What then may this singular expression mean?
This is what it manifestly means;--that no person, whoever he may be, without any exception, who possesseth a corrupt heart and corrupt actions, and therein persevereth unto death, shall have reason to expect in the resurrection a pure, subtile, active and impassible body.
This is actually dangerous tampering with the written letter.
Without touching on the question whether St.Paul in this celebrated chapter (1 'Cor'.

xv.) speaks of a partial or of the general resurrection, or even conceding to Lacunza that the former opinion is the more probable; I must still vehemently object to this Jesuitical interpretation of corruption, as used in a moral sense, and distinctive of the wicked souls.

St.Paul nowhere speaks dogmatically or preceptively (not popularly and incidentally,) of a soul as the proper 'I'.

It is always 'we', or the man.

How could a regenerate saint put off corruption at the sound of the trump, if up to that hour it did not in some sense or other appertain to him?
But what need of many words?
It flashes on every reader whose imagination supplies an unpreoccupied, unrefracting, 'medium' to the Apostolic assertion, that corruption in this passage is a descriptive synonyme of the material sensuous organism common to saint and sinner,--standing in precisely the same relation to the man that the testaceous offensive and defensive armour does to the crab and tortoise.