CHAPTER V. THE TESTIMONIES OF THE ANCIENTS TO THE PRIMITIVE AND TRUE EXPOSITION OF CHRIST'S DISCOURSE AT CAPERNAUM. p. 108. To avoid the charge of Innovation, which might possibly be preferred by the Romanists, the testimonies of the Ancients, as to the true exposition of Christ's Discourse, shall now be adduced. p. 108. I. Tertullian. p. 108. II. Cyprian. p. 110. III. Clement of Alexandria. p. 112. IV. The Author of the Treatise on the Lord's Supper. p. 114. V. Origen. p. 122. VI. Athanasius. p. 122. VII. Cyril of Jerusalem. p. 124. VIII. Jerome. p. 125. IX. Augustine. p. 127. X. Bertram of Corbey. p. 149. XI. Rabanus Mourus. p. 160. CHAPTER VI. THE BEARING OF CHRIST'S DISCOURSE AT CAPERNAUM UPON THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. p. 171. The bearing of our Lord's Discourse at Capernaum upon the Doctrine of Transubstantiation may now, with some advantage, be brought to a point: inasmuch as the same principle of connected interpretation runs through all the passages: which have been exhibited from the Ancients. p. 171. I. The Eating of the Bread from heaven, and the Eating of the Flesh and Drinking the Blood of the Lord, they declare to be allied phrases, equally importing a Devout Belief on Christ in his special capacity of the Redeemer. p. 172. II. Respecting any division of the Discourse into two distinct and mutually independent sections, they seem, from their silence, to be altogether ignorant. p. 172. III. They connect the peculiar Phraseology of the Discourse with the peculiar Phraseology employed at the Institution of the Eucharist. p. 173. IV. They perpetually adduce St. Paul's expression, The Rock was Christ, as parallel in rhetorical character and theological import with our Lord's eucharistic declaration, This is my Body and This is my Blood. p. 174. 1. Example from Ratramn. 177. 2. Example from Augustine. p. 178. 3. Example from Elfric. p. 179. V. On the whole, the early interpretation of the Discourse at Capernaum is absolutely fatal to the Doctrine of Transubstantiation. p. 180. CHAPTER VII. THE SUBVERSION OF THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION THE ROMISH DIVINES THEMSELVES. p. 181. BY The modern Romanists, in their management of the Discourse at Capernaum, not only contradict all Antiquity, but likewise act the suicidal part of hermeneutic self-destruction. p. 181. I. Exemplification in the case of Dr. Wiseman. p. 182. II. Dr. Wiseman's probable allegation, that he had foreseen and anticipated the objection, which would naturally be made to the exposition advocated by himself and his 1. An exhibition of Dr. Wiseman's inconsistency. p. 190. 2. Dr. Wiseman's gratuitous and unauthorised division of 3. Dr. Wiseman's prodigious assumptions. p. 197. (1.) Conclusion from an examination of his system. (2.) The impossibility of Dr. Wiseman's escape from the conclusion, save by a denial that the Bread from heaven in the alleged second section of the Discourse is the same as the Bread from heaven in the alleged first section of the Discourse. (3.) Dr. Wiseman's suicidal process extends, beyond the Discourse at Capernaum, to the subsequent Institution of the Eucharist. p. 202. 4. Dr. Wiseman's inconsistency in pronouncing his own. CHRIST'S DISCOURSE AT CAPERNAUM. CHAPTER I. CHRIST'S DISCOURSE WITH THE CAPERNAITES AND HIS DISCIPLES, AS RECORDED BY ST. JOHN. ST. JOHN has recorded a very remarkable Discourse of our Lord, partly with the Capernaites in their Synagogue, and partly after the manner of an Epilogue with his Disciples. This Discourse, viewed as referring more or less distinctly, either to the future actual Sacrament of the Eucharist, or to what upon its subsequent institution was made by Christ the Inward Grace of that Sacrament, has often formed the basis of a disputation between those who hold and those who reject the Doctrine of Transubstantiation. With some difficulties it certainly is attended: for, otherwise, there would have been no room for difference of opinion. But these difficulties are B |