Defectus ex parte formæ possunt contingere si aliquid desit ex iis, quæ ad integritatem verborum in ipsa consecratione requiruntur. Verba autem consecrationis, quæ sunt forma hujus sacramenti sunt hæc, "Hoc est enim corpus meum ;' et" Hic est enim calix sanguinis mei, novi et æterni testamenti mysterium fidei, qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum." Si quis autem aliquid diminueret, vel immutaret de forma consecrationis corporis et sanguinis, et in ipsa verborum immutatione verba idem non significarent, non conficaret sacramentum. Si vero aliquid adderit, quod significationem non mutavit, conficeret quidem sed gravissime peccaret.

T.-Defects in respect of "form" can arise, if any of those words are wanting which are required for the completion of the words which make the consecration. The words which constitute "the form" of this sacrament are as follow-" For this is my body," and "For this is the chalice of my blood of the New and Eternal Testament which shall be shed for you and for many, for the remission of sins." But if any person shall diminish or change any thing of the "form" of consecration of the body and of the blood, and if in this change of the words, the words substituted do not signify the same, the sacrament is not perfected. But if any person adds any thing which does not change the signification or meaning, he perfects the sacrament, but at the same time he is guilty of very great sin.*

Now, remember the words of consecration are repeated in a very low voice; you have, therefore, as you cannot hear them, no possible means of knowing whether they are correctly repeated or not, or whether the priest is guilty of such omissions or additions in the words as to vitiate the transubstantiation. Thus you perceive here again you are left in doubt; you worship, for aught

* We cannot refrain from expressing our regret here that your church has not been upon all occasions equally careful to follow the exact words of Holy Scripture. In the preceding note, "upon the rubric which directs what is to be done in case of the consecrated host being carried off," we have alluded to two remarkable instances of wilful change.

you know to the contrary, upon your own grounds, wafer or a piece of bread composed of flour and water, and common wine, and this your church imperatively commands you to do, though she tells you at the same time that you never can be certain as to the real nature of what she compels you to adore; and you blindly submit to this tyranny, though, if you exercised your reason and your judgment, you would, from this very circumstance, derive sufficient cause to throw off her yoke altogether. There are some other rubrics on this subject of "form," but sufficient extracts have been brought before you; we now proceed to consider another species of Defects.

De defectibus ministri.

Concerning the defects of the officiating priest.

Defectus ex parte ministri, possunt contingere quoad ea quæ in ipso requiruntur. Hæc autem sunt-In primis intentio; deinde dispositio anima; dispositio corporis, dispositio vestis mentorum, dispositio in ministerio ipso, quoad ea, quæ in ipso possunt occurrere.

T.-Defects on the part of the officiating priest or minister may happen with respect to those things which are required in himself personally. These are, in the first place, intention; 2dly, disposition of mind; 3dly, disposition of body; 4thly, disposition of vestments; 5thly, disposition in the ministration itself as to those things which can occur during its performance.

De defectu Intentionis.

Of the defect of Intention.

Si quis non intendit conficere sed delusorie aliquid agere. Item si aliquæ Hostiæ ex oblivione remaneant in altari vel aliqua pars vini, vel aliqua Hostia lateat, cum non intendat consecrari nisi quas vidit. Item si quis habeat coram se undecim Hostias et intendat consecrare solum decem non determinans quas decem intendit in his casibus non consecrat quia requiratur intentio.

T.-1. If any priest does not intend or design to

complete the sacrament, or to transubstantiate. 2. In like manner, if any hosts from forgetfulness remain upon the altar. 3. If any part of the wine or any hosts lie concealed, where he only intends to consecrate those he sees. 4. Likewise, if the priest has before him eleven hosts, and intends to consecrate only ten, not determining which ten, in these cases he does not consecrate, that is, no transubstantiation takes place, because his intention is wanting.

