BV THE SAME AUTHOR. 
 
 Sixth Edition. Crovm %vo, 6.s. 
 AFTER DEATH : An Examination of the Testimony of 
 Primitive Times respecting the State of the Faithful 
 Dead, and their Eelationship to the Living. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 PART I. 
 
 Tlic State of the Faithful Dead and the Good Offices of the Living in their 
 Behalf: The Test of Catholicity— Value of the Testimony of the 
 Primitive Fathers— The Intermediate State— Change in the Inter- 
 mediate State— Prayers for the Dead : Reasons for our Lord's Silence 
 on the Subject— Testimony of Holy Scripture— Testimony of the 
 Catacombs— Testimony of the Early Fathers— Testimony of the Primi- 
 tive Liturgies— Prayers for the Pardon of Sins of Infirmity and the 
 Effacement of Sinful Stains— Ineffieacy of Prayer for those who died 
 in wilful unrepented sin. 
 
 PART II. 
 
 77ie Good Offices of the Faithful Dead in Behalf of the Living .- Primitive 
 Testimony to the Intercession of the Saints— Primitive Testimony to 
 the Invocation of the Saints— Trustworthiness of the Patristic 
 Evidence for Invocation tested— The Primitive Liturgies and the 
 Roman Catacombs— Patristic Opinion on the extent of the Knowledge 
 possessed by the Saints— Testimony of Holy Scriptiure upon the same 
 Subject— The Beatific Vision not yet attained by any of the Saints- 
 Conclusions drawn from the foregoing Testimony. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY CHAPTERS. 
 
 Is a fuller recognition of the Practice of praying for the Dead desirable 
 or not? 
 
 Is it lawful or desirable to practise the Invocation of Saints in any form 
 or not? 
 
 RIVINGTONS: LONDON. 
 
Bp t\)z 0amc SLut^ov 
 
 Second Edition. Crovm Bvo. 6s. 
 THE BISHOPS IN THE TOWER. A Record of 
 Stirring Events affecting the Church and Nonconformists 
 from the Restoration to the Revolution. 
 
 OPINIONS OF THE PRESS. 
 
 " They are admirable. We most heartily commend this delightful 
 volume. It is no mere compilation. It is full of original research and 
 clear and broad grasp of .situations : it is written by one with the 
 historical faculty riclily developed." — I.tteniry Chnrchman. 
 
 "The encouragement of the study of Church history is Dr. Luckock's 
 object : and it will \k' chi'erfully allowed that his lectures are calculated 
 to promote \t."—!-rei latfir. 
 
 " Wi- liki> llii^ l.uMk fully as well as any that Canon Luekock has 
 written. It is an exrcllent piece of work in i)Oiut of composition. The 
 author sliows a tlioruugli knowledge of the period which he describes, and 
 his views are calm and fair." — Church Hells. 
 
 " It is very readable, and very pleasantly written."— CuanUoTt. 
 
 Third Edition. Crown Svo. Two Vols. 12s. 
 FOOTPRINTS OF THE SON OF MAN, AS 
 TRACED BY ST. MARK. Being Eighty Portions 
 for Private Study, Family Reading, and Instructions in 
 Church. With an Introduction by the late Bishop of 
 Ely. 
 
 OPINIONS OF THE PItESS. 
 
 " His book is designed ' for private study, family reading, and instruc- 
 tions in church." For one or all of these three purposes we heartily 
 recommend it. . . . The freiinnnt references to the Talmud and 
 Mishnah, as illustrating the Gospel reoonl, form a peculiarly valuable 
 feature of the book."— CA«rc7i Quarterly Itrrieu-. 
 
 " We will undertake to s.ay that there is not a church in England in 
 which the congregation would not be greatly benefited and advanced in 
 religious knowledge by listening to these addresses." — Guardian. 
 
 Third Edition. Crovm Svo. 6<. 
 STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF THE BOOK 
 OF COMMON PRAYER. The Anglican Reform— 
 The Puritan Inuovations— The Elizabethan Reaction — 
 The Caroline Settlement. With Appendices. 
 
 RIVINGTONS: LONDON 
 
THE DIVINE LITURGY 
 
Ecclesias oblatio, quam Domhms docuit offerri in universe 
 mundo, purum sacriflcium reputatum est apud Damn, et acceptiun 
 est Ei. 
 
 " The oblation of the Church, which the Lord taught to be 
 offered throughout the whole world, is accoxmted a pure sacri6ce 
 with God, and is acceptable to Him."— Ibes.eus, adversus 
 Hccreses, iv. xxxiv. 
 
BEING THE 
 
 ORDER FOR HOLY COMMUNION 
 
 Historically, Doctrinally, and Devotionally 
 set forth 
 
 In Fifty Portions 
 
 HERBERT MORTIMER LUCKOCK, D.D. 
 
 LIBRARY OF F^HINCETON 
 
 MAR 4 1999 
 
 THEOLOGICAL St MINARY 
 
 RI VINGTONS 
 
 WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON 
 
 MDCCCLXXXIX 
 
Digitized by tlie Internet Arcliive 
 in 2015 
 
 https://archive.org/details/divineliturgybeiOOIuck 
 
AD : MAJOKEM : DEI : GLOKIAM. 
 VIEO : ADMODUM : EEVERENDO : 
 
 EDVAEDO : 
 
 EPISCOPO : LINCOLNENSI : 
 S. T. P. 
 
 SANCTI : HUGONIS : IN : CATHEDEA : SEDENTI : 
 EANDEM : VIM : SIBI : ANIMOS : CONCILIANDI : 
 IDEM : STUDIU5I : FIDEI : CATHOLIC^B : 
 NEC : MINOEEM : PIETATEM : EEFEUENTI : 
 HHNC : QDALEMCDNQUE : LIBRDM : 
 EPISCOri ; DESIDEIIATISSIMI : IN : MEMORIAM 1 CONSCEIPTUM : 
 SUMMA : REVEEENTIA : DEDICAT 
 
 H. M. L. 
 
It is now four years since, in obedience to the 
 wish of my dear and revered Father in God, 
 the late Bishop Woodford, I put forth an 
 exposition of S. Mark's Gospel, so arranged that, 
 while it served for private and devotional study, 
 it might also be publicly read in the Services of 
 the Church. It was commended by him to the 
 Clergy of his Diocese, especially for this latter 
 purpose. The numerous letters that I have 
 received, not only from friends and neighbours, 
 but also from strangers at a distance, seem to 
 justify the principle which he thought fit to 
 advocate ; and the kind expressions of my corre- 
 spondents on this subject have led me to think 
 that another series of instructions of a similar 
 kind may prove helpful. 
 
 It was the Bishop's desire that the experiment 
 
X 
 
 Preface. 
 
 of reading from a printed book in place of a 
 written sermon should be tried in the first 
 instance with Sacred History; but he looked 
 forward to its being followed up by the publi- 
 cation of expositions of a distinctly doctrinal 
 character. I have thought it well, however, to 
 make the transition gradual by combining his- 
 tory and doctrine together in these pages; and 
 I wait for some future time, when, Dm volente, 
 I may put forth others which shall deal with 
 dogmatic teaching alone. 
 
 The subject, which is here treated of, is one 
 which, since the Catholic Eevival of the last 
 generation, has been attracting an ever-increasing 
 attention, till it has now an absorbing interest in 
 almost every part of the English Church. When 
 we go back in thought to our childhood, and 
 recall the quarterly or monthly recurrence of 
 what was called " Sacrament Sunday," and then 
 turn to read the List of Celebrations on any 
 Church-door almost that we may chance to enter, 
 we are filled with wonder at the rapid develop- 
 ment of the Sacramental system ; but we are 
 
Preface. 
 
 xi 
 
 disposed to question whether the instruction of 
 communicants in the principles of the Service has 
 quite kept pace with the multiplication of their 
 Communions. The laity are eager to be taught, 
 but the Clergy are not always able to teach. 
 During some thirteen or fourteen years, when it 
 was my privilege to fill the office of Examining 
 Chaplain to the late and present Bishops of Ely, 
 I felt it my duty to press invariably upon the 
 candidates for Ordination the necessity of estab- 
 lishing Communicants' Classes in their several 
 parishes, for specific instruction in Sacramental 
 doctrine. It will strike many as no over-exact- 
 ing standard to expect that they should at least 
 be prepared to teach their people the nature and 
 obligations of the highest Service ; but over and 
 over again I was met by the difficulty, on the 
 part of those who were to be admitted to the 
 Diaconate, " I should tell them all I know about 
 it in half-a-dozen times"; or from those who 
 were already in Orders, I heard the confession, 
 " I have tried a Communicants' Class ; but I was 
 soon obliged to change from the Prayer-book to 
 
xii 
 
 Preface. 
 
 the Bible, for I found my knowledge of the 
 former was quickly exhausted." For those 
 whose experience is here described, I trust that 
 this treatise will be found to supply at least 
 a partial remedy. It is designed, as well as for 
 public reading, to afford material for teaching in 
 a weekly class for a year; and if it is so used, 
 I can have little doubt that by the end of that 
 time the thirst for further knowledge on such 
 an absorbing subject, and the determination to 
 satisfy it, will have grown so strong that there 
 will be little danger of the instructions coming 
 to a premature end. 
 
 When I was ordained a quarter of a century 
 ago, so little did I know of the subject that, had 
 any examining chaplain told me that it was an 
 imperative part of my Parochial work to estab- 
 lish and constantly keep up a Class for instruc- 
 tion on the Holy Communion, I should have 
 received the injunction with blank amazement. 
 But circumstances compelled me to begin some 
 instructions on the Office, and I may safely say 
 that year by year, as I have gone on teaching the 
 
Preface. 
 
 xiii 
 
 same subject, information has been constantly 
 accumulating, as well from the study of other 
 men's works as from independent reflection, so 
 that one real difficulty has been how to compress 
 into a single volume what could more easily have 
 been expanded into two or three. I speak thus 
 of my own experience, even at the risk of being 
 misunderstood, simply for the encouragement of 
 others, because I know so well that this is sorely 
 needed. 
 
 Of course the teaching of our Service-books 
 will always be subordinated to the teaching of 
 the Word of God ; but the true ideal of instruc- 
 tion for Churchmen is the blending of the two, 
 according to the proportion of the Faith ; and 
 the class that will often possess the greatest 
 attraction for the young is one in which the 
 Bible and the Prayer-book lie open together, and 
 the teacher never wearies of explaining how 
 Sacramental doctrine is Scriptural truth. Both 
 alike are calculated to kindle the keenest in- 
 terest, if intelligently set forth ; for if the Bible 
 carries us back to the far-off ages and the first 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
xiv 
 
 Preface. 
 
 beginnings of the human race, the history of the 
 Liturgy reaches at least to the incipient life of 
 Christianity, and shows us how our forefathers 
 in the Faith worshipped God, when as yet they 
 were but a feeble folk, hiding from their perse- 
 cutors in the dark places of the earth. We 
 cannot rise from even the briefest comparison of 
 our Communion Office with a Primitive Liturgy 
 without being at once impressed with the his- 
 toric continuity of Christian worship. 
 
 The compilers of our present Prayer-book ex- 
 pressed in their Preface much satisfaction that 
 " the main body and essentials of it (as well in 
 the chiefest materials as in the frame and order 
 thereof) have continued the same," through aU 
 those Eevisions to which it was subjected in the 
 reigns of the "several princes of blessed memory." 
 They might have gone further and asserted that 
 every one of the great elemental features of the 
 Eucharistic worship of the Early Church had 
 survived throughout, even under the paralysing 
 overgrowths of mediteval times. In form and 
 feature — not perhaps in the same proportions 
 
Preface. 
 
 XV 
 
 but at least in outline — the Liturgy of the nine- 
 teenth century is one with the Liturgies of the 
 second and the third. And the knowledge of 
 this will often be found helpful in removing the 
 prejudices of men, who are apt to think that 
 every revival is simply an innovation. Their 
 attitude towards change is not infrequently 
 altered directly they realise that the so-called 
 " novel practices " are integral parts of an historic 
 system. With some, of course, the antiquity of 
 an usage or ceremony is no recommendation, and 
 the study of Primitive Liturgies is regarded by 
 them as nothing less than an unworthy waste of 
 time ; but a perfectly loyal adherence to the 
 Catholic Church, especially at times when she is 
 endeavouring to put forth her utmost strength, 
 is quite inconsistent with indifference to any 
 part of her life and worship. 
 
 It is now my pleasant duty to express my 
 sincere gratitude to friends, who have in divers 
 ways helped me in bringing out this book. It 
 is due to two eminent Liturgical scholars, the 
 Eev. Canon Wordsworth, one of the editors of the 
 
xvi 
 
 Preface. 
 
 Sarum Breviary and of other Offices, and the 
 Eev. r. E. Brightman, one of the Pusey libra- 
 rians, who have looked over in proof all that 
 I have written ; and I trust that after accepting 
 (in most cases) their corrections and suggestions, 
 I may not have gone seriously astray in the 
 Liturgical parts. I owe it also to the Eev. Canon 
 Evans, who, as on previous occasions, has revised 
 the pages generally for the press; and to Dr. 
 Schiller-Szinessy, the Eeader in Talmudic and 
 Eabbinical Literature at Cambridge, for advice 
 and information on those points where Jewish 
 and Christian practices became associated to- 
 gether. Lastly, my most grateful acknowledg- 
 ments are due to one of the very foremost in 
 the school of theology for criticisms on those 
 chapters which deal with such grave and 
 important subjects as the Sacrificial aspect of 
 the Holy Eucharist, and the Eeality of Christ's 
 Presence under the forms of Bread and Wine. 
 I have not asked him for the use of his name, 
 simply because the responsibility of issuing a 
 book which touches upon such profound verities 
 
Preface. 
 
 xvii 
 
 of Catholic worship ought to rest entirely upon 
 him who sends it forth. No one will realise 
 more clearly than I do myself how inadequate 
 it is to the greatness of the subject ; I can only 
 pray that all its imperfections, and — if so be — 
 its errors, may be corrected in the hearts of 
 those who read it, by Him Who alone can guide 
 us into all truth. 
 
 H. M. L. 
 
 College, Ely, 
 tiElie JFtaat of tlje Purification, 1889. 
 
 5 
 
TABLE OF LITURGIES 
 
Clementine (Constt. Ap. viii.). Roman (Sabcm Dbe). 
 
 I. 
 
 Lections— 1. Old Testament. 
 
 2. New Testament. 
 
 Sermon. 
 
 Prayers for all orders of men. 
 
 I. Prep, of the ministers (including Col- 
 lect for Purity and Lord's Prayer). 
 ( Introit. 
 J Kyrie. 
 
 ) Gloria in excelsis. 
 (CoUects. 
 
 Lections- 1. Epistle (or 0. T.). 
 
 Gradual, etc. 
 2. Gospel. 
 
 Sermon (position variable). 
 Creed. 
 
 11. Kiss of Peace. 
 Offertory— (1) Lavabo. 
 
 (2) Oblation. 
 
 (3) Silent Prayer. 
 
 II. 
 
 Offertory— (1) Sentence. 
 
 (2) Oblation. 
 
 (3) Prayers. 
 
 (4) Lavabo. 
 
 III. Grace. 
 
 Sursum corda, Preface, Sanctus. 
 
 rConimem. of Redemption. 
 J Institution. 
 
 1 Oblation and Invocation, and Prayer 
 for the benefits of Communion. 
 Commem. of (i) the Church, 
 (ii) the Living and the Dead. 
 
 HI. The Lord be, etc. 
 
 Sursum corda, Preface, Sanctus. 
 
 Canon— 
 
 / Commem. of (i) the Church, 
 (ii) the Living, (iii) the Saints, 
 Oblation in the name of all these 
 (cuncta familia tua), and 
 
 Prayer for Consecration with a 
 
 view to Communion. 
 Institution. 
 Oblation. 
 
 Commem. of (i) the Dead, 
 
 (ii) the Communion of Saints. 
 Lord's Prayer, with proem and 
 V embolism. 
 
 IV. "The Peace of God." 
 
 Deacon's Bidding, and 
 
 Prayer of Access. 
 
 Sancta Sanctis (= Invitation). 
 
 Communion. 
 
 Deacon's Bidding, and 
 Thanksgiving. 
 
 Prayer of Blessing, and Dismissal. 
 
 IV. " The Peace of the Lord," with Frac- 
 tion, Commixture, and Agnus Dei. 
 Kiss of Peace. 
 
 Prayers before Communion. 
 
 Communion. 
 
 Tlianksgiving. 
 
 Ablutions. 
 
 Post-communions. 
 
 
EngUsh, 1649. 
 
 English, 1662. 
 
 I. L. P. and Collect for Purity. 
 
 I. L. P. and Collect for Purity. 
 
 /"Introit 
 
 
 J Kyrie. ' 
 
 f Kyrie with Decalogue. 
 1 
 
 1 Gloria in excelsis. 
 
 
 I, Collects. 
 
 L Collects. 
 
 Lections.— 1. Epistle (or 0. T.). 
 
 Lections.— 1. Epistle (or 0. T.). 
 
 2. Gospel. 
 
 2. Gospel. 
 
 Creed. 
 
 Creed. 
 
 Sermon and Exhortation. 
 
 Sermon and Exhortation. 
 
 II. 
 
 11. 
 
 Offertory— (1) Sentences. 
 
 . Offertory— (1) Sentences. 
 
 
 (2) ObUtion. 
 
 (2) Oblation. 
 
 
 (3) Prayer — commem. 
 
 
 of (i) the Church, (ii) the Living, 
 
 
 (iii) the Dead. 
 
 
 Preparation of Communicants. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 n or a e or b. 
 
 III. The Lord be, etc. 
 
 in. 
 
 
 Sursum corda, Preface, Sanctus. 
 
 Sursum corda. Preface, Sanctus. 
 
 
 Prayer of Access. 
 
 Canok — 
 
 [Canon]— 
 
 Commem. of (i) the Chnrch, (ii) the 
 
 
 , Living, (iii) the Saints, (iv) the 
 
 
 
 ' Dead. 
 
 
 
 Commem. of Redemption. 
 
 /• Commem. of Redemption. 
 
 
 Invocation and 
 
 
 
 Prayer for Consecration with a 
 
 \ Prayer for the benefits of Com- 
 
 
 view to Communion. 
 
 J munion. 
 
 
 Institution. 
 
 \ Institution. 
 
 
 Oblation. 
 
 
 
 Lord's Prayer with proem. 
 
 
 IV. "The Peace of the Lord." 
 
 IV. 
 
 Preparation of Communicants. 
 
 
 Invitations. 
 
 
 Confession, Absolution, and 
 
 
 Comfortable Words. 
 
 
 Prayer of Access. 
 
 
 
 CoMMONiOK, with Agnus Dei. 
 
 Communion. 
 
 
 Lord's Prayer. 
 
 Post-communion (sentence). 
 
 Oblation or 
 
 
 Thanksgiving. 
 
 Thanksgiving. 
 
 
 Gloria in excelsis. 
 
 " The Peace of God," and Blessing. 
 
 " The Peace of God," and Blessing. 
 
 xxi 
 
GLOSSARY OF LITURGICAL TERMS. 
 
 All). — A white linen tunic reaching to the feet and fastened 
 with a girdle. 
 
 Ambon. — A raised desk or platform with steps from which 
 Lections were read and sometimes the Sermon was 
 preached. 
 
 Anaphora.— The Offering— the more sacred part of the 
 Eucharistic Service, extending from the sursum corda 
 to the end. 
 
 Antidoron. — The unconsecrated.remains of the Holy Loaves, 
 distributed to the people after the Liturgy in the Greek 
 Church. 
 
 Bema. — The Sanctuary or Altar-enclosure of an Eastern 
 Church. 
 
 Canon Missse. — In the Roman Liturgy the invariable portion 
 of the Service, including Consecration, Intercession, 
 Oblation, and the Lord's Prayer. 
 
 Catechumen. — A candidate for Baptism under instruction. 
 
 Chasuble.— The principal vestment worn by the Celebrant. 
 
 Chrlsom.— A white robe put upon one newly-baptized. 
 
 Cope. — A hooded cloak clasped on the breast and reaching 
 to the feet : formerly an outdoor vestment, and now 
 chiefly used in processions. 
 
 Corporal. — A linen cloth on which the elements are placed 
 for Consecration. 
 
 Credence. — A side-table on which are placed the elements 
 prepared for oblation. 
 
 Dalmatic. — A sleeved tunic, worn over the Alb as the dis- 
 tinctive vestment of the Gospeller or Deacon. 
 
 xxiii 
 
xxiv Glossary of Liturgical Terms. 
 
 Diptychs. — Tables on which are inscribed the names of 
 persons, living and dead, to be commemorated at the 
 Altar. 
 
 Embolismus.— An expansion of the two final clauses of the 
 Lord's Prayer. 
 
 Entrance.— (1) Little, the bringing in of the book of the 
 Gospels and placing it upon the Altar before the Gospel 
 is read. 
 
 (2) Great, the procession with the elements from 
 the Prothesis to the Altar at the Offertory. 
 
 Euchologlon. — The Eastern Service-book corresponding to 
 the Western Saoramentary and Book of Offices. 
 
 Fldeles.— The faithful, i.e. the baptized. 
 
 Parsed. — Interpolated matter in diflferent parts, as, e.g., in 
 the Gloria in Excehis. 
 
 Gradual. — An anthem sung after the Epistle : so called 
 because formerly it was sung on a step of the Ambon. 
 
 Intinction. — The steeping of the Consecrated Bread in the 
 Wine, with a view to administering them both together 
 to the people by means of a spoon ; used now by the 
 Eastern Churches. 
 
 Introit. — Called also "theOfiice," an anthem sung at the 
 beginning of the Service. 
 
 Lection,— A portion of Scripture read in the Service. 
 
 Missa Catechumenorum.— That part of the Service, consist- 
 ing mainly of instruction, at which the unbaptized 
 might be present. 
 
 Missa Fidelium. — The more sacred part, confined to the 
 baptized. 
 
 Ulssa Sicca. — Dry Mass, the Communion Office without 
 the Canon. 
 
 Oblation. — The ofiering or presentation to God. (i) The 
 Lesser, of the elements before Consecration ; (ii) the 
 Greater, of Christ's Body and Blood under the forms of 
 Bread and Wine after Consecration. 
 
Glossary of Liturgical Terms, xxv 
 
 Ordinary In the Mass. — All the fixed part of the Service 
 except the Canon. 
 
 Fax-bred. — A tablet kissed in common by the faithful as a 
 substitute for the Kiss of Peace among themselves. 
 
 Prokelmenon. — The Anthem which in the Greek Rite corre- 
 sponds in a measure to the Western Gradual, so called 
 because it " precedes " instead of following the Epistle. 
 
 Frothesis. — The Table on which the offerings of bread and 
 wine are prepared, and where they remain until the 
 Great Entrance. 
 
 Prose. — A hymn following the Gradual, less metrical in 
 structure than the Sequence. 
 
 Sanctus, or Tersanctus. — Holy, holy, holy, etc. 
 
 Sacramentary.— The Book for the use of the Celebrant con- 
 taining the fixed framework, the Canon, and the 
 variable prayers and prefaces of the Liturgy, together 
 with other rites. 
 
 Secret. — (1) Formerly used sometimes of the Canon ; (2) a 
 variable collect after the offertory in the Roman Rite ; 
 (3) the "Institution" in the Gallican. 
 
 Sequence.— A metrical hymn occasionally sung after the 
 Alleluia preceding the Gospel. 
 
 Trisagion.— The hymn, "Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy 
 Immortal, have mercy upon us." 
 
 Troparium.— In the East averse or anthem: in the West 
 the book containing the Tropes, i.e. the verses " farsed " 
 in the Gloria in Excelsis. 
 
 Tunicle,— A less ornate form of Dalmatic worn by the Epi- 
 stoler or Sub-Deacon. 
 
 Veil. — A square of linen or silk used for covering the 
 Chalice. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 FACE 
 
 I. Ihc ^iturgg i 
 
 II. '(EIu 'goxVs cSuppcr lo 
 
 III. Wolp_ (Eommunton, Jlass, llic gvcalting of 
 
 gxciH), anb the ®ttcharist, ... 22 
 
 IV. TEhc ffliJcning Rubrics 32 
 
 V. 'i;!!! (Christian ^^ticsthooli 41 
 
 VI. mn ^Itar 49 
 
 VII. 'SIu SoiS 'labic, 58 
 
 VIII. 'Eht (D£5c£ 0f Jprtparation, ... 67 
 
 IX. i;iu Ptcalcgoe 74 
 
 X. '^ritc QtoUccts 82 
 
 XI. 'illu eronsirttction of tltc dolUct, ... 92 
 
 XII. i;iti CEpistle .- . . 98 
 
 XIII. Uhc (gospel 107 
 
 XIV. Siitmc €xcci i'5 
 
 XV. tSwbstana of tltc #tccnc Crccb, . . 124 
 
 XVI. IhE person of the ijolg ©host, . - 132 
 
 xxvi 
 
Table of Contents. xxvii 
 
 PAGE 
 
 XVII. %,\\t 39ublication at §.a\\xts, ... 140 
 
 XVIII. ^Uc (Sermon 146 
 
 XIX. Waz (JDfEcrtorjj 154 
 
 XX. '(Ehc ^lixci Chalice 162 
 
 XXI. lite irajjcr for the Church, . . . 172 
 
 XXII. JJraBcrs for the ^faithful glcaii, . 179 
 
 XXIII. 'ilhc Jfirst exhortation 186 
 
 XXIV. Hhc <Seconb (Exhortation, .... 194 
 
 XXV. '(Ehc exhortation oi the Cetchration, . 204 
 
 XXVI. %\\t inbitation, 211 
 
 XXVII. 'nChe (general Confession, . . . 217 
 
 XXVIII. <(Eh£ glbsolution, 224 
 
 XXIX. %}c^t llianksgibiufl 234 
 
 XXX. liropcr ^prefaces 241 
 
 XXXI. ^rojjer prefaces for Caster an& JVsceusion- 
 
 fiifi 248 
 
 XXXII. ^proper |3rff:ices for Eaihitsun-iai.) anb 
 
 '(Eriniti) ^unbaj), .... 255 
 
 XXXIII. Ihe lersanctus 265 
 
 XXXIV. %X\t ^prager of grumble glccesis, . 272 
 
 XXXV. Wa,t flubrii before Consecration, . . 278 
 
 XXXVI. i;he $)raj)er rrf Consecration, . . 285 
 
 XXXVII. Ihe inbocatiou of the gjotj) ©host, . 292 
 
xxviii 
 
 Table of Contents. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 XXXVIII. lite saarba of Institution, . . 302 
 
 XXXIX. '(EhE glcalitg of CEhrist's J3rtscncc in 
 
 the tSiicramctit 310 
 
 XL. %.\z ^ign of the dross 320 
 
 XLI. "ilhe QEommunion of tlu ^priest, ... 328 
 
 XLII. '^Ehe CCommttnion of the ^aitg, ... 334 
 
 XLIII. lEhe IJorb's ^prajcr 342 
 
 XLIV. i;h£ gmser of ©bl.ttion, .... 349 
 
 XLV. '(Khe iSost-Commnnion '(Ehnnhsgibing, . 358 
 
 XLVI. ^Ihc ©loria in (Excclsis, .... 365 
 
 XLVII. 'uEhe glcssing, 373 
 
 XLVIII. ilcabeneb or Bnleabcneb grcab, anb 
 
 flcscrbation 379 
 
 XLIX. Jfrequcneg of (Eommnnion, • • • 39° 
 
 L. 'ilhc Jttl'iration ujJOtt gluccling, or the glack 
 
 llubrir 398 
 
 Index, 409 
 
I. 
 
 The Office of the Blessed Sacrament has borne 
 many names. One of the most widely used is " The 
 Liturgy." It is a word of great historic interest, one 
 which, for the most part, obtains a deeper meaning 
 at each successive stage of its use. In Greece it 
 was a civil or political " service " performed by the classical 
 few for the good of the many. The Athenians, "^age of the 
 instead of imposing upon the citizens a direct pro- 
 perty-tax, as is done in England and elsewhere, 
 adopted the arbitrary method of calling upon 
 wealthy individuals to provide at their own cost 
 for special national emergencies and certain regu- 
 larly-recurring burdens. The chief of these were 
 the equipment of ships of war, theatrical exhibi- 
 tions, tribal feastings, and public games. Not in- 
 frequently patriotic citizens offered to take the 
 expense upon themselves; but all services of this 
 kind, whether voluntary or imposed by the State, 
 were designated " Liturgies." 
 
 The word was adopted into the terminology of the 
 A 
 
4 
 
 The Liturgy. 
 
 that waiteth for Him." Now, it is true that in the 
 Authorised Version, from which we have quoted, 
 there is some similarity between the two, but neither 
 with the Hebrew, nor with the Septuagint Version 
 is the correspondence manifest. King James's trans- 
 lators were doubtless biassed by a desire to bring 
 S. Paul into harmony with the prophet, but we look 
 in vain for any trace of resemblance in the Revised 
 Version. 
 
 If, however, we turn to one of the primitive 
 Liturgies, we find the whole sentence word for word.^ 
 Furthermore, there is an expression slurred over 
 in the Authorised Version as insignificant, which 
 becomes intelligible at once when read from the 
 Liturgy.^ Indeed, the whole circumstances are such 
 that it has been pronounced by an eminent Liturgi- 
 ologist^ to be " certain beyond all assurance " that 
 this is the passage which the Apostle was quoting. 
 The doctrine The cxpressiou, "as it is written," has been 
 the early thought to Create a difficulty by interfering with 
 the common tradition of the existence of that dis- 
 ciplim arcani, that holy reverence which led the 
 Church to hide her mysteries from open and avowed 
 
 1 Liturgy of S. James. 
 
 - The quotation begins with a relative, S. S^BaXubs ovk elSe k.t.X. 
 "which eye hath not," etc., referring to rd duprifiaTa of the 
 Liturgy. S. Paul gives the quotation exactly, though it makes 
 the sentence appear so harsh, without what goes before. 
 
 ' J. M. Neale. It is right to add that his conclusions have been 
 freely canvassed, and are not universally accepted. 
 
The Lihirgy. 
 
 5 
 
 enemies. She knew and acted upon her Lord's 
 command, " Give not that which is holy unto the 
 dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest 
 they trample them under their feet, and turn again 
 and rend you " ; but it is by no means certain that 
 this " doctrine of reserve " was practised so early as 
 the time of S. Paul. It was only when Christianity 
 had made considerable progress, and was becoming 
 formidable, that the Church encountered the full 
 force of heathen opposition ; and then, but not till 
 then, would it become necessary to hide the mys- 
 teries of her worship, and withdraw from circulation 
 the books which were in use. This was certainly 303 a. d. 
 done before the persecution of Diocletian, for though 
 the sacred Scriptures and vestments and other trea- 
 sures of the Church were given up by those who 
 apostatised, there is no trace of the surrender, under 
 a most searching inquisition, of any books of Divine 
 worship, which would naturally be the first objects 
 of heathen curiosity. 
 
 We see no reason, therefore, on the grounds men- The Aposto- 
 tioned, for supposing that S. Paul did not quote '"^ ^"""'^y- 
 from a written Liturgy. It does not follow, how- 
 ever, that this was a complete Form. It is safer to 
 conclude that only portions of it were of Apostolic 
 authority. Probably before the Apostles separated 
 for their several spheres of missionary work, they 
 met and agreed, under the guidance of the Holy 
 
6 
 
 The Liturgy. 
 
 Ghost, upon the essentials of Eucharistic worship. 
 These would be put together not so much for a type 
 or model, as a framework or nucleus, upon which 
 divers forms might be built up, with variations of 
 detail characteristic of the tastes and wishes of in- 
 dividual Churches.^ These would be handed down, 
 for the most part, orally, till after the conversion of 
 Constantine, when persecution ceased, and Chris- 
 tianity enjoyed imperial favour. Then the main 
 reason for hiding the mysteries and their mode of 
 celebration was withdrawn, and written Service- 
 books made their appearance in abundance. 
 The families A Comparison of all the recognised Liturgies of the 
 of Liturgies. ^^^-^^ Church has made manifest the phenomena which 
 we have mentioned, of substantial uniformity with 
 variety of detail ; and a classification of the variable 
 parts has resulted in the reduction of the whole 
 number of Liturgies to four or five groups or families, 
 known by the names of Apostles, or others, who 
 laboured in the countries where they were severally 
 used, viz., the Liturgies of S. James, S. Mark, S. John 
 or S. Paul, S. Peter, and SS. Adseus and Maris.^ 
 The source It would be a matter of the highest interest if we 
 ilt'urgy."'"'' could State definitely which type the British and 
 Celtic Churches used, but too little is known to offer 
 materials for a positive judgment. Most probably 
 
 1 Cf. Murat. Diss. ix. 119. Firmilian Ep. ad Cyprian, Ixxv. § 6. 
 
 2 For some further account, cf. Author's After Death, ch. in. 
 
The Liturgy. 
 
 7 
 
 at first it was that of S. John or S. Paul, called 
 also the Ephesine Liturgy; for there was a close 
 connexion between the Churches of Gaul and 
 Ephesus,^ and as far back as history enables us 
 to penetrate, the Churches of Britain and Gaul 
 were intimately associated. It was to Gaul that 
 Britain appealed for help to oppose the inroads 429 a d- 
 of Pelagian error, and it was from Gaul that mis- 
 sionaries were sent to establish our forefathers in 447 a.d. 
 the doctrine of the Catholic Faith.^ 
 
 The preservation of the names of Galilean saints Traces of 
 in our Calendar, SS. Hilary, Enurchus, Britius, Re- influence, 
 migius, and Martin, the last with even a double 
 commemoration, and the dedication of endless 
 Churches, amongst them the oldest in England,^ to 
 the honour of the same Gallican Bishop, furnish cor- 
 roborative evidence ; so that there can hardly be a 
 doubt that when S. Augustine landed in England he 
 found the Gallican Liturgy in use. What modifica- 
 tion it underwent at his hands is uncertain ; but in 
 the beginning of the eighth century the Council of 747 a.d. 
 Cloveshoo superseded it by the Roman. Gallican 
 
 1 Euseb. Ecd. Hist. v. 1. 
 
 - Germanus of Auxerre and Lupus of Troyes were sent over by a 
 Gallican Synod, and, after meeting the heretics and refuting them, 
 returned home, but only to revisit the Britons at a later period 
 for the further confirmation of the faith. Cf. Bright's £arhj Eng. 
 Ch. HUt. ch. i. Warren's Lit. of Celtic Ch. pp. 61, 62. 
 
 s S. Martin's, at Canterbury. 
 
8 The Liturgy. 
 
 influence, however, did not then cease, for it left a 
 new impress on our Service-books when, after the 
 Norman Conquest, they were revised by a Norman 
 Count,^ and what is known as the Sarum Use was 
 established by them. This has been found to be 
 1087 A.D. almost identical with the Rouen Use of the eleventh 
 century.^ But, as we have said, the main principles 
 of Liturgical worship were the same in all the 
 primitive Forms, and it will be our endeavour in 
 Theanti- the following pages to show that the Anglican 
 English Office, which we use to-day, is a direct lineal 
 Liturgy. descendant of the Liturgies of the fourth century. 
 
 If our readers have any reverence for antiquity their 
 interest will be quickened as we trace out and exhibit 
 the many features of correspondence. Looked at, as 
 our Liturgy is looked at by thousands of our fellow- 
 Churchmen, with no knowledge of its long and 
 honoured existence, it fills them with admiration; 
 friend and foe unite in praising the English Office 
 for its singular beauty;^ but let them learn its 
 chequered history, follow it through sixteen cen- 
 turies of usage, developed and curtailed, overlaid 
 
 1 Osirmnd, a statesman of much distinction, was consecrated to 
 the see of Salisbxiry on the death of Herman. 
 
 Cf. De Moleon's Voyages LUurgiques, 283-292. This identity, 
 however, has lately been disputed. 
 
 3 Its inferiority, however, to the Office in the first Prayer-Book 
 of Edward vi. has often been noticed, and will be frequently re- 
 ferred to in the following pages. 
 
The Liturgy. 9 
 
 with superstition and purged from accretions, assailed 
 with the fiercest bigotry, and defended through 
 good report and evil report by some of the greatest 
 liturgical scholars — and admiration is turned into 
 awe. It is, if we may use the comparison, as when 
 we enter some modern church, and see everything 
 designed and arranged to offer unto God the beauty 
 of worship, but all is new ; and then we pass into 
 one of our oldest cathedrals, and as we walk about 
 we see everywhere traces of a lengthened history, of 
 centuries of change and vicissitude, of vigour and 
 decay, of enthusiastic devotion and iconoclastic fury, 
 and a sense of awe steals into the mind, and we ask 
 ourselves Avhat it is that has given permanence to 
 the fabric, that has repaired the breaches and 
 effaced the disfigurements ; what it is that has pre- 
 served our Church amongst the dissolution of well 
 nigh everything around us, and we go away with the 
 conviction with which the patriarch awakened out 
 of his dream : " Surely the Lord is in this place . . . 
 this is none other than the house of God, and this is 
 the gate of heaven." 
 
II. 
 
 From the Reformation to the Catholic Revival 
 
 the Lord's Supper was a familiar title for the Divine 
 1549— -^^ 
 1833 A.D. Mysteries. In the present generation it has happily 
 
 been almost entirely superseded by others, which 
 
 are at the same time more ancient, and less liable to 
 
 be misunderstood. Of course if it could be proved 
 
 that S. Paul applied it to the Holy Eucharist pure 
 
 and simple, none could be more ancient ; but when 
 
 he writes to the Corinthians touching certain abuses 
 
 The Scrip. ° 
 
 tiirai usage which had gathered round the celebration of this, 
 it was not by itself, but in combination with the 
 Agape or Love-Feast. In his eyes, of necessity, 
 the former was the all-important part, but still the 
 fact of the joint-celebration remains, and forbids 
 the appropriation of the term which he uses to any- 
 thing but the whole feast. Probably at first either 
 designation, Agapfe or the Lord's Supper, was 
 used indifferently to embrace both. 
 
 The origin of the connexion is obvious. Our 
 Blessed Lord had instituted the Holy Eucharist at 
 
 10 
 
The Lord's Supper. 
 
 the Paschal Supper. It naturally suggested to the 
 first Christians the propriety of preserving a similar 
 association in subsequent Celebrations. Social 
 gatherings, in which different classes united in par- 
 taking of a common meal, had long been known 
 among the Greeks. The brotherhood of Christians The chris- 
 prompted the adoption of a like practice, that rich Feast.""^ 
 and poor, master and slave, might have a common 
 meeting-ground. In the beginning, at Jerusalem at 
 least, the cost would be defrayed out of the common 
 fund, but subsequently, when they ceased to have 
 " all things in common," contributions in kind were 
 made for the feast by the richer members of the 
 community. At Corinth the sacred character im- 
 parted to the meal by the conjunction with it of the 
 Blessed Sacrament was forgotten, the bounds of 
 temperance were overstepped, and the Apostle was 
 called upon to interfere. He found that the whole 
 principle had been violated ; the rich would not wait 
 for the poor, but partook of the feast before their 
 arrival, and " one is hungry and another is drunken." ^ 
 
 The first result of the Apostle's interference was The connex- 
 to place the Holy Eucharist before instead of after eT- 
 the Love-Feast. We have an intimation of this in ^hfj^'p^^s"'' 
 what took place shortly after ^ in the upper chamber changed. 
 1 1 Cor. xi. 21. 
 
 - The First Epistle to the Corinthians was probably written in 
 the spring of 57 a.d. S. Paul's visit to Troas was shortly after 
 Tentecost in the same year. 
 
12 
 
 The Lord's Supper. 
 
 at Troas upon the restoration to life of Eutj'chus. 
 In the Authorised Version of the Acts we read, 
 " When he therefore was come up again, and had 
 broken bread and eaten " ; ^ but it would be more 
 fitly translated " had broken the bread," that is, of 
 the Eucharist, " and had made a meal," that is, the 
 subsequent Agapfe. 
 
 Ths next step in the history was the entire 
 separation of the two feasts, after which the Agape 
 gradually fell into disrepute.^ It would seem that 
 as soon as the connexion had been severed, the 
 Holy Eucharist began to be celebrated early in the 
 day, as far at least as we are able to gather from 
 the few scattered notices that are made of it ; and 
 when once this change had become established we 
 should have expected that the title of the " Lord's 
 Supper " would have fallen into disuse, but such was 
 not altogether the case. The Council of Trent ^ 
 expresses the truth in saying that " some of the 
 ancient fathers sometimes called the Sacred Eu- 
 cana charist also by the title of Supper "j but it is clear 
 Domini. ^^^^ could hardly have been regarded as a 
 recognised title, for it was applied without any 
 explanatory comment to an annual commemorative 
 The Maun- feast of Maundy Thursday, which was kept in the 
 
 day Supper. 
 
 1 Acts of the App. xx. 11. 
 
 2 The word survived in Latin for a dole of food to the poor, as 
 in Egbert's Pontifical, oratio ad agapem pauperum, Surtees Soc. 
 xxvii. 124. ' De Euchar. v. 
 
The Lord's Supper. 1 3 
 
 evening. We read in the Acts of the Council of 
 Carthage ^ of " that one day of the year on which the 39, a.d. 
 Lord's Supper is celebrated " ; and S. Augustine, in 
 speaking of a custom of bathing at the end of Lent, 
 writes, " that day was chosen on which the Lord's 
 Supper is annually celebrated." ^ 
 
 At the Eeformation, however, it found its way as 153° a.d. 
 the designation of the Holy Eucharist proper into 
 the great Protestant Confession of Augsburg,^ and 
 became a favourite with Calvin. Subsequently 
 it was introduced, though by what influence it 
 is not easy to discover, into the first Prayer-book 
 of Edward VI. : " The Supper of the Lord and the 1549 a.d. 
 Holy Communion, commonly called the Mass." 
 
 The legitimacy of " Evening Communions " arises Theinnov 
 almost of necessity out of a consideration of this in°g"com" 
 title. The advocates of the change of the time of 
 celebration from that in universal use for at least 
 eighteen centuries, base their right to make it upon 
 the account of the original institution ; but they 
 have hardly given sufficient weight to the following 
 considerations. An evening Celebration was tried 
 at Corinth, and became the cause of such terrible 
 evils, that they drew down upon the Church Divine 
 displeasure in the infliction of divers diseases and 
 death ; the subject was referred to S. Paul, and 
 
 1 iii. Cone. Garth. Can. xxix. 
 
 2 S. Aug. £p. 54, vii. § 10. 
 
 3 Part i. Art. x. 
 
14 
 
 The Lord's Supper. 
 
 his decision, given under the guidance of the Holy 
 Ghost, must have been adverse to the practice, 
 for it was never heard of any more in the Church 
 down to the present generation.^ These combined 
 facts afford conclusive proof that it was not intended 
 by our Lord that later ages should follow the ex- 
 ample of the original institution in all its particulars. 
 
 Had He given the slightest intimation that, apart 
 from that first celebration, the evening time would 
 be in accordance with His wish, the universal 
 Church could not possibly have gone against it, 
 as it did almost from the very beginning. In 
 speaking of " the things pertaining to the kingdom 
 of God," He must have explained what He left to 
 be settled by the Apostles; and we have the au- 
 thority of S. Augustine ^ for saying that the time to 
 be observed not only at Corinth but by the Church 
 generally was prescribed by an Apostle. If, there- 
 fore, S. Paul was guided into all truth in fulfil- 
 ment of the Divine promise, his direction on this 
 point claims the adherence of the Church every bit 
 as justly as upon any other matter, and to fly in 
 the face of this, is to reverse an Apostolic precept. 
 
 1 There were occasional celebrations at the ninth hour, i.e. to 
 ■3 P.M., on fast-days, to avoid anything so festal till the day was 
 far advanced ; but this obviously affords no sanction to evening 
 Communions as at present administered. Cf. Martene di Rit. 
 Antiq. i. p. 108. 
 
 = Ep. ad Januar. vi. § 8. 
 
The Lord's Slipper. 
 
 15 
 
 Now there is a remarkable consensus of testimony Celebrations 
 touching the time of celebration during the first '\niy.^i^y\n 
 centuries. Wherever it is spoken of, it is early, {'i^^™""" 
 always in the morning, sometimes even before the 
 break of day. 
 
 The Governor of Bithynia wrote to the Eoman '04 a.d. 
 Emperor about the habits of the Christians in his 
 province, and testified to their "meeting together 
 on a certain day before it was light, binding them- 
 selves by a sacrament." ^ 
 
 Tertullian says that they celebrated the Sacrament c. 200 a.d. 
 "in the assemblies which were held before daybreak."^ 
 
 S. Cyprian not only witnesses to the early hour =53 a.d. 
 of the Celebration, but justifies the departure from 
 that of the original institution ; " it was necessary 
 for Christ to offer on the evening of the day that 
 the very hour of sacrifice might signify the sunset 
 and evening of the world, . . . but we celebrate 
 the resurrection of the Lord in the morning."^ 
 
 Moreover, in addition to this, there is a large 
 body of indirect evidence in the writings of Fathers 
 and in the decrees of Councils and Synods touching 
 the propriety of receiving the Holy Eucharist before Fasting 
 taking food, which all points in the direction 
 the early hours. Confining ourselves to the first 
 four centuries, we find the mind of the primitive 
 Church very clearly expressed in favour of fasting 
 
 1 Ep. xcvii. 2 De Cor. Mil. iii. 3 Ep. ad Ca:cil. Ixiii. § 13. 
 
1 6 The Lord's Supper. 
 
 Communion. In the East, Pliny assumes tliat it 
 was received fasting, for he says that at the conclu- 
 sion of the Celebration they separated, and after an 
 interval met together again to partake of a meal. 
 370 A.D. S. Basil twice testifies to the custom, first when 
 he says, " It is impossible to venture on the priest's 
 office without fasting, not only in the present mys- 
 tical and true service, but also in that typical service 
 which was offered under the Law";^ and secondly, 
 in reference to the Easter Communion, he says, 
 "The Lord receives the faster within the holy 
 chancel."^ 
 
 381 A D. S. Chrysostom held very strongly the value of 
 fasting to prepare the soul for the reception of 
 grace, and when accused of " having communicated 
 some after they had eaten," he repudiated the charge 
 in the most vehement manner : " If I did this may 
 my name be wiped out of the roll of Bishops, and 
 not be written in the book of the orthodox Faith ; 
 for if I did this, Christ shall cast me out of His 
 kingdom."^ It is generally assumed that the 
 vehemence of his language was called forth by an 
 instinctive horror at the bare thought of such a 
 thing, but a careful examination of the context 
 rather suggests that it was prompted by a determi- 
 nation to satisfy his readers of the utter baselessness 
 
 1 Horn, dejejun. i. § 6. = IMd. ii. § 4. 
 
 3 Ep. 125. Cf. also Horn, iu Vidi Dominum vi. § 3. 
 
The Lord's Supper. 1 7 
 
 of this and other charges that had been raised 
 against him. But tlie fact remains ; he was charged 
 with doing something which was accounted wrong, 
 and he repudiates the charge. 
 
 So far for the testimony of the Eastern Church : 
 in the Western it is equally strong. 
 
 Tertullian, wiiting about dangers incurred bye. 200 a. d. 
 a wife even with a tolerant husband, asks her, 
 " Will not your husband know what it is that you 
 taste secretly before all food % and if he have known 
 it to be bread, will he not believe it to be that 
 (bread) which it is said to bef'^ 
 
 S. Ambrose, arguing about the advantage the 374 a.d. 
 tempter has over us when the body is languid from 
 the food that is being digested, and the mind 
 oppressed, says, " Do you prevent the snares of the 
 tempter ; lay up beforehand the heavenly banquet. 
 The fast has been proclaimed ; take heed you do not 
 neglect it."^ 
 
 But no one speaks with the same force and dis- 
 tinctness as S. Augustine. Januarius wrote to the 400 a.d. 
 Bishop for a solution of certain difficulties that 
 troubled him in connexion with the celebration on 
 Maundy Thursday. In his answer he asserted that 
 because the Apostles had eaten before they received 
 the Lord's Body at the Last Supper, it was not to 
 be regarded as culpable that men always received it 
 
 1 Ad uxorem, ii. 5. ^ In Psalm, cxviii. viii. § 48. 
 
 B 
 
1 8 The Lord's Slipper. 
 
 fasting throughout the whole Church ; " For for 
 this reason it seemed good to the Holy Ghost that 
 for the honour of so great a Sacrament the Lord's 
 Body should enter the mouth of a Christian before 
 any other food, because for this purpose this custom 
 is kept up throughout the world." ^ 
 
 Two Councils in Africa passed formal canons to 
 enforce fasting. The Council of Hippo,- which was 
 " plenary " for Africa, enacted that " the Sacra- 
 ments of the Altar be not celebrated save by 
 men who are fasting, with the exception of that 
 one day in the year when the Lord's Supper is 
 celebrated." 
 
 The (so-called) Third Council of Carthage re- 
 enacted it in the same words. Now it is quite true 
 that, as these were only provincial synods, and not 
 General Councils, their canons cannot be appealed to 
 as necessarily binding upon the Church universal ; 
 at the same time, it is worthy of notice that they 
 both were gatherings of more than ordinary in- 
 fluence and importance. At the first the restora- 
 tion of discipline was so effectually brought about 
 that the subsequent African Councils followed this 
 as their archetype ; and such was the authority of 
 
 1 XJt supra. 
 
 2 This Council, at which S. Augustine was present, must have 
 been held to be very important, for its canon was re-enacted at 
 two later African Councils, and also at Macon in France. Of. 
 Baronius, under 393 a.D. § xxxiii. 
 
The Lord's Supper. 1 9 
 
 the second that the Church finally accepted from it 
 the standard of the Canonical Scriptures. 
 
 If any, assenting to the testimony of the early The habit 
 and middle ages, should nevertheless plead that the "t'the'"'^ 
 restriction was withdrawn for the Anglican Church '^"^f"'™^""' 
 at the Reformation by the exercise of that authority 
 which belongs to each National Church to alter 
 rites and ceremonies, we should answer that evi- 
 dence is altogether wanting. The practice of non- 
 fasting Communion grew up during the laxity of the 
 eighteenth century, when so many time-honoured 
 customs were broken. We have the testimony of 
 men of varied views for the continuance of this 
 primitive practice — of Martin Bucer and Peter 
 Martyr after the issue of the first reformed Prayer- 
 book, and of Sparrow and Jeremy Taylor after that 
 of the last.^ The Canons^ also of James I. indirectly 1604 a.d. 
 infer the same, by limiting the celebration of Holy 
 Matrimony, at which the Holy Communion was 
 compulsory, to the forenoon ; and it is not without 
 significance that, when the ancient custom of com- 
 municating at this rite had fallen into abeyance, no 
 objection should have been raised to the withdrawal 
 of the limitation. 
 
 Now in dealing practically with this question, we The two 
 observe that two separate reasons have been alleged aUegeTfor 
 
 1 For the quotations, cf. Fasting Reception, by F. Hall, M.A. reception. 
 
20 The Lord's Supper. 
 
 by the Fathers as the object of the fast. That which 
 appears to claim priority in time, as far as the direct 
 evidence goes, was the obligation of coming to the 
 Holy Table with the body subdued to the spirit by 
 mortification and abstinence, that the recipient might 
 be in the fullest state of preparation ; it was, in short, 
 for the special profit of the communicant ; but that 
 which laid firmest hold upon the Church is said to 
 have originated with S. Augustine, and tauglit that 
 it was for the greater honour of the Sacrament.^ 
 
 Those who accept the latter view rigorously 
 refuse any concession to human infirmity, and insist 
 that to partake of food before reception is, ipso facto, 
 to treat the Lord's Body with irreverence. The 
 Eoman Church, for instance, holds that the single 
 admissible relaxation is in administering the Viati- 
 cum to a dying man. Those, on the other hand, 
 who accept the good of the recipient as the object 
 to be attained,^ feel less difiiculty in providing for 
 cases of sickness, age, or infirmity, when the insis- 
 
 1 He alleges this as the reason why the practice had been 
 generally adopted ; he must, therefore, have had grounds for his 
 assertion, though the evidence is not preserved. 
 
 2 SS. Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, and Chrysostom. On the 
 Continent the Council of Constance, 1415, recognised the principle 
 of exceptions, both by dispensation and custom : " in casu infir- 
 mitatis aut alterius necessitatis, a jure vel ecclesia concesso vel 
 admisso" (Sess. siii.), and in this spirit some leading Anglican 
 divines, e.g. Bishop King, Drs. Pusey and Liddon, and Mr. 
 Keble, have counselled that in such cases a little food of the 
 simplest kind may he taken. 
 
The Lord's Supper. 21 
 
 tence on a literal exaction of the rule would defeat 
 its intention. As it is a positive and not a moral 
 precept, exceptions must be admissible. 
 
 One lesson, however, which we may all draw from 
 ancient practice, is that in this Service all thought of 
 self-indulgence must be laid aside ; and, in an age 
 of growing luxury and temptation to idleness, the 
 Church should strive to revive and foster the spirit 
 of our forefathers, and rise early for the reception of 
 the Blessed Sacrament.^ 
 
 There is nothing contrary to the English habit in 
 services at the earliest hours. The statutes of our 
 cathedrals and old foundations bear abundant testi- 
 mony to them. What has been, still may be. If Seif-deniai of 
 the blessing to be received bears any proportion to oahr^"'^^ 
 the estimate in which the saints have held it, surely 
 no self-denial can possibly be too great. The 
 Psalmist said that he would awake the dawn that he 
 might meet his God in the sanctuary ; and we must 
 remember that if it be at the sacrifice of ease and 
 comfort that we approach these Holy Mysteries, 
 sacrifice is an essential principle of the Service, and 
 the more closely we assimilate ourselves to its true 
 spirit, the greater the good to be gained therefrom. 
 "What shall I render unto the Lord for all His 
 benefits toward mef At least it shall not be that 
 "which doth cost me nothing." 
 
 1 The case of domestic servants, which is so strongly pressed, 
 may always be met by a celebration at 5 or 6 a. nr. 
 
24 Holy Communion, Mass, the breaking 
 
 engraved with a crucifix, was substituted, and passed 
 round for all the communicants to kiss — priest and 
 people, men and women. The original idea was 
 preserved by all saluting the same object. 
 
 When we consider all this, we feel no surprise that 
 the compilers of the first Prayer-book should have 
 placed this title of " The Holy Communion " at the 
 head of the Ofiice. They added to it, " commonly 
 The Western called the Mass." This latter title had been for 
 
 title of the . . i . , 
 
 Mass, and its many ceuturies most widely used m the Western 
 ongin. Church. Its origin is wrapt in obscurity, and many 
 suggestions as to its derivation have been offered. 
 Taking these in what we account the inverse order 
 of merit, we find it derived from the Hebrew 
 " Missah," an oblation, the tribute of a " free-will 
 offering," as we have it spoken of in Deuteronomy.^ 
 But there is a fatal objection to this theory ; if it had 
 been of Hebrew origin, it would have found favour 
 in the East, and the Greeks would have retained it, 
 as they do other Hebrew words Hosannah, Alleluia, 
 Sabaoth, and the like, but its use has been confined 
 wholly to the Western Churches. In a kindred 
 sense, but as a Latin word, the Schoolmen said that 
 it implied that the oblation was " sent " (missa) to 
 God by the ministration of angels. 
 
 A third interpretation refers it to the Anglo- 
 Saxon " maesse," or feast, and traces its existence 
 xvi. 10. 
 
of Bread, and the Eiicharist. 25 
 
 in the final syllable of Christmas, Michaelmas, and 
 Martinmas, in which case a purely secular word is 
 elevated and appropriated for a distinctly sacred use. 
 The best authorities, however, have derived it from 
 a Latin substantive, missa, a dismissal.^ The dis- 
 missal of the catechumens became first the signal for 
 the commencement of the more sacred part of the 
 Office, and then the name by which this part was 
 designated. Subsequently it was used alike with- 
 out distinction for the service which preceded the 
 departure and for that which followed after, "the 
 Mass of the Catechumens " becoming as familiar a 
 title as " the Mass of the Faithful." We first read 
 of it when Ambrose describes to his sister Marcellina, 
 how, when he had dismissed the catechumens, he 
 heard the soldiers coming to set up the Imperial 
 banners, but notwithstanding he remained at his 
 post, and " began to celebrate Mass." ^ From this 
 time forward Western Fathers became enamoured of 
 the title, and, though it is wholly destitute of 
 doctrinal significance, it laid complete hold of the 
 Western division of the Church. For many centuries 
 it has been used to the exclusion of all other titles, 
 no matter how ancient or significant, by the whole 
 
 ' jVfissa is a noun like coWecte, not the participle. Itc, inissa 
 est, not (the assembly is) "dismissed," but, "it is the dismissal." 
 
 ■•J Bp. XX. (ul Sororem, c. 4. In the sixth and seventh centuries 
 Mass was more widely used, in Fr.ance for the Lessons, and in 
 Spain for the appointed Psalms, of the Choir Services. Cf. Smith, 
 Diet. Anliq., s.v. MrsSA. 
 
26 Holy Commzmion, Mass, the breaking 
 
 designation. 
 
 community acknowledging the Papal supremacy. 
 There can hardly be a doubt that it is bound up 
 Erroneous in the popular mind with error and superstition, 
 
 conceptions 
 
 of the title, and, though the abuse of a term can of itself be 
 no valid reason for its disuse, the wisdom of re- 
 suscitating it in Anglican phraseology may well 
 be questioned, when there are others ready to hand 
 pregnant with meaning and with higher claims to 
 antiquity. 
 
 We notice one more title, " The Breaking of 
 
 The Break- Bread," before we come to that which in our judg- 
 ing of Bread 
 
 ariiest mcut may take perhaps the foremost place. It was 
 probably the earliest designation of all. AATien S. 
 Luke writes an account of the life and habits of the 
 first Christians at Jerusalem, he states that they 
 "continued stedfastly in the breaking of bread," 
 and again, "day by day with one accord in the 
 temple and breaking bread at home " ^ (R.V.) In 
 both cases the reference is unquestionably to the 
 Holy Eucharist. The passage reveals to us the 
 deeply interesting fact that there was no such broad 
 line of demarcation, as is popularly supposed, be- 
 tween Judaism and Christianity, but that for a time 
 at least the dispensations overlapped. The Apostles 
 and earliest converts did not abandon their attend- 
 ance at the morning and evening sacrifice in the 
 Temple, but they superadded to this that which was 
 1 Acts ii. 42, 46. 
 
of Bread, and the Eucharist. 
 
 27 
 
 distinctly Christian, " breaking the bread " at home 
 in the upper room. Tradition says that when Queen 
 Helena visited Jerusalem to trace out the places 
 which had been hallowed by the presence of our The Con- 
 Lord/ she found that the upper room had been set thrupper"*^ 
 apart from its consecration at the Last Supper, and 
 used by devout Christians as an oratory for the 
 celebration of the Mysteries there instituted; and 
 she raised upon the site a church of beauty and 
 magnificence more proportionate to its wonderful 
 associations, as the birthplace and " home " of 
 Christian worship. The oldest extant interpreta- 
 tion of the passage in the Acts leaves no room 
 for doubt by rendering it in both places "breaking 
 the Eucharist." 2 
 
 We pass now to a consideration of the claims of TheEucha- 
 "The Eucharist" for more general adoption. Whether He delfgna- 
 it is directly used as a title in the New Testament "°" " 
 is doubtful. S. Paul, writing to the Corinthians, 
 speaks of certain persons celebrating in a language 
 not understood by the people, and asks " How shall " 
 he that is unlearned say Amen at thy giving of 
 thanks?"^ It has been argued, and not with- 
 out a show of reason, that it would be more fitly 
 rendered, "how shall he who fills the place of a 
 
 1 Euseb. Vit. Const, iii. 42. 
 
 - This is the rendering of the Peshito Syriac Version, believed 
 to have been made in the second century. 
 3 1 Cor. xiv. 16, 
 
28 Holy Commujiiofi, Mass, the breaking 
 
 private person (or layman ^) say the Amen at thy 
 Eucharist ? " 
 
 Again the same Apostle sends his directions to 
 Timothy, that " supplications, prayers, intercessions, 
 and giving of thanks, be made for all men ; for kings, 
 and for all that are in authority." ^ On some 
 grounds it would seem safer to substitute "Eucharists" 
 for giving of thanks," especially when it is remem- 
 bered that the king at this time, whom S. Paul 
 must have had mainly in his mind, was the cruel 
 Nero, one of the worst men that ever sat upon a 
 throne — one moreover who subjected the Christians 
 to the direst persecutions, clothing them in shirts 
 of pitch and setting them on fire to illumine the 
 night. It is very difficult to think that the Apostle 
 could have ordered thanks to be given for such a 
 man, but it is easy enough to understand that he 
 should desire " Eucharists " to be offered for him ; 
 Services, that is, in which, though thanksgi^dng 
 formed an important element, yet a still more pro- 
 minent part was the intercession for foes as well as 
 friends. But whether it was used as a title of the 
 The Didache Sacrament here or not, we have the evidence of the 
 Apostles, lately discovered document called " The Teaching of 
 
 1 IdtuiT-qs is strictly one wlio has no professional knowledge, and 
 is opposed here to those with ministerial functions. Justin 
 Martyr, in describing the celebration, calls attention to the Amen 
 of the people at the close of the thanksgiving. —Apol. i. 67. 
 
 2 1 Tim. ii. 1, 2. 
 
of Bread, and the Eucharist. 29 
 
 the Twelve Apostles," ^ which carries it back to the 
 last quarter of the first century. 
 
 It contains an account of the Eucharist under this 
 very designation, and it is worthy of note that the 
 element of thanksgiving occupies by far the larger 
 portion of the Service. Moreover the title of 
 Eucharist became so common and attractive, that it 
 was adopted into other languages, both Latins and 
 Syrians ^ using it in an untranslated form. 
 
 The Evangelists and S. Paul unite in recording 
 that our Lord gave thanks when He brake the 
 bread, and from the stress thus laid upon the fact, 
 Eucharist became a common title, both for the ele- 
 ments over which thanks had been given ^ and also 
 for the whole Service, in which gratitude for creation 
 and redemption became the dominant idea. Indeed 
 the act of thanksgiving was deemed so important 
 that in the language of the Fathers it was synonymous 
 with consecration. In this respect it ran parallel, at 
 least for a time, with " blessing." " Jesus took The blessing 
 bread and blessed it." " The cup of blessing which "^'^^ 
 we bless, is it not the communion of the Blood of 
 
 1 It is the oldest Church Manual extant. It was discovered by 
 Bryennios, Metropolitan of Serrs in Bithynia, in 1873. It is 
 written in Greek, and the MS. was first publislied in 1883, at Con- 
 stantinople. The work is divided into sixteen chapters, viii.-x. 
 and xiv. being the Liturgical part and giving directions for church 
 worship. The date assigned to it is 70 to 100 a.d. 
 
 2 E.(j. Tertullian, Cyprian, and the Syriac Version. 
 
 3 Ignat. ad Smyrn. vii. Just. Mart. Apul. i. 6G. Iren. adv. 
 hcer. vii. 2, 3. 
 
30 Holy Commtmion, Mass, the breaking 
 
 Christ r' "The Blessing" came to be used as 
 Euiogia. another term for the Consecrated Food ; ^ but, un- 
 like Eucharist, it lost this significance, and was 
 appropriated to the unconsecrated loaves, which had 
 been offered by the people, but not used in the 
 celebration. These were "blessed" at the end of 
 the Service, and divided among the clergy. In pro- 
 cess of time, when non-communicating attendance 
 became common, the pain Unit, regularly blessed 
 before the service, was distributed as an inferior 
 blessing, an antidoron, or substituted gift, in place of 
 the Eucharist. This holy loaf was at times regarded 
 with superstitious reverence, and was treasured up as 
 a remedy against sickness and disease. It was this 
 Forbidden mistaken use that led the revisers of Edward Sixth's 
 Reformers. ^"^^^ Prayer-book to withdraw the directions for the 
 blessing, but the withdrawal kindled the flames of 
 discontent among the rebels who rose up in Devon- 
 shire and Cornwall. It has been thought that the 
 custom of distributing bread at the conclusion of 
 the Service, which has lingered on in some of our 
 churches down to the present time, had its origin in 
 " a provision by will for the sujjply of the holy loaf."^ 
 The appro- But, returning to the title of " the Eucharist," we 
 fhrtuk of° value it mainly because it awakens at once feelings 
 the Eucha- gi-atitude for the deliverance from sin ; it reminds 
 
 > By Cyril of Alex, crebro. 
 
 - Qu. by Scudamore, Notit. Euchar. 892. 
 
of Bread, and the Eucharist. 3 1 
 
 us that, since Christ our Passover has been sacri- 
 ficed, it remains for us, in the spirit of the devout 
 Israelite, to keep the Feast, only with a deeper thank- 
 fulness proportioned to the greater redemption which 
 we enjoy. And though we thank God for what He 
 has done for us, and praise Him for what He is, yet 
 all experience proves that true Christian gratitude 
 merges into love, and love never rests till it finds its 
 outward expression in praise ; and so we feel justified 
 in praying God that He will accept our Service as a 
 " sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving." 
 
IV. 
 
 ' So many as intend to be partakers 
 of the Holy Communion shall signify 
 their names,' etc. 
 
 'And if any of those be an open 
 and notorious evil liver or have done 
 any wrong to liis neighbours . . . 
 the Curate . . . shall call him and 
 
 advertise him that in any wise he 
 presume not to come to the Lord's 
 Table,' etc. 
 
 ' The same order shall the Curate 
 use with those betwixt whom he per- 
 ceiveth malice and hatred to reign,* 
 etc. 
 
 The power These rubiTcs poiiit to the power of the Church 
 hihe'rem'ir excludc unwovtliy members from Communion, 
 the Church. It is a rccognised principle, based upon natural law, 
 that every society has an inherent authority to 
 suspend from the enjoyment of its privileges such 
 members as contravene its laws. The power was 
 solemnly committed to the Church by her Head, 
 when He gave to the Apostles the keys of the 
 kingdom, and made them stewards to open or close 
 the doors as they should think fit ; and such dis- 
 cipline was exercised as a distinct part of Church 
 organisation for many centuries. 
 
 Its object will best be understood by a reference 
 to the first-recorded instance. S. Paul, on hearing 
 that a member of the Corinthian Church had been 
 
 3i 
 
The Opening Rubrics. 33 
 
 guilty of the sin of incest, pronounced judgment 
 upon him; and the form of the sentence well 
 illustrates the twofold object of this penitential 
 discipline ; it was both punitive and remedial : 
 firstly, " to deliver such an one unto Satan for the 
 destruction of the flesh," secondly, " that the spirit 
 may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." ^ 
 
 It was freely accepted in the Church, and The wide 
 exercised the greatest influence because of the ont1n'"°' 
 reality of the belief in the Divine commission, ['j'^'^^"^^ 
 which promised that the sentences which the 
 ofBcers of the Church pronounced on earth should 
 be ratified in heaven. To incur the censures of 
 the Church was nothing less than to imperil the 
 salvation of one's soul. 
 
 The greatness of its influence may be read in the 
 famous historic episode, when a Bishop had the 
 moral courage to close the doors of his cathedral 
 in the face of an Emperor, who had been guilty 
 of wanton bloodshed, and the said Emperor, 
 though himself the most powerful man in Europe, 
 acquiesced in the justice of the sentence, and sub- 
 mitted to penitential discipline for restoration.^ 
 
 If the primary objects of the authority could 
 have been always observed, it might have been in 
 full exercise at the present day. At first its 
 administration was safeguarded, and admonition 
 1 1 Cor. V. 5. 2 Theod. Hist. Eccles. lib. v. 
 
 C 
 
34 The Opening Rubrics. 
 
 was used and again and again repeated, before 
 severity was applied to the offender ; but in the 
 The abuse of middle ages, as the Church degenerated, a vin- 
 
 it in the 
 
 middle ages, dictive Spirit was infused into the system, and it 
 proved its downfall. It makes us almost shudder 
 to read of the process by which the Greater Excom- 
 munication was inflicted in the twelfth century. 
 During the celebration of the highest Service of 
 love, after the reading of the Gospel, the Bishop 
 and twelve assisting priests gathered in the chancel, 
 holding lighted torches in their hands, and after 
 uttering anathemas upon the offender amidst the 
 tolling of bells, they dashed their torches upon 
 the ground, and trampled out the flames, with 
 the awful prayer that in like manner the soul 
 of the excommunicated might be extinguished in 
 hell.i 
 
 It can hardly be wondered at that such language 
 inspired terror and kindled a strong reaction 
 against ecclesiastical discipline altogether, till even 
 the godly form of it, which had always been 
 exercised with so much advantage, was gradually 
 laid aside. 
 
 The Church at the Eeforraation, in the full 
 
 1 The technical term for this excommunication was " by bell, 
 book, and candle." A full description may be found in Forbes on 
 the Articles, xxxiii. For the Sarum Form cf. Maskell's Mon. 
 Pat. iii. 309-330. It began to disappear from the Manuals about 
 1520. 
 
The Opening Rubrics. 35 
 
 consciousness of past abuse, looked forward to its The desire 
 restoration. She acknowledged its value in the s°oration. 
 39th Article of Eeligion, and expressed her wish 
 in the Ash-Wednesday Commination for the time 
 when it should be brought back again.^ Every 
 thoughtful ecclesiastical ruler recognises the absence 
 of a sound and wholesome system of discipline as 
 a real hindrance to the well-being of the Church ; 
 and it cannot be denied that without it the 
 rubrics which form the prelude to her highest 
 Service are little more than a dead letter. The 
 Church and the State, though allied in theory, are 
 antagonistic in practice, and the civil power is 
 found to cripple the ecclesiastical in every attempt 
 to revive her discipline. It may well be felt that 
 to gain discipline at the price of disestablish- 
 ment might form a disastrous bargain; but there 
 is no denying the fact that the retention of the 
 disciplinary rubrics in this Office is a bitter revela- 
 tion of the pitiable degree of impotence to which 
 the clergy are reduced through the action of the 
 State. 
 
 Three classes of persons lay themselves open to impedimen 
 exclusion from Communion : (1) those who neglect '^^^^j"^' 
 to advertise the curate of their intention to com- 
 
 1 Cf. also Can. xxvi. and the Homily for Whitsuntide, where 
 " the right use of ecclesiastical discipline " is one of the notes of 
 the Church. 
 
36 The Opening Rubrics. 
 
 municate;^ (2) men of evil and notorious lives; (3) 
 such as are at enmity with their neighbours. 
 
 Two causes led to a suspension of the order in 
 the first case : the indifference of the clergy to exact 
 it when more frequent communions came in, and 
 the love of independence and impatience of authority, 
 which satisfied men that they were themselves the 
 best judges of their fitness to receive. This latter 
 temper was largely developed by the Erastianism of 
 the seventeenth century subordinating the Church 
 to the State, and leaving the exercise of religion 
 to the choice of the individual. Some degree of 
 reality has been infused into the rubric in later 
 times by an attempt to enforce it once a year before 
 the Easter Communion. Practically it is a great con- 
 be venience to know beforehand on such an occasion 
 the number of those intending to communicate, and 
 the enforcement acts as a safeguard at least against 
 legal disqualifications, which there is a tendency 
 to ignore on the part of those who lie under them, 
 when the numbers are so great.^ There is still a 
 
 1 In 1 P. B. Edw. VI., names were to be given in "overnight 
 or else in the morning afore the beginning of Matins or immediately 
 after. " At this time the canonical hour for the Celebration was 
 9 a.m., matins having preceded at 6 or 7 a.m. It was changed in 
 1662 to "at least some time the day before." This was necessi- 
 tated by the habit that had become general since the order of 
 Archbp. Grindal (1571) to combine the different services without 
 an interval. 
 
 2 This has often happened with unconfirmed persons of mature 
 age. 
 
The opening Rtibrics. 37 
 
 " sturdy individualism " dominant in many congrega- 
 tions, but it will yield in time to the reasonableness of 
 obeying a direction which is so patent and practical. 
 
 There is less prospect of being able to carry out Difficulties 
 either of the rubrics that follow ; indeed, in the stltute Law. 
 present abeyance of discipline, it is well-nigh hope- 
 less. The discretionary power here apparently 
 placed in the hands of the priest is so fettered by 
 statute-law that it can rarely be exercised. For 
 instance, a man may be " an open and notorious " 
 evil liver and yet demand admission to Holy Com- 
 munion, provided only that he has never publicly 
 acknowledged his sin before legal witnesses, or been 
 convicted by a judge in a Court of justice. All 
 evidence short of this is in the eye of the law what is 
 " presumption " merely, and this is abhorrent from by a notori- 
 the legal instinct. A priest may have circum- 
 stantial evidence of the most conclusive nature that 
 a man is living in " adultery, whoredom, incest, 
 or drunkenness," so that his fellow-parishioners 
 are scandalised ; but unless the law has interposed 
 and fixed the brand of guilt upon the offender, his 
 expulsion from the Sacrament of the Altar renders 
 the curate who repels him liable to an action and 
 a mandamus from the Queen's Bench.^ The Church 
 
 I Bishop Andrewes expressed this very strongly. Cf. NichoUs 
 on the Com. Pr. Add. Notes, 36. Arch. Stephens on The Com. 
 Pr. with notes legal and historical, pp. 1064-1080. 
 
38 The Opening Rubrics. 
 
 is not absolutely powerless in such a case, because it 
 is competent for " the churchwardens or questmen 
 or sidesmen, in their next presentment to their 
 ordinaries, faithfully to present every such offender,"^ 
 that he may be punished by the severity of the 
 laws ; but such a provision is far from meeting the 
 requirements, mainly owing to the tedious course of 
 litigation. 
 
 What degree Again experience shows the extreme difiSculty 
 excludes under present circumstances of enforcing the third 
 muni^n!"" Tubric. Nothing is harder than to measure the de- 
 gree of malice and hatred which constitutes an 
 offence in the eye of the law. The Priest is ordered 
 to lay his evidence before the Bishop, and, unless it 
 be upheld in the Ecclesiastical Courts, he is liable to 
 an action for damages in a Civil Court, inasmuch as 
 by repelling the complainant from Holy Communion 
 he has affixed a stigma upon his character, which 
 may be pecuniarily assessed by a jury.'- 
 
 The conclusion, then, to which we are most reluct- 
 antly driven in regard to the Church's enforcement of 
 the aforesaid rubrics is simply this : " None are to be 
 suspended from the Sacrament but notorious delin- 
 quents, and none are notorious but they whom the 
 sentence of the law, or their own confession, have 
 stated so to be." It is far from satisfactory, but 
 
 1 This is provided for by Canons cix., ex. 
 
 2 Cf. Arch. Steph. 1083, for actual cases where it has been done. 
 
The Opening Rtibrics. 39 
 
 it will be easier to accept the inevitable for the 
 time, and turn it to the best account, than to go 
 on perpetually chafing under the restrictions. 
 
 It is quite possible that Providence, which ordereth 
 the march of events and the changing conditions of 
 society, may be putting before the Church a higher 
 office than that of guiding her children by rigid rules 
 and penal censures, and that her special function in 
 these later times is to bend herself to the raising 
 of the national conscience, and, while presenting to 
 the world the loftiest standard of faith and morality, 
 to be content to help obedience without attempting 
 to force it.i 
 
 Few cases will occur, now that public opinion Pubik 
 concurs so largely in fencing the Sacrament from saftguaK 
 profane use, when a priest will not be able to secure |>s=''°5t 
 all that he seeks, if he honestly set himself to Commu- 
 eraploy the admonitory powers which the Church 
 gives him, and the world acquiesces in. The aboli- 
 tion of religious disabilities, and the withdrawal of 
 all temptation to qualify for civil offices by partici- 
 pation of the Sacrament, have removed one of the 
 greatest dangers of irreverence. The strongest safe- 
 guard is really the exaltation of the ordinance. 
 Teach clearly and boldly the Catholic doctrine of 
 
 > This -will not, it is hoped, be interpreted as indicative of any 
 desire to yield ought of the true discipline of the Church. It 
 is a suggestion which may bring some consolation, and help to 
 tide us over " the present distress." 
 
40 The Opening Rubrics. 
 
 the Real Presence of Christ's Body and Blood un- 
 der the elements of bread and wine ; remind men 
 constantly how the intemperate Corinthians drew 
 down upon themselves the divine chastisement from 
 " not discerning the Lord's Body ; " they will then be 
 deterred from drawing nigh to the Divine Mysteries, 
 if only from the fear, lest that which was intended to 
 be a blessing may become a source of the direst evil, 
 though the anger of God is no longer manifested by 
 the visible infliction of disease and death. 
 
V. 
 
 'E^z Cljrijsti'ait ^9ciEi3tl)ooli» 
 
 "The Priest . . . shall say the Lord's Prayer," etc. 
 
 The Christian ideal has been said to be " a priest- 
 hood co-extensive with humanity." Every conquest 
 that the Church gains over the world hastens the 
 consummation, for every convert won to Christianity 
 is a fresh-added priest. It was to all believers that The priest- 
 
 . _. 1 • 1 1 J) f hood of the 
 
 S. Peter said : " Ye are a royal priesthood, ye are laUy. 
 built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood," and 
 S. John : He " hath made us a kingdom, priests 
 unto God."^ This priesthood of the, laity belongs 
 to every one who by Baptism has been made a 
 member of Christ's Mystical Body, and it restores 
 to him, through this union with Christ, the for- 
 feited privilege of appearing before God, and offer- 
 ing up "spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by 
 Jesus Christ." 
 
 It was typified in the Old Testament, when Fore- 
 God set apart one people, and said : " Ye shall be ^^^^^ 
 unto me a kingdom of priests and an holy nation." ^ 
 
 I 1 S. Pet. ii. 5, 9 ; Rev. i. 6. 
 
 2 Ex. xix. 6. 
 
 41 
 
42 The Christian Priesthood. 
 
 Indeed, the Apostles were only applying to the 
 Catholic Church the language which God had used 
 of the House of Israel. If, however, we stopped 
 here, we should but express one-half of the truth as 
 touching the nature of the priestly ofiSce. Within 
 the common priesthood of the Jewish nation there 
 was an inner circle of priests, confined to a single 
 family by natural descent, with special functions 
 and privileges, so fenced and guarded from invasion 
 by the rest, that to intrude into it was punish- 
 able by death. Korah^ and his company claimed, 
 by virtue of the national priesthood, " seeing," as 
 they said, " all the congregation was holy," to exer- 
 cise the functions of the ministerial priesthood ; and 
 God, to mark His extreme displeasure, made a new 
 thing, and the earth opened her mouth and swal- 
 lowed them up. 
 
 The corre- AVheu the Apostlcs applied to the Christian com- 
 betweOT^he munity language which had been used of the Jewish, 
 sationl'^^'"' ''^^y were conscious of what the application involved; 
 
 they were drawing no partial analogy, but one that 
 was complete. The great Catholic community of 
 Christian priests must have within it, even as the 
 Jewish had, an order of ministering priests; it 
 differed of necessity in its functions, and in its mode 
 of inheriting them, but they were at least as high 
 as the Aaronic, and no less restricted. One passage 
 1 Num. xvi. 
 
The Christian Priesthood. 43 
 
 from sacred history will sufiSce to prove this. 
 S. Jude^ denounced certain Christians for exercis- 
 ing an office to which they had not been called, and 
 he has recorded for our admonition that they paid 
 the same penalty as their Jewish predecessors. If 
 there had been no special priesthood in the Church 
 with inalienable prerogatives, distinct from those 
 of the mass of the baptized, none could have shared 
 the sin or " perished in the gainsaying of Korah." 
 So we see that it is not true, as is so often asserted, 
 that, when Christ entered upon His Priestly Office, 
 the earthly priesthood was abolished ; no more true 
 than that the sacrificial system closed, when He 
 exclaimed on the Cross, " It is finished." The pro- Predictions 
 phets had foretold that both the one and the other °ian pri«t- 
 should be perpetuated in the New Dispensation. 
 It was of this that Jeremiah^ wrote: " Neither shall 
 the Priests, the Levites, want a man before Me to 
 offer burnt-offerings, and to kindle meat-offerings, and 
 to do sacrifice continually"; and again the Lord pro- 
 mised by the mouth of Malachi : ^ " My Name shall 
 be great among the Gentiles, and in every place 
 incense shall be offered unto My Name, and a pure 
 offering." Now it is the principle of prophecy that 
 the seer should draw his imagery from surrounding 
 objects, but it does not follow that these should be 
 exactly reproduced in the fulfilment; we do not 
 1 Ver. 11. 2 xx.xiii. 18. » i. 11 ; cf. also Isa. Ixvi. 21. 
 
44 The Christian Priesthood. 
 
 expect, therefore, that either Christian priests or 
 offerings will be accurate reflections of the Jewish, 
 but the essence of the office and the oblation will be 
 Wherein it strictlj preserved. Looked at broadly the functions 
 the Jewish, of the two priesthoods differ thus : ^ the Jewish 
 priest was appointed to offer typical sacrifices — 
 sacrifices that looked forward to the Atoning Sacri- 
 fice of the Cross ; it was his province to sprinkle 
 the blood of the victim upon the altar, and to plead 
 before God by that which made atonement for the 
 soul;^ it was his also to give the body of the victim 
 to be consumed by the worshipper, in token that it 
 had been accepted, and that he was reconciled. 
 
 The Christian priest is ordained to offer a com- 
 memorative sacrifice — a sacrifice or oblation that 
 shall be "a memorial before God" of the all- 
 sufiicient Sacrifice of the Cross ; he sheds no blood, 
 because that has been once for all shed in Christ's 
 Death; and it is his oflBce to distribute to the wor- 
 shipper the spiritual food of Christ's Body and 
 Blood, which under the veils of bread and wine 
 have been presented before the Father, and are 
 given back from " God's Board " to be the source of 
 eternal life to the recipient. 
 
 1 The Law has the shadow : the Gospel the true image. There 
 is between them some close relation, because they both belong to 
 the same real thing ; but theij mutual relation may be simply a 
 likeness in outline only. 
 
 2 Lev. xvii. 11. 
 
The Christian Priesthood. 45 
 
 But there were other special priestly functions 
 under the Law, of which the most marked was the 
 cleansing of the leper. It devolved upon the priest 
 to inspect the diseased ; to perform for him when 
 healed the ritual of purification, and to pronounce 
 him clean. There is an office strictly analogous to it 
 in the Christian priesthood, in the discernment of 
 that of which leprosy was the type, and in the 
 cleansing of absolution. 
 
 Now both the priestly functions, of offering the The priestly 
 Eucharistic Sacrifice and of absolving the penitent, t"the'^'*'°" 
 were delegated and vicarious, not independent or ^po^''^^- 
 absolute. The one was received in the commission 
 to "do this in remembrance of Me"; the other, 
 when He, Who hath power on earth to forgive sins 
 because He is the Son of Man, said unto the 
 Apostles, " Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are re- 
 mitted unto them ; and whosesoever sins ye retain, 
 they are retained."^ Christ is Himself the Priest 
 in every Eucharist. Christ is the Absolver in 
 every ministry of reconciliation. The Eucharist is 
 the counterpart in earthly form, the representation 
 under a veil of Christ's sacrificial pleading in 
 heaven ; in the one case He acts by Himself, in the 
 other through human instruments; but whatever 
 the earthly delegate says, whatever he does, the 
 words and the acts are Christ's : he takes His very Christ's 
 1 S. John XX. 23. 
 
46 The Christian Priesthood. 
 
 authority Utterance on his lips, "This is My Body," and 
 human'"'' '° repeats His action, breaking the bread and blessing 
 
 agents. 
 
 So, again, in Absolution ; " All power," Christ 
 says,^ " is given unto Me . . . " ; " Go ye therefore 
 . . ." It was His power, not theirs, that they 
 would wield ; they were the visible media through 
 which it would be exercised after His departure. 
 
 This is the safeguard against priestly assumption, 
 this the answer to those who, in a holy jealousy for 
 their Master's honour, fear lest the recognition of 
 an earthly priesthood should derogate from His 
 Sovereign Mediatorship. 
 The change gut a difficulty has been felt in maintaining that 
 the priestly functions of the Jewish system were 
 intended to be continued, because the title of the 
 minister has been changed ; before, he was hiereus, 
 sacerdos, now he is presbyter, — for what is "priest 
 but presbyter writ short " ? It has been well said 
 that names "are not fossils, which, transplanted from 
 one bed to another, preserve their primeval forms 
 from age to age ; but rather, like fluid atoms, they 
 are ever running into fresh shapes and combina- 
 tions." If presbyter is stereotyped with its ancient 
 significance, then the ministers of the Christian 
 Church must be qualified for their ofBce not 
 through any aptitude for pastoral care, but simply, 
 1 S. Matt, xxviii. 18, 19. 
 
The Christian Priesthood. 47 
 
 like the senators at Eome or the elders of Israel, by- 
 age and seniority. But in reality it is not a ques- Theological 
 
 names often 
 
 tion of names so much as of things ; not what the deceptive. 
 Ministry is called, but what it does. To maintain 
 the opposite is to accept the advice which the 
 dramatist puts into the mouth of the impersonation 
 of the Tempter : " In dealing with matters of 
 theology, lay great stress upon names, and take no 
 notice of facts." 
 
 Two reasons may readily be found for not per- Reasons for 
 petuating the Jewish title ; it would have appeared 
 to the Jew to be erecting a rival institution, and to 
 place the Gospel in antagonism to the Law, whereas 
 we know that it only superseded it by degrees ; not 
 till the Temple was destroyed was Christ's Kingdom 
 really established as the Catholic Church. Again, a 
 priest was so closely associated in the popular mind 
 with animal sacrifice, that it was far easier to adopt 
 a new title, than to be for ever explaining wherein 
 his functions were changed. 
 
 But the whole history of the Church, Primitive, The vital 
 Mediaeval, and Eeformed, bears testimony to the ofrecog-""^^ 
 reality of the Christian priesthood. " No priest, no chrisliln' 
 Church," was the judgment of the Eeformers, every priesthood, 
 bit as much as of S. Jerome.^ The existence of a 
 priesthood was the question at issue between the 
 Church and the Presbyterians at the Savoy Confer- 1661 a.d. 
 1 Adv. iMcif. 8. 
 
48 The Christian Priesthood. 
 
 ence ; the representatives of the former realised the 
 crisis, and erased from the Prayer-book the titles, 
 which the latter advocated, in two crucial positions, 
 substituting "priest" for "minister" before the 
 Absolution, and for " pastor," in the suffrage of the 
 Litany, "Bishops, pastors, and ministers"; and the 
 representatives of the latter proved how they inter- 
 preted the decision, by refusing to conform. There 
 is no little cause for thankfulness that the spirit of 
 compromise was rejected, and the Catholic doctrine of 
 the priesthood preserved to the Church of England. 
 To have sacrificed it, would have severed her historic 
 continuity, and would at the same time have robbed 
 her children of an abiding source of help and 
 strength. When we think of the unapproachable 
 majesty of God, that " He is of purer eyes than to 
 behold iniquity," the sin-laden worshipper trembles 
 to draw near ; but we are encouraged by the thought 
 that, in His condescension to human weakness, God 
 has not kept the ministry of reconciliation in His 
 own hands, has not intrusted it even to Angels, but 
 has committed it to mortal men like ourselves. 
 
VI. 
 
 " The Priest standing humbly afore the midst of the Altar." 
 
 Such was the wording of the rubric in the first 
 Prayer-book of Edward Vl. It was changed in the 
 second to " the Priest standing at the north side of 
 the Table," and it is often alleged that the abolition of 
 the term " Altar " and the general adoption of " the The Jewish 
 Table," or "the Lord's Table," alike in the Prayer- "ermsAita' 
 book and in the Statute-law of the land,^ affords ^"'^ 
 convincing evidence that the Refoi'med Church re- 
 jected the sacrificial doctrine of the Holy Eucharist. 
 It may be shown that it is an unfair inference to 
 draw, on several grounds.^ The Jews, in whose 
 system altar and sacrifice were inseparably asso- 
 ciated, did not hesitate to call their altar also the 
 Lord's table. Ezekiel ^ writes of the altar which 
 
 1 Cf. Stephen's Com. Pr. 1087. " Altar " is left in the Corona- 
 tion Service. It occurs also in such an authoritative document as 
 the Church Building Acts. 
 
 - Andrewes, Ans. to Card. Perron, ch. xviii. Thotn. Aquinas 
 himself used the expression in hac mensa novi Regis in a hymn 
 for Corpus Christi Day. 
 
 3 xli. 22, xliv. 16. 
 
 D 
 
50 
 
 The Altar. 
 
 he describes, " This is the table that is before the 
 Lord " ; and again, " They shall enter into My 
 sanctuary, and they shall come near to My table, to 
 minister unto Me " ; and Malachi ^ expresses the 
 complaint of Israel's ingratitude in these terms : 
 " Ye offer polluted bread upon Mine altar, and ye 
 say. Wherein have we polluted Thee % In that ye 
 say. The table of the Lord is contemptible." Thus 
 we see that the terms were capable of being inter- 
 changed without any loss of sacrificial significance. 
 The doctrine Again it cau be proved that the revisers of the 
 Aiurno't^ Prayer-book, on their own showing, did not intend 
 
 the Reforma- ^^'^ Church adrift from its ancient teaching, 
 tion. They modified the language of the Service-books to 
 
 meet the exigencies of the time, but carefully 
 guarded themselves against the charge of abandon- 
 ing the doctrines which the older terms more clearly 
 expressed. In the Preface to the last revised 
 Prayer-book, it is asserted, not as the opinion of 
 private individuals merely, but with all the weight 
 and circumstance of a formal decree, by the authori- 
 tative representatives of the Church, which received 
 and sealed the result of their labours, that " in the 
 reigns of several princes since the Reformation, the 
 Church, upon just and weighty considerations her 
 thereunto moving, hath yielded to make such 
 alterations in some particulars as in their respective 
 1 i. 7, 12. 
 
The Altar. 
 
 51 
 
 times were thought convenient ; yet so as that the 
 main body and essentials of it . . . have still 
 continued the same unto this day." Further, it 
 was stated in the Act of Uniformity, which gave 1552 a.d 
 legal force to the second revision, that the doctrine 
 contained in the book that was superseded was 
 " agreeable to the Word of God and the i3rimitive 
 Church," and that the alterations had been called 
 for "rather by the curiosity of the minister and 
 mistakers than of any worthy cause." If, therefore, 
 it can be proved that sacrifice was an essential 
 feature of Eucharistic worship in primitive and pre- 
 Eeformation times, it remains so still. 
 
 Now there are few points more incontestable than 
 that, in the ancient Church, the structure upon 
 which the elements for the Holy Eucharist were 
 placed, was designated an Altar, and in the generally 
 accepted and proper sense of the word. That the 
 proof may not suffer from the use of a passage 
 which admits of the slightest doubt, we lay no 
 stress here upon the language of the Author of the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews, "we have an altar," ^ though 
 it must be confessed that it is very difficult to 
 explain it away. "We turn therefore to the Apo- Patristic 
 stolic Fathei's of the next generation. 
 
 Ignatius,^ a pupil of S. John, recognises no other 
 1 xiii. 10. 
 
 - Ep. ad Philad. iv. ad Eyhes. v. Trail, vii. 
 
52 
 
 The Altar. 
 
 designation : " one Eucharist . . . one altar " ; " he 
 who is not within the altar lacks the bread of God " ; 
 " he is clean who is within the altar." Half a cen- 
 
 167 A.D. tury later Irenaeus ^ writes of the Apostles that they 
 were " all priests who serve God and the altar con- 
 
 92A.D. tinually." Tertullian ^ appeals to men not to go 
 up to "the altar of God" before they have com- 
 posed their strife or quarrels with their brethren. 
 
 248A.D. S. Cyprian^ speaks of Novatian striving to "set 
 up an altar and offer sacrifices unlawfully"; and 
 again, no one "deserves to have his name men- 
 tioned in the priests' prayer at the altar, who 
 wished to call away the priests and ministers from 
 the altar." When we pass into the fourth century, 
 after heathen persecutions ceased, and there was no 
 longer any fear of divulging the mysteries of Chris- 
 tian worship, the Blessed Sacrament is frequently 
 treated of by SS. Ambrose, Augustine, Chrysostom, 
 and others, and all repeat the language of their pre- 
 decessors. Indeed, so general was the usage of the 
 term "altar," that none of the primitive writers, 
 save on one single occasion,* ever thought of em- 
 ploying any other. 
 
 Certain early It is quite true that evidence is forthcoming to 
 
 mLunder" suggcst that the uso of the word was only figurative, 
 not involving in the minds of those who used it sacri- 
 
 1 Adv. Hcer. iv. viii. § 3. 
 3 Epp. Ixxiii. and Ixvi. 
 
 2 De Oral. xiv. 
 •> Cf. infra, p. 58. 
 
The Altar. 
 
 53 
 
 ficial doctrine ; but it breaks down when properly 
 sifted. Minucius Felix, the Apologist, gives this de- 234 a.d. 
 scription of the Christians: "They have no altars nor 
 temples, nor images of note " ; ^ but so far is it from 
 expressing his own opinion, that the words are put 
 into the mouth of the heathen Csecilius, who can 
 hardly be accepted as a trustworthy exponent of the 
 Faith of Christ. If other passages may be found, 
 which appear to deny to Christians the possession 
 of an altar, they admit of easy explanation, when it 
 is realised that they were addressed to heathens 
 only, who were unable to conceive of an altar 
 without animal sacrifice and actual mactation. The 
 invariable use, then, of the term in primitive times, 
 and the impossibility of supposing that it could 
 have been so widely used in a mere metaphorical 
 sense, leave us no alternative but to accept it as 
 proof of the belief in the sacrificial doctrine of the 
 Blessed Sacrament. 
 
 It may be said that the fact of the material of the The material 
 structure being wood ^ is more suggestive of a table the l^tlr^ °^ 
 than an altar; but the varied character of the 
 Eucharist points not only to the Altar on which the 
 
 1 Octavius X. It is to be noted that it is ara, which in the 
 Vulgate is the equivalent of the idolatrous altar, not altare, which 
 was used to designate the Jewish altar. Ara is rarely used by 
 Latin writers for the Christian altar without a qualifying attribute. 
 
 2 Optat. Milev. de Schism. DoncU. vi. 1. August, contra Cresc. 
 iii. 43. Athanas. ad Monoch. I.e. 
 
54 
 
 The Altar. 
 
 victims were slain in the Old Dispensation, but to 
 the Altar of Incense and to the Mercy Seat, which 
 were no less associated with sacrificial worship.^ 
 Both were of wood. The shape that the Christian 
 altar took appears sometimes to have been that of an 
 oblong chest. Such is the oldest altar in existence, 
 that of S. John Lateran, on which tradition says 
 that S. Peter celebrated. This, therefore, points to 
 the altar of Incense, or the ark of the Covenant; 
 but, judging from the portable Altar of S. Cuthbert, 
 the most ancient in England, still preserved in the 
 library of Durham Cathedral, and from numerous 
 illustrations in the Utrecht Psalter, and in the 
 Eavenna mosaics,^ we conclude that it was sometimes 
 square, like the Altar of Burnt- off ering.^ At all 
 events, there is no trace anywhere to be found that 
 the table-form of the feast of the Last Supper 
 was reproduced. This must have been the tri- 
 clinium* 
 
 It was not long, however, before stone became 
 the common material. The custom of celebrating 
 over the relics of martyrs in the Catacombs,* com- 
 bined with the mystic language of the Apocalypse, 
 of " the saints under the altar," led to the change, 
 
 1 Exod. XXX. 10 ; Lev. xvi. 14. 
 
 - Cf. Chambers' Worship, p. 14. 3 Exod. xxvii. 1. 
 
 * The Roman customs of dining had been adopted in Palestine. 
 The tombs were built into the sides and arched over. The 
 technical term is arcosolia. 
 
The Altar. 
 
 55 
 
 and in the Western Church stone Altars were 
 enforced by order of a Council.^ 517 a.d. 
 
 Now there can be no question that erroneous Erroneous 
 views had grown up before the Eeformation, and sacrifice of 
 that an Altar had become associated in the popular ""^ 
 mind with a belief that Christ was actually im- 
 molated afresh in the Sacrifice of the Mass. It 
 created a prejudice against the continuance of the 
 term, and though it was sparingly used in the first 
 revision of the Communion Office, it was ■ wholly 
 withdrawn in the second. Bishop Hooper had in- 
 veighed against the prevailing misconceptions when 
 preaching before the King, and advised that the 
 magistrates should be empowered to " turn the altars 
 into tables to take away the false persuasions of 
 the people." It was, then, simply as a concession 
 in consequence of a " mistaken use," and not at all 
 in contravention of the Catholic doctrine in its 
 primitive purity, that the revisers were led to the 
 change.^ Their writings ^ oflFer abundant evidence 
 that they continued to hold that a commemorative 
 sacrifice was made in the Eucharist. 
 
 In the present generation there is a strong reac- Reaction in 
 
 favour of 
 
 1 Epaone, c. 26. Altar. 
 
 - The Advertisements, the Canons, and numerous decisions in 
 law courts have combined to ensure the Church from a relapse into 
 the error of the middle ages. The structure is to be of wood, not 
 stone ; moveable, not fixed. 
 
 ^ This may undoubtedly be said of Cranmer, Ridley, Overall, 
 and Cosin, besides some others. 
 
56 
 
 The Altar. 
 
 tion in favour of the use of Altar " almost to the 
 entire sui^ersession of " the Holy Table " or " the 
 Lord's Table." Such a course may weU be deprecated, 
 because, where both terms seem to express true 
 doctrines, the exclusive employment of one may 
 weaken our belief in that which is popularly 
 associated with the other. With the most laudable 
 desire, then, to vindicate the legitimacy of the de- 
 signation of " Altar," when we view the Service on 
 its sacrificial side, we must not forget that " the 
 Holy Table " best bespeaks the Bread of Life which 
 Christ has promised to the worthy partaker, and there- 
 fore rightly demands recognition in the Eucharistic 
 vocabulary. In the freshness of the early piety and 
 devotion of the Church, during those first centuries, 
 when the assurance of our blessed Lord, " Whoso 
 eateth My Flesh and drinketh My Blood hath 
 eternal life," rose up superior to every other con- 
 sideration ; when every Celebration was attended by 
 worshippers eager for actual participation of the 
 Sacred Food, there was no danger of that aspect, 
 which " the Lord's Table " naturally suggests, being 
 lost sight of, even though the title were unused. 
 But now that a new order of things has supervened, 
 and non-communicating attendance at the Rite is 
 becoming much in vogue, the idea that the Altar is 
 also " God's Board," ^ from which He dispenses gifts 
 1 It was so called in the rubric before the Prayer of Hiunble 
 
The Altar. 
 
 57 
 
 to men, must not, through the suppression of the 
 title which best expresses it, be suffered to fall into 
 the background, as it did fall in the mediseval ages. 
 Both conceptions of the Sacrament are true and 
 Catholic ; there is an oblation and there is a parti- 
 cipation ; it is a sacrifice and it is a means of 
 spiritual refreshment: they are mutually comple- 
 mentary, and the whole Ordinance inevitably suffers 
 if one of its appropriate terms, Altar or Holy Table, 
 be used to the exclusion of the other. 
 
 Access in 1 P.B. Edw. vi. Simmons has shown in Lay FolKs 
 Mass-hook, pp. 358-9, that " Goddesborde " had been used for 
 many centuries iu England. 
 
VII. 
 
 'The Table at the Communion-time having a fair white hnen cloth 
 upon it, shall stand in the Body of the Church or Chancel . . . And the 
 Priest standing at the North-side," etc. 
 
 There is some Scriptural authority for calling 
 the Christian Altar a Table, for S. Paul says, " Ye 
 cannot be partakers of the Lord's Table, and of the 
 table of devils " ; ^ but it is clear that he means by 
 it not so much the structure from which the Food 
 is received as the Food itself. Had he used it 
 simply to designate the former, it is not easy to 
 explain why the title should have found no place in 
 se ihe Patristic literature of the earliest ages. For three 
 centuries or more it is only once found in either 
 a Greek or a Latin Father. The exceptional instance 
 is where Dionysius of Alexandria, in a letter to a 
 Roman Bishop, describes the perplexity of a priest 
 on discovering that his Baptism was invalid, though 
 he had been in the habit of " standing at the Table, 
 and stretching forth his hands to receive the Holy 
 1 1 Cor. X. 21. 
 
The Holy Table. 59 
 
 Food."^ When it came into use it was almost 
 entirely appropriated to the East, and was generally- 
 distinguished by a characteristic epithet, such as, 
 " the holy," " the dread," " the mystic " Table. 
 It retains its position as the favourite designation 
 in the nomenclature of the Oriental Churches at 
 the present day. 
 
 Having already shown^ that its adoption in no 
 way contravenes the sacrificial doctrine of the Holy 
 Eucharist, we pass to the examination of the rubric 
 touching the proper place for the Holy Table in 
 the Church, and the Priest's position in relation to 
 it, when celebrating the Divine Mysteries. 
 
 It has been often said that after the conversion of 312 a.d. 
 the Empire, at the beginning of the fourth century, why the 
 Basilicas, or Law-courts, at Eome and elsewhere, were g^ven t< 
 were handed over to the Christians to be converted "'^ 
 into churches.^ It is supposed that these were selected 
 in preference to heathen temples, in order that con- 
 verts to the Faith might be haunted by no memory 
 of forsaken Rites ; but the more probable reason is 
 that they lent themselves with the least modifica- 
 
 1 In the fifth Ep. to Xystus, quoted by Euseb. Ecd. Eist. vi. vii. 
 
 2 Supra, ch. vi. 
 
 3 Trench's Synon. N. T. \eiTovpyla. Milman, Hist, of Christ. 
 ii. 342-3 ; iii. 374. Stanley, Christ. Instit. 179. It has been dis- 
 puted, it is true, wliether any such transfer was really made ; 
 especially by G. Scott (junior), Ch. Archit. in England, and G. 
 Baldwin Brown in From Schola to Cathedral. But there seems to be 
 no doubt that the Basilican Form was adopted for the Churches 
 of this period. Smith, Diet. Chr. Antiq., 368. 
 
6o 
 
 The Holy Table. 
 
 tion to the exigencies of public worship. Indeed, 
 the symbolic description of Eucharistic worship, 
 seen in vision by S. John,^ almost exactly coincides 
 with that which the Basilican form at once sug- 
 gested. It is possible, however, that the imagery 
 was drawn rather from an Eastern than a Western 
 building, in which case the Temple^ must have been 
 in the prophet's eye, but there can be no doubt that 
 the language is fully satisfied by a reference to the 
 The plan of {qxxq. and arrangements of the Basilica. The East 
 
 3 Basilica. ^ 
 
 end terminated in a semi-circular apse, in the centre 
 of which the judges' tribunal was set. It was the 
 place of greatest dignity, and was naturally selected 
 as the site of the altar. In lapse of time, as the 
 Basilican plan of churches came to be modified, the • 
 Altar was placed immediately against the East wall, 
 
 1 Cf. Rev. iv. ] , 2, 4, 6, 8, and v. 6. The Eoman Basilica was 
 in four parts, which corresponded to the four parts of the Christian 
 church, viz. the vestibule, the nave, the choir, and the sanctuary. 
 The last, usually semi-circular, was cut off by a door or curtain 
 from the choir. The Altar, on the site of the Judges' "throne," 
 is disclosed by the opening of "the door " (v. 1) ; " one sat upon 
 the throne " (v. 2) points to the Divine Presence in the Mysteries ; 
 and " round about the throne were twenty-four seats " for the 
 Bishops and priests, corresponding to the seats of the Assessors 
 round tlie tribunal ; " in the midst of the throne . . . were four 
 living creatures " (v. 6) indicates the Evangelistic Emblems, the 
 Four Gospels being set upon the Altar ivith much ceremony, while 
 in the statement that "in the midst of the throne . . . stood a 
 Lamb as it had been slain," we have the sacrificial teaching of the 
 Eucharist set forth. 
 
 2 This view is taken by Blunt in The Annotated Prayer-hook, 
 but it requires much forcing to harmonise the parts ; cf. Introd. 
 xlix. 
 
The Holy Table. 6i 
 
 as the altar-tombs were for the most part found in 
 
 the Catacombs. Such was the widely -prevalent 
 
 custom in England during the middle ages, and 
 
 down to the Keformation, though occasionally it 
 
 remained detached, as at first, and as it is frequently 
 
 in our cathedrals at the present day. 
 
 When a reaction against altars set in, not only 
 
 was it removed from its place of dignity, but its 
 
 altar-wise position was changed also. The Puritan The Aitar- 
 
 revisionists of 1552 ordered that, "at Communion- "r the Holy' 
 
 time, it should be brought down from the East wall "[^^^^^ 
 
 and set table-wise," or lengthways, either at the 
 
 lower end of the chancel,^ or more frequently in the 
 
 nave " before the chancel-door." It was argued 
 
 that the people would thus hear the Service better, 
 
 and that they might gather with greater ease and in 
 
 larger numbers round the Holy Table. When once 
 
 the change had been made, the Puritanical feeling 
 
 of the time was so strong that the restriction for 
 
 the altered position to the time of celebration was 
 
 ignored, and it remained permanently divorced from 
 
 the East end. Such an arrangement could only be 
 
 made at the expense of reverence, and Elizabeth 
 
 found it necessary to protect it by issuing an in- 1559 a.d. 
 
 junction that, when there was no Communion, " it 
 
 should be set in the place where the Altar stood." 
 
 • Called from the cancelU, the railings which separated the 
 bema from the nave, like KiyMSes which separated the SiKcurral 
 from the space " below the bar."— Aristoph. £7. 675, Vesii. 552. 
 
62 The Holy Table. 
 
 In practice, however, it is clearly shown by the his- 
 tory of the times that the removal or non-removal 
 was regulated entirely at the will of the ordinary. 
 Several instances occurred where Bishops^ claimed 
 a distinct right to determine what was to be done 
 in this matter, and it is on this admitted prero- 
 gative of decision that in modern times they base 
 their authority to override the rubric which at 
 Communion -time gives to "the Body of the 
 Church " the first place. 
 
 The first active opposition to the un-Catholic 
 custom of displacing the Altar came from Charles I.; 
 and in the Scotch Liturgy, at the instigation of 
 1637 A.D, Laud, the rubric was altered so as to order that it 
 " shall stand at the uppermost part of the Chancel 
 or Church." At the final revision of the Anglican 
 1662 A.D. Office the Bishops were anxious to apply to this 
 the same rule, but yielded their judgment, as in 
 many other matters besides, out of consideration to 
 the temper of the times, and allowed the rubric to 
 Theambi- remain as before. Moreover, they recognised the 
 rabrlcs*^ '^^ probability that the Puritan practice would still con- 
 touching the jgf^ untouched that part also of the 
 
 celebrants ' 
 
 position. rubric which directed that the Celebrant should 
 
 stand " at the North side." When the Altar was 
 
 1 Cf. Laud's Works, vi. 61 (Ed. 1857). A comparison of the 
 first clause of the Ornaments Rubric with the fourth rubric 
 before the Com. Off. shows practically that it rests with the 
 ordinary. 
 
The Holy Table. 
 
 63 
 
 set lengthways, either in the lower end of the 
 Chancel, or in the Body of the Church, the Priest 
 stood on the North or broad side of it, probably, as 
 being most convenient, in the centre ; and when it 
 was removed back again to the East wall, and placed 
 lengthways there also, as it doubtless was in many 
 churches, he could still stand at the North-s«(^e. 
 But when it was set altar-wise, as we see it always 
 at the present day, the rubric could no longer be 
 followed. Henceforward, the Priest might continue 
 the saine position relatively to the Church, and 
 remain at the North-e?ifZ, facing South, or relatively 
 to the Altar, and change to the West-si(Z«, facing 
 East. It is no quibble, invented to extricate us 
 from an unwilling obedience to an objectionable 
 rubric ; for the controversies of the day prove very Disputes 
 clearly that a distinction was drawn between side, „ end!"^' 
 and end, as representing respectively the broad and 
 narrow parts. As a practical illustration of the 
 difference, we read that when the Bishop of Bath 
 and Wells,^ in the exercise of his discretionary 
 authority, ordered the Churchwardens to place the 
 Holy Table altar-wise, they, in the full conviction 
 that it would entail upon the Priest the " Eastward 
 position," had a square table made, so that it would 
 
 1 This and the following cases are quoted by Soudamore, Notit. 
 JEitch. 190-2. Further traces of the distinction are found in 
 Cosin's Notes, which indicate many attempts on the part of the 
 revisers to overcome the difficulty. 
 
64 
 
 TJie Holy Table. 
 
 no longer be competent to plead that the only 
 s\de left available for him was the West, with his 
 back to the congregation. The construction of an 
 equilateral table, in which there were four sides, 
 in place of an oblong one with two sides and two 
 ends, removed the plea that the North position 
 involved his standing at the end of it. 
 1627 A.D. Williams, Bishop of Lincoln, wrote to the Vicar 
 of Grantham, in favour of placing the Altar length- 
 ways, East and West, and based his argument on 
 this very distinction between side and end. " The 
 Minister ... is directed to read the Command- 
 ments, not at the md, but at the North Me of the 
 Table, which implies the end to be placed towards 
 the East great window." 
 
 To the un-Liturgical mind all these and such like 
 discussions appear trivial, and quite unworthy of 
 the attention of sensible men; but experience has 
 proved that a careless sacrifice of details may some- 
 times be fraught with dangerous consequences. 
 Thejudg- In 1875, when the Privy Council 1 decided 
 Bishops on against the legality of " the Eastward position," the 
 cancTrf^he Bishops, for the quieting of men's consciences, issued 
 an Allocution, stating that it was an undoubted fact 
 that the position taken by the Celebrant had varied 
 in different ages and countries, and that, in the 
 absence of any formal decree or pronouncement of 
 1 In Hebbert v. Purchas. 
 
 Eastward 
 position. 
 
The Holy Table. 65 
 
 the Church, there was no authority for attaching a 
 doctrinal significance to one position or the other. 
 It failed to bring the necessary relief. The history 
 of the seventeenth century is far too well known to 
 allow much weight to such a statement. The Puritans 
 contended for that position which seemed to repre- 
 sent best the idea of the president of a feast distri- 
 buting food to his guests, just as they would, if they 
 had been able, have permitted the communicants to 
 sit for reception ; it was in their eyes " a Supper," 
 albeit of a sacred character, because it had been 
 instituted by Christ ; but the elements of mystery, 
 and the awe which any conception of its mystical 
 character creates, were wholly wanting. Had their 
 view, and the practices they introduced to express 
 it, been allowed to pass unchallenged, the Church 
 would have been in danger of losing that heritage of 
 Catholic truth which had come down from primi- 
 tive times. The spirit of the seventeenth century 
 Puritanism still survives; and it has been again and 
 again asserted that in the popular mind the East- 
 ward position, and the Sacrificial aspect of the 
 Eucharist are so connected that they must stand or 
 fall together — to disprove the legitimacy of the one 
 overthrows the legality of the other. It was the 
 very ground upon which proceedings were instituted. The dim- 
 It is impossible therefore for those who adhere to accepting 
 the Catliolic doctrine, to treat the position of the 
 E 
 
66 
 
 The Holy Table. 
 
 celebrant as a matter of indifference. The Priest 
 during the Celebration is in their eyes engaged in a 
 Sacrificial act in behalf of the laity ; he is combining 
 the priestly intercession of an earthly ministry with 
 the pleading of the Great High Priest in heaven, 
 and, as the mouthpiece and representative of the 
 congregation, reason demands, and the usage of the 
 Church in the best times of her history endorses 
 the claim, that he should stand at their head.'' 
 
 1 Tliis was again and again insisted upon by the Bishops at the 
 Savoy Conference, in reply to the request that the minister should 
 at all times face the people. Cf. Cardw. Confer. 353. 
 
VIII. 
 
 Cbe )3Dffict of ^©repamton, 
 
 . . . shall say the Lord's Prayer, with the Collect following. 
 
 The care that the Celebrant should approach the Provi< 
 
 for th( 
 preparation 
 
 Holy Mysteries with clean hands and a pure heart ^""^ 
 
 was a marked feature in the worship of the early ^'^i^^j.^j^, 
 Church. It was inherited from the Old Dispensation, 
 under which, with its highly symbolical ritual, the 
 priests were directed to wash their hands and feet 
 before they offered sacrifice. In the Eastern Churches 
 a laver is placed in the Prothesis, and at the opening 
 of the Preparatory Service the priest dips his hands 
 therein, saying, " I will wash my hands in innocency, 
 and so will I go to Thine altar and S. Cyril 
 describes the significance of the act. When asked, 
 " Is it that the filth of the body may be purged 
 away f he answers, " I trow not, but that cleansing 
 of the hands is a symbol, that we must be made 
 clean from all our sins and iniquities."^ 
 
 The Sarum Office of Preparation consisted of the The Sarum 
 
 1 Cf. Neale, The Office of the Prothesis, p. 179. purpose!' " 
 
 2 Catech. Myst. 5. 
 
 67 
 
68 The Office of Preparation. 
 
 following parts : the Hymn, " Come, Holy Ghost, 
 our souls inspire," the Collect for purity,^ Psalm 
 xliii. " Give sentence," etc., the Lord's Prayer, the 
 Ave Maria,^ the Introit, ending with a Confession, 
 to which the assistant-ministers responded with an 
 Absolution; after which they said the Confession, 
 and the Priest responded with an Absolution.^ 
 
 In the first revised Liturgy this was curtailed, 
 and so altered as to make it in a measure applicable 
 to all the worshippers as well as the Celebrant. The 
 Lord's Prayer and the Collect for purity were re- 
 tained in a different order, and to be said by the 
 Priest at the Altar.* The forms of Confession and 
 Absolution were re-written, the one so as to be 
 made general, the other more authoritative.^ 
 The present fhe first change violated two liturgical prin- 
 
 position of ° 
 
 the Lord's ciples of importance. From the beginning the 
 iturgicai. Lord's Prayer had been held so sacred that it was 
 always preceded by a preface. Like some conse- 
 crated building, it needed to be entered through a 
 porch. Usually the soul of the worshipper was 
 
 1 The York Use had a different Collect. 
 
 2 This is mentioned in the Sarum Missal only, not in the Sarum 
 Breviary. 
 
 3 The Priest's Absolution was an expanded form of that of the 
 minister's. The latter was a prayer for mercy and pardon, the 
 former for these and " remission of sins " as well. 
 
 4 Wlieu, however, l\Iass was sung the Celebrant said these 
 during the Introit, so that they would be inaudible to the people. 
 
 5 It is precatory in its language, but it is said by the Priest 
 alone. 
 
The Office of Preparation. 69 
 
 solemnised by the repetition of the Lesser Litany, 
 or the Invocation,^ or some "monitory precepts."^ 
 This feeling of reverent awe was ignored by the 
 revisers, and the Lord's Prayer placed without 
 preamble as the commencement of the Office.^ 
 
 Again, this Prayer was one of the mysteries 
 which " the doctrine of reserve " led the early 
 Church to conceal from the uninitiated, lest the 
 command should be transgressed, " Give not that 
 which is holy unto dogs." It was designated " The 
 Prayer of the faithful," that is, the baptized ; and it 
 might be used only by those who had been made 
 God's children by adoption and grace. It was not 
 taught to the catechumen till the last week of his 
 preparation, and its significance was preserved by 
 his reciting it as he came out of the baptismal 
 laver,* being then, as it was held, entitled for the 
 first time to address God as his Father.^ 
 
 Now all through the history of the Church the 
 unbaptized had been permitted to be present or take 
 part only in the preliminary portion of the Euchar- 
 istic Ofiice, from which everything of the nature of 
 
 1 Cf. The Hours. 
 
 2 Sacram. Gelas. Lit. Gall, and Milan. 
 
 3 The same was done also in Matins and Evensong, the Invoca- 
 tion being removed. ^ Apost. Constit. vii. 44. 
 
 5 S. Aug. Horn. lix. 1. Freem. ii. 389, argues, though inoou- 
 clusively, that tlie Lord's Prayer had this initial position in the 
 earliest Liturgy, and that it wa.s altered only after tlie Disdjdina 
 Arcani came in. 
 
70 The Office of Preparation. 
 
 a mystery was carefully excluded. To thrust, there- 
 fore, the Lord's Prayer into the forefront of the Ser- 
 vice was to ignore all that reverential feeling which 
 had fenced and guarded it through all the centuries. 
 It is a silent witness to the liturgical instinct that 
 the Prayer, in its present initial position, ought to 
 belong only to the Priest,^ that the congregation 
 never joins with him in the recitation, nor repeats 
 the Amen at the close.' 
 The Collect Leaving its Eucharistic teaching for consideration 
 
 for purity. . 10 • • i • * 
 
 when it comes before us in its more central position, 
 we pass to the Collect for purity. It has a very 
 special interest, as being entirely Anglican. Though 
 unknown to the primitive Church, it is still vener- 
 able with eight centuries of usage in this country,^ 
 as an appropriate introduction to the celebration of 
 the Mysteries. 
 
 It opens Avith an address to God, "unto Whom 
 all hearts are open," which reminds us of the lan- 
 guage of the Epistle to the Hebrews, where we read 
 that "all things are naked and opened unto the 
 eyes of Him with Whom we have to do." The 
 figure is a sacrificial one, and suggests that our 
 
 1 In the Scotch office of 1637 it is said by the presbyter " for 
 due preparation," but this probably means " of the congregation." 
 
 2 It was, however, customary for the Lord's Prayer to be said 
 privately as an introduction to an office. 
 
 3 Perhaps it is even older, as it is traced in the Sacr. of Alcuin, 
 in the eighth century. Cf. Scud. Not. Euch. iv. 2. 
 
The Office of Preparation. 7 1 
 
 sacrifice, like the ancient victim, is as it were 
 thrown upon its back,^ and exposed to the inquisi- 
 tion of the Priest, and that no flaw or blemish can 
 escape the scrutinising gaze of the great Momoscopus? 
 Hence we pray for the inspiration of the blessed 
 purifying Agent, which alone can cleanse the un- 
 clean, that with a pure heart and conscience undefiled 
 we may magnify God in the highest service of 
 Christian worship. 
 
 The Office is emphatically an act of praise, and The introit. 
 its whole structure is framed with this conception. 
 It is not, however, so clearly expressed as it was in 
 the early Liturgies, or in the first revised Prayer- 
 book. Almost as far back as we can trace, the 
 entrance of the Priest, after his penitential prepara- 
 tion was over, was accompanied by an outburst of 
 song ; it bore a variety of names, as " the Office," 
 " the Ingress," " the Introit." In its origin it was 
 an " invitatory " song, like the Psalm of Invitation 
 at Matins and Evensong, while the people were 
 assembling for worship. In its oldest forms, it has 
 come down to us in two grand invariable hymns for 
 the East and West, embodying one and the same idea its original 
 of the Incarnation and Passion, to be placed in the E™tVnd''^ 
 
 West. 
 
 1 TeTpaxri\uriih'a. Cf. Suicer, s.v. Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 18. 
 So S. Chrysost., Thdrt., Hammond, Wordsw. The priest was said 
 doKt/id^eiy, ixu/xoaKoireii'. Cf. S. Clirys. Iloin. xx. Ep. ad Horn. 
 
 2 The designation of the one who looked for blemishes in the 
 victim. 
 
72 
 
 The Office of Preparation. 
 
 forefront of the Eucharist, the true rationale of which 
 is, that the fruits of these two great mysteries of our 
 Redemption are thereby api^ropriated to individual 
 souls. The Eastern Church opened with the hymn, 
 " Only begotten Son and AVord of God, Who being 
 immortal didst deign for us to be incarnate of the 
 Holy Virgin Mary, and being made man wast cruci- 
 fied, God,^ by death having trodden down death, 
 glorified with the Father and the Holy Ghost, save 
 us." In the West it took the form of the Gloria 
 in excelsis, which we still retain, though unfortunately 
 divorced from its rightful position. 
 
 This hymn, however, did not stand alone as the 
 Introit; it was accompanied by an antiphon, a 
 portion of a psalm, and Gloria Patri. The first 
 varied, giving the keynote to the season. This idea 
 was seized by the compilers of the first Prayer- 
 book, who appointed a special psalm to be sung, 
 containing " something prophetic of the Evangelical 
 history for each Sunday and holy day." It was a 
 Our present uoble feature in the Service, and its destruction by 
 Ihe ombsion. reviscrs of 1552 is without excuse. It involved 
 no questionable doctrine, and had never been associ- 
 ated with superstitious symbolism ; but they were 
 bent upon reducing to a minimum the element of 
 
 1 Freem. ii. 316, sees iu this a trace of "the hymn to Christ 
 as God," wliich Pliny says the Christians sang. Swainson's Gk. 
 Liu., 12m., 113 n., 220-1. It is found in an earlier form in the 
 Arm. Lit. 
 
The Office of Preparation. 
 
 73 
 
 praise, and investing the Service, as they believed, 
 with the spirit of more sober gravity, and to this 
 end it was not conducive to strike the note of music 
 at the outset. The voice of prayer was the only 
 fitting prelude to solemnise their worship. 
 
 The natural instinct has, however, asserted itself, 
 and the Church has met it by the unauthoritative 
 introduction of a hymn, which at the best is but a 
 most imperfect substitute. The restitution of the 
 Introits will probably be one of the first steps taken 
 in any future revision, at least if it be made on 
 Catholic lines. We must learn to draw near to 
 the Mysteries with reverential awe and penitence, 
 lest we be found unworthy partakers, but we may 
 never forget that it is the highest act of worship, 
 that it is a Eucharist, a " Sacrifice of praise and 
 thanksgiving," and our hearts are best attuned to 
 the whole spirit of such service, if we follow up 
 our Ofiice of Preparation with " psalms and hymns 
 and spiritual songs, singing and making melody" 
 in our hearts to the Lord. 
 
72 
 
 The Office of Preparation. 
 
 forefront of the Eucharist, the true rationale of which 
 is, that the fruits of these two great mysteries of our 
 Redemption are thereby appropriated to individual 
 souls. The Eastern Church opened with the hymn, 
 " Only begotten Son and Word of God, Who being 
 immortal didst deign for us to be incarnate of the 
 Holy Virgin Mary, and being made man wast cruci- 
 fied, God,^ by death having trodden down death, 
 glorified with the Father and the Holy Ghost, save 
 us." In the West it took the form of the Gloria 
 in excelsis, which we still retain, though unfortunately 
 divorced from its rightful position. 
 
 This hymn, however, did not stand alone as the 
 Introit ; it was accompanied by an antiphon, a 
 portion of a psalm, and Gloria Patri. The first 
 varied, giving the keynote to the season. This idea 
 was seized by the compilers of the first Prayer- 
 book, who appointed a special psalm to be sung, 
 containing " something prophetic of the Evangelical 
 history for each Sunday and holy day." It was a 
 Our present noble feature in the Service, and its destruction by 
 tre" omission. Tevisers of 1552 is without excuse. It involved 
 no questionable doctrine, and had never been associ- 
 ated \vith superstitious symbolism ; but they were 
 bent upon reducing to a minimum the element of 
 
 1 Freem. ii. 316, sees in this a trace of "the hymn to Christ 
 as God," which Pliny says the Christians sang. Swainson's Gk. 
 Lilt., 12 n., 113 n., 220-1. It is found in an earlier form in the 
 Arm. Lit. 
 
The Office of Preparation. 73 
 
 praise, and investing the Service, as they believed, 
 with the spirit of more sober gravity, and to this 
 end it was not conducive to strike the note of music 
 at the outset. The voice of prayer was the only 
 fitting prelude to solemnise their worship. 
 
 The natural instinct has, however, asserted itself, 
 and the Church has met it by the unauthoritative 
 introduction of a hymn, which at the best is but a 
 most imperfect substitute. The restitution qi the 
 Introits will probably be one of the first steps taken 
 in any future revision, at least if it be made on 
 Catholic lines. We must learn to draw near to 
 the Mysteries with reverential awe and penitence, 
 lest we be found unworthy partakers, but we may 
 never forget that it is the highest act of worship, 
 that it is a Eucharist, a " Sacrifice of praise and 
 thanksgiving," and our hearts are best attuned to 
 the whole spirit of such service, if we follow up 
 our Office of Preparation with " psalms and hymns 
 and spiritual songs, singing and making melody " 
 in our hearts to the Lord. 
 
IX. 
 
 %\)t aoecalogut. 
 
 ' Then shall the Priest, turning to the people, rehearse distinctly the Ten 
 Commandments,' etc. 
 
 The signi- The recitation of the Decalogue is made by the 
 
 ficance of the , , 
 
 Priest's posi- Ppiest " tumiDg to the people. ' The direction -was 
 founded upon a liturgical principle strongly con- 
 tested for at the last revision, when the Presbyterians 
 desired that the minister should maintain one and 
 the same position throughout the Service, facing the 
 congregation. The Bishops contended for a certain 
 amount of change as symbolically necessary. When- 
 ever he was acting as a delegate of God to deliver 
 His message, either in the reading of the Holy 
 Scriptures, or in pronouncing Absolution, or in giving 
 a Blessing, it was fit that the Priest should turn 
 towards those to whom he was speaking ; but when 
 he represented the people before God, as in prayer or 
 intercession, reason suggested " that they should all 
 turn another way, as the ancient Church ever did." ^ 
 15=2 A.D. Now the introduction of the Decalogue as an 
 1 Cf. Cardwell's Conferences, ch. viii. 320, 353. 
 
The Decalogue. 75 
 
 integral part of the Eucharistic Service was a novelty. 
 Exception has been taken to it not only on this The Deca- 
 account, but as well from its alleged incongruity with e°fm!nt'in"' 
 the spiiit of the Ordinance. The stern, unbending "'^ ^""'•s''- 
 code of Judaism, it is said, strikes a note of discord 
 in the highest Office of Christian love. While we 
 admit the lack of authority founded on ancient usage, 
 it is not difficult to vindicate the innovation, at least 
 in a measure. For a long time the second Table 
 had been read once a year in the Mass as the Epistle 
 for the Wednesday before Mid-Lent Sunday. Why 
 the whole Decalogue was not embraced in the " lec- 
 tion," it is by no means easy to conjecture ; possibly 
 the fact that all the quotations from the Command- 
 ments, introduced into the New Testament, are made 
 from the second, none from the first Table, in- 
 fluenced the selection. Furthermore, it had been 
 customary for at least three hundred years to recite 
 the Decalogue publicly in the English Church, and to 
 explain it once every quarter ; ^ though no provision 
 was made for the time or Service at which this was 
 to be done. 
 
 It is, however, a matter of certainty that the 
 revisers of 1552 did not consider themselves in any 
 way bound by liturgical precedent ; and, if it had 
 commended itself to their judgment, they would have 
 
 1 Archbishop Peckhani's Order, 1281 a.d., Can. ix. Johnson's 
 Eng. Canons, ii. 283, 520. Maskell says once a year. 
 
76 The Decalogue. 
 
 A standard 
 of self-ex- 
 amination 
 thought 
 necessary. 
 
 had no hesitation in making an altogether new 
 thing. Their one aim was to fence and guard the 
 Sacrament from a careless participation; and, if 
 carried out in a proper spirit, nothing could have 
 been more laudable. Eemembering how S. Paul had 
 said, " Let a man examine himself, and so let him 
 eat of that bread and drink of that cup," ^ they 
 determined to introduce in the forefront of the 
 OflSce a standard of self-examination, and to make it 
 as strict and severe as they could. It is highly 
 probable that they were influenced by the example 
 of some Continental Reformers, for the Decalogue 
 had been used for this purpose at Strasburg, and the 
 Liturgy, of which it formed the introduction, had 
 been published in Latin the year before, and adopted 
 1551 A.D. for the use of German refugees at Glastonbury.^ 
 The inappro- To men of Other minds it would have occurred as 
 thTjewTsh"*^ more in harmony with the Gospel Dispensation, to 
 Code for the appropriate to the purpose a portion of the Sermon 
 on the Mount, such as the Beatitudes, or our Lord's 
 Own summary of the Decalogue : " Thou shalt love 
 the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all 
 thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first 
 and great commandment. And the second is like 
 unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 
 
 1 1 Cor. xi. 28. 
 
 " Pollanus had published it in Latin in 1551. In this the 
 Commandmeuts were sung in rhyme. 
 
The Decalogue. 77 
 
 On these two commandments hang all the law and 
 the prophets." ^ It was so when the Nonjurors i?'^ a.d. 
 compiled their Liturgy. They adopted the Gospel 
 form of the Commandments as a substitute for the 
 Judaic, and it found its way from the Scotch into 
 the American Communion Office. The difficulty of '789 a.d. 
 applying the Jewish Code as a literal test for self- 
 examination was first felt by the Scotch Bishops 2 in 
 the Liturgy which they drew up under the guidance 
 of Laud and Wren, the introduction of which ^ was 1637 a.d. 
 a signal for the outbreak against the Eoyal authority. 
 After the reading of each of the Commandments the 
 people are directed in this Liturgy to ask God's 
 mercy "for their transgression of every duty therein, 
 either according to the letter, or to the mystical 
 importance of the said Commandments." It would 
 have been an undoubted gain, if a similar rubric 
 had been introduced into the Anglican Office. 
 
 The action of the revisers of the second Prayer- ^ Lection 
 book of Edward Vl. admits of further justification J""" "'^ ?' 
 
 ^ Testament 
 
 on the ground, that by introducing the Decalogue primitive, 
 here, they brought back the long-forgotten practice 
 of reading " a Lesson " from the Law at the opening 
 of the Eucharistic Service. It is testified to in the 
 earliest historical records, in Justin Martyr's* 
 
 1 S. Matt. xxii. 37-40. 
 
 - Maxwell of Ross, and Wedderbunie of Dunblane. 
 
 3 In S. Giles', Ediulnivgh, on .July 23d. " Apd. i. 67. 
 
78 The Decalogue. 
 
 description of the Celebration in his day, and again 
 in Tertullian's ^ account of the African Church, as 
 well as in the Liturgy of the Apostolic Constitu- 
 tions.^ 
 
 That it is an invariable Lection is no bar to its 
 liturgical claims, for ancient usage supplies sufficient 
 precedent. In the old Irish Church Liturgy one 
 and the same Gospel and Epistle were always read,^ 
 and the same practice prevailed in the Churches of 
 the Malabar Christians of India.* In the former, it 
 is true, they were selected with special reference to 
 the institution of the Sacrament,^ but in the latter 
 without any such propriety. Furthermore, in the 
 Anglican Office for the Communion of the Sick, the 
 Lections are constant. 
 
 Again, no liturgical objection may be raised on 
 the ground that it is intercalated by the responses of 
 the people, for the habit of breaking the Lessons, by 
 " planting in a multitude of responds " ^ and anthems, 
 had long been recognised. It is easy to see that such 
 a practice might be abused so as to interfere unduly 
 with the continuity of the reading, but in the case 
 of the Decalogue each " word " is so pregnant with 
 
 1 De PrcEscrip. 36. viii. 5. Cf. S. Aug. Serm. 45, 48, 82. 
 3 Cf. Palmer's Orig. Lit. ii. 30. Warren's Celt. Lit. 228, 231. 
 251. 4 Ibid. 231. 
 
 5 From S. John vi. and 1 Cor. xi. 
 
 6 Cf. Preface to 1 P.B. Edw. vi. "Concerning the Service of 
 the Church." 
 
The Decalogue. 
 
 79 
 
 meaning and so complete in itself, that there is no 
 interruption. 
 
 It had been the regular custom to prepare for the The re- 
 Celebration by a Litany, which for the most part Idapttd from 
 was that designated the Lesser Litany, consisting of ^^^^^^^^^ 
 the three clauses — 
 
 Lmd have mercy upon us. 
 
 Christ have mercy upon us. 
 
 Lord have mercy upon us. 
 From the ninth century each of these clauses was 
 repeated three times.^ On Sundays and Festivals, 
 from the Anglo-Saxon times, it was customary to 
 enlarge or " farse " these with varying expressions 
 of praise or deprecation, according to the character 
 of the season. It was a clever adaptation of this 
 element to utilise " the vain repetition," as it was 
 accounted, and to employ the clauses to impart a 
 Christian tone to the Jewish Code, making each one 
 instinct with significance by its application for a 
 specific purpose. Nine of the responses were thus 
 supplied : the tenth was suggested by the Strasburg 
 Liturgy, in which the rehearsal of the Command- 
 ments drew forth the petition, " 0 Lord God, merci- 
 ful Father . . . Who hast taught us the justice of 
 Thy Law, deign to write it on our hearts by Thy 
 
 1 They occur thus in 1 P.B. immediately after the Collect for 
 purity. 
 
8o 
 
 The Decaiogice. 
 
 Spirit."^ It was a prayer for the fulfilment of the 
 prophet's prediction, " I will put my laws into their 
 hearts, and in their minds will I write them." ^ 
 Varied di vi- One more particular calls for notice. The Greek 
 Commind- ^"^^ English Churches print as the first and second 
 Commandments what the Roman Church unites in 
 one, and in like manner the former unite in one 
 what the latter recites separately as the ninth and 
 tenth. The mode of division, with which we are 
 familiar, is supported by Philo, Josephus, and Origen, 
 also by the Talmud and modern Jews. The Romans 
 rest for their authority upon the Masoretic text of 
 Exodus and Deuteronomy, which gives the traditional 
 belief in the tenth century after Christ. 
 The best use Now taking the Decalogue, as we find it in 
 this element the Eucharistic Office, how may we turn it to the 
 vice ' ^^^^ account 1 The Church Catechism answers the 
 question for us. When it is asked, " What is re- 
 quired of them who come to the Lord's Supper 1 " 
 the reply is given, " to examine themselves " ; and 
 the Exhortation, in appealing to men to come " holy 
 and clean to such a heavenly Feast," adds that " the 
 way and means thereto is : first to examine your 
 
 1 The melody of one of these farsed kyries (Kyrie, Rex splen- 
 dens) among the twenty-eight formerly in use in England was 
 suggested to Dunstau in a dream (Polychron. f. 242). If it is 
 ever authoritatively permitted to omit the Decalogue, as e.g. when 
 there are several Celebrations, it is to be hoped that the Lesser 
 Litany will be substituted. 
 
 2 .Ter. xxxi. .33. Heb. .x. 16. 
 
The Decalogue. 
 
 81 
 
 lives and conversations by the rule of God's Com- 
 mandments." In both places the imperative duty 
 of self-examination is pressed upon us. It is the 
 echo of the old maxim of heathen philosophy, " Know 
 thyself," which was seized by Christianity, and 
 sealed for use in all time : " Examine yourselves," 
 " Prove your own selves." ^ Hold up the Decalogue 
 side by side with its spiritual interpretation, and no 
 more complete standard can be found. So many 
 " Helps to self-examination " have been provided in 
 this generation, that, where so much is done for us, 
 the thoroughness of the exercise is often endangered. 
 We have need to be reminded of the warning of the 
 Exliortation, " not lightly," and " after the manner 
 of dissemblers with God." " Not lightly," because 
 nothing is more easily missed than the reality of 
 self-examination, but breaking up with our own 
 hands the fallow ground of a deceitful heart ; not 
 " after the manner of dissemblers," because, however 
 much man may wrap himself round with conven- 
 tionalities and false excuses, all will hereafter be 
 stript off in the all-searching Presence of Him with 
 Whom we have to do. 
 
 1 2 (Jor. xiii. 5. 
 
 F 
 
X. 
 
 "^!)e Collects/' 
 
 There is hardly any question in Liturgiology 
 more vexed than the true origin of the word 
 " Collect." 
 
 It may have been a prayer in which the si^irit of 
 the Eucharistic Lections, the Epistle and Gospel, was 
 " collected " or concentrated.^ In many cases it is 
 undoubtedly "the quintessence of the practical 
 lessons " deducible from these ; but there are many 
 exceptions ; there are, moreover, numerous cases 
 where " Collects " were used in ordinary Services.^ 
 So that we are compelled to look elsewhere for the 
 true explanation. 
 
 According to the most ancient usage of which we 
 have any record, the Collect was a prayer for "an 
 assembly collected together " for public worship.^ 
 
 1 Bona, Wheatly, Freeman, etc. 
 
 2 In the Rule of Caesarius they were said between the Lessons 
 and at the end of the Psalms. Cassian. lastit. ii. 7. 
 
 3 A populi collectione collectaB appellari cceperunt. Alcuin, 
 quoted by Wheatly. 
 
 82 
 
The Collects. 
 
 83 
 
 Colleda iu the Vulgate translation of the Old Testa- 
 ment is employed as the equivalent for a " solemn 
 assembly."^ In the Sacramentary of S. Gregory 
 there is a Collect or prayer to be used on the Feast 
 of Purification " for a congregation {colleda) at S. 
 Adrian's Church in Rome, to go in procession to 
 S. Mary Major," where Mass was appointed to be 
 celebrated on that day. " Ere long," we are told,^ 
 "the custom of saying a prayer 'at the collecta,' 
 before proceeding to the Station Church, appears 
 to have died out, and it became usual to transfer 
 the name colleda to the first prayer of the Mass 
 itself" 
 
 Another etymology of the word has been found 
 in the idea that in this form of prayer the Priest 
 collected in his own voice, and gathered into a 
 small compass, the petitions of the people.^ On this 
 theory it is to be contrasted with the Versicle and 
 Response or with the Litany, in which the congrega- 
 tion and the priest take their respective parts. It 
 has further been suggested that it is a recapitulation, 
 or gathering up by the reader, of certain prayers of 
 the congregation which had gone before, such as 
 we find so well illustrated in the daily Services, 
 where the Collects, For Peace, For Aid against all 
 
 1 Lev. x.xiii. 36. Dent. xvi. 8. 
 
 2 Dr. Bright, S.P.C.K. Prayer-book, p. 84. 
 
 3 Quod omnium petitiones colligit et conchidit. Micrologiis. 
 
84 
 
 The Collects. 
 
 The sources 
 from which 
 the Collects 
 
 Perils, and For Grace, are the echo in one voice of 
 the preceding combined suffrages, viz., " Give peace 
 in our time, 0 Lord — Because there is none other 
 that fighteth for us." "0 God, make clean our 
 hearts within us. — And take not Thy Holy Spirit 
 from us." No one derivation, however, seems to be 
 suited to the diverse characteristics of the pheno- 
 mena to be dealt with ; but this last, at least in 
 its simple form, presents perhaps on the whole the 
 fewest difficulties. 
 
 It lends a special interest to the investigation of 
 the sources from which the Collects were drawn, to 
 find that they are distinctly Western. They have 
 a place in all the old Sacramentaries, which were 
 the Service-books containing, besides other Offices, 
 the fixed parts, together with the variable Collects, 
 for the Mass. The three Sacramentaries that have 
 come down to us, as best known, bear the names 
 respectively of Popes Leo, Gelasius, and Gregory. 
 The earliest in date is now considered to have been 
 J ^ ^ only in part the composition of S. Leo ; but there is 
 no reason to question the tradition that he was in 
 those early days " the main constructor of the Col- 
 lect-type of prayers," and that at least some of the 
 Collects still in use proceeded originally from his pen. 
 We would not lightly abandon the belief that the 
 Collect for the fifth Sunday after Trinity was the 
 expression of his reliance upon Divine Providence 
 
The Collects. 
 
 85 
 
 after he had saved his country from " the scourge of 
 God."i 
 
 To this Sacramentary, as it was developed under Sacramen- 
 the Pontificate of Felix iii., ^ seven collects are Lemine. 
 to be assigned — five ^ in their integrity, two * in c. 483 a.d. 
 substance. 
 
 From the Gelasian Sacramentary we have received The Gei- 
 
 asian. 
 
 fifteen or eighteen, besides three of the invariable 492 a.d. 
 Collects for Matins and Evensong, together with 
 "The prayer for the clergy and people," and the 
 Collect at the end of the Communion OflBce, " Assist 
 us mercifully," etc. This last and the others in daily 
 use bear on their face the impress of the times.^ 
 They were penned in the midst of that great unrest, 
 which was created in Italy by the invasions of the 
 northern barbarians during the fifth century. The 
 Prayer for the Clergy was ambiguous in its earliest 
 phraseology, "the healthful spirit" of God's grace 
 being sought for His "servants" merely; in the 
 Sarum Litany it was made more definite, His 
 " servants the bishops " ; " curates " was added in 
 1544. The opening address, " Who alone workest 
 great marvels," has given rise to frequent discus- 
 
 1 Gibbon, Bed. and Fall, xxxv. 
 
 2 Cf. Appendix in Bright's Anc. Collects. 
 
 3 3d after Easter ; 5, 9, 13, 14 after Trin. 
 •» 10 and 12 after Trin. 
 
 ' Bright assigns to this also the Collects for Innocents' Day, 
 4th S. after East., and 2d S. after Trin., as well as the present 
 forms of 10th and 12th after Trin. 
 
86 
 
 The Collects. 
 
 sion,i the reference to the miraculous gift to the 
 first ministers of the Church at Pentecost, which 
 lends so much significance to the phrase in this con- 
 nexion, heing entirely missed. 
 TheGre- Thc third Sacrameutarj', in which the existing 
 moTd. Services were much condensed and abbreviated, was 
 compiled by Gregory the Great, when he succeeded 
 to the Papal Chair. It contained all the remaining 
 Collects now in the Anglican Office, except those 
 which were composed at the Eeformation. Of these 
 latter, six for Sundays ^ were drawn up for the 
 Reformat ion first Prayer-book, four were compiled from old 
 rtitfirs't ^' materials,^ thirteen for Saints' days (though two of 
 Revision. fchesc Were altered at the last Eevision) were entirely 
 re-written, as also were those for Christmas-Day 
 and Ash-AVednesday. The third for Good-Friday 
 incorporated the substance of three ancient forms, 
 for heretics, treacherous Jews, and Pagans. In 
 addition to these the two Communion Collects for 
 the King,* and three of the final Collects bear the 
 date of 1549. The main cause for re- writing the 
 
 1 Cardw. Conf. 275, 431. In the American P.B. it is "from 
 whom Cometh every good and perfect gift." 
 
 2 1, 2 Adv., Quinquag., 1 Lent, 1 and 2 after East. 
 
 3 Se.xag., 2d S. after Asc, Con v. of S. Paul, and S. Barth. 
 
 ■* It is not known wliy alternative Collects were composed. 
 Petitions for the king obtained this prominent place, in addition 
 to that in the Prayer for the Church, that he might not be for- 
 gotten, on those occasions where the latter was omitted, i.e. when 
 in 1st P.B. the Service might close with the Offertory. 
 
The Collects. 
 
 87 
 
 Collects for the Commemorcation-dayg of Saints was 
 the necessity of erasing all traces of that habit 
 of invoking the Saints to intercede for men, which 
 had entered so largely into public worship since the 
 beginning of the fourteenth century. 1335 a-d- 
 
 History has preserved no record of the names of 
 those who composed the Collects for the first 
 Prayer-book, but tradition has assigned the majority 
 of them to the authorship of Cranmer; and there 
 are certainly some remarkable points in his 
 life and teaching which find an exact reflection 
 in the language of the compositions of this 
 date.^ 
 
 The second revision left this element of worsliip The second 
 almost untouched. The allusion in S. Andrew's jj^'^'^.d. 
 Collect "to the sharp and painful death of the 
 Cross," resting as it did only on uncertain tradition, ^ 
 was deemed by the revisers unworthy of mention 
 in such a place, and a fresh form was composed to 
 commemorate the Apostle's ready obedience to the 
 calling of Christ. It is not unlikely also that they 
 believed that the habit of adoring the Cross was 
 largely fostered by the recollection of the salutation 
 with which the Apostle was supposed to have 
 greeted the instrument of his death. 
 
 1 Goulb. The Coll. 60, 61. 
 
 2 Cf. Lepsius, de Cruce 1, 7. Sagittarius de cruc. Martyr, 
 viii. 12. 
 
88 
 
 The Collects. 
 
 At the final revision four new Collects were 
 introduced into the OflSce. When, however, Cosin 
 composed that for S. Stephen's Day, he embodied 
 in it two expressions from the pre-Eeformation form, 
 " to learn to love our enemies," and " who prayed for 
 his persecutors." One very important change he 
 made, when he addressed it to the Second instead of 
 the First Person of the Blessed Trinity. In sentiment, 
 no doubt, it admits of ample justification, but on 
 liturgical grounds to be considered hereafter, it is 
 much to be deprecated. 
 
 No new Collects have been admitted to the Lit- 
 urgy since 1662, but the Church narrowly escaped 
 most extensive innovations at the hands of the 
 commissioners appointed to revise the Prayer-book 
 in the reign of William iii. Scarcely a Collect was 
 left untouched ; all of them were enlarged " by 
 the introduction of phrases from the Epistles and 
 Gospels, such as abound in the devotional writings 
 of the Nonconformists " ; the whole beauty and the 
 nervous simplicity which have called forth the ad- 
 miration of all M'lio are most capable of appreciating 
 the purity of the English language, were sacrificed to 
 a miserable attempt to make them more Scriptural.^ 
 The comparison of the most familiar Collect with 
 its proposed enlargement will suffice to awaken our 
 
 1 Goulbuni has shown fully the Scriptural character of the 
 Collects, 1, 5, 13, 17, 18 after Trinity. 
 
The Collects. 
 
 89 
 
 gratitude that the revision was abandoned. The 
 terse and simple petition of the Evening Prayer, 
 "Lighten our darkness," etc., was spun out into 
 treble its length, "Almighty God, Who hast hitherto 
 preserved us safely this day, by Thy great mercy 
 defend us from all perils and dangers of this night. 
 Pardon whatsoever we have done amiss, and settle 
 our holy purposes to do better for the time to come : 
 that laying ourselves down to sleep with these godly 
 resolutions in our hearts, they may awaken with us 
 in the morning, and we may daily grow more watch- 
 ful in all our ways, for the love of Thy Only Son 
 our Saviour Jesus Christ." ^ 
 
 In regulating the use of the Collects in the Symbolism 
 Eucharistic Office the Sarum Missal enjoined that "n uneven" 
 "an uneven number should always be preserved,""""'^'"'' 
 provision being made for the introduction of the 
 Collect for All Saints' Day, if those duly appointed 
 in the ordinary Service were either two or four. 
 This unevenness was regarded as symbolical of unity, 
 and expressed the desire for the unity of the Church. 
 
 In most of the English Uses the number was 
 restricted to seven after the eighth century.^ 
 
 J For an account of the revision, of. the author's The. Bishops 
 in the Tower, pp. 206-211. 
 
 - Martene, de Ant. Ecc. Hit. i. 4. Durand. Rat. v. 14. 
 Gemma Anivice, c. 116. Alcuin, de Dir. Off. 40. Maskell's 
 Anc. Lit. 30. But there was no servile adherence to this rule, for 
 there were recognised exceptions. 
 
90 
 
 The Collects. 
 
 When three were said, it was mystically interpreted 
 as in honour of the Blessed Trinity ; five pointed to 
 the five-fold Passion, and seven to the seven-fold 
 gifts of the Holy Spirit.^ 
 
 One more subject in connexion with the usage 
 of the Collect remains to be noticed — that is, the 
 way in which this, which has become a strictly 
 Eucharistic element, is made to pervade the ordinary 
 daily worship. The first Collect for the day in 
 Matins and Evensong, being in itself variable, and 
 often epitomising the Liturgical Lections, keeps 
 before the mind of the worshipper the appropriate 
 teaching of each Celebration.^ It has been said that 
 there is "no part of the ritual mechanism of the 
 The value West that is more worthy of admiration." It is 
 recitatfon'of impossible to over-estimatc the spiritual help which 
 the Collect, may thus be gained, by letting the Eucharist per- 
 vade with its hallowing influence our daily life, whilst 
 we bear ever about us the memory of the high 
 
 1 Chambers' WorsM'p, i. p. 323. To carry out the old custom 
 it is usual to read one or more of the additional Collects provided 
 at the end of the Office. 
 
 - It is because they are connected with the Collects, which are a 
 part of the Eucharistic Office, that the priest is directed to stand at 
 the Suffrages. In the Evening Service it is implied that he stands 
 for the Collects : in Matins " all kneeling" has led men to suppose 
 that the omission in Evensong is accidental ; but it is doubtful if 
 the "all" uniformly embr.aces the priest. Cf. Rubric before the 
 administration of the Elements. It has been said that directions 
 were given to the Printers to repeat the rubrics from Matins in the 
 order of Evensong, but that they were neglected. 
 
