is it necessary that this mystery should have one meaning only; nay, it is more probable that it should have many; and meanings, *Thus St. Cyril of Jerusalem having given several meanings, Lect. xiii. 21. adds, 22. "Whoever will enquire, will find other reasons also." Moderns, omitting to notice this, have much confused the interpretations of the Fathers. Thus even Card. Bellarmine, in order to elude the argument hence drawn, for the superiority of the two sacraments, opposes to this, which he admits to be the "exposition of almost all the Greeks," other explanations, which he thinks to be at variance with it, as that found in S. Cyril of Jerus. Lect. iii. 10. and S. Jerome, Ep. 69. ad Ocean. § 6. T. i. p. 418. of the two baptisms, one in blood, i. e. martyrdom, the other in water; as also that in Ambrose, Leo, Augustine, and Bede, which regards the blood as a symbol of the Redemption. Yet these, so far from being at variance, are frequently found in the same writer. Thus Turtullian, who in his de Pudicit. c. 22. p. 575. gives the exposition of the two baptisms, in the de Baptism. 16. p. 230. blends all three. These two baptisms He put forth from the wound of His pierced side, in order that they who believed in His blood should be washed with water; and that they who were washed with water, should also drink His blood." And in this he is partly followed by the author of the de rebaptismate ap. Cypr. Opp. p. 364. who chiefly dwelling on the two baptisms, (as being severally efficacious) uses the words, "that whoso believing should drink of both streams, should be filled with the Holy Spirit," which seems to include both sacraments. And Euthymius, ad loc. expressly gives both these explanations. In like way, S. Ambrose, in the place alleged by Bellarmine, explains indeed the "Blood" of the price of our redemption, but blends with it with the allusion to the Holy Eucharist (L. x. in Luc. 135) "For water and blood issued; the one to cleanse, the other to redeem. Drink we then our ransom, that by drinking we may be redeemed;" for so speaks S. Augustine of the Holy Eucharist, I eat, drink, dispense my ransom" (Conf. x. fin.) calling it also "the sacrament of our ransom." (Ib. ix. ult.) The word is the same which he uses on this very subject. Serm. v. de lucta Jacob, T. 5, p. 30. "There gushed forth blood and water. Behold thy ransom (pretium.) For what gushed from the side but the sacrament, which the faithful receive ?" (In the sequel of the passage he speaks also of Baptism.) The reception of the Holy Eucharist is the communication of our Redemption. So then he also refers, and that chiefly to the two sacraThis language of St. Ambrose may show that the de Pass, et Cruce Dom. 25. ap. Athanas. T. ii. p. 101. "redemption by His blood, and purification by the water," refers equally to the two sacraments. So again they are alluded to in the dupl. Mart. 1. c., water being said to be poured forth, "that we might be washed;" the blood, "that we might be strengthened;" the "strengthening" plainly applying to the Holy Eucharist. St. Augustine again in the place alleged by Bellarmine, exactly agrees with St. Ambrose, adding only the reference to the mingling of the water with the wine in the Holy Eucharist. A door of life was then, in a manner, opened, whence the sacraments of the Church flowed, without which is no entrance to the life, which is the true life. That blood was shed for the remission of sins; that water tempers the cup of salvation; it supplies both the laver and the cup.' -Tract. cx. in Joh. 2. Elsewhere he speaks only of "the sacraments of the Church flowing from His pierced side."-Ib. Tract, ix. § 10. xv. § 8. de Civ. Dei, xv. 26. xxii. 17. c. Faust. xii. 39. and of Baptism only, c. Faust. xii. 16. against the Manichees who derided it; as on the other hand, (an authority which Romanists will admit,) the Friday prayer in the Præparatio ad missam. at the end of the Breviary, and the last collect but one after the communion, give the application to the other Sacrament only; and so indeed St. Augus ments. apparently different, meet again in one. also, it is the more remarkable, that the Amid this partial variation. reference to Baptism, pre tine himself, c. Faust. xii. 21. Bede ad loc. is but an extract from St. Augustine, whom he probably also follows in 1 Joh. v. 6. where he combines the doctrine of the Passion with the two sacraments. S. Leo also, in his epistle to Flavianus against Eutyches (Ep. 28. al. 24.) explains it of the two sacraments, "let him consider what Nature it was, which, transfixed with nails, hung upon the Cross, and when the side of the Crucified was opened by the soldier's lance, let him understand whence flowed the blood and water, that the Church of God might be refreshed with the laver and the cup." Yet a few lines after in applying 1 Joh. v. 7. he speaks in the same way as S. Ambrose of the Spirit of sanctification, and the blood of redemption, and the water of Baptism;" and combines both with the proof of His real humanity, "which three are one, and remain inseparable, and no one of them is severed from their conjunction; since the Catholic Church lives and grows upon this faith, that neither should His manhood be believed apart from the true Godhead, nor the Godhead apart from the true manhood." In another epistle (16. c. 6.) [Ep. 4. ap. Bellarm.] where he had occasion only to speak of Baptism, he says, "He then consecrated the power of regeneration, when there flowed from His side the blood of redemption and the water of Baptism," without indicating whether he alluded to Baptism only, as applying the virtue of that blood, or to both sacraments. In like way our own liturgy, together with that of Gelasius (Ass. ii. 4.,) Gregory and the modern Roman (ib. 33.) rehearses the fact, without determining what the application of the blood is, "Whose most dearly beloved Son Jesus Christ, for the forgiveness of our sins did shed out of His most precious side both water and blood;" and in the words "for the forgiveness, &c." has the same allusion to the Redemption as S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, and S. Leo. And so again S. Paulinus of Nola (Ep. 42. ad Florentium, § 4.) "that Rock, which, the side being pierced by the lance, streamed with water and blood, to pour forth to us alike the health-giving sacraments, the water of forgiveness, and the blood of the sacrament, Who, the Same, is the fountain of our salvation, and our Ransom." The two sacraments alone are likewise named by the authors of the L. 2. de Symbolo, c. 6. and the de Cataclysmo, c. 4. ap. Aug. Opp. T. 6. by St. Chrysostome, ad loc.; by St. Cyril of Alexandria, ad loc.; probably Apollinarius ad loc. ap. Corderii Caten.; the author of Testim. de adv. Dom. ap. Greg. Nyss.; Joh. Damascen. (as a collector of older opinions) de fid. Orthod. L. iv. c. 9. Theophylact ad loc. follows St. Chrysostome, but combines St. Augustine's allusion to the mingling of the water with the wine in the Holy Eucharist, and uses it as an argument against the Armenians, who had not that rite. He also with St. Leo regards the blood as the symbol of the manhood, the water of the Godhead. It might then as well be argued that they who (as Ambrose, below, and Gregory xiii. ap. Ritter, 41.) apply this act to the mingling of water with the wine, mean, against all antiquity, to exclude the allusion to Baptism, as that they who happen to mention the two baptisms only of water and martyrdom (as St. Cyril of Jerusalem in one place, iii. 10. St. Jerome, Photius Amphiloch. 1. c.) exclude the reference to the Holy Eucharist. Some verses ascribed to Prudentius ap. Ritter, § 28. contain only an illusion to Baptism, to which he again refers, Dipt. 165, 6. "the blood is victory; water the bath." And S. Ambrose, in another place, directly treating on Baptism, mentions this only, (de Myst. 20.) "Thou hast read that the three witnesses in Baptism are one, water, blood, and the Spirit, whereof if one be withdrawn, the sacrament of Baptism ceases. For what is water without the Cross of Christ? A common element without any sacramental efficacy. Nor again does the mystery of served in our liturgy, is found almost throughout, the difference relating mostly to the "Blood," whether It refer to the other Sacrament, or to the Baptism of martyrdom, as being a Baptism in their own blood, sanctified by His. The reference to the Sacraments is regeneration take place without water; for unless a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.' For the catechumen also believes in the Cross of the Lord Jesus, wherewith also he is marked; but unless he be baptized in the Name of the Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit,' he cannot receive remission of sins, nor obtain the gift of spiritual grace.' In another, (de Sacr. v. 1. fin.) he also applies it to the mingling of the water and wine in the Cup. He there adds, "Water to cleanse, Blood to redeem," referring at