The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1888-03-19

ably supposed that, on this occasion
they argued on principle the very re
! verse OF that which the Saviour had beei
at so much pains to implant indellibl.
in their minds? Can We imagine then
reasoning thus: Though our Maste
says, This is my body it cannot b,
true, because to our minds it seems i'm
possible2"
Against this strong presumption il
favor Of the literal meaning having beer
unhesitatingly accepted by the Apostles
Protestants make very weak reply
The Scriptures, they say, often employ
Hgnratiye language; therefore these
words: "This is my body" not only
may, but must be fgurative. It does
not at all follow, that they must, be-
cause they may. Yet that is the iilogi.
cal inference usually drawn by Protest
ant controversialists.
Now whilstitis very true that figures or
tropes abound in Scripture, will any
scholar maintain that they are used
without regard TO the rules governing the
use OF all such language2 In the use Of
well-known figures, there isno difficulty.
But can writer coin figure and use 1t
without first informing his readers what
he means to represent under his new
cOiedn fgure2 OF course not. A stat
ute may receive the name OF him whom
it represents. Everybody understands
that expression; but il man points to
a shapeless block Of marble and calls it
Cicero or Washington, will he be under
stood? But. was bread an already we'll
known figure of Christ's body? Even
the Protestant will answer, no; but
Christ constituted II a figure Of his body
at the Last Supper! Then 1t is new
coined figure: and Christ, to be under
stood, must inform His hearers that, hic
9. name, He Is coming or instituting a
new hgurative expression. But He gives
no such warning.
The Bishop then reviewed large
number OF fgurative expressions
commonly adduced as parellel
or similar to the words Of the
institution, and pointed outin what re-
spect each OF them differed most COM
pletely from the words used by Christ at
his last supper. For instance: "The
rock was Christ" Il Cor. xl. But st.
Paul says 1t was a spiritual rock, and
that these things were done in figure.
"These are the two covenants" (Gal. iv.
24). But st. Paul tells us he is there
speaking allegorically or fguratively.
~ am the door-I am the vine" Christ
himself carefully explains these figures.
Moreover: ~ am the door," does not
mean g represent door" as the words:
'This is my body" neither do the
words, 81 am q vine" mean, 81 am
figure ola vine." Christ does not de-
mean himself into the symbol or figure
OF any national object. Moreover he
does not say, II am this door," II am
that vine;" but he does say, "This is
my body" Therefore the passages are
entirely dissimiiar.
II We may put u Egurative meaning on
the Scripture phrases to adopt them to
our own preconceived views, the Bible
can prove no Christian doctrine. On
that elastic principle, the Unitarian sees
no proof OF Christs divinity in the
words: "And the Word was God" He
will argue, yes, a figure or image Of God,
and he will back up his position by
quoting ! Cor, iv. 4 and Col. /. 15.
Next Sunday afternoon, the Bishop
will conclude this Lenten course by pro-
ducing the testimony of the carly church
in support Of the doctrine OF the real
presence OF Christ's body and blood in
the sacrament of the Eucharist,