The Collects. 
 
 91 
 
 and holy privilege to Avhich we have been admitted, 
 in receiving into our very being the Body and Blood 
 of Christ, so that we are able to say with S. Paul, 
 that our "life is hid with Christ in God." " Through 
 the Collect, in a word, we lay continually upon the 
 altar our present sacrifice and service, and receive, 
 in a manner, from the altar a continuation of the 
 heavenly gift." ^ 
 
 1 This subject is fully worked out in Fieeniau's Div. Serv. 
 i. iv. §5. 
 
XL 
 
 'Jlitz Congftcuction of tt)e Collect* 
 
 The struc- The Collcct, in its typical form, is made up of five 
 model Col- compoucnt parts : an invocation or address ; the 
 ■ statement of some fact, doctrinal or otherwise, as the 
 
 basis of a petition ; the petition itself ; the looked- 
 for result of its fulfilment ; and the recognition of 
 Theinvoca- Clirist's Mediation. The invocation is, with the 
 rarest exceptions, an appeal to the First Person in 
 the Blessed Trinity ; and this peculiarity stamps 
 " the Collect " as an element of sacrificial worship. 
 The essential idea of the Eucharistic Sacrifice is the 
 presentation to the Father of the memorial of His 
 Son's death, the pleading before Him the efficacy of 
 His One perfect and sufficient Sacrifice once oS'ered. 
 In this act Christ is both Priest and Victim ; but in 
 either capacity He comes before the Father, and we, 
 in Him and through Him, join in this sacrificial 
 Liturgical pleading. It introduces an incongruity, while so 
 braddressed engaged, to appeal to Him in prayer. It was on 
 Fa'thtr ^^^^ ground that the Council of Hippo passed a 
 canon directing that "no one should address the 
 
The Construction of the Collect. 93 
 
 Father instead of the Son, or the Son instead of the 
 Father ; and when we are officiating at the altar, 
 prayer should always be addressed to the Father." 393 a.d. 
 The same was indorsed by a still more important 
 Council convened at Carthage ^ a few years later, 397 a-d- 
 which decided some questions of weightiest moment. 
 
 There were, however, occasional departures from Exceptions 
 the rule. In the old English Use there were three 
 exceptions, the Collect for the 1st, 2d, and 4th 
 Sundays in Advent being addressed to our Blessed 
 Lord. The limitation of the exceptions to this 
 particular season suggests that the Church was so 
 carried away by the one predominant thought of 
 Christ's second Coming, that for the moment He 
 seemed to claim all her devotion. 
 
 At the beginning of the Eeform^ation the first two 1549 a.d. 
 Collects for this season were re-written ; but while 
 the address to the Son was altered in the former, it 
 was allowed to remain in the latter. At the final 
 revision the last two Collects for the same season 1661 a.d. 
 were also re-written, but with singular caprice the 
 address of the third was changed to the Son, that 
 of the fourth to the Father. In two other Collects 
 which date from this period, viz., for ■ S. Stephen's 
 Day and the 1st Sunday in Lent, the Second Person 
 was invoked instead of, as heretofore, the First. 
 The Collect for S. Stephen is somewhat ambiguous ; 
 1 Can. 25. 
 
94 The Constr7ictioiL of the Collect. 
 
 for it may fairly be supposed that the opening clause 
 refers to the Father, and only the conclusion to the 
 Son. 
 
 Motives for No doubt the principle of addressing the Son in 
 the Second the highest act of worship could be defended, and 
 its value shown as a protest against Arianism, and a 
 strong argument for the co-equal Deity of Jesus 
 Christ. In view of this we are content to acquiesce 
 in the occasional deviation from primitive practice ; 
 but, recognising the tendency that^has existed since 
 the Reformation to ignore the sacrificial character 
 of Christian worship, and thus break the continuity 
 of Catholic doctrine, we should deem it wiser to 
 allow nothing to traverse this, but to admit appeals 
 to our Blessed Lord much more largely into our 
 non-Eucharistic prayers. There can be little question 
 that liturgical usage has coloured to some extent 
 the other Offices, but more especially our private 
 practice, though far less in regard to the Second 
 than to the Third Person in the Trinity. Addresses 
 to Jesus Christ are by no means uncommon in some 
 of the Offices. In the Litany there is a succession 
 of them — in the Invocation, the Deprecations, the 
 Obsecrations, the Petitions, " 0 God the Son " ; 
 " Spare us. good Lord " ; " Son of God, we beseech 
 Thee " ; "0 Lamb of God " ; "0 Christ, hear us " ; 
 " Christ, have mercy upon us." In the Visitation of 
 the Sick : " Remember not, Lord, our iniquities " ; 
 
The Construction of the Collect. 95 
 
 " Christ, have mercy upon us " ; "0 Saviour of the 
 world, Who, by Thy Cross and jirecious Blood, hast 
 redeemed us, save us " ; and the same is repeated 
 more or less in some of the other Offices.i 
 
 But we may search our Prayer-book through for The Third 
 a prayer addressed to the Third Person, save in the rarely 
 Invocation of the Litany and the Ordination Hymn, 
 " Come, Holy Ghost, our souls inspire " j and there 
 are but few who can witness to the habit, in their 
 private devotions, of offering up a prayer with this 
 invocation, " 0 God, the Holy Ghost." And yet we 
 are unquestionably losers thereby, for such appeals 
 would tend to foster a more vivid realisation of His 
 Personality, and a firmer reliance upon His quicken- 
 ing influence. 
 
 Tlie second constituent part of the Collect is the The basis 
 basis of the petition. It is frequently the statement petition of 
 of some historical fact that is naturally suggestive 
 of the supply of the particular need. This feature 
 is most marked in the Collects for Saints' days. 
 The call of S. Andrew, for instance, affords obvious 
 grounds for a petition that we may be won from 
 the world to a like self-surrender and devotion to 
 God's will ; or the summons of S. Matthew from a 
 lucrative occupation is an inspiration to us to win 
 an abiding fellowship with Christ by " forsaking all 
 covetous desires, and inordinate love of riches." 
 
 ' liiddon, Bcmp. Led. vii. Note D, has drawn up a long list. 
 
g6 The Construction of the Collect. 
 
 Sometimes the petition is made to rest upon the 
 enunciation of a doctrine. For example, in the 
 Collect for Easter-Even: the statement that "we 
 are baptized into the Death of Thy Blessed Son," 
 reminds us at once of S. Paul's dogmatic exposition 
 of the character of Holy Baptism,^ and carries our 
 thoughts on in prayer, that we may so die to sin 
 in this life that " we may pass to our joyful resur- 
 rection." Most frequently, however, the ground- 
 work is simply the attribute of God's love or mercy, 
 or power, or knowledge : " Almighty and everlasting 
 God, Who hatest nothing that Thou hast made, and 
 dost forgive the sins of all them that are penitent " ; 
 "Who of Thy tender love towards mankind hast 
 sent Thy Son " ; " From Whom all good things do 
 come " ; " The strength of all them that put their 
 trust in Thee " ; " Who declarest Thy almighty 
 power most chiefly in showing mercy and pity " ; 
 " Who knowest our necessities before we ask, and 
 our ignorance in asking." 
 The petition. The third part is the petition for some definite 
 gift, generally spiritual; but, as though to keep us 
 ever in mind that we may ask also for material 
 blessings, not a few of the Collects contain sup- 
 plications for deliverance " from all perils and 
 dangers"; for defence again.st "all adversities 
 which may happen to the body ; " and for pre- 
 1 Eom. vi. 3, 4. 
 
The Constructio7i of the Collect. 
 
 97 
 
 servation " from all things that may hurt us," that 
 we may be enabled cheerfully to accomplish the will 
 of God. 
 
 The fourth part is the expected consequence, if The result of 
 
 ^ 1 1 r- • • T ■ ''^^ petition 
 
 (jrod shall see fat to grant the petition. It is i,eing 
 necessarily conditioned by the character of the s""'^''- 
 petition itself, and grows out of it in natural order. 
 Its usefulness lies in the earnestness which it seems 
 to impart to the supplication. How much force 
 and energy does it add to our prayer,^ " that, having 
 this hope, we may purify ourselves even as He is 
 pure," to realise that the result of such purification 
 will be an entire conformity to His likeness, not 
 only here, but throughout the ages " in His eternal 
 and glorious kingdom ! " 
 
 The fifth and last element in the Collect is the The media- 
 recognition of the might of the all-prevailing Name : ^c\^x\l. 
 '• No man cometh unto the Father but by Me." We 
 have a High Priest Who can " be touched with the 
 feeling of our infirmities," and when we ask Him, 
 He will bear our needs, our anxieties, our sorrows 
 on His breast before the Father ; and that " which 
 for our unworthiness we dare not, and for our 
 blindness we cannot ask, He will give us " for the 
 all-sufficient Sacrifice which Jesus Christ is for ever 
 pleading before the throne of God. 
 
 1 6 S. aft. Epiph. 
 G 
 
XII. 
 
 (Epistle* 
 
 *' The Priest shall read the Epistle, saying, The Epistle, or the portion 
 of Scripture appointed for the Epistle, is written in the chapter of , 
 beginning at the verse." 
 
 Holy The reading of Holy Scrij^ture has been an 
 
 aiw'ay's'read esscntial fsaturc of Eucharistic worship in every 
 Liturgy country and at all times ; at least there is no Liturgy 
 extant without it. In the nucleus of the Service 
 formed by the Apostles, the " Lection " must have 
 been drawn from the Old Testament,^ though pro- 
 vision would be made for the recitation of the 
 words of institution, and permission given for the 
 introduction of portions from the oral Gospel. The 
 most ancient Liturgy of S. James contains a rubric, 
 which seems to have been framed in the interval 
 before the Gospels were written : " Then the sacred 
 oracles of the Old Covenant and of the prophets are 
 read consecutively,^ and the Incarnation of the Son 
 of God ... is set forth." Nothing is more natural 
 
 1 Cf. supra, p. 77, 8. 
 Sie^oSiKuiTara, perhaps, "in detail." Cf. icropla. 5ie|o5iK-6f, 
 Plut. Fab. 16. 
 98 
 
The Epistle. 99 
 
 than that the Apostles should desire to embody in 
 the Service of their Lord's appointing something of 
 that life and teaching which they were commissioned 
 to record. By the middle of the second century all 
 the Books of the New Testament were written and 
 circulated in the Churches, and their paramount 
 claims were so fully recognised that in time they 
 superseded altogether the writings of the elder 
 Covenant. 
 
 The first of the Liturgical Lections is commonly The Epistie 
 called " the Epistle," but its earliest designation was fakerfrom 
 "the Apostle,"^ pointing to the fact that it was ^- 
 usually taken from one of the letters of S. Paul, to 
 whom so many of the Churches owed their founda- 
 tion. The name is stiU retained by the Greek 
 Church at Constantinople.^ 
 
 In the early Western Church fortj'-six " Epistles " 
 were from the writings of S. Paul, only twelve from 
 those of the other Apostles ; and it is an important 
 link with the past, and evidence of the historic con- 
 tinuity of our Eucharistic worship, that the present 
 selection of Epistles and Gospels is almost identical 
 with that which was in use at the close of the fourth 
 century. There is extant a Table of Liturgical Les- 
 sons, entitled Comes Eieronymi, i.e. " The Companion 
 
 1 August. Serm. de Verbis Apos. 176. Lit. Chrysos. Sacr. 
 Gregor. 
 
 2 Lit. Chrysos. Goar. 68. Palm. Orig. Lit. ii. 42. 
 
lOO 
 
 The Epistle. 
 
 The Comes of S. Jerome," purporting to have been compiled by 
 of s. Jerome, j^.^^ rpj^^ AngHcan Church adheres closely to it. 
 
 Some doubt has been thrown upon the authenticity of 
 the document, and it has been assigned to a date 
 several centuries later. It is, however, somewhat 
 significant that it contains no mention of saints 
 canonised after S. Jerome's time, and that its desig- 
 nation of the Feast of the Epiphany is " The Theo- 
 phany," which is known to have dropped out of 
 common use in the fifth century. Yet further, in con- 
 firmation of the alleged authorship and the use of the 
 above title in the Comes, it is to be noted that, while 
 other Fathers associate different manifestations with 
 this festival, S. Jerome alludes only to that of Christ's 
 Godhead, the true Theophany, in the declaration at 
 His baptism, " This is My beloved Son."^ 
 The place In the earliest times the Reader of the Epistle 
 
 from which n i t <> t • 
 
 the Epistle stood ou the steps of the amoon, a stage or pulpit 
 was rea . p]aced somctiijies at the western end of the chancel, 
 sometimes in the nave. If there was only one, the 
 Epistle was read from the second step, the Gospel 
 from the third ; but generally there were two, one 
 on either side, for Epistle and Gospel respectively. 
 Early examples are preserved in the ancient 
 Churches of SS. Clement, Laurence, and Pancras, at 
 
 1 In Ezek. i. Cf. Ussher, de Ann. Solar., Works, v. 7, p. 392. 
 
 2 Suicer, Thes. Ecd., quicquid eminet ac protuberat forma ro 
 tunda ; from ava^alveiv, to ascend. 
 
The Epistle. loi 
 
 Eome. Ill later times these stages were united by 
 a beam or gallery, with a representation of the 
 Crucifixion in the centre, thus originating the Eood- 
 loft, which was largely introduced into the French 
 churches in the thirteenth century. Its connexion 
 with the reading of " the Lections " is perpetuated 
 in its modern French name Jub6, the echo of the 
 Reader's request for the Priest's blessing, Juha Domne 
 benedicere} 
 
 In the Eastern Church the Keader stands at the incon- 
 door of the Sanctuary. The modern custom ofrradin" 
 reading from the altar-steps at the carnu Epistolm '^^^pf ''^ 
 probably grew out of the popularity of the Low 
 Mass, when, having no epistoler, the Celebrant 
 himself read without leaving the Altar. It has the 
 advantage of marking off the Eucharist more com- 
 pletely from the daily Offices ; but it runs the risk 
 of violating a principle which should be jealously 
 guarded, viz. , that the Word of God — His message to 
 the people — should be delivered in such a manner 
 that it may be best heard.^ In some churches 
 
 1 Domne is a contraction for Dumine, which latter, however, 
 was appropriated to God. Ducange s. dom. Jube was used as 
 a mark of I'espect, "bid yourself bless."— Le Brun. Clianibors' 
 Worship, p. 7. In the Saruni Missal the form of the blessing 
 before the Gospel was " The Lord be in thy heart and inoutli, 
 that thou mayest preach the Holy Gospel of God. In the 
 Name," etc. 
 
 - The Decalogue is so familiar that there is not the same necessity 
 to observe the rule in this particular instance. 
 
I02 The Epistle. 
 
 where the chancels are deep, and in cathedrals where 
 the congregation usually worships in the nave, this 
 object can rarely be obtained when the Reader 
 stands on the altar-steps. It would seem, however, 
 that in preaching, the Bishops of the early Church 
 did not observe the principle, but delivered their 
 sermons from the Altar ; for the historians ^ of the 
 time call attention to S. Chrysostom's preaching 
 from the awhon as a departure from custom ; but one 
 of them adds that he did it " that he might be the 
 better heard by the people." It may have been that 
 the Altar at Constantinople was further removed 
 than usual from the congregation. 
 The posture Some diversity of practice has arisen from the 
 during'^thT'^ abseuce of any rubrical direction for the posture 
 reading. people during the reading of the Epistle. 
 
 The order to stand for the Gospel implies that they 
 were before either sitting or kneeling. The rationale 
 of the rubrics implies kneeling, for a rubric is only 
 inserted when a change of posture is enjoined, the 
 worshipper remaining as he is, till a fresh direction is 
 given. He was left on his knees at the conclusion of 
 the Collect. But, on the other hand, primitive custom 
 points to the posture of sitting for the Epistle.^ 
 
 1 Socrates, vi. 5. Sozomen, viii. 5. 
 
 - Amalavius says that it was the custom of the ancients. De 
 Ecdes. Off. iii. 11, IS. Alcuin, 40. Microl. 6. The custom for 
 the laity to Icneel was prevalent in England before 1375. Cf. Lay 
 Folk's Mass-hook : ed. Simmons, 16. 
 
The Epistle. 103 
 
 Anciently there was no further provision for noti- 
 fying to the congregation the passage to be read 
 than the bare announcement, " the beginning of the 
 Epistle." There were no authorised divisions of the The mode of 
 several Books of Scripture, save in cases where sec- the Epistle, 
 tions were marked off by descriptive " titles," such 
 as " on agriculture,"^ " on the Magi," " on the 
 slaughtered infants," and the like. This inconveni- 
 ence was partly removed when Cardinal Hugo 
 divided the Scriptures into chapters in the thir- 1240 a.d. 
 teenth century, and entirely so, on the subdivision 
 into verses by Mordecai Nathan, a Jewish Rabbi, 1445 a.d. 
 two centuries later. 
 
 " The Epistle " has long been a recognised Litur- 
 gical term for a portion of Scripture selected for 
 the Eucharistic Office, though it was taken from the 
 Acts, the Apocalypse, or even from the prophecies 
 of the Old Testament. The alternative heading in 
 the rubric, " or the portion of Scripture appointed," 
 was therefore unnecessary ; but it is interesting 
 as an illustration of the conciliatory spirit of the 
 Bishops towards the objections of the Presbyterians 1661 a.d. 
 when no doctrine was involved,^ for they dis- 
 
 1 Genesis iii. Of. Steph. Booh ofC. P. ii. 1135. 
 
 2 The change was introduced after the Savoy Conference in 
 1661. This technical use of the term " Epistle," as also of " the 
 Gospel," forbids the too-familiar mode of giving it out, e.g. the 
 Epistle is written in ihat of S. Paul, etc. The title cannot be used 
 thus in two senses. 
 
I04 The Epistle. 
 
 approved of applying the term '■' Epistle " to what- 
 ever was read here. 
 
 At the conclusion of the Epistle a Psalm was sung. 
 S. Augustine ^ says, " We have heard the Apostle — 
 we have heard the Psalm." As time advanced it 
 varied in its character, and was represented by the 
 Gradual, the Sequence or Prose, and the Tract. 
 The Gradual. The Gradual was a responsory hymn, so called 
 from being sung on the step {gradus) of the ambon. 
 
 On special Festivals such as Easter or Whitsunday, 
 it was followed or superseded by " Alleluia," the 
 most jubilant of the old Jewish songs of praise. In 
 times of humiliation and abasement its place was 
 The Tract takcu by the " Tract," ^ which was so called from its 
 Sequence, bciug " drawu out " in a sad and mournful strain, 
 perhaps " continuously " by the Eeader without 
 assistance from the choir. After this followed "the 
 Sequence," a lengthy hymn not unlike the choral 
 odes of the Greeks in its construction, called a 
 " Prose," because unrestricted by the common rules 
 of metre. It grew to be a most popular element in 
 the Service,^ and in some churches every day had 
 its proper sequence. Notker, S. Bernard, Peter 
 Abelard, and Adam Victor were the chief com- 
 posers. From the first-named, who was an Abbot 
 
 1 Serm. xxxii., clxv., clxxvi. 
 
 2 Durau. iv. 21. Mask. Anc. Lit. 46, n. 
 
 3 Some of the best known are the Lauda Zion, Stabat Mater, 
 Veni Saucte Spiritus. Chambers, 329. 
 
The Epistle. 
 
 of S. Gall in Switzerland, we have the famous Dies 
 Irm, " Day of wrath, 0 day of mourning," which 
 was originally intended as a Sequence in the Mass 
 for the Dead. The solemn and sublime anthem in 
 our present Burial Office, " In the midst of life we 
 are in death," is a prose translation of another 
 Sequence by the same author. Media vita in morte 
 sumus. 
 
 All these musical portions were removed from the The musical 
 Service-book at the first revision, and a simple removed, 
 direction was given to the clerks and people to 
 answer the Priest, when he announced the Gospel, 
 with the words, " Glory be to Thee, 0 God." 
 
 Had these omissions been made by the compilers 
 of the second Prayer-book, we should have found 
 the motive in their general desire to reduce as 
 largely as possible the element of praise, with which 
 music is so naturally associated ; but it was the work 
 of the first revision. Possibly we should look for xhe probable 
 the cause in the degradation of church-music, which 
 
 O ' this. 
 
 reached its lowest point at this period. A Papal 
 Bull in the preceding century had condemned the 
 use of harmony in the services of the Church, except 
 on the great festivals, and insisted on a rigid restric- 
 tion to plain song. When a reaction against it took 
 place, the Church, having herself banned the higher 
 forms of music, had no means of supplying the 
 popular demands for harmonised song, and was 
 
io6 The Epistle. 
 
 driven to the adoption of secular tunes, and 
 not a few were adopted from rude and profane 
 ballads for her Eucharistic anthems.^ It would 
 have been well had the revisers been content 
 to Avait, for two great musicians were already at 
 work in raising church-music to a position worthy 
 
 1350 A.D. of the use for which it was designed. Merbecke in 
 England, succeeded in adapting the old plain song 
 to the translated Offices, and Palestrina, in Italy, 
 
 1582 A.D. completely revised it for the Eoman Church. 
 
 It is happily no longer held that the promotion of 
 " godly worship is in inverse proportion to the culti- 
 vation of sacred music." There is often in the soul 
 of man an heaven-born instinct for this. It has 
 proved auxiliary to the truest devotion, and it can 
 only be banished with harm and loss from the great 
 act of Christian worship. 
 
 • A very interesting account of the church-music of the time 
 may be found in Dr. Dykes' Lecture at the Church Congress at 
 Norwich in lSu5. 
 
XIII. 
 
 " Then shall he read the Gospel, the people all standing up.' 
 
 All the Books of the Bible, as written under the Reverence 
 
 for the Gos- 
 
 inspiration of the Holy Ghost, demand the reverent pel Lections 
 estimation of men ; but not all in an equal degree. 
 Histories, books of wars, genealogical records, 
 sapiential manuals, prophecies, apostolical letters, all 
 have their appointed place, one higher and another 
 lower, but all are of necessity subordinate to those 
 Books which contain the story of the earthly life of 
 Him to Whom all the prophets bear witness, and in 
 Whom all Scripture centres. It was on this principle 
 that the early Christians came to look upon the 
 Gospels as the very Holy of Holies of Inspiration. 
 This feeling of profound reverence manifested itself 
 especially towards the Gospel " Lection " in the 
 Eucharistic Office, and it has been handed down as 
 a precious heirloom through all the generations of 
 the Christian Church. 
 
 In the East the Book of the Gospels has been 
 adorned with every embellishment of art that pious 
 
 107 
 
io8 
 
 The Gospel. 
 
 devotion could lavish upon it, and enclosed in a 
 casket of the utmost magnificence. When about to 
 be used in the Celebration, it is always borne into 
 the church from the sacristy in procession, and laid 
 upon the Altar with considerable ceremony. 
 
 Whereas, during the reading of the other Litur- 
 gical Lessons the congregation was sometimes per- 
 mitted to sit, "the Gospel" was always to be heard 
 standing ; and to mark the significance of what was 
 about to be read, directions were given to " stand up 
 in great silence,"^ and "with soul and ear erect." 
 During a long period, from the eighth to the twelfth 
 century, when no seats or benches were provided in 
 the churches, the people were bidden to lay aside the 
 staves on which they ordinarily leaned,- and as a sign 
 that such respect was due, as well from the highest as 
 the lowest in earthly rank, the Emperor put off his 
 crown. Once only in the history of the Church has 
 the Epistle shared the same honour as the Gospel ; 
 it was when soldiers, who adopted S. Paul as their 
 patron saint, from a mistaken belief that the emblem 
 of the sword was indicative of a warlike spirit rather 
 than of death by martyrdom, when the Epistle was 
 given out from his letters, rose from their seats and 
 stood while it was read. 
 
 1 Afosl. Conatit. ii. 57. 
 
 = Amalar. iii. 18; Qem. Anim. i. 24. Ord. Rom. ii. S. 
 3 Stephen's C. P. ii. 1138 ; Duran. de Off. Div. iv. 16. 
 
The Gospel. 
 
 109 
 
 The place of reading, again, has been chosen to do 
 honour to the Gospel, the Reader whether at the 
 ambon or the Altar standing always on a higher 
 step than for the Epistle. Yet further, during the 
 reading of it, it has been customary for candles to be 
 lit, even though, as S. Jerome ^ testifies, " the sun be 
 already shining," in token that He, Whose voice it is, 
 had Himself declared " I am the light of the world." 
 The announcement, too, that " the Gospel " was 
 about to be read, has been received with an outburst 
 of praise, the familiar " Glory be to Thee, 0 God," 
 having been sung as far back as the fourth century ; 
 and in some countries its conclusion has been 
 followed by the grateful acknowledgment, " Thanks 
 be to Thee, 0 Lord." It is interesting to notice Marks of the 
 that while the former has held its place in the Ser- E^^and. 
 vice, notwithstanding the omission at the Reforma- 
 tion of the rubric which enjoined it, the latter is 
 far more rarely repeated, probably because it was 
 wholly unknown in the ancient Anglican Ritual.^ 
 
 How far this habit of exalting "the Gospel" had 
 developed in England at the time of the Reformation, 
 may be gathered from a book written in Henry the 
 Eighth's reign, in which the rites and ceremonies of 
 the Mass are freely canvassed by one who longed 
 for greater simplicity of worship. "What," he 
 
 1 Contra Vigil. 7. 
 
 - In the Mozar. Lit. it ends with " Amen." 
 
I lO The Gospel. 
 
 writes, " shall I say of the GosiDel when it is sung ? 
 Oh, how goodly ceremonies are then done ! There is 
 borne a banner of silk and garnished -ndth a goodly 
 cross, in token of the victorious and blessed triumph 
 which Jesus Christ made of subduing the world unto 
 Himself by the doctrine of the Gospel. Then after- 
 wards a priest beareth a censer of silver, making a 
 fumigation and savour of incense, as long as the Gospel 
 is in reading, to signify our inward affection for Christ. 
 There is also borne about the Gospel-book richly 
 covered with gold and silver garnished with precious 
 stones. Afterward there thundereth a great bell, by 
 which we do signify our Christian priestly and 
 apostolical office : last of all the Gospel is borne 
 about to every person in the Quire, and offered forth 
 to be kissed." ^ 
 
 The Reader The function of reading " the Gospel " devolved 
 of the Gospel. .^^ ^ncicut times upon the Deacon. This is worthy 
 of notice because reading Scripture in the church 
 ordinarily was the province of one of the minor 
 orders ; to except therefore the Liturgical Gospel 
 from the " Eeader's " office and appropriate it to a 
 Deacon, as was done throughout the "West, was a 
 1549 A.D. mark of honour. In the first Prayer-book there 
 are two rubrics bearing upon this point, one "the 
 Priest or one appointed to read the Gospel," the 
 
 1 "The Old God and the New," etc., qu. by Mask. And. Lit. 
 43 n. We have altered the spelling from the ancient method. 
 
The Gospel. 1 1 1 
 
 other, " the Priest or Deacon then shall read " ; the 
 second evidently showing that none below the 
 diaconate might be so appointed. At the last 1662 a.d. 
 revision the Priest alone is mentioned, but there is 
 a striking witness borne by "the Ordering of 
 Deacons " to the time-honoured custom, where, 
 immediately after the Imposition of hands, the 
 Bishop delivers to the Deacon not the whole Bible, 
 but the New Testament, together with " authority 
 to read the Gospel in the Church of God " ; and, as 
 a practical illustration, one of the newly ordained 
 deacons proceeds to execute that office. 
 
 One more ceremony in connexion with this part symbolism 
 of the Order calls for notice, if only to exemplify ff^^^j™'^^' 
 the intense love of symbolism which prevailed in Gospel, 
 the middle ages. As far back as the eighth century 
 it was customary to divide the sexes in public 
 worship, the men occupying the south side, the 
 women the north. ^ The reader of the Gospel was 
 directed to turn to the south in obedience to a 
 fancied belief, that it is the duty of the Church to 
 minister first to the men, from whom, as S. Paul 
 implies, the women may learn at home.^ 
 
 In lapse of time a yet stranger symbolism grew 
 up, and the Gospel was read towards the north, for 
 the mystical reason that Lucifer has his abode in 
 the north, as is gathered from his boast which Isaiah 
 
 1 Amal. de Div. Off. iii. 2. 2 j Cor. xiv. 35. 
 
1 1 2 The Gospel. 
 
 has preserved, " I will sit also upon the mount of 
 the congregation, in the sides of the north " ; ^ yet 
 further, the Gentiles and all who were cold in the 
 faith were denoted by the north, and to them the 
 Gospel was preached, that they might turn to 
 Christ.2 
 
 1661 A.D. One important change was made after the Savoy 
 Conference. Since the previous revision of the 
 Prayer-book a new translation of the Bible had been 
 161 1 A D. made and officially authorised. It was decided by 
 the Commissioners at their sittings in Ely House that. 
 The Version whilc the Great Bible Version might be retained 
 t'hrcospds. for the Decalogue, and, with slight variations, in the 
 Offertory Sentences, both of which, from being read 
 at every Celebration, had become familiar to the 
 popular ear, the labours of King James' translators 
 should be made available for the Epistles and 
 Gospels ; and these were ordered to be printed 
 in extenso from the latest Version in the Sealed 
 Books.^ It is a matter of uncertainty whether full 
 liberty may not be exercised by the Minister, in 
 reading the Lessons from any translation he pleases 
 in Matins and Evensong, because no more than the 
 headings is inserted in the authoritative standard, 
 
 1 Isai. xiv. 13. 
 
 - Oem. Anim. xvi. ; Chambers' Worship, 335. 
 
 ^ Copies, attested by the Great Seal, were deposited with the 
 Cathedral Chapters, in the Tower, and the several Courts of West- 
 minster. Cf. Hist, of P. B. by the author, 197-8. 
 
The Gospel. 113 
 
 but all such arbitrary choice has been precluded for 
 the Liturgical Lections.^ 
 
 The selections have been made most largely from xheseiec- 
 S. Matthew's narrative, most sparingly from S. made. °" 
 Mark's ; the extracts from S. John and S. Luke being 
 about equal. Dean Goulburn finds a reason for 
 the preference given to S. Matthew in the essentially 
 Jewish character of his Gospel, which fitted it pre- 
 eminently for a system that grew out of Judaism. 
 " It is in every sense," he says, " the original Gospel, 
 and from it accordingly the largest number of ex- 
 tracts are drawn for use in the Liturgy." ^ We 
 can readily understand why S. Jerome, if he was 
 the real compiler of the Table, in providing for a 
 highly doctrinal Service, should almost pass by S. 
 Mark's narrative, which is chiefly taken up with 
 personal memoirs. There are marked characteristics 
 in the writings of the other two Evangelists, which 
 must have made him eager to incorporate them in 
 the Eucharistic Ofiice. S. Luke, as exhibiting the 
 Atonement, is in fullest accord with the Memorial 
 of that Death, in which the blessings of the great 
 propitiatory Sacrifice are appropriated to individual 
 souls; while S. John is pervaded through and 
 through with a sacramental spirit, and contains 
 
 1 Lord Selborne gave it as his opinion that the Revised Version 
 might not be publicly used in Church. Cf. The Guardian, 
 June 8, 1881, p. 808. 
 
 The Liturgical Gospels, i. v. 51. 
 
 U 
 
1 1 4 The Gospel. 
 
 the deepest teaching in perfect harmony with the 
 Mysteries to be celebrated. It is not a little 
 significant that no less than nine of the Liturgical 
 Gospels have been selected from our Lord's Inter- 
 cessory Prayer, in which He shadowed forth the 
 Office which He was about to fulfil in heaven, 
 whereof His delegated Priests perform the earthly 
 counterpart at the Christian Altar. ^ 
 
 S. Chrysostom ^ exhorted his hearers to be care- 
 ful to read the section of the Gospel for the Sunday 
 some time in the jH-eceding week. One of the most 
 devotional of spiritual guides in these later days^ 
 has taught us how to meditate thereon during the 
 week that follows after. They have had one 
 common aim, viz., to extend and widen the influence 
 of the Blessed Eucharist, so that it may leaven the 
 whole religious life. It is thus, in prospect pre- 
 paring for it, in retrospect giving thanks, that we 
 shall best realise the sense of our Lord's abiding 
 Presence, " Lo, I am with you all the days (Marg.) 
 even unto the end of the world." 
 
 1 S. Cypr. Ep. 63. 
 
 - Horn. xi. in S. John, §1. 
 
 3 Govdburn's LUurgical Gospels. 
 
XIV. 
 
 No sooner was the Church founded, than the 
 necessity arose for a test of qualification for those 
 who sought admission to her privileges. At first it 
 would naturally be of the simplest kind ; probably it 
 embraced nothing more than a belief in the Three 
 Persons of the Blessed Trinity, as suggested by the 
 formula of Holy Baptism. It has even been main- 
 tained that an acceptance of the Divinity of the 
 Second Person sufficed, but this is hardly likely.^ 
 The phrase which is met with in the early Church, 
 to be " baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ " 
 was only another way of expressing " Christian 
 Baptism." 
 
 There are but few traces of any recognised Con- 
 fession of faith in Holy Scripture.^ S. Paul speaks The first 
 of a " form of doctrine," which had been delivered to creed°n' 
 the Roman Christians; of " the deposit committed " ^"'v<-^'^- 
 
 1 Stanley, Christ. Instil. 268 n. Acts ii. 38 ; viii. 12, 16 ; x. 48 ; 
 xi.x. 5; Smith, Did. Christ. Anliq. i. 162; Bingham, xi. iii. 3. 
 ■i Rom. V. 17. 1 Tim. vi. 12-20. S. Jude 3. 
 
1 1 6 The Nicene Creed. 
 
 to Timothy's trust, and of the " good profession " 
 that he had made " before many witnesses." S. Jude 
 reminds the converts whom he was addressing, how 
 he had encouraged them to " contend for the Faith 
 which was once delivered unto the saints." In the cen- 
 turies that followed, the test assumed larger propor- 
 tions, and is constantly referred to under a variety 
 The titles of of designations : " the rule of faith," " the rule of 
 lio^n o°f"faTth truth," " the doctrine," " the confession," " the 
 Uv'e''churrh sy^^oV "the tradition," "the Apostolic Faith," 
 and not infrequently, " the Faith." That, however, 
 which took strongest hold of the early Christians 
 was " the symbol." Tradition refers it primarily to 
 the Apostles' Creed, and looks for its origin in the 
 belief that this was a compilation'^ of the Twelve 
 Apostles, each one of whom contributed a separate 
 article. The idea has been long exploded by the 
 discovery that the Creed was gradually developed,^ 
 and did not receive its full complement till several 
 centuries had passed over the Church. It may 
 have been designated a symbol from containing a 
 " compendium " of Scripture doctrine, or it may 
 have been " a watchword " by which the soldiers of 
 
 1 Symbolum, a Latinized form of aiix^oKov, is from (rvfi^aWew, 
 to throw together, or place side by side. Hence used of " tallies " 
 or tokens —two corresponding pieces to be kept, one by one and 
 another by another, and to be produced as evidence of a compact 
 as occasion required. 
 
 - The later clauses were, the Descent into Hell, the Communion 
 of Saints, and the Life Everlasting. 
 
The Nicene Creed. 
 
 117 
 
 the Cross recognised each other, when persecution 
 was rife and secrecy indispensable; or, again, it 
 may have been a military contract, made before 
 enlisting, " the oath or bond " of our spiritual 
 warfare.^ Ancient authority may be found for all 
 such uses of the term " symbol " ; all therefore are 
 possible, no one of them is certain. 
 
 In the first instance Creeds were associated only Baptism 
 with the Rite of Baptism. Many of the Fathers 
 testify to this. In the Apostolic Constitutions^ the 
 ceremonies of Baptism are fully described, and the 
 confession of the catechumen is given ; it corre- 
 sponds more nearly with the Nicene than with any 
 other known Creed. 
 
 In consequence of " the doctrine of reserve " the 
 catechumen was only initiated into the mysteries of 
 the Faith at the close of his preparation, on the day, 
 as it was significantly called, " of the opening of his 
 ears." The Creed was then committed to memory, 
 and repeated in the presence of the Bishop and 
 the faithful shortly before the administration of 
 Baptism. 
 
 In the fourth and fifth centuries Creeds were Creeds a 
 used as safeguards against error, being recited and agtinst^ 
 subscribed by Bishops and Priests assembled in 
 Council for the maintenance of the Faith ; thus, 
 at the Council of Chalcedon, Aetius the Deacon 451 a.d. 
 
 1 Bingham, x. iii. 1. 2 vii. 41. 
 
1 1 8 The Nicene Creed. 
 
 read out the Creed of Nicsea and the Creed of 
 Constantinople, and they were received with the 
 expressions of assent : " This is the faith of the 
 Catholics, this is the faith of all ; we all believe like 
 this ; " and, before the Council finally broke up, 
 all the orthodox Bishops cried out, " This is 
 our faith ... by this we all walk; we all thus 
 think." 
 
 The first notice of the recitation of a Creed in a 
 Service of the Church, apart from Baptism, is when 
 Peter, the Fuller, ordered that of Nicsea to be incor- 
 porated into the Liturgy of Antioch, as a public 
 protest against the heresy of Arius. His example 
 was followed by Timothy, Bishop of Constantinople, 
 who enjoined its use at every congregation. After 
 it had thus become an integral part of the Liturgy 
 in the East, it spread to the West, the thii-d 
 Council of Toledo directing that, " before the Lord's 
 Prayer in the Liturgy, the Creed of the 150 should 
 be repeated by the people throughout the Churches 
 of Spain and Gallicia, according to the form of the 
 Oriental Churches." The necessity arose out of the 
 invasion of those countries by the Goths and the 
 diffusion of Arian principles. Isidore^ distinctly 
 testifies that it was so recited, " because it tramples 
 on all impious errors and blasphemies of perverted 
 faith." Rome was the last of the Churches to 
 1 Dc Eccl. Offic. i. 16. 
 
The Nicetie Creed. 
 
 119 
 
 recite this Creed, probably because, being the last 
 to be infected with Arianism, she was satisfied with 
 the simpler form. 
 
 Two ceremonies have come down to us in the reci- 
 tation of the Creed which call for special notice, viz., 
 turning to the East, and bowing at the Name of 
 Jesus. At first it was the general practice to look The custom 
 Eastwards in every act of worship. The Orienta- "he'ETs".^ 
 tion of Churches was for the most part obligatory, 
 and as the Altar was invariably placed towards the 
 East, the faces of the people were naturally turned 
 in that direction.^ Indeed, it was so marked that 
 Christians were even charged with being wor- 
 shippers of the Sun in consequence.^ A variety of 
 reasons for the custom have been suggested by the 
 Fathers : that they might have their faces towards 
 Paradise ; that they turned to the East in address- 
 ing Christ, because He is the Sun of Eighteousness, 
 the Day Spring from "on high ; that, as He came in 
 the East, they expect that He will return in the 
 East at the end of the world, which has been so 
 beautifully expressed by the poet,* where he de- 
 scribes the traditional custom of waiting for the 
 sunrise on the Feast of the Patron Saint, and 
 
 1 Basil, de Sjiirit. Sanct. 27. A post. Constit. ii. 57. Clem. Alex. 
 Slrom. vii. vii. 43. 
 
 2 Tert. Apol. xvi. 
 
 3 William Wordsworth, Miscellaneous Poems, No. x. 
 
I20 
 
 The Nicene Creed. 
 
 turning the Chancel to the point where the sun 
 rose on that day : 
 
 " He rose and straight — as by Divine command, 
 They, who had waited for that sign to trace 
 Their work's foundation, gave with careful hand 
 To the high Altar its determined place ; 
 
 Mindful of Him Who in the Orient born. 
 
 There lived, and on the Cross His Life resigned. 
 
 And VVho, from out the regions of the morn 
 Issuing in pomp, shall come to judge mankind." 
 
 Its connex- Now, though all Christian worship was so offered, 
 Rhe^of Bap- Special symbolism was attached to the habit of turn- 
 tism. jj^g j-^gj^ Creed in connexion with the 
 
 Eite of Baptism. S. Cyril i gives a graphic de- 
 scription of the ceremony which explains its signi- 
 ficance. Speaking to the newly baptized he says, 
 " You entered first into the outer chamber of the 
 Baptistery, and, standing with your faces to the 
 West, . . . you renounced Satan, as though he were 
 there before you, saying, 'I renounce thee, Satan' . . . 
 then, turning from the West towards the sunrise, 
 the place of light, you were told to say, ' I believe 
 in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost.'" 
 S. Jerome^ calls this "a covenant made with the 
 Sun of righteousness;" and S. Ambrose^ says, 
 " Thou art turned to the East, for he that renounces 
 the devil turns to Christ." 
 
 1 Cat. Myst. i. n. 2. 
 
 2 In Amos vi. 14. 
 
 s De Mysteriis, c. 2. 
 
The Nicene Creed. 
 
 121 
 
 The other ceremony is that of bowing at the Bowing at 
 Name of Jesus. Originally this was not confined of jflu^* 
 to the Creed alone, and even so late as the seven- 
 teenth century in England it was directed, " when 
 in Divine worship the Lord Jesus shall be men-i6o4A,D. 
 tioned, due and lowly reverence shall be done by all 
 persons present, as hath been accustomed."^ It has 
 been erroneously supposed to rest on Apostolic 
 authority : " At the Name of Jesus every knee 
 should bow." 2 S. Paul was thinking not of the 
 external homage which He should receive in all 
 after-ages, but of the recognition of the might of His 
 Intercession, which alone should lend an all-prevail- 
 ing efficacy to the prayers to be offered " i% His 
 Name." ^ Exception has been taken to rendering 
 especial reverence to one Divine Name above 
 another, to Jesus and not to Christ or to the 
 Incommunicable Name, Jehovah. The motive is 
 explained by referring to the origin of the custom. 
 During the persecutions of the early Ages the 
 Personal Name of our Blessed Lord was made an of the prac- 
 object of scorn by the heathen and the Jews : the 
 former called upon Christians to recant by the 
 formula, " Jesus is anathema;" and the latter reviled 
 the Founder as "Jesus, the Magician," "Jesus, the 
 Impostor," " Jesus, the Galilean Impostor," and the 
 
 1 Can. xviii. 1604 a.d. 
 ' Phil. ii. 10. 
 
 3 It is not cVi but (V tw dvo/tart 
 
122 The Nicene Creed. 
 
 like. It was as an act of reparation then for this 
 dishonour that the Christians paid unwonted rever- 
 ence to the despised Name. It was on just the same 
 principle as that which led them to honour the sign 
 of the Cross. The symbol of shame was made an 
 emblem of glory, and the more it was contemned, 
 the more highly it was exalted. 
 
 There is yet another ceremony employed at the 
 Nicene Creed of a kindred nature, not, however, 
 like the other two derived from antiquity, but 
 dating back only to the thirteenth century, viz., 
 bowing the head at the recitation of the three 
 clauses, which speak of Christ's humiliation : " and 
 was incarnate . . . and was made man . . . and 
 was crucified." ' 
 
 The value It is Very difficult to lay down rules for the 
 ^Q^'i'^^ '^''"' observance of such acts of reverence as these. 
 
 Because of the great variety of temperament in 
 different persons it is almost impossible to make 
 definite regulations. One man keeps his reverence 
 locked up in his own breast, another cannot rest 
 till it is made manifest by some outward expression. 
 They may be equally reverential at heart, and it is 
 at the heart that God looks. We cannot, however, 
 doubt the wisdom of the Church in encouraging 
 such ceremonial worship, but it is well for us to be 
 
 1 In the Sarum Use there were three inclinations ; in the Here- 
 ford, one genuflexion. 
 
The Nicene Creed. 1 23 
 
 leminded in what spirit it must be offered. There 
 was an order of an old Council, which directed that 
 every one should " bow the knees of his heart, and 
 testify that he does so by at least bowing the head."-^ 
 If we can carry this out, such external marks of 
 reverence will be found helpful, and we shall not 
 only have the sense of our own unworthiness 
 quickened, but we shall, by our example, be the 
 means of raising the devotion of others who join 
 with us in worship, and this in proportion as we 
 are, not as we seem to be, devout. 
 
 1 I have lost the reference, but feel sure of the fact. 
 
XV. 
 
 'Elie »>ub0tance of tljc iliiccne Crecti. 
 
 The Creed which was drawn up by the 318 
 325 A.D. Bishops, who sat in council under the presidency 
 of Constantine at Nicsea on the shores of the 
 Bithynian Lake, ended with the clause, " We believe 
 in the Holy Ghost." The remaining articles, with 
 the exception of a single phrase, though found in 
 the writings of Epiphanius^ seven years before, 
 381 A.D. were first recited at the Council of Constantinople. 
 
 We have become familiar with the form " I believe," 
 as it was introduced into the Eoman Missal from 
 the Latin translation, but originally it was recited 
 in the plural number, " We believe," as became 
 the confession of a Council. 
 The unity Several clauses of the Creed call for special con- 
 hlld! sideration. " I believe in one God " ;— it is the first 
 noticeable enlargement of the Apostles' Creed. The 
 addition was designed to meet the dualistic heresy 
 which sprang up in the East out of an apparent 
 contrariety between the attributes of God and the 
 1 Ancoratus, sub fin. 
 
 124 
 
The Substance of the Nicene Creed. 1 2 5 
 
 phenomena of Nature. It found its way into the 
 
 "West under the form of Manichseism. It taught 
 
 that there were two original Powers : two eternal 
 
 Principles more or less personified — the good God 
 
 and " the more cruel God." ^ The former was the ^^^^ 
 
 author of light and order, and all that is akin to '^t''^ '^eory. 
 
 these ; the latter was the creator of matter, ruling 
 
 over "the deadly earth" with its storms and tempests, 
 
 its chaos and darkness, its corruption and decay, its 
 
 poisonous plants and animals and all destructive 
 
 agencies. It was to protest against this belief that 
 
 the Nicene Bishops declared that there was but 
 
 " One God, the Maker of heaven and earth, visible 
 
 and invisible," i.e. material as well as spiritual. 
 
 " Light of Light " ; — In the mystery of the Godhead The co- 
 there is much that necessarily transcends the capa- th"s'on °^ 
 cities of a finite mind. Perhaps in the relationship ^^^^^^^ 
 of the several Persons of the Blessed Trinity there 
 is nothing which at first sight so completely bafiles 
 human comprehension as the combination of the 
 two truths, that God the Father is the one primal 
 source of Deity, and yet that the Son and the Holy 
 Ghost are co-eternal with Him. While it is our 
 duty to bow the head in awe and humility, and to 
 be content to wait for the final Eevelation, when 
 
 1 It was a fusion of Zoroastrianism and Gnosticism with Chris- 
 tianitj'. The matter which composed the world was the creation 
 of an evil spirit or Deus ssevior. 
 
126 The Stibsta^ice of the Nicene Creed. 
 
 we " shall see no longer through a glass darkly," 
 we may nevertheless be thankful, if from time to 
 time God in His condescension partially lifts the veil, 
 and vouchsafes a glimpse of the possibility of what 
 otherwise would seem wholly inconsistent. Such 
 a partial unveiling the Holy Spirit inspired the 
 Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews ^ to give to 
 man, when he wrote that the Son is " the brightness 
 of His (the Father's) glory," from which the Nicene 
 Fathers drew the figure " Light of Light," or, more 
 correctly rendered, Light proceeding from Light 
 It is, we know, an inherent property of any body of 
 light that it cannot exist without throwing oflF rays. 
 As an illustration, if we accept the popular conception 
 of the sun,^ it must have shed abroad rays of light 
 the very moment it was created. The sun is the 
 source of those rays, but the rays are coetaneous with 
 it. Even so when it is said that the Second Person 
 of the Trinity is " a ray-image of the Divine glory "^ 
 (for that is a more exact translation), it enables us 
 to reconcile the apparent contradiction of the two 
 statements, that the First Person is the fountain of 
 Deity, and yet that the Second is coeternal with Him. 
 
 1 i.e. diravyair fia rtjs 56fj)s, i. 3; cf. WisJ. vii. 26. 
 
 2 It is now proved that the sun derives its light-giving power 
 i'roin the atmosphere surrounding it— but for purposes of illustra- 
 tion it may be regarded as itself a luminous body. 
 
 3 airavyaa/xa is what the Germans call a Strahlbild, and 
 i] 56^7] is the Shekinah, i.e. the Divine Glory. 
 
TJie Stibstance of t lie Nicene Creed. 127 
 
 " Of one substance with the Father " ; — as applied 
 to the Godhead, substance carries with it no idea 
 of matter, for " God is Spirit," but it is used as 
 synonymous with essence. It is intended to ex- 
 press the collective attributes or properties which 
 belong to God and God alone; such are eternity, 
 uncreatedness, omnipotence, and omniscience. The 
 Arians, against whom the clause was directed, The Arian 
 allowed to Jesus Christ that He was in a sense 
 God, but by maintaining that " there was [a time] 
 when He was not," ^ they denied to Him the Divine 
 attribute of eternity, and destroyed the perfection 
 of His Godhead. 
 
 Tliis unequivocal expression of the doctrine of 
 Christ's perfect equality in being and essence with 
 the Father, became a stumbling-block to the less 
 orthodox party in the Church, to whom it appeared 
 to want definite sanction from Holy Scripture ; and 
 they attempted to modify it by the addition of a 
 single letter, which enabled them to hold that He The Semi- 
 was of "like" substance, Homoiousios instead of 
 Homoousios. This change, apparently so small, was 
 in reality so great and vital that it was very forcibly 
 said in reference to it, that "a diphthong had divided 
 the world." 
 
 The Catholic Church has clung through good 
 report and evil report to the original definition as 
 
 1 T)V &Te OlIK ^v. 
 
>8 The Substance of the Nicene Creed. 
 
 Thenc 
 of the 
 Church 
 
 the perfect criterion of the true belief in the God- 
 head of our Lord. Once only has she wavered; 
 it was at the Council of Eimini, when the Emperor 
 Constantine, having been over-persuaded in favour 
 of the Semi-Arians, by intimidation and threats 
 induced the Western Bishops, who alone adhered to 
 the Nicene Symbol in its integrity, to renounce the 
 expression.! What the consequences of such a con- 
 cession were, may be estimated by the famous 
 dictum of S. Jerome, uttered upon hearing of this 
 fatal result, " The whole world groaned and won- 
 dered to find itself Arian." If in His Essence Jesus 
 was only lile the Father, He was a distinct Being 
 from God, and therefore either created or another 
 God.2 
 
 " One (holy) Catholick and Apostolick Church " ; 
 —the Church is defined elsewhere as "a congrega-' 
 tion of faithful men, in the which the pure W^rd 
 of God is preached and the Sacraments be duly ad- 
 ministered." 3 " The faithful " are the baptized, as 
 in the familiar phrases, "the prayer of the faithful," 
 " the Mass of the faithful," that is, of those who by 
 baptism were admitted to the Mysteries, and allowed 
 to use the great Christian Prayer of tlie Church. 
 
 " The notes of the Church " are Unity, Holiness, 
 Catholicity, and Apostolic Origin and Doctrine.' 
 ' Socrat. Ecclts. Bist. ii. 37. 
 
 - Liddon, Bamp. Led. vii. iii. (/3). 3 Art. xix. 
 
The Substance of the Xicene Creed. 129 
 
 The Church is one as being united in all its Its unity, 
 branches, with One Head and teaching the same 
 truths — holding " One Lord, one Faith." Its oneness 
 with its Founder is illustrated by a remarkable 
 passage in S. Chrysostom : ^ " Christ is the Head, 
 Tve are the body : He the Foundation, we the build- 
 ing : He the Vine, we the branches : He the Bride- 
 groom, we the bride : He the Shepherd, we the 
 sheep." ..." All these things express unity, and 
 they allow no void interval, not even the smallest." 
 
 The Chitrch is holy - through its vital connexion ib hoUness 
 with Christ her Head, through the indwelling of 
 the Holy Ghost, and the holiness of her members. 
 This last is of a twofold nature, conditional and 
 positive. "The faithful" are holy, in that they 
 have been set apart, dedicated, consecrated to God 
 by the rite of Baptism : " a congregation of saints," 
 like the "holy people" which was God's heritage 
 in the Old Dispensation. They are holy, again, in 
 so far as they fulfil their destiny, and live up to 
 their high calling in Christ Jesus. 
 
 The Church is Catholic both as designed by her hsCatho- 
 Founder to be co-extensive with humanity, not 
 
 1 Bom. viii. in 1 Ep. ad Cor. 
 
 - This attribute is omitted in the English Version, but it is 
 generallv said to have been in the original Greek, and it is in the 
 Latin Liturgies. Its omission has generally been regarded as a 
 cliTical error: but it is argued in the Church Quarterly Reviexc. 
 July 1879, that it was "the result of an inquiry into ancient 
 sources." 
 
ijo The Siibstance of the Nicene Creed. 
 
 limited like the Jewish Church to any portion of 
 it ; as holding Catholic doctrine, which was defined 
 in the fifth century as " that which has been believed 
 always everywhere and by all men";^ and as teach- 
 ing " universally and with no omissions, the whole 
 body of truths which men ought to know " — " the 
 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." 
 The Greek Church, the Roman, and the Anglican 
 are all parts of the One Catholic Church, but none of 
 them can claim to be entitled " the Catholic Church," 
 any more than a branch may be called a tree, or a 
 hand or foot the whole body. 
 Its Apo- Lastly, the Apostolicity of the Church rests upon 
 stohcity. ^^^^^ j^^^ foundation was laid in Apostolic 
 
 doctrine and that her Ministry has been continued 
 in unbroken succession from the Apostles for the 
 transmission of the Faith. Hence in early times 
 heretical bodies were thus ^ challenged to establish 
 their claim to be considered Apostolical : " let them 
 produce the original records of their churches, let 
 them unfold the roll of their bishops, so running 
 down in due succession from the beginning, that 
 their first bishop shall be able to show for his 
 ordainer and predecessor some one of the Apostles 
 or of Apostolic men — a man moreover who con- 
 tinued steadfast with the Apostles ; " and again, in 
 
 1 Vincentius, Commonit. ii. ad fin. 
 
 2 Tert. de Prmsc. hcerel. xxxii. 
 
The Stibstance of the Nicenc Creed, i 3 1 
 
 cases of Churches of late foundation, " they are 
 accounted as not less Apostolic provided they are 
 akin in Apostolic doctrine." 
 
 If all these " notes " are yet weak, it is because 
 the Church is passing through a state of probation ; 
 and the knowledge of this calls for the utmost 
 forbearance, if they seem to be weaker in other 
 branches than in our own ; and it should quicken 
 our innate craving for more of that unity which is 
 strength. If we are dismayed by the sins and 
 shortcomings of any Church, whether our own or 
 another, while we find comfort in the realisation 
 that there must be tares among the wheat, we must 
 be careful, alike in our corporate and individual 
 life, never deliberately to acquiesce in what is 
 sinful. 
 
 Further, it is every one's duty, in the recollection 
 of the Divine command, to quench all self-interest 
 and to help on, as we may find opportunity, that 
 happy consummation, when the Gospel shall be 
 preached to every creature. And lastly, in the 
 legitimate pride of a noble lineage and all its in- 
 spiring hopes, let us live worthily of our descent, 
 and hand on the deposit of the Faith unimpaired 
 and undefiled to those that shall come after us. 
 
XVI. 
 
 "The Lord, and Giver of life, Who proceedeth from the Father 
 and the Son." 
 
 The latter part of the Creed is wholly taken up 
 with the Person and Office of the Holy Ghost. 
 Originally it was comprehended in the single Article, 
 " We believe in the Holy Ghost;" but the rise and 
 development of heresy respecting the Third Person 
 of the Trinity called for more express and definite 
 teaching.^ This was first authoritatively put forth 
 381 A.D. second General Council,^ when most of the 
 
 concluding clauses in the present form were accepted. 
 Refutation The enlargement began with the pregnant de- 
 Macedonian claration that He is " the Lord, and Giver of Life." 
 heresy. fliere is a double doctrine involved herein, which is 
 more unequivocally expressed in the original Greek 
 and in the Latin translation than in the English.^ 
 In the popular conception He is here only regarded 
 as the Lord of life and the Giver of life, as One 
 
 1 The Macedonian heresy, maintaining Him to be a creature, 
 arose after 343 a.d. 
 
 2 Constantinople. 
 
 5 rb Kupiov, ri j^woirotdv — Dominum et vivificantem. 
 132 
 
The Person of the Holy Ghost. 133 
 
 in Whom alone " we live, and move, and have our 
 being"; but in reality two distinct qualities are 
 thus assigned to Him, even a Divine Nature and a 
 quickening power. First, He is the Lord; — the 
 title expresses that supremacy of dominion which 
 " Jehovah " in the Old Testament carries with it, 
 that Lordship which, by virtue of "their mutual 
 indwelling,"^ may be claimed as an attribute by 
 each of the Three Persons. 
 
 Secondly, He is the Giver of life ; — according to 
 the counsel of His will, it has pleased God that, 
 while there is perfect co-operation in all things, yet The 
 each Person should have His appointed function, power of the 
 God the Father, at the beginning of creation, called 
 matter into being, but God the Holy Ghost bi'ought 
 light out of darkness, order out of chaos, life out of 
 death. " The earth was without form, and void ; 
 and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And 
 the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the 
 waters." So at the beginning of the re-creation it 
 was, by the life-giving property of the Holy Ghost, 
 that the Virgin's womb received power to conceive 
 the human nature of the Great Restorer of the race ; 
 and it is by the operation of the same Blessed Agent 
 that the regenerating Life of Christ is imparted to 
 each individual in Holy Baptism ; " except a man 
 
 1 irepcxiopv^is, civcumincessio, " coiuherence. " It is sometimes 
 written circumiusessio. 
 
134 ^/^^ Person of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 be bom of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter 
 into the Kingdom of God." 
 
 " Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son " ; 
 — three words have been used by theologians to 
 express severally the essential relationship of the 
 Three Persons to each other in eternity : The 
 
 The Creed Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten, the Holy 
 
 Councils. Ghost is proceeding; but a controversy arose be- 
 tween the Eastern and Western Fathers as to the 
 legitimacy of applying the last term " proceeding " 
 to set forth the derivation of the Holy Ghost from 
 the Son, as well as from the Father. 
 
 451 A.D. In the Creed, as it was accepted by the Council 
 
 of Chalcedon, there was no notice of a " double 
 procession " ; it was simply " from the Father" ; and 
 they indorsed a Canon which had been passed at 
 
 431 A D. Ephesus, " that no person should be allowed to 
 bring forward, or to write, or to compose any other 
 Creed besides that which was settled by the Holy 
 Fathers, who were assembled in the city of Nicsea, 
 with the Holy Spirit."^ They meant that no lesser 
 authority than a General Council might add to the 
 recognised Articles of Faith. 
 
 589 A. D. Towards the close of the sixth century a Council 
 
 was held at Toledo, in Spain, at which the Visi- 
 
 1 It is often assumed that this Canou -n-as passed with the 
 special object of preventing any addition to this particular clause, 
 whereas it was only the Niceiie Creed— not the Constantinopolitan 
 —that was recited at Ephesus. 
 
The Person of tJie Holy Ghost, T35 
 
 goths, with King Eecared at their head, abjured The first 
 
 ^ iiitroducti 
 oi Fiiioqii 
 
 \\ 
 
 with an addition to the clause, "Who proceedeth 
 from the Father and the Son " ; and all were anathe- 
 matised who denied the double procession. The 
 addition is believed to have crept in unconsciously 
 before this, for there was no discussion about it at 
 the Synod, as there must have been had they known 
 that they were introducing an innovation. They 
 treated it as an integral part of the Creed, and it 
 was chanted at Mass in the Churches of Spain with- 
 out calling forth any adverse criticism for at least 
 two centuries. From Spain it found its way, though 
 the date is unknown, into Gaul. At the beginning 
 of the ninth century a monkish fray at Jerusalem 
 started a controversy, which has broken out again 
 and again, and is not yet laid. A body of monks, xhe begin 
 under the patronage of the Galilean Court, estab- dSspJe'^' 
 lished themselves on the Mount of Olives, and used t^^'w^e" 
 
 East and 
 
 to recite the Creed as it was recited in the mother West, 
 country. This offended the Greeks, who endeavoured 
 to eject them. Thereupon they appealed to the 
 Pope, who opened communications with Charle- 
 magne, who was then on the throne. A Synod 809 a.d. 
 was assembled at Aix-la-Chapelle to discuss the 
 question, and it was referred to the Pope for deci- 
 sion. The Pope was in a dilemma, for he fully 
 
136 The Person of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 believed the doctrine taught by the insertion, but 
 disapproved of the breach of the Ephesine Canon, 
 which had safeguarded the Creed from unauthorised 
 additions. Further, it was pressed upon him that 
 the common people had gained their knowledge of 
 the truth from hearing it so expressed in the Creed, 
 and that the excision would seriously shake their 
 belief. In this perplexity he advised that they 
 should discontinue the chanting of the Creed in 
 Mass for a time, in view of re- introducing it in its 
 original form, when the old associations had been 
 forgotten, and the omission would be unobserved. 
 He seems to have had misgivings as to the likeli- 
 hood of his counsel being accepted, as indeed it was 
 not; and, to guard the Roman Church from the 
 interpolation, he ordered two silver shields to be 
 engraved in Greek and Latin with the original 
 Jealousy tif Creed, and affixed to the doors of St. Peter's. Much 
 
 Rome and . , , . . . n 1 
 
 Constaiiti- uncertainty hangs round the mtroduction of the 
 interpolated clause into the Creed at Eome, but 
 none about the acceptance of the doctrine which it 
 implied. Within fifty years of Leo the Third's 
 death, in the quarrel that arose between Photius 
 and Ignatius for the Patriarchate of Constantinople, 
 Nicholas i., who sided with the latter, was accused 
 of sanctioning the double procession. Yet once 
 more, in the middle of the eleventh centurj', when 
 Rome and Constantinople had carried their rivalry. 
 
The Person of the Holy Ghost. 137 
 
 not only for imperial but for spiritual pre-eminence, 
 to the furthest point, fresh disputes broke out: 
 the much-vexed question was again brought on, and 
 the discord became so bitter that the two Churches 
 excommunicated each other. 
 
 The schism has never since been healed. Two 
 attempts have been made to close the wound, at 
 Florence in 1439, and at Bonn^ in 1875, but no 
 definite result has been obtained. 
 
 So far for the history of the interpolation " and 
 the Son." Doctrinally there was no wide difference 
 originally between East and West. The Eastern 
 Fathers have been very jealous for the principle 
 that God the Father is the sole source and fountain The 
 
 The Western Fathers, laying stress on the fact 
 that the Second Person, by reason of the consub- 
 stantiality, is perfectly one with the First, maintain 
 that it follows of necessity that the Spirit Which 
 proceeds from the one must proceed from the other, 
 though not in the same way ; and they guarded the 
 distinction by such figures as the following : — " The 
 
 The first and third Resolutions passed at the Conference were 
 the important ones— (1) The Holy Ghost issues out of the Father 
 as the Beginning, apxn, the cause, ain'o, the source, tr-tf^ri, of the 
 Godhead. (3) The Holy Ghost issues out of the Father through 
 the Sou. It is necessary to add to the latter " eternally," to pre- 
 vent its limitation to the temporal mission. 
 
138 The Person of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 Spirit is the third from God, as the fruit which 
 comes from the shrub is the third from the root ; 
 and the river which issues from the stream is the 
 third from the fountain" ; in other words, they hold 
 that the Holy Ghost proceeds frm, the Father 
 through the Son.^ If in the light of past misunder- 
 standings the Churches were free to define the 
 doctrine afresh, such a definition would probably 
 obtain universal assent. It is not unreasonable to 
 hope that, since they already have been di'awn closer 
 together by the Conference at Bonn, the time is not 
 far distant when complete concord may be estab- 
 lished. But however much we may attempt to 
 define the doctrine, we must recognise it as one 
 of the mysteries which baffle the comprehension of 
 a finite mind. They were wise words which Gregory 
 Nazianzen wrote, and they deserve to be remem- 
 bered in all controversies about the nature of the 
 Godhead : " Do you tell me how the Father is un- 
 begotten, and I will then try to tell you how the 
 Son is begotten, and the Si^irit proceeds." 
 of " Who with the Father and the Son is worshipped 
 and glorified " ; — the principle finds but a scant 
 recognition in our public services. We glorify Him 
 in the doxologies with which we close our Psalms 
 and hymns ; and we supplicate His mercy in the 
 Litany, " 0 God, the Holy Ghost, proceeding from 
 I i.e. to avoid making tlie Son a second source of Deity. 
 
The Person of the Holy Ghost. 139 
 
 the Father and the Son, have mercy upon us but 
 what is this compared with the homage we pay to 
 Those with Whom He is coequal God] It is in 
 proportion as we recognise His claim to be ad- 
 dressed in prayer that we shall realise His Divinity. 
 Though we can hardly expect to remedy the defect 
 in public, we may compensate in a measure for the 
 omission by making Him a distinct object of our 
 supplications and homage in private devotion. 
 
 It is not always realised that the concluding His manifold 
 Articles of the Creed are not independent, but are "p^""^"""^- 
 for the most part bound up with the operations of 
 the Holy Ghost. The Church, the forgiveness of 
 sins, the resurrection, and life everlasting, each and 
 all are consequent upon the informing and quicken- 
 ing Spirit. It was He Who united the first con- 
 verts in one organic whole " fitly framed together " ; 
 it was only when they had received the Holy Ghost 
 by that mysterious inbreathing, that the Ministry of 
 the Church obtained power to remit or retain the 
 sins of men ; it is the same Spirit which raised up 
 J esus from the dead, Which shall revivify our mortal 
 bodies and deliver them from the grave ; and lastly, 
 if our Blessed Lord said, " Whosoever eateth My 
 flesh and drinketh My blood hath eternal life," it is 
 the office of the Divine Spirit to take of the things 
 of Christ and to show them unto us. 
 
XVII. 
 
 'W^t publication of i^otitesf. 
 
 " Then the Curate shall declare unto the people what Holy-days or 
 Fasting-days are in the week following to be observed." 
 
 The Curate is the Priest in charge, one who, by 
 the ceremony of institution, has received from the 
 Bishop " the cure and government of the souls of 
 the parishioners." This cannot be given to a 
 Deacon ; hence the modern usage of the term 
 " Curate " is quite inappropriate. 
 Holy-days The Holy-days, or Fasts, of which alone notice 
 be duly '^^J be legitimately given in Church, are set down 
 notified. ^jjg Tables in the beginning of the Prayer-book. 
 
 Before the Eeformation, the vast multiplication of 
 Feasts had acted " to the great prejudice of labouring 
 and trading men." They were much curtailed in 
 the time of Henry viii. ; and at the final revision 
 the principle was stereotyped of commemorating 
 none, save those whose history is written in the 
 Holy Scriptures. 
 
 The Table of Fasts to be observed includes the 
 
 140 
 
The Publication of Notices. 141 
 
 Forty Days of Lent, the Vigils of certain Feasts, 
 the Ember and Eogation Days, and all Fridays in 
 the year except Christmas Day. All of these the 
 Curate is bound by the sixty-fifth Canon of the 
 Church to declare to the people, or to " be censured 
 according to law" for omitting the duty. The 
 obligation needs to be emphasised, for though the 
 Catholic Revival has led to a more careful observance 
 of the Feasts, much way has still to be made up 
 before the Fasts shall be kept as strictly as the 
 Church requires. 
 
 The notice of Holy Communion is less needful, 
 at least in the numerous Churches where it has re- 
 gained its rightful position in the worship of each 
 Sunday. 
 
 After that part of the rubric referring to this. Banns of 
 there is written in the Sealed Books, " and the be published 
 Banns of Matrimony published." In the reign of gen'^ice. 
 George 11. an Act^ was passed to provide for the 
 due publication in Churches, where no Morning 
 Service was held, and the existing direction there- 
 fore could not be carried out. It ordered that 
 they should be published " during the time of 
 Morning Service, or of Evening Service, if there be 
 no Morning Service in such Church, immediately 
 after the Second Lesson." This statute in no way 
 repealed the existing rubric ; indeed it contained a 
 1 Marriage Act, 26 Geo. li. c. 33. 
 
142 The Pub I icaiion of Notices. 
 
 provision that this and all other rubrical directions 
 should be "duly observed"; but it legalised the 
 Misconstrue- publication in the afternoon or evening, in another 
 stTtute""^ place than after the Nicene Creed, which was not 
 then read, viz., after the Second Lesson. 
 
 The King's printers and the Universities took 
 the unwarrantable liberty of presuming to interpret 
 the Act for themselves, and, making " after the 
 Second Lesson " apply equally to the morning pub- 
 lication, they omitted from the present rubric, with- 
 out any right whatever, the old direction. To publish 
 the Banns at any other time, when the Communion 
 Office is said on the day, than after the Nicene 
 Creed, has been declared on high legal authority ^ to 
 be " a flagrant breach of the law." 
 Briefs, cita- " Bricfs, Citations, and Excommunications are 
 t.ons, etc. 2-ead"; — all of these are practically obsolete. Be- 
 fore the Keformation a " Brief" was a Papal Letter 
 issued with less formality than a " Bull," though 
 equally binding. It was sealed with " the fisher- 
 man's ring," which differed from the Imperial seal, 
 or huUa, very much as in England the Privy Seal is 
 distinguished from the Great Seal. After the Re- 
 formation, the term continued in use for Letters 
 from the Sovereign to be read in church ; the last 
 of these were the Queen's Letters directing collec- 
 tions to be made for Church Building, Foreign Mis- 
 1 Archibald Stephens, Com. Pr. ii. 1153. 
 
The Publication of Notices. 143 
 
 sions, and Education. They ceased to be issued 
 about a quarter of a century ago. 
 
 " Citations " were in the form of a summons from 
 an Ecclesiastical judge, to any one against whom a 
 complaint had been lodged, to appear to answer the 
 charge, or to any person who might have cause to 
 allege against the compurgation of a party accused. 
 
 "Excommunications"; — it is provided by Canon 1604 a. d. 
 65 that the Ordinary should direct that certain 
 persons, who have been guilty of stated offences, 
 " every six months, as well in the Parish Church 
 as in the Cathedral Church of the Diocese by the 
 Minister openly in the time of Divine Service upon 
 some Sunday, be denounced and declared excom- 
 municate " ; but in the present abeyance of discipluie 
 the practice has been suffered to fall into disuse.^ 
 
 " And nothing shall be proclaimed . . . but what 
 is prescribed " ; — from the time of Queen Elizabeth 
 it was customary to make proclamations of outlawry, 
 to give notices relative to the payment of rates and illegal 
 taxes, and the holding of courts, during Divine church.'" 
 Service ; and in the last century vestry meetings ^ 
 were advertised in the same way ; but about fifty 
 years ago all these directions were repealed,^ and 
 
 1 It has been enacted that no citation or proceeding whatsoever 
 in any Ecclesiastical Court should he read or published in any 
 Church. Stephens on Laws relating to the Clergy, 1101. 
 
 2 58 Geo. III. c. 69. 
 
 3 Stat. 7 William nr., and 1 Vict. c. 45. 
 
144 The Publication of Notices. 
 
 nothing is any longer lawfully proclaimed save what 
 is provided for in the Prayer-book, or especially 
 enjoined by the King or Bishop. 
 
 The only part of this rubric which seems to call 
 for notice in relation to the practical life is that 
 which is called the "bidding of the Fasting-days." 
 The need of The way in which the order of the Church touching 
 Fast'-dayst t^c principle of fasting is ignored ought to fill the 
 mind of thoughtful men with sadness. Often, in a 
 time of reaction from abuses, things which in them- 
 selves are good and salutary are suffered to be set 
 aside at least for a season ; but nothing that the 
 Church in her best estate has practised beneficially 
 can be permanently neglected without harm and 
 loss. So long as the Table of Fasts has its appointed 
 place in the Prayer-book, and the Clergy give their 
 " assent and consent " to all that is written therein, 
 the position of those who systematically disregard 
 the injunction to remind the people of their duty in 
 regard to them is wholly anomalous. If the Fasts 
 and Vigils are, as is too often the case, made days 
 of feasting and social enjoyment, the Church must 
 blame, as the primary cause of the disobedience to 
 her laws, not so much the people as the Priests, 
 whose carelessness has left them in ignorance of 
 what is required of them. 
 
 If our Blessed Lord Himself fasted, though He 
 had no sinful nature to keep in subjection ; if the 
 
The Publication of Notices. 
 
 45 
 
 Apostles enjoined the principle upon their converts ; 
 if the early Church largely practised it, it does 
 seem the very height of presumption for men, who 
 are living in an age of almost unequalled luxury 
 and self-indulgence, to pretend that they can do 
 without it. 
 
 K 
 
XVIIT. 
 
 %\)z »)ermon. 
 
 " Then shall follow the Sermon, or one of the Homilies," etc. 
 
 Tiie ordin- SoME estimate of the value attached to the ordin- 
 ance of 
 
 preaching in ancc of preaching by the early Church may be 
 Church.^ formed from the restriction of its exercise to the 
 liighest order of the Ministry. The limitation after 
 being universally imposed was withdrawn in the 
 East apparently at the close of the foui-th century,^ 
 and a little later in the African Church of the West. 
 The Bishop's throne was the recognised chair of 
 instruction ; and so great was the responsibility of 
 occupying it, held to be, that a Priest, even of S. 
 Ambrose's power and ability, is known to have 
 shrunk from the Episcopate, because it entailed the 
 office of preaching.2 It may have been exercised 
 before in a subordinate degree and on unimportant 
 occasions, but it is distinctly stated that S. Augus- 
 
 1 Some of S. Chrysostom's Sermons, c.j/. de Statuis, were de 
 livered before he was a Bishop. 
 
 2 De offic. Minis, i. 1. 
 
 146 
 
The Sermon. 
 
 147 
 
 tine was the first in the Western Church to win for 
 the priesthood the privilege of preaching publicly 
 in the presence of a Bishop.^ This signal departure 
 from the universal custom inaugurated a general 
 change ; and though for a time the priest was 
 considered to preach vicariously, and only by a 
 special authority delegated to him by the Bishop, 
 it eventually came to be regarded as an integral 
 part of the Priest's ofiBce, and a sermon or exposition 
 formed an essential feature in the Celebration at 
 least on Sundays or Holy Days. 
 
