L"H&P. Yl.] tttLJ ? c. oma_ umo? rended ? ?se ? whom he ?te?d M ? o? ?e cup. ?e? n? ? h c? ? ERROR, U? for ?y ?g ? comm? in one ?d ? prefe?le. The fo?ow?g ?e the? weigh?st menm :? They say, "?t ?e a?sdes were coined ? ?e of ?e ? well ? ?e bre?, ?cause ?ey were cler?en." To thim we ?* swer, ?t it ? ? ?e a?d? onl? be ?ve ?e br? ?; ?ere- fore ?e 1? sho?d hay, neither br? nor ?p, ? ?e objec?on be ?e. ?id?, &e a?os, ?ough not o?cia?, receiv? ?e cup; hence ?e non?cia? cler? ?e ? bye ?e cup ?so. Thus d?ne ? no s? from ?e fore?iug ?ent of ?e?. But �ey bye a s?e quibble wMch ?ey ?uce ? ?s p?e. ?ey ? ?dee? t?t the a?des were laden, ?d repr?ented ?e whole ?y of C?s?, when ?ey received ?e br?; but w?n our vio? ?d ?e wo?s, H?f?e, Do t?, by ?ese wo? he o?ed them p?est8; ?d these wo? were s?ken ?fore he ?ve ?em the cup. So tht when he cme M ?se ?e &er ? of ?e ucra- ment ? ?em, ?t is, ?e ?e, ?ey then ?d not receive ? laden, ? ?e repr?ent?ives of ?e ?ple, b? ? cler?en. It the Counc? of Trent ?d reference m ?s q?bb?ng sexism w? ?e the fo?owhg c?on: "If any one s?l ny by th?e �ey x wo?s, Do ? ? ?? of m, C?t ?d not i?mM ? a? d? p?em, or ?d not o? ?t ?ey ?d o?er p?es? ?o?d offer his body and Mood; let him be accursed."* But it is said, "Our Saviour himeft, after his resurrection, samlni?. tered tJ?e sacrament in one kind. For St. Luke says, that sitLing down with his two disciples at Emmaus, he took bread, and blessed it, and brae, nnd gave to them." But this was not administering the sacra* ment at oil. It wu a thanksgiving to (?o?, u wu usual at every meal, and as he did when he fed the multitudes with the loaves and fishes, according to the manner of the Jews, both at that time and since. They also argue, that in the Acts of the Aposdas it is said "that the diociples !net together to break bread on the first day of the week," Acts ii, 4?. This, ssy they, refers to ?e euc?. and the cup is not mice mentioned as given." But it is not certain tlmt this refer8 at all to the sacrament. And suppoemg it does; as in Scripture language conunon feasts are expressed by the singIra phrmm of eating bead, which certainly does not prove thf?t the guests (trank nothing; so neither (lees it prove, by a relis?us feast being expressed in the tone manner, that the guests dr? nothing. Besides, if there is no motJan of the ttyy receiving the cup, there is none of the priests receiving it. Yet think this abeolutely necessary; and if' one may be to. ken for fronted without being l?Cularly mentioned, so rosy the other also. Add to all the, t?n?t where St. Paul spa?k, in form of this sser?ment, he mentions the cup as 8 necesoe?'y part thereof. They also plmid, "du? the laity, by receiving the body' of Christ, ?oeivo h?s blood' also; for the blood is contained in the body.*But 1
�
