or Eating the Flesh and drinking the Blood of the Son of man is, in point of ideality, the same as Coming unto Christ and Believing on Christ. Exactly the same matters are predicated of the latter, as what are predicated of the former. : Without the former, no man can attain to everlasting life and, with it, no man can fail of attaining to everlasting life. Without the latter, the attainment of everlasting life by any man is an impossibility and, with it, the attainment of everlasting life is an infallible certainty. : But it is difficult to conceive, or perhaps I ought rather to say it is absolutely inconceiveable, how things identical of such a description can be predicated of two entirely different matters. Therefore we seem fairly driven to the conclusion: that, in point of ideality, the Eating the Bread from heaven or the Eating the Flesh and Drinking the Blood of the Son of man is the same as the Coming unto Christ or the Believing on Christ. To the present conclusion, accordingly, so far as respects the Eating the Bread from heaven, Commentators, both of the Roman Church and of the Reformed Churches, have been alike conducted. For they consider that earlier part of the Discourse, which some of them would make a distinct section of itself, to treat altogether of Believing on Christ; while they view the latter part of the Discourse, which again is made into a distinct section of itself likewise, as referring proleptically to the Institution of the Eucha rist. But, if Eating the Bread from heaven denotes Believing on Christ: then the Eating of Christ's Flesh, and consequently the Drinking of Christ's Blood, must equally and similarly denote Believing on Christ. For, since our Lord explicitly declares the Bread from heaven to be His Flesh: the Eating of his Flesh must inevitably be a phrase of the very same import as the Eating the Bread from heaven. Hence it follows: that those persons, who, from the force of the context, are driven to interpret the Eating of the Bread figuratively of Believing on Christ, stand absolutely bound, by the very explicitness of our Lord's declaration, similarly to interpret the Eating of the Flesh figuratively of the same Believing on Christ. The one draws the other after it: and, since the Bread and the Flesh are by Christ himself pronounced to be identical; no just law of consistent exposition can ever allow a Commentator to impose respectively two different meanings, upon an Eating of the Bread, and upon an Eating of the Flesh. 2. From what has been said, it will be seen: that, mainly at least, I assent to the interpretation, which makes the Eating of the Bread to denote the Believing on Christ. The broad principle of the interpretation, extending that principle also to the Eating of the Flesh and the Drinking of the Blood, I certainly adopt. But, if we loosely say, that the Eating of the Bread denotes Believing on Christ: I doubt, whether, in such vagueness of phraseology, we propound our interpretation with sufficient explicitness. To bring out the just import of the cognate phrases now before us, we must resort, both to the necessity of the phrases themselves, to the general context of the Discourse, and to the subsidiary language employed at the Institution of the Eucharist. (1.) Now the phrase of Eating the Bread from heaven, Bread which our Lord declares to be Himself, seems to import something much more definite and specific, than a General Belief in his Divine Mission as the great appointed Prophet of God. The notion of Eating a Person, however figurative may be the expression, involves the idea of the Death of that Person. And such an idea is even yet more strongly developed, when the evidently explanatory notion of Eating that same Person's Flesh and Drinking his Blood is subsequently introduced. For, if the Eating a Person, under the imagery of that Person being Bread from heaven, involves the idea of that Person's Death: much more strongly and definitely is the same idea involved, in the Eating his Flesh, and in the Drinking his Blood. Thus the very phrases themselves teach us to restrict the Believing on Christ to a Heart-felt Reliance upon the Efficacy of his Death in order to our Attainment of Everlasting Life. (2.) With this result from the quality of the allied phrases, will be found to agree the general context of the Discourse. He, who is the Bread of God, giveth life unto the world and he came down from heaven to do, not his own will, but the will of him that sent him. Furthermore, the Bread, which giveth life unto the world, is his own Flesh: and this his own Flesh he will give for the life of the world. In such language, there can be no doubt, that our Saviour refers prophetically to his death and passion, which would make a full atonement for the sins of the whole world, and which should infallibly secure the eternal salvation of all whom the Father should hereafter give him or would have formerly given him as true and sincere and vitally practical believers. Again, therefore, we are brought to the same result as before. The Believing on Christ, which forms the subject of the Discourse, is, specifically, an Abiding and influential Reliance upon the complete and exclusive Efficacy of his Death to atone for our sins and thus to reconcile us unto the Father. (3.) The language, employed at the Institution of the Eucharist and evidently borrowed from that which had already been used in the Discourse, still leads us to the very same conclusion. Jesus brake the bread, and poured the wine into the cup: and, when this preparation had been made, he said of the broken bread, This is my body which is given for you; and, of the poured out wine, he said, This is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins*. He added solemnly; Do this in remembrance of me: and the inspired comment of St. Paul upon the whole transaction is; As often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come t. Here, again, we are brought exactly to the same result as before. The subject of the Discourse at Capernaum is, not a Vague General Believing on Christ such as those may have who slight or reject the doctrine of the Atonement, but a Specific and particular and abiding and practically influential Belief in the Saving Efficacy of his Death. 3. Thus, I apprehend, we may now safely lay down the following determination. * Matt. xxvi. 26–28. Mark xiv. 22-24. Luke xxii. 19, 20. St. Paul gives the words of Institution, This is my body which is broken for you. 1 Corinth. xi. 24. Probably our Lord used both expressions. + 1 Corinth. xi. 26. |