in the Articles, for in these two questions there is not merely the distinction which we have in them between the sign and the thing signified, but the one is described as outward and the other inward. The one is a material thing, which the recipient may take in his hand, and which is altogether external to himself; the other is inward and invisible, something within the soul, and only seen by the inner man. It is, therefore, utterly contrary to the teaching of these two questions to suppose that both parts of the Sacrament are outward, and that the inward and spiritual grace has a localized, outward presence external to the soul of the recipient. But though the questions are thus distinct, can we say the same of the answers? The third answer is often boldly appealed to as deciding the question in favour of what is termed the real presence, and as finally settling the whole controversy. But nothing is easier than to make bold assertions of the kind, to persuade men to receive them without the trouble of investigation. But such a system will not satisfy those who desire to know the truth. Let us then examine the answer carefully. ‘What is the inward part or thing signified?’ ‘The body and blood of Christ; which are verily and indeed taken, and received by the faithful in the Lord’s Supper.’ Great stress is sometimes laid on the words, ‘Verily and indeed,’ as if they meant something more than a spiritual feeding on Christ. But there is nothing in them to convey any such idea. All they teach is that there is a real, true gift, really enjoyed and received by the devout communicant; and this we all thankfully believe. The question between us is not whether there is such a gift; but what is its character, and how is it received. The reality of the gift does not prove that it is material, external, or connected in any way with the natural elements. To maintain this would be to deny the reality of anything spiritual and internal. Nothing, therefore, can be proved either way from the words, ‘Verily and indeed.’ They cannot be quoted in opposition to the question to which they are intended as an answer, or in deciding that the inward part is outward. They do assert that the gift of the Lord is no mere fiction or idea, but they do not teach in any way whatever that the sacred gift is in the elements, and external to the soul.