As philosophers, you would seize
these points at once. Therefore I have desired to have you for my
audience. Suppose, for example, we ask our adversaries on what
ground they have concocted that novel and sectarian opinion which
banishes Christ from the Mystic Supper. If they name the Gospel,
we meet them promptly. On our side are the words, _this is my
body, this is my blood._ This language seemed to Luther himself
so forcible, that for all his strong desire to turn Zwinglian,
thinking by that means to make it most awkward for the Pope,
nevertheless he was caught and fast bound by this most open
context, and gave in to it (_Luther, epistol. ad Argent._), and
confessed Christ truly present in the Most Holy Sacrament no less
unwillingly than the demons of old, overcome by His miracles,
cried aloud that He was Christ, the Son of God. Well then, the
written text gives us the advantage: the dispute now turns on the
sense of what is written. Let us examine this from the words in
the context, _my body which is given for you, my blood which hall
be shed for many_. Still the explanation on Calvin's side is most
hard, on ours easy and quite plain.
Pages:
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130