Blood, as a Sacrifice to God, in his last supper, before he offered up himself upon the Cross.

If either of these prove false, the Sacrifice of the Mass must of necessity likewise be false.

As regards the first point, namely:--"That the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament are changed into the actual Body and Blood of Jesus Christ." We deem this most unscriptural. We do not understand how the same body can be present in more than one place, at the same moment. Christ in his Divine nature is everywhere present; Christ in his human body can only be present in one place. We cannot believe that a Priest can create his Creator; and, therefore, we do not believe, as the Church of Rome further maintains, that Christ exists whole and entire in every particle of the Bread, and in every drop of the Wine. We cannot believe that the Bread and Wine are changed into the Body and Blood-the Bones and Nerves*-the Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. But this we readily believe, that the Church of Rome, having claimed INFALLIBILITY-the attribute of Jehovah-the insulted Majesty of Heaven has suffered her to commit greater errors, and greater

*The Catechism of the Council of Trent, when defining the kind of body with which Christ is present in the Sacrament, uses the terms, BONES AND NERVES-"velut ossa et nervos:" and it is a remarkable fact, that, as this sounds rather harsh in our ears at the present day, the Rev. Mr. Donovan, Professor of Rhetoric, at Maynooth College, in his translation of the passage has omitted these words, and therefore given us an unfair translation."

"We believe, says the Rev. Francis Edgeworth, Roman Catholic Missionary at Bristol, that we receive in the Holy Eucharist, the Body and Blood of Christ whole and entire--therefore not excluding "the Bones and Nerves."

Discussion at Downside, near Bath, March 5th, 1834

absurdities than ever were committed by the most unenlightened people on the face of the earth. The Body and Blood, the Soul and Divinity of the Son of God, in every crumb of consecrated bread!! If her statement be true, Christ ate his own body before it had been broken; to say nothing of drinking his own blood before it had been shed.

Is it to be wondered at, then, that we are hard of belief? Is it a matter of surprise that men, who derive their ideas of the eternal God from his own word, are compelled to reject this doctrine? If it be true, to quote the words of one of old, "then men are required to worship a "God that may be stolen, or carried away by the wind"a God that may be lost-a God that may be "gnawed by mice or devoured by beasts-a God that may fall to the ground, but cannot "rise--a God that may be trampled under foot. "We believe assuredly that God would never subject "the glorious Body of His Son to such indignities, "unless some great benefit were thereby to result to "his Church.”

Upon this subject, I must not enlarge, as it will come under the notice of one of my Brethren. If it be proved, and I may boldly say it can and will be proved, that no such change takes place in the bread and wine; then, the whole Sacrifice of the Mass falls to the ground; for no one will maintain that there can be any atonement for sin, in offering to God the mere elements of bread and wine. Neither will any one maintain that portions of bread and wine offered to God, can accomplish for men's souls that which Christ's death on the cross could not accomplish. So that the whole value of the

Sacrifice of the Mass depends upon Christ being bodily present in the bread and wine: if he be not bodily present, it is no sacrifice; and if it be not a sacrifice, then the deceived Roman Catholic is not only deprived of that in which he trusted for his soul's benefit, but he is also loaded with the guilt of Idolatry. He has been commanded by his Church. to exhibit to this Sacrament, the worship which is due to the true God. He has obeyed his Church, and worshipped the Host, which worship, if God the Son be not bodily present, is, in simple language, GROSS IDOLATRY.

It is no sufficient palliation of this idolatry to say, that the intention is to worship the Creator and not the creature; for so, as Tillotson justly observes, "the Persians might be excused from idolatry, in "worshipping the Sun, because they intend to worship "God and not the creature; and so, indeed, we may "excuse all the idolatry that ever was in the world, "which is nothing else but a mistake respecting the Deity, and, upon that mistake, a worshipping of "something as God which is not God."

66

We pass by these errors, and proceed to the Second point, namely: That Christ offered up his body and blood, as a Sacrifice to God, in his last supper, before he offered up himself upon the Cross.

To this, we reply:-It surely is not possible that Christ offered up to His Father his own blood before it was shed, and his own body before it was crucified. Surely it is not possible, that when the Saviour sat at the table, he gave his body to his disciples to eat, and his blood to them to drink, and that he then presented these to his Father as a

We

Sacrifice for sin; though he appeared with a body as perfect as ever. If he did then offer himself a Sacrifice for sin, why did he a few days afterwards die on the Cross? If the first Sacrifice were an infinite atonement, why the second? If the second were an infinite atonement, why the first? rejoice in the belief that the atonement, when offered up, was infinite; but we do not see the necessity of two infinite atonements. Nay, rather, we know that God's plan is ever to accomplish the greatest good, at the smallest expenditure of means; there is with Him. no unnecessary exercise of wisdom, no superfluous expenditure of power.

What authority can the Church of Rome produce, to prove to us that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament are transformed into a victim offered up in Sacrifice?

The Confession of Faith on this subject is thus stated in Canon 3, Council of Trent:-"If any one assert that the Sacrifice of the Mass.... is not propitiatory; or, that it is of use only to him who receives it, and that it ought not to be offered for the living and the dead; for sin, punishment, satisfaction, and other necessities, let him be accursed!" So, also, in Pope Pius' Creed:-"1 profess, likewise, that in the Mass there is offered unto God, a true, proper, and propitiatory Sacrifice for the living and the dead; and that in the most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, there is truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Upon a subject of this solemn nature, the Canons and Creeds of the Church of Rome are not sufficient

C

authority. They are, in our estimation, only to be respected in proportion as they are supported by the authority of the written word of God. To find this Scriptural authority we consult the Index to the Douay Bible, the Roman Catholic Version of the Scriptures.

In this Index we read, that the Sacrifice of the Mass is prefigured in Gen. xiv. 18. Our enquiry is, what saith the Scripture? "But Melchisedech, the king of Salem, bringing forth bread and wine, for he was the Priest of the most High God, blessed him, and said, blessed be Abram by the most High God, who created heaven and earth: and blessed be the most High God by whose protection the enemies are in thy hands." We cannot discover "the prefiguring of the Mass" in these verses. We find Abram returning from the slaughter of his enemies, and Melchizedech, in accordance with the hospitable spirit of Patriarchal times, offers bread to nourish and wine to cheer the weary warrior; and, as a Priest, he blesses him. But be it granted that Melchizedech did offer a sacrifice, what was it that he offered? Bread and wine. He offered real and substantial bread and wine; and the Church of Rome does not offer them. He did not offer the body of Christ, and the Church of Rome maintains that her priest does offer it. In what respect does the offering made by Melchizedech resemble the Sacrifice of the Mass? What he did, Romanists do not; what Romanists do, Melchizedech did not.

We again turn to the Table of References, for a more satisfactory text, and there we read that the Mass is foretold in Malachi, i. 10, 11. What saith