SECOND REASON

THE SENSE OF HOLY WRIT

Another thing to incite me to the encounter, and to disparage in my eyes the poor forces of the enemy, is the habit of mind which they continually display in their exposition of the Scriptures, full of deceit, void of wisdom.  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.

What further?  Compare the Scriptures, they say, one with another.  By all means.  The Gospels agree, Paul concurs.  The words, the clauses, the whole sentence reverently repeat living bread, signal miracle, heavenly food, flesh, body, blood.  There is nothing enigmatical, nothing befogged with a mist of words.  Still our adversaries hold on and make no end of altercation.  What are we to do?  I presume, Antiquity should be heard; and what we, two parties suspect of one another, cannot settle, let it be settled by the decision of venerable ancient men of all past ages, as being nearer Christ and further removed from this contention.  They cannot stand that, they protest that they are being betrayed, they appeal to the word of God pure and simple, they turn away from the comments of men.  Treacherous and fatuous excuse.  We urge the word of God, they darken the meaning of it.  We appeal to the witness of the Saints as interpreters, they withstand them.  In short their position is that there shall be no trial, unless you stand by the judgment of the accused party.  And so they behave in every controversy which we start.  On infused grace, on inherent justice, on the visible Church, on the necessity of Baptism, on Sacraments and Sacrifice, on the merits of the good, on hope and fear, on the difference of guilt in sins, on the authority of Peter, on the keys, on vows, on the evangelical counsels, on other such points, we Catholics have cited and discussed Scripture