{"newspaper_name": "The New York herald.", "edition": "01", "page": "p2", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 6286, "word_count": 1163, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9799000024795532], "ccnet_perplexity": [1199.4000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
feast OF Corpus Christi, the Rev. Dr. POWERS
preached sermon at st. Peters church, having Pc
cular reference to Of the most important points
OF faith in the Roman Catholic creed, and one
which lattery has been made the point of dispute in
the Episcopal church, not only of England but also Of
this country, viz The Holy Eucharist and the doc
trne of ransubstantation. He took for his text the
Odd, 5ih, 55 and 56h verses of the 9th chapter of
ST. John. ",fhen Jesus said unto them verify, veri-


y, say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son
Of Man and drink his blood, ye have no life in you
Whose eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood,
hath eternal life, and will raise him up ut the last
day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is
drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh
my blood, dwelleth in me and | in him." He began
by asking whether it was required of us to believe
if the Holy Eucharist is really the body and blood
soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and as
such, do.we receive thunder the form of bread and
vine! 10 this he would unhesltatlngly answer
yes; and the reasons for this answer are very appa
rent II is the doctrine that was preached by the
Apostles, and the one that has been constantly be-


eved and constantly preached in the Catholic
church, and II could not thus have been presented to
them unless it was the doctrine that had descended
specially from Christ. The doctrine of transubstan-


atlon was tina one received by the whole christian
world, and this could not have been the case unless
Il had been the one handed down from the earliest
times II the doctrine OF the figurative presence
had been promug gated previous the eleventh CEN
tury, simultaneous change must have taken place
somewhere or another; but neither u simultaneous
or gradual change had anywhere been apparent, and
TO call on him to believe that IT had, absurdi-
ty. Hence the doctrine Of the eleventh century
must have been the doctrine OF every preceding
tury, as it cannot be denied that no dispute ever ex-
listed though sometime subsequent in the 18th century,
in Convention held at Lyons this subject
alluded to- He would this subject point to the fact
that the Jews had by the providence OF God been
so he
Greek church been preserved in existence prove the
Identity Of the anSsn @ q lie would refer to the
yiour says :"I am the living bread which came down
from heaven1-and the answer tho Jews gave, viz:
How this give his flesh to eat p proves that
his words not understood by thcmbut had he
meant to convey the ideas that he did by his words he
frmed his reply. We thus constrained, by severe
logic to acknowledge that this is the doctrine directly
preached ny Jesus Christ In M this light was pIoviden
all modern objections. We cannot perceive, and we,
therefore, do not believe all the objections that
more could be said to him. He is nfallibe, cannot de-
ceive or be deceived and the He gave is the
only that could have been given from the divine
master to disciple. 1t is always thought when doc
trnes are received without opposition that there is
ne 70 n sns % Ease yer 10
ought to strike terror into the hearts of those who
pose him. God tells is his flesh and blood and it not
better to say with Peter Lord thou art the living God
than to 60 with the incredulous disciples and cav and
dispute his assertions? 1t is evident the words Of Christ





Of the idea Of the carna manner in which they imagined
they to eat his flesh and blood he refers to his
senson Gems into heaven and the Eyyng spirit
probation given by the holy father Augustin He would
refer to the text where Jesus took bread and blessed
and brake it. and gave It to the disciples and said Take
eat this is my body" Now how is il possible to get over
this argument7 He says this is my body, not here
but this, and the substance of bread and wine must
be changed in the substance of his blood and body
1t is again argued that his body is referred to in
metaphorca sense, and parallel passages adduced
Now in the explanation Of metaphors it must be rcco
ected that all figures Of metaphor to be used SUCH
must be known and acknowledged, and where agure is
not generally known 1t cannot be used thus in the late
race we may sayshat Peytona won the palm because
that is the term usually taken victory; and again,
the yine it could not be inverted and thus il was no met
aPhor when he said Of the bread this my body and
blood" As bread had never been known public sign
Of the body of Christ he would have explained himself
if he spoke fguratvely but he did not and this proves
he speaks literally. Ali the many difficulties that are
urged against the doctrine of tnnsubstantiaon not
less obscure than the doctrine of the Trinity but that
say they be explained this never the difficulty be-
ing that the of taste and smell are involved and
refuse crcdence What if they do The question is can
God give appearances to substances that do not belong
to them and this must be answered you say he cannot
men, Holy Ghost descending in the shape oi
dove, and the Almighty appearing In the shape Of
aged man to Daniel proves that he give different ap
pearances to substances than what really belongs to
them The creed Of the Trinity says Gods omnipoten
and eternal one the Son is omnpoent and eternal one
and the Holy Ghost omnipotent and eternal one yet
all tnTee are out One now now can this dlnCuty be
got better than that But it is be-
lieved according to Scriptures, and in admitting the Tr
nifty and rejecting the Eucharist they act inconsistency
If speak Of the natural body Of Christ existing at the
same time million atars it is impossble but mis-
take is in arguing natural things from supernatural
events as in denying the latter should deny the
Scriptures The argument also regarding the nonbeef
of would lead to Desm, five refused
dence to that which cannot comprehend;
should also refuse to believe the miracles which the
Christian religion is founded. We must certainly be-


eve when the authority of God does not in
tervene; but in this case it does He concluded by say
ing that he had given these arguments dspassionaely
he hoped if any Protestant brethren present they
might say the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantation
was better established than those of Calvin.