Here you have evidence how entirely dependent you are upon the will of your priest. They need never give you what they teach you is the body and blood of our Lord, and thus a parish priest who wished to punish you, can, during the entire time of his ministration, deceive you by causing you to worship the untransubstantiated wafers and wine. We could enlarge upon the consequences of this most monstrous and absurd doctrine; in fact, such would unsettle the whole of Christianity, because intention is taught by your church, not only to be necessary in the sacrament of the Eucharist, but in all your other six-baptism, holy orders, and the others, none of which, upon this principle, can you be sure of being rightly administered. If this doctrine be true, our Lord has suffered in vain, for he has left his people to the will and intention of his erring servants, some of whom, as is asserted in the above-quoted rubric, may wish to deceive. And it is quite clear, if a priest does not believe in the doctrine of transubstantiation, which many of them, who have left the Roman Church, give convincing proofs that they do not, this change cannot take place, and you become guilty of the most degrading idolatry. It is vain you say, the fault is the priest's not ours that your intention is sincere. Where is your authority for worshipping the host at all! Scripture does not teach you to do so; the practice of the ancient churches is against you, and if you by modern inventions, and the introduction of "will-worship," voluntarily entangle yourselves in falsehood and error, you have only to abide by the consequences.

Can any thing be more absurd than what is said about

the ten hosts; of one of them, or of some of the wine, lying concealed, and thus not being changed into the body and blood of our Lord? Surely all these consequences would be avoided by retaining the primitive practice of having a loaf, and from that loaf, consecrated by prayer to God, breaking off pieces and giving them to the faithful.

Si sacerdos putans se tenere unam Hostiam, post consecrationem invenerit fuisse duas simul junctas, in sumptione sumat simul utramque.

T.—If the priest, supposing that he holds one host, after consecration finds that there are two joined together, let him take and eat them both at the proper time together.

Here is another instance of the confusion produced by this antiscriptural and irrational doctrine. Does the priest eat two bodies or one body? or if there are a number of consecrated hosts heaped together, do they all then become only one body, and as they are separated do the bodies distinctly and separately multiply without a new form of consecration. Surely this rubric must have been ordained before transubstantiation was introduced. The more you examine this doctrine by its consequences, the more unintelligible it becomes. There are several other regulations equally extraordinary upon this subject, but we have not space to mention them all.

De defectibus dispositionis animæ.

Of the defects of the disposition of mind.

Si quis suspensus, excommunicatus, degradatus, irregularis, vel alias canonice impeditus celebret, conficit quidem sacramentum sed gravissime peccat, tam propter communionem, quam indigne sumit, quam propter executionem ordinem, quæ sibi erat interdicta.

T.-If any priest, being suspended, excommunicated, degraded, or irregular, or under any other canonical impediment, celebrates Mass, he perfects the sacrament, but he is guilty of very heinous sin, as well on account of the communion which he outwardly partakes of, as

on that of the exercise of the office of holy orders, which he was forbidden to use.

There are several other rubrics upon the same subject.

How, we inquire in sober seriousness, is it to be supposed for a moment that such a character as that described above, could ever receive power from God to change the wafer and wine into the body and blood of the Lord Jesus, to hold him in his hands, and to treat that body and that blood perhaps with the greatest indignity? We cannot conceive it to be possible. Jesus once suffered humiliation; but that is now over. When he comes upon earth again, it will be with power and majesty, to reward his faithful servants, and to inflict his judgments upon those who rejected his authority, as set forth in the inspired writings of his prophets and apostles. By this doctrine you may perceive that once a priest, always a priest; and that the ministrations of any priest who may have rejected the errors of your church, and joined another creed, are, upon this principle, equally efficacious as those who still remain in subjection to her authority.

De defectibus dispositionis corporis.

Concerning the defects of disposition of body.

Si quis non es jejunus post mediam noctem, etiam post sumptionem solius aquæ, vel alterius potus aut cibi per modum etiam medicinæ, et in quantumcumque parva quantitate, non potest communicare nec celebrare.

If any priest is not fasting from midnight, even after the taking of water only, or of any other drink or food by way of medicine, and let the quantity be ever so small, still he can neither communicate nor celebrate Mass.

Here, again, you are left subject to the negligence or mistake of the priest as to the hour of midnight; and you are told by your infallible church that the priest can neither communicate nor celebrate Mass if the smallest portion of food or drink has been partaken of after that time; notwithstanding, as we before showed, that