On this page
- Text (3)
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
DEFENCE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION . To the Editor of the Monthly Repository . Sir , As you favoured my former communication with a place in your Repository , I now ,, according to my promise , send you a very short defence of the doctrine of Transubstantiation , foundr ed on modes of argument admitted , and acted upon , by orthodox Protestants . The matter lies in small compass .
Orthodox Protestants admit that the scriptures contain doctrines which are above reason , that Christians must believe what they cannot comprehend , that we are called not to reason but to believe , and that the use of reason is , in certain instances , superseded by the awful mandates of Heaven , which require an implicit assent to the words of scripture . On this orthodox
Protestant ground , which we Catholics have ever approved , I take my stand , and feel the defence of Transubstantiation , perfectly easy . I find it in the express words of our Lord Jesus Christ .
He said , " My flesh is meat indeed : '" and he told the Jews , u except ye eat the flesh of the son of man , and drink his blood , ye have no life in you . " At the institution of the holy Eucharist , he said of the br ' ead , ' This is my body , " and of the cup ,
This is my blood . " I know Protestants say it is unreasonable to suppose the bread and wine are changed into the real body and blood of Christ ; but who are they , that they should presume to set carnal reason , ( for they acknowledge on other occasions that reason is carnal , ) in opposition to the express words , of scripture r I grant that transubstantiation is above reason " , and that it cannot be comprehended ; but that ought to be no
reason for its rejection , at least , with orthodox Protestants ; they have only to proceed in the same way as they do in several other cases , to believe what they cannot comprehend , not to reason , but believe , and every obstacle to their reception of the doctrine of transubstantiation , is at once removed . Orthodox Protestants believe several other doctrines , and hold them to be fundamen-
tal doctrines of the gospel , which arc as much above reason and as incomprehensible , as transubstantiation . It is as much contrary to reason , and above all human comprehension , that three are one and one three—that we are all guilty and sinful before we are capable of acting wrong—that the sins of the
/ ¦ W Defence of Tfansubstantiation . 193
Creator , although Q . has failed in his charge of idolatry against us , it still reverts with unabated force against himself and brethren . Candidus *
YOL , II . 2 D
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), April 2, 1807, page 193, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2379/page/25/