actualized, only in the way of process or gradual historical develop- ment. All that belongs, then, to the new life of the Christian, con- ceived as complete at the last day, must be allowed to be in- volved in it as principle and process from the beginning. In every stage of its progress it is a true human life answerable to the nature of its organic root, and to the nature also of the sub- ject in which it is lodged. The bodies of the saints in glory will be only the last result, in organic continuity, of the divine life of Christ implanted in their souls at their regeneration. There is nothing abrupt in Christianity. It is a supernatural constitution indeed ; but as such it is clothed in a natural form, and involves in itself as regular a law of historical development, as the old creation itself. The resurrection body will be simply the ultimate outburst of the life that had been ripening for immortality under cover of the old Adamic nature before. The winged psyche has its elemental organization in the worm, and does not lose it in the tomb-like chrysalis. The resurrection of the body is, therefore, as much a natural process as the development of the butterfly from the grub, or the flower from the seed.1
1 To avoid the danger of misrepresentation the exhibition of the principles of this mod- ern aspect of theology has been given in great measure in the language of its advocates. No reference to names is given, so that no one is made responsible for the views expressed. Experience teaches that quoting a man's words is no security against the charge of misrepre- sentation. The writer was grieved to learn that his friend of more than forty years stand- ing, Dr. John W. Nevin, considers himself to be unjustly charged by us with holding doc- trines which he earnestly repudiates. On page 429 of the second volume of this work he is quoted as saying that Hegel's Christological ideas, "are very significant and full of in- struction. ' ' This has been construed as charging him with being a thorough Hegelian. As to this construction, we would say, first, that nothing was further from the writer's mind than the intention of making such an imputation ; and secondly, that the language used gives no fair ground for such an interpretation. On the preceding page (428) Dorner is quoted as saying that "the foundations of the new Christology were laid by Schelling, Hegel, and Schleiermacher." Dorner certainly did not mean to intimate that all the modern Christolo- gists, himself included, were Hegelians. Neither did we intend to intimate that Dr. Nevin adopted Hegel's philosophy as a system, which we know, from his own authority, he ab- hors.
Again, it is said that Dr. Nevin is represented as denying the divinity of Christ, because he is quoted as saying that our Lord was the ideal, or perfect man, that " his divine nature is at the same time human in the fullest sense." (Mystical Presence, Philadelphia, 1846, p. 174. ) Those who understand this language as necessarily involving the denial of the divinity of Christ are forgetful of the fact that the oneness of God and man is the primary principle of the New Theology. Even Lutherans hold that the humanity of Christ is capable of re- ceiving the attributes of divinity, that as a man He is omniscient, omnipresent, and almighty. Schleiermacher, as we understand him, had no other personal God, than Christ. We doubt not, and have never intimated anything to the contrary, that Dr. Nevin, although he makes Christ the ideal or perfect man, attributes to Him in his theory and in his heart, all the per- fections with which the most devout believer in his divinity invests the adorable Redeemer. How he reconciles this with his representing Him as the Ideal man ; and with the assertion that He has but one life and that life in the fullest sense human, it is not for us to say. The same thing, however, is done by many others besides Dr. Nevin.
656 PART m. Ch. XX. — the means of grace.
Applications of these Principles to the Lord's Supper.
It is obvious that as the principles above stated must modify the whole method, and, so to speak, theory of salvation, so they must also determine the view taken of the Lord's Supper. They necessarily exclude the Romish doctrine of transubstantiation ; and the Lutheran doctrine that the real natural body and blood of Christ are present in, with, and under the bread and wine in this sacrament, and received after a corporal manner (" corporaliter ") by the mouth. No less obviously do they exclude the doctrine of Calvin that what is received by the believer in the Lord's Supper is a supernatural influence emanating from the glorified body of Christ in heaven. In like manner they exclude the Reformed doctrine that what is received are the sacrificial benefits of the broken body of Christ, which benefits are not only the forgiveness of sins and reconciliation with God, but the indwelling of the Holy Spirit by which we are united to Christ and made partakers of his salvation. As our redemption, according to this theory, is effected by introducing into the centre of our being a new principle of life, a new organic law, which by its operation and gradual develop- ment works out our salvation ; and as this new life is generic humanity united with the divine nature of Christ so as to become truly divine while it is still truly human, and yet only one and the same life, it follows that it is not the body and blood of Christ, but his theanthropic nature that we receive in the Holy Commun- ion.
We are therefore told that the real communication which be- lievers have with Christ in the Holy Supper, extends to his whole person. To be real and not simply moral, it must be thus com- prehensive. We may divide Christ in our thoughts, abstracting his divinity from his humanity, or his soul from his body. But no such dualism has place in his actual person — that is, no dual- ism between his divinity and humanity, or, between his soul and body. If therefore He be received by us at all, He must be re- ceived in a whole way. We partake not of certain rights and privileges only, which have been secured for us by the breaking of his body and the shedding of his blood, but of the veritable substantial life of the beloved Immanuel Himself, as the fountain and channel by which alone all these benefits can be conveyed into our souls. We partake not of his divinity only, nor yet of his Spirit as separate from Himself, but also of his true and proper humanity. Not of his humanity in a separate form, his