Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1888-03-12
The FIVE L0AVES.
THE FOURTH LENTBN DISCOURSE By RI.
REV. BISHOP KAHN.
An Intimate Connection Between the Feeding Of the
Five Thousand and the Doctrine Of the
holy Eucharist

be read yesterday, the fourth Sunday IN
Lent, is found in John VI, 1-15. 1t
records the miracle Of the multiplication
of the five loaves of bread, with which the
Savior fed unto safety over five thousand
persons. Commenting on this ~extraordi-
nary prodigy, in the exordium OF his
fourth Lenten discourse, Bishop Kahn
stated that, in this miracle, there was no
new creation, but only such q change in
the natural qualities of bread as to make q
few loaves satisfy the hunger of more than
five thousand persons. Between this mar
vellous prodigy and the first public an
nouncement by the Saviour of the doc
trine of the Holy Eucharist, a connection
most intimate and purpOsely established
is marked out by the inspired penman.
For on the day after its Performance, mul-
titudes went in search Of Jesus, be-
cause they had shared in the bene-
fetal effects of this miracle ". 26).
Awaiting himself of the opportunity offer
ed, land none more lifting ever presented
itself in the whole course Of his ministry
Our Lord begins to prepare their minds for
the reception OF that still more wonderful
mystery through which he shall, in all
ages, enable his faithful disciples to feed
upon that bread which imparts the seeds
Of life everlastiDg-His own most sacred
flesh. As this implies unlimited faith in
His power and in His word,
He d~iscourses at considerable length
on the absolute necessity Of
believing in Him. After this preamble,
be announced that doctrine OF his real
presence under the appearance of bread,
| which demands an exercise of that i'm
plicit faith in Him and his word. wv. As
So How is this announcement received
by his hearers? With doubt amounting
to positive disbelief. How can this man
give US his flesh TO eat?' Our ears are
familiar with like objections, but
these objections are not made
By the children Of the Cath
Ole Church. Catholics never presume
to ask the Almighty God, the HOr Of any
of His dealings. His word is all sufficient
evidence Of the truth of any doctrine He is
pleased to reveal. How e~loquently some
of the early Fathers commented on what
they termed that fatal hOW Of the unbe-
lieEing Jews, and this even q thousand
years before the days of the so-called Re-
formers! Jesus is not indeed obliged to
answer this iusOlent query; for His hear
ers have had ample proof Of His divine
character and mission; His word then
should suffice. But in the superstition
that He does deign TO reply, Isl not q hOr-
rible blasphemy to maintain that His re-
ply will only confirm His hearers in the
erroneous impression His words have made
upon them? Evidently they have under
stood Him to assert that He is goipg to
give His own flesh to be eaten. Are they
mistaken? Did He mean merely that He
would constitute bread a figure of His
flesh? II they are mistaken, it
is His own words that have
caused their mistake; and for that reason,
He is bound, il justice as well as out Of
goodness, TO correct this mistake. Does He
DO it? Just the contrary. In the follow
ing six eerses $3.50, He repeats over and
over again His first proposition; He insists
that they must not only eat his flesh, but
drink bis blood; to those before Him then
as well as to the unbelieyers of every age
He says in terms as strong and pointed as
language can supply, my flesh is meat
indeed" not therefore IN figure. Nay
more, He briefly but clearly sum up the
true doctrine as explained to You
Sunday before last, viz that it is His
living flesh He distributes in the Holy
Eucharist. His body, His blood, His soul,
His diyinity-in q word Himself. He
that eateth Me, the same also shall live by
Me-" ". So. The disciples are astonished,
s~candalized. Like unbelievers now, they
declare: This is q bard saying"-tbis is
q harsh doctrine. "Who can hear it?" ".
81. Unpalatable as it sounds to them,
Jesus intimates that the institution He re-
fers TO is to he permanent in his Church; that
even when they have seen that body as
scendiug eloriied into heaven, it will still
be distributed sacramentally on EARTH
though not ia the gross manner their car
nal minds seemed to apprehend. 1t is this
observation-disclosures which in his hearers
and disciples should have long ago been
supplanted by the nobler sentiments in
spired by faith, that He reprOYes In V. 81,
AS Is duiullttu ny AhN OANoA AAOhSoAohh
Commentators, q list of whom may be
seen in WiSeman's Lectures OF the Eucha-
rist pp. l64-166. This much is GER
tain from the statement of the
inspired writer, that Christ's hearers
on this occasion continued TO understand
His words in their literal sense, and be-
cause they would not believe them in that
sense, MANY OF His disciples went back;
and walked no more with Him" ". 81
Will even the Apostle accept this Gs His
teaching? Evidently He gives them their
choice, either to accept that doctrine, or
TO abandon Him entirely. viii you also
away" ". So. Through Simon
Peter they make their profession
faith and CT adhesion to
their Divine Master. They do not
comprehend the hour Of this mystery any
more than the i~ncredulous disciples; but
they rest their faith on the unerriDg word
of Him of whom, through st. Peter, they
say: I'VE have believed and have known
that Thou art the Christ, the Son of God, "
Thou hast the words of eternal life"
wv. 90 and 70). Whose conduct most re-
that OF Peter and the rest Of the
Apostles-the conduct Of Catholics or of
fIOttSldules "uAShg W. luAANdhS buS III
believing disciples described in this most
remarkable chapter?
Replying to the advocates Of q mere
fgurstive presence, the Bishop remarked,
that if the literal sense of Christ's words is
and q tigurative meaning put
upon the words-tO eat Christ's fiesh-we
are forced TO adopt the only fguratiye
sense known TO the Jews. But this would
{ quire us to say that Christ commands
his disciples to calumpiste Him, TO ruin
His reputation; siEce this was the only
6gurative meaning those words bore in
Holy Scripture, or among the oriental
I
But the expression "to drink the blood
Of Jesus Christ" it intended TO be only q !
sgure, was most unfortunately selected,
inasmuch as the Jews were forbidden I'M
Ter the s~eyerest penalties to eat or drink
blood. The Apostles found it nee {
in the Council Of Jerusalem, TO I
,ontinue this probibitiOu. 80 repulsiya to !