid inquirer, that if ever the plain and literal meaning of Scriptural expressions is to be adopted, it must be resorted to in the present instance. We have just seen that our Redeemer had made to his disciples, in the presence of the Jews, a clear and decided promise of giving his body and blood; and on this occasion only we find that he carried it into effect, and completely redeemed the pledge which he had given. For at his last supper, as it is recorded by those three evangelists, our Saviour took bread, blessed it, broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, This is my body. He also took the cup, gave thanks, and gave it to his disciples, saying, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for the remission of sins. Unless we understand these words in their plain and obvious meaning, it must be said, that we have not a single passage left in the gospels to prove that our Redeemer fulfilled a promise, so solemnly and so deliberately given, as that contained in the sixth chapter of St. John. We must be, moreover, constrained to give up a principle, adopted with much ostentation by Protestants, that the literal sense is ever to be preferred in interpreting the sacred Scriptures, except it be clearly destroyed by other passages, of which

19,

1 Matt. xxvi. 26, et seq.; Mark xiv. 22, et seq.; Luke xxii. et seq.