 One great and notable exception, however, must Preaching 
 be made. Eomc alone of the Churches for many vLyTrre. 
 centuries set little store by preaching. It has been 
 expressly stated by the historian Sozomen,^ and the 440 a d. 
 statement has never been seriously challenged,^ that 
 preaching at Eome, either by Bishop or Priest, was 
 altogether unheard of till the middle of the fifth 
 century. Leo the Great is the first Eoman preacher 
 known to history ; and it is very remarkable, that 
 after he had broken the silence, and proved, as he 
 must have done (if we may judge by his sermons 
 that have come down to posterity), how much loss 
 his Church had suffered by its lack of preachers, it 
 
 1 Possidius, Vita Aug. 5. ^ Eccles. Hist. rii. 19. 
 
 3 Biugham, xiv. 14. § 3, has raised the objection that the refer- 
 ence in Just. Mart, to the sermon of the irpoeaTiht in the Christian 
 Assembly refutes this, but there is no ]iroof that he was speaking 
 of the Roman Church. 
 
148 The Sermon. 
 
 could possibly have been allowed to relapse into its 
 
 former apathy. Leo had not only no worthy 
 
 successor, but absolutely no one at all to carry on 
 
 the work which he had begun, for four centuries. 
 
 The Eastern Church had Chrysostom and Athanase, 
 
 and Ephraem Syrus, and its two Gregories, and 
 
 a host of others; the Western Church had an 
 
 Augustine in Africa, and an Ambrose and a Peter 
 
 Chrysologus in Italy, but the Eoman annals have 
 
 preserved no name in the least remarkable for 
 
 pulpit eloquence save that of Leo ; and we are told 
 
 that from the tenth century scarcely a single Pope 
 
 preached, till Pius the Fifth "struck Eome dumb 
 
 with amazement by the novelty" of preaching in 
 
 the sixteenth century.^ 
 
 The attitude At first whcu tho, Scrmon was preached by a 
 
 preacher, Bishop, it was delivered ex cathedrd, from his throne 
 
 preacUng."'^ behind the Altar. The posture of the preacher was 
 
 " sitting," as indicative of authority. It was adopted 
 
 into the Church fi-om the Jewish Synagogue ; for 
 
 the Scribes and Doctors, though they habitually 
 
 stood to read the Law, yet sat to expound it. It 
 
 was a mark of our Blessed Lord's claim to be a 
 
 teacher of the people, that after He had " stood up 
 
 for to read " in the Synagogue at Nazareth, He " sat 
 
 down" and began to explain in the ears of the 
 
 1 Contionatus Pius v. obstupescentem niiraculi novitate Bomam 
 peiculit. Qu. by Bingli. from Surius, ibid. n. 
 
The Sermon. 
 
 149 
 
 congregation the fulfilment of the projihecy which 
 they had just heard. So it was that " He sat down 
 and taught the people in the Temple." ^ 
 
 It was only when the function of preaching was 
 delegated to an officer of lower rank in the Church 
 that this authoritative attitude was abandoned. 
 The Priest preached from the ambon, originally a 
 stage or platform near the Chancel-gates, but by the 
 ninth century altered in shape to something like 
 the modern pulpit." 
 
 In primitive times the Sermon was introduced The 
 by the mutual salutation, the preacher saying, g"^^^ 
 " Peace be with you," and the people answering, 
 "And with thy spirit."^ There are, it is true, 
 traces botli of a prayer, and of the Invocation, being 
 used, but there can be no doubt that this was the 
 general rule. When Macarius, a Roman officer, 348; 
 was sent by the Emperor Constans to relieve the 
 distressed Christians in Africa, he was accused by 
 the Donatists of having usurped the office of a 
 Bishop and preached to the people in Church. It 
 was considered a conclusive refutation of the charge 
 when it was shown that his address was not pre- 
 ceded by this " salutation." * 
 
 1 S. Luke iv. 20, v. 3 ; S. John viii. 2 ; S. Matt. xxvi. 55. 
 - Its name was changed to " pyrgus," a tower. 
 3 It is frequently noticed by S. Chrysos. Jlom. 3 in Col., 30 in 
 1 Cor. 
 
 * Optatus, conira DonaC. vii. 6. 
 
TJie Sertnon. 
 
 la the English Church prayer became the favour- 
 ite introduction to the sermons of the Puritans. 
 Being confined at other times to i^re-composed forms, 
 they seized this opportunity for long extempore 
 effusions, which became so burdensome, and so much 
 "to the dishonour of God and scorn of religion," 
 
 1604 A.D. that at the Hampton Court Conference, a form was 
 drawn up "to be used by all preachers before their 
 sermons," and it was inserted in the Canons that 
 were issued at the time.^ It is doubtful, however, 
 whether it is competent for a preacher to use this 
 in Parish Churches, for it is provided by the Act of 
 
 1662 A.D. Uniformity, that no form be openly used for which 
 there is no rubrical direction, except in the case of 
 an University Sermon. 
 
 Authorised Liturgically the Sermon is intended to be an 
 
 exposi 10ns. g^pQgj^jQj^ ^l^g Eucharistic Lections, and as such 
 its utility and harmonious agreement with the 
 Service must be recognised at once. There were 
 many collections of such expositions in the middle 
 ages, and the favourite title for them was Postils. 
 A series was published by Taverner in the reign of 
 
 1540 A.D. Henry viii., and receiving a quasi-authority was 
 read in the churches, very much as the homilies of 
 S. Chrysostom and Ephraem were read in eaily 
 
 1 Can. Iv. The Bishops appealed to the Council of Milevi, 
 416 A.D., which forbade the use of any but authorised prayers in 
 Church. 
 
The Sermon. 
 
 times. The principle of using the compositions of 
 other writers has been adopted from the beginning. 
 S. Augustine went so far as to advise incompetent 
 preachers to commit borrowed sermons to memory 
 for delivery in Church. He believed that such a 
 course might be vindicated from any charge of 
 dishonesty, provided only that the preacher was 
 careful to practise what he preached,* and that it 
 expressed his own convictions, albeit in better 
 language than he could himself command. 
 
 In the sixteenth century the ignorance of the The 
 Anglican Clergy was such, that it became impera- 
 tively necessary, unless the people were to be left 
 wholly untaught, to provide greater facilities for duly 
 authorised instruction. Two Books of Homilies, 
 composed mainly by Cranmer, Latimer, Bonner, and 
 Jewell were issued within fifteen years, and ap- 1547-1562 
 pointed by royal injunction to be read every 
 Sunday, " except there be a Sermon." They bear 
 a title which, in its etymology, is suggestive of 
 popular " conferences " and homely instructions ; 
 and those which have come down from antiquity 
 are for the most part couched in colloquial language; 
 but those to which the rubric refers are grave and 
 hortatory, and answer more nearly to the description 
 which the modern acceptation of the term would 
 imply. 
 
 There is a tendency in the present age to depre- iheSerZ 
 
152 TJie Sermon. 
 
 ciate the Sermon as an unnecessary interference 
 with the spirit of Eucharistic worship. It is, in a 
 measure, a reaction against that undue exaltation 
 of the ordinance of preaching, which threw every- 
 thing else into the background. In restoring the 
 Blessed Sacrament to its rightful position as the 
 paramount object for which Christians are " to 
 assemble themselves together," it behoves us to 
 keep always in mind that in the purest ages of 
 Christianity, the Sermon was held to be an essential 
 Testimony part of it. The large provision for the reading of 
 Supremacy Holy Scripture in this Office, and the care that was 
 WOTd^^ taken to provide for its being rightly understood, is 
 an abiding witness to the Church's acknowledge- 
 ment of the Supremacy of God's Word. We need 
 it not only in our daily walk, as " a lamp unto our 
 feet and a light unto our path," amidst the perplex- 
 ities and entanglements of worldly business, but as 
 well when we join in the worship of the Sanctuary, 
 that we may have confidence to enter into the 
 Presence of God. And if the Word comes to us, 
 as it has come from the beginning, not in aU its 
 unexplained difiiculty, but unfolded and applied by 
 the preacher's voice, we may recognise herein yet 
 another proof of the Divine condescension in em- 
 ploying earthly means and human agencies in His 
 highest dealings with mankind. We all know how 
 often the simple message falls unheeded on the ear, 
 
The Sermon. 
 
 153 
 
 till, when the Word is taken up and illustrated hy a 
 living experience, it becomes at once instinct with 
 reality, and its application to the individual heart 
 is apprehended. 
 
 It is an age of criticism; but criticism when 
 api^lied, as it is too often, to the pulpit, is fatal to 
 every good influence ; whether learned or ignorant, 
 interesting or dull, he who speaks to us in the 
 Church is equally an ambassador of Christ. If only 
 we can "receive with meekness the engrafted Word," 
 God will give to it that which the preacher lacks, 
 and, through the vivifying power of the life-giving 
 Spirit, will quicken his most lifeless words and bring 
 strength out of weakness. " Take heed, then, how 
 ye hear." 
 
XIX. 
 
 "Then shall the Priest . . . begin the Offerton'," etc. 
 
 The song of " Offertory " is here a synonym for the " song 
 of the oiferers." It was an anthem, in the earliest 
 known form drawn from the Psalter, and sung 
 while the oblations of the people were being pre- 
 sented. In the old English Office it varied with 
 
 J549 A.D. the season, but in the first Prayer-book a number 
 of texts from different parts of Scripture were 
 thrown together, and a discretionary power was 
 given to the Priest to make whatever selection he 
 thought fit. This has remained unchanged through 
 all the successive revisions of the English Liturgy ; 
 but in the Office which was drawn up for Scotland in 
 1637 A.D. six fresh passages were introduced.^ At 
 
 1661 A.D. the final revision Cosin endeavoured to incorporate 
 these with the existing " Ofi"ertory," but without 
 success. It is not easy to understand on what 
 
 1 Gen. iv. 3-5 ; Exod. xxv. 2 ; Deut. xvi. 16 ; 1 Chron. xxix. 
 10-17 ; Ps. xcvi. 8 ; S. Mark xii. 41-44. These were not addi- 
 tional, but siibstituted for others. 
 154 
 
The Offertory. 
 
 155 
 
 grounds he was thwarted ; for, provided no obliga- 
 tion was imposed of reciting more than was con- 
 venient, the proposed multiplication would have 
 been found most advantageous. To mention but a 
 single example : the Davidic ascription of praise 
 and thanksgiving to God at the Dedication of the 
 Temple,^ which was among the rejected sentences, 
 would have filled a gap which is sorely felt at every 
 Consecration of an English Church. 
 
 Again, the arrangement of the sentences might 
 have been improved, so as to bring together such as 
 were general or special in their application. The 
 revisers were conscious of the want of order, but 
 failed to remedy it. 
 
 While " the Offertory " is iu reading, it is directed The Aims to 
 that " the alms for the poor and other devotions " 
 shall be received " in a decent bason," and then be 
 reverently brought to the Priest, presented and 
 placed upon the Holy Table. Leaving for the 
 moment the other " devotions," we dwell upon " the 
 alms for the poor," and other charitable purposes. 
 Almsgiving was recognised from the first as a 
 primary law and special characteristic of Chris- 
 tianity ; and from the time when S. Paul directed 
 that every one should " lay by him in store upon 
 the first day of the week," ^ it came to be associated 
 with the Eucharistic Service. 
 > 1 Chron. xxix. 10-17. 2 1 Cor. xvi. 2. 
 
156 The Offertory. 
 
 The institution of the Seven Deacons to " serve 
 tables " " in the daily ministration " led to the con- 
 stitution of this Order to be the Bishop's almoners,^ 
 and to the passage through their hands of all 
 offerings, tithes, and voluntary gifts. It is in con- 
 tinuance of this ancient usage that the Deacon holds 
 the first place in the rubric concerning the reception 
 and presentation of the alms, viz. " the Deacons, 
 Churchwardens, or others, shall receive the alms for 
 the poor." The " decent bason," in which they 
 are received, is a reminiscence of the " offertory 
 dish " often mentioned in the charters of ancient 
 English Monasteries.^ The offerings, however, were 
 sometimes personally presented at the Altar, ac- 
 cording to the scriptural inference, " If thou bring 
 thy gift to the Altar " ; sometimes they were placed 
 by the communicants in " the poor man's box," 
 which stood in the Chancel. Hence in the first 
 Prayer-book it was ordered that, after this had 
 been done, " so many as shall be partakers of the 
 Holy Communion shall tarry still in the Quire, or 
 in some convenient place nigh the Quire." ^ 
 
 1 Apost. Constit. ii. 26, 28, 31 ; iii. 19. 
 
 2 A very interesting account is given by Canon Venables in 
 Smith's Diet, of Christ. Antiq. 
 
 3 This implies tliat he was already in the Quire. The only 
 object that could have taken him there was to make liis offering. 
 After 1604, however, it v^as decided to put the box "in the most 
 convenient place," and this no doubt was generally the nave. 
 Can. Ixxxvi. 
 
The Offertory. 
 
 157 
 
 When the alms are received from the Church- Restriction 
 wardens and Sidesmen at the Chancel-gates, it is in °o the'Qu^r°e 
 accordance with various Synodical Canons, passed 
 in different countries to exclude the laity from the 
 precincts of the Altar.^ The Council of Laodicea 365 a.d. 
 ordered that " those only who were ordained to the 
 priesthood might enter the Altar-place for com- 
 munion"; and the same was indorsed at the Council 
 of Trullo, with an exception, said to have been 692 a.d. 
 founded upon what was already considered a very 
 old tradition, in favour of the Emperor, " when he 
 desired to offer gifts to the Creator." ^ 
 
 The other " devotions," named in the rubric, Offerings to 
 were of many kinds. It is most likely that money '''^ 
 for pious, not necessarily charitable, purposes, is 
 here chiefly indicated, but by no means exclu- 
 sively, for it was customary, when houses or lands 
 or ornaments, such as stained-glass windows, were 
 offered for the use of the Church, to present a 
 writing or chart descriptive thereof; and it is not 
 improbable that a trace of this ancient Ecclesias- 
 tical usage is still preserved in "the instrument 
 of conveyance, donation, or endowment," which 
 the Bishop places upon the Altar at the Consecra- 
 tion of a Church. 
 
 But there were also "lay-oblations" wholly distinct 
 from any of these. It was a primary and essential 
 I Laod. Can. xix. 2 Can. Ixix. 
 
158 The Offertory. 
 
 idea of sacrifice that it should cost the offerer some- 
 TheEie- thing. When the Jew brought his victim to the 
 Ceiebrl°bn Tabemacle, he surrendered it absolutely, 
 
 contributed ^j^j cost him what the value of the victim was. 
 
 by the 
 
 People. For the maintenance of this imperative principle 
 the early Church laid down the rule that the ele- 
 ments for the Eucharistic sacrifice should be con- 
 tributed by the people. Every person intending to 
 communicate brought to the Church an ofi'ering of 
 bread and wine. As the amount thus contributed 
 was of necessity far in excess of what was required, 
 the gifts were taken to the Prothesis ^ or Sacristy, 
 and placed upon a quasi-altar, sometimes separated 
 off from the Chancel, sometimes actually within it, 
 but always, for some unknown reason, on the north 
 side." This is now represented by the Credence- 
 table,'^ though in most churches placed on the south.* 
 Now the obligation for this personal contribution 
 was so stringent that Cassarius, the famous Galilean 
 
 542 A.D. Bishop of the sixth century, said that any right- 
 minded man ought to blush, if, having made no 
 
 1 In the West, paratorium. 
 
 - So Leo AUatius, Gear, Bingham, but Chambers ( Worship of 
 the Fourteenth Century) defends the South, but maintains that in 
 England there were two, as, e.g. in Kirkstall Abbey. 
 
 3 Generally derived from credenza, the Italian for a buffet or 
 sideboard, but more probably from the Anglo-Saxon gereden, 
 " to make ready. " Hence the noun gercdens, by contraction " cre- 
 dence." Cf. Hickes, Two Treatises, Pref. Disc. Ixvi., ed. 1711. 
 
 ^ Perhaps for the convenience of the Server. 
 
The Offertoi'y. 
 
 159 
 
 offering himself, lie should presume to communicate 
 from anothei-'s oblation.^ The only place, as far as The custom 
 we know, where the primitive custom is still ob- at MUanr' 
 served, is in the Cathedral of Milan, where some 
 men and women are chosen from among the pen- 
 sioners in the school of S, Ambrose to present the 
 bread and wine to the Priest for consecration at a 
 solemn Mass.^ 
 
 The feeling that the materials for the sacrifice 
 should be a strictly personal offering took such hold 
 upon the early Christians, that the worshipper not 
 only presented the bread, but actually made and 
 baked it himself. It was even done by persons of 
 the most exalted rank, for it is recorded of the 
 Emperor Valens ^ that his own hands had prepared 
 his oblations, and of S. Rhadegunda, the Queen of 
 the Franks, that she made the oblation from flour 
 which she herself had ground.* 
 
 In lapse of time the Church, through exceeding Bethiehems 
 reverence, began to restrict the office of preparing chu'cherfor 
 the elements to her own Ministers : and in some '"^'''"s the 
 
 ' Uread. 
 
 parts of the East Bethiehems, houses of bread, 
 where it was actually baked by the Deacons, were 
 
 1 Serm. 265, in App. ad 0pp. S. Auij. 
 - Bona, Mer. Lit. i. 10. 
 
 3 Greg. Naz. Orat. Funeb. iu laud. Basilii, c. 52 : to. SCipu. wv 
 * Acta S. Beued, i. 320. 
 
i6o 
 
 The Offertoij. 
 
 attached to the Sanctuary.^ Long, however, after 
 this change had been made, the traditional concep- 
 tion of this personal offering was preserved in the 
 presentation of the meal by each house or family.^ 
 It was doubtless intended as a link with the past 
 that the compilers of the First Prayer-book ordered 
 that " the parishioners of every parish shall offer 
 every Sunday, at the time of the Offertory, the just 
 valour and price of the holy loaf,"^ and for the same 
 object that it was directed at the final revision that 
 the bread and wine " shall be provided at the 
 charges of the parish." 
 The Offering As a practical issue of all this consideration, the 
 be'omUt'eV" principle should be forcibly inculcated that we must 
 not " come empty " to this Holy Feast. There is a 
 growing disposition, as Communions multiply, to 
 omit the Offertory and collection of alms. It is to 
 lose an essential feature of Sacrificial worship. The 
 maintenance of it may call for more self-denial, and 
 a further curtailment of luxuries, but the primitive 
 conception is well worth preserving. For the sake 
 of the poor, moreover, we need to be reminded that 
 a true Christian Communion requires as an indis- 
 
 1 Cf. Neale, East Ch., lutrod. 190. 
 
 2 Oem. Anim. i. 66. 
 
 3 Cf. Seventh rubric at close of first Prayer-book, Commiuiion 
 Office (ed. ParkerX and Rubric in same place in the present 
 Office. 
 
The Offertory. i6i 
 
 pensable condition Christian charity, and there is 
 no better touchstone of charity than to have pity 
 upon the poor. "To do good, and to distribute, 
 forget not ; for with such sacrifices God is well' 
 pleased." 
 
 L 
 
XX. 
 
 I^fie 9^i^eli CliaU'ce* 
 
 "When there is a Communion, the Priest shall then place upon the Table 
 so much Bread and Wine as he shall think fit." 
 
 The rubric mentions only bread and wine, but 
 all through the history of the Catholic Church, and 
 for the first fifteen centuries in the Anglican branch 
 Water added of it, Water has been added to the wine. A practice 
 
 to the wine. 
 
 so lai-ge and uniform could only have arisen out of 
 a settled conviction that such mixture was in accord- 
 ance with the original institution by our Blessed 
 Lord. Now we often read in the Old Testament of 
 " mixing " or " mingling " wine ; this was done as 
 well to strengthen as to modify its j^otency, in the 
 one case by the ingredient of spices, in the other by 
 water. It was the former mixture that was usually 
 prepared for high festivals, as we find in the Supper 
 The Jewish to wliich Wisdom invited her guests : " She hath 
 mixTngwLe. Icillcd her bcasts ) she hath mingled her wine ; she 
 crieth upon the highest places of the city, Come eat 
 of my bread and drink of the wine which I have 
 
 162 
 
The Mixed Chalice. 163 
 
 mingled " ; ^ but at the Passover there is nothing to 
 suggest the use of this " strong drink." There is no 
 notice of wine at all in connexion with it in the 
 Pentateuch, but the Mishnah enjoins that there 
 should be four cups of it even for the poorest 
 Israelite.^ It is authoritatively^ stated that the 
 third, " the Cup of Blessing," or that over which 
 " Grace " was said, was habitually mingled with 
 water; and it was this which our Lord selected for 
 consecration. There is no trace in Jewish writings 
 of any symbolic significance of a religious kind 
 attaching to the practice. In Palestine the wine 
 was so strong, that it was not thought proper to 
 pronounce over it the benediction of " the fruit of 
 the tree," that is, of the vine, until its strength had 
 been somewhat reduced by water. It does not, 
 however, positively prove the dilution, as is so 
 often asserted; at the most it cannot afford more 
 than a most reasonable presumption that diluted 
 wine was used at this particular Passover, for it 
 was specially provided that the duties of the Feast 
 
 1 Prov. ix. 2, 5. This passage is often quoted as typifying the 
 Holy Eucharist, and the mixture is erroneously supposed to he by 
 dilution with water, as e.g. Scudamore, Not. Euch. xii. x. sec. 2. 
 
 = Pesach. x. 1. 
 
 3 Talm. Bab. Berakholli, 50 b. in medio ; also Rashi in loco. 
 Mishnah, iJera^. vii. 5. Ughtt. Exercit. S. Matt. XTLvi. 27 . "The 
 wise agree, say the Gemarists, with Rab. Eliezer, that one ought 
 not to bless over the Cup of Blessing till water be mingled with 
 it." This Rabbi lived in the time of our Blessed Lord, but was 
 somewhat younger. 
 
164 The Mixed Chalice. 
 
 should be held to have been legitimately fulfilled if 
 a man drank of unmingled wine.^ 
 The evidence In a matter of so much uncertainty the only safe 
 Church."''^ guide is the practice of the early Church, which 
 would be careful to ascertain all the details of the 
 first institution for future guidance. Now the first 
 recorded history of the Ritual of the Holy Eucharist 
 testifies to the introduction of water : " The deacons 
 distribute . . . that Bread and Wine and Water 
 which has been blessed " ; ^ and there is a catem ^ 
 of evidence from the Fathers and the primitive 
 Liturgies, direct and indirect, which leaves us no 
 alternative but to accept the Mixed Chalice, not 
 only as consonant with the general practice of the 
 Jews, but in accordance with what was done at that 
 particular Passover. 
 The Rule of The AugUcan Church adopted the Catholic rule, 
 SaxOT^'° Jind enjoined it by a succession of canons; in 
 "^""yTo A.D. Egbert's time " that the priests shall diligently pro- 
 vide that the bread and wine and water, iu which 
 the Mass is celebrated, should be pure and clean 
 
 1 Lightf. ibid. Buxtorf, de Primal Cana; Hit. 20. 
 
 2 Just. Mart. Apol. i. 65. 
 
 3 Iren. adv. llaer. v. ii. 3, and v. xxxvi. 3. Cypr. Ep. ad 
 Caecil. Ixii. (or Ixiii.) 2 and 13. Ajwst. Constit. viii. xii. The 
 mixture is said to be mentioned in some 70 different Rituals of 
 earlier or later date. According to some of them the water was 
 warm. This has no basis in Jewish custom, but was purely Chris- 
 tian, originating in a symbolical reference to the water and blood 
 which flowed from the wounded side of our Lord. 
 
Tilc Mixed Chalice. 
 
 165 
 
 and under Edgcar she forbade any priest " to celebrate 960 a.d. 
 
 unless he have all things fitting for the Housel, that 
 
 is a pure oblation, and pure wine and water " ; but 
 
 for some unexplained reason the revisers of the 1532 a.d. 
 
 second Prayer-Book omitted the rubric contained 
 
 in the first, which directed the minister to add to 
 
 the wine "a little pure and clean water." 
 
 A great variety of symbolical interpretation 
 gathered round the act both in early and mediseval 
 times, but there is no trace of anything which could 
 possibly have associated it in men's minds with 
 perverted doctrine or superstitious ceremony. 
 
 Now if the judgment be accepted, that to under- 
 stand aright the principles of rubrical revision, 
 "omission is of equal force with prohibition," ^ it is 
 idle to maintain the legality of " the mixture " at 
 the present day ; but it is at least interesting to find 
 that such was not the interpretation that commended 
 itself to the leading divines who were engaged in the 
 liturgical controversies of the seventeenth century. 
 
 It was the practice of Bishop Andrewes - in the The seven- 
 King's Chapel all the time that he was Dean of it, 'tury'Di"ine 
 and he ordered it to be adopted in his Form of 
 Consecrating a Church. 
 
 1 This theory is supported by Stephens, B.C. P., p. 1237, who 
 maintains that i't is a legal principle, expressio unius est exchisio 
 alleritis. Talmer, Orir/. Lit., assumes the oppcsite. 
 
 2 Minor Works, p. 157. 
 
1 66 The Mixed Chalice. 
 
 Cosin,! who was chaplain to Bishop Overall, the 
 author of the Sacramental part of the Church 
 Catechism, in his notes on the Catechism, wrote, 
 " Our Church forbids it not, for aught I know, and 
 they that think fit may use it, as some most 
 eminent among us do at this day " ; but he implies 
 that it was not the common practice, and vindicates 
 the omission from the charge that it invalidated the 
 Sacrament. 
 
 In testimony of its continuance even in the 
 Georgian era, when Liturgical Eitual descended to 
 the lowest ebb. Bishop Wilson, in the manuscript of 
 his Sacra Privata, which was so largely used, wrote 
 directions " upon placing bread and wine and water 
 upon the Altar." - 
 The Non- The Noujurors, when they determined to compile 
 Uturgy. a Liturgy as far as possibly conformable to the 
 1718A.D. ^jjgjgQ^ standard, refused to be satisfied with any 
 tacit sanction, and deciding that the evidence pre- 
 ponderated in favour of the Mixed Chalice at the 
 original institution, secured its continuance by rein- 
 serting the omitted rubric, " putting thereto a little 
 pure and clean water." On the whole, then, though, as 
 even the Eoman Church confesses,^ the absence of the 
 
 1 Works, V. 154. 
 
 2 This was suppressed in the publication, but it is found in an 
 edition of 1854, p. 105, published by Mr. Denton direct from the 
 author's MS. 
 
 3 Cone. Trid. de Euch. Sacr. c. xvii. seq. 
 
The Mixed Chalice. 167 
 
 rite in no way invalidates the Sacrament, it is clear 
 that its observance brings us into closer harmony 
 with other Churches, and removes the reproach of 
 having departed from Catholic antiquity. 
 
 There is a marked coincidence between the direc- 
 tion to the Priest, after the alms have been pre- 
 sented, " to place upon the table bread and wine," 
 and the rubrical side-note in the Prayer that follows 
 "to accept our alms and oblations." The natural 
 explanation under the circumstances would be to 
 confine the latter term to the elements alone ; but 
 though undoubtedly these were primarily in the 
 thoughts of the revisers, no such limitation can be 
 maintained. There is abundance of contemporary 
 evidence to show that " Oblations " was a wider term, 
 embracing all offerings and " devotions " which were 
 not alms, such, for instance, as " the lay-oblations " 
 and offerings for the clergy, of which we have already 
 spoken. Passing over, however, the wider use, we 
 find in the primitive Liturgies that there was 
 always a double oblation of the elements, one ihe twofold 
 before, the other following immediately after, the 
 Act of Consecration ; they are designated in the 
 East the Lesser and the Greater Oblations. A con- 
 sideration of the object of the respective acts justifies 
 the distinction. That of the former is twofold ; first, 
 as a thankful dedication to the Creator of a kind of 
 first-fruits of His creatures, often expressed by the 
 
1 68 The Mixed Chalice. 
 
 sentence, " of Thine own, 0 Lord, we give Thee " ; 
 secondly, to ask God so to accept it that it may be 
 an " offering of a sweet-smelling savour." The 
 object of the latter is to present to the Father 
 Christ's Body and Blood under the veils of bread 
 and wine. 
 
 The first Oblation of the elements has always 
 been regarded as an important act demanding due 
 and proper reverence, and in the Eastern Church 
 it has been surrounded with unusual pomp and 
 magnificence. Cosin and Sancroft were anxious to 
 emphasise the Sacrificial character of the Priest's act 
 by substituting, " then shall he offer up and place," 
 for the simple " place upon the Table," ^ but liturgi- 
 cally it can be shown to be a matter of little 
 moment, because according to Jewish practice the 
 mere act of laying the gifts upon the Altar by the 
 hands of a priest makes them ipso f ado " oblations." ^ 
 So Bishop Patrick ■wrote, " When you see bread and 
 wine set upon God's Table by him that ministers 
 in the Divine Service, then it is ofi"ered to God ; for 
 whatsoever is solemnly placed there becomes by that 
 means a thing dedicated and appropriated to Him."^ 
 It is necessary to bear this in mind, for it is the 
 justification of the compilers of our Communion 
 
 1 It was so altered in the Scottish Office of 1639 A.D. 
 
 Exod. XXV. 30. S. Matt, xxiii. 19. 
 ^ Christ. Sacrifice, Pt. ii. sec. viii. 
 
The Mixed Chalice. 1 69 
 
 Office in not providing that the verbal petition for 
 God's acceptance of them should be repeated, when 
 fresh elements are presented for consecration in one 
 and the same Celebration.^ "Oblation is an act, 
 not a prayer." 
 
 We have observed before that the term " Obla- oblations or 
 tions" has been used to signify offerings for the clergy, [he c'lef^!'^ 
 Its special application to these grew out of an early 
 practice of no little interest. In ancient times it was 
 customary for the communicants to offer in kind for 
 the Sacred Feast, and necessarily far more was con- 
 tributed than was actually required. What remained, 
 after the Priest had selected what would suffice, be- 
 came the perquisite of himself and his assistants ; in- 
 deed it was the chief provision for their maintenance. 
 In later times, it is true, they distributed a portion 
 to the poor, but the oldest records establish the un- 
 divided claims of the clergy. Many time-honoured 
 customs, both in the Church and the world, have 
 fallen into disuse, but in many cases they have left 
 traces behind them. The Easter Offerings are a Easter 
 surviving relic of this prerogative of the priesthood. 
 When the ministers of the Church took into their 
 own hands the furnishing of the elements for the 
 Sacrament, an equivalent in money was contributed 
 by the people. The objects on which it was to be 
 
 1 Cf. Rubr. following the Form of Administering of the Cup, 
 " If the consecrated Bread and Wine be all spent, etc." 
 
170 The Mixed Chalice. 
 
 spent were largely multiplied, but four days in the 
 year were set apart when aU offerings should be 
 appropriated to the clergy. They were first fixed 
 for the Feasts of Christmas, Easter, S. John Baptist, 
 and S. Michael ; but as the laity formed the habit of 
 communicating only on Easter Day, it was provided 
 that, in default of payment on the other three days, 
 a cumulative contribution might be made at Easter. 
 The claims S. Paul reminded the Corinthians that God had 
 of the Minis- down au eternal principle for the maintenance 
 
 try for ^ 
 
 support. of ^i^g priesthood. As the Jewish priests and Levites 
 were fed and lived plenteously on their share of the 
 sacrifices, " tvtn so hath the Lord also ordained, that 
 they who preach the Gospel should live of the 
 Gospel." It is true that in times of poverty and 
 persecution he determined himself to forego his 
 rights and to preach without reward rather than be 
 burdensome to his flock; but it was a voluntary 
 departure for a pressing necessity, and may never be 
 drawn into a precedent, in face of his appeal to God's 
 unchanging law that " they who wait at the Altar 
 are partakers with the Altar." 1 Through the piety 
 of benefactors and the ample provision of former 
 generations, the burden of maintaining the clergy 
 falls lightly upon the laity of the present age, but it 
 may not always be so. We may, however, believe 
 it to be no unfounded hope that, if in the future they 
 1 1 Cor. ix. 1.3, 14. 
 
The Mixed Chalice. 1 7 1 
 
 realise their duties, the people will recognise their 
 claims, and will be careful to provide, as they have 
 done in the past, that they who give them that 
 which is spiritual, shall never be lacking in that 
 which is material. 
 
XXI. 
 
 'Ziriie ^va^tt for t\)t €\\uvc^. 
 
 One great change in the later worship of the 
 Anglican Church is the transfer of the intercessory 
 element from the Eucharistic to the Ordinary Ser- 
 L.tercessions vicBs. It was latroduced most sparingly into " the 
 i"n°the HTur". Hours " J but it entered very largely into the 
 Liturgy. At first it is found in the East in a form 
 closely resembling our Litany, as may be seen in 
 the Apostolic Constitutions,^ where literally " all 
 conditions " of men are remembered in the prayers 
 at the Altar. Western Litanies in the early times 
 Avere for the most part Processional,^ apart from the 
 Liturgy, but before long they were grafted into it, 
 and their connexion is fixed by the familiar title of 
 " Missal Litanies." The oldest forms ^ that have 
 come down to us are most comprehensive, embracing 
 petitions for the Catholic Church throughout the 
 
 1 viii. 9. 
 
 - Such were the Rogations. S. Basil, Ep. ad Nicaeas 207. 
 Sozom. Eccl. Hist. viii. 8. Amalar. de Eccl. Of. iv. 25. 
 
 3 Clement Liturgy. For some ancient forms, cf. Smith's Diet. 
 Chr. Antiq. p. 1001. 
 172 
 
The Prayer for the CJmrch. r 73 
 
 world, and the manifold estates of men and women 
 contained therein. 
 
 It is an unfortunate departure from primitive The separa- 
 usage that the Litany should have become in these Litany from 
 later days almost wholly dissociated from the un.iiturgr""' 
 Eucharist. Its penitential character makes it 
 especially appropriate in preparation for the Divine 
 Mysteries, and its petitions harmonise most com- 
 pletely with the great Office of Intercession. It 
 was on these grounds that it found a fitting place 
 before the Sunday Eucharist,^ but to relegate it to 
 the afternoon or evening is to destroy the rationale 
 of its use on the most festal of days. It is very 
 helpful to bow the heart of the worshipper before 
 entering into the Presence of his Lord ; it has an 
 obvious incongruity when praise and thanksgiving 
 have wholly taken possession of his soul. 
 
 Now, in addition to the more general interces- 
 sions of the Eucharistic Office, the prayers of the 
 congregation were asked by name for individuals. 
 In every Church there were Ecclesiastical Registers, 
 called Diptychs, because they were usually two- The Diptych 
 leaved, on which were written the names both of ald'de'ad."^ 
 living and dead. Among the former it was cus- 
 tomary to give prominence to those who brought 
 
 1 In first Prayer-book, Edw. vi., it was ordered to be said only 
 on Wednesday and Friday. In the second Prayer-book Sunday 
 was added— pi-obably to detract, as it was thought, from t}ie festal 
 character of Sunday, not to renew an ancient usage. 
 
I 74 The Prayer for the Church. 
 
 oblations; their names were recited, that they 
 might have the prayers of the people, and that it 
 might be known that they were in full communion, 
 for none but communicants were allowed to offer. 
 To refuse a place on the Diptychs was a common 
 method of condemnation for heresy or laxity in life 
 and discipline. Besides these, ofiicers of the Church 
 and civil rulers were included, especially Bishops 
 and Priests, and any benefactors, and laity of un- 
 disputed orthodoxy. In the Diptychs of the dead 
 the Saints and Martyrs held the chief place, together 
 with the founder of the church, the Bishops of the 
 diocese, and eminent laics who had died in the 
 Faith. It was chiefly from the belief " that the 
 greatest benefit would accrue to their souls for whom 
 the supplication was offered, while the holy and 
 most awful Sacrifice was being set forth." ^ But it 
 was also regarded among the highest earthly dis- 
 tinctions the Church had to bestow ; indeed it was 
 included in the seven honours of canonisation. " It 
 is a great honour," says S. Chrysostom,^ " to be 
 named in the Presence of the Lord, when that 
 Memorial is being celebrated, the dread Sacrifice, the 
 unopeakable Mysteries." It was fitting that the 
 faithful dead should be included as part of the 
 Mj'stical Body of Christ, which was being presented 
 to the Father ; and such commemoration exhibited 
 
 1 Cyril, Cal. Myst. v. - In Ada Apost. Horn, xxi § iv. 
 
TJie Prayer for the CJmrch. 
 
 1/5 
 
 a public testimony to the reality of the bond of 
 union between the Church militant and the Church 
 expectant in Paradise. 
 
 The time of recitation has varied ; sometimes Recited at 
 the names of the living were read out before, times, 
 the names of the departed after, the act of Con- 
 secration.^ The method also has varied. At one 
 time they were read aloud by the Deacon at the 
 Altar ; at another they were repeated in a whisper 
 to the Priest who celebrated; but in nearly all 
 cases,^ the idea was preserved of interceding for 
 them at the central part of the Service. In the 
 first Keformed Prayer-book of the Anglican Church 
 the custom was dropped of interceding or com- 
 memorating by name, but the laudable practice of 
 knitting up the Act of Intercession with that of 
 Consecration was retained. The Prayer of the 
 Church was comprehended in the same Form with 
 the Invocation of the Holy Ghost, the Consecration, 
 and Oblation. In the second Prayer-book the Dislocation 
 
 • n -11 . I of the 
 
 revisers, earned away by the reaction that was intercessory 
 taking place against the abuses of Masses for the 
 dead, curtailed the intercessory element of the 
 Office, and separated what was left from its time- 
 honoured position. It is interesting, however, to 
 
 1 In Orient Litt., except that of S. Mark aud the Coptic of 
 S. Cyril, these prayers all follow the Consecration. 
 - The Gallican, Mozar. aud Nest. Litt. 
 
I 76 Tlie Prayer for the Church. 
 
 find that though such a consideration would have 
 had little weight with them, had it entered into 
 their consultations, yet they did unwittingly bring 
 the revised Office in this particular into agreement 
 with the Galilean use, and so, indirectly, with that 
 also of the British Church, which was derived from 
 it. The Galilean was almost alone among the 
 ancient Liturgies in placing the prayers for the 
 Church before the Sursum Corda (" Lift up your 
 hearts "), which commenced the more sacred part, 
 the Anaphora in the East, the Canon in the West. 
 
 While we regret the dislocation that has taken 
 place in the Anglican Office, it is some consolation 
 to remember that the Lord's Prayer still remains in 
 some proximity to the central Act; and this is 
 emphatically a prayer for all the children of our 
 common Father. All its petitions, too, are framed 
 in the plural number, so that the ancient and 
 Catholic idea is not wholly lost to us. 
 
 The Prayer, as we now have it, contains petitions 
 for the universal Church, for kings, for the clergy, 
 for the people, for the sick and distressed ; and in 
 addition to these a thankful commemoration for the 
 faithful departed. There is abundant precedent in 
 ancient usage for all these petitions, but there is 
 one marked difference between the prayers for the 
 king in the early ages and our own — one in which 
 modern practice shows at a disadvantage. We have 
 
The Prayer for the ChurcJi. 177 
 
 made no provision for kings and princes without 
 the pale of Christendom ; but S. Paul ^ called upon 
 Timothy to teach his people to intercede for a Pagan Divers per- 
 emperor as wicked as Nero ; and Tertullian ^ testifies fo" iifthr^ 
 that the Christians of his day, when as yet the ^""■'sy- 
 Empire was unconverted, prayed even from the 
 heart for all kings, " that they might have a long 
 life, secure dominion, a safe home, valiant armies, a 
 faithful senate, an upright people, a world at peace, 
 and whatever be the desire both of the man and 
 the king." Intercession for those wlio are " in 
 trouble, sorrow, need, sickness, or any other adver- 
 sity," seems to be the natural outcome of a Christian 
 instinct, and yet it found no place in the Liturgies 
 of Eome and Milan. It tells us unmistakeably hoAV 
 vividly the early Christians realised its value, that Especiall 
 deliverance from the most pressing calamities and trouble"! 
 adversities, incidental to an age of persecution, was 
 always sought through the Service of the Altar ; as, 
 e.g. for the " holy fathers and brothers who carry on 
 their struggle in the caves and dens and holes of 
 the earth," " for those in bonds and in prisons, in 
 captivities and exile, in mines, and tortures, and 
 bitter slavery."^ 
 
 In these days when the Church is reinstating the Desirable to 
 Holy Eucharist in its rightful position as the centre practice of 
 
 ' 1 Tim. ii. 1, 2. ■- Apol. xxx. ami xxxix 
 
 3 Litt. (S. James and S. Mark. 
 
 M 
 
I 78 The Prayer for the Chirch. 
 
 praying of ouF religious life, we shall do well, as far as we 
 
 for persons . , , . _ _ 
 
 by name. caii, to revivc the ancient practice. It does seem 
 anomalous that the prayers of the congregation 
 should only be asked for individuals at Matins or 
 Evensong. If, however, by tacit consent other 
 notices than such as are recognised by the rubric, 
 are generally allowed after the Nicene Creed, it is 
 difficult to see where such a concession could be 
 more reasonably made, in favour of those who wish 
 their needs to be remembered in the pleadings of 
 the Altar Service. It is in this that we expect in 
 its fullest realisation the close co-operation of Him 
 " Who ever liveth to make intercession for us." It 
 is in the offering of this that we are more em- 
 boldened to ask, conscious that our intercessory 
 acts, with all their weaknesses and shortcomings, 
 are united with the all-sufficient Mediation of the 
 great High Priest, and that they must gain strength 
 and efficacy from the union. 
 
XXII. 
 
 i©ca?er0 for tijc faitljful Deai). 
 
 ** Militant here in earth." 
 
 When the compilers of the second Prayer-book Reaction 
 of Edward vr. removed the Prayer for the Church payers fc 
 to its present position, they also greatly curtailed it ',532''^!' 
 by obliterating a form of commemoration of saints 
 departed, as well as a petition for those who rest in 
 the sleep of peace. The former ascribed " most 
 high praise and hearty thanks, for the wonderful 
 grace and virtue, declared in all " God's " saints from 
 the beginning of the world " ; the latter commended 
 unto the mercy of the Lord, all other His servants 
 " which are departed hence with the sign of faith." 
 In the strong reaction that was setting in against 
 the Catholic practice of praying for the dead, by 
 reason of the abuses connecting it with the perverted 
 doctrine of Purgatory, they forgot the wholesome 
 maxim that the abuse of a thing, which is in itself 
 good, is no sufficient cause for its disuse ; ^ and they 
 stopped short in the Prayer for the Church for " all 
 1 Canon xx.x., 1604 a.d. 
 
1 80 Prayers for the faithftd dead. 
 
 them who in this transitory life are in trouble, 
 sorrow, need, sickness, or any other adversity." Yet 
 further to fence and guard it from all possibility of 
 its being ever interpreted as including that part of 
 the Church which is in Paradise, they prefixed the 
 restrictive title, " militant here in earth." 
 commemor- The uext hundred years passed away leaving the 
 dead intro- Prayer untouched ; ^ but at the final revision, 
 iMi^I'd. when the Church was recovering from the panic, 
 which had well-nigh made shipwreck of Catholic 
 doctrine under the alien guidance of Bucer and 
 Martyr,^ a portion at least of the ancient heritage 
 was reclaimed. The beautiful Commemoration which 
 closes the Prayer in its present form was introduced, 
 and though the direct supplication in behalf of the 
 dead was not restored, yet there can be little doubt 
 that the revisers no longer wished to restrict the 
 intercessions of the worshipper to the living alone, 
 for in the MS., where it is referred to in the 
 Post-Communion rubrics, as they laid it before 
 Parliament,^ it is designated the " General Prayer 
 for the good estate of the Catholic Church of 
 Christ. ' ' Furthermore, Cosin , the leading spirit in the 
 
 1 All alteration had been made in the Scotch Lit. of 1637, and 
 botli commeraoratioii of and prayer for the dead were re-admitted. 
 
 - Cf. the author's Studies in tin- lliat. of the Prayer-book, sub 
 " Puritan Innov.itions " ; also After Death, p. 240. 
 
 3 It is said that Parliament objected ; that the matter was re- 
 ferred back to Convocation, and the change accepted. 
 
Prayers for the faithful dead. 1 8 1 
 
 revision, has left it on record that expressions were 
 used in the Communion Office on the distinct under- 
 standing that they embraced the dead as well as 
 the living. In commenting on the expression " we 
 and all Thy whole Church " in the Prayer of Obla- 
 tion, he says that it is to be understood " as well of 
 those that have been here before, and those that 
 shall be hereafter, as of those that are now members 
 of it." ^ It would have been impossible for men so 
 imbued witli the Catholic spirit, and so conversant 
 with historic usage, to sanction the narrowing policy 
 of their predecessors. The foreign Reformers, who 
 removed the prayer for the dead, never ventured to 
 deny that it was lawful or primitive ; their arguments 
 and action were founded on expediency alone, and, as 
 so often happens, it betrayed them into extreme mea- 
 sures, where modification and correction would have 
 sufficed. The final revisers were satisfied that the 
 Church could only be permanently deprived of her 
 Catholic privilege with grave harm and loss; and 
 they resolved to bring back all that was practicable, 
 carefully guarding her faith and worship from late 
 and unauthorised perversions. 
 
 The principle of praying for the faithful dead has 
 so much to commend it, and is so full of comfort, 
 as well as so strictly Scriptural and Catholic, that it 
 almost demands a full and unqualified recognition 
 
 1 Worl^, vol. V. 351, 352, Anglo-Cath. Lib. 
 
1 82 Prayers for the faithful dead. 
 
 Varied evi- iu PubHc woisliip. There is an unbroken chain of 
 fevouVof evidence in favour of it^ all through the earliest 
 aiToead' '''S^^ ■ "^"^'^^ through Fathers, monumental inscrip- 
 tions, primitive Liturgies, and other sources of 
 information, and rests for its ultimate authority on 
 the teaching of Holy Scripture. S. Paul in his 
 Second Epistle to Timothy ^ prays for Onesiphorus : 
 " The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy 
 From Holy of the Lord in that day." It is only by doing 
 Scripture, yiolcnce to tlic whole drift of the passage that we 
 can evade the conclusion that he was no longer 
 alive. This prayer was written, like the rest of 
 Scripture, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. 
 Men may say that it is nothing more than a pious 
 apostrophe ; at least it is couched in almost exactly 
 similar language with the petitions which the Church 
 has always offered up, and Avith which she is satisfied. 
 Men may retort again that it is but a solitary 
 instance, and that it is found nowhere else in 
 the pages of Holy Writ. While we are far from 
 accepting the assertion that it is wholly wanting in 
 other parts, we have the distinct assurance that 
 the Apostles were guided into all truth in what 
 they wrote. Whatever, therefore, S. Paul states is 
 equally true, whether it be found in one or in twenty 
 places — not perhaps equally important or necessary 
 
 1 All this is set forth in detail in A fter Death. 
 
 2 2 Tim. i. IG, 18 and iv. 19. 
 
Prayers for the faithftd dead. 183 
 
 to salvation, but equally according to the Mind of 
 the Spirit, and as such the Church has no hesitation 
 in receiving it. 
 
 To pray for the dead, then, is Scriptural; and 
 because it is Scriptural, it was universally practised 
 in the early Church, by those who lived most nearly 
 to the time of our Blessed Lord, and must have 
 known His Mind and Will more accurately than 
 later generations. Now one convincing proof that From thc 
 it was so practised is the undoubted fact that Liturgies, 
 there is no primitive Liturgy extant in which it 
 was not provided for. The Liturgies, it is well 
 known, have not come down to us in their original 
 and authentic forms, but they abound in inter- 
 polations of later date. Any Liturgical scholar, 
 however, can furnish ample proof, that the petitions 
 for the dead may not be placed in the category of 
 such unauthorised additions.^ It is certain that no 
 practice could have been adopted or suffered to 
 continue for any length of time in the public 
 Services, which had not received the full and un- 
 wavering assent of the Church at large. 
 
 In the full belief then that the practice is perfectly 
 legitimate, we would gladly see a more frank and 
 open recognition of it on historic grounds. While 
 
 1 The late Dr. Swainson did much to distinguish the earlier 
 text of the Liturgies from later accretions. Cf. Gk. LitL, pp. 40, 
 83, 92, 131. etc. 
 
1 84 Prayers for the faithful dead. 
 
 sects are starting into existence and multiplying with 
 an amazing rapidity, and adopting any innovation 
 in modes of worship that fancy prompts, it is no 
 light claim to the respect of men that the Church 
 Objects to of the nineteenth century should be able to exhibit 
 
 oe gained by . 
 
 fuller adop- the sclf-same features that were familiar to the 
 p'rTct°ice. ^ Christians of the second and the third. Again it 
 would strengthen our position in the Eoman con 
 tvoversy, and remove one of the main charges 
 against the Church of the Eeformation — viz., that 
 she had cut herself adrift from the Church of the 
 first age by abandoning a usage that entered so 
 largely into primitive worship. But far above 
 either of these objects, or any others of a kindred 
 nature, there is the paramount aim of practical utility 
 and spiritual help. We have been told, that in one 
 particular country the Missions of the Anglican 
 Church have failed to lay hold of the natives because 
 the messengers we had sent out had taught them that 
 it was unlawful to pray for the departed. The natural 
 instincts of a nation, whose system of religious 
 worship was bound up with the commemoration 
 of the dead, rebelled against such teaching. But 
 while they closed their ears to the ministry, which 
 offered them nothing but the cold and chilling 
 comfort of Protestant reserve, they were attracted 
 by the Eoman Priests, who, to meet the natural 
 craving of the people for closer union with the 
 
Prayers for the faithful dead. 1 8 5 
 
 dead, pressed to the utmost their peculiar doctrine 
 of Purgatory. 
 
 The Church of England has long since paid the 
 penalty for the admission of false doctrine. She 
 has not indeed been deprived of all exercise of her 
 rightful prerogative, for " the main body and essen- 
 tials" of Divine worship have never been sacrificed/ 
 and enough was left at the Reformation just to 
 witness to her retention of the principle. But 
 for three centuries she has lost much of that free 
 and open action which alone can make her prayers 
 a real motive power in her life. It must be our 
 anxious care, in all efforts to recover her lost posi- 
 tion, to adhere strictly to the ancient lines, and to 
 use no petitions but such as echo the language of 
 the Liturgies of the early Church, and pray, not 
 for deliverance from Purgatoiial pains, but for the 
 light or rest or refreshment of the faithful de- 
 parted : for the effacement of their sinful stains and 
 defilement : and for the fuller sanctification of those 
 who are now in peace with Christ. 
 
 1 Cf. Preface to P.B. 1662 a.d. 
 
XXIII. 
 
 feve'enc! for " ^^^^ ^'"^^ P'^^^"'^^ " ' ^^^^ the pieg- 
 
 ^heMysteries naut cij of Warning, by which in almost aU the 
 
 safeguard. 
 
 ancient Liturgies, the Celebrant endeavoured to 
 shield the Mysteries from profane recipients. 
 
 During the middle ages the people rarely com- 
 municated ; they were satisfied to " attend Mass ; " 
 and as it was celebrated in a dead language, they 
 were in most cases unable to take an intelligent part 
 in the Service. At the Reformation, when this evil 
 was corrected, and frequent communion revived, it 
 became necessary to emphasise the old admonition ; 
 hence it was that the existing Exhortations were 
 introduced. There was one instance in which a 
 somewhat similar form had been used in earlier 
 times ; in the revised Galilean Liturgy, as adopted 
 in Spain under the name of the Mozarabic, there 
 was an address of admonition to the people, begin- 
 
 1 Sancta Sanctis, was proclaimed by the priest before the Frac- 
 tion, in the Litt. of S. James and S. Mark, and in others at a 
 different time. S. Chiysostom and S. Cyril comment upon it. 
 186 
 
The First ExJiortation. 187 
 
 ning " Dearly beloved brethren," ^ to arouse them to 
 pray earnestly to God. It is interesting to find 
 that it occupies a place nearly corresponding to 
 that of the Exhortation in our present Office ; for it 
 shows at least that in position as well as in principle 
 this element is not, as is too often supposed, without 
 the sanction of antiquity. It seems, however, to 
 have a more peculiar fitness in the place assigned to 
 it in the first Prayer-book after the Consecration, 
 when the Holy Sacrament, to which it refers, is 
 actually present. 
 
 The First Exhortation was drawn in a large The source 
 measure from The Consultation of Hermann,^ which had [hTExhor'ta. 
 been compiled by Melauchthon and Bucer, and pub- 
 lished in England shortly before the revision. It 1547 a.d. 
 opens up some very important subjects, three of 
 which deserve special consideration : — (1) the ter- 
 rible consequences of partaking unworthily ; (2) the 
 question whether Judas received or not; (3) the 
 principle of private or auricular confession. 
 
 (1) Unless we may suppose that the framers of the 
 Exhortation were guilty of culpable carelessness, 
 they used language which implied that the wicked 
 
 1 This was revised by Isidore, as Gregory revised the Roman, 
 aud about the same time. This Address, Fratres Charissimi, is 
 the lirstof the Seven Prayers into wliich he divides the Office. 
 
 - Tliis work was a "simple and pious consideration," .-lud was 
 intended .is a preliminary to a complete Reformation of the 
 Services and ceremonies in tlie Cliurches in Iiis Electorate. It was 
 published in Germau in 154.3, and in Latin 154.'). 
 
The First Exhortation. 
 
 as well as the godly eat the Body of Jesus Christ. The 
 " Holy Sacrament," which they say " is so danger- 
 ous to them that will presume to receive it un- 
 worthily," cannot be lawfully interpreted according 
 to the exact language of the Prayer-book to be only 
 the bread and wine. The Sacrament has two 
 parts, the outward and the inward, and all who 
 receive it receive both. It cannot be a Sacrament 
 to one and only half of a Sacrament to another. 
 All partake of the res Sacramenti, that is, the thing 
 signified, but not all of the virtm, that is, the bene- 
 ficial effect of the Sacrament.^ 
 Article x.xix. The 29th Article seems at first sight to be repug- 
 
 terpreted. 
 
 nant to this doctrine, but not when carefully and 
 theologically interpreted. The title runs thus:— 
 " Of the wicked which eat not the Body of Christ 
 in the use of the Lord's Supper but the expres- 
 sion is not reproduced in the substance of the 
 Article. It is there stated that " although they do 
 carnally and visibly press with their teeth the 
 Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, yet in 
 no wise are they partakers of Christ." Either, then, 
 the heading says something which is not supported 
 by the substance of the Article, and therefore not 
 binding,^ or else in the mind of the compiler "to 
 
 1 Cf. S. Aug. in Joan. Tract. x.\vi. 11. 
 
 ■- It is au accepted principle that no conclusion may be drawn 
 fiom the heading of a legal document unless it be borne out 
 by what is contained in the body of the document itself. 
 
The First Exhortatioii. 189 
 
 eat the Body of Christ " and " to be partakers of 
 Christ " are synonymous terms. Now, to be a 
 " partaker of Christ " is a phrase for which we have 
 an authoritative interpretation in Holy Scripture : ^ 
 it is to be brought into spiritual union with Him. 
 Such union through the Sacrament, the Article 
 denies to the ungodly ; and only if we understand 
 the " eating " spoken of in the heading as eating 
 spiritually or beneficially,^ is there no discrepancy. 
 
 The final sentence, " but rather to their condem- 
 nation, do eat and drink the Sign or Sacrament ^ of 
 so great a thing " is most ambiguous, because sign 
 and sacrament have both in the Church Catechism 
 an authorised definition, according to which it is 
 impossible to regard them as synonymous terms. 
 The one has one part only, the other two. Accord- 
 ing to the popular view, the wicked eat the sign, 
 that is, the outward part, or bread and wine ; 
 according to the interpretation here set forth they 
 eat the Sacrament, that is, both the outward and 
 the inward parts, or the bread and wine and the 
 
 1 Heb. iii. 14, vi. 4. 
 
 • "Eating" is so understood in St. John vi. 54, 56, 58, though 
 the manner is unexpressed. It is followed by union with Christ. 
 So it is in Art. xxviii. The "Body" is given to all, but it is 
 "received and eaten," i.e. beneficially, only through faith. 
 
 3 Note that iu the Latin Version the order is changed, sacra- 
 mentum seu sijmbolum, and symbol appears to be introduced as 
 another term for Sacrament, which "sign" can hardly be. For 
 further teaching on this Article read below, Chap, xxxix. 
 
igo The First Exhortation. 
 
 St. Augus- 
 tine's teach- 
 ing on the 
 Real 
 
 The doubt 
 whether 
 
 Body and Blood of Christ ; but, as will be shown 
 more fully hereafter, through lack of faith they can- 
 not do it beneficially, but rather, like the profane 
 Corinthians, they eat to their condemnation. 
 
 The general teaching of S. Augustine,^ who is 
 appealed to in the Article, is in accordance with this 
 latter interpretation. For instance, writing against 
 the Donatists, he says of one, who takes the Sacra- 
 ment unworthily, it does not follow, "because he 
 does not receive to his salvation, that he has received 
 nothing ; for it was none the less the Body of the 
 Lord to those to whom the Apostle said : " He that 
 eateth unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation 
 to himself." 
 
 (2) On the second question the Exhortatiou 
 speaks definitely, " Lest, after the taking of that 
 Holy Sacrament, the devil enter into you, as he 
 entered into Judas " ; and it is supported by some 
 of the leading Fathers. S. Ambrose ^ wrote in the 
 belief that Judas the traitor partook of the Sacra- 
 ment : " he perished at the feast in which others 
 were made whole " ; S. Augustine : ^ " The Lord 
 Himself tolerates Judas, the devil, the thief who 
 sold Him ; He suffers him to partake with the inno- 
 cent disciples of that which the faithful know to be 
 
 1 Cf. Tract. 62 in S. Joann., Senn. Ixxi. ; Ep. ^ ; alias 162, 
 sect. 23 ; de Bapt. contr. Dunat. v. 9. 
 - In Ps. xxxix ; Enar. and de Tobia, xiv. 
 s Rp. 43, sect. 23. 
 
The First Exhortation. 191 
 
 their Ransom " ; but S. Hilary ^ was very decidedly 
 against it, asserting that he was not present because 
 he was unworthy of the Eternal Sacrament. At the 
 Reformation opinions were again divided, and at the 
 final revision of the Prayer-book the majority op- 
 posed Bishop Wren, who wished to add " after the 
 sop," to indicate that the entrance of Satan was not 
 consequent on the reception of the Sacrament. 
 
 There is unquestionably some ambiguity in the Ambiguity 
 Gospel narrative. SS. Matthew and Mark and ^he doubt°fui 
 John clearly imply that Judas had left the Upper 
 Room before the Institution : while S. Luke's ac- Gospels, 
 count suggests at least that his departure did not 
 take place till after it. If in this uncertainty Ave 
 are free to exercise our own judgment, it must be 
 pronounced adverse to the statement in this Exhor- 
 tation. The very instinct of reverence forbids us to 
 think that Christ could tolerate the traitor's presence 
 in that Feast of love and union ; and besides this, it 
 would seem to be morally impossible that Judas 
 could himself remain after his terrible guilt had 
 been discovered. 
 
 (3) On the third question the Exhortation gives Private 
 a key to the true position of Private Confession in since'^the" 
 the Anglican Church : " because it is requisite that 
 no man should come to the Holy Communion but 
 with a full trust in God's mercy, and with a quiet 
 1 Comm. in Maith. c. xxx. 
 
192 The First Exhortation. 
 
 conscience ; therefore if there be any of you who by 
 this means cannot quiet his conscience ... let him 
 come to me . . . and open his grief; that ... he 
 may receive the benefit of Absolution." It shows 
 that it is no longer, as before the Reformation, com- 
 pulsory, but left entirely to the will and discretion 
 of the penitent. It was made even clearer in the 
 first Prayer-book, when the above clause was fol- 
 lowed by a warning unhappily removed in the 
 second : " requiring such as shall be satisfied with a 
 General Confession, not to be offended with them 
 that do use, to their further satisfying, the Auricular 
 and secret Confession to the Priest ; nor those also 
 which think needful or convenient, for the quietness 
 of their own consciences, particularly to open their 
 sins to the Priest, to be ofifended with them that are 
 satisfied with their humble confession to God . . . 
 but in all things to foUow and to keep the rule of 
 charity," etc. 
 
 The principle of private Confession has un- 
 doubtedly been preserved to usj but it has been 
 maintained that no sanction is extended to anything 
 like frequent or habitual Confession. The Reformers 
 actually hoped that the introduction of forms of 
 Confession and Absolution into the public Offices 
 Withdrawal would render it unnecessary, but their directions 
 °ion°i7the ^^ere not framed to exclude it. All they did was to 
 matter. ppovide that private Confession should in no case be 
 
The First ExJiortation. 1 93 
 
 enforced; it was left to a man's own conscience 
 whether he would use it or not ; and this surely 
 gives us as wide a latitude as can possibly be needed. 
 Cases occur where, in the awful dread of sin and its 
 consequences, men shrink from denying themselves 
 any help within their reach, and if they have found 
 it greater in private than in public Confession, it 
 may easily be perceived that their conscience would 
 give them no rest, if they did not seek again and 
 again that which they had found by a happy ex- 
 perience to be most helpful. 
 
 Let it be our earnest endeavour in preparing for 
 Holy Communion, to make our Confession, whether 
 private or public, intensely real, keeping nothing 
 back, and urging nothing in extenuation, because 
 God, Who is the Judge of our penitence, is merciful, 
 and will make allowance for everything that can be 
 interpreted in our favour without our telling Him. 
 Then, having confessed our sins, let us rise satisfied 
 that the word of forgiveness will be ratified in 
 Heaven, and let us receive the Bread of Life, and 
 the Cup of Immortality, in the strength and power 
 of which Christ has assured us we shall survive the 
 dissolution of our mortal nature, and rise from the 
 grave for an unending eternity. 
 
 N 
 
XXIV. 
 
 This Exhortation was composed by Peter Martyr 
 for the second Prayer-book. A rubric ordered it to 
 be used " when the Curate shall see the people negli- 
 gent to come to the Holy Communion "; and another 
 rubric, appended to the OfiBce at the same revision, 
 enjoined that " every parishioner shall communicate 
 at the least three times in the year." These two 
 No reference rubrics wheil read together point to the fact, which 
 who wire""'" may be proved also on other grounds, that the 
 ^"t'p^'tak- language was directed not against those who only 
 '"s- communicated rarely (for the Church held that this 
 
 limited number of Communions fulfilled the Christian 
 obligation) but against those who neglected to com- 
 municate altogether. In the original form of the 
 Exhortation they were denounced as sorely offending 
 God in refusing this Holy Banquet, and as adding 
 to that unkindness, if they stood by " as gazers and 
 lookers on them that do communicate " ; and yet 
 further, they were entreated, rather than despise and 
 mock the testimony of Christ, to " depart and give 
 
 194 
 
The Second Exhortation. 195 
 
 place to them that be godly disposed." The custom 
 of " all sorts of persons " remaining to assist at 
 the Celebration, which had prevailed through the 
 middle ages, still lingered on, and this was an 
 attempt to fence the Mysteries from the irreverent 
 intrusion of ungodly men. It did not touch in any 
 way the presence of pious and devout people. 
 
 At the last revision, it is true, the above passages Participation 
 
 . . the object to 
 
 were Withdrawn ; and it stands now as an m vita- set before aii. 
 tion "to all that be present" to communicate. The 
 Church is right to encourage all her members to 
 avail themselves of the highest privilege, which is 
 unquestionably actual participation ; but she no- 
 where even hints that, if they fall short of this, 
 there is nothing to be gained. It is her duty, as 
 well as her wisdom and love, to try to rouse the 
 people to the primitive conception of the Ordinance. 
 In the zeal and fervour of the earliest generations, 
 before the infusion of lukewarm converts after per- 
 secutions ceased had cooled the first enthusiasm, 
 Christians never dreamt of being satisfied with any 
 lower standard. The Food of Immortality was 
 provided for them, and as often as it was placed 
 within their reach, they stretched forth their hands 
 to receive it. 
 
 The Sacrificial aspect, again, under which it was 
 chiefly regarded, was the Paschal. Now it was in- 
 cumbent upon all, who took part in the Passover 
 
196 The Second Exhortaiion. 
 
 The Passover to partake of the Lamb ; and so we find a frequent 
 rikenofby reference to eating in connexion with this Ordi- 
 thejews. nance: "Take, eat, This is My Body;" "as often 
 as ye eat ; " " Christ, our Passover, is sacrificed 
 for us, therefore let us keep the feast " — that is, 
 let us eat of the Body of the Victim. With 
 this in view the early Fathers dwelt invariably 
 upon the reception of the Sacrament. S. Atha- 
 nase ^ implied that it was only those who were 
 actually fed by the Body and Blood of Christ that 
 could be said to keep the Passover properly. From 
 some incidental allusions to persons who were 
 allowed to be present but not receive, as being 
 " without oblation," or " not partaking of the obla- 
 tion," ^ it has been inferred that " unless we partake 
 we do not offer," ^ and therefore have no part in the 
 Commemorative Sacrifice. But " oblation " liturgi- 
 cally refers to several acts ; and it is probable that 
 the specific act here referred to was the offering of 
 the elements for the Celebration, made by the com- 
 municants. If they were prohibited from reception 
 they had no part in the presentation of the bread 
 and wine. It is quite impossible to believe that 
 they were excluded from all share in the Commemo- 
 rative Oblation of Christ's Body and Blood. The 
 
 1 Pest. Jipp. iv. 
 
 - Co. of Ancyra, Cairn, iv. v. vi. viii. ; Co. of Nicae-i, Can. xi. ; 
 S. Bas. Ep. ad AmjMl. Ivi. 
 
 2 Cf. Scud. Not. Euch. 443. 
 
The Second Exhortation. 197 
 
 Holy Eucharist in its sacrificial character is many- xhe Eucha. 
 sided. Just as Christ's Sacrifice was the gathering- J^y Ij^'^^rie'ly 
 up and consummation of all the diff"erent typical of sacrifices, 
 sacrifices of the Old Dispensation, so that which re- 
 presents it in the New is equally varied and manifold. 
 It looks broadly to three classes of sacrifice, of which 
 the leading examples were the Burnt-off'ering, the 
 Sin-offering, and the Peace-ofiTeriug, denoting sever- 
 ally self-dedication, expiation of sin, and thanks- 
 giving. Now, inasmuch as the Jews of old took 
 part in the two former without partaking of the 
 victim, so the Christian may join in the Commemor- 
 ative Oblation of these without communicating. We 
 must remember that the burnt-offering was to the 
 Jew emphatically the offering of worship, the symbol 
 of that abject adoration which is due from the 
 creature to the Creator, not for anything that He 
 gives us, but for Himself alone ; and the Church re- 
 minds us of the continuance of this conception most 
 forcibly in the Prayer of Oblation : " Here we offer 
 and present ourselves, our souls and bodies, to be a 
 reasonable, holy, and living sacrifice to Thee." To 
 deny to the Christian, therefore, any share in the 
 benefits of the Sacrifice without actually COmmUni- xhe earliest 
 eating, is to ignore the raanifoldness of the Holy commu°nicai 
 Eucharist, and to allow one aspect of it completely '"^ attend- 
 to overshadow the rest. 
 
 Historically the first departure from primitive 
 
198 The Second Exhoi'tation. 
 
 practice, of which we have any certain information, 
 was the permission to a certain class of Penitents to 
 be present without receiving. It has been hastily 
 assumed that, as they were undergoing penance, this 
 was not ordained by way of privilege but of depri- 
 vation. A careful consideration, however, of the 
 whole course of Penitential Discipline, points to an 
 opposite conclusion. After the third century there 
 were certain well-defined " stations " through which 
 Penitents passed progressively to the full restitution 
 of their forfeited rights. (1.) As " mourners " they 
 were forbidden to cross the threshold of a Church, 
 but placed themselves at the approaches to it, and 
 besought the intercessions of those who entered. 
 (2.) As " hearers " they were admitted to the 
 narthex or porch, and permitted to hear the Scrip- 
 tures read and expounded. (3.) As " prostrates " 
 they mingled with the catechumens and enjoyed 
 their privilege of joining in that part which was 
 called " the Catechumen's Mass." (4.) As " bye- 
 A privilege stauders " they were granted the further privilege 
 faTt'stagrof of sitting with "the faithful," and remaining 
 Penance. throughout the whole Ofiice, but making no offer- 
 ing in money or kind, and not communicating. If 
 the early Church held that there was no advantage 
 to be gained from being present without receiving, 
 her conduct, in conceding this permission to Peni- 
 tents, is wholly unintelligible. It must have been 
 
The Second Exhortation. 199 
 
 from a belief that there was a subordinate benefit, 
 some blessing inferior to that derived from actual 
 participation, that she consented to grant such a 
 privilege to those who were on the verge of restitu- 
 tion to full Communion. 
 
 Csesarius, the author of the well-kuoAvn Rule, felt 
 so strongly the propriety of remaining till after the 
 Consecration, that he imjiressed it upon his congre- ^,,^^^5, 
 gations by ordering the doors of the Church to be <3aui. 
 locked to prevent their departure. Two Gallican 
 Councils at the beginning of the sixth century 
 indorsed the principle. That of Agde, in the Nar- -06 a.d. 
 bonne, enjoined that the laity should not attempt 
 to leave before the Bishop's Blessing,^ which fol- 
 lowed the Lord's Prayer after the Act of Consecra- 
 tion, at all Sunday Celebrations ; and the Council ^^^j 
 of Orleans provided that, if there were no Bishop 
 present, they might depart without it at the same 
 point of the Service. 
 
 At the Reformation " hearing " Mass had so 
 generally superseded participation, that the revisers 
 set themselves to correct the practice and restore 
 the primary object of the Ordinance ; but even in 
 the violent reaction that took place, we fail to dis- 
 cover any trace of the prohibition of non-communi- 
 cating attendance. It had usurped the foremost 
 place, and it was necessary to dislodge it from this ; 
 
 1 Can. xlvii. 
 
200 The Second Exhortatioji. 
 
 but it had claims to a subordinate office, and these 
 Nowhere were not interfered with. The first Prayer-book 
 the Reformed ^^^6 all who Were not intending to communicate to 
 Offices. « depart out of the Quire." ^ It implied the presence 
 in other parts of the Church of non-communicants, 
 and only provided that the chief place should be 
 left free for the undisturbed Communion of those 
 who wished to receive. The second Prayer-book, 
 in which there was a strong denunciation of the 
 presence of the ungodly,- directed that the com- 
 municants should make their " humble confession 
 to Almighty God before this congregation here 
 gathered together," that is, possibly before others 
 than themselves. 
 
 But the general bar to withdrawal is the entire 
 absence of any order for it in all the Eeformed 
 Services. There is absolutely no law, canon, or 
 rubric, either in the Ecclesiastical Code or the 
 Prayer-book, which lends to it the least sanction. 
 
 1 The congregation went into the Quire to place their alms in 
 the poor man's box near the altar. 
 
 - It is often assumed that it was intended to exclude all who did 
 not communicate ; but that this was not so is clear from a recom- 
 mendation of the Lower House of Convocation ten years after: 
 "That no person abide within the church during the time of Com- 
 munion unless he do communicate," which was not accepted by 
 the Ui>per House. Strype Ann., vol. i. p. i. 508. In a Synod 
 at Ipswich in 1639 a.d., the Bishop arranged for the celebration, 
 and ordered that no non-communicant should go into the church. 
 Such an order would have been unnecessary on the common sup- 
 position. Prynne's Trial of Laud, p. 100 ; Stephen's Com. Pr. 
 ii. 1173. 
 
The Second Exhortation. 201 
 
 In the primitive and mediaval Church, where it 
 was enjoined upon certain classes, due provision was 
 made. A definite time was fixed, and the Deacon no rubrical 
 proclaimed it in the congregation : " Catechumens, church'iaw 
 depart in peace ; " " Penitents, stand in your places "'^^^'"^^^i 
 for dismissal." It is a mere arbitrary practice, aris- 
 ing out of individual caprice, and wholly unauthor- 
 ised, that people should depart out of the Church at 
 any given point — e.q. after the Sermon or the Prayer 
 for the Church Militant. It violates the principle 
 of obedience to rubrical order, which is the only 
 safeguard for the maintenance of an authorised 
 worship. 
 
 If it be argued that it is incumbent upon us to 
 revert to primitive practice, and that the history of 
 the first few centuries lends no countenance to the 
 practice we are considering, our answer is that we 
 would gladly revive the primitive rule whole and 
 entire. The early Church would accept nothing 
 short of the highest standard. She had the advan- 
 tage of a strict system of discipline, and could bend 
 the people to her will. The Church of to-day has impossible to 
 lost that discipline ; and it would be idle to attempt p^rrai^e 
 to enforce where she is powerless to punish. Her 
 Ministers hold it to be a paramount duty to put 
 before her children the incomparable blessings of 
 regular participation ; but in the consciousness that 
 it is only the few who are capable of rising to this 
 
202 The Second Exhortation. 
 
 high ideal, they bid the rest acce^jt the lesser obliga- 
 tion, and invite to inferior blessings those who are 
 equally the Church's charge with the most saintly 
 and devout. 
 
 Objects to be Here are some of the praiseworthy objects which 
 may be kept in view by the faithful at those Cele- 
 brations when they do not communicate : — 
 
 Worship. (1.) Worship : If Christ be really present, what- 
 ever the nature of Hia Eucharistic Presence may be 
 — " If," as Jeremy Taylor said, " He be present to 
 us not in mystery only, but in blessing also — why do 
 we not worship % " It must surely be easier, if we 
 can divest ourselves of prejudice, to pay to Him 
 the honour that is due unto His Name, Avhen we 
 see before our eyes the appointed emblems of His 
 Body and Blood. 
 
 Intercession. (2.) Intercession : If the Eucharist be the counter- 
 part on earth of Christ's pleading in heaven — if, as 
 the same writer has said, it be " the most powerful 
 impetration in the world " — then our own imperfect 
 prayers must gather force from their union M'ith the 
 all-prevailing Intercession of the great High Priest, 
 by which His Sacrifice is made " salutary and effec- 
 tual to all the needs of the Church, both for things 
 temporal and eternal." 
 
