Chap.  III.]  THE  LORD'S  SUPPER  523

were  current,  began  to  be  ashamed  that  he  had  so  long  suppressed  his
doubts  and  preached  doctrines  of  the  truth  of  which  he  was  not  thoroughly
convinced  ;  he  took  courage  no  longer  to  conceal  his  view  of  the  sense  of
the  mysterious  institutional  words.1

The  young  Bullinger  approached  the  question  from  another  side.  He
studied  Berengarius's  controversy,  and  came  to  the  conclusion  that  on
this  important  point, — the  very  point  afterwards  established  by  the
reformation, — injustice  had  been  done  to  that  early  reformer.  He  thought
Berengarius's  interpretation  might  even  be  found  in  St.  Augustine.2

The  main  thing,  however,  was,  that  Zwingli  declared  his  opinion.  In
studying  the  scripture  after  his  manner,  rather  as  a  whole  than  in  detached
passages,  and  not  without  a  continual  reference  to  classical  antiquity,  he
had  come  to  the  conviction  that  the  is  of  the  institutional  words  signifies
nothing  more  than  "denotes."  Already,  in  a  letter  dated  June,  1523,  he
declares  that  the  true  sense  of  the  Eucharist  cannot  be  understood,  until
the  bread  and  wine  in  the  Lord's  Supper  are  regarded  in  exactly  the  same
manner  as  the  water  in  baptism.3  While  attacking  the  mass,  he  had
already  conceived  the  intention  of  restoring  the  Eucharist  to  itself,  as
he  expressed  it.4  As  Carlstadt  now  brought  forward  a  very  similar
interpretation,  which  he  was  unable  to  maintain,  Zwingli  thought  he  could
no  longer  remain  silent.  He  published  his  exposition  ;  first  in  a  printed
address  to  a  parish  priest  in  Reutlingen  (November,  1524),  then  more  at
length  in  his  essay,  On  true  and  false  Religion.  Although  he  was  little
satisfied  with  Carlstadt's  explanation,  he  nevertheless  availed  himself  of
some  of  the  same  arguments  which  that  theologian  had  employed ;  e.g.,
that  the  body  of  Christ  was  in  heaven,  and  could  not  possibly  be  divided
realiter  among  His  disciples  on  earth.  He  rested  his  reasoning  chiefly
on  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  which  was  thus,  as  he
thought,  rendered  perfectly  clear.
