6 "church, as to a real presence in the sacrament, they "adopted the language also by which this mystery "was expressed; and the phrase of making the body "of Christ,' which occurs so frequently in the liturgies of the primitive church, is found likewise in the writings of the first Irish Christians. Thus A damnan, 66 66 "in speaking of the progress of the faith in the British isles, "implies in itself, that the belief held in those regions respecting "the Eucharist was the very same which he himself enforced in "his writings, and which the Catholic church maintains to the 66 present day." They have erected churches," (says the saint,) "and altars of sacrifice." But it will not be expected that I should here diverge into comments on this note; for, besides that it would lead me into a very extended and unnecessary digression, to prove that, even were it here implied that the eucharist of the British churches "was the very same which he him"self enforced by his writings," it by no means follows that it is that "which the Catholic church maintains to the present day," but very far different—all that is important on the subject will be presented in commenting on your text. I shall, therefore, only observe, that I presume that the passage which you have quoted from St. Chrysostom, is one which we have already noticed. The expressions which he there makes use of are these- uriasńgia xewnyaσiv; which, while it may be properly construed, "and they erected altars of sacrifice," by no means implies any thing of doctrine respecting the Eucharist, such as "the Catholic church maintains to the present day"— nothing of transubstantiation, nothing of immolation-but rather what is intended by the following verses; in Psalm 50, verse 14-"Offer unto God thanksgiving, and pay "thy vows unto the Most High;" or, in Psalm 116, verses 13 and 17-" I will take the cup of salvation-I will "offer to thee the sacrifice of salvation, and call upon the name "of the Lord." Allow me also to remark, that I am much surprised that, when you referred to St. Chrysostom for the character of Christian doctrine in Ireland, you did not at once perceive, that his evidence ought to have settled the question of the introduction of Christianity into this country, and the establishment of churches there, previously to his decease, which took place A.D. 407. "in his life of St. Columba, tells us of that saint 66 ordering the Bishop Cronan, Christi corpus ex "more conficere,' Lib. 1. c. 44. In later Irish "writers numerous passages to the same purport may "be found; but, confining myself to those only of the "earlier period, I shall add but the following strong testimony from Sedulius: 66 "Corpus, sanguis, aqua; tria vitæ munera nostræ : 66 46 Fonte renacentes, membris et sanguine Christi Car. Paschale Lib. iv. Before I enter upon this important subject I must observe, and it should be particularly noted, that it is so intimately connected with a difference of meaning, attached by different individuals to the same terms, that it is quite necessary to inquire what signification was in the mind of those whom we assert to agree with others, before we can be at all certain of that agreement being any thing more than the use of the same terms. Thus the real presence of Christ in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper is holden by most churches; but in one sense by the Roman Catholic, and in another essentially different by the Protestant so that it becomes necessary to inquire what Usher intended to signify, when he used the words sacrifice, mass, host, and others. I must likewise, before entering into the argument, again complain of the vague manner in which you quote your authorities; in a case where your assertions implicating a writer such as Usher, required surely to be supported by a very particular reference, ere they could be at all admitted by the intelligent part of the public. Is it fair that we should be put upon the examination of that learned man's voluminous works, or those eight volumes of St. Chrysostom, in order that we might with safety affirm, that they have no where spoken in the exact manner that you have said; and why have you not presented us with even one of "the liturgies of the Primitive church," or a part of one, by which we might try the truth of the allegation you so confidently advance? Here again I am forced to the proof of a negative; but here also I fear not to allege, that Usher makes, in the spirit of its meaning, no such admission as you attribute to him; that no liturgy of the primitive church in Ireland, within two centuries of St. Patrick's arrival, makes use of the phrase that you have quoted, nor do the writings of its early teachers; and that one, whose authority upon this occasion you must acknowledge to be decisive, takes the same view as the articles of the Church of England of this great question-in fine, that the present Roman Catholic tenets respecting it are adverse, not only to the opinions of Usher, and the early Irish Christians, but to that of the primitive church in general, and the Bible. I presume that the following is the admission of the archbishop to which you allude and let me remark that he is writing of Adamnanus, A.D. 700; and of what took place at the obsequies of Columbanus, A.D. 615; neither of which dates are entirely primitive but I do not press this point-"In Adam"nanus," he says, (Relig. &c. p. 35.) "the sacred "ministerie of the Eucharist and the solemnities of "the Masse are taken for the same thing. So like. "wise, in the relation of the passages that concerne "the obsequies of Columbanus, we finde, that Missam "celebrare et Missam agere, is made to be the same "with divina celebrare mysteria, et salutis hostiam, (or "salutare sacrificium,) immolare-the saying of "Masse, the same with the celebration of the "divine mysteries, and the oblation of the healthful "sacrifice; for by that terme was the administration " of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper at that time "usually designed." Now the important matter for us here to determine is, what meaning Usher affixed to these terms; and, had you thought fit to have laid before your readers all that he has said in the place referred to, that signification would have appeared as clearly as light; for he particularly remarks, that he applied a very different meaning to the terms thus employed by him, from that affixed to them by modern Romanists. He proceeds, immediately after the sentences already quoted, thus-"FOR, as in our beneficence, (Heb. 13. "16.) and communicating to the necessities of the poore, (which are sacrifices with which God "is well pleased,) wee are taught to give both our "selves and our almes first unto the Lord, and after to 66 66 our brethren by the will of God; so is it in this "ministry of the blessed sacrament; the service is "first presented to God, (from which the sacrament "it selfe is called the Eucharist, because therein wee "offer a speciall sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving "to God,) and then communicated unto the use of "God's people. In the performance of which part "of the service, both the minister was said to give, "and the communicant to receive the sacrifice as well as, in respect to the former part, they were "said to offer the same unto the Lord. For they "did not distinguish the sacrifice from the sacrament, 66 AS THE ROMANISTS DO NOW-A-DAYS; but used "the name of sacrifice indifferently, both of that "which was offered unto God, and of that which "was given to, and received by the communicant. "Therefore we read of offering the sacrifice unto "God-of giving the sacrifice to man-and of "receiving the sacrifice from the hands of that "minister; as in that sentence of the synod attributed "unto St. Patrick, He who deserveth not to "receive the sacrament in his life, how can it helpe "him after his death? Whereby it doth appear, "that the sacrifice of the elder times was NOT like "unto the new Masse of the ROMANISTS.' presume that it is now sufficiently manifest, that archbishop Usher has not made any admission at all consonant with the meaning that you have attributed to him; and certainly nothing could be farther from his intention, or from that of the ancient Irish Christians whom he quotes, or refers to, than the coupling of the great modern mystery of transubstantiation, or the equally modern doctrine of the actual sacrifice in the Mass of the body of Christ, I |