 Preparation. (3.) Greater preparedness for participation : If 
 the service be made in idea and intention both 
 retrospective and prospective ; if, e.g., the thanks- 
 
The Second Exhortation. 203 
 
 giving be used for our previous Communion, the 
 Confession, Exhortation, and other parts for the 
 next, the effect of the Blessed Sacrament will be 
 made more lasting, and our life be more fully per- 
 vaded by its sanctifying influence. 
 
XXV. 
 
 '2Ct)e (tjclfmatim at tte Celebration. 
 
 The teacliiug of this Exhortation is in the main a 
 rejDetition of that of the first — viz., the great need of 
 preparation, and the mystery of the Divine Presence. 
 Variation In the first Prayer-book it contained the warning, 
 firX Prayer- "If ^^J l^^re be a blasphemer, adulterer, or be in 
 malice or envy, or in any other grievous crime . . . 
 let him bewail his sins, and not come to that Holy 
 Table." It was found to be practically useless, as 
 no one would be likely to publish his guilt by rising 
 and leaving the Church in answer to the appeal. 
 At the last revision therefore it was transferred to 
 the Exhortation which is directed to be read on the 
 Sunday or Holy-day preceding the Celebration, when 
 it might be acted upon without the certainty of 
 detection. 
 
 Now there are three subjects in this Exhortation 
 which claim our special attention. Firstly, there is 
 the value of self-examination. " S. Paul exhorteth all 
 
 The duty of persous diligently to try and examine themselves." 
 
 ati'orl'^''"" ' Since the withdrawal of compulsory Confession before 
 
 204 
 
The ExJiortation at the Celebration. 205 
 
 Holy Communion, we have need to be reminded of 
 its necessity; and forms of self-examination are 
 introduced into all manuals for the use of com- 
 municants. There is a natural tendency in the 
 exercise of this to dwell with satisfaction upon the 
 commandments which we have kept, and to pass 
 with too little care over those that we have broken, 
 so that we must keep constantly before us the pro- 
 phet's declaration that "the heart is deceitful above 
 all things." It will help to secure the true object 
 of self-examination to write down results, and to 
 reconsider them from time to time, for often closer 
 inspection alters the whole complexion of our actions. 
 Further, it must be carried out fearlessly. A great 
 spiritual writer has said that " the first requisite for 
 a soul striving after holiness is courage, and the 
 second is courage, and the third is courage and we 
 may add to this that a man never needs courage 
 more than when he is confronted by his own sinful 
 self. 
 
 The second subject is the manner of Christ's Pre- 
 sence in the Sacrament : " Then we spiritually eat xh 
 the Flesh of Christ and drink His Blood." Now it ; ' 
 is very necessary to vindicate the interpretation of 
 this term " spiritual " from the grievous perversions 
 associated with it. According to the Catholic usage 
 of the term it is consistent with the highest teaching 
 on the Real Presence,but as misconstrued by men who 
 
2o6 The Exhortation at the Celebration. 
 
 depreciate Sacramental Grace, it takes this wholly 
 away, or else depresses it to the lowest degree. 
 With them a Spiritual Presence is something so 
 vague and shadowy that it does not exist in fact but 
 in fancy, not in reality but in effect, not at all in 
 the Elements, but only in those who receive them 
 in faith. The bread and wine are but means to 
 quicken our apprehension, and so to open the door 
 of the heart that Christ may enter in and take pos- 
 session of it. The high authority of Hooker has 
 Hooker s been most unfairly claimed for this uncatholic view.^ 
 misunder- Hc says, it is true, " The Real Presence of Christ's 
 Most Blessed Body and Blood is not to be sought 
 for in the Sacrament, but in the worthy receiver of 
 the Sacrament" ; but he said it when he was weary 
 of " the fierce contentions, whether by Consubstan- 
 tiation or else by Transubstantiation, the Sacrament 
 itself be first possessed with Christ or no." He 
 bade the people not to be seeking for the Presence, 
 not to trouble themselves about the antecedent steps, 
 but to be satisfied that they did receive it. If he 
 held what is regarded as the subjective view, he was 
 most inconsistent when he wrote: "This Bread 
 hath in it more than the substance which our e3'es 
 behold." 
 
 But what is the teaching of the Formularies of 
 the Church] In the first issue of the Articles of 
 > Ecd. Pol. V. Ixvii. § 6. Read especially § 12. 
 
The ExJwrlation at the Celebration. 207 
 
 Eeligion, in 1553, Avhen Protestant opinion was at 
 its height, the article on the Lord's Supper was Article 
 couched in language which directly traversed all 
 belief in a Eeal Presence of Christ's Body. After 
 rejecting Transubstantiation it went on, " Forasmuch 
 as the truth of man's nature requireth that the body 
 of one and the selfsame man cannot be at one time 
 in diverse places, but must needs be in some one 
 certain place : therefore the Body of Christ cannot 
 be present at one time in many and diverse places." 
 This was interpreted as rejecting the Catholic view, 
 for when it was altered to the present form, ten 
 years later, the Swiss party ^ expressed the strongest 
 dissatisfaction at the change ; " The Article," they 
 said, " composed in the time of Edward VI., respect- 
 ing the spiritual eating, vilwli expressly oppugned and 
 took away the Beal Presence in the Eucharist, and con- 
 tained a most clear explanation of the truth, is now 
 set forth among us mutilated and imperfect." Thus 
 it is clear that in their eyes " spiritual " eating was 
 independent of any Real Presence of Christ's Body. 
 
 In 1563 the whole clause was struck out by 
 Bishop Guest, who substituted for it the present 
 paragraph : " The Body of Christ is given, taken, ^^^^ 
 and eaten in the Supper only after an heavenly and '"'p^''''' 
 spiritual manner," etc. The change was conceived meaning. 
 
 1 Cf. Lett, from Hiimphruy and Sampson to Bullinger, July 15fi6. 
 Zurich Lett. i. 165. 
 
2o8 The Exhortation at the Celebration. 
 
 in a Catholic spirit, but the insertion of the word 
 " only " was thought by Bishop Cheney and others 
 to disparage the doctrine of the Eeal Presence, and 
 he asked the reviser of the Article for an explanation. 
 His answer has fortunately been preserved.^ In 
 justification of the expression, he assures him that 
 it " does not exclude the Presence of Christ's Body 
 from the Sacrament, but only the grossness and sen- 
 sibleness in the receiving thereof"; and again he 
 writes : ^ " When Christ's Body is taken and eaten, 
 It is neither seen, felt, nor tasted to be His Body : 
 It is taken after a heavenly and spiritual, and no 
 sensible manner." We have, then, the highest 
 authority for asserting that the Presence of Christ's 
 Body in the Sacrament is not one whit less Real 
 because it is spoken of as Spiritual. All that is 
 denied by the term is that it is gross, carnal, or 
 material. It is as really and truly His Body, as 
 that which His disciples saw and handled in His 
 earthly Life ; the only difference is that It is pre- 
 sent, whether on the Altar or in the hands and 
 mouth of the recipient, under the laws which govern 
 spiritual existence, of which, so long as we are in 
 the flesh, we cannot be cognisant. It is on these 
 
 1 This Letter to Cecil, dated Dec. 22, 1566, has been fouud 
 among the State Papers. 
 
 - Also to Cecil in May 1571, i.e. after the last issue of the 
 Articles. Hardw. Eist, pp. 130, 1.38, 312. Perry's Ded. of 
 Kneeling, 193. 
 
The Exhortation at the Celebration. 209 
 
 grounds that the Anglican Church has ever been 
 content to assert tlie fact without attempting to 
 define the mode of the Presence in the Sacrament. 
 
 S. Paul said " there is a natural body and there is 
 a spiritual body." That which we now have is the 
 natural, that which we shall have after the Eesur- 
 rection is the spiritual ; but the latter is not, any 
 more than the former, unreal or figurative. Our 
 Blessed Lord, in speaking of the Eucharistic Food, 
 said to His disciples,"it is the Spirit tliat quickeneth"; 
 He meant that the source of the life, which He 
 offered them, was His Spiritual Body, to be present 
 in the Sacrament He purposed to ordain, by the 
 power of the Eternal Spirit, which should receive 
 of Him and show it unto them. 
 
 The third subject is the goodness of Christ in 
 giving us "pledges" of this spiritual gift: "HeH^,p^ 
 hath instituted and ordained holy Mysteries as ''^•^.''5'= 
 pledges of His love." Because His Presence is cm.' " 
 invisible, we find it hard to realise. We crave for 
 something tangible, something for the eye to see 
 something to help us to grasp the possibility. With- 
 out these or similar pledges we should have been 
 casting about, now in one direction, now in another 
 hoping all the time to find Him, but not knowing 
 for certain where. Our Lord, in His condescension 
 to human infirmity, has removed all such doubtful- • 
 ness ; " as often," He seems to say, " as ye do this as 
 
2IO The Exhortatio7i at the Celebration. 
 
 often, that is, as ye celebrate these Mysteries, conse- 
 crate, and receive this bread and wine — ye do then 
 and there receive simultaneously the Spiritual Food 
 by which your souls shall live." 
 
 They are " pledges of His love," and " for a con- 
 tinual remembrance of His Death"; as guilty and 
 dying creatures, therefore, realising herein that it 
 was through the one that He gave Himself as a 
 propitiation for our sins, and through the other that 
 we obtain the gift of eternal life, " let us give (as 
 we are most bounden) continual thanks, submitting 
 ourselves wholly to His holy will and pleasure, and 
 studying to serve Him in true holiness and righteous- 
 ness " all our days. 
 
XXVI. 
 
 '(irije 3Ini)i'tati'oiu 
 
 " Ye that do truly and earnestly repent . . . draw near with failh," etc. 
 
 In the early ages, when religious feeling was Primitive 
 deeper, and communicants lived, or tried to live, in thrHdy 
 a spirit of more real devotion to their Master, less "^^y""'" 
 stress was laid upon the need of preparation for 
 admission to the Divine Mysteries. Even then, 
 however, the Church was careful to fence the Sacra- 
 ment from an irreverent approach, and at the last 
 moment, when all things were ready, the Deacon 
 stood forth and reminded the worshippers that none 
 should draw near without having on the wedding 
 garment : " Draw near with godly fear, with faith 
 and charity." i In these later days, when the love 
 of many has grown cold, and the awe that filled 
 the first generations has diminished, the Church has 
 taken care to provide that every encouragement 
 should be given to men to realise that the benefits 
 of reception depend very largely upon themselves. 
 The pre requisites for full participation thereof are 
 ' Prim. Litt. 
 
 211 
 
2 1 2 The Invitation. 
 
 repentance, love, and faith, and no strand in this 
 threefold cord may be broken. 
 The reality In this Preparation reality is the first note that is 
 
 of the act of . . ... 
 
 Preparation, struck, and it is struck with decision : " Ye that do 
 truly and earnestly repent." All our spiritual acts 
 are beset with temptations to insincerity and vague- 
 ness ; self-examination is hurried over superficially ; 
 sins are confessed with the lips, acknowledged before 
 God with none of that shame and deep distress that 
 we should feel if we had but to whisper them into the 
 ears of a man; and the Confession of sins is followed 
 by too little of that resolve to put them entirely away 
 from us. This is not " true " repentance. When the 
 Jew had sinned, and looked for propitiation in the 
 sin-offering of the Law, he not only confessed ^ his 
 sins, but by a symbolical act of the utmost signi- 
 ficance got rid of them for ever.^ The transgressor 
 How pro- ■^^'as bidden to transfer his sins to the head of the 
 vided lor in vigtiuj which was to be sacrificed as his substitute : 
 
 the typical ' ' 
 
 sacrifice. and iu the ceremony of laying on of his hands, it 
 was enjoined that he should do it " with all his might 
 and force," lest he should unwittingly leave any 
 behind. 
 
 What he did is just that to which this Exhortation 
 invites the Communicant, if he would appropriate to 
 himself that remission of sins and the other benefits 
 
 1 Lev. V. 5. Num. v. 6, 7. Cf. Maimouides in Maas. Korb. c. 3. 
 
 2 Lev. iv. 4, 15, 24, 29. 
 
The Invitation. 213 
 
 of the Passion of Him Who died as the antitype of 
 of all those offerings, for the very purpose of bearing 
 our iniquities, and so bearing as to take them away. 
 The qualification for the one and the other is the 
 same, only the sincerity of the Christian must be 
 truer and deeper, inasmuch as he belongs to a more 
 spiritual dispensation. 
 
 The second requisite is Love. In a feast of union, 
 where all assemble in the bond of Christian brother- 
 hood as " partakers of that one Bread," there is 
 no place for hatred or discord. It was provided 
 against, all through the earlier ages, by " the Kiss 
 of Peace," which was an essential feature of every j'^^^"^ 
 primitive Liturgy. In not a few of the Liturgies it ism. 
 occupied a place analogous to that of this Invitation, 
 following the dismissal of the non-communicants, 
 and before the commencement of the more sacred 
 portion of the Office.^ S. Cyril,^ in his exposition 
 of the Mysteries, describes it as " the sign that our 
 souls are mingled together, and have banished all 
 remembrance of revenge " ; and it was frequently 
 preceded by a special prayer that God would cleanse 
 our hearts from all hatred and deceit, and all mortal 
 recollection of injuries. The Kiss was a mark of the 
 fulfilment of our Lord's command, " If thou bring 
 
 1 In the West it follows the Consecration. Cf. Renaudot, ii. 
 p. 30, 76, 134. 
 
 2 Myst. V. 3. 
 
2 14 The Invitation. 
 
 thy gift to the Altar, and there rememberest that 
 thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there 
 thy gift before the Altar, and go thy way ; first be 
 reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer 
 thy gift." 
 
 The Pax- When, through the change of habits and the 
 st?tuted. decline of Christian simplicity, the ceremony was 
 abused, the idea was preserved by a modified use of 
 the symbolical act. A tablet, called the Pax-bred,^ 
 after being kissed by the Celebrant, was passed round 
 for the communicants to kiss. It was thought that 
 the fact of all uniting to kiss one and the same 
 object would serve to express the existence of a 
 mutual love. It is no slight satire on the Church 
 that what was intended to be a sign of Christian 
 love was made an occasion of envy and discord, 
 through contentions for precedence, and was in con- 
 sequence discontinued.^ 
 
 The symbol has been taken away, but that which 
 it symbolised remains among the most stringent 
 obligations ; and all who shall ever claim to take part 
 in this Sacrament of God's great love, must purify 
 their hearts from every disqualification of malice or 
 hatred, envy or discord. 
 The iieces- The third requisite is Faith, for the intention of 
 Fllth7 leading a new life, spoken of in the Invitation, is 
 
 ' The first mention of its use in England is at a Council at York, 
 1250 A. D. = Le Brun, i. 292. 
 
The Invitation. 2 1 5 
 
 only a part of the first qualification, seeing that there 
 can be no true repentance without a resolution of 
 amendment. It is provided that no one shall be 
 admitted to the great Mysteries of Christian worship 
 without accepting the doctrines of Christianity, by 
 the recitation of the Creed in the Introductory Office. 
 In the primitive Church, where discipline was strictly 
 exercised, the necessity of such a public profession 
 was not felt, and the introduction of a Formula of 
 Belief into the Liturgy was unknown till the close 
 of the fifth century.^ The Nicene Creed has, how- 
 ever, long held its position in the Service, and it 
 demands of all a clear belief in God the Father, Who 
 created us, in God the Son, Who became incarnate, 
 and in God the Holy Ghost, Who quickens the lives 
 of men, mainly through the ordinances of the 
 Church.^ The communicant is more especially 
 required to have faith in the Second Person, 
 because the Service is "the Memorial" of His 
 Passion, and the means by which its benefits are 
 extended to and appropriated by each individual. 
 He needs faith in the Incarnation, because the union e^peciaii- 
 of the Divine and human natures in the one Person of If^^'^^j' 
 Jesus Christ is a mystery which surpasses finite Passion, 
 comprehension ; it admits of no explanation, but in 
 so far as it is the key to the efficacy of the Atone- 
 ment, Avhich is here commemorated, it demands his 
 
 1 Cf. supra, p. 118. 2 P. 139. 
 
2 1 6 The Invitation. 
 
 to realise acceptance on the ground of Eevelation. He needs 
 Pres^i'ce"^ faith again, because, though he is told that he 
 Eiemems I'sccives nothing less than the Body and Blood of 
 Jesus Christ, the Divine Presence is hidden, and 
 inscrutably shrouded from every bodily sense. All 
 is incomprehensible to him, above man's reason to 
 grasp. His eyes behold common bread, his hands 
 handle nothing extraordinary ; and yet, beneath the 
 veil of these material things, unless the Apostles 
 were deceived and sixty generations of saints and 
 holy men have believed what is false, he does 
 verily and indeed receive into his being Christ 
 Himself 
 
 The Church, then, does well to bid us, as her last 
 Word of Exhortation, to " draw near with faith"; and 
 at her bidding we will take the very shoes from off 
 our feet in awe of the Mystery, praying ever " Lord, 
 I believe, help Thou mine unbelief" ; and then, in 
 answer to our prayer, He will enable us to realise 
 the truth of His declaration, " All things are possible 
 to him that believeth." 
 
XXVII. 
 
 'Elie (Benecal Confc00ion. 
 
 ' Then shall this general Confession be made, in the name of all those that 
 are minded to receive the Holy Communion by one of the ministers, 
 both he and all the people kneeling," etc. 
 
 Though a Christian instinct seems to prompt the 
 desire to confess our sins, that we may be cleansed 
 from an evil conscience before we presume to go 
 into the Presence of God, yet, in the early Liturgies, 
 perhaps with a single exception, no form of public The absence 
 Confession was ever introduced. It seems to have sions in the 
 been provided for at Matins in the East, for S. l^^^^ 
 Basil records that the people of Neo-Csesarea were 
 wont " to seek the house of prayer at early dawn 
 and, after confessing with sighs and tears to God, 
 to rise and pass on to Psalmody " ; ^ and he states 
 that the practice was general in other Churches. 
 This only enhances our wonder that it should have 
 been wanting in the highest Service of all. It is 
 true that Confession was sometimes made in the 
 Celebration by the priest, but it was private, and at 
 ' £p. 63, ad iXeo- Cuesar. 
 
 217 
 
2 1 8 The General Confession. 
 
 first said secretly ; it was in no sense representative 
 in the name of the people. " The Confession of the 
 Priest" became in the middle ages an integral 
 portion of the Service, said either in the Sacristy, 
 The Priest s or at the Altar. In the Sarum Missal, as soon 
 as the Preparatory Office was ended, the Celebrant 
 with his ministers was directed to approach the 
 Altar-step and say the Confession as follows : " I 
 confess to God, Blessed Mary,"^ all Saints, and to 
 you, that I have sinned exceedingly in thought 
 word, and deed, of my fault : I pray, Holy Mary, 
 all Saints of God, and you to pray for me." To 
 this the ministers replied : " God Almighty have 
 mercy upon you and forgive you all your sins; 
 deliver you from evil ; confirm and strengthen you 
 in goodness; and bring you to everlasting life." 
 Then the Confession and Prayer were repeated, the 
 first by the ministers, the second by the Priest, the 
 whole concluding by the Priest's Absolution : " The 
 Almighty and Merciful Lord grant you pardon and 
 forgiveness of all your sins, space for true repentance, 
 amendment of life, and the grace and consolation of 
 the Holy Ghost." 
 
 No satisfactory suggestion has been made to ac- 
 
 1 Originally, Confession was maile only to God. The practice 
 of confessing to tlie Saints was introduced about the end of the 
 eleventh century, cf. Martene, lib. i. c. iv. art. xii. ord. 4, 5, 13, 
 16. The Roman form was authorised by the third Council of 
 Ravenna, 1314 a.d. 
 
The General Confession. 219 
 
 count for the absence of any confession by the people 
 in primitive times,^ but it is easy to explain its non- 
 introduction in mediseval Liturgies, at least in the 
 West. When Latin became a dead unspoken lan- 
 guage, but continued to be employed for Public Wor- 
 ship, a Form of Confession, which few could under- Reasons for 
 stand, would henceforward be of little practical use. ofConfession 
 It was no longer possible for the laity to take an [^iLu^fgie^ 
 intelligent part in the Service, though their presence 
 was encouraged as before. This was one reason 
 why there was no public Confession. 
 
 Again, when once the people had ceased to under- 
 stand the Service, actual participation of the Blessed 
 Sacrament became rare, and the rare occasions on 
 which the laity communicated were preceded by 
 private Confession, which was rigorously enjoined.^ 
 Obviously under these circumstances a public Form 
 would have but little force. 
 
 By the Eeformation both these rules were 
 changed; the laity demanded opportunities for the 
 exercise of their priesthood, which required that 
 the Mysteries should be celebrated in a language 
 that they could understand ; and the Church with- 
 
 > The fact of Confession before the Eucharist is nevertheless 
 spoken of in the Didache c. xiv., but it is unnoticed in Apost. 
 Constit. vii. 30. 
 
 2 Though practically enforced, the neglect of it was not 
 attended with pains and penalties till Pope Innocent III. pro- 
 mulgated his famous bull Omnis utriusqve sexus in 1215. 
 
2 20 The General Confession. 
 
 from which 
 they drew i 
 
 The false 
 teaching of 
 the Lutherai 
 Confession. 
 
 drew compulsory Confession to a Priest before 
 communicating. 
 
 The revisers of the Prayer-book did not intend 
 to stop private Confession, for they provided for its 
 exercise under certain circumstances, but, establish- 
 ing the principle that it should be forced upon no 
 one, they were obliged to furnish the means of 
 unburdening the conscience in the Public Services. 
 " The Consultation " of Hermann, published in Eng- 
 lish the year before the first revision was carried 
 out, furnished the basis of a Form. It is much 
 more diffuse than that which was put forth for the 
 revised Oflnce ; but the following extracts will serve 
 to show how far the revisers drew upon this foreign 
 source : " Almighty everlasting God, the Father of 
 our Lord Jesus Christ, the Maker of all things, the 
 Judge of all men, we acknowledge and we lament 
 . . . that we have transgressed Thy holy Command- 
 ments. . . . We are sorry for it with all our hearts, 
 and we desire pardon of Thee for all the things that 
 we have committed against Thee. . . . Have mercy 
 upon us, most Gentle Father, through Thy Son, our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, . . . that dying to sins daily, 
 more and more, we may serve and please Thee in a 
 new life, to the glory of Thy Name." 
 
 One sentence placed in the forefront of the 
 Lutheran Confession was discarded as doctrinally 
 uncatholic, and practically injurious; it was this: 
 
The General Confession. 221 
 
 "we acknowledge and we lament that we were 
 conceived and born in sins, and that therefore we 
 be prone to all evils, and abhor from all good things." 
 What " the faithful " are called to grieve over is not 
 original but actual sin. The guilt of that nature 
 which we received from Adam has been wiped out 
 in Baptism, and in preparation for the reception of 
 one Sacrament we must be very careful not to 
 ignore or depreciate the blessings of another, lest 
 we mar the proportions of Catholic doctrine. 
 
 Again, such a confession must prove harmful in 
 practice, for to bring into prominence the depravity 
 of our fallen nature, is to plead some justification or 
 extenuation of our sins, which robs the confession 
 at once of its true value. The language of the 
 really contrite penitent is altogether different : " we 
 have done amiss and are without excuse." 
 
 Now, the introduction of the Confession into the 
 Eucharistic Office, apart from other considerations, 
 has its advantages in drawing more closely together 
 the Christian and Jewish Sacrifice. We have 
 already noticed^ how the three ideas represented 
 respectively by the burnt-offering, the sin-offering, Confession in 
 and the peace-offering are embodied in the Holy ™ith thToid 
 Eucharist. In the Jewish sin-offering a verbal "'"■"'^enns- 
 confession of sins was absolutely necessary — "It 
 shall be, when he shall be guilty in one of these 
 
 1 Cf. miira., p. 197. 
 
222 The General Confession. 
 
 things, that he shall confess that he hath sinned in 
 that thing " ; ^ and this was the method according 
 to Jewish tradition : The living victim was placed so 
 that the offerer, with his face towards the west, might 
 place his two hands between his horns and confess 
 his sins over it ; and his confession was on this wise : 
 "I have sinned, I have done perversely, I have 
 rebelled, and done thus and thus ; but I return by 
 repentance before Thee, and let this be my expia- 
 tion." 2 
 
 It was enjoined that the transgressor, while con- 
 fessing his sins, should " lay on both his hands with 
 all his might and force." ^ This was a symbolical 
 provision for the genuineness of the Confession and 
 the determination to put away the sin for which an 
 offering was made. 
 
 When the Eucharist is viewed as commemo- 
 rating the one great propitiatory Sacrifice for 
 the sins of the world the value of the Confession 
 before the oblation of the Victim becomes apparent 
 at once. The appropriation to the individual of the 
 fruits of the Propitiation, through the ordained 
 means by which its efficacy is pleaded before God, 
 must depend in a great degree upon the genuineness 
 and the earnestness of his preparation. Let us try 
 
 1 Lev. V. 5; Num. v. 6, 7. 
 
 = Liglitloot's Tcmiu Sen: chap. viii. 
 
 = Cf. Tar-. Jouatli.ui, Lightf. ibid. ; Outiaiu's Sacrif. /)iss. i. 
 XV. § C ; Willi.^' Worsh. of the 0. Coi: ii. § 3. 
 
Tlie General Confession. 
 
 223 
 
 then to catch something of the intensity of desire 
 with which the penitent Israelite strove to put away 
 his sins, and make our confession as real as we can, 
 urging nothing in extenuation and concealing no- 
 thing, because on the one hand we have to do with 
 a Judge Who will make every allowance that mercy 
 can suggest, and because on the other hand, " all 
 things are naked and open unto the eyes of Him 
 with Whom we have to do." 
 
XXVIII. 
 
 SLb0olution, 
 
 " Then shall the Priest (or the Bishop, being present) stand up, and 
 turning himself to the people, pronounce this Absolution." 
 
 ^^^°^Jhe only The prerogative of pardou belongs of right to the 
 pardon. Sovereign. In the spiritual kingdom it resides in 
 God and God alone, but He has chosen to dispense 
 it both directly and mediately ; either by His Own 
 Hands or through a delegated Ministry. In the 
 Incarnation it was exercised by Jesus Christ, not 
 by virtue of the power that was inherent in Him 
 through His Godhead, but by delegation from the 
 Father to be made available for men through His 
 Humanity. It is His own assertion : " The Son of 
 Man liath power on earth to forgive sins." And 
 again, " All power is given unto Me." While Christ 
 was upon earth He alone executed the ministry of 
 reconciliation, but before the Ascension He com- 
 mitted it to others, to be continued to the end in 
 the Church, which is His Body, by His authority 
 
 The mystery 1 • tt- -\T " " j 
 
 of the dele- m His JName. This commission is a profound 
 gauon of the jjjygtgj.y_ and One which deepens the more closely 
 
The A bsolution. 225 
 
 we consider the time and circumstances under which 
 it was given. It strikes upon the ear like a voice 
 speaking to us out of the Eternity. It is the Voice 
 of the Eisen Lord on the very day of the Eesurrec- 
 tion, and it tells us how, in the kingdom which He 
 is setting up, the two worlds will be joined together, 
 so that the act of man shall concur with the act of 
 God, the absolution spoken over the penitent here 
 below be scaled and ratified in the courts of 
 Heaven. 
 
 Our Lord knew how difficult it would be for 
 those who heard Him to realise what He was about 
 to do, and in His great condescension made it easier The unique 
 to grasp by surrounding the commission with cir- acrwh'ch' 
 cumstances of unparalleled solemnity. " Then said ^'^'^"■"panied 
 
 T the gift. 
 
 Jesus unto them again, Peace be unto you: as My 
 Father hath sent Me, even so send I you. And 
 when He had said this. He breathed on them, and 
 saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost : whose- 
 soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them : 
 and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained." ^ 
 Why that act of breathing on them % There is 
 nothing like it in anything that He had done 
 before. He had given them power to preach, to 
 heal the sick, to cast out evil spirits from those 
 whom they possessed ; ^ but no " inbreathing " ac- 
 companied the gift. The reason was because they 
 ' S- John XX. 21-23. 2 g. Luke x. 9, 17, 19. 
 
226 The A bsohUion. 
 
 had no difficulty about receiving any of these com- 
 missions. Every one of them had been exercised by 
 men, and why not by themselves % But the forgive- 
 ness of sins — that was something altogether differ- 
 ent. The startled inquiry, " Who can forgive sins 
 but God only ? " ^ expressed the inborn conviction 
 of every Jew. No, that is impossible — we cannot 
 ever do that. Then came that marvellous aciion 
 which must have taken the Apostles back in thought 
 to the Creation in Paradise, when "God formed 
 The meaning niau of the dust of the grouud and Ireathed into his 
 breathing Dostrils the breath of life "; ^ for in that symbolical 
 into Adam. a,ct, as the Jcws believcd, God had given to Adam 
 a portion of the Divine Nature, nothing less than the 
 gift of the Holy Spirit.^ Even so, by a similar 
 action, never repeated since that first Creation, 
 Christ gave to them as it were a part of Himself, 
 enabling them to do as He had done, when amidst 
 the astonished Jews He said to the sick of the 
 palsy, " Thy sins be forgiven thee." 
 
 " Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted un- 
 to them." We see then how God has not reserved 
 in His Own Hands, has not intrusted even to Angels, 
 but has committed to mortal men the ministry of 
 reconciliation. There is no explaining it away ; 
 1 S. Mark ii. 7. 
 
 - Gen. ii. 7. The same Greek word, (i'e(pv<rr)ff(i>, is used in 
 the LX.K. 
 
 3 Bull, State of Man before the Fall, ii. 90. 
 
The Absolution. 227 
 
 twist and distort the words as cleverly as human xhe church 
 ingenuity can devise, we cannot escape the fact ; "^^^f^^ ^er 
 Christ did give to the Apostles power to grant ''^'■^f ^''^ 
 
 , . -rx- Commission. 
 
 pardon m His Name ; Christ did make them, and 
 those who should bear the commission after them, 
 channels and media for the conveyance of forgive- 
 ness ; and so, through eighteen centuries of chequered 
 history, the Church has never doubted that the 
 power was to be passed on — as long as man should 
 need the pardon. Even after the shock of the 
 Puritan assaults of the seventeenth century, and 
 with the full knowledge of the notorious abuses of 
 the absolving power in the middle ages fresh in her 
 memory, the Church of England deliberately retained 
 the ancient form, and with no stammering lips has 
 said to every Priest as he knelt for Ordination the 
 selfsame words: "Whose sins thou dost forgive, 
 they are forgiven ; and whose sins thou dost retain, 
 they are retained." 
 
 This absolving power lias been exercised by the 
 Church in a variety of ways. They have been 
 summarised by the masterly mind of Barrow as Bishop 
 follows :— Priests remit sins (i.) dispositivh, by work- fh"poTve"of 
 ing in persons fit dispositions, upon which re- ""^ 
 mission of sins, by God's promise, is consequent ; 
 (ii.) declarative, as the ambassadors of God, in His 
 Name pronouncing the word of reconciliation to the 
 penitent ; (iii.) impetrativh, obtaining pardon for sins 
 
2 28 The Absolution. 
 
 by their prayers . . . ; (iv.) dispmsativh, by con- 
 signing pardon in administration of the Sacraments 
 . . . and in the absolving of penitents. . . . ^ 
 
 Under the first head we should place the ordin- 
 ance of preaching ^ as the chief means for the attain- 
 Exercised mcnt of the end ; under the second, such forms of 
 oftly™^ absolution as are pronounced by the Priest in the 
 English Matins and Evensong. They are obviously 
 intended to convey pardon, for the Priest assumes 
 a posture of authority, rising from his knees and 
 standing as the representative of God, and he pre- 
 faces the declaration of forgiveness with a state- 
 ment that he has received from God the power to 
 do that which he forthwith proceeds to do. It was 
 clearly moreover the intention of the revisers of 
 the Prayer-book that the Absolution should be so 
 interpreted; otherwise the people would have had 
 nothing to compensate them, when habitual private 
 Confession, with its authoritative Form of Absolu- 
 tion, was discouraged. The fact, however, that 
 it was to be uttered in the hearing of a general 
 
 1 Expos, of the Creed, vol. vii. p. 365. Cf. also de polestate 
 Clavium, ix. -292-9, 304-8. He illustrates the 1st by S. Peter's 
 preaching, Acts ii. 37, 38 ; the 2iid by referring to 2 Cor. r. 19, 20 ; 
 the 3rd by S. James, v. 15 ; the 4th by the case of the incestuous 
 Corinthian, 1 Cor. v. 5, and other instances. 
 
 " The Protestant Reformers limited the commission to this. 
 Calvin, Instit. iv. xi. 1, Zwingle, Hist. Dom. Hester. Cf. Elwin, 
 Confes. andAhsol.. p. 266-7. 
 
The Absohition. 229 
 
 and mixed congregation, of whose qualifications for 
 pardon the Priest had no certain knowledge, com- 
 pelled them to modify the personal directness of the 
 language. The Absolution is sown broadcast before 
 all to become " an individualised pardon " wherever 
 the soil is fitted to receive it. The third method of 
 exercising " the power of the keys " mentioned was 
 by the prayer of the Priest.^ It has been asserted 
 that all the Forms of the early Church were pre- 
 catory.^ Undoubtedly those used in Public Service 
 were so expressed, as we see in the familiar Form 
 taken from the Sarum Use: "The Almighty and 
 Merciful Lord grant you pardon and forgiveness of 
 all your sins, space for true repentance, amendment 
 of life, and the grace and consolation of the Holy 
 Spirit." Such too is the Liturgical Absolution 
 introduced into the first Prayer-book, and still 
 used in our present Ofiice. Not only is the tone 
 of it that of supplication, but the final clause, " and 
 bring you to everlasting life," fixes its supplicatory 
 character. 
 
 There is no doubt that the revisers intended, 
 
 1 S. Jerome in Psalm, xxviii. calls the absolution "the prayer 
 of a priest." The absolving priest is called by S. Leo a suppliant 
 with God, "precator." Epist. 168. 
 
 " Morinus <le pa:nit. viii. 2, xiii. 8, maintains tliat there was 
 no other form till the 1.3th century ; but S. Thorn. Aquiu. Opusc. 
 xxii. speaks of the indicative form as though it had been in 
 common use. Probably Morinus spoke only of the forms used in 
 Public Service. 
 
230 
 
 The Absolution. 
 
 though retaining the spirit of the old Form, to 
 impress upon the congregation that it was after all 
 Changes in Something more than a prayer. In the Order of 
 Absolution Communion they placed the authority of the Priest 
 to remit sins in the forefront : " Our Blessed Lord, 
 1548 A.D. ■\Yho hath left power to His Church to absolve 
 penitent sinners from their sins, and to restore to 
 the grace of the Heavenly Father such as truly 
 believe in Christ, have mercy," etc. This was 
 changed in the first Prayer-book into the more 
 general declaration of our present Fonn. At the 
 final revision a move was made to recover its more 
 authoritative character by substituting in the rubric 
 for " then shall the Priest . . . say thus," " then 
 shall the Priest . . . pronounce this Absolution." 
 
 But even admitting to the full its precatory 
 nature, its essential eSicacy is in no way diminished, 
 for the history of the doctrine tends to show that 
 the Church regards an absolution as equally valid, 
 whether it be given in the form of a petition or a 
 declaration, whether in the optative or in the in- 
 dicative mood. The use of the former by no means 
 warrants an inference that the Priest is devoid of 
 the Divinely appointed authority to absolve, any 
 more than the use of the latter " implies anything 
 else but the exercise of an authority which God has 
 given, to such an extent and under such limitations, 
 as Divine Revelation has declared." 
 
The Absolution. 
 
 231 
 
 The fourth method is, for the most part, this 
 latter form, where the language is personal and 
 direct, " I absolve thee," to be used only after strict 
 examination of the penitent, and in the full convic- 
 tion that as far as human judgment can decide, he 
 is qualified to receive the proffered pardon. 
 
 Although the Church for fourteen centuries spoke 
 with no faltering voice in the full conviction that 
 the power which Christ gave to the Apostles was 
 intended to remain and to be handed on through 
 the Apostolic Succession unto the end, difficulties 
 were started at the time of the Reformation objection 
 which are still felt, though they are in distinct po^er'^was 
 contradiction to our authorised Formularies of Faith. 
 It is granted that the power to forgive sins was Church, 
 delegated to the Apostles, but (so those who would 
 limit it to them assert) merely as one of the ex- 
 traordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, to be exercised 
 by men who were enabled by God " to discern spirits," 
 and to form an unerring judgment of the qualifi- 
 cation of the penitent for the reception of pardon. 
 But such a view of the commission to absolve 
 manifests an entire misconception of the object for 
 which miraculous powers were conferred on the first 
 generation of the Ministry. They were to be the 
 credentials of the Apostles' Divine mission before 
 an unbelieving world ; they were to serve as visible 
 means to convince men that God was with them ; 
 
232 The Absolution. 
 
 they could be appealed to in evidence, as giving 
 ocular demonstration of the existence of the powers 
 which were claimed. All this was possible in heal- 
 ing the sick, raising the dead to life, and casting 
 out evil spirits from those who were possessed 
 by them ; but it was quite impossible in the absolu- 
 tion of the penitent. No one could verify the 
 Apostles' claims in this matter ; there was no visible 
 proof, no evidence of any kind to be appealed to. 
 It is clear, therefore, that this cannot possibly be 
 placed in the same category with what are called 
 No tern- the miraculous powers of the early Church. Yet 
 pose wbe"^ further, we are quite at a loss to find out any object 
 answered. ■5yiiich could havc been answered by confining the 
 gift to the Apostolic age;^ no temporary purpose 
 to be served has ever been conjectured. The con- 
 clusion, therefore, is forced upon us that it was 
 intended to be continued, even as long as sin should 
 last among men, and that it underlay the promise, 
 " Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of 
 the world." 
 
 Then there is a popular objection which calls for 
 notice. It is this. If the sinner be really penitent, 
 no Ministerial absolution is needed, because his own 
 contrition will call forth the Divine pardon without 
 the intervention of any human agency. The prin- 
 
 1 Jer. Taylor, Off. MinUt. ii. 3, 4. Andiewes. Serin, on .ibsol. ; 
 Works, V. 91. 
 
The Absolution. 
 
 233 
 
 ciple may be extended to all the Ordinances of the An objection 
 
 • • 1 1 which strikes 
 
 Church. To give a single illustration, it might be at the root 
 said that if a man longs for communion with Christ, ^l^^^x"^' 
 and realises vividly the Incarnation and the Death 
 upon the Cross, by which it was made possible, there 
 is no necessity for him to partake of the Blessed 
 Sacrament, because he already has communion and 
 feels that he has it. No doubt God will accept 
 and bless the earnest longings of such an one ; and 
 He Who " is not bound by Sacraments " may give 
 him in a measure what his soul desires ; but to say 
 that feelings and desires are in themselves sufficient, 
 is to accuse our Lord of ordaining means and Sacra- 
 ments which are practically useless. It is to set 
 human opinion against the judgment of Him Who 
 " doeth all things according to the counsel of His 
 Will." 
 
XXIX. 
 
 "After which the Priest shall proceed saying, Lift up your hearts. 
 
 FOXJR sentences from Holy Scripture follow up 
 the Absolution, containing assurances of God's readi- 
 ness to forgive all who feel the need of Divine 
 The Com- niercy. They are designated " comfortable " words, 
 
 fortable , . « i * i • i , r 
 
 Words. as having for their object the encouragement of 
 those who may be tempted to despair, and desire to 
 have the seal of God's Word affixed to the Church's 
 Absolution. 
 
 Their introduction into the Liturgy was suggested 
 by the Lutheran " Consultation." i Apart from 
 their immediate use, they have a distinct value as 
 helping to give " a tone of Scriptural calmness and 
 earnestness to our English Service." They complete 
 the preparation of the worshipper. Acts of faith, 
 self-examination, penitence — all are ended, and he 
 stands on the threshold of the Mysteries. The more 
 
 1 The first, "Come unto me," etc., was not in this, hut there 
 were two others not adopted hy the revisers, viz. Acts x. 43 ; 
 S. John iii. 35. 
 234 
 
The Thanksgiving. 
 
 -35 
 
 solemn part, the Anaphora, begins with the action The com- 
 of thanksgiving, and to this the Priest with a ™the Ana- 
 herald's voice bids the people rise in the con- 
 sciousness of forgiven sin, and give utterance to 
 their gratitude. The trumpet-call, sursum corda, 
 with its response, has echoed on down all the 
 Christian centuries, perhaps even from Apostolic 
 times,^ for its existence in every primitive Liturgy, 
 Oriental and Western, can best be explained by 
 assigning it a place in the primal nucleus of the 
 Eucharistic Service. It is a deeper echo of the 
 Venite, the Invitatory alike to Jewish and Christian 
 Worship : " 0 come, let us sing unto the Lord : Let 
 us come before His presence with thanksgiving." 
 
 In some of the early Liturgies it was preceded by 
 the mutual salutation of Priest and people : " The The mutua 
 Lord be with you," "And with thy spirit," the former pr'est and"^ 
 clause being in several expanded into the Apostolic p^"'''"" 
 form : " The grace of our l.ord Jesus Christ, and 
 the love of God, and the Communion of the Holy 
 Ghost be with you all."^ It has been suggested 
 as possible that this benediction was intended to 
 close the less sacred part, rather than to serve as 
 a prelude to the Canon. In the most ancient 
 Services thanksgiving filled a much larger place 
 
 1 Mask. Anc. Litt. 73 n. ; S. Cypr. de Oral. Domin. ; S. Aug. 
 de dono perseverant. xiii. ; S. Cyril, Cat. Mys. v. 3. 
 
 - E.g. S. James's Lit., though slightly altered. Thy Syriau 
 Litt. : Clementine and Mozarabic. 
 
236 The Thanksgiving. 
 
 than it does in our own.i In the lately discovered 
 document entitled "The Teaching of the Twelve 
 Apostles," the Eucharist, for thus the Service is 
 The import- designated, is mainly composed of thanksgivings, 
 eiemen't'of Indeed, so generally is this principle recognised that 
 ing"''^^"^ one of the commonest tests applied by scholars for 
 the antiquity of a Liturgy is the length of its Form 
 of thanksgiving. 
 
 Now, when we compare the four records which 
 have come down to us of the Institution of the 
 Blessed Sacrament, we find it stated that our Lord 
 " gave thanks " when He took the Bread or the Cup 
 into His Hands. Primarily this thanksgiving corre- 
 sponded to " the Grace " which the Jews were careful 
 The Jewish to Say before and after meals.^ What form our 
 mraJs ^' Lord used is not recorded ; it may have been one 
 much in vogue, " The earth is the Lord's and the 
 fulness thereof." It was a recognition that all that 
 we receive comes from God, and was intended to 
 teach His followers in all time to come that they 
 should eat their meat with thankfulness.^ It is 
 interesting to trace the development of the idea 
 through the Eucharistic Service. Beginning with 
 thanksgiving for the bread and wine, the fruits of 
 
 1 Just. Mart. Apolog. i. 67. 6i7xopi(n"iai' ejri iroKii, k.t.\. 
 
 2 Mishn. Berak. vii. ; Lightf. Exercit. in Matt. xv. 36. The 
 Grace wMch modern Jews chiefly use is, " Blessed be Thou, Lord 
 God, King of the Universe, who hast brought forth bread from 
 the ground." 
 
 3 S, Chrysus. Horn, in Matt. slix. and IxxxiL 
 
The Thanksgiving. 237 
 
 the earth, the thoughts of the worshipper were led 
 on to the fact that all material gifts were created by 
 the same Hand ; and then, because by consecration 
 the Elements became the broken Body and out- Liturgical 
 poured Blood of the Saviour, thanks were claimed ing always 
 for His Sacrifice on the Cross ; and so in all the ° 
 primitive Liturgies thanksgiving was divided into 
 two distinct parts, first for Creation, then for Ee- 
 demption. It is this element of thanksgiving which 
 establishes such a close connexion between the 
 Christian Eucharist and the Jewish peace-offering. 
 The latter, in its highest form of the Passover, was 
 an individual and national act of thanksgiving for 
 redemption from captivity in Egypt, and reappears 
 in the Eucharist as a thankful remembrance of the 
 Redemption from the captivity of sin, purchased by 
 that Death of which it is intended to be the per- 
 petual memorial before God. 
 
 The part that follows the vcrsicle and response, 
 " Let us give thanks unto our Lord God " ; " It is 
 meet and right so to do"; bears liturgically a 
 variety of names, of which " the Preface " is perhaps The Preface, 
 the commonest, though " the Contestation " is much 
 more ancient. It was so called in the Gallican 
 Liturgies,^ as testifying to the Priest's acquiescence 
 in the acknowledgment of the duty of thanksgiving ; 
 
 1 Also immulatio, indicating that this begins the "ofl'ering" 
 of the Sacrifice. It was called illatio in the Mozarabic Liturgy, 
 (Irobably from "the bringing in " of the Sacrifice. 
 
238 The Thanksgiving. 
 
 " It is very meet, right, and our bounden duty, that 
 we should at all times, and in all places, give thanks 
 unto Thee, 0 Lord, Holy Father, Almighty Ever- 
 lasting God." The title of " Preface " was given to 
 it as the prelude to the most sacred portion of the 
 Office, the introduction to the great Eucharistic 
 action of Christ and of His Church. In the Eastern 
 Churches the Form never varies with the season, 
 and is much longer than that which is regularly 
 used in the West ; it has the advantage of giving 
 prominence to the thankfulness of the worshipper 
 at all times. The Western Offices, though formerly 
 as rich in Prefaces as they still are in Collects, cur- 
 tail this element on ordinary occasions, but intro- 
 duce supplementary Forms for certain important 
 Festivals. The abridgment of such an essential 
 feature as thanksgiving seems under any circum- 
 stances to be matter for regret ; but less so when, as 
 in primitive times, the special forms were sufficiently 
 numerous to supply the wants which the important 
 Festivals and Commemorations manifestly create. 
 This principle, as we shall see hereafter, was reck- 
 lessly ignored at the Eeformation. 
 
 Now if we would make our Eucharists in deed 
 and in truth what they are in name, it will be just 
 in proportion as we cultivate a spirit of thankfulness 
 for the lesser blessings of life, for food and raiment, 
 for health and strength, for friendships and affec- 
 
The Thanksgiving. 
 
 239 
 
 tions. By way of illustration we would dwell upon 
 an act of thanksgiving which should be daily re- 
 peated, but AThich is in danger of being altogether 
 forgotten. There was a time when to sit down to The value 
 meat, at least for the chief meal of the day, without °t ^'^ail 
 asking God's blessing, or to rise without giving 
 thanks for His bounty, would have been regarded 
 as culpable neglect, even at the table of worldly- 
 minded men. It was often the one only recogni- 
 tion of God throughout the day. In an age of 
 unparalleled wickedness in high places, at the board 
 of Charles the Second, in the presence of his licen- 
 tious courtiers and those who ministered most to 
 his sinful life, it is said that the chaplain's function 
 was rarely intermitted ; though the historian of the 
 period tells us, with no little satire, that the chaplain 
 was often summoned to the tables of the rich to 
 return thanks for a repast, from the greater part of 
 which he had himself been excluded. 
 
 From how many tables at the present day is this 
 acknowledgment to the Giver of all good gifts 
 wholly banished ! The danger of formality is very 
 great, and the consequent argument for discontinu- 
 ance is too readily yielded to. If we have deter- 
 mined that the spirit of the Eucharist shall leaven 
 our lives, or rather that our daily habits shall attune 
 our hearts for ever-grateful Eucharists, this time- 
 honoured practice will never be abandoned. It is 
 
The Thanksgiving. 
 
 enough for us to recall the image of our Lord in 
 the Upper Chamber at Jerusalem giving thanks at 
 that first Eucharist for the bread that He broke, 
 and to remember that it is a very law of His king- 
 dom, that the servant should be as his Master. 
 
XXX. 
 
 proper ^Brcfacesf. 
 
 '* Upon Christmas Day and seven days afterwards." 
 
 There is no " proper " Preface in the East, but 
 each Liturgy contains one unvarying form for use 
 on all occasions. In the West the idea that special 
 seasons and festivals called for appropriate memo- 
 rials of the mercies associated with them seems xhe differ- 
 to have prevailed largely in the early centuries, and "^^^ 
 it led to the introduction of a great variety of forms 
 
 ° ■' ing the Pre- 
 
 of thanksgiving. In the oldest Sacramentaries, face, 
 and in the Gallican and Mozarabic Liturgies, these 
 proper Prefaces were so numerous that there was 
 one for at least every Sunday and Festival. In 
 the Ambrosian they are provided even for week- 
 days. Gregory the Great reduced them to eight 
 in the Roman Church. When the Sarura Missal 
 was drawn up by Osmund, nine were admitted. 
 These were for Christmas, for the Epiphany, for 
 week-days in Lent,^ except Maundy Tlmrsday, for 
 
 1 The absence of a special Preface for Good-Friday is very signi- 
 ficant. It affords evidence for a belief that there was no cele- 
 bration on that day : the commemoration of the Sacrifice lieing 
 suspended on the anniversary of the Sacrifice. Cf. Warren, 
 S.P.C.K. P.B. p. 107. 
 
242 Proper Prefaces. 
 
 Easter, for the Ascension, for Whitsuntide, for the 
 Feast of the Blessed Trinity and Sundays following 
 till Advent, for Apostles and Evangelists, for the 
 Feasts of the Holy Cross ; and about a century later 
 there was one added to these for Feasts of the 
 Blessed Virgin.^ It had been introduced at Rome 
 by Pope Urban, but was not formally sanctioned in 
 England till the Council of "Westminster, 1175. 
 Five 'proper' The complleis of the first Prayer-book removed 
 moverby the five of thesc. We can hardly be surprised at their 
 first revisers, jg^ision in regard to the Festivals of the Holy 
 Cross, and of the Blessed Virgin, for they had become 
 associated in the popular mind with erroneous doc- 
 trine ; but to erase the proper Prefaces for the 
 Epiphany, Lent, and Feasts of Apostles, was to rob 
 the Church of most appropriate commemorations, 
 which could only be taken away with harm and loss. 
 
 The ancient form of the Christmas-day Preface 
 ran thus : " Because by the mystery of the Incarnate 
 Word, the new light of Thy brightness hath shone 
 upon the eyes of our mind, that, while we know 
 God by what we see, we may through Him be 
 caught up unto the love of things invisible." It 
 
 1 The Festivals were the Conception, Aimunciatiou, Nativitj-, 
 Visitation and Assumption. Tlie Purification was excepted, the 
 preface proper to Christmas being appointed for that Feast. The 
 former preface was used also for the weekly (Saturday) commem- 
 oration of the B. Virgin mentioned in the Sar. Consuetudinarium, 
 cc. 19. 65, 104. 
 
Proper Prefaces. 
 
 243 
 
 appeared to create confusion between the Nativity 
 and the Epiphany, and was in consequence re- 
 written by the first revisers. 
 
 In its present form there are two subjects which 
 call for consideration, one historical, the other doc- 
 trinal ; the first, the time of the Birth of Our Lord, 
 the second, the sinlessness of His human Nature. 
 " To be born as at this time." There is no very The Feast oi 
 early evidence of a direct character that can be LptatdiiTei- 
 appealed to as fixing the exact date of the Nativity. 
 The first of the Fathers ^ who speaks of it implies 
 that nothing definite was known in his time. In 
 the Eastern Church for several centuries the Festival 
 was kept in conjunction with that of the Epiphany, 
 upon January 6th, in consequence of a tradition^ 
 that our Lord's Baptism took place on the anniver- 
 sary of His Birth. The two commemorations, how- 
 ever, were separated before the Council of Ephesus 
 in deference to the practice of the "Western Church, 
 for which, as S. Chrysostom ^ asserted, there was 
 very ancient authority. In this the Nativity had 
 been kept on December 25 th. 
 
 Attempts have been made to fix the Christmas 
 
 1 Clem. Alex. Slrovx. i. c. 21. 
 
 2 In consequence of tins, Epiphany "in the East was one of 
 the chief days for administering Holy Baptism." — Apost. Conslit. 
 viii. 3-3. 
 
 3 Acta Cone. Eph. iii. 31. Horn, dc Nativiiate. The genuine- 
 ness of this Homily has been doubted. Cf. Smith, Did. i. 359. 
 
244 
 
 Proper Prefaces. 
 
 Suggested Festival at this season upon other than historic 
 fiTinTchrist- grounds. Some have thought that the commemora- 
 mas-day in ^Jq^ •^yg.s reiTulated simplv by a desire to supersede 
 
 December. ° r J J i 
 
 the heathen Saturnalia with all its licentious revelry 
 by the harmless festivities of the most joyful of 
 Christian Feasts. Others have attributed it to the 
 blending of Christianity with the heathen worship 
 of the Sun, whose chief festival was held at the 
 winter solstice ; but, though these coincidences are 
 not a little remarkable, we would not lightly sur- 
 render the conviction of the ancient Church that our 
 Blessed Lord was really born on the day on which 
 they had deliberately ^ commemorated His Nativity. 
 The arguments which S. Chrysostom adduced were 
 such that all mere questions of expediency must be 
 set aside in favour of the simple testimony of fact. 
 The sinless- " Without spot of sin " : such is the testimony of 
 
 nessof tijg Preface to the cardinal doctrine of the sinless- 
 Christ. 
 
 ness of Christ. It has often been disputed whether 
 this was the consequence of a successful resistance of 
 all temptation to sin, or whether He was simply im- 
 peccable, the two phrases, " the possibility of not 
 sinning " fos&e non peccare — or, " the impossibility 
 of sinning " non posse peccare, gathering up into brief 
 
 1 There was a traditiou that Pope Julian I. had investigated 
 the Jewish archives which had been carried by Titus to Rome, and 
 had arrived at this conclusion. Tert. adv. Marc. iv. 7, speaks 
 of "the census of Augustus, that most faithful witness of the 
 Lord's Birth, kept in the archives at Rome." 
 
Proper Prefaces. 
 
 245 
 
 propositions the question at issue.^ He undoubtedly xhe testi- 
 was free from actual sin. He challeneed His"""^"*^ 
 
 ° Scripture to 
 
 enemies, " which of you convinceth Me of sin 1 " the absence 
 The Apostles testified to it by the Holy Spirit : ororigTnaT 
 He " knew no sin " ; He " did no sin, neither was 
 guile found in His mouth " ; " in Him is no sin." 
 In the Epistle to the Hebrews it is said that He 
 was " holy, harmless, undefiled " and " separate 
 from sinners." 
 
 Again it is clear that He had no taint of a fallen 
 human nature, no tendency to sin through inherent 
 corruption.' The supernatural conception by the 
 Holy Ghost necessitated the holiness of that 
 which should be born of the Blessed Virgin.^ Had 
 " original sin " belonged in any sense to that 
 humanity which He took. He could not have said, 
 " The prince of this world cometh and hath nothing 
 in Me." * As the Perfect Victim He must be with- 
 out spot or flaw, with no defect by nature, with no 
 injury or maiming contracted in life; like the 
 typical animal of which it was said, " it shall be per- 
 fect to be accepted ; there shall be no blemish 
 therein." ^ 
 
 1 Cf. Hooker, Ecc. Pol. v. 52, § 3. Liddon, Bamp. Led. i. 23 ; 
 iv. 165 «. (ed. 1869). 
 
 2 S. John viii. 46 ; 2 Cor. v. 21 ; 1 S. Pet. ii. 22 ; 1 S. John iii. 
 5 ; Heb. vii. 26. 
 
 3 did Kal rb yewwixtvov ayiov, k.t.X. S. Luke i. 35. 
 
 S. John xiv. 30. 5 Lev. xxii. 21. 
 
246 
 
 Proper Prefaces. 
 
 In His Per. 
 Ronality im- 
 peccable. 
 
 But as the Second Adam, Who came into the 
 world to yield a perfect obedience, He received a 
 peccable Nature — a Nature such as the first Adam 
 had before he fell — sinless, but liable to sin ; — that 
 is, through the absence of corruption capable of not 
 sinning ; but through the existence of a free will not 
 incapable of sinning. We must be careful, how- 
 ever, to distinguish between saying that Christ had 
 a human nature liable to sin, and saying that Christ 
 Himself was liable to sin. Sin was possible to His 
 humanity, but impossible to His Divinity ; and 
 through the inseparable union of the two in the 
 One Person we are enabled to affirm that though 
 possessed of a peccable nature, He was in His Per- 
 sonality impeccable. 
 
 If such a conclusion seems in any way to take 
 away the reality of the Temptation,^ we can only 
 fall back upon the teaching of Scripture, which tells 
 us, as it were in the same breath, that He " in all 
 points was tempted like as we are," and at the same 
 time that He was " without sin"^ — " the notion of 
 sin therefore has to be wholly excluded from our 
 thoughts of Christ's temptation." Again, if it be 
 said that there is some contradiction in what is else- 
 where ^ written : " wherefore, in all things, it behoved 
 
 1 For tlie reality of this in connexion with Christ's impossi- 
 bility of sinnin?, cf. Hutchings, Tlie Mystery of the Temptation ; 
 Edersbeim's Life and Times of the Messiah, Bk. iii. c. i. 
 Heb. iv. 15. ' Heb. ii. 17. 
 
Proper Prefaces. 
 
 247 
 
 Him to be made like unto His brethren," the com- 
 pleteness of the resemblance must necessarily be 
 modified by the purpose in view, viz., " to make 
 reconciliation for the sins of the people." Had 
 there been a correspondence of any kind in the 
 matter of sin, either original or actual, inborn or 
 contracted. His oblation would have been imperfect 
 and could have made no atonement. 
 
XXXI. 
 
 laroper ^©reface^ for (EajJtcc anti 
 ia^censfion-.fiap* 
 
 The Preface for Easter was used as early as the 
 close of the fifth century. It was preserved byGregory 
 when he revised the so-called Gelasian Sacramentary. 
 The great The day was held in high honour from the begin- 
 a«igned to ning, as the feast of feasts, and marked by special 
 the first. liturgical distinctions. Vivid pictures have been 
 drawn by early writers of the solemnities of the 
 Easter celebration, in which everything was done 
 to harmonise the services Avith the jubilant character 
 of the day of the Resurrection. Gregory of Nyssa ^ 
 tells how the prison doors were thrown open and 
 pardons granted ; how crowds were wont to throng 
 the churches ; how every vestige of sorrow was laid 
 aside, so that none, however overwhelmed with 
 grief, might fail to find relief in the joy and 
 splendour of the festival. 
 
 1 Orai. iii. in Chrisli Resur. 
 
 24S 
 
Easter and Ascension-day. 249 
 
 Originally it Avas known as the Paschal Feast,' 
 extending over fifteen days, the week before the 
 Sunday being designated " the Pascha of the cruci- 
 fixion," the week after, " the Pascha of the resur- 
 rection," and there is a manifest allusion to this 
 ancient name preserved in this Preface, where Our 
 Lord Jesus Christ is spoken of as " the very Paschal 
 Lamb, which was offered for us " ; but in the Church The change 
 of this country it was superseded at an early date by [sh^oV" '^ 
 a title of heathen origin. The festival coincided with 
 a highly popular celebration in honour of Edstre, 
 the Anglo-Saxon goddess of spring ; and the Vener- 
 able Bede^ tells us that under the influence of 
 Christianity " the old festival was observed with 
 the gladness of a new solemnity." 
 
 The exact date for celebrating Easter was not 
 authoritatively fixed for three centuries after Christ ; 
 and a diversity of practice was the necessary con- Diversity oi 
 sequence in the early Churches. Without enter- ["h^^'^g'^f 
 ing into the complicated dispute, with its wide observing 
 
 Easter. 
 
 ramifications,^ it may be well to notice briefly the 
 ruling principles which created the divergence. 
 The Jewish Christians, adhering to ancient tradi- 
 tional associations of the Passover, kept the Festival 
 
 1 Orig. c. Ceh. vii, 362. S. Chrys. Hum. on Pascha. The title 
 is pei ]utuated ill France as Paques ; in Italy, Pasqua ; in Spain, 
 
 - />. T,:iuji. Rat. c. XV. 
 ^ Epipli. adv. Hcrres. Ixx. 
 
250 Proper Prefaces for 
 
 at the close of the 14th of Nisan, on whatever day 
 of the week it happened to fall.^ The Gentile 
 Churches, unfettered by Jewish tradition, identified 
 the first day of the week with the day of the 
 Resurrection, and the previous Friday as that of the 
 Crucifixion, without any regard to the day of the 
 month. Such diversity was an obvious e^dl, and 
 the remedying of it was one of the objects for which 
 
 32s A.D. the Council of Nicaea was summoned. It was 
 unanimously agreed by the Bishops assembled that 
 Easter should be celebrated on one and the same 
 day throughout the world, and that none should 
 follow the blindness of the Jews;^ but they left the 
 door open for new differences by only fixing the 
 day of the week, and not determining which was to 
 be regarded as the proper Paschal moon. It was 
 directed that this should be decided from time to 
 time by the astronomers of Alexandria and notified 
 to the Churches ; but as the directions were only 
 imperfectly carried out, it not infrequently happened 
 that Easter was celebrated in some parts in March, 
 in others in April. 
 
 After many attempts to establish uniformity, it 
 was attained in the Western Churches when Arch- 
 
 669 A.D. bishop Theodore recognised the Eoman rule ; ^ and 
 
 1 These were called Quartodecimans. At first the Asiatics 
 stood alone. It became later a distinctive mark of Judaizing. 
 
 2 Socr. Ecc. Hist. i. 9. 
 
 3 King Oswy's decision at the Synod of Whitby in 664 is well 
 
Easter and Ascension-day. 251 
 
 it lasted for nearly eleven centuries. When how- 
 ever Pope Gregory reformed the Calendar in 1582, 
 the English Church, in its hatred of Eome, refused 
 to accept the revision, and continued to observe 
 Easter according to the old Calendar, till the 
 "New Style" was_ adopted in 1752. This adop- 
 tion however did not effect an universal concur- 
 rence, for the East, still adhering to the " Old 
 Style," keeps Easter nearly a fortnight later than 
 the rest of Christendom.^ 
 
 The proper Preface for Ascension-day was com- 
 posed by Gregory for his reformed Sacramentary. 
 It is a matter of no little surprise that there should uncertainty 
 have been any doubts as to the recognition of the \ ^'^s^er- 
 - Feast of the Ascension by the earliest Christians. °} 
 
 Ascension- 
 There is no direct mention of it before the fourth day. 
 
 century ; ^ but after the middle of this it springs 
 
 into notice, and receives abundant honour as equal 
 
 with the other great Feasts of the Incarnation. It 
 
 is true that S. Augustine^ speaks of it as being 
 
 " observed throughout the world," which certainly 
 
 known. Theodore proposed this at the Council of Hertford, 673. 
 Cf. Bright, Early Eng. Ch. Hist, 200-243. 
 
 1 The difference of the two stylus, amounting to eleven days, 
 was removed by ordering September 3rd, 1752, to be counted as 
 September 14th. The popular prejudice against the change was 
 very strong, the poor and ignorant believing that they had been 
 robbed of the days. 
 
 = A post. Constit. v. 19, 20; viii. 33. 
 
 ^ Ep. ad Januar. i. 1. 
 
252 Proper Prefaces for 
 
 points to no late introduction, and he rests the 
 celebration upon Apostolic authority ; but it is 
 unfortunate that there is no corroborative evidence 
 in such writers as Tertullian, Cyprian, and Ambrose. 
 If however there was any neglect in the early 
 Churches, there has certainly been none since the 
 date above named. 
 
 The Eeformed Anglican Church has placed it on 
 an exact level in every respect, as far as liturgical 
 honour is concerned, with the greatest of our 
 Festivals. 
 
 The historic facts associated with both Easter 
 and the Ascension deserve before everything to be 
 commemorated in the Celebration of the Holy 
 The bearing Eucharist. The one is the pledge of eternal life 
 
 of Easter and _ ° 
 
 Ascension- which is hereby put within the reach of every 
 
 tide on • j- ■ i i 
 
 Eucharistic mdividual communicant ; the other is the entrance 
 doctrine. xx^q^ ^jj^t High-pricstly intercession, which gives 
 
 efficacy to all our imperfect pleadings at Christian 
 
 Altars. 
 
 The gift of life stands out clear and distinct in 
 almost every sentence of that speech which our 
 Blessed Lord spoke in the Synagogue of Capernaum, 
 Life through in anticipation of the Sacrament ^ that He was 
 
 the Sacra- 
 ment, mtending to institute. He began with the declara- 
 
 1 S. John vi. 48-59. For considerations which may have led 
 our Lord to speak beforehand of the doctrine of the Eucharist, 
 of. The Author's Footprints, etc. i. 40-1. 
 
Eastej^ and Ascension-day. 253 
 
 tion : " I am the bread of life." " I am the living 
 bread." " The bread that I will give is My Flesh, 
 which I will give for the life of the world." And 
 when the Jews were bewildered and strove among 
 themselves to find an explanation, He only repeated 
 it with a double asseveration, " Verily, verily, I 
 say unto you, Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of 
 Man and drink His Blood, ye have no life in you. 
 Whoso eateth My Flesh and drinketh My Blood, 
 hath eternal life : and I will raise him up at the 
 last day." "As the living Father hath sent Me, 
 and I live by the Father ; so he that eateth Me, 
 even he shall live by Me." It is ours to accept His 
 repeated testimony, and to strive to appropriate to 
 ourselves this gift of the Divine life, as Christ has 
 promised to communicate it, through His Flesh and 
 Blood. God, we know, is not fettered in His 
 operations of grace, but we have no right to suppose 
 that we shall receive it otherwise than as the 
 authority of the Church has taught us, when she 
 says to each communicant as he kneels to receive 
 the Eucharistic Food, " The Body of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ. . . . The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life." 
 
 And just as Easter is a pledge of our resurrection, 
 to be assured to us through the Blessed Sacrament, 
 so is the Ascension a similar guarantee that by the 
 same means, whatsoever we shall ask the Father 
 
254 Proper Prefaces for Easter, etc. 
 
 He will give it us "in Christ's Name" — that is, 
 
 Efficacy of 
 
 through His Mediation, of which the Holy Eucharist 
 intercesston '^'^ vno^t vivid earthly representation.! It is 
 because of this that it has ever been regarded as 
 the chief intercessory service of the Church. It is 
 here that all her members, not only the priests 
 who celebrate, but men and women, by virtue of 
 that priesthood which is bestowed upon them in 
 Baptism, unite their acts of intercession, in all its 
 weakness and imperfection, with the perfect Media- 
 tion of Him, Who from the Ascension onwards has 
 been perpetually presenting to the Father the one 
 sufficient Sacrifice " which taketh away " — which 
 continuously, now as when it was first offered, 
 " taketh away the sins of the world." 
 
 1 Cf. infra, ch. xxxvi.. xliv. 
 
XXXII. 
 
 proper ^vttm0 for (L(llljtt0im--tiap atiD 
 
 The birthday of the Church was celebrated from 
 the beginning under the title of Pentecost/ and it 
 corresponded to the Jewish Festival of that name : 
 the one being fifty days from Easter, the other from 
 Passover. From the fact that the Apostles received 
 on this day the Baptism of the Holy Ghost, it 
 became one of the chief times for the administration Whitsuntide 
 of the Sacrament of Baptism, dividing the honour ^j^'^g f^^' 
 with Easter in the West, with Epiphany and Easter Baptisms, 
 in the East. From this circumstance it was for a 
 long time supposed that the English name of Whit- 
 sun-day was derived from the custom of the candi- 
 dates for Baptism wearing white chrisoms,^ and 
 in all probability this is correct. But from the 
 fact that another Sunday, the octave of Easter, has 
 
 1 This however often included the whole season of fifty days. 
 Apost. Constit. v. 20. Tert. de Bapt. 19. The Jewish festival 
 was counted "from the morrow after the Sabbath," of. Lev. 
 xxiii. 15. 
 
 - " While Sundaij , from the A. -S. name hwUa sunnan-dmg, Icel. 
 hvUasunnudagr, Norwegian Kvittsundaf)." — Skeat, Etymol. Diet. 
 1SS2; so alsoOgilvic-.^iiTifindale, /m^enai />{C<. 1883. In northern 
 
 •255 
 
256 Proper Prefaces for 
 
 Theetymo- been long known as "the Sunday in white," 1 some 
 word.°'^"'^ etymologists have sought for another derivation, and 
 suggested that Whitsun is only a corruption, through 
 various forms, of the German Pfingsten, i.e. the fiftieth 
 or Pentecost.^ The proper Preface for this Festival 
 was composed for the first Prayer-book. It is much 
 longer than that which had been used for some cen- 
 turies in the Sarum Missal ; and it introduces in a 
 The com- most definite manner a subject almost unnoticed in 
 fn'thefndeT ^be earlier Service-books.^ It speaks of the " fiery 
 "onguef ' °^ tongues, lighting upon the Apostles, to teach them, 
 and to lead them into all truth; giving them both the 
 gift of divers languages, and also boldness with fervent 
 zeal constantly to preach the Gospel unto all nations." 
 The compilers thereby indorsed the popular tradi- 
 tion that " the gift of tongues," supernaturally be- 
 stowed upon the Apostles at Pentecost, was nothing 
 less than new linguistic powers, enabling them in the 
 spread of the Gospel to understand and be under- 
 stood by foreigners in diflferent countries. 
 
 climates Pentecost would be more suitable for baptism than Easter 
 was. In illustration of the peculiar termination in its adjectival 
 use ' Palson evin' (Scotch) and ' Lowson even ' (Hearne's Glossary), 
 the eves of Palmsunday and Lowsunday, may be cited. 
 
 1 They were worn for eight days ; hence Low Sunday was called 
 Dom. in albis depositis. 
 
 - Neale's Essays on Litiirg., p. 524. Other derivations are— 
 icit, from the gift of tongues : white, from the custom of distribu- 
 ting " whites of kine," i.e. milk, to the poor: and huit, the eighth 
 Sunday after Easter. 
 
 ^ It is mentioned, as far as we know, in the Gall. Lit. only, 
 and there with much less definiteness. 
 
Whit Sim- day and Trinity. 257 
 
 It is most unfortunate that anything like historical want of 
 evidence touching the nature of the gift is almost j^y"™^ 
 wholly wanting, till quite the end of the fourth 
 century. Under certain circumstances, however, this 
 might satisfy us ; as in a case, for instance, where 
 in testifying to a particular practice, the writer at 
 the same time asserts that it has come down from 
 the beginning. Such is the evidence for Eucharistic 
 worship in S. Ambrose and S. Augustine.^ But the 
 Fathers of the same age, who interpret " the gift of 
 tongues," do not rest their interpretation in any 
 way upon the authority of their predecessors; it 
 therefore only expresses the belief of their time. 
 S. Chrysostom ^ asks for what purpose the Apostles 
 received the gift of tongues, and answers him- 
 self, "because they were intended to go every- 
 where through the world." S. Jerome ^ says 
 that they received " a diversity of tongues that 
 they might not want an interpreter, when going 
 forth to preach Christ." There is, it is true, some 
 earlier notice of the gift in Irenaeus ; * but the 
 fact that it has been claimed by those who are 
 opposed to the traditional belief, as well as by 
 its advocates, shows that it offers no certain 
 testimony. 
 
 To men who realised vividly the supernatural gifts, 
 
 ■ Infra, cli. 1. - Rom. xxv. in 1 Vor. xiv. 
 
 3 Ad Uedibian. * Adv. Eaer. v. 6. Euseb. v. 7. 
 
 R 
 
258 Proper Prefaces for 
 
 The natural 
 tendency of 
 
 Christians tc 
 exaggerate 
 
 lous. 
 
 which had been exercised for the furtherance of the 
 Faith, casting out evil spirits, healing the sick, rais- 
 ing the dead, and discerning spirits, it would appear 
 quite natural to place a miraculous knowledge of 
 languages in the same category.^ The tendency of 
 the early Church was not unnaturally to multiply 
 miracles ; the tendency of these later times is to 
 minimise them. It is, we imagine, the safer course 
 to conclude that God carries on the government of 
 the world in all cases by natural agencies, unless we 
 are expressly told the contrary. The late Dr. Mozley 
 used to say that God had always exercised "an 
 economy of miracles." We see it most markedly 
 in the Divine Revelation : nothing is imparted to 
 man supernaturally, which he can learn for himself. 
 It was on this principle, doubtless, that God did not 
 make known the mysteries of Physical Science to 
 the patriarchs, but left them to be disclosed gradu- 
 ally through the labours of future generations. Now 
 had it been indispensable to the first preaching of 
 the Gospel, that the Apostles should understand 
 foreign languages, they might have learnt them, as 
 modern Missionaries do, only far more easily, be- 
 cause, though originally " ignorant and unlearned " 
 
 1 It is very significant that there shoiild be abundance of testi- 
 mony in support of these, but none, of this last, which must have 
 been far more common, if so used. Cf. S. Cypr. dt Idol. Van. 7 ; 
 ad Demetriam, 15 ; Iren. adv. Hcer. ii 32, § 4 ; Euseb. ff. E. 
 V. 7. and iii. 39. 
 
Whitsun-day and Trinity. 
 
 259 
 
 men, they had, on the evidence of Christ's promise,^ 
 the quickening influence of the Holy Spirit to 
 "guide them into all truth." Furthermore, the 
 widespread use of the Greek tongue, since the con- 
 quests of Alexander, would greatly facilitate their 
 labours; and it is not a little significant that the 
 very first missionary sermon that was preached, pro- 
 bably in this language,^ was understood by the 
 representatives of fifteen nationalities. 
 
 It is sometimes urged that Our Lord's promise 
 contained in the closing verses of S. Mark's Gospel 
 leads us to expect that the Apostles would have with 
 other credentials a supernatural knowledge of lan- 
 guages ; but in addition to the uncertainty caused 
 by difficulties of textual criticism,^ the gift of 
 " speaking with new tongues " is not here appro- 
 priated to the first Missionaries but to their con- 
 verts. It was intended to be one of the signs that 
 should " follow them that believe." * This considera- 
 tion suggests a parallelism with that strange pheno- 
 
 1 S. John xiv. 16, xvi. 13. 
 Acts ii. 14-40. Note the surprise of the people at Jerusalem, 
 when S. Paul did not speak Greek, but Hebrew or Aramaic. 
 Acts xxi. 40, xxii. 2. 
 
