` He gave thanks ;' as he did before the break ing of the bread.
` He gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it.' In Mark it is said, ` And they all drank of it.' In the Corinthian church the people, even the un worthy communicants, drank of the cup as well as ate of the bread. According to Justin Martyr, distribution was made to all present of the ender istic bread and wine, after which the deacons carried them to the absent. Reference is so fre quently made by the early Christian writers to the communion of the cup of the Lord," the cup of life,' the cup of blessing," the cup of mix ture,' that Romish writers readily admit that in refusing the cup to the laity they have departed from the primitive practice, and they plead the authority of the church to do so on account of its frequent abuse. In the middle ages considerable variety of usage may be observed. At one time the practice prevailed to a considerable extent of dipping the bread in the wine and then giving it to the communicants ; at another, of giving the wine without the bread, when infants were allowed to communicate. Before the denial of the cup to the people became the general practice of the Latin church, a usage arose in many places of consecrat ing two cups of wine, one for the priests, the other for the laity. The cup of the priests represented but too faithfully their arrogant assumption of ex clusive honour and privilege in the Church of Christ. The Greek and Eastern Churches strenu 3usly maintain the right of the people to partici pate in the cup. So strong is the feeling in favour 3f the communion in both kinds in the East, that the pope has under certain circumstances been in duced to concede the cup to the people in the congregations which have been gathered by Romish missionaries in Eastern countries.
` For this is my blood, that of the New Covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins,' are the words of Matthew. Mark omits the clause for the remission of sins.' According to Luke and Paul, our Lord said, This cup is the new covenant in my blood.' As the several writers do not profess to give the precise words of our Lord, who probably spoke in a different language, it is not possible for us to determine the exact fortnula which was used by him. In reply to an objection which has been brought against the literal interpre tation of the words, This is my blood,' from the parallel passage, This cup is the new covenant in my blood,' Cardinal Wiseman very ingeniously says, A cup cannot be a covenant, and, therefore, the phrases are not parallel.' It is not said,
` This is the new covenant,' but `this cup is the new covenant ;' but it is said, ` This (not this brcad) is my body,' and ` This (not this cup) is my blood.' (See his Lectures on the Sacrament.) Did Jesus himself partake of the bread and wine at the institution of the Eucharist? Romanists strenuously contend that he did not ; for if he did, he must, according to their doctrine, have eaten and drunken himself, his whole person, human and divine. This is startling, though it seems to us no more incredible than that he held himself in his own hand, brake himself to pieces, and gave him self, his whole and undivided person, to every one of his disciples separately. As to the inference which has been deduced in favour of this opinion from the words of our Lord, ` I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's king dom ;' we do not see how these words can prove that our Lord did not drink of that cup, when the similar words respecting the passover, I will not :my more eat thereof until it be fulfilled in the king dom of God,' certainly do not prove that Jesus did not eat of that passover.
Matthew and Mark say, When thty haa' sung a hymn they went out.' What connection, if any, this singing of a hymn had with the sacramental in stitution it may not be easy to say, as it is not possi ble to ascertain how much of the interesting con versation of the evening occurred between the supper and the singing, or between the singing and the going out. The hymn was probably one of the Psalms which constituted the hallelujah of the Paschal service as it was observed by the Jews of the later times. A hymn of praise seems to be an appropriate close of the Eucharistic feast, and in many churches it is sung in imitation of our Lord's example. Among the ancient Christians the sing ing seems to have preceded the communion service, Ye hear the ehanter with a sacred tune calling you to the communion of the holy mysteries, and saying, 0 taste, and see that the Lord is good' (Cyril, Lect. in Myst. v. 17). The thirty-fourth Psalm is prescribed in the Apostolic Constitutions, but other Psalms were sung in different churches. Appro priate as is the song of praise, we cannot but feel how strange is the desecration of this solemn rite, when it is converted into a musical service, as it often is by the Latin and Greek church, in honour of some event of national interest, as a royal mar riage, a signal victory, or a successful revolution.