tion, the Eucharist was no Eucharist at all, a representation of nothing, or a false representationf; and that the misbelievers themselves were very sensible of, and therefore abstained from it. I may further observe, that Ignatius here supposes not, with the consubstantiators, a natural body of Christ locally present, and a sacramental one besides; but it is all one symbolical body in the Eucharist, supplying the place of the natural, in real effect, and to all saving purposes. The Eucharist, that is, the bread and wine, is (constructionally) the flesh of Jesus, &c. It is not said, that it is with the flesh, or that one is in, with, or under the other so that Mr. Pfaffius had no occasion to triumph. here 8.

That Ignatius admitted of real and beneficial effects will be plain from another passage." Breaking one "bread, which is the medicine of immortality, a preser"vative that we should not die, but should live for ever "in Jesus Christ h." In what sense he understood the thing so to be, will appear more fully when we come to other Fathers, somewhat later in the same century. There is one place more of this apostolical writer worth the reciting. The flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ is but one,

f Chrysostom's reasoning, in like case, is here very apposite, in Matt. Hom, liii. p. 783. εἰ γὰρ μὴ ἀπέθανεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, τίνος σύμβολα τὰ τελούμενα; If Jesus did not really die, what are the eucharisticul elements symbols of? N. B. The argument did not require or suppose a corporal presence: a symbolicat one was sufficient to confute the gainsayers, if Chrysostom had any judgment. Conf. Pseud. Origen. Dialog. contr. Marcion, p. 853.

Pfaffius (p. 263.) appears to triumph over Albertinus, with respect to this passage of Ignatius: but Albertinus had very justly explained it, and defended his explication, with great learning and solid judgment, beyond all reasonable dispute; as every impartial reader will find, who will but be at the pains to look into him, p. 286, &c.

Η Ἕνα ἄρτον κλῶντες, ὅς ἐστι φάρμακον ἀθανασίας, ἀντίδοτος τοῦ μὴ ἀποθανεῖν, ἀλλὰ ζῆν ἐν Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, διὰ παντός. Ignat. ad Ephes. cap. 20. This was no flight, but the standing doctrine of the author, which he expresses without any figure elsewhere. Epist. ad Smyrn. cap. 7. ouvéßspev dè avros àɣatãv, ¡va xaì àvaçãow. It behoves them to celebrate the feast of the Eucharist, (so I understand άyæv, with Cotelerius in loc.) that they may rise to life.

"and the cup one unto the unity of his bloodi." He alluded, probably, to 1 Cor. x. 16. "communion of the "blood of Christ," and so the meaning is, for the uniting us to Christ, first, and then, in and through him, to one another, his one blood being the cement which binds head and members all together.

A. D. 140. Justin Martyr.

Justin, another early Christian teacher and martyr, comes next: I shall cite as much from him as may suffice to clear the point in hand. "This food we call the Eu"charist: which no one is allowed to partake of, but he "that believes our doctrines to be true, and who has been "baptized in the laver of regeneration for remission of “sins, and lives up to what Christ has taught. For we "take not these as common bread and common drink: but "like as Jesus Christ our Saviour, being incarnate by the "Word of God, bore about him both flesh and blood for "our salvation; so are we taught that this food which is "blessed by the prayer of the Word that came from him, "[God] and which is changed into the nourishment of "our flesh and blood, is the flesh and blood of the incar"nate Jesus. For the Apostles in their commentaries, "called the Gospels, have left it upon record, that Jesus 66 so commanded them; for he took bread, and when he "had given thanks, he said, Do this in remembrance of 66 me; this is my body in like manner also he took the "cup, and when he had given thanks, he said, This is my "blood." Upon this passage of Justin, may be observed as follows: 1. That he supposed the elements to be blessed or sanctified by virtue of the prayer of the Word or Logos, first made use of in the institution, and remaining in force to this day, in such a sense as I have explained above,

· Μία γὰρ σὰρξ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χρισοῦ, καὶ ἓν ποτήριον εἰς ἕνωσιν τοῦ αἵμα Tes avrov. Ignat. ad Philad. cap. 4.

* Justin Martyr. Apol. i. p. 96, 97. edit. Lond. See also above, chap. iii. p. 60. where part of the same passage is cited for another purpose.