 3 Besides some doubtfulness touching the whole passage, Kot- 
 vais, " new," is wanting in several MSS. 
 
 ^ There is no contradiction with 1 Cor. xiv. 22. Here it means 
 that converts should use the gift as a sign, i.e. with the uncon- 
 verted ; and S. Paul says that they would not edify persons 
 who already believed, for they were satisfied, but would be a 
 sign to others who did not believe. 
 
200 
 
 Proper Prefaces for 
 
 raenon of " speaking with tongues '' which appeared 
 shortly after in the Church of Corinth. There is 
 no trace in the elaborate account left by S. Paul,^ 
 of this ever having been used for disseminating the 
 Gospel ; indeed it is contrasted with " prophesying" 
 or inspired preaching. There is much in the 
 description to disprove the popular conception; 
 the utterance was not intelligible without an inter- 
 preter ; it was expressed not in the ordinary voice, 
 but probably with some musical intonation, for it is 
 likened to sounding brass, the blare of a trumpet, 
 or a clanging cymbal : it was a means of communi- 
 cating with God not man, for the benefit of the 
 speaker's own soul, rather than for the good of his 
 fellows : it Avas, in short, " the result of a sudden 
 influx of supernatural inspiration," the sign of a 
 quickened spiritual power, -^vhich found its exercise 
 in a kind of ecstatic devotion and in outbursts of 
 praise ; and in S. Paul's view " five clear words, 
 spoken from the mind of one man to the mind of 
 another, were better than ten thousand of these 
 more startling and wonderful phenomena." There 
 is, however, one difference between the manifesta- 
 tion of the gift at Jerusalem and at Corinth. On 
 the day of Pentecost the language was intelligible, 
 for the people asked in wonder and amazement, 
 " How hear we every man in our own tongue, 
 ' 1 Cor. xii.-xiv. ; note especially xiii. 2, xiv. 2, 4, 16, 19. 
 
Wliitsun-day atid Trinity. 261 
 
 wherein we were born ? " But there is also one 
 marked correspondence, for in both alike the end 
 and object of this spiritual utterance was praise : The objec 
 " we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonder- ° afpraLl 
 ful works of God." 
 
 We shrink instinctively from writing aught that 
 seems in any way calculated to diminish the deep- 
 seated reverence for the marvellous character of the 
 first beginnings of Christianity, and we trust that 
 nothing which has been set forth upon this subject 
 may have such a result. Those who cling to the 
 ancient belief have the unbroken tradition of fifteen 
 centuries to support them — a weight of authority 
 not lightly to be put aside. But the conviction in 
 our own minds, that the data of Scripture and the 
 earliest history do not bear it out, has long been 
 felt, and we are constrained to state, though we do 
 not press, the arguments, which, it must be allowed, 
 place difficulties in the way of an unreserved accept- 
 ance of the common interpretation. 
 
 The Preface for Trinity Sunday in a somewhat 
 enlarged form is as old as the time of Gelasius; 
 but it was appointed for the octave of Pentecost. 
 The Day was not marked in the Calendar as a Feast Triniiy 
 of the Trinity, till some centuries had elapsed. It observed' 
 was so designated in the Sarum Use, and it has been ^<^'^''"" 
 
 ^ ' Festival. 
 
 generally supposed that Osmund adopted it from 
 
262 Proper Prefaces for 
 
 previous English Offices. It was held as a special 
 Feast of the Trinity in England only ^ and in some 
 Churches of Germany, which were founded by the 
 English missionary, S. Wilfred or Boniface ; and in 
 the Ancient Offices of these Churches alone are the 
 Sundays that follow designated " Sundays after 
 Trinity"; in the Eoman they were styled "after 
 Pentecost " ; as they now are throughout the East, 
 where our " Trinity Sunday " is kept as the " Feast 
 of all Holy Mar'yrs." It has, however, been univers- 
 ally observed in honour of the Trinity throughout the 
 whole Western Church since 1334 A.D., when it was 
 so ordered by Pope John xxii. If any surprise be 
 felt that this cardinal doctrine of the Faith should 
 have been ever suffered to pass uncommemorated 
 in the Ecclesiastical Festivals, it should be noticed 
 that the reason was, because it was thought that it 
 already received more abundant honour and recogni- 
 tion through the frequent use of the Doxologies, 
 " Glory be to the Father," etc., in the Daily Offices. 
 
 The Preface sets forth in the briefest terms the 
 doctrine of a Trinity of Persons in the Godhead 
 with an unity of substance. Neither of the terms, 
 The meaning Pcrsou or substaucc, cxpresses at all adequately the 
 aiity^nT id^as which it is intended to convey ; but it is only 
 substance, expectcd that human language will fail in the 
 
 > This divergeuce from Roman practice is said to mark the inde- 
 pendent origin of the English Church. 
 
Whitsun-day and Trinity. 263 
 
 presence of Divine mysteries. By substance is 
 meant what we more commonly understand by the 
 word " essence " ; and as referred to the Godhead, 
 it signifies the combined attributes which belong to 
 Deity and Deity alone, such as eternity, uncreated- 
 ness, omnipotence, and the like.^ Personality is 
 thus described by Hooker 2: — "The substance of 
 God with this property to he of none doth make the 
 Person of the Father ; the very self-same substance 
 in number with this property to he of the Father 
 maketh the Person of the Son ; the same substance 
 having added unto it the property of proceeding from 
 the other two maketh the Person of the Holy Ghost." 
 Each has His own subsistence, peculiar to Himself, 
 together with a substance common to all Three. 
 
 But there is no true analogy between three human No real 
 persons with one nature and the Trinity of Persons h'ei-^Sn the 
 in the Deity with an unity of substance, because the of'^^^^nj 
 former have their being in independence of each of God. 
 other, whereas in the Persons of the Godhead there 
 is a mutual " coinherence " ^ or indwelling, which 
 makes them One, as no human persons can possibly 
 be. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost 
 mutually depend upon and complete each other; 
 they are indivisible ; they cannot exist apart from 
 
 1 Cf. supra, p. 127. 
 
 2 Ecc. Pol. V. li. § 1. 
 
 3 The Theological term is ireptxiipria-cf or circumincessio, also 
 written circuminsessio. 
 
264 Proper Prefaces for Whitsim-day,etc. 
 
 one another. No human similitude can be devised 
 to illustrate it ; all we know for certain is that the 
 fact of their Personality and their union is revealed 
 to us : God is " above and we are upon earth," 
 therefore, as Hooker said, " it behoveth that our 
 words be wary and few." " Our soundest knowledge 
 is to know that we know Him not as indeed He is, 
 neither can know Him : His glory is inexplicable : 
 His greatness above our capacity and reach." ^ 
 
 1 In the Guardian, 1888, p. 1077, there is a suggestion that in 
 the words of the Preface, " or inequality," there is a misprint for 
 " of inequality," in Lat. sine differentia discretionis. 
 
XXXIII. 
 
 " After each of which shall immediately be sung or said, Therefore with 
 Angels and Archangels," etc. 
 
 The custom, which largely prevailed a few years 
 ago, and is still observed in some churches, for the 
 people to join with the Priest in the Introduction 
 as well as the Tersanctus, has no sanction from Unauthor- 
 antiquity. In the first Prayer-book the two parts redtil^g'the^ 
 were printed in separate paragraphs, and a rubric 
 was subjoined to the second, "This the Clerks 
 shall also sing."i The division was preserved in the 
 printing of the second Prayer-book, but the direc- 
 tion for singing the latter portion was erased, in 
 accordance with the object of the revisers to reduce 
 the musical element in the Service. After the 
 Hampton Court Conference the whole was printed, 1604 a.d. 
 as we now have it, in one clause. 
 
 It is ever the tendency of thanksgiving to merge 
 
 1 All the old Musical settings are for the latter part only. Cf. 
 also Pontifical of Egbert of York (8th cent.), which shows that all 
 the congregation said the latter part. 
 
266 The Tersandtts. 
 
 into praise; from thanking God for what He has 
 
 done for us, we are led on almost instinctively to 
 
 praise Him for what He is. It has been so in this 
 
 part of the Liturgy from the earliest times. No 
 
 sooner was the commemoration of God's benefits 
 
 in the Eucharistic Preface finished, than priest 
 
 and people joined in the great Seraphic Hymn 
 
 The drawing of praiso. The Church, moreover, has always ex- 
 together of 1 T /> 
 
 earth and prossed her belief that in this act there has been 
 UiTincarna- ^ closc Community of worship 1 between earth and 
 heaven, established by the Incarnation, for God has 
 gathered " together in one all things in Christ, both 
 which are in heaven and which are on earth, even 
 in Him . . . that we should be to the praise of His 
 glory." 
 
 One illustration will serve to convince us of the 
 sincerity of the belief among the primitive Chris- 
 tians. The Thanksgiving in S. James's Liturgy, 
 used in the Church of Jerusalem, ran thus : " It is 
 truly meet and right, becoming, and our bounden 
 duty, that we should praise Thee ... the Maker 
 of all creation, visible and in^'isible . . . Whom the 
 heavens, and the heavens of heavens, and all the 
 host thereof celebrate with hymns . . . the heavenly 
 congregation of Jerusalem, the Church of the first- 
 
 1 Cf. S. Chrysost. Som. in 2 ad Cor. 18. In commenting on 
 1 Cor. xi. 10, " because of the angels," he says : iier' eKeivwv 
 i/fiviXt, /Jier' (Keivoiv aSeis. Cf. Hooker, Ecd. Pol. \. xxiii., xxv. 2. 
 
The Tersanctus. 267 
 
 born, who are written in heaven ; the spirits of 
 righteous men and prophets ; the souls of martyrs 
 and apostles, angels and archangels, thrones and 
 dominions, principalities and powers, and the dread 
 hosts and Cherubim with many eyes, and the six- 
 winged Seraphim, with twain whereof they cover 
 their faces, and with twain their feet, and with twain 
 they fly, and they cry with ceaseless voices one to 
 another the triumphal song of the magnificence of 
 Thy glory, Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord of Hosts, 
 heaven and earth are full of Thy glory. Hosanna 
 in the highest. Blessed is He that cometh in the 
 name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest." ^ 
 
 It will be noticed that the concluding words of 
 the Tersanctus have not been preserved in our 
 present Office.^ In a slightly altered form ^ they had 
 a place in the first Prayer-book, but they were 
 erased in the second, as expressing too strongly for 
 the men of the time the Catholic doctrine of the 
 Real Presence. Strictly speaking, one, who comes 
 in the name of another, is not identical with him ; xhe omittcJ 
 but in this case the early Church, remembering that ^""^5^1'° 
 these were the words with which our Blessed Lord Pr^ence. 
 
 1 Much of the above is almost identical with the Quedushak, 
 tlie Jewish Sanctification Hymn for Sabbath morning Sabbath 
 Additional, in the various Rituals, Ashkenazic, Sepharadic, Italian. 
 
 - They are found in the Litt. of S. Chrysost., S. Basil, the 
 Malabar, the Mozarabic, and in the Sarura Missal. In the Cle- 
 mentine the Tersanctus and the Hosanna are in different parts. 
 
 3 The last clause was, "Glory to Thee, 0 Lord, in the highest." 
 
268 The Tersanctus. 
 
 was hailed in His triumphal entry, always inter- 
 preted them as applicable to Him, and in antici- 
 pation of His coming in the Sacrament sang them 
 in what was not infrequently called the Triumphal 
 Hymn. 
 
 Some confusion has arisen from the fact that " the 
 Thrice Holy " is a title assigned to two different 
 hymns of praise. That called by the Greek equiva- 
 lent, Trisagion,! under the form " Holy God, Holy 
 Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy upon us," was 
 TheTris- sung, before the Book of the Gospels was brought 
 ^^'cTfrom into the Church, in the Mass of the Catechumens in 
 sanctus East.^ Whcu it was first introduced is a matter 
 
 of uncertainty, but it is generally assigned to the 
 Patriarchate of Proclus from a tradition that a child 
 which had been rapt into heaven in the time of a 
 434 A.D. great earthquake at Constantinople commanded the 
 people to repeat it, upon doing which the city was 
 saved.^ A few years after this it was sung at the 
 451 A.D. Council of Chalcedon, in exultation at the depriva- 
 
 1 Freeman, ii. 336, attempts to show that this was derived from 
 tlie Jewish Shemoneh Esreh, or Eighteen Prayers used in the 
 Synagogue ; the similarity, however, is not at all obvious. It has, 
 however, a close resemblance to the Targ. Jonathan of Isa. vi. 3, 
 which runs thus: The Angels said: "... Holy in the high 
 heavens, the celestial place of the concentration of His Omni- 
 presence ! Holy upon the earth is the work of His might ! Holy 
 for ever and for time without end is the Lord God of Hosts ! " 
 
 - It was used in the West only on Good Friday, and forms in 
 the present Latin Use part of "the Reproaches," being still re- 
 peated in Greek as well as in a Latin version. Miss. Sar., col. 329. 
 
 3 Brighfs Ch. Hist., 404, 
 
The Tersanctus. 269 
 
 tion of Dioscurus; " shouts of applause were mingled 
 with the solemn hymn of the Trisagion."^ 
 
 The other hymn, designated by the Latin title 
 Tersanctus, taken directly from the Seraphic ascrip- 
 tion of praise in the vision which Isaiah saw in the 
 Temple, has always been appropriated to the Mass 
 of the Faithful, which is the more solemn part of 
 the Office, and dates back as far as we can trace 
 liturgical worship. 
 
 We shall find the thought of association suggested 
 by the introduction to this hymn very helpful in our 
 Eucharistic praise. 
 
 It is this consciousness that we are not alone in 
 what we do that makes even the weakest feel him- 
 self strong. Why is it that the Church appoints a 
 special day for united intercession % It is not The thought 
 merely, it is not mainly, that the prayers of the °^heTp to"°" 
 nation may be multiplied a millionfold ; but it is p™*^- 
 because she knows that her people will pray the 
 more easily and the more earnestly, when they are 
 stirred by the inspiring thought that the whole 
 world of Anglican Churchmen is on its knees, with 
 the same prayer upon its lips and the same, desire 
 at heart. Even so in our praises; when bowed 
 down with a sense of our own littleness and un- 
 worthiness, we gather warmth and zeal from the 
 realisation of the truth, that our individual praises 
 
 1 Kobertson s CVi. UisL, i. 527 m. 
 
270 The Tersanctus. 
 
 are not offered alone, but that they help to swell a 
 mighty chorus which is for ever entering into the 
 ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. 
 Union with gut with whom are we thus associated 1 In the 
 
 the Saints in 
 
 praise. Scrvice of the Altar, more emiihatically than in any 
 other, we are with Christ ; and where Christ is, 
 there is the Communion of Saints, there is the 
 Blessed Company of Angels. 
 
 We are one with those who have died in the faith 
 and fear of God. In the Celebration there is a sense 
 of nearness to the departed that is felt to be very 
 real ; and for this reason, not to mention others that 
 are more obvious, the Church suffered a grievous 
 loss when she allowed the Eucharist to drop out of 
 the Burial Office. It is being gradually recovered 
 through the growing conviction that whatever brings 
 our holy dead into closer communion with us must 
 help to purify our jDraises from earthly alloy. 
 
 The same Again, we are one with the Angels. If it be true, 
 
 with Angels. ^j^^ ^^^^ SaUg, that 
 
 " Millions of spiritual creatures walk the earth 
 Unseen, both when we wake, and when we sleep," 
 
 we cannot doubt that they surround the Altar in the 
 highest Service, to minister to Him Who deigns to 
 sit enthroned amid the praises of His Church. 
 
 There is yet another thought suggested by the 
 Tersanctus. In that dread Vision which Isaiah saw, 
 when the Seraphim cried one to another, " Holy, 
 
The Tersanchis. 271 
 
 Holy, Holy, is the Lord of Hosts," we remember that The lesson 
 those angelic beings, who had never fallen, veiled taught by 
 their faces and covered their feet, and we endeavour vulon.^ 
 to realise something of the awfulness of being per- 
 mitted with our sin-stained hearts to mingle in their 
 songs of praise. Then again, as we read on, we 
 learn how the rapt seer, longing to speak, was 
 checked by the thought of his sin, and could only 
 cry out, " Woe is me, for I am undone, because I am 
 a man of unclean lips ! " We learn too, blessed be 
 God ! for our encouragement, that the cry of abase- 
 ment unsealed his lips. Let it be then with more 
 of the reverent awe of the Angels, who share our 
 Eucharistic Worship, and with more of the sin- 
 stricken conscience of the prophet of God, that we 
 draw near to the Divine Mysteries and take up the 
 Seraphic Hymn, " Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of 
 Hosts, heaven and earth are full of Thy glory." 
 
XXXIV. 
 
 tSrapec of l^umblc acce^g. 
 
 " Then shall the Priest, kneeling down at the Lord's Table, say in the 
 name of all them that shall receive the Communion this prayer following : 
 * We do not presume,' " etc. 
 
 154S A.D. This Prayer was composed for the Order of Com- 
 munion, but it followed the line of thought to be 
 found in one of the primitive Liturgies. The 
 Liturgy of S. Basil contains the humble deprecation 
 of those who serve the Altar closely corresponding 
 The source to that with which this Form begins : " we sinners 
 thTpTayer "^^Y uuworthy servants who have been per- 
 was drawn, fitted to minister . . . not for our own righteous- 
 ness . . . but for Thy mercies and compassions, 
 draw nigh to Thy holy Altar." And there is a 
 similar parallel to the petition of the second part 
 for the mutual indwelling through the cleansing of 
 our souls and bodies, viz., " cleanse us from all de- 
 filement of flesh and spirit, that ... we may be 
 united to the Holy Body and Blood of Thy Christ, 
 and may have Christ dwelling in our hearts." 
 
 When this Prayer was introduced into the Scotch 
 
 272 
 
The Prayer of Humble Access. 273 
 
 Office it was entitled the " Collect of Humble Access 
 to the Holy Communion " ; this, together with the its original 
 rubrical order that it is to be said " in the name of before com- 
 all them that shall receive the Communion," shows mo"e'^appro. 
 that its original position in the Office, after the p"^"^- 
 Consecration and immediately preceding the Re- 
 ception, was more appropriate.^ Yet further, the 
 direction in the Order of Communion to the Priest 
 to kneel down at " God's Board " ^ associates it more 
 closely with the act of participation. It indicates 
 not so much the Altar on which the Oblation is 
 made, as the " Table " from which God dispenses the 
 Sacred Food. Again, the attitude of kneeling, en- 
 joined on the Priest, is more naturally taken before 
 communicating than before consecrating; in the 
 latter act he stands as Christ's representative to the 
 people ; in the former, identifying himself with 
 them, as also — on the only other occasion ^ when he 
 is bidden to kneel — he humbles himself in awe and 
 self-abasement for the reception of the Unspeakable 
 Gift. We do not mean of course that the Priest has 
 no need to pray before he presumes to execute the 
 office of Christ's delegate, for in the old English Use 
 
 1 It was first placed in tliis position when composed for the 
 Order of Com., and it retained it in 1st P. B., and in the Scotch 
 Office, but not in the American, which is somewhat singular, 
 considering its derivation from the Scotch. 
 
 " This expression was adopted in the Scotch Office in 16-37, but 
 has since given way to " Altar." 
 
 3 For the Confession. 
 
 S 
 
2 74 The Prayer of Humble Access. 
 
 he was wont to pray before entering upon the 
 Canon: "In the spirit of humility and with a 
 contrite heart, may we be accepted by Thee, 0 
 Lord," and to ask the prayers of the people as 
 well, "Brethren and sisters, pray for me, that my 
 Sacrifice, and your own as well, may be accepted 
 by the Lord our God " ; but the special direction 
 to him to kneel, combined with the other cir- 
 cumstances which we have noticed, seems decisive 
 as to its most suitable position, if a choice were 
 left. 
 
 After setting forth our utter unworthiness apart 
 from God's mercy to approach the Divine ]\Iysteries, 
 the Prayer reminds us of the great possibilities 
 within our reach, the purification of body and soul 
 so complete that it may be followed up by the per- 
 petual indwelling of Him Who cleanseth from all 
 The honoui- sin. It speaks first of the body, and it is worthy 
 
 able place . . 
 
 assigned to of uotice how cqual honour is bestowed upon the 
 this'offi'ce" body as on the soul in this Ofiice : " The Body " 
 (and) " The Blood " " of our Lord Jesus Christ pre- 
 serve thy body and soul " ; " here we offer and 
 present unto Thee our souls and bodies." It is an 
 echo of the Apostle's prayer, " I pray God your 
 whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blame- 
 less unto the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ " ; ^ 
 and of that very striking declaration to the Eomans 
 1 1 Thess. V. 23. 
 
TJic Prayer of Htimble Access. 275 
 
 that the adoption for which we are groaning within 
 ourselves is " the redemption of our body." 
 
 The human body has been hallowed for ever by 
 the Incarnation. Our own bodies are hallowed 
 through the Sacraments, which are the Divinely- 
 appointed means for appropriating to the individual 
 in successive generations the blessings which the 
 Incarnation procured once for all for the whole race 
 of men. They are so cleansed from sin in Holy 
 Baptism as to be made sanctuaries of the Spirit of 
 God, and they may be kept so clean by union with 
 the Body of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, that He 
 will abide in us for ever ; for " He that eateth My 
 Flesh and drinketh My Blood dwelleth in Me and 
 I in Him"; "and I will raise him up at the last 
 day." 
 
 It was from not recognising the great honour and 
 high destiny of the body that the Presbyterians 
 were led at the Savoy Conference to raise an objec- objections 
 tion to the language of this prayer, on the ground prayerat'lh! 
 that it seemed to assign greater efEcacy to the Blood ^^'^y 
 
 ference. 
 
 of Christ than to His Body ; for while it ascribes 
 the cleansing of our bodies to the latter, it attri- 
 butes to the former the cleansing of the soul. In 
 their eyes it was a higher ofifice to fit the soul for 
 heaven than the body. The Bishops in their reply 
 were not careful to explain, as we might have ex- 
 pected, that for the restoration of the man the 
 
276 The Prayer of Htimble Access. 
 
 redemption of the body is of equal import with 
 that of the soul, but answered not very convincingly 
 by an analogy, saying that they assigned no more 
 efficacy to Christ's Blood than He Himself did 
 " when He saith. This is My Blood which is shed 
 for you and for many for the remission of sins, and 
 saith not so explicitly of His Body." 
 
 The compilers of the Order of Communion 
 simply adopted the language of a primitive Liturgy,^ 
 " Grant, 0 Lord, that our bodies may be sanctified 
 by Thy Holy Body, and our souls cleansed by Thy 
 atoning Blood," and in doing so they rested on the 
 authority of Scripture, which expressly states that 
 " it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the 
 soul." 
 
 itstesiimony Now, there is one word in this Prayer, small and 
 trine of the insignificant in itself, but pregnant with importance 
 ^nce^"" as it is here used. " Grant us, therefore. Gracious 
 Lord, &o to eat . . . that we may evermore dwell 
 in Him and He in us." It implies the terrible 
 alternative that we may so eat the Flesh of Christ 
 as not to ensure that blessed result. It teaches, in 
 short, the doctrine of the objective Presence of 
 Christ in the Sacrament, that, as the Article, when 
 rightly interpreted, suggests, we may receive the 
 Body of Christ and yet be in no wise partakers of 
 Christ." With this awful possibility before us, we 
 The Syrian Liturgy of S. James. 2 cf. supra, p. 188. 
 
The Prayer of Humble Access. 277 
 
 may well fall low on our knees, and in fear and 
 trembling, before we put forth our hands to receive, 
 pray that that which was ordained by Christ to be 
 unto us " a savour of life unto life " may never be 
 turned into " a savour of death unto death." 
 
XXXV. 
 
 %[}£ lK,ubn'c before Conslecrati'on. 
 
 " When the Priest, standing before the Table, hath so ordered the Bread 
 and Wine, that he may with more readiness and decency break the Bread 
 before the people, and take the Cup into his hands, he shall say the Prayer 
 of Consecration." 
 
 The J ewish Priest invariably stood to offer sacri- 
 fice. " Every Priest standeth daily ministering and 
 offering oftentimes the same sacrifices " : this is the 
 The Priest testimony of Holy Scripture.^ The same posture 
 
 has always 
 
 stood to offer was adopted into the Christian Church from the 
 sacrifice. beginning. The Clementine Liturgy^ directs the 
 Celebrant to "put on a shining vestment and to 
 stand at the Altar " ; and in the Liturgy of Jeru- 
 salem ^ the priests say, " we are filled with fear and 
 trembling, being about to stand at Thy Holy Altar, 
 and offer this awful and unbloody Sacrifice." The 
 same posture has been uniformly observed in the 
 English Church ; even the compilers of the second 
 Prayer-book provided for it. It must be accepted 
 as an indirect acknowledgment that the Service is in 
 
 J Ep. to Heb. X. 11 ; Deut. x. 8. 
 s Apost Constit. viii. xii. 
 278 
 
 3 Goar, p. 162. 
 
The Riibj^ic before Cojisecratioii. 279 
 
 some sense sacrificial, and different in kind from that 
 which the minister offers in Matins and Evensong, 
 where he identifies himself with the congregation 
 by kneeling for prayer. The single exception, during 
 the Versicles preceding the Collects and the Collects 
 themselves, finds its most probable explanation ^ in 
 the idea that the Collects are an essential part of 
 the Eucharistic Office, and that the Versicles are 
 closely allied to them, as giving the key-note of the 
 same. In the final revision the rubric was en- 
 larged from, "Then the Priest standing up shall 
 say," into its present form. There is some ambi- His position 
 guity touching its right interpretation, whether he f^^J"]'^ '''' 
 is only to stand " before the Table " to order the 
 Elements, or throughout the whole of the Prayer 
 following. We can have no doubt as to primitive 
 practice, though but very little positive evidence is 
 forthcoming ; perhaps there is none for several cen- 
 turies save that which may be taken from the Cata- 
 combs. It was expressly ordered in the third ^.d. 269. 
 century that the Eucharist should be celebrated, 
 whenever it was possible, on the Altar-tombs of 
 Saints and holy men. These were usually of the 
 form known as mwsoUa, where it would have been in the Cata 
 impossible for the Celebrant to stand otherwise than 
 
 J Some of these, however, refer to the Prayer for tlie Queen, 
 etc., which are not properly Collects. No other intelligent reason 
 has been assigned for the priest's posture. 
 
28o The Rubric before Consecration. 
 
 facing the tomb with the people behind him.^ This 
 position was observed all through the Pre-Eeforma- 
 tioa history in the English Church, and it is gener- 
 ally supposed that the rubric in the first Prayer- 
 book, " the Priest, turning him to the Altar," implied 
 a continuance of it. When at the second revision 
 His position Altars were brought down into the body of the 
 in the Re- Qhurch, he would still stand relatively to the Altar 
 
 formed ' •' 
 
 Offices. as before, i.e.. at the broad side of it ; and the 
 natural inference in the absence of any other direc- 
 tion is that "before the Table" in our present Office 
 implies the old position. The legal decisions have 
 spoken with uncertain sound, but the latest judg- 
 ment of the Privy Council gives a qualified sanction 
 to what is technically designated " the Eastward 
 position." 
 
 Difficulty of Again, the expression, "break the Bread hefore 
 '"beforr"^ ftoph" seems to admit of various interpretations, 
 the people." ]^j^g Privy Gouncil have seemed to fix its meaning 
 as " in the sight of the people," for they only 
 allowed the Eastward position provided the Cele- 
 brant did not intentionally hide " the manual acts " 
 of Consecration from the congregation. So far it 
 would appear to have been directed by the revisers 
 as a protest against the Eoman practice, as well as 
 
 1 If there had been any virtue in another position it would 
 have heen provided for by altering the construction of the tombs 
 
 after this order had been passed. 
 
The Riibric before Consecration. 281 
 
 that of the Eastern Church ; both concealed the 
 manual acts, the former, not necessarily of set pur- 
 pose, but as incidental to the ordinary position of 
 the sacrificing Priest ; the latter by design, for the 
 Chancel-gates were closed, or the Veil drawn till the 
 Consecration was effected. But on the other hand 
 we are almost driven to another explanation, for 
 when we remember the dread the Reformers had of 
 the medieeval Eite of Elevation, against which the 
 Articles ^ had apparently protested in saying that 
 " the Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be 
 gazed upon," or " to be lifted up," it does seem diffi- 
 cult to believe that the revisers would lay stress 
 upon the congregation being able to witness with 
 their eyes the breaking of the Bread in the hands 
 of the Priest. It was at least creating a risk of 
 reviving a condemned and disused practice. 
 
 We look therefore for some other interpretation. 
 If " before " may be understood as meaning " in the 
 presence of," the direction becomes intelligible at 
 once. All through the Puritan ascendancy every- 
 thing had been done to lower the dignity of the 
 Sacrament. From the second Prayer-book to the 
 final revision there were no rubrical notes for any 
 manual acts in the Prayer of Consecration, and it is 
 almost certain that there had been no ceremonial 
 fraction of the Bread. Amid the prevailing indiffer- 
 1 XXV., xxviii. 
 
282 The Rubric before Consecration. 
 
 ence on the part of the Priesthood, it was broken 
 or cut into pieces by a subordinate oflBcial in the 
 Vestry before the Service. 
 
 When Cosin proposed the present rubrics, he 
 called the attention of his fellow-revisers to the 
 omission, having in view the restoration of a 
 highly symbolical act to be performed by the proper 
 person and in the proper place, as an integral part 
 of the Consecration Service, in the presence of the 
 congregation.^ 
 
 The manner of " saying " the Prayer of Consecra- 
 tion has varied at different times. In the early 
 ages it was invariably said " aloud " both in the 
 East and West.^ In the Eastern Church it would 
 Whether the Seem that the primitive custom was in danger of 
 being lost earlier than in the Western, for Justinian 
 I. enacted in his Code of Laws that the Oblation 
 should be made " not silently, but in a voice audible 
 to the faithful." The intervention of the Civil 
 Power did not altogether stay the innovation, though 
 it led to the Words of Institution being recited 
 aloud, so that the people could respond at the close; 
 all the rest is said inaudibly. 
 
 1 Cf. Pamphlet, "Before the. People," by Morton Shaw, published 
 by Rivingtons, in which he considers both the above interpre- 
 tations, together with a third taken from the Roman technical 
 phrase, "missa coram episcopo," or "summo pontifice," in which 
 case the Celebrant always stands ^vith his back to the person 
 coram quo he celebrates. 
 - For numerous authorities cf. Scud. Notit. Euch. vi. sec. iii. 
 
TJie Rubric before Consecration. 283 
 
 There was less excuse for the change that took 
 place in the Western Churches, for the Greek of 
 the Oriental Liturgies was understood long after 
 Latin had become a dead language. Nevertheless 
 the Roman Church was anticipated in the departure 
 from ancient usage by at least two centuries. The 
 first notice of a " secret " recitation of the words of 
 Consecration is in the Roman Directory, commonly 
 called Ordo Romanus, and assigned to the beginning 
 of the eighth century. It states that at the close of a.d. 730. 
 the Sanctus the Bishop " rises alone and enters 
 silently upon the Canon." A great variety of rea- 
 sons have been put forward to justify the Roman 
 practice, all more or less mystical and wholly insufiB- 
 cient. One will suffice in illustration. Amalarius 
 writes, " The Prayer is called ' Secret,' as being 
 said secretly. In this the priest prays to be purged 
 at the present time. It belongs to the priest alone, 
 to offer sacrifice to God alone ; and therefore because 
 we speak out of our thoughts, no loud voice is 
 necessary, but words for this purpose alone, that the 
 priest may be reminded what he ought to think." ^ 
 
 It cuts at the very root of the priesthood of the The priest- 
 laity. If they have been ordained in Baptism " to not'to 
 offer unto God spiritual sacrifices," it cannot be right 
 to preclude them from taking an intelligent part in 
 the central act of the great Eucharistic Oblation. 
 
 1 De KticUs. Off. iii. 32. 
 
284 The Rubric before Consecration. 
 
 This prerogative was exercised in the early ages 
 by the repetition of the " Amen " at the close of 
 "the giving of thanks," ^ by which they manifested 
 their cooperation and sealed the action of their 
 representative Priest ; and it was happily restored 
 after long neglect by the final revision. 
 
 It is to be jealously guarded by the laity, as 
 everything else which reminds them of the respon- 
 sibilities of their Baptismal consecration to the 
 service of God. 
 
 1 Cf. 1 Cor. xiv. 16 ; Just. Mart. Apol. i. 65 ; Euseb. Ecc. Hist. 
 vii. 9. 
 
XXXVI. 
 
 ^m^zv of Consfccrati'on. 
 
 " Almighty God, our heavenly Father, Who of Thy tender mercy didst 
 give Thine only Son Jesus Christ to suffer death upon the Cross for our 
 redemption ; Who made there (by His one oblation of Himself once offered) 
 a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins 
 of the whole world ; and did institute, and in His holy Gospel command us 
 to continue, a perpetual memory of that His precious Death, until His 
 coming again." 
 
 Wk here reach the central act of the whole 
 Service, the Consecration of the Elements. The 
 form under which it is effected is called in the 
 English Office "the Prayer of Consecration." It is The three- 
 divided into three distinct parts, the commemoration of'f(,f " 
 of Our Blessed Lord's Sacrifice and Death ; the p'^^v^'^- 
 petition which corresponds to the ancient Invoca- 
 tion of the Holy Spirit for the sanctification of the 
 bread and wine; and the recitation of the Words 
 of Institution. 
 
 The first part begins by setting forth the Sacrifi- 
 cial Death of the Incarnate God as the perfect 
 propitiation for the sins of the world, and ends by 
 
 ... , Ti 1 Thecommc- 
 
 reminding us that it is not over and past like the moration of 
 ordinary events of history. The Incarnation and oelth* 
 
 •2S.5 
 
286 The Prayer of Consecration. 
 
 Passion have their extension in the commemorative 
 sacrifice of the Altar. 
 
 It asserts that the Sacrifice of the Cross, unlike 
 any of the typical sacrifices, was full and complete ; 
 the latter by reason of their imperfection were con- 
 tinually repeated ; the former, as absolutely and 
 entirely perfect, can never be renewed. It is " one 
 oblation once offered," but though complete in itself, 
 it is not a thing of the past. The Act of Will 
 whereby the Eternal Father so loved the world that 
 He gave His Only-Begotten Son, and whereby the 
 Only- Begotten gave Himself to death, is as living 
 and deliberate an act now, as eighteen centuries 
 ago : since He whose act it was and is, " knows no 
 variableness, neither shadow of turning." Accord- 
 ingly Our Lord in glory, ever presenting before the 
 Father His human Nature, crucified and risen, con- 
 tinuously pleads this one Sacrifice ; and with this 
 perpetual pleading, His earthly representatives asso- 
 ciate themselves at all the Altars of the Christian 
 Church. 
 
 Ti.e perfect The SacHfice of the Cross was a "full " sacrifice; 
 
 nessofHis . , , , 
 
 Sacrifice. it did uot suppIy oue or another human need or 
 make atonement for one or another phase of human 
 sin, like the peace-ofi"ering or sin-offering or trespass- 
 offering of the Old Dispensation, but it gathered up 
 into itself every imaginable transgression, and made 
 an atonement thereof to God. "The Blood of Jesus 
 
The Pi^ayer of Consecration. 
 
 287 
 
 Christ cleanseth from all sin." Again, it was a 
 " perfect " sacrifice, for through the Union of the 
 Divine and human Natures of Jesus Christ, He was 
 compassed by no infirmity ; in Him there was no 
 sin 1 or imperfection of any kind — none by trans- 
 mission from the progenitor of tlie race, none by 
 commission in a sinful world.^ " He is holy, harm- 
 less, undefiled, separate from sinners, Who needeth 
 not daily, as those high priests, to off"er up sacrifice 
 first for his own sins and then for the people's. For 
 the Law maketh men high priests which have infir- 
 mity ; but the word of the oath, which was since 
 the Law, maketh the Son, Who is consecrated (or 
 rather perfected) for evermore."^ Again, it was 
 said of Him, " Being made perfect, He became the 
 Author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey 
 Him." * Once more, it was a " sufficient " sacrifice. The sufs- 
 Christ's Death was more than an heroic act of self- Atonemin 
 sacrifice. By a mystery that must ever baffle our 
 human comprehension, the Lord " laid on Him the 
 iniquity of us all," and accepted His Offering as full 
 payment and satisfaction for all the debts that had 
 need to be forgiven. What gave to the Oblation 
 its infinite worth was the tremendous fact that the 
 
 1 Cf. the Author's Foolprinls, etc., i. 30 n. Supra, p. 244. 
 
 - The qualification for a victim to be sacrificed was that it 
 should be d/xu/xos, &<nri\os, without any blemish at its birth, or 
 injury contracted in life. 
 
 3 Hi-b. vii. 27, 28. ■> Ileb. v. 9. 
 
288 The Prayer of Consecration. 
 
 Victim was not only perfect man but also perfect God. 
 This Oblation, the prayer reminds us, was "once 
 offered." The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews ^ 
 contrasts the sacrifices of the Jewish with that of 
 the Christian Dispensation. The former were many 
 in number, various in kind : each was distinct from 
 Once offered all Others : they were offered afresh and repeated 
 tinuous,'^°" day by day and year by year. The latter was one, 
 once for all offered, " one Sacrifice for sins for ever." 
 
 But how is this consistent with the continuity of 
 the Sacrifice % The latter part of the Commemora- 
 tion of the Sacrifice in this Prayer embodies a 
 Divine command " to continue a perpetual memory'^ 
 of that His precious Death, until His coming again." 
 For the right understanding of the doctrine we 
 must fall back upon the Levitical account of the 
 The Ritual typical sacrifice of the great Day of Atonement, to 
 ol^h^Day wliich we are directly referred by an inspired 
 of Atone- Writer. » After the High-priest had offered the 
 bullock as a sin-offering for himself, he was com- 
 manded " to bring the goat upon which the Lord's 
 lot fell, and offer him for a sin-offering for the people." 
 As soon as this was slain in the outer Court of the 
 Temple, the High-priest took its blood within the 
 
 1 Especially in chapp. ix. s. 
 
 2 In 1 P.B. it was " memorial," not memory. It represents 
 avd/wria-is, and implies something to remind God as well as man. 
 Cf. Footprints ii. 196-8 for the evidence of this. 
 
 3 Lev. xvi. ; Heb. ix. 7,12, 25. 
 
The Prayer of Consecration. 289 
 
 Veil, sprinkled it upon the Mercy-seat, and pleaded 
 with God by virtue of it for the forgiveness of the 
 people's sins for the whole year. It is " the blood 
 which maketh Atonement for the soul " ; and with- 
 out the presentation of this before God, the victim 
 would have died to no purpose. It was this which 
 gave efficacy to and completed the sacrifice. 
 
 When we turn to the Antitype we see how Christ 
 suffered " without the camp," dying on the Cross 
 symbolically beyond the walls of Jerusalem, and 
 how at the Ascension He passed into the Holy of 
 Holies to appear before the true Mercy-seat, and 
 plead with the Father the efficacy of His all-sufficient 
 Sacrifice. " By His own Blood He entered in once 
 into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemp- 
 tion for us." 
 
 We can see now how the Sacrifice on the Cross 
 was complete and perfect but continuous ; for no 
 Jewish propitiatory sacrifice was finished till the 
 blood of it had been sprinkled on the altar. It 
 is true that without shedding of blood there is no 
 remission, but such blood-shedding is only prepara- 
 tory to its being pleaded before God. Even so, it was 
 not of the Sacrifice that Christ said " It is finished": Not of His 
 
 „ . , „ . Sacrifice th: 
 
 all pain and sufiermg was over ; the agony of death Christ said 
 was passed : " He being dead dieth no more," but 
 the Sacrifice will never be consummated " until His 
 coming again." 
 
 T 
 
290 The Prayer of Consecration. 
 
 As long as He is in heaven He is offering the 
 Mt morial of His Passion, exhibiting His sacrificial 
 wounds, and interceding in His High-priestly office 
 by the merits of His Blood ; for we are expressly 
 told that " He offered Himself once for all," and at 
 the same time, that as " every high-priest is ordained 
 to offer gifts and sacrifices, it is of necessity that This 
 Man have somewhat also to offer." ^ It is " One 
 Sacrifice for ever," begun when Christ surrendered 
 Himself in the eternal counsels of the Godhead, 
 but not to be fully accomplished till He shall have 
 delivered up His Mediatorial Kingdom at the end 
 of the world. 
 
 The Euchar- Now the " perpetual memory " of which the Con- 
 counter^an'^ sccration Prayer speaks is the earthly counterpart 
 sl^rifice'^ of that which is being offered in heaven. In the 
 Christian dispensation there is but one Sacrifice. The 
 Holy Eucharist is no reiteration of the Sacrifice on 
 the Cross ; it is, as Cosin^ wrote, " no new sacrifice, 
 but the same which was once offered, and which is 
 every day offered to God by Christ in heaven, and 
 continueth here still on earth by a mystical repre- 
 sentation " ; or again, as Jeremy Taylor^ still further 
 explained it, " as Christ Himself is a Priest in 
 heaven for ever, and yet does not sacrifice Himself 
 afresh, nor yet without a sacrifice could He be a 
 
 1 Heb. viii. 3. 
 
 2 Qu. by J. R. West, The Holy Eucharist, p. 131. ^ Ibid. 
 
The Prayer of CoTisecration. 291 
 
 Priest, but by a daily ministration and intercession 
 represents His Sacrifice to God, and offers Himself 
 to God as sacrificed ; so He does upon earth by the 
 ministry of His servants. He is ofl"ered to God, 
 that is. He is by prayers and the Sacrament repre- 
 sented or ofi'ered up to God as sacrificed." 
 
 It was because of the vivid realisation, which the 
 Church had all through the Pre-Eeformation history, 
 and during the time of the first Prayer-book, of the The unity of 
 unity of the heavenly and earthly pleadings of the andh^av'eniy 
 one great Sacrifice, that prayers for the whole estate sacrifice 
 
 ° ' •> realised by 
 
 of Christ's Church, aUke the living and the dead, the Church, 
 were knit up with the very central Act of the 
 Eucharistic Office. The voices of the Celebrant, and 
 of the people assenting in the exercise of their 
 priesthood, are caught up and presented before God 
 by the Voice of Him Who alone can make effec- 
 tual intercession for the transgressors. 
 
 Again, viewing the connexion in another light, 
 the Church has never been satisfied merely to place 
 before men the doctrine of the Atonement, and to 
 leave them to obtain the benefits of it for themselves, The means 
 as best they may, but has pointed them to the ^""p^;,"/"' 
 Eucharistic sacrifice as the Divinely - appointed "''''^'^ 
 
 Atonemem. 
 
 means for appropriating its all-sufficient virtue to 
 individual souls. Both for ourselves then, and for 
 others, we can find in the Sacrament of the Altar 
 in the fullest measure grace to help in time of need. 
 
XXXVII. 
 
 Intocatioti of tl)e ?^ol? (155o0t* 
 
 " Hear us (O Merciful Father) we most humbly beseech Thee ; and grant 
 that we receiving these Thy Creatures of bread and wine, according to Thy 
 Son, our Saviour, Jesus Christ's holy institution, in remembrance of His 
 Death and Passion, may be partakers of His most blessed Body and 
 Blood." 
 
 In all the primitive Liturgies the act of consecra- 
 tion was associated with a prayer. The object, 
 however, for which the prayer was offered was not 
 Prayer for always the Same. In the Eastern Churches it was 
 of'the Hdy nuiformly addressed to God the Father for a direct 
 Sacrament'' desceut of the Holy Spirit upon the worshippers and 
 upon the elements, to bless the former and so to 
 sanctify the latter that they might become the Body 
 and Blood of Jesus Christ. Of this the Liturgy of 
 S. Chrysostom, used at Constantinople, supplies the 
 normal form, " Send down Thy Holy Spirit upon us, 
 and upon these gifts lying before Thee. . . . Make 
 this Bread the precious Body of Thy Christ. Amen. 
 And that which is in this Cup the precious Blood 
 of Thy Christ. Amen. Changing them by Thy 
 Holy Spirit. Amen." ^ 
 
 J Swainson, Greek Litt, 91, 92, 130, 131. 
 
 292 
 
The Invocation of the Holy Ghost. 293 
 
 In some Liturgies there was combined with this 
 twofold prayer a further petition that the recipients 
 of the Blessed Sacrament might partake of it bene- 
 ficially. The earliest form of this is found in the The 
 Liturgy of Jerusalem,^ in which the AU-Holy Spirit. °™ 
 is invoked " upon us and on these gifts set forth ; 
 that He coming upon them may by His holy and 
 good and glorious Presence, sanctify tliem, and 
 make this Bread the holy Body of Thy Christ, and 
 this Cup the precious Blood of Thy Christ, that 
 they may be to all who partake thereof the cause of 
 forgiveness of sins and eternal life, and the hallow- 
 ing of souls and bodies, and the fruitful production 
 of good woi'ks." One or other of these forms, with 
 slight variations, occurs in all the Liturgies of the 
 East ; and it is important to notice that they testify 
 distinctly to the objective Presence of Christ in 
 the Sacrament. S. Cyril, in his Catechetical Lec- 
 tures, commenting on this petition in the latter 
 Liturgy, leaves no shadow of doubt by adding " for 
 whatever the Holy Spirit touched is sanctified and 
 changed." - 
 
 When we turn to the Western Liturgies we are 
 confronted by some very important variations. 
 Unfortunately there is considerable uncertainty 
 
 1 The Clementine gives the same in an expanded form. Apost. 
 Constii. viii. 12, § 17. 
 s Calech. Myst. v. 5. 
 
294 
 
 The Invocation of 
 
 hanging round the original forms used in not a few 
 of the Churches ; even the Roman form is by no 
 Departures means Certain. Liturgiologists, however, seem gener- 
 tive usage in ally agreed that there was an Invocation of the Holy 
 forra^*"° Spirit in the Gallican and Spanish Liturgies,^ but 
 none in the Churches of Italy and Eome.^ In the 
 590 A. D. Roman Liturgy, as it was used in the time of 
 Gregory the Great,^ a prayer, which corresponded 
 to that of the Eastern Liturgies, was couched in 
 these terms : " This oblation therefore of our service, 
 as well as of Thy whole family, we beseech Thee, 0 
 Lord, graciously to accept through Christ our Lord ; 
 . . . and do Thou, 0 Lord, we beseech Thee, vouchsafe 
 to make this oblation in all ways blessed, valid, 
 reasonable, and acceptable, that it may become unto 
 us the Body and Blood of Thy most dearly beloved 
 Son, our Lord God Jesus Christ." The variation 
 here from the Eastern and undoubtedly primitive 
 form is twofold ; there is no mention of the agency 
 of the Holy Spirit, and the petition for the change 
 in the Elements is not absolute ; in other words, 
 the language used is consistent with the theory of 
 a Presence which is only subjective. It is needless 
 
 1 Maskell's Anc. Lit. cix. n. 
 
 2 Palmer's Orig. Lit. ii. 137. 
 
 3 There is no certainty of the form in use before, but the pas- 
 sage cited in the te.\t just below is found in the Canon, attributed 
 to Gelasius in the Stowe Missal.— Ed. Warren, p. 226 ; Hammond, 
 p. 360. 
 
the Holy Ghost. 295 
 
 to say that it does not exclude the doctrine of the 
 objective Presence, for this was universally taught in 
 the Roman Church at this time. It is by no means 
 improbable that the direct language of the East was 
 purposely avoided, lest it should seem to traverse 
 the Roman belief that the Sacramental change was 
 wrought by the recitation of the Words of the 
 Institution. 
 
 The Roman form was adopted in the Sarum xi.e form 
 
 introducec 
 
 Use. At the Reformation the first revisers of the the first 
 Prayer-book introduced a form which could claim ^■^"'^'^r bo 
 no authority from any one of the Liturgies which 
 had come down from antiquity. They composed 
 a prayer partly from the Eastern Liturgies, partly 
 from the Roman : " Hear us (0 Merciful Father), 
 we beseech Thee ; and with Thy Holy Spirit and 
 Word vouchsafe to ble>I*ss and sanc>i<tify these 
 Thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that 
 they may be unto us the Body and Blood of Thy 
 most dearly beloved Son, Jesus Christ." The 
 recognition of the agency of the Holy Spirit was 
 a very distinct gain, and in accordance with the 
 most primitive usage. But having followed anti- 
 quity so far, it was unfortunate that they did 
 not do so throughout, and make a clearer state- 
 ment of the true Eucharistic doctrine, by praying 
 simply that the Elements might be made the 
 Body and Blood of Christ. This novel form was 
 
296 
 
 The Invocation of 
 
 adopted in Scotland in the Office which was 
 drawn up in 1637, but in the present recog- 
 nised Scotch Liturgy, as it was revised in 1764, 
 it is changed so as to represent the primitive 
 doctrine, the qualifying statement '•' unto us " being 
 omitted.^ 
 
 It is evident, however, that the adoption of these 
 words into the first Prayer-book were not inter- 
 preted as excluding the Catholic doctrine of the 
 Objections Objective Presence; for nothing would satisfy 
 
 raised by J o J 
 
 Bucer. Bucer, and the School which he represented, till all 
 reference to any change wrought by the operation 
 of the Holy Ghost was erased, and the language 
 was made to confine more clearly, as they thought, 
 the Presence of Christ's Body to the worthy 
 recipient : " grant that we receiving these Thy 
 creatures . . . may be partakers of His Most 
 Blessed Body and Blood."- 
 
 Now there can be no question that our present 
 Office, which successive revisers in the reigns of 
 Elizabeth, James I., and both Charles i. and 11., endea- 
 voured, and often successfully, to recover from the 
 
 1 The original Scotch Office gained but little favour in Scotland. 
 Its use in S. Giles', Edinburgh, was the signal for the revolt 
 against the Church and the King. After the Restoration the 
 English Office was sparingly used at first, and then veiy gene- 
 rally, till efforts were made for the revival of the Scotch Office by 
 Bishop Gadderar in 1724, and continued at intervals till the 
 present revised Office was formally accepted in 1764. 
 
 = In 2 P. B. Edw. vi. 1552. 
 
the Holy Ghost. 297 
 
 grave 
 
 defect. 
 
 baleful influence of Bucer and Calvin, is in the 
 matter of the Invocation distinctly inferior to the 
 first Prayer-book. It has even been objected that The absence 
 the absence of a direct prayer for the operation °^ 'j^^ 
 of the Holy Ghost goes far to invalidate the Con- 
 secration. The first American Bishop, Seabury, 
 expressed such a strong disapproval of it that, 
 when asked to celebrate with the English Office, 
 he said : " To confess the truth, I hardly con- 
 sider the form to be used as strictly amounting 
 to a consecration " ; and it would seem that the 
 objection is still felt in the American Church, 
 for Seabury's successor, the present Bishop of 
 Connecticut, has declared that in giving the primi- 
 tive form of Consecration, "Scotland gave us a 
 greater boon than when she gave us the Epis- 
 copate." ^ 
 
 The question of validity depends entirely upon 
 our being able to ascertain the exact means by 
 which consecration is effected ; and this is far from 
 being an easy matter. The Eastern Church, accord- 
 ing to the language of the Liturgies, and the com- 
 ments of S. Cyril, S. Basil, and others, used to 
 attribute the Sacramental change to the Invo- 
 cation of the Holy Spirit, and the position of this 
 after the Words of Institution is quite consistent 
 -with this belief. But in later days, at the Council 
 1 Dowden's Annot. ScotU Office. See 114. 117. 
 
298 
 
 The Invocation of 
 
 of Florence,^ and since what is known as " the 
 1439 A.D. Moscow Controversy," the principle has been 
 The difficulty accepted that consecration is effected by the com- 
 whaTeffr^s bined use of both. The Russian Catechism asks, 
 tkm""^^ "What is the most essential act in this part of the 
 Liturgy % " The answer is, " The utterance of the 
 words which Jesus Christ spake in instituting the 
 Sacrament : Take eat, this is My Body : drink ye all of 
 this. This is My Blood of the New Testament. And 
 after this, the Invocation of the Holy Ghost, and 
 the blessing the gifts, that is, the bread and wine 
 which have been offered." 
 
 The Roman Church holds that the consecration 
 is effected entirely by the recitation of the words, 
 "This is My Body" : "this is the Cup of My Blood";"^ 
 and does not use, and never has used, as far as can 
 The English be ascertained, the Praj er of Invocation. If, there- 
 church™^" fore, the absence of this invalidates, or in any way 
 auke in the .^ffgcj-g t]jg completeness of the Anglican consecra- 
 
 absence of ' ^ ° 
 
 theinvoca- tiou, the same applies with equal force to the 
 Roman. But it has been well maintained that the 
 question as to the necessity of that Pi-ayer to a 
 valid consecration is decided, because the whole 
 
 1 The representatives of the East accepted the Roman view, 
 and explained the necessity of the Invocation to prepare the 
 Communicants ; but their action was disavowed, and the author- 
 ity of the Council rejected. 
 
 - Card. Bona, Rer. Lit. ii. xiii. Co. of Trent, de Euch. Sacr. 
 xx.-xxiii. 
 
the Holy Ghost. 299 
 
 Catholic Church held communion with the Churches 
 of Italy and Rome during the primitive ages ; and 
 had there been any essential defect in the form of 
 consecration in those Churches, it must have been 
 noticed and objected to by the rest of the world. 
 Now no such objection was ever made against the 
 Eoman and Italian Liturgies during the first six or 
 eight centuries, and therefore the forms were valid 
 according to the judgment of the primitive Church.^ 
 We may rest fully assured then that there is no 
 essential feature wanting in the consecration by 
 the English Office. "We may have a full conviction 
 that the agency of the Holy Spirit is instru- 
 mental in producing the Sacramental change, and 
 yet not deem the omission to express this convic- 
 tion in the Office fatal to its validity. We pray 
 that those who receive the consecrated Bread and 
 Wine maybe partakers of Christ's Body and Bloodj 
 we may make no mention of the means by which 
 the result is obtained, knowing well that God will 
 accomplish it in His own appointed way, namely, 
 by the agency of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 Having, however, established the validity of 
 Consecration according to the Anglican Eite, we 
 
 need not hesitate to point out how much would be ^he un- 
 doubted gain 
 
 gained by restoring the ancient recognition of the of restoring 
 work of the Holy Ghost in the highest Service tion. 
 1 Palmer, Orig. Lit. ii. 137. 
 
300 
 
 The Invocation of 
 
 of the Churcli. On the one hand it would bring 
 our Office into closer accord with the Offices of the 
 earliest Churches ; and everything that strengthens 
 the historic character of our worship, amidst a 
 growing love for much that is novel and untried, is 
 a distinct gain. 
 
 On the other hand, it would help to remove a 
 reproach that is often brought upon us in perfect 
 good faith by religious Nonconformists. Believing, 
 as they do, the Holy Spirit to be the One quicken- 
 ing power in the spiritual life, they not unnaturally 
 feel difficulty in realising the fact that the Church 
 is apparently contented to ignore His influence in 
 her highest act of worship. We may sympathise 
 with their objection ; and while we point out how 
 in the one Sacrament it is placed in the very fore- 
 front of the Office and recurs again and again, we 
 are bound in self-justification to insist that but for 
 the intervention of those, who were in fact the first 
 to dissent from Catholic truth, the action of the 
 Holy Ghost in the other Sacrament would have 
 continued to receive the fullest recognition. The 
 true motto of the Church, alike in public worship 
 and private devotion, must always be, " It is the 
 Spirit that quickeneth " ; and if ever she has power 
 to revise her Service-books, untrammelled by the 
 control of a Parliament not necessarily Christian, 
 there can be little doubt that the use of the Invoca- 
 
the Holy Ghost. 301 
 
 tion will be one of the first restorations. Mean- 
 while it is incumbent upon all, whether priests or 
 laity, who realise our present loss, to compensate 
 for it, as best they can, by the private use of it in 
 its appointed place, that our offering may "be 
 acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost." ^ 
 1 Rom. XV. 16, qu. in Lit. of S. James, 
 
XXXVIII. 
 
 aaiorDsi of institution. 
 
 " Who in the same night that He was betrayed took Bread. . . 
 Do this as oft as ye shall drink it in remembrance of Me." 
 
 The commemoration of our Blessed Lord's words 
 and acts in instituting the Holy Eucharist has 
 always been regarded as an essential part of the 
 Consecration.^ The form in which they have been 
 commemorated cannot be traced to any one of the 
 The supposed four accounts which have come down to us in Holy 
 
 authority for 
 
 the form in Scripture ; it may have been a composite record 
 Institution Compiled from all, or one based on an independent 
 
 rated. 1 Gregory the Great to John, Bp. of Syracuse, states that the 
 
 App. consecrated with the Lord's prayer alone. — Hp. vii. 64. The 
 same is asserted also by Amalarius and Leo vii. , but in the absence 
 of confirmatory evidence of an earlier date, it is generally doubted. 
 It ought to be stated too that the language of S. Gregory in this 
 place is open to another interpretation. 
 
 The Greek Church, tliough attributing the Sacramental change 
 to the Invocation, has .ilways united with it the recitation of the 
 Words of Institution. The words " This . . . is My Body. . . My 
 Blood " occur in at least 75 of the total number of extant liturgi- 
 cal formulas (82) presented to us by Drs. Neale, Littledale, and 
 Wright ; and the absence of such important words from the 
 small minority of Nestorian, Ethiopic, and SjTO-Jacobite liturgies 
 has been attributed by such authorities as Renaudot and Scuda- 
 inore to causes other than heretical. 
 302 
 
The Words of Institution. 303 
 
 tradition. A circumstance noted in many of the 
 Early Liturgies, and found in all the old English 
 Uses, seems to favour the latter supposition. It is 
 stated in these that Jesus Christ "lifted up His eyes 
 to heaven," before He blessed the bread. The act, it 
 is true, is told of Him in connexion with the miracle 
 of feeding the five thousand,^ but there is no indi- 
 cation of it in the Scriptural narrative of the Last 
 Supper. Unless, therefore, it rested on some early 
 tradition which appeared to be trustworthy, it 
 would have been an unwarrantable intrusion, where 
 accuracy of detail must have been of the utmost 
 importance. It must be regarded with satisfaction 
 that the Anglican form adheres strictly to the 
 Biblical account. Its simplicity becomes very 
 marked when we compare it with the Eoman The Rc 
 form, which is as follows : " Who on the day before 
 He suffered took bread into His holy and adorable 
 hands, and lifting up His eyes to heaven, unto Thee, 
 His Father, God Almighty, gave thanks to Thee, 
 blessed, brake and gave it to His disciples, saying, 
 Take and eat ye all of this, For this is My 
 Body. Likewise after supper, taking also this 
 most excellent chalice into His holy and adorable 
 hands, and giving thanks to Thee, He blessed 
 and gave it to His disciples, saying, Take and 
 drink ye all of it. For this is the Cup of My 
 1 S. Matt. xiv. 19. 
 
304 The Words of Institution. 
 
 Blood of the New and Everlasting Testament, the 
 Mystery of Faith, which shall be shed for you 
 and for many for the Eemission of Sins. As oft 
 as ye shall do this, ye shall do it in remembrance 
 of Me." 
 
 Thesignifi- Now in the Act of Consecration stress is laid 
 
 canceof 
 
 repeating upon the exact repetition of Our Lord's words, and 
 words IIT'^ the imitation of His acts by the priest. It is be- 
 cause the Church has a profound conviction that 
 Christ is Himself the Consecrator in every Eucharist. 
 But for this, it would have been the very height 
 of presumption, bordering almost upon profanity. 
 S. Chrysostom gave the clearest expression of the 
 belief of Primitive times when he said, " Christ is 
 present at the Sacrament now, Who first instituted 
 it. He consecrates this also; it is not man that 
 makes the Body and Blood of Christ by consecrat- 
 ing the Holy Elements, but Christ Who was crucified 
 for us. The words are pronounced by the mouth of 
 the priest, but the Elements are consecrated by the 
 power and grace of God. This is, saith he, My 
 The Priest Body." ^ The Priest, then, who celebrates, claims to 
 reprelenta- ^o what he does as representing Christ; he puts 
 himself so to speak in the place of Christ, not ren- 
 dering His words in the third person, but in the 
 first, saying, as he takes the Bread and the Cup into 
 
 1 Sirm. 2. in ii. ad Tim. deped., i. 6. So in Lit. of S. Chiys. 
 2i> yap et 6 TrpotT(f>ipwv Kal irpo<Tipepb)i(vo's. — S. Cypr. Ep. 63. 
 
The Words of Institution. 305 
 
 his hands, " This is My Body. This is My Blood. 
 Do this in remembrance of Me." 
 
 Now all this impresses upon the Eucharist a sacri- 
 ficial character. The acts and words of our Blessed 
 Lord must necessarily have conveyed to the Apostles 
 the idea that what He was doing and what He was 
 instituting was distinctly sacrificial ; for it was all The sacrifi- 
 done " in sacrificial terms, at a sacrificial time, and oA'he Hdy 
 for a sacrificial end." 1 Let us dwell upon this Eucharist, 
 thought in explanation of His words : " Do this in 
 remembrance of Me." The old English rendering 
 has become so stereotyped and hallowed by the most 
 sacred associations, that there is but little probability 
 of its being ever changed ; and yet few persons who 
 have studied the question can fail to realise how far 
 short it falls of expressing the full meaning of Our 
 Lord's command. To " do this," when taken in 
 connexion with what follows, may certainly mean 
 to " celebrate " this or to " offer " this. It is well 
 known that the Greek word is used at least fifty 
 times in the translation of the Seventy in a sacri- 
 ficial sense,2 but it has not been often noticed that 
 our Lord Himself so used it in the very narrative 
 which tells of the Institution of the Eucharist. 
 When He sent forth His two disciples to prepare 
 
 1 Cf. Author's Footprints, etc., ii. 193-201. 
 
 2 For references cf. Bp. Hamilton's Charge, 1867, and Willis'.s 
 Worship of the Old Covenant. 
 
 U 
 
3o6 The Words of Institution. 
 
 for the feast, He bade them say to the goodman of 
 the house, " The Master saith, My time is at hand ; 
 I will keep the Passover at thy house with My dis- 
 ciples." ^ " Keep " — it is the same word as that 
 translated " do " — " do this in remembrance of Me." 
 " I will celebrate the Passover at thy house." The 
 Passover was essentially a sacrificial feast. 
 
 Again, the verb rendered " do " is often used dis- 
 tinctly for "offer." 2 The objection that "this" 
 cannot here grammatically refer to the Bread or 
 Wine, though often alleged, is wholly unfounded, 
 for apart from the existence of similar constructions 
 elsewhere,^ we may fall back upon the fact that 
 perhaps the very earliest comment on the expression 
 so explains it ; for Justin Martyr, quoting Our Lord's 
 words, writes, " Offer (do) this, for My Memorial, 
 that is to say My Body," and again, " The Bread of 
 the Eucharist which our Lord Jesus Christ has com- 
 manded us to offer." * 
 
 So also with " remembrance." It is used both 
 in the Old and New Testaments ^ for " a sacrificial 
 memorial," a memorial before God; indeed, in its 
 
 . att. xxvi. 18, Heb. xi. 28. 
 
 2 Exod. xxix. 3o, 39 ; Lev. iv. 20 ; ix. 7 ; Ps. Ixvi. 15, etc. 
 
 3 Exoil. xxix. 3S ; Lev. xv. 14, 15. 
 
 4 Dial, cum Tryph., 41, 70. 
 
 5 Numb. X. 10. The original is somewhat ambiguous: the 
 memorial may refer to the blowing of the trumpets ; Lev.xxiv. 7; 
 Heb. x. 3. For a fuller consideration see Chapter xuv., on the 
 Prayer of Oblation. 
 
The Words of Institution. 307 
 
 Scriptural usage it is restricted to this. The sacrifices 
 of peace-offering were designed to be for an rnia- 
 mnesis, " a memorial before God " ; the frankincense, 
 too, on the shew-bread, was " set in order before 
 the Lord every sabbath day" for an anamnesis, "a 
 memorial, even an offering by fire unto the Lord." 
 There is no instance of its being used to represent 
 anything which was intended to quicken me7is remem- 
 brance — it is always to call God to mind ; and it is 
 this which imparts to it its sacrificial character. 
 
 If, therefore, the one word must be interpreted 
 sacrificially, and the other may be, it seems only 
 natural to understand both, when they are found 
 together, in the same sense. 
 
 Now there is a Ritual action, not enjoined in the Q^ig;,, 
 Anglican Service, but in early times almost universal,^ meaning o 
 
 ° 'J 'the rite of 
 
 which is full of sacrificial significance, and is worthy Elevation, 
 of consideration because its original import has been 
 completely overshadowed since the middle ages — 
 viz., the elevation of the Elements after Consecration. 
 It is now regarded as a signal for adoration to be 
 
 1 Cf. Litt. of S. James (Syr.), S. Basil, S. Chrysos., Armen., 
 tlie Copt. (S. Bas.), and others. In the Eastern Churches it could 
 not have been for worship, because the doors of the Chancel were 
 shut to hide the act of Consecration from the worshippers. Eleva- 
 tion for purposes of adoration was not introduced into the West 
 till the 11th century, or I'ornially authorised before the 13th. The 
 ancient Elevation is retained in the modern Roman use at another 
 part. That at this place is for another purpose, ' osteudit populo.' 
 Cf. Mask. Ahc. Lit , 92 n.; Scud. A^ot. Euch. 616-620. 
 
3o8 The Words of Institution. 
 
 paid to the Host, but its primary object was a sym- 
 bolical uplifting of the earthly Oblation in order to 
 bring it sacrificially before God on the heavenly 
 Altar. It was unquestionably taken from the " heav- 
 ing and waving " which came into special prominence 
 in the old Mosaic peace-offering, which was in so 
 many ways especially typical of the Holy Eucharist. 
 The oblation was "heaved" upwards and down- 
 wards, and " waved " to the right hand and to the 
 left; and the action signified according to Jewish 
 interpretation that it was solemnly presented to God, 
 the Sovereign of the Universe.^ It will be observed 
 that this double movement, Avhich was enjoined also 
 in the Sarum Use, made the sign of the cross, and 
 signified the uplifting of Christ in the Crucifixion. 
 Now it has been well pointed out ^ that this is " a 
 further instance of the representation of Christ's 
 Own Actions, full of beautiful propriety, because it 
 designs to place the Things consecrated on earth on 
 a par with the glorious and complete Reality in 
 heaven. It seeks, on behalf of all the mystic sacri- 
 ficial gifts, the grace inherent in the original, merit- 
 orious, ever-abiding Sacrifice." 
 
 The more deeply, therefore, we enter into the 
 meaning of the Words and Acts associated ^vith the 
 Consecration of the Elements, the more clearly does 
 
 1 Outram on Sacrifice, i. xv. 5. Willis's Worship, 176. 
 
 2 Freeman's Principles, etc., ii. ii. 177. 
 
The Words of Institution. 309 
 
 the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharistic Eite stand 
 out. Its " memorial " character will be brought The 
 before us in " the Prayer of Oblation " ; suffice it [J^^j 
 now to state, in the briefest terms, the charge which 
 Christ gave to His Apostles, and to all who should 
 inherit in their line the Ministry of reconciliation ; 
 it was that under the consecrated symbols of broken 
 Bread and outpoured Wine they should plead before 
 the Father as long as time should last, the Sacri- 
 ficial Death of His Son, presenting on Christian 
 Altars that commemorative Oblation, by which the 
 Great High Priest is for ever making intercession 
 before the heavenly Mercy-Seat. 
 
XXXIX. 
 
 leiealitp of C5xi0t'!S ?0re0en« in 
 t^t »iaccament. 
 
 " This !s My Body: This is My Blood of the New Testament" 
 
 Probably no subject in the whole range of con- 
 troversy has been so largely debated as the meaning 
 of these words. Already in the preceding pages the 
 Catholic interpretation of them has been set forth 
 in part, as passing references seemed to call for it, 
 but the present place is the fitting one for a full 
 consideration. We shall be the better prepared to 
 understand the truth if we begin by an examination 
 of the various views that have found favour from 
 time to time with different schools of Theology. 
 We take first that which depreciated Sacramental 
 Grace to the lowest ebb ; Zwinglius maintained that 
 the Rite was purely commemorative, and that the 
 Elements were merely signs of an absent Lord, in 
 no way direct channels for the conveyance of 
 spiritual gifts. It is doubtful whether his view was 
 presented in this bare and unattractive form to the 
 Marian exiles, whose Swiss Theology influenced not 
 
 310 
 
Christ's Presence in the Sacrament. 31 1 
 
 a little the second revision of the Prayer-book ; ^ 
 but even in its best estate, as modified by Bullinger, 
 Peter Martyr, and John a Lasco, it is at vari- 
 ance with all the teaching of the Church for at least 
 fourteen centuries. No other conclusion is admis- 
 sible from it than that Christ is in no sense present 
 in the Sacrament, and that the recipient of it has no 
 real communion of Christ's Body and Blood. 
 
 The view which borders most nearly on this has The theory 
 been designated in modern times that of a " virtual presen™'"^ 
 Presence." It appeared first in the writings of 
 Calvin,2 who maintained that by Consecration a new 
 power was imparted to the Elements, so that, with- 
 out being themselves the Body and Blood of Christ, 
 they were able to communicate them to the worthy 
 recipient. He illustrated his theory by saying that 
 Christ, though at the right hand of God, can send 
 His influence upon the hearts of faithful communi- 
 cants, just as the sun, though so far distant in the 
 heavens, infuses light and heat into things on earth. 
 But such influence is constantly being exercised, and 
 it did not require the Institution of a Sacramental 
 Mystery to secure it to the faithful. The real 
 obstacle, however, to this interpretation is that, like 
 
 1 There is strong evidence of their disbelief in any Sacra- 
 mental Presence in the fact, that in the face of fifteen centuries 
 of usage, they removed all mention of Christ's Body and Blood 
 in distributing the Elements. 
 
 2 Instit. iv. 17, §§ 20, 21, 22. 
 
3 1 2 The Reality of Christ's Presence 
 
 Zwinglianism, it takes away all idea of a sacra- 
 mental Presence of Christ's Body, so that, in the 
 terse and expressive language of Keble, "Virtual 
 Presence is real absence." To assign to the Elements 
 the power to communicate that which they them- 
 selves are not, is to suppose the effect incommen- 
 surably greater than the cause, and it strains the 
 demands of faith to the furthest point. It is surely 
 easier to believe that He would make that His Body 
 which is to do the work of His Body. 
 Consubstan- A third vicw has generally passed under the name 
 Lutheran of Consubstantiation. It is a term designed by 
 ocnne. j^j^ Opponents to express the view broached by 
 Luther^ that after Consecration the substance of 
 the Lord's Body co-exists by fusion with the sub- 
 stance of bread and wine. The figure by which 
 he tried to illustrate it was that of heat diffused 
 through a bar of iron.^ According to the un- 
 scientific idea of his time heat was a substance : 
 now it is known to be unsubstantial. A figure 
 often used to explain the Eutychian heresy of 
 the fusion of the human and Divine Natures 
 in the One Person of Jesus Christ would have 
 represented his teaching more accurately. Wine 
 and water are two separate substances : pour them 
 
 1 There is no doubt that Luther's teaching was by no means 
 uniform. Cf. Pusey, Doctr. of the Real Presence, 43-56. 
 - Contra Henricum, regem Anglice, p. 8. 
 
in the Sacrament. 313 
 
 into the same vessel, they mingle together and 
 become a third substance composed of the two. 
 
 This view contradicts the Catholic doctrine in 
 more ways than one ; it confuses the sign with the 
 Thing signified, and it introduces the idea of a 
 physical or material change, whereas it is wholly 
 spiritual, and after a heavenly manner. 
 
 The fourth doctrine to be noticed is that of The docume 
 " Transubstantiation," by which we understand stantiation. 
 briefly that at the Consecration the substance of 
 the Elements ceases to be and is replaced by the 
 substance of the Body and Blood of Christ. This 
 doctrine takes for granted the truth of a distinction 
 between "substance" and "accidents," which is 
 open to serious philosophical objections; there is 
 no certain proof of the existence of such a thing as 
 substance transcending the " accidents " which meet 
 the senses. If substance be used in a popular, 
 unphilosophical sense, it means that the elements 
 are annihilated at Consecration, and this certainly 
 contradicts the teaching of Holy Scripture and of 
 the primitive Church. 
 
 Irenaeus ^ says that " the Eucharist consisted of 
 two things, an earthly and a heavenly " ; and the 
 Fathers generally spoke of the Elements as preserv- 
 ing their natural substance after Consecration ; and 
 herein they echoed the teaching of Scripture, which 
 1 Adu. ll(zr., iv. 18, § 5. 
 
314 The Reality of Christ's Presence 
 
 designates that which is received as both " bread " 
 and the " Body " of Christ : as " the fruit of the 
 vine " and the " Blood " of Christ. And to this the 
 Formularies! of the Anglican Church adhere, de- 
 claring that Transubstantiation " overthroweth the 
 nature of a sacrament," for it takes away the 
 outward and visible sign. 
 
 Having considered, therefore, what we believe to 
 be the chief erroneous views on the Presence of 
 Christ in the Blessed Sacrament, we are able to 
 frame a definition of the Catholic doctrine, calcu- 
 lated not only to express the truth but to exclude 
 error. 
 
 The Catholic After Cousecratiou the Elements are not a mere 
 ^^"1°'^'''^ sign of the absent Body and Blood of Christ, but 
 Presence. whilst Undergoing no change of substance, they have 
 become, not in grace and efficacy alone, but verily 
 and indeed, though spiritually, that is, in accord- 
 ance with the laws of the spiritual world, the 
 Present Body and Blood of Christ. The substance 
 of the outward part is not fused with nor changed 
 into the substance of the inward, but though remain- 
 ing distinct the two parts are, in a manner incom- 
 prehensible to finite minds, sacraraentally united, so 
 that what we receive is bread and wine, and is at 
 the same time Christ's Body and Blood. 
 
