Wesley Corpus

3, Contr. Marcion,) “the symbols,” (Euseb. Dem. Evang. l. 1, c. 1, et ult,) “the figure,” (Aug. contr. Adimant., c. 12,) of Christ’s body and blood. Q. 64. What is then that which is seen and tasted in the eucharist? A. The things seen and tasted are the accidents only of bread and wine; there is the savour, colour, and quantity of bread and wine, without any of their substance; but under those accidents there is only the body and blood of Christ. (Catech. Rom., n. 37, 44.) REPLY. Our Saviour appealed to the senses of his disciples: “Handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.” (Luke xxiv. 39.) Take away the certainty of sense, and there is no discerning a body from a spirit; and grant transubstantiation, and we take away the certainty of sense. Q. 65. Is the body and blood of Christ broken when the host is broken and divided ? A. No, because Christ is impassible; (Abridgment of Christ. Doctrine, c. 11, sec. Euchar.;) and, besides, there is whole and entire Christ under either species or element, under the species of bread, and under every particle of it; under the species of wine, and under every drop of it. (Conc. Trid, ibid., c. 3.) REPLY. If every particle of the host is as much the whole body of Christ, as the whole host is before it be divided, then a whole may be divided into wholes; for, divide it and sub divide it, it is still whole. Whole it is before the division, whole it is in the division, and whole it is after it. Thus unreason able, as well as false, is the doctrine of transubstantiation. Q. 66. Do they administer the sacrament in both kinds of bread and wine? A. No; the people are permitted to receive it only in one kind, and are denied the cup. (Trid, Sess. 21, c. 1.) REPLY. It is acknowledged that our Saviour instituted and delivered the sacrament in both kinds; (Concil. Constant., Sess. 13; Trid., Sess. 21, c. 1, 2;) and that it so continued even in the Church of Rome for above one thousand years after. (Consult. Cassandri., art.