CHAP. IV.] TRANSUBSTANTIATION. .239 the original institution or precept. For instance, the time, the place, the posture, the number of' persons joining in the action, or the like, are mere circumstances, about which neither our Saviour nor the apos- des gave us any peculiar rules. 5. Barely showing what this doctrine is, and nam/ng the several propositions which express it, are sufficient to prevent every unbiased person from assenting to it. Can any person believe this doctrine unless education, interest, fear, or blind submission has already made it familiar to him ? There never was any mystery in any religion in the world 8o unintelligible, so unconceivable, so loaded with contra- dictions, and so much both ag?tinst reason and sense, as this is. We w/ll readily grant that there are many honest and sincere persons who believe this doctrine; for it is well known that education, prejudice, and want of consideration have a powerful tendency to pervert the judgment of good men even in the plaineat matters; especially when they are bound by this fatal principle, that they must believe, on of damnation, whatever the church teaches, and that the more di/]icult the thiug is to be believed, the more meritorious is their faith. We do not, therefore, call in question the sincerity of those who profess to hal/eye it; but yet it is fit we should reprove it, and show its fallacy. .Certa/uly there is no doctgine in the world that more deserves to be, or m more capable of being exposed, than the doctrine now under consi- deration. Should we pursue the above propositions to their several consequences, what a multitude of monstrous absurdities and gross contradictions should we find in them ! Passing by many of the gross and blasphemous absurdities connected with th/s doctrine, we will confine ourselves to such as are necessary for the exposure of the pro- t?me ]2resy embraced in transubstantiation. Connected with this doctrine are communion in one kind, sacrifice of the mass, and the adoration of the wafer. On each of these we will treat separately, after we shall have first disposed of transubstantiation. II. We shall first attempt a confutation of the doctrine of. .transub- stantiation by Scr/pture and argument. I. The following are the words of institution as given by St. Mat.. thew: "And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed and brake ?T, and gave XT to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my .body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it: for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins," Matt. xxvi, 26-28. See also Mark xiv, 22; Luke xxii, 19; I Cor. xi, 23. � The principal argument of the Roman Catholics for transubstantia* tion is from the words, T/ds is my body. Hoc eat cor?? roeurn. They say, Doe8 not our Saviour most expressly declare, TAds is my body And/f ever it was needful he should speak plain, and without a ?gure, /t certainly must have Seen when he instituted this Christian sacra- ment. And what can be more plain than what Christ has spoken concerning it ? Every Christian ought to submit his reason to the revelation of Christ, for his reason is infinitely fallible, but Christ con neither deceive nor be deceived. To the word and to the testimony, which is your own Protestant rule. Christ hath said of the bread, ? is my body; and therefore it certainly is, whatever our senses or reason my suggest to the eonmu'y. 1
�
