distant prospect, conveyed through the whole line of suffering, from the garden of Gethsemane, to the grave of Joseph; and, in all this series of woe, saw nothing which was superfluous, nothing which was fruitless; but, on the contrary, saw every occurrence teeming with salutary influence to the minds and hearts of those, who, in every age and nation, should take the Cross for their standard, and Him who died on it for their King.

Less than this we cannot deduce from the prophecy before us; but the depth of its meaning is not to be expressed in human words: it is a study for the heart of him, who, like St. Paul, is crucified with Christ ; and can say with that Apostle, that, through the Cross of Christ, the world is crucified unto him, and he unto the world. Yet even to such, great will still be the mystery of godliness. The effects will more and more be felt; and as the devout man grows in grace, he will grow, also, in the knowledge of his Lord and Saviour. But the exquisite adaptation of our Redeemer's sufferings and death, to the maladies and capabilities of the human mind and heart, and the profoundly adjusted instrumentality thus prepared, for the use and application of the ever blessed Spirit, will afford matter for continued investigation, and increasing delight, in a more advanced state of existence. If angels desire to look into these things, we may assuredly infer, that they will not at once unfold themselves, to the perfected spirits of the just.

In remarking on this important quotation, I have not attempted to prove its strictly spiritual import; because, I conceive, it cannot be questioned. The being healed, is self-evidently a change, not in the external circumstances, but in the nature of the subject; and the application of the term to the inner

man, accords with the strictest analogy. Sin is an evil, in the moral system, exactly correspondent to disease, in the animal body. It is the sickness of the immortal spirit; and the healing of this sickness can be nothing else, than the re-establishment of internal purity and rectitude. The health of the body evinces itself, not only by ability for every natural exertion, but by an alacrity of performance, which, in some sort, turns labour into pleasure. Symptoms strictly correspondent, must concur to give evidence of a healed mind. When, therefore, it is said, that we are healed through the sufferings of the Messiah, nothing less can be meant, than that the passion and death of the Word made flesh, impressed upon the mind and heart, by the power of the Holy Ghost, are the one infallible remedy for the corruption of our nature; and that, in proportion as we feel, and yield to, and imbibe this influence, we are not only freed from the diseases, but rise above the weaknesses, of frail mortality; and enjoy the foretaste of that perfect health, which the leaves of the mystical tree of life are for ever to diffuse, in the future paradise of God.

We come then, finally, to this conclusion, that St. Peter, in this passage, contemplates the great mystery of redemption, in the same light, of reanimating influence, and purifying efficacy, in which we have seen it viewed by the other inspired writers, already adverted to; and, consequently, that the passage just considered, expresses only more compendiously the sentiments, which are expanded, and elucidated, in the Epistles to the Romans and the Hebrews.

It might confidently have been presumed, that such agreement could not fail to present itself: but, when thus manifested, what can in reason be inferred, but that a similar strictness of correspondence would be

equally found, in all other passages of like apparent import. In truth, it would be derogatory to the honour of Holy Scripture to suppose, that there should be, in any instance, a deviation from principles once clearly found to exist; or, that there could be the slightest shade of discord, between any detached passage, and those deeply digested discourses, which have been examined in the foregoing paragraphs.

It would not become me to conclude, that a more profound theologist than I pretend to be, might not, by possibility, be able to establish a different sense of the portions of Holy Scripture, upon which I have dwelt: but, until a result dissimilar to mine shall have been arrived at, by means of an equally minute and consecutive investigation, I think I have a reasonable title to occupy the ground, of which I have taken possession.

138

LETTER TO JOHN S. HARFORD, ESQ. PREFATORY TO THE TREATISE ON THE EUCHARIST.

July 19, 1826.

Yo

MY DEAR MR. HARFORD,

Our most acceptable letter, of the 11th of May, found me actually engaged in a reply to your query, in a former letter, respecting the sense, in which I supposed the term uabov, to contain a notion of philosophy and I also wished to explain more fully, in what respect I conceived it to differ from the latter word, usuúnual. I began my letter as soon as I was free from some indispensable matters which had occupied me; but the subject you have last brought before me, calls, I think, for more immediate attention; and I, therefore, hasten to give you, the best information of which I am capable.

But I must not proceed, without first thanking you cordially, for obtaining me the sight of the Bishop of

's letter. I am deeply gratified by the approbation it contains, the spirit of it being such as I could alone seriously value; I return it, with many thanks to Sir Thomas Acland for parting with it. It strengthens my purpose (God willing) of prefixing an introductory preface to my tract, and giving it to the public. When I may be able, however, (from another engagement which hangs upon me,) I cannot conjecture; as I advance with such a snail's pace in every thing.

The subject to which you turn my attention, I am scarcely qualified to write upon; as I have never

actually examined the volumes of the Fathers respecting it. The truth is, I was so completely satisfied with the quotations which I had met, in trustworthy writers of later times, that I felt, as I thought, no necessity for going farther.

The impression on my mind has been, that the ancient writers of the Church were agreed in ascribing, to the consecrated elements in the Eucharist, an unutterable and efficacious mystery, in virtue of our Saviour's words of institution, by which he had made those elements, when consecrated after his example, the vehicles of his saving and sanctifying power: and, in that respect, the permanent representatives of his incarnate person. But, notwithstanding this exalted estimate of the Eucharist, the notion of a literal transubstantiation, such as was subsequently introduced into the Western Church, would appear never to have entered into their mind.

I am brought to this conclusion, by the obvious fact, that those early writers always recognize, the continuance, after consecration, of the same natural substances, notwithstanding the heavenly properties with which they have become invested. I need not point out to you the radical difference, between this theory, and that of transubstantiation. The latter

notion, you know, supposes, that the substances of bread and wine exist no longer; that their outside form alone continues, and serves as a veil for the flesh and blood, into which, through consecration, they have been transmuted. That such is the strict import of transubstantiation, appears from the remarkable words of even the politic Bossuet: — "Comme il désiroit exercer notre foi dans ce mystère, et en même temps nous ôter l'horreur de manger sa chair, et de boire son sang, en leur propre espèce, il