once to the Passion; to the sacraments as its 'application; and the symbolical rite at the Holy Eucharist. He proceeds to speak of the Redemption: "Why from the side? because whence was the sin, thence the grace; sin through the woman, grace through the Lord Jesus Christ." So little did he esteem one meaning to exclude another. The sacred act is referred to in the Maronite liturgy (Ass. ii. 341.) as in our own, in the consecration of the font: "Let the Holy Spirit sanctify, bless, and make them [the waters] like to those which flowed from the side of the OnlyBegotten on the cross. This complete consent of antiquity, that the "water" was connected with our Baptism, makes it probable that it is also alluded to in a passage of S. Apollinaris Hierop., where he speaks of His "pouring forth from His side the two instruments of cleansing (katápoia) Blood and water," although his additional explanation “Word and Spirit" is, from its conciseness, obscure. (See Routh's Opusc. T. 4. p. 151. and note.) The allusion to the sacraments is doubtless intended by S. Hippolytus, where he says, de 2. latronibus, vol. i. p. 281. "Both did the body of the Lord yield to the world, the holy Blood and the holy water. For His Body being dead after the manner of men, had in It a great Power of Life. For what are not poured forth from dead bodies, these were poured forth from His, both water and Blood, that we might know how availing was the Power indwelling in His Body, to life, in that death was not to It the same as to the rest, but It could yet pour forth to us the laver of life." S. Epiphanius refers at least to Baptism by His expression, Hær. 46. fin, "to the water poured forth to signify the cleansing of the filth of our sins," whether or no he refer to the other sacrament, as the means of restoring the soul upon repentance, in His words, "to show to us the sprinkling of His Blood, to the cleansing of our defilement and of the repentant soul." S. Clement of Alexandria refers to Baptism, "the Spirit which is Life, and water, which is regeneration and faith," although his other explanation, Blood which is knowledge," seems to differ from any elsewhere given. He adds, however, "For in the Saviour are those saving powers, and life itself is in His Son," thus bringing their efficacy to the Person of our Lord, (Adumbrationes ad loc. T. 2. p. 1011. ed. Potter.) St. Chrysostome, who ad loc. gives his own meaning fully, says in Ep. ad Eph. c. 5. Hom. 20. § 3. fin. " from the side of Christ there gushed forth life." He had shortly before spoken of our birth in Baptism. In conclusion, it may be again observed, how much this apparent variation with respect to the meaning of the Blood illustrates the uniform consent of all Antiquity in interpreting the "water" of Baptism. Even among the Reformed, Beza and Calvin still recognize, in a way, the reference to the two sacraments (adopting S. Augustine's words;) but only to lead people away from the sacraments themselves, as they think, to their Author. Of the Romanists, preserved either way; as again, if "the Blood" were the actual embodying and visible representation of the truth, that "by His Blood we have redemption, even the remission of sins," the water denoted Baptism, as the means, whereby His Blood is applied to the cleansing and sanctifying of our souls. There is no reason why these should not be each contained in that mysterious event, each express a portion of that truth which it contained. Gushing out immediately upon the completion of our Redemption, they seem to speak that by water and blood is that Redemption applied to us, in all the ways wherein they may, in God's will be applied. The distinct mention, however, of the two substances poured from His side guides us most naturally to two distinct means, whereby that virtue is applied; and so the view, most commonly dwelt upon by the Ancients, that the two Christian Sacraments were thereby denoted, appears to correspond most fully with the sacred act itself. And this seems again to be borne out by the words, which offer themselves as an explanation of it, St. John's declaration of the "three which bear witness" to Him, "the Spirit, and the water, and the blood." For, considering the solemn way in which St. John insists upon the history of the issuing of the blood and water, it can scarcely be thought that when he again insists, doctrinally, in the same solemn way, on the "water and blood" as witnesses to Him, he is not bearing in mind that same