 In support of this, the Catholic doctrine of the 
 1 Cf. Catechism. Also Art. xxviii. 
 
in the Sacrament. 315 
 
 Real objective Presence, we appeal in the first 
 instance to Holy Scripture, then to the testimony 
 of the Fathers and Primitive Liturgies, and finally 
 to the Formularies of our own Branch of the Church 
 Universal. If we accept Hooker's declaration that 
 it is " a most infallible rule in expositions of Holy 
 Scripture, that where a literal construction will 
 stand, the farthest from the letter is commonly the 
 worst," we shall Lave no difficulty in accepting the 
 above definition. Christ Himself said, not of bread The teaching 
 generally but of a piece of bread, which He held in scHpture. 
 His hands and had just blessed, " This is My Body." 
 It was no sudden unexpected declaration, for a year 
 before, speaking in anticipation of this Eucharistic 
 Feast, He had said in the hearing of the same dis- 
 ciples, " The bread that I will give is My Flesh." ^ 
 If He had meant anything else than what His 
 words naturally indicated ; if, in short. He had 
 intended them to be interpreted in any way figura- 
 tively, it is inconceivable that He should not by the 
 simplest explanation have removed the stumbling 
 block, when some of them said " This is a hard say- 
 ing," and left Him in consequence. Had this been 
 the case, four words, " I speak metaphorically only," 
 would have more than sufficed to satisfy every 
 scruple. 
 
 Again, S. Paul says of certain Corinthians,- who 
 1 S. John vi. 57. 2 1 Cor. xi. 27. 
 
3i6 The Reality of Christ's Presence 
 
 approached the Sacred Mysteries in an unworthy 
 manner, that they were "guilty of the Body and 
 Blood of the Lord," and that they ate and drank 
 a judgment upon themselves from " not discerning 
 the Lord's Body." If that of which they partook 
 was only a figure of Christ's Body, his mode of 
 expressing it could not by any possibility have been 
 more oj^en to misconception. 
 The teaching From the testimony of the early Church a few 
 
 of the early 
 
 Church. quotations will suffice as examples; S. Ignatius^ 
 speaking of the Docetae says, " They abstain from 
 the Eucharist because they do not believe that it is 
 the Flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ." Justin 
 Martyr ^ writes in his Apology, " We have been 
 taught that the Food, over which thanks have been 
 given, is the Flesh and Blood of that Incarnate 
 Jesus." In the primitive Liturgies the language in 
 which the effect of the Invocation of the Holy 
 Ghost is spoken of is most explicit ; in that of 
 S. James it is "that He may make this Bread the 
 Holy Body of Thy Christ, and this Cup the precious 
 Blood " ; in that of S. Chrysostom, " make this 
 Bread the precious Body and that which is in this 
 Cup the precious Blood of Thy Christ . . . changing 
 them by the Holy Ghost." 
 
 ofthe IntheArticles^of the Reformed Church of England 
 
 Reformation. 
 
 ^ Ad ibmyrn. vii.; ad Philad,. iv. 
 
 2 Apol. i. 68. 3 Art. xxviu. 
 
in the Sacrament. 
 
 317 
 
 we read that " the Body of Christ is gimn, taken, and 
 eaten in the Lord's Supper," and in the Prayer of 
 Humble Access we ask, " so to eat the Flesh of Thy 
 dear Son Jesus Christ that our sinful bodies may be 
 cleansed by His Body." Both expressions in their 
 fxima fade meaning echo the teaching of antiquity 
 on the objectiveness of the Thing signified in the 
 Sacrament. 
 
 But it has been often noticed that there are Apparent 
 
 what seem like counter truths to the above both in t^ns!^'^"^ 
 
 the writings of the Fathers and in the Formularies 
 
 of our Church ; we mean all those passages which 
 
 appear to make the faith of the recipient a necessary 
 
 prerequisite for the participation in Christ's Body. 
 
 " The mean whereby the Body of Christ is received 
 
 and eaten in the Supper is Faith." ^ " The wicked The neces- 
 sity of faith. 
 
 and such as be void of a livmg faith ... m no wise 
 are partakers of Christ." ^ There is no antagonism 
 between the two ; they express a double aspect of 
 the truth ; they are parallel lines, they do not 
 cross each other. 
 
 We shall be able to understand more easily 
 what is meant, when a distinction is drawn between 
 the res Sacramenti and the virius^ Sacramenti; 
 1 Art. x.xviii. 
 
 - Art. xxix. Observe the repeated association of calls to faith 
 with the most solemn action of the Eucharist in ancient' liturgies. 
 Cf. Neale and Littledale's Transl., 50, 193, 4, 9 ; 208, 211. 
 
 3 Cf. S. Aug. in Ep. S. Joh., Tract, vi. § 10 ; in Evanr;. S. Joh. 
 Tract, xxvi. § 11. 
 
3 1 8 The Reality of C/u-isfs Presence 
 
 the former is the Body and Blood of Christ: the 
 latter is the strengthening and refreshing of our 
 souls. 
 
 The one is given to all who receive the Sacra- 
 ment, but to the unworthy recipient it becomes a 
 source of judgment, as it did to the Corinthians. 
 The other is received by all who have the qualifica- 
 tion of faith, and it becomes a means of spiritual 
 union with Christ, so that they dwell in Him and 
 He in them. 
 
 We have something at least analogous to this in 
 Christ's dealings with men during His Ministry upon 
 earth.^ His Body, in which healing power resided, 
 was touched again and again. It was present to 
 all, but virtue only went out of Him to heal 
 some, and that in obedience to the touch of faith. 
 There is however this great difference ; those who 
 touched His earthly Body carelessly as He went 
 in and out among them, did not know their fault, 
 and therefore received no punishment ; those, on 
 the other hand, who dare approach the Sacra- 
 ment of His Body and Blood, without becom- 
 ing reverence, are unable to plead ignorance of 
 their guilt, and must risk the penalty of an un- 
 worthy reception. 
 
 So far, then, from cavilling at the 29th Article for 
 1 Cf. Ch. Quart. Review, xxii., No. 43, p. 225. 
 
in the Sacrament. 319 
 
 appearing to traverse the doctrine of the Catholic 
 Church, we may be thankful for the safeguard 
 which it provides, by reminding us how alone 
 we may receive the Sacrament beneficially to the 
 strengthening and refreshing of our souls. 
 
XL. 
 
 ^isn. of tl)c Cro0!2f. 
 
 In ancient times the Cross was honoured by 
 commemorative services, and the sign of it was fre- 
 quently used. The only relic of the former is to be 
 found in the retention of their titles in the Church 
 Calendar, and the only rubrical provision for the 
 latter is preserved in the Baptismal Office. The 3rd 
 of May is marked as " the Invention of the Cross," 
 The honour in commemoratiou of the alleged discovery of the 
 Crol 'in e'l!iy instrument on which the Saviour was crucified, by 
 the Empress Helena, in 326. The 14th of Septem- 
 ber is designated " Holy Cross Day," and has been 
 associated for many centuries with the elevation of 
 a portion of the aforesaid Cross in a magnificent 
 Church at Jerusalem, which the piety of the Empress 
 raised on the site of the Holy Sepulchre.^ Special 
 Collects, Epistles, and Gospels, were appointed for 
 these two days, and so highly were the days hon- 
 
 1 This took place in 335, but it was not till tlie restoration of 
 the Cross, after it had been carried off by the Persians, in the be- 
 ginning of the 7th century, that the Festival became famous. In 
 the Eastern Church both Festivals are united on Sept. 14th. 
 3^ 
 
The Sign of the Cross. 3 2 i 
 
 oured for the twelve centuries following the insti- 
 tution, that they have shared with Christmas Day, 
 Easter, the Ascension, and a few others, the rare 
 distinction of a separate Preface in the Office for the 
 Holy Communion. 
 
 The legitimacy of the use of the sign of the The use of 
 Cross happily survived that long and bitter contro- pu^teTauhe 
 versy in which the Church was torn by divisions, Reformation, 
 when the Presbyterians strove to rob her of that 
 Catholic heritage of worship, which with a recog- 
 nised system of forms and ceremonies had come 
 down through many centuries. This was decided 
 when the sign was deliberately retained in Baptism, 
 and the xxxth Canon indorsed the principle "that ,604 ad. 
 the abuse of a thing doth not take away the lawful 
 use of it." The same Canon pointed to the expe- 
 diency of using it by asserting that it "begat a 
 reverend estimation even in the Apostles' time," 
 and that it was " held in the primitive Church, as 
 well by the Greeks as the Latins, with one consent 
 and great applause." 
 
 Now, remembering how largely the honour of the 
 Cross has entered into the religious worship of the 
 Church, we shall do well to trace its history. Per- The history 
 haps the earliest evidence of the use of the material "he'^ossin*^ 
 form of the Cross is to be found in the Catacombs,^ "'^ 
 
 1 This evidence is uncertain, as many of the inscriptions and 
 emblems are of later date than the monuments. 
 
 X 
 
322 
 
 The Sign of the Cross. 
 
 but it was not till the Conversion of the Empire 
 that it came prominently forward. We do not 
 care either to defend or to dispute the story of 
 the discovery of the true Cross, and of the means 
 adopted for distinguishing it from the others that 
 were discovered with it. It is said that its 
 touch instantly recovered a woman of her sick- 
 ness.^ The story was in all probability only the 
 poetic dress in which a reverent people, under 
 the impulse of a new-born faith, clothed its appre- 
 ciation of the cardinal doctrine of Christianity, 
 that no human help can save the soul, and that 
 it is only by the Sacrifice of the Cross that the 
 soul's sickness can be cured, and eternal life 
 granted to those who are dead in trespasses and 
 sins. 
 
 From the time of Constantine ^ the honour paid 
 to the Cross spread widely and rapidly ; and in the 
 centuries that followed the second exaltation of the 
 Cross, after its recovery by the Emperor Heraclius 
 from the hands of the heathen, the emblem was set 
 up in Churches. Churches were constructed in the 
 form of it, and dedicated to the Holy Cross. In 
 England alone it is said that more than a hundred 
 received this dedication ; and the historic Holyrood 
 
 1 Sozomen, Ecc. Hist. ii. 1. 
 
 = The Catechetical Ltctuies of S. CjTil were delivered in the 
 Basilica of the Holy Cross in 347-8. Cf. Euseb. Panegjr. Con- 
 stant. 9. 
 
The Sign of the Cross. 
 
 323 
 
 at Edinburgh is but another name for the Chapel of 
 Saint Cross. 
 
 When we turn to the investigation of what we Theeaiiyuse 
 commonly mean by the sign of the Cross, we have °he Croll" ° 
 far earlier testimony than we find for the use of 
 the material form. TertuUian in the second century 
 writes of the habits of the Christians of his day, 
 "at every forward step and movement, at every 
 coming in and going out, when we put on our shoes, 
 when we bathe, when we sit down to table, when 
 we light the lamps, on going to rest, on sitting 
 down, in all the occurrences of daily life, we mark ^ 
 our foreheads with the sign of the Cross." His lan- 
 guage is repeated more or less by many of the 
 writers of the fourth century ,2 but with rare excep- 
 tions they speak of the practice only in connexion 
 with the ordinary life. It is very difficult, however, 
 to believe that it could have found so large a place 
 in the Christian's secular occupations, and have been 
 excluded from his religious life and worship ; but it 
 has caused considerable perplexity to find no men- 
 tion of it in S. Cyril's Lectures on the Mysteries, in 
 which he dwells upon the ceremonies accompanying 
 the Celebration, and no trace of its use in the oldest 
 Sacramentary. On the other hand there are allu- 
 
 1 Dc Cor. Mil. iii. He uses the significant word terimus. 
 
 2 S. Ambrose, Serm. 56 ; S. Jerome ad Etistoch. ; S. Cyril, 
 Cat. Lect. xiii. 36. 
 
324 
 
 The Sign of the Cross. 
 
 sioiis to it in S. Chrysostom and S. Augustine,^ 
 which almost force us to believe that it had its 
 appointed place not only in the Sacrament of Bap- 
 tism, but in that of the Altar also. From the idea 
 that the mark of the Cross imparted a sacred 
 character to that upon which it was impressed, it 
 was chiefly employed in the act of consecrating the 
 elements. During the mediaeval times a special 
 virtue was attached to a repetition of the sign, and 
 minute directions were given for the places in which 
 it was to be made. In the Sarum Missal it was 
 introduced more than twenty times.^ The compilers 
 of the iirst Prayer-book accounting this a vain re- 
 petition, retained the sign only twice, to be made 
 during the Invocation of the Holy Ghost at the 
 words " to bl^ess and sanc>J<tify these Thy Gifts." 
 At the second revision, when the Invocation was 
 removed, the sign of the Cross disappeared with it, 
 and has not been restored by any subsequent rubric. 
 
 The multiplied repetition of the sign grew out of 
 what would generally be accounted a superstitious 
 belief in its eflBcacy as a charm to neutralise the 
 powers of evil. It is true that this appears to be 
 
 1 S. Chrys. Bom. liv. in B. Matt. xvi. 23. S. Aug. Horn, cxviii. 
 in S. Joh. -xix. 24. In this passage S. Aug. speaks as though the 
 sacraments were not properly ("rite") administered without it. 
 
 " About 740 A.D. Pope Zachary instructed Boniface as to the 
 number to be used in the Canon, viz., about sixteen or eighteen. 
 Ord. Rom. ii. Tn Greek Litt. at the Invocation the sign was made 
 thrice. Swainson. 01, 130. 
 
The Sign of the Cross. 325 
 
 sanctioned by no less a writer than S. Chrysostom,^ 
 who wi'ote : " This sign, both in the days of our fore- 
 fathers and now, hath opened doors tliat were shut 
 up: it hath quenched poisonous drugs: it hath taken 
 away the power of hemlock : it has healed the bites 
 of venomous beasts"; but the context shows very 
 clearly that in his judgment the virtue which accom- 
 panied the use of it was proportioned to the realisa- 
 tion of the great purpose of the Cross felt by him 
 who used it. He warned his hearers that it was not 
 merely with the fingers that they ought to make the 
 sign, but before this in the purpose of their heart 
 and with the fulness of faith. The revisers were of The objec- 
 opinion that this principle was endangered by a fre- R°eform'erl 
 quent repetition of the sign, and aimed at restoring '^^j^"'^ 
 a more moderate use of it ; and herein they only 
 followed the example of the leading ritualist of the 
 middle ages, for Amalarius pleaded for a single 
 sign as sufficient in the act of Consecration. At 
 the same time, Avhile laying down the general rule, 
 they were unwilling to fetter the hands of those, 
 whether priests or people, who found a larger use 
 helpful to their worship, for they subjoined to the 
 Eeformed Service-book a note " for the more plain 
 explication and decent ministration," in these words 
 " as touching kneeling, crossing, .... and other 
 gestures, they may be used or left, as every man's 
 1 S. Chrys. Horn. liv. in 5. Malt. xvi. 23. 
 
326 The Sign of the Cross. 
 
 devotion serveth, without blame." ^ Both directions, 
 viz., for the twofold sign in Consecration, and for 
 the optional use at other times, were subsequently 
 omitted, but there is great difficulty in accepting the 
 dictum that " omission implies prohibition always," 
 if only from the fact that in the revised Liturgy the 
 rubrics were withdrawn, which enjoined the manner 
 in which the Celebrant is to receive. Neither in 
 this nor in the present Prayer-book is he told 
 whether he is to receive standing or kneeling, or 
 what words he is to use in administering to himself 
 Some discretionary liberty seems of necessity left to 
 him. 
 
 The primary object which induced the Christians 
 to press the Cross into the forefront of their actions 
 has long ceased to be a moving influence ; it is no 
 more treated with shame and contempt, as the in- 
 strument of an ignominious death, and there is no 
 Its symbol- need to pay honour to it as an act of reparation ; ^ 
 the present but " the offcnce of the cross " still remains, though 
 the manner in which it makes itself felt is changed. 
 
 1 This was the 3i'd of "the Notes" placed at the end of the 
 1 P.B. This must have reference to occasions where no direc- 
 tion was given, and cannot therefore be limited to the single 
 occasion where the sign of the Cross is inserted ; at least this was 
 the decision of the final revisers : " The rubric that leaves kneel- 
 ing, crossing, etc., indifferent, is meant only at such times as they 
 are not prescribed and required." Cf. Answ. of the Bishops, 
 Cardw. Confer. 354. 
 Cf. su]jra, p. 122. 
 
The Sign of the Cross. 
 
 327 
 
 The cross is despised and hated in this generation 
 because its symbolism is a standing rebuke to the 
 self-indulgence of a soft and luxurious age. We 
 can sympathise then with those who feel reluctant 
 to part with any ceremonial emblem that can help 
 to keep alive the true spirit of Christianity. " God 
 forbid that I should glory save in the cross of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified 
 uuto me, and I unto the world." 
 
XLI. 
 
 Communion of t^e ^viz&u 
 
 " Then shall the Minister first receive the Communion in both kinds him- 
 self, and then proceed to deliver the same to the Bishops, Priests and 
 Deacons (if any be present).' 
 
 In the first Prayer-book the Celebrant is desig- 
 nated the Priest ; in the second and in all subsequent 
 issues, the Minister. It is somewhat perplexing that 
 at the final revision the compilers should not have 
 The title reverted to the original title, especially as they sub- 
 Priest. stituted " Bishops, Priests, and Deacons," for " other 
 ministers " in the same rubric. The only explana- 
 tion is that they left " Minister " as a more general 
 term, to embrace a Bishop. The Scotch Office had 
 provided for it more explicitly, reading : " The 
 Bishop, if present, or else the presbyter." It is 
 worthy of note that the title of " Minister " is in one 
 of the authoritative Formularies used doctriually as 
 an equivalent of "Priest," and that too in respect of 
 1604 A.D. his Ordination. The 32nd Canon appoints that " no 
 Bishop shall make any person, of whatever qualities 
 or gifts soever, a Deacon and a Minister in one day."^ 
 
 1 This expression is applied to the priest several times in the 
 same Canou. 
 
 323 
 
The Communion of the Priest. 329 
 
 There is no rule laid down for the posture of the 
 Celebrant in the act of receiving. On the following 
 grounds it may be argued that he receives standing. The posture 
 
 Firstly, it is a generally acknowledged principle by'^the^^Pries' 
 that Avhenever a change of posture or position is to ■^e'^^'ving. 
 be made, some direction is given in the rubrics. On 
 the two occasions in this Office, where the Celebrant 
 unquestionably kneels, definite instruction is given 
 him to do so, viz., for the Confession and for the 
 Prayer of Humble Access. It has been said that " all 
 meekly kneeling " at the end of this rubric includes 
 the Celebrant ; but the grammatical construction 
 of the sentence absolutely forbids such an interpre- 
 tation, for the words follow not only the direction 
 for the Priest's reception, but for his administration 
 to others ; they must apply therefore to both or 
 neither. 
 
 Secondly, on doctrinal grounds it may be urged 
 that standing is the posture of a Priest engaged in a 
 sacrificial act. The participation of the Priest under 
 the typical dispensation was regarded as an essential 
 part of the sacrifice.^ 
 
 When we look at the question historically, we are 
 placed at a disadvantage, from the absence of any- 
 thing like primitive evidence. The most we can say 
 of the early practice is that, even apart from doc- 
 liinal grounds, it was presumably standing, because 
 1 Cf. Lev. vi. 26. 
 
330 The Coviinunion of the Priest. 
 
 to kneel on a Sunday was considered unbefitting the 
 joyful character of the festival. Throughout the 
 middle ages there is no question that the Priest 
 stood. After the commencement of the Eeformation 
 Reasons for a diversity of practice seems to have grown up, for 
 postureVt'^ certain of the Bishops were careful to inquire upon 
 kneeling in subject in their Visitation Articles, and Cosin 
 
 the 17th cen- ' 
 
 tury. endeavoured to introduce uniformity by a change in 
 the rubric: "Tlien shall the Priest that celebrateth 
 receive the Holy Communion in both kinds upon his 
 knees." If any objection be raised against the 
 validity of the doctrinal gi-ounds as favouring the 
 standing posture, from the fact that divines such as 
 Andrewes, Wren, and Cosin, representatives, that 
 is, of the Catholic School of Theology, advocated 
 kneeling, we must allow full weight to the temper 
 and circumstances of the times in which they lived. 
 The Puritan attacks had fallen with the greatest 
 violence upon the practice of kneeling for reception ; 
 every consideration had to be set aside by its de- 
 fenders, and the principle maintained in its integrity 
 both by precept and example. It may be that 
 they were content to forego the sacrificial teaching 
 of the other posture, when assumed by the Celebrant, 
 lest this exceptional adoption should appear to the 
 unlearned to lend even the least sanction to the 
 
 1 e.g. Montague's Gen. Visit, of Chichester in 1634 ; ArcLl). 
 Seeker, Scnn.\. iv. ]1 ; Andiewes, Wren, etc. 
 
The Communion of the Priest. 331 
 
 Puritan practice. Now that all trace of the irre- 
 verent custom has passed away, it seems natural, 
 especially in an age when the sacrificial doctrine of 
 the Holy Eucharist is reclaiming its ancient recogni- 
 tion, to revert to the posture which is most conso- 
 nant with it. 
 
 With what words is the Celebrant to administer The words 
 
 , ^ be used by 
 
 to himself? Again, he is left without any rubrical theCeiebra 
 guidance, and it may fairly be assumed that it was °erint"to"hTm 
 not intended that he should adapt the formula for 
 himself by changing the second into the first 
 person, " I take," etc. ; at least the rejection of 
 Cosin's proposed rubric at the final revision seems 
 to admit of no other interpretation. His pro- 
 posal was to alter the wording of the existing 
 form as follows : " The Body of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, which was given for me, preserve my body 
 and soul unto everlasting life. Amen. I take and 
 eat this for the remembrance of Christ, Who died 
 for me, and I feed on Him in my heart by faith 
 with thanksgiving." In the absence of any direc- 
 tion it seems competent for him to use one of the 
 primitive formulas which necessitate no adaptation, 
 such, for instance, as that in the Clementine Liturgy; 
 "The Body of Christ, Amen." "The Blood of 
 Christ, the Cup of life. Amen." 1 
 
 Tiie injunction for the people to say Amen lias 
 1 Awsl. Const, viii. xiii. 
 
332 The Communion of the Priest. 
 
 most ancient authority, and it appears to have been 
 generally enforced, as we may gather both from 
 liturgical and Patristic evidence.^ 
 
 In the old English Missals there was no formula 
 for administration to the laity, only to the Priest. 
 In the Order of Communion it was : " The Body of 
 our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, 
 preserve thy body unto everlasting life." In the 
 first revised Office the prayer was made to extend 
 to the soul: . . . "preserve thy body and soul." 
 At the next revision, when so much was done to 
 obscure Catholic teaching on the Eeal Presence, all 
 allusion to Our Lord's Body and Blood was omitted, 
 and the second clause of the present form, or, as it is 
 sometimes called, " the Address," was substituted for 
 the first, or "the Benediction." It was such a 
 zabethan patent violation of Catholic usage that its continu- 
 
 compromise. ° 
 
 auce could hardly be expected ; and as soon as 
 better counsels prevailed, the time-honoured Bene- 
 diction was restored at the Elizabethan reaction, 
 but in combination with the later innovation of the 
 second Prayer-book, and at the Caroline settlement 
 this union of the two clauses was left undisturbed. 
 
 Viewed historically, the advantage is all in favour 
 of the use of the first only, and there can be no 
 question that, on occasions when the communicants 
 
 1 Clem. Copt. Aethiop. Litt. S. Cyril, Uyst. v. 18. S. Ambr. 
 de Sacram. iv. 5. S. Aug. Senn., TrZ, 33-2. 
 
 The innova- 
 tion of 1552, 
 and the Eli- 
 
TJie Communion of the Priest. 333 
 
 are numerous, the lengthened form is attended with 
 much inconvenience; but under ordinary circum- 
 stances the combination of the two is by no means 
 without use. It is a distinct gain to be reminded 
 of the great end for which our Blessed Lord gave 
 us His Flesh to eat ; and the very injunction to 
 take the Body " in remembrance that Christ died " 
 for us is calculated to keep before our eyes the 
 Sacrifice of the Cross, in "the Memorial" which 
 priests and people are enjoined to celebrate. 
 
XLII, 
 
 ^itz Communion of t!)e Eai'tp* 
 
 "Then shall the Minister . . . proceed to deliver the saine ... to the 
 people also in order, into their hands, all meekly kneeling. And when he 
 delivereth the Bread to any one, he shall say, The Body,' etc. 
 
 In the first Prayer-book it was directed that " in 
 the Communion-time the Clerks shall sing, 0 Lamb 
 of God, that takest away the sins of the world : have 
 mercy upon us," twice repeated and followed by 
 The Agnus « Q Lamb of God, that takest away the sins of the 
 world, grant us Thy peace." They began as soon 
 as the Celebrant received.^ When the laity had 
 communicated, they sang a sentence from Holy 
 Scripture, from a collection provided for the pur- 
 pose, which was called the post-communion. Both 
 Avere omitted in the second Prayer-book. 
 
 The removal of the former has been regarded in 
 two different lights. On the score of antiquity it 
 has no high claims, for it found no place in any of 
 the primitive Liturgies, and was wholly unused in 
 
 1 There are many notices of the singing of a Psalm or anthem to 
 fill up the time. It was called in the West communio. Ord. 
 Rom. iii. 18. Bing. Antiq. xv. v. 10. 
 334 
 
The Communion of the Laity. 335 
 
 the English OflSce before the ninth or the tenth 
 century.! Again, it is felt to cut across the Sacri- 
 ficial teaching of the Holy Eucharist, by directing 
 prayers to the Seeond Person of the Blessed Trinity, 
 and that too, at the very central part of the Service 
 immediately after the Oblation.^ 
 
 On the other hand, its re-introduction has been 
 strongly advocated as supplying a vivid witness to 
 the doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the 
 Sacrament. It could hardly be more forcibly im- 
 pressed upon the congregation than by this sudden 
 outburst in a direct personal address. 
 
 There is no rubrical direction vi^here the laity are The place 
 
 where the 
 
 to receive the Holy Communion. In the Eastern laity are to 
 Church it has never been customary for them to 
 approach the Altar for the purpose, but for the 
 ministers to come out at the Chancel door and 
 administer in the nave. In the English Church it 
 has been the general rule to enter the Chancel, 
 save when the Holy Table was brought down into 
 the body of the Church, or during the Puritan 
 ascendancy, when the congregation remained in 
 their pews, and received where they were. 
 
 1 Traces of it have been found in one or two early Liturgies, 
 but in a very imperfect form. It is in the ancient Celtic Stowe 
 Missal, which may be assigned to the ninth century. Warren, 
 p. 242. 
 
 2 This is done only in three of the Collects, and in the Gloria 
 in excelsis. In neither of these cases is the innovation so disturb- 
 ins: from the position. 
 
336 The Comimmion of the Laity. 
 
 The time at which they approached the Altar has 
 varied, as may be seen by the controversy which 
 has gathered round the right interpretation of the 
 invitation, " Draw near with faith." Not a few of 
 the Bishops ^ in the seventeenth century testify by 
 their Articles of Enquiry, as well as in other places, 
 to the prevailing practice of the day of approaching, 
 when these words were spoken, and not waiting till 
 the moment of communicating. 
 
 Surprise has been felt that there should have 
 been no rubric in the first Prayer-book to order the 
 The posture peoplc to reccive kneeling, but the traditional habit 
 in receiving'!'' '^"^^^ ^0 stroug that the rcvisers had no fears of its 
 being altered. "Within a year, however, an attempt 
 was made to bring in the practice, adopted by 
 certain Protestants on the Continent, of sitting to 
 receive. It so shocked the feelings of English 
 Churchmen that even the compilers of the second 
 Prayer-book were compelled to make provision 
 against it by the order that the Minister should 
 deliver it " to the people in their hands kneeling." 
 Continental influence, however, -waxed too strong, 
 and when the theory was pressed that this posture 
 was a tacit acknowledgment of the doctrine of 
 transubstantiation, the Church became divided into 
 two camps upon the practice of sitting or kneeling 
 
 1 Andrewes, Montagu, and Cosin. In the Parish Church at 
 Leeds it has long been the use to draw near at the Imitation. 
 
The Cotnvmniou of the Laity. 337 
 
 at the reception. During the Rebellion the advo- 16451661 
 cates of the former posture had things entirely their 
 own way ; and at the Restoration the Church- 
 party found it no easy task to uphold the ancient 1 
 and Catholic practice; for it is said that at the 
 Savoy Conference all the controversy between the 
 Presbyterians and the Bishops was summed up at 
 last in one single topic : ^ " the sinfulness of enjoin- 
 ing ministers to deny the communion to all that 
 dare not kneel." The closing words of the rubric, 
 "all meekly kneeling," attest the result of the 
 debate. 
 
 The Puritan party received another severe blow The words 
 when the revisers reinstated in the rubric the in- [fatfon'tTbe 
 junction, which had been omitted from the first '° ^f'^'^ 
 
 communi- 
 
 Prayer-book, that the words of administration must cant singly, 
 be repeated severally to each communicant. The 
 addition, "when he delivereth the bread to any 
 one, ^ he shall say," in place of " when he delivereth 
 the bread," was intended to prohibit the practice, 
 which had been largely adopted from the school of 
 Calvin, of repeating the formula once only for a 
 railful of communicants. Liberty in this matter 
 
 1 At first no doubt it was customary to receive standing, as is 
 done now in the Eastern Church, inclining the body, but this was 
 in accordance with the belief that on Sundays a postvire indica- 
 tive of joy was more fitting than one of humiliation. Cf. Co. 
 Nicaea, Can. xx. 
 
 2 Cardw. Confer. 265. 
 
 2 In first P. B. " to every one." 
 
338 The Comtmtnion of the Laity. 
 
 had long been contended for, and the Puritans in 
 the reign of Elizabeth laid " an admonition " before 
 Parliament ^ in favour of it. It was answered by 
 Archbishop Whitgift,^ who pointed out how much 
 of significance might thereby be sacrificed : " foras- 
 much as every one that receiveth this Sacrament, 
 hath to apply to himself the benefits of Christ's 
 Death and Passion, therefore it is convenient to be 
 said to every one, ' Take thou, eat thou.' " Hooker ^ 
 contended that it was because the Sacraments were 
 " instruments of grace unto every particular man " 
 that the Church with good congruity had framed 
 her words in the administration ; and the Bishops at 
 the Savoy * did but indorse the judgment of their 
 predecessors when they asserted that "It is most 
 requisite that the Minister deliver the bread and 
 wine into every particular communicant's hand, and 
 repeat the words in the singular number; for so 
 much as it is the propriety of sacraments to make 
 particular obsignation to each believer." 
 
 No plea, therefore, that it is advisable at large 
 communions for the saving of time, to depart from 
 the custom of repeating the words severally to each 
 individual, may be entertained, for it not only 
 
 1 In 1572 A.D. 
 
 ■•! "An answer by John Whitgift, D.D.," p. 100. 
 
 8 Eccles. Pol. V. Lxviii. 2. 
 
 ■> Ans. to E.\ceptious against the Pr.-bk. cone. Kneel. Cardw. 
 Confer. 354. 
 
The Communion of the Laity. 339 
 
 violates the law but injures the significance of the 
 Sacrament. 
 
 The mode of delivering the consecrated Bread to 
 the communicants has varied ; in the first Prayer- 
 book/ to avoid its being taken away for superstitious 
 purposes, it was enjoined " that the people com- The Brc:>d 
 monly receive the Sacrament of Christ's Body in l°ed'int'o Ih 
 their mouths, at the Priest's hand." At the next 
 revision the Minister was directed to deliver It 
 " in their hands " ; at the last revision " into their 
 hands." 
 
 So early as the second century anxiety was felt 
 by the faithful lest in the act of communicating 
 some portion of the sacred Elements should fall to 
 the ground; and in the fourth, S. Cyril 2 gives 
 minute directions to the newly-confirmed: "ap- 
 proaching therefore, come not with thy wrists ex- 
 tended or thy fingers open ; but make thy left hand 
 as it were a throne for thy right, which is on 
 the eve of receiving the King. And having made 
 thy palm hollow, receive the Body of Christ, saying 
 after it. Amen." ^ It is a clear indication tliat 
 in primitive times the modern practice of taking 
 
 1 Cf. Final Rubric at the close of the Office. 
 
 2 Myst. Cat. v. 18. 
 
 3 It was the invariable practice for the communicant to say 
 Amm at the end of tlie words of administration. It is often 
 l ecommeuded in Eucliaristic manuals ; and whether we regard it 
 as a pniyer "so may it be" or as an assent "so it is,'' it seunis to 
 be well worthy of adoption. 
 
340 The Communion of the Laity. 
 
 by the fingers, which is dangerously liable to irre- 
 verence unless wafer bread be used, found no 
 support. 
 
 For the administration of the Wine numerous 
 expedients have been tried to avoid the possibility 
 
 intinction. of Spilling. The Bread has been dipped in the Cup 
 and given to the communicant in a spoon. Tubes ^ 
 too have been used by which the Wine was drawn 
 
 The denial into the mouth. At the beginning of the thir- 
 
 of the Cup , , ,. . T, 
 
 to the laity, teenth century or somewhat earlier, certain Roman 
 Churches took upon themselves without any author- 
 ity to withhold the Cup altogether from the laity, 
 and the practice spread rapidly, though nothing 
 approaching to Ecclesiastical sanction was given to 
 
 1415 A.U. it till the Council of Constance resolved that 
 the custom introduced by the holy Fathers on 
 reasonable grounds should be accounted for a 
 law. 
 
 The doctrine jt has becu sought to justify Communion in one 
 itance. kind by the doctrine of concomitance, which implies 
 that "whole Christ is present after consecration under 
 either species of bread or wine." ^ The Eastern 
 Church, though opposed entirely to the denial of 
 the Cup to the laity, has sanctioned the principle of 
 
 1 Pugillaris, fistula, arundo, etc. 
 
 2 There are recorded instances in the early Church where the 
 Eucharist was administered only in one kind, But they are dis- 
 tinctly exceptional. S. Basil, Ep. 93, ad Cvesar. Patric. Euseb. 
 Ecd. Uist. vi. 41. 
 
The Communion of the Laity. 341 
 
 concomitance by its administration of Wine alone 
 in infant Communion.^ 
 
 Without entering upon a subject, Avhich has been 
 largely debated, it must suffice to plead the example 
 of Christ; what He gave could not but have a 
 virtue of its own. Through the refusal of the Cup 
 therefore, the laity are deprived of their rights, and 
 even the doctors at the Council of Trent indirectly 
 admitted it ; for they dared not to deny that those 
 who received in one kind only were deprived of any 
 grace, but they limited the loss to any grace that 
 was necessary to salvation. 
 
 While then it is our bounden duty to take every 
 precaution against any accident which may lead to 
 even the least irreverence, nothing can justify our 
 withholding that which Christ Himself gave at the 
 institution of the Feast, or which He designated as 
 of such vital import when He said, " Except ye eat 
 the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink His Blood, 
 ye have no life in you. He that eateth My Flesh 
 and drinketh My Blood, dwelleth in Me and I in 
 him." ^ 
 
 1 Cf. Goar in Annot. Nitrnsii ad Allatii Diss, de Missa Free- 
 sanct. ad Jin., qu. in Smith, Bid. Chr. Antiq., 837. 
 
 2 S. Jobn vi. 53-56. 
 
XLIII. 
 
 S. Jerome has told us that our Blessed Lord 
 taught this Prayer to the Apostles that believers 
 might use it " daily in the Sacrifice of His Body." ^ 
 Whether he had authority for the statement or not 
 The Lord's impossible to say, but it is quite certain that 
 
 diTfirs/'"" Lord's Prayer was regarded almost as an essen- 
 "h" 'a* ^^^^ ^^^^ °^ Divine Liturgy from the very first ; 
 Consecra- at least it is contained in every extant form but 
 one.2 Its position was almost invariably at the 
 close of the Consecration-Office, which in primitive 
 times comprised Intercessions and Oblation. S. 
 Augustine says that as regards " the prayers repeated 
 while tliat which is on the Holy Table is blessed, 
 hallowed and broken for distribution, nearly every 
 Church concludes them with the Lord's Prayer." ^ 
 If, as was clearly the case. Consecration was held to 
 depend wpon prayer, nothing could have been more 
 fittincr than that it should be combined with that 
 
 1 Dial. adv. Pelag. iii. 15. 
 
 2 The Clementine. Constit. Apost. viii. 13. 
 
 3 Ep. 59 ad Paulin. Serm. 227. 
 
The Lord's Prayer. 343 
 
 perfect Form which seemed to sanctify and give 
 efficacy to forms of mere human composition. Yet 
 further, whether we look upon it as completing 
 the Act of Consecration, or as preparatory to Com- 
 munion, its position between the two was marked 
 by singular propriety. 
 
 No doubt in the early and mediaeval Church it 
 was linked on in idea to the former rather than to the 
 latter; for it claimed whatever position was con- 
 sidered most honourable, and Consecration rather 
 than Communion was generally held to be the 
 culminating point of the Celebration. It is interest- its claim to 
 ing to notice how this claim has been recognised in of honour"" 
 all the Offices of the English Church.^ In the ^"^7/^^ 
 Baptismal Office the Lord's Prayer follows imme- 
 diately upon the notification to the congregation 
 that the child is " regenerate and grafted into the 
 body of Christ's Church." In Confirmation it 
 follows the laying on of hands. In the Burial of 
 the Dead it is repeated as soon as the body has been 
 solemnly committed to the ground. In the Com- 
 mination it is connected with the great penitential 
 Psalm or Miserere. The Form for the solemniza- 
 tion of Matrimony seems at first sight to break this 
 general rule, but the Psalm which follows the 
 priestly benediction on the union, is only introduced 
 as a processional to be said while those who arc 
 
 1 Tliis lias been illustrated at length by Scii,!. X,,'. Eucli. 7G8. 
 
344 The Lord's Prayer. 
 
 from the 
 
 Consecratic 
 
 Prayer. 
 
 taking part in the Service proceed from the Chancel- 
 gates to the Altar. During the Puritan innovations 
 of 1552, when the action of the Priest was depre- 
 ciated and Consecration divested of much of its 
 mystery, all the interest of the Service was made to 
 centre in the Communion ; and consequently the 
 Separated timc-honourcd position ^ of the Lord's Prayer was 
 
 at the second 
 
 revision chaugcd to suit this altered conception. There will 
 always be a difference of opinion upon the relative 
 import of two such tremendous mysteries: — whether 
 it is a greater thing that God by the agency of the 
 Holy Spirit should make bread and wine to become 
 the Body and Blood of Christ, or that we should be 
 made partakers thereof by actual reception ; and 
 men's judgment of the rightful position of the Lord's 
 Prayer will be regulated by their individual opinion; 
 but there can be no question that on some very sub- 
 stantial grounds it would more fitly precede than fol- 
 low Communion. " The daily bread," for which we 
 pray in this, was intended no doubt to comprehend 
 all the means by which life is sustained, but in its 
 highest sense it bespoke that Spiritual Food by 
 which the soul is fed. The early Fathers loved to 
 interpret it of this.^ S. Jerome helped largely to 
 fix this meaning by translating the word commonly 
 
 1 The .iEthiopio Liturgy is the single exception, having it in 
 the same place as our own. 
 
 2 Tevt. de Oral. Dom. S. Cyprian, de Oral. Dom. in loco. S. 
 Aug. crebro. 
 
The Lord' s Prayer. 345 
 
 rendered " daily," supersubstantialis, that is, the Bread 
 which is more than material.^ It puts the petition 
 into the fullest accord with the rest — all of which 
 are for spiritual gifts. It robs us, it is true, of the 
 authority of the model prayer for asking God for 
 material things, but this is assured to us by Divine 
 sanction in other places and with unmistakeable 
 distinctness.^ Interpreting therefore this petition 
 as clearly Eucharistic, it is obviously more appro- 
 priate to pray for " our daily bread " before than 
 after receiving it; and it is therefore a matter of 
 regret that the foreign compilers of the second 
 Prayer-book took upon themselves, in face of the 
 unbroken usage of fifteen centuries, to alter the 
 position of the Lord's Prayer. 
 
 One change was introduced into the Prayer at the 
 last revision deserving the highest commendation. 
 It had been made part of the post-communion 
 service, the key-note of which is thanksgiving. 
 Nothing could be more in harmony with this idea xhe 
 than to append to it the doxology, ascribing praise 
 
 1 ivLoiaioi has been interpreted in various ways. For a full 
 treatise upon it, of. Lightfoot, on the Revised Version : also 
 Wratislaw, The Churchman, July 1888, in which it is interpreted 
 as bread " for the on-coming day" : S. Matthew's version, "this 
 day our daily bread" being the proper formula for a morning 
 prayer ;— S. Luke's, " day by day our daily bread," to be used 
 at any time, for the bread of the on-coming space of the day, 
 reckoning from the moment when the Prayer is used. 
 
 2 S. Matt. xxi. 22. S. Mark xi. 24. 
 
34^ The Lord's Prayer. 
 
 to God, Whose is the kingdom and glory and power. 
 This had originally been inserted in some Eastern 
 Liturgies, though with far less propriety when it 
 was used strictly in supplication, but it had never 
 found a place in the Western Forms. It was 
 happily inserted by the same revisers as well in the 
 Prayer, where it followed immediately upon the 
 declaration of forgiveness in the preparatory Office 
 at the beginning of Matins and Evensong, and also 
 in the Form of Thanksgiving after Child-birth, 
 which was from beginning to end a service of praise ; 
 but it is a matter of surprise that, having recognised 
 the fitness of its use, they should not have added it 
 uniformly in the other Offices, where the idea of 
 praise predominates, as for instance in the Marriage 
 Service and in that for Confirmation. 
 
 Another change was made at the Reformation 
 
 The mode of touching the mode of reciting the Lord's Prayer. 
 
 Prayrr" '""^ lu the Eastem Churches and in the Gallican it was 
 invariably repeated by the whole congregation. In 
 the Mozarabic Liturgy, used in Spain, the people's 
 share in it was almost more emphatically marked by 
 their responding Amm to the several petitions, save 
 that they joined themselves in the last " deliver us 
 from evil," and responded to the request " Give us 
 this day our daily bread " by the declaration " Be- 
 cause Thou art God." It is clear that they under- 
 stood by it the Eucharistic Food, and acknowledged 
 
The Lord's Prayer. 347 
 
 the mystery, by confessing the Godhead of Him Who 
 gave it. The Eoman Church departed from the 
 universal custom, and left the recitation to the priest 
 alone, with the exception of the final clause ;^ and in 
 mediaeval times he said it secretly or in a low voice 
 as far as " lead us not' into temptation," when he 
 raised his voice as a signal for the laity to take 
 their part. The joint-recitation by all " the faith- 
 ful," priest and people, is a distinct gain, in harmony 
 with primitive practice, and most fitted to enable 
 all to express those feelings of thankfulness, with 
 which the Act of Communion has filled their hearts. 
 
 One ancient practice entirely disappeared from 
 the Anglican Liturgy at the revision — viz., the 
 expansion of both of the two final petitions, 
 "lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from "leadusnot 
 evil," by the insertion of a prayer, commonly called tbn."'""'"'' 
 Embolismus, varying in form and length, before 
 the doxology. Early forms of it are found in the 
 Liturgies of S. James : in the Jerusalem, " lead us 
 not into temptation, 0 Lord, Lord of power, Who 
 knowest our infirmity, but deliver us from the Evil 
 One,^ and his works, and all malice and wile of 
 his, for the sake of Thy Holy Name, which is 
 called upon our lowliness " : in the Syriac, " lead 
 
 1 Greg. Ep. Ixiv. ad Johaim. Syrac. de Mirac. S. Mart. ii. 30. 
 - This recognition of the Personality of the Tempter in the 
 Liturgies testifies very strongly to the belief of the early Church. 
 
348 The Lord's Prayer. 
 
 us not into temptation, such as we being destitute 
 of strength are not able to bear, but with the temp- 
 tation also make a way of escape, that we may be 
 able to bear it, and deliver us from evil." 
 
 In the later Liturgies the intercession of the 
 Saints was largely recognised in this place, the 
 names of local saints ^ being frequently united with 
 those which were recognised throughout the Church. 
 Reasons for The retention of this intercalary petition would 
 
 discontinu- 
 ing the Em- have been inconsistent with the altered position of 
 boiismus. ^j^^ Prayer ; it was well suited to an office of suppli- 
 cation, but not to one of thanksgiving. It is in this 
 latter spirit that we now say it, — dispelling thoughts 
 of fear, such as the mention of the Evil One must 
 ever inspire, and letting cheerfulness and joy take 
 possession of our souls, because we are realising, in 
 the highest degree that is possible to man, the 
 Divine declaration concerning our Blessed Lord, 
 that " as many as received Him, to them gave He 
 power to become the sons of God " ; and so with 
 one heart and voice, in all the confidence of trustful 
 children, we address Him as " Our Father." ^ 
 
 1 Cf. Stowe Miss, in Warren's Celtic Church, p. 242, where 
 S. Patrick is added to SS. Peter and Paul. For other examples, 
 cf. Scud. Not. Euch. 658. Microl. c. 33. 
 
 = Wheatley, Com. Pr. 309. 
 
XL IV. 
 
 Cte ^Scapcr of €)lilati'on 
 
 ' O Lord and heavenly Father, we Thy humble 
 
 The present position of this prayer has often been 
 designated a grievous blot upon the Anglican Office. 
 For many centuries Consecration was immediately owati 
 followed by Oblation ; as soon, that is, as the bread cioseiy 
 and wine became by the agency of the Holy Spirit 
 the Body and Blood of Christ, they were presented 
 to the Father. In the Sarum Use the Oblation was The Sarum 
 made in these words : " Wherefore also, 0 Lord, we tion. 
 Thy servants . . . offer to Thy excellent Majesty 
 of Thy gifts and bounties, a pure, a holy, a spotless 
 Sacrifice, the holy Bread of eternal life, and the Cup 
 of everlasting salvation. Upon which do Thou 
 vouchsafe to look with favourable and gracious 
 countenance, and accept them as Thou didst accept 
 the gifts of Thy righteous servant Abel, the sacrifice 
 of our patriarch Abraham, and the holy sacrifice, the 
 pure oblation, which Thy high priest Melchisedek 
 offered to Thee. We humbly entreat Thee, Al- 
 mighty God, command these things to be carried by 
 
350 
 
 The Prayer of Oblation. 
 
 the hands of Thy holy Angel to Thy Altar on high 
 before the sight of Thy Divine Majesty," etc. 
 The first In the first Eeformed Office the commemorative 
 
 Prayer-book. . /> i i i • 
 
 character of the oblation was more distinctly ex- 
 pressed : " we Thy humble servants do celebrate 
 and make here before Thy Divine Majesty, with 
 these Thy holy gifts, the memorial which Thy Son 
 hath willed us to make, having in remembrance His 
 blessed Passion," etc. All this was omitted in 1552, 
 Objection to and the eflfort made by Cosin to restore it at the 
 
 position of what was left of the form of Oblation was 
 separated from the act of Consecration by placing it 
 after the Communion of the people, and an option 
 allowed of substituting for it a thanksgiving Collect.^ 
 Now it is competent for us to look at the change in 
 two different lights; on the one hand, we may 
 regard it as liturgically defective, and join with 
 those eminent divines who have denounced it in 
 vehement terms. Overall,^ the author of the second 
 part of the Catechism, had such a strong feeling 
 against the dislocation of this prayer, that he did 
 not hesitate, when Bishop of Norwich, to restore it, 
 at the Celebration in his own chapel, to its rightful 
 
 1 The second post-communion Collect was composed for the first 
 Prayer-hook, to be said always. 
 
 2 Cosin, Works, v. IM, 115. 
 
The Prayer of Oblation. 3 5 1 
 
 position ; and Cosin/ after recording this practice 
 of his master, justified his conduct, saying, " We 
 ought first to send up Christ to God, and then He 
 will send Him down to us." 
 
 On the other hand we may plead that the Oblation a verbal 
 does not depend upon the use of any form of words, necessa"ry.°' 
 but that " the simple action of the Church in obe- 
 dience to the command is the sufficient and perfect 
 memorial of the Sacrifice on the Cross." As we 
 noticed before, (ch. xxi.) " oblation is an act," not a 
 form of prayer. Some support might be found for 
 this in Primitive Liturgies ; but it cannot be denied 
 that a verbal presentation generally marks the act.^ 
 
 It will be better therefore to accept the existing The present 
 form as a " prayer of oblation," and to use it as a ver- piicabie for 
 bal expression of the sacrificial act ; and the retention P'"'p°^''- 
 of one portion of the old prayer, "accept this our 
 sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving," in connexion 
 with the accompanying petition, " that by the merits 
 and death of Thy Son Jesus Christ, and through 
 faith in His blood, we and all Thy whole Church 
 may obtain remission of our sins and all other 
 benefits of His Passion," supplies all that is needed 
 for the purpose. It is possible, no doubt, to inter- 
 pret the phrase as though " praise and thanksgiving " ju^ai anTLi- 
 
 ' Lificance' of 
 
 - Scud. Not. Euch., 648, quotes some Egyptian Litt. where <. ^ sacrifice 
 there is uo verbal oblation, but there is in the Litt. of S. James, of praise and 
 S. C'lirysost., the Clementine, and others. thanksgiv. 
 
 ing." 
 
352 
 
 The Prayer of Oblation. 
 
 were in themselves offered up as a sacrifice, and the 
 author of the Epistle to the Hebrews ^ has shown 
 that such an interpretation is admissible, when he 
 wrote, " therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise 
 to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips, 
 giving thanks to His Name." If this were the only- 
 Scriptural authority for the term, the Church would 
 feel limited to this view in the present prayer ; but 
 there is abundant evidence in the Old Testament of 
 its usage for a material sacrifice accompanied by 
 praise and thanksgiving,^ and especially for the 
 peace-offering, which was itself typical of the Eu- 
 charistic sacrifice. It was in this latter sense that it 
 was adopted so generally into the Primitive Litur- 
 gies : in this sense that the first revisers used it 
 when they wrote, " we do celebrate with these holy 
 gifts this Memorial," following it up by the prayer 
 " to accept this our sacrifice of praise and thanks- 
 giving." The phrase was, moreover, so understood 
 alike by Roman Catholics and English reformers, for 
 Watson,^ one of the Marian Bishops, said, "Thus doth 
 the Church offer Christ her Head to God the Father, 
 as a worthy sacrifice of praise and thanks " ; and 
 
 1 xiii. 15. 
 
 2 Lev. vii. 12, 13 ; xxii. 29 ; Ps, cvii. 22 ; cxxi. 17 ; 2 Chron. 
 xxix. 31 ; Jer. xxxiii. 11 ; Amo.s iv. 5. 
 
 3 Both this and the following are quoted by Scud. , II. x. § iv. 
 There is a full discussion of the meaning of the term in Johnson's 
 Works, i. ch. ii. § 2 (Aiigl.-Nic. Lib.). 
 
The Prayer of Oblation. 
 
 353 
 
 Eidley wrote, "as though our unbloody Sacrifice 
 of the Church were any other than the Sacritico of 
 praise and thanksgiving, than a Commemoration, a 
 showing-forth, and a Sacramental representation of 
 that one only bloody Sacrifice offered up once for 
 all." All this affords ample justification for the 
 assertion that the Anglican Church, by retaining the 
 prayer that God will " accept this our sacrifice of 
 praise and thanksgiving," still possesses a verbal 
 oblation of the Memorial Sacrifice of Christ's Death. 
 
 The Holy Eucharist is the earthly counterpart of The Euchar- 
 " the Memorial " which Christ Himself is presenting memorati've 
 to the Father in heaven.^ As He is pleading by 
 the wounds in His hands and His pierced side — Sacrifice, 
 the marks of the Sacrifice once for all offered in the 
 Death of the Cross — He has willed that His priests 
 should make a commemorative oblation of the self- 
 same Sacrifice on Christian Altars; and they do 
 this when they hold in their hands the Bread and 
 Wine, consecrated and made by the operation of the 
 Holy Ghost His Body and Blood, and pray by the 
 merits of His Death, that His Church may obtain 
 remission of sins and all other benefits of His 
 Passion. 
 
 " Christ in heaven," says Jeremy Taylor,^ " per- 
 
 1 Cf. Footprints of the Son of Man, ii. 194-8. 
 
 2 Cf. Worthy Communicant, ch. i. § 4 ; Uoly Living, ch. iv. 
 § 10. 
 
 Z 
 
354 
 
 The Prayer of Oblation. 
 
 petually offers and represents that Sacrifice to His 
 Heavenly Father, and in virtue of that obtains all 
 good things for His Church. Now what Christ does 
 in heaven He hath commanded us to do on earth — 
 that is to represent His Death, and commemorate 
 His Sacrifice ... to lay it before the eyes of our 
 Heavenly Father. . . . The Church being the image 
 of heaven; the priest the minister of Christ; the 
 Holy Table being a copy of the celestial Altar ; and 
 the eternal sacrifice of the Lamb slain from the 
 beginning of the world being always the same; it 
 bleeds no more after the finishing of it on the Cross : 
 but it is wonderfully represented in heaven, and 
 graciously represented here; by Christ's action 
 there, by His commandment here." 
 
 This pleading by the merits of the One Sacrifice 
 is in this prayer accounted eflScacious for " all the 
 whole Church " ; not only for that part of it which 
 is militant here on earth, but for that which is 
 The faithful waiting in Paradise. The words were deliberately 
 fo'r! left at the final settlement, in the full consciousness 
 
 of the pregnant meaning which such a cumulative 
 expression was certain to carry with it ; for Cosin ^ 
 himself said that its intention was "that those on 
 earth and those that rest in the sleep of peace, being 
 departed in the faith of Christ, may find the efi'ect 
 
 1 Cf. Notes, 1st series. Works, v. 351-2 (Ang.-Nic). After 
 Death, by the Author, 242. 
 
The Prayer of Oblation. 
 
 355 
 
 and virtue of it," and in two other places he reverts 
 to the application of the term to the faithful dead. 
 
 We have here and in a previous chapter considered 
 the liturgical action of oblation under three aspects : The three- 
 first, in the offerings of the people ; secondly, [°'the'''""°" 
 in the oblation of the Elements for the Holy Eucharist, 
 
 to which IS 
 
 Eucharist upon the Altar ; thirdly, the representa- added the 
 tion of the One Oblation of Christ before the Father, self. 
 There is yet a fourth, upon which, at least as far as 
 the individual worshipper is concerned, the efficacy 
 of the rest practically depends. We said before 
 that the essential idea of the Jewish sacrifice was 
 the surrender of something, absolutely and entirely, 
 at the cost of the offerer. Now the price which 
 God demands of every one, who would offer accept- 
 ably the Eucharistic sacrifice, is emphasised in this 
 prayer. It is the echo of S. Paul's claim from his 
 Roman converts ; ^ " I beseech you therefore by the 
 mercies of God that ye present your bodies a living ^^i^ 
 sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your 
 reasonable service." It is a " living " sacrifice — no 
 incense merely ; no material gift of bread and wine ; 
 but our life — life, it may be, with its joys and 
 pleasures, its vigour and activity, its heart and 
 soul; all must be surrendered, if God demands 
 them. 
 
 It is a "holy" sacrifice — the human body has 
 
356 The Prayer of Oblation. 
 
 been sanctified for ever by the Incarnation, and the 
 body of each individual has been made a dwelling- 
 place of the Holy Ghost ; but, like the great Temple 
 at Jerusalem, it may be defiled through the base 
 trafiic in sin. If then we are conscious of any 
 unhallowed affection, any inordinate desire, any 
 corrupting presence, we must seize the scourge of 
 cords, and with a righteous indignation and a 
 determined resolve drive out everything that 
 offends this sanctuary of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 It is an " acceptable " sacrifice — something better 
 than the costliest offering of silver and gold ; better 
 than hecatombs of sheep and oxen : even the willing 
 mind, and an ungrudging self-devotion. It was 
 said in olden time that in the School of Socrates, a 
 pupil was so captivated by what he had heard of 
 the beauty of self-sacrifice, that at the close of the 
 lecture he went up to the teacher and said: "I 
 have nothing worthy of your acceptance, but I give 
 you myself ; do with me whatever you will" 
 Socrates at once accepted the offering with the 
 assurance that he should one day give it back 
 better than when he received it. This simple story 
 is but a parable of the Christian life. It is in the 
 spirit then of that poor JSschines (for that was the 
 pupil's name) that, recognising the true beauty of 
 self-surrender, we kneel down and say, we are " un- 
 worthy, through our manifold sins, to offer unto 
 
The Prayer of Oblation. 
 
 357 
 
 Thee any sacrifice, yet we beseech Thee to accept 
 this our bouuden duty and service ; not weighing 
 our merits, but pardoning our offences " through the 
 Sacrifice of Him, Who alone can cleanse the unclean 
 and make our offering acceptable in Thy sight. 
 
s 
 
 XLV. 
 
 •ZlTlje po0t'-Communion l^tianksigitn'ng. 
 
 " Or Ms, 
 
 " Almighty and Everlasting God, we most heartily thank Thee, for that 
 Thou dost vouchsafe to feed us, who have duly received these holy 
 Mysteries," etc. 
 
 This form of Thanksgiving was composed for the 
 first Prayer-book, and was intended to recall a lost 
 Thanksgiv feature from the primitive Liturgies.^ Throughout 
 
 ing after _ _ _ 
 
 reception an the East in early times ample provision was made 
 the early for tlic expression of gratitude after reception, and 
 Services. West, in Gaul and the Celtic Churches, in a 
 
 less degree ; but iu the mediaeval ages in the English 
 Use it was altogether ignored, save as an act of 
 private devotion for the Priest who celebrated. It 
 was placed very much on a par with preparation 
 for the Rite, in which the Priest and those who 
 ministered at the Altar alone were thought of. The 
 revised Service-book went fai- to redress the wrong; 
 and while it introduced the Exhortations for all, to 
 
 1 It in parts resembles that in the Litt. of Alexandria and 
 Cffisarea. Cf. Lit. Basil., Palm. Orig. Lit. ii. 156. 
 35S 
 
Post-Communion Thanksgiving. 359 
 
 prepare for a worthy participation, and provided a 
 general Confession and Absolution, it was not un- 
 mindful of the obligation to be thankful for the 
 blessings received. 
 
 The revision of 1552 marks a retrograde move- 
 ment ; for this form of Thanksgiving was made an 
 alternative with the old Prayer of Oblation then for 
 the first time separated from the act of Consecration. 
 The liberty of choice between two things, which the An aitema- 
 Church in her purest and best estate had regarded adUtTnct*^" 
 as necessary elements of the Service, could not but 
 involve harm and loss on one side or the other. To 
 omit the Prayer of Oblation was to overshadow the 
 sacrificial aspect of the Eite ; while the omission of 
 the Thanksgiving was the curtailment of a feature 
 to which Our Lord had given especial prominence 
 at the original Institution. Both were obligatory : 
 "these things ought ye to have done, but not to 
 leave the other undone." 
 
 One argument may be urged to extenuate the 
 action of the revisers; when they sanctioned the 
 disuse of the form of Thanksgiving in the post- 
 communion, they provided the worshipper with 
 some compensation, by transferring to this later part 
 the Gloria in excelsis. 
 
 As few Priests in the present age, when the 
 doctrine of the Memorial Sacrifice has recovered its 
 recognition, are likely to pass over the Prayer of 
 
360 The Post-Communion 
 
 Oblation, it only remains for us to urge all com- 
 municants to use for themselves the Thanksgiving 
 immediately after the close of the Office.^ If our 
 Blessed Lord, when He brake the loaves in the 
 wilderness, taught the multitudes that they should 
 " give thanks " for the meat that perisheth, how much 
 more incumbent upon men is it to do so for the 
 Bread of life and the Cup of immortality ! 
 The special In the present Form two causes for thankfulness 
 thankfui'ness are especially marked out : (i.) that we have been 
 here selected. ^^j^j^ ^.j^^ spiritual Food of the Body and Blood 
 of Christ; (ii.) that we are assured thereby of our 
 part in the Communion of the Saints. 
 
 We have seen in other parts of this Office what 
 it is to be made "partakers of Christ" for the 
 strengthening and refreshing of our undying souls ; 
 we turn then to the pledge which it gives us of our 
 membership of His Mystical Body. The participa- 
 tion in the Blessed Sacrament is an assurance that 
 we have not forfeited that which we received as our 
 Baptismal birthright. It is first a fellowship with 
 the Church on earth : it is a feast of union from 
 which all malice and hatred are excluded ; wherein 
 mutual love is the spirit that dominates those that 
 communicate ; " for we, being many, are one bread, 
 and one body ; for we are all partakers of that one 
 
 1 Other appropriate devotions for thanksgiving are part of the 
 Benedicile, Psalm cl., i\e Nunc Dimittis, the Lord's Prayer, etc. 
 
Thanksgiving. 
 
 361 
 
 bread." It is still further a bond of union with 
 the Church in Paradise; for we cannot dwell in 
 Christ and be one with Christ without holding at 
 the same time a close communion also with those 
 who have been admitted to an even nearer fellow- 
 ship with Him. We are all members of His Body, 
 though some, it may be, more honourable than 
 others : — the visible and the invisible one with 
 Him:- 
 
 " One family, in Christ we dwell, 
 One Church, above, beneath." 
 
 The means by which these gifts of spiritual Food 
 and Communion are imparted to the faithful are 
 here designated " holy Mysteries." It is no new The awe-in- 
 title, but one which the Church of the Reformation g^ve'n^o'tiie 
 inherited from antiquity ; and despite every attempt Sacrament, 
 of profane hands to tear away the veil from her 
 Sacraments and " make all things common," she de- 
 liberately retained and perpetuated it in her wor- 
 ship. In the Baptismal Office : " sanctify this water 
 to the mystical washing away of sin." God's power 
 to do this is first recognised, and then the exercise 
 of the power is asked for. In this Office: " consider 
 the dignity of that holy Mystery " : " so shall ye 
 be meet partakers of those holy Mysteries": "to 
 feed us, who have duly received these holy Mysteries." 
 It was not for nothing that a repetition was made 
 » 1 Cor. X. 17. 
 
362 The Post-Commwiioii 
 
 Inherited 
 
 quity and 
 handed on 
 by the Re- 
 formers. 
 
 of this a\ye- inspiring designation. If there had 
 been no regeneration in Baptism, and that rite had 
 been regarded only as a badge of the Christian 
 profession, why should the Eeformers have spoken 
 of it in a manner so calculated to mislead % Again, 
 if, in their eyes, there were no invisible yet real 
 Presence of Christ beneath the outward forms of 
 Bread and Wine : if the language which speaks of 
 Christ's Body in the Sacrament had been figurative 
 or metaphorical, could anything possibly have 
 justified them in drawing round the Ordinance a 
 shroud of Mystery by the very title that they gave 
 to it, not once only, but again and again % They 
 knew that to treat it as a plain and simple thing 
 would have been to sever their connexion with the 
 teaching of the great Fathers of the Church. The 
 doctrine of reserve which the early Christians had 
 been so careful to maintain was an abiding witness 
 to the awe in which the Sacraments were held. S. 
 Clement ^ exclaimed, as he spoke thus of the words 
 of Christ, about eating His Flesh and drinking His 
 Blood, "0 amazing Mystery! . . . receiving Him, 
 if we can, to hide Him within ! " 
 
 S. Cyril gave to the manual of instruction which 
 he wrote for the newly -baptized the title, " The 
 Catechism of the Mysteries." The ministers of the 
 Sacrament were " stewards of the Mystery " ; and 
 
 1 Poedag., lib. i. c. vi. 
 
Thanksgiving. 363 
 
 to draw near to the Altar was to " partake of the 
 holy Mysteries."^ Every one of the teachers of 
 the fourth century, to whom we are wont to 
 look as the authoritative exponents of Catholic 
 doctrine, S. Athanase, S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, S. 
 Chrysostom, and others besides them, dwell upon 
 " the Mysteries." The title, too, was adopted into 
 the Service-books of the early Church, and men 
 spoke with awe of the Service as " the mystic " and 
 " most dread " Liturgy.^ We may well be thankful 
 then that no change of designation was suffered to 
 break the Church's continuity with the past, or to 
 endeavour to make plain what Christ Himself had 
 purposely wrapt in obscurity. If Christ did not 
 intend the Sacraments to be regarded as Mysteries, 
 beyond the reach of finite intelligence to grasp, but 
 to be received in faith, then have His words, as has 
 been forcibly said, "misled the saints and martyrs 
 and confessors of the early Church : they have 
 misled such men as Augustine, Chrysostom, Thomas 
 a Kempis, Bernard, Anselm, Wesley, and Keble; 
 whilst they have been taken in their right sense by 
 Socinus and Zwinglius, by the Latitudinarians and 
 the Rationalists. Is it credible that these should 
 have been right and the Universal Church wrong? 
 
 1 Greg. Naz. Orat. 39 Laod. Cone. Can. 7. 
 
 2 17 ixvaTiKTi — i] 0o^£pd (cai (ppiKuSrjt — i) (ppiKoibearaTr) 
 Xenovpyla^ 
 
 3 Sadler, Mysteries of God. 
 
364 Post-Communion Thanksgiving. 
 
 In the Sacrament of the Altar we are confronted by 
 mystery, just as we are in contemplating the Incar- 
 Themys- natiou. The mystery of God incarnate in human 
 
 tery of 'he . 
 
 Sacrament Flesh admits of no explanation : the union of two 
 
 to that of the 
 
 Natures without confusion in One Person, so close 
 
 Irtcarnation. ^y^^^ jg thcologically kwful ^ tO Say that God 
 
 suffered, or that the Son of Man came down from 
 heaven, is far beyond the grasp of finite intelligence. 
 Even so is the mystery of the two parts of the 
 Blessed Sacrament — the visible and the invisible, 
 the material and the spiritual — both retain their 
 distinctive properties, yet, through the operation of 
 the Holy Ghost, they are made so truly one, that 
 we may speak of that which we receive either as 
 Bread and Wine, or as the Body and Blood of 
 Christ. 
 
 Let us draw near then with faith, in awe of the 
 mystery, taking the shoes from off our feet, and 
 with the prayer upon our lips, "Lord, I believe, 
 help thou mine unbelief," and thus, it may be, 
 we shall have the promise fulfilled in ourselves : 
 " All things are possible to him that believeth." 
 1 Hooker, E(x, Pol., v. liii. 3, 4. 
 
XLVI. 
 
 ^Ije (Blon'a in ci:ccl0i0. 
 
 " Glory to God in the highest," etc. 
 
 A CLOUD of uncertainty hangs over the origin 
 and primitive form of this Hymn of praise. There 
 can be hardly a doubt, however, that it is Eastern. 
 It has been either read or sung ^ daily in the Greek 
 Church from the fourth century to the present time; 
 but it is disappointing to find that it has never The earliest 
 found a place in any Oriental Liturgy, ancient or Hymn'not 
 modern. Its Eucharistic use is confined to the Eucharistic. 
 West, and even here its earliest adoption was into 
 the daily Matins.^ In Gaul it was sung in this 
 Office "every Lord's Day" by the Eule of 
 Caesarius ; in Spain on Sundays and Festivals ; at 
 Milan, in the Ambrosian Breviary, every day. In 
 Ireland it was sung also at uight.^ 
 
 1 It is sung on Sundays and Festivals ; read on other days. 
 Smith, Oreek Ch., 223. Bingham says erroneously, "it was 
 always used in the Communion service." — xiii. x. 9. 
 
 2 Cf. Ch. Quart. Rev., xli. 8. 
 
 3 Ad vesperum et ad matutinam. Cf. Bang. Antiph. Warren, 
 Celt. Ch., 193, 196. The Irish scribe attributes the addition to 
 S. Luke ii. 14 to S. Ambrose. 
 
366 
 
 The Gloria in excelsis. 
 
 There was an old tradition that it was first 
 ordered to be sung in the Celebration in the Roman 
 Church by Telesphorus in the second century ; ^ but 
 there can be little question now that what he 
 enjoined was the use of the single verse, containing 
 the Angels' ascription of praise taken from S. Luke's 
 Gospel, without any of the verses which follow in 
 the Hymn. At least it is a very fair conclusion, 
 for it is known to have existed in several Liturgies, 
 such as the Clementine and the Syriac Liturgies 
 of S. James and others.^ 
 Rome first Though We are compelled to abandon the old 
 
 adopted it in i i- « -p, 
 
 the Liturgy. Deliet, Komc still retains the honour of being the 
 first to adapt the Hymn itself for liturgical use. 
 Whether this was done at the beginning of the sixth 
 century by Pope Symmachus,* or at the end of it 
 by Gregory, it is not easy to decide ; all that is 
 known for certain is that it found no place in the 
 Leonine or Gelasian Sacramentaries, while in the 
 Gregorian there is a rubric ordering that it should 
 be sung " on Sundays and Feast-days, if a Bishop 
 were present; but that a presbyter should say it 
 only at Easter." In all probability England received 
 it from Eome, either through S. Augustine or after 
 
 747 AD the Council of Cloveshoo; for it soon came into 
 
 1 On the aiithority of tbe Lib. Pontificalis, not earlier than the 
 6th century. Cf. Ch. Quart, ibid. 
 
 2 Nest. Lit. of SS. Atteus and JIaris. 
 
 3 Walafrid Strabo, de rebus Ecc, c. 22. Warren, Celt. Ch., 250. 
 
The Gloria in excelsis. 367 
 
 general use in this country. Further, it was not 
 long before it formed an important element of 
 Eucliaristic worship, for it was made a means of 
 marking the particular seasons and Festivals, 
 through the interpolations or " farsings " which were 
 largely introduced into it.^ Many examples of 
 these are to be found ; in the Sarum, Bangor, and 
 Hereford Uses those for Feasts of the Blessed Virgin 
 are emphatically marked. 
 
 Apart from the variations so introduced, there The versions 
 were different versions of the Hymn. That which ° ' 
 seems to claim priority is found in "the Constitu- 
 tions of the Apostles," ^ a document, in parts at least, 
 of very uncertain date. In this it bears the title of 
 " a Morning Prayer." It is addressed, save in the 
 final clause, to God the Father, and is as follows : 
 " Glory to God in the highest, and upon earth peace, 
 goodwill among men. We praise Thee, we sing 
 hymns to Thee, we bless Thee, we glorify Thee, we 
 worship Thee by Thy great High Priest ; Thee Who 
 art the One unbegotten, the only unapproachable 
 Being. For Thy great glory, 0 Lord and heavenly 
 King, 0 God, the Father Almighty, 0 Lord God, 
 the Father of Christ, the immaculate Lamb, Who 
 
 1 These are found in the Troparia, or Tropers, so called from 
 rpoiral, "turns" or " changes," or from rpiiros in the rhetorical 
 sense. Cf. Rock. vol. iv. 22 n. 
 
 - vii. 47. The close of this book could not well have been 
 composed before the end of the fourth century. 
 
368 The Gloria in excelsis. 
 
 taketh away the sin of the world, receive our prayer, 
 Thou that sittest upon the cherubim. For Thou 
 only art holy, Thou only art the Lord Jesus, the 
 Christ of the God of all created nature, and our 
 King, by Whom glory, honour, and worsliip be to 
 Thee." 
 
 The fona There is another and fuller version, found in the 
 
 in the 
 
 Alexandrian Alexandrian MS. of the Scriptures, now in the 
 Manuscript, •gj.-j^jgjj Museum. It occurs with the thirteen 
 canticles of the Greek Church at the end of the 
 Psalms, under the title of "a Morning Hymn." 
 The main points on which it differs from the other 
 version are in its being addressed to the Three 
 Persons in the Godhead, and in its containing a 
 triple ^ repetition of the clauses " that taketh away 
 the sins of the world " and " have mercy upon us." 
 The address was, " God, Almighty Father, Lord, 
 only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, and Holy Spirit." 
 The only modern Liturgy in which this is repro- 
 duced is the Office now recognised by the Scotch 
 Church. It had no place in that which was issued 
 under the direction of Laud in 1637, as it has none 
 in our Liturgy of 1662. It was introduced at the 
 revision of the Scotch Office made by the Primus 
 of Scotland, Bishop Forbes, in 1764, to bring it " to 
 as exact conformity with the ancient standards of 
 
 1 It has been said that the third clause is written in a later 
 hand, but this is disputed. 
 
The Gloria in excelsis. 
 
 369 
 
 Eucharistic service as it would bear." ^ The eminent 
 Liturgiologist, Neale,^ was betrayed into the approval 
 of a most dangerous principle in speaking of this 
 alteration in the Gloria in excelsis ; after saying The address 
 that perhaps it was indefensible, he goes on, and s°pi!it 
 " yet I confess that in that century of Arianisni Ihe^srotch 
 (the eighteenth), when the enemy came in like a . 
 flood, there is something noble in the courage with 
 which an obscure and persecuted Church interpolated 
 the Catholic Faith of the Blessed Trinity into a 
 hymn which, in the altered sentence, had not pre- 
 viously borne witness to the doctrine of Nictea and 
 Constantinople." Any hymn or human composi- 
 tion, that lays no claim to be inspired, may be 
 altered by the Church; but nothing could justify 
 such an alteration as this, without the support of 
 some authoritative standard, when the avowed object 
 of revision was the recovery of primitive forms. 
 But Neale's panegyric was as undeserved as it was 
 unwise. The Scotch Bishops had evidence before 
 them, of which their liturgical predecessors were 
 ignorant. The Alexandrian MS. had, it is true, 
 been brought to England and presented to Charles i. 
 some years previously to the compilation of the 
 Laudian Ofiice of 1637 ; but it was some time before 
 it was collated or its details were at all accurately 
 
 1 Cf. Dowden's Annot. Scott. Office, pp. 97-99, 224-231. 
 
 = An Earnest Plea for the Retention of the Scotch Lit., p. 17. 
 
370 
 
 The Gloria in excelsis. 
 
 The great 
 doctrinal 
 
 this addition 
 
 nary Form. 
 
 The position 
 of the Hymr 
 changed in 
 1552, and 
 not without 
 
 known. After the lapse of nearly a century and a 
 half, scholars had become familiar mth its contents; 
 and it was quite natural that the ancient reading of 
 such an interesting portion as a hymn that was used 
 in Public Worship should have transpired ; it was 
 equally natural, too, that when the opportunity 
 offered, it should have been eagerly adopted. It is 
 much to be hoped that whenever the English Liturgy 
 is revised, a similar course will be followed ; for such 
 a distinct recognition of the Blessed Trinity in the 
 highest act of praise is full of significance. The 
 whole Three Persons have taken part in the 
 Sacrifice : the Father has accepted it : the Son has 
 presented it : the Holy Ghost has made it what it 
 is. How natural for the worshipper to give vent to 
 his gratitude in an outburst of praise to All alike ! 
 It is true that even in the unrevised form All are 
 confessed in the concluding ascription : " Thou only, 
 0 Christ, with the Holy Ghost, are most high in 
 the glory of God the Father " ; but it detracts 
 inevitably from the acknowledgment of our depend- 
 ence on the agency of the Holy Spirit, not to place 
 Him on an equality with the Father and the Son 
 also in the opening address. 
 
 The revisers of 1552 transferred this Hymn from 
 the beginning to the close of the Office, and they 
 have been severely rebuked for the change. We 
 could well wish that they had done nothing worse 
 
The Gloria in excelsis. 371 
 
 or more unliturgical ; for though it would have 
 been better to leave it in its old place, the altera- 
 tion admits of vindication. If the Hymn had 
 been largely used in the ancient Liturgies, and had 
 maintained therein anything like an uniform jjosi- 
 tion, we might have indorsed the condemnation; 
 but what are the facts'? It had no place in the 
 Eastern Liturgies ; and it was not general in the 
 West. It was absent from the original Gallican, 
 and when adopted for partial use in the seventh 
 century, it was sung as a thanksgiving after Com- 
 munion. In the Koman Liturgy and in Churches 
 that drew their forms of worship from Eome, it 
 occupied a position at the beginning ; but in placing 
 a hymn of praise at the end the revisers carried us 
 back to the very fountain-head of liturgical worship. 
 Some will regard it as no light thing to have re- 
 covered a single feature of the original Celebration, 
 for it may well be regarded as the echo of the 
 Hymn which our Lord and His Apostles sang before 
 they separated on the night of the Institution. 
 
 That the outburst of praise, with which the The 
 Hymn begins, is followed immediately by confes- 
 sion of sin and prayer, is a marked characteristic p«"'" 
 of Christian worship. No sooner has the penitent 
 heard the words of Absolution in Matins and 
 Evensong, than he is awed into a sense of humility 
 by its merging into prayer. No sooner again has 
 
372 
 
 The Gloria m excelsis. 
 
 he risen into the very heavens in concert " with 
 angels and archangels," than he sinks hack into the 
 cry of self-ahasement : " We arc not worthy so 
 much as to gather up the crumbs under Thy 
 Table." And it is the same here : the threefold 
 cry for mercy to Him, Who taketh away the sins 
 of the world, breaks forth in the very midst of the 
 ascription of glory ; but there is just one distinction : 
 in the Hymn the last thought is not of man's 
 weakness but of God's greatness, and so the highest 
 act of earthly worship ends in praise : " For Thou 
 only art holy. Thou only art the Lord, Thou only, 
 0 Christ, with the Holy Ghost, art most high in 
 the glory of God the Father." 
 
XLVII. 
 
 " Then the PriesI (or Bishop, if he be present), shall let them depart with 
 this Blessing, The Peace of God," etc. 
 
 " Collects ' to be said after the offertory," etc. 
 
 The act of benediction is of a twofold character : 
 on the one side it is little more than an intercession 
 to obtain a blessing ; on the other it conveys what 
 the spoken words imply ; but in either case it To whc 
 is restricted to those who are placed in a position of ^u'thori 
 authority, natural or official. It may be exercised 
 by the head of an ordinary household, or by a Priest 
 in the House and Family of God. In the Services 
 of the Church it has always been appropriated to 
 the ordained ministry, and in the greatest Service 
 of all for a long period during which the Episcopate 
 was far larger than it is now, it was regarded at least 
 in the West as the special prerogative of the highest 
 
 i Of these si.Y Collects^ three were ancient, three composed for the 
 1st P.B. " Assist us," etc., is in the Sacr. Gelas. : " 0 Almighty 
 Lord," etc., and "Prevent us," etc., in the Sacr. Greg. °The 
 beauty of the original of this last is very striking: "Actiones nos- 
 tras, (iua!siinius Domine, et aspirando prjeveni et adjuvando 
 prose(iuere : ut cuucta nostra operatic et a te semper inc'ipiat, et 
 per te coepta finiatur. Per, etc. 
 
 373 
 
374 ^/^^ Blessing. 
 
 order in the ministry.^ The rule in the Anglican 
 branch of the Church is laid down in the rubric 
 before us, which directs that the Blessing be given 
 by " the Priest (or Bishop, if he be present)." 
 
 In the fourth century we find this principle of 
 recognising superiority of Orders in the ofGce of 
 blessing clearly laid down:- "A bishop blesses, but 
 does not receive the blessing. He receives the bless- 
 ing from bishops, but by no means from presbyters. 
 A presbyter blesses, ... he receives the blessing 
 from the bishop or a fellow-presbyter. A deacon 
 does not bless." This was in accordance with the 
 teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews,^ " without 
 all contradiction, the less is blessed of the better." 
 
 In the ancient Liturgies the most important Bless- 
 ing invariably preceded the act of Communion, fol- 
 The form of lowing the UmboUsmus immediately after the Lord's 
 known as Prayer, which was united with the Form of Con- 
 onnd'wl" secration. This was commonly called "the Prayer 
 of Inclination." In the Western Churches it was 
 always pronounced by a Bishop, and much stress 
 was laid upon the bowing down to receive it, as an 
 acknowledgment of the superior dignity of the Epi- 
 scopal office. Thus we are told * that Valentinian 
 
 1 In tlio East it was not so, but generally in the West, except in 
 Spain. Cf. Co. of Agde, 506 a.d. ; Martene, lib. i. c. iv. 
 
 2 Jpost. Conslit. viii. 28. s vii. 7. 
 
 * Sttois Kal Tj/ieTs elXtKpivws airifi ras ij/jUpas vwOKKivoinev 
 Ke<t>a\ds, Theodoret, His!. Eccl. lib. iv. c. 6. 
 
The Blessing. 375 
 
 gave orders to the Bishops, who were assembled to 
 fill up the vacant see of Milan, that they should be 
 careful to place upon the Bishop's throne one of 
 such eminence for life and doctrine, that the Em- 
 perors themselves might not be ashamed to bow 
 doAvn their heads before him. 
 
 In lapse of time the privilege was extended to a 
 Priest by delegation, not of right, and in some 
 Churches by order of council.^ In wellnigh all the 
 Liturgies the blessing was preceded by a monition 
 from the deacon : " Bow down for the benediction," 
 "Bow your heads to the Lord"; and the custom 
 was preserved in England down to the Keformation 
 whenever a Bishop celebrated, the rubric in the 
 Sarum Missal giving this direction, " Let the Dea- 
 con, turning to the people and holding the Bishop's 
 staff in his right hand, with the crook turned towards 
 himself, say. Bow down yourselves for a blessing." 
 
 The form of this Episcopal benediction varied 
 with the season, except in the final clause, which in 
 the old Roman Liturgy ^ most nearly resembled the 
 final blessing of our present Office — viz., " The Bless- 
 ing of God tlie Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Ghost, and the Peace of the Lord, be always 
 with you." If the Bishop was not present, the 
 
 1 Co. of Toledo, 633 a.d., Can. xviii. 
 
 - This is quoted from the ancient Rom. Lit. of Greg, the Gt. , but 
 doubts have been expressed whether these Episcopal Benedictions 
 were ever used in the Rom. Ch. ; cf. Burbidge, Lituryies, p. 78 n. 
 
376 The Blessing. 
 
 Priest said the latter portion only : '• The Peace 
 of the Lord be always with you." 
 
 An indication of the importance attached to this 
 element of the OflSce may be seen in the injunctions 
 that all persons, whether communicating or not, 
 should remain up to this point.^ 
 The absence A benediction at the dismissal of the congregation, 
 Blessing in at the close of the Office, was unknown in the Roman 
 Mas^"""*" Church till the fourteenth century.^ At the Eeforma- 
 tion the revisers of our Liturgy introduced the first 
 clause of the present form in the Order of Com- 
 munion, and the second in the first Prayer-book the 
 following year. Furthermore, they discontinued that 
 which had been regarded as the Bishop's distinctive 
 blessing before Communion, and thus, as was done in 
 the East, placed the priesthood on a level with the 
 episcopate in the authority to bless, only reserving 
 to the latter the natural order of precedence, when- 
 ever a Bishop happened to be present. 
 
 Blessing was a priestly function inherited from 
 the institution of the order among the Jews : 
 " Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, saying. On 
 
 1 Co. of Agde, and 1st and 3rd Co. of Orleans, 511 a.d. and 538 
 A.D., ordered this. Csesarius preached a sermon to enforce it. 
 Serm. 281. 
 
 " In the Sar. Miss, there was a mutual blessing by priest and 
 people, common to other parts as well : " The Lord be with you ; 
 and with thy spirit. " A distinction was made between Pax vobis- 
 cum and Dominus vobiscum : the former, as being more authorita- 
 tive, was confined to the Bishop. 
 
The Blessing. 2)77 
 
 this wise ye shall bless the children of Israel "; ^ ^he right to 
 
 bless inherent 
 
 and though a right of priority was reserved to the in the priest- 
 hood of th<» 
 
 High Priest, the people at the morning and evening jews. 
 Sacrifice ordinarily received the blessing from the 
 priest who celebrated. When " the people waited 
 for Zacharias, and marvelled that he tarried so long 
 in the Temple," it was because they might not 
 depart without his blessing. In accordance with 
 ancient Jewish usage the Priest stands and lifts up 
 his hands in blessing.^ 
 
 A variety of forms have been used in the Chris- The various 
 tian Church, no two Services concluding with pre- b°™in°g ;„ 
 
 as on occasions not provided for in the Prayer-book, 
 it seems convenient to adopt one from other Offices 
 than the Liturgy. That in the latter is so peculiarly 
 consonant to the spirit of the Office to which it has 
 been affixed, that it seems most undesirable to use it 
 elsewhere. It was after the Institution of the Holy The fitness 
 Eucharist that Christ gave peace to the Apostles as °[ing^"°The 
 His parting bequest : " Peace I leave with you, My ,^'g^yQ,y° 
 peace I give unto you." It was no worldly peace of Eucharist, 
 which He spoke, for "without Avere fightings"; the 
 result of His Mission would be " to set a man at 
 variance against his father, and the daughter 
 
 1 Numb. vi. 23 ; Lev. ix. 22. 
 
 - Ibid. S. Luke xxiv. 50. In the East the first, second, and 
 fourth fingers are outstretched ; in the West, the first, second and 
 the thumb, the three together symbolising the Trinity. 
 
37^ The Blessing. 
 
 her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her 
 mother-in-law ; and a man's foes shall be they of his 
 own household and so He turned away their 
 thoughts from that which the world could offer to 
 that which was peculiarly His own — " My peace " : 
 it is even more in the original, " the peace that is 
 Mine," of which I alone am the source. It is ana- 
 logous to the expression that He used very shortly 
 after : "ye shall abide in My love or, more strictly, 
 "the love that is Mine," which answers to My nature.^ 
 Even so the Peace which the Priest is empowered 
 by the Church to offer here in Christ's Name is that 
 which comes from union with Him Who is the source 
 thereof ; and inasmuch as the Blessed Sacrament is 
 before all else the means whereby " we dwell in Him, 
 and He in us," nothing could be more fitting than 
 to restrict the Blessing of Peace to the Eucharistic 
 Office. 
 
 Yet again, if S. Paul ^ has assured us that " the 
 peace of God, which passeth all understanding," 
 shall be the possession of those who " by prayer and 
 supplication, with thanksgiving," let their " requests 
 be made known unto God," the echo of the Aposto- 
 lic promise comes home with peculiar force, at the 
 time when we have been joining in the highest act 
 of prayer and thanksgiving that is possible to man. 
 
 1 Cf. Westcott on S. John siv. 27 ; xv. 10. 
 
 2 Philipp. iv. 6, 7. 
 
XLVIII. 
 
 EeatencO or Unlcatcuet) Breati anti 
 lacsseubati'on* 
 
 " And to take away all occasion of dissention and superstition, it shall 
 suffice that the Bread be such as is usual to be eaten ; but the best and 
 purest Wheat Bread that conveniently may be gotten." 
 
 "And if any of the Bread and Wine remain unconsecrated, the Curate 
 shall have it to his own use; but if any remain of that which was consecrated, 
 it shall not be carried out of the Church, but the Priest and such other of the 
 Communicants as he shall then call unto him, shall, immediately after the 
 Blessing, reverently eat and drink the same." 
 
 "The Bread and Wine for the Communion shall be provided ... at the 
 charges of the Parish." 
 
 It has long been a subject of dispute between the 
 East and the West whether the sacramental bread 
 should be leavened or unleavened. The Eastern 
 Church has always ^ used leavened bread ; and in all use of 
 probability ^ the Western did the same for the first b^^^d"! 
 ten centuries. We have already mentioned ^ that ^"<='^^' 
 it was customary in the early Church to select the 
 
 1 There seems to be an exception, at least if the account given of 
 our Lord's institution in the Lit. of S. Epiphanius (Etliiopic) was 
 followed : "He took unleavened wheaten bread." Cf. Neale and 
 Littledale's Litt. p. 213 ; on the other hand, cf. S. Maruthas (Syr. 
 Jac), p. 232. 
 
 - Pellicia says that Mabillon had clearly proved that "from 
 earliest times the Latins everywhere used unleavened bread," but 
 Sirmond is decidedly against this view, and it is generally thought 
 that Bona satisfactorily overthrew Mabillon's arguments. Alcuin's 
 evidence, c. 780 a.d., is very ambiguous, cf. Scud. J\^ot. Such. 870. 
 Polity of the Chr. Ch. 272. 
 
 » Cf. supra, p. 158. 
 
 879 
 
380 Leavened or Unleavened Bread 
 
 elements for consecration from the offerings of the 
 people. Every one intending to communicate 
 brought to the Church a loaf and a flagon of wine, 
 and there is no indication that the bread which 
 they thus offered had been specially prepared. In 
 the life of S. Gregory the Great ^ there is a story 
 which bears distinct witness to its being such as 
 was in ordinary use. A certain matron named 
 Candida, who had made her usual offerings, when 
 S. Gregory was about to deliver to her the con- 
 secrated Bread with the words, " The Body of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ," was seen by him to smile ; he 
 thereupon withheld the Sacrament and passed her by, 
 but at the close of the Service questioned her upon 
 the cause of her irreverent behaviour. She told 
 him after much hesitation that it was because he 
 said that bread, which she knew that she had 
 made with her own hands, was the Lord's Body. 
 It almost necessitates the belief that there had been 
 nothing unusual in the mode of preparation ; had 
 there been, she would have felt no surprise. 
 Theinnova- The first indisputable notice- of unleavened bread 
 unleavened being uscd occurs in the middle of the eleventh 
 
 bread in the 
 West. 
 
 1051 A.D. 1 rpjjg above is translated roughly from the Latin given by 
 Bingham, xv. ii. § 5 n., from the life by John the Deacon, 1. ii. 
 c. xli. 
 
 - Though it is now first noticed, it is thought to have been intro- 
 duced in the 9th century, probably when the Chuixh took upon 
 itself the preparation of the bread. 
 
and Reservation. 
 
 381 
 
 century, when a fierce quarrel broke out between 
 the Churches of the East and West, and the 
 departure from primitive custom was employed as a 
 weapon of attack by the Patriarch of Constantinople. 
 Much bitterness was infused into the dispute, and 
 the Greeks contemptuously nicknamed the Eomans 
 Azymites, that is, " unleavened-ers." We may gather 
 that the cause of contention was held to be very 
 serious indeed from the fact that a number of Greek 
 monks actually laid down their lives rather than 1225 a.d. 
 admit the validity of a Eucharist celebrated with 
 unleavened bread, and they have been commemorated 
 by their Church as martyrs iu consequence.^ 
 
 Thomas Aquinas and the schoolmen vigorously 
 defended the new practice ; but the Eoman Church, 
 though forbidding leaven, has not gone so far as to 
 question the validity of the Sacrament, if it is used.^ 
 She appeals to the original Institution, maintaining Theuncer- 
 that our Blessed Lord celebrated with Passover what^was 
 cakes, which were of necessity unleavened ; but "^iglna'i'iJi^ 
 there is such a cloud of uncertainty hanging round stUution. 
 all the circumstances of the Last Supper, that it is 
 impossible to speak with confidence.^ The ceremony 
 
 1 When Cyprus w.is conquered by Honorius m. 
 
 - Coun. of Trent, P. ii. de Euchar. Sac, c. xv : "It can be 
 celebrated even in leavened bread." 
 
 3 The nature of tlie Last Supper and its connexion with the 
 Passover has been fully considered in the author's Footprints, 
 etc., ii. 183-7. It is, however, there erroneously stated that \in- 
 leavened bread must have been used. 
 
382 Leavened or Unleavened Bread 
 
 of " the search for leaven " took place on the 
 13th of Nisan, that would be, we hold, on this 
 occasion, on Thursday evening after dark ; ^ but 
 if the Sacrament was instituted on that night, that 
 is, on the beginning ^ of the 14th, it would not 
 have been illegal to use leavened bread, for after 
 " the search " enough was allowed to be preserved 
 for eating at breakfast or luncheon the next morn- 
 ing. This at the latest was eleven o'clock.^ The 
 law was that all leaven must be burnt before mid-day 
 on the 1 ith. " Thou shalt not kill the Passover, 
 while yet leaven is in existence."* After this no 
 kind of bread whatever might be eaten till evening, 
 when unleavened cakes were introduced, and became 
 one of the chief features of the Feast. Now there 
 is a strong probability that they had leavened bread 
 at the Last Supper, and that they had to wait for the 
 Passover bread till the time when it was absolutely 
 commanded. The grace that they said over this 
 latter was, " the blessing of Him Who hath kept us 
 alive," ^ and this is usually appropriated to occasions 
 when something new is being donej if they had 
 eaten unleavened bread already on the day it would 
 
 1 Mishnali Pesachim i. 1. 4. Maimonides Eilekhoth Chametz 
 U-matizah, ii. 1. 3. 
 
 2 Confusion often arises from forgetting that the Jewish day 
 began in the evening. 
 
 3 Modern Jews do not eat after 10 a.m. 
 
 * Mekhiltc, Massekhto de-Khasjw, Par. 20. Exod. xxiii. 18, 
 xxxiv. 25. 
 
 5 Shehecheyanu was the exact form nsed. 
 
and Reservation. 383 
 
 be inappropriate. It may be tliouglit, however, 
 that Our Lord would wish to conform, as far as 
 possible, to the ordinary Paschal Feast, and would 
 use Passover cakes, which were at least procurable; 
 but if so, it is inconceivable that the whole Church 
 should, from the very first, and for wellnigh a thou- 
 sand years, have deliberately disregarded His ex- 
 ample in regard to one of the elements of the Feast He 
 then instituted, when she scrupulously observed it in 
 the other. He might possibly have used unleavened 
 bread, just as He might have used unmingled wine : 
 there would be nothing illegal in either case. The 
 universal tradition of the Church points to the con- 
 clusion that He did neither the one nor the other. 
 
 What, then, may be urged in vindication of the 
 Eoman Church, and of our own, for this, too, at one 
 period distinctly ordered, and at the present time 
 appears to sanction, the use of unleavened bread 1 
 In the first Prayer-book it was directed that the Jhe English 
 
 •' Church at 
 
 bread " be made, through all this realm, after one the first 
 sort and fashion : that is to say, unleavened and followed the 
 round, as it was afore, but without all manner of 
 print." In the second a change was made, and for 
 the express direction for unleavened bread, the words 
 were substituted, " it shall suffice that the bread be 
 such as is usual to be eaten." This has been inter- 
 preted by the Privy CounciP as forbidding any 
 1 Hibbert v. Purclias. 
 
384 Leavened or Unleavened Bread 
 
 other kind ; but it is extremely difficult, at least for a 
 non-legal mind, to recognise such an interpretation 
 as consistent with the common usage of language, 
 especially when precisely the same expression is 
 used in the very next Office in the natural sense of 
 the words. In the Baptism of Infants it is said, if 
 the sponsors " certify that the child is weak, it shall 
 suffice to pour water upon it " ; but that this does not 
 prohibit immersion under other conditions is manifest 
 from the preceding rubric, which expressly orders it. 
 The Shew- Setting aside the original Institution as involved 
 
 bread with- 
 out leaven, lu obscurity, a motive for the use of unleavened 
 
 bread is found in the fact that the Shewbread was 
 
 " without leaven." As the Bread of the Face, that 
 
 is, of the Presence of God,^ it was an express type 
 
 of that " Bread which came down from heaven," of 
 
 which we are made partakers in the Holy Eucharist. 
 
 The origin of The habit of using wafer-bread probably dates from 
 
 ^"^ the twelfth century. It seems always to have been 
 
 round in shape, and at this time it is often mentioned 
 
 that it was moulded in the shape of a penny ; ^ the 
 
 most likely explanation of which is, that when the 
 
 laity ceased to bring their oblation of bread or 
 
 flour, they made an offering of a piece of money 
 
 instead. Certain letters, such as Alpha and Omega, 
 
 1 Joseph. Ant. iii. x. 7. Bahr, Symbolik, i. 6, § 2. 
 
 2 Statutum est eum in modum denarii formari et ut populus 
 pro oblatione farinae denarios offerent. — Gem. Animoe, i. 66. 
 
and Reservation. 
 
 385 
 
 the initial letters of Christ's name, crosses, and at 
 last crucifixes,^ were stamped upon the wafers, and 
 these were forbidden in the first revised Office, 
 for fear of superstition, by the words "without 
 all manner of print." The present legitimacy ^ 
 of wafers stands or falls with that of unleavened 
 bread. 
 
 The next rubric enjoins that " if any remain of that 
 which was consecrated, it shall not be carried out of 
 the Church," but that the Priest and other com- 
 municants "shall, immediately after the Blessing, 
 reverently eat and drink the same." It must be 
 read in connexion with the rubric after the people 
 have communicated : " the minister shall return to Provisions at 
 the Lord's Table, and reverently place upon it what sion agaTm't 
 remaineth of the consecrated elements, covering the ^^^g^^^"*^ 
 same with a fair linen cloth." Both were introduced "^nt- 
 at the final revision, and witness to the desire to 
 recognise more clearly the doctrine of the Eeality 
 of Christ's Presence. 
 
 An evil practice had grown up, for the Priest to 
 prepare and consecrate far more than was needed, 
 
 1 Oewi. Animct, i. 35. 
 
 ^ No authoritative decision has been given by the Church since 
 Qn. Elizab. Injunc, which ordered wafers. At the close of her 
 reign, however, a diversity arose owing to the objections of the 
 Puritans ; and Hooker pronounced it to be indifferent "what kind 
 of bread was used," Eccl. Pol. iv. x. 2. The Lower House of 
 Convoc. of Canterbury in 1866 decided that the use of wafers 
 was tliscouraged by the Church. 
 
 2 B 
 
386 Leavened or Unleavened Bread 
 
 Objects for 
 which the 
 Sacrament 
 
 and then to consume what was left in a careless and 
 irreverent manner. Cosin in his Visitation Articles^ 
 asks : " doth the Curate carefully see . . . that the 
 quantity thereof may be answerable to the number 
 of his communicants, and that he prepareth or 
 blesseth not twice as much as shall suffice, either to 
 have it home to his house, or to tarry behind in the 
 church, there with other people, in profane and 
 common manner to eat and to drink at the Lord's 
 Table and in the house of God % " There can be 
 little doubt, therefore, that the primary object of 
 the first rubric was to guard against the prevailing 
 contempt of the Sacrament, but we dare not assert 
 that it was the only object. At the time of the 
 Reformation it was usual to reserve the Sacrament 
 for several purposes, mainly for the public adoration, 
 called the Expositio, for benediction,^ for communion 
 ou Good Friday and other Fast-days, and for com- 
 municating the sick. Now at the first revision 
 nothing was said in this Office about reservation of 
 any kind, but we can have little doubt that the 
 revisers intended to prohibit the practice in some, 
 probably in all, cases. They could have no sjTiipathy 
 with the first two objects, for absolutely no ancient 
 precedent could be pleaded in their behalf, the 
 
 1 Correspondence, vol. i. 118. Works, v. 519. 
 
 2 It is not certain that these two latter usages were then known 
 in Eiifrlami. 
 
and Reservation. 
 
 387 
 
 former having originated in the thirteenth, the latter 
 only in the sixteenth century. 
 
 It was diflferent with the last two, for the Eastern 
 Church ^ almost from the beginning, and the West- 
 ern for many centuries, had refused to consecrate 
 the Eucharist on Good Friday. Two grounds have The Euchar 
 been alleged for the prohibition, one, that, while secraTed°" 
 Communion may be allowed, Consecration is too on.Good 
 festal a thing for such a day of sorrow and humilia- 
 tion ; another and more reasonable one, that 
 " Christ was sacrificed on that day, and when the 
 truth comes, the figure ought to cease and give it 
 place." Inasmuch, however, as there seems to be 
 no call at the present time for the restoration of 
 Communion on Good Friday, we may pass to the 
 consideration of reservation for the sick ; and here 
 we are able to plead not only universal recognition 
 from the earliest times, but also a widely felt desire 
 for liberty to use it on grounds of pressing need 
 and practical utility. 
 
 It was sanctioned in the Office for the Communion Reservation 
 of the Sick in 1549, but the sanction would appear ddib«atdy 
 to have been withdrawn in 1552,2 because the rubric 
 was suppressed ; and at the same time other provi- fo™ation. 
 sion was carefully made for communicating the sick. 
 
 1 They only consecrated in Lent on Saturday and Sunday, and 
 on the Feast of the Annunciation. 
 
 2 Mr. Kempe argues that the rubric was simply dropped to 
 
388 Leavened or Unleavened Bread 
 
 Furthermore, the practice of the Church in discon- 
 tinuing it after the change implied prohibition. 
 The twenty-eighth Article has been often referred 
 to as though it settled the illegality, saying that 
 " the Sacrament was not by Christ's ordinance re- 
 served, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped." 
 It was ordained, it is true, that it might be re- 
 ceived, but it is by no means denied here that 
 it may be reserved for a purpose in the fullest 
 accord with that object. The language does not 
 touch the case in point. Had, however, the final 
 revisers intended to secure this exceptional use, it 
 is difficult to see why it was not positively pro- 
 vided for. 
 
 Reasons While, howcver, we are constrained to construe 
 
 why such a 
 
 course is to the absence of such provision as prohibitory of the 
 be regretted. pj,^g(.jgg^ abandonment is much to be regretted, 
 and mainly on these two grounds : first, it places 
 the English Church in a disadvantageous position, 
 and deprives her of a long and time-honoured privi- 
 lege. It is a distinct breach in the continuity of 
 Catholic practice. Secondly, it creates a risk of 
 
 conciliate the foreign Refomers, and argues from the analogy of 
 the omission of the rubrical directions for the manual acts in 
 consecration, which, he says, were nevertheless undoubtedly 
 continued, Reservation of the B. Sacr., p. 13. It is by no means 
 certain, however, that they were continued in all cases, e.g., the 
 fraction of the bread, but if so, there is this great diilerence: 
 the rubrics enjoining these were reinserted in the final revision, 
 but the rubric for reservation was not. 
 
and Reservation. 389 
 
 the sick being deprived of the Sacrament when it 
 is most needed. 
 
 Cases are far from infrequent, where in times of 
 grievous sickness and epidemic diseases, especially 
 in large and populous places, the Church, if reser- 
 vation is forbidden, is wellnigh powerless to supply 
 the wants of the sick, and is obliged, simply from the 
 exigency of the imposed restriction, to leave them 
 to die without that which might have ministered to 
 their great and endless comfort. " Whoso eateth My 
 Flesh and drinketh My Blood hath eternal life " : 
 that is the sure promise of the Saviour. The 
 Church, in the full conviction that "God is not 
 bound by Sacraments," has mercifully taught that 
 in such dire extremities a man may spiritually eat 
 and drink the Body and Blood of Christ profitably 
 to his soul's health, even without actual participation 
 of the Sacrament; but it is her bounden duty to 
 leave no stone unturned to enable every one to 
 ensure the blessings of the promise by a literal 
 obedience to the Divine command. 
 
XLIX. 
 
 ifrequencp of Commum'on. 
 
 " Upon the Sunday and other Holy-Days (if there be no Communion) 
 shall be said all that is appointed," 1 etc. 
 
 "And there shall be no Celebration . . . except there be a convenient 
 number," 2 etc. 
 
 "And if there be not above twenty persons in the Parish of discretion 
 . . . except four (or three at the least), communicate with the Priest." 
 
 " And in Cathedral and Collegiate Churches, and Colleges, where there 
 are many Priests and Deacons, they shall all receive the Communion with 
 the Priest every Sunday at the least, except they have a reasonable cause 
 to the contrary." 
 
 " And note, that every Parishioner shall communicate at the least three 
 times in the year, of which Easter to be one. And yearly at Easter every 
 Parishioner shall reckon with the Parson,"' etc. 
 
 It is far from clear how frequently the early 
 
 Christians were wont to communicate. In all pro- 
 
 ' There is early authority for a partial use of the Liturgy. 
 " At Ale.xandria on Thursday and Friday all the solemnity for the 
 Conimuuioii is accomplished, yet the Communion is not received" 
 cf. Socrat. Eccl. Hist., v. 21). In the mediasval Ch. the Missa 
 Sicca, or Dry JIass, without the Canon, became very common. In 
 1 P.B. Edw. VI. it was ordered that when there was no Com- 
 munion the Prie.st should "say all things at the Altar until after 
 the Offertory." In 2 P.B. tlie place for saying was omitted, and 
 the Puritans began to read this "Second Service " from the read- 
 ing-desk. No alteration iu this respect was made in 1662; and 
 the Puritan custom, notwithstanding the discouragement of the 
 Bishops, lingered on almost to the present generation. It is to be 
 noted that this service must include the Prayer lor the Church. 
 The restriction on consecration to the presence of communi- 
 
 3 Cf. supra, p. 160. 
 390 
 
Frequency of Communion. 39 1 
 
 bability S. Augustine's^ observation, that there was 
 a divided practice, was applicable to preceding ages 
 as well as to his own : " some communicate in the 
 Lord's Body and Blood every day, others receive on Diversity of 
 stated days." It is quite true that the earliest 
 notice leaves no doubt that the disciples, in the ^'^^''^"'^ 
 fervour of their first love and devotion, celebrated mun'O" 
 daily in the upper chamber at Jerusalem but it is 
 somewhat remarkable that the assembling together 
 " to break bread " very shortly comes to be a dis- 
 tinguishing mark of the Lord's Day.^ At the 
 beginning of the second century the Bithynian 
 Christians, on the testimony of the Eoman gover- 
 nor,* confined their Communion to a particular day 
 in the week ; and a generation later the day appro- 
 priated to the Celebration, on the evidence of the 
 
 cants was in the 1 P.B. vaguely, " except there be some." In 2 
 P.B. two rubrics were introduced— one "except there be a good 
 number"; the other as at present, "except four, or thi'ee at the 
 least." The object of the revisers was to check Private and Soli- 
 tary Masses, and to encourage communion among the laity (cf. 
 Span-ow, Rationale, p. 154'; Beveridge, Necess. of Com., pp. 44, 
 92). There is great difficulty in obeying these rulirics at tlie pre- 
 .sent day, from the absence of discipline. So long as there is no 
 enforcement of the rubric, which orders intending communicants 
 "to signify their names to tlie Curate" beforeliand, it is quite 
 impossible to be sure till after the Consecration that the requisite 
 number are prejiared to communicate. If the laity resent this as .a 
 restriction on their liberty, they cannot complain if the other 
 rubric is disregarded. 
 
 1 Ep. ad Jarmar. , c. ii. 2. 
 
 2 Acts ii. 42, 46. Cf. supra, pp. 26, 27. 
 
 s Acts XX. 7. Somewhat later Sunday was called Dies Panis. 
 * Pliny, Ep. x. 97 
 
392 Fi'equency of Communion. 
 
 Apologist, was "that day called Sunday."^ Other 
 days 2 were added : Wednesday and Friday in the 
 West, Saturday in the East. 
 
 It was not long, however, before the Fathers^ 
 interpreted the petition in the Lord's Prayer for 
 " daily bread " as applicable to Christ, the Bread of 
 Life ; and this led to a general revival of the practice 
 of the first disciples at Jerusalem. With this in- 
 crease of Celebrations, strange to say, there came a 
 falling away in the frequency of Communion. The 
 fourth century witnessed what have been called "vast 
 polar and equatorial extremes" in the Eucharistic life 
 of the Church, some communicating every day, some 
 restricting their reception to once a year. This age 
 was marked by much controversy touching the 
 value of frequent reception, as well as the possible 
 risk of detracting from the honour of the Sacrament 
 by a familiar use thereof. The first question was 
 left for the most part to be settled as a case of con- 
 science by the communicant himself on the result of 
 his experience. S. Jerome,* when consulted for the 
 resolution of a man's scruples on this point, advised 
 him, if possible, to follow the traditions of the 
 particular Church to which he belonged, and while 
 
 1 Just. Mart., Apol. i. 67. 
 
 2 Tert., de Orat. 14. BasU, Ep. 289. 
 
 s Tert., de Orat. 6. S. Cj-pr. de Orat. Dum. sect. 18. S. Cyiil, 
 Cat. Myst. v. 15. 
 
 Ep, 2nd ad Lucin. Eoatic. 
 
Frequency of Communion. 393 
 
 personally counselling a daily reception, warned him 
 strictly that it might only be, provided he could do 
 it " without condemnation and pricks of conscience 
 for an unworthy receiving." S. Augustine^ gave simi- 
 lar advice, and referred also to a high estimate of the 
 Sacrament being the aim alike of the infrequent and 
 the frequent communicant, both of whom were con- 
 tending to show to it the greatest reverence ; " the 
 one to honour it, not daring to receive every day, and 
 the other shrinking, for the same end, from passing 
 any day without it." But S. Augustine's experience 
 was not shared by his great contemporary in the 
 Church of Antioch, who speaks in tones of the 
 deepest sadness of the people's negligence, and con- The increase 
 trasts the paucity of communicants with the vast ^^^s'^'ied'^to a 
 multitudes who flocked together to hear his sermons, diminution 
 " What pardon or excuse," he asks indignantly, " can ■ 
 be granted for such conduct ? If you had laid to 
 heart what I preach to you, it would hold you back 
 that you might receive the holy Mysteries with 
 piety and reverence ; but now, as if you were hearing 
 a man play upon some instrument, the preacher has 
 no sooner done, but you are all gone out of the 
 church."^ This was the beginning of the decadence 
 in lay-communions. No long time elapsed before 
 legislation became necessary, and the Council of 
 
 1 Ep. ad Jan. iii. 4. 
 
 2 S. Cbrys., Bom. 3 de Incomprehensibili Dei Nat. 
 
394 Frequency of Communion. 
 
 Ecciesiasti- Agde^ fixcd three communions in the year as the 
 t^n'on'^^e minimum to be allowed consistently with church- 
 subject. membershil). It was a sad declension from the high 
 religious standard of another Council,^ which, exactly 
 two hundred years before, had decreed that if any one 
 dwelling in a town should absent himself from Church 
 on three Sundays, he should be excommunicated.* 
 The practice Tumiug to the Church in our own country, we 
 before^the'^ find that, as the Venerable Bede says, it was no 
 Reformation, better than the Churches on the Continent. Every- 
 where, rare Communions were the rule, and satisfied 
 even the more religious ; and after the beginning of 
 the thirteenth century, aU Churches in communion 
 1215 A.D. with Kome adopted the decree of the Lateran Coun- 
 cil,* allowing a single reception at Easter to fulfil 
 the Christian obligation. No advance was made at 
 After the Reformation, the first revised Prayer-book 
 
 Reformation, merely directing " every man and woman to com- 
 municate once a year at the least," till 1552, when 
 it was ordered as at present, " at the least three times 
 in the year, Easter to be one." We may feel some 
 
 1 Co. of Agde, 506 A.D. 
 
 2 Iliberis, 305 A.D. It does uot mention attendance at the 
 Celebi-ation totidem verbis ; but as this was the regular Sunday 
 Service at this time the significance of the decree cannot be mis- 
 taken. So also at Co. of TruUo and Antioch. Cf. Wal. Strabo, 
 de reb. Eccl. c. xx. 
 
 3 He mentions Epiphany as one of the three days, and omits 
 Pentecost. 
 
 * Fourth Lat. Council, Can. xxi. 
 
Frequency of Cotnmunioit. 395 
 
 surprise that men, so loyal to primitive doctrine as 
 Cosin, Wren, and their co-revisers, should have con- 
 sented at the final to impress no higher standard 
 upon the Church at large ; but it is impossible for 
 us to understand the state of popular feeling result- 
 ing fi-om a famine and starvation of Eucliaristic 
 Food for twenty years. Throughout a great part of 
 England even the recollection of the Blessed Sacra- Difficulty 
 
 1 11 of setting 
 
 ment had passed away; and where it was not wholly a high 
 forgotten, it was mentioned only in contempt and ^'^"^'''^5,^ 
 blasphemy. In the "Exemplary Churches," how- 
 ever, the revisers insisted upon the restoration of a 
 weekly Communion, but the Visitation Articles of 
 the Bishops show no traces of their influence being 
 felt in the dioceses outside. No Bishop, as far as 
 we know, looked for more than a monthly Celebra- 
 tion, and the majority were satisfied to insist on 
 one each quarter, or even on the minimum " three 
 times in the yeai'." 
 
 It was not till the Catholic Revival of 1833 that 
 the English Church awoke to her duty of off"ering a 
 Communion on every day for which her Prayer- 
 book provides an appointed Service. Even after The begin- 
 
 , . T 1 ningofbettt 
 
 half a century of resuscitation and quickened energy, things m 
 there is still, in not a few of the rural districts, '^^3 a.d. 
 a clinging to the "old order," and the monthly 
 Communion is thought sufficient. This is a purely 
 arbitrary practice, based upon no substantial prin- 
 
396 Frequency of Communioii. 
 
 ciple or recognised authority. But it is altogether 
 different when a Sunday or Festival Communion is 
 adopted. This rule rests on the teaching and usage of 
 the purest ages of the Church's history, and it brings 
 our practice up to a level with the standard enforced 
 by the provisions of our Service-books. Few will 
 Weekly and deny that, in exceptional cases, even a higher stan- 
 Com- dard may be striven after with profit, and the deep 
 t^Te'the religious fervour of the Apostles imitated by a daily 
 general aim. Eucharist ; but for the generality of Christians, 
 Sunday and Saints'-day Celebrations, with others 
 occasionally added, seem most consistent with the 
 need for a constant supply of this spiritual Food, 
 while it recognises the obligation to approach the 
 Mysteries only after due preparation, which would 
 often be impossible at shorter intervals. We speak 
 here only of occasions for communicating. Addi- 
 tional opportunities are freely offered for " the faith- 
 ful" to be present for purposes of worship and 
 intercession.^ It will be a grievous loss to the 
 spiritual life if history is allowed to repeat itself, and 
 these latter occasions are ever suffered to diminish the 
 former. We need have no fears, if the true principles 
 of Sacramental Grace continue to be taught, as they 
 have been taught with ever-increasing faithfulness, 
 since their revival in the past generation. We have 
 learned to recognise how the necessity for frequent 
 J Cf. supra, p. 202. 
 
Frequency of Communion. 397 
 
 Communion was symbolised in the very elements The sym- 
 which Christ used for the conveyance of the gift. Ekm"ems. 
 When He took the bread and the wine as the out- 
 ward and visible signs, He chose those which were 
 — both at least in the country where He was — the 
 very staff of life : not the choice viands and luxuries 
 of the rare feast, but that which was absolutely 
 necessary for the continual support of the bodily 
 frame. And by this choice He must have intended 
 to teach us that, just as in the human body there is 
 always going on a process of waste, which needs to 
 be constantly repaired, so in the spiritual life the 
 ravages of sin cannot possibly be counteracted by 
 rare supplies of Divine grace, but only by a frequent 
 participation of the life-giving Food. We can only 
 be loyal then to the true spirit of the ordinance, 
 and the ideal that our Prayer-book puts before us, 
 if we live in such a state of preparation that we 
 may be ready week by week, and festival by festival, 
 to respond to the invitation which Wisdom gives 
 us : " Come, eat of my bread, and drink of the cup 
 that I have mingled." 
 
L. 
 
 'STfie 2DccIacati'on upon fencelins;, oc 
 
 "Whereas it is ordained in this Office that the Communicants should 
 receive the same kneeling, ... it is hereby declared, that thereby no 
 Adoration is intended . . . unto any Corporal Presence of Christ's natural 
 Flesh and Blood, . . . the Natural Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ 
 are in heaven, and not here ; it being against the truth of Christ's natural 
 Body to be at one time in more places than one." 
 
 " The Black rubric," as it is familiarly called, 
 was composed in all probability by Cranmer, and 
 illegally foisted into the second Prayer-book of 
 The history g^j^ard VI. It Had no place in the revised Form 
 
 of'theBl-icl: ^ 
 
 rubric ' that was laid before Parliament, and enforced by 
 an Act of Uniformity, passed on April 6th, 1552; 
 but three days ^ before the time appointed for the 
 Book to come into use, it was sent by the Privy 
 Council to the Lord Chancellor, with a direction 
 that it might be inserted. This was done on the 
 sole authority of the King's signature. It is not 
 surprising therefore, that, when this second Prayer- 
 book was adopted by the Elizabethan Commissioners 
 as the basis of a new revision, the interpolation was 
 
 1 Nov. 1, 1552, was the day fixed by the Act. This was inserted 
 Oct. 27th. 
 
 398 
 
The Declaration upon Kneeling. 399 
 
 ignored as destitute of any legal sanction. Nothing 
 more was seen or heard of it till at the Savoy- 
 Conference the Presbyterians tried to vindicate its i66i a.d. 
 authority, and pleaded for its admission into the 
 new Service-book, on the ground that it was 
 " established by law as much as any other part of 
 the Common Prayer-book." This was peremptorily 
 denied by the Bishops, who expressed at the same 
 time their conviction that its re-introduction was Un- fi^g reasons 
 called for, as the prevailing tendency of the world at ^ 
 
 ^ I. G J prompted 
 
 the time was towards the profanation of the Sacrament 'he Bishops 
 rather than idolatry.^ When, however, it was pressed 
 upon them that kneeling for reception had come to be 
 popularly interpreted as favouring transubstantiation, 
 being themselves as strongly averse to this erroneous 
 doctrine as any of their opponents, they yielded to 
 the demand, but not till they had guarded them- 
 selves against the possibility of being misunderstood 
 by making a vital change in the language. In its The change 
 original form the Declaration had spoken of " any g" "ge'.''" 
 real and essential Presence." This they struck out 
 and substituted " any corporal Presence." It might, 
 no doubt, be argued that in the language of the 
 Schools ^ there is no great difference between the 
 two phrases, since a Real Presence of Christ involves 
 the Presence of Christ's Body, that is, a Corporal 
 
 1 Cf. Cardw. Cmf., 354. 
 
 2 Cf. Perry's Ded. cm Kneeling, pp. 42, 46, 53, etc. 
 
400 The Declaration tipon Kneeling, 
 
 Presence. But the Bishops knew that a "Real 
 Presence " of Christ's Body in the Sacrament was 
 the doctrine of the Catholic Church, and they were 
 anxious to disentangle it from errors, whether 
 speculative or popular, with which it had come to 
 be associated. They therefore adopted " corporal " 
 for " real and essential," in the belief that it would 
 be accepted simply as rejecting the idea of such a 
 Presence of Christ's Body under natural conditions 
 as at the time was connected with the doctrine of 
 tran substantiation. To suppose that they intended 
 to lend even the semblance of support to those who 
 denied a Presence under supernatural or sacra- 
 mental conditions such as the great Fathers of 
 the Church in all ages had upheld, is to accuse them 
 of deliberate inconsistency. Every other change 
 they made at this revision tended to the exaltation 
 of the Sacrament.^ If they are to be judged by 
 their acts and writings, there cannot be a question 
 that "the Declaration is nothing more than a 
 negation of transubstantiation." It is well known 
 that Gauden, Bishop of Exeter, was mainly instru- 
 mental in bringing about its re-admission ; and this 
 Gauden's jg Jjq^^ jjg expresses himself touching the nature of 
 specting the Christ's Preseuce : " I believe that in the Sacrament 
 
 Real Pre- 
 
 1 e.g., the oblation of the elements: the introduction of the 
 manual acts : the veiling of the consecrated elements : the reverent 
 consumption of that which was left, etc. 
 
or The Black Rtibric. 401 
 
 of the Lord's Supper there are both Objects pre- 
 sented to and received by a worthy receiver : first, 
 the Bread and Wine . . . which are true Objects of 
 our sense. . . . Also there are spiritual, invisible, and 
 credible, yet most true and really present, Objects 
 of faith : the Body and Blood of Christ, that is, Christ 
 Jesus Himself. These two materials of the Sacra- 
 ment are so united, that it may be truly said (not 
 in a gross and physical, but Divine and sacramental 
 sense) the Bread and Wine are the Body and Blood 
 of Christ."^ And as showing his belief in the 
 Objective Presence, independently of the faith of 
 the recipient, he writes, " Shall I who am loaden 
 with sins, . , . with my polluted looks and lying 
 tongue, shall I touch the Bread of Angels 1 or shall 
 I lodge the King of kings in a heart filled with foul 
 concupiscence ? " Furthermore, as indicative of 
 the general acceptance of such views, it is worthy 
 of notice that these passages are cited from the 
 tenth edition of a manual for communicants, bear- 
 ing the imprimatur of Archbishop Sancroft,^ who 
 had acted as secretary when the Black rubric was 
 re-admitted. 
 
 Accepting this then as the primary object of the 
 
 1 Perry has printed the Manual at length, and the extracts 
 are made from his copy, Decl. pp. 308-320. 
 
 - This is of the utmost importance. It is next to impossible 
 that he could have authorised it, if the Declaration contradicted 
 the Real Presence. 
 
 2 c 
 
402 The Declaration upon K^ieelinq, 
 
 Declaration, we have less difficulty in interpreting 
 the expressions " Christ's natural Flesh and Blood," 
 and " the natural Body and Blood of Our Saviour 
 Christ are in heaven and not here." " Natural " was 
 an unfortunate term to use, because it has received 
 a Scriptural definition in regard to the body which 
 makes it inapplicable here. Our Lord has no 
 natural Body in the sense affixed to the term 
 What was " natural " by S. Paul.^ When he spoke of a man's 
 Ch^rsts^ natural body he signified that with which he was 
 Bo'dy^' ^'^^^ world, " actuated by an animal soul " : 
 
 and he opposed to it his " spiritual " body, with 
 which he will be clothed in the risen life. Such 
 is the Body of Christ, and such it has been since 
 the morning of the Eesurrection. We are driven 
 therefore to find out why the Bishops used the 
 language which they did. It must have been simply 
 because it seemed to add weight to their repudiation 
 of the popular belief with its carnal ideas resulting 
 from the theory of transubstantiation. The fact is 
 that the traditional language of the Church about 
 the reality of the sacred Presence in the Sacrament 
 had led men to think of it as a Presence of the 
 same kind as that of Our Lord in Palestine before 
 His Death and Eesurrection, with the single excep- 
 tion of its being invisible ; and hence discussions as 
 to whether Our Lord saw out of the sacramental 
 1 1 Cor. xy. 41. 
 
or The Black Rubric. 
 
 Species and the like. The conditions of the sacra- 
 mental Presence in the Church were very different 
 from those under which Christ was present on earth 
 before His Death ; they also differed from those in 
 which in His risen Body He is now in the courts 
 of heaven. It was inconsistent with the reality of 
 this to be in two places at once; but it is not 
 inconsistent with His Presence in the Sacrament to 
 be at the same time on the many thousand Altars 
 in the Catholic Church. It was this difference 
 which the Bishops, by using the word "natural," 
 endeavoured, not very happily, to express; but 
 while questions may be raised about the appropri- 
 ateness of their phraseology, there is no room for 
 question as to their meaning. 
 
 What the Anglican Church believes is that 
 Christ's risen and glorified Body is in heaven, at 
 the right hand of God, there to remain till He shall 
 come again at the end of the world, and that His 
 Body is one, having the same form, dimensions, and 
 outline, as it possessed when the Apostles saw it 
 ascend, or when S. Stephen, S. Paul, and S. John 
 recognised it in vision ; and further, that naturally 
 it is not "at one time in more places than one." 
 And all that the Bishops denied in this Declaration The particu- 
 is, first, that any adoration is to be paid to such a '»^f^=»doration 
 Presence of Christ's Body as was that in the Manger Body here 
 or on the Cross, because in fact such a Presence no 
 
404 The Declaration upon Kneeling, 
 
 longer exists anywhere; or yet to such as that 
 which is in heaven at this moment, because the 
 truth of this Presence is inconsistent with a pre- 
 sumed ubiquity of Christ's human Nature on divers 
 Altars here on earth. But it contains no censure or 
 rejection of any such worship or adoration of what is 
 called His "Sacramental" Body, that is, His Body, 
 present under conditions peculiar to the Sacrament, 
 mystically and invisibly, and after a wholly different 
 manner from that in which His Body is present at 
 God's right hand. 
 
 The views of those who accepted the Declaration 
 for re-admission into the Prayer-book are well 
 understood in relation to transubstantiation ; and 
 the following evidence will make it abundantly 
 clear what they held as touching the legitimacy of 
 true Eucharistic adoration, 
 stimony Gaudcu,^ two ycars before the revision, wrote, 
 charLic " ^6 . . . reverently adore in that blessed Mystery 
 .radon by (.j^g ^gal Body and Blood of Christ"; and 
 
 uden ; 
 
 again, he spoke of " receiving the heavenly dainties 
 with that adoration and gratitude which is meet." 
 In the manual aforesaid, containing " the whole duty 
 of a communicant," he directs him to say, when the 
 Minister is drawing near with the Elements, " I 
 adore Thee, O most righteous Eedeemer." 
 
 1 Peny, ibid. p. 307; cf. also Gauden's Ecclcsia: Anglicanct 
 Suspiria. 
 
or The Black Rubric. 405 
 
 Cosin.i again, quotes with approval a note from by cosin ; 
 Callixtus : " they worship and adore, not indeed the 
 Elements ... but Our Lord and God Himself, 
 Jesus Christ " ; and in his own words he writes, 
 " whosoever so receiveth them (the Elements), at that 
 time when he receiveth them, rightly doth he adore 
 and reverence his Saviour there together with the 
 sacramental Bread and Cup, exhibiting His Own 
 Body and Blood unto them." 
 
 One more quotation from a contemporary divine 
 will suffice. Sparrow,^ the author of the " Eationale by Sparrow ; 
 of Common Prayer," speaking of the posture for 
 reception, says : " It is to be given to the people 
 kneeling: for a sin it is not to adore when we 
 receive the Sacrament"; and again, "the old 
 custom was to receive It after the manner of 
 adoration." 
 
 Finally, as absolutely conclusive evidence of the 
 views of the Commission as a body, they made by the whole 
 answer to the "Exceptions of the Ministers " ^ that c°">""i^5i°" ; 
 in primitive times when the Church used to stand 
 for prayers, "the manner of receiving was more 
 adorantium," that is, after the manner of adoration ; 
 and in support of their assertion they appealed to 
 the Fathers SS. Augustine and Cyril. 
 
 We turn therefore to a consideration of the 
 Patristic evidence. In the middle of the fourth 
 
 I Works, V. 345. 2 P. 236. s Cardw. Con/., 350. 
 
4o6 The Declaration tipon Kneeling, 
 
 by s. Cyril ; ceiitury S. Cyril wrote his Catechetical Lectures ^ 
 for the newly-baptized and confirmed, and herein he 
 bids them approach " bending and saying after the 
 manner of worship, Amen," that is, signifying their 
 assent to the truth of the words spoken by the Cele- 
 brant, "The Body of Our Lord Jesus," not only by 
 word, but in gesture and act, paying that homage 
 that is due to the Presence of God. 
 
 by s. Am- S. Ambrosc,^ about thirty years later, in defend- 
 ing the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, dwells upon 
 the worship of Christ, and speaks of " the Flesh of 
 Christ which we adore in the Mysteries to this 
 day " : and argues that adoration was due to Christ's 
 sacramental Presence every bit as much as it was 
 to that Risen Body which Mary Magdalene and the 
 
 ^ ^ ^ disciples worshipped during the forty days. 
 
 tine. ° S. Augustine, at the beginning of the fifth 
 century, enforced the same when he said, " No one 
 eats that Flesh except he have first adored : we not 
 only do not sin by adoring, but we should sin if we 
 did not " ; and in his exposition of the words " All 
 they that be fat upon earth shall eat and worship," 
 he interprets it of " the proud who are brought to 
 the Table of Christ and receive of His Body and 
 Blood, but only adore and are not also satisfied, 
 because they do not imitate Him," and again, " they 
 
 1 V. § 22 (19). 
 
 2 De Spiritu Sancto, lib. iii. c. xi. 
 
or The Black Rzibric. 407 
 
 eat and adore, and yet they are not satisfied, because 
 they do not hunger and thirst after righteousness." 
 
 Theodoret, in a treatise which he put forth 
 shortly before the fourth General Council, speaks of 451 a d. 
 the adoration which Christ received in the Sacra- 
 ment as the counterpart of the adoration of Christ's 
 Body by all creatures in heaven ; and his testimony 
 is of importance, because he argues against that view 
 of the Real Presence which was afterwards desig- 
 nated transubstantiation. 
 
 It is worthy of notice that the way in which these 
 Fathers speak of adoration leaves no doubt upon the 
 mind that they were recording no new thing, but 
 a custom which had long prevailed in the Church. 
 
 S. Cyril, the earliest of them, characterises the 
 practice as one of the " traditions " which they were 
 to hold fast, applying to it the same designation as 
 is given to Apostolic doctrines. 
 
 S. Ambrose again carries the practice back to 
 earlier times by the use of a striking expression : 
 " the Flesh of Christ, which we adore down to this 
 day." It can only be interpreted as indicating his 
 belief that it was inherited from their forefathers 
 in the Faith. 
 
 It is our firm and abiding conviction that " the 
 Black rubric," when fairly interpreted in the light of 
 contemporary history, does not contravene any true 
 and Catholic doctrine. It has been often made the 
 
4o8 The Declaration upon Kneeling. 
 
 battle-ground of angry strife as opening up the great 
 questions which have divided our Church ; but we 
 look forward in the same prayerful hope which 
 animated one of our most saintly priests ^ to the time 
 when "this Sacrament of peace, ceasing to be to 
 believers a Sacrament of contention, will be free to 
 work its Lord's work among men : being, indeed, 
 that wonder-working Fire which He came to kindle 
 on the earth, of power to transform and subdue all 
 to itself." 
 
 Should what we have set forth in this treatise, 
 following as our finite judgment has enabled us the 
 teaching of Holy Scripture, as the great Fathers 
 have interpreted it, be the means of hastening in 
 any hearts this blessed consummation, to God be all 
 the praise ; it will not have been written in vain. 
 1 Keble, Kuchar. Adoration, ch. v. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 Absolution, the source of, 224. 
 
 delegation of the power of, 225. 
 
 the Church's helief in, 227. 
 
 exercised in various ways, 227- 
 
 231. 
 
 Morinus on, 229. 
 
 objections to the principle of, 
 
 231, 232. 
 
 Adoration of Christ in the Sacrament 
 according to the early Church, 406, 
 407. 
 
 the Reformers, 404, 405. 
 
 Agape, 10, 11. 
 
 Agde, Council of, 199, 394. 
 
 Agnus Dei, 334. 
 
 Allocution of Bishops on the East- 
 ward position, 65. 
 
 Almsgiving, 155, 160. 
 
 Altar and Table interchangeable terms 
 with the Jews, 49. 
 
 mutually complementary in 
 
 Christian worship, 56. 
 
 title of, discontinued in the 
 
 Second Prayer-book, 49. 
 
 doctrine of, not changed, 50, 51. 
 
 Primitive usage of the term, 52. 
 
 ancient shape of, 54. 
 
 errors connected with, 55. 
 
 Anamnesis, a memorial before God, 353. 
 
 Anaphora, 235. 
 
 Aquinas, Thomas, on Eucharistic 
 
 Bread, 381. 
 Arcosolia, 279. 
 
 Articles, Thirty-nine, teaching of, on 
 the Sacramental Presence, 188, 189. 
 
 Ascension-day, early honour of, 248. 
 
 Atonement, ritual of the day of, 288, 
 289. 
 
 Augustine on the Real Presence, 190. 
 Azymites, 381. 
 
 Baptism, special time for, 255. 
 Banns of marriage, time for publish- 
 ing, 141. 
 
 Barrow on the power of the keys, 227. 
 
 Basilicas, said to have been given to 
 Christians, 59. 
 
 Basilican form of Churches, 60. 
 
 Before the people, 280. 
 
 Table, 279. 
 
 Benediction, the, 332. 
 
 Bethlehems iu Church, 159. 
 
 Blessing, Eulogia, 80. 
 
 the function of a superior, 373. 
 
 in Apostolical Constitutions, 374. 
 
 the Bishop's, 374. 
 
 a final, wanting in the Roman 
 
 Mass, 376. 
 
 - — • various forms of, in the English 
 Offices, 377. 
 
 appropriateness of the Euchar- 
 istic, 37S. 
 
 Body, dignity of the, recognised, 274, 
 275. 
 
 Bread for the Eucharist made by the 
 communicants, 159, S80. 
 
 by the ministry, 160. 
 
 the breaking of, an early title, 26. 
 
 daily, how interpreted, 344. 
 
 leavened or unleavened, 380, 384. 
 
 wafer, 384. 
 
 Breathing on the App., 225, 226. 
 Briefs, 142. 
 
 Calendar, English, revised, 251. 
 Candida, story of, 380. 
 
Index. 
 
 Carthage, Co. of, 13. 
 
 Catacombs, altar-tombs in the, 279. 
 
 Celebrant, posture of the, in receiv- 
 ing, 329, 330. 
 
 with wliat words he receives, 331. 
 
 position of the, 279. 
 
 Chalcedon, Co. of, 2CS. 
 
 Cliamber, the Upper, 27. 
 
 Christmas-day, wliy fixed in Decem- 
 ber, 243. 
 
 Church, notes of the, 129, 130. 
 
 Churches of Gaul and Britain con- 
 nected, 7. 
 
 Circumincessio or Coinherence, 263. 
 
 Citations, 143. 
 
 Collect, etymology of, 82, 83. 
 
 construction of a, 92. 
 
 Collects, ancient, 84-86. 
 
 Reformation, 86-SS. 
 
 proposed revision of, 88. 
 
 an uneven number read, 89. 
 
 addressed to the Father, with 
 
 few exceptions, 93. 
 
 Comes of Jerome, 100. 
 
 Comfortable Words, the, 231. 
 
 Communion, early meaning of, 22, 23. 
 
 impediments to, 36. 
 
 exclusion from, difBcult, 36, 37. 
 
 Evening, 13-15. 
 
 spiritual, 389. 
 
 daily, 391, 392. 
 
 legislation for attendance at, 394. 
 
 fasting, in the Early Church, IS- 
 IS. 
 
 at the Eeformation, 19. 
 
 opinion of leading Divines 
 
 upon, 20. 
 Concomitance, doctrine of, 340. 
 Confession, private, among the Jews, 
 
 222. 
 
 in the first Prayer-book, 192. 
 
 in the present Prayer-boolt, 
 
 102. 
 
 a general, 217-220. 
 
 absent from the old Litt, 
 
 19. 
 
 Consecration, priest's posture at, 27S. 
 
 position at, 279. 
 
 prayer, aloud or secret, 282, 283. 
 
 Consecration, what constitutes it in 
 
 the East, 297, 298. 
 
 in the Roman Church, 298. 
 
 Consubstantial, 127. 
 Consubstantiation, 312. 
 Consultation of Hermann, 187, 220, 
 
 234. 
 
 Contestatio, 237. 
 
 Cross, discovery of the true, 320-322. 
 
 .sign of, in the Early Church, 323. 
 
 at the Reformation, 321-321. 
 
 used as a charm, 325. 
 
 oft-repetition of, 325. 
 
 Holy, Feasts of, 242. 
 
 Proper Preface for, 242. 
 
 Creed, first traces of a, 115, 116. 
 
 connected with Baptism, 117-120. 
 
 as a safeguard against heresy, 
 
 117. 
 
 first recited in public worship, 
 
 118. 
 
 recited at General Councils, 134. 
 
 turning to the East at the, 119. 
 
 bomng at the Name of Jesus in 
 
 the, 121. 
 Cup, denial of the, 340. 
 
 Depaeted, commemoration of the, 
 180. 
 
 prayers for the, 181, 354. 
 
 evidence for, 182, 183. 
 
 value of, 184. 
 
 Decalogue, the, recited before the 
 
 Reformation, 75. 
 
 why introduced in 2 P. B., 76. 
 
 its inappropriateness, 76. 
 
 its justification, 77, 78, 80, 81. 
 
 differently divided, 80. 
 
 Devotions of the people, 157. 
 
 Didach6, the, 29, 236. 
 
 Diptychs, 174 ; when recited, 175. 
 
 Disciplina Arcani, 4, 5. 
 
 Discipline, Church, in Prin-.itive 
 
 times, 33, 198. 
 abused in the Middle Ages. 
 
 34. 
 
 present lack of, 35. 
 
 Dispensations, Jewish and Christian, 
 compared, 42, 43. 
 
Index. 
 
 411 
 
 Do, to, sometimes a sacrificial term, 
 
 305. 
 Dry Mass, 390. 
 
 Doiology, in tlie Lord's Trayor, 346. 
 
 East, tiirniEg to the, 110. 
 Easter in tlie Early Churcli, 248. 
 
 origin ot the name, 240. 
 
 observed at different times, 2S0, 
 
 251. 
 
 offerings, 169. 
 
 Eastward position, the, C3, 04. 
 
 allocution of hishons upon, 
 
 65. 
 
 Ecclesia, original meaning of, 2. 
 Elements, the, offered by the people, 
 158. 
 
 Elevation, meaning of, in early times, 
 308. 
 
 Bmbolismus, 347, 348. 
 Epiphany confused with Cliristmas, 
 242. 
 
 Epistle, called also Apostle, 99, 104. 
 
 place of reading the, 101, 102. 
 
 people's posture during the, 102. 
 
 Epistles, table of, resembles the 
 
 Comes, 99. 
 Eucharist, Scriptural use of the term, 
 
 27, 28. 
 
 in the Didach6, 29. 
 
 sacrificial character ot the, 195, 
 
 305-308. 
 
 typified by various sacrifices, 197. 
 
 the counterpart of Christ's Obla- 
 tion, 290. 
 Eucharistic Adoration, 404-407. 
 Eulogia, 30. 
 
 Evening Communions, 13-15. 
 Excommunication, 143. 
 Exhortation, the second, teaching of, 
 194. 
 
 Exhortations, ancient authority for, 
 186. 
 
 sources ot the, 186. 
 
 Faith, necessity of, for partaking of 
 Christ, 215. 
 
 to realise the doctrine, 216. 
 
 Fast-days, notice of, obligatory, 144. 
 
 Fasting Communion. Of. Cin- 
 
 why enjoined, 144, 145. 
 
 Filionue, first introduction of, in a 
 Creed, 135. 
 
 disputes about, 135, 130. 
 
 doctrine involved in, 137. 
 
 Frequency of Communion, in the 
 Early Church, 391, 392. 
 
 in Anglo-Saxon times, 394. 
 
 impossible after the Re- 
 bellion, 395. 
 
 revival of, 306. 
 
 symbolised by the elements, 
 
 397. 
 
 Gallican Saints in the English 
 
 Calendar, 7. 
 Gauden on the Black Rubric, 404. 
 Gloria in excelsis, its original use, 
 
 365. 
 
 adopted in a Liturgy, 366. 
 
 versions of, 367. 
 
 Alexandrine MS. of, 3CS. 
 
 change of its position, 371. 
 
 God's Board, 273. 
 
 Good Friday, no consecration upon, 
 386, 3S7. 
 
 Gospel-Lection, marked with honour, 
 
 107-110. 
 
 Reader of the, 110. 
 
 place of reading the, 109. 
 
 Gospels, Book of the, 107. 
 
 version of, in the Sealed Books, 
 
 112. 
 
 how selected, 113, 114. 
 
 Grace, Jewish form of, 230. 
 
 value ot saying, 239. 
 
 Gradual, the, 104. 
 
 Hermann's Consultatio, 117, 220, 234. 
 
 Holy Days, notice of, 140. 
 
 Holy Ghost, the, rarely addressed in 
 
 prayer, 95. 
 addressed in the Gloria, in 
 
 excelsis, 368, 369. 
 claim of, to Divine worship, 
 
 138. 
 
 quickening power of, 133. 
 
412 
 
 Index. 
 
 HolyGhost, procession of the, 134, 13.5. 
 Hosannah in the highest, in IP. B., 
 267. 
 
 Humble Access, Prayer of, 272. 
 
 its original position, 273. 
 
 its testimony to the Real 
 
 Presence, 276. 
 
 Illatio, immolatio, 237. 
 Inclination, Prayer of, 374, 375. 
 Institution, words of, in Early Litt., 
 303. 
 
 in the Roman Lit., 304. 
 
 Intercession, Bucharistic, value of, 
 254. 
 
 proper place for, 175. 
 
 in the Galilean Lit., 176. 
 
 for kings, 177. 
 
 for people by name, 178. 
 
 dislocation of the form of, 
 
 170. 
 
 Intinction, 340. 
 Introit, 71, 73. 
 
 Invocation of the Holy Ghost, in 
 Prim. Litt, 292. 
 
 form of, in the East, 293. 
 
 in the West, 294. 
 
 in 1 P. B., 295. 
 
 in the Scotch and Ame- 
 rican offices, 296, 297. 
 
 Puritan objections to, 297. 
 
 absence of, to be regretted, 
 
 300. 
 
 JuBfi, 109. 
 
 Judas, did he receive the Sacrament, 
 191, 192. 
 
 Kets, the power of, 227. 
 Kiss of Peace, 23. 
 
 symbolism of, 213. 
 
 Kyries, the, how used, 79. 
 farsed, 80. 
 
 Laity, their place for receiving 
 335, 336. 
 
 manner of receiving, 337-340. 
 
 the priesthood of the, 41. 
 
 Lay-oblations, 157, 196. 
 
 Leaven, search for, 382. 
 Leavened bread, 379. 
 Litany, its Liturgical use, 173-175. 
 Liturgy, its classical nsage, 1. 
 
 a Primitive, quotations from, 3. 
 
 the Apostolic, 5, 6. 
 
 antiquity of the English, 8. 
 
 Living, diptychs of the, 173. 
 Lord's Prayer, the, proper position 
 for, 68, 343. 
 
 separated from the central 
 
 ac-t, 344. 
 
 mode of reciting, 346. 
 
 treated as a mystery, 69. 
 
 Lord's Supper, Scriptural use of the 
 title, 10. 
 
 on Maundy Thursday, 13. 
 
 in Augsburg Confession, 12. 
 
 Love-feast, 10, 11. 
 
 JIacakics, a Roman officer, 149. 
 JIacedonian heresy, 132. 
 Manual acts in Consecration, 304. 
 Marriage, Banns of, when published 
 141, 142. 
 
 Mass, derivation of the term, 24, 25. 
 
 solitary, 391. 
 
 Maundy Supper, 12, 13. 
 Memorial Sacrifice, 290, 353. 
 Minister, meaning of the term, 329. 
 Miracles, in early times, 258. 
 
 economy of, 258. 
 
 Mixed Cup, the, 162. 
 Music, Church, degradation of, at the 
 
 Reformation, 105. 
 Mysteries, reverence for the, 211. 
 
 Holy, a primitive title, 362, 363. 
 
 retained deliberately, 361. 
 
 Mystery of the Sacrament analogous 
 to that of Christ's Person, 364. 
 
 Name of Jesus, bowing at the, 121. 
 Natural Body, meaning of the, as 
 used by S. Paul, 402. 
 
 in the Black Rubric, 402. 
 
 Nicsea, Co. of, on Paschal observance, 
 250. 
 
 Nicene Creed, the, when compiled, 
 121. 
 
Index. 
 
 413 
 
 Nieene Creed, its teaching on the 
 co-eternity of the Father and the 
 Son, 125, 126. 
 
 ceremonies connected with, 
 
 119-121. 
 
 Non - communicating attendance, 
 
 earliest notice of, 19S. 
 
 in Gaul, 199. 
 
 nowhere prohibited, 200. 
 
 objects of, 202. 
 
 Notes of the Church, 129, 130. 
 Notices in Church, what are lawful, 
 
 143 
 
 Oblation, threefold, 167, 355. 
 
 the greater, 168. 
 
 the lesser, 168. 
 
 of self in the Eucharist, 355, 356. 
 
 Prayer of, 351. 
 
 Sarum form of, 349. 
 
 in 1 P. B. and 2 P. B., 350. 
 
 verbal, not necessary, 351. 
 
 Offering, Easter, 169. 
 Offertory sentences, 154. 
 Omission not prohibition, 326. 
 Orientation of Churches, 119. 
 
 Wordsworth's lines on, 120. 
 
 Orleans, Co. of, 199. 
 
 Pain benit, 50. 
 
 Pax-bred, 23, 214. 
 
 Peace, blessing of, 377, 378. 
 
 Kiss of, 23, 213. 
 
 offering, type of the Eucharist, 
 
 196. 
 
 Penitential discipline, 198. 
 Pentecost, Sundays after, 262. 
 Person, meaning of, 263. 
 Pfingsten, 256. 
 
 Pledges of Christ's love, the Sacra- 
 ments, 209. 
 Poor man's box, 157. 
 Postils, 150. 
 
 Prayers for the departed, reaction 
 
 against, 179. 
 Preacher's posture, 148. 
 
 salutation, 149. 
 
 Preaching, the special function of a 
 
 Bishop, 146. 
 
 Preaching rare in Rome, 147, 148. 
 Preface, the, in East and West, 238, 
 240. 
 
 Prefaces, Proper, originally numer- 
 ous, 241. 
 
 reduced by Gregory, 241. 
 
 — in 1 P.B., 242. 
 
 Preparation of the Priest, 67. 
 
 office for, 68. 
 
 Presence of Christ, Sacramental, 
 
 teaching of Scriptm-e on the, 
 
 315, 316. 
 
 Hooker on, 20G. 
 
 different views on, 310-314. 
 
 Thirty-nine Articles on. 
 
 Presbyter, meaning of, 46. 
 
 Priest, Jewish and Christian, com- 
 pared, 44. 
 
 title of, 46. 
 
 Communion of the, 328. 
 
 Priesthood, Christ's commission to 
 the, 45, 46. 
 
 Christian, foreshadowed and 
 
 predicted, 42, 44. 
 
 of the laity, 41. 
 
 Prose, the, 104. 
 
 Prothesis, 158. 
 
 Public opinion, a safeguard, 39. 
 Purity, CoUect for, TO. 
 
 Ql'edushah, Jewish Sanctiflcation 
 Hymn, 267. 
 
 Real Presence, doctrine of the, 
 
 276, 293, 314, 315, 385. 
 Receiving, mode of, the Sacrament, 
 
 339, 340. 
 
 Remembrance, a sacrificial terra, 307. 
 Reserve, the doctrine of, 4, 6. 
 Reservation of the Sacrament, for 
 what purposes, 380. 
 
 its usefulness, 389. 
 
 Rogations, 172. 
 
 Rubric, the Black, history of, 398. 
 
 its changed language, 399, 
 
 400. 
 
 Sackament, contempt for the 386. 
 
414 
 
 hidex. 
 
 Sacrament, honour of the, 385. 
 
 reservation of the, 386. 
 
 Sacramenti res et virtm, 188. 
 Sacrifice, Christ's, one, perfect, etc., 
 2S6, 287. 
 
 unity of, with the Eucharist, 
 
 291. 
 
 of praise and thanksgivings, 
 
 351, 352. 
 Saints, Communion of, 270, 361. 
 Salutation of priest and people, 149, 
 
 235 
 
 Savoy Conference, 275. 
 
 Scripture, divisions of, into chapters 
 
 and verses, 103. 
 Second Service, the, 390. 
 Self-examination, 81, 205. 
 Semi-Arianism, 127, 128. 
 Sequence, 104. 
 
 Sermon, prayer before the, 150. 
 Shemoneh Ezreh, 268. 
 Sinlessness of Christ, 244, 246. 
 Shewbread, the, a type of the Eu- 
 charist, 384. 
 
 without leaven, 384. 
 
 Spiritual eating, meaning of, 208, 209. 
 
 Presence, 206. 
 
 Style, old and new, 251. 
 Substance, meaning of, 263. 
 Sursum corda, antiquity of, 235. 
 
 Table, title of the, used by Jews, 49. 
 very rare in the Early 
 
 Church, 58. 
 position of the Holy, in Church, 
 
 61, 62, 
 
 North side of the, 63, 64. 
 
 Tersanctns, mode of saying the, 265. 
 Thanksgiving, or Grace, Jewish form 
 
 of, 236, 237. 
 
 alternative use of the, 359. 
 
 Tongues, the Gift of, uncertainty 
 
 about, 257, 259. 
 
 speaking with, 260. 
 
 Tract, 104. 
 
 Transubstantiation, 313, 400, 404. 
 Trinity, not originally a separate 
 
 Feast of the, 261, 262. 
 Trisagion, 268. 
 Troparia, 307. 
 
 Union with the. Saints in praise, 
 270. 
 
 through the Sacrament, 361. 
 
 Unleavened Bread, at the Passover, 
 382, 383. 
 
 a Western innovation, 380. 
 
 Unleavened-ers, or Azymites, 381. 
 Upper Eoom, the, 27. 
 
 Virgin, the Blessed, Feasts of, 242. 
 Vision of Isaiah, 271. 
 
 Wafer-bread, origin of, 384. 
 Whitsuntide, etymology of, 255, 256. 
 Wine, Jewish, mixed with spices, 162 
 
 with water, 163. 
 
 • in the Early Church, 
 
 164. 
 
 in England, 164. 
 
 . — - in 17th and 18th cen- 
 turies, 165, 166. 
 Words of Administration, varied, 332. 
 to be said to each person, 337. 
 
 Printed by T. and A. Constable, Printers to Her Majesty, 
 at tin Edinburgh University Press. 
 
6