in the chapter of Consecration. 2. That Justin also supposed the same elements, after consecration, to continue still bread and wine, only not common bread and wine: for while he says, it is not common bread, he supposes it to be bread. 3. That while he supposes the consecrated elements to be changed into our bodily nutriment, he could not have a thought of our Lord's natural body's admitting such a change. 4. That nevertheless he does maintain that such consecrated food is, in some sense or other, the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus; and he quotes the words of the institution to prove it. 5. He supposes no other flesh and blood locally present in the Eucharist, but that very consecrated food which he speaks of; for that is the flesh and blood. Therefore he affords no colour for imagining two bodies, natural and sacramental, as locally present together, in the way of consubstantiation. 6. It remains then, that he could mean nothing else but the representative or symbolical body of Christ, answering to the natural, (once upon the cross, and now in heaven,) as proxies answer to their principals, as authentic copies or exemplifications to their originals, in use, value, and legal effect. For, that Justin cannot be understood of a bare figure, or naked representation, appears from hence, that he supposes a Divine power, the power of the Logos himself (which implies his spiritual presence) to be necessary for making the elements become such symbolical flesh and blood: whereas, if it were only a figure, or representation, men might easily make it themselves by their own power, and would need only the original commission to warrant their doing it. 7. Though Justin (addressing himself to Jews or Pagans) does not speak so plainly of the great Christian privileges or graces conferred in the Eucharist, as Ignatius, writing to Christians, before him did, yet he has tacitly insinuated the same things; as well by mentioning the previous qualifications requisite for it, as also by observing that the [symbolical] flesh and blood of Christ are incorporate with ours: from whence by just inference all the rest follows, as every grace is im

.

plied in such our interpretative union with Christ crucified or glorified. Besides that our author supposed, as I before noted, a real spiritual presence of the Divine nature of our Lord in or with the elements, to make them effectually the body and blood of Christ: and he carries it so high, as to draw a comparison from the presence of the Logos to our Lord's humanity, whereof the Eucharist is a kind of emblem, though in a loose general way, faint and imperfect. Thus much however is common to both: that there is a presence of the Logos with something corporeal; a presence with something considered as his body; and a presence operating in conjunction with that body for the uniting all his true members together under him their head. But that such comparisons help to clear the subject is more than I will say; being sensible that they are far from exact, and may want distinctions to make them bear, or otherwise may be apt to mislead: it is enough, if we can but come at the true and full sense of the authors.

A. D. 176. Irenæus.

Irenæus's doctrine of the Eucharist, so far as concerns. this present chapter, may be understood from the passages here following, together with some explanatory remarks which I mean to add to them.

"How can they say that the flesh goes to corruption, "and never more partakes of life, when it is fed with the "body of our Lord, and with his blood?-As the terres"trial bread upon receiving the invocation of God is no "longer common bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of "two things, terrestrial and celestial; so also our bodies,

upon receiving the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, "having an assurance of a resurrection to all eternity m

See the Doctrinal Use of the Sacraments considered, in a Charge,

p. 25.

m Πῶς τὴν σάρκα λέγουσιν εἰς φθορὰν χωρεῖν, καὶ μὴ μετέχειν τῆς ζωῆς, τὴν ἀπὸ τοῦ σώματος τοῦ κυρίου καὶ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ τρεφομένην ;—ὡς γὰρ ἀπὸ γῆς ἄρτος προσλαμβανόμενος ἔκκλησιν [forte ἐπίκλησιν] τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὐκ ἔτι κοινὸς ἄρτος ἐστὶν, ἀλλ ̓ εὐχαρισία, ἐκ δύο πραγμάτων συνετηκυῖα, ἐπιγείου τε καὶ οὐρανίου· οὕτως

"But if this flesh of ours has no title to salvation, then "neither did our Lord redeem us with his own blood, nor "is the cup of the Eucharist the communion [communica"tion] of his blood, nor the bread which we break the "communion [communication] of his body. For it is not "blood, if it is not of the veins and flesh, and whatever "else makes up the substance of the human frame, such "as the Word was really maden." A little after, the author adds this large explanatory passage, worth the noting. "The creature of the cup he declared to be his own blood, "with which he imbues our blood; and the creature of "bread he affirmed to be his own body, out of which our "bodies grow up. When therefore the mingled cup and "the created bread receive the Word of God, and the Eu"charist becomes Christ's body, and by these the sub"stance of our flesh grows and consists, how can they "say, that the flesh is not capable of the gift of God, (namely, life eternal,) when it is fed with the body and "blood of Christ, and is member of him? To this purpose "speaks St. Paul in his Epistle to the Ephesians, that we "are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones, "Ephes. v. 30.-The flesh is nourished by the cup which "is his blood, and is increased by the bread which is his body. And like as a branch of the vine put into the ground brings forth fruit in its season, and a grain of "wheat falling into the ground and there dissolved, riseth "again with manifest increase, by the Spirit of God that "containeth all things; and those afterwards by Divine "wisdom serve for the use of man, and receiving the "Logos [Word] of God, become the Eucharist, which is

66

καὶ τὰ σώματα ἡμῶν μεταλαμβάνοντα τῆς εὐχαριστίας μηκέτι εἶναι φθαρτά, τὴν ἐλπίδα τῆς εἰς αἰῶνας ἀνατάσεως ἔχοντα. Iren. lib. iv. cap. 18. p. 251. ed. Bened.

n Si autem non salvetur hæc [caro] videlicet nec Dominus sanguine suo redemit nos, neque calix Eucharistiæ communicatio sanguinis ejus est, neque panis quem frangimus, communicatio corporis ejus est, Sanguis enim non est nisi a venis et carnibus, et a reliqua quæ secundum hominem est substantia, qua vere factum est Verbum Dei. Iren, lib. v. cap. 2. p. 293.