sight, which was impressed so deeply upon his spirit. The words, "this is He which cometh by water and blood, not by water only, but by water and blood, and the Spirit is it which beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth; there are three which bear witness-the Spirit, and the water, and the blood,"t seem to contain at once an allusion to that sight, and to be an explanation of the main truth which it contained. There are these two witnesses, and a third, the Holy Spirit, cooperating with them; they are witnesses which continue to bear witness; which He has left to bear witness; (St. John says not, "which bore witness," but which "bear witness," of papropouvres ;) which bear witness now, continually, and which shall continue to the end to bear an ever present witness; they are witnesses to Him, "whereby He cometh," which testify to His Presence, and through which He is present. But the act upon the Cross is past; the actual shedding of the water and the blood took place, and is not; the Cross Itself, and Passion, Jansen, in Conc. c. 143. Maldonat. in Matt. 27. Alph. Salmeron, T. 10. tr. 48. (quoted by Ritter, 1. c.) retain the old doctrine, though Jansen. and Maldonat. insert the words, "the two chief sacraments," no where used in antiquity. *¿ ¿ov. For the past, "who came," St. John uses ¿λnλudis, 1 Ep. iv. 2, 3. †The omission of ver 7. is not meant to express any opinion as to its genuineness; those verses only are taken which bear upon the immediate argument. * the Precious Death, are borne witness to, but bear not witness now; They are ever-present with the Father, to whom they were offered; they are the meritorious causes of all our blessings and acceptableness with Him, but themselves are hid from sight; He has " entered within the veil," "now to appear in the presence of God for us, and there He presenteth "His own blood;" with them He appeareth before the Father, but cometh not to us; to us He cometh in His Sacraments; they are the visible tokens of his invisible Presence; the means of our adoption; the pledges of His love;" the witnesses that He "is come in the flesh;" the continual memorials of His Death and Resurrection; the channels of "the Life" which we have " in Him ;"t the foretaste of eternal life ; the witness "in us" also, as the means of His indwelling ;|| the witness to us, "that we are very members incorporate in the mystical body of His Son; T whereby "we have power and strength to have victory,** and to triumph against the devil, the world, and the flesh;" the "New Testamentti in His Blood," which He has bequeathed to the Church; the witness to the Church "that He will be with her always even to the end of the world." By both doth He come to us; in Baptism cleansing us with “ water," not mere water, but water purified, and purifying by the efficacy of that Blood, where "the Spirit" also is present, in the birth of "water and the Spirit ;" in the Holy Eucharist giving us to "drink of His Blood," and "quickening us by His Spirit," and "making us to drink into One Spirit." This exposition again harmonizes with the true doctrine of the sacraments, in that it separates the two great Sacraments of the Gospel from every thing else which God has made a means of grace;¶¶ * Ecumenius so gives the connection of this verse with the preceding, "Having made mention of the generation and birth from God, in that he said, 'every thing born of God,' since this is obtained to us through Holy Baptism, therefore He says, 'this is He which cometh by water and blood, Jesus Christ;" And wherefore came He? regenerating us, and making us sons of God. For it follows upon what was said, that, 'Every thing born of God overcometh the world.' And how was it born? by water,' he saith, and blood.' For Jesus Christ, Who cometh, regenerates by water and blood." The same passage occurs in Theophylact in Joh. v. 5. whence, perhaps, it is probable that both derived it from St. Chrysostome. † In Joh. v. 11. Joh. vi. 27. 6 Ib. vi. 54. tt John vi. 53, 54, 56. Ib. ver. 63. TT Hence, remarkably enough, Card. Bellarmine rejects this allusion (de Effect. Sacram. L. 2. c. 27.) and argues against it from the position of the words "blood and water," as though, had the two sacraments been intended, it should have stood "water and blood," in the order in which they are bestowed upon us. S. Thomas Aquinas, (who retains the ancient interpretation, P. 3. qu. 66. art. 3. ad 3. "From the side of Christ flowed water to cleanse, |