256 TItANSU BaTAh'TIITION. [BOO- I[. We should wonder, with Scotus, "?hy such an interpretation should be put upon this one article as makes our faith contemptible to all who are guided by reason." Nor can we abstain from thinking, with Pc- tms Clumacenses, "that it is agains? humanity, against piety, to break with our hands, to ?ear with our teeth, and to devour as we do common meat, the flesh and blood of Christ; or that God and man should be devoured by man--the Master by his disciples, the Lord by his ser- rarite, and Christ by Christians."* (7.) Roman Catholics tell-us that nothing whatever remains of the substance of bread and wine after pronouncing the words of consecra- tion. Therefore whatever may have been mixed with the broad and wine before consecration, provided the mixture does not destroy the bread and wine, or predominate over them, can do no harm to him that receives it. The following anecdote will illustrate what is here meant. It is of no great importance whether it is literally true in its circumstances or not, as it may be properly applied to the doctrine in question. "A Protestant lady entered the matrimonial state with Roman Catholic gentleman, on condition he would never use any at- te. mpto, in his intercourse with her, to induce her to embrace his reli. g?on. Accordingly, after their marriage, he abstained from convening with her on those religious topics which he knew would be disagree- able to her. He employed the Romish priest, however, who often visited the family, to use his influence to instil his popish notions into her mind. But she remained unmoved, particularly on the doctrine of transubstantiation. At length the husband fell ill, and during his affiic. ties was recommended by the priest to receive the holy sacrament The wife was requested to prepare bread and wine for the solemnity by the next day. She did so; and on presenting them to the priest said, ' These, sir, you wish me to understand, will be changed into the real body and blood of Christ after you have consecrated them.' ' Most certainly,' he replied. ' Then, sir,' she rejoined, ' it will not be possi- ble, after the consecration, for them to do any harm to the worthy par- takers; "for," says our Lord, "my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed; and he that eateth me shall live by me." ' Assuredly,' answered the priest, ' they cannot do harm to the worthy receivers, but must communicate grea? good.' The ceremony was proceeded in, and the bread and wine were consecrated; the priest was about to take and eat the bread, but the lady begged pardon for interrupting him, adding, ' I miYed a little arsenic with the bread, sir, but as it is now changed into the real body of Christ, it cannot, of course, do ?/o? any harm.' The principles of the priest, however, were not suflicienfiy firm to enable him to eat it. Confused, ashamed, and irritated, he le2 the house, and never more ventured to enforce on the lady the absurd doctrine of transubstantiation." ' (8.) We shall make a few quotations in this place from standard Roman Catholic authors, which will need no comments of ours to show their complete absurdity, blasphemy, and superstitious character. These things rarely appear in English. They are mostly shut out from the common people by their 'Latin garments. The Roman* Missal says that a consecration is invalid when a In'ie? oigitize by Goodie
�
