Ac per hoc qui non manet in Christo, et in quo non manet Christus, proculdubio nec manducat ejus carnem, nec bibit sanguinem, etiam si tantæ rei sacramentum ad judicium sibi manducet et bibat." This doctrine, so completely Protestant, is undoubtedly St. Austin's. The Benedictine editors, accordingly, found themselves constrained to place within parenthetic marks, the words which have been so distinguished in the second extract from Bede, (note 5,) and to place at the bottom of the page the following apology for inserting these words at all. "Sic editi quidem, at MSS. nostri omnes habent hoc modo, Nec manducat carnem ejus, nec bibit ejus sanguinem, etiamsi tantæ rei sacramentum ad judicium sibi manducet et bibat. Sicut inquit misit me vivus Pater, &c. carentque verbis ceteris, quæ hic ansulis concluduntur: quæ verba nullo etiam e suis MSS. contineri testantur Lovanienses habentur ipsa in Bedæ et Alcuini commentariis super Johannem." Alcuin most probably copied the passage, as it stood in Bede, without any farther enquiry. Bede here might have used, possibly, some interpolated copy, and considered the additions serviceable for the better understanding of the text. Or it may even be, that these additions are his own, and were intended as a sort of interpretative amplification of his author. It should be observed, that he is not in the habit of citing the quarters whence he derives his matter. An incautious reader might therefore take his incessant transcriptions from St. Austin for language of his own. Obviously, however, by this course, he renders himself responsible for all the contents of his voluminous works, and he thought himself, pro

bably, at full liberty to make such additions to the passages adopted, as appeared likely to render them .more effective and intelligible. How such a representation of St. Austin's language having received currency from the authorities of Bede and Alcuin, came to be regularly produced in the works of that Father, we are at no loss to conceive. The bishop of Hippo, even in his interpolated form, is a very strong evidence against transubstantiation. As Bede exhibits him uninterpolated, he utterly overthrows that principal article of the Romish creed.

That these words included within a parenthesis are indeed an interpolation, appears also from two ancient MSS. in the Bodleian library. (Laud. 144. and Laud. 139.) In the former of these the passage thus appears: "Hoc é go manducare illa esca & illū potū bibere, i xpo manere, & illu manentē i se hre: ac per hoc q' ñ manet i xpo & i qo ñ manet xpc, proculdubio nec manducat carne eius, nec bibit sanguine eius, etiam si tante rei sacramtum ad iudiciu s1 manducet & bibat." In the latter every word is the same.

The third citation from Bede is contained in St. Austin's next Tractate: viz. xxvii. col. 502. It is extracted verbatim.

The fourth citation from Bede is taken from the following passage in St. Austin upon the Psalms. "Sed et ibi qui diligenter legunt, vident in illo bello David pacatum fuisse filio, qui etiam magno cum dolore planxit extinctum, dicens, Abessalon, filius meus, quis dabit mihi mori pro te? Et in historia Novi Testamenti ipsa Domini nostri tanta et tam miranda patientia, quod eum tamdiu pertulit tamquam bonum, cum ejus cogitationes non igno

raret, cum adhibuit ad convivium, in quo corporis et sanguinis sui figuram discipulis commendavit et tradidit; quod denique in ipsa traditione osculum accepit, bene intelligitur, pacem Christum exhibuisse traditori suo, quamvis ille tam sceleratæ cogitationis interno bello vastaretur." (S. August. Episc. Enarratio in Psalmum iii. Opp. tom. IV. col. 7.)

The variations from his author's words in which the venerable expositor has here indulged himself, will serve, probably, to explain his conduct in offering to the world the second extract as we find it. He meant, we may reasonably suppose, neither to interpolate, nor to adopt an interpolation; only to present St. Austin's doctrine in a manner which he thought more clear and effective than that in which the renowned prelate of Hippo left it. But whatever were Bede's object in giving us this version of St. Austin, he has thereby afforded considerable satisfaction to the Romanists. By means of the word spiritualiter he allows them some chance of escape from his obvious meaning. This term may be and has been contrasted with sacramentaliter; and thus a subtle disputant is enabled to involve the passage in a degree of mystery, and to overlay it with a degree of refinement, which at least will afford a plausible reason for remaining unconvinced to those who are anxious to see nothing unfavourable to transubstantiation. St. Austin's genuine text, however, destroys every hope of the kind. If none eat the flesh of Christ and drink his blood, but those who dwell in Christ, and in whom Christ dwells; then the doctrine of transubstantiation is at an end, and the author who overthrows it by

affirming this proposition, in language so plain and positive as to cut off every prospect of evasion, could have been no Romanist.

5 "Finitis Paschæ veteris solemniis quæ in commemoratione antiquæ de Ægypto liberationis populi Dei agebatur: transiit ad novum quod in suæ redemptionis memoriam Ecclesiam frequentare volebat, ut videlicet pro carne agni ac sanguine, sui corporis et sanguinis sacramentum substitueret. Benedixit panem et fregit, quia hominem adsumptum ita morti subdere dignatus est, ut ei divinæ immortalitatis veraciter inesse potentiam demonstraret, ideoque velocius eum a morte resuscitandum doceret. Et accipiens calicem, gratias egit, et dedit illis, dicens, Bibite ex hoc omnes. Gratias egit ut ostendat, quod unusquisque in flagello culpæ propriæ facere debeat, si ipse æquanimiter flagella culpæ portat alienæ, et quod in correptione facit subditus, gratias Patri agit æqualis. Hic enim est sanguis meus Novi Testamenti, qui pro multis effunditur in remissionem peccatorum. Quia ergo panis carnem confirmat, vinum vero sanguinem operatur in carne: hic ad corpus Christi mystice illud refertur ad sanguinem verum, quia et nos in Christo, et in nobis Christum manere oportet." (Ven. Bed. in Matt. 26. Opp. Col. Agr. 1612. tom. V. p. 77.) The same language is also used by the venerable expositor, in treating upon the parallel passages in St. Mark. (p. 145.)

"Et qui manducat carnem meam, et bibit meum sanguinem, in me manet, et ego in eo. Hoc est, ergo, manducare illam escam, et illum bibere potum, in Christo manere, et illum manentem in se habere. Ac per hoc qui non manet in Christo, et

in quo non manet Christus, proculdubio nec manducat (spiritualiter) ejus carnem, (licet carnaliter et visibiliter premat dentibus sacramentum corporis et sanguinis Christi :) sed magis tantæ rei sacramentum ad judicium sibi manducat et bibit, quia immundus præsumitur ad Christi accedere sacra-menta, quæ alius non digne sumit, nisi qui mundus est: de quibus dicitur, Beati mundi corde, quoniam Deum videbunt." (Ibid. in Joh. vi. p. 509.)

"Hoc ergo nos docuit, et admonuit mysticis verbis, ut simus in ejus corpore, sub ipso capite in membris ejus, non relinquentes unitatem ejus." (Ibid. p. 510.)

"Invenietur quoque spiritalis David immensam in Judam habuisse pacem traditorem, cum et ejus nefanda consilia cognoscens, ejus præsentiam pertulit, nec a sacratissima cœna, in qua figuram sacrosancti corporis sanguinisque sui discipulis tradidit, ipsumque exclusit, atque pacis osculum illi tradenti se non negavit, cum tamen celeritate cogitationis interno bello nequam ille vastaretur." (Bedæ Presb. Commentarius in Psalmum III. Opp. tom. VIII. col. 438. Bas. 1563.) The venerable commentator treats upon this Psalm by drawing a mystical parallel between our Saviour and David, and between Absalom and Judas Iscariot.

"This explanation of the term sacrament will be found below, in the citation from Haymo of Halberstadt. (note 10.) It may be confirmed by the following passage from the ritualist, Amalarius, which, by stating that benediction converts oil into a sacrament, shews plainly enough the signification affixed to that term in the ninth century. "Quando a populis offertur, simplex liquor est; per bene